[1. CALL TO ORDER] [00:00:11] >> OPENED THE PLANNING BOARD MEETING OF MAY 12, 2025. PLEASE STAND FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. >> I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. >> THANK YOU. A FRIENDLY REMINDER, PLEASE SILENCE YOUR CELL PHONES. AND WE WILL GET GOING. PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. >> MS. CLEMONS? >> PRESENT. >> MR. COLLINS? >> MR. EDWARDS? >> HERE. >> MR. WIDING? >> PRESENT. >> MR. EDWARDS? >> HERE. >> CHAIRMAN KREISL? [5. APPROVAL OF MINUTES] >> PRESENT. >> DO WE HAVE ANY ABSENCES TODAY? >> WE HAVE TWO. >> WE HAVE A QUORUM. >> NEXT, WE WILL MOVE TO APPROVE THE MEETINGS FROM OUR APRIL 14, 2025 MEETING. I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION. >> SO MOVED. [a. Master Plan Development - Sunset Gardens - 4945 Edwards Road Parcel ID(s) 2430-244-0001-000-4 and 2430-243-0001-000-1] >> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES. PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. >> >> >> WE ARE PRESENTING MASTER PLAN DEVELOPMENT. THIS IS WHAT SOME OF YOU MAY HAVE ALREADY COME ACROSS AS NAME, DATE, CONCEPTUAL, MINARI, OR SOMETHING. IN THE PAST, WE HAVE CHANGED THE CODE TO BE ABLE TO ACCEPT MASTER SITE PLANS AS PART OF PD AGREEMENTS. THEY ARE NOT AS COMPREHENSIVE AS A FINAL MASTER PLAN DEVELOPMENT WILL BE. THERE THAT IN MIND WHEN YOU ARE REVIEWING THEM, BUT THEY WILL COME BACK TO YOU TO RESOLVE ANY ISSUES THAT YOU MIGHT FIND DURING THE MASTER PLAN. AND THEN ALSO ANY ISSUES THAT WILL BE REQUIRED TO BE ADDRESSED UNDER CODE. THIS ONE IS SUNSET GARDENS. THE ADDRESS IS 4945 EDWARDS ROAD. THIS APPLICATION PROPOSES 20 TOWNHOUSE BUILDINGS THAT ALLOW FOR A MIX OF 4 TO 8 TOWNHOUSE UNITS IN EACH BUILDING. THE ULTIMATE DENSITY IS 6.37 UNITS SPUR A CUR. IT HAS RECREATIONAL FACILITIES, PRIVATE PATIOS, ET CETERA, AND ALSO A SIDEWALK NETWORK THAT ENTER CONNECTS THE COMMUNITY. HERE IS THE SITE LOCATION. EDWARDS ROAD , THE PROPERTY CONNECTS IN ESSENCE THROUGH A STRIP THROUGH EDWARDS ROAD AND THEN INTO A LARGER AREA. GIVES A BETTER PERSPECTIVE OF WHERE THE SITE SITS. EXISTING ZONING IS PLANNED DEVELOPMENT. FUTURE LAND USE IS LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL. AND THAT IS THE SITE PLAN. THAT IS A DIFFERENT ORIENTATION. NORTH IS ACTUALLY TO THE RIGHT OF THE SCREEN. EDWARDS ROAD, YOU HAVE ACCESS THERE. AND THEN THE INTERNAL DEVELOPMENT, THE WETLAND, IT IS ACTUALLY TO THE SOUTH. ON THE SLIDE, IT IS TO THE LEFT. THIS GIVES SOME READOUT OF HOW MUCH OPEN SPACE AND WETLAND ARE GOING TO BE [00:05:02] RETAINED ON-SITE, WHICH IS OVER 41.7%. THE SETBACKS WILL BE INCLUDED IN ANY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. SO IN ESSENCE, THE STAFF RECOMMENDED THE PLANNING BOARD MOVE THE MASTER SITE PLAN TO CITY COMMISSION WITH A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE 14 CONDITIONS OF DEVELOPMENT . DO YOU WISH ME TO GO THROUGH THOSE, CHAIR? >> YOU CAN GO THROUGH THEM QUICKLY. >> AS I MENTIONED DURING THE INTRODUCTION TO THE PRESENTATION, A FINAL SITE PLAN SHALL BE REQUIRED PRIOR TO ANY DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES ASSOCIATED WITH THE MASTER SITE PLAN. THE FINAL PD PLAN SHALL CONFORM TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY CODE OF ORDINANCE AND BE SUBJECT TO THE GENERAL STANDARDS OF APPROVAL FOR PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ZONING. THE FINAL SITE PLAN SHOULD INCLUDE A WETLAND JURISDICTIONAL SURVEY. PRIOR TO SUBMITTAL OF THE FINAL SITE PLAN, A GOPHER TORTOISE SURVEY SHALL BE CARRIED OUT ON-SITE. DETAILED STORMWATER AND DRAINAGE PLAN AND STATEMENT SHALL BE SUBMITTED AT THE TIME OF THE FINAL PD SITE PLAN APPLICATION. THE FINAL PD SITE PLAN WAS -- SHALL BE IN UNIFY CONTROL AND PROPERTY OWNERSHIP FOR ALL LAND INTENDED TO BE INCLUDED IN THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT SHALL BE UNDER THE LEGAL CONTROL OF THE APPLICANT FOR THE FINAL PD SITE PLAN SHALL INCLUDE A GENERAL DESCRIPTION OF THE BUILDINGS AND STREETSCAPES INCLUDING STANDARDS FOR HEIGHT, BUILDING COVERAGE, PARKING AREAS, AND PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS PROPOSED FOR DEVELOPMENT. THE FINAL PD SITE PLAN SHALL INCLUDE QUANTITATIVE DATA FOR THE PARCEL SIZES, PROPOSED LOT COVERAGE FOR BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES, AND THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF OPEN SPACE. THE PLAN SHALL INCLUDE ALL AGREEMENTS, PROVISIONS AND COVENANTS WHICH GOVERN THE USE, MAINTENANCE, AND CONTINUED PRODUCTION OF THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AND ANY OF ITS COMMON OPEN SPACE OR OTHER SHARED AREAS. THIS MATERIAL SHALL INCLUDE MATERIAL WHICH BINDS SUCCESSORS IN TITLE TO ANY COMMITMENTS CONCERNING COMPLETION OF THE PROJECT AND ITS MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION. THE FINAL PD SITE PLAN SHALL CONTAIN THE FOLLOWING INFORMATION AT MINIMUM. THIS LISTS OUT THE REQUIREMENTS IN CODE THAT ARE REQUIRED FOR CONSIDERATION IN THE FINAL PD SITE PLAN. LANDSCAPE AND IRRIGATION PLAN, PROPOSED THE LOT LINES, THE LOCATION, SIZE, AND HEIGHT OF PRESENT AND PROPOSED BUILDINGS, EXISTING AND PROPOSED VEHICLE THE CIRCULATION SYSTEM, THE PEDESTRIAN CIRCULATION SYSTEM INCLUDING INTO RELATIONSHIPS WITH THE VEHICLE CIRCULATION SYSTEM WITH ADJACENT STREETS, AND EXISTING AND PROPOSED UTILITY SYSTEMS INCLUDING SEWERS, WATER, AND GAS LINES. THIS INFORMATION WOULD ALSO INCLUDE AT THAT TIME HOW SOLID WASTE WILL BE TAKING CARE OF , MORE DETAILED CONVERSATIONS WITH THE SCHOOL DISTRICT ON HOW AND IF THEY NEED SCHOOL PICKUP , ORGANIZING WITHIN THE PROPERTY OR EDWARDS ROAD. ANY REQUIRED SIDEWALK OR ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS SHALL BE IDENTIFIED THROUGH THE FINAL PD SITE PLAN PROCESS. THE PROPERTY SHALL BE PLATTED PRIOR TO ANY VERTICAL CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITIES. THAT IS IF IT IS REQUIRED TO BE PLATTED. ALL OTHER APPLICABLE STATE AND FEDERAL PERMITS SHALL BE OBTAINED BEFORE COMMENCEMENT OF THE DEVELOPMENT. THE PROVISIONS DO NOT CREATE ANY RIGHT ON THE PART OF THE APPLICANT TO OBTAIN A PERMIT FROM THE STATE OR FEDERAL AGENCY. THAT IS DONE OUTSIDE OF THE PROCESS. THEY WILL NEED TO DO THAT PRIOR TO MOVING FORWARD FOR BUILDING PERMITS. WE PUT A CONDITION THERE THAT IS IN ESSENCE A NOTE AND CONFIRMATION OF THAT. SEEING THAT, WE ARE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THOSE CONDITIONS , NOTING THAT THERE WILL BE MUCH MORE INFORMATION REQUIRED AT FINAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AND THE PLANNING BOARD WILL GET TO SEE THAT AS IT MOVES FORWARD, IF IT MOVES FORWARD. >> THANK YOU, MR. FREEMAN. QUESTIONS FOR STAFF FROM THE BOARD? I JUST HAD A FEW. CAN YOU GO TO THE NEXT PAGE, CONDITIONS SEVEN AND EIGHT ? THE LANGUAGE HERE ABOUT STANDARDS FOR HEIGHT [00:10:02] AND BUILDING COVERAGE AND ALSO THE PROPOSED LOT COVERAGE OF BUILDINGS AND STRUCTURES, ARE THOSE ELEMENTS NOT CLEARLY DEFINED IN THE APPLICABLE ORDINANCES AT THIS TIME? >> I KNOW WHAT WE REALLY WOULD BE LOOKING FOR , THAT ALL MASTER PLANS WILL INCLUDE THAT AT THE OUTSET. THERE MAY BE AMENDMENTS REQUIRED DURING THE PROCESS BETWEEN MASTER AND FINAL WERE DISCUSSIONS ON OTHER ISSUES MAY COME OUT AND THE PLAN IS AMENDED SLIGHTLY. WE WOULD LIKE THOSE REITERATING, CONFIRMING, OR ADJUSTING IF AND WHERE APPLICABLE IN THAT APPLICATION. >> GOT IT. AT THIS STAGE IN THE APPLICATION PROCESS, IS THE DENSITY OF THE PROPOSED PLAN FAIRLY SET IN STONE AT THIS POINT? OR IS THAT ALSO A MOVING TARGET? >> THE APPLICANT PROPOSES 6.37 UNITS SPUR ACRE -- PER ACRE . THERE IS VERY LITTLE ADJUSTMENT THERE. WE ARE APPROVING HERE IS THE FINAL DENSITY. THE FINAL SITE PLAN COULD CHANGE, BUT IT WILL NOT CHANGE BY MUCH. IT COULD GO UP TO 6.5. IN ESSENCE, WE ARE DOING NOW IS CONFIRMING THAT THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT IS LIMITED TO 6.37. IF THAT CHANGES, THAT WOULD NEED TO BE NOTED IN THE FINAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT. >> WHERE DID IT SAVE THE 6.37 NUMBER? >> IT IS BASED ON THE PROPOSED NUMBER OF UNITS. THAT COMES OUT TO 6.37, WHICH IS WITHIN THE FUTURE LAND USE. >> GOT IT. UNDERSTOOD. >> IS THAT 6.37 NUMBER IF THERE WERE EIGHT TOWNHOUSE IS FOR BUILDING ? >> IS LIMITED TO THE NUMBER OF TOWNHOUSE UNITS OVERALL. SO THEY ARE A MIX. SOME UNITS WILL HAVE FOUR. SOME BUILDINGS WILL HAVE EIGHT. THAT COMES OUT TO BE 6.37. >> OKAY. >> WE WOULD JUST ME NOTING ANY VARIATION FROM THIS NUMBER AS IT IS PRESENTED HERE WE GET TO THE NEXT STAGE. >> STAFF AND OTHER DEPARTMENTS WOULD BE NOTING THOSE THINGS AS THEY CAME THROUGH AND PULLING THOSE OUT FOR FURTHER NEGOTIATION OR NOTIFICATION OF THE PLANNING BOARD. SO ANY VARIATION TO ANYTHING THAT IS ON THE MASTER NOW, EITHER THEY PRESENT THE MASTER AS THE FINAL WITH CERTAIN ELEMENTS INCLUDED , OR IF THERE ARE ANY CHANGES TO THAT, THAT COMES FORWARD HAS THE FINAL. THE PLANNING BOARD AND TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE WOULD HAVE A REVIEW OF THAT BEFORE CAME FORWARD. >> OKAY. CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG. I BELIEVE THIS IS KIND OF A NEW ARC OF THIS PLAN DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION PROCESS THAT YOU HAVE BEEN WORKING ON, RIGHT? >> BECAUSE WE KNOW FROM THE DEVELOPMENT SIDE OF A PROPERTY THE ACTUAL EXPENSE TO PREPARE FINAL DRAWINGS EARLY ON IN A PROJECT IS QUITE EXPENSIVE , BUT WE ARE TRYING TO DO HERE IS PROVIDE A METHODOLOGY AND A FRAMEWORK FOR SOME OF THOSE DOCUMENTS TO BE PREPARED AFTER THE APPLICANT HAS A GOOD IDEA THAT, AS PRESENTED, THE APPLICATION WOULD MOVE FORWARD. OBVIOUSLY IF YOU ASK TO CHANGE, THE COST OF DOING THE CHANGES IS REDUCED BECAUSE WE ARE NOT GOING THROUGH FINAL ENGINEERING OR FINAL LANDSCAPE PLANS AT THIS MOMENT . THEY WILL NEED TO BE PROVIDED SUBSEQUENTLY. >> UNDERSTOOD. I AM NOT SURE HOW MANY OF THESE WE HAVE SEEN AT THIS STAGE AT THIS POINT. THIS IS FAIRLY NEW, WE ARE STILL TESTING THE WATERS. LOOKS LIKE IT IS WORKING AS INTENDED. I WOULD BE CURIOUS TO HEAR THE INPUT OF THE APPLICANT. >> IT IS A BIT OF A TEETHING PROCESS IN TERMS OF A LEGAL REVIEW OF THE AND AN UNDERSTANDING FROM A DEVELOPMENT [00:15:02] COMMUNITY EXACTLY WHAT THEY ARE GETTING AT EACH STAGE. ULTIMATELY, THE FINAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT WILL BE SUBJECT TO NOT ONLY AN ORDINANCE, WHICH SETS THAT OUT, BUT A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, WHICH LOCKS IN A LOT OF THE PARAMETERS THAT YOU WOULD BE PUTTING CONDITIONS ON . THAT WOULD BE A FORMAL AGREEMENT SIGNED BY THE CITY AND THE APPLICANT. THE APPLICANT DOES HAVE A CHOICE AND THAT THEY DO NOT HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE MASTER-PLANNED DEVELOPMENT FIRST. IT IS MORE OF AN EXPENSE AND ESSENTIALLY A RISK FOR AN APPLICANT TO GO TO A FINAL. WE ARE STILL SEEING THESE COME THROUGH. THE NEXT AGENDA ITEM IS A FINAL THAT IS COMING THROUGH. THEY HAVE MOVED FORWARD AND ACTUALLY PREPARED A FINAL PLAN AND PRODUCED ENGINEERING CALCULATIONS AND ALL SORTS OF INFORMATION FOR THEM. >> ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? OKAY. AT THIS TIME, I WOULD INVITE THE APPLICANT TO COME FORWARD IF THEY ARE PREPARED TO MAKE A BRIEF PRESENTATION. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND SIGN IN. >> GOOD AFTERNOON MR. CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING BOARD. MY NAME IS LESLIE OLSON. WE ARE LOCATED HERE IN DOWNTOWN FORT PIERCE. I CAN PRESENT . I HAVE A PRESENTATION IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT. HOWEVER, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU NEED IT TOO WOULD YOU LIKE THE PRESENTATION? >> I WOULD SAY YES. >> KEV, IT IS ON THE DESKTOP, UPPER RIGHT-HAND SIDE. >> HERE WE GO. >> THANK YOU. SO THIS IS SUNSET GARDENS. AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THE MAP HERE, IS LOCATED IN THE SOUTHWEST AREA OF THE CITY. TO KIND OF GET YOU A SENSE OF WHERE WE ARE, WE ARE LOCATED PRETTY CLOSE TO BOTH THE OKEECHOBEE/I-95 ON-RAMP AND THE TURNPIKE ON-RAMP. IT IS LOCATED PRETTY NICELY FOR THE PEOPLE WHO ARE MAYBE MOVING TO FORT PIERCE AND ARE LIVING IN ONE OF THE AREAS TO THE SOUTH OR TO THE NORTH , WANTING TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE BEAUTIFUL FORT PIERCE LIFESTYLE. IT IS LOCATED JUST OFF OF EDWARDS ROAD AND JUST TO THE EAST OF JENKINS ROAD , WHERE THEY INTERSECT. YOU WILL SEE THAT TEN MILE CREEK RUNS ALONG TO THE SOUTH. YOU WILL SEE SOME OF THE PRESERVATION LANDS, THE LOCAL PARK. THERE IS A LOT OF BEAUTIFUL, NATURAL AREAS AROUND , AS WELL. IT IS LOCATED IN CLOSE PROXIMITY TO THE INDUSTRIAL NODE WITH LOTS OF JOBS AVAILABLE . YOU WILL ALSO SEE THAT LINE BETWEEN I-95 AND THE TURNPIKE , KINGS HIGHWAY , IS IDENTIFIED AS A FUTURE JOBS GROWTH CORRIDOR AREA. THE ECONOMIC COUNCIL IS WORKING ON THAT WITH THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE TO IDENTIFY HOW THAT COULD BECOME A REAL LOCUS FOR JOBS, AS WELL. WHEN YOU HAVE JOBS, YOU NEED HOUSING. THIS PROJECT PROVIDES THAT IN AN INTERESTING ADDING TO THE MIX OF HOUSING AVAILABLE IN FORT PIERCE. THERE ARE NOT A LOT OF TOWNHOUSE OPTIONS AVAILABLE IN FORT PIERCE. WE ARE HAPPY TO PROVIDE THAT OPTION WITH THIS. ZOOMING IN IN A LITTLE BIT , YOU GET A BETTER SENSE OF WHAT IS AROUND US. YOU WILL SEE THAT, TO THE WEST OF THIS PROPERTY IS PROBABLY A 1970S ERA DUPLEX SUBDIVISION THAT RUNS ALONGSIDE. THAT IS ACTUALLY A RESIDENTIAL HIGH FUTURE LAND USE ON THAT SIDE. ON THE EAST, IT IS A LARGER LOT , UNINCORPORATED SAINT LUCIE COUNTY NEIGHBORHOOD. WE HAVE TAKEN A LOOK AT BOTH OF THESE SIDES TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE ADEQUATELY BUFFERING OURSELVES FROM OUR NEIGHBORS. WE ARE PRETTY HAPPY WITH THE WAY THAT IS TURNING OUT. WE WILL GET INTO THAT IN A LITTLE BIT. YOU WILL SEE HEAR THAT FROM THE AERIAL , YOU WILL SEE THAT AREA THAT WE HAVE IN PRESERVATION IS [00:20:03] THERE BECAUSE IT IS ACTUALLY A PART OF THE FLOODPLAIN TO CAPTURE THE WATER FROM TEN MILE CREEK IN FLOODING SITUATIONS. WE ARE NOT TOUCHING ANY OF THAT. WE ARE NOT TOUCHING ANY OF THE FLOODPLAIN AREA. IT WILL ALL BE RETAINED AS AN ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE WETLANDS. IT SERVES THE DUAL PURPOSE OF CREATING PROTECTED ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE LAND IN PERPETUITY AND ALSO CREATE THE ABILITY FOR THE LAND TO ABSORB FLOODWATERS, WHICH IS SO IMPORTANT. AGAIN, WE HAVE SWITCHED IT BECAUSE WE ARE ON LANDSCAPE, NOT PORTRAIT VIEW HERE. YOU CAN SEE THE 3 1/2 ACRE WETLAND THERE ON THE LEFT-HAND SIDE. THAT WOULD BE THE SOUTH. THAT LITTLE STRIP OF LAND NEXT TO IT IS A WETLAND BUFFER SO THAT YOU HAVE SPACE BETWEEN YOUR DEVELOPED AREA AS KIND OF A SPACE WHERE ANY FURTHER VISORS CAN GET ABSORBED SO IT DOES NOT GO STRAIGHT INTO THE WETLANDS. AND THEN IT IS ORGANIZED AROUND A CENTRALIZED THE LAKE THAT HAS BEEN A MONETIZED BY PUTTING THE VIEWS ON IT. IT WILL HAVE A FOUNTAIN IN IT AND A RECREATIONAL CENTER ON THE LAKE. ONE OF THE THINGS I LIKE ABOUT THE WAY THIS SITE HAS BEEN DESIGNED IS IT TURNS THE WEIRD LITTLE ACCESS ROAD INTO A FUN AMENITY WHERE THERE IS A WIDE SIDEWALK ON ONE SIDE AND A LOT OF LANDSCAPING ON BOTH SIDES. IT WILL FEEL LIKE A NICE WINDING ENTRANCE INTO THIS COMMUNITY BACK HERE. TALKING A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE BUFFERING THAT WE FOCUSED ON HERE, THIS IS ON THE EAST SIDE. SO THOSE LARGER LOTS THAT ARE IN UNINCORPORATED ST. LUCIE COUNTY HERE, WE HAVE ADDED 53 TREES INCLUDING LIVE OAKS AND SLASH PINES. YOU CAN SEE HOW CLOSELY THOSE ARE PLANTED THERE. THAT WILL BE A VERY DENSE STENCH IT -- DENSE VEGETATIVE BUFFER. WE HAVE SHRUBS ON THIS SIDE, ALL NATIVE. TO THE WEST WHERE THE DUPLEX SUBDIVISION IS , WE HAVE 61 TREES OF THE SAME KIND OF SPECIES MIX, AND 268 SIMPSON STOPPER SHRUBS. AGAIN, WE WILL CREATE A LIVING WALL BETWEEN US AND OUR NEIGHBORS THERE. YOU WILL SEE HEAR THE WETLAND, 3 1/2 ACRES IN PRESERVATION. YOU WILL SEE IN THE CENTER OF THIS, I AM POINTING THAT OUT WITH MY CURSOR, THIS IS A SMALL COMMUNITY PARK THAT IS ACCESSIBLE BY THE INTERCONNECTED WALKWAYS AROUND THE COMMUNITY. IT IS ALSO HEAVILY VEGETATED AND INCLUDES AN OBSERVATION PLATFORM WHERE YOU CAN SEE THE WETLAND , BUT YOU ARE NOT IN THE PROTECTED WETLAND. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT NOT EVERYONE KNOWS ABOUT THESE TYPES OF WETLANDS ESPECIALLY THAT ARE WITHIN THE FLOODPLAIN IS THAT YOU REALLY CAN'T PUT ANYTHING IN IT . IF YOU ADD SO MUCH AS A TABLESPOON OF DIRT TO ONE OF THESE AREAS, IT BECOMES A REAL ISSUE. YOU WANT PEOPLE TO BE ABLE TO SEE IT , BUT YOU REALLY SHOULDN'T BE PUTTING BOARDWALKS AND THINGS LIKE THAT INTO IT. IT CREATES REAL ISSUES WITH THE FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT. SO WE HAVE OUR UNITY AMENITIES AREA. IT HAS A POOL, A CABANA , A LARGE OPEN SPACE THAT WE PURPOSEFULLY LEAVE TO BE UNPROGRAMMED SO PEOPLE CAN DO WHATEVER THEY WANT, WHETHER IT IS A PICKUP GAME OF ULTIMATE FRISBEE OR THE KIDS CAN BRING OUT SOME SOCCER EQUIPMENT. THAT IS THE GOAL, TO LEAVE THIS UNPROGRAMMED AS A COMMUNITY GREEN. THAT IS MY PRESENTATION. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I AM HAPPY TO ANSWER THEM. >> ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD? >> IF WE COULD BACK UP A COUPLE OF SLIDES WHERE YOU HAD THE WETLANDS? >> SURE. >> IT IS KIND OF HARD TO READ, BUT I SEE THE ASSOCIATION'S LINE ON THE SOUTH SIDE. THEN WE'VE GOT , TELL ME ABOUT THAT NEUTRAL [00:25:06] AREA THAT IS ZIGZAGGING ON THE WAY DOWN. >> WHEN I MENTIONED THAT THERE IS THE PROTECTED WETLAND, RIGHT, THIS IS AN OFFSET TO GIVE YOU SOME SPACE FOR ANY FURTHER VISORS OR ANY OTHER KINDS OF ISSUES TO BASICALLY WORK THEMSELVES OUT BEFORE THEY GET TO THE WETLAND. THIS IS A BUFFER IN ADDITION TO THE WETLAND. IT IS A BUFFER TO THE WETLAND. IT IS GOOD FOR WATER QUALITY ISSUES. THAT IS ESPECIALLY WHAT IT IS MADE FOR. AND TO KEEP THE WETLAND HEALTHY. >> WHEN YOU SAY WETLAND, WHAT DOES THAT LOOK LIKE? WILL IT BE A RIDGE? WILL IT BE PLANTED WITH VEGETATION? >> IT HAS EXISTING TREE CANOPY IN IT . IT WILL LOOK JUST LIKE THE WETLAND. IT JUST WON'T BE WET. >> OKAY. >> IT WILL HAVE A DIFFERENT TYPE OF VEGETATION IN IT. GOOD QUESTION. >> THEY WON'T HAVE ANY ON-SITE OFFICE BUILDING OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT TO MANAGE THE PROPERTY? I SEE THEY HAVE A POOL, SO I'M QUESTIONING WHO IS GOING TO MANAGE THAT. >> IT WILL BE THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION. THE DEVELOPER WILL MANAGE THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION UNTIL SALES IT A CERTAIN THRESHOLD, AT WHICH POINT IT IS TURNED OVER TO THE HOMEOWNERS THEMSELVES TO MANAGE THEMSELVES. >> OKAY. THANK YOU. >> IS THERE GOING TO BE ANY DISCUSSION OF TRAFFIC COMING OUT OF THERE, LIKE A LIGHT OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT? >> YES, SIR. THE TRAFFIC HAS BEEN REVIEWED. WE HAVE OUR TRAFFIC ENGINEER HERE. IF YOU'D LIKE TO ASK ANY DETAILED QUESTIONS ABOUT TRAFFIC, WE ARE AVAILABLE. WE HAVE PROPOSED IS TO USE THE ACCESS ROAD AS IT IS PROPOSED HERE. THE COUNTY HAS ASKED US TO CREATE AN EMERGENCY ACCESS STUB OUT HERE IN CASE IN THE FUTURE THERE IS ENOUGH RIGHT-OF-WAY HERE TO USE THIS AS A SECONDARY ACCESS. HOWEVER, THERE IS NOT ENOUGH RIGHT-OF-WAY. AT THIS POINT, IT WOULD NOT BE POSSIBLE. WE HAVE STUBBED THIS OUT IN CASE IT IS NEEDED AS A RELIEVER. IF YOU HAVE ANY PARTICULAR QUESTIONS INVOLVING TRAFFIC, THE SHORT ANSWER IS WE HAVE NOT TRIPPED ANY THRESHOLDS FOR MAKING THE ROAD FAIL. WE DO HAVE OUR TRAFFIC ENGINEER HERE IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO ASK HIM QUESTIONS. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? HEARING NONE, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME. >> THANK YOU. SUCK AT THIS TIME, WE WOULD OPEN UP TO PUBLIC COMMENT IF THERE IS ANYBODY FROM THE PUBLIC WHO WISHES TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM. SEEING NONE, I WILL SEND IT BACK TO THE BOARD FOR ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, CONCERNS. HEARING NONE , AT THIS TIME, I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION. PLEASE KEEP IN MIND WE HAVE A TOTAL OF 14 CONDITIONS RECOMMENDED BY STAFF. >> I MOVE FOR APPROVAL WITH THE 14 CONDITIONS. >> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL BY MS. CLEMONS, SECOND BY MR. EDWARDS. PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. >> [b. Final Planned Development - Sunrise Lakes -3804 Sunrise Boulevard] >> MOVING ON, 6B, FINAL DEVELOPMENT, SUNRISE LAKES. >> THIS IS ACTUALLY A FINAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT SITE PLAN. THE DIFFERENTIAL IS THAT THERE HAS BEEN MUCH MORE INFORMATION AND MORE DETAILED INFORMATION PROVIDED DURING THE REVIEW. THE CONDITIONS REFLECT THAT. SO DO THE DOCUMENTS PRESENTED. WITH THAT APPLICATION. THIS APPLICATION IS CALLED LAKES FINAL SITE PLAN DEVELOPMENT LOCATED ON SUNRISE BOULEVARD. THE APPLICANT REPRESENTS KM A ENGINEERING. THE [00:30:02] ADDRESS IS 3804 SUNRISE BOULEVARD. THE PARCEL NUMBER IS 2433-123-0001-000-1. THIS APPLICATION IS PROPOSING A REZONING TO A FINAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OF 50 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES ON AN 11.54 ACRE LOT. THE PROPERTY IS ZONED R-3 WITH A FUTURE USE OF RAM, MEDIUM DENSITY. THE SITE IS BOARDED BY RS-3 TO THE WEST. TO THE EAST IS A FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION BUILDING. AND THEN THERE IS A CEMETERY. BOTH OF THOSE HAVE INDUSTRIAL ZONING. HERE WE ARE IN TERMS OF SITE LOCATION. THIS STREET RUNS TO THE EAST. SUNRISE BOULEVARD RUNS TO THE WEST. THE SHADED AREAS ARE EXISTING CITY LIMITS. YOU CAN SEE THE PROPERTY LIES WITHIN A TRACT THAT IS NOT WITHIN THE CITY AT THE MOMENT. SOME PARTS MAY NEVER COME INTO THE CITY. THEY ARE RIGHT FOR INFILL. YOU WOULD EXPECT THAT IN THE FUTURE, YOU MIGHT GET SOME MORE APPLICATIONS COMING IN THOSE AREAS. THE SITE IS 11.54 ACRES. THAT IS THE LOCATION. AT THE MOMENT, IT IS ZONED R-1, A LOW-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL. I AM JUST GOING BACK TO THAT, WHICH SAYS R-3 AND RESIDENTIAL MEDIUM. I AM NOT SURE WHY IT IS SHOWING US THAT. MAY BE THE SITE PLAN HAS NOT BEEN, IT HAS NOT BEEN UPDATED. THE SITE PLAN SHOWS 50 LOTS FOR SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL. WE DID HAVE SOME COMMENT FROM THE OPERATOR OF SDOT IN TERMS OF OPERATIONS GOING ON TO THE EAST. THERE WAS A CONCERN ABOUT NOISE AND DISTURBANCE COMING IN THROUGH THAT SITE, THROUGH THE OPERATION. WE AS A RESULT OF THAT RECOMMENDED THAT A MASONRY RETAINING WALL BE PROVIDED DOWN THAT BOUNDARY . THAT IS SHOWN ON THE SITE PLAN THROUGH THE APPLICANT. THERE ARE SOME PD STANDARDS SET WITH THIS. THIS IS A FINAL PD. THIS WILL BE THE FINAL DIMENSIONS AND AREAS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PD. SO ANY DIFFERENTIAL OF THAT IN TERMS OF AMENDMENT PRIOR TO ACTUAL BUILDING ON THIS PROPERTY, THEY WOULD BE REQUIRING EITHER ADMINISTRATIVE OR OTHER AMENDMENT THROUGH THE PLANNING BOARD AND CITY COMMISSION. THE APPLICANT HAS PROVIDED A LANDSCAPE PLAN. WE DID NOTE THAT THE MASONRY WALL HAD NOT BEEN NOTED ON THERE. THAT IS WHAT WE WOULD BE REQUIRING FINAL TWO PRESENTATION TO THE CITY COMMISSION, THAT THE NOTE BE CHANGED TO THERE. I KNOW THE APPLICANT HAS BEEN IN DISCUSSION WITH THE SCHOOL DISTRICT ON THIS IN TERMS OF A BUS STOP OR BUS FACILITIES THAT HAS PROVIDED A STANDING AREA FOR OCCUPANTS OF THE PROPERTY TO WAIT FOR A BUS . THAT HAS BEEN INCORPORATED ON THAT. SO IN GENERAL, WE HAVE LOOKED AT THIS PROPERTY AND WE ARE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING 11 CONDITIONS , ALL INFRASTRUCTURE. WE HAVE 11 CONDITIONS INCLUDING THE PRIVATE THE STATION, INSTALLATION OF STORM WATER SYSTEM BEING COMPLETED PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF THE FIRST [00:35:02] CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY FOR A RESIDENTIAL BUILDING ON THE SITE. A PLAT OF THE PROPERTY SHALL BE REQUIRED PRIOR TO APPLICATION FOR A BUILDING PERMIT FOR A RESIDENTIAL BUILDING. MINIMUM OPEN SPACE SHALL BE MAINTAINED AT A MINIMUM OF 23% OF THE FINAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT SITE AREA. THE DEVELOPMENT SHALL COMPLY WITH THE PERMITTED DENSITY, INTENSITY, AND RESIDENTIAL LOT AND BUILDING HEIGHTS AS OUTLINED WITHIN THE APPROVED SUNRISE LAKES DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AND FINAL PD SITE PLAN. YOU WILL SEE THAT ATTACHED TO THE AGENDA ITEM. THAT HAS BEEN REVIEWED THROUGH THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT. THAT WILL BE GOING FORWARD TO CITY COMMISSION AS A PART OF THIS APPLICATION FOR SIGNATURE. A DETAILED STORMWATER AND DRAINAGE PLAN SHALL BE SUBMITTED AT THE TIME OF BUILDING PERMIT. THE FINAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PLAN SHALL BE GOVERNED BY ALL AGREEMENTS, PROVISIONS, AND COVENANTS WHICH GOVERN THE USE, MAINTENANCE, AND CONTINUED PROTECTION OF THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT AND ANY OF ITS COMMON OPEN SPACE OR ANY OTHER SHARED AREAS. THE APPROVAL SHALL INCLUDE THE BINDING OF SUCCESSORS IN TITLE TO ANY COMMITMENTS CONCERNING COMPLETION OF THE PROJECT AND ITS MAINTENANCE AND OPERATION. AS PART OF SITE DEVELOPMENT , CONDITION NUMBER EIGHT DEALS WITH TREE MITIGATION. WE WOULD BE REQUIRING A CALCULATION TO BE SUBMITTED AND APPROVED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF A SITE CLEARING OR VEGETATION REMOVAL PERMIT. THAT IS UNDERTAKEN DURING AN APPLICATION FOR SITE WORKS THROUGH THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT. THAT IS ROUTED BACK TO CITY ENGINEERING AND PLANNING. A LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT SHALL BE REQUIRED PRIOR TO FINAL CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPATION. A REVISED FINAL SITE PLAN, ARCHITECTURAL ELEVATIONS, AND LANDSCAPING PLAN SHALL BE SUBMITTED FOR THE PROPOSED AMENITY CENTER. SO WITHIN THE SITE PLAN , THERE IS -- WHERE ARE WE? SOMEWHERE IN THE PROPOSED AMENITY CENTER. THEY ARE PROPOSING AN AMENITY AREA , A POTENTIAL BUILDING TO GO IN THERE. THAT WOULD REQUIRE A PLAN TO COME BACK TO STAFF AND PROBABLY AS A MINOR AMENDMENT TO THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT THAT WE WOULD BE WAITING ON THAT TO COME THROUGH. AGAIN, ALL APPLICABLE STATE AND FEDERAL PERMITS SHALL BE OBTAINED BEFORE COMMENCEMENT OF THE DEVELOPMENT. I WOULD BE RECOMMENDING THE ADDITION OF THE NOTE THAT WE HAVE BEEN ADVISED TO APPLY THAT THIS APPROVAL DOES NOT STAND FOR ANY OF THE REQUIRED STATE OR FEDERAL PERMITS THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED OUTSIDE OF THIS PROCESS. >> NOT NECESSARY TO STATE THAT IN AN OFFICIAL CONDITION? >> I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT WE PUT THAT IN AS A CONDITION. IT IS SOMETHING THAT WE WILL BE ADDING NOW TO DEVELOPMENT APPROVALS THROUGH PLANNING BOARD AND CITY COMMISSION TO MAKE THAT CLEAR. IT IS A STATE RECOMMENDED WORDING THAT WE WILL BE USING. >> OKAY. SO THIS SPECIFIC LANGUAGE IS ESTABLISHED WELL ENOUGH AT THIS POINT FOR STAFF TO -- >> IT HAS BEEN RECOMMENDED THROUGH THE STATE ON VARIOUS CORRESPONDENCE THAT WE HAVE HAD. THE STAFF ON THIS TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE 11 CONDITIONS AS NOTED. >> COULD YOU GO BACK TO THAT PAGE RIGHT THERE? I JUST WANTED TO HANG ON THIS FOR A SECOND AND SEE . OKAY. ALL RIGHT. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF FROM THE BOARD? >> I HAVE A COUPLE. KEV, IN CONDITION THREE, MINIMUM OPEN SPACE , TELL ME THE GENERAL PARAMETERS THAT YOU USED. HOW DID YOU COME UP WITH 23%? >> THAT IS WHAT THE APPLICANT PROPOSES. WE LOOK AT WHETHER THAT EXCEEDS WHAT WE WOULD BE ASKING FOR A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT IN ANY CASE, WHICH IS 20%. >> ANY KIND OF PROPERTY LIKE THIS, I GUESS THE QUESTION WOULD BE HOW TIGHT AND HOW BROAD CAN [00:40:06] THAT RANGE BE. >> THE APPLICANT HAS COMMITTED TO THAT NUMBER. AS THEY COME IN AND DEVELOP PROPERTY, I THINK THAT NUMBER WOULD INCREASE IN TERMS OF PERCENTAGE. BUT WE ARE SAYING THAT THAT , FOR THE START POINT FOR THIS AGREEMENT, IS THAT THE MINIMUM. IT SHOULD NOT BE REDUCED BELOW THAT MINIMUM. >> THE OTHER QUESTION, WE'VE GOT 10 CONDITIONS HERE. THE PAGE FLIPS. TO QUOTE NUMBER 11, ACTUALLY, YOU DO HAVE 11. >> I THINK THIS , I KNOW THIS WAS ADDED. >> YOU ADDED IT. GO ONE MORE PAGE. OKAY, BACK IT UP A SECOND. WHAT YOU DID HAVE ON THE PIECE THAT I COPIED WAS THE ISSUE WITH THE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT DOES NOT CREATE A RIGHT. SO STANDARD LANGUAGE. IS THAT SOMEWHERE IN HERE? >> THAT IS WHAT I HAVE RECOMMENDED SHOULD BE PUT IN THERE. FOR WHATEVER REASON, MY REASON, I DID NOT ADD IT TO THE PRESENTATION. >> THE PREVIOUS CONSIDERATION THAT WE HAD, YOU ACTUALLY HAD THAT AS A LINE ITEM. >> IT HAS BEEN OMITTED. >> I AM JUST ASKING. >> IT HAS NOT BEEN DELIBERATE. IT HAS BEEN OMITTED BECAUSE I WAS HURRYING THROUGH THE PRESENTATION. >> KEV, CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE PAGE YOU WERE LOOKING AT BEFORE ? WHEN I SEE THE TABLE ON THE RIGHT HERE, LOOKING AT THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE, THESE ARE THE INDIVIDUAL PARCEL REQUIREMENTS. 45 FOOT BUILDING HEIGHT? >> YEAH. >> WHERE IS THAT IN RELATION TO -- EXPLAIN TO ME WHERE 45 FEET IS IN RELATION TO THE STANDARD MAXIMUM HEIGHT ALLOWABLE FOR, WHERE WE END, R-1? >> I DON'T THINK IT WAS ADJUSTED ON THE PROPERTY APPRAISER'S MAP. I WOULD HAVE TO GET THE APPLICANT TO CONFIRM THAT. I BELIEVED IT WAS R-3, BUT THAT WOULD BE IN RELATION TO R-3. R-1 IS, I BELIEVE, 35 FEET. AM I RIGHT ON THAT ONE? SO IT IS APPLICABLE TO R-1 ANYWAY. THAT IS THE MAXIMUM THAT WE ARE SEEING. WHAT WE ARE SEEING WITH THESE STANDARDS ARE , IT IS IN EFFECT A NEW ZONING DISTRICT. THAT IS WHAT A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT IS. THE FINAL PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ARE PUTTING IN PLACE THE DEVELOPMENT PARAMETERS FOR THAT PLANNED DEVELOPMENT. THE APPLICANT MAY REDUCE SOME OF THOSE, BUT NOT A LOT SIZE OR THE LOT WITH , LOT DROPPED. -- DEPTH . THE DENSITY CANNOT BE INCREASED. THE SETBACKS WILL NEED TO BE MAINTAINED, AS WE ARE SEEING ON SCREEN. IN ESSENCE, IT IS ITS OWN ZONING DISTRICT. >> THE ONLY OTHER QUESTION I HAD WAS, I BELIEVE IN THE FIRST PAGE OF THE PRESENTATION, YOU MENTIONED 4.41 UNITS FOR ACRE. HERE IT IS LISTED AS 3.81. IT SEEMS LIKE THE TABLE WAS SHOOTING FOR LESS. >> YEAH, IT SHOULD BE 3.4, I BELIEVE. [00:45:02] >> OKAY. >> IT WAS 3.8. >> I GET AROUND 3.5. >> WE ARE IN THE BALLPARK. ALL RIGHT. I JUST WANTED TO HANG ON THIS FOR A BIT CONSIDERING, YOU KNOW, I WOULD SAY THE FIDELITY OF THIS METHOD. I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE WERE ALL DIGESTING THIS INFORMATION HERE ON THE TABLE. THIS IS REALLY IMPORTANT STUFF. SO THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? >> I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION. WOULD BE THE HEIGHT OF THE WALL? >> WE WOULD LOOK FOR DETAILS TO BE PROVIDED ON THAT. THAT WOULD BE INCORPORATED INTO THE LANDSCAPE PLAN. THE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM THE PLANNING BOARD ON WHAT THEY WOULD BE LOOKING FOR WITH THAT. WE WOULD NORMALLY SAY 6 FEET. >> I NEED IT TO BE HIGHER. >> YOU JUMP 6 FEET? >> WITH ENOUGH AGGRESSION. >> THE RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE BETWEEN SIX AND 8 FEET, WHATEVER THAT WOULD BE, 7 FEET. >> HOW DOES THE BOARD FEEL ABOUT THAT HEIGHT. WHAT IS FDOT DOING ON THAT? >> ON THE YARD WITH A MAYBE HAVE TRUCKS COMING IN AND OUT , THERE ARE TIMES OF DAY WHERE THERE IS NOISE THERE. ESSENTIALLY IT IS JUST A PARTICULAR OPERATION. >> THEY ARE NOT FILLING DUMP TRUCKS WITH GRAVEL OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT? IT IS JUST TRAFFIC? >> IT IS LIKE AN OPERATIONS CENTER. >> OKAY. I MEAN, I WOULD THINK A 6 FOOT WALL WITH, YOU KNOW, SOME AMOUNT OF LANDSCAPE AND TREES WOULD PROBABLY BE SUFFICIENT FOR THAT. IF THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY WAS A MANUFACTURING PLANT , CONCRETE, SOMETHING OUTSIDE, THAT MIGHT NOT BE ENOUGH. CONSIDERING THE USE, I THINK 6 FEET IS APPROPRIATE. HOW DOES EVERYBODY ELSE FEEL ABOUT THAT? >> MR. CHAIR, YOU MAY WANT TO PUT IT AS A MINIMUM OF 6 FEET SO YOU KNOW THAT THE STARTING POINT IS HIS FEET. >> DO WE HAVE A CONDITION ON THIS LISTED ALREADY? >> KNOW. IT WAS A DISCUSSION POINT TO BE RAISED DURING THE HEARING. THE APPLICANT MAY ALSO HAVE SOME SUGGESTIONS ABOUT WHAT THEY ARE GOING TO DO ON THAT BOUNDARY. >> VERTICAL VEGETATION. >> RIGHT. >> IS THAT WHAT THEY'RE CURRENTLY SHOWING? >> ON THE SITE PLAN, THEY NOTATE A MASONRY RETAINING WALL. NO HIGHT SPECIFIED. >> OKAY. THOSE WOULD BE CONFORMING WITH EACH OTHER BEFORE YOU MOVE ON. >> OKAY. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF AT THIS TIME? >> I GUESS I COULD INTRODUCE THIS BEFORE THE PRESENTATION WOULD COME UP ABOUT THE BUS LOADING INFORMATION. DO WE HAVE ANYTHING ON THAT FROM THE SCHOOL? >> YES. MR. CHAIR, KEV FREEMAN IS POINTING TO THAT LOCATION. WE HAVE BEEN IN DISCUSSIONS WITH THEM. WE HAVE A BUS STOP THAT IS LOCATED AT BELL. NO, NO, NO. I'M JUST TELLING YOU CURRENTLY RIGHT NOW, THERE IS A BUS LOCATION AT BELL AVENUE. WE WOULD PUT ANOTHER BUS LOCATION [00:50:02] AT THIS AREA. WILL WE ASKED FOR, OF COURSE, IS A SIDEWALK TO PROVIDE A WAITING AREA THAT IS SAFE. UNFORTUNATELY, WE DID INDICATE MAYBE A WAITING AREA, TOO. A LOT OF PARENTS IN THIS AREA THEY WANT TO DRIVE THEIR KID TO THE FRONT AND WAIT WITH THEM, MAKE SURE THEY GET ON THE BUS SAFELY. PARENTS LIKE TO WAIT IN THE AFTERNOON FOR THEM TO GET OFF AND GET INTO THE CAR AND GO TO THE GROCERY STORE OR EVEN DRIVE TO THE BACK OF THE DEVELOPMENT TO THEIR HOME SO THAT THEIR CHILD IS SAFE. ANOTHER THING WE INDICATED WAS A BIKE RACK AREA THERE, TOO, SO IF THE KIDS WANT TO RIDE THEIR BIKE TO THE BUS STOP AND THEN WAIT FOR THE BUS. WE HAVE BEEN IN DISCUSSIONS WITH THEM. WE HAD EMAIL EXCHANGES WITH THEM ON THIS. >> I HAVE TRAVELED THAT ROAD FOR TWO AND HALF YEARS. IT WAS THE WORST THING TO SEE THE STUDENTS WALKING UP AND DOWN THAT AREA. IT IS SCARY WITH DITCHES ON BOTH SIDES AND A LITTLE BIT OF NOTHING. >> ONE OF OUR MAJOR REQUESTS HERE WAS A SIDEWALK. THERE ISN'T ONE ON THAT LOCATION AREA. >> THANK YOU. >> SO WE ARE SEEING SIDEWALK ROAD IMPROVEMENT ON SUNRISE, THE ENTIRE FRONTAGE OF THIS PROPERTY? IS THERE ANY EXISTING SIDEWALK TO THE NORTH? >> I THINK SO. LINKS TO THE CEMETERY. >> THAT IS ALL COUNTY PROPERTY TO THE NORTH, CORRECT? I THINK THE ONLY COMMENT THAT I WOULD HAVE ON THIS, WHICH IS A GENERAL COMMENT FOR THESE SPECIFIC TYPES OF NEIGHBORHOODS, ON THE ROADWAY SYSTEMS THAT WE HAVE IN THE CITY IN GENERAL, CONSIDERING ANECDOTALLY AT LEAST HOW MUCH SUNRISE BOULEVARD SPECIFICALLY BECOMES A TRAFFIC THOROUGHFARE IN THE MORNINGS AND THE EVENINGS, I AM NOT A FAN OF THE BUSES PULLING OFF TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD FOR PICKUPS ON SUNRISE BOULEVARD AT ALL. I KNOW THAT IS HOW WE ARE DOING IT. I LIVE NOT FAR TO THE NORTH FROM HERE. I DON'T MIND THE DISRUPTION, BUT I KNOW A LOT OF PEOPLE DO. I DON'T MIND 35 MILES PER HOUR, BUT I KNOW A LOT OF PEOPLE DO. I AM SHOCKED AND APPALLED AT HOW BRAZENLY SOME PEOPLE DRIVE NORTH AND SOUTH ON THAT ROAD SOMETIMES. I TAKE IT PERSONALLY BECAUSE I LIVE THERE AT THAT TIME IN THE MORNING, WITH THE BUS TRAFFIC, IT SEEMS REALLY RECKLESS. MY SUGGESTION WOULD BE THAT PROVISIONS FOR HAVING THE BUSES PULL OFF AND INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD WITH A TURNAROUND BE PROVIDED. I AM WELL AWARE THAT THAT PROVIDES -- REQUIRES A LOT MORE SPACE. MAYBE WE CAN HAVE SOME DISCUSSION WITH THE APPLICANT ABOUT THAT WHEN THEY COME UP. IF THERE ARE NO OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF AT THIS TIME, I THINK WE WILL GO AHEAD AND INVITE THE APPLICANT TO COME FORWARD. PLEASE COME TO THE PODIUM, STATE YOUR NAME, AND SIGN IN. >> GOOD AFTERNOON, EVERYONE. I AM BLAINE WITH KMI ENGINEERING AND SURVEYING, REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT. I WANT TO THANK EVERYONE FOR THEIR TIME TODAY. CAN YOU PULL UP THE SITE PLAN? JUST A QUICK SYNOPSIS OF THIS, THIS PROJECT IS VERY SIMILAR TO THE PROJECT THAT THE BOARD APPROVED THE LAST YEAR. THAT IS DIRECTY TO THE SOUTHEAST OF THIS PROJECT ON OLEANDER. 'S SIMILAR LOT SIZES, HOUSES. THAT PROJECT IS A RENTAL COMMUNITY. THIS ONE WILL BE FOR SALE. IF YOU ARE CURIOUS WHAT THE PRODUCT WOULD LOOK LIKE, HALF OF THOSE HOUSES ARE DONE IN THEIR IT WOULD BE VERY SIMILAR ARCHITECTURE AND LAYOUT OF THE COMMUNITY. WE ARE PROPOSING 50 LOTS WITH THE MAIN AMENITY AREA BEING BETWEEN LOTS 35 AND 50. WE WOULD HAVE A SMALL PARK NEXT TO LOT 35 THAT WOULD CONSIST OF SOME BENCHES AND SOME ENHANCED LANDSCAPING. AS YOU COME INTO THE ENTRANCE, YOU WILL HAVE A SMALL POCKET PARK TO THE LEFT OF LOT 1. GOING OFF OF THAT, THE MAIN STORM WATER SYSTEM, AND THIS WILL BE THAT POND IN THE MIDDLE, YOU CAN SEE HOW IT IS SKINNY IN BETWEEN THOSE TWO LIENS. WE ARE PROPOSING A BIO SWELL SYSTEM. THERE IS ENHANCED LANDSCAPING FOR WATER QUALITY. AS WAS SHOWN RIGHT HERE, THERE [00:55:08] WOULD BE PLANTS WITH DIFFERENT TREES AND TALL GRASSES AND DIFFERENT ROCKS. THAT WOULD FILTERING TO THE LARGER DRY RETENTION PONDS ON THE NORTH AND SOUTH SIDES OF THE SITE. ULTIMATELY THOSE PONDS WILL DRAIN INTO IT. YOU CAN SEE THAT THIS PROPER TO THE EAST IS NOW TRAIN THROUGH. IT IS CURRENTLY FILLED WITH AUSTRALIAN PEPPER TREES, EXCUSE ME, AUSTRALIAN PINES AND PEPPER TREES. WE WILL CLEAN THAT UP AND PUT A 20 FOOT DRAINAGE EASEMENT THERE. OURSELVES NEIGHBOR IS THE ONLY RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBOR THAT WE HAVE WE HAVE DONE KIND OF AN ENHANCED SETBACK OF THE LOTS FROM HIM TO TRY TO CREATE AS MUCH OF A LANDSCAPE BUFFER AS WE CAN FROM HIM. WE HAVE AGREED TO PUT A WALL ALONG THE EASTERN PROPERTY LINE. THAT HAS BEEN BECAUSE OF SOME DISCUSSIONS WE HAVE HAD WITH FDOT AND THE NOISE THEY CREATE THE ONLY THING I WOULD ASK ON THE CONDITION IS THAT WE LIST IT AS A FOOT MINIMUM WALL/SOUND BARRIER, AS WE MIGHT WANT TO DO ACM YOU ALL OR A PRECAST WALL. WE ARE WORKING WITH OUTSIDE AGENCIES, ONE BEING ST. LUCIE COUNTY. THEY HAVE APPROVED OUR TRAFFIC REPORT. AS PART OF OUR COORDINATION WITH THEM, WE HAVE DONE A 10 FOOT RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATION ALONG SUNRISE BOULEVARD. WE WILL BE GIVING THEM A 10 FOOT STRIP OF LAND AND PROVIDING AN ESTABLISHED SWALE ALONG SUNRISE THERE , AS WELL AS A SIDEWALK ALONG OUR WHOLE WESTERN FRONTAGE. I AM GOING OFF OF THAT . AS STATED, WE HAVE BEEN COORDINATING WITH THE SCHOOL DISTRICT ON THIS. AND THE SCHOOL BUS DROP OFF . OUR PLAN IS THAT THIS WILL NOT BE A GATED COMMUNITY. AS YOU CAN SEE, WE ARE PROVIDING ON THE PROPOSED SIDEWALK A CONCRETE BUS STOP AREA. OUR HOPE IS THAT THE BUS WILL NOT STOP ALONG SUNRISE , BUT WOULD COME ONTO THE PROPERTY. THERE WOULD BE NO GATE. IT WOULD BE ABLE TO LOOP AROUND AND PICK THE KIDS SAFELY UP BEFORE EXITING THE PROPERTY. GOING OFF OF THAT, I WROTE DOWN A COUPLE OF THE QUESTIONS THAT YOU GUYS PRESENTED. ONE OF THEM WAS ABOUT THE MINIMUM OPEN SPACE. WILL WE DID ON THAT, THIS IS THE ZONING ON THE RIGHT. THIS WILL BE IN THE DEVELOPER AGREEMENT. EVERY SINGLE HOUSE WILL BE HELD TO THIS. IF YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE THE MINIMUM SETBACKS ON THE LOT, WE WILL PUT A HOUSE ON THERE. WHATEVER GREEN SPACE IS LEFT OPEN ON THAT, THAT WILL BE THE MINIMUM OPEN SPACE WE WILL PROVIDE FOR THE WHOLE DEVELOPMENT. MOST LIKELY, THE HOUSES WILL NOT ALL BE BILLED TO THE MAXIMUM SETBACKS. THE MINIMUM OPEN SPACE NUMBER WILL BE MET AND WILL BE EVEN MORE INCREASE OF GREEN , OPEN SPACE. YOU CAN ALSO SEE THAT THE BUILDING HEIGHT IS LISTED AS 45 FEET. THAT IS WHAT EXISTING ZONING CALLS FOR. AS YOU CAN SEE ON THE ZONING TABLE LESS TO BUILDING HEIGHT, WE LIST IT AS ONE STORY. THEORETICALLY, YOU WILL NOT BE ABLE TO DO A 40 FOOT TALL, ONE-STORY BUILDING. IT IS TYPICAL THAT YOU WILL SEE 10 FOOT, 20 FOOT ROOF LINES FOR ALL THE PRODUCTS OUT THERE. I AM JUST LOOKING THROUGH MY NOTES FOR THE COMMENTS FROM YOU GUYS. GOING OFF OF THAT, WE HAVE ALSO BEEN COORDINATING WITH FORT PIERCE UTILITIES ON EXISTING CAPACITY THAT THEY HAVE OUT THERE. WE ARE HALFWAY THROUGH OUR PRAYER MEETING WITH THEM, AS WELL AS THE SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT, WITH WHOM WE HAVE BEEN COORDINATING FOR OUR DRAINAGE. ONCE WE GET THOSE PERMITS, WE ARE OKAY WITH THE CONDITIONS STATED IN THERE THAT ALL OF THOSE PERMITS ARE REQUIRED FOR US TO COMMENCE DEVELOPMENT. SO I AM HERE FOR ANY QUESTIONS THAT THE BOARD MIGHT HAVE. >> DO YOU HAVE CITY WATER AND SEWAGE? >> ALL WATER AND SEWER IS PROVIDED BY FORT PIERCE UTILITIES. I THINK CURRENTLY, WE WILL BE DOING A FORCED MAIN EXTENSION ALONG SUNRISE THAT WILL ALLOW OTHER PEOPLE TO BE [01:00:04] ABLE TO TIE INTO IT IN THE FUTURE. >> JUST GOING BACK TO THE BUS DROP OFF, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THE INTENTION IS THAT THE BUS CAN PULL OFF TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD AT THE ENTRANCE POINT ENOUGH TO PICK UP THE KIDS? OR WOULD THE BUS HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE ENTIRE LOOP AND THEN EXIT BACK OUT? >> THAT WOULD BE UP TO THE SCHOOL DISTRICT. HOW WE DESIGNED IT IS THAT SENSE THERE WILL NOT BE A GATE, IF THEY WANT TO, THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO PULL IN, LOOP AROUND, AND STOPPED HERE. THAT WOULD BE THE SAFEST OPTION. ON THE OLEANDER OAKS PROJECT, WE HAD THE BUS PULL IN AND DO A U-TURN THERE. WE HAD TO KEEP OUR DRIVEWAY ON THE NORTH. IT MAKES IT DIFFICULT TO ACHIEVE THAT SAME MOTION HERE. THAT IS WHY WE WENT WITH THE NO GATE. >> GIVEN THIS PLAN, DO YOU FEEL LIKE THE SCHOOL BUS OPERATORS WOULD BE ABLE TO ACCOMPLISH PICKUP AND DROP OFF WITHOUT STOPPING ON SUNRISE? I AM NOT GOING TO ASSUME THAT YOU ARE GOING TO WANT YOUR BUS DRIVERS FOR EVERY ONE OF THESE TYPES OF DEVELOPMENTS TO TAKE A LOOP THROUGH THE WHOLE COMMUNITY, ADDING TO THE TIME OF OPERATION FOR PICKUP AND DROP-OFF. >> TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, YES, IT ADDS TIME TO OUR PICKUP AND DROP-OFF, PULLING INTO THE COMMUNITY AND DOING A FULL LOOP THROUGH. WE TEND TO NOT WANT TO COME ALL THE WAY INTO THE COMMUNITY. WE PREFER EITHER A ROUNDABOUT AT THE VERY FRONT ENTRANCE OR, YOU KNOW, UNFORTUNATELY IN THIS AREA, THE AMENITY AREA AT THE FRONT SO WE CAN ALLOW PARKING AS WELL AS LOCATION FOR THE CHILDREN TO SAFELY WAIT. HERE ARE MY OPTION WOULD BE TO ACTUALLY HAVE THE BUS STOP ON SUNRISE BOULEVARD AND PICK UP THE CHILDREN FROM THAT PAD. >> UNDERSTOOD. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. I WILL OPEN IT UP TO PUBLIC COMMENT. IF THERE ARE ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC THAT WOULD LIKE TO COME FORWARD AND SPEAK ON THIS ITEM, YOU MAY DO SO. SEEING NONE, I WILL SEND IT BACK TO THE BOARD FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION. >> I WOULD LIKE TO GO ON THE RECORD. THIS IS ONE OF THOSE INSTANCES WHERE I WOULD HAVE LIKED TO HAVE SEEN THIS IN A PRELIMINARY PLATFORM SO WE COULD GO THROUGH THE PROCESS OF ADDRESSING THAT PRIOR TO THEM BEING IN THE FINAL STAGE. FOR ME, THIS IS A BIG ISSUE TO HAVE THE KIDS OUT THERE IN THIS PARTICULAR AREA OF THE CITY, WAITING FOR THE SCHOOL BUSES. NOT ONLY IS IT A DANGEROUS AREA BECAUSE IT IS SUCH A NARROW ROAD, THERE IS A LOT OF FOG THERE ALL THE TIME. THE KIDS DO NOT HAVE TO CROSS THE STREET BECAUSE THERE IS A COUNTY PROPERTY OR CITY PROPERTY THAT IS RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET. BUT THE KIDS TO WALK BACK AND FORTH BECAUSE THEY HAVE TWO SCHOOLS ON EACH END WHERE THE KIDS WALK TO SCHOOL IN THE AREA. THERE IS A FOUR WAY STOP SIGN. TRAFFIC IS ALWAYS BACKED UP AT THAT PARTICULAR TIME OF THE MORNING. FOR ME, THIS IS ALARMING. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOMETHING DIFFERENT. I JUST KNOW THAT OUR HANDS ARE TIED AS TO WHAT WE CAN MAKE THEM DO OR SUGGEST THAT THEY DO AT THIS POINT IN TIME IN THE DEVELOPMENT. >> I WOULD BE CURIOUS TO SEE IF THERE IS ANY OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK WITH THE COUNTY ABOUT UTILIZING THE RIGHT-OF-WAY BUFFER THAT HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED TO ALLOW A SUFFICIENT ENOUGH SPACE AT LEAST FOR A BUS TO PULL OFF OF THE MAIN ROADWAY. I THINK EVEN IN THAT SITUATION, WE WOULD STILL BE UNDER THE CONDITION THAT THE BUSES WOULD STILL PUT OUT THE LIGHTS AND SIGNS TO BE [01:05:02] STOPPING TRAFFIC. WHICH I DON'T OBJECT TO. AGAIN, MY PREFERENCE WOULD BE THAT THE PICKUP AND DROP OFF IS HAPPENING OFF THE ROADWAY COMPLETELY. I AM NOT REALLY SURE HOW TO PROCEED WITH THIS. I DON'T WANT TO TIE UP THE DEVELOPMENT TOO MUCH OVER THIS ISSUE. BUT FROM MY PERSPECTIVE , WE CAN'T CHANGE THE PAST , BUT AS WE GO FORWARD WITH MORE DEVELOPMENTS , THIS SHOULD BE CONSIDERED A PRIORITY IN SOME WAY , TO MAKE SURE THAT THESE DESIGNS ARE BEING DONE IN CONSIDERATION, ESPECIALLY WHEN THEY ARE BUILT -- I KNOW SUNRISE IS NOT U.S. 1 , BUT IT GETS USED IN THE MORNING AND IN THE AFTERNOONS, BEING A HIGHLY UTILIZED NORTH AND SOUTH STERILE FAIR. -- THOROUGHFARE. WE NEED TO LOOK AT BETTER WAYS TO KEEP THESE BUS STOPS OFF THE ROADWAYS FOR THESE TYPES OF CONDITIONS. THAT IS HOW I FEEL ABOUT IT. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? >> MS. CLEMONS, ARE YOU THINKING ABOUT ADDING AN ADDITION TO THIS? I AM JUST TORN. >> I THINK YOU MAKE A GOOD POINT. THE COULD HAVE BEEN A BETTER OPPORTUNITY TO ADDRESS THIS AT AN EARLIER STAGE AND LET IT BE KNOWN. >> MR. CHAIR, IF I MAY? >> PLEASE. >> I CAN DEFINITELY PROVIDED DIRECTION TO OUR TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT IN THIS INSTANCE. WE ARE IN THE FINAL SITE PLAN. THERE ARE ONLY CERTAIN THINGS THAT ARE OFFERED TO YOU IN THIS STAGE OF IT. I CAN PROVIDE A DIRECTION THAT, IN THIS INSTANCE, AND I CANNOT GUARANTEE YOU , BUT I CAN DEFINITELY TELL YOU THAT I CAN PROVIDE DIRECTION AND THAT WE ARE STRONGLY ENCOURAGED TO MOVE INTO THIS DEVELOPMENT WHEN IT COMES UP. IF WE HAVE CHILDREN IN THIS LOCATION WHO ARE ON THE BUS, THEN WE CAN PULL INTO THIS ESTABLISHMENT AND PROVIDE THAT PICKUP OFF OF SUNRISE. I CAN PROVIDE THAT DIRECTION TO THE DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION. ACTUALLY, GOING FORWARD, I HAVE BEEN ENGAGED IN REVIEWING THESE AT AN EARLIER STAGE. UNFORTUNATELY, THIS ONE IS AT A LATER STAGE. WE DO HAVE STOP SIGNS THAT POLL HOURS. UNFORTUNATELY, THERE ARE PEOPLE, I AM 10 MINUTES LATE TO WORK, I AM DRIVINGAROUND THIS. WE HAVE CAMERAS ON OUR BUSES. WE SEE THAT THIS PERSON IS DOING THAT. THEIR TAG US TAKEN. JUST TO LET EVERYBODY KNOW, DON'T DRIVE AROUND A BUS IF THE LIGHTS ARE OUT. THAT IS THE LAW. ALL TRAFFIC NEEDS TO STOP. WE DO OUR BEST TO PULL THESE BUS STOPS OFF OF MAJOR FAIRWAYS. OKEECHOBEE ROAD, U.S. 1, WE DO OUR BEST TO MAKE SURE THOSE ARE NOT LOCATED ON THERE. SOMETIMES A MAJOR DEVELOPMENT THAT IS ON U.S. 1, THAT IS THE ONLY LOCATION WE CAN PUT IT . IT IS STRONGLY ENCOURAGING THOSE PEOPLE TO FOLLOW THE LAW . I WILL PROVIDED DIRECTION TO OUR TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT TO STRONGLY ENCOURAGE TO PULL THESE BUS STOPS OFF OF THE ROAD. THAT IS WHAT I CAN GIVE TO YOU AS AN ASSURANCE, THAT I CAN PROVIDE THAT DIRECTION. I CANNOT GUARANTEE IT. SOMETIMES WE ARE ON A CRUNCH AND WE NEED TO GET THESE KIDS TO SCHOOL AND THAT IS OUR PRIMARY, TO MAKE SURE THEY HAVE AS MUCH TEACHING AND LEARNING TIME PROVIDED TO THEM AS POSSIBLE. THAT IS OUR THING, GETTING THEM THERE SAFELY AND PROVIDING THEM WITH THE EDUCATION THAT THEY DESERVE. >> THANK YOU. NOTED AND APPRECIATED. >> I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A QUICK COMMENT. >> ABSOLUTELY. >> WE HAVE BEEN EXCHANGING EMAILS BACK AND FORTH ON THIS PROJECT. OUR NEXT STEP AFTER CITY COUNCIL WOULD BE TO SUBMIT A D.C. PR FOR THE CIVIL PLANS AS PART OF THAT PLANNING AND ENGINEERING HAVING TO APPROVE IT. WE CAN WORK WITH STAFF IN THE SCHOOL DISTRICT AND LOOK AT THIS BUS STOPS SITUATION . MAYBE THEY WILL NOT APPROVE THE PLANS UNLESS THE SCHOOL DISTRICT IS [01:10:06] SATISFIED WITH THE BUS STOP LOCATION. >> UNDERSTOOD. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? FROM THE BOARD, I'M JUST GOING TO GO THROUGH IT HERE. WE HAVE THE 11 CONDITIONS STATED BY STAFF. I AM GOING TO SAY A 12 CONDITION THAT IS NOT LISTED IN THE PRESENTATION, BUT WAS STATED BY THE DIRECTOR REGARDING THE LIMITATIONS OF THE FINAL PD IN REFERENCE TO PERMITTING . WE ALSO DISCUSSED A 13TH CONDITION POTENTIALLY FOR A FOOT MINIMUM SOLID CONSTRUCTION. THE APPLICANT WOULD RESERVE THE RIGHT TO DETERMINE THE FINAL BUILDING MATERIALS. SO AT THIS TIME , I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION. >> I MOVE FOR APPROVAL WITH THE 13 STATED AND PRESENTED CONDITIONS. >> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL BY MS. CLEMONS, SECOND BY MR. EDWARDS. PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. >> MR. JOHNSON? >> YES. >> MS. CLEMONS? >> YES. >> MR. EDWARDS? >> YES. >> MR. WIDING? >> YES. >> CHAIRMAN KREISL? >> YES. THANK YOU. MOVING ON [c. Conditional Use with No New Construction - Atlantic Coast Recycling 3301 Avenue D] NOW, I DON'T 6C, CONDITIONAL USE WITH NO NEW CONSTRUCTION. >> THIS CONDITIONAL USE IS IN RESPECT OF ATLANTIC RECYCLING. IT IS AN UNUSUAL REQUEST. IT IS THE REESTABLISHMENT OF AN EXISTING USE THEY HAVE ON THE PROPERTY. IF THE APPLICANT IS HERE, I WOULD LIKE THEM EXPLAIN WHY THAT HAS BEEN REQUESTED. I THINK IT HAS BEEN REQUESTED AS PART OF THE NEW BUSINESS LICENSING REQUIREMENTS OF THE CITY. I WOULD LIKE TO GET MORE UPDATE ON THAT ONE. IN ESSENCE, IT HAS BEEN REQUESTED TO COMPLETE A NEW CONDITIONAL USE REVIEW. THIS IS A CONDITIONAL USE WITHOUT IMPROVEMENTS, AN ESTABLISHED OPERATION. IT IS THE SAME USE THAT HAS BEEN IN PLACE FOR THE LAST 20 YEARS. IT HAS BEEN REVIEWED UNDER CITY REQUIREMENTS. THERE HAVE BEEN NO CHANGES IN USE OF THE PROPERTY THAT WOULD OTHERWISE REQUIRE RECONSIDERATION OF THIS PREVIOUSLY RECOGNIZED PROPERTY STATUS. THE APPLICANT IS DENNIS MURPHY. THIS IS ON BEHALF OF ATLANTIC RECYCLING. THE ADDRESS IS KERRY DRIVER. THE PARCEL I.D. IS 2408-214-0001-000-2. THE RECYCLING, ATLANTIC RECYCLING, IS LOCATED OFF OF AVENUE D . TO THE EAST OF ANGLE ROAD. THAT IS AN OVERVIEW, A CLOSE-UP. YOU CAN SEE THAT THE MAJORITY OF CITY PROPERTY LIES TO THE EAST OF THE PROPERTY. THAT IS A PHOTOGRAPH OF THE EXISTING LOCATION . STAFF CONSIDERED THE EXTENSIVE LANDSCAPING ON THE FRONT AND THE ACCESS LOCATION . IT IS ZONED INDUSTRIAL. FUTURE LAND USE WILL BE INDUSTRIAL. THAT IS THE SITE PLAN THAT WAS APPROVED FOR THE INITIAL CONDITIONAL USE . STAFF RECOMMEND THAT THE PLANNING BOARD FORWARD THE APPLICATION OF THIS CONDITIONAL USE WITH NO NEW CONSTRUCTION TO THE CITY COMMISSION WITH A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL. THE CONDITIONAL USE IS ESTABLISHED ALREADY. >> UNDERSTOOD. THANK YOU. I DIDN'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS ONE OTHER THAN WHAT YOU STATED AT THE TOP. IS THE APPLICANT HERE TODAY? IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE THEY ARE. I WAS JUST MORE CURIOUS [01:15:01] OPERATIONALLY WHY THEY WERE HAVING TO GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS. >> IT IS NOTHING TO DO WITH PLANNING AND ZONING. THE OPERATION HAS BEEN ACTIVE NOW FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS. I WAS HOPING THE APPLICANT WOULD BE HERE TO FULLY UNDERSTAND WHY THEY APPLIED FOR THIS. THROUGH THE TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE, THERE WERE STATEMENTS MADE THAT IT IS PART OF A REQUIREMENT FOR THE BUSINESS LICENSING TO UPDATE THE CONDITIONAL USE TO COME UNDER THE NEW SYSTEM. >> OKAY. SO THIS ISN'T AKIN -- A CITY REQUIREMENT. >> I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT THIS ONE HAS COME FORWARD WITH THIS. I DON'T THINK IT IS PART OF THE AGREEMENT THAT IT RENEWS AFTER 20 YEARS. IT IS NOT CHANGED. THE OPERATION IS THE SAME. THERE WAS SOME OTHER REQUIREMENT OUTSIDE OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT. >> THERE WERE NO CODE ENFORCEMENT ISSUES OR REPORTS ON THIS PROPERTY? >> WE WENT THROUGH IT WITH TRC. NO COMMENTS CAME FORWARD OTHER THAN COMMENTS TO APPROVE IT IT WAS APPROVED BY ST. LUCIE COUNTY IN TERMS OF THEIR HIGHWAY IMPACTS. IT WAS REVIEWED BY THE CITY ENGINEER THAT IS AS PART OF THE WHOLE OPERATION THAT IS GOING ON IN THERE. THERE WERE NO COMMENTS. >> UNDERSTOOD. >> I DO HAVE SOME QUESTIONS, SINCE IT IS BEING BROUGHT BEFORE US. I THINK IT IS AN EYE SORE. HOW DO WE ADDRESS THE LANDSCAPING ISSUE? >> IT IS AN INDUSTRIAL ZONING. I THINK WHAT THEY HAVE ON SITE AT THE MOMENT ACTUALLY EXCEEDS WE WILL BE REQUIRING IN TERMS OF LANDSCAPING FOR AN INDUSTRIAL PROPERTY. WE DON'T HAVE SUBSTANTIAL LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS FOR INDUSTRIAL PROPERTIES. IT IS MAINLY ABOUT FENCING. >> THE CONDITIONAL USE APPLICATION PROCESS FOR EXISTING PROPERTIES DOES NOT TRIGGER ANY REQUIREMENT . >> THE PLANNING BOARD COULD RECOMMEND ANYTHING TO DO WITH SITE PLANNING ON THIS. IT IS A CONDITIONAL USE. >> RIGHT. >> THE WAY THAT STAFF HANDLE THE DEPARTMENT REVIEW IS THEY TAKE THIS AS A CONDITIONAL USE THAT WAS APPROVED. THERE WAS NO SIGNIFICANT REQUIREMENT FROM PLANNING OR ANYBODY ELSE THAT THEY CAME INTO CONDITIONAL USE. AGAIN. I THINK WE WOULD HAVE SUGGESTED SOME ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPING ON THE FRONT. AS IT IS INDUSTRIAL, THEY HAVE A SUBSTANTIAL HEDGE ALONG THE MAJORITY OF THE FRONTAGE THAT THEY HAVE THERE. YOU HAVE TO BEAR IN MIND, IT IS AN INDUSTRIAL USE AND ZONED APPROPRIATELY FOR INDUSTRIAL USE. YOU COULD MAKE COMMENT THAT YOU WANTED SOMETHING IN THIS AREA. IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS USED AS AN ACCESS. >> THAT PART IS CLOSED OFF. THE ACCESS IS BETWEEN THE HEDGES AND THAT POLL RIGHT THERE. THERE AND AT THE OTHER END ARE STILL SOME BOUNDARIES THAT ARE NOT COVERED BY HEDGES. >> THE PLANNING BOARD CAN REQUEST ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPING ALONG THE FRONTAGE IF THEY SO DESIRE. IT IS A CONDITIONAL USE. >> THANK YOU FOR GUIDANCE. >> I THINK THE ONLY THING THAT I MIGHT SUGGEST IN CONSIDERATION, AND I AM NOT RECOMMENDING THIS, JUST BRINGING IT UP FOR DISCUSSION, IS A REQUEST FOR A REVIEW BY CODE ENFORCEMENT, AN ACTIVE REVIEW BY CODE ENFORCEMENT OF THE PROPERTY. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT FALLS WITHIN OUR AUTHORITY TO DO SO. I THINK THAT WOULD BE THE ONLY THING THAT COULD POTENTIALLY TRIGGER ADDRESSING YOUR CONCERN ABOUT THE VISUAL APPEARANCE OF THE PROPERTY. IT DOESN'T SOUND FROM WHAT MR. FREEMAN IS SCRIBING THAT THEY ARE NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE EXISTING REGULATIONS AND REQUIREMENTS FOR LANDSCAPING. BUT IF YOU FEEL LIKE THAT IS IMPORTANT ENOUGH TO YOU , WE CAN CERTAINLY ADD CONDITIONS. DISCUSSION FROM [01:20:06] ANYONE ELSE? I DO NEED TO OPEN THIS UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENT . IF THERE IS ANYBODY FROM THE PUBLIC WOULD WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM, PLEASE COME FORWARD. SEEING NONE AT THIS TIME, I WILL SEND IT BACK TO THE BOARD FOR ANY FINAL CONSIDERATIONS. >> I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE LANDSCAPING ISSUE ADDRESSED . THIS HAS BEEN A LONG-TERM EYESORE FOR ME AS A PERSON GOING UP HERE IN FORT PIERCE. I HAVE ALWAYS FELT LIKE IT WAS AN EYE SORE IN AN AREA THAT IS MOSTLY RESIDENTIAL. IT KINDA STANDS OUT. >> MOST OF THAT BLOCK IS INDUSTRIAL. >> I KNOW IT IS TAGGED. VISUALLY, AS A RESIDENT OF THIS AREA, WE DO NOT SEE THAT AS AN INDUSTRIAL AREA. IT IS NOT UTILIZED MOSTLY AT THAT. I KNOW THAT IS HOW IT IS LABELED AND EVERYTHING. THAT IS NOT HOW WE SEE IT. >> COULD I JUST ASK, CHAIR , IF STAFF RECOMMENDED THAT THE APPLICANT LOOKED AT ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPING, SPECIFICALLY IN THIS LOCATION , THE FRONT AND MAYBE A BIT OF THE SIDE , AND CAME FORWARD WITH MAYBE A SIMILAR LANDSCAPING AS YOU SEE HERE, WHICH IS QUITE DENSE, THERE MAY BE A REQUIREMENT TO MAINTAIN THIS AS AN OPEN EMERGENCY ACCESS POTENTIALLY? I WOULD HAVE TO LOOK AT THAT IN MORE DETAIL. ESSENTIALLY, WE COULD ENCOURAGE THE PROPERTY OWNER TO DO A LENGTH OF THAT , TO DO AS MUCH AS WE CAN DOWN THERE, AND THEN THE FRONTAGE. >> PERFECT. >> YEAH. >> ALL RIGHT. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION >> KEV, IS THAT AT THE ENCOURAGEMENT LEVEL? OR COULD YOU GO HIGHER THAN THAT? >> YOU COULD PUT A CONDITION ON THE CONDITIONAL USE. IT STATES THAT THE PROPERTY OWNER SHALL INSTALL LANDSCAPING AS APPROPRIATE ALONG THE FRONTAGE WITH AVENUE D AND MAYBE A LENGTH OF 20 FEET OR SO DOWN THE , THAT WOULD BE, THE EASTERN BOUNDARY. >> YES. >> ALL RIGHT. IF THERE IS NO FURTHER DISCUSSION, WE HAVE A CONDITIONAL USE APPLICATION. IT IS UP FOR RECOMMENDATION WITH AN ADDITIONAL CONDITION DISCUSSED HERE TODAY , AS STATED BY MR. FREEMAN. I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION AT THIS TIME. >> I MOVE FOR APPROVAL WITH THE ONE STATED CONDITION. >> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION FOR RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL BY MS. CLEMONS, SECOND BY MR. WIDING. PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. >> [d. Minor Site Plan and Innovative Residential Development - Duplex 209 N. 18th Street] ITEM 6D. MR. GILMORE, IT IS GOOD TO SEE YOU. >> GOOD TO SEE YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON. BEFORE YOU, WE HAVE A MINOR SITE PLAN FOR AN INNOVATIVE DEVELOPMENT FOR DUPLEX TO BE LOCATED AT 209 NORTH 18TH STREET. THIS INVOLVES ANDRE BAXAM AND A-OK CONSTRUCTION. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO DEVELOP A SINGLE-STORY DUPLEX WITH ENHANCED LANDSCAPING, ARCHITECTURAL DESIGNS, AND A COMMON AREA FOR RESIDENTS. THESE PARCELS ARE LOCATED AT [01:25:01] APPROXIMATELY 0.31 ACRES. THIS IS A CONDITIONAL USE. THIS IS AN AERIAL OF THE SUBJECT SITE LOCATED IN A PREDOMINANTLY RESIDENTIAL AREA. THIS IS ANOTHER AREA , WHICH ALSO SHOWS THE LOCATION. THE FUTURE LAND USE ONCE AGAIN IS LOW-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL. ZONING, R-3. THIS IS THE SITE PLAN AND DETAILS. THE PROPOSED STRUCTURE IS 3300 , PLUS OR MINUS THE TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE BUILDING. INCLUDES GRANITE COUNTERTOPS, STAINLESS STEEL APPLIANCES, WASHERS AND DRYERS INCLUDED, RESIDENTIAL COOKOUT AREA IN THE REAR, AND GARBAGE CANS WILL BE PROVIDED. THE LANDSCAPING DETAILS INCLUDE TWO COCONUT PALM TREES, THREE PALM TREES, ONE JAPANESE PLUM TREE, LIVE EVERGREEN SHRUBS, DIFFERENT SHRUBS, AND ONE EXISTING OAK TREE. THESE ARE THE ARCHITECTURAL ELEVATION DETAILS INCLUDING SOUTH FLORIDA DESIGN STYLE, LIGHTING PROVIDED EVERY 4 FEET AROUND THE PROPERTY. SHOWS A COMMUNITY COMMON OUTDOOR AREA WITH LANDSCAPING SURROUNDING IT AND THE ENHANCED LANDSCAPING SURROUNDING THE ENTIRE BUILDING. COLORS TO BE USED INCLUDE PURE WHITE, SEA SALT, AGREEABLE GRAY, SMOKY BLUE, AND SLEEPY BLUE. THIS IS THE FLOOR PLAN. EACH UNIT WILL BE APPROXIMATELY 1600 FT.÷. WITH A REAR PORCH, 4200 FT.÷, TOTALING APPROXIMATELY 1693 FT.÷ EACH. STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL THE SITE PLAN WITH ONE CONDITION PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF OCCUPANCY. MAINTENANCE SHALL BE MAINTAINED IN PERPETUITY IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE SECTION 123-7 OF THE CITY CODE OF ORDINANCES, IN ORDER THAT IT CONTINUES TO PRESENT A HEALTHY, NEAT, AND ORDERLY APPEARANCE FREE OF REFUSE AND DEBRIS, IN CONFORMITY WITH THE FOLLOWING REQUIREMENTS: VEGETATION REQUIRED BY THIS ARTICLE SHALL BE REPLACED WITH EQUIVALENT OR BETTER VEGETATION IF IT IS NOT LIVING. ALL TREES FOR WHICH CREDIT IS AWARDED, AND WHICH SUBSEQUENTLY DIE SHALL BE REPLACED BY THE SAME OR GREATER NUMBER OF LIVING TREES ACCORDING TO THE STANDARDS ESTABLISHED IN THIS ARTICLE. MAINTENANCE SHALL INCLUDE SUFFICIENT WEEDING, WATERING, FERTILIZING, PRUNING, MOWING, EDGING, MULCHING AND OTHER HORTICULTURAL PRACTICES TO ENSURE THAT THE LANDSCAPING CONTINUES TO MAINTAIN A HEALTHY, NEAT, AND ORDERLY APPEARANCE. ALTERNATIVE RECOMMENDATIONS INCLUDE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL WITH ADDITIONAL OR MODIFIED CONDITIONS OR RECOMMEND DISAPPROVAL. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, MR. GILMORE. AT THE BEGINNING OF THE PRESENTATION , I HEARD YOU MENTIONED A CONDITIONAL USE? >> YES, THIS IS CONDITIONAL USE. >> COULD YOU ELABORATE ON THAT SPECIFICALLY? >> AN INNOVATIVE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT, IF THEY ARE CREATIVE AND IMAGINATIVE HOUSING THAT MAKES USE OF COMMUNITY-ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT, IN ORDER TO RECEIVE CERTAIN VARIANCES SUCH AS SETBACKS AND POSSIBLY HEIGHT OR EVEN DENSITY BY OUR ALLOWED USE TABLE, IT REQUIRES CONDITIONAL USE. THIS IS WHY IT IS CONDITIONAL USE. >> WET CONDITIONS -- WHAT THINGS DID THEY REQUEST OR REQUIRE? >> FOR THE INNOVATIVE? BASICALLY AN INCRIN LANDSCAPING, AN INCREASE IN SIDING AND DESIGN. WITH THIS PROJECT, THE APPLICANT IS COMPLEMENTING THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITY THAT EXISTS CURRENTLY. THIS IS PREDOMINANTLY AN OLDER AREA. I BELIEVE THIS IS ALSO INCLUDED IN THE LINCOLN PARK [01:30:01] COMMUNITIES JUST NORTH OF ORANGE AVENUE. I FEEL LIKE IT WOULD BE A GREAT ADDITION TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. >> WAS IT THE DENSITY SPECIFICALLY THAT INCREASED ? >> THE DENSITY IS WHAT TRIGGERED IT. ALSO, THE USE. WITH R-3, YOU HAVE TO HAVE AN INNOVATIVE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT TO DO A DUPLEX. >> THANK YOU. >> TELL US WHAT IS NORTH OF THE PROPERTY. >> IT IS WHAT SHOULD BE A FAMILY HOME. IT IS PROBABLY JUST JUNK IN THE YARD, TO BE HONEST WITH YOU. MOST OF THOSE ARE SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES SURROUNDING IT. >> THERE ARE A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT ONES. >> IS NOT A BUSINESS. IT IS DEFINITELY RESIDENTIAL. I DON'T KNOW IF PEOPLE ARE LIVING IN IT OR IF THEY HAVE CARS STORED IN IT. IT IS DEFINITELY RESIDENTIAL. >> DO YOU HAVE THE USE MAP? >> YEAH. >> IT LOOKS LIKE IT WAS ALL R-3. IT IS DEFINITELY RESIDENTIAL. >> DOESN'T LOOK LIKE IT, BUT YEAH. >> THE INITIATIVE BEHIND THE INNOVATIVE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM IS THAT YOU, WHAT YOU ARE SEEING NOW IS TO ENABLE A REDEVELOPMENT OF A PROPERTY , WHICH WOULD OTHERWISE BE UNABLE TO BE REDEVELOPED IN TERMS OF THE MARKET VALUES THAT WE SEE IN TERMS OF ALLOWING A DUPLEX OR SOME OTHER UNIT THERE. IT DOES GIVE FLEXIBILITY . ESSENTIALLY SETBACKS AND OTHER FEATURES, LANDSCAPING, AND STORMWATER DESIGN, THE DENSITY IS ALWAYS MAINTAINED AT WHATEVER THE FUTURE LAND USE IS SET. THEY CAN'T INCREASE THE DENSITY, BUT THEY CAN UTILIZE THE FULL DENSITY UNDER THE INNOVATIVE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT. THERE ARE OTHER OPTIONS WITHIN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT ALLOW ADDITIONAL UNITS IF THEY ARE AIMED AT AFFORDABLE INCOME. IN ESSENCE, THE INNOVATIVE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DOES PERMIT ACCESSORY DWELLINGS AND ALL THE OTHER THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN MISSING FROM THE CODE OF THE CITY AND MISSING FROM THE CODING IN APPLICATION TO THESE HISTORIC LIENS , WHICH WE HAVE FOUND THAT A NUMBER REMAIN VACANT AND UNABLE TO BE DEVELOPED EFFICIENTLY BECAUSE OF THE SETBACKS THAT ARE REQUIRED WITHIN THOSE. >> THIS PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY R-3? >> IT IS R-3. IT WILL BE RETAINED AS R-3. THE SITE PLAN IS A CONDITIONAL USE. THOSE PARAMETERS WILL BE OVERLAID ONTO THAT R-3. UNDERNEATH ALL OF THIS, IT IS STILL R-3. IS IT LOWER DENSITY HERE? >> IT IS. >> THIS IS A THIRD OF AN ACRE. YOU CAN GET TWO UNITS ON THERE UNDER THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. >> R-3 IS HIGHER DENSITY WHERE AS THE OTHERS ARE LOW-DENSITY? >> IF IT IS LOW-DENSITY ESIDENTIAL, THE DENSITY IS THE SAME ON ALL OF THESE LOTS. THE BENEFIT OF BEING , IF YOU WANT TO SAY BENEFIT, THE DIFFERENTIAL WITH R-3 TO R-1 OR R-2 ARE THE SIZE OF THE LOTS. WITH THE SETBACKS IN CERTAIN CASES, IT MAY BE DIFFERENT. THE BIGGEST ISSUE THAT WE HAD FOUND WITH REDEVELOPMENT AND GETTING SOME DECENT DEVELOPMENT GOING -- AND WHEN I SAY DECENT, I MEAN ARCHITECTURAL STYLES, IMPROVEMENT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, TRYING TO BRING UP THE LEVEL OF APPEARANCE OF COMMUNITIES -- JUST TO THE NORTH OF THIS, IT WOULD BE INTERESTING TO SEE WHETHER OR NOT WHEN THIS GETS DEVELOPED WHAT HAPPENS IN THIS AREA. WHEN PROPERTY OWNERS REALIZE WHAT THEY CAN ACTUALLY DO WITH THEIR PROPERTY , I THINK IT WOULD INCREASE THE OPPORTUNITIES FOR REDEVELOPMENT [01:35:01] AND UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT CAN BE DONE IN THESE AREAS. >> THERE IS A SNOWBALL EFFECT, TOO. THE TRIGGERING OF THE NEW DEVELOPMENT ALSO BRINGS UP THE STANDARD FOR THE NEW LANDSCAPING CODE. >> YES. >> IF I AM NOT MISTAKEN, THIS SPECIFIC OPPORTUNITY FOR THE DEVELOPERS IS A RELATIVELY NEW ASPECT OF OUR CODE. IT IS GOOD TO SEE THAT THAT IS BEING UTILIZED AND TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF. >> I THINK THIS MAY BE THE FIRST ONE. >> I THINK WE HAVE SEEN A FEW. I AM VERY CURIOUS TO SEE HOW THIS PROJECT MOVES FORWARD. I THINK THIS IS A VERY GOOD OPPORTUNITY FOR THE DEVELOPERS, THE CITY, AND THE CITIZENS. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? DOES THE STAFF FEEL IT IS NECESSARY TO HAVE THE APPLICANT COME AND PRESENT? I FEEL LIKE WE HAVE SEEN EVERYTHING WE NEED TO SEE HERE. >> IF THEY ARE HERE, I WOULD LIKE TO GIVE THEM AN OPPORTUNITY. >> IF THE APPLICANT IS HERE AND THEY WISH TO COME FORTH AND SPEAK, THEY CAN CERTAINLY DO SO. PLEASE SIGN IN AND STATE YOUR NAME. >> MY NAME IS ANDRE BAXAM WITH A-OK CONSTRUCTION. I JUST WANT TO SAY THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK AT WHAT I HAVE TO OFFER. THIS WILL BE MY SECOND PROPERTY THAT I WILL BE BUILDING HERE IN THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE. I JUST DID ONE ON 19TH STREET. VERY BEAUTIFUL THREE BEDROOM, TWO BATHROOM HOME. NICE FAMILY MOVING IN. I WOULD LIKE TO CONTINUE DOING THIS AND UTILIZING THE PROGRAMS THAT YOU HAVE TO OFFER HERE. >> VERY GOOD. THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? THANK YOU VERY MUCH. APPRECIATE YOUR TIME. AT THIS TIME, WE WOULD OPEN IT UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. IF THERE ARE ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WOULD WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM, PLEASE COME FORWARD. SEEING NONE, I WILL SEND IT BACK TO THE BOARD FOR ANY FINAL DISCUSSION. HEARING NONE, AT THIS TIME, I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. >> I MOTION TO APPROVE. >> WE DO HAVE A CONDITION. >> WITH ONE CONDITION. >> STATED BY STAFF. >> I MOVED TO APPROVE WITH ONE CONDITION. >> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL WITH THE ONE STATED CONDITION BY MS. CLEMONS, SECOND BY MR. JOHNSON. PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. >> MS. CLEMONS? >> YES. >> MR. EDWARDS? >> YES. [e. Site Plan - Woodspring Suites Hotel - 2480 S. Jenkins Road] >> MR. WIDING? >> YES. >> CHAIRMAN KREISL? >> YES. NOW MOVING ON TO ITEM 6E . >> GOOD AFTERNOON, PLANNING BOARD MEMBERS. BEFORE YOU, WE HAVE A MAJOR SITE PLAN FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY LOCATED AT 2480 SOUTH JENKINS ROAD , PARCEL I.D. 2419-232-0003-000-6. THE OWNER IS MR. PATEL. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING APPROVAL OF THIS APPLICTION TO CONSTRUCT A FOUR STORY , 122 HOTEL ROOM WITH SITE IMPROVEMENTS. THE PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY VACANT. ON OCTOBER 24, 2024, THE PROPERTY WAS APPROVED TO BE SUBDIVIDED. THE OUT PARCEL WAS CREATED FOR THE POTENTIAL USE OF AN ADDITIONAL HOTEL TO BE CONSTRUCTED. WOODSPRING SUITES PRIMARILY BY RESIDENTIAL USES, SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES, AND ONE COMMERCIAL PARCEL. TO THE EAST, THERE ARE SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES. ACROSS SOUTH JENKINS ROAD CONSISTS OF SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES. THE DEVELOPMENT IS CURRENTLY OCCUPIED BY AN EXTRA SPACE STORAGE FACILITY, WHICH IS COMMERCIAL USE. THIS IS AN AERIAL OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. IT IS 3.39 ACRES. ALL AFFECTED [01:40:08] DEPARTMENTS HAVE REVIEWED THE SITE PLANS. THE EXISTING FUTURE LAND USE IS GENERAL COMMERCIAL WITH A CURRENT ZONING OF GENERAL COMMERCIAL. YOU CAN SEE THAT IT IS SURROUNDED BY THE CITY AND SOME RESIDENTIAL USES. AND THEN YOU HAVE THE COUNTY, WHICH IS COMMERCIAL USES. THE SITE PLAN CONSISTS OF APPROXIMATELY 48,100 GROSS SQUARE FOOTAGE TOTAL. EACH FLOOR WOULD CONSIST OF APPROXIMATELY 12,025 FT.÷ . 135'S PARKING SPACES, SIX OF THOSE BEING HANDICAPPED. THIS IS AN EXTENDED STAY HOTEL. SUITES WILL ALL BE UNDER 500 FT.÷. IN ROOM KITCHENS, DESK, WORKSPACE, AND 24/7 LAUNDRY. THE LANDSCAPE PLAN CONSISTS OF 117 PROPOSED TREES INCLUDING PALMS, 100 OF WHICH ARE 100% NATIVE. THE OTHER PALMS PROPOSED , 100% ARE ALSO NATIVE. THE TOTAL PROPOSED AT 575. 339 OF THOSE ARE NATIVE SHRUBS. THIS IS THE LANDSCAPING DETAIL. THERE IS A TOTAL OF 74 NATIVE TREES THAT MEETS THE FORT PIERCE REQUIREMENTS FOR IRRIGATION. WE HAVE LOWER OAK, CABBAGE PALM /PINE . THE TOTALS ARE 38, 33, AND 13. THIS WAS THE ORIGINAL SUBMITTED DESIGN THAT THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED THROUGH OUR DESIGN REVIEW, AS A DEPARTMENT , WE WERE ABLE TO GET THE APPLICANT TO ADD SOME ARCHITECTURAL EMBELLISHMENTS. THIS IS THE FINAL DESIGN, A TEMPORARY STYLE THAT MIRRORS THE TRENDS WITH MANY CURRENT HOUSING AND LOGIC PROJECTS. FUTURES AND MATERIALS INCLUDE ALUMINUM FRAMING, VINYL SIDING, MULTICOLORED SIDING, ASPHALT PITCHED ROOF WITH VARIATION AND OTHER THINGS. YOU CAN SEE MIST, GRAY CLOUDS, AND LET IT RAIN. PLANNING STAFF HAS SEVEN CONDITIONS. ONE, LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT WILL BE REQUIRED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRIOR TO THE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. TWO, THE LANDSCAPE INSPECTION WILL BE REQUIRED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT PRIOR TO FINAL CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. THREE, PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ANY SITE CLEARING PERMITS, THE APPLICANT SHALL PROVIDE A TREE MITIGATION SURVEY AND COORDINATE WITH THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE ARBORIST FOR THE REQUIRED MITIGATION OF THE CITY REGULATED TREES PROPOSED TO BE REMOVED AS A RESULT OF THIS SITE 'S DEVELOPMENT AND CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY. FOUR, INSTALL A LANDSCAPED AREA AROUND THE PROPOSED MONUMENT SITE BASE WHICH EXTENDS A MINIMUM DISTANCE OF 3 FEET IN ALL DIRECTIONS FOR SUCH LANDSCAPED AREA SHALL BE COMPLETELY COVERED BY GROUNDCOVER AND SHRUBS, HEDGES, OR SIMILAR VEGETATIVE MATERIALS. FIVE, UPDATE THE DUMPSTER ENCLOSURE TO THE CURRENT STANDARDS BUT IS ALWAYS DEPARTMENT. SIX, INSTALL THE CONCRETE, WOOD, OR VINYL FENCE TO BUFFER THE RESIDENTIAL USES FROM THE NORTH AND EAST. AND FINALLY, SEVEN, INSTALLING STREETSCAPE IMPROVEMENTS SUCH AS TABLES OR BENCHES AROUND OR NEAR THE STORM WATER POND AREA OR AN OUTDOOR RECREATION AREA. THE STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL WITH THE SEVEN MODIFICATIONS OR ALTERNATIVE CONDITIONS. ABSENT THAT, WE WOULD RECOMMEND DISAPPROVAL. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, MR. GILMORE. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? >> I HAVE A QUESTION. IN THE BEGINNING, YOU SAID THAT THERE WAS AN ADDITIONAL OUT PARCEL FOR A FUTURE HOTEL? >> YES . >> CAN YOU SHOW US THAT AREA? ISN'T THAT THE OPEN SPACE WHERE THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO PUT THE POND? >> NO, THAT IS IN THIS AREA. THIS IS THE CUT OUT OUT PARCEL THAT WAS CREATED. THEY HAVEN'T PRESENTED US ANY SITE PLAN FOR THIS. WHO KNOWS, THEY MAY SELL IT, I DON'T KNOW. WE WOULD ENCOURAGE THEM TO USE THIS ONE [01:45:07] ACCESS ROAD AND MAYBE HAVE AN ENTRANCE THAT WILL INCREASE TRAFFIC ALONG JENKINS ROAD. >> THIS INCLUDES A FRONTAGE IMPROVEMENT PLAN THAT INCLUDES A SIDEWALK? >> YES . >> WE ARE GETTING THERE. >> SIDEWALKS ON BOTH SIDES. >> IT MAY NOT BE A HOTEL. IT MAY BE SOMETHING ELSE. >> I WANTED TO GET AN IDEA OF WHAT THAT MIGHT LOOK LIKE. >> WE HAVE HAD THE SIDEWALK IMPROVEMENTS ON AT LEAST TWO OTHER PARCELS JUST WITHIN THIS PAST YEAR COME FORWARD. THAT IS GOOD TO SEE, THAT THIS IS FILLING IN. DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF? >> CAN WE BACKUP A SLIDE? GET THE AERIAL AROUND THE SITE IN QUESTION. SO WE HAVE THREE SIDES WITH RESIDENTIAL AND THE SOUTH SIDE IS -- >> COMMERCIAL. >> SO IT IS COMMERCIAL. >> WE HAVE ADDED A CONDITION FOR A WALL ALONG THE NORTH AND EAST. >> SO THIS SITE , IT APPEARS THAT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT IS COMFORTABLE WITH FOUR STORIES THERE. IT LOOKS LIKE ALL THE CONDITIONS, VIRTUALLY ALL OF THEM HAVE TO DO WITH BUFFERING LANDSCAPING AND FENCING. >> CORRECT. >> THE STORAGE LOCATION, ISN'T IT THREE? >> IT IS LIKE FOUR. >> CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE USE MAP OR THE ZONE MAP? YEP . >> WE HAVE A VERY ENCLOSED ENCLAVE OF COMPANY PROPERTY NASH COUNTY PROPERTY. >> THAT IS COMMERCIAL ZONING. >> ON THE MAP, IT LOOKS LIKE SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES. >> IT IS ZONED COMMERCIAL. IF THOSE HOMES ARE AS SOLD, THEY WILL BE REZONED COMMERCIAL. IT IS C-1, NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL. >> I AM CURIOUS ABOUT THE COUNTY PROPERTIES TO THE EAST THERE. OKAY. >> VERY GOOD. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? AT THIS TIME, I WOULD INVITE THE APPLICANT TO COME FORWARD IF THE APPLICANT IS HERE. >> GOOD AFTERNOON. I AM THE CIVIL ENGINEER INVOLVED WITH THIS PROJECT. I THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. I RECOGNIZE THE COMMENTS. WE WILL REVISE THE PLANS ACCORDINGLY , ACCORDING WITH LANDSCAPE AND EVERYTHING. WE ARE DEFINITELY MOVING FORWARD WITH THIS AND HOPE TO WORK WITH THE CITY . >> GOOD . HOW DO YOU PLAN TO APPROACH THE RECOMMENDATION FOR FENCING? >> I BELIEVE WE ARE , I AM COORDINATING WITH OUR ARCHITECTURAL DEPARTMENT TO FILL IN SOME DETAILS AS TO WHETHER OR NOT WE ARE USING, I THINK WE ARE LOOKING AT WHAT FENCING OF SOME SORT. I THINK THEY HAVE BOUNCED AROUND EITHER MASONRY OR WOOD FENCING FOR SCREENING. WE DO NOT HAVE THE EXACT DETAILS FOR DUMPSTER SCREENING AND SUCH. >> DO YOU HAVE A HEIGHT RECOMMENDATION ON THE FENCING? >> I WOULD HONESTLY SAY EIGHT. IS THAT CLARIFIED IN THE CONDITION AT THIS TIME? >> IT IS NOT. >> DO WE WANT TO ADD A CONDITION OR AMEND THE EXISTING CONDITION? >> ABSOLUTELY. >> OKAY. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER [01:50:01] QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT FROM THE BOARD? >> MS. CLEMONS, ARE YOU GOING TO ADD A CONDITION? >> I THINK WE CAN JUST SPECIFY IN THE CONDITION THAT IS ALREADY THERE THAT IT IS A MINIMUM OF 8 FEET. >> THAT IS NUMBER SIX. >> NUMBER SIX. >> I THINK THAT IS EASY ENOUGH TO DEAL WITH. ALL RIGHT. IF THERE IS NOTHING ELSE FOR THE APPLICANT, I THINK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. APPRECIATE IT. AT THIS TIME, I WOULD OPEN IT UP TO THE PUBLIC. IF THERE ARE ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WOULD WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM, PLEASE COME FORWARD. SEEING NONE, I WILL SEND IT BACK TO THE BOARD FOR ANY ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION. HEARING NONE, WE HAVE A SITE PLAN BEFORE US WITH SEVEN STATED CONDITIONS AND AN EIGHTH ADDED RECOMMENDATION , CONDITION TO SET A MINIMUM OF 8 FEET. THAT IS FOR THE FENCING REFERENCED IN CONDITIONS SIX. AT THIS TIME, I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION. >> I MOVE FOR APPROVAL WITH THE SEVEN CONDITIONS WITH THE AMENDMENT OF NUMBER SIX BEING AN 8 FEET MINIMUM. >> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION FOR APPROVAL BY MS. CLEMONS, SECOND BY MR. EDWARDS. >> MR. EDWARDS? PLEASE CALL >> YES. THE ROLL. >> MR. WIDING? >> YES. >> MR. JOHNSON? >> YES. >> MS. CLEMONS? >> YES. >> CHAIRMAN KREISL? >> YES. THANK YOU. AND LAST UP [f. Preliminary Plat - Kings Highway Commerce Park - 2300 S. Kings Highway] FOR SIX, WE HAVE ITEM 6F, PRELIMINARY PLAT , KINGS HIGHWAY COMMERCE PARK. >> THANK YOU, CHAIR. A SIMPLE PRELIMINARY PLAT WILL NEED TO BE FOLLOWED UP WITH A FINAL PLAT AT SOME POINT. I THINK WE ARE READY HAVE AN APPLICATION IN PROCESS RIGHT NOW. THIS IS AT THE KINGS HIGHWAY COMMERCE PARK AND THE APPLICANT IS JEFF . THE ADDRESS IS 2300 SOUTH KINGS HIGHWAY, A PARCEL OF 2324-210-0000-000-6. THE REQUEST IS TO SUBDIVIDED AN EXISTING 107.4 ACRE PARCEL , THE KINGS HIGHWAY COMMERCE PARK , INTO THREE LOTS. THE SITE IS UNDER CP-1 WITH A COMMERCIAL GENERAL , MIXED-USE FUTURE LAND USE. THERE ARE THREE PARCELS. 26.8 ACRES, PARCEL 2 INTO 21.2 ACRES, AND THE REMAINING PROPERTY WOULD BE RETAINED IN PARCEL 3 AND PRODUCE THE SAME AS WHAT WAS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED IN PHASE 2. THERE IS THE LOCATION BETWEEN SOUTH KINGS HIGHWAY, PETERS ROAD, AND WHITE ROAD. THAT IS AN OVERVIEW . ZONING, CP-1. COMMERCIAL GENERAL , PRIMARILY IN A COMMERCIAL GENERAL LOCATION. SO IT HAS BEEN THROUGH REVIEW OF THE TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE. WE WERE ADVISED BY ST. LUCIE COUNTY , BY THE ACQUISITION TEAM, THAT THERE IS A PROPOSED DEDICATION TO GO TO THE COUNTY. THEY WOULD WANT TO SEE THAT BROUGHT TO THE APPROVAL OF THE PRELIMINARY PLAT. THAT WOULD NOT BE DONE UNTIL HE GETS TO CITY COMMISSION. WE ARE MOVING THIS ON WITH THAT CONDITION IN MIND. ALSO, THE APPLICANT SHALL ADDRESS ALL THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE ENGINEERING COMMENTS PRIOR TO THE APPROVAL OF THE PRELIMINARY PLAT. THAT IS GOING THROUGH AND I THINK IT IS ALMOST FINALIZED. THE FINAL REVIEW BY THE CONSULTANT OF THE CITY, THAT WOULD BE DONE MORE IN DETAIL AT THE FINAL PLAT. WE ARE RECOMMENDING APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS. >> UPON APPLICATION FOR THE FINAL PLAT PROCESS , WE WILL [01:55:06] HAVE CONFIRMATION FROM ENGINEERING AND ANYBODY ELSE? >> IT IS AT THAT POINT WHEN THEY DO A MORE DETAILED REVIEW OF THE PLAT. THOSE ARE INCORPORATED INTO THE APPROVAL , BOTH TO THE PLANNING BOARD AND TO THE CITY COMMISSION. THIS PRELIMINARY IS GETTING THE STRUCTURE OF THE PLAT IN PLACE, RESOLVING MAJOR ISSUES. THE ISSUE WE SEE HERE IS THE DEDICATION TO THE COUNTY'S RIGHT-OF-WAY TEAM BEING INCORPORATED ON THE PLAT. STAFF WILL NOT BE MOVING THAT FORWARD UNTIL THIS IS RESOLVED. >> IT IS NOT A WHOLE LOT TO LOOK AT THE -- AT THIS POINT THAN. IS THE ISSUE ALONG KINGS HIGHWAY? >> I THINK THE APPLICANT CAN EXPLAIN THE ISSUES WITH WHERE HE IS THAT AT THE MOMENT. >> IS KIND OF A MOOT POINT TO GET TO THIS. OF THE TIME IT GETS TO COMMISSION, THAT WILL BE FLESHED OUT. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? HEARING NONE , IF THE APPLICANT IS HERE, I WOULD INVITE YOU TO COME FORWARD. I AM NOT SURE THERE IS A WHOLE LOT TO DISCUSS. TWO GOOD AFTERNOON. THE 107 ACRE PARCEL WILL BE DIVIDED INTO THREE PRCELS. THE SOUTHWEST CORNER IS GOING TO BE GENERAL LARVAE. WE HAVE SUBMITTED FOR A SITE PLAN APPROVAL ALREADY. WE ARE SPEAKING WITH THE COUNTY ABOUT DEDICATING RIGHT-OF-WAY ON PETERS ROAD AND WHITE ROADWAY. WE HAVE SUBMITTED ALL THE REQUIRED DOCUMENTS TO THE COUNTY REGARDING RIGHT-OF-WAY ACQUISITION. THEY TOLD US THEY SHOULD GET APPROVAL BY THE END OF THIS MONTH. >> ALL RIGHT. ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? HEARING NONE, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME. APPRECIATE IT. ALL RIGHT. AT THIS TIME, I WOULD OPEN IT UP TO COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC. ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM, PLEASE COME FORWARD. SEEING NONE, I WILL SEND IT BACK TO THE BOARD FOR ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION. SEEING NONE, I WOULD ENTERTAIN A MOTION. TO RECAP, WE HAVE TWO STATED CONDITIONS BY STAFF. >> I WILL RECOMMEND THAT THE PLANNING BOARD FORWARD THE APPLICATION FOR THE KINGS HIGHWAY COMMERCE PARK AS A PRELIMINARY PLAT TO THE CITY COMMISSION WITH THE RECOMMENDATIONS OF THOSE TWO CONSIDERATIONS. >> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION FOR RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL BY MR. WIDING, >> MR. EDWARDS? SECOND BY MS. >> YES. CLEMONS. PLEASE CALL THE ROLL. >> MR. WIDING? >> YES. >> MR. JOHNSON? >> YES. >> MS. CLEMONS? >> YES. >> CHAIRMAN KREISL? >> YES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AT THIS TIME, WE WOULD OPEN UP THE [8. DIRECTOR'S REPORT] FLOOR TO COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC. ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC WISHING TO SPEAK ON ISSUES OF PLANNING AND ZONING GENERALLY, PLEASE COME FORWARD. SEEING NONE, WE WILL MOVE ON TO THE REPORT FROM THE DIRECTOR. HOW ARE YOU DOING, MR. FREEMAN? >> STILL TRYING TO GET TO THE SURFACE HERE. I WANT TO APOLOGIZE. I THINK A LOT OF THE PRESENTATIONS YOU SAW TODAY HAVE ALL BEEN HURRIED. THERE HAVE BEEN A NUMBER OF TYPE OF GRAPHICAL ERRORS IN THERE. I THINK IT IS JUST THE WORKLOAD WE ARE UNDER AT THE MOMENT. AS AN UPDATE, CAUSEWAY COVE , YOU MAY HAVE HEARD OF THIS. THIS IS AN APPLICATION THAT HAS COME FORWARD WITH A LIVE LOCAL ACTIVE. IT IS A SUBSTANTIAL APPLICATION. THERE ARE A NUMBER OF REQUIREMENTS THAT ANY APPLICATION OF THIS NATURE NEEDS TO MEET. THERE ARE A NUMBER OF OBLIGATIONS THAT THE CITY AND ITS REVIEWERS ALSO NEED TO MEET. [02:00:08] ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THE CITY CAN'T DO IS HOLD PUBLIC HEARINGS AND MAKE DETERMINATIONS AT PUBLIC HEARINGS ON THESE TYPES OF APPLICATIONS. I BROUGHT THIS FOR YOU TODAY FOR INFORMATION ONLY, TO GIVE YOU IF YOU EVER ASKED, WHICH I'M SURE YOU MIGHT BE, IN THE COMMUNITY WHAT THIS IS ALL ABOUT. YOU WILL HAVE A BETTER IDEA OF WHAT TO ANSWER AND THE PARAMETERS OF THIS . THAT IS LOCATION OF THE PROPERTY. IT IS A LONG SEA WAY . THIS IS THE WASTE WATER TREATMENT PLANT OF THE CITY, WHICH IS ASSUMED TO BE RE-PATRIOT IT TO THE WEST , WHERE THERE ARE OTHER BEACH TYPE ENVIRONMENTS TO THE NORTH. THIS IS WHERE WE STAND. THE LIVE LOCAL ACT IS A STATE MANDATED OBLIGATION OR ENTITLEMENT, IF YOU LIKE. IT PROVIDES LAND-USE ENTITLEMENTS FOR ELIGIBLE AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS IN AREAS ZONED FOR COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL, AND MIXED-USE. IN THIS CASE, THE PROPERTY IS ZONED FOR COMMERCIAL AND HAS A MIXED-USE FUTURE LAND USE. IT BECOMES INELIGIBLE FOR THIS TYPE OF APPLICATION. AS PART OF THAT OBLIGATION, THE APPLICANT NEEDS TO FULFILL THAT AT LEAST 40% OF THE TOTAL UNITS DEALT WITH IN THE DEVELOPMENT ARE AFFORDABLE RENTAL UNITS. THAT IS BASED ON 120% OR BELOW THE ANNUAL MEDIAN INCOME . THE MEDIAN INCOME IS BASED ON THE ST. LUCIE METROPOLITAN SERVICE AREA. THEY WOULD NEED TO DEMONSTRATE THAT THEY ARE GOING TO BE RENTING ELIGIBLE UNITS FOR A PERIOD OF AT LEAST 30 YEARS UNDER THAT CRITERIA. THAT IS PART OF THE INFORMATION THE APPLICANT WOULD NEED TO SUPPLY AND CONFIRM TO THE CITY. SO THE CITY IS REQUIRED TO ALLOW MULTI-FAMILY AND MIXED-USE RESIDENTIAL AS ALLOWABLE USES IN ANY AREA ZONED FOR COMMERCIAL OR MIXED-USE. WE HAVE STATUTORY PARAMETERS REGARDING DENSITY, HEIGHT , FLOOR AREA, RATIO, AND A REQUIREMENT FOR ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL. THERE ARE OBLIGATIONS TO MAYBE LOOK AT THE PARKING STANDARDS APPLIED TO THESE DEVELOPMENTS. WE HAVE ESTABLISHED THAT THE USE IS ACCEPTABLE IN TERMS OF THE STATE MANDATED OVERVIEW OF THIS. THE DENSITY, NOW THE DENSITY IS SET AT THE HIGHEST FLINT CITY -- HIGHEST DENSITY IN ANY CITY OR COUNTY WHERE RESIDENTIAL IS ALLOWED. THE CURRENT MAXIMUM IS 30 UNITS PER ACRE. THAT COMES FROM THE FUTURE LAND USE FOR THE CITY FOR HIGH DENSITY AND THE DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT AREA. THE HEIGHT IS SET AT THE HIGHEST CURRENTLY ALLOWED HEIGHT FOR COMMERCIAL. IT IS ACTUALLY A RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WITHIN 1 MILE OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT , OR THREE STORES, WHICHEVER IS HIGHER. THE PROPERTIES LOCATED IN THE SOUTH BEACH OVERLAY , WHICH NORMALLY WOULD LIMIT HEIGHT TO FOUR STORIES , IN THE CITY, THE HIGHEST AVAILABLE IS 200 FEET. THAT OCCURS IN HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AND DOWNTOWN LOCATIONS. I WILL SHOW YOU IN A MINUTE WHETHER OR NOT THE PROPOSAL BECOMES SUBJECT TO THAT BECAUSE IT IS WITHIN 1 MILE OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT. THERE ARE EXCEPTIONS TO THIS . THAT OCCURS IF A PROPOSAL IS CONTACTED ON TWO OR MORE SIDES , CONTACTING SINGLE-FAMILY ZONED PROPERTY. THAT WOULD BE WITHIN THAT SINGLE-FAMILY ZONED PROPERTY, WORD MUST HAVE 25 SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES. THEN WE WOULD BE SUBJECT TO NOT , THE APPLICANT WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO CLAIM THE MAXIMUMHEIGHT LIMITS. AND THEN THE CITY MUST CONSIDER [02:05:01] REDUCING PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR ELIGIBLE PROPOSED PROJECTS THAT WOULD BE LOCATED WITHIN A QUARTER-MILE OF A TRANSIT STOP. I DON'T THINK THAT OCCURS HERE. THE FLOOR AREA RATIO , WE HAVE TO SET THE FLOOR AREA RATIO, WHICH IS THE AMOUNT OF FLOOR SPACE AVAILABLE ON A PROPERTY, TO 150% OF THE EXISTING FLOOR AREA RATIO MAXIMUM IN THE PLAN. IF WE APPLY 150%, THAT GOES TO 4.5, WHICH IN ESSENCE IS 4.5 TIMES THE OVERALL SITE AREA. YOU CAN SEE HOW DEVELOPMENTS CAN GET BIG. THE APPROVAL PROCEDURE IS LIMITED TO BE APPROVED AT THE ADMINISTRATIVE LEVEL. IN TERMS OF THE CITY, THAT MEANS THE TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE WOULD REVIEW THE APPLICATION. EACH ENTITY WOULD NEED TO SIGN OFF THAT IT MEETS THEIR CODES AS FAR AS ZONING APPLICATIONS BEING APPROVED IN THE CITY. TO SATISFY THAT, WE WOULD BE RUNNING THIS PROJECT UNDER A TYPICAL MULTI-FAMILY PROJECT UNDER THE R-5 ZONING DISTRICT. IT NEEDS TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE PLAN AND THEN, ACCEPTING DENSITY, HEIGHT, AND USE. SO THE PER ACRE -- LIVE LOCAL ACT STATE ENTITLEMENTS DISPERSED WITH A LOT OF THE CRITERIA THAT WE WOULD BE APPLYING TO A SITE PLAN. SO WE APPLIED THE ONE-MILE RADII TO THE DEVELOPMENT . THE MOST IMPORTANT OVERLAP IS IN THIS AREA TO THE WEST, WHICH CONTAINS HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL , I THINK C-5 AND ALSO DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT. THAT ALL ALLOWS THAT HEIGHT LIMIT TO BE PLACED AT THE 200 FEET MARK. THIS IS THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN, WHICH HAS FIVE BUILDINGS, OVER 2300 PARKING SPACES, 204 HOTEL ROOMS -- AND I AM TOLD THERE ARE TWO HOTELS IN THIS LOCATION PROPOSED, OVER 1000 RESIDENTIAL UNITS. WE KNOW FROM STATE STATUTE THAT AT MINIMUM, 40% OF THOSE ARE REQUIRED TO BE AFFORDABLE AND MAINTAINED AFFORDABLE FOR 30 YEARS. IT IS A MIX OF COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL. THERE ARE ADDITIONAL BOAT SLIPS AND MOORINGS ASSOCIATED WITH THE DEVELOPMENT. THAT IS A RENDER OF THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN LOOKING FROM SEAWAY. IT DOES NOT SHOW THE BRIDGE, BUT YOU CAN SEE THE PROPOSAL. SOME OF THE ARCHITECTURAL DETAILS OF THE PROPERTIES CAN BE SEEN. SO IT IS A SUBSTANTIAL PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT. THAT WOULD BE THE FIRST HEARING AT THE TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE , THURSDAY OF THIS WEEK. FROM THAT, WE WOULD GET INPUT FROM CITY DEPARTMENTS AS TO WHAT THEY SEE AND WHAT THEY WOULD NEED TO MOVE THIS PROJECT FORWARD . THERE ARE A NUMBER OF OUTSTANDING ITEMS THAT WE HAVE ALREADY IDENTIFIED THAT THE PROJECT WOULD NEED TO MEET. IT WOULD BE RELATED TO THE PROJECT TEAM AT TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE. >> I AM GOING TO EXPRESS MY PREEMPTIVE CONDOLENCES FOR YOU ON HOW MANY TIMES YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE TO EXPLAIN THIS TO PEOPLE , THAT THIS IS OUT OF OUR HANDS AND OUT OF THE HANDS OF THE COMMISSION. I HAVE ALREADY HEARD IT. I CANNOT IMAGINE HOW MANY TIMES YOU ARE GOING TO HEAR IT. I HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS THAT I WOULD LIKE TO CLARIFY ABOUT THE LIVE LOCAL ACT. WHEN ESTABLISHING THE AMI , WHAT IS THE METHODOLOGY USED? WHO IS [02:10:04] TALLIED? HOW DOES THE GOVERNMENT TRACK THAT INFORMATION? HOW OFTEN DO THEY UPDATE IT ? >> THE FOUNDATION OF THE AMI COMES FROM THE METROPOLITAN SERVICE AREA OF ST. LUCIE COUNTY. THOSE NUMBERS ARE PUBLISHED AS PART OF THE STATE HOUSING INITIATIVE PROGRAM UNDER THE TABLES. I MAKE THE BOARD AWARE THAT THOSE NUMBERS ARE HIGHER THAN THEY WOULD BE LOOKING AT FOR FORT PIERCE, BECAUSE IT INCLUDES THE WHOLE OF PORT ST. LUCIE. THAT MEANS THE AVERAGE MEDIAN EARNING INCOME IS HIGHER BECAUSE IT INCLUDES THAT WHOLE AREA. NOW IN TERMS OF HOW THAT IS MONITORED AFTER A PROJECT MAY GET APPROVAL IS THROUGH, WE WOULD NEED A MECHANISM APPLIED TO THAT APPROVAL THAT WOULD MONITOR THAT ARRANGEMENT, A NUMBER OF UNITS AND HOW THEY ARE MAINTAINED AND MONITORED FROM THE APPLICANT TO GUARANTEE THE 30 YEAR PROGRAM. I BELIEVE THERE ARE STATE AGENCIES THAT WOULD BE INTERESTED IN RECEIVING THAT, BUT THERE IS NO MANDATE ON HOW THAT IS DONE AT THE MOMENT. I THINK THE RESPONSIBILITY WOULD PROBABLY LIE WITH THE MUNICIPALITY. WE WOULD WANT TO SECURE THAT MECHANISM WITH THE APPLICANT SO THAT IS DONE AS EFFICIENTLY AS POSSIBLE AND IS SECURED LEGALLY. THAT IS THE PARAMETER , AS THE NUMBERS FOR THAT ARE GENERATED BY THE STATE . >> OKAY. OVER THE LIFE OF 30 YEARS, I WOULD IMAGINE THAT NUMBER WOULD NATURALLY RISE. OR DOES IT GET LOCKED IN AT THE INITIATION OF THIS APPLICATION? >> IN GENERAL, YEAR-ON-YEAR, THEY WOULD MEET WHATEVER THE REQUIREMENT WAS. ANYTHING BELOW 120% AMI WOULD NEED TO BE MET EVERY YEAR. IN ESSENCE, THE NUMBER WOULD RISE, AS IT NORMALLY DOES ANYWAY YEAR-ON-YEAR THROUGH INFLATION AND EARNINGS POTENTIAL. >> I MEAN, I KNOW YOU DID NOT WRITE THIS LEGISLATION. SINCE WE HAVE STARTED TALKING ABOUT THIS, I HAVE A FEW OBSERVATIONS THAT I AM ONLY GOING TO STAY HERE FOR THE FACT OF THE MATTER THAT I AM ASSUMING PEOPLE WILL BE WATCHING THIS SPECIFIC PRESENTATION THAT YOU HAVE GIVEN HERE. IF YOU GO BACK TO THE PAGE THAT YOU HAVE WHERE YOU LISTED THE BULLETPOINTS OF THE LEGISLATION , THE FACT THAT THERE WERE NO PERCENTAGE INCREASES IN RELATION TO THE EXISTING REQUIREMENTS CONSIDERED IN THIS LEGISLATION TO ME SEEMS LIKE A REALLY GLARING OVERSIGHT. IN REFERENCE TO THE DENSITY AND THE HEIGHT RESTRICTIONS. BY JUST GOING ALL THE WAY TO THE HIGHEST DENSITY, GOING TO THE HIGHEST HEIGHT AND NOT AS A PERCENTAGE ALLOWABLE FROM WHERE THE UNDERLYING ZONING MAY OCCUR , I THINK, THAT WAS A BIG MISS BY THE STATE IN DRAFTING THIS LEGISLATION. MY BIGGEST CONCERN WITH THIS SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT IS DENSITY. IT IS AN ISLAND. THERE IS ONE WAY IN AND ONE WAY OUT. THE ONLY THING THAT I CAN SAY IS THAT , IN TECHNICAL REVIEW , AND THIS IS NOT TO CAST DISPERSIONS ON ANY PART OF THE TECHNICAL PROCESS, BUT IT IS INCREDIBLY IMPORTANT IN REVIEWING THIS SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT THAT WHEN LOOKING AT ALL OF THE THINGS THAT DENSITY IMPACTS , SPECIFICALLY TRAFFIC , THAT WE ARE NOT MISSING ANYTHING. THE STATE CAN PASS THIS LAW AND FORCE US TO COMPLY WITH IT, BUT THEY ARE NOT NECESSARILY OBLIGATED TO BUILD US A NEW BRIDGE. WE HAVE A LOT OF THINGS THE CITY THAT WE HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT. IN ORDER TO MAINTAIN GOOD PLANNING, WE MAY NOT BE ABLE TO PARTICIPATE AT ALL AS WE [02:15:05] NORMALLY WOULD IN A SITUATION LIKE THIS. I JUST HOPE THAT THE COMMUNITY IS PATIENT AND UNDERSTANDING WITH WHAT WE CAN AND CANNOT DO , THAT THEY CONTINUE TO PAY ATTENTION TO THIS DEVELOPMENT AS IT IS NEW, UNCHARTED TERRITORY. >> I CAN REASSURE THE PLANNING BOARD THAT WE HAVE ALREADY IDENTIFIED SHORTCOMINGS WITH THE APPLICATION IN TERMS OF THE INFORMATION SUBMITTED. THE APPLICANT WOULD BE , WILL BE REQUIRED TO ENSURE THAT EVERYTHING THAT IS SUBMITTED IS IN THE CORRECT ORDER AND IS ULTIMATELY SIGNED OFF BY ANY ENTITY , INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL, THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED TO SIGN OFF. >> I HAVE LOTS OF QUESTIONS. >> JUMP IN. >> YOU NAMED A COUPLE OF THEM. TRAFFIC IS ONE OF THE LARGEST FOR ME AND SOMETHING YOU ALWAYS BRING UP IN REGARDS TO SCHOOL BOARD BUSING AND THINGS. ON ANY GIVEN NIGHT STAY AT THE BEACH, YOU ARE PARKED ON TOP OF THE BRIDGE OR EVEN FARTHER BACK. HOW ARE YOU GOING TO GET ON THE ISLAND? THE TRAFFIC IS JUST NOT GOING TO WORK. >> I AM VERY, VERY CURIOUS TO SEE HOW THE TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY IS GOING TO DEVELOP WITH THIS. I KNOW AFTER THIS PRESENTATION, WE ARE BASICALLY OUT OF THE CONVERSATION. I HOPE YOU CONTINUE TO BRING US UPDATES ON THIS AS PART OF YOUR REPORT. I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT FOR US TO HEAR IT LARGELY BECAUSE THIS IS NOT THE ONLY DEVELOPABLE PROPERTY ON THE ISLAND. WE WILL HAVE TO STAY CUTE INTO WHAT IS GOING ON HERE AS WE LOOK AT OTHER APPLICATIONS THAT COME FORWARD. >> BEING THIS COMES OFF 1 MILE FROM DOWNTOWN AND THIS IS ALSO IN A PORT OVERLAY DISTRICT, CAN THINGS FROM THAT DISTRICT ALSO BE BROUGHT INTO THIS? ALL OF THOSE QUALIFY ON THE LIST THAT YOU GAVE US WITH THE MASTER PLAN. >> THERE IS A COMPLICATION WHEN IT COMES TO INDUSTRIAL ZONED PROPERTIES IN THE CITY. IT MAY BE THAT INDUSTRIAL ZONED PROPERTIES IN THE CITY DO NOT QUALIFY FOR THIS BECAUSE OF THE DESIGNATION THAT THE CITY HAS FOR A WORKING WATERFRONT. BUT THAT IS TO SAY THAT WE HAVE A MAJORITY OF PROPERTY IN THE PORT AREA THAT IS NOT ZONED INDUSTRIAL. IT IS ZONED COMMERCIAL. THAT WE WOULD, IN ITSELF, GIVE IT THE SAME CRITERIA AS WE HAVE WITH THIS PROPERTY. I WILL SAY THOUGH THAT FURTHER EAST ON SEAWAY , THE MILE RADIUS DROPS OUT OF THAT OPTION. >> WITHIN THIS LIVE LOCAL ACT, IF YOU COME TO HEAR, THEY HAVE SET A NEW PRECEDENT FOR SOMETHING. CAN WE PIGGYBACK BEYOND THIS POINT? >> LIVE LOCAL APPLIES TO ANY COMMERCIAL PROPERTY. >> BUT NOW THAT THIS HAS BEEN SET A MILE FROM DOWNTOWN, CONECUH 1 MILE LYNN EITHER DIRECTION? >> NO. THERE IS A SPECIFIC PARAGRAPH IN THE STATE STATUTE THAT THIS DOES NOT SET THE HEIGHT OF THE PROPERTY. >> IT IS NOT A NEW BENCHMARK? >> NOPE . >> KEVIN, MAYBE IT IS ALREADY IN THE SITE , BUT CAN YOU SEND US -- THESE ARE OBVIOUSLY PUBLIC AND OUT THERE -- SEND ALL OF THESE, PLEASE? QUICK MATH, AND I JUST LOOKED UP ST. LUCIE COUNTY ANNUAL MEDIAN INCOME, $75,149. 30% IS ABOUT $27,000. RENT IS $2259. >> I THINK THERE IS A TABLE [02:20:02] THERE. YOU NEED TO GO TO THE STATE HOUSING INITIATIVE PROGRAM TABLE, WHICH WILL GIVE YOU , IT IS A BREAKDOWN OF THE RENT FOR BEDROOM. THAT IS THE CRITERIA THAT SETS THAT TABLE OUT. HOWEVER, THERE ARE DIFFERENT RENTALS. I DON'T THINK IT IS THAT LOW. LET ME TRY AND PULL THAT UP IF YOU WOULD ALLOW ME THAT. >> THE LAST SLIDE, THERE ARE A LOT OF NUMBERS. THE 3,075,000 FT.÷ , IS THAT THE TOTAL UNITS OF 1063? THIS THAT INCLUDE THE HOTEL ROOMS? >> IT IS THE FLOORSPACE. IT IS THE HOTEL SPACE, THE RESTAURANTS, AND RESIDENTIAL. AS I SAID, I HAVE BEEN INFORMED THAT THERE ARE TWO HOTELS GOING IN THERE. >> FROM WHAT I READ, THEY ARE GOING TO BE HAVING A CONVENTION CENTER AND THERE, AS WELL. >> YES. >> SO THESE ARE THE TABLES THEY RELEASE EVERY YEAR. I THINK IT IS AROUND APRIL EACH YEAR. ALL THE METROPOLITAN MSAS . WE WILL HAVE ONE FOR ST. LUCIE SOMEWHERE. LET ME PULL THAT UP. SO YOU CAN SEE THAT IT IS SET BY INCOME LIMIT, BY NUMBER OF PERSONS. YOU CAN ONLY EARN UP TO A CERTAIN AMOUNT. THEN THE RENT LIMIT THE NUMBER OF BEDROOMS IS SET. IT IS NOT VERY EASY TO GET TO SEE ALL OF THIS AT THE SAME TIME. >> WHICHEVER IS LOWER. >> 120%, LET'S TAKE AN EXAMPLE OF A TWO BEDROOM OCCUPIED BY TWO OR THREE PEOPLE. SO IF YOU HAVE THREE PEOPLE IN THERE, THEY WOULD BE LIMITED TO AN INCOME LIMIT OF $102,000 PER YEAR. THAT IS WELL ABOVE WHAT YOU WOULD THINK IS APPROPRIATE FOR ST. LUCIE. AND IF YOU HAVE TWO BEDROOMS, 120%, THAT IS $2259 PER MONTH MAXIMUM RENT. >> 80% OF FORT PIERCE COULD LIVE IN THOSE. >> WHAT I HAD WAS $2023. ON THE BOTTOM LEFT IN THE ST. LUCIE BOX, THE MEDIAN IS $89,300. MY QUICK MATH IS 23 AND KEVIN'S IS 25. >> YOU HAVE USED THE RIGHT METHODOLOGY. >> DOES THAT SOUND AFFORDABLE? DOES THAT SOUND LIKE THE INTENT OF THE LAW? >> IT IS A VERY GOOD QUESTION. I THINK THE SLIDING SCALE CONCEPT ON AFFORDABILITY IS GOING TO BE , IT IS A MOVING TARGET. IT GOES FROM COUNTY TO COUNTY. AGAIN, MY CONCERNS WITH THIS ARE LESS ABOUT THE LEGISLATION GLOBALLY -- I THINK IT IS CLEAR WHAT THE INTENT OF THE LEGISLATION IS. IT IS NOT UNNEEDED TO ADDRESS A LOT OF THE ISSUES WE HAVE BEEN SEEING IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA. MY CONCERN OVER THIS SPECIFIC APPLICATION IS REALLY JUST ON THE LOCATION . FOR ME, THE GREATEST THING , THE GREATEST CONCERN IS THE DENSITY . IT IS JUST AN INCREDIBLE VOLUME [02:25:07] INCREASE OF PEOPLE, TRAFFIC NEEDS, SERVICES, AND EVERYTHING TO COME INTO THAT AREA. WITHOUT THIS LEGISLATION , I DON'T THINK ANYBODY ON THIS BOARD OR THE COMMISSION , I FIND IT HARD TO BELIEVE ANY OF US WOULD BE LIKE, YEAH, GREEN LIGHT, GO WITHOUT A LOT OF CONCERNS OVER THAT. AND NOT JUST BECAUSE WE DON'T WANT PEOPLE TO BUILD BIG THINGS IN FORT PIERCE. THEY HAVE TO WORK. WE LIVE HERE. I DON'T CARE IF PEOPLE BUILD BIG BUILDINGS AND ADD HOTELS AND AMENITIES. I DON'T CARE IF OUR POPULATION INCREASES. EVERYTHING JUST HAS TO WORK. I REALLY WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU ARE CONTINUING TO BRING THESE TO US AND KEEP US UPDATED ON THE PROGRESS OF THE TRC THROUGH THIS AND WHAT THEY ARE FINDING AND SEEING AND RECOMMENDING SO THAT AT LEAST THE PUBLIC THROUGH THOSE REPORTS AS AN OPPORTUNITY TO STAY UPDATED ON HOW THIS PROGRESSES. >> ONE TO GO GOES THROUGH TECHNICAL REVIEW, IT IS PUBLIC INFORMATION NOW , ALL THOSE REVIEWS WILL BECOME PUBLIC INFORMATION. I WILL BE UPDATING THE PLANNING BOARD MONTHLY , BRINGING FORWARD WHAT WOULD INCLUDE MAYBE A PACKET OF THE TECHNICAL REVIEW COMMITTEE COMMENTS AND WHERE THIS IS. FOR INFORMATIONAL USE ONLY . STAFF WILL BE REVIEWING THIS AGAINST THE CODE. AND THAT IS OUR LIMITATION. >> SO WITH THIS NOW OUT THERE, SHOULD WE START TO LOOK BACK INTO THE DOWNTOWN CODE AND THEN LOOK AT DESIGNATIONS IN CODES THAT ARE THERE AND CURTAIL IT TO POTENTIALLY FORECAST WHAT COULD BE COMING OR MAKE CHANGES TO KNOW IT WILL BE COMING? >> I WOULD SAY THEY HAVE ALREADY THOUGHT OF THAT. THE LEGISLATION PUTS IN PLACE WHATEVER ZONING WAS IN PLACE AT THE TIME OF ADOPTION OF LIVE LOCAL. >> IF ONE OF THESE GOES INTO PLAY, IT MAY NOT MEAN THERE IS ANOTHER ONE THAT MAY NOT COME OUT. >> WHATEVER IS NOW IS THERE. >> EVEN IF YOU SAID, THIS IS THE REASON WHY THIS OCCURRED HERE , BECAUSE OF THESE CERTAIN ZONING ALLOWANCES, EVEN IF YOU WENT AND AMENDED THOSE ZONING ALLOWANCES, MAYBE YOU WOULD NOT GET THE HEIGHT. THE STATE HAS SAID YOU ARE TOO LATE. YOU WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK TO WHATEVER WAS IN PLACE IN 2023. >> SO IT IS NOT EVEN WHEN THE LEGISLATION GOES INTO IT IS WHEN THE LEGISLATION WAS ADOPTED. WE ARE FROZEN AT THOSE PARAMETERS. >> IT IS DESIGNED TO PREVENT COUNTIES TAKING PROACTIVE ADJUSTMENTS TO CODE TO NEGATE THESE TYPES OF DEVELOPMENTS. I WOULD ALSO BE CONCERNED THAT THE CITY WOULD BE CONSIDERING DOWNGRADING THE POTENTIAL FOR DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT BECAUSE OF THESE TYPE OF, WE ARE SUPPOSED TO BE ENCOURAGING DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT. I THINK ONE OF THE CONSEQUENCES OF , ONE OF THE REASONS BEHIND THIS TYPE OF CODE COMING FORWARD FROM THE STATE IS BECAUSE THIS TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT IS NOT PERMITTED IN THE APPROPRIATE LOCATIONS. THERE IS A LOT OF DIFFICULTY GETTING THROUGH THE PROCESS TO GET THIS TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT WHERE IT SHOULD BE . OR IF THERE IS A PLACE FOR THIS. ONE OF THE CONSEQUENCES OF HAVING A CODE THAT IS DISJOINTED AND IS DIFFICULT TO MEET FOR TYPICAL DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENTS , YOU CAN SEE THE FOR INSTANCE, THE KINGS LANDING DEVELOPMENT IS FACING. HAVE WE SEEN ANY MAJOR DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE DOWNTOWN? WE HAVE TO REALLY LOOK AND SAY, WHY IS THAT OCCURRING? A LOT OF IT IS WE DON'T HAVE THE CODE IN PLACE TO [02:30:05] ALLOW THIS SORT OF DEVELOPMENT TO GOING TO THE RIGHT PLACE. IT IS SOMETHING THAT WE ARE FACING. IF WE ARE UNDER REAL PLANNING BASIS ON HOW WE SHOULD BE PLANNING THE CITY, WE SHOULD BE ENCOURAGING DEVELOPMENT IN THE DOWNTOWN TO HAVE THAT ACTIVITY DOWN HERE AND NOT ON THE OUTSKIRTS OF THE CITY. I WOULD SAY MANY POLITICIANS ARE FEARING THIS BECAUSE OF THE IMPACT IT WOULD HAVE ON THESE PERIPHERAL LOCATIONS. >> SO THE ENTIRE TIME OF THEIR BUILD IS REGULATED WITHIN THE 2023 TIMELINE? OR IF YOU BRING THINGS, IF YOU DO AMENDMENTS TO YOUR DISTRICT, IF THEY GO IN FOR REVISION, DO THEY HAVE TO COME UP TO THAT? >> NOPE. WHATEVER THE ZONING REGULATIONS, WE HAVE NOT REALLY AMENDED ANY OF OUR BASELINE ZONING REGULATIONS FOR THE CITY. WE HAVE DONE DEFINITION AMENDMENTS. THIS OVERRIDES ALL OF THAT , PROVIDING IT IS IN A ZONING DISTRICT THAT FALLS INTO LIVE LOCAL. PROVIDING IT IS MIXED-USE, PROVIDING THEY ARE 40% RENTAL , AFFORDABLE PROPERTIES, A DEVELOPMENT COULD PROPOSE WHATEVER FITS ON THAT PROPERTY BASED ON THE SUM OF THE EXISTING ZONING , THE SUM OF THE EXISTING ZONING BEING NEGATED BY THE ALLOWANCES. BUT WE DO HAVE THE ESSENTIAL PIECES AS THE CHAIR HAS ALREADY SPOKEN ABOUT , THE TRAFFIC IMPACT. THERE ARE OTHER IMPACTS THAT WE WOULD NEED TO SEE RESOLVED THROUGH THE CODE . IT STILL NEEDS TO MEET ENGINEERING STORM WATER . I KNOW WE WOULD BE LOOKING AT HOW THE SCHOOL DISTRICT WOULD WORK WITH THIS. >> RIGHT? >> THE CAPACITY FOR EMERGENCY SERVICES. >> ALL OF THE SAME THINGS WE DO WITH A SITE PLAN RIGHT NOW. >> I THINK THAT IS A VERY IMPORTANT THING TO LOOK AT SPECIFICALLY. WE HAVE JUST BEEN THROUGH THE ORDEAL IN THE PAST YEAR. MY TIME ON THE BOARD, MY OBSERVATION IS THAT IT IS APPROVED TO NOW. WE HAVE SEEN A LOT OF APPLICATIONS COME THROUGH WITH VERY LITTLE INPUT OR REVIEW FROM THE IMPACT ON EMERGENCY SERVICES. IN MY VIEW, IT IS NOT AN AGGRESSIVE ENOUGH STATEMENT ON HALL -- ON HOW THIS PREVENTS THEM FROM DOING THE JOB WE NEED THEM TO DO. I AM ENCOURAGED NOW WITH WHAT WE HAVE GONE THROUGH IN THE LAST YEAR THAT WHEN LOOKING AT POTENTIAL APPLICATIONS LIKE THIS , THAT WE WILL DO A MUCH BETTER JOB OF UNDERSTANDING WHAT THOSE NEEDS ARE AND HOW THEY WILL BE IMPACTED , MAKING SURE WE ARE PREPARED . AGAIN, I WILL GO ON THE RECORD I PERSONALLY DO NOT HAVE AN OBJECTION TO DEVELOPMENT. MY GREATEST CONCERN IS THAT WE ARE STILL MAKING SURE THAT EVERYTHING WORKS. MY FEAR WITH THIS LEGISLATION IS THAT IT IS GOING TO ALLOW DEVELOPMENT THAT IS GOING TO CAUSE A FUNDAMENTAL BREAKDOWN OF OUR INFRASTRUCTURE. TO BE ABLE TO OPERATE AS A CITY AND AS NEIGHBORS THE WAY WE SHOULD WITHOUT HAVING TO PUT AN UNDUE BURDEN ON THE CITIZENS TO FIX THOSE GAPS RETROACTIVELY. ANYWAY, ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ANY OTHER DISCUSSION ON THIS? >> WHAT IS THE TIMELINE ON DECOMMISSIONING THAT TREATMENT PLANT AS FAR AS JUST [02:35:02] DEVELOPMENT? HOW DOES THAT LOOK? I CANNOT IMAGINE STAYING IN THAT COMMUNITY. >> THAT IS IN PROCESS. FOR MY NEXT UPDATE, I WILL GET A REAL UPDATE FROM FPOA. THE DATES ARE 2026 FOR MOST OF THE CONDITIONING FOR THAT. THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT IN THE WEST IS UNDER CONSTRUCTION NOW. I THINK THAT WAS THE INITIAL TIMELINE, SAT AROUND MID 2026. I WILL GET AN UPDATE TO SEE HOW THAT IS WORKING. >> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU FOR THE REPORT. I LOOK FORWARD TO HEARING FROM YOU AGAIN NEXT MONTH. AT THIS TIME , ARE THERE ANY GENERAL COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD? >> I THINK THE ONLY THING I WILL SAY BACK TO THIS FIRST RENDITION, I WILL PUT IT THAT WAY, IS THAT, AGAIN, THE INTENT OF THE LEGISLATION I BELIEVE WAS TO PRODUCE AFFORDABLE HOUSING. AFFORDABLE HOUSING. I AM NOT SO SURE WHAT I AM SEEING , IF THAT IS THE INTENT. >> THE APPLICANT WILL HAVE TO JUSTIFY THAT. CRITERIA IS SET BY THE STATE. THEY WILL NEED TO JUSTIFY THAT THEY MEET THAT CRITERIA, AND WHETHER THAT CRITERIA IS APPROPRIATE OR NOT, WE CANNOT GET INTO. IF THEY MEET THAT, THEN WE HAVE TO APPROVE IT. AND MOVE FORWARD WITH IT. >> WE HAVE OUR LOCAL STATE REPRESENTATIVES . THIS MAY NOT BE THE FIRST THAT CAME OUT OF THAT LEGISLATION, BUT SEEING THIS TYPE OF PROJECT , HOUSING PROJECT , AGAIN, DOES IT REALLY MATCH WHAT THE INTENT OF THE LEGISLATION WAS? I HAVE TO BELIEVE THAT ALL OVER THE STATE, ALL 67 COUNTIES , DOES IT REALLY MEET WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH? >> 2023 WAS THE ADOPTION. AND THEN IT WAS AMENDED LAST YEAR. I KNOW YOU ARE VERY BUSY. IN PREPARATION FOR NEXT MONTH OR POSSIBLY A SUBSEQUENT REPORT , I WOULD BE VERY , I WOULD BE VERY CURIOUS TO HEAR OF ANY OTHER DEVELOPMENTS UNDER THE LIVE LOCAL ACT THAT HAVE BEEN BROUGHT FORTH FROM THE STATE THAT WE ARE AWARE OF , TO SEE HOW THINGS ARE GETTING DONE. JUST A LITTLE BIT OF CONTEXT WOULD BE HELPFUL FOR US. THAT IS ALL I HAVE. IF THERE IS NOTHING ELSE , I THINK WE CAN ADJOURN FOR TODAY. THANK YOU ALL. * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.