Jul 13, 2020 Planning Board

>> YES, MA'AM. >> I'D LIKE TO APOLOGIZE FOR EVERYONE THAT IS HERE NOW THAT WE RAN A LITTLE OVER ON WHAT MRS. HOFF MYSELF WANTED TO USE AS A GUIDE FOR TIME ON OUR MEETING AND I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT.

I THINK WE CAN MOVE FORWARD FROM HERE.

OUR FIRST ORDER OF NEW BUSINESS IS ANNEXATION OF SUNRISE

[a. Annexation - Sunrise Tabernacle Church - 2428-232-0002-020-3]

TABERNACLE CHURCH. 4282-32 -- PARDON ME 232-0002-020-3. DID I GET IT RIGHT?

>> GOOD AFTERNOON CHAIR AND MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.

BEFORE YOU TODAY IS AN ANEXECSATION FOR APPLICATION FOR AN UNADDRESSED PARCEL ABUTTING THE WEST SIDE OF 3280 SOUTH 25TH STREET. THIS PARCEL IS PART OF THE SUNRISE TABERNACLE CHURCH PROPERTY AND EVERYBODY IS AS THEIR ENTRANCE INTO THEIR CHURCH.

PROPERTY CURRENTLY HAS A FUTURE LAND USE IN THE COUNTY OF RU, RESIDENTIAL URBAN FIVE DWELLING UNITS AN ACRE.

IF ANNEXED IN IT WOULD BE GINN OUR DESIGNATION OF RL LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL. IT HAS A COUNTY SPLIT ZONING OF RS4 SINGLE FAMILY FOUR DWELLING UNITS AN ACRE AND RELIGIOUS FACILITY RF. THEIR DRIVEWAY HAS THE RF, GREEN SPACE UP TO THE NORTH IS THE ONE WITH T THE RS4.

ONCE ANNEXED IT WOULD BE GIVEN OUR DESIGNATION OF R1 SINGLE FAMILY LOW DENSITY. I'D LIKE TO NOTE DURING THE CITY'S LOST ROUND OF MASS ANNEXATIONS THE PROPERTIES TO THE NORTH AND SOUTH WERE BROUGHT INTO THE CITY THROUGH UTILITY ANNEXATION AGREEMENTS. STAFF REX MENDS APPROVAL AS IT MEETS CONDITIONS. YOU CAN APPROVE AS STAFF IS RECOMMEND AGO APPROVAL OR YOU CAN RECOMMEND DISAPPROVAL.

I'M HERE FOR ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.

>> ANY QUESTIONS? NOT SEEING ANY QUESTIONS.

OPEN THE PUBLIC PORTION OF THE MEETING.

ANYONE SPEAKING IN FAVOR OF THIS PROJECT PLEASE STEP FORWARD.

NOT SEEING ONE. ANYONE SPEAKING OPPOSED.

NOT SEEING ANYONE, WE'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC PORTION OF THE MEETING. COME BACK TO COMMENTS BY THE

BOARD. >> I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE.

>> MOTION TO APPROVE AND A SECOND.

[00:05:02]

CALL THE ROLL PLEASE. >> YES, MA'AM.

YES, MA'AM. >> NEXT ORDER OF BUSINESS IS

>> YES. >> REMEMBER.

[b. Conditional Use CCCL - Iannotti Dune Crossover - 618 South Ocean Drive]

CONDITIONAL USE CCC0LINADY DUNE CROSS OVER 618 SOUTH OCEAN

DRIVE. >> THIS ITEM IS A CONDITIONAL USE. THE REASON FOR THAT IS BECAUSE THE PROPOSED DUNE CROSS OVER IS EASTWARD OF COASTAL CONSTRUCTION CONTROL LINE. AS YOU ARE AWARE OR MAYBE YOU ARE NOT AND I WILL LET YOU KNOW THAT IS NOT A SETBACK LINE.

IT'S A REGULATORY LINE AND IT REQUIRES STATE APPROVAL THROUGH OUR DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION WHERE THEY HAVE DESIGN GUIDELINES. WE HAVE A REVIEW TEAM RTRC , THE COUNTY DOES REVIEW THESE AS WELL BECAUSE THEY HAVE A PERTLE EASEMENT WHICH THIS DUNE CROSSOVER IS NOT PROPOSED IN IT.

WHERE IT'S LOCATED IS AT 618 SOUTH OCEAN DRIVE.

LAST YEAR AT 620 WHICH IS THE PROPERTY JUST TO THE SOUTH BY THE PUBLIC ACCESS AREA, THERE WAS AN APPROVAL AFTER THE FACT FOR A DUNE CROSSOVER. AND THE NEIGHBOR AT 618 IS NOW REQUESTING THEIR OWN PRIVATE DUNE CROSSOVER ALSO SO THEY CAN GET TO THE SAND WITHOUT AFFECTING THE VEGETATION ON THE BEACH. THE ZONING FOR THE PROPERTY IS R4A WHICH IS HUTCHENSON ISLAND MEDIUM DENSITY.

AND THIS IS THE SITE PLAN. IT'S NEAR WHAT IS EXISTING AT THE NEIGHBORS. I'VE GONE OUT THERE AND THE NEIGHBORS DO CROSSOVER IS WELL MAINTAINED.

AND THIS PROPOSAL WILL BE VERY SIMILAR.

WE RECOMMEND APPROVAL. ONLY CONDITION IS OUR STANDARD ONE THEY GET WHICH IS GOING TO BE REQUIRED.

THEY WILL NOT BE ABLE TO CONSTRUCT IT OR GET A BUILDING PERMIT FROM US IF THEY DON'T HAVE APPROVAL FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION.

SO RECOMMENDATIONS POSSIBLE RECOMMENDATIONS GOING BEFORE THE CITY COMMISSION WOULD BE TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL WITH THE CONDITION PROPOSED BY STAFF. RECOMMEND APPROVAL WITH CHANGES TO THE -- [INAUDIBLE] .

>> ANY QUESTIONS? >> I'M FAMILIAR WITH THE INSTALLATION. IF MY SPECULATION IS CORRECT THIS IS A TOWNHOUSE DEVELOPMENT ON INDIVIDUAL LOTS.

SUBSEQUENTLY THERE IS COMMON AREA.

I GUESS THE ONLY QUESTION I HAVE IS WE COULD HAVE SIX OR 7 DUNE CROSSOVERS WITHIN 100-FOOT OR 200-FOOT AREA.

THEY COULD HAVE HANDLED THIS BETTER IF IT WAS DONE JOINTLY.

I JUST THINK IT'S GOING TO BE ONTRACTIVE THESE THINGS LIKE PARKING STALLS THEY ARE GOING TO BE SO CLOSE TO EACH OTHER.

ASSUME THAT'S THE CASE THEY COULD DO THAT WITH APPROVAL.

>> YES, THEY COULD. >> THE PURPOSE OF A DUNE CROSSOVER IS TO PROTECT OUR DUNE SYSTEM AND THE VEGETATION THAT PROTECTS THE MAINLAND OR THE LAND.

SO WITHOUT THIS I'M SURE WHAT THEY ARE DOING IS USING THE PUBLIC ACCESS. AND THE WAY THAT THE DUNE

[00:10:03]

STRUCTURE IS FOR 620 IS THE SEATING AREA AND THEY ARE ABLE TO WALK OVER TO THE SAND. AND IT'S THEIR PRIVATE DUNE SYSTEM AND DUNE CROSSOVER. HAVING SAID THAT, IF ALL OF THE UNIT OWNERS WANTED TO DO THAT, THEY WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH

APPROVAL PROCESS. >> ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS?

>> NOT SEEING ANY. I'LL OPEN IT UP TO THE PUBLIC.

ANYONE WANT TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS.

>> I AM 100% IN FAVOR OF THIS VACATION RENTAL.

I HAVE WALKED THE BEACH -- >> THIS IS NOT A VACATION

RENTAL. >> WE ARE DISCUSSING A DUNE

CROSSOVER. >> EXCUSE ME, SORRY.

>> CAN YOU RETURN THE SIGN IN SHEET PLEASE?

>> ARE YOU SPEAKING TO THE CROSS OVER?

>> I AM. >> I'M WITH ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS. WE HAD AN OFFICE DOWNTOWN.

I PERMITTED THE JULY AFTER THE FACT CROSSOVER A NUMBER OF MONTHS AGO. AND TO FURTHER YOUR COMMENT, THERE IS QUITE A BIT OF AREA IN BETWEEN THE UNITS.

AND WHAT THEY ARE PROPOSING IS AS YOU GO OUT THE BACK DOOR THEY ARE HAVING A SAND PAVERS ON COMPACTED SAND AND THEY HAVE A SITTING AREA THERE. THEY HAVE A RAMP GOING UP TO THIS 12 BY 12 PLATFORM AND A SMALL RAMP COMING OFF THAT PLATFORM. IT HAS REALLY MINIMALIZED THE IMPACT TO THE AREA VERSUS WHAT THEY INITIALLY DID IN THEIRS IS ELEVATED AND IT EXTENDS PAST THE COUNTIES CONSERVATION EASEMENT DOWN INTO THE SANDY BEACH. THERE WAS AN OLD REMNANT FEATURE DOWN BY THE FOURTH OR SECOND UNIT TO THE NORTH.

AND PEOPLE SOMETIMES DON'T PLAY WELL TOGETHER.

AND I UNDERSTAND THAT WALK OVER WAS QUITE AN ACTIVE LITTLE SPOT FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS. IT EVENTUALLY CAME TO DISREPAIR.

THESE FOLKS EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE UNDER ONE ROOF SO TO SPEAK, THEY ARE NOT PLAYING WELL TOGETHER. NOR WOULD ANYONE WANT THE OTHER UNIT OWN TORE TRAVEL THROUGH THEIR WALKWAY.

IT IS CORRECT THERE IS A PUBLIC ACCESS TO THE SOUTH.

THEY ARE MAKING GOOD USE OF THE LIMITED SPACE THEY HAVE.

THEY ARE BEING VERY CONSERVATIVE OF MATERIALS THEY ARE USING.

WE HAVE NO REBAR, NO PERMANENT AS FAR AS THE PAVERS GO THAT MAKE UP THE RETAINING WALL THAT WILL HOLD THE LUSH VEGETATION THEY HAVE. THE OVERROCK IS CONSTRUCTED OF SIX INCH DIAMETER PILINGS. IT'S BUILT CONSISTENT WITH DEP RULES AND IT'S MADE TO BE EXPENDABLE.

I GUESS MY LAST COMMENT WOULD BE THAT EACH ONE OF THESE INDIVIDUALS AND THEIR GUESTS ARE TROMPING THROUGH THE DUNE FEATURE. THOSE ARE SIGNIFICANT HISTORICAL DUNE AND IT'S HEAVILY VEGETATED. WHAT IMPACTS WILL COME ABOUT AS A RESULT OF THE WALKOVER WILL BE MORE THAN MITIGATED WITH SALT TOLERANT VEGETATION. BOTH PARTIES SO FAR IN THAT UNIT, ONE MADE VERY GOOD USE WITH MINOR IMPACT TO THE BEACH DUNE SYSTEM OR NO IMPACT. AND MINOR IMPACT TO THE BEACH SIDE. AND I THINK IN PARTICULAR THEY HAVE REALLY CONDENSED WHAT THEY COULD GET PERMITTED OUT THERE.

I'LL GO AS FAR AS TO SAY DEP WILL PERMIT FIVE OUT OF FIVE PUBLIC ACCESS THERE IF THEY DEEM TO BE WANT BY THE INDIVIDUAL OWNERS. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS?

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> I'M GLAD YOU ARE SO ACTIVE

OUT THERE. >> YES.

[00:15:01]

I PRETTY MUCH OWN COASTAL PROPERTIES SO I HOPE TO SEE A

LOT MORE OF YOU. >> ANYONE ELSE SPEAKING TO THIS PROJECT? NOT SEEING ANYONE I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC PORTION OF THIS MEETING.

COME BACK FOR FURTHER COMMENTS BY OUR BOARD.

ANY QUESTIONS? NOT HEARING ANY COMMENTS.

WE'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION. >> MOTION TO APPROVE.

>> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE, SECOND. CALL THE ROLL PLEASE.

>> YES, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE MY APOLOGIES MOTION SHOULD HAVE CONTAINED WITH RECOMMENDATIONS FROM STAFF.

>> CORRECT. >> ANY APOLOGY.

I AMEND THE MOTION TO REFLECT THAT.

>> I SHOULD HAVE CAUGHT IT MYSELF.

>> >> WE'LL MOVE ON THE ITEM C.

[c. Conditional Use - France Vacation Rental - 1361 Binney Drive]

CONDITIONAL USE. VACATION RENTAL 1218 SOUTH

11TH STREET. >> IT'S THE FRANCE VACATION

RENTAL FIRST. >> I'M MOVING DOWN TOO FAR.

YOU ARE RIGHT. THE FRANCE VACATION RENTAL AT

1361 BENNY AVENUE. >> CHAIRPERSON, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD , THE NEXT TWO ITEMS ARE VACATION RENTALS FOR UNDER 30 DAYS. THE FIRST ONE I'LL SPEAK OF IS THE FRANCE VACATION RENTAL ON OUR SOUTH BEACH AREA.

THE LOCATION IS 1361 BENNY DRIVE.

PROPERTY HAS A ZONING DISTRICT DESIGNATION OF HUTCHENSON ISLAND RESIDENTIAL WITH A COMPATIBLE ZONING DISTRICT OF R4A.

THE APPLICANT IS SEEKING A CONDITIONAL USE TO OPERATE THE VACATION RENTAL OFFERING LODGING LESS THAN SIX MONTHS AND MINIMUM STAY AS TWO DAYS. STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL SUBJECT TO SIX CONDITIONS. TO REOPEN WHAT VACATION RENTALS ARE, WE PASSED OUR VACATION RENTAL ORDINANCE WHICH MADE DWELLING UNITS A CONDITIONAL USE BACK IN 2001.

2011 THE STATE CREATED THEIR OWN SYSTEM OF REGULATIONS AND PUT THE REGULATORY AGENCY AS OUR DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION. OUR CODE CONDITIONAL USE LOOKS AT CONDITIONAL USE ARE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AS BEING ADDED TO PROTECT THE HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. STAFF IS RECOMMENDING SIX CONDITIONS. FIRST FIVE ARE THOSE WE WENT OVER IN THE WORKSHOP. STANDARD ONES THAT REQUIRE THE PROPERTY MANAGER, GUIDE BOOKLETS TO BE AVAILABLE.

THE APPLICANT MAINTAINING THEIR BUSINESS TAX RECEIPT AND GETTING THEIR BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION LICENSE 30 DAYS AFTER APPROVAL. LIMITING THE NUMBER OF VEHICLES ON SITE TO TWO AND HAVING THE CITY PROCURE BUSINESS TAX LICENSE AVAILABLE. ADDITIONALLY BECAUSE THIS SITE DOES NOT HAVE SIDEWALKS IN FRONT OF THE PROPERTY, OUR CODE REGULATES ALL CONDITIONAL, ANY APPLICATION FOR A CONDITIONAL USE IS REQUIRED TO EITHER PUT IN SIDEWALKS OR PAVEMENT.

AS A PLANNING DIRECTOR, I HAVE THE ABILITY TO OPINE ON THIS.

BEING THAT STREET DOES HAVE SIDEWALKS ON THE EASTERN SIDE ALONG THERE, BUT THERE ARE NO SIDEWALK ONS THE EAST, IT WOULD BE MY RECOMMENDATION THE APPLICANT GO THROUGH PAVE IN LIEU OF SIDEWALKS. PLANNING BO BOARD CAN RECOMMEND APPROVAL WITH THE SIX CONDITIONS.

RECOMMEND APPROVAL WITH CHANGES TO THE RECOMMENDATIONS OR DENY APPROVAL OF THE CONDITIONAL USE. I'M HERE TO ENTERTAIN ANY

QUESTIONS. >> ANY QUESTIONS BY THE BOARD? NOT SEEING ANY, I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC PORTION.

>> I'VE NOT CALLED ANYONE TO THE PODIUM.

[00:20:02]

I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC PORTION OF THE MEETING.

ANYONE SPEAKING IN FAVOR OF THE PROJECT, YOU MAY STEP FORWARD.

>> I'M A REALTOR HERE. I'VE BEEN PROMOTING FORT PIERCE IN A POSITIVE LIGHT. TYPICALLY THE FIRST TIME SOMEBODY MOVES HERE OR VISITS. I WANT TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS VACATION RENTALS CITY OF FORT PIERCE IS IN BUSINESS OF PROMOTING PEOPLE TO COME HERE TO VISITORS GO FISHING, GO TO THE BEACH. THOSE PEOPLE NEED A PLACE WHERE THEY CAN STAY. AND THESE PLACES THIS IS NOT A CONDITION FOR A HOTEL. A LOT OF PEOPLE LIKE TO STAY 30 DAYS TO A MONTH SOMETIMES LOOKING FOR A PERMANENT RESIDENCE OR RELOCATION. VACATION RENTALS ARE VERY IMPORTANT. I'M SPEAKING IN GENERAL FOR THE VACATION RENTALS. I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH THIS PARTICULAR SITE. IT'S A POSITIVE THING TO HAVE IN THE CITY. AND WELCOME PEOPLE IN AND HAVE A PLACE FOR THOSE WHO WANT TO SEEK TO BE HERE.

THANK YOU. >> ANYONE ELSE SPEAKING IN FAVOR

OF THIS PROJECT? >> I WANT TO REITERATE EVERYTHING HE SAID BUT BASICALLY THAT'S MY FEELING TOO.

DO I HAVE A VACATION RENTAL ALREADY.

IT'S ON THE STREET OF DUPLEXES THAT CONDONES VACATION RENTAL.

WITHOUT THE VACATIONER INS HERE, ORANTS, BARS AND ANYTHING ALONG THE ISLAND THAT WE LIES ON PEOPLE COMING AND GOING, RIGHT NOW THEY ARE NEARLY OUT OF BUSINESS BECAUSE THE LOCALS ARE NOT GOING. WE REALLY NEED THESE, DOWNTOWN ALL OVER SPENDING MONEY IN OUR COUNTY.

I THINK IT'S VERY IMPORTANT. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. >> ANYONE ELSE SPEAKING IN

FAVOR. >> IF YOU ARE REPRESENTING THE

CLIENT, YOU MAY SPEAK. >> 715 SOUTH OCEAN DRIVE UNIT D.

I REPRESENT MRS. FRANCE IN REGARDS TO THIS VACATION RENTAL.

>> I WANT TO REITERATE AGAIN MY POSITION ON VACATION RENTALS AS WE OWN ONE AND OPERATE ONE. THE AREA IS VERY CONDUCIVE TO BEING CLOSE TO THE JETTY. YOU CAN WALK TO THE BEACH.

YOU CAN WALK TO THE JETTY. MOST OF MY CLIENT ARE VERY HAPPY IN THAT LOCATION BECAUSE THERE IS SO MUCH TO DO.

SO MANY THINGS TO OFFER. WITH REGARDS TO THE CONDITIONS, MRS. FRANCE DOES RESIDE IN ST. LOUIS SI COUNTY, I'LL ASSIST HER WITH THE MANAGEMENT AS WELL. SHE ALREADY HAS THE GUIDE BOOKLETS. SHE IS APPLYING FOR HER LICENSING. I'M ASSISTING HER WITH THAT AS WELL WITH REGARDS TO THE DBPR REGULATIONS AND LETTING HER KNOW WHAT IS GOING ON WITH THAT. WITH REGARDS TO NO MORE THAN TWO VEHICLES ON THE SITE. THAT IS NOT POSSIBLE.

SHE LIVES THERE WITH HER SPOUSE ON ONE SIDE.

THEY HAVE TWO VEHICLES. I'VE STAYED ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE RESIDENCE AND WE HAVE TWO VEHICLES.

THERE IS FOUR VEHICLES THERE AT ONE TIME.

THE DRIVEWAY IS LARGE ENOUGH, WIDE ENOUGH THERE.

IS NO ISSUE WHATSOEVER. I THINK THAT'S A VIOLATION OF HER PROPERTY RIGHTS. SHE'S DESPITE TOLD DO WHAT SHE WANTS ON HER PROPERTY. WE'RE GOING TO OBJECT TO NUMBER FOUR. AND THEN AS FAR AS THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE BUSINESS TAX NUMBER SHOULD BE INCLUDED ON ALL ADVERTISEMENT. I'M IN FAVOR OF THAT.

IF YOU LOOK AT MINING I HAVE EVERYTHING LISTED WITH REGARDS TO COMMENTS REGARDING THE STATE , THE DBPR, WE LIST ALL OUR

[00:25:04]

LICENSES. WE PAY FOR ALL OUR TAXES.

I ENCOURAGE EVERY APPLICANT TO BE COMPLETELY TRANSPARENT WITH THEIR ADVERTISEMENT. WE'RE GOING OBJECT TO THE SIDEWALKS AS WELL. BECAUSE FIRST OF ALL, THERE IS A SIDEWALK ACROSS THE WAY. IT IS NOT NECESSARY FOR THIS CLIENT TO PAY FOR A SIDEWALK FEE.

I WENT THROUGH THIS WITH JENNIFER REGARDING MY OWN VACATION RENTAL. IT'S JUST NOT NECESSARY.

THERE ARE PLENTY OF COMMUNITIES THEY HAVE SIDEWALKS ONLY ON ONE SIDE OR THE OTHER. AND THERE IS NO SIDEWALK ON EITHER SIDE OF HER POSITION. WEARABILWE OBJECT THE THOSE TWO.

WITH REGARDS TO ANY OF THE OTHER CONDITIONS, WE THINK THEY ARE APPLICABLE AS FAR AS THE LICENSING.

IF YOU GUYS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING THIS, THE VACATION RENTAL. MY CLIENT HAS PROPERTY RIGHTS.

SHE'S NOT RAISING QUASI JUDICIAL.

YOU SAID THIS IS NOT A QUASI JUDICIAL BOARD.

I WANT TO MAKE IT CRYSTAL CLEAR SHE'S NOT WAIVING THAT WITH REGARDS TO THAT. I WANT TO MAKE A LITTLE COMMENT WITH REGARDS TO HER RIGHTS. SUPREME COURT RULED AND 201 U.S.

43, 106. SINCE THE UNITED STATES DECIDED TO INCORPORATE THEY MUST ABIDE BY OTHER RULES AND ANY OTHER CORPORATION BY THE SUPREME COURT.

RULES, STATUTES, ORDINANCES, POLICIES, EXECUTIVE ORDERERS ARE NOT LAWS. THEY ARE CORPORATE BY LAWS, CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS BEING VIOLATED BY THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE IS NOT OK. I HAVE INCIDENT OVER TO NICK MINIMUMS AND LEGAL AND EVERYBODY ELSE WITH REGARDS TO ALL THE CLIENTS THAT I'M REPRESENTING TO GET THEIR VACATION RENTAL.

WE ARE CONSTITUTIONALLY PROTECTED WITH OUR RIGHTS WITH REGARDS TO PROPERTIES. AS YOU ARE PROBABLY AWARE, THE FOLLOWING RIGHTS STAY MANY TACT. THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO ACQUIRE, POSSES, PROTECT THEIR PROPERTY , THE RIGHT TO USE AND ENJOY YOUR PROPERTY , THE RIGHT TO EXCLUDE OTHERS FROM YOUR PROPERTY.

THE RIGHT TO DISPOSE OF YOUR PROPERTY , THE RIGHT TO DUE PROCESS , THE RIGHT TO JUST COMPENSATION FOR PROPERTY TAKEN FOR PUBLIC PURPOSE. THE RIGHT TO RELIEF OR PAYMENT COMPENSATION WHEN A NEW LAW, RULE, REGULATION OR ORDINANCE OF THE STATE OR POLITICAL ENTITY UNFAIRLY AFFECTS YOUR PROPERTY.

I'VE MADE THIS VERY CRYSTAL CLEAR WITH MY POSITION WITH REGARDS TO ALL THE CLIENTS. I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WAS ALSO IN THERE. AS ARGUE WARE BECAUSE YOU GUYS HAVE SEEN ME MANY TIMES, YOU KNOW I JUST WANT YOU GUYS TO TAKE NOTICE OF THE BINDING INTERPRETATION AND THE INFORMAL INTERPRETATION REPORT OF OCTOBER 8027 JUST IN CASE YOU DON'T HAVE THAT. THAT IS IN REGARDS TO THE SPRINKLER BECAUSE I KNOW THAT'S BEEN BROUGHT UP BEFORE IN THE PAST. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.

>> I'M INTERESTED TO KNOW WHAT YOUR POSITION IS ON THE SIGNAGE

THAT WE TALKED ABOUT. >> THANK YOU FOR ASKING.

IN OUR PARTICULAR -- WE HAVE 13 IN OURS.

OUR HOA DOES NOT ALLOW SIGNAGE. I WOULD LOVE TO HAVE SIGNAGE.

I THINK IT'S CUTE. I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH IT.

I DON'T THINK I WANT MY PERSONAL CELL PHONE OUT THERE.

I DO MANAGE MY PEOPLE ALL OF THE PEOPLE THEY REPRESENT OR ANY CLIENTS THERE, I MAKE SURE THAT ALL OF MY NEIGHBORS HAVE MY PHONE NUMBERS , THE POLICE DEPARTMENT HAS MY PHONE NUMBER.

I STAY IN CONTACT WITH THEM AND STUFF LIKE THAT.

I THINK THAT THERE IS A LOT OF FEAR WITH REGARDS TO PROPERTY MANAGEMENT. GOOD PROPERTY MANAGERS WILL MAKE SURE THAT THEIR CLIENT IS OK. I CHECK IN WITH MY CLIENT IF THEY ARE THERE FOR 7 DAYS EVERY OTHER DAY TO SEE IF THEY NEED ANYTHING. I CHECK IN WITH MY NEIGHBORS AND DO A CHECK IN WITH THEM. I ALSO WALK THE PROPERTY AS WELL. I DON'T THINK THAT PUTTING A SIGN WITH PHONE NUMBER AND EMAIL IS -- I THINK IT'S THE PROPERTY RIGHTS ARE KIND OF SUPERSEDE THAT A LITTLE BIT AS FAR AS PUTTING OUT YOUR SIGNAGE AND PUTTING ALL OF THAT STUFF OUT THERE. SOME HOA'S WON'T ALLOW IT.

[00:30:01]

MINE WON'T ALLOW ME TO IDENTIFY MY UNIT AS THAT EVEN IF I WANT TO PUT A STICK ATTORNEY DOOR OR WINDOW.

YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE INTERFERENCE WITH CONDOMINIUM TYPE SIGNAGE. THAT'S KIND OF MY POSITION ON IT. I DO HEAR THE PUBLIC REGARDS TO THEIR FEARS ON THE PROPERTY MANAGER.

I WISH IF ANYBODY WANTS TO CONTACT ME, 772-708-4557.

I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS ABOUT IT.

I'M VERY SERIOUS ABOUT PROPERTY MANAGEMENT.

>> THE PROPERTY YOU ARE DISCUSSING IS THE 1361 RIGHT?

>> YES. >> AND IS THERE AN APARTMENT A

AND B ON THAT ADDRESS? >> YES.

>> WHICH APARTMENT ARE WE TALKING ABOUT?

>> A OR B? >> SHE'S APPLIED FOR BOTH.

>> AND ARE WE SAYING THAT WE'RE ALLOWING TWO VEHICLES PER

APARTMENT? >> IF I MAY IS THIS IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING WITH THE APPLICATION THAT THE OWNER WAS GOING TO BE RESIDING IN THE ONE BEDROOM AND SHE'S GOING TO BE RENTING OUT THE DWELLING UNIT FOR THE TWO BEDROOM UNIT.

AND I NOAH OUR CONDITION READ THIS IT'S TWO PARKING SPACES PER SITE. THAT'S ALWAYS HOW IT'S BEEN.

BUT I DON'T SEE WHY -- THIS WOULD -- THIS WAS A CONDITION IMPOSED BY THE COMMISSION OVER A YEAR OR SO AGO.

BEFORE MY TIME. BUT THIS COULD BE SOMETHING THAT WE CAN MAKE THAT DISCUSSION OPEN UP AT THE CITY COMMISSION LEVEL.

I UNDERSTAND WHAT SHE'S SAYING. I'VE GONE BY THE SITE.

>> THERE IS TWO DIFFERENT APARTMENTS.

THEY ARE JUST RENTING ONE OF THEM.

>> IT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING AND PLEASE CORRECT ME.

YOU INDICATED HERE AT THE PUBLIC HEARING SHE RESIDES THERE WITH

HER HUSBAND. >> SHE RESIDES THERE WITH HER SPOUSE. AT THE CURRENT MOMENT.

BUT THE APPLICATION WAS PUT IN FOR A AND B.

>> THAT WAS THIS NOT MY UNDERSTANDING.

>> PULL OUT THE APPLICATION FOR ME.

>> I HAVE EMAILS THAT STATE THAT AS WELL I CAN PROBABLY FORWARD.

>> IT WOULD BE MY INTERPRETATION THAT EACH UNIT WOULD HAVE TWO WHICH IT CURRENTLY HAS. THE TWO FOR THE RENTAL APARTMENT AND THE TWO FOR THE ONE SHE'S RESIDING IN.

OR IF SHE CHOOSES NOT TO RESIDE IN THAT ONE ANYMORE, THERE WOULD BE TWO AVAILABLE FOR THAT ONE IF IT MEETS THE MINIMUM SQUARE

FOOTAGE. >> I UNDERSTOOD SHE WAS ALLOWED TO HAVE TWO FOR THE RENTAL APARTMENT BECAUSE THERE THERE IS TWO DIFFERENT UNITS. MY INTERPRETATION YOU SHOULD GET TWO PARKING SPACES FOR A AND B SHOULD GET TWO PARKING SPACES.

>> THE APPLICATION DOES SAY A AND B.

>> I STAND CORRECTED. >> BASICALLY WITH THE WAY THIS APPLICATION HAS BEEN FILLED OUT AND THE REQUIREMENT THAT HAS BEEN ADDED TO IT OF THE TWO PARKING SPACES, THAT IS TWO

PARKING SPACES A AND B. >> I WAS SPEAKING WITH STAFF

HERE. >> IT SHOULD BE CORRECTED IN THE LANGUAGE -- IT SHOULD BE PER UNIT RATHER THAN SITE.

>> DESIGNATED PARKING PER UNIT ONLY MAKES SENSE.

>> THIS PICTURE DOESN'T DO THE SITE JUSTICE.

I'VE GONE OUT TO THE PROPERTY. IT'S BEEN REALLY IMPROVED.

DRIVEWAY LOOKS GREAT. >> IT'S A NONISSUE.

>> PART OF THE PROBLEM WAS WHEN JENNIFER AND I WERE TALKING ABOUT WHETHER IT WAS A OR B, IS THAT IT'S ONLY ONE PARCEL ID NUMBER ON THIS PROPERTY. TYPICALLY WITH DUPLEXES THERE IS USUALLY A PARCEL ID FOR A AND FOR B AND THAT IS NOT THE CASE FOR THIS PROPERTY. WHEN WE PUT IN THE APPLICATION.

TED FLOOR PLANNED AND I SAID CAN THEY DO A AND B AT THE SAME TIME BECAUSE THERE IS ONLY ONE PARCEL ID.

I THINK THAT IS PART OF THE ISSUE.

THEY HAVE IMPROVED THEIR PROPERTY SINCE THAT PICTURE.

>> THE FACADE LOOK AS MAZING. IT LOOKS REALLY GOOD.

>> IS THERE AN ISSUE WITH CHANGING THE RECOMMEND ADD

APPROVAL? >> I DO NOT SEE A PROBLEM WITH

THAT. >> TWO PER UNIT.

>> IT'S TYPICALLY WITH A DUPLEX. WAS THIS A CON FLEX.

[00:35:05]

>> I THINK SOMETHING HAPPENED PRIOR TO MRS. FRANCE OWNING IT.

SHE'S NOT OWNED IT VERY LONG. I THINK THE PROPERTY OWNER PRIOR MAY HAVE ALTERED IT, I DON'T KNOW.

I DIDN'T GO THROUGH DOCS. >> AND IF I MAY SPEAK TO THE SIDEWALKS WHENEVER YOU GET A MOMENT.

>> LET'S FINISH THIS DISCUSSION UP.

WE'RE GOING TO MODIFY THE CONDITIONS TO BE TWO PARKING SPACES PER UNIT A AND B, IS THAT CORRECT?

>> YES, SIR. >> NOW THIS TERMS OF SIDEWALKS.

>> YOU WANT TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC? >> NO.

BECAUSE WE'RE ANSWERING A QUESTION.

IN TERMS OF THE SIDEWALKS, THIS IS A FORT PIERCE CODE OF

ORDINANCE. >> TYPICALLY THIS IS A STANDARD KIND OF CONDITION FOR MANY MUNICIPALITIES.

THE REASON WHY THEY HAVE SIDEWALK PAYMENT IN LIEU, THIS IS THE WAY LOCAL GOVERNMENTS CAN COLLECT A TRUST FUND FOR SIDEWALKS. AND WHEN THEY HAVE DESIGNATED PROJECTS THAT IS PART OF THEIR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM, THEY HAVE THE FUNDS TO DO IT. NOW WHEN YOU READ THIS CODE SECTION, NOT TO WAIVE MEANING YOU DON'T PAVE THE SIDEWALK, THAT YOU CRICKETED INTO THIS FUND.

WHAT HAPPENED WITH THE APPLICANT MICHELLE'S SITE PROPERTY WHICH IS ON SOUTH OCEAN 715 AND WE'VE SEEN MICHELLE HERE QUITE A BIT AND YOU'LL SEE HER IN THE FUTURE, THAT RECOGNITION OF NO NEED FOR SIDEWALK WAS BECAUSE THERE IS ALREADY A SIDEWALK.

WHEN YOU LOOK AT HER ADDRESS IT FRONTS ON TO SOUTH OCEAN.

IT'S 715 REGARDLESS OF THE UNIT LETTER.

SO THE SIDEWALK CONDITION WAS FIRST -- THIS IS WHEN I FIRST BEGAN MY TERM HERE. WAS FOR THE BACK STREET THAT DEAD ENDS. AFTER CAREFUL CONSIDERATION I DID NOT THINK IT WAS NECESSARY SINCE THERE WAS ALREADY A SIDEWALK PROVIDED ON THE FRONT OF HER PROPERTY WHICH IS THE

ADDRESS FOR ALL THE UNITS. >> IT WAS A DEAD TONED A

DUMPSTER. >> SO YOU DID PAYMENT IN LIEU?

>> I REFUNDED HER. SHE DID THE PAYMENT IN LIEU AND THROUGH DISCUSSION AND LOOKING AT THE WAY THAT THE ADDRESS IS, THERE IS ALREADY A SIDEWALK IN FRONT OF HER PROPERTY.

SO IT WAS NOT NECESSARY TO HAVE HER PAY FOR THE SIDEWALK IN THE

BACK OF HER PROPERTY. >> I WOULD SUGGEST MOVING FORWARD AND I'M NOT CERTAIN THAT YOU ARE GOING TO ADDRESS IT WITH THE COMMISSION, WE CAN'T ALTER THIS AT THIS POINT.

ANY OTHER COMMENTS? >> ANYONE ELSE HAVE QUESTIONS?

>> YOU'VE GIVEN ME PER NOTION CALL YOU MICHELLE?

>> ABSOLUTELY. >> NOT SEEING ANY.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TESTIMONY. >> ANYONE ELSE SPEAKING TO THIS PROJECT? NOT SEEING ANYONE I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC PORTION OF THE MEETING. COME BACK, ANY FURTHER COMMENTS BY THE BOARD? NOT SEEING ANY I.

>> MOTION TO APPROVE WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATION INCLUSIVE OF THE MODIFICATION ON THE PARKING TO MAXIMUM OF FOUR VEHICLES ON THE

SITE, TWO VEHICLES PER UNIT. >> SECOND.

>> WE HAVE TWO SECONDS. CALL THE ROLL PLEASE.

>> YES, MA'AM. >> NOW WE'LL MOVE ON ON TO THE

[d. Conditional Use - Arenas Vacation Rental - 1218 S. 11th Street]

1218 SOUTH 11TH STREET PROJECT THAT I'VE ALREADY ANNOUNCED.

>> I'M HANDLING THE ITEM AS WELL.

THIS IS THE VACATION RENTAL. LOCATION IS 1218 SOUTH 11TH STREET. THE FUTURE LAND USE FOR THIS PROPERTY IS RESIDENTIAL LOW AND IT ALSO HAS A COMPATIBLE ZONING DISTRICT DESIGNATION OF SINGLE FAMILY LOW RESIDENTIAL.

DO TO THE GIVE YOU HISTORY. THE VACATION RENTAL DID COME BEFORE PLANNING BOARD AND WAS DENIED AT THAT TIME.

[00:40:06]

MEETING THAT SINGLE FAMILY 340 OPENS WERE NOT LOOKED FAVORABLY ON AS VACATION RENTALS. BUT THE EDUCATION WE'RE GETTING.

VACATION RENTALS IN FORT PIERCE ARE CONDITIONAL USES.

THERE ARE ELEMENTS YOU LOOK AT WHEN AWE PROVE CONDITIONAL USES.

SOME OF THOSE THAT WE CAN REGULATE PROTECTION OF OUR HEALTH AND SAFETY AND WELFARE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, IF THERE ARE CODE ENFORCEMENT ISSUES, POLICE DEPARTMENT VIOLATION.

AT THAT TIME THERE WAS A CODE ENFORCEMENT ISSUE AND THAT WAS THE BASIS FOR THAT DENIAL. SUBSEQUENTLY I BELIEVE IT'S BEEN ABOUT TWO YEARS SINCE THAT TIME. THEY HAVE RECEIVED AN AFFIDAVIT OF COMPLIANCE. THEY ARE IN COMPLIANCE RIGHT NOW AND AS MR. SWEENEY DISCUSSED THIS ISSUE IF YOU DO NOT PASS YOUR BAR AND YOU WANT TO COME AND DO IT AGAIN, YOU CAN.

SO THEY ARE IN COMPLIANCE WITH OUR CODE AND THEY ARE BEFORE YOU TODAY FOR A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL WITH SIX CONDITIONS OF

APPROVAL. >> I THOUGHT THERE WAS FIVE.

>> I'M SORRY. YES.

I THINK IT'S ONLY FIVE. IT'S A STANDARD FIVE CONDITIONS.

IT'S THE PARKING SURFACE PARKING SPACES.

CAN YOU GO BACK TO THE AERIAL? AS I INDICATED CERTAIN PROJECTS REQUIRE PARKING OR THEIR DRIVEWAYS BE MAINTAINED.

THIS COULD BE AN ERROR. >> ALL KINDS OF PARKING SPACES

TUCKED IN THERE. >> I THINK THIS IS NOT -- I DON'T BELIEVE IT'S PART OF THE STAFF REPORT.

IT COULD HAVE BEEN AN ERROR IN THE PRESENTATION AND IT WAS.

SO THERE ARE ONLY FIVE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL THAT I'M REQUESTING BECAUSE THIS HOUSE ALTHOUGH THERE IS NO SIDEWALK THERE, THE HOUSE IS A SINGLE FAMILY HOME AND WE DO NOT REQUIRE SIDEWALKS OR SIDEWALK PAYMENT IN LIEU.

I APOLOGIZE THIS WAS A CONDITION THAT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ON THIS SLIDE. STAFF IS RECOMMEND AGO APPROVAL SUBJECT TO THESE FIVE CONDITIONS.

THE BOARD CAN RECOMMEND APPROVAL WITH THE FIVE CONDITIONS, MODIFICATIONS TO THE FIVE CONDITIONS OR RECOMMEND DENIAL.

I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

>> I WENT BACK THROUGH THIS AND WHAT I WAS ABLE TO FIND ON THIS PROPERTY THAT WAS ON DECEMBER 12TH OF 2017 THIS BOARD HEARD THIS CASE. AND THIS BOARD I BELIEVE MADE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE APPLICATION.

AND WE SENT IT TO THE COMMISSION FOR APPROVAL.

JANUARY 16 16 IT WAS ON THE CITY COMMISSION AGENDA AND IT WAS POSTPONED AT THIS TIME TO HEAR IT ON THE 5TH OF FEBRUARY.

ON THE 5TH OF FEBRUARY, IT WAS ON THE AGENDA AND POSTPONED TO THE 20TH OF JANUARY. WHERE IT WAS HEARD.

20TH OF FEBRUARY WHEN IT WAS HEARD.

AT THAT TIME IT WAS LONG DISCUSSION.

I DID NOT GO BACK AND REVISIT THE VIDEO.

BUT IT WAS A REALLY LONG DISCUSSION WHERE THE COMMISSION DENIED IT. IN ALL OF THIS THERE WERE SEVERAL CODE ENFORCEMENT ISSUES REGARDING THE PROPERTY THAT THE LATEST ONE THAT I COULD FIND WAS ON JANUARY 15TH OF 2019.

>> THIS PROPERTY WAS BROUGHT TO CODE ENFORCEMENT DUE TO THEM OPERATING A VACATION RENTAL WITHOUT A LICENSE.

>> SEVERAL TIMES. STARTED BACK IN 2016.

[00:45:05]

>> RIGHT. >> THEN IT PROGRESSED AND THE MOST RECENT INFRACTION WAS ON JANUARY 19TH.

>> OF 2019. >> AND THEY HAVE BEEN IN

COMPLIANCE AND IT'S 2020 NOW. >> SINCE THAT TIME.

I COULD NOT FIND ANYTHING FURTHER.

>> RIGHT. >> WE'VE HAD A LONG HISTORY OF THIS. I WANTED TO MAKE A NOTE OF THAT.

BE MORE DETAILED IN THE NOTE OF WHAT THE HISTORY OF THIS WAS ONLY BECAUSE WE'VE GOT SEVERAL BOARD MEMBERS THAT DIDN'T LIVE THROUGH ALL OF THIS. MR.BURG LIVED THROUGH IT.

WE'VE HAD A LOT OF HISTORY ON THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY.

UNFORTUNATELY FOR THE CITY NOT ALL OF IT VERY GOOD.

BUT AS HAS BEEN POINTED OUT, WE GET A CHANCE TO DO THIS OVER AND OVER AGAIN. ANY COMMENTS OTHER COMMENTS BY THE BOARD? QUESTIONS?

>> >> ARE YOU INDICATING THIS IS SUBJECT TO A CURRENT CODE FINE THAT IS LEVIED AGAINST THE

PROPERTY? >> NOT PRESENTLY NO.

THE LAST INFRACTION WAS ON JANUARY 15TH OF 2019.

AND THERE WAS A RECOMMENDATION OF $2,970 FINE WAS ASSESSED TO

THE PROPERTY. >> NOW THERE IS NO CODE ACTION

AND THAT FINE IS NOT PENDING? >> PRESENTLY I BELIEVE EVERYTHING IS CLEAN. I COULDN'T FIND ANYTHING FURTHER ON IT. I COULDN'T EVEN FIND --

>> IF I MAY ADD. ALL OF THESE ITEMS COME BEFORE PREAPP THEY GET DISPERSED AMONG REVIEW AGENCIES.

THEY GO TO TRC. AGENCIES INTERNAL AND EXTERNAL TO THE CITY. CODE ENFORCEMENT IS PART OF THAT REVIEW. THEY PAY PARTICULAR ATTENTION TO VACATION RENTALS AS RELATE TO CODE RELATIONS.

THEY DON'T HAVE ANYMORE CODE VIOLATIONS.

THEY PAID THEIR FINES AND HAVE AFFIDAVIT OF COMPLETENESS.

>> THANK YOU. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR

COMMENTS? >> NOT SEEING ANY, I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC MEETING. ANYONE SPEAKING IN FAVOR? IF YOU ARE GOING TO TELL US THE SAME THING YOU ALREADY TOLD US

TWICE NOW -- >> YES.

I'D LIKE TO INCORPORATE MY PREVIOUS COMMENTS IN THE RECORD FOR THIS ITEM. AND I WANT TO SAY I DID NOT SEE THIS PROPERTY. BUT I DO RECALL AND I MIGHT HAVE SPOKEN AT THE COUNCIL MEETING ON THIS WAS TWO YEARS AGO.

I WOULD HAVE BEEN IN FAVOR. IT'S NOT ON THE BEACH.

THAT'S A GOOD SIGN. MAYBE YOU GOT SOME -- [INDISCERNIBLE] ARE A BENEFIT TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD BECAUSE IT'S A BENEFIT TO THE CITY TO HAVE THESE THINGS. IF YOU TALK ABOUT A SIDEWALK.

IF THE CITY DOES NOT PRODUCE A SIDEWALK CONNECTED IN THE FUTURE, YOU SHOULD NEVER ASK FOR A SIDEWALK TO BE PUT IN.

BECAUSE YOU ARE ONLY 50 FEET AND DON'T HAVE CONNECTIVITY.

IF THE CITY NEVER INTENDS TO CONNECT A SIDEWALK WHY WOULD YOU ASK FOR 50 FEET OF CEMENT OR 80 FEET OF CEMENT.

IF THE CITY DOES NOT INTEND IT FOR PUBLIC USE YOU SHOULDN'T ASK FOR PUBLIC USE WHEN THE CITY ITSELF DOES NOT HAVE IT.

THAT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE. THE GRASS IS JUST FINE.

YOU GOT ATE IT ACROSS THE STRE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> I THINK SHE EXPLAINED HOW AND WHY THE SIDEWALK ISSUE COMES UP.

IT IS AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE.

AS YOU SO WISELY TESTIFIED JUST A FEW MOMENTS AGO THIS BOARD

[00:50:03]

NEEDS TO FOLLOW THE ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE.

WE TRY TO DO THAT. IF YOU HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THE SIDEWALK ORDINANCES, I SUGGEST YOU TAKE IT TO THE NEXT CITY COMMISSION MEETING. GET THE COMMISSIONERS TO MAKE A CHANGE. UNTIL THEN WE HAVE TO ABIDE BY

WHAT THEY SAY. >> THEY SHOULD ASK THEMSELVES THE QUESTION IF YOU ARE NOT GOING TO CONNECT IT TO, YOU

SHOULD NOT REQUIRE IT. >> THERE ARE MIXED OPINIONS.

AND I IMAGINE YOU PROBABLY HAVE MIXED OPINIONS ALSO ABOUT IT.

I HAVE MIXED OPINIONS ABOUT IT MYSELF.

IT'S A CODE. >> HAVE TO LOOK AT IT AGAIN.

>> THANK YOU FOR YOUR TESTIMONY. >> ANYONE ELSE SPEAKING IN FAVOR OF THIS PROJECT? YOU MAY SPEAK.

>> MICHELLE, 15 SOUTH OCEAN DRIVE UNIT D.

I REPRESENT MR. ARENIS. HE LIVES IN ANOTHER COUNTRY.

I WILL BE HIS ON SITE PROPERTY MANAGER.

WE ARE IN REGULAR CONTACT. I RECOMMENDED HE CLEAN UP THE YARD AS WELL. WITH REGARDS TO THE LANDSCAPE.

>> RIGHT NOW IT'S CLEAN. YOU SHOULD HAVE SEEN IT A

COUPLELE OF YEARS AGO. >> AS FAR AS BEAUTIFYING IT.

>> HE DID HAVE SOMEBODY GO THERE A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO.

I DON'T KNOW HOW OLD THAT PICTURE.

WITH REGARDS TO THAT. I'M GOING TO AGAIN I KNOW WE TALKED ABOUT ORDINANCES. MY CLIENTS' PROPERTY RIGHTS SUPERSEDE AN ORDINANCE. I BROUGHT THIS UP TO THE COMMISSIONERS. FOUR OF THE FIVE COMMISSIONERS TALK TO ME REGULARLY WITH REGARDS TO PROPERTY RIGHTS.

I KNOW THERE IS A MIXED FEELING ON IT.

BUT I WANT TO ASSERT THAT HIS RIGHTS ARE STILL IN TACT.

HE'S AN OWNER. HE PAYS TAXES AND HE WANTS TO MAINTAIN HAD. HE'S NOT WAIVING QUASI JUDICIAL.

WITH REGARDS TO PROPERTY MANAGEMENT IT'S A LITTLE DIFFERENT BECAUSE HE'S OUT OF THE COUNTRY.

HE'S GETTING MEDICAL TREATMENT OUT OF THE COUNTRY.

I WILL BE HELPING HIM ON A LOCAL LEVEL.

HE HAS SOMEBODY THAT WILL HELP HIM FROM A DISTANCE FOR OTHER ISSUES AS WELL. HE WILL HAVE TWO OF US.

THE GUIDE BOOKLETS I'VE GIVEN HIM ONE SO HE UNDERSTANDS THAT.

AS FAR AS THE APPLICANT TO OBTAIN ALL THE BUSINESS LICENSES, AGAIN I'M RECOMMENDING ALL OF THAT.

I SENT HIM AN EMAIL WITH HOW TO OBTAIN THOSE THINGS AND HE'S ALREADY IN PROCESS. THE VEHICLE SITUATION AGAIN JUST OBJECT THE IT BECAUSE HIS PROPERTY RIGHTS ARE HIS PROPERTY RIGHTS. IF HE WANTS TO PARK VEHICLES THERE AND HE'S NOT BREAKING THE LAW.

I KNOW MAYBE SOMEBODY DOESN'T LIKE THE WAY FOUR VEHICLES LOOK BUT HE MAINTAINS HIS PROPERTY RIGHTS ON THAT.

WITH REGARDS TO ALL THE ADVERTISEMENT, AGREED ON THAT.

PREVIOUS VIOLATIONS, I KNOW THERE HAS BEEN SOME.

HE'S IN COMPLIANCE. I'VE TALKED TO HIM ON A REGULAR BASIS WITH REGARDS TO. THAT HE'S DOING EVERYTHING HE CAN TO BE IN COMPLIANCE. SO I DON'T THINK THERE WILL BE ANY ISSUES GOING FORWARD. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS

FOR ME REGARDING THIS? >> I THINK YOU AND I LOOK AT THIS FROM POLAR OPPOSITES. I'M ASKING THIS QUESTION BECAUSE I'M TRYING TO GATHER YOUR POSITION ON THIS IN MORE DETAIL.

IT'S YOUR -- [INAUDIBLE] IN THAT PROPERTY OWNERS HAVE THE RIGHTS TO DO VIRTUALLY ANYTHING THEY WANT WITH THEIR

PROPERTY. >> THAT IS NOT WHAT MY POSITION IS. MY POSITION IS AS LONG AS IT'S LAWFUL. NOT A BROTHEL OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT THAT IS NOT LAWFUL. IF THEY ARE LAWFULLY PAYING THEIR TAXES AND THEY ARE DOING THINGS THAT ARE WITHIN THE LAW BECAUSE I KNOW THAT KIND OF EVERYBODY HAS A DIFFERENT OPINION, BUT THE PROBLEM IS WE DO HAVE THE POLICE DEPARTMENT.

IF SOMEBODY IS DOING SOMETHING INCORRECTLY, THAT IS WHAT THE POLICE ARE THERE FOR TO ENFORCE ILLEGAL ACTIVITY.

>> NO ILLEGAL ACTIVITY. ANY LEGAL ACTIVITY -- I'LL GIVE YOU AN EXAMPLE. TELL ME IF I'M IN THE ARENA AND THIS WILL BE A 60 SECOND CONVERSATION.

CHAIRMAN HAS A $5 MILLION OCEAN FRONT HOME AND I DECIDE TO PURCHASE THE LOT IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO HIM AND PUT MY CONCRETE RECYCLING FACTORY THERE.

[00:55:01]

UNDER YOUR PREMISE THAT'S ALLOWED.

>> AS LONG AS IT'S WITHIN THE LAW, YES, UNFORTUNATELY.

I DON'T LIKE THE FPUA'S PLAN. BUT THEY ARE LAWFULLY OPERATING.

THEY GET TO DO WHAT THEY WANT. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT MOVED.

>> I'M CURIOUS ABOUT THIS. YOU BROUGHT THIS UP SEVERAL TIMES. IN THAT CASE THEN WE WILL

RESPECTFULLY DISAGREE ON THAT. >> I UNDERSTAND.

>> I WAS JUST CURIOUS TO GET YOUR INTERPRETATION THAT ZONING IN ESSENCE HAS NO PLACE IN ANY LOCATION.

>> I DON'T THINK THAT IT DOESN'T HAVE ANY -- YOU HAVE COMMERCIAL ZONING AND RESIDENTIAL ZONING. EVERYTHING THAT I'M FIGHTING FOR IS ALL RESIDENTIAL. IT'S EITHER IT'S BEEN WITHIN THE CONFINES OF EITHER A DUPLEX, CONDO OR SINGLE FAMILY HOME.

TYPICALLY THERE ARE NOT THOSE KIND OF SITUATIONS WHERE I COULD SAY THERE IS GOING TO BE SOME KIND OF PLANT NEXT TO THAT.

IF THERE WAS IF I WAS THE PROPERTY OWNER, OF COURSE I DON'T KNOW, I WOULD HAVE TO MAKE THAT ASSESSMENT.

I'M VOCAL. I'D COME TO MEETINGS AND MAKE MYSELF KNOWN. THAT'S NOT BEEN PRESENTED TO ME.

TABLE PROPERTY RIGHTS ARE THE PROPERTY RIGHTS YES.

>> I DON'T THINK YOU CAN PICK AND CHOOSE HERE ALL OR NOTHING.

YOU PREFER SHORT TERM RENTAL, I PREFER A CONCRETE FACTORY, I

GUESS WE'LL DISAGREE. >> I WILL TELL YOU FROM THIS STANDPOINT IS THAT WE HAVE 13 UNITS IN OUR CONDO.

WE OWN TWO OF THEM NOW OUT OF THE 13.

I WOULD TELL YOU MY EXPERIENCE HAS BEEN FROM BEING THERE FOR 18 MONTHS, ALL OF THE SHORT TERM, WE'RE SHORT TERM, WE KEEP IT IMMACULATE. THE NEXT PERSON COMING IN WANTS TO HAVE THE SAME EXPERIENCE. I HAVE PEOPLE UPSTAIRS LONG TERM RENTERS, THEY ARE TRASHING THE PLACE.

THROWING CIGARETTE BUTTS OUT. THEY DON'T CARE FOR THE PLACE THE SAME. PEOPLE WITH VRBO, THEY WANT TO KEEP THEIR RATING UP. WHEN THEY LEAVE MY PROPERTY I HAVE TO CHECK HOW MANY STARS OR IF THEY LEFT IT CLEAN.

THEY WANT THEIR RATING TO STAY SAME.

I FEEL LIKE THAT'S NOT BEEN BROUGHT TO THE ATTENTION OF THE PUBLIC. MAYBE THEY DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT. I CAN'T STAND LONG TERM RENTERS IN MY BUILDING. I'LL BE STRAIGHT.

THEY DON'T EVEN KEEP THE PLACE AS NICE AS I KEEP IT.

>> THANK YOU. >> ANYONE ELSE SPEAKING TO THIS PROJECT? OPPOSED? I'LL CLOSE THE PUBLIC MEETING. COME BACK TO COMMENTS OF THE BOARD. NOT HEARING ANY I'LL ENTERTAIN A

MOTION. >> I MOVE RECOMMEND APPROVAL

WITH THE FIVE CONDITIONS. >> WE HAVE A MOTION APPROVAL

WITH FIVE CONDITIONS. >> MR. LEE SECOND.

CALL THE ROLL PLEASE. >> YES.

>> YES, MA'AM. >> NEXT ITEM OF BUSINESS IS ITEM

[e. Subdivision - Replat of Magnolia Square Townhouse Tract ]

E SUBDIVISION REPLAT OF MAGNOLIA SQUARE TOWNHOUSE TRACK.

>> BETTER YOU TODAY IS A REPLAT OF THE PORTION OF MAGNOLIA SQUARE SUBDIVISION THAT WAS APPROVED.

IT WENT FOR A LITTLE WHILE DURING RECESSION.

NOW IT'S BACK UP AND SINGLE FAMILY HOMES ARE BEING CONSTRUCTED. THE PROPERTY HAS A FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF RESIDENTIAL LOW.

THERE IS A COMBINATION OF SINGLE FAMILY AND TOWNHOUSE DEVELOPMENT IN THE MAGNOLIA SQUARE. THE SUBJECT OF THE PETITION ARE THE TOWN HOMES. RIGHT NOW THAT THERE ARE FOUR, FOUR UNIT TOWNHOUSES THAT DEVELOPMENTS THAT ARE ALREADY CONSTRUCTED IN MAGNOLIA SQUARE. THERE ARE TWO LAND AREAS WHICH I'VE HIGHLIGHTED HERE THAT IS THE SUBJECT OF THE PETITION.

ONE WAS ORIGINALLY APPROVED ON THE PLAT TO HAVE EIGHT UNITS ALL CONNECTED. AND THEN THE OTHER TWO WHICH ARE NOT DEVELOPED YET ARE THE STANDARD FOUR UNIT WITH A BREEZEWAY AND FOUR UNIT. THESE ARE V A LITTLE DIFFERENT ELEVATION. THAT'S NOT THE SUBJECT OF THE PETITION. THIS IS JUST THE REPLAT.

[01:00:02]

WHAT THE SPEAT SEEKING TO DO IS MAKE THE EIGHT UNIT FOUR AND FOUR, THERE BY LOSING TO UNITS BUT MAKING CONSISTENT ALL THE TOWNHOUSE DEVELOPMENTS IN THE REMAINING PART OF THE PLAT.

IN ORDER TO DO THAT HE HAS TO REPLAT THE TOWNHOUSE TRACT.

THAT IS WHAT THE SUBJECT OF THIS PETITION IS.

THIS IS THE AREA IN QUESTION. YOU CAN SEE THE REMAINING PART OF THE PLAT EVERYTHING SAYS NOT INCLUDED BECAUSE THIS IS A REPLAT AND IT WILL BE CALLED MAGNOLIA TOWN HOMES.

STAFF IS RECOMMEND AGO APPROVAL WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITION OF APPROVAL WHICH IS A STANDARD CONDITION WHEN IT COMES TO PLATS THAT THE APPLICANT APPLIES FOR APPROPRIATE SIGNATURES AND THAT PLAT WILL BE THEN RECORDED AT THE CLERK OF COURT.

STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED PLAT WITH THE STANDARD ONE CONDITION. AND THE PLANNING BOARD CAN EITHER IN FAVOR OF THAT OR RECOMMEND APPROVAL EPI WITH SUBSEQUENT CHANGES TO THE CONDITIONS OR RECOMMEND DENIAL

OF THE TOWNHOUSE PLAT. >> QUESTIONINGS? NOT SEEING ANY FROM THE BOARD I'LL OPEN TO THE PUBLIC.

ANYONE IN FAVOR? NOT SEEING ANYONE I'LL CLOSE THIS PORTION. COMING BACK TO THE BOARD.

ANY QUESTIONS. NOT HEARING ANY I'LL ENTERTAIN A

MOTION. >> MOTION TO APPROVE.

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

>> WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS. >> YES WITH THE ONE RECOMMENDATION. CALL THE ROLL PLEASE.

>> YES, MA'AM. >> MOVING ON TO ITEM F.

[f. City Initiated Abandonment - A Portion of Avenue B]

[g. City Initiated Abandonment - Parcel IDs 2410-503-0041-020-4 and 2410-503-0012-010-9]

CITY ABANDONMENT OF PORTION OF AVENUE B.

I'M GUESSING JACK I SAW YOU COME IN, I SUPPOSE YOU ARE HERE FOR

THIS. >> YOU ARE RIGHT.

>> THIS IS A BOUNCING BALL. >> BEFORE I BEGIN, I'D LIKE TO ASK THE BOARD IF WE CAN DO ITEMS 6F AND G TOGETHER AS ONE PRESENTATION AND THEN ONE MOTION.

>> I THINK WE CAN DO THAT. BEFORE YOU TODAY ARE A FEW DIFFERENT CITY INITIATED ABANDONMENTS.

FIRST IS CONCERNING A PORTION OF AVENUE B.

NORTH 2ND STREET TO THE EAST AVENUE A TO THE SOUTH AND RAILROAD TO THE WEST. THE AVENUE B RIGHT OF WAY IS APPROXIMATELY 65 FEET WIDE. FORT PIERCE UTILITIES AUTHORITY IS REQUESTING AN EASEMENT OF 65 FEET BY 55 FEET TO BE LOCATED AT THE WESTERN EDGE OF THE PROPERTY.

THE SECOND SET OF ABANDONMENTS IS CONCERNING VACATION AND ABANDONING ALL RIGHT OF WAY PASSING THROUGH OR IN THE TWO PARCEL TONS SEEN REPORTED IN PAGE 189 OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS.

THIS DOES NOT INCLUDE THE PORTION OF AVENUE B THAT IS APPROXIMATELY 50 FEET WIDE LYING BETWEEN NORTH 12TH STREET AND NORTH INDIAN RIVER DRIVE. THIS PORTION OF AVENUE B WILL REMAIN FOR PUBLIC USE AND WILL REMAIN OPEN.

JUST TO FURTHER REITERATE THIS. THIS IS MOSTLY PERTAINING TO THE FORMER PINE STREET AND RIVER STREET ABANDONMENTS OR ROADWAYS.

BACK IN 1888 WHEN THIS PROPERTY WENT THROUGH HAD SITE ALONG WITH MORRIS CREEK YOU CAN SEE ON THE PLAT AND THERE IS A RIVER BED PORTION NOTED ON THE PLAT AS WELL.

SO BASICALLY WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN IS THIS ABANDONMENT VIA THE ORDINANCE IS GOING TO ABANDON PINE STREET AND RIVER STREET AND ABANDON ANY UNNAMED OR UNIMPROVED RIGHT OF WAY.

IF THE CITY DID NOT ABANDON MORRIS CREEK, IT WOULD ABANDON MORRIS CREEK. IF IT DIDN'T ABANDON THE RIVER BED, IT WOULD ABANDON THE RIVER BED.

HOWEVER IT IS WRITTEN IN THE ORDINANCE AVENUE B IS NOT SUBJECT TO THIS SPECIFIC ABANDONMENT.

STAFF IS RECOMMEND AGO APPROVAL WITH ONE CONDITION AND THAT PERTAINS TO THE 65 BY 55-FOOT UTILITY EASE.

THAT WILL HAVE TO BE RECORDED WITH THE CLERK OF COURTS.

WE DID HAVE A DISCUSSION WITH THE FOLKS WHO WILL BE DEVELOPING THE KINGS LANDING DEVELOPMENT. STAFF WOULD LIKE TO NOTE THAT

[01:05:04]

WE'RE GOING TO WE'RE GOING TO RECOMMEND A 90 DAYTIME LINE DUE COVID-19. IT'S HARDER TO GET STUFF DONE THESE DAYS. SO WE'RE GOING TO RECOMMEND A 90 DAYTIME LINE TO GIVE THE APPLICANTS THE MOST AMOUNT OF TIME TO GET THE ABANDONMENTS RECORDED WITH THE CLERK OF COURTS. YOU CAN APPROVE THE PROPOSED SUBJECT TO THE ONE CONDITION FOR THE AVENUE B.

YOU CAN RECOMMEND DAYS APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED ABANDONMENTS.

I'M OPEN FOR ANY QUESTIONS AND JACK IS HERE FOR ANY QUESTIONS

YOU MAY HAVE. >> QUESTIONS?

COMMENTS? >> I HAVE A QUESTION.

>> THE EASEMENT, WHERE IS THAT ON THE PROPERTY?

>> THIS IS GOING TO BE ON THE WESTER WESTERN EDGE OF THE PROPERTY. ABUTTING THE RAILROAD.

>> WOULD THAT INTERFERE WITH ANY FUTURE TRAIN LANDING WITH THAT

PROPERTY? >> I DO NOT BELIEVE SO.

>> THANK YOU. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? ANY QUESTIONS FOR JACK?

JACK, DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS? >> NO, SIR, JUST HERE TO ANSWER

QUESTIONS. >> I SEE NO QUESTIONS.

I'LL OPEN THE PUBLIC PORTION OF THE MEETING.

ANYONE SPEAKING TO THIS PROJECT PLEASE STEP FORWARD.

STATE YOUR NAME ADDRESS AND SIGN IN.

YOU'VE DONE THAT A LOT TODAY. >> THANK YOU.

>> I'VE BEEN A RESIDENT FOR 32 YEARS HERE.

CAME HERE IN TIMES. THIS IS AN ITEM THAT HAS BEEN INTEREST TO ME MANY TIMES IN THE PAST.

WHAT I DID NOT HEAR IN THE PRESENTATION YOU INITIATED ABANDONMENT. WHO DO YOU ABANDON IT TO.

WHO BECOMES THE OWNER? YOU ABANDON THE PUBLIC USE OF THIS PROPERTY SO WHO BECOMES THE BENEFICIARY TO THIS OF THIS PROPERTY IN FEE SIMPLE SO I ASSUME THEY ARE TRANSFERRING THE FEE SIMPLE. I'M SURE IT WAS HELD BY THE CITY MANY FEE SIMPLE. IF THIS WAS A PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY OR PUBLIC PORTION OF PROPERTY AND IT'S NO LONGER USED BY THE PUBLIC, THEN IT IS ABANDONED TO WHOM?

TYPICALLY IT IS ABANDONED -- >> LET'S GET AN ANSWER.

>> SO COUNTERLY THIS PROPERTY IS OWNED BY THE CITY OF FORT PIERCE. PER THE AGREEMENT OF AN F -- A REQUEST FOR QUALIFICATIONS AND REQUEST FOR PROPOSE IT WILL CITY OF FORT PIERCE AWARDED THE PROPERTY TO THE KINGS LANDING DEVELOPMENT GROUP. SO WHEN IT COMES TIME TO DEVELOP THAT PROPERTY, WE WILL FOLLOW THE AGREEMENT AS WE HAVE WITH THE KINGS LANDING DEVELOPERS AND THEY WILL BE THE OWNERS OF THE

PROPERTY IS MY UNDERSTANDING. >> OK.

>> SO THE CITY IS VACATING. THAT CLEARS IT UP A LITTLE BIT FOR ME. THANK YOU.

>> OK THANK YOU. >> ANYONE ELSE SPEAKING TO THIS PROJECT? NOT SEEING ANYONE I'LL CLOSE THIS PORTION OF THE MEETING. DO I NEED -- I'M GOING TO NEED

TWO MOTIONS ON THIS AM I NOT? >> YOU CAN DO TWO MOTIONS IF YOU

LIKE. >> I'D LIKE TO -- ANY OTHER COMMENTS BY THE BOARD? NOT SEEING ANY.

I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION CONCERNING ITEM G, ITEM F, THE

ABANDONMENT OF AVENUE B. >> 80 MAKE A MOTION WE RECOMMEND

APPROVAL RASHING THE EASEMENT. >> MOTION, SECOND.

CALL THE ROLL PLEASE. >> YES.

>> I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION OR CONVERSATION CONCERNING ITEM G.

I'M NOT GOING TO GO THROUGH ALL THESE CODE NUMBERS OF LOT NUMBERS. THEY DRIVE ME NUTS.

ANY DISCUSSION OR MOTION? >> I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WEATHER SERVICE PROVE THE ABANDONMENT OF ITEM G SUBJECT TO

THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION. >> SECOND.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND. CALL THE ROLL PLEASE.

[01:10:05]