Aug 29, 2024 Council Meetings - Special

[00:00:02]

OKAY. IT IS 1800 HOURS.

[CALL TO ORDER:]

OUR PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE WILL BE LED BY DEPUTY MAYOR DONNIE FELIX.

PLEASE RISE.

PLEASE FACE THE FLAG.

I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS.

ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.

BURAK.

MADAM JONES, ROLL CALL.

MAYOR. MEDINA.

PRESENT. DEPUTY MAYOR FELIX HERE.

COUNCILMAN. JOHNSON HERE.

COUNCILMAN WEINBERG. HERE.

MISS SHERMAN. HERE.

MISS SMITH. HERE.

THANK YOU, COUNSELOR.

I'D LIKE TO MOVE OUR BUSINESS.

[BUSINESS:]

BEFORE WE HAVE OUR PUBLIC HEARINGS.

AND I WOULD NEED A MOTION TO DO THAT.

SO MOVED. SECOND.

GOT A MOTION BY COUNCILMAN JOHNSON, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN WEINBERG.

ALL IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.

AYE. PASSES FOUR ZERO.

SO LET'S GO RIGHT INTO ITEM NUMBER ONE, AND I'LL PRESENT THIS ITEM.

[PUBLIC HEARINGS:]

THE BEST INFORMATION THAT I HAVE IS FROM THE AIR FORCE THAT HE LOST HIS LIFE.

HE WAS SERVING IN OPERATION RESOLVE OR INHERENT RESOLVE, I BELIEVE WAS THE OPERATION NAME.

AND IT'S AN UNDISCLOSED LOCATION.

SO, GENTLEMEN, MY MY THOUGHTS ARE.

AND I DID MEET WITH THE THE MOTHER AND FATHER, WHICH BY THE WAY, THE FATHER IS A KOREAN MARINE.

RETIRED GUNNERY SERGEANT AND STAFF SERGEANT.

TRISTAN WRIGHT WAS ACTUALLY BORN AT CAMP LEJEUNE NAVAL HOSPITAL.

JUST TO GIVE YOU THE TRADITION OF THE FAMILY AND AND THEIR SERVICE TO OUR NATION.

SO I, I THOUGHT I'D BRING THIS TO THIS COUNCIL EARLY SO THAT I'M ABLE TO PRESENT THEM WITH A FLAG TO FLY OVER.

CITY HALL IN IN HONOR OF STAFF SERGEANT TRISTAN WRIGHT'S SERVICE TO OUR NATION AS HE SERVED VALIANTLY.

HE WAS NOT IN COMBAT OPERATIONS, HOWEVER WHEN THE MILITARY SAYS UNDISCLOSED LOCATIONS, WE CAN READ BETWEEN THE LINES AS MASTER CHIEF IS SMILING. SO I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IF ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE WISHES TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM, EITHER FOR OR AGAINST IT.

ANYONE. OKAY.

SEEING NONE. I NEED A MOTION.

SO MOVED. SECOND.

GOT A MOTION BY COUNCILMAN JOHNSON, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN WEINBERG.

ALL IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.

AYE. THANK YOU.

GENTLEMEN, I TRULY APPRECIATE YOUR DEDICATION TO OUR MEMBERS THAT SERVE OUR OUR UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

SO NOW WE'RE ON PUBLIC HEARING NUMBER ONE, AND WE'LL ASK MISS SMITH TO READ THE CAPTION.

ORDINANCE 20 2432 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PALM BAY, BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, TITLE 17, LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE BY REPEALING THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE IN ITS ENTIRETY.

PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF ORDINANCES OR PARTS OF ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT.

HEREWITH. PROVIDING FOR DELETION FROM THE CITY OF PALM BAY.

CODE OF ORDINANCES PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY CLAUSE.

PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

THANK YOU MA'AM. I'M GOING TO OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING AND ASKED MR. SHERMAN. THANK YOU SIR.

I'M ACTUALLY GOING TO DEFER TO DEPUTY CITY MANAGER CARLA BROWN TO PRESENT THE ITEM.

THANK YOU. MA'AM.

MADAM. MADAM BROWN.

THANK YOU MAYOR. SO TONIGHT WE ARE COMING BACK TO YOU WITH A SERIES OF ADDITIONAL AMENDMENTS TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.

FROM WHAT YOU SAW ON AUGUST 8TH, WE ALSO HAVE ITEMS THAT ARE THAT HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED AFTER THE AGENDA ITEM THAT WAS PUBLISHED ON FRIDAY THAT WE'RE GOING TO DISCUSS DURING THE PRESENTATION.

AND FINALLY, WE HAVE ITEMS THAT WE ARE SEEKING COUNCIL'S DIRECTION ON TONIGHT.

SO I'LL ASK OUR CONSULTANT, PAT, TO GO AHEAD AND KICK OFF THE PRESENTATION.

AND WHEN WE GET TO MY SLIDES, I'LL TAKE OVER FROM THERE.

THANK YOU MA'AM.

GOOD EVENING. I'M BACK.

BUT THIS TIME WITH A DIFFERENT PRESENTATION.

SO WE THE LAST TIME WE WERE TALKING ABOUT THIS WAS AUGUST 8TH, AND THE ITEM WAS POSTPONED BECAUSE

[00:05:01]

SO WE HELD THREE ADDITIONAL MEETINGS, TWO IN PERSON AND ONE ONLINE.

WE HAD ABOUT 54 PEOPLE ATTENDING BETWEEN THE THREE MEETINGS, AND THEN WE GATHERED 186 COMMENTS.

SO YOU GOT THAT IN THE PACKET.

IT'S A VERY LONG TABLE, AND WE TRY TO CAPTURE EVERYBODY THAT CAME IN AND GAVE US SOME SOME INPUT.

SO WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO THROUGH THIS POWERPOINT IS GO THROUGH ALL THE CHANGES THAT WE HAVE MADE SINCE WE PRESENTED THIS TO YOU ON AUGUST 8TH.

SO THE CHAPTERS WHERE WE MADE CHANGES INCLUDE 171, WHICH IS DEFINITIONS, 172, WHICH IS THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW PROCESS, 173 ZONING. 174 ACCESSORY, TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT USES, AND 176 STREET STREETS.

PARKING AND LOADING. WE DIDN'T MAKE ANY CHANGES TO THE OTHER CHAPTERS.

IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT WE DIDN'T GET COMMENTS ON THE OTHER CHAPTERS, BUT WE'LL EXPLAIN WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO WITH THOSE LATER.

SO FOR THE DEFINITIONS CHAPTER, AT THE REQUEST OF THE MAYOR, WE INCLUDED A DEFINITION OF CONVENTION CENTER.

AND WHEN WE GO TO THE ZONING CHAPTER, YOU WILL SEE WHERE WE'RE PROPOSING TO ALLOW THEM.

SO THE DEFINITION IS A BUILDING OR GROUP OF BUILDINGS DESIGNED TO HOST CONVENTIONS, INDUSTRIAL SHOWS AND SIMILAR EVENTS.

WE NOTICED THAT THE DEFINITION OF TINY HOMES INCLUDED A STANDARD, SOMETHING TO DO WITH THE SIZE AND HAVING TO MEET CERTAIN STANDARDS.

SO WE MOVED THAT TO THE ZONING CHAPTER.

SO IT'S NOT THAT WE'RE JUST DELETING IT, IT'S THAT WE'RE MOVING THAT FOR CHAPTER 172, WHICH IS THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW CHAPTER.

THIS IS A MINOR CHANGE, BUT BASICALLY IT'S SAYING THAT YOUR CONDITIONAL USE IS VALID FOR TWO YEARS, AND THEN AT THAT TIME YOU CAN EITHER GET A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY, A CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION, BUSINESS TAX RECEIPT.

BUT WE HAD MISSED PUTTING IN JUST AN APPROVED SITE PLAN.

ONCE YOU GET YOUR SITE PLAN APPROVED, YOUR CONDITIONAL USE, IT'S GOOD.

I MEAN THAT YOU DON'T HAVE TO GO BACK.

THE OTHER CHANGE THAT WE MADE HAS TO DO WITH PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT.

JUST GO AHEAD. JUST A MINUTE, MA'AM.

RIGHT NOW, THAT CONDITIONAL USE IS FOR ONE YEAR, AND WE'RE EXTENDING IT TO TWO.

NO, WE'RE NOT CHANGING THE TIME.

IT'S JUST THAT NOW, IF WITHIN THOSE TWO YEARS YOU GET YOUR SITE PLAN APPROVED, YOU'RE GOOD.

YOU DON'T HAVE TO WAIT UNTIL YOU GET A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY.

JUST GETTING YOUR SITE PLAN APPROVED MEANS YOU'RE GOOD.

YOU DON'T HAVE TO GET ANY EXTENSIONS.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

FOR THE PUD, SOMETHING THAT WE NOTICED WAS THAT THERE WAS CONFUSION BETWEEN A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR STATUTES VERSUS A PUD AGREEMENT, WHICH IS WHERE THE CITY AND THE APPLICANT AGREE ON WHERE THEY'RE GOING TO PUT THE USES AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM AND ALL THAT.

SO WE MADE A FEW CHANGES THROUGHOUT SEVERAL CHAPTERS TO ADDRESS THAT.

NOW THERE'S A LOT OF TEXT HERE, BUT THE POINT I WANT TO MAKE IS THAT THERE IS A SECTION IN THIS CHAPTER THAT TALKS ABOUT THE REQUIRED EXHIBITS FOR A PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN.

THERE WAS SOME REORGANIZATION.

SO WHERE YOU SEE THOSE ARROWS, IT MEANS THAT WE DIDN'T DELETE THOSE REQUIREMENTS.

WE JUST MOVED THEM UP.

WE DID DELETE THE REQUIREMENT FOR A PHASED PLAN.

WE DON'T NEED TO KNOW ABOUT PHASES AT THIS POINT.

THE PHASES WILL COME LATER WHEN THEY COME WITH THEIR FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN.

SO WE TOOK THAT OUT.

WE CLARIFIED THAT IT IS NOT A TRAFFIC STUDY THAT THEY HAVE TO SUBMIT AT THIS POINT.

IT'S JUST A TRAFFIC MEMORANDUM.

AND THE LAST ONE HAS TO DO WITH THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AND THE AGREEMENT.

THE OTHER CHANGE THAT WE MADE HERE, ALSO RELATED TO PUDS.

IT HAS TO DO WITH MODIFICATIONS TO THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AND I CAN'T REMEMBER THAT ONE IF IT WAS SOMETHING THAT IS SOMEWHERE ELSE.

OR DO YOU WANT TO MENTION SOMETHING ABOUT THAT ONE? YEAH. IF I RECALL, IT WAS THAT IT WAS FOR THE FDP PROCESS.

IT WAS PLACED UNDER THE PDP SECTION, SO WE STRUCK IT FROM THIS SECTION.

IT ALREADY OCCURS IN THE FDP SECTION OF THE CODE.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

STILL IN THE SAME CHAPTER.

IT'S THIS IS WHERE WE ARE EXPLAINING THAT A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.

AND THEN WE SPECIFICALLY STATE ACCORDING TO STATE STATUTE.

SO THAT'S WHEN WE REFER TO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS VERSUS THE PUD AGREEMENT.

SO IT'S JUST A CLARIFICATION.

AND THEN THIS ONE ALSO REFERS TO THE TRAFFIC STUDY VERSUS TRAFFIC MEMORANDUM, BUT THIS IS SPECIFIC TO THE RAC.

THE REGIONAL ACTIVITY CENTER.

MOVING ON TO THE ZONING CHAPTER.

SO ONE OF THE COMMENTS THAT WE GOT FROM THE PUBLIC WAS THAT THE ELIMINATION OF THE RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL DISTRICT WAS

[00:10:01]

WE WERE COMBINING THAT WITH NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL, BUT AFTER TALKING TO THEM, WE REALIZED WE BETTER LEAVE IT THE WAY IT IS.

SO WE'RE BRINGING IT BACK.

RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL THE WAY IT WAS BEFORE.

ALSO, THIS TABLE STAFF NOTICED THAT WE HAVE SOME PROPERTIES TODAY IN THE BAYFRONT REDEVELOPMENT AREA THAT WOULD EVENTUALLY BECOME THE MIXED USE ZONING DISTRICTS.

THEY HAVE A LAND USE CLASSIFICATION OF UMU, NOT CMU, LIKE WE WERE SHOWING ON THIS TABLE.

SO IN AN EFFORT TO NOT MAKE THINGS NON-CONFORMING, WE JUST ADJUSTED THE TABLE.

SO WHETHER YOU'RE IN CMU OR EMU, YOU CAN HAVE YOU'RE UNDER THE SAME LAND USE CLASSIFICATION.

AND THIS ONE IS JUST TO SHOW THAT WE BROUGHT BACK THE RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL DISTRICT.

SO THAT'S NOT NEW TEXT.

IT'S JUST BRINGING IT BACK FROM YOUR CURRENT CODE.

THEN ANOTHER COMMENT THAT SOMEBODY BROUGHT UP WAS THAT THE CODE TODAY TALKS ABOUT HOW MANY ANIMALS YOU CAN HAVE AND HOW MUCH ACREAGE YOU HAVE TO HAVE FOR KEEPING FARM ANIMALS, GOATS OR HORSES, COWS.

AND WE HAD LUMPED THAT IN AS AN AGRICULTURE USE, BUT IT WAS IMPORTANT TO KEEP THOSE NUMBERS IN PLACE.

SO WE DECIDED TO BRING THAT LINE BACK TO THE TABLE.

SO IN TERMS OF THE NUMBERS OF ANIMALS, THE ACREAGES, THAT'S NOT CHANGING.

IT'S WHAT YOU HAVE IN THE CODE TODAY WHICH IS BRINGING IT, BRINGING IT BACK TO THE DRAFT.

THE QUESTION HAS COME UP IN TERMS OF ROOSTERS AS OPPOSED TO JUST CHICKENS.

IT'S NOT IN THE CODE TODAY.

AND IF WE DO ANYTHING ABOUT THAT, IT WOULD HAVE TO BE IN PHASE TWO.

SO REMEMBER THAT THIS IS NOT THE LAST TIME THAT YOU SEE THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE CHANGING.

THERE MAY BE OTHER CHANGES IN THE FUTURE.

SO THIS IS SOMETHING THAT THEY CAN BRING IT UP AGAIN.

SO THE ROOSTERS ARE COMING BACK.

THE ROOSTERS ARE COMING, RIGHT? MISS JOANIE. MISS.

MISS BROWN. WE'LL BE BRINGING THESE ROOSTERS ISSUES BACK TO THE CONSIDERATION.

YES, BECAUSE I DO HAVE SOMEONE THAT REALLY PULLED MY EAR ON THE ROOSTERS.

I BELIEVE THAT WE HAD NOTED THAT FOR PHASE TWO.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

THEN THIS TABLE SHOWS THE USES THAT ARE PERMITTED IN THE DIFFERENT COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS.

SO WE BROUGHT BACK THE COLUMN FOR RC.

SO THAT WAS PUT BACK IN THE TABLE.

AND THEN THE ONES THAT ARE SHOWN IN YELLOW ARE SOME USES THAT WE'RE PROPOSING TO CHANGE.

LIKE FOR EXAMPLE, WE NOTICED THAT WE WERE NOT ALLOWING BREWPUBS IN THE MIXED USE DISTRICT AND THERE IS NO REASON FOR NOT ALLOWING IT.

ALSO, WE NOTICED THAT RESTAURANTS AND ESTABLISHMENTS FOR SOME REASON WERE NOT SHOWING H.C.

HEAVY COMMERCIAL. SO WE'RE PROPOSING TO PUT THAT BACK IN RETAIL ESTABLISHMENTS.

CHURCHES WAS SOMETHING THAT SOMEBODY ELSE BROUGHT UP, THAT WHY AREN'T WE ALLOWING CHURCHES IN UMU? MAKES SENSE. THERE WAS NO REASON WHY.

WE JUST MISSED IT.

AND THE CONVENTION CENTERS FOR THE COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS WERE PROPOSING TO ALLOW THEM IN GHC AND UMU.

AND THEN WHEN WE GO TO THE INDUSTRIAL TABLE, WE'LL SEE MORE OF THAT.

SO WE'VE ADDED THE CHURCHES.

WE ADDED CHURCHES, YES.

FOR THE INDUSTRIAL DISTRICTS, WE ADDED THE LINE FOR CONVENTION CENTERS.

AND WE'RE SAYING THAT THEY SHOULD BE ALLOWED IN THE LEE DISTRICT, THE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT.

WE ALSO NOTICED THAT RESTAURANTS AND EATING ESTABLISHMENTS ARE NOT CURRENTLY ALLOWED IN LEE, AND WE FELT LIKE IT WOULD MAKE SENSE TO HAVE FOOD CLOSE TO WHERE THE PEOPLE WORK. SO WE ARE ALLOWING THEM AS CONDITIONAL USES.

AND AND SOMETHING HAD HAPPENED WITH THE TABLES AND WE HAD MARKED ADULT ENTERTAINMENT AS BEING ALLOWED IN IU AND CONSERVATION, BUT THAT WAS JUST A COMPLETE MISTAKE.

SO WE JUST CLARIFIED THAT BY MOVING THEM TO LEE.

SO THAT'S WHERE YOU ALREADY HAVE ONE OF THESE ESTABLISHMENTS, AND THAT'S WHERE THEY WOULD BE ALLOWED SUBJECT TO ALL THE STANDARDS OF THE CODE.

THEN TALKING ABOUT THE DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS WE WERE TALKING ABOUT TOWNHOUSES AND, YOU KNOW, THE, THE WIDTH OF THE LAWS FOR TOWNHOUSES AND REALIZED THAT THE MATH WAS JUST NOT WORKING, BECAUSE IF WE'RE ALLOWING A 40 FOOT OR, YOU KNOW, 20 FOOT WIDE TOWNHOUSE AND WE WERE ASKING FOR 100 FOOT DEEP LOT, BUT WE WERE SAYING THAT THE, THE SIZE OF THE LOT COULD NOT BE MORE THEN WHERE AM I? I THINK I DIDN'T INCLUDE THAT LINE, BUT BASICALLY THE 20 TIMES 100.

IT WAS JUST NOT WORKING THAT MATH.

SO WE DECIDED TO REDUCE THE DEPTH DEPTH FOR TOWNHOUSES ONLY TO 80FT.

AND THEN SOMETHING ELSE THAT SOMEBODY POINTED OUT FROM THE PUBLIC WAS THAT IN THE CMU, WE WERE REQUIRING A IMPERVIOUS SURFACE RATIO OF 0.7.

[00:15:01]

AND THEY MADE THE CASE THAT IF IT IS GOING TO BE A MIXED USE, WE SHOULD BUMP IT UP A LITTLE BIT.

SO WE CHANGED IT TO 0.8.

FOR INDUSTRIAL.

THE DRAFTS THAT YOU GOT BEFORE WERE SHOWING 20% FOR OPEN SPACE, AND WE CHANGED THAT TO TO TEN.

NOW FOR COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS.

AGAIN, BRINGING BACK THE RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL AND THEN FOR NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL, THE MAXIMUM BUILDING COVERAGE WAS REDUCED FROM 35 TO 30. THAT WAS THE ONLY OTHER CHANGE HERE.

FOR STILL IN THE ZONING CHAPTER, THE ARCHITECTURAL STANDARDS, WHICH IS BROUGHT BACK THE REFERENCE TO THE RC DISTRICT, SINCE NOW WE HAVE IT BACK IN THE CODE. THEN THERE IS A SECTION THAT TALKS ABOUT LIVING AREA, MINIMUM LIVING AREA.

AND INITIALLY IT STATED THAT TINY HOMES WERE EXEMPT FROM THIS REQUIREMENT.

BUT WE'RE PUTTING IN A REQUIREMENT THAT A MINIMUM SIZE WOULD HAVE TO BE 120FT SQUARE FEET.

AND THEN FOR SOME REASON, WE HAD A LINE THAT SAID MAXIMUM UNIT SIZE 1400 SQUARE FEET.

AND SOMEBODY MADE THE POINT THAT WHY WOULD YOU WANT TO LIMIT THAT? IF YOU WANT TO HAVE LIKE A LUXURY APARTMENT, CONDO OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT? WHY? WHY NOT? SO THERE'S NO NEED TO A MAXIMUM UNIT SIZE FOR MULTIFAMILY.

AND THEN REMEMBER, IN THE DEFINITIONS CHAPTER, WE SAID THAT WE WERE TAKING SOMETHING OUT OF THE DEFINITION OF TINY HOMES.

THIS IS WHERE WE'RE PUTTING IT.

SO IT HAS TO DO WITH JUST STANDARDS FOR TINY HOMES.

NOW WE'RE MOVING ON TO THE NEXT CHAPTER.

174 THIS IS WHERE WE HAVE STANDARDS FOR ACCESSORY STRUCTURES.

AND SOMEBODY BROUGHT UP THE ISSUE OF LIMITING THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURES IN RURAL AREAS.

DIDN'T MAKE A LOT OF SENSE BECAUSE YOU HAVE STORAGE BUILDINGS, YOU HAVE BARNS, STABLES, YOU KNOW, THINGS THAT YOU WOULD NORMALLY FIND IN AGRICULTURAL AREAS OR RURAL ESTATES. SO WE'RE EXEMPTING THOSE DISTRICTS FROM CERTAIN STANDARDS LIKE THE EXCEEDING THE HEIGHT OF THE STRUCTURE OF THE PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE.

IF YOU'RE IN A REGULAR ZONING DISTRICT, YOUR ACCESSORY STRUCTURE HAS TO BE LOWER THAN YOUR MAIN BUILDING IN THE RR.

GU R E S R E R.

THEY CAN EXCEED THE HEIGHT OF THE PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE.

AND ALSO THERE IS SOMETHING THAT TALKS ABOUT THE SIZE OF THE ENCLOSURES OF THE ANIMAL ENCLOSURES.

SO WE'RE SAYING THAT IF YOU HAVE PROPERTY WITHIN THESE DISTRICTS, YOU'RE EXEMPT FROM THOSE STANDARDS RELATED TO FENCES AND WALLS.

SOMEBODY BROUGHT UP THE ISSUE LAST TIME THAT WHY ARE WE RESTRICTING CHAIN LINK FENCE IN THE FRONT YARD? WE REALIZED THAT IN THE CURRENT CODE IT ONLY APPLIES TO THE MIXED USE DISTRICTS.

SO WE WENT IN AND CLARIFIED IT'S JUST IN THE MIXED USE DISTRICTS THAT WE HAVE THAT RESTRICTION.

THE PARKING CHART, ONE ISSUE WAS JUST A MISSING ASTERISK FOR THE FOOTNOTE.

SO WE PUT THAT BACK AND THEN SOME REFERENCE TO SOME DISTRICTS THAT WERE INCORRECT.

SO THE SF ONE WAS ELIMINATED.

SO IT SHOULD BE RS ONE.

AND THE TABLES STILL REFERRED TO AN RT EIGHT, WHICH SHOULD BE RT TEN.

AND THEN DO YOU WANT TO TAKE THIS ONE? YES. AND IF COUNCIL.

IF YOU DON'T MIND, MAYOR, I'D LIKE TO PRESENT IT FROM HERE, BECAUSE I'D LIKE TO TAKE NOTES AND.

AND WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO DO IS KIND OF JUST GO THROUGH IT.

BUT WHAT MISS SHERMAN HAS POINTED OUT IS THAT WE'RE ON PUBLIC HEARING NUMBER ONE, WHICH IS THE REPEAL OF THE LDC.

SO I CAN PRESENT THIS NOW UNDER THIS PUBLIC HEARING.

NUMBER ONE, SO THAT, YOU KNOW, BEFORE YOU GET TO PUBLIC HEARING, NUMBER TWO, IF YOU'RE REPEALING IT, WHAT YOU'RE REPLACING IT WITH, AND THEN WE CAN COME BACK TO GETTING DIRECTION ON EACH ITEM SLIDE IF THAT'S FINE.

OKAY. OKAY.

IS THAT GOOD? OKAY.

AS LONG AS IT'S GOOD WITH OUR ATTORNEYS.

AND I JUST WANT TO NOTE WE HAVE TWO TODAY I GOT I GOT A I HAVE A I HAD A NOD OKAY.

CARRY ON. MA'AM. OKAY.

SO I WILL JUST READ THESE IN SUMMARY AND THEN WE CAN COME BACK TO THEM.

SO IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND FOLLOWING WITH ME, PAT, SLIDE 17 IS THE CLEANUP ITEMS. AND THAT INCLUDES REFERENCES THAT WE FOUND AFTER THE AGENDA WAS PUBLISHED THAT WERE REALLY OMISSIONS OR OVERSIGHTS OF STAFF.

AND THE FIRST ONE IS EDUCATIONAL ESTABLISHMENTS VERSUS EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS, EDUCATIONAL ESTABLISHMENTS.

THE LANGUAGE FOR THAT DEFINITION WAS REALLY ENCOMPASSED UNDER EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS.

SO WE'RE SUGGESTING ELIMINATE THAT DEFINITION.

AND SINCE OUR EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS IS ALSO CLOSELY MIRRORING WHAT THE FLORIDA STATUTES STATES, WHICH IS

[00:20:06]

THE SECOND CORRECTION IS REFERENCING SMALL EVENT SPACES.

SO IN THE SCHEDULE OF USES TABLE, SMALL EVENT SPACES IS ONLY ALLOWED AS A CONDITIONAL USE IN NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL DISTRICT.

AND IT'S LIMITED TO 5000FT² WHICH IS IN LINE WITH THE DEFINITION IN CHAPTER 171.

WHAT WE'RE NOTING IS THAT SMALL EVENT SPACES, THERE'S NO REASON WHY IT SHOULDN'T BE PERMITTED BY RIGHT.

IN CC, GC, HC, CMU, AND UMU ADDITIONALLY ALLOWING IT REQUIRING IT TO BE LIMITED TO 5000FT² IN ALIGNMENT WITH THE DEFINITION. AND THEN FINALLY, ANOTHER OVERSIGHT.

WHEN WE ADDED BACK THE RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICT, WHAT WE DIDN'T FACTOR IN WAS THAT THE DRIVE THROUGH ESTABLISHMENTS THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY ALLOWED AS A PIECE OF ANOTHER PERMITTED USE WAS TAKEN OUT.

DRIVE THROUGH ESTABLISHMENTS.

NOW IS A IS A SEPARATE USE IN THE ZONING SCHEDULE.

USE THIS TABLE. AND WE'RE JUST SAYING WE'D LIKE TO CONTINUE TO ALLOW DRIVE THROUGH ESTABLISHMENTS TO BE A PERMITTED USE IN RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL.

ALL RIGHT. SO MOVING ON TO THE NEXT SLIDE.

THANK YOU. IT'S KIND OF HARD TO SEE ON THE BOARD, BUT THESE ARE ITEMS THAT CAME OUT OF THE OPEN HOUSE SESSIONS.

AND THEY WERE COMMENTS BY THE PUBLIC AND STAKEHOLDERS THAT WE FELT, YOU KNOW, WE WERE IN ALIGNMENT WITH.

AND WE WANTED TO GET A LITTLE BIT MORE DIRECTION ON.

SO THE FIRST ONE IS TREE REMOVAL PERMITS UNDER ONE ACRE.

AND THE CONCERN WAS REALLY ABOUT THE SIZE OF THE LOT BEING A QUARTER ACRE OR A HALF OF AN ACRE AND TRYING TO COMPLY WITH THE REQUIREMENTS BY FDOH FOR SEPTIC TANKS AS WELL AS THE CITY'S DRAINAGE REQUIREMENTS.

AND WHEN STAFF REVIEWED THIS, WE FELT WE FELT LIKE THERE WERE A COUPLE POINTS WE WANTED TO MAKE THE INFILL LOTS WHERE CENTRALIZED SEWER IS AVAILABLE ARE REQUIRED TO CONNECT ANYWAY.

INFILL LOTS WHERE THERE IS NO SEWER AVAILABLE, THEY'RE PERMITTED TO OBTAIN THEIR SEPTIC PERMIT AND TREE PROTECTION AND PRESERVATION IS IS REALLY MORE OF AN INCENTIVE WHERE WE PROVIDE CREDITS FOR THEIR PRESERVING THE TREES.

HOWEVER, PRE PRESERVING TREES IS NOT REQUIRED WHEN YOU'RE CLEARING A LOT FOR A NEW SINGLE FAMILY HOME.

AND IN ORDER TO GET A PERMIT FOR A NEW SINGLE FAMILY HOME, YOU MUST SUBMIT A SITE PLAN, WHICH INCLUDES A LANDSCAPE PLAN SO YOU CAN REMOVE THE TREES.

YOU JUST HAVE TO PUT SOME TREES BACK ON THE LOT.

SO WHAT WE'RE SAYING HERE IS, YOU KNOW, WE'RE RECOMMENDING THAT UNDER PHASE TWO, MAYBE WE CONSIDER LOOKING AT ANY EXEMPTIONS THAT THE CITY MIGHT WANT TO CONSIDER FOR INFILL.

LOTS THAT ARE NOT ON THAT DO NOT HAVE ACCESS TO CENTRALIZED SEWER.

MOVING ON TO THE NEXT SLIDE.

THIS IS MORE MORE REALLY, I THINK WHEN IT COMES TO PUDS AND LARGER SUBDIVISIONS, THE PLACEMENT OF STREET TREES AND WHERE THOSE STREET TREES ARE REQUIRED TO BE PLACED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CODE, AND THAT'S REALLY WITHIN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY.

AND WHAT A MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC NOTED IS YOU'RE PLACING THESE TREES IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY.

THEY CAN CONFLICT WITH UTILITIES.

IF YOU'RE REQUIRING CANOPY TREES, THE ROOTS CAN GROW THROUGH THE SIDEWALKS AND CAUSE DAMAGE.

SO STAFF AGREES.

THIS IS A FAIR POINT. WE SHOULD CONSIDER THIS, AND WE WOULD LIKE TO LOOK AT IT UNDER PHASE TWO.

THAT'LL GIVE US TIME TO TALK WITH PUBLIC WORKS AND UTILITIES STAFF AND THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY TO FIND A BETTER SOLUTION.

ON THE NEXT SLIDE, CLUSTER SUBDIVISIONS.

THIS CAME UP QUITE A BIT.

I'M GOING TO SPEND A LITTLE BIT MORE TIME ON THIS ONE.

SO CLUSTER SUBDIVISIONS IS KIND OF A UNIQUE CONCEPT.

IT WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS PRESENTED TO US BY THE CONSULTANT.

I FEEL LIKE IT MEETS A NEED AND A GAP IN IN THE CITY OF PALM BAY ZONING CODE.

BUT I WILL SAY THAT IT IS NOT A ZONING DISTRICT.

A LOT OF THE CONCERN THAT CAME OUT FROM THE PUBLIC IS THAT CLUSTER SUBDIVISIONS WILL CREATE ADDITIONAL HOUSING DEVELOPMENT WITHIN EXISTING NEIGHBORHOODS.

THEY WILL DETERIORATE THE CURRENT INFRASTRUCTURE THAT CAN'T SUPPORT THE EXISTING RATE OF BUILDING AND CLUSTER SUBDIVISIONS AND INCREASES POPULATION DENSITY.

A REQUEST THAT CAME OUT OF THE PUBLIC SESSIONS WAS THAT THE CITY SHOULD CONSIDER ALLOWING A MINIMUM 40 FOOT LOT WIDTH IN CLUSTER SUBDIVISIONS, WHERE WE CURRENTLY ARE PROPOSING 50 50 FOOT.

SO AGAIN, I JUST WANT TO NOTE THAT CLUSTER SUBDIVISIONS ISN'T A ZONING DISTRICT.

IT IS A USE, AND IT IS ONLY ALLOWED BY CONDITIONAL USE IN CERTAIN SUB IN IN CERTAIN SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS.

[00:25:07]

RURAL. RESIDENTIAL.

RURAL. ESTATE. SUB SUBURBAN REAL ESTATE.

RS ONE. RS TWO AND RS THREE.

AND OF COURSE, THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF PERMITTED LOTS OR HOUSES MIRRORS THE UNDERLYING ZONING DISTRICT.

THE OTHER ITEM I WANTED TO MAKE NOTE OF IS.

WHILE WE ARE ALLOWING SMALLER LOTS IN CLUSTER SUBDIVISIONS, THE TRADE OFF IS THAT WE'RE REQUIRING MORE OPEN SPACE.

AND THE IMPORTANT THING TO NOTE WITH THAT IS THAT THE OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENT IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE YOU'RE PROVIDING SMALLER LOTS.

SO YOU WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THERE'S THIS COMMON RECREATION, OPEN SPACE, YOU KNOW, PLACE FOR ENJOYMENT FOR THE RESIDENTS OF THAT COMMUNITY.

SO IN THAT STAFF IS SAYING THAT, YOU KNOW, WE'RE WILLING TO WE'D LIKE TO CONSIDER KEEPING CLUSTER SUBDIVISIONS.

BUT WHAT WE'RE WE'RE WILLING TO CONSIDER IS PROPOSING A MINIMUM 40 FOOT LOT WIDTH, NOTING THAT IT IS INCUMBENT UPON THE DEVELOPER TO MAKE SURE THAT THE BUILDING AND THE STRUCTURE FIT WITHIN THAT MINIMUM LOT WIDTH.

WHAT THAT DOES IS IN SOME CASES YOU MIGHT GET A STARTER HOME, YOU MIGHT GET HOMES THAT ARE A LITTLE BIT MORE AFFORDABLE.

SO I THINK IT MEETS THE NEED FOR THE CITY IN SOME ASPECTS.

AND AGAIN, IT IS A CONDITIONAL USE, SO IT HAS TO COME BEFORE COUNCIL TO BE APPROVED.

ON THE NEXT SLIDE IS A REFERENCE TO COMMON RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS, SPECIFICALLY IN PUD ZONING DISTRICTS.

AND THE QUESTION CAME UP WHY IS THERE ONLY A 50% MAXIMUM OF WHY IS ONLY 50% OF WETLANDS AND CONSERVATION AREA ALLOWED TO BE COUNTED TOWARDS THE OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENT? SO I POINTED TO THE DEFINITIONS IN THIS SECTION.

I'M NOT GOING TO READ IT OUT, BUT WHAT I DID UNDERLINE IS THAT THE DEFINITION FOR COMMON RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE INCLUDES THAT IT IS INTENDED FOR THE USE OF ENJOYMENT, USE, OR ENJOYMENT OF ITS RESIDENTS.

WHEN YOU HAVE WETLANDS AND CONSERVATION AREA, IT'S NOT LIKE A RESIDENT CAN GO IN AND ENJOY AND PLAY IN THE WETLANDS, RIGHT? SO WHAT? WE'VE ALSO NOTED THE REQUIREMENT OF THE 25% COMMON RECREATION OPEN SPACE PREVIOUSLY EXISTED IN THE CODE, SO WE HAVEN'T CHANGED THAT.

WHAT WE DID CHANGE IS WE TOOK OUT WE'RE ACTUALLY RATHER WE WE WE INCREASED THE WAYS IN WHICH YOU CAN YOU CAN COUNT STORM WATERS AND WETLANDS AND THINGS LIKE THAT IN YOUR COMMON RECREATION, OPEN SPACE CALCULATIONS BY ACTIVATING THAT, THAT SPACE.

SO PUTTING A TRAIL AROUND A STORMWATER POND OR PUTTING A TRAIL IN THE UPLANDS OF A WETLAND.

THAT'S A WAY TO ACTIVATE THE SPACE AND BE ABLE TO COUNT THAT TOWARDS YOUR COMMON OPEN SPACE AND RECREATION.

AND YOU KNOW, WE WE AGREE THE CITY SHOULD SEEK TO PRESERVE ALL EXISTING WETLANDS RATHER THAN ENCOURAGING IT TO BE MITIGATED.

AND IN THE SAME TONE.

WHILE WETLANDS ARE OPEN SPACE, AGAIN, THEY'RE NOT CONSIDERED RECREATION SPACE, SO THEY'RE NOT FOR ENJOYMENT OF THE RESIDENTS.

BUT STAFF RECOMMENDS ENCOURAGING DEVELOPERS TO PRESERVE THE EXISTING WETLANDS BY ALLOWING THEM TO COUNT 100% OF THEIR WETLANDS AS COMMON TOWARDS COMMON RECREATION OPEN SPACE.

HOWEVER, THE UPLANDS OF THE WETLANDS MUST BE ACTIVATED BY SOMETHING LIKE TRAILS, AND THEY MUST IN SOME WAY MEET THE RECREATION REQUIREMENT.

SO, YOU KNOW, PUTTING A TRAIL ON THE UPLANDS OF THE WETLAND AREA.

THE SECOND HALF OF THIS STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS SOMETHING THAT CAME UP IN CONVERSATION, ACTUALLY, BETWEEN LISA AND I.

WE WE NOTE PROTECTED OPEN SPACE IN CLUSTER SUBDIVISIONS.

AND WE RECOGNIZE THAT PROTECTED OPEN SPACE IS DEFINED AS WETLANDS CONSERVATION AND EASEMENTS.

SO WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO DO IS INCLUDE THAT AS A DEFINITION IN CHAPTER 171.

AND THEN WE JUST REFERENCE IT AS YOU CAN COUNT YOUR PROTECTED OPEN SPACE TOWARDS YOUR COMMON RECREATION OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENT.

ON THE NEXT SLIDE IS REFERENCING THE MINIMUM 20% COMMERCIAL REQUIREMENT IN THE PUD ZONING DISTRICT.

THIS ONE CAME UP QUITE A BIT AS WELL.

THE CONCERN IS THAT WE HAVE A REQUIREMENT OF 20% OF THE GROSS ACREAGE, WHICH SEEMS TO BE ARBITRARY.

SO IN THE EXAMPLE, IF YOU HAVE A THOUSAND ACRES OF A PUD SITE, 200 OF YOUR ACRES MUST BE FOR COMMERCIAL.

THE OTHER COMMENT THAT CAME UP IS OFTENTIMES YOU HAVE A PUD WHERE THE DEVELOPER IS A SINGLE FAMILY HOME DEVELOPER, BUT THEY'RE NOT A COMMERCIAL DEVELOPER.

AND SO AND VICE VERSA.

AND SO HOW DO YOU MAKE THAT WORK? SO WE NOTED THAT THE EXISTING PUD ZONING DISTRICT REQUIRES A MINIMUM OF 15% TOTAL GROSS ACREAGE FOR PUDS THAT HAVE 500 DWELLINGS OR LESS

[00:30:06]

AND THE CHANGE THAT WE MADE IS WE CREATED A FLAT 20% MINIMUM AND WE STOPPED REFERENCING JUST COMMERCIAL USES.

WE REFERENCE NONRESIDENTIAL USES.

SO THAT INCLUDES INSTITUTIONAL, COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL.

AND THAT ALLOWS, YOU KNOW, CHURCHES AND SCHOOLS AND THINGS LIKE THAT, NOT JUST COMMERCIAL RETAIL RESTAURANT.

THE OTHER CHANGE THAT'S INCLUDED IN THE LANGUAGE IN THE IN THE CODE IS THAT WE NOTE THIS IS 20% DEVELOPABLE ACREAGE OF THE SITE.

SO JUST BY THAT ALONE, YOU CAN COUNT YOU CAN TAKE OUT OR BACK OUT THE WETLANDS FOR EXAMPLE.

SO AGAIN, WE RECOGNIZE ALL DEVELOPERS ARE NOT NECESSARILY RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL DEVELOPERS ONE VERSUS THE OTHER.

SO WE POINTED BACK TO THE CODE WHERE WE NOTE UNIFIED CONTROL.

SO, YOU KNOW, YOU COULD HAVE A PUD ZONING DISTRICT THAT HAS TWO PARCELS, YOU KNOW, ONE ZONED BY A COMMERCIAL DEVELOPER, ONE ZONED BY A SINGLE FAMILY HOME DEVELOPER.

THEY HAVE SOME SORT OF STATEMENT OF UNIFIED CONTROL, AND THAT'S HOW THEY'RE ABLE TO SATISFY THE COMMERCIAL REQUIREMENT.

SO STAFF RECOMMENDS AND ASSERTS THAT DEVELOPABLE ACREAGE DOES NOT INCLUDE WETLANDS AND CONSERVATION AREAS OR PROTECTED OPEN SPACE.

AND WE OFFER TO REVISE THE LANGUAGE TO CLARIFY THE CALCULATION OF NONRESIDENTIAL SHALL NOT INCLUDE COMMON RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENT OF 25%. THE PROTECTED OPEN SPACE OR UNDEVELOPABLE LANDS AND ANY ACREAGE OF REQUIRED STORM WATER OR ROAD RIGHT OF WAY.

GOING ON TO THE NEXT SLIDE.

THIS IS MORE OF A GENERAL COMMENT THAT WE HEARD, YOU KNOW, HERE AND THERE FROM BOTH RESIDENTS AND STAKEHOLDERS ALIKE.

AND THE COMMENT WAS.

YOU KNOW, YOU NEED MORE USES IN THAT TABLE.

SO THE USES IN THE TABLE.

ARE GENERALLY PRETTY BROAD, AND A LOT OF THEM POINT BACK TO THE DEFINITIONS SECTION.

AND YOU MIGHT SEE SOMETHING THAT SAYS SERVICE ESTABLISHMENT PERSONAL SERVICE ESTABLISHMENT BUSINESS.

YOU GO YOU GO TO THE DEFINITION SECTION AND IT COVERS QUITE A BIT.

AND SO WHAT WE'D LIKE TO DO IS GET A LITTLE DIRECTION FROM COUNCIL TONIGHT.

IF THERE'S ANYTHING YOU THINK IS NOT COVERED IN THERE, WE'LL JOT IT DOWN AND WE CAN COME BACK AND WE'LL EITHER CLARIFY WHETHER IT'S COVERED IN A PARTICULAR SECTION, OR MAYBE WE NEED TO LOOK AT ADDING IT, AND WE COULD DO THE SAME WITH THE PUBLIC AS WELL.

BUT WHAT WE DON'T WANT TO DO IS RUSH TO ADDING USES INTO ZONING DISTRICTS WITHOUT, YOU KNOW, THOUGHT AND CARE.

SO WE'RE JUST RECOMMENDING THAT WE GET SOME OF THAT DIRECTION TONIGHT AND WE COME BACK WITH PHASE TWO.

AND THEN THE LAST ONE IS REFERENCING EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS IN NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICTS.

THE BIGGEST CONCERN I THINK WE FACED RECENTLY IS THAT SCHOOLS CAN CREATE TRAFFIC CONGESTION WITHIN ESTABLISHED OR ADJACENT TO ESTABLISHED NEIGHBORHOODS.

AND I WANT TO NOTE THAT THERE'S A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL AND RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL, AND THAT IS THAT NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL IS MORE OF COMPLEMENTARY USES TO THE EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD.

AND IT INCLUDES THINGS LIKE RETAIL, LIMITED GOODS AND SERVICES, CHURCHES AND SCHOOLS, RC RESTRICTED COMMERCIALS, MORE COMMERCIAL USES THAT ARE COMPATIBLE BUT PROVIDE TRANSITION FROM RESIDENTIAL TO COMMERCIAL WHILE ENHANCING THE CORRIDOR.

SO, FOR EXAMPLE, YOU'VE GOT MALABAR ROAD AND THEN ALMOST IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO MALABAR ROAD, YOU'VE GOT A SINGLE FAMILY HOME AND A WHOLE SINGLE FAMILY SUBDIVISION. AND SO YOU'RE WANTING TO PROVIDE CREATE THAT COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR, BUT ALSO BEING SENSITIVE TO YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD SURROUNDING.

SO WHAT STAFF RECOMMENDS.

OH, AND I SHOULD NOTE THAT THE EXISTING CODE LANGUAGE AND THE PROPOSED CODE LANGUAGE IN FACT DOES NOT.

THAT ALLOWS SCHOOLS BUT DOES NOT REQUIRE ANY LIMITATION ON SIZE.

SO THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS IMPORTANT HERE.

WHAT WE'RE RECOMMENDING IS EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS SHOULD BE ENCOURAGED IN NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL, BUT THEY SHOULD BE LIMITED OR COULD BE LIMITED TO 5000FT² AND REQUIRE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR ANYTHING GREATER THAN 5000FT².

AND THAT'S TO KEEP THE NEIGHBOR THE NATURE OF THE SURROUNDING RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS.

THE THIS RESTRICTION ALSO ALLOWS THE USE TO BE LESS INTENSE, COMPLEMENTARY USE.

SO YOU'VE GOT A KARATE SCHOOL OR A CHILD OR A DAYCARE CENTER.

AND IF THEY SEEK TO DO, YOU KNOW, A PUBLIC SCHOOL OR A CHARTER SCHOOL, THEN THEY WOULD COME IN WITH A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT.

AND THAT ALLOWS US TO KEEP THE INTENT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL DISTRICT, WHICH IF YOU READ THAT SECTION OF THE ZONING CODE, YOU KNOW IT ENDS WITH

[00:35:02]

SO, YOU KNOW, IN LOOKING AT THAT, WE JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE BEING SENSITIVE TO HOW SCHOOLS, AS THEY COME INTO NEIGHBORHOODS AND THEY EXPAND AND GROW IN CAPACITY. WE'RE MINDFUL OF TRAFFIC THAT IMPACTS THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

THANK YOU. I'LL TURN IT BACK TO PAT.

THANK YOU FOR THAT, MA'AM.

BEFORE WE GO TO THE NEXT ONE, I JUST WANTED TO MENTION THAT THAT TABLE THAT INCLUDED ALL THE COMMENTS, THERE IS A COLUMN THAT TALKS ABOUT THE ACTION.

BASICALLY, WE SAID THESE COMMENTS WERE GOING TO ADDRESS THEM.

THAT'S THOSE ARE THE CHANGES THAT WE TALKED ABOUT.

SOME COMMENTS ARE GOING TO BE ADDRESSED IN PHASE TWO.

SO YOU KNOW, LATER ON AND OTHER COMMENTS, STAFF REVIEWED THEM, WE REVIEWED THEM, WE TALKED ABOUT THEM AND WE JUST DISAGREE WITH THEM.

SO WE DIDN'T WANT TO IGNORE ANYBODY, JUST LETTING THEM KNOW HOW WE ADDRESS THEIR COMMENTS.

SO WHAT COMES NEXT IS THE REZONINGS.

BECAUSE IF YOU REMEMBER, WE CONSOLIDATED SOME DISTRICTS AND THOSE PROPERTIES THAT HAVE THE DISTRICT THAT IS BEING ELIMINATED WILL NEED TO BE REZONED TO THE NEW DISTRICT.

SO THOSE DATES ARE COMING UP IN SEPTEMBER AND OCTOBER FOR THE MULTI-FAMILY DISTRICTS AND SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICTS, AND FOR THE MIXED USE DISTRICTS WOULD BE IN OCTOBER AND NOVEMBER.

SO THIS IS THE FIRST READING.

SO THE PLAN WOULD BE THAT THE SECOND READING WOULD HAPPEN ON SEPTEMBER 19TH.

AND IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'LL BE GLAD TO ADDRESS COUNCIL.

COUNCILMAN WEINBERG, ANY QUESTIONS? NO. SPECIFICALLY, I HAVE A NUMBER OF COMMENTS.

ALL RIGHT, SIR, GO AHEAD AND GO AHEAD AND GET ON.

BUT YEAH, YET. NO SPECIFIC QUESTIONS.

OKAY. COUNCILMAN.

JOHNSON. YES, MAYOR.

THIS THIS QUESTION CAN BE FOR YOU, MA'AM.

OR STAFF OR THE CITY ATTORNEY.

FOR THE LAST ITEM FOR EDUCATIONAL USES UNDER NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL.

SO IF THAT WAS TO BE APPROVED.

THIS THIS RIGHT HERE. YES.

YES, SIR. IF THAT WAS TO BE APPROVED, THEN A SCHOOL WOULDN'T HAVE TO COME BEFORE COUNCIL.

CORRECT. OR THE WAY I UNDERSTAND WHAT SHE JUST SAID WAS.

SEE, YOU PERMIT GREATER THAN 5000FT².

BUT I'M RIGHT ALONG.

WHAT? YOU'RE WHERE YOU'RE GOING WITH THAT? YES, SIR. I'D RATHER BE SAFE THAN SORRY.

SO I'M I'M. I'LL BE HONEST.

I'M NOT. I'M NOT WITH THAT PART.

ESPECIALLY WHEN IF WE LOOK AT THE GIS MAP AND LOOK AT A CERTAIN AREA OF PALM BAY THAT HAS NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL.

SO I PREFER NOT TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THAT.

SO YOU'RE AND HERE'S HERE'S WHERE WHERE I'M AT WITH THIS.

RIGHT. BECAUSE I JUST WANT TO UNDERSTAND WE'RE ON THE SAME PAGE HERE.

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIALS AND RESTRICTED COMMERCIAL.

RIGHT. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THIS AND LET'S SAY AND I'LL USE LIKE A TAEKWONDO TWO LOCATION.

RIGHT. USUALLY STUDENTS THERE AREN'T GOING TO CREATE MUCH OF AN IMPACT.

YOU KNOW, IT'S GOING TO BE LESS THAN 100 STUDENTS, RIGHT? USUALLY IT WILL BE ABOUT 5000FT².

WHERE IS THAT SAFE TO SAY? OR DO YOU THINK IT'LL BE MORE? YOU NEVER KNOW. YOU OPEN UP THE THE BOX.

SO I JUST I YEAH I'M.

NO, THAT'S WHERE I'M GOING BECAUSE I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE BECAUSE WE, WE, WE GET CALLS FROM RESIDENTS AND I WANT TO BE CONSIDERATE OF THAT.

SO I'D RATHER MAKE SURE IT CAN GET TO COUNCIL.

AND I'M NOT SAYING IT WON'T GET TO COUNCIL, BUT I'D RATHER BE SAFER THAN SORRY AND FOR IT TO COME.

YES, SIR. YES, SIR. YEAH, WE'RE ON THE SAME PAGE.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THAT'S.

THAT'S WHERE I'M AT. THAT'S WHAT I'M DEFINITELY ON THE SAME PAGE.

SO I THINK WHAT WHAT THEY'RE LOOKING AT IS THAT RESOLVE IS SETTING IT AT A 5000FT².

SO IN OTHER WORDS, THE IMPACT OF OF THE, THE COMMUNITY WHERE IT'S LIKE CHILD CARE.

OR IT COULD BE A NURSE, A NURSING SCHOOL, RIGHT, WHERE USUALLY YOU'RE NOT GOING TO GET 100 STUDENTS THERE, BUT YOU'RE YOU'RE SPOT ON WITH THE IMPACT IN THE COMMUNITY.

SO WHAT DO YOU PROPOSE? THEY'RE SAYING 5000FT².

NO GREATER THAN MAIER, RIGHT? YEAH, I KNOW WE ARE.

WE KIND OF COMBINE THE PRESENTATIONS.

YEAH. BUT IF WE COULD FOCUS FROM NOW ON THE REPEAL AND THEN WHEN WE BRING UP INSTITUTING THE NEW CODE, IF WE CAN THEN BRING UP THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, WE CAN BRING UP THE NEW ZONING AND THEN WE CAN TALK ABOUT THE CHANGES UNDER THAT SECOND ITEM.

WE'RE GOOD. WE'RE GOOD MAN.

WE'D HAVE A MUCH CLEANER. WE JUST WE JUST GOT A LITTLE PASSIONATE HERE.

ALRIGHT. CARRY ON.

WE'LL WE'LL BRING THIS BACK.

AS YOU WERE. THANK YOU MA'AM.

CARRY ON. ANY QUESTIONS? NO. I'M GOOD. NO. ANY QUESTIONS, DEPUTY MAYOR? THANK YOU. NOTHING.

[00:40:02]

WE'LL GET INTO THE ROLLING UP OUR SLEEVES, LIKE MADAM ATTORNEY SAID LATER ON.

DOES THAT CONCLUDE YOUR PRESENTATION, MA'AM? YES. ALRIGHT, OUTSTANDING.

SO WE'LL GIVE THE OPPORTUNITY FOR THE PUBLIC TO ENGAGE WITH US.

SO IS THERE ANYONE THAT WISHES TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THIS ITEM? WE'RE ON ITEM NUMBER ONE, PUBLIC HEARINGS.

NUMBER ONE, BY SHOW OF HANDS, PLEASE RAISE YOUR HAND IF YOU'RE WILLING TO SPEAK.

WE DON'T EVEN HAVE MASTER CHIEF WILLING TO COME ON UP, MA'AM.

COPY THAT. SIR.

COPY THAT.

I WAS CONCERNED.

YES, MA'AM. COULD YOU JUST GET CLOSER TO THE MIC OR THE MIC? YES. THANK YOU MA'AM.

OKAY. STATE YOUR NAME.

AND GERALD AND I LIVE OVER ON TOPEKA ROAD IN SOUTHWEST PALM BAY.

AND I WAS AT THE LAST MEETING, AND WE WERE TOLD WE WERE GOING TO BE WORKSHOPS, WHICH I KNOW THERE WERE, BUT I WORK AND THE WORKSHOPS THAT I SAW POSTED, AND ONLY THE NIGHT BEFORE THE WORKSHOP WAS IT POSTED.

WAS AUGUST THE 24TH? I MEAN, EXCUSE ME, EIGHT, EIGHT, 15 AUGUST THE 15TH, FROM 3 TO 6, 816 FROM 130 TO 430 AND 819 FROM 330 TO 530.

HOW CAN A WORKING PERSON ATTEND THESE WORKSHOPS TO ASK QUESTIONS? AND ARE YOU AT THE LAST MEETING? MAYOR, IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY, YOU SAID YOU WANTED THE PUBLIC TO BE ENGAGED, WHICH WE WANT TO BE OR WE WOULDN'T BE HERE.

BUT YOU ALSO MENTIONED EVEN HAVING SATURDAY MEETINGS.

NONE OF THAT HAPPENED.

AND I TRIED TO READ SOME OF THESE THINGS, AND IT'S VERY HARD TO UNDERSTAND EVERYTHING.

AND I WOULD REALLY LIKE TO BE MORE ENGAGED AND BE ABLE TO TALK AND ASK QUESTIONS AND GET ANSWERS FROM THE PLANNERS AND FROM.

AND I READ WHERE THE DEVELOPERS WERE THE MAIN STAKEHOLDER OR SHAREHOLDER IN DEVELOPING THESE PLANS.

SO THEY'RE WINNING.

WE'RE POSSIBLY LOSING AND WE CAN'T WE DON'T EVEN KNOW.

SO MY THING WOULD BE IF WE COULD GET A COUPLE MORE WORKSHOPS IN AT A TIME, THAT'S MORE WORKER.

YEAH. WORKER FRIENDLY.

AND THE OTHER THING I'M CONCERNED WITH IS WITH ALL OF THESE DEVELOPMENTS COMING IN, I HAVEN'T HEARD ANYBODY TALKING ABOUT THE INFRASTRUCTURE LIKE BABCOCK STREET OR JUPITER OR MALABAR.

I MEAN, THEY'RE SO CONGESTED, IT TAKES ME 45 MINUTES TO AN HOUR.

I LIVE UP IN MELBOURNE, WORK IN MELBOURNE ON A GALLIE BOULEVARD, 45 MINUTES TO AN HOUR TO GET TO WORK AND BACK EVERY DAY.

AND IT'S JUST WHEN I FIRST MOVED HERE SIX YEARS AGO, IT TOOK ME 30 MINUTES, TOPS.

IT'S JUST THE CONGESTION IS HORRIBLE AND YOU'RE PUTTING MORE AND MORE DEVELOPMENTS IN AND NOTHING'S HAPPENING TO HELP THE ROADS.

SO ANYWAY, THAT'S MY THING, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE A COUPLE MORE WORKSHOPS WHERE WE CAN BE ENGAGED AND GET GOOD ANSWERS AND UNDERSTAND WHAT'S GOING ON A LITTLE BETTER. SO YEAH, NO, I'LL HAVE STAFF ADDRESS IT, MA'AM.

BUT TO YOUR POINT, YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY RIGHT.

I DID SAY EVEN IF IT TOOK SATURDAY WORKSHOPS, RIGHT, I DID.

I DID SAY THAT BECAUSE IT'S IMPORTANT TO EACH AND EVERY ONE OF US UP HERE.

BUT TO THAT, THAT SAME RIGHT ALONG THAT SAME VEIN I KNOW THAT THEY ALSO HAD AN OPPORTUNITY FOR YOU TO ENGAGE ONLINE.

AND MA'AM, CAN DID WE PASSED THAT INFORMATION OUT TO THE PUBLIC SO THAT THEY CAN ENGAGE WITH US VIA EMAIL AND SUCH. YES.

SO WE HELD TWO PUBLIC WORKSHOPS, AND WE DID TRY TO OVERLAP IT IN THE EVENING TO BE SENSITIVE TO RESIDENTS THAT ARE COMING AFTER WORK.

WE HELD ONE VIRTUAL, WHICH DID OVERLAP IN THE EVENING AS WELL.

WE HAD AN INPUT AT PBS.ORG EMAIL ADDRESS SET UP TO TAKE ALL WRITTEN RESPONSES TO ANYONE WHO WASN'T ABLE TO ATTEND, EITHER IN PERSON OR VIRTUALLY. WE ADVERTISED IT, YOU KNOW, IN A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT WAYS, MORE THAN WHAT WE TYPICALLY DO FOR LIKE A PRESS RELEASE OF A PROJECT.

ENGAGING WITH BOTH RESIDENTS AND STAKEHOLDERS OF THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY IS IS ALSO CONSIDERED A STAKEHOLDER.

AND WE HAD 59 ATTENDEES ACROSS ALL THREE VIRTUAL WORKSHOPS.

WE HAD 186 PUBLIC COMMENTS, BOTH RESIDENTS AND DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY.

SO, YOU KNOW, WE FELT OUT OF MOST OF THE PUBLIC WORKSHOPS THAT WE'VE DONE.

THIS WAS PRETTY WELL ATTENDED AND WE GOT A PRETTY STRONG RESPONSE RATE.

WELL THANK YOU MA'AM. SO MA'AM, I GUESS THE POINT IF YOU CAN AND I WANT YOU TO ADDRESS THIS BECAUSE SHE MENTIONED SOME CONCERNS, RIGHT.

SO IF WE COULD ADDRESS HER CONCERNS THAT SHE JUST MENTIONED WITH OUR INFRASTRUCTURE AND ETC., CAN WE ADDRESS THOSE CONCERNS? SO THE UPDATE TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE THAT'S COMING BEFORE YOU TONIGHT IS PERTAINING TO THE UPDATE TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

[00:45:06]

IT DOESN'T ADDRESS IT'S NOT ADDRESSING CHANGES TO IMPACT FEES ASSOCIATED WITH TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS PARKS, POLICE, FIRE AND INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS AND THE IMPACT FEES ASSOCIATED WITH THAT.

SO WE HAVEN'T TOUCHED THAT.

AND THAT, IN FACT, IS COMING BACK IN SEPTEMBER WHEN COUNCIL ADOPTS THE IMPACT FEES FOR PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS.

SO YOU'RE SPOT ON, MA'AM.

BUT IT'S IT'S SOMETHING THAT'S COMING BEFORE US IN SEPTEMBER, AND I BELIEVE THE 19TH, WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IMPACT FEES AND HOW WE GARNER THOSE FUNDS TO INCREASE OUR INFRASTRUCTURE.

SO I HOPE THAT WAS HELPFUL, MA'AM.

YES. WELL, THE INFRASTRUCTURE ALSO INCLUDE MAYBE MORE FOR THE AMBULANCES OR AMBULANCE STATIONS.

FIRE STATIONS, POLICE STATIONS.

WELL, YES, MA'AM, WE WE ACTUALLY IT'S LIKE THERE'S NOTHING AROUND ME.

ACTUALLY, MA'AM, WE WE DID THAT.

WE'RE NOT DISCUSSING THAT TODAY.

BUT AT OUR LAST MEETING, WE ADDRESSED THAT WE'RE ACTUALLY MOVING INTO SOME TEMPORARY STATIONS, AND WE'RE ACTUALLY GOING TO GO INTO DEBT MANAGEMENT TO CREATE ADDITIONAL FIRE STATIONS. AND, AND ON THE 13TH, ACTUALLY, YOU'RE WELCOME TO JOIN US AT OUR GROUNDBREAKING FOR FIRE STATION SEVEN, WHICH IS ON PALM BAY ROAD, WHICH IS THE OLD PALM, YOU KNOW, FIRE STATION NUMBER ONE.

BUT. YES, MA'AM. YOUR CONCERNS ARE BEING HEARD.

IT'S JUST TODAY WE'RE DEALING WITH THE OUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODES AND OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

AND ONE MORE. HOW DO YOU FIND OUT ABOUT THESE WORKSHOPS? I MEAN, I MEAN, I SAW IT POSTED.

I FOLLOW YOU ON FACEBOOK AND THAT'S WHERE I SEE THEM POSTED.

BUT LIKE I SAID, THE ONES I SAW POSTED WERE THE THREE THAT WERE IN A TIME I CAN'T ATTEND.

I CAN'T NOT WORK AND ATTEND.

WHAT I LOVE FOR YOU TO DO, WHAT I LOVE FOR YOU TO DO IS GET HER INFORMATION.

SO ANY SHE'S GOING TO PROVIDE YOU WITH THAT LINK BECAUSE DO YOU HAVE EMAIL ACCESS? SO MAYBE YOU COULD ALL YOUR CONCERNS.

WE COULD GO GO AHEAD AND SHARE THAT.

AND THAT WAY THAT THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE SAYING.

THEY HAD SO MANY COMMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN INCORPORATED IN THIS PROCESS.

BUT I LOVE YOUR ENGAGEMENT, MAN.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR BEING HERE.

THANK YOU MA'AM. SO IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND.

THANK YOU. NEXT SPEAKER.

ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK FOR OR FOR OR AGAINST THIS ITEM.

I'VE GOT MISS ANNA SAUNDERS AND THEN MR. BRUCE MOYER. IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND COMING UP HERE, SIR.

YOU'RE NEXT. AND CAN I JUST.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE REPEAL ACTION RIGHT NOW.

RIGHT. THAT I DON'T TALK.

YES, MA'AM. SO THE ONE THING THAT I WOULD JUST RAISE UP THAT.

MA'AM, YOU'RE PRETTY TALL.

I AM, BUT I FEEL LIKE. OKAY.

CAN HEAR ME. OKAY. OKAY.

GO AHEAD. BEND OVER. GO AHEAD. I WOULD JUST LIKE CONSIDERATION TO NOT REPEAL THE PARKWAY MIXED USE PMU ZONING CATEGORY THAT YOU HAVE RIGHT NOW.

IN PARKWAY MIXED USE, THERE IS A REQUIREMENT FOR COMMERCIAL ESTABLISHED IN THAT ZONING CATEGORY IN ADDITION TO THE RESIDENTIAL COMPONENTS, BUT THE COMMERCIAL REQUIREMENT IS BASED ON THE NUMBER OF RESIDENTIAL UNITS THAT YOU'RE ACTUALLY PRESENTING AND PROVIDING IN THAT PARTICULAR DEVELOPMENT.

NOT BASED ON SORT OF AN ARBITRARY 20% OF AN ACREAGE.

SO WHAT WE WANT IS WE WANT TO HAVE COMMERCIAL THAT'S VIABLE, THAT'S MEANINGFUL, THAT CAN BE SUPPORTED BY THE RESIDENTS AROUND IT AND AND IN REQUIRING THE AMOUNT OF COMMERCIAL LETTING, THE NUMBER OF UNITS DICTATE THAT AMOUNT SO THAT IT DOES HAVE THE ABILITY TO BE VIABLE, I THINK IS REALLY IMPORTANT.

YOU SHOULDN'T BE PENALIZED BECAUSE YOUR PROJECT SITE IS LARGE AND YOU HAVE WETLANDS, AND YOU HAVE THIS AND YOU'VE GOT ROADWAYS AND WHAT HAVE YOU, BECAUSE YOUR PROJECT CAN BE GIGANTIC AND YOU COULD HAVE LET'S JUST SAY YOU DO ACRE LOTS AND YOU HAVE VERY FEW LOTS.

YOU'RE STILL GOING TO HAVE THAT SAME NUMBER OF SAME ACREAGE OF COMMERCIAL TO PUT IN IN PLACE, BUT YOU'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE THE RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT TO SUBSTANTIATE AND SUPPORT IT. AND SO MY MY REQUEST WOULD BE, AGAIN, IF WE COULD CONSIDER KEEPING PMU IN THE CODE SO THAT WE HAVE A DIFFERENT MECHANISM TO PROVIDE THE COMMERCIAL USES THAT THE COUNCIL.

SO, YOU KNOW, HAS MADE VERY AWARE THAT YOU GUYS WANT, BUT THAT WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO PROVIDE YOU SOMETHING THAT CAN BE SUSTAINABLE.

AND LAST LONG TERM, I SEE.

SO EVEN THOUGH IT SAYS IT'S PRETTY LAX, RIGHT? YOU GOT COMMERCIAL.

YOU COULD BE.

IT COULD BE A CHURCH.

IT COULD BE. IT'S JUST NOT SPECIFIC.

IT'S GIVING YOU A BROADER AND IT'S BACKING OUT THE WETLANDS AS WELL.

SO JUST JUST TO GIVE YOU A REALLY QUICK BREAKDOWN OF NUMBERS, THE PALM VISTA WEST PROJECT THAT YOU GUYS KNOW ABOUT ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE PARKWAY BY EMERSON AND THE IN PACE.

IT'S IN ROUND NUMBERS.

IT'S 1200 ACRES.

IF I TAKE THE WETLANDS IN THE OPEN SPACE OUT, IT'S 574 TIMES 20% IS 115 ACRES OF COMMERCIAL OR WHAT HAVE YOU, PUBLIX. EVERYONE KNOWS THAT A PUBLIX IS THOSE OUTPARCELS.

[00:50:02]

ANYWHERE BETWEEN 12 AND 15 ACRES INCLUDES THE PUBLIX INCLUDES, YOU KNOW, 2 OR 3 OUTPARCELS IN IT.

115 ACRES TOTAL PROVIDES EIGHT PUBLIC SITES IN THAT 115 ACRES.

THAT'S AN ENORMOUS AMOUNT OF COMMERCIAL.

YEAH, TO BE SUPPORTED FOR.

YOU'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE EIGHT PUBLIX PUBLIX'S IN FOR FOR A DEVELOPMENT THAT'S GOING TO SUPPORT 2300 UNITS.

SO IS THAT THE THE PROPERTY THAT CAME BEFORE US THAT WAS 1200 ACRES? YES, SIR. 1198 ACRES AND 27 ACRES OF IT WAS ZONED COMMERCIAL.

IT HAD A LAND USE OF COMMERCIAL.

IT HAD A LAND USE OF COMMERCIAL.

AND YET IT WAS WETLANDS THAT YOU THE WAY YOU DESIGNED IT, RIGHT, WAS WETLANDS.

AND AND WE DIDN'T APPROVE THAT BECAUSE THERE WAS NO COMMERCIAL ON THAT SITE.

YES AND NO. SO THE WAY IT'S BEEN DESCRIBED MAKES IT SOUND LIKE I SHOULD BE WEARING A BLACK CAPE AND A HOOD, BUT THAT'S NOT QUITE THE WAY IT REALLY.

YOU'VE GOT TO REMEMBER. I DIDN'T MEAN IT THAT WAY, MA'AM.

I'M JUST SAYING, THE PALM VISTA AS A WHOLE, THE WEST SIDE AND THE EAST SIDE, YOU'VE GOT TO REMEMBER THAT WAS A JOINT VENTURE.

SO WHEN THAT WHOLE PROJECT, THAT WHOLE PERIMETER, THE 1300 ACRE OR THE 1200 ACRES ON THE WEST, PLUS THE DEVELOPMENT ON THE EAST SIDE CAME IN.

IT HAD A 60 ACRE COMMERCIAL NODE IN THE MIDDLE OF IT.

THAT'S WHY YOU'VE GOT THAT ACREAGE ALONG EMERSON IN THE PARK.

AND I'M NOT TRYING TO HIJACK THE CONVERSATION FOR THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT.

I'M JUST TRYING TO USE IT AS AN EXAMPLE.

AND THE 40FT² PER RESIDENTIAL UNIT THAT'S PERMITTED IN PMU, AND I APOLOGIZE FOR GOING OVER, BUT IT IS BASED ON THE NUMBER OF RESIDENTIAL UNITS THAT YOU'RE BRINGING TO THE TABLE SO THAT THE COMMERCIAL CAN BE VIABLE.

SO LET ME ASK YOU THIS.

BASED ON THAT PROJECT TODAY, 198 ACRES, IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY.

RIGHT. WHAT WOULD IT BE TODAY WITH WITH THIS ZONING NOW, WITH PMU, WITH WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING TODAY.

RIGHT NOW? YEAH.

IF I LEFT OUT THE WETLANDS, I LEFT OUT THE OPEN SPACE.

I HAVE TO GIVE YOU 115 ACRES OF COMMERCIAL IN ADDITION TO THE 60 ACRES THAT'S ALREADY THERE.

SO YOU WOULD HAVE 100.

AND WHAT IS IT WITH THE PMU RIGHT NOW? EXCUSE ME? WHAT WOULD IT BE RIGHT NOW? THE WAY IT'S YOU. I'D GIVE YOU AN ADDITIONAL TEN ACRES OF COMMERCIAL IN ADDITION TO THE 60 THAT'S SITTING THERE TODAY.

SO YOU'D END UP WITH 70 ACRES TOTAL IN THAT INTERSECTION.

BUT OUT OF THE 198 ACRES, I REMEMBER, JUST 27 OF IT.

HOW DOES IT BECOME 60? I DON'T REMEMBER 60, BECAUSE THERE'S COMMERCIAL ACREAGE OUTSIDE OF THE BOUNDARY OF THAT 198 ACRES.

RIGHT. BUT THAT'S OUTSIDE.

IT IS. BUT WHEN THAT PROJECT WAS BROUGHT TO THE CITY 20 YEARS AGO AND, WELL, 15 YEARS AGO, THE WHOLE PROJECT, THE PROJECT IN ITS ENTIRETY, INCLUDED THE 60 ACRES.

IT WAS A JOINT VENTURE.

SO THOSE THAT ENTITY ARE STILL THEY STILL EXPERIENCE OR PARTICIPATE IN A WORKING RELATIONSHIP.

WITH THE JOINT VENTURE DISSOLVED WHEN THE 2008 MARKET CHANGES OCCURRED.

OKAY. SO WE HAD THE LAND USES THERE.

AND SO WHAT HAPPENED IS WE ACTUALLY HAD THE LAND USE FOR THE ZONING FOR PUD, BUT BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T MOVE FORWARD WITH IT, BECAUSE THE ECONOMY CHANGED, WE REVERTED BACK TO AN O ZONING AND WE HAD THE UNDERLYING LAND USES.

WHAT YOU SEE THAT'S LEFT OVER TODAY.

AND YOU SAW ME MORE TIMES THAN YOU PROBABLY LIKE TO FOR ME TO COME IN AND CHANGE THE LAND USE AND THE, THE ZONING BACK TO PUD, BECAUSE THEY REVERTED BACK AFTER A CERTAIN PERIOD OF TIME. SO ONE LAST QUESTION.

RIGHT. YOU SAID 100 ACRES IF WE PROPOSE THIS.

BUT YOU'RE I THINK IF I'M UNDERSTANDING YOU CORRECTLY, MA'AM, YOU'RE TAKING THE AMOUNT THAT'S OUTSIDE OF THOSE BORDERS AT THIS POINT, WHEN YOU SAY WHEN YOU SAY 100 ACRES, RIGHT.

OR 60 ACRES.

YES, I REMEMBER 27.

RIGHT. BUT YOU'RE SAYING YOU'RE INCORPORATING 60 THAT WERE OUTSIDE OF THOSE 198 ACRES, AM I AM I CORRECT? NOT EXACT.

SO 27 ACRES OF COMMERCIAL LAND USE IS ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE PARKWAY.

CORRECT? OF THOSE 27 ACRES, 14 OF THOSE ACRES WERE ENCOMPASSED BY A SHARED STORMWATER AND WETLAND SYSTEM.

RIGHT. AND SO WHEN WE BROUGHT THAT TO STAFF BACK IN THE DAY, WE SAID, HEY, THIS IS WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE.

STAFF SUGGESTED, LET'S CLEAN UP OUR BOOKS.

IT'S NOT REALLY COMMERCIAL. IT'S BEEN THAT WAY, NO PROBLEM.

BUT IT HAD ALWAYS HISTORICALLY BEEN LIKE THAT.

SO THAT WAS THE LAND USE, THE ACTUAL USABLE NET ACREAGE OF COMMERCIAL FOR THAT CORRIDOR TODAY AS IT SITS, IS 60 ACRES OF TRUE COMMERCIAL VIABLE, NO WETLANDS.

IT'S JUST STRAIGHT COMMERCIAL.

AND SO YOU WERE I THINK THE CONFUSION WAS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE LAND USE, THE UNDERLYING LAND USE AND WHAT WAS ACTUALLY ZONED AND WHAT'S SITTING THERE TODAY AS A COMMERCIAL ENTITY THAT I COULD GO BACK AND IT HAS THE CC ZONING ON IT.

WE COULD COME IN WITH SITE PLANS AND SUBMIT THOSE TOMORROW.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU MA'AM. YES, SIR.

APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU.

[00:55:01]

CORRECT ME IF MY MEMORY IS RIGHT, BUT IT WASN'T THAT 60 ACRES OF COMMERCIAL PROPERTY UNDER A DIFFERENT OWNERSHIP.

IT WAS ORIGINALLY PART OF THE JOINT VENTURE, AND THEN.

YES. SO THE JOINT VENTURE DISSOLVED.

RIGHT. ENTITIES? YES.

SO NOW IT'S UNDER A DIFFERENT OWNERSHIP WHO CAN DO PRETTY MUCH WHATEVER THEY WANT WITH IT, AS LONG AS IT'S WITHIN THE ZONING.

THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY.

SO IT'S NOT PART OF THIS PROJECT ACTUALLY.

AND ALSO YOUR YOUR COMMENTS ARE DIRECTLY STRICTLY TO CMU ZONING, CORRECT? YES, SIR. OKAY.

THANK YOU. AND I WOULD JUST TO CLARIFY, SO THEY THEY DON'T ENJOY THE THE BENEFIT OF A BUSINESS RELATIONSHIP ON THIS PARTICULAR JOINT OWNERSHIP.

BUT THERE ARE AGREEMENTS IN PLACE BETWEEN THE RESIDENTIAL AND THE COMMERCIAL ENTITY WHERE THEY'VE GOT CROSS ACCESS EASEMENTS, STORM WATER, SIGNAGE, UTILITIES.

SO THEY STILL REMEMBER THAT.

SO THEY DO STILL HAVE THAT UNDERLYING COMPONENT THAT DOES TIE THOSE WHERE THEY HAVE ACCESS TO IT AND THAT KIND OF THING.

I REMEMBER THAT. AND THOSE ARE STILL VALID TODAY.

OKAY. YES, SIR. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, MR. MOYER. EVENING, MR. MAYOR. COUNCIL.

IT'S BEEN A WHILE SINCE I'VE BEEN HERE.

PROBABLY WHY I DIDN'T EVEN KNOW THAT YOU GUYS WERE DOING THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE CHANGE.

WE JUST FOUND OUT AT THE HOBNOB BACK IN.

WAS THAT AUGUST 6TH? I ASSUME YOU GUYS HAVE PROBABLY BEEN WORKING ON THIS SINCE MAYBE JANUARY.

I KNOW WHEN YOU GUYS DID YOUR LAND USE OR DID YOUR COMP PLAN? YOU GUYS HAD PUBLIC WORKSHOPS AT THE BEGINNING OF THE OF THE PROCESS, AND THEN HERE YOU HAD THEM AT THE VERY END.

THAT WAS A LITTLE DISHEARTENING TO HEAR THAT THIS WAS EVEN COMING WHEN WE HAD NO IDEA THAT WE WOULD HAVE LOVED TO PROVIDE ALL THIS INPUT A LONG TIME AGO, WHERE IT COULD BE ADDRESSED WAY BEFORE WE EVER GOT TO THIS POINT.

SO AND I KNOW STAFF IS WORKING FEVERISHLY TO GET THIS THING YOU KNOW, HANDLED AND ADDRESS ALL THESE COMMENTS THAT ARE COMING.

AND I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE BIG RUSH IS, BUT, YOU KNOW, HERE WE ARE.

SO I WAS HOPING THAT WE COULD HAVE DONE A LOT OF THIS SOONER, AND A LOT OF THE STUFF COULD HAVE BEEN IRONED OUT BECAUSE I HAD THE.

I DON'T REALLY LIKE THE FACT THAT SOMETHING COULD GET ADOPTED, ONLY TO KNOW THAT YEAH, WE'RE GOING TO CHANGE IT LATER BECAUSE THAT MEANS WE GOT TO DEAL WITH IT NOW UNTIL IT GETS CHANGED. SO ANYWAY, THAT WAS ONE THING.

AND THEN I WAS KIND OF I WAS KIND OF PARROTING THE FIRST SPEAKER.

AND AS FAR AS MISS SAUNDERS WAS SAYING, YOU KNOW, THE WE KNOW EVERYBODY WANTS COMMERCIAL, YOU KNOW, NO, THE CITY NEEDS IT.

BUT AT THE PERCENTAGE RATES THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, 20%, I MEAN, EVERY THOUSAND ACRE PROJECT, WHICH I THINK THERE'S SOME COMING.

YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT TWO MELBOURNE SQUARE MALLS IN ONE PROJECT.

I DON'T THINK THE CITY COULD HANDLE THAT IN A SMALL AREA.

SO I THINK WE NEED TO HAVE SOME SORT OF SOME SORT OF A FORMULA, LIKE SHE WAS SAYING TO SAY START AT 20%.

AND THEN WITH ALL THESE OTHER THINGS YOU HAVE TO DO, MAYBE THAT DWINDLES DOWN TO MAKE IT MORE PALATABLE.

SO SOMETHING TO CONSIDER.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

I APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS.

AND I'M I'M DISAPPOINTED BRUCE, BECAUSE I SPECIFICALLY ASKED IF YOU AND THE HOME BUILDERS WERE ENGAGED.

AND THE FEEDBACK WAS THAT THAT THERE WAS FEEDBACK FROM THE HOME BUILDERS AND YOURSELF AS WELL.

I SPECIFICALLY ASKED THAT QUESTION BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, I LOVE FOR PEOPLE TO BE ENGAGED.

SO MY MY QUESTION IS, I KNOW THAT I SAW AN EMAIL AND I RESPONDED AS TO THE MY RESPONSE WAS MORE ALONG THE LINES OF HAVE YOU HAVE YOUR CONCERNS BEEN ADDRESSED? AND YOU SAID, YES, I'M WORKING WITH STAFF OR SOMETHING ALONG THOSE LINES.

YES, WE DID GET TOGETHER AND WE, WE GOT WE SENT OUT THE, YOU KNOW, THE, THE THE ALARM.

AND SO WE GOT A GROUP OF PEOPLE TO SIT DOWN AND GO THROUGH THIS 180 SOMETHING PAGE CODE AS QUICKLY AS WE COULD AND PROVIDE YOU WRITTEN COMMENTS.

AS QUICK AS WE COULD, BECAUSE I THINK THE MEETING WAS THE FIRST MEETING YOU GUYS WERE.

THANK THANKFULLY, THAT YOU TABLED IT SO WE COULD BE HERE.

BUT IT WAS, YOU KNOW, THE FIRST TIME I DID HEAR ABOUT IT WAS AT THE HOBNOB, AND WE DID GET TOGETHER AS QUICKLY AS WE COULD TO GET COMMENTS TO STAFF AND TO YOU GUYS AS WELL. ALL RIGHT. WELL, THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR ENGAGEMENT.

THANK YOU I APPRECIATE THAT.

ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK? RAISE YOUR HAND.

STAFF, I WANT TO ASK, I GUESS, MADAM JOANIE, HAVE YOU I KNOW THAT YOU'VE GOTTEN A LOT OF CONCERNS HERE, AND WE'VE ADDRESSED MOST OF THOSE CONCERNS.

IS THAT CORRECT? ALL OF THE CONCERNS THAT WE'VE RECEIVED FROM THE OPEN HOUSE SESSIONS, THE INPUT AT PBS.ORG, EMAIL ADDRESS AND TO OUR

[01:00:06]

THE SUMMARY OF THE PUBLIC INPUT AND STAFF'S COMMENTS TO THOSE SOME OF THEM WE.

YOU KNOW FEEL COULD BE INCORPORATED TONIGHT BECAUSE WE EITHER AGREE OR IT WAS AN OVERSIGHT.

SOME WE BELIEVE NEED TO BE, YOU KNOW, DISCUSSED A LITTLE BIT FURTHER TO ENSURE THAT WE'RE MAKING THE RIGHT AMENDMENTS TO THE CODE.

AND THAT'S WHY WE PROPOSED PHASE TWO AND SOME OF THEM, DEPENDING ON COUNCIL DIRECTION AND THINGS LIKE THAT FROM THE PAST, WE'VE SAID, YOU KNOW, WE RECOMMEND NO CHANGE.

IN OTHER CASES, THERE ARE SOME COMMENTS THAT ARE NOT RELATED TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE PERTAINING TO THE COMP PLAN AND WHERE WE FEEL LIKE IT'S, YOU KNOW, A GOOD TOPIC TO DISCUSS FURTHER. WE'VE ADDED IT INTO PHASE TWO.

SO WE'VE GOT A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT COMMENTS.

AND SO THERE ARE DIFFERENT ACTION ITEMS DEPENDING ON THE TYPE OF COMMENT THAT CAME IN.

SO MISS MISS SULLIVAN BROUGHT UP SOME POINTS REGARDING THAT THAT PERCENTAGE.

WHAT ARE YOUR WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS ON THAT AND ANY FEEDBACK YOU COULD GIVE US? OR HOW DO WE CONSIDER THOSE COMMENTS? SO THE 20% COMMERCIAL REQUIREMENT CURRENTLY UNDER THE PUD CODE ALWAYS EXISTED.

IT EXISTED BEFORE WE DID THIS CHANGE.

AND I THINK IT WAS CHANGED ORIGINALLY BACK IN LIKE 2018 OR 2019.

I CAN'T REMEMBER THE YEAR.

SO IT EXISTED PREVIOUSLY IN OUR CURRENT CODE, AND WE DID CHANGE IT IN THIS FIRST AMENDMENT THAT CAME UP ON AUGUST 8TH TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT WE HEARD ABOUT.

I'M SORRY, HER NAME IS. HANNAH.

SAUNDERS. SAUNDERS.

SAUNDERS. AS YOU WERE, MISS SAUNDERS.

CARRY ON. I FIGURED I KNEW WHO YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT.

THE REQUIREMENT THAT MISS SAUNDERS IS REFERRING TO IN PMU IS IT STATES.

20 MINIMUM OF 40FT² OF COMMERCIAL SPACE PROVIDED FOR EACH RESIDENTIAL UNIT PROPOSED WITHIN A CMU.

YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW WHERE THAT CAME FROM.

I DON'T KNOW THAT STAFF KNOWS WHERE THAT CAME FROM.

AND TO HER POINT ABOUT BEING ARBITRARY, I WOULD BE CURIOUS TO KNOW.

AND IN FACT, I DID TRY TO DO A LITTLE BIT OF RESEARCH TODAY TO FIND OUT, YOU KNOW, WHAT IS A GOOD RATIO FOR COMMERCIAL SQUARE FEET PER SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOT.

AND THERE WASN'T ANYTHING THAT WE COULD FIND THAT WAS DEFINITE.

SO WE'RE ASKING, YOU KNOW, IF WE ARE CONSIDERING CHANGING THAT, ALLOW US TO DO A LITTLE BIT MORE RESEARCH TO FIND OUT.

YOU KNOW WHAT? AND MAYBE SCAR CAN HELP US.

YOU KNOW, SPACE COAST, SPACE COAST ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS HELP US IDENTIFY A FIGURE THAT ACTUALLY A CALCULATION THAT MAKES SENSE.

SO, I MEAN, I GUESS THAT THAT'S MY RESPONSE TO THAT.

BUT OBVIOUSLY AT COUNCIL DIRECTION, WE'RE WILLING TO GO EITHER WAY.

SO THAT EXISTED BEFORE IS WHAT I'M HEARING.

YES. OKAY.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. WE'RE CONSIDERING WHAT YOU'RE SAYING, MA'AM.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK? OKAY. COUNCIL.

SOMEONE ELSE.

WE ALREADY SPOKE, BRUCE.

YOU ALREADY SPOKE.

YOU'LL COME BACK FOR THE SECOND TIME.

COME BACK. ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK? OKAY. I'M CLOSING THE PUBLIC HEARING AND ASKING FOR A MOTION.

SO MOVED. SECOND FOR DISCUSSION.

GOT A MOTION BY COUNCILMAN JOHNSON, SECONDED BY COUNCILMAN WEINBERG.

COUNCILMAN JOHNSON? YES, MA'AM. I CAN GO EITHER WAY WITH THE PMU.

YES, IT WAS THERE BEFORE, BUT OBVIOUSLY WE WEREN'T GETTING COMMERCIAL BEFORE, SO SOMETHING NEEDS TO BE CHANGED.

SO I DO LIKE THE IDEA OF LOOKING AT SOME FORM OF ALGORITHM OR SOMETHING, SOME MEASURABLE.

THAT'S NOT SOMETHING WE'RE GOING TO FIGURE OUT RIGHT NOW, BUT I JUST WANTED TO MAKE A MOTION TO HAVE THAT DISCUSSION.

SO COPY THAT, SIR.

WELL, THAT'S THE ONLY THING.

YES, SIR. THAT THAT YOU RESERVE COUNCILMAN WEINBERG.

YEAH, I PRETTY MUCH AGREE WITH COUNCILMAN JOHNSON AS FAR AS THAT GOES.

BUT, YOU KNOW, AND THE THE, YOU KNOW, OPEN SPACE AND UNDEVELOPED LANDS ARE REMOVED FROM THAT 20% REQUIREMENT.

BUT, YOU KNOW, I'D LIKE TO SEE SOMETHING IN THERE WHERE, YOU KNOW, WHERE WHERE IT CAN BE REDUCED AT COUNCIL'S DISCRETION.

IN OTHER WORDS, IT CAN BE PRESENTED TO TO CITY COUNCIL.

AND, YOU KNOW, STAFF CAN RECOMMEND 20%, STAFF CAN RECOMMEND 15% OR SOMETHING, YOU KNOW, TO THAT EFFECT WHERE WHERE CITY COUNCIL WOULD HAVE THE THE ULTIMATE DECISION ON ON ON HOW THAT'S APPLIED, RATHER THAN JUST HAVE IT WRITTEN IN STONE THAT THIS IS WHAT'S REQUIRED.

SO WOULD THAT BE MORE OF A RANGE? IS WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR? WELL, YOU KNOW, I THINK, YOU KNOW, FOR EACH YOU KNOW, I THINK IT SHOULD BE IT SHOULD BE CONSIDERED, YOU KNOW, FOR EACH DEVELOPMENT.

[01:05:06]

WELL, MAYOR.

YES? CARRY ON.

I KNOW WE'RE GOING TO BE ADDRESSING THAT IN THE NEXT ITEM WHERE WE'RE CREATING THE LDCS, BUT IF THAT IS WHAT THIS COUNCIL WOULD LIKE, STAFF WOULD NEED TO CREATE SOME CRITERIA BECAUSE IT CAN'T BE COMPLETELY AT COUNCIL'S DISCRETION, BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE ARBITRARY AND IT WOULDN'T, YOU KNOW, PASS FORTH.

BUT IF COUNCIL IS INTERESTED IN HAVING STAFF COME UP WITH SOME CONSIDERATIONS WHICH MAY DETERMINE THE AMOUNT THAT COULD HAPPEN, BUT IT CAN'T BE COMPLETELY UP TO COUNCIL'S DISCRETION.

COPY THAT. THAT'S THANK YOU, MA'AM, I APPRECIATE THAT.

COUNCILMAN WEINBERG.

NO, I UNDERSTAND.

IT CAN'T BE ARBITRARILY AT THE COUNCIL'S DECISION.

BUT IF STAFF CAN BRING UP SOME YOU KNOW, SOME CERTAIN UNDER CERTAIN CONDITIONS THAT CAN BE LESSENED AND, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, DETERMINED BY, BY CITY COUNCIL.

THAT'S THAT MEETS WHAT I'M WHAT I'M LOOKING TO DO.

REALLY? OKAY.

THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE THAT, COUNCILMAN JOHNSON.

YOU MADE THE MOTION.

SO YOU GO WITH SETTING UP CERTAIN CRITERIA WHEN WE GO DOWN RANGE.

NOT. NOT NOW.

YES, SIR. I'M FINE. OKAY.

ALL RIGHT, DEPUTY MAYOR.

MAYOR. THANK YOU.

I WOULD TEND TO AGREE WITH COUNCILMAN JOHNSON WITH HIS RECOMMENDATION.

I. I THINK ALL PROJECTS DON'T NECESSARILY CREATED EQUAL.

YEAH, I GET THE, THE LEGAL ASPECT OF OF NOT LEAVE IT UP TO COUNCIL, BUT I DO BELIEVE AS WELL, BASED ON THE AREA OF THE CITY, ALL ALL PROJECTS ARE NOT CREATED EQUAL.

HAVING THE STANDARD NUMBER COULD COULD JUST BE PROBLEMATIC TO SOME TO SOME DEGREE.

SO I WOULD DEFINITELY ENCOURAGE THAT.

STAFF LOOKED AT IT AND AND MADE CONSIDERATION TO LOWER IT.

YEAH I LIKE THE CRITERIA ASPECT TO IT AND I'LL TELL YOU WHY.

WE HAVE A LOT OF BEDS OR A LOT OF ROOFTOPS.

RIGHT. AND YOU'RE RIGHT, WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH COMMERCIAL.

WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH LIGHT INDUSTRIAL.

WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH JOBS.

RIGHT. SO I THINK SETTING THAT TONE AND SEND THAT CRITERIA IS CRITICAL.

I WANT TO LIVE AND WORK HERE IN PALM BAY FOR YEARS.

MANY PEOPLE HAVE TO GO WORK IN MELBOURNE, RIGHT.

AND WE'RE NOT CREATING THAT TYPE OF INDUSTRY.

SO I LIKE THE ASPECT OF A CRITERIA.

PERHAPS THERE'S A SWEET SPOT.

I'M A BASEBALL GUY. WHEN YOU HIT THE BALL ON THE SWEET SPOT, THAT BALL JUST GOES OVER THE FENCE, RIGHT.

AND I THINK WE COULD WORK TOGETHER TO GET THAT SWEET SPOT WHEN WE.

WE DO NEED A CRITERION.

AND SO I'LL GO WITH THAT AND MAYBE WE WORK OUT THOSE DETAILS.

WHAT ARE THOSE ALGORITHMS AS HE SAYS.

OR CAN WE GET SCORE TO GET THEIR INPUT? THERE ARE MANY COMMUNITIES THAT HAVE BEEN DEVELOPED BASED ON THEIR COMMERCIAL, BASED ON THEIR GROWTH WITHOUT THE URBAN SPRAWL.

SO LET'S GET DETAILS FROM HOW THEY THEY'RE WORKING AND BEING SUCCESSFUL JUST DOWN THE STREET.

YOU ALWAYS MENTIONED CERTAIN CITIES, RIGHT, THAT HAVE GROWN IN COMMERCIAL THAT THAT CAPACITY.

HOW DO THEY GET TO THAT POINT.

SO CERTAINLY WE DON'T WANT ANYTHING THAT'S GOING TO RUIN OUR, OUR FUTURE.

BUT CERTAINLY WE ALWAYS HAVE TO CONSIDER OF CREATING JOBS FOR OUR CITIZENS.

AND THAT'S WHERE THAT'S WHERE I'M AT.

SO GETTING THAT RIGHT, SWEET MIX IS GOING TO BE OUR STAFF TO BRING THAT BACK TO US.

SO I'M I'M IN AGREEMENT WITH THAT.

ANY OTHER DISCUSSION GENTLEMEN.

YES. YES, SIR.

QUESTION FOR THE CITY ATTORNEY.

REGARDING. WE'RE NOT SPEAKING AT ALL ON THE EDUCATIONAL MR. NO, THAT'S NEXT.

THAT'S NUMBER TWO.

THAT'S GONNA BE NEXT. ALL RIGHT.

OKAY. I'M JUST WAITING. I'M GOING ON.

YES, SIR. OKAY.

I'M IN AGREEMENT WITH YOU.

I THINK WE'RE ON THE SAME PAGE.

ANYTHING ELSE? YOU MAY.

YOU MADE THE MOTION, COUNCILMAN JOHNSON.

YOU MADE THE SECOND. WHAT DO WE NEED TO AMEND IT TO GIVE? WE'RE GOOD, WE'RE GOOD.

ALL RIGHT. OKAY. I'M GOOD.

MAYOR. ALL RIGHT, ALL IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.

AYE. PASSES FOUR ZERO.

WE'RE NOW ON ITEM NUMBER TWO, MADAM SMITH, ORDINANCE 20 2433, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF PALM BAY, BREVARD COUNTY, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE CODE OF ORDINANCES BY CREATING TITLE 17, LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TO PROVIDE FOR THE GOVERNANCE AND REGULATION OF THE CITY OF PALM BAY.

LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS, INCLUDING ZONING.

ACCESSORY USES.

SUBDIVISION REQUIREMENTS.

SIGNS, RESOURCES, STREETS, PARKING.

BUILDING DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT, REVIEW PROCEDURES, PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF ORDINANCES OR PARTS OF ORDINANCES AND CONFLICT.

HEREWITH PROVIDING FOR INCLUSION IN THE CITY OF PALM BAY.

CODE OF ORDINANCES PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY CLAUSE.

[01:10:02]

THANK YOU MA'AM. I'M GOING TO OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING AND ASK MISS SHERMAN WHO'LL TEAR IT OFF TO.

I'LL DEFER TO JOAN. THANK YOU, MADAM JOHN BROWN.

THANK YOU. MAYOR.

JULIET, WOULD YOU MIND GOING BACK TO SLIDE 17? THANK YOU. SO BEFORE WE GO TO THE INDIVIDUAL ITEMS NEEDING COUNCIL DIRECTION.

AND PATRICIA, PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG.

I DO WANT TO JUST MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE GOOD WITH THESE.

VERBALLY NOTING THAT THE CHANGES THAT WE'D LIKE TO MAKE BETWEEN THE THE FIRST READING OF THE ORDINANCE AND THE SECOND READING OF THE ORDINANCE, THAT WE CAN INCORPORATE THESE CHANGES. AS MENTIONED, YES, IF COUNCIL VOTES TO INCORPORATE THOSE CHANGES, THE CLERK WILL HAVE THEM FOR THE NEXT TIME IN WHICH THEY'LL BE IN THE ACTUAL ORDINANCE.

OKAY. WELL, YOU ALL PROVIDE THEM, AND THE CLERK WILL, OF COURSE.

PASS THEM FORWARD.

SO WITH THAT, I GUESS, DOES COUNCIL HAVE ANY THOUGHTS OR CONCERNS WITH THE CLEANUP ITEMS THAT STAFF IDENTIFIED THAT WE'D LIKE TO INCORPORATE INTO THE FINAL READING? I'LL START WITH COUNCILMAN WEINBERG.

THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. NO, I'M GOOD WITH THE CLEANUP ITEMS. I WAS JUST GLAD TO SEE THAT WE RETURNED OUR ZONING TO TO THE NEW LCD, LLC.

THANK YOU. COUNCILMAN JOHNSON.

DEPUTY MAYOR.

I'M GOOD AS WELL. JUST A COUPLE OF COMMENTS.

MAYOR. THANK YOU.

I THINK IT WAS JUST.

IT'S WORTH NOTING.

THE AND THE THE NUANCE BETWEEN THE EDUCATIONAL ESTABLISHMENT VERSUS THE EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION.

I THINK THAT MAKES SENSE.

SO A LOT OF THESE THINGS MAKES A LOT OF SENSE AS WELL.

SO I APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT THE WORK THAT'S BEING DONE IN THERE, THERE'S QUITE A FEW OF IT.

I THINK STAFF DID A PRETTY GOOD JOB IDENTIFYING WITH THE HELP OF THE STAKEHOLDERS AS WELL.

TAKE ALL THAT INTO ACCOUNT.

AND AS COUNCILWOMAN WEINBERG MENTIONED, THE D'ARCY, I THINK MAKES SENSE TO KEEP THAT IN THERE.

JUST JUST WANT TO SAY THANK YOU FOR THE WORK YOU GUYS DONE WITH THAT.

AND I THINK ALSO GOING BACK TO THE TREE ORDINANCE AND SO ON, AND I THINK ALL THAT, IT'S JUST TAKING ALL THAT INTO CONSIDERATION MAKES A LOT OF SENSE.

I JUST WANTED TO MENTION THAT.

THANK YOU. NO.

THANK YOU. AND I WANT TO ECHO THAT.

MY MY ISSUE, AS YOU KNOW, WAS THE THE CONVENTION CENTER.

RIGHT. AS YOU OBVIOUSLY KNOW, BECAUSE I'LL SAY IT AGAIN, I'VE BEEN SAYING IT FOR THREE YEARS AND IT WASN'T THERE.

BUT I ALSO WANTED TO SHARE ABOUT THE CLUSTERS.

I THINK YOU GAVE THAT.

YOU GAVE THAT SOME THOUGHT.

RIGHT. I WAS REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT THAT.

I'M NOT I'M NOT TOTALLY EXUBERANT ABOUT IT.

BUT YOU DID GIVE THAT SOME THOUGHT, AND YOU DID CONSIDER ALL THE COMMENTS THAT WERE GIVEN BY OUR CITIZENS.

SO THAT THAT BEING SAID, YEAH, I, I WOULD JUST I'M NOT I'M NOT TOTALLY 1,000% WITH THIS.

THE CLUSTERS ISSUES.

BUT I UNDERSTAND THEY'RE PART OF SUBDIVISIONS, RIGHT? IF I MAY. SO THE WHAT I'M ASKING FOR AT THIS POINT IS JUST THESE THREE ITEMS LISTED UNDER CLEANUP, BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO COME BACK TO THOSE COUNCIL ACTION ITEMS INDIVIDUALLY.

I JUST WANTED TO GET THAT OFF MY CHEST BECAUSE YOU GUYS DID AN OUTSTANDING JOB.

AND I KNOW THAT IT WAS THE ENTIRE TEAM.

AND THEN WE DID TAXI THESE LAST FEW, BUT THAT THAT'S WHERE I'M HAVING A LITTLE BIT OF HEARTBURN.

AND ALONG WITH THE EDUCATIONAL THING THAT I'LL, I'LL TAG TEAM WITH COUNCILMAN JOHNSON BECAUSE I THINK WE'RE IT'S LIKE WE READ EACH OTHER'S MINDS WITH THAT, RIGHT? AT LEAST I FEEL I.

BUT. YEAH, MAN, I'M.

I'M GOOD WITH THOSE THREE.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

SO CARRY ON, MADAM BROWN.

THE NEXT SLIDE, JULIET, IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND.

THANK YOU. SO THIS ONE IS THE.

SORRY. LET ME GET MYSELF THERE.

THE TREE REMOVAL PERMIT UNDER ONE ACRE.

IF YOU'D LIKE ME TO READ IT AGAIN, I CAN, BUT ESSENTIALLY, WE'RE RECOMMENDING THAT WE TRY TO ADDRESS THIS UNDER PHASE TWO BECAUSE WE DON'T YET NECESSARILY AGREE OR UNDERSTAND WITH THE IMPACT OF A SEPTIC PERMIT ON INFILL LOTS AND THE DRAINAGE REQUIREMENTS ON INFILL LOTS HINDERING THE REMOVAL FOR FOR OF TREES REQUIRING A PERMIT TO TO REMOVE A TREE.

[01:15:04]

MRS. JOHN BROWN, KAREN BROWN, JOHN BROWN.

AGAIN, YOU KNOW, THAT'S THAT'S ANOTHER ONE THAT I THINK IT IS GREAT THAT YOU GUYS ARE PAUSING ON THAT AND GIVE IT SOME MORE CONSIDERATION, CONSIDERING THAT OVER 70% OF OUR CITY IS ON SEPTIC.

SO I APPLAUD THAT BECAUSE WHEN I SEE THAT, BECAUSE THAT RAISED SOME CONCERN, I GOT SOME CALLS AND QUITE A FEW CONCERNS WITH, WITH BUILDERS COMMUNITY THAT CONSIDERING THE CHALLENGE WE'RE FACING WHEN IT COMES TO ALL UTILITIES CHALLENGES.

SO I THINK THIS IS GREAT.

SO WE NEED TO REALLY LOOK AT THIS A LOT CLOSER.

IN PHASE TWO, MAKING THE RIGHT DECISION FOR EVERYBODY.

RIGHT. THE RESIDENTS AND THE BUILDING COMMUNITY AS WELL.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU MAYOR.

YEAH. SO I'M GOOD WITH PHASE TWO.

I THINK WE'RE ALL GOOD WITH THAT.

YEP. CARRY ON OKAY.

NEXT SLIDE. THANK YOU.

JULIET. PLACEMENT OF STREET TREES AND RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISIONS.

AGAIN, STAFF AGREES.

THIS IS A FAIR POINT.

AND WE WOULD LIKE TO PAUSE, ADDRESS IT IN PHASE TWO BECAUSE WE DO WANT TO TALK WITH PUBLIC WORKS, TALK WITH UTILITIES, TALK WITH THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY.

THERE WERE CONCERNS ABOUT USING USE OF OAK TREES, PLACEMENT IN THE RIGHT OF WAY INSTEAD OF ON THE THE PROPERTY PRIVATE PROPERTY LINE.

SO IF COUNCIL IS GOOD WITH THIS, WE'D PREFER TO TRY AND ADDRESS THIS UNDER PHASE TWO.

I'M GOOD. DEPUTY MAYOR.

COUNCILOR. YES.

OKAY. NEXT ITEM CLUSTER SUBDIVISIONS.

I KNOW THIS ONE'S PROBABLY GOING TO TAKE SOME CONVERSATION.

I'M HAPPY TO REITERATE EVERYTHING AGAIN, BUT AGAIN, STAFF SUPPORTS KEEPING THE CLUSTER SUBDIVISIONS.

WE ALSO SUPPORT THE REQUEST OF ALLOWING THE MINIMUM, REDUCING THE MINIMUM FROM 50 FOOT WIDE LOT TO A MINIMUM OF 40 FOOT WIDE LOT.

AGAIN, THEY, THE DEVELOPER AND THE BUILDER HAVE TO COMPLY WITH ALL OF THE LOT REQUIREMENTS, SO THAT'S INCUMBENT UPON THEM.

COUNCIL I'M FINE WITH THAT MAN.

I WAS. I WAS WITH YOU ON THAT ONE TOO, MAYOR.

I CAN GO WITH OR WITHOUT.

REALLY? MORE SO WITHOUT.

BUT I'LL LISTEN TO COUNCIL'S FEEDBACK, COUNCILMAN WEINBERG.

YEAH. MR. MAYOR, THANK YOU.

A COUPLE OF THINGS I HAVE SOME CONCERNS ABOUT, ABOUT THE CLUSTER HOMES.

YOU KNOW, I UNDERSTAND IT'S STILL A CONDITIONAL USE, BUT SPECIFICALLY TO ALLOW CLUSTER HOMES IN RURAL RESIDENTIAL RESIDENTIAL ESTATE.

SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL ESTATE ZONES.

YOU KNOW, YOU'VE TALKED MANY TIMES ABOUT PRESERVING RURAL RESIDENTIAL AREAS, SEEING HOMES ON LARGER LOTS TO ALLOW CLUSTER HOMES IN THESE AREAS THAT ARE ZONED, WHETHER THEY'RE DEVELOPED CURRENTLY RIGHT NOW WITH SURROUNDING, YOU KNOW STATE HOMES OR RURAL RESIDENTIAL HOMES, BUT TO ALLOW CLUSTER HOMES IN THOSE ZONING CODES, I JUST THINK IS A MISTAKE. I WHOLEHEARTEDLY AGREE WITH THAT.

SO I THINK WE HAVE I'M WITH COUNCILMAN WEINBERG ON THAT AND I THINK I'VE GOT.

YES, SIR. COUNCILMAN JOHNSON ON THAT AS WELL.

SO ARE WE PROPOSING TO KEEP CLUSTER SUBDIVISIONS, BUT REMOVING THE REMOVING THE USE OUT OF RURAL RESIDENTIAL, SUBURBAN RESIDENTIAL AND THE.

RESIDENTIAL ESTATE. NOW.

I WOULD LIKE TO JUST MAKE A COMMENT THAT THE REDUCTION TO 40 WOULD NOT APPLY TO ALL DISTRICTS.

SAY AGAIN, SAY THE REDUCTION TO 40 FOOT WIDE LOTS WOULD NOT APPLY TO ALL DISTRICTS BECAUSE THE LANGUAGE SAYS THAT YOU CAN DO HALF OF WHAT YOUR DISTRICT ALLOWS. SO LIKE IF YOU'RE A RURAL RESIDENTIAL, YOU HAVE TO DO HALF AN ACRE.

IT'S NOT LIKE YOU'RE GOING TO GO TO 40 FOOT LOTS.

SO IT'S NOT THAT YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE SMALL LOTS EVERYWHERE.

IT DEPENDS ON WHAT DISTRICT YOU HAVE.

SO IF YOU'RE IN A RS ONE OR RS TWO, YOU MAY GET TO THE 40, BUT NOT WHEN YOU'RE IN THE RURAL AREAS.

SO LIKE WE CAN PULL UP THAT REGULATION AND SEE IF YOU KNOW THAT MAKES A DIFFERENCE.

BUT JUST SO YOU'RE AWARE, YOU KNOW, IT SAYS IN NO EVENT YOU CAN HAVE LESS THAN HALF AN ACRE IN SOME OF THESE DISTRICTS.

YEAH. I THINK I THINK THE CONCERN HAS BEEN THAT WE'VE BEEN LOSING THE RURAL RESIDENTIAL.

[01:20:03]

AND IF WE DON'T HAVE IT, THEN THERE'LL BE THOSE CLUSTERS ANYWAY.

SO I THINK THAT I DON'T KNOW, THAT'S WHERE I'M AT.

I DON'T KNOW HOW COUNCIL FEELS, BUT THAT'S WHERE I'M AT.

I, I WANT TO PRESERVE WHATEVER RURAL RESIDENTIAL THAT WE HAVE IN THE CITY OF PALM BAY.

I ACTUALLY WOULD LOVE TO HAVE MORE.

BUT WE'LL SEE HOW THAT FUTURE HOLDS, RIGHT? THANK YOU. WE'RE GOOD.

OKAY. CARRY ON.

SO I JUST WANT TO CONFIRM. TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND.

YES. WE'RE KEEPING CLUSTER SUBDIVISIONS AS A CONDITIONAL USE, BUT ONLY IN RS ONE, RS TWO, AND RS THREE AND ALLOWING A MINIMUM OF 40 FOOT WIDE LOTS IN RS ONE, RS TWO AND RS THREE.

JUST TO CONFIRM THAT, AND JUST LIKE IF THAT'S WHAT COUNCIL IS AGREEING ON, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT'S.

YEAH. AGAIN, EVEN IN R ONE, R TWO AND THREE AS A CONDITIONAL USE.

YEAH. SO IT WOULD HAVE TO BE APPROVED BY COUNCIL.

CORRECT. IT'S NOT A ZONING DISTRICT.

IT'S ONLY A USE.

BUT I JUST WANT TO DOUBLE CHECK THAT RS ONE RS TWO RS THREE.

IS THERE ANY ISSUE WITH A MINIMUM 40 FOOT WIDE LOT? LET ME READ WHAT IT SAYS.

SORRY, SORRY.

IN THE PROPOSED NUMBER ONE, YOU HAVE TO HAVE TEN ACRES TO DO THIS.

SO IT'S NOT LIKE YOU CAN HAVE ANY PIECE OF PROPERTY.

THEN THE LOT SIZE RIGHT NOW IT SAYS ONE HALF ACRE MINIMUM IN RURAL RESIDENTIAL, AND THEN 50% OF THE MINIMUM REQUIRED IN ALL OTHER DISTRICTS, BUT NO LESS THAN 6000FT² LOT WIDTH.

IT SAYS 50. IT WOULD BE CHANGED TO 40.

AND THEN THERE ARE SETBACKS.

SO YEAH, SO IN THE RS ONE DISTRICTS IT WOULD BE 50%, NOT LESS THAN 6000 AND NOT LESS THAN 40 FOOT IN WIDTH.

OKAY. SO THERE ARE SOME. SO WE'RE GOOD FOR 123.

OKAY. THANK YOU MA'AM.

OKAY. NEXT SLIDE.

COMMON RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE.

AND THIS IS SO MA'AM, I KNOW THAT WE'RE DOING THINGS BACKWARD, BUT MAYBE WE SHOULD LET THE PUBLIC SPEAK BEFORE WE ACTUALLY START TAKING ACTION ITEMS. SHOULD WE ALLOW THE PUBLIC TO COME UP AND AND AND HEAR WHAT THEY'RE SAYING? BECAUSE WE'RE GOING ITEM BY ITEM AT THIS POINT AND, AND I'D RATHER HEAR FROM THEM BEFORE WE GO ITEM BY ITEM.

MADAM ATTORNEY, THAT MAY BE WHAT YOU WANT TO DO, BECAUSE WHAT YOU MAY END UP DOING IS GOING ITEM BY ITEM.

AND THEN THE PUBLIC PROVIDES FEEDBACK AND THEN YOU GO BACK ITEM THROUGH ITEM.

SO CERTAINLY THAT'S UP TO YOU.

IT COULD, AS YOU MENTIONED BE MORE EFFICIENT.

YES MA'AM. I WE WE STARTED GOING INTO IT.

BUT I WANT TO HEAR FROM THE PUBLIC TODAY.

IS THERE ANYONE THAT WISHES TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THE ITEM? COME ON UP. MR. MILLS, I BELIEVE.

DOCTOR MILLS. DOCTOR.

MILLS. ALAN MILLS, 350 GARVEY.

SOUTHWEST. IF YOU CAN GO BACK TO THAT OTHER SLIDE, THAT'S WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.

RIGHT. AND IT SAID RE AND I BELIEVE THAT'S RESIDENTIAL ESTATE.

SO THAT WOULD BE SLIDE THE ONE YOU HAD JUST YEAH THAT'S IT.

SO I BELIEVE I'M AN RE AND AREAS NEAR LOCHMERE I THINK ARE RE.

SO IF YOU'RE SAYING 40 FOOT YOU'RE SAYING THAT AN 80 BY 125 WHICH IS PROBABLY 80% OF WHAT.

PALM BAY IS DIVIDED INTO QUARTER ACRES, 80 BY 125.

THEN YOU COULD GET TWO HOUSES, 40 AND 40, IN AN 80 FOOT AREA, IN A RESIDENTIAL AREA.

AND THEN I'M CONCERNED. WHAT WOULD YOU DO WITH ALL THE SEPTIC TANKS? HOW ARE YOU GOING TO DO THAT? SO I DON'T THINK 40 FOOT SHOULD BE THE APPROPRIATE AMOUNT.

BECAUSE YOU'RE CREATING A HAZARD IN THAT COMMUNITY AND YOU'RE DOUBLING THEM UP.

THE AMOUNT OF PEOPLE THERE, WHERE ARE YOU GOING? TO PUT THE CARS. WHERE ARE YOU GOING TO PUT EVERYTHING SO THAT THAT'S MY INPUT.

THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE THAT, DOCTOR MILLS, MRS. JOHN JOAN CARLA BROWN, THIS IS.

YEAH. SEPTIC TANKS ARE NOT ALLOWED.

WHEN YOU WHEN YOU WHEN YOU DEVELOP A WHEN YOU PROPOSE A SUBDIVISION THAT'S THREE LOTS OR MORE, YOU'RE REQUIRED TO CONNECT A CENTRALIZED SEWER.

AND IF YOU DON'T HAVE CENTRALIZED SEWER, YOU'RE REQUIRED TO BRING CENTRALIZED SEWER TO YOUR PROPERTY.

SO I THINK TO EXPLAIN IT A LITTLE MORE IN DEPTH, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A MINIMUM OF TEN ACRES AND SOMEONE COMING TO DEVELOP TEN ACRES, NOT JUST, YOU KNOW, A HOUSE HERE, A HOUSE THERE.

RIGHT. OKAY.

THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING THAT.

ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK? YES, MA'AM. COME ON UP.

[01:25:07]

I DON'T FEEL THAT WE NEED ANOTHER SUBDIVISION WITH THE CLUSTER SUBDIVISIONS.

YOU'RE JUST GOING TO ADD MORE TRAFFIC.

AND I CAN SAY THERE IS TEN ACRES THAT COULD POSSIBLY BE PUT A CLUSTER SUBDIVISION WHICH WILL CREATE MORE TRAFFIC IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

AND WHY DO WE NEED TO DO THAT? WE ALREADY HAVE SUBDIVISIONS.

WHY DO WE NEED TO ADD THAT? AND I THINK IT WOULD CREATE MORE OF A HEADACHE.

SO BECAUSE I KNOW THERE IS ONE THAT COULD GO THAT WAY.

THANK YOU.

MADAM BROWN, YOU WANT TO RESPOND TO TO HER COMMENT? YES. I WOULD LIKE TO CLARIFY THAT CLUSTER SUBDIVISION DOESN'T MEAN THAT YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE MORE LOTS.

IT'S WHATEVER LOTS YOU CAN HAVE TODAY, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE WITH CLUSTER SUBDIVISION.

SO THE NUMBER OF LOTS IS NOT GOING TO CHANGE.

THE NUMBER OF CARS IS NOT GOING TO CHANGE.

THE ONLY THING THAT CHANGES IS THE SIZE OF YOUR LOT SO THAT YOU CAN HAVE MORE OPEN SPACE.

SO YOU'RE EXCHANGING THAT SMALLER LOTS, MORE COMMON OPEN SPACE.

BUT IT'S NOT CHANGING THE DENSITY.

IT'S NOT CHANGING THE NUMBER OF UNITS THAT YOU CAN HAVE.

THANK YOU MA'AM.

SURE. MASTER CHIEF.

BILL BATTEN, 586 OCEAN SPRAY STREET, SOUTHWEST.

I WASN'T SURE IF YOUR QUESTIONING WHEN YOU SAID THIS, IF IT WAS JUST PERTAINING TO PUBLIC HEARING NUMBER TWO, OR IF IT WAS JUST THE SPECIFIC ITEMS THAT YOU WERE JUST GOT THROUGH TALKING ABOUT, JUST IN CASE.

AND I'LL DO MINE NOW.

YES. QUESTION NUMBER ONE WAS COMMERCIAL OPEN SPACE REDUCTION FROM 20% TO 10%.

THERE IS A NEGATIVE SIDE THAT I CAN SEE WITH THAT BECAUSE WHEN YOU HAVE YOUR COMMERCIAL SPACE, THAT'S ALSO MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF RUNOFF AND STORMWATER.

WHEN YOU HAVE OPEN SPACE, THAT'S ALSO ALLOWS FOR YOUR GROUND PERCOLATION BACK INTO YOUR TO YOUR WATER REPLENISHMENT BACK INTO YOUR AQUIFER.

SO YOU MIGHT BE ABLE TO GET MORE BUILDING ON THERE, BUT YOU'RE LOSING SOMETHING ON THE OTHER END OF IT.

THAT'S ONE SIDE THAT I SEE NEGATIVE WITH THAT.

THE OTHER ONE WAS THE TREE ORDINANCE.

I KNOW YOU'RE SAYING YOU'RE GOING TO TRY AND DO MORE RESEARCH INTO YOUR TREE ORDINANCE WITH PHASE TWO.

I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT I'LL SPEAK WITH SPECIFIC HAPPENED ON THE STREET OVER FROM ME.

WE WE WENT THROUGH AND WE HAD GOPHER TURTLES ON.

SO WE GOT IT. WE GOT THE SITE PROTECTED.

THE SITE WAS PROTECTED SO IT COULD NOT BE CLEARED UNTIL THEY REMEDIATED THE GOPHER TURTLES.

AND THE PERSON SAID, WELL, IT'S CHEAPER FOR US TO PAY THE FINE THAN IT IS TO SOLVE THE SYSTEM.

SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT'S HAPPENED WITH IT, BUT THAT SITE IS NOW JUST BEEN CLEARED WITHIN THE LAST WEEK AND THEY WEREN'T SUPPOSED TO CLEAR IT.

AND BUT IF THIS WAS THE CASE, THERE WAS NO PERMIT.

THEY DID IT.

WHAT'S GOING TO BE THE REPERCUSSIONS FOR THIS? DO I HAVE TO NOW BE THE LAND SUPERVISOR GOING AROUND SAYING, HEY, THEY JUST CLEARED THIS SITE BECAUSE THE PERSON WANTED IT CLEARED.

OR WHEN THERE'S PERMITS ON THIS WHEN THEY DON'T POST IT BECAUSE THE PERMITS ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO BE ISSUED BECAUSE IT'S GOT IT'S GOT A RED FLAG ON IT FROM THE PROTECTED SPECIES, WHICH COMES FROM ANOTHER DEPARTMENT.

SO HOW ARE WE? I WANT TO KNOW WHAT THE PROCESS IS, HOW WE CAN LOOK AT THAT, BECAUSE IT'S DEFINITELY RIGHT NOW IT'S JUST BEING WHO CARES? THEY'RE GOING TO GO THERE AND THEY'RE DOING IT BECAUSE I KNOW I HAD THE PERMITS ON THE PROPERTY, COULD NOT GET THE PERMIT PULLED BECAUSE OF THE PROTECTED SPECIES.

SO GO FROM THERE.

TELL ME HOW WE'RE GOING TO SOLVE THAT.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. CHIEF. MADAM BROWN.

ON THE COMMON OPEN SPACE REDUCTION.

I'M SORRY, ON THE OPEN SPACE REDUCTION.

ON COMMERCIAL FROM 20% TO 10%.

IN THE COMP PLAN.

RESIDENTIAL REQUIRES 20% MINIMUM OPEN SPACE AND NONRESIDENTIAL IS 10% OPEN SPACE.

AND SO THIS KEEPS US COMPATIBLE.

OBVIOUSLY, COUNCIL CAN DECIDE TO REQUIRE MORE COMMERCIAL AS LONG AS WE'RE MEETING OUR MINIMUM UNDER THE COMP PLAN TO BE COMPATIBLE.

BUT REMEMBER, THE MORE OPEN SPACE YOU REQUIRE ON A COMMERCIAL SITE, THE LESS COMMERCIAL SQUARE FOOT, YOU KNOW, BUILDING FOOTPRINT YOU'LL GET.

THE OTHER SIDE OF THE COIN IS THAT, YOU KNOW, IF THEY PROVIDE MORE COMMERCIAL, THEY CAN ALWAYS PROVIDE MORE OPEN SPACE IF THEY DECIDE TO USE LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, LIKE DOING, YOU KNOW, MORE PERVIOUS AREA, THEN THERE ARE THERE ARE SOME INCENTIVES

[01:30:06]

THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK? YES, SIR. COME ON UP.

YEAH. WE WERE VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THIS.

10%. I DIDN'T REALIZE THAT IT WAS IN YOUR COMP PLAN.

SO OBVIOUSLY THAT WE'RE A LITTLE BIT LATE ON THAT ONE.

BUT 10%.

I DON'T KNOW ANYBODY THAT REQUIRES 10% OPEN SPACE ON COMMERCIAL LIKE DUNKIN DONUTS.

MCDONALD'S. YOU'RE GOING TO PROVIDE 10% OPEN SPACE FOR WHAT? IF YOU CAN DEFINE OPEN SPACE FOR COMMERCIAL A LITTLE DIFFERENTLY, SO THAT LANDSCAPE BUFFERS AND THINGS LIKE THAT WOULD BE INCLUDED AS OPEN SPACE.

I THINK THAT GOES FARTHER TO PROMOTE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT, AS OPPOSED TO NOT PROMOTING IT BY REQUIRING OPEN SPACE FOR.

FOR WHAT? NOT REALLY SURE WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO DO WHEN A COMMERCIAL PROPERTY, IF YOU WANT TO SAY, YOU KNOW, HEY, IF YOU'RE A RESTAURANT, YOU HAVE OUTDOOR SEATING THAT'S OPEN SPACE, THAT'S GREAT. SO IF YOU CAN DO IT THROUGH DEFINITION FOR COMMERCIAL OR FOR NONRESIDENTIAL, ONLY GET A LITTLE CREATIVE.

I THINK THAT THAT WOULDN'T BE SO BAD.

I APPRECIATE THAT, BRUCE.

THANK YOU. SO, MA'AM INCORPORATING BRUCE'S COMMENTS THAT OPEN SPACE AND COMMERCIAL, YOU KNOW, I ALWAYS ASK, WHAT'S THE INTENT? RIGHT.

TOWN CENTER INTENT.

WHAT? WHAT'S THE INTENT? WELL, OUR INTENT IS TO COMPLY WITH THE COMP PLAN WHICH HAS 10%.

BUT IF COUNCIL WANTS STAFF TO REVIEW DOING A COMP PLAN AMENDMENT AND BRINGING THAT FORTH TO REDUCE THAT REQUIREMENT, WE CAN CERTAINLY DO THAT.

WE CAN ALSO LOOK AT THE DEFINITION FOR OPEN SPACE AND FIND CREATIVE WAYS TO ENCOURAGE I DON'T KNOW HOW WE WOULD DO THIS, BUT I MEAN, THE CURRENT DEFINITION FOR OPEN SPACE IS ANY PARCEL AREA OF LAND OR WATER ESSENTIALLY UNIMPROVED AND SET ASIDE, DEDICATED, DESIGNATED, OR RESERVED FOR PUBLIC OR PRIVATE USE OR ENJOYMENT.

SO TO BRUCE'S POINT, YOU KNOW, HOW MUCH OPEN SPACE DO YOU NEED ON COMMERCIAL? AND THAT COULD BE, YOU KNOW, A COURTYARD WITHIN A PLAZA THAT HAS PAVERS THAT'S PERVIOUS, THAT YOU HAVE CHAIRS AND TABLES OUT.

RIGHT? OR, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN DO DOGGY DINING OR WHAT HAVE YOU, AND BE ABLE TO CONSIDER THAT AS OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENT.

SO WE CAN GET CREATIVE.

BUT FOR THE TIME BEING, WE'RE SIMPLY TRYING TO COMPLY WITH OUR COMP PLAN.

SO AND TO THAT ARGUMENT, BRUCE.

RIGHT. AND I APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS.

SO I'M, I'M ENVISIONING LIKE THE AVENUES THEY'VE GOT REALLY NICE OPEN SPACE WHERE YOU COULD, YOU KNOW, MULTIPLE RESTAURANTS CAN GO INTO A GATHERING SPACE ALL WITHIN THE CONFINES OF THAT, THAT AREA.

SO I SEE I SEE YOUR POINT.

YEAH. MAYBE WE INCORPORATE THAT DEFINITION.

OUTSIDE WHERE IT'D BE LIKE A TOWN CENTER EFFECT.

AND THAT'S WHERE I WAS GOING.

GO AHEAD. COUNCILMAN JOHNSON ONLY QUESTION WHAT ABOUT AREAS LIKE WOULD IT MICKEY D'S OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT? I WAS THINKING INDUSTRIAL INDUSTRIAL FLEX SHOES.

WOULD THAT STILL LIGHT INDUSTRIAL LIGHT INDUSTRIAL HEAVY INDUSTRIAL FLEX SHOES.

BECAUSE THEY'RE.

YEAH. WHAT ABOUT THAT OPEN SPACE? YEAH. COUNCILMAN NECESSARY.

YEAH. THAT'S NOT REALLY AN AREA WHERE YOU'RE JUST THERE TO WORK.

YOU'RE NOT THERE TO, YOU KNOW.

RIGHT. YOU GET A YOU GET A TRUCK, A CANTEEN WITH A FOOD TRUCK.

RIGHT. AND YOU GET CHOW.

BUT THAT THAT'S A GREAT THAT'S A GREAT QUESTION.

I THINK I THINK MR..

COUNCILMAN WEINBERGER.

YEAH. I, YOU KNOW I LIKE MR. MOYER'S SUGGESTION. I MEAN, WHY CAN'T WE COUNT LANDSCAPED AREAS AS PART OF THAT, THAT OPEN, EVEN THOUGH IT'S, YOU KNOW, NOT FOR COMMON RECREATION, BUT AS OPEN AREA.

I DON'T SEE ANYTHING WRONG WITH THAT.

YEAH, I THINK DEFINING IT TO A LITTLE BIT MORE.

I THINK WE'RE ALL IN AGREEMENT WITH THAT.

RIGHT. SETTING.

GO AHEAD MA'AM. THERE ARE TWO POINTS I WANT TO MAKE.

I'M SORRY. I'M GETTING INPUT FROM BOTH SIDES.

OKAY. FOR YOU GUYS, JUST CHIP IN AS YOU SEE FIT.

THE THERE ARE TWO DIFFERENT DEFINITIONS AS WELL.

FOR OPEN SPACE THERE'S RESOURCE AND ACTIVITY.

AND THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S CONTEMPLATED AS WELL.

THAT'S THAT COMES FROM THE COMP PLAN.

PAT JUST NOTED THAT THE COMP PLAN DOESN'T REQUIRE A MINIMUM 10% FOR OPEN SPACE FOR COMMERCIAL.

RATHER, THAT WAS A REQUEST OF THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIRECTOR.

SO I WOULD JUST ASK LISA TO CHIME IN ON HER THOUGHTS ON THAT ONE.

GOOD EVENING. YES.

SO WHEN YOU WHEN YOU LOOK AT GET ON THE MIC, MA'AM, I'M NOT SURE MY I AM ON.

THERE YOU GO. MAYBE I NEED TO BE LOUDER, WHICH IS UNUSUAL.

WHAT I WANTED TO POINT OUT IS THAT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN HAS PRETTY THOROUGH DEFINITIONS REGARDING ACTIVITY BASED AND RESOURCE BASED

[01:35:07]

AND WHEN YOU'RE CONSIDERING OPEN SPACE, I HEAR THE CONVERSATION ABOUT WHY WOULD COMMERCIAL OR INDUSTRIAL NEED OPEN SPACE? OPEN SPACE IS, AGAIN, NOT JUST FOR RECREATIONAL PURPOSES.

OPEN SPACE IS THERE TO ALLEVIATE A LOT OF CONDITIONS IN A DEVELOPED PARCEL.

OKAY. AND THESE ARE CONDITIONS THAT ARE WELL KNOWN AND WELL DOCUMENTED AS FAR AS HEAT SOURCES MENTAL HEALTH RELIEF THOSE, YOU KNOW, BEAUTIFICATION AS YOU'RE GOING DOWN A THOROUGHFARE, YOUR, YOUR VIEW SHEDS, THEY HAVE MULTIPLE CONNOTATIONS, MULTIPLE USES, MULTIPLE NEEDS.

SO WE HAVE ATTEMPTED TO ADD AND BETTER DEFINE WHAT A RESOURCE BASE OR AN ACTIVITY BASED OPEN SPACE MAY INCLUDE. AND WE DID.

AND IF IT DIDN'T GET IN THERE, I APOLOGIZE.

WE'LL GO BACK AND LOOK.

WE DID ADD THAT THE NATIVE BUFFER LANDSCAPE AROUND THE PERIMETER OF A PROPERTY WOULD COUNT.

WE DID ADD LIDS SUCH AS IF YOU HAVE TREATMENT TRAINS, WHICH IS YOUR PLANTED.

A TREATMENT TRAIN IS WHERE YOU DON'T JUST HAVE A STORMWATER POND, BUT YOU HAVE DITCHES AND, AND DIFFERENT THOROUGHFARES.

YOU SEE THEM IN WALMART'S PARKING LOTS, WHERE THEY HAVE THE CURB CUTS GOING INTO THE A SWALE AND A LANDSCAPED SWALE IN THE MIDDLE OF A PARKING LOT. THOSE TYPE OF ITEMS COULD BE CONSISTENT WITH YOUR OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS, AND IT JUST MAKES THE EXPERIENCE OF THE COMMERCIAL SPACE A LOT MORE.

WELL, BETTER, FOR LACK OF A BETTER WORD HERE.

AND SO THAT IS WHY WE ARE REQUESTING AT LEAST 10% OF IT BE OPEN SPACE.

AND WE HAVE WE HAVE EXPANDED THE DEFINITION TO INCLUDE A MULTIPLE USES.

YEAH. I THINK THE COMMUNICATION PART OF SHARING THOSE EXPANDED DEFINITIONS, I THINK THAT'S CRITICAL FOR OUR COMMUNITY TO, TO SHARE WHAT THOSE EXPANDED BECAUSE 10% COULD BE, YOU KNOW, ANYTHING.

AND IF THEY'RE NOT GETTING THAT DEFINITION, IT IT'S LIKE, HEY, WHAT'S GOING ON HERE? SO I THINK WE NEED TO SHARE THAT AND HAVE THAT COMMUNICATION AND, AND MAYBE EVEN EXPAND IT SOME MORE.

BUT RIGHT NOW WE CAN'T EXPAND IT BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE A VISUAL OF IT.

RIGHT? WE CAN'T SUGGEST TO EXPAND IT IF WE DON'T HAVE A VISUAL OF IT FOR, FOR THE ACTUAL RESIDENTS TO SEE AS WELL.

SO I, I DO LIKE THE, THE AVENUES AS AN EXAMPLE.

I DO LIKE WHERE THEY HAVE DIFFERENT COMMERCIAL ESTABLISHMENTS AND THEY ALL COME INTO A GATHERING PLACE.

IT'S QUITE WHEN YOU SAY MENTAL HEALTH, IT IT DOES HELP AS WELL.

SO I CAN SEE YOUR ARGUMENT, MA'AM.

SO THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK? YES, SIR. I'VE GOT AWAY FROM WHAT I WANTED TO TALK ABOUT.

THE 40 FOOT, SIR.

GO AHEAD. BUTCH RAN 219 TRENTON AVENUE.

THE 40 FOOT LOT YOU MENTIONED.

YOU'RE GOING TO. YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE SEPTICS.

CORRECT. I MEAN, NOT SEPTICS.

YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE SEWER.

ARE YOU GOING TO HAVE CITY WATER ALSO, OR IS IT GOING TO BE AN INDIVIDUAL WELLS ON EACH ONE OF THOSE LOTS? IS THAT YOUR QUESTION? YES, SIR. OKAY, MA'AM.

THE SAME APPLIES ON TEN ACRE AND SUBDIVISIONS OF PARCELS.

THREE OR MORE. SO WATER TO THE SITE IT'S ALWAYS UTILITIES IS CITY WATER AND CITY SEWER.

IS THAT IS THAT WHAT I'M HEARING? CITY WATER AND CITY SEWER.

GARBAGE SUBDIVISION LIKE? YES. ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK FOR OR AGAINST THIS ITEM? YES. COME ON UP, MA'AM.

MARY SPAR, I'M GOING TO CHANGE THE SUBJECT AND DO MORE.

GENERAL. MARY SPAR, 825 CLIFTON'S COVE COURT IN COCOA.

AND I'M SPEAKING FOR SIERRA CLUB.

AND WE APPRECIATE.

CAN YOU GET THE MIC CLOSER TO YOU? THANK YOU. MA'AM, WE APPRECIATE THE CHANCE TO COME TO THE PUBLIC INPUT SESSIONS I ATTENDED IN OUR SIERRA CLUB VICE CHAIR ALSO ATTENDED AND I WROTE WRITTEN COMMENTS FOR SIERRA CLUB.

FRONT, WHICH FOCUSED ON A DIFFERENT SUBJECT THAN YOU HAD JUST BEEN DISCUSSING.

NATURAL RESOURCES, SPECIFICALLY WETLANDS, COASTAL AREAS, FLOODPLAIN TREES, AND THE INDIAN RIVER LAGOON.

[01:40:05]

THEN I LOOKED AT THE PROPOSED LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, AND I FOUND THAT THERE IS STILL VERY IMPORTANT WORK TO BE DONE ON THE NATURAL RESOURCES CODE.

NOW SIERRA CLUB REALIZES THAT YOU HAVE THESE IMMEDIATE PRACTICAL PROBLEMS REGARDING THE ZONING LANGUAGE AND THE DEVELOPMENT COMPLEXITIES THAT YOU'VE BEEN DISCUSSING.

BUT WE ASK YOU TO FOCUS ON NATURAL RESOURCES IMPROVEMENTS IN THE FUTURE FOR PHASE TWO. ACTUALLY, WE FOUND TWO NATURAL RESOURCES TOPICS THAT MAY HAVE BEEN OVERLOOKED IN THE CODE UPDATE RIGHT BEFORE YOU.

AND WE'D HOPE THAT OUR SUGGESTIONS WOULD BE FOLLOWED NOW, BUT AT LEAST LET'S TAKE CARE OF THESE TWO ESSENTIAL UPDATES IN PHASE TWO. AND FIRST, TO COMPLY WITH YOUR COMP PLAN, YOU NEED TO PUT WETLAND STANDARDS IN YOUR CODE.

I COULD NOT FIND ANY WETLAND SECTION IN YOUR CODE, AND THE 2045 PLAN SAYS YOU NEED TO UPDATE YOUR CODE TO PUT IN WETLAND STANDARDS. SECOND, THE COASTAL HAZARD AREAS LANGUAGE IN YOUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE NEEDS TO BE UPDATED TO MATCH WHAT WAS PUT INTO THE 2045 COMP PLAN.

THEN, BESIDES THE WETLANDS AND COASTAL AREAS SUGGESTIONS, WE'D HOPE FOR NOW, WE ASKED YOU TO CONSIDER THREE ADDITIONAL IMPROVEMENTS IN PHASE TWO. FIRST, STRENGTHEN YOUR FLOODPLAIN CODE TO PREVENT NEW DEVELOPMENT FROM CAUSING INCREASED FLOODING PROBLEMS ON NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES.

THEN ADD INCENTIVES FOR DEVELOPERS WHEN THEY PROVIDE ADDITIONAL OPEN SPACE OVER AND ABOVE WHAT IS REQUIRED AS ADDITIONAL OPEN SPACE THAT IS PRESERVED TREE CANOPY AREAS.

AND FINALLY ZERO IN ON PROVISIONS YOU CAN ADD TO IMPROVE THE HEALTH OF THE INDIAN RIVER LAGOON.

THE INDIAN RIVER LAGOON NEEDS ALL THE HELP POMPEII CAN GIVE IT? THANK YOU. WELL, THANK YOU MA'AM.

DO WE HAVE A LIST OF.

DID SHE SUBMIT THOSE ALREADY? YES, SIR. WE HAVE THOSE. OKAY.

REGARDING THE INDIAN RIVER LAGOON.

MA'AM, THIS COUNCIL HAS INCREASED OUR CAPACITY WITH NUTRIENT FILTERING BAFFLE BOXES.

SO WE GET THE MUCK BEFORE IT GETS IN.

AND NOT ONLY THAT, WE'VE ALSO INVESTED IN TRUCKS TO CLEAN OUT THOSE BAFFLE BOXES.

SO THANK YOU, MA'AM.

I APPRECIATE YOU BEING HERE.

NEXT SPEAKER.

YES, MA'AM. COME ON UP.

I'VE BEEN WATCHING YOU ON TV, SO I JUST GOT.

RUTH KOPPEL, 935 DOUGLAS STREET SOUTHEAST.

FIRST OF ALL, I'D LIKE TO COMPLIMENT THE STAFF ON THEIR PROFESSIONALISM AND HOW THEY HANDLED THE WORKSHOPS.

THEY WERE VERY GOOD.

I DIDN'T LIKE THE FORMAT SO MUCH AS I WOULD RATHER HAVE A ONE ON ONE CONVERSATION, BUT I SHE DID AN AWESOME JOB, AND THE WHOLE PLACE WAS.

IT WAS REALLY GOOD.

SO MY SITUATION IS WITH THE CLUSTER HOMES AS WELL.

I'M VERY CONCERNED THAT IF IF IT'S, I WANT TO JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I UNDERSTAND COMPLETELY THAT IT'S SINGLE HOME, SINGLE STORY, AND YOU CAN'T TAKE A 13 ACRE LOT AND CRAM MANY HOMES IN THAT.

I SEE THAT IF WE REDUCE THE DENSITY JUST TO GIVE IT MORE SPACE FOR FOLIAGE AND ALL THAT, WHEN YOU REDUCE IT, DON'T YOU INCREASE THE DENSITY? THAT'S MY CONCERN.

SAME THING. I HEARD HIM SAY THAT HE'S NOT GOING TO INCREASE, BUT THAT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE.

IF YOU IF YOU SQUEEZE IT, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE THE SAME AMOUNT OF PEOPLE CRAMMED IN ONE LITTLE SPACE.

AND THESE HOUSES THAT ARE SO CLOSE TOGETHER THAT WE CAN HAVE COFFEE OUT THE WINDOW IS RIDICULOUS, ESPECIALLY WHEN PEOPLE WANT ONE MOVED TO FLORIDA.

THEY WANT, YOU KNOW, THE WHOLE PACKAGE.

THEY DON'T WANT TO COME FROM WHERE THEY WERE.

THEY DON'T WANT TO, YOU KNOW, BE HERE.

SO AND THEN THE SECOND PART OF MY CONCERN IS, IS THAT THE FACT THAT THERE'S CONCERN ABOUT THE INFRASTRUCTURE.

[01:45:04]

WELL, WHERE'S THAT 16% INCREASE IN THAT REVENUE? SO THAT'S ME.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU MA'AM.

MISS GIANCOLA BROWN.

SO ON CLUSTER SUBDIVISIONS AGAIN IT IS A USE AND IT IS A CONDITIONAL USE, BUT IT IS A CONDITIONAL USE TO THE ZONING DISTRICT THAT IT'S PERMITTED IN.

SO FOR EXAMPLE, IF WE MOVE FORWARD WITH SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL RS ONE RS TWO RS THREE, THEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT, YOU KNOW, ONE UNIT PER ACRE.

AND WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT SMALLER LOT SIZES.

AND PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT SMALLER LOT SIZES, YOU KNOW, A 40 FOOT WIDE LOT VERSUS WHAT YOU COULD GET ON A ONE ACRE LOT, YOU THEN CAN FIT MORE HOMES INTO AN AREA, BUT YOU STILL MUST PROVIDE THE OPEN SPACE.

SO YOU'RE NOT IT'S IT IS JUST A TRADE OFF.

YOU'RE NOT ALLOWING INCREASED DENSITY.

SO THE UNDERLYING DENSITY INTENSITY OF THE ZONING DISTRICT STILL APPLIES.

BUT I DEFER TO LISA TO CORRECT ME ON ANY AREA WHERE I'M WRONG.

WELL, I'M NOT GOING TO CORRECT YOU BECAUSE YOU DID A GREAT JOB.

BUT WHAT I WANTED TO EMPHASIZE, AND I KNOW I HAD SPOKEN WITH SEVERAL PEOPLE AT THE WORKSHOP ABOUT THIS CLUSTER SUBDIVISION.

CLUSTER DEVELOPMENTS IS REALLY A KNOWN AS AN ENVIRONMENTAL TOOL.

AND WHAT IT DOES IS THAT, AGAIN, IF YOU HAVE TEN ACRES AND YOU HAVE RS.

ONE IS ONE UNIT PER ACRE, AS JOAN RIGHTLY STATED.

SO YOU HAVE TEN ACRES YOU CAN PUT IN TEN SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.

THIS IS ALL THEORETICAL.

OF COURSE, IN A CLUSTER SUBDIVISION YOU'RE ONLY GOING TO PUT IN TEN RESIDENTIAL HOMES.

YOU'RE NOT GOING TO GET MORE DENSITY.

AND IT IS USED QUITE OFTEN FOR THE PARCELS OF LAND THAT MAY HAVE EXTENSIVE CONNECTED WETLANDS AND OR UPLANDS THAT ARE PROTECTED.

AND SO THEY SET ASIDE THAT AND THEY PUT IN THE SMALLER LOTS.

AND PEOPLE ARE, YES, CLUSTERED TOGETHER.

BUT WE'RE DOING THAT TODAY.

AND THEY, THEY PUT THEM CLOSER TOGETHER IN ONE AREA AND THEY CAN MAKE VERY, VERY CHARMING DEVELOPMENTS.

I VIEWED MANY OF THEM.

THAT'S WHERE EVEN SOME OF YOUR, YOU KNOW, SMALLER HOMES COULD GO, OR EVEN IF IT COULD BE AFFORDABLE, YOU COULD PUT IT IN THERE.

BUT THAT'S TYPICALLY THE TOOL.

AGAIN, THERE'S NO INCREASE IN DENSITY.

YOU HAVE TO HAVE THE EXACT SAME DENSITY.

IT'S JUST SHOVED OFF TO ONE CORNER.

THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.

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

COME ON UP.

SUSAN CONNOLLY, 3901 DIXIE HIGHWAY, NORTHEAST.

PALM BAY. I DON'T KNOW IF I'M SPEAKING AT THE RIGHT TIME OR NOT, BUT ONE OF MY SUGGESTIONS HAD TO DO WITH CITIZEN PARTICIPATION PLANS.

I DIDN'T HEAR ANYTHING ABOUT THAT.

AM I IN PHASE TWO OR NO PHASE? YES, MA'AM. YOU ARE IN PHASE TWO.

NO, WE HAVE WE HAVE CAPTURED.

WE HAVE CAPTURED ALL OF THE COMMENTS IN THIS.

HOLD ON.

30 SHEETS.

GOOD. HERE.

AND WE HAVE GONE THROUGH EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM.

AND THOSE THAT WE FELT MAY TAKE A LITTLE TIME TO DIGEST OR MAKE EVEN BETTER.

WE DECIDED THAT WE WOULD DO AFTER THIS CRITICAL POINT OF GETTING OUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE IN PLACE.

AND THEN, AS WE ALL KNOW, IT'S A LIVING DOCUMENT.

CHANGES, WILL, AND EDITS OCCUR ALL OF THE TIME, AND SO WE CAN CLEAN UP SOME OF THOSE ITEMS AT THAT TIME.

BUT WE HAVE CAPTURED EVERYONE'S COMMENTS AND WE HAVE.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

AND I'D LIKE TO JUST SAY TO CITIZENS, IT'S VERY IMPORTANT THAT THE INPUT@PB.ORG IS STILL AN OPEN LINE. SO EVEN IF IF OTHER CITIZENS HAVE QUESTIONS, THERE IS STILL A CONTINUATION OF THE PROCESS.

AND I WOULD SAY, I THINK THAT'S A GREAT IDEA TO KEEP THAT ALIVE EVEN AFTER ADOPTION OF THIS, THIS THIS PARTICULAR STAGE OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, SO THAT THE CITIZENS CAN PROVIDE US WITH CONTINUOUS INPUT, INSTEAD OF JUST SENDING EMAILS OFF AND HOPING THEY GET TO THE APPROPRIATE PLACE.

WELL, I ACTUALLY HAD HEARD A COMMENT TO THAT EFFECT, AND I, I WOULD LIKE FOR COUNCIL TO SOLIDIFY THAT.

I THINK THAT IS AN EXCELLENT WAY TO CONTINUE THE DISCUSSION AND CONTINUE THE MOMENTUM.

AND THESE THINGS TAKE TIME TO DIGEST AND LEARN, AND THE THE BACK AND FORTH CONVERSATIONS IS EXCELLENT.

[01:50:02]

I KNOW NOT EVERY CITIZEN COULD BE THERE, BUT UNDER THE CIRCUMSTANCES OF TWO WEEKS OR LESS, YOU ALL DID A PHENOMENAL JOB AND I WANT COUNCIL TO KNOW HOW APPRECIATIVE I AM AS A CITIZEN AND HOW WE REALLY GOT THE WORD OUT IN ADDITION TO WHAT THE STAFF DID.

AND IT WAS ACTUALLY FUN TO GO INTO TALK AND TO HAVE SUCH THOROUGH, DETAILED PEOPLE WHO UNDERSTOOD.

I MEAN, THERE WAS NO WELL, I'LL GET BACK TO YOU OR LET ME CHECK ON THAT.

I MEAN, THE RESOURCES WERE THERE, THEY WERE PREPARED.

AND I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT KIND OF CITIZEN CITY COLLABORATION IN MANY THINGS THAT INVOLVE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION.

I THINK IT ONLY MAKES US A GREATER CITY.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

YEAH, I THINK THAT'S A GREAT IDEA TO CONTINUE THAT DIALOG AND KEEPING THAT ALIVE EVEN LONG, LONG AFTER ESPECIALLY PHASE TWO AND AS A CONTINUAL RESOURCE OF OUR ENGAGEMENT.

AND I THINK THAT WE OWE THE CITIZENS THAT MUCH.

SO AS FAR AS THIS COUNCIL IS CONCERNED, I THINK WE GOT THUMBS UP ALL AROUND.

SO WE'RE, WE'RE GOOD TO GO TO CONTINUE THAT DIALOG.

ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK.

SEEING NONE WE'RE GOING TO GO ITEM FROM ITEM RIGHT NOW.

CARRY ON MISS JONI.

ARE THERE ANY ITEMS THAT YOU WISH TO GO BACK TO AFTER HEARING PUBLIC COMMENTS? YES. OKAY.

LET ME GO BACK TO JULIETTE.

IF YOU WOULDN'T MIND THE FIRST COUNCIL DIRECTION SLIDE.

THANK YOU. WELL, I THINK THE BIGGEST ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM FOR COUNCILMAN JOHNSON AND THE MAYOR.

I'M SPEAKING TO.

I'M SPEAKING IN THIRD PARTY, BUT IS THE EDUCATIONAL ISSUES THAT HE BROUGHT UP INSTITUTIONS.

AND THERE.

SEE, YOU PERMIT GREATER THAN 5000FT².

WE WANT THAT TO COME BACK TO COUNCIL.

AT LEAST THIS IS FROM MY PERSPECTIVE.

SO I'LL LET YOU TAKE IT.

COUNCILMAN JOHNSON SINCE YOU FIRST BROUGHT IT UP.

YES, MAYOR.

ARE WE SEEING A REQUEST FROM THIS? FROM BUILDERS OR FROM.

FROM EMPLOYERS OR FROM BUSINESS OWNERS? SO I CAN ANSWER THAT.

THE WHERE THIS CONCEPT CAME IN IS THE CONCERNS THAT HAVE COME UP OVER SCHOOLS THAT HAVE EXPANDED IN THE RECENT PAST AND HAVE NOT NECESSARILY TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT THE TRAFFIC IMPACTS.

DUE TO INCREASED CAPACITY OF STUDENTS.

SO ONE AREA WHERE THIS EXISTS AND I WANT TO SAY IT WAS IN THE IT WAS IN NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL, BUT ONLY FOR A SPECIFIC TYPE OF USE.

WE HAD THIS LIMITATION OF 5000FT² AND THE REQUEST FOR COUNCIL'S CONSIDERATION TO LIMIT IT TO 5000FT² IN NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL ONLY IS IN KEEPING WITH THE INTENT OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL DISTRICT, WHICH IS STATED IN THE ZONING CODE.

AND I CAN PULL IT UP IF YOU'D LIKE ME TO READ IT.

IT DOESN'T PROHIBIT SCHOOLS OR EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS THAT ARE LARGER THAN 5000FT².

IT JUST REQUIRES THAT THEY COME BACK FOR A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT, WHICH ALLOWS CITY COUNCIL AND STAFF TO REVIEW AND ENSURE THAT THEY'RE MEETING ALL OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR PARKING FOR TRAFFIC CIRCULATION.

YOU KNOW, SOME THINGS THAT WE HAVE FACED IN THE RECENT PAST, SO IT'S JUST STAFF WANTING TO BE A LITTLE BIT MORE DILIGENT IN CONSIDERING THOSE PAST CONCERNS.

OKAY. I JUST IF I CAN GET THE CITY ATTORNEY'S WEIGH IN AS WELL, I IT'S HARD FOR US TO DENY CONDITIONAL USES.

IF I THINK COUNSEL WOULD AGREE.

BECAUSE USUALLY WHEN THEY DOT ALL THE I'S, CROSS ALL THE T'S, YOU HAVE TO.

SO I'M I'M JUST I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE MOVE CAREFULLY THERE.

JUST LIKE YOU.

YEAH. NO, I'M, I'M I'M WITH YOU BECAUSE I, I WHAT I WANT IS I WANT THAT ACCESS TO SAY.

OKAY, I LOOKED AT THIS TRAFFIC STUDY WITH THIS WITH THIS SCHOOL.

RIGHT. AND I THINK WE COULD MOVE FORWARD IN THIS.

NOW, MY CONCERN IS LIKE DOJOS OR DANCE STUDIOS WHERE WE'RE WE'RE HARMING THE SMALL BUSINESSMEN, RIGHT? I DON'T EVER WANT TO HARM THE SMALL BUSINESSMEN.

[01:55:03]

THERE'S CHILD CARE FACILITIES ALSO THAT YOU HAVE TO CONSIDER.

I THINK THE SWEET SPOT HERE IS 5000FT².

AND THEN IF YOU KNOW, YOU CAN'T LIMIT LIKE, THE NUMBER OF STUDENTS, RIGHT? BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE I WAS INITIALLY.

BUT I THINK THAT THAT MIGHT BE A GOOD SPOT WHERE IT COMES TO US.

AND THEN AT THAT POINT, THERE'LL BE THERE'S THINGS THAT HAVE TO BE CHECKED OFF.

TRAFFIC STUDY.

WHAT WHAT CAPACITY DOES THE ROADWAY HAVE? SO I THINK THIS MAY BE THE BEST WAY TO HAVING THIS COME TO US, BECAUSE OTHERWISE, RIGHT NOW, IT WOULDN'T COME TO US THE WAY IT IS. SO ONE OF THE THINGS.

YEAH, WELL, NO, IT WOULDN'T.

BUT ONE OF THE THINGS I THINK GETTING TO YOUR POINT, COUNCILMAN JOHNSON, IS WE HAVE LIKE CONDITIONAL USES WHERE IT'S JUST THE GENERAL CONDITIONAL USE CRITERIA. AND THEN WE HAVE CERTAIN USES THAT NOT ONLY HAVE THE GENERAL, BUT THEY HAVE SPECIFIC USES TAILORED TO THEM.

SO WHAT YOU MAY NEED IS FAR AS WHEN WE'RE LOOKING AT THESE EDUCATIONAL USES IS TO HAVE SOME SPECIFIC CRITERIA THAT IS TAILORED TO THE SCHOOLS, THAT IS GOING TO LOOK AT THE TRAFFIC IMPACTS SO THAT YOU'RE NOT JUST GETTING THE TYPICAL INGRESS, EGRESS AND THAT TYPE OF THING, BUT SOMETHING SPECIFIC TO THE HARM THAT YOU'RE REALLY WANTING TO BE ABLE TO MAKE YOUR DECISION BASED UPON.

SO TO THAT, YOU MAY BE CORRECT THAT STAFF MAY NEED TO, IF THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE THIS AS A CONDITIONAL USE, HAVE CONDITIONS THAT ARE SPECIFIC TO THIS USE SO THAT YOU'RE CONSIDERING IF IT LOOKS LIKE, YOU KNOW, THE TRAFFIC ISN'T GOING TO BE SOMETHING THIS NEIGHBORHOOD COULD ACCOMMODATE, YOU HAVE A BASIS TO DENY RATHER THAN HAVE A CONDITIONAL USE. AND EVERYBODY COMES HERE AND THEN YOU'RE LIKE, WELL, I KNOW YOU GUYS ARE REALLY MAD, AND I KNOW THIS MAY NOT WORK FOR YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD NECESSARILY, BUT THESE ARE THE STANDARDS I HAVE AND WE CAN'T CONSIDER THAT.

AND I KNOW THAT SOMETIMES GETS FRUSTRATING FOR THE PUBLIC BECAUSE THEY'RE LIKE, YOU KNOW, YOUR STANDARDS DON'T ACCOMMODATE THE THINGS THAT WE THINK ARE IMPORTANT.

YOU SHOULD CHANGE YOUR STANDARDS.

SO I THINK IT IS WORTHWHILE TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR STANDARDS INCORPORATE THE THINGS THAT YOU WANT TO CONSIDER AND THAT REALLY MAKE THIS COMPATIBLE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

OKAY, SO HOW DO WE DO THAT? I HAVE ON TOP OF THE 5000FT², HOW DO WE ADD MORE OF THAT CONTINGENCY TO GIVE US THAT AUTHORITY? WELL, HAVING IT AS A CONDITIONAL USE, BUT ASKING STAFF TO LOOK AT AS FAR AS WHAT, BECAUSE YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE IT AS A CONDITIONAL USE, BUT YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE SEPARATELY WHAT CONDITIONAL USE STANDARDS TO MAKING SURE THAT THERE ARE STANDARDS IN THE CONDITIONAL USE WHERE YOU'RE CONSIDERING THIS, THAT ARE APPLICABLE TO THE SCHOOLS THAT REALLY FOCUS IN ON THE TRAFFIC AND HOW IT AFFECTS THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

SO THAT BECAUSE THAT IS PROBABLY GOING TO BE ONE OF THE BIGGEST THINGS THAT YOU CONSIDER, AS OPPOSED TO IF YOU DON'T REALLY HAVE IT AS A STANDARD, WHAT YOU END UP WITH IS, WELL, TRAFFIC ISN'T CONSIDERED AT THIS POINT IN TIME.

YOU APPROVE IT, AND THEN WE'LL CONSIDER THE TRAFFIC LATER ON, WHICH DOESN'T USUALLY LEAVE MOST PEOPLE SATISFIED.

OKAY. SO, YOU KNOW, I'M.

I DIDN'T MEAN TO CUT YOU OFF, COUNCILMAN JOHNSON.

BUT I THINK THIS IS SOMETHING RIGHT NOW, I THINK THAT'S GOOD.

I'D LIKE TO HAVE STAFF WORK ON THAT, AND I'LL CARRY ON.

LAST QUESTION.

HOW WOULD THESE, IF AN EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION WERE TO BE APPROVED IN A NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL, HOW WOULD IT BE TAXED? WOULD IT BE TAXED LIKE AN IU? WOULD IT BE TAXED LIKE BECAUSE WE JUST APPROVED, YOU KNOW, REMOVING THE EDUCATIONAL ESTABLISHMENTS AND USING THE LANGUAGE FOR EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS, WHICH INCLUDES PUBLIC CHARTER ELEMENTARY, MIDDLE AND HIGH COLLEGE? DO YOU GET WHAT I'M ASKING? NO.

IF YOU'RE ASKING IF YOU'RE ALLOWING ITEMS THAT ARE NOT GOING TO BE TAXED INTO YOUR COMMERCIAL AREA.

THAT'S PROBABLY CORRECT, IF THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE ASKING.

YES. YES.

SO, SO. SO IT WOULDN'T BE TAXED AS COMMERCIAL? CORRECT? NO.

OKAY. NOT A SCHOOL, BUT A DANCE STUDIO.

WOULD WOULD A DANCE STUDIO BE TAXED? A KARATE STUDIO WOULD BE TAXED.

OR JIU-JITSU? YEAH. OR.

OKAY. YOU GET WHAT I MEAN, THOUGH.

IT'S A IT'S A WIDE DEFINITION.

YEAH, IT'S A WIDE DEFINITION.

BUT IF WE OPEN IT UP, THEN YOU CAN OPEN IT UP WHERE IT COULD BE ONE THAT CAN BE OR IT COULD BE ONE THAT'S NOT.

SO I THINK COUNCILMAN JOHNSON YOU COULD CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT I THINK WHAT COUNCILMAN JOHNSON IS GETTING TO IS IF WE'RE, WE'RE USING THIS EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION TERMINOLOGY.

[02:00:04]

THE DANCE STUDIO IS GOING TO BE TAXED.

OR IS IT BECAUSE IT'S CONSIDERED AN EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION.

THERE'S NO TAX.

WELL, KARATE AND DANCE SCHOOLS, I MEAN, CERTAINLY WE DON'T SAY THAT THAT WOULDN'T CHANGE.

BUT, YOU KNOW, YOUR ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS, YOUR CHARTER SCHOOLS ARE GOING TO BE TAXED AND IT DOESN'T MATTER WHERE YOU PUT THOSE AT.

YEAH. OKAY. COPY THAT.

YEAH. DID I EXPLAIN IT CORRECTLY? I'M GOOD. OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

SO IF WE COULD, YOU KNOW, GET INTO WHAT MADAM ATTORNEY SAID, GET INTO THOSE SPECIFIC DETAILS OF GIVING COUNCIL THE OPPORTUNITY TO SAY BASED ON, YOU KNOW, OUR OUR ORDINANCE OR BASED ON OUR LAND CODE, WE WE HAVE THE AUTHORITY TO DENY THIS CONDITIONAL USE.

I THINK THE STAFF UNDERSTAND THAT DIRECTION.

MADAM ATTORNEY, IS THAT HOW YOU ARTICULATE IT? DID I CONVEY THAT CORRECTLY? YES. WE'LL CREATE SOME CONDITIONS.

CERTAINLY. MY STAFF AND GROWTH WILL WORK TOGETHER TO CREATE SOME CONDITIONS SO THAT YOU ARE CONSIDERING THE TRAFFIC IMPACTS WHEN YOU'RE ACTUALLY APPROVING THE CONDITIONAL USE. OKAY.

COUNCILMAN WEINBERG.

I'M SORRY. YEAH. THANK YOU, MR. MAYOR. LOOK, HERE'S MY THINKING ON THIS.

YOU KNOW ALLOWING EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONS SUCH AS KARATE STUDIOS, DANCE STUDIOS, CHILDCARE FACILITIES.

THOSE ARE COMMERCIAL ENTERPRISES, AND THEY'LL BE TAXED AS SUCH.

BUT TO ALLOW AND THEN IT GOES ON TO SAY, ALLOW MEDIUM INTENSE USES LIKE A PUBLIC OR CHARTER SCHOOL.

WELL IN MY MIND A PUBLIC OR CHARTER SCHOOL IS NOT A MEDIUM USE, AND THAT WILL MINIMIZE THE INTERRUPTION OF TRAFFIC.

WE'VE ALL HEARD NUMEROUS HORROR STORIES ABOUT TRAFFIC BY CHARTER SCHOOLS AND PUBLIC SCHOOLS.

SO, FRANKLY, I'D LIKE TO SEE THAT.

ABSOLUTELY. JUST THE PUBLIC OR CHARTER SCHOOLS? ABSOLUTELY. EVEN EVEN THOUGH IT'S IT CAN BE APPROVED BY A CONDITIONAL USE.

I'D LIKE TO SEE THAT ELIMINATED FROM ANY COMMERCIAL ZONING.

SO THAT'S AN EXCELLENT POINT.

I. ARE WE ABLE TO STRIKE IT? CERTAINLY. IF THAT IS COUNCIL'S PREROGATIVE.

ABSOLUTELY. YOU ALL HAVE TO FIGURE OUT BECAUSE YOU'RE IMPLEMENTING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

AS FAR AS THIS AREA IS THIS, YOU KNOW HOW YOU FEEL.

IT BEST IMPLEMENTS THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO HAVE IT IN THIS PARTICULAR ZONE.

SO THERE MAY BE UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES WITH A NURSING SCHOOL BY, YOU KNOW, BY DEFINITION, WOULD THAT BE CONSIDERED A CHARTER SCHOOL OR A PUBLIC SCHOOL? BUT A NURSING SCHOOL OR.

I'M JUST CONCERNED OF ANY UNINTENDED CONSEQUENCES, IF I MAY, JUST TO BACK UP.

AND IF YOU DIDN'T HAVE THAT, YOU STILL IT WOULDN'T BE THAT THE PLACE COULDN'T BE THERE.

INSTEAD OF HAVING A CONDITIONAL USE, YOU MORE LIKELY IF IT WASN'T ALLOWED IN THAT IF THERE WERE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL AND THEY WANTED IT, INSTEAD OF GETTING A CONDITIONAL USE NOW, YOU WOULD HAVE THEM ESSENTIALLY GOING TO SOMETHING LIKE AN INSTITUTIONAL USE WHERE THEY'RE DOING INSTEAD OF SO THEY'RE HAVING THEY'RE GOING TO A NEW LAND USE BECAUSE THEIR LAND USE WOULD NO LONGER BE COMPATIBLE.

BUT IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT THEY CAN'T.

IT'S JUST THAT THE CURRENT USE THAT INSTEAD OF GOING THROUGH A CONDITIONAL USE, THEY'D HAVE A COUPLE MORE STEPS.

OKAY. MADAM BROWN.

SO FIRST I WANT TO STATE SCHOOLS ARE CURRENTLY PERMITTED BY RIGHT WITH NO LIMITATION ON SQUARE FOOTAGE IN NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL.

THE SECOND THING I WANTED TO POINT OUT IS EDUCATIONAL SERVICES.

SERVICE ESTABLISHMENTS IS NOW ENCOMPASSED OR WILL BE ENCOMPASSED IN EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTION.

IT JUST CREATES ONE BROAD USE CATEGORY, IF YOU WILL, WHERE THE 5000 SQUARE FOOT LIMITATION COMES IN IS IT ALLOWS THE KARATE STUDIOS, THE DANCE STUDIOS, THE SMALLER NURSING SCHOOLS TO COME IN.

PERMITTED BY RIGHT WITHOUT A CONDITIONAL USE, SO LONG AS THEY'RE WITHIN THAT 5000 SQUARE FOOT THRESHOLD.

ANYTHING BEYOND THAT, LIKE CHARTER SCHOOLS AND PUBLIC SCHOOLS, WHICH ARE COMPLEMENTARY TO A NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL DISTRICT SERVING THE STUDENTS OF THAT RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD. ANYTHING BEYOND 5000FT² HAS TO COME TO COUNCIL.

AND OF COURSE, CONDITIONAL USE STANDARDS WE'LL LOOK AT ARE THINGS LIKE, YOU KNOW, TRAFFIC THAT REQUIRE TRAFFIC STUDY, LOOK AT THE TRAFFIC CIRCULATION, LOOK AT THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS, LOOK AT THE PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIONS TO GET STUDENTS SAFELY TO THE SCHOOL, REQUIREMENTS FOR SIDEWALKS AND THINGS LIKE THAT THAT MAKE SENSE FOR THAT PARTICULAR CONDITIONAL USE.

SO I JUST WANTED TO STATE SOME OF THAT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ALL UNDERSTAND WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WHEN WE SAY

[02:05:01]

COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICT.

COUNCILMAN. JOHNSON. SO.

SO TECHNICALLY, THEY CAN GO INTO A NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL RIGHT NOW WITHOUT A RIGHT WITH IT.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

WE ARE EXPERIENCING ONE.

YEAH. I MEAN, ALL RIGHT.

SO I'M GOOD.

I'M GOOD WITH GENTLEMEN.

GETTING BACK ON TRACK.

WE'RE. I'M GOOD WITH WHAT? OUR CITY ATTORNEY HAS SAID TO WORK WITH GROWTH MANAGEMENT AND HONE IN ON THIS BECAUSE THERE IS AN EXISTING.

AND ALL WE'RE DOING IS, IS CREATING AN OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO COME BACK AND LOOK AT IT AND HAVE ENOUGH AMMUNITION TO SAY WE DON'T AGREE.

ALL RIGHT. SO I'M I'M GOOD THERE.

I'M GOOD WITH IT. CAN CAN WE MOVE FORWARD ON THAT? YES, SIR. ALL RIGHT.

ARE WE? YEAH.

IF I MAKE ONE COMMENT HERE, YOU KNOW, THE LAST SENTENCE THIS IS IS THE INTENT REMAINS MINIMIZING THE INTERRUPTION OF TRAFFIC ALONG ADJACENT THOROUGHFARES. BOY, THAT'S A POINT OF CONTENTION AS FAR AS I'M CONCERNED, BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW ABOUT YOU, BUT I DON'T EVER REMEMBER SEEING A TRAFFIC STUDY DONE ON ANY PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT THAT SAYS, NO, THIS THIS IS GOING TO CAUSE EXCESSIVE TRAFFIC.

AND YOU KNOW, IT'S JUST GOING TO BE A PROBLEM, WHICH IS THAT'S A CONCERN OF MINE.

AND IF IT COMES TO THEY HAVE A TRAFFIC STUDY, IT SAYS, YEAH, YEAH, NO PROBLEM.

AND IT COMES BEFORE CITY COUNCIL FOR CONDITIONAL USE APPROVAL.

HOW CAN WE DENY THAT? BECAUSE WE FEEL THAT IT WILL CREATE A TRAFFIC PROBLEM.

I'LL LET THE CITY ATTORNEY JUST ANSWER THAT AGAIN.

WELL, IT'S NOT THAT IT DOESN'T SAY THAT IT CAUSES A PROBLEM WITH THE TRAFFIC.

STUDY USUALLY WILL IDENTIFY WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE TO ALLEVIATE THAT PROBLEM.

SO MAYBE THAT THIS COMES IN AND IT'S GOING TO CREATE THESE ISSUES.

BUT THAT'S WHY WE'RE SAYING THAT IT NEEDS ADDITIONAL TURN LANES OR IT NEEDS SOME TYPE OF TRAFFIC SIGNAL.

AND SO ESSENTIALLY HOW YOU NEGATE THAT OR YOU DISCUSS THAT IS YOU HAVE THE EXPERTS, CERTAINLY THE DEVELOPER HAVE THEIR EXPERT THAT DID THE TRAFFIC STUDY.

THE CITY WILL HAVE ITS OWN AND IN STAFF EXPERTS THAT WILL REVIEW THE TRAFFIC STUDY.

IF THERE'S SOMETHING WRONG WITH THE METHODOLOGY OR THERE'S SOMETHING ISSUE, USUALLY OUR CONSULTANT OR OUR STAFF WILL HAVE ALREADY ADDRESSED THAT WITH THE ENGINEER BEFORE IT COMES FORTH. BUT USUALLY, YOU KNOW, YOU DON'T SEE THAT IT DOESN'T CAUSE A PROBLEM BECAUSE THEY TELL YOU HOW TO MITIGATE THE PROBLEMS IN THE STUDY ITSELF.

YEAH. THANK YOU.

I WAS AWARE OF THAT.

BUT, YOU KNOW, I WAS JUST MAYBE A LITTLE EXAGGERATION THERE.

BUT BUT AGAIN, I'VE SEEN WHERE THEY HAVE PROPOSED MITIGATION WHERE, YOU KNOW, EXTENDED TURN LANES AND THIS TYPE OF STUFF, AND IT REALLY DIDN'T SOLVE THE PROBLEM.

SO THAT'S MY CONCERN WITH ALLOWING CHARTER SCHOOLS AND, YOU KNOW, AND AND AND PUBLIC SCHOOLS IN IN NC DEVELOPMENT.

BUT THAT'S OKAY. SO I'M SORRY, MAYOR, I JUST I'LL RATHER HANDLE I'D RATHER SPEND ANOTHER 30 MINUTES HERE NOW TO HANDLE THIS.

THEN YOU UNDERSTAND.

SO IF WE WERE TO REMOVE CHARTER AND PUBLIC SCHOOLS FROM THIS LANGUAGE WHAT WOULD BE THE OUTCOME? WOULD SAY THEY WANTED TO COME FORWARD.

THEY WOULD HAVE TO GO FOR A REZONING.

OR WOULD THEY HAVE TO IF IT WAS, IF THEY HAD A SITE THAT WAS CURRENTLY IN C AND WE DIDN'T HAVE IT PERMITTED AS A USE OR A CONDITIONAL USE, THEY WOULD THEN HAVE TO SEEK A LAND USE CHANGE TO A USE THAT WOULD ALLOW THEM TO BE A SCHOOL, AND IN THAT LAND USE CHANGE, WILL WE HAVE MORE FLEXIBILITY? WELL, LAND USE CHANGE, YOU HAVE THE MOST FLEXIBILITY.

THEN THAT'S WHERE I WOULD LIKE TO GO.

SO I'LL SECOND THAT.

SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A STRIKING PUBLIC OR CHARTER SCHOOL BY CONDITIONAL USE.

BY CONDITIONAL USE.

REMOVE THAT LANGUAGE.

AM I CLEAR? YES, SIR.

IS THAT. IS THAT UNDERSTOOD? SO YOU DON'T WANT IT AS A PERMITTED OR A CONDITIONAL USE IN NEIGHBORHOOD? COMMERCIAL? CORRECT.

THAT'S THAT'S WHAT I'M HEARING.

RIGHT. AND, MATT.

MADAM BROWN, I HEAR TWO.

ARE YOU THE THIRD? OH, YEAH.

I'LL JUMP IN ON THAT ONE.

SO IT WOULD NEED TO DO WE WOULD HAVE TO BRING BACK A CHANGE IN THE SCHEDULE OF USES TO ENSURE THAT WE'RE ALLOWING PUBLIC SCHOOLS AND CHARTER SCHOOLS AND OTHER ZONING DISTRICTS AND AND OTHER.

YEAH, I WAS JUST ABOUT TO BRING THAT UP.

SCHEDULE OF USES.

IT'S ALLOWED IN RC.

SO A LOT OF THOSE COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES ALONG MALABAR ROAD, FOR EXAMPLE.

INSTITUTIONAL. IT'S ALLOWED IN INSTITUTIONAL.

[02:10:02]

SO LET ME SEE.

MADAM ATTORNEY WE CAN GO DOWN THIS PATH BY STRIKING THAT OUT.

YES. IT DOES APPEAR THAT THIS IS NOT OUR NC IS NOT THE ONLY AREA THAT SCHOOLS CAN GO THROUGH AS FAR AS ZONING.

SO IF THAT WAS COUNCIL'S PREROGATIVE.

YES. OKAY. SO I GOT I'VE GOT THREE MEMBERS ON, ON THE DAIS THAT SAY STRIKE THAT IF IF THE CITY ATTORNEY IS GOOD WITH THAT, THEN I'M GOOD DEPUTY MAYOR.

MAYOR. I'M FINE. THAT'S IF THAT'S WHAT THE MAJORITY WANTS.

I MEAN, I WAS OKAY WITH THE LANGUAGE, THE LANGUAGE.

SO NOW MOVING ON TO THE NEXT ITEM I WANT TO TALK ABOUT MISS SAUNDERS.

AND AND HOW WE WE COULD MINIMIZE HER SUGGESTION.

RIGHT. HOW DO WE HOW DO WE WORK ON THAT ITEM? THE 10%.

YOU GUYS ARE GOING TO COME BACK WITH CERTAIN CRITERIA.

I'M SORRY. I JUST ONE MORE MINUTE SO I CAN TAKE A NOTE ON.

OKAY. ABOUT BECAUSE THERE ARE OTHER THINGS THIS WILL IMPACT.

OKAY. ON THE 10% FOR I'M SORRY FOR OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENT UNDER FOR COMMERCIAL USES. YES.

MAY I SUGGEST THAT WE DELINEATED MORE CLEAR.

I BELIEVE THAT'S WHAT THE, THE COUNCIL WAS EVEN STATING BECAUSE THE VERBIAGE IS IN THERE.

THAT REALLY, MA'AM, ON THE MC, ON THE MC MR..

I DON'T KNOW WHY THIS MIC ISN'T LOUD ENOUGH FOR ME.

WHAT I WANTED TO STATE IS THAT THE VERBIAGE IS IN THERE, BUT I BELIEVE THAT, AS YOU STATED SUCCINCTLY BEFORE, THAT PERHAPS WE NEED TO PULL IT OUT INTO A TABLE OR A LIST TO MAKE IT MUCH MORE CLEAR AS TO WHAT IS ALLOWABLE OR OR SIMILAR, IF YOU KNOW WHAT I'M SAYING.

OKAY. AND I THINK THAT THAT MIGHT ADDRESS SOME OF OUR, OUR OUTSTANDING ISSUES WITH THAT.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

I JUST WOULD LIKE FOR MISS SAUNDERS TO TAKE A LOOK AND BRUCE TO LOOK AT THAT.

WELL, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE 20.

YEAH. BRUCE.

BRUCE WAS. YEAH.

BRUCE WAS THE 10%.

SHE WAS. BRUCE WAS TEN. SHE'S 20.

YEAH. AS YOU WERE.

I DIDN'T WANT TO CUT YOU. YEAH.

DID YOU HEAR WHAT SHE SAID? SHE SAID I'M ALWAYS EXTRA.

NO YOU'RE NOT, MA'AM.

SO. ALL RIGHT, LET'S TALK ABOUT BRUCE'S 10%, AND THEN WE'LL TALK ABOUT MISS SAUNDERS 20.

SO THERE'S A CRITERIA ALREADY COMPLETED THAT YOU SAID.

ALL RIGHT. AND WE'LL SHARE THAT WITH BRUCE.

ALL RIGHT. SO LET'S TALK ABOUT HOW WE DEAL WITH BUSINESS 20% AND MAKE THAT A LITTLE MORE DESCRIPTIVE AND STRINGENT.

OR HOW ARE WE GOING TO WORK THIS OUT? 10% IS THE COMMERCIAL.

THAT'S WHAT WE'RE ON RIGHT NOW.

20 MISS SAUNDERS, 20% OF THE COMMERCIAL.

ARE YOU ASKING STAFF TO CONSIDER SOMETHING SPECIFIC? YEAH, EXACTLY. YEAH.

DIFFERENT CRITERIA HONE IT IN ON SO INCREASING THE.

SO LET ME GO BACK TO BECAUSE ANNA AND I DID TALK ABOUT THIS YESTERDAY EVENING AS WELL.

AND SO A LOT OF WHAT IS IN THIS RECOMMENDATION DID COME FROM HER AS A SUGGESTION.

SO I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY, WE ARE CURRENTLY PROPOSING TO.

WELL, FIRST OF ALL, I WANT TO MAKE SURE EVERYONE'S AWARE OF THE DEFINITION OF OR THE REQUIREMENT FOR COMMON RECREATION AND OPEN SPACES ONLY APPLIED TO DEVELOPABLE ACREAGE.

THAT'S ONE WE ARE BACKING OUT THE 100% OF THE WETLANDS OR WHAT IS CONSIDERED PROTECTED OPEN SPACE.

WE ARE BACKING OUT ANY REQUIRED STORMWATER, ANY REQUIRED EASEMENTS, AND ANY REQUIRED RIGHTS OF WAY FOR ROADS. FOR EXAMPLE, WAS THERE SOMETHING ADDITIONAL THAT I DID NOT INCLUDE? WAS THE THING SHE WAS TALKING ABOUT THE 2020, MA'AM, WOULD YOU WANT TO COME BACK UP? ABSOLUTELY. YEAH.

SO I GUESS I WOULD BE MORE COMFORTABLE WITH A COMMERCIAL REQUIREMENT THAT'S DICTATED OR PREDICATED UPON A NUMBER OF RESIDENTIAL UNITS THAT CAN SUPPORT IT, AS OPPOSED TO A GROSS LAND AREA.

REGARDLESS OF WHAT YOU KNOW, LESS OUT.

AGAIN, THE PURPOSE OF HAVING THE COMMERCIAL SO IT'S VIABLE AND WE WANT IT TO, YOU KNOW, NOBODY WANTS A VACANT STRIP MALL.

THE RESIDENTS DON'T WANT IT.

YOU GUYS DON'T WANT IT. IT DOESN'T LOOK GOOD.

[02:15:03]

AND THE 40FT² PER UNIT HAD ACTUALLY COME, I THINK THAT ORIGINATED ACTUALLY WITH OUR OFFICE AND HELPING THE CITY GENERATE THAT PMU CODE.

QUITE A FEW YEARS AGO, AND I CAN I'M MORE THAN HAPPY TO SHARE THAT INFORMATION WITH YOU.

BUT REALLY, WHERE IT COMES FROM IS JUST OUR DECADES OF DOING PROBABLY 20 OR 30 DRIS OF DEVELOPMENTS, OF REGIONAL IMPACT.

WE DON'T DO THOSE SO MUCH ANYMORE.

BUT IN THE 80S AND 90S, THOSE WERE VERY POPULAR.

I OBVIOUSLY COULD DO THAT. BUT OUR OFFICE DID, AND SO THAT'S WHAT THAT I DID.

YEAH. SO THAT'S WHERE THAT INFORMATION CAME FROM.

AND AGAIN, I'M MORE THAN HAPPY TO FACILITATE THAT INFORMATION AND BE ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU MA'AM. I APPRECIATE YOU COMING BACK UP TOO.

SO. YES, MA'AM.

DO I JUST WANT TO CONFIRM.

AND, LISA, PLEASE CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG.

IF WE AMEND THAT, WE MUST FIRST AMEND OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BECAUSE RESIDENTIAL REQUIRES 20%, A MINIMUM OF 20% OPEN SPACE.

YES. AND THAT CAN BE ACTIVITY BASED OR RESOURCE BASED.

I THINK THERE ARE TWO ITEMS. ONE IS OPEN SPACE, THE OTHER ONE IS COMMERCIAL.

COMMERCIAL? YEAH, WE'RE TALKING COMMERCIAL.

COMMERCIAL. WE'RE DOING COMMERCIAL.

YES. OKAY.

YEAH. YES, I, I UNDERSTAND THAT WE'RE TALKING COMMERCIAL NOW.

UNDERSTAND? SO I'M I'M TRACKING NOW.

OKAY. OKAY.

OKAY. AND I WANT TO SAY THAT IN MY, IN MY LONG CAREER THAT WE HAVE OFTEN STRUGGLED WITH.

WHAT IS THE PROPER MIX? AND YOU ASK AN ECONOMIST, YOU ASK, YOU KNOW, REAL ESTATE.

YOU ASK ANYONE IN THE FIELD IN THESE DIFFERENT WEAR DIFFERENT HATS AND THEY'LL SAY, IT DEPENDS.

AND IT REALLY IS.

IT DEPENDS. OKAY.

IT DEPENDS ON WHAT THE MARKET IS.

IT DEPENDS ON WHERE YOU ARE.

WELL, I LIKE THAT BECAUSE YOU'RE RIGHT.

YOU CAN'T COOKIE CUTTER IT.

BUT I DEFINITELY WANT TO GET SCAR'S INPUT ON THIS.

I DEFINITELY WANT TO GET THOSE DETAILS.

MISS SAUNDERS TALKS ABOUT A DRY LISTEN THAT THIS DRY THAT WE WE CALL VIERA TODAY.

IT'S HUGE. IT'S SUCCESSFUL THAT THAT MIX.

RIGHT. SO YEAH, IF WE COULD GET SOME OF THOSE DETAILS TO BE INCORPORATED IN THIS AND THEN I THINK WE IT'S A WIN WIN FOR US.

AND THAT'LL BE PHASE TWO.

RIGHT. I GUESS WE'RE MOVING INTO PHASE TWO FOR THAT, OR ARE WE WORKING ON THAT FOR NOW? WE'RE TRYING TO INCORPORATE IT BEFORE THE SECOND READING, WHICH IS SEPTEMBER 19TH, AND WE NEED TO HAVE OUR MEETINGS WITH THE ENGINEERS AND SCAA.

WE WILL HAVE TO ADJUST THE NEXT COUPLE OF WEEKS SCHEDULE.

OH, AND, YOU KNOW I'M GOING TO TAKE I'M GOING TO TAKE A PAUSE.

I'M GOING TO LOOK AT MY COUNCIL MEMBERS.

RIGHT. I THINK THIS IS SO IMPORTANT TO, TO ME ANYWAY, THAT WE DON'T RUSH THIS THROUGH.

IF IT'S GOOD FOR ME FOR PHASE TWO, THEN I WOULD WANT A PRODUCT THAT IS SUCCESSFUL.

AND SO CAN WE DO THIS FOR A PHASE TWO OR DO WE NEED TO DO IT NOW? THAT'S A QUESTION FOR STAFF.

I WOULD PREFER WE DON'T RUSH IT, BECAUSE I DON'T WANT US TO BE IN A POSITION LIKE WE HAVE BEEN IN THE LAST FEW WEEKS, AND STAFF HAS.

SO THIS IS SOMETHING FOR PHASE TWO THAT I THINK COUNCIL, BUT I UNDERSTAND.

ALL RIGHT. COUNCILMAN WEINBERG, DEPUTY MAYOR YEAH, THIS IS SOMETHING FOR PHASE TWO THAT WE WANT TO GET THIS RIGHT AND WE WANT TO GET THE COMMUNITY'S INPUT ON THIS.

SO DEFINITELY PHASE TWO.

THANK YOU FOR BRINGING UP THAT DRY BECAUSE I LOVE THAT DRY THAT WAS PROPOSED SO MANY YEARS AGO.

I WAS ON THE BOARD OF COUNCIL, NOT THAT I SERVED AS A STAFFER ON THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSION DURING THAT TIME.

YES, MA'AM. IT WAS A GREAT REFERENCE.

YEAH, ABSOLUTELY.

SO WE'RE GOOD ON THAT. WHAT'S THE NEXT ITEM, MA'AM? LET'S SEE.

AND THIS IS GREAT DIALOG ITEM THAT WE HAVEN'T YET COVERED IS JUST THE BROAD CONVERSATION ABOUT THE ENSURING THAT WE HAVE A VARIETY OF USES ALLOWED WITHIN THE ZONING DISTRICTS.

AND JULIET, I KNOW THAT WE HAVE THE LAST PRESENTATION AVAILABLE.

IF WE COULD BRING THAT UP, I BELIEVE WE HAVE THE SCHEDULE OF USES.

IF YOU JUST WANT TO HAVE A DIALOG ON USES YOU BELIEVE SHOULD BE IN DISTRICTS THAT YOU DON'T THINK IS COVERED, WE'LL NOTE THEM DOWN AND WE'LL WE'LL TAKE

[02:20:02]

BUT CERTAINLY IN PHASE TWO, YOU KNOW, WE'D LIKE TO LOOK AT WHETHER OR NOT ANY OF THOSE USES REALLY BELONG IN THAT PARTICULAR ZONING DISTRICT.

IF IT'S NOT THERE, IT'S NOT IN THAT POWERPOINT.

BUT IF WE HAVE THOSE BOARDS THAT WE CREATED, WE HAVE THAT IN ONE OF THOSE BOARDS.

I MEAN, THE SCALE IS PRETTY MONUMENTAL.

SO, OKAY, I GUESS AT THIS POINT THEN IF THERE'S ANYTHING THAT ANY USES, YOU HAVEN'T SEEN OR DIDN'T JUMP OUT AT YOU IN THOSE ZONING DISTRICTS. SO ONE THAT WAS BROUGHT UP AND I THINK YOU GUYS COVERED IT WAS THE THE CHURCHES BEING IN TWO DIFFERENT LOCATIONS.

AND I THINK YOU GUYS ADDRESSED THAT.

YOU ADDRESSED THE CONVENTION CENTER ASPECT TO IT.

SO COUNCIL, ANY ANYTHING ELSE? COUNCILMAN WEINBERG, DEPUTY MAYOR, ANYTHING POPS OUT.

OKAY. SO I THINK WE'RE GOOD RIGHT NOW.

SO DO YOU NEED A MOTION? YES, MADAM. MADAM? YES, MADAM. CLERK.

OKAY, SO I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION.

MOTION TO APPROVE THIS ITEM WITH ALL OF COUNCIL'S DIRECTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.

I GOT A MOTION BY COUNCILMAN JOHNSON, SECONDED BY DEPUTY MAYOR FELIX.

ANY ADDITIONAL DISCUSSION? COUNCILMAN JOHNSON? NO.

I APPRECIATE THE DIALOG.

I APPRECIATE THE DIALOG WITH STAFF, WITH THE RESIDENTS, BECAUSE WE WE WANT TO TAKE OUR TIME TO GET IT DONE.

RIGHT. SO THAT'S ALL.

MAYOR. THANK YOU, DEPUTY MAYOR.

MAYOR, I THINK, AGAIN, AS IT'S BEEN SAID, I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE DO GET IT RIGHT.

WE PUT A LOT OF TIME WE ASKED THE THE COMMUNITY TO GET INVOLVED, AND WE WANT TO MAKE SURE WE WE GET IT RIGHT.

SO YEAH.

SO FIRST I WANT TO THANK STAFF BECAUSE I KNOW THE WHOLE TEAM WAS AT THIS FOR MONTHS.

AND OVER THE LAST FEW WEEKS, WE'VE GOTTEN RAVE REPORTS FROM OUR CITIZENS ON YOUR PROFESSIONALISM AND THE TIME THAT YOU TOOK TO, TO TO PUT THIS ALL TOGETHER IN SUCH A SHORT PERIOD OF TIME.

WE REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR HARD WORK, MADAM SHERMAN.

I COMMEND THE ENTIRE STAFF, SO THANK YOU FOR THAT.

THEN I WANT TO COMMEND OUR CITIZENRY.

I WANT TO COMMEND OUR CITIZENRY FOR BEING ENGAGED, AND WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO KEEP THAT OPEN.

YEAH. COME ON. COME ON.

THEN I WANT TO COMMEND OUR CITIZENRY, BUT I ALSO WANT TO ENCOURAGE WHAT MISS FRAZIER SAID.

STAY ENGAGED.

WE'RE GOING TO KEEP THAT LINE OF COMMUNICATION OPEN ON A CONTINUAL BASIS.

AND THEN THIRDLY, I WANT TO COMMEND MISS SAUNDERS FOR BRINGING UP THE DRY THAT JUST LIGHT BULBS WENT OFF IN MY HEAD.

AND, MR. MOYER, FOR EVERYTHING THAT YOU'VE DONE, REALLY, REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR ENGAGEMENT.

SO THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE THIS LATE HOUR.

WITH THAT BEING SAID, I GOT A MOTION BY COUNCILMAN JOHNSON, SECONDED BY DEPUTY MAYOR FELIX.

ALL IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING I.

I. PASSES FOUR ZERO.

AND THAT CONCLUDES THIS MEETING.

THIS MEETING IS ADJOURNED.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.