[4. EDEN/MAR STUART SMALL-SCALE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT (LEGISLATIVE) (RC): ORDINANCE No. 2535-2025; AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF STUART, FLORIDA, FOR A SMALL-SCALE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT AS DEFINED IN F.S.§163.3187; AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE MAP FOR AN APPROXIMATE 22.76-ACRE PARCEL FROM COMMERCIAL TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD SPECIAL DISTRICT FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION; AMENDING THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE; AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.]

WANT ME TO READ THE WHOLE THING OUT? YES, PLEASE. OKAY. SURE THING. EDEN. MAR STEWART, SMALL SCALE, COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT. LEGISLATIVE RC, ORDINANCE NUMBER 25352025. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF STUART, FLORIDA FOR A SMALL SCALE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT AS DEFINED IN FS 163.3187. AMENDING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE MAP FOR AN APPROXIMATE 22.76 ACRE PARCEL FROM COMMERCIAL TO NEIGHBORHOOD SPECIAL DISTRICT. FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION AMENDING THE

[00:05:02]

FUTURE LAND USE MAP. PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT. PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY. PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES. THANK YOU. CHAIR. I WOULD LIKE TO INVITE MICHAEL HOUSTON WITH H.J, WHO IS THE REPRESENTATIVE OF THIS PROJECT. GOOD EVENING. MEMBERS OF THE BOARD MICHAEL HOUSTON WITH HRA DESIGN STUDIO HERE REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT, ALONG WITH TERRY MCCARTHY, WITH MCCARTHY SUMMERS. MARIO. MARIO MORGADO, WHO IS OUR CLIENT, IS UNABLE TO BE HERE THIS EVENING. SO WE'VE ASKED FOR A TABLING TO THE FIRST MEETING IN MARCH, WHICH WE BELIEVE, OR THE MEETING IN MARCH, WHICH WE BELIEVE IS MARCH 6TH. I DO HAVE THE PROOF OF PUBLIC NOTICE HERE WITH ME, WHICH INCLUDES THE COPIES OF THE SIGNS. SIR, I HAVE A QUESTION. I HAD THOUGHT THIS WAS FEBRUARY, BUT NOW WE'RE MOVING IT TO MARCH. THEY ARE REQUESTING TO MARCH.

UNFORTUNATELY. IT'S NOT MARCH 6TH. IT'S MARCH 13TH. THAT'S CORRECT. THAT'S WHAT I WAS WONDERING. YES. OKAY. OKAY. OKAY. 13. 13. OKAY. OKAY. YES, MA'AM. OKAY. SO I HAVE THESE FOR STAFF AND FOR THE CLERK, BUT THAT IS OUR REQUEST. OKAY. DO WE NEED. WE NEED TO MAKE A MOTION.

STAFF, DO YOU HAVE A RECOMMENDATION? WE AGREE WITH THE APPLICANT. YOU AGREE WITH THE POSTPONEMENT? OKAY. POSTPONEMENT. WOULD SOMEBODY LIKE TO MAKE A RECOMMENDATION FOR POSTPONEMENT OF THIS PROJECT TO THE MARCH LPA MEETING? IT'S A CONTINUANCE, RIGHT? YES.

CONTINUANCE. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO CONTINUE TO THE MARCH 13TH LPA MEETING. I'LL SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? OKAY. ALL RIGHT. NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA. EDEN MAR STEWART, MAJOR

[5. EDEN/MAR STUART MAJOR AMENDMENT TO THE COMMERCIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (QUASI-JUDICIAL) (RC): ORDINANCE No. 2536-2025; AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF STUART, FLORIDA, FOR A MAJOR CPUD AMENDMENT TO THE 12.31- ACRE MAR-STUART (MARKET PLACE) COMMERCIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (CPUD) LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF SE FEDERAL HIGHWAY, TO INCORPORATE A 22.76-ACRE PARCEL WITHIN THE OVERALL MARSTUART CPUD FOR A TOTAL LAND AREA OF 35.07-ACRES; PROVIDING FOR CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE; AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.]

AMENDMENT TO THE COMMERCIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, QUASI JUDICIAL. ORDINANCE NUMBER 2536-2025, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF STUART, FLORIDA, FOR A MAJOR PUD AMENDMENT TO THE 12.31 ACRE MAR STUDENT MARKETPLACE. COMMERCIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT PUD LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF SOUTHEAST FEDERAL HIGHWAY, TO INCORPORATE A 22.76 ACRE PARCEL WITHIN THE OVERALL MAR STUART KPD FOR A TOTAL LAND AREA OF 35.07 ACRES, PROVIDING FOR CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT. PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES. AGAIN, I WOULD LIKE TO INTRODUCE MR. HOUSTON WITH HCA DESIGNS. MADAM CHAIR, MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, THE SAME REQUEST FOR THIS ITEM. THE TWO OBVIOUSLY GO TOGETHER. SO CONTINUANCE TILL THE MARCH 13TH IS REQUESTED. AND WE APPRECIATE IT. OKAY. WOULD ANYBODY LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE TO THE MARCH 13TH MEETING? I MOVE FOR THE CONTINUANCE TO MARCH 13TH. SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? OKAY. THANK YOU

[6. POLK STREET HOTELS, INC. (AKA FAIRFIELD INN HOTEL) AMENDMENT TO THE OFFICIAL ZONING ATLAS (REZONE) (QUASI-JUDICIAL) (RC): ORDINANCE No. 2537-2025; AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF STUART, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE CITY’S OFFICIAL ZONING MAP; TO REZONE A 0.33-ACRE PARCEL; LOCATED AT 255 SW 6TH STREET; BEING MORE 1/16/2025 LPA DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT “A” ATTACHED, FROM THE URBAN WATERFRONT (UW) ZONING DESIGNATION TO THE URBAN HIGHWAY (UH) ZONING DESIGNATION; PROVIDING DIRECTIONS TO THE CITY CLERK; PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF ALL ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.]

VERY MUCH. THANK YOU. SIR. ITEM NUMBER SIX. POLK STREET HOTELS, INC, AKA FAIRFIELD INN HOTEL.

AMENDMENT TO THE OFFICIAL ZONING ATLAS REZONE QUASI-JUDICIAL RC ORDINANCE NUMBER 25372025. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION TO THE CITY OF STUART, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE CITY'S OFFICIAL ZONING MAP TO REZONE A 0.33 ACRE PARCEL LOCATED AT 255 SOUTHWEST SIXTH STREET. BEING MORE DESCRIBED IN EXHIBIT A ATTACHED FROM THE URBAN WATERFRONT ZONING DESIGNATION TO THE URBAN HIGHWAY ZONING DESIGNATION, PROVIDING DIRECTIONS TO THE CITY CLERK, PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF ALL ORDINANCES AND CONFLICT, PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES. DO WE NOW SWITCH TO THIS SINCE THIS IS THE QUASI JUDICIAL AND. OKAY.

SOUNDS GOOD. DO THE BOARD MEMBERS HAVE ANY EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS TO DISCLOSE? NO, I HAVE NONE. OKAY. ALL THOSE GIVING TESTIMONY, PLEASE STAND, RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND AND BE SWORN IN. ARE YOU AT ALL RIGHT? OKAY. ALL RIGHT. DO YOU AFFIRM THAT THE TESTIMONY THAT YOU ARE ABOUT TO PROVIDE IN THIS HEARING WILL BE THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH, SO HELP YOU GOD? I DO. OKAY. I'D JUST LIKE TO LET THE RECORD REFLECT. THERE WAS TWO PEOPLE SWORN IN. WHAT? WHAT DO I NEED TO REPEAT THAT? I DID IT. OKAY. OKAY. AS YOU TESTIFY, PLEASE PUT YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS ON THE RECORD. THE CITY DEVELOPMENT. OKAY. PLEASE PRESENT YOUR TESTIMONY, INCLUDING ANY EVIDENCE AND YOUR RECOMMENDATION REGARDING THIS CASE. THAT'S YOU? YES. SO I CAN GO AHEAD WITH MY PRESENTATION. YES. OKAY. THANK YOU. GOOD

[00:10:05]

EVENING, BOARD MEMBERS, AND CONGRATULATIONS ON THE CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR. FOR THE RECORD, MY NAME IS JODY KUGLER. I'M THE DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR FOR THE CITY OF STUART. TONIGHT I'LL BE PRESENTING AGENDA ITEM NUMBER SIX FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE OFFICIAL ZONING MAP FOR A PETITION TO REZONE A 0.33 ACRE SITE LOCATED AT 255 SOUTHWEST SIXTH STREET, FROM THE URBAN WATERFRONT TO THE URBAN HIGHWAY ZONING DESIGNATION. PURSUANT TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.

PUBLIC NOTICE REQUIREMENT. ON DECEMBER 20TH, 2024, THE APPLICANT MAILED NOTICES TO ALL ADJACENT OWNERS WITHIN 300FT OF THE SUBJECT PARCEL TO PROVIDE DETAILS OF THE REQUESTED PETITION AND A DATE AND TIME OF TONIGHT'S PUBLIC HEARING. IN ADDITION, THREE PUBLIC NOTICE SIGNS WERE POSTED ON THE PROPERTY WITH THE SAME INFORMATION. THE 0.33 PARCEL IS CURRENTLY VACANT AND BOUNDED BY THE VACANT VACATED FUNERAL AND CEMETERY CREMATORY SITE. THE 0.33 ACRE SITE IS PART OF A MERGING OF THREE LOTS TO REDEVELOP. THE SITE IS WITHIN THE URBAN OVERLAY DISTRICT AND THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AREA. THE CURRENT FUTURE LAND USE IS A DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT AND GENERALLY USES. PURPOSE PERMITTED INCLUDE. LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL, MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, OFFICE, COMMERCIAL, RECREATIONAL, LODGING, PUBLIC FACILITIES, AND CONSERVATION AND MIXED USE PROJECTS. THIS JUST SHOWS THE CONSISTENCY THAT THE ENTIRE PROPERTY IN BLUE IS THE DOWNTOWN REDEVELOPMENT. FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION. THE EXISTING ZONING IS FOR. THIS 0.33 ACRE SITE IS AN URBAN WATERFRONT, AND THE DEFINITION FOR THAT IT REFERS TO A SPECIAL WATERFRONT ORIENTED USES, INCLUDING MARINAS, RESTAURANTS, ENTERTAINMENT, HOTELS, AND HIGHER DENSITY RESIDENTIAL. IS THIS A MARINE? INDUSTRIAL USES ARE A CONDITIONAL PERMITTED. THE EXISTING ZONING IS CURRENTLY ZONED. URBAN WATERFRONT IS DEPICTED WHERE THE RED CIRCLE IS ON THE ON THE MAP. THE PROPERTY TO THE NORTH AND SOUTH AND WEST ARE ZONED URBAN HIGHWAY, AND THE PROPERTY TO THE EAST IS ZONED URBAN WATERFRONT. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO REZONE THIS PROPERTY TO URBAN HIGHWAY. THIS IS A DEFINITION OCCURS OCCURS ALONG BOTH SIDES OF SOUTHEAST FEDERAL HIGHWAY AS IT TRAVERSES THE URBAN CODE DISTRICT. THIS.

THIS AREA ALLOWS LARGE FRONT SETBACKS AND HIGHWAY ORIENTED COMMERCIAL OR HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL USES, WITH GENEROUS PARKING LOTS. AGAIN, YOU CAN SEE THE PROPERTY AND IS. THE PROPOSAL SHOWS A PURPLE. LET ME JUST POINT THAT OUT REAL QUICK RIGHT HERE. AND IT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES. THIS PETITION CONFORMS TO THE CRITERIA OUTLINED IN SECTION 11.01 .09 OF THE LAND OF THE STUART LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, FLORIDA STATUTES AND IS CONSISTENT WITH THE GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES OF THE CITY OF STUART COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THE LOCAL PLANNING AGENT REPORT A RECOMMENDATION TO THE CITY OF STUART COMMISSION TO APPROVE THE REZONING. THE SUBJECT PARCEL FROM THE URBAN WATERFRONT TO THE URBAN HIGHWAY. THERE WAS A IN A STAFF REPORT ON THE LAST PAGE. UNDER ONE OF THE JUSTIFICATIONS IT TALKED ABOUT, AND I JUST WANTED TO POINT THIS OUT, TO PUT IT ON RECORD. AND WE HAVE MADE THE CHANGE SINCE IT WAS BROUGHT TO OUR ATTENTION. ON YOUR LAST PAGE OF YOUR STAFF REPORT UNDER ITEM I. IT DOES SAY THE EVIDENCE, THE EXISTENCE OF OTHER ADJACENT SITE IS I'M SORRY IT'S DARK SO I'M TRYING TO READ SITE THE CITY FOR THE PROPOSED USES. DISTRICTS ALREADY PERMITTED SUCH USES. SO IN YOUR STAFF REPORT IT TALKED ABOUT A MARTIN COUNTY UNINCORPORATED. IT WAS AN ERROR AND A TEMPLATE. WE DID CORRECT IT TO STATE THAT BOTH PROPERTIES ARE CONSISTENT. AND THEY DO ALLOW A HOTEL USE AS A PERMITTED USE IN BOTH DISTRICTS. THIS IS JUST TO CLEAN UP THE DESIGN GUIDELINES TO BE CONSISTENT FOR ONE TYPE OF REDEVELOPMENT. THE APPLICANT ALSO HAS A PRESENTATION AS WELL AND I'D LIKE TO INTRODUCE MR. MR. JARED GAYLORD. THE PETITIONER MAY NOW GIVE TESTIMONY AND CALL ANY OTHER WITNESSES. PLEASE. YES. FORMALLY STATE YOUR NAME. GOOD

[00:15:02]

EVENING EVERYBODY. MY NAME IS JARED GAYLORD. FOR THE RECORD, REPRESENT POLK STREET HOTELS INCORPORATED. I'M JOINED BY MR. PATEL THIS EVENING, WHO IS A MEMBER OF POLK STREET HOTELS, INC. THE PROPERTY AGAIN WAS REFERENCED IN JODI'S PRESENTATION. AND, JODI, IF IT'S OKAY, CAN I ASK YOU JUST TO FLIP THROUGH THE SLIDES? ONE. OH, SURE. ABSOLUTELY. SO IF YOU COULD GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. SO THIS IS AN AERIAL SHOWING THE SURROUNDING PROPERTY. IT'S LOCATED ALONG THE FEDERAL HIGHWAY CORRIDOR CORRIDOR JUST SOUTH OF FRAZIER CREEK. DUNE DOG, IF ANYONE LIKES HOT DOGS, IS JUST TO THE NORTH. SO THAT'S KIND OF A WAYPOINT.

JODI DID POINT OUT THAT MOST OF THE PROPERTIES NORTH AND SOUTH ALONG THAT FEDERAL HIGHWAY CORRIDOR ARE ZONED URBAN HIGHWAY. THIS IS SOMEWHAT OF A UNIQUE SITUATION. MY CLIENTS PURCHASED THE PROPERTY IN APRIL OF 2023. CURRENTLY AT THAT TIME, THE PROPERTY WAS ZONED. THERE WERE THREE PARCELS, ALL SEPARATE, ALL WITH. THERE WERE TWO ZONING DESIGNATIONS FOR THOSE THREE PARCELS. ONE WAS URBAN HIGHWAY FOR THE NORTHERN PARCEL. THE SOUTHERN PARCEL ALONG FEDERAL HIGHWAY WAS ALSO URBAN HIGHWAY, AND THAT EASTERN PARCEL WAS URBAN WATERFRONT, WHICH IS SOMEWHAT STRANGE BECAUSE THAT EASTERN PARCEL DOESN'T ACTUALLY HAVE ANY WATERFRONT PROPERTY ALONG FRAZIER CREEK. THAT'S ACTUALLY THE EAST. THE FURTHER PROPERTY TO THE EAST THAT HAS FRONTAGE ALONG FRAZIER CREEK. AND THEN THE NORTHERN SLIVER OF THAT PARCEL ALSO DOES HAVE FRONTAGE ALONG FRAZIER CREEK. SO IT'S SOMEWHAT, YOU KNOW, JUST STRANGE THAT IT WOULD BE URBAN WATER FRONTAGE. BUT HERE WE ARE TODAY. IF YOU COULD FLIP TO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. IF YOU'VE HAD A CHANCE TO DRIVE BY THE SITE OR IF YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH THE PROPERTY, IT IT WAS A FORMER FUNERAL HOME. SO THAT'S WHAT PREDOMINATES THAT THAT FRONTAGE ALONG US HIGHWAY ONE. THE PARCEL THAT IS ZONED URBAN WATERFRONT THAT IS ACTUALLY CURRENTLY VACANT ALONG SIXTH STREET. IF YOU GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. THESE ARE JUST SOME SOME SITE PHOTOS OF THE EXISTING PROPERTY. IT IS IN NEED OF SOME REDEVELOPMENT. SO THAT'S WHAT MY CLIENTS ARE TRYING TO DO. UNFORTUNATELY, BECAUSE OF THAT ZONING DISCREPANCY, SOME OF THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ARE CONTRADICTORY AND CONFLICTING. RIGHT? THE MAIN ISSUE BEING THAT ONE OF THE ZONING REGULATIONS WANTS THE PARKING IN THE FRONT AND ONE OF THE ZONING REGULATIONS WANTS THE PARKING IN THE REAR. SO WHEN WE HAVE THAT ON ONE SITE, IT'S DIFFICULT TO MAKE A DECISION. AND THAT'S WHY WE ARE HERE BEFORE THE LPA THIS EVENING. IF YOU GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. THIS IS JUST A SURVEY OF THE PROPERTY. THE ENTIRE SITE IS ABOUT 1.58 ACRES.

THE PORTION THAT IS THAT WE'RE REQUESTING THIS EVENING IS ONLY 0.33 ACRES. SO A THIRD OF AN ACRE, IN ESSENCE. AND THAT'S IN THE LOWER RIGHT HAND CORNER OF THE SOUTHEASTERN PORTION OF THE PROPERTY. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. AND THIS IS JUST AN UP CLOSE. SURVEY IN ESSENCE SHOWING WHERE THE WHERE THE EXISTING FUNERAL HOME IS AND THAT THAT EASTERN, THAT SOUTHEASTERN PORTION OF THE PROPERTY IS VACANT. YOU CAN GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. THIS IS THAT UNITY OF TITLE THAT WAS RECORDED. OBVIOUSLY WE NEEDED TO JOIN ALL THE PROPERTIES TOGETHER SO THAT WE DON'T HAVE SETBACKS AND OTHER THINGS LIKE THAT FOR WHEN THE PROPERTY IS EVENTUALLY REDEVELOPED. THAT WAS RECORDED IN MAY OF 2023. YOU CAN GO TO THE NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. I'M NOT GOING TO TAKE TOO MUCH TIME BECAUSE JODY WENT THROUGH THESE. BUT AGAIN, YOU CAN SEE THE EXISTING SOUTHEASTERN THIRD OF THE PROPERTY IS ZONED URBAN WATERFRONT. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE. THANK YOU. AND THEN WE'RE PROPOSING THAT IT'S ALL CONSISTENT WITH URBAN HIGHWAY. NEXT SLIDE. AND THEN AGAIN THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP SHOWS THAT IT IS THE DOWNTOWN DESIGNATION. AND I'M HAPPY TO GO THROUGH THE REZONING STANDARDS OR ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT THE LPA MAY HAVE. OKAY. MY PRESENTATION IS THAT THE IT'S THAT CONCLUDES YOUR PRESENTATION. OKAY. DO THE BOARD MEMBERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE PETITIONER? SO WE DON'T ASK FOR COMMENT FOR THIS BECAUSE NORMALLY WE WOULD ASK COMMENT.

BUT I DON'T SEE ANY LIKE PUBLIC COMMENT. THERE'S NOT A SPOT FOR IT. ALL RIGHT. WELL ON THIS THAT DOESN'T APPEAR. THAT SHOULD BE PARAGRAPH SEVEN. OH IT'S ALL THE WAY DOWN THERE. OKAY. OKAY. NEXT STEP WOULD BE TO SEE IF THERE'S ANY MOTION AND WHAT'S A MOTION. AND A SECOND IT'S ON THE FLOOR.

AND THEN YOU CAN TAKE PUBLIC COMMENT. OH OKAY. NORMALLY WE DO IT FOR YOU BUT KIND OF A DIFFERENT WAY. SO OKAY. DOES THE CITY STAFF HAVE ANY RESPONSE OR COMMENTS RELATED TO THE PRESENTATION? NO, WE DO NOT. OKAY. DOES THE PETITIONER WISH TO OFFER ANY REBUTTAL TESTIMONY? OKAY. CAN I MAKE A COMMENT? KELLY? YES. SO THIS IS STRICTLY FOR THE REZONING. IT IS NOT JUST

[00:20:09]

FOR THE PUBLIC. IT'S NOT FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL. THAT IS ANOTHER PROCESS, I BELIEVE THROUGH THE CRB. CORRECT. THAT WOULD SINCE IT'S DOWNTOWN. OR IS THAT LPA, IF I MAY ANSWER THAT.

THE RIGHT NOW THE APPLICANT DOES HAVE A APPLICATION FOR A MINOR SITE PLAN. THE WAY OUR ORDINANCE READS IS IF IT IF IT'S JUST A STRAIGHT MINOR SITE PLAN AND THEY MEET ALL THE CRITERIA, IT'S APPROVED AT ADMINISTRATIVE LEVEL. OKAY. OKAY. SO WE'RE STRICTLY VOTING ON THE CHANGE FROM THE URBAN WATERFRONT TO URBAN HIGHWAY ZONING. I GUESS MY QUESTION IS IF THIS IS IN THE DOWNTOWN DISTRICT, WHY IS IT NOT IT? WHY IS IT AT THE LPA AND NOT JUST AT THE CRB? IT WILL BE PRESENTED TO THE CRB AS WELL. BUT THIS IS THE LOCAL PLANNING. THIS IS THE RECOMMENDATION BOARD. OKAY. AND ARE THERE ANY LIKE SETBACK DIFFERENCES. IS THERE LIKE WHAT'S THE MAJOR DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO. SO THE MAJOR DIFFERENCE IS IN THE URBAN WATERFRONT, THEY TALK ABOUT A VISTA THAT YOU HAVE TO HAVE A VIEW TO THE WATER. IN YOUR PARKING LOT FROM THE REAR.

THIS PROPERTY DOESN'T FLANK ALONG THE FRAZIER CREEK ON THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY. SO IT'S HARD TO PUT A VIEW SHED THROUGH A PARKING LOT THAT'S INCONSISTENT. ALSO, THE SETBACKS ARE THE SAME. IT'S JUST REALLY YOUR DESIGN CRITERIA AND HOW YOU HOW YOU. DESIGN THIS HOTEL. SO AND ALSO AS, AS THE APPLICANT TALKED ABOUT PARKING UP FRONT VERSUS PARKING OUT IN THE REAR.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WAS COVERED. ALL RIGHT. SO WE ARE CLOSING THE HEARING AT THE CONCLUSION OF ALL EVIDENCE. AND BOARD MEMBERS, PLEASE DELIBERATE IN PUBLIC, CITING THE FACTS BEING CONSIDERED AND STATE THEIR POSITION AND FORMULATE A MOTION.

MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE. I'LL SECOND. OKAY. NOW WE OPEN PUBLIC COMMENT. PLEASE GO OVER THERE.

HI, I'M JULIE SIEGEL AND I LIVE IN THE BACKYARD ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THAT CREEK. AND I GUESS ONE THING THAT BOTHERED ME A LITTLE BIT AS I'M WATCHING IS THAT, YOU KNOW, YOU SEE ALL THE COLOR, BUT WHAT YOU DON'T SEE IS THAT OUR BACKYARDS ARE SO CLOSE TO THAT. SO WHEN I HEARD THE WORDS ENORMOUS, LET'S SEE, WHAT WAS IT? GENEROUS PARKING LOT SCARES ME A LITTLE BIT IN TERMS OF THE LIGHTING, IN TERMS OF WHERE THE DUMPSTERS WOULD GO, THE SOUND, ALL OF THAT. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT LITTLE SECTION IS RELATED TO OUR BACKYARDS, BUT I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE YOU ALL KNEW THAT SEVERAL OF US ARE HERE FROM OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. WE BACK UP TO THAT CREEK. THAT CREEK IS VERY TINY, AND IT IS LITERALLY IN OUR BACKYARD. AND THERE ARE ABOUT 15 HOUSES IN THAT SECTION.

SO I JUST WANTED TO KIND OF MAKE SURE KIND OF FLAG US. OKAY. THANK YOU. WHAT I THINK I WOULD RECOMMEND, BASED ON WHAT I'M HEARING, IS WE'RE JUST APPROVING A ZONING. BUT WHEN THE SITE PLAN ACTUALLY BECOMES BEFORE I BELIEVE THIS, YOU SAID THE CRB. YES. STAFF. RIGHT. OKAY. WELL, SO THEN THAT OPENS A WHOLE NEW CAN OF WORMS THAT IT DOESN'T COME BEFORE A PUBLIC RIGHT. SO TO GET THEIR COMMENTS, HOW WOULD THEY BE HEARD THEN? YES, THAT'S MY CONCERN. THEY CAN CONTACT STAFF AND WE CAN SIT DOWN WITH THEM AND GO OVER THE PLANS. WE'D BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO. AND YOU'RE SAYING STAFF THAT? YES. THAT WOULD BE THIS LADY RIGHT HERE. SO ANYTHING SHE IS YOU.

JODY. YES. ACTUALLY MET WITH YOU A YEAR AGO. YES. SO THE WAY THE ORDINANCE READS TODAY THAT A MAJOR SITE PLAN THAT'S OVER 50,000FT■!S WOULD HAVE TO GO TO THE BOARD, TO THE CITY COMMISSION FOR APPROVAL. IF YOU THINK ANYTHING UNDER DOES NOT REQUIRE A CITY COMMISSION APPROVAL, IT JUST REQUIRES ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF APPROVAL. THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT THEY STILL DON'T HAVE TO MEET ALL THE GUIDELINES WITHIN THE CODE. THEY STILL HAVE TO MEET THE CHADS.

THEY STILL HAVE TO MEET THE SCREENING REQUIREMENTS FROM ADJACENT PROPERTIES. THEY WOULD STILL HAVE TO MEET ALL THE ARCHITECTURAL STANDARDS. SO THIS IS WHY THIS THIS ZONING ASK IS TO MAKE CONSISTENT GUIDELINES. SO WE'RE LOOKING AT ONE SET OF GUIDELINES. INSTEAD OF TRYING TO MAKE TWO DIFFERENT GUIDELINES WORK THAT ARE NOT CURRENTLY WORKING TODAY. RIGHT I GET IT.

BUT IF ONE SET OF GUIDELINES IS PARKING IN THE FRONT AND ONE SET IS IN THE BACK, I'M NOT SURE HOW THAT AFFECTS US. CAN YOU TELL ME WHICH WHICH ONE OF THESE IS PARKING IN THE FRONT VERSUS PARKING IN THE BACK? SO THE HIGHWAY WOULD BE PARKING IN THE REAR INSTEAD OF THE HOTEL BEING PUSHED BACK TO THE TO THE TO THE REAR PROPERTY LINE. THE URBAN HIGHWAY HAS SOME OTHER DESIGN CRITERIA THAT THEY WOULD THAT WE JUST RECENTLY ADOPTED, THAT THEY HAVE TO DO A WHOLE TREE

[00:25:04]

LANDSCAPING ALONG US, ONE TO WIDEN THE SIDEWALKS FOR PEDESTRIANS TO WALK, ADD SOME SHADE THERE. SO THERE IS A BENEFIT. STILL, THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY IS STILL THERE. THE CONCERN IS THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY. THEY WOULD STILL HAVE SOME SCREENING REQUIREMENTS THAT THEY WOULD HAVE TO DO FROM THE RESIDENTIAL TO THEIR PROPERTY. SO CAN I ASK? I KNOW THIS IS NOT WHAT WE'RE CONSIDERING TODAY, BUT HOW MANY STORIES IS THIS HOTEL GOING TO BE? I DO BELIEVE RIGHT NOW IT IS FOUR STORIES. YES. SO THE FOUR STORIES AT THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY, I'M NOT TELLING YOU WHAT TO THINK, BUT JUST IN MY THINKING IS IF IT'S FOUR STORIES AT THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY, THEY'RE GOING TO BE LOOKING DOWN ACROSS THE CREEK WHERE IF YOU PUSH THOSE FOUR STORIES CLOSER TO US, ONE AND YOU HAVE PARKING LOT BEHIND, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE A FOUR STORY BUILDING AS CLOSE TO YOUR PROPERTY LOOKING DOWN OVER YOU. SO IT THAT WHETHER PARKING IS IN THE FRONT OR BACK TO ME, I THINK I'D RATHER HAVE THE PARKING CLOSER TO MY PROPERTY AND NOT HAVE THE FOUR STORY LOOKING DOWN ON MY PROPERTY. BUT AGAIN, THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE DECIDING TODAY. IT'S JUST A FOOD FOR THOUGHT. THERE'S A CREEK IN BETWEEN WHERE THE THIS. SO LET ME ASK A QUESTION. SO BECAUSE THERE'S A CREEK DO THE SAME RESIDENTIAL STANDARDS. BECAUSE TECHNICALLY THERE'S A CREEK RIGHT BEHIND IT, NOT A HOUSE. BUT DO YOU HAVE TO ABIDE BY THE SAME STANDARDS EVEN THOUGH IT'S THE CREEK AND NOT A HOUSE? YES. YOU STILL HAVE TO ABIDE BY THE SAME STANDARDS. THERE'S. YES. OKAY. ANSWER IS YES. OKAY. AND THEN ONE OTHER QUESTION. SO IT SAYS THAT IT CAN BE APPROVED ADMINISTRATIVELY IF IT'S UNDER IF WE HAVE RESIDENTS SUCH AS THESE LOVELY PEOPLE HERE WHO ARE CONCERNED, CAN WE THEN ASK THAT IT COME BEFORE US, OR DOES IT AUTOMATIC THAT IT NEEDS TO GO TO BE ADMINISTRATIVELY DONE? THE CODE DOES SPECIFICALLY STATE IF IT'S UNDER 50,000FT■!S, IT IS APPROVED ADMINISTRATIVELY. OKAY. SO WE DON'T EVEN GET AN OPTION MASKING KIND OF THE ATTORNEY. SORRY. SO IF THEY'RE STRAIGHT ZONING SO THEY'RE JUST SWITCHING TO ZONING. IF YOU RECALL PUDS OR CUSTOM ZONING, ANY TIME YOU MAKE A CHANGE IN A PUD, IT WOULD COME BACK BEFORE THE BOARDS. IN THIS CASE THEY CAN GO STRAIGHT. ZONING FOR THIS SIZE PROPERTY AND NOT HAVE TO GO BEFORE A BOARD UNLESS THEY WANT TO DEVIATE FROM THE CODE LIKE A CONDITIONAL USE TYPE THING. THEN THAT WOULD COME BEFORE THE BOARD. OKAY, SO EVEN THOUGH THEY'RE GOING TO BE DOING A LARGE SCALE DEVELOPMENT BECAUSE OF THIS, THEY STAY WITHIN THEIR ZONING, THEN THEY DON'T THEY CAN DO ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL. IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE TELLING US? THE SIZE. AND YOU HEARD THE DIRECTOR OVER HERE JUST SAY UNDER 50,000 SQUARE FOOT, WHICH THIS PROJECT IS AT. I DON'T KNOW, BUT I'M ASSUMING THAT'S WHAT IT IS. HOW MANY SQUARE FEET IS THIS? IT'S RIGHT AROUND 49,000. OH GOOD LORD. WHAT A SURPRISE. BUT THAT IS THE LINE. I MEAN, IT'S UNDER 50,000. SO IF A PROJECT UNDER 50,000FT■!S, THEN THE CODE SAYS THAT THE DIRECTOR HAS THE AUTHORITY TO APPROVE IT ADMINISTRATIVELY UNLESS THEY'RE TRYING TO DEVIATE FROM THE CODE.

I MEAN, WE'VE WE HAVE A CODE IN PLACE BECAUSE WE WANT FOLKS TO BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE CODE WITHOUT HAVING TO COME FOR DEVIATION, YOU KNOW, SO OUR CODE IS THERE FOR A PURPOSE. AND IF THEY'RE GOING TO STAY WITHIN THE CODE CITY'S POSITION, THAT'S A GOOD THING. IF THEY'RE GOING TO DEVIATE FROM THE CODE, THEY GOT TO COME IN AND HAVE PERMISSION. BUT I GUESS MY CONCERN IS THEY MAY HAVE TO DO THAT. WE DON'T KNOW THAT. RIGHT? YEAH. NO, NO, NO. BUT MY CONCERN IS THAT AS REPRESENTATIVES OF THE PUBLIC, WE LIKE TO MAKE SURE THAT THE PUBLIC'S VOICE IS HEARD NOT JUST BY STAFF, BUT BY US AS REPRESENTATIVES OF THE COMMUNITY. SO THIS IS WHEN I HAVE A BIT OF AN ISSUE, PARTICULARLY WHEN IT'S SITTING JUST SLIGHTLY UNDER THE REQUIREMENT, WHICH SOMEBODY OBVIOUSLY WAS VERY SMART TO MAKE SURE THEY WOULDN'T HAVE TO COME BEFORE. SO THAT'S WHERE I HAVE A PROBLEM. WELL, WE ARE AT A PUBLIC FORUM TODAY. YES. THEY'RE FREE. I ASSUME THERE'S OTHER FOLKS HERE THAT ARE GOING TO SPEAK. THEY CAN SPEAK TODAY ON THE MATTER. OKAY. AND WE ALREADY HAD ONE LADY COME UP AND SPEAK OKAY FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. SO AS FAR AS SPEAKING TO A BOARD, THEY CAN DO THAT RIGHT NOW. SO BUT THEY DON'T. BUT WE DON'T HAVE THE DETAILS OF THE ACTUAL PLAN RIGHT NOW. SO THEN THAT IS VERY HARD BECAUSE YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND THE DETAILS TO BE ABLE TO SPEAK TO THEM. SO IT'S KIND OF NOT REALLY, I GUESS IS MY POINT. WELL, NOT EVERY PROJECT THAT IS NOT EVERY APPLICATION GOES BEFORE THE BOARD. YEAH, THERE'S STRAIGHT ZONING. THEY DON'T HAVE TO GO BEFORE THE BOARD. WE ARE TRYING TO ENCOURAGE FOLKS TO BE STRAIGHT ZONING. YEAH. AGAIN, IF THIS PROJECT, A LOT OF PROJECTS HAVE TO DEVIATE FROM THE CODE AND GET PERMISSION, I WE JUST DON'T HAVE THE PLAN BEEN PRESENTED. LIKE, DO WE HAVE PRELIMINARY PLANS? DOES IT LOOK LIKE IT'S GOING TO BE STRAIGHT ZONING? DOES IT LOOK LIKE IT'S GOING TO COME BEFORE A BOARD, OR IT LOOK LIKE IT'S NOT ASKING FOR EXCEPTIONS? DO WE KNOW? I CAN'T ANSWER THAT. THERE'S NOTHING IN YET. OKAY. I

[00:30:02]

DO BELIEVE THE APPLICANT THE APPLICANT HAS SUBMITTED SOME SUBMITTALS IN RETURN. THIS IS WHERE THE REZONING WAS REQUESTED TO BE CONSISTENT WITH ONE SET OF GUIDELINES. SO I DO BELIEVE THE APPLICANT'S READY FOR THE REZONING TO BE APPROVED OR CONSIDERED. AND THEN FROM THERE, THEY WILL RESUBMIT WITH THE ONE SET OF GUIDELINES. IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO TRY TO USE TWO DIFFERENT TYPES OF GUIDELINES WHEN ONE WHEN THE PROPERTY THAT'S IN QUESTION DOESN'T EVEN FLANK THE FRAZIER CREEK. SO NOW, JUST FOR SOME REASSURANCE, THEY DO HAVE TO DO A SUBSTANTIAL ARCHITECTURAL GUIDELINES IN THE URBAN HIGHWAY ALONG ACTUALLY THE FRONTAGE AND ALONG SIXTH STREET.

AND WE ARE REQUESTING CERTAIN THINGS THAT THEY WOULD BRING THE SIDEWALK DOWN. SO THERE'S CONNECTIVITY. THEY ARE GOING TO ADDRESS THEIR STORMWATER. I DO KNOW THERE'S SOME STORMWATER ISSUES ALONG CHANNEL AVENUE, AND THEY'RE GOING TO ADDRESS IT ON THEIR SITE. THAT WILL HOLD PROBABLY WILL RETAIN ALL THEIR STORMWATER. THAT WILL PROBABLY HELP OUT WITH CHANNEL AVENUE OR SIXTH STREET, WHERE I DO KNOW THAT THEY HAVE EXPERIENCED SOME FLOODING. THEY ALSO HAVE TO DO PUBLIC ART REQUIREMENTS. SO AND THERE'S SOME DEVIATION FOR HEIGHTS. SO THEY THEY ARE WORKING THROUGH THAT RIGHT NOW OKAY. SO IS THERE A POSSIBILITY BEFORE WE APPROVE THIS AS ONE OF THE CONDITIONS THAT THEY MUST HAVE A PUBLIC MEETING WITH TO PRESENT THE PROJECT TO HOMEOWNERS FOR THEM TO PROVIDE COMMENT. SO WE CAN'T CONDITION A REZONING APPLICATION, BUT WE CAN CERTAINLY GO AHEAD AND REQUEST THAT FROM THE APPLICANT TO PREPARE SOME TYPE OF MEETING FOR THE PUBLIC TO ATTEND OR TO COME AND LOOK AT THE PLANS. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. ONE OTHER COMMENT. SO IT APPEARS THAT THE CREMATORIUM IN THE BACK IS GOING TO BE REMOVED, OKAY. WHICH IS GOOD FOR THE NEIGHBORS. ONE THING THAT I HAVE SEEN THAT HAS BEEN SUCCESSFUL, WHEN YOU HAVE NEIGHBORS THAT ARE VERY CONCERNED ABOUT A PARKING LOT AND A TALL BUILDING, IF YOU'RE ABLE TO DEVELOP THAT LANDSCAPE, PLAN IN THE BACK AND SHOW THE SIGHT LINES, WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO SEE AS FAR AS A PARKING LOT AND THE BUILDING FROM THE FOUR STORY, HOW THEY'RE GOING TO BE IMPACTED. I THINK THAT'S GOING TO HELP A LOT. A VISUAL. YEAH. IS THERE ANYTHING IN PLACE IN THE CODE NOW TO PROTECT LIKE LIGHT POLLUTION INTO THE NEIGHBORING ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES? YES, SIR. THEY WOULD HAVE TO SUBMIT A PHOTO MATRIX WHICH SHOWS ZERO AT THE PROPERTY LINE. SO THEY'RE NOT FLOODING OR DOING LIGHT POLLUTION OVER SPILLAGE ONTO THE CREEK AND ALSO ONTO ADJACENT PROPERTIES AND ACTUALLY ON US ONE AS WELL. OKAY, OKAY. YEAH. WE ONE OF THE APPLICANTS ASKED AN AUDIENCE, HOW DO WE GET TO SEE THE PLANS? YOU'RE MORE THAN WELCOME TO CALL OUR OFFICE. YOU CAN SIT DOWN WITH US ANY TIME RIGHT NOW. WE DON'T HAVE A RESUBMITTAL, SO I CAN SHOW YOU WHAT THEY PRESENTED IN THE PAST. BUT BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN TRYING TO GET THE CONSISTENT GUIDELINES.

BUT ONCE THEY DO, WE CAN WE CAN CERTAINLY WORK WITH THIS GROUP AS WELL. I'D ALSO LIKE TO ADD THAT THIS WILL GO BEFORE THE BOARD, THE CITY COMMISSION TO TWO PUBLIC HEARINGS, OKAY, IN THE FUTURE. SO THEY WOULD HAVE TIME TO GET WITH STAFF PERFECT. AND THEN SPEAK THEIR MIND TO THE CITY COMMISSION. OKAY. THAT'S OUR MAIN CONCERN. BUT WHEN IT GOES BEFORE THE COMMISSION, IT'LL STILL BE JUST FOR THE STRAIGHT ZONING AND NOT THE SITE PLAN. CORRECT? THAT'S CORRECT.

IT'S A LIMITED ISSUE, JUST LIKE THIS IS A LIMITED ISSUE BEFORE YOU TODAY, BUT THAT DOESN'T PREVENT THAT. THERE MIGHT BE A DEVIATION FROM THE CODE REQUIREMENT BY THE DEVELOPER, AND IT WILL HAVE TO GO BEFORE THE BOARD ON SOME OTHER ISSUE. OKAY. WE HAVE ANOTHER PUBLIC COMMENT. ROBERT HAMILTON, MR. HAMILTON. GOOD EVENING. GOOD EVENING SIR. I LIVE JUST NORTH OF FRAZIER CREEK AND SOME OF THESE PEOPLE ARE OUR NEIGHBORS. FIRST OF ALL, I'D LIKE TO THANK THE BOARD, AND I THINK SOME OF YOUR SUGGESTIONS WERE REALLY GOOD. I THINK WHAT WOULD ALLEVIATE A LOT OF THE CONCERNS AND PROBLEMS, AND MADAM AND VICE MADAM, YOU BROUGHT IT UP. IF THE DEVELOPERS COULD JUST SIT DOWN WITH THEM, BECAUSE THE BIGGEST CONCERNS I HEAR IS LIKE THE LIGHT POLLUTION, YOUR LIGHT POLLUTION IS DIFFERENT IN A PARKING LOT THAN AGAINST A BUILDING. SO THEY MIGHT HAVE OPTIONS. THE OPTIONS MIGHT BE LIKE YOU SUGGESTED, THAT WE MOVE THE BUILDING TO THE BACK. THAT WOULD MIGHT MAKE IT MORE SECURE. I THINK THE OTHER THING THAT WAS CONCERNING THEM WAS THE VEGETATION AND THEN SECURITY. THOSE ARE THE MAIN THINGS. AND MY NEIGHBORS ARE VERY REASONABLE PEOPLE. THEY'RE VERY NICE PEOPLE. AND I THINK IT WOULD HELP EVERYBODY IF THE DEVELOPERS SAT DOWN AND JUST HEARD THEM, BECAUSE I THINK IT COULD BE WORKED OUT, LIKE IN A REASONABLE MAN STANDARD, AND MAKE EVERYBODY HAPPY. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR COMMENT. DOES THE APPLICANT HAVE ANYTHING ELSE YOU WOULD LIKE TO

[00:35:02]

ADD TO THIS? BASED ON THE CONCERNS THAT WE HAVE HAD BROUGHT UP? I JUST WANTED TO COMMENT THAT THERE IS A THERE WILL BE LANDSCAPING ALONG THAT FRONTAGE ALONG FRAZIER CREEK TO MAKE SURE THAT THE VIEW OF THE STRUCTURE IS NOT VISIBLE AND THE PARKING LOT WILL BE MINIMIZED FROM ACROSS THE CREEK. WOULD WANT TO NOTE THAT THAT THAT FRONTAGE ALONG FRAZIER CREEK, IF YOU CAN SEE THAT RED LINE BECAUSE OF WHERE THE ACTUAL PARCEL THAT'S BEING REZONED IS, DOESN'T HAVE ANY FRONTAGE, IT'S ABOUT 100FT. SO IT'S NOT AGAIN, IT'S NOT THE ENTIRE LENGTH OF THAT PROPERTY BECAUSE THERE'S AN INTERVENING HOUSE JUST TO THE EAST OF WHERE THE PROPERTY WILL BE REZONED. BUT THERE IS A PLAN TO LANDSCAPE THAT, AND I'M HAPPY TO WHAT? WE CAN HAVE THAT FOR THE CITY COMMISSION WHEN WE COME BACK FOR. CAN YOU ADDRESS OR PERHAPS THE GENTLEMAN THAT YOU BROUGHT WITH YOU WHO IS PART, I BELIEVE, OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, THE CONCERN AND THE DESIRE FOR THEM TO MEET WITH THE DEVELOPER SO THAT THEY CAN LEARN MORE. ARE YOU WILLING TO DO SOMETHING LIKE THAT? I MEAN, I'M HAPPY TO DISCUSS WITH SOME OF THE NEIGHBORS TO SEE WHAT THEIR CONCERNS ARE, AND IF THERE'S SOME REASONABLE WAY THAT WE CAN ADDRESS THOSE. OKAY. HAPPY TO DO THAT. OKAY. WONDERFUL. THANK YOU VERY MUCH I APPRECIATE IT. YES, MA'AM. I HEAR WE HAVE ANOTHER PUBLIC COMMENT OR I SAW THAT WE DID JERRY JOHNSON OKAY. PLEASE COME. GOOD EVENING. BOARD. MY NAME IS TERRY JOHNSON AND I HAVE TWO UNITS IN STUART EXECUTIVE ACROSS THE FRAZIER CREEK. A COUPLE OF THINGS I'D HAVE TO ASK THE BOARD IS IF APPROVING THE ZONING TONIGHT ALLOWS THEM TO PUT A FOUR STORY BUILDING ON THAT PROPERTY. I THINK WE'RE DOING AN INJUSTICE TO THE NEIGHBORS EVERYWHERE, UP AND DOWN FEDERAL HIGHWAY THERE. THERE'S NO OTHER FOUR STORY BUILDINGS, SO IF THAT ALLOWS THEM TO PUT A FOUR STORY INSTEAD OF A THREE STORY BUILDING, I THINK WE REALLY NEED TO CONSIDER CHANGING THE ZONING WITH THE IMPACT IT COULD HAVE WIDESPREAD.

AND SO I'D HATE TO SEE YOU MAKE A DECISION WITHOUT KNOWING EXACTLY WHAT'S GOING TO GO ON THERE. IF YOU GO UP AND DOWN TO THE BRIDGE OR DOWN TO PAST HOME DEPOT, THERE'S ANOTHER FOUR STORY BUILDING IN STUART. OKAY, OKAY. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, I APPRECIATE IT. DOES THIS CHANGE LIKE IF IT WAS URBAN, IF THE WHOLE PARCEL WAS URBAN WATERFRONT INSTEAD OF URBAN HIGHWAY, WOULD IT CHANGE WHETHER OR NOT THEY WERE ALLOWED FOUR STORIES. SO THE URBAN WATERFRONT DOES REQUIRE A THREE STORY. AND THEN THERE'S SOME, SOME LANGUAGE THAT THEY CAN HAVE ACHIEVE A SECOND STORY. I MEAN, A FOUR STORY. HOWEVER, MAJORITY OF THIS PROPERTY IS URBAN HIGHWAY. SO THE BUILDING HAS TO BE BROUGHT UP TO THE FRONT OF FEDERAL HIGHWAY. SO IT HAS THAT MORE FRONTAGE. IT'S KIND OF THE SAME AS YOUR HAMPTON INN ALONG THAT CORRIDOR. BUT THERE IS SOME SOME DEVIATIONS TO THE HEIGHT. SO IT'S JUST NOT A STRAIGHT SQUARE BUILDING. AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE THAT'S WHAT THOSE DESIGN GUIDELINES WERE PUT IN PLACE. SO YOU JUST DON'T HAVE A LARGE FOUR STORY BUILDING. THERE'S SOME ELEMENTS THAT YOU HAVE TO DEVIATE THAT YOU HAVE TO BRING IT IN AND OUT. SO WHEN YOU DRIVE ALONG THE CORRIDOR, YOU DON'T JUST HAVE THE STRAIGHT WALL, OKAY. DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER COMMENTS? ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC? ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD? WHAT'S THE QUESTION? DO WE KNOW IF THERE'S ANY OUTDOOR ACTIVITY ALLOWED ON THE THIRD AND FOURTH FLOOR FACING FRAZIER CREEK? YEAH. IS THERE ANY RESTRICTIONS ON ANY OUTDOOR ACTIVITY, OPEN LANAI OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT? AS FAR AS BEING THIRD OR FOURTH FLOOR? NO, THERE IS SOME CONDITIONS AND THERE IS IN THE DESIGN GUIDELINES FOR URBAN HIGHWAY AND ALSO AN URBAN WATERFRONT THAT THEY THEIR AIR CONDITIONERS THAT THEY HAVE OUTSIDE AIR CONDITIONERS CANNOT BE EXPOSED ON THE OUTSIDE. SO THEY DO HAVE TO HAVE SOME TYPE OF FACADE BALCONY. IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE A TRUE BALCONY, BUT IT DOES HAVE TO GIVE YOU SOME TYPE OF BALCONY LOOK, THEY DO HAVE TO ADOPT ALL THOSE TYPE OF ON THE FRONT SIDE AND THE REAR.

SO IT GIVES YOU THAT ELEMENT. SO IT'S JUST NOT LIKE I SAID, STRAIGHT. WALL RIGHT. ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER COMMENTS. DO WE. WE NEED TO WE HAVE TO STICK WITH THE ORIGINAL PROPOSED MOTION. SHOULD WE RESTATE THE MOTION I CAN IF YOU'D LIKE. OKAY. SO BOARD MEMBER STROM MADE A MOTION TO APPROVE WITH MR. BOWLES SECONDING THE MOTION. I'M READY TO CALL. ROLL CALL WHENEVER YOU CAN. BUT WEREN'T WE. DID WE SAY THAT WE COULD DO A MOTION TO ALLOW IT WITH A PUBLIC MEETING? WAS THAT SOMETHING THAT WAS DECIDED THAT WE COULD DO THAT? WE COULD REQUIRE A SO WE CAN'T WE CAN'T PUT ANY RESTRICTIONS ON A REZONING. WE CAN'T. OKAY. BUT WE CAN CERTAINLY REQUEST THE DEVELOPER. WE DID HEAR THE RESIDENTS, AND WE WILL CERTAINLY

[00:40:05]

WORK WITH THE DEVELOPER TO TRY TO WORK WITH, GET THE RESIDENTS SO THEY CAN ACTUALLY SEE THE PLANS BEFORE THEY GO FOR ANY TYPE OF APPROVAL. OKAY, SO WITH THE MOTION, WHICH I KNOW WE CAN'T REQUIRE IT AS PART OF THE MOTION, BUT I THINK WE'VE DONE THIS IN THE PAST WHERE WE'VE MADE THE MOTION, BUT WITH A RECOMMENDATION ATTACHED, NOT AN ACTUAL LIKE APPROVAL, BUT RECOMMENDATION AS PART OF IT, THAT WE MAKE SURE THAT THEY HAVE A PUBLIC MEETING OR HEARING TO HELP ADDRESS THE CONCERNS OF RESIDENTS. I LET THE CITY ATTORNEY KNOW THE CHAIR. CAN WE ASK THAT IT NOT BE A PUBLIC MEETING, BUT A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING OR A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING? THAT'S FINE. OKAY. A NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING IS TOTALLY FINE. YES. AND WE CAN. SO WE CAN ADD THAT AS PART OF THE RECOMMENDATION. OKAY. WONDERFUL. NOW WE CAN DO GO DOWN THE LINE.

BOARD MEMBER BOWLES. YES. VICE CHAIR. PETERSON. YES. BOARD MEMBER. VOGEL. YES. BOARD MEMBER. STROM. YES. CHAIR. LORIEN. YES. AND BOARD MEMBER. BROMFIELD. YES. ALL RIGHT.

[7. ZONING IN PROGRESS LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TEXT AMENDMENTS IMPLEMENTATION (QUASI-JUDICIAL) (RC): ORDINANCE No. 2539-2025; AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF STUART, FLORIDA, AMENDING AND RESTATING THE CITY’S LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE CHAPTER II ZONING DISTRICTS USES ALLOWED, DENSITY, INTENSITY, CHAPTER III SPECIAL ZONING CODES, CHAPTER V RESOURCE PROTECTION RELATED DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, AND CHAPTER VI ON-SITE AND OFF-SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS WHICH WERE DETERMINED DURING THE "ZONING IN PROGRESS" UNDER SECTION 1.04.04, STUART LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT; PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE; AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.]

WONDERFUL. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ALL RIGHT. ITEM NUMBER SEVEN. ZONING IN PROGRESS. LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, TEXT AMENDMENTS, IMPLEMENTATION, QUASI JUDICIAL. ORDINANCE NUMBER 2539-2025, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF STUART, FLORIDA, AMENDING AND RESTATING THE CITY'S LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. CHAPTER TWO ZONING DISTRICT USES ALLOWED DENSITY, INTENSITY. CHAPTER THREE SPECIAL ZONING CODES. CHAPTER FIVE RESOURCE PROTECTION RELATED DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. AND CHAPTER SIX ON SITE AND OFF SITE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, WHICH WERE DETERMINED DURING THE ZONING IN PROGRESS UNDER SECTION 1.04.04 STUART LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT, PROVIDING FOR CODIFICATION, PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES. THANK YOU. CHAIR. IF I COULD STAFF IS REQUESTING FOR A POSTPONEMENT TO A DATE CERTAIN FOR THE LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY FOR TO BE HELD ON FEBRUARY 6TH, 2025. OKAY.

WOULD ANYBODY LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE. IT'S NOT A CALL TO CONTINUANCE. IT'S CALLED A POSTPONEMENT THIS TIME. EITHER ONE. EITHER ONE WORKS GOOD. OKAY. CONTINUANCE. IPOD CONTINUANCE TO FEBRUARY 6TH FEBRUARY 6TH. OKAY. I MOVE TO. I'LL SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE.

ANY OPPOSED? OKAY. FANTASTIC. CAN I ASK A QUESTION? SO I KNOW THIS TIME AND IT KIND OF CAME UP QUICKLY. WE WERE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO SEE THE RECOMMENDATIONS AHEAD OF TIME NOW THAT WE'RE PUSHING IT OUT. I KNOW Y'ALL ARE REALLY BUSY, BUT IS THERE A CHANCE THAT WE'RE GOING TO GET TO SEE THESE BEFORE THEY COME BEFORE THE BOARD SO THAT WE CAN KIND OF BE LOOKING AT THEM AND NOT JUST LIKE, HEY, WHAT DO YOU THINK ON THE FLY? SO WE WILL BE PROVIDING A STRIKE THROUGH AND UNDERLYING ORDINANCE, SHOWING WHERE IT'S DEVIATING AND WHERE THE NEW LANGUAGE IS BEING ADDED.

SO WE WILL GET THAT AHEAD OF THE MEETING. LIKE WITH THE AGENDA. YES MA'AM. AND THAT'S THAT TYPE OF THING GETS ADVERTISED. IT WAS ADVERTISED OKAY. YES. OKAY. FANTASTIC. ALL RIGHT. STAFF

[STAFF UPDATE]

UPDATE, ADVISORY BOARD ORIENTATION REVIEW AND PUBLIC RECORDS PRESENTATION. OKAY.

FANTASTIC. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ALL RIGHT, MY TURN. GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS MARY KENDALL. I'M THE CITY CLERK FOR THE CITY OF STUART AND MYSELF AND LEE BAGGETT, THE CITY ATTORNEY, ARE GOING TO BE CO-PRESENTING. SO I WANTED TO FIRST CONGRATULATE MR. VOGEL AND MR. BOWLES ON YOUR APPOINTMENTS. AND CONGRATULATIONS TO THE REST OF THE BOARD AS WELL FOR YOUR REAPPOINTMENT. SO WE'RE HAPPY TO HAVE YOU. I FIRST, BEFORE I GET STARTED ON THE POWERPOINT I WANTED TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT, THERE'S A PACKET THAT WAS LEFT ON YOUR IN FRONT OF YOUR SEAT, AND IT'S JUST KIND OF A, A PAPER COPY OF THE ORIENTATION PACKET. FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO HAVE BEEN ON THE BOARD, YOU'RE AWARE THAT WE'VE SENT THINGS ELECTRONICALLY IN THE PAST. WE STILL DO DO THAT AND INTEND TO DO THAT, BUT WE WANTED TO PROVIDE YOU SOME THINGS JUST FOR YOUR REFERENCE.

ESPECIALLY. THERE'S THE GUIDE TO THE SUNSHINE BOOKLET. THAT IS A VERY IMPORTANT DOCUMENT. IT'S VERY HELPFUL. AND A LOT OF TIMES IF WE SEND THE LINK, WE'RE A LITTLE NERVOUS. EXCUSE ME, MY VOICE IS CATCHING, BUT WE'RE A LITTLE NERVOUS THAT PEOPLE DON'T NECESSARILY GO IN AND READ IT.

SO WE FIGURED WE'D WE'D PROVIDE YOU A HARD COPY. THERE'S ALSO A CALENDAR THERE OF THE MEETING CALENDARS FOR OR ALL THE PUBLIC MEETINGS FOR 2025, AS WELL AS A FEW OTHER HELPFUL THINGS. THE ELECTRONIC COPY WILL BE SENT TO YOU PROBABLY THIS NEXT WEEK, MAYBE EVEN TOMORROW IF WE GET AROUND TO IT. BUT THAT WILL INCLUDE ALSO SOME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION, LIKE BOUNDARY MAPS

[00:45:04]

FOR THE CITY OF STUART, THE CRA. JUST SO WHEN THINGS ARE BROUGHT BEFORE YOU, YOU'RE COMFORTABLE IN KNOWING THE CITY BOUNDARIES AND THINGS. OKAY, WELL, I'M TALKING TO YOU TODAY ABOUT PUBLIC RECORDS AND JUST WANTING TO GIVE AN OVERALL BRIEF TRAINING OF WHAT IS EXPECTED OF THE BOARD. SO IN THIS PRESENTATION WE'RE GOING TO REVIEW PUBLIC RECORDS LAW AND WHO IT APPLIES TO BOARD MEMBERS RESPONSIBILITIES. WHAT IS A PUBLIC RECORD AND WHAT TO DO IF YOU RECEIVE A REQUEST. SO JUST KIND OF GOING DOWN THE LINE I DON'T WANT TO READ SLIDE. YOU KNOW EVERYTHING ON THE SLIDE. BUT THESE ARE KIND OF IMPORTANT LITTLE FACTS. IT SAYS THE PUBLIC RECORDS LAW APPLIES TO ELECTED AND APPOINTED BOARD MEMBERS. SO YOU AS THE LPA IT DOES APPLY.

BOARD MEMBERS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR PRESERVING AND TRANCE THE TRANSFER OF PUBLIC RECORDS TO THE OF THEIR POSSESSION TO THE CITY, AND TO RESPOND TO PUBLIC RECORDS REQUESTS WHEN REQUESTED.