[a. Annexation - Hickory Branch Properties (3601, 3605, and 3725 Gordy Road) - Parcel IDs: 2326-413-0001-000-2, 2326-434-0000-000-0 and 2326-413-0000-000-5]

UNDER NEW BUSINESS. ANNEXATIO OF THE HICKORY BRANCH PROPERTIES AT 3601 , 3605, 3725 GORDY ROAD . PARCEL IDS I WILL LET YOU DO THE IDS BECAUSE YOU'VE GOT TO DO THEM

[00:10:03]

ANYWAY. RIGHT? OKAY I WILL LET YOU DO THEM.

>> OKAY THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON CITY OF FORT PIERCE PLANNING BOARD. TODAY I BRING BEFORE YOU THE HICKORY BRANCH PROPERTIES ANNEXATION AND MAJO FUTURE LAND USE 361, 3605 AND 3725 GORDY ROAD . THE APPLICANT IS DAVID BARN PROPERTY OWNERS DONALD BARN, HICKORY BRANCH PROPERTIES INC., CARE OF SUZANNE BARN PRESIDENT AND ON GROSS INC. CARE OF DAVID BARN PRESIDENT. THE PARCEL IDS ARE 2326- 413- 001 000- 2, 2326-413 -0001 -0002 AND 2326-434- 0000000 -000 -0.

SITE AREA IS APPROXIMATELY 126.29 ACRES. HERE IS AN AREA OF VIEW HIGHLIGHTING OR OUTLINING THE PARCELS. THE SUBJECT PROPERTIES HAVE AN EXISTING ST. LUCIE COUNTY DESIGNATION AS RESIDENTIAL SUBURBAN TWO DWELLING UNITS PE ACRE IN ST. LUCIE COUNTY DOZING -- ZONING DESIGNATION OF AGRICULTURAL. REQUEST TO REVIE APPLICATION VOLUNTEER ANNEXATIO ON THE THREE PROPERTIES. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A FUTUR LAND USE DESIGNATION OF MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT WHICH ALLOWS 15 UNIT , 15 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE AND THE PROPERT ZONING CLASSIFICATION WILL REMAIN THE SAME AS AGRICULTURAL. HERE IS AN AREA OF VIEW OUTLINING THE CURRENT EXISTING FUTURE LAND USE OF TH PARCELS IN QUESTION AS WELL AS THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES. AGAIN, THE CURRENT FUTURE LAND USE OF THE PARCELS IS RESIDENTIAL SUBURBAN. HERE IS THE PROPOSED FUTURE LAND USE GIVEN THE ANNEXATION APPROVED T THE CITY MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT AS WELL AS AREA VIEWS OF SURROUNDING FUTURE LAND USES.

EXISTING ZONING IS AGRICULTURAL WITH NO CHANGES FO THE PROPOSED ZONING. STAFF HA CONFIRMED THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED WITHIN INC. ST. LUCIE COUNTY AND IN THE MUNICIPAL BOUNDARY WITHIN THE SERVICE AREA. THE CURRENT VALUE OF THE PROPERTY IS 3,332,942 AND THERE IS AN EXISTING DWELLING UNIT ON ONE OF THE PARCELS. TH SUBJECT PROPOSED VOLUNTARY ANNEXATION IS CONSISTENT WITH CHAPTER 171.044 FLORIDA STATUTE AS THE PROPERTY IS MUNICIPALITY AND REASONABLE COMPACT. ANNEXATION WILL NOT RESULT IN ANY CREATION OF A ENCLAVE. STATE STATUTE MAJOR FUTURE LAND USE. THE APPLICATIO INVOLVES A LAND AREA GREATER THAN 50 ACRES THEREFORE THE APPLICATION WILL REQUIRE TRANSMISSION TO THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE AND OTHER REQUIRED STATE AGENCIES FOR REVIEW. THI PROCESS WILL COMMENCE SHOULD TH APPLICATION RECEIVE APPROVAL AT THE FIRST HEARING AT CITY COMMISSION. HERE IS A MAP TO BREAKDOWN THE FUTURE LAND USE AND COMPARISON ACCORDING TO TH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, PROPERTY ANNEXED SHALL RECEIVE DESIGNATION COMPATIBLE WITH THE COUNTY LAND USE DESIGNATION UNLESS OTHERWISE APPROVED BY CITY COMMISSION. IN THIS CASE THE APPLICANT HAS REQUESTED FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT WHICH DESIGNATES THE PROPERTY FOR GREATER POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. AS WE CAN SEE THE EXISTING

[00:15:05]

RESIDENTIAL SUBURBAN THE DENSITY IS TWO WITH PROPOSED BEING MOVED TO MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT THE DENSITY WILL INCREASE TO 15, MAX UNITS CURRENTLY 252 WITH A PROPOSED 1894 GIVING AN INCREASE TO THE CITY OF 1642. TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMENTS GORDY ROAD SERVING TH PROPOSED ANNEXATION PROPERTY CONSTRUCTED TO SERVE AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL INTERES WEST OF FLORIDA TURNPIKE SOUTH OF STATE ROAD 70. THE ROADWAY CHARACTERISTICS AND FEATURES AR BELOW STANDARDS THAT WOULD NORMALLY BE PROVIDED TO SERVE URBAN USE. FOR SAFETY AND OPERATION PURPOSES THE CITY SHOULD CONSIDER HOW IT WILL ENTER GORDY ROAD OPERATES WITH SUFFICIENT CAPACITY AND SAFETY ON THE MORE URBANIZED CONDITION WHEN THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AND OTHER PROPERTIES ALONG GORDY ROAD DEVELOP. THE CITY SHOULD CONDUCT AN ANALYSIS OF IMMUNE THE IMPACT OF DEVELOPMENT AT TH GORDY ROAD STATE ROAD INTERSECTION. THIS MAY DETERMIN IF AND WHEN PERMITS FOR THE INTERSECTION MIGHT BE NECESSARY AND AFFORD THE CITY OPTIONS TO DETERMINE FINDINGS COMMISERATE WITH DEVELOPMENT IMPACT. STAFF RECOMMENDS A CONDITION TO ADDRESS THIS COMMENT. SO, ESSENTIALLY THE STAFF RECOMMEND FOR THE PLANNING BOARD TO MOVE THE PROPOSED ANNEXATION APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL TO CIT COMMISSION WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS. ONE, THE APPLICANT WILL PROVIDE A TRAFFIC ANALYST FOR GORDY ROAD AND THE CUMULATIVE EFFECTS OF DEVELOPMENT AT THE INTERSECTION STATE ROAD 70 AND FOR THE APPLICATION REZONING OF THE PROPERTY SUBMITTED IN CONJUNCTION WITH ANY APPLICATIO FOR SITE PLAN REVIEW.

ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATIONS INCLUDE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL WITH OTHER CONDITIONS OR RECOMMEND DISAPPROVAL. SO AGAIN, BECAUSE THE PROPERTIES, THE PARCELS ARE GREATER THAN 50 ACRES, CERTAIN REPORTS ARE REQUIRED BY STATE AND HERE ARE FEW. THE SOIL MAP, THIS IS A DATA ANALYST OF THE SOIL MAP.

FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE. STRATEGIC HABITAT FOR THE FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE. AND THE AGRICULTURE US FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE. HERE IS A OUTLINE OF TERRITORY HIGHLIGHTING EACH PARCEL. FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF THE CONJOINED PARCELS . THANK YOU.

>> AS I WAS REVIEWING THIS, OBVIOUSLY WE ARE SEVERAL YEARS AWAY FROM SHOVELING DIRT TO START A DEVELOPMENT LIKE THIS.

AND, WE HAVE SEVERAL DEPARTMENT COMPLEXES AND HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS NOW THAT HAVE BEEN APPROVED ALONG 10 MILE CREEK. 10 MILE CREEK IS KNOWN TO FLOOD IN THE AREA OF HARTMAN ROAD EXTENDING ACROSS ROUTE 70 AND I THINK IT BECOME 30 OR 41ST STREET MAYBE. SOUT OF JENKINS ROAD. 10 MILE CREE FLOODS DOWN INTO NEIGHBORHOODS DOWN THERE, WE HAD AN APARTMENT COMPLEX OF A SIZABLE NATURE THAT WAS GOING TO EVENTUALLY

[00:20:06]

DUMP WATER INTO 10 MILE CREEK. THE COLLEGE DUMPS CONSIDERABLE GALLONS INTO 10 MILE CREEK THAT ALSO CAUSES BACKUP AND FLOODING. WE HAVE HAD FLOODING ALONG THE WHOLE WATERSHED OFF O 10 MILE CREEK DOWN INTO THE SUNSHINE MALL AREA , OTHER LITTLE TRIBUTARIES OFF OF 10 MILE CREEK PRIOR TO GOING TO THE ST. LUCIE RIVER. IT WOULD SEEM TO ME THAT IF WE'RE GOING IF THIS IS BEING PURSUED AND WE'VE GOT A FEW YEARS AHEAD O US BEFORE IT COMES TO PASS AN RESTART DEVELOPMENT, IT WOULD SEEM THIS WOULD BE A GOOD TIME TO BE HAVING DISCUSSION THROUGHOUT THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE, PARTICULARLY IN THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT THAT I NOTICE IS ABSENT AGAIN TODAY.

HAVE REQUESTED ENGINEER COME TO MEETINGS SEVERAL TIMES. I THIN IT IS IMPORTANT THAT THEY DO, ENGINEERING HAS ALWAYS GOT THEIR FINGERPRINTS ON OUTFLOW O WATER , THAT'S A HOT BUTTON OF MINE. IF WE DON'T START NOW TALKING ABOUT THIS , A COUPLE THOUSAND HOUSES WE WILL HAVE A REAL MESS. I'M NOT GOING TO BE HERE , BUT SOMEBODY IS GOING T HAVE A REAL MESS ON THEIR HANDS WITH 10 MILE CREEK. IT'S ALREADY BAD AND IT ALREADY FLOODS. WE HAVE HOMEOWNERS BEING FLOODED OUT NOW THAT HAV BEEN IN THEIR PRESENT HOMES FOR YEARS AND WE KEEP ADDING MORE AND MORE WATER TO 10 MILE CREE EXPECTING IT TO MAYBE BE ABLE TO HANDLE IT AND IT'S NOT GOIN TO HAPPEN. CONDITIONS ARE GETTING WORSE ON A DAILY BASIS IF ALL THE RAIN WE ARE GETTING IF IT IS TRUE THAT IT'S FROM CLIMATE CHANGE, AND IT'S BECAUSE I DRIVE A GASOLINE POWERED AUTOMOBILE I AM PART O THE PROBLEM SO I WILL TAKE THA BURDEN ON AND I'M HELPING TO FLOOD 10 MILE CREEK. WE NEED T BE AS A CITY REGARDLESS OF WHA SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT US, THE DAYS WE CAN SI HERE AT OUR DESKS ON THE CITY ENGINEERING AND PLANNING AND THROW THE BALL BACK OF TO THE SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT AND SAY IF A PERMIT IT IT'S GOING TO BE OKAY, THOSE DAYS ARE LONG GONE. BECAUSE IT'S NOT OKAY. IT IS A COMBINATION OF THE CITY AND THE COUNTY AND WE HAVE TO START PAYING ATTENTION TO IT. THE OUTFLOW OF WATER IN FORT PIERCE IS A BAD CONDITION , WE ARE NOT GETTING IT OUT OF THE AREA, IT IS FLOODING. FLOODING ALL OVER THE CITY. THE OTHER DAY WE HAD FLOODS ON STREETS. THE CREEK HAD FLOODS. THE MASTER ASSOCIATION OF BED CREEKS SAID 10 MILE CREEK HAS A IMPACT BY THE WAY. A LETTER WAS SENT OUT TO HOMEOWNERS TELLING THEM THAT PART OF THE STORM WATER SYSTE , THE ENGINEERING FROM MOVING THE STORM WATER AND IT WAS THA WATER WAS SUPPOSED TO FLOW IN THE STREETS. IT IS NORMAL FOR THE STREETS TO FLOOD. I MEAN COME ON. WE ARE NOT DOING OUR JOB AND WE'VE GOT TO START DOING OUR JOB. TODAY IS A GOOD DAY TO THINK ABOUT IT BECAUSE THIS PROJECT , THIS PROJECT WILL COMPOUND THE ISSUES ON 10 MILE CREEK LIKE WE HAVE NEVER SEEN. I WILL STILL SOME WORDS FROM THE FORMER PRESIDENT. LIK WE HAVE NEVER SEEN BEFORE, BUT IT IS TRUE. QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS?

>> DID YOU MENTION FOR CONDITIONS SOMEBODY WILL LOOK AT GORDY ROAD BECAUSE THAT'S NO BUILT FOR WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT. IS THAT A CONDITION BEFORE THEY GO INTO THE

BUILDING? >> YES AND EVERYTHING THE CHAI HAS SAID ALSO IS FULLY REVIEWED BEFORE BUILDING AND THAT'S PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION WHICH YOU WOULD SE COMING FORWARD. AS AN ASIDE AND LINKED TO GORDY ROAD I HEARD TODAY THAT AUTHORITY DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

[00:25:05]

HAS TOLD THE CITY AND THE COUNT THAT THEY ARE ALLOCATING FUNDING TO CONSTRUCT A INTERCHANGE WITH A TURNPIKE A WEST MIDWAY WHICH GOES FROM, WHICH IMPACTS GLADE ROAD CUT OFF AND JENKINS AND ALSO WOULD BE PART OF ANY FUTURE TRAFFIC STUDY AND THAT IS DUE FOR CONSTRUCTION IN 2027 WHICH WOUL ALIGN ITSELF TO MOST OF THE DEVELOPMENT COMING ONLINE. IN TERMS OF WE'VE GOT ISSUES WITH TRAFFIC AND CONGESTION . THIS IS A GOOD THING FOR THE CITY AN IT WILL ENABLE A BETTER FLOW I THIS AREA. WE ALSO HAVE ANOTHE DIFFICULTY WITH FLOW OF STORM WATER. SO, IS THAT A QUESTION OR THE CITY LOOKING AT ITS OWN REGULATIONS FOR ENGINEERING STANDARDS FOR STORMWATER TREATMENT WITHIN DEPARTMENT SITES? THAT SEEMS TO BE THE DIRECTION THAT YOU WERE INTIMATING. ARE WE TO RELY ON WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT STANDARDS OR DO WE HAVE ENHANCED STANDARDS INCORPORATE INTO VARIOUS OTHER ELEMENTS OF OUR CODE AND I HAVE SEEN THOSE DONE IN LANDSCAPING AND I WAS STILL CALL THEM INNOVATIVE DRAINAGE SYSTEMS WHERE WE STORE MORE ON THE SITE WHICH W DEAL WITH MORE ON-SITE AND RETREAT MORE ON-SITE RATHER THAN DISCHARGING IT . THERE WILL ALWAYS BE DISCHARGED, THE AMOUNT OF RAIN THAT WE EXPERIENCE IN FLORIDA ANYWAY I ALWAYS GOING TO BE DISCHARGED SOMEWHERE DURING A MAJOR STORM EVENT AND WE HAVE VARIOUS TEAR OF STORMS WHICH NEED TO BE ACCOMMODATED AND ONCE IT GETS TO A CERTAIN POINT IT WILL OUTFLOW AND THAT'S WHERE THE CREEKS COME IN TO PLAY ESSENTIALLY. SO, AND WE DO HAVE A BIT OF TIME, BUT I THINK IF THE PLANNING BOARD WILL MIND IT WE SHOULD BE LOOKING AT CITY CODE AND WHERE THAT LIES WITH STANDARDS WE ARE TRYING T ESTABLISH AND WITH THE PROBLEM AND ISSUES ARE THAT WE HAVE IN THE CITY TO DEAL WITH THE STORM WATER AND INCREASED DEVELOPMENT THIS IS ALL FROM THE PLAN THI WAS LIKE A OLD CITRUS. OBVIOUSLY NOW IT IS CLOSE TO THE INTERSECTION. THERE WILL B NO INTERSECTION ON BOARD AND WILL BE A PRIMARY FOR REDEVELOPMENT. WE LOOK AT THE CHANGE OF THE FUTURE LAND USE AND WE SCARE PEOPLE WITH THE ACTUAL ULTIMATE NUMBER OF POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT THAT COULD BE PUT ON. IT IS RARELY THE CASE THAT THAT IS DONE BECAUSE IT'S ALMOST PHYSICALLY IMPOSSIBLE TO DO THAT. IT CAN BE DONE AND IT IS ALLOWED UNDE FUTURE LAND USE. SO THERE WIL BE DEVELOPMENT THERE. THERE WILL BE DEVELOPMENT AROUND THES INTERSECTIONS AND I THINK WE ARE AWARE OF IT. WE ARE ALREAD TRYING TO INCORPORATE SOME AMENDMENTS TO LANDSCAPE CODE WHICH I HOPE WILL BE COMING FORWARD TO YOU WITHIN THE NEXT ONE OR TWO MONTHS IN TERMS OF DEALING WITH THE PLANTING AND HOW THAT IS DEALT WITH IN TERMS OF AIDING STORM WATER NATURAL VEGETATION AND HAPPY -- HABITAT. IS A LOT OF THINGS SPINNING AROUND IN THE PLANNIN DEPARTMENT AT THE MOMENT AND WE'RE TRYING TO HERD THE CATS TOGETHER. THERE ARE THEMES, TRANSPORTATION AND STORM WATER ARE THE TWO BIGGEST THEMES. AN WE ARE WORKING ON THOSE. AGAIN YOU'RE RIGHT, THE ENGINEERING AND THE CITY DEPARTMENTS NEED TO BE PART OF THIS AS WELL AS

ACCOUNTING. >> IS GORDY ROAD COUNTY OR CIT

? >> I THINK IT IS COUNTY.

>> WE CAN DO ALL THE WISHING AN PLANNING WE WANT, BUT IF WE DON'T DO ANYTHING WITH THE ROAD ITSELF.

>> IT MIGHT COME DOWN TO THE POINT WHERE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT WOULD HAVE TO BRING THAT ROAD T STANDARD AND THAT WOULD BE PAR OF THAT. THE PLANNING AGREEMEN WITH THIS COMES FORWARD IN FUTURE AND THE TRAFFIC ANALYSI SAYS MAYBE A TRAFFIC SIGNAL IS

REQUIRED. >> I'M TALKING THE ROAD ITSELF.

[00:30:01]

MY THOUGHT WAS IF WE ANNEX SOMETHING THAT'S NOT CAPABLE O FIXING THE ROAD SHOULD WE BE ANNEXING THE ROADS , TOO? NOBODY WANTS TO TAKE ON THE ROA AND IT'S NOT RIGHT BUT AT THE SAME TIME THE COUNTY WILL NOT FIX IT.

>> TO RESOLVE ANY COMMENTS THAT THE COUNTY OR CITY MADE ON THE CONDITION OF THE ROADS THAN THE APPLICANT WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE FOR FIXING THE ROADS AND BRING IT UP TO COUNTY STANDARD. AND THEN HANDING IT OVER TO THE COUNTY. ALL CITIES WANT TO DO IT. THAT WOULD BE PART OF A FUTURE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.

>> THAT IS HAPPENING IN PORT ST. LUCIE ON A REGULAR BASIS.

>> THE PROBLEM THEY ARE ANNEXING AND THEN WORRYING ABOUT THE ROADS SO I'M TRYING TO GET AHEAD OF IT .

>> I JUST SEE AN AWFUL LOT OF WORK COMING FORWARD FOR THIS.

THE TIMING TO BRING PROJECTS WITH THIS , FORTUNATELY IT IS IN THE COUNTY THEY WANT TO MOV IT IN THE CITY. SO THIS DISCUSSION CAN BE HAD FOR THE NEXT COUPLE YEARS AS ALL THE ENGINEERING IS TALKED ABOUT AND BEING DONE. WE WILL HAVE PLAYERS IN DOWNTOWN ON THE PROJECT OFF AND ON THAT WE CAN CERTAINLY GET SOLID DIALOGUE GOING ON IT. AND IT NEEDS TO BE. THE STORM WATER OUTFLOW NEEDS TO BE MORE OF A DISCUSSIO WITHIN THE CITY. WE'VE GOT TO STOP, DEPENDING ON COUNTY WATE AUTHORITY AND THE SOUTH FLORID WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT. TO HAVE UP-TO-DATE INFORMATION O EVERYTHING WE ARE PROVING. ALL THE DEVELOPMENT TAKING PLACE NOW, PLUS IT'S ON THE BOOKS IN FORT PIERCE AREA. AND THINK THAT THEY WILL KNOW EVERYTHING THEY NEED TO KNOW ABOUT WHAT W ARE DOING IN ORDER TO MAKE A JUDGMENT CALL ON WHETHER OR NO 10 MILE CREEK CAN HANDLE THE HYDRAULICS OF AN ADDITIONAL 5 MILLION GALLONS OF WATER COMING OUT. THAT IS THE POSITION WE ARE IN. WE ARE NOT ONLY IN IT ON 10 MILE CREEK, ALL OVER THE CITY AND THEY BRING IT UP ON A REGULAR BASIS. NOT ONLY WITH YOU, KEVIN , BUT PEOPLE IN THE COUNTY WILL HEAR FROM ME TOO. BUT WE'VE GOT TO DO IT, WE'VE GOT TO BE MORE PROACTIVE. IF I IS CITY ENGINEERING THEN NEEDS TO BE MORE PROACTIVE THAN SOMEHOW WE HAVE TO GET CITY ENGINEERING TO BE MORE PROACTIVE. PERHAPS WE NEED OUR OWN STORMWATER WATERSHEDS TO MOVE WATER INTO. THEY COULD BE FACILITIES AND THERE'S A LOT O THINGS WE CAN DO. WHAT WE'VE GO TO DO IS BREAK RESERVE FUNDS OU THAT ARE HIDDEN AWAY IN THE BAC ROOM AND START PULLING OUT DOLLARS. IT'S GOT TO BE HERE SOMEWHERE. PEOPLE HAVE BEEN PAYING TAXES FOR YEARS. OKAY.

FURTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS?

>> ONE QUESTION FOR STAFF. YOU MENTIONED SOMETHING IN THE PRESENTATION ABOUT ZONING BEIN MAINTAINED AS AGRICULTURAL.

WHAT IS THE PURPOSE OR ADVANTAG OF THAT?

>> THE APPLICANT REQUESTED THAT IN TERMS OF THEY ARE USING IT NOW FOR CONTROL USE AND AGRICULTURAL EXEMPTION SO THEY WANT TO SECURE THAT UNTIL SUCH TIME THEY CAME IN WITH A DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION. IT CA BE DONE, THE CITY HAS IN THE

PAST ON OTHER LOCATIONS. >> WHEN WOULD WE EXPECT TO SEE

A ZONING AMENDMENT? >> NOTHING HAPPENING ON THIS UNLESS A SITE PLAN CAME THROUGH AND YOU WOULD SEE THAT.

>> IT WOULD BE DONE IN PHASES, ON A PROJECT THIS SIZE.

>> I WOULD HOPE TO SEE A MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO GIVE US A BETTER HANDLE ON TRAFFIC AND STORM WATER FOR THE MASTER PLA AND THEN MAYBE BROKEN UP INTO PHASES. DEPENDING ON THE DETAI THOSE PHASES MAY BE COMING IN SUBSEQUENTLY INDIVIDUALLY AS THEY DEVELOP WITH CERTAIN AREA OF THE SITE BEING UNDER A COMPREHENSIVE INFRASTRUCTURE DEVELOPMENT PLAN WHERE A LOT O THE INFRASTRUCTURE WILL NEED TO BE IN PLACE BEFORE THE PHASES CAME IN. DEPENDING HOW IT WAS ENGINEERED AND ORGANIZED.

[00:35:02]

>> ANYTHING ELSE? NOT HEARING ANY. I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC PORTION OF THE MEETING. AND WE WILL HAVE THE APPLICANT SPEAK TO US FIRST. STATE YOUR NAME.

>> GOOD AFTERNOON MR. CHAIRMAN, PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS. I AM HERE REPRESENTING THE BARN FAMILY. THIS PROPERTY HAS BEEN KNOWN FOR A COUPLE GENERATIONS BY THE BARN FAMILY AND ANYBODY IN TOWN PROBABLY RECOGNIZES TH NAME BARN SUTURES SINCE 1943 HERE IN ST. LUCIE COUNTY. I WONDER IF WE CAN PULL THE LAND USE MAPS , I WANT TO REITERATE COUPLE THINGS. YOU MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE NOTICED, BUT THE ADJOINING PROPERTY TO THE NORT , THEY CALL THAT THE PROMISE LAND PROPERTY OWNED BY, THAT I IN CITY LIMITS OF FORD PIERCE ZONING MIXED USE. BY THE WAY THEY HAVE BEEN NOTIFIED THAT THEY HAVE TO UPGRADE GORDY ROAD TO THEIR PROPERTY WHICH IS A GOOD WAY TO THIS PROPERTY. AN THE OTHER LAND USE MAP GOING OU TO OKEECHOBEE ROAD , RIGHT THER ALL THE WAY TO OKEECHOBEE IS MIXED-USE. THAT IS MIXED-USE IN THE COUNTY IN THE PROPERTY AT OKEECHOBEE ROAD BUT BASICALLY THEY WANT TO KEEP CONSISTENT WITH WHAT THE NEIGHBORS HAVE.

AS THEY SAID IN THE PRESENTATION. CONSISTENT WITH FLORIDA STATUTE 170 104 CONTIGUOUS RECENTLY COMPACT, N URBAN SPRAWL. WILL NOT CREATE AN ENCLAVE. I'M GLAD YOU MENTIONED , THEY'RE RUNNING CATTLE ON THE PROPERTY THEY USE TO RUN CITRUS. THAT IS NOT VIABLE ANYMORE, BUT THEY WANT TO MAINTAIN, UNTIL AND THERE WILL BE A LOT OF APPLICATIONS COMING FORTH AT SOME POINT AND THAT IS A MULTI-YOUR PROCESS.

UNTIL THAT TIME THE WANT TO REMAIN THERE EXEMPTION. THIS IS A FIRST STEP IN MANY STEPS YET TO COME . I WOULD SAY LEAST TW OR THREE YEARS IT WILL REMAIN SO THE BIG TAX REVENUE FOR TH CITY IS GOING TO STILL BE A WAYS DOWN THE ROAD. I JUST GOT TO ADDRESS THE POTENTIAL DENSIT OF 15 UNITS PER ACRE. THAT IS WHAT YOU HAVE INCODE, THAT IS CERTAINLY NOT WHAT THEY ARE LOOKING TO DO. THERE TALKING WITH SOME DEVELOPERS NOW IN THE 4 TO 6 , BUT WE WILL SEE WHAT PLANS COME FORTH. I THINK YOU HAVE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT INFRASTRUCTURE AND SO FORTH. I IS NOT SET TO HAVE TO ACCOMMODATE 15 UNIT ACRE DENSITY. AND, THAT DEVELOPER THEY KNOW THEY HAVE TO EXPEND SUBSTANTIAL MONEY ON THESE OFF-SITE MINTS AND THAT IS ONE OF THE MAIN REASONS WHY WE WAN TO BE LIKE OUR NEIGHBORS IN MIXED-USE TO JUSTIFY THE EXPENSE OF DOING THAT. THEY HAVE OWNED THE PROPERTY FOR A COUPLE GENERATIONS AND THE BOTTOM LINE, THEY WANT THE SAME MIXED-USE ZONING THAT THEIR NEIGHBORS HAVE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I HOPE YOU CAN READ MY

HANDWRITING. >> ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? OKAY, THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE SPEAKING TO THIS PROJECT PLEASE STEP FORWARD . NOT SEEING ANYONE I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC PORTION OF THE MEETING AND COME BACK TO THE BOARD. FURTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? I WOULD ENTERTAIN A

MOTION. >> I MOVE FOR APPROVAL WITH THE

TWO CONDITIONS. >> SECOND.

>> MOTION AND SECOND . I'M SORRY. CALL THE ROLL PLEASE.

PLUS

[b. Annexation - 1703 Totten Road - Parcel ID: 2417-323-0001-000-5]

[00:40:08]

ANNEXATION 1703 TOTTEN ROAD PARCEL ID 2417-323-0001-000 -5

MR. -- MISS COOPER. >> THAT'S RIGHT, I REMEMBER.

>> THANK YOU. YOU MENTIONED SOMETHING ABOUT THAT TO ME.

>> OKAY. I WILL GET THERE. >> OKAY. AGAIN GOOD AFTERNOON CITY OF FORT PIERCE PLANNING BOARD. BEFORE YOU HAVE THE ORTI ANNEXATION AT 1703 TOTTEN ROAD 1703 TOTTEN ROAD. THE APPLICANT AND PROPERTY OWNER IS GEORGE RUIZ ORTIZ PARCEL ID 2417-323-0001- 000-5. IN SUMMARY, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A VOLUNTARY ANNEXATION OF THEIR ONE PARCEL LOCATED AT 1703 TOTTEN ROAD I FORT PIERCE, FLORIDA. SUBJECT PROPERTY HAS ST. LUCIE COUNTY FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF COMMERCIAL IN ST. LUCIE COUNTY ZONING DESIGNATION OF COMMERCIAL NEIGHBORHOOD. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING FUTURE LAND USE AS WELL AS OWNING CLASSIFICATION OF GENERAL COMMERCIAL ALLOWING 15 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE. THE CURRENT VALUE OF THE PROPERTY I $186,600. PROPERTY HAS EXISTIN DWELLING UNIT LOCATED ON IT. HERE IS AN AREA VIEW OF THE PROPERTY. WHERE IT IS APPROXIMATELY .59 ACRES. STAF RECOMMENDATION IS FOR THE PLANNING BOARD TO MOVE THE PROPOSED ANNEXATION APPLICATION FOR APPROVAL TO CITY COMMISSION ULTIMATE RECOMMENDATIONS. RECOMMEND APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS OR RECOMMEND DISAPPROVAL. THANK YOU.

>> COMMENCE QUESTIONS. NOT HEARING ANY. I WILL MOVE TO TH PUBLIC PORTION OF THE MEETING. IS THE APPLICANT REPRESENTED HERE? PLEASE STEP FORWARD. IF YOU WOULD, STATE YOUR NAME AND

ADDRESS AND SIGN IN PLEASE. >> I DO NOT SEE A PATTERN HERE, I'M SORRY. GOOD AFTERNOON BOAR MEMBERS . MY NAME IS GEORGE RUIZ ORTIZ. I'M THE OWNER OF 1703 TOTTEN ROAD. LOOKING FOR ANNEXATION OF THIS PROPERTY TO THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE, RIGHT NOW OWNED BY THE COUNTY AND LOOKING FOR THE PROCESS TO SEE IF WE CAN MOVE THIS PROPERTY WITH CHANGING FROM COMMERCIAL NEIGHBORHOOD TO GENERAL . PLEASE ANY QUESTIONS I AM MORE

THAN HAPPY TO ANSWER. >> ANY QUESTIONS? NOT SEEING ANY IS THAT A COUNTY STREET? FEEDER COMING INTO YOUR

PROPERTY? >> I ASSUME, BUT I DON'T KNOW.

I KNOW EVERY COMMERCIAL PROPERT AROUND MY PROPERTY BELONGS TO THE CHURCH THERE AS WELL. I GUESS IT IS THE COUNTY ROAD BUT I'M NOT SURE. HOWEVER, YOU UTILITIES ARE NEARBY. SO WHEN WE LOOK TO CONNECT TO UTILITIE THEY DON'T HAVE NO IDEA. THAT

[00:45:03]

TELL US THERE IS NO UTILITY THERE. YOU NEED TO FIGURE IT OUT, YOUR SEPTIC AND WATER. SO WE COME TO THE CITY AND THEY SAY YES WE ARE NEXT TO YOU, CLOSE BY AND YES.

>> LET ME ASK , I WANT TO KNOW WHY YOU'RE DOING THIS. WHAT YOU

WANT TO ANNEX INTO THE CITY? >> FIRST, THE PROPERTY WILL BE CHANGING FOR GENERAL COMMERCIAL SO IT WOULD BE FOR FUTURE COMMERCIAL USE. EVERYTHING AROUND HIS COMMERCIAL AS WELL SO IT IS A WIN-WIN OPERATION FOR BOTH SIDES. FOR THE CITY AN FOR US. WE WILL HAVE COMMERCIA AND WE WILL USE IT IN THE CITY WILL GET TAX MONEY SO I GUESS IT IS A WIN-WIN OPERATION FOR BOTH SIDES. THAT'S THE MOST FAI BUSINESS WE CAN FIND TODAY.

BUT WE TRY TO WORK WITH THE COUNTY. THERE WERE THE ONES WH PUSHED US TO SAY WE CANNOT GIVE YOU UTILITIES , SO TRY TO SEE IF THEY ARE CLOSE BY BUT THEY DON'T GIVE ME ENOUGH INFORMATION. PRETTY MUCH THEY DON'T WANT US. THAT'S HOW I LOOK AT IT BECAUSE AT LEAST WE HAVE ANSWERS YES THE CITY HAS UTILITIES NEARBY RIGHT THERE, TALK TO THEM AND CONNECT IT, BUT WE WILL SAY OKAY LET'S MOV TO CITY OF FORT PIERCE AND LOO

FOR A WIN-WIN OPERATION HERE. >> DOING OVER THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE UTILITIES ARE CLOSEST TO THIS?

>> LOOK OF THE PHOTOS , SOMEONE DRAWS THE LINE THAT SAYS THAT THE CHURCH IN THE CORNER , BELO THAT IS THE UTILITY CONNECTIONS. WATER AND SEWER. THAT'S THE LINES.

>> FPUA ? >> YES ALL OF IT.

>> I THOUGHT IT WAS. I KNEW IT WAS RIGHT THERE SOMEWHERE.

>> THAT'S WHY I'M LAUGHING. I' THINKING TO MYSELF WE ARE RIGHT

BEHIND. >> DOES NOT NECESSARILY MEAN W

HAVE UTILITIES. >> SEEMS LIKE THE SIMPLE

EXPLANATION. >> IT IS A OUTSIDE STORAGE LOT.

SO THERE'S NO TELLING WHAT IS THERE. WELL WE FOUND PROPERT IN THE MIDDLE OF FORT PIERCE THAT DID NOT HAVE UTILITY SERVICE. YOU ARE ONE OF THEM? OKAY. WELL , I'M HAPPY TO SEE YOU ARE MAKING THE DECISION TO SUPPORT FORT PIERCE.

>> AGAIN I THINK IT IS A WIN-WI OPERATION FOR BOTH SIDES.

>> I THINK IT'S THE RIGHT DECISION BECAUSE ALL AROUND YOU YOU ARE CIRCLED AND THE LINES ARE SO JAGGED, IT'S AMAZING SOMEBODY COMES IN WANTING ANNEXATION AND EVERYTHING AROUND THIS ONE PARCEL IS CITY OF FORT PIERCE EXCEPT FOR THIS ONE LITTLE PARCEL. HOW CAN IT STAY LIKE THAT SO OKAY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH AND I HOPE EVERYTHING WORKS OUT WELL FOR

YOU. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH.

>> YES, I KNEW THEY HAD THE LOT, BUT I THINK IT IS THAT LOT. SOMETIMES IF WE HAVE MORE OF A VIEW OF THE AREA IT WOULD BE MUCH EASIER FOR ME. I DO NO LOOK AT THIS, GENERALLY I GO OU AND I LOOK AT EVERY APPLICATION BUT I DID NOT GET OUT TO LOOK A THIS ONE. OKAY. ANY FURTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? NOT HEARING ANY I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

>> I JUST HAD A QUESTION , IF THIS PROPERTY IS ANNEXED TO CIT OF FORT PIERCE AND THERE ARE N SERVICES WHAT HAPPENS? TO THE PROPERTY AS FAR AS CONNECTION T UTILITIES?

>> WELL THERE IS A COUPLE OF POTENTIAL SCENARIOS , BUT TYPICALLY WHAT TAKES PLACE KEVIN?

>> WE WOULD USUALLY , WHEN ANNEXATION IS TAKING PLACE WE WOULD CONFIRM WITH UTILITIES AUTHORITY THAT SERVICES ARE THERE IN THE APPLICANT WOULD B ADVISED IF THEY ARE OR NOT. WE WOULD ENCOURAGE , IF THE APPLICANT WAS THINKING OF ANNEXATION AND THERE WAS NO SERVICE IN THE AREA THAT THEY ENGAGE IN EXTENDING THE SERVICE TO THEIR PROPERTY. IT CAUSES DIFFICULTY IN DEVELOPMENT PROCESSING AND SITE PLAN AND BUILDING. SO THEY ARE NOT REALLY GETTING ANY BENEFIT IN THE STATE GOT UTILITIES TO THE PROPERTY. THAT USUALLY COMES OUT DURING, WE HAVE A PRELIMINARY MEETING WITH APPLICANTS AND THEN WE GO THROUGH THE TECHNICAL REVIEW

[00:50:01]

COMMITTEE AND THEN THE FPUA WOULD CHIME IN AND ADVISE THE APPLICANT AND US WHETHER OR NOT UTILITIES ARE AVAILABLE. AND DON'T KNOW, THINGS THAT GO ON IN THE CITY WHERE WE HAVE PARCELS THAT ARE SURROUNDED BY CITY UTILITIES, SOMETIMES ARE CAUSED BY PARCELS NOT ENGAGING WITH UTILITIES WHEN THEY WERE I THE AREA AND PULLING UTILITIES THROUGH OR WITH PARCELS THAT ARE NOT CLOSE BY. AND THAT IS SERIOUS EXPENSE IN GETTING THOSE IN. THERE IS AN AGREEMEN THAT USUALLY MADE EVEN IF A PARCEL IS IN THE COUNTY THERE IS AN AGREEMENT MADE AT THE TIM OF CONNECTION THAT IF THE CONNECTION IS MADE IN THE CITY AND FPUA CAN ASK FOR THE PROPERTY TO BE ANNEXED INTO THE CITY. SO WE'RE TRYING TO TIDY U THE BOUNDARIES .

>> THANK YOU. CLEAR? WE JUST HAD ONE LAST MONTH. DIDN'T WE JUST HAVE ONE LAST MONTH AND THE MONTH BEFORE THAT UTILITIES HAD TO BE BROUGHT IN 7000 FEET OR SOMETHING? OKAY.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL.

>> SECOND. >> SECOND. MOTION AND SECOND

CALL THE ROLL PLEASE. >>

>> NEXT ITEM OF BUSINESS IS ITEM 6 C. FINAL PLAT , HERNAND

[c. Final Plat - Hernando Street Plat - 601 Hernando Street]

STREET . 601 . ALL RIGHT. PLANNING BOARD.

>> BEFORE USE APPLICATION FOR FINAL PLAT FOR HERNANDO STREET AT 601. APPLICANT IS WITH RED TAIL DESIGN GROUP. PROPERTY OWNERS ARE CHRISTOPHER AND PAMELA AND THE PARCEL IDEAS 240150200850007 AND. IN SUMMARY REQUEST FOR REVIEW OF AN APPLICATION FOR FINAL PLAT TO SUBDIVIDE ONE PARCEL INTO SI LOTS. THIS IS THE SITE LOCATIO WITH AREA OF GIVE OR TAKE .81 ACRES. THE EXISTING PROPOSED FUTURE LAND USE IS HUTCHINSON ISLAND RESIDENTIAL. THE CURREN ZONING IS HUTCHINSON ISLAND MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL . THIS IS THE FINAL PLAT IN QUESTION . THIS FINAL PLAT FOR SUBDIVISION TITLED HERNANDO SUBDIVISION'S AFRICA MEN'S APPROVAL OF REQUEST AS THE FINA PLAT NEEDS -- MEETS CRITERIA IN CODE OF ORDINANCES AND IS CONSISTENT WITH DEVELOPING CODE ENCUMBRANCE A PLAN. CONDITION OF APPROVAL STAFF RECOMMENDS ONE CONDITION, THE APPLICANT WILL SUPPLY TWO MYLARS FOR SIGNATURES AND PLAT IS RECORDE WITH THE CLERK OF COURTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH FLORIDA STATE STATUTE 177 111. STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS FOR THE PLANNING BOARD TO MOVE THE FINA PLAT FOR APPROVAL TO CITY COMMISSION WITH ONE CONDITION. ALTERNATE RECOMMENDATIONS. THE BOARD CAN GIVE RECOMMENDATION O APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS OR RECOMMENDATION OF DISAPPROVAL. THANK YOU.

>> SOME TIME AGO. AND I'M TURNING THE CLOCK BACK A COUPL OF YEARS. I DON'T EVEN REMEMBE IF YOU WERE HERE. MR. GILMORE WAS NOT HERE. WE WORKED ON TH ABANDONMENT THAT RAN ACROSS SOMEWHERE NEAR THE CENTER OF THIS PROPERTY AND WE WORKED ON THE ABANDONMENT AND THERE WAS DISCUSSION WHETHER OR NOT THER WAS EXISTING UTILITIES UNDERGROUND IN FRANCIS. I KNO THERE WAS DISCUSSION AFTER WE DID OUR WORK ON THE RECOMMENDE APPROVAL FOR FRANCIS ON THAT LOT, BUT I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE OUTCOME WAS. I'M ASSUMING I IMAGINE THAT HE WILL BE ABLE TO ANSWER THIS QUESTION BETTER. I AM ASSUMING THAT IT WAS IN THE UNDERGROUND DISCOVERY THAT THERE WAS NO UTILITIES IN THE

[00:55:01]

RIGHT-OF-WAY OF FRANCIS. >> MY UNDERSTANDING IS BASED OF THE COMMENTS OF THE TRC THAT THERE WERE NO UNDERGROUND CONNECTIONS OR ANYTHING FOR UTILITIES.

>> I HAVE GONE BACK NOW MAYBE EVEN MORE THAN A COUPLE YEARS.

BECAUSE I'M THINKING THAT IT WAS PRIOR TO , SO I DON'T THIN IT WAS , I THINK IT WAS , YEAH YOU WERE HERE?

>> NO SIR. >> I DID NOT THINK SO.

>> OKAY. I AM ASSUMING THAT MYSTERY WAS SOLVED AND THAT THERE ARE NO UTILITIES INVOLVE AND I WOULD HOPE THAT THE APPLICANT AND SINCE THERE IS NO OTHER PUBLIC HERE, WHY DON'T THE APPLICANT , AND ENGAGE IN THE CONVERSATION. WE WILL GET IT DONE AT ONE TIME. I WILL OPE THE PUBLIC PORTION OF THE MEETING FOR THE APPLICANT. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND SIGN

IT . >> GOOD AFTERNOON MEMBERS. FOR THE RECORD TODD MALLORY. GLAD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. THIS IS A PROCESS ONGOING FOR A LON TIME. THIS BEGAN IN 2021. AND THIS WAS SUPPOSED TO BE A SIMPL PROCESS. KEVIN IS PICKING UP THE PIECES AND FINALIZING THIS. YOU MAY RECALL THIS BEGAN WITH THE FORMER PLANNING DIRECTOR AN STAFF ASKING FOR THE APPLICANT TO TAKE WHAT HAD BEEN FIVE LOTS TO DO UNITY OF TITLE MAKING IT ONE LOT AND DOING THE PROCESS IT GOES BACK TO THE HURRICANES OF 2004 AND 2005 OR THE RELEVANT APARTMENT UNITS. THER WERE 11 UNITS. GOT RID OF 11 INSTEAD OF REPLACING DECIDED T TAKE INSTEAD OF FIVE LOTS, SIX INCLUDING ABANDONMENT OF STREE RIGHT-OF-WAY SO WE WOULD HAVE LOWER DENSITY OVERALL. INSTEAD OF 11+ THE VACANT LOTS WE WOUL ONLY HAVE SIX HOMES . SUPPOSED TO BE SIMPLE AND EASY AND THEN THE PD SAID WE DON'T WANT THE P SO COME BACK SO IT'S BEEN ONE THING AFTER ANOTHER. WE ARE AT THE FINAL PROCESS OF THE HOMEOWNER WHO HAS HAD PLANS READY AND TOOK THEM TO THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT TO SAY HERE'S WHAT I WANT TO DO WITH THESE HOMES AND HE GOT STOPPED AND SAID WE CAN GET THROUGH THA NOW HE IS FINALLY AT THE END

OF HIS JOURNEY. >> OKAY AND MUST OF BEEN EARLY QUESTION THERE ARE NO UTILITIES EXCEPT ALONG THE STREET RIGHT-OF-WAY. OTHER THAN THAT THERE'S NOTHING. SO THAT IS ABOUT , THE CITY NORMALLY WOULD NOT WORK THROUGH ABANDONMENT PROCESS WITH THOSE IN PLACE CAUSING A CONFLICT OF ISSUE.

THAT SORT OF RELATES TO THE QUESTION ABOUT ANNEXATION. THE WAY THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE DEALS WITH ANNEXATION IS DIFFERENT FROM MOST CITIES, MOS CITIES SAY YOU WANT TO ANNEX PROPERTY THEY WILL CONSIDER IT AND SEE WHAT'S THE CONTIGUOUS ASPECT AND THEY WANT TO SEE IF THEY CAN PROVIDE SERVICES TO TH AREA. MAKE SURE IT MAKES SENSE SO SOMEBODY SAYS WE FOUND A WAY TO CONNECT TO THE CITY BUT IT WOULD BE HARD FOR THE CITY TO GET SERVICES OUT , WHETHER IT UTILITIES OR SOLID WASTE. IT CA BE A CHALLENGE SO YOU HAVE THE CITY WITH SOLID WASTE PROVIDER DIFFERENT FROM THE COUNTY, DIFFERENT DAYS AND SCHEDULES, DIFFERENT POLICE, DIFFERENT ZONING SO WHAT HAPPENS AT THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE DOES ANNEXATION BASED ON THE NEED FOR UTILITIES. IF YOU NEED UTILITIES THEY AUTOMATICALLY ANNEX YOU IN. IF YOU LOOK AT THE DETAIL ON THE CITY WEBSITE ON THE CITY MAP THAT SHOWS THE DIFFERENT PARCELS IN THE CITY YOU WILL SEE PARCELS ON ONE STREET IN IN OUT OUT OUT, IN OUT, IN OUT. IMAGINE THE CHALLENGES THAT CREATES FOR YOUR NEIGHBOR LIKE WAIT A MINUT YOUR TRASH IS OUT BUT REMEMBER WE ARE COUNTY IN YOUR CITY. THAT YOUR DOG ON MY ART WHO AM CALLING? IT'S JUST A REAL STRUGGLE AT TIMES BUT THAT'S HOW THE CITY HAS TRIED TO WORK THROUGH THE GROWTH OF UTILITY BY SEEING IF YOU NEED UTILITIES YOU HAVE TO ANNEX IN. NOW YOU ARE IN IT DOESN'T MATTER WHETHE OR NOT IT MADE SENSE WITH WHO IS PROVIDING TRASH ON WHAT DAY AND WHETHER IT MAKES SENSE BECAUSE NOW YOU HAVE DOUBLE THE TRASH TRUCKS AND IT IS INTERESTING SCENARIO. SO THAT' A LITTLE BIT OF THE HISTORY AND

[01:00:04]

THOUGHT PROCESS AS WE CAN RELATE TO THAT. TO THIS IT SHOULD BE SIMPLE. GOING TO THE PROCESS, THIS IS IN PLACE, WE HAVE BEEN THROUGH THE ZONING AND WE ARE NOW AT THE FINAL STAGE WITH SIDE PLAN APPROVED NOW THIS IS GETTING THE PLANT I PLACE, THE PLAT ALLOWS THEM TO PHYSICALLY SELL THE LOTS. THEY HAVE IT APPROVED BY THE COMMISSION THAN THE APPLICANT

CAN PHYSICALLY SELL THE LOTS. >> THESE LOTS ARE SOMEWHAT

NARROW. >> 45 FEET WIDE, YES. YOU HAVE LOTS ON THE ISLAND. THE ZONING DISTRICT FOR THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE , THEY ARE THE LOWEST , IF YOU LOOK AT THE DENSITIES CREATED AND ALLOWED IN TERMS O THE CITY. THERE IS NOT A DISTRICT THAT ALLOWS FOR MOST LOTS ON THE ISLAND TO BE CONSIDERED LEGAL BECAUSE MANY O THE ISLAND ARE BELOW YOUR MINIMUM LOT WITH. SO YOU HAVE 65 FOOT LOT WITH MINIMUM FOR CITY LOTS AND MOST ON THE ISLAND ARE 60, 50, SOME ARE I THE 30S SO YOU HAVE A VARIETY OF LOT WITH. SO THAT IS WHAT I

THERE. >> WITH THAT SAID THEY WILL BE SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES AND MEET TH THRESHOLD OF 5000 SQUARE FEET.

FROM A COUPLE YEARS AGO TO ALLOW LAW USAGE. THIS IS NOT

UNDER THE SOUTH BEACH OVERLAY? >> IT IS, YES. THEY MEET THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE AMOUNT OF LAND.

>> 45 WHEAT -- FEET >> SO THE LAND REQUIREMENT IS 5000 SQUARE FEET. THIS IS ABOV THAT, 5700 FOR EACH LOT. SO THEY MEET THE REQUIREMENT ALONGSIDE THE LOT LENGTH AND WIDTH SOUTH BEACH OVERLAY DISTRICT.

>> OKAY, OKAY. LATER ON I WAN TO ADDRESS TO TRY TO CLEAR UP BECAUSE THERE HAS BEEN SOME DISCUSSION CONCERNING WARRANT OF THE. AND OF JUST GOING TO OUTLINE IT AND THEN WE CAN DECIDE WHETHER WE WANT TO TALK ABOUT IT THIS MINUTE OR NOT.

POSSIBLY WANT TO TALK ABOUT IT IN A SPECIAL TIME THAT WE SET UP. AS A TRAINING PROCESS FOR THE PLANNING BOARD. WHAT HAS COME TO LIGHT OVER THE PAST COUPLE OF MONTHS IS THAT IF I HAVE TWO LOTS AND YOU WANT TO GLUE THEM TOGETHER AND MAKE THE ONE LOT, I GO THROUGH THE COUNTY TO DO THAT AND I MIGHT GO THROUGH THE COUNTY TO DO THA WITHOUT EVER ACKNOWLEDGING TO THE CITY THAT I WAS GOING TO D THAT. AND THE COUNTY MAY OR MA NOT CALL THE CITY AND GIVE PLANNING A HEADS UP OR ANY DEPARTMENT A HEADS UP THAT I'M TAKING TWO LOTS AND I'M GOING TO GLUE THEM TOGETHER TO MAKE ONE. HOWEVER, NOW THAT I'VE GO THEM GLUED TOGETHER TO MAKE ONE AND THIS IS A GOOD EXAMPLE.

THIS HAD THREE LOTS, FIVE LOTS. THEY WERE GLUED TOGETHER TO MAK ONE TO THE COUNTY AT THE REQUEST, IN THIS CASE, OF THE

CITY. >> TO HELP WITH THAT THE COUNT PROCESS IS DIFFERENT. TO MAKE IT CLEAR TODAY, YOU, ANYBODY CAN GO TO THE COUNTY AND YOU CA RECORD DOCUMENTS AT THE CLERK OF THE COURT AND WHEN THE DOCUMENTS ARE RECORDED AND SEN TO THE PROPERTY APPRAISER OFFIC THINGS START IN THAT MINDSET BUT THAT DOES NOT MEAN THEY WERE LEGALLY DONE AS IT RELATES TO ZONING STANDARDS FOR THE COUNTY OR CITY. SO IT IS COMMONPLACE AND REALTORS GET CAUGHT IN THE SCENARIO. I'M DOING WITH ONE NOW ON CARLTON ROAD. THE THIRD OWNERS TRYING TO BUILD A HOUSE ON HIS FIVE-ACRE PIECE OF LAND THAT H PURCHASED. THE THIRD OWNER IN THE LAST 15 YEARS TO PURCHASE.

HE CANNOT BUILD A HOUSE ON THAT BECAUSE IT WAS NEVER LEGALLY ESTABLISHED. HE SAID WHAT DO YOU MEAN? NOBODY EVER PLATTED IT OR DID A LOT SPLIT. THEY CUT OUT THE PIECE AND THEY RECORDE WITH THE DESCRIPTION BUT IT IS NOT LEGALLY RECOGNIZED BY THE

[01:05:02]

COUNTY BECAUSE IT DOES NOT MEET THEIR ZONING STANDARDS AS THE CORRECT WITH. IT IS THE LONG POLE AND THEN A PIECE ON THE BACK. NOW IN ORDER TO GET A HOUSE CAN YOU IMAGINE, YOU PURCHASED THIS LOT, YOU ARE TH THIRD OWNER, YOU SHOW UP WITH BUILDING PLANS TO THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT TO SAY HERE'S THE HOME I WANT TO BUILD, I RETIRED FROM MY JOB AND THIS WAS HIS DREAM HOME AND THEY SAY YOU CAN'T DO IT. NOW HE IS TO GET VARIANCE, DO A MINOR SITE PLAN AND A FULL PLAT SO HE WILL SPEN ABOUT $37,000 ON THIS PROCESS FOR SOMETHING THAT'S GOING TO TAKE HIM NINE MONTHS TO DO MEANWHILE HE'S WAITING WITH HIS WIFE TO SAY I THOUGHT I WAS IS MOVING RETIRING AND BUILDING MY

HOME. >> DOES HE HAVE A WARRANTY OF

DEED? >> HE DID.

>> THE WARRANTY OF DEED IS PUT TOGETHER.

>> BUT AGAIN IT DID NOT GET APPROVED BY THE COUNTY TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING SIMILAR TO THE CITY. IN THIS CASE THE CIT SAID WE WANT TO DO A UNITY OF TITLE SO THIS WAS A FORMER PLANNER. NONE OF THEM HERE. HE HAD THE APPLICANT DO THIS IN THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT CAME ALONG AND SAID YOU HAVE ONE LARGE PARCEL. HE SAID WAIT A MINUTE I DON'T HAVE ONE. I HAD FIVE PARCELS. YOU TOLD ME TO COMBINE THEM. SO IT'S ALWAYS A

INTERESTING JOURNEY. >> NOW HE'S GOT SIX.

>> NOW IT WILL BE SIX. FROM 5 T 6.

>> NOW THE PROCESS, HE HAS TO COME BACK TO THE CITY TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS TO SEPARATE IT TO SIX PARCELS AS PART OF

THE PLAT. >> RIGHT, IF YOU LOOK AT THE MAP IT LOOKS LIKE FIVE PARCELS ARE THERE. BUT IT IS ACTUALLY

ONE. >> COULD THIS HAVE BEEN DONE THROUGH A PLANT TO TAKE FIVE PARCEL LOT AND MAKE IT SIX PARCELS BY DEVELOPING A PLANT SO STILL HAD TO GO TO THE COUNT

TO HAVE IT DONE. >> IT WAS DONE TO THE CITY.

AFTER APPROVED TO CITY IT IS A THE COUNTY SO THE COUNTY WILL HAVE THE NEW PLANT AND THE NEW PLANT WILL SHOW WHAT'S GOING ON AND THAT WILL BE SENT TO THE PROPERTY APPRAISER . SO YOUR PLAT , THIS WAS ONE CONDITION. IT HAS THE MYLAR , THE MYLAR HA SEVERAL PAGES. FIRST IS YOUR COVER PAGE WITH THE TITLE , SIGNATURE AND LINE ITEMS IN TH CLERK OF THE COURT OR THE CITY CLERK AND OTHERS WILL ALL SIGN ON THAT. IF YOU HAVE A MORTGAG THAT IS PUT ON AS WELL. WHATEVER IMPORTANT DOCUMENTS THAT ARE DEEMED TO BE PRESENT IN THE SECOND PAGE SHOWS THE MA

THAT YOU CAN SEE >> OKAY. OTHER QUESTIONS?

>> NO. MY IDEAS ALL GOT SHOT DOWN. I THOUGHT THEY WERE TOO THIN. IF YOU LOOK TO THE WEST YOU CAN SEE THREE LOTS. IF YOU LOOK TO THE RIGHT OF OCEAN YOU SEE HOW SMALL THOSE ARE. SO MY THINKING GOING OUT THERE SAYS THERE'S NO WAY YOU CAN GET SIX BUILDINGS IN THAT SPOT, BUT I GUESS.

>> WE HAD TO GO THROUGH THE VARIANCE PROCESS. IT WAS ALREADY DONE AND CAME THROUGH YOU ALL.

>> BEFORE ME JUST TO BE CLEAR.

>> PURPOSELY BEFORE YOUR. NO.

>> JUST A NOTE THE R2 DISTRICT HAS EVEN STRICTER GUIDELINES FO LARGER LOTS BUT AS YOU CAN SEE THEY ARE SMALLER BECAUSE OF THE

OVERLAY DISTRICT. >> WHEN YOU GET OVERLAY THINGS CHANGE. THIS IS THE SAME OWNER IS THE ONE WHO OWNS FRANCIS HERNANDEZ ACROSS THE STREET? THE NORTHEAST OF THAT SECTION.

IS THAT THE SAME OWNER WITH THA PROPERTY? WEREN'T THEY HERE

ONCE BEFORE? NO? ALL RIGHT. >> THIS PROPERTY WAS BOUGHT IN

2000 ? I DON'T KNOW. >> IS THE BUILDING COMING DOWN

IN THAT PROPERTY NOW? >> IT IS VACANT.

>> HAVE ONE PROPERTY IN THE YELLOW SQUARE.

>> OUTSIDE, YEAH. YOU HAVE SIX TOTAL COUNTING THAT BUILDING.

[01:10:05]

THAT'S IN THE FIRST PLATTED LOT.

>> THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. APPRECIATE IT.

>> THANK YOU. WE ALWAYS PICK UP INFORMATION SOMEHOW. LIKE IT

OR NOT. >> WE ARE ALL PART OF THE

PROCESS. >> SEND THE CITY A BILL. SEND KEVIN THE BILL. OKAY. ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS AT ALL? IF NOT I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

>> A MOVE FOR APPROVAL WITH ONE CONDITION.

>> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND.

>> VERY MUCH. 2013 IS WHEN THEY BOUGHT THAT LOT OR LOTS.

PARCEL. OKAY. THE NEXT ITEM O BUSINESS IS ZONING TEXT

[d. Zoning Text Amendment - Landscape Bond and Landscape Enforcement.]

AMENDMENT FOR LANDSCAPING BOND AND LANDSCAPING ENFORCEMENT.

>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. SO, AS WE MOVE THROUGH THIS I -- PLA APPROVAL PROCESS ONE OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF THAT WHEN PEOPLE PUT IN A LANDSCAPE PLAN IS TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS OF ESTIMATING LANDSCAPE BOND WHICH IS THE COST OF REPLACEMEN OF LANDSCAPING SHOULD IT FAIL DURING THE FIRST TWO YEARS I THINK. SO WE FOUND THAT WE AR ENCOUNTERING ISSUES WITH MANAGING THOSE BONDS , WHERE THOSE BONDS ARE IN THE RELUCTANCE OF THE CITY WANTING TO GO ON TO SOMEBODY'S PROPERTY AND PULL THE BOND AND THEN GO BUY LANDSCAPING AND PLANT IT FOR THEM. I THINK THE ONUS IS O THE SITE OWNER TO TAKE CARE OF THE LANDSCAPING. THAT IS IN PERPETUITY ONCE THE SITE PLAN HAS BEEN APPROVED LANDSCAPING ON THE SITE SHOULD BE MAINTAINE AS APPROVED AND YOU CAN GO AROUND A CITY AND SEE VARIOUS LOCATIONS WHERE LANDSCAPING HA BEEN REMOVED AND I THINK WHAT HAVE NOTED IN THE CITY IS THAT WE NEED TO HAVE MORE ACTION , MORE RESPONSIBILITY FROM SITE AND PROPERTY OWNERS WHERE WE HAVE RECENTLY APPROVED SOME REALLY NICE LANDSCAPING SCHEME THAT ARE LYING ON PULLING A BOND AND GOING TO THE PROCESS WHERE THE CITY WERE RELUCTANT AND GOING ON PEOPLE'S PROPERTIES IN DOING THAT. WE HAVE MECHANISMS IN PLACE THAT W CAN ISSUE CODE ENFORCEMENT AND HAVE A FINE ACCUMULATING ON PROPERTY TO REINSTATE THE LANDSCAPE. WANTS THE LANDSCAPING IS INSTALLED, WE G OUT THERE. PRIOR TO FINAL CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY WHEN EVERYTHING ON THE SITE SHOULD B DONE, WE GO OUT AND THE LANDSCAPING IS INSPECTED TO MAKE SURE IT'S ALL IN PLACE. THEY DON'T GET A FINAL CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPATION UNLESS IT'S IN PLACE. SO THAT STARTS THE PROCESS AND THEN THEREAFTER IT SHOULD BE MONITORED AND IF SOMETHING FAILS THAN THE LANDSCAPE BOND IS PULLED ANDREA PROPERTIES THAT ARE OUT NOW OUTSIDE OF TWO YEARS THAT ARE NOT MAINTAINING LANDSCAPING. THERE IS PROVISIO IN THE CODE ALREADY THAT SAYS IF YOU'RE NOT MAINTAINING LANDSCAPING WE SHOULD BE CODE ENFORCING THAT. AND ESTABLISHING LANDSCAPING BACK TO WHAT WAS APPROVED. SO THE SUGGESTION IS , THE RECOMMENDATION IS DURING THE SITE PLAN PROCESS, APPLICANTS ARE MADE VERY AWARE OF THAT.

THEY PUT FORWARD A LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT. THAT IS APPROVED AS PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT PACKAGE. IT WILL B

[01:15:01]

PRESENTED TO THE PLANNING BOARD AND CITY COMMISSION. IT BECOMES PART OF THE APPROVAL AND THEREAFTER IF THAT IS NOT MET THEY WILL SUBJECT TO CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTION. THIS IS A INITIATIVE THAT DEPENDS ON BOT PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND CODE ENFORCEMENT WORKING HAND-IN-HAN . WE WILL BE LOOKING AT PROPERTIES THAT ARE SUBJECT T LANDSCAPE APPROVED PLANS AND THEN PUTTING TOGETHER A REPORT THAT WOULD GO TO THE CODE ENFORCEMENT DEPARTMENT AND INITIATING SOME RESOLUTION TO THESE THINGS. SO THAT IS THE POTENTIAL AND THE RECOMMENDATION HERE. WE DO HAV A LOT OF COMPLAINTS IF I CAN PUT IT THAT WAY. IN THAT THE ONUS ON THE DELIVERER PROPERTY OWNER TO GET A LANDSCAPE BOND I THE PROCESS CAN BE QUITE EXPENSIVE AND IT IS UNDER THE SYSTEM WITH THE MONITOR. IT IS OFTEN TIME TAKE THE. SO WE WANT TO MOVE THE RESPONSIBILITY TO TAKING CARE OF THIS AND THESE APPROVED PLANS ONTO THE DEVELOPER, THE PROPERTY OWNER AND THE PEOPLE WHO ACTUALLY SAID THEY WERE GOING TO DO THI RATHER THAN HAVING THE CITY TAK CARE OF IT ULTIMATELY. SO THAT'S THE PROPOSAL. SO WE ARE RECOMMENDING THAT SECTION 123 - AND 1-2-3-7 REGARDING LANDSCAP BOND AND LANDSCAPE ENFORCEMENT IS MOVED FORWARD TO THE CITY COMMISSION WITH RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL THAT WOULD REMOVE THE REQUIREMENT FOR A LANDSCAPE BOND , ADD REQUIRE FOR MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT AND ADD THE ANNUAL CITY INSPECTION.

AND I HAVE ATTACHED TO THE AGENDA ITEM A CLEAN VERSION O THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE IN THERE.

>> SO THE PROCESS HAS BEEN THAT A BOND WAS POSTED , TO COVER THE COST OF THE LANDSCAPE IN THE EVENT THAT THE LANDSCAP PORTIONS OF IT FAILED. THAT WOULD THEN PUT THE RESPONSIBILITY ONTO THE CITY TO PACE THE FAILED LANDSCAPE.

YES. >> VERY OFTEN IN REVIEWING PROJECTS , THE PLANNING BOARD WILL POSE QUESTIONS TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. WHOSE RESPONSIBILITY IS IT TO FOLLOW UP ON THIS LANDSCAPING AND THE ANSWER TRADITIONALLY HAD BEEN THAT IT WAS A CODE ENFORCEMENT ISSUE. EXCEPT I GUESS IT REALL WASN'T A CODE ENFORCEMENT ISSUE

>> I THINK IT IS A CODE ENFORCEMENT ISSUE AT THE MOMENT BUT IT WOULD DEPEND ON SOMEBOD REPORTING THE ISSUE.

>> FOR CODE ENFORCEMENT AND THEN TAKE ACTION. WITH THE BOND THAT HAS THE CITY REPLACING THE FAILED LANDSCAPE OF TO A TWO-YEAR WINDOW. AND I THINK TH WINDOW YOU COMMENTED IS CORRECT. 'S WE WANT TO DO AWAY WITH THE BOND AND HAVE THE OWNER AVAILABLE , DEVELOPER FOR THE LANDSCAPE TO BE RESPONSIBLE AND MOVE FORWARD SO WE GET THE CITY OUT OF THE PICTURE AND THE CITY NO LONGER HAS TO ACCOUNT FOR ALL THESE BONDS AND HOW MANY DOLLARS WA OR WAS NOT SPENT OUT OF THE BON AND I AM THE DEVELOPER AND I COME BACK TO THE CITY AND SAY WANT MY BOND FOR $10,000 BACK.

>> THAT IS PRECISELY THE ISSUE.

>> NOBODY KNOWS IF 2000 WAS SPENT OR NOT.

>> RIGHT, EXACTLY. >> IS THIS CLEAR TO EVERYBODY

WHAT WE ARE DOING? >> YES. IT MAKES SENSE.

>> WHEN I FIRST READ THIS I THOUGHT I'VE GOT TO READ THIS AGAIN. BECAUSE I THINK THAT OVER THE YEARS, THE PLATTING BOARD REPRESENTATIVES THAT HAVE COME AND GONE HAVE BEEN A SOME POINT A LITTLE MISLED INTO HOW THIS PROCESS WAS WORKING AND I WAS A BIT CONFUSED BECAUSE ONCE YOU SAY BOND, TO ME THAT TELLS ME YOU HAVE ACCEPTED , YOU HAVE TAKEN RESPONSIBILITY FROM ME AND PUT IT ON YOURSELF. BUT IT WAS

[01:20:04]

ALWAYS PUT FORWARD TO THE BOARD AS OH, NO, THE LAND OWNER OR THE DEVELOPER OR THE TENANT IS RESPONSIBLE AND IT NEVER SEEME BRIGHT. IT WAS NOT SO IMPORTAN TO ME PERSONALLY. SO I NEVER GOT INTO IT MUCH. OKAY. ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS?

>> SO, THE DRAFT ORDINANCE IS PROPOSING A MANDATORY ANNUAL INSPECTION OF ANY LANDSCAPE THAT REQUIRES A LANDSCAPE

PERMIT ? >> YES.

>> WHO PERFORMS THAT INSPECTION

>> THAT WOULD BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF PLANNING. I THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE TAKEN AS A RESPONSIBILITY OF THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT WHERE THEY ARE AWARE OF THE SITES APPROVED MORE LIKELY TO BE AWARE OF WHA LANDSCAPING SHOULD BE THERE AN OBVIOUSLY MORE LIKELY TO BE ABL TO INTERPRET THE LANDSCAPE TO WHAT'S ON SITE. THAT ALSO MAY , YES. YOU KNOW WE WON'T BE ENFORCING THAT , WE WILL BE REFERRING ENFORCEMENT TO CODE ENFORCEMENT WITH A PACKAE WHICH THEY WILL BE ABLE TO ACT ON AND THINK THE BREAKPOINT WHERE CODE ENFORCEMENT MAY STRUGGLE IS GATHERING INFORMATION TO PRECISELY AIM CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTION TOWARD AND THEY WOULD USE THE COME TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND ASK WHICH PART OF THE CODE DOES THI VIOLATE OR WHAT INFORMATION DO YOU HAVE? INSTEAD OF IT HAVING COME IN REVERSE WE WANT TO BE MORE PROACTIVE AND WE'RE TRYIN TO GET THE CITY TO LOOK BETTER. WE ARE TRYING TO GET THE RESPONSIBILITY ON PROPERTY OWNERS AND DEVELOPERS TO HELP U TO DO THAT AND IF PEOPLE ARE AWARE THAT THE WAY WE ARE DOIN THINGS I THINK MORE LIKELY THE WILL TAKE RESPONSIBILITY ABOUT WHAT THEY HAVE AGREED TO DO. BECAUSE THERE IS RELUCTANCE IN THE CITY TO PULL THE BONDS AND TAKE ACTION AND ENGAGE WITH A THIRD ENTITY TO GO REPLACE LANDSCAPING ON SOMEBODY ELSE PROPERTY. I DON'T LIKE THAT IDEA. I THINK IT IS TOO COMPLICATED AS THE CHAIR SAYS.

>> WEDNESDAY PLANNING. ARBORISTS.

>> WE DO HAVE A ARBORIST. >> IS NOT NECESSARILY THE PLANNER, WE HAVE ARBORISTS RESPONSIBLE FOR COUNTY TREES , APPROVING THE ABILITY FOR A LANDOWNER TO CUT A TREE DOWN. T MOVE A TREE. WHAT KIND OF TREE, WHAT KIND OF BUSH OR FLOUR. I DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT ANY OF THAT. WE HAVE ARBORISTS AS REPORT TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT SO THE ARBORISTS ARE GOING OUT TO DO THE INSPECTIONS AND PASSING THE INFORMATION BACK TO CODE ENFORCEMENT. PLANNING DEPARTMENT HAS MORE THAN JUST WEREN'T WE SEE HERE.

>> I WAS WONDERING WHICH ONE OF YOU GUYS WOULD BE DRIVING AROUN LANDSCAPING. OR IF THERE WAS A NEW POSITION AVAILABLE.

>> SOUNDS LIKE A PRETTY CUSHY JOB.

>> I REQUIRE A TEST FOR THAT POSITION.

>> MY WIFE DRIVES A TESLA. TRUST ME IT'S NOT ALL IT'S CRACKED UP TO BE. I LIKE TO SMELL GASOLINE AND HEAR THE ENGINE. PERPETUITY. I UNDERSTAND THE USE OF THE WORD AND WHY IT'S BEING USED, BUT MEAN THAT'S UNTIL THE END OF TIME. IT'S NOT JUST THE END O THE LIFE EXPECTANY OF THE BILL.

THAT'S UNTIL THE END OF TIME.

>> HOPEFULLY BEFORE THE LIFE EXPECTANCY OF THE BUILDING EXPIRED THERE WOULD BE A REVISED BUILDING PUT ON SITE

WITH A NEW PLAN AND SO FORTH . >> OKAY THAT'S A LONG TIME.

>> NORMAL LANGUAGE TO USE IN SUCH INSTANCES.

>> I HAVE AN ATTORNEY THAT PLAYS WITH THAT WORD A LOT.

OKAY. FURTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS?

>> I HAVE A QUESTION. THE ARBORISTS WHO ARE CURRENTLY OU INSPECTING, HAVE THE CAPACITY TO TAKE THIS ON AS WELL, THIS IS ADDITIONAL WORK FOR THEM AND ADDITIONAL PAPERWORK? HOW DOES

IT WORK? >> IF THIS WAS IN OPERATION

[01:25:01]

WORKING AS IT SHOULD BE THEY WOULD BE OUT THERE DOING THESE INSPECTIONS BUT THEN REQUESTIN THE BOND WOULD BE PULLED. NOW THEY WOULD BE REQUESTING CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTION WOULD BE TAKEN. SO IT WILL BE A COMBINE EFFORT AND WE WOULD START TO WORK WITH A SCHEDULE AND A TIMETABLE OF WHEN THESE WOULD BE REVIEWED. SO IT IS EXTRA WORK. IT'S A DIFFERENT ROUTINE I SHOULD SAY. IS A DIFFERENT ROUTINE AND A DIFFERENT PROCESS RIGHT? GOING AROUND DOING THIS

>> YES. >> ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

>> MOTION. >> SECOND.

>> MOTION TO APPROVE . AND SECOND.

[e. Zoning Text Amendment - Preliminary Plat Process]

>> NEXT ITEM IS A ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT ON PRELIMINARY PLAT PROCESS . I WAS HAPPY TO SEE THIS. WHAT WE HAD ORIGINALLY DONE, WHAT WE DID SEVERAL MONTHS MADE A LOT OF SENSE. I BROUGHT IT UP SEVERAL TIMES TO ELIMINATE THE PRELIMINARY PLAT OBVIOUSLY IT CONFUSED THOSE ON THE OUTSIDE.

>> ALSO, SO THIS IS A RECOMMENDATION TO AMEND THE CITY CODE AT VARIOUS SECTIONS. SOME TIME AGO EARLY THIS YEAR WE PUT IN PLACE A PROCESS , LET ME PULL THIS UP WHERE WE SEND THEIR TW BREAKPOINTS, THE PRELIMINARY AND THE FINAL PLAT AND WE PUT IN THE PROCESS FOR OPTIONAL MOVEMENT OF PUTTING IN A PRELIMINARY PLAT TO SAVE TIME AND TO SAVE APPLCANTS GOING TO THE EXPENSE OF PUTTING A FINAL PLAT TOGETHER. WHAT WE FOUND IN THE IDEA OF THIS WAS TO ENABLE THE APPLICANT TO COM IN AND PLAT THEIR PROPERTY LIK YOU HAVE SEEN TODAY CREATING LOTS AND LEGAL DESCRIPTIONS, GET AN ADDRESS AND START DOING SOME PRELIMINARY BUILDING WORK. IT TO DO PRELIMINARY BUILDING WORK YOU NEED A PARCEL ID AND ADDRESS AND THE NEW TO THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT AND THEY WILL START DOING PERMITS. WHAT WE FOUND IS THE PROPERTY APPRAISER WILL NOT PROVIDE A PARCEL ID FOR A PRELIMINARY PLAT. SEE YOU CAN HAVE EVERYTHING IN PLACE, YOU CAN HAVE THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION, YOU CAN COME TO US AND ASK FOR AN ADDRESS. WE WOULD NEED A PARCEL ID TO GET AN ADDRESS. TO THAT WAS NOT HAPPENING. SO THE THOUGHT THAT WE WOULD BE ASSISTING DEVELOPMENT TO MOVE AHEAD DURING THE PROCESS WAS CAUSING MORE CONFUSION. IN THA THE BEGINNING THE PRELIMINARY PLAT IN THE PROPERTY APPRAISER WERE NOT GET PARCEL ID AND THE BUILDING CANNOT GIVE A PERMIT OR WHATEVER THAT WAS. SO THERE WAS A BREAKPOINT AND WE LOOKED AT THIS AND SAID IS A PRELIMINARY PLAT WORTH ANYTHING IT'S A NICE PIECE OF PAPER GH T PEOPLE SEE IT AND APPROVE AND IT'S REVIEWED BUT APPLICANTS TAKE IT AWAY ARE NOT ABLE TO USE IT. SO WE ARE CONFUSING TH APPLICANTS , WE ARE CONFUSING THAT PART OF THE PROCESS AND WE HAVE REVISED THE FINAL PROCESS ITSELF TO BE MORE ESTABLISHED ON STATE STATUTE. SO INSTEAD O THE INTRICACIES OF ENGINEERING REVIEWS HERE AND THERE, IF TH PLAT MEETS STATE STATUTE AND ENGINEERING REVIEW IT AGAIN STATE STATUTE AND THE CONSULTANT REVIEWS AGAIN STATE STATUTE IF IT MEETS , THAT IS THE FINAL PLAT AND WE'RE CUTTING DOWN AND GOING BACKWARD AND FORWARDS, CUTTING DOWN ON REVIEW TIME, CUTTING DOWN ON EXPENSE FOR APPLICANTS TO GO THROUGH DRYING THESE PLATS THINKING THEY WILL GET SOMETHIN OUT OF IT. AND WE DO RECOMMEND EVEN WITH THIS PROCESS NOW WE RECOMMEND PEOPLE GOING FOR FINAL PLAT RATHER THAN

[01:30:01]

PRELIMINARY, BUT SOME APPLICANTS DECIDE THEY WOULD RATHER GO THROUGH PRELIMINARY PLAT EVEN WHEN THEY KNOW THIS WILL NOT GET THEM MUCH. AND THEN IT CAUSES CONFUSION. THEY THINK THEY WILL COME IN AND GET A PERMIT AND IS NOT HAPPENING.

SO THE IDEA IS LET'S GET RID O THE OPTIONAL PRELIMINARY PLAT AND PUT EVERYTHING IN THE FINAL PLAT, COME THROUGH TO THE PLANNING BOARD, TECHNICAL REVIE AND THEN CITY COMMISSION FOR APPROVAL. OR DENIAL AS THE CASE MAY BE. IT IS CONDENSING THE CODE IN THE PROCESS AND HOPEFULLY MAKING IT MORE STRAIGHTFORWARD. FOR EVERYBODY. THAT'S THE RECOMMENDATION.

TO WHAT WE HAD TO WHAT WE TRIED TO DO, TO WHERE YOU ARE

NOW, I THINK A GOOD JOB. >> I AM LIKING THIS BETTER.

>> I THINK IT'S CLEAR AND EASY TO UNDERSTAND FOR APPLICANTS.

IT ANSWERS SOME OF THE UNKNOWN QUESTIONS . SOMETIMES YOU TRY T DO SOMETHING AND YOU FIND OUT YOU DID NOT DO WHAT YOU THOUGHT YOU DID, BUT THIS LOOKS VERY VERY GOOD. IT WAS A GOOD JOB .

ANY OTHER FURTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS?

>> I LIKE THE IDEA OF CONDENSE FOR SURE. WILL IT HAMPER WHAT WE NORMALLY DO WHEN WE SEE FIRST COMING TO US A LOT OF THINGS ARE WRONG AND WE HAVE QUESTIONS. NOW WE COME WITH A FINAL PLAT AND FIND SEVERAL THINGS WRONG.

>> I THINK WHAT YOU WILL FIND I THOSE QUESTIONS WILL STILL ARISE, THERE WILL BE BETTER PLACE WHEN RESOLVED THEY ARE NOT GOING TO COME BACK. SO, A PRELIMINARY PLAT DOES NOT NECESSARILY CONTAIN ALL THE DETAILS OF THE FINAL PLAT SO YOU MIGHT ADDRESS ISSUES THAT YOU FIND IN THE PRELIMINARY PLA AND THEN THE FINAL COMES IN AN YES IT IS SET IN THESE AREAS, BUT IT MIGHT RAISE OTHER QUESTIONS AT THE TIME BECAUSE IT BECOMES MORE DETAILED. SO A LOT OF THINGS ON THE FINAL PLAT MAY BE SOME EASEMENT OR YOU HAVE NOT ANSWERED THOSE AT THE LUMINARY. THEN YOU SEE THEM NO AND HANG ON I DID NOT REALIZE I WAS DOING THAT IN PRELIMINARY I'VE GOT A LOT THERE THAT MAYBE NEEDS TO BE ADJUSTED IN FINAL.

>> AND HE SAID SOMETHING OKAY WE'RE HERE FOR FINAL PLAT. GO AHEAD AND APPROVE AND THAT TYP OF THOUGHT PROCESS. I WAS THINKING MAYBE THEY ALREADY APPROVED BEFORE HAND SO THAT'S SOMETHING I NEED TO LEARN. FINAL DOES NOT MEAN FINAL.

>> IT MEANS YOU NEED TO REVIEW

>> WELL IT'S NOT FINAL UNTIL WE HAVE REVIEWED IT, MADE RECOMMENDATION TO THE COMMISSIO , THE COMMISSION REVIEWS IT , SEEMINGLY APPROVES AND THEN FINE. AND IT GOES TO BUILDING FOR PERMITTING. BUILDING MIGHT REVIEW AND FIND A HICK UP HERE OR HERE PERTAINING TO ORDINANCES THAT WE ARE NOT WORKING WITHIN. OUR ORDINANCE WE SPENT OUR LIFE IN -- ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WOULD HAPPEN REPEATEDLY IN A PRELIMINARY PLAT IS THAT IT WOULD COME IN, QUESTIONS WOULD BE ASKED AND TH QUESTION WOULD BE THE FINAL ENGINEERING IS NOT RIGHT. WE DON'T HAVE THE ANSWER. SO IT HAD A COME BACK IN THE FINAL PLAT AND WE WOULD BE ASKING TH SAME QUESTION ALL OVER. THE DIFFERENCE WAS THE ANSWERS WER THERE. ELIMINATION OF THE

PRELIMINARY PLAT MADE SENSE. >> GOTCHA .

>> IT ALSO PUT US IN A SPOT WHERE WHEN WE DO ASK QUESTIONS IF WE GET THE WRONG ANSWER FOR WE DON'T GET AN ANSWER, THAT COMES UP TO A DIFFERENT SCENARI THAT WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT ALREADY. IT REALLY DOES NOT PLA HERE. SO, WE ARE TAKING THE WORKLOAD OF HEARING ALL THESE PRELIMINARY PLATS FOR EVERY ONE

[01:35:02]

OF THESE PROJECTS AND WE HAVE DONE AWAY WITH THEM. OPENED UP THE TIME SLOT TO SEE MORE PROPERTIES. WHICH WE ARE NOT

LACKING IN. >> WE SHOULD NOT CUT OUR

WORKLOAD. >> ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OR

COMMENTS? >> I AM WONDERING ABOUT ALL OF THE STRIKETHROUGH ON THE DRAFT ORDINANCE DOCUMENTS. THERE IS A LIST OF ITEMS ELIMINATED REQUIREMENTS FOR IN THE SPECIFICATIONS. ARE THESE ITEM THAT ARE NOT RELEVANT FOR REVIEW AT THAT STAGE WHERE THES PROVIDED ELSEWHERE IN THE APPLICATION PROCESS THAT WE AR DOUBLING UP ON?

>> ENGINEERING HAVE TAKEN A MUCH CLOSER LOOK AND THEY HAVE SEEN A LOT OF THOSE ITEMS ARE B STATE STATUTE SO RECOMMENDATIO WAS WE ARE ASKING FOR THOSE HERE, BUT COVERED BY THOSE

HERE. >> THEY WILL GET THEM IN

BUILDING REVIEW. >> ACTUALLY AT SOME POINT IN THE FINAL PLAT WE JUST SAY STATE STATUTE IT HAS TO MEET STATE STATUTE UNDER THE REQUIREMENTS.

>> NO NEED TO MENTION HERE. >> RIGHT IT'S DOUBLE MENTIONING. THEY ARE GOING TO DO IT.

>> IT'S GOING TO TAKE US, ONCE THIS IS IN EFFECT WE WILL GO THROUGH A LEARNING CURVE BECAUS WHEN WE ASK FOR THE PIPE DIAMETER THE ANSWER COULD BE THAT COVERED THE STATE STATUTE

AND THEN -- >> WELL.

>> SO, YEAH. >> JUST TRYING TO STREAMLINE IT ALL OUT. TRYING TO STREAMLINE AND HELP THE APPLICANT GET THROUGH THE PROCESS. I WOULD ENTERTAIN A

MOTION >> I MOVE FOR APPROVAL.

>> SECOND. >> MOTION FOR APPROVAL AND

SECOND. CALL THE ROLL PLEASE >>

[8. DIRECTOR'S REPORT]

>> ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WITH ANY COMMENTS? NOT SEEING ANY OF A MOVE ON. DIRECTOR REPORT.

>> THIS MORNING I WAS AT THE CITY CONFERENCE MEETING WHICH IS THE CITY COMMISSION. OPPORTUNITY FOR STAFF TO COME FORWARD AND ADDRESS SOME ISSUE THAT THE CITY COMMISSION HAVE RAISED AND TODAY WE SPOKE ABOU THREE THINGS. HOUSING AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING. AS A RESUL OF THAT, AT A PRIOR CONFERENCE, I DID RAISE THE OPTION OF LOOKING AT DENSITY I A DIFFERENT WAY. THIS MORNING GOT SOME POSITIVE FEEDBACK , MORE POSITIVE FEEDBACK DOING THAT. WE LOOKED AT SOME THINGS THAT WERE EXISTING IN THE CITY CODE, PARTICULARLY IN THE CONFERENCE A PLAN THAT ENCOURAGED AFFORDABLE HOUSING DENSITY BONUSES. LOOKING AT WAYS THAT WE ARE NOT RELYING O THE STATE STATUTE TO FORCE US INTO CERTAIN DIRECTIONS, BUT W ARE TAKING POSITIVE ACTIONS AN DETERMINING OUR OWN WORLD HERE. WE DO HAVE A LOT OF THINGS IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLA LIKE IF YOU PUT AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING UNIT INTO YOUR DEVELOPMENT YOU AUTOMATICALLY GET AN ADDITIONAL RATE BEING ABLE TO BE PUT IN. SO INSTEAD OF DENSITY BEING RESTRICT IT T A NUMBER, YOU'RE UP TO 40 UNITS IF THE SITE CAN ACCOMMODATE COULD BE AFFORDABLE AND FOR EACH OF THOSE AFFORDABLE YOU GE A GREAT UNIT AND THAT'S ADDRESSING THIS , PART OF ADDRESSING WHAT THE STATE MANDATES SOME TIME AGO THAT YOU HAVE TO COMPENSATE DEVELOPERS FOR PUTTING AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN A PROPERTY OR ON A PROPERTY. SO WHEN PEOPLE COME THROUGH AND TALK TO US ABOUT HOUSING, NOT A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE AWARE OF THAT. AND SO PART OF THIS QUESTION THIS MORNING WAS HOW DO WE GET THE MESSAGE OUT THAT THERE IS OPPORTUNITY HERE TO BURY -- VARY THE NUMBER OF HOUSING UNITS ON THE SITE WITH VARYING LEVELS OF INCOME SUPPORTING UNITS SO WE CAN HAV LOWER INCOME OR HIGHER INCOME IN THE SAME LOCATION WITH DIFFERENT SIZES OF UNITS AND

[01:40:05]

THERE IS BENEFIT TO DOING THAT. THERE IS A BENEFIT FOR THE APPLICANT GETTING ADDITIONAL DENSITY WITHOUT BEING COUNTED .

WE DID TALK ABOUT THE MOVEMENT , TRYING TO GET THE MOVEMENT TOWARD MORE HOMEOWNERSHIP IN THE CITY. WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE FORWARD MYSELF IN THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND SOME CONFIRMATION FROM CITY COMMISSION WAS HOW TO GENERATE SMALLER LOT'S ? FOR SMALLER HOMES TO MAKE THEM MORE AFFORDABLE? AND WE HAVE NEIGHBORHOODS WHICH REALLY HAV ZONING ON THEM WHICH RESTRICT THEIR ABILITY TO HAVE SMALLER LOTS AND CREATE MORE AFFORDABL HOMES ON THOSE LOTS. SO HOPEFULLY IN THE NEXT TWO MONTHS OR THREE MONTHS TO SEE SOME ORDINANCES COMING THROUGH WHICH ARE LOOKING TO ENABLE PROPERTY OWNERS TO ACTUALLY TAKE ADVANTAGE AND PUT ACCESSORY DWELLINGS ON THE BAC OF THEIR PROPERTIES OR FOR THE LAND OWNERS TO LOOK TO SPLIT SITES INTO SMALLER PROPERTIES AND WORKING WITH OUR GRANTS DEPARTMENT I AM HOPING TO SET UP A PROGRAM WHERE WE ALREADY RUN PROGRAMS TO EDUCATE PEOPLE ON HOME OWNERSHIP AND WORKING WITH THE GRANTS PROGRAM AND ALSO REDEVELOPMENT AGENCIES , LOOKING AT CITY-OWNED PROPERTIE AND SPLITTING THOSE INTO SMALLER LOT AND LETTING THOSE OUT FOR PEOPLE TO COME AND BUIL THEIR OWN HOMES. SO THERE IS OPPORTUNITY TO DO MULTIPLE DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS ON THIS AND WE'RE TRYING TO PUT SOMETHING TOGETHER. I THINK THAT WOULD BE VERY POSITIVE AN THINKING OF LINKIN PARK IN THE CITY INITIALLY TO HELP REGENERATE THAT NEIGHBORHOOD AND GET SOME HOME OWNERSHIP GOING IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD. SO THAT COMING ON. WE SPOKE ABOUT NOTIFICATION. NOTIFICATION PRIOR TO PLANNING BOARD. WE HAV SEEN TODAY AND THERE WAS A DISCUSSION ABOUT WHO DID THAT THE EXPENSE OF DOING THAT AND WHEN IT SHOULD BE DONE. SOME VERY POSITIVE OUTCOME TODAY, THE COMMISSION WANTS US TO LOO AT ENGAGING WITH THE APPLICANT AND ALMOST MANDATING THE APPLICANT TO TAKE CARE O■F SIT NOTICING AND MAIL OUTS PRIOR TO THE PLANNING BOARD. SO WE HAVE MORE INFORMATION GOING OUT PRIOR TO THE PLANNING BOARD THAT PEOPLE KNOW WHAT'S GOING O AND THAT WOULD BE BACKED UP WITH A REPORT THAT GOES TO CIT MANAGER FROM THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT ABOUT WHAT'S GOING ON WHICH LEADS INTO THE NEXT ITEM WHICH IS THE THRESHOLD OF MINOR AND MAJOR SITE PLAN. SOM DISCUSSION THIS MORNING ABOUT THE THRESHOLD OF A MINOR SITE PLAN COMMERCIAL USE 4000 SQUARE FEET SO ANYTHING BELOW 4000 SQUARE FEET WOULD BE ADMINISTRATIVE AND ANYTHING ABOVE WOULD BE , IT WOULD COME THROUGH THE PROCESS. AND ANYTHING LESS THAN 20 UNITS WOULD BE ADMINISTRATIVE , MORE THAN 20 UNITS WOULD BE THROUGH THE PROCESS. SO WE LOOKED AT THE , THE MUNICIPALITIES WHAT THEY DID IN THE AREA AND THE COMMISSION WANTED US TO LOOK AT BRINGING BACK TO THE PLANNING BOARD. THE THRESHOLD OF MAYBE 50 UNITS FOR RESIDENTIAL MINO AND 10,000 SQUARE FEET COMMERCIAL MINOR. THAT'S A DISCUSSION FOR THE PLANNING BOARD, WE WILL BRING THEM BACK FOR YOU TO ANALYZE THAT. AND I WANT TO PRESENT ANALYSIS OF WHA DEVELOPMENTS THAT INCLUDES IF THE THRESHOLD WAS MOVED. I DID A BIT OF ANALYSIS OVER THE WEEKEND LOOKING AT HOW PARCELS IN THE SIZE OF PARCELS AND COMMERCIAL PLAZAS AND MOST OF THOSE WERE HALF OF AN ACRE TO 3/4 ACRES AND THOSE OF THE PROPERTIES WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. IF SOMETHING COMES IN ON THOSE CITY BE ADMINISTRATIVE OR SHOULD THEY BE GOING TO THE WHOLE PROCESS? WE ARE AWARE OF THE PLAZA AND THE OUT PARCELS, WE KNOW SOMETHING IS GOING ON. IS IT ADDING 60 TO 90 DAYS ON

[01:45:05]

THE PROCESS HOLDING PEOPLE UP? WE DO SEE PEOPLE COMING IN WITH APPLICATIONS COMING IN THAT COM THROUGH A PRELIMINARY DISCUSSION AND THEY SAY I'VE GOT A PROPERTY HERE, WE WILL PU IN 4300 SQUARE FOOT PROPERTY AND WE SAY THAT'S A MAJOR SITE PLAN MAY FALL OFF OF THE CHAIR AND SAY WHAT'S MINOR? 4000 AN THEY SAY WE JUST CHANGED FOR SPACE TO 3999. SO IT'S THAT SORT OF THING THAT'S HAPPENING AND IS THAT THE BEST FOR THE CITY? ARE WE GETTING THE BEST OF WHAT WE SHOULD BE ENCOURAGING, SO WE WILL BRING SOMETHING BACK TO THE PLANNING BOARD. SO, THOSE ARE THE MAIN THINGS THAT I HAVE TODAY.

CHAIR, THAT IS MY REPORT. >> THAT IS ALL GOOD STUFF. I PAY VERY CLOSE ATTENTION TO THE COMMISSIONER MEETING LAST WEEK. IN THE PROPERTY OUT IN SURFSIDE DISCUSSED AND APPROVE , THE ONE WE TABLED. NEVER TO SEE AGAIN. I WAS GOING TO PLAY , ASKED TO PLAY A SECTION OF THAT DISCUSSION AND THEN I CHOSE NOT TO . BUT I WOULD LIK ALL THE BOARD MEMBERS TO GO ONLINE , PULL UP LAST WEEK'S COMMISSION MEETING. I THINK THAT WAS OCTOBER 3RD OR SECOND AND WHEN YOU PULL UP THE WEBSITE, IT SHOULD BE ON THE TOP LEFT-HAND CORNER WHERE THE SCREEN COMES UP WHERE YOU CAN VIEW THE MEDIA BEFORE YOU CLIC AND MAKE IT FULL-SCREEN. UNDERNEATH IT IS THE AGENDA AND YOU CAN SCROLL THROUGH THE AGENDA. THERE IS THE AGENDA TO THE RIGHT, BUT UNDER THE IMAGE THERE IS AN AGENDA YOU CAN GO DOWN AND CLICK ON THE ITEM THAT YOU WANT TO VIEW AND IN THE VIDEO ONLY THAT ITEM COMES UP. IF YOU CLICK ON THAT ITEM FOR SURFSIDE, YOU CAN WATCH THAT SECTION WITHOUT GOING THROUGH THE ENTIRE VIDEO. SOMETIMES COMMISSION MEETINGS GET READY LONG. I WOULD LIKE YOU TO GO AND VIEW IT. YES. I WOULD LIK YOU TO GO AND VIEW THAT. IT WAS INTERESTING. AS THEY WERE GOIN TO THE PROCESS, THE MEETING LASTED ABOUT AS LONG AS OURS AN MANY OF THE SAME QUESTIONS WERE ASKED. MOST OF THEM HAD ANSWERS. AND THE ANSWERS THAT WE ASKED , MANY OF THE QUESTION THAT WE ASKED THAT GOT ANSWERS THE ANSWERS WERE DIFFERENT FOR US THAN THEY WERE TO THE COMMISSION BECAUSE SOMEBODY WEN BACK AS THE PRESENTER OF THE APPLICANT AND DID THEIR HOMEWORK. AND MADE SURE THAT THE NEW WHAT THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT. WHICH THEY DIDN'T DO WHEN THEY CAME HERE. HAD WE GOTTEN THE ANSWERS THAT WERE GIVEN TO THE COMMISSION, I THIN THE OUTCOME OF THAT DISCUSSION WOULD HAVE GONE A DIFFERENT DIRECTION AND WOULD'VE HAD , W WOULD'VE MADE , WE WOULD'VE MADE A DECISION THAT WOULD'VE BEEN MORE FAVORABLE. SO, GO AND TAKE A LOOK AT THAT. THAT ALS LEADS INTO THE MAIN THRUST OF WHAT I WANT TO TALK ABOUT. THE CONDITIONAL USE ORDINANCE. I HAD HAD SOME DISCUSSION WITH SOME OF OUR CITY PERSONNEL PRIOR TO THE COMMISSION MEETING REVEALING THAT PROJECT. ONE O THE THINGS THAT I SAID WAS THAT I FELT LIKE THE CONDITION , THAT WAS, TO ME THAT IT SHOULD NOT FALL UNDER CONDITIONAL USE.

CONDITIONAL USE SHOULD BE I HAVE THIS BUILDING AND I WANT TO USE IT FOR X AND TRADITIONALLY IT HAS BEEN USED FOR A . I AM CHANGING THE CONDITION OF THE USE OF THE BIL FROM ONE THING TO SOMETHING THAT IS VERY FOREIGN TO WHAT I

[01:50:02]

WAS INTENDED TO BE USED FOR. THAT IS CONDITIONAL USE. WHAT WAS BROUGHT BEFORE THIS BOARD IN MY HUMBLE OPINION THAT HAPPENED TO BE RIGHT IS A VARIANCE. THE QUESTION WAS WHAT WE GIVE THEM A VARIANCE FOR THE ADDITIONAL HEIGHT THE WERE ASKING FOR? NOT A CONDITIONAL USE. THERE IS NO BUILDING THERE. WE CAN'T TELL THEM THEY CAN HAVE CONDITIONAL USE ON A BUILDING NOT EVEN THER IT IS A VARIANCE. TECHNICALLY THE WAY THAT OUR GOVERNMENT IN THE CITY FLOWS AND THE BOARD FLOW, THAT SHOULD HAVE GONE TO THE PLANNING BOARD OF ADJUSTMEN NOT THE PLANNING BOARD. BECAUSE IT SHOULD'VE BEEN VIEWE AS A VARIANCE. IF WE VIEW AS A VARIANCE WE TAKE IT OUT OF CONDITIONAL USE, THAT CHANGES CONDITIONAL USE DISCUSSION ALTOGETHER AND THE MAYOR, I DON'T KNOW SHE FORMALLY ASKED THE CITY MANAGER TO REVIEW THE CONDITIONAL USE REQUIREMENTS O WAS IT NOT UNDERSTOOD AS A FORMAL REQUEST, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO FORMALLY REQUEST TO THE CITY MANAGER MADE COMMISSIONER WHO LOOK AT THE CONDITIONAL USE ORDINANCE AND LOOK AT ITEMS THAT HAVE COME BEFORE US , COME BEFORE THE COMMISSION UNDER THE CONDITIONAL USE VETTING AND SAY WHERE THEY CONDITIONAL USES OR NOT? I THINK WE WILL FIND MANY OF THEM PARTICULARLY ALMOST ALL OF THE THAT COME TO US OUT ON THE ISLAND TODAY PARTICULARLY IN TH SOUTH BEACH OVERLAY DISTRICT.

ARE THE HEIGHT. AND THAT IS A VARIANCE. IT IS NOT CONDITIONA USE. IF I WERE TO BUILD A 45 FOOT TALL BUILDING I'M ASKING FOR VARIANCE TO GO OVER 28 FEET IT IS NO DIFFERENT FROM IF I'V GOT A SEVEN FOOT SETBACK ON TH SIDELINE AND I WANT TO PUT IN GENERATOR AND IT'S GOING TO STAND THREE FEET INTO THE SEVE FEET. I HAVE TO ASK THE VARIANCE. IT'S A SAME THING. A DIMENSIONAL CHANGE AND IT IS A VARIANCE. WE SHOULD NEVER SEE

THOSE THINGS. >> THE CODE SAYS YOU DO. I THINK WE NEED TO CHECK. I THIN WHAT YOU ARE SAYING MAKES SENSE SO IT'S THE CODE THAT BRINGS THOSE THINGS TO YOU.

>> THAT'S EXACTLY RIGHT. THE COMMISSION NEEDS TO ASK CITY MANAGER TO DIRECT THE DIRECTOR OF PLANNING TO REVIEW THE CODE

FOR A POTENTIAL AMENDMENT. >> I HAVE TAKEN THREE THINGS OF

MY CHECKLIST. >> I'M GOING TO ADD SOME.

>> CALL IT WHAT IT IS WHEN IT DOES COME TO US.

>> A VARIANCE WOULD NOT COME T US. NOW IN THE WORK YOU'RE TRYING TO DO IN TERMS OF SQUARE FOOTAGE, NUMBER OF UNITS SO ON AND SO FORTH I'M NOT OPPOSED T THAT, BUT ONE OF THE THINGS I HAVE BEEN DOING FOR A LONG TIME IS TRYING TO , I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE PLANNING BOARD ABSORB THE WHAT THE PLANNING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT DOES . I THINK BECAUSE OUR SYSTEM ON THE RIGHT-HAND I BELIEVE IN FORT PIERCE IS WORKING THERE IS A FEE CHARGED FOR ME TO COME TO THE CITY AND ASK FOR A VARIANC SO I CAN PUT THE GENERATOR WHERE WANT TO PUT IT VERSUS WHERE I COULD IF I DIDN'T GET A VARIANCE AND BECAUSE THE FEE , THE DOLLAR VALUE THAT IT IS , WE'RE NOT BEING BOMBARDED WITH VARIANCE REQUESTS. AND THEREFORE THE PLANNING BOARD OF

ADJUSTMENTS RARELY MEETS. >> I CAN GIVE YOU A REASON FOR THAT AS WELL. THERE IS AN ADDITIONAL REASON. THE PARAMETERS FOR ASKING FOR VARIANCE ARE VERY RESTRICTIVE.

IT HAS TO BE A HARDSHIP AND MOST THINGS THAT PEOPLE ASK FOR ARE NOT HARDSHIPS IT IS SOMETHING THEY ARE CREATING THEMSELVES BY WHAT THEY ARE ASKING FOR. NOT TO DO IT WE HAVE A SMALL LOT AND I WANT TO PUT THIS SIZE THING ON IT. SO THAT MIGHT NEED TO BE LOOKED AT OF THE CRITERIA OF WHAT IS A HARDSHIP. MAYBE ONE OF THOSE THINGS IS THE FLOODPLAIN ELEVATION NEEDS TO BE TAKEN INT ACCOUNT AS A POTENTIAL HARDSHIP

[01:55:01]

ON SOME PROPERTIES THAT WILL NEED TO BE BUILT HIGHER. DOES NOT NECESSARILY MEAN THAT WIL GET APPROVAL IF THEY ARE GOING TWO STORIES OR LARGE CEILING HEIGHTS RATHER THAN ONE STORY.

GENTLEMAN BUILDING THE PROPERTY 6'6". SO YES HE NEEDS A TALLE CEILING. THAT'S A HARDSHIP. AGAIN WOULD ALSO MAKES THAT FI INTO THE VARIANCE. IF WE WERE BOARD THAT HAD A CALENDAR OF 1 MEETINGS AND WE MET TWO TIMES LAST YEAR, AND YOU WERE SCHEDULING YOUR LIFE AROUND THE ONE MEETING PER MONTH AND I'M SURE WE ALL DO AROUND THE ONE MEETING PER MONTH THAT WE NEED TO BE HERE, BUT WE WERE ONLY HERE TWICE LAST YEAR HOW LONG WOULD YOU WANT TO SCHEDUL OUR LIFE AROUND? THAT WAS PART OF THE ARGUMENT I MAKE IN COMBINING THAT BOARD WITH THIS BOARD AND VARIANCES ARE NOT VERY MUCH DIFFERENT TO LOOK AT FROM WHAT WE DO NOW. THE DIFFERENCE IS THAT BOARD IS QUASI-JUDICIAL. NOW THAT BRINGS ME TO THE REST OF WHAT I WANT TO CHAT ABOUT. IF YOU'RE LOOKING , GOING TO REVISIT AND THIS IS THE SECOND TIME SINCE I HAVE BEEN ON THE BOARD THAT W HAVE VISITED AND AMENDED TH SIZING AND THE NUMBERS OF DEVELOPMENT AND THE SIZE OF A PROPERTY GOING TO BE DEVELOPED AND DETERMINED WHETHER OR NOT IT IS A MAJOR OR MINOR OR WHO SHOULD SEE IT AND WHEN SHOULD IT BE SEEN. IF WE GO BACK IN AN GO THROUGH THE PROCESS AGAIN, THIS WOULD BE A GOOD TIME TO REVIEW THIS. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I HAVE SPOKEN WITH A PREVIOUS DIRECTOR WAS THAT I THIS PROJECT COMES BEFORE THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND EVERYTHING ON IT MEETS ALL THE ORDINANCES, THERE IS NOTHING THAT NEEDS TO BE ALTERED, THERE IS NOTHING SPECIAL ABOUT IT, DURING THE PROJECT, NOTHING WAS OUT OF LINE, IT ALL MET THE ORDINANCE, IT FALLS INTO THE SOUTH BEACH OVERLAY, EVERYTHING WAS FINE AND WE APPROVED IT.

WHY DOES IT HAVE TO GO TO THE COMMISSION. IT MEETS ALL THE ORDINANCES. IT GOES TO THE COMMISSION BECAUSE WE ARE NOT QUITE AS I JUDICIAL. IF WE WER GOING TO COMBINE THE EFFORTS AND HAVE TALKED WITH A COUPLE LONG-TERM MEMBERS ON THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT AND THEY AGREE I PRINCIPLE WITH ME. IF WE WERE TO COMBINE THEIR EFFORTS INTO THIS BOARD AND WE HEARD VARIANCES AND WE WERE JUDICIA IN THE RESPECTIVE VARIANCES AN WHEN WE MADE THE DECISION IT WAS OVER IT DID NOT HAVE TO GO ANYWHERE ELSE IF THIS PROJECT MEETS ALL THE CODES RIGHT? WHY COULDN'T THIS BE QUASI-JUDICIAL AT THIS BOARD AN THEN BE DONE WITH IT AND ELIMINATE GOING TO THE COMMISSION. IT ONLY GOES TO TH COMMISSION BECAUSE THE COMMISSION IN FORT PIERCE IS GOING TO MICROMANAGE. IF THEY GET MAD AT ME THAT'S OKAY GUYS AND GALS. THEY WANT TO MICROMANAGE THEY WANT THEIR FINGERPRINTS ON EVERYTHING.

THEY DON'T NEED THEIR FINGERPRINTS ON EVERYTHING AND IF WE'RE GOING TO REVIEW THE ORDINANCES FOR SIZE AND SCOPE O PROJECTS DOLLAR VALUE, SQUARE FOOTAGE, NUMBER OF UNITS HOWEVE YOU WANT TO DISCUSS THAT THEN LET'S TAKE A LOOK AT SOME OF TH OTHER ISSUES. WE KEEP TAKING ANOTHER BITE OF THAT APPLE , THIS TAKE A BIG BITE AND GET DONE WITH IT SO WE DON'T HAVE TO KEEP HEARING ABOUT IT. NOW THAT MEANS ON THIS BOARD WHE WE ARE PREPARING FOR OUR MEETINGS WITH THE MAYBE STUDY LITTLE HARDER. PARTICULARLY IF IT IS A QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARING THEN WE HAVE TO STUDY A LOT HARDER TO MAKE SURE WE UNDERSTAND COMPLETELY WHAT'S GOING ON AND WHY BECAUSE IT IS

[02:00:04]

DIFFERENT BALL GAME. YOU KNOW YOU ARE SAYING 5000 SQUARE-FOO BUILDING MAYBE YOUR DEPARTMENT APPROVES. YOU ARE SAYING I'M GOING TO TAKE ON MORE RESPONSIBILITY APPROVING 5000 SQUARE-FOOT PROPERTY. MORE RESPONSIBLE LOAD ON THE PLANNIN DEPARTMENT. SO YOUR STAFF HAS TO BE BETTER PREPARED TOO. SO IT WOULD HOLD TRUE TO THIS BOARD AS WELL. SO, ANYONE ELSE

[9. BOARD COMMENTS]

HAVE ANYTHING TO SAY? >> NOT ABOUT THAT SPECIFICALLY.

I HAVE TWO COMMENTS I WILL TRY TO MAKE THEM BRIEF. PICKING UP ON THE AND TESTING SUBJECT IN THE BUILDING ON SURFSIDE DRIVE WHICH EVERYONE IS EXCITED TO TALK ABOUT. WANTING I REALIZED IN REVIEWING THAT WHOLE ITEM I THAT YOU KNOW THERE ARE NO MAXIMUM LIMITS TO THE SIZES OF LOTS, THEIR MINIMUM LOT REQUIREMENTS, NO MAXIMUM REQUIREMENTS AND A LOT OF ZONE , IF NOT ALL OF THEM , CERTAINL NOT AT THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AN BECAUSE WE ARE NOT INVOLVED IN THE UNITY OF TITLE PROCESS BECAUSE THE CITY IS NOT INVOLVE AT ALL. EFFECTIVELY THAT NEIGHBORHOOD LOST THE SIDE YARD SETBACK TO PROPERTIES.

THROUGH THE PROCESS THAT UNITY OF TITLE. AND YOU KNOW IF YOU HAVE A 7 1/2 SIDE LOT SETBACK FOR SINGLE-STORY 2000 SQUARE-FOOT HOUSE, 7 1/2 FEET STANDING AWAY FROM AN EVE AT 8 1/2 FEET IT'S A LOT OF THEM FROM STANDING AWAY FROM A 40 FOOT TALL STRUCTURE AND IT SEEM TO ME INAPPROPRIATE FOR US TO APPLY THIS ONE-SIZE-FITS-ALL REQUIREMENT. ESPECIALLY WHEN W HAVE SITUATIONS WHERE WE HAVE NO OVERSIGHT OR REVIEW OR CONTROL OVER WHEN THAT EMPTY SPACE, THE GREEN SPACE THAT TH NEIGHBORHOOD IS ENTITLED TO BUY THE LOT LINE REQUIREMENT IS GOING TO GET , IT'S GOING TO DISAPPEAR AS IT DID IN A SITUATION. SO YOU KNOW IF THEY HAD BILLED TWO HOUSES THAT WOULD'VE BEEN 15 FEET MINIMUM I BETWEEN THEM AND THAT WHEN AWAY THE NEIGHBORHOOD LOST THAT. W HAD NO MECHANISM TO DEAL WITH THAT. SO I WAS THINKING ABOUT WAYS WE COULD TRY TO IN A FAIR WAY MITIGATE THAT. I'M NOT REALLY SURE IF THERE WOULD BE WAY TO APPLY THE LOT LINE REQUIREMENTS AND HAVE IT BE TIED TO THE LOT WITH OR HAV IT SO INSTEAD OF SAYING EVERYTHING IN THIS , THE LOT LINE REQUIREMENT SEVEN AND HALF FEET, HAVE IT ON A SCALE WHERE THE PROPERTY IS SO WIDE YOU COULD BUILD A STRUCTURE SO BIG THAT IT MIGHT MAKE MORE SENSE TO APPLY TO SCALE TO TH LOT LINE REQUIREMENTS. THIS I A REALLY SPECIFIC EXAMPLE OF HOW NOT HAVING A SYSTEM IN PLAC CAN INADVERTENTLY WHILE FOLLOWING ALL THE RULES FOR TH KIND OF TAKE SOMETHING AWAY FRO THE NEIGHBORHOOD UNINTENTIONALLY. THE PROPERTY OWNER HAS THE RIGHT TO UNITY OF TITLE AND THE RIGHT TO BUILD STRUCTURE ON HIS PROPERTY THAT FITS WITHIN CODE, BUT AS A RESULT OF THAT THIS HAPPEN. I' WONDERING IF THERE SOMETHING WE CAN DO IN THE FUTURE TO PREVENT THAT AND PROTECT A LITTLE BIT I A WAY THAT IS STILL FAIR. I DON'T THINK THE PROPERTY OWNER WOULD HAVE BEEN UPSET IF THEY HAD TO ADD FIVE FEET ON EITHER SIDE, THEY COULD'VE MADE IT WORK. BUT YOU KNOW IF WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING IN PLACE , SO YOU KNOW THIS IS MORE SO A COMMENT FOR STAFF, SOMETHING TO CONSIDE AND PLANNING AND SEE IF THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY THERE. THE OTHER THING IS MORE OF A GENERAL QUESTION AND WE HAD A GENTLEMAN PRESENTING EARLIER TODAY LOOKING AT MIXED-USE AND THIS HAS COME UP MULTIPLE TIMES WE HAVE A MIXED-USE APPLICATIO WHERE WE LOOK AT THE CHART THAT IS TERRIFYING ON SOME LEVEL OF CAPACITY FOR WHAT YO CAN BUILD ON THE PROPERTY. AND

[02:05:02]

HE SAID HIMSELF WE ONLY DO THI BECAUSE THIS IS WHAT CODE ALLOWS. IT IS A ONE SIZE FITS ALL SCENARIO. LOOKING AT 4 TO 6, CODE WILL LET THEM DO 15. WHAT IF WE START GOING THROUGH THIS PROCESS THAT TAKES YEARS AND THEY START LOOKING AT GORDY ROAD AND IMPROVEMENTS IN EVERYBODY'S TALKING ABOUT 4 TO , 4 TO 6, 4 TO 6 AND THEN PLANS FALL THROUGH AND YEARS DOWN THE ROAD SOMEBODY ELSE COMES IN. THE CODE SAID I CAN DO 15 AND NOW WE HAVE INVESTED MONEY AND TIME AND ENGINEERING AND EVERYTHING INTO EXPANDING THE ROAD 4 TO 6. SO I FEEL LIK WE KEEP EXPERIENCING ONE SIZ FITS ALL APPLICATIONS THAT MIGHT NOT NECESSARILY BE APPROPRIATE AND YOU KNOW I DON'T LIKE THE IDEA OF JUST MAKING MORE REGULATION FOR MORE REGULATION, BUT HAVING THESE SKILLS OF THINGS MIGHT MAKE IT EASIER FOR US TO FEEL BETTER ABOUT PLANNING THESE THINGS IN THE FUTURE. BEING MORE SPECIFI ABOUT HOW WE PLAN THINGS AROUND

AS WELL. THAT'S IT. >> GIVING YOU A LITTLE BIT MOR

TO THINK ABOUT. >> A COMMENT. AS ALWAYS I APPRECIATE THE COMMENTS. I THIN IT GIVES US SOME MORE GROUND TO WORK ON. WE ARE ALL AMENDING THINGS AND IT'S GOOD TO SEE AND HEAR ABOUT THE DIRECTION , I WANT TO BE TURNING UP WITH APPLICATIONS AND PROPOSALS THA YOU WILL BE HAPPY NO DOUBT.

>> NO DOUBT AT ALL. >> I CERTAINLY LIKE TO SEE PROJECTS THAT ARE NOT JUST WAREHOUSES. NOT THAT THE WAREHOUSES AREN'T NEEDED, TOO . AT LEAST THE WAREHOUSE , IT SEEMS LIKE IT STARTS TO BECOME A ZONE OUT THERE. MAKES SOME SENSE WHERE MOST OF THEM ARE BEING BUILT. THAT IS ALL GOOD AND I'M EXCITED ABOUT SEEING SOME OF THESE FUEL STATIONS COMING IN. YOU KNOW I'M NOT SURE WHAT IS HAPPENING. WE'VE

GOT LUCKY BEAVER SOMETHING. >> I AM A FAN.

>> MY SON LOVES THESE PLACES. HE THINKS THEY ARE THE GREATEST THING SINCE SLICED BREAD. I GO IN THERE AND SAY GET ME OUT OF HERE. IT IS INTERESTING TO ME BECAUSE WE HAVE A FEDERAL GOVERNMENT THAT IS DOING EVERYTHING THEY CAN TO CONVINCE US TO SHUT PETROLEUM INDUSTRY DOWN AND EVERYBODY DRIVE ELECTRIC VEHICLES . AT THE SAME TIME, FUELING STATIONS ARE GETTING BIGGER AND BIGGER AND MORE PUMPS AND MORE PUMPS AND PUMPING MORE GALLONS OF PETROLEUM. SO I'M NOT SURE WHAT THAT ALL REALLY MEANS. LIKE THE SMELL OF GASOLINE. OKAY.

MEETING, AND IT HAS BEEN A GO LEARNING EXPERIENCE.

>> THIS MEETING IS NOT UNLIKE MANY WE HAVE. THIS IS KIND OF REPRESENTING OF WHAT THIS BOARD SEES AND DOES. SOME OF OUR AGENDAS ARE MUCH LONGER AND WE DO NOT GET AN OPPORTUNITY TO TOUCH ON SOME OF THE THINGS END OF THEWE DID HERE AT THE MEETING TODAY WITH THE CHITCHAT WE DID TODAY BECAUSE TIME DOES NOT PERMIT IT. IT IS PRETTY REPRESENTATIVE OF THE TYPE OF MATERIAL YOU WILL SEE. EVERYTHING COMES TO YOU ONLINE.

HAVE YOU HAD TIME TO SIT WITH MS. CARTER?

>> WE HAD A CHAT BUT THERE WILL BE TIME WE GET TOGETHER.

>> EVERYTHING WILL COME TO YOU ONLINE. IF YOU WANT TO LOOK AT A DRAWING FOR SOME REASON, GIVE ALICIA A CALL AND YOU CAN SIT IN A CONFERENCE ROOM AND TAKE A LOOK AT DRAWINGS AND

[02:10:04]

FAMILIARIZE YOURSELF A LITTLE BIT MORE. I HATE COMPUTERS . I LIKE TO GET INK ON MY FINGERS AND SMELL THE PAPER.

>> I BET YOU DO, TOO. >> ALL THE TREES , HE GOT THIS PETROLEUM GOING. YOU HAVE A BIG CARBON FOOTPRINT.

LAUGHTER ] >> I AM A PRODUCT OF THE 1940S.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.

CITY PLANNING BOARD BOARD AGENDA Planning Board Regular Meeting - Monday, October 9, 2023 - 2:00 p.m. City Hall - City Commission Chambers, 100 North U.S. #1, Fort Pierce, Florida

6. NEW BUSINESS

6. NEW BUSINESS

Oct 09, 2023 Planning Board

CITY PLANNING BOARD BOARD AGENDA Planning Board Regular Meeting - Monday, October 9, 2023 - 2:00 p.m. City Hall - City Commission Chambers, 100 North U.S. #1, Fort Pierce, Florida

6. NEW BUSINESS

6. NEW BUSINESS

Link

Social

Embed

Download

Download Selected Item