Aug 02, 2023 Planning and Zoning Board

[00:00:03]

GOOD EVENING. THE AUGUST 2ND PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD IS NOW CALLED TO ORDER.

[CALL TO ORDER]

CHANDRA. THE ROLL CALL, PLEASE.

YES, MR. BOEREMA.

PRESENT, MR. GOOD. PRESENT, MR. JORDAN. PRESENT.

MR. MCLEOD HAS ASKED TO BE EXCUSED.

MR. OLSZEWSKI. PRESENT.

MR. WARNER. PRESENT.

MR. WEINBERG. PRESENT.

MR. KARAFFA HAS ASKED TO BE EXCUSED, AND OUR CITY ATTORNEY, PATRICIA SMITH, IS PRESENT.

WE DO HAVE A QUORUM. THANK YOU.

COULD I HAVE A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE MINUTES OF THE LAST MEETING?

[ADOPTION OF MINUTES]

MOTION BY MR. WEINBERG.

SECOND BY MR. WARNER.

ALL IN FAVOR? AYE, AYE. SO MOVED.

ALL RIGHT. FOR THE AGENDA.

THERE'S BEEN SOME CORRECTIONS AND CHANGES.

Q 23 00008 HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN.

NO ACTION NEEDED.

WE ARE MOVING CASE 16, WHICH IS T.

[NEW BUSINESS]

THE FIRST ITEM TODAY.

RIGHT.

GOOD EVENING, EVERYBODY.

STEVE MOORE, SENIOR PLANNER FOR GROWTH MANAGEMENT.

THE CASE BEFORE YOU IS T 20 3-0020.

IT IS CITYWIDE.

IT IS A TEXTUAL AMENDMENT TO THE CODE OF ORDINANCES.

TITLE 17 LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE CHAPTER 170 CONSTRUCTION CODES AND REGULATIONS SECTION 170 .0050.006007008 AND 009 AND SECTION 170 .116 AND 170 .161.

TO REMOVE LANGUAGE PERTAINING TO THE BUILDING CODE FOR THE CITY OF PALM BAY.

A GROWTH MANAGEMENT AND COORDINATION WITH THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT HAS DRAFTED A TEXTUAL AMENDMENT REQUESTING REPEAL OF CHAPTER 170.

0.005217. 0.009.

AND 170 .161 AND 170 .160.

THE REPLACEMENT OF THIS LANGUAGE WILL BE MOVED TO TITLE NINE OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES WILL ALLOW THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT TO TAKE AMENDMENTS AND CHANGES TO TO THE BUILDING CODE DIRECTLY TO CITY COUNCIL.

THE BUILDING CODE IS OUTSIDE THE PURVIEW OF THE LAND PLANNING AGENCY AND THIS WILL ALIGN THE CODE OF ORDINANCE WITH THE PROPER DISTRIBUTION OF DEVELOPMENT RESPONSIBILITIES AND STAFF. RECOMMENDS. CASE T 20 3-0020 FOR APPROVAL AND STAFF IS AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.

THANK YOU. DOES THE BOARD HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE. IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS? MR. BATTEN. BILL BATTEN, 586 OCEAN SPRAY STREET SOUTHWEST.

SINCE THIS ONE'S A LITTLE BIT OUT OF ORDER FROM COMPARISON, HOW WE WERE GOING TO BE GOING THROUGH IT, THERE'S A COUPLE OF STATEMENTS THAT MIGHT NOT MAKE SENSE.

I'LL HAVE TO EXPLAIN SOME OF THOSE.

RIGHT. PREVIOUS TO THIS READING OF OF TEXTUAL AMENDMENT NUMBER 20.

RIGHT. WE ARE LOOKING AT SIX TEXTUAL AMENDMENTS PRIOR TO THIS.

NOW, THIS ACTUAL TEXTUAL AMENDMENT.

MY QUESTION IS, WE JUST LOOKED AT SIX TEXTUAL AMENDMENTS.

WILL THIS CHANGE REMOVE THE ABILITY FROM PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD THAT'S YOU TO REVIEW REGULATIONS? BECAUSE WE'RE GOING WE'RE GENERATING A LOT OF QUESTIONS WHEN WE HAVE THESE MEETINGS.

IS THIS GOING TO ALLEVIATE THEM AND WHERE IT GOES DIRECTLY TO CITY COUNCIL WITHOUT GOING THROUGH A BOARD? BECAUSE I KNOW WE GENERATE A LOT OF QUESTIONS AND GET SOME THINGS ANSWERED HERE THAT WHEN IT GOES TO COUNCIL, WE'VE HAD PUBLIC INPUT ADDRESSED ON IT.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

DOES ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS MATTER? AND NONE WILL BE BROUGHT BACK TO THE BOARD FOR A VOTE.

SORRY. DO YOU WANT TO RESPOND TO? YES, AND I'LL TRY AND ANSWER IT.

IF IT'S NOT TO THE RIGHT OF I'LL HAVE JOHN PEARSON COME UP.

BUT ESSENTIALLY, IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS FOR PROJECTS.

THIS IS ASSOCIATED DIRECTLY WITH THE BUILDING CODE AND THEIR REQUIREMENTS.

ALL THE PROJECTS.

NOTHING IS CHANGING.

[00:05:01]

THE CASES YOU WILL HEAR WILL STILL BE THE SAME.

ANYTHING PERTAINING TO THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT AGAIN IS OUTSIDE THE PURVIEW OF THE LAND PLANNING AGENCY, WHICH IS NOW GOING TO THE SEPARATE TITLE OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, WHICH WILL ALLOW THEM TO GO TO CITY COUNCIL AND WILL NOT COME BEFORE THIS BOARD.

OKAY. OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF.

OR DO I HAVE A MOTION OR ANY FURTHER COMMENTS? MOTION TO APPROVE T 23 000 20.

RIGHT. MR. WEINBERG, DRIVE A SECOND.

I SECOND. SECOND BY MR. GOOD. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE, AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.

BENEFIT OF EVERYONE IN ATTENDANCE.

THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD IS AN ADVISORY BOARD COMPRISED OF SEVEN MEMBERS.

ALL MEMBERS OF THE BOARD ARE UNPAID VOLUNTEERS APPOINTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL.

OUR PROCEDURES ARE AS FOLLOWED.

THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT STAFF WILL PRESENT THE STAFF REPORT FOR EACH CASE.

BOARD MEMBERS WILL THEN BE ASKED IF THEY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF.

THE APPLICATION OR THEIR REPRESENTATIVE WILL THEN BE ASKED TO COME TO THE PODIUM AND PRESENT ANY INFORMATION GERMANE TO THE CASE AND TO ANSWER ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD. THE FLOOR WILL THEN BE OPEN FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS.

WE WILL THEN FIRST HEAR FROM THOSE IN OPPOSITION TO THE APPLICATION.

THOSE IN FAVOR ALL APPLICANTS AND SPEAKERS FROM THE AUDIENCE MUST SIGN AN OATH CARD AT THE PODIUM.

PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY AND SPEAK DIRECTLY INTO THE MICROPHONE AND STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.

AS A COURTESY.

THERE IS A GROUP OF PEOPLE FROM A NEIGHBORHOOD WHO WISH TO HAVE SIMILAR COMMENTS.

YOU INFORMALLY APPOINT A SPOKESMAN TO CLARIFY YOUR VIEWS.

AFTER PUBLIC COMMENTS, I WILL BRING THE CASE BACK TO THE BOARD.

AT THIS TIME, THE FLOOR WILL BE CLOSED AND NO FURTHER COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC WILL BE HEARD.

WE'LL THEN CALL FOR A MOTION AND A SECOND AT WHICH TIME THE BOARD MAY HAVE ADDITIONAL COMMENTS OR FURTHER DISCUSSION.

I WILL THEN CALL FOR A VOTE.

DECISIONS OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD ARE THEN FORWARDED TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR FINAL DISPOSITION.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENDANCE AND YOUR COOPERATION AND HEARING TO THE MEETING GUIDELINES.

ALL RIGHT. THE NEXT ITEM OF BUSINESS IS GOING TO BE.

NEW BUSINESS.

C. U. 23 00001.

ALL RIGHT. GOOD EVENING.

STEPHEN WHITE, SENIOR PLANNER, GROWTH MANAGEMENT CASE BEFORE YOU IS Q 20 3-0001.

THE APPLICANT IS EQUIPMENT SHARE.COM WITH SAMUELI.

SAMANTHA BISCHOFF FROM KIMLEY-HORN IS A REPRESENTATIVE.

THE PROJECT IS LOCATED IN THE VICINITY EAST OF ROBERT J.

CONLON BOULEVARD, NORTHEAST AND EAST OF AN ADJACENT TO TRANSOM CIRCLE.

THE SIZE IS APPROXIMATELY 4.86 ACRES AND THE FUTURE LAND USE IS INDUSTRIAL.

THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CONDITIONAL USE TO ALLOW FOR AUTOMOTIVE FUEL, PROPANE AND NATURAL GAS DISPENSARY IN A REFUELING STATION IN THE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL OR WAREHOUSE DISTRICT. AND THAT IS IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 185 .045 DELTA ONE OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES.

STAFF RECOMMENDS CU 23 00001 FOR APPROVAL, SUBJECT TO COMMENTS IN THE STAFF REPORT AND COMPLETION OF A LOT COMBINATION PRIOR TO THE SITE PLAN APPROVAL. STAFF AND APPLICANT I BELIEVE ARE HERE FOR ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.

YOU, MR. WHITE, IS THE BOARD HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? THANK YOU. IS THE APPLICANT HERE TO COME FORWARD? GOOD EVENING. SAMANTHA BISCHOFF WITH KIMLEY-HORN.

MY ADDRESS IS 1217 PRESTON ESTATE CIRCLE IN VERO BEACH.

SO WE HAVE OUR EQUIPMENT SHARE.

AS HE SAID, THE PROJECT AREA IS 4.86 ACRES.

IT'S A CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT RENTAL COMPANY FOR CONTRACTORS TO COME AND RENT EQUIPMENT.

THE CONDITIONAL USE IS ONLY FOR THE TWO 500 GALLON ABOVE GROUND FUELING TANKS THAT THEY'RE GOING TO USE TO REFUEL THE EQUIPMENT WITHIN THE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL.

AND IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I AM AVAILABLE.

THANK YOU. DOES THE BOARD HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? MR. GOOD. THIS IS JUST THEY'RE NOT RESELLING ANY FUEL OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.

THIS IS JUST FOR THEIR.

CORRECT? YEAH.

THIS IS JUST TO REFUEL THEIR OWN.

[00:10:08]

NO, WILL NOT.

THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. TWO TANKS.

WHAT WILL THE FUEL INSIDE OF THEM BE? BOTH DIESEL. ONE GASOLINE.

WHAT WILL IT BE? I BELIEVE THEY'RE BOTH BE DIESEL.

OKAY, SO A TOTAL OF 1000 GALLONS OF DIESEL AND IT FILLS UP THE EQUIPMENT AS THEY COME IN AND OUT OF THEIR RENTALS.

CORRECT. OKAY.

THANK YOU. QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

NOW, THE I'LL OPEN IT FOR.

IS ANYONE IN FAVOR OF THIS REQUEST, MR. BATTEN? YOU'RE BATON 586, OCEAN SPRAY STREET, SOUTHWEST. I THINK THIS IS A VERY GOOD USE OF LAND IN THIS COMMERCIAL DISTRICT.

IT'S A VERY GOOD LOCATION FOR DOING THAT.

AND THE ONLY QUESTION I WOULD SAY THAT DOES NOT MEAN THAT EVERY LIGHT, INDUSTRIAL AND EVERY WAREHOUSING DISTRICT THAT COMES AROUND THAT THAT'S WHAT WE SHOULD BE LOOKING AT IN THIS LOCATION. I THINK IT'S A PERFECT, PERFECT EXAMPLE OF HOW TO UTILIZE THAT CONDITIONAL USE.

THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS REQUEST? ME OPPOSED.

SEEING NONE. BROUGHT BACK TO THE BOARD BOARD.

DO I HAVE A MOTION OR FURTHER QUESTIONS? YES. AS MR. BATTEN JUST MENTIONED, THIS IS THE PERFECT LOCATION FOR SOMETHING LIKE THIS, AND IT ONLY REQUIRES A CONDITIONAL USE TO DISPENSE FUEL.

AND IT'S NOT GOING TO BE FOR THE PUBLIC.

SO MOTION TO APPROVE QUEUE 23 00001.

AND I CONCUR WITH THAT.

I AGREE. I MEAN, WHEN I FIRST LOOKED AT THIS CASE, I FELT THE SAME WAY THAT ESPECIALLY WITH THEM BEING NEW TANKS COMING IN, BECAUSE THAT WAS ONE OF MY QUESTIONS WHETHER IT WAS GOING TO BE NEW TANKS OR OR IF THE TANKS WERE WHERE BASICALLY WHERE THE TANKS WERE COMING FROM.

SO WITH THAT, I SECOND THE CURRENT MOTION.

YOU HAVE A MOTION? A SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR? AYE, AYE. ANY OPPOSED MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.

THANK YOU. NEXT CASE IS CP 23 00008.

MR. WHITE. GOOD EVENING.

STEPHEN WIGHT SENIOR PLANNER FOR GROWTH MANAGEMENT.

THIS CASE IS CP 20 3-00008.

APPLICANT IS TARA WILLIAMSON AND RONALD CHABOT WITH KELLY HYVÖNEN OF LAND DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES AS THE REPRESENTATIVE.

PROPERTY IS LOCATED SOUTH OF HIAWATHA AVENUE, NORTHEAST AND WEST OF DIXIE HIGHWAY NORTHEAST AND IS SPECIFICALLY LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF HIAWATHA AVENUE, NORTHEAST AND DIXIE HIGHWAY NORTHEAST.

THE SUBJECT PROPERTIES ARE APPROXIMATELY 1.06 ACRES AND A FUTURE LAND USE OF COMMERCIAL.

THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A SMALL SCALE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT FROM COMMERCIAL AND HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO COMMERCIAL.

THE REQUEST TO CHANGE THE FUTURE LAND USE.

WILL ALIGN THE PROPERTY WITH THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT 1.4 C OF OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

THE PROPOSAL WOULD BRING PLACE.

THE PROPERTY WOULD THEN PLACE THE PROPERTIES UNDER ONE FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION AND COMPATIBLE WITH THE HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICT.

STAFF RECOMMENDS CP 23 00008 FOR APPROVAL AND THE APPLICANT IS HERE FOR ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.

THANK YOU, MR. WHITE. IS ANY OF THE BOARD HAVE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? DO WELL, THE APPLICANT.

PLEASE COME FORWARD.

HI, GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS KELLY HYVÖNEN.

I'M A PLANNING CONSULTANT WITH LAND DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES.

AND I'M JOINED HERE TONIGHT WITH RONNIE SCHUBERT, WHO IS THE PROPERTY OWNER.

WE ACTUALLY HAVE TWO ITEMS ON TONIGHT'S AGENDA.

ITEM TWO RIGHT NOW IS THE SMALL SCALE FUTURE LAND USE AMENDMENT.

AND ITEM 14 IS A CODE TEXT AMENDMENT.

THOSE ARE COMPANION REQUESTS.

AND SO WE WOULD KINDLY REQUEST THAT WE COULD PRESENT THOSE TOGETHER AND HOPEFULLY YOU ALL CAN MAKE A VOTE TO VOTE ON BOTH OF THOSE SUBSEQUENTLY IF THAT WOULD BE OKAY.

CONSIDERING YOUR FIRST CASE IN THE COMPANION WILL BE NEXT.

OKAY, THAT SOUNDS GOOD.

I'LL TIME TOGETHER A LITTLE BIT BECAUSE IT'S ALL PART OF THE STORY.

BUT WHAT WE'RE WHAT WE'RE HAVING BEFORE YOU IS WE HAVE A UNIQUE BREWPUB CONCEPT FOR THIS PROPERTY AND WE'RE EXCITED TO BRING THAT FORTH TO THE COMMUNITY.

SO WHAT THAT WILL INCLUDE IS A BREWERY ON SITE, A MICROBREWERY THAT WOULD BREW AND SERVE ITS OWN BEER AND ALSO GUEST BEERS.

AND THEN THERE WOULD ALSO BE FOOD TRUCKS ON THE SITE THAT WOULD HAVE ROTATING LOCATIONS THAT ARE PERMANENTLY INSTALLED IN PLACE.

[00:15:08]

BUT WE'RE REALLY EXCITED ABOUT THAT CONCEPT AND WE CAN'T WAIT TO SUBMIT THE SITE PLANS.

WE'VE HAD TWO COMMUNITY MEETINGS AND WE HAD NO COMMENTS COME FORTH FROM THOSE MEETINGS.

THE CURRENT ZONING ON THIS PROPERTY IS H C, WHICH COVERS THE ENTIRE PROPERTY AS STAFF HAS REPORTED.

AND WE'RE HAVING AN ISSUE RIGHT NOW WITH HAVING SPLIT FUTURE LAND USE.

SO THE FIRST REQUEST ESSENTIALLY JUST MAKES THE ENTIRE PROPERTY COMMERCIAL.

SO WE'RE CONSISTENT AND COMPATIBLE.

AND THEN OUR SECOND REQUEST IS FOR THE CODE CHANGE, WHICH IF YOU'D LIKE ME TO WAIT ON THAT, I CAN DO THAT.

TRUE. HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT.

AND THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT. I'M OPENING UP THE FLOOR.

DOES ANYONE WISH TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS REQUEST? THEY WENT OPPOSED.

AND I'LL BRING IT BACK TO THE BOARD.

I HAVE A MOTION. A MOTION TO APPROVE CFP 23 00008.

SECOND. MOTION AND A SECOND BY MR..

GOOD. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.

THE NEXT ITEM IN THE AGENDA IS GOING TO BE ITEM.

14 T 23 00015.

OUT OF ORDER. BUT IT'S A. ANYONE CASE TO THIS.

IT'S T 2315.

YEAH. STEPHEN WIGHT, SENIOR PLANNER WITH GROWTH MANAGEMENT CASE BEFORE YOU IS T 23 00015.

THE APPLICANT IS KELLY HIRVONEN WITH LAND DEVELOPMENT STRATEGIES AND THIS IS A TEXTUAL AMENDMENT TO THE CODE OF ORDINANCES TITLE 17 LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE CHAPTER 185 ZONING CODE SECTION 185 .044 HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL DISTRICT.

THIS IS BROUGHT FORWARD TO ADD BREWPUB OR OTHER DRINKING ESTABLISHMENTS TO BE A PERMITTED USE WITHIN THE HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL DISTRICT.

STAFF RECEIVED AN APPLICATION FOR A TEXTUAL AMENDMENT REQUESTING BREWPUBS OR OTHER DRINKING ESTABLISHMENTS BE ADDED AS A PERMITTED USE WITHIN THE HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL DISTRICT. IN ADDITION TO THIS USE WITHIN THE HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL DISTRICT WILL BE COMPATIBLE WITH OTHER USES THAT ARE CURRENTLY PERMITTED IN THE HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL DISTRICT. SIMILARLY, SIMILAR USES ARE CURRENTLY PERMITTED AND THE ADDITION OF BREWPUBS OR OTHER DRINKING ESTABLISHMENTS WOULD INCREASE THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE CITY OF PALM BAY WITH THE ADDITION OF BREWPUBS AND OTHER DRINKING ESTABLISHMENTS REQUESTED, IT WOULD FALL IN LINE WITH THE INTENT AND PURPOSE OF THIS SECTION OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES.

HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICTS BEING PRIMARILY LOCATED ALONG OR NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF MAJOR ARTERIAL AND MAJOR TRANSPORTATION NODES.

STAFF WOULD RECOMMEND T 23 00015 FOR APPROVAL AND THE APPLICANT IS HERE FOR ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.

YOU, MR. WHITE, DOES THE BOARD HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE. EVERYTHING I'D LIKE TO.

HI, KELLY HYVÖNEN.

WE WOULD APPRECIATE YOUR SUPPORT IN ADDING BREWPUBS AS A PERMITTED USE IN THE DISTRICT.

IT DOES MEET THE INTENT OF THAT CODE AND WITH THAT WE CAN TAKE ANY QUESTIONS.

QUESTION I PROBABLY SHOULD HAVE ASKED EARLIER, BUT YOU HAD SAID THERE WAS NO COMMENTS AT THE MEETING.

CORRECT. NOBODY CAME.

NOBODY CAME. ACTUALLY, SCRATCH THAT.

WE HELD IT AT THE GREATER PALM BAY REGIONAL CHAMBER AND WE HAD A COUPLE OF LADIES FROM THE OFFICE THAT ATTENDED AND THEY HAD NO NO CONCERNS.

TO BE CLEAR, THE C.P.P.

THE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PLAN IS NOT IN ASSOCIATION WITH THIS SPECIFIC CASE, SO IT CANNOT BE CONSIDERED FOR THIS CASE.

YOU CAN ONLY CONSIDER THE TEXTUAL AMENDMENT.

YEAH. SECOND QUESTION, PLEASE.

WOULD BE ARE THEY GOING TO BE OPEN EVERY DAY EVEN IF THERE ARE NO FOOD TRUCKS THERE? YES, THE GAME PLAN RIGHT NOW IS THAT IT WOULD BE OPENED UP SEVEN DAYS A WEEK.

THE. THANK YOU. YES, BUT THERE WILL ALWAYS BE FOOD.

THERE ALWAYS BE FOOD AVAILABLE.

YES. AND IT PROBABLY BE YOU'RE LOOKING AT PROBABLY FROM, I'D SAY, THE HOURS OF 11 TO 10 LATEST.

STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.

I'M RONALD SCHUBERT, 1191 RIVER DRIVE, NORTHEAST PALM BAY, FLORIDA.

THANK YOU. AND JUST FOR FURTHER CLARIFICATION, BECAUSE YOU ARE ASKING ABOUT THEIR SPECIFIC TIMEFRAME, THIS IS A USE THAT WILL BE IN THIS ZONING DISTRICT FOR ANYONE IN THIS ZONING DISTRICT.

SO IF YOU'RE LOOKING TO PUT SPECIFIC CONDITIONS ON THIS USE, IT WOULD HAVE TO BE FOR THE ZONING DISTRICT, NOT JUST FOR THEM.

[00:20:03]

OTHER THE QUESTIONS. MR. WEINBERG, A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.

NUMBER ONE, I LOVE THIS CONCEPT, BY THE WAY.

I ALSO HAPPEN TO SERVE ON THE BAYFRONT COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, AND I THINK THIS WILL CERTAINLY CONTRIBUTE TO TO THAT DEVELOPMENT.

A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.

I THINK YOU PARTIALLY ANSWERED.

ONE, THE BREWPUB WILL ALSO BE PROVIDING FOOD, OFFERING FOOD AS WELL.

CORRECT. SO, YEAH, I COULDN'T.

I COULDN'T QUITE HEAR THAT BREWPUB WILL YOURSELF.

YOU WILL BE OFFERING FOOD? NO, IT WILL BE STRICTLY THROUGH THE FOOD TRUCKS.

YES, SIR. AND WE'LL ALWAYS HAVE FOOD TRUCKS ON SITE.

THIS IS SOMETHING THAT RIGHT NOW A LOT OF COMMUNITIES HAVE HAVE PERMANENT PLACES WHERE FOOD TRUCKS CAN GATHER AND PEOPLE CAN HAVE A SELECTION OF FOOD TRUCKS.

WE DON'T HAVE THAT AT THIS POINT.

SO THAT'S WHY I REALLY LIKE THIS CONCEPT.

IT'S HOW MANY HOW MANY SPACES DO YOU HAVE FOR FOOD TRUCKS? THREE. THREE SPACES.

THREE SPACES? YES. AND THEY'LL BE ABLE TO PLUG INTO ELECTRIC SO WE WON'T NECESSARILY HAVE TO HAVE THE LOUD GENERATORS RUNNING.

SO IT'S A MORE OF AN ESTABLISHED CONNECTION POINT AND IT'S SET UP IN A WAY, WHEREAS IT'S ESTHETICALLY PLEASING AND IT'S NOT THEY'RE NOT JUST PARKED IN A PARKING SPACE.

THERE'S ACTUALLY A SPACE SET ASIDE FOR EACH OF THE FOOD TRUCKS TO OPERATE.

OKAY. AND WILL YOU BE OFFERING ROTATING FOOD TRUCKS, DIFFERENT FOOD TRUCKS AT DIFFERENT TIMES AND THAT TYPE OF THING? YES, SIR. WOULD YOU LIKE TO ADD ANY MORE ON THAT? YEAH, KELLY WAS ACTUALLY JUST MISTAKEN ON THE NUMBER, THOUGH.

SO WE'RE ACTUALLY GOING TO HAVE, IF WE GET APPROVAL FOR THE SITE PLAN, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE LIKE UP TO SIX FOOD TRUCKS THAT'LL BE ON THE SITE PLAN.

THAT'S ONLY FOR LIKE SPECIAL OCCASIONS.

WE WILL HAVE LIKE ONE RESIDENT FOOD TRUCK AND THEN WE'LL HAVE TWO ROTATING ON A CONSTANT BASIS, JUST WHETHER IT'S SEASONAL OR A THEMED NIGHT.

HAVE YOU HAD ANY DISCUSSIONS WITH ANY OF THE EXISTING FOOD TRUCKS IN THE AREA YET? YES. YES, I'VE HAD WITH WITH A FEW.

I IMAGINE THERE WOULD BE A GREAT INTEREST IN.

OH, YEAH, NO, FOR SURE.

SO AND AT LEAST IT GIVES LIKE A PERMIT STRUCTURE.

LIKE I SAID, EVERYTHING WILL BE HOOKED UP.

IT'LL BE EASE OF USE FOR THE VENDORS AS WELL AS FOR THE CONSUMERS.

IT'S A GREAT CONCEPT. I LIKE IT.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? JUST JUST TO KIND OF PIGGY ON THAT A LITTLE BIT, IS THERE A REASON WHY YOU'RE LIMITING IT, LIMITING IT TO JUST THE THREE TRUCKS? OH, JUST I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S PROFITABLE FOR THEM.

SO I THINK, LIKE IF LIKE ANYTHING, IF IT'S LIKE A MONDAY OR A TUESDAY OR WEDNESDAY, IT'S GENERALLY A SLOW NIGHT FOR FOR LIKE ANY TYPE OF RESTAURANT HERE.

SO, YOU KNOW, I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE FOOD TRUCKS ACTUALLY MAKE MONEY SO IT'S NOT SO MANY ON THE BUSIER NIGHTS OR BUSIER WEEKENDS.

THAT'S WHEN WE WOULD BE ABLE TO MAX OUT.

I MEAN, BECAUSE I LIKE THE I LIKE THE FACT THAT YOU HAVE THE ACCESS OFF OF HIAWATHA.

SO IT'S NOT NECESSARILY THAT YOU HAVE TO DO YOU HAVE TO DEAL WITH THE TRAFFIC ON US ONE, SO THAT THAT CONCEPT ALONE MAKES IT A MUCH BETTER PROJECT.

YEAH. THE FRONTAGE, THE DRIVEWAY WILL ACTUALLY BE ON HIAWATHA, SO THAT WAY WE KEEP THAT OFF OF US ONE AND THE PLAN IS THE ONLY THING YOU'LL BE ABLE TO DO ON US.

ONE IS JUST A JUST A TURN SOUTH.

SO THAT WAY WE DON'T HAVE ANYBODY CROSSING OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.

REALLY JUST TRYING TO KEEP PEDESTRIAN AND VEHICLE SAFETY IN MIND.

OPEN TO ANYONE AND IT'S OPEN TO ANYONE THAT WANTS TO.

YES, SIR. THIS WILL BE OPEN TO THE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC.

AND THEN, LIKE I SAID, WE'LL JUST OBVIOUSLY FOR THE FOOD TRUCKS, WE'LL JUST STILL HAVE TO WE'LL KEEP A RECORD AS FAR AS MAKING SURE THAT THEY'RE LICENSED.

THEY'RE UP TO DATE WITH CURRENT CODE.

SO WE'LL ACTUALLY BE A RESOURCE FOR THE CITY TO COME TO AND TAKE A PEEK AT EVERYONE'S LICENSE THAT'S ON OUR PROPERTY.

THE ONLY THING I DIDN'T I DID NOT SEE OR MAYBE YOU CAN BETTER EXPLAIN IS THE PARKING.

THAT'S THE ONLY THING THAT I THAT I THAT I DIDN'T SEE IN YOUR IN THE PACKET.

SO IF YOU COULD MAYBE EXPLAIN A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THE PARKING BECAUSE I MEAN, BECAUSE I'VE SEEN THIS CONCEPT BEFORE.

MADAM CHAIR, THIS, THIS DIALOG ISN'T GERMANE.

THIS LINE OF DIALOG ISN'T GERMANE TO THIS ITEM.

EVEN TALKING ABOUT THE FOOD TRUCKS ISN'T GERMANE TO THIS ITEM.

THE ITEM IS TO SAY IN A HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL DISTRICT, CAN THEY BREW BEER? BEER? THAT'S IT.

NOT THIS PROJECT, NOT ANYTHING IN HIGHWAY COMMERCIAL.

CAN THEY BREW BEER THAT'S BEING GERMANE TO THIS ITEM? I HATE TO BE SO DIRECT, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO BRING US INTO ORDER.

IT'S OKAY.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

WHAT'S GOING ON? THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT. DOES ANYONE WISH TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS REQUEST? YOU WEREN'T OPPOSED.

SEEING NONE IS BROUGHT BACK TO THE BOARD.

DO I HAVE A MOTION? MOTION TO APPROVE T 23 00015.

SECOND. SECOND. AND IN A SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR? AYE, AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.

THANK YOU. NEXT CASE.

RAMOS. 323.

ZERO 12.

GOOD EVENING. I'M TANYA RAMOS, SENIOR PLANNER WITH GROWTH MANAGEMENT.

[00:25:04]

THE APPLICANT IS LAWRENCE KRAMER.

IT'S LOCATED SOUTH OF AND ADJACENT TO MALABAR ROAD, NORTHEAST AND WEST OF AN ADJACENT TO GREEN ACRE DRIVE SOUTHEAST, SPECIFICALLY AT 110 GREEN ACRE DRIVE.

THE PROPERTY HAS A FUTURE LAND USE OF COMMERCIAL AND THE EXISTING ZONING IS IU, WHICH IS INSTITUTIONAL USE, AND IT'S APPROXIMATELY 0.9 OF AN ACRE.

THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A ZONING REZONING FROM INSTITUTIONAL USE TO RC, WHICH IS RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL.

THE ANALYSIS IS THAT THE PROPERTY ALREADY HAS A FUTURE LAND USE OF COMMERCIAL.

THE REQUESTED RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL ZONING CLASSIFICATION IS INTENDED FOR PROPERTIES TRANSITIONING TO A COMMERCIAL USE ALONG MAJOR TRANSPORTATION CORRIDORS. THE USES AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS INCLUDED IN THE DISTRICT ARE INTENDED TO PROVIDE COMPATIBILITY BETWEEN USES AND TO PROTECT NEARBY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS DIRECTLY ON A MAJOR TRANSPORTATION CORRIDOR AND IS SEPARATED FROM RESIDENTIALLY ZONED PROPERTY BY ONE OTHER LOT.

AND STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL FOR CASE Z 20 3-000012.

AND THE APPLICANT AND STAFF ARE AVAILABLE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.

MS.. RAMOS, DOES THE BOARD HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? WE HAVE THE MAP OF THIS IN THE PRESENTATION FOR A VISUAL AID FOR THIS CASE.

SO IT'S THE CORNER PROPERTY WITH THE YELLOW.

UNDERSTOOD. AND.

EXCUSE ME. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR, FOR RECOGNIZING ME.

AND THANK YOU FOR ANSWERING.

SO THE THE LOT THAT WE NOW HAVE ON THE MAP, THIS PARTICULAR CASE, IS TO TALK ABOUT IF WE WOULD LIKE TO CHANGE THAT FROM INSTITUTIONAL USE.

TO COMMERCIAL.

TO LIMITED. COMMERCIAL.

RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL.

YES. AS NOT A MATTER OF ZONING, IS IT? IS ZONING. IT'S NOT FOOD. IT IS THE FUTURE.

LAND USE IS ALREADY COMMERCIAL.

FUTURE LAND USE IS COMMERCIAL AND INSTITUTIONAL ZONING.

AND WE WANT TO TAKE THAT ZONING FROM INSTITUTIONAL TO A RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL.

AND YOU DESCRIBED TO US WHAT RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL IS.

OKAY. THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION.

NOW I CAN HONE IN ON EVERYTHING.

THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF.

AND WHEN THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD.

GOOD EVENING. LAWRENCE KRAMER ONE 6498, NORTHEAST 26TH AVENUE, NORTH MIAMI BEACH, FLORIDA.

THANK YOU. ANYTHING FURTHER TO ADD ABOUT YOUR PROJECT? IT'S IT'S TO ME IT'S COMMON SENSE THAT WE CHANGE FROM AN INSTITUTIONAL TO A RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL THAT WAY.

AT THIS POINT, EVERYTHING TO THE EAST IS ALL MEDICAL, AS YOU WELL CAN SEE, ALL THOSE CLINICS THAT ARE THERE.

AND AT THIS POINT, IF I WISH TO DEVELOP IT OR HAVE A CO-DEVELOPER, I STILL NEED TO CHANGE THE ZONING AND THAT'S WHAT I'M REQUESTING.

YOU, SIR. DOES IT? DOES THE BOARD HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? AND THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

WELL, NOW OPEN THE FLOOR.

DOES ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS REQUEST? BATON. BILL BATTEN, 586 OCEAN SPRAY STREET SOUTHWEST. THE REASON I'M SPEAKING IN FAVOR OF THIS, WHEN I SEE SOME POSITIVE AND SOME NEGATIVES WITH THIS ONE, THE FIRST ONE IS THE MAN IS CORRECT.

WE'RE INSTITUTIONAL IS NOT DEVELOPING THERE.

IF WE HAVE THE OFFICE SPACES AND STUFF LIKE THAT, THAT WOULD BE VERY BENEFICIAL.

THAT WOULD BE BUSINESS REVENUE COMING ALONG MALABAR ROAD.

THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT WE WANT.

BUT WITH THAT STATEMENT, THERE'S ALSO THE NEGATIVE SIDE THAT I SEE WHEN GOING THROUGH THIS PACKET THAT THEY'RE ALSO SUGGESTING A COFFEE SHOP ON MALABAR ROAD IN THAT LOCATION, IT'S ONLY 0.9 ACRES ON MALABAR ROAD.

WE ALREADY HAVE A COFFEE SHOP JUST DOWN THE ROAD FROM THERE AND WE'VE SEEN HOW THE MORNING TRAFFIC COMES IN TO GET THEIR COFFEE ON THEIR WAY THAT WE END UP LOSING ONE LANE OF TRAFFIC ON MALABAR ROAD BECAUSE OF THE DRIVE THROUGH TRAFFIC.

RIGHT. MY RECOMMENDATION IS I DON'T KNOW HOW ZONED PLANNING AND ZONING CAN DO THIS IS THAT THEY IF THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE IT AS A COFFEE SHOP WITH THAT MUCH OF A MASSIVE INFLUX IN THE MORNING THAT THAT TRAFFIC HAS TO FIND A WAY TO STAY ON THEIR RESIDENCE INSTEAD OF USING MALABAR ROAD AS THEIR PART AS THEIR LINE TRAFFIC LINE GOING THROUGH.

BUT LIKE I SAY, I SEE A PLUS AND A MINUS WITH THIS ONE.

[00:30:02]

BUT THEY ARE ALSO SUGGESTING THAT THEY MIGHT DO.

THANK YOU. DOES ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK IN FAVOR? ANY OPPOSED? SIR. MICHAELS.

OH, MICHAEL SCOTT.

540 WATERMAN LANE.

SOUTHEAST. PALM BAY.

I'M JUST SOUTH OF THAT PROPERTY OFF OF GREEN ACRE, AND I AM NOT TECHNICALLY OPPOSED TO IT SO MUCH AS I DON'T SEE ANY REASON FOR IT WHEN HE DOES NOT HAVE A DEVELOPER.

HE DOESN'T HAVE SOMEONE WHO'S ACTUALLY PLANNING TO BUILD THERE.

I'D DO ANYTHING NOW.

I DON'T REALLY SEE ANY REASON FOR GOING AHEAD WITH THAT.

UNLIKE YOU'RE GOING TO SPEAK LATER ABOUT THE THRIFTY STORE GOING IN VERY IN FAVOR OF THAT, BUT YOU DON'T HAVE A PLAN.

SO RIGHT NOW, I DON'T SEE ANY NEED FOR THIS TO HAPPEN.

SO MY FULL COMMENT.

THANK YOU, SIR. DID YOU FILL OUT A COMMENT CARD? NO, BUT I WILL.

THANK YOU. YOU CAN JUST BRING IT BACK.

SIR, DID YOU WANT TO SPEAK? OH, I'M SORRY.

GOT ONE MORE PERSON.

YEAH. GOOD EVENING.

MY NAME IS LYNN DIFFENBAUGH AND I LIVE AT 521 WATERMAN LANE, SOUTHEAST PALM BAY, WHICH IS ON THE AERIAL MAP FROM YOUR AGENDA.

IT'S THE LOWER LEFT CORNER OF YOUR AERIAL MAP SOUTH AND WEST OF THAT PARCEL.

I'VE LIVED AT THIS ADDRESS SINCE 1984 AND HAVE SEEN MANY CHANGES COME AND GO IN THE CITY AND OUR IMMEDIATE NEIGHBORHOOD.

THIS PARCEL, FOR INSTANCE, WAS REZONED TO INSTITUTIONAL USE BY A PREVIOUS COUNCIL WHEN THE OWNER HAD TENTATIVE PLANS TO BUILD A SMALL MEDICAL COMPLEX.

THAT'S ONE OF THE CHANGES THAT BORE NO FRUIT, AND THAT IS WHAT CONVERTED BOTH OF THOSE ACRES, THE YELLOW ONE IN QUESTION, AND THE ONE IMMEDIATELY SOUTH OF IT, WHICH WAS MENTIONED IN THE STAFF REPORT AS ONE OTHER LOT SEPARATING.

THAT'S ALSO AN INSTITUTIONAL USE LOT.

I'LL STATE IMMEDIATELY THAT I'M OPPOSED TO THIS REZONING REQUEST AND WILL PROVIDE MY REASONS FOR THE FOLLOWING.

THE CONSIDERATION SET FORTH IN THE PALM BAY CODE OF ORDINANCES.

ITEM ONE THE NEED AND JUSTIFICATION.

HAVING READ THE APPLICANT'S INTENDED USE, I SEE NO CLEAR AND IMMEDIATE REASON FOR THE REZONING.

THERE IS. THERE DOES NOT SEEM TO BE AN ACTUAL PLAN FOR WHAT WILL BE DEVELOPED ON THIS PARCEL, BUT ONLY VAGUE WORDS THAT RESTATE THE MOST DESIRABLE OPTIONS ALLOWED UNDER THE REQUESTED RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL ZONING.

THE EFFECT ON THE OF THE CHANGE ON THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES.

THIS APPLICATION IS ONLY TO REZONE THE PARCEL IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO MALABAR ROAD.

HOWEVER, THE ADJACENT PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH IS ALSO CURRENTLY ZONED FOR INSTITUTIONAL USE.

IF THIS PARCEL IS REZONED, IT WILL LEAVE THAT SECOND PARCEL AN ISOLATED ISLAND SURROUNDED BY COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES.

AS STAFF POINTED OUT IN ITEM THREE, IT'S DIFFICULT TO AGGREGATE PARCELS, SO WHY SPLIT UP? THIS MATCHED SET OF TWO INSTITUTIONAL USE PROPERTIES BY CHANGING ONE AND NOT THE OTHER.

THE AMOUNT OF UNDEVELOPED LAND WITH THE SAME CLASSIFICATION.

THERE'S A 5.5 ACRE TRACT OF VACANT COMMERCIAL LAND JUST OVER A MILE AWAY FROM THIS PROPERTY.

I'M NOT A REAL ESTATE EXPERT, BUT IT'S EASY TO SEE THE ALREADY DEVELOPED EMPTY COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS ACTIVELY SOLICITING OCCUPANTS.

AND WHILE IT IS SLOWLY FILLING, THERE ARE STILL EMPTY, ALREADY COMMERCIAL LOTS ALONG THE MALABAR ROAD CORRIDOR.

INSTITUTIONAL USE PROPERTIES, ON THE OTHER HAND, ARE NOT AS PREVALENT ON THE ZONING MAPS, SO WHY TAKE AWAY THIS PARCEL FROM THAT ZONING POOL FOR NO IMMEDIATE REASON? AN ITEM FOR THE CITY'S PLANNED DEVELOPMENT.

IT'S THE ONLY ITEM WHERE I AGREE WITH THE STAFF REPORT THAT THE LAND USE ALONG MALABAR ROAD WAS COMMERCIALIZED BY A PREVIOUS COUNCIL, AND THIS REQUEST DEFINITELY FALLS WITHIN THAT PLAN. BUT INSTITUTIONAL USE PROVISIONS, IN MY HUMBLE OPINION, IS OF MORE VALUE TO THE OVERALL DEVELOPMENT AND SUPPORT OF THE CITIZENS OF THE CITY OF PALM BAY.

THEREFORE, BASED ON THOSE THREE POINTS, I STRONGLY ENCOURAGE PLANNING AND ZONING TO CONSIDER NOT RECOMMENDING THIS CHANGE TO CITY COUNCIL.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND ATTENTION.

THANK YOU. DOES ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK AGAINST THIS REQUEST? NOW. WOULD YOU LIKE TO COMMENT, SIR? DIDN'T REALIZE THAT THERE WAS SUCH DISSENT.

AND AGAIN, HERE'S A PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT'S BEEN SITTING FOR YEARS IN TO THE RIGHT OF ME.

ON THE EAST OF ME IS ALL COMMERCIAL AND IT'S BEEN UP FOR SALE.

NO ONE'S ACTUALLY TAKING ANY INTEREST IN IT.

AND I JUST THOUGHT THAT BY CHANGING TO A COMMERCIAL ZONING THAT IT WOULD HAVE MORE RELEVANT AND SOMEBODY WOULD ACTUALLY COME UP AND

[00:35:02]

THE CITY WILL THEN TAKE THE INCOME FROM IT, WHICH TODAY IS A VACANT PIECE OF PROPERTY.

SO AGAIN, I'M HERE IN FRONT OF YOU.

THIS IS MY REQUEST.

SO BE IT.

SO ALL I CAN ASK IS TO CHANGE IT.

LAW IS NOW CLOSED AND IS BROUGHT BACK TO THE BOARD.

OR ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION OR MOTION.

YEAH, CHAIR. YOU KNOW, THE APPLICANT IS ABSOLUTELY RIGHT.

THIS IS THE FUTURE LAND USE OF THIS, OF THIS LAND IS ALREADY COMMERCIAL.

MALABAR ROAD IS A COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR.

NOBODY HAS COME FORWARD WANTING TO BUILD ANYTHING ON THIS INSTITUTIONAL USE PROPERTY.

SO IT JUST MAKES SENSE TO CHANGE THE THE ZONING AS THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO CONFORM TO THE FUTURE LAND USE.

SO MOTION TO APPROVE Z 23 00012.

SECOND. BY MR. WEINBERG, SECOND BY MR. BAUM. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? I OPPOSE.

I AGREE. I DON'T THINK THAT IT.

MOVING THAT CHANGING THAT THAT ZONING IS GOING TO.

AND CARRIES 5 TO 1.

NEXT CASE. MS.. BERNARD Z.

23 00011.

GOOD EVENING. ALEX BERNARD, PRINCIPAL PLANNER.

THE CASE BEFORE YOU TONIGHT IS Z 23 000 11.

THE APPLICANT IS NORA DORA WITH 1611 MERIDIAN, AND KIM ROSINKA IS THE REP.

THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED NORTH OF AND ADJACENT TO PALM BAY ROAD, NORTHEAST EAST OF SKIPPERS WAY.

SPECIFICALLY WITH THE ADDRESS OF 1881 PALM BAY ROAD NORTHEAST.

IT HAS AN EXISTING FUTURE LAND USE OF COMMERCIAL AND AN EXISTING ZONING OF IU INSTITUTIONAL USE.

IT'S 4.08 ACRES.

THE REQUEST BEFORE YOU TONIGHT IS TO REZONE FROM INSTITUTIONAL TO COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL, AND THE ANALYSIS SHOWS THAT IT'S ALREADY GOT A FUTURE LAND USE OF COMMERCIAL.

AND SO IT'S A IT'S A ZONING CHANGE ONLY FROM INSTITUTIONAL TO COMMUNITY, COMMERCIAL AND ALL OF THE SURROUNDING AREA ON PALM BAY ROAD IS ALREADY COMMUNITY, COMMERCIAL.

AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE AS WELL AS THE APPLICANT BEING HERE.

MISS BERNARD, DOES THE BOARD HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SEEING NONE. THANK YOU. WILL THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD? GOOD EVENING, CHAIRMAN.

MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD.

MY NAME IS KIM ROSENKER.

I'M WITH THE LAW FIRM OF LACY LYONS, ROSENKER AND ROCKLEDGE.

I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT 1611 MERIDIAN LLC.

MR.. DORA IS HERE, AS WELL AS HIS PARTNER, WILLIAM FROM META.

THEY'RE PARTNERS IN THE COMPANY AND WE ARE HERE TO ASK FOR THE CHANGE OF THE ZONING.

YOU MAY RECALL THIS PROPERTY.

IT WAS THE SITE OF AN ASSISTED LIVING FACILITY CALLED CRYSTAL PALACE THAT CLOSED DOWN IN AUGUST OF 2020.

BEFORE THAT, IT WAS A HOLIDAY INN AND CONFERENCE CENTER.

I UNDERSTAND IT WAS A HAPPENING PLACE BACK IN THE DAY.

ROBIN FISHER TOLD ME THEY USED TO HANG OUT THERE WHEN HE LIVED HERE WHEN HE WAS IN THE 80S.

SO I HAVE FOR YOU A POWERPOINT.

THIS IS GOING TO BE AN AFFORDABLE AND WORKFORCE HOUSING FACILITY.

AS YOU KNOW, THIS HAS BEEN A DERELICT PROPERTY FOR MANY YEARS.

IT'S BEEN IN CODE ENFORCEMENT.

WE'RE CLEANING IT UP.

THERE'S BEEN GRAFFITI, WE'RE CLEANING IT UP.

AND SO THIS PLAN IS MOVING FORWARD.

IN FACT, THEY HOPE TO HAVE IT OPEN WITHIN 12 MONTHS, ASSUMING WITH THE REZONING.

SO JUST TO GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE PROJECT'S, IT'S CALLED THE ESSENCE AT PALM BAY.

AND I ALWAYS MESS THIS UP, SO LET ME SEE IF I CAN DO IT.

UM, AGAIN, THIS IS A THE.

THE OWNER IS FROM MIAMI.

THEY SPECIALIZE IN AFFORDABLE AND WORKFORCE HOUSING.

THEY HAVE A NUMBER OF PROJECTS.

I HAVE A LIST OF THEM AT THE END OF THIS.

POWERPOINT HAS BEEN PROVIDED TO YOU AS WELL.

THE PROBLEM IS THERE'S NOT ENOUGH INVENTORY FOR AFFORDABLE AND WORKFORCE HOUSING.

THERE'S MORE NEED THAN THERE IS AVAILABILITY AND THERE'S WAITING LISTS AND SOME OF THE PEOPLE PAYING RENT IS 50% OF THEIR INCOME.

THIS IS A TWO PHASE REMODELING AND CONSTRUCTION PROJECT.

PHASE ONE TAKES THE EXISTING BUILDING AND MAKES IT INTO 130 EFFICIENCIES.

PHASE TWO COMES NEXT AND THEY'LL BUILD 171 AND ONE ONE AND TWO ONE UNITS.

AND THIS WOULD HOPEFULLY BE DONE WITHIN THE NEXT 2 TO 3 YEARS.

PHASE ONE, 130 STUDIO APARTMENTS.

THAT'S THE RENDERING FROM THEIR ARCHITECT.

[00:40:01]

THAT IS THE EXTERIOR.

THAT'S THE FLOOR PLAN.

IT'S FOUR STORIES.

I KNOW IT'S HARD TO SEE, BUT THEIR EFFICIENCY APARTMENTS.

SHOULD KNOW HOW TO DO THIS, BUT I DON'T.

AND TO. PHASE TWO, THAT'S 170 UNITS.

THIS WILL BE AFFORDABLE AND WORKFORCE UNITS.

SO WE'LL HAVE THE SAME EXTERIOR DESIGN.

IT WILL BE UP TO SEVEN FLOORS, WHICH HAS ALLOWED.

THAT'S THE EXTERIOR RENDERING.

DIFFERENT FLOOR PLANS.

THEY'RE WORKING IN COORDINATION WITH THE HOUSING AUTHORITY OF BREVARD COUNTY AND PALM BAY.

SIMPLE AND QUICK TO BUILD CREATE SPACES FOR COMMUNITY INTERACTIONS AFFORDABLE TO TENANTS, A BOOST TO LOCAL ECONOMY AND PROPERTY TAXES.

THIS IS THE COMPANY OVERVIEW AGAIN, THIS WILL BE CALLED THE ESSENCE OF PALM BAY.

THEY HAVE ONE SIMILAR IN MIAMI.

THEY HAVE TEN OTHER SIMILAR PROJECTS AROUND THE STATE.

MAY 20TH, 24. THEY HOPE TO COMPLETE PHASE ONE NOVEMBER 25TH, COMPLETE PHASE 2ND DECEMBER 2025.

CONTINUE ON WORKING IN OTHER PROJECTS.

SO AGAIN, WE'RE ASKING FOR THE CHANGE FROM INSTITUTIONAL TO REDEVELOP THIS FACILITY INTO A TWO PHASE AFFORDABLE AND WORKFORCE HOUSING.

THE THE OWNERS ARE HERE.

THEY'VE OWNED THIS PROPERTY FOR A WHILE.

THEY'RE LOOKING TO RENOVATE IT.

WE DID HAVE A COMMUNITY MEETING ON MAY 30TH.

NO ONE SHOWED UP. WE SENT TO ALMOST 115 PEOPLE.

THERE ARE TOWNHOMES IN THE AREA AND THERE ARE DORMITORIES IN THE AREA.

BUT. BUT NO ONE SHOWED TO THE MEETING.

WE'RE HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AND ASK FOR YOUR APPROVAL TO A COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL ZONING.

THANK YOU. IT.

DOES THE BOARD HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? YOU. THANK YOU, SON. NOW OPEN THE FLOOR.

DOES ANYONE WISH TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS REQUEST? HE OPPOSED.

JUST BROUGHT BACK TO THE BOARD? OR DO I HAVE A MOTION? YEAH. AS AS MS..

ROSINKA SAID, THIS THIS PROPERTY HAS BEEN VACANT FOR A LONG TIME.

IT'S AN EYESORE.

THE CITY IS AND COUNCIL HAS BEEN TALKING ABOUT FOR A LONG, LONG TIME IS AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

THIS IS A GREAT PROJECT.

MOTION TO APPROVE Z 23 000 11.

SECOND. AND BY MR. WEINBERG SECOND BY MR. BOEREMA. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.

NEXT CASE IS CP 23 00014.

IT'S A REQUEST TO CONTINUE TO THE SEPTEMBER 5TH MEETING.

CAN I HAVE A MOTION PLEASE TO CONTINUE? SO MOVED. MOTION.

AND A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE, AYE, AYE. AND HE OPPOSED.

THANK YOU. NEXT CASE.

MR. RAMOS, I BELIEVE, IS YOURS.

FS 23 00006.

GOOD EVENING, MISS TANYA RAMOS WITH THE SENIOR PLANNER WITH GROWTH MANAGEMENT.

AND THIS IS FS 23 00006.

THE APPLICANT IS HERITAGE SQUARE PARTNERS LLC, AND THEY ARE REPRESENTED BY ANNA SAUNDERS FROM BSE CONSULTANTS.

THIS IS LOCATED AT WEST OF AND ADJACENT TO SAINT JOHNS HERITAGE PARKWAY, NORTH OF AND ADJACENT TO MALABAR ROAD NORTHWEST.

FUTURE LAND USE FOR THE PROPERTY IS PSU PARKWAY FLEX USE AND THE ZONING IS PMU IS PARKWAY MIXED USE AND THIS SITE IS APPROXIMATELY 15 ACRES.

THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING THAT THE PROPERTY BE GRANTED A FINAL SUBDIVISION PLAT APPROVAL TO ALLOW FOR A PROPOSED FOUR LOT COMMERCIAL SUBDIVISION CALLED COMMERCIAL AT HERITAGE SQUARE.

IN ANALYSIS, THIS PROPOSED FINAL SUBDIVISION PLAT IS A PLAT OF SAINT JOHNS PRESERVE PHASE ONE TRACT X, WHICH WAS NOTED FOR FUTURE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT WITH A MINIMUM OF 24,800FT² OF FLOOR AREA AND THE 15 ACRE COMMERCIAL PARCEL IS BEING SPLIT INTO FOUR LOTS.

STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF CASE FS 23 00006 AND I'M AVAILABLE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.

AND THE APPLICANT IS ALSO AVAILABLE.

YOU, MR. RAMOS. DOES THE BOARD HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.

THANK YOU, MS.. RAMOS.

I'M LOOKING AT THE MAP.

AND SO IT'S A IT CHUNKS THE PIECE OF LAND UP INTO FOUR PIECES.

[00:45:05]

FIVE TOTAL BECAUSE IT HAS A PIECE THAT IT CALLS A TRACT.

SO IS EACH ONE OF THOSE THINGS GOING TO HAVE LIKE A DIFFERENT BUILDING ON IT, OR IS IT ALL GOING TO BE LIKE A CONTINUOUS PIECE? LIKE WHAT'S IT INTENDED TO HOW IS IT INTENDED TO LAY OUT? BECAUSE LIKE I LOOK AT THE MAP AND I SEE LIKE LOT FOUR LOOKS LIKE IT WOULD BE LIKE PARKING, I SUPPOSE, BUT LIKE, IS IT MEANT TO HAVE SO THE TRACT I THINK IS A STORMWATER TRACT AND THEN THE FOUR LOTS WOULD BE FOR COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT.

SO PROBABLY LOT FOUR WOULD BE LIKE A SHOPPING CENTER AND THEN LOTS TO.

ONE, TWO AND THREE WOULD BE OUTPARCELS, LIKE SMALLER SITES.

OKAY. OKAY. AND THEN LOT ONE WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT TAKES UP LIKE THE FRONT CORNER.

RIGHT? OKAY.

RIGHT. OKAY.

THAT GIVES ME JUST MORE VISUAL UNDERSTANDING OF IT.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU FOR THAT. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.

FURTHER QUESTIONS. THING NONE WITH THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD.

GOOD EVENING. ANNA SAUNDERS WITH BSE CONSULTANTS.

NOTHING FURTHER TO ADD.

JUST A COUNCILMAN OSOWSKI.

JUST JUST SO YOU KNOW, WE DO HAVE IT APPROVED SET OF CONSTRUCTION PLANS FOR THIS PROJECT.

THAT WOULD CERTAINLY HELP.

PROBABLY PAINT THE PICTURE IN THERE A LITTLE BIT.

BUT AS MS.. RAMOS SAID, THAT'S EXACTLY IT.

THE TRACT IS FOR STORMWATER.

THERE'S THREE OUTPARCELS THAT WILL BE SEPARATE STANDALONE BUILDINGS AND THEN THERE'S THE MAIN PARENT COMMERCIAL PARCEL.

MADAM CHAIR, MAY I ASK A FOLLOW UP QUESTION? JUST. SURE.

WHILE WE'RE HERE TALKING.

ARE YOU AT ANY IN ANY WAY IS THIS PROJECT IN ANY WAY INVOLVED WITH THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE INTERSECTION WIDENING? IS THAT KIND OF IN THE PURVIEW OF WHAT YOU'RE DOING? YOU KNOW, SO WE'RE NOT ACTUALLY DOING ANY OF THE INTERSECTION RELATED WORK, BUT WE WILL BE CONSTRUCTING TURN LANES ON THE PARKWAY INTO THIS PARCEL.

OKAY. AND SO IT'LL CUT IN FROM THE PARKWAY WILL COME IN FROM MALABAR TO.

WE DO HAVE TWO ACCESS POINTS OFF OF MALABAR ROAD.

YES, SIR. ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT.

THANK YOU. THE FLOOR IS NOW OPEN.

DOES ANYONE WISH TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS REQUEST? YOU WEREN'T OPPOSED.

SEEING NONE IS NOW THE FLOOR IS CLOSED, IS BROUGHT BACK TO THE BOARD OR DO I HAVE A MOTION? YEAH. THIS IS, YOU KNOW, BEEN A LONG TIME COMING.

COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT IS BADLY NEEDED OUT THERE, INCLUDING A LARGE GROCERY STORE.

SO A MOTION TO APPROVE FS 23 00006C COMMERCIAL F SECOND.

MOTION AND A SECOND BY MR. WARNER. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE, AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.

THANK YOU. THREE THE NEXT CASE.

PS 23 00006.

SURE. THE APPLICANT FOR THIS IS THE DIOCESE OF ORLANDO.

JOHN G. NOONAN BISHOP AND IS REPRESENTED BY DAVID BASSFORD FROM ENGINEERING.

IT'S LOCATED SOUTH OF AND ADJACENT TO OSMOSIS DRIVE, SOUTH EAST AND WEST OF AND ADJACENT TO COGAN DRIVE SOUTHEAST.

THE PROPERTY HAS A FUTURE LAND USE OF HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL AND THE ZONING IS PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AND THE SITE IS APPROXIMATELY 21 ACRES.

THE APPLICANT REQUESTS THAT THE PROPERTY BE GRANTED PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PLAN APPROVAL FOR A DEVELOPMENT CONSISTING OF 88 TOWNHOME LOTS AND 35 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS FOR A TOTAL OF 123 DWELLING UNITS TO BE CALLED BAYSIDE LANDINGS.

IN ANALYSIS, PRELIMINARY SUBDIVISION PLAN, ALSO KNOWN AS A PRELIMINARY PLAT, IS A MAP INDICATING THE PROPOSED LAYOUT OF A DEVELOPMENT AND RELATED INFORMATION TO SHOW CONSISTENCY WITH THE SUBDIVISION REQUIREMENTS.

IN ACCORDANCE WITH CHAPTER 185 OF THE PALM BAY CODE OF ORDINANCES, BAYSIDE LANDINGS RECEIVED A FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL ON JUNE 16TH, 2022 THROUGH ORDINANCE 2022 DASH 64.

A MORE IN-DEPTH REVIEW OF THE REQUIRED CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS WILL TAKE PLACE DURING THE ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW OF THE CONSTRUCTION PLANS AND AFTER CONSTRUCTION PLAN APPROVAL. THE FINAL PLAT WILL THEN BE BROUGHT BACK THROUGH THE PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS FOR FINAL PLAT APPROVAL AND STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF CASE 23 00006 AND STAFF IS AVAILABLE AND THE APPLICANT IS AVAILABLE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.

YOU, MR. RAMOS. DOES THE BOARD HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? NONE WITH THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD.

GOOD EVENING. DAVID BASHFORD MBB ENGINEERING ENGINEER OF RECORD AS STAFF HAS DONE A GOOD JOB OF PRESENTING.

[00:50:04]

OTHERWISE I'LL KEEP IT TO A MINIMUM.

THANK YOU, SIR. HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? MR. BERESFORD, THIS LOOKS AWFULLY FAMILIAR.

IT SHOULD. I KNOW.

THIS IS THE THIRD TIME. THE LAST TIME THIS CAME BEFORE US, THERE WAS A LOT OF CITIZEN RESPONSE TO IT.

AND AT THAT POINT, AT THAT TIME, YOU MADE A LOT OF CONCESSIONS.

WE DID, INCLUDING THE LOCATION OF THE TOWNHOUSE UNITS, SETBACKS AND ALL THAT, THAT TYPE OF THING.

ARE THOSE RESPONSES STILL INCLUDED IN THIS NEW.

I DON'T KNOW IF THEY'RE INCLUDED IN THE PACKAGE, BUT YES, ALL OF THOSE ARE STILL BEING ADDRESSED IN ACCORDANCE WITH WHAT WE HAD PREVIOUSLY AGREED TO.

THE SETBACKS, I KNOW ORIGINALLY YOU HAD SINGLE FAMILY HOMES BACKING TO THEM AND SO ON AND THE SETBACKS FOR THE TOWNHOMES.

AND THERE WAS A LOT OF DISCUSSION AND THAT WAS THAT WAS INCLUDED IN THE THE ORIGINAL APPROVAL.

I DON'T KNOW WHY IS THIS COMING BACK TO US AT SUCH A LATE DATE? AS I UNDERSTAND IT, IT'S A LITTLE BIT OF A HOUSE CLEANING EFFORT.

I'D HAVE TO LET STAFF COMPLETELY ANSWER THAT.

IT DIDN'T RECEIVE ALL OF ITS ENTITLEMENTS THE SECOND TIME THROUGH.

SO LIKE I SAID, A LITTLE BIT OF HOUSE CLEANING MORE THAN ANYTHING.

THANK YOU, JESSE.

DID YOU WANT TO ADD SOMETHING TO THAT? YEAH, SURE.

SO THE LAST TIME THIS CAME THROUGH WAS FOR A FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN.

SO THAT IS YOUR ZONING CLASSIFICATION.

AND THEN THIS IS THE PRELIMINARY PLAT THAT SHOWS COMPLIANCE WITH THAT ZONING DESIGNATION.

SO THEY GAVE US THE STANDARDS LAST TIME.

NOW THEY'RE SHOWING THAT THEY'RE ADHERING TO THOSE STANDARDS.

THANK YOU. OKAY.

THANK YOU. MR.. THE QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT.

OKAY. THE FLOOR IS NOW OPEN.

WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS REQUEST, MR. BENTON? BILL BATTEN, 586 OCEAN SPRAY STREET SOUTHWEST.

THE REASON I'M SPEAKING IN FAVOR OF THIS IS BECAUSE THEY MADE THOSE CONCESSIONS ORIGINALLY COMING INTO THE BAYSIDE LAKES AREA FOR A PLANNING THAT WAS THERE, BUT IT GENERATED A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.

THE FIRST QUESTION WAS WHEN WILL OSMOSIS BE CONNECTED TO THE GROUP? BECAUSE THAT WILL BE THE SECONDARY ROAD ALLEVIATING SOME OF THE TRAFFIC, HAVING TO GO THROUGH BAYSIDE LAKES.

IT WILL ALLEVIATE SOME OF THAT PROBLEM THAT WE'RE HEARING ABOUT.

SO THAT'S THE FIRST QUESTION WHICH GENERATES THE TIE IN TO THIS DEVELOPER.

WELL, THIS DEVELOPER BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY OF THAT COST OF CONNECTING OSMOSIS ONTO THE GROUP.

WILL THEY BE RESPONSIBLE FOR ANY OF THAT? AND THE FUNDING SOURCE? RIGHT. AND THE ONLY REASON WHY I'M SAYING THAT IS BECAUSE THEY'RE THE ONLY DEVELOPMENT THAT IS CURRENTLY EXITING OUT ONTO OSMOSIS DRIVE.

THAT'S WHY I'M SAYING THAT THEY'LL BE THE 100% AT THIS LOCATION USING THAT ROAD.

THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS, SIR? GOOD EVENING, MADAM CHAIRMAN.

ALAN GERSON, 536 DILLARD DRIVE SOUTHEAST IN PALM BAY.

I'M IN FAVOR OF THE PROJECT.

I'VE BEEN WORKING WITH MBP ENGINEERING, DAVID BASSFORD.

HE'S ADDRESSED OUR CONCERNS IN THE PAST.

WE REQUESTED A GREEN AREA IN THE NON-DEVELOPMENTAL SECTION WHERE THERE'S SORT OF A DEAD DEAD ZONE. IT'S THERE ON THERE.

PLOT PLAN.

THERE. IT'S LZ4.

AND THEY'VE AGREED TO LEAVE THAT AS GREEN SPACE, LEAVE THE EXISTING VEGETATION, TREES AND THAT AND THE DRAINAGE, YOU KNOW, AS IS, THERE IS A STORMWATER CATCH BASIN THAT IS IN THAT IN THE PROPERTY THAT WAS NEVER SHOWN ON THE ORIGINAL SURVEY.

THE NEW SURVEY FOR THE THE DEVELOPMENT SHOWS THAT THAT STORM SEWER IS THERE.

THEIR COVER SHEET SHOWS THAT THE NEW HOA WILL BE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE MAINTENANCE OF THAT STORMWATER BASIN.

I'VE PREVIOUSLY CHECKED WITH THE PALM BAY CITY OF PALM BAY STORMWATER MANAGEMENT OFFICE AND THEY WERE UNAWARE THAT THAT STORM WATER CATCH BASIN WAS THERE.

THAT CATCH BASIN APPARENTLY DRAINS INTO THE AMBERWOOD DEVELOPMENT.

UH, LAKE, YOU KNOW, ACROSS THE STREET FROM DILLARD.

SO I JUST WOULD LIKE TO SEE A NOTE ON THE LEAD SHEET INDICATING THAT THAT SECTION, LZ FOUR WILL REMAIN A GREEN

[00:55:05]

IT'S DIRECTLY BEHIND MY HOUSE AND NEIGHBORS ON EITHER SIDE OF ME.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS CASE? SEEING NONE WHEN THE APPLICANT.

I'M SORRY. OH, I'M SORRY.

STAFF. GOOD EVENING.

ROBERT STICE, 1796 WEINBERG DRIVE SOUTHEAST.

I AM OPPOSED TO THIS AND I WANT TO TELL YOU WHY.

I WANT TO GIVE YOU ALL SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT.

WE JUST HAD STONEBRIAR COMPLETE 333 HOMES JUST SOUTH OF MY HOA IN SUMMERFIELD.

OKAY. AND YOU HAVE SO MANY CLUSTERS GOING IN.

I THINK WHAT WE DON'T THINK ABOUT IS AS A ZONING BOARD, AS A CITY OR AS A PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT IS WE HAVE OVER 40% OF PALM BAY TO DEVELOP.

OKAY. SO JUST BECAUSE THERE'S AN OPEN LAND HERE, IF YOU PUT I'M JUST GOING TO EXAGGERATE TO MAKE A POINT HERE, SO STAY WITH ME.

SO IF YOU PUT 2000 HOMES HERE, RIGHT, YOU DON'T HAVE THE INFRASTRUCTURE TO GO WITH IT.

IN OTHER WORDS, IF YOU'RE IN NEW YORK, NEW JERSEY, WHERE I'M FROM, THERE'S 15 WAYS TO GO FROM POINT A TO POINT C HERE.

WHEN YOU HAD THE ORIGINAL BUILDERS COME IN TO PALM BAY, THE ROADS WERE OBSOLETE RIGHT AFTER THEY PUT THEM IN.

NOW NOW WE ARE DUMPING ALL OF THESE HIGHWAYS AND ALL THESE DEVELOPMENTS JUST BECAUSE THAT LAND IS AVAILABLE.

LET'S DUMP IT IN HERE.

WELL, LET'S USE IT OVER HERE.

LOOK AT THE 41 HOMES.

I THINK IT WAS THAT YOU DENIED, I DON'T KNOW, ABOUT NINE MONTHS AGO WHEN WE CHATTED ABOUT THAT, THERE WAS ONE WAY IN AND ONE WAY OUT.

THE FIRE DEPARTMENT'S RESPONSE IS 12 MINUTES.

OKAY. THAT'S A THAT'S A DANGER.

THE CITY'S EMBLEM, FOR LACK OF A BETTER WORD, LACK OF A BETTER WORD, IS QUALITY OF LIFE.

NOW, I'M WALKING IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD AND I HAD A NEIGHBOR TELL ME WHO WORKS AT HARRIS THAT YOU GO TO PUBLIX ON BAYSIDE LAKE AT ANY TIME.

IT FEELS LIKE THANKSGIVING DAY.

THE POINT IS IT'S PACKED.

WE ARE CREATING YOU ARE CREATING SUBURBAN, SUBURBAN GRIDLOCK IS WHAT YOU'RE CREATING.

I'M NOT EVEN TALKING ABOUT TRAFFIC.

YOU'RE ALL LOOKING AT THE TRAFFIC, RIGHT? IF YOU'RE TRAVELING ANYWHERE, YOU KNOW THE TRAFFIC IS GONE WORSE.

YOU'RE PROVEN AREAS THAT RUN ON MALABAR ROAD AND BABCOCK PARK.

AND THAT'S ONE OF THE WORST INTERSECTIONS IN ALL OF PALM BAY.

SO I WANT YOU TO THINK OUT OF THE BOX A LITTLE BIT.

NOW YOU'RE GOING ON COLGAN IN THAT AREA HERE AND YOU HAVE, WHAT WAS IT, 35? IF I READ MY OWN, MY OWN WRITING HERE, YOU HAVE TOWNHOMES AND OTHER HOMES COMING IN.

THAT'S ALL IN THAT AREA.

OKAY. DID ANYBODY LOOK AT THE ACCIDENT RATE ON BAYSIDE LAKES AND COLGAN AREA THERE? DID ANYBODY LOOK AT THE ACCIDENT RATE FOR THE PAST FIVE YEARS OUTSIDE MY HOA OF SUMMERFIELD, WHERE WE HAD FIVE DEATHS IN THE FIRST FIVE YEARS I MOVED HERE.

I WANT YOU TO THINK ABOUT QUALITY OF LIFE.

NOT THAT, HEY, IT'S OKAY FOR THIS TO GO HERE BECAUSE PLANNING SAID IT WAS OKAY AND WE CAN WE CAN DO THAT.

BUT YOU'RE CREATING SUBURBAN GRIDLOCK.

OKAY? WHO THE HECK WANTS TO LIVE IN SUBURBAN GRIDLOCK? WHO WANTS TO WHO WANTS TO LIVE DOWN BY HERITAGE AND WHAT HAVE YOU? THESE ARE WHAT NEIGHBORS ARE TELLING ME.

OKAY? IT'S BECOMING INSANE.

SO JUST DON'T SIT THERE AND STAMP SOMETHING AND SAY, YEAH, YOU KNOW, BUILD IT, SAY IT'S GOING TO BE OKAY TO DEVELOP IT, SAY IT'S GOING TO BE OKAY.

LET'S PUT IT IN BECAUSE WE HAVE TO LIVE HERE.

THESE BUILDINGS ARE GOING TO BE GONE.

ALL RIGHT. SO THINK ABOUT AS YOU'RE DOING THIS, THINK ABOUT QUALITY OF LIFE AS WE CONTINUE TO HAVE TO BE THERE.

NOW, YOU'RE PROBABLY GOING TO PASS THIS, AND I GET THAT.

BUT WHEN YOU WHEN YOU'RE PUTTING THESE MAJOR AREAS, THESE THESE MAJOR DEVELOPMENTS NEXT TO ONE ANOTHER, IT AFFECTS THE RESIDENTS.

IT AFFECTS THEM IN SHOPPING.

IT AFFECTS HEALTH CARE.

WAITING ON LINE.

MY WIFE HAD TO GO TO URGENT CARE THE OTHER DAY, GOT IN ABOUT 2.5 HOURS BECAUSE IT WAS PACKED.

EVERY SERVICE THAT WE GET AND NOT TO MENTION COMMERCIAL VEHICLES, TRASH TRUCKS.

OKAY. THE POLICE RESPONSE AND THE FIRE RESPONSE IS STILL 12 MINUTES.

OKAY. SO THINK OUT OF THE BOX.

I WOULD LIKE YOU TO THINK BEFORE YOU YOU AGREE TO ANYTHING GOING FORWARD.

IS THIS GOING TO IMPROVE OUR RESIDENTS QUALITY OF LIFE? BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT YOU SHOULD BE THINKING OF, NOT ABOUT IMPACT FEES, PLENTY OF IMPACT FEES TO GO AROUND FOR EVERYBODY.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. DOES ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS? YOU'RE IN THE BACK. WELL.

[01:00:08]

I LIVE RIGHT BEHIND THAT PROPERTY, AND I WAS HERE FOR THE LAST MEETING AND THERE WAS A LOT OF CITIZENS HERE TELLING YOU WHY THEY DIDN'T WANT THAT.

AND IT TOOK YOU 30S TO PASS IT.

YOU DIDN'T DEBATE ONE WORD THAT WE ALL BROUGHT UP TO ALL OF YOU HERE.

YOU PASSED IT IN 30S.

YOU HAD NO CONVERSATION ABOUT ALL THE CITIZENS THAT CAME UP HERE.

TOLD YOU WHAT WE DIDN'T LIKE ABOUT IT, AND YOU DIDN'T EVEN DEBATE.

IT PASSED.

AND I EXPECT THE SAME THING.

SO MY COMPLAINT IS THE TRAFFIC, THE CRIME THAT'S GOING TO COME WITH IT.

WE DON'T NEED MORE RESIDENTIAL BAYSIDE LAKES.

WE NEED MORE. WE NEED A CHURCH, NOT A CATHOLIC CHURCH.

A CHRISTIAN CHURCH.

OKAY. I'M NOT INTO CATHOLIC CHURCHES.

SORRY, BUT WE DON'T NEED MORE RESIDENTIAL.

WE'VE ALREADY GOT A PROBLEM.

HAVE YOU TRIED GETTING OFF MALABAR ROAD WHERE YOU'RE STUCK ON 95? I'VE ALMOST CRASHED TWICE.

I'M SURE YOU'VE HAD A PROBLEM WITH IT.

DO YOU THINK WE NEED MORE RESIDENTIAL AND PALM BAY? WE DON'T.

WE NEED MORE NATURE, MORE WILDLIFE TREES.

SO WE DON'T WANT TO KILL EACH OTHER ON THE STREETS THAT YOU PUT US ON.

THANKS. WOULD YOU FILL OUT A COMMENT CARD FOR US? THANK YOU.

HI, GOOD EVENING. JOHN MAGEE.

1991 THORNWOOD DRIVE.

BAYSIDE LAKES.

I'VE LIVED IN BAYSIDE NOW FOR 14 YEARS.

I WENT BACK AND LOOKED AT THE ESSENTIAL PREMISE OF THE CREATION OF BAYSIDE LAKES IN 2006, AND THE HEART AND SOUL OF THAT, OF COURSE, WAS THE MAJORS, COUNTRY, COUNTRY AND GOLF CLUB AROUND THAT WERE BUILT VARIOUS COMMUNITIES, SINGLE FAMILY HOME COMMUNITIES OF VARYING DEGREES OF PRICING. BUT I SEE A LOT OF THE CITY TRYING TO NOW.

LEVERAGE IN MULTI-UNIT HOUSING INTO BAYSIDE WITH NO THOUGHT ABOUT THE IMPACT OF WHAT IT'S GOING TO DO TO THE PEOPLE WHO ALREADY LIVE THERE.

AND WE ALSO HAVE THE PWA, WHICH IS THE GREATER ASSOCIATION OF ALL THE HOAS IN BAYSIDE, WERE PACKED TO THE GILLS NOW.

BUT IF YOU'RE GOING TO ADD APARTMENT COMPLEXES, WHICH IS REALLY WHAT THESE ARE BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO LOOK LIKE.

I'VE SEEN CONCEPTS OF TOWNHOMES BEING DESIGNED TO BUILD IN BAYSIDE AND THEY LOOK LIKE WAREHOUSES.

THEY LOOK LIKE THEY BELONG UP AT THE OTHER END OF EMERSON RATHER THAN IN A RESIDENTIAL AREA.

BUT I GO BACK TO THE CODE OF 185 .005 ABOUT OVERCROWDING OF LAND AND CHARACTER OF THE COMMUNITY AND DRAIN.

SOMEBODY BROUGHT UP THE DRAINAGE AND ENHANCING THE STANDARD OF LIVING AS BOB BROUGHT UP.

WE HAVE ONE FIRE STATION WHICH IS OVER BY THE HIGH SCHOOL.

WE HAVE NO POLICE STATION OR ANYTHING.

SO EVERY COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT OR COMMERCIAL ENTITY WITHIN BAYSIDE LAKES, THEY SERVE NOW ALL THE WAY DOWN ON BABCOCK STREET, ALL THE WAY DOWN TO SAINT JOHNS PARKWAY, BECAUSE THERE'S NO COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT BEING BUILT THERE.

ADDED TO THAT, NOW YOU HAVE THE TRAFFIC ON KOGAN.

YOU HAVE TRAFFIC ON BAYSIDE LAKES BOULEVARD GOING TO AND FROM WORK GOING TO AND FROM SCHOOL.

IT IS BECOMING VERY HIGHLY DENSE, POPULATED AREA.

AND I DON'T UNDERSTAND THIS FASCINATION WITH JUST BUILDING TOWNHOMES FOR THE SAKE OF BUILDING TOWNHOMES.

WHAT DO THEY LOOK LIKE? WHAT ARE THEY GOING TO BE? WHAT'S THE PRICE POINT GOING TO BE? WHAT IS THE CHARACTER OF THE DESIGN OF THEM GOING TO BE THAT WAY? BUT IT SEEMS LIKE WE'RE JUST PLUGGING IN OPEN LAND, PLUGGING IN A BUNCH OF TOWNHOMES AND A BUNCH OF OTHER TYPES OF HOMES JUST TO FILL UP THE LAND SPACE. AND THEN THE BUILDERS LEAVE AND THE CITY GETS THE TAX REVENUE.

AND WE, THE RESIDENTS, HAVE TO LIVE THERE AND DEAL WITH ALL THE PROBLEMS AND ALL THE DISASTERS THAT HAVE BEEN CREATED BECAUSE OF OVERCROWDING AND DENSITY OF HOUSING AND THE ALL THE OTHER IMPACTS THAT COME WITH IT.

SO I'M OPPOSED TO THIS, OR AT LEAST THE WAY IT SITS.

AND I THINK THAT THERE NEEDS TO BE A LOT MORE CONSIDERATION OF WHAT THE PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY WANT AND NOT WHAT THE BUILDERS WANT.

ANY FURTHER COMMENTS FROM THE FLOOR.

SEEING NONE WITH THE APPLICANT LIKE TO RESPOND.

JUST SERVES AS A REMINDER BOARD.

[01:05:01]

THIS AREA ALREADY HAS FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN, APPROVAL AND ENTITLEMENTS FROM ITS FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN.

AT THIS POINT IN TIME, THE PRELIMINARY PLAT IS TO BE IN IN IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN.

IF YOU FIND IT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN, THEN THERE IS NOTHING THAT SHOULD BE STOPPING YOUR APPROVAL.

OTHERWISE, IF YOU FIND IT IN NONCOMPLIANCE WITH THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN, YOU SHOULD NOT BE APPROVING IT.

BUT THE BASIS OF TRAFFIC IS SOMETHING THAT WAS CONSIDERED AT THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND WILL BE CONSIDERED AGAIN AT THE SUBDIVISION CONSTRUCTION PLANS BY ADMINISTRATION.

YOU, MR. ANDERSON, FOR THAT CLARIFICATION.

AS JESSE SAID, WE'VE MET ALL OF THE APPLICABLE CRITERIA.

ONE THING JUST TO HELP SET THE RECORD STRAIGHT, BECAUSE I DON'T REMEMBER SEEING THE GENTLEMAN AT THE MEETING OR AT THE TWO CITY MEETINGS.

THE TOWNHOMES WERE ACTUALLY AT THE REQUEST OF THE CITY.

SO THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT WE ORIGINALLY STARTED WITH ON OUR OWN.

WE'VE ALREADY DONE A TRAFFIC STUDY.

JUST PUT THAT ON THE RECORD.

WE ACTUALLY REDID IT TO INCLUDE A SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS.

SO WE WILL BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH ALL OF THE CITY CODES.

YOU'RE WELCOME. IS NOW CLOSED IS BROUGHT BACK TO THE BOARD FOR DISCUSSION.

NO, SIR. YOU'VE ALREADY SPOKEN.

NO. AFTER WE CLOSE IT, HE GETS TO RESPOND.

MADAM CHAIR. YES.

I JUST VERY BRIEFLY, BEFORE WE GET INTO MOTION MAKING, I WANT TO HIGHLIGHT MR. ANDERSON'S POINT ABOUT WHERE OUR CURRENT ORDER OF BUSINESS LEAVES US.

AND IT'S BASICALLY, YOU KNOW, GIVEN THE PARAMETERS THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN GRANTED TO THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY, CAN THEY MOVE FORWARD? ARE THEY IN COMPLIANCE WITH MOVING FORWARD WITH BUILDING AS THEY'VE ALREADY SOUGHT THEIR ENTITLEMENTS TO? I WILL SHARE FROM LACK OF A BETTER WAY OF SAYING IT, A $0.02 PERSPECTIVE THAT I REALLY APPRECIATE THE NEIGHBORS SHARING WHERE THEY'RE AT.

I CAN'T QUITE SAY THAT I DISAGREE WITH THEM, BUT THIS ORDER OF BUSINESS HAVING TO LOOK AT THIS PLAN AND SAY NOW THAT THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY ALREADY HAS BEEN CHANGED FROM INSTITUTIONAL, WHICH AGAIN MAY OR MAY NOT BE SOMETHING I AGREE WITH, BUT LOOKING AT THE FACT THAT IT IS DONE, IS THIS BUILD OUT GOOD? AND I DO APPRECIATE HEARING FROM THE NEIGHBOR THAT'S REALLY CLOSE TO THE DEVELOPMENT AND AND HEARING THAT THE DEVELOPER NOT ONLY IN COMPLIANCE WITH EVERYTHING THAT THE CITY ASKS, BUT WITH WHAT THE NEIGHBORS ARE ASKING, TRIED TO FINESSE THE PROPERTY AND MAKE IT AS BEST IT CAN.

SO A LOT OF THE SENTIMENTS, AGAIN FROM THE NEIGHBORS ARE THEY REALLY HIT WITH ME.

AND I WOULD SEE IT DIFFERENT IF I COULD IN MY FANTASY OF MAKING IT.

BUT WITH THE ORDER OF BUSINESS, I AM GOING TO BE IN SUPPORT OF IT.

AND I DO JUST NEED TO SAY THAT I DON'T SUGGEST ANYBODY USES THE MALABAR ROAD SOUTHBOUND EXIT TO TRAFFIC.

I THINK IT IS WORTH IT TO GO TO OUR NEW EXIT OFF OF 166 OR GET OFF AT PALM BAY ROAD IF YOU HAVE TO, BUT NEVER GET OFF SOUTHBOUND.

95 ON MALABAR.

I HAVE TO SAY THAT. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.

FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION OR MOTION, PLEASE.

YEAH. YOU KNOW, THOSE COMMENTS WERE EXACTLY RIGHT, THAT ALL THE ALL THE ENTITLEMENTS HAVE BEEN MET.

SO, YOU KNOW, A MOTION TO APPROVE PS 23 00006.

SECOND MOTION AND A SECOND BY MR. BOEREMA. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE, AYE. ANY OPPOSED? CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.

NADH. ACP 23 00015.

GOOD EVENING. ALEX BERNARD, PRINCIPAL PLANNER.

THIS IS CASE CP 00015.

THE APPLICANT IS MERRITT ISLAND HOLDING.

IT'S BEING REPRESENTED BY JOHN NEWTON.

THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED SOUTH OF AND ADJACENT TO MALABAR ROAD, WEST OF GREEN ACRES DRIVE.

IT IS APPROXIMATELY 6.43 ACRES.

IT CURRENTLY HAS A FUTURE LAND USE OF PUBLIC SLASH SEMI PUBLIC.

THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING FOR A SMALL SCALE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHANGE FROM PUBLIC SEMIPUBLIC TO COMMERCIAL.

THIS IS IN ALIGNMENT WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA AND POLICY.

F FLEW 1-4C OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WHICH WOULD BE COMPATIBLE AND IT WOULD ALLOW AN OPPORTUNITY FOR MORE COMMERCIAL IN AN ALREADY MAJORLY ESTABLISHED COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR OF THE CITY AND STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL FOR CP 0015.

AND I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AS WELL AS THE APPLICANT BEING HERE AS WELL.

THANK YOU. DOES THE BOARD HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE.

[01:10:01]

I'M A REAL ESTATE DEVELOPER AND PROJECT MANAGER FOR THIS PROJECT FOR THE POTENTIAL BUYER OF THE LAND.

THE CURRENT OWNER HAS A CONTRACT SELLING IT TO MY CLIENT AND WE'VE BEEN WORKING TO COME UP WITH A CONCEPT THAT WOULD PRESENT A COMMERCIAL SHOPPING CENTER ENVIRONMENT THAT WOULD BE THE HOME TO THRIFTY SPECIALTY PRODUCE AND MEATS THAT CURRENTLY HAS A LOCATION ON PALM BAY ROAD AND ALSO HAS A LOCATION ON BARTON BOULEVARD IN ROCKLEDGE, FLORIDA.

EXCUSE ME, SIR. PEOPLE IN THE AUDIENCE.

I'M SORRY. YOU'LL HAVE TO.

QUIET DOWN.

WE CAN'T HEAR THE APPLICANT.

HEAD, SIR. AS I SAID, THIS THIS IS TO BE A COMMERCIAL SHOPPING CENTER WITH THE ANCHOR TENANT BEING THRIFTY, SPECIALTY PRODUCE AND MEATS.

IF YOU LIVE IN PALM BAY, YOU'RE PROBABLY VERY FAMILIAR WITH THEIR STORE ON O'GALLEY.

EXCUSE ME? ON PALM BAY ROAD.

I RECENTLY SPENT THE LAST TWO AND A HALF YEARS OF MY LIFE REDEVELOPING A SHOPPING CENTER THAT WAS DEFUNCT UP IN ROCKLEDGE TO BE THEIR NEW HOME FOR THEIR NEWEST CONCEPT STORE, WHICH IS A FULL SIZED GROCERY STORE.

AND NOW WE'RE LOOKING BACK TO PALM BAY AFTER THAT LAST THREE YEARS TO BRING THAT LARGER CONCEPT HERE INTO TOWN IN A PROJECT THAT WOULD BE OWNED RATHER THAN LEASED.

SO IT WOULD BE OWNED BY THE THE PRINCIPALS OF THE COMPANY, THEIR BEING THE PRIMARY OCCUPANT.

AND THEN THIS CONCEPT THAT WE'VE WORKED ON HAS ABOUT 8000FT² OF EXTRA RENTAL SPACE.

HOPEFULLY WE'LL WE'LL BRING IN AN ATTRACTIVE COMPATIBLE TENANT THAT WOULD BE A FAMILY ORIENTED BUSINESS JUST LIKE THE GROCERY STORE HAPPENS TO BE.

AND I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD.

THANK YOU, SIR. DOES THE BOARD HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? MR. WEINBERG? YES, SIR.

THAT FLAG AREA AT THE.

AT THE REAR OF THE SITE.

WHAT IS THE INTENDED USE OF THAT? THE SOUTHERN THE SOUTHERN END OF THE SITE WILL BE STORMWATER RETENTION, INCLUDING THAT AREA THAT THAT JUTS OUT AT THE AND WE'RE PROBABLY NOT GOING TO USE THAT PIECE AT ALL.

THAT'S GOING TO REMAIN VACANT.

YES. NO PLAN TO MAKE ANY CONNECTION.

NO PLANS TO MAKE IT. IN FACT, WE ARE NOT GOING TO MAKE IT.

I CAN MAKE THAT OFFICIAL STATEMENT.

WE'RE NOT GOING TO MAKE THAT A DRIVEWAY THAT GOES THROUGH A RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION.

IT MAKES NO SENSE.

OKAY. THANK YOU. ARE THEY RELOCATING OR ARE THEY? THIS WILL BE AN ADDITIONAL STORE.

QUESTIONS, MA'AM.

AND YOU MENTIONED THIS IS THE FULL SCALE CONCEPT.

SO THIS IS A FULL SERVICE GROCERY STORE.

HAVE YOU BEEN TO THE ONE IN ROCKLEDGE YET? NOT PERSONALLY, BUT THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING.

YES. IT'LL BE MORE LIKE THAT.

THAT FLOOR PLAN. IT'S MORE OF A SIZE OF A STANDARD GROCERY STORE RATHER THAN THE ONE THEY'VE OCCUPIED FOR THE LAST 15 YEARS, WHICH IS MORE OF A GROWTH IN PLACE FROM A STRIP CENTER. THIS IS SOMETHING WELL THOUGHT OUT, WELL, WELL DESIGNED AND AND AND QUITE A LOT TO OFFER.

SO WHAT'S THE SQUARE FOOTAGE THAT THE GROCERY STORE WOULD TAKE UP? AND THEN WHAT'S THE SQUARE FOOTAGE AND HOW MANY UNITS THAT ARE ATTACHED? 30,000 FOR THE GROCERY STORE AND APPROXIMATELY 8000, WHICH WE DON'T KNOW HOW WE'LL SPLIT IT UP YET.

I'M CURRENTLY TALKING WITH SOME SUSPECTED POTENTIAL USERS.

ONE COULD BE A SINGLE USER.

MOST LIKELY TO BE TWO.

DON'T KNOW WHO THEY ARE YET.

CAN'T MAKE ANY COMMENTS. NOBODY'S MADE A COMMITMENT, BUT IT WOULD BE LIKE ONE BIG PARKING LOT.

YES. YES.

ONE ONE RECTANGULAR BUILDING.

THE THE 8000 PORTION WOULD NOT BE AS DEEP AS THE GROCERY STORE.

IT WOULD ONLY BE 80FT DEEP, WHEREAS THE GROCERY STORE IS 120FT DEEP.

OKAY. AND SO WILL THAT EXTRA BE WHERE THE UTILITY PORTION OF THE GROCERY STORE IS, WHERE THE SEMIS WILL LIKE BACK IN AND THEY'LL BE ABLE TO IF YOU COULD LOOK AT THAT SITE PLAN RIGHT THERE ON THE SCREEN, WE HAVE A COUPLE OF TRUCK DOCKS THERE AT THE RIGHT THERE.

OKAY. THOSE ARE BUT BUT QUITE HONESTLY, MOST OF THE TRUCKS WILL DRIVE BEHIND THE BUILDING IN THAT DRIVEWAY AND WE SEE ALL THOSE EXPOSED COOLERS OUTSIDE.

MANY OF THE DELIVERIES WILL BE UNLOADED DIRECTLY INTO THE RESPECTIVE COOLERS THAT HAVE ACCESS INTO THE BUILDING.

ANOTHER POINT TO COMMENT THAT I WANTED TO BRING UP, THAT WAS SOMETHING I FAILED TO MENTION AND I DID NOT KNOW ABOUT AT THE TIME WE HAD OUR PUBLIC MEETING.

WE DO SEE IN ROCKLEDGE PROBABLY 12 TO 15 TRUCKS A DAY MAKING DELIVERIES THROUGHOUT THE DAY, NOT BEFORE WORKING HOURS AND NOT AFTER SIX, PROBABLY NOT EVEN AFTER 4:00 IN THE AFTERNOON.

BUT THE BENEFIT OF BEING HERE IS THEY ALREADY HAVE A DISTRIBUTION WAREHOUSE ON PALM BAY ROAD.

SO MANY OF THOSE TRUCKLOADS THAT WOULD HAVE COME THROUGH HERE 12 TIMES WILL BE DELIVERING THEIR THE LOADS WILL BE THEN COORDINATED INTO A SMALLER TRUCKLOADS THAT BRING MULTIPLE DELIVERIES IN ONE TRUCK RATHER THAN FOUR TRUCKS, LET'S SAY.

SO THAT'LL REDUCE THE TRUCK TRAFFIC WE HAD I'VE GOT SOME SOME MEMBERS THAT CAME WITH ME, BUT WE'VE HAD CONVERSATIONS ABOUT WHAT WE CAN DO TO KIND OF

[01:15:01]

AND THAT'S ONE IDEA AND IT MAY BE A QUESTION FOR STAFF, MADAM CHAIR, BUT MAYBE, SIR, YOU MAY BE ABLE TO ANSWER IN THAT WHAT IS A COMPATIBLE PARTNER USE FOR YOU? MAYBE IT'S FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE, BUT WHAT WOULD BE IN THIS RESPECTIVE BECAUSE WHAT'S AT HAND NOT ISN'T NECESSARILY THE ENTIRETY, BUT THIS IS SOMETHING WE DISCUSSED AT LENGTH AT THE PUBLIC MEETING.

PEOPLE WANT TO KNOW WHO'S GOING TO BE THERE.

THEY WANT TO KNOW IF WE'RE GOING TO HAVE STRIP CLUBS.

THEY WANT TO KNOW IF WE'RE GOING TO HAVE VAPE SHOPS.

THEY WANT TO KNOW IF WE'RE GOING TO HAVE LOUD, OBNOXIOUS TYPE OF BUSINESSES.

AND I'M GOING TO TELL YOU ABSOLUTELY NOT.

I'M NOT AN OWNER OF THIS PROJECT.

I'M NOT AN OWNER OF THE COMPANY THAT'S GOING TO BE THE GROCERY STORE THERE.

BUT I AM A REAL ESTATE DEVELOPER WHO HAS BEEN WORKING IN THIS AREA FOR CLOSE TO 30 YEARS.

AND AND I HAVE FOUND THIS GROUP OF PEOPLE TO BE ABOVE BOARD, ETHICAL AND FAMILY ORIENTED MORE THAN MOST.

I HAVE ONLY SAY, A HANDFUL IN THE LAST 30 YEARS OF PEOPLE I WORK WITH AGAIN AND AGAIN BECAUSE I LIKE THEIR VALUES AND I RESPECT THEM AS PEOPLE AND THEY'RE GOOD PEOPLE.

THIS FAMILY, THIS IS A FAMILY RUN BUSINESS.

TWO GENERATIONS IN THE GROCERY STORE BUSINESS THAT HAVE EMIGRATED FROM THE DOMINICAN REPUBLIC, THAT HAVE BEEN HERE IN AMERICA.

THE PARENTS HAVE BEEN HERE 40 YEARS.

THE THIS THIS PRINCIPAL PARTNER HERE IS A GENTLEMAN NAMED PETER HERNANDEZ, APPROXIMATELY 40 YEARS OLD.

HE'S BEEN IN THE GROCERY STORE BUSINESS SINCE HE WAS ABOUT 15.

AND HE STARTED THE ONE ON PALM BAY ROAD APPROXIMATELY 17 YEARS AGO AND BUILT IT FROM A CORNER WITH HIS DAD'S, YOU KNOW, GUIDANCE OVER THE YEARS.

BUT BASICALLY, HE'S BEEN AN INDEPENDENT BUSINESSMAN FOR THE LAST 15 YEARS AND HAS DONE A PHENOMENAL JOB.

I WORKED WITH HIM CLOSELY ON THE DESIGN BUILD CONCEPT IN ROCKLEDGE.

WE BROUGHT IN OUTSIDE PROFESSIONALS FROM UNFI, THE BIG THE BIG SUPERMARKET CONSULTING GROUP OUT OF MINNESOTA.

WE DID NOT USE OUR CONSTRUCTION TEAM.

WE EMPLOYED LOCAL PEOPLE TO BUILD IT AND LOCAL PEOPLE TO DESIGN IT.

RICK, RICK KERN, OUR LOCAL CIVIL ENGINEERS HERE IN THE AUDIENCE.

BUT HE DOES HE DID THE CIVIL ENGINEERING FOR THE LAST PROJECT.

WE ALSO, 4 OR 5 YEARS AGO ATTEMPTED TO DO ONE ON MALABAR ROAD FURTHER WEST.

MANY OF YOU WERE HERE, SOME OF YOU WEREN'T.

BUT THAT DIDN'T HAPPEN.

DIDN'T HAPPEN FOR A LOT OF REASONS.

BUT I THINK THE SMARTEST DECISION WAS WE PUT OUR HEADS TOGETHER AND DECIDE IT WAS TOO PREMATURE, TOO FAR WEST TO BE SUPPORTABLE BY THE POPULATION.

THIS ONE IS CLOSER TO I-95.

IT'S IN A MORE TRAFFICKED AREA.

AND AND WE FEEL IT WOULD BE A BETTER, BETTER WIN WIN FOR THE COMMUNITY, SERVE THE COMMUNITY BETTER, FULL RESPECT FOR YOUR YOUR SUMMARY HERE AND EVERYTHING YOU SHARED.

JUST TO ASK DIRECTLY WHAT WOULD BE A COMPATIBLE PARTNER USE NEXT DOOR AND WITHIN COMMERCIAL.

SO I WILL DEFER TO STAFF.

BUT WHAT IS THE DREAM FROM YOU GUYS PERSPECTIVE? MY PREFERRED IS A HARDWARE STORE, HARDWARE TYPE OF THING.

UNDERSTOOD. I'M ACTIVELY BEEN SOLICITING SOMEONE LIKE THAT FOR A COUPLE OF YEARS.

WE MIGHT BE GETTING ONE IN ROCKLEDGE AS WELL.

SO THAT'S THAT'S YOUR SENTIMENT.

AND THEN I WILL DEFER TO STAFF IF YOU ALLOW ME, MADAM CHAIR, TO UNDERSTAND IT'S SWITCHING THE FUTURE LAND USE TO COMMERCIAL.

SO THEREFORE, AS A PROPERTY OWNER, THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO DO WHATEVER FUTURE LAND USE OF COMMERCIAL GRANTS.

RIGHT. WHAT'S SOME EXAMPLES? SO. SO AS FAR AS COMMERCIAL, THEY CAN DO A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT THINGS.

LIKE YOU HAVE THE MEDICAL THAT'S NEXT DOOR THAT'S ALREADY ESTABLISHED, RIGHT? AND YOU HAVE OTHER SMALL OUTPARCELS YOU HAVE AN EXAMPLE OF BREWSTER'S, WHICH IS ALSO COMMERCIAL ACROSS THE STREET.

SO YOU HAVE THERE'S AN EXAMPLE OF PROFESSIONAL MEDICAL OFFICE AND AN EXAMPLE OF AN ICE CREAM SHOP.

THOSE ARE TWO THINGS THAT YOU HAVE AN EYE DOCTOR'S OFFICE.

THERE'S THERE'S MANY, MANY OPPORTUNITIES THAT I DON'T THINK THAT THE CURRENT PROPERTY OWNER HAS WILL SUMMARIZE HIS NEFARIOUS INTENTS WITH THE USES.

BUT ARE SOME OF THE TO SPEAK OBJECTIVELY ARE SOME OF THE USES THAT THE RESIDENTS FEAR ARE THEY LEGITIMATE USES WITHIN THE FUTURE LAND USE OF COMMERCIAL? THEY ARE NOT. NOT THE ONES THAT WERE AT LEAST ITEMIZED IN THE ITEM THAT I READ.

OKAY. AND THAT WHICH IS ON THE RECORD AND IS THE EMAIL FROM THE GENTLEMAN YOU ARE MR. NEWTON. YES. MR. NEWTON. SO, OKAY, THAT HELPS ME UNDERSTAND.

OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

AND AGAIN, I DO APPRECIATE YOUR SUMMARY TO SIR.

I JUST WANTED TO BE VERY I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE IT'S VERY CLEAR THAT WE DON'T WE DON'T WANT ANYTHING THAT'S GOING TO BE A PROBLEM FOR THE COMMUNITY OR INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE GROCERY STORE. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR CONSIDERATION.

WE OPEN THE FLOOR. THERE ARE TWO CORRESPONDENTS IN THE FILE ON THIS CASE AND THE.

CANYON ZONING CASE.

NOW I'LL OPEN THE FLOOR.

DOES ANYONE WISH TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS REQUEST? MR. BATTEN. GILBERTON 586 OCEAN SPRAY STREET SOUTHWEST.

[01:20:01]

JUST MAKES SENSE THAT THAT'S WHAT'S GOING TO BE HAPPENING.

THAT'S WHY I'M IN FAVOR OF IT.

WHEN I WAS LOOKING AT GOING THROUGH THE PLAN, THOUGH, I NOTICED THAT THE EXITS WERE BEFORE THE ENTRANCE OF THE OF THE ESTABLISHMENT.

SO THAT'S GOING TO GENERATE A CRISS CROSS OF TRAFFIC.

OKAY. BUT I'M JUST WONDERING IF THEY COULD POSSIBLY BE ADDRESSING THAT.

AND THE ONLY REASON I'M SAYING THAT IS WE CAN LOOK AT IT NOW.

WE HAVE A CHANCE IN THE FUTURE TO SOLVE IT.

AND THAT LEADS TO THE NEXT ONE WITH THE NEW COFFEE SHOP DIRECTLY TO THE EAST.

IF THAT'S WHAT COMES IN UNDER THE PROPERTY.

YOU JUST CHANGED THE ZONING ON.

IF THAT COFFEE SHOP, COFFEE SHOP TO THE EAST GETS BUILT AND IT ENDS UP LIKE THE OTHER MALABAR COFFEE SHOP, THE TRAFFIC IN THE MORNING WILL NOT ALLOW THE VEHICLES BECAUSE IT'LL BE TOO CLOSE TO THE ENTRANCE OF THIS OF THE GROCERY STORE, BE TOO CLOSE TO THE ENTRANCE FOR THEM TO COME IN FROM WHERE THEIR ENTRANCE IS.

RIGHT. SO.

MY BASIC STATEMENT IS WILL THAT COFFEE SHOP CREATE A TRAFFIC BACKUP IMPACTING THEIR ABILITY TO GET THE THEIR CLIENTS IN AND OUT? THEY DID ANSWER THE QUESTION, ARE THEY PLANNING ANYTHING ON WATERMAN? AND THEY SAID THEY'RE NOT PLANNING ANYTHING ON WATERMAN, WHICH IS ALSO A PLUS FOR WE WANT THAT COMMERCIAL NOT HAVING TO IMPACT ON LOCAL RESIDENTS.

SO WE NEED THE COMMERCIAL.

THIS IS COMMERCIAL ROAD.

I JUST MAYBE TAKE A LOOK AT HOW THEY'RE GOING TO GET IN AND OUT AND THE POTENTIAL WITH THAT COFFEE SHOP RIGHT NEXT DOOR.

THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE IN FAVOR OF THIS REQUEST? HE OPPOSED. BACK.

MY NAME IS LYNN DEFFENBAUGH.

I LIVE AT 521 WATERMAN LANE, SOUTHEAST PALM BAY.

AND IF YOU CAN BRING THE MAP BACK UP.

BUT I SEE HE'S NOT HERE RIGHT NOW.

I'M ADJACENT.

I'M ADJACENT TO THIS PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH AND JUST EAST OF THAT QUESTIONABLE LITTLE TRACT COMING DOWN TO WATERMAN LANE.

SO I'M RIGHT THERE IN THAT CORNER, JUST THAT LITTLE CORNER.

ANYWAY, THAT'S WHERE I'M AT.

AND I'M ONLY GOING TO SPEAK TO THE FUTURE LAND USE CONSIDERATIONS HERE.

AND ONE OF THOSE IS THE CONSERVATION ELEMENT.

I NOTED STAFF SAID THAT THERE'S NO SCRUB JAY HABITAT THERE, BUT I HAVE NOT PERSONALLY SEEN HIS BURROW RECENTLY.

BUT I KNOW THERE IS A GOPHER TORTOISE THAT VISITS OUR YARD FOR FEEDING AND I'VE SEEN HIM COME AND GO FROM AND INTO THIS PARCEL OF LAND.

SO HOPEFULLY THERE WILL BE A GOPHER TORTOISE STUDY REQUIRED PRIOR TO ANY ACTUAL DEVELOPMENT GOING IN THERE AND DESTROYING GOPHER TORTOISE HABITAT.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM THE FLOOR? AND. APPLICANT RESPOND.

THANK YOU FOR THE COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE.

I APPRECIATE THOSE.

WE ARE AT STEP ONE OF MULTIPLE STEPS TO GO THROUGH THE PROCESS TO APPROVE AND DEVELOP A PROPERTY HERE.

THE DESIGN IS VERY COSTLY.

SO ARE ALL THE REQUIRED STUDIES.

AS WE GET THROUGH THIS FIRST STEP, OF COURSE, WE'RE GOING TO TURN ON THE ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERS, THE SURVEYORS TO DO TOPOGRAPHIC SURVEYS, TREE SURVEYS, ALL THE THINGS THAT YOU NEED TO DO. BUT THEY'RE EACH AT A COST.

SO WE WANT TO GET THROUGH THESE FIRST COUPLE OF STEPS AND KNOW THAT THE PROPERTY IS LIKELY TO BE USED FOR WHAT WE WANT TO USE IT, AND WE'RE GOING TO DO ALL THE THINGS THAT ARE REQUIRED AND SATISFY ALL THE DESIGN DEPARTMENT REVIEWS THAT WE NEED TO DO AND TRY TO MAKE THIS AS COMPATIBLE AND SAFE AND AS MINIMALLY IMPACTFUL TO THE COMMUNITY AS POSSIBLE FROM THE WAY OF TRANSPORTATION.

SO WE'RE WORKING TO DO OUR BEST.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, SIR.

OR IS NOT CLOSED FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS AND BROUGHT BACK TO THE BOARD BOARD FOR DISCUSSION OR MOTION.

MOTION TO APPROVE CP 23 00015.

BY MR. WEINBERG SECOND BY MR. GOOD. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE, AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.

NEXT CASE. CPC 23 00008.

GOOD EVENING. THIS IS THE COMPANION FOR THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ONE.

THIS IS THE REZONING REQUEST AND THE APPLICANT IS MERRITT ISLAND HOLDINGS, LLC.

JOHN NEWTON IS REPRESENTING IT'S 6.43 ACRES.

IT CURRENTLY HAS A ZONING OF IU INSTITUTIONAL AND THEY ARE REQUESTING A REZONING FROM INSTITUTIONAL TO RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL, WHICH IS WHAT ALL THE SURROUNDING PROPERTY IS ON THE REST OF MALABAR ROAD.

WE HAVE ALREADY DISCUSSED HOW THEY WANT TO DESIGN AND BUILD A GROCERY STORE AS PART OF THIS REZONING.

THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE LOOKING FOR.

[01:25:01]

YOU, MISS BERNARD? DOES THE BOARD HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? YOU, THE APPLICANT, PLEASE COME FORWARD.

THANK YOU AGAIN.

AS MISS BERNARD SAID, THIS IS PART TWO OF THE REQUEST TO GET THE PROPER ZONING TO ACCOMMODATE THE GROCERY STORE.

SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE HERE FOR.

AND I WANT TO THANK THE STAFF FOR THEIR IN-DEPTH REVIEW AND SPENDING QUITE A BIT OF TIME WITH US, TRYING TO HELP US THROUGH THE UNDERSTANDING OF ALL THE STEPS NECESSARY TO DO IT.

AND HERE WE ARE.

SO LOOK FORWARD TO YOUR YOUR THOUGHTS OR QUESTIONS.

THANK YOU. MADAM CHAIR.

SIR, A QUESTION FROM THE.

OH, IT'S A IT'S ACTUALLY A GENERAL INQUIRY, SO I DON'T KNOW IF IT'LL BE THE APPLICANT THAT ANSWERS IT OR NOT, BUT AND IT MAY BE FOR THE THE CITY ATTORNEY HERSELF, BUT I'M CURIOUS TO UNDERSTAND WHAT OPTIONS EXIST WITHIN THIS CASE AND, AND WE MAY BE OUT OF TURN ENTIRELY GIVEN THIS IS A ZONING TO RESTRICT THE USE OF THAT PIECE OF LAND THAT TOUCHES THE CUL DE SAC.

IS THERE IS WOULD THIS BE THE CASE THAT WE COULD ADD THAT SORT OF RESTRICTION JUST TO GET IT CODIFIED AND MAKE SURE THAT NOTHING EVER GOES THERE? OR DID WE MISS THAT? ON THE FUTURE LAND USE, YOU COULD ADD AN ADDITIONAL SETBACK BEYOND THE REGULATIONS THAT ARE CURRENTLY IN PLACE FOR THE RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICT. THAT WOULD PROBABLY BE THE CLOSEST YOU'RE GOING TO GET TO CONSIDERING IT OPEN SPACE THAT WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN ON NECESSARILY THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN EITHER.

IT'S MORE OF A REQUEST THAT WE WOULD HAVE HAD TO HAVE A SPLIT PARCEL AT THAT POINT.

RIGHT. THAT'S WHY IT SEEMS TOO COMPLEX TO TO DO THAT WAY.

RIGHT. BUT BUT IF YEAH, IT WOULD BE PRETTY DIFFICULT.

BUT WE COULD DO AN EXTENDED SETBACK.

HOWEVER, IF THEY'RE PUTTING THAT POND ALREADY IN PLACE, THEY'RE ADHERING TO THAT EXTENDED SETBACK AND I THINK THAT WILL MEET THE INTENT.

BUT IF YOU WANT TO PUT THAT IN PLACE TO ENSURE THAT YOU COULD EXTEND THE SETBACK FURTHER.

OKAY. WHAT'S THE WHAT IS WHAT DOES THE DISTRICT CALL FOR AS FAR AS THE SETBACK? AND I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S IT'S CORRECT OR NOT TO LOOK AT THEIR SITE PLAN, BUT WHAT SETBACK ARE THEY CURRENTLY LOOKING AT? MOREOVER, WHAT DOES IT CALL FOR? CURRENTLY, IT REQUIRES A 30 FOOT REAR SETBACK.

OKAY. SO IF WE'RE TO USE THAT, MAY I INTERRUPT HER FOR A SECOND? BECAUSE THIS AFFECTS US BIG TIME.

YEAH. I DON'T THINK YOU SHOULD DO IT THAT WAY, BECAUSE YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT TAKING A UNIFORM 30 FOOT SETBACK AND ADDING IT TO THE WIDTH OF THE BACK PROPERTY.

THE STORMWATER SYSTEM HAS TO BE CLOSER TO THE THE 30 FOOT TO THE PROPERTY LINE ON THOSE BOTTOM TWO SIDES.

THAT LITTLE STRIP IS COMPLETELY DIFFERENT, RIGHT? YOU I DON'T WANT TO LOSE 30FT OF STORMWATER SETBACK IS NOT A SIGNIFICANT PERCENTAGE OF STORMWATER.

SURE. SURE. SETBACK WILL NOT INFLUENCE YOUR STORMWATER.

IT'S ONLY FOR THE BUILDING SETBACK.

OKAY. SO ANYTHING THAT YOU WANT TO PLACE, FOR INSTANCE, GREEN LANDSCAPING INSIDE THAT AREA, EVEN A FENCE CAN GO INSIDE THE SETBACK.

RICK MAY ASK MY CIVIL ENGINEER IF THAT'S CORRECT.

CORRECT. THANK YOU.

SO WHERE'S THE STORMWATER GO IN THIS VISUAL IN THAT SOUTHERN RECTANGLE THAT GOES THE FULL WIDTH? FOR EXAMPLE, THEY HAVE OVER 140FT SETBACK RIGHT NOW.

SO IT'S A 30 FOOT MINIMUM.

I'M NOT SURE WHAT YOU'D NECESSARILY.

ARE THEY GOING TO PUT WATER INTO THE I MEAN, IT'S THEIR PROPERTY, BUT ARE THEY GOING TO PUT WATER INTO THE HERE THAT I'M CIRCLING IS THE RETENTION POND FROM JUST THIS POINT THE CLOSEST REAR PORTION OF THE PROPERTY.

THEY'RE SAYING THE REAR ALLEY, NOT EVEN THE BUILDING ITSELF, BUT THE REAR ALLEY WOULD BE 140FT, THAT THE BUILDING WOULD BE ANOTHER 40.

SO IT'S CLOSE TO 200FT AWAY FROM THE REAR PROPERTY LINE.

THE NEAREST REAR.

YOU'D ALSO BE CONSIDERING THIS PORTION, WHICH IS MORE EXTENDED.

SO WE'RE TALKING MORE LIKE 200 TO 250FT AWAY TO BE ABLE TO GET THAT AREA.

SO IS THERE ANY FEASIBLE WAY TO CODIFY A LACK OF USE OF THAT PARTICULAR STRIP? MAYBE IF YOU ADDED 15FT, WE'D NEED TO KNOW HOW LONG THAT IS.

TO BE HONEST, THAT'S THE PROBLEM.

IF YOU SAY 35FT RIGHT NOW, THAT MIGHT BE 30FT.

IT MIGHT ALREADY BE THAT EXTENSION THAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR.

I DON'T KNOW HOW LONG IT IS. THAT'S THE PROBLEM.

BUT I WOULD NOT NECESSARILY RECOMMEND FOR THAT BECAUSE THE DESIGN OF THEIR PROPERTY IS NOT GOING TO ALLOW THEM TO GET THROUGH THAT AREA.

WE WILL LIKE FOR A SITE PLAN, THEY WILL NOT BE ABLE TO PUT ACCESS THROUGH THAT AREA.

BECAUSE I'D BE COMMERCIAL TRAFFIC INTO IT.

YEAH, EXACTLY. SO I THINK I THINK THE STAFF HAS ADVISED US, OBVIOUSLY, EVEN IF WE WANTED TO DO IT, WE DON'T WANT TO DO COMMERCIAL TRAFFIC THROUGH THERE, BUT IT WOULDN'T HAVE BEEN A COMPATIBLE USE.

I DON'T WANT TO LOSE THE REAR SETBACK JUST BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW WHY IT MIGHT AFFECT US, BUT THAT THAT LITTLE STRIP MAY BE SOME VALUE IN THE STORMWATER PARCEL.

YOU KNOW, IT. I'M HEARING THAT THE NEIGHBORS HAVE DRAINAGE ISSUES FROM THAT CUL DE SAC THAT WE MIGHT WANT TO HELP ADDRESS THROUGH THAT LITTLE STRIP.

[01:30:03]

IT'S GOING TO GO DUE EAST TO THE TO THE STORMWATER TRACK THAT GOES ALONG THE PROPERTY ON THE EAST PROPERTY LINE.

GOTCHA. OKAY.

I'M THINKING I'M HEARING WE'RE WITHOUT OF OUR WITHOUT OF OUR REALM AND THAT IS OKAY.

I'M JUST EXPRESSING A STRONG DESIRE AND I KNOW THE NEIGHBORS HAVE IT TO NOT USE THAT PIECE.

I LIKE THAT THEIR SENTIMENT THAT IT'S NOT GOING TO BE DONE.

THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? MR. ANDERSON, I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU.

GOOD. JUST TO SIMPLIFY THINGS, COULD WE SAY THAT THERE'S NO ACCESS ON WATERMAN INSTEAD OF SAYING A SET BACK? YES, YOU CAN.

YOU CAN LIMIT ACCESS.

WE DID THAT WITH THE MITTEN.

YEAH. ANY.

THANK YOU, SIR. THANK YOU.

IS NOW CLOSED. BROUGHT BACK TO THE BOARD.

NO, SIR. YOU'VE ALREADY SPOKEN IN THIS CASE.

CASE? THIS CASE? I ASKED FOR COMMENTS FROM THE FLOOR AND NO ONE ELSE.

AFTER YOU DID NOT ASK FOR COMMENTS FROM THE FLOOR ON THE ZONING CASE YET.

AS MY QUESTION TO THE APPLICANT.

MADAM CHAIR. I'M SORRY.

HE HASN'T HAD A CHANCE. YOU'RE CORRECT.

I WOULD LIKE TO. OKAY.

THE FIRST GENTLEMAN IN THE.

I'M SORRY. I'M JUST SENSITIVE TO POINTS OF ORDER.

MY NAME IS STILL LYNN DIFFENBAUGH.

I STILL LIVE AT THE SAME 521 WATERMAN LANE AND REZONING A SIX AND A HALF ACRE PARCEL OF LAND THAT EXTENDS DEEPLY INTO RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS.

IT'S NOT SURROUNDED BY COMMERCIAL THAT'S RESIDENTIAL.

ON THE BACK HALF OF THAT PROPERTY IS NOT TO BE TAKEN LIGHTLY.

HOWEVER, THE STAFF REPORT ACCOMPANYING THIS REQUEST READS LIKE A RUBBER STAMP SET OF BOILER COPY PASTE RESPONSES TO THE ORDINANCE REQUIRED ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION.

BUT INSTEAD OF ADDRESSING EACH OF THE FOUR ITEMS LIKE I DID PREVIOUSLY, I'M GOING TO FOCUS ON ITEM NUMBER TWO, THE EFFECT ON THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES.

IF YOU LOOK AT THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP IN YOUR AGENDA, YOU CAN EASILY SEE THAT THIS PROPERTY DOES ABUT MALABAR ROAD ON THE NORTH.

BUT STAFF REPORT FAILED TO HIGHLIGHT THE FACT THAT OVER HALF OF THE INVOLVED AREA ABUTS EXISTING RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITIES.

AND IT'S NOT JUST ALONG ONE SIDE, BUT THE PARCEL EXTENDS OVER HALF INTO THESE COMMUNITIES TO THE EAST, WEST AND SOUTH.

I WASN'T INVOLVED CITIZEN WHEN THIS PROPERTY WAS REZONED FROM COMMERCIAL IN THE NORTH AND RURAL RESIDENTIAL IN THE SOUTH TO THE CURRENT INSTITUTIONAL USE, A MEMORY CARE FACILITY WAS PLANNED AT THAT TIME AS A JUSTIFICATION FOR THE REZONING.

WE CAN ALL SEE THAT THAT DEVELOPMENT NEVER HAPPENED.

SO MY REQUEST TO PLANNING AND ZONING IS THAT IF THIS REZONING IS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL, THAT THE RECOMMENDATION BE MADE CONDITIONAL ON THE SMALL GROCERY STORE STAFF'S WORDS, NOT MINE DEVELOPMENT ACTUALLY COMING TO FRUITION IN SOME REASONABLE TIMEFRAME.

AND IF THE DEVELOPMENT DOES NOT OCCUR THAT THE LAND USE AND ZONING REVERT BACK TO THE PUBLIC SEMIPUBLIC AND INSTITUTIONAL USE IN THE COMMUNITY MEETING AND AGAIN HERE TONIGHT, THE PRESENTERS MENTIONED THAT THRIFTY HAD ANOTHER PARCEL OF LAND REZONED TO COMMERCIAL SOMEPLACE FURTHER WEST ON MALABAR ROAD AND CHOSE NOT TO DEVELOP THERE. THAT ZONING, OF COURSE, IS STILL COMMERCIAL EVEN WITHOUT THEIR DEVELOPMENT.

I DO NOT WANT TO SEE THAT HAPPENING AGAIN HERE.

IF THE DEVELOPMENT DOESN'T OCCUR, REVERT THE ZONING TO INSTITUTIONAL USE, WHICH IS LESS OF A POSSIBLE FUTURE IMPACT TO THE SURROUNDING RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS.

THERE IS A PRECEDENT FOR THIS REQUEST.

WHEN THE PROPERTY THAT IS NOW CORAL QUAY, IMMEDIATELY SOUTH AND WEST OF THIS PARCEL, WAS REZONED FROM RURAL RESIDENTIAL TO SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL ESTATES.

CITY COUNCIL, ON THE ADVICE OF THE CITY ATTORNEY, MADE THAT REZONING CONDITIONAL ON THE DEVELOPER BRINGING BACK AN APPROVED SITE PLAN TO THE CITY, MATCHING THE INTENT AS STATED IN THE REZONING REQUEST.

FAILURE TO GET A SITE PLAN APPROVED WOULD HAVE REVERTED THE ZONING AUTOMATICALLY BACK TO RURAL RESIDENTIAL.

A STRONG MOTIVATION FOR COMPLETING THE DEVELOPMENT AS THEY'RE PRESENTING IT.

I THEREFORE REQUEST THAT THIS ZONING REQUEST, IF APPROVED FOR IF RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL, BE RECOMMENDED WITH THAT REVERSION TO INSTITUTIONAL USE IF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT FALLS THROUGH.

THIS WILL PROTECT THE IMPACTED ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS FROM WHATEVER FUTURE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT MIGHT RIDE THE COATTAILS OF THIS REZONING REQUEST.

IF THRIFTY CHOOSES NOT TO DEVELOP THERE.

THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO SPEAK, MA'AM?

[01:35:22]

I JUST WANT TO BRING UP SOME POINTS THAT NEED TO BE CONSIDERED.

AND I'M JUST GOING TO START WITH SOME COMPARISONS FIRST.

THE THRIFTY ON PALM BAY ROAD IS LOCATED ON 1.85 ACRES, ROUGHLY 75 PARKING PLACES, SQUARE FOOT, ROUGHLY 17,000.

THE PROPOSED LOCATION IS A LITTLE OVER SIX ACRES, 210 PARKING PLACES, A TOTAL OF ABOUT 45,000FT².

SO IN ALL ASPECTS, THAT'S ABOUT THREE TIMES THE SIZE OF WHAT WE SEE ON PALM BAY ROAD.

IT WAS STATED THAT THRIFTY ON PALM BAY ROAD HAS AN AVERAGE OF 800 TO 1000 TRANSACTIONS PER DAY, RECEIVES ABOUT 10 TO 15 DELIVERY TRUCKS PER DAY MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY, FIVE ON SATURDAY. WITH THE PROPOSED LOCATION BEING THREE TIMES THAT, ONE MUST ASK, CAN WE EXPECT THERE TO BE MORE THAN 800 TO 1000 TRANSACTIONS PER DAY? ANYONE EXPANDING A BUSINESS WOULD CERTAINLY HOPE THAT TO BE THE CASE.

COULD THAT LEAD TO THE POSSIBILITY OF MORE THAN 10 TO 15 TRUCKS A DAY, ESPECIALLY AROUND THE HOLIDAYS? AGAIN, ANYONE EXPANDING A BUSINESS WOULD LIKE TO SEE AN INCREASE IN TRUCK DELIVERIES AS THAT INDICATES THAT THEIR BUSINESS IS THRIVING.

WHAT ABOUT THAT RENTAL SPACE THAT WILL BE AVAILABLE TO OTHER BUSINESSES YET TO BE DETERMINED? WILL THOSE BUSINESSES BRING IN THEIR OWN CLIENTELE SEPARATE FROM THRIFTY? IF THE BUSINESSES ARE OPERATING CORRECTLY AND DOING WELL, THEN THE ANSWER IS YES.

THAT WOULD MEAN ADDITIONAL VEHICLE AND FOOT TRAFFIC WITH ADDITIONAL DELIVERY TRUCKS EITHER DAILY OR WEEKLY, ALL DEPENDING ON THE TYPE OF BUSINESS THAT IS A LOT OF NOISE THROUGHOUT THE DAY THAT WILL BE FORCED UPON THE SURROUNDING HOMES WEST, EAST AND SOUTH SIDES OF THAT LOT IN QUESTION.

EIGHT FOOT WALL WILL NOT DO MUCH FOR SIGHTS OR SOUNDS, DEPENDING ON THE ELEVATION OF THE FOUNDATION, THE HEIGHT OF THE VARYING TRUCKS, WHICH ARE ANYWHERE FROM 8 TO 13FT TALL, PLUS THE 6 TO 10 LARGE COOLERS THAT WILL BE RUNNING CONSISTENTLY ON THE BACK SIDE, FACING THE PROPERTIES ALL AROUND.

WHAT ABOUT THE SAFETY AND PRIVACY FOR THE SURROUNDING HOMES, ESPECIALLY THE TWO STORY HOMES THAT WOULD BE DIRECTLY ADJACENT? IT WAS STATED THAT THEY WOULD WORK TO POSITION CAMERAS SO AS NOT TO BE VIEWING HOMES, BUT IN THE PRESENCE OF A VERY HIGHLY PUBLICLY TRAFFICKED AREA SUCH AS THRIFTY, NO ONE CAN ENSURE THE PRIVACY OF THE SURROUNDING HOMES, ESPECIALLY THE TWO STORY HOMES AND THE CHILDREN WITHIN THEM.

TRAFFIC. IT WAS STATED THAT THE PROPOSED THRIFTY WOULD NOT ATTRACT ANY MORE TRAFFIC THAN WHAT ALREADY GOES EAST AND WEST ON MALABAR ROAD.

BUT THAT IS SIMPLY NOT TRUE AND MISLEADING TO THE NEIGHBORING RESIDENTS.

OPENING WEEKEND OF THE CUCINA CAFE, WHICH IS OWNED BY MR. HERNANDEZ, WHO IS OWNED THRIFTY.

THERE WAS WELL OVER 100 PEOPLE THAT BROWSED THROUGH THE PLAZA VERBALIZING THAT THEY CAME FOR THE CAFE BUT WANTED TO SEE WHAT ELSE WAS THERE BECAUSE THEY'D NEVER BEEN INSIDE THE PLAZA BEFORE. THAT WAS JUST OPENING WEEKEND.

CURRENTLY, IT CAN BE DIFFICULT TO EXIT FROM GREEN ACRE DRIVE TO MALABAR ROAD.

THE EXTRA TRAFFIC THAT THRIFTY WILL BRING WILL MAKE IT MORE CHALLENGING.

THE PLAN IS GREAT, BUT THE LOCATION WHICH DOES ENCROACH UPON WELL-ESTABLISHED NEIGHBORHOODS IS NOT UTILIZING ONLY THE FRONT THREE ACRES CLOSEST TO MALABAR ROAD THAT IS IN LINE WITH THE OTHER ESTABLISHED BUSINESSES WOULD PREVENT THE DIRECT INTRUSION INTO THE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT THE CURRENT PLAN ALLOWS FOR.

MEANING TO WRAP IT UP.

I AM. THERE ARE MANY REASONS AS TO WHY COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT OUGHT NOT TO BE IMPOSED ON AND WITHIN RESIDENTIAL AREAS.

THERE IS CURRENTLY A FIVE AND A HALF ACRE LAND OF VACANT COMMERCIAL, JUST 1.3 ACRES FROM THAT PROPOSED SITE ON MALABAR ROAD, JUST NORTH OF OR ON MINTON ROAD, JUST NORTH OF MALABAR.

THAT WOULD BE LESS IMPACTFUL TO ANY ONE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THEREFORE PROVIDE A MORE POSITIVE IMPACT TO THE COMMUNITY AS A WHOLE.

THANK YOU. ANY MORE COMMENTS FROM THE FLOOR.

GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS ROGER CARTER AND I RESIDE AT 520 WATERMAN LANE.

I AM AGAINST SUCH A REZONING ACCORDING TO YOUR CODE.

THE PURPOSE OF THE RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL DISTRICT SHALL BE TO LOCATE AND ESTABLISH AREAS WITHIN THE CITY WHICH ARE UNIQUELY SUITED FOR COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT, BUT WHICH ARE TRANSITIONING FROM RESIDENTIAL TO OTHER NON COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT TO COMMERCIAL USE.

THE PROPERTY THE SIX AREA PROPERTY IN QUESTION.

DOES NOTRILLIONEPRESENT AN AREA THAT SERVES AS A TRANSITION, AT LEAST NOT IN MY DEFINITION.

WHEN YOU TRANSITION FROM FROM RESIDENTIAL TO COMMERCIAL, YOU ARE LEAVING.

RESIDENTIAL. COMMERCIAL IS FURTHER UP.

[01:40:02]

THIS SIX AREA, SIX ACRE PLOT EXTENDS DEEP INTO RESIDENTIAL AREA.

AGAIN, THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION IS PART OF A WELL ESTABLISHED RESIDENTIAL AREA AND DOESN'T FALL UNDER THE DESCRIPTION OF A TRANSITIONAL AREA.

IT'S MY REQUEST, THEREFORE, THAT PLANNING AND ZONING VOTE AGAINST SUCH AN AMENDMENT.

THANKS FOR YOUR TIME. ONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK? THANK YOU. I BELIEVE IN OUR PUBLIC MEETING AND IN MY COMMENTS TO TO STAFF.

WE'VE WE'VE ADDRESSED ALL OF THESE CONCERNS.

AND AND WHILE I UNDERSTAND THEY BACK UP TO COMMERCIAL, I WOULD VENTURE TO SAY I BET YOU THE COMMERCIAL WAS THERE FIRST BEFORE THE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS WERE EVER BUILT.

SURE. THE PLAN WAS THE CITY WAS PLANNED WITH THAT AS A COMMERCIAL TRACT OF LAND WAY BEFORE THESE MORE RECENT SUBDIVISIONS WERE EVER PUT IN.

IT'S LIKE SAYING I BUILT MY HOUSE NEXT TO AN AIRPORT.

NOW, WHEN YOU START FLYING AIRPLANES, THE COMMERCIAL IS THERE.

WE'RE NOT GOING TO GO THROUGH THE RESIDENTIAL TO GET TO THIS COMMERCIAL.

PEOPLE WILL GO OUT ONTO MALABAR ROAD AND COME IN FROM MALABAR ROAD.

THEY DO NOT COME THROUGH THE RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION TO GET TO THIS LOCATION.

AND I WANT TO POINT THAT OUT.

BUT I THINK WE ARE GOING TO DO OUR BEST TO MINIMIZE NOISE.

ABSOLUTELY. TO NOT HAVE CAMERAS FACING ANYBODY'S YARDS OVER THEIR FENCES LOOKING IN THEIR BACKYARDS.

WE WILL PUT WALLS OF AN ADEQUATE HEIGHT WHERE NECESSARY TO SCREEN AND TO PROTECT THE PEOPLE WHO ARE ON THE LEFT AND RIGHT OF THE THE BUSINESS SIDE OF THE BUSINESS. THE SOUTH END IS SO FAR AWAY THAT I DON'T THINK THEY'LL EVER HEAR WHAT WE DO.

SO I APPRECIATE THE THOUGHTS, BUT WE WILL CONSIDER THEM ALL.

THANK YOU. YOU.

LAW IS NOW CLOSED, IS BROUGHT BACK TO THE BOARD.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION OR MOTION? YEAH. YOU KNOW, PERSONALLY, I'VE NEVER BEEN INTO INSIDE A THRIFTY MARKET, BUT IT DOES HAVE A VERY LOYAL FOLLOWING.

I'M FAMILIAR WITH THE WITH THE WITH THE FAMILY THAT OWNS THIS.

THEY'VE BEEN REALLY, REALLY GOOD CITIZENS OF BOMBAY AND RESPONSIVE TO ANYTHING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL HAS ASKED THEM TO DO.

YOU KNOW, MALABAR ROAD IS IS CLEARLY A COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR.

IT IS A COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR.

IT WILL CONTINUE TO BE SO AND CONTINUE TO BE DEVELOPED.

SO MOTION TO APPROVE CPC 23 00008.

MOTION A SECOND BY MR. GOOD. MADAM CHAIR, BEFORE WE TO VOTE UPON THE MOTION, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO UNDERSTAND IF THE REST OF THE BOARD HAS ANY APPETITE FOR WHAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT, ABOUT RECOMMENDING A RESTRICTION TO WATERMAN AS A CONDITION OF THE APPROVAL.

I KNOW IT WOULD TAKE RESTATING THE MOTION, BUT I HAVE A HIGH INTEREST IN THAT, SO I JUST WANTED TO MENTION THAT AND MAKE SURE PERHAPS IT WASN'T AN OVERSIGHT OR.

FOR WEINBERG, WOULD YOU? LET ME RESPOND TO THAT.

IT'S REALLY NOT NECESSARY THAT THE DEVELOPER HAS ALREADY SAID THAT THERE WILL BE NO ACCESS TO WATERMAN.

SO THAT'S ON THE RECORD, CORRECT? MR. ANDERSON? IF YOU WANT IT TO BE COMMITTED TO YOU, YOU'D HAVE TO MAKE IT INSIDE THE MOTION.

THE OTHER ALTERNATIVE ASPECT OF IT IS THAT GOING THROUGH A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD FROM A COMMERCIAL SETTING IS AGAINST THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

SO IT WOULDN'T BE IN CONFORMANCE WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, BUT TO ENSURE THAT IT IS STUCK WITH THE ZONING, YOU COULD ALWAYS RESTRICT ACCESS FOR THE ZONING.

I HAVE NO PROBLEM DOING THAT.

WE NEED MR. GOOD TO TO REMOVE HIS SECOND.

OKAY. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE CPC 23 00008 WITH NO INGRESS OR EGRESS ONTO WATERMAN DRIVE.

MOTION. AND A SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR? AYE, AYE.

ANY OPPOSED MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.

NEXT CASE.

U. 23 00010.

ENGLER. GOOD EVENING.

I'M KIMBERLY HAGLER, GIS PLANNER.

I'M BRINGING YOU 2310 TO YOU TONIGHT.

THE APPLICANT IS CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING GROUP REPRESENTATIVE JAKE WISE.

LOCATION IS SOUTH MALABAR ROAD, SOUTHEAST AND WEST OF VELOUR DRIVE SOUTHEAST.

SPECIFIC ADDRESS IS 920 MALABAR ROAD SOUTHEAST, AND THE SIZE IS APPROXIMATELY 44.93 ACRES AND ZONING IS COMMERCIAL.

THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CONDITIONAL USE AMENDMENT TO THE EXISTING CONDITIONAL USE RESOLUTION 20 1948 FROM A TWO STOREY, 64,000

[01:45:08]

IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 185 .0439 OF PALM BAY CODE OF ORDINANCES.

THE ORIGINAL CONDITIONAL USE WAS GRANTED BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON DECEMBER 5TH, 2019.

RESOLUTION 20, 1948.

THE PROJECT SITE PLAN WAS APPROVED ON APRIL 30TH, 2021.

A REQUEST BY THE DEVELOPER TO AMEND THE APPROVED SITE PLAN FOR THE ADDITION OF A THIRD STOREY WAS APPROVED ON OCTOBER 1ST, 2021.

HOWEVER, IT WAS NEVER AMENDED TO THE CONDITIONAL USE.

THE DEVELOPER FAILED TO COMMENCE CONSTRUCTION WITHIN ONE YEAR THRESHOLD REQUIRED, THEREFORE NULLIFYING THE CONDITIONAL USE.

SO THIS PROPOSED AMENDMENT WILL SERVE TO UPDATE AS WELL AS RENEW THE CONDITIONAL USE FOR THE SELF STORAGE PROJECT, WHICH IS CURRENTLY UNDER DEVELOPMENT.

AND RECOMMENDATION STAFF RECOMMENDS 2310 FOR APPROVAL.

THANK YOU. DOES THE BOARD HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? MR. WEINBERG. MISS HAGLER.

THE STAFF REPORT.

THE SUMMARY OF THE REQUEST SAYS THAT THE THIS CONDITIONAL USE AMENDMENT IS TO INCREASE FROM A TWO STORY 64,000 SQUARE FOOT SELF STORAGE FACILITY WITH APPROXIMATELY 600 UNITS TO YOU'RE GOING TO INCREASE IT ONE AND A HALF TIMES TO A THREE STORY 96,000 SQUARE FOOT SELF STORAGE UNIT WITH 612 UNITS.

IS THAT CORRECT? THEY'RE ONLY ADDING 12 UNITS.

CORRECT. WHEN THEY FIRST GOT THEIR RECEIVED THEIR CONDITIONAL USE, THEY WERE ESTIMATING HOW MANY UNITS THEY WOULD HAVE.

NOW THEY KNOW HOW MANY THEY HAVE COMMITTED TO.

CORRECT. DOES THIS AFFECT ANY OF THE REQUIRED PARKING SPACES? NO, IT DOES NOT TRIGGER ANY OTHER CHANGES ON BECAUSE THEY WERE ALREADY BECAUSE OF THE MANY SPACES OVER AS IT WAS.

OKAY. THANK YOU. THE QUESTION.

THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.

THE BUILDING IS CURRENTLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION.

AND IS IT BEING BUILT TO THE SPECIFICATIONS OF THREE STORIES RIGHT NOW? AT THIS POINT, THE FOUNDATION.

SO AT THIS POINT IN TIME, THERE HAS BEEN A STOP WORK ORDER PLACED ON THE THIRD STORY, CONSTRUCTION BEYOND THAT OF BEING SECURED.

SO WE ARE ALLOWING FOR THEM TO SECURE THE THIRD FLOOR.

SO IT IS NOT A PUBLIC HAZARD OR NUISANCE, BUT ANYTHING BEYOND THAT ON THE THIRD FLOOR IS CURRENTLY PROHIBITED UNDER A STOP WORK ORDER.

THEY ARE ALLOWED TO CONTINUE SITE DEVELOPMENT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THEIR APPROVED SITE PLAN THAT WAS ORIGINALLY FOR THE 64,000 TO 2 STORY BUILDING.

OKAY. SO THEY NEVER, NEVER BROUGHT FORTH A SITE PLAN THAT HAD A THIRD STORY.

SO UNFORTUNATELY, WHAT HAPPENED WAS THERE WAS AN OVERREACH BY A PREVIOUS GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIRECTOR THAT HAD ALLOWED FOR A REVISION TO APPROVE PLANS TO EXTEND THIS BUILDING TO A THIRD STORY WHEN IT SHOULD HAVE COME BACK AS A CONDITIONAL USE, BECAUSE THE CONDITIONAL USE ONLY ALLOTTED FOR TWO STORIES IN THE FIRST PLACE.

SO IT WAS A LITTLE OVERREACH FROM OUR DEPARTMENT TRYING TO BE DEVELOPER FRIENDLY.

WE HAVE RECOGNIZED THAT OVERSIGHT DURING OUR REVIEW OF SUBSEQUENT PLANS AND UNDER NEW DIRECTION.

OF COURSE, WE WANT THIS TO GO THROUGH THE CORRECT PROCESS SO THAT YOU ALL SEE IT BEFORE YOU AND MAKE THAT DETERMINATION YOURSELVES.

THE THIRD FLOOR EXISTS RIGHT NOW, BUT IT'S NOT BEING FINISHED AND IT'S NOT ALLOWED TO BE WORKED ON.

SO ALL THIS THE UNIQUE SITUATION AT HAND IS.

YES, THAT IS CORRECT. BUT AT THE SAME TIME, THE SITE PLAN ITSELF, OR THE CONDITIONAL USE WAS TO TWO STORIES.

IT WAS IRREGARDLESS OF WHAT? TWO STORIES PARTICULARLY.

BUT THEY CANNOT UTILIZE ALL THREE STORIES AS STORAGE IF THEY WANTED TO.

FOR INSTANCE, SIMILAR TO WHAT WE HAVE ADDED TO OUR TEXTUAL AMENDMENTS A FEW WEEKS AGO FOR OUR STORAGE UNITS, PUT RETAIL ON THE FIRST FLOOR.

THEY DON'T NEED TO IN THIS CIRCUMSTANCE BECAUSE THEIR SETBACK IS FAR ENOUGH.

BUT IF THEY WANTED TO, THEY COULD, FOR INSTANCE, PUT RETAIL ON THE FIRST OR ON THE THIRD FLOOR OFFICE SPACE ON THE THIRD FLOOR AND STILL UTILIZE ALL THREE LEVELS.

THEY JUST ARE NOT RIGHT NOW ALLOWED TO HAVE STORAGE FOR ALL THREE LEVELS.

THEY CAN ONLY HAVE STORAGE AND TWO STORAGE CAN BE INTO BUT IT COULD BE ANY TWO.

SO THEN THEY COULD THEORETICALLY PUSH THE STORAGE UP AND HAVE IT BE NUMBERS TWO AND THREE, AND THEN DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT ON THE BOTTOM, ALL WITHOUT THIS HAPPENING.

THEORETICALLY, HOWEVER, THE FIRST FLOOR WAS BUILT OBVIOUSLY FOR STORAGE PURPOSES ALREADY, SO I'M NOT SURE IF BUSINESS PRACTICAL, BUT SO THE THEY'RE TRYING TO PURSUE CURRENTLY THREE STORIES AND THAT'S WHAT THE CONDITIONAL USE IS FOR.

BUT IF THEY WANTED TO WORK AROUND WITH WHAT THEY CURRENTLY HAVE, THEY COULD PUT POTENTIAL OTHER USES INSIDE OF THAT THAT ARE PERMITTED IN THE DISTRICT.

UNDERSTOOD. THANK YOU FOR THAT.

AND THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR, FOR ALLOWING ME TO ASK THE QUESTION.

I'M GOING TO LOOK IN THE DIRECTION OF THE CITY ATTORNEY AND SHARE WITH YOU, MADAM CHAIR, THE BOARD AND THE CITY ATTORNEY THAT THIS MAKES ME FEEL UNCOMFORTABLE BECAUSE I FEEL AS THOUGH IT I'M TRYING AS HARD AS I CAN TO REMAIN OBJECTIVE AND UNDERSTAND IF I WOULD LIKE A THREE STORY CONDITIONAL USE WITHIN

[01:50:02]

SO IT'S SUCH SUCH A COMPLICATING FACTOR.

I'M REALLY CURIOUS HERE WHAT THE BURDEN OF CONSIDERATION AND WHERE I STAND TO BE ABLE TO CONTRIBUTE TO THIS IN THE BEST WAY.

ALTHOUGH IT'S UNUSUAL, YOU'RE OVER COMPLICATING IT.

OKAY. ALL OF THAT THAT HAPPENED.

YOU KNOW, IT'S A STAFF ISSUE.

IT WAS A CITY MANAGER ISSUE.

IT WAS ME WORKING WITH THEM TO ACTUALLY GET IT BACK ON TRACK.

BUT NOW THAT IT'S HERE, YOU'RE GOING TO LOOK AT IT AS YOU WOULD ANY OTHER CONDITIONAL USE.

DOES IT YOU KNOW, YOU'RE GOING TO LOOK AT IT.

DOES IT MAKE SENSE? IS IT COMPATIBLE TO HAVE THIS THREE STORY AT THE THREE STORIES AS FAR AS SELF STORAGE? FORGET ABOUT WHERE THEY THEY ARE BECAUSE IT DOESN'T AFFECT YOU ONE WAY OR THE OTHER.

YOU'RE NOT GOING TO GRANT IT BASED UPON IT AND YOU'RE NOT GOING TO DENY IT BASED UPON IT.

THIS ISN'T SOMETHING THAT YOU SHOULD HOLD AGAINST THEM.

SO LOOK AT IT JUST AS A PLAIN APPLICATION.

THIS IS KIND OF HISTORY ABOUT HOW WE GOT HERE, BUT IT REALLY ISN'T RELEVANT TO YOUR DECISION.

AND THERE ISN'T LIKE.

WE COULD THEORETICALLY RECOMMEND DENIAL OF THIS CONDITIONAL USE AND THAT IT'S OUR SENTIMENT THAT WE ONLY THAT THIS FACILITY SHOULD ONLY HAVE TWO STORIES OF STORAGE.

WE'RE WITHIN OUR PURVIEW TO RECOMMEND THAT, EVEN THOUGH THERE'S THIS COMPLEX BACKGROUND.

THAT'S BACKGROUND ISN'T RELEVANT TO WHAT YOU'RE DOING.

AND IF YOU FELT AND ESSENTIALLY WHAT HE'S SAYING IS IF YOU DECIDED THAT IT DIDN'T WAS NOT COMPATIBLE, IT WAS NOT CONSISTENT AND MAKE THE STANDARDS FOR THAT THIRD STORAGE.

GRANTED, YOU'RE STILL LOOKING AT THE CONDITIONAL USE STANDARDS, WHICH ARE NOT OVERLY AGGRESSIVE.

SO YOU CERTAINLY WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE ACTUALLY APPLYING THE ORDINANCE PROPERLY.

BUT IF YOU WERE ABLE TO APPLY IT AND CAME UP WITH THAT, THEN THAT WOULD BE FINE.

THEY WOULD STILL BE ABLE TO DO THREE STORIES.

IT JUST ESSENTIALLY THAT THIRD STORAGE FLOOR COULDN'T BE SELF STORAGE, BUT YOU'RE GOING TO APPLY THIS STANDARDS THE SAME WAY YOU WOULD IF NONE OF THIS HAPPENED, WHICH JUST THE LAST FOLLOW UP QUESTION ARE TO INCLUDE LOOKING AT THE SURROUNDING AREA AND UNDERSTANDING WHAT WOULD BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA.

YET CONSISTENCY WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN COMPATIBILITY.

THE ACTUAL STANDARDS IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE FOR CONDITIONAL USES THE SAME ANALYSIS YOU WOULD DO FOR ANY OTHER CONDITIONAL USE.

OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THE CLARIFICATION.

THAT MAKES ME FEEL MORE COMFORTABLE IN WHAT I'M LOOKING AT HERE.

SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? APPLICANT, PLEASE COME FORWARD.

IT'S GOING TO ASK. SO CURRENTLY IT'S THREE.

SO CURRENTLY THE BUILDING IS THREE STORIES.

CANADA COMPLETE THREE STORIES.

THE FIRST TWO STORIES ARE FULLY COMPLETE THERE, AND I BELIEVE THE APPLICANT WILL BE ABLE TO EXPLAIN THIS A LITTLE BIT BETTER.

POSSIBLY. BUT THERE ARE FIRST TWO STORIES ARE FULLY COMPLETE.

THERE ARE BASICALLY THE BONES TO THE THIRD FLOOR.

WE'RE ALLOWING THEM TO PUT A ROOF IN PLACE AND A FEW OTHER ASPECTS OF IT SO THAT IT IS NOT A PUBLIC NUISANCE OR HAZARD AT THAT POINT IN TIME, AND THAT THE MATERIALS THAT HAVE BEEN ORDERED AREN'T, YOU KNOW, ROT ROTTED OR ANYTHING.

HI, MY NAME IS. EXCUSE ME.

MY NAME IS DAVID TOM.

I'M WITH CEG. OUR OFFICE IS AT 2651 WEST EAU GALLIE BOULEVARD.

JAKE WAS NOT ABLE TO MAKE TONIGHT, SO I'M THE ENGINEER OF RECORD FOR THIS PROJECT.

IT'S BEEN GOING ON SINCE 2019.

LIKE STAFF SAID, WE DID GO THROUGH WHAT WE WERE TOLD WERE THE PROPER STEPS AT THE TIME IN 21 WHERE IT WAS REAPPROVED FOR A THREE STORY BUILDING.

SO BY NO FAULT OF OUR CLIENT OR CEG, THE THIRD FLOOR WAS APPROVED BY STAFF.

LIKE THE ATTORNEY SAID, THAT THAT'S NOT REALLY WHAT WE'RE HERE FOR.

WE'RE HERE TO DISCUSS WHETHER OR NOT THAT THIRD FLOOR CAN BE.

STORAGE. WE DID HAVE OUR CP MEETING WITH THE RESIDENTS, PRETTY MUCH THE SAME PEOPLE THAT CAME OUT THE FIRST TIME CAME OUT AGAIN.

THIS TIME WE REVIEWED WHAT HAS GONE ON.

THEY WENT THROUGH WHAT THEY APPROVED THE FIRST TIME AND WHAT THEY REQUESTED AT THE 2009 2019 CONDITIONAL USE WAS THEY WANTED SOME ADDITIONAL LANDSCAPING ALONG THEIR PROPERTY LINE AND AN EIGHT FOOT HIGH FENCE, OPAQUE FENCE WHICH WE GAVE THEM AT THIS CURRENT MEETING.

ONE OF THE RESIDENTS THAT'S OFF THE BACK CORNER, HE REQUESTED THAT WE HAVE TWO WE HAD TWO OAK TREES BY HIS PROPERTY AND HE WANTED ONE OF THOSE TO BE SWITCHED OUT WITH SOME OF THE RED CYPRESS OR RED CEDAR TREES THAT WERE DOING SO.

[01:55:07]

ONE OF THE OTHER RESIDENTS THAT CAME AND IT LOOKS LIKE NEITHER OF THEM ARE HERE THIS EVENING, BUT THEY WERE DISCUSSED. WE DISCUSSED THE SITE AND WHERE THE STORMWATER WAS GOING, NORMAL STUFF THAT WE HAD ALREADY DISCUSSED WITH THEM.

THEY JUST WANTED TO REITERATE WHAT WAS GOING ON.

THE POSSIBILITY OF OR KEEPING IT.

L3 STORAGE LEVELS IS THE LEAST AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC THAT IS GOING TO BE FOR THIS AREA.

STORAGE UNITS ARE VERY LOW TRAFFIC GENERATORS.

SO IT'S A THEY'RE GOOD NEIGHBORS, REALLY.

THEY'RE QUIET. THE THREE STORY BUILDINGS FOR STORAGE IS QUIET.

THEY DON'T PEOPLE DON'T COME VISIT THEIR STUFF AND HANG OUT THERE.

SO THEY COME DROP THEIR STUFF OFF AND THEN THEY LEAVE.

SO AGAIN, WE'RE REQUESTING THE APPROVAL OF THIS.

AND IF YOU HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, I'LL BE HERE.

AND THE OWNER IS ALSO HERE IF YOU NEED TO ASK ANY QUESTIONS OF THEM.

THANK YOU, SIR. DOES THE BOARD HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? NOW OPEN IT UP TO THE FLOOR.

DOES ANYONE WISH TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS REQUEST? ANYONE OPPOSED? MR. BATTEN? BILL BATTEN, 586 OCEAN SPRAY STREET SOUTHWEST.

THE ONLY REASON I'M BEING OPPOSED TO THIS WAS BECAUSE OF THE PROCESS OF HOW WE GOT HERE.

THAT'S WHAT I'M CHALLENGING ON.

THAT'S WHAT THEY SAY, BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE VOTING ON.

I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT IT STILL HAS TO BE SAID BECAUSE THE SAME WE'RE FACING A SIMILAR SITUATION.

THIS IS ONE WHERE WE'VE HAD A STOP ORDER.

WE'RE FACING ANOTHER ONE WHERE POTENTIALLY WE COULD HAVE THE SAME THING, WHERE SOMEBODY HAD PLANNED SOMETHING AND SAID, WELL, WE JUST WANT TO HAVE A CONDITIONAL USE.

WE HAVEN'T PRESENTED OR TOLD YOU, WHICH IS THE REVIEW BOARD, WHAT WE'RE PLANNING.

AND THAT'S THERE'S A DEVELOPMENT IN BAYFRONT RIGHT NOW WHERE THAT MIGHT BE COMING UP AGAIN.

BUT WE SAID, WELL, WE'LL DISCUSS THAT WHEN IT COMES TO PRESENTATION.

HOPEFULLY I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND GO THROUGH MY LITTLE SPIEL HERE.

HOPEFULLY THAT'LL CLEAR SOME OF THIS UP.

THIS IS A PERFECT EXAMPLE OF WHAT HAPPENS WITHOUT KNOWING THE PLANS BEFORE ALLOWING MODIFICATIONS.

YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT THE MODIFICATIONS ARE GOING TO BE, BUT YOU'RE ALLOWING IT.

THIS ENDED UP IN A STOP ORDER, AS YOU JUST HEARD, WHICH RESULTED IN A FINANCIAL COST TO THE BUILDER AND A SEVERE EMBARRASSMENT TO THE CITY OF PALM BAY.

I WON'T SAY IT REFLECTED UPON YOU, BUT IT DID REFLECT UPON THE CITY OF PALM BAY.

SO THAT BEING SAID, LET'S LEARN FROM OUR MISTAKES SO WE DON'T SEE THIS HAPPEN AGAIN IN THE FUTURE.

AND I UNDERSTAND BY TALKING WITH CITY MANAGER AND STUFF THAT SOME OF THESE CORRECTIONS THAT WE'VE EXPERIENCED BECAUSE BELIEVE IT OR NOT, EXPERIENCE IS A VERY GOOD TEACHER, BUT THE POTENTIAL OF THE SAME FAILURE IS FACING US IN BAYFRONT AREA ON ANOTHER PROJECT.

THAT BEING SAID, I APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT STAFF ACTUALLY TOLD HOW IT HAPPENED TO THE PUBLIC.

SO NOW THE PUBLIC IS ALSO AWARE THAT'S THE ONLY REASON WHY I'M SPEAKING AGAINST IT.

THE FACT THAT IT'S GOING TO BE THREE STORIES AND IT'S ALREADY PLANNED OUT TO BE THERE, I WOULD RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE CONDITIONAL USE FOR THE THREE STORIES BECAUSE THEY'VE INVESTED SO MUCH.

AND IT WAS NOT THEIR MISTAKE.

IT WAS THE CITY'S MISTAKE.

AND FOR THAT PRIMARY REASON, I RECOMMEND YOU APPROVE THE CONDITIONAL USE.

THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS? MAKE ANY OTHER COMMENTS? OKAY. LAURA'S CLOTHES IS BROUGHT BACK TO THE BOARD.

BOARD? DO YOU HAVE ANY FURTHER COMMENTS OR MOTION? YEAH. THIS, YOU KNOW, THIS BASICALLY IS AMENDING THE ORIGINAL CONDITIONAL USE.

AND RIGHT NOW, AS YOU HEARD, THEY COULD ACTUALLY BUILD A THIRD STORY ON THIS THAT JUST CAN'T BE USED AS STORAGE.

SO IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE. THEY'RE ONLY ADDING 12 MORE UNITS TO WHAT WAS ALREADY ESTIMATED AT 600 UNITS.

THIS DOESN'T CHANGE THE FOOTPRINT OF THE STRUCTURE AT ALL, SO I SEE NO REASON NOT TO APPROVE IT.

SO A MOTION TO APPROVE CU 23 000 TEN.

AND I MEAN, THIS IS ONE OF THE REASONS WHY I LIKE TO ASK A LOT OF QUESTIONS OR WOULD LIKE TO KNOW A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THE PROJECTS AS WE MOVE FORWARD.

SO THAT'S ONE OF THE REASONS WHY I ASK QUESTIONS, YOU KNOW, TO GET THE INFORMATION ABOUT THESE PROJECTS SO I'LL KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON AND HAVE A BETTER IDEA OF WHAT'S WHAT IS COMING INTO THE CITY. SO WITH THAT, I TOO, I THINK THAT IF THE THIRD IF THE THIRD FLOOR IS ALREADY THERE AND OBVIOUSLY WE GOT TO DO SOMETHING WITH IT SO IT DOESN'T SO DO NOT BECOME AN EYESORE AND BECOME DERELICT.

[02:00:03]

MOTION. AND A SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR? AYE, AYE. ANY OPPOSED? NAY. ONE.

ALL RIGHT. MOTION CARRIES.

NEXT CASE T 23 00017 MRS BERNARD.

GOOD EVENING.

THIS CASE IS T 23 000 17.

THE APPLICANT IS ALL DIGITAL ALL DAY LLC REPRESENTED BY MATT ASHLEY.

THE TEXTUAL AMENDMENT REQUEST IS TO THE CODE OF ORDINANCES TITLE 17 LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE CHAPTER 178 SIGNS SECTION ONE 7817 IN REGARDS TO BILLBOARDS AND INTERCHANGE SIGNS TO MODIFY THE LANGUAGE FOR THE DISTANCE BETWEEN INTERCHANGE SIGNS TO BE IN ALIGNMENT WITH STATE STATUTE. SO THEY ARE BASICALLY ASKING FOR A REQUEST FOR THE INTERCHANGE SIGNS FROM A DISTANCE OF 500FT TO 1500 FEET, WHICH WOULD BE IN ALIGNMENT WITH WHAT OUR CURRENT CODE SAYS FOR BILLBOARD SIGNS.

I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE, AND THE APPLICANT IS ALSO HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MIGHT HAVE.

THANK YOU. DOES THE BOARD HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? THE CONTEXT. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR, FOR THE CONTEXT OF THIS CONVERSATION.

WHAT ARE WE REFERRING TO AS AN INTERCHANGE SIGN? SO CURRENTLY OUR CODE IS SILENT ON INTERCHANGE SIGNS, AND SO THE APPLICANT REQUESTED IT TO BE AN ALIGNMENT.

BILLBOARD SIGNS AND INTERCHANGE SIGNS HAVE THE SAME DISTANCE APART, SO WE DID NOT GO INTO A DEFINITION.

THE REQUEST WAS FOR THE DISTANCE.

SO WE DON'T HAVE A DEFINITION OF WHAT AN INTERCHANGE SIGN IS? THAT'S CORRECT. THE CODE IS SILENT ON IT.

OKAY. IS THERE A DEFINITION OF A BILLBOARD? I BELIEVE SO.

THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. QUESTIONS.

HAVE ONE, MISS BERNARD, IT MENTIONS.

I'M SORRY. MENTIONS IN THE.

PACKET THAT THEY WORK WITH THE CITY TO PUT OUT ANNOUNCEMENTS FOR THE CITY.

DOES THAT HAPPEN WITH THE INTERCHANGE SIGNS NOW AND AND ARE WE TAKING ADVANTAGE OF THAT? AND WHO FROM THE CITY DOES THAT? I BELIEVE THAT WOULD BE WITH OUR COMMUNICATIONS DEPARTMENT.

AND SO THAT IS PART OF A STANDARD TIME AND TEMPERATURE IN THE EVENT OF A LOCAL STORM EVENT OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, THEN THEY WOULD PARTNER WITH THE COMMUNITY TO BROADCAST ON THEIR DIGITAL BILLBOARDS.

NO FURTHER QUESTIONS.

OH. SIR.

I'M SORRY. YOU ARE THE. MATT ASHLEY ALL DIGITAL ALL DAY.

1900 SOUTH HARBOR STREET, MELBOURNE, FLORIDA.

AND I'M JUST THE APPLICANT.

YEAH, I JUST ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

WE'RE JUST GETTING THIS CODE INTO STATE STATUTE AND JUST I CAN ANSWER YOUR QUESTION REAL QUICK ON THE DEFINITION.

IT'S BASICALLY CONSIDERED A DIGITAL BILLBOARD OR AN ON SITE.

YOU KNOW, YOU CAN IT'S KIND OF INTERCHANGEABLE.

SO I DON'T THINK THERE WAS A DEFINITION NEEDED FOR THAT ONE.

AND WE'RE JUST BRINGING IT INTO THE STATE STATUTE AS IT'S 1500 FEET ON THE INTERSTATE FOR SIGNS OF THIS NATURE.

SO. HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT.

YEAH. THANK YOU. DOES ANYONE WISH TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS REQUEST? MR. BATTEN. BILL BATTEN 581 586 OCEAN SPRAY STREET SOUTHWEST, ANOTHER PROPERTY.

WHEN I WAS GOING THROUGH THIS PACKET, IT WAS LISTING BILLBOARDS AND MADE A STATEMENT ON OF SEE ONE IN YOUR PACKETS, SEE ONE.

IT SAID THERE WAS ONLY TWO BILLBOARDS THAT WERE CURRENTLY MEETING THE CRITERIA.

BECAUSE OF YOUR QUESTION YOU'RE ASKING, WAS THIS JUST THE ONES ALONG THE INTERSTATE OR WAS IT ALL DIGITAL BILLBOARDS? AND SO THAT GENERATED WITH ME WITHIN THE CITY OF PALM BAY.

WE HAVE LOTS OF DIGITAL BILLBOARDS THAT THEY AREN'T THE INTERSTATE BILLBOARDS, BUT THEY'RE STILL FLASHING DIGITAL BILLBOARDS WITHIN THE STATE.

AND IT SAID THAT THERE WAS ONLY TWO THAT MET THE CRITERIA FOR THE AS IT STANDS RIGHT NOW THAT MET THE CRITERIA.

SO I'M SAYING, DOES THE CITY'S CURRENT BILLBOARDS THAT WE HAVE, DO THEY MEET THE CRITERIA BECAUSE THEY WEREN'T LISTED AS ONE THAT DOES?

[02:05:07]

AND THAT'S JUST HOW I WAS READING THE PACKET AND IT WAS C ONE OR C DASH I, I DON'T KNOW.

SO TO BE CLEAR, THERE IS A MINOR DIFFERENCE BETWEEN BILLBOARDS AND INTERCHANGE SIGNS IN OUR CODE.

IT JUST REFLECTS THE ALTERNATIVE DISTANCE.

SO, FOR EXAMPLE.

DIGITAL BILLBOARD SIGNS ARE A BILLBOARD SIGN IS LOCATED OUTSIDE OF HALF A MILE.

NINE IS LOCATED WITHIN HALF A MILE OF.

THE MAIN DIFFERENCE BETWEEN.

BUT THE PORTION OF THE CODE THAT IS AT PLAY TODAY IS THE DISTANCE FROM EACH OTHER.

DISTANCE FROM OTHER BILLBOARDS IS THE PORTION OF THE CODE THAT IS TO BE CHANGED.

WHICH, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, RIGHT NOW, IS AT 500FT, WHICH IS MUCH MORE STRICT AND STRINGENT THAN THE STATE STATUTE AT 1500 FEET.

SO THIS JUST ALLOWS THERE TO BE MORE BILLBOARDS POTENTIALLY IN A GIVEN AREA FROM EACH OTHER.

THANK YOU. SORRY. LESS BILLBOARDS IN A GIVEN AREA.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

MORE STRINGENT THAN BEFORE.

UM. YEAH.

UM. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.

WHY? WHY WOULD.

WHY WOULD. WHAT'S THE MOTIVATION FOR SOMEONE TO COME UP AND SAY WE WANT TO SPACE THEM OUT AS AS THE APPLICANT THAT SELLS BILLBOARDS? WHY WOULD HE WANT TO? I CANNOT ANSWER THAT.

THAT WOULD BE A QUESTION FOR HIM.

BUT WHAT IT DOES POTENTIALLY DO IS IF THERE ARE LESS BILLBOARDS, THEN YOU'RE SEEING LESS THINGS IN OVERALL SKYLINES TO AN EXTENT AND SO FORTH.

YOU'RE ALSO ALLOWING FOR MORE VISIBILITY OF EACH INDIVIDUAL ONE, WHICH COULD BE MORE VALUABLE FOR THEM POTENTIALLY AS WELL.

SO IT WASN'T A SITUATION WHERE THERE'S A PROJECT AT HAND AND THE CODE ISN'T ALLOWING THAT PROJECT TO REALLY MOVE FORWARD PER SE.

IT'S JUST SOMEONE DOING BUSINESS IN THE CITY.

THEY'RE LOOKING AT IT. THEY WANT TO CONTINUE DOING BUSINESS IN THE CITY AND THEY'RE LIKE, HEY, YOU DON'T EVEN HAVE A POLICY ON THAT.

AND YOU'RE LIKE, YEAH, YOU'RE RIGHT.

TOO GROSSLY OVER SUMMARIZE.

TO MY KNOWLEDGE, THERE'S NO PROJECT SPECIFIC ASPECT OF THIS CODE.

OKAY. YEAH.

OKAY. THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION.

I APPRECIATE I LEARNED MORE ABOUT BILLBOARDS, INTERCHANGE SIGNS TONIGHT THAN I THOUGHT I WOULD.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ALL RIGHT.

THE FLOOR IS STILL OPEN. ANYONE ELSE WANTS TO SPEAK ON THIS? SEEING NONE.

FURTHER COMMENTS FROM THE APPLICANT.

CAUSE CLOSE IS BROUGHT BACK TO THE BOARD.

BOARD? DO I HAVE A MOTION? A MOTION TO APPROVE T 23 000 17.

AH, MR. WEINBERG.

SECOND. AS MR. BOEREMA BOEREMA.

I'M SORRY. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE, AYE, AYE. ANY OPPOSED MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.

MR. WHITE. E 23 00013.

STEPHEN WIGHT, SENIOR PLANNER OF GROWTH MANAGEMENT.

THE CASE BEFORE YOU IS T 20 3-00013.

IT IS CITYWIDE.

IT IS A TEXTUAL AMENDMENT TO THE CODE OF ORDINANCES.

TITLE 17 LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE CHAPTER 185 ZONING ZONING CODE SECTION 185 .006.

THE DEFINITIONS AND SECTION 185 .123 REGULATIONS OF VEHICLES AND RESIDENTIAL AREAS.

AND THIS IS BEING BROUGHT FORWARD TO PROVIDE CLEAR LANGUAGE FOR AUTHORIZED PARKING WITHIN RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS.

WE CONDUCTED AN ANALYSIS AND IN COORDINATION WITH CODE COMPLIANCE.

FOR THE. I'M SORRY. I DIDN'T KNOW IF I HIT SOMETHING.

THE RESIDENTIAL PARKING SECTION OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES AND DISCREPANCIES WERE FOUND AND CLARIFICATION WAS NEEDED TO ALIGN THE CITY OF PALM BAY'S CODE OF ORDINANCES WITH FLORIDA STATE STATUTE.

STAFF PROVIDED UPDATES TO THE DEFINITION OF COMMERCIAL VEHICLE, RECREATIONAL VEHICLES, TRAILERS AND OTHER REQUIREMENTS FOR PARKING WITHIN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS.

AND THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT CHANGING COMMERCIAL VEHICLES EXCLUSIVELY.

STAFF CHANGED THE DEFINITION OF COMMERCIAL VEHICLES TO LARGE VEHICLES, VEHICLES USED FOR PROFESSIONAL PURPOSES IDENTIFIED AS SIZE AND GROSS VEHICLE WEIGHT OUTLINED IN THE DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES TO ALLOW CERTAIN VEHICLES TO BE PARKED IN THE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT.

CAPPING THE GROSS VEHICLE WEIGHT AT 15,000 POUNDS ALLOWS SUCH VEHICLES TO BE PARKED IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS.

ADDITIONALLY, THE ALLOWANCE OF UNTAGGED OR INOPERABLE VEHICLES BEING PARKED IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS HAS BEEN REMOVED AND WILL NOW NOT BE AUTHORIZED BY THE CODE OF ORDINANCES. FOR THOSE TYPES OF VEHICLES, THEY WILL HAVE TO BE STORED WITHIN AN ENCLOSED STRUCTURE OR NOT IN THE PROPERTY AT ALL.

AND LASTLY, THERE WAS A CLARIFICATION NEEDED FOR RECREATIONAL VEHICLES AND TRAILERS.

[02:10:05]

THE FLORIDA STATE STATUTE, DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OUTLINES THE RECREATIONAL RECREATIONAL VEHICLE AS A VEHICLE USED FOR INHABITING FOR TEMPORARY LIVING BY 12.

COMMERCIAL OR LONG TRAILER IS NOT A RECREATIONAL VEHICLE.

THEY ACTUALLY DO DIFFERENTIATE THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A RECREATIONAL VEHICLE AND A TRAILER IN THE STATE STATUTE.

SO NOW OUR CODE ALIGNS WITH THE STATE STATUTE AS WELL.

STAFF RECOMMENDS CASE T 20 3-00013 FOR APPROVAL AND I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.

YOU, MR. WHITE, DOES THE BOARD HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.

THANK YOU, MR. WHITE, FOR YOUR PRESENTATION.

ALTHOUGH THE ISSUE AT HAND IS TITLED COMMERCIAL VEHICLES AND RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS, ONE KEY DELINEATION I WANT TO HIGHLIGHT IS WHAT YOU MENTIONED IN THE ANALYSIS. THIS ALSO STANDS TO INCLUDE VEHICLES THAT AREN'T CONSIDERED LARGE VEHICLES OR CORRECT.

FOR AN EXAMPLE WOULD BE SOME OF THE BIG DEVELOPMENT COMPANIES THAT GIVE YOU THE F-150, F-250 THAT YOU HAVE THE CAPABILITY OF BRINGING HOME AND OUR CODE AS IT CURRENTLY SITS, THOSE ARE LISTED AS COMMERCIAL VEHICLES.

THE STATE STATUTE OR EXCUSE ME.

YEAH, THE FLORIDA STATE STATUTE DOES NOT IDENTIFY THAT AS A COMMERCIAL VEHICLE.

COMMERCIAL VEHICLE REQUIRES A COMMERCIAL DRIVER'S LICENSE.

SO THEREFORE, NOW THAT ALLOWS THE PERSON WHO IS THE INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR FOR EXCUSE ME, CELL PHONE TELEVISION TO BRING THEIR VEHICLES HOME CAN NOW PARK LEGALLY IN ACCORDANCE WITH STATE STATUTE IN A RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT.

WHAT IT IS CHANGING NOW IS VEHICLES OVER 15,000 POUNDS, GROSS VEHICLE WEIGHT.

YOU'RE GETTING INTO YOUR DUMP TRUCKS, YOUR BOX TRUCKS, YOUR RECORDS, YOUR TOW TRUCKS FROM BEING PARKED OPENLY IN A RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT.

WHAT ABOUT THE ILLUSION TO UNTAGGED OR INOPERABLE VEHICLES? WHAT THAT DOES IS.

NOT ALL TIMES AT NIGHT, BUT DERELICT OR INOPERABLE.

INOPERABLE VEHICLES CAN'T LEGALLY BE PARKED OPERATED ON A STREET.

WHAT IT DOES IS IF YOU HAVE ONE.

MORE TIMES THAN NOT, IT'S GOING TO LEAD TO 2 OR 3.

AND THEN YOU HAVE SOME OF THE CASES WHERE YOU SEE 15 CARS PARKED IN A ON A PROPERTY OR IN A BACKYARD.

YOU CAN IF YOU ARE DOING YOU HAVE A VEHICLE THAT'S DAMAGED OR NEEDING REPAIR, YOU CAN STILL KEEP IT.

IT HAS TO BE WITHIN AN ENCLOSED STRUCTURE.

LEAVING A CAR OUTSIDE TARPED ON BLOCKS WILL NOT BE PERMITTED WITH THIS CODE IS APPROVED, EVEN WITH A SIX FOOT FENCE.

CORRECT. HE SAID IF IT'S SCREENED, THEN IT CAN BE THERE.

IT WOULD BE SCREENED. THE SIX FOOT FENCE WOULD BE IN THE BACK OR SIDE YARD, SO IT CAN BE IN THE SCREENED AREA BUT WOULD NOT BE IN THE FRONT YARD ON THE PERSON'S PROPERTY WITHIN THE BOUNDS OF THEIR SIX FOOT FENCE.

THEY'VE GOT A GATE, THEY'VE GOT A PRIVACY FENCE THERE MINDING THEIR OWN BUSINESS WITHIN THEIR OWN YARD.

THEY CAN HAVE WHATEVER CAR THEY WANT BACK THERE.

YEAH, CORRECT.

THERE'S ALSO A CHANGE IN THE CODE THAT YOU'LL SEE IN THE PROPOSED LANGUAGE THAT DOES LIMIT THE AMOUNT OF VEHICLES PARKED IN THE REAR AND SIDES OF THE PROPERTY.

RIGHT. I STARTED TO READ IT.

SO YOU CAN ONLY PARK ONE ON EACH SIDE.

CORRECT? 1 OR 2.

WHAT'S A VEHICLE? ONE. THAT IS THE DEFINITION OUTLINED IN THE.

SO ONLY IF IT'S MOTORIZED.

CORRECT. GASOLINE MOTOR BECAUSE THE DEFINITION OF A TRAILER IN A MOTOR VEHICLE IS ONE THAT CAN BE POWERED BY A MOTOR.

SO A MOPED, ANYTHING THAT CANNOT BE MOVED ON ITS OWN MOTIVE, POWER IS CONSIDERED.

A TRAILER IS NOT A MOTOR VEHICLE.

AND ARE THEY DELINEATED IN THIS LANGUAGE? I'M READING THROUGH IT WORD FOR WORD, BUT SO IS THAT TO SAY THAT YOU CAN HAVE A TRAILER ON ONE SIDE OF YOUR HOUSE BUT YOU CAN'T HAVE A CAR ON THAT SAME SIDE? THERE IS LANGUAGE IN THERE THAT TALKS ABOUT WHERE YOU CAN PARK TRAILERS NOW AS WELL TO CLARIFY THE TYPES OF TRAILER, WHETHER IT BE A RECREATIONAL VEHICLE NOW AND AGAIN, TO GOING BACK TO STILL GIVING SOME ALLOWANCE, IF YOU OWN IT, YOUR INDIVIDUAL OWNER OPERATOR AND YOU HAVE THE PROPERTY BIG ENOUGH, YOU CAN HAVE YOUR TRUCK PARKED.

THERE HAS TO BE IN AN ENCLOSED STRUCTURE.

SO IF YOU HAVE THE PROPERTY IN THE MEANS OF PARKING A TRAILER OR EXCUSE ME, A TRUCK ON IT, THAT IS OVER THE 15,000 POUND GROSS VEHICLE WEIGHT, YOU CAN STILL PARK IT ON THE PROPERTY. IT JUST HAS TO BE WITHIN AN ENCLOSED STRUCTURE.

AND WHAT THAT DOES IS THAT JUST HELPS WITH THE ESTHETICS OF THE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT.

THE TROUBLE I'M HAVING NOT TO INTERRUPT YOU, SIR, BUT JUST TO KEEP IT MOVING FORWARD ONTO THIS ITEM IS THE TROUBLE I'M HAVING IS THAT THE ITEM? AND THE CORE OF IT HAS TO DO WITH COMMERCIAL VEHICLES AND WORK VEHICLES AND THINGS OF THE SORT, BUT THEN IT MEANDERS INTO.

NOTHING TO DO WITH COMMERCIAL VEHICLES AND JUST NORMAL VEHICLES AND JUST PEOPLE WANTING TO HAVE THEIR PROPERTY RIGHTS AND CHOOSING TO LIVE IN THE CITY OF PALM BAY AND NOT LIVE IN

[02:15:01]

AND IF THE RULE IS YOU'VE GOT TO BUILD A FENCE, THEY BUILD A FENCE.

SO I DON'T LIKE THAT THEY'RE MIXED TOGETHER AND I DON'T LIKE THAT THEY'RE MIXED TOGETHER.

THE REASON THEY ARE MIXED TOGETHER, AND THAT IS IT IS OUTLINED IN THE CODE AS THE AUTHORIZED PARKING WITHIN A RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT.

THE CODE DOES OUTLINE COMMERCIAL VEHICLES THAT ARE ALLOWED TO BE PARKED IN THE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT.

THAT'S WHERE IT GOES FROM COMMERCIAL VEHICLES TO THE TYPES OF VEHICLES, BECAUSE IT ALL ENCOMPASSES THE PARKING AND THE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT.

BUT AT THE SAME TIME, YOU'RE REPEALING THERE'S PROTECTIONS BUILT INTO THE CITY'S CODE CURRENTLY FOR PEOPLE TO PUT CARS ON THEIR PROPERTY.

THERE'S RULES WHERE THEY HAVE TO DO IT.

THEY HAVE TO HAVE THEIR YARD FENCED IN, SCREENED, AS MR. ANDERSON SAYS. AND THIS, IN ADDITION TO FIXING THINGS UP FOR COMMERCIAL VEHICLES, STANDS TO REPEAL THAT LANGUAGE.

I BELIEVE THAT LANGUAGE IS CONTAINED IN SECTIONS TWO, B TWO, PERHAPS IN THE AREA.

THE POINT IS IT'S NOT JUST A CONVERSATION ABOUT RECREATIONAL VEHICLES AND WORK VEHICLES.

IT'S ALSO A CONVERSATION ABOUT VEHICLES IN GENERAL.

SO IT'S IT'S THERE'S THERE'S TO ME THAT'S DIFFERENT BECAUSE I HAVE AN OPINION ABOUT COMMERCIAL VEHICLES AND WORK VEHICLES AND THINGS INTENDED TO TO EARN MONEY.

AND THEN I HAVE A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT OPINION ABOUT, FOR LACK OF A BETTER WAY OF SAYING IT, THINGS MEANT TO SPEND MONEY, I.E.

THE HOBBYIST. IF SOMEBODY WANTS TO HAVE A VEHICLE IN THEIR YARD AS A HOBBY THERE, THERE'S PARAMETERS IN OUR CODE THAT ALLOW THAT.

AND THIS ACTION I'M READING WOULD TAKE IT AWAY AND THAT IS BLURRING THE WATERS AND MIXING IT WITH COMMERCIAL VEHICLES.

IN MY OPINION, THAT'S JUST MY OPINION.

BUT I ALSO I MEAN, THAT'S TRUE, RIGHT? THAT IT STANDS TO RESTRICT THAT TYPE OF VEHICLE.

SO JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, THIS IS NOT REMOVING THE ABILITY TO HAVE A VEHICLE IN YOUR BACKYARD.

IT'S NOT. NO, NO.

OKAY. THAT IS STILL THERE.

SO I'M LOOKING. WHERE DOES THAT LEAD TO? TO A VEHICLES PARKED ON THE SIDE OF A RESIDENCE LOCATED ON A CORNER.

LOT MUST BE SCREENED FROM THE ADJACENT TO ADJACENT STREET TO THE SIDE RESIDENCE.

AND. AND SO BE JUST SINCE WE'RE ON IT TO BE TRAILER SHALL BE PARKED IN AN ENCLOSED STRUCTURE OR BEHIND A SIX FOOT OPAQUE FENCE.

CORRECT. SO IF YOU HAVE YOUR FENCE AND YOU PUT YOUR TRAILER IN THERE, WHETHER IT'S TAGGED OR NOT, IT'S A TRAILER.

NO ONE'S GOING TO COME LOOKING.

AND WHETHER THERE'S A CAR THAT YOUR BACKYARD, WHICH THEORETICALLY NO ONE SHOULD BE SEEING ANYWAYS, AND YOU'RE BEHIND A SIX FOOT FENCE, THESE DON'T STAND TO TAKE THAT THAT AWAY. NO, THAT ENTITLEMENT IS NOT.

NO. WELL, WHAT IT DOES STAND TO TAKE TO MOVE IS THIS NUMBER TWO, WHERE IT SAYS A MAXIMUM OF TWO VEHICLES PER PROPERTY ARE PERMITTED TO BE PARKED ON THE SIDES OF A RESIDENCE, AND THAT'S WHERE IT TRIES TO SPLIT THE TWO AND SAY IT NEEDS TO BE ONE ON EACH SIDE.

CORRECT. SO IT'S STILL TWO, BUT IT'S ONE ON EACH SIDE RATHER THAN PUTTING TWO ON ONE SIDE AND THERE IS A SEPARATION.

CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, STEVEN, BUT THE SEPARATION STILL IS BETWEEN A RECREATIONAL VEHICLE AND A COMMERCIAL AND A VEHICLE ITSELF.

SORRY, LET ME REPHRASE THAT. A TRAILER AND A VEHICLE.

SO YOU COULD STILL TECHNICALLY HAVE A TRAILER AND A VEHICLE BOTH ON THE SAME SIDE AND A TRAILER AND A VEHICLE ON THE OTHER SIDE.

GOTCHA. YOU JUST CAN'T HAVE MORE THAN TWO VEHICLES, ONE ON EACH SIDE AND OUTSIDE OF COMMERCIAL USES AND THINGS ASSOCIATED WITH COMMERCIAL USES.

AS LONG AS SOMEONE PUTS UP A SIX FOOT FENCE AROUND THEIR YARD, THEY CAN PUT WHAT THEY WANT IN THE YARD.

I BELIEVE THERE IS A CERTAIN LIMIT OF NUMBER OF VEHICLES, BUT THAT'S NOT FROM THIS SPECIFIC CHANGE IN THE CODE.

WE ALREADY HAD THAT IN PLACE.

I WOULD HAVE TO DOUBLE CHECK, BUT I BELIEVE IT WAS FOUR VEHICLES, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, PER LOT.

BUT THAT HAS ALREADY BEEN IN THE CODE AND HAS REMAINED IN THE CODE FOR QUITE SOME THAT'S UNREGISTERED OR REGISTERED FOR VEHICLES IN TOTALITY.

I BELIEVE THE RATIONALE FOR THAT IS SO THAT PEOPLE DO NOT HAVE ALL THOSE DIFFERENT CARS PILING UP IN THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE OR EVEN ON THE SIDE OR BASICALLY HAVING A JUNKYARD.

IT'S TO AVOID A JUNKYARD, RIGHT? BECAUSE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES TRADITIONALLY ARE NOT GOING TO REQUIRE MORE THAN FOUR CARS FOR THE HOUSEHOLD.

SO THAT'S TRADITIONALLY WHAT WE HAVE HAD FOR OUR CODE FOR A LONG TIME.

THIS HAS NOT TOUCHED THAT AT ALL.

THIS JUST ALLOWS FOR YOU TO HAVE CERTAIN TYPES AND CERTAIN PLACEMENTS OF OTHER TYPES OF VEHICLES.

SO THE COMMERCIAL PORTION SPECIFICALLY, AND THEN IT DOES ALLOW FOR THE LOCATION OF THE RECREATIONAL VEHICLE JUST IN SPECIFICATION.

NONE OF THIS MOVES.

NOT TO INTERRUPT YOU, SIR, BUT NONE OF THIS MOVES WHEN YOU'RE IN RURAL, RESIDENTIAL AND THINGS OF THIS SORT.

THE ONLY BIG DIFFERENCE IS THERE YOU HAVE MORE SPACE THAT YOU CAN BUILD YOURSELF AN ENCLOSURE, BUT LIKE IF YOUR VEHICLES AREN'T IN AN ENCLOSURE, THERE'S LITERALLY A HEAD COUNT OF HOW MANY VEHICLES YOU CAN HAVE ON YOUR YOUR PARCEL OF PROPERTY.

THE WHAT WAS IN THE CODE AT THE BEGINNING COVERING THE CHAPTER THAT HASN'T BEEN CHANGED IS IT OUTLINED EVERY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT I BELIEVE IT'S GOING TO BE TOWARDS I DON'T HAVE YEAH I SAW THAT STARTING AND THAT WASN'T AMENDED IN ANY WAY.

IT'S ALL THE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS.

SO TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, WE DID NOT CONSIDER SPECIFICALLY LOOKING AT BROADENING ENTITLEMENTS FOR HOW MANY CARS COULD BE ON A SPECIFIC LOT IN ASSOCIATION WITH

[02:20:09]

HOWEVER, LIKE YOU HAD MENTIONED, FOR INSTANCE, IF YOU'RE ON A RURAL RESIDENTIAL LAND AND YOU SEEK TO BUILD AN ACCESSORY GARAGE, THAT'S A SIX CAR GARAGE AND ALL OF A SUDDEN YOU CAN HAVE SIX CARS PLUS FOUR IN YOUR YARD.

SO IT REALLY DEPENDS ON THE OWNER.

IT'S REALLY ALSO THE PUBLIC NUISANCE ASPECT.

SO SEEING MULTIPLE CARS IN A SINGLE LOT, LIKE AT A CERTAIN POINT IT TURNS INTO A PARKING LOT, WHICH IS NOT A PERMITTED USE IN SINGLE FAMILY ZONING DISTRICT.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

I REALLY APPRECIATE THE CLARIFICATION AND THE DELINEATION BECAUSE THAT THAT HELPS ME UNDERSTAND THAT THE CORE INTENT OF THE ITEM AT HAND HERE.

SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH, BOTH OF YOU, FOR THE CONVERSATION.

AND MADAM CHAIR, THANK YOU.

GOOD QUESTION.

ANOTHER QUESTION REGARDING BEFORE WE DEFINE A BOAT IN THE RECREATIONAL AS A RECREATIONAL VEHICLE, WE TOOK THAT OUT.

SO ALL THESE BOATS WE HAVE PARKED ON THE SIDE OF PEOPLE'S YARDS, THINGS LIKE THAT AND PALM BAY, WHERE DO THOSE FALL NOW? IS THAT FALL UNDER A TRAILER OR DOES THAT FALL UNDER A RECREATIONAL VEHICLE? CORRECT. IT IS NO LONGER A RECREATIONAL VEHICLE BECAUSE THE CHANGE IN THE ADDED DEFINITION OF A RECREATIONAL VEHICLE EXCUSE ME, THE AMENDMENT AND THE CHANGE TO THAT DEFINITION IS IN ALIGNMENT WITH THE FLORIDA STATE STATUTE, WHERE A RECREATIONAL VEHICLE IS EITHER BEING CAPABLE OF IS BEING MOTORIZED OR CAPABLE OF BEING PULLED DOWN THE ROAD FOR TEMPORARY LIVING.

NOW, A BOAT, A BOAT IN AND OF ITSELF IS A MOTORIZED VESSEL VEHICLE.

THE TRAILER, AGAIN, WOULD HAVE TO BE PARKED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE PARKING OF TRAILERS IN THE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT.

OR THE QUESTIONS. SEEING NONE.

WELL, I GUESS JUST SO THE INDIVIDUALS THAT DO HAVE, LET'S JUST SAY FOUR VEHICLES AND THOSE FOUR VEHICLES ARE OPERATING OR THEY CAN OPERATE THOSE EVERY DAY AND THEY'RE MOVING THEM EVERY DAY.

SO HOW WOULD THIS AFFECT THEM IN ANY KIND OF WAY? NO, IT WILL NOT.

IT'S JUST THOSE CARS THAT ARE SITTING A LOT OF IT.

WHAT WHAT THIS IS DESIGNED TO DO THIS IS IN COORDINATION WITH CODE ENFORCEMENT OR EXCUSE ME, CODE COMPLIANCE THAT WAS BROUGHT FORWARD FOR ISSUES THEY'RE HAVING.

AND WE SAT DOWN AND EVALUATED.

WE COMPARED TO OTHER SURROUNDING MUNICIPALITIES AND WHAT IT IS, IT IS ONE TO PROTECT PRIVATE PROPERTY AND VALUES WITHOUT HAVING THE VEHICLES, WITHOUT THE PEOPLE PARKING, BUT ALSO IS ALLOWING MORE FLEXIBILITY IN CHANGING THE DEFINITION OF A COMMERCIAL VEHICLE, WHICH NOW ALLOWS FOR THE INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR OR THE PERSON WHO HAS A POOL CLEANING COMPANY THAT BRINGS THEIR TRUCK HOME TO LEGALLY PARK IT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE STATE STATUTE, WHETHER IF THE RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD ALLOWS FOR ON STREET PARKING AS LONG AS IT'S LEGALLY PARKED.

IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE STATE STATUTE.

SO THERE IS SOME THAT THERE WAS DEFINITELY A LOT OF GIVE AND TAKE WHERE THERE WAS A LOT OF BENEFITS ADDED, BUT ALSO STUFF ADDED TO PROTECT EVERYBODY, ALL THE OTHER CITIZENS WITH THE PROPERTY VALUE, THE REMOVAL OF BLIGHT FOR THE INOPERABLE OR DAMAGED VEHICLES AND PROPERTY.

AND IT WILL ALSO DETER CRIME BECAUSE IF YOU HAVE A LOT OF VEHICLES JUST PARKED AROUND, YOU'RE GOING TO INVITE PEOPLE.

SO WHAT IT'S TRYING TO DO IS CLEAN UP TO MAKE THE AREA SAFER AS WELL.

WHITE. I DO.

I DO THINK THAT WE WE MAYBE NEED TO CLEAN UP THE LANGUAGE JUST A LITTLE BIT A LITTLE BIT BETTER BECAUSE I THINK WE DID KIND OF MERGE THE COMMERCIAL ASPECT OF THIS ALONG WITH THE ALONG WITH JUST THE VOCALS BECAUSE IT DID GET SOMEWHAT CONFUSING.

WELL, THAT'S UNDERSTANDABLE. I'M SORRY.

SO IT DID GET SOMEWHAT CONFUSING JUST READING THROUGH IT WHERE, WHERE IT WENT FROM THE COMMERCIAL, BECAUSE AT FIRST, I MEAN, YEAH, YOU'RE READING IT AND IT'S LIKE, OKAY, THIS IS ONLY TALKING ABOUT COMMERCIAL.

THEN IT DID JUMP INTO WHERE IT LOOKED LIKE IT WAS JUST TALKING ABOUT LIKE JUST AN AVERAGE, EVERYDAY CAR, EVERYDAY VEHICLE.

YEAH. AND THAT'S ONE OF THE ISSUES THAT LED TO THE CLARIFICATION NEEDED.

I THINK, AND YOU HIT ON IT.

I THINK THAT'S WHAT'S CAUSING SOME OF THE CONFUSION.

IT'S NOT COMMERCIAL PARKING.

IT'S THE COMMERCIAL VEHICLES IN A RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT.

SO THIS IS ALL THE REQUIREMENTS FOR PARKING VEHICLES IN A RESIDENTIAL, RESIDENTIALLY ZONED DISTRICTS.

AND THE BIG ASPECT OF THE CODE WAS IT'S A LOT MORE BECAUSE THE DEFINITIONS WERE BROKE DOWN TO BE MORE EXACT, TWO LARGE VEHICLES, TWO ALLOWING THE AND I WON'T EVEN SAY COMMERCIAL VEHICLES YOUR BUSINESS OR YOUR TAKE HOME VEHICLES TO BE PARKED IN A RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT.

SO IT'S REALLY IT'S ALL ENCOMPASSED.

NOTHING LEFT THIS SECTION OF THE CODE, IT'S JUST BROKE DOWN IN DEPTH MORE AS WE ALIGN THE DEFINITIONS WITH THE STATE STATUTE.

[02:25:04]

WE HAVE TO MAKE CODE FOR ALL THREE OF THOSE, WHETHER WE PERMIT THEM OR EXCLUDE THEM, WE HAVE TO MENTION THEM BECAUSE THEY'RE THREE DIFFERENT TYPES OF VEHICLES.

SO WE HAVE RECREATIONAL VEHICLES, COMMERCIAL VEHICLES AND THEN RESIDENTIAL VEHICLES.

WE ARE NOT SPECIFYING THAT.

WE ARE ONLY AMENDING FOR COMMERCIAL.

WE'RE AMENDING THE COMMERCIAL.

WE'RE AMENDING VEHICLES IN RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS.

THE HIGHLIGHT TO THAT IS IT WILL ALLOW FOR CERTAIN TYPES OF COMMERCIAL VEHICLES IN CERTAIN LOCATIONS FOR RVS, AS WELL AS THE PARKING PARAMETERS FOR OTHER VEHICLES SUCH AS REGULAR CARS.

SO BECAUSE OF THAT, MOST OF THIS LANGUAGE ALREADY IN PLACE, WE ARE JUST AMENDING IT TO ALLOW FOR A CERTAIN TYPE OF COMMERCIAL VEHICLE TO BE ALLOWED IN THERE AND THEN SPECIFYING BETTER THE LOCATIONS FOR THE PARKING.

BUT THE FOR CARS WAS ALREADY IN PLACE.

IT ALREADY SAID TWO ON ONE SIDE AND TWO IN THE DRIVEWAY.

THE ONLY CHANGE NOW IS THAT IT'S GOING TO HAVE ONE ON EACH SIDE, STILL TWO IN THE DRIVEWAY, AND THEN ALLOW FOR COMMERCIAL VEHICLES THAT HAVE CERTAIN LEVEL OF ENTITLEMENTS SUCH AS AF1 50 OR F 250.

THAT HAPPENS TO BE A WORK TRUCK.

SO IT'S NOT GOING TO ALLOW ANY LARGER VEHICLES THAN THAT.

IT'S BASICALLY GOING TO BE TRADITIONAL TRUCKS THAT YOU'LL SEE THAT HAVE EMBLEMS ON THEM IN NEIGHBORHOOD AREAS BECAUSE OF THIS TYPE OF CODE.

AND THAT'S IF YOU WERE TO APPROVE THIS.

OTHERWISE, THE ONLY DIFFERENCE IS YOU WILL NOT SEE THOSE COMMERCIAL VEHICLES.

YOU'LL STILL SEE TWO CARS PARKED ON ONE SIDE AND TWO IN THE FRONT RATHER THAN ONE ON EACH SIDE.

THEY'LL STILL BE BEHIND THE FENCE REGARDLESS IN EITHER SITUATION IF THEY'RE NOT IN THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE.

THE QUESTIONS FOR STAFF.

SEEING NONE. THE FLOOR IS OPEN.

THANK YOU, MR. WHITE.

ANYONE LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS? BILL BATTEN, 586 OCEAN SPRAY STREET SOUTHWEST.

THIS IS SPECIFICALLY PAYING ATTENTION TO SECTION THREE E UNDER AGRICULTURAL AFFIDAVIT.

AND THE REASON I'M ASKING THIS QUESTION IS BECAUSE THAT'S THE CATEGORY I FALL INTO.

AND I HAVE MY AFFIDAVIT ON FILE NOW, DO I HAVE TO PUT ANOTHER AFFIDAVIT IN BECAUSE WE'VE NOW CHANGED IT FROM THE SECTION LOCATION.

SO IT'S STRICTLY A I'M JUST TRYING TO SEEK CLARIFICATION BECAUSE I DON'T WANT CODE COMPLIANCE COMING ON ME BECAUSE I DIDN'T PUT A PIECE OF PAPER IN CITY.

I'M JUST TRYING TO BE A RESPONSIBLE RESIDENT.

I JUST HAVE TO KNOW IF I HAVE TO DO IT.

IF NOT, THEN I'M GOOD TO GO.

THANK. QUESTION NO, YOU'LL BE ALL SET.

GOOD TO GO? YEAH. ANY FURTHER COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE? SEEING NONE. IT'S BROUGHT BACK TO THE BOARD BOARD.

DO I HAVE A MOTION OR DISCUSSION? MOTION TO APPROVE T20 3000 13.

BY MR. WEINBERG. SECOND BY MR. GOOD. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE, AYE. AYE. OPPOSED.

THERE'S. IS MR. WHITE T 23 00014.

STEPHEN WHITE, SENIOR PLANNER FOR GROWTH MANAGEMENT.

THIS CASE IS T 20 3-00014.

IT IS CITYWIDE.

IT IS A TEXTUAL AMENDMENT TO THE CODE OF ORDINANCE.

TITLE 17 LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE CHAPTER 184 SUBDIVISIONS SECTION 184 .35.

SIMPLE LOT SPLIT LOT RECONFIGURATION.

AND THIS IS TO PROVIDE LANGUAGE FOR THE CITY OF PALM BAY TO REGULATE SIMPLE LOT SPLIT OR LOT RECONFIGURATIONS.

AS A STAFF. WE CONDUCTED AN ANALYSIS ON THE LOT SPLIT AND RECONFIGURATIONS BEING CONDUCTED WITHIN THE CITY OF PALM BAY.

ON MULTIPLE OCCASIONS, STAFF HAS ENCOUNTERED PROPERTIES WITH SPLIT ZONING AND FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATIONS.

WE CONDUCTED A REVIEW WITH SURROUNDING MUNICIPALITIES TO DEVELOP LANGUAGE FOR ADOPTION INTO THE CODE OF ORDINANCES.

THESE PROCEDURES WILL HELP STAFF BETTER TRACK THE ZONING AND FUTURE LAND USE MAPS WITHIN THE CITY.

AND IT WILL. LEAD TO LESS CASES LIKE WE HEARD TONIGHT FOR THIS FUTURE LAND USE AND ZONING AND PROPERTIES.

STAFF DOES RECOMMEND CASE T 23 00014 FOR APPROVAL AND I'M AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.

OR HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF.

THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.

MR. WHITE, HOW DOES THIS CHANGE STAND TO TO PREVENT AN OCCURRENCE LIKE YOU MENTIONED IN YOUR LAST POINT THERE, WHERE USES ARE

[02:30:04]

WE'VE HAD SOME THAT HAVE COME IN WITH THE SPLIT ZONING.

SO TRYING TO GET SOMEBODY AND IF THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN THAT WOULD HAVE COME TO US BEFORE, WE WOULD HAVE CAUGHT THAT AS A STAFF IN REVIEWING THE LOT RECONFIGURATION, THE PROPOSED SURVEY COMPARED TO THE CURRENT LAYOUT AND THEN THE PROPOSED ONE, AS WELL AS THE CREATION OF POTENTIALLY NON-CONFORMING LOTS, WHICH WE RUN INTO A LOT IN THE CITY, WHICH HAMPERS THE GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT FOR NON-CONFORMING LOTS THAT ARE CREATED THAT WE DO NOT SEE.

AND IN OTHER INSTANCE, IT WILL CATCH AS IF THEY HAVE TO BY STATE STATUTE, GO THROUGH PLATTING AND THEY CANNOT JUST CONSISTENTLY SPLIT A PARCEL WITHOUT NOTIFYING US.

AND THEN IF SOMEBODY COMES IN LATER REQUIRING A WHOLE DIFFERENT PROCESS THAT THEY WEREN'T RESPONSIBLE FOR FINDING OUT, THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH A FINAL PLAT PROCESS.

OKAY. THANK YOU FOR THAT TEXTURE.

I APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.

AND THERE'S ALSO ANOTHER LARGE SCALE ADDED BENEFIT WHICH ALLOWS FOR US TO HAVE A MUCH MORE CONSISTENT AND UPDATED GIS MAPPING CAPABILITY.

CURRENTLY WE ONLY ARE ABLE TO TRACK LOT SPLITS THROUGH WHEN BREVARD COUNTY ACTUALLY UPDATES THEIRS.

AND THEN WE HAVE TO MATCH OUR MAP TO THEIR MAP.

AND IT'S A LOT MORE EFFORT WHERE IF WE'RE PROCESSING LOT SPLITS, WE'LL KNOW THEM BEFORE BREVARD COUNTY ACTUALLY, AND WE CAN ADD THEM IN BECAUSE WE'VE APPROVED THEM.

WE'RE ALSO ABLE TO MAKE SURE AND MONITOR THAT THEY'RE ADHERING TO ZONING STANDARDS WHEN THEY'RE SPLITTING THE LOT SO WE CAN GIVE THEM MORE INFORMATION AND MAKE SURE THEY'RE NOT CREATING NON-CONFORMITIES THAT THEY CAN'T BUILD ON ANYMORE BECAUSE THERE WOULDN'T BE LEGAL SINCE WE DIDN'T APPROVE THEM.

SO THERE ARE A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT THINGS THAT ARE GOING TO COME INTO PLAY WITH THIS LOT SPLIT LOT RECONFIGURATION.

IT ALSO DOES ALLOW FOR US TO MAKE SURE THAT WHEN AN APPLICANT DOESN'T WANT A SINGLE ZONING, WE WE CAN RECOMMEND THE LOT SPLIT AND HAVE TWO DIFFERENT PROJECTS COME FORWARD.

OR WE CAN LOOK AT, FOR INSTANCE, THESE CONDITIONAL USES THAT HAVE BEEN OVER FIVE ACRES AND THEN YOU'RE ONLY LOOKING AT IT CONTAINING TWO OF THE FIVE ACRES.

THEY'LL BE SPLITTING THE LOT WITH US OR THROUGH US BEFORE THEY COME TO YOU FROM NOW ON, IF THIS WERE TO PASS.

SO YOU'D BE LOOKING AT THE SITE SPECIFIC AREA RATHER THAN A WHOLE ENTIRE PARCEL, BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO CUT THEM DOWN IN ACCORDANCE WITH WHAT THEY'RE TRYING TO PROJECT RATHER THAN BRINGING FORWARD MORE OF THIS CONCEPTUAL IDEA.

QUESTIONS. ANDERSON.

GOING TO BE DONE THROUGH GROWTH MANAGEMENT ADMINISTRATIVELY, OR IS IT? YES, IT WILL BE DONE ADMINISTRATIVELY FOR A NOMINAL FEE.

WE HAVE YET TO DETERMINE THE FEE, BUT WE WILL BE DOING SO OVER THE NEXT FEW MONTHS FOR OUR NEXT BUDGET CYCLE.

IT WILL BE A NOMINAL FEE AND AS MR. WHITE HAD MENTIONED BEFORE, IT ESSENTIALLY ONLY REQUIRES A BEFORE AND AFTER SURVEY.

SO WHAT THE LOT LOOKS LIKE NOW AND HOW YOU'RE PROPOSING TO SPLIT IT OR HOW YOU'RE PROPOSING TO COMBINE IT.

SO IT'LL BE A VERY SIMPLE REVIEW ADMINISTRATIVELY DONE PRIMARILY THROUGH GROWTH MANAGEMENT WITH THE HELP OF THE CITY SURVEYOR.

YOU AIN'T SEEING NOTHING FURTHER.

WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS REQUEST, MR. BUTTON? BILL BATTEN, 586 OCEAN SPRAY STREET SOUTHWEST. HEARING HOW YOUR WHAT YOUR PLAN IS ALL MAKES SENSE EXCEPT FOR I DIDN'T SEE THE PROCESS OF NOTIFYING THE PROPERTY APPRAISERS, AND THAT'S WHERE IT'S GOING TO COME INTO PLAY BECAUSE THE PROPERTY APPRAISER FROM THE COUNTY, THAT'S WHAT DETERMINES YOUR TAX RATE ON YOUR PIECE OF PROPERTY.

IT'S NOT THE CITY DOING THAT.

SO I DIDN'T SEE THE PROCESS ANYWHERE IN THIS PACKET OF HOW TO NOTIFY THE PROPERTY APPRAISER BECAUSE LIKE YOU SAY, IT DOES MAKE AN IMPACT ON THEIR MAP BECAUSE WE'RE USING THEIR MAPS FOR OUR GIS NOW.

SO I JUST DIDN'T SEE THE PROCESS OF HOW WE COULD GET THEM INVOLVED IN OUR INNER CHANGES.

SOMEBODY CAN TELL ME THAT.

I'LL BE AWARE OF HOW YOU'RE DOING IT.

THANK YOU. THAT'S A GOOD QUESTION.

SO THIS PROCESS DOES NOT SUBJUGATE NOR NULLIFY THE COUNTY PROCESS WHATSOEVER.

INSTEAD, IT IS ON TOP OF THE COUNTY PROCESS.

SO WHAT IT IS, IS TO HAVE YOU STILL SPLIT THE LOT THROUGH THE COUNTY, BUT YOU ALSO SPLIT THE LOT THROUGH THE CITY.

SO IT SOUNDS LIKE IT'S A DUAL PROCESS.

BUT THE REASON FOR THAT IS, AS YOU HAD MENTIONED, ONE, THE COUNTY VERSION IS FOR TAX PURPOSES TO IDENTIFY TAXING AREAS TO AN EXTENT FOR YOUR PARCELS, RIGHT? THE CITY IS TO MAKE SURE THE LOT IS MEETING THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ZONING DISTRICT THAT YOU'RE IN SO THAT YOUR LOT CAN CONFORM TO THE TYPE OF USE THAT YOU WOULD WANT.

SO THEY'RE GOING TO BE VERY SIMILAR, BUT TWO SEPARATE PATHS.

WHAT WE CAN DO AND THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THIS UP.

WHAT WE CAN DO IS ONCE WE CREATE OUR LOT SPLIT FORM, WE CAN HAVE A CAVEAT THAT IT STILL HAS TO BE SUBMITTED TO THE BREVARD COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISER FOR THAT.

[02:35:01]

IT WILL BE HARD TO GET THE RECIPROCAL COMMUNICATION BECAUSE THE COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISER IS NOT DOES NOT HAVE TO BE MANDATED TO GIVE US A LOT SPLIT THAT HAS HAPPENED THAT'S NONCONFORMING. THEY DON'T HAVE TO HAVE US CHECK THE ZONING.

SO THAT STILL COULD POTENTIALLY HAPPEN.

BUT WHAT THIS WILL DO IS PUT A REGULATION IN PLACE THAT THE CITY STILL REVIEWING LOT SPLITS OR WILL BE REVIEWING LOT SPLITS WHICH WILL ALLOW US TO THEN SAY THOSE LOTS ARE NON POTENTIALLY ADDRESSED THEM IN DIFFERENT FRAMEWORKS ALSO HAVE THE ABILITY TO RECONFIGURE THE LOT IF WE NEED TO IF THEY SPLIT IT IMPROPERLY.

SO IT GIVES US AVENUES FOR DEFENSE IN CASE SOMEBODY SPLITS A LOT THROUGH THE COUNTY.

THAT'S NOT MEETING OUR ZONING STANDARDS, PUTS A PROCESS IN PLACE FOR US TO REVIEW THOSE LOTS AND THEN ALSO GIVES US SOME SEMBLANCE OF WHAT TO DO IF THESE LOTS ARE SPLIT WITHOUT US LOOKING AT. SO IS THERE WOULD NOT BE A REQUIREMENT FOR THE COUNTY TO.

WE COULD NOT REQUIRE THE COUNTY TO DO THAT.

NO. BECAUSE JUST TO GIVE IT TO YOU, BUT TO REQUIRE IT BEFORE THEY COULD ACCEPT THAT, NO, WE WILL REQUIRE IT.

INSTEAD, WE WOULD HAVE TO BE VERY VOCAL AND COMMUNICATIVE TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC TO MAKE SURE THEY'RE AWARE OF THIS PROCESS ONCE IT HAPPENS.

SO THAT WILL BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE AN INITIATIVE, AN INITIATIVE RIGHT AWAY FOR US.

AND IT WILL BE SOMETHING THAT WILL TAKE A LITTLE TIME FOR PEOPLE TO GET USED TO FOR SURE.

BUT THE CHANGE, FOR INSTANCE, IN WEST MELBOURNE ALREADY DOES THIS TYPE OF WORK WHERE THEY DO LOT SPLITS, BUT THE COUNTY, BECAUSE IT'S THE COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISER AND AS MR. BATTEN HAD MENTIONED, IT'S A TAX PURPOSE.

THEY DO NOT HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT AND IT SAYS IT ON THEIR FORM.

IT DOES NOT HAVE TO MEET ZONING STANDARDS.

WE DO NOT CHECK ZONING STANDARDS.

SO IT'S UP TO THE PROPERTY OWNER TO THEN DO THAT DUE DILIGENCE.

US PUTTING THIS PROCESS IN PLACE HELPS THE PROPERTY OWNER KNOW THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH THIS TO MAKE SURE IT'S CORRECT.

SO IT'S KIND OF TRYING TO GUIDE THEM IN THE RIGHT FORM AND THAT'S WHY IT WOULD BE A NOMINAL FEE, SIMPLE REVIEW PROCESS, BUT MAKING SURE EVERYTHING IS IN LINE SO THAT WHEN WE GO FORWARD, WE'RE ABLE TO DO SO.

ON THAT. I DO THEIR CURRENT CHECKLIST AS IF YOU WERE TO GO IN AND GET A LOCK COMBINATION OR A LOT SPLIT FROM THE PROPERTY APPRAISER, IT DOES SAY TO FOLLOW UP WITH YOUR LOCAL MUNICIPALITY TO ENSURE THE ZONING OF YOUR PROPERTY AND YOUR PROPERTY IS IN ACCORDANCE.

SO AT THAT POINT WHERE WE GET A LOT OF THE WALK INS AT THIS POINT WHERE WE'RE NOT REQUIRED TO SHOW ANYTHING, ALL WE'RE VERIFYING IS THE ZONING DISTRICT.

NOW, AT THIS POINT, WE'LL BE ABLE TO MAKE SURE THAT CONFORMING LOTS STAY LEGAL, CONFORMING LOTS WITH THE SURVEYS PRIOR TO THEM, CONTINUING THE PROCESS WITH THE COUNTY AND THE RECORDING AT THE CLERK OF COURT.

HERE. ONE MORE QUESTION, IF I MAY, MR. HRUSHEVSKY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MA'AM.

IS THERE MAYBE AN OPPORTUNITY WHEN WE'RE GRANTED ALL THIS GOES THROUGH THAT PERHAPS EVEN IF IT'S IN AN INFORMAL WAY, BUT WE COULD THE ADMINISTRATION, SO TO SPEAK, WHETHER IT'S THE DEPARTMENT OR EVEN THE CITY MANAGER, COULD JUST SEND A NICE LITTLE LETTER TO THE BREVARD COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISER AND SAY, HEY, WE'VE CHANGED OUR OUR PROCESSES DOWN HERE.

IF YOU COULD LET THE TEAM KNOW, WE SURE WOULD APPRECIATE IT.

AGAIN, NOTHING FORMAL, BUT THAT'S SOMETHING WE CAN DEFINITELY REACH OUT TO THEM.

ASK, YOU KNOW, WE CAN ALWAYS ASK AND SEE IF THEY MIGHT BE ABLE TO ADD SOMETHING ON THE FORM, LIKE AN ASTERISK SAYING PALM BAY HAS A LOT, BUT PERHAPS IT MIGHT EVEN HELP TO LET THEM KNOW, YOU KNOW WHAT, MELBOURNE IS DOING THE SAME.

MAYBE WE GET A LITTLE COLUMN THAT SAYS THAT ON THERE, BUT I CAN'T PROMISE IT.

BUT YES, WE CAN DEFINITELY ASK AND COORDINATE WHAT WE CAN.

THAT HAS BEEN A POINT OF CONVERSATION, TRYING TO OPEN UP THE CHANNELS OF COMMUNICATION TO HAVE SOMETHING, AS JESSIE SAID, THAT WE CAN'T MAKE THEM DO ANYTHING.

IT'S REALLY I'VE HAD THAT PROFESSIONAL RELATIONSHIP TO DO IT IN OTHER STUFF WHERE IT WAS LIKE BOUNCING BACK AND FORTH WITH THE COUNTY AND THE COUNTY AND WAS REALLY HELPFUL TO SAY, WELL, THIS IS WHAT YOU'LL NEED TO GO BACK TO THE CITY OF PALM BAY AND DO AND THEN COME BACK TO ME.

AND THEY WERE SUPER HELPFUL.

IT WAS REALLY NICE. SO I THINK THAT THAT AMICABILITY PROBABLY EXISTS AT THAT LEVEL.

IT WOULD JUST BE REALLY GOOD TO FORMALLY COMMUNICATE IT.

BUT I REALLY LIKE THE DIRECTION THAT WE'RE HEADING HERE AND TRYING TO JUST DO OUR BEST TO SET THE PROPERTY OWNER UP FOR SUCCESS, BECAUSE RIGHT NOW THE SYSTEM DOESN'T NECESSARILY EXIST, THE CHECKS AND BALANCES AREN'T IN PLACE.

SO I LIKE THIS HERE AND I APPRECIATE IT.

THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. OKAY.

THANK YOU, MR. WHITE. FURTHER COMMENTS FROM THE FLOOR ON THIS, SEEING NONE WILL BE BROUGHT BACK TO THE BOARD.

MOTION TO APPROVE G 23 00014.

SECOND. YES, MA'AM.

OKAY. MOTION AND A SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.

HERE IS UNIT. UNANIMOUSLY.

NEXT CASE.

IS T 23 00019 HAGLER.

EVENING AGAIN, I'M BRINGING A CASE T 2319 APPLICANT CITY OF PALM BAY AND THE MINUTES.

[02:40:06]

CURRENTLY, CODE ALLOWS FOR A MODEL HOMES TO BE BUILT AND A NEW SUBDIVISION BASED ON THE APPROVED PRELIMINARY PLAT.

THE PROPOSED LANGUAGE ESTABLISHES MORE REASONABLE PROCEDURE FOR THE ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT WITHIN A SUBDIVISION BY REQUIRING FORMAL RECORDING OF THE FINAL PLAT IN BREVARD COUNTY.

THIS WILL ENSURE THAT BEFORE THE CONSTRUCTION OF A MODEL HOME, THE SUBDIVISION LAYOUT HAS BEEN CERTIFIED BY A SURVEYOR AND THE PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION PLANS HAVE MET THE CITY PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENTS, DESIGN SPECIFICATIONS FOR STREETS, SIDEWALKS, DRAINAGE AND NATURAL RESOURCE PROTECTION.

IN ADDITION, THE MODEL HOME WILL NOT BE ISSUED A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY UNTIL THE SUBDIVISION CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION HAS BEEN ISSUED.

THIS REQUIRES THE CERTIFICATION OF THE SUBDIVISIONS AS BUILT PLANS WHICH ARE ACCEPTED BY THE CITY ENGINEER.

THIS WILL PROVIDE FURTHER ASSURANCE THAT ALL PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS ARE COMPLETED ACCORDING TO THE CITY'S SPECIFICATIONS BEFORE THE SUBDIVISION IS OPEN FOR ACCESS BY THE PUBLIC.

AND BRINGS IT INTO ALIGNMENT WITH OUR OTHER CODES FOR BUILDINGS.

OR HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF.

NONE. OPEN TO THE PUBLIC.

DOES ANYONE WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS CASE? CAUSE NOW CLOSED, IT'S BROUGHT BACK TO THE BOARD.

OR DO I HAVE A MOTION OR FURTHER DISCUSSION? MOTION TO APPROVE T 23 00019.

SECOND. AND BY MR. WEINBERG, SECOND BY MR. BAUM. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE, AYE. ANY OPPOSED MOTION CARRIES? NOW, THAT WAS THE LAST CASE.

THE LAST ORDER OF BUSINESS IS THE RESCHEDULING OF THE SEPTEMBER PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING TO SEPTEMBER TUESDAY.

FOR THE FIFTH. TIME.

6:00. SO CHANGE YOUR CALENDARS.

AND DO YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE TO ADD? NO. ALL SET? OKAY.

THANK YOU. THE MEETINGS CLOSED.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.