[B. Approval of expenditure for the installation of holiday lighting at Marina Square by Lighting by Design from West Palm Beach Florida, in the amount of $63,347.00. ]

>> ITEM 11 B IS APPROVAL OF EXPENDITURE OF THE INSTALLATION OF HOLIDAY LIGHTING AT MARINA SQUARE BY LETTING A DESIGN FROM WEST PALM BEACH, FLORIDA, IN THE AMOUNT OF $63,347.

>> MADAME MAYOR , WHEN I READ THIS ITEM AND I DID -- HAD MY WEEKLY CONVERSATIONS, I HAD SOME GREAT CONCERN WITH THIS .

FIRST, LET ME MAKE SURE THIS IS UNDERSTOOD.

BEAUTIFUL JOB OF DECORATING OUR MARINA FOR CHRISTMAS . FOCAL POINT OF THE CITY. THE PARADE CULMINATES THERE. IT'S ALWAYS AN EXCITING TIME , HOWEVER, UPON MY INVESTIGATION AND READING OF THIS , IT FURTHER CONCERNED ME ABOUT THE PROCESS THAT WE WENT THROUGH FOR THIS. RFP PROCESS. WORK BEING COMPLETED.

AUTHORITARIAN SIGNING OFF ON THIS AND EXPENDITURE LEVEL THAT SHOULD HAVE COME TO THE CITY COMMISSION. I KNOW IT IS COMING NOW, BUT I HAVE GREAT CONCERN INTERNALLY ON HOW THIS GOT TO WHAT WE ARE. AND THEN IT FURTHER CONCERNED ME THAT IT ONLY -- I HAD CONCERNS ABOUT, OKAY, IS THIS JUST ONE AREA OF OUR CITY? OR ARE THERE OTHER PARTS ? AND WE HAVE MANY FOCAL POINTS IN OUR CITY. AND WE HAVE DONE DECORATING THE TREES ON AVENUE D, AVENUE Q , ET CETERA. MY REAL CONCERN WAS, ARE THOSE TREES INCLUDED WHEN THEY PUT UP LIGHTS ? I HAVE COME TO LEARN THAT THE CITY DOES THAT. PUBLIC WORKS. BUT THIS IS SOMETHING SPECIAL.

SO I AM CONCERNED. I'M DISAPPOINTED IN WHAT I LEARNED IN MY INVESTIGATION WITH THIS . AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO

[00:15:02]

TIGHTEN SOME THINGS UP AROUND HERE FISCALLY . AND I WILL BE HAVING A CONVERSATION WITH MR. CHESS BECAUSE WHAT I LEARNED AND

HOW THIS WENT DOWN IS NOT GOOD. >> MR. CHESS , DO YOU WANT TO

RESPOND? >> I CAN SAY HOW WE GOT TO WHERE WE ARE. I WILL TRY TO GIVE YOU THE SHORT VERSION OF IT. WE RECEIVED AN INVOICE FROM THE VENDOR FOR THIS WORK TO BE DONE.

IN MY RESEARCH -- MOVED THE ITEM TO THE AGENDA. I ASKED TO SEE THE CONTRACT. AND THIS ACTUALLY EXPIRED IN NOVEMBER 2024. END OF JUNE 2025. AT THAT STAGE ARE DETERMINED IN EARLY SEPTEMBER THIS ITEM HAD TO GO TO COMMISSION AUTHORITY. IT WAS BEYOND MY AUTHORITY . PLACE IT ON THE AGENDA. AND I GUESS THE RUB WAS THAT IT WAS ACTUALLY DONE SEPTEMBER 15TH. WHICH WAS MORE CONCERNING FOR ME AS WELL. AND FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, THERE WAS THREE MISSTEPS. THE MISSTEP THAT WE SHOULD HAVE PUT OUR FPL BECAUSE IT EXPIRED NOVEMBER 24.

WE HAVE OPPORTUNITY TO STILL PUT AN RFPL. MORE IMPORTANTLY IT WAS IDENTIFIED IT SHOULD BE TABLED UNTIL IT COMES TO COMMISSION. SO WE DEFINITELY NEED WORK TO BE DONE. I'VE SPOKEN TO THOSE THAT WERE INVOLVED IN THE DECISION-MAKING ON THIS. AND CERTAINLY THERE WILL BE CHANGES GOING FORWARD.

>> MAYOR, A COUPLE COMMENTS. I WAS BRIEFED ON THIS MATTER. AND I SHARE THE CONCERNS COMMISSIONER JOHNSON HAS RELATIVE TO PROCESSES AND PROCEDURES . THIS IS OBVIOUSLY A FAILURE OF THE PROCESSES AND PROCEDURES THAT ARE IN PLACE.

THE OTHER CONCERN I HAD IS THE COST FACTOR IS APPROXIMATELY 15% HIGHER THAN WHAT WE PAID IN THE PRIOR FISCAL YEAR. SO THAT KIND OF ADDS INSULT TO INJURY HERE THAT THERE WAS A 15% PREMIUM.

COST HAD GONE UP OVER THE LAST 12 MONTHS, BUT I DON'T SEE A 15% INCREASE IS BEING WARRANTED. THE CONCERN I EXPRESSED TO THE CITY MANAGER -- HE WAS QUITE FORTHRIGHT ABOUT THE EXPLANATION OF WHAT HAPPENED. SO THERE IS NO TRYING TO HIDE THE BALL OR ANYTHING. THIS IS A BREAKDOWN OF PROCEDURES AND POLICIES AND ULTIMATELY OF COURSE HE ACKNOWLEDGED THE FACT THAT HIS SIGN OF AUTHORITY IS $50,000. HE DIDN'T HAVE AUTHORITY TO APPROVE THIS, NOR DID HE. THE WORK WAS DONE PRIOR TO REACHING HIS DESK APPARENTLY. SO I'M NOT LOOKING TO LAY BLAME IN ANY CAPACITY. ALL I'M SUGGESTING IS WE CAN DO BETTER. AND AS COMMISSIONER JOHNSON SAID, WE NEED TO TIGHTEN UP THIS PROCESS.

I UNDERSTAND WE'RE DOING WORK BECAUSE THERE HAVE BEEN OTHER ISSUES THAT HAVE COME TO MY ATTENTION RELATIVE TO THOSE PROCESSES AND PROCEDURES. SO Ú' CITY MANAGER THAT WITH THE THOUSAND THINGS YOU HAVE GOING ON, THIS ONE NEEDS TO PERCOLATE TO THE TOP TO GET THIS RESOLVED BECAUSE WE CANNOT JUST BE APPROVING THINGS AND THINGS OF THIS NATURE. WE NEED TO ACCOUNT FOR EVERY PENNY OF TAXPAYER DOLLARS. OUR BUDGET IS BALANCED BARELY AND THE PROSPECT OF GOING IN A NEGATIVE OR RESERVES TO COVER OUR BUDGET FOR THIS YEAR WAS A VERY REAL REALITY. WE HAVE TO BE CAUTIOUS WITH EVERY PENNY GOING OUT THE DOOR. I'M CONFIDENT THAT CITY MANAGER CHESS CAN GET THIS PROBLEM RESOLVED AND GET US ON THE RIGHT TRACK SO THAT OUR DEPARTMENT WILL CATCH THESE THINGS AS THEY COME IN THE DOOR NOT AFTER IT HAS BEEN THROUGH SEVERAL MANIFESTATIONS OF MANAGEMENT FUND WAITING ON HIS DESK WHERE I UNDERSTAND THIS WAS FINALLY INTERCEPTED TO SAY THERE IS A PROBLEM HERE. SO I'M CONFIDENT WE WILL GET THE PROBLEM RESOLVED. I'M LOOKING TO HAVE THAT RESOLUTION AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE.

>> ABSOLUTELY. >> AND WE DID HAVE THREE BUDGET MEETINGS WHERE WE REALLY WHITTLED DOWN OUR BUDGET AND WE WENT THROUGH IT. AND WE WANT TO INTRODUCED NEW PURCHASING PROCEDURES, RIGHT? AND SO I'M SURE THAT IN THE PROCESS , THOSE PROCEDURES WILL COVER THIS. AND I'M HOPING THAT YOU WON'T HAVE THIS HAPPEN AGAIN BECAUSE WE ALL KNOW LIGHTS BRING A LOT OF PEOPLE TO DOWNTOWN FORT PIERCE THROUGH THE WHOLE HOLIDAY PERIOD . THE WHOLE HOLIDAY PERIOD AND THROUGHOUT FORT PIERCE THEY DO A

GOOD JOB . SO WE CAN DO BETTER. >> YES. WE WILL DO BETTER.

>> RIGHT. >> I'M CONFIDENT OF THAT.

>> THANK YOU, SIR. >> SO I WILL MAKE THIS FINAL COMMENT. I KNOW WE HAVE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR HERE. I WILL HAVE MY CONVERSATION WITH MR. CHESS. HE IS ONE OF THREE PEOPLE THAT REPORT TO US. THIS IS HIS DEPARTMENT. HE WILL OVERSEE THE DIRECTOR AND FURTHER DIRECTION OF THIS. WE HAVE TO DO BETTER.

IT IS CONCERNING ON A LOT OF LEVELS TO ME . BUT I ALSO KNOW

[00:20:07]

THAT THE DANCING LIGHTS WITH THE CHRISTMAS MUSIC MEANS A LOT TO A LOT OF PEOPLE. I GET THAT. BUT I'M NOT GOING TO SIT UP HERE IN GOOD FAITH AND SUPPORT THIS TONIGHT. I AM DISAPPOINTED . I AM DISAPPOINTED. IT IS EMBARRASSING. WE ARE BETTER THAN

THIS. MOTION. >> I JUST -- I ALREADY SEE THE PROBLEM AS BEING FIXED. AND I'M JUST SUGGESTING REQUIRING THAT WE JUST FIX IT AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE. THIS WHOLE PROCESS JUST NEEDS TO BE TIGHTENED UP . NOBODY WANTS TO STAND UP HERE AND HEAR CRITICISM. I GET THAT. AND I'M NOT BEING CRITICAL OF ANYONE OR ANYTHING. THIS IS A CASCADING SET OF DEFAULTS THAT CREATED THIS PROBLEM. UNFORTUNATELY, THE CITY MANAGER ULTIMATELY CAUGHT IT. JUST HAVING SAID THAT, FROM A TEAM EFFORT APPROACH, COMMISSIONER JOHNSON HIT THE NAIL ON THE HEAD . WE MUST DO BETTER. AND WE MUST DO BETTER STARTING NOW. THAT'S

IT. THAT'S ALL I'VE GOT. >> IS THERE A MOTION?

>> MOVE TO APPROVE. >> I WILL SECOND IT.

[C. Approval of expenditure in the amount of $296,976.00 for the purchase of the Glance Emergency Vehicle Preemption System.]

>> CALL THE ROLL, PLEASE. >>

>> ITEM 11 C IS THE APPROVAL OF AN EXPENDITURE IN THE AMOUNT OF $296,976 FOR THE PURCHASE OF THE GLANCE EMERGENCY VEHICLE

PREEMPTION SYSTEM . >> OKAY. I WILL START AND YOU CAN CHIME IN. THIS IS A SYSTEM FOR THE PUBLIC 'S CLARIFICATION THAT WILL COORDINATE ALL OF OUR TRAFFIC LIGHTS WITH EMERGENCY VEHICLES. AND MAKE IT SAFER FOR FIRST RESPONDERS AND MAKE IT SAFER FOR THOSE OF US ON THE ROAD . AND WE HAVE HAD TROUBLE FINDING FUNDING FOR THIS. PORT ST. LUCIE HAS ALREADY DONE IT.

THE COUNTY HAS ALREADY DONE IT. I WANT TO THANK YOU AND YOUR STAFF FOR BEING CREATIVE AND FINDING THE FUNDING FOR THIS BECAUSE THIS IS REALLY IMPORTANT. IT IS SOMETHING I HAVE BEEN ADVOCATING FOR. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON AS CHAIR OF THE FIRE DISTRICT HAS BEEN AGITATING FOR. I'M VERY HAPPY TO SEE THIS IS GOING TO BE HAPPENING. DO YOU HAVE ANY IDEA

OF WHEN THIS WILL BE IN EFFECT? >> THE LONGEST PORTION OF THIS IS GOING TO BE INSTALLING IT. WE ARE DOING THAT IN HOUSE TO SAVE MONEY. SO WE ARE HOPING 60 TO 90 DAYS . WE TALKED TO THE SUPPLIER. THEY HAVE A LOT OF THE MATERIALS IN STOCK. SO WE CAN

GET GOING . AS WE GET MORE IN. >> IS THIS A ONE-TIME CHARGE?

>> THIS COVERS 10 YEARS OF SERVICE WITH THE SOFTWARE. SO WE

ARE GOOD FOR 10 YEARS. >> GOOD FOR 10 YEARS. OKAY.

>> I WAS GOING TO PULL THIS ITEM SIMPLY BECAUSE IT IS NOW MY HABIT I SEE AN ITEM ON THE CONSENT AGENDA FOR SEVERAL HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS. I BELIEVE THE CITIZENS AND TAXPAYERS IN THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE DESERVE AN IN-DEPTH EXPLANATION AS TO WHAT THOSE ARE BEING APPLIED FOR WILL BE AT GRANT MONEY, BUDGETED MONEY. IT IS STILL MONEY THAT THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE IS EXPENDING. AND, DIRECTOR, THANK YOU FOR COMING UP TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE TONIGHT. CAN YOU JUST GIVE A VERY BRIEF EXPLANATION AS TO WHAT THE SYSTEM DOES?

>> SURE.

CLARIFY, IT IS NOT ALL OF OUR INTERSECTIONS. IT IS THE MAIN

THOROUGHFARES. >> 46. ON MAIN ROAD. YEAH.

RIGHT. >> BASICALLY WHAT IT DOES IS AS EMERGENCY VEHICLES ARE APPROACHING INTERSECTIONS, THE SYSTEM PREEMPTIVELY TURNS THE LIGHTS GREEN TO ALLOW THEM TO GO THROUGH. IDEAS SPEEDS UP RESPONSE TIME AND ULTIMATELY

SAVES LIVES. >> I WILL MAKE IT QUICK. YOU INDICATED THIS IS GOING TO BE INSTALLED IN HOUSE. YOU ARE CONFIDENT THAT WE HAVE STAFF EXPERTISE TO MANAGE THE INSTALLATION OF THIS BECAUSE EVERY TIME I SEE WORK TAKING PLACE ON TRAFFIC LIGHTS, IT IS TO AN OUTSIDE VENDOR. FIRST OFF, WHAT DEPARTMENT IS DOING IT AND DO THEY HAVE THE STAFFING

CAPABILITY TO ACCOMPLISH THIS? >> WITH ENGINEERING AND TRAFFIC DIVISION AND THE CONTRACTOR WORKING ON THE TRAFFIC LIGHTS .

OUR STAFF IS WITH HIM DOING THAT TOO. HE IS ALWAYS THERE.

>> THANK YOU. >> MADAM MAYOR, THANK YOU. I WANT TO CHIME IN OF THE FIRE BOARD. THIS WAS BROUGHT

[00:25:03]

IN AS THE FIRE CHIEF. THIS IS THROUGHOUT OUR COUNTY. AND SO I THINK PORT ST. LUCIE HAS ALREADY DONE IT. THE COUNTY IS EMBARKING ON SOME OF THE STREETS THEY HAVE READ THIS WILL ABSOLUTELY SAVE LIVES SIMPLY BECAUSE MOVED TRAFFIC OUT OF THE WAY SO THAT THE RESPONSE TIMES WILL INCREASE. AND ALSO PROVIDE SOME SAFETY THERE TOO BECAUSE AS ONE LIGHT TURNS GREEN, ANOTHER LIGHT TURNS RED. SO I AM ALL IN FOR THIS. THANK YOU, MR. CHESS , FOR FINDING THIS. THE CHIEF HAD GREAT CONCERNS. OUR CITY IS GROWING. PEOPLE CAN SEE THAT NOW EVEN ON U.S. ONE , AND IT IS NOT EVEN THAT TIME OF SEASON WHEN WE GET OUR NORTHERN VISITORS BACK HERE. SO IT'S GOING TO BE VERY IMPORTANT. THANK YOU FOR THE WORK THAT YOU DO. AS THIS BECOMES PUBLIC, I GUESS, YOU HAVE KIND OF NAME DAY MAJOR INTERSECTION THAT WE HAVE. HAPPY TO SUPPORT THIS. WITH THAT, MADAM MAYOR, I AM OF THE

APPROVAL OF CONSENT ITEM C. >> MOTION AND SECOND. CALL THE

ROLL, PLEASE. >>

[A. Legislative Hearing - Ordinance 25-024 Creating Chapter 103, Article XII Mandatory Structural Inspections for Condominium and Cooperative Buildings. SECOND READING]

>> OKAY. THAT CONCLUDES THE CONSENT AGENDA. SO WE WILL MOVE ON TO OUR ORDINANCES. AND WE HAVE A LEGISLATIVE HEARING FOR ORDINANCE 25-024 , AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE, FLORIDA, CREATING CHAPTER 103 COME BUILDINGS AND BUILDING REGULATIONS, ARTICLE 12 MANDATORY STRUCTURAL INSPECTIONS FOR CONDOMINIUM AND COOPERATIVE BUILDINGS, SECTIONS 103-425 THROUGH 103-429 PROVIDING FOR TITLE IN SECTION 103-425 PROVIDING FOR APPLICABLE IT APPLICABILITY PROVIDING FOR DEFINITIONS IN SECTION 103-427, PROVIDING FOR A TIMEFRAME SCHEDULE COMMENCE REPAIRS FOLLOWING RECEIPT OF PHASE TWO INSPECTION REPORT IN SECTION 103-428. PROVIDING FOR ENFORCEMENT IN SECTIONS 103-429.

PROVIDING FOR RESERVATION OF SECTIONS 103-430 THROUGH 439.

REPEALING ORDINANCES OR PARTS OF ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT HEREWITH AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR EFFECTIVE DATE. THIS IS THE SECOND READING.

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

SEEING NO MOVEMENT, WILL COME BACK TO THE COMMISSION.

>> ARE YOU SURE THERE IS NO FURTHER! NATION NEEDED WITH THAT? THAT WAS LIKE YOU JUST READ THE ONE-PIECE NOVEL, I THINK. I WOULD JUST COMMENTED THAT I WAS THE ONE THAT RAISED THIS AS AN ISSUE. AND I WOULD LIKE TO THANK DIRECTOR PAUL THOMAS OF THE BILLING DEPARTMENT FOR THE OUTSTANDING JOB HE DID TO COME BACK AND ADDRESS MY CONCERNS AND MOVE THIS FORWARD,

[B. Legislative Hearing - Ordinance 25-028 establishing Mayor and City Commission compensation and providing for cost of living increases commensurate with non-bargaining city employees each year as part of the annual budget adoption. SECOND READING]

SO I WOULD MOVE APPROVAL. >> MOTION AND SECOND. CALL THE

ROLL, PLEASE. >>

>> NEXT WE HAVE ORDINANCE 25 028 ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE, FLORIDA, AMENDING CHAPTER TWO ADMINISTRATION ARTICLE TWO CITY COMMISSION DIVISION I GENERALLY SECTION 2-19 ESTABLISHING THE COMPENSATION DUE TO MAYOR AND COMMISSIONERS PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY REPEALING ORDINANCES OR PARTS OF ORDINANCES HERE WITH AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THIS IS THE SECOND READING.

>> ANYONE WISHING TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION ON THIS ISSUE , PLEASE COME FORWARD. SEEING NO MOVEMENT, I WILL COME BACK TO

[C. Legislative Hearing - Ordinance 25-029 Deleting Chapter 103, Article VII Coastal Construction Code. FIRST READING]

THE COMMISSION FOR EMOTION. >> MOVE APPROVAL, ORDINANCE

25-028. >> MOTION AND SECOND. ALL THE

ROLL, PLEASE. >>

>> NEXT WE HAVE ORDINANCE 25-029. AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE, FLORIDA, AMENDING CHAPTER ONE OF THREE, BUILDING AND BUILDING REGULATIONS ARTICLE SEVEN COASTAL CONSTRUCTION CODE BY DELETING AND RESERVING SECTIONS 103 -263 THROUGH 103-268 REPEALING ORDINANCES OR PARTS OF ORDINANCES HERE WITH PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

THIS IS THE FIRST READING. >> MR. THOMAS, YOU'RE GOING TO

TELL US ABOUT THIS. >> PAUL THOMAS. MADAM MAYOR, COMMISSIONERS , THIS IS ACTUALLY JUST A LITTLE HOUSEKEEPING . IN THE PAST THERE WAS A LOCAL ORDINANCE THAT DEALT WITH CONSTRUCTION CODES. HOWEVER, THIS IS CURRENTLY BEING DEALT WITH THROUGH THE CHAPTER 31. SO STATE IS REQUIRING US TO DELETE THIS ORDINANCE BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY THE BUILDING CODE IS STATE STATUTE . AND IT SUPERSEDES ANY LOCAL ORDINANCE. SO THIS IS OBSOLETE AND IT IS JUST BEING REMOVED. BUT THE REGULATIONS ARE

STILL BEING COVERED. >> THE REGULATIONS ARE THERE IN PLACE, BUT THE FLORIDA STATUTE REQUIRES YOU TO HAVE THIS

REMOVED. IS THAT CORRECT ? >> YES, MA'AM.

>> SO WE ARE NOT CHANGING ANYTHING. IT'S JUST IN A

DIFFERENT PLACE. >> DIRECTOR THOMAS, THIS

[00:30:01]

PARTICULAR PROVISION -- AND I UNDERSTAND A LOT OF THIS INFORMATION. THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH FLOODPLAIN ELEVATION,

DOES IT? >> TO SOME DEGREE, IT DOES.

HOWEVER, TYPICALLY YOUR FLOODPLAIN ELEVATIONS ARE NOT SET BY THE BUILDING CODE. THEY NEVER ARE. THEY ARE GOING TO BE SET BY THE DEP IF YOU'RE CONSTRUCTING COASTAL CONSTRUCTION LINE OR IF YOU'RE IN A VOLATILE FLOOD ZONE LIKE AN EX-ZONE OR A ZONE. BUT YOU HAVE A FLOOD MAP THAT ESTABLISHES ELEVATION. YOU HAVE THE DEP THAT SETS THE ELEVATION FOR CCC CONSTRUCTION. SO IT JUST TELLS YOU WHAT YOU ARE SUPPOSED -- THE BUILDING STANDARDS BUT NOT THE ELEVATIONS.

>> THE REASON I BRING THAT UP -- NOT TO SEGUE OFF THIS TOPIC SPECIFICALLY, BUT THERE IS A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF CONFUSION AS TO WHAT THE FIRST FLOOR GRADE FOR CONSTRUCTION PURPOSES SHOULD BE WHEN YOU INCORPORATE THE FLOOD ELEVATIONS. AND I SEE THIS SERVING NINE YEARS ON THE PLANNING BOARD. I SAW THIS. IT TOOK ME A LONG TIME TO WRAP MY HEAD AROUND EXACTLY HOW THIS PROCESS WORKS. AND I DO KNOW FROM THE CONSUMERS AND, HOMEOWNERS AND NEIGHBORS THERE IS A TREMENDOUS MISUNDERSTANDIG IN HOW THIS WORKS. THIS DOESN'T CLARIFY THAT, BUT THERE'S GOING TO BE FURTHER DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT THIS EVENING, I KNOW. WE MAY CALL YOU BACK UP HERE TO GET SOME FURTHER GUIDANCE .

>> RIGHT. THERE IS CONFUSION. EXACTLY. OKAY. ANY MOTION? NO.

THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. ANYONE WISHING TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE, PLEASE COME FORWARD. SEEING NO MOVEMENT, I WILL COME BACK TO THE COMMISSION. ANYMORE QUESTIONS? ANY MOTION? MOTION AND SECOND. CALL THE ROLL, PLEASE.

[D. Legislative Hearing - Ordinance 25-030 Amending Chapter 103, Article II Building Code, and Amending Chapter 109, Article I Floodplain Management. FIRST READING]

>> 25-030. ORDINANCE AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES OF THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE, FLORIDA, AMENDING CHAPTER ONE OF THREE, BUILDING AND BUILDING REGULATIONS, ARTICLE TWO BUILDING CODE DIVISION I, GENERALLY SECTION 103-24 BY DELETING THE FLORIDA BUILDING CODE TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS FOR ADDITIONS, AMENDING CHAPTER 109, FLORIDA FLOODPLAIN MANAGEMENT, ARTICLE ONE . IN GENERAL, SECTION 109-2 BY MODIFYING CERTAIN DEFINITIONS AMENDING ARTICLE THREE, FLOOD RESISTANT DEVELOPMENT, SECTION 109-49 BY PROVIDING FOR TECHNICAL AMENDMENT TO THE FLORIDA BUILDING CODE FOR ADDITIONS, REPEALING ORDINANCES OR PARTS OF ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT HEREWITH PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY CLAUSE AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE . THIS IS THE FIRST READNG.

>> MR. THOMAS, DO YOU WANT TO TELL US ABOUT THIS?

>> YES, MA'AM. MADAM MAYOR, COMMISSIONERS, THIS IS FROM THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT . AND IT REALLY JUST CLARIFIES SOME OF THE ORDINANCES AND DECISIONS THAT WE MAKE HERE LOCALLY. SO FOR INSTANCE, IN THE PAST, IF YOU WERE GOING TO DO -- LET'S SAY YOU HAD A DISASTER AND THE BUILDING WAS DAMAGED AND YOU HAD THE 50% RULE THAT COMES IN FOR SUBSTANTIAL DAMAGE. THE VALUATION WAS ESTABLISHED -- THE BUILDING VALUATION THAT YOU ESTABLISHED AT 50% TYPICALLY NOBODY HAS -- NOBODY HAS AN APPRAISAL. PROPERTY APPRAISERS VALUATION AND THEN YOU CAN ADD 20%. AND THAT WAS TYPICALLY THE STANDARD. THE DM SAYS THAT IS NOT APPROPRIATE. YES. SO BASICALLY WHAT THEY ARE SAYING IS THEY WANT THE VERBIAGE TO READ THAT YOU CAN HAVE THE PROPERTY APPRAISERS VALUATION WITH A MULTIPLIER ESTABLISHED BY THE PROPERTY APPRAISER. SO THEY DON'T WANT US TO ESTABLISH A 20% NUMBER . THEY SAY THAT IT IS THE NUMBER THAT IS ESTABLISHED FOR THE MULTIPLIER THAT IS ESTABLISHED BY THE PROPERTY APPRAISAL. ODDLY ENOUGH, THE PROPERTY APPRAISER SAYS THEY DON'T ESTABLISH THAT VALUATION . HOWEVER, THE STATE MENTIONED THEY STILL WANTED THE VERBIAGE TO BE THAT WAY BECAUSE DIFFERENT PROPERTY APPRAISERS MAY HAVE DIFFERENT OPINIONS. SO IF YOU LEAVE IT THAT WAY THEN IN THE FUTURE IF THERE IS A CHANGE, THEN THERE COULD BE A DIFFERENT APPROACH.

>> SO OUR PROPERTY APPRAISER WHEN THERE IS A DISASTER WOULD ESTABLISH A MULTIPLIER, YOU THINK?

>> CURRENTLY THEY ARE SAYING THEY DON'T DO THAT CURRENTLY. I WOULD BE SURE THAT PERHAPS UNDER THE PRESSURE OF A MAJOR DISASTER THAT THEY WOULD BE INCLINED TO DO SOMETHING. BUT AS IT IS RIGHT NOW, THEIR DETERMINATION IS THEY DON'T ESTABLISH A MULTIPLIER.

>> AS SOMEBODY THAT'S BEEN THROUGH THIS PROCESS A FEW TIMES UNFORTUNATELY , DIRECTOR THOMAS, WHAT YOU'RE INDICATING -- AND I

[00:35:02]

KNOW IT IS NOT YOU. THIS IS COMING FROM THE HIGHER AUTHORITY. WE ARE NOT USING MARKET VALUE TO DETERMINE VALUATION. WE ARE NOT USING INSURABLE VALUE TO DETERMINE VALUATION. WE ARE NOT USING CONSTRUCTION COSTS. IT IS SOME ARBITRARY NUMBER WE DON'T EVEN HAVE A SOURCE TO SECURE THAT

NUMBER FROM CURRENTLY. >> JUST TO CLARIFY THAT, YOU HAVE A COUPLE OF OPTIONS. A PERSON CAN GET A PRIVATE APPRAISAL FOR WHAT MARKET VALUE IS.

>> MARKET VALUE. BECAUSE WE ALL KNOW THAT THE PROPERTY APPRAISER'S OFFICE IS NOT MARKET VALUE.

>> AND THEY BREAK IT DOWN TO DIFFERENT AREAS. SO IF YOU TAKE THE SECTION THAT IS MARKET VALUE ON THE PROPERTY APPRAISER WEBSITE, TYPICALLY YOU WOULD ADD THE 20% AND THAT WOULD GET YOU IN THE BALLPARK. SO WE HAD TWO OPTIONS. YOU CAN HAVE A PRIVATE APPRAISAL THAT GIVES YOU AS ACCURATE A PICTURE AS YOU CAN HAVE . IF YOU DON'T HAVE TIME OR YOU DIDN'T GET A PRIVATE APPRAISAL, YOU CAN USE WHATEVER THAT MARKET VALUE VALUATION IS FROM THE PROPERTY APPRAISER. AND IT USED TO BE JUST AT 20% TO IT, THAT WOULD BRING YOU CLOSE. NOW THAT LANGUAGE THEY DON'T WANT MULTIPLIER -- MARKET VALUE PLUS THE MULTIPLIER ESTABLISHED BY THE PROPERTY APPRAISER. SO IT IS STILL MARKET VALUE. IT IS JUST LOWER. SO THAT IS NOT GOING TO MAKE FOLKS HAPPY, BUT THAT IS THE WAY THE STATE CHOOSES TO REQUIRE US TO DO BUSINESS.

>> YOU STILL HAVE THE OPTION AS THE PROPERTY OWNER TO CONTEST THAT MARKET VALUE NUMBER BASED ON SOME MULTIPLE THAT IS FANTASYLAND , CANDIDLY, TO USE AN APPRAISAL. A MARKET APPRAISAL TO CONTEST THAT. SO THIS INFORMATION THEN GETS PACKAGED AND BROUGHT TO YOU AS THE ADMINISTRATOR TO SAY, WELL, PROPERTY APPRAISER SAYS THE NUMBER IS THIS LOWER NUMBER WITH THIS MULTIPLIER ADDED TO IT, BUT MY MARKET APPRAISAL INDICATES THE VALUE IS HIGHER. WHAT DO YOU DO WITH THAT?

>> WELL, WE WILL TAKE THE APPRAISAL FIRST. YES.

>> THAT IS A VERY REASONABLE APPROACH.

>> ABSOLUTELY. >> I HATE TO SAY IT, BUT THE OTHER INFORMATION -- THERE IS NO REALITY TO IT. I KNOW THAT FOR A FACT. I HAVE BEEN DOWN THIS PATH THREE OR FOUR TIMES ON PROPERTIES AND IT IS NOT A PLEASANT PROCESS TO GO THROUGH.

WE ACTUALLY DID THE PRIVATE APPRAISAL ROUTE TO CONTEST THE NUMBERS WE WERE BEING GIVEN , WHICH WAS EFFECTIVE . SO AS LONG AS THAT OPTION IS STILL THERE, IT GIVES THE PROPERTY OWNER ILLEGITIMATE OUT TO DETERMINE ACTUAL MARKET VALUE PRIOR TO THE

DAMAGE TO THEIR PROPERTY. >> OR AT THE TIME OF.

>> AND WHO ESTABLISHES THE 15% ?

>> THAT IS IN THE DIRECTIVES FOR FEMA.

>> IS THAT IN THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT?

>> YES. >> YOU HAVE TOOLS -- SO THAT IS

FAIR AND OBJECTIVE ? >> ABSOLUTELY.

>> I ACTUALLY THINK THAT COMES FROM NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM. WHERE THAT ORIGINATES THAT RULE. IT IS NOT ARBITRARY.

IT IS JUST 50%. APPRAISAL FOR $1 MILLION. IF MY DAMAGES ARE 499,000, I WILL GET A PERMIT TO REBUILD.

>> ABSOLUTELY. >> AND FROM A MARKET STANDPOINT, THAT IS A REASONABLE APPROACH. I'M OKAY WITH THAT. THAT IS A WORKABLE SCENARIO. WE ALL KNOW HOW THE LAW DOESN'T WORK MANY TIMES. THERE IS NO FIGHTING CITY HALL. THIS -- I THOUGHT CITY

HALL AND IT WAS NOT PRETTY. >> YEAH. OKAY. ANYTHING ELSE ? ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING. ANYONE WISHING TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE, PLEASE COME FORWARD. SEEING NO MOVEMENT, WELCOME BACK TO THE COMMISSION FOR EMOTION.

>> MADAM MAYOR, I'M OF APPROVAL.

>> MOTION AND SECOND. CALL THE ROLL, PLEASE.

[E. Quasi-Judicial Hearing - Ordinance 25-031 - Review of an application to approve a planned development in respect of the Final Site Plan for Pod 1 and the Planned Development Zoning Agreement for the Symphony Lakes Planned Development (PD) generally located at or near the northeast corner of Selvitz Road and Devine Road and west of Christensen Road, containing approximately 88.5 acres of land, more or less, plus additional right-of-way; providing for a severability clause; providing for repeal of ordinances or parts thereof in conflict; and providing for an effective date. - FIRST READING.]

>> OKAY. WE MOVE ON TO OUR FIRST QUASIJUDICIAL HEARING FOR THIS EVENING. IT IS AN ORDINANCE , 25-031. ORDINANCE BY THE CITY COMMISSION AND CITY OF FORT PIERCE, FLORIDA APPROVING PLAN DEVELOPMENT SITE PLAN AND THE PLAN DEVELOPMENT ZONING AGREEMENT FOR THE SYMPHONY LAKES PLANNED DEVELOPMENT , PD, GENERALLY LOCATED AT OR NEAR THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SELVITZ ROAD AND DEVINE ROAD AND WEST CHRISTENSEN ROAD, CONTAINING APPROXIMATELY 88.5 ACRES OF LAND, MORE OR LESS, PLUS ADDITIONAL RIGHT-OF-WAY, PROVIDING FOR A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE, PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF ORDINANCES OR PARTS THEREOF IN CONFLICT , AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THIS IS THE

FIRST READING. >> THIS IS THE FIRST OF TWO QUASIJUDICIAL READINGS. WOULD YOU LIKE TO READ OUR PROCEEDINGS

GUIDE, PLEASE ? >> YES, MA'AM. THE CITY COMMISSION SERVES A LEGISLATIVE AND QUASIJUDICIAL ROLE. WHEN ACTING AS A LEGISLATIVE BODY, THE COMMISSION ENGAGES IN RULEMAKING ACTIVITIES BY ESTABLISHING POLICIES. WHEN ACTING AS A QUASIJUDICIAL BODY, THE COMMISSION APPLIES THOSE LAWS AND POLICIES AND IS HOW TO STRUCTURE PROCEDURAL

[00:40:02]

REQUIREMENTS. QUASIJUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS ARE LESS FORMAL IN PROCEEDINGS BEFORE A CIRCUIT COURT BUT MORE FORMAL THAN THE NORMAL COMMISSION MEETING. QUASIJUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS STANDARDS OF NOTICE AND DUE PROCESS AND DECISIONS MUST BE MADE BASED ON SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE. THEREFORE COMMISSIONERS HAVE DUTY TO CONDUCT QUASIJUDICIAL PROCEEDINGS MORE LIKE JUDGES THAN LEGISLATORS. THAT IS WHERE THE COMMISSION HAS ESTABLISHED UNIFORM PROCEDURES FOR QUASIJUDICIAL HEARINGS THAT WILL BE FOLLOWED THIS EVENING.

FINALLY, NO ONE SHOULD APPROACH ANY MEMBER OF THE CITY COMMISSION ON THE DAIS, THE CITY ATTORNEY, OR THE CITY CLERK DURING THE HEARING. IF DOCUMENTS ARE TO BE GIVEN TO THE CITY CLERK , PLEASE GIVE THEM TO THE SERGEANT AT ARMS, WHICH ARE ANY OF THE POLICE OFFICERS IN THE CHAMBER.

>> THANK YOU, MA'AM. MADAM CLAIRE, HAVE THE ADVERTISING AND

NOTICE REQUIREMENTS BEEN MET ? >> YES, MA'AM. WE HAVE MET THE

REQUIREMENTS. >> WOULD YOU LIKE TO ASK COMMISSIONERS ABOUT X PARTAKE COMMUNICATIONS ?

>> YES. I HAVE TALKED TO THE DEVELOPMENT TEAM.

>> COMMISSIONER JOHNSON. >> YES, MA'AM. I HAVE MET WITH AND TALKED WITH THE DEVELOPMENT TEAM.

>> MAYOR HUDSON. >> NO MA'AM.

>> WOULD YOU LIKE TO SWEAR IN THE WITNESSES ?

>> IS. ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM -- AND THAT WOULD INCLUDE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC IF YOU PLAN TO SPEAK -- STAND, RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. DO YOU SWEAR AND AFFIRM TO TELL THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH ? THANK

YOU VERY MUCH. >> ALL RIGHT. WE WILL PROCEED.

>> THANK YOU, MADAM MAYOR. KEVIN FREEMAN. CITY PLANNING DIRECTOR.

MULTITASKING DAY. >> I WAS GOING TO HELP YOU WITH

THAT ONE. >> SYMPHONY LAKES PLANNING DEVELOPMENT FINAL SITE PLAN. COMMISSION MAY RECALL THE LONG JOURNEY THIS HAS TAKEN , PARTICULARLY IN ITS INITIAL FORM GOING THROUGH A NUMBER OF PUBLIC HEARINGS TO RESOLVE THE INPUT OF THE COMMUNITY . PRIMARILY BASED ON THE ACCESS AND NEIGHBORING DISTURBANCE ON CHRISTENSEN ROAD . THAT HAS BEEN RESOLVED . AND THIS FIRST PHASE DEMONSTRATES HOW THAT HAS BEEN DONE . THE BIGGEST ISSUE THAT WE HEARD DURING THOSE HEARINGS WAS THE ACCESS AND MULTIPLE HOMES PROPOSED ON CHRISTENSEN. THOSE HAVE BEEN REMOVED. THIS SITE PLAN IN EFFECT INCORPORATES THE WHOLE OF THIS PART ONE WITHIN THE AREA WEST OF CHRISTENSEN.

THE ONLY ACCESS ON CHRISTENSEN NOW IS AN EMERGENCY ACCESS. NO IMPROVEMENTS MADE TO THAT ROADWAY . SO FOR THE MOST PART, THE RESIDENTS OF THAT ROADWAY WILL BE UNDISTURBED . WE DID ADVERTISE THIS TO RESIDENTS IN THE PROPOSED POD 1 FINAL SITE PLAN HAS BEEN REVIEWED. IT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE MASTER SITE PLAN. POD 1 IS APPROXIMATELY 88 ACRES. 88.5 ABOUT. ROPOSES 286 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL UNITS . DENSITY OF POD 1 IS JUST ABOVE THREE UNITS PER ACRE. AND AS THE REQUIRED AMOUNT OF OPEN SPACE. PARCEL I.D.S. THE ACTUAL BOUNDARY OF THIS PHASE PORTIONED OUT ON A NUMBER OF LOTS AND PARCELS , INCLUDING ONE ENTIRE PARCEL . THE MASTER SITE PLAN, WHICH WAS APPROVED IN JUNE 3RD, 2024 , SHOWS THE VARIOUS PHASES AND PODS . THE POD TWO ORIGINALLY RAN DOWN CHRISTENSEN ROAD HAS BEEN REMOVED. THAT ENTIRE RESIDENTIAL PART OF THE SITE NOW ACCESSES FROM SELVITZ. AND YOU WILL SEE THAT IN THE PROPOSED POD 1 SITE PLAN. SO THERE IS THE LOCATION OF THE PROPERTY. SELVITZ ROAD. CHRISTENSEN. AND DEVINE. IT HAS WHEN IT'S ULTIMATE BUILDOUT WILL HAVE TWO ACCESSES. ONE TO THE NORTH AND ONE TO THE SOUTH. SOUTHERN ACCESS IS PRIMARILY DEFINED AS THE ACCESS TO THE POD 1 PHASE ONE PART OF THE SITE INCORPORATES A SCHOOLBUS TURNAROUND AND ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS THAT BOTH THESE LOCATIONS ON SELVITZ AND IN

[00:45:01]

ACCORDANCE WITH ST. LUCIE COUNTY RECOMMENDATIONS AND REQUIREMENTS. AROUND THE SITE WE HAVE SOME EXISTING SINGLE-FAMILY LARGE LOT STILL REMAINING IN THE COUNTY. APPROXIMATELY 85 FEET FROM THAT BUFFER AREA TO THE PROPERTY ITSELF . IT IS A P.E.D.

. THAT WAS GRANTED IN JUNE 3RD, 2024. COUNTY PROPERTIES PRIMARILY TO THE EAST AND CITY TO THE NORTH AND WEST . IT WAS FUTURE LAND USE OF MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT. ADOPTED ON APRIL 1ST, 2024 , INCORPORATING A MUCH WIDER AREA . INCORPORATED WITHIN THE SYMPHONY LAKES PLANNING DEVELOPMENT AS A WHOLE. THIS WENT TO THE PLANNING BOARD ON JUNE 9TH, 2025. AND THE PLANNING BOARD RECOMMENDED BY A VOTE OF % 6-1 TO MOVE THE APPLICATION TO THE CITY COMMISSION. RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL .

THEY INCLUDED CONDITIONS REGARDING THE ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS . ALL CONDITIONS CONCEPTUAL SYMPHONY LAKES PD HAD BEEN MET. AND THAT IS NOTE TO THE COMMISSION THAT THE ORIGINAL PLANNING DEVELOPMENT WAS APPROVED UNDER THE OLD SYSTEM AND WAS A CONCEPTUAL QUOTES. IT WOULD REQUIRE A PLAT PRIOR TO APPLICATION OF THE BUILDING REQUIREMENT AND VERTICAL CONSTRUCTION. ST. LUCIE COUNTY CLERK OF COURTS AND ST. LUCIE COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISER'S SHALL BE COMPLETED BEFORE ANY BUILDING PERMIT . ADDRESS IS REQUIRED AND ALL REQUIRED RIGHT-OF-WAY IN RESPECT TO SELVITZ ROAD SHALL BE APPROVED PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF FIRST CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION FOR A DWELLING IN POD 1. THIS IS THE FINAL PLANNING DEVELOPMENT SITE PLAN RELATING TO POD 1. YOU CAN SEE IT ENCOMPASSES THE AREA BETWEEN SELVITZ AND CHRISTENSEN . AND I THINK IT IS 286 OR SO RESIDENTIAL SINGLE-FAMILY UNITS . THIS EXISTING CONSERVATION EASEMENT WITHIN THE PROPERTY, WHICH IS BEING RETAINED. A SCHOOL BUS STOP THAT HAS APPROVED -- BEEN APPROVED BY THE SCHOOL DISTRICT. SO IT ALLOWS SCHOOLBUS. THERE ARE SIDEWALKS LEADING TO THE SCHOOL BUS STOP FOR THE SAFETY OF THE STUDENTS WHO LIVE IN THIS DEVELOPMENT. 286 BUILDING UNITS.

APPROXIMATELY 3.2 UNITS PER ACRE. IT MAINTAINS THE MINIMUM 20% OPEN SPACE . COMPLETES ALL THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CONCEPTUAL PLANNING DEVELOPMENT IN ITS CRITERIA . THE LANDSCAPE FAIRLY HEAVY LANDSCAPING WITHIN AND AROUND THE SITE, PARTICULARLY WITH A BUFFER THAT RUNS DOWN CHRISTENSEN AND ACROSS DEVINE. AND THAT IS 232 STREET TREES , MANY SHRUBS PROVIDED WITHIN THAT DEVELOPMENT . THE LANDSCAPE BUFFERS ARE BUILT UP ON A BURGER -- AND PROVIDE ADDITIONAL SHIELDING . THE LANDSCAPE BUFFERS HAVE ALSO BEEN DESIGNED WITH VARIETY OF SHRUBS, HEDGES, AND TREES AND A PARTICULAR ASK OF THE APPLICANT WAS THAT THEY DESIGN THESE BUFFERS TO BE FULL AND INCLUDE STORY PLANTING. THAT IS PLANTING THAT GOES BETWEEN THE SHRUBS AND HIGHER TREES. WHAT WE NORMALLY SEE IN STANDARD LANDSCAPE BUFFERS ACCORDING TO CITY CODE BUILT ACCORDING TO CITY CODE WHEN MISSING THAT PIECE THAT PROVIDES ALMOST THE EYE LEVEL SHIELDING TO A BUFFER . THERE IS THE ENLARGED DIAGRAM OF THE BUS STOP . THERE IS A SHELTER AREA THERE . SIDEWALKS LEADING EITHER SIDE AROUND IN AND OUT OF THE DEVELOPMENT . TRAFFIC GENERATION

[00:50:10]

MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE IMPACT OF THIS DEVELOPMENT ON THE AREA . AND THAT HAS BEEN REVIEWED BY ST. LUCIE COUNTY AND APPROVED . WE LOOKED AT THE COMPLIANCE WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP AND ALSO HOW THE DEVELOPMENT PROPOSAL RELATES TO PUBLIC HEALTH SAFETY AND WELFARE. SO WE KNOW THE FOLLOWING IMPROVEMENTS , ROADWAY ACCESS TO PRIMARY ACCESS ROADS OFF SELVITZ ROAD AND EMERGENCY ONLY ACCESS . THERE WAS A SCHOOL BUS STOP. AND SIDEWALKS WITHIN THE PROJECT . UTILITIES . THE PROJECT WILL PROVIDE WATER MAIN AND PRIVATE LIFT STATION TO SERVE THE NEEDS OF THE PROJECT.

UTILITY LINES AND INFRASTRUCTURE WITHIN THE PROJECT ITSELF. OPEN SPACE FOR THE BENEFIT OF RESIDENTS . THE PROJECT.

SIDEWALKS. SIDEWALKS AND STREET LIGHTS ARE LOCATED ON INTERNAL ROADS. LANDSCAPING. LARGE LANDSCAPING BUFFERS ARE PROVIDED AROUND THE PERIMETER. THAT INCLUDES THE ASPECTS OF THOSE.

BEARING ALL THAT IN MIND, STAFF RECOMMEND THAT CITY COMMISSION APPROVED THE APPLICATION FOR FINAL PD SITE PLAN SUBJECT TO THE EIGHT CONDITIONS OF DEVELOPMENT LISTED BELOW. SO THESE CONDITIONS INCORPORATE RECOMMENDATIONS MADE BY THE PLANNING BOARD PLUS OTHERS THAT WE WENT THROUGH AS WE RECOMMENDED THIS FOR PRESENTATION TO THE CITY COMMISSION. AGAIN, ALL REQUIRED ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS SHALL BE COMPLETED . DEVELOPMENT OF POD 1 SHALL SATISFY ALL APPLICABLE CONDITIONS OF CONCEPTUAL SYMPHONY LAKES PLAN DEVELOPMENT.

A PLAT WILL BE REQUIRED. PARCEL COMBINATION . GENERAL ADDRESSES ALL REQUIRED RIGHT-OF-WAY DEDICATIONS. WITH RESPECT TO SELVITZ SHALL BE COMPLETED PRIOR TO FIRST COMPLETION DWELLING POD 1 . LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT SHALL BE REQUIRED INAUDIBLE ] OCCUPANCY . DEVELOPERS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR OBTAINING ALL STATE FEDERAL AGENCY PERMITS AND THEREFORE THE APPROVAL OF DEVELOPMENT BY THE CITY DOES NOT CREATE LIABILITY FOR ISSUANCE OF THIS DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL IF THE APPLICANT FAILS TO OBTAIN REQUISITE APPROVALS FROM AGENCIES. MOST OF THOSE APPROVALS WILL BE PRESENTED RECOMMENDATIONS ARE THEREFORE APPROVAL WITH ADDITIONAL ALTERNATIVE CONDITIONS OR

STAFF PRESENTATION. THANK YOU. >> QUESTIONS OF MR. FREEMAN.

COMMISSIONER BRODERICK. >> JUST FOR CLARIFICATION PURPOSES, I REMEMBER THIS PLAN CAME IN AND IT WENT THROUGH SEVERAL MANIFESTATIONS BEFORE BEING APPROVED BY CITY COMMISSION. THE TWO ACCESS ROADS . ARE THOSE BOTH BEING INSTALLED AND WILL BE UTILIZED BY HOMEOWNERS AT THE BEGINNING OF THIS PROJECT? OR DID YOU COMMENT THAT ONE IS BEING INSTALLED

LATER? >> BOTH ARE TO BE INSTALLED WITH THIS PHASE ALTHOUGH THE NORTHERN ACCESS ROAD IS NOT ACCESS BY RESIDENTS. ALL THE ACCESS TO POD 1 IS UNDERTAKEN BY THE

SOUTHERNMOST ACCESS POINT . >> SO THE SECOND ACCESS IS

CONSTRUCTION? >> I BELIEVE SO. THE APPLICANT WILL HAVE FAR MORE DETAIL ON THAT ONE . IT IS INTENDED TO SERVE THE OTHER PHASES OF DEVELOPMENT IN THE FUTURE.

>> IT IS ALSO MY UNDERSTANDING THAT MAXIMUM NUMBER OF UNITS THAT COULD HAVE BEEN PLACED IN THIS PROPERTY IN POD 1 WAS SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER THAN THE END RESULT OF THE SITE PLAN.

>> THAT IS CORRECT. >> AND WAS A SIGNIFICANT

DIFFERENTIAL. >> IT IS SIGNIFICANT. WE ARE AT A NUMBER NOW JUST ABOVE THREE UNITS PER ACRE. THE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT PROBABLY GIVES YOU BETWEEN 10 AND 15 UNITS PER

ACRE. >> I KNOW THERE WAS A SIGNIFICANT DOWNSIZING OF THE DENSITY.

>> THE OVERALL NUMBERS RELATED. MULTIPLY THAT BY ACRES.

>> I HAVE A FEELING THEY ARE GOING TO GIVE US A FULL CALCULATION ON THAT. MY FINAL QUESTION TO YOU IS , OBVIOUSLY

[00:55:01]

YOU HAVE HAD EXTENSIVE DISCUSSION AND NEGOTIATION WITH THE DEVELOPMENT TEAM. ARE THERE ANY ASPECTS OF THIS PLAN THAT THEY DID NOT SATISFY YOUR REQUEST TO RESOLVE?

>> WE WENT THROUGH A SUBSTANTIAL AS YOU SAY NEGOTIATION PERIOD.

THE APPLICANT DID RESPOND VERY WELL TO ALL THE REQUESTS THAT CAME OUT OF THOSE. NOT ONLY OUR NEGOTIATIONS WITH THEM BUT ISSUES RAISED BY THE PLANNING BOARD AND OTHER AGENCIES. SO WE DON'T HAVE ANY OUTSTANDING ISSUES IN RESPECT TO THIS PHASE

WITH THE APPLICANT. >> THANK YOU. I'M GOOD.

>> YEAH. AND PROBABLY CONCERNS OF THIS COMMISSION . RIGHT.

>> MAYOR, THE LAYOUT OF THIS FIRST PHASE ACTUALLY RESPONDS TO THE LETTER, REALLY . WHAT THE CITY COMMISSION WERE REQUESTING THE APPLICANT DID DURING THOSE HEARINGS.

>> I REMEMBER THAT VERY MUCH. OKAY. IF THERE'S NO OTHER QUESTIONS, WE ARE GOING TO ASK THE APPLICANT TO COME FORWARD AND IDENTIFY YOURSELF. I'M GOING TO ASK IF YOU HAVE ANY

QUESTIONS OF STAFF. >> I DO NOT. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. GOOD EVENING, CITY COMMISSION, BOARD MEMBERS, MAYOR HUDSON. MY NAME IS LEO WITH HEARING HERE ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT, DON STEVENSON, FOR SYMPHONY LAKES. I WANT TO START OUT BY THANKING KEV FOR HIS PRESENTATION .

>> YOU MIGHT NEED THE KEYBOARD. >> ALL RIGHT. I WOULD LIKE TO HIGHLIGHT OUR GREAT TEAM. DON STEVENSON IS THE APPLICANT. THE PLANNERS AND LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT. SHORT AND ASSOCIATES ARE CIVIL ENGINEERS. MCKINSEY ENGINEERING AND PLANNING AS OUR TRAFFIC ENGINEERS. ADVANCED RESTORATION AS OUR ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS. OUR TEAM IS HERE THIS EVENING TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS ANY OF YOU MAY HAVE . SO THE PD OF THE MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT WAS APPROVED BY THE CITY COMMISSIONERS ON JUNE 3RD, 2024. LEADING UP TO THE APPROVAL WAS EXTENSIVE COLLABORATION WITH CITY STAFF AND COMMUNITY MEETING WAS HELD IN AUGUST OF 2023 TO DISCUSS THE PROJECT WITH NEIGHBORS. TODAY WE COME BEFORE YOU WITH PROPOSED SITE PLAN FOR PHASE ONE THAT ADHERES TO THE DESIGN CRITERIA PREVIOUSLY APPROVED. AS SHOWN EARLIER BY STAFF, SYMPHONY LAKES HAS LOCATED EAST OF I -95. TURNPIKE.

NORTH OF MIDWAY ROAD AND OFF SELVITZ AND DEVINE ROAD . THE 122 ACRE SITE IS LOCATED WITHIN THE URBAN SERVICE BOUNDARY AND THE APPROVED PD PLAN ALLOWS FOR LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL , HIGH-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, AND LIGHT INDUSTRIAL. TODAY I WILL BE FOCUSING ON PHASE ONE, WHICH ENCOMPASSES THE LOW-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL PORTION OF THE SITE. HERE WE CAN SEE A CLOSER LOOK AT THE SITE BOUNDARY. THE ACCESS INTO THE SITE OFF SELVITZ ROAD.

TO THE NORTH, SPECIALIST AND CONCRETE PLANS AND SERVICES. AS WELL AS OTHER INDUSTRIAL USES, OFFICE BUILDING AND SPECIALIZED RETAILERS. TO THE EAST, THERE ARE LOW-DENSITY RESIDENCES FURTHER THAN THESE RESIDENCES IS THE FORT PIERCE CENTRAL HIGH SCHOOL. TO THE SOUTH THERE ARE ALSO LOW-DENSITY RESIDENCES AND AGRICULTURAL USES SUCH AS THE PLANT HAVEN NURSERY. OTHER USES TO THE SOUTH INCLUDE CREST 'S SHELTER AND DOGS AND CATS ANIMAL SHELTER. TO THE WEST IS A FUTURE TRANSPORTATION SITE FOR ST.

LUCIE COUNTY AND THE EXISTING FM P.A. THERMO POWERPLANT. SINCE THE APPROVAL OF THE PD, THE FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION IS IN XD, ALLOWING FOR THE USES PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED. SORRY ABOUT THAT.

THE ZONING HAS ALSO CHANGED TO PD, AGAIN MATCHING WHAT WAS APPROVED LAST YEAR. WE WILL EVENTUALLY GET THERE AGAIN. ALL RIGHT. HERE IS A LOOK AT THE PHASING FOR THE 122 ACRE PROPERTY. AS MENTIONED, THE FIRST VERSION OF THE SITE PLAN WE ARE BRINGING FORWARD IS PHASE ONE, INCLUDING THE MAIN ENTRYWAY AND TO SYMPHONY LAKES ALONG WITH THE LOW-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, THE CONSTRUCTION OF FIVE LAKES, AND AMENITIES CENTER AND CONSERVATION AREA. FUTURE PHASES WILL BE FORWARDED AT A LATER

[01:00:03]

DATE OUTLINED WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, INCLUDING THE HIGH-DENSITY MULTIFAMILY AND LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DESIGN. I'M

NOT SURE WHAT IS GOING ON. >> --

>> TAKING LOOK AT OUR SITE, THE AREA IS ROUGHLY 80 ACRES WITH ELONGATED ENTRY OFF SELVITZ ROAD WITH LUSH VEGETATION AND LARGE RIGHT-OF-WAY GIVING ROOM FOR CANOPY GROWTH OVER THE YEARS .

ENTRY IS FOR BOTH PHASE ONE AND THE FUTURE MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT FOR THE LOWER PORTION. THIS PLAN LOCATES 286 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCES AND 3.2 DWELLING UNITS AND ACRE AND PROVIDES WALK ABILITY AND MULTIPLE GREEN SPACES FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THE PD ALLOWS FOR UP TO 300 UNITS OF SINGLE FAMILY IN THIS PROJECT. THE DESIGN PROVIDES LAWS TO ENSURE THE BUFFERING ALIGNS WITH THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES. THE PHASE PROVIDES FIVE LAKES, ONE OF WHICH IS VIEWED AS YOU ENTER INTO THE COMMUNITY ALONG WITH A LARGE TRACK AND AMENITIES CENTER THAT HAS PEDESTRIAN ACCESS TO THE SCHOOL BUS STOP .

RESIDENTIAL LOTS ARE EITHER LOCATED ALONG ONE OF THE 25 FOOT ENHANCED VEGETATIVE BUFFERS ADJACENT TO ONE OF THE LARGE LAKES PROVIDED OR ABUTTING THE EXISTING CONSERVATION AREA TO THE NORTH OF THE PROPERTY. THE FUTURE HOMES WILL BE DESIGNED WITH VARIOUS ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENTS TO AVOID A MONOTONOUS VIEW AS YOU DRIVE THROUGH. EACH HOME WILL HAVE THEIR OWN LANDSCAPE ALONG THE FRONT AND REAR. TREES WILL LINE THE SIDE OF THE STREET WITH LARGE LANDSCAPED LAWN TO ENSURE PROPER REGROWTH WHILE ALSO PROVIDING A LUSH CANOPY FOR SHADE AS RESIDENTS WALK THE LOOPS OF SIDEWALKS IN THEIR COMMUNITY.

THE STREETS WILL BE ALIGNED WITH LIGHTS LOCATED AT PROPER INTERVALS TO ENSURE SAFETY AND VISIBILITY AT LATE HOURS. TO GIVE FURTHER CLARITY ON A LARGE 25 FOOT BUFFER SURROUNDING THE ENTIRE SITE, WE HAVE PROVIDED SECTION VIEWS. THE FIRST ONE REFLECTS THE BUFFER ALONG CHRISTENSEN ROAD, WHICH IS ROUGHLY 20 FEET WIDE WITH A 50 FOOT RIGHT-OF-WAY EAST OF OUR PROPERTY. THE BERM IS ROUGHLY 2 TO 3 FEET IN HEIGHT, INCLUDING LARGE CANOPY TREES AND PALMS, LARGE SHRUB HEDGE AT THE TOP OF THE BERM, AND SWATHS OF GROUND COVERED VEGETATION TO ENHANCE THE VIEW. NO ENTRY ON CHRISTENSEN ROAD OTHER THAN EMS, WHICH WILL BE GATED WITH A NOTCH BOX. TO GIVE A NATURAL VIEW FOR THE RESIDENTS ACROSS THE STATE, THE BERM IS HEAVILY LANDSCAPED.

THIS WAS MAIN DISCUSSION TOPIC DURING THE PD APPROVAL AND THE ENHANCED BUFFER HAS BEEN PROVIDED FOR STAFF'S REQUEST.

THIS NEXT SECTION THE DESIGN FROM BACK OF HOMES TO DEVINE ROAD TO THE SOUTHERN PORTION OF THE SITE. NOT ONLY IS THERE A 25 FOOT HEAVILY BUFFERED BERM, BUT THERE IS FPL EASEMENT TO GIVE EXTRA ROOM FROM THE ROADWAY.

SORRY. NO. >> MAYBE IT IS THE DISTANCE.

>> MAYBE WE WILL STOP THE CLOCK BECAUSE SHE ONLY HAS 20 MINUTES.

I DON'T WANT YOU TO RUN OUT OF TIME.

>> I DON'T THINK I WILL RUN OUT OF TIME. LASTLY, HERE IS SECTION VIEW OF THE NORTHERN RESIDENTS ALONG THE CANAL. 25-FOOT HEAVILY LANDSCAPED OFFER ADJACENT TO 20 FOOT SERVICE DRIVE GIVING ROUGHLY 80 FEET OVERALL WITH THE CANAL TO THE ADJACENT USER. THE PLANT HAS BEEN IN COORDINATION WITH THE CITY TO PROVIDE MORE ENHANCED BUFFERS ON THEIR SITE. SAFETY AND WELFARE ARE THE THREE MOST IMPORTANT TOPICS WHEN DESIGNING FOR A COMMUNITY. THE SAFETY OF CHILDREN GETTING TO AND FROM SCHOOL HAS ALWAYS BEEN A PRIORITY AND SINCE THE PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING, WE HAVE CONFIRMED THE LOCATION OF THE SCHOOL BUS STOP WITH ST.

LUCIE SCHOOLS. THE DROP OFF AND PICK UP IS LOCATED BEFORE THE GATES ALLOWING THE BUS AS IT TURNS ONTO SELVITZ ROAD. THE AREA INCLUDES COVERED SEATING WITH PEDESTRIAN PATH THAT LOOPS TO THE PARKING FOR PARENTS WHO WISH TO DROP THEIR KIDS OFF. PER DEVELOPMENT ORDER, OFF-SITE IMPROVEMENTS WILL BE MADE TO SELVITZ ROAD. OUR CIVIL TEAM HAS COORDINATED WITH ST. LUCIE COUNTY AND IS WORKING WITH THE CITY ON CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS.

IMPROVEMENTS WILL INCLUDE TURN LANES, MEDIANS, AND IMPROVED SIDEWALKS AND ANY OTHER INFRASTRUCTURE UPDATES THAT NEED TO BE MADE FOR THE FIRST SITE PLAN PHASE. OUR TRAFFIC TEAM IS ALSO COORDINATING WITH THE COUNTY AND HAS REVIEWED AND APPROVED THE FULL TRAFFIC REPORT. THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD RECOMMENDED APPROVAL FOR THE PHASE ONE SITE PLAN CONTINGENT ON A FEW OUTSTANDING ITEMS THAT HAVE SINCE BEEN MET AND DISCUSSED WITH STAFF. I HAVE SHARED MOST OF THE ITEMS ALREADY, BUT THE REMAINDER PROVIDED TO SATISFY THE REASON WE ARE HERE BEFORE YOU TODAY. THE REQUESTED PHASE ONE SITE PLAN NOT ONLY ALIGNS WITH THE APPROVED FUTURE LAND-USE AND APPROVED ZONING BUT IS CONSISTENT WITH SURROUNDING USES

[01:05:01]

TO GIVE FORT PIERCE A NEW NEIGHBORHOOD WITH RESIDENTS INVESTED IN THE CITY'S GROWTH. WE APPRECIATE STAFF SUPPORT AND AGREE WITH RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL WITH A LIST OF CONDITIONS PROVIDED FOR PHASE ONE SITE PLAN. I THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND THE TEAM IS HERE TO TAKE ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE . AND I ALSO ASKED TO RESERVE TIME AT THE END OF PUBLIC COMMENT TO RESPOND TO ANY PUBLIC OR COMMISSIONER CONCERNS.

THANK YOU. >> WE ALWAYS PROVIDE THAT, BUT I THINK YOU FOR ASKING FOR IT. THANK YOU FOR WORKING WITH THE MECHANICS OF THAT. APOLOGIZE. IT IS NOT YOUR FAULT. OKAY.

QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT. >> I ASKED THE DIRECTOR ABOUT THAT SECOND ACCESS ROAD. WHAT IS THE PLAN FOR THAT? WHAT IS IT THEREFORE IF IT IS NOT SERVICING THE RESIDENTIAL UNITS ?

>> SURE. IT IS JUST BEING IMPLEMENTED AT THE SAME TIME AS THE REST OF IT. IT'S GOING TO BE MORE OF A CONSTRUCTION ACCESS FOR THE RESIDENTIAL. BUT THAT WILL BE FOR THE FUTURE PHASES FOR THE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AND OFFICE. AND THE MULTIFAMILY AND SINGLE-FAMILY WILL BE COMING OFF OF THAT MAIN SOUTHERN ENTRANCE

OFF OF SELVITZ. >> SO ULTIMATELY WILL THAT BE OPENED UP TO RESIDENTIAL USE AS WELL ?

>> IT WILL JUST BE FOR THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT.

>> OTHER QUESTIONS ? >> I HAVE NO QUESTIONS.

>> I HAVE NO QUESTIONS. YOU HAVE ANSWERED THEM ALL IN YOUR PRESENTATION. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I'M GOING TO SEE IF THERE IS ANYONE ELSE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THIS ISSUE. ANYONE WHO WAS SWORN IN WANTS TO COME FORWARD. ANYONE ELSE? OKAY. DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE YOU WANT

TO SAY? >> I DON'T UNLESS THERE IS ANY

OTHER COMMISSIONER QUESTIONS. >> OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE WILL CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING AND COME BACK TO THE COMMISSION.

>> I DO HAVE ONE COMMENT I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE. THIS IS TO DIRECTOR FREEMAN. I THINK YOUR STAFF HAS DONE A GREAT JOB WITH THIS PLAN. THIS HAS BEEN A MASSIVE UNDERTAKING. AND THERE WAS A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF PUSHBACK FROM THE COMMUNITY AND FROM THE COMMISSION INITIALLY THAT I THINK YOU GUYS WORKED REALLY HARD. YOU HEARD WHAT WE HAD TO SAY AND YOU WENT ON AND FIXED IT. I APPRECIATE YOUR TEAM'S EFFORTS TO GET THAT DONE. THANKS TO YOUR TEAM FROM ME, PLEASE.

>> AND I WANT TO ECHO THAT . NOT ONLY THAT BUT ALSO IN TERMS OF DEVELOPER WHO IS LOOKING TO BRING A PROJECT TO OUR CITY AND TAKE AN AREA THAT IS DEVELOPING . A LOT GOING ON OUT THERE. BUT HAVING THE FORTITUDE TO WORK WITH STAFF AND MR. FREEMAN . AND HEARING ALSO FROM THE COMMUNITY BECAUSE THE COMMUNITY SHOWED UP.

THEY HAD GREAT CONCERNS. WE HAD GREAT CONCERNS KNOWING THE GREATER ROAD THAT IS OUT THERE AND COUNTY ROADS AND DITCHES AND TO BRING IN THIS AMOUNT OF PEOPLE TRYING TO NAVIGATE WAS NOT A SAFE THING. THERE ARE NOT MANY LIGHTS OUT THERE AT NIGHT.

I JUST WANT TO SAY THANK YOU TO BOTH OUR STAFF AND FOR THE DEVELOPER AND HIS TEAM FOR MODIFYING . GIVING US THE PUBLIC SAFETY. I KNOW THAT BUS STOP WAS INTEGRAL IN MAKING SURE THOSE KIDS DON'T HAVE TO DEAL WITH SELVITZ ROAD. WE WILL HAVE A SAFE WAY FOR THEM TO CATCH THE BUS .

>> I DO HAVE ONE FINAL COMMENT. I DON'T WANT TO GET TOO FAR INTO THE WEEDS OF FUTURE CONCEPTUAL PLANNING, BUT THIS PROJECT TIES IN DIRECTLY TO THE CREATION OF OUR JOBS CORRIDOR ON SOUTH KINGS HIGHWAY. WE NEED THIS TYPE OF PRODUCT . I SPOKE TO THE DEVELOPMENT TEAM. THEIR PRICE POINTS. IN THIS DAY AND AGE IT WOULD BE CONSIDERED WORKFORCE OR AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

WHATEVER MONIKER YOU WANT TO ATTACH TO THAT. I THANK THEM FOR THAT. LISTEN TO THAT AS I PAINTED THE PICTURE FOR THEM OF WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH IN THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE BECAUSE OUR JOBS CORRIDOR DOES NO GOOD IF WE DON'T HAVE A PLACE TO HAVE QUALITY HOUSING FOR EMPLOYEES WE WANT TO EMPLOY UP THERE. SO THIS PROJECT AMONGST A FEW OTHERS THAT ARE COMING ALONG THAT I HAVE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK AT ARE ONE OF THE LEGS OF THAT THREE-LEGGED STOOL CRITICALLY IMPORTANT TO ACCOMPLISH ALL OF THIS. SO I THINK THE DEVELOPMENT TEAM FOR THAT. AND THIS PROJECT IS GOING TO BE WELL RECEIVED IN THE COMMUNITY AND IS CRITICALLY IMPORTANT TO THE JOBS CORRIDOR THAT WE KNOW NEEDS TO BE UNDERTAKEN BY THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE ALONG WITH THOSE OTHER DEVELOPERS ON THE SOUTH KINGS

HIGHWAY CORRIDOR. >> AND I THINK THAT THE PROCESS THAT WE WENT THROUGH IN LETTING THE DEVELOPER KNOW WHAT OUR CONCERNS WERE AND HAVING THE DEVELOPER RESPOND I THINK I APPRECIATE THAT BECAUSE THIS IS A VERY CHALLENGING AREA. AND SELVITZ RIGHT NOW IS A VERY CHALLENGING ROAD AND I KNOW IT IS PRIORITY FOR THE COUNTY TO IMPROVE SELVITZ. SO EVERYBODY

[01:10:08]

KNOWS WHAT THEY ARE GETTING INTO IN TERMS OF WHAT IS SURROUNDING IT. SCHOOL ON ONE SIDE AND FT UA FACILITY . AND THE CONCRETE FACILITY. WE ALL KNOW. WE HAVE LOOKED AT THIS A LOT. DEVELOPERS LOOK AT IT A LOT AND I THINK WE HAVE DONE THE BEST OR THEY HAVE DONE THE BEST THAT WE CAN FOR THIS CHALLENGING AREA. SO WITH THAT , WE ARE READY FOR A MOTION.

>> I MOVE TO APPROVE. >> MOTION AND SECOND. CALL THE

ROLL, PLEASE. >> CLARIFICATION.

>> IT IS WITH THE CONDITIONS AS OUTLINED BY STAFF AND THE

PLANNING BOARD. >> COMMISSIONER BRODERICK.

[F. Quasi-Judicial Hearing - Review and approval of an application for a Conditional Use with New Construction by J Conroy LLC, located at 1606 Surfside Drive, Parcel Control Number: 2412-501-0131-000-6]

YOU. WELCOME TO FORT PIERCE. >> OKAY. OUR NEXT QUASIJUDICIAL HEARING IS FOR THE REVIEW AND HEARING AND APPROVAL OF APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE WITH NEW CONSTRUCTION BY J CONROY LLC LOCATED AT 1606 SURFSIDE DRIVE.

>> ALL RIGHT. YOU HAVE HEARD OF THE GUIDELINES FOR QUASIJUDICIAL. NOTICE AND ADVERTISING REQUIREMENTS BEEN

MET ? >> YES, MA'AM. THEY HAVE.

>> AND DID YOU LAST ASK COMMISSIONERS FOR EX PARTE

COMMUNICATIONS ? >> YES, MA'AM.

>> I HAVE HAD EMAILS AND PHONE CALLS REGARDING THIS.

>> COMMISSIONER JOHNSON ? >> YES, MA'AM. I HAVE HAD

EMAILS. >> AND MAYOR HUDSON.

>> I WATCHED THE PLANNING BOARD. I HAVE HAD EMAILS. I HAVE HAD CONVERSATIONS WITH NEIGHBORS. I HAD A CONVERSATION WITH THE PLANNING DIRECTOR. AND I DID A DRIVE-BY THAT STREET . FULL DISCLOSURE, I USED TO LIVE ON THAT STREET, SO I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH THAT STREET. OKAY. AND WOULD YOU LIKE TO SWEAR IN

THE WITNESSES ? >> YES, MA'AM. ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM, INCLUDING MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC, PLEASE STAND AND RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND . DO YOU SWEAR TO TELL THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH? THANK YOU

VERY MUCH. OKAY. PROCEED. >> GOOD EVENING, MADAM MAYOR, CITY COMMISSIONERS. ON BEHALF OF THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, WE BRING BEFORE YOU A CONDITIONAL USE.

>> WOULD YOU STATE YOUR NAME FOR THE RECORD ? WE HAVE TO GET USED TO IT. WE'LL HAVE TO GET USED TO IT.

>> THANK YOU MS. DRIVER. >> WE BRING BEFORE YOU CONDITIONAL USE WITH NEW CONSTRUCTION FOR 1606 SURFSIDE DRIVE WHERE THE APPLICANT IS J CONROY LLC PROPERTY OWNER DON MARTINEZ AND PARCEL I.D. IS 241-2501 0131 0006 . IN SUMMARY, THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO CONSTRUCT A THREE-STORY SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENCE TO A HEIGHT OF 35 FEET , WHICH REQUIRES CONSTRUCTION APPROVAL. HERE IS THE AREA LOCATION OF THE SITE SHOWING THAT THE SITE AREA IS APPROXIMATELY .54 ACRES . THE FUTURE LAND USE PROPERTY IS HUTCHISON ISLAND RESIDENTIAL.

HIR . THE ZONING IS SINGLE-FAMILY LOW-DENSITY. R 1 .

ACCORDING TO ARTICLE FIVE SECTION 125 -325, THE PURPOSE OF THE CONDITIONAL USE PROCESS IS TO ALLOW WHEN DESIRABLE USES THAT WOULD NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, APPEARANCE, CONVENIENCE IN THE GENERAL WELFARE. THE REQUEST IS FOR CONDITIONAL USE TO INCREASE THE MAXIMAL HEIGHT OF THE PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY TO 35 FEET ABOVE THE PLANE ELEVATION. STAFF CONSIDERS THAT THE REQUEST IS IN LINE WITH BUILDING HEIGHTS IN THE AREA AND TAKES ACCOUNT OF POTENTIAL FLOODING. THEREFORE, THE PROPOSAL WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, COMFORT, GOOD ORDER, APPEARANCE, CONVENIENCE IN THE GENERAL WELFARE OF THE AREA.

HEIGHT RESTRICTIONS FOR THE OVERLAY FOR SECTION 125-157 SUBSECTION 1C .2 HEIGHT . MAXIMUM HEIGHT MAY EXTEND UP TO 35 FEET IN THE R1, R 2, R 3 ZONING DISTRICTS SUBJECT TO CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL. AGAIN, THIS PROPERTY IS IN R1. STAYING IN THAT SECTION BUT MOVING DOWN TO C POINT 3 , CALCULATIONS OF THE HEIGHT. HEIGHT SHALL BE CALCULATED FROM THE ESTABLISHED

[01:15:02]

FEMA ELEVATION TO THE HIGHEST POINT OF THE ROOF, EXCLUDING NON-INHABITABLE ARCHITECTURE DESIGN ELEMENTS OF THE STRUCTURE. NON-INHABITABLE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN OF THIS STRUCTURE WOULD BE THE GARAGE. IF WE LOOK AT -- LET'S TAKE A MOMENT TO LOOK AT THE ILLUSTRATION. JUST TO GIVE AN IDEA OF WHAT I'M SPEAKING OF. SO WE HAVE THE EXISTING GRADING.

THEN WE HAVE THE FEMA BASE FLOOD ELEVATION, THE MEASUREMENT STARTS FROM THE FEMA BASE FLOOD ELEVATION. THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT IS DETERMINED THERE.

THE SITE PLAN DETAILS AS FOLLOWS IS PROPOSED TO BE A FOUR BEDROOM, FOUR BATHROOM WITH 4/2 BATHROOM SQUARE FOOTAGE . 4259 .

GROUND FLOOR. 3151. FIRST FLOOR, 2644 . SECOND FLOOR. 1616.

PROPOSED ELEVATOR FROM THE GROUND FLOOR TO THE TOP . FIRST AND SECOND FLOOR REAR DECKS. SECOND FLOOR FRONT BALCONY.

OFFICE AND CATWALK . ELEVATED POOL. EIGHT LIGHTS AND SIX PASS LIGHTS. 20 PLANTED TREES. 320+ GROUNDCOVERS AND SHRUBS. THE PLAN OUTLINES WHERE THE LIGHTING WILL BE PLACED ALONG THE PROPERTY. PLEASE NOTE THAT THE WILDLIFE CERTIFICATION WILL BE PLACED ON THE PROPERTY AS WELL. THERE IS A CONDITION THAT SPEAKS TO THAT. AND HERE IS THE LANDSCAPE PLAN DETAILING THE PROPOSED TREES AND SHRUBS TO BE PLANTED ON THE PROPERTY. AND HERE ARE A FEW NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES THAT ARE LOCATED ON SURFSIDE DRIVE TO KIND OF GIVE INSIGHT WHAT GROUND LEVEL LOOKS LIKE AS OPPOSED TO THE LIVING SPACE . HERE IS A PROPOSED RENDERING OF THE PROPOSED SINGLE FAMILY TO BE DEVELOPED. FLAT ROOF. DARK BROWN. WINDOWS WITH DOORFRAMES. CHINA WHITE.

SEPTEMBER 8, 2025 MEETING, THE PLANNING BOARD UNANIMOUSLY RECOMMENDED APPROVAL WITH THE FOLLOWING THREE CONDITIONS. THE DRIVEWAY CONSTRUCTION SHALL COMPLY WITH THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE CODE ENFORCEMENT STANDARD DRIVEWAY DETAIL AND BE COMPRISED OF CONCRETE PAVERS AND CONCRETE PER SECTION 32.9 PRIOR TO ISSUANCE OF FINAL CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. THE CITY LANDSCAPE AGREEMENT SHALL BE NOTARIZED AND SUBMITTED FOR FILING. THE PROPOSED LANDSCAPE PLAN HAS IMPROVEMENTS, INCLUDING TREES WITHIN THE CITY'S RIGHT-OF-WAY . ACKNOWLEDGMENT THAT ANY CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS DEEMED NECESSARY BY THE CITY HOMEOWNERS LANDSCAPE WILL BE REMOVED WITHOUT REPLACEMENT OF MATERIALS INSIDE. TODAY WITH THOSE THREE CONDITIONS WE ARE RECOMMENDING CITY COMMISSION APPROVED THE CONDITIONAL USE WITH ADDITIONAL CONDITION, WHICH WAS NUMBER FOUR , DURING THE TURTLE NESTING AND HATCHING SEASON FROM MARCH 1ST THROUGH OCTOBER 31ST. ALL EXTERIOR ARTIFICIAL LIGHTING FIXTRES SHALL BE MOUNTED AS LOW AS FEASIBLY POSSIBLE AND SHIELDED SO THAT THE SOURCE OF LIGHT IS NOT DIRECTLY VISIBLE FROM THE BEACH AND DOES NOT DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY ELIMINATE AREAS SEAWARD OF THE PRIMARY DUNE AND OTHERWISE BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH SECTION 16-82 UP TO CODE OF ORDINANCE REGULATING LIGHTING ON THE BEACH AND SEA TURTLE PROTECTION. ULTIMATE RECOMMENDATIONS WOULD BE TWO, ONE, RECOMMEND APPROVAL WITH ADDITIONAL OR MODIFIED CONDITIONS OR, TWO, RECOMMEND DISAPPROVAL. THANK YOU.

>> QUESTIONS OF STAFF? >> SO I WANT TO START WITH THE LAST POINT. SO THERE ARE REGULATIONS ON WHAT LIGHTS AND DENSITY AND ILLUMINATION THAT THEY CAN BE FOR PEOPLE BEACH SEA TURTLES. SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IS THERE. DURING THE NESTING HATCHING EXTERIOR LIGHT FIXTURES SHOULD BE MOUNTED AS LOW AS POSSIBLE. SO UNLESS THEY ARE MOUNTED, THEY WON'T BE CHANGED WHEN THEY ARE NOT NESTING, CORRECT?

>> THAT IN EFFECT MEANS THAT ALL OF THE LIGHTS, WHICH ARE NOT --

[01:20:03]

I THINK THE APPLICANT ON THE LIGHTING PLAN ACTUALLY DOES HIGHLIGHT ALL THEIR LIGHTS THEY ARE PROPOSING ARE GOING TO BE LOW NATURE COMPLIANT . WHAT THEY ARE PROPOSING DOES MEET THAT CONDITION. IT IS JUST A PROTECTION THAT IN THE FUTURE THE PROPERTY OWNER GOES IN AND PUTS LIGHTS HIGHER UP , THEY ARE FULLY AWARE THAT THEY CANNOT ILLUMINATE THOSE DURING CERTAIN

PERIODS. >> RIGHT. ALSO PROTECTING IF FOR WHATEVER REASON IF THERE WAS A CHANGE OF OWNERSHIP AND SOMEONE ELSE WANTED TO COME IN AND PUT DIFFERENT LIGHTS OUT THERE TO HAVE MORE OF A FESTIVE BACKYARD AND THAT KIND OF STUFF WOULD

PROTECT THE SEA TURTLES. >> PRECISELY. YOU KNOW, THAT IS WHAT THAT CONDITION IS AIMED AT. MAKING PEOPLE AWARE OF THAT.

>> OKAY. ONE OTHER QUICK QUESTION. AERIAL VIEW. I'M JUST CURIOUS TO THE NORTH OF THAT. SO I'M ASSUMING THAT IS NORTH ,

RIGHT? SO WHAT IS THAT? >> THOSE ARE TOWNHOMES.

>> THOSE ARE TOWNHOMES ? >> THEY ARE BEING BUILT.

>> OH, OKAY. AND WHAT LEVEL? SOME OF THE PICTURES THAT THESE TOWNHOUSES ARE BEING BUILT TO. I'M JUST CURIOUS.

>> THOSE ARE UNDER CONSTRUCTION RIGHT NOW. EQUIVALENT HEIGHT.

>> OKAY. THAT IS WHAT I THOUGHT. I REMEMBER THIS AREA. I WAS TRYING TO GET A BEARING ON WHAT AREA. SO I GOT IT. YES. OKAY.

>> I THOUGHT WE IMPROVED THE RAIN OVER THERE AND THE DRAINAGE. IS THAT COMING? DIDN'T WE JUST IMPROVE SOMETHING? ALL THIS WATER ON THE GROUND.

>> KEV FREEMAN FROM THE CITY PLANNING DEPARTMENT. I ACTUALLY VISITED THE LOCATION THIS MORNING TO GET AN IDEA OF WHAT IT MAY LOOK LIKE AFTER A RAIN EVENT ON SURFSIDE. THAT IS THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH , WHICH IS LOWER. AND WE HAVE RECEIVED CORRESPONDENCE FROM THAT OWNER . PRIMARILY YOU CAN SEE THE REASON FOR ESTABLISHING THE FLOOD LEVEL HEIGHTS THAT WE SEE IN THIS AREA IS IT IS VERY PRONE TO FLOODING AND THE REASON WHY WE ARE AND THE STATE AND BUILDING ARE ADVISING THAT -- WELL, WE HAVE TO RECOMMEND BUILDINGS ARE FINISHED TO A CERTAIN LEVEL . ANYTHING UNDER THAT LEVEL CANNOT BE INHABITABLE. AND I KNOW THE BUILDING DIRECTOR IS HERE TO EXPLAIN THAT MORE. BUT THERE ARE OFTEN FITTED OUT WITH FRANGIBLE, BREAKAWAY PANELS IN THE EVENT OF A SURGE . AND THAT FIRST FLOOR ACTUALLY BREAKS AWAY AND ALLOWS THE WATER TO RUN THROUGH, WHICH CAUSES LESS STRESS ON THE BUILDING ITSELF AS THE WALLS GIVE WAY TO THE POWER OF THE WATER.

>> SO WITH THAT BEING SAID , UNDER THESE CONSTRUCTIONS, WHEN IT COMES TO STORMWATER AND HANDLING STORMWATER , THE STATE STATUTES REGULATIONS TO OUR DEPARTMENT. WHO GIVES THAT CERTIFICATION THAT THIS -- WHO SIGNS OFF ON THAT TO PROTECT THE BUILDER AND THE NEIGHBORS WHEN IT COMES TO STORMWATER HERE?

>> I WILL LET THE BUILDING DIRECTOR ANSWER THAT FULLY.

RESPONSIBILITY OF BOTH THE STATE AND ENGINEER DESIGNING THAT AND ALSO THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT REVIEWS THAT.

>> MR. THOMAS, WERE YOU SWORN IN?

>> YES, I WAS. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YOU MAY

PROCEED. >> PAUL THOMAS. DIRECTOR OF BUILDING. COMMISSIONER JOHNSON, THE ANSWER TO THE QUESTION IS , IS THAT FOR A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE PROJECTS , THERE IS A REQUIREMENT FOR A CERTIFIED DRAINAGE . AND THIS IS JUST FOR STORMWATER. THAT IS VERY IMPORTANT TO UNDERSTAND BECAUSE NO ONE CAN CONTAIN STORM SURGE ON ANY PROPERTY. WE ARE TALKING JUST ABOUT STORMWATER. SO THE WAY THIS WORKS IS AN ENGINEER OR DESIGN PROFESSIONAL DESIGNS THIS DRAINAGE PLAN AND SIGNS IT AND SEALS IT AND THEN AT THE END HE CERTIFIES HIS WORK AND VERIFIES IT IS GOING TO BE SUFFICIENT. SO IF IT IS NOT SUFFICIENT -- IF IT DOESN'T WORK , THEN NOT ONLY THE HOMEOWNER BUT THE AGGRIEVED

[01:25:02]

PARTIES CAN SUE HIM. THAT IS THE WAY THAT IT IS DESIGNED.

>> OKAY. THAT IS WHAT I THOUGHT. AND I WANTED TO MAKE SURE PUBLICLY UNDERSTOOD THAT BECAUSE WHEN THESE ENGINEERS WHO SAY, HEY, THIS IS OUR DESIGN PLAN -- IT IS DESIGNED TO THIS.

SOMETIMES STUFF FAILS. BEST LAID PLANS SOMETIMES FAIL. AND I GUESS THEY HAVE A CERTAIN DEGREE OF CERTAINTY BASED ON A LEVEL OF RAINFALL. SO IF WE GET UNPRECEDENTED LEVEL -- I MEAN, HELP ME UNDERSTAND THE DEGREE OF THAT. LIKE LAST NIGHT OR WHAT WE HAVE BEEN GETTING. HOW DO WE -- WHAT LEVEL OF CERTAINTY DO WE HAVE THE PUBLIC FOR THEM TO UNDERSTAND?

>> SO, I CAN'T REALLY SPEAK TO THE AMOUNT OF RAINFALL OR FLOW OF VOLUME THAT THEY CONSTRUCT OR DESIGN .

>> IT IS PROBABLY SOME NUMBER THEY HAVE TO THAT IS ACCEPTABLE BY THE STATE TO GET THIS CERTIFICATION.

>> SO WHAT THEY DO IS THEY MAKE SURE THAT THE PROPERTY IS RATED IN CERTAIN WAYS SO IT DOES NOT DIRECT WATER AWAY FROM THE HOME.

ONE OF THE BIGGEST CONDUITS FOR STORMWATER ARE YOUR DOWNSPOUTS THAT ARE COMING FROM THE GUTTERS FROM THE STRUCTURE. SO TYPICALLY THOSE ARE ROUTED UNDERGROUND THROUGH DRAINAGE TILES TO THE STREET OR TO DIFFERENT AREAS ON THE PROPERTY . TYPICALLY THAT IS WHAT YOU ARE GRADING IT SO THAT THE WATER DOES NOT AFFECT YOUR NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES OR ADJACENT PROPERTIES. YOU ARE MAKING SURE THAT THE FLOW FROM YOUR LEADERS OR DOWNSPOUTS DOES NOT JUST FLOW DIRECTLY OFF . THAT IS TYPICALLY HOW IT IS

ACCOMPLISHED. >> OKAY. I'M DONE FOR NOW.

THANK YOU. >> COMMISSIONER BRODERICK.

>> LET'S GET INTO THE COMPLEXITIES OF THIS. YOU ARE IN THE HOT SEAT TONIGHT. THE FEMA FLOOD BASE LEVEL IS CALCULATED THROUGH FEMA AND PROVIDED TO THE ENGINEERS WHO HAVE TO THEN DETERMINE WHAT THE HEIGHT OF THE FINISHED FLOOR OF THE FIRST -- THE AREA THAT YOU RESIDE IN. THE HABITABLE SPACE. AS DIRECTOR FREEMAN IS INDICATING, YOU CAN PUT A GARAGE OR SOMETHING UNDERNEATH THAT. BUT THAT IS NOT WHAT WE REALLY DEALING WITH IN THIS APPLICATION. SO IF I HAVE TO BRING IN 100 TRUCKLOADS OF PHIL TO GET TO THAT LEVEL FROM MY FINISHED FIRST FLOOR FINISHED FLOOR SPACE, THAT IS AN ACCEPTABLE SOLUTION TO GET INTO THAT PROPER FEMA LEVEL. IS THAT CORRECT?

>> IN THIS INSTANCE, NO. THIS IS GOVERNED NOT BY FEMA BECAUSE ODDLY ENOUGH I THINK IF WE COULD GO BACK TO A DIFFERENT SLIDE, I MIGHT BE ABLE TO SHOW YOU SOME OF YOUR LINES. OKAY. LET'S GO.

LET'S GO BACK ONE MORE. OKAY. SO IF YOU LOOK HERE , YES. YOU SEE WHERE THE POOL OR THE ARCING -- THAT IS THE DECK FOR THE POOL. THAT IS A SECOND-FLOOR POOL. AND THEN IF YOU LOOK RIGHT, THE GRAY LINE THAT COMES . IT SAYS VE ELEVATION EIGHT.

YOU SEE THAT? RIGHT WHERE IT SAYS TOWARD THE BOTTOM.

EVERYTHING RIGHT CLOSE TO THE DUNE. EVERYTHING FROM THE DUNE TO THE OCEAN IS IN A HIGH VELOCITY THE ZONE. IF YOU FOLLOW THAT GRAY LINE AND YOU GO UP TOWARD LITTLE RED BOX, YOU SEE OVER TO THE LEFT IT SAYS FLOOD ZONE X. FLOOD ZONE X HAS NO REQUIREMENTS PER FEMA. RIGHT? HOWEVER , IN THIS STRUCTURE BEING CONSTRUCTED IN THE X ZONE. YOU WOULD THINK BY FEMA THERE ARE NO REQUIREMENTS. HOWEVER, BECAUSE THE CONSTRUCTION IS SEAWARD IN THE COASTAL CONSTRUCTION LINE , THERE ARE REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE SET BY THE DED. SO THE FLOOD ELEVATION -- THIS IS NOT A FLOOD ZONE. THIS IS NOT A FEMA FLOOD ZONE ELEVATION. THIS IS AN ELEVATION SET BY THE STATE OF FLORIDA AND ALL THE REGULATIONS ARE BASED OFF OF THE REQUIREMENTS FROM THE DEP. SO IN THIS CASE , THEY CANNOT BRING PHIL. YOU CANNOT PUT 16 FEET OF FILLABLE ON. BECAUSE HOW CAN YOU MAKE A DRAINAGE PLANT AND NOT AFFECT YOUR NEIGHBORS ? IT WOULD NEVER EVEN WORK. WHAT IS REQUIRED IS YOU HAVE AUGER CAST PILES, WHICH YOU DRILL DOWN UNTIL YOU HIT BEDROCK. SOMETIMES 20 FEET OR MORE. GRADE BEAM ON GRADE LEVEL. COLUMNS. AND THEN IF YOU GO BACK TO YOUR FIRST PICTURE IF WE CAN SCROLL BACK TO WHERE THE

[01:30:03]

BUILDING -- IF WE COULD ZOOM IN , AND WE GO DOWN TO THE BOTTOM OF THE STRUCTURE. IF YOU SEE WHERE IT SAYS FEMA-BASED FLOOD ELEVATION, THIS IS NOT A FEMA ELEVATION. THIS IS DEP ELEVATION, BUT IT WORKS SIMILARLY. YOU SEE THE ELEVATION LINE GOES UNDER WHAT WOULD BE THE SLAB. SO YOU ARE GOING TO BE ON COLUMNS. YOUR FIRST HORIZONTAL MEMBER. THE BOTTOM OF THAT HORIZONTAL MEMBER HAS TO BE ABOVE WHATEVER THE DEP ELEVATION IS. AND THE LOGIC BEHIND IT IS IF YOU HAVE ANY FLOW , ESPECIALLY IN A COASTAL AREA, YOU'RE GOING TO BE LOOKING AT STORM SURGE. STORM SURGE IS LIKE A BULLDOZER. WE HAVE SEEN FLOODS AND RIVERS. AND WE SEE THE VELOCITY WHEN THE OCEAN COMES IN. IT IS LIKE A BULLDOZER. SO ANY HORIZONTAL MEMBER IF IT IS IMPACTED IS GOING TO BE PUSHED . SO THE OBJECTIVE IS TO ELEVATE IT ABOVE THE FALL OF WATER SO THAT IT MINIMIZES THAT PUSH ON THE STRUCTURE. SO NOT VERY MUCH PUSH ON YOUR COLUMNS . YOU HAVE FRANGIBLE WALLS UNDERNEATH SO WHEN THEY HIT A CERTAIN LEVEL OF PRESSURE AND COLLAPSE, THEY BREAK UP ARE THEY EVEN HAVE FRANGIBLE FLOORS WHERE THE FLOORS BREAK UP . THEY ARE DESIGNED NOT TO KNOCK OVER YOUR COLUMNS. SO THIS IS THE SCIENCE BEHIND WHAT IS GOING ON. SO IN THIS PARTICULAR AREA OR THIS PARTICULAR NEIGHBORHOOD, THE DEP ELEVATION IS TYPICALLY 16.46 FEET . IF YOU ARE STANDING ON THIS PROPERTY AND YOU LOOK AT THE PROPERTY APPRAISER , IT SAYS RIGHT NOW THAT GROUND IS AT SIX FEET . SO THE 16.4 FEET ELEVATION IS JUST GOING TO BE ABOUT 10 1/2 FEET ABOVE WHERE YOUR FEET ARE ON THE GROUND.

THAT IS WHERE YOUR FIRST FLOOR ELEVATION WOULD BEGIN. AND THEN EVERYTHING THAT IS UNDER THAT 16.4 FEET CAN BE HABITABLE. YOU CAN HAVE PARKING. YOU CAN HAVE STORAGE. YOU CAN DO WHATEVER YOU LIKE. BUT YOU CANNOT HAVE OPEN SPACE. THE SPACE STARTS ABOVE

THAT 16.4 FEET. >> IN THAT SAME LINE OF DISCUSSION, FIRST OFF, THE CODE IS 28 FEET . CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL GETS A MAXIMUM OF 35 FEET BECAUSE I THINK IT WAS COMMENTED ON THAT THE CODE IS 35 FEET. IT IS ACTUALLY 28 WITH CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL OF 35. SO DIRECTOR THOMAS, THAT 28 FOOT HEIGHT IN THE CODE STARTS AT THAT FIRST FLOOR FINISH GRADE,

CORRECT ? >> 16.4 FEET.

>> 16.4 FEET UP IS WHERE THE 20 FOOT CALCULATION STARTS FROM.

JUST TO BE CLEAR ON THIS, THIS HAS BEEN A CONTENTION ON A VARIETY OF STRUCTURES . SOUTH BEACH. ELEVATION SHAFTS ARE NOT CALCULATED INTO THAT 28-FOOT OR 35-FOOT MAXIMUM HEIGHT. THOSE ARE CONSIDERED ANCILLARY TO THE HEIGHT REQUIREMENT. IT CANNOT BE LIVING SPACE. HAVE A DECK UP THERE WITH A SURROUNDING GLASS RAILWAY OR SOMETHING OF THIS NATURE. THAT IS NOT CONSIDERED PART OF THAT CALCULATION EITHER. I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR ON THIS THAT THOSE EXTENDED PORTIONS OF THE BUILDING. AN ELEVATOR SHAFT OR WHATEVER. NOT LIVING STATION PART OF THAT CALCULATION.

>> THAT IS CORRECT. >> OKAY. I THINK I'VE GOT IT CLEAR NOW IN MY MIND WHERE THAT HEIGHT STARTS FROM AND WHERE IT

TERMINATES. >> AND THAT IS DEP, YOU SAID.

>> YES. >> AND SO UNDERNEATH THAT 16 FEET IS WHERE YOU HAVE -- WHERE THOSE GARAGES ARE. AND YOU SAY THAT LOOKS SOLID TO ME. BUT YOU SAID THAT IT IS NOT MEANT TO BE

SOLID, RIGHT? >> MADAM MAYOR , THIS STRUCTURE -- THE WAY THAT IT LOOKS, IT LOOKS SOLID. BUT IT IS DESIGNED ON COLUMNS. SO THE STRUCTURAL MEMBERS THAT SUPPORT IT ARE ALL COLUMNS. OR THEY WILL BE. THEY ARE REQUIRED TO BE. ALL OF THE WALLS TYPICALLY ARE GOING TO BE FRANGIBLE SO THAT THE WATER ONCE IT HITS WILL BLOW OUT THE WALLS OR THEY CAN HAVE FLOOD IN CERTAIN CASES IF THIS WERE IN A NORMAL SITUATION, FLOOD VENTS WOULD ALLOW THE WATER TO BE ABLE TO ESCAPE. SO THIS APPEARS TO BE A SOLID STRUCTURE. BUT IT IS DESIGNED SO THAT IN A MASSIVE

[01:35:04]

EVENT STORM SURGE THAT IT WOULD JUST FLOW THROUGH THE STRUCTURE.

FLOW AROUND THE COLUMNS AND IT POTENTIALLY WOULD JUST .

>> BUT I WOULD THINK NOT BEING AN ENGINEER -- JUST BEING A REGULAR PERSON -- THAT THE STORM SURGE WATER WOULD GO AROUND IT AND GO MORE ON THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES.

>> WELL, THAT MAY BE TRUE UNTIL IT HITS A CERTAIN PRESSURE. SO YOU HAVE HYDROSTATIC PRESSURE, WHICH IS WATER STANDING STILL.

AND THEN YOU HAVE HYDRODYNAMIC, WHICH IS WATER MOVING. SO UNTIL YOU GET ENOUGH WATER TO PUSH THE WALL OVER, IT MAY DIVERT ENOUGH.

BUT THE QUESTION WAS ASKED IN AN EMAIL ABOUT WALLS OR SWELLS.

THEY MAY BE PUSHED OVER AS WELL. THE REASON YOU HAVE TO DRILL DOWN AND NOT JUST BUILD ON COLUMNS IS THAT STORM SURGE HAS THE EFFECT OF SCOURING . SO THAT IS WHY THEY DRILL DOWN TWENTYSOMETHING FEET BECAUSE PROBABLY 10 FEET THEY GET SCOURED OUT AND SO YOU HAVE 10, 13 FEET UNDER THE GROUND THAT STILL ANCHORS THE BUILDING. THAT IS THE DESIGN TECHNOLOGY TO PREVENT A COLLAPSE. BUT WHEN YOU HAVE A SLAB ON BUILDING OR IF YOU HAVE A WALL , STORM SURGE IS LIKE A BULLDOZER. SO THEY CAN KNOCK THE WALL OVER INTO THE ADJACENT GRADE

>> I SAW THE HOUSES ON THE OUTER BANKS OF NORTH CAROLINA. AND WHAT HAPPENED TO THEM? SO YEAH.

>> THOSE WERE ON PILES. >> WERE THEY ON PILES? OKAY. I DON'T KNOW HOW FAR DOWN THEY WERE.

>> OBVIOUSLY WEREN'T TO THE SAME DEGREE.

>> RIGHT. >> 28 FEET UNDER GRADE. AND THEN YOU BUILD 16 FEET ON TOP OF THAT.

>> SO THE HOUSE. THIS PICTURE DOES NOT SHOW THAT THE HOUSE NEXT DOOR TO THE SOUTH IS OVER 50 YEARS OLD. AND, YOU KNOW, THAT PROPERTY OWNER WOULD BE VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THIS AND HOW EVEN JUST THE STORM WATER WOULD BE ARRANGED. IT LOOKS TO ME LIKE IT TAKES UP SO MUCH OF THE FOOTPRINT. I DON'T KNOW WHERE THE STORM WATER WOULD GO OR HOW IT WOULD BE -- YOU KNOW, HOW IT WOULD BE ARRANGED. BUT I'M ALSO CONCERNED. FLAT ROOF IN FLORIDA WENT OUT OF STYLE A LONG TIME AGO BECAUSE OF RAINFALL AND THE SALT AND EVERYTHING. SO I'M CONCERNED ABOUT HOW THE STORM WATER IS GOING TO GATHER ON A FLAT ROOF

LIKE THAT. >> TYPICALLY THERE ARE DRAINS THAT COME OUT OF THE SIDE OR THEY HAVE ROOF DRAINS SO THEY SLOPE THE ROOF AND IT COMES TO DRAINS. IF FOR INSTANCE WHERE IT IS NESTED UP AND THEY PLUG UP THE DRAINS OR WHATEVER HAPPENED AND THE DRAINS GOT PLUGGED, THERE IS A DESIGN FEATURE FOR FLAT ROOFS WHERE YOU HAVE EMERGENCE A DRAIN THAT IS A LITTLE HIGHER BUT YOU ONLY ALLOW THE WATER TO POND FOR SO MUCH AND THEN IT WOULD GO DOWN THE AUXILIARY DRAIN .

>> AND SO YOU ARE SAYING THAT THIS WILL HAPPEN IN THIS PARTICULAR -- WILL THIS BE PART OF WHAT --

>> TYPICAL CONSTRUCTION PRACTICE .

>> YES. >> OKAY. ONE OF THE THINGS -- I MEAN, I KNOW WE ARE TALKING ABOUT HEIGHT RIGHT NOW. SO THE GROUND FLOOR IS GOING TO BE AT LEAST 16 FEET . THE GROUND FLOOR

THAT IS HABITABLE. >> YES, MA'AM.

>> SO THAT IS 16.4 FEET ABOVE SEA LEVEL . LIKE I SAID, IF YOU WERE TO WALK ON THAT SITE RIGHT NOW, YOU ARE ALREADY SIX FEET ABOVE SEA LEVEL AND THEN 10 1/2 FEET ABOVE THAT.

>> AND THEN THE DIRT THAT WAS PUT THERE BEFORE . HAS THAT BEEN LEVEL NOW AS IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE ?

>> NOT THAT I HAVE SEEN YET. >> THERE IS, LIKE , ALMOST AN

ARTIFICIAL DUNE IN THE BACK. >> AND SO ONCE THEY START

CONSTRUCTION. >> WHAT HAPPENS TO THAT ?

>> SO INITIALLY WHEN THEY WERE DIGGING THE FOUNDATION FOR THE PROPERTY TO THE NORTH -- THE TOWNHOUSES -- THEY SAID, WE CAN USE THIS FILL BECAUSE WE WANT TO GRADE OUR PROPERTY. THEY NEEDED A PERMIT FOR THAT. WE CITED THEM. SO THEY DID COME IN AND PULL THE PERMIT . AND THEIR PERMIT WAS APPROVED. IT IS CALLED A FLOOD DEVELOPMNT PERMIT. AND IT JUST ASSURES THAT

[01:40:01]

THEY ARE GOING TO UTILIZE THAT. AND THEY ASSURED US THE PURPOSE OF THAT FILL BEING ON SITE IS TO BE ABLE TO ACCOMPLISH THE GRADING NECESSARY TO HAVE THEIR FLOOD DEVELOPMENT AND THEIR CERTIFIED DRAINAGE PLAN. AS IT IS RIGHT NOW, EVERYTHING IS KIND OF JUST UNEVEN. AND SO THEY WILL GRADE IT OUT. THEY WILL PUT THE SLOPES THAT THEY NEED IN ALL OF THOSE DESIGN FEATURES. THAT IS THEIR BASE MATERIAL FOR THAT. WHATEVER IS LEFT OVER, THEY HAVE SAID THAT THEY WILL REMOVE FROM THE SITE.

>> AND YOU HAVE MENTIONED THE WALL. THERE IS A WALL TO THE NORTH. AND SO , DOES A WALL HELP KEEPING RUNOFF AND STORM SURGE OFF OF THE PROPERTY? WOULD IT HELP THE PROPERTY ?

>> SO THE ANSWER TO THAT IS YES AND NO. SO PERHAPS IN CERTAIN --

>> IT DEPENDS. >> FOR INSTANCE, IN AN EVENT LIKE WE HAVE, WE CALL THIS BLUE SKY FLOODING. THERE IS NO DISASTER. SO WE JUST HAVE AN INUNDATION OF RAIN. WOULD THAT POTENTIALLY KEEP THAT FROM AFFECTING THE ADJACENT PROPERTY? YEAH. OBVIOUSLY IT WILL. IF YOU HAVE A TRUE STORM SURGE LIKE WE WENT TO SANIBEL ISLAND , THEY HAD SIX FEET OF WATER FLOOD THE ENTIRE ISLAND JUST BULLDOZED THE WHOLE THING. IT MAY NOT STAND.

IT DEPENDS HOW IT IS ENGINEERED. BUT NOTHING REALLY -- UNLESS YOU GO 20 FEET DOWN, TYPICALLY NOTHING -- STORM SURGE TAKES ASPHALT OFF OF ROADS. IT SCOURS THE EARTH. SO DEPENDING ON WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DESIGN AGAINST, STORM SURGE . THAT IS WHY IT IS NOT A REQUIREMENT. IF THEY THOUGHT IT WOULD WORK, THEY WOULD REQUIRE YOU TO BUILD WALLS , BUT IT IS NOT IN ANY FEMA REQUIREMENT, AND IT IS CERTAINLY NOT IN ANY BUILDING CODE AS REQUIREMENT BECAUSE GIVEN THE SITUATION IT JUST PUTS MORE DEBRIS IN THE WATER TO AFFECT ADJACENT PROPERTIES AND

STRUCTURES. >> WELL, YOU CAN SEE WHY THEY

ARE CONCERNED. >> ABSOLUTELY.

>> AND SOME OF THE OTHER STRUCTURES THAT ARE SHOWN THAT ARE HIGHER THAN THE 28 FEET HAVE MITIGATING FEATURES. THEY ARE NOT ALL ONE BLOCK LIKE THAT. THEY ARE KIND OF STAGGERED .

SOME OF THEM. SO THAT IS ALL I HAVE FOR MR. THOMAS. ANYONE ELSE

? >> I THINK HE HAS ANSWERED ALL

MY QUESTIONS. >> DON'T GO TOO FAR IN SOMEBODY

ELSE HAS ONE. >> MADAM MAYOR, I JUST HAD A FEW QUICK QUESTIONS TO CLEAN UP THE RECORD. ESTHER THOMAS, WHEN YOU SAY DEP, DO YOU MEAN THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT

PROTECTION? >> YES, MA'AM.

>> YOU KEEP USING THE WORD, SCOURING, AND MAKING A HEAD MOTION. THE RECORD DOES NOT PICK UP THE HEAD MOTION. CAN YOU VERBALLY EXPLAIN TO US WHAT SCOURING IS?

>> SCOURING IS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN IMAGINE BEING AT THE BEACH AND HAVING A FIVE GALLON BUCKET OF WATER AND DUMPING IT INTO THE SAND AND THE SAND LIQUEFIES INAUDIBLE ] SCOURING HAPPENS WHEN WATER IS TRAVELING. IT HITS A STRUCTURE AND THEN IT JUST DOES THAT TO THE FOUNDATION. IT DIGS DOWN. IT POURS DOWN. SO YOU COULD HAVE A STRUCTURE WHERE YOUR SUBTERRANEAN PILES GO DOWN 20 FEET AND AFTER A STORM EVENT, 10 FEET OF THE PILE HAS BEEN EXPOSED DUE TO SCOURING.

>> AND THEN FINAL QUESTION. MADAM MAYOR ASKED YOU QUESTIONS ABOUT THE HOUSES IN NORTH CAROLINA. I THINK YOU ALL KNOW WHAT YOU ARE REFERRING TO, BUT THE RECORD WON'T. ARE YOU REFERRING TO HOUSES WITH STORM SURGE THAT JUST COLLAPSED?

>> IT IS IMPORTANT TO REALIZE THOSE HOUSES -- PILES BUT NOT ACCORDING TO THE CURRENT STANDARD WHERE YOU HAVE TO DRILL

DOWN TO HIT BEDROCK. >> THANK YOU.

>> THAT WAS IT, MADAM MAYOR. THANK YOU.

>> TYPICALLY THEY ARE CALLED AUGER CAST PILES. IT GOES DOWN AND DRILLS IN AND THEN IT STAYS. AUGER CAST PILES DRILL DOWN AND THEN THEY POUR CONCRETE INTO THE HOLE AS THE SAND COMES OUT. AND THEN THEY PUT THE STEEL CAGE DOWN INTO THE HOLE SO IT MAKES

-- IT IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT. >> YOU ARE OUR RESILIENCE

PERSON, RIGHT? POINT PERSON. >> FLOODPLAIN ADMINISTRATOR.

THIS IS ALSO A FUNCTION OF . >> RIGHT. AND SO AT SOME POINT ,

[01:45:03]

I MEAN, YOU ARE TALKING TO US ABOUT WHAT WE NEED TO DO TO PRESERVE OUR CITY AND PRESERVE . AT SOME POINT WE'VE GOT TO COME TO GRIPS WITH THE FACT THAT THINGS ARE NOT -- SHOULD NOT BE

BUILT . >> IF I MAY SPEAK TO THAT. MANY CITIES IN FLORIDA HAVE TO DO WITH WHAT THEY CALL PRE-FIRM CONSTRUCTION. FIRM EQUALS FLOOD INSURANCE . SO WHEN YOU SAY YOU HAVE A FLOOD ZONE OR YOU HAVE A FLOOD MAP, THAT IS FROM THE NFIP , WHICH IS A BRANCH OF FEMA. AND IT SETS THE ELEVATIONS. SO WHEN WE SAW IT, IT SAYS VE EIGHT. THAT IS ON THE FLOOD MAP. RIGHT? SO THIS STRUCTURE THAT IS IN QUESTION WAS BUILT BEFORE THERE WAS A FLOOD MAP. BEFORE THERE WERE FLOOD ELEVATIONS. SLAP ON GRADE. SO UNFORTUNATELY , IT IS INHERENTLY AT RISK. IF ALL OF THE DATA RECOMMENDS THAT YOU BUILD TODAY AT 16.4 FEET AND YOUR STRUCTURE IS AT SIX FEET , NOT GOOD. IF YOU GET A 10 FOOT STORM SURGE, YOUR WHOLE HOUSE MAY BE UNDERWATER OR WORSE . I DON'T WANT TO BE A CALAMITY , BUT THAT IS THE UNFORTUNATE REALITY. SO RESILIENCY GOES, HOW DO YOU MITIGATE THE RISK FOR YOURSELF ? SO IN THE PAST, IF THERE WAS A FLOOD EVENT AND YOUR HOME WAS DAMAGED AND LET'S SAY IT WAS SUBSTANTIAL DAMAGE , THEN YOU COULD APPLY FOR GRANTS. FEMA WOULD MAKE GRANTS AVAILABLE BUT ONLY AFTER THERE WAS DAMAGE. RECENTLY, THERE IS A PROGRAM CALLED ELEVATE FLORIDA. AND DEPENDING ON YOUR RISK, THERE ARE GRANTS THAT ARE AVAILABLE NOW SO THAT YOU DON'T HAVE TO HAVE THE DAMAGE. BUT IF YOU ARE ABLE TO -- YOU KNOW, THE LEVEL OF MATCHING KIND OF DEPENDS ON THE RISK . HAVE YOU BEEN REPETITIVELY DAMAGED BEFORE IN THE PAST? MAYBE THEY COVER THE FULL COST. THEY MAY COVER 25% AND YOU COME UP WITH 75. IT MAY BE 50-50. BUT THE GOOD THING IS THAT IT IS SOMETHING THAT HAS BEEN MADE AVAILABLE NOW. IT HAS BEEN SO POPULAR THAT THEY ARE

RUNNING OUT OF MONEY. >> OF COURSE.

>> ESPECIALLY LIKE WE SAID WE WENT TO SANIBEL AND WHOLE NEIGHBORHOODS ARE BEING ELEVATED. SO THE MONEY GOES QUICKLY. IT IS NOT INEXPENSIVE TO ELEVATE A STRUCTURE. AND ESPECIALLY IF YOU THINK ABOUT IT , ELEVATING A STRUCTURE IN THAT AREA MEANS YOU HAVE TO GO WITH PILES AND EVERYTHING THEY ARE DOING NEXT DOOR YOU HAVE TO DO HERE. YOU CANNOT JUST PUT BRICKS UP AND ELEVATE IT THAT WAY. IT IS A PROCESS.

>> DO YOU BELIEVE THAT THE SURROUNDING BUILDINGS ARE MORE AT RISK WITH AN ADDITIONAL STRUCTURE HERE?

>> I BELIEVE THAT IF YOU HAVE A STORM SURGE EVENT THERE IS NOTHING THAT THEY CAN DO. PRE-FIRM STRUCTURE. BUILD SLAB ON GRADE AND YOU BUILD A HURRICANE AND THAT STORM SURGE COMES OVER THE DOING, THERE'S NOTHING ANYBODY CAN DO.

>> IT DID IN 2004. I DON'T KNOW WHICH ONE.

>> IT WAS 6'4" WAS THE FLOOD LEVEL.

>> I DON'T KNOW WHICH ONE. >> SO REALLY THE ONLY WAY TO PROTECT YOURSELF FROM THAT TYPE OF EVENT IS ELEVATING.

>> ELEVATION. BUT OTHER THAN THAT , THAT STRUCTURE HAS TO HAVE ITS OWN RUNOFF AND SHOULD NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT ITS

NEIGHBORS. SHOULD NOT. >> ABSOLUTELY NOT. CORRECT.

>> AND TO THAT, MADAM MAYOR, I THOUGHT HE SPOKE THAT THERE ARE PROTECTIONS IF THAT IS THE CASE BECAUSE CERTIFIED ENGINEERS SAID THAT THIS SHOULD NOT BE THE CASE. SO I THINK THAT IS THE FAILSAFE THAT IS THERE . ALL PARTIES INVOLVING A PERSON THAT MAY CAUSE IT BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY IF YOU BUILD SOMETHING THERE AND THAT RUNOFF -- REGULAR RAIN OR WHATEVER. THAT CAUSES AN ADVERSE -- SOME TYPE OF ADVERSE EFFECT UPON NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES OR WHATEVER. THEN THEIR ABILITY TO HANDLE THEIR STORMWATER HAS FAILED . AND THAT IS HOW I INTERPRET IT. SO THERE IS A LOT GOING INTO THESE PROFESSIONAL CERTIFICATIONS OF ENGINEERS THAT BUILD STUFF. AND SO THAT IS WHERE WE ARE. THAT IS WHERE I'M

AT. >> DIRECTOR FREEMAN COMMENTED HE WAS OUT ON THE PROPERTY ON SURFSIDE THIS MORNING . AND THAT

[01:50:05]

WAS FROM RAINWATER. SEAWAY DRIVE WAS FLOODED FROM SALTWATER INTRUSION UP THROUGH THE SURFACE WATER DRAINAGE SYSTEM NEXT TO THE PELICAN YACHT CLUB. THAT IS WHERE HISTORICALLY. BUT WHAT YOU OBSERVED TODAY WAS RAINWATER BECAUSE MY NEIGHBORHOOD WAS

DROWNED LIKE THAT TOO. >> I HAVE A QUESTION FOR MR. FREEMAN. SO, THE TRC SAID THAT WASTEWATER WAS NOT AVAILABLE FOR THIS PROPERTY. AND I TALKED TO FPUA TODAY . FROM 1706 NORTH TO SOMEWHERE ON OCEAN DRIVE , WASTEWATER IS NOT AVAILABLE .

>> CANNOT GET SEWER HOOKUPS? >> NO.

>> SO UNLESS -- SO THE PROPERTY NEXT DOOR BECAUSE IT IS MULTI FAMILY IS HAVING TO MAKE SOME ARRANGEMENT FOR THAT. SO THIS WOULD NOT BE -- THIS WOULD NOT BE ACCEPTABLE. THERE IS NO PLACE FOR SEPTIC HERE. RIGHT? AND IT IS IN THE TRC BACKGROUND. AND I CHECKED WITH FPUA TODAY. SO THAT CONCERNS ME A GREAT DEAL.

>> REALLY. THEY CAN'T BUILD IT. >> WELL, UNLESS THEY PAY A LOT OF MONEY TO HOOK UP TO THE NEAREST , WHICH IS AT 1706. AND SOMEWHERE ELSE ON DRIVE TO THE NORTH.

>> NO KIDDING. >> SO I THINK THAT NEEDS TO BE

ADDRESSED . >> I WOULD LIKE TO GET -- THAT IS A SERIOUS ISSUE. AND THEY ARE NOT GOING TO RUN AN INDEPENDENT SEWER LINE OUT OCEAN AVENUE. THAT IS A BIT OF A HIKE . SO THAT DOES NOT SEEM -- FOUR-UNIT BUILDING NEXT DOOR I'M ASSUMING

IS LOOKING INTO SEWER. >> DO SOMETHING SPECIAL.

>> I THINK THIS HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH CONDITIONAL USE OF HEIGHT. BUT CLEARLY THAT IS A SIGNIFICANT ISSUE THAT WE NEED ANSWERS ON THAT BEFORE . CANDIDLY, ONE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE OTHER. BUT THAT TRUMPS THE HEIGHT ISSUE.

>> BUT IT IS IN THE DRC BACKUP. WASTEWATER NOT AVAILABLE. I DID CALL FPUA TODAY. THE BUILDING THAT IS GOING ON NEXT DOOR IS MAKING SOME SORT OF ARRANGEMENTS, WHICH THIS HOUSE MAY BE ABLE TO TAP INTO. BUT THAT IS NOT SOMETHING. I DON'T

KNOW ALL THE TECHNICALITIES. >> MADAM MAYOR, WITH THAT LEVEL OF SPECIFICATION COME WITH -- RIGHT NOW WE HAVE THE CONCEPT OF HEIGHT. WOULDN')T THAT COME WITH THE PLANNING? THE FINAL PLAT AND

ALL OF THAT? >> THE PERMIT.

>> YOU HAVE NO SOIL HOOK UP AND YOU'RE NOT GOING TO BE RUNNING

A TRUCK. >> IF I MAY SPEAK TO THAT.

>> YEAH. MR. THOMAS. >> MADAM MAYOR, COMMISSIONERS.

WHAT IS HAPPENING IN MANY AREAS OF THE CITY CURRENTLY UTILIZING SEPTIC SYSTEMS AND THEY ARE TRYING TO DECOMMISSION THOSE IN CITY LIMITS IS THAT THEY ARE INSTALLING SYSTEMS AND THE FPUA IS DOING THIS. THEY ARE INSTALLING GRINDER PUMPS.

>> IT IS LIKE A MINI LIFT STATION.

>> EXACTLY. IT IS A FORCED MAINE. IT PUMPS IT TO THE NEAREST SEWER MAIN. SO I WAS NOT -- CERTAINLY I WAS NOT AWARE OF THAT BECAUSE MY UNDERSTANDING IS WITHIN THE CITY LIMITS YOU HAVE

TO BE. >> IT GOES BACK TO THE LATE '70S. FOR SOME REASON THAT LITTLE AREA DID NOT GET COVERED.

>> WOW. >> TROUBLING.

>> TROUBLING. YEAH. >> IT IS BIZARRE.

>> SO SOMETHING WE NEED TO KNOW ABOUT.

>> MADAM MAYOR ? >> YES.

>> I DID PREPARE MEMORANDUM FOR THE COMMISSION REGARDING PHYSICALLY ENCAPSULATING EVERYTHING THAT I SPOKE TO TODAY. I DIDN'T -- I WAS DIRECTED BY OUR CITY CLERK THAT SINCE THIS WAS QUASIJUDICIAL IT MAY BE BEST TO NOT PRESENT THIS.

BUT IF YOU ALL WOULD BE INTERESTED IN HAVING A COPY OF THIS AS BACKGROUND INFORMATION, I CAN GIVE IT TO THE CLERK OR IF

[01:55:03]

WHAT I HAVE SAID IS SUFFICIENT, IT IS UP TO YOU.

>> SUBMITTED INTO THE RECORD. >> MADAM MAYOR? MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION? IF IT IS GOING TO BE GIVEN TO THE COMMISSION TO REVIEW, I THINK IT SHOULD BE SUBMITTED INTO THE RECORD AND SO THAT IT IS CLEAR THAT YOU HAVE REVIEWED IT SINCE NOW IS THE FIRST TIME THOMAS WILL NEED TO READ IT IN INSTEAD OF EACH OF

YOU READING IT. HOW LONG IS IT? >> BASICALLY A PAGE AND A HALF.

WE CAN WORRY ABOUT THIS LATER. >> HAVE YOU COVERED EVERYTHING THAT IS IN IT? DO YOU WANT TO TAKE A SECOND TO REVIEW AND SEE IF THERE IS ANYTHING ELSE YOU FEEL YOU NEED TO TELL THEM?

>> I THINK EVERYTHING IS COVERED.

>> I DO HAVE A FOLLOW-UP QUESTION. CITY ATTORNEY. IN THE PROCESS OF THIS HEARING, WE HAVE BEEN BROUGHT A RATHER UNUSUAL PIECE OF INFORMATION RELATIVE TO SOMETHING THAT HAS REALLY NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS HEARING . ARE WE IN A POSITION TO BE ACTIONABLE ON THAT HERE SINCE THAT IS NOT THE TOPIC OF THIS

QUASIJUDICIAL HEARING? >> MADAM MAYOR? MISSIONERS , YOU ARE REFERRING TO THE WASTEWATER ISSUE. SO IF I UNDERSTOOD THE TESTIMONY CORRECTLY, THAT WOULD BE RESOLVED AT A LATER ISSUE.

THE APPLICATION THAT IS BEFORE YOU TOO MY UNDERSTANDING IS SIMPLY A CONDITIONAL USE RELATED TO THE HEIGHT. SO I WOULD -- MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE THAT UNLESS THERE IS TESTIMONY THAT SAYS THE WASTEWATER ISSUE IS RELATED TO THE HEIGHT, THEY

WOULD BE TWO SEPARATE ISSUES. >> OKAY.

>> I'M ASSUMING THIS WASTEWATER -- NOT TO BELABOR THE FACT -- WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE ANALYZED WHEN IT GETS IN THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT. SEWER LINE HOOK UP. FORCE MAIN. PUMP. IT'S GOT TO BE ADDRESSED . YOU'RE NOT GOING TO ISSUE A PERMIT WITHOUT A SOLUTION. SO THERE IS A SAFETY VALVE.

>> YEAH. ABSOLUTELY. >> OKAY.

>> THANK YOU, PAUL. THANK YOU MR. THOMAS. ANYTHING ELSE OF STAFF? SO I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT NOW. WELCOME.

GOOD EVENING. >> MY NAME IS JOE MCCARTY. I AM THE ARCHITECT FOR DON AND DAMIEN MARTINEZ, WHO ARE TRYING TO BUILD A HOUSE ON SURFSIDE DRIVE .

>> DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF BEFORE YOU START? OKAY.

>> SO, YOU AND YOUR INTRODUCTION SAY WE MEASURE FROM FEMA FLOODPLAIN. ALSO MR. THOMAS MEASURE FROM FEMA FLOODPLAIN.

THESE PLANS WERE MEASURING FROM THE GRADE , WHICH IS SIX FEET.

WE HAVE NOT CHANGED GRADE WITH YOUR CONCERNS OF THE NEIGHBOR AND FLOODING OF THE NEIGHBORS. AND ALSO, MR. CHARLES GAVE A VERY GOOD EXPLANATION OF HOW THESE HOUSES ARE CONSTRUCTED.

THEY ARE LEGS BASIC THE. IN STORM EVENT , THE WALLS GO AWAY AND YOU ARE STANDING ON LEGS IN A WAY THAT CANNOT HIT ANY HORIZONTAL STRUCTURE. THE MINIMUM WAVE HEIGHT IS 16.4 AS

MR. THOMAS SAID. >> MADAM MAYOR ?

>> EXCUSE ME. ONE SECOND, SIR. I DO APOLOGIZE, BUT I'M GOING TO JUMP IN BECAUSE WE ARE ON THE PORTION OF QUESTIONS FOR STAFF AND WE ARE MOVING TO TESTIMONY FROM THE APPLICANT. SO IF WE COULD BRING IT BACK TO IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF.

>> THAT IS THE ONLY QUESTION. WE DON'T MEASURE FROM FEMA, RIGHT?

BASE FLOOD ELEVATION. >> NOT FEMA.

>> WE MEASURE FROM

>> MR. THOMAS CAN COME UP TO ANSWER THAT .

>> COME UP AND ANSWER THE QUESTION FOR US, PLEASE.

>> SIR, MADAM MAYOR, THE ANSWER IS IT IS NOT A FEMA ELEVATION.

IT IS THE DEP ELEVATION. >> WE CANNOT BUILD ANY LOWER.

>> NO LOWER THAN 16.4. THERE IS A MONUMENT. THE 16.4 IS NOT FROM

GRADE. IT IS FROM SEA LEVEL. >> I UNDERSTAND THAT. IS THAT WHERE WE MEASURE RATHER THAN GRADE?

>> AS FAR AS ELEVATION FOR YOUR HEIGHT.

>> IF WE ARE 28 FEET ABOVE 16.4, WE DON'T NEED THE CONDITION.

OUR BUILDING IS SHORTER THAN THAT.

>> OKAY. IS THAT PART OF THE QUESTION TO MR. FREEMAN AND MS.

[02:00:03]

DRIVER? >> IF I MAY, I CAN ANSWER THAT.

WE ACTUALLY REVIEWED THE ARCHITECTURAL ELEVATION THIS AFTERNOON AND FOUND THEM RATHER CONFUSING IN TERMS OF WHERE THE MEASUREMENTS WERE TAKEN FROM. THERE WERE CERTAIN MATHEMATICAL CALCULATIONS IN WHICH SHOWED THE ROOF LEVEL TO BE 34 FEET AND OTHERS WHICH DID SHOW THE ELEVATION TO BE 28 FEET . SO WE FOUND THAT VERY CONFUSING THIS AFTERNOON. IF YOU'RE TESTIFYING NOW THAT YOU ARE MEASURING FROM THE 16.54 -- WHATEVER THAT IS -- 28 FEET AND THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT FOR CONDITIONAL USE.

>> RIGHT. RIGHT. >> DO YOU AGREE WITH ME WE DON'T NEED CONDITIONAL APPROVAL?

>> IF YOU ARE AGREEING WITH ME THAT THAT IS 28 FEET ABOVE. ARE YOU BUILDING 28 FEET ABOVE THE 16.54 ?

>> NO MORE THAN THAT. 24 .5 FEET.

>> THE APPLICANT IS TESTIFYING HE IS BUILDING AT --

>> NO MORE THAN 28. >> NO MORE THAN 28 FEET ABOVE.

>> IF THAT IS THE CASE, WHAT ARE WE DOING HERE?

>> RIGHT. >> WELL, I APPRECIATE YOU

CLARIFYING THAT FOR US, SIR. >> LET ME BE CLEAR ON THIS. YOUR MAXIMUM HEIGHT ABOVE THE 16.4 IS 28 FEET. THERE IS NO CONDITIONAL

APPLICATION NEEDED THEN. >> YOU ARE CERTAIN OF THAT?

>> IT'S GOING TO GO ON THE RECORD THAT WAY.

>> YEAH, WELL, YOU CAN'T NOW. EXACTLY.

>> CHIME IN ON THIS PLEASE. >> CERTAINLY. MADAM MAYOR, MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION, WE REALLY HAVE TWO OPTIONS AT THIS POINT. IF THERE IS A CONCERN THAT WE WANT TO CONFIRM THESE CALCULATIONS AND MAYBE HAVE THE ARCHITECT THAT DESIGNED THIS COME IN, YOU DO HAVE THE ABILITY TO CONTINUE THIS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO A DATE CERTAIN PRIOR CODE . IF THE APPLICANT IS CERTAIN THAT HE IS ONLY BUILDING A MAXIMUM OF 28 FEET PLUS THE

16.5 WITH MY LAWYER -- >> 16.4.

>> 16.4 WITH MY LAWYER MATH WOULD BE 44.4 . TAKE THAT FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH. SO IF HE IS CERTAIN OF THAT, THEN HE COULD WITHDRAW HIS APPLICATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE AND THAT WOULD END THE HEARING. YOU WOULD LIKE TO WITHDRAW YOUR APPLICATION FOR THE CONDITIONAL USE AT THIS TIME?

>> YES. >> AND THAT WOULD CONCLUDE THE

HEARING, MADAM MAYOR. >> OKAY. THAT CONCLUDES THE HEARING. THANK YOU. WE ARE DONE WITH THIS ITEM. OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

WE WILL MOVE ON. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> MADAM MAYOR , MAYBE SOME PEOPLE LOOKING A LITTLE BEWILDERED HERE. I DON'T KNOW IF OUR ATTORNEY CAN HELP CLARIFY ANYTHING BECAUSE WE ARE HERE TO HEAR A CASE. AND OBVIOUSLY EVIDENCE HAS CHANGED IN THAT HEARING OF WHAT YOU HAVE SWORN TESTIMONY BECAUSE IT HAS NOT BEEN GIVEN TO US ON RECORD AND THEY HAVE AFFIRMED . IS THERE ANYWAY YOU CAN CLEAN THAT UP IN LAYMAN'S TERMS SO PEOPLE CAN UNDERSTAND WHAT JUST HAPPENED

HERE? >> YES, SIR. THE BEST THAT I CAN. MADAM MAYOR, COMMISSIONER, CONDITIONAL USE APPLICATION. THE CODE SAYS THEY CAN GO TO 28 FEET. BUT ADDITIONAL WITH CONDITIONAL USE. AS TESTIFIED TO BY STAFF WAS THAT THAT 20 FEET -- 28 FEET DOES NOT START GETTING MEASURED UNTIL THE 16.4.

THE APPLICANT INDICATED THAT HE IS BUILDING ONLY TO THE 28 FEET OR UNDER WHEN YOU STARTED THAT 16.4 FOOT NUMBER. THEREFORE, CONDITIONAL USE PER THE CODE AND STAFF TESTIMONY WOULD NOT BE NEEDED. HE WOULD BE WITHIN THE CODE 28 FEET. SO HE IS WITHDRAWING THE APPLICATION BECAUSE IT IS NOT NEEDED FOR

WHAT HE INTENDS TO BUILD. >> THAT IS WHAT I THOUGHT I UNDERSTOOD. I JUST WANTED YOU TO EXPLAIN THAT.

>> SIX FEET. SO THEY'VE GOT TO GO UP 10 FEET TO GET TO THAT

GRADE TO START. >> I GOT IT. I GOT IT. THAT WAS

A FIRST. >> WE DON'T HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING RIGHT NOW. AND I APPRECIATE THAT YOU HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY. YOU CAN STAY TILL THE END OF THE MEETING. SO

[A. Resolution 25-R51 Approving an Amendment to the Assigned and Assumed Agreement for the Development of King's Landing (Villas Plat) and Release of the City's Reverter to the Villas Plat Property, only.]

WE WILL MOVE ON. >> SO WE ARE GOING TO MOVE ON TO RESOLUTION 25- R51. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF CITY

[02:05:05]

OF FORT PIERCE FLORIDA MUNICIPAL CORPORATION IMPROVING AMENDMENT TO THE ASSIGNED AND ASSUMED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE VILLAS PLAT FOR KINGS LENDING AND RELEASE OF THE CITIES REVERTED TO THE VILLAS PLAT PROPERTY ONLY PROVIDING FOR AN

EFFECTIVE DATE. >> I THINK WE HAD THIS ON THE FPRA ATTENDANCE TOO. SO IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION ON THIS? MOTION?

>> APPROVAL. >> SECOND.

[B. Resolution 25-R70 adopting precinct polling places for the Special Election]

RESOLUTION , 25-R70. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE, FLORIDA, PROVIDING FOR PUBLICATION OF DESIGNATED PRECINCT POLLING PLACES FOR THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE FOR THE SPECIAL ELECTION TO BE HELD ON NOVEMBER 4TH, 2025, AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

>> I LOOK AT THOSE LIFT -- LIST OF PRECINCTS. WHERE THOSE PEOPLE USUALLY VOTE, RIGHT? NO CHANGES. THEY WILL KNOW WHERE TO GO,

RIGHT? >> APPROVAL.

>> SECOND. >> MOTION AND SECOND. CALL THE

ROLL, PLEASE. >>

[14. COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC Any person who wishes to comment on any subject may be heard at this time. Please limit your comments to three (3) minutes or less, as directed by the Mayor, as this section of the Agenda is limited to thirty minutes. The City Commission will not be able to take any official actions under Comments from the Public. Speakers will address the Mayor, Commissioners, and the Public with respect. Inappropriate language will not be tolerated.]

>> OKAY, NEXT WE HAVE COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC.

>> AND A MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC WISH TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION, PLEASE COME FORWARD ON ANY SUBJECT.

>> MADAM MAYOR ? COMMISSION, OFFICER HAS INFORMED ME THAT ONE OF OUR MEMBERS FROM THE PUBLIC RAN TO THE RESTROOM BUT DID WANT TO SPEAK. THEY THOUGHT THEY WOULD HAVE A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME . SO I'M NOT SURE IF YOU WANT TO GIVE THEM A FEW MINUTES.

I KNOW THEY CAN HEAR US IN THE BATHROOM BECAUSE IT PLAYS IN THERE. IF HE COULD -- GO QUICKLY AND COME BACK, THAT WOULD BE

GREATLY APPRECIATED. >> OKAY. SO ANYBODY ELSE WANT TO

SPEAK IN HIS ABSENCE ? >> THAT IS A FIRST FOR ME. I HAVE NEVER REALLY SEEN ANYTHING LIKE THAT AND I SAT THROUGH MANY OF THESE CONDITIONAL USE ON THE PLANNING BOARD, ET CETERA. AND I'VE NEVER SEEN ANYTHING LIKE THAT. THAT IS A FIRST.

>> AND IT IS WITHDRAWN. IT IS WITHDRAWN. SO AT ONE TIME WE WERE TALKING ABOUT MAYBE HOLDING IT OVER AND FINDING OUT MORE INFORMATION. BUT AS IT PLAYED OUT, IT IS WITHDRAWN, SO IT IS GOING TO BE BUILT HOWEVER IT IS GOING TO BE BUILT. TO OUR CODE.

AND IN THE BUILDING THERE IS SOME FAILSAFES ALONG THE WAY.

THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT, FPUA, ET CETERA.

>> YES, MADAM MAYOR. I WAS GOING TO POINT THAT OUT. IF THEY FIND SOMETHING IS WRONG OR AMISS, IT CAN BE READDRESSED. THEY WOULD INFORM THEM WHAT THEY NEEDED TO DO SO THERE ARE OTHER FAILSAFES THAT STILL EXIST. BUT AS OF RIGHT NOW, THAT APPLICATION HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN, SO THERE'S NOTHING FOR YOU TO CONSIDER.

>> SIR, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME. YOU HAVE THREE MINUTES.

>> MY NAME IS . I OWN THE PROPERTY ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY TO THE NORTH BUILDING THE TOWNHOUSES. 1600 SURFSIDE.