[1. CALL TO ORDER]
[00:00:10]
>> GOOD AFTERNOON. YOU ARE SEATED IN THE PLANNING BOARD MEETING OF NOVEMBER 14 FOR FORCE PIERCE.
I'M GETTING WHERE I READ THAT DATE NOW.
BECAUSE I THINK I MISSED IT BY 10 OR 15 YEARS ONE DAY.
I READ IT. IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE, STAND WITH
US FOR PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. >> I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE 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.
AL THE ROLL, PLEASE. >> MR. EDWARDS?
>> CHAIRMAN CREYAUFMILLER? >> PRESENT.
>> DID MR. ALBURY CALL IN? >> YES, HE DID.
A REASONABLE EXCUSE FOR NOT ATTENDING TODAY.
I WOULD LIKE TO JUST MAKE A COUPLE OF MENTIONS.
ONE, WE JUST OBSERVED THE VETERANS DAY, AND FOR ALL VETERANS, WE THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR SERVICE.
FOR ALL FIRST RESPONDERS, I'LL INCLUDE, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR SERVICE. AND I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO CONGRATULATE MR. BRODERICK. HE IS ONE OF OUR NOW PAST BOARD MEMBERS. HE WAS ELECTED ON NOVEMBER 8 TO FILL THE CITY COMMISSION CHAIR BEING VACATED BY COMMISSIONER PERONA. IT WAS REQUIRED THAT HE RESIGN FROM THIS BOARD ONCE HE WAS ELECTED, AND REGARDLESS OF BEING COMMISSIONER-ELECT, HE STILL HAD TO LEAVE THE BOARD.
SO WE ARE DOWN ONE BOARD MEMBER, AND I'M SURE THERE IS GOING TO BE A CALL FOR... TO REPLACE THAT SEAT SOON FROM THE CITY.
AND IF YOU SEE THAT, AND YOU WOULD LIKE TO JOIN OUR BOARD, PLEASE FILL OUT AN APPLICATION. I WOULD LIKE TO ENTERTAIN A
[5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES]
MOTION FOR THE MINUTES, PLEASE. >> MOVE FOR APPROVAL.
>> SECONDED. >> WE HAVE A MOTION BY MR. BURDGE. SECOND BY MS. CLEMONS.
WOULD YOU CALL THE ROLL, PLEASE? >> MR. SPHWHURNLG.
>> YES. >> CHAIRMAN CREYAUFMILLER?
>> YES, MA'AM. >> BEFORE I MOVE INTO THE REST OF OUR HEARING, I'M GOING TO MAKE AN ANNOUNCEMENT THAT UNDER NEW BUSINESS, ITEM 7, I'M GOING TO MOVE ITEMS B AND C TO THE END OF THE MEETING BEHIND ITEM J. I'M DOING THAT SO WE CAN GO THROUGH THE ITEMS THAT Y'ALL ARE PROBABLY MOST INTERESTED IN TODAY AND NOT HAVE TO SIT THROUGH A DISCUSSION ABOUT CHANGING OUR AMENDMENTS TO A ZONE UNLESS YOU CHOOSE TO.
I'M NOT TELLING YOU THAT YOU HAVE TO LEAVE.
[a. Future Land Use Map Amendment - Viva West - 3037 South Jenkins Road]
OUR FIRST ITEM UNDER 6-A IS FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT.FOR VIVA WEST AT 337 SOUTH GENERAL TINS ROAD.
MR. GILMORE IS NOT WITH US TODAY.
I'M GOING TO REALLY BE MESSED UP HERE NOW WITH SOME OF MY NOTES.
>> VERY CLOSE. >> I'M WITHIN... I'M OKAY?
(LAUGHTER) YOU WOULD THINK WITH MY NAME, I WOULD HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH PEOPLE'S NAMES. I KILL THEM.
YOU WOULD BE PRESENTING TODAY. >> YES.
ALL RIGHTY. THE PLANNING BOARD, PLANNING BOARD CHAIRMAN, I AM PRESENTING TO YOU AN APPLICATION FOR FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT AT 3037 SOUTH JENKINS ROAD.
HERE IS AN AERIAL MAP OF THE APPROXIMATELY 27.89 ACRES PARCEL. THE I.D. IS 2325111001002.
THE CURRENT FUTURE LAND USE IS GENERAL COMMERCIAL, GC.
AND THE PROPOSED FUTURE LAND USE IS RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM-DENSITY.
[00:05:04]
R NF N. HERE IS A MAP OF THE FUTURE LAND USE AND THE ZONING, AS YOU CAN SEE IT.Z-3 AND GENERAL COMMERCIAL. THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT, THE FUTURE LAND USE CHANGE FOR ONE PARCEL TO MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, THE STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST AS IT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE SECTION 125-136 OF CITY CODE AND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. AND IT DOES NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, CONVENIENCE, AND GENERAL WELFARE OF THE PUBLIC. THE PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDATIONS TODAY, THE POSSIBLE ACTIONS OF THE PLANNING BOARD ARE TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT WHICH IS THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION. RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT WITH CHANGES OR RECOMMEND... A RECOMMENDATION OF A DISAPPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT.
CAN YOU TELL ME, HAS THERE BEEN ANY MEETINGS WITH THE, THE HOME OWNERS IN BRYER GATE CONCERNING THIS?
THAT WE ARE AWARE OF? >> I HAVE NOT BEEN MADE AWARE OF ANYTHING. WE DO NORMALLY ADVISE APPLICANTS TO CARRY OUT OUTREACH PRIOR TO SUBMITTAL OR DURING SUBMITTAL.
>> OKAY. BEING THAT THIS IS WRAPPED AROUND BRYER GATE, I THINK IT WOULD, IN MY MIND, IT SHOULD BE ALMOST NECESSARY THAT THAT BE DONE.
SOME OF OUR APPLICANTS DO A VERY GOOD JOB AT THAT.
SOME, NOT SO GOOD. I THINK IN THIS CASE, BRYER GATE SHOULD CERTAINLY BE MADE TOTALLY AWARE OF WHAT'S HAPPENING ON THIS PARCEL PROPERTY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMENTS? FOR THE BOARD?
>> LET ME ASK THIS QUESTION IN REGARDS TO WHAT YOU ARE SAYING.
BRYER GATE IS WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS OF FORT PIERCE?
>> YES. >> IT IS? OKAY. THEY WILL GET THEIR NOTIFICATION WITHIN... BEFORE THE CITY COMMISSION MEETING, FOR SURE.
>> YES, SIR. >> BUT IT IS... IT DOES LEND ITSELF TO HAVE, HOPEFULLY, THEY ARE BEING NOTICED TO THIS OTHER THAN THE LITTLE POLITICAL SIGN THAT IS OUT IN FRONT OF THE BUILDING. IN FRONT OF THE PROPERTY.
>> YES. THEY WILL... IF NECESSARY, THAT
WE MAIL ANYBODY WITHIN 500 FEET. >> PRIOR TO THE COMMISSIONER
>> RIGHT. ANY OTHER COMMENTS, QUESTIONS? NONE? LY MOVE TO THE PUBLIC PORTION OF
I WAS THINKING. I DO JUST HAVE ONE QUESTION.
IS THERE FOR STAFF, ARE YOU AWARE OF ANY RESTRICTIONS FOR THIS TYPE OF LAND USE AS FAR AS HOW CLOSE TO THE INTERSTATE THE
RESIDENCES CAN BE BUILT? >> I'M NOT AWARE OF ANY RESTRICTIONS OTHER THAN NORMAL CITY SETBACKS FROM THAT PARTICULAR ZONING DISTRICT. I SHOULD POINT OUT THAT THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY IS ZONED COMMERCIAL-GENERAL.
THE CHANGE TO MEDIUM-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL WOULD ESSENTIALLY REMOVE SOME OF THE POTENTIAL INTENSITY OF DEVELOPMENT FROM THAT PROPERTY. I'M TALKING ABOUT PROBABLY APPROXIMATELY 1.2 MILLION SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL SPACE REDUCTION, AND APPROXIMATELY A REDUCTION IN TOTAL NUMBER OF POTENTIAL DWELLING UNITS OF ABOUT 83 OR SO.
SO THERE IS SOME DIMINISHMENT OF INTENSITY AT THAT LOCATION WITH
THIS FUTURE LAND USE CHANGE. >> OBVIOUSLY, ANY FURTHER DEVELOPMENT WOULD GO THROUGH SITE PLAN REVIEW?
>> CORRECT, YES. > MOVING FORWARD?
>> YES. >> ATTACHED TO THE PACKET, IT SHOWED THE LOTS PROPOSED FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT, A RATHER LARGE... IT IS NOT GOING TO BE A HIGH-DENSITY DEVELOPMENT FROM WHAT I COULD SEE. AM I CORRECT IN THAT?
I DON'T THINK THEY ATTACHED THE SITE PLAN TO THIS PRESENTATION,
IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE? I WILL GO TO THE PUBLIC PORTION OF THE MEETING. ANYONE SPEAKING TO THIS ITEM?
AND YOU ARE THE â– DEVELOPER? >> GOOD AFTERNOON.
MY NAME IS MATTHEW SCOTT. I'M THE ATTORNEY FOR THE
YOU ARE REPRESENTING THEM TODAY. >> AGAIN, YES, SIR.
[00:10:02]
>> A COUPLE OF COMMENTS TO ADD. SOME COLOR...
>> I'M SORRY. I HAVE TO INTERRUPT.
IF YOU WOULD, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.
>> YES, OF COURSE. MATTHEW SCOTT.
I'M A ZONING ATTORNEY. 14 SOUTHEAST FOREST STREET IN BOCA RATON. I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT. BEFORE GETTING INTO A COUPLE OF DETAILS, ADDING SOME COLOR TO THE PRESENTATION, I DID PERSONALLY MEET WITH THE BRYER GATE NEIGHBORHOOD.
PRIOR TO APPLICATIONS GETTING THIS FAR.
WE REACHED OUT AND SENT A MAILER.
IT WAS SORT OF DURING COVID OR THE ENDS OF IT.
WE DID HAVE A ZOOM MEETING THAT WAS SURPRISINGLY WELL ATTENDED.
AND WE SPENT-- I DON'T KNOW, AN HOUR, HOUR AND A HALF CHATTING WITH THEM ABOUT THEIR CONCERNS. THEIR CONCERNS WERE WHAT YOU WOULD EXPECT. WHAT'S TRAFFIC GOING TO LOOK LIKE? HOW ARE THE BUFFERS GOING TO BE? AND DRAINAGE. BECAUSE BRYER GATE HAS DRAINAGE ISSUES. WE WERE ABLE TO SHARE THAT WE WILL BUILD A LARGE BUFFER BETWEEN THE BACK OF THEIR PROPERTY AND THIS PROPERTY WITH A FENCE OR A WALL.
TO BUFFER THAT. SO THEY DON'T FEEL OR SEE THE NEW DEVELOPMENT. WE ALSO SHARED WITH THEM THAT THE SITE IS CURRENTLY ZONED FOR GENERAL-COMMERCIAL AS STAFF SAID. THAT IS A HIGH-INTENSITY TYPE OF ZONING. RIGHT? AS OF RIGHT, SOMEONE COULD COME IN AND BUILD A HUGE SHOPPING CENTER WITH DELIVERIES AND DUMP TRUCKS.
ALL THOSE SORTS OF THINGS. IN MY OPINION, THEY ARE UNDESIRABLE ADJACENT TO A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND THEN FINALLY, WE TALKED ABOUT DRAINAGE.
OUR ENGINEER WAS ON THE CALL WITH US.
HE SHARED WITH THEM THAT WHILE CANDIDLY, WE CAN'T SOLVE THEIR DRAINAGE ISSUE. WHAT WE CAN ENSURE IS THAT OUR DRAINAGE IS GOING TO DRASTICALLY IMPROVE FROM WHAT IS JUST SORT OF AN OPEN WETLAND RIGHT NOW. THAT WILL ENSURE PER LAW, HONESTLY, IT IS SORT OF A SOFTBALL ANSWER.
WE WILL MAINTAIN ALL OF THE DRAINAGE ON SITE.
WHATEVER THEIR SITUATION IS, WE CAN PROMISE TO THEM THAT WHATEVER THEIR SITUATION IS, I SHOULD SAY, IT IS NOT GOING TO GET ANY WORSES WITH OUR DEVELOPMENT.
AND SO THAT WAS SORT OF A PRELIMINARY MEETING.
WE EXPLAINED THAT WE NEEDED TO GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS OF CHANGING THE LAND USE, CHANGING THE ZONING.
AND A SITE PLAN WOULD FOLLOW LATER.
I MADE THE COMMITMENT TO THEM THAT I WOULD REACH BACK OUT ONCE WE GOT CLOSER TO THE SITE PLAN PHASE AND SHOW THEM SPECIFICS OF HOW THE BUFFER IS GOING TO LOOK. HOW ACCESS POINTS AND DRIVEWAYS ARE GOING TO LOOK AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
CAN I SAY TO THIS BOARD, THAT THEY SAY WE ARE ALL ONBOARD, WE ARE FULLY IS UP PORRIVE? NEW DEVELOPMENTS COME WITH CONSTERNATION BY THE NEIGHBORS. IT WAS NOT WHAT I ENCOUNTER SOMETIMES, WHICH IS, LIKE, GET OUT OF HERE, CHASING ME WITH A STICK. IT WAS A POSITIVE INTERACTION.
I WILL REPRESENT TO THE BOARD THAT I WILL MEET WITH THEM AGAIN IF THIS ALL GOES WELL. I HAVE A PRESENTATION.
I DON'T THINK I NEED TO RUN THROUGH ALL OF IT.
STAFF DID A NICE JOB. OF COURSE, I WANT TO EMPHASIZE THAT STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL.
THEY REVIEWED APPLICATIONS. YOUR EXPERTS ARE SAYING WE MEET CRITERIA. AND THIS IS A REDUCTION INTENSITY. I THOUGHT I WOULD BE HELPFUL IF I COULD SHOW A COUPLE OF IMAGES QUICKLY.
>> I WILL PERMIT THAT IF IT IS QUICK.
>> I WILL MAKE IT REALLY FAST. (LAUGHTER (.
>> OH, OKAY. YOU HAVE CONTROL.
ARE YOU CONTROLLING IT? >> OH, SORRY.
ARE WE FITING OVER CONTROL? >> WE WERE FOR A SECOND.
(LAUGHTER). >> I'M TRYING TO GO FAST.
I'M TRYING TO GO FAST. I WAS WONDERING WHAT THE DEVIL WAS GOING ON HERE. THANK YOU.
I'LL LET YOU STAY IN CONTROL. THIS IS A CONCEPT CHUL SITE PLAN. THIS IS NOT THE PLAN.
WE WANTED TO SHOW WHAT IT MIGHT LOOK LIKE.
WHICH IS IF THE LAND USE AND ZONING ARE CHANGED, YOU MIGHT BE SEEING IN SOME MONTHS TIME, A SITE PLAN THAT SHOWS A VARIETY OF COTTAGE-STYLE HOMES AND TOWNHOMES.
THE IDEA BEING ENTRY-LEVEL HOUSING PRODUCT FOR PEOPLE LOOKING TO MOVE TO THE AREA. SORT OF MEETING A NEED FOR WORKING FAMILIES THAT WANT TO GET OUT OF THE APARTMENT-STYLE LIVING. AND SO THIS WOULD GIVE THEM THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE IN A COTTAGE-STYLE HOME OR TOWNHOUSE.
WHAT WE ARE SHOWING AS WELL IS AMENITIES.
A CLUBHOUSE, BASKETBALL COURT AREA, PICNIC AREA, AND A POOL FOR THE RESIDENTS. SO THIS CAN BE A REALLY NICE DEVELOPMENT THAT WE HOPE WOULD ADD TO THE DEVELOPMENT ALONG JENKINS ROAD. IF WE CAN SKIP TO THE NEXT ONE.
AGAIN, I WANT TO BE CLEAR. YOU ARE NOT APPROVING THIS TODAY. I'M NOT ASKING YOU TO.
I WANT TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF OF THE DESIGN WE ARE LOOKING AT.
YOU CAN GO TO THE NEXT ONE. THEN ONE MORE.
SO I CAN LEAVE IT AT. THAT TRAFFIC IS A GREAT PLACE TO LEAVE IT. THANK YOU FOR LETTING ME SPEAK FOR SO LONG. THAT IS KIND OF THE ARCHITECTURAL INTENT WE HAVE. YOU WILL SEE IT AGAIN WHEN WE COME BACK WITH. THAT, WE WOULD REQUEST APPROVAL PRIMARILY BECAUSE AS STAFF SAID, THIS IS A DRASTIC REDUCTION IN TRAFFIC. FOR WHAT'S CURRENTLY CONTEMPLATED FOR THIS AREA. THIS IS A NET IMPROVEMENT THAT WE THINK WILL BE AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT POSITIVE BUT ALSO
[00:15:01]
REALLY HELP WITH THE DEVELOPMENTS GOING ON IN THE AREA. THANK YOU FOR LETTING ME SPEAK.>> YOU BROUGHT UP DRAINAGE. I'M GOING TO GO THERE FOR A MINUTE. IS THERE ANYBODY HERE FROM ENGINEERING ON THIS APPLICATION? NO.
YOU MENTIONED THAT THERE IS NOT GOING TO BE ANY OUTFLOW OF
>> IT IS GOING TO BE ALL MAINTAINED ON SITE.
>> IN ONE MITIGATION POND? >> OUR ENGINEERS HERE... OUR ENGINEER IS HERE. IF YOU WANT TO MAKE A COMMENT ON
THAT. >> I GUESS I DIDN'T LOOK FAR ENOUGH OVER TO MY LEFT. I HAVE A VISION PROBLEM IN THE LEFT EYE. I PROBABLY NEED TO LEARN AND
HEAR TOSTAIR STARE AT THE DOOR. >> STEPHEN COOPER.
SEEP ENGINEERS. THE PROJECT IS NEXT TO A CANAL.
WE WILL BE USING THAT CANAL TO DISCHARGE.
WE WILL ABIDE BY ALL THEIR... YOU KNOW, THEY LET YOU DISCHARGE A CERTAIN AMOUNT IN 24 HOURS. WE HAVE TO GET A PERMIT FROM WATER MANAGEMENT. WE WILL BE DOING WATER QUALITY AND QUANTITY AND THE NEW ANALYSIS ON IT AS WELL.
AS FAR AS BRYER GATE GOES, THE COMMENT I HEARD WAS THAT OUR SITE WAS KIND OF DISCHARGING ON THEM A LITTLE BIT.
WE WILL TAKE THAT AWAY. AND TAKE IT... RIGHT NOW, THERE IS A BIG BERM BETWEEN THE CANAL AND THE SITE.
THE WATER CAN'T GET INTO THE CANAL.
WE WILL TAKE THAT AWAY AND GET THE WATER INTO THE CANAL.
YOU KNOW, WHERE IT IS SUPPOSED TO BE.
WE ARE NOT HOLDING EVERYTHING ON SITE.
WE ARE DOING WHAT WE ARE ALLOWED TO DISCHARGE TO THE NORTH ST.
LUCIE CANAL. >> OUTFLOW WATER DRAINAGE IS A
>> I HAVE WALKED NOW PROBABLY 175 MILES OF OUR DRAINAGE DITCHES TO WHAT WE CALL CANALS, AT TIMES, TO THE RIVERS.
AND I RESPECT WHAT SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT DOES.
I RESPECT ALL THE ENGINEERING THAT GOES INTO THE APPLICATIONS.
BUT WHAT I'M HAVING A DIFFICULT TIME DOING, I'M GOING TO STEP WAY OUT HERE AND PUT MY HEAD WAY OUT OVER THE CHOPPING BLOCK.
I DON'T VERY MUCH RESPECT WHAT THE COUNTY OF ST. LUCIE IS DOING IN MAINTAINING THOSE OUTFLOW WATERWAYS.
NOR DO I SEE A LOT OF GOOD WORK BEING DONE BY OUR OWN CITY.
I HAVE BEEN VERY VOCAL ABOUT. THIS I'M GOING TO CONTINUE TO DO THAT. THAT DOES NOT HAVE A BEARING ON WHAT YOU ARE DOING WITH YOUR ENGINEERING, UNDERSTAND.
BUT REGARDLESS OF WHAT THE ENGINEERING DOES, IF THE OUTFLOW AND THE WITH AERWAYS IS NOT ADEQUATE, IF THEY ARE NOT BEING MAINTAINED, THEN WE STILL HAVE A WATER ISSUE.
>> WELL, THAT IS RIGHT. >> SO... I MEAN...
>> ST. LUCIE COUNTY IS NOT INVOLVED IN THIS OUTFALL AT ALL.
NOR ST. LUCIE WATER CONTROL DISTRICT.
>> EXACTLY. >> THEY ARE A HEAVY-DUTY MAINTENANCE... THEY HAVE BEEN AROUND A LONG TIME.
NOT RECENTLY, BUT A FEW YEARS BACK, THEY UPGRADED THAT CANAL BECAUSE THERE WAS AN ISSUE WITH IT.
AND PEOPLE HAVE BEEN AROUND... IT USED TO GO OUT OF ITS BANKS INTO EDWARDS ROAD. THEY WENT DOWNSTREAM AND UPGRADED ONE OF THE STRUCTURES. I HAVEN'T SEEN, YOU KNOW, ANY
PROBLEMS SINCE THEN. >> I HAVEN'T WALKED THAT PARTICULAR... BUT IT IS ON MY LIST FOR POSSIBLY NEXT WEEK OR THE FOLLOWING WEEK. (LAUGHTER) ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR ASSISTANCE.
ANY QUESTIONS FOR EITHER OF THESE TWO GENTLEMEN? NONE? VERY GOOD.
THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE SPEAKING TO THIS PROJECT? NOT SEEING ANYONE, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC PORTION OF THE MEETING.
AND COME BACK TO OUR PRESENTER. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FOR THE PRESENTER? DID I MISS SOMETHING IN THIS APPLICATION? WAS THERE A DRAWING THAT I S
SAW... >> SO THIS ISN'T FOR A SITE
THAT I SAW A DRAWING, I THOUGHT, ATOCHED TO THIS WHEN I WAS GOING THROUGH THE PACKET, THAT SHOWED THAT THE BASIC LAYOUT OF THIS
WAS GOING TO BE LARGE LOTS. >> VENNIS DID NOT PUT THE PICTURE ON THE PRESENTATION, SO I DON'T HAVE THE PICTURE OF
ALL RIGHT. I'M GOING TO GO BACK IN AND LOOK AT IT LATER ON. OKAY.
I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. >> MOTION FOR APPROVAL.
[00:20:02]
>> WE HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL BY MR. KREISL.
(LAUGHTER) I'LL GIVE YOU ONE MORE.
>> ONE MORE! A SECOND BY MS. CLEMONS.
>> IT TOOK ME THREE MONTHS TO GET MS. CLEMONS' NAME DOWN RIGHT. CALL THE ROLL, PLEASE.
CHAIRMAN CREYAUFMILLER? >> YES, MA'AM.
[b. Future Land Use Map Amendment - Allegra at Fort Pierce - Parcel IDs: 2419-111-0002-000-7 and 2419-113-0001-000-6]
>> THE NEXT ITEM ON THE LIST IS 6-B.
FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT FOR FORT PIERCE.
PARCEL I.D.2419-111-0002-000-7 AND PARCEL NUMBER 2419-1 2419-113-0001-000-6. AND WE ONLY HAVE ONE PRESENTER TODAY. WELL, WE HAVE TWO.
(LAUGHTER). >> YOU WILL PRESENT AGAIN.
>> ALL RIGHTY. PLANNING BOARD, PLANNING BOARD CHAIRMAN, TODAY I'M PRESENTING ALLEGRA RESIDENTIAL FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT. THIS IS THE LOCATION MAP OF THE TWO PARCELS THAT ARE APPROXIMATELY 32.93 ACRES.
THE CURRENT FORT PIERCE FUTURE LAND USE MAP IS SHOWN ON THE SCREEN WITH GENERAL-COMMERCIAL BEING MOSTLY THE FUTURE LAND USE WITH RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM... SORRY.
RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM DENSITY AND RESIDENTIAL LOW DENSITY TO THE EAST. THIS IS THE CURRENT ST. LUCIE COUNTY FUTURE LAND USE MAP. THE PARCEL TO THE NORTH WAS ANNEXED IN, AND IT SHOWS HERE THE COMMERCIAL FUTURE LAND USE, URBAN RESIDENTIAL AND THE RIGHT-OF-WAY.
THE PROPOSED FUTURE LAND USE MAP IS ON THE SCREEN WITH THE GENERAL-COMMERCIAL TURNING TO RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM-DENSITY.
THIS IS FUTURE LAND USE COMPARISON SHOWING YOU THE INTENSITIES OF THE TWO PARCELS. WITH THE CHANGE TO MEDIUM-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, THERE WOULD BE AN IMPACT THAT WOULD DECREASE THE AMOUNT OF UNITS ALLOWED ON THE LOT AS WELL AS THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF COMMERCIAL FLOOR SPACE.
THE REQUEST FOR THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT CHANGED FOR TWO PARCELS FROM GENERAL-COMMERCIAL TO MEDIUM-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL IS... THE STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST, AS IT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE SURROUNDING FUTURE LAND USE, CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
IT DOES NOT ADVERSARY AFFECT THE PUBLIC HEALTH AND WELFARE OF OUR CITIZENS. THANK YOU.
>> QUESTIONS FOR THE PRESENTER? >> DIDN'T WE ALREADY APPROVE THIS? I THOUGHT?
>> THAT WAS... THERE WAS ONE, I THINK, VENNIS DID THE SOUTH
>> BUT THE APPLICANT DECIDED TO PUT THEM TOGETHER AS THEY ARE GOING TO USE THESE TWO PARCELS AS THE SAME.
>> SO THIS ACTION IS JOINING THE TWO TOGETHER?
>> YES. >> AS WELL AS REVIEWING THE NORTH PARCEL THAT WE HADN'T REVIEWED IN.
>> I CAN'T SPEAK ON THE LOT COMBINATION FOR THE PARCELS.
BUT IT IS THE TWO PARCELS WILL BE USED VERY MUCH THE SAME WITH THE ALLEGRA RESIDENTIAL GOING IN.
>> OKAY. QUESTIONS? NOT HEARING ANY,LY OPEN TO THE PUBLIC PORTION OF THE MEETING.
I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE NOTE HERE THAT THIS IS PERTAINING ONLY TO THE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT. HAVE YOU, HAVE YOU GOTTEN ON THE PAYROLL YET? (LAUGHTER) SOMETIMES IT FEELS LIKE I SHOULD JUST MOVE INTO THE BUILDING.
>> GOOD AFTERNOON. FOR THE RECORD.
LEE DOBBINS REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT.
THE BROWNSTONE GROUP. THE BROWNSTONE GROUP HAS THESE
[00:25:02]
TWO PROPERTIES UNDER CONTRACT. THE NORTH AND SOUTH PROPERTY.THEY ARE UNDER CONTRACT TO PURCHASE THOSE PROPERTIES.
THE BROWNSTONE GROUP BUILDS AND OPERATES MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS ACROSS THE SOUTHEASTERN UNITED STATES, AND ASSUMING WE OBTAIN THE NECESSARY APPROVALS, THEY WILL BE CLOSING ON THE PROPERTY TO DO A MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT HERE AS WELL.
I DON'T HAVE A PRESENTATION HERE FOR YOU TODAY.
I DID WANT TO GO OVER A FEW ITEMS WITH YOU.
AND THEN I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE.
SO AS YOU GUYS WERE DISCUSSING, THE PROPERTY IS COMPRISED OF TWO TAX PARCELS. THE NORTHERN PARCEL WAS IN THE COUNTY. WE HAD TO ANNEX IT INTO THE CITY. I CAME TO YOU GUYS BEFORE BACK
IN AUGUST FOR THE ANNEXATION. >> OKAY.
>> WE HAVE GONE THROUGH THAT NOW.
THE ANNEXATION WAS APPROVED BY THE CITY COMMISSION.
SO NOW BOTH PARCELS ARE IN THE CITY.
NOW THAT THEY ARE BOTH IN THE CITY, WE ARE NOW COMING BACK TO YOU FOR THE FUTURE LAND USE AMENDMENT AND ZONING CHANGE TODAY. AND WE WILL BE SUBMITTING AN APPLICATION FOR A SITE PLAN APPROVAL.
I WILL BE COMING BACK TO YOU YET ONE MORE TIME FOR A SITE PLAN APPROVAL. WE HAVE DONE COMMUNITY MEETINGS WITH THE NEIGHBORHOODS SURROUNDING.
INITIALLY, WE DID A MEETING AT THE BEGINNING OF SEPTEMBER WHERE A NOTICE WENT OUT TO ALL THE RESIDENTS WITHIN 500 FEET.
I THINK WE HAD ABOUT 11 RESIDENTS AT THAT MEETING.
LATER, WE HEARD THAT THERE WAS FEEDBACK TO THE CITY FROM SOME RESIDENTS OUTSIDE OF THAT DISTANCE.
THAT HAD CONCERNS AND WANTED TO KNOW WHAT WAS GOING ON.
WE SENT OUT ANOTHER NOTICE TO THE RESIDENTS WITHIN 1,000 FEET AT THIS TIME. WHELM DID A MEETING AT THE END OF OCTOBER AND HAD SOME MORE ATTENDANCE AT THAT ONE.
THE APPLICANT, THEY ARE A VERY EXPERIENCED DEVELOPER.
THEY WANT TO BE GOOD NEIGHBORS. THEY WANT TO LISTEN TO THE CONCERNS OF THE NEIGHBORS. AND TRY TO ADDRESS ANY OF THOSE CONCERNS. WE DON'T FEEL THAT THERE IS ANYTHING THAT CANNOT BE ADDRESSED DURING SITE PLANNING PROCESS. FRANKLY, THERE ARE SOME OF THE SAME TYPES OF CONCERNS THAT YOU HEARD FROM THE LAST APPLICATION.
DRAINAGE, TRAFFIC. HOW MUCH DOES IT FIT IN WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD? WE BELIEVE THOSE ARE THINGS WE CAN DEAL WITH DURING THE SITE-PLANNING PROCESS.
I CAN TELL YOU WITH RESPECT TO THE SITE PLAN, YOU KNOW, WE ARE LOOKING AT A SITE PLAN THAT IS GOING TO PROVIDE A GOOD SIZED BUFFER ON BOTH THE SOUTH SIDE AND THE EAST SIDE.
IN ORDER TO TRY TO BE GOOD NEIGHBORS BETWEEN THIS MULTIFAMILY PROJECT AND THE NEIGHBORING SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL. AS YOU KNOW, THE CITY STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL. WE BELIEVE THAT THE PROPOSED FUTURE LAND USE AMENDMENT AND REZONING GOING FROM A COMMERCIAL FUTURE LAND USE AND ZONING TO A RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM LAND USE AND ZONING CREATES A BETTER FIT WITH THE RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS.
UNDER THE EXISTING C-3 ZONING, YOU DO SOME PRETTY INTENSE USES ON THESE SITES. I CAN TELL YOU IN THE PAST, I HAVE HAD A COUPLE OF CLIENTS THAT WERE LOOKING AT DOING PROJECTS ON THE COMMERCIAL HERE. IT IS RIGHT ON OKEECHOBEE ROAD.
SOMEBODY IS GOING TO DO SOMETHING ON IT EVENTUALLY.
TWO YEARS AGO, I WAS WORKING ON A PROJECT THAT DID NOT GO FORWARD. THEY WERE LOOKING AT DOING A STRIP MALL. I CAN'T REMEMBER IF IT WAS THE NORTHERN SIDE OR BOTH OF THEM. THEY WERE LOOKING AT DOING A STRIP MALL THERE ANCHORED BY A LARGE ANCHOR TENANT.
THAT IS THE KIND OF THING THAT COULD GO THERE UNDER THE EXISTING C-3. WE ARE LOOKING TO MOVE TO A LESS INTENSE USE. SOMETHING THAT FITS BETTER WITH THE SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL. SOMETHING THAT PRODUCES LESS TRAFFIC. WE BELIEVE THAT THROUGH GOOD RESPONSIBLE SITE-PLANNING, THAT WE CAN ADDRESS MANY CONCERNS AS WE COME FORWARD WITH THAT STAGE OF THE PROCESS.
SO WITH THAT, WE ARE HERE. WE ARE AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY
QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE. >> QUESTIONS?
>> LET ME ASK ONE QUESTION. YOU MENTIONED THIS IS GOING TO
>> ARE THESE UNITS GOING TO BE SOLD?
>> THESE WOULD BE RENTAL APARTMENTS.
>> SO WE ARE LOOKING FOR RENTAL PROPERTIES FOR THIS AREA.
>> CORRECT. THESE WOULD BE RENTAL UNITS ON
THIS SIDE. >> DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA WHAT THE ANTICIPATED BUILD-OUT WOULD BE? F I KNOW THAT MAYBE IT IS SOMETHING THAT WE DON'T NEED TO DISCUSS TODAY.
>> RIGHT. >> IT JUST SORT OF IS IN THE
BACK OF MY MIND. >> AS IN THE NUMBER OF UNITS?
>> ANYTHING FURTHER? I KNOW THAT, AGAIN, WE ARE NOT HEARING THE PLAT, BUT AS I UNDERSTAND IT ALL, INGRESS AND
[00:30:03]
EGRESS ON THIS PROPERTY IS PLANNED TO ENTER OFF OF AND BACKWE ARE... THAT IS GOVERNED BY FDOT IN TERMS OF HOW WE CAN GET IN AND OUT. YES, WE BELIEVE THAT WILL BE THE ENTRANCE AND THAT THERE WILL HAVE TO BE IMPROVEMENTS DONE AT THAT INTERSECTION. WE ARE NOT SURE WHAT THOSE IMPROVEMENTS WILL BE. AGAIN, THAT IS OUT OF OUR HANDS.
THAT WOULD BE UP TO FDOT AND TO SOME EXTENT, THE COUNTY
PROBABLY. >> SO YOU HAVE ALREADY STARTED DISCUSSIONS AND... CONCERNING WHAT TO DO WITH 41ST "STREET, THE INTERSECTION AT VIRGINIA AVENUE?
>> OUR TRAFFIC ENGINEER CAN ANSWER QUESTIONS ON THAT.
I CAN TELL YOU THAT CONVERSATIONS HAVE BEEN HAD WITH FDOT GOING ON... BACK TO THAT PREVIOUS PROJECT TWO YEARS AGO.
THOSE CONVERSATIONS HAVE BEEN HAPPENING IF ARWHILE.
IT IS, YOU KNOW, KIND OF AN AWKWARD SPOT THERE.
YOU HAVE THE TWO ROADS COMING TOGETHER.
AND YOU KNOW, IT HAS TO BE DESIGNED WELL TO BE ABLE TO
HANDLE THE TRAFFIC. >> LET'S... THAT IS A MIXED BAG OF RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES THAT YOU ARE GOING TO BE BORDERLINING ON, BOTH ON THE SOUTH SIDE... OR EAST SIDE OF 41ST STREET.
I GUESS 41ST. RUNNING NORTH AND SOUTH.
IT PROBABLY DOESN'T REALLY. LET'S CONSIDER THAT IT DOES.
ON THIS EAST SIDE OF 41ST STREET.
IT IS KIND OF MIXED RESIDENTIAL IN TERMS OF WHAT TYPES OF HOUSING HAS BEEN BUILT THERE. THIS IS ALL COUNTY IN THAT AREA.
AND ON LAZY HAMMOCK ROAD, THERE ARE SOME VERY EXPENSIVE HOMES THAT HAVE BEEN BUILT IN THERE. AND I'LL... I SHOULD HAVE DONE THIS TO BEGIN WITH. I APOLOGIZE.
I HAVE HAD CONVERSATIONS WITH SEVERAL OF THE HOME OWNERS IN THAT AREA. BOTH ON LAZY HAMMOCK AND 41ST STREET CONCERNING THIS ISSUE.
IN RESPECT TO OUR NEEDING TO ALWAYS ACKNOWLEDGE THAT FACT THAT THE BEGINNING IS NOT AS CRITICAL AS IT IS FOR ELECTED OFFICIALS, BEING THAT WE ARE APPOINTED, WE HAVE MORE LATITUDE. I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE THAT KNOWN AND AGAIN, I'LL APOLOGIZE FOR NOT DOING THAT RIGHT UP-FRONT.
I HAVE HAD SEVERAL CONVERSATIONS WITH RESIDENTS IN THAT AREA.
AND TRAFFIC FLOW IS ONE OF THE NUMBER ONE THINGS THAT COMES UP.
AND RIGHT IN THAT SAME NUMBER OF CONCERNS IS FLOODING.
THIS WHOLE AREA UP IN FORT PIERCE ALONG VIRGINIA AVENUE AND INCLUDING THE OLD ORANGE BLOSSOM MALL ACROSS THE STREET AND THIS AREA HAS BEEN A REAL PROBLEM AREA FOR MANY YEARS HERE, AND MOST OF THE... AGAIN, IS IN COUNTY.
I LOOK AT THEM AS RESIDENTS OF FORT PIERCE.
ANYWAY, THEY ARE NEIGHBORS. IT IS A REAL PROBLEM.
AND THERE IS A MAJOR CONCERN, AND I'M SURE IN YOUR MEETINGS, YOU HEARD IT. I LOOKED AT SOME OF THE MINUTES OF THOSE MEETINGS. I KNOW YOU HAVE HEARD SOME OF IT. THAT... AND WE HAVE TO BE VERY CAREFUL ABOUT HOW WE HANDLE WATER.
AND AGAIN, FIVE MILE CREEK IS HEAVILY USED.
THERE ARE SEVERAL DRAINAGE DITCHES OR CANALS THAT DUMP INTO FIVE MILE CREEK. FIVE MILE CREEK IS... HAS A LOT OF BACK-FLOW WATER COMING OFF OF THE ST. LUCIE RIVER IN HEAVY RAINS OR WHEN TIDES CHANGE. IT IS AN ISSUE.
I WOULD REALLY LIKE YOU TO KEEP A VERY CLOSE EYE ON... WELL, NOT SO MUCH YOU BUT YOUR ENGIN ENGINEERING... I KNOW YOUR JOB IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT. I REALLY LIKE THEM TO KEEP A VERY, VERY CLOSE EYE ON WHAT WE ARE DOING WITH THAT FLOW OF WATER AND HOW WE ARE GOING TO COLLECT WATER ON THIS SITE.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMENTS?
>> I HAVE ONE, MR. CHAIR. FOR THE APPLICANT, YOU KNOW, I HAVEN'T BEEN ON THIS BOARD VERY LONG, BUT IN THE FEW MEETINGS THAT I HAVE BEEN HERE, WE HAVE BEEN APPROVING A LOT OF LAND ZONING AMENDMENTS FOR MOVING TO RESIDENTIAL.
[00:35:03]
LIKE, THAT IS 90% OF WHAT WE HAVE DONE SINCE I HAVE BEEN ON THE COMMITTEE. BEEN ON THE BOARD.MY QUESTION IS TO... YOU KNOW, TO THE DEVELOPER.
WHAT... YOU KNOW, WHAT MARKET RESEARCH IS INDICATING TO YOU THE SPECIFIC NEED FOR RESIDENTS OF THIS DENSITY IN THIS AREA.
AND ARE YOU TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION THE EXPANSION OF PROPERTY THAT IS NOW BECOMING AVAILABLE FOR THESE EXACT TYPES OF BUILDINGS? BECAUSE YOU ARE IN COMPETITION WITH THEM. RIGHT? FOR FINDING PEOPLE TO MOVE INTO THESE HOMES.
>> RIGHT. >> SO I'M ONLY CONCERNED THAT, THAT, YOU KNOW, THE PROPER AMOUNT OF RESEARCH IS GOING I INTO... MARKET RESEARCH IS GOING INTO MAKING SURE THAT THIS IS APPROPRIATE FOR THE MARKET THAT IS GOING TO NEED IT.
>> WELL, I HAVE WITH ME JEREMY MERES WITH THE BROWNSTONE GROUP.
HE CAN SPEAK TO MARKET RESEARCH ON IT.
FROM MY PERSONAL EXPERIENCE, I AND A COUPLE OTHER PEOPLE IN THIS ROOM SIT ON A TASK FORCE WHICH IS PUT TOGETHER BY THE CHAMBER AND THE EDC AND ALSO AS MEMBERS OF THE BUILDERS ASSOCIATION, THE TCMA. AND WE HAVE MEETINGS PERIODICALLY WITH YOUR STAFF AS WELL AS WITH THE COUNTY STAFF AND THE CITY OF PORT ST. LUCIE STAFF TO LOOK AT DEVELOPMENT ISSUES AFFECTING US ALL AND MAKING THE DEVELOPMENT PROCESS WORK MORE SMOOTHLY. WE DID OUR MOST RECENT ONE WITH ST. LUCIE COUNTY THREE OR FOUR MONTHS AGO.
AND THINK HAD A LIST OF ISSUES THEY WANTED TO GO OVER WITH US.
AND ONE OF THEM WAS THE LACK OF AFFORDABLE WORKFORCE MARKET RATE HOUSING IN THIS COMMUNITY AND HOW DO WE GET MORE OF THAT TO MARKET AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE? SO I MEAN, THE GOVERNMENTS ARE RECOGNIZING THAT THERE IS A NEED FOR THAT HERE.
IT IS SOMETHING THAT THE EDC ACTUALLY PUSHED AT OUR ANNUAL MEETING LAST YEAR. IT IS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT CAME OUT OF THE PLANNING MEETING.
YOU KNOW, AGAIN, HOW DO WE GET MORE, MORE RESIDENCES FOR THE WORKING FOLKS OF THE COMMUNITY? THEY HAVE BEEN WORKING VERY HARD TO BRING A LOT OF GREAT JOBS TO THE AREA.
YOU KNOW, THAT ECONOMIC BOOM CANNOT CONTINUE UNLESS YOU HAVE PLACES WHERE THE PEOPLE THAT WORK IN THOSE PLACES CAN WORK.
I HAVE SEEN THAT IN MY OWN OFFICE WITH HIRING PEOPLE AND HAVING A HARD TIME WITH... WHEN WE BRING IN A LEGAL, WHERE ARE THEY GOING TO LIVE? I CAN'T REALLY ANSWER THE QUESTION AS TO HOW MANY COMING O MARKET VERSUS NEED.
THERE IS A BIG NEED CURRENTLY. AND MY ANSWER TO THAT GROUP AT THE COUNTY WAS THE BEST THING YOU CAN DO IS TRY TO STREAMLINE YOUR PROCESSES TO ALLOW MORE OF THESE TO COME TO MARKET QUICKLY SO THAT THE MARKET CAN FUNCTION AND PROVIDE FOR OF THESE TO BE ABLE TO FILL THE NEED. THAT IS KIND OF A GENERAL
ANSWER. >> I GUESS WE SWITCHED FROM TALKING ABOUT AFFORDABLE HOUSING TO WORKFORCE HOUSING.
>> WELL, THAT IS WHERE THIS IS REALLY ABOUT... AFFORDABLE HOUSING HAS A NEGATIVE CONNOTATION.
PEOPLE THINK IS GOVERNMENT-FUNDED HOUSING.
WE ARE TALKING ABOUT WHAT IS OFTEN CALLED ATTAINABLE HOUSING.
ONCE AGAIN, THAT IS THE HOUSING THAT FILLS THAT NEED IN THE
>> DID THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION?
>> YES. WOULD YOU LIKE THE HEAR FURTHER FROM THE APPLICANT? BY DON'T THINK THAT IS NECESSARY. I FOUND THAT ANSWER SUFFICIENT.
ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>> THANK YOU. >> AS ALWAYS, YOU HAVE DONE A
>> I WILL CALL FOR ANYONE ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS TO COME FORWARD. I WANT TO, I WANT TO BE... TELL YOU TO BE CAUTIOUS AND STAY ON TOPIC AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE.
I KNOW IT IS DIFFICULT TO DO. AND ALSO THERE IS A THREE-MINUTE TIME PERIOD FOR ALL PUBLIC SPEAKERS.
SO YOU MAY COME FORWARD. STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.
>> I LIVE AT 2605 LAZY HAMMOCK LANE.
>> CAN YOU PLEASE SIGN IN? >> MR. CHAIRMAN, I HAVE ONE QUESTION FOR THE BOARD. HAS ANYONE BEEN DOWN LAZY
HAMMOCK WHEN IT FLOODS? >> I HAVE NOT BEEN DOWN IT WHEN IT FLOODS. I KNOW THAT IT FLOODS.
>> I DO HAVE PICTURES. >> YOU MAY GIVE THEM TO THE
[00:40:04]
SECRETARY. >> DO YOU WANT TO SHOW THESE TO
>> IT FLOODS SO BAD WE CAN'T DRIVE DOWN IT.
WE HAD A RAINSTORM, AND IT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE HURRICANE. WE HAD AN EMPTY POOL, 40,000-GALLON POOL WHEN IT RAINED, IT FILLED IT.
I HAD A LAKEFRONT IN FRONT OF MY HOME.
IF AN EMERGENCY VEHICLE HAD TO COME DOWN THAT ROAD, THEY WOULDN'T GET THROUGH. NOW, WITH THE IMPACT ON A BUILDING AND PARKING LOT IS GOING TO CREATE ADDITIONAL FLOODING. IT HAS NO PLACE TO GO.
I HAVE TALKED TO MANAGEMENT ABOUT THE CREEK.
I HAVE TALKED ABOUT THE BROKEN PIPE AND THE ONE DRAINAGE DITCH THAT WE HAVE ON THAT ROAD. THE ENTRANCE INTO THIS BIG APARTMENT BUILDING AND CONCRETE PARKING LOTS IS GOING TO...
WHERE IS THE WATER GOING TO GO? TO US.
41ST STREET CAN'T ACCOMMODATE 720 VEHICLES.
IF THERE IS SOME KIND OF SOLUTION, I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR IT. WHEN SOMEBODY SAYS WE WILL TAKE CARE OF THE ENGINEERING AND THE DRAINAGE, THERE IS NO TAKING CARE OF IT. IT IS WHAT IT IS.
WE GET A COMMENT. OH, YOU CAN'T LIVE IN PARADISE FOR THE REST OF YOUR LIFE. WELL, WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN...
IT IS GOING TO IMPACT US. DO WE JUST MOVE? I LOVE MY AREA. I HAVE PAID TAXES THERE FOR YEARS. SO I LIKE TO SEE MORE OF HOW THEY ARE GOING TO HANDLE IT. I WANT ENGINEERING PLANS.
IF I HAVE TO GET AN ENGINEER MYSELF.
I'M NOT PAYING FOR IT. THE COUNTY OR THE CITY, THEY HAVE TO SHOW US SOMETHING. BECAUSE YOU JUST APPROVE THESE THINGS, AND WHO GETS HURT? US.
I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. KEVIN, WOULD YOU EXPLAIN WHAT
THIS REVIEW IS? >> WELL, THERE IS TWO STAGES TO THIS. THE FIRST THING, THE APPLICATION YOU ARE HEARING AT THE MOMENT IS WHETHER OR NOT THE LAND THAT IS ADJACENT TO THIS LOCATION IS CHANGED FROM A COMMERCIAL USE TO A RESIDENTIAL USE. AND THAT IS WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT AT THIS MOMENT. LATER ON, WE WILL BE TALKING ABOUT WHAT THE ZONING SHOULD BE WHICH THEN CONTROLS WHAT CAN BE... (INAUDIBLE).
>> WHICH CONTROLS WHAT CAN BE BUILT ON THERE.
WHEN THAT IS DESIGNED AND PUSHED THROUGH A FURTHER REVIEW, THEN THE ENGINEERING HAS TO DEMONSTRATE THAT IT MEETS ALL THE CODES, CITY CODE, COUNTY CODE, SOUTH FLORIDA WALTER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT CODE, TO ENSURE THAT WHATEVER IT DOES ON THAT PROPERTY IS MAINTAINED ON THAT PROPERTY.
AND ONLY DISCHARGED IF THERE IS A MAJOR EVENT TO A CERTAIN LOCATION. AND THAT IS ALL APPROVED BY...
NOT ONLY BY THE CITY BUT BY EXTERNAL AGENCIES ALSO.
AND IT IS DIFFICULT FOR STAFF AT THIS MOMENT OF THE REVIEW TO BE ABLE TO GUARANTEE THE SOLUTION OR TO BE AWARE OF THE SOLUTION THAT THE ENGINEERING CONSULTANT WILL USE FOR THE DESIGN.
THE ONLY THING THAT WE CAN DO IS ASSURE YOU THAT WHATEVER IS BUILT THERE AND WHATEVER IS DESIGNED THERE HAS TO MEET ALL LOCAL AND STATE AND LOCAL AGENCY CODES.
>> LOVELY. >> IT SOUNDS GOOD, YES.
[00:45:02]
>> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
>> TELL THE WATER MANAGEMENT. TRUST ME.
>> THANK YOU. >> ANYONE ELSE SPEAKING TO THIS,
PLEASE? >> MY NAME IS PATRICIA RUBY.
I LIVE AT 2607 LAIDZY HAMMOCK. I'M AT THE DEAD END ALSO.
THE DEEPEST FLOODWATER WHEN I COMES... IT HITS THE DEAD END.
>> MS. RUBEY, CAN YOU PLEASE SIGN IN?
>> THANK YOU. YOU SEEM TO HAVE DONE QUITE WELL ADDRESSING OUR FLOOD ISSUES. I MAY PASS ON THAT ONE.
THE TRAFFIC ISSUE, THIS DEVELOPMENT WILL NEGATIVELY IMPACT OUR AREA DRAMATICALLY. FLOODING, TRAFFIC, AND CRIME AREA BECAUSE SOONER OR LATER, THOSE APARTMENTS ARE GOING TO GO DOWNHILL. I'M SORRY.
HISTORICALLY, EVERY APARTMENT COMPLEX IN FORT PIERCE HAS GONE DOWN ONCE THE DEVELOPERS PULLED OUT.
I DON'T WANT TO START NAMING NAMES.
THE TRAFFIC ISSUE IS MY BIGGEST PROBLEM.
THE GENTLEMAN REFERRED... IT WAS CONTROLLED BY D.O.T.
I SPOKE TO MS. FERNANDEZ AT FLORIDA DOT.
SHE SAID THERE IS NOTHING ETCHED IN STONE THAT THEY CANNOT NECESSARILY CONNECT OR USE THEIR MAIN ENTRANCE ON OKEECHOBEE.
MY CONTENTION IS THAT 41 41ST... SOMEBODY IS GOING TO GET KILLED THERE. I GOT HIT MYSELF.
AFTER 20 YEARS OF LIVING THERE, I FINALLY GOT HIT COMING OUT OF MY OWN DEVELOPMENT. THE IDEAL SOLUTION, IN MY MIND, WOULD BE IF WE COULD TIE IN IN THE MAIN ENTRANCE.
IT IS A FORGONE CONCLUSION THIS IS GOING TO HAPPEN.
THEY TIE THE MAIN ENTRANCE INTO ONE OF THE EXISTING TRAFFIC LIGHTS ON OKEECHOBEE THAT SERVICED THE DEFUNCT RENAISSANCE MALL. THE OLD ORANGE BLOSSOM MALL.
IT WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH APPROVAL.
YES, COMMITTEE, ENGINEERING DOWN THERE.
IT IS NOT... NOTHING SAYS IT CAN'T BE DONE.
IT IS NOT ETCHED IN STONE. RIGHT NOW THERE IS 173 FEET BETWEEN THE MAIN ENTRANCE OF ALLEGRA, THE PROPOSED ENTRANCE TO VIRGINIA. 173 FEET.
TO GET 360 CARS OUT OF THERE ON A DAILY BASIS.
WE WOULD BE BASICALLY LANDLOCKED IN OUR OWN DEVELOPMENT.
IF THERE WAS ONE CAR PER UNIT, THAT IS 360 CARS.
IF EACH UNIT HAD TWO CARS WHICH IS NOT IMPOSSIBLE, THAT IS 780.
IF EACH ONE HAD THREE, YOU ARE TALKING OVER A THOUSAND CARS A DAY. THAT DOESN'T INCLUDE DELIVERIES, MAILMEN, SCHOOL BUSES, KIDS, FRIENDS.
AND THEY ARE SAYING IT IS GOING TO BE A GATED COMMUNITY.
WELL, THAT IS GREAT. YOU KNOW, KIDS ARE GOING TO GIVE CODE TO HIS FRIEND. TO HIS FRIEND.
IT IS GOING TO BE MORE THAN 360 PEOPLE IN AND OUT OF THERE EVERY DAY. IN THE MEANTIME, PUTTING A RED LIGHT AT OKEECHOBEE OR VIRGINIA AND 41ST IS NOT GOING TO HELP ANY. THE CARS COMING AROUND THE CURVE, THEY ARE GOING TO CREATE MORE ACCIDENTS.
IF THEY USE THE EXISTING LIGHTS, IT WOULD ACTUALLY SLOW TRAFFIC DOWN AND PREVENT ACCIDENTS AT OUR INTERSECTION.
41ST. THEY WOULD HAVE TO STOP FOR THE LIGHT TO LET THE ALLEGRA TRAFFIC IN AND OUT.
THAT WOULD BE DIRECTLY ACROSS FROM THE MALL.
>> I THINK YOUR THREE MINUTES IS UP.
>> I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT WOULD EVEN BE CONSIDERED.
IT WOULD CERTAINLY ALLEVIATE A LOT OF CONCERNS ABOUT TRAFFIC COMING IN AND OUT OF OUR STREET. SO THAT IS ALL I HAVE TO SAY.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> ANY QUESTIONS?
>> NO. >> ARE THE LIGHTS WORKING CONNECT WITHLY? ... CORRECTLY?
>> WHAT LIGHTS? >> TEN SECONDS LEFT.
>> THREE LIGHTS ARE. THEY WORKING CORRECTLY?
>> BECAUSE THEY SEEM TO BE FLASHING A LOT ON ME HERE.
>> THE TIMER IS RUNNING. >> ANYONE ELSE TO SPEAK TO THIS?
>> GOOD AFTERNOON. GOOD AFTERNOON.
>> MY NAME IS GINA GRANT. I LIVE AT 260 # LAZY HAMMOCK LANE. I'M A NURSE.
MY HUSBAND IS A PHYSICIAN. WE ARE VERY WORRIED ABOUT THE TRAFFIC. IF YOU THINK ABOUT OKEECHOBEE ROAD, WHEN YOU WERE HEADING EAST, PAST WALMART, PEOPLE ARE FLYING, AND THEN IT DIVIDES INTO VIRGINIA, AND WE ARE ON THE
[00:50:05]
VIRGINIA SIDE. WE ARE THE FIRST STREET.THERE IS A CURVE. IT'S NOT REAL WELL MAINTAINED WITH THE GRASS GROWING. ALMOST EVERY ONE OF US HAS BEEN IN TERRIBLE ACCIDENTS. SO THERE WAS A WHILE IN THE LATE 90S WHERE WE ALL DROVE VOLVOS. BECAUSE WE THOUGHT THEY WERE THE SAFEST CAR. WE ARE SO CONCERNED, TRULY, ABOUT THAT CURVE COMING SO FAST, AND WE ARE SO CAUTIOUS.
THERE IS ONLY EIGHT HOUSEHOLDS. MOST OF US ARE HERE.
AND WE HAVE KIDS AND GRANDE KIDS.
AND YOU KNOW, WE ARE IN AND OUT, SCHOOL, WORK.
WE CAN'T FIGURE OUT HOW MAYBE 752 OR A THOUSAND CARS ARE GOING TO ENTER OFF THE STREET WITHOUT REACTIONS PRETTY QUICKLY.
AND THE FLOODING. WE HAVE HAD TO USE AIR BOATS IN THE PAST. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. >> COULD I ASK THE YOUNG LADY A
>> AT THE ENTRANCE OF 41ST STREET AND VIRGINIA AVENUE, IS THAT RIGHT TURN ONLY? CAN YOU TURN LEFT AND GO
STRAIGHT ACROSS? >> YOU CAN TURN... IF YOU ARE HEADING, YOU CAN TURN RIGHT TURN ON TO OUR STREET.
IF YOU CAN'T TURN LEFT. IT GOES INTO HARTMAN.
IT IS A DIVIDED ROAD. >> OKAY.
YOU ARE HEADING NORTH ON 41ST STREET COMING...
HEADING NORTH. NOW, IN FRONT OF YOU, IS
>> IS THAT INTERSECTION OF VIRGINIA AND 41ST STREET, A
YOU CAN TURN RIGHT. THEN YOU ALSO HAVE TO GO OVER THE WHOLE, YOU KNOW, AREA TO TURN LEFT TO GO TO 95.
>> GO BACK AROUND. >> YOU COULD GO RIGHT OR LEFT.
>> BECAUSE THEY FLY AROUND THAT CORNER.
>> RIGHT. >> IT IS NOT WELL MAINTAINED WITH ALL THE VEGETATION GROWING UP.
BOOM. YOU HAVE TO CONSIDER THAT PIECE.
AND WHAT PAT SAID. IF WE COULD ENTER THROUGH A LIGHT, WE ARE ALL ABOUT GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING. WE GET IT.
YOU KNOW, IF THE LIGHT COULD COME OFF OF OKEECHOBEE, YOU KNOW, BY THE MALL, I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT WORKS.
IT WOULD CERTAINLY SLOW OUR SUICIDE CORNER AROUND A LOT, TOO. FOR US.
>> I TRAVEL THAT ROAD, I TRAVEL 41ST STREET TO HARTMAN ROAD VERY MUCH. I LIVE FURTHER NORTH ON HARTMAN.
>> YOU UNDERSTAND. >> I DON'T USE THAT ROAD TO GET ON VIRGINIA AVENUE. I WOULD RATHER GO UP TO OKEECHOBEE ROAD, DELAWARE AVENUE AND CROSS OVER ON 35TH
>> YOU KNOW, USE THE COLLEGE INTERSECTION THERE TO GET ON
THERE. >> IF YOU KNOW THE BACK WAY.
YOU KNOW, I'M LIKE YOU. I DON'T WANT ANY MORE ACCIDENTS.
>> YOU DRIVE VOLVO? >> NO, NO.
>> YOU MIGHT WANT TO CONSIDER ONE.
WE HAVE ALL BEEN IN THE VOLVOS. >> I'VE GOT THAT CZECHOSLOVAKIAN CAR CALLED YUGO. (LAUGHTER).
APPRECIATE IT. >> IS ANYONE ELSE SPEAKING TO THIS PROJECT? NOT SEEING ANYONE, I WILL GIVE APPLICANT AN OPPORTUNITY FOR REBUTTAL, IF THEY SO CHOOSE.
>> THANK YOU. SO JUST FOR CLARITY, YOU KNOW, WHAT WE ARE LOOKING AT TODAY IS, YOU KNOW, A LAND USE AMENDMENT AND A ZONING CHANGE. WHICH IS STRICTLY ABOUT THE CHANGES FROM THE COMMERCIAL LAND USE TO RESIDENTIAL.
CHANGES FROM COMMERCIAL ZONING TO A RESIDENTIAL ZONING.
AND WHAT THOSE CHANGES BRING ABOUT ARE CHANGES IN THE ALLOWED USE. AND AS YOU HAVE SEEN FROM THE TRAFFIC NOW, THE CHANGES IN THE AMOUNT OF TRIPS.
A LOT OF WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT TODAY ARE THINGS THAT DEALT WITH THE SITE PLAN STAGE. THE ONE THING YOU CAN LOOK AT.
THE LOWER TRAFFIC COUNT. SO IN TERMS OF WHERE TURN LANES GO AND HOW INTERSECTIONS WORK AND ALL OF THAT, THAT COMES AT THE SITE PLAN STAGE. WHAT IS BEFORE YOU TODAY ACTUALLY REDUCES THE NUMBER OF TRIPS THAT WOULD BE DONE UNDER THE USE AS ALLOWED CURRENTLY. CURRENTLY, SOMEBODY WANTED TO COME IN UNDER THE CURRENT COMMERCIAL LAND USE AND CURRENT ZONING, THEY COULD COME IN AND BUILD A PROJECT LIKE I WAS TALKING ABOUT BEFORE. A STRIP MALL ANCHORED BY AN ANCHOR STORE. AND IT WOULD PRODUCE TRIPS...
REDUCE TRIPS. THAT WOULD BE A BY-RIGHT APPROVAL. THAT WOULD NOT REQUIRE A ZONING CHANGE OR LAND USE AMENDMENT. ALL THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED IS
[00:55:06]
APPROVAL THAT MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CODE.IN TERMS OF BOTH THE TRAFFIC AND THE DRAINAGE, THOSE WOULD BE DEALT WITH AT THE SITE PLAN STAGE.
ONE THING I CAN TELL YOU IN TERMS OF THE DRAINAGE, AND I'M NOT AN ENGINEER, SO I HAVE TO BE CAREFUL ABOUT TALKING ABOUT THINGS I DON'T KNOW ABOUT. I CAN TELL YOU FROM THE STANDPOINT OF DRAINAGE, THE REQUIREMENTS THAT YOUR STAFF ARE TALKING ABOUT, THE REQUIREMENTS ARE THAT IN THE DESIGN, YOU HAVE TO CAPTURE YOUR OWN DRAINAGE ON THE SIDE.
AND DEAL WITH THAT DRAINAGE, AND IT HAS TO GO TO AN OUT-FALL WHICH I ASSUME WOULD BE FIVE MILE CREEK.
THAT IS RIGHT NEXT-DOOR. CURRENTLY, YOU HAVE A VACANT PROPERTY THAT DRAINS HOWEVER GOD DESIGNED IT TO DRAIN.
IF IT POOLS THERE AND GOES TO THE SOUTH OR GOES TO THE EAST OVER 45TH, 4 #ST STREET, IT GOES WHEREVER IT GOES NATURALLY. WE WILL BE IMPROVING THE CONDITION ON THE PROPERTY ITSELF.
I'M NOT SAYING THIS DEVELOPMENT WILL FIX FIVE MILE.
I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE HAVE HISTORICALLY BEEN ISSUES WITH FIVE MILE. THE MALL ACROSS THE STREET USED TO FLOOD QUITE BADLY BEFORE SOME IMPROVEMENTS WERE MADE TO THE DRAINAGE OVER THERE, INCLUDING IMPROVEMENTS TO FIVE MILE.
IN TERMS OF JUST THE SITE, WHEN IT IS DESIGNED AND ENGINEERED TO DRAIN, THERE WILL BE STORMWATER POND.
IT WILL HAVE TO MEET THE DRAINAGE REQUIREMENTS WHERE THE RUN RUNOFF FROM THE PARKING LOTS GO INTO THAT STORMWATER POND.
IT HOLDS A CERTAIN AMOUNT. IT RISES TO A CERTAIN LEVEL THROUTHROUGH AN ENGINEERED STRU. THEN IT GOES TO THE OUTFALL.
THAT SHOULD IMPROVE THINGS SOMEWHAT.
BECAUSE WHAT IS ON THE SITE CURRENTLY WOULD NOT BE ALLOWED TO JUST FLOW WHEREVER IT WOULD NATURALLY FLOW.
ARE YOU HAVING ANYTHING TO ADD? >> NO.
>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IS THERE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS
OR COMMENTS? >> MR. CHAIR, I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT WHAT WE ARE DEALING WITH SHES, JUST A POINT OF CLARIFICATION, WE ARE DEALING WITH THE ZONING.
>> WE ARE JUST DEALING WITH THE FUTURE LAND USE.
>> NOTHING ELSE. >> ALL RIGHT.
>> BUT ALL THIS CHATTER ABOUT WHAT'S TO COME IS VERY VALUABLE EVEN AT THIS STAGE. IT GIVES THE APPLICANT AN OPPORTUNITY TO GET A CLEARER UNDERSTANDING OF PERHAPS WHAT WE ARE THINKING AS A BOARD AS WELL AS WHAT THE CITIZENRY IS THINKING. I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
>> I MOVE FOR APPROVAL. >> SECOND.
>> WE HAVE A MOTION BY MS. CLEMONS FOR APPROVAL.
SECOND BY MR. EDWARDS. CALL THE ROLL, PLEASEMENT.
>> CHAIRMAN CREYAUFMILLER? >> YES, MA'AM.
[a. Annexation - 7-Brew Drive-Thru - 2605 Kerr Street]
>> THE NEXT ITEM OF BUSINESS IS NEW BUSINESS.
ANNEXATION OF 7 BREW DRIVE-THROUGH AT 2605 CARR STREET. NOW, I UNDERSTAND THAT THAT IS ACTUALLY TWO ADDRESSES INVOLVED IN THAT.
>> YES. THERE IS ONE, I THINK, WITHIN THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE. AND THEN THE ANNEXATION ITSELF.
I THINK THEY ARE LOOKING AT... >> WHICH IS THE COUNTY.
>> WHICH IS THE COUNTY. >> YEAH.
THAT IS CRAZY, THE WAY THAT OUR CITY MAP IS IN THAT GENERAL VICINITY. I NEVER KNOW WHERE I'M AT.
>> EXACTLY. WHICH JURISDICTION ARE YOU IN? PLANNING BOARD, PLANNING BOARD CHAIRMAN, THIS IS AN APPLICATION FOR AN ANNEXATION OF ONE PARCEL AT 2605KERR STREET.
THIS IS THE LOCATION MAP. CURRENTLY, THE FUTURE LAND USE IS COMMERCIAL. THE PROPOSED FUTURE LAND USE WOULD BE, WOULD BE A COMME COMMERCIAL... SORRY.
GENERAL-COMMERCIAL. THE CURRENT ZONING IS CO WHICH IS COMMERCIAL-OFFICE. IN ST. LUCIE COUNTY.
THE PROPOSED ZONING WOULD BE GENERAL-COMMERCIAL C-3.
THE PARCEL ITSELF IS .23 ACRES PLUS OR MINUS.
AS PROPOSED, THE ANNEXATION MEETS THE STAND RTDZ OF THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. SPECIFICALLY, POLL CY SECTION
[01:00:01]
111 REGARDING ANNEXATION. THE CITY'S GENERAL-COMMERCIAL FUTURE LAND USE ALLOWS A RATIO OF 1.0.THE PROPOSED FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION IS CONSIDERED TO BE SUITABLE. HAVING EXAMINED THE CHAPTER OF THE PROPERTY, ITS TOPOGRAPHY SOILS, AND NATURAL RESOURCES.
TODAY THE PLANNING BOARD'S ACTIONS ARE TO APPROVE THE PROPOSED ANNEXATION WHICH IS THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION OR TO RECOMMEND A DISAPPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED ANNEXATION.
THANK YOU. >> LET ME ASK YOU A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. ONE, THERE IS A HUGE BILLBOARD ADJACENT TO THESE TWO LOTS. IN FRONT OF THESE TWO LOTS.
THIS IS A RESIDENTIAL COMM COMMUNITY... FOR THE MOST PART.
IN THE RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY, THERE IS SOME MIX THERE AT THE FRONT END NEAR VIRGINIA. VIRGINIA AVENUE.
I GUESS THAT IS TECHNICALLY OKEECHOBEE ROAD.
THERE IS SOME COMMERCIAL THAT IS INVOLVED THERE ACROSS THE STREET FROM THESE TWO LOTS. FOR THE MOST PART, THAT IS A RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY THAT, AS YOU GO FURTHER INTO THE COMMUNITY, YOU WIND UP BACK INTO WHERE THERE IS AN APARTMENT COMPLEX BACK IN THERE AS WELL. AND I KNOW, AGAIN, ONCE AGAIN, WE ARE NOT AT A PLAT. I WANT TO THROW THIS OUT THERE.
THAT FROM THE STANDPOINT OF MIXING COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL, I QUESTION THE WISDOM AND MIXING... IN MIXING THIS COMMERCIAL WITH THIS RESIDENTIAL.
WITH THAT, I'M GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO THE BOARD FOR ANY FURTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS. NOT HEARING ANY, I WILL OPEN TO THE PUBLIC PORTION OF THE MEETING.
ANYONE SPEAKING TO THIS, PLEASE STEP FORWARD.
IF YOU WOULD SIGN IN AND STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.
MY NAME IS CHRIS OSA. I'M THE ENGINEER OF RECORD FOR THE PROJECT. ADDRESS 7341 OFFICE PARK IN MELBOURNE, FLORIDA. I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF 7 BREW TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THE BOARD MAY HAVE ON THE REQUEST FOR
APPROVAL OF ANNEXATION. >> WOULD YOU HAVE ANY COMMENT TO
MY STATEMENT? >> MY CLIENT HAS NO PLANS OF QUICHING THAT BILLBOARD. ... KEEPING THAT BILLBOARD.
>> IS IT ON THESE PARSE LES? >> IT IS NOT THE A... IT IS NOT ON THE AGENDA ITEM THAT WE ARE TRYING TO ANNEX.
IT IS ON FORT PIERCE'S PORTION OF THE PROJECT.
THAT WILL ULTIMATELY BE PART OF THE FOUR PARCELS BEING COMBINED.
>> FAIR ENOUGH. IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE
APPLICANT? >> NOT SEEING ANY, MR. EDWARDS?
>> CHAIRMAN, SO YOU ARE... WHAT YOU ARE TRYING TO DO IS JUST BRING THIS OTHER PARCEL IN TO COMPLETE A BIGGER PROJECT.
>> ANYONE ELSE? THANK YOU VERY MUCH, SIR.
>> THANK YOU. >> IS THERE ANYONE ELSE? THE PUBLIC WANTS TO SPEAK TO THIS PROJECT? NOT SEEING ANYONE, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC PORTION OF THE MEETING. COME BACK TO THE BOARD.
ANY FURTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? NOT HEARING ANY, I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
>> MOTION FOR APPROVAL. >> SECOND.
>> MOTION WAS MADE BY MR. KREISL.
>> CLOSE ENOUGH. >> CLOSE ENOUGH.
I'M SORRY. (LAUGHTER) SECONDED BY MS. CLEMONS. CALL THE ROLL, PLEASEMENT.
MR. CREYAUFMILLER? >> YES, MA'AM.
>> THE NEXT TWO ITEMS, WE MOVE TO THE BOTTOM OF THE LIST.
[d. Zoning Atlas Map Amendment - Viva West - 3037 South Jenkins Road]
I'M GOING TO MOVE TO ITEM D. THAT WOULD BE 7-D.FOR VIVA WEST 3037 SOUTH JENKINS ROAD.
>> I'M PRESENTING AN APPLICATION FOR A ZONING ATLAS MAP AMENDMENT AT 3037 SOUTH JENKINS ROAD. HERE IS THE AERIAL MAP OF THE PARCEL. WHICH IS 27.89 ACRES APPROXIMATELY. CURRENTLY, IT IS ZONING AS C-3,
[01:05:02]
GENERAL-COMMERCIAL. THE PROPOSED ZONING WOULD BE R-4 MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL. HERE IS THE ZONING MAP, AND AS YOU CAN SEE, IT IS C-3. THE ZONING MAP AMENDMENT FROM C-3 GENERAL-COMMERCIAL, ONE PARCEL TO R-4 MEDIUM DENSITY, THE STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THIS REQUEST.IT IS CONSISTENT WITH SECTION 125-212 AND THE CITY CODE AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. IT IS ALSO RECOMMENDED APPROVAL BECAUSE IT DOES NOT ADVERSARY AFFECT THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, CONVENIENCE OR GENERAL WELFARE OF THE CITIZENS.
THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS FOR THE APPROVAL.
AND TODAY THE PLANNING BOARD'S POSSIBLE ACTIONS ARE APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED ZONING ATLAS AMENDMENT WITH NO CHANGES.
WHICH IS THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
A RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED ZONING ATLAS AMENDMENT WITH CHANGES OR A RECOMMENDATION OF DISAPPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED ZONING ATLAS AMENDMENT.
>> KEVIN FREEMAN, PLANNING DIRECTOR.
JUST SO THE PLANNING BOARD ARE FULLY AWARE, THIS IS THE SAME SITE THAT WE JUST CHANGED THE FUTURE LAND USE TO MEDIUM-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL. THIS PROPOSED ZONING IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THAT FUTURE LAND USE.
>> THIS IS THE MATCH-UP OF THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE ZONING TO
THE COUNTY ZONING? >> WELL, I THINK THE COUNTY ZONING IS RESIDENTIAL. BUT OF A DIFFERENT... ACTUALLY,
IT IS CITY ZONING OF R-2. >> YEAH.
THIS IS THE FIRST PROJECT WE SAW.
OFF OF JENKINS ROAD. IT WASN'T ANNEXED.
THIS IS A PARCEL THAT WAS IN THE CITY ITSELF.
>> LET ME CLARIFY SOMETHING. WHEN I TALKED ABOUT THE DIAGRAM SHOWING LARGE LOTS,... YES. YES, SIR.
>> THIS IS WHAT MENTALLY I HAD THE IMAGE AND WHY I WAS SO MESSED UP WHEN I SAW THE OTHER IMAGE.
(LAUGHTER) YOU KNOW, ONE OF THOSE DAYS.
OKAY. QUESTIONS? NOT HEARING ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD, I WOULD OPEN THE PUBLIC PORTION OF THE MEETING. ANYONE SPEAKING TO THIS, PLEASE
STEP FORWARD. >> GOOD AFTERNOON AGAIN.
MY NAME IS MATTHEW SCOTT, ZONING ATTORNEY...
>> DID YOU SIGN IN THE FIRST TIME?
>> PLEASE. >> I DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD.
IT IS EXACTLY THE SAME AND CONSISTENT WITH OUR PRIOR APPLICATION YOU HAVE HEARD ALREADY.
I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.
THANK YOU. >> ANY QUESTIONS? NOT SEEING ANY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD OR...
NOT SEEING ANY, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC PORTION OF THE MEETING.
COME BACK TO THE BOARD FOR ANY FURTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS.
NOT HEARING ANY, I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
>> MOVE FOR APPROVAL. WITH NO CHANGES.
>> SECOND. >> MS. CLEMONS, MOTION FOR APPROVAL. SECOND BY MR....
>> CHAIRMAN CREYAUFMILLER? >> YES, MA'AM.
[e. Zoning Atlas Map Amendment - Allegra at Fort Pierce - Parcel IDs: 2419-111-0002-000-7 and 2419-113-0001-000-6]
>> THE NEXT ITEM ON THE LIST IS 7-E.
ZONING MAP... ATLAS MAP AMENDMENT.
PARCEL I.D.S 2419-111 2419-111-0002-000-7.
AND PARCEL NUMBER 2419-1 2419-113-0001-000-6.
THIS IS THE SECOND PHASE OF THE ATLAS MAP AMENDMENT.
>> YES, SIR. >> THE PLANNING BOARD, PLANNING BOARD CHAIRMAN, THIS IS THE RE-ZONING OF THE PROJECT THAT WE SAW EARLIER THAT WAS APPROVED FOR THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT. ON OKEECHOBEE.
OR IT IS 3,000 VIRGINIA AVENUE. THE APPROXIMATE ADDRESS.
HERE IS THE LOCATION MAP OF THE 32.93 ACRES OF THE TWO PARCELS.
CURRENTLY, THE FORT PIERCE ZONING MAP IS C-3, GENERAL-COMMERCIAL. MOSTLY ALL AROUND TO THE EAST, YOU HAVE R-2 WHICH IS MODERATE. THEN YOU HAVE A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ALSO TO THE EAST. THE CURRENT ST. LUCIE COUNTY MAP
[01:10:02]
IS SHOWN. THE PARCEL WAS ANNEXED IN A COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO. YOU ALSO HAVE RRS-# AND RM-5, SINGLE FAMILY, THREE UNITS PER ACRE TO THE SOUTH.AND THEN TO THE EAST, THE RM-5 IS RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM-DENSITY.
FOR ST. LUCIE COUNTY. THE PROPOSED MAP IS BEFORE YOU NOW. CHANGING THE C-3 TO R-4.
WHICH IS THE MEDIUM-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL.
THE REQUEST OF THE ZONING MAP AMENDMENT CHANGED FOR TWO PARCELS FROM C-3 GENERAL-COMMERCIAL TO R-4 MEDIUM-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE QUESTION. CONSISTENT WITH SECTION 125-136 OF CITY CODE AND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
AND DUPS NOT ADVERSARY AFFECT THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, CONVENIENCE, AND GENERAL WELFARE OF THE CITIZENS.
THE PLANNING BOARD'S ACTIONS TODAY ARE AN APPROVAL OF THE RE-ZONING WITH NO CHANGES. THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION.
>> QUESTIONS BY THE BOARD OF STAFF?
>> I HAD ONE QUESTION. COULD YOU GO BACK TO THE MAP THAT SHOWED... I WAS JUST CURIOUS ABOUT SOMETHING.
ON THE NORTH SIDE OF OKEECHOBEE, WE HAVE... BEHIND WHAT I THINK IS THE TRACK OR THE SUPPLY AREA. THERE IS A COMMUNITY, A RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY BACK THERE.
>> NOT DISSIMILAR TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PROPOSAL, KIND OF THE... THAT WE SAW EARLIER.
>> YES. >> SO I MEAN... I'M JUST CURIOUS FOR MYSELF HERE. YOU KNOW, IF THE PROPERTY THAT WE ARE LOOKING AT WHICH WAS C-3, YOU CAN DEVELOP EXACTLY WHAT WE SAW IN THESE DRAWINGS. IN C-3.
>> I THINK... KEVIN FREEMAN AGAIN.
PLANNING DIRECTOR. WHAT WE FOUND WHEN WE LOOKED AT THE PROPERTIES NORTH OF OKEECHOBEE IS THAT IN ESSENCE, LARGE PORGES OF THOSE ARE NONCONFORMING IN TERMS OF ZONING. I THINK THEY MAY HAVE BEEN ANNEXED IN FROM THE COUNTY. AND GIVEN A DESIGNATION OF THAT PURELY BECAUSE THERE WAS A LOT OF COMMERCIAL IN THAT AREA.
YES. I LOOKED AT THAT THE WHEN WE FIRST GOT THIS IN AND THOUGHT THIS WAS... IT'S NOT IN
CONFORMITY WITH THE ZONING. >> RIGHT.
>> IT COULD VERY WELL BE... >> MOSTLY MAKING THE OBSERVATION THAT, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE JUST ADJACENT TO THE PROPOSED PROPERTY, WE HAVE, YOU KNOW, RESIDENCES OF SIMILAR CONSTRUCTION STYLE AND DENSITY ALREADY THERE.
ALTHOUGH THE ZONING O'. >> THAT MAY NOT BE CORRECT.
>> THAT IS ALL. >> ANYONE ELSE?
>> NOT HEARING ANY, I WILL ENTER INTO THE PUBLIC PORTION OF THE MEETING. IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK,
PLEASE STEP FORWARD. >> FOR THE RECORD, LEE DOBBINS, AGAIN REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT.
NOTHING FURTHER TO ADD FROM BEFORE.
HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> QUESTIONS?
YOUR JOB IS EASY. >> SOMETIMES.
(LAUGHTER) YOU HAVE BEEN HERE WHEN IT HAS BEEN ROUGH.
(LAUGHTER) ANY FURTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS FOR STAFF?
>> NOT HEARING ANY, I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
>> MOVE FOR APPROVAL. >> AS IS.
>> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL BY MR. EDWARDS. SECOND BY MS. CLEMONS.
CALL THE ROLL, PLEASE. >> MR. EDWARDS?
>> YES. CHAIRMAN CREYAUFMILLER?
[f. Zoning Atlas Map Amendment - 805 Office Plaza - 805 Virginia Avenue]
THE NEXT ITEM IS ITEM 7-F. AM I RIGHT?[01:15:02]
>> CORRECT, YES. >> QUICHE MEF STRAIGHT.
GOOD, THANK YOU. I GET LOST HERE SOMETIMES IN THE SHUFFLE. AND ITEM 7-F.
ZONING ATLAS MAP AMENDMENT 805. OFFICE PLAZA.
805, VIRGINIA AVENUE. >> PLANNING BOARD, PLANNING BOARD CHAIRMAN, TODAY I'M PRESENTING A REQUEST FOR A RE-ZONING OF 805 OFFICE VIRGINIA AVENUE.
THIS IS THE LOCATION MAP. IT IS APPROXIMATELY OF THE PARCEL... APPROXIMATELY 2.54 ACRES.
CLOSE TO U.S.-1 ON VIRGINIA AVENUE.
THE CURRENT ZONING MAP IS BEFORE YOU.
MOST OF IT IS GENERAL-COMMERCIAL C-3.
WITH SOME R-2 RIGHT TO THE SOUTH.
AND THEN THERE IS ALSO SOME C-1 WHICH IS OFFICE-... COMMERCIAL OFFICE AND SOME HIGH-DENSITY TO THE NORTH AS WELL.
THE PROPOSED ZONING WOULD CHANGE THAT R-5 TO A C-3.
THE REQUEST FOR THE ZONING MAP AMENDMENT CHANGE FROM ONE PARCEL TO HIGH-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO C-3 GENERAL COMMERCIAL, THE STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST.
IT IS CONSISTENT WITH SURROUNDING ZONES, CONSISTENT WITH SECTION 125-136 OF CITY CODE AND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND DOES NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT THE SAFETY, CONVENIENCE AND GENERAL WELFARE OF THE CITIZENS. THANK YOU.
>> IT HAS BEEN IN THE LAST COUPLE OF MONTHS, WE HEARD THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT ON THIS.
AND IT IS MORE OF A HOUSEKEEPING CLEAN-UP OF SOMETHING PERHAPS
THAT WAS OVERLOOKED. >> AGREED.
>> ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF IN. >> I HAVE A QUESTION.
WHAT WOULD YOU CONSIDER THE CURRENT USE RIGHT NOW?
>> IIT IS PRETTY MUCH GENERAL COMMERCIAL.
DOCTOR OFFICES. SO AS A RESIDENTIAL ZONING, IT DOESN'T MAKE AS MUCH SENSE RIGHT NOW.
>> RIGHT. >> THE GENERAL COMMERCIAL BRINGS
IT INTO CONFORMITY. >> OR COULD IT ALSO BE
CONSIDERED A C-1 ZONING? >> SO IT ISN'T ZONED R-5 NOW.
C-1 ZONING WOULD BE APPROPRIATE FOR WHAT IS THERE RIGHT NOW.
GENERAL-COMMERCIAL ADDS FLEXIBILITY TO WHAT COULD
POSSIBLY BE BROUGHT INTO THAT... >> IT WOULD ADD TO THE AVAILABILITY OF THE TYPES OF BUSINESSES.
>> YES, SIR. >> WHICH COULD INCLUDE LIQUOR
STORES IN. >> I DO BELIEVE LIQUOR STORES
COULD BE ADDED? >> AND ALSO MEDICINAL MARIJUANA
DISTRIBUTION POINTS? >> I DO BELIEVE BOTH OF THOSE
ARE ALLOWABLE UNDER COMMERCIAL? >> THEY WOULDN'T BE UNDER C-1,
WOULD THEY? >> NO, I DON'T THINK SO.
>> TO ME, WHAT'S CURRENTLY WILL IS C-1 PROPERTY.
IN AN R-5 ZONE. >> WE FLIP THIS TO A C-3 PROPERTY, WE WILL HAVE POTENTIALLY WHAT IS NOT ONLY ACROSS THE STREET BUT THROUGHOUT THE AREA, WHEREAS THE CURRENT USE IS C-1. SEEMS TO HAVE BEEN WELL RENTED, WELL USED BY THE FOLKS THERE. AND ALSO OFFERED A MUCH EASIER... A MUCH EASIER BUFFER BETWEEN VIRGINIA AVENUE AND THE R-2 ZONE IMMEDIATELY SOUTH OF IT.
VERSUS A C-3 ZONE NEXT TO AN R-2 ZONE.
YOU KNOW, MY TENDENCY WOULD BE TO REZONE IT C-1.
THAT IS WHAT THEY ARE CURRENTLY USING IT FOR.
NOW, IF THERE IS GOING TO BE AN INTENSITY, IN OTHER WORDS, IF THE OWNER IS PLANNING ON READING THROUGH THE PROPERTY, IT DIDN'T APPEAR LIKE THEY WERE GOING TO MAKE IT... MAKE ANY IMPROVEMENTS. IN ORDER TO ALLOW FOR A LARGER ANCHOR STORE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.
YOU KNOW, I THINK WHAT THEY ARE GOING TO DO IS CONTINUE ON WITH WHAT THEY HAVE. BUT CHANGE THE ZONING AND MAKE THE AVAILABILITY OF C-3 AVAILABLE FOR POTENTIAL RENTERS.
YET IT WOULD HAVE THE IMPACT OF CHANGING IT FROM WHAT IT IS CURRENTLY WHICH IS MORE OF A C-1, EVEN THOUGH IT IS AN R-5 ZONE. TO THE HOUSES IMMEDIATELY SOUTH OF IT WHICH ARE R-2S. SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL.
I DON'T THINK THERE IS ANY MULTIFAMILY REZ ENUSUAL ALONG THAT ROAD. IT IS SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL.
YOU KNOW. SO I MEAN, I WOULD, I WOULD RATHER SEE IT GO C-1 THAN C-3. I'M SURE WE ARE GOING TO HEAR
FROM THE OWNER. >> THAT WAS A GOOD OBSERVATION,
MR. BURDGE. >> ANYONE ELSE? QUESTIONS? ABCS?
[01:20:01]
ANSWERS? COMMENTS? NOT HEARING ANY, I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC PORTION OF THE MEETING.>> GOOD AFTERNOON. FOR THE RECORD, BRAD CURRY WITH EDC. REPRESENTING THE PROPERTY OWNER.
I DO HAVE A RESPONSE TO MR. BURDGE.
STAFF, I THINK, DOESN'T HAVE THE HISTORY ON THIS PROPERTY THAT I REMEMBER READING. AGAIN, I WASN'T A PART OF THE PROJECT. I DO BELIEVE THAT THIS APPLICANT HAS COME IN AND ASKED FOR SOME CONDITIONAL USES FOR SOME OF THE USES THAT ARE ON THE PROPERTY. IS THAT CORRECT?
DO YOU HAVE MEMORY OF THAT? >> I DON'T.
I WAS NOT HERE WHEN THOSE HAPPENED.
>> I BELIEVE THERE ARE SOME USES IN THERE.
I CAN'T PINPOINT THEM. THE WHOLE REASON THIS CAME IS UP THAT THERE WERE SOME DISCUSSIONS ABOUT HAVING A RETAIL USE THERE.
OR SOME OTHER USES. THE DETERMINATION FROM STAFF WAS THAT IT HAD TO BE A CONDITIONAL USE.
WHEN WE LOOKED AROUND THE IMMEDIATE AREA, WE SAW THAT MOST OF THE ZONING THAT WAS IN THE AREA WAS A C-3.
THAT WAS THE REASON WE SELECTED THE C-#.
IT FIT WITHIN WHAT WAS IN THE AREA.
I COULD DO A LITTLE BIT OF RESEARCH AND GET BACK TO THE BOARD, IF YOU WOULD LIKE, ABOUT THE SPECIFIC USES.
THE HISTORY OF THIS PIECE HAS BEEN FOR MANY YEARS, THERE HAS BEEN ISSUES WITH THE R-5 ZONING. NOTIFYING... NOT FITTING THE ACTUAL USE. HE CALLED ME ABOUT DOING CONDITIONAL USE. I SAID IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE.
LET'S REZONE THE PROPERTY TO BE CONSISTENT WITH WHAT'S THERE TODAY. AS WELL AS WHAT'S IN THE SURROUNDING AREA. THAT IS WHY WE ARE HERE TODAY.
THERE WERE... THERE HAS BEEN HISTORICAL ISSUES WITH THIS PROPERTY, WITH THE R-5 ZONING. AND SOME OF THE USES THAT ARE THERE. THAT IS THE REASON FOR THE C-3
REQUEST. >> THE USES THAT ARE THERE NOW, THE CONDITIONAL USE WOULD HAVE BEEN BECAUSE OF THE ZONING.
. >> IT COULD HAVE BEEN BECAUSE OF THE R-5. YES, SIR.
BUT I'M NOT CONVINCED. I DON'T HAVE THE DATA IN FRONT OF ME TO TELL YOU THAT THE C-1 WOULD NOT REQUIRE ADDITIONAL USES AS WELL. I THINK IT WAS PURELY... YOU KNOW, FROM A ZONING PERSPECTIVE, WHEN WE LOOK AT PROPERTIES, FROM A PLANNING PERSPECTIVE, WE TRY TO, YOU KNOW, MATCH COLORS.
IT IS MORE LIKE COLORING IN THE LINES.
THAT IS BASICALLY WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO DO HERE.
THAT SEEMED TO MAKE SENSE. THE PROPERTY ACROSS THE STREET, SIMILAR TO THE USES ON THIS PROPERTY.
SEEMED TO MAKE SENSE TO HAVE THE C-3.
I'M NOT COMFORTABLE WITH THE C-1 RIGHT NOW.
I HAVE TO GO BACK IN AND LOOK AT THE DIFFERENT USES.
I DIDN'T COMPARE THE C-1S AND C-3S.
>> YOU WOULD ADMIT T THAT THE OBSERVATION THAT MR. BURDGE MADE CONCERNING THE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT DIRECTLY BEHIND THIS
I BELIEVE THERE IS SOME SOME OF THE SAME RESIDENTIAL ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE STREET. MAYBE MORE HIGH DENSITY.
YOU HAVE RESIDENTIAL USES ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES AS WELL. MAYBE A LITTLE MORE INTENSE.
MULTIFAMILY VERSUS SINGLE-FAMILY.
AGAIN, WE ARE NOT PROPOSING TO CHANGE ANY USES IMMEDIATELY.
IT WAS INTLUS JUST SOMETHING THAT THEY HAD A TENANT LOOKING AT THIS PROPERTY. THEY APPROACHED THE CITY.
THEY SAID IT HAD TO BE CONDITIONAL USE.
THEN I GOT INVOLVED. AGAIN, IT MAKES THE PROPERTY FIT IN WITH WHAT'S TO THE KNOT, EAST, AND WEST.
IT IS UP TO THIS BOARD. >> PROPERTIES, RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES TO THE NORTH, I BELIEVE, ARE MOSTLY RENTAL
>> I'M NOT PICKING ON RENTALLINGS.
I DON'T WANT TO SUGGEST THAT SOMEBODY THAT IS IN A RENTAL UNIT SHOULD BE TREATED DIFFERENTLY THAN A HOME OWNER, WITH THE EXCEPTION... AND I HAVE BEEN A RENTER IN THE PAST.
A HOME OWNER HAS QUITE A STAKE INVESTED.
NOW, I WOULD GUESS THAT THERE ARE PROBABLY RENTAL PROPERTIES IN THIS DEVELOPMENT DIRECTLY TO THE SOUTH OF THIS, BUT I STILL THINK THAT THE OBSERVATION AND THE COMMENTS THAT MR. BURDGE MADE ARE FAIRLY SOUND. I GUESS I'M IN A QUANDARY HERE OF WHERE WE MIGHT WANT TO CONTINUE TO MOVE FORWARD ON THIS AND HOW. BUT ANYTHING FURTHER?
THANK YOU. IS THE APPLICANT HERE.
>> I'M HERE REPRESENTING HIM. >> OKAY.
ANYONE ELSE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS? NOT SEEING ANYBODY... I'LL COME BACK TO THE BOARD.
I WOULD BE HAPPY FOR YOU TO EXPAND ON SOME OF THIS, MR.
BURDGE, IF YOU WOULD LIKE. >> WELL, I DON'T OFNY HANKSGIVING... I DON'T F ANYTHING... THE REASON WHY SOMETHING WOULD BE TRIGGERED TO A CONDITIONAL USE IS BECAUSE IT DIDN'T FIT THE R-5 ZONING. AND IT COULD HAVE BEEN APPLICABLE TO A C-1 ZONING. I DON'T KNOW OF ANY BUSINESS THAT WOULD HAVE TRIGGERED THAT. YOU KNOW, I DON'T REMEMBER ANYTHING AT ALL. NOW, I DO REMEMBER WHEN THE C- BUILDING ON THE CORN CARE CAME INTO THE CITY.
I WAS ON THE PLANNING BOARD AT THAT PARTICULAR TIME.
MY VIEWPOINT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AT THAT PARTICULAR TIME AND I DID GO TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, WAS WOULD YOU RATHER HAVE A BUSINESS
[01:25:02]
THERE OR WOULD YOU RATHER HAVE A DUPLEX THERE? AT THAT PARTICULAR TIME, YOU KNOW, THE DUPLEX WOULD HAVE BEEN MULTIFAMILY. SUCH LIKE THAT.WHEREAS THIS... THE BUILDING... THEY WOULD BE OPEN FROM 9:00 TO 5:00 AND CLOSE. YOU KNOW, IT WAS THAT KIND OF THING. YOU KNOW, I UNDERSTAND THE APPLICANTS WANTING TO CHANGE THE ZONING.
I DON'T SEE THE NECESSITY OF CHANGING IT TO R-3.
WHEN CURRENT USE... IT APPEARS THAT THE APPLICANT IS CURRENTLY GOING TO USE IT, AND YOU KNOW, YOU CAN STILL GO TO THE CONDITIONAL USE, I GUESS, UNDER C-1 IF SOMEBODY WANTED SOMETHING THAT INVOLVED C-3. I DON'T KNOW.
I WOULD PREFER EITHER TO TABLE IT AND THEN LET STAFF WORK ON THE C-1 ASPECT, C-1 ASPECT OF IT OR, YOU KNOW, HAVE A MOTION.
>> ANY OTHER COMMENTS? >> MR. CHAIR, I'M IN AGREEMENT WITH MR. BURDGE. I WOULD LIKE TO, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE MORE INFORMATION ABOUT THE CURRENT USES THERE TO CONFIRM THAT THE CURRENT USES ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE C-1.
AND TO ASSURE THAT, YOU KNOW THAT, WOULDN'T POSE ANY ISSUE FOR THE APPLICANT. AND PERHAPS TABLE THIS AND ALLOW THEM TO KIND OF REFINE THAT PRESENTATION.
>> I HAVE A QUESTION. >> CERTAINLY.
>> SO IF THEY DECIDE TO GO TO A C-1, WOULD THEY HAVE TO REAPPLY?
CAN THEY COME BACK WITH CHANGES? >> WE WOULD CONTINUE THIS TO THE NEXT PLANNING BOARD AND BRING BACK STAFF AN SITS... ANALYSIS BASED ON THE PLANNING BOARD'S DISCUSSION POINTS.
WE ALSO HAVE TO CONSIDER WHETHER, YOU KNOW, AT WHAT POINT DOES IT BECOME SPOT-ZONING THAT WE ARE PUTTING A ZONING IN WHICH IS A DIFFERENT COLOR TO THE IMMEDIATE SURROUNDINGS OF THAT ROADWAY. I CAN UNDERSTAND THE USES BECOMING VERY IMPORTANT. BECAUSE WE HAVE THAT... IT IS ACTUALLY A BUFFER FROM VIRGINIA TO THE RESIDENTIAL TO THE SOUTH.
WE DO SEE C-1 BUFFERING R-2 TO THE NORTH.
THERE ARE A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT ASPECTS THAT MAY NEED TO BE DISCUSSED. AND I THINK IF THE APPLICANT IS REPRESENTATIVE... IF THE APPLICANT REPRESENTATIVE WOULD BE INCLINED, WE WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS THIS FURTHER.
>> I WILL REOPEN THE PUBLIC PORTION OF THE MEETING FOR MR.
>> I'M SORRY. >> I MEAN, THERE ARE SOME VERY SIMILAR USES THAT ARE ALLOWED ON PERMITTED AND CONDITIONAL USES.
I THINK THE ONE THING THAT MR. BURDGE POINTED OUT WAS THE LIQUOR STORE IS NOT PERMITTED IN C-1.
AND IT IS PERMITTED IN C-2 AND C-3.
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL SALES... I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT IS.
THAT SONDS LIKE REGULAR RETAIL. THAT IS NOT PERMITTED IN C-1.
THAT COULD BE A PROBLEM. OFFICE SUPPLIES, I DON'T THINK THAT IS A BIG ISSUE. I MEAN, IT IS NOT THAT BIG OF A DIFFERENCE. THE LIQUOR STORE WAS ONE THING THAT STOOD OUT TO ME. AS A PROBLEM.
I'M NOT SURE ABOUT THE MEDICAL MARIJUANA.
IS THAT CONSIDERED A DRUGSTORE? IS THAT A SPECIAL SPECIFIC USE
>> IT IS A DRUGSTORE? >> I THINK... YEAH.
I DON'T SEE DRUGSTORE ON THIS LIST.
LET ME GO BACK AND LOOK REAL QUICK.
>> IS ARCADE ON THE LIST? >> IT WAS.
I DON'T REMEMBER WHERE IT WAS. >> ARCADES ARE CONDITIONAL USES.
>> YEAH. I DON'T SEE DRUGSTORE ON THIS LIST. MAYBE I'M GOING TOO QUICKLY HERE. NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL, RETAIL SALES, PAWN SHOPS ARE SOMETHING THAT IS PERMITTED.
AGAIN, THAT IS NOT ANYTHING WE ARE PROPOSING TO DO AT THIS POINT. YOU KNOW, FROM OUR STANDPOINT, FOR MY CLIENTS, I WANT TO GET THE MOST INTENSE ZONING THAT THERE IS. C-# IS THE MOST INTENSE.
THERE IS NOT THAT MUCH OF A DIFFERENCE.
IF THERE IS SOMETHING THAT IS MORE INTENSE, IT LOOKS LIKE IT WOULD BE ALLOWED AS A CONDITIONAL USE.
THANK YOU. IT SEEMS THAT MR. FREEMAN IS WILLING TO REEVALUATE THIS APPLICATION.
>> IT'S THE WILL OF THE BOARD REALLY.
WHETHER OR NOT THEY WANT TO, YOU KNOW VERY, STAFF INVESTIGATE THIS FURTHER. STAFF ARE WILLING TO INVESTIGATE THIS FURTHER. AND BRING BACK A RECOMMENDATION.
WHETHER THAT RECOMMENDATION IS DIFFERENT TO WHAT WE HAVE BEFORE
YOU NOW WILL BE DETERMINED. >> LET ME ASK ONE OTHER QUESTION. MAYBE YOU KNOW THIS ANSWER.
MAYBE YOU DON'T. THERE IS DEFINITELY A DIFFERENCE AS FAR AS EVALUATION OF C-# PROPERTY AND C-1 PROPERTY.
THERE IS A POTENTIAL TAX BENEFIT IF THIS WAS TO BE REDUCED FROM A
[01:30:01]
C-3 ZONING TO A C-1 OR TO COME IN AS A C-1 VERSUS C-3 ZONING.THE APPRAISER MAY LOOK AT IT AS A HIGHER APPRAISAL VALUE AT C-3 THAN C-1. YET, THEY ARE GOING TO BE USING
IT BASICALLY AS A C-1 PROPERTY. >> THAT COULD BE THE CASE.
>> RIGHT. >> WE COULD BE SAVING THE OWNER MONEY. IT WOULD BE INCREASING THE MONEY FROM R-5, MULTIFAMILY TO C-1. THAT IS ONLY BECAUSE THAT SORT OF REPRESENTS WHAT'S CURRENTLY BEING USED.
IF WE GO TO C-3, I'M SURE THE TAX APPRAISER WILL BE IN HERE REAPPRAISING THE PROPERTY AS C-3 PROPERTY VERSUS R-5 OR C-1.
WHICH TO ME, YOU KNOW, SOMEBODY IS GOING TO PAY MORE TAXES.
IF IT IS C-3. YOU KNOW? WHETHER THEY ARE USING IT AS C-3 PROPERTY AS COMPARED TO C-1
PROPERTY. >> THAT COULD BE THE CASE.
YOU MIGHT CONSIDER THAT ALSO. IN THE ASPECT OF TRYING TO SAVE SOME MONEY. IF YOU WANT TO KEEP THE USAGE AS C-1 BUT NOT PAY THE TAXES OF C-3.
>> I'M GOING TO CLOSE... BEING I REOPENED THE PUBLIC PORTION OF THE MEETING. I'M GOING TO RE-CLOSE THE PUBLIC PORTION OF THE MEETING. I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
>> I'LL MAKE THE MOTION TO TABLE THE ITEM FOR FURTHER INVESTIGATION BY CITY STAFF IN REGARDS TO THE C-1 ZONING.
>> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION TO TABLE BY MR. BURDGE. AND SECONDED BY MR.... I'M GOING TO TRY THIS ONE MORE TIME. KREISL.
>> KREISL. >> I'M GETTING CLOSER.
BEAR WITH ME. AL THE ROLL, PLEASEMENT.
>> MR. SPHWHURNLG. >> YES, MA'AM.
CHAIRMAN CREYAUFMILLER? >> YES, MA'AM.
>> THAT WOULD BE TABLED PROBABLY UNTIL THE NEXT MEETING.
>> IF YOU WANT TO CONTINUE IT TO THE NEXT MEETING, THEN IT IS BEST TO MENTION A DATE WITHIN THAT MOTION.
>> THE MOTION... THAT WITH THE INTENT OF THE MOTION-MAKER WAS
TO CARRY TO THE NEXT MEETING. >> THAT IS SUFFICIENT.
IS IT NOT? YOU OKAY WITH THAT?
>> YES. >> YOU OKAY WITH THAT?
>> WE WILL CONTINUE IT TO THE NEXT PLANNING BOARD MEETING.
I'M SORRY. I SHOULD HAVE CAUGHT THAT.
>> WELL, AT THE NEXT MEETING, THERE WILL NEED TO BE A MOTION
TO TAKE IT FROM THE TABLE. >> YES.
>> OKAY? SO JUST AS LONG AS IT IS ON THE AGENDA. YOU CAN RISE IT FROM THE TABLE.
AT THAT PARTICULAR POINT. YOU KNOW.
[g. Major Amendment to Planned Development - Red Hawk Rebar - 4280 Bandy Boulevard]
>> THE NEXT ITEM IS 7-G. AND THAT IS MAJOR AMENDMENT TO PLANNING DEVELOPMENT REDHAWK REBAR AT 4280 BRANDY BSTLED.
BOULEVARD. >> PLANNING BOARD, PLANNING BOARD CHAIRMAN, TODAY I'M REPRESENTING A APPLICATION FOR A MAJOR AMENDMENT TO A PLAN DEVELOPMENT AT 4280 BRANDY BOULEVARD. THIS IS THE LOCATION MAP OF THE PARCEL. APPROXIMATELY 3.565 ACRES.
THE FUTURE LAND USE IS... INDUSTRIAL, HIGH-INTENSITY.
AND THE ZONING IS PD WHICH IS PLANNED DEVELOPMENT.
THE MAJOR AMENDMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTIONS 12537, 125133, 125136 AND 125212 OF THE CITY CODE, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING THE REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF A MAJOR AMENDMENT TO THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED PLAN DEVELOPMENT AND SITE PLAN.
THIS REQUIRES AN APPLICATION FOR A MAJOR AMENDMENT WITH MODIFICATIONS AND EXPIRED DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO FOLLOW THE SAME PROCEDURE AS SET FORTH FOR A NEW PLANNED DEVELOPMENT.
THE STAFF RECOMMENDS THE CONSISTENT WITH SECTIONS 125212 AND 125126 OF THE CITY CODE AND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
IT DOES NOT ADVERSARY AFFECT THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, CONVENIENCE, AND GENERAL WELFARE.
THE CITY COMMISSION APPROVED THE AMENDMENT TO PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ALONG WITH AN APPROVED DEVELOPMENT PLAN ON SEPTEMBER 4, 2018. THE RED HAWK REBAR FACILITY IS A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT FOR THE PROPOSED... FOR THE PURPOSE OF CONSTRUCTING AND MANUFACTURING FACILITY THAT TRANSFORMS ALREADY FABRICATED REBARS INTO COMPONENTS FOR THE COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION PROCESS. THE ORIGINAL PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PLAN CONSISTED OF A 40,000-SQUARE-FOOT MANUFACTURING FACILITY. OF WHICH 8,000 SQUARE FEET PROVIDES OFFICE SPACE, PHASE O ONE, 16,000 SQUARE FEET
[01:35:05]
INDUSTRIAL BUILDING. AND A 4,000-SQUARE-FOOT AREA FOR COVERED STAGING OF A FINISHED PRODUCT.THE NEW PROPOSED... THE NEW PROPOSAL CONSISTS O'.
>> A SMALLER FOOTPRINT OF APPROXIMATELY 32,000 SQUARE FEET. THIS IS THE ORIGINAL PD THAT WAS APPROVED BY THE CITY COMMISSION E.40,000 SQUARE FEET MANUFACTURING FACILITY OF WHICH 8,000... THE OFFICE PHASE, 16,000 FEET OF INDUSTRIAL SQUARE BUILDING.
THE NEW PD DEVELOPMENT PLAN IS THE SMALLER.
IT IS THE SITE PLAN CONSISTING OF APPROXIMATELY 32,000-SQUARE FOOT MANUFACTURING FACILITY WITH 2,382 SQUARE FOOT OF OFFICE SPACE, A $12,475 SQUARE FOOT RECEIVING AREA, AND A 15,200 SQUARE FOOT FABRICATION BAY. THIS IS THE LANDSCAPE PLAN.
THE TREES SHOULD BE PLANTED AS SHOWN.
THE GROUND COVER AND NEW IRRIGATION WILL BE INSTALLED.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR THE MAJOR AMENDMENT.
THE REQUESTED APPLICATION FOR A MAJOR AMENDMENT TO A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT MEETS THE CRITERIA SPECIFIED IN SECTION 125136 AND 125212 OF THE CITY CODE. THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.
IT DOES NOT A ADVERSELY AFFECT THE PUBLIC SAFETY, HEALTH, AND THEREFORE, THE STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITION. A COMPLETION CERTIFICATION BY A LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. SHALL BE REQUIRED BEFORE THE FINAL CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY IS APPROVED FOR THE SITE.
THE PLANNING BOARD'S ACTIONS FOR TODAY... A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL FOR THE PROPOSED MAJOR AMENDMENT WITH NO CHANGES.
THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION. RECOMMENDED AN APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED MAJOR AMENDMENT WITH CHANGES, OR RECOMMEND A DISAPPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED MAJOR AMENDMENT.
THANK YOU. >> IN THE STAFF REPORT, I SPOTTED A SHORT SENTENCE TALKING ABOUT THE POSSIBILITY OF INCORPORATING A RAILROAD SITING SPUR OFF THE RAILROAD THAT IS RUNNING BEHIND THIS BUILDING. I'M NOT SURE WHAT DIRECTION THAT IS. I THINK IT IS NORTHEAST.
IS IT NOT? BEHIND THIS BUILDING?
>> IT IS NORTHWEST. >> NORTHWEST? OKAY. SEE, I'M ALL TURNED AROUND.
THAT BE SPELLED OUT MORE CLEARLY IN THIS APPLICATION?
>> I MEAN, THIS IS SAYING THE PLAN ALSO INCORPORATES A RAILROAD SPUR TO ACCOMMODATE. I DON'T SEE ANYTHING ON THIS DIAGRAM SHOWING ME THERE IS GOING TO BE A RAILROAD SPUR.
NOR DO I SEE HOW THAT COULD BE ACCOMPLISHED WITH THE PRESENT
LAYOUT OF THE SITE PLAN. >> SEEING AS THIS IS VENNIS' PROMPT, I WILL LET THE APPLICANT ANSWER THAT QUESTION.
(LAUGHTER) ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? BY OUR BOARD?
COMMENTS? >> I WILL SAY ON THE SITE PLAN, THOUGH, THE PROPOSED RAIL SPUR IS PUT ON THERE.
IT IS VERY SMALL. >> I'M READING THIS STUFF OFF OF MY COMPUTER AT HOME JUST LIKE I'M DOING HERE NOW.
AND I CAN'T SEE IT. THAT IS SOMETHING ELSE I WANT TO TALK TO MR. FREEMAN ABOUT HERE. AT SOME POINT.
OKAY. IT IS SHOWN ON THIS DIAGRAM.
FAIR ENOUGH. ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? NOT HEARING ANY, I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC PORTION OF THE MEETING
NOW. >> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.
FOR THE RECORD, MY NAME IS DENNIS MURPHY, REPRESENTING RED HAWK REBAR LLC. AS YOUR STAFF POINTED OUT, THIS IS AN ESSENCE OF DEJA VU ALL OVER AGAIN.
THREE YEARS AGO, WE CAME BEFORE THE CITY AND RECEIVED APPROVAL FOR PRETTY MUCH THE SAME PROJECT.
I SAY PRETTY MUCH. THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT CHANGED.
THAT IS ABOUT IT. FOR A VARIETY OF REASONS, THE PROJECT COULD NOT PROCEED, AND NOW THEY ARE IN A POSITION TO PROCEED. THE SITE PLAN EXPIRED.
WE HAD TO GO BACK AND START THE PROCESS ALL OVER AGAIN.
SO I'M HERE FOR THAT TONIGHT. OR TODAY.
BRIEFLY, YES.ÚTHE CHAIRMAN, IF Y CAREFULLY, IT IS SHOWN LIGHTLY ON HERE. THE WAY THAT THE GRAPHICS ARE.
[01:40:02]
THERE IS A DASH LINE FOR A FUTURE RAIL.YOU SEE WHERE THE CURVE LINE IS IN THE BACK AREA? IN THE BACK STORAGE AREA? ST.
>> ACTUALLY, THESE OLD EYES DON'T SEE IT SO GOOD.
(LAUGHTER). >> THERE IS A CURVE LINE COMING IN FROM THE NORTH, NORTHWEST. COMING INTO THE SITE.
THAT WOULD BE THE APPROXIMATE LOCATION OF ANY RAIL SPUR.
AND AGAIN, WE SAY APPROXIMATE. BECAUSE WE HAVE NOT DONE ANYTHING IN ENGINEERING FOR THAT.
THAT IS DONE SEPARATE FROM US. WE RESERVED THE OPPORTUNITY TO FIT IT IN THERE. IT WILL FIT ON THE SITE, WE BELIEVE, SHOULD WE CHOOSE TO GO AND DO IT.
THAT IS SOMETHING FOR THE FUTURE.
OTHER THAN THAT, WE HAVE REVIEWED THE STAFF COMMENTS.
THE STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS FOR APPROVAL.
WE DON'T HAVE A PARTICULAR PROBLEM WITH THEM.
I WILL RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT YOU FORWARD THIS TO THE COMMISSION FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL.
>> VERY GOOD. ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. MURPHY? NOT HEARING ANY, I THANK YOU VERY MUCH, SIR.
ANYONE ELSE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TO THIS PROJECT? PLEASE STEP FORWARD. NOT SEEING ANYONE, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC PORTION OF THE MEETING.
IS THERE ANY FURTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? BY OUR BOARD? NOT HEARING ANY, I WOULD
ENTERTAIN A MOTION. >> MOTION FOR APPROVAL.
>> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL BY MR. KREISL. HEY, I'M GETTING THERE.
MS. CLEMONS, SECOND. CALL THE ROLL, PLEASE.
CHAIRMAN CREYAUFMILLER? >> YES, MA'AM.
[h. Conditional Use - Brighter Care Adult Daycare - 415 Avenue A ]
THE NEXT ITEM ON THE LIST IS 7-H.CONDITIONAL USE ADULT DAY CARE AT 15 AVENUE A.
>> THE PLANNING BOARD, PLANNING BOARD CHAIRMAN, TODAY I'M PRESENTING AN APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE FROM THE BRIGHTER CARE ADULT DAY CARE CENTER ON 415 AVENUE A.
WHICH IS RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET.
THE LOCATION MAP SHOWS THE APPROXIMATE .20 ACRE PARCEL.
THE ZONING AND THE FUTURE LAND USE OF THE PARCEL ARE BOTH GENERAL-COMMERCIAL. GC AND C-3.
AND THAT IS AROUND THE WHOLE SURROUNDING AREA OF THE PARCEL.
THIS IS A SURVEY OF THE EXISTING BUILDING, AND THE PARKING LOT ACROSS THE STREET. THIS IS THE FLOOR PLAN.
IT IS A 4,892-SQUARE FEET OF DAY CARE INSIDE THE BUILDING.
THE HOURS OF OPERATIONS WOULD BE 9:00 A.M. TO 4:00 P.M.
THEY WILL EMPLOY FOUR STAFF MEMBERS.
WITH THE CAPACITY FOR APPROXIMATELY TEN PATIENTS.
THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR THE PROPOSED USE OFFERS A PROVISION OF AN ADULT DAY CARE AS A LIMITED COMMERCIAL USE THAT IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD AND IS GENERALLY CONSISTENT WITH THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE WITH APPROPRIATE RESTRICTIONS.
THEREFORE, THE STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL.
THE PLANNING BOARD HAS THE OPTIONS OF APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED CONDITIONAL USE WITH NO CHANGES WHICH IS STAFF RECOMMENDATION. APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED CONDITIONAL USE WITH CHANGES OR DISAPPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED CONDITIONAL USE. THANK YOU.
>> COMMENTS? QUESTIONS? BY THE BOARD. NOT HEARING ANY, THIS IS NOT
USING THIS WHOLE BUILDING. >> IT IS JUST ONE FLOOR.
(LAUGHTER). >> I WANTED TO CONFIRM THAT.
>> THE WITHHOLD BUILDING, NO, SIR.
VERY GOOD. IS THERE AMPLE PARKING HERE?
>> THERE IS AMPLE PARKING, AND THERE IS PARKING ACROSS THE
STREET THAT IS ABLE TO BE USED. >> I IMAGINE THAT IT IS MOS MOSTLY... I'M GOING TO BRING MY AGING MOTHER FOR DAY CARE TO THE FACILITY AND I'LL DROP HER OFF ON U.S.-1 AND LET HER WALK IN.
>> HOPEFULLY, THAT IS NOT WHAT YOU WERE LOOKING TO DO.
>> ALL RIGHT. THAT IS THE ONLY QUESTION I HAD.
I WANTED TO CONFIRM THAT AND THROW A LITTLE HUMOR IN THIS THING. WE ARE GETTING TOO SERIOUS.
>> I HAVE A QUESTION. >> VERY GOOD.
>> ALL RIGHT. LET'S TALK ABOUT DROPPING OFF MOTHER. OKAY? BECAUSE WE HAVE DONE THIS IN THE PAST FOR CHILD DAY CARE CENTERS.
THAT BASICALLY, THEY HAVE A HORSE SHOE-DROP-OFF POINT.
DO WE HAVE A SIMILAR-TYPE SITUATION THAT WE COULD DEVELOP THAT HERE? SO THAT COMING IN OFF OF NORTH FIFTH STREET AND THEN GOING INTO ORANGE AVENUE, YOU KNOW, OFF THE
[01:45:01]
>> AND YES, SIR. THERE IS THE PARKING LOT ONAVENUE A-2. THAT COULD BE USED.
THEN YOU HAVE TO CROSS THE STREET.
THERE IS THE ASPHALT WHERE YOU COULD DO THE...
>> THE LOOP. THAT WOULD BE VERY IMPORTANT, YOU KNOW, IF I WAS TO DROP A PARENT OFF THERE.
ESPECIALLY. OR IF I DECIDE TO COME MYSELF.
(LAUGHTER) DEPENDS ON WHAT KIND OF ACTIVITIES YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE. BINGO.
(LAUGHTER) SLOT MACHINES. BLACK JACK.
YOU KNOW, YOU CAN DO LOW-WAGERING CARD GAMES, I THINK. I KNOW YOU CAN.
>> ONLY MR. BURDGE WOULD KNOW THAT.
ONLY MR. BURDGE WOULD KNOW THAT.
>> YOU LIVE IN THAT TYPE OF COMMUNITY, THEY HAVE CARD GAMES
AT YOUR CENTER. >> OH, WE PUT AN END TO IT.
>> THEY WERE GETTING TOO MEAN. >> THEY WERE PLAYING DOLLARS INSTEAD OF QUARTERS. THEY WERE QUARTER GAMES OR SOMETHING. I REMEMBER THAT.
ENOUGH. I JUST WANTED TO BRING THAT ASPECT OF DROP-OFF, THE AVAILABILITY OF DROP-OFF SO T THAT, YOU KNOW, IT IS CONVENIENT FOR NOT ONLY THE PERSON BUT THE SAFETY OF THE PERSON. YOU KNOW.
THANK YOU. >> HAS THIS SPURRED ANY FURTHER
COMMENT OR QUESTIONS? >> THANK YOU.
I WOULD OPEN THE PUBLIC PORTION OF THE MEETING, PLEASE.
I THINK THIS LOVELY YOUNG LADY IS THE APPLICANT.
IF YOU WOULD, STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND SIGN IN, PLEASE.
>> OKAY. MY NAME IS SHONTEL JOAQUIN.
415 AVENUE A. I'M ALSO A MEDICAL PROVIDER.
I HAVE A HOME HEALTH AGENCY. AND THE REASON I CAME UP WITH THIS IDEA IS BECAUSE WHEN THE WORKERS DO COMPANION, SOME FAMILIES DON'T WANT THE WORKERS AT HOME.
I CAME UP WITH THIS IDEA TO GIVE THEM ANOTHER CHANCE TO HAVE FUN.
NOT BECAUSE THEY ARE OLD. IT IS LIKE, YOU KNOW, SO I HAVE OTHER PEOPLE WHO IS GOING TO COME AND ENTERTAIN THEM.
YOU KNOW, DO COMEDY. YOU KNOW, SOME GAMES.
AND YOGA AND I JUST FEEL LIKE IT IS SOMETHING THEY NEED.
I HAVE BEEN LOOKING AROUND. I DID MY RESEARCH.
VERO HAS IT. PORT ST. LUCIE HAD IT.
FORCE PIERCE DON'T. FORT PIERCE DON'T.
I THINK IT IS GOING TO BE GOOD. SOMETHING WE CAN START WITH.
>> I LIKE THE IDEA. I LIKE THE ADDRESS.
VERY OFTEN WHEN THESE KINDS OF APPLICATIONS COME BEFORE US, I LOOK AT THE ADDRESSES. AND I KIND OF SCRATCH MY HEAD.
WHY ARE WE TALKING ABOUT THIS IN THIS PARTICULAR LOCATION?
I LIKE THE ADDRESS. I THINK IT IS A GOOD UPSCALE FEEL. AND IT IS SOMETHING THAT WE NEED
WE ARE DOING DOOR-TO-DOOR TRANSPORTATION.
IF THEY COME, WE ARE GOING TO GET MOM, DAD, AND IT IS MORE
>> YES. >> MAYBE NOT MR. BURDGE.
>> DEFINITELY. I SUPPOSE WE CAN STOP AT THAT LIQUOR STORE. (LAUGHTER).
>> OH, I LIKE HIM. IT IS SOMETHING, YOU KNOW, I HAVE BEEN IN THE MEDICAL FIELD FOR FOUR YEARS.
I HAVE BEEN A CNA FOR 11. I WAS, LIKE, YOU KNOW WHAT? I HAVE THE HOME HEALTH GOING GOOD.
INTHINK THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE REALLY GOOD.
I CAN OPEN UP ANOTHER ONE. THIS ONE WILL PROSPER FIRST.
ANYTHING ELSE I NEED TO DO, LET ME KNOW.
MS. CLEMONS? >> WELL, AS A PERSON WHO HAVE PIERCE, THERE IS AN ALZHEIMER'SS IF COMMUNITY CARE IN FORT PIERCE. THEY ALWAYS HAVE A WAITING LIST.
I RECENTLY HAD A SISTER WHO UTILIZED THE SERVICE FOR TWO AND A HALF YEARS. IT IS A HEAVEN-SENT GRACE FOR
>> AND FOR THE PATIENT. I WANT TO CONGRATULATE YOU FOR SEEING THE NEED AND PROVIDING US HERE IN THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE WITH THAT NEED. I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION.
I KNOW HE TALKED ABOUT THE DROP-OFF AND BEING ABLE TO CIRCLE AROUND IN THE PARKING LOT.
I WANT TO KNOW IS IT COVERED. >> IT IS.
BECAUSE RIGHT WHEN YOU COME INTO THE BUILDING, THAT WHOLE SLOT IS SAFE. IT IS NOT ACROSS THE STREET.
>> NO. I MEAN, WHEN YOU GET OUT OF THE
CAR, IS IT COVERED? >> OH, YES.
IT IS. >> YOU MEAN LIKE... COVERAGE FOR
WE DON'T HAVE THAT IN THE PARKING LOT.
WE WILL MAKE ARRANGEMENTS. >> MAYBE SOMETHING TO CONSIDER.
>> YES. >> PERHAPS YOU COULD TALK TO MR CROSS, JR. INTO DOING THAT FOR YOU.
MAYBE NOT. ANYONE ELSE, ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? NOT HEARING ANY, I THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR
[01:50:04]
ACTIVITY AND... IN FORT PIERCE IN TRYING TO IMPROVE AND PROVIDESERVICES FOR OUR COMMUNITY. >> YOU ARE WELCOME.
THANK YOU GUYS. >> ANYONE ELSE SPEAKING TO THIS PROJECT? NOT HEARING ANY, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC PORTION OF THE MEETING.
AND COME BACK TO THE BOARD. ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS MANY? NOT HEARING ANY, I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION.
>> I'LL MOVE FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE CONDITIONAL USE.
AS PRESENTED BY THE... WHAT ARE YOU GUYS CALLED? STAFF. THERE YOU GO.
I'M DOING WHAT THAT GUY'S NAME. THE NEW SENATOR UP IN PENNSYLVANIA. FREEMAN?
>> (LAUGHTER. ) WHERE IS THE PRESIDENT, I'M DOING.
ALL RIGHT. >> DO WE HAVE A MOTION?
>> A STROKE, TOO. >> A SECOND TO THIS MOTION?
>> MS. CLEMONS IS SECONDING THIS MOTION.
>> YOU KNOW, WE ARE NOT USED TO STAYING THIS LATE ANYMORE.
I THINK WE ARE GETTING A LITTLE PUNCHY HERE.
(LAUGHTER) CALL THE ROLL, PLEASE.
CHAIRMAN CREYAUFMILLER? >> YES, MA'AM.
>> WE HAVE TO HAVE A LITTLE HUMOR ONCE IN A WHILE.
[i. Conditional Use - Longman Garage & Guest House - 1506 Thumb Point Drive]
NEXT ITEM, ITEM 7-I. CONDITIONAL USE.LONGMAN GARAGE AND GUESTHOUSE AT 1506 THUMB POINT DRIVE.
>> PLANNING BOARD, PLANNING BOARD CHAIRMAN, TODAY I'M PRESENTING AN APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE FOR THE LONGMAN GARAGE AND GUESTHOUSE AT 1506 THUMB POINT DRIVE.
HERE IS AN AERIAL MAP OF THE PARCEL THAT IS APPROXIMATELY .867 ACRES. THE FUTURE LAND USE AND THE ZONING MAP... I DON'T KNOW WHY THIS PARCEL RIGHT HERE IS HIGHLIGHTED. IT IS THIS ONE RIGHT HERE.
WITH THE R-1 ZONING AS WELL AS THE LOW-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL FOR THE FUTURE LAND USE. THIS IS A SITE PLAN OF THE PROPOSED ADDITION. THE GARAGE WOULD BE 1,974 SQUARE FEET AS WELL AS THE SECOND FLOOR LIVING GUEST-HOUSE.
THERE WILL BE A BALCONY THAT IS 270 SQUARE FEET WITH THE TOTAL OF 4,218 SQUARE FOOTAGE ON TO THE... ON TO THIS LOT.
HERE ARE THE ELEVATIONS. OF THE PROPOSED GARAGE AND GUEST QUARTERS. THE PLANNING BOARD EAKSES...
AXES FOR TODAY ARE RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED CONDITIONAL USE. NO CHANGES...' I'M SORRY, Y'ALL. FROM THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS THE PROPOSED CONDITIONAL USE APPLICATION, ADHERING TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AND GUIDELINES OF THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND DOES NOT APPEAR TO ADVERSELY AFFECT THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, CONVENIENCE, OR GENERAL WELFARE OF CITIZENS. THEREFORE, STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE REQUESTED APPLICATION.
THE PLANNING BOARD'S ACTIONS TODAY ARE POSSIBLE OF A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED CONDITIONAL USE WITH NO CHANGES. THE RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED CONDITIONAL USE WITH CHANGES OR THE RECOMMENDATION OF A DISAPPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED CONDITIONAL USE.
>> YES. >> IF I MAY ADD, OVER THE LAST FEW DAYS, WE HAVE RECEIVED OBJECTION EMAILS FROM RESIDENTS IN THAT LOCATION. THEY BROUGHT UP ISSUES OF THE ARCHITECTURE AND SETBACKS AND THE APPROPRIATENESS OF THE DESIGN FOR THAT LOCATION. IF WE COULD JUST PULL UP THE SITE PHOTOGRAPH, YOU WILL SEE THAT THIS IS A SINGLE-STORY...
IT WAS LIKE A RANCH-STYLE HOUSE. >> WHAT IS THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF
THIS TO EVE? >> SO IF I CAN JUST GO THROUGH WHAT I WAS GOING TO DO, AND THEN WE WILL GET YOU.
YOU ARE GOING TO READ ALL OF THESE?
>> WELL, I'M NOT GOING TO READ THEM ALL.
I DO HAVE OBJECTIONS WHICH WE HAVE NOTED FROM RESIDENTS ADJACENT TO THIS PROPERTY AND ALSO CLOSE TO THIS PROPERTY.
I WANT TO REAWE SURE THEM THAT WE HAVE THOSE AND THOSE HAVE BEEN RECEIVED. WHICH CALLS ME TO LOOK A BIT FURTHER INTO WHAT THE PLANNING BOARD ARE ABLE TO DO WITH THIS.
YOU ALL MAY BE AWARE THAT STATE STATUTE LIMITS IN CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES, THE ACTIONS OF PLANNING BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS IN TERMS OF ARCHITECTURAL DISCUSSIONS OF A PROSED DEVELOPMENT... I LOOKED A BIT FURTHER INTO THAT.
AND I LOOKED AT STATE STATUTE 163.3202 WHICH ACTUALLY
[01:55:04]
NOTETATES THAT RESTRICTION. IT DOES HAVE A COUPLE OF EXEMPTIONS WHICH IN THIS CASE ARE QUITE INTERESTING.SO THE RESTRICTIONS SAY THAT BUILDING DESIGN, REGULATIONS MAY NOT BE APPLIED TO SINGLE OR DUPLEX FAMILY DWELLING UNITS.
SO IN NORMAL CIRCUMSTANCES, THE CITY CANNOT APPLY THOSE THINGS.
HOWEVER, WE HAVE TWO ISSUES HERE WHICH ACTUALLY, MAY ALLOW THE PLANNING BOARD TO MAKE CALLS ON THE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN OF THE PARTICULAR PROPOSAL. THE FIRST IS THAT ONE EXEMPTION FROM STATE STATUTE IS THAT A LOCATION IN THE CRA DOES ALLOW THE DISCUSSION OR APPLICATION OF REGULATIONS REGARDING DESIGN TO BE APPLIED. THE CONDITIONAL USE PROCESS ITSELF DOES NOT PROVIDE ANY ARK TEBLG CHURL... ARCHITECTURAL REQUIREMENTS OR ANYTHING WITHIN THAT PROCESS.
HOWEVER, WE HAVE ANOTHER OVERLY A WHICH DOES AFFECT THIS PROPERTY, WHICH IS THE SOUTH BEACH OVERLY A.
WITHIN THAT OVER LAY, IT DOES MENTION ARCHITECTURAL REQUIREMENTS. THEY PRIMARILY, THOUGH, ONLY APPLY TO MULTIFAMILY AND NONRESIDENTIAL.
SO WE ARE IN ALMOST A NO-MAN'S LAND OF THE FACT THAT THE CITY DOES NOT HAVE SPECIFIC ARCHITECTURAL REGULATIONS THAT ARE APPLICABLE WITHIN THE CRA OR THE SOUTH BEACH TO SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. THE ITEM BEFORE YOU TODAY IS TO LOOK AT THE CONDITIONAL USE APPLICATION TO INCREASE THE HEIGHT OF THAT PROPOSAL. WHICH IS ABOVE WHAT WOULD NORMALLY BE ALLOWED IN THE R-1 ZONING DISTRICT.
SO WHILE WE LOOK AT THE ARCHITECTURAL APPEARANCE OF T THIS, IT IS NOT SOMETHING THAT REALLY... I DON'T THINK THAT IN THIS CASE, THE PLANNING BOARD HAVE AUTHORITY TO ACTUALLY CONDITION THAT. THEY ARE ABLING TO CONDITION THE HEIGHT, WHETHER OR NOT THEY GRANT THE HEIGHT ABOVE WHAT'S ALLOWED IN THE ZONING DISTRICT. I THINK IT IS SOMETHING FROM A STAFF POINT OF VIEW NOW, DIVERTING FROM A UD WOOER ASPECT,... FROM A WIDER ASPECT, IT IS SOMETHING WE SHOULD BE LOOKING AT. ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN REGULATIONS WITHIN THE CRA, IN GENERAL. AND THAT WOULD BE THE ONLY AVENUE, I THINK, TO LOOK AT SINGLE-FAMILY OR DUPLEX RESIDENTIAL DESIGNS WITHIN THE CRA.
AND WITHIN SOME OF THESE OVERLAY DISTRICTS.
>> THAT MAKES SENSE TO YOU. >> YES.
HOW MANY OBJECTION LETTERS DID YOU GET?
>> I RECEIVED TWO IN ALL. WELL, TWO FROM... THERE MAY BE MORE FROM THE SAME PERSONS. TWO PERSONS, I HAVE ACTUALLY HAD
I UNDERSTAND COMPLETELY. >> I HAVE A QUESTION.
>> YES. >> LET ME ASK A QUESTION.
THE APPLICANT WANTS TO BUILD A GARAGE AND A GUEST HOUSE.
OKAY. DOES THE CURRENT ZONING ALLOW
FOR TWO HOUSES ON THIS PROPERTY? >> NO.
>> NO. SO THEY ARE GOING TO BE TAKING THIS PROPERTY FROM SINGLE-FAMILY TO MULTIFAMILY?
IT DOESN'T ALLOW IT? THAT IS THE REASON WHY THEY ARE COMING IN FOR THE CONDITIONAL USE?
>> THE REASON WHY THEY ARE COMING IN FOR THE CONDITIONAL
USE IS FOR THE HEIGHT. >> FOR THE HEIGHT.
OKAY. BUT IN ADDING THE GUEST HOUSE, THEY ARE TAKING THIS LOT FROM AN R-1 TO AN R-2 OR R-3 HOUSE.
THAT WOULD BE SPOT-ZONING, THEN. >> IF THIS GUEST HOUSE INCORPORATES A KITCHEN, THEN IT WOULD BE CLASSED AS A RESIDENTIAL UNIT. IF IT DOESN'T, THEN IT IS
ADDITIONAL SPACE TO THE... >> WHAT IS THE TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION?
>> IS IT 30,000 SQUARE FEET OR MORE?
>> .867 ACRES. >> DO THE CONVERSION.
[02:00:03]
OUR RESTRICTION IN THE CODE IS IN SQUARE FEET.NOT IN FRACTIONS OF ACRES. >> .867.
SO PER THE R-1 CODE, A GUEST HOUSE IS PERMISSIBLE ON THIS PROPERTY. PROVIDED THAT IT DOES NOT HAVE KITCHEN FACILITIES. IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY.
>> YES. I THINK THAT IS CORRECT, YES.
>> DOES THE CURRENT PLAN HAVE KITCHEN FACILITIES?
>> SO THE REASON THIS IS EVEN HERE FOR US TO DISCUSS IN THE FIRST PLACE IS BECAUSE THE PLAN HAS A KITCHEN, AND THE HEIGHT IS
ABOVE WHAT'S ALLOWABLE BY R-1. >> YES.
>> AND IS IT HERE TO INCLUDE THE KITCHEN DISCUSSION OR JUST THE
HEIGHT? >> SO I AM NOT THE STAFF THAT...
REVIEWED IN THE. >> WE SHOULD BE HERE TODAY TO
DISCUSS THE HEIGHT ONLY. >> THE HEIGHT ONLY.
>> THIS WILL NOT GRANT PERMISSION FOR A KITCHEN TO BE INSTALLED WITHIN THIS PROPERTY. OR AN ADDITIONAL UNIT TO BE PLACED ON THIS. ON THIS PROPERTY.
IT DOES AS A CONSEQUENCE OF THIS BEING APPROVED, THERE COULD BE ADDITIONAL FLOOR SPACE INCORPORATED HERE.
TO EXTEND THE FLOOR SPACE OF THE HOME WITHOUT A KITCHEN.
THAT WOULD BE ALLOWABLE IN THE ZONING DISTRICT.
BUT... YES. >> WE WOULD NOT HAVE TO... THAT
WOULD NOT HAVE TO COME TO US. >> YOU WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO GRANT PERMISSION FOR AN ADDITIONAL DWELLING UNIT TO BE PUT ON THIS PROPERTY BECAUSE IT WOULD NOT MEET THE ZONING.
OR THE FUTURE LAND USE. >> AND AS SOON AS... LET'S SAY THFTION BUILT... THIS WAS BUILT AND THE APPLICANT COMES IN AND SAYS NO, I'M NOT GOING TO PUT A KITCHEN IT IN.
AND THREE WEEKS LATER, THE NEIGHBORHOOD FINDS OUT THERE IS A KITCHEN IN IT. NOW WHOSE PROBLEM DOES IT BECOME? CODE ENFORCEMENT?
HERE WE GO WITH THAT PROBLEM. >> YES.
>> OR WE COULD JUST DENY THIS THING AND NOT HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT IT AT ALL? BECAUSE YOU KNOW...
>> THAT IS AN OPTION. >> WHAT WAS THE HEIGHT?
>> THE HEIGHT? >> 29 SOMETHING.
>> 29.5. >> TO THE PEAK OF THE ROOF?
>> OR TO THE EVE. >> YOU ARE HAVING THE SAME PROBLEM HERE TONIGHT THAT WE HAVE WHEN WE...
AHEAD. >> I BELIEVE IT IS TO THE EVE.
FROM THIS. MAKE SURE THAT I'M LOOKING AT IT
NOW. >> THAT IS HOW I THOUGHT I READ IT. WHEN I WENT THROUGH THE PACKET.
I COULDN'T FIND ANYTHING THAT TOLD ME WHAT THE MAXIMUM HEIGHTS
ON THE BUILDING WASMENT. >> YEAH.
I THINK IT IS TO THE EVE. NOT THE TOP.
>> WHAT IS THE SOUTH BEACH OVERLAY SPHESIFICATIONS TO? TO EVE HEIGHT OR MAXIMUM PEAK HEIGHT?
>> MAXIMUM PEAK HEIGHT. >> OKAY.
THAT WAS 45 FEET. IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY.
THEN YOU GET INTO THE R. >> ST 1, R-2, R-3.
>> FURTHER COMMENTS? QUESTIONS?
>> WE ARE HERE TO DISCUSS THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING.
WHAT IS THE CURRENT CODE RESTRICTION FOR THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF A BUILDING THAT WOULD BE ALLOWABLE?
IF THEY COMPLIED WITH IT... >> 28 FEET.
>> YES. >> WHAT IS THE APPLIED HEIGHT THAT THEY ARE ASKING FOR, CONDITIONAL USE?
>> IS THE 29 TO THE EVE OR TO THE PEAK?
THE 28 IS THE REGULATION. >> THE REGULATION STATES MAXIMUM STRUCTURE HEIGHT SHALL BE CALCULATED FROM THE ESTABLISHED FEMA BASED FLOOD ELEVATION TO THE HIGHEST POINT OF THE ROOF,
[02:05:04]
EXCLUDING NON-HABITABLE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN ELEMENTS OF THE STRUCTURE. SO... (LAUGHTER) HIGHEST POINT OF THE ROOF EXCLUDING NON-HABITABLE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN ELEMENTS. IS THAT THE ROOF?>> HABITABLE ENDS AT THE EAVES. >> IS THERE A BEDROOM IN THE
ATTIC? >> I DON'T LIKE THE WAY THAT
THAT'S BEEN SOME OF THE PROBLEM THAT WE HAVE HAD, AND WE TRY TO CHIP AWAY AT THESE WHEN WE FIND THESE ORDINANCES.
>> IT MAKES IT HARD FOR THE APPLICANT TO COMPLY WITH THE
WHAT I'M TRYING TO ESTABLISH IS WE HAVE A PERMISSIBLE HEIGHT BY
>> THEN WE HAVE SOME OTHER HEIGHT WHICH THEY ARE APPLYING FOR. THAT IS WHY WE ARE HERE.
>> YES. >> THAT IS THE ONLY DECISION WE ARE TRYING TO MAKE. WHAT IS THAT DIFFERENCE AND WHY? IS THAT A GOOD ENOUGH REASON? AND YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW, I WANT TO IDENTIFY THAT. SO WE CAN JUSTIFY IT TO THE NEIGHBORS. THEY ARE OBVIOUSLY CONCERNED
ABOUT THIS. >> I THINK THAT IS AN EXPLANATION OF WHY, YOU KNOW, THE ADDITIONAL HEIGHT IS REQUIRED. FROM THE APPLICANT.
THE APPLICANT NEEDS TO DESCRIBE WHY THEY ARE LOOKING FOR ADDITIONAL HEIGHT. YOU KNOW, THE BOARD HAS HEARD IN THE PAST, THAT IT IS DOWN TO FLOOD ELEVATIONS AND SO FORTH.
I'M NOT SURE. >> WE KNOW WHAT THE FEMA
ELEVATION IS IN THIS PROPERTY? >> I'M NOT CERTAIN.
>> NOT OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD. >> I MEAN, WE HAVE GOTTEN INTO THIS DISCUSSION WHEN WE HAVE BEEN ON THE WATERFRONT.
>> I GUESS I'M TALKING ABOUT ON 1-A ESWATERFRONT.
WHEN WE HAVE LOOKED AT MAXIMUM LENGTH OF BUILDINGS.
I DON'T THINK WE HAVE COME ACROSS IT HERE IN THUMB POINT ON
WHATEVER THIS IS CALLED. >> WE HAD ONE.
>> WE HAVE HAD ONE THAT WE HAVE GOTTEN INTO THIS?
>> OKAY. >> IF I MAY INTERRUPT AGAIN, CHAIR, THERE IS A SKETCH ATTACHED TO THE CODE WHICH DOES INDICATE MAXIMUM HEIGHT TO THE RIDGE OF A ROOFLINE.
ACTUALLY, THE DECORATIVE OR THE NON-HABITABLE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGNS OR THINGS LIKE CHIMNEYS, COUPE LAS, THE HEIGHT OF 28 F FEET, ACTUALLY, WOULD BE REVERSE TO THE PEAK OF THE RIDGE.
>> THAT IS WHAT I WOULD HAVE ASSUMED.
SO THE REAL NUMBER THAT WE WOULD NEED TO GET TO WOULD BE THE TOTAL HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING. OKAY.
ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? BEFORE I OPEN THE PUBLIC PORTION OF THE MEETING? NOT HEARING ANY, I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC PORTION OF THE MEETING. I BELIEVE THE APPLICANT IS HERE?
>> NOT THE APPLICANT. >> YOU ARE REPRESENTING THE
IF YOU WANT ME TO SIT BACK DOWN, I WILL.
>> THE APPLICANT IS NOT HERE? >> NO.
SO WE HAVE AN APPLICANT THAT IS REQUESTING A CONDITIONAL USE AND THEY CHOOSE NOT TO COME TO THE MEETING.
>> THAT WILL BE EASY. >> OKAY.
THEN STEP FORWARD, SIR. >> ALL RIGHT.
>> STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS. AND SIGN IN.
>> MY NAME IS DAVID HICKS. I LIVE AT 1502 THUMB POINT DRIVE NEXT-DOOR TO THESE PEOPLE. TO THIS PROPERTY.
AND 337 IS WHAT THEY ARE ASKING FOR, IN TERMS OF THE WHOLE
HEIGHT OF THE STRUCTURE. >> 33.7.
>> 28 IS ALLOWED. THEY ARE ASKING FOR 33.7.
AND WELL, LET ME START THIS WAY. WHEN THE WEST SIDE OF THUMB POINT... THERE ARE 18 WATERFRONT HOMES.
ALL RIGHT? ONLY ONE OF THEM HAS... IS HIGHER THAN ONE STORY. AND I HAD THE PICTURE OF IT
HERE. >> I JUST DROVE AROUND THROUGH
LET ME GRAB THIS PICTURE. AND THE ONE WATERFRONT THAT HAS HIGHER THAN ONE STORY OF THE 18 IS A BEAUTIFUL HOME.
IT DOESN'T LOOK ANYTHING LIKE THIS MANUFACTURING GARAGE THAT THEY WANT TO PUT IN THE RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY.
OKAY? SO LIKE I SAID, THE OTHER 17 ARE ALL ONE-STORY WATERFRONTS. ALL ALONG THE STREET.
ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE STREET, EVERY PROPERTY IS ONE-STORY
[02:10:01]
EXCEPT JEREMIAH JOHNSON'S HOUSE WHICH IS TWO-STORIES.IT IS A NICE-LOOKING HOUSE. OTHER THAN THAT, THEY ARE ALL ONE STORIES. ON BOTH SIDES OF THE STREET.
ALL RIGHT? SO AND INTERESTINGLY, THESE PEOPLE WHO ARE DOING THIS, THE LONGMANS, THEY OWN A FARM WEST OF TOWN. I MEAN, THE REASON HE WANTS THIS SO HIGH IS SO HE CAN PARK AN R.V. ON THE FIRST FLOOR.
AND A BOAT, I THINK. AND THIS IS THE DESIGN OF THE INTERIOR OF THE SECOND FLOOR. WHWITH THE BIG KITCHEN RIGHT HE.
SO THE KITCHEN IS PLANNED TO BE IN THERE.
>> THAT DESIGN WAS IN THE PACKET.
>> YEAH, IT WAS. THAT IS THE SECOND FLOOR.
SO AT ANY RATE, THEY OWN A FARM WEST OF TOWN.
THEY COULD PUT THEIR MANUFACTURING STRUCTURE UP AND I'M SURE NOBODY WOULD CARE. THEY ARE GOING TO PUT IT RIGHT HERE IN THE MIDDLE OF THUMB POINT, A NICE RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY. THE OTHER THING WITH THESE PLANS, I TRIED TO BLOW THEM UP ENOUGH THAT EVERYBODY COULD SEE, BUT THEY ARE PUTTING... THE BUILDING IS... THE PROPERTY IS AT AN ANGLE. AT THE CLOSEST ANGLE TO MY PROPERTY LINE, IT IS ONLY 4.5 FEET AWAY.
WELL, I CALLED THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, THIS MORNING OR...
YEAH, THE PLANNING BOARD. AND THEY SAID THAT MY PROPERTY WHICH I GAVE THEM THE ADDRESS IS SINGLE-FAMILY R-1, INTERMEDIATE DENSITY. REQUIRES BUILDING TO BE AT LEAST 7 FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE. SO THE WAY THEY HAVE DRAWN THIS IS NOT EVEN IN COMPLIANCE IN TERMS OF WHERE IT IS RELATIVE TO THE PROPERTY LINE. OKAY.
I DID... I MEAN, WHEN YOU SEE THE SCALE OF, THIS I DID THIS MOCK-UP. THE ONE-STORY RESIDENCE ON THE PROPERTY. HERE IS THE 33.7 PROPERTY THEY WANT TO DO. YOU CAN JUST SEE IT DOESN'T GO.
WE HAVE HAD PEOPLE UP THE STREET FROM ME, FOUR DOORS UP DESIGN ANOTHER GARAGE... THEY HAD ROOM ON THE SIDE OF THEIR HOUSE. THEY PUT... THEY ADDED ON TO THE HOUSE. THEY DID A BEAUTIFUL JOB.
I MEAN, THES GORGEOUS. THIS IS JUST LIKE A MONSTROSITY.
I KNOW YOU DON'T HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO DEAL WITH THAT COMPONENT OF IT, BUT IT IS JUST FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
IT IS A HORRIBLE THING. NOT TO MENTION THE PRIVACY ISSUES. I MEAN, I HAVE FENCES AROUND MY HOUSE. AND THEY ARE SIX FEET HIGH.
THESE GUYS ARE GOING TO BE UP 25 FEET LOOKING DOWN INTO MY YARD?
IT IS UNTHINKABLE. >> IT IS VERY
COMMERCIAL-LOOKING, TOO. >> IT DOES NOT LOOK LIKE A THUMB POINT HOUSE. EVEN THE HIGH ONES THAT YOU PROBABLY HAVE MADE EXCEPTIONS FOR BEFORE, ARE REALLY... THEY ARE ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE THUMB POINT.
AS YOU COME AROUND AND YOU ARE LOOKING...
AND IN THOSE, THEY ARE GORGEOUS HOUSES.
I MEAN, YOU KNOW, VERY IMPOLICE RECEIVE.
NOT LIKE WHAT'S ON MY SIDE OF THE STREET.
LARGELY, BECAUSE THOSE HOUSES USUALLY WERE WIPED OUT BY HURRICANES AND STUFF. I MEAN, YOU HAVE A LOT OF FETCH THERE WHERE WHEN THE WINDS BUILD UP AND EVERYTHING, THOSE END UP GETTING DESTROYED AND SO THAT IS WHY THEY KEEP REBUILDING THEM AND THEN NOW THEY ARE BUILDING THEM HIGH ENOUGH WHERE THEY HAVE ABOUT FIVE FEET BEFORE YOU GET TO THE LIVING AREA.
OKAY? >> I WILL PUT MY ADDRESS DOWN.
AFTER THIS, WHAT IS THE NEXT STEP IN BECAUSE I'M GOING TO FIGHT THIS THIS WHOLE WAY. I MEAN, IF WE HAVE TO GO TO
COURT, WE WILL. >> WHEN WE ARE FINALLY DONE HERE, I'LL LET YOU KNOW WHAT THAT IS.
>> OKAY. >> ANYONE ELSE SPEAKING TO THIS?
>> MY NAME IS SALLY GRIFFITH. AND I LIVE AT 1510 THUMB POINT DRIVE. ON THE OTHER SIDE ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE LONGMAN HOUSE. AND DAVID HAS DONE A GREAT PRESENTATION, AND I AGREE WITH EVERYTHING THAT HE HAS SAID.
I DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ELSE I COULD ADD.
JUST THAT IT IS JUST TOO BIG FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND TOO COMMERCIAL-LOOKING. IT AFFECTS THE WELFARE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE THERE.
IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE ANYTHING. IT DOESN'T IMPROVE THE NEIGHBORHOOD. I'M A BIG BELIEVER IN LEAVING THE WORLD BETTER THAN YOU FOUND IT.
AND THIS WOULD NOT. THAT IS ALL I HAVE TO SAY.
>> THANK YOU. >> ALSO THEY REMOVED THEIR SIGN.
CONDITIONAL USE SIGN. >> OKAY.
YEAH. I DIDN'T SEE ONE TODAY WHEN I WENT BY THERE. OKAY.
WELL, ANYWAY, THANKS. >> ALL RIGHT.
THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? NOT SEEING ANYONE, I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC PORTION OF THE MEETING. BOARD?
>> CHAIRMAN, I THINK CONSIDERING WHAT WE HAVE HEARD TODAY AND
[02:15:01]
ESPECIALLY THE ABSENCE OF THE APPLICANT, I THINK IT IS VERY TELLING AS TO HOW WE NEED TO APPROACH THIS.>> I THINK SO. MY ONLY COMMENT ON IT WOULD BE BASED ON THE INFORMATION THAT WE HAVE AND THE APPLICATION, IF A MOTION CAME TO APPROVE, I WOULD NOT MOVE FOR THAT MOTION TO APPROVE. ANYONE LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO
ENTERTAIN IT? >> I WOULD MAKE A MOTION TO DISAPPROVE THE CONDITIONAL USE FOR THE HEIGHT RESTRICTION.
>> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MAJOR LEAGUES BY MR. KREISL I'M GOING TO KEEP GOING.
I'LL KEEP WORKING ON IT. YOU ARE KILLING ME.
MS. CLEMONS? >> I KEEP MAKING MOTIONS TO MAKE YOU SAY IT. REPETITION.
>> I'M SLOW LEARNER. IT WILL SINK IN.
MS. CLEMONS, SECONDED MOTION. CALL THE ROLL, PLEASE? HELP ME ALL YOU CAN. I DON'T MEAN TO MAKE THIS SOUND LIKE WE WERE LAUGHING ABOUT THE PROJECT.
WE ARE NOT. IT IS MY STUPIDITY THAT WE ARE LAUGHING AT. I'M WILLING TO LAUGH WIT.
WITH IT. NEXT ITEM ON THE LIST IS ITEM
7... >> LET ME ASK YOU A QUESTION ON THIS. DOES STAFF UNDERSTAND THE REASON FOR THE DENIAL? BECAUSE IT IS GOING TO HAVE TO GO TO THE COMMISSION ON WHY WE DENIED IT.
THERE HAS TO BE AN EXPLANATION OF WHY IT WAS DENIED.
NOT SIMPLY THE MOTION. THAT IS MY UNDERSTANDING.
>> YES. MR. KREISL MADE A STATEMENT OF
WHY HE WAS GOING TO DENY IT. >> AS LONG AS THE STAFF
UNDERSTANDS... >> I GET THE THEME OF THE MOTION. YES.
>> OKAY. BECAUSE THIS COULD COME BACK.
YOU KNOW,... WILL HAVE YEAH. >> THERE WAS NO COMPELLING REASON TO ALLOW THE HEIGHT RESTRICTION.
>> OKAY, GOOD. JUST CLARIFICATION.
>> I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW THAT IF IT CAME BACK THROUGH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, THAT WE WOULD REVIEW THE ENTIRE...
>> AGREED. >> PROPOSAL VERY CLOSELY.
ONE OF THE THINGS, I GUESS THAT, STRUCK ME WHEN I READ THIS WAS THE IDEA THAT IT WAS GOING TO BE A GUEST HOUSE.
I DON'T KNOW WHO IS IN THE GUEST HOUSE.
AND WHAT I COULD SEE WAS ANOTHER VACATION RENTAL ON THUMB POINT.
ALTHOUGH WE HAVE KREEF IT AD A MEANS OF BEING ABLE TO DO THAT NOW, THAT SEEMS TO BE WORKING VERY WELL, I JUST HATE TO SEE THUMB POINT CONTINUE TO BE JAMMED UP WITH VACATION RENTALS.
THEY ARE ALLOWED. BUT IT IS A SHAME WHAT COULD HAPPEN TO THAT NEIGHBORHOOD IF IT KEPT UP.
>> THAT IS WHY I BROUGHT UP THE ZONING R-1 VERSUS... BECAUSE NOW
IT IS GOING TO BE MULTIFAMILY. >> YES.
>> IT IS NOT ALLOWED. >> SOMEBODY COULD LIVE IN THAT
>> WELL, IF THAT HAD BEEN BUILT WHEN THE HOUSE WAS BUILT, THAT IS A WHOLE DIFFERENT STORY. OKAY?
>> IT WOULD STILL BE QUESTIONABLE, THOUGH.
[j. Site Plan, Design Review and Conditional Use - Ballarena Multi-Family - 4701 Regina Drive]
NEXT ITEM ON THE LIST IS ITEM 7-J.SITE PLAN DESIGN REVIEW FOR CONDITIONAL USE, MULTIFAMILY
>> IT ISN'T GETTING ANY BETTER. >> PLANNING BOARD, PLANNING CHAIRMAN, WE HAVE HEARD THIS... WE HAVE HEARD THIS... NOT THIS APPLICATION. BUT WE ANNEXED THIS INTO THE CITY. WE CHANGED THE ATLAS LEARNING MAP. NOW WE ARE IN THE PLANNING
>> PLANNING BOARD, PLANNING BOARD CHAIRMAN, TODAY I'M PRESENTING AN APPLICATION FOR A SITE PLAN WITH DEVELOPMENT REVIEW AND DESIGN REVIEW AS WELL AS CANNABLE USE FOR THE BALLERINA MULTIFAMILY AT 4701 REKNEE YEAH DRIVE.
THIS IS A LOCATION MAP OF THE PARCEL.
WHICH IS APPROXIMATELY 9.754 ACRES.
THE FUTURE LAND USE IS RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM.
WHEREAS THE ZONING IS R-4 WHICH IS MEDIUM DENSITY.
THIS IS THE SITE PLAN. OF THE 114-UNIT MULTI-FAMILY NINE SAYTIVE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.
WITH NINE BUILDINGS. SIX OF THEM BEING TOWNHOMES,
[02:20:03]
THREE BEING CONVENTIONAL APARTMENT BUILDINGS.A 2,534 CLUBHOUSE. 800-SQUARE-FOOT POOL.
AND ASSOCIATED SITE IMPROVEMENTS.
THE DESIGN REVIEW COLOR BOARD, THE BUILDING FACADES HAVE A SMOOTH STUCCO FINISH WITH AN... WHICH IS THIS COLOR RIGHT HERE.
AND AN ICE CUBE WHICH IS THIS COLOR.
THERE ARE EIGHT-INCH-WIDE RAISED STUCCO BANDS TO SIMULATE BOARDS WHICH ARE OF A CAST IRON COLOR. THE INNO VEATIVE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IS WHY THIS IS HERE FOR A USE.
THE APPLICATION REQUIRES APPROVAL FOR THE CONDITIONAL USE FOR THE ADDITIONAL MAXIMUM DENSITY BONUS OF TWO UNITS PER CAKIER ACRE AND QUALIFIES FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS.
ONE, THE LANDSCAPING PROVIDES FOR EFFECTIVE USE OF EXISTING VEGETATION AND STREET-SCAIPS. PEDESTRIAN WAYS, BICYCLE PATHS, AREAS NEAR BUILDINGS, OPEN SPACES AND RECREATION AREAS.
LANDSCAPING OF THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT EXCEEDS THE REQUIREMENTS IN SECTION 125314 FOR LANDSCAPE AREA BY 10%.
FOR THE AMOUNT OF TREES BY 10%. AND IN TERMS OF QUALITATIVE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE LANDSCAPING.
THE CODE MINIMUM FOR TOTAL OF TREES IS 168.
THE APPLICANT HAS PROVIDED 303 TREES.
THE SITE PLAN PROVIDES FOR CREATIVE PLACEMENT OF BUILDINGS AND OTHER FACILITIES IN TERMS OF VISUAL FOCAL POINTS, USE OF EXISTING PHYSICAL FEATURES SUCH AS TOPOGRAPHY, VIEWS, SUN, AND WIND ORIENTATION. THE CIRCULATION PATTERN, VARIATIONS IN BUILDING SETBACKS OR BUILDING OR FACILITY GROUPINGS. AND THREE, THE DESIGN ELEVATIONS PROVIDE FOR FEATURES INCLUDING ARCHITECTURAL STYLES, HARMONIOUS USE OF MATERIALS, AND OTHER DESIGN ELEMENTS OF THE INNOVATIVE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.
THE ARCHITECTURE INCLUDES A NEOMODERN DESIGN WITH BALCONIES, PITCHED ROOFS, WINDOW CANOPIES AND OPEN-AIR STAIRWAY SPACES.
THE LANDSCAPE PLAN IS BEFORE YOU WITH THE TREES THAT ARE TO BE PLANTED. THE PALMS, THE SHRUBS, THE GROUND COVERAGE AS WELL AS NEW IRRIGATION WHICH WILL BE INSTALLED. THE CLUBHOUSE ELEVATIONS ARE AS FOLLOWED: THE EIGHT-UNIT TOWNHOME ELEVATIONS ARE AS FOLLOWED. THE TEN-UNIT TOWNHOME ELEVATIONS ARE AS FOLLOWED: THE 20-UNIT CONVENTIONAL APARTMENT ELEVATIONS ARE SHOWN. AS WELL AS THE 22-UNIT CONVENTIONAL APARTMENT ELEVATIONS.
THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL WITH FOUR CONDITIONS. ONE, PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF BUILDING PERMIT APPROVAL, PROVIDE COLOR TO ELEVATIONS TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THE PROPOSED BUILDING CONFORMS TO SPECIFICATIONS OF CITY CODE 125314 FOR THE DESIGN REVIEW.
TWO, INCORPORATE PLANTINGS AROUND THE LAKE, RETENTION POND, PER CITY CODE SECTION 123-6. THREE, A COMPLETION CERTIFICATE, CERTIFICATION BY A LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT, COST ESTIMATE AND LANDSCAPE PURSUANT TO CITY CODE 1236.
SHALL BE REQUIRED BEFORE THE FINAL CERTIFICATION OF OCCUPANCY IS APPROVED FOR THE SITE. FINALLY, FOUR, PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF SITE-CLEARING PERMITS THE APPLICANT SHALL PROVIDE A TREE MITIGATION SURVEY AND COORDINATE WITH THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE ARBORIST. THE POSSIBLE ACTIONS OF THE PLANNING BOARD TODAY ARE TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN, THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW AND DESIGN REVIEW AND CONDITIONAL USE WITH NO CHANGES, RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED SITE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW AND DESIGN REVIEW AND CONDITIONAL USE WITH CHANGES, OR TO RECOMMEND DISAPPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN AND CONDITIONAL USE.
THANK YOU. >> I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU WERE NOT THE PRESENTER IN THE PREVIOUS DISCUSSIONS.
CAN YOU PULL UP... LET'S TRY THE SITE PLAN FOR A MOMENT.
OKAY. THE SOUTH PROPERTY LINE, ACTUALLY, IF WE PULL UP THE TAX...
YOU KNOW WHAT I'M AFTER. >> YES, SIR.
>> STAFF REPORT. >> I SEE YOU GOING TO IT.
I KNOW YOU KNOW WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT.
WE HAD A LENGTHY DISCUSSION ABOUT THIS, AND...
[02:25:15]
Y'ALL AMAZE ME. WHEN YOU CAN MOVE THAT CURSOR ALL AROUND THE PLACE. (LAUGHTER) I SIT THERE AT MY COMPUTER. IT TAKES ME THREE DAYS TO DO WHAT YOU ARE DOING HERE NOR A COUPLE OF SECONDS.>> SORRY. IT IS A LARGE DOCUMENT.
>> YOU HAD AN IMAGE WITH THE STREET THAT RUNS TO THE SOUTH OF THIS PROPERTY. OKAY.
IS THE APPLICANT HERE? >> YES.
>> I'M GOING TO ALLOW THE APPLICANT TO COME UP BECAUSE I THINK IT MAY BE NECESSARY TO ANSWER SOME QUESTINS HERE.
WHEN WE WERE VENTING THIS FOR, I GUESS IT WAS ZONING CHANGES, WE GOT INTO A LONG DISCUSSION ABOUT THE STREET THAT IS TO THE SOUTH OF THIS PROPERTY. AND IT WAS DETERMINED, I BELIEVE, AT THAT TIME, AND I THINK I'M TURNING THE CLOCK BACK TO ANOTHER TIME PERIOD, WE DETERMINED AT THAT TIME, THAT THAT STREET TO THE SOUTH OF THIS DEVELOPMENT WAS IN THE WRONG PLACE, AND IT WAS PARTIALLY ON YOUR PROPERTY, IF I REMEMBER
CORRECTLY. >> YOU REMEMBER EXACTLY CORRECT.
>> OKAY. ONE OF THE THINGS I BELIEVE THAT I MADE A STATEMENT OF IS THAT BEFORE ANY FURTHER ACTION WAS TAKEN ON THIS, WE SHOULD GET THE... THE CITY SHOULD GET SOMETHING FROM THE COUNTY IN TERMS OF WHAT THEY WANT DONE ABOUT THIS STREET. AND I DON'T KNOW IF WE HAVE RECEIVED ANYTHING IN THAT REGARD.
NOW, I'LL LET YOU TRY TO ANSWER THAT.
IF YOU CAN. >> CHAIRMAN, I HAVE A FULL PRESENTATION I WOULD LIKE TO PRESENT TO THE BOARD IF IT WOULD
BE OKAY. >> THIS MIGHT BE A GOOD TIME TO DO. THAT I'M NOT OPPOSED TO DOING IT. ARE YOU, MR. FREEMAN?
>> THIS WOULD BE A GOOD TIME TO DO IT.
BECAUSE THEN ALL THE PRESENTATION IS DONE AND OVER WITH. OKAY.
VERY GOOD. IF YOU HAD BEEN AT THE BEGINNING OF THIS MEETING TODAY, I PROBABLY WOULDN'T HAVE WAY.
BECAUSE YOU ARE THE LAST... GENERALLY SPEAKING, PUBLIC PORTION OF THE MEETING BEFORE WE GET INTO SOME STUFF THAT IS MORE CITY-RELATED, I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND HANDLE THIS IN THIS
>> YOU HAVE CONTROL. LET ME JUST MAKE THIS...
>> GOOD EVENING. FOR THE RECORD, MY NAME IS DAN SARO WITH THE LAND-PLANNING FIRM OF CUTLER AND HEARING REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER.
PLEASED TO BE HERE THIS AFTERNOON BEFORE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION. HERE WITH ME IN THE COUNCIL CHAMBERS IS MR. BALLERINA. THE PROPERTY OWNER AND DEVELOP WE ARE HIM IS MS. ESCOBAR WITH BALLERINA CONSTRUCTION GROUP.
MS. ANNA ERICSON, OUR CIVIL ENGINEER IS MR. AARON STANTON AND OUR TRAFFIC ENGINEER IS M MS. SUSAN O'ROURKE.
WE ARE PLEASED TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS OR FOLLOW-UP DISCUSSION THE BOARD MAY HAVE. THIS IS WHAT WE ARE TITLING THE BALLERINA PROJECT. FORT PIERCE'S NEWEST MULTIFAMILY COMMUNITY. THE PROJECT IS JUST UNDER TEN ACRES. IT ALREADY HAS THE FUTURE LAND USE OF RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM AS WELL AS THE ZONING WHICH YOU ALLOWED TO EARLIER, CHAIRMAN, WHICH HAS ALREADY BEEN CHANGED TO R-4 WHICH ALLOWS UP TO 12 UNITS PER ACRE.
THE APPLICANT IS ASKING FOR A TWO-UNIT INCREASE IN DENSITY BECAUSE OF THE INNOVATION DISTRICT THAT IS ALREADY ALLOWED WITHIN THE CODE. INGRESS AND EGRESS OFF OF WEATHERBY. MOST OF THE PEOPLE WHEN THEY COME HOME OR LEAVE HOME WILL BE USING U.S.-1 HEADING EAST ON WEATHERBY GOING INTO THE PROJECT SITE.
YOU SEE IT HIGHLIGHTED IN THE YELLOW AREA.
REALLY NO TRAVEL IS GOING TO BE DOWN REGINA OR FURTHER TO THE EAST. YOU KNOW, YOU JUST GO OVER THE CAUSEWAY THERE TO, TO THE OCEAN. MOST ALL THE TRAFFIC IS GOING TO COME OFF U.S.-1. SOME OF OUR SURROUNDING NEIGHBORS AND WHY WE LIKE THIS SITE IS BECAUSE THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL AND VERY CLOSE PROXIMITY. WE SEE A LOT OF FAMILIES MOVING TO THIS COMMUNITY, UTE UTILIZING THE EXISTING PEDESTRIAN NETWORK,
[02:30:04]
TAKING THEIR KIDS TO SCHOOL, PIRKING THEM UP FROM SCHOOL.YOU HAVE THE CHURCH ACROSS THE STREET.
SOME OF THE AUTO DEALERSHIPS LOCATED ALONG USE F 1.
AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT PLANNING AS A GENERAL TOOL, YOU GO FROM MORE INTENSE TO LESS INTENSE. YOU GO FROM GENERAL-COMMERCIAL WHICH HAS THE MAJOR INTENSITY FOR YOUR WATER AND SEWER AND TRAFFIC TO A MEDIUM INTENSITY. SUCH AS MEDIUM DENSITY, RESIDENTIAL. THAT IS GOING TO BUFFER YOUR SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL. YOU SEE THE SING SINGLE-FAMILY OFF FURTHER TO THE EAST. THE CITY DID A GREAT JOB SIGNING THE APPROPRIATE LAND USE AND ZONING TO THE SUBJECT SITE.
THE SUBJECT SITE IS R-4. AGAIN, ALLOWING UP TO 12 UNITS PER ACRE. SIMILAR AND COMPATIBLE TO WHAT'S AROUND IT. WHICH IS INDICATED WITH THE YELLOW AREAS. AGAIN, A BUFFER BETWEEN THE RED WHICH IS COMMERCIAL AND THE SINGLE-FAMILY, LOW-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL FURTHER TO THE EAST. THIS IS A RENDERING OF OUR PROPOSED SITE PLAN. REALLY PROUD OF THIS SITE PLAN.
I THIS I THE ENTIRE TEAM WORKED TOGETHER TO BRING THIS TO THE CITY. WE HAVE A MIX OF TOWNHOME LOTS AND A MIX OF APARTMENT LOTS. IT DOES HAVE A TOT LOT FOR THE YOUNGSTERS WHO AREN'T READY FOR WEATHERBY ELEMENTARY YET.
THEY STILL WANT A PLACE TO HANG OUT AND PLAY IN THE COMMUNITY.
IT DOES HAVE A PICNIC AREA. WITH A BARBECUE AREA.
A POOL AND A CLUBHOUSE WHERE WE WILL ALSO HANDLE THE LEASING.
AND THE OFFICE. AND A SMALL GYM FACILITY.
AND A NATURAL GARDEN. WE THOUGHT THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING KIND OF NEAT IN THIS URBAN ENVIRONMENT TO HAVE A PLACE TO GROW YOUR OWN HERBS AND VEGETABLES.
AS WELL AS A DOG PARK. THE DOG PARK IS LOCATED FURTHEST TO THE SOUTH, ALONG THE 40-FOOT TRACK THAT YOU SEE ON THE BOTTOM OF YOUR SCREEN. AND THEN JUST TO HIGHLIGHT SOME PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIONS, WE ARE PROVIDING THE SIDEWALK ALONG WEATHERBY. FROM PROJECT BOUNDARY TO PROJECT BOUNDARY. ON BOTH THE SOUTH SIDE.
THERE IS ONE ON THE NORTH SIDE ALREADY.
AND I DROVE BY THE SITE BEFORE THE MEETING.
IT WAS, YOU KNOW, 1:30-ISH. THERE WAS NOBODY ON WEATHERBY.
A LOW TRAVELED STREET. THAT WAY WE ARE PROVIDING OUR INGRESS AND EGRESS RIGHT OFF WEATHERBY.
AND TO OUR PROJECT SITE. NO TURN LANES ARE REQUIRED.
YOU CAN SEE THE ROUND-ABOUT THAT SHOWS, SHOWS THE ACCESS.
IT WON'T BE A GATED COMMUNITY. WE WILL BE OPEN TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC. BUT I WANTED TO SHOW, YOU KNOW, SOME HIGHLIGHTS OF THE SITE PLAN.
YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE ARE DOING ON THE BOARD, WE WILL HAVE SOME NICE ROYAL PALMS ALONG WEATHERBY.
WE HAVE A PHOTO-METRIC PLAN THAT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO MR. FREEMAN. AND MR. VENNIS GILMORE.
IT SHOWS UPLIGHT GHTING AT NIGHT.
YOU WILL SEE THE ROYAL PALMS LIT AT NIGHT.
AN ENHANCED BUFFER ON BOTH THE EAST AND WEST SIDES OF THE PROPERTY. AND ALONG THE SOUTH WHERE THEY E ARE SOME EXISTING SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES.
AND KIND OF A NEW URBANIST TOOL THAT YOU DON'T SEE A LOT IN APARTMENT COMMUNITIES IS THE ON-STREET PARKING.
WE WANTED TO PROVIDE A MIX OF PARALLEL ON-STREET PARKING WHICH IS A NICE FEATURE THAT THE BALLERINA GROUP IS EMPLOYING HERE ON THIS PROJECT. THE ADDED STORMWATER POND WITH TREATMENT AREA. THAT WILL HELP TO, YOU KNOW, FILTER AND PROVIDE SOME WATER QUALITY FOR THE AREA.
WE ARE FINE WITH STAFF'S CONDITION TO ADD TO THAT.
WE THINK IT WILL BE AN AMENITY TO THAT SITE AND PROVIDE THAT BENEFIT AS WELL. WE ARE ALSO PROVIDING A SIDEWALK ALONG REGINA. WE HAVE NO ACCESS ON REGINA.
NO ACCESS ON POINT SIETTA. IT WAS SOMETHING THE DEVELOPER AGREED TO SET ASIDE. SHOULD PROPERTIES DOWN TO THE SOUTH GET DEVELOPED AND WANT TO PROVIDE SAFE ACCESS FOR THE KIDS. THE 40-FOOT ACRE TRACK TO THE SOUTH IS... YOU ARE EXACTLY CORRECT, CHAIRMAN.
THAT IS PART OF MY CLIENT'S PROPERTY.
IT WAS DEEDED TO HIM. THEY OWN IT.
WHEN THE SURVEYOR WENT OUT FROM, HE NOTICED THAT IT IS CURRENTLY BEING OCCUPIED AS A ROAD. HALF OF THE ROAD IS WITHIN MY CLIENT'S OWNERSHIP. IT IS PART OF THE PLAN.
AND WORKING WITH MR. FREEMAN'S PREDECESSOR, MR. FROHMAN,...
MR. FREEMAN, WE PUT ON OUR SITE PLAN THAT THAT WOULD BE DEDICATED AS A FUTURE RIGHT OF WAY AT THE TIME THE COUNTY SHOULD WANT TO EXPAND OR AT THE TIME THAT, YOU KNOW, THE COUNTY GOES TO ACQUIRE IT. WE DON'T NEED IT FOR THE DENSITY. OUR SITE PLAN WORKS WITHOUT IT.
WE HAVE GONE THROUGH A LOT OF EFFORTS TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT RIGHT OF WAY TRACK THAT IS CURRENTLY UNDER THE OWNERSHIP IS RESERVED IN PLACE. SO THAT... YOU KNOW, SHOULD THEY WANT TO EXPAND THE RIGHT OF WAY IN THE FUTURE, THAT THE REAL ESTATE IS THERE FOR IT. THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE
[02:35:04]
WORKED WITH THE COUNTY STAFF AND THE CITY STAFF TO WORK THROUGH.AND WE ARE APPLYING FOR THE TWO EXTRA UNITS TO GO FROM 112 TO 114 BECAUSE OF THE THREE CRITERIA THAT STAFF MENTIONED EARLIER. NUMBER ONE, WE ARE FAR EXCEEDING THE CITY CODE. AS A LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT, THAT IS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT, YOU KNOW, WE REALLY TRY TO ENHANCE ON MOST OF OUR PROJECTS. WITH THE LANDSCAPING.
WE ARE EXCEEDING THE MINIMUM CODE BY 13%.
ALSO, THE CREATIVE PLACEMENT OF THE BUILDINGS AROUND THE LAKE AREA. AROUND THE PERIMETER.
AROUND THE INTERNAL LAKE FEATURE.
AND THE MODERN DESIGN. IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT STAFF HAS BEEN GREAT TO WORK WITH OVER THE PROCESS.
THEY ARE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL FOR THE CITY INCREASE.
WE HAVE TWO BUILDING TYPES. TOWNHOMES AND APARTMENTS.
SOME PEOPLE WILL WANT GARAGES. THEY WILL CHOOSE THE TOWNHOME.
SOME PEOPLE ARE NOT GOING TO CARE ABOUT GARAGES.
THEY WILL JUST GO WITH THE APARTMENTS.
THERE IS 52 TOWNHOMES. THEY ARE ALL THREE-BEDROOMS. THE TOWNHOMES, WE HAVE FOUR BUILDINGS.
THEY CONTAIN NINE UNITS. THEN TWO BUILDINGS CONTAINING EIGHT UNITS. THE APARTMENTS ARE ALL, ARE ALL TWO-BEDROOMS. FOR THE APARTMENTS.
YOU SEE THE TOP PLAN VIEW WHICH ARE THE APARTMENTS.
THEY HAVE TWO BEDROOMS AND THREE BEDROOMS. SORRY. TWO BEDROOMS AND THREE BEDROOMS FOR THE APARTMENTS. ALL THE TOWNHOMES HAVE THREE BEDROOMS. NO ONE-BEDROOMS. NO FOUR-BEDROOMS. GREAT FOR FAMILIES.
GREAT FOR PEOPLE THAT WANT THE EXTRA BEDROOM.
IT IS A MODERN ARCHITECTURE. YOU CAN KIND OF SEE THE CLEAN LINES, CONTEMPORARY FEEL. OF THE ARCHITECTURE.
THE CLOSEST CAR IN THE IMAGE DOES SHOW THE PARALLEL PARKING.
WHICH IS NICE IN THESE TYPES OF COMMUNITIES.
WE ARE PROPOSING A FLAT ROOF. THERE IS LOTS OF BENEFITS WITH A FLAT ROOF. YOU CAN PUT THE HVAC EQUIPMENT ON TOP OF THE ROOF AND SCREEN IT WITH A WALL.
SO YOU DON'T SEE IT. THAT FREES UP THE REAL ESTATE ON THE BOTTOM OF THE BUILDING. SO YOU CAN PLANT ADDITIONAL SHRUBS AND GROUND COVERS AND LANDSCAPING.
THAT REALLY SOFTENS THE FEEL OF THE WHOLE LOOK.
SO THIS WAS THE TOWNHOMES. YOU BUT CAN SEE THE GARAGES DOWN ON THE BOTTOM FLOOR. AND THIS WOULD BE THE APAR APARTMENTS. ALL TWO-STORY PRODUCTS.
THE TOWNHOMES AND THE APARTMENTS TWO-STORY.
AGAIN, THE FLAT ROOFS. YOU KNOW, HERE IN THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE, THE GREAT CITY OF FORT PIERCE, YOU CAN DO WOOD CONSTRUCTION ON YOUR MULTIFAMILY.
WE ARE DOING CONCRETE BLOCK. ALL IMPACT GLASS.
IN THE EVENTS OF A REPEAT OF NICOLE OR EVAN, THESE ARE PRETTY WELL-BUILT STRUCTURES. CONCRETE BLOCK STRUCTURES, VERY WELL-DONE. MEETING THE HIGHEST WIND CODES AND THE HIGHEST STANDARDS. THIS IS A SHOT OF OUR AMENITY CENTER. THE CLUBHOUSE, THE LEASING OFFICE, AND THE CLUBHOUSE IS SHOWN HERE.
VERY MODERN. THIS IS THE FRONT BUILDING OF THE ARCHITECTURE. THAT ANY OF THE NEW POTENTIAL RESIDENTS WILL SEE. ANYONE COMING TO A BIRTHDAY PARTY IN THE COMMUNITY, THEY WILL PARK HERE IN FRONT OF THE AMENITY CENTER. AND ENJOY THE FANTASTIC POOL OUT IN BACK OF THE AMENITY CENTER WHICH IS ALSO ON THE LAKE.
REALLY NICE FEATURE. WE LOCATED THIS ON THE SOUTHWEST EARN FACING EXPOSURE OF THE LAKE.
IN THE WINTERTIME, WHEN PEOPLE WANT TO BE HERE IN FORT PIERCE RS AND IT IS JANUARY, YOU STILL HAVE THAT SUN SHINING OFF THE LAKE AND THE POOL. SO YOU CAN COME AND ENJOY THE OUTDOORS. THIS IS A RENDERING OF THE POOL.
AND JUST IN CLOSING, WE WANT TO THANK STAFF FOR THEIR PRESENTATION. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.
THIS MEDIUM DENSITY PROJECTS PROVIDES A GOOD USE OF THE SITE.
IT HAS BEEN VACANT FOREVER. THIS IS BRINGING SOME NEW ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT TO WEATHERBY.
AND WE HUMBLY REQUEST THE DENSITY BONUS OF THE TWO ADDITIONAL RESIDENTIAL UNITS, CONSISTENT WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AND THE COMP PLAN.
THE TRC RECOMMENDS APPROVAL. WE WOULD ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT THIS AFTERNOON ON BEHALF OF OUR TEAM AND OUR CLIENT.
WE WOULD BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.
I HOPE, CHAIRMAN, THAT ANSWERS YOUR QUESTIONS ABOUT THE RIGHT WAY. THE EXTRA 40 FEET ON MY CLIENT'S PROPERTY. THAT YOU KNOW, WE ARE WILLING TO, YOU KNOW, DESIGNATE AS FUTURE RIGHT-OF-WAY.
>> IT WAS... IT SEEMED TO ME LIKE, FOR THE COUNTY TO HAVE...
I'M GLAD IT IS WORKING OUT THE WAY IT IS.
BECAUSE FOR THE COUNTY TO HAVE COME IN AND SAID WE NEED TO MOVE
[02:40:02]
THIS TO THE SOUTH, IT WOULD HAVE CREATED A TREMENDOUS SETBACK PROBLEM WITH SEVERAL OF THE HOUSES THAT ARE ON POINT SIETAA.THE FACT THAT YOUR COMPANY IS WILLING TO ALLOW THAT ROAD SURFACE TO BE WHERE IT IS AND EXTENDED THE ABILITY FOR THE COUNTY TO WORK OUT A LAND DEAL TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN IS A GOOD THING. ONE OF THE COMMENTS THAT YOU MADE WAS THAT YOU WERE DOWN ON WEATHERBY ON THE WAY OVER HERE TO THE MEETING, AND THERE WASN'T ANY TRAFFIC ON IT.
AND THAT IS WONDERFUL BECAUSE I HAVE A THOUSAND CARS THAT ARE GOING TO DUMP OUT ON TO WEATHERBY A DAY.
THEY ARE NOT GOING TO HAVE ANY PROBLEM.
WELL, THAT IS NOT ALTOGETHER ACCURATE.
IF YOU WERE TO GO OVER THERE IN THE MORNING WHEN MOMMIES ARE DROPPING OFF DARLINGINGS AT THE SCHOOL, YOU WOULD FIND THAT THE TRAFFIC BACKS UP ON WEATHERBY SOMETIMES UP IN FRONT OF YOUR PROPOSED PROPERTY. AND IN THE AFTERNOON, WHEN MOMMIES ARE PICKING DARLINGS UP AGAIN, WE HAVE THAT SAME PROBLEM. I KNOW THAT VERY PLAINLY BECAUSE I LIVE IN... ACROSS THE ROAD FROM Y'ALL TO THE EAST.
I SCHEDULE MY TIMES IN AND OUT DURING SCHOOL DAYS SO THAT I DON'T HAVE TO DEAL WITH MOMMIES AND THEIR DARLINGS COMES AND GOING. WE DO NEED TO BE SENSITIVE TO
THE TRAFFIC FLOW ON WEATHERBY. >> YES, SIR.
>> THAT IS THE POINT I'M TRYING TO MAKE.
NOT ONLY DO WE HAVE ALL THE PRIVATE CARS GOING UP AND DOWN WEATHERBY TO THE SCHOOL, BUT WE ALSO HAVE MULTIPLE BUSES THAT SOMETIMES ARRIVE EMPTY AND LEAVE EMPTY.
I DON'T GET IT. WE HAD A MULTIPLE BUSES GOING UP AND DOWN WEATHERBY ALSO. AND NONE OF THEM HEAD EAST TOWARD MIDWAY ROAD. THEY ALL, AS YOU POINTED OUT, UTILIZE U.S.-1. I CHOOSE TO GO THE OTHER DIRECTION. BUT SO WE DO HAVE SOME TRAFFIC ISSUES THERE. AND WE NEED TO BE SENSITIVE TO THAT. OVERALL, I LIKE WHAT YOU ARE SHOWING US, AND I LIKE WHAT YOU ARE DOING.
I'M GOING TO LET THE BOARD ASK QUESTIONS.
>> HERE AGAIN, I AGREE WITH THE CHAIRMAN AS FAR AS THE PRESENTATION AND THE DESIGN AND SUCH LIKE THAT.
I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THAT AT ALL.
I WISH THAT YOUR OWNER WOULD TURN THIS INTO A HOME OWNER COMMUNITY AND NOT A RENTAL COMMUNITY.
THAT YOU SELL THESE PROPERTIES SO PEOPLE WILL HAVE A PLACE TO LIVE BUT THEY OWN THE PLACE THEY LIVE.
AND TURN IT INTO AN HOA. SO IT WOULD BECOME A PERMANENT RESIDENCE. YOU HAVE A GOOD AREA HERE.
YOU HAVE A GOOD DESIGN. IT MIGHT BE FOR YOU TO CONSIDER THAT. YOU WERE HERE EARLIER TODAY.
WE GOT THAT OTHER DEVELOPMENT, MORE RENTAL PROPERTIES.
THERE IS TOO MUCH RENTAL PROPERTIES, AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED. I DON'T CARE IF IT IS AFORRABLE OR UNAFFORDABLE. WE NEED MORE OWNER PROPERTIES.
THE WAY YOU ARE DOING IT, AND YOU HAVE GONE ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT YOU HAVE BEEN ASKED SO THAT YOU WILL GET NOT ONLY THE INCREASE AS FAR AS THE DENSITY IS CONCERNED, THE UNITS, BUT I THINK THAT YOU ARE DOING THAT IN THE ASPECT OF BEING ABLE TO HAVE A GOOD PRODUCT. I THINK A PRODUCT THAT COULD BE SOLD... I'M GOING TO VOTE FOR A RENTAL PROPERTY.
I DON'T LIKE THE IDEA THAT IT IS A RENTAL PROPERTY.
YOU MENTIONED IT IS GOING TO BE A RENTAL PROPERTY.
I MEAN, I'M NOT GOING TO SAY THE WORD, BUT YOU KNOW, I WAS DISAPPOINTED. I THINK YOU COULD SELL THE PROPERTIES. YOU KNOW, MAYBE THAT IS A CONSIDERATION THAT YOUR OWNER MIGHT CONSIDER.
YOU KNOW, THESE ARE SELLABLE. THERE ARE BEAUTIFUL PROPERTIES NOT TOO F FROM THIS AREA. THEY EASILY SOLD-OUT.
I'M SURE THIS COULD, TOO. ESPECIALLY WHEN I SEE THE SQUARE FOOTAGE THAT YOU HAVE FOR YOUR CLUBHOUSE.
YOUR SWINKING POOL. IT IS BEAUTIFUL.
ALL THE OTHER AMENITY THAT IS YOU ARE HAVING THERE.
THE ONLY THING I DIDN'T SEE WAS A BARBECUE PIT.
THAT IS EASILY DEVELOPED. ANYWAY, I'M DONE.
SELL THEM INSTEAD OF RENT THEM. HOA.
>> COULD YOU GO BACK TO THE SITE PLAN PAGE?
>> REAL QUICK. YOU MENTIONED... I WANTED TO
[02:45:01]
LOOK AT THE PARKING. SPECIFICALLY AROUND THE CLUBHOUSE. YOU MENTIONED THE CLUBHOUSE BEING UTILIZED FOR EVENTS. AND THAT IS... YOU KNOW, I HAVE BEEN TO... I HAVE TWO YOUNG CHILDREN.I HAVE BEEN TO A LOT OF THOSE PARTIES IN COMMUNITIES THAT LOOK JUST LIKE THIS. PARKING IS ALWAYS AN ISSUE.
YOUR PARKING AL CUELATION FOR THE UNITS THAT DO NOT HAVE THEIR OWN GARAGE AND DRIVEWAY... I ASSUME ALL OF THAT IS UP TO CODE. DO YOU HAVE ANY PROVISIONS IN THE SITE PLAN FOR ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING?
>> YOU KNOW... HAVE YOU CONSIDERED IT?
>> WE DEFINITELY HAVE... YOU CAN'T NOT CONSIDER IT TODAY.
I MEAN, WITH ALL THE ELECT ELECTRICAL... ELECTRIC VEHICLES BEING OUT THERE. OUR HOMES WILL BE WIRED AND HOOKED UP FOR, YOU KNOW, ELECTRICAL CHARGING WITHIN SOME OF THE TOWNHOME UNITS. THAT IS SOMETHING.
I THINK IT IS A GOOD IDEA THAT WE COULD, YOU KNOW, POSSIBLY LOOK AT INCORPORATING SOME E.V. STATIONS IN SOME OF THE SURFACE LOT AS WELL. YOU KNOW, SOMETIMES, YOU KNOW, THEY ARE REALLY EXPENSIVE TO INSTALL UP-FRONT.
A COUPLE OF THEM RANGE ABOUT $100,000.
WE HAVE WANT TO BE SENSITIVE TO HOW MANY USERS ARE GOING TO BE HERE WITH THAT TYPE OF VEHICLE. SO NOT SOMETHING THAT WE HAVE RULED OUT. WE HAVEN'T DESIGNATED IT ON THE SITE PLAN YET. FOR ANY OF THE STAND-ALONE SPACES. OTHER THAN IN THE GARAGE.
FOR THE TOWNHOMES. IT IS SOMETHING THAT, YOU KNOW, CERTAINLY OUR PROPERTY MANAGEMENT COMPANY, IF THERE IS A NEED FOR IT, WE CAN INSTALL THOSE IN THE FUTURE.
>> ANYTHING ELSE? >> I NOTICED THAT YOU HAVE A ROUND-ABOUT FOR THE TRAFFIC TO COME INSIDE.
CAN A SCHOOL BUS BE ACCOMMODATED?
>> YES, IT CAN. YOU KNOW, WE SPECIFICALLY WORKED WITH CAPTAIN LANGELIER AT THE ST. LUCIE COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT ON THE RADIUS OF THAT TRAFFIC CIRCLE SO THATST IF NOT ONLY CAN THE SCHOOL BUS MAKE THE FULL TURNAROUND, BUT ALL THE AMAZON VEHICLES AND FIRE TRUCKS AND EVERYONE ELSE.
SO YES, MA'AM. >> THERE WILL BE A SCHOOL BUS STATION STOP INSIDE THE COMMUNITY?
WILL IT BE ON THE RIGHT-OF-WAY? >> THAT IS CHANGING.
ALMOST MONTHLY. WITH THE SCHOOL BOARD PLANNING.
RECENTLY, JUST RECENTLY, THEY WANT TO ENTER INTO THE... AS A RESULT OF THAT TRAGIC ACCIDENT, MARTY SANDERS WITH THE SCHOOL DISTRICT STARTED WANTING THE BUSES TO PULL INSIDE THE COMMUNITY. THEY CAN GO ALL THE WAY ARNOLD OR JUST TURN AT THE ROUND-ABILITY... ROUND-ABOUT.
HOWEVER, THERE IS A PROVISION FOR US TO HAVE A STOP ON WEATHERBY IF, YOU KNOW, SOMETIMES THEY LIKE TO STOP ON THE MAIN ROAD AND SHUT DOWN TRAFFIC.
BUT I THINK WE ARE SO CLOSE. I THINK, I THINK MOST OF THE KIDS ARE GOING TO HAVE TO WALK TO SCHOOL.
I THINK... YOU KNOW, WE ARE TOO CLOSE.
>> BY ELEMENTARY. WHAT ABOUT TO HIGH SCHOOL AND
HIDLE... MIDDLE SCHOOL? >> TRUE.
>> HIGH SCHOOL, THEY WILL BE RIDING, DRIVING THEIR JAGUARS BACK AND FORTH. (LAUGHTER).
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS?
>> VERY GOOD. I THANK YOU FOR YOUR
>> IT WAS VERY WELL-DONE. I LIKE THE COMMUNITY OVERALL.
LET'S SEE WHERE WE GO. >> THANK YOU.
>> IS THERE ANYONE ELSE IN THE PUBLIC THAT IS GOING TO SPEAK TO THIS? ANYONE ELSE FROM THE APPLICANT THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK? NOT SEEING ANYONE, I'LL COME BACK TO THE BOARD. ANY FURTHER COMMENTS OR
QUESTIONS? >> MR. CHAIRMAN, I HAVE ONE CLARIFYING QUESTION. FOR THE CONDITIONAL USE, WHY IS IT ALL ONE? IF WE DON'T APPROVE THE CONDITIONAL USE, THEN... JUST TO CLARIFY THE QUESTION.
THAT IS ALL. >> WELL, THE CONDITIONAL USE IS RELATED TO THE SITE PLAN IN THAT THEY ARE ASKING FOR THE
>> SO IF YOU APPROVE THE SITE PLAN, YOU WE DEFAULT,... YOU BY DEFAULT, APPROVE THE CONDITIONAL USE.
IF YOU APPROVE THE CONDITIONAL USE FOR DENSITY, YOU COULD ASK FOR AMENDMENTS FOR THE SITE PLAN.
>> THEY AFFECT EACH OTHER. >> OKAY.
RIGHT. >> ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? COMMENTS? NOT HEARING ANY, I WILL
ENTERTAIN A MOTION. >> I'LL MAKE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL. WITH THE... ANY CONDITIONS THAT
[02:50:04]
THE STAFF IS RECOMMENDING. >> I SECOND.
>> (LAUGHTER). >> WE HAVE A MOTION... YOU GUYS ARE KILLING ME. WE HAVE A MOTION FROM MR. BURDGE... MOTION TO APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS?
AND MR. KREISL... I'M GETTING THERE.
SECONDED THE MOTION. PLEASE CALL THE ROLL.
CHAIRMAN CREYAUFMILLER? >> YEVMENT YOU GUYS ARE KILLING ME. THANK YOU.
BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO THE REST OF OUR BUSINESS, I WOULD LIKE TO TAKE AT LEAST A FIVE-MINUTE BREAK. A A A A A A A A A A A A .
IT WOULD BE SOLELY FOR DISCUSSION PURPOSES.
>> OKAY. >> TO RELEASE ANY COMMENTS THEY WOULD HAVE. AND THEY WOULD BE THEN INCORPORATED INTO THE PLANNING STAFF REPORT THAT COMES BACK TO
[b. Zoning Text Amendment - Edgartown Settlement Zoning District]
I WOULD LIKE SOME COMMENT FROM OUR BOARD REGARDING THIS BEFORE WE HAVE THE READING. IS THAT APPROPRIATE?>> YEAH. I THINK IT IS WORTH WHILE JUST TRYING TO SETTLE THIS OUT BEFORE WE GO THROUGH THE WHOLE THING.
BECAUSE THAT COULD GET VERY INVOLVED IF WE CHOOSE TO DO THE
WHOLE THING. >> I SUGGEST WE SEND IT TO THE
HISTORICAL PRESERVATION BOARD. >> OKAY.
I WOULD LIKE THIS IN A MOTION IF IT IS ACCEPTABLE TO EVERYBODY.
>> I'LL MOVE THAT. >> I SECOND IT.
>> AND AFTER THE REVIEW, BRING IT BACK TO US.
>> IF IT IS NEXT MONTH, IT IS GOOD.
IF IT IS NOT NEXT MONTH, GOOD. >> I'M HOPING IT WILL GET TO THE DECEMBER 5 HISTORIC PRESERVATION BOARD... I THINK IT IS DECEMBER
>> YES, SIR. >> WE HAVE A MOTION TO FORWARD THIS ITEM TO THE HISTORICAL PRESERVATION BOARD FOR THEIR REVIEW, AND IT WOULD COME BACK TO US AFTER THAT HAS BEEN DONE.
>> RIGHT. >> AND IT WAS SECONDED BY MS. CLEMONS? CALL THE ROLL, PLEASEMENT.
>> CHAIRMAN CREYAUFMILLER? >> YES, MA'AM.
[c. Zoning Text Amendment - Code of Ordinances, Chapter 121 - Subdivisions Sec. 121-8, 121-9 and 121-10. Plat specification.]
OKAY. THE NEXT ITEM ON THE LIST IS ALSO A TEXT AMENDMENT. AND IT INVOLVES IF PLANNING BOARD. ... THE PLANNING BOARD.I SPOKE WITH MR. FREEMAN ABOUT THIS BEFORE THE MEETING.
AND AS I UNDERSTAND THE PROPOSAL, IT WOULD BE A TEXT CHANGE THAT RIGHT NOW ALL PRELIMINARY PLATS COME TO THIS BOARD. WELL, THEY GO TO THE TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE. THE PLANNING REVIEW.
THEY GO TO THE CITY COMMISSION. THEN A FINAL PLAT FOLLOWS THAT SAME PROCESS. AND THE PROPOSAL HERE WAS FOR THE PRELIMINARY PLAT TO GO TO THE TECHNICAL REVIEW AND THEN TO THE CITY COMMISSION. MY SUGGESTION TO MR. FREEMAN WAS THAT IT COME HERE. IF WE ARE GOING TO ELIMINATE A STEPPING STONE AND A PRELIMINARY PLAT, WE SHOULD ELIMINATE THAT STEPPING STONE FROM THE CITY COMMISSION.
NOT FROM THE PLANNING BOARD. THE PLANNING BOARD'S FUNCTION IS TO BE A... SOMEWHAT OF AN OVERVIEW TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. SO THAT WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW PROJECTS. AND IF THERE IS ANY TWEAKS THAT NEED TO HAPPEN, THAT GIVES THE OPPORTUNITY FOR THAT TO HAPPEN.
OUR JOB IS TO MAKE RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY COMMISSION ON ALL OF THESE PROJECTS.
IT ONLY MAKES SENSE TO ME THAT THE CITY COMMISSION SHOULD NEVER SEE ANYTHING COMING OUT OF THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT OUTSIDE OF THE PROJECT THAT ARE ALLOWABLE TO GO DIRECTLY TO THEM WITHOUT IT COMING THROUGH US. AND IF THIS IS STRICTLY FOR A PURPOSE OF STREAMLINING, SPEEDING THE PROCESS UP, IT SHOULD COME HERE. ONCE IT IS IN THE MEAT AND
[02:55:04]
POTATOES TO WHERE ALL THE FINAL DESIGN WORK HAS BEEN DONE, CERTAINLY, THE COMMISSION SHOULD HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO REVIEW IT AS WELL. AND I THINK THAT MR. FREEMAN...YES. I'M GOING TO PUT MY WORDS...
>> THE INTENT OF THE CODE, AND I THINK YOU ARE HITTING ON REALLY WHERE WE ARE TRYING TO GO WITH THIS.
WE ARE TRYING TO STREAMLINE THE PROCESS.
PART OF THAT IS BASED ON RECOMMENDATION THAT WAS MADE IN 2016. SOME TIME AGO.
WE DID HAVE AN ISSUE RECENTLY WITH A PLAT THAT CAME IN.
AND DIDN'T MEET ALL THE EXISTING CITY REQUIREMENTS FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT. A PRELIMINARY PLAT SHOULD BE JUST THAT. A PRELIMINARY TO A FINAL.
THE CITY SEEMED TO HAVE GOT IT BACKWARDS.
THAT MOST OF THE DETAILS WERE PROVIDED IN A PRELIMINARY.
THEN THE FINAL PLAT WAS ALMOST AN OVERVIEW OF THE PRELIMINARY TO MAKE SURE NOTHING MUCH HAD CHANGED.
THE RECOMMENDATION IS THAT WE HAVE THE PRELIMINARY PLAT MEET THE BASIC REQUIREMENTS. THE BASIC REQUIREMENTS ARE JUST ENOUGH TO SETTLE OUT THE ADDRESSING OR THE PARCEL LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS TO ENABLE DEVELOPMENTS TO MOVE TO BUILDING PERMIT BEFORE FINAL CO, AND THEN IN THE INTERIM, COME TO FINAL PLAT WHICH WILL RESOLVE ALL THOSE THINGS AND GET EVERY DETAIL IN PLACE. BEFORE THEY MOVE TO CO AND BE ABLE TO SELL THESE THINGS. SO YES, THE CHAIR IS RIGHT.
IT IS TO MAKE THE SYSTEM SIMPLELER.
THE STAFF HAVE NO OBJECTION TO THE PLANNING BOARD BEING THE REVIEWER OF THE PRELIMINARY PLAN.
STAGE. WHAT YOU WILL BE SEEING IS YOUR OVERVIEW OF THE PRELIMINARY PLAT.
IT WILL REALLY BE, DOES IT MEET WITH WHAT WE HAVE APPROVED FOR THE SITE PLAN. DOES IT LOOK LIKE THE SITE PLAN THAT WE HAVE APPROVED? I THINK YOU WOULD BE MORE
KNOWLEDGEABLE ABOUT THAT. >> NOW, THERE WAS THIS LIST OF
>> ARE WE GOING SHRINK THAT LIST FOR THE PRELIMINARY PLAT TO
>> THAT FITS THE DESCRIPTION OF A PRELIMINARY PLAT.
>> WE ARE GOING TO MOVE TOWARDS A REQUIREMENT FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT TO BE BOUNDARY LINES AND SO FORTH.
AND THEN A FINAL PLAT WOULD NEED TO MEET STATE STATUTE.
WHICH WOULD BE ESSENTIALLY, ALL THE REQUIREMENTS THAT WE HAVE EXISTING IN THE PRELIMINARY PLAT NOW.
SO WE ARE MOVING TO MORE OF A REVIEW PROCESS.
IT IS MORE IN LINE WITH WHAT SURVEYORS AND APPLICANTS DO ANYWAY. MEET STATE STATUTES IN TERMS OF
THEIR SUBMITTALS. >> NOW, I'LL ALSO MAKE ANOTHER DISCLOSURE HERE. I THINK THAT PROBABLY SOME OF THE ACTION THAT I TOOK IN REGARD TO THE PROJECT IN FRONT OF THE CITY COMMISSION HAS BROUGHT THIS TO THE SURFACE.
>> IT DID. BUT ALSO I'M GOING BACK TO 2016 WHEN THAT ISSUE WAS RECOGNIZED. THERE WAS TOO MUCH EMPHASIS BEING REQUIRED AT PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR SOME DETAIL THAT WASN'T REALLY NECESSARY AT THAT STAGE OF THE PROCESS.
THE CITY'S PROCESS FOR A LONG TIME HAS BEEN OUT OF LINE WITH THE STATE AND OUT OF LINE ALSO WITH WHAT WE REQUIRE FOR A BUILDING PERMIT TO BE ISSUED. OR FOR WORK TO COMMENCE.
WE ARE FACING ISSUES AT THE MOMENT WITH EXISTING DEVELOPMENTS THAT ARE RUNNING THROUGH INITIAL CONSTRUCTION PROCESS THAT... THEY HAVE TO STOP UNTIL THEY GET A PRELIMINARY PLAT IN T WHICH IS ALMOST LIKE DOING A FINAL PLAN.
THERE IS NO BENEFIT REALLY TO DOING A PRELIMINARY PLAT.
THEY MAY AS WELL GO TO FINAL PLAN.
IF. >> SO IF WE WANTED TO MOVE FORWARD ON ANYTHING TODAY, WOULD JUST A SIMPLE CORRECTION OF THE PROCEDURE BE ENOUGH TO BE ABLE TO KEEP THIS MOVING FORWARD SO
IF A RECOMMENDATION WAS MADE TO AMEND THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO INCLUDE THE PLANNING BOARD IN EXCHANGE FOR THE CITY COMMISSION STAGE OF THE PROCESSING, THEN STAFF COULD DEAL WITH THAT AND
AMEND THE CODE APPROPRIATELY. >> I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION
[03:00:04]
THAT WAS WHAT MR. FREEMAN JUST SO ELOQUENTLY STATED, OR FURTHER DISCUSSION. WHICHEVER YOU CHOOSE.>> I'LL MOVE THAT THE AMENDED PROCESS WITHDRAW THE CITY COMMISSION APPROVAL OR DENIAL UNDERNEATH THE OPTION AND THAT THE PLANNING BOARD BE PLACED IN THAT SPOT INSTEAD.
IS THAT WHAT YOU ARE LOOKING FOR?
>> MR. BURDGE MADE THE MOTION. TO APPROVE.
WITH THE RECOMMENDED CHANGE. AND MR. KREISL SECONDED.
CALL THE ROLL, PLEASE. >> MR. KREISL?
[8. 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 Chair, as this section of the Agenda is limited to thirty minutes. The Planning Board will not be able to take any official actions under Comments from the Public. Speakers will address the Board and the Public with respect. Inappropriate language will not be tolerated.]
>> YES. CHAIRMAN CREYAUFMILLER?
>> YES, MA'AM. >> THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC. NO COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC.
THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA... OH, YOU ARE GOING TO COMMENT.
COME FORWARD. >> SHE HAS GIFT CARDS.
>> I'M SORRY. YOU HAVE A GIFT CARD.
NO. >> I HAVE BEEN HERE THIS LONG.
I FIGURED I WOULD COME UP AND SAY HELLO.
I'M LANEY WILLIAMS. I'M AN ATTORNEY.
WE REPRESENT SOME RESIDENTS WITHIN EDGARTOWN.
I WAS HERE FOR THE AMENDMENT ISSUE THAT HAS BEEN CONTINUED.
WE THANK YOU FOR THAT. I WANTED TO RAISE A FEW ISSUES WHILE I'M HERE, AND I'M SURE THAT THIS WILL BE BACK AGAIN.
IT IS GOOD TO GO AHEAD AND LET YOU KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON.
MY COLLEAGUE TOM BAIRD IS A BOARD-CERTIFIED ATTORNEY AND CITY COUNTY AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT LAW.
HE IS A PLANNER CERTIFIED BY THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF CERTIFIED PLANNERS. HE HAS TAKEN A LOOK AT THE TEXT AMENDMENTS AND BASED ON OUR REVIEW, WE BELIEVE THAT SOME MODIFICATIONS TO THE TEXT AMENDMENT WOULD BE BEST FOR THE RESIDENTS AS WELL AS THE BUSINESSES IN THE EDGARTOWN AREA. SPECIFICALLY, IF AMENDMENTS THAT WE ARE PROPOSING WOULD BE CONSISTENT AND IN FURTHERANCE OF THE FOLLOWING OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES.
THOSE INCLUDE OBJECTIVE 1.9. POLICY 1.157.
OBJECTIVE 6.5. OBJECTIVE 12.11.
AND POLICY 12.1.1.2. OUR MAIN ISSUES RIGHT NOW WITH THE DRAFT AS IT IS, IS THAT THE COMMERCIAL USES THAT ARE ALLOWED, THAT SECTION. IT IS CHART 1-1 ON PAGE 6 OF THE ORDINANCE. RIGHT NOW, CERTAIN USES ARE ACTUALLY PERSONAL... PERMANENT USES, NOT CONDITIONAL USES.
THAT INCLUDES BISTROS, WINE AND CIGAR BARS, BED & BREAKFASTS, BOUTIQUE HOTELS AND VACATION RENTALS.
AS PERMITTED USES, ALL THEY WOULD HAVE TO DO IS SUBMIT A SITE PLAN. THERE ARE NO ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS TO GET APPROVAL. AND WE FIND THAT CONCERNING SPECIFICALLY THAT EVEN IN THIS TEXT AMENDMENT, USE OF A HISTORIC HOME AS A RESIDENCE IS ACTUALLY A CONDITIONAL USE THAT YOU HAVE TO SUBMIT TO THESE EXTRA REQUIREMENTS.
WE WOULD LIKE TO SEE THESE USES THAT ARE LISTED AS RIGHT NOW, PERMANENT USES TO BE SWITCHED TO CONDITIONAL USES, JUST TO GIVE THE CITY MORE CONTROL TO PROTECT THE RESIDENTS THAT ARE WITHIN THAT AREA. ADDITIONALLY, I WOULD LIKE TO BRIEFLY ADDRESS THE NOISE ISSUE. WE DO NOT AGREE WITH THE CHANGE TO ALLOW AMPLIFIED SOUND IN THE ZONING DISTRICT.
THERE WAS A LOT OF WORK, PUBLIC HEARINGS, WORKSHOPS, EVERYTHING WENT INTO CHANGING THIS ORDINANCE TO ACOUSTIC NOISE LEVELS. A CHANGE RIGHT NOW WOULD JUST BE REGRESSIVE. IT IS SO MUCH WORK HAS GONE INTO MAINTAINING THE HISTORIC CHARACTER OF THE AREA.
WE DON'T SEE A NEED FOR A CHANGE.
HOWEVER, IF A CHANGE IS GOING TO HAPPEN, THE 16DBA LEVEL THAT IS LISTED RIGHT NOW IS QUITE LOUD. IT IS WHAT'S TYPICAL OF A COMMERCIAL AREA. NOT A RESIDENTIAL AREA.
WE WOULD BE REQUESTING 55DBA. THAT IS MORE COMMON IN MUNICIPALITIES FOR RECEIVING RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES.
AND WE WOULD ALSO LIKE A REQUIREMENT... THE PROPERTIES THAT ARE PRODUCING AN AMPLIFIED SOUND, THAT THEY SHOULD HAVE SOUND LIMITERS ON THE PROPERTY SO THE CITY DOES NOT HAVE TO PURCHASE THIS EQUIPMENT OR REQUEST TO USE THE COUNTY'S EQUIPMENT OR ASK THE POLICE DEPARTMENT TO BRING THE EQUIPMENT FORWARD. THIS WOULD ALLOW THE PROPERTIES TO PUT THAT INVESTMENT IN THEMSELVES.
IT WOULD TAKE SOME BURDEN OFF OF THE CITY.
FINALLY, WE WOULD LIKE A CHANGE IN THE 26-44 PENALTIES.
THIS SECTION, WE DON'T FEEL THAT THE VIOLATIONS ARE STRONG ENOUGH TO DISCOURAGE THE CONTINUED VIOLATIONS OF AMPLIFIED NOISE
[03:05:04]
THAT CURRENTLY CHARACTERIZED THE AREA.WE WOULD ALSO LIKE TO SEE A CHANGE THERE.
I REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR TIME TODAY AND THANK YOU FOR TAKING MY COMMENT AT THE END OF THE MEETING.
I APPRECIATE IT. >> WELL, THANK YOU.
I DIDN'T SEE YOU GETTING UP. >> THAT IS OKAY.
I'LL SIGN IN AS WELL. >> I THINK YOUR COMMENTS AND NOTES ARE VERY GOOD. I WOULD HOPE THAT YOU ARE GOING TO BE PRESENT IN THE DISCUSSION THAT MR. FREEMAN IS GOING TO BRING FORWARD TO THE HISTORICAL PRESERVATION BOARD.
>> YES, SIR. >> AND IF I UNDERSTOOD CORRECTLY, FROM COMMENTS OF SOME OF THE RESIDENTS IN THAT AREA, THAT I HAVE HAD OVER THE PAST WEEK, THERE WAS AN INTENDED MEETING THAT WAS TO TAKE PLACE, BUT BECAUSE OF THE HURRICANE, IT
DID NOT TAKE PLACE? >> YES, SIR.
>> BETWEEN YOUR FIRM AND THE CITY IN.
WE ARE CURRENTLY ATTEMPTING TO SET UP SOME MEETINGS WITH STAFF TO BRING FORTH OUR AMENDMENT IDEAS AND WORK TOWARDS A SOLUTION. BUT THE HURRICANE CAME AT THE WORST POSSIBLE TIME, AS THEY ALWAYS DO.
WE ARE LOOKING FORWARD TO CONTINUING THAT PROCESS.
FOR THE TIME BEING. >> AND YOU WERE COMPLETING...
COMPLETELY INFORMED AND AWARE OF ALL OF THAT?
>> WE RECEIVED AN EMAIL PRIOR TO THE HURRICANE.
NOTIFIED OF. THAT I HAVE NO OBJECTION TO.
THAT I MEAN, IF THE REPRESENTATIVES COULD FORWARD ANY NOTES THEY HAVE ON RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE CODE CHANGES, THAT WOULD BE... YOU KNOW, WELL-RECEIVED.
WE APPRECIATE THAT. >> WELL, I THINK THIS IS FAST VERY, VERY IMPORTANT ISSUE. FOR THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE.
I DON'T... I CERTAINLY HOPE THAT AS THIS MOVES THROUGH THE CITY, THAT EVERYBODY THAT HAS FINGERPRINTS ON IT UNDERSTAND CLEARLY AND THINKS ABOUT HOW IMPORTANT THIS ISSUE IS TO THE CITY. IT IS MORE THAN JUST SAYING THERE IS GOING TO BE ANOTHER BAR ON THE CORNER OF SECOND STREET AND A STREET. QUITE FRANKLY, I DON'T THINK FACILITIES WITH ENTERTAINMENT SHOULD EVEN BE IN EDGARTOWN.
I DON'T THINK THAT IS WHAT THE INTENT OF THE ORIGINAL WORK THAT WAS DONE THROUGH THE ORDINANCES THAT HAVE BEEN DRAFTED... I DON'T THINK THAT ANYONE WAS GIVEN THAT CONSIDERATION THAT THAT WOULD EVER HAPPEN. DRESS SHOPS, TAILOR SHOPS, SHOE REPAIR SHOPS. I HAVE BEEN AROUND FORT PIERCE COMING IN AND OUT OF FORT PIERCE FOR A VERY LONG TIME.
THAT IS WHAT I COULD REMEMBER IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.
I NEVER SAW ALCOHOL ESTABLISHMENTS AND PARTICULARLY WITH ENTERTAINMENT. AND I THINK THAT THERE IS A LOT OF CHILDISH NONSENSE THAT'S BEEN GOING ON IN RECENT MONTHS OVER THIS ISSUE. AND THAT NEEDS TO STOP.
I HOPE THAT THE PARTIES THAT ARE INVOLVED IN THAT HEARS WHAT I'M SAYING. JUST STOP THE CHILDISH NONSENSE.
LET THE CITY DO ITS WORK. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
I APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS. >> GOT ONE MORE.
>> I HAVE ONE MORE. OH! COME ON. COME ON.
>> I'M THE ONLY ONE Y'ALL DON'T KNOW EXCEPT FOR MR. BURDGE AND THESE GUYS. MY NAME IS HOLLY TONES.
I'M THE VICE CHAIR OF THE HISTORICAL PRESERVATION BOARD.
I HAVE SAT ON THAT BOARD FOR NINE YEARS.
I CARE VERY DEEPLY ABOUT THE HISTORICAL PRINT... FOOTPRINT OF THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE. EDGARTOWN WAS THE ORIGINAL SETTLEMENT OF FORT PIERCE. IT BEGAN IN THE 1790S.
WE ARE LUCKY TO HAVE THAT GEM IN OUR DOWNTOWN.
>> YES, WE ARE. >> VERY LUCKY.
I ALSO REDID A 1905 HOUSE FROM SCRATCH.
AND DOWNTOWN EDGARTOWN. AS DID MANY OF MY NEIGHBORS.
AND WHEN WE PURCHASED OUR PROPERTIES, WE PURCHASED IT WITH THE 2012 ORDINANCE IN PLACE. AS YOU WOULD DO YOUR DUE DILIGENCE BEFORE YOU PURCHASED A HOME.
ANY PLACE. SO THAT WAS IN PLACE WHEN WE PURCHASED OUR HOMES. AND IT WAS OUR PROTECTION AGAINST WHAT WE ARE EXPERIENCING NOW.
SO THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH. >> THANK YOU, HOLLY.
[10. BOARD COMMENTS]
ON THE BOARD COMMENTS, SOME TIME AGO, A DECISION WAS MADE POSSIBLY A LOT TO DO WITH ECONOMICS AT THE TIME, I THINK WE WERE IN THE MIDST OF THE PANDEMIC.A DECISION WAS MADE TOE LIP MATE THE THE PRINTED... TO ELIMINATE THE PRINTED PACKETS FROM BEING DISTRIBUTED TO THE PLANNING
[03:10:02]
BOARD. A LONG TIME BEFORE YOU SHOWED UP. A LONG TIME BEFORE YOU SHOWED UP. AND I WAS IN FAVOR OF IT AT THE TIME. I DIDN'T SEE A BIG PROBLEM WITH IT AT THE TIME. AT THE TIME, I HAD ACCESS TO THE ABILITY TO BE ABLE TO BRING THOSE PACKETS UP ON A GREAT BIG SCREEN, AND I COULD SEE THESE DRAWINGS.ALMOST IN A SIZED FORMAT. I'M OLD.
I'M CRANKY. I JUST HAD A SPECIAL DAY THE OTHER DAY. BOTH OF US DID.
>> IT WAS... DID YOU GET MARRIED?
>> I HAVE BEEN MARRIED FOR A LONG TIME.
>> OKAY. >> I THINK IT WAS SATURDAY.
THE OLD CRANKY... THE CRANKY OLD MEN'S DAY.
AT ANY RATE, I FIND IT MORE AND MORE DIFFICULT, AS TIME GOES BY, TO BE ABLE TO REVIEW THE DRAWINGS IN PARTICULAR ON THESE PROJECTS. AND IT IS JUST LIKE... WELL, EVEN ON THESE SCREENS. I COULDN'T SEE THOSE DIMENSIONS.
NEITHER COULD YOU. I'VE GOT 50 YEARS ON YOU.
WELL, 40 ANYWAY. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE US GET BACK TO PACKETS. THAT IS WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE. I DON'T KNOW WHAT IT WOULD TAKE KEVIN FOR THAT TO HAPPEN THROUGH CITY GOVERNMENT.
IF WE COULD EVER... IF WE COULD DO THAT, I THINK IT WOULD BE HANDY. MR. BURDGE, OBVIOUSLY, HAS STILL BEEN REQUESTING PACKETS. HE COMES IN AND PICKS THEM UP.
I WOULD THINK THAT, PARTICULARLY, I THINK WITH SOME OF THE COMPLEXITY OF THE PROJECTS COMING OUR WAY, AS WE GET INTO THE FINAL PLATS, OF SOME OF THESE DEVELOPMENTS THAT WE HAVE JUST BEEN TALKING ABOUT, WE ARE GOING TO NEED TO SEE THAT STUFF. WE CAN'T SEE IT.
>> I UNDERSTAND. >> WE CAN'T SEE IT, WE CAN'T DO
OUR JOB. >> LET ME WORK ON THAT.
IF WE COULD, I'LL GET ALICIA TO DO A POLL OF THE PLANNING MEMBERS WHO WOULD APPRECIATE A FULL PAPER COPY.
AND WE WILL WORK FROM THERE. >> IS THERE ANYBODY HERE THAT
WOULDN'T APPRECIATE THAT? >> I'M FINE WITH THE DIGITAL
YOU DON'T COUNT. >> NO, SERIOUSLY.
THE CITY MANAGER HAS ALREADY APPROVED THAT WE CAN HAVE PACKETS. OKAY? WE DID THIS A LONG TIME AGO. THAT IS WHY I STILL GET THEM.
BECAUSE THE PLANNING DIRECTOR DECIDED THAT SHE DIDN'T WANT US TO HAVE THEM ANYMORE BECAUSE OF A BUDGET SITUATION.
I APPEALED TO THE CITY MANAGER. THE CITY MANAGER WROTE A MEMO TO THE CITY DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AT THAT TIME SAYING, YOU KNOW, DO IT ON AN AS-NEEDED BASIS. I DON'T KNOW WHERE THE MEMO IS.
YOU PROBABLY KNOW WHERE IT IS. YOU ARE FAMILIAR WITH WHAT WENT ON. THAT IS THE ONLY REASON I'M GETTING THEM. I GUARANTEE YOU THAT... THIS IS A PAIN IN THE BUTT FOR HER TO HAVE TO PUT THESE THINGS TOGETHER. I UNDERSTAND THAT.
THEY ARE JUST WHAT HE SAYS. FOR US OLD GUYS.
YOU KNOW, TECHNICALLY, AFTER DECEMBER, I MAY NOT BE HERE
ANYMORE ANYWAY. >> NO, NO, NO.
>> WELL, MR. BURDGE IS COMMISSIONER PERONA'S APPOINTEE.
SO... SO LET'S SEE WHAT WE CAN DO.
WE WILL OUTREACH. YOU KNOW, I'M NOT PUTTING AN EMBARGO ON GETTING PAPER COPIES OUT TO PEOPLE.
I THINK IF WE CAN, YOU KNOW, THINK ABOUT IT AS MEMBERS, AND WE WILL WORK ON THAT. I WILL LOOK TO ACTUALLY TRY AND PLACE THAT BURDEN ON APPLICANTS TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL COPIES.
>> WE WERE DOING IT FOR YEARS. >> IT IS ALREADY ON THE APPLICANT. THE APPLICANT HAS TO PROVIDE, LIKE, 12 COPIES OF SOMETHING. A LOT OF THEM GO TO THE TRC.
>> NOT ANYMORE. THEY JUST PROVIDE THREE HARD
COPIES. >> OH, REALLY? I'M SORRY ABOUT. THAT I AGREE WITH YOU.
WE SHOULD GO BACK TO THE OLD THING THAT IS ON THAT PIECE OF PAPER. IT WAS, LIKE, 12 THINGS.
>> YOU ARE GOING ALL THE WAY BACK TO... FOR A SOUTH?
>> THAT WAS THE BOCA GUY YOU WERE THINKING OF.
>> OKAY. >> WELL, LET'S SEE WHAT WE CAN DO. I KNOW THAT THE LABOR INTENSITY OF PUTTING THAT STUFF TOGETHER...
>> YOU KNOW, I KNOW IT IS A PAIN.
I USED TO TAKE MINE AND GIVE IT TO PERONA.
I PASSED IT ON TO HIM. THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN, HE GOT TIRED OF IT, TOO. BECAUSE I MEAN, THESE THINGS A ARE... THERE HAVE BEEN TIMES WHERE I HAVE TAKEN THESE THINGS AND GIVE THEM BACK TO THE APPLICANT.
YOU KNOW, JUST BECAUSE... YOU KNOW, IT IS COSTLY TO THEM, TOO.
[03:15:03]
I MEAN, I DON'T MIND, YOU KN KNOW,...>> OKAY. ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANYTHING?
>> NOPE. .
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.