Sep 02, 2026 Planning and Zoning Board

[00:00:02]

ALL RIGHT. GOOD. GOOD EVENING. WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD MEETING FOR THE REGULAR MEETING FOR

[CALL TO ORDER:]

IF I CAN GET EVERYONE TO STAND. I'LL LEAD US IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.

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.

ALL RIGHT, MISS SANDRA, IF WE CAN GET A ROLL CALL, PLEASE. YES.

MR. WARNER. PRESENT, MR. CATALANO PRESENT. MR. FILIBERTO HAS ASKED TO BE EXCUSED. MR. HIGGINS HAS ASKED TO BE EXCUSED.

MR. MCNALLY. HERE, MR. NORRIS HERE. MISS BROCOLINI HAS ASKED TO BE EXCUSED, AND OUR CHIEF DEPUTY CITY ATTORNEY TANYA EARLY, IS PRESENT. WE DO HAVE A QUORUM. THANK YOU, MISS POWELL.

OH, YOU SAID WE HAD. NO, WE DIDN'T HAVE ANY MINUTES. SO WE CAN MOVE ON OVER TO THAT ONE. WELL.

ALL RIGHT. FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE APPLICANTS AND AND THE AUDIENCE, THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD IS AN ADVISORY BOARD COMPRISED OF UNPAID VOLUNTEERS.

[ANNOUNCEMENTS:]

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

THE APPLICANT OF OR THEIR REPRESENTATIVE WOULD 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.

WILL BE. I'M SORRY. THE FLOOR WILL THEN BE OPEN FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS.

WE WILL FIRST HEAR THOSE WISHING TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THE APPLICATION, AND THEN THOSE IN OPPOSITION OF THE APPLICATION.

FOR ALL PROCEEDINGS, ALL APPLICANTS AND SPEAKERS FROM THE AUDIENCE MUST SIGN SPEAKER OATH CARDS LOCATED AT THE SIDE OF THE ROOM.

AND THERE'S ALSO SOME CARDS HERE IN THE FRONT.

JUST NEED YOU TO JUST SIGN IT, PUT YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS, AND THEN JUST PLACE IT IN THE BOX. I KNOW I SHOULD HAVE NEVER DID ALL THAT BECAUSE I LOST WHILE I WAS READING. I'M JUST KIDDING. PLEASE PRINT LEGIBLY.

SPEAK DIRECTLY INTO THE MICROPHONE AND STATE YOUR NAME, ADDRESS, AND COMMENTS FOR THE RECORD. AS A COURTESY, I ASK THAT IF THERE IS A GROUP OF PEOPLE FROM A NEIGHBORHOOD WHO MAY HAVE SIMILAR COMMENTS, YOU. 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 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 AND ADHERING TO THE MEETING GUIDELINES.

AT THIS TIME, I'LL ASK IF YOU HAVE CELL PHONES, IF YOU DON'T MIND JUST SILENCING YOUR CELL PHONES SO THAT WE CAN TRY TO EXPEDITE THE MEETING AS AS QUICK AS WE POSSIBLY CAN. THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT. OUR FIRST CASE WILL BE. OH, BOARD MEMBERS, HAVE YOU HAVE ANY EX PARTE

[NEW BUSINESS:]

OUR FIRST CASE WOULD BE V 260005. AND I WILL WOULD DIRECT THIS TO STAFF.

THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. THE CASE I'M PRESENTING IS V26-05.

THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A FIVE FOOT REDUCTION OF THE REAR ACCESSORY STRUCTURE.

SETBACK OF TEN FEET. WHICH IS TEN FEET IS REQUIRED.

I'M SORRY. AND HE'S REQUESTING A FIVE FOOT REDUCTION, WHICH IS EQUIVALENT TO A 50% RELIEF FROM THE REQUIRED CODE.

SUBJECT PROPERTY IS OWNED BY MR. AND MRS. RAMON BUSTAMANTE AT 1402 WILDER ROAD, SOUTHEAST.

THE SUBJECT PARCEL, AS YOU CAN SEE, IS ON A CORNER LOT.

UNLIKE THE OTHER PROPERTIES ON WYOMING DRIVE, THIS PROPERTY HAS ITS FRONT YARD ALONG WILDER ROAD SOUTHEAST. SO THE REAR PART OF THEIR PROPERTY IS ACTUALLY THEIR NEIGHBOR'S SIDE YARD.

[00:05:03]

THE SITE WAS POSTED WITH THE NOTICE AS WELL AS MAIL NOTICES WERE SENT OUT BY THE CITY AND IT WAS ADVERTISED BY THE CITY AS WELL.

THE CODE OF ORDINANCES REQUIRES THE ZONING BOARD TO REVIEW APPLICATIONS SUCH AS THIS AND MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL.

THIS SLIDE SHOWS THE APPLICANT SITE PLAN FOR THE PROPOSED POOL AND THE POOL DECK.

WHICH IS HERE. CAN YOU POINT TO. CHRISTINA'S GOING TO POINT THAT OUT IF YOU CAN'T SEE MY MOUSE.

RIGHT UP THERE? YES. SO THE POOL AND POOL DECK IS PROPOSED ALONG THE REAR OF THE EXISTING RESIDENCE, AND WOULD EXTEND INTO THE REQUIRED REAR YARD ACCESSORY STRUCTURE BY TEN FEET, AS SHOWN ON THE SITE PLAN.

THE PROPOSED STRUCTURE WOULD NOT MEET THE MINIMUM REAR YARD REQUIRED SETBACK.

THE CODE ESTABLISHES SETBACK STANDARDS TO MAINTAIN ADEQUATE SEPARATION BETWEEN STRUCTURES, PRESERVE THE CHARACTER AND SPACING OF RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS, AND TO ACCOMMODATE DRAINAGE AND UTILITY EASEMENTS WHERE THEY'RE NEEDED.

STAFF USED THE APPROPRIATE REVIEW CRITERIA FROM THE CODE FOR VARIANCE REQUESTS, WHICH LOOKS AT WHETHER OR NOT THERE WERE SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES.

IF WE'RE ACTUALLY HAVING A LITERAL INTERPRETATION OF THE CODE THAT'S PREVENTING THE APPLICANT FROM USING THEIR PROPERTY.

MINIMUM NECESSARY FOR THE PROPERTY USE, MEANING THEY ARE ASKING FOR THE SMALLEST VARIANCE FROM THE REQUIRED CODE TO ACHIEVE WHAT THEY WANT.

WE NEED TO MAKE SURE WE'RE NOT GIVING SPECIAL PRIVILEGES.

MAKE SURE THAT THE THE REQUEST, IF APPROVED, IS IN HARMONY WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, INTENT, SAFETY AND PUBLIC WELFARE, AND IMPACT ON SURROUNDING PROPERTIES.

AS YOU KNOW, THE FIRST ITEM IS SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES.

AND IN REVIEWING THE STAFF REPORT, I'M SURE YOU SAW THE APPLICANT'S RESPONSE.

HOWEVER, STAFF FINDS THAT THERE ARE NO UNIQUE PHYSICAL CONDITIONS OR SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES THAT EXIST THAT ARE PARTICULAR TO THIS PROPERTY.

THE CONDITIONS CITED BY THE APPLICANT ARE NOT UNIQUE AND ARE GENERALLY SHARED BY OTHER RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES WITHIN THEIR AREA.

STAFF FINDS THAT THE STRICT APPLICATION OF THE REQUIRED SETBACK DOES NOT CREATE AN UNNECESSARY HARDSHIP.

THE PROPERTY CAN CONTINUE TO BE REASONABLY USED AS A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE WITHOUT THE REQUESTED VARIANCE.

I'VE ALREADY ENUMERATED STAFF'S FINDINGS WITH THE INFORMATION WE'VE PROVIDED TODAY, AS WELL AS THE APPLICATION AND STAFF REPORT IN YOUR PACKET. STAFF IS RECOMMENDING DENIAL OF THE VARIANCE REQUEST.

WE'RE ASKING THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD TONIGHT TO PROVIDE CITY COUNCIL WITH A RECOMMENDATION, AND THE NEXT STEP WOULD BE THE BOARD'S RECOMMENDATION GOING TO CITY COUNCIL FOR A PUBLIC HEARING.

STAFF IS PROVIDING SOME PROPOSED LANGUAGE FOR A BOARD MOTION FOR EITHER APPROVAL OR DENIAL.

JUST REMEMBER THAT A BASIS OF DENIAL MUST BE BASED ON SPECIFIC CRITERIA NOT BEING MET.

WITH THAT, I'LL TAKE ANY QUESTIONS TO THE BOARD.

HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? NO. ALL RIGHT. IF I CAN GET THE APPLICANT TO COME FORWARD, PLEASE STATE YOUR CASE. FIRST, YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS.

YES. MY NAME IS RAMON BUSTAMANTE. I'VE BEEN A PALM BAY RESIDENTS FOR 25 YEARS, SINCE 2001.

AND THIS IS MY FAMILY, MY WIFE, MY DAUGHTER AND MY GRANDBABY.

THIS SPECIFIC REQUEST FOR THE VARIANCE. IT'S A HOME I PURCHASED BRAND NEW IN JUNE OF 2025 FROM BALTER HOMES.

AT THAT SPECIFIC TIME, IT WAS ONLY ME AND MY WIFE WERE GOING TO ENJOY WHAT WE WANT TO CALL OUR RETIREMENT HOME.

AND SHE WENT A LITTLE AFTER WE PURCHASED THE HOME, SHE FELL INTO SOME HEALTH ISSUES, WHICH AT THAT POINT MY DAUGHTER AND MY GRANDBABY DECIDED TO COME HELP US WITH HER HEALTH ISSUES AND HELP US GET ALONG, WHICH GOD HAS PROVIDED BETTER HEALTH FOR HER.

AND NOW SHE'S IN, YOU KNOW, VERY GOOD SHAPE. SO WITH THAT BEING SAID, MY DAUGHTER HAS TO START TO HAS TO DECIDE TO STAY WITH US,

[00:10:05]

SO AT THAT POINT, WHAT A BETTER WAY TO ENJOY OUR GRANDKIDS AND OUR DAUGHTER THAN, YOU KNOW, WITH A, A SWIMMING POOL THAT WE CAN ENJOY FOR YEARS TO COME.

AND MY GRANDKIDS CAN ENJOY IT LATER. SO I STARTED DOING RESEARCH.

THE ACTUAL POOL BUILT IS BEING DONE BY ME. I'M DOING THE POOL MYSELF.

OWNER, BUILDER. I DON'T HAVE A BUILDER AT ALL.

SO DRAWINGS HAVE BEEN ALREADY MADE. EVERYTHING HAS BEEN SUBMITTED TO THE CITY FOR APPROVAL.

BUT THEN, YOU KNOW, I FOUND OUT THAT I NEEDED THIS VARIANCE.

SO WITH THAT BEING SAID THE POOL THAT I'M PROPOSING IS GOING TO BE A 12 BY 26.

MY HOUSE IS PURCHASED. I'M SORRY. MY HOUSE IS PLACED.

I GOT OVER 40FT OF FRONTAGE TO MY HOUSE BECAUSE IT'S IN A CORNER LOT.

I'VE GOT SO MUCH MORE TO THE SIDE, BUT THEN THEY SHORTEN ME, THE REAR BEING 25FT TOTAL WITH A SETBACK OF TEN FEET.

SO WHAT I'M ASKING IS IF, IF IT CAN PLEASE BE GRANTED FOR ME TO ENCROACH FIVE FEET OF THAT TEN FEET SETBACK SO I CAN FIT THE DECK OF 12 BY 26 THAT I HAVE DRAWN AND PROVIDE THAT POOL AND BE ABLE TO BUILD THE POOL TO TO THAT, TO THAT MEASUREMENT. OKAY. THE BOARD HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? SURE. IT'S IN GROUND. YES SIR, IT IS IN GROUND.

SO THERE'S A DECK AROUND IT. THAT'S THE CONCRETE DECK.

THAT'S CORRECT. THE DECK IS WHAT'S GOING TO GO INTO THE.

IT'S GOING TO TAKE FIVE FEET OF THE EASEMENT. THE ACTUAL POOL ITSELF FALLS WITHIN THAT TEN FOOT EASEMENT THAT THE YOU KNOW, I'M REQUESTED TO HAVE. HOW MUCH DECK IS REQUIRED FOR.

IS THERE A CODE ABOUT HAVING TO HAVE CONCRETE AROUND THE.

YES, SIR. SO I'VE ALSO SUBMITTED THAT TO THE BOARD.

CITY REQUESTS FOR ME TO HAVE UNDER 50% OF MY LOT COVERED WITH CONCRETE BY ME ADDING, I'M SORRY BY ME ADDING 1100FT² OF DECK. I'M STILL UNDER THAT MEASUREMENT BY 44%.

SO I'M STILL MY LOT WILL STILL WOULD NOT BE COVERED COMPLETELY WITH THE CITY ALLOWS ME AS FAR AS CONCRETE, I'M JUST THINKING MAYBE THERE'S SOMETHING YOU COULD DO WITH LESS DECK, YOU KNOW, AND JUST HAVE AS MUCH POOL AS YOU WANT. AND THEN. BUT I GUESS THAT PROBABLY WOULDN'T WORK. SO THE LENGTH OF IT IS NOT AN ISSUE.

IT'S WHEN I GO BACKWARDS. IF I WASN'T ALLOWED THAT FIVE FEET, IT WOULD MAKE A FULL SEVEN FEET WIDE INSTEAD OF THE 12FT.

BECAUSE I ALSO HAVE TO BUY CODE, I HAVE TO LEAVE THE SAME DEPTH OF THE POOL.

I'VE GOT TO LEAVE IT PAST MY PATIO. SO THE POOL SIX FEET DEEP.

I HAVE TO LEAVE FROM MY PATIO TO THE START OF THE POOL.

ANOTHER SIX FEET. AND THAT. THAT'S JUST CODE BASED ON THE POOL BUILDING CODE FOR THE STATE OF FLORIDA.

OKAY, SO LOOKING AT CAN WE GO BACK TO YOU HAVE THE COLOR PHOTO UP THERE.

SO YOU'RE LOOKING AT PLACING THE POOL BEHIND THE.

SO YES, THIS IS THE SITE WHICH IS WYOMING. I'VE GOT A COVERED PATIO HERE.

I'M LOOKING TO PLACE THE POOL HERE 12FT THIS WAY.

26FT THAT WAY. MY SET BACK HERE SAYS TEN FEET.

I'M ASKING YOU TO GO FIVE FEET INTO MY SETBACK OF THE DECK ONLY.

OKAY. YOU CAN COME BACK TO THE PODIUM. NOW, YOU GOTTA REPEAT ALL OF THAT IN THE MICROPHONE BECAUSE I DIDN'T GET ANY.

I'M SO SORRY. OH, I CAN. SO, LIKE I SAID, THE THE BACK OF THE POOL.

I'M SORRY. THE BACK OF THE HOUSE, WHICH IS THE RIGHT SIDE RIGHT THERE.

I'VE GOT A COVERED PATIO. OKAY. FROM THERE ON IS WHERE I HAVE 25FT TOTAL TO THE PROPERTY LINE, WHICH I'VE ALREADY PUT A FENCE IN. IT'S GOT PERMITTED. AND EVERYTHING FROM THAT FENCE IN I HAVE A TEN FOOT SETBACK.

I'M ASKING TO BE ABLE TO BUILD A 12 BY 26 BY ENCROACHING THAT SETBACK OF TEN FEET, FIVE FEET TO MAKE MY DECK GO THAT FAR.

AND THEN I CAN MAKE WHAT I'VE ALREADY MADE DRAWINGS FOR AND BE ABLE TO BUILD IT.

OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR. SO YOU MENTIONED THE POOL DOESN'T GO INTO THE SETBACK AT ALL, CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT. ONLY ONLY THE DECK WILL BE THE CONCRETE PART OF IT.

FOUR INCHES OF CONCRETE AROUND IT. SO HOW MUCH OF THE DECK WOULD GO INTO THE EASEMENT OUT OF THE FIVE FOOT EASEMENT? IF YOU DIDN'T HAVE AN EASEMENT, HOW BIG OF A DECK COULD YOU HAVE WITHOUT THE EASEMENT? I WOULDN'T HAVE ANY DECK. ONE FOOT, ONE FOOT DECK.

YEAH. CORRECT. YES. THAT'S I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND THE DIMENSIONS.

[00:15:03]

I'M NOT RECOMMENDING YOU DO IT, BUT IS IT POSSIBLE TO HAVE A MORE SHALLOW POOL RATHER THAN GOING OUT SIX FEET, MAYBE A FOUR FOOT POOL, THEN YOU ONLY HAVE TO COME OUT FOUR FEET.

YOU CAN GET FOUR. YOU CAN GET TWO FOOT CLOSER TO YOUR HOUSE, RIGHT? IF YOU ONLY HAVE FOUR FEET BECAUSE THEN YOU HAVE A FOUR FOOT AND THEN YOU'LL HAVE MORE.

DEC. JUST A QUESTION. I MEAN, OPTIONS ARE THERE.

I WAS JUST DOING IT FOR A MINIMUM OF SIX FEET.

I KNOW THERE'S EIGHT AND TEN BUT A MINIMUM OF SIX FEET BECAUSE NOT ONLY IS THE BABY GOING TO ENJOY IT WITH THEIR FRIENDS OR ADULTS ARE GOING TO GO IN IT TO SURE.

AND TO BE ABLE TO HAVE A FOUR FOOT POOL. I'VE ALREADY HAD SHALLOW POOLS BEFORE.

IT MAKES IT A LITTLE DIFFICULT FOR, YOU KNOW, THE DEPTH OF IT.

NOT THAT IT CAN'T HAPPEN, RIGHT? IT'S NOT, IT'S NOT AN OPTION, BUT I MEAN, IT IS AN OPTION. YES, SIR. YEAH.

OKAY. YEAH. JUST LOOKING AT DIFFERENT OPTIONS POSSIBLE I UNDERSTAND.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT. I DON'T KNOW IF HE WOULD HAVE THIS QUESTION.

I DON'T KNOW IF THE NEIGHBORS IF THEY'VE BEEN CONTACTED AS FAR AS WHAT THEY DO HAVE THAT INFORMATION ALSO.

OKAY, I'VE GOT ONE NEIGHBOR TO THE BACK OF ME WHO IS A FAMILY MEMBER, AND THE TWO NEIGHBORS IN FRONT OF ME, ALL THREE HAVE GOT NOTIFICATIONS FROM THE CITY FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING AND THIS HEARING, ALL THREE HAVE TURNED IN THEIR PAPERWORK TO ME, SAYING THAT THERE'S NO NEED FOR THEM TO BE HERE OR OPPOSED BECAUSE THEY HAVE NO OBJECTION FOR ME TO DO THIS AT ALL.

OKAY. AND YOU HAVE THAT PAPERWORK IN THE PACKET? I DIDN'T SEE IT, BUT I DON'T HAVE IT HERE. THEY GOT NOTIFIED BECAUSE I HAD I HAD TO SUPPLY A 500 RADIUS.

SO THEY EACH GOT NOTIFICATIONS AND BROUGHT IT TO MY HOME SAYING, LOOK, WE GOT NOTIFICATION, BUT WE KNOW WHAT YOU'RE DOING ALREADY. SO I'M ASKING THEN YOU HAVE THAT NOTIFICATION FROM THEM STATING THEY'RE GOOD WITH IT.

YES, I HAVE IT AT HOME. I DON'T HAVE IT HERE. OKAY. BUT YES, I DO HAVE IT, SIR. BUT YOU COULD PRODUCE THOSE ALL THREE NEIGHBORS.

YES, SIR. OKAY. YES, SIR, I CAN THANK YOU. OKAY.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? ALL RIGHT, SIR, YOU CAN YOU CAN HAVE A SEAT.

I APPRECIATE IT, THANK YOU, MA'AM. FOR THE RECORD, WE.

OTHER THAN WHAT HE'S ALREADY DISCLOSED, WE. THERE WERE THERE WEREN'T ANY LETTERS IN THE PACKAGE IN REGARDING THIS CASE.

I'M GOING TO NOW OPEN UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS.

ANYONE IN FAVOR OF THIS? FEEL FREE TO STEP UP AND.

YOU HAVE THE FREEDOM TO SPEAK IF YOU WOULD LIKE.

I MEAN, THIS, THIS YOU MAY YOU MAY OR MAY NOT SWAY THE BOARD, BUT YOU DO HAVE THE FREEDOM TO SPEAK.

IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO ENJOY WITH MY FAMILY. OKAY.

FAIR ENOUGH. ALL RIGHT. ANYONE IN OPPOSITION TO THE TO THIS REQUEST? YOU HAVE A COMMENT TO SAY? OKAY. UNDERSTOOD. I MEAN, I WANT ONE, TOO.

AS A MATTER OF FACT. SO YOU BUILD THESE. YOU BUILD THESE THINGS. CAN YOU COME BACK UP TO THE PODIUM REAL QUICK? BUT THAT THAT WAS ONE QUESTION I DID. HAVE YOU BEEN THE OWNER? THE OWNER BUILDER. SO I'M ASSUMING THEN THAT YOUR YOUR QUALIFICATIONS ARE THERE TO BUILD THIS TYPE OF POOL.

I DO, SIR, I HAVE A, I HAVE A FAMILY MEMBER WHO'S A GC AND I HAVE A PAST EXPERIENCE IN BUILDING, SO I KNOW ALL THE CRITERIAS, I KNOW ALL THE INSPECTIONS, I KNOW ALL THE PERMITS THAT'S REQUIRED, AND I'VE ALREADY SUBMITTED ALL THAT TO THE CITY WITH THE DRAWINGS AND EVERYTHING OF THE MEASUREMENTS OF THE POOL.

AND I KNOW WHAT IT TAKES FROM OPENING GROUND TO THE FINAL INSPECTION.

ALL RIGHT, SIR. THANK YOU. OKAY. ANYONE IN OPPOSITION THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS CASE? ALL RIGHT. SEEING NONE, I WILL BRING IT BACK TO THE BOARD.

BOARD. I NEED A BOARD. I NEED A MOTION. I NEED A BOARD.

I NEED A MOTION. AND WE CAN EITHER I NEED A MOTION EITHER WAY.

SO WE CAN EITHER CONTINUE WITH DISCUSSION OR A MOTION TO APPROVE.

CAN I ASK THE STAFF A QUESTION? YES, SIR. HAVE YOU LOOKED AT OTHER OPTIONS RATHER THAN COMPLETELY DENYING IT.

IS THERE A POSSIBILITY TO MAKE IT HAPPEN WITH SOME MODIFICATIONS TO HIS PLAN SO THAT THEY COULD HAVE THE POOL? IF I COULD JUST MAKE IT CLEAR THAT WHEN STAFF'S ANALYSIS IS DONE IS STRICTLY BY THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AND THOSE CRITERIA I READ OUT. FUNDAMENTALLY, A 50% VARIANCE. YOU KNOW, I'VE NEVER RECOMMENDED APPROVAL.

I DID, HOWEVER, NOTE THAT THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING THE MINIMUM.

HE'S REQUESTING THE LEAST AMOUNT THAT HE CAN IN ORDER TO DO WHAT HE WANTS TO ACHIEVE WITH HIS PROPERTY.

SO HE'S ASKING JUST FOR WHAT HE NEEDS, AND YOU CAN TAKE THAT INTO ACCOUNT.

[00:20:02]

THAT'S NOT PART OF THE CRITERIA. IT'S GOOD INFORMATION FOR YOU.

OKAY. I WOULD MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE. AS LONG AS WE GET THE VERIFICATION FROM THE NEIGHBORS SAYING THEY'RE GOOD WITH IT.

OKAY. IT'S IN THE PACKET. I DIDN'T SEE IT. OKAY.

IF YOU'RE SAYING THE NEIGHBORS INFORMATION IS THERE, IF THAT'S IN THERE, IF WE HEAR IF WE HEAR FROM THE NEIGHBORS, IT'S PUT INTO THE PACK, RIGHT? IF IF HE DIDN'T SUBMIT IT, MAYBE WE DIDN'T.

BUT ANY EMAILS WE GET OR ANY COMMENTARY WE GET ABOUT AN APPLICATION, WE'RE SURE TO INCLUDE IT.

OKAY. I DIDN'T SEE IT IN THE PACKET, BUT HE'S SAYING HE HAS IT AT HOME.

SO CAN WE MAKE THIS MOTION SUBJECT TO VERIFICATION OF THE NEIGHBOR'S APPROVAL? YES. NO. MAYBE, MR. CHAIR, IF I MAY. YES, MA'AM.

SO. AND THE THE WITNESS CAN TESTIFY OR CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, BUT WHAT I HEARD WAS THAT NEIGHBORS RECEIVED A NOTICE AND THEY PHYSICALLY BROUGHT THE NOTICE BACK TO HIS HOME, SAYING THAT THEY DID NOT WISH TO COME HERE AND SPEAK AGAINST IT.

I DON'T KNOW THAT THEY PROVIDED ANYTHING IN WRITING TO THE APPLICANT, BUT YOU CAN CERTAINLY HAVE HIM COME UP AND VERIFY THAT THAT THAT'S ACCURATE. SURE. SO YOU'RE 100% CORRECT. ALL THREE NEIGHBORS RECEIVED A LETTER STATING WHAT I WAS DOING, PLUS THE SIGN, MY PUBLIC HEARING SIGN. AND ALL THREE CAME TO ME AND SAID, LOOK, WE KNOW WHAT YOU'RE DOING.

WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IT. THIS IS A SIX MONTH PLAN.

WE RECEIVED THIS. WE DON'T OBJECT WHATSOEVER.

WE'RE NOT GOING TO GO TO THIS. IT'S GOING TO BE A WASTE OF OUR TIME. GOTCHA. THAT WAS THE THE THE STATEMENT THAT I GOT FROM ALL THREE OF THEM.

GOTCHA. AND AS HE MENTIONED, IT'S A 500 FOOT RADIUS.

SO NOT JUST THE THREE HOMES ADJACENT TO HIS PROPERTY, BUT ALL THE PROPERTIES WITHIN 500FT RECEIVED NOTICE.

GOTCHA. IS THAT A PUBLIC SHIRT? IS THAT A PUBLIC TRASH SHIRT? I'M AN OPERATIONS SUPERVISOR. WE. I APPRECIATE YOU KEEPING THE STREETS CLEAN.

I JUST WANT TO SAY THANK YOU FOR THAT. I'VE BEEN DOING IT 26 YEARS.

I WAS WITH WASTE MANAGEMENT 20 AND THEN TOOK OVER THE 2020 CONTRACT FOR PALM BAY.

THANK YOU, I APPRECIATE THAT. OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

SO WE HAVE A WE HAVE A YEAH, WE. CAN YOU AMEND YOUR.

YEAH. I'D LIKE TO AMEND MY MOTION TO APPROVE THE SETBACK AS AS PROPOSED.

THIS LITTLE GUY NEEDS A POOL, I THINK SO. WHAT'S YOUR NAME? OH YOU'RE WELCOME. THAT'S MY MOTION. BUT THE BOARD HAS TO APPROVE IT.

I'LL SECOND IT. ALL RIGHT, SO WE HAVE A MOTION FOR FIRST AND A SECOND.

FURTHER DISCUSSION. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION, MR. MIGNON? ALL RIGHT. SO WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO ADD.

LET ME GET BACK THERE BECAUSE THIS IS THIS IS WHAT THE, THE THE, THE RESPONSE IS IT'S THE SAME THING THAT YOU KIND OF TOUCHED TOUCHSTONE ALSO IS THE.

THAT YOU PURCHASED IT IN JUNE 1ST, 2025. AND YOU DIDN'T HAVE ANY INVOLVEMENT IN THE PLANNING, DESIGN OR THE PLACEMENT OF THE HOME. SO FOR I, I WAS, I'M, I'M KIND OF, I'M KIND OF IN THAT MIDDLE PLACE BECAUSE, I MEAN, NOW THAT YOU KIND OF DESCRIBED HOW THE POOL HAS TO BE PUT IN THERE, AND THAT'S THE REASON WHY YOU'RE ASKING FOR THAT MINIMUM. AND BECAUSE OF THIS, THE MINIMUM, I'M LEANING TOWARDS THE APPROVAL, BUT THE APPROVAL WOULD, WOULD WITH CONDITIONS.

I, I'M ASSUMING, WELL, WHAT I DON'T SEE ON THE PICTURE IS AT THE MOMENT IS A FENCE IS SO YOU HAVE A FENCE, THAT'S ALL. SO THE, SO THE POOL WILL GO INSIDE THE FENCE ALL AROUND THE PROPERTY THAT I HAVE PERMITTED THE CITY, I BUILT IT. OKAY, WELL, JUST LET ME ASK YOU THIS THEN.

IF THERE'S A IF THERE'S AN EXISTING FENCE, THE FENCE IS COMING DOWN TO GO TO GO AROUND.

CAN YOU COME BACK UP TO THE PODIUM? BECAUSE I JUST WANT I JUST, I JUST NEED TO BE CLEAR BEFORE WE BEFORE WE DO THIS, I UNDERSTAND. SO IS SO IS THE YOU ALREADY HAVE A FENCE EXISTING FENCE.

SO WHERE THE POOL IS GOING IN AT WILL THE FENCE, YOU'RE GOING TO PUSH THE FENCE BACK THE ADDITIONAL FIVE FEET.

NO, THE FENCE IS ALREADY ON MY PROPERTY LINE.

OKAY. SO THE FROM THE FENCE INTO MY PROPERTY IS THE TEN FOOT SETBACK THAT THE CITY REQUIRES.

THE FENCE IS BUILT. IT'S IT'S IT'S INSTALLED ON MY PROPERTY LINE ALREADY.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. YOU'RE WELCOME. ALL RIGHT.

[00:25:06]

AYE AYE AYE AYE. ALL RIGHT. PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.

CONGRATULATIONS. YOU HAVE YOUR. YOU CAN DO WHAT YOU NEED TO DO WITH YOUR POOL.

ALL RIGHT, MOVING ON. LET'S MOVE ON TO. THANK YOU, THANK YOU, THANK YOU.

HAVE A GREAT NIGHT. GOD BLESS YOU TO CASE NUMBER TWO.

CU26CU26-0002. ALL THESE ZEROS START TO STARTING TO RUN TOGETHER.

STARTING TO LIKE MORE ZEROS THAN IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE. ALL RIGHT, CKCU2600002.

ALL RIGHT STAFF IF YOU WILL MISTER CHAIR BEFORE STAFF I DO YOU WANT TO PULL US EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS.

YES, MA'AM. PARTICULAR APPLICATION. BOARD HAS THERE BEEN ANY EX PARTE COMMUNICATION AS FAR AS THIS CASE IS CONCERNED? NO. I WILL HONESTLY SAY THAT INADVERTENTLY I'VE HAD I'VE DROVE PAST THE SITE.

I KNOW, BUT I HAD TO DRIVE PAST THE SITE IN ORDER TO GET TO 192.

SO BUT AS FAR AS SPEAKING WITH ANYBODY ABOUT IT.

NO, NONE. ALL RIGHT. SO. ALL RIGHT, STAFF. GOOD EVENING, CHAIR MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.

MY NAME IS CHRISTINA HALL. I'M A SENIOR PLANNER IN OUR GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT.

I'M HERE TONIGHT TO PRESENT THIS CASE. CU2600002.

IT'S A CONDITIONAL USE REQUEST FOR A GAS STATION AND CONVENIENCE STORE IN THE COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL ZONING DISTRICT.

AS YOU CAN SEE ON THE MAP, IT'S AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAINT JOHN'S HERITAGE PARKWAY AND EMERSON DRIVE.

NORTHWEST. GAS STATIONS REQUIRE CONDITIONAL USE REVIEW AND ARE NOT PERMITTED BY RIGHT WITHIN THIS ZONING DISTRICT OR ANY OTHERS.

YOUR ROLE TONIGHT IS TO EVALUATE THIS REQUEST BASED ON THE CONDITIONAL USE REVIEW CRITERIA AND THEN PROVIDE A RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL.

SO WE'VE USED OUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, INCLUDING THE CONDITIONAL USE REVIEW CRITERIA AND SUPPLEMENTAL STANDARDS FOR FUEL STATIONS TO REVIEW THIS APPLICATION.

THIS SUBJECT PROPERTY IS THAT THAT YOU'LL SEE LATER.

IT'S PART OF A LARGER 11.73 ACRE PARCEL. AND THE DEVELOPMENT IS PROPOSED TO BE UP IN THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THIS LARGER PARCEL. THE FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION IS COMMERCIAL AND THE ZONING IS COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL, WHICH ARE BOTH INTENDED TO PERMIT DEVELOPMENT OF COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES, WHICH OFFER A WIDE RANGE OF GOODS AND SERVICES AND THAT ARE PRIMARILY LOCATED AT OR NEAR THE INTERSECTION OF ARTERIAL ROADWAYS.

SO THIS SITE IS CURRENTLY VACANT. AS YOU KNOW, SINCE YOU'VE DRIVEN BY IT IT HAS FRONTAGE ALONG SAINT JOHNS HERITAGE PARKWAY AND THAT'S A MINOR ARTERIAL ROAD PER OUR COMP PLAN. AND THE ADDITIONAL ACCESS IS ALONG THE FUTURE EXTENSION OF EMERSON DRIVE NORTHWEST, WHICH IS A MAJOR COLLECTOR ROADWAY. SO IT'S THE INTERSECTION OF A COLLECTOR AND AN ARTERIAL ROADWAY.

SO A SNAPSHOT OF THE CURRENT DEVELOPMENT IN THIS LOCATION.

SO HERE UP HERE THIS IS THE EXISTING CIRCLE K GAS STATION THAT'S ALREADY OPERATING.

DOWN THIS WAY IS A SUBDIVISION. SO SINGLE FAMILY HOMES WITHIN BERLIN'S EAST.

THIS IS THE PROPOSED SITE FOR THE GAS STATION AND THEN SOME, A FUTURE COMMERCIAL SITE THAT WE DO NOT HAVE AN APPLICATION FOR YET.

TO THE SOUTH IS IT'S THE 7-ELEVEN THAT IS ALMOST FINISHED WITH CONSTRUCTION.

SO IT'S THE SECOND GAS STATION. AND THEN THESE ARE FUTURE COMMERCIAL PARCELS AS WELL.

AND YOU SEE HERE THIS EMERSON DRIVE NORTHWEST, IT'S CURRENTLY BEING CONSTRUCTED AS AN EXTENSION.

7-ELEVEN IS DOING THAT. AND THIS INTERSECTION HERE, IT'S NOT CURRENTLY SIGNALIZED, BUT THERE ARE PLANS TO SIGNALIZE IT PER OUR PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT. THE TEMPORARY LIGHT IS SUPPOSED TO BE GOING IN LATE OCTOBER.

PERMANENT SIGNALIZATION. NEXT SUMMER TENTATIVELY IS AS THE TIMELINE THAT THEY'VE BEEN GIVEN.

AND THEN RIGHT TO THE NORTH OF THIS PARCEL WHERE IT SAYS COMMERCIAL.

SO EVERYTHING ABOVE UP HERE, THIS WAS THE RECENTLY APPROVED BERLIN'S WEST.

SO THE PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENT PLAN WAS APPROVED RECENTLY WITH THAT SECTION BEING LISTED AS COMMERCIAL.

RIGHT NOW ON OUR ZONING MAP, IT SHOWS AS COUNTY AGRICULTURAL RESIDENTIAL BECAUSE IT WON'T CHANGE ON THE MAP UNTIL A FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN IS APPROVED AND THEY HAVE THREE YEARS TO GET THAT DONE. SO AS A SUMMARY WE'VE GOT CIRCLE K AND 7-ELEVEN AT THIS INTERSECTION.

[00:30:09]

SO OUR APPLICATION REVIEW CRITERIA INCLUDED CONDITIONAL USE REVIEW CRITERIA IN CHAPTER 17202 FOR THE SCHEDULE OF USES IN CHAPTER 173021. AND THEN THOSE SUPPLEMENTAL STANDARDS FOR FUEL STATIONS IN SECTION 174041.

SO USING THIS WE AS STAFF EVALUATED ACCESS AND CIRCULATION TO THE SITE.

PROPOSED PARKING UTILITY CONNECTION, ANY KIND OF SCREENING AND BUFFERING AND JUST OVERALL COMPATIBILITY OF THIS PROPOSED USE WITH SURROUNDING PROPERTIES AND ZONING DISTRICTS. SO YOUR JOB AS THE BOARD TONIGHT IS TO EVALUATE WHETHER THIS USE AS, AS YOU SEE IT DEPICTED WOULD BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING USES. AND WOULD IT CREATE ANY ADVERSE IMPACTS FOR THE SURROUNDING AREA.

SO THIS IS ANOTHER VIEW OF THE SITE. THIS IS ILLUSTRATING THE BUILDING PLACEMENT ACCESS POINTS PARKING LAYOUT AND INTERNAL CIRCULATION.

AND AGAIN THIS IS ALL CONCEPTUAL. SO NONE OF THIS THAT YOU'RE SEEING HAS BEEN APPROVED.

MORE EVEN SUBMITTED. SO THE SITE OF THE GAS STATION DOWN AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER.

SORRY. SO IT'S GOT THESE TWO DRIVEWAYS THERE.

RIGHT IN, RIGHT OUT IS WHAT'S PROPOSED ALONG SAINT JOHN'S HERITAGE PARKWAY. AND THEN THREE ACCESS POINTS ON THIS TWO FULL ACCESS AND ONE RIGHT IN, RIGHT OUT ALONG THE FUTURE EMERSON DRIVE NORTHWEST EXTENSION.

SO WITH THIS APPLICATION, OUR PUBLIC WORKS TEAM MADE THE DECISION THAT A TRAFFIC STUDY WOULD BE REQUIRED WITH THE SITE PLAN SUBMITTAL, AND THAT A TRAFFIC GENERATION OR TRIP GENERATION MEMO WOULD SUFFICE FOR THE CONDITIONAL USE.

BECAUSE THE SITE PARKWAY IS CURRENTLY UNDER DESIGN FOR WIDENING.

SO THEY WILL BE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE A TRAFFIC STUDY AT SITE PLAN SUBMITTAL.

BUT WE DO NOT HAVE ONE TO PROVIDE TONIGHT. AND THAT STUDY WILL BE REQUIRED TO ANALYZE ALL THE ROADWAY SEGMENTS AND INTERSECTIONS ENSURE APPROPRIATE SPACING OF DRIVEWAYS AND THEN PROVIDE TURN LANE ANALYSIS SO WE KNOW WHEN A TURN LANE WOULD BE REQUIRED.

SO A TOTAL OF 19 PARKING SPACES IS DEPICTED. OUR CODE WOULD ONLY REQUIRE 13 AND THAT'S BASED ON THE SIZE OF THE BUILDING.

AND AS WELL, NO LOADING SPACES REQUIRED BASED ON THE SIZE OF THE BUILDING.

OUR CODE ONLY REQUIRES LOADING SPACES FOR BUILDINGS 5000FT² OR GREATER, AND THIS IS ONLY LIKE 1600FT², SO IT'S A SMALLER GAS STATION. ANY FINAL DETAILS LIKE LANDSCAPING, LIGHTING, DRAINAGE, ENGINEERING THOSE ARE ALL ADDRESSED DURING A BIT OF SITE ADMINISTRATIVE SITE PLAN REVIEW. SO THEY ARE LOOKED AT BUT IT'S JUST NOT PART OF THE CONDITIONAL USE REVIEW.

SO WE'RE ASKING YOU TO CONSIDER THIS APPLICATION, OUR STAFF ANALYSIS AND OF COURSE OUR PUBLIC INPUT.

SO WE ARE REQUESTING THAT YOU RECOMMEND APPROVAL APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS OR DENIAL TO CITY COUNCIL FOR THEM TO MAKE THAT FINAL DETERMINATION.

I APOLOGIZE, THIS IS SO SMALL. SO THESE ARE JUST SOME EXAMPLE MOTIONS THAT YOU MAY WANT TO SO RECOMMENDING FOR APPROVAL APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS OR FOR DENIAL. SOME OF THE CONDITIONS THAT STAFF WAS RECOMMENDING WAS STATING THAT THAT TRAFFIC STUDY IS GOING TO BE REQUIRED AND THAT SHOULD. THE PALM BAY SAID EVER SINCE THE P D TO THE NORTH NOT RECEIVE THEIR FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN APPROVAL IN THREE YEARS, THAT WE WOULD REQUIRE A 25 FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER ALONG THAT SIDE, BECAUSE IT WOULD THEN BE THAT RESIDENTIAL ZONING AGAIN, RATHER THAN THE COMMERCIAL PARCEL THAT THEY'RE SUGGESTING.

ANY QUESTIONS? DO THE BOARD HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? I HAVE A QUESTION. GO AHEAD. JUST TO REITERATE, THE ONE POINT YOU HAD MENTIONED ABOUT THE MADAGASCAR STATIONS ALLOWED AT AN INTERSECTION.

SO JUST TO CLARIFY, SINCE THIS IS A LITTLE BIT DOWN, WOULD THAT NOT APPLY OR IS THAT WHY THIS CONDITIONAL USE IS BEING ASKED FOR? SO I'M LOOKING FOR THE SITE PLAN. SO LIKE I SAID, THIS SITE PLAN THAT'S HERE, IT'S CONCEPTUAL.

SO WHAT THEY'RE SHOWING THAT THAT PARCEL IN THE CORNER THAT DOESN'T EXIST YET.

THIS IS ALL ONE GIANT PARCEL. SO IT'S CONSIDERED A CORNER LOT.

YEAH. AND IT'S CONSIDERED PART OF THAT INTERSECTION. SO CURRENTLY WE ALREADY HAVE TWO GAS STATIONS THERE,

[00:35:04]

SO THAT'S WHY I WANT YOU TO CONSIDER STAFF ANALYSIS, BUT ALSO YOUR OWN AND PUBLIC INPUT WHEN YOU MAKE YOUR DECISION.

OKAY. TWO QUESTIONS. SO LIKE WHAT HE'S SAYING IS THEY JUST SCOOTED IT OFF THE INTERSECTION SO IT WOULDN'T COUNT TOWARDS THE TWO, WHICH IS WHATEVER. BUT IT WOULD BECAUSE IT'S STILL ALL ONE PARCEL.

OH, SO IT WOULD BE LIKE A VARIANCE OR YOU HAVE TO YOU CAN'T VARIANCE YOUR WAY INTO A USE.

SO. SO THIS WOULD COUNT AS A THIRD GAS STATION AT THE INTERSECTION.

THAT IS STAFF INTERPRETATION. YES. OKAY. AND WHY IS THERE A RECOMMENDATION FROM STAFF LIKE ON THE LAST CASE BUT NOT ON THIS CASE.

WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE? OUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE DOESN'T REQUIRE STAFF TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION FOR CONDITIONAL USE, BUT THEY DO FOR VARIANCES. SO WE LEAVE THAT UP TO THE BOARD TO INTERPRET. I JUST LOVE TO HEAR FROM YOU GUYS SO MUCH.

YEAH. I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. NOTHING. OKAY.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT. I WILL ASK THE APPLICANT TO PLEASE COME TO THE PODIUM.

GOOD EVENING. I AM CHASE LASLEY WITH KIMLEY-HORN.

I DID WANT TO START WITH WE DO AGREE WITH THE STAFF REPORT, BUT I WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT IN OUR SITE PLAN WE ARE SHOWING EIGHT FUELING STATIONS WITH 16 SPOTS. I BELIEVE IN THE STAFF REPORT IT MENTIONED FOUR FUEL PUMPS AND EIGHT SPOTS.

BUT THAT IS THE ONLY CLARIFICATION WE HAVE FOR THIS.

THAT YOU GUYS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. SORRY. I WOULD LIKE TO SAY SOMETHING.

OH, SURE. GOOD EVENING. STEVE LEPOFSKY WITH BLACKFIN PARTNERS.

WE'RE THE CONTRACT PURCHASER OF THIS LOT. I JUST WANTED TO REITERATE.

THIS ISN'T YOUR TYPICAL GAS STATION CONVENIENCE STORE SUCH AS THE 7-ELEVEN OR THE CIRCLE K OUT THERE.

THIS IS ACTUALLY AN ANCILLARY USE TO A GROCER.

THAT IS PART OF THIS DEVELOPMENT. WHAT'S THE GROCER? IS THAT A PUBLIX OR IS THAT GOING TO BE A. UNFORTUNATELY, I CAN'T SAY.

WHEN I HEARD 11 ACRES I THOUGHT YES, A BUCKY'S AND D A AND WHATNOT.

BUT THERE ARE GROCERS OUT THERE THAT DO HAVE, YOU KNOW, ANCILLARY GAS USES AS AN OFFERING FOR THEIR CUSTOMERS.

AND THAT IS WHAT WE ARE PROPOSING HERE. AND TO THE POINT ABOUT THE MULTIPLE GAS STATIONS AT THIS INTERSECTION, IT IS OUR INTENT TO, AS YOU CAN SEE ON THIS SITE PLAN SUBDIVIDE THE LOT.

SO THIS USE IS NOT AT THE, AT THE CORNER. HOWEVER, OUR VIEW IS THAT IT IS IN HARMONY WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AND THAT IT WILL BE AT A SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION ON A MAJOR ROAD. AND WE'RE LOOKING FORWARD TO BRING THIS PROJECT FORWARD TO THE CITY AND PROVIDING ADDITIONAL SERVICES TO THE RESIDENTS. WHAT BOARD HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANTS? WHAT'S THE PARCEL? WHAT'S THE SOUTHEAST PORTION THERE? I CAN'T SEE FROM HERE. IT'S JUST KIND OF SMALL.

IT'S SO THE IMAGE IS FLIPPED ON THIS SLIDE. YEAH.

NORTH IS ON THE OTHERS. YEAH. NORTH IS TO THE RIGHT THERE IN SOUTHEAST.

WHAT'S THE IT'S IT'S JUST A FUTURE DEVELOPMENT LOT.

THERE'S NO USE OR OR USER PROPOSED ON THAT RIGHT NOW.

RIGHT NOW WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO GET OVER THE LINE IS THE GROCER WITH THEIR ANCILLARY FUEL.

THAT'S REALLY THE CATALYST FOR, FOR THIS PROJECT ON THIS LOT.

ARE THERE A NUMBER OF JOBS THAT YOU'RE PROJECTING TO BRING INTO, TO BRING INTO THE CITY WITH THIS PROJECT? I MEAN, I DON'T I DON'T HAVE THOSE EXACT FIGURES.

SO I DON'T WANT TO THROW OUT A NUMBER AND BE COMPLETELY WRONG, BUT I MEAN, IT'S, I MEAN, IS IT DESIGNED TO BRING IN JOBS? ABSOLUTELY. SO, SO IT IS AT LEAST DESIGNED TO BRING IN LARGE NATIONAL GROCER.

ABSOLUTELY. I MEAN, YOU GOT OUR WHEELS TURNING BECAUSE NOW WE'RE LIKE, OKAY, THE SECRET.

IS THAT IF FOR YOU ALL'S PRESENTATION, THAT'S ALL YOU HAVE FOR ME.

WE CAN ANSWER ANSWER SOME QUESTIONS IF YOU HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL BOARD HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANTS? I JUST CAN'T SEE THAT FAR. IS THAT A LAKE IN THE BACK? WHAT IS THE RECTANGULAR PART RIGHT THERE? THAT'S THE POND.

RETENTION POND. RETENTION POND. ALL RIGHT, GENTLEMEN, YOU CAN YOU CAN HAVE A SEAT.

RIGHT THERE IS GOOD. ALL RIGHT. I'M GOING TO NOW OPEN IT UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS.

ANYONE IN FAVOR OF THIS PROJECT, PLEASE STAND. COME FORWARD.

[00:40:12]

I'M A LITTLE BIT FOR AND A LITTLE BIT AGAINST.

AS USUAL, I'LL EXPRESS THEM AND THEN LET YOU MAKE THAT HARD DECISION.

THE FIRST ONE IS WE CURRENTLY HAVE ON THE BOOKS AN ORDINANCE THAT NO MORE THAN TWO GAS STATIONS ON AN INTERSECTION.

AND THAT WAS PUT THERE BECAUSE WE WERE BEING FLOODED BY, BY GAS STATIONS.

AND THAT GOT TO BE A COMPLAINT, JUST LIKE STORAGE UNITS AND SO FORTH.

BUT SO THAT'S WHY IT APPEARS IN OUR ORDINANCE THAT NO MORE THAN TWO.

BUT WITH THAT BEING SAID, I'VE LIVED IN PALM BAY LONG ENOUGH THAT WHEN WE HAD WHEN THERE WAS EVACUATIONS COMING OUT OF THE CITY, WE RAN INTO A SHORTFALL AND EXTREME BACKUPS OF PEOPLE TRYING TO GET INTO GAS STATIONS TO GET FUEL TO GET OUT OF THE AREA.

AND SINCE THE SAINT JOHN'S HERITAGE PARKWAY IS SUPPOSEDLY OUR EXIT OUT OF PALM BAY.

WELL, I COULD SEE WHY YOU MIGHT WANT A FEW MORE GAS STATIONS TO PROVIDE A FEW MORE GALLONS OF GAS TO THE PEOPLE TRYING TO LEAVE.

BUT THAT JUST MAKES IT A BIG CONGESTION AREA RIGHT THERE ON THE MAIN EXIT, TRYING TO GET OUT OF THE CITY.

BUT IT WOULD PROVIDE US ANOTHER POINT TO FILL OUR VEHICLE.

THAT'S ITEM NUMBER ONE AND TWO. ITEM NUMBER THREE IS THEY DON'T HAVE THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLANS FOR THE PROPOSAL FOR THE DEVELOPMENT IN THE BACK.

THEY HAVE THREE YEARS BY WHICH TO PROPOSE IT.

I DON'T THINK THEY'RE GOING TO WAIT THREE YEARS IN ORDER TO BUILD THIS.

I DON'T THINK THEY'RE PLANNING ON WAITING THAT LONG BEFORE THEY DO THIS.

THAT'S A SPECULATION. SO MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE THEY CONFORM TO THE 25 FOOT SETBACK BECAUSE THEY MIGHT THEY MIGHT EVENTUALLY BE IN VIOLATION BECAUSE WE'RE GRANTING THEM SOMETHING FOR THE FUTURE THAT WE DON'T KNOW ABOUT.

SO I'D SAY PUT THEIR BUFFERS IN NOW BECAUSE NO MATTER WHAT, THEY'RE STILL GOING TO BE LEGAL.

THAT'S MY INPUT. AND THEY DIDN'T KNOW WHAT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THAT SQUARE ON THE PROPERTY WAS GOING TO BE.

WELL, WE STILL DON'T KNOW WHAT IT COULD BE. THAT MIGHT JUST EVENTUALLY BE AN EXPANSION TO THE GAS STATION BECAUSE THEY FIND THEY NEED MORE.

RIGHT? THAT'S JUST JUST ME BEING A DOUBTING TOM THAT I AM.

SO THE BENEFIT WOULD BE THAT WE HAVE ANOTHER PLACE TO FILL UP DURING AN EMERGENCY.

THE NEGATIVE WOULD BE THEY GOT A VARIANCE FOR THREE YEARS IN THE FUTURE THAT WE DON'T KNOW ABOUT, AND WE CURRENTLY ALREADY HAVE ON THE BOOKS ORDINANCE OF NO MORE THAN TWO GAS STATIONS ON AN INTERSECTION.

THAT'S WHY YOU GUYS SIT UP THERE AND I JUST SIT OUT HERE.

THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OF THIS PROJECT? NO. ANYONE NOT IN FAVOR. OKAY.

ALL RIGHT. WOULD YOU ALL LIKE TO RESPOND IN ANY WAY? YEAH. TO ADDRESS SOME OF THOSE POINTS, IT IS NOT OUR INTENT TO EXPAND ON THIS GAS STATION ANY MORE THAN WHAT IT IS CURRENTLY SHOWN.

SO I BELIEVE THE STAFF REPORT CALLS OUT THE NUMBER OF NPDS, WHICH WE WE DID.

CORRECT. THERE'S, THERE'S EIGHT EIGHT DISPENSERS, 16 TOTAL FUELING POSITIONS.

WE'D BE FINE WITH A CONDITION LIMITING IT TO THAT ADDITIONALLY LIMITING IT TO THE LOCATION SHOWN ON THE CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN THAT WE'RE REVIEWING RIGHT NOW. I KNOW THAT YOU, I KNOW THAT YOU ALL YOU OWNED THE PARCEL, BUT BECAUSE OF THE CODE THAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE FOR THE TWO GAS STATIONS.

OR YOU CAN COME BACK UP. YEAH. I MEAN, YOU'VE SEEN THE WHY ANOTHER GAS STATION THERE? IT'S IT'S JUST AFFILIATED WITH THE GROCER THAT WANTS TO BE HERE.

THEY, THEY OFFER ANCILLARY GAS FOR THEIR CUSTOMERS AS AN OFFERING.

AND THE ONLY WAY WE CAN LAND THEM HERE IS IF WE GET THE GAS STATION.

SO WE'RE HERE REQUESTING THE USE TO ALLOW US TO MOVE FORWARD INTO THE SITE PLAN PROCESS AND BUILDING PERMITTING PROCESS.

OKAY. THANK YOU SIR. MR. CHAIR, I JUST HAVE A QUESTION.

I GUESS MAYBE YOU KIND OF JUST ANSWERED IT. SO ARE WE SAYING IF THIS DOESN'T HAPPEN? OBVIOUSLY, WE'RE JUST A RECOMMENDED BODY. PEOPLE MADE THAT VERY CLEAR LAST MEETING.

WE ARE JUST A RECOMMENDING BODY. BUT IF THIS DOESN'T GO THROUGH, THAT GROCER DOESN'T COME.

OR IS THAT IS THAT FIRM OR IS THAT JUST A CORRECT? YEAH. THE THIS, THIS USE THIS USER DOES NOT MOVE FORWARD.

WE'RE BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD. OKAY. THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A LOT TO. OH. GO AHEAD. I'M SORRY.

SO THE GAS STATION, WOULD IT BE OPEN TO THE PUBLIC OR WOULD IT BE RESTRICTED TO ONLY THE GROCER USERS?

[00:45:02]

WE'RE TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT. WE SLOWLY, SLOWLY DISSECTING HERE.

MR. CATALANO, CAN I MAKE A MOTION? YES, IF YOU.

YOU'RE READY? I'LL MAKE A MOTION FOR THE PLANNING BOARD.

RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE CONDITIONAL USE FOR CASE NUMBER CU26-0002 FOR THE NEW GAS STATION CONVENIENCE STORE.

BASED ON THE FINDINGS THAT THE PROPOSED PLAN COMPLIES WITH THE REVIEW AND APPROVAL CRITERIA OF THE PALM BAY CODE OR ORDINANCE 172.1024 FOR THE FOLLOWING WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS.

THE TRAFFIC. AS THE STAFF RECOMMENDS TRAFFIC IMPACT STUDY WILL BE REQUIRED WITH THE ADMINISTRATIVE SITE PLAN REVIEW. THE STUDY MUST DEMONSTRATE THAT THE PROPOSED ACCESS CONFIGURATION WILL OPERATE AT AN ACCEPTABLE LEVEL OF SERVICE.

THE 25 FOOT LAND SETBACK GRANTING GRANT APPROVAL.

THE CITY MAY PRESCRIBE ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS ONCE IT GETS TO THE CITY COUNCIL WITH SECTION 172.024 VIOLATIONS.

SUCH CONDITIONS MAY WERE MADE AS PART OF THE TERM UNDER WHICH THE CONDITIONAL USE IS GRANTED SHALL BE DEEMED A VIOLATION OF THE CHAPTER.

I'LL SECOND IT, BUT I GUESS I JUST WANTED TO ASK A CLARIFICATION ON ONE OF HIS PERSONAL A MOTION, IF THAT'S POSSIBLE. YES, SIR. SO THE CLARIFICATION I KNOW YOU YOU READ POINT TWO AND DIDN'T READ THE WHOLE, BUT ARE YOU APPROVING WHAT STAFF SAID? ARE WE APPROVING THAT THE BUFFER GOES IN REGARDLESS? I'M GOING WITH STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION ON WHAT WHAT STAFF SAID.

ALL RIGHT. SO IF THAT WITH THAT CLARIFICATION, I'M I'M REQUESTING THAT WE AMEND YOUR MOTION TO ALLOW TO SAY THAT 20 FOOT FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER GOES IN 25 FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER GOES IN REGARDLESS, GOES IN.

THAT'S ONE OF THE CONDITIONS IN GENERAL THAT WE ARE PROPOSING TO COUNCIL, REGARDLESS OF THE PALM VISTA.

YES. I'LL AMEND IT. OKAY. THANK YOU. I'LL SECOND IT.

ALL RIGHT. I HAVE A FIRST AND A SECOND. ANY OTHER ANY ANY OTHER COMMUNICATION? ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE. ALL IN FAVOR.

AYE AYE AYE AYE. ALL RIGHT. THAT PASSES.

JUST TRYING TO GET MY CHECKS IN ORDER HERE. WELL, IT PASSED, GENTLEMEN.

SO GOOD LUCK TO YOU. ALL FOR. YEAH, YEAH. I'M SORRY.

GOOD LUCK. YES, SIR. HOPEFULLY THE NEXT TIME WE SEE YOU ALL YOU GOT.

YOU GOT A NICE CONCEPTUAL PLAN WRITTEN OUT WITH WITH EVERYTHING THAT THAT'S THAT'S HEADING OUR WAY.

SO SO WE'RE NO, WE'RE NOT PALM BAY NOT GOING TO BE ON FIRE BECAUSE.

ALL RIGHT, GUYS, TAKE CARE. THANK YOU GENTLEMEN.

ALL RIGHT. OUR NEXT CASE. CASE NUMBER THREE. IT WILL BE T 26.

ZERO. ZERO. ZERO. ZERO. FIVE. CONDITIONAL USE REVIEW CRITERIA.

YES. HAVING JUST CONSIDERED A CONDITIONAL USE APPLICATION, YOU HAVE SEEN THE CRITERIA ALREADY TONIGHT AND IN YOUR STAFF REPORT. WHAT STAFF IS PROPOSING IS JUST TO ADD TO ONE OF THE REVIEW CRITERIA, A LITTLE BIT OF A CLARIFICATION ABOUT HOW WE WOULD EVALUATE COMPATIBILITY.

SO WE'RE ADDING IT TO JUST FOR CLARIFICATION THAT THE CITY COUNCIL MAY CONSIDER, AMONG OTHER RELEVANT LAND USE COMPATIBILITY FACTORS, THE LOCATION AND DISTRIBUTION OF EXISTING CONDITIONAL USES IN THE SURROUNDING AREA, AND THE CUMULATIVE EFFECT SUCH USES SHALL HAVE ON THE CHARACTER AND FUNCTION OF THE AREA.

THIS IS LANGUAGE THAT STAFF IS PROPOSING THAT WE ADD TO THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, AND WE'RE ASKING FOR YOU TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL TONIGHT. WITH THAT, I'LL TAKE ANY QUESTIONS.

DISAPPEARED ON ME AGAIN. ALL RIGHT. DO BOARD HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? I THINK WE HAD JUST ENOUGH TO. YES, YES, YES I SHALL.

[00:50:04]

I THINK YOU ALL DID THIS TO ME ON PURPOSE. WE GOT THIS PLOT GOING ON.

I KNOW, MAN, IT'S LIKE THE WEIRDEST MEETINGS. I DO, I APPRECIATE YOU GUYS SHOWING UP.

OH, DEFINITELY. APPRECIATE YOU AND THANKS FOR YOUR.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR LEADERSHIP. I NEED TO.

I NEED TO DO THIS. BUT DO YOU THINK WE CAN ASK THEM TO RESTATE THAT? BECAUSE THAT WAS TOTALLY NOT UNDERSTANDING WHAT SHE WAS COMING BACK.

BUT YOU KNOW, YEAH, EXPLAIN THAT WHAT THAT CASE IS ALL ABOUT, BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW IF I WAS FOCUSED ON THE OTHER CASE STILL OR WHAT, BUT IF SHE COULD JUST KIND OF SUMMARIZE IT BECAUSE I DIDN'T QUITE.

DID YOU GET WHAT YOU I READ I READ THE WHOLE STUFF.

OKAY, I DID, BUT I CAN'T FIND IT. I HAVE IT, I CAN'T FIND IT.

YES, SIR. OH. WHAT'S WITH ALL THE INFORMALITY HERE? JUST HANGING OUT. WE DIDN'T HAVE A QUORUM WHEN I GOT OUT.

THERE WAS NO QUORUM. I WOULD HAVE. I DIDN'T KNOW THAT.

I DON'T KNOW. SORRY ABOUT THAT. OKAY, SO YOU HAVE TO HAVE A QUORUM PRESENT? YES. NOT JUST BECAUSE SHE'S. BUT SHE'S PRESENTING ALL THE INFORMATION.

THAT'S THAT'S MY BAD. I DIDN'T KNOW THAT. I FOUND IT NOW.

I'LL READ IT. OKAY. YEAH. NO, THAT'S TOO SMALL FOR REAL.

KROGER DISTRIBUTION. I LOVE THAT. I LOVE THAT GUY.

YOU'RE DOING A GREAT JOB, BY THE WAY. I'M KICKBACK.

YEAH. I HAD A STROKE. I.

START SHAKING THAT GUY. MY DEPRESSION. NOPE. WHERE'S THE ONE? NEXT TIME I START TO DO SOMETHING SILLY, JUST GRAB ME AND SAY, DON'T GO TO THE BATHROOM. I DIDN'T.

I CAN BARELY SEE. WELL, I AM HIDING, SO I'M NOT GOING TO SEE ME VERY WELL, BUT I'LL KNOW NEXT TIME.

WHO'S TALKING RIGHT NOW? OH, THERE YOU ARE. AT THE SAME TIME.

THAT INTERSECTION. IS. THE INTERSECTION OF MALABAR. DEVELOPERS ARE GOING TO HAVE TO.

FIND YOU. THAT IS ONE OF WISE BEYOND HER YEARS. ACTIVELY. ACTIVELY INVOLVED IN THE COMMUNITY.

WOW. THAT'S AWESOME.

RIGHT. I LIKE CHECKING MY RING CAMERA. EVENTUALLY, IT'S GOING TO BE A REAL TRAFFIC LIGHT.

IT WILL BE. BUT RIGHT NOW IT'S JUST A TEMPORARY LIGHT BECAUSE WE HAVE TO WIDEN THE SAINT JOHN'S HERITAGE PARK.

SO THIS. OH. I'M SORRY. WE'RE JUST TALKING ABOUT THIS.

I KNOW THEY HAVE THEIR OWN LITTLE BOARD OUT THERE. ALL RIGHT, LET'S GO AHEAD AND CALL THIS THIS MEETING BACK TO ORDER.

WE'RE GOING TO RESUME WITH CASE NUMBER T 2600005.

IF YOU CAN JUST DO A QUICK SUMMARY. YES SIR. IF THERE ARE ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING STAFF'S PROPOSED TEXT AMENDMENT TO THE CONDITIONAL USE CRITERIA, THAT WILL BE SUPPLEMENTING ITEM SEVEN IN THAT REVIEW CRITERIA TO SPEAK TO COMPATIBILITY FACTORS.

[00:55:09]

ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF. THIS SEEMS LIKE COMMON SENSE.

I MEAN WITH THE AMOUNT OF VARIANCES WE'RE ISSUING, EVENTUALLY YOU HAVE TO CONSIDER THE COMPREHENSIVE MANNER.

SO YEAH, I FULLY SUPPORT THIS. OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

ALL RIGHT THEN. NO DIRECT QUESTIONS FOR STAFF.

I WILL OPEN IT UP FOR THE OPEN IT UP TO THE FOR COMMENTS FROM FROM THE PUBLIC.

ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS? ANYBODY IN FAVOR? ANYBODY OPPOSED.

ANYBODY ELSE CONFUSED? NO, I'M JUST KIDDING. ALL RIGHT THEN I WILL BRING IT BACK TO THE BOARD.

BOARD. WE JUST NEED A MOTION FOR THIS ONE. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO I SUPPORT ALLOWING THE CITY COUNCIL TO CONSIDER A NUMBER, LOCATION, DISTRIBUTION AND CUMULATIVE EFFECT OF SIMILAR CONDITION USES.

I APPROVE THE I. I MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.

I'LL SECOND IT. ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A FIRST AND A SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR. AYE AYE AYE. ALL RIGHT. MOVING ON.

ALL RIGHT. NUMBER CASE NUMBER T26-00006. MODEL.

MODEL HOMES, CITY OF PALM BAY. STAFF. WELL GOOD EVENING.

SO THIS ACTUALLY IS A TEXT AMENDMENT THAT IS BEING PROPOSED BY STAFF IN ORDER TO COMPLY WITH FLORIDA STATUTES.

SO A RECENT AMENDMENT TO FLORIDA STATUTES, CHAPTER 177, REQUIRES THAT LOCAL GOVERNMENTS PROVIDE EXPEDITED APPROVAL OF RESIDENTIAL BUILDING PERMITS FOR A MINIMUM OF 50% OF THE TOTAL NUMBER OF RESIDENTIAL UNITS, AS APPROVED WITH THE PRELIMINARY PLAT.

AND WHAT WE FOUND AS WE STARTED TO RECEIVE APPLICATIONS FOR APPROVED PRELIMINARY PLATS, WAS THAT THERE WAS A CONFLICT BETWEEN THE STATUTE AND THIS CODE, AND IT WAS MAKING IT DIFFICULT ON OUR BUILDING DEPARTMENT TO DECIDE WHO DO WE FOLLOW? WELL, WE FOLLOW FLORIDA STATUTE. SO THAT'S WHAT WE'VE DONE.

SO WE NEED TO PUT THIS IN LINE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE IN COMPLIANCE WITH FLORIDA STATUTES.

SO A SUMMARY OF THE CHANGES THAT WE'RE MAKING ALL OF COURSE, IN CHAPTER 172.

IN THAT .05 A AND B, WE'RE CLARIFYING THAT THE GENERAL BUILDING PERMIT RESTRICTION APPLIES TO ANY STRUCTURE WITHIN THE SUBDIVISION AND REQUIRES BOTH THE CERTIFICATE OF COMPLETION FOR SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS AND RECORDING OF THE FINAL PLAT BEFORE THE SUBDIVISION IS OPEN FOR GENERAL BUILDING.

WE'RE ALSO EXPANDING THE EARLY CONSTRUCTION EXCEPTION TO INCLUDE MODEL DISPLAY GROUPS OR EARLY START HOMES TO REQUIRE AN APPROVED PLAN IN COMPLIANCE WITH OUR CODE. CHAPTER 174. AND WE'RE ALSO LIMITING EARLY PERMITS TO A MAXIMUM OF 50%, OF COURSE, TO MATCH FLORIDA STATUTES. IT ALSO REQUIRES PROPOSED HOMES TO HAVE ADDRESSES ASSIGNED BY BREVARD COUNTY.

THAT WAS ANOTHER ISSUE THAT WE WERE RUNNING INTO WITH REGARD TO PROPERTY APPRAISER AND COUNTY GOVERNMENT WHO DOES OUR ADDRESSING.

SO ALL OF THESE PIECES NEEDED TO COME TOGETHER SO THAT ADDRESSES COULD BE ISSUED AS WELL.

AND WE PROHIBIT BOTH TEMPORARY AND FINAL CERTIFICATES OF OCCUPANCY UNTIL THE SUBDIVISION HAS RECEIVED A COC AND THE FINAL PLAT HAS BEEN RECORDED. SO WHILE WE WILL BE APPROVING THOSE MODEL HOMES PURSUANT TO FLORIDA STATUTE, WE DO HAVE STOP GAPS IN PLACE TO MAKE SURE THAT BEFORE THERE IS A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY THAT THE CITY HAS INSPECTED ALL OF THE PUBLIC SUBDIVISION IMPROVEMENTS. OKAY. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? I'LL TAKE ANY QUESTIONS.

STAFF IS ASKING FOR YOU TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL.

I HAVE A QUESTION. I UNDERSTAND THAT THE AMENDMENT IS QUITE IS REQUIRED TO COMPLY WITH THE STATE OF FLORIDA STATUTE 177.073 BEFORE PERMITS ARE ISSUED. WHO WILL VERIFY THAT THE ALL WEATHER, ROADWAY, FIRE ACCESS, WATER SUPPLY, PERMANENT ACCESS, SEWER AND ELECTRICAL REQUIREMENTS ARE ACTUALLY IN PLACE.

WE HAVE A TEAM OF STAFF WHO HAVE CHECKLISTS FOR THOSE FINAL INSPECTIONS.

SO YOU'RE SAYING STAFF THAT IS CONDUCTED BY STAFF.

[01:00:02]

YEAH, I WOULD HAVE TO LOOK AT THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE.

LET ME LOOK IN THE STAFF REPORT. TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IT IS THAT YOU'RE ASKING.

THERE IS A SEPARATE DEPARTMENT THAT HANDLES THE PERFORMANCE BONDS AND SUCH.

NOT MY DEPARTMENT. AND THEY WOULD MAKE THAT CLARIFICATION ABOUT WHAT THE BOND IS COVERING.

SO, MR. CHAIR, IF I MAY. YES, MA'AM. I BELIEVE AND THIS IS GOING OFF MEMORY NOW, BUT I BELIEVE AS FAR AS EARLY START HOMES ARE CONCERNED OR THOSE MODEL HOME TYPE HOMES THAT MIGHT BE CONSTRUCTED EARLY ON IN THE PROCESS BY A DEVELOPER.

TYPICALLY THEY, THEY DO GO AHEAD AND SUBMIT WHAT'S CALLED A DEMOLITION BOND, WHEREBY IF THEY, THEY DON'T CONSTRUCT THE PROPERTY TO STANDARD OR IF THEY DON'T GO BACK AND GET THE PROPER APPROVALS AND THE PROPERTY IS UNABLE TO RECEIVE A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY THEY SUBMIT A BOND THAT'S SUFFICIENT TO ALLOW THE CITY TO GO IN AND DEMOLISH THE PROPERTY IF NECESSARY.

BUT ALL OF THOSE OTHER INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS ARE TYPICALLY BONDED SEPARATELY UNDER THE, UNDER SEPARATE APPROVAL. SO YOU'RE LOOKING AT USUALLY TWO DIFFERENT BONDS FOR THIS TYPE OF, OF EARLY CONSTRUCTION. OKAY. OKAY. AND JUST ONE OTHER QUESTION.

SO I RECOGNIZE THE STATE MANDATE, BUT PALM BAY SHOULD APPLY EVERY AVAILABLE SAFEGUARD.

SO BUILDERS ARE NOT ALLOWED TO GET AHEAD OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDED TO SUPPORT THEIR DEVELOPMENTS.

IT'S JUST A STATEMENT. ALL RIGHT. I DID HAVE A QUESTION.

HOW HOW WILL THIS APPLY TO THE SCATTERED LOTS OR DO IT APPLY TO THE SCATTERED LOTS AT ALL? WELL, IT DEPENDS ON HOW THE APPROVALS HAVE OCCURRED.

IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT AN APPROVED PRELIMINARY PLAT FOR 50 HOMES, BUT THEY'VE BEEN DEVELOPED IN A SCATTER FORMAT, AGAIN IT'S UP TO 50% OF THE PRELIMINARY PLAT APPROVAL.

SO 25 HOMES COULD BE BUILT. WE DO HAVE REQUIREMENTS THOUGH FOR THE MODEL HOMES.

WE WE MAKE SURE IF YOU'VE EVER BEEN TO A MODEL HOME THAT THERE'S PARKING THAT IT MEETS ADA REQUIREMENTS.

SO TYPICALLY IT'S GOING TO BE A PUD OR A LARGER SUBDIVISION.

AND THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE AN AREA FOR PEOPLE TO WALK THROUGH THOSE MODEL HOMES.

I DON'T HONESTLY KNOW THE BUSINESS OF MODEL HOME BUILDING, BUT THAT'S THE BEST ANSWER I CAN GIVE YOU.

AND THE CERTIFICATE OF THE CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY THAT YOU WERE DESCRIBING IN THE, IN THE, IN THE, IN THE STAFF REPORT. SO WHEN IT, WHEN IT IS A SINGLE MODEL HOME LIKE THAT, THERE'S SUCH A C O TAKES PLACE AS SOON AS IT'S AFTER IT'S BUILT BECAUSE THERE WILL BE SOMEBODY THERE OR SO C O DOESN'T TAKE PLACE AT THAT TIME THAT I.

I BELIEVE THERE'S SOME SORT OF PROVISIONARY C O PROVIDED BY BUILDING DEPARTMENT.

THAT'S NOT MY DEPARTMENT, SO I CANNOT ANSWER THAT.

I DO NOT KNOW. OH, OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? NO. ALL RIGHT. I WILL OPEN IT UP TO PUBLIC COMMENTS.

ANYONE IN FAVOR OF THIS TEXTUAL AMENDMENT, PLEASE COME TO THE PODIUM.

BILL BATTEN, 586 OCEAN SPRAY STREET, SOUTHWEST.

I UNDERSTAND THE THE BOND FOR 130%, RIGHT. BUT I'VE WATCHED CONSTRUCTIONS COME IN.

WE HAVE SEVERAL OF THEM THROUGHOUT THE CITY THAT WERE STARTED AND FAILED.

AND YOU STILL HAVE A LOT OF INFRASTRUCTURE AND STUFF THAT'S LEFT THERE OVER.

I PROMISE YOU, AFTER THEY AFTER THEY DEMOLISH WHAT'S THERE, IT NEVER DOES LOOK LIKE IT DID A HUNDRED YEARS AGO, OR IT TAKES A HUNDRED YEARS TO BRING BACK THE LAND THAT THEY TORE DOWN WHEN THEY'RE STARTING TO BUILD.

THAT'S JUST SOMETHING TO CONSIDER. YOU NEVER PUT IT BACK TO WHAT IT WAS.

SO YOU'VE ALREADY YOU'VE ALREADY DAMAGED PART OF THE THE WATER REPLENISHMENTS WE WANT FROM THE CITY,

[01:05:04]

RIGHT? THE NEXT ONE IS MY QUESTION, BECAUSE THIS IS MANDATED BY STATE.

UNFORTUNATELY, WE'VE LOST A HOME RULE. HOW DOES THIS BENEFIT THE RESIDENTS OF PALM BAY? IT REALLY DOESN'T. BUT WE'RE TRYING TO MAKE ORDINANCES AND GUIDANCE JUST BECAUSE WE HAVE TO FROM STATE.

IT BENEFITS THE DEVELOPER. AS FOR SCATTER LOTS AND THEY HAVE THE MODEL HOMES.

A LOT OF THE MAJOR DEVELOPERS HAVE GOT MODEL HOMES SCATTERED ALL THROUGHOUT THE CITY.

DOES THAT INCLUDE THOSE MODEL HOMES OR IS IT THE DEVELOPER OR IS IT JUST STRICTLY FOR THE ONE SITE THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT? THAT'S WHAT KIND OF BOTHERS ME. IT'S GREAT WHEN THEY SAY A BUILDER.

WELL, I'LL JUST USE I'M NOT EVEN GOING TO SAY A NAME.

ONE BUILDER HAS GOT 5 OR 6 COMPONENTS GOING WITHIN THE CITY AND SCATTER LOTS GOING WITHIN THE CITY, BUT THEY HAVE MODEL HOMES ON EVERY ONE OF THE ARTERIAL ROADS THAT NOBODY LIVES IN, BUT THEIR MODEL HOMES, THAT THEY CAN COME IN AND GET THEIR FLOOR PLANS FOR ALL THE ANY SITES THAT ARE AVAILABLE.

SO I'M JUST WONDERING, LIKE YOU SAID, HOW ABOUT SCATTER LOTS? IF THAT COMPANY GOES BELLY UP, DO THEY TEAR THOSE DOWN? I DON'T KNOW, THAT'S WHY YOU GUYS ARE SITTING UP THERE AND I'M OUT HERE JUST BRINGING IT TO LIGHT.

UNFORTUNATELY, THIS ONE WAS MANDATED BY STATE UNFORTUNATELY.

SO LET'S JUST KEEP OUR GUIDELINES AND OUR PROTECTION TO PROTECT THE CITY IN THERE, WHICH PUTS THE RESPONSIBILITY BACK ON OUR INSPECTORS AND OUR FROM THERE.

OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU SIR. ANYONE ELSE THAT WANTS TO SPEAK IN FAVOR? ANYONE AGAINST. ALL RIGHT. I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC COMMENTS.

BRING IT BACK TO THE BOARD. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? FOR STAFF ON THIS ONE OR DO OR EMOTION. STAFF BE ABLE TO ANSWER SOME OF THE QUESTIONS THAT WERE ADDRESSED.

ABSOLUTELY. IF THEY WERE. IF THEY. I THINK SO.

I THINK THE BOTTOM LINE HERE IS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT APPROVED PRELIMINARY PLATS.

SO IF THERE IS A PLAT APPROVAL OF A SUBDIVISION, 50 LOTS PLANNED OUT, IT'S BEEN APPROVED BY THE CITY. 50% OF THOSE CAN BE BUILT PURSUANT TO FLORIDA STATUTE.

THE SCATTERED LOTS IS A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT SITUATION IF IT'S PART OF A APPROVED PRELIMINARY PLAT.

YES, 50% OF THAT APPROVED PRELIMINARY PLAT CAN BE CONSTRUCTED.

I THAT WAS THE BOTTOM LINE OF WHAT I HEARD. IF THERE WERE OTHER QUESTIONS THAT I MISSED, LET ME KNOW.

THERE'S A LOT OF STATEMENTS. SO THERE WAS A LOT OF STATEMENTS, NOT A WHOLE LOT OF QUESTIONS.

I WANTED TO GO AHEAD AND MAKE A MOTION, IF THAT'S ALL RIGHT.

UNLESS WE'RE A LOT MORE QUESTIONS. I SUPPORT OBVIOUSLY THE LEGALLY REQUIRED PROVISION STAFF PROVIDED THE STAFF CONFORMS CONFIRMS THE FINANCIAL INFRASTRUCTURE FIRE SAFETY, NO OCCUPANCY PROTECTION ARE ENFORCEABLE.

THAT'S MY MOTION. SO ARE YOU APPROVING? ARE YOU APPROVING? YEAH. I'M SAYING I SUPPORT OKAY AS LEGALLY REQUIRED.

RIGHT. WE'RE REQUIRED LEGALLY THE STATE MANDATE.

SO I'M SAYING I SUPPORT AS LEGALLY REQUIRED PROVIDED STAFF CONFIRMS THE FINANCIAL INFRASTRUCTURE FIRE SAFETY AND NO OCCUPANCY PROTECTIONS ARE ENFORCEABLE. THANK YOU. DID YOU SAY YOU APPROVE? I APPROVE IT, THANK YOU SIR. ALL RIGHT. IF I MAY.

YES, MA'AM. WAS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE CASE NUMBER 22600006? YES. I APPROVE ITEM 4-26-0006. EARLY RESIDENTIAL BUILDING PERMITS, MODEL HOMES. I SUPPORT IT. I MAKE A MOTION AS LEGALLY REQUIRED, PROVIDED STAFF CONFIRMS THE FINANCIAL INFRASTRUCTURE. FIRE SAFETY AND NO OCCUPANCY PROTECTIONS ARE ENFORCEABLE.

OKAY, WE WE HAVE AN APPROVED MOTION FOR APPROVAL.

AND I THINK I HEARD A SECOND DOWN HERE. YEAH.

SECOND. SECOND. ALL RIGHT. SO ANY OTHER FURTHER DISCUSSION.

ANY ANY OTHER. OKAY. ALL IN FAVOR. I AYE. AYE.

[01:10:08]

ALRIGHT. NUMBER. LET'S DO THIS ONE. TT26-00008.

PUBLIC HEARING AND ADMINISTRATIVE VARIANCE PROCEDURES.

THANK YOU. SO THIS IS ONE I REALLY NEED YOU TO PAY ATTENTION TO CLOSELY.

WE ARE PROPOSING TO AMEND THE CODE REVISIONS FOR APPROVAL OF VARIANCES.

AS YOU KNOW ALREADY WE HAVE STAFF LEVEL APPROVALS OF VARIANCES WHICH ARE CALLED ADMINISTRATIVE VARIANCES.

RIGHT NOW THERE ARE SOME WE CAN APPROVE AT 10%, OTHERS AT 20%.

STAFF IS PROPOSING TO TAKE IT ALL ADMINISTRATIVE VARIANCES TO THE 20% LEVEL SO THAT WOULD BE THE FIRST CHANGE. THE SECOND CHANGE IS THAT RATHER THAN HAVING THE VARIANCE GO FROM STAFF TO YOUR BOARD TO CITY COUNCIL, WE'RE PROPOSING TO AUTHORIZE THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD TO BE THE FINAL APPROVAL AUTHORITY ON VARIANCES THAT ARE REQUESTING 33% RELIEF, ANYTHING BETWEEN 20.5% AND 33.4%.

WELL, 33% WOULD BE A FINAL APPROVAL OR DENIAL AT THIS BOARD.

AND OF COURSE, THE APPEAL PROCESS WOULD BE IN PLACE.

IF THEY NEEDED TO APPEAL, THEY'D GO TO CITY COUNCIL.

IF THEY APPEAL MY DECISION AT A 20%, THEY APPEAL TO YOU.

SO THE APPEALS WOULD STILL WORK THROUGH OUR APPROVAL PROCESSES.

NOW ANYTHING ABOVE THAT 33% AGAIN WILL BE GOING TO CITY COUNCIL.

YOU WOULD JUST BE MAKING A RECOMMENDATION TO APPROVE, DENY OR APPROVE WITH CONDITIONS.

SO THE IMPORTANT THING HERE IS THAT WE'RE MAKING IT EVEN ACROSS THE BOARD AT 20% FOR ADMINISTRATIVE VARIANCE APPROVALS, WHICH CURRENTLY EXISTS FOR SOME TYPES OF VARIANCES.

THEN WE'RE ALSO AUTHORIZING PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD TO BE THE FINAL APPROVAL AUTHORITY FOR VARIANCES BETWEEN ADMINISTRATIVE AND THE 33%. I BELIEVE I COVERED IT ALL THERE, AND I'LL TAKE ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE AT THIS TIME.

BOARD HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? SO YEAH, I DO.

SO WILL ADJOINING OWNERS RECEIVE ANY NOTICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE VARIANCES? UP TO 20%, EVEN THOUGH THERE'S NO PUBLIC HEARING.

WOOD, WHO RECEIVED NOTICE, WILL ADJOINING OWNERS RECEIVE ANY NOTICE OF ANY ADMINISTRATIVE VARIANCE? UP TO 20%. EVEN THOUGH THERE'S NO PUBLIC HEARING? NO I APOLOGIZE. YES. SO THAT THAT'S CHAPTER 51.07, WHICH TECHNICALLY WOULD NOT BE UNDER YOUR PURVIEW, I BELIEVE. BUT IT IS PART OF THE ORDINANCE THAT I'LL BE PRESENTING TO THE CITY COUNCIL.

ALSO, I HAVE A GOOD MULTIPLE 20% ADMINISTRATIVE ADJUSTMENTS BE GRANTED ON THE SAME PROJECT, PRODUCING A MUCH LARGER CUMULATIVE DEVIATION.

SO I BELIEVE WHAT I HEARD YOU SAY IS IF A PROPOSAL CAME TO STAFF WITH A 20% VARIANCE FOR IT.

A REAR SETBACK, A 20% VARIANCE FOR OPEN SPACE.

YES, THEY COULD STILL GO THROUGH THE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCESS.

OKAY. THANK YOU. ONE LAST QUESTION. HOW MANY OF THESE DECISIONS WILL BE RECORDED AND MADE AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC? ALL OF THEM ARE MADE AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC.

OKAY. THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? JUST OUT OF CURIOSITY, WHICH ARE THE ONES THAT ARE 10% AND WHICH ONES ARE? I MEAN, I UNDERSTAND THERE'S A LOT OF THEM, BUT JUST WHAT ARE SOME EXAMPLES OF THINGS THAT WOULD BE 10% VERSUS WHAT WOULD BE 20%? SO WHAT WE HAVE IN THE CODE NOW IS THAT CURRENTLY THE THRESHOLD FOR A NEW CONSTRUCTION PROJECT, SOMEONE COMING IN WITH JUST A VACANT LAND AND THEY'RE PROPOSING WE CAN APPROVE AT 10%.

SEEMS LIKE IT REALLY STREAMLINED THINGS, STREAMLINES THINGS BECAUSE, I MEAN, WE GOT PEOPLE COMING IN HERE FOR ASKING FOR 50 AND IT'S LIKE,

[01:15:05]

OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? ALL RIGHT.

SEEING NONE. WELL, NOW BRING IT BACK TO THE BOARD.

AND ACTUALLY I WILL OPEN UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS.

ANYONE IN FAVOR OF THIS TEXTUAL AMENDMENT, PLEASE COME TO THE PODIUM.

OH ONE. HOLD YOUR HORSES. CAN I GET A COMMENT? HI. CHRISTINE STEVENS, 1561 WILLARD ROAD, NORTHWEST IS THE PRIMARY PURPOSE FOR THIS CHANGE.

TO STREAMLINE THE WORKFLOW AND TAKE THESE OFF THE AGENDA TO SAVE TIME.

LIKE I GUESS I'M, I'M CURIOUS WHAT THE PURPOSE IS FOR MAKING THE CHANGE.

THAT WOULD BE THE PURPOSE TO ALLOW HOMEOWNERS LIKE THE ONES THAT WERE HERE TONIGHT REQUESTING A VARIANCE NO HIGHER THAN 33% TO BE DONE AT THIS POINT. SO THE EXAMPLE WE SAW TONIGHT, HE WOULD, THEY WOULD STILL NEED TO GO TO CITY COUNCIL.

THEY WOULD TYPICALLY NOW THEY WOULD STILL NEED TO GO TO CITY COUNCIL.

BUT WITH THIS PROPOSAL ACCEPTED, IT WOULD TAKE THAT OFF CITY COUNCIL.

IT WOULD EVEN TAKE IT OFF OF THIS GROUP HERE.

NOT FOR THE ONE WE HEARD TONIGHT THAT WAS AT 50%.

THAT WAS 50%. YEAH. MOST COMMUNITIES, 35 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE.

I'VE NEVER HAD A COMMUNITY THAT APPROVED MORE THAN 25%.

IF IT WAS MORE THAN THAT, THEY JUST WEREN'T ALLOWED TO APPLY.

THEY HAD TO FIND A WAY TO MAKE IT WORK. OKAY.

WITH THAT QUESTION ANSWERED, I'M TOTALLY IN APPROVAL OF THIS BECAUSE I'VE BEEN ON THAT SIDE AS WELL AND HAD TO TAKE OUT THE TWO MEETINGS AND THE TIME AND THE QUESTIONS FROM THE NEIGHBORS. IT IS VERY CONFUSING FOR A LOT OF THE PUBLIC IF THEY DON'T KNOW.

SO YEAH, I'M ACTUALLY AN APPROVAL. I'LL FILL IT OUT.

THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE IN APPROVAL OR OF THIS TEXTUAL AMENDMENT? NO. ALL RIGHT. ALL THOSE THAT ARE OPPOSED TO THE TO THE TEXT.

SIR, I DON'T WANT TO HAVE TO FOLLOW MR. BATMAN AS A TV STAR.

THANK YOU. I'M TOM MARSHALL. I LIVE ON JUPITER BOULEVARD, UNIT 14.

I'M SPEAKING AS AN INDIVIDUAL HOMEOWNER WHO HAD A HOME PROJECT THAT WAS REJECTED BY PNC AND THEN LATER APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL UNANIMOUSLY. SO AS YOU CAN IMAGINE, I'M WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, I OBJECT TO THIS AND WOULD HOPE YOU'D YOU WOULD REJECT IT ALSO. I LIKE HAVING AN ELECTED REVIEW BODY THAT I AT LEAST THAT LAST RESORT.

IF YOU GUYS ARE HAVING A BAD DAY OR SOMETHING, I CAN I CAN LOOK THE GUYS IN THE EYES THAT I VOTED FOR AND ASK THEM TO APPROVE MY PROJECT.

YOU GUYS HAVE A TOUGH JOB. LIKE YOU SAID, MR. CHAIRMAN, YOUR VOLUNTEERS, YOU GENERALLY DO A GOOD JOB.

I APPRECIATE ALL YOU BRINGING YOUR EXPERTISE HERE.

I JUST, IN FACT, TONIGHT YOU HAD TO VOTE ON A SWIMMING POOL IN FLORIDA IN THE SUMMERTIME WITH A LITTLE BOY GIVING YOU THE STINK EYE.

I, I, I'D COLLAPSE UNDER THAT KIND OF PRESSURE.

SO I APPRECIATE YOUR JOB. IT AND WHEN I DO A HOME PROJECT, IT'S NOT AN ISSUE OF PERCENT RELIEF TO ME IF MY PROJECT GETS REJECTED, I GOT ZERO RELIEF. SO I AGAIN, IT'S ONE THING TO HAVE A BUILDING RIGID BUILDING CODE AND YOU CAN MAKE THE PROPERTY RIGHTS ARGUMENT, AT LEAST THE WAY WE HAVE IT SET UP. NOW I CAN GET TO THE COUNCIL AND AND APPEAL.

I WOULD ARGUE IF YOU WANTED TO STREAMLINE THE PROCESS, LET'S STREAMLINE THE BUILDING CODE.

WE WOULD BE SPENDING LESS TIME HERE, BUT THAT'S JUST ME.

THE OTHER THING I'D MENTION IS IT MIGHT BE IN YOUR INTEREST TO REJECT THIS.

YOU KNOW, TALLAHASSEE'S BEEN STICKING THEIR NOSE INTO LOCAL BUILDING CODES LATELY.

JUST A FEW MONTHS AGO, THEY WAIVED PERMITS FOR ANY PROJECT UNDER $7,500.

THEY'VE TAKEN AN ISSUE WITH OTHER ZONING CODES AND BUILDING CODES.

I THINK THE MORE RIGID WE MAKE THIS THING, THE MORE WE THEY WE INVITE THEM TO STICK THEIR NOSE INTO IT, WHICH IS NOT GOOD FOR, FOR ANY OF US. I'D RATHER DEAL WITH YOU GUYS THAN, THAN THE GUYS IN TALLAHASSEE.

I'D URGE YOU TO REJECT THIS AND MAKE THE CITY COUNCIL EARN THEIR MONEY HERE.

I APPRECIATE YOUR GOOD WORK. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, SIR.

MR. BEN. BILL BATTEN, 586 OCEAN SPRAY STREET, SOUTHWEST.

AS I LOOK AT THIS, THAT MY PRIMARY CONCERN IS ANYTHING LESS THAN ONE THIRD OF THE VARIANCE DOES NOT GO BEFORE THE

[01:20:04]

AND THAT'S WHY WE HAVE OUR VOTING OFFICIALS FOR US, SO WE CAN ADDRESS THEM WHEN WE WANT, WHEN WE WANT SOMETHING BECAUSE IT HAS AN IMPACT ON THE QUALITY OF LIFE. SO I SAY 10% FOR STAFF. WE MAY WE NEVER EVEN HEAR ABOUT WHAT THAT IS.

SPEAKING FROM EXPERIENCE. BILL BATTEN GETS THE PLANS AND REVIEWS.

EVERYBODY KNOWS THAT'S WHAT I DO. I REVIEW THEM, I GET THEM, AND I REVIEW THEM.

AND THEN I'LL SEE THESE PROPOSALS. THEN AS I'M LOOKING AT THEM, YOU KNOW, 6 OR 8 MONTHS LATER, I'LL SAY, WELL, THAT'S NOT WHAT WAS SET UP. THE KIOSK WAS SUPPOSED TO BE OVER HERE AWAY FROM THE MAIN ENTRANCE, BUT ALL OF A SUDDEN THE KIOSK IS RIGHT NEXT TO THE PRIMARY ROAD, STUFF LIKE THAT.

WELL, IT WAS ONLY A 10% VARIANCE, SO IT WAS APPROVED AT STAFF.

THOSE TYPES OF THINGS HAVE HAVE AN IMPACT ON THE QUALITY OF LIFE FOR THE PEOPLE AROUND IT.

SO THE OTHER THING FROM MY STATEMENT BEING BILL BATTEN, THE SELFISH PERSON THAT HE IS, I'M GOING TO SAY KEEP IT AS IS.

WE GET TO ADDRESS IT WITH PLANNING AND ZONING.

WELL, ANYTHING LESS THAN ANYTHING GREATER THAN 10%.

AND WE THEN GET TO ADDRESS IT ALSO WITH THE CITY COUNCIL.

SO MY STATEMENT IS LEAVE IT AS IS AND LET'S MOVE ON SMARTLY.

KEEP IT THE SAME. DON'T HAVE TO CHANGE ANYTHING.

THANK YOU. WOULD ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO SPEAK? SHE'S GOT A BIG NO. ALRIGHT THEN, I WILL CLOSE THE. WOULD YOU LIKE TO DO A REBUTTAL OF ANY.

NO, I'M NOT SURE THERE'S ANY ANYTHING ELSE LEFT TO SAY? ALL RIGHT, THEN I WILL. I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC COMMENTS AND BRING IT BACK TO THE BOARD.

BOARD. THERE THERE MAY OR MAY NOT BE SOME DISCUSSION ON THIS ONE.

HOWEVER, WE DO NEED A, A A MOTION. I'LL MAKE A MOTION.

I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ITEM 5T20T260008.

PUBLIC HEARING AND VARIANCE PROCEDURES THAT SUPPORT GIVING PNC FINAL AUTHORITY OVER VARIANCES VARIANCES UP TO 33%.

I'LL SECOND IN THE INTEREST OF DISCUSSION. ALL RIGHT.

GOT A FIRST. WE GOT A SECOND. LET'S OPEN THIS UP FOR DISCUSSION.

MY QUESTION IS ABOUT. I'M SORRY, MR. CHAIR, IF I MAY.

YES, SIR. I NEED TO GET WAY BETTER AT THAT. I JUST STARTED TALKING, MR. CHAIR, IF I MAY. MY QUESTION IS THAT WHAT IS THE APPEALS PROCESS FOR THAT? LIKE, IF SOMEONE DOES GET AN ADMINISTRATIVE DENIAL OR WHATEVER, COULD THEY THEN APPEAL TO US AND THEN FROM FROM THERE AND WHAT'S THAT LOOK LIKE? YES. CURRENTLY, ANY ADMINISTRATIVE DECISIONS OF THE CITY MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE WOULD BE APPEALED TO THIS BOARD. AND THAT IS I THINK THERE ARE SOME TIME REQUIREMENTS WITHIN SO MANY DAYS OF FINAL JUDGMENT. OUR CITY ATTORNEY IS LOOKING AT THAT.

THEY WOULD JUST NEED TO LET US KNOW THAT THEY WANT TO APPEAL THAT DECISION.

AND THEN WE PUT IT ON TO THE COUNCIL, I MEAN, THE BOARD'S AGENDA AND THEN VICE VERSA.

OR JUST LIKE THAT WITH THE 33% APPROVED FOR YOU, THE BOARD TO APPROVE 33%.

IF SOMEONE WANTED TO APPEAL YOUR DENIAL, THAT APPEAL WOULD GO TO CITY COUNCIL.

SO THERE'S THERE'S SOME RECOURSE THERE. IT SEEMS LIKE WHY WOULDN'T ANYONE THAT'S DENIED.

JUST GO AHEAD. IS THERE SOME SORT OF IS IT AN ONEROUS PROCESS OR IS IT DIFFICULT IN ANY WAY OR DOES IT JUST TAKE MORE TIME? IT IS SET FORTH IN THE CODE. THEY. THEY JUST NEED TO FILE THE, THE CORRECT PAPERWORK WITHIN THE, THE TIME FRAME SET IN 172.014 OF THE CODE, SO THAT THE VARIANCE SECTION LINKS BACK TO THAT, TO THAT PARTICULAR SECTION. I'M JUST SURPRISED MORE PEOPLE DON'T AVAIL THEMSELVES OF THAT.

THE APPEALS PROCESS. WELL THEY DO. WE HAVEN'T DENIED VERY MANY VARIANCES.

IT'S A GOOD NIGHT TO ASK FOR SOMETHING APPARENTLY.

MR. CHAIR. I DON'T AGREE WITH THE. THIS CHANGE.

I BELIEVE IT SHOULD STAY AS IS. THERE IS A DIFFERENT EXPECTATION WITH THE CITY COUNCIL WHEN YOU'RE AN ELECTED OFFICIAL.

AND THAT EXPECTATION DOES NOT EXTEND ALL THE WAY TO THIS BOARD.

AND I WILL SPEAK ONLY FOR MYSELF, BUT OTHERS MAY AGREE.

I MAY NOT ALWAYS BE THE MOST KNOWLEDGEABLE COMING UP HERE ABOUT CERTAIN TOPICS AS I TRY TO BE.

[01:25:07]

SO I DON'T LIKE TO BYPASSING THEM. YOU KNOW, OBVIOUSLY, I KNOW WE HAVE THE ADMINISTRATIVE AS IT CURRENTLY IS, BUT THE COUNCIL NEEDS THEIR SAY WHETHER THEY AGREE OR NOT.

BUT THAT'S ALL I WOULD JUST I WOULD LIKE TO STATE THAT, YOU KNOW, OUR CITY IS BECOMING LARGE AND THERE'S, THERE'S A LOT OF A LOT OF THINGS WERE BUILDING.

A LOT OF WE'RE GETTING, YOU KNOW, JUST TAKE A LOOK AROUND. WE'RE GETTING VERY, VERY BIG. AND IF WE CONTINUE TO PILE ALL THAT ON THE CITY COUNCIL, THEY'LL NEED A TWO DAY BOARD MEETING. SO I THINK IT'S I THINK THIS LIGHTENS THE LOAD.

I THINK IT'S A GREAT STAFF SUGGESTION. I THINK IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE SHOULD MOVE FORWARD ON.

OKAY. WELL, I. I FEEL AS IF THE, I MEAN, I'VE SAID ON THIS BOARD FOR A WHILE AND I'VE SEEN A LOT OF DIFFERENT VARIANCES AND PRIOR TO THE, THE STAFF THAT WERE THAT, THAT ARE HERE NOW, WE DIDN'T, THE, THE STAFF DIDN'T TAKE PART IN A LOT OF THE, IN A LOT OF THE VARIANCES OR THE DECISION MAKING FOR THE VARIANCES.

SO THIS GIVING STAFF ONE WHO WAS THE FIRST HAND.

I'M JUST GOING TO PUT IT LIKE THIS. THE FIRST HANDERS IN THIS, GIVING THEM AN OPPORTUNITY TO TO WRITE THEIR REPORT.

AND IF THE VARIANTS CAN BE DONE AT THAT LEVEL, THEN IT'S DONE.

THEY'RE NOT THEY DON'T HAVE TO WAIT ANOTHER MONTH OR TWO MONTHS OR, YOU KNOW, WHEN, WHEN WE CAN ALL COLLECTIVELY GET TOGETHER TO, TO HAVE THAT DECISION RENDERED BY A BOARD. SO THAT MAKES SO THAT KIND OF STREAMLINES IT THERE.

THEN IF THEY DO MAKE IT TO THE BOARD, THEN IT'S, IT'S A, IT'S ANOTHER PROCESS WHERE NOW WE'RE HERE TO DO OUR JOBS TO, TO EITHER APPROVE OR DISAPPROVE OF THE VARIANCE.

SO I THINK WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE IS JUST CLEANING UP SOME OF THE, THE, THE, THE, THE JARGON HERE.

AND AT THE SAME TIME, I THINK WE'RE, WE'RE TRYING TO STREAMLINE IT AS BEST AS WE POSSIBLY CAN.

SO AND, AND I, I AGREE, I AGREE ON BOTH ENDS.

I, I MEAN, I DO IT'S THIS, THIS IS ONE THAT'S THAT I FELT THAT WE NEEDED A LITTLE BIT MORE DISCUSSION WITH, BUT I, I AM LEANING A LITTLE BIT MORE TOWARDS LET'S STREAMLINE THIS BECAUSE IT'S, THERE ARE GOING TO BE A LOT MORE, A LOT MORE POOL PEOPLE COMING IN ASKING FOR, FOR, FOR VARIANCES JUST BECAUSE OF HOW THEIR HOUSES ARE SITUATED.

WOULD IT BE PREFERABLE TO JUST ALIGN TO THE 20% BUT NOT THE 33? I KNOW, I KNOW, I KNOW NOW IT'S ALREADY 10 TO 20 ANYWAY, SO IT'S KIND OF MAYBE A MOOT POINT, BUT ALIGNED TO THE 20% AS THE STANDARD, BUT NOT TO THE 23.

THAT GIVES THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD THE FINAL SAY. IT'S JUST A SUGGESTION, YOU KNOW, MOTIONS ON THE FLOOR. IT'S UP TO HIM IF HE WANTS TO DECIDE. BUT YEAH, I'D LIKE TO STAY WITH THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION.

I THINK 33%. THAT'S THAT'S THE NUMBER THAT'S BEEN LOOKED AT.

AND I THINK THAT IF YOU TAKE ALL OF THE. AND I BELIEVE THERE'S ENOUGH TALENT UP HERE, WE CAN MAKE THOSE DECISIONS.

IT'S IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT ISN'T GOING TO TAKE BRAIN SURGERY TO FIGURE THESE THESE PROJECTS OUT AS THEY COME IN.

I'VE A BUILDER DEVELOPER. IT'S NOT IT'S NOT NOT THAT DIFFICULT.

I THINK WE CAN TAKE A LOT OF THE LOAD OFF OF THE CITY COUNCIL BY APPROVING THIS TONIGHT.

YEAH. I THINK YOU'RE SMARTER THAN YOU GIVE YOURSELF CREDIT FOR TOO.

AND I THINK YEAH. AND, YOU KNOW, JUST LIKE WHAT YOU JUST SAID, I KIND OF THINK THAT THERE'S, THERE'S STILL, THERE STILL IS A, A, AN APPEAL PROCESS.

SO IF THERE HAD NOT BEEN AN APPEAL PROCESS, THEN I WOULD NOT BE IN FAVOR OF THIS.

SO THERE IS STILL THERE'S THERE, THERE IS A, AN APPEAL PROCESS.

SO THAT'S KIND OF WHAT PUT ME OVER THE EDGE TOO, IS THE GOOD THE GENTLEMAN DOWN AT THE BOARD RECOMMENDED. IS THIS THE APPEAL PROCESS? I THINK SINCE THERE'S THAT, THAT KIND OF HAS THEM THAT GIVES THEM ANOTHER OUT.

SO I'M I'M DEFINITELY IN FAVOR OF IT. MR. CHAIR.

YES, MA'AM. IF I COULD. IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU YOU WERE ALL SPLIT WITH NOT ONLY THE PERCENTAGE, BUT JUST THE FINAL AUTHORITY ISSUE. WOULD IT WOULD IT BE SOMETHING THAT THE

[01:30:02]

YEAH, I SUPPORT IT AS IS. I THINK WE'RE READY TO MAKE A DECISION.

I THINK WE'RE READY. YES, SIR. OKAY. HE I THINK IS LIKE THAT COME WILL ALWAYS BE APPROVED NO MATTER THE BOARD.

AND IF IT'S AND IF IT'S THE PROPERTY OWNER'S RIGHT, ALL FOR IT.

BUT IF THE IF THERE'S ABILITY AND TO LIMIT ANY LARGER SIZE PROJECTS, IT WOULD MAKE ME MORE FEEL MORE COMFORTABLE.

I MEAN, NOW THERE SEEMS TO BE COMFORTABILITY ACROSS THE BOARD. THE OTHER THREE.

BUT IF WE COULD DO THAT, GREAT. BUT ONCE AGAIN, IT'S HIS MOTION.

MAY I ASK, SO WHO'S THE PRIMARY DECIDER THAT YOU SAID THE CITY MANAGER MAKES THOSE ADMINISTRATIVE DECISIONS ULTIMATELY OR HIS DESIGNEE.

BUT FOR ADMINISTRATIVE WHAT WHAT PERCENTAGE OF THOSE DO YOU THINK WOULD BE HANDLED BY THE CITY MANAGER VERSUS HOW MANY WOULD BE HANDLED BY HIS DESIGNEE? LIKE, WHAT DOES HE DO? MOST OF THEM OR YOU OR THE DESIGNEE DOES MOST OF THEM? NO, I'M HIS DESIGNEE. HE HE HAS A BIG JOB, SO I TAKE CARE OF THAT UNTIL HE TELLS ME NOT TO.

OKAY, SO THE WHEN I SAY I, I MEAN MY TEAM. RIGHT.

SO THE ACREAGE WOULD MAKE WOULD WOULD YOU'D BE OKAY WITH THAT? YEAH. AND AT THAT POINT, WE, IF WE WERE RECOMMEND RECOMMENDING BODY TO SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, ACREAGE OR SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE COVERED UNDER THAT, YOU KNOW, WE WOULD TAKE THE MUNDANE PROPERTY RIGHTS CONVERSATION AWAY FROM THE COUNCIL, WHICH I THINK IS WHAT EVERYBODY THE STATEMENT THAT LITERALLY WAS SAID AS PEOPLE CONTINUE TO MOVE INTO THE THING, IT'S GOING TO MUNDANE AND BOG DOWN THE COUNCIL, GET IT? THAT'LL TAKE COUNCIL AWAY AND STILL KEEP IT HERE.

BUT PROJECTS THAT ARE LARGER THAT MAY AFFECT A LARGER AREA.

SOME HAVE, SOME HAVE HAVE SOME OTHER EFFECT OF THE CITY WOULD STILL GO BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL.

THAT WOULD BE MY THOUGHT. BUT AGAIN, IF IT MAKES HIM FEEL BETTER, I'M AMENABLE TO EITHER WAY.

I DON'T SEE THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN ONE ACRE 100 ACRES.

I MEAN, THE VARIANCE IS A VARIANCE, AND IF IT'S 33%, WE'RE NOT SAYING WE'RE MAKING ALL THE DECISIONS UP TO 33% OF THE VARIANCE THAT I THINK THAT'S LIKE, AGAIN, IT'S NOT BRAIN SURGERY.

SO YOU LOOK AT A PLAT AND IF THEY'RE GOING IN 33%, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD ULTIMATELY DECIDE ON.

IT IS. AND YOU KNOW, WE'RE WE'RE NOT DOING IT OURSELVES.

THE STAFF IS COMING IN RECOMMENDING IT. SO WE'RE TAKING THE STAFF WORK THAT THEY'VE DONE, THEY'VE PUT IT TOGETHER, AND THEN WE'RE MAKING A DECISION BASED BASED ON THAT AND MAYBE OUR OWN OBSERVATIONS.

BUT I THINK IF WE'RE GOING TO TAKE THE WEIGHT OFF THE CITY COUNCIL, WE HAVE TO DO IT AND NOT JUST KIND OF TIPTOE AROUND IT.

WE JUST HAVE TO MAKE THAT DECISION. MY LAST COMMENT ON IT IS THAT I GET IT.

I APPRECIATE EVERYTHING STAFF DOES, BUT THE PEOPLE THAT ELECTED THE CITY COUNCIL, THE STAFF ISN'T HIRED BY THE PEOPLE OF PALM BAY.

THE COUNCIL IS ELECTED. SO. THE GOVERNMENT OF A CITY IS FOR THE PEOPLE.

AND IF THE COUNCIL IS THE ONLY VEHICLE THAT THEY HAVE, AND WE TAKE THAT AWAY FOR LARGER SCALE PROJECTS.

JUST MY OPINION. AND I'LL JUST SAY, IF WE HAD A DENIAL SAYING HERE AND THEN THEY CAN APPEAL IT.

CORRECT. SO THEY'RE NOT LOCKED WITH OUR DECISION, THEY STILL HAVE ANOTHER WAY OUT.

THEY HAVE ANOTHER APPEAL PROCESS. SO WE'RE JUST LETTING THE LOAD FOR THE COUNCIL AND THEY AND THE PEOPLE HAVE ANOTHER OPTION.

IF IF WE IF THE REJECTED, THEY HAVE ANOTHER OPTION TO TO APPEAL IT AND BRING IT BACK FOR APPROVAL.

I JUST THINK THAT WE'RE CONFUSING PEOPLE LIKE RESIDENTIAL HOMES TO COMMERCIAL PROJECTS, BUT THAT I THINK WE JUST KIND OF GET TO THE VOTE. ALL RIGHT. ALL RIGHT. SO WE HAVE A MOTION.

WE HAVE A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR. AYE AYE AYE NAY NAY.

[01:35:10]

ALL RIGHT. GENTLEMEN CAN WE GO BACK. I'M SORRY.

TWO, TWO. I COULDN'T. I WAS 313131. OKAY. THANK YOU.

MR. CHAIR. CAN WE HAVE THAT BY ROLL? YOU'RE GOING TO PUT US ON THE SPOTLIGHT? NO, I'M JUST KIDDING. MISS SANDRA, COULD YOU CALL THE ROLL, PLEASE? OKAY. MR. WARNER. I MR. CATALANO, I. MR. MR. MCNALLY.

NAY, AND MR. NORRIS. I THREE ONE.

OKAY, LET'S MOVE ON TO. OTHER BUSINESS AND. THIS IS

[1. Proposed Amendment to the Planning and Zoning Board By-Laws]

I GUESS WE'VE WE'VE MOVED THIS ONE TWICE ALREADY.

SO I THINK THIS IS THE ONE THAT MR. FILIBERTO BROUGHT UP ABOUT THE ELECTION PROCESS BETWEEN THE PRESIDENT AND THE VICE PRESIDENT.

YES, SIR. YEAH. PETE SAID HE'D LIKE TO BE HERE WHEN HE WASN'T ABLE TO BE HERE.

HE'S CALLED OUT OF TOWN, SO HE'S ASKING FOR IT TO BE TABLED.

AND I, I WOULD I WOULD I PROPOSE THIS TO AGREE TO THAT.

HE'S THE ONE THAT BROUGHT IT UP. HE SHOULD BE HERE TO REPRESENT IT.

I AGREE. SO WE'RE SO I JUST I JUST NEED SOMEONE TO MAKE A MOTION SO THAT WE TABLE THIS TO THE NEXT MEETING.

I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO TABLE THE PROPOSED PNC BYLAW AMENDMENT SECOND.

ALL RIGHT. HAVE A MOTION. I HAVE A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR.

AYE AYE AYE. ALL RIGHT, GENTLEMEN, I HAVE ONE MORE THING ON THE.

IT'S NOT NECESSARILY AN AGENDA ITEM, BUT IT'S SOMETHING THAT I FEEL AS THOUGH THAT IT JUST NEEDS TO BE ADDRESSED.

OUR, OUR, OUR STAFF WORKS WORKS VERY HARD TO PUT TOGETHER THESE TO PUT TOGETHER OUR, OUR OUR REPORTS, THE STAFF REPORTS AND I APPRECIATE EVERYTHING THAT THE STAFF DO BECAUSE WHEN YOU GO BACK AND YOU READ THEM, YOU CAN SEE HOW IN DEPTH THEY, THAT THEY ARE WITH THE, WITH THEIR REPORTS.

SO I WOULD APPRECIATE, I WOULD CONTINUE, I WOULD APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT WE DON'T, WE DON'T LOOK DOWN ON, ON OUR STAFF AND THAT WE APPRECIATE WHAT OUR STAFF IS DOING FOR US BECAUSE THEY, THEY DO A LOT BEHIND THE SCENES.

THEY DO DO A LOT MORE THAN WHAT WE THAN WHAT WE SEE.

AND YOU CAN SEE IT IN THE REPORTS. I MEAN, AGAIN, NOT TO HARP ON, ON THE TIME FRAME OF, OF BEING ON THIS BOARD, BUT I'VE, I'VE SEEN IT EVOLVE WITH, WITH WHAT WE'VE ASKED FOR WITH THEM GOING BACK AND, AND, AND PUTTING IN THE PUTTING IN OUR TAKING, TAKING OUR INPUT AND, AND PUTTING IT INTO THE REPORTS.

SO THEY'RE NOT DOING THIS IN VAIN. AND I DON'T WANT THEM TO BE DOING IT IN VAIN.

SO FOR, FOR A STAFF MEMBER TO FEEL AS THOUGH THAT WE, THAT, THAT WE HAVE TALKED DOWN TO THEM OR, OR ABOVE THEM NOT ON THIS BOARD. SO I WANT TO KEEP IT RESPECTFUL AND I WANT, I WANT, I WANT THE WANT, WANT YOU ALL AS BOARD MEMBERS TO BE THE, THE PILLARS OF SOCIETY THAT WE'RE SUPPOSED TO BE BECAUSE WE'RE, EVEN THOUGH WE'RE NOT PAID, WE'RE, WE'RE STILL HOLDING A VERY, WE'RE HOLDING A CLASSY ROLE.

AND, AND I WANT US TO RESPECT THE STAFF THAT SUPPORTS US.

THAT'S ALL I HAVE. I AGREE. YOU APPROVE. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THAT.

ALL RIGHT. MEETING ADJOURNED. THANK YOU.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.