[8. COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC ON AGENDA ITEMS NOT REQUIRING PUBLIC HEARINGS Any person who wishes to comment on an agenda item which is not under Public Hearings on the Agenda may be heard at this time and must sign up to speak in advance. Please limit your comments to three (3) minutes or less, as directed by the Mayor, as this section of the Agenda is limited to thirty minutes. The City Commission will not be able to take any official actions under Comments from the Public. Speakers will address the Mayor, Commissioners, and the Public with respect. Inappropriate language will not be tolerated.]

>> AND WE THANK YOU. >> NEXT WE HAVE COMMENTS FROM

THE PUBLIC. >> ALL RIGHT, WE HAVE THREE PEOPLE WHO SIGNED UP. THERE'S A LIMB -- A LIMIT TO 3 MINUTES. REGINALD IS THE FIRST WHOREGINA

WHO SIGNED UP. >> GOOD AFTERNOON.

>> WELCOME. >> REGINALD SESSIONS, RESIDENT, CITY OF FORT PIERCE. OFFICE LOCATED DOWNTOWN FORT PIERCE. THANK YOU FOR THIS OPPORTUNITY TO COME BEFORE YOU TODAY ON A VERY IMPORTANT AND PRESSING ISSUE WITH REGARDS TO THE APPLICATION OF MS. SUSAN BAKER.

I HAVE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO LISTEN TO THE PREVIOUS MEETINGS AND THE RESPONSES THAT WERE GIVEN AND REASONS FOR THE DENIAL AT THIS POINT, AND TO SAY THAT TONIGHT I HEAR COMMISSIONER ALEXANDER IS ON THE LINE, BUT AT ANY RATE, I'M REALLY DISTURBED AND I'M HURT AND I'M SORT OF UPSET BUT THIS IS BIGGER THAN ME. THE REASON WHY I SAY THAT IS BECAUSE AS COMMISSIONER ALEXANDER USED TO ALWAYS SAY, YOU CAN SEE IT IF IT WAS RAY CHARLES.

THIS IS A BLATANT ACT OF RACIAL DISCRIMINATION.

THE REASONS WHY IS BECAUSE WHEN YOU LOOK AT ALL THE FACTORS CONSIDERED, THERE HAVE BEEN TWO AFRICAN AMERICANS THAT HAVE COME BEFORE YOU WITH THE SAME ISSUE IN THE SAME REGARDS AND THEY HAVE BEEN GIVEN THE SAME REASON FOR DENIAL AND THAT IS SAFETY.

THIS COMMISSION HAS SET PRECEDENCE.

THERE HAVE BEEN NUMEROUS INDIVIDUALS THAT HAVE BEEN APPROVED AND I, FOR ONE, WILL SAY THAT I WAS NOT A PROPONENT BUT THE GOVERNMENT HAS TIED YOUR HANDS AND AS FAR AS THE STATUTE IS CONCERNED, UNDER THE RULES, YOU CAN'T DENY A PERSON BECAUSE THERE'S A STANDARD OF PROOF THAT YOU HAVE TO STEP IN IN YOUR QUASI-JUDICIAL CAPACITY WHERE YOU CAN'T DENY AN INDIVIDUAL BASED ON ANY TYPE OF HYPOTHETICALS, SPECULATIVE REASONS, OR FEAR OR EMOTIONAL REASONS.

AND I'M SURE THE ATTORNEY HAS LAID IT OUT TO YOU AS HE'S DONE WITH ME SEVERAL TIMES BEFORE, IN THE ABSENCE OF DOING SO, WHAT I

[00:15:08]

HAVE HEARD IN TERM OFFENSE YOUR EXCUSES IS NOT GOING TO FLY, AND WHENS YOUR EXCUSES IS NOT GOING T YOUR EXCUSES IS NOT GOING TO FLY, AND WF YOUR EXCUSES IS NOT GOING TO FLY, AND W YOUR EXCUSES IS NOT GOING TO FLY, AND W YOUR EXCUSES IS NOT GOING TO FLY, AND WF YOUR EXCUSES IS NOT GOING TO FLY, AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE SIGNS ON THE BEACH SAYING THAT TYPE OF ACTIVITY IS NOT WANTED ON THE ISLAND YOU MIGHT AS WELL SAY NO BLACKS SHOULD BE ALLOWED ON THE ISLAND AND WE'RE GOING BACK TO JIM CROW ALL OVER AGAIN.

>> AT YOUR TIME, SIR, THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> THANK YOU. >> AISHA NASH.

>> GOOD EVENING, MY NAME IS ATTORNEY AISHA NASH AND I'M A THIRD GENERATION FORT PIERCE CITIZEN.

WE SELECTED THIS MEETING OVER A MONTH AGO TO INTRODUCE MYSELF TO THIS CITY XHISHL BOARD AS THE NEWLY ELECTED PRESIDENT OF THE NAACP FOR ST. LUCIE COUNTY, HOWEVER, I MUST ADMIT THAT I'M ALSO VERY DISAPPOINTED IN ITEM 13B.

THE LAW IS PRETTY CLEAR, NO CITY GOVERNMENT COULD REGULATE SHORT TERM RENTALS AND I HIGHLY SUGGEST THAT YOU ALL CONSIDER THAT MOVING FORWARD. I DID READ IN THE PAPER THAT MR. JOHNSON, YOU STATED THAT FOR US TO --

>> MA'AM, WE DON'T CALL OUT ANY COMMISSIONER.

>> I APOLOGIZE. >> THAT'S ALL RIGHT.

>> I READ IN THE SOMEBODY THAT SOMEBODY STATE THAT HAD CALLING IT RACISM IS DIVISIVE, HOWEVER, IF IT WALKS LIKE A DUCK, QUACKS LIKE A DUCK, USING OUR REASONING SKILLS, IT'S A DUCK.

AS MR. SESSIONS ALSO STATED, IT'S ALMOST LIKE WE'RE HERE IN SPIRIT TODAY THAT THE BOARD SAYS PRECEDENT FOR SHORT TERM RENTALS AND BEING THAT THERE'S NO CONCRETE RESIDENT AS TO IT PRODUCING ANY FEAR OR SAFETY CONCERNS, THERE'S ONLY ONE REASON FOR US TO ASSUME WHY IT WAS DENIGHTED.

HER NEIGHBORS BROUGHT HER A BASKET OF BANANAS.

IN 2021, ANYBODY KNOWS THAT BRINGING A BASKET OF BANANAS IS CULTURALLY INSENSITIVE. I TAUGHT HIGH SCHOOL BEFORE I BECAME AN ATTORNEY AND I'M SURE MY HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS COULD TELL YOU THE SAME THING. THE RESIDENTS SAYING CULTURALLY THESE PEOPLE SIT ON THEIR PORCHES, SITTING ON A PORE. IS NOT A CRIME.CH IS NOT A CRIME.

IN FACT, IT WAS MANY GRANDMOTHER WHO WAS ONE OF THE BIGGEST BUSINESS PEOPLE IN THIS CITY TO SET ON HER PORCH AND TALK TO OFFICIALS. THAT'S DIVISIVE.

BEFORE I END TODAY, I WANT TO REMIND YOU ALL JAMES 4:17 STATES THEREFORE UNTO HIM KNOWS GOOD BUT DOES NOT DO IT IT IS SIN.

WE DO RIGHT BECAUSE IT'S RIGHT TO DO RIGHT.

I'M ASKING EVERYBODY ON THIS DAY, TODAY, WHEN YOU MAKE THIS DECISION TODAY, THAT YOU DO RIGHT BECAUSE IT'S RIGHT TO DO RIGHT, NOT JUST FOR YOUR OWN POCKETS OR WHATEVER YOUR INTENTIONS MAY BE, THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE]

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. NO APPLAUSE, PLEASE.

>> SUSAN BAKER? >> HI, I'M SUSAN BAKER, MY RESIDENCY IS 1577 THUMB POINT DRIVE.

I'M JUST HERE TO EXERCISE MY PROPERTY RIGHTS AND I HOPE THAT YOU VOTE TO APPROVE ME, THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THAT IS ALL THAT HAVE SIGNED UP

FOR PUBLIC COMMENT AT THIS TIME. >> OKAY, THE NEXT THING ON THE

[9. ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS TO AGENDA AND APPROVAL OF AGENDA]

AGENDA IS ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS TO THE AGENDA AND APPROVAL OF THE AGENDA. ANY ADDITIONS OR DELETIONS?

DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO SAY? >> NO, I FIXED IT.

>> ALL RIGHT, SORRY. >> I MOVE TO SET THE AGENDA,

>> SECOND. >> CALL THE ROLL POLICE.

>> COMMISSIONER ALEXANDER? >> YES.

>> COMMISSIONER C JOHNSON. >> YES, COMMISSIONER J JOHNSON.

[00:20:03]

>> COMMISSIONER PERON A? >> YES, MA'AM.

[a. Presentation of Lincoln Park Main Street's recommendation for honorees of bronze plaque at NW Pioneers Park]

>> MAY YOU'RE HUDSON? >> YES, MA'AM.

>> NEXT WE HAVE THE PRESENTATION OF LINCOLN PARK MAIN STREET'S RECOMMENDATION FOR HONOREES OF BRONZE PLAQUE AT NORTHWEST PAR

NEARS PARK. >> WE DO HAVE OUR COMMUNITY PARTNER, PAMELA, COMING UP REPRESENTING LINCOLN PARK MAIN STREET. SHE'S ONE OF OUR LOCAL HISTORIANS AND I BELIEVE SHE'S BEEN WORKING WITH A MEMBER OF THE CITY COMMISSION AND THE CITY COMMISSION'S FAMILY MEMBERS TO OBTAIN THE INFORMATION ABOUT THE HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE OF OUR TRAIL BLAZERS AND OUR PIONEERS IN NORTHWEST FORT PIERCE.

AS WE LOOK AT RENAMING THE NORTHWEST PIONEER'S PARK WITH THE HONOREES AND THE BRONZE PLAQUES IN THE ENTRY PLAZA FEATUREPIONEER'S PARK WITH THE S AND THE BRONZE PLAQUES IN THE

ENTRY PLAZA FEATURE. >> GOOD EVENING, I'M PAMELA CARUTHERS, 1234 AFTER KNEW D. I'M PLEASED TO COME AND DISCUSSION TO NORTHWEST PIONEER PARK HONORED PIONEERS OF LYNNE CONGRESS PARK INCOLN PARK COMMUNITY.

I HAVE PROVIDED FOR YOU AN ABBREVIATED VERSION OF PREVIOUS DOCUMENT THAT IS WERE SUBMITTED TO YOU BASED ON INDIVIDUALS THAT ARE FROM THE LINCOLN PARK COMMUNITY THAT HAVE MADE AN IMPACT AND THEIR CONTRIBUTIONS HAVE REDIRECTED AND CHANGED THE COURSE OF THE DEVELOPMENT AND THE PROGRESSION OF THE LINCOLN PARK COMMUNITY. AS WE DISCUSSED BEFORE, WE WANTED TO HAVE A SYSTEMATIC APPROACH TO NOMINATING THE INDIVIDUALS BASED ON A SET OF CRITERION THAT WAS ESTABLISHED SO THAT IN THE FUTURE MOVING FORWARD, THAT INFORMATION CAN NOT ONLY BE PRESENTED TODAY BUT MOVING FORWARD, OTHER INDIVIDUALS THAT LIKE TO NOMINATE SOMEONE THAT THEY BELIEVE TO HAVE MADE CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE LINCOLN PARK COMMUNITY BE ADDED TO THAT LIST OR BE CONSIDERED TO HAVE A BRONZE PLAQUE PLACED AT THE ENTRY POINT WITH THAT INDIVIDUAL'S NAME, A SKETCH OF THEIR PICTURE AND A SHORT BIO ABOUT THEIR LIFE'S WORK. SO WHAT YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU IS, ONE, THAT SET OF CRITERION THAT WAS USED AND THEN ALSO A MATRIX THAT IDENTIFIED SOME OF THOSE SAME VALIDATING POINTS THAT NOT ONLY SUBSTANTIATE AN INDIVIDUAL'S ACCOMPLISHMENTS, BUT ALSO IT'S FACT BASED. SO WHAT WE DECIDED WAS, WE MEANING THE PIONEER PARK COMMIE OF LINCOLN PARK MAIN STREET, WHAT WAS THE PURPOSE OF THIS CRITERION? AND THE PURPOSE WAS TO ESTABLISH A SYSTEMATIC AND CONSISTENTTHIS? AND THE PURPOSE WAS TO ESTABLISH A SYSTEMATIC AND CONSISTENT APPROACH FOR THOSE NAMED INDIVIDUALS OR FOLKS TO BE NOMINATED. THEN WE IDENTIFIED A SET OF OBJECTIVES AS WELL AS THE CRITERION AND THEN INCLUSION OF NAMES FOR THE BRONZE PLAQUE AND THEN A SET OF PROCEDURES THAT WOULD FOLLOW. SO THE CRITERION IS DRAFTED IN PART OF WHAT THE CITY'S REQUIREMENTS ARE FOR NAMING SOME OF THE SIMILAR TYPE PARKS BUILDINGS, HOWEVER, OUR APPROACH WAS AN ABBREVIATED VERSION OF THAT AND WE SOUGHT TO LOOK FOR INDIVIDUALS THAT ARE UNSUNG HEROS SO TO SPEAK IN THE LINCOLN PARK COMMUNITY, THAT THEY CONTRIBUTED, HOWEVER, THEY DON'T HAVE A NAME ON A BUILDING OR A NAME ON A PARK OR A STREET NAMED IN THEIR HONOR, BUT THEIR CONTRIBUTIONS HAVE MAINLY CHANGED THE COURSE OF THE COMMUNITY OF LINCOLN PARK COMMUNITY AS RESIDENTS AND THE CITY AS A WHOLE, SO THAT'S WHAT YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU. NOW, OUR CRITERION, IT SAYS THE PRACTICE OF THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE IS TO SELECT RESIDENCE DIDN'TS FROM THE LINCOLN PARK COMMUNITY TO BE HONORED WITH PLAQUES AT THE ENTRANT OF NORTHWEST PIONEER PARK.

THIS IS THROUGH AN ADOPTIVE PROCESS UTILIZING THE ABOVE

[00:25:01]

OBJECTIVES AND OUR OBJECTIVES ARE ENSURE THE PLAQUES ARE EASILY IDENTIFIED AND LOCATED, ENSURE THAT REPUTATION AND BACKGROUND OF INDIVIDUAL'S NAMES GIVEN ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE VALUES AND CHARACTER OF LINCOLN PARK.

ENCOURAGE LINCOLN PARK PARTICIPATION FOR COMMUNITY MEMBERS FOR CONSIDERATION FOR BEING HONORED WITH A PLAQUE AT PIONEER PARK AND TO ADVANCE THE REGISTRATION OF HISTORIC LINCOLN PARK COMMUNITY AND SHOWCASE AND HIGHLIGHT THE HISTORY AND CONTRIBUTIONS OF ITS RESIDENTS AS WELL AS INCREASED AWARENESS OF THE RICH HISTORY AND HERITAGE OF LINCOLN PARK.

SO THOSE LEFT SIDE ARE THE BASIS ARE THE BASIS OF OUR CRITERIA.

WHEN WE GO THROUGH AND ADOPT A PROCESS UTILIZING THOSE OBJECTIVES, UTILIZING CHARACTER, LOCAL GEOGRAPHY AND CIVICS, THEREFORE THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA SHOULD BE USED IN DETERMINING THE APPROPRIATENESS OF THAT NOMINATION, ONE, A HISTORICAL FIGURE OR OTHER INSTANCE OF HISTORICAL OR CULTURAL SIGNIFICANCE. LOCAL LEADERS ARE OUR UNSUNG HEROS, BOTH PAST AND PRESENT. ON INDIVIDUAL LIVING OR DECEASED WHO, A, HAS MADE A CONSIDERABLE IMPACT IN THEIR CIVIC MINDED INVOLVEMENT AND ACTIVITIES THAT INFLUENCED THE COMMUNITY, B, CONTRIBUTED TO THE EDUCATION AND SOCIAL DEVELOPMENT OF YOUTH, C, GOING ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT IS REQUIRED, AND D, LONGEVITY IN THE COMMUNITY AND GIVING OF ONE'S TIME AND TALENT.

THEN WE HAVE AN INDIVIDUAL LIVING OR DECEASED WHO HAS CONTRIBUTED OUTSTANDING SERVICE TO THE COMMUNITY.

SO THAT'S THE BASIS OF -- THAT INFORMATION IS WHAT WE WERE USING TO DETERMINE, ONE, THE INFORMATION THREE HAS BEEN VETTED ON THE INDIVIDUALS THAT WERE NOMINATEDAT HAS BEEN VETTED ON THE INDIVIDUALS THAT WERE NOMINATED AND BY THIS BEING THE FIRST ROUND OF NOMINATIONS, OUR COMMITTEE CAME UP WITH A LIST OF NAMES OF INDIVIDUALS AND WE RESEARCHED, PULLED THEIR BACKGROUND INFORMATION TOGETHER, REACHED OUT TO HISTORIANS AND FAMILY MEMBERS AND LOOKED INTO THE FACT BOOKS TO THEIR FIE THAT THE INFORMATION IS ACCURATE AS WELL AS CONCISE.

WE CAME UP WITH THAT LIST AND WE PRESENTED THAT TO YOU AND THAT'S WHAT YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU. WE ALSO HAVE THE NOMINATION FORM AND THAT IS COMPLETED, FILLED OUT, INCLUDES THE NAME OF THE INDIVIDUAL, THEIR LAST -- IF THEY ARE DECEITS, THE DATE OF DEATH, AND THEN THEIR LAST KNOWN ADDRESS, WHETHER DECEASED OR LIVING. IT ALSO TALKS ABOUT THEIR YEARS OF ACTIVE INVOLVEMENT AS WELL AS IDENTIFYING THE GENERAL AREA, SUCH AS GOVERNMENT, EDUCATION, CIVIC, ENVIRONMENT, OR SOMETHING OTHER. AND THEN IT GIVES US A BRIEF SUMMARY. WE WANT TO HAVE A BRIEF SUMMARY THAT LEADS INTO A MORE DETAILED EXPLANATION OR MORE DETAILED ACCOUNT OF THAT INDIVIDUAL'S BACKGROUND LIFE, LIFE'S WORK, A HISTORY. THEN WE GO INTO TALKING ABOUT THE PROCEDURES. WE WILL MAKE A PLEA TO THE COMMUNITY MOVING FORWARD STARTING NEXT YEAR OR HOWEVER THE CITY DETERMINES THAT NAMES WILL BE ADDED TO THAT WALL.

THEN WE WILL MAKE A PLEA TO THE COMMUNITY AS TO IT IS OPEN SEASON OR THE NOMINATION PROCESS IS OPEN NOW FOR NAMES TO BE CONSIDERED TO BE ADDED TO THE NORTHWEST PARK.

THEN ONCE THE SUBMISSIONS HAVE BEEN TURNED IN WITHIN AN APPROPRIATE DEADLINE THAT WE HAVE ESTABLISHED, THEN OUR COMMITTEE WOULD GO AND GO THROUGH THE INFORMATION USING THIS CRITERIA BECAUSE WHAT ME AS A CITIZEN MIGHT THINK IS WORTHY OF AN INDIVIDUAL, MIGHT NOT NECESSARILY MEET THAT CRITERIA, HOWEVER, WE WILL GO THROUGH THAT AS WELL AS VETTING THE

[00:30:01]

PRESENTED TO US AND WINGS LOOK AT THE INFORMATION THAT HAS BEEN RECEIVED AND VERIFIED AND WE CA RECEIVED AND VERIFIED AND WE CAN MTHE INFORMATION THAT HAS BEEN RECEIVED AND VERIFIED AND WE CAN MAT THE INFORMATION THAT HAS BEN RECEIVED AND VERIFIED AND WE CAN MOVE FORWARD FROM THERE. THEN IT WILL BE IN THE CITY'S

HANDS. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

I WAS LOOKING FOR THIS IN THE BACKUP BECAUSE I WANTED TO READ IT. WHAT KIND OF TIME ARE WE GOING TO HAVE TO REVIEW THIS? WHAT'S THE PLAN FOR THIS,

MR. MIMMS? >> THE PLAN WAS FOR PAM TO COME WITH YOU WITH THE DRAFT OF THE PROCEDURE AND BASED ON THE FACT THAT YOU JUST RECEIVED THIS TONIGHT, IT WOULD BE A GOOD IDEA TO REVIEW IT OVER THE NEXT COUPLE OF WEEKS AND WE COULD ADOPT THE POLICY AT A SUBSEQUENT MEETING OR DISCUSS IT AGAIN AT A

CONFERENCE AGENDA IF YOU PLEASE. >> THAT'S WHAT I WOULD PREFER BUT YOU HAVE DONE A LOT OF WORK AND FOR EVERYBODY WHO IS LISTENING, THIS PARK WAS CREATED WITH THIS IN MIND.

WHEN IT WAS CREATED, THERE WAS A LOT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT WHAT IT WAS GOING TO BE NAMED. IT WAS SETTLED ON PIONEER OR PIONEER'S PARK AND PIONEER'S NAMES WERE GOING TO BE PUT SO THIS WAS THE PLAN ALL ALONG, FROM READING THE HISTORY OF THIS PARK, IS THAT RIGHT? RIGHT.

ANYONE ELSE? COMMISSIONER PERONA?

>> I THINK THE BIGGEST VALUE IS FINDING OUT ALL THE FOLKS WHO MADE US WHO WE ARE TODAY. THAT'S WHAT GETS ME EXCITED.

YOU MIGHT NOT GET A PLAQUE IN A BARK BUT AS LONG AS WE RETAIN THAT HISTORICAL INFORMATION. I CAN SEE 50 YEARS FROM NOW, SOMEBODY FROM LPA WILL BE GOING THROUGH THIS THING SAYING DO YOU KNOW WHAT HAPPENED BACK THEN? IT'S GOING TO BE BASED ON THE WORK WE'RE DOING RIGHT NOW, THE WORK THAT YOU'RE DOING AND YOUR COMMITTEE IS DOING RIGHT NOW THAT WILL BE SO VALUABLE FOR THAT REFERENCE. I THINK THAT'S THE TRUE PRICE

RIGHT THERE. >> AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT SOME OF THE NAMES THAT ARE NOT HERE ARE NOT HERE BECAUSE THEY'RE ON BUILDINGS OR SOMETHING.

THEY'RE HONORED IN SOME OTHER WAY.

>> THAT'S CORRECT. WE DIDN'T WANT TO DUPLICATE BECAUSE THEN HALF OF THAT LIST WOULD HAVE BEEN KNOCKED OUT BECAUSE OF OTHER MEMBERS THAT ARE ALREADY RECOGNIZED ON A BUILDING, ON A STREET, IN A PARK, THINGS LIKE THAT.

>> RIGHT. >> AND ALSO FROM OUR LAST DISCUSSION, PREVIOUSLY WE HAD PRESENT DAY BACK TO MAYBE 1970, 1980 INDIVIDUALS, WE TOOK HEED TO YOUR SUGGESTION, AS IT SAYS, PIONEERS, SO WE WENT BACK TO 1902, 1905 AND PULLED THAT INFORMATION BECAUSE WHEN WE LOOK AT THE FAMILIES OF THE LIONS FAMILY, ONE OF THE FIRST AFRICAN AMERICAN FAMILIES, WILLIAM LIONS, ONE OF THE BROTHERS, THE LAND THAT MOUNT OLIVE MISSIONARY BAPTIST CHURCH SITS ON AT THE CORNER OF EIGHTH STREET AND AVENUE C, MR. LIONS DONATED THAT PROPERTY AND THE FIRST HOME BUILT ON AVENUE D WAS BUILD BY THE BROTHER WILSON AND HIS WIFE, ALICE LIONS AND WE CAN'T FORGET MRS. FRANCINE DUVAL AND HER HUSBAND. WITHOUT MRS. DUVAL'S DRIVE AND QUESTIONS ALONG WITH OTHER MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY TO WANT TO HAVE A SCHOOL FOR AFRICAN AMERICANS IN ST. LUCIE COUNTY, NOT JUST A SCHOOL FOR K-8 BUT THEY WENT ON A QUEST TO HAVE A HIGH SCHOOL THAT WE ALL KNOW AND LOVE TODAY KNOWN AS LINCOLN PARK ACADEMY. TONGEE MONROE, FIRST HOME BUILT IN THE LINCOLN PARK COMMUNITY. WE WENT BACK TO THOSE INDIVIDUALS AS WELL AND BRIDGED THOSE EARLY SETTLERS UP TO TODAY'S CURRENT TIME AND ALL OF THAT IS PART OF THE PROGRESSION, THE DEVELOPMENT OF LINCOLN PARK COMMUNITY.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THE ASSIGNMENT.

>> IF I COULD, I WANT TO SAW THANK YOU.

IT TAKES A LOT OF RESEARCH AND TIME AND EFFORT AND I APPRECIATE EXACTLY WHAT YOU HAVE DONE AND LAYING OUT THE DETAILS AND THE FORMAT AND THE FIT IS NOT ALWAYS AN EASY TASK.

>> IT IS NOT. >> THIS IS A GREAT ROAD MAP TO

[00:35:02]

THE NEXT STEPS AND I APPRECIATE IT AND I JUST LOVE HISTORY AND I LOVE TO HEAR -- I WROTH DOWN 8TH AND AVENUE C BECAUSE THE COUNTY OWNS LAND RIGHT NEXT TO THAT AT THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT, ACTUALLY, AND I THINK ABOUT MY KIDS AND THEY'RE AT LINCOLN PARK OR LEAST MY SON GRADUATED AND MY DAUGHTER GRADUATES THIS YEAR FROM LINCOLN PARK, SO I SAY THANK YOU. I LOOK FORWARD TO DIGGING IN AND

MAKING THIS HAPPEN. >> PLUGCOMMISSIONER C. JOHNSON.

>> I WANT TO PUBLICLY ACKNOWLEDGE THE HARD WORK THE COMMITTEE PUT FORTH ON THIS. I THINK IT'S A GREAT TESTIMONY TO THE COMMUNITY AS WELL BECAUSE THERE WILL BE OTHER UNSUNG HEROS THAT WILL SURFACE AS A RESULT OF THIS AND AS I LOOK THROUGH THE PACKET, I'M FAMILIAR WITH QUITE A FEW NAMES THERE AND I THINK THAT'S A GREAT TESTIMONY TO NOT ONLY THE 11 BUT THE YOUNG PEOPLE WO DIDN'T HAVE THE PRIVILEGE TO KNOW THE SETTLERS OF THE COMMUNITY AND AS WE BRING THAT PARK ALIVE, THE VISION OF HAVING THE KIDS FROM CA MOORE WALK DOWN THE STREET TO BE ABLE TO SEE THAT OR YOUNG PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN THAT AREA TO BE ABLE TO WALK UP AND TOUCH SOME OF THOSE MONUMENTS, TA MAKE ATE LIVING PARK IS THE VISION FOR THIS. WE THANK YOU FOR YOUR WORK AND YOUR CONTINUED HARD WOK BECAUSE THERE'S MORE TO DO AND THERE WILL BE A PLEA COMING FOR FUNDING, I'LL SAY THAT NOW, SO

THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> THANK YOU. >> WE APPRECIATE ALL THE HARD

WORK. >> SURE THING.

>> I'M GOING TO SCAN EVERYTHING SHE PRESENTED TO YOU ALL TONIGHT AND ATTACH IT TO THE AGENDA SO ANYONE IN THE PUBLIC INTERESTED IN SEE WHATTING SHE SUBMITTED TONIGHT WILL BE AVAILABLE

TOMORROW. >> I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT,

[11. CONSENT AGENDA]

GREAT. >> THE NEXT ITEM IS THE CONSENT

AGENDA. >> ANY ITEM ANYONE WOULD TO PULL? IF NOT I WILL ASK FOR A MOTION.

>> MOVED. >> SECOND.

>> ROLL CALL, PLEASE. >> OKAY, WE HAVE RESOLUTION

[a. Resolution No. 21-R25 and Quasi-Judicial Hearing – A hearing to allow the owners and/or parties of interest in the property identified as 515 N 14th Street to show cause why the structure located on the premises should not be condemned and demolished.]

21-R25 AN A HEARING TO ALLOW THE OWNERS AND/OR PARTIES OF INTEREST TO THE PROPERTY IDENTIFIED AS 515N.14TH STREET TO SHOW CAUSE WHY THE STRUCTURE LOCATED ON THE PREMISES SHOULD NOT BE CONDEMNED AND DEMOLISHED ORDERING THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE TO PROCEED WITH SUCH REMOVAL AND PLACE A LEAN ON THE PROPERTY IDENTIFIED IF COMPLETED BY THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE PROVIDING FOR AN APPEAL, PROVIDING FOR NOTICE TO ALL PARTIES AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THINNED THIS IS A QUASI JUDICIAL

HEARING. >> MR. SWEENY.

>> THANK YOU, MAD DAM MAYOR [INAUDIBLE] LAWS AND POLICIES AND IS HELD TO STRICT PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTS.

QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARINGS ARE LESS FORMAL THAN PROCEEDINGS IN COURT BUT ARE MORE FORMAL THAN A FROM ADDITIONAL COMMITTEE MEETING.

COMMISSIONERS HAVE A DUTY TO CONDUCT THE QUASI-JUDICIAL MEETINGS MORE LIKE JUDGES THAN LEGISLATURES.

THAT'S THE WHY THE COMMISSION HAS ESTABLISHED THE UNIFORM PROCEDURES FOR QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARINGS TO BE FOLLOWED THIS EVENING, NO ONE SHOULD APPROACH THE COMMISSIONERS OR THE CITY CLERK DURING THE HEARING. GIVE DOCUMENTS TO THE SERGEANT AT ARMS, EITHER OF THE POLICE OFFICERS IN THE CLAIM FER BEHRS.

>> HAS THE ADVERTISING BEEN MET FOR THIS ITEM?

>> ADVERTISING HAS BEEN MET.

>> EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS ON THIS MATTER?

>> NO, I HAVEN'T. >> COMMISSIONER C. JOHNSON?

>> GNOME. >> COMMISSIONER JOHNSON.

>> NO, MA'AM. >> COMMISSIONER PERONA?

>> NO MA'AM. COMMISSIONER HUDSON?

>> NO MA'AM. >> WE WILL NOW MOVE FORWARD WITH

THE HEARING, >> DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH T WHOLE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH, THECH.

[00:40:01]

>> YOU MAY PROCEED. >> GOOD EVENING MADAM MAYOR AND COMMISSIONERS. WE'RE HERE TO DISCUSS THE COME DEN NATION OF 515 NORTH 14TH STREET.

THE FOLLOWING IS A HISTORY AND WHAT BROUGHT US TODAY.

IN 2018, IT WAS RECOMMENDED ALLOWING TIME FOR REHABILITATION FOR THE STRUCTURE BUT DUE TO THE DETERIORATION IF NO EFFORTS WERE MADE TO REHABILITATE IT THAT THE BUILDING SHOULD BE DEMOLISHED.

THE CONDEMNATION WAS ISSUED IN 2019 AND AT THE TIME T OWNER WAS WILLY LAMPKIN AND OTHER LAMPKIN FAMILY MEMBERS.

HE WANTED TO REHABILITATE THE STRUCTURE BUT HE NEEDED TO FIND THE FUNDS. IN MAY HE SAID HE FOUND A PURCHASER, SOMEONE WHO WOULD BUY THE PROPERTY AND DO THE REHABILITATION SO WE ALLOWED AN EXTENSION SO THE SALED COUTH GO THERE AND IN FEBRUARY 2020, THE TITLE CHANGED TO MR. YOU GENE BROWN. WE GENE BROWN. WE REDRAFTED STATE THAT HAD WE WOULD RECEIVE AN UPDATE BY MARCH 1, 2020, AND NO OTHER ACTIONS HAVE BEEN TAKEN. SO WE DID SCHEDULE THIS FOR A HEARING IN FRONT OF THE CITY COMMISSION AND I RECEIVED A CALL FROM MR. BROWN'S CON TTRACTOR STATING THAT THEY WOULD APPLY FOR A PERMIT TO DEMOLISH THE T A DEMMELATION PERMIT IN HOUSE RIGHT NOW. NOTICES WERE PROVIDED, PROVIDED TO THE FIRST OWNER, THE SECOND OWNER AND THERE WAS A TAX CERTIFICATE HOLDER WHO CONTACTED US AFTER I SENT THE NOTICE.

SHE DID NOT HAVE AN INTEREST IN FOLLOWING THROUGH ON HER INTEREST IN THE PROPERTY. IT'S NOT HOMESTEADED, IT'S VACANT, THERE'S NO CODE ENFORCEMENT, IT'S A HISTORIC PROPERTY AND THERE WAS A TITLE SEARCH COMPLETED AS I INDICATED, ONE PERSON WAS IDENTIFIED WHO WAS PROVIDED NOTICE.

THIS IS THE CONDITION OF THE PROPERTY AS IT STANDS.

S THIS WAS JUST TAKE AN COUPLE OF DAYS AGO.

THAT'S THE CONDITION OF THE ROOF WHICH IS FALLING IN.

THERE ARE HOLES IN THE ROOF, THERE ARE HOLES IN THE FOUNDATION, THE CONCRETE IS CRACKING, THERE ARE PLUMBING ISSUES AND THIS IS JUST A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF WHERE THIS IS LOCATED. THIS IS ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD AT ROADWAY REVIVAL CENTER.

THIS BUILDING IS GONE, THIS BUILDING IS BEING REHABILITATED, SO THIS IS AN AREA OF CURRENT ACTIVITY IN THIS LOCATION.

THE CITY COMMISSION CAN APPROVE THE RESOLUTION FOR DEMOLITION, AMEND IT OR DENY IT COMPLETELY. IF IT IS TO BE APPROVED, THE OWNER WOULD HAVE 30 DAYS TO APPEAL.

IT WOULD NEED TO GO TO THE HISTORIC BOARD FOR FINAL REVIEW AND A FINAL NOTICE WOULD BE SENT FOLLOWED BY DEMOLITION IF THE PROCESS WAS APPROVED AND THAT'S THE PRESENTATION.

>> ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF? >> COMMISSIONER C. JOHNSON?

>> GO BACK TO THE SLIDE WHERE YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT THE APPLICANT ASKING FOR A DEMOLITION TO BE DONE IN 2020.

DID THEY GET THE SAME COMPANY IN 2021 TODAY TO DO THAT? BECAUSE THAT WAS A PROCESS THEN AND YOU JUST INFORMED US THAT YOU RECEIVED SOMETHING THIS MORNING, RIGHT?

>> I CONFIRMED THIS MORNING THAT IT'S STILL IN PLAN CHECK.

[00:45:01]

I HAD BEEN NOTIFIED THE OTHER DAY THAT THE APPLICATION WAS IN HOUSE. I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S THE SAME CONTRACTOR OR NOT. I KNOW THAT THE FIRST TIME IT WAS DENIED DUE TO HISTORIC PRESERVATION.

I SPOKE TO MARIA IN HISTORIC PRESERVATION THIS WEEK AND SHE WAS GOING TO APPROVE IT BECAUSE IT WAS JUST THE DEMOLITION OF

THE INTERIOR. >> SO IN 2020, IT WAS STOPPED BECAUSE IT WAS DISCOVERED AS A HISTORIC SITE, RIGHT?

>> CORRECT. >> AND WE'RE STILL IN THAT PROCESS OF -- OR HAS IT BEEN VERIFIED THAT IT'S A HISTORICAL

SITE? >> IT HAS BEEN VERIFY THAT HAD IT'S HISTORIC AND THE DEMOLITION WENT BEYOND WHAT THIS APPLICATION IS FOR. THIS TIME, MARIA DID APPROVE IT.

IT'S BEEN APPROVED BY HISTORIC. >> ALL RIGHT.

>> AGAIN, IT'S JUST FOR THE ROOF AND THE INTERIOR WALLS.

>> OKAY, THAT'S IT FOR NOW. I MAY COME BACK.

>> I SAW IN THE PACKET THERE WAS A FLOOR PLAN ATTACHED AND IT LOOKS LIKE A PROFESSIONAL DREW THESE PLANS OR SOME KIND OF

ELECTRONIC SYSTEM. >> THAT WAS THE PAPERWORK SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT, PEGGY.

>> THAT WAS SUBMITTED BY THE APPLICANT.

>> SO JUST A DEMO ONLY HAS BEEN SUBMITTED?

>> THAT'S CORRECT. I CAN PULL IT UP REAL QUICK.

>> THE OTHER QUESTIONS, AS YOU'RE DOING THIS, I SAW IN THE PICTURES WATER AND SEWER CONNECTIONS THAT WERE COMING FROM THE RESIDENTS. I'M CURIOUS WHAT FPUA'S SUBSTITUTION HAS BEEN ON THAT BECAUSE IT LOOKS LIKE THE CLEANOUT SECTION RIGHT THERE NEXT TO THE HOME.

>> HAS A BEER CAN IN IT >> YEAH, IT LOOKED OPEN.

I DON'T KNOW IF THEY MADE A DISCONNECTION.

>> THERE ARE NO UTILITIES THERE. THERE ARE NO UTILITIES AT THE

PROPERTY RIGHT NOW >> ONE MORE.

>> DID YOU WANT TO SEE THE PLANS?

>> YEAH. OKAY.

SO MAYBE THAT'S THE PLAN, MAYBE WE'LL HEAR TESTIMONY TO THE FACT THAT MAYBE THIS IS THEIR IDEA FOR THE NEXT STEP.

IT LOOKS LIKE IN THE PICTURES THAT'S A CONCRETE BLOCK STRUCTURE WITH WOOD TRESSESS THAT ARE DETERIORATED, CORRECT?

>> THAT'S CORRECT. >> COMMISSIONER PERONA?

>> YES, THANK YOU. >> AND THEN COMMISSIONER

ALEXANDER. >> THIS HAS BEEN GOING ON NOW FOR ABOUT TWO AND A HALF YEARS, DIFFERENT OWNERS AND NOW WE HAVE

A PERMIT, A DEMOLITION PERMIT. >> PLUCK IN HOUSE, YES.

>> THE APPLICATION, WITH THE APPLICATION, DO THEY HAVE TO PUT SOME TYPE OF TIMING MECHANISM ON THAT OR IS IT JUST A DEMOLITION PERMIT AND THEY GET IT DONE WHEN IT GETS DONE?

>> THE DEMOLITION PERMEANT IS GOOD FOR 60 DAYS.

>> 60 DAYS? OKAY.

>> BUT ONCE THAT WORK IS COMPLETED, THERE'S NO OTHER TIME

RESTRICTIONS. >> SO AT THE END OF 60 DAYS, WE COULD END UP WITH INTERIOR WALLS AND THEN WE MAY BE RIGHT BACK HERE AGAIN DOING THE SAME THING WE'RE DOING AND REALLY WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IS A DEMOLITION PERMIT THAT'S GOING TO BE 60 DAYS AND A PLAN THAT SHOWS BY THIS TIME NEXT YEAR, THIS HOUSE WILL BE COMPLETELY RENOVATED, ON THE TAX ROLL, A GREAT RESIDENT FOR SOMEBODY IN OUR COMMUNITY TO GO TO.

I GUESS THAT'S NOW HOW IT WORKS. >> I CAN'T SPEAK FOR THE OWNER AND THEY ARE HERE TO SPOKE. AGAIN, I DID EXPRESS STAFF'S OPINION ABOUT FOUR EQUALS STANDING TO HIS CONTRACTOR.

THE SUBMIT LEA THAT THEY MADE, IT SOUNDS LIKE THEY HEARD ME AND HOPEFULLY IF THERE'S ANY MESSAGE FROM THE COMMISSION THAT THEY WOULD HEAR YOU, TOO, BY SUBMITTING A SET OF PLANS.

HOPEFULLY THAT'S CONVEYED AND RECEIVED PROPERLY THAT THAT'S NOT WHAT STAFF IS LOOKING FAR. WE'RE NOT LOOKING FOR FOUR WALLS TO BE LEFT, THERE HAS TO BE ADDITIONAL ACTION TAKEN FROM

STAFF'S POINT OF VIEW >> THANK YOU FOR THAT, YOU MENTIONED IT NOW AND SO HAVE IT, SO HOPEFULLY OTHERS ARE LISTENING AND THAT'S PART OF THE PLAN.

I LOOK AT THIS AND I SEE JUST AN ABSOLUTE UNSAFE BUILDING THAT YOU NAME IT, ANYTHING CAN HAPPEN.

YOU HAVE AN SOFFET HANGING OFF THERE, I'M SURE THINGS HAVE FALLEN OFF THE ROOF. KIDS LIKE TO PLAY AROUND

[00:50:01]

BUILDINGS LIKE THIS, I DID AS A KID, IT JUST CAN'T BE ANY GOOD FOR THE COMMUNITY SO SOMEONE HAS TO STEP UP.

I'M LOOKING AT TIMING MECHANISMS HERE AND LOOKING A TEA THE FASTEST TIME THAT WE CAN GET THIS HOUSET THE FASTEST TIME THAT WE CAN GET THIS HOUSE INTO SOME FORM OF SAFE CONDITION. THANK YOU.

>> OKAY, COMMISSIONER ALEXANDER? >> YES, GOOD EVENING.

MY QUESTION IS OF A CONCERN, DOES THIS FAMILY HAVE SOME TYPE OF INSURANCE TO COVER THE PROPERTY FROM THE OUTSIDE AS FAR AS THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE CHILDREN IN THE NAME? I HEARD COMMISSIONER PERONA SAY TWO-AND-A-HALF YEARS.

OUR STAFF DOESN'T HAVE ANY RECORD OF ANY PROGRESS BEING MADE OR ANY STATEMENTS BEING STATED OF WHAT THE INTENT IS.

I JUST WANT TO KNOW WHY WOULD ANYBODY GO THROUGH THAT MUCH TROUBLE IF THEY DON'T HAVE ANY INTENT TO DO GOOD? SO I WANT TO NOT DISCOURAGE THE COMMUNITY.

I WANT THE COMMUNITY TO WORK BECAUSE I'M TIRED OF THESE VACANT LOTS AND THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE CANNOT MAINTAIN ITSELF ON VACANT LOTS. SO I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A STRUCTURE THERE AND LET'S WORK TOWARD THAT, PLEASE.

THANK YOU. >> PEGGY, COULD YOU PUT BACK UP WHAT OUR CHOICES ARE? I'M CONFUSED ABOUT HISTORIC PRESERVATION. WHAT ARE WE GOING TO BE ABLE TO DO IF THIS IS A HISTORIC STRUCTURE?

>> THIS IS ACTUALLY OUTSIDE THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION PER VIEW IN A SENSE THAT THE COMMISSION COMES FIRST BECAUSE THIS IS A LIFE/HEALTH SAFETY ISSUE. IT GOES TO THE HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD ALMOST AS AN ADMINISTRATIVE STEP.

SO THE COMMISSION, YOU HAVE THE CHOICE TO APPROVE THE RESOLUTION AND SAY YES, IT THESE TO BE DEMOLISHED AND GO AWAY.

TOUGH ABLE TO AMEND THE RESOLUTION, SUCH AS CHANGING THE DATES, GIVING AN EXTENSION OR TABLING IT.

WE HAVE TABLED OTHER ONES IN THE PAST.

THEN YOU CAN JUST DENY IT OUTRIGHT AND SAY NO, WE DON'T SUPPORT THIS RESOLUTION AT ALL. THOSE ARE THE CHOICES.

IF IT IS APPROVED, IT WOULD GO TO HISTORIC PRESERVATION FOR

FINAL REVIEW. >> THANK YOU, THAT HELPS AND THEN THE DATES WERE ON THAT OTHER SLIDE, WHAT HAPPENS NEXT

IF WE APPROVE, RIGHT? >> AND THESE STEPS ARE IF IT'S

APPROVED. >> IF YOU SAY, YES, THE BUILDING

NEEDS TO COME DOWN. >> SO THEY HAVE 30 DAYS TO

APPEAL? >> RIGHT, AND THE APPEAL GOES TO

CIRCUIT COURT. >> ALL RIGHT, IS THERE ANY

DISCUSSION? >> PUBLIC HEARING.

>> YES, THANK YOU. >> THE LAND SIDE IS 0.17 ACRES.

THESE ARE HIS TOR -- HISTORIC PLATTED LOTS --

>> THAT WOULD BE A QUESTION FOR PLANNING, I DON'T KNOW THAT

ANSWER. >> OKAY.

>> ALL RIGHT, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF?

>> YES, I HAVE ONE OTHER QUESTION.

DID I UNDERSTAND THAT THE FAMILY IS THERE? IS THERE NO COMMUNICATION AGAIN BETWEEN STAFF AND THE FAMILY?

>> I WAS JUST GOING TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND SEE IF SOMEONE WANTED TO COME FORWARD. ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU, SIR. IF THE APPLICANT IS HERE, I WOULD LIKE YOU TO COME FORWARD, PLEASE, AND STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND WHETHER YOU WERE SWORN IN.

[00:55:11]

>> MY NAME IS EUGENE BROWN. >> WERE YOU SWORN IN?

>> YES. >> IS THIS THE ADDRESS YOU'RE

USING? >> YEAH, THE HOLD UP ON THE PROPERTY IS LAST YEAR, COVID. I HAVEN'T HAD THE PROPERTY BUT 1 YEAR, I HAVEN'T HAD IT 2 YEARS.

YOU CAN SEE IN THE PAPERWORK I JUST OWNER BOOTH THE PROPERTY FROM LAMPKIN. LAST YEAR WAS A BAD YEAR FROM ME AND I CHOSE A BAD ARCHITECT AND I WAS HELD UP BUT I PRESENTED A FLOOR PLAN, A PERMIT TO GET STARTED ON THE PROPERTY AND WE CAN GET MOVING FORWARD RIGHT AWAY AS SOON AS WE GET THE PERMIT. WE SUBMITTED THAT TWO OR 3 WEEKS

AGO. >> APRIL 23RD

>> I BOUGHT IT FROM WILLY. HE HIRED ME TO DEMOLITION ITHE D I WANTED IT. I DID NOT KNOW IT WAS A HISTORIC PROPERTY OR I WOULD HAVE APPLIED FOR SOME FUNDING TO GET IT DONE.

>> ALL RIGHT, ANY QUESTIONS OF MR. BROWN?

>> MR. BROWN I SAW THAT THE FLOOR PLAN IS ON THE SCREEN THERE. YOU SAID YOU HAD A PROBLEM WITH THE ARCHITECT, ARE YOU THROUGH THAT ISSUE NOW?

>> THAT'S A NEW ARCHITECT, HE JUST CAME IN THE PICTURE AND

HE'S MOVING FAST >> THIS IS HIS PLAN?

>> YES. >> ALL RIGHT, EXCELLENT.

SO JUST WANT TO CONFIRM THE STRUCTURE IS A CB IS CONCRETE

BLOCK STRUCTURE, RIGHT? >> YES.

>> WHAT IS THE FLOOR? >> WOOD BUT WE'RE GOING BACK WITH CONCRETE. ONCE WE REMOVE THE PLAN -- THE PLAN PROBABLY WOULD BE FINISHED AND PRESENTED SO WE PROBABLY

WOULD BE MOVING ON PRETTY FAST. >> COMMISSIONER PERONA?

>> SO I WOULD LIKE TO NARROW THAT MOVING ON PRETTY FAST DOWN TO WHEN DO YOU EXPECT THIS PROJECT TO BE COMPLETED?

>> I CAN'T SAY EXACTLY BECAUSE THE LAST CONTRACTOR DISAPPOINTED ME SO BY HOLDING ME UP SO LONG, THE LAST ARCHITECT, BUT THIS ARCHITECT HERE, HE'S BEEN MOVING ALONG GOOD SO I CAN'T SAY UNTIL I GET THE PLAN APPROVED. IT'S GOING TO BE HARD FOR ME TO PUT SOME TIME TO IT BUT I WOULD LIKE TO ASK FOR AT LEAST A YEAR TO FINISH IT BUT WE CAN GET IT STARTED, I HOPE TO BE FINISHED IN LIKE 4 MONTHS. I HOPE

>> COMMISSIONER C. JOHNSON? >> MR. BROWN, QUESTION.

SO THE FIRST PHASE IS THE DEMOLITION PART, RIGHT? TO TEAR OUT THE WOOD AND THE UNSAFE STRUCTURE, SO MY UNDERSTANDING, THEN, YOU WILL BE LEFT WITH FOUR WALLS AND UNTIL APPROVAL OF THE PLANS. IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE

ANTICIPATING? >> YEAH.

>> OKAY, AND THEN MOVING FORWARD, YOU MENTIONED EARLIER ABOUT IT'S BEEN A ROUGH TIME FOR ALL OF US, RIGHT, WITH THE PANDEMIC, ETC., YOU'RE IN THE PROCESS OR ABLE NOW TO MOVE FORWARD AND YOU RECTIFIED THAT AND FINANCING IS IN LINE?

>> CORRECT. >> ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU.

>> MADAM MAYOR. A QUESTION WAS RAISED BY I BELIEVE JEREMIAH JOHNSON WHERE HE ASKED ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY OF THE HOME BEING BUILT ON A NONCONFORMING LOT.

IT'S A PLATTED AND EXISTING LOT AND IT CAN BE BUILT AS IT SITS

TODAY, YES. >> ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU.

>> ANYTHING ELSE YOU WOULD LIKE TO SAY?

>> YEAH, 7-FEET OF THAT PROPERTY IS AN EASEMENT.

CAN I FENCE THAT SINCE I HAVE TO PAY TAXES ON IT?

>> I CAN'T ANSWER THAT, I DON'T THINK WE CAN ANSWER THAT, MM MR. MIMMS?

>> TYPICALLY EASEMENT IS OWNED BY THE PROPERTY OWNER AND IT'S USED FOR A SPECIFIC PURPOSE, I DON'T KNOW WHAT TYPE OF EASEMENT IT IS. IF IT IS AN ACCESSING UTILITY EASEMENT, WHATEVER YOU PLACE ON THAT PROPERTY, IT SHOULD BE ABLE TO BE REMOVED. IN ESSENCE, YOU WOULD BE TAKING IT AT YOUR OWN RISK, WHATEVER YOU PUT ON THAT PROPERTY.

>> AT SOME POINT I WOULD LIKE TO FENCE IT.

>> I READ IN THE DESCRIPTION THAT IT WAS AN ALLEYWAY, AN

[01:00:03]

ABANDONED ALLEYWAY. >> IT'S LIKE 14-FEET WIDE.

I PAY TAXES ON 7-FEET OF IT. >> MADAM MAYOR, THE PURPOSE OF THIS SHOULD BE ON THE RESOLUTION.

WE HAVE PROCEDURE AND A PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND PLANNING DEPARTMENT WHO WOULD WANT TO WEIGH IN ON THIS.

>> WE'RE GOING DOWN THE FENCE ROAD.

>> ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. THANK YOU SO MUCH.

I'M GOING TO SEE IF ANYBODY ELSE WANTS TO SPEAK.

WE APPRECIATE YOUR BEING HERE. >> OKAY THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. >> ANYONE ELSE IN THE PUBLIC WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS ISSUE? ANYONE ELSE? ALL RIGHT. WE SHALL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND I WILL ENTERTAIN DISCUSSION.

>> I JUST HAVE A COUPLE OF COMMENTS.

I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS THAT WERE ANSWERED.

WE HAVE A GOOD FLOOR PLAN HERE. I THINK COMMISSIONER ALEXANDER WILL RECALL ME TALKING ABOUT STRUCTURES THAT HAVE POTENTIAL GOOD BONES AND GOOD STRUCTURE OPPORTUNITY AND IN THIS CASE, IT'S CONCRETE BLOCK, THE APPLICANT TALKED ABOUT THE WOOD FLOOR BEING A PROBLEM, HE'S GOING TO PUT IT BACK TO CONCRETE WHICH IS MORE CONVENTIONAL CONSTRUCTION PRACTICE.

WITH THE FLOOR PLAN THAT'S PRESENTED, HE'S GOING TO DO A WOOD TRUSS ROOF SYSTEM BRINGING IT UP TO CODE I'M SURE.

AND THE TIMING, YOU HAVE THE QUESTION ON A TIMING.

I SEE AN OPPORTUNITY HERE. IT LOOKS LIKE MR. BROWN IS READY TO PUT IT TO WORK. WHAT ARE YOU THINKING ON TIME

FRAME? >> COMMISSIONER PERONA.

>> YEAH, I THINK MR. BROWN HAS EXPRESSED THAT HE'S READY TO GET TO WORK. WE DID HAVE A PANDEMIC COME THROUGH AND AS LONG AS WE'RE ACTING AS IF WE ARE PART OF THE MAJOR SOLUTION, I REALLY THINK WE ARE, I THINK THAT 1 YEAR IN THIS SMALL HOUSE SHOULD BE ABLE TO BE ACCOMPLISHED.

I'M JUST THINKING TO MYSELF, THOUGH, THAT IF THIS COMES BACK IN FRONT OF THIS COMMISSION AGAIN, WE ALL NEED TO KNOW THAT IT'S GOING TO GET KNOCKED DOWN, BUT I AGREE, THE CONCRETE STRUCTURE, THE GOOD BONES, BUILT IN 1953.

NOT EVERYTHING BUILT BACK THEN IS FALLING APART, ALTHOUGH I FEEL IT ONCE IN A WHILE. IT'S INTERESTING BECAUSE IT HAS A STEM WALL, YOU CAN SEE THE VENTING AND ALL THE ACCESS AND I'M ALWAYS FASCINATED WITH THAT. I WOULD ALMOST LIKE TO SEE THIS HOW BE RECONSTRUCTED MYSELF AND BE PART OF THAT, BUT THAT'S NOT GOING TO BE SO. SO I AGREE, IS THERE SOME TIME FORMAT THAT WE CAN PUT IN HERE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HIT CERTAIN THRESHOLDS BEFORE WE JUST WAIT A YEAR?

THAT WOULD BE MY QUESTION. >> I THINK WHAT WE NEED TO DO IS JUST ESTABLISH WHAT WE WANT TO SEE DONE BY A CERTAIN TIME PERHAPS AND SO IF WE WANT THE STRUCTURE COMPLETED BY A YEAR, HAVE SOME KIND OF INSPECTION AFTER 4 MONTHS OR SOMETHING TO

SEE WHAT PROGRESS HAS BEEN MADE. >> I HAVE A COUPLE OF IDEAS, IF I COULD. HE'S GOT A DEMOLITION PERMIT IN RIGHT NOW, WHICH IS THE ROOF AND PROBABLY SOME OF THE SUBSTRUCTURE OF THE FLOOR AND I IMAGINE TAKING THE WINDOWS OUT AND THE PLYWOOD OFF. WE WOULD WANT THAT TO HAPPEN AS SOON AS THEY GET THE APPROVAL OF THAT PERMIT TO HAPPEN WITHIN 45 DAYS AND AT 60 DESS, SUBMITTING FOR THE BUILDING PERMIT TO AYS, SUBMITTING FOR THE BUILDING PERMIT TO REBUILD THE STRUCTURE. I THINK THAT WOULD HIT YOUR 1 YEAR TIME FRAME BY THE TIME YOU GET THOSE THINGS MOVING AND

PUT IN MOTION. >> CORRECTION, THOUSGH.

THE PLANS HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED, NO?

>> ONCE THE PERMIT IS ISSUED TO DEMO THE APPLICATION, I THINK PEGGY TALKED ABOUT THE ROOF AND THE FLOOR AND I'M MISSING

SOMETHING >> THE INTERIOR.

>> THAT'S WHAT IT WAS. ONCE THE PERMIT IS ISSUED TO GET ALL THAT CLEANED UP AND OFF THE PROPERTY, THAT WAY YOU HAVE FOUR WALLS AND WITHIN 60 DAYS TO HAVE THE ARCHITECT, BECAUSE THAT CAN WORK IN PARALLEL WITH THE DEMO, AN ARCHITECT SUBMITTING A SET OF PLANS FOR REVIEW AND RECONSTRUCTION.

THAT'S MY THEORY. >> SO STAFF AND I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE OUR STAFF AND MR. MIMMS IN GETTING THAT OUT, WE CAN MEET THAT AND MAKING SURE WE DON'T HOLD UP HIS END OF THAT

[01:05:05]

WHEN IT COMES TO THAT PROCESS, RIGHT?

>> I'M TALKING ABOUT HIM PERFORMING THE WORK 45 DAYS AFTER THE ISSUANCE OF THE PERMIT.

>> OKAY, GOT YOU. I'M OKAY WITH THAT.

I THINK IF WE PUT IN THOSE MILE STONES.

I, TOO, WOULD LIKE TOO SEE THIS AREA REVITALIZED.

I'M CURIOUS OF THE HISTORIC NATURE OF THIS HOUSE AND I WOULD AGREE THAT HOUSES BUILT IN THAT TIME, I LIVE IN ONE BUILT AROUND THAT TIME SO THEY'RE MADE OF GOOD STRUCTURE.

IT'S IMPORTANT AS COMMISSIONER ALEXANDER STATED THAT WE DO EVERYTHING WE CAN TO GET THESE THINGS BACK ON TAX ROLLS AND WHAT I HEARD WAS THE MOST IMPORTANT THING FROM THE APPLICANT IS THAT HE'S IN A POSITION NOW TO MOVE FORWARD WITH HIS PLANS AND EVERYTHING THAT WAS DELAYED AND I THINK THAT TRANSITION BETWEEN HIM AND THE PRIOR OWNER PUTS US IN A BETTER POSITION TO SEE SOMETHING LITERALLY WITHIN 45 DAYS AFTER

AND THEN 60 DAYS AND SO FORTH. >> AND THEN WE WANT A REPORT

FROM STAFF? >> I WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOMETHING IF NOT MET. I THINK WE NEED TO KEEP THIS IN

FRONT OF US. >> RIGHT.

>> AND THE OTHER CONDITION JUST THINKING OUT LOUD WITH YOU, COMMISSIONERS, ONCE THE 45 DAYS, THE 60 DAYS, THEN IT'S IN STAFF'S REVIEW FOR THE REBUILD AND RECONSTRUCTION.

ONCE THAT PERMIT IS ISSUED, WE SHOULD PROBABLY CLARIFY THAT THE FIRST INSPECTION SHOULD OCCUR WITHIN THE FIRST 30 TO 60 DAYS AFTER THE PERMIT IS ISSUED, THE SECOND ONE.

ONE IS THE DEMO, THE SECOND WILL BE THE REBUILD.

THINGS LIKE WINDOWS, THOSE ARE HELD UP AROUND THE UNITED STATES RIGHT NOW, THERE'S AN A FOUR TO 5-MONTH DELAY ON WINDOWS AND DOOR, SOME PRODUCTS, NOT ALL, AS WE KNOW YOU HAVE HEARD IN THE NEWS WHAT'S HAPPENING WITH WOOD PRICES AND THE TRUSS INDUSTRY HAS CHANGED. IT'S JUST MORE EXPENSIVE BUT IT'S NOT A DELAY RIGHT NOW FROM WHAT I HAVE SEEN, BUT YOU CAN PULL YOUR FIRST PERMIT AND HAVE YOUR FIRST INSPECTION WITHIN 30 TO 60 DAYS NO PROBLEM, WHETHER IT BE ELECTRICAL OR MAYBE THE CONCRETE, THE SUB FLOOR, MAYBE YOU SEE THE UTILITIES, YOU SAW THE PLUMBING IN THE PICTURES. IT'S ANOTHER MILESTONE IS MY

POINT. >> ALL RIGHT, WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS WE'RE SEEING ABOUT THE TIMING BECAUSE THIS HAS GONE ON A LONG TIME AND THIS IS IT ABOUT THE TIMING, I THINK.

SO I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. IF YOU CAN PUT ALL THAT TOGETHER. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON?

>> WRITING THE MILESTONES DOWN. >> MADAM MAYOR, I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S APPROPRIATE BY JUST TO MAKE SURE THE APPLICANT IS UNDERSTANDING THESE MILESTONES AND WHAT WE'RE ASKING, IS THERE

A POINT THAT WE CAN -- >> I CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING AND SO I DON'T THINK -- I MYSELF DON'T THINK IT IS APPROPRIATE BECAUSE I THINK HE NEEDS TO MEET THE MILESTONES.

>> WE WOULD PUT IN A NOTICE TO HIM AFTER YOU DO THIS.

>> IS THERE'S AN APPEAL PROCESS AFTER THAT AS LONG AS THERE'S

SOMETHING THERE. >> AND I DID ASK FOR A TIME MECHANISM ON THIS WHOLE THING AND IT'S HARD TO GET HIS HANDS ON IT RIGHT NOW BY I HAVE CONFIDENT ON THE FACT THAT THIS IS SOMETHING THIS IS ON THE FAC IS SOMETHING TC ON THE FACT THA IS SOMETHING TE ON THE FACT THAS IS SOMETHING THIS IS SOMETHING MOVING FORWARD. EVERYTHING CAN WORK IN PARALLEL.

YOU HAVE ALL THE TASKS MOVING AT THE SAME TIME.

>> YEAH. ALL RIGHT.

ARE YOU READY? >> NOT REALLY BUT I'M GOING TO GIVE IT A SHOT. I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE AMEND RESOLUTION 21-R25 TO INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING, THAT THE STRUCTURE IS DEEMED UNSAFE, HOWEVER, THE APPLICANT CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH REBUILTING WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS: THAT THE APPLICANT IS COME PLEADING THE ROOF STRUCTURE AND INTERIOR WALLS WITHIN 45 DAYS OF PERMIT ISSUANCE, THAT THE APPLICANT SUBMIT A SET OF PLANS FOR BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATION 60 DAYS FROM TODAY, AND THAT THE FIRST INSPECTION BE PULLED ON THE PROPERTY FOR THAT BUILDING PERMIT WITHIN 45 DAYS OF PERMIT

ISSUANCE. >> IS THERE A SECOND?

>> SECOND. >> ALL RIGHT.

ANY DISCUSSION? CALL THE ROLL, PLEASE.

>> COMMISSIONER ALEXANDER? >> YES.

>> COMICSER C. JOHNSON? >> YES, MA'AM.

[01:10:02]

OOVMENT COMICSER J. JOHNSON >> YES, MA'AM

>> COMICSER PERONA >> YES, MA'AM.

[b. Legislative Hearing - Ordinance 21-004 - extending the territorial limits of the City of Fort Pierce, to include two (2) properties at or near 2398 Peters Road in Fort Pierce, Florida. FIRST READING]

>> MAYOR SUDDEN SON. >> YES, MA'AM.

>> ALL RIGHT, THE NEXT IS ORRED NINETIES 21-004 EXTENDING THE TERRITORIAL LIMITS [INDISCERNIBLE] AS OF JANUARY 1, 2021, DIRECTING THE ST. L UCIE COUNTY TAX COLLECTOR TO COLLECT TAXES ESTABLISHING THE ZONING DESIGNATION DIRECTING FILING OF THE ORDINANCE WITH THE CLERK OF THE SIR CAUGHT COURT AND CHIEF ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICER OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY TO BE FILED WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE AND SUBMITTED TO THE [INDISCERNIBLE]

>> HELLO, WELCOME. >> BEFORE I BEGIN, I WOULD TO NOTE THAT THIS ANNEXATION CAME THROUGH ABOUT A MOVE AND A HALF AGO DUE TO THE APPLICANT WANTING US TO PUT LANGUAGE IN THE ORDINANCE FOR THE CITY TO RECK NAYS THEIR AG EXEMPTION ON THE PROPERTY. WE HAD TO RENOTIFY THE COMMISSION SO WE'LL GO TO SECOND READING IN 2 WEEKS.

THIS IS ANNEXATION FOR TWO PROPERTIES AT 2398 PETERS ROAD.

THE FUTURE LAND USE CURRENTLY IS MIXED USE COUNTY.

ONE ANNEXED IT WILL BE GIVEN OUR MIXED USE CATEGORY.

THE CURRENT COUNTY ZONING IS R2. AS PROPOSED THE ANNEXATION MEETS THETY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLANS SPECIALLY POLICY 1.11.

THE PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDED APPROVAL 7-0 AT THE FEBRUARY PLANNING COMMITTEE. POSSIBLE ACTIONS ARE TO APPROVE THE ANNEXATION. YOU CAN ALSO DISAPPROVE THE PROPOSED ANNEXATION. I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS

YOU MAY HAVE, THANK YOU. >> ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF? THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING, ANYONE WISHING TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE PLEASE COME FORWARD. I SEE NO ONE, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND ENTERTAIN A MEXICO.

>> MOVE TO APROVE. >> SECOND.

A MOTION AND A SECOND, CALL ROLL, PLEASE.

>> COMMISSIONER ALEXANDER >> YES.

>> COMMISSIONER C. JOHNSON >> YES, MA'AM.

>> COMMISSIONER J. JOHNSON. >> YES, MA'AM.

[c. Legislative Hearing - Ordinance 21-012 Amending Chapter 103, Article IX, Property Maintenance Ordinance and Housing Code and creating Article XI, Mobile and Manufactured Homes. FIRST READING]

COMMISSIONER PERONA. >> MAYOR HUDSON, YES, MA'AM.

>> NEXT WE HAVE 21-012, AN ORDINANCE BY THE CITY COMMISSION AMENDING CHAPTER 103 CREATING ARTICLE 11 PROPERTY MAINTENANCE ORDINANCE MOBILE AND MANUFACTURED HOMES PROVIDED FOR APPLICABLE AND NATURE PROVIDING FOR ENFORCEMENT REPEALING ALL ARID NANCES AND PARTS IN ORDINANCES AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE, THIS IS THE FIRST READING.

>> I HAVE BEG THE PARRED OF THIS COMMISSION BECAUSE THIS SOUNDS LIKE A REPEAT OF THE LAST PRESENTATIONATION.

>> IT SOUNDS FAMILIAR, YES >>.

SO I PREMATURELY PRESENT THIRD-DEGREE SIGH TEAM SO THIS IS THE ACTUAL RESOLUTION FOR THE MOBILE HOME ORDINANCE.

RIGHT NOW MOBILE HOMES ARE VEHICLES, NOT STRUCTURES OR RESIDENTS SO THEY ARE NOT COVERED BY THE FLORIDA BUILDING CODE BUT SINCE THEY ARE BUILT AND APPROVED AND INSPECTED IN A FACTORY, IF ANYONE MAKES ANY MODIFICATIONS TO THEM, THEY CAN SEVERELY MODIFY AND WEAKEN THE STRUCTURE.

UNFORTUNATELY, YOU MIGHT SAY LISTEN, A PREHN HAS A RIGHT TO DO WHATEVERPERSON HAS A RIGHT T DO WHATEVER THEY WANT ON THEIR OWN STRUCTURE OF THEIR HOME, BUT MOBILE HOMES ARE VERY TRANSIENT SO SOMEONE CAN MODIFY A MOBILE HEME, WOME, WEAKEN IT AND SELL THAT PERSON NOT BE AWARE OF THE DANGERS.

SINCE THERE'S NO CRITERION IN THE BUILDING CODE, IT ESTABLISHES THE DOT OR DMV'S CRITERION FOR REPAIRS.

IN OTHER WORDS, THEY HAVE TO GO LIKE FOR LIKE CARD THAT STANDARD SO IT ESTABLISHES THAT STANDARD. IT ALSO ALLOWS THE MAINTENANCE CODE TO BE USED. THAT'S BASICALLY THE OBJECTIVE OF THIS. I YOU WOULD LIKE ME TO EXPLAIN WHAT THE OTHER ONE WAS FOR, I WOULD BE WILLING TO DO THAT AS

[01:15:05]

WELL. >> ANY QUESTIONS OF MR. THOMAS?

COMMISSIONER PERONA? >> WELL, ONE WAS CONSIDERED A VEHICLE, BASICALLY, AND THE OTHER ONE IS A STRUCTURE R.

THERE ANY CON FLIKTS BETWEEN A RESIDENT OR A BUILDING AND AFLI RESIDENT OR A BUILDING AND A VEHICLE THAT MAY BE A CONFLICTING ITEM NO COULD COME DOWN THE ROAD?

>> I WOULD SAY REALLY, EVEN THOUGH A MOBILE HOME IS A LIVABLE STRUCTURE, IT'S CLASSIFIED AS A VEHICLE BECAUSE EVERYTHING IS SMALLER, THEY DON'T USE TWO BY FOURS, THE DRY WALL ISN'T THE SAME SIZE, THE SHEATHING FOR THE EXTERIOR AND THE ROOF IS NOT THE SAME AS A REGULAR HOUSE.

THE REASON THE STANDARDS ARE DIFFERENT IS IF SOMEONE SAYS I HAVE A LEAK IN THE ROOF AND THEY USE HALF INCH PLYWOOD, THE EXTRA WEIGHT IN THE ROOF DURING A STORM CHANGES THE STRUCTURE.

SO A TRUE HOME BUILT SLAB ON GRADE IS MUCH STRONGER THAN A MOBILE HOME. THAT'S WHY YOU HAVE TO BE CAREFUL WITH FOLKS FOLLOWING WITH IT.

THEY HAVE TO MEET THE STANDARD SO IT'S AS SAFE AS CAN BE OR GET AN ENGINEER SAYING IT'S SAFE BECAUSE IF YOU KINGER WITH IT, IT CAN REALLY, REALLY JEEP SIZE THOSE.

>> TO ME, IT'S APPLE AND ORANGES, NOT EVEN CLOSE.

MOBILE HOMES JUST DON'T MAKE ANY SENSE IN SOME PARTS OF FLORIDA BUT THEY CAN ANCHOR THOSE AND SECURE THEM PROPERLY AND, AGAIN, IF YOU START CHANGING SOME OF THAT FRAME STRUCTURE AND CALL STRUCTURE AROUND, THINGS ARE NOT AS SECURE AS THEY SHOULD BE.

>> ABSOLUTELY. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF?

>> JUST A COMMENT, THINKING MR. THOMAS IS BEING VERY PROACTIVE IN THIS AND DOING MORE LEARNING THAN THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THESE TWO BUT I THINK AS OUR COMMUNITY GROWS AND WE LOOK AT THESE THINGS, WE WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE PROVIDING THE BEST SAFE ALTERNATIVE WHEN WE'RE APPROVING THESE STRUCTURES AND COMMUNITIES COMING INTO OUR NEIGHBORHOODS, THAT WE ARE PROTECTING THE CITIZENS. THANK YOU FOR HAVING PROACTIVE

IN BRINGING THIS FORWARD. >> ALL RIGHT.

IF THAT'S ALL, I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.

ANYONE WISHING TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE, COME FORWARD.

SEEING NO ONE, I WILL CLOSE THE HEARING AND ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

>> MOVE FOR APPROVAL. >> SECOND.

>> CALL ROLL, PLEASE. >> COMMISSIONER ALEXANDER

>> YES. >> COMMISSIONER C. JOHNSON

>> YES, MA'AM. >> COMMISSIONER J. JOHNSON, YES, MA'AM. COMMISSIONER PERONA

>> YES, MA'AM. MAYOR HUDSON.

>> YES, MA'AM. >> WHO SECONDED THAT?

I MISSED IT. >> I DID.

[d. Legislative Hearing - Ordinance 21-013 - extending the territorial limits of the City of Fort Pierce, to include one (1) property at or near 2192 Copenhaver Road in Fort Pierce, Florida. FIRST READING]

>> NEXT WE HAVE 21-013 INCLUDING ONE PARCEL AT OR NEAR 2192COPENHAVER ROAD IN FORT PIERCE, FLORIDA, ASSESSING SED PROPERTY AND PLACE IT ON THE THE CITY'S TAX ROLLS, ESTABLISHING THE ZONING DESIGNATION ESTABLISHING THE LAND USE DESIGNATION DRECKING THE REVISION OF THE CHARTER BOUNDARY ARTICLE TO BE FILED WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE AND SUBMITTED TO THE OFFICE OF DEMOGRAPHIC RESEARCH [INDISCERNIBLE] PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

THIS IS TE FIRST REEDING. >> PROCEED.

>> GOOD EVENING, THIS IS AN APPLICATION FOR ANNEXATION FOR 2192 COPENHAVER ROAD. THE FUTURE LAND USE ON THE PROPERTY IS RU RESIDENTIAL URBAN, IT WILL BE GIVEN OUR FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION REC L [INDISCERNIBLE] AT THE MARCH PLANTING BOARD MEETING THE BOARD VOTED 5-0 TO APPROVE THE REQUEST. POSSIBLE ACTIONS BY THE [INDISCERNIBLE] I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.

>> JUST A QUICK COMMENT. I THINK I DID MEET WITH THE APPLICANT ON THIS ONE MANY MONTHS AGO.

THIS SECTION OF ROADWAY IS CALLED COPENHAVER ROAD AND JUST

[01:20:02]

TO THE SOUTH IT JUST MAGICALLY TURNS TO PETERS ROAD.

HAS THERE BEEN DISCUSSION WITH STAFF TO MAKE THAT CONSISTENT UP TO GRAHAM ROAD AND HAVE IT BE PETERS ROAD INSTEAD OF THE MAGIC CHANGE IN THE MIDDLE OF THE ROAD SECTION?

>> AT THIS TIME THERE HASN'T BEEN ANY DISCUSSION BUT IT'S A MIX, HONESTLY, I THINK THIS IS THE ONLY PROPERTY ON THIS SIDE OF THE ROAD THAT IS COPENHAVER ROAD.

EVERYTHING ELSE IS PETERS ROAD SO THE FIX COULD BE THAT THEY

COULD AUBSUBMIT AN ADDRESS REQU. >> MAYBE A PLANNING FUNCTION TO

PLAY THAT OUT. >> MR. MIMMS.

>> COPENHAVER ROAD AND I BELIEVE THIS SECTION OF PETERS ROAD, I BELIEVE THESE ARE COUNTY ROADS, COUNTY DESIGNATED ROADS SO IF THERE ARE ANY CHANGES TO THE NAME OR DESIGNATION, THE COUNTY WOULD HAVE TO APPROVE THIS CHANGE.

>> ST. LUCIE DOES IT ALL THE TIME, SAME ROAD, TWO DIFFERENT NAMES. THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING, ANYONE WISHING TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE PLEASE COME FORWARD.

I SEE NO ONE, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND ENTERTAIN A

MEXICO >> MOVE TO APPROVE.

>> SECOND. >> CALL THE ROLL, PLEASE.

>> COMMISSIONER ALEXANDER >> YES.

>> YES, MA'AM, THANK YOU. >> THAT CONCLUDES OUR PUBLIC

[a. Hearing on notice of appeal filed by St. Peter Lutheran Church, 2900 Jenkins Road, to appeal a decision made by the Board of Adjustment of the City of Fort Pierce on February 25, 2021, pursuant to the Fort Pierce Code of Ordinances, Sec. 125-108.]

HEARINGS. NOW WE HAVE A HEARING, NOTICE OF APPEAL FILED BY ST. PETER RUTH RAN CHARGE PURSUANT TO THE FORT PIERCE CODE OF ORDINANCES 125-128.

I BELIEVE BEFORE YOU YOU HAVE THE PROCEDURES FOR THIS APPEAL

>> THIS IS AN APPEAL FROM A BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT REQUEST.

YOU SHOULD HAVE ALL THE BACKUP MATERIALS PROVIDED FROM THE I'LL KAY APPELLANT. SO THE PROCEDURES YOU SHOULD HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU I DISSEMINATED BY E-MAIL LAST WEEK. IF YOU LOOK DOWN AT THE BOTTOM, CONDUCT OF HEARING, IS PROCEDURE WE HAVE ALL AGREED ON IS AN UP TO 20-MINUTE PRESENTATION BY THE APPELLANT TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION. ONCE HE'S DONE WITH HIS PRESENTATION, YOU WILL BE ABLE TO ASK A MANY QUESTIONS AS YOU WOULD LIKE OF THE APPELLANT AND THEN WHEN YOU'RE DONE WITH THAT, THE APPELLANT WILL TAKE A SEAT.

ONCE THEY'RE DONE, THEY'RE TRULY DONE AND YOU CAN ASK STAFF ANY QUESTIONS AND THEN IF THE APPELLANT REQUESTED ANY REBUTTAL, HE WOULD HAVE USE WHATEVER TIME IS LEFT AND THEN

YOU WOULD HAVE AN OPEN DISCUSSION. >> ARE THERE NO SWEARING IN OF

WITNESSES? >> NO BECAUSE THE ENTIRE RECORD IS THE BACKUP MATERIAL PROVIDED VIA THE AGENDA SO THAT IS YOUR WORLD AND WHAT YOU WILL BE HEARING IS ARGUMENT.

>> AND NO EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS? > I DON'T BELIEVE -- WE CAN TAKE A POLL VERY QUICKLY JUST TO MAKE SURE BY I WOULD NOT EXPECT THAT THERE HAD BEEN BUT IN AN

ABUNDANCE OF CAUTION I THINK THAT'S AN EXCELLENT IDEA. >> COMMISSIONER RICE, WE DID DISTRIBUTE SOME ADDITIONAL HARDCOPIES OF TOUGH STUFF THAT MUCH ATTACHED TO THE AGENDA.

>> ALL RIGHT. DO YOU WANT TOO ASK COMMISSIONERS ABOUT AN EX PARTE?

>> YES, COMMISSIONER ALEXANDER HAVE YOU HAD EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS ON THIS ISSUE?

>> NO I HAVEN'T. >> COMMISSIONER C. JOHNSON? >> NO, MA'AM.

>> COMMISSION ERE J. JOHNSON. >> GNOME. I HAD ONE CONVERSATION WHAT THE APPELLANT WHEN HE WAS TRYING TO GET THROUGH TO STAFF ABOUT THE APPELLANT SPINELIKES BUT THAT'S IT. THAT'S THE ONLYPROCEDURES BUT T IT.

THAT'S THE ONLY CONVERSATION I HEAD. RIGHT NOW, THEN, WE WILL CALL THE APPELLANT FORWARD, PLEASE. STATE YOUR NAME AND YOU HAVE UP TO 20 MINUTES, YOU CERTAINLY

DON'T HAVE TO TAKE 20 MINUTES TO ENLIGHTEN US. >> THANK YOU, MY NAME IS TED RICE. I'M PASTOR OF ST. PETER LUTHERAN CHURCH, 2900 SOUTH JENKINS HERE

[01:25:05]

IN FORT PIERCE. MADAM MAYOR, COMMISSIONERS. I THINK THIS WHOLE THING STARTED BECAUSE WE HAD EXCESS PROPERTY THAT WE DIDN'T NEED AND WE MADE A DECISION THAT WE WERE GOING TO SELL SOME OF IT BUT THE CONDITION WAS THAT IT HAD TO BE SOMETHING THAT WAS GOOD FOR THE COMMUNITY. I GUESS GOD WAS HEARING US BEFORE WE PUT IT ON THE MARKET, A CHARTER SCHOOL CAME TO US AND WANTED TO BUY THE PROPERTY, SO THAT KIND OF STARTED THIS WHOLE THING. I WANT TO SAY UP FRONT THIS DISPUTE OR WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT STARTED WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND I WANT TO SAY I HAVE NO GRIPE WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. THEY TREATED US WITH RESPECT AND I KNOW WHY THEY DID WHAT THEY DID AND I UNDERSTAND THAT. THE PROBLEM IS THAT THEY'RE LOCKED INTO RULE THAT IS WERE PROBABLY WRITTEN IN THE MIDDLE OF THE 20TH CENTURY TRYING TO FUNCTION IN A CITY THAT'S NOT 21ST CENTURY AND THE BALL GAME JUST SIMPLY IS NOT THE SAME. THE REASON WE APPLIED FOR A SIGN AND I GUESS YOU PASSED OUT THE TOP COPIES, THE SIGNING THAT WE'RE ASKING TO PUT UP IS 9'2" HIGH AND IT WAS DENIED BECAUSE WE WERE TOLD IT CAN'T BE MORE THAN 6-INCHES HIGH BECAUSE WE'RE IN A RIESE DENTAL NEIGHBORHOOD. THE PROPERTY DIRECTLY NORTH OF US IS COMMERCIAL.RESIDENTIAL NE.

THE PROPERTY DIRECTLY NORTH OF US IS COMMERCIAL. THE WHOLE STREET ACROSS THE COMMERCIAL AND THE PROPERTY DIRECTLY SOUTH OF US IS COMMERCIAL.

WE ARE NO LONGER A RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY. NOW, YES, WHEN WE BOUGHT IT WE WERE AND ONE OF THE THINGS THEY SAID, WELL, YOU HAD A 6-FOOT SIGN, YEAH, 21 YEARS AGO WE WERE IN A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD. THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE AND I THINK FOR GOOD REASONS, HAS DECIDED THAT. WE'RE NO LONGER IN THE SAME POSITION.

IT'S BEEN DIFFICULT FOR US BECAUSE THERE ARE THINGS I JUST LOOK AT AND SHAKE MY HEAD.

WE HAD TO PUT IN A SIDEWALK ACROSS THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY AND I UNDERSTAND WHY WE WANT SIDEWALKS, BUT NORTH OF US IS A PLACE THAT'S PARKING SEMI TRUCKS AND THEY HAVE BEEN THERE 8 OR 9 MONTHS AND THEY WERE NOT REQUIRED TO PUT IN A SIDEWALK. BETWEEN US AND A SOUTH PROPERTY, THERE'S A CANAL WHICH I GUESS IS THE WATER DISTRICT AND THEY'RE NOT REQUIRED TO PUT IN A SIDEWALK, SO WE PAID FOR A SIDEWALK THAT GOES NOWHERE. IT DOESN'T SEEM TO MAKE SENSE TO ME. WE WERE ALSO REQUIRED TO PUT IN A SIDEWALK FROM THE FRONT SIDEWALK ALL THE WAY BACK TO THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY WHERE THE SCHOOL IS.

IT'S BEEN THERE 3 MONTHS, NO HUMAN BEING HAS YET TO WALK ON THAT PROPERTY, ON THAT SIDEWALK, AND IF SOMEBODY DROPS THEIR CHILD OFF, THEY WOULD HAVE TO WADE THROUGH THE SWELL TO GET THROUGH THE SIDEWALK TO USE IT, YET IT COSTS THANK YOUS OF DOLLARS IN CEMENT THAT COULD HAVE BEEN USED FOR COMPUTERS OR LEARNING JUST A LOT OF STUFF THAT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE IN TODAY'S WORLD AND I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THE SIDEWALK. IF EVERYBODY HAS ONE AND IT GOES SOMEWHERE, THAT'S FINE BUT WE NOW HAVE A SWELL THAT'S ABOUT 4-FOOT WIDE AND THE PROPERY NORTH OF US HAS NO SWELL AT ALL SO WE DON'T HAVE A SWELL, WE HAVE A LAKE IN FRONT OF THE PROPERTY, JUST THINGS THAT MAKE NO SENSE. BUT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT HAPPENED WAS WE HAD TO PUT IN A TURN LANE. A TURN LANE WENT RIGHT THROUGH OUR ORIGINAL SIGN. THE SIGN IS NOW GONE AND WE CONTACTED A SIGN COMPANY AND THE PICTURE THAT YOU HAVE IS A SIGN THAT WE ARE HOPING TO HAVE. I ALSO ATTACHED ON JENKINS ROAD, I ATTACHED SOME OVER SIGNS, ONE FOR WAWA JUST UP THE STREET FROM US, THAT'S 12-FEET HIGH.

THERE'S ONE THAT BELONGS TO WALGREENS WHICH HAS CHICK-FIL-A AT THE BOTTOM OF IT, THAT ONE IS 12-FEET HIGH. DOWN THE STREET IS GANDER RV, THAT SIGN IS 18-FEET HIGH AND WE'RE ASKING FOR 9-FEET, WHICH IS LESS THAN ALL OF THOSE SIGNS. I ALSO PUT IN HERE PICTURES OF TRINITY LUTHERAN CHURCH ON 13TH STREET. THEY HAVE THE EXACT SIGN THAT WE WANT TO PUT UP. WE'RE TOLD THEY CAN H APPARENTL THEY HAVE IS OPEN SPACE OR

[01:30:06]

SOMETHING AND I ASKED WHEN WAS THAT PUT IN AND THEY COULDN'T EVEN ANSWER ME.

THAT'S PROBABLY BEEN THERE FOR 100 YEARS BUT THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE REQUIRED, SO THEY CAN HAVE THE SIGN THAT WE CAN'T HAVE BUT THEY'RE IN A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD.

IT JUST DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE. RIGHT DOWN THE STREET FROM US IS AN A SIGN VERY MUCH LIKE OURS FOR THE PUBLIC SCHOOL THERE AND I'M TOLD, WELL, FORT PIERCE HAS NO CONTROL OVER THAT, THAT'S THE STATE. IT DOESN'T MATTER IF IT'S FORT PIERCE APPROVED IT, THE STATE APPROVED IT, IF THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES APPROVED IT, THE SIGN IS THERE AND IT CHANGES THE NEIGHBORHOOD. TO ME IT'S ALMOST LUDICROUS, IT REALLY IS.

I KNOW WE'RE ASKING FOR A LEGAL ANSWER TO THIS, A CHANGE IN THE POLICY OR A SPECIAL EXEMPTION I GUESS IT'S CALLED, BUT THAT'S NOT REALLY WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR.

WE'RE ASKING THAT WE BE TREATED LIKE OUR NEIGHBORS AND LIKE OTHER PLACES IN THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE. I HAVE HEARD THE REASONS WHY THEY CAN'T AND I HAVE TO BE HONEST WITH YOU, BACK IN 1950, THAT WAS PROBABLY A GOOD THING. IN 2021, IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY

SENSE AT ALL. THANK YOU. >> YOU STAY HERE IN CASE SOMEONE

WANTS TO ASK YOU A QUESTION. ANY QUESTIONS OF THE APPELLANT? >> PASTOR RICE, SO HAVE YOU EVER

THOUGHT ABOUT REZONING TO COMMERCIAL? >> YEAH, BUT THAT'S ADDITIONAL EXPENSE. WE HAVE SPENT THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS FOR WHAT FORT PIERCE REQUIRED AND TO NOW SAY, WE TOOK YOUR SIGN BECAUSE WE NEEDED TO WIDEN THE STREET SO NOW YOU HAVE TO PAY ADDITIONAL. COULD WE DO THAT? SURE, WE COULD DO THAT.

>> I MEAN IN YOUR WORDS SAYING THAT THE OTHERS ON THE SAME STREET HAVE HAD THE ABILITY TO MAKE THE SIGN MUCH LIKE YOU WANT TO PROVIDE, BUT I THINK ALL THOSE ARE COMMERCIAL OR

SOMETHING OTHER THAN R2 ZONING >> THEY ARE. I UNDERSTAND THAT, I UNDERSTAND

WHY PLANNING DID THAT, YES. >> I READ THROUGH SOME OF THE MINUTES FROM YOUR MEETING ON THE ADJUSTMENTS AND IT SEEMS LIKE COMMERCIAL SAYS IING NATION OF PROPERTY AS VALUES TO THE PROPERTY AND GIVES YOU CERTAIN RIGHTS AND CERTAIN -- IT ALLOWS YOU TO DO THINGS YOU CAN DO THAT YOU CAN'T DO IN AN REC 2 RESIDENTIAL AREA BUT I DON'T KNOWR RESIDENTIAL AREA BUT I D2 RESIDENTIAL AREA BUT I DON'T KNOW YOUR FUTURE PLANS.

YOUR BOSS HASN'T TOLD YOU YOUR FUTURE PLANS YET. >> IN A WAY HE HAS.

THE NAME NO LONGER SAYS ST. PETER. >> I SEE THAT.

>> THE REASON IS WE'RE NO LONGER ST. PETER LUTHERAN. WE ARE LEGALLY AND WE STILL HAVE A SUNDAY SERVICE THAT'S A LUTHERAN SERVICE, BUT WE ALSO, ON SATURDAY MORNING, HAVE A JEWISH CONGREGATION THAT USES THE BUILDING. SATURDAY AFTERNOON OR SATURDAY EVENING WE HAVE A CHURCH THAT'S A SPINE OFF FROM CHRIST FELLOWSHIP IN PORT ST. LUCIE, THERE'S A SERVICE. WE HAVE A SMALL CHURCH EARLY SUNDAY MORNING THAT USES YOU ARE A SANCTUARY AND WHILE WE'RE DOING A SERVICE IN THE SANCTUARY, ACROSS THE HALL IS A SMALL BAPTIST HALL DOING A SERVICE. DURING THE WEEK, WE HAVE A SCHOOL NOW BECAUSE THE CHARTER SCHOOL HAS A LIST OF 100 KIDS THAT THEY CAN'T FIT IN THERE SO WE STARTED A SCHOOL INSIDE THE CHURCH AND THEN DURING THE WEEK MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY WE HAVE AN ALZHEIMER'S DAY CARE CENTER. THE CHURCH LEGALLY BELONGS TO US BUT IT BELONGS TO GOD AND IT'S FOR THE USE OF THE COMMUNITY. WE ARE PLANNING SOME OTHER THINGS, WE'RE NEGOTIATING NOW FOR 20 MORE CLASSROOMS AND MODULARS THAT WILL COST US PROBABLY $400,000 TO PUT IN SO WHEN I SAY I'M RELUCTANT TO SPEND ON ZONING, I MIGHT NOT HAVE IT RIGHT NOW.

I HAVE NO GRIPE WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, I KNOW WHY THEY DID IT AND THE RULES BUT

THE RULES DON'T MAKE ANY SENSE ANYMORE. >> THANK YOU.

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF THE APPELLANT? I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I

[01:35:05]

UNDERSTAND THAT YOU TOOK YOU'RE SIGN BECAUSE IT NEEDED TO COME DOWN TO BUILD THE SCHOOL, RIGHT?

>> NO, IT CAME DOWN BECAUSE THE SCHOOL, IN ORDER TO PUT THE SCHOOL IN, THEY NEEDED TO PUT IN A TURN LANE ON THE ROAD. AND THE TURN LANE WENT RIGHT THROUGH THE SIGN

>> AND YOU SOLD THE PROPERTY TO THE SCHOOL AND THAT'S HOW YOU GOT TO THIS PARTICULAR SPOT.

SO THEN YOU PURCHASED THIS SIGN, RIGHT? >> YES.

>> AND SO IT WAS YOUR UNDERSTANDING THAT YOU COULD PUT THIS SIGN HERE.

>> YEAH, WHEN I SEE SIGNS ALL OVER TOWN THE SAME, YEAH. >> OKAY, I JUST WANTED TO --

>> AND IF WE WERE STILL A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD I WOULDN'T HAVE ANY PROBLEM WITH

THE OTHER SIGN BUT WE'RE NOT. >> WELL, I THINK WE ALL KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN TO JENKINS ROAD, WHAT'S ALREADY HAPPENED. THE TPO PLANS TO COMPLETE IT ALL THE WAY TO MIDWAY ROAD AND ALL THE WAY TO ORANGE AVENUE AND SO I THINK THAT'S A POINT WELL

TAKEN. FEW OTHER QUESTIONS? >> YEAH THANK YOU, PASTOR.

THIS SIGN THAT YOU'RE PROPOSAL, IT'S JUST A SIGN? A DIGITAL SIGN?

>> IT'S A DIGITAL SIGN >> SO WHERE WE SEE THIS FOLLOW JESUS, THAT CHANGES?

>> THAT'S DIGITAL, YES, THAT WILL CHANGE. >> WE WANT TO BE ABLE TO PUT ON SATURDAY MORNING THAT THE CONGREGATION IS MEETING FROM THIS TIME TO THAT TIME RATHER THAN HAVE TEN GUYS PUT OUT THEIR SIGNS SAYING THEY'RE HERE, WE CAN DO IT ALL ON ONE SIGN AND IT WILL PROGRAM TO FLIP AND WE CAN CHANGE THE TIMES AND THE NAMES OF THE CHURCHES THAT ARE MEETING AT THAT TIME, THAT ALZHEIMER'S DAY CARE CENTER IS THERE DURING THE WEEK, THE SCHOOL IS THERE AND EVEN THE CHARTER SCHOOL BECAUSE THEIR ENTRANCE IS THE SAME AS OUR ENTRANCE SO IT'S

ALSO FOR THE CHARTER SCHOOL AT THE SAME TIME. >> SO I JUST HEARD SOMETHING ABOUT THE SIGN. I HEARD YOU SAY THAT YOU ALREADY PURCHASED THE SIGN?

>> YES. >> SO WHAT'S DRIVING 9-FEET? IT HAS A 4-FOOT BASE SECTION.

CAN THAT BE MODIFIED AT ALL? IS THERE ANY LEEWAY? >> YES, WE COULD CHANGE IT.

DO I WANT TO CHANGE IT? NO, BECAUSE WE WANT PEOPLE TO SEE IT AS THEY DRIVE BY AND DEPENDING ON THE SPEED THEY GO BY, YOU NEED CERTAIN SIZE LETTERS OR THEY CAN'T READ THAT.

THERE'S A SIGN ON 13TH STREET THAT FRANKLY MY CHURCH PUT SOME MONEY INTO BECAUSE THAT WAS A POORER CHURCH AND A POORER NEIGHBORHOOD AND THEY CAME TO ME AND ASKED IF WE COULD MAKE A DONATION, WHICH WE DID, AND IT'S A HISTORICAL NEIGHBORHOOD AND HE WANTED A SIGN LIKE THIS AND NOW IT'S LIKE THIS. I TOOK A FRIEND TO LOOK AT IT, WE GOT WIN BLOCK PAST THEM AND WE SIDE WHERE'S THE SIGN? YOU CAN'T SEE IT. IT WAS A WASTE OF $20,000.

>> OKAY THANK YOU, SIR. >> I'M FAMILIAR WITH THE PROPERTY WHERE THE TRUCKS ARE PARKED. I KNOW EXACTLY WHERE YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT.

OKAY. ANYTHING ELSE YOU WANT TO SAY? ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. IT'S TIME FOR STAFF TO MAKE YOUR

PRESENTATION. PROCEED. >> GOOD EVENING MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSIONER. I'M GOING TO PRESENT TO YOU WITH ONE ENJOYS EXCEPXCEPTION WHICH E TO WHAT HAPPENED AT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT IS EXACTLY HAPPENED AT THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT.

HERE'S AN AERIAL MAP FROM WHERE THE SITE IS. YOU CAN SEE THE BACK AND THIS IS VACANT PROPERTY THAT THE SCHOOL, THE CHURCH, AS THE PASTOR HAS INDICATED PREVIOUSLY IS CONTEMPLATING FOR EXPANSION FOR EXPANSION OR FOR SALE. THIS IS THE QUARTER THAT WE'RE DISCUSSING NOW. THIS SHOW IT IS SCHOOL IN THE BACK AND YOU CAN SEE ALL THE COMMERCIAL TO THE NORTH AND TO THE WEST. THE CORRIDOR HAS A FUTURE LAND USE OF GENERAL COMMERCIAL SO THE AREA IS TRENDING TOWARDS COMMERCIAL.

THIS IS VERY MUCH BECOMING A COMMERCIAL AREA. THERE'S NO DISAGREEMENT BETWEEN STAFF, THE APPLICANT, THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE AND WORK IN THIS AREA. THIS IS SOLIDLY A COMMERCIAL AREA. WHAT'S IMPORTANT ABOUT THIS MAP AND WHY I'M STAND HERE IS THAT THE PROPERTIES IN RED, ALL OF THOSE CHANGES, ALL OF THOSE, WHEN THEY CAME IN FROM THE

[01:40:01]

COUNTY TO THE CITY, ALL OF THOSE REZONINGS WERE PRIVATELY DONE. NONE OF THEM WERE CITY NICHE YOU'VEED. EVERY ONE OF THESE DEVELOPMENTS WERE ALL PRIVATELY INITIATED.

ORIGINALLY THERE WERE TWO SIGN VARIANCES REQUESTED. ONE WAS TO DEVIATE FROM THE MAXIMUM ALLOWED SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE SIGN AND THE SECOND WAS FOR THE HEIGHT.

BECAUSE WE FELT THAT THE APPLICANT HAD JUSTIFICATION FOR REPLACING LIKE FOR LIKE, WE WANTED TO MAKE HIM, FOR LACK OF A BETTER WORD, WHOLE. WE WANTED TO GIVE HIM THE SIGN HE HAD BEFORE, SO WE AGREED TO THE SQUARE FOOT GE COMING BACK UP, THAT 36 SQUARE FEET AND THE BOARDAGE COMING BACK UP, THAT 36 SQUARE FEET AND THE BOARD AGREED SO THAT VARIANCE HAS BEEN GRANTED AND WHAT'S BEFORE YOU IS THE SECOND VARIANCE ASKING FOR A 9'2" SIGN.

THIS IS THE PREVIOUS SIGN THAT THE PASTOR WAS REFERRING TO, THE ONE REPLACED AS A RESULT OF THE TURN LANE BEING INSTALLED. THAT SIGN BASED ON VERY NONPROFESSIONAL MEASURES APPROXIMATELY 6-FEET TALL AND WAS ABOUT 34 TO 36 SQUARE FEET IN SIZE AND THAT WAS EXACTLY WHAT IT LOOKED LIKE. WHEN I SAY THE SIZE, I MEAN THE COPY AREA OF THE SIGN ITSELF.

THIS IS THE PROPOSED SIGN, I'M SURE YOU HAVE A COPY OF IT AS WELL.

THE COPY AREA ITSELF, 26 SQUARE FEET, THE HEIGHT OF IT 9'2" AND THE BASE OF IT, 4-FOUR FEETED NE IN FAVOR AND NONE IN OPPOSITION. THESE ARE THE STANDARDS TO REVIEW.

WE RECOMMEND APROVING THE FIRST AND DENYING THE SECOND. THIS IS WHY WE RERECOMMENDED DENIAL OF THE SECOND VARIANCE AND I WILL GET INTO THAT AS WE DISCUSS THE SIGNS OUT THERE TODAY BECAUSE IT WILL MAKE MORE SENSE. WHEN WE MAKE THESE RECOMMENDATIONS, WE HOOK AT WHAT'S UNTIL COMMUNITY, WHAT'S IN THE CORRIDOR.

WE DON'T TRY TO COMPARE ORANGES TO APPLES BECAUSE THAT'S NOT FAIR TO THE APPLICANT.

WE TRY TO COMPARE SIMILAR ZONING DISTRICTS AND USES AND WHAT WE FOUND WERE TWO CHURCHES THAT HAVE R2 ZONING THAT HAVE SIMILAR SIGNAGE OR APPROXIMATE SIGNAGE TO WHAT THE APPLICANT HAD BEFORE. SO I'M JUST GOING TO ADVANCE SO YOU CAN SEE THE LOCATION OF THESE CHURCHES RELATIVE TO THE SITE, THE SUBJECT SITE. SO BOTH OF THESE CHURCHES, WEST SIDE, HAS A SIGN THAT IS SIMILAR TO WHAT THE CHURCH HAD PREV PREVIOUSLY AND THE CHURCH CLOSER TO THIS SUBJECT'S SITE HAS A SMALLER SIGN AS YOU CAN SEE WHICH IS WHAT THEY CHOSE TO DO. THEY CHOSE TO BUILD IT THIS SIZE, THEY COULD HAVE GONE BIGGER OR TALLER BUT THIS IS WHAT THEY CHOSE TO DO. THE ONE ON THE RIGHT IS A LEGAL NONCONFORMING SIGN BECAUSE IT WAS CREATED PRIOR TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE, THE ONE ON THE LEFT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ZONING ORDINANCE FOR SIGNAGE. WHEN WE MAKE OUR RECOMMENDATIONS, WE DO SO BECAUSE THIS IS WHAT THE CODE HAS LAID OUT FOR US, THIS IS WHAT THE STATE HAS TOLD US. WHEN YOU ASK FOR A VARIANCE, YOU'RE SEEKING A CHANGE FROM THE CODE BASED ON A HARDSHIP THAT'S NOT SELF-CREATED. IN THIS CASE, THE INTENT OF STAFF WAS TO MAKE THEM WHOLE BY GRANTING THE VARIANCE FFRT COPY AREA AND BY REDUCING THE BASE OF THE SIGN BY 4-FOOT BY 1 FOOT THEY COULD HAVE THE EXACT SAME SIGN THEY HAD, ACTUALLY A LITTLE BIT BIGGER AND CONSISTENT WITH EXISTING RESIDENTIAL ZONING, NONCONFIRMING USES ON THEM.

SO THIS WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH THOSE EXISTING USES IN THE CORRIDOR.

VARIANCES ARE MEANT TO PROVIDE A RELIEF FOR FOLKS THAT ARE EXPERIENCING A HARDSHIP.

IN THIS CASE, WHAT THE WE BELIEVE THE APPLICANT SHOULD DO IS REZONE THE PROPERTY.

THAT'S WHY THAT PROCESS EXISTS. A VARIANCE IS NOT THERE IN ORDER FOR A SIGN TO BE BIGGER BECAUSE

[01:45:01]

A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OR REZONING ISN'T SOMETHING THAT THEY WANT TO PURSUE.

A VARIANCE SHOULD BE GRANTED ACCORDING TO THESE CRITERIAS AND BY STATE'S CRITERIA ALSO FOR VARIANCES BECAUSE THERE'S AN EXISTING HARDSHIP OR A HARDSHIP CREATED NOT OF THE APPLICANT'S DOING. WE HAVE NO DISAGREEMENT THAT THIS IS A COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR AS ALL. THIS IS ABSOLUTELY A COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR AND THIS PROPERTY, AS WE JUST HEARD, WANTS TO EXPAND, GROW, FEED THE NEEDS OF THIS COMMUNITY, THEY SHOULDN'T HAVE TO GO THROUGH CONDITIONAL USE WHICH IS WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO DO TO DO TO DO THE EXPANSIONS THEY WANT TO DO. THEY SHOULD DO A ZONING SO THEY NEVER HAVE TO COME HERE AND ASK TO DO WHAT THEY WANT TO DO AND THEY CAN BUILD AND GROW AND IF THEY WANT TO SELL THAT PROPERTY SO THAT THE SCHOOL CAN GROW AND FEED THE NEEDS THAT THEY CLEARLY ESTABLISHED THAT THEY HAVE.

THAT'S THE CORRECT PROCEDURES, THAT'S WHY WE HAVE THAT PROCESS IN PLACE.

THE VARIANCE IS NOT MEANT TO FEED THAT PROCESS. SO TODAY, THEY DON'T HAVE TO CHANGE THEIR SIGN. THAT COPY AREA OF THAT SIGN THEY PURCHASED CAN STAY AS IT IS, IT'S NOT GOING TO GET SMALLER. THEY HAVE BEEN GRANTED THAT VARIANCE.

THE BASE, HOOVER, IF IT COULD JUST BE REDUCED TO 1 FOOT, THEY CAN PLACE IT ON THE PLATFORM, THEY CAN HAVE BEAUTIFUL LANDSCAPING AROUND IT AND HAVE A 6-FOOT SIGN THAT'S BEAUTIFUL TO EVERYONE AND GO THROUGH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING AND ZONING AND ALLOW THEM TO CHANGE TO GENERAL COMMERCIAL AND ALLOW THEM TO GROW, TO PROSPER AND NOT HAVE TO COME BEFORE THIS COMMISSION EVERY SINGLE TIME THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO DO ANY CHANGES.

SO WITH THAT, I'M GOING TO ADVANCE IN AN AWKWARDLY SLOW MANNER.

THESE WERE THE BOA ACTIONS ON FEBRUARY 25TH. THEY APPROVED THE VARIANCE FOR THE COPY AREA AND DENIED FOR THE HEIGHT FOR THE RATIONALE THAT THE 6-FOOT HEIGHT WAS CONSISTENT WITH OTHER CHURCHES AND THAT THE BASE COULD BE ADJUSTED. STAFF RECK MEN DECISION IS TO KEEP THE VARIANCE AS IT WAS GRANTED AND TO UPHOLD THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT'S DECISION TO DENY

THE HEIGHT. THIS CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION. >> QUESTIONS OF STAFF? SO THEY BUILT A SCHOOL BEHIND THIS CHURCH AND THIS CHURCH SERVES MULTIPLE FUNCTIONS AND WE HAVE HEARD THAT THERE IS A SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCE BECAUSE THEY HAD TO TAKE DOWN THE SIGN IN ORDER TO PUT SOMETHING ELSE THERE. HE WOULD BE HAVING THE SAME SIGN RIGHT NOW IF HE HAD NOT ENCOURAGED THE SCHOOL AND NOW WE HAVE THIS CHARTER SCHOOL THERE AS WELL AS THE CHURCH PERFORMING A LOT OF FUNCTIONS, RIGHT? AND THEN HE PURCHASED THE SIGN, THINKING THAT HE'S PROBABLY ALL RIGHT PURCHASING THE SIGN, MAYBE NOT KNOWING THAT HE WASN'T ALREADY, WHO THINKS ABOUT THAT? TRMS OF ZONING, ETC., ETC. IN A WAY, I SEE SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES HERE. I SEE SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES AND IT IS SURROUNDED BY COMMERCIAL AND IT'S NOT IN HIS OR GOD'S PLANS RIGHT NOW TO ZONE FOR COMMERCIAL BECAUSE IT'S

EXPENSIVE. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? >> CAN WE GO BACK TO THE PRESENTATION TO THE PREVIOUS SIGN? THERE WAS A PICTURE OF IT.

IT'S REALLY SOMETHING FOR US TO TALK ABOUT BUT >> AWKWARDLY SLOW.

>> HERE IT IS. >> SO THE SIMPLEST OF QUESTIONS WHERE I TRY TO GO EVERY TIME, WE REQUIRE SIGNS TO BE A CERTAIN HEIGHT AND WIDTH AND THEN WE ALSO SAY YOU HAVE TO LANDSCAPE IT. ONCE IT'S 18-INCHES TALL, WE HAVE COVERED UP THE FIRST 18-INCHES OF SIGN. I THINK THIS IS SOMETHING WE SHOULD TALK ABOUT, YOU HAVE THESE VARIEGATED SHRUBS RIGHT HERE AND ALL OF A SUDDEN IT'S COVERING UP PART OF THE SIGN.

I'M NOT SAYING THIS IS SOMETHING TO DISCUSS TONIGHT BUT IT'S A PRACTICAL DISCUSSION POINT FOR TONIGHT'S DISCUSSION. THAT'S WHY I ASKED ABOUT THE 4-FOOT BASE.

[01:50:03]

OUR CODE SAYS THERE ARE TWO PARTS TO IT, HOW YOU SHOULD LANDSCAPE AND HOW YOU SHOULD LANDSCAPE AROUND THE SIGN, CORRECT? IF YOU COULD GO AWKWARDLY SLOW A

COUPLE OF SLIDES. THAT MAY BE FROM GOOGLE MAPS, >> I'M JUST GOING TO GO FASTER BECAUSE IT'S PAINFUL FOR EVERYONE. I THINK THAT'S CHANGED.

IT'S BLANK NOW. >> I WENT ON GOOGLE. >> THAT'S WHAT IT USED TO LOOK LKE. THIS PROPERTY IS ALSO ZONED RESIDENTIAL.

COMMISSIONER C. JOHNSON AND I SIT ON THE TPO. WE KNOW JENKINS ROAD IS GOING TO CHANGE. WE'RE DOING STUDIES RIGHT NOW WITH DOT TO TALK ABOUT HOW IT'S GOING TO CHANGE. IT'S GOING TO BE A FOUR LANE, MAYBE MORE, IN THE NEXT 20 YEARS. WHO KNOWS WHAT IT WILL LOOK LIKE.

>> MAY HAVE TO MOVE THE SIGN AGAIN. >> THAT'S MY QUESTION, COMMISSIONER, IF I CAN. IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE SIGN, I HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT POTENTIAL CURRENT PLACEMENT OF A 9-FOOT SIGN AND SO THE APPLICANT IS TALKING ABOUT VISIBILITY AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT DIGITAL AND HOPEFULLY NOT A DISTRACTED DRIVER TRYING TO READ COMING DOWN THERE DOING 55 OR 65 BUT TALK TO ME ABOUT THAT, MAYBE I MISSED THAT IN THE PACKET OF POTENTIAL PLACEMENT OF THIS NEW SIGN. I'M CONCERNED WITH THAT.

I HAVE A STAFFING QUESTION. >> IN THE BACK THERE COULD BE A LOCATION.

IT WILL BE LOCATED -- I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN SEE, IT'S GOING TO BE LOCATED AROUND HERE AND IT WILL LIKELY BE AFFECTED NOT NOW BUT IN ANY FUTURE EXPANSIONS, IT WILL LIKELY BE AFFECTED GIVEN ITS LOCATION. OF COURSE, AS IT MAKES SENSE, THEY PUT IT AS CLOSE AS THEY COULD TO MEET THE SET BACKS REQUIRED OF THE SIGN ORDINANCE TO GET IT WITH AS MUCH VISIBILITY AS HE COULD. GIVEN WHERE THIS PROPERTY LINE IS, WHAT THE CHURCH HAD TO DO WAS NOW MOVE IT BEHIND THE PROPERTY LINE. AT THIS POINT, IT'S A 50/50.

I THINK IT'S UNLIKELY BUT I CAN'T SAY THAT ON THE RECORD. THE REASON THERE'S SUCH A GAP BETWEEN THE PROPERTY LINE AND SET STREET IS FOR THAT EXPANSION TO TAKE PLACE.

SO AND REMEMBER, IT'S ON BOTH SIDES. I CAN'T TELL YOU IT WILL HAVE TO

BE MOVED. >> YOU GET TO COME BACK, NOT NOW.

NOT NOW. >> YOU WILL GET A CHANCE TO COME BACK.

>> YOU WILL GET A CHANCE TO COME BACK. >> SO WE TALKED ABOUT COMMERCIAL ZONING WOULD BE A SIMPLE WAY TO DO THAT AND THE PASTOR SHARED CONCERNS ABOUT THE COST OF THAT,

TELL ME AN PROXIMATION FOR THOSE THINGS. >>>> IT DEPENDS.

WE HAVE A BILL IN FRONT [INDISCERNIBLE] SO THAT AFFECTS THE COST CONSIDERABLY.

IN TERMS OF AN AMENDMENT AND ZONING, IT WOULD DEPEND. IN SOME CASES, BECAUSE THIS IS A CORRIDOR THAT'S CHANGING, WE WOULD INCUR THE COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH THAT AND THEY WOULD DO THE PLAN CHANGE BECAUSE IT'S COSTLIER OF A HIT. WE COULD BE DIRECTED TO DO AN INITIATIVE ALL AROUND ABOUT GIVEN THIS ACREAGE, IF THEY DECIDE TO DO EVERYTHING, AND THAT'S CLEAN UP THE SCHOOL SITE SO THEY CAN EXPAND, TOO, WE'RE LOOKING AT ABOUT $10,000.

>> OKAY. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF? MR. SWEENY, THIS IS OUR -- ONCE

WE GET THROUGH WITH STAFF, WE'RE THROUGH WITH STAFF, RIGHT? >> THIS IS IT.

>> SORRY TO BE SO BLUNT. >> THIS IS IT. >> SO IF THERE ARE NO OTHER

[01:55:06]

QUESTIONS OF STAFF, I THINK YOU COULD BE EXCUSED MYSELF. >> YES, PLEASE.

>> YEP. AND SO WE CAN'T ASK YOU ANYMORE QUESTIONS.

WE WOULD LIKE THE APPELLANT COME BACK AND YOU HAVE 3 MINUTES. >> WE'RE GOING TO GO WITH

3 MINUTES, YES. >> TO TELL US ANYTHING YOU WANT ABOUT WHAT WAS SAID.

>> TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, I DIDN'T MEASURE IT BUT I KNOW WHEN I HIT A GOLF BALL IT'S ABOUT 20-FEET FROM THE STREET BEYOND THE SIDEWALK AND WE'LL BE PROBABLY SEVEN OR 8-FEET AT THE BEGINNING OF THE SIGN, 7 OR 8-FEET BEHIND THAT SO WE'RE PROBABLY 27, 30-FEET AWAY FROM STREET. THEY SHOWED THE SIGNS FROM WEST SIDE BAPTIST BUT WEST SIDE BAPTIST ONLY NEEDS TO SAY WEST SIDE BAPTIST CHURCH BECAUSE THAT'S ALL THAT'S GOING ON THERE. WE HAVE EIGHT DIFFERENT ENTITY THAT IS WE HAVE TO KIND OF TELL WHAT TIME, WHAT THEY ARE, WHAT THEY'RE DOING AND WHAT TIME THEY MEET SO THAT'S WHY A DIGITAL

SIGN, SO WE CAN DO THAT. >> DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE YOU WANT TO SAY? YOU HAVE TIME TOO SAY ANYTHING ELSE? THIS IS YOUR LAST CHANCE TO TALK

TO US? >> NO, I DON'T REALLY HAVE ANYTHING ELSE.

>> ANY QUESTIONS OF THE APPELLANT. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR

TIME. >> THANK YOU. AND NOW WE'RE IN DELIBERATION.

SINCE NOBODY ELSE IS JUMPING IN HERE, I WILL BE HAPPY TO JUMP IN AND SAY THAT I CONSIDER SEVERAL SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES AND I WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF THE SIGN THAT HE'S PURCHASED TO BE

INSTALLED. COMMISSIONER PERONA? >> MADAM MAYOR.

I HEARD STAFF AND STAFF DOES A GREAT JOB OF TRYING TO KEEP US ON THE RIGHT TRACK AND IT'S IMPORTANT. EVERY ONCE IN A WHILE, WE HAVE TO TAKE A LOOK BECAUSE NO

PROPERTY IS EXACTLY THE SAME, NO SITUATION IS EXACTLY THE SAME. >> WE'RE LEARNING THAT OVER AND

OVER AGAIN. >> I THINK IT'S WHEN STAFF SAID UNLESS THERE'S A HARDSHIP THAT'S BEEN CREATED, I THINK WE CREATE ADD HARDSHIP BY TRANSITIONING THAT WHOLE AREA FROM R2 INTO COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES, NOW THEY'RE THE ONLY SSTAND OUT THEE AND TO COMPETE ON THAT CORRIDOR, RATHER THAN TALK ABOUT THE SIGN, I WOULD RATHER TALK ABOUT THE CITY GETTING INVOLVED AND PICKING UP SOME OF THE SLACK AND CLEANING UP THAT WHOLE CORRIDOR AND I'M NOT ONE THAT LIKES TO STEP AND CREATE PREZ DENSE WHEN WE HAVE OUR RULES AND REGULATIONS AND I KNOW WE HAVE SOME LEEWAY BASED ON THESE SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES THAT YOU MENTIONED.

I LOOK AT IT TWO WAYS, ONE WAY, CAN THE CITY GET INVOLVED WITH A CITY INITIATED ZONING CHANGE? AND MAYBE A HELP AND ASSIST TO PULL THAT INTO SOME TYPE OF COMPLIANT ON A FORMAT AND HE'S DONE AN AMAZING JOB OVER THE YEARS, OR IF NOT, WE JUST GO AHEAD AND TALK ABOUT THIS ONE SIGN INCIDENT AND MOVE FORWARD. SO IN MY MIND, THERE'S TWO PRONGS.

IT'S A OR B, AND WHICHEVER ONE THAT THIS COMMISSION WANTS TO ATTACK, I WOULD SUPPORT.

>> WHEN I ASKED A QUESTION, I WAS TRYING TO GET MY HEAD AROUND THE COSTS, I TRAVELED THROUGH THAT AREA TODAY AND I LOOKED AND NOTICED SOME OF THE SAME THINGS THE PASTOR TALKED ABOUT AND UNDERSTANDING THE SCENEING HERE AND TO ME, I'M LEANING TOWARDS HOW DO WE FIND A MIDDLE GROUND SOLUTION HERE WITHZONING HERE AND TO ME, I'M LEANING TOWARDS HOW DO WE FIND A MIDDLE GROUND SOLUTION HERE WITH THIS? I HEAR AN APPLICANT WHO MADE A SACK VICE AND ALLOWED FOR ANOTHER ENTITY TO COME IN, REMOVED HIS SIGN AS A RESULT TO PUT IN A TURNING LANE BUT YET HAS THE APPROVAL TO PUT BACK A SIMILAR SIGN. RIGHT NOW WE'RE JUST DEALING WITH HEIGHT AND MY MAIN CONCERN WAS THIS IS THE ONLY PIECE OF PROPERTY I THINK ON THAT ENTIRE STREET. I'M A LITTLE ALLEVIATED BY STRESS AND FRUSTRATION OF KNOWING THAT THERE WILL BE HOPEFULLY -- IT'S A COMMERCIALLY ZONED PROPERTY SO IF PEOPLE

[02:00:02]

BOUGHT INTO A DEVELOPMENT OR SOME TYPE OF APARTMENTS, THEY WOULD REALIZE IT'S COMMERCIAL AND PEOPLE WOULDN'T BE COMPLAINING ABOUT THE NEON BRIGHTNESS OF THOSE SIGNS GOES TOWARDS THEIR RESIDENCES. AND REALLY I'M NOT SURE I GOT TO UNDERSTAND EXACTLY WHERE STAFF IS WITH THIS BUT HOW DO WE FIND SOMETHING THERE THAT COULD HELP US CLEAN THAT AREA UP AS FAR AS ZONING AND HIGHWAY COULD WE CONTRIBUTE SOMETHING TOWARDS IT BUT ALSO HAVE THE APPLY CAN'T -- APPLICANT NOT HAVE THE FULL BURDEN OF THE ZONING COSTS. THAT SIGN WITH THE FPUA OUT THERE, SYME SURE THEY WOULD BE GLAD TO HAVE HIM AS A CUSTOMER AND WITH THE INTERNET AND CABLE AND STUFF, HOPEFULLY THAT COULD BE SOMETHING WE WOULD PARTNER WITH GOING FORWARD.

>> COMMISSIONER ALEXANDER? >> I GUESS MY CONCERN IS THAT THIS CHURCH AND SURROUNDING COMMUNITY, NOTHING BUT THE BEST OF HEART FOR FORT PIERCE, EVERY TIME THEY [INDISCERNIBLE] FOR LIFE OF ME I DON'T UNDERSTAND. THEY ALREADY MADE THE SIGN, IT'S NOT WITHOUT THE OUTSIDER, THE PARAMETER OF WHAT'S AROUND, I THINK WE NEED TO ALLOW THIS TO -- I DON'T WANT TO DETER HIM FROM DOING ANYTHING IN THE FUTURE. THANK YOU.

>> ALL RIGHT. COMMISSIONER J. JOHNSON? >> THANK YOU, MA'AM.

THIS IS ONE OF THOSE CORRIDORS THAT'S ADAPTED OVER TIME AND IT'S GOING TO CONTINUE TO CHANGE. WE DIDN'T KNOW THAT IT WAS GOING TO BE THE CONNECTER, POTENTIAL CONNECTER FROM PORT ST. LUCIE TO PORT ST. LUCIE TO THE AIRPORT AND THAT'S WHAT'S HAPPENING SO I AGREE WITH ALL THE SENTIMENTS OF THE COMMISSION. EITHER WE WAIVE IT OR WORK WITH THE ZONING PART OF IT AND I'M GOOD WITH EITHER ONE OF THEM. AGAIN, IT'S ONE OF THOSE UNIQUE CORRIDORS AND IT JUST PRESENTS AN OPPORTUNITY HERE THAT SAYS, ALL RIGHT, WE HAVE THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE. HOW DO WE ADAPT TO WHAT THE PROPERTIES ARE TODAY? I DON'T LIKE MESSING WITH THE CODE TOO MUCH. WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT THIS SIGN CODE A COUPLE OF TIMES OVER THE LAST 3 YEARS I THINK, MAYBE NOT THIS EXACT EXAMPLE OR THIS EXACT REFERENCE TO THE CODE BUT WE HAVE AMENDED IT AND MADE MODIFICATIONS BUT I LIKE THE ZONING IDEA FOR SURE OVER THE OTHER BUT I'M OKAY WITH BOTH OF THEM.

>> MADAM MAYOR? >> YES, MA'AM. >> WE CAN REALLY DO BOTH.

SEEMS LIKE WE HAVE CONSENSUS TO GET THE SIGN UP BUT WE CAN GO AHEAD AND MAKE THAT RECOMMENDATION OR MAKE A MOTION TO DO SO AND WE CAN ALSO ADD INTO THAT TO TELL STAFF TO MOVE FORWARD AND COME UP WITH A PLAN THAT BRINGS THAT CHURCH INTO COMPLIANCE WITH THE ZONING.

ALL THE REQUIREMENTS AND I JUST THINK THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE CREATED SOME OF THAT ISSUE AND I WOULD LIKE TO PARTNER WITH THIS AND MOVE FORWARD ON A SEPARATE RECOMMENDATION FROM STAFF IF WE

CAN TASK THEM TO DO SO. >> SO ON THAT, MAYOR, THE MOTION I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE IS TO APPROVE THE 9.2-FOOT SIGN, WHICH IS OPPOSITE OF WHAT HAS BEEN DONE BY OUR VARIANCE COMMITTEE

[02:05:09]

BUT I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE IT. >> IS THERE A SECOND?

>> I WILL SECOND THAT. >> ALL RIGHT. AND IT WASN'T UNANIMOUS THAT

COMMITTEE. READY TO VOTE? >> I HAVE ONE MORE QUESTION.

>> YOU MENTIONED WORKING WITH STAFF, HOW DOES THAT COME ABOUT? >> I DIDN'T WANT TO CONFUSE, MAY I ADD IN? IT WOULD BE SEPARATE. THE VOTE IS PURELY ON THE REQUEST FOR THE VARIANCE BY I THINK MR. MIMMS IS NODDING HIS HEAD BECAUSE IT'S LOUD AND

CLEAR. >> THE CITY WILL DEFINITELY MOVE FORWARD.

I HAVE HEARD THE FEEDBACK FROM THE CITY COMMISSION, WE WILL MOVE FORWARD ON A COMMISSION, I

BELIEVE WE CAN DO THAT. >> ALL RIGHT, YES. >> GREAT.

ARE YOU READY TO VOTE? >> READY. >> SO WE'RE GOING TO APPROVE THE 9.2-FOOT SIGN AND OVERTURN THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT RULING. JUST SO WE'RE SUPER CLEAR.

COMMISSIONER ALEXANDER? >> YES. >> COMMISSIONER C. JOHNSON?

>> YES, MA'AM. >> COMMISSIONER J JOHNSON. >> YES, MA'AM.

>> COMMISSIONER PERONA. >> YES, MA'AM. >> MAYOR HUDSON.

[b. Tabled from April 19, 2021 - Commission deliberations on an application for Conditional Use with No New Construction submitted by property owner, Susan Baker, and applicant, Michelle Longarzo, for Conditional Use Approval to operate a Dwelling Rental with a rental period of 30 days or less. The property is located at 1577 Thumb Point Drive and is zoned Single-Family Intermediate density zone (R-2). Parcel ID: 2401-605-0105-000-0.]

>> YES, MA'AM. >> THE NEXT ITEM WAS TABLED FROM THE APRIL 19, 2021, HEARING AND NOW LEADS US TO COMMISSION DELIBERATIONS ON AN APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE WITH NO NEW CONSTRUCTION SUBMITTED BY PROPERTY YOONER SUDAN BAKER, AND APPLICANT MICHELLE LONGARZO FOR CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL TO OPERATE A DWELLING RENTAL WITH A RENTAL PERIOD OF 30 DAYS OR LESS. THE PROPERTY IS AT 1577 THUMB POINT DRIVE AND IS ZONED SINGLE

FAMILY INTERMEDIATE DENSITY ZONE R2. >> PROCEDURALLY, THE FIRST THING WE WOULD DO IS ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO BRING FROM THE TABLE, A SIMPLE PROCEDURAL MOTION, ONCE WE DO THAT, BECAUSE WE HAVE HAD THE FULL PUBLIC HEARING ALREADY, WE ARE NOW PURELY IN DELIBERATION, THERE WILL BE NO MORE PRESENTATION OF EVIDENCE, OF SYSTEM, NO MORE INPUT FROM PUBLIC COMMENT SPEAKERS. IT'S BASED ON THE RECORD AS YOU SEE IT AND AS YOU WILL RECALL, WE DIDN'T HAVE A FUEL COMMISSION BUT NOW WE DO. I WOULD SUGGEST STARTING WITH A

MOTION TO PULL FROM THE TABLE. >> IS THERE A MOTION? >> SECOND.

>> A MOTION AND A SECOND. >> COMMISSION COMMISSIONER ALEXANDER?

>> YES. >> XHICOMMISSIONER C JOHNSON >> I JUST WANT TO THANK COMMISSIONER ALEXANDER, IT'S GOOD TO HAVE YOU BACK. WE HAVE MISSED YOU AND IT'S BEEN A LITTLE TOUGH SOMETIMES NOT HAVING ALL FIVE OF US HERE AND I'M HAPPY YOU'RE WITH US

TONIGHT. >> YET, THANK YOU. >> IS THERE DISCUSSION ON THIS

ITEM? >> I HAVE BEEN ABREAST OF WHAT'S GOING ON.

THERE'S NO NEED TOE DELIBERATE ON THIS, WE CAN JUST GO ON AHEAD.

WE DON'T NEED TO STIR UP ANY UNNECESSARY COMMENTS FROM INDIVIDUALS.

>> I APPRECIATE HEARING THAT. I THINK THAT WE ARE ALLOWED TO I THINK IN WHAT'S FAIR TO THE APPLY CAN'T AND ANY OF THOSE WHO A POSE THIS APPLICATION, WE CAN OUTLINE OUR REASONS FOR WHY WE ARE WHERE WE ARE. I'M VERY CONCERNED WITH SOME OF THE INCONSISTENCIES THAT HAVE BEEN FREQUENTED AND I'M STILL OF THE MIND THAT THE INCREASE IN TRAFFIC AND THE INCREASE AT THIS PARTICULAR CORNER AND WITH THE GARAGE ON WAIN SIDE AND A SAFETY PROBLEM FOR THIS PARTICULAR NEIGHBORHOOD, WHICH IS A NEIGHBORHOOD OF SINGLEONE SIDE PROBLEM FOR THIS PARTICULAR NEIGHBORHOOD, WHICH IS A NEIGHBORHOOD OF SINGLE FAMILY HOME DWELLINGS.

[02:10:05]

WITH SENIOR CITIZENS AND WITH GRANDCHILDREN VISITING AND WITH CHILDREN AND WITH DOGS AND NO SIDEWALKS AND A NARROW STREET, A STREET YOU HAVE NO REASON TO BE ON THUMB POINT DRIVE UNLESS YOU'RE GOING TO VISIT SOMEONE OR IF YOU LIVE THERE SO THAT'S MY REASONS FOR WHAT I HAVE DONE IN THE PAST AND WHAT I WILL DO TONIGHT AND I WILL ENTERTAIN ANY OF THE DISCUSSION FROM ANYONE

ELSE. >> I WILL MAKE A COMMENT ON THIS.

FROM THE BEGINNING LOOKING AT THIS AND LOOKING AT IT FROM THE STANDPOINT OF WHAT THE COMMISSION HAD DONE PRIOR TO GETTING ON THIS COMMISSION AND WATCHING THE WORK AND STUDYING THE WORK MYSELF AND LOOKING AT IT FROM A PRACTICAL SIDE FROM THE RESIDENTS, I HAVE HEARD FROM MANY OF THEM. I HAVE ALSO RED AND RERED WITH COUNCIL ON THIS, THE OVERREACH OF GOVERNMENT WITH CITIZENS AND THEIR PROPERTIES, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT CONCERNS ME WHEN SOMEONE OWNS A HOUSE, THEIR HOUSE, HOW FAR DOES GOVERNMENT GO WHEN IT COMES TO THAT REACH.

MY CONCERN IS WHEN WE LOOK AT A PROPERTY LIKE THIS, WITH THAT CORNER, TO ME IT'S ONE THAT DOESN'T PA OSSESS A THREAT BECAE IT'S DEEP INTO THE RESIDENCES THERE AND LOOKING AT CONDITIONAL USES. MY LOOK AT THIS IS THAT CONDITIONS CAN BE GIVEN AND CONDITIONS CAN BE REMOVED AS A RESULT OF VIOLATIONS AND ISSUES AND SO THIS IS ONE THAT FROM THE INCEPTION OF THIS, I WAS STANDING ON THE POINT OF NOT FINDING THE CAMP TENT SUBSTANTIAL OMPETENT SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE, ALTHOUGH I HAVE HEARD A LOT OF SYSTEM FROM PEOPLE, PERSONAL, EVERYTHING THAT REEDS INTO THAT, AND I'M REALLY STRUGGLING WITH DENYING THIS AND THE PRECEDENT THAT MAY SET SEEING THAT WE HAVE MADE THESE DECISIONS BEFORE IN THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE. THAT'S WHERE I'M LEANING TOWARDS RIGHT NOW.

>> ANYONE ELSE? >> MADAM MAYOR? >> YES, SIR.

>> I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE SOME INPUT FROM MY ATTORNEY BECAUSE HE KNOWS WE MAY FORGET, JAR LOOK, BUT HE KNOWS THE POINT OF LAW AND I DON'T WANT TO GET THIS CITY OF FORT PIERCE IN TROUBLE BECAUSE THIS COMMUNITY LOVES EACH OTHER AND IF THEY CAN'T LOVE EACH OTHER BECAUSE SOMEONE DOESN'T LIKE YOUR OPINION, THIS COMMUNITY KNOWS I ASK [INDISCERNIBLE]

>> MR. SWEENY, DID YOU UNDERSTAND THAT QUESTION? >> I THINK SO.

LY GO BACK TO COMMISSIONER ALEXANDER HAS, ON LOTS OF OCCASIONS, ASKED ME TO REITERATE WHAT THE STANDARD IS. WE HAVE A SLIDE THAT WE TYPICALLY PUT UP DURING THE DELIBERATIONS, SO NOT ONLY THE COMMISSION CAN SEE IT BUT ALSO EVERYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE CAN

SEE IT AS WELL. >> WOULD YOU LIKE THAT SLIDE UP? >> IF WE COULD.

NOT WANTING TO WASTE ANYBODY'S TIME, I WILL JUST REFER TO THIS, THIS HAS BEEN ADOPTED PER OUR RESOLUTION, THE DECISION TO AFFIRM OR REVERSE SHALL BE BASED ON KEMP TENT SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE WHICH IS EVIDENCE WHICH WILL ESTABLISH THE SUBSTANTIAL BASIS FROM WHICH THE FACT AT ISSUE CAN REASONABLY BE INSTIRED AND INCLUDES FACT OR OPINION EVIDENCE OFFERED BY EVIDENCE ON

[02:15:01]

THE MATTER THAT REQUIRES SPECIALIZED KNOWLEDGE AND THAT IS RELEVANT TO THE ISSUE TO BE DECIDED. IT IS EVIDENCE AS HAVING PROBATIVE WEIGHT, HYPOTHETICAL, SPECULATIVE, FEAR OR EMOTION BASED GENERALIZED STATEMENT THAT IS DO NOT ADDRESS THE RELEVANT ISSUES AND THAT CANNOT BE REASONABLY SUPPORTING THE ACTION SO, AGAIN, I CAN'T DECIDE THAT FOR YOU. YOU ARE THE JUDGE IN THIS CIRCUMSTANCE, SO YOU HAVE TO INDEPENDENTLY, AS MAYOR, YOU HAVE EVALUATED THE EFT IN YOUR MIND AND YOU COME TO YOUR CONCLUSION, EACH OF YOU AND INDEPENDENTLYVIDENCE IN YOUR MIND AND YOU COME TO YOUR CONCLUSION, EACH OF YOU AND INDEPENDENTLY INDEPE DO THAT.

>> JUST A COUPLE OF COMMENTS. I THINK YOU SUMMARIZED IT ACCURATELY.

THERE'S SOME CONCERN IN MY MIND BASED ON THE TESTIMONY I HEARD. I ALSO BELIEVE WITH THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED BY THE APPLICANT AND PROBABLY THE CONVERSATIONS WITH STAFF, THAT IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA THERE'S AN INCONSISTENCY. THE STATE OF FLORIDA CAN RECALL AND PROVIDE DIRECTION TO US AN ON A BODY BUT NOT ON AN HOA SPECIFICALLY, I HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THAT. WE TALK ABOUT WHAT'S GOOD FOR ONE SHOULD BE GOOD FOR ANOTHER, THEN I BELIEVE THAT. IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA, IN TALLAHASSEE, THEY'RE FIGHTING THAT AND THEY'RE OMITTING PARTS OF OUR STATE, WHETHER THEY MEANT TO DECLARE THAT OR NOT, THAT'S WHAT'S BEEN DECLARED AND I HEARD SYSTEM TO THAT, THAT HOAS ARE DIFFERENT.

WELL, I THINK THAT'S A CHALLENGING POINT BECAUSE WHY SHOULD A BODY BE ABLE TO MAKE UP RULES BUT ANOTHER BODY CANNOT? I THINK THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE IS WITH ITS 2001 LEGISLATION,

CHUB A MODEL FOR THE STATE OF FLORIDA. >> YOU JUST WON COMMISSIONER, I DON'T MEAN IN DISRESPECT TO YOU, BUT I HAVE SEEN MANY HOME OWNERS COME BEFORE US AND THEY'RE NOT EVEN FROM OUR CITY. I CAN'T LIVE WITH THOSE COMMENTS WITHOUT SAYING ANYTHING ABOUT IT. I'M GOING TO SAY WHAT'S ON MY MIND AND WHEN I HEAR THE THINGS THAT I'VE HEARD, IT'S SAD, BUT IT'S ALWAYS A CORNER TO TURN. THIS COMMUNITY, THIS VIRUS HAS SHOWN US ALL WHAT BREATHING IS. SEW, AGAIN, A, AGAO, AG WE HAVEE LETTER OF THE LAW.

>> SO WE GET READY FOR THIS TYPE OF AGENDA ITEM, YOU HAVE TO REMOVE YOUR PERSONAL OPINIONS, EVEN THOUGH IN MY MIND IT'S SCREAMING OUT THAT COMMON SENSE SAYS THIS COMMERCIAL APPLICATION DOES NOT FIT IN A RESIDENTIAL AREA OF R1, R2 AND I KNOW WE CAN'T TALK ABOUT ZONING SO THAT'S JUST -- BUT THAT'S EXACTLY WHERE I START. CLEAR THAT FOR A MOMENT AND LISTEN TO ALL THE TESTIMONY THAT WE HAVE RECEIVED OVER A PERIOD OF TIME AND I RESPECT THE FACT THAT YOU HAVE QUESTIONS AND INCONSISTENCIES, BUT I'M THINKING ABOUT THUMB POINT AND OVER THE YEARS, WE HAVE APPROVED SPECIAL USES ON THESE MEGA HOMES AND EVERYTHING ELSE RIGHT ON THE SAME ROADWAY THAT IF WE HAD ISSUES OF TRAFFIC AND EVERYTHING ELSE, THE SIDEWALKS, WE APPROVE THESE EASILY. THOSE WERE FOLKS THAT WENT IN THERE, THEY WANTED TO SPEND A LOT OF MONEY, BE ON THE WEARED, BUILD THESE, I'M TALKING YOU COULD PROBABLY FIT THREE OF MY HOUSES IN SOME OF THESE AND I DON'T REMEMBER ANY CONVERSATION ABOUT ANY CONCERN ABOUT THE TRAFFIC PATTERNS OR ANYTHING ELSE IN THERE. I'M STICKING WITH THE PLAN, I'M STICKING WITH THE RULE AND REGULATION THAT WAS SET OUT IN FRONT OF ME.

I'M DISMISSING MY PERSONAL OPINIONS AND I'M GOING BACK TO THE POINT WHERE I HAVE NOT HEARD

[02:20:08]

ANY SUBSTANTIAL, COMPETENT TESTIMONY THAT WOULD MAKE ME THINK THAT THIS WOULD AFFECT THE

HEALTH, WELFARE, AND SAFETY OF THE COMMUNITY. >> WELL, WE HAVE CONDITIONAL USE AND WE HAVE GRANDFATHERED IN FOR THE LEGISLATION AND WHAT WE NEED TO DO AND WHAT WE'RE CHALLENGED TO DO IS TO CONSIDER EACH APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE ON ITS OWN MERITS ON ITS OWN SO TO COMPARE IT TO OTHERS IS REALLY A FALSE COMPARISON BECAUSE EACH ONE HAS ITS OWN INDIVIDUAL STRENGTHS AND WEAKNESSES AND WHAT MAKES A DIFFERENCE TO WHETHER THIS IS GOING TO BE A SAFE USE OR NOT A SAFE USE, AND I THINK THAT IT IS PROBLEMATIC AND I WILL SAY THAT THE PROPERTY OWNER, TO THE PLANNING BOARD, SAID A NUMBER OF THINGS THAT WERE INCONSISTENT AND THE APPLICANT WHO CAME TO THE COMMISSION SPEAKING FOR THE PROPERTY OWNER HAS SAID SOME THINGS THAT WERE INCONSISTENT. SO ONE OF THE THINGS WE DO WHEN A DEVELOPER COMES BEFORE US AND SAYS I'M GOING TO DEVELOP THIS AND DO THIS AND THIS AND THIS AND THIS, WE HAVE TO EVALUATE THEIR TRUTHFULNESS AND ALSO THE ABILITY TO DO WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO DO AND I HAVE SOME PROBLEMS WITH SOME OF THE THICKSNS GS TH HAVE BEEN PROMISED AND I'M PARTICULARLY CONCERNED ABOUT THE SAFETY OF THE PEOPLE LIVING IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.

ANYONE ELSE? ANYONE READY TO MAKE A MOTION?

>> MADAM MAYOR, I MOVE THAT WE DENY THIS CONDITIONAL USE APPLICATION?

>> IS THERE A SECOND? >> I WILL SECOND WITH COMMENT. ON THIS, WE NORMALLY INTRODUCE INTO THAT FOR THE RECORD EXACTLY ON WHAT GROUND, IF WE CAN. IT WOULD BE HELPFUL.

>> BASED ON THE NUMBER OF CONDITIONS THAT HAVE BEEN DISCUSSED AND THE THREE MEETINGS WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT, BASED ON THE HEALTH, SAFETY, WELFARE OF THE CONDITIONS THAT ARE PRESENTED AT THE INTERSECTION OF THUMB POINT, FERDINA AND THE ADDITIONAL USES THAT HAVE BEEN

PRESENTED. THAT'S THE THE BASIS OF DENIAL. >> ANY DISCUSSION?

ARE YOU READY TO VOTE? >> READY TO VOTE. >> CALL THE ROLL, PLEASE.

>> COMMISSIONER ALEXANDER? >> NO. >> COMMISSIONER C. JOHNSON.

>> NEEM. >> COMMISSIONER J JOHNSON. YES, MA'AM.

>> COMMISSIONER J. JOHNSON, NO, MA'AM. >> MAYOR HUDSON?

>> YES. OKAY. IS IT TIME TO MOVE ON? WE STILL NEED A -- THAT MOTION FAILED SO WE STILL NEED A MOTION.

>> I MOVE TO APPROVE. >> SECOND. >> ALL RIGHT.

>> COMMISSIONER ALEXANDER DOES THAT INCLUDE THE FIVE STAFF CONDITIONS?

>> YES, THAT WILL INCLUDE THE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS >> U. THANK YOU.

>> CALL THE ROLL PLEASE. >> COMMISSIONER ALEXANDER. >> YES.

C. JOHNSON YES, MA'AM J. JOHNSON NO, MA'AM PROPERTY DIRECTLY NO, MA'AM COMMISSIONER HUDSON, NO

MA'AM. MOTION CARRIES. >> LET'S MOVE ON.

[c. Resolution 21-R20 authorizing the sale of surplus property on Cortez Boulevard (parcel ID: 2421-500-0060-000-2) to the successful bidder, Miguel Aguilar.]

THE NEXT ITEM IS RESOLUTION 21-R20, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF -- JUST A MINUTE. COULD YOU PLEASE TAKE YOUR CONVERSATIONS OUTSIDE? THANK YOU. THE TRANSFER OF REAL PROPERTY COMMONLY KNOWN AS LOTS 48 AND 50

[02:25:07]

ON CORTEZ BOULEVARD PREVIOUSLY DECLARED AS SURPLUS PROPERTY TO BE IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE PUBLIC DETERMINING THAT A BID FOR THE REAL PROPERTY FROM A THIRD PARTY PURCHASER FOR VALUE TO BE IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND AUTHORIZING TO TAKE ALL ACTIONS NECESSARY TO CARRY OUT

TRANSACTIONS AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECT I HAVE DATE. >> MR. MIMMS?

>> YES, MA'AM, THIS IS THE CULMINATION OF THE PROCESS PROCESS FOR AUTHORIZING THE SALE OF SURPLUS PROPERTY. THIS IS JUST THE END OF THE PROCESS.

> WHAT WE WANTED ALL ALONG. >> YES, MA'AM, ABSOLUTELY. >> DO I HAVE A MOTION?

>> MOVE TO APPROVE. >> SECOND. >> CAL THE CALL THE ROLL.

>> MAYOR HUDSON. >> YES, MA'AM. >> RESIDENCE SOLUTION 21-R21, A

[d. Resolution 21-R21 authorizing the sale of surplus property on South 11th Street to the successful bidder, KIB Construction Corp.]

RESOLUTION OF THE REAL PROPERTY COMMONLY LOAN AS LOT ON1 ON SOU 11TH STREET FORT PIERCE, FLORIDA PREVIOUSLY DECLARED AS SURPLUS PROPERTY TO BE IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE PUBLIC, DETERMINING THAT A BID FOR THE REAL PROPERTY FROM A THIRD PROPERTY [INDISCERNIBLE] OF THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE TO TAKE ALL NECESSARY ACTIONS TO CARRY OUT TRANSACTIONS AND PROVIDING FOR

AN EFFECTIVE DATE. >> MR. MIMMS? >> THIS IS THE SAME SITUATION, THIS IS A BEAUTIFUL LOT ON SOUTH 11TH STREET. WE'RE LOOKING FORWARD TO SEEING

A BEAUTIFUL HOME CORRECTED SOON SOON. >> MOVE FOR APPROVAL?

>> SO MOVED. >> I SECOND. >> I HAVE A QUESTION.

ARE WE GOING TO CREATE A LINE ITEM? I THOUGHT WE WERE PUTTING IN THIS RIGHT HERE. WE HAVE BEEN DISCUSSING THIS WE WOULD LIKE TO ESTABLISH THE FUND FOR THESE PROCEEDS AND THE SALE OF OTHER CITY PROPERTY TO GO INTO A RETRICKEDED REVENUE FUND FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PURPOSES. THIS IS WHAT IT'S ALL ABOUT, REJUVENATING AND STABILIZING OUR NEIGHBORHOODS AND WE FEEL THAT THAT WOULD BE A GREAT USE FOR

THESE PROCEEDS. >> I AGREE WITH YOU 100%. >> THANK YOU, SIR.

>> THANK YOU. >> DID WE HAVE A MOTION? >> WE HAD A MOTION AND A SECOND.

SO COMMISSIONER ALEXANDER? >> YES COMMISSIONER C. JOHNSON YES, MA'AM MAYOR HUDSON?

YES, MA'AM. >> SO RESOLUTION 21-R22, A RESOLUTION FOR THE CITY OF FORT

[e. Resolution 21-R22 authorizing the sale of 1207 Avenue L to the successful bidder, Team Facey Real Estate, LLC.]

PIERCE, FLORIDA DETERMINING THAT THE TRANSFER OF REAL PROPERTY COMMONLY KNOWN AS 1207 AVENUE L FORT PIERCE, FLORIDA PREVIOUSLY DECLARED AS SURPLUS PROPERTY TO BE CONSIDERED THE BEST INTEREST OF THE PUBLIC FOR A VALUE TO BE IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING OFFICERS, ATTORNEYS AND AGENTS OF THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE TO CARRY OUT TRANSACTIONS AND

PROVITEING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. >> I'M GOING TO ASSUMEVIDING FO.

>> I'M GOING TO ASSUME THIS IS, AGAIN IN THE SAME VEIN? >> YES, MA'AM, BUT THIS IS AN ACTUAL HOME THAT WAS BESTOWED UPON THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE AND WE'RE LOOKING FOR REHABILITATION AND HOPEFULLY THAT WILL SPARK THE RESTORATION OF THE ENTIRE NEIGHBORHOOD.

>> OKAY, IS THERE A MOTION? >> SO MOVED. >> I SECOND.

>> CALL THE ROLL, PLEASE. MA MAYOR HUDSON.

>> YES, MA'AM. >> I WANT TO COMMEND MR. MIMMS AND HIS STAFF, THEY HAVE BEEN PAFKED UNDER MR. MIMMS, WE HAD NO PROCESS IN PLACE FOR THIS AS WELL AND IT'S NOW BECOME A PRETTY REFINED PROCESS BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO SEE MORE OF THESE, QUITE A FEW MORE OF THESE SO I WANT TO THANK NICK, CHEYENNE AND AUDRA FOR MAKING IT EASY TO WORK WITH AND GETTING

THESE BACK OUT. >> YEAH, THAT'S PART OF OUR STRATEGY OR PLAN OR EMPHASIS,

RIGHT? >> VERY MUCH. >> THANK YOU FOR THAT.

[f. Resolution 21-R23, adopting the State Housing Initiatives Partnership (SHIP) Local Housing Assistance Plan (LHAP) for program years 2021-2022, 2022-2023, 2023-2024.]

[02:30:02]

>> RESOLUTION OPT APPROVING THE LOCAL HOUSING ASSISTANT PLAN AS REQUIRED BY THE STATE HOUSING INITIATIVES PARTNERSHIP PROGRAM AT SUBSECTIONS 420.907 FLORIDA STATUTES AND RULE CHAPTER 67-37 FLORIDA ADMINISTRATIVE CODE AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE ANY NECESSARY DOCUMENTS AUTHORIZING THE SUBMISSION OF THE LOCAL HOUSE

ASSISTANCE PLAN, PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. >> ALL RIGHT.

MR. MIMMS? >> WE DID HAVE YOU ARE A GRANTS DIVISION MANAGER HERE A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO THAT GAVE US AN OVERVIEW OF OUR PLAN AND THIS IS JUST THE FORMALIZATION OF THIS ACCEPTANCE. WE JUST NEED THIS RESOLUTION TO BE PASSED.

>> IS THERE A MOTION? >> MOVE FOR APPROVAL? A SECOND?

A MOTION AND A SECOND, CALL FOR THE ROLL, PLEASE. >> COMMISSIONER PERONA, YES,

MA'AM. MAYOR HUDSON. >> YES, MA'AM.

>> CAN I JUST MAKE A COMMENT ON THAT LAST APPROVAL? I HAVE BEEN APPROACHED BY A NUMBER OF STENS IN THE COMMUNITY AND I'MCITIZENS IN THE COMMUNITY AND I'M SURE THEY THEY ARE HOPEFULLY WATCHING. I'M GLAD THAT WE PASSED THIS AND THIS IS FORMALIZING MOVING THAT PROS FORWARD, ICESS FORWARD, I SEE ALL THE CITIZENS ASKING AND E-MAILING, JUST STOP BY CITY HALL, IT WILL SIT OUT FRONT. HOPEFULLY THOSE APPLICANTS AND APPLICATIONS WILL BE THERE, SO I THINK THIS IS GOING TO DO A GREAT DEAL OF GOOD IN OUR COMMUNITY.

THERE ARE A NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT ARE INTERESTED IN GETTING THEIR HOUSES DONE AND EFFICIENT AS WE PREPARE FOR THE HOT SOMER MONTHS COMING UP. PLEASE GO AND STOP BY, THE

APPLICATIONS ARE OUT FRONT. THANK YOU. >> GOOD MARKETING.

>> CUTTING DOWN ON E-MAILS, TOO MANY E-MAILS, TOO MANY E-MAILS, COME GET YOUR APPLICATIONS,

PLEASE. >> NEXT WE HAVE COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC.

[14. COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC Any person who wishes to comment on any subject may be heard at this time. Please limit your comments to three (3) minutes or less, as directed by the Mayor, as this section of the Agenda is limited to thirty minutes. The City Commission will not be able to take any official actions under Comments from the Public. Speakers will address the Mayor, Commissioners, and the Public with respect. Inappropriate language will not be tolerated.]

>> OKAY. THIS IS A TIME FOR ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC WHICH WISHES TO COME FORWARD, STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND YOU HAVE 3 MINUTES AND MS. COX WILL GIVE YOU A WARNING OF 3 SECONDS. YOU DON'T HAVE TO BE SWORN IN FOR THIS, JUST SAY YOUR NAME AND

ADDRESS. >> EUGENE COCHRAN, 1417 PLOVER AVENUE.

THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR JOBS AND YOU DO A VERY GOOD JOB, EVERY ONE OF YOU, OKAY.

THAT BEING SAID, I JUST WANT TO SAY BACK TO THE CONDITIONAL USE, OF COURSE, AND I KNOW YOU'RE PROBABLY OVER THIS, BUT FORT PIERCE IS A GREAT COMMUNITY AND WE ALL DO WORK TOGETHER, BELIEVE IT OR NOT. ALL WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS PROTECT OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.

WE WANT PEOPLE TO BE HERE, TO ENJOY THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND WE ALL WANT TO LIVE TOGETHER.

CONDITIONAL USE IS CONDITIONAL, OBVIOUSLY, AND YOU MAKE GREAT DECISIONS, BY WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO IS PROTECT THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND WE WANT EVERYBODY HERE.

WE LOVE IT, WE'RE ALL LUCKY TO BE HERE, BUT IT'S DISCOURAGING THAT PEOPLE WOULD BRING IN OTHER ISSUES TO TRY TO SWAY OPINIONS AND SO FORTH. AS SOON AS YOU MADE YOUR RULING, THE MEDIA LEFT, EVERYBODY ELSE LEFT. WHAT I'M TRYING TO GET TO IS IF WE ALLOW PUBLIC DISCOURSE INTO OUR CITY, I THINK WE'RE NOT GOING TO GO ANYWHERE.

WE NEED TO STICK TOGETHER AS A COMMUNITY AND NOT LET WHAT HAPPENED EARLIER AND IN PREVIOUS MEETINGS, THAT NEGATIVE SPEECH COME OUT. IT'S IMPORTANT JUST TO -- I'M NOT SURE HOW TO SAY THIS, BUT WE NEED TO WORK TOGETHER AND NOT LET THINGS THAT AREN'T RELEVANT INTO THE FACTOR AND I HEAR A LOT OF THINGS, THE LAST COUPLE OF MEETINGS AND THE BEGINNING OF THIS MEETING THAT WERE NOT RELEVANT TO THIS ISSUE. I DON'T WANT PEOPLE TO NOT JUST HERE IN FORT PIERCE BUT HERE IN THE COUNTRY, THERE'S NO REASON TO BRING THAT UP.

ACROSS THE STREET FROM ME WAS MR. JOSEPH AND I LIKE THE GUY. HE'S A PROFESSIONAL DRUMMER, I'M

[02:35:05]

A DRUMMER, I WAS WAITING TO GET TOGETHER WITH ME BY HE DIDN'T WANT TO MOVE INTO THE HOUSE FOR WHATEVER REASON, HE'S THERE TO MAKE MONEY AND THESE PEOPLE ARE GOING TO -- THEY'RE RICH PEOPLE AND THEY DON'T WANT EQUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS, WHICH IS RENT SHORT TERM, RENT LONG TERM, MOVE INTO THE PROPERTY, WHICH IS REALLY HUGE, OR YOU CAN SELL THE PROPERTY, WE ALL HAVE THAT, WE ALL HAVE THOSE RIGHTS, THESE PEOPLE WANT SPECIAL ADDITIONAL PROPERTY RIGHTS SO THEY WERE GIVEN A SPECIAL POWER NOW AND I HOPE THEY USE IT WELL BECAUSE THESE ARE MORE RIGHTS THAN EVERYONE ELSE IN THE AREA HAS, SO THAT'S ALL I WANT TO SAY, I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU, SIR. THANK YOU FOR STAYING. >> THANK YOU FOR YOUR JOB.