[00:00:03] GOOD EVENING. GOOD EVENING EVERYBODY. BY WHATEVER MEASURE, IT'S ABOUT 6:00. [CALL TO ORDER:] WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND GET STARTED. THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD REGULAR MEETING OF OCTOBER THE 1ST IS NOW CALLED TO ORDER. IF YOU COULD ALL PLEASE SILENCE YOUR CELL PHONES. BOTH UP HERE AND DOWN THERE. AND WE'LL GET UNDERWAY. I'LL GO AHEAD AND LEAD US IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. IF ALL OF YOU WOULD PLEASE STAND. 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. MISS POWELL, WILL YOU PLEASE CALL THE ROLL? YES. MR.. KARAFFA HERE. MR. WARNER PRESENT. MR. FILIBERTO HERE, MR. HIGGINS HERE, MISS JORDAN HERE, MR. MCNALLY HERE. MR. NORRIS. MR. NORRIS I AM EXPECTING. AND OUR SCHOOL BOARD APPOINTEE POSITION IS STILL VACANT. CITY ATTORNEY PATRICIA SMITH IS PRESENT. WE DO HAVE A QUORUM. THANK YOU. OUR FIRST ORDER OF BUSINESS FOR THIS EVENING WILL BE TO CALL FOR A MOTION TO ACCEPT THE MINUTES, [ADOPTION OF MINUTES:] THE MINUTES OF OUR PREVIOUS MEETING, IF ANYBODY WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION. AND SECOND, THAT. SO MOVED. ALL RIGHT. THAT HAS BEEN MOVED BY MISS. MISS JORDAN. I'LL SECOND. THANK YOU, MR. FILIBERTO. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR DESIGNATE BY SAYING AYE. AYE. ALL OPPOSED? HEARING NONE. MOTION PASSES. [ANNOUNCEMENTS:] FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE APPLICANTS AND THE AUDIENCE. THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD IS AN ADVISORY BOARD COMPRISED OF UNPAID VOLUNTEERS. THE LAND DEVELOPMENT DIVISION STAFF WILL PRESENT OUR STAFF REPORT FOR EACH CASE. BOARD MEMBERS WILL THEN BE ASKED IF THEY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF. THE APPLICANT OR THEIR REPRESENTATIVE WILL THEN BE ASKED TO APPROACH THE PODIUM AND PRESENT ANY INFORMATION GERMANE TO THE CASE, AND TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD. THE FLOOR WILL THEN BE OPEN FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS. WE WILL FIRST HEAR FROM THOSE WISHING TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THE APPLICATION, THEN THOSE IN OPPOSITION TO THE APPLICATION. FOR ALL PROCEEDINGS, ALL APPLICANTS AND SPEAKERS FROM THE AUDIENCE MUST SIGN THEIR SPEAKER OATH CARDS, WHICH ARE LOCATED EITHER AT THE PODIUM, OR YOU CAN GET THEM OVER HERE NEXT TO MISS POWELL. PLEASE MAKE SURE TO PRINT LEGIBLY AND SPEAK DIRECTLY INTO THE MICROPHONE, BECAUSE MISS POWELL HAS TO INCLUDE THAT IN OUR MINUTES. ALL RIGHT. AND STATE YOUR NAME, YOUR ADDRESS AND YOUR 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, THAT YOU INFORMALLY APPOINT A SPOKESPERSON TO CLARIFY YOUR VIEWS AFTER PUBLIC COMMENTS, I WILL BRING THE CASE BACK TO THE BOARD. AT THIS TIME, THE FLOOR WILL BE CLOSED AND NO FURTHER COMMENTS WILL BE HEARD FROM THE AUDIENCE. I WILL THEN CALL FOR A MOTION AND A SECOND, AT WHICH TIME THE BOARD MAY HAVE ADDITIONAL COMMENTS OR FURTHER DISCUSSION. I WILL THEN CALL FOR A VOTE. DECISIONS OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD ARE THEN FORWARDED TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR FINAL DISPOSITION. THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENDANCE AND FOR YOUR COOPERATION IN ADHERING TO OUR MEETING GUIDELINES. [NEW BUSINESS:] ALL RIGHT. WITH THAT, WE HAVE A NUMBER OF ITEMS ON THE AGENDA, THOUGH. I AM TOLD THAT ITEMS CP 24 00005, CPC 24 00003, CP 24 00006 AND CPC 24 0004 DID NOT PROPERLY DISPLAY THEIR NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING THIS EVENING. AS A RESULT, WE ARE NOT ABLE TO HEAR ON THESE ITEMS. THEY WILL BE CONTINUED TO THE NOVEMBER THE 5TH MEETING. AND THAT'S IT. OTHER THAN THAT, WE WILL STILL HERE ON ITEM NUMBER PD 25 00001. SO IF YOU ARE HERE FOR ANY OF THOSE OTHER ITEMS, I APOLOGIZE FOR THE INCONVENIENCE OF YOU COMING OUT, BUT PROPER NOTICE WAS NOT PUT OUT ON THAT PROPERTY AND WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO HEAR ON THAT ITEM. ALL RIGHT. WE WILL NOW MOVE TO ITEM NUMBER PD 25 00001. IF I PUT AN EXTRA ZERO IN THERE, I APOLOGIZE. THE KOGAN PLAZA. EXCUSE ME IF CERTAINLY YOU STATED THE FACTS CORRECTLY. IF I COULD ONLY HAVE THE BOARD VOTE ON THE DATE THAT WE'RE CONTINUING TO THAT NOVEMBER. [00:05:01] WHAT WAS IT THAT NOVEMBER 5TH DATE? THAT'S ALL. IF WE CAN. OKAY. WHICH CASE NUMBER DO YOU WANT THIS VOTE PUT UNDER? PUT THEM ALL. YEAH I'M JUST GOING TO PUT ALL FOUR. I'M NOT GETTING IN TROUBLE FOR WITH CHANDRA. ALL RIGHT. THAT POOR LADY'S GOT TO WRITE ALL THIS UP. ALL RIGHT. I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION TO HOLD THOSE ITEMS THAT I DESCRIBED TILL OUR NOVEMBER THE 5TH MOTION. I MEAN, OUR NOVEMBER THE 5TH MEETING. DO I HAVE A MOTION? MOTION TO CONTINUE THE FOUR CASES TO THE NOVEMBER 5TH MEETING. THANK YOU. DO I HAVE A SECOND? SECOND? THANK YOU, MR. MCNALLY. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR DESIGNATE BY SAYING I. I. ALL OPPOSED. ALL RIGHT. UNANIMOUSLY. THE MOTION CARRIES. WE'LL NOW MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER PD 25 00001. THE KOGAN PLAZA SELF-STORAGE AT PALM BAY LIKES. WE'LL HEAR FROM STAFF FIRST. GOOD EVENING. I'M TANYA RAMOS, PRINCIPAL PLANNER WITH GROWTH MANAGEMENT. AND I'M PRESENTING THE PD 25 00001. FOR THE AUDIENCE, IF YOU DIDN'T GRAB ONE ALREADY, I PRINTED OUT SOME OF THE LONGER CODE SECTIONS. IF YOU NEEDED TO HAVE A COPY IN FRONT OF YOU, YOU CAN GRAB ONE AT THE TABLE HERE. SO THIS PROJECT IS THE KOGAN PLAZA SELF-STORAGE AT BAYSIDE LAKES. THE APPLICANT IS PALM BAY MEDICAL OFFICE CORPORATION AND WILL BE REPRESENTED THIS EVENING BY FRANK PLATA. AND HE HAS SOME OTHER REPRESENTATIVES WITH HIM. THE LOCATION IS SOUTH OF AND ADJACENT TO BAYSIDE LAKES BOULEVARD, SOUTH, EAST AND WEST OF AND ADJACENT TO KOGAN DRIVE SOUTHEAST, AND THEY'RE REQUESTING A PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL FOR A PROPOSED PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT TO ALLOW COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT WITH A SELF-STORAGE FACILITY ON APPROXIMATELY 6.57 ACRES. SO HERE YOU CAN SEE THE SITE IS 6.57 ACRES. IT HAS A COMMERCIAL FUTURE LAND USE WHICH YOU SEE IN RED. THE SITE IS HIGHLIGHTED WITH THE YELLOW STRIPING. AND YOU CAN SEE THAT THERE'S OTHER COMMERCIAL AND OTHER USES IN THE AREA. AND HERE IS THE ZONING MAP WHICH IS SHOWING THAT THIS WHOLE AREA IS ALREADY PART OF BAYSIDE PUD. THE SUBJECT PROPERTY HAS TWO EXISTING OFFICE BUILDINGS ON THE SITE. THERE'S ALSO THREE ADDITIONAL BUILDING PADS FOR FUTURE OFFICE BUILDINGS. AND IN 2024 LAST YEAR, THEY OBTAINED A SITE PLAN APPROVAL FOR AN 11,282 SQUARE FOOT RETAIL BUILDING. SO IN PREPARATION FOR THIS MEETING, THEY HELD A CITIZENS PARTICIPATION MEETING ON MAY 14TH, 2025, AND THE APPROPRIATE NOTICES HAVE BEEN MAILED OUT AND POSTED AT THE SITE. BOARD ACTION IS NEEDED BECAUSE THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD REFUSED THE APPLICATION AT A PUBLIC HEARING AND MAKES A RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL BASED ON THE REVIEW CRITERIA OF SECTION 170 2.0 30H OF THE PALM BAY CODE OF ORDINANCES. AND IF YOU GRAB THE CODE REFERENCES THAT I HAD PRINTED OUT, THAT WOULD BE THIS BEGINNING ON THE SECOND SHEET. SO HERE WE JUST HAVE SOME BACKGROUND INFORMATION ON THE SITE. I'VE LISTED THE VARIOUS CODES THAT THEY NEED TO COMPLY WITH HERE, AND THEY HAVE SUBMITTED APPLICATION AND THE APPROPRIATE LETTERS OF AUTHORIZATION ALONG WITH THEIR PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN. SO THERE'S QUITE A STORY FOR THE BAYSIDE DEVELOPMENTS. AND I WANTED TO KIND OF TAKE YOU THROUGH ALL THE PROCESS THAT THIS PROJECT HAS ALREADY GONE THROUGH. JUST SO THAT YOU'RE UP TO SPEED WITH, WITH EVERYTHING THAT THAT THEY HAVE PUT FORTH. SO THIS PARCEL IS PART OF THE BAYSIDE LAKES COMMERCIAL CENTER PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT. IT WAS ORIGINALLY APPROVED IN 1999, AND THEN THE SITE WAS VACANT UNTIL IT WAS RECEIVED A SITE PLAN APPROVAL IN 2007. AND THAT'S WHAT ALLOWED THE DEVELOPMENT OF MEDICAL AND PROFESSIONAL OFFICE CENTER. THE PLAN CONSISTED OF 12 OFFICE BUILDINGS ALONG WITH PARKING, DRIVEWAYS, SIDEWALKS, AND LANDSCAPING. SO THE SITE REMAINED WITH THE TWO BUILDINGS THAT WERE CONSTRUCTED. AND APPARENTLY THERE WAS AN INTEREST FOR MORE OFFICE BUILDINGS THERE. [00:10:03] SO IN 2024, THE SITE PLAN WAS REVISED TO REPLACE THREE OF THE PROPOSED OFFICE BUILDINGS TOTALING 11,114FT² WITH AN 11,282 SQUARE FOOT RETAIL BUILDING THAT FACES THE FRONTAGE ON COGAN DRIVE, SOUTHEAST IN ORDER TO FACILITATE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT. THIS PLAN WAS REVIEWED WITHIN THE SAME PARAMETERS AS THE ORIGINAL 2007 SITE PLAN. THE APPLICANT IS NOW PROPOSING THE DEVELOPMENT OF A SELF-STORAGE FACILITY ON THE REMAINING PORTION OF THE PROPERTY, AND SELF STORAGE IS TYPICALLY A CONDITIONAL USE AND COMMERCIAL ZONING CLASSIFICATIONS, AND IT WAS NOT SPECIFICALLY ALLOWED IN THE DECLARATIONS OR ANY OTHER DOCUMENTS RELATED TO THE BAYSIDE LAKES COMMERCIAL CENTER. AND THAT'S WHAT BRINGS US HERE TODAY IS IS TRYING TO ADD SELF STORAGE AS A PERMITTED USE HERE. SO HERE'S A PICTURE OF THE SITE AS IT LOOKED FOR MANY YEARS WITH THE TWO OFFICE BUILDINGS. AND YOU CAN SEE IF I CAN GET THIS FOR YOU, THERE'S A PAD HERE FOR FUTURE OFFICE PADS, HERE FOR FUTURE OFFICE BUILDING. AND THEN THE RETAIL STRIP WOULD EVENTUALLY GO HERE AND THE SELF STORAGE WOULD BE OVER IN THIS REMAINING SECTION. AND HERE IS THE PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN THAT WAS PRESENTED. IT'S A LITTLE HARD TO SEE. IT'S A LITTLE BUSY ON THE SCREEN, BUT THE THE SELF SELF STORAGE IS IN THE BLUE RIGHT HERE. AND THE RETAIL IS RIGHT HERE. SO WHEN THE BAYSIDE LAKES COMMERCIAL CENTER WAS APPROVED IN 1999, THE APPROVAL PROCESS DIFFERED FROM OUR CURRENT PROCESS AND NO DETAILED DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS WERE FORMALLY ADOPTED. SINCE A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT DOES NOT EXIST FOR THIS PUD. THE APPLICANT WAS ADVISED BY OUR CITY ATTORNEY REPRESENTATIVE AT THE TIME TO SUBMIT A SITE PLAN FOR REVIEW, DEMONSTRATING COMPLIANCE WITH THE STANDARDS FOR SELF STORAGE REQUIRED IN SECTION 174 .047. AND THAT'S THE FIRST SHEET OF THE HANDOUT OF THE CODES. IF YOU GRABBED ONE OF THOSE, YOU'LL SEE THAT IT HAS SPECIFIC DESIGN AND OPERATIONAL STANDARDS. SO WHEN A SELF STORAGE FACILITY COMES TO US AS A CONDITIONAL USE. WE REVIEW FOR ALL OF THOSE REQUIREMENTS. AND SO THEY WERE ASKED TO SHOW COMPLIANCE WITH THAT FOR THIS FIRST APPLICATION THAT THEY SUBMITTED. AND THEY WERE ALSO REQUESTED TO SUBMIT DIRECTLY TO CITY COUNCIL TO ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT TO AMEND THE PUD TO ALLOW FOR SELF STORAGE. SO THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED THAT SITE PLAN FOR REVIEW OCTOBER 6TH, 2024. AND ALTHOUGH THE PLAN DID NOT RECEIVE FULL APPROVAL BECAUSE THEY NEEDED TO GET THIS PUD APPROVAL FIRST IT DID DEMONSTRATE THAT THEY COMPLIED WITH ALL OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR SELF STORAGE IN SECTION 174 .047. THE REMAINING SITE PLAN COMMENTS HAVE BEEN INCORPORATED INTO THE STAFF REPORT THAT WAS PROVIDED WITH THE AGENDA PACKET. THOSE ARE ALL ITEMS THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE ADDRESSED BEFORE THEY WOULD GET SITE PLAN APPROVAL. BUT ULTIMATELY THE PUD AGREEMENT WAS DENIED BY CITY COUNCIL ON DECEMBER 19TH, 2024. AND THE REASON WHY WE'RE BACK HERE TODAY IS BECAUSE THIS PROCESS DID NOT CREATE AN AVENUE FOR THE APPLICANT TO APPEAL THAT DECISION. SO HERE WE HAVE CODE SECTION 5105, WHICH TALKS ABOUT THE DENIAL OF A REQUEST BY COUNCIL OR BOARD. TYPICALLY, A REQUEST CANNOT COME BACK TO US UNLESS IT IS SUBSTANTIALLY CHANGED WITHIN A 12 MONTH PERIOD. BUT THIS IS TELLING US THAT CITY COUNCIL OR ANY BOARD MAY RECONSIDER THE SAME OR SIMILAR ISSUE WITHIN THE 12 MONTH PERIOD IF A MISTAKE INADVERTENCE SURPRISE EXCUSABLE NEGLECT HAS OCCURRED AS A RESULT OF THE ACTIONS OF THE APPLICANT OR THE CITY, PROVIDED THAT THE EVENT DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY FORM THE BASIS FOR THE COUNCIL'S DECISION TO DENY THE REQUEST. SO WHAT WE HAVE FOUND IS THAT THE CODE IN SECTION 173 .061 PUD STANDARDS DOES INCLUDE A STATEMENT WHICH SAYS FOR PUDS APPROVED THAT DO NOT HAVE ANY IDENTIFIABLE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, BUT HAVE NOT YET COMPLETED ALL PHASES OF CONSTRUCTION, THE PUD MUST OBTAIN A PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL FROM CITY COUNCIL TO SET STANDARDS FOR ALL FUTURE DEVELOPMENT. [00:15:07] AND THAT'S WHAT BRINGS US BACK HERE THIS EVENING TO REVIEW THIS AGAIN. SO THE APPLICANT HAS NOW SUBMITTED A PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO ESTABLISH THOSE STANDARDS. AND THEY'RE SEEKING TO ALLOW A SELF STORAGE FACILITY ON THIS SITE. SO IT WOULD BE SPECIFIC TO THIS SITE. THE APPROPRIATE CITY DEPARTMENTS HAVE REVIEWED AND COMMENTED ON THE PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN. AS I STATED, THAT'S INCLUDED IN THE STAFF REPORT. AND SO HERE I PUT TOGETHER A LITTLE BIT OF A COMPARISON FOR EVERYONE TO LOOK AT. SO THE OVERALL SITE IS 6.57 ACRES. THE USES THAT THEY'RE PROPOSING FOR THIS SITE INCLUDE OFFICE RETAIL AND THE SELF STORAGE FACILITY. AND WHAT I'VE DONE IS I'VE GIVEN YOU A COMPARISON. SO ORIGINALLY THEY HAD THEIR DECLARATIONS, WHICH IS SOMETHING THAT CITY STAFF DOES NOT ENFORCE. BUT IT OUTLINED WHAT THEY WANTED SETBACKS TO BE. AND THEN THE SITE PLAN THAT WAS APPROVED IN 2007, THAT SITE PLAN NUMBER 1106, THE MIDDLE COLUMN THERE THAT INCLUDED ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND STANDARDS THAT THAT SITE WITH THE OFFICE BUILDINGS WAS ORIGINALLY DESIGNED WITH. SO COMPARING THAT TO WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING TODAY, I HIGHLIGHTED THE TWO MAIN DIFFERENCES THAT I SEE. NOT SURE WHY THEY CHANGED THE REAR SETBACK THERE, REDUCED IT TO 20FT. I THINK THAT THE SELF STORAGE IS STILL EXCEEDING THAT, BUT THEY HAVE CHANGED THE BUILDING HEIGHT TO 60FT TO ACCOMMODATE THE THREE STORY SELF STORAGE. SO THAT'S QUITE A CHANGE FROM THE 25FT HEIGHT THAT THEY PREVIOUSLY HAD. EXCUSE ME. AS FAR AS ONE OF THESE SCREENS BE TURNED TOWARDS THE BOARD. IS THAT ONE THAT FACES. WE CAN'T SEE IT. THAT'S FINE THANK YOU SIR. OKAY. MUCH BETTER. THANK YOU. SURE. YEP. OKAY. GOT IT. THANK YOU. SURE. SO YOU SEE THE DIFFERENCES THERE? OKAY. SO I HAD INCLUDED THE SELF STORAGE FACILITY AGAIN HERE. IT IS HARD TO SEE THIS IS THEIR PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN. BUT RIGHT IN HERE IT SAYS THAT THIS WILL BE A THREE STORY BUILDING. SO IF THIS WAS APPROVED THAT'S WHAT THEY WOULD BE LIMITED TO. AND SO FOR STAFF ANALYSIS I FIND THAT THE PROJECT IS STAFF FINDS THAT THE PROJECT IS CONSISTENT WITH ALL THE RELEVANT DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND HAS SATISFACTORILY ADDRESSED THE REQUIRED CRITERIA. AND SO YOU HAVE THE OPTIONS TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL OR DENIAL. IF YOU WERE TO DENY, YOU WOULD NEED TO REFER TO THAT SECOND HANDOUT AND WHICH SECOND SHEET IN THE HANDOUT AND REFER TO WHICH ITEM OR CRITERIA YOU THINK THAT THE PROPOSED PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN IS NOT MEETING AND STATE THAT IN YOUR MOTION? AND THEN I'M AVAILABLE IF YOU HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS, STAFF IS AVAILABLE. AND THE APPLICANT IS HERE AS WELL. APPLICANT. REPRESENTATIVE. THANK YOU. BEFORE WE HEAR FROM THE APPLICANTS AND THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE, DOES ANY MEMBER OF THE BOARD HAVE A QUESTION FOR STAFF? I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION. SURE. GO AHEAD. I WAS JUST LOOKING FOR CLARIFICATION IN THE STAFF REPORT THE ACRONYM FOR ALL THE DIFFERENT FACILITY FOR MT WCD. AND IT'S JUST MENTIONED ABOUT THAT THE NON COMPLIANCE FOR STORMWATER RUNOFF AND IT BEING CURRENTLY UNDER REVIEW. CAN YOU EXPAND ON THAT. SO THE THAT COMMENT IS FROM THE MELBOURNE TILLMAN I BELIEVE. AND IT'S IT'S A SITE PLAN REVIEW COMMENT. SO IT'S SOMETHING THAT THEY WOULD HAVE TO RESOLVE BEFORE THEY WOULD HAVE A FULL SITE PLAN APPROVAL. SO I THINK YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT MELBOURNE TILLMAN WATER CONTROL DISTRICT IS IS THE ACRONYM. YEAH. OKAY. THAT'S ALL I GOT. ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? I DO HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. OKAY. SO THIS HAS ALREADY COME BEFORE THE BOARD IN DECEMBER OF LAST YEAR. IT WENT TO CITY COUNCIL DIRECTLY BECAUSE IT WAS JUST A PUD AGREEMENT. IT WASN'T FOLLOWING THE WHOLE PUD OR PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN REVIEW PROCESS. [00:20:03] OKAY, SO I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED ABOUT WHAT IS THE CRITERIA THAT IS ALLOWING IT TO COME BACK. SO THAT'S THE SECTION 51.05 WHERE IT TALKS ABOUT WITHIN 12 MONTHS. IF BASICALLY THE CITY ATTORNEY THAT WE HAD AT THAT TIME REPRESENTING OUR DEPARTMENT ADVISED THIS. I'M SORRY. THE CHIEF DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY, THE CITY ATTORNEY HAS BEEN THE SAME. YES. THAT'S WHY I TRY TO STAY REPRESENTING OUR OFFICE. AT THAT TIME. HE ADVISED TO GO DIRECTLY TO THAT AGREEMENT. BECAUSE BAYSIDE IS ALWAYS A COMPLICATED. IT'S AN OLDER PUD. THEY DID THINGS DIFFERENTLY THAN WE OFTEN LOOK AT IT. AND WE'RE LIKE, WHAT DID THEY DO? WHAT WAS THE INTENT HERE? SO HE CAME UP WITH THAT OPTION TO TRY TO PUT AN AGREEMENT AND SOME DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS IN PLACE THAT THEY WOULD BE LOCKED INTO. BUT THAT WAS DENIED BY CITY COUNCIL. AND THEN LOOKING BACK AT OUR CODE AGAIN, WE FIND THAT, YOU KNOW, WE WE REVISED THE CODE LIKE IN 2024, I BELIEVE. AND WE DID ADD A STATEMENT IN THERE THAT THAT WAS TO COVER SITUATIONS LIKE THIS SAYING, IF YOU DON'T HAVE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND THE SITE WAS NOT FULLY DEVELOPED. THEN YOU WOULD COME BACK THROUGH THE PDP PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN PROCESS. OKAY, SO WE'RE BEING ASKED TO LOOK AT THIS PRELIMINARY PUD AND APPROVE IT OR DENY IT. THIS IS NOT A REZONING. NO, IT'S ALREADY A PUD. BUT THEY WANT TO ADD THE SELF STORAGE. AND I'M GOING TO GET TO THAT QUESTION IN JUST A SECOND. THEY THEY NEED TO AMEND THE PUD TO ALLOW SELF STORAGE FOR THIS LOT. OKAY. SO THIS IS A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT. IT'S NOT REALLY BUT IT'S SIMILAR. AND THIS IS WHERE MY CONFUSION IS COMING FROM. I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE BEING ASKED TO LOOK AT. ARE WE LOOKING AT A PRELIMINARY LOOKING AT THE WHOLE SITE THOUGH? IT'S THIS SITE. YOU'RE NOT LOOKING AT ANY OTHER PART OF BAYSIDE. IT'S JUST THIS PROPERTY. SO THIS SITE PLAN WOULD BASICALLY BECOME THEIR THEIR DEVELOPMENT PLAN. AND IF THEY CHANGE THEIR MIND AND WANTED TO DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT, I BELIEVE THEY'D HAVE TO COME BACK THROUGH THIS PROCESS. WELL, I'M JUST I'M CURIOUS BECAUSE THIS IS ALL WRAPPED UP INTO ONE MOTION. WE'VE GOT A PRELIMINARY UNIT DEVELOPMENT THAT INVOLVES MORE THAN JUST SELF STORAGE. SELF STORAGE IS A PART OF IT. AND SELF STORAGE, FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, YOU'RE SAYING IS A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT. SO WHY ISN'T THIS TWO DIFFERENT ITEMS. SO I'M JUST TRYING TO MAKE THE COMPARISON THAT THEY WERE ASKED TO SHOW IF THIS WAS A CONDITIONAL USE. THEY COMPLY WITH ALL OF THOSE REQUIREMENTS, BUT IT'S NOT A CONDITIONAL USE. SO IT'S LIKE SHOWING THAT IF THIS WAS A DIFFERENT ZONING AND THEY COULD DO A COMMERCIAL, IF IT WAS A COMMERCIAL ZONING AND THEY COULD DO A CONDITIONAL USE, THEY WOULD STILL HAVE TO COMPLY WITH ALL THOSE REQUIREMENTS IF THIS PROPERTY WAS RIGHT NEXT DOOR IN A PUD. WE'RE JUST SHOWING YOU THAT THEY TOO ARE BEING ASKED TO COMPLY. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. I THINK WHAT'S KEY? YOU'RE USED TO DEALING WITH ZONING AND AS PART OF ZONING. NO ONE HAS THE INHERENT RIGHT TO DO STORAGE. SO YOU DO A CONDITIONAL USE WITH A PUD. IT'S ALLOW FLEXIBILITY. SO THERE ARE NO AUTOMATIC USES. SO YOU HAVE TO SET WHAT THE USES ARE. WE SET THE USES SOME TIME AGO. AND WE DIDN'T SET THE USE THAT ALLOWS A SELF STORAGE. AND SO WHAT YOU'RE CONSIDERING NOW IS SHOULD WE ALLOW A SELF STORAGE ON THIS PROPERTY. AND IF WE ARE ALLOWING THE SELF STORAGE YOU'RE ALSO LOOKING AT BECAUSE YOU'RE DOING IT IN THE CONTEXT OF A PUD. SO YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN. SO YOU HAVE ALL THE STANDARDS. SO YOU COULD SAY WELL YES YOU KNOW THINK SELF STORAGE FITS HERE. THESE STANDARDS ARE GOOD AND YOU COULD APPROVE IT. YOU COULD PROVE THAT THAT YOU AGREED WITH THE SELF STORAGE, BUT YOU DIDN'T AGREE TO SOME OF THESE STANDARDS AND YOU COULD HAVE YOUR MOTION DO THOSE. ESSENTIALLY IT'S THE FLEXIBILITY. DO WE HAVE THIS USE. AND IF WE DO HAVE THIS USE, HOW DO WE DO IT SO THAT IT IS COMPATIBLE AND CONSISTENT WITH THE ENVIRONMENT IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THOSE STANDARDS THAT YOU HAVE THERE. SO YOU'RE USING THE CONDITIONAL USE CRITERIA BECAUSE ESSENTIALLY THIS DOESN'T HAVE THAT USE. IT DOESN'T HAVE ANY USE UNTIL YOU SAY WHAT THE USES ARE FOR PUD. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF BEFORE WE MOVE FORWARD? HEARING FROM THE APPLICANT. HEARING NONE. INVITE THE APPLICANT TO COME FORWARD. [00:25:11] GOOD EVENING, MR. CHAIRMAN. MEMBERS OF THE BOARD. MY NAME IS JACK SPARROW. MY ADDRESS IS FIVE 205 BABCOCK STREET. I REPRESENT THE APPLICANT HERE. I'LL LISTEN TO THE EXCHANGE, AND I CAN SEE WHERE THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF CONFUSION HERE. BUT BASICALLY, LET ME GIVE YOU JUST A SUMMARY OF WHAT'S HAPPENED HERE, AT LEAST AS FAR AS THIS SPECIFIC PROJECT. I THINK THE CITY ATTORNEY SORT OF GAVE AN EXPLANATION OF WHY WE'RE HERE TODAY. THIS IS A COURSE OF PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN. THE OVERALL LOT AREA, THE ENTIRE PROPERTY IS 6.76.57 ACRES. GOING BACK TO 2007 TO TO PRESENT DATE, THERE'S 4.87 ACRES BUILDING AND APPROVED, WHICH INCLUDES FIVE BUILDINGS AND MEDICAL OFFICES AND ONE RETAIL USE. THIS THIS REQUEST IS FOR THE REMAINING 1.7 ACRES. AND RIGHT NOW THERE'S CURRENTLY APPROVED BY THE BY THE CITY A BUILDING SITE PLAN. THE CENSUS IS A CONDITIONAL USE. THERE'S A LOT OF FLEXIBILITY GRANTED. SO WE'RE TRYING AGAIN BECAUSE OF MARKET CONDITIONS. CERTAINLY FELT THAT THAT PROBABLY MORE APPROPRIATE HERE WOULD BE A SELF STORAGE FACILITY. AGAIN THE REQUEST IS A SELF STORAGE FACILITY IS A THREE STORY BUILDING. I THINK STAFF INDICATED IT'S GOING TO BE 60FT. I THINK IT'S 60FT ALLOWED. I THINK THIS BUILDING WILL BE 45FT, IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN. SO I THINK I WOULD JUST CORRECT. I WAS TOLD THAT BY THE ENGINEER. ALL THE WATER, SEWER AND DRAINAGE UTILITIES ARE ON THE SITE. THE STORMWATER AND OPEN SPACE ARE SEPARATE PARCELS SERVED BY THE BAYSIDE LAKES COMMERCIAL CENTER. PHASE TWO. THE OVERALL SITE HAS BEEN APPROVED FOR MEDICAL AND RETAIL. WITH THIS SELF STORAGE FACILITY IS ALWAYS A CONCERN OVER TRAFFIC COUNTS. ACTUALLY, SELF STORAGE FACILITY USES LESS TRAFFIC OR GENERATES LESS TRAFFIC THAN EVERYTHING ELSE. IN THIS CASE, THERE'S AN OVERALL TRAFFIC REDUCTION OF 80 TRIPS PER DAY AND GOING FROM RETAIL TO SELF STORAGE. I'D LIKE TO INCORPORATE STAFF COMMENTS INTO MY PRESENTATION REQUEST TO APPROVE CITY COUNCIL. AND WE HAVE WITH THE ENGINEER WHO'S ALSO HERE, I BELIEVE, WITH A QUESTION ABOUT MELBOURNE TILLMAN. A GENTLEMAN ASKED, I THINK MELBOURNE TILLMAN HAS FINAL SITE PLAN APPROVAL. CERTAINLY ANY SITE PLAN THAT HAS TO BE COMPLETED HAS TO MEET MELBOURNE TILLMAN REQUIREMENTS. I THINK THAT'S THAT'S REALLY WHY THAT ISSUE CAME ABOUT. CERTAINLY I'LL ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS I HAVE, AND CERTAINLY I HAVE THE ENGINEER HERE WITH ME TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU SIR I APPRECIATE THAT. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD FOR THE APPLICANT AT THIS TIME? NO, THANK YOU VERY MUCH, SIR. ALL RIGHT. WE'LL NOW MOVE FORWARD WITH PUBLIC COMMENT. WE WILL HAVE FOLKS WHO WOULD LIKE TO COME FORWARD IN FAVOR OF THIS PROJECT. FIRST, COME TO THE PODIUM, FILL OUT THE CARD AND PLACE IT THERE, AND MAKE SURE YOU SAY YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS CLEARLY INTO THE MICROPHONE. ALL RIGHT. BILL BATTEN, 586 OCEAN SPRAY STREET SOUTHWEST. THE ONLY REASON WHY I'M SPEAKING IN FAVOR OF THIS IS BECAUSE OF THE FACT THAT IT'S LANDOWNERS LANDS ALREADY THERE. I GO BACK TO 1999, WHEN BAYSIDE LAKES WAS PRESENTED OF WHAT A GREAT PLACE IT WAS GOING TO BE, AND I HAVE SEEN VERY LITTLE OF THE ACTUAL COMMERCIAL SIDE COMING INTO WHAT BAYSIDE LAKES WAS GOING TO BE PROVIDING TO THE CITY FOR THE REVENUE, SO THAT THE HOMEOWNERS DIDN'T HAVE TO BE CARRYING THE BURDEN. THAT'S THE ONLY REASON WHY I'M SPEAKING IN FAVOR OF THIS WAS BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO BOOST THE TAX REVENUE FOR A BUSINESS COMING IN TO HELP OFFSET MY TAXES. I'M NOT REAL HAPPY WITH THREE STORY, BUT THAT'S YOU KNOW, THAT'S WHERE YOU GET MAYBE ASK IF YOU COULD HAVE IT A TWO STORY. THAT'S WHY YOUR BOARD MIGHT BE ABLE TO QUALIFY FOR THAT. THE OTHER SIDE OF THIS WAS IT'S NOW STARTED IN 1999. WHEN IT WAS PRESENTED, IT PRESENTED IS GOING TO BE THE GEM OF THE CITY. THE ONLY THING THAT ACTUALLY FOLLOWED THROUGH FROM WHAT WAS BEING PRESENTED TO US WAS MORE RESIDENTS MOVED INTO THE CITY OF PALM BAY FOR WHAT WAS BEING PROMISED TO US. THE GOLF COURSE DISAPPEARED. THE BUSINESSES DID NOT GET BUILT. BUT I PROMISE YOU, THE POPULATION DID INCREASE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU SIR. ALL RIGHT. OH! COME FORWARD. MY NAME IS ERIC OSBORNE. I LIVE AT 581 BURLINGTON, HERE IN PALM BAY. I'VE LIVED HERE FOR ALMOST 20 YEARS, AND PALM BAY IS NOT PROGRESSING THE WAY IT SHOULD. AND WITH ADDING ADDITIONAL SELF STORAGE FOR THESE NEIGHBORHOODS THAT LIVE ON POSTAGE STAMPS THAT HAVE NO STORAGE, I DON'T SEE WHY WE SHOULDN'T APPROVE THIS. IF YOU LOOK THROUGHOUT THE COUNTY, THERE ARE MULTIPLE DIFFERENT FACILITIES SITTING RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF NEIGHBORHOODS, SITTING RIGHT NEXT TO A SCHOOL. SO THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE IN APPROVING THIS ONE. [00:30:06] I WOULD STRONGLY ENCOURAGE IT. I MEAN, THERE'S JUST NO STORAGE FOR MOST OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS IN THAT AREA. THIS WOULD BE CLOSE AND CONVENIENT FOR THEM. SO OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. APPRECIATE THAT. ANYBODY ELSE WISHING TO SPEAK IN FAVOR? OKAY. HEARING NONE, WE WILL OPEN THE BOARD. OPEN THE FLOOR. PARDON? FOR THOSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK AGAINST THIS PROPOSAL. IS THERE ANYBODY WHO WOULD LIKE TO COME FORWARD AND SPEAK AGAINST. ALL RIGHT, SIR. IF IF YOU LIVE NEAR THIS, IF YOU COULD JUST KIND OF POINT OUT GENERALLY WHERE YOU LIVE NEAR IT, THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL TO US TO UNDERSTAND YOUR PERSPECTIVE. NO. BAYSIDE LAKES DEVELOPMENT DOWN BAYSIDE BOULEVARD AT THE CLUBHOUSE AREA. OKAY. SURE. THANKS A LOT. THE REASON I ASK IS A LOT OF TIMES FOLK COMES UP, FOLKS COME FORWARD AND THEY TALK ABOUT THEIR VIEW AND HOW IT'S GOING TO IMPACT THEM. AND WE HAVE NO IDEA WHERE THEY LIVE SO FAR. SO FAR, NO PROBLEM. SO MY NAME IS JOHN MCGEE. I LIVE AT 1991 THORNWOOD DRIVE IN MAGNOLIA PARK IN BAYSIDE LAKES. I'VE LIVED THERE FOR 16 YEARS NOW. I MOVED TO BAYSIDE LAKES BECAUSE I THOUGHT IT WAS A BEAUTIFUL COMMUNITY, A PLANNED COMMUNITY WITH A CHAMPIONSHIP GOLF COURSE. AND WE KNEW THAT THERE WERE FUTURE PLANS, BUT AS I UNDERSTAND IT, THOSE PLANS DID NOT INCLUDE A LOT OF STORAGE UNITS, AND THEY CERTAINLY DID NOT STORE AT THAT TIME MORE THAN TWO STORY BUILDINGS AS PART OF THE ORIGINAL PLAN. WE ALREADY HAVE TWO STORAGE BUILDINGS IN BAYSIDE THERE IN FRONT OF THE CLUBHOUSE OF THE MAJORS ON EACH SIDE OF THE ROAD, OWNED BY MR. MIKE ERDMAN OF KEW. I'M NOT SURE IF YOU ARE AWARE OF MR. ERDMAN'S HOSTILE TAKEOVER OF THE PLANNED PROPERTY OWNERS ASSOCIATION IN BAYSIDE, BUT LAST OCTOBER HE PRESENTED US WITH PETITIONS AND AFFIDAVITS AND AFFIDAVITS FROM SO-CALLED COMMERCIAL OWNERS TO BASICALLY TAKE OVER THE ENTIRE AREA OF BAYSIDE LAKES. SO THE OVER 2000 PROPERTY OWNERS NOW IN BAYSIDE HAVE ZERO SAY IN WHAT HAPPENS IN BAYSIDE. HE RUNS THE SHOW, AND YET WE HAVE TO PAY HIM DUES FOR HIM TO TURN AROUND AND IGNORE US AND WHAT WE WANT. SO WE ARE AT THE MERCY NOW BECAUSE WE HAVE NO SAY OTHER THAN TO COME BEFORE BODIES LIKE YOURSELF AND THE CITY COUNCIL, BECAUSE WE HAVE BEEN SUMMARILY CUT OUT OF EVERYTHING GOING ON IN BAYSIDE AS IT STANDS TODAY. BECAUSE WE HAVE TWO VALUES, THERE'S NO NEED FOR A THIRD. AND I UNDERSTAND THERE'S ANOTHER ONE PLANNED OR APPROVED ALREADY. DOWN PAST THE COUNTY OFFICE BUILDING FOR ANOTHER THREE STORY STORAGE UNIT. DOWN THERE IN FRONT OF RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES AS WELL. I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT WHAT THE THIS IS ALL ABOUT, BECAUSE WE HAVE 2000 RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY OWNERS IN BAYSIDE NOW THAT HAVE BEEN ADAMANTLY OPPOSED TO A LOT OF THE DEVELOPMENT THAT'S BEEN GOING ON. WE UNDERSTAND THE NEED FOR COMMERCIAL GROWTH AND STORES AND THINGS LIKE THAT. BUT WHY DO WE HAVE TO CONTINUE TO BUILD STORAGE UNITS? I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE VALUE TO THE CITY. I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE VALUE TO THE PROPERTY OWNERS THAT LIVE NEAR THIS. SO MY PRINCIPAL POINT IS THIS THAT WE HAVE NOW LOST THE GOLF COURSE. IT'S GONE AND IT LOOKS LIKE A WEED FIELD. AND NOW THEY WANT TO STUFF IN STORAGE UNITS. NOW THIS 1A3 STORY STORAGE UNIT BEHIND THE PROPERTIES. I MEAN, WHEN DOES THIS STOP? WHEN DO WE, AS THE PROPERTY OWNERS, THE 2000 PROPERTY OWNERS IN BAYSIDE HAVE A VOICE? BECAUSE RIGHT NOW WE'VE GOT NOBODY REPRESENTING US. AND THIS STUFF HAS TO STOP PEOPLE. IT HAS TO STOP. THANK YOU. THANK YOU SIR. ANYBODY ELSE? IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE WHO WISH TO COME FORWARD? ROBERT STILES, 1796 WOODBRIDGE DRIVE, SOUTHEAST. I'M THE PRESIDENT OF WEINBERG DRIVE. AND FIRST OF ALL, DITTO WHAT JOHN SAYS. WE'VE BEEN FIGHTING OVERDEVELOPMENT FOR SO LONG. I LIVE A LITTLE BIT FURTHER DOWN ON BAYSIDE LAKES. I WANT TO BACK UP JUST A LITTLE BIT. ABOUT THREE YEARS AGO, I HAD A TRAFFIC STUDY THAT WAS DONE BY SUZANNE SHERMAN WHERE WHEN YOU COME IN INTO SUMMERFIELD, IT'S NOT A 90 DEGREE TURN. IT'S CONSIDERED AN L SHAPED TERM L SHAPE CURVE, ONE OF THE MOST DANGEROUS IN ALL OF PALM BAY. NOW, FIRST FIVE YEARS I'VE BEEN HERE EIGHT YEARS. THE FIRST FIVE YEARS I'VE BEEN HERE, WE'VE HAD FIVE TRAFFIC DEATHS, INCLUDING SOMEBODY HITTING A TREE. [00:35:01] AND WE HAD ONE EXACTLY WHERE THAT IS THERE NOW. NOW, I LOVE WHEN THE THE VENDORS COME UP TO YOU, THESE THESE DEVELOPERS COME UP TO YOU AND SAY, WE'VE DONE A TRAFFIC STUDY. YOU HAVE YOU SEEN THE TRAFFIC IN THE MORNING? I'VE BEEN OUT THERE WITH THE PREVIOUS GENTLEMAN WHO'S NO LONGER WITH THE COMPANY, WHO IS WHO WAS WE DID A TRAFFIC STUDY OUT THERE IN THE MORNING. PEOPLE ARE DOING 50, 55 MILES AN HOUR. I'VE BEEN BANGING JEFFREY SPEARS AND THE CHIEF TO GET PEOPLE OUT THERE AND START WRITING TICKETS. AND I DON'T MEAN WARNING TICKETS. WARNING TICKETS NEVER STOPPED ANYBODY. BUT, YOU KNOW, WHAT DO YOU WANT BAYSIDE LAKES TO BE? YOU KNOW, IT HAS SUCH POTENTIAL. THEY YOU KNOW, THEY BUILT UP BAYSIDE LAKES. IT'S AN IT'S AN UPPER MIDDLE CLASS NEIGHBORHOOD. WE HAVE GREAT NEIGHBORS IN HERE, AND I'VE CALLED IT MY. MY NEW PHRASE HERE IS WE CONTINUE TO CREATE SUBURBAN GRIDLOCK. I MEAN, HOW LONG DOES IT TAKE TO GET THROUGH THERE? YOU GOT PEOPLE GOING TO THE LICENSE PLATES. THEY'RE HAULING ASS DOWN COGAN STREET. YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE TRAFFIC STUDY. I KEEP SAYING I KEEP HEARING, WELL, THE PEOPLE GO THERE. THERE'S NOT GOING TO BE MUCH TRAFFIC. TOLD ME, YOU KNOW, THERE'S NOT GOING TO BE MUCH MORE TRAFFIC. I THINK I'M WORKING HARDER NOW THAN I'VE EVER DID FULL TIME. YOU KNOW, I AND I WANT TO BACK UP. ARE YOU LISTENING TO MIKE MCCABE AND TILMAN? I BUMPED INTO MIKE TWO WEEKS AGO. HE'S THE ENGINEER TILMAN CANAL. AND HE SAYS THE PEOPLE DON'T REALIZE THAT CANALS WERE BUILT IN THE 1920S. ALL OF THIS OVERDEVELOPMENT. AND THAT'S WHERE WE'RE AT RIGHT NOW. IT IS NOT SUSTAINED. I MEAN, WE MOVE WATER LIKE THE ROMANS DID. IT'S JUST GRAVITY, MAN. OKAY. AND ASPHALT, AS WE CONTINUE TO DEVELOP. AND OVERDEVELOP DOESN'T MOVE WATER EFFECTIVELY OR EFFICIENTLY. SO TO MARK'S POINT, YOU HAVE A STORAGE UNIT RIGHT WHERE THE MAJORS WAS. YOU HAVE ONE ACROSS THE STREET BY URBAN. THEY WANT TO PUT ANOTHER ONE. DO YOU WANT TO CEMENT WHAT'S GOING ON? I MEAN, WHAT IS THERE TO DO IN PALM BAY. YOU KNOW, YOU KEEP APPROVING PLACES LIKE THIS, STORAGE UNITS LIKE THIS IN THREE STORIES. ARE YOU KIDDING ME? OKAY, YOU'RE CEMENTING THE FACT THAT WE'RE DEFINITELY NOTHING BUT A BEDSIDE COMMUNITY BY THIS CONTINUED BUILD UP. SAFETY, IN MY MIND, IS IS, YOU KNOW ON TOP OF WHAT YOU'RE DOING NOW, THERE'S A PROPOSAL WHAT YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU. NOW THERE'S A PROPOSAL COMING UP FOR TO 300. I'M SORRY. 560 UNITS ON THE FORMER MAJORS. YOU HAVE PEOPLE ON TOP OF ONE ANOTHER. THESE HOUSES ARE GOING TO BE. YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE RIGHT NOW WE HAVE LIKE, A THIRD OF AN ACRE HOUSES TOGETHER, MAYBE IN A QUARTER ACRE. YOU'RE LOOKING AT ABOUT AN EIGHTH OF AN ACRE. YOU HAVING ALL THESE HOUSES? A LOT OF THEM ARE 1200 SQUARE FEET. YOU'RE PUTTING PEOPLE ON TOP OF ONE ANOTHER. AND THIS IS JUST THE START. IT'S NOT THE START OF IT. IT CONTINUES TO HAPPEN. 60FT. I'M NOT UNDERSTANDING. THREE STORIES WOULD BE 60FT, BUT I THOUGHT I HEARD 40 OR 45. HOW HIGH IS PERMISSIBLE FOR YOU, FOR YOUR PEOPLE ON THE ZONING BOARD? WHAT DO YOU WANT? I TAKE IT THAT YOU ALL LIVE IN PALM BAY. WHAT DO YOU WANT? PALM BAY TO BE KNOWN FOR. THERE'S A LOT OF PEOPLE TRYING TO GET THE HELL OUT OF PALM BAY. I'M GOING TO ASK YOU TO WRAP UP YOUR COMMENTS. WELL, THE COMMENT IS, IS THAT IT'S NOT ONLY UNACCEPTABLE AND IT'S MORE THAN 30. THERE'S MORE THAN 2000 PEOPLE IN PALM BAY. AND WE'RE NOT LETTING THIS GO AWAY. AND BY THE WAY, WE'RE GOING TO ORGANIZE THE RED SHIRTS AND FIGHT THIS ALL WE CAN. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. WHO ELSE WOULD LIKE TO COME FORWARD? I'M GOING TO MAKE THIS SHORT AND SWEET. MY MY NAME IS KAREN SEARLE. I LIVE AT 628 EASTERN FOREST CIRCLE IN THE STONEBRIAR SUBDIVISION. I THINK I MAY BE THE ONLY PERSON BESIDES MY HUSBAND THAT ACTUALLY LIVES OFF OF KOGAN. THAT SEES THE TRAFFIC EVERY DAY. WHEN YOU SEE THE ELEMENTARY, MIDDLE SCHOOL, AND HIGH SCHOOL BUSSES COMING THROUGH, AS WELL AS ODYSSEY, WHICH ALSO IS ON ELDEN, JUST ALL WITHIN ABOUT A MILE AND A HALF OF EACH OTHER. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT PUTTING IN NOW THREE STORAGE UNITS, THREE MEGA STORAGE UNITS. WHEN I BOUGHT OUR OUR PROPERTY EIGHT AND A HALF YEARS AGO, WE WANTED TO MOVE INTO BAYSIDE LAKES BECAUSE WE THOUGHT IT WAS A BEAUTIFUL RESIDENTIAL AREA WITH THE LAKES AND EVERYTHING. I DIDN'T THINK I WAS MOVING TO STORAGE WORLD, AND THAT'S WHAT I FEEL LIKE WE'RE GOING TO BE AT IF WE BUILD ANOTHER ONE. [00:40:03] SO I WOULD LIKE NOT ONLY FOR TRAFFIC, BUT ALSO JUST FOR THE BEAUTY OF THAT AREA FOR YOU TO PLEASE RECONSIDER THIS PROPOSAL FOR ADDITIONAL STORAGE FACILITY BECAUSE IT'S NOT NEEDED. THANK YOU. THANK YOU MA'AM. YES, SIR. GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS VICTOR CAVALIERE AT 981 GARDEN BROOK IN SUMMERFIELD. BUT I'M HERE TO REPRESENT THE BUILDING THAT'S ADJACENT TO THIS LOT THAT'S GOING TO BE BUILT. THAT'S THE AMERICAN LEGION POST 394. WE ARE A CIVIC AND FRATERNAL ORGANIZATION, AND WE SEE THAT THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT MAY BE WORTHY TO SOME PEOPLE, BUT FOR WHAT WE SEE HERE, MY MEMBERSHIP SEES HERE, WE ARE ABOUT 1200 MEMBERS STRONG IN THIS FACILITY. THIS OFFERS ZERO OPPORTUNITY FOR OUR YOUTH AND OUR EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES FOR OUR RESIDENTS HERE. IT'S LIMITED. PERMANENT EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITIES JUST DON'T EXIST, IF ANYTHING. TWO, THREE. WE I'VE BEEN HERE SINCE 2001, WHEN I RETIRED FROM THE MILITARY, AND I'M NOT GOOD AT SPEAKING, SO I HAVE TO READ. NO. YOU'RE FINE. THE THE THE PROPOSED PROJECT IS ADJACENT TO US, AND IT IT IT DOES DOES NOT OFFER ANY BENEFITS TO OUR ORGANIZATION WHATSOEVER. ZERO. YOU KNOW, WE NEED LAND, SURELY, BUT WE DON'T NEED STORAGE. TORCH. IT DOES NOTHING FOR US. THE TRAFFIC SAFETY SITUATION HERE IS ABHORRENT. ON COGAN, BEATING RACING CARS, MOTORCYCLES, POPPING WHEELIES IN THERE. AND NOW THE E-BIKES RUNNING RAMPANT UP IN THERE. I HAVE A LOT OF SENIOR MEMBERS THERE AND THEIR SAFETY IS MY CONCERN. I DON'T THINK THAT WE NEED THIS INCREASE IN IN, IN TRAFFIC IN THIS AREA BECAUSE WE HAVE A NEW STORAGE FACILITY. WE'VE GOT TWO ALREADY AT THE ENTRANCE TO WHERE I LIVE AT DOWN IN SUMMERFIELD. AND I HEAR THERE'S ANOTHER ONE COMING UP NOT TOO FAR FROM HERE. SO HOW MUCH STORAGE IS ENOUGH STORAGE? IF YOU LOOK AT THE AT THE MERITS OF IT ALL, THEY'LL SAY YOU NEVER HAVE ENOUGH STORAGE. IF YOU LOOK AT MY ATTIC, YOU'LL SAY THAT TOO. YOU DON'T HAVE ENOUGH STORAGE. BUT THAT'S WHAT I DO. I THROW AWAY WHAT I NEED, I KEEP WHAT I NEED AND THROW AWAY WHAT I DON'T. SO THIS, THIS, THIS WHOLE THING HERE GOES TOWARDS THE OVERSATURATION OF STORAGE UNITS IN PALM BAY. WE'VE GOT A LOT OF THEM IN THIS CITY. I HAVE A STORAGE UNIT ON PATRICK AIR FORCE BASE WHERE I TAKE MY BOAT BECAUSE I CAN'T KEEP IT HERE IN PALM BAY BECAUSE THERE'S NO STORAGE FOR IT IN PALM BAY. BUT THERE'S NO STORAGE ANYWHERE IN PALM BAY UNLESS YOU GO TO MELBOURNE. WE DON'T NEED IT HERE. WE DON'T NEED A UNIT LIKE THIS. THE DENIAL PROCESS IN SEPTEMBER OF 2020 4TH DECEMBER 2024, THE CITY COUNCIL DECLINED IT FOR SIMILAR PURPOSES AND THIS SITE DUE TO CONFLICTS OF THE CITY OBJECTIVES. ALTHOUGH THE APPLICANT WAS SUBMITTED THIS REQUEST VIA A DIFFERENT PROCEDURAL ROUTE, THE FUNDAMENTAL POLICY CONCERNS REMAINED UNCHANGED. SO I SAY, OR I ASK, WHAT HAS CHANGED, THAT IT SHOULD BE RECONSIDERED. AND IT SHOULDN'T. IT SHOULD NOT. THIS THE TWO GENTLEMEN AND THE YOUNG AND THE LADY THAT SPOKE BEFORE ME SPOKE ABOUT SOME SERIOUS ISSUES WHICH I HAVE HERE. AND I WILL NOT REITERATE JUST FOR JUST FOR BREVITY. BUT THE BIG THING IS TOO, IS THE STORMWATER COMPLIANCE. THAT'S ANOTHER ISSUE IN THIS AREA. WE NEED TO LOOK AT ALL THIS AND JUST SAY TO OURSELVES, DO WE NEED MORE OF THIS TYPE OF STRUCTURE? WE DON'T. YOU KNOW, WE CAME HERE WITH CERTAIN PROMISES FROM THE CITY IT WAS GOING TO BE DESIGNED FOR US TO LIVE HERE AND GROW. BUT IT'S DETERIORATING FAST. THE ROADS AREN'T ALL THAT GREAT. THE MONEY'S NOT HERE. THEY'RE JUST GOING TO KEEP RAISING MY TAXES AND FORCE ME OUT OF HERE. THAT'S WHAT. THAT'S WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN. NOT BECAUSE OF YOU. GENTLEMEN AND LADIES, BUT BECAUSE OF THE WAY THE PLANNING IS NOT BEING CONSIDERATE OF THE POPULATION. SO THANK YOU. THANK YOU SIR. AND THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE. NEXT PERSON. MY NAME IS TOM WESTFALL. I LIVE RIGHT HERE. OKAY. THANK YOU. YES, SIR. AND IN THE LAST MONTH. WELL, COULD YOU GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS OR ELSE. THOMAS POWELL DOWN THERE, 1960 MUIRFIELD WAY. THANK YOU. SIR. I SENT YOU THE ONLY LETTER YOU GOT. OKAY. BUT IN THE LAST MONTH AND A HALF, THERE'S BEEN A LADY KILLED OUT THERE. THERE'S BEEN A WRECK RIGHT STRAIGHT IN FRONT OF OUR PLACE. AND YOU GOT A TURNAROUND TO GO TO THE LEGION A LITTLE BIT FURTHER DOWN. YOU GOT ENTRANCES INTO MCDONALD'S. YOU GOT THEM INTO 7-ELEVEN. IT'S LIKE BUMPER CARS. AND THESE PEOPLE DON'T GO SLOW. SO I'M NOT REALLY OPPOSED TO THE STORAGE UNIT, BUT IT'S GOT TO COME DOWN FROM 60. [00:45:08] THAT'S JUST WAY TOO TALL FOR A BAYSIDE LAKES. THERE'S NOT ANOTHER THREE STORY BUILDING IN THE PLACE. SO YOU NEED TO LOOK AT SOME OF THE COSMETICS AS WELL. BUT THAT'S ALL I GOT TO SAY. THANK YOU SIR. YES, MA'AM. MY NAME IS MARY LOU ROSS. 2131 BROOK DRIVE IN SUMMERFIELD. WE PURCHASED A LOT IN SUMMERFIELD ON THE GOLF COURSE IN OH FOUR BECAUSE IT WAS SUCH A WONDERFUL GOLF COURSE. SO WE INVESTED IN PALM BAY IN BAYSIDE LAKES COMING HERE, AND WE EXPECTED TO LIVE IN A VERY BEAUTIFUL NEIGHBORHOOD. WELL, AT OUR GATE WE HAVE THE FIRST STORAGE UNITS AND THEY ARE ALREADY LOOKING DULL, DIRTY, KIND OF RUN DOWN A LITTLE BIT. AND OF COURSE, NOW WITH THE NEW DEVELOPMENT ON THE LEFT SIDE THERE BY DOLLAR TREE AND ALL THAT THAT THEY'RE PUTTING IN, THEY'RE CUTTING TREES AWAY SO WE CAN SEE THE OTHER SECTION OF THE, THE FIRST PART OF THE STORAGE UNIT. I DIDN'T MOVE IN BAYSIDE LAKES THINKING I'D BE LIVING WITH STORAGE UNITS. WE HAVE ALREADY LOST PROPERTY VALUE BECAUSE OF THE GOLF COURSE. I UNDERSTAND IT'S A PRIVATE OWNER THERE. WE ALL HAVE RIGHTS. BUT I ALSO WANT TO ON THIS. I DON'T WANT TO SEE ANOTHER STORAGE UNIT. AND I WRITE BY THE GOVERNMENT BUILDING. WHEN PEOPLE COME AND THEY SAY, WELL, I'LL NEVER LIVE HERE. IT'S ALL STORAGE UNITS. BUT IS ANYBODY CONSIDERED HOW DANGEROUS IT IS TO TURN OFF A BAYSIDE LAKES INTO THAT RED ENTRY THAT'S BETWEEN THE GAS STATION AND A LITTLE ROW OF BUILDINGS THERE. BIG CHUCKHOLES. BUT HOW ARE THEY GOING TO TURN LEFT? RIGHT FROM THE INTERSECTION? THERE'S NO WAY IT'S BAD ENOUGH IF YOU COME ON DOWN TO THE NEXT ROAD DOWN BY THAT FLORIDA AID TO ANIMALS TO GET ACROSS THERE, IT'S JUST IMPOSSIBLE. AND YOU ALSO REALIZE THERE ARE TEENAGERS AT THE BAY STATE HIGH SCHOOL THAT COMES THEY I GUESS THEY NEED TO GET OUT OF SCHOOL AND GET AWAY FROM IT. SPEED DOWN BAYSIDE LAKES ALL THE WAY, YOU KNOW, BACK TO EMERSON. AND I KNOW THE STORAGE UNIT ISN'T GOING TO HAVE TRAFFIC EVERY HOUR, BUT THERE'S NO WAY A TRUCK CAN TURN INTO THERE. YOU'RE GOING TO START HAVING AS MANY ACCIDENTS AS WE HAVE ON THE CURVE THERE IN FRONT OF SUMMERFIELD. AND JUST WANT TO POINT OUT TO I THINK EVERY UNIT RIGHT NOW IN BAYSIDE LAKES HAS A GARAGE. AND ALSO WE'VE BEEN HEARING JUST FOR A LITTLE BIT OF HUMOR, PEOPLE UP NORTH PART OF THE COUNTY SAY, YEAH, BAYSIDE LAKES HAS STORAGE UNITS, SO ALL THE PEOPLE FROM VIERA CAN PUT THEIR JUNK DOWN THERE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU MA'AM. IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN OPPOSITION TO THIS? YES, MA'AM. YES, MA'AM. GRAB ONE NOW OR YOU CAN GRAB IT AFTERWARD. THAT'S FINE. JUST SAY YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS INTO THE MIC VERY CLEARLY. GREAT. MY NAME IS LAURA HIRSCH HARRIS, AND I ALSO LIVE NEAR TOM UP IN THE IN THE BAYSIDE LAKES PLAYERS CLUB DEVELOPMENT. SO PRETTY MUCH PARALLEL TO THE PROPOSED UNIT. AND I ADD MY VOICE TO THOSE WHO HAVE SPOKEN BEFORE ME. I THINK MY BIGGEST CONCERNS THAT'S 60 FOOT HEIGHT, DON'T I THINK ESTHETICALLY IT WOULDN'T WORK. NUMBER TWO, I'M CONCERNED ABOUT HURRICANES LIKE THAT. THAT'S AN IMPACT. THAT'S A REALLY TALL BUILDING. THE THE EXTRA SURFACE AREA THAT WILL COLLECT WATER. I THINK SOMEBODY MENTIONED THE CANALS AND THE WATER RUNOFF. AND ALSO WHAT I HEAR FROM PEOPLE IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD. IS THAT WHAT WE WOULD LIKE MORE OF. SO LIKE MORE INSTEAD OF STORAGE UNITS, MORE PARKS, MORE BUSINESSES THAT PROVIDE EMPLOYMENT, MORE BUSINESSES THAT EMPLOY PLACES TO PLAY, COMMUNITY CENTER, WE HAVE TO I MEAN, I'M SPEAKING MOSTLY FOR MYSELF RIGHT NOW AND SOME OTHER PEOPLE I KNOW OF, BUT WE HAVE TO TRAVEL FAR OUT OF PALM BAY TO ACTUALLY DO THINGS IN OUR COMMUNITY. AND WE WOULD LIKE, WOULD LOVE SOMETHING LIKE THAT. THAT ADDS VALUE MORE VALUE THAN A STORAGE UNIT. I DO APPRECIATE THAT WITH THE STORAGE UNIT YOU'D HAVE LESS TRAFFIC. BUT AND I ALSO HEAR AND I KNOW THE TRAFFIC IS HORRENDOUS AND IT WOULD BE A MAJOR LIABILITY. AND I COULD SEE THAT TRAFFIC AND ACCIDENTS COULD HAPPEN THERE PRETTY EASILY WITH THIS PROPOSAL. [00:50:02] SO I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THE HEIGHT LOWERED AND A CONSIDERATION FOR A DIFFERENT USE OF THIS PROPERTY. THANK YOU. YES, MA'AM. IF YOU LOOK AT THE PODIUM THERE AND GRAB ONE OF THOSE LITTLE CARDS TO FILL OUT AT THE PODIUM. OH, RIGHT HERE. THAT'S PERFECT. THANK YOU. YES, MA'AM. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YES, MA'AM. HI, MY NAME IS PATRICIA MASHEGO. I LIVE IN AMBERWOOD, WELLINGTON, 692 CARNIVAL TRAYMORE. THANK YOU MA'AM. I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT MIKE ERDMAN, HE HAS AN AGENDA AND WE HAD THAT. NO MORE STORAGE UNITS COULD BE BUILT IN OUR WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT AT THE POA. AND HE CHANGED THE DOCUMENTS THAT WE COULD HAVE MORE STORAGE UNITS BUILT. AND HERE HE IS TRYING TO BUILD MORE STORAGE UNITS, WHICH I DON'T THINK IS FAIR. HE'S GOT AN AGENDA HERE. AND I JUST DON'T THINK IT'S FAIR THAT HE'S. HE'S JUST COMING IN DOING WHATEVER HE THINKS HE CAN DO. AND I JUST YOU KNOW, WHATEVER. MIKE. MIKE ERDMAN WANTS TO DO. HE JUST THINKS HE HAS THE RIGHT TO DO. I JUST DON'T THINK IT'S RIGHT. I THINK WE HAVE TO STOP THEM. THAT'S IT. THANK YOU. MA'AM. THAT'S IT. IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO COME FORWARD AND SPEAK IN OPPOSITION? OKAY. HEARING NONE, WE'LL CLOSE THE FLOOR TO PUBLIC COMMENT AND INVITE THE APPLICANT FORWARD. IF THEY WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TO ANY OF THE CONCERNS BROUGHT FORWARD BY THE PUBLIC. WROTE DOWN THE NOTES. TRY TO KEEP AS MANY AS I CAN. CERTAINLY. MR.. MR.. MR.. URBAN IS NOT INVOLVED IN THIS PROJECT CERTAINLY HAS NO CONNECTION WITH THIS PROJECT. WITH REGARDS TO THE PROJECT ITSELF, AS FAR AS AS FAR AS THE SELF STORAGE, EVERYTHING, LIKE ANY REAL ESTATE IS MARKET DRIVEN. CERTAINLY THIS PROPERTY WAS UNDEVELOPED FOR A PERIOD OF TIME. THE THE MARKET CERTAINLY INDICATES THAT THERE'S A MARKET FOR SELF STORAGE FACILITIES. IF THERE'S SOMETHING ELSE I'M SURE BE BUILT. BUT CLEARLY THE PEOPLE WHO ARE PUTTING THIS TOGETHER HAVE DONE MARKET STUDIES. THEY'VE DETERMINED THERE'S A MARKET FOR FOR SELF-STORAGE. THE THE TRAFFIC THERE'S QUITE A BIT OF PEOPLE CONCERNED OVER TRAFFIC IS INDICATED BEFORE. I'LL MAKE SURE IT'S CLEAR THE TRAFFIC COUNT FOR STORAGE FACILITY IS 80 EVERY 80 TRIPS PER DAY, LESS THAN WHAT WOULD BE PERMITTED. RIGHT NOW IT'S 80 TRIPS PER DAY. ALSO, THERE'S A CONCERN SAYING THERE'S ENOUGH STORAGE FACILITIES IN OTHER AREAS. PEOPLE HAVE TO DRIVE TO THAT. PEOPLE INDICATE THERE'S A CONCERN OVER TRAFFIC THAT PUTS MORE TRAFFIC ON THE ROAD. IF THERE'S A NEED HERE, PEOPLE STAY WITHIN THE AREAS. THERE'S LESS TRAFFIC ON THE ROAD. KOGAN, WHICH IS THAT AREA THAT PEOPLE ARE CONCERNED WITH AS FAR AS THE RUNOFF WATER RUNOFF, THE FOOTPRINT FOR THIS PROPERTY, FOR THIS PROJECT WILL BE THE SAME FOOTPRINT THAT IS ALLOWED RIGHT NOW. SO IT'S NOT A SITUATION WHERE YOU'RE ADDING MORE IMPERVIOUS SURFACE. IT'S THE SAME FOOTPRINT THAT YOU CAN BUILD RIGHT NOW. SO YOU'RE NOT ADDING MORE IMPERVIOUS SURFACE TO INCREASE RUNOFF. IT'S THE SAME THING THAT'S CURRENTLY ALLOWED RIGHT NOW. I WANT TO CLEAR SOME CONFUSION. THE ALLOWED HEIGHT ALLOWABLE HEIGHT IS 60FT. THIS PROJECT IS ONLY 45FT. IT IS NOT 60FT, AS SOME PEOPLE SEEM TO INDICATE. CERTAINLY. I THINK THIS MEETS CODE REQUIREMENTS. THE CITY HAS ESTABLISHED THE CODES. WE BELIEVE THAT WE MEET CODE REQUIREMENTS. AND AGAIN, I'D RECOMMEND OR REQUEST YOU RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO CITY COUNCIL. THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON. WORKING WITH THE TEAM CIVIL ENGINEER. LOOKING AT THE COMMENTS, I THINK EVERYBODY IS IN FAVOR OF THIS. THERE'S A LOT OF FAKE NEWS GOING ON. BOTTOM LINE IS TO MAKE IT SIMPLE. WE ARE TAKING CARE OF EVERY CONCERN, AND WE'RE ONLY LOOKING FOR THE USE. THAT'S THE ONLY THING WE'RE TWO THINGS REGARDING. I WILL POINT OUT THIS AREA HERE. ON THE SOUTH. THAT'S WHAT IT'S IN RIGHT NOW WITH MELBOURNE. THEY HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE CITY OF PALM BAY, NOT WITH THE CITY OF PALM BAY, BUT WITH BAYSIDE. THEY ARE NOT MAINTAINING THE DRAINAGE SYSTEM FROM 2000. THAT PARCEL IS SUPPOSED TO BE CLEAR. SUPPOSED TO BE A RETENTION AREA. AND BY THEY'RE PRESSING, TRYING TO GET BASICALLY TO TAKE CARE OF THOSE AREAS WHICH ARE PART OF THE MASTER ASSOCIATION. SO THIS PROJECT WILL TAKE CARE OF THAT. SO THE DRAINAGE PART HAS BEEN APPROVED SINCE 2008 FOR BASICALLY THE AMOUNT OF PAVEMENT, THE AMOUNT OF BUILDINGS THAT HAS BEEN APPROVED SINCE 2009, THE BUILDINGS EVERYTHING THAT WAS FOR THE SITE, WATER, SEWER, GREEN AREAS SET AND EVERYTHING HAS BEEN APPROVED IN 2009. [00:55:08] NINE. THE IRONY OF THE WHOLE THING. MIKE MCCABE. HE WAS THE CITY ENGINEER AT THAT TIME. SO WHEN WE BASICALLY LOOK AT THE PROJECT, WE'RE LOOKING AT, OKAY THIS PROJECT, WHEN THEY WERE THEY WERE SUPPOSED TO DO ALL THESE THINGS AND NEVER HAPPENED. SO THAT PART WILL BE ACTUALLY A BENEFIT FROM THAT FROM THAT POINT OF VIEW. SO THE DRAINAGE PART, THE BUILDINGS RIGHT NOW. THE PROJECT DOESN'T NEED ANY OTHER APPROVALS. IF WE WERE GOING TO DO OFFICE ANY RETAILS, IT BASICALLY GOES STRAIGHT TO THE SITE PLAN. THE CORRECTION IS THAT THE FOR SOME REASON, THE THE TABLES WERE KIND OF ALL OVER THE PLACE, BUT THE MASTER ASSOCIATION ALLOWED THE 60 FOOT. SO IF WE WERE GOING TO DO AN OFFICE BUILDING, WE CAN GO FOR THE 60. WE DON'T HAVE ANY. WE DON'T NEED ANY PUBLIC MEETINGS. NO, NOTHING. IT JUST BUILDS THE OFFICE. NOW TO GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT HISTORY. I'M GOING TO TRY TO BE BRIEF BECAUSE IT'S BEEN FOUR YEARS OF PERMITS ON THIS BACK AND FORTH. THE PROJECT, EVERYTHING BECAME TECHNICALLY VESTED IN 2009. ORIGINALLY IT WAS LIKE THOSE SEVERAL BUILDINGS, LIKE THERE WERE THREE THAT THEY ARE BUILDING TO CONSTRUCTED ONE PAD. TWO OTHER PADS IN THE FRONT THERE WERE THREE WERE DIRECTLY ACROSS COGGINS. SO THE ONE THAT IS VERY DIFFICULT FOR SINCE 2009 IS A LITTLE SQUARE IN THE BACK, YOU KNOW, THE REAR OF THE AREA WHICH HAS BEEN APPROVED FOR OFFICES, HAS BEEN CONSIDERED FOR RETAIL, HAS BEEN ON THE MARKETING. THE THE MAIN COMPLAINT OR THE MAIN ISSUE FROM LAST YEAR IS THAT WE KNOW FOR SURE THERE'S A LOT OF YOU KNOW, SELF STORAGE PROJECTS. YOU CAN TELL MOST LIKELY IF THERE ARE ONE STORY, TWO STORY. WHATEVER. THERE'S SOME THAT. THEY'RE NOT SELF STORAGE COMPANIES. THIS DEVELOPER IS A SELF STORAGE COMPANY. SO THEY WILL THEY HAVE A PRODUCT, YOU KNOW, PROTOTYPE BUILDING THAT WILL FIT IN AND IT DOESN'T HAVE TO GO FOR SPECULATION. SO WITH THAT SAID RIGHT NOW THE PROJECT WENT TO ADDED THE RETAIL IN THE FRONT AND THE OWNER DECIDED TO OKAY, LET'S GET VESTED. LET'S SHOW THE CITY THAT WE ARE GOING TO DO MULTI-USE. WE HAVE THE OFFICE, WE HAVE THE RETAIL NOW. NOW WE HAVE SELF STORAGE BETWEEN THOSE THREE IN THE SAME LOT, BASICALLY ONE OF THE OTHER ONE. AND THIS IS THE BEST PART. 2009 WAS APPROVED FOR TECHNICALLY 2000 VEHICLES PER DAY. TRAFFIC THAT'S APPROVED. THEY DON'T NEED ANY PERMITS WITH THE RETAIL AND KEEPING EVERYTHING OFFICE. AGAIN, NO PERMITS NEEDED. THAT'S IT GOES TO 2500 VEHICLES PER DAY, REPLACING THE THREE BUILDINGS IN THE BACK WITH THE SELF STORAGE. INSTEAD OF 2500 VEHICLES PER DAY, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE 1500. SO YOU'RE GOING TO BE DROPPING. BUT THE OTHER OPTION IS THAT 2500. I'M GOING TO HAVE YOU ADDRESS THE BOARD, THE 2400 2500 THAT ARE APPROVED. SO THAT'S THE OVERALL VIEW FOR TRAFFIC PART MARKETING. THOSE FIVE PARTS HAVE BEEN ON THE MARKET SINCE 2009, 2010 WITH THE DOWNTURN. THOSE TWO BUILDINGS IN THE CENTER ARE EXISTING. REMAIN BASICALLY A SHELL SALE SUPPOSED TO HAVE BEEN SEALED. AND WE, THE OWNER, CAME TO FIND OUT IN 2020 THAT TECHNICALLY THE BUILDING WASN'T ALLOWED TO BE SEALED, BUT THEY WERE BEING CHARGED TAXES FOR TEN YEARS. THAT'S THE PART THAT I KNOW BECAUSE I DO THE NUMBERS. SO THE PROPERTY HAS BEEN CHARGED $140,000 FROM 2010 TO 2020. EXTRA FOR TWO VACANT, YOU KNOW, WITHOUT THE SEAL. SO THAT SHOWS BASICALLY LIKE A PROPERTY THAT HAS BEEN AVAILABLE, YOU KNOW, MARKETED FOR MANY SOURCES. THE RETAIL RATE NOW IS 12,000FT². ANYBODY CAN GO IN AND TRY TO LEASE. WE'RE STILL HAVING PROBLEMS TO FIND THE LEASE. WE HAVE ONLY TWO UNITS FROM THE SIX UNITS, AND WE HAVE BEEN AT THIS OVER TWO YEARS. AND IT'S A BIG INVESTMENT. THE SELF STORAGE IS LESS RISK BECAUSE YOU ONLY HAVE ONE INVESTOR. [01:00:05] NOW FOR THE BENEFITS, SIR, I'M GOING TO ASK YOU TO WRAP IT UP. YEAH. NO. AND FOR THE BENEFIT, THE COMPARISON IS LIKE A $4 MILLION BUILDING COMPARED TO THE ONE THAT WILL BE BUILT. THAT IS 15 MILLION. BUT BASICALLY THAT'S THE OVERALL VIEW THAT THE SITE HAS BEEN TRIED FOR. EVERYTHING IS COMPATIBLE. THE BUILDING IS THE REAR PART IS ONLY THREE STORY 45 FOOT, AND IT'S NEXT TO A 110 WIDE TRANSMISSION POWER LINES. WHO IS GOING TO WANT TO BE NEXT TO IT? I'M GLAD THE SELF-STORAGE WANTS TO BE NEXT TO IT, BUT THEY WILL CORRECT THE DRAINAGE, WHICH IS IN NONCOMPLIANCE ON THE SOUTH. YEAH. THANK YOU. THANK YOU SIR. ALL RIGHT. WITH THAT, WE'RE GOING TO BRING THIS BACK TO THE BOARD. IS THERE? DO I NEED TO OPEN IT BACK UP TO ALLOW THE BOARD TO ASK THE APPLICANT ANYTHING AFTER THE END OF THAT CONVERSATION? OKAY. SO WE'RE GOING TO BRING IT BACK TO THE BOARD. DO I HAVE A MOTION? EITHER WAY, SO THAT WE CAN BEGIN DISCUSSION. MR. CHAIR? YES, MR. FILIBERTO. I MOVE THAT THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD RECOMMEND DENIAL OF THE KOGAN PLAZA SELF-STORAGE FACILITY AT BAYSIDE LAKES. PDP CASE NUMBER PD 25 0001, BECAUSE IT FAILS TO MEET THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA FROM THE CITY OF PALM BEACH LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, SECTION 172.03, SUBSECTION EXCUSE ME, SECTION H, SPECIFICALLY SUBSECTION TWO COMPATIBILITY WITHIN THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AND RELATIONSHIP OF THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS. AND THEN NUMBER TEN, THE BENEFITS WITHIN THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AND TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC TO JUSTIFY THE REQUEST. DEPARTURE FROM STANDARD LAND USE REQUIREMENTS INHERENT IN A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CLASSIFICATION. ALL RIGHT, I HAVE A MOTION. DO I HAVE A SECOND? SECOND. SECOND. WHOA! MR. WARNER, I GOT YOU DOWN AS THE SECOND. I BELIEVE I HEARD YOU FIRST. ALL RIGHT, NOW WE CAN GO FORWARD WITH COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD. ANYBODY WHO WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT. SURE, MR. CHAIR. YES, SIR. GO AHEAD. SO BASICALLY, WHEN PEOPLE MOVE INTO A PUD OR HOA THEY THEY LIKE IT. I PERSONALLY DON'T, BUT THEY LIKE IT BECAUSE NOTHING'S GOING TO CHANGE AROUND IN THE AREA. IF YOU MOVE INTO HOA, EVERYTHING'S BE SET, NOT SET. AND STAY THAT WAY FOR THE REMAINDER OF THE TIME YOU'RE GOING TO LIVE THERE. HOWEVER, WHAT SEEMS TO BE HAPPENING HERE AND, AND THE RESIDENTS WORDS IS A HOSTILE TAKEOVER. HOWEVER, WITH THAT BEING SAID A PUD SHOULD REMAIN THE SAME AS WHEN THE POD WAS GENERATED TO BEGIN WITH. THAT IS THE REASON FOR PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT. THAT'S THE REASON FOR HOSE. IF THERE IS A CHANGE THAT'S NEEDED, IT'LL GO THROUGH AN ART COMMITTEE WITH RESIDENTS VOTING ON THAT. SO THAT IS MY DECISION, MY RECOMMENDATION HERE TO THIS BOARD AND TO COUNCIL. THANK YOU, MR. FILIBERTO. IS ANYBODY ELSE WHO WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT? SURE. IT'S JUST CAR WASH, STORAGE UNIT, SMOKE SHOP, CAR WASH, STORAGE UNIT, CANNABIS SHOP, CAR WASH, STORAGE UNIT, VAPE SHOP, GAS STATION. PALM BAY IS MORE THAN AN UGLY CASH GRAB. THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY. ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD? YEAH, I HAVE A COUPLE. OKAY. SO FIRST I FEEL AS THOUGH THAT ONCE AGAIN, WE'RE DIMINISHING THE INTEGRITY OF THE BAYSIDE LAKES BY DOING ANOTHER STORAGE UNIT OR THE STEP OF A PROJECT. I ALSO WANT TO ADD IN THAT WITH ONE 7172, SUBSECTION 172 .030 ALSO WANTED TO ADD IN NUMBERS 11 AND NUMBER 13. BECAUSE IT'S, IT'S IT'S WE'VE WE'VE DONE SOME CHANGES WITH THE, WITH THE, WITH THE COMP PLAN AS WELL AS OUR CITY ORDINANCE. AND BASED ON NUMBER 13, WE ARE THIS THIS WILL NOT BE CONSISTENT WITH THE WITH THE COMP PLAN OR THE COMP PLAN GOALS. THE CITY ORDINANCE WAS ALSO CHANGED. AND IF I, IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY, IT ALSO THE ORDINANCE ALSO PASSED WHERE WE WERE GOING TO EITHER RESTRICT OR NUMBER THE AMOUNT OF STORAGE UNITS THAT WILL BE SELF STORAGE UNITS THAT WILL BE IN THE CITY OF PALM BAY. SO BECAUSE OF THOSE REASONS, THAT'S WHY I'M ALSO SUPPORTING THE THE 01111 MORE. THE GENTLEMAN DID MENTION SOMETHING THAT THAT KIND OF THAT KIND OF MADE SENSE. THIS IS THIS IS A PROJECT WHEN WE BRING PROJECTS INTO THE CITY OF PALM BAY, [01:05:02] BAYSIDE, BAYSIDE LAKES AND EVEN SOME OF THE NEWER DEVELOPMENTS. I FEEL AS THOUGH THAT IT HAS TO BENEFIT THE, THE RESIDENTS AT SOMEHOW, SOME WAY AND HAVING OFFICE BUILDINGS OR OPEN UP SOMETHING WHERE IT'S GOING TO BE PROFESSIONALS THAT CAN ACTUALLY COME OUT AND WORK AND, AND PROVIDE A SERVICE TO THE, TO THE COMMUNITIES. I THINK THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT. SO SO AGAIN, FOR THOSE REASONS, I THAT'S THE REASON WHY I'M GOING TO SUPPORT THE DENIAL. OKAY. ANYBODY ELSE FROM THE BOARD WISH TO SPEAK? OKAY. I WILL ALSO NOT BE SUPPORTING THE PROJECT. I BELIEVE THAT THE CITY COUNCIL HAS MADE ITS INTENTIONS CLEAR ON THIS. I DON'T REALLY SEE ANYTHING DIFFERENT COMING FORWARD THAT WOULD DIFFERENTIATE IT FROM THE PREVIOUS DENIAL. AND I ACTUALLY DO AGREE ON SUBSECTION TWO WITH THE COMPATIBILITY WITH THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AND THE RELATIONSHIP WITH THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS. I AGREE WITH MR. FILIBERTO. WHEN YOU ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT AND THEN YOU SAY TAKE POSSESSION OF THAT PROPERTY ALONG WITH THE AGREEMENT, YOU SHOULD HONOR THE AGREEMENT THAT IS IN PLACE WITH THE RESIDENTS WHO'VE BOUGHT THE PROPERTY IN THE AREA. THEREFORE, I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND CALL FOR THE VOTE. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION FOR DENIAL SIGNAL BY SAYING I, I. ALL OPPOSED? ALL RIGHT. IS UNANIMOUSLY IN FAVOR OF DENIAL WITH THAT. WITH THAT IN NO OTHER BUSINESS ON OUR AGENDA, I DECLARE THIS MEETING CLOSED. HAVE A GOOD EVENING. THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK. * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.