May 06, 2024 City Commission Regular Meeting

[1. CALL TO ORDER]

[00:00:13]

>> I WOULD LIKE TO CALL THIS MEETING TO ORDER. THIS IS MONDAY, MAY 6, 2024. THIS IS THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE COMMISSION REGULAR MEETING. PLEASE STAND FOR THE OPENING PRAYER BY PASTOR ROBERT MEMBER WITH WHITE CITY UNITED METHODIST CHURCH , AND REMAIN STANDING FOR THE PLEDGE OF

ALLEGIANCE. >> LET US PRAY. ALMIGHTY TRUE GOD , WE GIVE YOU THANKS AND PRAISE FOR ALL OF YOUR WORKS.

GOD, WE THANK YOU FOR YOUR BLESSING. EVERY BLESSING THAT YOU HAVE BESTOWED UPON US. YOUR LOVING AND GOOD AND GRACIOUS .

THANK YOU FOR CREATING US AND SUSTAINING US DAY BY DAY. THANK YOU THAT YOU MADE US IN YOUR IMAGE TO EXISTING COMMUNITY WITH OTHER PEOPLE. GOD, I TAKE THIS MOMENT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THAT WE DO NOT DESERVE THESE GOOD GIFTS. WE ARE NOT WORTHY OF YOUR FAVOR FOR WE HAVE SINNED AGAINST YOU IN THOUGHT, WORD, AND DEED. WE DO THE THINGS THAT WE SHOULD NOT DO. AND WE DON'T DO THINGS THAT WE SHOULD DO. WE HAVE NOT LOVED YOU WITH OUR WHOLE HEART, AND WE HAVE NOT LOVED OUR NEIGHBOR AS OURSELVES. SO, WE APPEAL TO THE LAMB OF GOD, JESUS CHRIST, WHO DIED FOR OUR SINS. FORGIVE US , AND GIVE US HEARTS OF OBEDIENCE TO YOUR HOLY SCRIPTURES. GOD, THANK YOU. I THINK THAT YOUR SON JESUS ROSE FROM THE DEAD, AND REIGNS AS KING OVER HEAVEN AND EARTH. GRANT THAT OUR CITY WOULD BE KNOWN AS A RIGHTEOUS CITY. A CITY THAT CONFESSES JESUS AS LORD . A CITY OF PEACE AND HOPE. A CITY WITH HAPPY HOMES PITTED A CITY THAT WELCOMES A STRANGER. A CITY THAT CARES FOR THE NEEDY. A CITY THAT DEFENDS THE INNOCENT FROM EVILDOERS. LORD, I THANK YOU FOR THE CIVIL GOVERNMENT. BE WORD WITH OUR JUDGES, ATTORNEY, AND LAW ENFORCEMENT. GRANT THAT THEY WOULD NEVER NEGLECT OR ABUSE THEIR AUTHORITY , BUT THAT THEY WOULD STAND FIRM FOR TRUTH AND JUSTICE. KEEP THEM SAFE FROM HARM AS THEY SERVE OUR COMMUNITY. I PRAY FOR THIS MEETING TONIGHT . GIVE THE MEMBERS WISDOM AND GUIDANCE AS THEY DISCUSSED THE ITEMS BEFORE THEM. THEY EVERY DECISION BE RIGHT JUST IN YOUR SITE FOR OUR BENEFIT. AND FOR YOUR GLORY.

BLESS ALL OF US HERE , BLESS THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE , THIS SUNRISE CITY. WITH THE STATE OF FLORIDA, THE SUNSHINE STATE, AND BLESS THESE UNITED STATES OF AMERICAN, THE LAND OF THE FREE. THE NAME OF THE FATHER, THE SON, AND THE HOLY SPIRIT,

AMEN. >> AMEN. I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA. INTO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS ONE NATION UNDER GOD INDIVISIBLE WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. CALL THE ROLE, PLEASE?

>> MAYOR HUDSON? >> PRESENT.

>> COMMISSIONER BRODERICK? >> PRESENT.

>> COMMISSIONER GAINES? >> PRESENT.

>> COMMISSIONER C. JOHNSON? >> PRESENT.

>> COMMISSIONER J. JOHNSON? >> PRESENT.

>> FIRST, WE HAVE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FROM THE APRIL

15TH, 2024 REGULAR MEETING. >> A MOVE FOR THE APPROVAL.

>> SECOND. >> A MOTION IN A SECOND. THE

[5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES]

MOTION, PLEASE? >> COMMISSIONER BRODERICK?

>> YES. >> COMMISSIONER GAINES?

>> YES. >> COMMISSIONER C. JOHNSON?

>> YES. >> COMMISSIONER J. JOHNSON?

>> YES. >> MAYOR HUDSON?

>> YES. >> WE HAVE APPROVAL OF THE APRIL 19TH, 2024 SPECIAL MEETING.

[a. Legislative Update by Representative Trabulsy ]

>> SO MOVED. >> SECOND.

>> THERE IS A MOTION IN A SECOND. CALL THE ROLE, PLEASE?

>> COMMISSIONER BRODERICK? >> YES.

>> COMMISSIONER GAINES? >> YES.

>> COMMISSIONER C. JOHNSON? >> YES.

>> COMMISSIONER J. JOHNSON? >> YES.

>> MAYOR HUDSON? >> YES.

>> WE HAVE A REPRESENTATIVE WITH US TONIGHT ON A TIGHT TIME SCHEDULE. IF IT IS OKAY, SHE WOULD LIKE TO GO, AND THEN WE WILL DO OUR PROCLAMATIONS IMMEDIATELY AFTER.

>> ABSOLUTELY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE APPRECIATE YOU BEING HERE. MR. MEMES, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO LEAD INTO THIS? WE

ALL KNOW HER. >> WE HAVE THE PLEASURE OF HER REPRESENTING HERE. THE COMMUNICATIVE BEFORE THE MEETING THAT SHE WAS ASKED ORDINARILY EXCITED ABOUT BEING HERE, SO, THANK YOU, VERY MUCH.

>> WELCOME. >> THANK YOU. IT'S OKAY TO SEE YOU ALL. WAS JUST IN HERE I THINK ABOUT FOUR YEARS AGO WHEN THEY DID MY FIRST LEGISLATIVE UPDATE FOR YOU. I SAID WE NEEDED TO TALK MORE TO EACH OTHER. WE NEED TO HAVE MORE CONVERSATIONS. YOU REMEMBER THAT, DON'T YOU? THEN I THINK WE HAVE DONE THAT. I THINK WE CULTIVATED A GREAT RELATIONSHIP

[00:05:02]

THE PAST ABOUT 325 BILLS. I TRY TO READ AS MUCH OF THOSE AS I POSSIBLY CAN , BECAUSE WE ARE VOTING ON THE FLOOR, AND AGAIN, I APPRECIATE WHEN YOU GUYS GIVE ME A CALL WHEN I AM DEEP INTO IT LETTING ME KNOW WHAT IS IMPORTANT TO THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE. SENATE PRESIDENT AND OUR SPEAKER WERE ABLE TO GET THEIR PRIORITIES THROUGH THIS YEAR , WHICH IS HOUSE BILL ONE, WHICH TURNED INTO HOUSE BILL THREE, WHICH DEALT WITH SOCIAL MEDIA WITH CHILDREN . SO, THE PRIORITY IS, I THINK, A GREAT PIECE OF LEGISLATION , BECAUSE IT WILL PROHIBIT CHILDREN 14 AND UNDER TO HAVE SOCIAL MEDIA ACCOUNTS. WE FOUND THROUGH A LOT OF STUDY AND RESEARCH THAT NOT ONLY IS IT HARMFUL TO THEIR BRAINS AND MINDS, BUT ALSO TO THEIR MENTAL HEALTH. THIS MONTH IS MENTAL HEALTH AWARENESS MONTH, AND I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT WHEN INSTAGRAM STARTED IN 2012, WITHIN THE FIRST FOUR YEARS , IT WAS LIVE AND RUNNING, AND SUICIDE RATES DOUBLED IN TEEN GIRLS, AND IT IS ATTRIBUTED DIRECTLY TO SOCIAL MEDIA. SO, I AM REALLY PROUD THAT WE PASSED THAT PIECE OF LEGISLATION. ALSO, OUR LIVE HEALTHY BILL, WHICH COINCIDES WITH LAST YEAR'S LIVE LOCAL BILL REALLY IS ADDRESSING THE HEALTHCARE NEEDS WE HAVE IN THE STATE. WHETHER THAT BE FROM ACCESS TO HEALTHCARE, HEALTHCARE STUDIES , OR EVEN TACKLING OUR HEALTHCARE SHORTAGE WITHIN THE PROFESSION OF DOCTORS DENNIS WHATEVER. FIVE BIG BILLS WERE PASSED TO ADDRESS THAT. I AM SURE WE WILL GO BACK FOR THE NEXT SEVERAL YEARS AND KEEP MAKING IT BETTER, BUT THAT WAS A $700 MILLION INVESTMENT INTO OUR STATE. OUR TAX PACKAGE THIS YEAR WAS 117 .5 BILLION DOLLARS. THE LARGEST TAX PACKAGE WE HAVE EVER PASSED. WE STILL HAVE QUITE A BIT IN RESERVES BECAUSE WE ARE PLANNING FOR A RAINY DAY AS WE SEE OUR ECONOMY FLUCTUATE. HE WANTED TO KEEP THAT UNDER RESERVES. THE GOVERNOR HAS NOT SIGNED OUR BUDGET YET. WE ARE STILL KEEPING OUR FINGERS CROSSED. I HAVE A FEELING HE MAY WAIT UNTIL WE GO BACK FOR A SPECIAL SESSION HERE SOON, BUT I WOULD LIKE FOR HIM TO SIGN IT A LITTLE BIT SOONER. SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WERE PUT INTO OUR BUDGET WHERE WE EXPANDED THE TAX HOLIDAY, SO WE HAVE FIVE TAX HOLIDAYS. WE ALSO INVESTED MORE INTO THE MY SAFE FLORIDA PROGRAM , WHERE WE HAVE HAD SEVERAL CONVERSATIONS ABOUT THIS , AND A $200,000,000.00 INVESTMENT INTO THE CONDO PROGRAM , WHICH WILL ACTUALLY TAKE THAT SAME PROGRAM , AND BECAUSE WE HAVE SO MANY CONDO OWNERS HERE IN FLORIDA, THEY WILL BE ABLE TO REAP THE BENEFITS OF THOSE HOME IMPROVEMENT AS WELL. OVER 50% OF OUR BUDGET WAS HEALTHCARE . THE NEXT BIGGEST LOT OF OUR BUDGET WAS EDUCATION AS WE CONTINUE TO REALLY ADDRESS THE EDUCATIONAL SAVINGS ACCOUNTS AND SCHOOL CHOICE. I WANTED TO TALK TO YOU GUYS A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THREE BILLS THAT I PASS THIS YEAR THAT I THINK WILL RELATE SPECIFICALLY TO FORT PIERCE. ALTHOUGH YOU MAY NOT THINK THIS DOES, IT DOES. ONE IS HOUSE BILL 159. PROUD TO BE A COSPONSOR WITH THIS BILL, AND THEY HAVE THE SAME AUTHORITY AS A SPONSOR. I WORKED WITH REPRESENTATIVES OUT FRANKLIN ON THIS BILL, AND IT IS A BILL THAT PERTAINS TO HIV AND A.I.D.S. EVERY YEAR, I WORK REALLY HARD TO GET A $1,000,000.00 APPROPRIATION IN THE BUDGET FOR A.I.D.S. RESEARCH. MY BROTHR PASSED AWAY OF A.I.D.S. 29 YEARS AGO, SO IT IS A TRUE PASSION OF MINE TO KEEP HIS LEGACY ALIVE. WITH THIS BILL, IT ACTUALLY PROVIDES ACCESS TO SOMETHING CALLED PEP, WHICH IS A PRO EXPOSURE PROPHYLAXIS, WHICH TYPICALLY HAS HAD TO BE PRESCRIBED BY A DOCTOR IN AN OFFICE SETTING. NOW, IT WILL BE ABLE TO BE PRESCRIBED BY A PHARMACIST . THE REASON WHY THAT IS IMPORTANT IS BECAUSE WHEN SOMEBODY IS EXPOSED TO HIV, THERE IS A 72 HOUR WINDOW BY WHICH THEY CAN ACTUALLY HAVE A 97% CHANCE OF NOT CONTRACTING HIV , AND SUBSEQUENTLY A.I.D.S.

[00:10:06]

LOUIS COUNTY. IF SOMEONE IS INMATE AND THEY HAVE TO GO TO THE HOSPITAL, THE CLOSEST ONE IS LAWNWOOD. I LOVE LAWNWOOD, IT IS A GREAT HOSPITAL, BUT YOU HAVE TO GO AS CLOSE AS THE CROW FLIES, AND THAT IS WERE THE CROW FLIES TO FIRST. AND INMATE IS NOT ALLOWED TO HAVE INSURANCE. YOU BECOME A WARD OF THE STATE WHEN YOU ARE ARRESTED, SO, IT IS UP TO THE COUNTY TO PAY YOUR MEDICAL BILLS. ON A STATEWIDE LEVEL, IF YOU ARE A PRISONER IN A PENITENTIARY , THE STATE IS ONLY CHARGED 110% OF MEDICARE RATE . IF YOU'RE AN INMATE IN A JAIL , WE HAVE SEEN IN OUR OWN COUNTY UP TO 27,000% ABOVE MEDICARE RATE. THIS WILL ESSENTIALLY SAVE ST. LOUIS COUNTY AND TAXPAYER DOLLARS AT A VERY BEEN RAISED $10,000,000.00 A YEAR IN PERPETUITY. SO, WE ARE REALLY EXCITED ABOUT THAT BILL. AGAIN, WE HAVE NOT HAD THE BILL GO BEFORE THE GOVERNOR YET . WE WERE WAITING TO GET THAT ON HIS DESK AND SIGN IT IF YOU ARE SO INCLINED, ANYONE, TO WRITE A LETTER TO OUR GOVERNOR. TELL THEM HOW IMPORTANT IT WOULD BE CHOOSING WAS THE COUNTY, SO THAT IS NOT CHUMP CHANGE.

LESLIE IS OUR PEACE LOAN BILL. I DO NOT KNOW HOW FAMILIAR WITH THE FINANCE PROGRAM, BUT THIS PARTICULAR BILL OR STATUTES AND TYPE OF FINANCING FOR HOME HARDENING HAS BEEN SOMEWHAT PREDATORY OVER THE PAST 10 TO 12 YEARS. SO THAT OUR HOMEOWNERS ARE NOT TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF, AND ARE VERY WELL AWARE OF WHAT THEIR TAX BILL WILL BE IF THEY DECIDE TO PURSUE THIS TYPE OF FINANCING FOR THEIR HOME. LASTLY, I SEE THAT YOU GUYS ARE RECOGNIZING LUPUS AWARENESS MONTH BY A PROCLAMATION TODAY . I DO HAVE LUPUS, AND I KNOW THAT IT IS A VERY MYSTERIOUS KIND OF DISEASE THAT AFFECTS EVERYONE DIFFERENTLY. SO, I DOES APPRECIATE YOUR AWARENESS AND PUT IN THE PUT THE WORD OUT. UNLESS IT IS YOU , COMMISSIONER JOHNSON, BECAUSE I KNOW YOU'LL GET ME ON SOME THING.

>> GO AHEAD, GET HER! >> AT ME!

>> THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE TO ST. LOUIS COUNTY AND FORT

PIERCE. >> THANK YOU.

>> ANYBODY ELSE? YOU DID A GOOD JOB. I KNOW HOW HARD YOU WORK.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, THANK YOU.

[a. Letter Carriers’ Food Drive Day]

>> THANK YOU! >> THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR BEING

HERE. >> THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. >> OKAY, WE WILL GO AHEAD AND BEGIN WITH OUR BUCKLE NATIONS NEXT. THE FIRST IS LETTER CARRIERS FOOD DRIVE DAY. I BELIEVE WE HAVE SOMEONE IN THE AUDIENCE, RIGHT? WHERE IS ON THE SECOND SATURDAY OF MAY EACH YEAR, LETTER CARRIERS ACROSS THE COUNTRY HAVE NONPERISHABLE FOOD ITEMS TO NONLOCAL FOOD PANTRIES AS PART OF THE NATION'S ONE-DAY FOOD DRIVE. WHEREAS AN ESTIMATED 12% OF AMERICAN HOUSEHOLDS IN THE UNITED STATES MAY EXPERIENCE FOOD INSECURITY IN ANY GIVEN YEAR. IN LOWER AMERICANS, THAT NUMBER JUST TO 36%. AFTER RECOGNIZING THE NEEDS TO ADDRESS CRITICAL ISSUE, WE CREATED THE STAMP OUT HUNGER FOOD DRIVE. WHEREAS THE PILOT DRIVE WAS HELD IN 1991, THE STAMP OUT HUNGER HAS GENERATE APPROXIMATELY ONE .9 BILLION POUNDS OF DONATED FOOD , AND IT COMMITTED DONATIONS TO MORE THAN 10,000 CITIES AND TOWNS IN ALL 50 STATES. WE KNOWLEDGE THE NOTEWORTHY MILESTONES OF 33 YEARS OF THE NATIONAL LETTER CARRIERS STAMP OUT HUNGER FOOD DRIVE CELEBRATES IN 2024. 1.9

[00:15:02]

>> OKAY. WOULD YOU LIKE TO SAY COUPLE OF WORDS?

>> THANK YOU, MAYOR, AND COMMISSIONERS, FULL OF YOUR SUPPORT JUST IN GENERAL , ESPECIALLY ON THIS DAY. THE LETTER CARRIERS ARE GOING TO BE ABLE TO PUT OUT BAGS. THEY WILL BE DOING THAT THIS WEEK. JUST TO REMIND PEOPLE, THAT IS THE STAMP OUT HUNGER FOOD DRIVE. I WOULD APPRECIATE IF YOU JUST LET YOUR FAMILY AND FRIENDS KNOW TO JUST PUT A FEW CANS IN THEIR . IT MAKES IT QUITE SIMPLE. IT'S EASIER ON THE LETTER CARRIERS OF IT IS ALREADY ON A BAG SO THEY ARE NOT TRYING TO COLLECT IT. I FORGET WHAT THE MAXIMUM IS. I THINK WE COLLECTED ABOUT 900,000 POUNDS OF FOOD IN ONE DAY. THIS IS THE LARGEST ONE-DAY FOOD DRIVE ACROSS THE NATION. ALL OF THE ORGANIZATIONS THAT WERE PRESENTED HERE ARE GOING TO BE TAKING THIS, DISSIPATING IT OUT THROUGH PANTRIES AND THROUGH SOUP KITCHENS SO THAT WE CAN DEFINITELY FEED THE HUNGRY AROUND. SO, WE DO THANK YOU, THE CITY, AND THE COUNTY FOR ALL OF YOUR SUPPORT.

>> REMIND US OF THE DATE. >> IT IS THIS COMING SATURDAY, MAY 11TH. IT'S ALWAYS THE SECOND SATURDAY OF THE MONTH OF

[b. Lupus Awareness Month]

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> THANK YOU.

>> OKAY. NEXT, WE HAVE THE LUPUS AWARENESS MONTH PROCLAMATION. WE HAVE SOMEBODY IN THE AUDIENCE FOR THAT? HERE SHE IS. MR. MIMMS, WE HAVE HANDBOOKS THERE IF YOU ARE NOT MIND SHARING THEM WITH THE COMMISSIONERS? THANK YOU.

WHEREAS LUPUS IS AN UNPREDICTABLE AND MISUNDERSTOOD AUTOIMMUNE DISEASE THAT CAN CAUSE SEVERE DAMAGE TO THE ORGANS OF THE BODY, AND, IN SOME CASES, DEATH. WHEREAS MORE THAN 1.5 MILLION AMERICANS AND 5 MILLION WORLDWIDE SUFFER FROM THE DEVASTATING EFFECTS OF THIS CRUEL AND MYSTERIOUS DISEASE, INCLUDING OVER 100,000 FLORIDIANS. AND WHEREAS LUPUS CAN BE PARTIALLY DIFFICULT OR PARTICULARLY GIVE TO GO TO DIAGNOSE BECAUSE ITS SYMPTOMS ARE SIMILAR TO THOSE OF MANY OTHER ILLNESSES , AND MAJOR GAPS EXIST IN THE UNDERSTANDING OF THE CAUSES AND CONSEQUENCES OF LUPUS. MORE THAN HALF OF ALL PEOPLE WITH LUPUS TAKE FOUR OR MORE YEARS TO VISIT THREE OR MORE DOCTORS BEFORE OBTAINIG A CORRECT DIAGNOSIS. AND WHEREAS WHILE LUPUS STRIKES MOSTLY WOMEN OF CHILDBEARING AGE, NO ONE IS SAFE FROM LUPUS. AFRICAN-AMERICANS, HISPANIC LATINOS, ASIANS, AND NATIVE AMERICANS ARE TWO TO THREE TIMES MORE LIKELY TO DEVELOP LUPUS , A DISPARITY THAT REMAINS YET UNEXPLAINED. AND WHEREAS LUPUS ORGANIZATIONS CALL FOR INCREASES IN PUBLIC AND PRIVATE SECTOR FUNDING FOR MEDICAL RESEARCH ON LUPUS, TARGETED EDUCATION PROGRAMS , HEALTH PROFESSIONALS, PATIENTS, AND THE PUBLIC, AND RECOGNITION OF LUPUS AS A CERTIFICATE PUBLIC HEALTH ISSUE. NOW THEREFORE, I, LINDA HUDSON, MAYOR OF FORT PIERCE DUBAI BROOKLYN THE MONTH OF MAY OF LUPUS AWARENESS MONTH IN THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE, AND ENCOURAGE CITIZENS TO OBSERVE THIS MONTH BY EDUCATING THEMSELVES ON THE SYMPTOMS AND IMPACT OF LUPUS IN THE LUPUS FOUNDATION OF AMERICA , SUPPORTING PROGRAMS OF RESEARCH, EDUCATION, ADVOCACY,

AND COMMUNITY SERVICE. >> THANK YOU.

>> I ALWAYS GET A LITTLE NERVOUS WHEN I SPEAK, SO, EXCUSE ME. I AM AN AMBASSADOR FOR THE LUPUS FOUNDATION OF AMERICA , THE ORGANIZATIONS WHOSE SOLE MISSION IS TO IMPROVE QUALITY OF LIFE FOR PEOPLE THROUGH RESEARCH, EDUCATION, AND ADVOCACY. 1994, I BEGAN EXPENSING SYMPTOMS OF UNKNOWN ORIGIN FOR ABOUT THREE YEARS. ONE OF MY PHYSICIANS QUESTION WHETHER OR NOT I MIGHT HAVE LUPUS. AT THE TIME, THERE WERE VERY FEW DOCTORS WHO WERE AWARE OF LUPUS, INCLUDING MY OWN. THOSE WHO WERE AWARE OF THIS DISEASE HAD VERY LITTLE TO OFFER US. THERE IS NO SPECIFIC LUPUS TEST , NO SPECIFIC LUPUS MEDICINES, DIAGNOSIS IS MADE BY A PROCESS OF ELIMINATION, AND OFTEN MISDIAGNOSED. AT THE TIME, PEOPLE WERE OFTEN LOST WITH THE DISEASE BECAUSE WE DO NOT HAVE TREATMENT OPTIONS. THE NATURE OF LUPUS IS TO CHANGE AND ATTACK THE BODY AT WILL, SO OFTEN, THE TREATMENTS AND ACTIONS THAT WE HAD WOULD FAIL, AND THERE WOULD BE NO OTHER OPTION TO TURN TO. IN 2011, THE FDA APPROVED OUR FIRST LUPUS SPECIFIC MEDICATION , MAKING US WAIT OVER 50 YEARS. IN 2021, A DECADE LATER, WE RECEIVED APPROVAL FOR A SECOND, AND NOW, WE HAVE A SPECIFIC THIRD MEDICATION . THESE ARE ALL POSITIVE IMPROVEMENTS, BUT

[00:20:07]

HOW CAN WE MAKE LUPUS MORE VISIBLE IN OUR COMMUNITIES? AMBASSADORS LIKE MYSELF ACROSS THE COUNTRY COMMIT TO PARTNERING WITH THE LUPUS FOUNDATION OF AMERICA TO RAISE AWARENESS, PROVIDE RESOURCES, AND EDUCATE COMMUNITIES. WE PROVIDE PROGRAMS, TOOLS TO HELP PEOPLE MANAGE THE DISEASE, AND PROVIDE SUPPORT TO FAMILIES AND CAREGIVERS. WE ARE THE VOICE FOR ALL PEOPLE WERE AFFECTED BY LUPUS. NOW, WE TURN TO PEOPLE LIKE ALL OF YOU, THE LEADERS OF OUR COMMUNITY, AND WE ASK THAT YOU STAND WITH US AND GIVE US A PLATFORM FOR WHICH TO RAISE OUR VOICES. TONIGHT, IN THE CITY OF PORT ST. LUCIE, WE ARE BASED IN PURPLE, AND TONIGHT, AND FORT PIERCE, WE HAVE MADE A PROCLAMATION THAT SAYS MAY, 2024, IS LUPUS AWARENESS MONTH . IN DOING SO, YOU ACKNOWLEDGE EVERYONE OF LUPUS . THANK YOU FOR HEARING ME, AND FOR HELPING TO MAKE LUPUS MORE VISIBLE IN

THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

[c. Haitian Heritage Month]

>> THANK YOU. >> NEXT, WE HAVE HAITIAN HERITAGE MONTH. SO WHERE IS THE VIBRANT AND RICH CULTURE OF HAITI HAS MADE SIGNIFICANT CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE DIVERSITY AND HERITAGE OF OUR SOCIETY , AND WHEREAS THE PEOPLE OF HAITI HAVE DEMONSTRATED RESILIENCE , CREATIVITY, AND STRENGTH IN THE GENERATIONS OF THE INSPIRING - DEMONSTRATION AND SPIRIT. AND WHERE IS HAITIAN HERITAGE MONTH PROVIDES AN OPPORTUNITY TO CELEBRATE AND HONOR THE ACHIEVEMENTS, HISTORY, AND TRADITIONS OF THE HAITIAN COMMUNITY. AND WHERE IS THE CELEBRATION OF HAITIAN HERITAGE MONTH SERVES AS A REMINDER OF THE IMPORTANCE OF CULTURAL DIVERSITY , AND THE CONTRIBUTIONS OF PATIENT AMERICANS TO OUR NATION. NOW THEREFORE, I, LINDA HUDSON, TO HEREBY PROCLAIM THE MONTH OF MAY AS HAITIAN HERITAGE MONTH THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE, AND ENCOURAGE OUR CITIZENS JOIN IS LIMITING THE RICH CULTURE, HISTORY, AND HERITAGE OF HAITI, AND TO RECOGNIZE THE VALUED CONTRIBUTIONS OF THE TRAN 25 COMMUNITY TO OUR SOCIETY.

>> THANK YOU. WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK?

>> SURE. COULD EVENING, MADAM MAYOR AND COMMISSIONERS. I AM THE COFOUNDER AND SECRETARY OF TCF. I HAVE WITH ME CAROL KING.

SHE IS THE FOUNDER OF THE ORGANIZATION. I HAVE RAYMOND NAUTILUS, AND THEY ARE ALL MEMBERS OF THE ORGANIZATION. ON BEHALF OF TCF IN THE WHOLE HAITIAN COMMUNITY, WE WOULD LIKE TO THANK YOU FOR GRANTING US, AGAIN, THIS YEAR TO PROCLAMATION OF HAITIAN HERITAGE MONTH. IT IS REALLY A PRIVILEGE FROM FOR US, BECAUSE THE MONTH OF MAY IS A HUGE HISTORY FOR THE HAITIAN COMMUNITY. YOU KNOW, OUR ANCESTORS FOUGHT FOR OUR FREEDOM, AND WE ARE THE FIRST BLACK REPUBLIC TO BE INDEPENDENT. ON THAT NOTE, I WOULD LIKE TO INVITE EVERYONE ON MAY 18TH AS WE HAVE THE HAITIAN FLAG DAY FESTIVAL AT THE MID-FLORIDA EVENT CENTER.

IT IS A FREE ADMISSION, FREE PARKING EVENT , AND FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO HAVE NEVER BEEN THERE, I AM SURE MADAM MAYOR AND THE COMMISSIONERS CAN SPEAK ON OUR BEHALF. THE FOOD IS DELICIOUS, THERE WILL BE A LOT OF FOOD, AND A LOT OF ACTIVITIES. WE ALSO HAVE A GRAND DRIVE-BY PARADE THAT WILL START ACTUALLY IN THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE, AND END UP AT THE CIVIC CENTER. ALSO EMERGING PARADE. IF YOU HAVE A BUSINESS AND YOU WOULD LIKE TO ADVERTISE, THIS IS A GREAT MOMENT FOR YOU , BECAUSE WE HAVE THOUSANDS OF PEOPLE WHO COME TO THE FESTIVAL. THANK YOU, AGAIN, FOR THIS

[a. Progression Properties LLC and Andros Construction commend Miriam Garcia, Redevelopment Specialist, and Building Department staff, Sue Keller, Frank Rhemling, and Anthony Jetmore for their help in obtaining construction permits for two projects.]

>> THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE.

>> OKAY. WE HAVE THE FOLLOWING LETTER THAT WILL BE KEPT ON FILE IN THE CITY CLERK OFFICE. PROGRESS PROPERTIES LLC COMMENDED MIRIAM GARCIA, RITA VELTMAN SPECIALIST IN BUILDING APARTMENT STAFF, FRANK WREN LAYING , AND ANTHONY JET MORE

[b. Email from Elizabeth Osborne thanking Code Enforcement Officer Heather Debevec for her support and praising her for her hard work and assistance with a magistrate's hearing.]

[c. Thank you letter from Bill and Karen Hager to Cecelia Bacener Permit Specialist in appreciation of her assistance with the permit and inspection and her indispensable role in the timely completion. ]

[d. Thank you note from Carol A. Costas thanking Planning Department staff Alicia Rosenthal and Vennis Gilmore for providing information about city development and expressing her gratitude for their efforts in maintaining a safe environment for residents and workers.]

[00:25:02]

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

>> ADMISSIONS, DELETIONS, OR CHANGES? IF NOT, I WILL

ENTERTAIN A MOTION. >> I MOVE THAT WE SET THE

AGENDA AS PROPOSED. >> SECOND.

>> THERE IS A MOTION IN A SECOND. CALL THE ROLE, PLEASE?

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

>> COMMISSIONER BRODERICK? >> YES.

>> COMMISSIONER GAINES? >> YES.

>> COMMISSIONER C. JOHNSON? >> YES.

>> COMMISSIONER J. JOHNSON? >> YES.

>> MAYOR HUDSON? >> YES.

>> NEXT, WE HAVE, SOME THE PUBLIC.

>> OKAY, WE HAVE ONE PERSON SIGNED UP. THESE ARE FOR ITEMS THAT DON'T HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT. THAT IS SUSAN PERRY.

SUSAN PERRY? YES. YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES. MISS COX WILL GIVE YOU A THREE SECOND WARNING.

>> GOOD EVENING. SUSAN PERRY WITH UNITED FOR ANIMALS , AND ALSO, A NEW BIT MORE BOARD MEMBER AT DOGS AND CATS FOREVER, WHICH IS A PRIVILEGE. I AM HERE TONIGHT AS A TREAT TONIGHT. I AM HERE TO BE ON A POSITIVE NOTE . A GROUP OF PEOPLE ARE ALSO IN THE AUDIENCE IN THE SAME REGARD TO YOUR NEW INVESTMENT MOVING FORWARD TO YOUR VET CLINIC AT 100 SAVANNAH ROAD ANIMAL SHELTER. THIS IS A CRITICAL DECISION AND CRITICAL INVESTMENT. IT IS REALLY NEEDED . THERE ARE NUMEROUS ORGANIZATIONS IN THE AUDIENCE TONIGHT IN SUPPORT OF THIS.

THEY CAME HERE TO COMMEND YOU FOR MOVING FORWARD IN THIS VERY POSITIVE DIRECTION. THIS IS REALLY THE ANSWER TO OUR PET OVERPOPULATION PROBLEM , PROVIDING THIS CLINIC TO PROVIDE THE SPAY NEUTER SERVICES TO SUPPORT OUR VOUCHER PROGRAM, THE LOW-COST SERVICES FOR OUR PET OWNING CITIZENS THAT ARE FINANCIALLY CHALLENGED , AND BECAUSE IT AFFECTS ALL OF THEM AS WELL. DOGS AND CATS DON'T RESPECT CITY BOUNDARIES.

THEY GO INTO OTHER COMMUNITIES, AND LIKE DOGS AND CATS FOREVER IS CURRENTLY PROVIDING SERVICES FOR THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE ANIMALS. SO, THIS AFFECTS THEM AS WELL, AND I WILL ASK THEM ALL TO STAND IN SUPPORT OF THE CITY MAYOR AND CITY COMMISSION IN MAKING THIS VERY IMPORTANT INVESTMENT, AND TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS PET CLINIC, GETTING IT UP AND RUNNING SOONER THAN

LATER. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH! THANK

[11. CONSENT AGENDA]

>> OKAY. NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS THE CONSENT AGENDA.

>> IS THERE ANY ITEM THAT ANY COMMISSIONER LIKE TO PULL?

COMMISSIONER JOHNSON? >> I WOULD LIKE TO PULL A MADAM

MAYOR. >> I CANNOT HEAR YOU.

>> A. >> MADAM MAYOR, I WOULD LIKE TO

ADD ITEM B AND D. >> ANY OTHER ITEMS? OKAY. IS THERE A MOTION FOR THE REMAINDER OF THE CONSENT

AGENDA? >> AND MOVE TO APPROVE.

>> SECOND. >> THERE'S A MOTION IN A

[a. Approval of Interlocal Funding Agreement with St. Lucie County for Homeless Services in the amount of $125,000.]

>> COMMISSIONER BRODERICK? >> YES.

>> COMMISSIONER GAINES? >> YES.

>> COMMISSIONER C. JOHNSON? >> YES.

>> COMMISSIONER J. JOHNSON? >> YES.

>> MAYOR HUDSON? >> YES.

>> OKAY. ITEM 11 A IS APPROVAL OF INTERLOCAL LAYING FUNDING AGREEMENT WITH ST. LOUIS COUNTY FOR HOMELESS SERVICES IN THE

AMOUNT OF $125,000.00. >> ASKED FOR THIS AGENDA ITEM TO BE PULLED NOT TO VOTE AGAINST IT , BUT TO LET EVERYONE KNOW THAT WE HEARTHE CRIES AND PLEAS OF THE HOMELESS CITIZENS, AND WE ARE TRYING TO DO EVERYTHING THAT WE CAN TO ASSIST. THIS $125,000.00 THAT WE ARE PUTTING IN WITH THE COUNTY FOR HOMELESS SERVICES IS GOING TO BE A GREAT START . AS YOU KNOW, I SIT ON THE COUNTY HOMELESSNESS TASK FORCE, AND THERE ARE A LOT OF THINGS COMING. WE CAN ADDRESS THE HOMELESS PROBLEM IN ST. LOUIS COUNTY. WE ARE NOT RUNNING FROM IT ANYMORE. I JUST WANT TO COMMEND THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS AGREED TO ALLOW US TO SPEND THIS $125,000.00 TOWARDS HOMELESSNESS. I THINK IT WILL BE A GREAT INVESTMENT , AND AGAIN, OTHER THINGS ARE COMING.

>> THIS IS GOING FOR THE SERVICES, RIGHT?

>> COMMISSIONER JOHNSON, GREAT QUESTION. AT FIRST, THE LITTLE

[00:30:02]

THIS IS A START. WE ARE THE COUNTY WITH OUR HELP THE HELP OF THE CITY OF PORT ST. LUCIE , WE HAVE SOME RESIDENTS IN NEW BUILDINGS COMING. WE ARE TALKING ABOUT A DAY CARE, YOU KNOW, FOR HOMELESS IS TO COME IN AND GET ESSENTIAL SERVICES AND GO OUT. SO, AS WE ALWAYS SAY , WE LIKE TO SEE SHOVELS IN THE DIRT SO TO SPEAK WHEN WE ARE TALKING ABOUT PROJECTS. I SEE THAT HAPPENING NOW. BEFORE, IT WAS A LOT OF TALKING. WITH THIS MONEY, IF I AM NOT FOR SURE, PORT ST. LUCIE MAY BE DOING THE SAME THING. I KNOW THAT WE ASKED FOR THAT, AND THAT WE ARE. SO, STUFF IS STARTING TO HAPPEN NOW. WE ARE NOT JUST TURNING A BLIND EYE. THIS IS JUST THE FIRST. THIS IS JUST FOR SERVICES ON SEVENTH STREET. KNOW THAT THE COUNTY HAS WHAT THEY ARE LOOKING AT , WHICH IS A VACANT OR SELDOM USED HOTEL OFF OF U.S. ONE. THEY'RE LOOKING INTO BUYING A PROPERTY, RENOVATING IT, AND THAT SHOULD BE ABLE TO HOLD 20 THROUGH 30 FAMILIES TO GET THEMSELVES ALTOGETHER. I KNOW WE ARE ALSO LOOKING FOR SOME BUILDINGS AND SOME OTHER THINGS TO DO THE DAY CARE CENTER IN THE HOMELESS DAY CARE RESOURCE SERVICES . IT IS MOVING AND IT IS WORKING.

>> THE COMMITTEE SPECIFICALLY THAT YOU ARE ON , THE OTHER COMMISSIONERS, COUNTY ELECTED OFFICIALS , IS THAT STILL AND

UP AND RUNNING SERVICE? >> YES.

>> BECAUSE AT ONE POINT, YOU WERE COMING BACK . I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE, BECAUSE THAT IS RUNNING IN PARALLEL TO THIS. THIS IS OUR STRUCTURE. YOU GUYS ARE DEALING FROM A GLOBAL PERSPECTIVE OF HOMELESSNESS THROUGHOUT THE

COUNTY. RIGHT? >> THROUGHOUT THE COMMITTEE, IT WAS ASKED TO THE CITIES , THE COUNTY ASKED THE CITIES TO HELP, YOU KNOW, AND WE DID FROM THE COMMITTEE. SO, WE ARE ACTUALLY MOVING IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION AND GETTING STUFF

DONE NOW. >> ONE REASON THAT I ASK IS WE HAVE A CAPTIVE AUDIENCE TONIGHT WITH A WHOLE BUNCH OF PEOPLE, RIGHT? WE DO TO HELP THEM UNDERSTAND, AND OUR COMMUNITIES UNDERSTAND THAT WE TAKE THIS PROBLEM SERIOUSLY. WE HAVE HAD A NUMBER OF PEOPLE COME IN AND YOUR COMMENTS AND CONCERNS ABOUT IT. WE HAVE SEEN IT, AND WE HAVE TAKEN PROACTIVE STEPS THROUGHOUT THE CITY TO CONTROL SOME AREAS THAT WERE REALLY BE ON GETTING OUT OF CONTROL HERE. WE JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT PEOPLE ARE AWARE THAT WE ARE HERE IN THAT WE ARE BEGINNING TO ADDRESS CONTINUE TO ADDRESS THE THREE YOUR COMMITTEE AND THE WORK WE ARE DOING. WHO IS THE CHAIR OF THE COMMITTEE

MIGHT I ASK? YOU KNOW? >> YOU REMEMBER? IS IT REMI?

>> REMI NICHOLS. AND COMMISSIONER JOHNSON, EVERYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE , THIS IS NOT A ONE-TIME BANDAGE. THIS IS JUST SOMETHINGTO KICKSTART, AND YOU SELL THINGS . WE ARE NOT GOING TO JUST GET THIS MONEY AND STOP. WE ARE GOING TO FACE THIS

PROBLEM HEAD-ON. >> THANK YOU.

>> WOULD YOU LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION?

>> YES. MADAM MAYOR, I MOVE THAT WE APPROVE CONSENT AGENDA

ITEM A. >> TO DO?

[b. Approval of award of Bid No. 2024-017 for the purchase of a modular building to provide a veterinary clinic at the Fort Pierce Animal Adoption Center to the lowest bidder, East Coast Modular Building, LLC in an amount not to exceed $260,000.00.]

>> YES. >> COMMISSIONER BRODERICK?

>> YES. BUT COMMISSIONER C. JOHNSON?

>> YES >> COMMISSIONER J. JOHNSON?

>> YES. >> MAYOR HUDSON?

>> YES. >> MOVED TO APPROVE APPROVAL OF INTERLOCAL -- ITEM CONSENT AGENDA 11 B FOR APPROVAL OF A WORD FOR THE PURCHASE OF THE MODULAR BUILDING TO PROVIDE A VETERINARY CLINIC TO FORT PIERCE ANIMAL ADOPTION CENTER TO THE LOWEST BIDDER, EAST COAST MODULAR BUILDING, LLC IN AN AMOUNT NOT TO BE EXCEEDED OF $260,000.00.

>> I PULLED THIS TO COMMENT AGAIN, I HAVE VISITED THE CENTER MANY TIMES. I THINK THIS TYPE OF RESOURCE, IF NOT MISTAKEN , WILL ACTUALLY FREE UP MORE SPACE INSIDE THE SHELTER, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN. THERE WERE SOME ROOMS THAT DEDICATED OR SEMI-DEDICATED TO THESE TYPES OF SERVICES. I AM ASSUMING THEN THAT THIS ACTUALLY EXPANDS OUR FOOTPRINT THERE ON THAT PROPERTY TO ALLOW FOR STORAGE OR WHAT. I FREQUENT STAYS, I KNOW THAT THERE WERE ROOMS THAT ARE PLANNED OR TALKED ABOUT THAT WOULD BE USED FOR THAT, AND NOW THAT IS ALLOWING FOR EXPANSION. I GOT THE NAME RIGHT, SEE? YEAH. SO, THANK YOU FOR THAT, AND I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR AN UPDATE FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE OVER WHAT THIS IS DOING AS FAR AS THE EVOLUTION OF US CONTROLLING AND OUT-OF-CONTROL SITUATION.

>> MYSTERIES? >> GOOD EVENING, MADAM MAYOR'S, COMMISSIONERS. YES, WE ARE ALL VERY, VERY EXCITED THAT THIS IS HAPPENING AND COMING TO FRUITION. HAVING A CLINIC RIGHT

[00:35:05]

>> OKAY. >> THERE IS A STATE STATUTE THAT ACTUALLY REQUIRES ANY ANIMAL TO BE ADOPTED TO BE STERILIZED. RIGHT NOW, WE ARE TRANSPORTING ALL OVER TO DIFFERENT FATS FITTING IN HERE THERE , SO IT WILL ADDRESS THOSE ITEMS, IT IS GOING TO ADDRESS THE PREVENTIONS, AND OBVIOUSLY IT IS NOT A FULL CARE VETERINARY CENTER , SO WE SONY SOME OF OUR LOCAL VETS TO HELP US.

>> RIGHT. >> WHAT WILL ADDRESS HIS IMMEDIATE ISSUES AND CONCERNS, AND THEN WILL ALSO PROVIDE A LOW COST CLINIC OPTION FOR THE COMMUNITY. ON THE PLANS, WE EVEN WORKED ON THE PLANS. ONE OF THE ROOMS HAS AN EXIT DOOR.

SO, WE ARE LOOKING FOR A FUTURE FOR A RABIES CLINIC WHERE YOU HAVE A MOST COMMON ONE WAY AND OUT THE OTHER SO THAT YOU CAN

DO THINGS LIKE THAT. >> I AGREE WITH THE FACT THAT IT IS GOING TO HELP THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY. WE ARE SEEING A HUGE INCREASE ON INTAKES, AND THAT IS BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE NOT SPAYING AND ENTERING THEIR PETS. WE HAVE ANIMALS COMING IN THAT YOU KNOW ARE INFESTED WITH FLEAS AND TICKS. THEY DON'T HAVE THE PREVENTATIVE CARE. SO I DON'T HAVE A LOW-COST OPTION

FOR THE COMMITTEE. >> THIS IS A LOW COST SOLUTION TO THE ACTUAL SERVICE, BUT WHAT IS MISSING HERE IS WHO IS GOING TO PERFORM THE SERVICE? I AM SURE THAT SHE WAS GOING TO DROP AT SOME POINT IN THE FUTURE BECAUSE HAS TO DO THE ACTUAL

WORK. >> THAT IS CORRECT. SUMMER HAS BEEN CONTACTED BY SEVERAL DIFFERENT ENTITIES, BUT THE PROBLEM IS WE ARE ALWAYS TALKING WHAT IF . AND WE HOPE.

IT'S IN THE FUTURE. WHAT I'M HOPING THE COMMISSION WILL DO TONIGHT WILL ACTUALLY BE ABLE TO HAVE REAL CONCRETE TALKS AND SAY YES, THIS IS NOW HAPPENING, AND THIS IS GOING TO TAKE PLACE. IT'S REALLY HARD TO MAKE PLANS WHEN YOU DON'T HAVE A CONCRETE PLAN, BUT NOW WE DO. FRANK, FROM THE TREASURE COAST SOCIETY, HE ASKED IF THERE WAS A WAY WE COULD WORK OUT SHARING VETS WITH THEIR ORGANIZATION. SO, THAT WILL BE A WORK IN PROGRESS AND A LOT EASIER TO ADDRESS NOW THAT WE HAVE A REAL PLAN, AND WE KNOW SOMETHING IS GOING TO HAPPEN.

>> THAT IS WHY AM IN AGREEMENT. LIKE I SAID, I HAVE VISITED MANY TIMES THERE. I HAVE ADOPTED FROM THERE. AND I HAVE RECENTLY HAD THE CHALLENGE OF TRYING TO GET AN ANIMAL SPAYED AND NEUTERED THAT WE JUST INHERITED FROM THE COMMUNITY.

AND THAT WAS A CHALLENGE, RIGHT? I THINK WHAT I AM HEAR YOU SAYING AND WHY I AM IN SUPPORT OF THIS, BUT I WANTED TO PULL IT BECAUSE I WANTED THE AUDIENCE TO BE AWARE OF THIS, IS THAT WE ARE MAKING AN INVESTMENT HERE FOR ALMOST WILL HELP US ATTRACT THE PERSONS THAT WE WILL NEED TO DO THE SERVICE. ONCE WE HAVE THIS BUILT ON A MODULAR SET UP AND READY TO GO , WE'LL HAVE A NICE LITTLE SHINY PLACE THERE.

BUT WE NEED SOMEONE TO COME IN AND DO THE WORK. THAT IS WILL

BE CHALLENGED. RIGHT? >> OKAY. I'M GOOD WITH THAT.

>> THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. I HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO TOUR THE FACILITY, AND I HAVE BEEN KEEPING AN EYE ON ITS MANIFESTATION SINCE THE BEGINNING. I MUST APPLAUD YOU AND YOUR TEAM. THIS IS A TRUE SUCCESS STORY. YOU KNOW, APPEAR, WE DO WITH A LOT OF WAITING ISSUES, AND SOME OF THEM ARE NOT POSITIVE AT THE OUTCOME. IN THIS PARTICULAR INSTANCE, I CAN SAY AM VERY PROUD OF WHAT THE CITY TEAM HAS DONE HERE, AND THE CONTINUING DEVELOPMENT OF THIS MUCH NEEDED SERVICE . SO, I AM THRILLED WITH THIS BUT IS ALSO COMING ADDITIONALLY FROM OTHER SOURCES? WHAT IS YOUR OUTLOOK

ON THAT? >> IS A WORK IN PROGRESS,

COMMISSIONER. >> ACCEPTED THAT IS THE ANSWER.

THAT'S OKAY. >> I AGAIN APPLAUD YOUR TEAM.

YOU GUYS REALLY WORKED HARD, AND IT SHOWS . THE COMMITTEE SHOWS YOU A DEBT OF GRATITUDE FOR THE SERVICES YOU PROVIDE

HERE. >> THANK YOU. ANY OF THE COUSINS OR COMMENTS? THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IS THERE A MOTION?

>> I MOVE APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA 11 B.

>> IS A MOTION IN A SECOND. >> COMMISSIONER BRODERICK?

[d. Authorize staff to enter into negotiations for Parking Management Services RFP 2023-057 to provide a full service pay to park pilot program for three locations on South Beach with the highest responsive bidder, PCI Municipal Services, LLC.]

>> YES. >> COMMISSIONER GAINES?

>> YES. >> COMMISSIONER GAINES?

>> YES. >> COMMISSIONER C. JOHNSON?

>> YES. >> COMMISSIONER J. JOHNSON?

YES. >> MAYOR HUDSON?

>> YES. >> WE HAVE ITEM 11 D TO

[00:40:01]

LLC. >> I GUESS THAT IS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU JUST PULL SOMETHING. THIS IS A GREAT THING IN RESPONSE TO COMMUNITY . WELL, THE BUSINESSES ON THE SOUTH BEACH AREA , I THINK WE ARE LOOKING TO GET AHEAD OF WHAT IS A CHALLENGE RIGHT NOW , AND WHAT I READ THIS, I WAS VERY IMPRESSED WITH WHAT I SAW, AND WHAT STAFF WENT THROUGH. WE HAD TWO BIDDERS, BUT I WAS VERY IMPRESSED WITH THIS COMPANY THAT WAS FERRETED OUT THROUGH THE PROCESS TO COME HERE. BASED ON WHAT I READ, IT ALSO FELT LIKE THERE WAS PART OF THAT WHERE THERE MAY BE SOME CONDITIONS THAT YOU ENTERED INTO NEGOTIATIONS OF HOW THIS IS FINANCED, ET CETERA. SO, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I CALL ATTENTION TO THAT, BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT JUMPED OUT TO ME. BECAUSE IF NOT, YOU'RE JUST GOING ON CONSENT, WHATEVER, AND WE ARE IN A NEGOTIATION PHASE , BUT I WANT TO PULL THAT OUT BECAUSE THAT IS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I LOOKED AT FOR HOW DO WE PAY FOR THIS. THERE WERE A COUPLE OF OPTIONS THERE, AND I WANT TO GET TOO DEEP IN THE WEEDS, BUT YOU COULD YOU GIVE US A TOP LINE OF WHAT YOU SEE

HERE? >> GOOD EVENING, MADAM MAYOR AND COMMISSIONERS. ESSENTIALLY, THIS IS THE NEGOTIATIONS FEES.

>> OKAY. >> WHAT WILL HAPPEN IS DOUBTFUL WORK WITH THE COMMITTEE TO COME UP AT THE CONTRACT, AND THAT WILL COME BACK BEFORE YOU FOR FINAL REVIEW AND APPROVAL AND

ANSWERS TO THOSE QUESTIONS. >> OKAY. THAT IS ALSO GOOD FOR THE PUBLIC TO HEAR, BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, FIRST THING YOU WILL HEAR IS THEY ARE CHARGING A PARK ON THE BEACH, RIGHT? AND THEN, YOU KNOW, AT CERTAIN AREAS, WE WANT TO MAKE SURE

THAT THAT IS AVAILABLE. >> MADAM MAYOR?

>> MR. MIMMS? >> BEFORE YOU AUTHORIZE STAFF TO ENTER INTO NEGOTIATIONS , IF YOU HAVE ANY REQUESTS OR STRATEGIES FOR STAFF OR DEMANDS THAT YOU WANT STAFF TO THEM PUT UPON THE NEGOTIATION TABLE , PLEASE DO SO AT THIS TIME.

>> I WOULD LIKE TO REMIND US ALL THAT ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE AGREED UPON IS THAT IF YOU LIVED IN FORT PIERCE AND YOU LIVED IN ST. LOUIS COUNTY, YOU WOULD NOT HAVE TO PAY. IN -- IT'S ONLY GOING TO APPLY TO THREE PLACES RIGHT NOW. JC PARK, JENNY PARK, AND CAUSEWAY PARK. RIGHT? THIS WILL NOT

HAPPEN TOMORROW. >> NO, MA'AM.

>> THIS WILL BE QUITE A FEW MONTHS UPCOMING .

>> YES, MA'AM. THE NEGOTIATIONS WILL JUST BE STARTED AND APPROVED TODAY , AND WE ARE PURCHASING ON MOVING THROUGH THAT. OF COURSE, IT HAS TO BE REVIEWED BY LEGAL, AND THEN I CAN COME BACK BEFORE YOU FOR APPROVAL AND REVEAL YOURSELVES WITH THE COMPANY PROVIDING ANY ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS AT THAT TIME ALSO IF NEED BE.

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? >> MADAM MAYOR?

>> YES? >> SO, JC PARK, JENNY PARK, AND WAS THE THIRD? CAUSEWAY PARK. I JUST WANTED TO REPEAT THAT RIGHT. THOSE ARE THE THREE PILOT AREAS. BUT THIS IS ALSO A PILOT THAT WE ARE LOOKING AT WITH THIS PARTICULAR POINT, AND I THINK THAT IS IMPORTANT AS WE LOOK AT THAT. I THINK THE CONCERNS HAVE BEEN SHARED. WE ARE MAKING SURE THAT THERE ARE PROVISIONS FOR CITY AND COUNTY RESIDENTS RIGHT NOW. I THOUGHT I SAW SOME THINGS THAT HAD SOME SUGGESTED LANGUAGE OF UTILIZING EITHER TECHNOLOGY AND HAVING PEOPLE REGISTERED . I AM ASSUMING THAT THAT WOULD BE VERIFIED THAT THEY ARE A PART OF OUR CITY OR COUNTY IF THEIR PLATES ARE REGISTERED SO THAT THEY WOULD HAVE THESE PARK PRIVILEGES OVER ON THESE AREAS IS THE ELECT TO GO TO JENNY PARK, JC PARK, OR SURF -- CAUSEWAY PARK. COFFEY PARK. RIGHT.

>> THOSE THREE ARE VERY POPULAR PARKS.

>> THEY ARE VERY POPULAR. >> THEY ARE VERY POPULAR. ONE OF THE THINGS WE FOUND OUT DURING THE PANDEMIC THAT THEY WERE VERY POPULAR WITH PEOPLE THAT DON'T LIVE IN ST. LUCIE COUNTY . THE TAXPAYERS SHOULD BE ENJOYING THOSE BEACHES , BUT

[00:45:06]

>> MADAM MAYOR, I THINK THAT IS THE POINT. BECAUSE WE CONSTANTLY GET, OR SOMEHOW I GET EMAILS ABOUT THE CONDITIONS OF OUR FACILITIES OVER THERE, AND THE CONTINENT CONSTANT MAINTENANCE THAT WE HAVE TO DO TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE FIXING THE BROKEN PARTS WITH KEEPING THEM CLEAN WHEN THEY ARE HEAVILY USED. THIS WILL HELP OFFSET SOME OF THAT BURDEN OVER THERE, PARTICULARLY FOR THOSE VISITORS ARE COMING TO OUR AREA AND ARE UTILIZING OUR AREA LITERALLY FOR FREE , AND NOT COMING OUT, TAXPAYING CITIZENS HERE. YOU KNOW, I HOPE THIS GETS OUT AND GETS COMMUNITY THE RIGHT WAY IN OUR COMMITTEE THAT WE ARE GOING TO DO EVERYTHING THAT WE CAN TO PROTECT LOCAL CITIZENSHIP AND USE OF THE BEACH, BUT WE ALSO HAVE TO THINK BEYOND HOW DO WE MAINTAIN OUR FACILITY, AND IT IS BECOMING VERY BURDENSOME ISSUE. SO, THANK YOU.

>> YES. ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? OR, A MOTION?

>> MADAM MAYOR, I MOVE TO APPROVE CONSENT AGENDA ITEM 11

D. >> I SECOND.

>> MOTION IN A SECOND. CALL THE MOTION, PLEASE?

>> COMMISSIONER BRODERICK? >> YES.

>> COMMISSIONER BRODERICK? >> YES.

>> COMMISSIONER C. JOHNSON? YES.

[a. *CONTINUED FROM MARCH 18, 2024* Quasi-Judicial Hearing - Review and approval of an application for a Site Plan (Development and Design Review), submitted by applicant Francarlos Rivera with TEG Developers, to construct a two-hundred and six (206) unit rental community with an amenity center, a proposed 10.7 acre conservation easement and associated development improvements at 5315 Edwards Road and 5496 Altman Road, more specifically at Parcel IDs: 2430-231-0001-000-4 and 2430-234-0001-000-3. ]

>> COMMISSIONER J. JOHNSON? YES.

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

>> MADAM MAYOR, IF YOU PULL YOUR MICROPHONE CLOSER?

>> ALREADY? >> I'M HAVING TROUBLE HEARING YOU. SO, MOVE ON TO PUBLIC HEARING, AND FIRST IS THE QUASIJUDICIAL HEARING FOR THE REVIEW AND APPROVAL OF THE APPLICATION FOR A SAY PLAN, DEVELOPMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW, SUBMITTED BY APPLICANT FRAN CARLOS RIVERA WITH TEG DEVELOPERS TO CONSTRUCT A 206 UNIT RENTAL COMMUNITY WITH AMENITY CENTER, A PROPOSED 10.7 ACRE CONSERVATION EASEMENT AND ASSOCIATED DEVELOPMENT IMPROVEMENTS AT 5315 EDWARDS ROAD AND 5496 OPEN ROAD . THIS HEARING HAS BEEN CONTINUED FROM

THE MARCH 18TH, 2024 MEETING. >> IT IS NOW TIME FOR OUR CITY ATTORNEY TO READ THE GUIDELINES FOR QUASIJUDICIAL HEARINGS .

THERE ARE SEVERAL TONIGHT, SO, PLEASE LISTEN. SHE WILL ONLY READ IT ONCE UNLESS YOU ASK HER TO READ IT AGAIN. MISS HEDGES?

>> YES, MA'AM. SORRY. AS SOON AS MY COMPUTER PULLS THIS UP.

>> THERE MAY BE TROUBLE WITH INTERNET IN HERE TONIGHT BECAUSE THEY ARE DOING SOME UPGRADES TO THE SYSTEM.

>> WOULD YOU LIKE A PAPER COPY? >> I WOULD VERY MUCH.

>> I AND GIVING THAT TO HER FOR ME PLEASE.

>> GOOD OLD PAPER COMES IN HANDY SOMETIMES.

>> MA'AM, THANK YOU. >> WE WILL PUT A COPY IN THE DRAWER OVER THERE IN THE FUTURE.

>> THE CITY COMMISSION SINCE THE QUASIJUDICIAL ROLE. WHEN ACTING AS A LESLIE THE BODY, THE COMMISSION ENGAGES IN LAWMAKING ACTIVITY BY PASSING LAWS AND ESTABLISHING POLICIES.

WHEN ACTING AS A QUASIJUDICIAL BODY, THE COMMISSION APPLIES THOSE LAWS AND POLICIES, AND WITHOUT DISTRICT PROCEDURE REQUIREMENTS. QUASIJUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS ARE LESS FORMAL THAN PROCEEDINGS BEFORE A CIRCUIT COURT , BUT ARE MORE FORMAL AND INFORMAL COMMISSION MEETING. QUASIJUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS MUST FOLLOW BASIC STANDARDS OF NOTICE AND DUE PROCESS , AND DECISIONS MUST BE MADE BASED ON COMPETENT SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE. THEREFORE, COMMISSIONERS HAVE A DUTY TO CONDUCT A QUASIJUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS , MORE LIKE JUDGES AND LEGISLATORS. THIS IS WHERE THE COMMISSION HAS ESTABLISH UNIFORM PROCEDURE FOR QUASIJUDICIAL HEARINGS THAT WILL BE FOLLOWED THIS EVENING.

>> THANK YOU, MA'AM. THESE PROCEEDINGS ARE NOW CALLED TO ORDER. WILL YOU PLEASE CONFIRM COMPLIANCE WITH ADVERTISING

REQUIREMENTS? >> YES, MA'AM. THE ADVERTISING

FOR THIS ITEM HAS BEEN MET. >> IT WOULD U.S. COMMISSIONERS

ABOUT EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS? >> YES, MA'AM.

>> COMMISSIONER BRODERICK? >> YES. I HAVE SPOKEN TO SOME OF THE FOLKS THAT ARE INVOLVED ON THE GATOR TRADE SIDE. ALSO, THE RESIDENCE IN THE COMMUNITY.

>> THIS IS IN THAT. >> THIS IS EDWARDS ROAD.

>> I'M ALREADY JUMPING IN. IT HAS BEEN ON MY MIND ALL DAY.

THING PAST THE PRIOR MEETING WITH THE EXCEPTION, I BELIEVE WE RECEIVED AN UPDATE AT ONE OF OUR SENIOR STAFF MEETINGS

REGARDING THIS PROJECT. >> OUR MEETING IS STAFF.

>> THIS IS THE ONE THAT HAS BEEN POSTPONED.

>> I AM DUMB. IT >> I AM ALREADY LIGHT YEARS

AHEAD. GEEZ. >> COMMISSIONER GAMES?

>> MADAM CLERK, LET THEM PAY AS THE FIRST HEARING. I'M TRYING TO THINK. WE COULD BE IN OUR MEETING. I CAN'T REMEMBER. I

[00:50:01]

ANY EMAILS ON THIS ONE. >>

>> WHICH AGENDA ITEM ARE YOU ON?

>> WHEN YOU SAID GATOR TRADES, I-READY JUMPED TO GATOR TRADES.

MY ANSWER IS NO. >> COMMISSIONER C. JOHNSON?

>> I HAVE HAD NO CONTACT SINCE THE LAST MEETING.

>> COMMISSIONER J. JOHNSON? >> NO NEW REPORTS SINCE THE

MARCH MEETING. >> AND MAYOR HUDSON?

>> NO NEW CAN MEDICATIONS OF THE LAST MEETING.

>> IT ENOUGH. THANK YOU. >> WE ARTY HAVE THAT PART

ESTABLISHED. >> NOW THE SHOWOFFS CAN SEND IT. RIGHT? SO, WOULD YOU LIKE TO SWEAR IN THE WITNESSES?

>> YES. WOULD ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM PLEASE STAND AND RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND? DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM TO TELL THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH? THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> PLEASE PROCEED. >> ALL RIGHT, MAYOR, CITY COMMISSIONERS. I WILL GIVE A BRIEF OVERVIEW BECAUSE YOU HAVE ALREADY HEARD THAT BEFORE AT YOUR MARCH MEETING. THIS IS FOR

BB THE SITE PLANS. >> I AM GETTING IT UP THERE.

THERE WE GO. >> PERFECT. THE PROPERTY OWNER IS TEG MARINER COVE LLC , AND THE PARK I.D. IS 220, 341, 000 FOR ONE, 00444, AND 203244 00344113 . AGAIN, THIS IS FOR 216 RENTAL COMMUNITY THAT WILL HAVE A 10.7 ACRE LAND OF BUFFER AS A PRESERVED AREA . THE PROPOSED 206 UNITS IS FAR BELOW THE ALLOTTED 10 UNITS PER ACRE , SO, 397 UNITS THAT CAN BE PUT IN IN THE ZONING DISTRICT. THIS IS THE SITE LOCATION OF THE 39.70 ACRES . THE FUTURE LAND USE RM TEDIUM DENSITY , THE SITE PLAN THAT YOU GUYS HAVE ALREADY RECEIVED , THE LANDSCAPE PLAN THAT YOU GUYS HAVE ALREADY LOOKED AT . SORRY ABOUT THAT. HERE ARE THE ELEVATIONS FOR ALL OF THE BUILDINGS THAT ARE BEING PROPOSED IN THE COMMUNITY. ALL RIGHT. AT THEIR FEBRUARY 12, 2023 MEETING, THE PLANNING BOARD VOTED UNANIMOUSLY TO MOVE THE SITE PLAN FORWARD TO THE CITY COMMISSION WITH A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL WITH FOUR CONDITIONS AND ONE ADDITIONAL CONDITION. THERE IS PAYMENT LISTED WAS A COUNTY IN RESPECT TO THE SIDEWALK THAT TWO OF ELEMENTS. THAT PORTION - WOULD BE RELATED ONLY TO THE SIDEWALK ITSELF, NOT TO ANY STORMWATER INFO STRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED. FOR STAFF RECOMMENDATION, THIS IS BEEN UPDATED SINCE YOU GUYS HAVE I SEEN IT, AND I WILL LET MR. GILMORE TAKE OVER FROM THERE.

THANK YOU. >> GOOD EVENING, MADAM MAYOR.

>> GOOD EVENING. I HAVE BEEN SWORN IN.

>> THANK YOU. >> SO, I WILL GO OVER A FEW BULLET POINTS OF THE REASONING FOR OUR RECOMMENDATION AT YOUR MARCH 18TH, 2024 CITY COMMISSION MEETING. PLANNING STAFF PRESENTED THE APPLICATION TO CITY COMMISSION WITH THE RECOGNITION OF APPROVAL WITH THE FOUR CONDITIONS IN ONE ADDITIONAL COMMISSION FROM THE PLANNING BOARD. THE RECOMMEND THAT IT BE CONTINUE TO A DATE CERTAIN OF MAY 6, 2024, WHICH IS TODAY WITH FURTHER DISCUSSION WITH IT WAS A COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS AND ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT. A MEMO FROM THE COUNTY PUBLIC WORKS ENGINEERING WAS VISITED TO CITY MANAGER AND STAFF ON APRIL 9TH WITH SEVERAL CONDITIONS TO BE INCLUDED IN THE RECOMMENDATION. ONE OF THESE CONDITIONS IS IDENTICAL TO THE PLANNING BOARD COMMISSION. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL FOR THESE 11 CONDITIONS . A COMPLETION CERTIFICATION BY LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT COST ESTIMATE LANDSCAPE LAW PURSUANT TO CITY COULD SECTION 123-6 WILL BE REQUIRED BEFORE THE FINAL CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY IS APPROVED FOR THE SITE . A GOPHER TORTOISE INSPECTION WILL HAVE TO HAPPEN FIRST. THREE ADDRESSES OUGHT TO BE SUBMITTED TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT FOR ALL UNITS PRIOR TO BUILDING PERMIT APPLICATIONS FOR PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ANY SITE PLAN PERMITS. THERE'LL BE A STATE LITIGATION SURVEY FOR AUBURN IN THE CITY LITIGATION OF THE CITY REQUIRED REGULATED TREES PROPOSED TO BE REMOVED THE SITES

DEVELOPMENT/CONSTRUCTION. >> WOULD YOU SPEAK A LITTLE CLOSER TO YOUR MICROPHONE? NUMBER FIVE, JENKINS ROAD AND EDWARDS ROAD ARE IDENTIFIED ON THE COUNTIES RIGHT AWAY PROTECTION PLAN AND DEDICATION OF 40 FEET ALONG JENKINS ROAD AND A DEDICATION OF 40 FEET ALONG EDWARDS ROAD ARE SHOWN ON

[00:55:01]

THESE RIGHT OF WAYS SHALL BE NOTED TO WAS A COUNTY FOR 90 DAYS OF THE SITE PLAN APPROVAL OF THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE. A SIX FOOT WIDE SIDEWALK IS REQUIRED ALONG THE ENTIRE PARCEL FRONTAGE AT ALL ADJACENT RIGHT OF WAYS. SEVEN, BASED ON ANSWERS DISCUSSED AT THE CITIES PUBLIC HEARING AND AN OUTCOME OF THE APRIL 2920 24 MEETING , AND DEVELOPERS AGENTS IN ST.

LUCIE COUNTY, STAFF IS DETERMINED AND AGREED THAT CERTAIN OFF-SITE IS A REQUIRED TO BE PROVIDED FOR VEHICULAR AND PEDESTRIAN SAFETY AS FOLLOWS. A, THE INTERSECTION OF EDWARDS ROAD AND JENKINS WILL BE SIGNALIZED WITHIN SIX MONTHS OF THE ISSUANCE OF THE HUNDRED CERTIFICATE OF CAPACITY AT THE THAT USED FOR THE 100 CERTIFICATE FOR CAPACITY AT VIVA WEST, WHICH SHARES AMENITIES , WHICHEVER OCCURS FIRST. B, A DEDICATED WESTBOUND RIGHT HAND TURN LANE ON EDWARDS ROAD SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED WITHIN SIX MONTHS OF THE ISSUANCE OF THE 100 CERTIFICATE OF CAPACITY AT VIVA EAST , OR THE HUNDRED CERTIFICATE OF CAPACITY AT VIVA WEST, WHICH IS STATED TO SHARE AMENITIES BETWEEN DEVELOPMENT, WHICHEVER OCCURS FIRST. C, A DEDICATED SOUTHBOUND WESTERN WAYNE ON DICKENS ROAD SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED WITHIN SIX MONTHS, ALTHOUGH ISSUANCE OF THE HUNDRED CERTIFICATE OF CAPACITY AT VIVA EAST OR THE CAPACITY AT VIVA WEST IS STATED TO SHARE AMENITIES BETWEEN DEVELOPERS, WHICHEVER OCCURS FIRST. D, CROSSWALKS AT THE EDWARDS ROAD AN INSERT INTERSECTION ON THE SOUTH AND EAST LAY STILL BE CONSTRUCTED WITHIN SIX MONTHS OF THE ISSUANCE OF THE FINAL CERTIFICATE OF CAPACITY OF THE THE EAST. U, CONSTRUCTED OF A SIX FOOT WIDE SIDEWALK FROM THE VIVA EAST TO VIVA WEST PARCEL OF THE WEST SIDE OF JENKINS ROAD WITHIN TWO YEARS A FINAL CERTIFICATE OF CAPACITY OF THE THAT USED OR THE 100 CERTIFICATE OF CAPACITY AT VIVA WEST, WHAT IS STATED TO SHARE AMENITIES BETWEEN DEVELOPERS, WHICHEVER OCCURS FIRST. EIGHT, WE SHALL ENTER INTO A ROADWAY IMPROVEMENT AND IMPACT CREDIT AGREEMENT WITH ST. LUCIE COUNTY PRIOR TO ANY CONSTRUCTION IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY. NINE, THE CITY SHALL OBTAIN AND PAY ANY COSTS ASSOCIATED WITH A 25 FOOT RIGHT-OF-WAY ALONG THE WEST SIDE OF LINCOLN'S ROAD FROM PARCELS 2325-DASH 01 -005-0000 , AND 2325-501-0001-0009 . THE CITY SHOULD DEDICATE THE RIGHT-OF-WAY TO ST. LUCIE COUNTY AT NO COST. 10, THE COUNTY AGREES TO OBLIGATE THE COUNTY FEES UP TO THE AMOUNT DUE BY THE DEVELOPMENT BASED ON THE COUNTIES CURRENT ROADWAY IMPACT FEES SCHEDULE TOWARDS THE IMPAIRMENT LISTED IN COMMON. THREE, THE COUNTY SHARE THE COLLECTIVELY IMPACT FEES AS 36% WITH THE CITY RETAINING 64%, INCLUDING 4% OF THE COLLECTION OF ALL FUNDS COLLECTED, ANY AND ALL COST TO DECIDE PERMITTING AND CONSTRUCTION BUFF IMPROVEMENTS AND ACCESS TO BE ROADWAY IMPACT FEES SHALL BE DIESEL RESPONSE ABILITY OF THE DEVELOPER WHO DESCRIBED COUNTY'S OPERATIONS OF THE COUNTY CONTAINED ROADWAY IMPACT FEES SHALL BE PROVIDED AS A ROADWAY IMPACT FEE CREDIT.

THIS DESCRIBES THE CITY'S OBLIGATION OF THE COUNTY PERTAIN ROADWAY IMPACT FEES SHALL BE PROVIDED AS A ROADWAY IMPACT FEE CREDIT. AN AGREEMENT SHALL DOCUMENT CONTRIBUTION IN RESPONSE ABILITIES OF ALL PARTIES. AND 11, THE CITY AGREES TO OBLIGATE THE CITY'S SHARED COLLECTED COUNTY ROADWAY IMPACT FEES 64%, INCLUDING ADMINISTRATION OF THE COLLECTION OF ALL FUNDS , COLLECTIVE ON THE CONSTRUCTION OF IMPROVEMENTS IN ADDITION TO THE CITY TO OBLIGATE THE TRANSPORTATION IMPACT FEES UP TO THE AMOUNT DUE BY THE DEVELOPMENT BASED ON THE CITY'S CURRENT INVITATION IMPACT FEES SCHEDULE TOWARDS THE IMPROVEMENT LISTED IN COMIC THREE, AND AN AGREEMENT SHALL DOCUMENT THE CONTRIBUTION RENAISSANCE ABILITIES FROM ALL PARTIES. THANK YOU. STAFF IS ARE COMMITTING APPROVAL WITH THE 11 CONDITIONS, ALTERNATIVE CONDITIONS INCLUDE THAT RECKONING, ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS ARE CONDITIONS OR JUST. THANK YOU.

>> QUESTIONS OF STAFF? >> MADAM MAYOR, JUST A QUICK QUESTION JUST FOR ME. WHEN I READ THIS, WHAT I AM SAYING IS WE ARE APPROVING THIS TONIGHT IF IT GETS APPROVED TONIGHT , AND THEN WE ARE SAYING UPON UNDER COMPLETION OF EAST AND WEST , OTHER THINGS AT THAT TIME, THEY WILL GO BACK AND BUILD ROADWAYS OR BUILD THE SIDEWALK, WHATEVER THEY ARE

[01:00:03]

I AM SAYING? >> MR. FREEMAN COMEDY WANT TO

ANSWER THAT? >> I CAN TRY, THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER. WE DO MONITOR THE NUMBER OF HOUSING UNITS APPROVED THROUGH FINAL TO GET OF OCCUPANCY, AND THAT WILL BE MONITORED TO THE BUILDING APARTMENT. ONCE A TRIGGER HAVE BEEN REACHED , THESE CONDITIONS WOULD FORM THAT OBLIGATION ON THE SITE DEVELOPER. NO FOR THE CEOS COULD BE AND LAMENTED PRIOR TO THE THINGS BEING TAKEN CARE OF BY THE DEVELOPER. IT WOULD BEHOOVE THE DEVELOPER TO NOT START THESE WORKS IN WAIT

UNTIL THE 100. >> YOU GET 100 UNITS , AND YOU WILL SAY, YOU KNOW WHAT, 100 IS FINE. I AM SAYING OKAY, HOW CAN WE GO BACK INTO THESE OTHER CONDITIONS? IS IT OKAY, WE CAN GO BACK TO PROTECT THE TAXPAYER AND PROTECT THE COMMITTEE FROM SAYING, OKAY, LET'S GO FINISH WHAT WE SAY WE'RE GOING TO DO.

THAT WE DID OUR PART, LET'S FINISH WHAT THEY SAY THEY WERE GOING TO DO. ANYTHING ALSO THEY SAID YOU COULD DO. AND MAYBE, MAYBE , I RELY ON MY ENGINEERS APPEAR . MAYBE I'M OVERTHINKING THIS. I HAVE ANOTHER HAT ON. MAYBE I'M OVERTHINKING THIS AREA AND I AM JUST CURIOUS . IF IT'S NOT A BIG DEAL, MR. FREEMAN, TELL ME IT IS NOT A BIG DEAL, AND I WILL SIT BACK IN MY CHAIR AND WE WILL MOVE ON , BUT I KNOW IT IS A BIG DEAL. BUT IF THERE IS A REASON, IF THERE IS SOMETHING THAT WE CAN DO, IF THE CEOS WOULD DO IT , I AM FINE WITH THAT AND I WILL SIT BACK DOWN. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE PROTECTING AND MAKING THEM DO WHAT THEY SAID THEY WERE GOING TO DO. THAT IS ALL I'M ASKING.

>> IT IS IMPOSSIBLE , I THINK, FOR ME TO SAY THAT THEY WOULD COMPLETE THE WHOLE SITE PLAN. I DON'T KNOW THE ECONOMY OR HOW THAT IS GOING TO GO. THE LIMITS ON WHAT IS TRIGGER POINT IS REALLY DISCUSSED AND SET BY THE COUNTY IN TERMS OF THE VOLUME THAT IS LIKELY TO BE CONTRIBUTED TO ANYTHING IN EXCESS OF 100 UNITS ON EITHER SITE.

>> OKAY. >> SO, WITH THE DEVELOPER, AND I AM TALKING IN GENERAL NOW, ONCE THE DEVELOPER STARTS AND LAMENTING OF A STRUCTURE IMPRUDENCE ON THE SITE , STARTING TO CONSTRUCT EVERYTHING THAT IS REQUIRED JUST TO GET THE FIRST COMPLETION CERTIFICATE ON ONE HOUSE, THE AMOUNT OF INVESTMENT THAT HAS BEEN MADE , I CANNOT REALLY SEE THAT WORK OUT FEASIBLY UNLESS THEY TO COMPLETE THE WHOLE DEVELOP. WE WILL MONITOR THAT AS I SAY WHETHER THERE WAS INTO THE ULTIMATE A PLAN, THAT IS THE WAY 100 AND HAVE A SAY PLAN FOR THE REST OF THE PROPERTY. IT WOULD BE A MAJOR MEMO TO THE SITE PLAN.

>> THANK YOU. THANK YOU, YOU HAVE A GREAT QUESTION THERE.

WHAT I WAS WHEN TO ASK WAS HOW YOU DO THAT ON A DAY-TO-DAY BASIS FOR ANY REGULAR DEVELOPMENT. NOT THAT ANY TWO PIECES OF PROPERTY ARE TIED TOGETHER. BASICALLY, THRESHOLDS OF DO WE HAVE THE ROADS, INFRASTRUCTURE, AND WHEN CAN THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT ISSUES CEOS, RIGHT? AND I THINK STAFF HAS ANSWERED THAT FUNDAMENTALLY, BUT MY ONE QUESTION WAS , AND I WANT TO SAY THANK YOU, FIRST OF ALL, FOR NOT ONLY TO THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY AND THE APPLICANT , BUT YOU STAFF AND ST. LUCIE COUNTY FOR WORKING THROUGH THIS. THIS IS OUR JOB, THIS IS OUR DUTY, AND THIS IS WHAT WE SHOULD BE DOING, AND MY OPINION, ON EVERY DEVELOPMENT PROJECT. THIS IS HOW WE STRATEGICALLY GROW AND INVEST WITHIN OUR OWN COMMUNITY AND THE BUILDING OF A STRUCTURE THAT IS BADLY NEEDED AND SORELY NEEDED. NO ALL EVERYONE IN THIS ROOM UNDERSTANDS AND FEELS IT. SO, I WOULD SAY THANK YOU TO THAT. THE OTHER PART OF MY QUESTION, OR MY SPECIFIC QUESTION IS IN THE DISCUSSIONS, WORRY PRIVY TO OR TALKING WITH THE DEVELOPER IN ST. LUCIE COUNTY ON THE 100 UNITS? WE HAVE A PARTICIPATION ON THE CONVERSATION?

[01:05:06]

>> THE DEVELOPER? >> WITH ST. LUCIE COUNTY.

>> EVERYBODY WAS IN THE ROOM. >> EVERYONE IS ANY ROOM?.

>> WHEN THE COUNTY -- SO, IT WAS THE COUNTY AROUND ENGINEERING SECTIONS I BELIEVE, THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE, OUR STAFF. THE APPLICANT, ST. LUCIE COUNTY. NUMBERS A ST. LUCIE COUNTY WERE THERE. ULTIMATELY, THESE CONDITIONS WERE BASED ON INFORMED ON REALLY DIRECTION FROM THE COUNTY STAFF. THEY WERE PRESENTED THEN TO THE APPLICANT, AND THE APPLICANT WAS ASKED ULTIMATELY ARE YOU IN FAVOR OF THESE? TO GO ALONG WITH THESE? WE GOT A RESPONSE OF YET. WE DID WOULD NOT HAVE BROUGHT IT FORWARD I THINK WITHOUT THE CONFIRMATION. SO, THESE CRITERIA, THESE TRIGGER POINTS, THE CONTRIBUTIONS, THE RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATIONS, THE ACQUISITION OF FURTHER RIGHT-OF-WAY, THEY WERE ALSO DOWN IN THAT MEETING . THE ULTIMATE BREAKPOINTS FOR THOSE WAS WHERE THE CAPACITY HIT WHERE THE INFO STRUCTURE SHOULD BE PROVIDED. I WAS THEN DETERMINED BY COUNTY DETERMINEDLY .

>> THANK YOU FOR THAT. RECOMMENDATION NUMBER NINE, YOU TALK ABOUT THE CITY SHALL OBTAIN. ANYTIME THERE IS CONDITIONS WHERE THE CITY IS, YOU KNOW, OBLIGATED TO DO SOMETHING , TELL ME ABOUT THESE TWO PARCELS. WHICH PARCELS ARE

THESE TWO? >> DO WE HAVE A MAP? THERE ARE TWO PARCELS THAT CAN PINCH ON THE ULTIMATE WITH OF THE CITY COUNTIES RIGHT-OF-WAY REQUIREMENT FOR THAT LENGTH OF ROADWAY. IN THE MEETING, THE CITY DID COMMIT TO NEGOTIATING WITH THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS TO GET THOSE RIGHT-OF-WAY. SO ULTIMATELY, THE COUNTY CAN MAKE THE RECOMMENDED ROADWAY

SEGMENT. >> IF I AM NOT MISTAKEN , THIS IS NOT FOR ME TO TESTIFY, BUT FOR STAFF TO TESTIFY. IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, ALONG THE CORRIDOR URGING ITS ROADS , WHAT HAS COME THROUGH OVER THE LAST 20 YEARS, HAS BEEN CONSISTENTLY SHOWN THAT ADDITIONAL RIGHT-OF-WAY HAS BEEN DEDICATED BY THOSE PERSONAL OWNERS?

>> THERE IS A CONSISTENCY, YOU KNOW? WHEN YOU LOOK DOWN THE ULTIMATE ROADWAY SECTION , THERE ARE PARCELS WHICH HAVE BEEN THAT DEDICATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE IN THIS INTO RESPECTIVE THIS APPLICATION. THEY ALSO MAY DEDICATIONS I BELIEVE OR WILL MAKE DEDICATIONS. SO, IT IS A VERY SAWTOOTH RIGHT-OF-WAY THAT WE SEE NOW, WHICH HAS CAUSED THE ISSUE IN OBTAINING DIRECT SIDEWALK LINK BETWEEN THE TWO PARCELS , WHICH IS WHAT THE CITY NEEDS TO GET INVOLVED WITH AND OBTAIN THESE SECTIONS. AM I USING THAT RIGHT?

>> YES. YES. >> IT'S TWO AT THE CORNER OF

PRIOR GATE. >> YES.

>> EXCELLENT. >> I BELIEVE THERE IS A CHOICE

CHURCH TO THE RIGHT-OF-WAY. >> YOU CAN SEE HOW THE RIGHT-OF-WAY JOGS THEN AND OUT THROUGHOUT THE WHOLE SECTION

THERE . >> OKAY. I WANT TO SAY THANKS, AGAIN. THIS IS JUST SO YOU PLAN THE COMMUNITY. HE SET UP AS NUMBERS OF THE TPO TRANSPORTATION PLANNING , AND WE TALK ABOUT THIS ROAD QUITE OFTEN. OUR COMMUNITY COUNTYWIDE HAS BEEN INVESTING A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF MONEY INTO THIS CORRIDOR. IT'S VERY IMPORTANT THAT WE STRATEGICALLY PLAN AND PLACE ALL OF THIS INFRASTRUCTURE, AND HAVE A MECHANISM GOING FORWARD TO ADDRESS ALL OF THESE ISSUES. I

WANT TO SAY THANK YOU. >> MADAM MAYOR?

>> YES? >> COMMISSIONER, THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THAT UP. SO, WE ARE IN THE NEGOTIATION STAGE WITH THESE LANDOWNERS. THAT'S THE QUESTION. WE WOULD NEGOTIATE DIRECTLY WITH THEM AND COME UP WITH A PRICE AND ACQUIRE THAT AND I DEDICATE THAT TOWARDS THE COUNTY. IS THAT WHAT I READ?

>> I THINK THERE ARE MANY WAYS OF DOING IT. I THINK NEGOTIATION IS THE PREFERRED WAY.

>> NEGOTIATION? >> IT COULD'VE BEEN A DONATION BEFORE YOU SAID THAT , BUT WE CAN DEFINITELY DO THAT.

>> OKAY. I AM SITTING HERE IN VOTING IN THE COUNTY TO, YOU KNOW. I'M A COUNTY RESIDENT. I JUST SAW THAT AND JUMPED OUT TO MAKE IT. IF I UNDERSTAND, THE RESTRICTIONS THAT YOU ALL SIT IN THE ROOM WITH IS AN OPTION FOR EITHER THE THE EAST OR VIVA

[01:10:06]

OF THE THE EAST. >> ACTUALLY, SIR, DURING THE COMMUNICATION AND DURING THAT MEETING, THE DEVELOPER MENTIONED THAT WE BELIEVE THIS PROJECT, THE CONSTRUCTION WILL BEGIN FIRST, BUT I WILL ALLOW THE DEVELOPER TO BUILD THAT.

>> I THOUGHT IT WAS I HAD. I THOUGHT THE OTHER PERSON WAS I HAD, AND EITHER WAY, IT WAS. THE 100 TRIGGER POINT IS EITHER ONE OF THESE WITH CONSTRUCTION, SIGNALING, STRIPPING OF THE ROAD , ALL OF THE TRIGGERS AT 100. I GUESS TO COMMISSIONER GAINES POINTS, WHICH I THOUGHT ABOUT AS WELL IS THAT OKAY, WE GET TO THE 100 TRIGGER POINT, WHAT HAPPENS, ET CETERA, I GUESS I WILL WAIT TO HEAR FROM THE DEVELOPER AS WELL, BUT I WANT TO MAKE SURE, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE THOUGHT THROUGH THIS AS WELL , AND I GUESS WE WERE SITTING IN A ROOM IN THE COUNTY MADE A RECOGNITION OF THIS, AND WE ARE OKAY WITH THAT. RIGHT?

>> JUST TO ADD TO THAT, SIR, WE HAD THE INITIAL DISCUSSION.

MYSELF IN THE DEVELOPERS TEAM, THE DEVELOPER WAS EXTRAORDINARILY HELPFUL IN HELPING US CRAFT THESE CONDITIONS. PATRICK AND FROM ST. LUCIE COUNTY BACK TO THE CHALKBOARD, DRAFTED THIS FOR CONSIDERATION , I BELIEVE THE DEVELOPER IS TAKEN A LOOK AT IT, AND IT IS NOW BEING PLACED FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. I BELIEVE THIS NOT CREATE A SAFE CONFIGURATION FOR NOT ONLY VEHICLES, BUT ALSO PEDESTRIANS IN THAT HIGHLY TRAVELED COURT ORDER. THAT IS THE LAST

QUESTION OF I REMEMBER. >> DO WE HAVE ANY, AND THIS IS A LEGAL QUESTION,/FINANCE QUESTION , DO WE HAVE ANY BINDING OR ANYTHING TIED TO THIS TO ENSURE, NUMBER ONE, THAT THIS PROJECT IS CAPITALIZED AND WILL GET TO 200 UNITS, AND THAT WE CAN TIE THIS TO IT AS WELL THAT THEY GET TO THESE 206 UNITS THAT WE ARE PLANNING FOR. I'M CONCERNED FOR THIS UNIT TRIGGER. AND I AM GOING TO WANT TO UNDERSTAND , AND I'M JUST LETTING THE DEVELOPER KNOWINGLY FINANCE OF THIS MECHANISM THAT THIS WHOLE THING IS GOING TO GO. I'VE GOTTEN A LITTLE GUNSHOT SITTING APPEAR , AND MY QUESTION IS MAYBE OUT OF LINE. I WILL NOT PURVEY CAPITAL PROJECT, AND WE DO HAVE FINANCES IN THERE, AND IT IS BACK ON THE MARKET FOR SALE FOR ANOTHER DEVELOPER TO COME IN AND PICK UP THE PROJECT AFTER THEY HAVE CLEARED THE WAY. I AM JUST BEING VERY TRANSPARENT NWORA MATT FOR SITTING IN THE SEAT. IN MY MIND RIGHT NOW, AS I GET INTO THIS FURTHER TONIGHT, AS THEY LISTEN TO THE DEVELOPER, WE HAVE NOTHING TIED IN A CONDITION RIGHT NOW OF HAVING THAT ON RECORD.

>> THESE CONDITIONS ARE ATTACHED TO THIS? SHOULD NOT MOVE AHEAD. WE ARE NOT AWARE OF THE APPLICANT'S ABILITY TO FUND THE PROJECT. IT'S NOT A QUESTION THAT WE WOULD ASK. TO DETERMINE A SCENARIO WHERE SHOULD THIS GO AHEAD , THAT AT A CERTAIN POINT, THERE IS USUALLY A CERTAIN POINT IN ANY PROJECT, WHETHER IT IS BY UNIT OR WHETHER IT IS BY PHASE THAT WE WOULD SEE THESE IMPROVEMENTS WOULD NEED TO BE MADE.

>> I UNDERSTAND. IT IS NO ASPHALT, WINE, INFRASTRUCTURE, AND THOSE THINGS , COMMISSIONERS HAVE TAUGHT ME THEY ARE VERY EXPENSIVE. AND THIS PROJECT IS EXPENSIVE. AND NOW WE HAVE CONDITIONING THAT SAYS TO TRIGGER IT AT 100. YOU HAVE TO WIDEN THE ROAD, YOU HAVE TO SIGNAL EYES, YOU HAVE TO SCRAPE IT , YOU HAVE TO BUILD A SIDEWALK. AND I DO KNOW SIDEWALKS COST A LOT OF MONEY. RIGHT? I AM IN THE MILLIONS HERE. RIGHT? I WILL HAVE TO GET REAL COUNTABLE HERE TONIGHT TO UNDERSTAND THAT. I THINK WE NEED TO BUCKLE UP, BECAUSE I THINK WE CAN REALLY DIG INTO THIS COMMISSIONER, MADAM MAYOR.

I WILL STOP RIGHT THERE. >> MADAM MAYOR?

>> YES, SIR? >> ALSO NOTE FROM THE CONDITIONS THERE THAT A LOT OF THESE WORKS AREN'T TIED INTO A COMMITMENT OF THE CITY AND THE COUNTY TO USE WHATEVER IMPACT FEES COME IN FROM THE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT TO GO DIRECTLY INTO THESE IMPAIRMENTS. THESE ARE COMING

[01:15:02]

>> AS THEY PAY THEIR IMPACT FEES?

>> THEY PAY THEIR IMPACT FEES.

>> THAT SETTING ONTO THE COST OF DEVELOPMENT.

>> THEY WILL ALWAYS PAY THEIR IMPACT FEES.

>> I UNDERSTAND. >> THIS IS A GOOD WAY OF DOING

BUSINESS FOR THE CITY. >> OKAY.

>> IN RESPECT OF COUNTY RIGHT-OF-WAY.

>> OKAY. >> BECAUSE THE CITY COLLECTS IMPACT FEES THAT ARE DESIGNATED TO THE COUNTY.

>> RIGHT. >> WE HAVE VERY LIMITED SAY IN WHERE THOSE IMPACT FEES ARE GOING TO BE SPENT. IN THIS RESPECT, WE KNOW THAT IMPACT FEES COLLECTED BY THIS DEVELOPMENT ARE GOING TO BE TARGETED TO THE PARTICULAR IMPROVEMENT. IT'S VERY SPECIFIC. WE KNOW WE ARE GETTING BENEFIT FROM OUR COLLECTIONS IN THE COUNTY. THEY WILL HAVE TO DO MORE COMMITMENT CONFIRMATIONS . AS A CITY, WE ARE PUTTING IS IS A VERY GOOD POSITION AND PUTTING WHERE THOSE IMPACT THESE ARE GOING TO BE SPENT.

>> OKAY. >> BECAUSE WE DON'T ALWAYS KNOW WHEN OTHER PROJECTS. CORRECT? OKAY. IF I REMEMBER RIGHT , ALL OF THESE CHANGES ARE BECAUSE WE WERE CONCERNED ABOUT THE SAFETY OF THAT INTERSECTION. SOUNDS LIKE THIS INTERSECTION IS GOING TO BE CONSIDERABLY IMPROVED.

>> PEDESTRIAN AND IN PARTICULAR CHILDREN .

>> CHILDREN AND VEHICLES. AND VEHICLES. AND VEHICLES. RIGHT.

COMMISSIONER BRODERICK? >> IT COMMENTS. YOU COVERED MOST OF THE QUESTIONS I HAD. I ONLY HAVE ONE REMAINING. I READ THESE RECOMMENDATIONS , AND I HAVE TO SUGGEST, THIS IS ONE OF THE MORE EXHAUSTIVE LISTS OF RECOMMENDATIONS WE HAVE HAD ATTACHED TO AN APPLICATION. THAT IS A TESTAMENT TO THE AMOUNT OF WORK THAT WAS PUT ON IT. THANK YOU FOR THE WORK THAT YOU DID FOR THE COUNTY IN THE DEVELOPER AS WELL. I READ IT A FEW TIMES, AND I AM NOT SURE. CONSTRUCTION OF A SIX FOOT SIDEWALK . YOU HAVE A WEST PERSONAL ALONG THE WEST PARTIAL JENKINS ROAD. THE FINALS TO GET A CAPACITY , THAT IS INDICATING TO ME THIS IS AN EITHER OR. RECEIVES CERTIFICATE OF CAPACITY AVIVA WEST , THEN THERE IS A TWO YEAR HOLD PERIOD. MY INTERPRETING THIS CORRECTLY? IT CAN BE THE LATER OF THESE TWO OPTIONS, OR IS IT THE EARLIER OF THESE TWO OPTIONS? THIS CAPACITY CL, WHICH I AM ASSUMING THAT THIS PROJECT IS COMPLETED, VERSUS THE HUNDREDS CL . THEN WE HAVE A WAY PERIOD OF TWO YEARS. WHY IS THAT? IT MIGHT HAVE TO DO WITH THE SECURING OF THE RIGHT OF WAYS, ET CETERA , BUT CAN YOU SHARE SOME MORE INSIGHT ON THAT? TWO YEARS ARE AN EXTENDED PERIOD OF TIME TO HAVE ALL OF THESE RESIDENTS LIVING THERE, AND THE SIDEWALK ISSUE , WHICH IS A PRIMARY CONCERN TO THIS BODY WHEN IT CAME FORWARD , WE ARE NOW WAITING TWO YEARS TO HAVE THIS INSTALLED. IS THAT ACCURATE? IS IT A TYPO?

>> YEAH, LIBBY JUST LOOK AT THE OTHER SIDE. BECAUSE WHERE THE FACILITIES ARE BETWEEN THE TWO SEGMENTS OF THIS OVERALL AVIVA DEVELOPMENT , THE SIDEWALK IS REQUIRED TO ENABLE THE PEDESTRIANS TO CONNECT BETWEEN ONE OR TWO. IT DOES ALLOW FOR TWO YEARS FEE THAT USED . THAT'S WHERE THE FACILITIES

ARE, I BELIEVE. >> IF I AM ANALYZING THIS CORRECTLY, IS IT THE FINAL CL ISSUE DEVELOPER IS DONE? THEY HAVE COMPLETED THEIR PROJECT? NOW THERE IS A 24 MONTH HOLD PERIOD UNTIL THEY HAVE TO COME OUT AND SPEND ADDITIONAL FUNDS TO PUT THIS IN. THIS GOES BACK TO OTHER COMMENTS RELATIVE.

THERE IS NO BONDING CAPACITY IN PLACE. THERE IS NO ENFORCEMENT HERE, BECAUSE AT THAT JUNCTURE , THE THEORY THE DEVELOPMENT IS STILL IN PROCESS MOVING FORWARD.

[01:20:08]

>> I THINK THE JUSTIFICATION BEHIND THIS IS THAT THE FACILITIES ARE LOCATED IN VIVA EAST . SO, THERE WOULD BE NO REQUIREMENT REALLY FOR A SIDEWALK AT THAT TIME UNTIL ANY PART OF THE CONSTRUCTION OF VIVA WEST 100 TO THE CAPACITY AVIVA WEST, WHICH TRIGGER ALL THE OTHER THINGS COMING IN AS WELL THAT YOU WOULD NOT SEE THE MOVEMENT BETWEEN VIVA EAST IN

VIVA WEST. >> IS A LOGISTICAL THING. THIS GOES BACK TO COMMISSIONER GAINES'S COMMENTS. I

UNDERSTAND THE CONCERN. >> YES, YOU DO.

>> I WILL COLOR ANY FURTHER THAN THAT. ALL OF THOSE IMPROVEMENTS CAN BE MADE. THIS BODY HAS COMMITMENTS TO DEVELOPERS IN THE OTHER JUNK CONTROL CORRIDOR TO PUT AN EXPENSIVE SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS , HOPING WE WILL TIE ALL OF THIS TOGETHER TO HAVE A SAFE COURT OR FOR PEDESTRIANS, BIKERS, AND THINGS OF THIS NATURE DUE TO THE HEAVY TRAFFIC LOAD IN THAT AREA . I WILL ASK DEVELOPERS THIS , BUT I HAVE A

CONCERN. >> I RECOMMEND WE DON'T HAVE

THE TWO YEARS. >> I AGREE. YOU CAN CHANGE THE RECOMMENDATION AND SHORTEN THAT TIMELINE. MAYBE THEY CAN SHED SOME LIGHT ON THIS AS TO WHY THAT IS THERE? MAYBE THAT IS AND OVERSIGHT. IT SHOULD NOT BE THERE. I HAVE NOT REALLY SEEN ANYTHING LIKE THAT, THOUGH. WE ARE HOLDING THIS TO VELMA, THE DEVELOPMENT IS DONE, TWO YEARS FROM NOW, WE WILL GET WITH THE PUBLIC ACTUALLY NEEDS FROM THIS COMPONENT. THAT'S MY CONCERN.

YOU THE SECONDS ARE DIRECTED TO THE DEVELOPER AND SEE WHAT THEY HAVE TO SAY. THAT'S HIS DIRECTION OF THE COMMENT. MAYBE COMMISSIONER JOHNSON CAN SHED SOME LIGHT THAT I AM MISSING

SOMETHING HERE. >> ONLY TO THE ANSWER. THE DEVELOPER WILL PROBABLY ANSWER. BUT I WILL FOLLOW-UP WITH YOU ON THAT. IF I COULD, JUST FOR HOUSEKEEPING MATTERS , I SAW ON A COUPLE OF RECOMMENDATIONS, I WANT TO MAKE SURE I AM CLEAR.

IS IT BASED ON, NUMBER THREE, --

>> CINDY HSU BE RELATED BACK TO A CONDITION. THE NEEDS TO BE RELATED BACK TO CONDITION SEVEN.

>> IT IS WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT BEFORE WE GET THERE. MORE HOUSEKEEPING THAN ANYTHING. BECAUSE NUMBER THREE IS RELATED

TO ADDRESSES. >> I WOULD ADDRESS THE WORDING OF CONDITION SEVEN. EVER BECOME RECOMMEND THAT THE COMPRESSED TO THE FOLLOWING OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENTS THAT ARE REQUIRED TO BE REQUIRED TO VEHICLE AND PEDESTRIAN SAFETY AS FOLLOWS

FOR SAFETY, AND THEN ABCD. >> RIGHT.

>> AND THEN, FURTHER ON , THAT WOULD SAY STATING CONDITION SEVEN OR WHATEVER INSTEAD OF PARAGRAPH FOUR COMMENT THREE.

>> I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE IF WE WERE TURNING SOMETHING TO ME. THE BEST CONDITION NUMBER 10 AND 11 THAT MAKES THOSE TWO REFERENCES. THAT IS ALL. WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE VOTE LEADER,

WE WILL BRING THAT UP. >> COULD CATCH. GOOD CATCH.

ANYTHING ELSE? ANYTHING ELSE? ALL RIGHT. I WOULD LIKE THE APPLICANT TO COME FORWARD FIRST. STAFF, YOU ARE GOOD?

>> YES. DO YOU HAVE QUESTIONS OF STAFF?

>> NO, MA'AM. THANK YOU GUYS FOR THE PRESENTATION. IT WAS VERY DETAILED, AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY DETAILS YOU MIGHT

HAVE. >> IT AND IF I YOURSELF AND TELL US ANYTHING YOU WANT TO TELL US BEFORE YOU ASK ANY QUESTIONS AND WHERE YOU ARE SWORN IN.

>> FRANK HARLESS. TED DEVELOPERS.

>> DEVELOPER HAVE -- -- ANY OF THE QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT?

>> EXCUSE ME. WHY THE ON CONSTR THE SIDEWALKS?

>> SPECIFIC AND BEING DELAYED OF THE CONCERT OF THE SIDEWALK

[01:25:01]

WE INTEND TO MOVE INTO THOSE RIGHT-OF-WAY IMPROVEMENTS SO THAT WHEN IT COMES TIME IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY EXISTS, WE CAN HIT

THE GROUND RUNNING. >> FOLLOW-UP QUESTION ON THAT THEN. CAN YOU TIE INTO THE SECURITY OF THESE RIGHT OF WAYS AND THIS CAN BE AND LAMENTED SECURING THOSE RIGHT AWAY SINCE -- YOU WILL PUSH FORWARD ALL SPEED TO GET THAT DONE. WOULD IT BE REASONABLE TO SUGGEST THAT WITHIN SIX MONTHS OF RECEIPT OF THOSE RIGHT-OF-WAY'S THAT THOSE

SIDEWALKS COULD BE INSTALLED? >> WE WOULD NOT BE OPPOSED TO AN AGREEMENT OF THAT NATURE. IT'S REALLY A MATTER OF HOW LONG IT TAKES TO GET THE AGREEMENT OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY AND HOW LONG IT TAKES TO GET THE RIGHT-OF-WAY. IF WE CAN OBTAIN THEM TOMORROW, THAT MAY BE A LITTLE BIT TOO QUICKLY FOR US BECAUSE WE ARE STILL WORKING TOWARDS OUR APPROVAL DOCUMENTS

AND GETTING ACTUAL PERMITS. >> REALISTICALLY, IF YOU SAID WE SECURE THE RIGHT OF WAYS , IT WILL TAKE SOME TIME TO DO THAT. IN YOUR DEVELOPMENT, YOU ROLL OUT PROCESSES TO GET THINGS IN OPERATIONAL. THE CITY SECURES HISTORICALLY HOW CHALLENGING IT IS BEEN TO GET THESE RIGHT OF WAYS.

>> THERE IS NO CONSISTENCY IN OUR EXPERIENCE. IN SOME CASES, IT'S VERY EASY, AND IN SOME CASES, IT DOES NOT HAPPEN. WE ARE WORKING WITH THE PROPERTY OWNER, AND WE HAVE A FUNDING MECHANISM. WE ARE RETAINING FUNDS FOR COUNTY IMPACT FEES ON COUNTY ROADWAYS. THAT'S NOT A PROBLEM. WE WILL INITIATE THEIR PROCESS IMMEDIATELY UPON APPROVAL IF THIS BOARD SO

CHOOSES TO DO SO. >> THANK YOU FOR THAT. MY SUGGESTION THIS BODY WOULD BE THE WE WOULD LINK IT TO SOME KIND OF DATE THAT THEY WERE SUITS HIM SECURE THE RIGHT-OF-WAY IS WITHIN THE SIDEWALK TO BE COMPLETED IF THE DEVELOPER IS IN AGREEMENT WITH THAT. THAT MAKE SENSE TO YOU.

IS THAT A REALISTIC TIMELINE FOR YOU?

>> CAN I REQUEST 12 MONTHS? IT REALLY DEPENDS ON HOW IT ALIGNS WITH THE OTHER WORK ON-SITE. BUT THE GOAL WOULD BE TO HAVE THE OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENTS IMPROVED AT THE SAME TIME. IF WE CAN AVOID HAVING TO FACE THE OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENTS, THAT WOULD BE TO EVERYBODY'S BENEFIT.

>> YOUR ON-SITE DEVELOPMENT IS STILL GOING TO BE TAKING PLACE IN A TIMELY WITH THE 100 UNIT TRIGGER. I WOULD BECOME TROUBLE GOING TO 12 MONTHS AFTER SECURING OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY. I AM SUGGESTING THAT YOU GUYS CAN THROW PENCILS AT ME IF YOU WANT. MAKE SOME SENSE OF THE LINKAGE WOULD BE A MORE NATURAL THING THAN AN ARBITRARY DATE OF 24 MONTHS OUT.

>> YEAH. GOOD POINT. GOOD POINT.

>> THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR GOING TO WORK AND WORKING ON THIS ISSUE. YOU HEARD OUR COMMENTS IN PREVIOUS MEETINGS. HEARD MY COMMENTS SPECIFICALLY. I JUST WANT TO SAY THANK YOU. IS ALWAYS THEY DEVELOP IN TM GOES AFTER IN PARTNERSHIP WITH THE COMMUNITY FULL-FLEDGED. I FEEL LIKE YOU HAVE DONE THAT. YOU PUT THE EFFORT FORWARD IN YOUR APPLICATION. EVEN ADDRESSING SOME OF THE OTHER RANDOM ITEMS THAT ARE THERE. HE MENTIONED THE BOND , AND I'M NOT THE ONE TO TESTIFY ABOUT THIS, BUT YOU ARE. YOU MENTIONED THE BOND EARLIER FROM WHEN YOU SECURED RIGHT-OF-WAY OR WORKING THE RIGHT-OF-WAY. YOU PUT YOUR BONDING FORWARD. WHAT IS THE TYPICAL PROCESS FROM YOUR EXPERIENCE OF HOW LONG THAT TAKES? MAYBE I CAN PARLAY OR TRANSITION INTO THE CONVERSATION THAT COMMISSIONER BRODERICK HAS BRING YOU

TONIGHT. >> I WOULD HAD AN ANSWER FOR THAT. I DON'T HAVE AN ANSWER FOR THAT, MR. JOHNSON.

>> THE PARTY CONTROL IS A COUNTY CONVERSATION WITH THE COUNTY AS THE COUNTY RELYING ON YOU TO BRING FORWARD THE CIVIL ENGINEERING PLANS AND THE TRAFFIC PLANS?

>> YES, SIR. I AM SORRY. I MISUNDERSTOOD YOU. UPON APPROVAL , OUR INTENTION IS TO GO DIRECTLY INTO THAT PHASE .

YOU HAVE TO START WORKING WITH OUR ENGINEERS, OUR TRAFFIC

[01:30:02]

COURT. >> OKAY. THEN YOU WILL APPLY, OF COURSE, FOR THE WORK IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY. YOU HAVE TO DO THAT ANYWAY WHEN YOU MAKE CONNECTIONS. CORRECT?

>> WE WILL SUBMIT A SAY PLAN APPROVAL APPLICATION TO ST.

LUCIE COUNTY AS WELL AS TO THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE REDEVELOPMENT APPROVAL. WE ARE WITH THERE IS A DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THESE PERSONAL. WE MIGHT SUBMIT THAT SLIGHTLY AHEAD JUST TO GET A LITTLE BIT OF AN EDGE ON THE OF REVIEW PROCESS AND APPROVALS. IN THE OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENTS WOULD

FOLLOW SHORTLY THEREAFTER. >> WE HAVE RUN INTO DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS HERE IN THE CITY SOMETIMES WHERE THOSE THINGS GET MISALIGNED. THE APPLICATION PROCESS, RIGHT? JUST PUTTING FORWARD GOOD-QUALITY DEVELOPMENT , BRINGING IT TO THE CITY IN STAGES OR IN PARALLEL TO EACH OTHER, WHETHER IT IS A DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION OR EVEN THE FIRST BUILDING PERMIT. WHAT IS YOUR GOAL IN TYING THOSE TWO APPLICATIONS TOGETHER , AND RELATING THE SITE CIVIL WITH BUILDING

PERMITS? >> ABSOLUTELY. IDEALLY, WE WOULD BE STARTING THE OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENTS WITH SHOVELS IN THE DIRT AND RELATING PERMITS AT THE SAME TIME AS THIS ARE GOING VERTICAL WITH OUR BUILDINGS. RIGHT? SET THE TAIL END OF SITE WORK, UTILITY IMPROVEMENTS ON SITE , THEN WE WILL TAKE AND MOVE THE MOBILIZATION OFF-SITE FOR THE INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS, THE CROSSWALKS, AND HOPEFULLY , EVERYTHING LINES UP WITH THE SIDEWALK, WE CAN GO RIGHT INTO THE SIDEWALK AS WELL. I WAS IN THE OVERALL CONSTRUCTION DURATION FOR THE ENTIRE SAY IT GOING FROM HORIZONTAL TO FINAL CO IS GOING TO BE APPROXIMATELY TWO YEARS. I IMAGINE WOULD BE THROUGH OUR SITE WORK PROCESS IN ABOUT 12 MONTHS OR SO WITH A COUPLE OF ODDS AND ENDS LEFT BASED ON THE CURRENTLY TIMES FOR TRAFFIC SIGNAL IS ASIAN AND TRAFFIC EQUIPMENT THAT WOULD FALL PERFECTLY IN LINE. LEAD TIMES ARE APPROXIMATELY 12 MONTHS ON TRAFFIC EQUIPMENT. THE REVIEW AND APPROVAL PROCESS MY UNDER STANDING IS APPROXIMATELY TWO TO FOUR MONTHS. ACTUALLY WORKS OUT QUITE NICELY. THE KEY TO ALL OF THIS IS US MOVING FORWARD AND GETTING THE BALL ROLLING

IMMEDIATELY UPON APPROVAL. >> I'M ASKING THEM SPECIFICALLY, AND THANK YOU TO THE TESTIMONY, BECAUSE IT IS VERY IMPORTANT THAT THIS PROCESS CONTINUES, RIGHT? YOU TWO VELTMAN APPLICATIONS, TWO PARCELS TO LINK TOGETHER. IT'S FAILING WITH THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC THAT IS THERE. THERE ARE OTHER ENGINEERING DOCUMENTS , BUT THAT IS JUST ME. THAT IS NOT ONLY KNOWN TO US. YOU WILL DO YOUR HORIZONTAL, ALL OF YOUR SITE CIVIL WITHIN SIX, EIGHT, 12 MONTHS, MAYBE EVEN LONGER , AND THEN START APPLYING FOR OR STARTING YOUR VERTICAL CONSTRUCTION WITH BUILDINGS. HOW WILL YOU FACE A PROJECT?

>> THAT IS FOR THE EAST COAST SPECIFICALLY. IT'S TREASURE COAST WEST TO START SITE WORK TOWARDS THE END OF CONSTRUCTION FOR TREASURE COAST EAST. WE DON'T EVEN INTEND TO START TREASURE COAST WEST UNTIL WE ARE IN COMPLETION WITH TREASURE

COAST EAST. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH.

>> MADAM MAYOR, I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION. THANK YOU FOR ADDRESSING THE BOND CAPACITY AND ISSUE WITH THE CONDITIONS IN RECOMMENDATIONS INSIDE OF THIS . SINCE YOU ARE TESTIFYING HERE IN DEVELOPING THIS PROJECT, CAN YOU SPEAK TO THE A SURETY OF THE OVERALL PROJECT AND HOW THIS IS GOING TO BE BROUGHT TO FRUITION IF YOU WOULD?

>> I DON'T HAVE ALL OF THAT INFORMATION. IT'S FINANCED THROUGH A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT MECHANISMS. SOME FINANCING IS IN PLACE AND SOME IS SECURED UPON APPROVAL.

>> YOU HAVE A PERCENTAGE OF WHAT WE ARE? THE ACQUISITION IS? IS IT TIED TO EACH OVERALL PROJECT? OR IS IT, YOU KNOW, 100% USED OR SUMMON WEST? CAN YOU UNDERSTAND THAT?

>> IS PROJECT BY PROJECT. THE FUNDING FOR ONE PROJECT IS NOT DEPENDENT ON THE FUNDING FOR ANOTHER PROJECT. BUT I CAN SAY IS HISTORICALLY, IT IS NOT BEEN AN ISSUE.

>> LET'S GO WITH YOU SINCE YOU SAY THAT IS GOING TO BE THE FIRST CAPACITY WERE WE SEE SHOVELS IN NATURE BEFORE YOU

START ON WEST. >> I DON'T HAVE THAT INFORMATION OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD. I CAN GIVE ANY EXACT NUMBERS AS TO HOW MUCH FINANCING HAS BEEN SECURED AND

HOW MUCH IS STILL PENDING. >> IS A SOMETHING YOU DO

[01:35:12]

>> I AM ON THE CONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOP INSIDE. IN TERMS OF THE FINANCING, I CAN FIND THE ANSWER FOR YOU, BUT I DON'T HAVE IT OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF THE DEVELOPER. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF THE DEVELOPER? ALL RIGHT.

I'M GOING TO ASK YOU TO COME BACK UP. I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING NOW. IF ANYONE ELSE WISHES TO ADDRESS THIS PROJECT, PLEASE COME FORWARD. ANYONE ELSE WANTED TO ADDRESS THIS PROJECT, PLEASE COME FORWARD. OKAY. MR. RIVERA COMEDY WANT TO ADD ANYTHING AT ALL BEFORE WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING? DO YOU WANT TO ADD ANYTHING AT ALL BEFORE WE CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING? ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMISSIONERS, OR THE DEVELOPER? WE ARE CLOSING THE PUBLIC HEARING AND BRINGING IT BACK TO THE COMMISSION. I WILL ENTERTAIN DISCUSSION. OR A

MOTION. >> MADAM MAYOR, I WOULD MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE -- VENICE, CAN YOU GO BACK ? YES. WITH A REVISION TO RECOMMENDATION E . CONSTRUCTION OF A SIX FOOT WIDE SIDEWALK VV PARCEL VIVA WEST PARCEL WESTSIDE ROAD WHATEVER WITHI 10 MONTHS OF SECURING THE NECESSARY RIGHT OF WAYS .

DOES THAT SEEM TO -- IS THAT THE THRUST OF WHAT WE WOULD

NEED THEIR GUYS? >> WHAT I FEEL IT, YES.

>> YOU COUNTABLE WITH THAT LINKAGE?

>> YES. >> I WILL MOVE THAT.

>> THERE WERE SOME OF THE CLEANUP LANGUAGE.

>> WITH ALL OF THE OTHER RECOMMENDATIONS.

>> AND WITH SOME CLEANUP LANGUAGE.

>> I HAVE SOME COMMENTS. >> GO AHEAD.

>> COMMISSIONER BRODERICK? JUST FOR THE RECORD, I LIKE TO JUST HELP THE HOUSEKEEPING ITEM PROBABLY. I BELIEVE THE WORDS PROBABLY THROUGH THE LEASE A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY AND NOT CAPACITY IN EVERY INSTANCE WHERE THAT IS REFERENCED. AND ALSO FROM COMMENT THREE AND ITEM 10 AND 11 TO CONDITION CONDITION SEVEN. ARE YOU AMENABLE TO THAT?

>> ANY STATE THAT AGAIN? >> CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY WORDS A CERTIFICATE OF CAPACITY EVERY PLACE. DO YOU WANT TO SAY

THAT AGAIN FOR GLENDA? >> YOU GET A CERTIFICATE OF

OCCUPANCY. >> AND ITEM 10 AND ITEM 11, IT MAKES PACIFIC REFERENCE TO COMMENT THREE, WHICH I -- CONDITION SEVEN OF LOU OF THREE. I THINK IS ONLY TWO TIMES, IS IT? DO SEE THAT ANYWHERE ELSE?

>> THAT IS 10 AND 11 AS WELL. >> 1011 TWO TIMES.

>> THIS IS ONE OF THE LOWER TORTURED CONDITIONS THAT WE HAVE EVER HAD. WE WANT TO GET IT RIGHT.

>> MADAM MAYOR? >> YES, SIR? THERE IS A MOTION IN A SECOND. NOW WE ARE HAVING DISCUSSION.

>> IT'S EMOTIONAL ON THE FLOOR. I'VE GOT IT. I AM STRUGGLING OVER HERE. I WILL BE HONEST. I LIKE THE PROJECT. I LIKE TO FROM THE BEGINNING. I THINK THE AMENDED A NUMBER OF OUR CONDITIONS. PARTICULARLY THE SAFETY , THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT OF THAT ROAD, AND KNOWING WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN UP THERE. I'M FINE WITH ALL OF THAT. IT JUST TOOK ME ABOUT FINANCING. WE DON'T HAVE PERMISSION TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE PROJECT FOR ALL THESE CONDITIONS BUT TO THEM . HE IS THE DEVELOPER. IF I MISSED THIS, THAT IS WHY AM ASKING FOR YOUR HELP ABOUT HOW THIS WILL REALLY GO. IS IT ENGINEERED? WE HAVE SAT HERE, AND WE HAVE SEVERAL DEVELOPERS COME WITH THIS , AND I AM AT THAT POINT GETTING REAL WARY AND APPREHENSIVE. I AM IN FAVOR OF THE PROJECTS , BUT I JUST WANT US TO THINK ABOUT THIS. I REALLY NEED TO WORK WITH STAFF ON THIS AND FIGURING OUT THEIR ATTORNEY ON I THINK WE SHOULD LOOK AT MAKING SURE THESE PROJECTS HAVE THE CAPITALIZATION TO MOVE FORWARD. IF I CAN BE WITH MY FELLOW

[01:40:06]

GOOD ALLOW RIGHT NOW. >> MAYOR, I DO HAVE A FOLLOW-UP, TO THE COMMISSIONER. I UNDERSTAND YOUR LINE OF INQUIRY ON THAT. THERE ARE DIFFERENCES HERE IN SOME OF THOSE DISCUSSIONS WHERE WE ARE DEALING WITH A PUBLIC PRIVATE SCENARIO CITY-OWNED OR PRIVATE CITY-OWNED ASSETS POTENTIALLY VERSUS STRICTLY PRIVATE. THIS IS SQUARELY IN THE CAMPUS STRICTLY PRIVATE. THE CITY THAT HAS NO INVOLVEMENT WITH LAND OR ANYTHING OF THIS NATURE. IT IS THE DEVELOPER'S RESPONSE ABILITY TO SECURE THEIR FINANCING. IF THEY CAN'T SECURE THEIR FINANCING, THEY ARE SIMPLY UNABLE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THEIR PROJECT. I DON'T BELIEVE THAT IS JURISDICTION -- WE HAVE NO JURISDICTION OVER FINANCING OR PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT. TAXPAYER PROPERTY AS PART OF THAT DISCUSSION, AND CLEARLY, WE HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY TO BE SURE THAT FINANCING MECHANISMS ARE IN PLACE TO BE ABLE TO EXECUTE ON OUR BEHALF. BUT FOR THIS INSTANCE IN ALL THE PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT, THE RISK AND THE BURDEN IS ON THE DEVELOPER. IT IS THEIR MONEY AT RISK, IT IS THEIR TIME AND EFFORT AT RISK. WE REALLY DON'T HAVE OVERSIGHT. TO ANSWER YOUR OTHER QUESTION, I WAS CURIOUS AND GLAD YOU ARE SECURING THE ANSWERS REGARDING THE BONDING ISSUE. BECAUSE THESE COMMON IMPROVEMENTS RELATIVE TO SIDEWALKS AND THINGS OF THIS NATURE NEED TO BE PROTECTED BY THAT MECHANISM . THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE WANT TO INVESTIGATE FURTHER WITH STAFF MOVING FORWARD. BUT THE CORE DEVELOPMENT, THIS IS PRIVATE ENTERPRISE. THEY SUCCEED OR THEY FAIL BASED ON

THEIR OWN EFFORTS. >> MADAM MAYOR?

>> MR. MEM? >> THE FIRST IF THERE IS A DEFINITE CONCERN , IF THIS IS AN ISSUE OF GREAT CONCERN , THERE IS THE POSSIBILITY THAT THE CITY, THE COUNTY, OR THE DEVELOPER MAY ENTER INTO A LOCAL GROUP. THEY HAVE AN AGREEMENT WORKING WITH ST. LUCIE COUNTY THAT IS GOING TO NEED TO BE EXECUTED. THERE IS A POSSIBILITY THAT THE CITY OF PORT FOR FORT PIERCE ARE CONTRIBUTING AS WELL .

RETAINING COUNTY IMPACT FEES FOR ROADWAY SERVICES. I DO BELIEVE THAT THERE IS A GREAT POSSIBILITY THAT WE CAN DO THAT, THAT WAY YOU KNOW THE PARTICULARS OF THEIR REQUIREMENT , YOU WILL SEE ALL OF THE REQUIREMENTS PUT UPON NOT ONLY THE CITY AND THE COUNTY BUT ALSO THE DEVELOPER AS WELL, AND IN ADDITION, THE DEVELOPER MAY BE ABLE TO SHARE A LITTLE BIT OF LIGHT AS TO SOME OF THE THINGS THAT YOU ARE ASKING, IF YOU WOULD GRANT HIM THE OPPORTUNITY TO COME UP , THAT WOULD BE AT THE DISCRETION OF THIS BORD.

>> DOES THAT ADDRESS YOUR QUESTION?

>> THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. FOR REMINDING NOT ONLY ME, BUT THE PUBLIC. THE COMMUNITY IS GETTING VERY WARY IN MY OPINIONS AND, THAT I AM HEARING AFTER DEVELOPMENT AND NOTHING IS HAPPENING. WE CREATE A LOT OF HOPE AND ASPIRATION , AND YET, WE ARE CHALLENGING EVERYTHING GOING VERTICAL .

SOMETIME SOME STUFF HAS HAPPENED, AND THEN SOMETIME SOME STUFF HAS NOT. IT'S A MAJOR CORRIDOR. IT'S MUCH-NEEDED HOUSING WORKFORCE TYPE HOUSING THAT WE NEED FOR PEOPLE THAT WORK AND SERVICE AND INDUSTRY. I'M TIRED OF BUILDING UP HOPE WHEN I COME BACK AND SEE A FOR SALE SIGN OR SOMETHING THAT IS THERE. AND I THINK THAT WE NEED TO HAVE THIS CONVERSATION, BUT YOU THINK IS SPOT ON. THIS IS A PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT, BUT I STILL THINK IT BEHOOVE US TO KNOW AND ASK THESE QUESTIONS WHEN PEOPLE ARE COMING TO DEVELOP THEIR LAND SO THAT WE DON'T BUILD UP THAT HELP THE PEOPLE THAT RESPECT THE THINGS TO COME , AND THEN THEY'RE ASKING US IN THE GROCERY STORE WHEN IS IS COMING , AND WE ARE ADMIRED IN THIS CONVERSATION AGAIN AND AGAIN. THAT IS MY CONCERN. THIS IS NOT GOING TO BE THE FIRST. IT'S NOT THE LAST. AS FAR AS MR. MEMES FOR DEVELOPING FROM A PARLIAMENTARY PROCEDURE, WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR AND WE HAVE A COMMENT. I DON'T THINK IT WOULD BE PROPER AT THIS POINT OF THE MOTION IS ON THE FLOOR, SIR, BUT YOU CAN ALWAYS PROVIDE BACKGROUND INFORMATION. I AM GOING TO VOTE IN FAVOR OF THIS MOTION , BUT I HAD TO PUT THIS OUT AND PUT THIS ON THE RECORD.

>> THAT IS A VERY GOOD POINT. YES, SIR?

[01:45:03]

>> IT IS ODD , BECAUSE THERE IS A PORTION OF THE COMMUNITY THAT IS ALSO NOT ASKING ABOUT WHEN IT IS COMING, BUT PLEASE MAKE IT STOP. AND YOU GUYS KNOW I HAVE A VERY CRITICAL OF THESE TWO PRODUCTS. I'VE BEEN VERY, VERY CRITICAL. I VOTED NO AGAINST THE WEST SIDE. THE APPLICANT HAS MADE AN INVESTMENT, THEY HAVE MADE SIGNIFICANT, WHETHER IT IS LEGAL, OR CIVIL, OR WHATEVER THEY ARE DOING IN THE BACKGROUND, SOMETHING IS HAPPENING , BECAUSE WE HAVE A LIVING CONDITIONS ON THE TABLE HERE THAT WE DID NOT HAVE BEFORE WE HAD TWO OR THREE. SO THEY ARE OBVIOUSLY INVESTED INTO THEIR PROJECTS AND THE PARCELS THAT THEY HAVE REQUIRED. AND I CAN SEE THAT IN JUST THEIR ACTION. I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU ARE LOOKING FOR TWO. WE HAVE LEGISLATIVELY GETTING INVOLVED IN THAT PORTION OF IT EXCEPT FOR THE PORTIONS THAT ARE IN THE PARTS OF THE PUBLIC'S BEST INTEREST WITH CONNECTIONS, SAFETY, HEALTH, WELFARE , AND THAT IS REGARDING THE PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY. I'M COMFORTABLE WITH IT. I APPRECIATE IT. I WILL CONTINUE TO THINK ABOUT EXACTLY WHAT YOU ARE SAYING , AND I WILL DESIRE TO BRING THAT FORWARD AND OTHER APPLICATIONS. I HAVE A RECENT EXAMPLE. IF THIS WASN'T A RENTAL COMMUNITY , WE HAD THE COMMUNITY DOWN ON MIDWAY ROAD FOR THE DEVELOPED OR PUT FORWARD THEIR OWN CDD, RIGHT? THEY BROUGHT THAT TO US FOR APPROVAL FREE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT FOR THOSE THAT HAVE HEARD THAT FOR THE FIRST TIME TO WHERE THOSE ARE GOING TO BE THE INVESTMENT COMMUNITY IS FOR SINGLE HOME OWNERSHIP, AND THEY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PAYBACK OF INFO STRUCTURE AND WHATNOT BECAUSE THEY HAVE THEIR OWN DISTRICT. IT'S VERY ODD, BUT IT IS PART OF THE FLORIDA STATE LEGISLATURE RULES AND PROCEDURES THAT IS ALLOWABLE. ALL RIGHT. ARE YOU READY TO

VOTE? CALL THE ROLE, PLEASE. >> COMMISSIONER BRODERICK?

[b. Quasi-Judicial Hearing - Review and approval of an application for a Site Plan (Development and Design Review), submitted by applicant Jerry Compton with Creech Consulting, Inc., of a 4,306 square-feet building to provide mental health services for ages 3 and up at 1211 and 1213 S. 25th Street, more specifically at Parcel IDs: 2417-507-0005-000-7 and 2417-503-0040-000-2.]

>> YES. >> COMMISSIONER GAINES?

>> YES. >> COMMISSIONER C. JOHNSON?

>> YES. >> COMMISSIONER J. JOHNSON?

YES. >> MAYOR HUDSON?

>> YES. SUCK WE HAVE AN APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN DEVELOP AND DOES SIGNED FOR YOU SUBMITTED WITH APPLICANT JERRY COMPTON FOR CREECH CONSULTING FOR A 4300 THREE HITS HIM 4306 SQUARE FEET BUILDING TO PROVIDE MENTAL HEALTH SERVICE FOR AGES THREE AND UP AT 1211 AND 1213 SOUTH 25 STREET MORE SECRETS

SPECIFICALLY AT PARCEL . >> COMMISSIONER GAINES, EX

PARTE COMMUNICATIONS? >> I RECEIVED EMAILS.

>> COMMISSIONER C. JOHNSON? >> I DON'T KNOW , MA'AM, FOR

HE RECORD. >> THANK YOU? COMMISSIONER J.

JOHNSON? >> NOTHING TO REPORT RIGHT THIS

SECOND. I AM CHECKING. >> MAYOR HUDSON?

>> NO, MA'AM. WOULD YOU LIKE TO SWEAR IN THE WITNESSES

AGAIN? >> ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM, PLEASE RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. THESE WERE FROM TO TELL THE WHOLE TRUTH, NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT

THE TRUTH? >> I DO.

>> THANK YOU. >> PROCEED -- DID WE SKIP ONE?

>> NO, DID COMMISSIONER BRODERICK LEAVE CHAMBERS?

>> YOU DID. >> I WALKED OUT AND THE AUDIO WAS NOT PLAYING OUTSIDE. SO WE DON'T HAVE A LEGAL ISSUE TO

WAIT FOR HIM TO RETURN. >> REGISTER THE AUDIO ON.

SORRY. THANK YOU FOR LETTING ME KNOW THAT.

>> DID YOU FIND OUT ANYTHING, COMMISSIONER J. JOHNSON?

>> NO. >> COMMISSIONER BRODERICK, DID

[01:50:09]

ITEM? >> NO.

>> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. THE APPLICANT IS JERRY COMPTON . THE PROPERTY OWNER IS JOHN MURRAY WITH YOUTH AND FAMILY BEHAVIORAL INC. AND THE HEALTH PARCEL IDEAS ARE 2417, 50700050007 , AND TWO FOR 1750035004000002 . IN SUMMARY, THIS IS A REQUEST FOR REVIEW FOR AN APPLICATION SITE PLAN DEVELOPMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW OF THE 4306 SQUARE FEET BUILDING TO PROVIDE MENTAL HEALTH SERVICES FOR AGES THREE AND UP. THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IS LOCATED ON A PERSON WITH A FUTURE LAND USE OF GENERAL COMMERCIAL ANY ZONING OF GENERAL COMMERCIAL. THIS IS THE SITE LOCATION WITH SITE AREA 0.52, GIVE OR TAKE ACRES. THE CURRENT LAND USES GENERAL COMMERCIAL AS SHOWN. THE CURRENT ZONING IS C3 GENERAL COMMERCIAL, AS SHOWN ON THE MAP. THIS IS THE SITE PLAN OF THE 4306 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING. ALONG WITH THE SITE PLAN DATA. THIS IS THE LANDSCAPING PLAN PROPOSED.

THESE ARE THE ELEVATIONS OF THE PROPOSED BUILDING. THESE ARE EAST, NORTH, WEST , AND SOUTH. A COMPLETION CERTIFICATION BY LANDSCAPING ARCHITECT LANDSCAPE ON PURSUANT TO CITY CODE 1736 SHALL BE REQUIRED . THE SURVEY WILL BE REQUIRED FOR STATUE BEFORE CONSTRUCTION CAN BEGIN. PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF ANY SITE CLEARING PERMITS THE APPLICANT SHALL PROVIDE APPLICATION OF TREATMENT LITIGATION SURVEY IN ACCORDANCE TO ARBORISTS WITH THE CITY REGULATED TREES PROPOSED TO BE REMOVED TO SAY DEVELOPMENT CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY , AND FOUR, BUILDING PERMIT FOR THE BUILDING TITLE CLERK OF COURTS INTERPERSONAL ACCOMMODATION WITH THE CITY PARCEL PROPERTY APPRAISER SHOULD BE PROVIDED. AFTER MARCH 11TH, 2024 MEETING, THE VOTING BOARD FOR DISSLY TO PRODUCE A PORTFOLIO REVIEW TO COMMISSION WITH APPROVAL TO THE FOUR COMMISSION. STAFF RECOMMENDATION FOR THE CITY COMMISSION APPROVED A BLEND OF THE COMMISSION WITH THE SAY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS OF RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS OR RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL.

>> QUESTIONS OF STAFF? QUESTIONS OF STAFF?

>> JUST ONE QUICK QUESTION. BASED ON PARTICLES BEING PUT INTO PLACE, THE FALL UNDER THE THRESHOLD.

>> THIS WAS AN APPLICATION. THIS IS AN APPLICATION THAT WAS CAUGHT IN THE SYSTEM AS YOU RECALL FROM THE LAST COMMISSION MEETING. WE REMOVE THE LANDSCAPER CREMATORY LANDSCAPE BOND, WHICH IS COMMISSION ONE ON THIS ONE. SO, I WOULD REQUEST THAT WE MOVE THIS CONDITION FROM THIS INTERFACE WITH A REQUIREMENT FOR LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT. UNFORTUNATELY, THE SQUARE FOOTAGE WAS IN THE

SYSTEM. >> I THOUGHT THAT WAS THE CASE.

THANK YOU. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF? OKAY. I WOULD LIKE TO ASK THE APPLICANT TO COME FORWARD PLEASE. DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF?

>> NO I DO NOT. THEY DID A WONDERFUL JOB. MY NAME IS JERRY COMPTON WITH CREECH CONSULTING. STEWART FOLDER.

>> DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING TO ADD TO WHAT THEY PRESENTED? COMMISSIONERS, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ANYONE ELSE WISHING TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE PLEASE COME FORWARD. I AM SEEING NO MOVEMENT. I WILL BRING IT BACK TO THE COMMISSION, AND ENTERTAIN

DISCUSSION OR EMOTION. >> STUFF, CAN YOU GO BACK ONE SCREEN JUST TO SEE THE ADMISSIONS? JUST TO REVIEW LANDSCAPING MOM, WE ARE GOING ONE COMMENTS. IS THAT ACCURATE? YES. WE LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT.

>> LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT. MADAM MAYOR, I WILL BE APPROVAL WITH THE FOURTH EDITION ARE ONE BE MODIFIED

FROM A LANDSCAPE ON RELATED . >> THERE A SECOND? WELL,

[01:55:01]

PLEASE? >> COMMISSIONER BRODERICK?

>> YES. >> COMMISSIONER GAINES?

>> YES. >> COMMISSIONER C. JOHNSON?

>> YES ARIEN >> COMMISSIONER J. JOHNSON?

YES. >> MAYOR HUDSON?

>> YES. >> OKAY. THE NEXT ITEM IS GOING

[c. Quasi-Judicial Hearing - Ordinance No. 24-010 - An ordinance amending the planned development plan for the property generally located at or near 4150 and 4200 Gator Trace Road and known as The Gator Trace Planned Unit Development. Subject Property: Parcel ID(s): 2435-311-0001-000-4 & 2435-243-0001-000-6 - FIRST READING]

READING. >> AGREEMENT THE ADVERTISING A

NOTICE REQUIREMENT? >> THE ADVERTISING A NOTICE REQUIREMENT SEVEN UP FOR THIS ITEM.

>> CAN YOU ASK ABOUT EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS?

>> YES, MA'AM. COMMISSIONER BRODERICK?

>> NONE. IF YOU ME. >> ON GATOR TRADES.

>> YOU ALREADY ASK THAT. I'M A COMMISSIONER COMMENTS ALREADY.

I'LL GET IT TOGETHER BY THE END OF THE MEETING. IT'S ALL RIGHT. I HAVE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TO REPRESENTATIVES OF THE GATOR TRADE DEVELOPMENT MASTER ASSOCIATION. I'VE ALSO HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO RESIDENTS OF GATOR TRADES AND HAVE RECEIVED NUMEROUS EMAILS FROM ALL PARTIES CONCERNED WITH THIS APPLICATION.

>> THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER C. JOHNSON?

>> NO. >> COMMISSIONER J. JOHNSON?

>> EMAILS THAT WITH THE APPLICANT . I MET WITH SOME OF THE PEOPLE OF GATOR TRADES AS WELL.

>> COMMISSIONER JEH JOHNSON? >> YES, MA'AM. WHAT IS I -- EMAIL OR ELECTRONIC CORRESPONDENCE.

>> MAYOR HUDSON? >> I REVIEWED THE PLANNING BOARD MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 11TH, 2023. I HAVE HAD MEETINGS WITH RESIDENTS , AND I'VE HAD CONVERSATIONS WITH RESIDENTS.

>> THANK YOU. >> WOULD YOU LIKE TO SWEAR IN

THE WITNESSES? >> YES. ANALOGY TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM PLEASE STAND AND RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WILL SPEAK ON THIS ITEM IS TO BE SWORN IN, PLEASE. THESE WERE OR FROM TO TELL THE WHOLE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH? THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> OKAY. PROCEED. >> GOOD EVENING, MADAM MAYOR, COMMISSIONERS. BEFORE YOU IS A MAJOR AMENDMENT TO A PLAN DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR TWO PARCELS IN THE GATOR TRACE UNIT DEVELOPMENT LOCATED APPROXIMATELY A 4150 AND 4200 TRADER JOE'S ROAD. THERE RECEIVING PROPERTY ON THE GREEN LLC PARCEL IDEA 24 2035-311-333-0111 AND FOR , AND 2435 243-0001-0006. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING THE MAJOR PLAN AMENDMENT TO THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT TOGETHER WITH THE DESIGN OF THE APPLICATION FOR THE TWO SUBJECT PARCELS. THE CURRENT FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION IS MEETING DOESN'T RESIDENTIAL WITH A ZONING OF PD PLAN DEVELOPMENT ZONE. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING THE INCREASED DEVELOPMENTS OF PARCELS FROM 67 USED 83 UNITS, IDENTIFIED AS GATOR GATOR TRACE DEVELOPMENT PLAN. THIS CONSISTS OF 13 RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS IN THE TOTAL APPROXIMATE ACREAGE AT 6.94. IS A SUMMARY OF THE PROJECT THE CITY COMMISSION SHOULD BE AWARE OF AN OBJECTION LETTER WITH THIS PROPOSAL RECEIVED TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT ON JULY 7TH, 2023.

THE LETTER IS ATTACHED IN YOUR AGENDA PACKET. ALSO, THE APPLICANT'S INTENT IS TO REDISTRIBUTE THE EXISTING ALLOCATIONS OF THE RESIDENTIAL UNITS FROM ONE PART OF THE GATOR TRACE TO ANOTHER. THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PERMITS A MAXIMUM DENSITY OF 12 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE. THIS PROVIDES A MAXIMUM 83 DWELLING UNITS IF A PORTION TO THE AREA OF THE

[02:00:05]

NOT INDIVIDUAL PARCELS, KEEPING THE OVERALL DENSITY OF LESS THAN THREE UNITS PER ACRE. MAY 3RD, 1999, THIS IS APPROVED FOR 120 UNITS OF CONDOMINIUMS TO BE BUILT BY NEW SENTRY VENTURES INCORPORATED . THE NEW OWNERS OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY SYMPHONY BUILDERS APPLIED TO AMEND THE SITE PLAN FOR THE TWO PART SUBJECT PARCELS. EVEN CONSIDERED IT PHASE ONE OF SEVERAL OTHER PROPERTIES THAT THEY OWN. KIND OF STUFF DID NOT AGREE WITH COMPATIBILITY BECAUSE THE PARCELS ARE IN THE PLAINTIFF DEVELOPING COMMUNITY. SYMPHONY BUILDERS RESUBMITTED AND PROPOSED 67 STORY TOWNHOMES THAT WERE IN SCALE OF THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITY ON DECEMBER 19TH, 2005. THE FABLED IS APPROVED BY THE CITY COMMISSION TO BUILD 67 UNITS 2022. SEE CENTERS BUILT 83 TOWNHOME UNITS ON A 6.9 ACRE SUBJECT SITE. THE EXISTING UNITS OF THE PUD IS 252. THAT LEAVES A TOTAL OF 343 LEFT TO BE BUILT WITHIN THE GATOR TRADES PUD. 83 UNITS ON THE 6.9 ACRES MEET THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN PERTAINING TO THE MAXIMUM UNITS PER ACRE OF OUR MEETING DENSITY RESIDENTIAL. WITHOUT INCREASING THE APPROVED PD MAX CALLAN OF 678, THE 83 IN ADDITION KEEPS THE PD A LITTLE UNDER THE THREE UNITS PER ACRE OVERALL. THIS IS A LITTLE INFORMATION OF PHASE TWO PERMITS THAT ARE INITIATED.

THIS IS THE SITE LOCATION OF THE CURRENT LAND USE AND ZONING. IT WAS A PLAN FOR THE 13 RESIDENTIAL UNIT TOWNHOMES.

83 UNITS. THIS IS THE PROPOSED LANDSCAPE PLAN.

>> LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, PLEASE. THANK YOU. CONTINUE,

VENICE. >> THIS IS A LANDSCAPE LEGEND AND DATA FOR YOUR VIEWING. THIS IS RENDERING OF THE OTHER BUILDINGS, AND I'VE A FEW OTHER SLIDES. OKAY. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING THE COLOR PALETTE, WHICH WOULD INCLUDE SOME OF THE FOLLOWING COLORS, WHICH IS GRAY TONE , WHITE, PURE WHITE, GRANDMA PAVERS , SILVER MISSED , AND SEA SALT. ALL AFFECTED DEPARTMENTS HAVE REVIEWED THE MAJOR AMENDMENT TO THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN WITH REGARDS TO CONSISTENCY OF THE ESTABLISHED ORDINANCES IN A GRIMACE TO THE CITY CODE. ST. LUCIE COUNTY PUBLIC WAS AN ENGINEERING HAVE THE FOLLOWING TWO COMMENTS. THE STATEMENT IS INTERNAL CAPTURE THAT THE OVERALL APARTMENT FOR GATOR TRACE ON THE GREENS PHASE ONE AND TWO PROVIDED FOR 67 UNITS IN PHASE ONE, AND 254 UNITS IN PHASE TWO. THIS PLAQUE INCLUDES 83 UNITS IN PHASE ONE, AND AN INCREASE OF 16 UNITS REGARDING MINIMAL INCREASE AND PEEK OUR TRIPS. THERE IS NO NEED FOR TRAFFIC REPORT INCLUDING THESE TWO ADDITIONAL TRIPS. PLANNING BOARD PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO THE PLANNING DEVELOPMENT AND DESIGN REVIEW AT THE SEPTEMBER 11TH, 2023 MEETING. STAFF IS ARE

[02:05:08]

LIKE. NEED TO. >> YOU PROBABLY SHOULD READ THEM QUICKLY SO THAT THEY ARE ON THE RECORD.

>> NUMBER ONE, NO SITE CLEARING PERMITS OR BUILDING PERMITS SHOULD BE ISSUED UNTIL THE DEVELOPERS AGREEMENT IS AMENDED TO ALLOW FOR 83 TWO STORY TOWNHOMES IN PHASE ONE. THIS MUST BE -- FACING ONE PROVISIONS OF PHASING ARE INCLUDED IN DEVELOPING PLAN, EACH PHASE OF A DEVELOPMENT MUST BE SO PLANS RELATED TO PREVIOUS DEVELOPMENT SURROUNDING PROPERTIES WITH FAILURE TO RECEIVE SUBSEQUENT PURPOSES TO NOT IMPACT DRAINAGE PARKING OR THE TRAFFIC FLOW THE COMPETED PHASES. THE DEVELOPING PHASING SCHEDULE INDICATING A, THE APPROXIMATE DATE WHEN CAN SECTION OF THE PROJECT CAN BE EXPECTED TO BEGIN, B, THE PHASES OF THE PROJECT WOULD BE ABLE TO THE APPROXIMATE DATE WITH THE CAN SECTION OF EACH PHASE TO BE BEGINNING. A GENERAL DISCUSSION OF THE BUILDING AT THREE SKILLS INCLUDING STANDARD FOR HIGH BUILDING COVERAGE PARKING AREAS IN PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT PROPOSED FOR EACH PHASE OF THE DEVELOPMENT. THREE, THE FOLLOWING DOCUMENTS AND PLANS FORM PART OF THE APPROVED PD AMENDMENT. A, THE SITE PLAN GATOR TRACE . B, FIRE HOSE REACH PLAN DASH 000 . THE FIRETRUCK TURNOUT, NUMBER FOUR, FT 2.00 BY INCREMENT. 100 EIGHT DASH 2.0-2.0-2.0 -2.0-2.0.

TOPOGRAPHICAL SURVEY SHEET ONE AND SHE TWO . 22-356 BY THE EDC . LEGAL DESCRIPTION, PARKING SITE VELTMAN PLAN. PAVING, GRADING, DRAINAGE PLAN. WATER SEWAGE PLAN, UTILITIES, NOTES, WATER DETAILS, UTILITY DETAILS, DRAINAGE DETAILS, FIRE HYDRANT, EROSION CONTROL, STORMWATER PREVENTION, C1, C2, C3, C4, C5, C6 THROUGH C 15 BY ATLANTIC ENGINEERING. G, THE ENGINEERING SPECIFICATIONS SHALL INCLUDE THE LANDSCAPE DESIGN ASSOCIATES . EACH TREE SURVEY INSPECTION MAPS 23-236 IN LITIGATION COST OF 233,000 BY EDC . ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT OF AUGUST 29TH, 2022 BY EDC , J, THE TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS PROVIDE DECEMBER, 2022 BY ATLANTIC AND NEARING SERVICES INCORPORATED, FOUR, THE IMPROVED PLAN DEVELOPMENT AMENDMENT SHALL BE SUBJECT TO ALL AGREEMENT, PER -- IN ANY OF ITS, OPEN SPACE AND OTHER SHARED AREAS. THIS MATERIAL SHALL INCLUDE MATERIAL WITH SUCCESSES AND TITLE TO ANY COMMITMENTS CONCERNED COMPLETION OF THE PROJECT IN ITS MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION. FIVE, PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF ANY SAY CLEARING PERMISSIONS, THE APPLICANT SHALL PROVIDE THE SUM OF THE $112 112,750 IN RESPECT TO TREATMENT LITIGATION THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE. 68 SUBJECT APPLICATION SUBMITTED IN THE FUTURE , A GENERAL ADDRESS REQUEST FORM FOR THE NEWLY CREATED PARCELS AND FOR ANY AND EACH PROPOSED BUILDING AND RESIDENTIAL UNITS SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. INSTALL A FIVE FOOT WIDE CONCRETE SIDEWALK WITH INTEGRATED TRAITS RIGHT-OF-WAY THAT LIMITS THE SIDEWALK SHALL EXTEND THE LENGTH OF THE PROPERTY FRONTAGE AND CONNECT ALL INTERNAL SIDEWALK CONNECTIONS. STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL, POSSIBLE ACTIONS OF THE CITY COMMISSION.

OR, APPROVED WITH THE SEVEN CONDITIONS APPROVED WITH THE CHANGES OR DISAPPROVAL OF THE AMENDMENT TO THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT PLAN OF THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT. THANK

YOU. >> QUESTIONS OF STAFF.

QUESTIONS OF STAFF? YES. >> YOU HAVE A SITE PLAN YOU PUT ON THE SCREEN? YOU MENTIONED SIDEWALKS, AND I WANTED TO

[02:10:02]

SYSTEM? >> CORRECT.

>> ARE THERE ANY IMPROVEMENTS TO REFERENCES IN THIS APPLICATION? GATOR TRACE BOULEVARD IS COMING FROM B.

>> NOT THAT I'M AWARE OF. >> NO.

>> MAY BE ANOTHER APPLICANT CAN REFERENCE THAT. IS THERE ANY CONNECTION OR EXTENSION OF GATOR TRACE PROPOSED AT ANY PHASE OF GATOR TRACE COMMUNITY? THE NORTH-SOUTH RUN COMING TO OTHER ELEMENTS WITHIN THE COMMUNITY.

>> NOT THAT I AM AWARE OF. NO.

>> IS THAT CITY OR PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY? DO WE KNOW THAT? IT LOOKS LIKE WEATHERBY TO THE GATOR TRACE COMMUNITY. I BELIEVE IT LOOKS LIKE A RIGHT-OF-WAY TO ME.

>> OKAY. I SAW SOME REFERENCES TO THE FIRE DISTRICT MAKING SOME COMMENTS IN CONJUNCTION PROBABLY WITH YOUR COMMENTS AS FAR AS EMERGENCY VEHICLES , ACCESS, TO SECOND FROM THE FIRE DISTRICT OR DOES THAT COME FROM STAFF?

>> FIRE DISTRICT. IN THE APPLICANT ALSO HAS TWO SUBMIT THE SITE PLAN REVIEW PROCESS AS WELL BEFORE THE EVEN APPROVE

IT. >> TO THE FIRE DISTRICT?

>> TO THE FIRE TO START. >> FOR FEES AND ET CETERA. DID THEY MAKE ANY COMMENTS FOR THE ETERNAL CONNECTIVITY FOR GATOR TRAITS? WAS THERE ANYTHING IN THEIR PACKAGE? I'M ASSUMING

THAT CAME THROUGH TRC, TIME? >> YES.

>> ALL RIGHT. THE REASON I ASK THAT IS I DON'T KNOW, AND THIS

[02:15:01]

THAT MIGHT BE SOMETHING THAT IS REFERENCED AS A COMMUNITY THAT IS BUILT OUT. WAS THERE ANY REFERENCE TO THAT IN THE

HISTORICAL DOCUMENTS AT ALL? >> NO.

>> OKAY. THAT'S ALL I HAVE FOR NOW. THANK YOU.

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF? YES, COMMISSIONER

BRODERICK? >> THANK YOU. THE OVERALL SCOPE WAS 678 UNITS. THERE WAS A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IN PLACE THAT THE CITY IS A PARTY TO. AM I CORRECT ON THAT? THIS MAY BE A QUESTION FOR CITY ATTORNEY HEDGES RELATIVE TO THIS AGREEMENT. THIS IS A BILATERAL AGREEMENT, SO WE HAVE OBLIGATIONS TO STAFF FOR THAT AGREEMENT. MS. HEDGES, HOW DOES THAT AGREEMENT INTERACT WITH THE UNITS BEING REQUESTED FOR THIS VERSUS WHAT WAS APPROVED BACK IN THE DAY BY THE CITY COMMISSION AND I AM ASSUMING REFLECTED IN THE DEVELOPING AGREEMENT. CAN YOU JUST GIVE ME SOME UNDERSTANDING ABOUT THAT?

>> YES, SIR, MADAM MAYOR. THIS ALLOWS FOR 67 TOWNHOMES. YOU WILL SEE ONE OF THE CONDITIONS IS THAT IN ORDER TO GO ABOVE THE 67 UNITS, THERE HAS TO BE IN A MEMO TO THE DEVELOPING AGREEMENT. THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IS BINDING ON THE PARTIES THAT FIND IT, AS WELL AS ANY OF THEIR SUCCESSORS IN INTEREST. SO, ANYONE THAT HAS BEEN SOLD TO, INCLUDING THE APPLICANT. UNDER THE RECOMMENDATION FROM STAFF IN ORDER FOR HIM TO ACTUALLY BUILD OUT ABOVE THE SEVEN UNITS, YOU HOW TO HAVE THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AMENDED. UNILATERAL AUTHORITY CAN CHANGE THIS AGREEMENT. HE NEEDS TO BE AGREED TO TELL THE PARTIES AN AGREEMENT.

>> THAT IS CORRECT. AS TO THE DEVELOPERS AGREEMENT.

>> THE CITY IS MANDATED BY THE DEVELOPER AGREEMENT TO KEEP 67 UNITS. THE UP IN A PERSON TO MODIFY THE DEVELOPING AGREEMENT, BUT IT IS NOT A PARTY AT THE TABLE RIGHT NOW TO ADDRESS THIS WITH THE CITY'S CONCERNS OF THIS BEING A JOINT AGREEMENT THAT IF WE MODIFY IT , WE ARE JUST HANGING THIS THING OUT THERE SAYING THAT'S FINE. THE CITY'S PROCESS HAS HALTED BECAUSE WE HAVE CHANGED IT. NOW IT IS UP TO YOU GUYS TO SORT THIS OUT. I KNOW THAT'S NOT LEGALESE, BUT THAT IS HOW I

AM LOOKING AT IT. >> YES, SIR. THAT IS A FAIR

ASSESSMENT. >> AND HIS BODY WERE JUST TO APPROVE THE 67 UNITS, WE ARE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE DEVELOPMENT

AGREEMENT. DONE, MOVE ON. >> HE CURRENTLY HAS 67 UNITS

APPROVED. >> APPROVED THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT , WHICH IS A MULTILATERAL AGREEMENT.

OBVIOUSLY THERE ARE MORE THAN TWO PARTIES. THERE ARE THREE PARTIES. SO, WE ARE HEARING TO OUR ANALYST AND THAT AGREEMENT

IF WE MAINTAIN 67 UNITS. >> YES, SIR.

>> OKAY, THANK YOU. >> AND A FOLLOW-UP QUESTION, MS. HEDGES? IF WE WERE TO APPROVE THE 83 UNITS , WOULD WE BE AMENDING THE AGREEMENT ON THE HEART OF THE CITY?

>> THE DEVELOPING AGREEMENT? NO, MA'AM. I WAS UP TO COME BACK BEFORE THIS COMMISSION FOR A VOTE.

>> SO, THAT IS OBVIOUSLY SAYING THAT THAT IS PART OF OUR AGREEMENT, AND WE ARE SAYING YES. THAT IS AN OBVIOUS ONE.

>> NO, MA'AM. I WOULD HAVE TO BE VOTED ON.

>> WOULD HAVE TO BE NEGOTIATED.

>> YES, MA'AM. IT WOULD INCLUDE THIS APPLICANT AND ANY OTHER PARTIES TO THE AGREEMENT. ONCE THEY HAVE WORKED OUT THEIR TERMS, I WOULD THINK GENERALLY THE ANSWER IS THEY NEED TO WORK

[02:20:04]

>> IDEALLY, THE SHOULD HAVE ALREADY HAPPENED.

>> THAT IS WHAT I WAS GOING FOR.

>> MADAM MAYOR, I AM DISTURBED BY THE POINT THAT IT APPEARS TO ME. WE ARE BEING DRAWN INTO BE THE ARBITER BETWEEN THESE OTHER PARTIES , AND THAT IS OUR SIGN DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AT 67 UNITS. I DON'T CARE OR REALLY CARE TO KNOW THE PRIVATE BUSINESS RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN HIM AND THE MASTER ASSOCIATION DEVELOPER , BUT IT APPEARS TO ME THAT WE ARE BEING DRAWN INTO THIS OVER SOME KIND OF LEVERAGE. AND CANDIDLY, THAT IS WHERE NEED TO BE. I SUPPORT THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. WE NEED TO BE WHERE WE WERE 30 YEARS AGO APPROXIMATELY. 2005. 20

YEARS AGO. >> I APOLOGIZE. THIS ONE IS

2007 I BELIEVE. >> I AM VERY CONCERNED WHERE THIS IS GOING. THAT WE ARE BEING DRAWN INTO SOMETHING THAT IS OF NO CONCERN OF OURS HONESTLY. THAT IS MY LAYMAN'S PERSPECTIVE. SEE MY CITY ATTORNEY RUBBING A SET OF MY COMMENTS, BUT COMMISSIONER GAINES, THAT IS WHAT I AM

LOOKING AT. >> NO, COMMISSIONER BRODERICK, I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHY WERE VOTING ON ANYTHING THERE HAS NOT BEEN AN AGREEMENT TO CHANGE THIS AGREEMENT BEFORE IT CAME TO US FROM 67 TO 83. I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY THIS IS IN FRONT OF US IF THERE HASN'T BEEN AN AGREEMENT AND A SIGNED DOCUMENT THAT WE CAN SEE THAT EVERYBODY WANTS AN APPROVED 83.

I AM SEEING EXACTLY WHAT YOU ARE SEEING. YOU SAY YES, THEY WILL GO BACK AND SAY THE CITY IS ALREADY ON BOARD. WHY CAN'T WE GET ON BOARD? THAT IS HOW I AM LOOKING AT IT. IF WE HAVE A WRITTEN CONTRACT FOR 67 , THAT IS OUR PART AS A CITY. WE SHOULD STAND BY THAT WITH POWERS TO BE COMING BACK TO SAY WE ALL HAVE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE 83. AND NOW, THE CITY CAN'T EVEN VOTE TO CHANGE IT BECAUSE YOU AGREED TO 65. WE HAVE AN AGREEMENT THAT WE WANT 83 TO FRONT OF US. I DON'T IS A WAY IT IS HERE TONIGHT . THAT AGREEMENT HAS NOT BEEN MODIFIED, AMENDED, OR CHANGED.

>> I AGREE. THIS IS FLIP-FLOPPED. WE SHOULD BE THE LAST ONE BROUGHT INTO THIS AFTER AN AGREEMENT HAS BEEN

REACHED. >> IT SHOULD ALSO BE GOOD WITH OUR CODE. THAT IS THE ONLY THING WE ARE VOTING ON. RIGHT.

COMMISSIONER J. JOHNSON? >> THANK YOU, MA'AM. I AGREE, COMMISSIONERS, BUT I HAVE A DIFFERENT TAKE EXPLAINING IT.

MY ONLY DIFFERENCE IN THE TAKE IS NOT THE DEVELOPERS DREAM SPECIFICALLY, BUT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY, WE SHOULD BE THE LAST ONES TO AGREE TO THAT DOCUMENT WHAT IT IS TIME TO DO THAT, AS MS. HEDGES HAS CLEARLY IDENTIFIED. ALL THE PARTIES NEED TO AGREE, COME BY ARE, WHATEVER THEY NEED TO DO IN THE OUTSIDE WORLD , AND WE WILL DO IT WE NEED TO DO. WE'RE GOING THROUGH A REFERENCE SITE PLAN HAVE PROCESS.

[02:25:12]

>> KEEP IN MIND, COMMISSIONER BRODERICK, WHAT YOU ARE STATING, WE ALREADY READ IN THE DEVELOPERS AGREEMENT HOPE THE PUBLIC UNDERSTANDS. THIS IS JUST A PROCESS THAT SOMEONE HAD A PLAN ONE TIME, AND THEY WANT TO AMEND IT. THEY CHANGED THEIR MINDS. YOU ARE BRINGING IT FORTH TO US , AND THAT IS HOW WE OPERATE. THEY HAVE GONE TO THAT PROCESS. OUR DECISIONING NOW IS ACCEPTING THEIR AMENDING PROPOSED CHANGES TO THEIR PLAN , AND DOUBLE THE TRIGGER NOW IS GOING THROUGH THE PROCESS OF SITE PLAN APPROVAL TRC, ET CETERA, AND BY THE WAY, LEGAL HAS A DEVELOPER AGREEMENT IN PLACE THAT SAYS IT'S NOT THE

67. >> WE WORKED WITH THE APPLICANT, WE WERE TO THE CITY'S ATTORNEY OFFICE, AND WE WORKED WITH OUTSIDE COUNSEL , AN ANSWER TO THAT WAS YES. OUR COLOSSUS APPLICATION TO BE MADE , THE STATE STATUTE REQUIRES THAT WE REVIEW THIS APPLICATION IN A CERTAIN TIMEFRAME , THE APPLICANT HAS EXTENDED THAT ABILITY ON A NUMBER OF OCCASIONS FULLY AWARE THAT THERE IS ANOTHER PROCESS THAT NEEDS TO BE UNDERTAKEN . IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT THE PLANNING STAFF WANTS TO BE IN FRONT OF HIM BEING PART OF THIS DUAL PROCESS , BUT WHAT WE ARE PRESENTING TODAY IS BASED ENTIRELY AND PURELY ON A PLANNING ANALYSIS OF WHAT YOU SEE BEFORE YOU. THERE IS A CONDITION THAT WE PLACED ON THE ADVICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO REALLY MAKE SURE THAT NOTHING CAN HAPPEN UNTIL THE DEVELOPING AGREEMENT WAS AMENDED OR NOT. IF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IS NOT AMENDED , THAT ALL OF THIS IS MUTE. POLICE WE WENT TO THE

PROCESS. >> GREAT. OKAY. I THINK THAT'S THE PART I WANTED TO MAKE SURE. SPENT A LOT OF TIME MEETING WITH STAFF AND A LOT OF TIME READING THIS, AND MEETING WITH LEGAL, RIGHT? ALL OF THAT STILL DOES NOT LINE UP WITH THE PUBLIC. THAT'S A PUBLIC INTERPRETATION. WE ARE NO DIFFERENT. WE JUST ENCOMPASS OUR STUDYING AND READING THE STUFFING: OUR COLLEAGUES IN OTHER CITIES . I GET TALK TO YOU EVENTUALLY GET IN FRONT OF YOU. I CAN TALK TO ANYBODY ELSE IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA, BUT I GET IT. I AM TO TRY TO BRING THE PUBLIC ALONG JUST WHERE WE ARE AND HAVING THEM, CATCH UP WITH US. WE HAVE A QUANDARY HERE , BUT IN THE LANGUAGE OF THE CONDITIONS , I WILL STOP RIGHT THERE AND WE WILL HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT AND GO FROM THERE. THANK YOU.

>> MADAM MAYOR , I JUST CAN'T, IN GOOD CONSCIENCE, SUGGEST , AND DIRECTOR FREEMAN, THANK YOU FOR THAT INFORMATION AS THE DUAL TRACK. THAT MAKES SENSE AS TO WHY YOUR RECOMMENDATIONS ARE THE WAY THAT THEY ARE. BUT THIS IS A VERY UNIQUE SITUATION.

COMMISSIONER GAINES IS ABSOLUTELY CORRECT THAT THIS IS COMPLETELY BACKWARDS. WE SHOULD BE BROUGHT IN AS THE LAST SIGNATURE TO SAY OKAY, ON THE PRIVATE EXERCISE OF THIS THING, POLICY OR AN AGREEMENT. WE CAN'T ENTERTAIN THAT AS A POSSIBILITY TO DO SO. THIS RECENT LITIGATION. IT JUST

[02:30:01]

I WILL RESPECT THAT DECISION AND SUGGEST THERE ARE A COUPLE OF SUGGESTIONS HERE. ONE IS THAT THE DEVELOPER GET TOGETHER WITH THE MASTERS ASSOCIATION TO DETERMINE IF THERE IS A SOLUTION THAT WILL BE FORTHCOMING, OR IS THIS UTILIZES A LITIGATION TOOL? THAT'S A LITIGATION THING TO ASK DEVELOPERS. THE CITIZENS OF THE CITY BEING USED AS A TOOL WITH PRIVATE LITIGATION, I SIMPLE HAVE NO TOLERANCE FOR.

AT THAT JUNCTURE, I SUPPORT THE AGREEMENT WE HAVE ENTERED INTO UNTIL THE PARTY IS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THIS CAN GET THEIR COLLECTIVE ACTS TOGETHER AND COME BACK SO YOU CAN TABLE YOUR APPLICATION TO 30 DAYS OUT TO SEA IF THERE ARE ANY COOPERATIONS AMONGST THE PARTIES , REVISE YOUR APPLICATION AS YOU DEEM APPROPRIATE TO THE 67 UNITS , OR TRY TO FIND SOME AREA OF COOPERATION IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR PORTION OF THIS . THEN BRING IT BACK HERE TO SAY YES, WE REACHED AGREEMENT. THAT IS WHERE I'M COMING FROM ON THIS.

I DON'T WANT TO SEE THE CITY EMBROILED IN THIS.

>> COMMISSIONER, NEITHER DO I . THIS END OF THE DAIS , THERE ARE NO LAWYERS DON'T HEAR ME AND YOU. WE ARE NOT LAWYERS, RIGHT? IT'S COMMON SENSE. BUT WHAT CONCERNS ME IS WHEN I SPOKE TO OUR LEGAL COUNSEL IS THAT OUTSIDE COUNSEL WAS BROUGHT IN TO GIVE A RENDERING OPINION AND HELP WITH THE SITUATION. WHAT CONCERNS ME IS A LITTLE BIT OPPOSITE OF WHAT YOU SAID. BECAUSE OF OUR CURRENT PROCESS AND CODING, WHERE DOES THAT LEAVE US IF WE DON'T GO THROUGH WITH THE PROCESS? AND THAT IS A CONCERN, AND ONLY LEGAL CAN HELP WITH THAT TO HELP US UNDERSTAND THAT. YOU KNOW, THEY RENDERED AN OPINION AND THEY SUBSEQUENTLY GAVE INFORMATION IN OUR DOCUMENT TO SHOW THE CONDITIONS. CAN YOU PUT THAT UP AS A PART OF THIS? I THINK IT WAS FOUR CONDITIONS THAT TALK SPECIFICALLY, AND I THINK ONE OF THOSE WAS CRAFTED AS A CONDITION THAT WAS EVALUATING THE LEGAL ASPECT HERE OF THE

CURRENT SITUATION YOU ARE IN. >> IT WOULD BE CONDITION ONE,

SIR. >> CONDITION ONE? OKAY. NO SITE CLEARING PERMITS BUILDING SHALL BE ISSUED UNLESS THAT SMACK UNTIL THE UNIT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IS ALLOWED. EVEN SITE

CLEARANCE CANNOT START. >> NO PERFORMANCE.

>> NOW PERMITS, SORRY. OR BUILDING PERMITS. EITHER WAY IT GOES , THIS IS A LEGAL JUGGERNAUT.

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF? ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF? OKAY. I RELATE THE APPLICANT TO COME FORWARD, PLEASE. DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF?

>> AND YOU GET HIS PRESENTATION UP? I THINK IT'S ATTACHED TO

THE AGENDA. THANK YOU. >> I HAVE ONLY ONE QUESTION ABOUT MY PRESENTATION. I HAVE ONLY ONE QUESTION IN THE PRESENTATION. HOW CAN I GO BACK AND FORTH IN HERE?

>> YOU DON'T HAVE TO HIT ANYTHING. YOU CAN KEEP YOUR

FINGER OFF OF IT. >> OKAY, THANK YOU.

>> ARE YOU AWARE OF THE TIME LIMIT?

>> YES. CAN I START? >> NOT YET. DID YOU SAY YOU HAD

A QUESTION FOR THE STUFF? >> I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS

OF STAFF. >> YOUR TIMING HASN'T STARTED.

THANK YOU. ARE YOU READY, LINDA?

>> YES, MA'AM. >> PROCEED.

>> MADAM MAYOR, COMMISSIONERS, THE STUFF, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THIS MEETING. AFTER 10 MONTHS OF WAITING, I AM AFRAID TO PRESENT MY PROJECT CALLED GATOR TRACE TOWNHOUSE ELEMENT.

MY PRESENTATION HAS ABOUT 50 SLIDES , AND A LIMITED TIME.

WILL THIS GIVE SOME OF THE SLIDES VERY FASTLY. THERE IS SOME STUFF I'M SUPPOSED TO SAY AT THE END I WILL SAY AT THE BEGINNING. THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THAT EVERYBODY TRIES TO TIE ME IS NOT IN EFFECT. THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IS NOT IN PLACE. ACCORDING TO FORT A STATUTE 163 3239 , RECORDING

[02:35:05]

WE ALSO HAVE TO PROVIDE TWO PARKING SPACES WITH THREE FOR THE GARAGE. YOU CAN SEE THAT IT'S A STORYTIME HOUSE THREE BEDROOM 2 1/2 BATHROOM ONE CAR GARAGE. THE TOTAL AREA IS 1706, AND TOTAL AREA ON THE LEFT IS 1981 SQUARE FEET. WE JUST SHOW YOU THOSE BEFORE , AND I DON'T WANT TO WASTE YOUR TIME FOR THAT TIME. WE HAVE THE LANDSCAPE BECAUSE OF THE NOVELTY DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENT. WE ALSO HAVE OUR STORM DRAINS ON, OUR WATER SEWER PLANS ARE DONE, WE HAVE DIFFERENT VARIETY OFF THE TRACK TERMS . I JUST SHOW TWO OF THEM IN HERE. AND THIS IS A TRACTOR HAVE TO USE ACCORDING TO OUR FIRE MARSHAL OF THE ECONOMY. THE IMPACT OF THE ELIMINATION OF THE COMMUNITY. I JUST WANT TO MENTION ABOUT THE SEQUENCE IN HERE AS WELL AFTER THE COMPLETION OF THE UNDERGROUND STRUCTURES. HE WILL START WITH BUILDING SIX AND SEVEN THAT WE WILL CONTINUE WITH EIGHT AND NINE AND 10 AND 11, BUILDING 12, BUILDING 23, AND THEN WE WILL HAVE THE LAST STAGE OF THE PROJECT, WHICH IS BUILDING FOUR AND FIVE. JUST RELATED TO THE PUBLIC, IT IS ALL APPROVED. SOME OF THEM APPROVED , SOME OF SECONDS TAKEN ABOUT THE PROJECT. APPLICATION FOR PHASE TWO, 2007, 25 MORE UNITS. WE WOULD LOVE TO HAVE IS NOT COLOSSAL HAVE MENTORING IN FOR YOUR PLUS COMMUNITY . THE

[02:40:03]

THERE'LL BE A THREE $50,000 IN VALUE. THAT'S OVER $7000 VALUE PROPERTY TAX OF THE CITY OR THE COUNTY. ITS PRODUCT OWNS, SO THERE NO EXPENSE FOR THE CITY. IT IS ANSWER THE CHANCELLOR'S QUESTION REGARDING THE SIDEWALK. AT THIS, FROM THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT REGARDING THE SIDEWALK CONNECTION. THE ROAD WAS A PRIVATELY OWNED PROPERTY. THEY LIMITED THEIR COMMENTS, BUT WE NEED TO SELECT THIS, WILL MAKE THE SIDEWALK A PROBLEM. THERE'S NO ADDITIONAL EXPENSE TO THE CITY. THE SHERIFF HAS DENIED TYPE SECURITY PROPERTIES. AS FOR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT ALSO. NOW THAT IS WHERE THE PRESENTATION STARTS. BEFORE HE PURCHASED THE PROPERTY, I CONTACTED THE ZONING DEPARTMENT REGARDING THE ZONING VERIFICATION REQUEST, AND I SPECIFICALLY ASKED IN HERE, IS THERE A MAXIMUM QUALITY UNDER PUD? MANY MAXIMUM RAINING UNITS, WHAT IS THE MAXIMUM NUMBER TO BUILD ON THIS PROPERTY? IT IS 200 SOMETHING PAGES. THERE ARE SOME SITE PLANS FOR THE 2007 , AND I DID NOT GET ANY CLEAR ANSWER TO MY QUESTION FROM THE CITY. SAID SOMETHING TO KEVIN FREEMAN FOR 83 UNITS , AND ABLE TO SIT DOWN WITH HIM INTO THE POSSIBLE AVENUES TO MAKE THIS HAPPEN. HE GAVE ME THREE OPTIONS. OPTION NUMBER ONE, I HAD TO KEEP EVERYTHING IS 67 UNITS. OPTION NUMBER TWO, IF I WANT TO BUILD MORE THAN 67 UNITS, WE HAVE TO MAKE A MAJOR AMENDMENT WITHIN PD NOT EXCEEDING LAND-USE.

NUMBER THREE, IF I'M GETTING DONATIONS FROM ANY OTHER PHASE I NEED TO HEAR FROM THESE OWNERS REGARDING THE DONATION NUMBERS FOR THEM. I DID MY CALCULATION AND EVERYTHING. IF I BUILD 83 UNITS, IS THAT MANY DEVELOPER BILLS 83 UNITS OVER THAT INCLUDING EVERYTHING IN GATOR TRACE, THE MAXIMUM CAPACITY REACHING 3.1 UNIT PER ACRE , MR. KEVIN FREEMAN CALCULATED 3.2 UNITS PER ACRE . THE PROPERTY HAS APPROVED 12 UNITS PER ACRE. THERE IS NO DENSITY PROBLEM IN HERE.

ACCORDING TO THIS EMAIL , MY APPLICATION DOES NOT NEED A DONATION , DOES NOT NEED A REALLOCATION, DESIGNING AN ADDITIONAL AGREEMENT. I CAN GO DIRECT LEAD TO MAJOR AMENDMENT ANY SITE PLAN APPROVAL. THEN, JUST BEFORE OUR MEETING, WE RECEIVED THIS EMAIL FROM THE SAME LOBBYIST WHO ADMITTED THAT THE 2007 SITE PLAN APPROVAL WAS NOT UPLOADED PROPERLY. THAT'S THE SAME UNIT, AND HE IS THE PARTNER OF THE SETTLES. HE SAYS THE CITY CANNOT REALLOCATE THE LOCATION OF MULTIPLE UNITS OF THE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT WITHOUT THE EXPRESS PROPERTY IMPACTED . I AM NOT ASKING ANY DONATION FROM ANYBODY. IN THE CAPACITY IS JUST CLEAR OF THE PUBLIC. IF YOU DEVELOP PURCHASES THE PROPERTY FROM THE OWNER OF THE GOLF CLUB, THIS PROPERTY IS ALLOWED TO BUILD 2600 32 UNITS IN THIS AREA. I KNOW IT WON'T HAPPEN , BUT WE HAVE COMPOSED OF THAT. SO, THE SEPARATION DOES NOT CREATE A DENSITY DEPARTMENT, AND NOTHING IS GREAT IF THERE ANY OTHER DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENTS. AND THIS IS MY SALES CONTRACT. SIGNED BY THE SELLER AND ALSO THE PERSON WHO OBJECTS MY APPLICATION. IT IS CLEARLY STATING THAT AN ADDITIONAL TERMS , WE READ, UNDERSTOOD, AND SIGNED REGARDING MORE THAN 67 TOWNHOME SITE PLAN APPROVAL . THE CONTRACT DOES NOT SAY 67. IT DOES NOT SAY ONLY 67. IT DOES NOT SAY MAXIMUM 67 . CLEARLY MINIMUM 67 UNITS JUST UNDER THAT PARAGRAPH WITH THE RED HIGHLIGHTER WE HAVE , THIS IS INTENDED TO BE A LEGALLY BINDING CONTRACT. IF NOT FULLY UNDERSTOOD, THE ADVICE OF AN ATTORNEY BEFORE SIGNING IT. SEE IN RED, THEY AGREED AND UNDERSTOOD EVERYTHING IN THE CONTRACT, AND HE AGREED FOR ME TO BUILD MORE THAN 67 UNITS.

SINCE THE DEVELOPER AND THE SELLER ARE THE SAME PERSON, THIS PRESENTS ALL PRIDE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS STATED IN 2007, WHICH THEY ALSO ADDED NOT IN PLACE. UPON THE

[02:45:02]

SOMETIME IN THE MIDDLE, THIS DEVELOPER GOT INTO THIS AGREEMENT , AND HE WON THE DEVELOPER TITLE. THESE ARE THE SUCCESSORS TO THE ORIGINAL DEVELOPER IN THE THREE SIMPLE OWNERSHIPS OF THE ESTIMATED PROPERTY , WHICH IS PREDICTED CHAIN OF TITLE. HE GOT ALL OF THE DEVELOPER RIGHTS. I PURCHASED THE PROPERTY WITH THE CHAIN OF TITLE TWO. SO, I AM ANOTHER DEVELOPER IN THE AREA. EVERYBODY AUTOMATICALLY ASSUMES THAT HE STILL CONTROLS 100% OF GATOR TRACE. HE CANNOT. AS A LEGALLY BINDING SALES CONTRACT THAT HE ACCEPTED THE MINIMUM 67. HE ALSO HAS TO TRANSFER ENTIRE ACCESS RIGHTS , ENTIRE RIGHTS OF THE PROPERTY ALONG WITH THE CHANGE OF TITLE . I JUST WANT TO MENTION ONE THING. IT HAS TO BE IN THE PUBLIC RECORDS WITH THIS MEETING IN HERE TODAY. IN 2007, THE SITE PLAN APPROVAL HAD TWO DIFFERENT PHASES. PHASE ONE IS MY PROPERTY , PHASE TWO IS HIS CURRENT PROPERTY. IN PHASE ONE , A PROPOSED 67 UNITS . IF YOU MULTIPLY INTO THE MATH , THAT COMES WITH 9.65 DEVELOPMENT UNITS PER ACRE , WHICH IS LESS THAN 12 UNITS PER ACRE. IF YOU GO TO PHASE TWO , 264 UNITS.

THAT MAKES 15 UNITS PER ACRE , WHICH IS IN VIOLATION OF LOCAL ORDINANCES. YOU CANNOT BUILD MORE THAN UNDERLYING LAND-USE QUANTITY. I'M NOT SAYING OUR PLANNING DIRECTOR SENT ME AN EMAIL. AS LONG AS I KEEP EVERYTHING BY THE LOCAL ORDINANCES, I CAN GO TO 83 UNITS. BUT IN PHASE ONE AND PHASE TWO, THERE'S 15 UNITS PER ACRE. THREE UNITS MORE THAN WHAT THEY CAN BUILD. THERE IS A RUMOR. HE CAME IN HERE, HE WILL DESTROY OUR COMMITTEE. HE IS BUILDING MORE THAN HE IS SUPPOSED TO DO. HE CANNOT GO MORE THAN SIX SEVEN. I'M NOT THE ONE WHO BUILDS EXTRA. I AM DOING A MEETING WITH THE LOCAL COURTS AND ORDINANCES. IF SOMEONE IS BUILDING EXTRA UNITS IN HERE, IT IS PHASE TWO. HE HAS 53 EXTRA UNITS IN HIS APPLICATION. THIS VERY INTERESTING NEWS IN HERE FROM 2002. I WASN'T EVEN LIVING IN THE U.S. AT THAT TIME. THE MOTION COMPLEX VIOLATED RULES . THEY BEGAN TEARING DOWN $3,300,000.00 LUXURY APARTMENT . CONTEXT, THIS WEEK, SEVEN YEARS AFTER NEARBY RESIDENTS SUED THE DEVELOPER FOR BUILDING IN VIOLATION OF LOCAL GRANT RULES , THAT CASE WENT ALL THE WAY UP TO THE SUPREME COURSE AND THE JUDGE REJECTED IT. THE

[02:50:01]

AGAIN, THIS IS LOCAL ORDINANCES. IF SOMEBODY IS TAKING SO MUCH UNIT QUANTITY, DOES NOT BY PROJECT. THIS IS THE HEART OF THIS MEETING. THAT LETTER SHOULD BE THE HEART OF THIS MEETING. THAT LETTER WAS IGNORED, MISSED, OR NEVER SAW DAYLIGHT UNTIL TODAY , AND SENT BY THE SAME ATTORNEY WHO SENT THE REJECTION LETTER TO THE CITY. IT IS DATED NOVEMBER 8TH, 2012. THE AGENCY DEVELOPMENT SENT THIS LETTER TO SEE THE CONDITIONS A DEVELOPER AGREEMENT. THE RESEARCH ITEMS MEANT IN THE AREA , AND THERE ARE SOME ITEMS THAT WERE NEVER STARTED. THIS CONNECTION A SIDEWALK . THEY DO NOT DO THIS JOB. DEVELOPERS PROVIDED BONDS IN THE AMOUNT OF $270-$300.

THEY DO NOT KNOW IF THAT WAS PROVIDED. FINANCES OF THE PROJECT NOT COMPLETED. ALSO, HE IS EVERYTHING AT THE END. THE DEVELOPER REPRESENTS THE SITE PLAN PRESENTED BY THE SCHOOL BOARD -- ANSARI, THE DEVELOPER TO SIZE OF THE SITE PLANS THAT I CANNOT SEE THIS. I DID NOT WRITE THIS UNKNOWN. THE LAWYER WROTE UNKNOWN. THE PROJECT THAT WE ARE TRYING TO BE TIED TO WAS NEVER REVIEWED BY THE FIRE DEPARTMENT. THIS IS A LIFE-SAVING ISSUE. HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE'S LIVES ARE IN JEOPARDY IN HERE, AND I'M TRYING TO TRY FOR SOMETHING THAT IS NOT ONLY ACTIVE, BUT DANGEROUS. IN THE LAST PARAGRAPH OF THIS EMAIL , HE ADMITS THAT THE DEVELOPER AGREEMENT WAS NEVER TO BE RECORDED , AND FOR THE STATUTE SAYS IF IT IS NOT FULLY RECORDED , IF IT IS NOT FULLY RECORDED IN 14 DAYS , IT IS NOT EFFECTIVE UNTIL IT IS PROPERLY RECORDED. SO, IT'S NOT ONLY NOT RECORDED , IT IS ALSO INCOMPLETE. THEY DO NOT COMPLETE THE CRITERIA IN HERE. THERE ARE A LOT OF DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS WITH A PLAN TO DO. NOT JUST FOR THE PROPERTY TO PURCHASE IT THROUGH THE FIRST BUILDING I HAVE COMPLETE IT.

THEY FINISHED THE FIRST BUILDING AND THEY STOPPED. IT HAS BEEN OVER 10 YEARS LATER. MAYBE CLOSE TO 15 YEARS, SOMETHING LIKE THAT. SENT AN EMAIL. IT WAS REGARDING WHAT THE NEXT STEP WAS , AND HE REPLIED TO ME THAT THE DEVELOPERS AGREEMENT SEPARATE FROM THE SITE PLAN APPROVED. WE GOT TO GET THAT DONE TODAY, AND ACCORDING TO HIS EMAIL, I HAVE TO SIT DOWN WITH THE SELLER AND AGREE FOR THE INCREASE OF UNITS. I DID NOT MAKE THIS PATH. I'M JUST FOLLOWING WHAT I HAVE BEEN TOLD. I HAVE BEEN WAITING FOR ALMOST SEVEN MONTHS A YEAR JUST TO APPEAR BEFORE YOU. SO, OUR PLANNING DEPARTMENT, ALL OF US IS TAKING YOUR SITE PLAN APPROVAL TO GO BACK AND SIT DOWN WITH THEM AND SHE'S THE DEVELOPERS AGREEMENT. BUT WHAT IF YOU DID WITH THE SELLER IS NOT EFFECTIVE. IS IT JUST DOCUMENTS THAT EVERYBODY DISCUSSED IN THESE FOUR WALLS. THE PUBLIC DOES NOT KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT THIS DEAL. IF I PURCHASE ANY OF YOUR PROPERTIES FROM YOU , IF YOU DON'T RECORD ITS, MY MONEY WILL GO DOWN TO THE GARBAGE , BECAUSE I AM NOT OFFICIALLY BUYING IT FROM YOU. IT'S NOT RECORDED. THIS AGREEMENT IS THE SAME. IT WAS NEVER DULY RECORDED. IS NOT EFFECTIVE. SUMMARY, I WILL ALSO BE ASKED -- I AM SORRY. OUTSIDE COUNSEL IS RECOMMENDING THIS PROCESS TO US . WHEN I HEARD THE CONCLUSION ABOUT THIS, I WAS REALLY DISAPPOINTED, AND ASKED HER, WHAT IS USEFUL TO DOCUMENT THE REVIEW? SHE NEVER RECEIVED THESE 2012 EMAILS. THAT THING WAS JUST NEVER SENT TO HER. IF IT WAS SENT TO HER , I AM SO HER JUDGMENT AND CONCLUSION WOULD BE COMPLETELY DIFFERENT , BECAUSE WE ARE TALKING FOR SOME THAT IS NOT EVEN EFFECTIVE.

>> IS THAT HIS TIME? >> THAT IS TIME.

>> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YOU JUST MADE IT! COMMISSIONERS, QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT?

>> I DO HAVE A QUESTION. I AM GOING TO ASSUME BY YOUR INITIAL

[02:55:03]

>> YES, SIR. >> OKAY. THERE ARE NOSE DISCUSSIONS TAKEN WITH THOSE TWO PARTIES, ONLY WITH THE CITY. YOUR ENTIRE APPLICATION HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE MASTERS ASSOCIATION, EVERYTHING IS PREDICATED ON CITY PROCESS.

>> MASTER ASSOCIATION DOES NOT HAVE ANYTHING ON THE APPLICATION, WHICH IS ADMITTED AS WELL. ONLY THE DEVELOPER HAS SOMETHING REGARDING HIS APPLICATION, AND HIS FORCE WAS

DEVELOPERS AGREEMENT . >> I RESPECT YOUR POSITION. I DON'T NECESSARILY AGREE WITH THAT IN ITS ENTIRETY, BUT YOU HAVE ANSWERED MY QUESTION. THANK YOU.

>> OTHER QUESTIONS? >> MADAM MAYOR , LET ME BE CLEAR ON THIS. SO, YOU ARE HERE GIVING TESTIMONY. THIS IS A QUASIJUDICIAL HEARING ON THIS PROCESS. SO, OUR PROCESS IS WE ARE SITTING HERE AND LOOKING AT EVIDENCE THAT YOU ARE SUBMITTING. YOUR TESTIMONY HERE IS THAT THIS WAS NOT RECORDED IN THOSE RECORDS. DO YOU HAVE DOCUMENT TATIAN TO SHOW THAT OR A LETTER FROM AN ATTORNEY OR JUDICIAL SHOWING THAT? -- I CANNOT. HE ADMITTED THAT IT WAS NEVER DULY RECORDED. WHAT IS

THAT ADMISSION AGAIN? >> 2012 EMAIL HE SENT TO THE CITY AFTER THE PART OF THE PROPERTY IN 2012. HE SENT THIS EMAIL TO THE CITY. THEY SAY IN AN EFFORT TO DETERMINE THE STATUS OF THE ORIGIN OF DEVELOPERS OF LITIGATION UNDER THE DEVELOPERS AGREEMENT -- I'M SORRY? THE USE THAT TO TIME THAT ORIGINAL BUILDING THE FIRST TIME ANOTHER ONE, CROSS-SECTION OF THE SIDEWALK NOT COMPLETED. DOUBLE EFFORT TO PROVIDE BONDING EFFORTS FOR $227,000.00. I DON'T WANT TO TAKE YOUR TIME. LAST ONE. A BUILDING PARAGRAPH. IT'S CLEARLY STATING IN HERE, I AM NOT STATING THIS. HERE.

OUTSTANDING, PLEASE NOTE THAT THE DEVELOPERS AGREEMENT WAS NEVER DULY RECORDED. AND IF WE CANNOT FIND SOMETHING NOT RECORDED, IT IS NOT RECORDING. I CANNOT SHOW YOU THE PROOF.

>> THANK YOU FOR 20. WHO IS THIS FROM AGAIN HERE?

>> THIS IS FROM THE PARTNER . STEVE SIGNED THE SALES AGREEMENT WITH ME. , AND THEN RICHARD WARREN IS HIS ATTORNEY AND HIS LAWYER. I'M SORRY. HIS ATTORNEY AND HIS PARTNER.

>> THIS IS IS AN ATTORNEY? OKAY.? HIS ATTORNEY AND HIS

PARTNER. >> OKAY, THANK YOU.

>> MADAM MAYOR? >> YES, SIR?

>> WOULD YOU GO TO SIGN NUMBER 11 PLEASE? SCROLL DOWN, RIGHT THERE. YOU WROTE IN YOUR PRESENTATION TWO PARCELS TOTAL IS INNOVATIVE DEVELOPMENT . SO, WHAT IS INNOVATIVE ABOUT THIS

PROJECT? >> TO BE HONEST WITH YOU, NO ONE GIVE ME A DEFINITIVE ANSWER ON THAT ONE.

>> IN YOUR PROFESSIONAL OPINION, WHAT IS THAT?

>> SOME ADDITIONAL AMENITIES THAT NOT EVERY DEVELOPER -- THAT EVERY REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT PROPERTY HAS TO HAVE THE FITNESS PATH , SOME KIDS PLAYGROUNDS, SOMETHING

[03:00:02]

BUILD MY STUFF. >> OKAY, AND I THANK YOU FOR THAT. IN THIS ANALYSIS IN THE FUTURE LAND USE, WHAT YOU REFERENCED A NUMBER OF TIMES, COULD YOU ZOOM IN ON THE TABLE THAT IS ON THE TOP PLEASE? OKAY, THAT IS GOOD. THAT IS OUR ZONING, AND IT LOOKS LIKE TO ME , DOES YOUR MAJOR SITE PLAN A MINUTE FOLLOW THE SITE PLAN QUALIFICATIONS OF THE STABLE?

>> YES, SIR. >> OKAY. WHAT IS THE EXISTING APPROVAL, AND WHAT IS EVACUATION?

>> 9.63 UNITS PER ACRE FOR MY PROPERTY, 16 UNITS PER ACRE FOR PHASE TWO, WHICH IS VIOLATION OF THE LOCAL ORDINANCES. IF I COMBINE THEM, IT'S STILL ALL OVER THE CURRENT ALLOWED DENSITY. IS 13.65 UNITS PER ACRE. SO, THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IS COMPLETELY IN VIOLATION OF THE LOCAL GROWTH ROOTS. YOU CANNOT BUILD ANYTHING IN HERE. DOES NOT MATTER IF YOU CALL YOURSELF A DEVELOPER, OR YOU CALL YOURSELF A GOD. NONE OF THESE PEOPLE CAN DO THIS. THIS IS 12 UNITS PER ACRE. IF SOMEBODY TRIES TO BUILD THAT AND MORE THAN 12 UNITS PER ACRE, SUPREME COURT IS WAITING FOR YOU. IT'S NOT FOR THEM ONLY, IS FOR EVERYBODY.

>> THANK YOU FOR THAT. I AM BEING SINCERE WHEN I SAY THIS , BECAUSE YOU HAVE COME TO THIS COMMISSION A NUMBER OF TIMES.

YOU AND I HAVE MET INDIVIDUALLY, AND YOU HAVE A LOT OF PASSION AND EXCITEMENT ABOUT THE PROJECTS. SO, I APPRECIATE THAT. I SAY WITH A SMILE BECAUSE I MEAN IT. AT THE SAME TIME HOWEVER, MY POSITION IS VERY CRITICAL THAT WE UNDERSTAND WHAT OUR RULES IN RESPONSE ABILITIES ARE AS YOU HAVE INDICATED , AND IT IS WANT TO KNOW THE SIMPLEST OF QUESTIONS. WHY NOT JUST GO WITH THE 67 THAT IS ALREADY APPROVED? WHEN I HAVE TO COME HERE, YOU WOULD NOT HAVE HAD A LATE 10 MONTHS, YOU WOULD'VE ALREADY HAD A PROJECT, YOU WOULD'VE ALREADY BUILT IT. YOU PROBABLY WOULD HAVE ALREADY HAD A SEAL ON 30, 40, MAYBE 67 BY NOW. WHY?

>> BECAUSE I HAVE MY RIGHTS. >> SURE YOU DO.

>> GIVEN TO ME BY THE LOCAL ORDINANCES.

>> OF COURSE. >> AND I AM USING EVERY LAST

DROP OF IT. >> RIGHT. BECAUSE THESE TABLES ARE VERY SPECIFIC , DO YOU AGREE, IN YOUR PROFESSIONAL OPINION, THE TABLES SUCH AS THIS HAVE A RANGE OF DWELLING

UNITS PER ACRE? >> YES.

>> AND YOU HAVE ASKED FOR THE RIGHT-HAND SIDE .

>> ALWAYS. >> ALWAYS, RIGHT?

>> I AM ALSO A DEVELOPER. >> YOU ARE WHAT?

>> I'M A REAL ESTATE DEVELOPER , SO WE NEED TO HAVE THE MAXIMUM ALLOWED NUMBERS ON THE PROPERTIES. SOMETIMES WE HAD TO NEGOTIATE WITH THE CITY'S GIVE AND TAKE. BUT IN THIS CASE , I NEVER HAD THIS CHANCE. I WAS ALWAYS STOP BY SOME EMAIL, BY SOME LETTER , I WAS KICKED OUT OF THE MEETING, I NEVER HAD THE

CHANCE TO COME BEFORE YOU. >> AND HERE YOU ARE.

>> THANK YOU. >> ALL RIGHT. AND WE APPRECIATE YOU COMING. OKAY. IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE YOU CAN SHARE WITH ME? IN MY ANALYSIS , AND OUR ANALYSIS LISTENING TO A TESTIMONY FROM STAFF, LISTENING TO TESTIMONY OF OTHER APPLICATIONS , YOUR APPLICATION, THE CONVERSATION WITH YOU, THE CONVERSATION WITH THE COMMUNITY, TELL ME WHY SHOULD WE APPROVE 12 UNIT DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE OTHER THAN SAYING I JUST WANT TO MAXIMIZE IT? WHAT IS THE

REASON? >> I KNOW A LOT OF LOCAL RESIDENTS , FOR EXAMPLE, RECENTLY LAST MONTH, THE INCREASE THE MAINTENANCE FEE OF THE HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION FEES BY 25 OR $40.00, SOMETHING LIKE THAT, AND EVERYONE IS COMBINING ABOUT THE INCREASE. IF THEY WANT TO LOWER THE HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION FEE, THEY NEED MORE RESIDENCE IN THE AREA.

>> LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, YOU CAN SAY THAT WHENEVER IT IS

YOUR TIME TO SAY IT. OKAY? >> ALSO, YOU KNOW, THE ECONOMY IS MUCH BETTER FOR EVERYBODY. EACH UNIT WILL GIVE YOU THE $500.00 ANY PROPERTY TAXES ANNUALLY. 60 UNITS MAKE A LOT OF MONEY . IT'S GOING TO PAY A LOT OF SALARY OF THE CITY AND THE COUNTY. I AM NOT DOING THIS ALL FOR MYSELF ONLY. NOBODY WILL IS OUT OF THAT ONE. I'M NOT BUILDING A SINGLE UNIT EXTRA BY LAW. BUT THERE IS A 50 3X UNIT ON THE OTHER SIDE . IF THE BUSINESS IS QUESTIONING SOMETHING, THEY SHOULD QUESTION THE OTHER SIDE. ON MY SIDE. I'M TRYING TO MAXIMIZE ECONOMICS FOR EVERYBODY. NOT FOR MY APARTMENT ONLY. IF I WAS THE BAD GUY IN HERE , I WOULD PAY $5,400,000.00 AND TURN THIS PLACE TO --. I WOULD ALTERNATELY FIVE UNITS AND ONE

[03:05:01]

MONTHS TO RESEARCH TO FIND OUT . I'M FINALLY GLAD I FOUND OUT THE PAPER. THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THAT I AM TRYING TO BE TIGHT IN IS NOT THE PLACE. THERE IS A 225 UNIT AVAILABLE, 350 UNIT AVAILABLE, WHATEVER THE NUMBER IS, IT SHOULD BE FIRST COME FIRST SERVE , AND THE REMAINING TAKEN BY ANYONE

ELSE WILL MAXIMIZE MY UNIT. >> AND SO, I AM STILL LEFT WONDERING IF THERE IS A DEVELOPERS AGREEMENT THAT IS NOT VALID , BUT THERE IS A DEVELOPERS AGREEMENT THAT WAS NOT STATED IN CLEARLY STATED IN THE PUBLIC RECORD WITHIN THE CONFINES OF THE PUD APPLICATION IN 2007. IT'S ON THE PUBLIC RECORD. THE RESIDENTS KNOW ALL ABOUT IT. TO BE DETERMINED ON THE FILING, OKAY? YOU ARE SAYING YOU CAN'T FIND IT.

OKAY, VERY GOOD. BUT TALK TO ME ABOUT THE CONDITIONS, I'M NOT WORRIED ABOUT THE FLORIDA STATUTE. I LIKE TO FOLLOW THE WILL OF IT, AND THAT IS OKAY. SO DO YOU, OBVIOUSLY. BUT TALK TO ME ABOUT THE CONDITIONS OF THE DEVELOPERS AGREEMENT. WERE YOU IN THE ROOM THE LAST APPLICATION THAT CAN BEFORE US TONIGHT? DID YOU LISTEN TO THE COMMENTS COMING FROM THE COMMISSION ON THE PREVIOUS APPLICATION? TONIGHT?

>> YES. >> OKAY. YOU HEARD US GETTING INTO PUBLIC AMENITIES, PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY , ACCESS POINTS,

SAFETY POINTS. >> YES.

>> SO, FREE TO BRING FORTH AN INNOVATIVE DEVELOPMENT, MY QUESTION TO YOU IS, YOU SAY YOU ARE, I SAY, OKAY, I AM LISTENING , AND I'M LISTENING INTENTLY. THERE IS A DEVELOPERS AGREEMENT THAT WAS NOT FILED. HOWEVER, THERE WERE CONDITIONS CLEARLY STATED IN THE PUBLIC RECORD. WHEN I BRING FORWARD SOME OF THOSE PORTIONS OR A PORTION OF THOSE STATED DEVELOPER AGREEMENT CONDITIONS IN YOUR APPLICATION TO PUT IT

OVER THE TOP? >> I UNDERSTAND. I AM READY TO DO WHATEVER WE ARE SUPPOSED TO DO WITH THE CURRENT DEVELOPER AND ME. WHATEVER WAS PROMISED IN 2007 TO THE CITY, AND WHATEVER IS NOT DONE, I WILL DO MY FAIR SHARE ALONG WITH THE UNIQUE QUANTITIES THAT WE HAVE. WHATEVER MY PORTION IS, I AM READY TO PAY THE COMPLETE MISSING ITEMS IN THAT DEVELOPERS AGREEMENT. IF YOU NEEDED TO BUILD A CYCLE, A FOUR-WAY STOP SIGN, IF YOU NEED TO DO THIS END, WHATEVER THAT IS. EVEN IF IT IS NOT RECORDED, I WANT THAT TO BE IN THE PUBLIC

RECORDS OVER TIME. >> IS IN THE PUBLIC RECORD.

>> IF I'M TAKING THIS AS A REFERENCE, IF A PROJECT IS PROMISED, IF A PRODUCT WAS PROMISED TO THE CITY FOR SOME ITEMS THAT WE HAVE TO COMPLETE, I'M READY TO COMPLETE THEM.

BUT THE OTHER DEVELOPER HAS TO SPEND MONEY AS WELL. WHATEVER HIS UNIT NUMBER, WHATEVER IT WAS, WE NEED TO DO THE MATH. I AM READY TO PAY MY FAIR SHARES. INCOMPLETE ALL THESE MISSING ITEMS IN THE DEVELOPERS AGREEMENT. EXCEPT COMPLETION OF HIS BUILDINGS. BECAUSE EVERYTHING HERE THAT THEY PROMISED TO COMPLETE THOSE BUILDINGS BY CERTAIN DATES.

ONLY THE REST WAS NOT COMPLETED, ONLY ONE IS COMPLETE. I BELIEVE IT WAS 2012. AND 12 YEARS , IN THE LAST 12 YEARS, HE DID NOT PUT A SINGLE NAIL AFTER HE COMPLETED THE FIRST BUILDING. NOTHING WAS DONE. AND ACCORDING TO THIS DEVELOPER AGREEMENT, I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU PROMISED THE CITY AND NOT COMPLETED AND STILL NOT BE RESPONSIBLE OF THESE PROMISES. THERE MUST BE SOME CONSEQUENCES ON THAT ONE. I DON'T KNOW, PUTTING SOME VIOLATIONS ON THE PROJECT OR DOING SOMETHING, HE NEEDS TO MOVE FORWARD! YOU CANNOT JUST BUY THE PROPERTY AND WAIT FOR SOMEBODY, YOU KNOW, TO MAKE HUGE PROFIT OFF OF THIS PROPERTY. IF YOU'RE DOING THE DEVELOPER AGREEMENT, YOU NEED TO KEEP YOUR PROMISES IN THE DEVELOPERS AGREEMENT. IF YOU ARE NOT KEEPING YOUR PROMISES IN THE DEVELOPER AGREEMENT AND 12 YEARS , WE ARE NOT TALKING IN 12 MONTHS, BUT IN 12 YEARS, YOU CANNOT ENFORCE A PORTION OF THIS TO SOMEBODY, AND STILL KEEP YOURSELF NOT RESPONSIBLE OUT OF THESE PROMISES. TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, I AM READY TO COMPLETE WHATEVER IS IN THIS AGREEMENT ON MY FAIR

SHARE. >> OKAY. THANK YOU FOR THAT.

THAT IS THE FIRST TIME I EVER THAT. THAT IS THE FIRST TIME I HAVE HEARD IT. I WILL JUST LEAVE IT AT THAT. SO, I THINK THAT IS A COMPONENT OF TONIGHT'S CONVERSATION , BECAUSE IT IS GOING TO BE VERY DIFFICULT FOR ME TO VOTE SPECIFICALLY ON CONDITIONS , AND I'M BEING VERY CLEAR WITH YOU , BECAUSE I THINK THAT WE SHOULD BE , AND I THINK YOU

[03:10:01]

NEED THAT IN WRITING SOMEHOW. >> DO YOU HAVE WHITE PAPER?

>> WE WILL TALK ABOUT THAT IN A FEW MINUTES. I LET MY OTHER

COMMISSIONERS TALK. >> I'M READY.

>> THANK YOU. >> MADAM MAYOR, I AM NOT SURE , I WAS TRAINED TO FIND WHAT THE NOISE WAS AS WELL.

>> NOW AT A STOP. >> YES, MA'AM.

>> OKAY. SORRY, THERE WAS A NOISE. COMMISSIONER GAINES, DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING FOR THE APPLICANT? OKAY. I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING NOW. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> MADAM MAYOR, THANK YOU. >> WE WILL CALL YOU BACK UP AT THE END FOR YOU TO ANSWER ANYTHING THAT YOU THINK NEEDS ANSWERING. OKAY? ALL RIGHT. ANYONE ELSE, PLEASE COME FORWARD . IF YOU HAVE SEVERAL PEOPLE, IF YOU GET ALONG IN THE LINE OVER THERE , COME ON FORWARD. ALL RIGHT? STATE YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS. YOU WILL HAVE THREE MINUTES, AND MS. COX WILL TIME YOU, AND SHE WILL GIVE YOU A THREE SECOND

WARNING. >> I WILL ASK YOU SAY WHETHER

OR NOT IF YOU ARE SWORN. >> YES, THANK YOU, SIR. THANK

YOU, SIR. >> MY NAME IS MY EXCELLENT SKI.

111 ORANGE AVENUE. READY? OKAY. I AM SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF STEVE TARR, WHO IS OUT OF TOWN TODAY. I WOULD LIKE TO READ INTO THE RECORD A LETTER FROM HIS ATTORNEY TO THE CITY ATTORNEY FROM FRIDAY, WHICH PREVIOUSLY MAILED TO EACH ONE OF YOU. AS YOU KNOW, I REPRESENT GATOR TRACE ONE, LLC, COMMISSIONER BRODERICK, LLC, AND COMMISSIONER GAINES, LLC.

IT IS COME TO MY TENDON THAT THE CITY HAS DECIDED THAT MAC I

AM SORRY. OH, MAN. >> PROPOSE?

>> IS A LEGAL TERM. >> PROPER MAYBE?

>> THE SITE PLAN APPROVED DEVELOPERS AGREEMENT AS IT RELEASED ON THE GREENS. LLC MAJOR SAY PLAN AGREEMENTS OF EXISTING PUD FOR GATOR TRADES. PLEASE BE ADVISED THAT MY CLIENTS PRINCIPAL WILL BE OUT-OF-STATE ON MONDAY, MAY 6 , 2024. THEREFORE, UNABLE TO ATTEND THE HEARING SCHEDULED FOR THAT DATE. PLEASE CONSIDER THIS LETTER AN OBJECTION TO THE CITY'S POSITION FOR THE ABOVE REFERENCED ISSUES AN OBJECTION TO THE PETITIONER'S APPLICATION FOR A MAJOR SITE PLAN AMENDMENT AND FINAL PLAY OF APPROVAL. MAYBE THE PETITIONER NOR COUNSELOR HAS CONDUCTED THAT HAS CONTACTED MY CLIENT OR ME TO ADDRESS THE ISSUES RELATED TO THE IMPACT OF THE PETITIONER'S DEVELOPMENT ON THE GATOR TRADES COMMUNITY. THE INSTRUCTION PROCESS WITH RESPECT TO CONSTRUCTION ISSUES INGRESS AND EGRESS TO THE CONSTRUCTION SITE. MY CLIENTS PREDECESSOR RECEIVED SAY PLAN APPROVAL FOR ITS DEVELOPMENT WITH THE GATOR TRACE COMMUNITY. THE CITY MANDATED THAT DEVELOPMENT THAT THE DEVELOPER ENTER INTO DEVELOPERS AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY TO ADDRESS CONSTRUCTION ISSUES IN INGRESS AND EGRESS AS PART OF THE APPROVAL PROCESS. WHEN MY CLIENTS EXCEEDED THE INTEREST OF THE ORIGINAL DEVELOPER AND TOOK OVER THE CONSTRUCTION , THE CITY FURTHER MANDATED THAT MY CLIENTS COMPLY WITH THE DEVELOPERS AGREEMENT. THE PETITIONER'S APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN AMENDMENT FILED A PLANT APPROVAL TO ADDRESS THE PLANS OF THE DEVELOPER AGREEMENT AND ITS CONDITIONS TO THE APPROVAL. THE ISSUES WILL ONLY BE TO CONFUSION WITH POTENTIAL CONFLICT. PLEASE KNOW MY CLIENTS OBJECTION FOR THIS RECORDING ON MAY 6, 2024 HEARING. THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. YOU ALSO ADDED IN SUMMARY THE CITIES OUTSIDE COUNSEL HAS DETERMINED THAT THE DEVELOPERS AGREEMENT MUST BE A HERETIC. THE ISSUE OF CHANGING THE DEVELOPERS AGREEMENT PARTICULARLY DENSITY REQUIREMENT MEANT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND MYSELF, NOT THE APPLICATION , THUS, IT IS OUR POSITION THAT THIS MUST BE CHANGED BEFORE THE COMMISSION ADDRESSES ANY

CHANGES -- >> THANK YOU, SIR. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. JUST UNDER THE WIRE. YES, SIR. THANK YOU.

>> I WAS SWORN IN. >> THANK YOU, SIR.

>> MY NAME IS ROBERT WHITE, 4055, FORT PIERCE. I HAVE TWO

[03:15:01]

THEY WANT TO GO AWAY IN THE NEXT FEW YEARS, AND THE CITY, I THINK, IS GOING TO GET WHACKED WITH THE QUESTION WHY WOULD YOU EVEN LET A HOUSING COMMUNITY GO INTO THIS AREA THAT GETS HIT WITH HUNDREDS OF GOLF BALLS EVERY YEAR. THAT IS ONE THING.

THE OTHER THING IS I AM CONCERNED ABOUT THE PLAYGROUNDS, THE PERSONAL PROPERTY, THE KIDS, THE SIDEWALKS. THE SIDEWALKS, AGAIN, ARE NOT GOING TO STOP FLYING OVER HERE. THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE THERE, THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BE HAPPY ABOUT THE WINDOWS BEING BROKEN, THE CARS BEING DENTED, KIDS BEING HIT BY GOLF BALLS, AND THE GOLFERS ARE CONCERNED THAT SOME RESIDENT MIGHT COME CHASING AFTER HIM OR HER WITH SOMETHING THAT WILL LEAD TO VIOLENCE. AND AGAIN , THAT IS MY CONCERN WITH THE CITY AS TO WHY YOU WOULD EVEN CONSIDER PUTTING HOUSES THERE. AND AGAIN, THERE ARE MANY HOUSES ON GOLF COURSES I NEVER GET HIT. I HAPPEN TO LIVE IN A HOUSE ON A GOLF COURSE THAT GETS IT. I TRIED TO PROTECT IT IS MUCH AS I COULD , BUT I STILL GET HIT . THIS PARTICULAR AREA YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT IS RIPE FOR GETTING HITS DAILY.

AND LIKE I SAID, I AM CONCERNED ABOUT MY SAFETY , AND CONCERNED ABOUT THE SAFETY OF THE PEOPLE WHO BUY THEIR HOUSES , AND THE DEVELOPER SAYS, YOU KNOW, YOU LOOK FOR RESPONSIBILITY 10, 12 YEARS DOWN THE ROAD, THEY WILL BE GONE. BUT THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE THERE ARE GOING TO BE DEALING WITH THE CONSEQUENCES OF THESE. I DON'T KNOW IF ANY OF YOU PLAY GOLF, BUT BY GOLLY, IF YOU GET HIT BY A GOLF BALL, YOU NEVER FORGET. OR IF YOUR CAR GETS HIT, OR YOUR WINSHIELD GETS HIT .

>> THANK YOU, SIR. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> I APPRECIATE THE TIME. >> WHO IS NEXT?

>> HI. I HAVE BEEN SWORN IN. MY NAME IS. SCOTT. I WOULD LIKE TO REFERENCE BACK TO THE DOG PARK. IF ANYBODY OWNS A DOG OR IF ANYBODY READS ANYTHING ABOUT DOG PARKS , THEY ARE THE MOST DANGEROUS PLACE YOU CAN TAKE YOUR DOG . DEATH, MAIMING , INFECTIONS, DISEASES. YOU CAN ASK THE DOGS AND CATS FOREVER FOLK IF YOU NEED MORE DETAIL. THEY ARE HORRIBLE AND SHOULD NOT BE PART OF ANY COMMUNITY. NUMBER TWO, I KNOW WE ARE NOT A 55 ABOVE COMMUNITY, BUT THERE ARE NO CHILDREN THAT LIVE IN GATOR TRACE. MY CHILDREN, I MEAN CHILDREN MIDDLE SCHOOL AND YOUNGER. WE HAVE HAD AN OCCASIONAL HIGH SCHOOLER. I KNOW OF TWO TO LIVE IN ALL OF GATOR TRACE. THERE ARE NO AMENITIES FOR CHILDREN. THERE IS NO LIFEGUARDS AT THE POOL .

THERE IS THE FILTH, CHURCH, AND NOISE OF ALL THIS CONSTRUCTION AMONG THE MAJORITY OF PEOPLE THAT LIVE THERE THAT ARE SENIOR CITIZENS. TO OUR KNOWLEDGE , AS OWNERS, THERE IS NO EGRESS FOR THIS CONSTRUCTION THAT IS BEEN APPROVED YET. SO, ARE YOU GOING TO FLY HELICOPTERS AND DROP EVERYTHING DOWN? THERE IS NO EGRESS. THE LOSS OF GREEN SPACE IN THE ANIMAL HABITAT IS MUTE AT THIS POINT, BECAUSE YOU APPROVED THE 63 OR WHATEVER THE NUMBER IS , BUT IT IS KIND OF SAD. THERE ARE MULTIPLE BODIES OF OPEN MORTAR ALL THROUGH GATOR TRACE. WE WILL HAVE A FLOATING CHILD. WE'VE ALREADY HAD A FLOATING ADULT. IT IS NOT SAFE. MAYBE IF THEY LOOK AT AGES, THAT MIGHT BE SOME CONSIDERATION. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.

[03:20:03]

>> THANK YOU, MA'AM. ANYONE ELSE? ANYONE ELSE? ANYONE ELSE?

OKAY. >> MY NAME IS SCOTT GODFREY.

ARIZONA 4103 . OKAY. MY ITEMS OF INTEREST CONCERN THE ENVIRONMENT STUDY DONE FOR THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO ONLY IDENTIFY GO FOR TURTLES REQUIRING MITIGATION. RESIDENTS KNOW FROM EXPERIENCE THAT THERE ARE SPECIES PROTECTED BY U.S.

AND FLORIDA LAW. SANDHILL CRANES AND FLORIDA ALLIGATORS , WHICH USE SAID PROPERTY FOR BREEDING AND HABITAT. THE VISUAL STUDY WAS DONE PRIOR TO THE APPLICATION FOR ADDITIONAL UNITS. WE WOULD REQUEST A NEW, MORE COMPLEX STUDY. IN REGARDS TO TRAFFIC, ACCORDING TO THE CITY, THE ADDITIONAL UNITS AT 100+ TRIPS , TALKING ONLY THE ADDITIONAL UNITS , ADD 100+ TRIPS DAILY , AND ONLY MEASURED DURING THE HIGH TRAFFIC PERIODS. THERE IS NO INDICATION THAT THE NUMBER OF PEDESTRIANS, GOLF CART USE WAS INCLUDED IN THE STUDY. WE REQUEST A REVISED STUDY BE DONE BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION. I WOULD QUESTION THE LACK OF A BONDS RECORDED FOR REPAIR OF THE ROADS RESULTING FROM CONSTRUCTION VEHICLES , AND SHOULD -- I'M SORRY, SHOULD REQUIRE SIDEWALK CONSTRUCTION ANYWHERE ALONG THE PATH OF THE CONSTRUCTION VEHICLES WHERE SIDEWALKS DON'T CURRENTLY EXIST. I HAVE ONE FINAL ITEM. THE HEARING IN FRONT OF THE PLANNING BOARD 911 23 CONTAIN CERTAIN IRREGULARITIES. THE CHAIRMAN BEGAN BY RECOMMENDING THIS PROJECT BEFORE ANY COMMENTS WERE MADE. PEOPLE ON THE PLANNING BOARD , KNOWING THAT THE CHAIRMAN LIVES IN GATOR TRACE MAY BELIEVE THAT HE EVER PRESENTED THE REPRESENT RESIDENCE FEELINGS. WE BELIEVE HE SHOULD HAVE RECUSED HIMSELF IN REGARDS TO THAT. ALSO, AS PRESIDENT OF THE MASTER BOARD ASSOCIATION FOR GATOR TRACE, SAID COMMISSIONER TRY TO OFFER THE CONTRACTOR A DEAL THAT ANY DAMAGE TO THE ROADS CAUSED BY HEAVY EQUIPMENT WOULD BE PAID DULY. WE THINK IT SHOULD ONLY BE PAID BY THE DEVELOPER AND THE CONSTRUCTION COMPANY. IN REGARDS TO THAT, SAID COMMISSIONER WAS REMOVED FROM HIS POSITION AS PRESIDENT OF THE GATOR TRACE MASTERS ASSOCIATION. SIMPLY PUT, WE ASK THAT YOU TAKE A STEP BACK AND ASK THE STAFF TO TAKE A CLOSER LOOK , ESPECIALLY AT THE DENSITY OF THE PROJECT , AND HOW DIFFERENT THAT IS FROM THE REST OF THE GATOR TRACE COMMITTEE. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU, SIR. ANYONE ELSE? ANYONE ELSE? ARE YOU SWORN IN,

SIR? >> YES, MA'AM, I WAS BORN IN.

MY NAME IS ROBBIE CRESSWELL. ACTUALLY, I AM THE PRESIDENT OF GARDEN HILLS H AWAY. I'M BEFORE YOU TONIGHT ON BEHALF OF SOME OF THE RESIDENCE OF GARDEN VILLAS. THEY ARE CONCERNED WITH A FEW ISSUES THAT THESE UNITS THAT ARE BEING BUILT , MOST OF THEM ARE GOING TO BE FAMILY OR HAVE A LOT OF KIDS. THE DISCUSSION OF THE SIDEWALK ON THE ROAD WAS BROUGHT UP EARLIER, BUT ALSO, WHETHER THERE IS NO SIDEWALK THERE IF KIDS ARE WALKING TO SCHOOL OR WALKING DOWN TO CATCH THE BUS, BECAUSE OUR ROADS ARE PRIVATE. SO, SCHOOL BUSES ARE NOT ALLOWED ON THEM. SO, THAT BECOMES AN ISSUE. SO, LIKE I SAID, THE BRINGS UP THE DEMOGRAPHICS . PROBABLY ABOUT 80% OF THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN GATOR TRACE ARE RETIRED. MOST ARE GOLFERS. SO HERE, WE ARE GOING TO BRING IN A BUNCH OF FAMILIES IN HERE . RIGHT NOW THE WAY OUR ROADS ARE SET UP , WE HAVE GOLF CARTS ON THEM, PEOPLE ON BICYCLES , AND NOW WE ARE GOING TO ADD MORE PEOPLE WALKING ON THE ROADS, PLUS WE WILL ADD MORE VEHICLES ON THE ROADS . THE GOLF COURSES USING THE ROADS FOR THEIR EQUIPMENT GOING AROUND TO THE GOLF COURSE. SO, WE ONLY HAVE ONE ONE WAY OUT . I KNOW SOME OF THE OTHER PROJECT THAT YOU ALL HAVE HAD. U OF L MADE EMERGENCY ENTRANCES FOR FIRE DEPARTMENT AND POLICE DEPARTMENT TO COME IN, WHERE AS GATOR TRACE HAS NONE. SO, SOUTH

[03:25:01]

SO, IF YOU DO THE MATH, YOU WILL FIND OUT THAT THEY PICK IT UP FOUR OR FIVE TIMES A WEEK, AND YOU WILL HAVE MORE TRAFFIC WITH THE TRUCKS COMING IN THEIR THAT MANY TIMES. MORE TO PICK IT UP VERSUS ALL OF THE OTHER RESIDENTS WHO HAVE A GARAGE YOU HAVE A SINGLE 96 GALLON GARBAGE CAN WHICH THEY PULL OUT TWICE A WEEK VERSUS DUMPSTERS . THAT MAY BE SOMETHING TO LOOK AT.

THAT WAY, YOU WILL HAVE LESS OF THE CITIES TRASH TRUCKS COMING IN AND OUT OF THERE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> THANK YOU, SIR. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> CAN YOU SEE IF SHE WOULD RATHER SIT DOWN?

>> NO, I DON'T WANT TO SIT DOWN, I WON'T GET UP. AGNES MICHAEL , 467 PIERRE-LOUIS COURT.

>> CAN YOU SEE YOUR NAME AGAIN, I AM SORRY?

>> AGNES, MICHAEL. >> AND YOU ARE SWORN IN?

>> WERE YOU SWORN IN, MISS MICHAEL?

>> YES. >> YOU ARE SWORN IN? THANK YOU.

>> MY CONCERN IS SAFETY. GARDEN VILLAS A GOLF COMMUNITY . THERE REALLY ISN'T ANY AMENITIES FOR CHILDREN . WITH CHILDREN COMING INTO THIS DEVELOPMENT, PARENTS WILL HAVE TO TAKE THEM OUT TO THE FRONT OF GARDEN VILLAS TO GET ON THE SCHOOL BUS. THEY WILL ALSO HAVE TO TAKE THEM TO THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL. THIS IS GOING TO REALLY IMPOSE A PROBLEM FOR ENTRANCE AND EXITS OF PEOPLE COMING TO WORK AT GATOR TRACE, AS WELL AS PEOPLE COMING HOME FROM WORK , AND OTHER PEOPLE COMING TO PLAY GOLF. I CAN SEE ALL OF THE GRASS IN THE FRONT OF GATOR TRACE HAS BEEN USED BY CARS WAITING FOR THE SCHOOL BUS, AND, OF COURSE, PEOPLE TRYING TO GET OUT . IT'S GOING TO BE A REAL PROBLEM AS PEOPLE REALIZE THAT THERE IS 166 OR 134 MORE CARS IN THE DEVELOPMENT , AND ALSO, ONE OF THE CHILDREN COMES OF AGE TO DRIVE, THERE GOES ANOTHER CAR ADDED TO THEIR HOUSEHOLD. SO, GATOR TRACE IS A WONDERFUL PLACE TO LIVE , WITH 67 UNITS . PEOPLE WILL BE ABLE TO ENJOY THE LEISURE AND LIVING OF GATOR TRACE. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ANYONE ELSE? ANYONE ELSE? LAST CALL FOR ANYONE ELSE. ALL RIGHT. ARE YOU SWORN IN?

>> YES, MA'AM. >> ALL RIGHT.

>> HELLO. MY NAME IS JUDY AND METZGER. THEY LIVED DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.

BASICALLY, I LIKE TO SAY THREE THINGS. THE FIRST ONE , THIS IS A LAWFUL PIECE OF GREEN THAT WE HAVE. THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE THERE DO NOT WALK ON THE GOLF COURSE. WE WALKED THE STREETS . WE

[03:30:03]

>> ADDRESS THE COMMISSION. >> THE POINT BEING IS IF YOU WANT TO DEVELOP SOMETHING, OKAY? HAVE TO INCLUDE THE PEOPLE THAT ARE THERE ALREADY. THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE ON THE STREET. YOU CAN'T JUST GO AHEAD AND SAY THIS IS MY PROJECT, I AM GOING TO DO IT. NUMBER THREE , WE HAVE ALL WORKED WITH DEVELOPERS. I AM STILL CORRECTING WITH THE DEVELOPER LEFT, OKAY? SO, IF THEY DON'T KNOW HOW -- IF THEY DON'T KNOW HOW TO WORK THE LAND, THEY THEMSELVES ARE NOT ACTUAL HANDS ON PEOPLE WHO BUILD. WHAT YOU GET IS WHAT YOU'VE GOT. WE ARE STILL DOING OUR CORRECTIONS. AGAIN, IT IS A BEAUTIFUL WETLAND AREA. IT IS A DIFFERENT PLACE . I THINK IT JUST STAY THE WAY IT IS , OKAY? THEY ARE GOING TO BUILD 100 WHATEVER MAXIMUM UNITS ACROSS THE STREET ON NINE ACRES, GOOD RIDDANCE. BUT ANYWAYS, THAT IS ME. THAT'S MY OPINION. THANK

YOU FOR LISTENING. GOD BLESS. >> THANK YOU, THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE? ANYONE ELSE? OKAY. SIR, WOULD YOU LIKE TO COME BACK UP AND CLOSE US OUT, PLEASE? YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES.

>> HE HAS FIVE. >> FIVE. YOU FIVE MINUTES.

>> THANK YOU. COMMISSIONERS, STAFF, JUST TO, TO THE LAST LADIES COMMENT READY NOW PROPOSING A PROJECT TO THE RESIDENCE, SHE IS ANNA. I WAS AT THE MASTERS ASSOCIATION MEETING AND GENERATE 21ST, 2023 AT 6 P.M. I HAVE A LOT OF PICTURES FROM THAT. MR. FRANK WAS THE MASTER HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION AT THAT TIME. HE INVITED ME TO THAT MEETING. I WAS IN THE MEETING. I DID PRESENTATION TO THE RESIDENCE.

IF SHE MISSED THAT, THEN SORRY, SHE MISSED IT. THE PROJECT IN THE ENVIRONMENTS, THEY ARE RIGHT. I DON'T WANT TO HARMONY ANIMAL BECAUSE IT IS ILLEGAL, AND WE WILL DO WHATEVER WE CAN TO RELOCATE THOSE ANIMALS BY LAW. SAME AS THE WRITTEN MITIGATION, THE COMPLETED MITIGATION WITH THE MATTER OF THE DISTRICT AND THE FOOT OF THE PERMIT OF THE ENVIRONMENT OF PROTECTION, I HAVE A MEDICATION COST PAID AND EVERYTHING IS DONE. WE DECIDE TO START THE CONSTRUCTION.

ABOUT THE ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC, THE GARBAGE PICKUP IN THE SCHOOL BOARD , I SHALL DO MY PRESENTATION REVIEWED BY ALL OF THESE AGENCIES , WITH NO EXERCISE TAKEN OR APPROVED.

THEY ARE COMBINING ABOUT GARBAGE NOT PICKING UP ON TIME, THEY MIGHT BE RIGHT ON THIS, BUT THE ADDITIONAL FUNDS COMING INTO THE PROPERTY , THEY HAVE TO BUY MORE GARBAGE TRUCKS.

IT'S NOT MY JOB. THE GOVERNMENT HAS TO TAKE CARE OF THAT. ADDITIONAL IMPACT FEES, ADDITIONAL DEPARTMENT FEES, ADDITIONAL TAX WILL BRING A LOT OF ECONOMICS AT THIS LOCATION, AND I BELIEVE EVEN BUILDING EXTRA UNITS HAS NOTHING TO DO NEGATIVE ON THE RESIDENCE SIDE. FORGETTING THE GOLF PARK, KIDS PLAYGROUND, AND THEN THE REST OF THE MINUTES OVER THERE , AS LONG AS I CAN GET 12 UNITS PER ACRE, I'M HAPPY TO REMOVE THEM. IT'S CHEAPER FOR ME. I'LL JUST THROW GRASS OVER THAT INSTANT SEND A SPINNING BUDDY FOR THE FENCE , SPENDING MONEY FOR THE FITNESS, SPENDING MONEY FOR THE KIDS PLAYGROUND , I'M PUTTING IN THIS KIDS PLAYGROUND BECAUSE THEY HAVE TWO KIDS. I BELIEVE IT IS THIS TERMINATION IF YOU JUST TAKE THE CERTAIN FAMILY GROUP IN THE COUNTRY , YOU CAN'T MOVE IN HERE BECAUSE EVEN THOUGH YOU ARE NOT 55 OVER, WE DON'T WANT YOU IN LIFE. THIS IS ABSOLUTELY DISSEMINATION. I CANNOT HANDPICK MY CLIENTS, MY BUYERS WHEN IT COMES TO SELLING THESE PROPERTIES. WHOEVER COMES WITH THE MONEY, THEY WILL BUY THE UNITS. AND AGAIN, I AM READY TO REMOVE THESE AMENITIES FROM THE PROJECT IS GOING AS YOU APPROVE OUR OTHER CRITERIA. I WILL BUILD A PARK, I WILL BUILD A FITNESS PAD, I WILL BUILD A KIDS PLAYGROUND. NO PROBLEM. IF YOU DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, I WOULD LIKE TO GET YOUR APPROVAL.

>> DID YOU ANSWER THE QUESTION ABOUT THE GOLF BALLS?

>> ALL FALLS? SADLY, HE IS RIGHT ON THIS. AND I HAVE BEEN

[03:35:03]

FIRST OF ALL, THERE ARE A LOT OF OTHER HOMES FOR THE LONGEST.

HE'S GIVING EXAMPLE FOR MY PROPERTY , BUT I CAN GIVE YOU FIVE TIMES WERE EXAMPLES OF WHAT HE IS TALKING ABOUT. MY SOLUTION TO THAT ONE IS A REALLY TO BUILD A CAGE. LIKE,

-- >> PLEASE.

>> AWFUL PROOF CAGE WITH THE ROOF ON TOP . WE HAVE MOSQUITO NETS , AND NOTHING IS NOT ONLY PROTECTING FOR MOSQUITOES, PROTECTS GOLF BALLS AS WELL. IF SOMEONE IS WALKING BY THE GOLF COURSE , THEY WILL BE WALKING OVER THAT ANYWAY. BUT IF THE REST OF THE CITY IN THE BACK PATIO HAS A DANGER OF BEING HIT BY THE GOLF BALLS, IF TWO USES A PRODUCTION. NUMBER ONE IS A HEAVILY LANDSCAPED BACKYARD. NUMBER TWO IS THE SCREEN WITH A BALL GOLF BALL PROOF MATERIAL ON IT. IF YOUR TIME IS COME, YOUR TIME IS COME. I CANNOT STOP YOU. YOU WILL BE HAPPY A

CAR INSTEAD OF A GOLF BALL. >> OKAY. ANYTHING ELSE, SIR?

>> NO, MA'AM. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MADAM MAYOR.

>> THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. OKAY. THIS COMPLETES THE PUBLIC PORTION OF THIS. FOR NOW, IT IS TO THE COMMISSION DISCUSSION , AND IT IS TIME FOR THE AUDIENCE TO BE QUITE AND

FOR THE COMMISSION TO TALK. >> MADAM MAYOR, STAFF, COULD YOU HELP ME WITH THE SITE PLANS ON THIS YEAR? JUST A COUPLE OF THINGS SPECIFICALLY CAME UP ABOUT INGRESS AND EGRESS WHEN IT COMES TO ACCESSING THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY. CAN YOU GIVE ME A LINE OF SIGHT ON THAT? I AM FAMILIAR WITH THIS, AND FULL DISCLOSURE, I HAVE PLAYED GOLF THERE . ASHLEY CUT THE CORNER AND MADE IT ACROSS. IN ANY WOODS OF THE WATER. I KNOW THIS WHOLE, RIGHT? I KNOW IT VERY WELL. YEAH, I CUT THE CORNER. TRUST ME. YEAH, SO, WE ARE HERE . TALK TO ME ABOUT THE ACCESS TO THIS PROPERTY FOR ANY PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION. HAS IT BEEN LAID OUT AND DELAYED? SO THAT ACTUALLY HAPPEN? OR HAS

THE DEVELOPER PUT THAT FORTH? >> IN THE ORIGINAL DEVELOPER'S AGREEMENT , THIS IS THE POTENTIAL CONSTRUCTION ACCESS

ROUTES. >> IN THE ORIGINAL ?

>> RIGHT. >> SO, THAT WAS 2000 ? 2007? WE ARE FAST FORWARDING TO NOW. IS THE STILL THE PROPOSAL? HAS THE CHANGED AS A RESULT OF CONSTRUCTION HOUSES? GROWTH, WHAT LYNN, I DUNNO, DITCHES? ANYTHING. THAT IS A FUNDAMENTAL QUESTION ANY TO TRY TO UNDERSTAND HERE.

>> I THINK THAT WOULD BE DEPENDED UPON THE NEW DEVELOPERS AGREEMENT. I MEAN, IT CAN STAY THE SAME, BUT THAT WOULD BE RESENTED TO THE CITY.

>> FOR THE CURRENT DEVELOPERS AGREEMENT THAT HAS BEEN ALLEGED THAT IS NOT REAL THINKS THIS IS HOW WE WOULD ACCESS IT. RIGHT? IF THE ALLEGED IS SAYING IT DOES NOT EXIST BECAUSE IT WAS NEVER FILED , THEN THIS MAY COME INTO QUESTION AS IF IT EXISTS. RIGHT? WE CAN GO BACK TO THAT. SO, WHAT I HEARD FROM A DEVELOPER IS THAT IF IT IS NOT THERE , THEN HE HAS A PROBLEM ADDRESSING GETTING TO HIS CONSTRUCTION SITE. THAT MAKE SENSE? I'M JUST FOLLOWING THE LOGIC. I AM NO LAWYER , BUT IF IT IS NOT VALID, LIKE HE IS ARGUING, AND HE STATED THAT WITH THAT EMAIL , HOW WILL YOU GET BRICKS AND TRUCKS TO THE

SCREEN PIECE OF PASTOR? >> YOU WOULD HAVE TO BE A NEGOTIATED AGREEMENT BETWEEN THIS DEVELOPER AND THE AGE

AWAY, WHOEVER CONTROLS THOSE. >> WE ARE IN A BIT OF A QUANDARY HERE IN MY OPINION. RIGHT? I AM JUST A REAL COMMONSENSE GUY THAT APPLIES HIMSELF. THAT IS WHEN HE HEARD WITH SWORN TESTIMONY FROM HERE. I WILL DO WITH MY ATTORNEY ON THAT AS FAR AS THIS AGREEMENT. YOU KNOW, IT IS ALLEGED, WE HAVE HEARD IN TESTIMONY HERE THAT THIS IS A NONVALID AGREEMENT THAT WAS SENT TO US BY THE ATTORNEY REPRESENTING THE OWNER , I AM SORRY . WE HAVE ALREADY, WE'VE ALL MADE REFERENCE TO IT. IS THERE VALIDITY TO THIS ALLEGATION?

>> MADAM MAYOR, COMMISSIONERS , SO, I THINK YOU MAY A BIT OF A MISCHARACTERIZATION OF WHAT THAT ATTORNEY'S LETTER SAID.

BECAUSE IT ESSENTIALLY SAID WHAT HE'S DOING IS HE'S PRESERVING HIS RIGHT TO ARGUE THAT IT IS NOT VALID. WE CAN GO

[03:40:02]

WE CALLED A DEVELOPING AGREEMENT FIRST , BUT CHANGED IT TO A STILL AGREEMENT AS NOT TO CONFUSE IT WITH A CHAPTER 163 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. JUST BECAUSE SOMETHING IS TITLE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT DOES NOT MEAN IT NECESSARILY FALLS UNDER CHAPTER 163 . NEITHER HERE NOR THERE , THIS IS NOT THE PROPER VENUE FOR THAT DISPUTE. AT THIS POINT, WE HAVE AN AGREEMENT IN PLACE THAT, FROM THE CITY'S PERSPECTIVE, IS A VALID AND ENFORCEABLE AGREEMENT WAS A COMPETENT JURISDICTION TELLS US OTHERWISE. WE SHOULD BE PROCEEDING UNDER THAT

DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. >> OKAY. IN THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT , IS 67 UNITS AGREED TO BY ALL PARTIES INVOLVED ? PERSON THAT OWNS THE LAND, THE PERSON WHO TO WRITE, I GUESS, THE CELL, ET CETERA, IN THE CITY THAT SIGNED OFF ON IT. AT

67. >> YES, SIR. IT IS A 67. IS DETERMINED THERE THAT IT RUNS IN THE LAND THAT WE SEE WITH OUR SALE AGREEMENTS AND A SURPLUS PROPERTY. THOSE TERMS

ARE IN THERE. >> OKAY. SO, I JUST CAME TO THAT CONCLUSION A MINUTE AGO. YOU KNOW, IF THERE IS AN ALLEGATION THAT WE DON'T HAVE AN AGREEMENT, THEN THERE IS NO WAY TO GET TO THAT. TO DEVELOPMENT. WHICH IS A MAJOR ISSUE. THAT'S WHAT I MEAN, THE ACCESS FOR CONSTRUCTION. AND THEN, YOU KNOW , THE OTHER ASPECT HERE THAT POPPED TO MIND, AND THE DEVELOPER JUST SPOKE TO THIS IN HIS LAST COMMENTS IS THAT HIS DEVELOPMENT IS TO SELL THE UNITS OR HOWEVER IT IS , AND THAT IS TO THE PREROGATIVE THAT HE DOES BECAUSE HE OWNS THE PROPERTY OR WHATEVER TO PUT OUT THERE. BUT I THINK AN EXAMPLE, I DO RECALL THAT THERE IS A REQUIREMENT HE USED WITH THE FIRE TRUCK UP THERE, AND IT ACTUALLY SHOWED, THE USE THAT AS AN EXAMPLE HERE, BUT THERE IS NO SCHOOL BUS. THERE WAS A COMMENT OR TESTIMONY THAT I HEARD THAT STATED THAT THIS WAS A PRIVATE ROAD THAT COMES THROUGH HERE , AND THERE ARE NO SIDEWALKS THAT YOU COME IN AND OUT OF THEIR TO GATOR TRACE, ET CETERA. CAN SOMEONE HELP ME WITH THAT? EVEN MR. FREEMAN, AS FAR AS THE SCHOOL BOARD IN THE MOVEMENT OF SCHOOL BUSES? BECAUSE WE HAVE REQUIRED THAT IF THERE IS GOING TO BE DEVELOPING, WE HAVE REQUIRED SCHOOL SHELTERS , THE BUS BEING ABLE TO NAVIGATE AND TURNAROUND SAFELY, YOU KNOW, AND IN LIGHT OF THINGS THAT HAVE HAPPENED IN THAT VICINITY THE SCHOOL TO CHILDREN, THAT IS TOP OF MIND FOR US TO MAKE SURE SAFETY IS PARAMOUNT AND WE ARE NAVIGATING

BUSY ROADS . >> AT THIS DEVELOPING CAME AND NOW , GATOR TREES AS A WHOLE , THERE WOULD BE A REQUIREMENT , I AM SURE TO HAVE A FULL BUS STOP NOTWITHSTANDING WHOEVER BOUGHT THE PROPERTIES, IF THEY WERE FAMILIES OR NOT FAMILIES.

THE CALCULATING THE NUMBER OF PROPERTIES AND MULTIPLYING THAT BY THE POPULATION RATIO THAT THEY WOULD USE. IT'S NOT A 55 AND OVER DEVELOPMENT. SO, THE SCHOOL BOARD AND THE CITY SUFFERED LOOK AT THIS AND SAY, YOU KNOW, ON THE ENTRANCE, WE NEED SOME ACCOMMODATION FOR SCHOOL JUST CHILDREN. PICK UP, DROP OFF, SO FORTH. HOWEVER, WE ARE DEALING WITH A PREMIER LEGAL TELL DEVELOPMENT WITH AN INTERNAL PHASE OF THAT DEVELOPMENT BEING PART OF THAT OVERALL DEVELOPMENT. IT DID NOT, AT THAT POINT WHEN IT WAS APPROVED, INCORPORATE THE

SCHOOL BUS STOP. >> GOT IT.

>> WHEN WE REVIEWED THIS TO THE TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE , I DON'T BELIEVE THE SCHOOL DISTRICT MADE ANY COMMENT REGARDING A SCHOOL BUS STOP OR THE PROXIMITY OF THE SCHOOL BUS

STOP. >> I THINK THAT IS A CONCERN.

WHAT I HAVE HEARD FROM TESTIMONY, YOU KNOW, THE DEVELOPER IS SAYING , USING HIS WORD, DISCRIMINATE ON IT WHO BUYS HIS HOUSE IS THERE. IF THAT IS THE CASE, MY CONCERN IS NOW HOW DO I NAVIGATE THAT IS A COMMISSIONER TO PUT MY FAMILY

[03:45:02]

GOLF BALLS. >> FOR MY ANSWER PREDATION OF WHAT WAS SAID, IT WAS MORE LIKE A FLORIDA ROOM FLY SCREEN STRUCTURE WITH A STRONGER MATERIAL TO PREVENT GOLF BALLS.

I THINK WE WAS TALKING ABOUT WAS THAT TO BE ATTACHED AS

ADDITIONAL. >> LET'S NOT TESTIFY FOR THAT.

I WOULD HAVE TO BE A BETTER EXPIRATION. BUT COMMISSIONERS AND MAYOR, THAT IS WHAT I HAVE HEARD. THAT IS WHERE MY CONCERNS LIE WITH THIS PROJECT. YOU KNOW, THERE'S A LOT OF ALLEGATION AS TO WHAT IS WHAT, AND I TRY TO STICK TO THE LAW, THOUGH I AM NOT A LAWYER. I WILL LEAVE THAT TO COMMISSIONER GAINES. BUT IF THERE IS A STATEMENT HERE TONIGHT STATING THAT THIS IS NOT BEEN FILED, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I'VE GONE DOWN THE RABBIT HOLE OF UNDERSTANDING THAT THIS AGREEMENT IS VALID , WE HAVE A VALID DEVELOPERS AGREEMENT , AND IT IS STATED IN THEIR THAT WE WILL STICK TO 67 ACRES PER UNIT. IT'S BEING CHALLENGED BY THE DEVELOPER BECAUSE HE WANTS TO MAXIMIZE HIS PROJECT TO 83.

>> MADAM MAYOR, COMMISSIONERS, IT IS MY POSITION THAT THIS IS THE IMPROPER VENUE FOR HIM TO CHALLENGE THAT THE DEVELOPERS

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

NEEDED TO HEAR. THANK YOU. >> THERE IS AN ADDITIONAL

ACCESS ISSUE, RIGHT? >> AN ACCESS ISSUE IS METER FOR

ME ON THIS. >> COMMISSIONERS?

>> MADAM MAYOR? >> YES, SIR?

>> I HAVE A COUPLE OF COMMENTS I GUESS. SO, ON THE DEVELOPERS AGREEMENT, I HAVE NOT HEARD ANY TESTIMONY TONIGHT OUTSIDE OF THE COURT SAYING WHAT WE SHOULD BE DOING WITH THE DEVELOPER AGREEMENT. I HAVE NOT HEARD ANYTHING THAT SAYS I NEED TO SCRATCH IT OFF OF THE LIST AND MAKE IT GO AWAY. I THINK COMMISSIONER BRODERICK, YOU MENTIONED THAT EARLIER TONIGHT AS WELL. I WAS NOT AT THAT POINT, BUT THROUGH THE ENTIRE TESTIMONY THAT I HAVE HEARD TONIGHT , IN WEIGHING ALL OF THE FACTS IN THE INFORMATION , AND LOOKING AT THE HISTORY, LOOKING AT THE DOCUMENTS THAT ARE IN PLAY, LOOKING AT MEETING MINUTES FROM 2007, WHICH I'M SITTING HERE READING ABOUT TRAFFIC , I DON'T KNOW, AND REANALYZING, I GUESS IT IS, THERE ARE A FEW THINGS. THE SCREEN THAT IS HERE SHOW NOW FOR THE ACCESS POINT, I AM SURE THAT THERE HAVE BEEN CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS IN GATOR TRACE OVER THE YEARS THAT DID NOT REQUIRE THE CONSTRUCTION CROSS TO GO TO THE REDLINE ON THE SCREEN. WHETHER IT WAS A SINGLE-FAMILY HOME OR A CONDO UNIT, I AM CHOOSING A FAMILY HOMES WERE BUILT OVER A PERIOD OF YEARS THAT WERE DIFFERENT AND APART. NOW, DOES THAT SET ASIDE HAVE YOUR TRAFFIC COMING INTO CONSTRUCT 67 OR 83 UNITS? NO. I HAVE NOT PUT THAT TO THE SIDE. HOWEVER, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE LEGAL RIGHTS TO ACCESS PROPERTIES. SO, I TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION . JESSICA THERE ARE LEGAL PRIMITIVES WE SHOULD CONSIDER . AND I ALWAYS CONSIDER THOSE, WHETHER IT BE AN INCONVENIENCE OR A CONVENIENCE FOR WHICHEVER PARTY. SO, I AM WEIGHING THE IDEAS OF THE MASTER PLAN COMMUNITY, THE DEVELOPERS AGREEMENT , AND THAT IS WHY I WAS GETTING INTO THE CONVERSATION OF GATOR TREES BOULEVARD, BECAUSE IT IS THE NORTH SOUTH ROAD COMING FROM WEATHERBY. I THINK THAT'S AN INCREDIBLE INGREDIENT TO ALL OF THIS PROCESS . NOT ONLY WAS IT A TESTIMONY TONIGHT FROM A FEW FOLKS ABOUT, YOU KNOW, INGRESS AND EGRESS EMERGENCY VEHICLES , HAVING ACCESS POINTS, NOT CONSTRICTING IT DOWN TO JUST ONE IN OR OUT , BUT IS LOOKING AT THE PARAMETER AS A WHOLE. I WANT TO SHARE WITH YOU ALL THAT I REMEMBER WHEN THIS PROJECT WAS BEING DISCUSSED BACK IN 2007. I'VE ALWAYS HAD RESERVATION ON PROJECTS LIKE THIS, AND I WILL SHARE WITH YOU WHY. BECAUSE YOU CAN BUILD A COMMUNITY, AND IT DOES NOT MATTER HOW YOU GET THERE. BUT TO SOME FOLKS, IT DOES MATTER HOW YOU GET THERE. RIGHT? DURING CONSTRUCTION. BUT WHAT ABOUT THE FOLKS THAT LIVE ON ST. JAMES? THE ONE THAT IS CONNECTED TO U.S. ONE AT THE SIGNAL THERE WHERE THE REDLINE BEGINS ON THE LEFT-HAND SIDE OF THAT PAGE? WHAT ABOUT THOSE POOR FOLKS? THEY DO SEE THE TRUCKS COMING IN AND OUT .

EVERYBODY SAYS WELL, IT'S ON MY BACKYARD, SO WHY DO I CARE? FINANCING EVERYBODY HAS AN OPINION, I AM JUST SHARING WITH YOU WHAT MAY BE TAKEN ON BY SOME. SO, MY POINT IS, AND I AM

[03:50:03]

WE HAVE TO WEIGH ALL THOSE CONSIDERATIONS. I DO BELIEVE IN THAT DEVELOPING AGREEMENT OF THIS PHASE ONE AND PHASE TWO PORTIONS OF THE PROJECT. I BELIEVE IN THAT. I ALSO BELIEVE IN THE FACT THAT WHOMEVER OWNS THE PROPERTY IN THE NORTHWEST CORNER , IN THIS CASE I THINK THE REFERENCE HAS BEEN MADE BY SOME INDIVIDUALS, AND RECEIVED CORRESPONDENCE FROM MR. TARR , I REALLY BELIEVE THAT HE SHOULD BE COMPLYING WITH THE AGREEMENTS , THE AGREEMENT ITSELF. HE SHOULD BE IMPROVING WHATEVER IS IN THE DEVELOPERS AGREEMENT , AND I AM NOT SURE WITHOUT THE COURTS SAYING THAT THERE IS A LEGAL RIGHT TO LIMIT ACCESS THERE . BUT I WOULD DEFER THAT TO A JUDGE AND NOT ME. SO, I WANT THAT TO BE CLEAR , AND I'M SURE HE WILL GET AN EMAIL ABOUT THESE COMMENTS, AND THAT IS OKAY , BECAUSE THAT IS WHERE I'M COMING FROM, AND I DON'T BELIEVE THAT ONE PERSON SHOULD CONTROL ALL THAT HAPPENS HERE. IT JUST DOES NOT MAKE SENSE TO ME. COMMON SENSE. I HAVE HEARD THAT THE MING A NUMBER OF TIMES TODAY. IN ADDITION TO THAT, I QUESTION THE APPLICANT A NUMBER OF TIMES ON THE IMPROVEMENTS, AND WITH THE PROPORTION A FAIR SHARE IS, BECAUSE I BELIEVE YOU HAVE HEARD ME TALK A LOT ABOUT THAT TONIGHT IN A NUMBER OF APPLICATIONS. GATOR TRACE SHOULD BE EITHER IMPROVED, MAINTAINED, ADDED SIDEWALKS , OR REFURBISHED AFTER A CONSTRUCTION PROJECT. I BELIEVE IN THOSE PARAMETERS ALSO. I BELIEVE THAT THAT IS PART OF THIS PROCESS. I BELIEVE THAT THAT IS FAIR THAT THAT IS PART OF THE PROCESS. THERE ARE MONIES BEING EXPENDED AS FAR AS IMPACT FEES. WHAT ABOUT THE ANALYSIS? GO BACK TO THE NOTES FROM 2005 I BELIEVE , THERE IS A TRAFFIC STUDY, AND REMEMBER BACK IN THE DAY OF 2005 THAT U.S. ONE HAD NO SIGNAL . PART OF THIS EXPANSION WAS WHEN THE SIGNAL IS AND LAMENTED AT WEATHERBY AND U.S. ONE BASED ON THE MEETING MINUTES OF 2005. THERE IS ALSO CONVERSATION ABOUT GATOR TRACE AND WHETHER IT WOULD BE -- WHAT KIND OF INTERSECTION IS THAT GOING TO BE AND WHAT IS IT GOING TO LOOK LIKE? SO, I THINK THOSE ARE OPTIONS THAT NEED TO BE CONSIDERED. AT THIS POINT, I AM JUST SHARING WITH YOU WHERE MY MIND HAS DRIFTED IN WERE I HAVE BROUGHT IT FULL-CIRCLE AND BROUGHT IT ALL THE WAY BACK. BUT AT THIS POINT, I BELIEVE THE DEVELOPERS AGREEMENT SHOULD STAND , AND THE 67 UNITS IS APPROPRIATE AND PROPER. I ALSO BELIEVE THAT DOG PARKS SHOULD BE ALLOWED. I BELIEVE THAT SCHOOL BUSES SHOULD HAVE THEIR OWN ACCESS POINTS, WHETHER IT IS AT WEATHERBY ROAD OR GATOR TREES BOULEVARD WITH A SIDEWALK WITH SAFETY AND CONSIDERATION.

I BELIEVE THAT ENVIRONMENT IMPACTS SHOULD BE EVALUATED WITH THIS PARCEL BEFORE FULL COMPLIANCE OR FULL PERMITTING OF CLEARING OPERATIONS, WHICH WILL BE DONE, BECAUSE THAT IS REQUIRED BY LAW. I'M NOT WORRIED ABOUT GOLF BALLS. I WILL JUST BE HONEST WITH YOU. WE CAN PLAY WITH A DIFFERENT STYLE BALL IF WE HAVE TO. WE HAD A PICKLEBALL CONVERSATION, WE CAN HAVE A GOLF BALL CONVERSATION. I AM TEASING, I AM DEALING! PTSD APPEAR. I AM SORRY, I AM SORRY.

>> IT IS OKAY. BUT THIS IS A REAL CONVERSATION, RIGHT? AND THESE ARE REAL ISSUES , AND I THINK THERE ARE AGREEMENTS IN PLACE THAT WE SHOULD ABIDE BY THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO ADJUST THE APPLICANT HAS MADE HIS PLEA OVER THE LAST FEW MONTHS ABOUT COMING TO US, ABOUT AMENDING THE SITE PLAN, AND I HAVE NOT HEARD ENOUGH TESTIMONY THAT WOULD SWAY ME TO AMEND THE CURRENT SITE PLAN FROM 67 TO 83. THANK YOU.

>> COMMISSIONER GAINES? GOT ANYTHING TO ADD?

>> MADAM MAYOR, NOT REALLY. I SAW THE LETTER. I READ THE

[03:55:03]

BUT, IF A JUDGE COMES IN AND AGREES WITH THE DEVELOPER, I HAVE A DIFFERENT OUTLOOK ON THIS WHOLE SITUATION, BECAUSE NOW WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO STOP IT. SO, MY HANGUP IS -- I AM STUCK IN THE DEVELOPING AGREEMENT . WE ARE CALLING IT A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BECAUSE THAT IS WHAT THEY CALLED IT. I DON'T KNOW WHAT A JUDGE WILL DO. I'M NOT THE JUDGE. EVEN THOUGH I AM IN A QUASI-TONIGHT'S , I AM ACTING LIKE SOME TYPE OF, YOU KNOW, BUT IT IS NOT A CASE OF LAW, AND I BELIEVE IN NOT OVERSTEPPING MY BOUNDS OF THE CITY COMMISSIONER. SO, I AGREE WITH MY COMMISSIONER , YOU KNOW, JEREMIAH JOHNSON , INTO THE RESIDENT THAT SPOKE ABOUT THE GOLF BALLS , ON ONE, IT DOES HURT. I WASN'T ON THE GOLF COURSE. I WANTED TO SEE IF IT HURT, THEY HAD IT, AND IT HURT. I WAS THAT KID. BUT, YOU KNOW, I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER JEREMIAH JOHNSON. THAT WOULD BE A LAWSUIT WAITING TO HAPPEN JUST TO STOP SOMEBODY BRINGING IN A TRUCK TO TRY, YOU KNOW, TO DO A PROJECT . I ALSO AGREE WITH THE DEVELOPER . YOU KNOW, I UNDERSTAND, I ALSO PLAYED THERE ANY UNDERSTAND THAT GATOR TRACE IS NOT A 55 AND ABOVE NAMED AREA , BUT IT IS A 55 AND ABOVE, YOU KNOW, AREA. I UNDERSTAND THAT. BUT WE WOULD BE SETTING OURSELVES UP FOR A MAJOR LAWSUIT. I'M JUST BEING HONEST WITH YOU, TO SAY THAT A PRIVATE DEVELOPER COULD NOT COME IN AND TRY TO, YOU KNOW, PUT FAMILIES IN THERE. I LOVE THE WETLANDS, SO I NEED SOME MORE, YOU KNOW, DETAILS TO SEE WHAT IS IN THEIR AND WHAT TYPE OF ANIMALS ARE IN THEIR, BUT OF ALL OF THAT IS DONE, AND EVERYTHING IS DONE , AND ANYBODY WANTS TO COME DOWN THE ROAD, SO HE WANTS TO SPEND THE MONEY AND PUT THEIR HOUSE AND LINE OF GOLF BALLS, YOU KNOW , AND HOPE THAT EVERYONE IS LIKE COMMISSIONER JOHNSON, AND MISS THE CORNER AND NOT HIT THE HOUSES , THAT IS ON HIM. THE RIGHT NOW AS OF TONIGHT, I AM CONCERNED ABOUT THE VALIDITY OR NON-VALIDITY OF THIS AGREEMENT. THAT IS MY HANGUP.

>> YEAH, I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THE HEALTH AND SAFETY. I THINK THIS IS FAR-FETCHED, PERHAPS, BUT I THINK THAT THIS DEVELOPER AND THE OTHER PARTY IN THIS SHOULD HAVE MET AND AGREED, AND THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN BROUGHT TO US BEFORE WE HAD TO DEAL WITH THIS. I AM READY FOR A MOTION , AND I'M READY FOR A MOTION TOWARD 67 UNITS. WHO WOULD LIKE TO MAKE THE MOTION?

>> I HAVE A QUESTION PERTAINING TO THAT.

>> SURE. >> WHAT ARE THE OPTIONS HERE? COMMITTEE SITE PLAN OF 83 UNITS. THE OPTIONS ARE TO DENY

[04:00:07]

>> I MAKE A COMMENT? >> SURE.

>> AT THE QUESTION, ACTUALLY. >> THESE ARE ONE OF THOSE TIMES WHERE WE ARE MORE SIMPLE. I'M JUST GIVING YOU MY GUTS AND MY WISDOM THAT WE EVEN GET TO APPROVE IT WITH CONDITIONS . I WILL BE HONEST WITH YOU. THIS IS A MAJOR MEMO TO DEVELOPMENT PLAN IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN. I AM PRETTY SURE THAT IS WHAT IT IS.

LIKE ALL THE STUFF NEED TO PLAY OUT SOMEWHERE ELSE BESIDES HIS CHAMBER , AND THE EASIEST AND MOST SIMPLE WAY IS JUST TO SAY I DISAGREE, AND A MOTION TO DISAPPROVE THE AMENDED.

>> GO AHEAD, JEREMIAH. >> I MAKE A MOTION THAT WE DISAPPROVE THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT.

>> SECOND. >> IS THAT IMPROPER?

>> ME TO SAY PLAN AMENDMENT IS WHAT YOU MADE EMOTION ON?

>> YES. >> THAT IS WHAT WE HAVE IN FRONT OF US IS A MAJOR SAY PLAN A MINUTE. THAT IS MOTION

PERTAINS TO. >> THAT IS THE AMENDED PLAN.

>> IT WOULD BE ORDINANCE 24-0-0.

>> I WILL JUST WITHDRAW THE MOTION AND GET BACK TO THE

FRONT FOR FOR DISAPPROVAL. >> AND COMMISSIONER, WHILE YOU ARE PULLING THAT UP , THIS IS QUASIJUDICIAL ON THIS. RIGHT? SO, YOU PROBABLY HAVE TO SITE WHY.

>> YES, YOU'RE RIGHT. THANK YOU.

>> YOU'RE WELCOME, SIR. >> COMMISSIONER, WHILE YOU'RE DOING THAT, CAN YOU PUT THE FIRST CONDITION UP ? THE VERY FIRST ONE. I THINK WHERE WE ARE CHALLENGED HERE, AS I SAID, IS CLEARLY THE DEVELOPERS AGREEMENT THAT IS IN PLACE.

THAT STATE 67. IS THERE THIS CONDITION OF APPROVAL ? IS THERE A WAY TO AMEND THE SLING WHICH YEAR TO SPECIFICALLY STATE THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WHICH STATES 67 UNITS AND REFERENCES THAT IN THE FIRST CONDITION SO THAT IT IS IN RECORD ANY PART OF THAT? BECAUSE RIGHT NOW, UNLESS ISSUED UNLESS AND UNTIL THE DEVELOPER AGREEMENT IS AMENDED

TO ALLOW FOR 83 PER UNIT. >> YES, SIR. MADAM MAYOR, COMMISSIONERS , IF THE ORDINANCE ITSELF REFERENCES THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT , I BELIEVE IT REFERENCES IT SPECIFICALLY BY DATE OF APPROVAL. IF I CAN HAVE ONE

SECOND? >> OKAY.

>> I WILL HAVE TO WRITE IT DOWN NOW.

>> IF IT FOLLOWS THE APPROVAL THERE IN THE ORDINANCE

THEMSELVES. >> THERE AS AN EXHIBIT. YES.

>> SO, THE ORDINANCE ITSELF REFERENCES THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT DATED MARCH 26 , 2007 , AS ENTERED INTO INTO THE PARTIES THAT EXISTED AT THAT POINT IN TIME . SO, THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IS REFERENCED SPECIFICALLY IN THE ORDINANCE THROUGHOUT. BUT, TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, YOU COULD AMEND THE CONDITIONS HOWEVER YOU SEE FIT.

>> JUST TO THE COMMISSION , THAT WAY IT LOCKS AND SPECIFICALLY THAT AGREEMENT SO THERE IS NO QUESTION ON WHAT AGREEMENT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT, THE VALID AGREEMENT THAT WE AGREE ON THAT IS IN PLACE THAT LOCKS IN 67.

>> MADAM MAYOR'S, WHAT I AM HEARING IS THAT A DEVELOPER

[04:05:01]

>> WE WOULD BE ADDING A CONDITION EIGHT THAT THE MARCH 26, 2007 DEVELOPERS AGREEMENT MUST BE FOLLOWED.

>> OR AMEND THIS NUMBER ONE COMMISSION THAT IS HERE AMENDED TO THE LANGUAGE TO AFFECT THAT IS WHAT I AM SAYING. VIDEO THAT'S, OR WE CAN ADD, AT THIS POINT, IT IS JUST INK. WE HAVE A WHOLE BUNCH OF THAT. WE CAN KEEP PRINTING, RIGHT?

>> YES, SIR. >> YES, IT'S JUST INK.

>> COMMISSIONER JOHNSON, BEFORE YOU SAY SOMETHING , YOU WOKE ME UP OVER HERE NOW. THE MOTION THAT I THINK IS COMING, WE ARE RELYING ON THIS AGREEMENT AND TRYING TO CHANGE A COMMISSION TO SAY THERE AGREEMENT. IF WE ARE TRYING TO SAY 67 , MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE FOR 67, BECAUSE WE ARTY HAVE IT. CAN WE

NOT DO IT? >> WE DON'T HAVE TO PROVE THAT THE SEVEN. 67 IS ALREADY APPROVED.

>> THAT'S I'M SAYING! IT'S ALREADY APPROVED! IF WE ARE GOING TO DENY IT BASED ON -- IF WE ARE DENYING IT BASED ON -- IF WE ARE DENYING IT BASED ON THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, IT'S ALREADY BEEN APPROVED FOR 67, SO WHAT ARE WE DENYING? EVERY GOING TO COME OUT AND SAY TONIGHT 83? THAT IS WHAT WE ARE

DENYING? >> THAT'S WHERE I WAS HEADING.

>> IF YOU'RE GOING TO SAY TONIGHT 83, TO SAY WE ARE

DENYING A MOTION FOR 83. >> YOU JUST WALKING THROUGH THE

PROCESS. >> THAT'S OVERDOING! THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING! INSTEAD OF TRYING TO FIGURE OUT AND TWEAK SOME WORDS , SAY IT IS ALREADY BEEN APPROVED FOR 67, SO WE ARE DENYING 83. BASED ON WHAT WE BELIEVE THEY DEVELOP MENTAL AGREEMENT. THAT IS WHAT I AM HEARING.

>> YEAH. NO? 20 FIGURE IT OUT.

>> MADAM MAYOR, COMMISSIONERS, IT MAY BE HELPFUL IF STAFF WERE ABLE TO HELP TO PULL FROM A RECORD OF ORDINANCES SECTION 125-212 . THAT GIVES YOU THE PURPOSE OF THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT ZONE THAT WE ARE OPERATING UNDER . SUBSECTION A IS THE PURPOSE. IT GOES THROUGH 10, I AM SORRY , 11 SUBSECTIONS , SOME OF WHICH MAY BE USEFUL IN YOUR MOTION.

>> YEAH. >> SUBSECTION B IS YOUR

STANDARDS FOR APPROVAL. >> YOU WANT TO HAVE THOSE WITH

EVERY QUASIJUDICIAL . >> YES, MA'AM.

>> YOU'RE MAKING THE SLIGHTLY MORE COLLOCATED THAN IT NEEDS TO BE. HE MAKE A MOTION TO DENY THE APPLICATION FOR 83 UNITS BASED ON THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE DEVELOPER

AGREEMENT. PERIOD. >> MADAM MAYOR, COMMISSIONERS, WHEN WE ARE DOING A DENIAL, IT IS BETTER TO PLACE AS MANY OF YOUR REASONS FOR YOUR DENIAL ON THE RECORD IF IT IS SUBJECT TO REVIEW SO IT IS CLEAR TO THE REVIEWING COURT AS TO WHY. SO, IF THERE ARE ADDITIONAL REASONS FOR THE MOVEMENT TO DENY, I WOULD SUGGEST THOSE BE INCLUDED IN THE MOTION.

>> THAT IS WHERE I WAS GOING. >> OKAY.

>> GENERALLY 125-212 . YES. 212. WE ARE STARTING AS OF SECTION A AT THE TEMPORARY OF YOUR PURPOSE OF YOUR PLANNING

DEVELOP AND ZONE. >> YES.

>> I'M NOT SURE WHERE YOU ARE AT.

>> YOU ARE TOO LOW. UP TO A. YOU ARE A CAPITAL E. KEEP GOING. KEEP GOING. KEEP ON GOING. KEEP ON GOING. THERE YOU

GO. >> MISS HEDGES?

>> YES, MA'AM? >> I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE

COMMISSION. >> I WILL JUST WAIT UNTIL WE ARE READY. MY QUESTION TO THE COMMISSION IS, YOU KNOW, FUNDAMENTALLY I THOUGHT I KNEW WHERE I WAS GOING TO GO RIGHT UP FRONT, AND I STILL DO. BASED ON THIS CHAPTER , BASED ON THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. HOWEVER, TO ACCOMPLISH THE SAME MISSION WITHTHE APPROVAL AND CONDITION NUMBER ONE, DOES THAT ACCOMPLISH THE SAME? WE WANT TO CLEARLY DEFINED ON 67? BECAUSE APPROVAL WAS NUMBER ONE IN PLAY MEANS THAT WE ARE OKAY WITH THE 83 . HOWEVER, THEY HAVE TO GO OUT AND DO SOMETHING, AND IT WILL COME BACK TO THIS COMMISSION TO MODIFY THE DEVELOPING AGREEMENT AT SOME POINT IN LIFE. SO, I HAVE HEARD MADAM MAYOR SAY 67. I SAID IT. DID YOU SAY? I THINK YOU SAID IT. I LEARNED HOW TO COUNT TO THREE A LONG TIME AGO. BUT I

[04:10:01]

>> IT COLLEGES THE SAME THING.

>> I THINK IT DOES. I THINK THAT'S WHY WAS TRYING TO BE EVEN MORE SPECIFIC IN THE CALLOUT ON THE DEVELOPER AGREEMENT. EVEN JUST A SLIGHT MODIFICATION AND PLANT , SPECIFICALLY THE DATE OR WHATEVER IS REFERENCED.

>> YOU BRING A VALID POINT AS WELL. IF YOU'RE USING THAT AS THE BASIS OF THE MOTION THAT THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IS THE CORE OF THIS, THE NECK COVERS UP EVERYTHING. NOT JUST

THE NUMBER OF UNITS. >> RAY. AS WE READ AND AGREE THAT THAT THE DEVELOPER AGREEMENT.

>> I CAN'T MAKE THAT MOTION YET.

>> YOU CAN, YOU JUST TELL YOURSELF YOU CAN'T.

>> I AM TIRED. IT IS COMP LOCATED. MISS HEDGES, DO YOU HAVE A SUGGESTION AS TO HOW THE MOTION WOULD BE?

>> WHICH MOTION? WE ARE TALKING ABOUT MULTIPLE MOTIONS. SO,

WHICH MOTION? >> IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THERE IS A CONSENSUS TO SAY -- TO APPROVE SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.

>> THAT IS BASICALLY IT. >> I THINK THAT IS WHERE

EVERYBODY IS AT. YES? >> 11 CONDITIONS THAT STAFF RECOMMENDED TO INCLUDE THE DEVELOPERS AGREEMENT.

>> YOU ARE CREATING THE SAME ISSUE.

>> WAS A SEVEN? >> YES, SEVEN. GO BACK TO THE CONDITIONS. BECAUSE I AM READY TO MOVE ON. WE HAVE A WHOLE ANOTHER HOUR AND A HALF. GO BACK TO THE CONDITION, MR.

GILMORE? >> MY QUESTION STILL STANDS. IF IT IS AFFIRMATIVE ON WHAT YOU ARE SAYING, AND SEE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, BUT THIS IS CONDITION NUMBER ONE. IS IT ACCEPTABLE

AND APPLICABLE? >> THAT IS WHAT I WANT TO A CONSENSUS ON, AND I WILL MAKE THE MOTION. WE NEED TO CALL OUT SPECIFICALLY WHAT THIS SAYS . UNTIL THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, THAT IS WHAT I WANT TO REFERENCE . THE SPECIFIC HOME AGREEMENT THAT WE ALL AGREE ON. RIGHT? I'M LOOKING FOR A REFERENCE. IF THERE IS A NUMBER, OR IF THERE IS A DATE?

SPECIFIC DATES? >> MARCH 26, 2007.

>> YES. I WANT THAT AS PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT LINKAGE UP THERE SPECIFICALLY CALLING OUT THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.

>> MADAM MAYOR? >> YES?

>> I THINK WHAT YOU ARE TRYING TO GET TO IS CONDITION ONE SHOULD READ -- THIS AMENDMENT TO THE PUD SUBJECT TO THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT DATED MARCH THE SIXTH , 2007.

>> THAT IS CORRECT, YES. >> IT WAS AMENDED TO ALLOW THE 83. IS THIS A SPECIFIC LOAN THE VELTMAN DATE?

>> NO, SIR, I DON'T BELIEVE SO. THE WAY YOU JUST PHRASED IT WOULD BE AMENDING THE DEVELOPERS AGREEMENT.

>> OKAY. ONE MORE TIME, MR. FREEMAN? ONE MORE TIME, PLEASE?

>> THIS AMENDMENT TO THE DATA TRACE PUD AGREEMENT IS SUBJECT TO THE EXISTING DEVELOPERS AGREEMENT DATED MARCH THE

SIXTH, 2007. >> MARCH 26, 2007?

>> MARCH 26, 2007. I AM SORRY.

>> I GUESS ANY CLARITY TO BE ABLE TO ANSWER THESE QUESTIONS ON WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO DO, BECAUSE I AM HEARING THAT WE WANT TO DENY THIS AND STAY AT 67, THAT I AM HEARING THAT WE WANT TO APPROVE IT FOR THE 83. IF YOU ARE LOOKING TO DENY THIS , IF YOU WANT TO STAY AT 67 UNITS , WE WOULD HAVE A MOTIO TO DENY , AND YOU NEED TO PUT YOUR REASONS FOR THE DENIAL ON THE RECORD. WHETHER IT IS HEALTH SAFETY WELFARE, BECAUSE OF A DEVELOPER AGREEMENT THAT EXISTS , IF YOU GO THROUGH THE 125-212, THERE STUFF IN THERE ABOUT ENVIRONMENT IMPACTS, THINGS LIKE THAT. SO, WHATEVER YOUR REASONS FOR DENYING THE AMENDMENT TO INCREASE TO 83, YOU NEED TO STATE THOSE. IF THE INTENT IS TO AUTHORIZE 83 UNITS AS IT WAS REVIEWED BY OUTSIDE COUNSEL, WHICH YOU SPECIFICALLY STATED AS HE HAS A RIGHT TO PROCEED WITH HIS AMENDMENT. IT DOESN'T MEAN YOU HAVE TO ALLOW THE AMENDMENT. HE SOUGHT TO DO YOUR NORMAL ANALYSIS , BUT HER RECOMMENDATION IS THAT ANY APPROVAL BE CONDITIONED ON THE FACT THAT THE DEVELOPING AGREEMENT HAS TO BE AMENDED TO ALLOW FOR THE ADDITIONAL UNITS TO 83. BECAUSE THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT -- THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT STATES 67 UNITS. SO,

[04:15:02]

WHATEVER TO READ AS FOLLOWS. >> YEAH.

>> WELL, WITH THAT BEING SAID, WE HAVE THE RIGHT IN FRONT OF US RIGHT NOW. THAT WAS PREPARED. THIS IS BEEN PREPARED

BY STAFF AND BY LEGAL COUNSEL. >> YES, SIR. YOU CAN AMEND ANY OF THOSE CONDITIONS TO READ HOWEVER YOU WOULD LIKE, OR YOU CAN ADD ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS OR ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS. I THINK WE NEED TO GO BACK TO CONDITION ONE, BECAUSE THAT IS

THE ONE IN QUESTION. >> THAT IS THE ONLY ONE IN QUESTION FOR ME. EVERYTHING ELSE FALLS INTO PLACE.

>> SO, ALL RIGHT. LET'S PLAY THIS OUT. WE WILL GO THROUGH IF WE WERE ABLE TO APPROVE WITH THE CONDITIONS AS STATED HERE ON THE SCREEN . THE APPLICANT IS STILL REQUIRED TO GET THE DEVELOPERS AGREEMENT AMENDED. ALL PARTIES HAVE TO SIGN, THEY SOUGHT TO COME BACK TO THE CITY COMMISSION. WHATEVER DATE IN THE CALENDAR THAT COMES BACK, WE WILL HAVE ANOTHER DISCUSSION ON THIS TO TALK ABOUT THAT, TO TALK ABOUT THE UNITS, AND TO TALK ABOUT THE ALLEGATIONS , AND TO TALK ABOUT ANY CONDITIONS WITHIN THE DEVELOPER AGREEMENT LATER ON THAT WE MAY OR MAY NOT WANT TO ADDRESS AT THAT TIME.

>> YOU ARE CORRECT, BUT WHAT HAS BEEN STATED HERE IS A PUTS THOSE TWO PARTIES HAVING TO AGREE. IT TAKES US OUT OF HEARING AND PUTTING THOSE TWO PARTIES IN THE ROOM TO COME UP WITH A CONSENSUS. BECAUSE RIGHT NOW, THERE IS NO CONSENSUS

BETWEEN THE TWO. >> THAT IS HOW THIS WHOLE DISCUSSION STARTED AN HOUR AND 20 MINUTE AGO.

>> I AGREE WITH YOU. >> SO, THAT LOCKS IT IN, AND THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT OUR INTENTION IS. THEY NEED TO RESOLVE THIS AND GET IT BACK TO US. THAT IS WHAT THAT SAYS, AT

LEAST IN MY INTERPRETATION. >> RIGHT. BECAUSE THERE WILL BE NO SAY PLAN PERMITS OR BUILDING PERMITS .

>> RATE. >> RAY.

>> NONE. >> ZERO.

>> SO, AND IT FEELS TO ME , IF I MAY, IT FEELS TO ME , I HAVE BEEN ON THE SIDE OF DENYING APPLICATIONS BEFORE , AND YOU HAVE TO BE VERY STRATEGIC. AS TO BE VERY SPECIFIC 125-212 ON WHICH PARTS ARE NOT MEETING THE APPLICATION IN THE CODE.

>> IS BASED ON SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE.

>> IS BASED ON THE EVIDENCE. >> SO HERE, YOU'RE APPROVING IT SUBJECT TO THE DEVELOPERS. THAT TAKES US OUT OF IT. SO,

THEY HAVE AN AGREEMENT. >> YES.

>> THAT WORKS FOR ME. LIKE I SAID, AN HOUR AND A HALF AGO.

THAT WAS THE INITIAL CONVERSATION.

>> WELL, WE OWE IT TO THE PUBLIC TO BRING THEM ALONG. WE THROW AROUND THESE TERMS OF EVIDENCE. YOU KNOW, I JUST LEARNED THAT FOUR YEARS AGO. RIGHT?

>> AND IT IS STILL HARD. IT'S VERY HARD.

>> BUT WE ARE TRYING TO HELP THE PUBLIC UNDERSTAND IS THAT THERE ARE STILL PROTECTIONS OUT HERE. ELECTED OFFICIALS FOR THE STUFF TO BE FAIR AND TO PROTECT THE CITIZENS AND PROTECT DEVELOPERS. WE ARE DOING THAT IN BOTH ASPECTS, BECAUSE THE WAVES THE LAW IS WRITTEN IN THIS APPROVAL IS, THIS CONDITION , THERE ARE PROTECTIONS IN PLACE FOR CITIZENS , AND EVEN THE DEVELOPER TO WORK OUT THE SITUATION , WHICH THEY NEED TO DO, AND NOT HAVE US WORK THERE AGREEMENT OUT. WITH THAT BEING SAID, MADAM MAYOR, I WILL MOVE FORWARD THE APPROVAL OF , WHAT IS THIS YEAR? NO, YES.

QUASIJUDICIAL 24- 010 WITH THE STATED SEVEN CONDITIONS THAT ARE ON THE SCREEN FOR APPROVAL.

>> MADAM MAYOR, BEFORE THERE IS A SECOND , MAY I ASK IF YOU WOULD LIKE CONDITION ONE TO BE AMENDED TO READ NO SAY CLEARING PERMITS OR BUILDING PERMITS SHALL BE ISSUED UNLESS THEY UNTIL THE MARCH 26, 2007 DEVELOPMENT DEVELOPERS AGREEMENT IS AMENDED TO ALLOW FOR 83 TWO-STORY TOWNHOUSE UNITS IN PHASE ONE. SO, THAT GIVES YOU THE DATE OF YOU

DEVELOPERS AGREEMENT. >> I WOULD LIKE THAT.

>> THAT IS INCORPORATED INTO AND MOTION.

>> YES, INCORPORATE THAT INTO MY MOTION. YES, MA'AM.

>> WAS THERE A SECOND? >> YOU GOT HEARING NOTHING WE

SAID! >> MA'AM? IS THERE A SECOND ?

[04:20:03]

>> I DO, COMMISSIONER C. JOHNSON. I THINK IT WARRANTS THE UNDERSTANDING THAT NOT ONLY IS THE NUMBER OF JUST A, BUT HE NEEDS TO BE IN FULL COMPLIANCE WITH THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT

AS IT EXISTS. >> EXACTLY.

>> I WANTED TO MAKE THE SUGGESTION, IF YOU JUST ENDED IT AS AMENDED AND LEAVE OUT THE LAST , AND YOU KNOW WHAT I

MEAN? >> AND USE A MICROPHONE, MAYOR?

CAN HEAR YOU. I AM SORRY. >> SORRY. SORRY. I DON'T KNOW WHY WE CAN'T JUST LEAVE IT TO ALLOW FOR 83 TOWNHOUSE UNITS IN PHASE ONE. IT IS JUST UNTIL THE DEVELOPERS AGREEMENT OF MARCH 26, 2007 AS AMENDED. PERIOD. CANNOT BE DONE?

>> I DON'T BELIEVE THAT WOULD ADDRESS THE QUESTION BEFORE YOU RELATED TO THE SITE PLAN. SPECIFICALLY WHAT YOU ARE REVIEWING IS A SAY PLAN AMENDMENT RELATED TO 67 UNITS INCREASE TO 53 UNITS. NOT INCLUDING A SECOND PART OF THAT SENTENCE, I DON'T TAKE IT ADDRESSES AN ISSUE IN THE DEVELOPERS AGREEMENT OF 67 UNITS.

>> AGAIN, THE OUTBURST IS BECAUSE THERE IS A FUNDAMENTAL DISCONNECTION OF WHAT WE KNOW WE ARE DOING , AND I'M NOT UNDERSTANDING WHAT WE ARE DOING. AND THAT IS AN ISSUE.

YOU ELECTED US TO BE HERE AS COMMISSIONERS, AND WE GOVERN AS ONE FORT PIERCE. I CARE WHAT IS HAPPENING IN THIS OR TWO AS IT IS IN DISTRICT 1. I AM TRYING ON VERY CLEAR TERMS TO HELP YOU UNDERSTAND AND NOTHING MOVES FORWARD ON ANY DEVELOPMENT WITHOUT AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE DEVELOPER AND STEVE TARR ON THE NUMBER OF WHAT CAN BE DEVELOPED IN THE DATA TREES AREA. NOTHING. BECAUSE THE REMIT THAT WE ARE LOOKING AT THAT IS IN PLACE RIGHT NOW LOCKS AND AT 67. BUT THERE ARE CERTAIN PARAMETERS THAT WE, AS ELECTED OFFICIALS, THAT WE ALSO HAVE TO FOLLOW THE LAW OF QUASIJUDICIAL HEARING . WE ARE ACTING AS JUDGE AND AS EVIDENCE HERE. ARE GOING ON EVIDENCE THAT HAS BEEN SUBMITTED THAT CAN BE UPHELD IN COURT. WE HAVE TO GO BEFORE THE COURT FOR ANY DOCUMENTATION . I AM NOT JEOPARDIZING ANYBODY TO INCLUDE OURSELVES , THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE, OR A DEVELOPER. AND THINGS LIKE THAT HAPPEN, AND UNFORTUNATELY , IF THERE ARE LAWSUITS, THE CITIZENS GET PENALIZED GET TO THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE. UTILIZE TAX DOLLARS TO DEFEND THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE. BUT TO DENY SOMETHING OUT FRONT THAT IS HERE , WE HAVE TO HAVE EVIDENCE ON DENYING THAT. THAT IS THE STRUGGLE YOU SEE HERE THAT THE COMMISSIONERS AND I ARE GOING THROUGH. BECAUSE YOU CAN'T JUST SAY NO AND A QUASIJUDICIAL HEARING. IT'S ROOTED IN EVIDENCE THAT IS COMPETENT AND SUBSTANTIAL BY THOSE PARTY THAT CAN READ THAT INTO THE RECORD. WE APPRECIATE EVERYTHING THAT YOU HEAR AND UNDERSTAND . THERE IS ALSO A POINT THAT I KNOW AS AN ELECTED OFFICIAL , AND THERE IS THIS CONDITION ONE THAT PUTS INTO PLACE THAT THERE'LL BE NO CLEARING PERMITS. THAT MEANS NO TREES COMING DOWN, NO NOTHING, NO BUILDING PERMITS ISSUED. IF YOU GET A BUILDING PERMIT, THERE IS NOTHING TO BE BUILT UNTIL THIS DEVELOPER AGREEMENT WHICH IS DATED MARCH 22ND, 2007 , WHICH STATES THAT THIS IS LOCKED IN AT 67 UNITS RIGHT NOW. AND UNTIL THAT AS AMENDED, THAT IS WHERE IT IS AT. AND UP A SETBACK ON THE DEVELOPER, AND YOUR LANDOWNER OUT THERE.

[04:25:05]

>> IT JUST NEED TO BE IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE

DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. >> THAT IS FINE TOO. WE CAN DO IT. NO SAY CLEARING PERMITS SHALL BE ISSUED .

>> WE CAN CHANGE IT. >> THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN IS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. IT'S SIMPLE.

>> THAT IS FINE BY ME. >> YEAH, TALK TO AN ATTORNEY.

>> THAT IS NOT MY RECOMMENDATION ON HOW THE CONDITION SHOULD READ. I BELIEVE IT SHOULD READ AS IS, AND IF YOU WANTED TO INCLUDE THE DEVELOPER AGREEMENT FOR MORE CLARITY , THAT I THINK WOULD BE FINE. BUT THE POINT IS, WE HAVE TO AMENDED, AND THAT IS WHAT IS TO BE CLEAR.

>> JUST INSERT THE DATE. >> THAT IS WHAT WE DID.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR FOR THAT. WE ARE STILL

WAITING ON THE SECOND. >> SECOND.

>> IS THERE ANY MORE DISCUSSION? I WOULD BE MORE

COMFORTABLE WITH DENIAL. >> MAKE THE MOTION.

>> I CAN'T. >> SO, THE MOTION INCLUDES A DATE OF THE DEVELOPER AGREEMENT. MARCH 26, 2007 IS

THE ONLY CHANGE. >> YES.

>> ARE YOU READY TO CALL THE ROLE?

>> ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? >> OKAY. CALL THE ROLE, PLEASE.

>> COMMISSIONER BRODERICK? >> YES.

>> COMMISSIONER GAINES? >> NO.

>> COMMISSIONER C. JOHNSON? >> YES.

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

>> MAYOR HUDSON? >> NO.

>> THAT MOTION FAILS. WE NEED ANOTHER MOTION.

>> MADAM MAYOR, AND MAKE A MOTION TO DENY THIS . TO DENY ORDINANCE 24-10 BASED ON THE DEVELOPER AGREEMENTS WE

BELIEVED THAT IS IN PLAY. >> IS THERE A SECOND?

>> SECOND. >> ANY DISCUSSION?

>> MADAM MAYOR? >> YES?

>> I UNDERSTAND THE MOTION. IF YOU COULD JUST RESTATE IT, WE ARE LOOKING AT OUR CODE RIGHT HERE. AND I WAS GOING TO BE MY

NEXT QUESTION ABOUT THE DATE. >> OTIS REESE DATA. MADAM MAYOR, AND MAKE A MOTION TO DENY ORDINANCE 24 010 BASED ON THE UNDERSTANDING THAT WE HAVE A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THAT IS IN EFFECT , DATED MARCH 26 , 2007 BASED UPON ALSO OUR CODE .

125 TO 12. >> SECOND.

>> OKAY. IS EVERYBODY OKAY? WANT TO SEE WHAT WE ARE BROKEN

VOTING ON? >> WHAT IN 125.12 IS CITED

SPECIFICALLY? >> I CAN SHARE MY IPAD. THAT'S THE SAME THING THAT IS ON THE SCREEN.

>> GIVE ME ONE SECOND, COMMISSIONER JOHNSON. BASED ON THE CODE, COMMISSIONER JOHNSON, CF1F WRITTEN AGREEMENT GOVERNANCE USE MAINTENANCE AND CONTROL PROTECTION OF THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT OF ITS, AND OPEN SPACES AND OTHER SHARED AREAS.

WE HAVE A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IN PLACE. HOW DO WE REACH THAT

AREA? >> THANK YOU. I SECOND THAT.

>> AS AN AGREEMENT, WE HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT FOR THE LAST HOUR AND A HALF A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. THE DEVELOPED

[04:30:02]

>> MADAM MAYOR , COMMISSIONER GAINES, MAY I HAVE A SCROLL TO SUBSECTION A AT THE TOP? THERE, YOU SEE THAT IT INCLUDES THE PUBLIC HEALTH SAFETY AND GENERAL WELFARE . IS YOUR

MOTION ALSO INCLUDE -- >> YES.

>> THAT IT DOES NOT COMPLY WITH THE GENERAL WELFARE BASED ON

THE TESTIMONY PRESENTED? >> YES.

>> TO ANY OF THE OTHER SUBSECTIONS ONE THROUGH 11 , ARE THEY INCLUDED IN YOUR MOTION AS WELL? I WOULD POINT FOR CONSIDER ACTION CONSIDERATION, SUBSECTION TWO.

YES, SIR. OF THE MOTION INCLUDE THAT?

>> YES. >> A4?

>> YES. >> ANY OTHERS?

>> WHAT ABOUT A 10? >> SAME AS THE OTHER ONES, COMMISSIONER BURKE, BUT I WILL INCLUDE THAT AS WELL.

>> A 10? >> YES, A 10. IS THAT IT? THEN

I WILL SECOND. >> ARE WE GOOD? ARE YOU READY

TO VOTE? CALL THE ROLE. >> OKAY. WE HAVE COMMISSIONER

BRODERICK? >> YES.

>> COMMISSIONER GAINES? >> YES.

>> COMMISSIONER C. JOHNSON? >> NO, MA'AM.

>> COMMISSIONER J. JOHNSON? >> YES.

>> MAYOR HUDSON? >> YES.

>> THANK YOU. >> OKAY.

[d. Legislative Hearing - Ordinance 24-011: Review and approval of a voluntary annexation by Owner, Ignacio and Amelia Garcia, to extend the territorial limits of the City of Fort Pierce, Florida, to include one (1) parcel at 2507 Rolyat Street. The proposed Future Land Use of the property is General Commercial (GC), with a proposed Zoning of Office Commercial (C-1). The Parcel ID is 2419-601-0049-000-2. FIRST READING]

>> OKAY. SO, WE MOVE ON TO ORDINANCE 24-011. AN ORDINANCE EXTENDING THE TERRITORIAL LIMITS OF FORT PIERCE, FLORIDA TO INCLUDE ONE PARCEL AT OR NEAR PROXIMATELY 2507 ROWLETT STREET AND SHOWN ON EXHIBIT A , DIRECTING THE STATE COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISER WITH PROPERTY AS THE TAX ROLLS AS OF JANUARY 1, 2024, DIRECTING THE ST. LUCIE COUNTY, TEXT DIRECTOR TO COLLECT TAXES OF THE HEARING DESCRIBE PROPERTIES ESTABLISHING THE ZONING DESIGNATION OF OFFICE COMMERCIAL C1 ESTABLISHING BEFORE PEERS LAND-USE DESIGNATION OF GENERAL COMMERCIAL CG DIRECTING FILING OF THE ORDINANCE WITH THE COURT CIRCUIT COURT ADMINISTRATION TO OFFICER OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY WITH THE CHARTER BOUNDARY ARTICLE TO BE FUN WITH THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE.

CONSIDERING THE OFFICE OF ECONOMIC AND DEMOGRAPHIC RESEARCH PROVIDING FOR SEPARATE CLAUSES FOR SEVERAL CONFLICT HERE AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THIS IS THE

FIRST READING. >> THE SUBJECT PROPOSE

[04:35:14]

FURTHERMORE, PURSUANT TO CHAPTER 171.0446 , SUBSECTION ONE, FOR THE STATUTE, WHERE IS THE REGISTRATION RECOGNIZES THE ENCLAVES COULD CREATE SIGNIFICANT PROBLEMS IN PLANNING, GROWTH MANAGEMENT, AND SERVICE DELIVERY, AND THAT IS THE POLICY OF THE STATE TO LIMITING ENCLAVES. THE CURRENT VALUE OF THE PROPERTY IS 150,700. THIS CREATES A NEW TAX REVENUE ANNUALLY TO THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE IF DEVELOPED. THE PROPOSED FUTURE LAND USE IN THE CITY IS COMMERCIAL. THE EXISTING ZONING IN THE COUNTY IS COMMERCIAL OFFICE . THE ZONING WILL BE C1 OFFICE COMMERCIAL.

>> QUESTIONS TO STAFF? >> MADAM MAYOR?

>> YES? >> THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION. VERY GOOD JOB. ANY COLORMAP WORKS FOR ME. CAN YOU EXPLAIN TO ME OR TALK TO ME ABOUT THE STREET ITSELF? IS IT A DEAD END, OR DOES IT HAVE A WAY FOR VEHICLES TO EXIT FROM THE NORTH IF YOU ARE IN NORTHBOUND?

>> THAT IS A GOOD QUESTION. IF YOU SEE HERE, MY MOUSE, THIS IS THE STREET HERE. YOU CAN COME AROUND AND EXIT . SO, IT IS NOT A DEAD-END TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION.

>> ALL RIGHT. SO, WE ARE PROVIDING AN EXISTING BUILDING

ON THIS PROPERTY. >> YES, SIR, IT IS. THERE IS A

STRUCTURE THERE. >> SO, WE WILL BE PROVIDING CITY SERVICES 2466 PROPERTIES TO ANY OTHER CITY PROPERTY.

>> I DO BELIEVE THAT IS CORRECT.

>> OKAY. THAT IS IT. THAT IS A LITTLE BIT OF A CHALLENGE .

I'M THINKING ABOUT GARBAGE TRUCKS, I THINKING ABOUT DUPLICATION OF SERVICES . WE HAVE HAD THE SITUATION IN OTHER PLACES. BECAUSE THIS IS LEGISLATIVE. WE DON'T HAVE TO GET TOO DEEP INTO IT. FROM THE CITY'S PERSPECTIVE, FROM THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT PERSPECTIVE, IS THERE A WAY FOR US TO IMPROVE CONDITIONS UNTIL SUCH TIME THAT THE OTHER PARCELS ON THE STREET ARE ANNEXED OR SOMETHING ALONG MANAGER? YOU SEE WHERE I AM GOING WITH THAT?

>> WELL, I THINK, AND I THINK WILL BE TALKING TO THE COMMISSION IF THAT IS LATER ON IN TERMS OF AN ANNEXATION STRATEGY. NOT TODAY, BUT SOMETIME IN THE FUTURE. WHAT WE COULD START TO ORIGINATE IS AN AGREEMENT TO ANNEX THE PROPERTY

[04:40:07]

YOU CAN SEE THEY HAVE THE BENEFIT THAT THEY DO HAVE, YOU KNOW, A NUMBER PROPERTIES THERE THAT WOULD BE THE SAME. WE HAVE SIMILAR LOCATIONS IN THE CITY WHICH ARE THE OPPOSITE. WE HAVE MANY CITY AND COUNTY PROPERTIES. IF WE DON'T MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS NOW , WHAT I WOULD SUGGEST IS THAT, IF THE APPLICANT IS OPEN TO IT, THAT WE HAVE AN AGREEMENT ESTABLISHED . I WILL HAVE TO TALK TO THE CITY ATTORNEY ABOUT HOW THAT IS FORMED , AND THE COMMISSION WOULD APPLY TO THIS.

>> WANT TO BECOME CONTIGUOUS WITH A CITY LIMIT , YOU'RE IN.

ONCE A CITY TAKE THAT ACTION, YOU ARE IN.

>> I HAVE A FEELING, AND MR. MIMMS IS INVITING US. WE JUST INVERTED THE SITUATION WHERE THE COUNTY ONLY HAS ONE OR TWO PARCELS LEFT, AND NOW THEY ARE PROVIDING SERVICES.

>> WE ARE DOING THE SAM THING AND I AM REPEATING THE EXACT SAME INDUSTRY THAT IS COST ME ISSUE FOR A COMMISSIONER FOR 2024. HAVE THE SAME HEARTBURN AND GULP IN MY BELLY. THERE HAS

TO BE A BETTER WAY. >> I DON'T WANT TO TALK.

>> YOU HAVE TO TALK. >> I KNOW HAD IS BEEN A LONG NIGHT, BUT CAN SOMEONE TELL ME HOW THIS MAKES SENSE?

>> I UNDERSTAND, AND I LIKE THE AGREEMENT. ANY WANT TO COME TO FORT PIERCE. WE WANT YOU HERE. BUT WE JUST HAVE ONE HOUSE.

>> WITH ONE TRASH CAN. >> ONE HOUSE? THIS IS EVERYTHING ELSE? EVERYTHING ELSE ON THIS BLOCK?

>> I HAVE TO SAY THAT THIS IS HAPPENING IN OTHER

NEIGHBORHOODS IN THE CITY. >> YOU HAVE TO GET THEM OFF.

>> YES. >> THAT IS WHY AM ANSWERING THE QUESTION. OUR GOAL IS TO GIVE IT TO ANOTHER CITY. I AM JUST

[04:45:02]

>> IT IS COOL. WE ARE ALL TIGHT. MADAM MAYOR AND MEMBERS OF THE CITY COMMISSION, THIS IS VOLUNTARY ANNEXATION THAT WAS NOT INITIATED BY THE CITY OF YOUR STAFF. FUNCTIONALLY, IS A STRATEGIC ? THIS IS NOT STRATEGIC. THIS WAS BROUGHT TO US BY THE APPLICANTS. AS A MATTER OF OPERATION AND PROCEDURE , THIS WILL NOT ENHANCE OUR SERVICE DELIVERY.

THIS IS YOUR CHOICE. BUT THIS DOES NOT ENHANCE OUR SERVICE

DELIVERY. >> EVERYBODY WANTS TO COME INTO

THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE. >> CORRECT. CORRECT.

>> THAT THE ISSUE I HAVE, MADAM MAYOR. YOU KNOW, I LIKE THE IDEA OF SOME TYPE OF, YOU KNOW, AGREEMENT . WE WANT YOU IN FORT PIERCE. IF THERE IS A PROBLEM IN MY HOUSE, THE CITY HAS TO GO TO THEIR HOUSE. BUT THEY STEP OVER AND HAVE A PROBLEM AT ANOTHER HOUSE , THAT IS WHERE THE CHAIR HAS TO GO. TO SCORE ON THE LOOP, LIKE JEREMIAH SAID.

>> YEP. IT WILL BE THE ONE RESIDENTIAL TRASH CAN OF THAT DAY. IT WILL NOT BE A COMMERCIAL CAN. IT WILL BE ONE LITTLE BABY 96 GALLON AS WE WERE EDUCATED ON EARLIER TONIGHT. SO, HERE IS MY POINT. STAFF, YOU'RE DOING A GREAT JOB. YOU ARE BRINGING IT IT TO US IN DISCUSSING. HIS LETTER OF FLEXION OF WHAT YOU ARE DOING , THIS IS A REFLECTION OF WHAT YOU SHOULD DO, BECAUSE THERE ARE WAYS, MEANS, AND METHODS TO GET RID OF ENCLAVES, AND TO GET RID OF THESE CONFLICTS, AND TO GET RID OF THE SITUATIONS WHERE YOU ARE DUPLICATE SERVICES, TEARING UP ROADS, DRIVING DOWN THE STREET TWO OR THREE TIMES ON MONDAY, WEDNESDAY, FRIDAY, SATURDAY TO PICK UP TRASH OR

CALL IN FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE LOVE YOU IN THE CITY. WE LOVE YOU. FIND THE PIECE OF PAPER, AND ONE DAY WE WILL ANNEX YOU IN. RIGHT?

>> I WILL REFLECT THE AGREEMENT IN SOME WAY.

>> EASY PEASY. >> THEY MUST'VE HAD A REASON

TO COME INTO THE CITY? >> BECAUSE THEY WANT TO COME INTO THE CITY. AT SUCH A GREAT PLACE. THEY ARE GETTING VALLEY BECAUSE OF WHAT THEY CAN DO ON THEIR PROPERTY.

>> RAY. I WANT THEM IN THE CITY.

>> MADAM MAYOR, IF I MAY SAY, EVEN THOUGH THE APPLICANT IS NOT HERE THIS EVENING, HE DID STATE HIS REASONING FOR ANNEXATION TO GET HOOKED UP TO CITY GUYS. SO?

>> WAIT, WHAT? CITY GUYS? >> YOU WANTED ACCESS TO CITY

GUYS. >> TO PAY FOR THE LINE LIKE YOU WILL ANYWAYS? WILL HE GET IT? NO. WE SIGNED UP A CUSTOMER NO

CALIFORNIA. >> DOES HE KNOW THAT?

>> NO, I GUESS. LET HIM GUESS. TAKE A GUESS.

>> TWO THEY KNOW THEY CAN GET GAS WITHOUT COMING IN? OH, MAN.

>> MAYBE WE SHOULD SUGGEST -- MAYBE WE SHOULD SUGGEST THAT WE PUT THIS OFF FOR A MONTH, AND GO BACK TO THEM AND SAY IF YOUR PRIMARY REASON IS TO GET GAS, YOU DON'T HAVE TO BE ANNEXED.

>> BUT HERE IS A FORM. PLEASE SIGN UP. BECAUSE WE WANT YOU

ANNEXED. >> IF THERE IS A DIFFERENT BASIS FOR THIS, YOU CAN GO BACK AND HAVE A DISCUSSION. BUT IT IS 6:00 AT NIGHT VERSUS 10:00.

>> ATTORNEY, REAL QUICK, THIS FORUM THAT THE COMMISSIONER JOHNSON AND DIRECTOR FREEMAN ARE TALKING ABOUT , IF THERE IS SOMETHING THAT WE CAN CREATE LIKE THAT TO SAY HEY, I HAVEN'T SEEN IT, YOU KNOW, AND SAY HEY, THANK YOU FOR YOUR INTEREST , PLEASE SIGN UP, AND THIS IS OUR POLICY, YOU KNOW, I KNOW THIS IS BETTER. SAY THAT AGAIN, JEREMIAH? IS A FORM? WE WILL GET YOU WELCOME TO THE CITY.

>> YOU WANT TO BE IN THE CITY.

>> WHEN YOUR PROPERTY IS SURROUNDED BY OTHERS 20 TO COME

INTO THE CITY. >> COMMISSIONERS, WE CAN TAKE A

[04:50:02]

PLACE. >> I WILL SUGGEST WE DO THAT.

MADAM MAYOR, THAT SHOWS -- THAT SHOWS THE RESIDENT THAT WE DO WANT THEM. NOT JUST TURNING OUR BACK, WE DO WANT THEM, BUT WE ALSO HAVE TO PROTECT THE OTHER RESIDENTS BY, YOU KNOW, BY NOT SUMMONING ONE TRUCK OUT THERE. SO, I LIKE THE IDEAS. I UNDERSTAND WE HAVE TO COME UP WITH A BETTER PROCEDURE. LIKE I SAID, I'VE GOT YOU, CITY MANAGER. THEY CALLED US, SO THERE IS A REASON WHY. GONE PEOPLE AND EXIT FORT PIERCE.

>> ONE ONE PHONE CALL SAYS THAT THEY WANT WATER ON A STREET, YOU DON'T START CANVASSING THE NEIGHBORHOOD. I'VE DONE IT ON FOOT MYSELF MANY TIMES. YOU CANVASSED THE NEIGHBORHOOD, YOU SEND LETTERS OUT, AND YOU SAY HEY, BY THE WAY, YOUR NEIGHBORS ARE INTERESTED IN ANNEXING THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE. THERE IS A PROCESS IN THE CITY OF FLORIDA THAT BY A LITTLE SIDE OF ANNEXATION , THIS IS A DEFINED AREA. WE WOULD LIKE YOUR VOTE AND BASICALLY, INSTEAD OF BEING INFORMED OF I AM GOING TO ANNEXED, THEY ARE JUST SAYING YES, I AM UP FOR THE VOTE. THE SBU PROCESS WAS 51%. 50% PLUS ONE VOTE MEANT THAT IT WAS GOING FORWARD ON NOT GETTING WATER SERVICE. THAT IS HOW I RECEIVE IT. LET US LEAD OF ANNEXATION IS A BIT DIFFERENT I KNOW , BUT I KNOW THAT YOU CAN GO THROUGH A PROCESS OF VOTING IN ENCLAVES AND PARCELS THE NEIGHBORHOODS WOULD BE IN.

>> I THINK THIS OFF TO BE OWNERS.

>> ANYONE WISHING TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE, PLEASE COME FORWARD. I AM SEEING NO ONE OR NO MOVEMENT. I WILL COME BACK TO THE COMMISSION. WHAT IS YOUR PLEASURE?

>> I HAVE NO IDEA. >> WELL, COMMISSIONER BRODERICK BROUGHT UP A GOOD IDEA. JUST POSTPONE AND REALLY DIG INTO WHY THEY WANT THIS. THEY JUST ASKED FOR IT AND SAID GAS OR

SOMETHING. >> I KNOW MADAM ATTORNEY LIKES

TO TAKE DATES. >> IS YOUR MOTION TO CONTINUE

TO A DATE CERTAIN? >> YES, MA'AM.

>> WE WILL MOTION TO TABLE FOR 60 DAYS.

>> SECOND. >> IT WILL CONTINUE, NOT TABLE,

FOR 60 DAYS. >> CAN WE GIVE THE DATE CERTAIN

FOR THE JULY MEETING? >> I HAVE TO FIND A CALENDAR

HERE. >> SO I FOURTH IS A THURSDAY.

>> WE HAVE A MEETING ON JULY 1ST OR JULY 15TH.

>> AND I GOT THE INFORMATION, JEREMIAH.

>> JULY 1 OR JULY 15? >> I WAS A JULY ONE IS MORE

EFFICIENT. >> SECOND.

>> OKAY. READY TO VOTE? CALL THE ROLE.

>> COMMISSIONER BRODERICK? >> YES.

>> COMMISSIONER GAINES? >> YES.

>> COMMISSIONER C. JOHNSON? >> YES.

>> COMMISSIONER J. JOHNSON? >> YES.

>> MAYOR HUDSON? >> YES.

>> I THOUGHT IT WOULD BE ON MY OWN ENCLAVE THERE.

[e. Legislative Hearing - Ordinance No. 24-014 - An ordinance amending the Code of Ordinances of the City of Fort Pierce, Chapter 28 - Parks, regarding fishing, hours, prohibited activities, parking and special use permits. FIRST READING]

>> YOU ARE GOING TO BE AN ISLAND ALL TO YOUR SELF.

LAUGHTER ] >> OKAY, NOW WE HAVE ORDINANCE 24-01 FOR AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE, CHAPTER 28 PARKS , REGARDING FISHING, HOURS , SECTION 20-4, FISHING WITHIN THE CITY TO INCLUDE AREAS OF JC PARK AND SOUTH CAUSEWAY PARK, INCLUDING SECTION 28 DASH FIVE , CLEANING UP BEACH DURING TURTLE NESTING SEASON, AMENDING ARTICLE TO , PARKS AND RECREATION, SECTION 38-40 , HOURS TO PROVIDE REGULATION BY SIGNAGE, AMENDING SECTION 28-31 PROHIBITING ACTIVITIES BY AMENDING TEMPORARY SHELTER REGULATIONS TO ALLOW DIGGING IN THE SAND BEACH AREAS , CLARIFYING ANIMALS PERMITTED IN PARKS TO BE SERVICE ANIMALS TO PROHIBIT THE USE OF FIREWORKS AT THE PARKS. AMENDING SECTION 28-33, PARKING WITHIN PARKS TO PROVIDE REGULATIONS BY SIGNAGE TO PROVIDE REGULATION REGARDING TYPE OF AND SIZE OF VEHICLES, AMENDING SECTION 28-37 , APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL USE PERMITS TO ALLOW THE CITY MANAGER TO ASSIGN A DESIGNEE THEREOF IN CONFLICT WITH PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

>> GOOD EVENING, MADAM MAYOR AND COMMISSIONERS. WE WILL JUST QUICKLY REVIEW THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS FOR CHAPTER 28. WE DISCUSSED THESE DURING A CONFERENCE AGENDA. MOST OF THIS

[04:55:02]

>> IS THERE TO PARK IT AND GET A CHANCE TO USE?

>> THE RESTRICTION IS IN OUR ORDINANCE, BUT AS A RULE, WE DON'T ENFORCE BE ON THE DOING LINE. WE DID FINAL THE PAPERWORK, ACTUALLY, TO SUPPORT THAT TO REMOVE IT. BUT AGAIN,

-- >> THAT IS FINE. I JUST WONDERED IF IT WAS SOMETHING SPECIAL. GOT IT.

>> IS JUST A MATTER THAT THAT WILL COME BACK AT A DIFFERENT

TIME. >> OKAY.

>> THERE WAS A LETTER A LOT OF ITEMS A DISCUSSION. THEY HAD A LOT OF DISCUSSION. THAT IS IT.

>> WELL, QUESTIONS FOR PEGGY? MR. REYES? ANYTHING? OKAY. THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. ANYONE WISHING TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE, PLEASE COME FORWARD. I AM SEEING NO MOVEMENT. I WILL BRING IT BACK TO THE COMMISSION. IS THERE A MOTION?

OR DISCUSSION? >> MADAM MAYOR, I MOVE TO APPROVE ORDINANCE NUMBER 24-104.

>> CALL THE ROLE, PLEASE. >> COMMISSIONER BRODERICK?

[f. Legislative Hearing - Ordinance 24-015: Amending the Code of Ordinances of the City of Fort Pierce Chapter 125 - Zoning, Article IV - Basic Zoning Districts, Section 125-212 Planned Development Zone (PD) and deleting existing Section 125-213 CHAPTER 125-213 - Planned Unit Redevelopment Zone (PUR). FIRST READING.]

>> YES. >> COMMISSIONER GAINES?

>> YES. BY COMMISSIONER C. JOHNSON?

>> YES. >> COMMISSIONER J. JOHNSON?

>> YES. >> MAYOR HUDSON?

>> YES. >> OKAY. NEXT, WE HAVE ORDINANCE 24-015 . MANY THE COURT OF ORDINANCES IN THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE, FLORIDA WITH AN AMENDED OR REVISED SECTION OF CHAPTER 125 ZONING ARTICLE FOUR BASIC ZONING DISTRICT 125-212

[05:00:01]

READING. >> MADAM MAYOR?

>> YES, SIR? >> I HAVE A SUGGESTION. THIS IS A VERY SUBSEQUENT ISSUE. CANDIDLY, TAKING THIS ON AT FIVE PAST 10:00 WILL DO A DISSERVICE TO WHAT THIS MODIFICATION REQUIRES. THIS, MOVING FORWARD AS PART OF THE LARGEST WEEPING CHANGES FOR DEVELOPMENT IN THE CITY. I AM JUST SUGGESTING BASED ON THE TIME THAT THIS IS NOT GOING TO GET THE ATTENTION THAT REALLY REQUIRES.

TRANSITIONING ]

>> YOU WANT TO GIVE IT ITS FULL ATTENTION, MR. FREEMAN, IS THIS A MAJOR AFFECT YOUR OPERATION TO PUT THIS OFF?

>> THERE ARE A NUMBER OF APPLICATIONS LOOKING FOR THIS TO HAPPEN. THE AMENDMENTS HERE ARE A RESPONSE TO THE CONFUSION THAT EXISTS NOW REGARDING WHETHER SOMETHING IS CONCEPTUAL, PRELIMINARY, IT OUTLINES, IN ESSENCE IT OUTLINES WHAT THE SUBMITTALS ARE IN MORE DETAIL. THE ACTUAL PROCESS FOR A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT IS ESSENTIALLY THE SAME. ALL THE REQUIREMENTS OUTLINED IN DPU ARE ARE TAKEN OUT TO AVOID CONFUSION. WE RESOLVED EVERYTHING DOWN TO APD

ZONE. >> WHAT IS THE WILL OF THE COMMISSION? I AM OKAY WITH SPLITTING THE DECISION. DOES

ANYBODY HAVE STRONG FEELINGS? >> I DON'T KNOW IF I HAVE A STRONG FEELING, I JUST DON'T LIKE HOLDING UP PROGRESS.

>> I HAVE A QUESTION. MR. FREEMAN, BASED ON YOUR JUDGMENT, NOW, WHAT IS THE IMPACT WITH WHERE WE STAND WITH THE NUMBER OF SUBMITTALS OR APPLICATIONS THAT MAY BE HELD UP AS A RESULT OF WHAT WE ARE LOOKING AT HERE.

>> I THINK IT IS PROBABLY BETWEEN FOUR AND SIX.

>> I AM SORRY THAT I HAVE TO CORRECT THIS, BUT ALL PENDING APPLICANTS WERE GIVEN THE OPTION TO PROCEED AS THE CODE CURRENTLY EXISTS. EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM CAN PROCEED RIGHT NOW SHOULD THEY CHOOSE, OR THEY COULD WAIT FOR THE AMENDMENT.

THAT IS MY UNDERSTANDING. THEY WERE ALL GIVEN THAT OPTION.

THIS IS NOT SPECIFICALLY HOLDING THEM UP, THEY WOULD JUST HAVE TO APPLY WITH THE CODE AS IT IS CURRENTLY WRITTEN SHOULD THEY LIKE TO PROCEED NOW.

>> WITH THAT BEING THE CASE, THEY COULD PROCEED FORWARD?

>> THE CODE IS THERE? >> RIGHT. THIS IS A VERY SERIOUS MATTER BECAUSE I HAD SOME LEGAL STAFF TIME AND HAD SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT A FEW THINGS. AS I RECALL, SEVERAL APPLICATIONS THAT CAME BEFORE US AND I RECALL PEOPLE SITTING AT THAT TABLE MAKING COMMENT'S ABOUT THE AMOUNT OF INVESTMENT TO GET SOMETHING TO US TO REVIEW. THEN, BEING AT THAT POINT, THAT THEY WOULD HAVE MADE A SIZABLE INVESTMENT AND

[05:05:04]

IS A TO YOU GUYS. >> IF WE POSTPONE THIS DO WE HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING OR WHAT DO WE DO?

>> IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO CONTINUE IT, YOU COULD DO SO.

WE HAVE NOT HAD ANY PRESENTATION WHATSOEVER. THE QUESTION I HAVE FOR MADAM CLERK IS, DOES IT NEED TO BE

RE-ADVERTISED? >> IT SHOULD BE.

>> WHAT IS THE SOONEST MEETING IT COULD GO ON.

>> THAT WOULD BE JUNE 3. THAT WOULD BE THE QUICKEST.

>> MADAM MAYOR, SHOULD WE ALSO BEFORE, WE HAVE PEOPLE IN THE AUDIENCE STILL? I DON'T KNOW IF THEY WOULD HEAR JUST THIS

ONE? >> THAT IS WHAT I WAS JUST

ASKING ABOUT. >> YOU ARE NOT GETTING PICKED

UP ON THE MICROPHONE. >> I GUESS I AM TURNING MY HEAD. SO, I WAS ASKING ABOUT WHETHER WE SHOULD HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING IF WE ARE GOING TO POSTPONE AND -- IT.

>> IT WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE IF YOU WISH TO TAKE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT, IF YOU WANT TO TAKE IT TODAY, YOU COULD DO THAT OUT OF ORDER AND THEN CONTINUE THE REMAINDER OF THE FIRST READ UNTIL THE JUNE 3 DATE IF THAT IS WHAT YOU WILL CHOOSE TO DO

AS A COMMISSION. >> ALL RIGHT. ANY FURTHER,?

>> I MAKE A MOTION TO CONTINUE IT TO JUNE 3.

>> DO YOU WANT TO DO THAT BEFORE THE PUBLIC HEARING?

>> IF YOU WANT PUBLIC COMMENT NOW, I AM FINE WITH THAT. THE BODY OF THIS SHOULD BE MOVED TO JUNE 3.

>> ANYONE WISHING TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE PLEASE COME FORWARD.

>> I AGREE, THIS IS BIG AND WE DO NEED THE FULLEST ATTENTION.

I UNFORTUNATELY GET VERY FRUSTRATED AND I DO NOT KNOW HOW YOUR PLANNING GOES OR WHAT YOU PUT ONTO A DOCKET, BUT EVERYBODY KNEW IT WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS GOING TO TAKE QUITE A WHILE. I FEEL LIKE WE KICK -- KEEP GETTING DOWN THIS ROAD.

THIS IS SOMETHING BIG THAT MAYBE WE SHOULD LOOK AT WHAT'S GOING ON THE AGENDA. I PURPOSELY FLEW BACK FROM ARUBA TO BE HERE FOR THIS. I AM OUT OF THE COUNTRY THE ENTIRE MONTH OF JUNE OVER IN EUROPE. NOW I HAVE TO REDO THAT FLIGHT. WE STARTED WITH THIS BEFORE A YEAR AGO IN JULY, AUGUST, SEPTEMBER, OCTOBER, A YEAR AGO 2023 TO MAKE SURE I AM HERE I KEEP PLANNING MY SCHEDULES AROUND THESE MEETINGS AND THEY ARE PLANNED HAPHAZARDLY. YOU HAVE TOO MUCH ON THE AGENDA OR YOU DON'T HAVE ENOUGH PLANNERS. I REMEMBER HOW MANY MONTHS AGO THEY SAID WE ARE GETTING MORE PLANERS. I DON'T SEE ANY MORE PLANERS. THERE ARE A LOT OF ISSUES LIKE THAT. I HAVE A LACK OF SLEEP NOW, I AM VERY TIRED AND VERY UPSET THAT THIS IS NOT GOING FORWARD. WE HAVE BEEN WAITING. IT IS INCORRECT ABOUT US BEING TOLD MOVE FORWARD OR WAIT UNTIL THIS NEW TEXT COMES THROUGH. IF WE WENT FORWARD WE WOULD HAVE BEEN DENIED AND HAD TO WAIT AT LEAST SIX MONTHS. THERE ARE A LOT OF ISSUES WITH THIS. THIS IS EVEN SENT TO OUTSIDE COUNSEL -- COUNSEL TO BE REVIEWED. I THINK WE NEED TO LOOK A LITTLE BIT BETTER AT PLANNING THESE MEETINGS. THIS IS RIDICULOUS. I SAT THERE ALL THIS, FLEW BACK HERE, I AM FLYING BACK AND FORTH THE DAY BEFORE THE COMMISSIONER MEETING AND I FLY OUT THE DAY AFTER.

THIS KEEPS HAPPENING. NOTHING ELSE TO SAY. VERY FRUSTRATING.

>> ANYONE ELSE? >> IS THERE DISCUSSION?

[g. Legislative Hearing - Ordinance 24-016 review and adoption of a Future Land Use Map Amendment by property owner Janica Jules, of one (1) parcel of land to change the Future Land Use from Boundary Commercial (BC), to General Commercial (GC), at 3720 Okeechobee road - Parcel ID: 2417-331-0002-000-7 - FIRST READING]

>> NEXT WE HAVE ORDINANCE 24 DASH 016. PROVIDING FOR REPEAL

[05:10:14]

>> PROCEED. >> BEFORE YOU AS AN APPLICATION FOR A MAP AMENDMENT AT 3720 OKEECHOBEE ROAD. THE PROPERTY OWNERS ARE --. IN SUMMARY, THE REQUEST FOR AN APPLICATION FOR FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT TO CHANGE THE ZONE FROM BOUNDARY COMMERCIAL TO GENERAL COMMERCIAL. THIS IS THE SITE LOCATION WITH AN AREA OF 1.06 GIVE OR TAKE ACRES. THE CURRENT FUTURE LAND USE IS BOUNDARY COMMERCIAL. THE PROPOSED IS GENERAL COMMERCIAL. THE ZONING WHICH YOU WILL SEE NEXT, RIGHT NOW IS --. FOR THE FUTURE LAND USE, THE BOUNDARY COMMERCIAL, THE MAX RESIDENT DENSITY IS NONE WITH GENERAL COMMERCIAL AS 15. WITH THAT IN MIND, THE INCREASE IN RESIDENTIAL UNITS COULD BE 15 UNITS. 20% FOR -- FLOORSPACE. ST. LUCIE COUNTY DID NOT PROVIDE COMMENTS. PLANNING BOARD AT THE MARCH 11, 2024 MEETING, THE PLANNING BOARD VOTED UNANIMOUSLY TO VOTE WITH THE RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL. FUTURE LAND USE IS CONSISTENT WITH FUTURE LAND USE CONSISTENT WITH A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. IT DOES NOT ADVERSELY IMPACT THE GENERAL WELFARE OF

THE PUBLIC. THANK YOU. >> QUESTIONS FROM STAFF?

>> THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING, ANYONE WISHING TO ADDRESS THIS

ISSUE PLEASE COME FORWARD. >> HELLO, I LIVE AT 1208 APPLE STREET. THE REASON I AM HERE IS TO PREVENT ANY FUTURE PROBLEMS FOR ME. I OWN THE PROPERTY RIGHT THERE ON OKEECHOBEE, THOSE TWO LOTS. THOSE TWO PROPERTIES. I OWN THEM. WHAT I PLAN TO DO THERE IS BUILD A MECHANIC SHOP IN THE FUTURE, HOPEFULLY THE NEAR FUTURE. FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, I HAVE NO ISSUE WITH THEM BUILDING THAT, BUT I SPOKE WITH SOMEONE WHO TOLD ME AN EVENT CENTER. I HAVE NO ISSUE WITH THAT, BUT IN THE FUTURE I WOULD NOT WANT TO HAVE ANY OBSTACLES SAYING, YOU CANNOT BUILD HERE. WHEN I BOUGHT THIS PROPERTY I SPOKE TO SOMEONE PLANNING AND THEY TOLD ME THAT MY PROPERTY WAS ZONED FOR WHAT I WANTED IT FOR. I JUST WANT TO PREVENT ANY FUTURE PROBLEMS LIKE I SAID, FOR ME. I DON'T KNOW IF I SAID SOMETHING

RIGHT. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, VERY MUCH. THE JOB. ANYONE ELSE? CLOSING THE PUBLIC HEARING.

>> JUST TO MAKE A QUICK COMMENT, I DON'T BELIEVE THERE WOULD BE ANY ISSUES LATER ON. YOU HAVE A GENERAL COMMERCIAL, EITHER WAY WHEN WE LOOK AT THE ZONING NEXT, IT IS VERY CONSISTENT. I DON'T THINK THERE WILL BE ANY ISSUES IN THE FUTURE. I MOVE FOR THE APPROVAL.

>> SECOND. MOTION AND A SECOND, CALL THE ROLE.

[h. Quasi-Judicial Hearing - Ordinance 24-017 providing for a Zoning Atlas Map Amendment by owner Janica Jules, of one (1) parcel of land from Neighborhood Commercial (C-2) to General Commercial (C-3) at 3720 Okeechobee Road, more specifically at Parcel ID: 2417-331-0002-000-7 - FIRST READING.]

>>> NEXT WE HAVE ORDINANCE 24 DASH 017.

>> HAVE WE MET ALL THE ADVERTISING IN COMPLIANCE?

[05:15:01]

>> WE DID NOT SUBMIT ADVERTISING REQUIREMENTS.

COMMISSIONER BRODERICK? >> NOTHING TO REPORT.

>> WILL YOU SWEAR AND THE WITNESSES?

>> ANYONE WISHING --. >> MAYOR, COMMISSIONERS, BEFORE YOU IS AN APPLICATION FOR A ZONING. THE APPLICANT IS --. IN SUMMARY, THIS IS A REQUEST FOR A REVIEW OF A ZONING APPLICATION FOR ONE PARCEL OF LAND TO CHANGE FROM NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL TO GENERAL COMMERCIAL. THIS IS THE SITE LOCATION WITH THE AREA OF 1.06 GIVE OR TAKE ACRES. AS YOU SAW IN THE LAST PRESENTATION, THE FUTURE LAND USE IS BOUNDARY COMMRCIAL BUT IT IS PROPOSED FOR GENERAL COMMERCIAL. ZONING CURRENTLY IS SEE TO NEIGHBORHOOD MARSHALL. ZONING IS THAT IT IS INTENDED TO PROVIDE FOR A BROAD VARIETY OF BUSINESSES INCLUDING SHOPPERS, GOODS STORES CONVENIENCE ESTABLISHMENTS AND ENTERTAINMENT FACILITIES WHICH IS THE PROPOSED USE BEING BROUGHT IN. ST. LUCIE COUNTY PUBLIC WORK DID NOT PROVIDE ANY COMMENTS FOR THIS. AT THE PLANNING BOARD AT THE MARCH 11, 2024 MEETING, THE PLANNING BOARD VOTED TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL. ANALYSIS IS THAT THIS IS CONSISTENT WITH SURROUNDING ZONING. THIS DOES NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT THE PUBLIC HEALTH AND SAFETY OR GENERAL WELFARE OF

THE PUBLIC. >> QUESTIONS OF STAFF? OKAY. IS THE APPLICANT HERE? PLEASE COME FORWARD. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME

AND YOUR ADDRESS. >> 430 NORTH --.

>> YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? >> NO, I HAVE -- THEY HAVE DONE A GREAT JOB AND HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH ME FOR MONTHS AND

MONTHS. >> YOU WANT TO TELL US

ANYTHING? >> NO, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE EVERYTHING CONFORMS BECAUSE WE ALL THIS WE OWN THREE OTHER PROPERTIES RIGHT THERE. WE WANT TO MAKE THE LAST LOT TO UNIFORM SO WE CAN UNIFY THE LOTS TOGETHER.

>> ANY QUESTIONS OF THIS APPLICANT?

>> THANK YOU SO MUCH. ANYONE ELSE WHO WISHES TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE, PLEASE COME FORWARD. I CLOSE THIS PUBLIC EARING AND

ENTERTAIN A MOTION. >> I MOVED TO APPROVE THE

ORDINANCE. >> SECOND. CALL THE ROLL,

PLEASE. >> IT HAS BEEN A PLEASURE.

>> THANK YOU. >> THIS IS RYAN'S LAST

[a. Resolution 24-R25 authorizing the Police Department to apply for permits through the Florida Department of Transportation for Flock automatic license plate readers.]

MEETING, THANK YOU. >> GOOD LUCK TO YOU.

>> NEXT WE HAVE A RESOLUTION BY THE CITY COMMISSION AUTHORIZING THE FORT PIERCE POLICE DEPARTMENT TO APPLY FOR PERMITS TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION FOR AUTOMATIC LICENSE PLATE READERS. AUTHORIZING THE CHIEF OF POLICE TO PROVIDE FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

>> THIS IS A REQUIREMENT OF THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TO HAVE THIS RESOLUTION AND WE ARE FOLLOWING

THROUGH WITH THE REQUIREMENT. >> CALL THE ROLL PLEASE.

[b. Submittal of applications to serve on the Sunrise Theatre Advisory Board.]

>>> THE NEXT ITEM IS SUBMITTAL OF APPLICATIONS TO SERVE ON THE -- ADVISORY BOARD. WE HAVE A NEW FORM SO ALL THE -- THE APPLICATION IS COMPLETELY DONE ONLINE AND SUBMITTED ONLINE. WE HAD A VERY LARGE NUMBER OF APPLICATIONS. JUST IN CASE YOU ARE QUESTIONED, A LOT OF THE APPLICATIONS WERE FROM PORT PIERCE RESIDENT PLAYERS BUT SEATS WE HAVE AS AVAILABLE FOR

[05:20:06]

--. >> THEY HAVE TO LIVE IN THE COUNTY EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE A COUNTY RESIDENT LIVING IN THE CITY, THEY HAVE TO LIVE OUTSIDE OF THE CITY, IS THAT RIGHT?

>> I BELIEVE SO. >> IT IS TO HELP DIVERSIFY THE

BOARD. >> ARE WE GOING TO DO THAT NEXT

TIME NOW? >> NEXT TIME.

>> ARE THERE ANY REAPPLYING? >> I DO NOT BELIEVE SO.

>> I LOOKED AT THE APPLICATIONS AND I WAS NOT SURE.

>> THE SCHOOL BOARD REPRESENTATIVE WILL BE A REAPPOINTMENT BUT THEY GIVE US SOMEBODY. THAT WILL BE ON THE NEXT, ON THE APPROVING RESOLUTION. WE HAVE COMMENTS

FROM THE PUBLIC. >> THIS IS A TIME FOR ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC TO COME FORWARD AND ADDRESS THE

COMMISSION ON ANY SUBJECT. >> SEEING NO MOVEMENT.

>> NO COMMENTS AT THIS TIME. >> OKAY.

[16. COMMENTS FROM THE COMMISSION]

>> ANYONE ELSE? >> NO WAY.

>> COMMENTS FROM THE COMMISSION?

>> I AM GOING TO PASS BASED ON THE HOUR.

>> NO COMMENT BUT A COMMENT. I TOOK TO HEART WHAT THAT RESIDENT STATED. I THINK WE HAVE TO WORK REAL HARD TO MAKE SURE THESE AGENDAS, PARTICULARLY IMPORTANT ITEMS, THAT WE TRY TO DO OUR BEST. THAT IS ALL I'M GOING TO SAY,

THANK YOU. >> COMMISSIONER JOHNSON?

>> NO COMMENTS. >> WE SHALL ADJOURN.

>>

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.