[1. Ordinance 2021-40, amending the City’s Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map to change the designated use of property located at the northwest corner of Dixie Highway and Port Malabar Boulevard, from Mixed Use to Bayfront Mixed Use (10.3 acres)(Case CP-4- 2021, Eztopeliz, LLC), first reading. (Part 1 of 2 )]

SMITH, ITEM NUMBER ONE.

OR TWENTY TWENTY ONE, DASH 40, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PALM BAY, BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA, MANY OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, TITLE SEVEN, TITLE 17, LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, CHAPTER 183.

COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REGULATIONS.

SECTION ONE EIGHTY THREE POINT ZERO ONE.

COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SUBSECTION D.

ADOPTION OF FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDING FUTURE LAND USE MAP.

PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF ORDINANCES OR PARTS OF ORDINANCES AND CONFLICT HERE WITH PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

WANT TO READ THE. THIS ISN'T A QUASI.

THIS TIME, I'M GOING TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING.

AND ASK THE APPLICANT TO STEP FORWARD AND PRESENT THIS CASE.

I'M HERE. AND SO. ADAM SHERMAN.

WANT STAFF TO COME IN AND SEE IF COUNSEL HAS ANY QUESTIONS AT THIS POINT OR I THINK HE WAS SAYING BY DO WE TABLE THIS, I WOULD RECOMMEND MAYBE WE JUST MOVE THE AGENDA, ORDER AROUND A LITTLE BIT. SO, YES, IF UNLESS YOU ALL ARE PLANNING TO JUST GO AHEAD ALL THE WAY THROUGH, IF YOU ARE HOPING THAT HE COMES, I WOULD NOT START THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS.

I JUST OPEN IT. I WOULD STOP AT THE APPLICANT HAS ALL WE'VE DONE IS READ THE ORDINANCE CAPTION, BUT I WOULDN'T START ACTUALLY TAKING TESTIMONY ON THIS AND HAVING ANY WITNESSES IF IF THE PLAN IS YOU DON'T HAVE TO WAIT FOR HIM.

BUT IF THE PLAN IS YOU'RE HOPING FOR HIM TO BE HERE, MAYBE WE COULD START WITH THE CITY'S.

ITEM, AND THEN WE COULD COME BACK TO THIS, BUT IT IS NOT REQUIRED.

COUNCIL CAN RULE ON SOMETHING IN THE ABSENCE OF IT.

BUT IF IT IF IT WAS YOUR HOPE TO GIVE TIME, I WOULD SUGGEST THAT.

OK, SO I COULD JUST STOP IT AT THIS POINT.

AND I'M SHERMAN. YES.

WE HAVEN'T HAD ANY TESTIMONY.

NOBODY'S BEEN BROUGHT UP ON THAT THEN.

RIGHT. IS THE CAPTION. SO WE'RE GOING TO GET BACK TO THIS.

AND LET'S GO TO ITEM SIX.

HMM. ALSO, MAYOR, I'LL ALSO SAY THAT I DO SEE RESIDENTS WHOSE.

THEIR REQUESTS FOR US ARE FOR CERTAIN HEARINGS ARE IN THE AUDIENCE, TOO, SO I KNOW THEY PROBABLY WANT TO GET IN AND OUT AS WELL.

[6. Ordinance 2021-45, amending the Code of Ordinances, Chapter 185, Zoning Code, Subchapter 'District Regulations' by modifying provisions of the BMU - Bayfront Mixed Use District (Case T-8-2021, City of Palm Bay), first reading. ]

SO LET'S GO TO ITEM SIX FOR.

I'M SIX MS. SMITH. WITNESS TWENTY TWENTY ONE, DASH FORTY FIVE, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PALM BAY, BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, TITLE 17, LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, CHAPTER 185, ZONING CODE, SUBCHAPTER DISTRICT REGULATIONS BY MODIFY PROVISIONS OF THE BAMU BAYFRONT MIXED-USE DISTRICT PROVIDED FOR THE REPEAL OF ORDINANCES OR PARTS OF SUZANNE CONFLICT HERE WITH PROVIDED FOR INCLUSION ISD PALM BAY CODE OF ORDINANCES PROVIDING FOR A SEVERABILITY CLAUSE PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

I'M GOING TO OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING AND DEFER TO MS. SHERMAN. THANK YOU, MAYOR.

I'M GOING TO ASK LARRY BRADLEY, OUR GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIRECTOR, TO COME UP AND PROVIDE AN OVERVIEW OF THIS CASE. GOOD EVENING, EVERYONE.

LARRY BRADLEY, GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIRECTOR, THIS IS A TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE BAYFRONT MIXED USE ZONING TEXT.

THIS HAS BEEN REVIEWED PREVIOUSLY BY PLANNING AND ZONING AND THE BAYFRONT REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT. IT INVOLVES CHANGES TO A NUMBER OF SECTIONS WITHIN THE TEXT.

I CAN GO THROUGH THEM INDIVIDUALLY, IF YOU LIKE, OR I CAN JUST KIND OF GO THROUGH A QUICK SUMMARY WHERE WHICH IS KIND OF IN THE STAFF REPORT.

[00:05:04]

WE'RE MAKING CHANGES TO THE INTENT, TO THE PERCENTAGES WHERE WE'RE GOING TO REQUIRE A MINIMUM OF 85 PERCENT RESIDENTIAL AND 15 PERCENT COMMERCIAL.

WE'RE MAKING SOME CHANGES TO THE PRINCIPAL USES, REPLACING SHARED STORMWATER FACILITIES WITH BREWPUBS AND OTHER DRINKING ESTABLISHMENTS, MODIFYING CONDITIONAL USE TO ALLOW ON PREMISES CONSUMPTION OF ALCOHOL AND OUTDOOR TABLE SERVICE NO LONGER REQUIRES CONDITIONAL USE. WE ARE PROHIBITING WAREHOUSES AND SELF STORAGES AND ADDING THEM TO A LIST OF PROHIBITED USES.

CHANGES TO SECTION F LOT AND STRUCTURE REQUIREMENTS INCLUDE A NUMBER OF CHANGES WHERE WE'RE REQUIRING CERTAIN DIFFERENT REQUIREMENTS FOR THE HEIGHT INCENTIVES.

WE'RE ALSO MODIFYING SOME PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR THE WITH THE DISTANCE OF PARKING SPACES TO SETBACKS, WE ARE MAKING SOME CHANGES TO THE HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS WERE REQUIRING SOME STEP STEPPING BACK OF THE ARCHITECTURE.

SOME LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENTS TO SCREEN PARKING STRUCTURES FROM THE ROADWAYS SIDEWALK, WHICH WILL GO TO A MINIMUM OF FIVE FEET AND PROHIBITING THE USE OF BARBED WIRE.

I CAN GO THROUGH ANYTHING. AND MORE SPECIFICALLY, IF YOU'D LIKE TO HAVE THE LANGUAGE ON THE SCREEN, WHICH WE CAN GO THROUGH, IF YOU WOULD LIKE AS WELL.

BUT THAT'S BASICALLY IT.

AS I SAID, YOU'VE PROBABLY ALL SEEN THIS BEFORE ON BESHARA.

MOST OF YOU HAVE SEEN IT BEFORE.

SO WITH THAT, I WILL ENTERTAIN ANY QUESTIONS.

ALSO, ANY QUESTIONS? ARIANE. ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WISHES TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST ITEM NUMBER SIX ON THE AGENDA? AND THEN I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND ASK FOR A MOTION MOTION TO IMPROVE ON HIS TWENTY TWENTY ONE DASH 45 FIRST READING. GOT A MOTION BY DEPUTY MAYOR JOHNSON, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN BAILEY.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION COUNCIL SYNANON I'M CALLING IT ALL IN FAVOR.

I UNANIMOUSLY LET'S REARRANGE.

OUR AGENDA IS THE APPLICANT FOR ITEM NUMBER ONE PRESENT AND YET.

WHAT APPLICANTS ARE HERE? THREE AND FOUR, WE'LL TAKE ITEM NUMBER THREE NEXT.

[3. Ordinance 2021-42, amending the City’s Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map to change the designated use of property located north of and adjacent to Port Malabar Boulevard, in the vicinity between Clearmont Street and Sadnet Circle, from Public/Semi- Public Use to Single-Family Residential Use (0.30 acres)(Case CP-5-2021, Richard Pribell), only one reading required. ]

ADAM SMITH.

ORDINANCE TWENTY TWENTY ONE, DASH 42, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PALM BAY, BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA, MEANING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, TITLE 17, LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, CHAPTER 183, COMPREHENSIVE PROLIA REGULATIONS, SECTION ONE EIGHTY THREE POINT ZERO ONE.

COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SUBSECTION D ADOPTION OF FUTURE LAND USE MAP BY AMENDING THE FUTURE LEASE LAND USE MAP PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF ORDINANCES OR PARTS OF ORDINANCES AND CONFLICT HERE WITH PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

THANK YOU, MISS SMITH. I'M GOING TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AT THIS TIME AND ASK THE APPLICANT TO STEP FORWARD.

EVEN. I'M NOT SUPPOSED TO SPEAK ON THE SUBJECT, OK? THE PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING THEY HAD STAFF DISCUSS CLOSED.

HI. YES, MY NAME IS RICK PRIBYL.

I PURCHASED THIS LAND AND CLOSED ON IT APPROXIMATELY SIX WEEKS AGO.

I PURCHASED IT FROM THE PEACE LUTHERAN CHURCH.

IT'S A PARCEL THAT IS ADJACENT.

THEY BUILT IT FOR THE PASTOR IN 1973.

THEY SOLD ME THIS HOME.

AT FIRST, GROWTH MANAGEMENT SAID I COULD LIVE THERE, BUT JUST COULDN'T ADD ON TO THE NONCONFORMING USE BECAUSE IT WAS OWNED.

IT IS ZONED INSTITUTIONAL BECAUSE THEY WERE ENTITLED TO DO THAT UNDER THE CHURCH'S ZONING. NOW THAT THEY SOLD IT TO ME, GROWTH MANAGEMENT ASKED THAT I GET A RESIDENTIAL ZONING SO I CAN MOVE IN.

MY INTENTION IS TO MOVE THERE AND TO CERTAINLY ADD A LOT OF VALUE FROM ITS CURB APPEAL.

WITH YOUR APPROVAL, I'LL BE ADDING IRRIGATION, NEW ROOF, NEW WINDOWS.

AND I LOOK FORWARD TO.

BEING A GOOD NEIGHBOR AND AND SHOWING GOOD OF OWNERSHIP.

JUST IN, BY THE WAY, THE PROPERTY APPRAISERS HAS A PASSPORT CONTROL NUMBER FOR THIS PROPERTY. IF YOU LOOK ON THEIR WEBSITE, IT IS ALREADY A CONSIDERED A SINGLE FAMILY HOME.

AND I JUST SIMPLY WANT TO CONTINUE ITS USE AS A HOME.

[00:10:04]

HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, CAN COUNSEL ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE APPLICANT? THANK YOU. IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WISHES TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THIS ITEM? NONE. I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT THIS TIME, ARE YOU COMPLETED WITH YOUR COMMENTS BEFORE? I DO, SIR.

YES, SIR. YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE TO ADD? I FEEL LIKE IT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE STREET BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF HOMES ALONG THAT THAT ROAD, SO IT DOESN'T LOOK OUT OF PLACE AND LIKE I SAY, IT'S EXISTING SINCE 1973.

THANK YOU. OK, THE PUBLIC HEARING IS NOW CLOSED AND COUNCIL, WHAT IS YOUR PLEASURE? MOTION TO APPROVE CP DASH FIVE, DASH TWENTY TWENTY ONE SUBJECT TO STAFF COMMENTS.

ONLY ONE READING. I'VE GOT A MOTION BY DEPUTY MAYOR JOHNSON, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN BAILEY. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION COUNCIL? YOU NONE, WE HAVE A MOTION, I'M CALLING IT ALL IN FAVOR, I.

AS IS UNANIMOUSLY.

ITEM NUMBER FOUR, ADAM SMITH, THE FOLLOWING ITEMS ARE QUASI JUDICIAL IN NATURE.

[4. Ordinance 2021-43, rezoning property located north of and adjacent to Port Malabar Boulevard, in the vicinity between Clearmont Street and Sadnet Circle, from IU (Institutional Use District) to RS-2 (Single-Family Residential District) (0.30 acres) (Case CPZ-5-2021, Richard Pribell), first reading. (Quasi-Judicial Proceeding) ]

PUBLIC HEARINGS, AGENDA ITEMS, NUMBERS TWO, FOUR AND SEVEN.

ANY PERSON WHO WISHES TO TESTIFY ON SUCH A MATTER MEDINA SPEAK A CARD WHICH CONTAINS A SWORN OATH TO TELL THE TRUTH.

ANY INDIVIDUAL DRESSED IN A COUNCILMAN STATE, HIS OR HER NAME, AND CONFIRMED THAT A SPEAKER CARD HAS BEEN SIGNED.

ATTORNEYS WHO ARE APPEARING ON BEHALF OF A PARTY AND NOT PROVIDING TESTIMONIAL EVIDENCE ARE NOT CONSIDERED WITNESSES AND NEED NOT BE SWORN.

ALSO, TO DISCLOSE ANY EX PARTE COMMUNICATION BY DISCLOSING THE SUBJECT MATTER OF THE COMMUNICATION AND THE IDENTITY OF THE PERSON, GROUP OR ENTITY WITH WHOM THE COMMUNICATION TOOK PLACE. ORDER OF THIS PROCEEDING WILL BE AS FOLLOWS FIRST, THE APPLICANT WILL MAKE HIS PRESENTATION, FOLLOWED BY STAFF COMMENTS FOLLOWED BY ANY READ OR ADVERSELY AFFECTED PARTY THAT HAS COMPLIED WITH SECTION FIFTY NINE POINT THREE OF PALM BAY CODE OF ORDINANCES. EACH WILL HAVE A MAXIMUM OF 30 MINUTES.

ANY SPEAKER MAY BE SUBJECT TO CROSS-EXAMINATION BY THE COUNSEL OR ANY OTHER INTERESTED PARTY OR MAXIMAL 15 MINUTES PER WITNESS.

ANY OTHER PERSON MAY SPEAK FOR A MAXIMUM OF THREE MINUTES, THE APPLICANT WILL THEN BE ALLOWED CONCLUDING REMARKS OR MAXIMUM OF 10 MINUTES, AS I JUST ABOUT MAY MODIFY THE TIME LIMITS ON HIS OWN MOTION OR UPON REQUEST OF A PARTY TO THE PROCEEDING.

HEARING WILL THEN BE CLOSED AND NO ADDITIONAL TESTIMONY OR ARGUMENT WILL BE ALLOWED AND COUNSEL WILL THEN DELIBERATE IN PUBLIC AT THE END OF DELIBERATION, A COUNCIL MEMBER WILL MAKE A MOTION ON THE APPLICATION, BRING THE MATTER TO A VOTE.

EVERY COUNCIL MEMBER IS THEN FREE TO VOTE IN FAVOR OR AGAINST THE MOTION.

ORDOÑEZ, 20, 2021, DAYS 43.

AN AUDIENCE OF THE CITY OF PALM BAY, BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE ZONING ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PALM BAY BY CHANGING A ZONING A PROPERTY FROM IUE INSTITUTIONAL USE DISTRICT TO ARTIST TO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT, WHICH PROPERTY IS LOCATED NORTH OF AND ADJACENT TO MALABAR BOULEVARD IN THE VICINITY BETWEEN CLAREMONT STREET, ASTATINE ITS CIRCLE AND LEGALLY DESCRIBED HERE IN PROVIDING FOR A CHANGE OF THE ZONING MAP PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

AT THIS TIME, I'M OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING AND ASK THE APPLICANT TO STEP FORWARD AND PRESENT THIS CASE. WHY AM I TO SPEAK ON THE MATTER? IT'S. BECAUSE IT REQUIRES A LAND USE CHANGE AND A ZONING CHANGE, I THINK MY PREVIOUS COMMENTS ARE APPLICABLE TO THIS.

THANK YOU. ANYONE THAT WISHES TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THIS ITEM.

THE QUESTIONS AND DO YOU NONE, I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

MOTION APPROVED ORDINANCE TWENTY TWENTY ONE, DASH FORTY THREE, FIRST READING.

I'VE GOT A MOTION BY DEPUTY MAYOR JOHNSON SINGING IT BY COUNCILMAN BAILEY ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION COUNCIL AND NONE.

I'M GOING TO POSE THE QUESTION ALL IN FAVOR I ASK IS UNANIMOUSLY.

ITEM NUMBER ONE, APPLICANT PRESIDENT.

ITEM TWO. EMMAVILLE.

[5. Ordinance 2021-44, amending the City’s Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map to change the designated use of property located west of Tripoli Road and Walsh Avenue, in the vicinity south of Tiffiny Avenue, from Utilities Use and Recreation and Open Space Use to Single-Family Residential Use (2.83 acres) (Case CP-7-2021, MRJV, LLC), only one reading required. ]

I'VE. AND I'M FINE, MS., MAN.

[00:15:21]

AND. AN AUDIENCE, THE AUDIENCE, 2021, THAT'S 40 FOR AN AUDIENCE OF THE CITY OF PALM BAY, OUR COUNTY, FLORIDA, MEANING THE CODE OF ORTIZ'S TITLE 17 LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, CHAPTER 183 COMPREHENSIVE CLEAR REGULATIONS, SECTION ONE EIGHTY THREE POINT ZERO ONE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SUBSECTION D THAT SHERMAN OF FUTURE LAND USE MAP BY AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP PROVIDED FOR THE REPEAL OF ORDINANCES OR PARTS OF ORDINANCES AND CONFLICT HERE WITH PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

THANK YOU, MISS SMITH, I'M GOING TO OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING AND ASK THE APPLICANT TO STEP FORWARD AND PRESENT THEIR CASE.

WELL, HOW'S EVERYBODY DOING? WELL, THANK YOU. HELLO, FIRST AND FOREMOST, THANK YOU TO THE PALM BAY CITY COUNCIL TEAM FOR TAKING THE TIME TO REVIEW OUR REQUEST FOR A FUTURE LAND USE AMENDMENT.

MY NAME IS ASHLEY WOFFORD.

I REPRESENT AMARA JTV LLC.

AT THIS HEARING LAST NOVEMBER, WE PURCHASED TWO ADJOINING VACANT LOT PARCELS AND PALM BAY AT TWO 098 WALSH AVENUE SE AND 12 18 TRIPOLI ROAD SE.

THE WALSCH LOT IS ONE POINT ONE TWO ACRES AND THE TRIPOLI LOT IS ONE POINT SEVEN ONE ACRES. WE BOUGHT THEM FROM ONE SELLER THAT HAD NO PLANS TO USE OR DEVELOP THE LAND.

THESE ARE THE ONLY TWO LOTS WE OWN IN THE AREA.

WE PURCHASED THESE LOTS WITH INTENT TO POTENTIALLY BUILD TWO HOMES, ONE PER LOT THAT FIT INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND COMMUNITY.

WE SUBMITTED AN APPLICATION IN MARCH REQUESTING A CHANGE OF THE FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION FOR BOTH PLOTS TO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL.

ALTHOUGH THE LOTS ARE ZONED FOR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, THE CURRENT FUTURE LAND USE STATUS AS UTILITIES AND RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE.

WE ARE HAPPY THAT THE STAFF REPORT AND THE PALM BAY PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING ON MAY 5TH RESULTED IN A FAVORABLE RECOMMENDATION FOR THE FUTURE LAND USE AMENDMENT.

AS NOTED IN THE STAFF REPORT, THE CITY OF PALM BAY ALREADY HAS A REQUISITE AMOUNT OF PUBLIC OWNERSHIP OF PARK DESIGNATED LAND TO ALLOW FOR FUTURE LAND USE CHANGE FOR THESE LOTS FROM RECREATIONAL TO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL.

ADDITIONALLY, THE STAFF REPORT NOTED THAT THIS FUTURE LAND USE AMENDMENT SHOULD NOT IMPACT THE SUPPLY AND VARIETY OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING IN THE CITY.

LASTLY, THE STAFF REPORT CONCLUDED THAT THE FLU AMENDMENT WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT UTILITIES STANDARDS AND SOLID WASTE STANDARDS, AND WE ACKNOWLEDGE THE NEED TO WORK WITH THE CITY ON A DRAINAGE PLAN IF THE NEW AMENDMENT IS ACCEPTED.

WE ARE HAPPY THAT THERE WOULD BE NO ADVERSE IMPACT ON THE PUBLIC SCHOOL SYSTEM.

WE HOPE TO BUILD A HOME THAT FITS THE COMMUNITY ON THESE LAND PARCELS AND OR HAVE THE OPTION TO SELL THE PARCELS TO SOMEONE IN THE COMMUNITY WHO WISHES TO BUILD HOMES.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.

THANK YOU. AND ALSO, EXCUSE ME, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? AND ANY IS THERE ONE THAT WISHES TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THIS OF THE FORWARD MR. THAT. GILBERTON, 586 OCEAN SPRAY STREET, SOUTHWEST, WHEN I WAS GOING THROUGH THE PACKET, I SAW THAT THESE LOTS COULD BE DIVIDED ONE MORE TIME WITHOUT HAVING TO COME BACK BEFORE COUNCIL FOR REVIEW.

I UNDERSTAND THAT BECAUSE THEY'RE VERY NICE PIECES OF PROPERTY IS KIND OF THE WAY I LIKE EVERY PLACE AND PALM BAY TO BE.

BUT I DID HAVE ONE QUESTION.

I MIGHT GET IT ANSWERED BY STAFF.

HOW MANY HOMES? BECAUSE THIS IS TWO TOTAL OF TWO POINT EIGHTY THREE ACRES.

HOW MANY HOMES, EVEN IF THEY DON'T DIVIDE, COULD THEY PUT ON THIS PROPERTY BASED ON THE ON THE CHANGE OF ZONING, HOW MANY HOMES COULD THEY BUILD.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

GREAT OPPORTUNITY FOR STAFF TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION, I'D LIKE TO BRING UP LARRY BRADLEE, OUR GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIRECTOR.

GOING TO PULL UP THE UNCOWED, I DON'T MISQUOTE IT.

OH. JUST BRING THE CODE.

AND THIS PROPERTY LEAVE IS IS IN THE.

SARAH. THIS IS ADDRESSED TO OWNING.

VICTOR, I GET THAT RIGHT.

SO IT'S TWO POINT EIGHTY THREE ACRES, I HAVEN'T COMMITTED THE ENTIRE CODE TO MEMORY YET, SO I MAKE SURE I READ IT CORRECTLY.

[00:20:12]

SO THIS, OF COURSE, IS GOING TO BE A CALCULATION BASED ON THE SIZE OF THE LOT, BUT OBVIOUSLY IF THERE'S DRAINAGE UTILITIES, IT ALSO HAS TO BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT.

ASKED WHO'S OWNING? AS A MINIMUM LOT SIZE OF 7500 SQUARE FEET, SO.

QUICK MATH AND I WILL GIVE YOU THE ROUGH NUMBER.

IT'S SOMEWHERE BETWEEN, I WOULD SAY BETWEEN 10 AND 16 LOTS.

AND IF YOU DIVIDED IT BY STRAIGHT CALCULATION OF THE LOTTERY, IT'S SIXTEEN POINT FOUR THREE. THAT WOULD BE THAT WOULD BE 7500 SQUARE FEET, ASSUMING THEY COULD BUILD THE MALL WITHOUT LOSS OF AREA FOR DRAINAGE DRIVEWAYS ACCESS.

SO IT'S THE MAXIMUM OF 16 IS PROBABLY GOING TO BE LESS THAN THAT IF YOU ACTUALLY DID A FULL SUBDIVISION ON IT.

I BE THAT COUNSEL.

ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS, MAYOR OF STAFF? IT DIDN'T SEEM IN BAILEY.

DO THEY NEED TO HAVE YOUR DRIVEWAY PERMANENTLY HAVE CERTAIN TYPE OF ACCESS THERE TO CORRECT? WELL, YEAH, IF THEY WERE GOING TO DO A FULL SUBDIVISION ON THIS, THEY'D HAVE TO CREATE A FRONTAGE FOR THE LOTTS.

MINIMUM, THE MINIMUM FRONTAGE IN THIS ZONING CATEGORY LEAVE IS MAKE SURE I GET IT CORRECT.

IT'S 20. YEAH, THEY HAVE THEIR FRONTAGE ON EACH OF THE LOTS, AT LEAST AT LEAST 25 FEET OF FRONTAGE FOR EACH LOT. SO THEY HAVE TO IF THEY WERE GOING TO CREATE LIKE A CUL DE SAC OR SOMETHING IN THERE, THEY THEY'RE GOING TO LOSE LOTS.

GOING TO BE 16. IT'LL BE LESS THAN THAT.

FURTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF COUNSEL.

THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU.

ANYONE ELSE IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WISHES TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THIS ITEM? SO. I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT THIS TIME, COUNCILMAN MOTION PROVE OR ITS 20, 21, DASH 44, ONLY ONE READING REQUIRED.

SECOND, I GOT A MOTION BY DEPUTY MAYOR JOHNSON AND I BELIEVE WAS SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN FELIX. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION COUNCIL? CNN POSING THE QUESTION ALL IN FAVOR OF ANY OPPOSE PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.

ITEM NUMBER SEVEN. YOUR STUFF IS LET ME KNOW THAT THE APPLICANT INDICATED THEY'RE SENDING SOMEONE, BUT I DON'T HAVE AN ETA OR ITEM ONE, 15, 20.

I'M SORRY, I THOUGHT YOU SAID SEVEN ITEMS. SEVEN. ITEM SEVEN, YES.

OK, SO THAT'S THE APPLICANTS NOT HERE.

YEAH. LET'S GO TO ITEM EIGHT, THE APPLICANT HERE FROM ITEM EIGHT, HE IS ALSO INCOMING.

OH, ON ITEM NINE.

[9. Request by Timothy and Karen Durnin for a variance to allow a proposed detached garage to encroach ten (10) feet into the 25-foot side building setback as established by Section 185.034(F)(7)(c), Palm Bay Code of Ordinances (0.47 acres) (V-15-2021). (Quasi-Judicial Proceeding) ]

WHAT ITEM NUMBER NINE? I. HELLO, MY NAME IS KAREN BRITNEY.

HOLD ON ONE SECOND. I BELIEVE YOU ALREADY READ THE CAPTION.

I NEED YOU TO READ THE CAPTION YOU READ THE PROCEDURE FOR.

NUMBER NINE, NUMBER NINE, MY SQUADRON JUDICIAL.

CARRY ON, MA'AM. WE JUST WANT TO GET A PERMIT FOR.

ALUMINUM BUILDING OR GARAGE MAT LAND, WHICH WE'VE ALREADY POURED THE CONCRETE THAT WAS APPROVED AND NOW THE BUILDING WAS NOT APPROVED, SO WE'RE JUST HOPING FOR AN AMENDMENT ON THAT. WE DON'T HAVE TO POUR MORE CONCRETE.

ANYTHING ELSE YOU WISH THE STATEMENT? NOT THAT I CAN THINK OF NOTHING THAT IS ALREADY IN THE MINUTES FROM LAST MEETING.

THANK YOU, MA'AM. ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WISHES TO SPEAK GILBERTON? THANK YOU, MA'AM. OK, SOMEONE'S GOING TO SPEAK, YOU'LL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK AGAIN. BILL 586 OCEAN SPRAY STREET SOUTHWEST.

[00:25:05]

JUST OUT OF CURIOSITY, I WAS IF THEY'RE ABLE TO GET A SLAB POURED WITH IT BECAUSE IT'S IN THE SAME FOOTPRINT, IS WHAT THEY'RE ASKING FOR THE VARIANCE ON.

NOW, HOW WAS THAT SLAB ABLE TO BE POURED AT THAT TIME? I'M BILL BATTEN, BEING THE DOUBTING TOM THAT HE IS IS JUST ONE MORE TIME WHERE SAYING, WELL, WE'VE ALREADY MADE THIS MISTAKE, WE HAVE TO NOW PROCEED WITH IT AS THE INDIVIDUAL THEMSELVES. I PERSONALLY SEE NO PROBLEM WITH THEM GETTING IT DONE.

I DON'T THAT'S NOT MY CONCERN OR WHAT WAS BOTHERING BILL BATIN.

IT WAS THE FACT THAT IT WAS DID NOT MEET THE CRITERIA TO BEGIN WITH WITHOUT HAVING TO HAVE A WAIVER OF THAT TIME.

SO HOW DID WE GET TO THIS POINT WHERE WE'RE AT NOW? THAT BEING SAID. I SEE NO PROBLEM WITH THE INDIVIDUAL GETTING A PLACE TO HAVE A CHAT.

THEY'VE GOT THE LAND, THEY OWN IT, IT'S NOT REALLY INFRINGING UPON ANYBODY ELSE.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU.

IS THERE ANYONE ELSE THAT WISHES TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THIS ITEM? AND I'M SHERMAN A GREAT OPPORTUNITY FOR A RESPONSE TO THAT QUESTION TO BRING LARRY UP TO TRY TO PROVIDE SOME INFO ON THAT.

THAT EVENING AGAIN, YEAH, THIS IS COVERED IN THE STAFF REPORT.

THIS PARTICULAR QUESTION, AN ITEM UNDER ITEM ONE, IT SAYS WHEN THIS WAS DISCUSSED IN THE REPORT, IT SAYS APPLICANT SEATS, A CONCRETE SLAB WAS WAS PERMITTED AS A FOUNDATION FOR STEEL GARAGE. NOW THAT IT IS POURED IN FROM IT.

AND WE WERE NOTIFIED IT WAS KICKED BACK ON A LOT, 15 FEET.

SO THE CONCRETE SLAB WAS POURED BEFORE THEY APPLIED FOR THE PERMIT.

AND THEN WHEN THEY WENT FOR THE BUILDING PERMIT, THAT'S WHEN THEY WERE TOLD THAT THAT THEY HAD TO GET THE PERMIT FOR THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE.

THE CONCRETE SLAB WAS POURED PRIOR TO A PERMIT BEING OBTAINED, YES.

OR REQUESTED.

COUNCILWOMAN BAILEY, SO WERE THEY GRANTED THE PERMIT FOR THE SLAB OR IS THAT SOON-SHIONG PROMISES ACTUALLY PART OF THE VARIANCE RIGHT NOW? OK, SO IT'S YEAH, IT'S SO IT HASN'T BEEN GRANTED.

I'M SORRY. SO NOT A PERMIT WAS NOT GRANTED.

NO SLAB. AND I CLARIFY, LARRY, IN THE BACKGROUND SECTION OF THE MEMO, IF IT SEEMS TO INDICATE THE APPLICANTS HAVE ON BOTH PROPERTIES SINCE 2019 AND 2020, THE APPLICANTS RECEIVED A PERMIT FOR A CONCRETE SLAB VIA PERMIT.

NO, IT GIVES A NO CONCRETE SLAB HAS SINCE BEEN INSTALLED.

OK. THE APPLICANTS HAVE NOW APPLIED FOR THE DETACHED METAL GARAGE.

SO I DON'T KNOW, I GUESS TO MR. BOUTON'S QUESTION, DO YOU HAVE ANY DATA ON WHY WE APPROVED A PERMIT THAT WOULD NOT BE CONSISTENT WITH OUR.

YEAH, I DON'T KNOW.

I DID NOT DISCUSS IT WITH THE BUILDING OFFICIAL, BUT YEAH, IT WOULD BE CONSIDERED SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE PART OF WHAT WOULD BE REQUIRED FOR A VARIANCE.

WE SOMEHOW ISSUED A PERMIT BASICALLY WITH IT IN THE WRONG SPOT.

IT WOULD BE MY. BIG ON THAT, BUT I DON'T HAVE THE BACKUP AS TO WHY THAT HAPPENED OR HOW THAT HAPPENED. CERTAINLY SOMETHING.

I MEAN, SOMETIMES THINGS GET BUILT AND THEY REQUIRE A VARIANCE OR THEY REQUIRE APPROVAL AND IT'S NOT CAUGHT UNTIL AFTER THE FACT.

THAT DOES HAPPEN FROM TIME TO TIME.

ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS OF STAFF COUNSEL IS.

WHERE ARE THESE GOING TO HAVE TO BE MARRIED TOGETHER IN ORDER TO HAVE THE ACCESSOR? WELL, UNIT ON A SEPARATE LOT.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER LEGAL PROCESSES YOU HAVE TO GO THROUGH? A STREET UNIT, SORRY, I'M SORRY.

WELL, YOU KNOW, BUT AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE.

YEAH, THEY'LL THEY'LL HAVE TO THEY'LL HAVE TO PUT THESE LOTS TOGETHER BECAUSE IT'S IT'S YEAH. I WAS JUST CHECKING IT OUT.

YEAH, THE LOTS WILL HAVE TO BE TIED TOGETHER.

THEY HAVE TO RECORD THE VARIANCE WITH WHAT THE CLERK OF COURT, SO THEY WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO SELL IT OFF AFTER THAT, THEY'LL BE ABLE TO DO.

YEAH, THEY WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO SPLIT IT AGAIN.

THANK YOU. ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS OF STAFF COUNCILMAN? AND THEN, MA'AM, YOU HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK AGAIN.

WE DID APPLY OR THE TO BE MARRIED.

I'M NOT SURE IF IT WENT THROUGH, I DON'T KNOW WHO.

THEY WERE THEY COULDN'T TELL ME THAT THEY WOULD ANSWER ME WHEN IT WAS DONE, THEY WOULDN'T EMAIL ME, I WOULD JUST HAVE TO CHECK AND, YOU KNOW, ACTUALLY KNOW IF THAT'S HAPPENED YET.

BUT WE DID APPLY.

THERE SHOULD BE NO REASON THAT THEY WOULDN'T MARRY THE LOUTS AND GO AHEAD, COUNCILMAN, BAILEY. AND IF I MAY, MAY I JUST SAY, YOU KNOW, THE REASON I WAS ASKED TO JUST TO MAKE SURE I WANT TO MAKE SURE YOU DON'T COME UP WITH ANY MORE HICCUPS ALONG THE WAY THAT THERE

[00:30:03]

WERE THAT WE COULD SOLVE THEM HERE.

SO I WASN'T ASKING THAT TO BE DETRIMENTAL TO THE CASE TONIGHT.

IT WAS JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S WHAT MAKES YOUR STAFF IS REALLY LOOKED AT.

LOOK AT ALL THE WAY THROUGH.

AND I JUST PULLED UP PROPER APPRAISER'S WEBSITE.

IT DOES SHOW TOTAL ACRS POINT FOUR SEVEN INDICATES TO LOTS.

SO IT LOOKS LIKE THEY HAVE COMPLETED THAT.

OUR SOUL HERE.

THANK YOU. COUNCILMAN, SO A PERMIT YOU DID GET TO APPLY FOR THE PERMIT PRIOR TO OFFERING CONCRETE? YES, WE HAD A GENERAL CONTRACTOR, TYPICALLY AN LLC ONCE ONCE THE BOARD, WHEN ITS FORM THE FOUNDATION IS FROM YOU KNOW, IT REQUIRED AN INSPECTION PRIOR TO ACTUALLY PULL. CORRECT.

AND IT WAS THAT WAS A CASE OF.

ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS, COUNSEL, THANK YOU, MA'AM.

I DON'T WISH TO.

ALL ANYBODY OUT, YOU KNOW, THAT THEY'RE INCORRECT, BUT IT'S THE I KNOW IT THAT'S TRUE.

HUMAM. IT CLOSED A PUBLIC HEARING AT THIS TIME, AND THAT'S COUNSEL FOR A MOTION, A MOTION TO APPROVE A REQUEST FOR VARIANCE TO ALLOW PROPOSED THE DETACHED GARAGE TO ENCROACH 10 FEET INTO THE 24 25 FOOT SIDE BUILDING SET BACK AS ESTABLISHED BY SECTION ONE EIGHT FIVE POINT ZERO THREE FOUR F SEVEN C OF THE PALM BAY CODE OF ORDINANCES POINT FORTY SEVEN ACRES. DASH 15.

THAT'S 20 21 SECOND OUT OF MOTION BY DEPUTY MAYOR JOHNSON SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN FELIX.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION COUNCIL AND MAYOR, JUST REAL QUICK, NOW THAT MY MIND WENT EXACTLY TO WHERE MR. BATTON THEN ASKING THAT QUESTION AS FAR AS WHY WAS THE PERMIT ISSUED? SO I KNOW WHAT THE I GUESS A MORE COMPLETE HISTORY IS WHY I'M LOOKING FOR.

SO IF I GET A COPY OF THAT PERMIT AND I'LL JUST BE IN IT, THE CONTRACTORS THAT WE USE, BECAUSE THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I KEEP TALKING ABOUT.

I WAS TRYING TO GET AWAY FROM SOME OF THOSE FOLKS BECAUSE SOMETIMES THERE MIGHT BE INCONSISTENCIES AS OPPOSED TO OUR IN-HOUSE TEAM.

SO ANYHOW, I WAS JUST ANOTHER ONE OF THOSE POINTS.

I'M JUST CURIOUS IF THAT HAS ANYTHING TO DO WITH THAT.

THE ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION, COUNCILMAN.

THE AINUN, I'M GOING TO CALL IT.

ALL IN FAVOR OF ANY OPPOSE PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.

WE GO TO ITEM 10, DO I VENTURE TO SAY WE'VE GOT.

[10. Request by Tania and Alvaro Gonzalez for a variance to allow a proposed screened patio to encroach five (5) feet into the 25-foot rear building setback as established by Section 185.034(F)(7)(d), Palm Bay Code of Ordinances (0.23 acres) (V-16-2021). (Quasi-Judicial Proceeding) ]

ITEM NUMBER 10.

A. BUT HEARING.

ASK THE APPLICANT TO STEP FORWARD AND PRESENT THEIR CASE.

SO MY NAME IS SALAS.

I WAS HERE LAST MONTH, TOO, BECAUSE I DID COME FROM MY BACKYARD AND WHEN I DID THAT, THEY SAID I COULD GO OVER 12 FEET, HARD CORE TO THE SUPPORT, TO THE ABORTION.

AND THEN WHEN I CALLED A COMPANY, THEY SAY I COULD ONLY COVER THE SEVEN, THREE AND A HALF. SO MY MY MOM IS IN A WHEELCHAIR, THOSE KIND OF LONG WHEELCHAIR.

IF I DO SEVEN FEET, YOU WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO SIT OUTSIDE BECAUSE IT'S RAIN OR SUN, YOU KNOW WHAT I MEAN? SO I NEED 12 INSTEAD OF SEVEN AND A HALF.

AND I DID MY SURGERY AND I DON'T SEE WHY I'M NOT SUPPOSED TO GET IT BECAUSE MY BACKYARD IS REALLY BIG. THERE IS NO I NEED NOT BOTHERED ANYTHING IN THE ISD.

I HAVE A LOT OF SPACE BETWEEN THE FENCE AND OR SHOULD BE.

ANYTHING ELSE? NO COUNSEL, ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? THANK YOU. AND I'M SHERMAN YOU WANT TO WEIGH IN ON THIS OR.

IF I SUPPOSE QUESTION.

HAPPY THAT BELZONI, ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF? A SPEAK OR ELSE OR DEPUTY MAYOR JOHNSON.

BUT I CLOSED A PUBLIC HEARING AND ASK FOR A MOTION, A MOTION TO APPROVE, A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE TO ALLOW A PROPOSED SCREEN PATIO TO ENCROACH FIVE FEET TO THE 25 FOOT REAR BUILDING STEP BACK, AS ESTABLISHED BY SECTION ONE EIGHT FIVE POINT ZERO THREE FOUR F 70 PALM BAY CODE OF ORDINANCES POINT TWENTY THREE ACRES BEADELL 16.

THAT'S 20 21.

HEY, I CAN I'VE GOT A MOTION SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN FELIX THAT I HEAR YOU CORRECTLY OR WAS THAT YOU? COUNCILMAN COUNCILMAN FELIX.

I GOT A MOTION AND A SECOND MOTION BY DEPUTY MAYOR OF JOHNSON SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN

[00:35:01]

FELIX. ANY ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION COUNCIL AND NONE.

I'M CALLING THE QUESTION ALL IN FAVOR.

I IS UNANIMOUSLY I VENTURE TO SAY THAT APPLICANT FOR NO ONE IS HERE.

OUTSTANDING. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL.

I AM VERY, VERY SORRY, I APOLOGIZE.

A PUBLIC HEARING AND ASK THE APPLICANT TO STEP OK, GRACE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THE APPLICANT WAS HERE.

I APPRECIATE THAT.

THANK YOU. THIS TIME DIFFERENCE GOT ME UP.

I APOLOGIZE. THANK YOU FOR ACCOMMODATING ME.

MY NAME IS BRUCE MOYANE.

THE APPLICANT FOR THE PROJECT WE'RE ASKING FOR TODAY IS THE BASICALLY THE FIRST HEARING FOR THE LAND USE AMENDMENT FOR THE PROPERTY ON THE CORNER REPORT, MALABAR BOULEVARD AND UC ONE, WHICH YOU ALL KNOW IS THE OLD WINN-DIXIE SHOPPING CENTER THAT HAS BEEN DEMOLISHED FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS.

WE HAVE BEEN LOOKING AT THIS PROJECT FOR A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT CLIENTS.

AND FINALLY, WE BELIEVE WE HAVE SOMEONE THAT IS GOING TO DEVELOP THIS PROPERTY FOR THE CITY. WE'RE ASKING FOR THE VIEW LAND USE.

WE WANT TO DO RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL.

SO THE MIXED USE IS RIGHT THERE ON MAJOR ROADWAY.

SO WE THINK THE COMMERCIAL IS GOING TO BE GREAT.

WE WE'RE HOPING TO BRING A NICE RESTAURANT TO THE AREA, REALLY EXCITED ABOUT THIS PROJECT. YOU KNOW, IT'S JUST BEEN SITTING THERE FOR A LONG TIME, KIND OF AN EYESORE.

I KNOW YOU GUYS HAVE USED IT FOR DIFFERENT EVENTS, BUT WE'RE HOPING TO STIMULATE THAT THAT BAY FRONT AREA WITH SOME HOUSING AND SOME COMMERCIAL.

AND WE HOPE THAT THIS WILL BE THE CATALYST TO REALLY GET THAT CORRIDOR GOING.

SO I DON'T WANT TO PUT ON A HUGE PRESENTATION, BUT I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU GUYS HAVE ANSWERED.

DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTION THAT YOU JOHNSON? YES. AND THANK YOU, MR. MOYER. THANK YOU, MAYOR.

MY QUESTION IS REGARDING THE COMMERCIAL ASPECTS.

SO THE HISTORY OF THIS ON THIS WAS PREVIOUSLY HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL COMPLETELY AND THEN RESUMED. AND HERE WE'RE SEEING FROM 161 RESIDENTIAL UNITS TO 412 UNITS.

AND THEN RIGHT AFTER THAT, IT SAYS, WHILE ALLOWING FOR MUCH SMALLER COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT THAN PREVIOUSLY REQUIRED, WHEN WE SAY MUCH SMALLER, HOW MUCH LESS ARE WE TALKING IN REGARDS TO COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT THAN PREVIOUSLY REQUIRED? WELL, THAT'S OBVIOUSLY YOU HEARD THE VENUE ZONING TEXT'S AMENDMENT EARLIER BEFORE I ARRIVED, WHERE YOU'RE TAKING THAT THE REQUIRED PERCENTAGE AND REDUCING IT TO MAKE IT MORE PALATABLE FOR THESE MIXED USE TYPES OF PROJECTS TO BRING THE COMMERCIAL COMPONENT TO IT.

AND AS YOU'RE AWARE, YOU KNOW, TO GET COMMERCIAL, YOU GOT TO BRING SOME SOME PEOPLE THERE TO GET THE COMMERCIAL TO COME.

SO THE IT'LL BE REDUCING IT DOWN FROM, I GUESS, HOW COMMERCIAL 100 PERCENT COMMERCIAL TO THE 15 PERCENT COMMERCIAL.

THAT WOULD BE THE PMU ZONING THAT YOU GUYS ARE LOOKING AT RIGHT NOW.

AND YOU KNOW, THAT SPOT ON THAT USED TO I KNOW IT'S AN EYESORE.

YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT.

HOWEVER, THAT WAS ALL COMMERCIAL AT ONE POINT.

IT WAS TOTALLY COMMERCIAL.

SO WE ARE WE ARE ACTUALLY WHEN WE'RE TRYING TO INCREASE OUR COMMERCIAL BASE, WE WE'RE ACTUALLY WE'VE REDUCED THAT.

SO MY QUESTION, WHEN YOU SAY JUST THE RESTAURANT TO YOU, IS IT OR WHEN YOU SAY COMMERCIAL OR MIXED USE, IS IT MORE LIKE.

RESIDENTIAL ABOVE, YES, RESIDENTIAL ABOVE, FOREFRONTS DOWN BELOW.

YES, NOT PROBABLY NOT FOR EVERY BUILDING IT'LL BE COMMERCIAL TO THE EXTENT WHERE IT CAN SUPPORT THE THE RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT THAT'S COMING WITH IT.

ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS ARE COUNCILMAN, FOSTER.

MIGHT BE PREMATURE, BUT YOU KNOW WHAT TYPE OF COMMERCIAL? NO, SIR. NO, SIR, I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY AS BE DESIRES TO BRING A RESTAURANT THERE, I THINK THAT'S THE PLAN. BUT, YOU KNOW, IT'S WAY TOO EARLY.

I MEAN, THIS IS THE VERY FIRST STEP.

THIS IS JUST TO GET US TO THE STATE SO THAT WE CAN GET TO THE DEO TO GET THE STATE TO REVIEW THIS SO WE CAN COME BACK TO YOU FOR THE SECOND READING.

SO WE'RE IN THE INFANCY OF THIS OF THIS PROJECT.

WE HAVE SOME CONCEPT PLANS THAT WILL BE COMING BACK TO YOU BECAUSE THIS IS ALSO A CONDITIONAL USE. SO EVEN THOUGH WE'RE GOING TO DO THIS PROCESS, ASSUMING WE GET WE'RE SUCCESSFUL AND WE MOVE FORWARD, WE'LL BE COMING BACK TO YOU WITH THE ACTUAL DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR YOU TO LOOK AT.

OK, AS FAR AS THE RESIDENTIAL IS, THESE ARE CONDOS OR APARTMENTS, APARTMENTS OR MORE LIKELY APARTMENTS. YES.

THANK YOU. SO, YOU KNOW, JUST A LITTLE BIT OF HISTORY, I KNOW THAT YOU'VE BEEN HERE FOR A VERY LONG TIME, BUT THE RESIDENTS IN THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS NEARBY ALWAYS WANTED A

[00:40:04]

SUPERMARKET. THAT'S WHAT THEY HAD RIGHT THERE BEFORE THE HURRICANE.

AND I NEED WIPE THAT OUT.

AND UNFORTUNATELY, THE SUPERMARKET NEVER CAME BACK.

SO THAT'S A GREAT OPPORTUNITY.

TO INCREASE THEIR FOOTPRINT OR THAT TYPE OF INDUSTRY IN THAT AREA, MS. OR. DEPUTY MAYOR JOHNSON OH, YES, MAYOR, WE PULL IT BACK UP.

SO MY MY ONLY CONCERN.

AND I'M JUST SPEAKING OUT LOUD TO YOU, MR. MILLION TO EVERYBODY IS, YOU KNOW, WITH IN THIS SENSE, I KNOW WE APPROVED THE B.M.

YOU EARLIER THE FIRST FIRST ITEM.

BUT IN THIS SENSE, YOU KNOW, RIGHT NOW WITH THE IMU MIXED-USE, WE HAVE MORE DISCRETION ON HOW MUCH COMMERCIAL, HOW MUCH RESIDENTIAL WE WILL LIKE, WHICH IS WHAT I HAD PRINTED FOR ALL THE COUNCIL WHERE WITH PMU, YOU'RE YOUR DISTRICT YOU'RE TIED TO.

YOU KNOW, LIMITED AMOUNT IN THIS CASE, AND I PERSONALLY THINK WE CAN SEE MORE COMMERCIAL.

I KNOW IT'S BEEN VACANT FOR A LONG TIME.

I'M JUST EXPRESSING MY OPINION ON.

BUT WHEN I LOOK AT THAT AREA AND WE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT THE SPACE COAST MARINA, THINGS OF THAT NATURE, I SEE THIS CAN BE A PART OF THAT COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR.

AND I JUST I DON'T WANT TO SEE US GET AWAY TOO MUCH AND GIVING AWAY SOME COMMERCIAL HERE AND THERE. AND I'M JUST SPEAKING OUT LOUD, EVERYBODY.

SO I JUST I'M TALKING TO YOU AS WELL, MR. MOYER, BECAUSE I'VE READ AND LOOKED UP SOME OF THE HISTORY ON IT.

AND WHILE I DO UNDERSTAND IT'S BEEN VACANT, I JUST DON'T WANT TO SETTLE AT THE SAME TIME.

I UNDERSTAND. YEAH. AND JUST SO YOU KNOW, IT WAS REZONE FROM HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL A WHILE BACK. THAT'S THE PERSON THAT STILL OWNS THE PROPERTY, HAD A REASON TO HAVE MIXED USE OF COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL, MOSTLY HIGH RISE RESIDENTIAL.

THAT WAS BEFORE THE THE RECESSION, SO IT NEVER HAPPENED AND IT PROBABLY STILL WOULDN'T HAPPEN. IT WAS PRETTY GRANDIOSE IF YOU ASKED ME FOR FOUR OR WHAT HE THOUGHT HE COULD GET THERE. SO IT'S ALREADY A MIXED USE, RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL.

SO YOU'VE ALREADY LOST A LITTLE BIT OF THE COMMERCIAL.

SO, YOU KNOW, WE WANT TO WE WANT TO BALANCE IT AND WE WANT TO GET ENOUGH COMMERCIAL, BUT WE ALSO WANT TO BRING THE DEMAND THERE SO THE COMMERCIAL SURVIVE.

WE DON'T WANT IT TO YOU KNOW, WE DON'T WANT TO OPEN AND THEN NOT BE ABLE TO SURVIVE.

SO IF YOU NOTICE SOME OF THE NEWER DEVELOPMENTS THAT ARE COMING ON BOARD, IF YOU IF YOU'VE SEEN THE SPACE COAST TOWN CENTER THAT WE'RE PART OF OVER IN WEST MELBOURNE, ON THE WEST SIDE OF 95, THE IT IS A MIXED USE OF COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL.

BUT UNTIL THE RESIDENTIAL IS THERE TO SUPPORT THE COMMERCIAL, THE COMMERCIAL IS COMING YET. BUT IT IS COMING NOW BECAUSE THERE'S RESIDENTIAL UNDER CONSTRUCTION.

SO THE INTEREST IS COMING.

SO WE WANT TO PROVIDE THAT NEED, WHICH IS THE RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT TO TO SUPPORT THAT COMMERCIAL. SO WE WILL WILL WE'LL BRING ALL THAT TO YOU AFTER AS PART OF THE CONDITIONAL USE. BUT WE WILL DEFINITELY BRING YOUR CONCERNS TO THE TO THE DEVELOPERS SO THAT THEY CAN MAXIMIZE THAT THAT COMPONENT OF IT.

AND UNLIKE THE WEST WEST MELBOURNE THAT WAS MENTIONED, WE HAVE ROOFTOPS THERE ALREADY.

YOU DO HAVE SOME. YES.

SO I JUST WANTED TO JUST STRESS THAT THAT THERE'S A GREAT OPPORTUNITY.

I ECHO WHAT DEPUTY MAYOR JOHNSON SAYING IS THAT WE HAD COMMERCIAL AT ONE POINT.

WE UNDERSTAND IT WAS REZONE.

WE UNDERSTAND THAT.

BUT THAT QUARTER, WE KNOW THAT IT REALLY SHOULD BE ENHANCING THAT COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR TO TO REALLY ENHANCE THE WHOLE COMMUNITY.

SO I APPRECIATE YOU TAKING THOSE NOTES AND BUILDING ON THOSE.

I BELIEVE COUNCILMAN BAILEY HAD SOME COMMENT.

I'M JUST CURIOUS, WHAT IS THE UNDER THE CURRENT.

THE CURRENT CONDITIONS OF THE PROPERTY, WHAT'S THE MAXIMUM ARE OF RESIDENTIAL? YOU CAN PUT THEIR. I MEAN, I'M KIND OF BOUNCE AROUND, THIS GUY WAS ASKING THAT I DON'T HAVE THE ORIGINAL ORDINANCE ON ME.

I DON'T KNOW IF. AND I CAN ASK STAFF IF YOU DON'T HAVE IT.

I'M JUST I'M JUST CURIOUS WHAT YOUR WHAT WHAT DO YOU WHAT DO YOU SEE REFLECTED BY CHANGING THIS IS YOUR GAIN IN RESIDENTIAL.

I BELIEVE THAT WE WILL GET SOME ADDITIONAL RESIDENTIAL UNITS FROM THIS.

SEE IF I CAN FIND THE AUDIENCE HERE THIS.

SO THERE WAS RIGHT NOW THE MAXIMUM DENSITY PER YEAR ORDINANCE ON THE APPROVAL OF THIS PROPERTY WAS ONE HUNDRED SIXTY ONE OF THE PMU WOULD ALLOW US 40 UNITS TO THE ACRE.

[00:45:07]

BUT I DON'T THINK THAT THAT'S POSSIBLE.

THAT'S WAY TOO MANY UNITS THAT WE WOULD PROPOSE BECAUSE YOU'VE GOT TO GET THE PARKING.

IF YOU KNOW YOU CAN. YOU COULD GO HIGH.

BUT I THINK THE ECONOMY OF SCALE STARTS TO CHANGE.

IF YOU HAVE TO DO, YOU KNOW, PARKING GARAGES IN ORDER TO SUPPORT THAT MANY UNITS, SO I BELIEVE THAT WILL MORE THAN LIKELY BE SOMEWHERE BETWEEN 15 AND 20 UNITS, THE A.

MORE LIKELY, AND THEN HAVE THE COMMERCIAL COMPONENT ON THE FIRST FLOOR.

THOSE OPPOSED TO I THINK ORIGINALLY THEY HAD SEVEN STORIES THAT THEY WERE PROPOSING, THESE WILL BE MORE THREE AND FOUR STORY TYPE BUILDINGS.

IT WILL BE KIND OF LESS INTRUSIVE TO THE THE NEIGHBORS, BUT YET STILL HAVE THAT COMMERCIAL COMPONENT. SO I THINK THEY HAD THE I DON'T RECALL HOW MANY THEY HAD SIXTY ONE THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED SQUARE FEET OF MAXIMUM COMMERCIAL AND UNDER THE EXISTING ORDINANCE.

HOW WILL IT AFFECT YOU AND, YOU KNOW, THE DEPUTY MAYOR MENTIONED THAT WE PASSED SOMETHING EARLIER, IT'S STILL IT'S NOT ENACTED AT THIS POINT IN TIME.

WE CAN STILL MAKE MODIFICATIONS.

BUT I GUESS HOW IMPORTANT TO YOU IS HAVING THAT 85 PERCENT MAXIMUM FOR RESIDENTIAL? WELL, I'LL BE HONEST WITH YOU, EVERYBODY, THIS LOOKED AT THIS PROPERTY, WANTED TO DO ZERO COMMERCIAL ON THIS PROPERTY, THEY DIDN'T WANT THE COMMERCIAL COMPONENT AT ALL.

AND THREE PEOPLE HAVE ALREADY WALKED BECAUSE OF THE COMMERCIAL REQUIREMENT.

SO THE FACT THAT THAT YOU'RE CONSIDERING BRINGING THAT COMMERCIAL PERCENTAGE DOWN TO A MORE REALISTIC PERCENTAGE, I THINK IS AS GOOD AS I THINK IT'S VERY GOOD.

WELL, ASIDE OF THE COUNCIL TO CONSIDER THAT, BECAUSE I JUST DON'T KNOW IF THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY IS GOING TO ABSORB THAT AND THAT YOU HAVEN'T HAD MUCH LUCK IN GETTING IT.

SO MAYBE THIS IS GOING TO GET YOU SOME REAL DEVELOPMENT AND GET TO SOME COMMERCIAL THAT YOU AREN'T GETTING NOW. SO THEY ARE WILLING TO DO THE 15 PERCENT THAT'S GOING TO BE REQUIRED. IS THAT WHAT THEY REALLY DO? NO, BUT THAT'S THAT'S THEY'RE GOING TO DO IT BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO.

SO I THINK THE COMMERCIAL IS MORE REALISTIC THE WAY IT'S GOING TO BE WORDED NOW, AS OPPOSED TO THE WAY IT'S WORDED NOW, BECAUSE I DON'T THINK ANYBODY'S DEVELOPED UNDER THAT ORDINANCE THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN NOW.

SO IF THE OTHER OF THE OTHER FAILS, THOUGH, THEN ONCE YOU'RE APPLYING AN APPLICANT GOING TO DO WHAT HAPPENS IF SOMETHING CHANGES IN THAT OTHER ORDINANCE, WHICH IS NOT BECAUSE YOU'RE YOU'RE BASING IT ON WHAT YOU PERCEIVE THAT'S GOING TO BE IN THE FUTURE, NOT AT THE CURRENT TIME, CORRECT? WELL, WE'RE HOPING I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY, WHEN WE HEARD THAT THE WHEN OUR CLIENTS HEARD THAT YOU WERE CHANGING THE VMC ORDINANCE OF THE ZONING TEXT, THAT WAS MORE ENCOURAGING FOR THEM TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS PROJECT.

AND THEY'RE HOPING THAT IT PASSES.

IF IT DOES NOT PASS, THEN OBVIOUSLY THIS PROP, THIS PROJECT WILL PROBABLY DIE.

THAT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO GO BEYOND THE 15 PERCENT, IT WOULD BE IMPOSSIBLE.

MR. MILLION DEEP ELSOM IN FELIX, I MEAN, DO YOU KNOW ROUGHLY WHAT THAT 15 PERCENT MAY REPRESENT IN TERMS OF SQUARE FOOTAGE? WELL, IT'S IT REALLY JUST DEPENDS ON HOW MUCH SQUARE FOOTAGE THEY HAVE OF RESIDENTIAL.

SO IF THEY DECIDE TO MAX OUT THE PROPERTY AND BUILD AS MANY UNITS AS POSSIBLE, THE MORE YOU THEY BUILD, THE MORE COMMERCIAL THEY HAVE TO PROVIDE.

SO INSTEAD OF TAKING THE TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE POOR AREA, YOU'RE TAKING THIS THE PERCENTAGE OF THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE OF THE GROUND AREA.

SO IT MAKES IT MORE REALISTIC, BUT.

WITH ALL THE OTHER THINGS THEY HAVE TO DO, THE DRAINAGE, THE PARKING, THE LANDSCAPING, EVERYTHING IT'S GOING TO BE THE 15 PERCENT IS GOING TO MAKE A LOT OF SENSE.

IN YOUR OPINION, YOU POSSIBLY LOOKING AT MAYBE 20, 20 UNITS PER ACRE, BUT IT'LL BE MORE THAN THAT TYPE OF DENSITY? YES. MY LAST QUESTION, WOULD THE APPLICANT CONSIDER TOWN HOME OR ON THOSE TYPE INSTEAD OF APARTMENT? WE HAVE QUITE A FEW APARTMENTS.

WELL, PERSONALLY, FOR ME, WHAT I'VE ALWAYS WANTED TO SEE IS A DIVERSED STYLE OF HOUSING.

AND THAT'S SOMETHING I BELIEVE, IN MY OPINION, WAS SHORT OF.

I'D LIKE TO SEE MORE.

OH, AND HOME AND ON THOSE, WE DO HAVE AN AGING COMMUNITY, WE HAVE TO THINK, LORD.

I MEAN, 10, 15 YEARS FROM NOW.

[00:50:04]

MOST OF THOSE FOLKS, THEY WON'T BE ABLE TO HANDLE A 2000 SQUARE FOOT AND A HALF OR A QUARTER OF AN ACRE, SO I BELIEVE THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S THE DIRECTION WE MUST BE THINKING ABOUT. AS YOU YOU KNOW, SOME OF YOUR CLIENTS OR CURRENT CLIENTS, I THINK THIS MAY BE A GOOD FIT.

INSTEAD OF BREGLIO APARTMENT, WHICH SERVED THE SAME PURPOSE BUT OFFER HOMEOWNERSHIP.

MM HMM. OH, THAT WOULD BE A COMPONENT THAT.

I WOULD LOVE TO SEE.

I CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND THAT AND, YOU KNOW, IT'S OBVIOUSLY NOT MY PROPERTY AND I'M NOT THE DEVELOPER. I HAVEN'T DONE ALL THE MARKET STUDIES, BUT FOR SOME REASON IN THIS AREA, THEY JUST SEEM LIKE THEY CAN'T BUILD ENOUGH APARTMENTS THAT THEY'RE IN EVERY CITY THAT ARE IN HIGH DEMAND. LIKE EVERYTHING ELSE, EVERYTHING'S MARKET DRIVEN.

SO IF THE MARKET WANTS IT, PEOPLE ARE GOING TO COME AND PROVIDE IT.

SO THAT'S WHAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO DO HERE IS APARTMENTS.

THEY DON'T DO TOWNHOUSES.

NOW, WE WE WE CAN HOPEFULLY TRY THAT WILL BE COMING BACK TO THIS BOARD WITH ANOTHER PROJECT THAT PROPOSALS TOWN HOMES THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT WOULD PROVIDE AN ALTERNATE TYPE OF THAT'LL BE IN A DIFFERENT LOCATION IN THE CITY.

HERE'S WHAT I'M SAYING CURRENTLY.

IF YOU THINK THE MEDIAN INCOME HERE IN PALM BAY, MOST OF THESE FOLKS CANNOT AFFORD CANNOT GO TO A, YOU KNOW, REGULAR COMMUNITY AND AFFORD A THREE HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLAR HOME, THEY MAY BE ABLE TO AFFORD A TOWNHOME NODDING OUT AT 120 OR 150.

SO THAT'S WHAT I'M LOOKING AT.

I THINK, YOU KNOW, AND WE ARE NOT ENCOURAGING HOMEOWNERSHIP BY KEEP.

THROWING THOSE APARTMENTS RIGHT AND I GET IT MARKET, I UNDERSTAND THAT TO ME IN THE AS YOU KNOW, THE THE I MEAN, THE MARKET IS VERY, VERY LIMITED IN WHAT PEOPLE CAN AFFORD.

AND SO THAT'S KIND OF WHERE I'M AT.

AND THAT MAY BE SOMETHING WE CAN CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND THAT.

AND BEING ON A I MEAN, THIS IS A MAJOR ARTERIAL U.S., ONE VERY HIGH PRICED PROPERTY.

SO DENSITY IS IS IS PARAMOUNT.

SO YOU LOSE A LOT OF DENSITY ON TOWNHOMES FOR SOMETHING THAT IS THE PRICE POINT OF THE PROPERTY TO BUY AND DEVELOP IS SO HIGH.

YOU KNOW, YOU'VE GOT RIVERVIEW GOT YOU KNOW, YOU'RE ON A COLLECTOR OF ARTERIAL ROAD, WHICH YOU DON'T REALLY LIKE TO HAVE SINGLE FAMILY ON ARTERIAL ROADS BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, YOU DON'T WANT DRIVEWAYS THAT HOLD ON TO US ONE AND THEN TO BUILD UP, YOU KNOW, SO YOU CAN GET REVIEWS.

YOU KNOW, PEOPLE ARE DIFFERENT NOW.

I MEAN, THE MILLENNIALS, THEY LIKE TO RENT, THEY DON'T LIKE TO OWN.

I DON'T KNOW WHY, BUT THAT SEEMS TO BE WHAT THEY LIKE.

SO I THINK BECAUSE THEY MOVE AROUND A LOT, THEY COME, THEY RENT AND THEY THEY ROTATE AROUND AND GO TO DIFFERENT PLACES.

THEY MOVE JOBS QUICKER THAN PEOPLE IN OUR GENERATION HAVE DONE.

SO THAT'S I THINK THAT'S THE ATTRACTION.

PLUS, YOU GET ALL YOUR AMENITIES.

THERE ARE COMMON. YOU DON'T HAVE TO YOU DON'T HAVE TO HAVE YOUR OWN POOL.

YOU DON'T HAVE TO HAVE YOU DON'T HAVE TO GO GET A GYM MEMBERSHIP.

YOU'VE GOT EVERYTHING RIGHT THERE IN YOUR COMMUNITY.

IT'S IT'S A WALK TO WALK AWAY FROM YOUR FRONT DOOR.

SO THEY PROVIDE EVERYTHING THAT THAT A PERSON WOULD WANT.

CLOSE TO GOOD, GOOD JOBS, I MEAN, RIGHT THERE, RIGHT BY HARRIS, RIGHT BY, YOU KNOW, WHERE THEY CAN GET A GOOD JOB AND THEN WHEN THEY GET HOME, THEY CAN DO EVERYTHING IN THEIR COMPLEX. THEY DON'T REALLY HAVE TO GO ANYWHERE ELSE EXCEPT MAYBE GO GET SOMETHING TO EAT.

WELL, THEY WON'T HAVE TO. THEY'LL HAVE A RESTAURANT, HOPEFULLY, RIGHT THERE SO THEY CAN DO EVERYTHING RIGHT THERE.

AND I THINK THAT'S VERY ATTRACTIVE TO THEM.

AND THAT'S WHY THEY PICKED THIS SITE.

DEPUTY MAYOR OF JOHNSON, THANK YOU, MAYOR.

YOU MENTIONED THE COST AND EVERYTHING, HAVE YOU OR THE DEVELOPER CONTACTED OR TALKED WITH STAFF REGARDING THE IMPACT FEES AND THE COST TO DEVELOP THE SITE OR.

YEAH, WE'VE ALREADY DONE THE WE'VE CALCULATED WHAT THAT WILL BE.

IT'S IT'S UP THERE.

UP THERE YOU HAVE A NUMBER OR.

DON'T OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, BUT I MEAN, IT'S YEAH, IT'S GOING TO BE.

BEHI COULD BE IN THE MILLIONS.

WITH EVERYTHING, WATER, SEWER, TRANSPORTATION, SCHOOLS, RECREATION.

YOU HAVE A NUMBER OF IMPACT FEES AT LEASE OR.

WE'LL ASK THAT.

YEAH, NOT TO MENTION OUR COMMERCIAL SPACE THERE IN THE COMMERCIAL ACTUALLY PAYS A LOT OF MORE IMPACT FEES AND RESIDENTIAL.

SO, OK, I'M GOING TO SERVE THIS TIME FOR QUESTIONS FOR THE UP.

I'M GOOD RIGHT NOW. WE'RE GOOD.

COUNCILMAN FOSTER. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. UH.

[00:55:02]

LARRY. ONE STEP FORWARD.

GOOD EVENING AGAIN. SO THIS IS THE FIRST READING.

THIS IS A LARGE SCALE COMPLAINT AMENDMENT.

SO ONCE THIS ASSUMING YOU APPROVE IT THIS EVENING, IT WILL GO UP TO THE DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMIC OPPORTUNITY.

IT'LL COME BACK IN 45 TO 60 DAYS FOR A FINAL READING.

AND IF ANY COMMENTS THAT ANY OF THE STATE AGENCIES HAVE, THAT WILL HAVE TO BE ADDRESSED ON THE FINAL READING. SO THE STAFF REVIEWED THIS.

AND I SHOULD POINT OUT THAT THIS IS TEN POINT THREE ACRES.

PMU HAS A REQUIREMENT THAT ANYTHING OVER 10 ACRES IS A CONDITIONAL USE, OR YOU WILL ALSO BE SEEING THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN AS A CONDITIONAL USE REVIEW WHEN THAT COMES BACK.

SECOND CONDITION, THE OWNER APPLICANT AT THEIR EXPENSE WILL BE REQUIRED TO DESIGN, PERMIT, INSTALL, INSPECT AND TEST WATER SYSTEMS OF ADEQUATE SIZE TO ACCOMMODATE THE DEVELOPMENT AND CONNECT TO THE CITY'S WATER AND SEWER SYSTEM.

THE APPLICANT OWNER WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PROPERTY'S HYDRAULIC SHARE.

AND WE HAVE OUR UTILITIES DIRECTOR HERE.

IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT WHAT HYDRAULIC SHARE IS FOR THE NEW UTILITIES REQUIRED TO SERVE THE DEVELOPMENT OVERSAVING OVERSIGHT OF UTILITIES AT THE REQUEST OF UTILITIES DEPARTMENT WILL BE SUBJECT TO A REFUNDING AGREEMENT OR REFUNDABLE ADVANCE.

A SCHOOL CAPACITY DETERMINATION LETTER, ALSO KNOWN AS A SCANDAL SHALL BE REQUIRED FROM EVERY COUNTY SCHOOLS, AND THE LAST CONDITION RECOMMENDED BY STAFF IS THE PERCENTAGE OF NONRESIDENTIAL USES FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT SHALL CONSIST OF ACTIVE COMMERCIAL USES SUCH AS RETAIL OFFICE, RESTAURANT, PERSONAL OR BUSINESS SERVICES, HOTEL OR CONVENTION SPACE.

AND THAT CONDITION WAS ADDED BY STAFF BECAUSE IN THIS PARTICULAR ZONING CATEGORY, THE WORDING IS ACTUALLY NONRESIDENTIAL.

IT DOESN'T SAY COMMERCIAL.

SO STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THAT IF YOU'RE GOING TO APPROVE IT, THAT YOU CONDITIONED THE LAND USE TO SAY YOU ARE AN ACTIVE RESIDENT, ACTIVE COMMERCIAL, NOT NONRESIDENTIAL, BECAUSE NONRESIDENTIAL COULD BE ANYTHING.

IT COULD BE A SCHOOL, IT COULD BE ANY KIND OF ACTIVITY THAT'S NOT RESIDENTIAL, BECAUSE ONCE YOU USE THE WORD NONRESIDENTIAL, IT MEANS EVERYTHING THAT'S NOT RESIDENTIAL.

SO BUT WE WANT TO STAFF FEELS THAT THERE SHOULD BE COMMERCIAL HERE.

SO THAT'S WHAT WE RECOMMEND RECOMMENDING THAT CONDITION.

SO THOSE ARE MY COMMENTS.

AND AVAILABLE, IF YOU HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS.

I KNOW DEPUTY MAYOR JOHNSON HAD A QUESTION FIRST AND THEN FOLLOWED BY COUNCILMAN BAILEY.

DEPUTY MAYOR JOHNSON, PLEASE.

THANK YOU, MAYOR. I APPRECIATE THAT LAST PORTION OF REGARDS TO ADDING THAT IN ON, YOU KNOW, AND SHOULDN'T HAVE TO BE ADDED IN, BUT WE HAVE IT IN NOW ON MY QUESTION, EITHER FOR YOURSELF OR MAYBE MRS. BROWN, MOVING FORWARD FROM MIXED-USE TO BERMUDA, YOU ALL HAVE ANY CONCERNS REGARDING THE REDUCTION IN COMMERCIAL COMPARED TO WHERE IT COULD BE, AS IS? WELL, EARLIER WE DISCUSSED AN EARLIER TEXT AMENDMENT, WHICH SETS IT AT 15 PERCENT, WHERE RIGHT NOW THERE IS NO MINIMUM COMMERCIAL.

AND BAMU, THAT'S ANOTHER THING THAT WE'RE HOPING THAT THE AMENDMENT YOU PASSED ON EARLIER WILL HELP THE AND I BROUGHT THE COMPLAINT WITH ME.

THE THE MIXED USE CATEGORY THAT YOU'RE ALLUDING TO DOESN'T HAVE A MINIMUM REQUIREMENT EITHER. IT'S JUST THAT IT ALLOWS FOR MORE COMMERCIAL BECAUSE IT DOESN'T ALLOW IT DOESN'T REQUIRE THE 85 PERCENT RESIDENTIAL.

SO BY EXTENSION, YOU CAN BUILD MORE COMMERCIAL IN THE HMU THAN YOU CAN.

AND BAYFRONT MIXED USE BECAUSE YOU DON'T HAVE TO HAVE THAT RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT.

SO IT'S NOT THAT BAYFRONT REQUIRES LESS COMMERCIAL, IT'S A BAYFRONT REQUIRES MORE RESIDENTIAL. SO THAT'S REALLY HOW YOU GET TO THAT, THAT POINT.

SO HOPEFULLY THAT ANSWER THE QUESTION AND THEN LAST QUESTION THERE.

THANK YOU. AND REGARDING THE IMPACT FEES, BUT THAT WOULD BE FOR CHRIS LITTLE OR.

WELL, TO CLARIFY, BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW, WE HAD PRIOR CONVERSATION, SO FOR CONTEXT QUESTION WAS ASKED IF WE HAD ANY SENSE OF WHAT THE COST WOULD BE FOR IMPACT FEES FOR UTILITIES AND OTHER COSTS TO DEVELOP THE SITE.

WE'VE NOT LOOKED AT THIS SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE A PLAN FOR WHAT WILL BE HERE.

ALL WE'VE DONE IS PRIOR, YOU KNOW, ANALYSIS FOR OTHERS THAT HAVE LOOKED AND ASK QUESTIONS FOR DIFFERENT TYPES OF PROJECTS.

I THINK TO MR. MOLIERE'S POINT, I THINK THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT EXPENSE EXPECTED FOR THE UTILITY SIDE OF THE HOUSE, BUT I WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO GIVE YOU LIKE HARD NUMBERS.

YEAH, IMPACT FEES.

WE HAVE EVERY YEAR WE ADOPT THE CHART AND THAT HAS THE RIGHTS TO IT.

[01:00:04]

AND I BELIEVE OUR GOVERNOR JUST SIGNED A NEW IMPAC FEE LEGISLATION.

SO THAT COULD ALSO HAVE AN IMPACT GOING FORWARD ON IMPACT FEES, NOT SO MUCH ON WHAT WE'RE WHAT, BUT IF WE WANTED TO CHANGE THEM IN THE FUTURE.

I BELIEVE THAT'S REALLY WHAT THAT LEGISLATION DEALS WITH.

BUT CERTAINLY THERE'S A CALCULATION FOR MULTIFAMILY WHICH THERE'S GOING TO BE HERE, THERE'LL BE A CALCULATION FOR DIFFERENT CATEGORIES OF RETAIL OR COMMERCIAL.

AND THEN THERE'S OTHER THINGS SUCH AS THE UTILITY IMPACT FEES, WHICH IS BASED ON THE TYPES OF UNITS AND THE TYPES OF BEDROOMS AND FIXTURES.

THERE'S OTHER IMPACT FEES FOR SCHOOLS WHICH WILL COME OUT OF THE SKY TO THEY'LL DETERMINE THE IMPACT TO THE SCHOOLS.

SO THERE'S A LOT OF DIFFERENT IMPACT FEES THAT WILL BE CALCULATED AT THE TIME THEY COME IN FOR THEIR DEVELOPMENT PLAN.

COUNCILWOMAN BAILEY, YEAH, MR. BRADLEY, I'M JUST CURIOUS FOR THE FOR THE PARTICULAR LAND USE, FOR BAYFRONT MIXED USE, DOES IT HAVE ANY ZONING CATEGORY OTHER THAN A MIXED USE THAT IT CAN BE REZONE TO AFTER WE CHANGE LAND USE? THE BAYFRONT MIXED-USE LAND USE CATEGORY GOES WITH THE BAYFRONT MIXED USE ZONING THAT'S IN ONE PLACE.

YEAH, THEY THEY REALLY GO TOGETHER, SO YOU USUALLY DON'T YOU DON'T HAVE ONE WITHOUT THE OTHER. THE MIXED USE CATEGORY, WHICH IS WHAT IT IS NOW, WAS USED FOR THE PC CARD, WHICH IS THE CURRENT ZONING ON THE PROPERTY.

AND SO THE PICARDIE, WHAT DOES IT REQUIRE AS A COMMERCIAL? THERE'S DIFFERENT THERE'S DIFFERENT CALCULATIONS, IT'S KIND OF A FORMULA, SO IT'S BASED ON THE SIZE OF THE LOT AND WHAT YOU BUILD, IT'S IT'S KIND OF A COMPLICATED FORMULA WITHIN THAT THAT CATEGORY.

THERE'S ALSO A BUY DOWN OPTION WHERE YOU CAN BUY DOWN COMMERCIAL.

IT'S A PRETTY HEFTY BUY DOWN, WHICH I THINK MR. MOYAR ALLUDED TO EARLIER, THAT THE PREVIOUS APPROVAL HAD THAT BUY DOWN IN THERE TO BUY DOWN THE COMMERCIAL, TO BUILD MORE RESIDENTIAL.

IT'S A CAMERA, BUT THE NUMBER IS IT'S A PRETTY SIGNIFICANT NUMBER ON THE PREVIOUS APPROVAL. THERE'S NO BUY DOWN OPTION FOR THE COMMERCIAL IN BAMU.

OK, THEN THAT'S WHERE I'M STILL THE WORDING ON IT, ON THAT ON THAT, ON THE BAMU OR THE ZONING, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE PRESUMING.

THAT'S THE ONLY THING THAT CAN BE COMPATIBLE.

RIGHT. AND AND I'LL BE HONEST WITH YOU, I HAD SOME SOME RESERVATION ON IT EARLIER.

AND I THINK THAT SOME OF THE CONVERSATION WE'VE HAD HERE, MIGHT YOU ENCOURAGE ME TO REVISIT MY VOTE ON WHAT WE DID EARLIER WITH COUNCIL? BUT I'M JUST CURIOUS.

IT SAYS THE WAY IT'S CURRENTLY WRITTEN IS THAT THERE IS GOING TO BE 85 PERCENT RESIDENTIAL USE THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN TODAY FOR BURAK, 85 PERCENT MINIMUM, THEY CAN GO UP TO 99 PERCENT COMMERCIAL, I MEAN, 99 PERCENT RESIDENTIAL.

THEY STILL HAVE TO HAVE SOME COMMERCIAL COMPONENT BECAUSE IT REQUIRES MIXED USE.

IT SAYS THAT RIGHT THERE IN THE ORDINANCE.

BUT THEY CAN THERE'S NO THERE'S REALLY NO UPPER LIMIT ON THE RESIDENTIAL OTHER THE FACT THAT YOU HAVE TO HAVE SOME NONRESIDENTIAL USE EMBEDDED WITH THAT.

SO WE'RE PIGEONHOLING RESIDENTIAL INTO IT.

UNDER THE CURRENT LANGUAGE FOR BEING, YOU KNOW, THERE'S A THERE'S A MINIMUM IT'S REQUIRED MINIMUM OF 85 PERCENT, SO IT'S A MINIMUM 85 PERCENT OR FORSEEN WORKFORCE AND RESIDENTIAL WITH THE CURRENT LANGUAGE FOR THE BMA.

YES, THROUGH THE CURRENT PMU REQUIRES PRESIDENTIAL AND THE AMENDMENT THAT YOU YOU YOU PASSED EARLIER ALSO REQUIRES PRESIDENTIAL, SO THEY BOTH REQUIRE IT.

IT'S JUST THAT THE ONE OF THE MAJOR CHANGES WAS THAT THE NEW BAMU, ASSUMING YOU PASS ON SECOND READING, WILL REQUIRE 15 PERCENT COMMERCIAL.

BUT THEN THIS IS WHERE WE'RE AT NONRESIDENTIAL, I SHOULD SAY NONRESIDENTIAL.

THAT'S THE KEY. SO I LIKE THE FACT THAT YOU HIGHLY COMMERCIAL AND MAYBE THAT'S SOMETHING FOR COUNCIL TO CONSIDER THAT WE NOT JUST FOR THIS CASE, THIS APPLICANT.

I THINK SUGAR SAID HE'LL SPEAK IN A MINUTE AS FAR AS KNOW THEIR COMMITMENT TO THAT FOR THIS PROJECT. BUT JUST IN GENERAL.

BUT THE OTHER THING IS THAT IT'S ONLY 15 PERCENT.

THIS IS WHERE I THINK I SCREWED UP IN READING IT ORIGINALLY.

IT'S ONLY IN THE FIRST FLOOR THAT THERE'S FOUR FLOORS.

YOU'RE GETTING LESS THAN FOUR PERCENT COMMERCIAL OR NONRESIDENTIAL.

WELL, YES, BECAUSE THE THAT WAS PART OF THE OTHER CHANGE AND IT'S REALLY ABOUT THE APPLICATION THAT WE ALREADY PASSED ON, WAS THAT IT WAS BASED ON FLOOR AREA AND NOW WE'RE BASING IT ON EITHER FLOOR AREA OR A FOOTPRINT IF IF THE AMENDMENT PASSES.

SO IT MAKES IT EASIER FOR SOMEBODY TO COMPLY BY REDUCING THE AMOUNT BECAUSE THEY CAN IF ON A LARGE SITE LIKE THIS, THEY'RE MORE LIKELY GOING TO BE ABLE TO MEET THE FOOTPRINT REQUIREMENT. BUT ON A SMALL SITE, THAT MAY BE EASIER FOR THEM TO MEET THE FLOOR AREA.

SO THAT'S WHY WE LEFT BOTH IN THEIR.

IT'S AN EITHER OR THEY CAN EITHER DO FOUR AREA OR FOOTPRINT, BUT ON A LARGER SITES, WE FEEL THAT THE FOOTPRINTS ARE GOING TO BE ASSUMING THAT PEOPLE WANT TO BUILD MORE RESIDENTIAL. THAT SEEMS TO BE THE MARKET TREND THAT I HAVE SEEN.

THEY WOULD MORE LIKELY BE EASIER TO COMPLY WITH THE COMMERCIAL COMPONENT IF THEY HAD

[01:05:02]

FOOTPRINT VERSUS FLOOR AREA WITH.

THE CURRENT VIEW REQUIRES IT TO BE BASED ON FLOOR AREA.

SO BASICALLY CURRENTLY THEY NEED ONE PERCENT COMMERCIAL.

AND WITH THE CHANGE WE MADE THEY WERE PROPOSING TO MAKE, IT'S SOMETHING LESS THAN FOUR PERCENT. IT'S IT'S THEY COULD HAVE UP TO OVER 96 PERCENT.

SO BASICALLY JUST MOVED IT JUST JUST A COUPLE OF PERCENT IN THE AREA.

WELL, AS I SAID, THE THE CURRENT PMU REGULATION DOESN'T HAVE IT ONLY HAS A MINIMUM 85 PERCENT RESIDENTIAL.

THERE IS NO YOU STILL HAVE TO HAVE SOME NONRESIDENTIAL, BUT IT COULD BE ONE PERCENT.

NOW, WE'VE NOW WE'VE SET THAT AT 15, NOW WE'RE ALLOWING THEM TO GO MORE COMMERCIAL AND REACT, BUT IT STILL ALLOWS THEM PRETTY MUCH GO TO WHERE THEY ARE RESIDENTIAL CURRENTLY TO. YES, BECAUSE THERE ARE SOME TRADEOFFS IN THERE, BECAUSE YOU'RE TRADING OFF THE FLOOR A CALCULATION FOR THE FOOTPRINT CALCULATION, BUT NOW YOU'RE REQUIRING 15 PERCENT OF THAT TO BE NONRESIDENTIAL.

SO THERE IS YOU KNOW, IT'S A BIT OF A BALANCING ACT.

WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO WITH THAT ORDINANCE, I MEAN, I'M JUST AND I WANT AND I WANT TO BECAUSE THIS IS ALL TO ME, IT'S ALL TIED TOGETHER.

IT'S RELEVANT. I WANT TO MAKE SURE I GET THESE, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THESE QUESTIONS AND STATEMENTS ON THE RECORD. AND JUST, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, I'D BE CLEAR WITH MR. MOYAR AS WELL, THE APPLICANT THAT I'M HAVING, I'M I'M REVISITING WHAT THAT REALITY MIGHT BE, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER YOU GET THE ZONING OR NOT.

SO IN THE END, THE CURRENT THE CURRENT ZONING THAT'S ON THE PROPERTY IN THE CURRENT APPROVAL THAT'S THERE HAD A MINIMUM.

I THINK IT HAD SIXTY ONE THOUSAND SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL.

I WOULD IMAGINE THAT THIS IS GOING TO HAVE LESS COMMERCIAL THAN WHAT'S OUT THERE NOW.

WHAT'S UP? WHAT'S WHAT'S APPROVED TO BE THERE? I CAN'T GIVE YOU A NUMBER BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T WE HAVEN'T REVIEWED THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN YET, BUT THE COMMERCIAL AND THE COMMERCIAL SQUARE FOOTAGE UNDER THE PREVIOUS APPROVAL, IT'S ON PAGE ONE OF THE STAFF REPORT.

MAXIMUM COMMERCIAL INTENSITY FOR THIS PROJECT UNDER THE CURRENT APPROVAL IS CAPPED AT SIXTY ONE THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED.

SO THEY CAN'T GO ABOVE THAT.

AND THE MAXIMUM RESIDENTIAL DENSITY IS CAPPED AT 161 UNDER THE CURRENT APPROVAL.

IF YOU APPROVE THIS CHANGE OF THE LAND USE, THEY CAN GO TO.

WELL, I DON'T KNOW IF THEY'LL EVER GET THERE, BUT THE MATHEMATICALLY THEY CAN GET TO 412 UNITS, ALTHOUGH I DOUBT THEY'LL EVER GET THAT MANY ON THAT SITE.

AND THEN THE THE COMMERCIAL COMPONENT IS 15 PERCENT OF THE BUILDING FOOTPRINT OR THE FLOOR AREA. THEY'LL HAVE THE CHOICE BECAUSE BY THE TIME THEY'RE LARGE SCALE COMES BACK, ASSUMING YOU APPROVE IT, THE ZONING THAT YOU READ TONIGHT WILL GO FOR A SECOND.

READING WILL BE IN PLACE BEFORE THEY'RE LARGE SCALE COMES BACK.

ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS, COUNCIL OF STAFF.

THANK YOU, MS., OK, THANK YOU.

ANYONE IN THE PUBLIC THAT WISHES TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THIS ITEM MS. ABOUT. GILBERTON, 586 OCEAN SPRAY STREET, SOUTHWEST, AS YOU KNOW, I'VE BEEN COMING TO THESE A LONG TIME.

IN FACT, I WAS CURRENT I WAS STANDING UP HERE DURING S.P.

26, 2006, ADDRESS ADDRESSING THIS.

THAT'S HOW LONG HAD BEEN COMING.

THESE THIS IS NOT THE FIRST TIME YOU'VE SEEN ME.

THIS IS THAT LITTLE REMINDER.

SO AT THE TIME WHEN THEY CHANGED IT, WHEN THEY CHANGED THAT INTO MULTI MULTIPURPOSE USE, THAT WAS GIVEN THEM COMMERCIAL, THAT WAS GIVEN THEM THE ABILITY TO HAVE RESIDENTIAL IN WHAT THE CITY WAS TRYING TO PUSH FOR COMMERCIAL, AS YOU'VE ALL BEEN ADDRESSING, THAT'S WHAT WE'RE FIGHTING FOR, IS COMMERCIAL PROPERTY.

ALL RIGHT. WELL, EVERYBODY SAYS, WELL, LOOK, THIS IS THE PERFECT PLACE FOR AN APARTMENT TO LOOK OUT. IT'S A BEAUTIFUL RIVERFRONT.

I UNDERSTAND THAT.

BUT WHAT WE DON'T HAVE, WE HAVE LOTS OF FRONTAGE ALONG THE RIVER.

WE ACTUALLY DO.

WE DON'T HAVE, THOUGH, IS COMMERCIAL LAND ALONG U.S.

ONE THAT WE DO NOT HAVE.

SO THAT'S WHY WHEN IT WAS FIRST PRESENTED IN 2006, WE THOUGHT, OK, THAT WAS THE COMPROMISE. YOU COULD HAVE UP TO ONE HUNDRED AND SIXTY ONE RESIDENTIAL SITES AND YOU'D HAVE SIXTY ONE THOUSAND SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL MINIMUM.

AND THAT'S WHAT THEY PLANNED.

THAT'S WHAT THEY LAID OUT. THAT'S WHAT THEY PRESENTED AND GOT APPROVED.

SAME OWNER. AT THE SAME TIME, REMEMBER THAT, SO I SAID, WELL, NOW THERE'S SOMETHING CHANGED. IT'S BEEN THE EXACT SAME OWNER THE ENTIRE TIME WITH THE NEXT TOPIC, PARKS AND RECS. IF THEY GO WITH THE CHANGE, IF WE GET THIS CHANGE, THAT'LL BE TWO HUNDRED AND TWELVE UNITS THAT COME DOWN TO JUST FOUR RESIDENTS PER HOME.

THAT WOULD BE HUNDRED RESIDENTS, WHICH MEANS THEORETICALLY, THEY SHOULD HAVE THREE ACRE PARK SOMEPLACE IN THAT.

BUT INSTEAD OF COMPARING WHAT THEIR LAND WAS TO THEIR POPULATION, IT WAS INCORPORATED.

WHILE THE ENTIRE 88 SQUARE MILES OF THE CITY OF PALM BAY WE HAVE ENOUGH PARKS.

SO IT WAS NOT EVEN CONSIDERED ITEM NUMBER THREE.

WHEN THEY SAY, OH, IT'S BEEN VACANT A LONG TIME, IT HAS BEEN VACANT A LONG TIME WITH THE

[01:10:02]

WHIP, BUT THE OWNER OWNED IT, THAT WAS THEIR CHOICE.

IF THEY CAN'T FIND FINANCING, THAT'S UP TO THEM.

BUT REMEMBER, THE CITY OF PALM BAY IS ONLY 60 YEARS OLD.

IT'S NOT LIKE WE'VE BEEN ESTABLISHED AND HAS BEEN VACANT FOR A LONG TIME.

PEOPLE THINK THAT THE LONG TIME, SHORT 60 YEARS IS A RELATIVELY SHORT TIME IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF A CITY WHERE A NEW CITY.

SO IT'S BEEN VACANT FOREVER AND A DAY.

NO, IT WAS A SHOPPING CENTER FOR THE RESIDENTS.

THAT AREA IS APPROXIMATELY 80 PERCENT BUILT OUT RIGHT NOW WITH RESIDENTS.

THEY LOST WHAT THEY CALLED THEIR FAMILY MARKET.

THEY LOST IT ALONG WITH SOME OF THE CHANGES THAT ARE COMING UP IN THE NEXT FEW MINUTES HERE. THEY'RE EVEN GOING TO LOSE ANOTHER PUBLIX FOR SEVERAL YEARS IN THAT AREA IF WE GET THE IF SOMETHING ELSE GETS APPROVED LATER IN THE PACKET.

BUT WITH THAT BEING SAID, REMEMBER, THEY CAN HAVE COMMERCIAL, BUT DO WE WANT ONE MORE CHECKER'S? BECAUSE THAT WAS THE BARE MINIMUM REQUIRED SOMETHING TO CONSIDER.

THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK OR AGAINST MR. RANDALL? OLSZEWSKI.

IT EVEN COUNCILMAN RANDALL SHAMSKY TO DO SEVEN NEVILL CIRCLE, YOU KNOW, OPEN UP WITH THE CLAIMS THAT FOR COMMERCIAL TO EXIST WE NEED RESIDENTIAL.

SO IN THE NORTHEAST SECTOR SPECIFICALLY ON THIS MAP THAT WE'RE LOOKING, THIS IS ARGUABLY THE MOST DENSELY DEVELOPED PORTION OF OUR CITY BECAUSE IT'S THE BEGINNING OF OUR CITY AS THE ORIGIN OF OUR CITY.

THAT BEING SAID, YES, IT IS SOME OF THE OLDEST HOMES OF OUR CITY, BUT PEOPLE LIVE IN THESE HOMES. THESE AREN'T OLD, ABANDONED HOMES.

THESE ARE PROUD HOMEOWNERS THAT LIVE IN THESE HOMES.

ONE OF MY BEST FRIENDS, MY BROTHER, HIS WIFE, MY LITTLE NIECE, LIVED THREE BLOCKS AWAY FROM HERE. WHEN I HEAR THAT TO BUILD ANYTHING COMMERCIAL ON THIS BLOCK, ON THIS PLOT OF LAND, WE NEED MORE RESIDENTIAL.

THAT TELLS ME THAT HIS MONEY IS NO GOOD.

THAT TELLS ME WHEN I'M VISITING HIM ON A WEEKEND THAT MY MONEY'S NO GOOD.

THE LAST EVENT THAT WAS HELD AT CELEBRATION SQUARE, WE ALL LOADED IN THE TRUCK AND ENJOYED IT. IT WAS A FUN LITTLE LASER LIGHT SHOW, ENTERTAINMENT, COMMERCIAL USE.

THE NEIGHBORING HOUSES WILL BENEFIT FROM SOMETHING BEING THERE IF WE PUT APARTMENTS SKY HIGH ABOVE. AND I KNOW HE'S NOT GOING SKY HIGH FOR STORIES, WHAT HAVE YOU.

AND WE PUT A RESTAURANT, AS MR. BATTAN ALLUDED TO, CHECKER'S IS YOUR RESTAURANT.

IF EVERY TIME WE'RE PRESENTED WITH SOME SORT OF PRIME REAL ESTATE TO DEVELOP IT COMMERCIALLY, WE MUST ADD MORE RESIDENTIAL.

WE NEED TO STOP FALLING FOR THIS NARRATIVE.

NOW, THIS PARTICULAR DEVELOPMENT AND PROJECT HAS NOT ASKED FOR A TAX REBATE OR A TAX ABATEMENT YET, BUT WE'LL GET THERE.

I MEAN, MR. BACK AND WILL BE HERE TO TALK AGAINST THAT, TOO.

WE NEED TO STRONGLY CONSIDER THE FUTURE LAND USE OF THE US ONE CORRIDOR IN OUR CITY BECAUSE IT IS THE MOST PRIME PIECE OF REAL ESTATE TO MAKE MONEY FOR US TO GENERATE REVENUE FOR US, IT'S VERY IMPORTANT THAT WE PAY ATTENTION TO THE FUTURE AND AGAIN, TO MR. BILL BOUTON'S POINT. WE ARE A YOUNG CITY AND THIS HAS SAT VACANT FOR 15 YEARS AND THAT'S VERY UNFORTUNATE. IRONICALLY ENOUGH, THE YEAR I MOVED TO THE CITY IS WHEN THIS BUILDING WAS DESTROYED, WAS TAKEN DOWN.

AND FOR YEARS THIS MIGHT COME, THAT MIGHT COME.

A GROCERY STORE, A PLACE FOR THE COMMUNITY TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF IS WHAT'S NECESSARY.

AN APARTMENT BUILDING IS NOT WHAT'S NECESSARY TO MAKE A PLUG FOR A SPECIFIC GROCERY STORE. OUR COMMUNITY WANTS A TRADER JOE'S NEIGHBORHOOD MARKET, PUT IT IN A NEIGHBORHOOD, PUT A NEIGHBORHOOD MARKET WHERE PEOPLE CAN GO GET FRESH FOOD ON FOOT BECAUSE THAT MAY BE THE ONLY MODE OF TRANSPORTATION THAT THEY HAVE SO THAT THEY CAN NOURISH THEIR FAMILY AND THEY CAN TAKE CARE OF THEIR FAMILY, STOP BUILDING APARTMENTS EVERYWHERE.

WE DON'T WANT PALM BAY TO TURN INTO SOUTH FLORIDA.

WELL, AT THAT, GO TO SOUTH FLORIDA, GO TO SOUTH FLORIDA AND GO ON DIXIE HIGHWAY, GO ON U.S. ONE IN SOUTH FLORIDA.

THERE ISN'T EVEN APARTMENTS THERE.

WHAT THERE IS THERE IS COMMERCIAL BUSINESSES THAT GENERATE MONEY FOR THE CITIES THAT THEY'RE IN. THERE'S AUTOMOTIVE DEALERSHIPS THAT I HAPPEN TO GO TO.

THERE IS THERE'S MALLS THERE, SHOPPING, THERE'S GROCERY STORES, THERE'S STARBUCKS, THERE'S COFFEE, THERE'S SMALL COMMUNITY RESTAURANTS.

THERE'S EVERYTHING. THERE'S NOT A FLOOD OF APARTMENTS.

SLOW IT DOWN, COUNSEL, PLEASE.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THIS ITEM? AND SINAN. WOULD YOU LIKE TO SPEAK AGAIN? MR. MOYA. YES, THANK YOU.

JUST A COUPLE OF THINGS.

ONE, WE JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT YOU ARE ALL AWARE THAT WE ARE IN FULL AGREEMENT WITH THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS AND CONDITIONS.

AND TWO, IF WE ARE SUCCESSFUL AND WE DO GET TO YOU FOR A NATIONAL NEWS, WE WILL BRING YOU AN IMPACT THE SPREADSHEET SO YOU WILL KNOW WHAT KIND OF IMPACT FEES THE CITY WILL BE

[01:15:01]

GETTING. A NUMBER TWO, THREE, I WAS JUST RACKING MY BRAIN.

I DON'T KNOW OF A SINGLE SHOPPING CENTER ON U.S.

ONE IN BREVARD COUNTY.

I CAN'T THINK OF ONE. THE RULES OF WAR SHOPPING CENTERS GO NOW CHANGE, THEY'RE NOT GOING TO GO ON THIS ONE BECAUSE THERE'S NOBODY TO THE EAST, THERE'S VERY, VERY STRICT CRITERIA WHERE THEY WILL AND WILL NOT GO.

SO WOULD IT BE NICE? YES. THIS IS A POTENTIAL.

PROBABLY NOT. I THINK WHAT WE'RE GOING TO WIND UP WITH IS A COMMERCIAL THAT WILL ACTUALLY BE SUPPORTED BY THE THE RESIDENTS THAT ACTUALLY LIVE IN THIS COMPLEX AND THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD. SO THOSE ARE THE KIND OF USES THAT WILL COME IN THERE THAT WILL SUPPORT THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE NEW THE NEW RESIDENTS.

YOU KNOW, I I THINK THAT THE ATTRACTION THERE IS IS DENSITY, IF YOU WANT THAT AREA TO GROW, YOU'VE PUT DENSITY THERE THAT THAT ATTRACTS GROWTH.

I THINK THERE'LL BE I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE VALUE OF THIS PROJECT'S GOING TO BE, BUT I IMAGINE THE TAXPAYERS IS GOING TO BE PRETTY HIGH.

I DON'T REALLY HAVE A WHOLE LOT MORE THAN THAT.

OH, THE NONRESIDENTIAL USE, SO WHEN WE FIRST CAME TO THE STAFF AND WITH THIS PROJECT, WE ACTUALLY PROPOSED THE NONRESIDENTIAL USE, THAT WAS A COMMERCIAL.

IT WAS WE WERE GOING TO PUT A BIT OF A PARK, A NEIGHBORHOOD PARK THAT WAS OUR ORIGINAL PROPOSAL. AND AS INSTEAD OF THE COMMERCIAL, SO NOW THE STAFF CONDITION IS TO HAVE COMMERCIAL INSTEAD OF A NON RESIDENTIAL USE.

AND THAT'S WHAT WE'LL BE PROVIDING.

BUT SO TO SAY THAT WE DIDN'T THINK ABOUT THE RESIDENTS INITIALLY AND WHAT MIGHT BE GREAT FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE PARK SHOULDN'T BE THERE OR SHOULD BE THERE, THAT WAS OUR ORIGINAL PROPOSAL. WE ACTUALLY MET WITH STAFF.

WE MET WITH THE PARKS AND REC DIRECTOR.

THEY WERE ON BOARD WITH THIS AND IT WAS DECIDED THAT COMMERCIAL WAS MORE DESIRABLE.

SO WE'RE PROPOSING THE COMMERCIAL.

SO. YOU KNOW, THIS COUNCIL FEELS THAT WE SHOULD GO BACK TO THAT, YOU KNOW, THAT WOULD BE FINE, THAT, YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY WE'RE A LITTLE PREMATURE IN EVEN TALKING ABOUT THAT BECAUSE WE'RE REALLY JUST ASKING FOR THE LAND USE FIRST READING RIGHT NOW.

SO I BELIEVE THAT THE THE PMU, I KNOW THAT THAT KIND OF CAME UP IN THIS AND I HOPE WE DIDN'T STIR THAT UP AND CREATE A HORNET'S NEST.

BUT I THINK THAT THAT ZONING CODE IS HEADED IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION.

I THINK YOU'RE GOING TO SEE GOOD THINGS COME OUT OF IT BECAUSE NOTHING CAME OUT OF THE WAY. IT'S WRITTEN NOW, SO.

I THINK THAT WE WILL HAVE THOSE USES THAT WILL BE GOOD FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE FACT THAT YOU ARE ON A MAJOR ARTERIAL ROADWAY, I THINK IT'S THE MOST APPROPRIATE USE.

SO UNLESS YOU HAVE ANY MORE QUESTIONS, I THINK I'M DONE WITH MY I DO HAVE A COMMENT, MR. MOORE. I SCANNED BREVARD COUNTY, U.S.

ONE. TITUSVILLE HAS A LOT OF COMMERCIAL AND USE ONE PORT ST.

JOHN POCHO.

SO WHEN YOU SAY THAT THERE'S NO COMMERCIAL ON U.S.

ONE TO COMMERCIAL ASSET SHOPPING CENTERS, THERE IS DEFINITELY A LOT OF COMMERCIAL ON U.S.

ONE. YES. SO THAT'S WHAT I'M EQUATING IT.

UNDERSTAND? ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS FROM.

MR., CARRY ON COUNCILMAN FOSTER, SIR.

I THINK YOU MENTIONED ABOUT INVESTORS, YOUR EARLY PRESENTATION.

SO HAD WE INVESTORS WANTED TO DO RESIDENTIAL ONLY.

YES, YES, AND THERE WAS SOME TALK ABOUT THE OWNER WHO OWNS THE PROPERTY.

THIS IS NOT GOING TO BE DEVELOPED BY THE OWNER.

THE OWNER HAS A SORT OF A CONTRACT TO SELL IT TO A DEVELOPER TO DEVELOP.

HE'S BEEN LOOKING TO DEVELOP THIS PROPERTY.

NOTHING'S HAPPENED. WE HAVE MET WITH THREE PREVIOUS DEVELOPERS ON THIS PROPERTY FOR THE CURRENT OWNER AND ALL THREE WALKED.

BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T WANT TO. DOES NOT WANT THE COMMERCIAL COMPONENT AT ALL.

YOU HAVE ONE THAT DOES ONE NOW WE HAVE ONE THAT DOES YES, SIR.

HOW LONG IT TOOK? WE STARTED THIS IN EARLY 2000, 2013.

THANK YOU. THERE IS A PUBLIX IN TITUSVILLE.

DO YOU KNOW HOW LONG IT'S BEEN THERE? A LONG TIME, PROBABLY. IT'S A FAIRLY NEW IS IT FAIRLY? WELL, AT LEAST 20 SOMEWHAT YEARS, BUT IT'S LIKE IT'S A NICE PLACE.

OK, THAT'S PRETTY FAR TO GET THAT ONE RIGHT.

AND. I DON'T KNOW IF I'M MISSING ANY OTHERS, BUT I WANTED TO SHARE THAT.

IT'S A REALLY GOOD ONE, TOO.

OK, SO COUNCILWOMAN COUNCILMAN FELIX SIX AGAIN AT PUBLIX WAS BUILT IN 06.

IT'S OUT OF SEASON SIX.

[01:20:02]

SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU, JOHN AS WELL TOO.

YEAH, WE'RE IN THE MIDDLE OF TOWN AND BOY, THIS IS THE BEST THING IN PORT ST.

JOHN PUBLIX.

YEAH, IT IS A NICE ONE.

KNOW. SO THERE ARE SHOPPING CENTERS.

A FEW DAYS I GOT I GOT ANY OTHER ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS OF MR. MOYER COUNCIL.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

WE'VE HAD OUR LAST SPEAKER ON A CLOSED THE PUBLIC HEARING AND ASK FOR A MOTION.

ALSO. I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ORDINANCE 2021, THAT'S 40 FOR THE FIRST READING.

AT A MOTION BY COUNCILMAN FOSTER.

AGAIN. I'VE GOT A SECOND BY COUNCILMAN FELIX.

DISCUSSION COUNCIL.

AND I GO FIRST. YES, ABSOLUTELY.

YOU MADE THE MOTIONS. I REALLY WANT COMMERCIAL TO BE BUILT ON U.S.

ONE, AND AS I MR. MR. MOYER, THAT, YOU KNOW, THEY HAD THREE DEVELOPERS SINCE 2019 AND WE HAVE ONE THAT'S WILLING TO. DO WHAT IT TAKES TO BRING COMMERCIAL TO THAT LOCATION THAT'S AN EYESORE ON U.S. ONE. REALLY IS WE HAD COMMERCIAL THERE, WINN-DIXIE NOW IS GONE, AND I DON'T SEE ANYTHING COMING ANY TIME SOON, I THINK.

THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO.

IT COMMERCIAL LESS PASS FOR THE FIRST READING, AND THEN WHEN IT COMES BACK, WE SHALL WE EVALUATE THE IMPACT FEES.

TRAFFIC AND OTHER THINGS.

I URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO PASS IT FOR THE FIRST.

THANK YOU, COUNCILMAN FOSTER COUNCILMAN FELIX.

AS MUCH AS I WANT TO AND I UNDERSTAND EXACTLY WHERE A COUNCILMAN FOSTER IS GOING WITH IT, YOU KNOW, IT'S TO HIS POINT, MY ONLY CONCERN IS, IS THAT IF.

THAT THAT CORRIDOR IS VERY, VERY CRITICAL, VERY IMPORTANT IN TERMS OF COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT, IF EVERY APPLICANT COMES BRINGING US MORE RESIDENTIAL ON THE PROMISES THAT WE NEED ROOFTOP TO SUPPORT COMMERCIAL, WE MAY HAVE A PROBLEM IN OUR HANDS, YOU KNOW, BASED ON ON ON WHAT WE'RE DOING WITH THE WITH THE CURRENT CURRENT AND FUTURE.

EVEN IF WE WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO LAND USE OR THE PMU, THAT'S WHERE THAT'S WHERE I'M AT.

IT'S GREAT TO SEE SOME COMMERCIAL COMING IN WITH THIS PROJECT.

BUT I'M AFRAID IF WE CONTINUE, IF EVERY APPLICANT COME IN WITH THAT SAME NOTION, WE MAY GO IN ON THE SAME PATH.

THAT'S MY COMMENT FOR THAT.

I APPRECIATE THAT. DEPUTY MAYOR JOHNSON, YEAH, I JUST WANT TO JUMP IN ON THAT THE DEVELOPERS INTENT ISN'T TO, YOU KNOW, AND REALLY TO DO ANY COMMERCIAL, IT'S TO INCREASE THE RESIDENTIAL DENSITY.

AND THAT'S THE MAIN THING THAT STUCK OUT TO ME.

THAT'S WHY I WAS ASKING THE QUESTIONS I ASKED, BECAUSE THEIR INTENT IS TO, YOU KNOW, FROM 161 TO POSSIBLY 412, ALL, YOU KNOW, IN THE STAFF MINUTES ARE IN STAFF COMMENTS AND EVERYTHING. I DON'T SEE WHERE THE DEVELOPER SAID THEIR INTENT WAS TO ADD MORE COMMERCIAL HERE. IT SAYS ALLOWING FOR SMALLER COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT IN PREVIOUSLY.

AND THAT'S WHERE I'M ON THE FENCE ON IT, AS I UNDERSTAND IT HASN'T BEEN DEVELOPED.

BUT ONCE YOU ONCE YOU LOSE IT, YOU LOSE.

IT IS GONE. AND THAT'S MY OTHER CONCERN WITH THAT.

WOULD IT STAY VACANT FOR ANOTHER YEAR OR TWO? WHO KNOWS WHAT? AT LEAST WE STILL HAVE THAT PRIME REAL ESTATE ON THE POSSIBILITY OF HAVING WHATEVER MAYBE NOT A TRADER JOE'S, MAYBE A TRADER JOE'S, BUT SOMETHING OR THAT AREA.

SO THAT'S WHERE I'M REALLY ON THE FENCE WITH THIS.

BUT I'M LEANING MORE TOWARDS NOT SUPPORTING IT.

AND THOSE ARE JUST MY COUNCILMAN COMMENTS TO COUNCIL RIGHT NOW, SO.

THANK YOU, DEPUTY MAYOR JOHNSON COUNCILMAN BAILEY.

YEAH, AND NOW WE DON'T HAVE A GUARANTEE OF 15 PERCENT HERE, SO I JUST DON'T WANT US TO.

[01:25:01]

IT'S STUCK ON THAT.

THE QUESTION HERE ISN'T, DO WE WANT MORE COMMERCIAL, WE CAN ALWAYS GET MORE COMMERCIAL IF WE'RE GOING TO GET, YOU KNOW, 90 PERCENT RESIDENTIAL AND WE'RE GOING TO, YOU KNOW, WITH THAT COMMERCIAL, WE'RE JUST. EXCUSE ME.

WE'RE JUST GOING TO KEEP GROWING IN THE SAME WAY, WAYS OUT THAT WE ARE CURRENTLY STUCK AND WE'RE JUST IT'S JUST SIMILAR TO WHAT I SAID LAST TIME.

WHENEVER WE'RE DISCUSSING THE DEVELOPERS AGREEMENT FOR THE NORTH SHORE PROJECT, ALL YOU'RE DOING IS TAKING THE SAME PROBLEM WE ALREADY HAVE AND MAKING IT BIGGER.

AND THAT NEVER MAKE THINGS BETTER.

IT'S LIKE IT'S LIKE BARN.

IT'S LIKE PAYING OFF A CREDIT CARD OR ANOTHER CREDIT CARD.

YOU DIDN'T GET INTO A BETTER POSITION.

YOU'RE JUST IT'S JUST BIGGER NOW.

YOU MIGHT STILL HAVE THE SAME PERCENTAGE OVERALL OF WHAT YOU YOU KNOW, YOU'RE UTILIZING OR, YOU KNOW. BUT IN THE END, YOU KNOW, IT'S JUST A BIGGER PROBLEM.

AND SO THAT MY ISSUE I THINK THAT WE NEED TO I GUESS I'M CONFLICTED.

I'M CONFLICTED BECAUSE I THINK THAT I HAVE INTENT ON MAYBE HOW THAT EARLIER ORDINANCE FOR THE PMU SHOULD BE ALTERED, WHICH WOULD PUT A BIGGER BURDEN UPON THIS PARTICULAR APPLICANT AND OTHERS. BUT IT'S ONLY, YOU KNOW, NOTABLE NOW BECAUSE WE HAVE THIS APPLICANT IN FRONT OF US RIGHT THIS SECOND. BUT I THINK THAT WE HAVE TO ASK YOURSELF, DO WE WANT NOW THIS MUCH MORE RESIDENTIAL? AND THAT ANSWER, I THINK, IS RESOUNDING.

YOU KNOW, NOT NECESSARILY.

NOT REALLY. RIGHT. I THINK THAT THAT'S BEEN PRETTY CLEAR.

WE WANT COMMERCIAL AND I THINK WE'RE GOING TO WANT COMMERCIAL.

WE NEED TO MAYBE TWEAK THAT ORDINANCE TO SAY WHAT WE WANT.

IT'S DIFFICULT FOR ME BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, I KIND OF FEEL THAT WE COULD HAVE NO ZONING, YOU KNOW, LIKE SOME OTHER PLACES HAVE JUST HAVE SOME BASIC LAND USE.

BUT ON THE OTHER SIDE OF IS EVER GOING TO HAVE THE SYSTEM AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THESE EXPECTATIONS THAT THIS THIS IS A TOOL THAT WE'RE USING.

AND I WANT TO USE IT CORRECTLY.

AND SO I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT REFLECTS WHAT OUR WILL IS AS COUNSEL, AS FAR AS TRYING TO GET MORE COMMERCIAL AND JUST AND WE HAVE A STRONG INTEREST HERE.

I BELIEVE THAT THE INDIVIDUAL PROPERTY OWNER HAS AN INTEREST.

AND I WANT TO I I REALLY BELIEVE THAT THEY SHOULD BUILD WHAT THEY WANT.

BUT OUR JOB IS TO DEFEND THE REST OF THE CITY BECAUSE ALL THOSE ADDITIONAL SERVICES, WE'VE GOT TO FIND SOME WAY OF FUNDING.

AND RIGHT NOW, IT'S JUST IT'S VERY DIFFICULT.

SO THAT'S WHY I SEE THAT THE PROBLEMS AREN'T GOING TO CHANGE.

AND WE'LL ADD ONE MORE NOTE, TOO, IS THAT HAS BEEN STATED ONCE AGAIN BY ANOTHER DEVELOPER. YOU KNOW, AS I SAID, AS I KEEP ADDING TO EVIDENCE, I KNOW IT'S KIND OF A DONE DEAL, BUT BY LINE WITH THE NORTHSHORE, WE SEE THAT THERE'S DEMAND FOR APARTMENTS AND YOU DON'T HAVE TO SUBSIDIZE THEM. THEY THEY WANT TO BE ALLOWED TO BUILD 100 PERCENT.

IT SOUNDS LIKE RIGHT NOW THERE'S A LOT OF SPOTS WHERE WE CAN BREAK 100 PERCENT OF A BUILT WITH NO SUBSIDIZATION.

THAT'S ALL. I'LL BE THERE IN MY COMMENTS, AS I ALLUDED TO BEFORE, WE HAVE THE ROOFTOPS THERE AND THE COMMERCIAL BASE.

I AGREE WITH EVERYONE.

EVERYONE'S COMMENTS ON COUNCIL FROM COUNCILMAN FOSTER ARE SAYING THAT IS AN EYESORE.

IT HAS BEEN FOR YEARS.

I AGREE WITH COUNCILMAN FELIX IN SAYING THAT, HEY, THIS IS THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY WHERE THERE'S A PRIME LOCATION HERE FOR OR COMMERCIAL.

AND I THINK YOU HIT THE NAIL ON THE HEAD.

DEPUTY MAYOR JOHNSON, WHEN YOU STARTED TO ALLUDE TO THE FACT THAT IT WAS 100 PERCENT COMMERCIAL AND IT WAS WIPED OUT.

SO FOR US TO SUPPLEMENT THAT WITH RESIDENTIAL, I'M HAVING A REALLY DIFFICULT TIME WHEN WHEN THIS COUNCIL TOGETHER I'VE STATED THIS AND WE WANT MORE COMMERCIAL.

WE KNOW THAT WE CAN'T SUSTAIN OURSELVES.

WE KNOW THAT WE HAVE TO RID OURSELVES OF THIS BEDROOM COMMUNITY STIGMA BECAUSE WE CAN'T SUSTAIN THE TAXES ON THE RESIDENTS.

WE CAN'T SURVIVE THAT WAY.

SO I'M IN AGREEMENT WITH ALL THE COMMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN SAID IN RELATION TO THAT.

I THINK COUNCILMAN BAILEY HAS THE FORESIGHT AND AND WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO CHANGE THAT.

BAMU AND SO I'M GLAD THAT WE'RE HAVING THIS CONVERSATION.

BUT AS FOR MY VOTE, I WOULD PREFER TO MAINTAIN IT A HIGHER LEVEL OF COMMERCIAL.

AND THIS THIS CERTAINLY ISN'T IT FOR ME.

THE ADDITIONAL COMMENTS, MAUNSELL.

SO COUNCILMAN COUNCILMAN FOSTER, YOU KNOW.

ONCE AGAIN. A LOT BEEN SITTING THERE.

I MEAN, WE'RE GOING TO WAIT AND WAIT, WAIT.

NOTHING'S HAPPENING WHEN YOU HAVE A COMMERCIAL THAT WAS THERE A WINN-DIXIE, I THINK WE WOULD HAVE GOT TO WINN-DIXIE AND PALM BAY.

WHY THAT ONE HAD FAILED.

[01:30:03]

THE REASON WHY THEY MOVED, WINN-DIXIE MOVED.

OH, YOU CAN BUILD SOME APARTMENTS AND THAT WHOLE CORRIDOR IS THAT APARTMENT BECAUSE SUPPORT OTHER COMMERCIAL THAT'S IN THE AREA.

BUT APPARENTLY THE RESIDENTIAL AROUND THERE DIDN'T SUPPORT THAT WINN-DIXIE OR THEY WOULDN'T MOVE. DIXIE DON'T CLOSE PLACES.

THEY'RE NOT MAKING A PROFIT, I BELIEVE SO WE HAVE OPPORTUNITY TO.

IT COMMERCIAL IN THE AUDIENCE, IN OUR AUDIENCE, TO GET COMMERCIAL AIR CHANGED THE LANDSCAPE. TO IMPROVE IT.

NOT MAKE IT AN EYESORE FOR OUR CITY.

EITHER WAY IS A WIN WIN SITUATION FOR US.

I BELIEVE WE'RE GOING TO GET THE COMMERCIAL, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE APARTMENTS.

THE MILLENNIUM'S LIKE I SAID, THEY'RE NOT BUYING HOUSES.

LIVING IN APARTMENTS AND AND.

AND YOU HAVE HARRIS RIGHT DOWN THE STREET, YOU MIGHT GET SOME OF.

OH, WORKERS TO MOVE IN APARTMENTS THAT SUPPORT THE COMMERCIAL IN THAT AREA.

THERE'S COMMERCIAL UP AND NOW YOU SEE ONE.

WELL, NOT AT THAT LOCATION.

I ASKED THE GENTLEMAN ABOUT INVESTORS AND ALL OF THEM BACKED OUT BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T WANT TO DO COMMERCIAL. NOW WE HAVE ONE THAT WAS WILLING TO DO COMMERCIAL THERE.

ACCORDING TO. WE ASKED THEM TO DO OUR ORDINANCE.

I THINK WE NEED TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THIS AND PASS THIS ORDINANCE.

IF NOT, I BELIEVE THAT'S THE.

I'M BACK IN 2024, COME BACK AND SAY, MR. FOSTER YOU WAS WRONG, I BELIEVE THAT LOT'S GOING TO BE THERE FAKING LIKE THAT FOR A LONG TIME AND I DON'T WANT TO SEE THAT PALM BAY.

SO I WOULD HAVE COMMERCIAL IMPACT FEES, TAXES THAT'S GOING TO COME FROM MY APARTMENT.

WE GET MORE TAXES FROM APARTMENTS THAN ALL COMMERCIAL BUSINESS THERE THAT RESIDENTS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD COULD TAKE ADVANTAGE OF.

SO I URGE MY COLLEAGUES TO PASS.

THANK YOU, I RESPECT YOUR COMMENTS, I LIKE WITH COUNCILMAN, FELIX SAID IN RELATIONS TO THAT HE PUT IT THIS WAY WE WE CAN WAIT IN THAT SENSE.

AND WHEN YOU MADE THOSE COMMENTS, COUNCILMAN FELIX, I WAS THINKING OF RETURN ON INVESTMENT WHEN IT CAME TO THAT COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR.

BUT ALL THE COMMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE.

SO I'M GOING TO CALL THE QUESTION.

THERE'S A MOTION BY COUNCILMAN FOSTER AND IS SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN FELIX ALL IN FAVOR, SAY I. ALL OPPOSE NAY.

SO LET'S DO A ROLL CALL.

DEPUTY MAYOR JOHNSON, A COUNCILMAN BAILEY.

COUNCILMAN FOSTER I COUNCILMAN FELIX, MAN, MEDINA NAYE.

MOTION FAILS, GO TO ITEM NUMBER TWO.

AYLSWORTH FEEL.

BEFORE. ITEM NUMBER SEVEN.

[7. Resolution 2021-22, granting a conditional use for commercial development of a parcel of land of ten (10) or more acres of area in CC (Community Commercial District) zoning, on property located east of and adjacent to Babcock Street, in the vicinity south of Palm Bay Road (12.32 acres) (Case CU-17-2021, Palm Bay Partners, LLC). (Quasi-Judicial Proceeding) ]

I ON THE RIGHT AFTER ITEM NUMBER SEVEN.

THE SMITH RESOLUTION, 20 21 DASH.

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF PALM BAY, BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA, RIGHT NOW, ADDITIONAL USE FOR COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT OF A PARCEL OF LAND OF 10 OR MORE ACRES, AN AREA IN S.C.

COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL DISTRICT ZONING, WHICH PROPERTY IS LOCATED EAST OF AN ADJACENT TO BABCOCK STREET VICINITY, SOUTH OF PALM BAY ROAD AND LEGALLY DESCRIBED HEREIN, WRITTEN TO USE AS A CONDITIONAL USE IN PROVIDING CONDITIONS HERE IN PROVIDING FOR A COMMENCEMENT PERIOD, PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

WHEN I OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND ASK THE APPLICANT TO STATE HER CASE.

GOOD AFTERNOON, COUNSEL. MY NAME IS LISA COLBY.

I AM WITH CEG.

I'M REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT BUSINESS ADDRESSES TWO SIX FIVE ONE WEST VALLEY BOULEVARD, MELBOURNE, FLORIDA. SO THIS PROJECT IS LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF PALM BAY ROAD AND BABCOCK STREET. IT'S THE EXISTING PALM BAY, THE PUBLIC SHOPPING PLAZA, THE PROPOSED CONDITIONAL USES, BECAUSE OUR ACREAGE, OUR PROJECT ACREAGE IS TWELVE POINT THREE TWO ACRES. ANYTHING OVER 10 REQUIRES THE CONDITIONAL USE.

IT WAS APPROVED LAST MONTH, MAY 5TH, THAT PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD UNANIMOUSLY.

AND WE ARE EXCITED TO PRESENT IN FRONT OF YOU ALL TODAY.

SO WITH THE SCOPE OF OUR PROJECT, WE WOULD BE DECREASING THE COMMERCIAL SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE PROPERTY THERE. WE WOULD BE DEMOLISHING THE EXISTING COMMERCIAL OF THE PALM BAY

[01:35:02]

ANCHOR AND THE L SHAPED SHOPPING PLAZA.

SO THAT'S APPROXIMATELY 100 AND 35000 SQUARE FEET.

WE WOULD BE REPLACING IT WITH ABOUT 78000 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL.

THE PUBLIC WOULD BE REBUILT.

SO THAT WOULD STILL BE THE ANCHOR OF THE PLAZA WITH OTHER RETAIL SHOPS NEXT TO IT.

WE'D BE INCREASING THE PARKING WITH SOME OF THAT FOOTPRINT THAT WAS LOST FROM THE SHOPPING PLAZA THAT WAS DEMOLISHED.

SO WITH THE PUBLIC, THAT WILL ACTUALLY HAVE A NEW DRIVE THROUGH PHARMACY BECAUSE IT'LL BE REBUILT, AS I SAID, WILL BE MORE PARKING.

IT'LL HAVE ADDITIONAL RETAIL, RETAIL, A DRIVE THROUGH COMMERCIAL.

THE TENANTS AT THIS TIME ARE TO BE DETERMINED.

AS I SAID, WE'RE GOING THROUGH A CONDITIONAL USE WILL BE COMING BACK WITH SITE PLAN.

BUT THE TENANTS BESIDES THE PUBLIC FOR THE COMMERCIAL OUT PARCELS AT THE FRONT ARE TO BE DETERMINED. THE SIGNIFICANT DECREASE IN THE COMMERCIAL ACREAGE OF THE SHOPPING PLAZA ACTUALLY HAS A DECREASE IN TRAFFIC IN THAT AREA.

THE DECREASE IN THE COMMERCIAL EQUATES TO A DECREASE IN TRIPS, ABOUT 3000 LESS TRIPS TO THAT PLAZA DAILY.

THAT'S JUST FROM SOME PRELIMINARY TRIP GENERATION STUDIES.

A FULL TRAFFIC ANALYSIS WILL BE REQUIRED WHEN WE GO THROUGH SITE PLAN APPROVAL OF THIS PROCESS. THAT'S ONE OF THE CONDITIONS OF PENNSY AND THAT THAT STAFF HAS PUT TOGETHER.

AND THERE WILL BE A TRAFFIC SIGNAL AT THE INTERSECTION SOUTH OF THAT PLAZA.

THE TRAFFIC ENGINEER FOR THE PROJECT HAS ALREADY BEEN IN COMMUNICATIONS WITH F.D.A.

SO THEY KNOW THAT THAT'S FORTHCOMING PENDING THE TRAFFIC ANALYSIS AND THE FINDINGS.

IT'LL BE A BENEFIT TO THIS PLAZA, THE NEIGHBORING PLAZA ACROSS THE STREET, VEHICULAR SAFETY, PEDESTRIAN SAFETY IN THAT AREA, ET CETERA.

AND THEN ANOTHER THING TO NOTE FROM THE ENGINEERING STANDPOINT IS THAT RIGHT NOW, ALL OF THE STORMWATER FROM THAT SITE, BECAUSE IT WAS BUILT IN THE LATE 1980S, GOES DIRECTLY TO BABCOCK STREET. THERE'S NO EXISTING STORMWATER TREATMENT ON THAT SITE.

SO BY REDOING THAT CONFIGURATION OF THE SHOPPING PLAZA, WE'RE ABLE TO ADD TO RETENTION PONDS. WE'RE STILL IN THE PROCESS OF DESIGNING, BUT THAT WILL ADD ADDITIONAL STORMWATER TREATMENT FOR THE SITE.

IT'LL CONNECT BACK INTO THE EXISTING SYSTEM THAT DOES DISCHARGE TO BABCOCK.

SO I'M AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS.

THE APPLICANT IS ALSO IN THE AUDIENCE FOR QUESTIONS AS WELL.

AND WE THANK YOU AGAIN FOR YOUR TIME.

ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE APPLICANT COUNSEL? THANK YOU, MA'AM. QUESTIONS FROM US, FROM STAFF COUNSEL AT THIS TIME.

IS THERE ANYONE THAT WISHES TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST A BILL THAT.

GILBERTON, 586 OCEAN SPRAY STREET, SOUTHWEST, I WAS NOT GOING TO ADDRESS THIS ONE, BUT THE MORE I HEARD THE COMMENTS FROM THE APPLICANT.

THE MORE I FELT THE NEED TO DO SUCH, THIS IS MY BILL BATTEN STANDARD, WHICH DOESN'T MEAN ANYTHING IN THE CITY OF PALM BAY.

THIS IS THE KIND OF DEVELOPMENT AND PURPOSE AND PROFESSIONALISM I LIKE HAPPENING ON COMMERCIAL PROPERTY.

THEY'RE MAKING 100 PERCENT COMMERCIAL.

THEY'RE NOT SAYING, OH, YOU GOT TO PUT A HOUSE ON HERE IN ORDER TO HAVE THIS DEVELOPMENT COME IN. IT'S 100 PERCENT COMMERCIAL.

THEY'RE TAKING THE RISK.

THEY'RE INVESTING INTO IT AND THEY'RE ACCOMPLISHING THEIR OBJECTIVE.

SO THE ONLY ONE THING I SEE NEGATIVE WITH THIS IS THE FACT THAT WE DON'T HAVE A PUBLIC'S OVER ON US ONE.

SO THAT NOW MEANS THAT ALL THE RESIDENTS IN THAT AREA OVER ON US ONE NOW HAVE TO COME ALL THE WAY OVER TO THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF BABCOCK STREET IN ORDER TO GO SHOPPING.

ISN'T THAT A BUMMER? BUT I'M VERY HAPPY WITH WHAT THIS DEVELOPED WITH THIS DEVELOPER IS DOING.

AND IT'S 100 PERCENT WHAT I WANT AT WHAT BILL BRATTON WANTS TO SEE OF DEVELOPERS IN THE CITY OF PALM BAY.

SO I CONGRATULATE THEM 100 PERCENT.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU.

ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST ASYLUM? STEP FORWARD. YOU NEED THIS TO SPEAK.

WELL, OK, I GUESS YOU WANT AFTER THIS.

THANK YOU. RANDALL CHESKY, TWO TO SEVEN, NEVILLE CIRCLE.

I WANTED TO MAKE SURE TO COME UP ON THIS SITE AND LET YOU GUYS KNOW THAT I AM NOT ALL NEGATIVE. I'M ACTUALLY A POSITIVE RAY OF SUNSHINE AND I'M SUPER EXCITED ABOUT THIS PROJECT. IF WE TALK ABOUT EYESORES, THE PALM BAY, SHOPPING PLAZAS AND EYESORE, WE TALK ABOUT BUSY INTERSECTIONS.

WE TALK ABOUT BABCOCK AND PALM BAY ROAD INTERSECTION BEING I THINK WE'VE TALKED ABOUT AT PREVIOUS MEETINGS, THE BUSIEST INTERSECTION IN THE ENTIRE COUNTY AND THEREFORE SPACE COAST. PEOPLE COME, PEOPLE GO.

AND WHEN YOU'RE ON THE SOUTHERN PORTION IN THIS ENTRANCE THAT THE APPLICANT HAS STATED THEY WILL PAY FOR AND INSTALL A TRAFFIC LIGHT THAT BOTH SIDES OF BABCOCK WILL BENEFIT FROM, YOU KNOW, WE DON'T HAVE THE ADVANTAGE OF HAVING CHEAP MOYAR HERE TO ATTEST TO THIS, BUT THE MAJORITY OF THE TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS THAT HAPPEN IN OUR GREAT CITY PROBABLY HAPPEN RIGHT THERE. IT IS A NIGHTMARE TO GET IN AND OUT OF THAT SHOPPING CENTER IF YOU'RE TRYING

[01:40:01]

TO GET TO THE PUBLICS, WHICH IS THE ONLY REMAINING TENANT.

SO I DO HEAR A LOT OF COMMERCIAL SQUARE FOOTAGE, BUT WITH THAT BEING SAID, I HEAR A GAIN OF EFFICIENCY AND I HEAR A GAIN OF ENVIRONMENTAL SUSTAINABILITY WITH USING CREATING STORMWATER RETENTIONS AND THINGS OF THAT SORT.

AND I HOPE THAT THEY'LL LOOK TO MORE SUSTAINABLE METHODS OF DOING THAT.

BESIDES JUST MAKING A BIG CONCRETE HOLE, WE CAN ACTUALLY CREATE A NATURE HABITAT OUT OF THAT STORMWATER. AND I'M SURE THAT THEY WILL.

I'M SURE THEY HEAR ME. BUT OVERALL, THIS IS A FANTASTIC PROJECT AND IT IS GOING TO BE A BUMMER THAT THOSE RESIDENTS DON'T HAVE VERY, VERY MANY OPTIONS WHEN THAT PUBLIC IS CLOSED, YOU KNOW, IT'S GOING TO BE TOUGH.

AND THE WHOLE CITY AS A WHOLE IS GOING TO HAVE TO DEAL WITH A LOT OF CONSTRUCTION, EVEN FOR THE INSTALLATION OF THE TRAFFIC LIGHT.

BUT IN THE LONG TERM, IN THE FUTURE, WE WILL ALL BENEFIT FROM THIS AND WE WILL ALL APPRECIATE THAT IT'S COMING.

SO I SURE DO HOPE YOU GUYS DO THE RIGHT THING AND SEND THIS ONE THROUGH.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

DOES THE APPLICANT WISH TO MAKE ANY CLOSING REMARKS? THANKS, GUYS. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.

WE REALLY APPRECIATE BEING HEARD IN FRONT OF THE PROJECT IN FRONT OF THE COUNCIL ON THIS PROJECT. WE WANT TO YOU KNOW, I'M A LOCAL IN BROWARD COUNTY.

EVERYONE HERE DOES WANT TO DO A GOOD JOB AND PROVIDE A GREAT RESOURCE FOR THE WHOLE CITY OF PALM BAY. SO, AGAIN, APPRECIATE YOUR TIME.

APOLOGIES FOR BEING A BIT TARDY AND THANK YOU.

ANY QUESTIONS? COUNCILMAN.

BAILEY. AS FORGIVE ME, MAYBE I THINK MAYBE I DIDN'T FALL SOMEWHERE IN THE NARRATIVE.

THE DELAY IS REQUIRED.

YOU GUYS ARE WE HAVE A TRAFFIC STUDY THAT'S REQUIRING THAT, SO A TRAFFIC STUDY IS FORTHCOMING. TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS, WE KNOW THAT THAT I BELIEVE IT WAS A CONDITION PROVIDED TRAFFIC STUDY AND FULLY ENGINEERED INTERSECTION AND TRAFFIC SIGNAL DESIGN WAS A CONDITION OF PENNSY APPROVAL, A STAFF CONDITION THAT YOU DIDN'T I HEAR YOU SAY THAT THERE WOULD BE LESS DOESN'T MEAN LESS COMMERCIAL OR LESS TRAFFIC THROUGH THERE.

I SHOULD SAY TRIP GENERATION, JUST VERY PRELIMINARY NUMBERS.

IT'S RUN BASED ON YOUR TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE OF COMMERCIAL.

ALSO, BY DECREASING YOUR COMMERCIAL FOOTPRINT, YOU WOULD DECREASE THE NUMBER OF TRIPS.

OK, SO ESSENTIALLY IT'S JUST BECOMING A STAFF OR OR PENNSY REQUIREMENT, IS WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, THE TRAFFIC SIGNAL.

YES. IT WAS IN DISCUSSIONS A FEW YEARS AGO AS WELL.

THIS WASN'T JUST WITH THE CONDITIONAL USE, BUT THERE WILL BE A TRAFFIC SIGNALS PART OF THIS PROJECT.

AND I BELIEVE STAFF CAN ALSO, JUST FROM YOUR FROM THE APPLICANT'S POINT OF VIEW OR FROM THE ENGINEERING POINT OF VIEW, DO YOU FEEL THAT THAT'S GOING TO BE SOMETHING THAT THAT SHOULD BE THAT SERIOUSLY LOOKED AT? OR DO YOU THINK LET'S DO THE TRAFFIC STUDY, THEN GET THE DESIGN PLANS? NORMALLY THEY'LL DO THE TRAFFIC STUDY AND THEN DO THE DESIGN PLANS.

AND PERSONALLY, WE WORK WITH THE TRAFFIC ENGINEER ON THE PROJECT WHO WILL BE SPEARHEADING THAT AS A CIVIL ENGINEER.

WE WORK HAND IN HAND WITH THEM TO PROVIDE A GOOD PRODUCT, BUT JUST RUNNING THE PRELIMINARY NUMBERS WITH THEM, WITH THE DECREASE IN THE SQUARE FOOTAGE, A COMMERCIAL COMES A DECREASE IN TRAFFIC.

I'M SORRY IF THAT WAS I WASN'T SUPER CLEAR ON THAT.

NO, YOU'RE FINE. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE NOT REQUIRING SOMETHING.

THAT'S TO ME, I DON'T WANT TO TRAFFIC I DON'T LIKE TRAFFIC LIGHTS, TO BE HONEST WITH YOU.

BUT IT'S JUST ALSO IF IT'S NOT, I DON'T WANT YOU GUYS HAVE TO DO WORK.

THAT'S NOT JUST IF I WANT YOU TO DO IT IN THE RIGHT ORDER, I GUESS I DON'T WANT YOU GUYS HAVE TO HAVE A PLAN AND HAVE THIS READY.

THEN THE TRAFFIC AND WE'RE EXPECTING TRAFFIC COUNT TO GO DOWN.

AND IF TRAFFIC COUNT COMES OUT TO BE LOWER AND THE WARRANT IS NOT THERE, THEN, YOU KNOW, IT JUST KIND OF FELT LIKE THE APPLICANTS HAD BEEN FORCED TO PAY FOR THIS SERVICE, FOR THIS PLANE FOR NO REASON. I UNDERSTOOD.

THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE IT. THE ADDITIONAL QUESTION, IF I MAY, COUNCILMAN FELIX.

YEAH. NOT SO MUCH A QUESTION.

JUST WANT A YOU KNOW, FOR THE RECORD, SAY HOW EXCITED I HOW EXCITED I AM ABOUT THIS PROJECT AND THAT EVERY STORE I WORK THERE FOR QUITE A FEW YEARS AWAY BACK.

SO I DO UNDERSTAND THAT THAT INTERSECTION ACTUALLY EXISTS, EXIT AND ACCESS TO THESE DISPLAYS. IT'S A NIGHTMARE.

I WOULD AGREE WITH YOU REGARDLESS HOW YOU LOOKED AT IT.

AND IT IS DIFFICULT.

SO IT'S GREAT A LONG TIME COMING.

I THINK IT'S A GREAT THING, GREAT MOVE BY THE APPLICANT AND I'M SURE EXCITED ABOUT THAT AS WELL. SO THE ONE THING I WOULD SAY, THOUGH, MAYBE FRANK MAY BE ABLE TO SPEAK ON THAT IN TERMS OF LIGHTING.

WITHIN THAT INTERSECTION, JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE GOT.

ADEQUATE LIGHTING.

THAT'S ONE AREA I THINK LIGHTING HELP, HELP QUITE A BIT WHEN WE TALK ABOUT OVERALL SAFETY, THAT'S SOMETHING AS A WHOLE.

WE NEED TO LOOK THAT AS FAR AS THE CITY IS CONCERNED.

BUT THIS WOULD BE AN OPPORTUNITY WHERE WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THE, YOU KNOW, DEVELOPERS OR THE BUILDERS ARE CONTRIBUTING TO ACCURATE OR ADEQUATE LIGHTING AS WE DEVELOP, AS WE AS WE

[01:45:02]

BUILD. UNDERSTOOD.

AND WE'RE HAPPY TO WORK WITH STAFF AND COUNCIL AS WE MOVE FORWARD WITH SITE REVIEW AS WELL. THAT'S FOR STAFF TO MAKE SURE WE WE WE TEST IT, WE ACT.

WE GOOD ON THAT. THANK YOU.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, COUNCILWOMAN FELIX.

COUNCILMAN BAILEY, YOU HAVE AN ADDITIONAL QUESTION? I WAS JUST GOING TO ASK COUNCILMAN COUNCILMAN WITH THE APPLICANT IF I COULD JUST ASK WHAT WE HAD SHAFT'S TRUSTEE ALREADY.

BUT WE WE'VE HAD WE'VE HAD STAFF OPPORTUNITY THAT WE WENT BY.

I HAD ASKED COUNSEL, BUT THANK YOU, MA'AM.

THANK YOU. ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? I SEE. THANK YOU, MA'AM, I APPRECIATE.

SO, MADAM SHERMAN.

WOULD YOU LIKE TO CALL PERHAPS OUR COMMENTS REGARDING THE LIGHTS, LIKE COUNCILMAN, FELIX ADDRESS, MAYBE MAKE THAT PART OF THE PROCESS? IS THAT SOMETHING THAT CAN BE LOOKED AT? CERTAINLY. LIKE TRYING TO COME UP, COME ON, A MR. ONE NUBBY. GOOD EVENING FROM WANNABE, THE CITY ENGINEER, THAT INTERSECTION HAS BEEN LOOKED AT IN THE PAST IS AN A CORRIDOR FIVE OR SEVEN.

IT IS A STATE ROUTE AND SO THE PROCESS WILL GO THROUGH EFG.

BUT THERE HAS BEEN IN MY DISCUSSIONS WITH THE FDA FOR THAT CORRIDOR, THAT LOCATION, MAINLY BECAUSE OF THE ACCIDENTS, THEY ARE INTERESTED IN LOOKING AT A POSSIBLE SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION CONNECTING THE TWO.

AND TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, THE GOOD PART ABOUT HAVING A NEW SIGNAL, ESPECIALLY WITH THAT TOSTADAS, THEY REQUIRE STREETLIGHTS ON THE SIGNAL INTERSECTION SO THEY'LL BE LIGHTING.

JUST REAL QUICK, THERE, ARE WE BEING PREMATURE IN ACQUIRING THE DESIGN BEFORE HAVING THE TRAFFIC STUDY, OR AM I WRONG IN THAT THOUGHT? WELL, IT'S BECAUSE THE THE INTERSECTION WILL BE THE ISSUE IN TERMS OF CIVIL WAR.

AS THIS CONFLICT POINTS. THE MAIN LINE, BABCOCK ALREADY HAS TO BUY IMPORTS.

SO NOW YOU'RE LOOKING AT A SIDEBOARDS SIDE, WHICH WOULD BE SINCE THEY'RE GOING TO OPEN UP A FOURTH LEG, IT'LL PROBABLY SHIP THE WHITE HOUSE'S REAR SIGNAL.

ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS OF STAFF COUNSEL? OK, CNN, I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AT THIS TIME AND ENTERTAIN A MOTION MOTION TO PROVE CASEY, YOU DASH 17 DAYS, 20 21, SUBJECT TO THE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDATIONS CONTAINED IN THE STAFF REPORT AND COMPLIANCE WITH ALL CITY CODES AND OTHER GOVERNMENTAL REGULATIONS. SECOND, I'VE GOT A MOTION BY DEPUTY MAYOR JOHNSON SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN FELIX. ANY ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION COUNCIL? THE AINUN, I'M CALLING IT ALL IN FAVOR AND YOU WANT TO POSE AS IS UNANIMOUSLY, WE'RE ON ITEM NUMBER EIGHT.

[8. Request by Palm Bay Greens, LLC, for Final Subdivision approval of a proposed singlefamily subdivision to be known as ‘Country Club Lakes Estates Phase 4’, which property is located in the vicinity east of Seymour Road, between Riviera Drive and Meadowbrook Road, in RS-1 (Single-Family Residential District) zoning (32.31 acres) (Case FS-1-2021). (Quasi- Judicial Proceeding) ]

AND OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND HAVE THE APPLICANT STEP FORWARD.

HE REMEMBERS COUNCILMAN APOLOGIZE, CAME IN LATE, LIKE EVERYONE ELSE, I THOUGHT IT WAS SEVEN O'CLOCK AND LIKE THE HORSE GOING TO THE BARN, I HEAR CITY COUNCIL SEVEN O'CLOCK.

THAT'S IN MY MIND. I DIDN'T GO BACK TO MY OFFICE BECAUSE I INTENDED TO.

BUT BASICALLY, THIS IS A COUNTRY CLUB LIKE STRAIGHT-FACED FOR THIS IS NO FOR PHASE FOUR OF A TOTAL OF BAILEY FIVE PHASES.

THIS IS THE OLD GOLF COURSE THAT'S BEEN VACANT FOR THE LAST SIX YEARS OR SO.

THE FIRST THREE PHASES ARE PROCESS HOMES BEING BUILT THERE.

I INVITE COUNSEL. THEY HAVEN'T HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK AT THAT YET.

I SUGGEST YOU DO THAT.

IT'S TURNED OUT TO BE VERY NICE DEVELOPMENT.

WE'VE WORKED CLOSELY WITH STAFF TO SAVE SPECIMEN TREES AND I THINK THE STAFF HAS INDICATED THEY'RE SATISFIED WITH IT AS WELL AS I'M ZONING AT BROCCOLIS, PROXIMITY TO SPEAK TO THE ZONING ALLOWS CLOSE TO FIVE BILAD RETENTION PONDS.

THIS HAS BEEN APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY BY PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD FOR FINAL APPROVAL AND REQUEST FOR APPROVAL.

FINAL PLETT AT THIS TIME, I'LL ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.