A GOOD GUY. JUST THE OPPOSITE.
[CALL TO ORDER:]
[00:00:03]
OKAY. OH, THAT TIME ALREADY? THE THE PLANNING AT 6:06 P.M., THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD REGULAR MEETING FOR SEPTEMBER IS NOW CALLED TO ORDER.MISS JORDAN, WOULD YOU PLEASE LEAD US IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE? I'LL STAND. I'LL RISE.
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.
THANK YOU. MISS POWELL, COULD YOU PLEASE DO THE ROLL CALL? YES. MR. BOEREMA PRESIDENT.
MR.. GOOD PRESENT, MR. JAFFEE. PRESENT.
MISS JORDAN. PRESENT, MR. MCLEOD. PRESENT.
MR. OLSZEWSKI HAS ASKED TO BE EXCUSED.
THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE AN ADOPTION OF THE MINUTES FOR LAST? NO, NO. OKAY, WE DO NOT.
[ANNOUNCEMENTS:]
THE LAND DEVELOPMENT STAFF WILL PRESENT THE STAFF REPORT FOR EACH CAYCE.BOARD MEMBERS WILL THEN BE ASKED IF THEY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF.
THE BOARD WILL THEN BE OPEN FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS.
FOR THE RECORD, AS A COURTESY, I ASK THAT IF THERE IS A GROUP OF PEOPLE FROM A NEIGHBORHOOD WHO MAY HAVE SIMILAR COMMENTS, YOU INFORMALLY APPOINT A SPOKESPERSON TO CLARIFY YOUR VIEWS.
I WILL BRING THE CASE BACK TO THE BOARD.
AT THIS TIME, THE FLOOR WILL BE CLOSED AND NO FURTHER COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE WILL BE HEARD.
THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENDANCE AND FOR YOUR COOPERATION IN ADHERING TO THE MEETING GUIDELINES.
SO, MISS BERNARD, I GUESS WE HAVE WE ARE STARTING WITH IS IT CAYCE? I SEE WE HAVE A REQUEST TO CONTINUE.
SIR. DO WE OR DO WE HAVE TO VOTE FOR THE.
I THINK WE NEED TO MAKE A MOTION TO ADOPT THE MINUTES FROM THE LAST MINUTE.
FROM THE LAST. I ASKED THAT, AND I WAS TOLD THERE WAS NO MINUTES.
THERE WERE NO MINUTES. WAS THAT THERE ARE NO MINUTES THIS EVENING? YEAH. OR FROM THE LAST MEETING? YES. OKAY.
THANK YOU, I APPRECIATE IT. YES, YES.
[OLD/UNFINISHED BUSINESS:]
SIR. SO THE UNDER OLD UNFINISHED BUSINESS, THERE ARE THREE ITEMS THAT THE BOARD WILL NOT BE CONSIDERING THIS EVENING. IF I MAY, PS 23 00009 PALM BAY POINT EAST PRELIMINARY PLAT HAS BEEN WITHDRAWN FROM CONSIDERATION BY THE APPLICANT.OKAY. YOU'LL SEE IT AGAIN IN THE FUTURE.
AND THEN THE SAME WITH PS 23 000 11 PALM BAY POINT WEST PRELIMINARY PLAT.
THEY HAVE ALSO WITHDRAWN BY THE APPLICANT, SO THERE'S NO CONSIDERATION THIS EVENING.
THE EVENT HALL HAS BEEN CANCELED BY THE APPLICANT, SO YOU WILL NOT BE SEEING THAT AGAIN.
AND THEN I NOTICED IN OUR PACKET WE HAD Z 24 0003 THAT WAS ALSO WITHDRAWN.
[NEW BUSINESS:]
WAS THAT WITHDRAWN BY THE CITY? IF I MAY MAY I KIND OF DO A LITTLE PRESENTATION FOR YOU ALL REGARDING THE CITY WIDE APPLICATION.REZONINGS THAT ARE BEING PROPOSED WITH YOUR PERMISSION.
YEAH. OKAY. SO, AS YOU KNOW, WE HAVE BEEN WORKING DILIGENTLY ON UPDATING THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.
[00:05:02]
YES. DURING THAT PROCESS, IT WAS RECOGNIZED HOW MANY ZONING DISTRICTS THE CITY HAS.AS WE STARTED MOVING TOWARDS THESE CHANGES, SOME OF THE ZONING DISTRICTS WERE DETERMINED TO BE LEFT ALONE, FOR ONE THING.
AND THIS IS ONE OF THEM, THIS BEING Z 24 0003A REZONING FROM RC TO NC.
I WANT TO ASSURE YOU AND THE COMMUNITY THAT IN ALL OF THESE ZONING CONSOLIDATIONS, IT'S NOTHING HAS BEEN TAKEN AWAY.
FOR INSTANCE, IF D'ARCY WAS WAS CONSOLIDATED WITH NC, RC PERMITTED USES AND ENTITLEMENTS IN THAT DISTRICT WOULD REMAIN THE SAME OR BE BETTER AS PART OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL.
HOWEVER, THERE WAS SOME CONSTERNATION REGARDING THAT CONSOLIDATION, AND SO THE CITY DETERMINED THAT THEY WOULD JUST WITHDRAW IT.
SO IT WILL NOT BE CONSIDERED THE CONSOLIDATING RC INTO NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL.
OKAY. AND THEN IF I MAY, I'D LIKE TO MOVE ON TO Z 24 00004.
THAT IS THE REZONING FROM RM TEN TO ARM 15.
THE CITY IS CONTINUING TO CONSIDER THAT CONSOLIDATION, BUT WHY? WE'RE ASKING FOR THAT CONTINUATION IS THAT OF THE TEN PROPERTY OWNERS, AND YOU'LL SEE THE PARCEL OWNERS UP THERE, THERE WERE 689, ACCORDING TO FLORIDA STATUTES.
AND I KNOW I WON'T BE ELOQUENT IN SAYING THIS, MICHAEL, SO I'M GOING TO ALLOW YOU TO SAY IT.
WE ONLY SENT OUT BECAUSE OF FLORIDA STATUTES ALLOWING US TO CONSOLIDATE THE MAILINGS.
SO THAT LEFT 582 PROPERTY OWNERS WITHOUT DIRECT NOTIFICATION, THOUGH.
HOWEVER, CITY MANAGEMENT THEN DECIDED THAT REALLY, IT'S BETTER WE JUST NOTIFY EVERYONE AND MAKE SURE RIGHT, THAT EVERYONE HAS BEEN NOTIFIED. THEREFORE, WE ARE ASKING FOR THAT CONTINUANCE FOR THIS PARTICULAR ZONING.
THE BMU BMV AND SO THAT IS WHY WE ASKED FOR THAT CONTINUANCE.
AND I'LL HAVE MICHAEL TALK TO YOU MORE ABOUT THE FLORIDA STATUTE BRIEFLY, IF HE DOESN'T MIND.
COMMISSIONER, THE THE NOTICE REQUIREMENTS FOR THESE ARE ZONINGS THAT ARE ACTUALLY INITIATED BY THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT, AS OPPOSED TO ZONINGS THAT ARE REZONINGS THAT ARE INITIATED BY APPLICANTS OR THE PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNER.
SO THE REQUIREMENT UNDER UNDER FLORIDA STATUTES IS THAT AND THIS IS IN 166 041C1 IN CASES IN WHICH THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE CHANGES THE ACTUAL ZONING MAP DESIGNATION FOR A PARCEL OR PARCELS OF LAND INVOLVING LESS THAN TEN CONTIGUOUS ACRES, THE GOVERNING BODY SHALL DIRECT THE CLERK OF THE GOVERNING BODY TO NOTIFY BY MAIL EACH PROPERTY OWNER WHOSE LAND THE MUNICIPALITY WILL DESIGNATE BY ENACTMENT OF THE ORDINANCE, AND WHOSE ADDRESS IS KNOWN BY REFERENCE TO THE LATEST AD VALOREM TAX RECORDS.
HOWEVER, THERE'S NOTHING THAT PROHIBITS THE CITY FROM SENDING DIRECT NOTIFICATION TO EVERYBODY.
SO BASICALLY THE MINIMUM THE LEGAL MINIMUM WAS THE 100 AND 107.
BUT THE CITY HAS HAS DETERMINED THAT IT WILL GO ABOVE THE LEGAL MINIMUMS AND ACTUALLY SEND DIRECT MAILINGS AND DIRECT NOTIFICATIONS TO ALL PROPERTY OWNERS WHOSE PROPERTY WILL BE REZONED BY THE CITY.
FROM THAT'S THE DESIGNATION THAT WAS PRESENTED SO WITH THAT CONSIDERATION
[00:10:02]
UNDER CAYCE 2400003.OOPS. I'M SORRY, THAT WAS WITHDRAWN, I APOLOGIZE.
MOVING ON. 000 FOR THE EXISTING ZONING.
TEN SINGLE TWO FAMILY AND MULTIFAMILY TO RM 15, WHICH IS ALSO A SINGLE TWO IN MULTIFAMILY.
IT'S ABOUT 361 ACRES, COLLECTIVELY, ABOUT 689 PARCELS.
WE ARE REQUESTING THAT THE BOARD RECOMMENDS A CONTINUANCE TO ONE DATE. WHAT'S OUR NEXT OCTOBER? GIVE ME A SECOND.
SO THIS CONTINUANCE WOULD BE TO THEN VOTE ON IT.
I'M SORRY. SO IT IS ALSO ALLOWING TIME FOR THOSE PROPERTY OWNERS TO BE.
IN FACT, NOTIFICATIONS WILL BE GOING OUT THIS WEEK.
SO. DID THAT CONCLUDE YOUR PRESENTATION BEFORE WE ASK QUESTIONS OR IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE YOU WANT TO ADD FOR THIS FOR THIS PARTICULAR ITEM? THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.
SO IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THIS PARTICULAR ITEM.
OKAY. MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF OF OF STAFF? YEAH I HAD A QUESTION ON ON THE WITHDRAWING 00003.
WILL THE NEW RC CODE, WOULD THAT ALLOW THE SAME USES AS THE CURRENT CODE.
OKAY. AND NC STAYING THE SAME.
OKAY. AND CC AND WILL THAT COME BACK? WE HAVE A LOT OF YOU GUYS EXPECT THAT TO COME BACK AGAIN OR I CAN'T HEAR YOU.
YOU EXPECT THAT TO COME BACK IN FRONT OF THIS BOARD? NO I IT'S WITHDRAWN, SO IT WON'T GO ANY FURTHER, I BELIEVE.
OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS DIRECTLY RELATED TO 00004? I NEED A MOTION TO CONTINUE.
WITH THAT QUESTIONS? OH, YES. I'M SORRY.
SO WITH THAT, WE'LL HEAR FROM THE AUDIENCE MEMBERS.
IS THERE ANYONE THAT WISHES TO SPEAK IN FAVOR? MR. CHAIR? THE MATTER IS BEING REQUESTED TO BE CONTINUED.
SO THE MATTER IS NOT TO BE HEARD.
IT WILL BE HEARD. WE'RE JUST CONTINUING.
OKAY, SO WITH THAT, IS THERE A MOTION? MOTION TO CONTINUE Z 24 0004 TO THE OCTOBER 2ND MEETING.
SECOND. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.
AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.
OKAY, SO WITH THAT, WE'LL MOVE ON TO Z 24 00005.
MR. CHAIR, JUST AS A FORMALITY.
THE MATTER IS A REZONING WHICH CONSTITUTES A QUASI JUDICIAL HEARING OF THIS, OF THIS COUNCIL.
SO I SIMPLY ASK IF ANY MEMBERS HAVE HAD ANY EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS RELATING TO THIS MATTER.
AND IF YOU HAVE, WHO HAVE YOU HAD THEM WITH? AND I WILL ASSUME BY YOUR SILENCE THAT YOU HAVEN'T, AND WE WILL GO FORWARD.
WOULD THE CITY LIKE TO PRESENT CASE Z 24 00005? THANK YOU. CHAIRMAN. SO IN THIS REZONING, THERE'S ONLY ONE PARCEL.
AND THAT PROPERTY OWNER WAS DIRECTLY NOTIFIED.
THIS THERE'S ONE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL UNDER SF ONE, AND IT'S 0.14 ACRES.
AND I BELIEVE YOU ALL RECEIVED THESE COMPARISON TABLES THE LAST MEETING.
[00:15:01]
AND AS YOU COMPARE, YOU'LL SEE THAT THERE WILL NO NOT BE A LOSS IN PERMITTED USES OR ENTITLEMENT FOR THE SF1 PARCEL OWNER TO MOVE IT TO A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT.RS1 IS ONE OF OUR LARGEST, IF YOU WILL.
IT'S THE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PARCEL RS2 AND RS3.
WE DON'T HAVE AS MANY PARCELS AS WE DO IN RS1.
IF YOU LOOK ON THE ZONING MAP.
RECOMMENDS APPROVAL FOR MOVING THIS FORWARD.
BOARD IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR FOR STAFF? YES, SIR, MR. CHAIR. MY QUESTION IS, IS HOW DO WE HOW DO.
AND I GUESS IT JUST MAY BE A GENERAL QUESTION FOR, FOR FOR, FOR GENERAL KNOWLEDGE, BUT HOWEVER, HOW DO WE, HOW DO WE HANDLE A LOT OF THOSE LARGE PARCELS THAT ARE PART OF THE CITY THAT TOUCHES ON THE CITY'S I GUESS LAND AREA AND THE ONES THAT TOUCH ON SOMEWHAT LIKE THE COUNTY OR, OR FOR INSTANCE, LIKE LIKE HILL ROAD.
HOW DO WE HOW DO WE ADDRESS CERTAIN CERTAIN PROPERTIES THAT THAT CERTAIN CERTAIN RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES THAT ARE, THAT ARE SINGLE FAMILY, BUT ALSO SOMEWHAT IN THAT RURAL AREA, REAL ZONE AREA? I'M NOT SURE I UNDERSTAND.
YOUR QUESTION IS, MR. WARNER, IF YOU'RE IF YOU'RE SAYING HOW DO WE HANDLE THEM FOR REZONING OR LAND USE, RIGHT.
IF THEY'RE IN THE CITY PROPER.
WE HANDLE THEM THE EXACT SAME WAY.
NOW LAND USE OR EVEN ANYTHING WITH THE PUBLIC HEARING, I BELIEVE.
CHANDRA, YOU CAN YOU CAN CHIME IN ON THIS.
SO THEY THEY STILL GET NOTIFICATIONS.
IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE POSSIBLY ALLUDING TO? WELL, THAT WAS YEAH, THAT WAS PART THAT WAS A PART ONE.
BUT I GUESS THE QUESTION ALSO WAS LIKE, BECAUSE I KNOW THAT WE'RE DOING THE LAND CODE DEVELOPMENT.
SO IT WAS JUST A QUESTION THAT WAS KIND OF RAISED AS TO HOW DO WE HANDLE SOME OF THOSE PARCELS THAT ARE STILL IN THE CITY WITHIN THE CITY OF PALM BAY? I MEAN, OBVIOUSLY MOST OF THOSE GUYS THAT HAVE NOT ALREADY ANNEXED INTO THE CITY BUT ARE STILL SOMEWHAT IN THE CITY, BUT STILL SOMEWHAT SOMEWHAT COUNTY IS DO WE OR DO THAT PRETTY MUCH JUST BECOME LIKE A COUNTY? WELL, IF THEY'RE IN THE COUNTY ZONING, THEY'RE IN THE COUNTY.
THEY'RE IN THE COUNTY. IF THERE IN THE CITY.
THERE IN THE CITY. AND THEY'LL FALL UNDER OUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODES.
BUT IF YOU'RE MAYBE ALLUDING TO SOME OF THE BIG DEVELOPMENTS THAT ARE IN THE COUNTY AND COMING IN AND ARE ABOUT TO BE DEVELOPED AND THEY'RE WITHIN OUR ADJACENT TO OUR CITY LIMITS, SUCH AS SUNTERRA AND BUT THEY'RE BEING DEVELOPED IN THE COUNTY.
THEY'RE, THEY'RE COUNTY UNDER COUNTY REGULATIONS.
OKAY. THEY NOTIFY US AND TELL US IT'S GOING TO HAPPEN.
WE GIVE OUR INPUT, BUT, YOU KNOW, IT'S IT'S THEIR JURISDICTION.
DOES THAT HELP YOU, MR. WARNER? YES, MA'AM. YEAH.
WELL, AND I AND I'D LIKE TO ADDRESS IT IN A LITTLE BIT.
UPDATE WE TOOK IN A LOT OF FEEDBACK FROM THE COMMUNITY, WHICH I'M REALLY GRATEFUL FOR, AND THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY, WHICH I'M ALSO REALLY GRATEFUL FOR BECAUSE THEY'RE READING THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.
SO WHAT WE DID WAS WHEN WHEN IN ANY TIME YOU DO A CODE UPDATE OF ANY SORT, EVEN IF IT'S JUST A MINOR CHANGE, IT'S ALWAYS GOOD TO LOOK AND SEE WHAT OTHER MUNICIPALITIES ARE DOING SO THAT YOU CAN COMPARE AND CONTRAST WHAT'S BEST FOR YOUR COMMUNITY. CORRECT? AND WE DID THAT WITH OUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE UPDATES SO THAT, YOU KNOW, WE I MEAN, WE LOOKED AT WEST MELBOURNE AND MELBOURNE AND BREVARD COUNTY AND, AND TO SEE HOW THEY DID THEIR DEVELOPMENT PROCESSES.
[00:20:05]
OUR CITY. BUT THERE'S SOME SIMILARITY THROUGHOUT BREVARD COUNTY.DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? YES, MA'AM. OKAY.
THANK YOU. I HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS.
YES. YES, SIR. THE THE THE THE LOT THAT WE'RE SPEAKING OF IS 0.14 ACRES, WHICH EQUALS JUST A LITTLE OVER 6000FT². THE MINIMUM LOT AREA PER THE CODE IS 8000FT².
RIGHT. AND ALSO WHAT WHAT'S THE POINT OF THE COMMON OPEN SPACE FOR JUST A PRIVATE RESIDENTIAL LOT.
SO IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT WAS WHAT WAS ADOPTED THAT ALL RESIDENTIAL ZONING WOULD BE ADHERED TO 20% OPEN SPACE.
AND, YOU KNOW, THAT'S THAT'S THE SAME AS YOUR IMPERVIOUS RATIO.
AND THAT'S COMMON TO BE HELD TO SUCH A LINE WITH ANY IN ANY MUNICIPALITY.
SO THAT YOU DON'T JUST DEVELOP THE ENTIRE LOT AND MAKE IT ALL PERVIOUS, IMPERVIOUS.
THERE'S SOME OPEN SPACE ALLOWED, AND THAT IS THE POINT.
OKAY. SO WOULD THEY THE FUTURE, IF THEY WERE TO BUILD ON IT IN THE FUTURE, WOULD THEY HAVE TO COME FOR A VARIANCE? THE FACT THAT IT'S SMALLER THAN IT'S ALREADY EXISTING.
THERE'S A LOT OF NON-CONFORMING EXISTING LOTS IN THE CITY.
I MEAN, IT REALLY THESE STANDARDS FOR MINIMUM LOT AREA ARE FOR, YOU KNOW, WHEN A NEW PIECE OF PROPERTY COMES IN TEN ACRES OR FIVE ACRES OR ONE ACRE AND SAYS, HEY, I WANT TO DO THIS.
WELL, I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT, FIRST OF ALL, THANK YOU FOR THE COMPARISON TABLE.
I THINK THAT WAS HELPFUL FOR THE READER AS WELL.
SO THANK YOU. I SHARE THAT, YEAH, VERY HELPFUL WITH THAT, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR ANY MOTION.
OKAY. GO AHEAD. I NOTICED ON 0005 THAT THE OLD.
COMPARISON SAYS REAR SETBACK IS 25FT.
AND THEN THE NEW COMPARISON IS 20FT.
WAS THAT A SERIOUS REVIEW CHANGE OR.
NOBODY'S THINKING ABOUT THE FIVE EXTRA FEET? SO THAT ACTUALLY IS A BENEFIT TO THE ONE PROPERTY OWNER THAT IN THE CHANGE TO RS ONE, THEY ONLY NEED 20FT SET ASIDE IN THE BACK AND NOT 25.
AND SO THAT WAS THAT WAS THE CONSIDERATION.
THANK YOU. FOR THE RECORD, THERE AREN'T ANY LETTERS IN THE FILE OR ANYTHING REGARDING THIS.
THE FLOOR WILL BE OPEN TO PUBLIC COMMENT.
IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WISHES TO SPEAK ON REGARDING THIS? MR.. BATTEN? BILL BATTEN 586 OCEAN SPRAY STREET, SOUTHWEST. I'M IN FAVOR OF CHANGING THE ZONING ON THIS ONE FROM SF ONE TO THE RS ONE.
AM I CORRECT? THERE'S ONLY THERE'S ONLY ONE SITE AND IT WAS 0.1 ACRES.
SO THAT'S GOING TO ALLOW US TO CLEAR ALL OF IT OFF OF THE BOOKS.
SO IT'S GOING TO CLEAR UP A LITTLE BIT OF REPEAT.
SO IT'S GOING TO BE A GOOD THING.
AND THEY'LL STILL MEET ALL THE CRITERIA.
[00:25:02]
SO I'M I'M IN FAVOR OF THIS ONE CHANGE.IT'LL HELP US CLEAR UP THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.
IS THERE ANYONE ELSE IN THE AUDIENCE THAT WISHES TO SPEAK REGARDING THIS ISSUE? OKAY, OKAY.
IS THERE ANY OTHER DISCUSSION OR MOTION? MOTION TO APPROVE Z 24 00005 SECOND OKAY.
THE THE. IT PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.
UNANIMOUSLY. AND IS THERE ANY OTHER ISSUES TO BE BROUGHT BEFORE THE.
[OTHER BUSINESS:]
OKAY. SO I'M LOOKING.YEAH. COULD YOU GRANT ME PERMISSION TO SPEAK JUST IN GENERAL COMMENT FOR YOU? OKAY. SURE.
I'M SUSAN CONNOLLY, 3901 DIXIE HIGHWAY, NORTHEAST.
I'VE BEEN WANTING TO HAVE A CONVERSATION, AND THE REASON IS BECAUSE THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODES ARE BEING REVIEWED AND REVISED, AND WE'RE NOW IN PHASE TWO OF THAT PROCESS.
SO I'VE STARTED MY HOMEWORK HERE.
THESE ARE JUST THREE CHAPTERS AND I FEEL LIKE I'M BACK IN SCHOOL.
HOWEVER, IT MADE ME BEGIN TO QUESTION THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD AND IN THE HOPES THAT YOU ALL, BEFORE YOU TOOK ON YOUR ROLES HERE, HAVE ALREADY REVIEWED ALL THESE CODES.
AND I WOULD HOPE AS WELL THAT YOU ARE FULLY PARTICIPATING IN THE REVISION PROCESS BECAUSE YOU ARE THE CLOSEST AS CITIZENS TO WHAT REALLY NEEDS TO BE REVISED.
YOU SEE THE PROBLEMS AND YOU CAN HAVE THE BEST VOICE.
SO I WANTED TO ENCOURAGE YOU AND HOPE THAT YOU ARE ALREADY DOING THIS.
THE OTHER THING I HAVE LEARNED IS THAT IN READING, IT SEEMS LIKE FOR EVERY FOR WHEN SOMEONE COMES BEFORE THE BOARD, WHEN IT'S A REZONING OR A REQUEST TO AMEND THE LAND USE, THAT IN THESE ORDINANCES THEY EACH HAVE REVIEW CRITERIA. AND FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND IT IS THAT WRITE REVIEW CRITERIA THAT GOES INTO THE STAFF REPORT WHETHER THE STAFF RECOMMENDS TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMITTEE WHETHER A PARTICULAR APPLICANT SHOULD BE MEETS ALL THE REVIEW CRITERIA, AND IF THEY DO, THEN IT WOULD BE FAVORABLE TO VOTE IN FAVOR OF THAT.
I NOTICED THAT THE REVIEW CRITERIA FOR THE ZONING AND THE THE LAND USE CHANGES AND THINGS LIKE THAT. REALLY, THE CRITERIA IS VERY SIMILAR.
I JUST WANTED TO READ YOU A COUPLE OF THE CRITERIA.
AGAIN, BECAUSE THEY ARE SIMILAR FOR EACH REQUEST.
ONE IS WHETHER THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT WILL ADVERSELY AFFECT THE LEVEL OF SERVICE OF PUBLIC FACILITIES THAT IS SUPPOSED TO BE ADDRESSED FOR EVERY REQUEST THAT COMES BEFORE THE PLANNING AND ZONING.
WHETHER THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT WILL ADVERSELY AFFECT THE ENVIRONMENT OR THE NATURAL OR HISTORICAL RESOURCES OF THE CITY OR THE REGION AS A RESULT OF THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT.
[00:30:01]
ACCESSIBLE TO THEIR PLACES OF EMPLOYMENT, AND THIS IS THE ONE THAT I CONSIDER.THE MOST IMPORTANT, IS WHETHER THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT WILL PROMOTE OR ADVERSELY IMPACT THE PUBLIC HEALTH, THE SAFETY, THE WELFARE, OR THE ESTHETICS OF THE REGION OR THE CITY.
SO I LOOKED AT THAT AND I STARTED I'VE BEEN ATTENDING THE MEETINGS FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS, AND I'VE BEEN INVOLVED IN CITIZEN GROUPS WHO HAVE COME BEFORE THE BOARD AND ASKED FOR SOMETHING NOT TO BE PASSED BECAUSE THE CITIZENS IN THE COMMUNITY BELIEVE THE REQUEST FROM THE DEVELOPER DID NOT CONFORM OR WAS NOT COMPATIBLE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD.
AND IN ALL THE CASES THAT I WAS INVOLVED IN, THE PLANNING AND ZONING DID PASS IN SPITE OF CITIZEN OPPOSITION.
AND IT WENT ON TO CITY COUNCIL.
AND IN ALL THOSE CASES EXCEPT FOR ONE THAT I KNOW OF, THE COUNCIL AGAIN APPROVED BASED ON THE RECOMMENDATION, I THINK, OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING.
COULD WE WRAP IT UP FOR TIME PURPOSES? I WILL WRAP IT UP.
SO I JUST IN MY OPINION, IT SEEMS LIKE THE PROPERTIES THAT I SEE THAT HAVE COME BEFORE THE BOARD AS WELL AS I KNOW WE'VE GOT SOME CITIZENS HERE TONIGHT WHO WILL BE OPPOSING SOME FUTURE PROPERTIES THAT COME BEFORE YOU.
I JUST WANT TO BRING THIS UP, THIS CRITERIA.
BECAUSE TO ME, AS A CITIZEN OVER HERE, I DON'T KNOW HOW SOME OF THESE THINGS CAN EVEN PASS THOSE CRITERIA OF SAFETY AND AND SAFETY AND PUBLIC USE.
THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR LISTENING TO ME TONIGHT.
YES. I'LL FILL OUT ONE OF THESE CARDS.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU. AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS.
AND THANK YOU FOR BEING INVOLVED.
AND I WILL SAY THIS TO THE THE AUDIENCE THAT'S HERE.
I KNOW THAT THE CITY TAKES VERY, VERY SERIOUSLY THE CITIZEN PARTICIPATION AND THE PUBLIC COMMENTS THAT ARE INVOLVED WITH EACH ONE OF OUR PACKETS, AND THEY MAKE SURE THAT ANYONE WHO VOICES THEIR OPINION OR SENDS THEM A LETTER REGARDING THESE ISSUES IS INCLUDED IN OUR PACKAGE.
WITH THAT, AND WE ALSO HAVE THE BENEFIT OF LEGAL COUNSEL TO LET US KNOW WHETHER OR NOT THE REQUIREMENTS ARE MET, AND IT IS TO BE CONSIDERED THAT THERE ARE TIMES WHEN AN INDIVIDUAL WILL BELIEVE THEY'RE BEING ENCROACHED UPON, AND IN ACTUALITY, IT'S JUST A FEELING.
SO WE CONSIDER ALL THOSE THINGS WHEN WE LOOK AT THOSE CASES.
I THINK YOU MAKE VERY GOOD POINTS, AND I WILL GO BACK TO LEARNING THIS, BECAUSE THERE REALLY SHOULD BE WE SHOULD ALL BE IN AGREEMENT. I THINK THAT THERE SHOULD BE NO NO DISAGREEMENT.
THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENT.
THANK YOU. OKAY, SO WITH THAT I WILL I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE THE MEETING PLEASE.
WHAT IS WHAT IS YOUR COME UP WITH WHAT SHE WAS GOING TO SAY.
COULD COULD YOU KEEP IT TO A COUPLE OF MINUTES? OKAY PLEASE.
GO AHEAD. YES, I GOT A GREAT GAME THAT DOESN'T LIKE THEM.
SO SHE'LL BE UNDER AND TRY AND GET UNDER THE SOFA.
I TOO HAVE STARTED A NEW BOOK WITH ALL THIS.
I LIVE AT 480 HOBART AVENUE, NORTHWEST PALM BAY.
WE ARE FINDING THAT IN OUR LITTLE NEIGHBORHOOD.
BOUGHT THERE WHEN IT WAS A DIRT ROAD.
WE'VE HAD FOUR GENERATIONS LIVE ON THAT STREET.
I WORRY ABOUT THESE MULTI TOWNHOUSES, DENSITY HOMES COMING IN.
WE DON'T HAVE SPACE FOR THEM IN OUR AREAS.
KEEP IT TO SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE.
THAT'S ALL WE WANT. THAT'S WHAT WE BOUGHT.
I GOT GRANDCHILDREN THAT CAN'T GET TO TO THE HIGH SCHOOL IN TIME FOR THEIR CLASSES.
AND WHAT WE NEED TO DO IS SLOW DOWN ON THE DEVELOPMENT AND CATCH UP WITH THE INFRASTRUCTURE.
[00:35:02]
CHILDREN IN A SEAT.BECAUSE THERE'S NOT ENOUGH BUS DRIVERS, THERE'S NOT ENOUGH POLICE OFFICERS.
THERE'S NOT ENOUGH FIRE DEPARTMENT TO HANDLE WHAT? YOU GUYS WANT TO COME IN WITH ALL THESE HOUSES? THANK YOU VERY MUCH.
WHAT DO I DO WITH THIS? I DON'T KNOW, I'VE NEVER DONE THIS.
JUST YOU FILL THAT OUT AND PUT IT IN THE BASKET.
AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS.
WITH THAT, I WILL CLOSE THE THE MEETING.
THANK YOU. MOVE FOR ADJOURNMENT.
OH, I HAVE TO MOVE FOR MAKE A MOTION.
OKAY. MEETING IS ADJOURNED OKAY.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.