NEW BUSINESS:

[1. T25-00003 - LDC Phase II Update to Chapter 173 Zoning - City of Palm Bay (Growth Management Department) - A textual amendment to the Code of Ordinances, Title XVII, Land Development Code to revise language within Chapter 173: Zoning]

00003. WE'LL HEAR FROM STAFF. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.

THIS EVENING WE HAVE TWO TEXTUAL AMENDMENTS ON THE AGENDA.

AND IF YOU ALL RECALL, BACK IN SEPTEMBER 2024, WE COMPLETED OUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE UPDATE.

AT THAT TIME, WE ALL RECOGNIZE THAT SINCE IT WAS SUCH A HEAVY UPLIFT THAT THERE WOULD BE A PHASE TWO AFTER SIX MONTHS OF

[00:05:08]

APPLYING THE LAND USE. AS IT WAS WRITTEN, STAFF HAS IDENTIFIED AREAS THAT NEED REVISION.

IN ADDITION, WE HELD A STAKEHOLDER WORKSHOPS IN JANUARY TO GET FEEDBACK FROM THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY AND FROM OUR RESIDENTS TO DETERMINE WHERE THEY SAW SOME OF THE HICCUPS.

SO THIS EVENING WE ARE LOOKING AT THE ZONING CHANGES, CHANGES TO THE ZONING CHAPTER, WHICH IS 173. AS YOU REVIEW HAVE REVIEWED YOUR ATTACHMENTS, YOU'LL SEE REALLY SOME MINOR CLARIFICATIONS AND CORRECTIONS. A LOT TO OUR USE.

USE OUR TABLES OF USES AND TABLES OF SETBACKS AND DIMENSIONS.

REALLY? NOTHING REAL SIGNIFICANT UNTIL YOU GET TO, I BELIEVE THE FIRST ONE, WHICH IS CLUSTER SUBDIVISIONS 173.03. THIS HAS BEEN BROUGHT UP ON SEVERAL OCCASIONS, ACTUALLY.

BY NOT ONLY THIS BOARD, BUT THE RESIDENTS FOR MORE CLARIFICATION.

SO LET ME TRY TO GET TO IT MYSELF. THE MAJOR CHANGES THAT WE BROUGHT TO THIS SECTION OF THIS CHAPTER REALLY HAS TO DO WITH CLARIFYING THAT CLUSTER SUBDIVISIONS ARE A CONSERVATION OPTION FOR DEVELOPMENTS.

IT IS A WAY OF CONSERVING OUR SENSITIVE ENVIRONMENTAL LANDS.

SO WE WE BOLSTERED THIS UP SO THAT IT REALLY DOES IS WRITTEN MORE TOWARDS CLUSTER SUBDIVISIONS THAT ARE ARE TRYING TO GET THE SAME AMOUNT OF DENSITY, IF YOU WILL, ON A PROPERTY WHILE SETTING ASIDE SENSITIVE LANDS. AND SO WHEN YOU LOOK AT THIS REVIEW THE CHANGES THAT WE'VE MADE AND READ, IT'S REALLY ACCOMMODATING, TRYING TO ACCOMMODATE THAT ABILITY TO CLUSTER THE DEVELOPMENT IN AN AREA THAT IS NOT SENSITIVE OR ENVIRONMENTALLY IMPACTFUL.

BY GIVING THEM RELIEF ON LOT SIZES, ON SETBACKS, ON THE IMPERVIOUS SURFACES, WHILE AT THE SAME TIME LET ME GO OVER HERE AT THE SAME TIME REQUIRING THAT 30% OF THE SUBDIVISION MUST CONTAIN PROTECTED OPEN LANDS AND BE CONTIGUOUS WITH OFF SITE AREAS.

WE DON'T NEED A BUNCH OF. WE'RE TRYING TO CREATE GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE.

WE DON'T NEED A BUNCH OF ISOLATED SYSTEMS. AND IN GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE, WHEN YOU'RE WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT HUBS AND SINKS AND CONNECTORS.

SO BECAUSE THERE'S NO VALUE, THERE'S VERY LITTLE VALUE.

I'M NOT GOING TO SAY NO, BUT VERY LITTLE VALUE IN PROTECTING ISOLATED SYSTEMS AND ISOLATED AREAS.

SO THAT'S WHY WE'RE ASKING FOR THIS. YOU MAY WONDER WHY 50.

WE'RE CHANGING IT TO 30% INSTEAD OF 50%. I'M SURE THAT'S A CONCERN.

HOWEVER, WE ARE TRYING TO ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO PROTECT THEIR PROPERTIES, AND THERE'S REALLY NOT THAT MANY PROPERTIES THAT WOULD HAVE 50% OF LAND AVAILABLE TO BE SET ASIDE, BUT 30 THEY MAY CONSIDER IF IT WORKS WITH THE PROPERTY.

SO THAT'S WHY WE'VE MADE THESE CHANGES, RIGHT, THAT I HAVE OUTLINED FOR YOU.

SOME OF THE OTHER BIG CHANGES IS WITH THE DEVELOPMENT BONUS PROGRAM.

I KNOW THE COUNCIL WAS VERY INTERESTED IN FURTHERING OUR ABILITY TO INCENTIVIZE SOME OF OUR NECESSARY INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS OR CONSERVATION OF PROPERTIES ESPECIALLY AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

WHICH BRINGS US TO THE VOLUNTARY INCLUSIONARY HOUSING.

THIS IS, YES, ESTABLISHED BY FLORIDA STATUTE.

HOWEVER, WE FELT IT WAS IMPORTANT TO GET IT INTO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE SO THAT WE ALL KNOW THAT IT'S THERE AND WHAT HOW THE PROCESS WOULD WORK.

YES. I NEED TO MAKE A NOTE. I JUST SAID WE WE GOT TO CHANGE THAT.

WE CITED THE WRONG STATUTE. IS ACTUALLY ONE. YOU CITED THE ONE FOR COUNTIES, NOT FOR CITIES.

IT'S 166 .041511166.04151516.

[00:10:03]

THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. I APPRECIATE YOU CATCHING THAT.

THE OTHER ITEMS THAT I WANTED TO BRING TO YOUR ATTENTION WAS SOME OF THE CHANGES TO OUR PUD ZONING DISTRICT REGULATIONS.

IN ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY'S CONCERNS REGARDING THE OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENT OF 25% AND THE NONRESIDENTIAL OF 20%, AND THE 25% IS IN OUR COMP PLAN.

HOWEVER, WE PREVIOUSLY HAD AND SOME OF YOU MAY REMEMBER WE PREVIOUSLY ACKNOWLEDGED THAT THERE WERE SMALL PUDS SPUDS. WELL, WE REMOVED THAT. SO IN IN ORDER TO ACCOMMODATE SOME OF THESE CONCERNS AND THEY'RE RELEVANT, WE UTILIZED THAT SPUD NUMBER, IF YOU WILL, AND BROUGHT IT BACK INTO PLAY WITH THE NON RESIDENTIAL USES.

SO THE SMALLER PUDS REALLY CAN'T ACCOMMODATE 20% NONRESIDENTIAL.

BUT WE WERE LOOKING AT 15. AND THEN THE COMMON RECREATION AREA WE ALSO MADE IT DOWN TO 15% MINIMUM LOT SIZES.

AS YOU AS YOU'VE SEEN IN THE PUDS. TYPICALLY YOU NEED TO BE KEEPING WITH YOUR UNDERLYING ZONING, YOUR RESIDENTIAL ZONING AND OUR RESIDENTIAL ZONING.

LOTS ARE TYPICALLY 75FT WIDE WITH EIGHT FOOT SETBACKS.

IN A PUD. PEOPLE GO PEOPLE. DEVELOPERS GO TO PUDS BECAUSE IT ALLOWS THAT FLEXIBILITY IN YOUR DESIGN.

AND WE ARE NOT TAKING THAT OUT. WE'RE JUST STATING THAT THEIR LOT WIDTHS, THEIR SETBACKS NEED TO BE WITHIN 75% OF THE UNDERLYING ZONING. THIS ISN'T ANY DIFFERENT FROM WHEN IN THE PUD THEY'LL SET ASIDE THEIR COMMERCIAL AREA, AND WE UTILIZE THE UNDERLYING COMMERCIAL ZONING IN ORDER TO ALLOW THEM TO TO MOVE FORWARD WITH THE SITE PLAN. THE SETBACKS ARE THE SAME THE THE ENTRANCES, THE EXIT, THE ACCESS, THE PARKING SPACES.

IT WILL FOLLOW YOUR COMMERCIAL ZONING. SO WE MADE THIS CHANGE JUST TO TRY TO GET A HANDLE ON KEEPING THE UNDERLYING ZONING COMPATIBLE WITH OUR EXISTING RESIDENTIAL ZONING.

NOW, THIS DOESN'T MEAN THAT THERE CAN'T BE SOME KIND OF FLEXIBILITY OR NEGOTIATION IN LOT SIZES AS WE MOVE FORWARD.

AND THAT IS PART OF OUR BONUS INCENTIVES AS FAR AS NOT INCREASING DENSITY, CERTAINLY.

BUT, YOU KNOW, GETTING MORE PUBLIC BENEFIT OUT OF A PROJECT.

MORE SET ASIDES. SO THIS IS IN LINE WITH THIS, AND THIS IS WHY WE MADE THAT CHANGE.

AND WITH THAT, THOSE COVERED THE THE MAJORITY OF THE LARGE CHANGES WE'RE MAKING TO THIS IN THIS PHASE TWO OF THE UPDATE.

AND OF COURSE, STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL.

AND I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY OF YOUR QUESTIONS.

THANK YOU, MISS FRAZIER. WITH THAT, I'M GOING TO BRING IT BACK TO THE BOARD AND ASK THE BOARD, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF BEFORE WE MOVE FORWARD? YES, SIR. MR. CHAIR, MISS FRAZIER WITH THE CLUSTER.

WITH THE CLUSTER CLUSTER SUBDIVISIONS? HOW MANY AREAS WITHIN THE CITY HAVE ALREADY BEEN IDENTIFIED AS.

AS CLUSTER? POSSIBLE CLUSTER? WE HAVE NOT DONE THAT THAT SURVEY, SIR.

AND THAT WOULD ACTUALLY BE A REALLY GOOD EXERCISE IF WE COULD CLEAR SOME OF THE WEEDS WE'RE IN.

BUT THAT'S ACTUALLY A REALLY GOOD EXERCISE. I'M I'M POSITIVE OUR GIS STAFF HAS ALREADY IDENTIFIED SOME OF THE MORE ENVIRONMENTALLY SENSITIVE AREAS, BUT THAT DOESN'T NEGATE THAT THINGS WOULD BE OVERLOOKED.

THAT COULD BE CONNECTORS SUCH AS SOME OF OUR ESTABLISHED DRAINAGE WAYS YOU KNOW, THAT CONNECT TO OFF SITE AREAS OR OFF SITE PROTECTED HUBS, AS I LIKE TO CALL THEM. OKAY.

AND WITH A REALLY GOOD EXERCISE TO TO TAKE ON SIR KIM.

ALL RIGHT. AND ONE OTHER QUESTION. WITH THE TEN ACRES.

HOW MANY? I MEAN, I ALREADY KNOW. KNOW TO KIND OF KNOW THE ANSWER, BUT I JUST GUESS I WANT TO HEAR IT OUT LOUD.

HOW MANY? HOW MANY HOUSES ARE WE LOOKING AT WITH THE TEN ACRES FOR THE CLUSTER LOTS? TEN ACRES? YES. I THINK IT'S IT HAS TO BE AT LEAST TEN ACRES.

OR TO BE IDENTIFIED AS A CLUSTER FOR THE SUBDIVISION.

I DON'T SEE THAT, SIR. I'M SORRY. I DON'T RECALL THERE BEING A, I THINK MAYBE JUST A MINIMUM SIZE,

[00:15:02]

BUT 173 DASH 21, 173 DASH THE DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS UNDER SUBSECTION C.

OH, THAT'S. YES, THAT'S TEN ACRE MINIMUM. HOW MUCH WOULD BE HOUSING? YES, MA'AM. IT ALL DEPENDS ON HOW MUCH THEY'RE SETTING ASIDE.

SO IF THEY'RE SETTING ASIDE AT LEAST 30% OF THE PROPERTY, THEN YOU'RE LOOKING AT SEVEN ACRES AND SEVEN ACRES.

IT ALL KNOW WHAT YOU WHAT YOU HAVE TO DO THEN IS TAKE OUT YOUR STORMWATER AND YOU HAVE TO TAKE IT, WHICH ALSO COULD BE PART OF THAT YOUR, YOUR STORMWATER AND OF COURSE YOUR ROADS AND YOUR INFRASTRUCTURE.

SO IT ALL REALLY DEPENDS ON HOW MANY, HOW MUCH LAND YOU HAVE LEFT.

AND THEN WHAT'S YOUR, YOUR WIDTH OF YOUR, OF YOUR YOUR LOTS.

IT'S ALL DEPENDABLE, BUT IN TEN ACRES. DO YOU WANT TO YOU WANT TO VENTURE A GUESS? IT'S EXACTLY WHAT YOU SAID. IT ALL DEPENDS. I'M SORRY, I COULDN'T.

I COULDN'T REALLY VENTURE A GUESS WITHOUT, YOU KNOW, REALLY LOOKING AT THE.

TYPICALLY YOU TAKE OUT 10 TO 15% FOR YOUR STORMWATER AND MAYBE ANOTHER 10% FOR YOUR INFRASTRUCTURE.

AM I GETTING CLOSE? AND THEN WHATEVER YOU HAVE LEFT, YOU CAN PUT YOUR HOMES IN ABOUT 50%.

YEAH. OKAY. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. SO WE WE DISCUSSED THE FIVE FOOT MINIMUM SETBACK MOVING DOWN FROM EIGHT.

I DID HAVE A CONCERN ABOUT THE BUILDING COVERAGE. MOVING FROM 50%, MOVING FROM 30% TO 50%.

MAXIMUM PER LOT. HAS THERE BEEN ANY STORMWATER RESEARCH ON THAT INCREASING THE DWELLING SIZE ON A PIECE OF PROPERTY? WELL, SO THE THE THE QUESTION CAME IN AND I REFERRED BACK TO MANY STUDIES ON, ON CLUSTER ZONING. WHY WE DID THAT IS BECAUSE JUST LIKE WHAT TANYA WAS SHOWING IN HER DENSITY PRESENTATION ON A 40 FOOT LOT, WHEN THEY GO DOWN TO THE 40 FOOT LOT, THEY STILL WOULD LIKE TO MAXIMIZE THE AMOUNT OF HOUSE COVERAGE, BUILDING COVERAGE. AND SO IN A CLUSTER DEVELOPMENT, AGAIN, YOU'RE TRYING TO GET AS MANY HOUSES AS YOU CAN IN A REDUCED AREA IN ORDER TO PROTECT. I THINK WE HAVE THAT THAT CONCEPT RIGHT.

AND SO IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO BUILD THE 2000 OR 2500 SQUARE FOOT HOME THAT IS TYPICAL THESE DAYS ON THAT 40 FOOT LOT, BUT THEY ARE DOING IT. AND THAT'S THE TYPE OF HOME THAT IS TYPICALLY IN THESE SUBDIVISIONS.

SO WE'RE JUST ALLOWING THE SAME MAXIMIZING OF THE HOME BUILD.

BUT IT REALLY YOUR QUESTION ABOUT STORMWATER AND IMPERVIOUS THAT'S GOING TO BE CAPTURED IN THE STORMWATER MASTER PLAN. WE HAVE CAPS ON OUR IMPERVIOUS AREA.

AND IN FACT WE HAVE THE SAME CAP, THE MAXIMUM IMPERVIOUS AREA FOR THE SITE AS ALL OF OUR OTHER RESIDENTIAL STANDARD ZONINGS. YEAH, IT SHOWS A 0.5 MAXIMUM FOR EACH LOT.

0.7 FOR BUILDABLE AREA OF THE ENTIRE SITE. CORRECT? OKAY. SO THE ENTIRE SITE WOULD BE AND THAT'S OKAY FOR, FOR STORMWATER AND IN YOUR OPINION.

YES, SIR. THEY'D HAVE TO CAPTURE IT AND TREAT IT REGARDLESS.

OKAY. THE OTHER ONE I HAD HERE IS ON THE NEXT PAGE, I BELIEVE WAS ON 17322.

IT STATES THAT REDUCING THE PROTECTED OPEN SPACE FROM FROM 50%.

FROM 30%. EXCUSE ME. WE'RE GOING TO INCREASE THE PROTECTED OPEN SPACE FROM REDUCE OPEN SPACE FROM 50% TO 30%.

LET ME READ A SENTENCE. SORRY. YEAH. SO SUBSECTION FOUR A MINIMUM OF 30 INSTEAD OF 50% OF SUBDIVISION MUST CONTAIN PROTECTED OPEN SPACE LANDS.

SO THAT'S A DECREASE IN OPEN SPACE LANDS? YES, SIR.

SO AS I STATED, I'M TRYING TO INCENTIVIZE THE USE OF THIS AND THE PROTECTION OF LANDS, AND QUITE FRANKLY, 50% OF A PROPERTY WOULD BE HARD TO GET SOMEONE TO BUY INTO.

BUT A 30% COULD REALLY INCENTIVIZE THEM TO DO THIS METHOD.

AND AGAIN, WHAT WE ADDED, EVEN THOUGH WE REDUCED IT TO 30, WE ADDED THE LANGUAGE THAT IT NEEDS TO BE INTERCONNECTED TO OFF SITE AREAS.

SO AGAIN WE'RE NOT CREATING THESE ISOLATED SYSTEMS THAT WE'RE ASKING THEM TO BE CONNECTED.

AND YOU KNOW WHEN WE DO THESE GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE CONNECTIONS.

AND I'M JUST GOING TO PUT ON MY LITTLE NATURE CONSERVANCY HAT BECAUSE I USED TO BE WITH THEM.

[00:20:02]

AND WE DID THESE, THESE STUDIES. AND THE STATE OF FLORIDA HAS A GREAT GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE GOING ON THROUGHOUT THE STATE.

IT IS FOR BIOLOGICAL TRANSFER OF DNA IS THE SCIENTIFIC TERM.

HOWEVER, IT IS FOR THE CAPTURE OF ALLOWING US, YOU KNOW, HELP ME WILDLIFE TO BE ABLE TO CONTINUE ON WHEN THEY HAVE THESE DESIGNATED WALKWAYS, THIS GREEN INFRASTRUCTURE.

AND SO THAT IS WHY, YES, WE REDUCED IT. AND YOU CAN CHALLENGE THAT.

IT'S UP TO YOU ALL. BUT IN THE THINKING IS WE REDUCED THE AMOUNT THAT HAS TO BE SET ASIDE.

BUT WE ADDED THAT IT HAS TO BE CONNECTED, IT HAS TO HAVE AN OFF SITE CONNECTION.

SO AND THAT AGAIN THAT CONNECTION CAN BE A DRAINAGE DITCH.

IT CAN BE ANOTHER WETLAND, IT CAN BE A PARK SYSTEM, YOU KNOW, A PASSIVE PARK SYSTEM.

SO THERE'S MANY WAYS THAT YOU CAN CAPTURE THAT.

THAT WAS THE THINKING AGAIN, IF IF YOU DON'T AGREE, I'M OPEN.

I WENT FROM LAW SCHOOL TO PHYSICAL SCIENCE. I'M LOOKING TO SEE WHERE THIS MEETING IS GOING TO GO NEXT.

AND IT'S MY PASSION. JUST JUST THE LAST ONE. THIS IS ON A DIFFERENT PAGE TO.

BUT SINCE I HAVE THE MIC, IF YOU DON'T MIND. 17338.

SPEAKING OF PODS CONTAINING 500 UNITS HAVE A MINIMUM OF 15% OF ACREAGE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

LET ME CHECK. I'M SORRY. I GAVE YOU THE PAGE NUMBERS THIS TIME.

SAY THAT AGAIN, SIR. ONE. 73.3838. YES, SIR. SO IT STATES HERE PUD IS CONTAINING 500 UNITS OR LESS.

SHALL HAVE THE MINIMUM OF 15% OF GROSS SIGHT ACREAGE OR DEVELOPABLE ACREAGE DEDICATED TO COMMON RECREATION AND OPEN SPACE.

YES, SIR. SO THAT'S THAT'S A DECREASE FROM THE 25% THAT WAS ORIGINALLY THERE.

CORRECT. AND AS WE STATED IN THE OLD LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, WE HAD SMALL PUDS ALLOCATED WITH THESE NUMBERS SAYING THAT IF THERE ARE 500 UNITS OR LESS, YOU KNOW, THEY THEY CAN PROVIDE LESS OF THE COMMON OPEN SPACE.

AND THE SAME WITH THE NONRESIDENTIAL. AND SO, IN RECOGNITION OF SOME FEEDBACK THAT WE HAVE RECEIVED FROM OUR STAKEHOLDERS, WE WENT BACK TO INSTEAD OF SAYING SPUDS, WE WENT BACK TO THIS TYPE OF DESIGNATION.

SO IF YOU HAVE A SMALLER PUD, IT'S DIFFICULT TO SET ASIDE 25% IN OPEN SPACE OR 20% NONRESIDENTIAL.

AND SO WE'RE GIVING THEM A LITTLE RELIEF. AGAIN, IT CAN BE CHALLENGED.

IN YOUR EXPERIENCE, HAVE YOU HAD A MAJOR DEVELOPER COME IN, BUY A THOUSAND ACRES AND THEN PIECEMEAL SPUDS INSTEAD OF DOING ONE BIG SPUD? WELL, THAT THAT CAN BE A RISK. YES, SIR. IF IF THAT WAS TO HAPPEN I.

MICHAEL, IT SEEMS LIKE WE HAD CONSIDERED THAT AND THERE WAS SOMETHING IN HERE THAT WAS.

BUT THAT'S LET'S LET'S DO SOME RESEARCH, AND I CAN GET BACK TO YOU ON WHAT WAYS THAT WE CAN PREVENT THAT FROM HAPPENING.

THANK YOU. BECAUSE WE WOULD NOT WANT THAT TO HAPPEN.

YOU'RE ABSOLUTELY CORRECT. THANK YOU SIR. I DO HAVE ONE LARGE AREA. 500 UNITS WOULD BE LIKE 200 ACRES.

ONE LARGE AREA AND A PUD. AND AT LEAST A MINIMUM 25%.

BUT IF I DECIDE TO SPLIT THAT INTO TWO SMALL PIECES.

THAT'S TRUE. THAT WAS IT. THAT WAS THE THINKING. I GOT TWO SMALL PUDS AND I GOT TO DO 15.

I GOT 215, AND THE TOTAL AREA WILL HAVE 30% OVER MORE THAN 25%.

SO IT DOESN'T REALLY WORK IN MY BENEFIT IF I'M A DEVELOPER, TO SPLIT IT INTO MULTIPLE SMALLER, SMALLER PUDS WITH FEWER UNITS BECAUSE YOU'RE GOING TO END UP IN THE AGGREGATE ACTUALLY HAVING MORE REQUIRED TO HAVE MORE OPEN SPACE.

AND HE'S ABSOLUTELY CORRECT. AND THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT WE WERE THINKING.

AND THANK YOU FOR STARTING MY BRAIN GOING, BECAUSE THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT WE WERE THINKING.

AND IN OUR CALCULATIONS, YOU KNOW, 500 UNITS.

AGAIN, IT'S IT ALL DEPENDS ON WHAT YOU'RE PUTTING IN, BUT IT'S ROUGHLY ABOUT 200 ACRES.

SO BUT AGAIN, IF YOU HAVE A THOUSAND ACRES, YOU CAN'T CUT IT UP INTO FIVE DIFFERENT SPUDS BECAUSE YOU WILL BE ADDING EVEN MORE AT THE END OF THE DAY, HAVING TO PROVIDE MORE OPEN SPACE AND MORE NONRESIDENTIAL.

DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? IT WOULD BE COMPOUNDING AS YOU WENT.

OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD? I THINK I ASKED THIS ONE TIME BEFORE GOING BACK TO THE CLUSTERS.

WE SO WE COULD NOT DO ON THESE CLUSTERS. WE COULDN'T DO LIKE A HALF AN ACRE, A HOUSE ON A HALF AN ACRE OR A HOUSE ON AN ACRE.

[00:25:08]

HOLD ON, LET ME GET THERE. WHERE DID WHERE DID IT GO? I'M SORRY, MR. WARNER. I'M NOT SURE I'M UNDERSTANDING YOUR QUESTION, SIR.

YOU'RE SAYING WHAT NOW? SO ON THE CLUSTERS ON THE TEN ACRES FOR THE CLUSTERS, IT'S NOT POSSIBLE TO DO A HOUSE ON A HALF ACRE OR ONE HOUSE ON AN ACRE. THAT STILL GIVES YOU TEN HOUSES AND YOU CAN STILL DO YOUR INTERCONNECTIONS.

THESE ARE MINIMUMS, NOT MAXIMUMS. SO YOU CAN HAVE AN ACRE LOT.

ABSOLUTELY. THEY'RE JUST SAYING THAT YOU CANNOT GO LESS THAN, YOU KNOW, FOR A LOT WIDTH OR LOT SIZES.

YOU CANNOT GO LESS THAN 6000FT². BUT YOU DEFINITELY CAN GO LARGER.

OKAY. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. DID YOU HAVE A QUESTION? NO. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. WITH THAT, WE'LL OPEN IT UP FOR THE PUBLIC COMMENT.

WE DON'T HAVE AN APPLICANT OTHER THAN THE THE THE CITY, SO WE'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE TO HEAR FROM THAT.

BUT IF ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC WOULD LIKE TO COME FORWARD IN FAVOR OF THESE CHANGES.

IN FAVOR OF THE CHANGES. COME ON. FORWARD. HAVE A QUESTION? OKAY. COME ON. COME ON UP.

JUDY. PEBBLE BEACH AVENUE. THIS GOES BACK TO THE WETLANDS WHEN YOU SAID THAT THE STATE CONTROLS THAT.

YES, I LEARNED THAT FROM YOU, ACTUALLY. BUT ISN'T THERE SOMETHING THAT WHEN THEY'RE COMING UP FOR A ZONING CHANGE OR WHATEVER CHANGE, AND YOU SEE THAT THEY HAVE MITIGATED OUR WETLANDS AWAY? CAN'T YOU MAKE SOME KIND OF COMMENT ABOUT THAT AND MAYBE DENY IT? A FEW OF THESE CAN YOU DENY IT? IF THEY'VE GOTTEN THAT MITIGATION.

IT'S IT'S IF THE STATE HAS ALLOWED THEM TO IMPACT AND MITIGATE FOR THE WETLANDS AND THE STATE HAS THEY THEY THEY GO THROUGH A PRETTY STRINGENT PROCESS. WELL, THEY USED TO WE CAN'T DENY THEM WE'RE PREEMPTED BY THE STATE.

THE STATE IS THE PERMITTING AGENCY FOR WETLANDS.

NOW, I CAN TELL YOU, JUDY, THAT WHEN WE ARE NOW ASKING FOR NATURAL RESOURCE ASSESSMENTS WITH ALL OF OUR PROJECTS AND IF THERE ARE WETLANDS THAT THEY CAN AND WANT TO KEEP, THEN WE, THE STATE WILL REQUIRE THEM TO HAVE A BUFFER, AN UPLAND BUFFER. SO YOU HAVE YOUR WETLAND LINE AND YOU HAVE YOUR BUFFER.

WE ARE ONCE AGAIN TRYING TO INCENTIVIZE THE PRESERVATION OF THESE WETLANDS BY ALLOWING THEM TO COUNT A PORTION OF IT AS OPEN SPACE. AND IF THEY PUT A WALKING PATH ALONG THE EDGE OF THE BUFFER, THEN THEY CAN COUNT THAT AS RECREATIONAL OPEN SPACE.

SO WE'RE TRYING TO INCENTIVIZE THE DEVELOPER TO UTILIZE THAT TO PROTECT THOSE AREAS.

AND THEN WE WE INCORPORATE IT INTO THE REQUIREMENTS.

THAT'S REALLY THE STRONGEST METHOD THAT WE HAVE UNFORTUNATELY.

AND WE MAKE THEM PLANT WITH NATIVES. SO. SO HAS THAT BEEN BROUGHT TO THE STATE THAT THIS AREA WANTS TO PROTECT ITS WILDLIFE AND ITS WETLANDS? I'M GOING TO PAUSE YOU THERE BECAUSE WE GOT WE GOT TO STAY CLOSE TO THE TIME AND CLOSE TO THE MOTION.

I THINK THIS IS A GREAT CONVERSATION THAT YOU GUYS CAN TAKE OFFLINE AFTER THE MEETING, BECAUSE I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO DO.

AND THAT'S FINE, I THINK I THINK, YOU KNOW, THOSE QUESTIONS ARE PERTINENT, BUT THEY'RE NOT PERTINENT TO WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.

DO YOU HAVE ANOTHER QUESTION? OH I DIDN'T. OH, OKAY.

NO, THAT THAT WAS REALLY ADAMANT ABOUT IT. I HEAR YOUR PASSION I DO.

YEAH. AND SHE'S SHE'LL BE AVAILABLE AFTER THE MEETING. IF YOU HAVE A QUESTION OR A COMMENT. I WANTED TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR PASSION ABOUT THAT. I AGREE WITH YOU ON IT.

ANYBODY ELSE? SURE. SURE.

BILL BATTEN 586 OCEAN SPRAY STREET, SOUTHWEST ON CLUSTER HOMES.

THERE'S MANY OTHERS. THERE'S, I DON'T KNOW, 150 PAGES OF GOING THROUGH FOR THIS AGENDA, TRYING TO READ UP ON THIS, BUT ON THE CLUSTER HOMES, ONE OF THE THINGS I THOUGHT WAS KIND OF STRANGE WAS NEXT TO SENSITIVE LAND.

THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO PROMOTE IT IN. THE CONCEPT IS TO PROTECT THE SENSITIVE LAND.

[00:30:02]

SO WE'LL CLUSTER A WHOLE BUNCH OF HOMES IN THE SAME THING WITH A DIFFERENT DENSITY THAN IF IT WAS JUST SPREAD OUT.

WELL, CLUSTER MORE HOMES IN THERE. WELL, THAT WILL ACCOMPLISH TWO THINGS NEXT.

ONE, SENSITIVE LAND WILL HAVE STILL MORE TRAFFIC BECAUSE WHAT HAVE WE DONE? WE'VE INCREASED THE DENSITY INTO THAT SAME AREA.

RIGHT. WELL, THAT'S THE FIRST ONE BECAUSE THEY WANT IT NEXT TO A SENSITIVE LAND.

THE NEXT ITEM IS THEY WANT THAT CLUSTER HOME CONNECTED TO SENSITIVE LAND THAT THEN CONNECTS TO OFF SITE AREAS. SO THE CONCEPT SAYS, OH, WELL, WE'RE GOING TO MAKE IT A BIGGER GREEN SPACE BECAUSE IT'S NEXT TO SOMETHING ELSE THAT'S OVER HERE.

WELL, YOU'RE TYING IT TO AN IDENTITY THAT MIGHT NOT BE THERE NEXT WEEK.

SOMEBODY MIGHT BUY THAT IDENTITY THAT IT SELLS TO.

SO YOU DON'T HAVE THIS BIG GREEN SPACE OUT HERE THAT THEY'RE CONNECTED TO.

IT COULD CHANGE THE NEXT DAY. SO NOW WHAT DO YOU HAVE? AND WE SEE THIS ALL THE TIME. SOMEBODY SAYS, WELL I WANT TO BUY THAT.

I KNOW IT'S ENDANGERED LAND OR I'M GOING TO PAY THE MITIGATION OR WHATEVER METHOD YOU GO WITH TO GET RID OF IT.

IT DOES DISAPPEAR. SO NOW YOU'VE GOT A CLUSTER HOME CLUSTER ORGANIZATION WITH A SMALL IDENTITY OF GREEN SPACE, WHERE THE DENSITY IS COMPACT INTO IT BECAUSE YOU CHANGE THE DENSITY.

SO MY OVERALL, WHEN I WAS GOING THROUGH THE CHAPTER 173 173 FOR THESE CHANGES, THE MAIN THING I SAW WHEN LOOKING AT ALL OF IT WAS IT WAS LOWER DENSITY VERSUS HIGHER DENSITY.

THE ONLY THING THAT I SAW CHANGING WAS THEY WANTED HIGHER DENSITY, LESS PROTECTION.

THAT'S THE BOTTOM LINE FOR THIS ENTIRE CHANGE.

THAT'S ALL THAT'S THERE. SO MY RECOMMENDATION IS YOU THINK OF THE RESIDENTS, BECAUSE THIS IS THE ONLY TIME WE CAN CHANGE THE DENSITY.

ONCE YOU ALREADY HEARD FROM LEGAL, ONCE YOU APPROVE THE ZONE CHANGING, THEY CAN DO WHAT'S THERE.

IT'S VERY HARD TO DO IT. WELL, WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY RIGHT NOW TO SAY NO.

WE WANT TO KEEP THE LOWER DENSITY IN PALM BAY.

YOU HAVE THE ABILITY IF YOU DECLINE THIS CHANGE, WHICH IS INCREASING THE DENSITY, THAT'S EVERY EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THOSE.

THAT'S ALL IT DID WAS INCREASE THE DENSITY. YOU HAVE THE ABILITY TO RECOMMEND TO YOUR CITY COUNCIL RIGHT NOW THAT, NO, YOU DON'T DO THAT, BUT THAT'S UP TO YOU. YOU'RE THE P AND Z BOARD.

THAT'S THE BOTTOM LINE IS THEY'RE TRYING TO INCREASE DENSITY WHICH INCREASES POPULATION, WHICH INCREASES MORE TRAFFIC WITHOUT ANY SOLUTIONS ON HOW TO PROTECT IT.

WHAT WE BOUGHT INTO IN THE CITY OF PALM BAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THANK YOU SIR. ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM THE AUDIENCE? PAT DELBERT, 14 GEORGE'S AVENUE. I JUST WANT TO SAY TO LISA, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR ALL THE WORK YOU'RE DOING, BUT I AM CONCERNED ABOUT THE ACCOMMODATING BUILDERS.

IF THEY CAN'T USE THE LAND AS IS, WHY ARE WE ACCOMMODATING THEM TO PUT MORE THAN WHAT WE WANT IN A NEIGHBORHOOD? I WENT TO A MEETING WITH A BUILDER WHO PLANS ON BUILDING A CLUSTER.

IT SEEMS LIKE A CLUSTER BECAUSE THE HOUSES ARE GOING TO BE CLOSER TOGETHER AND SMALLER.

AND WE ASKED THEM WHY THEY HAD TO BE THAT SIZE.

AND HE SAYS, WELL, I CAN'T MAKE MONEY IF I MAKE THE HOUSES BIGGER.

SO THE WHOLE POINT IS MONEY. SO WHY? WE'VE ALSO TALKED TO PEOPLE WHO BUY PROPERTY IN A NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE MOST OF THE HOUSES ARE A SIMILAR SIZE, AND THEY WANT TO BUILD A BIGGER HOUSE.

SO WHEN YOU'RE LOOKING FOR LAND. YOU NEED TO DETERMINE, OKAY, I'M GOING TO BUILD THIS SIZE HOUSE OR THIS WHATEVER SIZE THEY WANT.

THEY OUGHT TO BE LOOKING INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS FAR AS WHAT'S THERE ALREADY, AND NOT COME IN AND SAY, I WANT TO CHANGE THE ZONING BECAUSE I WANT TO BUILD A BIGGER HOUSE, OR I WANT TO CHANGE THE ZONING BECAUSE I WANT TO PUT MORE HOUSES.

AND AS BILL SAID, IT'S GOING TO AFFECT THE ENVIRONMENT NO MATTER WHAT.

SO I THINK WE REALLY NEED TO LOOK AT THIS. AND BUILDERS WILL SAY, THIS IS WHAT I'M GOING TO DO AT THE BEGINNING.

AND EVENTUALLY WHEN THEY GET TO THE ZONING CHANGE AND AT THE END OF LIKE WHEN EVERYTHING HAS TO BE FINISHED AS FAR AS WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO DO, A LOT OF TIMES IT CHANGES. SO WE NEED TO REALLY BE CAREFUL ON WHAT WE'RE DOING.

THANKS. THANK YOU MA'AM. ANY OTHER MEMBER FROM THE PUBLIC WISH TO COME FORWARD? SEEING NONE, I'LL BRING IT BACK TO THE BOARD.

AND IS THERE ANYBODY FROM THE BOARD WHO HAS ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSION FOR STAFF OR AMONGST OURSELVES?

[00:35:06]

I DO. WELL, SINCE I CAN'T REALLY THIS IS MY SECOND MEETING EVER, SO I'M STILL GETTING USED TO THIS.

SINCE WE CAN'T DISCUSS BUSINESS OUTSIDE OF THIS FORUM, I FIGURED I'D JUST BRING IT UP IN THIS FORUM IS I DIDN'T KNOW HOW HOW BOUND WE WERE BY LEGAL MATTERS. AS FAR AS IT SEEMS LIKE WE HAVE LITTLE DISCRETION IN WHETHER WE CAN CHOOSE HOW TO VOTE.

BASED ON WHAT WOULD IT MAKE MORE SENSE TO JUST HAVE FOUR ATTORNEYS UP HERE INTERPRETING THE THE PERMITTING? BECAUSE I CAME INTO IT KIND OF THINKING WE HAD A LITTLE MORE DISCRETION, BUT I GUESS THAT'S NOT THE CASE.

CAN YOU CLARIFY THAT FOR ME? OR WE HAVE TO HAVE EVIDENCE BASED DECISIONS THAT WE CAN, THAT WE CAN SUPPORT IN A COURT OR AS QUASI JUDICIAL? SO I ASSUME SO. WELL, IT'S GOING TO DEPEND ON THE I MEAN, THE MATTER PRESENTED BEFORE YOU LIKE THIS ISSUE RIGHT NOW.

SO WHAT YOU'RE WHAT YOU'RE SIGNING ON NOW THIS IS AN AMENDMENT TO THE CODE.

THIS IS LEGISLATIVE. SO NOW HERE YOU'RE JUST IT'S WHAT YOU DEEM REASONABLE.

SO WHATEVER YOU WANT TO BRING IN, WHATEVER COMMENTS YOU WANT TO DO RIGHT NOW, YOU'RE ACTING LIKE A LEGEND.

WELL, YOU'RE ACTING AS A RECOMMENDATION RECOMMENDATORY BODY TO THE LEGISLATURE.

BUT WHEN IT COMES TO ZONING DECISIONS YOU ARE BASING YOUR DECISIONS BASED ON THE CRITERIA THAT THE CODE PROVIDES.

SO YOU'RE, YOU HAVE TO FOLLOW THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, AND THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE SETS OUT AN APPLICANT, AND THE APPLICANT IS BOUND BY THE SAME CRITERIA AND STANDARDS IN A LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.

THEIR APPLICATION HAS TO MEET. AND YOU'LL SEE THAT WHEN YOU RECEIVE THE STAFF REPORT.

STAFF REPORT SETS OUT WHAT'S IN THE CODE. WHAT DOES THE APPLICANT HAVE TO MEET? BASICALLY QUESTIONS HAVE THEY DONE THIS? HAVE THEY DONE THAT? HOW DO THEY MEET THIS? YOU'RE LOOKING AT IT AND YOU'RE GOING TO THEN DETERMINE LOOK AT IT.

WELL HAVE THEY MET THIS. HAVE THEY MET THIS STANDARD.

HAVE HAVE THEY SHOWN YOU THAT THEY'VE MET THIS STANDARD.

YES OR NO. AND YOU'RE GOING TO LOOK AT THAT AND YOU'RE GOING TO WEIGH IT AND YOU'RE GOING TO, YOU'RE GOING TO, YOU KNOW, USE YOUR JUDGMENT TO DETERMINE YES, THEY HAVE AND NO, THEY HAVEN'T.

BUT I GUESS WHEN I'M STATING THAT THE DECISION HAS TO BE BASED ON EVIDENCE, YOU CAN'T FLY OUTSIDE, YOU CAN'T COME UP WITH A REASON OUT OF LEFT FIELD FOR SOMETHING THAT WAS NEVER RAISED OR NEVER BROUGHT FORWARD AS YOUR BASIS FOR A DENIAL.

YOU CAN AND YOU CAN STATE THAT AS YOUR DECISION.

THE THE ISSUE THEN BECOMES, IF CHALLENGED, IT THEN BECOMES A TENUOUS POSITION IN FRONT OF THE COURTS TO SUPPORT THAT.

IF IT'S NOT CHALLENGED, IT'S GOING TO STAND. BUT IT'S IT'S ONE OF THOSE, YOU KNOW, IT'S IT'S I ALWAYS HAVE TO PREPARE AND WARN AND ADVISE YOU GUYS.

YOU KNOW, IF SOME MATTERS NEVER GET TO THAT POINT.

BUT IF ON HIGHLY CONTROVERSIAL MATTERS, YOU KNOW, I HAVE TO KIND OF GUIDE YOU GUYS TO MAKE SURE THAT I HAVE TO KIND OF THINK THREE STEPS AHEAD AS TO WHERE IS THIS GOING TO END UP AND WHERE ARE THE ARGUMENTS GOING TO BE IF I'M GOING TO BE BEFORE A JUDGE IN A CIRCUIT COURT OF APPEAL, I'M GOING FORWARD AS IF I'M GOING TO BE IN A COURTROOM IN DAYTONA AT THE FIFTH CIRCUIT COURT, FIFTH DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS, BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO GO THAT THAT FAR.

IF IT'S A MAJOR PROJECT WITH A MAJOR APPEAL, AND I'VE GOT TO MAKE SURE THAT I'VE GOT ENOUGH HERE TO STAND BY THE CITY'S DECISION THAT IT IS REALLY BASED ON WHAT OUR CODE PROVIDES AND THAT WE AS A CITY ADMINISTERED OUR CODE BASED, AND THAT OUR DECISIONS WERE BASED ON EVIDENCE SUPPORTED BY THE STANDARDS SET FORTH IN OUR CODE.

WELL, I'LL TRY NOT TO PUT YOU IN A TENUOUS POSITION. IT SEEMS LIKE YOU'RE MORE THAN THREE STEPS AHEAD, THOUGH. MAY I SAY SOMETHING TOO? WE RECENTLY PROVIDED YOU ALL A GUIDEBOOK, AND IT HAS SECTIONS OF CODE FOR THE CRITERIA. IF A ZONING OR AN AMENDMENT COMES TO YOU.

IT PROVIDES YOU THE ZONING, THE CRITERIA. IF YOU DENY ONE OF THOSE CRITERIA, YOU STATE THAT I BELIEVE THAT WOULD HELP THE CASE AS WELL.

CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, MICHAEL. RIGHT. YEP.

A LOT OF THE TIME, I MEAN, AS A PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD, I MEAN, YOU'RE REALLY GOING TO RECOMMEND. SO IT'S GOING TO GO FORWARD.

SO YOU HAVE I DON'T SAY YOU HAVE FULL DISCRETION, BUT YOU CAN RECOMMEND AND YOU CAN BASICALLY VOICE YOUR OPINION UP TO THE CITY COUNCIL.

I MEAN, IT'S REALLY GOING TO FALL AT THE END OF THE DAY UPON THE CITY COUNCIL BECAUSE THEIR DECISIONS AND A LOT OF TIMES ON SOME OF THESE DECISIONS ON THESE QUASI JUDICIAL DECISIONS ANY, ESPECIALLY IF THERE'S A DENIAL, THERE'S GOING TO BE AN EXPECTATION THAT THE CITY COUNCIL IS ACTUALLY GOING TO PUT IN WRITING THEIR BASIS AND REASONS FOR DENIAL, BECAUSE THAT'S SOMETHING THAT THE APPLICANT IS GOING TO HAVE AN EXPECTATION TO HAVE IN WRITING THE BASIS FOR THAT DENIAL.

AND THAT REALLY IS GOING TO THEN BECOME WHAT'S GOING TO GO FORWARD IF THERE IS GOING TO BE A CHALLENGE. IT'S USUALLY IT'S ALMOST LIKE A FINDING OF FACT.

HERE'S THE FINDINGS OF FACT. AND THEN HERE ARE THE CONCLUSIONS OF LAW FOR THE FOR THE BASIS FOR THEIR DECISION.

[00:40:07]

NOW YOU AS A, AS A, AS A RECOMMENDATORY BODY, YOU'RE GOING TO LISTEN TO ALL THE PRESENTATIONS THAT ARE BROUGHT FORWARD.

SO YOUR DECISIONS AND YOUR RECOMMENDATIONS ARE BASED ON EVERYTHING YOU HEAR.

SO IF YOU CAN TAKE ALL THE CONSIDERATIONS OF THE RESIDENTS, AND IF YOU BELIEVE SOME OF THE RESIDENTS HAVE VALID ARGUMENTS, THAT YOU CAN THEN KIND OF BRING INTO CONSIDERATION, YOU BELIEVE THAT WOULD BE GOOD EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT A DECISION, STATE THAT AS A RECORD, AND THAT GOES UP AS A AS A RECOMMENDATION UP TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THEM TO TAKE TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION.

THAT WAS THE BASIS OF MY QUESTION IS, DO WE HAVE A BIT OF A HUMAN ELEMENT IN OUR DISCRETION, OR ARE WE JUST BOUND BY LAW AS A AS A BODY. AS A RECOMMENDATORY BODY.

YOU HAVE THAT IT'S JUST I, YOU KNOW, WHAT I TRY TO AVOID IS REALLY SOMETHING THAT'S COMPLETELY OUT OF LEFT FIELD.

AND I HAVE TO. IF I SEE SOMETHING LIKE THAT, I HAVE TO WARN YOU, YOU KNOW, PLEASE, YOU KNOW, I'LL TRY TO REIN IN AND BRING IT IN. PLEASE SUPPORT THAT.

OR IS THERE SOMETHING TO SUPPORT THAT OR IT'S JUST, YOU KNOW, GOING TO BE KIND OF AN OUTLIER.

BUT IT'S IN THE END OF THE DAY, YOU KNOW, IT REALLY IS GOING TO BE THE DECISION OF THE, OF THE CITY COUNCIL.

AND A LOT OF TIMES I'VE BEEN IN I WAS IN PRIVATE PRACTICE REPRESENTING RESIDENTS, REPRESENTING DEVELOPERS.

THERE ARE MANY TIMES WHERE I'VE HAD A PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD GO UP UNANIMOUS WITH RECOMMENDATIONS OF DENIAL, ONLY TO HAVE A CITY COUNCIL COME BACK WITH A UNANIMOUS APPROVAL.

SO OR VICE VERSA. SO IT IT ALWAYS DEPENDS. THANK YOU, THANK YOU.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS RELATED TO THIS ITEM. SO I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SAY THAT.

WHAT PASSES FOR FOR ACCEPTABLE DENSITY THESE DAYS IS DRIVING ME CRAZY.

I COULDN'T LIVE THAT CLOSE TO MY NEIGHBORS. I MEAN, I'M A NEIGHBORLY GUY, BUT I HONESTLY COULDN'T LIVE THAT CLOSE TO MY NEIGHBORS.

I STARTED TO FEEL LIKE I WAS IN A SARDINE CAN.

HOWEVER YOU KNOW, THE MARKET IS WHAT THE MARKET IS, AND DEVELOPERS ARE GOING TO BUILD WHAT PEOPLE ARE BUYING.

YOU KNOW, WHAT PEOPLE ARE BUYING, AND IT'S IT'S NOT SOMETHING I WOULD EVER BUY.

MR. CHAIR, MAY I PROVIDE A CLARIFYING NOTE TO THIS QUESTION OF DENSITY? SURE. SO THE DENSITY IS ESTABLISHED BY THE UNDERLYING LAND USE.

THE UNDERLYING LAND USE ESTABLISHES YOUR DENSITY OR YOUR INTENSITY.

IF WE RELATE BACK TO THE CLUSTER ZONING, THAT IS THE CLUSTER.

I'M SORRY. SUBDIVISION. IT IS NOT A ZONING. THIS IS A CONDITIONAL USE THAT IS PUT UPON A RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION.

AND IT IS RS. ONE, 2 OR 3, WHICH ALL HAVE THE LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL LAND USE UNDERNEATH THEM.

THEIR DENSITY IS SET AT ONE UNIT PER. I'M SORRY, FIVE UNITS PER ONE ACRE.

THAT DOESN'T CHANGE. DOESN'T MATTER IF IT'S A CLUSTER SUBDIVISION OR IF IT'S A STRAIGHT SUBDIVISION.

BUT THE MECHANISM THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT FOR CLUSTER SUBDIVISIONS IS IT'S A IT'S A YOU FOLLOW THE SUBDIVISION PROCESS WHERE YOU HAVE A PIECE OF PROPERTY OR PROPERTY, AND YOU SUBDIVIDE IT INTO RESIDENTIAL LOTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH RS ONE, RS TWO RS THREE. BUT FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE IS, YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE A PIECE OF LAND THAT'S SIZE X, OKAY. AND ACCORDING TO OUR DENSITY PROFILE, THEY'RE ALLOWED TO HAVE Y NUMBER OF HOMES OR Y NUMBER OF DENSITY.

WHAT WE'RE DOING WITH THIS CLUSTER THING IS WE'RE BASICALLY SAYING WE WANT TO CONSERVE MORE LAND.

SO YOU'RE STILL ALLOWED TO HAVE Y AS YOUR DENSITY, BUT YOU'RE CRAMMING IT INTO A SMALLER AREA INSIDE OF THAT IS CORRECT.

SO YOU GET THE SAME NUMBER OF UNITS. BUT THEN WHAT I'M SAYING IS CORRECT.

WHEN I'M DRIVING THROUGH THERE WITH MY WIFE AND WE'RE LOOKING TO PURCHASE A HOME, I DON'T WANT TO BE THAT CLOSE.

AND AND I HEAR YOU. BUT THE POINT IS, WE'RE ALLOWING THIS IN PUDS TODAY.

OKAY. WE SHOWED YOU EXAMPLES OF WHAT WE'RE ALLOWING TODAY IN PUDS.

40 FOOT LOTS, FIVE FOOT SETBACKS. YEAH. WE ARE.

THAT IS WHY WE CHANGED THE PUD LANGUAGE THAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT TONIGHT.

TO SAY YOU HAVE TO FOLLOW THE UNDERLYING ZONING, WHICH IS 75 FOOT LOTS AND EIGHT FOOT SETBACKS, AND THAT YOU HAVE TO BE WITHIN 75% OF THAT SO YOU CAN GO DOWN TO 55 FOOT LOTS.

BUT WE HAVE TO BE MORE SENSITIVE AS THE, THE, THE PUBLIC HAS COME UP AND COMMENTED ON NUMEROUS OCCASIONS WITH THE EXISTING NEIGHBORHOODS THAT WE HAVE. AND THESE EXISTING NEIGHBORHOODS ARE 75 FOOT AND 80 FOOT LOTS.

[00:45:04]

AND SO THAT IS WHY WE MADE THE CHANGE IN THE PUD.

I'M SURE IT'LL BE CHALLENGED. BUT THAT IS WHAT WE'RE ALLOWING TODAY.

AND SO WHEN YOU HAVE A CLUSTER ZONING AND YOU COULD FIT 100 LOTS IF YOU JUST DID THE STRAIGHT SUBDIVISION, THIS IS JUST ALLOWING YOU TO POSSIBLY STILL DO 100 LOTS BUT PRESERVE 30% OF THE LAND.

SO THAT'S WHAT THAT IS. AGAIN, I KNOW THERE'S DISCOMFORT WITH IT AND I MR. WARNER ARE THEY'RE SMILING. SO AGAIN, HE AND I THAT'S THIS IS PRESENTED TO YOU.

THIS WAS BROUGHT FORWARD WITH OUR CONSULTANT BEFORE I EVEN CAME ON BOARD.

BUT THIS IS REALLY A CLUSTER ZONING IS AN ENVIRONMENTAL TOOL THAT IS USED.

AND SO I'M JUST GIVING YOU THAT BACKGROUND ON IT.

JUST FROM MY EXPERIENCE, FROM MY FAMILIARITY.

THIS IS SOMETHING THAT PALM BEACH COUNTY HAS.

AND THERE'S AN AREA IN PALM BEACH COUNTY IS KNOWN AS THE AGRICULTURAL RESERVE. IT'S THE WESTERN PART OF THE COUNTY WEST OF THE TURNPIKE WHERE IT OPENED UP THE AGRICULTURAL AREAS FOR RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. PUDS. WITHIN THE AGRICULTURAL RESERVE, THERE'S TWO TYPES OF PUDS, AND THEY'RE KNOWN AS 80 OVER 20 OR 60 OVER 40.

80 OVER 20 MEANS THAT YOU CAN DEVELOP AT 20% OF THAT AREA OF YOUR AREA WILL BE RESERVED FOR RESIDENTIAL, BUT THAT MEANS 80% HAS TO BE PRESERVED. SO THAT'S YOUR CLUSTER SUBDIVISION OF AN 80, 20, 80% HAS TO BE RESERVED.

OR YOU CAN TAKE THE 6040 SPLIT, WHICH MEANS 60% HAS TO BE PRESERVED.

SO MOST OF THE RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISIONS IN THIS AREA ARE CLUSTERED.

SO THAT DOESN'T NECESSARILY MEAN THEIR HOMES ARE ALL JAMMED IN, BUT YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE MUCH MORE WIDE OPEN SPACES.

SOME OF THESE SPACES ARE STILL ARE STILL PRESERVED FOR AGRICULTURAL USES.

I DON'T THINK WE REALLY HAVE THAT. YOU DON'T HAVE AGRICULTURAL USES HERE, BUT BUT PRACTICALLY SPEAKING, IT HAS BEEN DONE HAS BEEN DONE HERE IN FLORIDA.

I MEAN, IF YOU'RE EVER VENTURING DOWN THERE, I MEAN, THE AGRICULTURAL RESERVE NO LONGER LOOKS AGRICULTURAL BECAUSE THEY'VE ALSO NOW DEVELOPED COMMERCIAL HUBS IN THERE, AND IT'S UNRECOGNIZABLE FROM WHEN I LIVED THERE.

AND IT'S BEEN NOW NINE YEARS SINCE I LEFT PALM BEACH.

AND EVEN IN THE 20 YEARS THAT I LIVED IN THAT AREA, IT BLOWN UP.

BUT THAT'S HOW RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IS DONE IN THAT AREA IN THAT 8020 AND 6040 SPLITS.

ALL RIGHT. I THINK WE'VE HAD A HEALTHY CONVERSATION ABOUT THIS.

YEAH. I THINK WE CAN LOOK FOR A MOTION FROM THE BOARD.

MR. CHAIR. YES. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO DENY T250003 LDC PHASE TWO UPDATE TO CHAPTER 173 ZONING.

THERE'S BEEN A MOTION TO DENY. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND.

I SECOND THAT. THANK YOU. MCNALLY. RIGHT. YES.

I GOT TO GET IT RIGHT OR I'M GOING TO GET IN TROUBLE. OKAY.

ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF DENIAL SAY SO BY SAYING I.

I. ALL OPPOSED? NAY. AND WE'RE GOING TO DO ROLL CALL.

SORRY. OKAY. SO MYSELF IS IN NAY. MISS JORDAN, YOU ALSO SAID NAY.

WERE THERE ANY OTHER NAYS? OKAY. WE JUST HAVE THE CLERK DO A ROLL CALL.

I'M SORRY. I JUST ASKED THE CLERK TO DO A ROLL CALL.

IT'D BE EASIER THAN HAVE YOU. OH, I'M GONNA DO A ROLL CALL.

FIGURE IT OUT. SORRY. COULD WE CLARIFY QUICKLY WHAT WE'RE VOTING ON HERE? I WAS IN THE RESTROOM, I APOLOGIZE. SURE. SO WE'RE MR. FILIBERTO MADE A MOTION THAT WE DENY THESE CHANGES TO THE CODE.

IT WAS SECONDED BY MR. MCNALLY. AND WERE YOU DID I DID YOU WERE.

YOU WERE. SO YOU'RE A NAY OR A YAY NAY NAY. OKAY.

OH, NO. I'M AN A ON DENIAL. OKAY. I'M LEARNING SLOWLY BUT SURELY.

AND MR. HIGGINS IS NOT HERE TODAY. OKAY, WELL THEN THE MOTION PASSES TO DENY.

ALL RIGHT. MOVING FORWARD ITEM NUMBER T 25 00004.

DO WE HAVE A TALLY ON THE. IS IT THREE? WHAT'S THE VOTE? I'M SORRY. IT IS TWO NAYS AND IN FOUR YEAS WITH ONE ABSENCE.

AND THAT'S MR. HIGGINS. OKAY. MR.. ANDREW, DID I GET THAT RIGHT? WOULD YOU LIKE TO ROLL? SURE. DO THE ROLL CALL.

VOTE. OKAY. MR. KARAFFA. NAY. MR. WARNER. AYE.

AYE. SORRY. MR.. FILIBERTO. AYE. MR. HIGGINS.

OH, SORRY. HE'S EXCUSED. MRS. JORDAN. MR. MCNALLY? AYE. AND MR. NORRIS. AYE. OKAY. MOTION PASSES FOR DENIAL.

[00:50:06]

MOVING ON. ITEM NUMBER T 25 00004. WE'LL HEAR FROM STAFF.

[2. T25-00004 - LDC Phase II Update to Chapter 175 Tree Protection, Landscaping, Buffering - City of Palm Bay (Growth Management Department) - A textual amendment to the Code of Ordinances, Title XVII, Land Development Code to revise language within Chapter 175: Tree Protection, Landscaping, Buffering]

THANK YOU. SO THIS IS AGAIN A TEXTUAL AMENDMENT AFTER UTILIZING THE TREE PROTECTION LANDSCAPING BUFFERING CHAPTER FOR THE LAST SIX MONTHS. THESE CHANGES ARE ONLY IN ACCORDANCE WITH PARTS ONE AND TWO OF THE CODE. THERE WAS A GREAT DEAL OF CONSIDERATION AND CONSTERNATION REGARDING LOT CLEARING, AND SO WE WANTED TO CLARIFY WHAT THIS, THIS SECTION OF THE CODE WAS REFERRING TO.

FOR ONE THING, ALL PROPERTIES THAT WOULD LIKE TO CLEAR THEIR LAND OR REMOVE TREES, UNDEVELOPED PROPERTIES, THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH A SITE PLANNING PROCESS.

THEY NEED TO OBTAIN EITHER A BUILDING PERMIT FOR A PRIMARY STRUCTURE, WHICH IS A SINGLE FAMILY LOTS, OR A SITE WORK PERMIT, WHICH ALLOWS FOR THE CLEARING OF PROPERTY.

SO THIS IS ACROSS THE BOARD. WHAT WE THE CHANGES THAT WE'VE MADE REALLY CLARIFY THIS STATEMENT THAT NO SEPARATE PERMIT IS REQUIRED FOR TREE REMOVAL IF APPLIED IN CONJUNCTION WITH AN APPROVED SITE PLAN, SUBDIVISION OR BUILDING PERMIT, AND TREE REMOVAL AND LAND CLEARING PERMITS ARE ACTIVITIES NOT IF IT'S NOT AN ACTIVITY THAT'S NOT COVERED UNDER APPROVED PERMIT OR SITE PLAN.

THEN WE HAVE THE PERMITS AVAILABLE THAT YOU NEED TO APPLY FOR.

AND WE HAVE THE WHOLE APPLICATION PROCESS DESIGNED TO, TO HELP ME PRESERVE THE TREES THAT ARE ON THE SITE. AND BACK TO THE QUESTION ABOUT PALMS, IS THAT OUR PROTECTED TREES, NATIVE TREES INCLUDE A DBH OF SIX INCHES OR GREATER IN ALL PALMS HAVING 4.5FT OF CLEAR WOOD OR GREATER.

AND THIS IS MEASURED FROM THE GROUND TO THE BASE OF THE FIRST FRONDS.

THESE ARE AND THESE HAVE TO BE NATIVE TREES. WE'RE NOT PROTECTING NON-NATIVE TREES.

SO IF YOU HAVE A DEVELOPED PROPERTY, IF YOU LIVE ON A SITE THAT YOU KNOW IS A COUPLE LOTS, NO, YOU DON'T NEED TO COME TO THE CITY IN ORDER TO REMOVE A TREE THAT MAY BE HAZARDOUS.

THIS IS ALL AGAIN PREEMPTED BY THE STATE. IT IS PART OF THE FLORIDA STATUTES.

NOW THAT IF YOU HAVE A TREE THAT IS HAZARDOUS OR IS COMPROMISING THE USE OF YOUR PROPERTY, YOU YOU HAVE THE LEGITIMACY TO REMOVE IT.

THIS IS UNDEVELOPED LOTS, BUT IF IT'S NOT DEVELOPED, YOU NEED TO COME TO THE CITY.