[00:00:06]
>>> WE WILL BEGIN OUR PLANNING BOARD MEETING OF MONDAY SEPTEMBER 12TH, IF YOU WOULD STAND WITH US FOR
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. >> I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO 2 FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AND TO THE REPUBLIC, FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION, UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.
>> THANK YOU. >> I HAVE A COUPLE OF THINGS BEFORE WE GO ANY FURTHER. WE HAVE A NEW BOARD MEMBER.
I AM GOING TO TELL YOU RIGHT NOW.
I WILL GET YOUR NAME WRONG. >> YOU BETTER HOLD YOUR
BREATH, THEN. >> MY JOB IS TO CORRECT NAMES FOR EVERY PRESENTATION.
>>CHAIR: PERHAPS YOU WOULD LIKE TO TELL US A LITTLE BIT
BEEN RESIDENT OF FT. PIERCE SINCE 2012.
I WORK FOR AN ELECTRICAL ENGINEERING FIRM.
OUR OFFICE IS RIGHT HERE IN DOWNTOWN.
AND FOR THE PAST THREE YEARS I'VE BEEN SERVING ON THE
CITY'S PARKING COMMITTEE. >> YOU'VE REALLY GOT YOUR FEET WET IN THAT; DIDN'T YOU?
>> YES. >> THAT'S NOT OVER; IS IT?
>> THAT'S NEVER GOING TO BE OVER.
>> WE WILL GO ALONG WITH THAT FOREVER.
WE'RE GLAD TO SEE YOU ON THE BOARD.
MISS BAKER CAME TO US AND FILLED -- WHO DID MISS BAKER
FILL THE TERM FOR? >> THE ATTORNEY.
>> THE ATTORNEY FROM MIAMI. >> OH, GOSH.
I HAD HER NAME A LITTLE WHILE AGO.
MISS DIAZ. MISS BAKER WAS ON THE PLANNING BOARD LAST TERM THAT SHE FELT.
SHE ALWAYS CAME PREPARED. AND ALWAYS HAD SOMETHING TO ADD TO THE MEETING. WHETHER WE WANTED HER TO OR NOT. SOMETIMES BUT SHE ALWAYS ADDED TO THE MEETING. SHE WAS ALWAYS PREPARED AND I WAS JUST TALKING TO ALICIA.
WE THINK THAT SHE ONLY MISSED ONE MEETING IN HER JOINT TERMS OR POSSIBLY TWO WHEN SHE HAD A KNEE REPLACEMENT. OUTSIDE OF THAT, SHE HAD A PERFECT RECORD. ALICIA AND I BELIEVE.
TALKING HERE JUST A MOMENT AGO, WE THINK SHE WAS A BOARD MEMBER FOR SOMEWHERE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF NINE TO TEN YEARS. AS MUCH AS THERE WERE TIMES THAT SHE AND I DIDN'T SEE EYE-TO-EYE, I APPRECIATED HER VERY MUCH. AND SHE ALWAYS BROUGHT SOMETHING TO THE TABLE. AND SHOULD BE LESSON FOR THE REST OF US. ALSO WE JUST REMEMBERED 9/11 YESTERDAY. OVER AND OVER AND OVER AGAIN WE REMEMBERED 9/11 FOR THE 24 HOURS I BELIEVE.
THE QUEEN OF ENGLAND, QUEEN ELIZABETH PASSED AWAY.
HOW THAT'S GOING TO IMPACT THE WORLD IS GOING TO BE VERY INTERESTING MOVING FORWARD.
SOMETIMES WE DON'T THINK OF THE MONARCHY AS BEING POLITICALLY AND TYPICALLY THEY ARE NOT.
BUT THEY CERTAINLY HAVE A FINGERPRINT IN POLITICS AND WORLD POLITICS, WITHOUT A DOUBT.
THAT'S WHAT I HAD THERE. CALL THE ROLL PLEASE.
ABSENCES, WHICH IS COMMON FOR THIS BOARD AND I
[5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES]
APPRECIATE THAT. APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES.>> MOVE FOR APPROVAL. >> SECONDED.
>> WE HAVE MOTION BY MISTER BURDGE SECOND BY MISS CLEMONS. CALL THE ROLL PLEASE.
THAT'S FOR THE AUGUST 8TH MINUTES.
[00:05:04]
I BELIEVE THAT WE HAVE TWO ITEMS THAT HAVE BEEN PULLED BY THE REQUEST OF THE APPLICANT.ITEM 6A AND 7A BOTH RELATED TO THE ALLEGRA AT FT. PIERCE APPLICATION. IT'S REQUESTED THAT'S HELD UNTIL THE ANNEXATION OF THAT PROPERTY IS APPROVED BY THE CITY COMMISSION. YOU WILL BE GETTING TO SEE THOSE. IT'S JUST MAKING SURE THE
PROCESS IS LEVELED OUT. >> OKAY.
>> IF YOU HAVE ANY NOTES, BOARD MEMBERS CONCERNING THESE TWO ITEMS, KEEP YOUR NOTES.
BECAUSE AS MISS FREEMAN SAID WE WILL BE SEEING.
THAT'S WHY YOU SAID THIS WILL BE A FASTER MEETING.
YOU HAD INSIDER INFORMATION. >> THAT'S AMAZING.
[b. Conditional Use and Site Plan - Fort Pierce Utilities Authority Water Reclamation Facility - 4515 Energy Lane]
>>CHAIR: MOVING FORWARD TO NEW BUSINESS 7B, CONDITIONAL USE AND SITE PLAN FT. PIERCE UTILITIES AUTHORITY WATER RECLAMATION FACILITY AT 4515 ENERGY LANE.
MY GILMORE IS AS ALWAYS ON THE SPOT READY TO GO.
>> YES. >> EVERYTHING JUST WENT OFF.
>> I THINK WE'RE UP NOW. >> TECHNOLOGY DELAY.
>> IF I WERE FOOLING WITH IT, IT WILL STAY OFF
FOREVER. >> GOOD AFTERNOON PLANNING CHAIRMAN AND BOARD MEMBERS. BEFORE YOU WE HAVE A SITE PLAN DEVELOPMENT REVIEW AND DESIGN REVIEW OF CONDITIONAL USE FOR THE FT. PIERCE UTILITY AUTHORITY RECLAMATION FACILITY. LOCATED 4515 ENERGY LANE.
AS YOU ALL ARE AWARE, WE HAVE CURRENTLY HAVE A WATER RECLAMATION FACILITY LOCATED SOUTH HUTCHINSON HIGHLAND WHICH WAS BUILT IN 1986, FPUA WILL BE DECOMMISSIONING THIS FACILITY AND IT'S PROPOSING A NEW MAINLAND FACILITY. AND WE WILL REDIRECT THE WATER FLOW TO THIS MAINLAND FACILITY.
THE PROPERTY IS APPROXIMATELY 25.03 ACRES.
THE CURRENT ZONING IS INDUSTRIAL WITH A ZONING OF LIGHT INDUSTRIAL I-1. BEFORE YOU IS THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN WHICH EXISTS OF AN APPROXIMATE 78,408 SQUARE FOOT CLOSED ROOF RECLAMATION FACILITY.
OF THAT IS ONE ADMINISTRATION MAINTENANCE BUILDING. PROCESSING PUMP STATIONS AUK KWAU BASINS. STORAGE TANKS AND PONDS CHLORINE TANKS AND BASINS AND ALSO INCLUDES SITE IMPROVEMENTS. THIS IS THE SUBMITTED SITE DATA CHART BY THE APPLICANT. EXPLAINING TO YOU THE PARKING CALCULATIONS, ZONING, PARCEL ID AND SUCH.
AND LOT COVERAGE AS WELL. BEFORE YOU WE HAVE THE LANDSCAPE PLAN. THE APPLICANT PROPOSING TREES BE PLANTED. NINE CRATE MYRTLE.
NINE SOUTHERN LIVE OAK. PALMS PLANTED.
SEVERAL SHRUBS AND GROUND COVERS, WHICH SHALL INCLUDE ARGENTINE AND IRRIGATION WILL ALSO BE INSTALLED.
THIS IS THE NORTHERN ELEVATION OF THE SITE.
AND THE MAIN STRUCTURE BUILDING IN THE FRONT OF YOU IS THE ADMINISTRATION AND MAINTENANCE BUILDING.
EAST ELEVATION AND THIS IS THE WEST ELEVATION OF THE SITE. WHICH KIND OF HAS A BETTER OVERVIEW. STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL WITH TWO CONDITIONS FOR THE SITE PLAN IN CONDITIONAL USE NUMBER ONE COMPLETION CERTIFICATION BY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT COST ESTIMATE LANDSCAPE PURSUANT TO CITY CODE SECTION 123-06 WILL BE REQUIRED.
NUMBER TWO PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF SITE PLAN PERMITS, THE APPLICANT SHALL COORDINATE WITH THE CITY OF FT. PIERCE ARBOUREST. THANK YOU.
>> AND YOU ALSO HAVE THE POSSIBLE ACTIONS OF THE
[00:10:01]
PLANNING BOARD. IT WAS TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL. RECOMMEND APPROVAL WITH CHANGES OR RECOMMEND DISAPPROVAL.THANK YOU. >>>>CHAIR: QUESTIONS OF THE
PRESENTER? >> CHAIR, CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE -- THAT'S FINE. I NOTED WITH THE LANDSCAPE PACKAGE IT APPEARS THE LANDSCAPE PACKAGE IS FAIRLY MINIMAL. I GET THAT.
IT'S DICTATED WITH THE I-1 ZONE AND CLASSIFICATION OF WHAT'S REQUIRED. I THINK IT'S UNIQUE THERE'S NO PERIMETER LANDSCAPE BUFFERING HERE.
IS THAT BECAUSE THERE'S NO REQUIREMENT IN THE ZONE ONE CLASSIFICATION? DOES THE CITY OWN THE
ADJACENT LAND TO THIS OR NO. >> NO.
I THINK IT'S FLORIDA MUNICIPAL POWER AGENCY TO THE SOUTH AND THEN THERE'S THE BUSINESS PARK THAT WAS RECENTLY RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL A FEW MONTHS AGO
WHICH SURROUNDS THIS SITE. >> THERE'S NO PERIMETER
LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENT. >> WE DO HAVE THAT.
HOWEVER, THE APPLICANT I GUESS HAS ASKED DUE TO THE CONSTRAINTS, THAT THEY WOULD PROVIDE I GUESS THE MINIMUM LANDSCAPING. BUT WE DO HAVE THAT.
>> AND THEY ARE ASKING TO REMOVE IT; WHY?
>> THE SURROUNDING ZONING PRETTY MUCH BECAUSE IT'S AN INDUSTRIAL AREA. WHAT'S THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT'S POSITION ON THAT.
WE'RE NOT GOING TO DO IT -- IS FPUA IS THE
>> I HAVE HAD SOME DISCUSSIONS WITH THE NEIGHBORING INDUSTRIAL COMPLEX.
THE BUSINESS PARK. THEY WERE CONCERNED ABOUT THE PROXIMITY OF THIS OPERATION TO THEIR BUSINESS.
THEIR MAIN CONCERN WAS THE POTENTIAL FOR ODOR AND OTHER NOXIOUS ACTIVITIES GOING ON THERE.
IT'S HIGH-END, UNLIKELY TO EMIT SUBSTANTIAL ODORS.
BUT THE NEIGHBORS WERE MORE CONCERNED WITH BEING ABLE TO DO PERHAPS MORE ACTIVITY ON THIS BOUNDARY WHILE ON THEIR ADJACENT BOUNDARY THAN CURRENTLY COMMITTED TO DO SO. WE'RE TALKING TO THOSE -- TO THAT ISSUE NOW. THE BOARD WILL HEAR MORE ABOUT THAT IN THE FUTURE. IF THEY DECIDE TO GO AHEAD.
THE ACTUAL LANDSCAPE BUFFER DIDN'T COME INTO THAT CONVERSATION. USUALLY IT'S MORE STRAIGHT TO MORE WILLING TO PUSH THE ISSUE IF THE SITE IS ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL AND THAT IS SUPPORTED BY CODE.
I THINK IN THIS INSTANCE, IT'S THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST TO REMOVE -- TO GO MINIMUM ON THAT.
WHEN WITH WE BRING IT FORWARD WITH THAT.
>> DO YOU SUPPORT THAT? >> I WOULD PREFER TO SEE A BUFFER AROUND THE WHOLE THING; YES.
>> THAT'S THE CAMP I'M OBVIOUSLY IN.
BUT I PICKED UP ON THAT INSTANTLY WITH THE PRESENTATION WHEN WE RECEIVED IT LAST WEEK.
I DON'T REALLY UNDERSTAND WHAT THE RESISTANCE WOULD BE. YOU LOOK AT WHAT, 85, $90 MILLION PROJECT. YOU LOOK AT MINIMUM AMOUNT OF LANDSCAPING INVESTMENT. I'M NOT SAYING THAT IT'S CAUSE FOR DELAY. I'M A PROPONENT OF MOVING FORWARD AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE.
HOWEVER, I DO BELIEVE THAT IT'S IN A CODE TO PROVIDE LANDSCAPING BUFFER. I KNOW IF I LAND THAT PIECE NEXT DOOR AND PUT LIGHT INDUSTRIAL USE IN THERE WE WOULD PUT INDUSTRIAL CONDOMINIUMS IN THERE.
I WOULD LIKE TO SEE LANDSCAPING BUFFERING AND EVERY PROJECT WE'RE INVOLVED WITH INDUSTRIAL CONDOMINIUM THAT REQUIRING LANDSCAPING BUFFERING.
IF WE MADE IT A STIPULATION THAT THEY MEET THE CODE, IS THAT A FAIR DESCRIPTION? MEET THE LANDSCAPING CODE?
>> ONE OTHER QUESTION OBVIOUSLY, THIS IS BACK END OF INFRASTRUCTURE FOR THE CITY.
[00:15:01]
I NOTICED THAT THERE'S NO PERIMETER INCLOSURE HERE.IS THAT BECAUSE THE BUILDING -- I'M NOT SECURITY EXPERT BY ANY MEANS. BUT MY CAUSE FOR CONCERN HERE WAS RELATIVE TO EASY ACCESS TO THE SITE FROM A SECURITY PERSPECTIVE. WHERE -- WAS THERE ANY DISCUSSION HELD RELATIVE TO SECURITY CONCERNS FOR THE
SITE? >> OR IS THAT ALL INCORPORATED IN ADMINISTRATIVE BUILDING.
>> I DID THINK ON THE SITE PLAN THEY HAD SOME --
>> A GATE. >> THEY REALIZE THEY WILL HAVE A FENCE OF SOME SORT AROUND THERE.
>> SEE THE APPLICANT IS SIGNIFYING HE MAY HAVE SOME
INFORMATION. >> WE WILL BE A LITTLE BIT MORE CASUAL. COME ON FORWARD.
I THINK IT WOULD BE GOOD FOR YOU TO ENTER INTO THE CONVERSATION. IF YOU WOULD STATE YOUR NAME
AND ADDRESS. >> I'M JOE FRANKEN WITH HAZEN AND SAWYER. I'M A PROJECT MANAGER ON THE HAZEN SIDE REPRESENTED FPUA. THERE IS A PERIMETER FENCE AROUND THERE IN -- IF YOU SAW THE DESIGN PACKAGE.
THERE'S A PERIMETER SECURITY FENCE AND THERE'S A BUFFER.
THERE'S A BERM THAT'S REQUIRED FOR THE ERP.
THE REASON FOR NOT PUTTING LANDSCAPING ALONG THE FENCE IS MAINTENANCE. IF YOU TRY TO PUT LANDSCAPING IN, THERE YOU HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE BERM THAT YOU HAVE. WE HAVE THE LAKE AND YOU DON'T SEE THE LAKE IN ON THIS RENDERING.
BUT THERE IS A LAKE WITH A LANDSCAPING BUFFERING ON THERE. I THINK IT'S ON THE DRAWING THAT YOU HAVE. DENNIS?
THE EAST SIDE OF THAT, THAT THE BORDERING THE ADJACENT DEVELOPER THAT'S BASICALLY THAT LAKE IN THE LANDSCAPE AROUND THAT LAKE IS THERE BUFFER.
WE MOVE THE TREATMENT FACILITY ITSELF IS LIKE OVER 100 YARDS INSIDE THE SITE ITSELF.
THE ONLY THING THAT'S CLOSE TO THE PROPERTY LINE ON THE EAST IS THE ADMIN BUILDING WHICH HAS PLENTY OF LANDSCAPING AROUND IT. IT'S A NICE STRUCTURE.
I WOULD POINT OUT TO THE BOARD IF YOU LOOK TO THE SOUTH SIDE ON THE ENERGY CENTER, THERE'S NO BUFFER.
THERE'S NOTHING THERE. THEY BASICALLY HAVE 8-FOOT BERM ADJACENT TO THIS PROPERTY WITH A CHAIN-LINK FENCE ON IT. THERE'S NO BUFFER.
>> WHAT'S THE FENCING MATERIAL FOR THIS SITE?
>>> IT'S GOING TO BE CHAIN-LINK FENCE.
IT MAY BE VINYL COATED. WE EVEN LOOKED AT PUTTING SLATS IN THERE. THAT'S A DECISION AS WE MOVE FORWARD. RIGHT NOW IT'S A CHAIN-LINK FENCE SIMILAR TO WHAT THEY HAVE AT THE ISLAND FACILITY.
AND NO LANDSCAPE BUFFER ON THIS CHAIN LINK BOUNDARY
LINE. >> BECAUSE OF THE PA RAMTER BERM REQUIRED FOR ERP PUTTING LANDSCAPING IN THERE
WOULD BE VERY DIFFICULT. >> THE BERM --
>> THE BERM IS LIKE BETWEEN 2 AND 3 FEET FROM NATURAL GRADE. AND THEN YOU HAVE A FENCE ON
>> THANK YOU. >> DOES THAT BERM GO ALL THE WAY AROUND THE PERIMETER OF THE PROPERTY?
>> YES IT DOES. >> MR. CHAIR, CAN I ASK THE APPLICANT? JUST REAL QUICK.
ARE YOU FAMILIAR THAT FT. PIERCE IS TREE CITY
>> AND SO YOU ASK US NOT TO APPROVE THIS PROJECT ON THE AUSPILL U.S.S TREE CITY U.S. AND THE NATIONAL ARBOUREST ASSOCIATION BECAUSE OF THE UTILITY AUTHORITY NOT ONLY NOT WANTING TO DO THE MAINTENANCE OF THE LANDSCAPING WHETHER IT'S JUST A PERIMETER OR TREES INSTEAD OF BUSHES OR SUCH LIKE THAT.
I THINK MR. BRODERICK BRINGS UP AN EXCELLENT POINT.
IF WE START ALLOWING THIS TO AN.
MAYBE WE SHOULD CHANGE OUR LANDSCAPING CODE COMPLETELY AND LET THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT HAVE A REAL THREE-RING CIRCUS. WHICH WILL BE ENFORCED AND NOT. IF WE ENFORCE EVERYBODY, WE DON'T HAVE A QUESTION. IT'S JUST -- I THINK HIS COMMENTS ARE IN ORDER. AND MAYBE AN ITEM NO. 3 AS FAR AS RECOMMENDATIONS ARE CONCERNED FROM THIS BOARD IN REGARD FULLFILLING THE LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS.
YOU DON'T SUSPECT THAT THE UTILITY AUTHORITY WOULD BE AGAIN TRYING TO LANDSCAPE SOMETHING.
THE REASON THAT WE DIDN'T DO IT BECAUSE OF MAINTENANCE.
IT WASN'T THE AUTHORITY TELLING US NO DON'T PUT LANDING ESCAPING THERE. WE THOUGHT IT WOULD BE AN
[00:20:02]
>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?
>> COMMENTS? >> I TEND TO AGREE WITH THIS LANDSCAPE ISSUE. WE HAVE THE ORDINANCES IN PLACE FOR A PURPOSE. IF I WERE A NEIGHBOR, I THINK IT WOULD BE UPSET IF I ATTEMPTED TO DEVELOP MY PROPERTY AND HAD TO HAVE THE LANDSCAPING ISSUES AND FPUA DID NOT. I UNDERSTAND THAT IT'S VERY COSTLY TO MOVE THIS FACILITY.
WE NEED TO MOVE IT. WE SHOULD HAVE -- WHETHER OR NOT IT SHOULD HAVE EVER BEEN BUILT WHEN IT WAS BUILT IS A SEPARATE QUESTION, I GUESS. BUT IT NEEDS TO BE MOVED.
AND I WOULD HOPE THAT THE COST OF HOWEVER MANY TREES OR BUSHES WOULD BE INVOLVED TO PROPERLY LANDSCAPE THE AREA, WOULD NOT BE THE FINANCIAL STRAW ON THE CAMEL
BACK THAT BREAKS THE BACK. >> IF IT IS, WE HAVE A BIG
PROBLEM. >> IF IT IS, MAYBE WE'VE TIGHTENED THE BUDGETS TOO TIGHT.
I THINK THAT THE PROPER LANDSCAPING TO MEET OUR CITY CODE SHOULD BE -- SHOULD CERTAINLY BE APPLIED IN THIS
CASE AS WELL. >> IT'S NOT OFTEN THAT WE GET A REQUEST FOR WAIVER OF LANDSCAPING.
IF YOU LOOK AT IT FROM PERSPECTIVE.
THIS IS A 25-ACRE SITE. I HAVE THAT MUCH LANDSCAPING AT MY OFFICE. SUFFICE IT TO SAY.
IT WOULD BE MORE INCLINED TO SUGGEST THAT THE CHAIN-LINK FENCE IS FINE. YOU KNOW THAT I USUALLY MAKE AN ISSUE OUT OF THAT. BASED ON THE LENGTH OF MATERIAL. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE GREEN VINYL COATED. TO SOFTEN THE CHAIN-LINK FENCE TO PUT UP -- WHAT WOULD BE THE SUGGESTED MATERIAL FOR SOMETHING LIKE THIS?
>> ANY IDEA OFF THE TOP OF YOUR HEAD?
>> NORMALLY, WHEN SITE IS ALONG DESIGN REVIEW ROAD, WE WOULD REQUIRE THE FENCING BE COATED AND SOME SHRUBS, YOU KNOW, TO KIND OF CAMO THE FENCING.
>> IF THERE'S NO OTHER ISSUE PERTAINING TO IT, FRANK, I AGREE WITH YOUR PERSPECTIVE, THAT IF I'M THE ADJOINING PROPERTY OWNER, I WILL BE HELD TO THAT STANDARD.
AND DO I WANT MY DEVELOPMENT OF X MILLION DOLLARS TO BE VISUALLY EXPOSED TO THIS SITE WITH NO LANDSCAPING BUFFERS. MY INCALLINATION IS TO GO ALONG WITH WHAT THE CODE REQUIREMENT IS FOR THIS.
YOU KNOW IF WE DON'T WE WILL HAVE PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT COME IN WHAT'S GOOD FOR THE CITY.
>> THIS IS PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT.
>> BY EXTENSION IT'S THE CITY.
>> IT IS. BUT, YOU KNOW, WE'RE CONSTANTLY REMINDED THAT FPUA IS A SEPARATE CORPORATION. IT DOESN'T BELONG TO THE CITY. I'M NOT LOOKING AT THIS AS -- ALL RIGHT. ANY FURTHER COMMENTS OR
I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC PORTION.
ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC WISHING TO SPEAK TO THIS,
PLEASE STEP FORWARD. >> NOT SEEING ANYONE.
I WILL COME BACK TO THE BOARD.
ANY FURTHER COMMENTS? >> NOT HEARING ANY.
>> I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
BUT I'M GOING TO MAKE A SUGGESTION THAT WE INCLUDE AN ITEM 3 AND 4. AND ITEM 3 I WOULD SUGGEST HOWEVER THIS NEEDS TO BE WORDED FOR IT TO BE PROPERLY THAT WE REQUESTING THE SITE BE TREATED AS IN I SITE REGARDING THE LANDSCAPE ORDINANCES.
AND I WOULD ASK THAT WE REQUIRE THE CHAIN-LINK FENCE
TO BE POWDER COATED -- >> VINYL COATED.
>> NOT THE SLAB. >> I WILL PUT IT INTO A
MOTION IF YOU WOULD LIKE. >> I WOULD LIKE.
>> COULD OBACK TO -- YOU GO BACK TO THE REQUIREMENTS?
>> WE WOULD ADD ITEM 3, CHAIN-LINK FENCE INSTALLATION, AROUND THE PERIMETER.
SHALL BE GREEN VINYL COATED. NO SLATTING.
AND, FOUR, KEVIN, JUST TO MAKE SURE WE GET THIS RIGHT HERE, THAT LANDSCAPING ON THE PERIMETER MEET CODE
REQUIREMENT. >> WOULD YOU SAY THAT
[00:25:02]
LANDSCAPING THROUGHOUT THE SITE SHOULD MEET CODE?>> THAT'S A ONE STEP BETTER. >> I WOULD PUT THAT IN A
MOTION. >> I WILL SECOND THE MOTION.
>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
IF YOU WOULD, CALL THE ROLL. LET'S IDENTIFY THE FOUR ITEMS THAT GO ALONG WITH THIS.
THERE WERE TWO BY THE CITY AND THE ADDITIONAL TWO MR. BRODERICK AND MR. FREEMAN JUST WORKED OUT AS PART OF THAT MOTION. CALL THE ROLL PLEASE.
[c. Site Plan - Bev Smith North - 3300 and 3330 S. US Highway 1]
>> THE NEXT ITEM ON OUR LIST IS SITE PLAN FOR BEV SMITH NORTH 3300 AND 3330 SOUTH U.S. HIGHWAY ONE.
MR. GILMORE IS STILL PRESENTING.
WE HAVE A SITE PLAN DEVELOPMENT REVIEW AND DESIGN REVIEW APPLICATION FOR BEV SMITH NORTH.
3300 AND 3330 SOUTH U.S. HIGHWAY ONE.
THE SUBJECT PROPERTY LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SOUTH LAND DRIVE AND SOUTH U.S. HIGHWAY 1 AND ADJACENT TO BEV SMITH TOYOTA TO THE SOUTH WHICH IS AN AFFILIATED VEHICLE SALES AND SERVICE FACILITY TO THE SOUTH.
PROPERTY 26.65 ACRES. THE CURRENT USE IS GENERAL COMMERCIAL WITH A ZONING OF C-3 GENERAL COMMERCIAL.
AND THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN, THE APPLICANT PROPOSING A 7,329 SQUARE FOOT VEHICLE RECONDITIONING FACILITY.
WITH SITE IMPROVEMENT SUCH AS RETENTION POND AND SITE AREA FOR VEHICLES STORAGE PARKING.
WHERE THE VEHICLES THAT WILL BE RECONDITIONED WILL BE PARKED. THE APPLICANT AS YOU CAN SEE ONLY PROPOSING TO USE A PORTION OF THE LOT.
THEREFORE, WE ARE REQUIRING THAT A SUBDIVISION IS COMPLETED AND THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING THE TWO PARCELS TO THE WEST WILL BE NEW COMMERCIAL OUT PARCELS WITH THE POTENTIAL ACCESS. POTENTIAL ACCESS TRACK.
THIS IS THE LANDSCAPING PLAN THAT THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING.
21 PAUL MEADOW, SHRUBS, GROUND COVERS.
ST. AUGUSTINE SOD AND NEW IRRIGATION WILL BE INSTALLED. BEFORE YOU IS THE ELEVATION OF THE PROPOSED BUILDING. WHICH IS MEDIUM GRAY CHARCOAL TONES SPLIT MASONRY INTO THE RIGHT AS YOU CAN SEE THE MATERIALS THAT WILL BE USED.
STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL WITH A CONDITION.
FOR THE SIMPLE FACT THAT THIS NORTHERN SITE WILL WILL HAVE PARKING AS WELL FOR THE SOUTHERN.
AND I DON'T KNOW IF YOU ALL REMEMBER THE APPROVAL IN JULY FOR BEV SMITH SOUTH. I HAD THE CONDITIONS ON THERE. WE AGREED TO PLACE THEM ON THE NORTHERN PARCEL. NUMBER ONE IS COMPLETION CERTIFICATION BY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT LANDSCAPE BOND.
CITY CODE 123-6 REQUIRING BEFORE THE FINAL CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY IS APPROVED. NUMBER 2, APPLICANT SHALL PROVIDE A TREE MITIGATION SURVEY AND COORDINATE WITH THE CITY OF FT. PIERCE. PROPOSED TO BE REMOVED AS A RESULT OF THE SITE DEVELOPMENT OR CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY. NUMBER 3 PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMIT PROVIDE COLOR ELEVATIONS TO DEMONSTRATE THE PROPOSED BILLING CONFORMS TO SPECIFICATIONS OF CITY CODE 125-314.
DESIGN REVIEW. NUMBER FOUR, CITY PER CITY CODE SECTION CHAPTER 121 SUBDIVISION PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLATT ARE REQUIRED. NUMBER FIVE, PROVIDE SIDEWALKS AND SIDEWALK CONNECTIONS ALONG THE ABUTTING RIGHT OF WAYS. NUMBER, SIX, CROSSWALK BETWEEN BEV SMITH TOYOTA SOUTH PARCEL TO PROPOSED EMPLOYEE PARKING TO THE NORTH SHALL BE PROVIDED WHEN THE SITE PLAN FOR THE NORTH PARCEL IS SUBMITTED.
[00:30:03]
NUMBER, 7, PROVIDE COVENANT IN LIEU OF UNITY OF TITLE OR SHARED PARKING AGREEMENT BETWEEN BEV SMITH NORTH AND BEV SMITH SOUTH PARCELS. NUMBER 8 UNITY OF TIGHT WALL ST. LUCIE COUNTY CLERK OF COURTS AND A PARCEL COMBINATION WITH THE ST. LUCIE COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISER WILL BE CONDUCTED BEFORE THE ISSUIANS OF THEBUILDING PERMIT. >> QUESTIONS FOR
>> YOU KNOW I HAD TO HAVE ONE.
>> THE ORIGINAL DEVELOPMENT SCHEME THAT WAS SUBMITTED IN JULY, THAT'S NOT -- THIS IS NOT REPLACING THAT.
>> THIS IS THE NORTHERN. BASICALLY JUST BUILDING OFF
THE REST OF THE SITE. >> LET ME SHOW YOU.
THE ONE YOU IS ALL SAW IN JULY IS LOCATION.
THAT'S A MODIFICATION -- RENOVATION
>> THAT'S THE EXPANSION, YEAH.
THEY WOULD LIKE TO DEVELOP THIS AS RECON FACILITY.
AS YOU CAN SEE IT'S TWO PARCELS.
PART OF THIS SITE'S DEVELOPMENT IS ON BOTH PARCELS. THEY NEED TO DO A LOT COMBINATION FIRST AND THEN THEY HAVE TO COME IN AND DO PRELIMINARY AND FINAL PLAT TO CREATE THE TWO OUT PARCELS. THE OUT PARCEL AND THAT PLAT WILL COME BACK TO THE PLANNING BOARD FOR APPROVAL.
>> CORRECT. >> THE SITE PLAN THAT WE'RE APPROVING SPECIFICALLY FOR THAT SUBDIVIDED PORTION.
>> CORRECT. >> THEY REPLAT, COME BACK IN AND GET THAT APPROVE INSTEAD.
>> THAT'S WHY THE PERIMETER LANDSCAPE SING CURRENTLY JUST FOR THAT PORTION THEY WOULD LIKE TO DO.
WE'RE REQUIRING THEY COME IN WITH THE PRELIMINARY AND
>> THANK YOU. >> FURTHER QUESTIONS?
COMMENTS? >> MR. GILMORE IS THIS PROPERTY CONTAINS WATER. HOLDS WATER.
>> I'M NOT SURE ABOUT THAT. >> I WALKED IT TWICE THIS THE PAST SIX MONTHS. I FIND THAT IT HOLDS WATER.
WHETHER OR NOT IT'S CLASSIFIED THROUGH WATER MANAGEMENT OR THE COUNTY, WATER MANAGEMENT CREW, AS WET LAND. I CAN'T COMMENT TO THAT.
THE OFF LOAD IS GOING INTO OUR DITCH.
THAT RUNS NORTH AND SOUTH ALONG U.S. ONE.
AND YOU KNOW WHERE I AM ON PARTICULARLY ON THIS DITCH.
FOR A REASONS WHY. I STARTED TO STUDY THE WATER REPORT STORMWATER REPORT. THAT'S WHAT I'M REFERRING TO HERE. STORMWATER ONLY.
AND I'M STILL STUDYING IT AND MY EYES GOT CROSSED FOR A COUPLE OF DAYS. AND I HAD TO STOP.
FOR A CHANGE, WE HAVE A REPORT COMING TO US THAT IS
VERY THOROUGH. >> I WAS GLAD TO SEE THAT.
BUT IT'S VERY TAXING TO STUDY IT OFF.
WHAT I DIDN'T SEE IN OUR PACKET WAS DOCUMENTS FROM OUR STORMWATER ENGINEER, CITY AND STORMWATER CITY ENGINEER. DID SHE NOT PROVIDE ANYTHING? ON THIS SUBJECT?
>> IT WASN'T AN ENGINEERING. >> I SAW SOME INFORMATION FROM THE CITY ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT.
BUT I DON'T REMEMBER SEEING --
>> SEPARATE? >> TO STORMWATER.
THE WAY ITEMS ARE REVIEWED THROUGH THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT. THEY SELECT A PARTICULAR ENGINEER AND THAT'S THE PERSON WHO REVIEWS IT.
THERE'S ONE STORMWATER ENGINEER, WHICH IS VENITIA.
I'M NOT SURE SHE LOOKS AT ALL THE DEPARTMENT.
THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE ANSWERED BY ENGINEERING
DEPARTMENTS. >> THERE'S 17 ITEMS IN OUR CODE THAT HAVE PRELIMINARY PLAT HAS TO MEET.
I'M GOING TO ASSUME THAT WE'VE BEEN VERY SPECIFIC AND PRECISE AND WE'RE NOW MAKING SURE THAT ALL 17 ITEMS ARE
>> IF WE ELIMINATE ANY POTENTIAL EMBARRASSMENT MOVING FORWARD. MY CONCERN IS I'M GOING TO STATE IT AGAIN. SPECIFICALLY, REFERRING TO
[00:35:04]
THE PARTICULAR DITCH WHERE THE WATER GOES AS IT MOVES SOUTH, HOW IT MOVES SOUTH, HOW MANY GALLONS OF WATER WERE CONTINUALLY BUILDING INTO IT NOW PRIOR TO ALL OF THE NEW DEVELOPMENT ON U.S. ONE CORRIDOR.ASSUMING THAT THE TRAFFIC POLICE OFFICER AT THE CORNER OF THE SOUTHERN END OF THE DITCH MEETING THE EDGE OF THE CREEK GOING TO THE WEST, IF THAT OFFICER IS THERE, MAYBE THE WATER WILL MAKE THAT 90-DEGREE TURN.
IN AN AREA THAT IS FULLY OVERGROWN TO A POINT THAT YOU CAN'T SEE IT. YOU DON'T KNOW IT'S THERE.
I'VE BEEN MAKING A LOT OF NOISE.
I WILL CONTINUE TO MAKE NOISE ABOUT THE LACK OF MAINTENANCE THAT WE ARE SEEING ON THIS OUT FLOW WATERWAYS THAT CARRY STORMWATER.
AT THE SAME TIME THAT WE'VE GOT TREMENDOUS GROWTH GOING ON IN THE CITY. WE'RE CONTINUALLY WANTING TO DUMP MORE AND MORE WATER INTO THE OUT FLOWS THAT ARE BARELY HANDLING THE WATER THEY ARE SEEING YESTERDAY MUCH LESS WHAT THEY WILL SEE TOMORROW.
AND I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE PROPER PROCEDURE IS AND HOW TO FIX THE HICCUP THAT WE'VE GOT.
YOUR DEPARTMENT CAN ONLY GO SO FAR.
I UNDERSTAND THAT. ENGINEERING CAN ONLY DO SO MUCH AND I UNDERSTAND THAT. BUT WE'RE LETTING THE RESIDENTS OF FT. PIERCE DOWN BY NOT PAYING CLOSER ATTENTION TO WHAT'S HAPPENING TO OUTFLOW OF WATER IN THE CITY. AND THE MORE I STUDY IT AND THE MORE I DIG INTO IT THE MORE HAPPY I GET FOR EVERYBODY. NOW I'VE HAD MY SOAP BOX.
OPEN TO THE PUBLIC PORTION OF THE MEETING.
IS ANYONE HERE REPRESENTING -- STEP FORWARD. I THOUGHT I RECOGNIZED YOU FROM BEING UP NORTH. I HAD CONCERNS ABOUT THE STORMWATER ON THE SOUTH. MAIN CAMPUS.
WHAT I WAS EXPLAINING THEN IS WE HAVE SEVERAL AGENCIES THAT WE HAVE TO GO THROUGH. SOUTH FLORIDA BEING ONE.
WE HAVE NORTH ST. LUCIE RIVER, WATER PATROL DISTRICT THAT WE DISCHARGED CANAL TO THE EAST.
WE DISCHARGE TO A DISH OFF SITE.
ON THE COUNTY ROAD. WE PERMIT THROUGH SAINT LUCY COUNTY. YOUR CONCERNS ABOUT MAYBE PONDING. THERE'S NO WET LANDS CURRENTLY. IF THERE'S ANYTHING TO THE D.O.T. NOW THIS IS ALL BEING PULLED BACK NOW WE HAVE A DRY POND, THAT DISCHARGES INTO THE WET POND THEN DISCHARGES OFF SITE INTO THE SOUTHLAND DRIVE RIGHT-OF-WAY. THEN HEADS EAST INTO THE NORTH ST. LUCIE RIVER WATER PATROL DISTRICT IN THE B%-R BIT MORE DETAIL ABOUT HOW IT DOES ALL THAT.
I WILL NOT DO THAT IN TODAY'S MEETING.
AIM SURE YOU WILL BE HAPPY TO HEAR THAT.
>> THE WATER FLOW IS ALMOST 50% OF WHAT IT SHOULD BE TODAY. AND EVERY GALLON OF WATER WE ADD TO THAT FLOW IS A GALLON TOO MUCH OF WATER WE'RE ADDING TO THAT FLOW. YOU HAVE NOT WALKED THAT -- THAT FLOW TO THE SOUTH.
IT CARRIES IT AWAY IN THE DITCH TO THE EAST.
IT DUMPS IT INTO ANOTHER -- IT'S ACTUALLY A CANAL BEHIND THIS TOYOTA THAT WAS DUG AT THE SAME TIME THAT HIGH POINT DUG THEIR CANAL ON THEIR PROPERTY. THEY CLEANED UP WHAT WAS A DISH. BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T WANT THAT FLOW OF WATER GOING INTO THEIR CANAL.
THEY CLEANED IT UP THEN IT TURNS INTO A DITCH.
THEN IT WINDS UP GOING TO PLATT'S CREEK.
THEN IT DOES GO WEST INTO THE COUNTY WET LANDS AND EVENTUALLY INTO THE I GUESS THAT'S THE NORTH BRANCH OF
[00:40:03]
THE ST. LUCIE RIVER. HOW IT GETS THERE IS A VERY DIFFICULT PROCESS WHEN EVERYTHING IS OVER GROWN WITH PEPPER TREES AND SUCH. I SPEND A LOT OF MONEY EVERY YEAR MAKING SURE THAT DITCH IS CLEAR GOING PAST THERE.OTHER DEVELOPMENTS AREN'T GETTING THAT.
OTHER HOMEOWNERS ARE NOT GETTING THAT.
I HAVE TREMENDOUS CONCERNS ABOUT WHAT'S HAPPENING AS THAT WATER MOVES SOUTH AND EVENTUALLY MOVES WEST.
IT'S NOT CLEAR -- AND IT'S NOT YOUR CLIENTS RESPONSIBILITY, NOR SHOULD IT BE MINE.
WE PAY OUR TAXES TO MAKE SURE IT HAPPENS.
I DIDN'T HAPPEN. IT'S NOT HAPPENING ALL OVER THE CITY I'M SURE VERO BEACH HAS SIMILAR ISSUES.
THIS IS NOT EXCLUSIVE TO FT. PIERCE.
I DON'T WANT ANYONE TO THINK I THINK IT IS.
WE'RE IN SOUTH FLORIDA. WE HAVE WATER PROBLEMS. AS THE ENVIRONMENT CHANGES THE PROBLEMS ARE GETTING WORSE. DAILY.
WORSE. >> THE WORST 10-YEAR RAINS ARE NOW EVERY YEAR. WE HAVE MORE WATER FLOODWATER THAN WE EVER SAW BEFORE IN FT. PIERCE.
AND NOTHING IS BEING DONE TO MAKE IT GO AWAY.
WE HAVE TO SPEND SOME MONEY. >> I THANKS, COMPLETELY.
>> THAT LOT DOES HAVE SOME POOLING ON IT.
I DON'T BELIEVE IT FALLS BY ANY STRETCH INTO WETLANDS.
>> OKAY. >> IT DOES HAVE SOME POOLING ON IT. I WALKED IT THE OTHER DAY AFTER WE HAD -- WHAT DID WE HAVE 2 AND A HALF INCHES OF RAIN IN AN HOUR OR SOMETHING.
AND THE NEXT DAY I WENT AND WALKED IT BECAUSE I WAS CURIOUS. I HAD BEEN WHERE IT HADN'T RAIN IN ALMOST A WEEK. I HAD SEEN SOME POOLING.
I WONDERED HOW MUCH POOLING WOULD BE THERE.
I WALKED AROUND IT. I DIDN'T SEE IN GOPHER TURTLES. I GUESS THEY WERE ALL IN THE
GROUND. >> DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE
TO ADD TO THAT. >> WE TALKED ABOUT CROSSWALKS. WE HAVE THAT DESIGNED IN THE
PLANS NOW. >> I'M ANXIOUS TO SEE THIS DEVELOPMENT WITH BEV SMITH. THEY'VE BEEN A GOOD COMPANY TO THIS CITY. A GOOD NEIGHBOR TO THE STILL. THEY SEEM TO DO THE RIGHT THINGS WHEN THEY DO IT. AND I'M EXCITED TO SEE THEM EXPAND. I DON'T WANT THEM TO GET THE IMPRESSION I'M NOT HAPPY WITH THEM.
WE NEED TO GET MORE SERIOUS ABOUT IT.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT.
>> I HAVE A QUICK ONE. DO YOU KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT
THE LANDSCAPING? >> I KNOW WE PROVIDED THE THEN I WILL GO TO STAFF. THE HOLLY TREE, ARE YOU SURE THAT'S NOT THE HOLLY TREE THAT'S U.SUSCEPTIBLE TO SEE THAT THE CITY HAD TO DESTROY ALL THEIR TREES.
DOWNTOWN. I'M JUST ASKING BECAUSE I HAVE THEM IN MY DEVELOPMENT WHERE I LIVE ON NEBRASKA AVENUE. AND THEY ARE DYING BECAUSE THEY ARE DISEASED. IT'S JUST SOMETHING MAYBE
YOU COULD AGO THE FORRESTER. >> HOLLY TREES.
. >> THERE ARE DIFFERENT VARIETIES OF HOLLY TREES. I DON'T REMEMBER THE EXACT ONE THAT'S THE PROBLEM IS. WHEN I SAW THIS, I SAY I NEED TO TALK ABOUT IT. AT LEAST GIVE YOU AN UNDERSTANDING. YOU COULD PUT BOX WOOD UP INSTEAD. THAT'S A CONCERN WE DEFINITELY COULD EXCHANGE SOME OF THE TREES.
>> AND THE URBAN FORRESTER I KNOW HE WILL WORK WITH YOU.
IF THIS IS THE SUSCEPTIBLE TREE OF DISEASE.
YOU DON'T WANT TO PUT A NICE TREE UP AND SIX YEARS IT DIES ON YOU. NOW YOU HAVE TO TAKE IT DOWN. THEN THE DEALERSHIP DOESN'T
[00:45:01]
>> COULD I ASK THE APPLICANT A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS TOWN
>> THE CURRENT CONDITIONS ON THIS SITE.
THERE'S NO WATER CONTROL STRUCTURES OR MANAGEMENT.
>> THAT'S CORRECT. >> IT'S UNDEVELOPMENT.
IN THAT CASE BEING THERE'S NO RESTRICTION FOR THE SITE
WHERE THE WATER CAN FLOW TO. >> CORRECT.
>> YOUR DESIGN ACTUALLY PUTS IN CONTROL MEASURE THAT EXIST AT THE MOMENT. THE CONTROL MEASURES WILL MEET OR EXCEED REQUIRED DESIGN REQUIREMENTS.
THAT'S CORRECT. IT ALSO CONSIDERS THE OUT PARCELS UP FRONT. SO THE PONDS ARE OVERSIZED FOR THE ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE FUTURE.
>> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, SIR.
>> I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC PORTION OF THE MEETING.
ANYONE ELSE SPEAKING TO THIS PROJECT, PLEASE STEP FORWARD. NOT SEEING ANYONE.
I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC PORTION OF THE MEETING.
COME BACK TO THE BOARD. ANY FURTHER COMMENTS OR
QUESTIONS? >> I DO HAVE ONE JUST TO PICK UP ON THE COMMENTS. I'M QUITE INTRIGUED BY YOUR LINE OF QUESTIONING. MAYBE MY ASSUMPTION IS INCORRECT. THIS SITE PLAN.
THINK SITE PLAN, BEFORE IT REACHES THIS THRESHOLD HAS ALREADY GONE THROUGH ENGINEERING TO DETERMINE THOSE LOADS AND GENERATION AND OUT FLOW, ET CETERA.
>> I WANTED TO GET THAT ON RECORD THAT THE SITUATION IS NOT CONTROLLED AT PRESENT. THE DESIGN OF ANY SITE THAT COMES BEFORE YOU, YOU ARE QUITE RIGHT HAS TO MEET CERTAINTY CHOIRMENTS. THAT'S REVIEWED BY ENGINEERING INTERNALLY. IT'S REVIEWED BY OTHER EXTERNAL AGENCIES. WHERE WE ARE AT THE MOMENT IN THE CITY AND STATEWIDE, WE HAVE A LEVEL OF REQUIREMENTS FOR STORMWATER TREATMENT ON ALL SITES THAT AREN'T REDEVELOPED. THE DISCUSSION IN FUTURE WILL BE ARE THOSE STANDARDS HIGH ENOUGH TO ADDRESS WHERE WE ARE GOING IN THE FUTURE? I WAS QUITE RELIEVED TO HEAR THAT THE SIZE THAT WE HAVE ON THIS PARTICULAR DEVELOPMENT ARE OVERSIZED TO THE REQUIREMENTS.
THEY MAY BE A BIT OF NEGOTIATION THAT WOULD BE CONTINUED AS THIS SITE CONTINUED TO DEVELOP IN THE FRONT PARCELS COULD ALSO ACCOMMODATE A DEGREE OR PROPORTION OF WATER THAT MAY BE ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT WE
ARE ACTUALLY LOOKING FOR. >> WHEN YOU MADE THAT COMMENT INITIALLY WE APPROVED 7 MILLION FEET OF INDUSTRIAL SPACE WEST OF THE CITY.
I HAD A THOUGHT. 7 MILLION SQUARE FEET OF
WAVE PARK. >> HOWEVER, I BELIEVE THAT YOUR QUESTIONING WAS SPOT ON AND IN COMMENTS LATER I HAVE QUESTION PERTAINING TO THAT. THANK YOU FOR THE MORE
DETAILED EXPLANATION. >> IF THERE'S NO OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENT. I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
>> MOVE FOR APPROVAL WITH THE CONDITIONS AS SUGGESTED
>> WE HAVE A MOTION MOVE FOR APPROVAL BY MR. BURDGE AND SECONDED BY MR. ALBURY. CALL THE ROLL PLEASE.
>>CHAIR: THAT HANDLES THE NEW BUSINESS OF APPLICANT.
[8. ELECTION OF CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR]
THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS ITEM 8 AND THAT'S ELECTION OF THE CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR.I WOULD MOVE TO NOMINATE OUR CURRENT CHAIRMAN CREYAUFMILLER TO CONTINUE IN THAT ROLL.
I BELIEVE THAT MY EDITORIAL COMMENT IS THAT FRANK PUT A LOT OF TIME AND EFFORT INTO THIS POSITION.
HE'S TRULY DEDICATED TO THE CITY.
HE'S DEDICATED TO THE BOARD. AND HIS WORK DOES NOT GO UNNOTICED. I FOR ONE APPRECIATE THE EFFORT. AND WOULD LIKE TO SEE HIM CONTINUE IN THAT ROLE. I NOMINATE CHAIRMAN CREYAUFMILLER TO CONTINUE AS CHAIRMAN.
>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
[00:50:02]
>> MOVE ALL NOMINATIONS BE CLOSED.
>> MOVE THE NOMINATIONS BE CLOSED.
>> NOW WE WILL CALL THE ROLL ON THE MOTION FOR CHAIR.
>> YOU CALL FOR CLOSING NOMINATIONS.
>> WE ALREADY DID THAT. >> WE DID THAT.
I HAD TO CLOSE IT. CALL ROLL FOR MOTION ON THE CHAIR.
>> I THANK YOU MISS BURDGE FOR SAVING THE DAY.
THE NEXT ITEM IS MOTION FOR VICE CHAIR.
>> I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE NOMINATE MISS CLEMONS.
I SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION TO NOMINATE MISS CLEMONS. SECOND BY MR. EDWARDS.
SHALL WE CLOSE THE NOMINATIONS?
>> YOU CAN. >> THE CHAIR WOULD NORMALLY
SHOW THEIR NOMINATIONS. >> THERE'S NO FURTHER NOMINATIONS. I THINK ACCORDING TO ROBERTS RULES YOU CAN PROCEED TO VOTE.
EVEN THOUGH IT'S A UNANIMOUS VOTE.
>> DO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
BRACK >> THANK YOU MR. BURDGE.
THEY DID THIS ONCE A YEAR. I GET RUSTY.
OH, GOODNESS. ANY COMMENTS FROM THE
[10. DIRECTOR'S REPORT]
PUBLIC, YOU MAY COME FORWARD.NOT SEEING ANYONE, THE NEXT ITEM OF BUSINESS IS
DIRECTOR'S REPORT. >> THANK YOU CHAIR.
I DON'T KNOW IF ANYONE SAW ON THE COMMISSION CONFERENCE MEETING THIS MORNING THERE WAS A DISCUSSION ON IS THERE REGARDING THE IMPACT FEE MORATORIUM.
WHICH COINGS DENTALLY COINCIDENTALLY WAS DUE TO EXPIRE TODAY. THERE'S WAS SOME DATA FROM THAT, THAT WAS QUITE SURPRISING.
THE ANALYSIS OF THE YEAR IN PLACE IS VERY SIMILAR TO THE YEAR THAT IT WASN'T IN PLACE.
IT REALLY DID NOT MAKE ANY PRO OR CON FOR DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE FT. PIERCE REDEVELOPMENT AREA.
HAVING SAID THAT, THE COMMISSION DID INSTRUCTED THAT THE MORATORIUM ON IMPACT FEES CONTINUED WITH A CHALLENGE TO CITY STAFF TO REALLY MOVE THIS REDEVELOPMENT EFFORT TOWARDS THE CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT AND DOWNTOWN. AND AS THE ALSO AS THE IMPLEMENTATION OF MAYBE GETTING SOME ATTAINABLE HOUSING IN THE CITY WITHIN THE FT. PIERCE REDEVELOPMENT AREA. BEHIND THE SCENES, STAFF OVER THE LAST AT LEAST THREE MONTHS, I KNOW, ONE OF MY DEPARTMENTS MOVEMENTS IS TO INVESTIGATE BETTER WAYS OF ENGAGING DEVELOPERS AND PROPERTY OWNERS IN THE REDEVELOPMENT OF AREAS WITHIN THE CRA.
WE'VE GOT SOME THINGS THAT WILL BE COMING FORWARD TO YOU. WE'VE HAD INTEREST IN FROM DEVELOPER WHOSE ARE LOOKING TO ENGAGE WITH ATTAINABLE, AFFORDABLE WORKFORCE HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS.
WE'RE OPEN TO SEE SOME MOVEMENT ON THERE.
WE'VE HAD INTEREST FROM PROPERTY OWNERS, WHO HAVE BEEN REALLY STAGNATING ON PROPERTY WITHIN THE CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT. I HOPE TO MOVE SOMETHING FORWARD ON THAT. IN TERMS OF ENABLING ONE OF THE INCENTIVES WHICH WOULD BE THE MORATORIUM ON IMPACT
[00:55:03]
FEES TO BE GATHERED TOGETHER WITH OTHER INCENTIVES THAT WE WILL BE MORE CODE BASED. THAT'S WHERE IT WOULD BE COMING BACK TO THE PLANNING BOARD WITH SOME IDEAS ON THAT. THE AMOUNT OF DEVELOPMENT THAT WAS ACTUALLY OCCURRING IN THE CRA AREA, WAS 4% OF THE OVERALL IN COMPARISON TO WHAT'S GOING ON.YOU SEE THE PRESSURE OF DEVELOPMENT IS OUTSIDE THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA. WHICH IS TOTALLY THE INVERSE TO WHERE IT SHOULD BE. THAT INCLUDES ALL THE AREAS THAT WE SEE IN THE HOUSING. WE LEAVE ON THE TABLE SOME PAST STUDIES THAT I BRING OFF THE SHELF REGARDING THE EXPANSION OF THE CENTRAL BUSINESS DISTRICT.
I'M LOOKING AT THAT. STAFF ARE LOOKING AT THE DISTRICT TO SEE HOW WE CAN BETTER ENGAGE THAT AND GET REDEVELOPMENT TOWARDS THAT AREA AND HELP THE EXISTING CITIZENS WITHIN THAT AREA. TO SEE IMPROVEMENTS.
IT'S IMPORTANT AND PART OF INVOLVE THE LOCAL COMMUNITY OF CITIZENS WITHIN THE COMMUNITIES WHICH THEY RESIDE. TO SHOW THEM THEY CAN IMPROVE THE SITUATION IN THOSE COMMUNITIES.
HOPEFULLY, AS PART OF MY PLAN TO MOVE AHEAD THIS YEAR IS IN DIRECTIONS OF REALLY CONSOLIDATING REDEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE REDEVELOPMENT AREA OF THE CITY.
HOPEFULLY YOU WILL SEE SOME OF THAT VERY SOON.
>> WHAT THE DIRECTION IS COMMITTEE LEADING TO MOVE
TOWARD THE MORATORIUM. >> THEY LOOK TO DO THE SAME THING. THEY LOOK TO GET A BETTER QUALITY OF HOUSING. A BIGGER WIDER SPECTRUM OF HOUSING WITHIN THIS AREA. PEOPLE CAN ACTUALLY LIVE AND WORK IN DOWNTOWN. THAT EEM CAN LIVE IN THE COMMUNITIES DOWNTOWN. EAST AND WEST.
OF FT. PIERCE. WE NEED TO SHOW THE ACCESSIBILITY GOES BOTH WAYS.
>> THEY HAD A MEETING WITH THE HOUSING AUTHORITY.
AND I THINK A LOT OF THEM ARE CREATED FROM THAT.
AND INTEREST IN LOOKING AT WAYS THAT THE CITY CAN HELP SOME MORE BLIGHT OF THE MORE BLIGHTED AREAS.
AND ENCOURAGING EXISTING OWNERS OUT THERE TO BENEFIT FROM THE FACT THAT THEY ARE OUT THERE.
I WOULD LIKE TO SEE US TRY TO I'VE BEEN WATCHING THIS FROM A DISTANCE WITH OTHER CITIES.
OTHER COMMUNITIES. IN TERMS OF DEVELOPING HOUSING I KNOW THERE'S SOME WORK BEING DONE IN WEST PALM BEACH TO TRY TO CREATE A COMMUNITY ENVIRONMENT FOR SCHOOL TEACHERS TO MAKE IT EASIER FOR THEM TO ALSO OBTAIN HOUSING. WHEN WE THINK OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING, I GUESS THERE'S ANOTHER TERM NOW THAT'S
BEING USED. >> ATTAINABLE HOUSE.
>> I JUST LIKE TO CALL IT HOUSING.
I WOULD LIKE TO CALL IT HOUSING.
>> WE TEND TO LOOK AT AND FORGET THE FACT THAT UNFORTUNATELY IN AMERICA VERY OFTEN OUR SCHOOL TEACHERS FALL INTO THAT THRESHOLD THAT COULD VERY EASILY BE PRONE TO ME TO LEAN ON THAT LESSER EXPENSIVE HOUSING. AND IT'S UNFORTUNATE THAT WE HAVE THAT. BUT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE US AS A CITY DO MORE IN OUR PLANNING OF ZONES AND THROUGH THIS GROWTH LOOK AT WHERE THERE'S PROPERTY THAT
[01:00:02]
PERHAPS WE COULD SET ASIDE FOR THIS TYPE OF THING.>> MR. CHAIRMAN? IN LIGHT OF WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT, I THINK THAT THE SCHOOL DISTRICT COULD WORK WITH THE CITY ON THAT. BECAUSE THERE'S A BIG PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT'S AVAILABLE FOR POTENTIAL HOUSING ALONG THE EDWARDS ROAD. THAT FT. PIERCE CENTRAL CAMPUS. THAT'S A HUGE PIECE OF PROMPT THAT COULD BE DEVELOPED INTO SOME SORT OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR IF THEY WANT MARKET FOR TEACHER, SO BIT. THEY OWN IT.
HOUSING IS EXPENSIVE IN THE DEVELOPMENT OUT WHERE I LIVE WE'RE GETTING READY TO DEVELOP ANOTHER 2 OR 300 HOUSES. IN THE ZONE RIGHT BEHIND MY HOUSE AND I LOOK FORWARD TO THAT.
I HAVE THE WHISTLER DUCKS. I FEED THEM.
YOU LAUGH, BUT I DO. IS THERE ANYTHING FURTHER?
[11. BOARD COMMENTS]
>> NO, THANK YOU CHAIR. THAT'S GOOD.
>> THANK YOU. >> I HAVE A COUPLE OF COMMENTS FOR THE BOARD. WE HAVE A NEW MEMBER.
WE HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO SIT AND CHAT ALREADY.
AS I TRY TO DO WITH ALL NEW MEMBERS, AND NOW WE HAVE A NEW VICE CHAIR. I WILL BE LOOKING FOR REALLY GREAT THINGS FROM YOU. I NEED YOU TO REALLY FRESHEN UP ON THE RULES AND GIVE MR. BURDGE HERE A BREAK.
BUT KEEP ME THE STRAIGHT. PART OF YOUR JOB MAKE SURE I LOOK GOOD. I CAN'T LOOK GOOD IF SOMEONE DOESN'T HELP ME OUT EVERY ONCE IN A WHILE.
I DEFINITELY NEED IT. THERE'S NO QUESTION.
I APPRECIATE THE CONTINUED ENDORSEMENT THAT YOU GIVE ME EACH YEAR. I HAD THIS POSITION NOW FOR SEVERAL YEARS. I DON'T WANT TO HOG IT.
AT ANY TIME ANYONE FEELS AS THOUGH DAY ARE READY TO JUMP INTO THIS SEAT, DON'T NOT PUT YOUR HAND UP.
JUMP RIGHT FORWARD. BUT I APPRECIATE ONCE AGAIN YOUR ENDORSEMENT AND I WILL DO MY BEST TO CONTINUE TO DO THE VERY BEST THAT I CAN MOVING FORWARD AS YOU KNOW, I SPEND TIME WHEN I NEED TO BE OUR COMMISSIONERS, AND TRY TO GET -- WHETHER IT BE SPECIFIC PROJECTS OR VERY OFTEN ORDINANCES. WE HAD IN THE PAST SEVERAL YEARS, WE'VE CHANGED SEVERAL ORDINANCES, THROUGH THE EFFORTS OF THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND PLANNING BOARD WORKING COHESIVELY TOGETHER TO MAKE IT HAPPEN AND WORKING WITH THE COMMISSION.
PROBABLY THE BIGGEST ONE THAT WE EVER TOOK ON WAS SHORT-TERM RENTALS. MR. BURDGE PLAYED A BIG ROLE IN THAT. HE'S OUR RESIDENT EXPERT ON SHORT-TERM RENTAL. THAT WAS SIX OF EIGHT MONTHS OF ALMOST DAILY MEETINGS I THINK AT SOME POINTS, THIS BOARD IS MORE ACTIVE THAN MANY PLANNING BOARDS OR AGENCIES IN SMALL TOWNS. I HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO SIT ON A PANEL NOT LONG AGO. AN ASSOCIATION OF PLANNING BOARDS. AND I LEARNED A LOT IN THOSE MEETINGS. NOT ONLY FROM THE PRESENTATIONS BUT FROM DISCUSSIONS WITH OTHER PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS OR PLANNING AGENCY MEMBERS THAT I VISITED WITH WHILE I WAS THERE.
THE ONE THING THAT I NOTICED IN MANY OF MY DISCUSSIONS WITH THEM IS THAT PARTICIPATION OF THE BOARD MEMBERS THEY SEEM TO HAVE LACK OF PARTICIPATION.
WE NEVER HAVE THAT. EVERYBODY ON THE BOARD SEEMS
[01:05:03]
TO COME PREPARED AND READY FOR ACTION.THE OTHER THING THEY HAD AN ATTENDANCE PROBLEM.
MANY OF THEM COMMENTED ABOUT ATTENDANCE PROBLEMS THAT THEY HAD TO RUSSELL TO TRY TO GET A QUORUM.
I CAN'T REMEMBER THE YEARS I'VE BEEN ON THIS BOARD.
I CAN'T REMEMBER EVER HAVING AN ISSUE WITH THE QUORUM.
THAT SAYS A LOT TO THE MEMBR OF THE BOARD.
YOU HAVE THE DEDICATION AND MAKE SURE YOU ARE HERE.
NONE OF THOSE BOARDS THAT I TALK TO NONE OF THE CHAIRS THAT I TALK TO SEEM TO HAVE ANY INTEREST IN LOOKING AT WEAKNESSES IN ORDINANCES AND SAYING YOU KNOW WE CONSTANTLY GET THIS ORDINANCES.
THE PROBLEM CONSTANTLY GETTING CASES BEFORE US.
LOOK WHAT WE WENT THROUGH NOT ONLY ON VACATION RENTALS BUT ON CONDITIONAL USE APPLICATION AS THE WHOLE.
WE WERE GETTING KILLED ON ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE SALES AND RENTAL. WE WENT THROUGH AND WE'VE MANAGED TO HELP CORRECT THAT.
THAT WAS THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT WORKING WITH THIS BOARD TO DO THAT. AS WE HEAR CASES IF YOU RECOGNIZE THAT THERE'S AN ORDINANCE THAT CONTINUALLY KEEPS COMING UP AND WE CONTINUALLY HAVE A AND ISSUE TRYING TO DEAL WITH IT. LET ME KNOW THAT YOU FEEL LIKE WE NEED TO TAKE A LOOK AT THAT.
JUST ABOUT. >> YOU'RE ALMOST A LONG-TERMER NOW. I DON'T SEE YOU NAME TAG.
I JUST LIKE TO COMMENT IF I MAY ON WHAT YOU BEEN TALKING ABOUT. I HEARD SOME FEEDBACK FROM THAT CONFERENCE THAT YOU WENT TO.
FROM STAFF THAT I WORKED WITH IN THE PAST.
THEY SAID WOW WHY CAN'T WE HAVE A PLANNING BOARD LIKES FOR PIERCE DO. THEY CAME AWAY WITH SUCH POSITIVE FEELING ACT FT. PIERCE.
I WAS QUITE PROUD TO SAY I WORK AT FT. PIERCE.
IT'S VERY RARE YOU GET THAT. >> THE QUESTION AND ANSWER PERIOD SOME OF THE QUESTIONS KEPT POPPING UP OVER AND OVER AGAIN ABOUT HOW DO YOU GET QUORUMS AND HOW MANY SEATS DO YOU HAVE ON YOUR BOARD.
SOME OF THE ANSWERS CAME FROM SOME OF THE OTHER PANELIST. I WAS SURPRISED.
I WAS HAPPY TO SHOW FT. PIERCE IS STRONG IN ALL THESE AREAS. THAT HAS A LOT TO DO WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND THE PERSONAL AND YOUR WILLINGNESS TO WORK WITH THE PLANNING BOARD IN THE WAY THAT YOU DO. SINCE I'VE BEEN ON THIS BOARD, THE CHANGES TO THE PRESENTATIONS MADE AND THE DOCUMENTATION THAT ARE COMING TO US ARE WELL ABOVE WHERE IT WAS WHEN I FIRST CAME ON THIS BOARD.
I REMEMBER WHEN MR. BURDGE SAT AS CHAIR.
HE USE TO SIT IN THAT CUBBIE HOLE.
I WOULD WATCH MR. BURDGE WRESTLE WITH A REPORT FROM DISASTER AND I KNEW I WRITE IT I KNOW IT WAS FULL OF HOLES. HE WOULD TRY TO MAKE SENSE OF SOME OF IT. WHERE WE ARE AT TODAY IS LIGHT YEARS AHEAD. KEEP UP THE GOOD WORK.
YOU'VE COME A LONG WAY. YOU CAME TO US WHILE YOU
WERE STILL IN COLLEGE. >> YOU'RE THE PLANNER.
[01:10:04]
YOU ARE -- I APPRECIATE EVERYTHING YOU ARE DOING.>> WHAT IS STATUS ON THE SAVANNAH PRESERVES AND BERM CONSTRUCTION? THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO COME BACK TO THE PLANNING BOARD IF THERE WERE CHANGES TO
THAT? >> THEY HAVEN'T RESUBMITTED.
>> WE HAVEN'T SEEN ANYTHING YET.
>> PLAN WOULD BE TO BRING IT BACK HERE.
>> SECOND QUESTION, IS RELATIVE TO I KNOW THIS IS NEW. WE'VE BEEN DISCUSSING 10,000 FOOT VIEW OF THE JENKINS ROAD KINGS HIGHWAY INTERCHANGE ALL THAT. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT'S IN THE FOREFRONT OF EVERYBODY'S MIND AS TO AT SOME POINT IN TIME MOVING FORWARD WITH THAT.
IT'S ONLY BEEN A MONTH. I FIGURED I WOULD MENTION AS
MORE OF A CRITICAL ISSUE. >> WE'VE GOT AN APPLICATION OUT THERE THAT WE'RE WORKING WITH THE COUNTY AND THEY'VE ACTUALLY APPOINTED AN EXTERNAL CONSULTANT TO LOOK AT THE IMPACT OF THAT APPLICATION NOW.
>> WE UNDERSTAND THAT. I WOULD LIKE ONCE I GET MY BUDGET SORTED OUT TO GET INVOLVED WITH A TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER TO DO A COMBINATION WITH A
COUNTY AGAIN TO -- >> YOU LOOK AT SIZABLE
>> IT'S RESIDENTIAL. >> THANK YOU.
>> YOU'RE WELCOME. >> I'M GOING TO TRY TO BRING THIS UP-TO-DATE A LITTLE BIT MORE IF YOU DON'T MIND WITHOUT MY GETTING INTO THAT DARK GRAY AREA THAT I SHOULDN'T GET INTO. THE SAVANNAH PRESERVES AT SAVANNAH LAKES IS THE TECHNICAL TERM FOR IT WAS WITHDRAWN IN THE JULY 15TH, CITY COMMISSION MEETING.
BECAUSE APPLICATIONS NOT COMPLETE.
AND LACKING IN THAT APPLICATION WAS THE STORMWATER, BY THE COMMUNITY HAS GOT GREAT CONCERNS ABOUT. IT WAS WITHDRAWN.
NOW AS I UNDERSTAND IT BY LOOKING AT OUR CITY CODES, I BELIEVE THAT WHEN THEY COME BACK WITH THAT APPLICATION THEY ARE GOING TO HAVE TO START FRESH; IS THAT
CORRECT? >> THEY HAVE TO WALK THROUGH THE WHOLE PROCESS AGAIN. TO GET IT BACK IN FRONT OF THE COMMISSION. I WILL BE COMING BACK.
IF NOT, BECAUSE OF THE MOTION MADE WHEN HERE.
MORE SO BECAUSE IT HAD BEEN WITHDRAWN AS AN APPLICATION FROM THE CITY FROM THE CITY. IT COMES BACK AS A NEW APPLICATION. I DON'T BELIEF WE WILL BE SEE BIG CHANGES IN THE OVERALL DEVELOPMENT VIEW OF IT. BUT IT WILL BE COME IMAGE
BACK. >> QUICK QUESTION, STAFF.
HAVE YOU HEARD ANYTHING IN REGARD TO REALIGNMENT OR
SOMETHING. >> PETERSON -- HARTMAN ROAD
>> I HEARD RECENTLY FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT THEY BUILT THE ROAD THEY PUT IN THE WRONG PLACE.
YOU KNOW, AND THEN I DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY WILL DO ON THE WEST SIDE. I CALL IT WHERE THE CREEK IT. THAT'S NOT DEVELOPED AT ALL AS FAR AS THE ROAD IS CONCERNED.
THEY BROUGHT IT UP TO THE BRIDGE AND THAT'S IT.
AND THEN I UNDERSTAND THAT THEY -- YOU HEAR ALL KINDS OF STUFF. YOU KNOW MORE THAN I KNOW.
>> YEAH. >> I'VE BEEN TALKING TO THE
ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT. >> I THOUGHT THAT WAS KIND
OF -- >> THAT'S ON THE WEST SIDE.
THE EAST SIDE -- BECAUSE I KNOW THEY GET READY TO BUILD MORE HOUSES ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE CREEK.
HEY WILL PUT NEW HOUSES OVER THERE.
AND THEN 1-A WILL POP UP OR 2-A.
>> THEY HAVE TWO OTHER TRACTS TO COMPLETE.
>> THEY PUT THE BARRIER FENCE.
>> ACTUALLY THREE. THE THIRD ONE IS SUPPOSED TO
BE A PARK. >> AND THE PARK IS THIRD
[01:15:02]
DEVELOPMENT THAT I THINK IS GOING TO BE THE TEETERING POINT OF WHETHER THE CITY WILL ACCEPT THE PARK.JUST FOR THE MEMBERSHIP FOR THE HOMEOWNERS.
BECAUSE THE CITY DOESN'T WANT TO ACCEPT IT.
EVEN THOUGH THE CITY -- THAT'S -- HERE AGAIN THAT'S ANOTHER RUMOR BECAUSE OF THE PAENTS.
WE TALK ABOUT MAINTENANCE. THEY DON'T WANT TO -- THAT'S GO TO BE A BEAUTIFUL PARK, I WILL TELL YOU THAT.
>> IT IS. >> IS THERE ANYTHING THAT YOU'VE WORKED ON FOR US IN TERMS OF BRINGING IN THE CITY ATTORNEY TO DISCUSS FLORIDA SUNSHINE LAWS AND RECUSAL PROCESS SHOULD SOMEONE NEED TO RECUSE THEMSELVES? WE SPOKE OF THAT A LITTLE
BIT ONE MEETING. >> I KNOW THE CITY ATTORNEY HAS BEEN HUGELY BUSY. AS SOON AS SHE GETS A SPLIT IN THAT TIME, MAYBE NEXT PLANNING BOARD MAYBE WE CAN
WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO BE SENSITIVE AS TO WHAT OUR AGENDAS LOOK LIKE AS TODAY IT COULD HAVE BEEN A GOOD DAY TO POP THAT IN. BUT WE APPRECIATE THAT THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE IS A VERY BUSY OFFICE.
I KNOW THAT YOU'VE JUST GONE THROUGH A DISCUSSION ON SUNSHINE LAW. I DON'T KNOW HOW DEEP THAT DISCUSSION WENT. BUT I STILL WOULD LIKE TO TRY TO BRING AN EFFORT TOGETHER WITH THAT.
AND I'M SURE THAT THERE'S QUESTIONS THAT POP UP THAT WE'VE SEEN HERE FROM THE LEGAL SIDE OF DISCUSSIONS THAT WE MIGHT HAVE SOME OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE ATTORNEY AT THAT TIME. VERY GOOD.
IF THERE'S NOTHING ELSE. >> MOVE FOR ADJOURNMENT.
>> MEETING IS ADJOURNED.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.