Feb 03, 2026 Community Redevelopment Board

YOU FOR BEING ON TIME. I'D LIKE TO OPEN THIS MEETING OF THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT BOARD.

[00:00:15]

[APPROVAL OF AGENDA]

ANY PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE MOTION? GOT THAT BACKWARDS, DIDN'T I? YEAH. OKAY. MINUTES.

[APPROVAL OF MINUTES]

SECOND, HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE. MOTION PASSES. COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC. MARY, DO WE HAVE ANY BLUE COMMENT CARDS? I HAVE NONE. CHAIR. ANYONE IN THE

[COMMENTS BY BOARD MEMBERS (Non-Agenda Items)]

I'VE GOT A REQUEST PANEL. I'M SO GLAD YOU'RE HERE. I'M SPECIFICALLY SPEAKING TO YOU.

SO IN MY MIND, THIS IS A BRAND NEW BOARD AND I WOULD LIKE AS CHAIR FOR THE NEXT MEETING. I WOULD LOVE A PRESENTATION THAT HELPS US ONCE AGAIN UNDERSTAND OUR ROLE. WHAT IS THE WHAT IS OUR BOARD'S ROLE SPECIFICALLY? ONE WHAT DOES THE CHARTER SAY ABOUT ANY AND ALL AUTHORITY BESTOWED UPON US BY THE COMMISSION? IN OTHER WORDS, WHAT DOES THE CHARTER SAY? IS OUR ROLE ALSO? I WOULD LIKE YOU TO WEED OUT ANY LANGUAGE IN THE COMP PLANNED COMP PLAN AND LAND DEVELOPMENT CODES THAT ALSO DESCRIBE EXACTLY THE ROLE AND AUTHORITY OF THIS BOARD. IN

[00:05:08]

TOP 15 WILL BE FINE IN THE PIPELINE, BUT NOT YET IN DESIGN FOR THE NEXT MEETING IN THE PIPELINE, BUT NOT YET IN DESIGN. I'M JUST LOOKING FOR A STARTING POINT SO THIS NEW BOARD CAN SET PRIORITIES. I LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH YOU PANEL TO MAKE THIS BOARD SOMETHING MUCH DIFFERENT THAN PURELY PERFORMATIVE AND PERFUNCTORY. PLEASE KEEP THE ENTIRE PRESENTATION TO UNDER 20 MINUTES. OUR EYES DON'T NEED TO GLAZE OVER, JUST HIT US WITH OUR ROLE. OUR CHARTER COMP PLAN AND STATE GIVEN AUTHORITY. THEN GIVE US THE LIST OF PROJECTS IN THE PIPELINE NOT YET APPROVED OR IN DESIGN. AGAIN, MY GOAL IS FOR THIS NEW BOARD TO SET THOSE PRIORITIES. YOU GOOD? DO YOU NEED A MOTION FOR THAT? AWESOME. ALRIGHT, PANEL. WELL THANK YOU SO MUCH. OH, AND BY THE WAY, IF IN YOUR RESEARCH YOU FIND OUT, YES, THIS BOARD IS PURELY PERFORMATIVE, SPEAK THE TRUTH. ALRIGHT, ALRIGHT. THAT'S ALL I HAVE. ACTION ITEMS. NUMBER TWO,

[2. 400 S.E. OSCEOLA STREET REZONE TO COMMERCIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT (CPUD) (QUASI-JUDICIAL) (RC): ORDINANCE No. 2549-2026; AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF STUART, FLORIDA, REZONING A +/-0.45 ACRE PARCEL LOCATED AT 400 S.E. OSCEOLA STREET WITHIN THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AREA SPECIAL DISTRICT, FOR PROPERTY LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOTS 23, 24 AND 25, BLOCK 1, STYPMANN'S SUBDIVISION, FROM R-3 – RESIDENTIAL MULTIFAMILY/OFFICE ZONING DESIGNATION TO COMMERCIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DESIGNATION AND ADDING BARBERSHOP, BEAUTY SALONS, AND SPECIALTY SALONS AS ALLOWABLE USES; PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE; AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.]

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF STUART, FLORIDA. REZONING A PLUS OR -0.45 ACRE PARCEL LOCATED AT 400 SOUTHEAST OSCEOLA STREET WITHIN THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AREA. SPECIAL DISTRICT FOR PROPERTY LEGALLY DESCRIBED AS LOTS 23, 24 AND 25. BLOCK ONE STILLMAN SUBDIVISION FROM R3 RESIDENTIAL MULTIFAMILY OFFICE ZONING DESIGNATION TO COMMERCIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DESIGNATION AND ADDING BARBERSHOP. YOU CANNOT BE SERIOUS. ADDING BARBERSHOP. BEAUTY SALONS AND SPECIALTY SALONS AS ALLOWABLE USES. PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT. PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY.

PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES. THE BOARD MEMBERS HAVE ANY EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS TO DISCLOSE. THESE ARE ANY COMMUNICATIONS OUTSIDE THE MEETING REGARDING THE MATTER UNDER CONSIDERATION. OR NOT? I DO NOT, I DO NOT, I DO NOT. I DO NOT. I SPOKE BRIEFLY WITH THE DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR YESTERDAY ABOUT BOTH OF THESE ISSUES. ALL THOSE GIVING TESTIMONY. PLEASE STAND, RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND AND BE SWORN IN BY OUR ATTORNEY. THIS ONE. DO YOU AFFIRM THAT THE TESTIMONY THAT YOU'RE ABOUT TO PROVIDE WILL BE THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH, SO HELP YOU GOD? THANK YOU. YOU MAY BE SEATED.

THANK YOU SIR. ALL RIGHT. STAFF REPORT. OKAY. PLEASE PRESENT YOUR TESTIMONY, INCLUDING ANY EVIDENCE AND YOUR RECOMMENDATION REGARDING THIS CASE. THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING, CHAIR AND BOARD MEMBERS. FOR THE RECORD, MY NAME IS JODY COOGLER. I AM THE DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR WITH THE CITY OF STUART. TONIGHT I PRESENT THE AGENDA ITEM NUMBER TWO. THE APPLICANT, OSCEOLA STREET HOLDINGS LLC, IS REQUESTING APPROVAL OF A REZONING FROM THE

[00:10:05]

ADDITIONALLY, A SIGN WAS PLACED ON THE PROPERTY WITH THE SAME INFORMATION. THE 0.45 ACRE PARCEL PROPERTY IS OUTLINED IN RED AND IS LOCATED AT 400 SOUTHEAST OSCEOLA STREET AND IS SITUATED AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF OSCEOLA STREET IN GEORGIA AVENUE. THE PROPERTY IS ZONED CURRENTLY RESIDENTIAL, MULTIFAMILY OFFICE, AND THE FUTURE LAND USES OFFICE RESIDENTIAL, AND IT IS LOCATED WITHIN THE CRA DISTRICT. THE APPLICANT. I'M JUST GOING TO GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT OF HISTORY OF WHY WE'RE HERE TODAY WITH THIS PROPOSAL. LAST YEAR, THE APPLICANT CAME TO THE CITY AND WAS DISCUSSING HE HAS AN EXISTING BUILDING TO ADD, A BEAUTY SALON OR A SPECIALTY SALON. DOCTOR BENEDETTI AND HIS WIFE ERIN. AUDIENCE. TODAY, IN REVIEWING THE CODE, IT DOES NOT ALLOW THESE TYPE OF USES ALLOWABLE USES WITHIN THE R-3, EVEN THOUGH ACROSS THE STREET THERE IS BEAUTY SALONS AND ACROSS THE STREET A LITTLE BIT FURTHER IS NAIL SALONS THAT ARE ALL KIND OF DOING THE SAME THING. HOWEVER, THEY ARE NOT ZONED R3. SO DURING THE ZONING AND PROGRESS LAST YEAR THAT THE CITY COMMISSION WERE GOING THROUGH, WE THOUGHT THAT STAFF COULD PRESENT THAT WE JUST DO A TEXT AMENDMENT IN THE R-3 ZONING DISTRICT TO ALLOW ANYTHING THAT'S IN R-3 RESIDENTIAL, OFFICE, ZONING, DISTRICT USE TO ALLOW THESE TYPE OF USES, AS THEY ARE CONSISTENT WITHIN THAT, THAT STRETCH OF LAND AND THAT STRETCH OF AREA. HOWEVER, THE CITY COMMISSION ADVISED THE APPLICANT TO GO THROUGH A PLANNED DEVELOPMENT JUST TO ZONE THIS PARTICULAR SITE, AS OPPOSED TO PUTTING A TEXT AMENDMENT FOR THE ENTIRE DISTRICT. SO TODAY, THAT IS WHY YOU'RE BEING PRESENTED THIS PARTICULAR APPLICATION. SO THESE ARE THE THREE DIFFERENT ALLOWABLE USES THAT THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING. AND IT'S A BEAUTY SALON A A I'M SORRY, A BEAUTY SALON. IT SHOULD BE A SALON A HAIR SALON AND A SPECIALTY SALON. SO IN YOUR R3 IT IS THESE IT IS CONSISTENT. THE ALLOWABLE USES WITHIN YOUR ZONING DISTRICTS.

WHAT IS NOT CONSISTENT IS IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD. THESE TYPE OF USES ARE NOT ALLOWED IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD. SPECIAL DISTRICTS, YOUR LOW DENSITY, YOUR COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL AND MARINE ARE NOT CONSISTENT. THESE ARE THE CURRENT ALLOWED USES WITHIN THE R3. AS YOU CAN SEE, THE ONES HIGHLIGHTED IN RED AND IN THE YELLOW. THOSE ARE ONES THAT WOULD HAVE TO GO AS A CONDITIONAL USE, WHICH WE HAVE TO BE APPROVED BY THIS. WE RECOMMENDED BY THIS BOARD AND APPROVED. SO IT'S NOT MOVING FORWARD. OH I'M SORRY ENDING UP ON THE SCREEN OKAY I'M SORRY ABOUT THAT. HOLD ON ONE SECOND. OH. LET ME JUST. THANK YOU. OKAY. I'M JUST GOING TO KIND OF GO THROUGH THE SLIDES THAT YOU MISSED. HOLD ON ONE SECOND. SO THIS IS THE NOTICE THAT WAS POSTED ON THE PROPERTY. AND THE APPROVED THAT THEY DID MAIL THE AFFIDAVITS THAT THE LETTERS.

THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY OUTLINED IN RED. AND THESE ARE THE ALLOWABLE USES THAT THEY'RE ASKING FOR. THIS IS THE R3 DIFFERENT LAND USE THAT ARE ALLOWED. AND THIS IS THE SLIDE WE ARE UP TO. I APOLOGIZE FOR THAT. SO ANY R3 CURRENTLY TODAY ALL THESE USES ARE ALLOWED EXCEPT FOR THE ONES THAT ARE IN HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW. THOSE ARE CONDITIONAL USE WHICH WOULD REQUIRE ACTION BY THIS BOARD AND APPROVAL BY THE CITY COMMISSION. I'M JUST GOING TO KIND OF RUN THROUGH THESE QUICKLY. AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE'S NO SPECIALTY SALON OR HAIR SALON OR ANY OF THOSE TYPE OF USES ALLOWED. THE IN THE R3, THEY THE EXISTING BUILDING MEETS THE MINIMUM DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS OUTLINED IN RED FOR THE PROFESSIONAL OFFICE. THEY

[00:15:03]

COULD YOU USE YOUR MICROPHONE? IS IT ON? IF THERE ARE, IF THERE HAVE BEEN ANY OBJECTIONS THAT ANYONE IS AWARE OF, WHAT HAVE THEY BEEN TO THIS REZONING? IF THE CITY RECEIVED ANY OBJECTIONS OR OPPOSITIONS, YOU WOULD HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED TO THIS BOARD FOR THIS MEETING TONIGHT. WE DID NOT RECEIVE ANY OF OPPOSITION. FRANK, IN YOUR EX PARTE, DID YOU UNCOVER ANY POSSIBLE OBJECTIONS? SO IN MY TALK WITH THE DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR, WHAT I TOOK AWAY FROM THAT WAS. NO, NO OBJECTIONS. BUT WHAT? WAS NEW TO ME WAS THIS IS IN THAT AREA, IN THAT GENERAL AREA. THIS WOULD NOT BE THE FIRST ESTABLISHMENT OF THIS TYPE. I BELIEVE THERE'S ONE ACROSS THE STREET AND TWO DOORS DOWN OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. SO WE'RE NOT, YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT DOING ANYTHING BRAND NEW THAT MIGHT UPSET THE APPLE CART IN THIS AREA OF TOWN. THAT WAS THAT WAS ONE OF THE REASONS I WENT IN TO TALK WITH HER. SO NO COMPLAINTS FROM ANYONE. AND AGAIN, THE BIG THING FOR ME WAS THIS IS NOT SOMETHING NEW IN THAT AREA, RIGHT? THE ONLY OTHER QUESTION I WOULD HAVE IS THE DENSITY BEFORE AND THE DENSITY AFTER THE PROPOSED CHANGE. RESIDENTIAL. IS THERE NO CHANGE IN THE RESIDENTIAL DENSITY, POTENTIAL USAGE, POTENTIAL NUMBER OF UNITS AND SQUARE FOOTAGE FOR RESIDENTIAL CHAIR AND BOARD MEMBERS? RIGHT NOW, THEY'RE NOT IN CONSIDERING ANY DENSITY BECAUSE IT'S CONSIDERED OFFICE. IT'S A COMMERCIAL USE RIGHT NOW. IF IF THEY WERE GOING TO CONSIDER A DENSITY USE OR A RESIDENTIAL OR CONVERT THIS TO A RESIDENTIAL, THEY WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK TO THIS BOARD AND ASK PERMISSION AND GO THROUGH THE APPLICATION PROCESS. SO RIGHT NOW IT IS NOT MIXED USE WHERE THEY COULD HAVE A COMBINATION OF RESIDENTIAL AND COMMERCIAL. IT'S STRICTLY COMMERCIAL. IT IS FOR COMMERCIAL BUILDING. HOWEVER THEY DON'T LOSE THE DENSITY FOR RESIDENTIAL. BUT IF THEY WANTED TO HAVE ANY TYPE OF RESIDENTIAL TODAY, IT'S ZONED COMMERCIAL. YEAH. AND THAT IS THE USE TODAY.

[00:20:02]

THAT'S THE ONLY CHANGE. BUT WHEN THEY DO THAT, THEY GOT TO COME UP TO CODE ON OTHER THINGS LIKE THE LANDSCAPE. AND I SAW THE PROPOSAL WITH THE LANDSCAPE AND TRAFFIC AND ALL THAT. THAT MAKES SENSE. MAKES SENSE. OKAY. THANK YOU. SO I GUESS THE LAST THING, MR. BAGGETT. SO WHEN IF WE ALLOW IT, IT DOES NOT CHANGE THE ENTIRE SCOPE. IT JUST CHANGES THAT PARTICULAR PARCEL.

YEAH. WHEN YOU SAY SCOPE THE WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD OR OTHER. RIGHT, RIGHT. SO RIGHT NOW IT HAS AN R-3 ZONING DISTRICT LABELED ON THAT PARCEL WHEN WHEN THEY REFERRED TO OTHER SALONS ACROSS THE STREET OR WHATNOT, THEY HAVE A DIFFERENT ZONING DISTRICT. THAT'S WHY THEY'RE ALLOWED TO HAVE A SALON. SO THEY'RE TRYING TO CHANGE THEIR ZONING DISTRICT THAT TO A CPD, WHICH ALLOWS BEAUTY SALONS AND BARBERSHOPS. AND YOU HAVE TO DETERMINE WHETHER IT FITS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD IS ONE OF THE THINGS. AND THAT'S WHY YOU HAVE EVIDENCE THAT ACROSS THE STREET AND DOWN THE STREET THERE, THAT USE IS ALREADY BEING USED BY OTHER PROPERTIES. WOULD IT OPEN UP? I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW THE THE DENSITY OF THE AREA AROUND IT. ARE THERE OTHER PROPERTIES THAT WOULD BE ABLE TO APPLY FOR THE SAME CHANGE? WELL, EVERYBODY CAN GO THROUGH A REZONING CHANGE JUST LIKE DOCTOR BENEDETTI'S DOING HERE, RIGHT? BUT IF THEY HAD DONE THE TEXT AMENDMENT WHEN WE WERE DOING THE ZONING AND PROGRESS, THE ZONING IN PROGRESS, WE WERE GOING THROUGH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AND UPDATING CERTAI N CODES. AND SO THEY IT WAS IT CAME TO THEIR ATTENTION. SHOULD WE UPDATE THIS AND ALLOW BARBERSHOPS AND SALONS AND ALL R3'S. BUT THERE ARE SOME NEIGHBORHOODS THAT THEY'RE JUST

[00:25:05]

UNDERSTOOD. THANK YOU. YEP. THANKS. OKAY. AS CHAIR, I'M GOING TO. CLOSE THIS HEARING.

ALL EVIDENCE HAS BEEN PRESENTED. AND REMEMBER, I'LL REMIND THE BOARD MEMBERS THAT WE WILL DELIBERATE. DELIBERATE IN PUBLIC. I'LL ASK YOU TO CITE THE FACTS BEING CONSIDERED AND THEN TO STATE YOUR POSITION. AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, I THINK WE'RE READY. DOES ANYONE HAVE A MOTION? MOTION TO APPROVE? I'LL SECOND. I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. AND THIS DOES REQUIRE ROLL CALL. CLERK. THANK YOU I WOULD THERE WE HAVE NO PUBLIC COMMENT. I'M NOT SURE IF. OH I'M SORRY I'M SORRY. YEAH. ANY PUBLIC COMMENT FOR THIS? OKAY. SO I'LL CALL THE ROLL CALL.

ROLL. THANK YOU. BOARD MEMBER WHALEN APPROVE. BOARD MEMBER. JAMES. APPROVED. BOARD MEMBER.

BOARD APPROVE. CHAIRMAN. YES. VICE CHAIR. MOSER. YES. BOARD MEMBER. LAUGHLIN. YES. AND BOARD MEMBER. YES. ALL RIGHT. MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. NEXT. ITEM NUMBER THREE. AVONLEA.

[3. AVONLEA COMMERCIAL CORNERS EAST MAJOR AMENDMENT TO THE NEW AVONLEA PUD FOR PARCEL D (LOT 11) ORDINANCE No. 2550-2026; AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF STUART, FLORIDA, PROVIDING FOR THE THIRD AMENDMENT OF THE “NEW AVONLEA PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT” CONSISTING OF 12.40 ACRES ZONED RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, 16.24 ACRES ZONED COMMERCIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, AND 20.4 ACRES OF WETLAND/UPLAND PRESERVE ZONED RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, BEING GENERALLY LOCATED BETWEEN NE DIXIE HIGHWAY TO THE SOUTH, LAND ON BOTH SIDES OF GREEN RIVER PARKWAY ON THE WEST, LAND ON BOTH SIDES OF CARDINAL AVENUE ON THE EAST AND THE CITY BOUNDARY TO THE NORTH, FOR PROPERTY LEGALLY DESCRIBED BY EXHIBIT “A” ATTACHED; AMENDING THE COMMERCIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT TO PROVIDE FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE MASTER PARCEL SITE PLAN FOR THE AVONLEA COMMERCIAL EAST PARCEL D (LOT 11) TO BE IDENTIFIED AS AVONLEA COMMERCIAL CORNERS EAST; PROVIDING FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE MASTER SITE OFF-SITE INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN FOR THE ENTIRE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT; PROVIDING FOR REVISED AND NEW DEVELOPMENT CONDITIONS APPROVAL FOR PARCEL D (LOT 11); PROVIDING FOR AMENDED AND NEW TIMETABLES FOR DEVELOPMENT; DECLARING THE PLAN TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE CITY’S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN; PROVIDING DIRECTIONS TO THE CITY CLERK; PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF ALL ORDINANCES IN CONFLICT; PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY; PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE, AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES.]

ORDINANCE NUMBER 2550-2026, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF STUART, FLORIDA, PROVIDING FOR THE THIRD AMENDMENT OF THE NEW AVONLEA PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT CONSISTING OF 12.4 ACRES. ZONED RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT 16.24 ACRES. ZONED COMMERCIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT AND 20.4 ACRES OF WETLAND. UPLAND PRESERVE.

ZONED RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT BEING GENERALLY LOCATED BETWEEN THE NORTHEAST DIXIE HIGHWAY TO THE SOUTH. LAND ON BOTH SIDES OF GREEN RIVER PARKWAY ON THE WEST, LAND ON BOTH SIDES OF CARDINAL AVENUE ON THE EAST, AND THE CITY BOUNDARY TO THE NORTH. FOR PROPERTY LEGALLY DESCRIBED BY EXHIBIT A ATTACHED AMENDING THE COMMERCIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT TO PROVIDE FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE MASTER PARCEL SITE PLAN FOR THE AVONLEA COMMERCIAL EAST PARCEL DISTRICT EAST PARCEL D, LOT 11, TO BE IDENTIFIED AS AVONLEA COMMERCIAL CORNERS EAST, PROVIDING FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE MASTER SITE. OFF SITE INFRASTRUCTURE PLAN FOR THE ENTIRE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT. PROVIDING FOR REVISED AND NEW DEVELOPMENT CONDITIONS. APPROVAL FOR PARCEL D, LOT 11. PROVIDING FOR AMENDED AND NEW TIMETABLES FOR DEVELOPMENT. DECLARING THE PLAN TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE CITY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. PROVIDING DIRECTIONS TO THE CITY CLERK, PROVIDING FOR REPEAL OF ALL ORDINANCES AND CONFLICTS, AND CONFLICT. CONFLICT. PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE AND FOR OTHER PURPOSES. HERE WE GO. TO THE BOARD MEMBERS HAVE ANY EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS TO DISCLOSE? I DO. I MET WITH GEORGE MESSMER AND ELLIS STONE VIA ZOOM ON JANUARY 20TH. THANK YOU, I DO NOT. I MET WITH GEORGE AND NICK. I'M SORRY I DON'T HAVE THE DATE VIA ZOOM AS WELL, AND THEN SPOKE WITH NICK LAST WEEK BRIEFLY AT A SCHOOL EVENT. I MET WITH JODY, THE DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR, BRIEFLY YESTERDAY. I DO NOT, I DO NOT, I DO NOT. ALL THOSE GIVING TESTIMONY. PLEASE STAND, RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND AND BE SWORN IN BY OUR ATTORNEY.

THE TESTIMONY THAT YOU'RE ABOUT TO PROVIDE WILL BE THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING

[00:30:04]

THE PROPERTY IS ALSO LOCATED WITHIN THE COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AREA SPECIAL DISTRICT. AGAIN PURSUANT TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE ON JANUARY 19TH, 2026, THE APPLICANT DID MAILED THE NOTICES WITHIN ALL ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 300FT OF THE SUBJECT PARCEL, PROVIDED THE DETAILS OF TONIGHT'S MEETING TIME, AND ALSO PUT A SIGN ON THE PROPERTY WITH THE WITH THE SAME INFORMATION. THE VACANT PARCEL IS LOCATED AT THE CORNER OF NORTHEAST DIXIE HIGHWAY AND CARDINAL AVENUE. THE FUTURE LAND USE IS NEIGHBORHOOD SPECIAL DISTRICT, AND THE CURRENT ZONING IS A COMMERCIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, AND THE TOTAL LAND ACRE SITE IS 0.9 ACRES, AND ALSO IT IS LOCATED IN A CRA. IN 2015, THE NEW AVONLEA PD WAS ADOPTED BY THE CITY OF STUART COMMISSIONER STUART COMMISSION.

THIS PUD STATED THAT THE EACH SITE PLAN FOR THE VARIOUS PARCELS WITHIN THE PUD WOULD CONSTITUTE A MAJOR AMENDMENT TO THE NEW AVONLEA PUD. AS A 2015 PD APPROVAL ESTABLISHED OVERALL DENSITIES AND INTENSITIES, BUT DID NOT APPROVE SITE PLANS ON ANY INDIVIDUAL PARCELS. THIS PROPOSED MAJOR AMENDMENT DOES NOT INCREASE DENSITY OR INTENSITY, AND IS CONSISTENT WITH THE OVERALL MASTER PLAN APPROVED IN 2015. THE 0.9 ACRE OF DEVELOPMENT AREA HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED AS DEVELOPED DEVELOPMENT AREA BY THE MASTER PUD PLAN, AND IS CONSIDERED IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE OVERALL 20 ACRES OF PRESERVE AREA AND THAT HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED, RESTORED AND PROTECTED AS PART OF THE PD. IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THE DEVELOPMENT ACREAGE IS NET OF WETLAND SETBACKS AND IS MEMORIALIZED BY THE CONSERVATION EASEMENT WITH SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT, THE NEW AVONLEA PD PLAT, AND THE LAND USE AMENDMENT OF THE PRESERVE AREAS AND SETBACKS WITHIN THE CONSERVATION FROM THE PUBLIC UTILITIES. TO SITE.

PROPOSES THE CONSTRUCTION OF A COMMERCIAL BUILDING ON A NINE ACRE SITE. THE PROPOSED ONE STORY BUILDING IS IS DESIGNED TO ACCOMMODATE A MIXED MIX OF USES INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO RETAIL, OFFICE, RETAIL, OFFICE AND RESTAURANT ESTABLISHMENTS, AND ALSO MEDICAL. THE COMMERCIAL CORNERS WILL SERVE AS THE VITAL COMPONENT IN SUPPORTING THE NEW AVONLEA RESIDENTIAL UNITS BEING DEVELOPED WITHIN THE RPD, WITHIN THE RESIDENTIAL PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, AS WELL AS THE SURROUNDING AREAS BY PROVIDING CONVENIENT ACCESS TO NEIGHBORHOODS, COMMERCIAL SERVING COMMERCIAL AREAS. THE APPLICANT HAS PROVIDED THE REQUIRED 35 PARKING SPACES, INCLUDING ONE ADA COMPLIANT SPACE BASED ON THE PROPOSED OFFICE, RETAIL, MEDICAL AND PERSONAL AND RESTAURANT SERVICE USES. IN ADDITION, THE PLANNING DEVELOPMENT REQUIRES A MINIMUM OPEN SPACE OF 25%. THE APPLICANT MEETS AND EXCEEDS THIS REQUIREMENT BY PROVIDING 50% OF OPEN SPACE. THE CITY'S TRAFFIC CONSULTANT DID REVIEW THIS TRAFFIC STUDY AND DOES NOT HAVE ANY MEETS THE MINIMUM STANDARDS. THE LANDSCAPE PLAN INCLUDES A DIVERSE MIX OF CANOPY AND ORNAMENTAL PLANTINGS CONSISTING OF JAPANESE BLUEBERRY TREES, SLASH PALMS, I'M SORRY SLASH PINES, LIVE OAKS, AND BALD CYPRESS. IN ADDITION, A VARIETY OF PALM SPECIES ARE PROPOSED, INCLUDING EUROPEAN FAN PALMS, SHORT HAIR, OLD MEN PALMS, ALEXANDER PALMS, ROYAL PALMS, SABAL PALMETTO, AND CHRISTMAS PALMS. THE CITY LANDSCAPE CONSULTANT, KIMLEY-HORN HAS REVIEWED THE SUBMITTED SUBMITTAL OF THE TREE DISPOSITION AND LANDSCAPE PLAN AND THE ASSOCIATED DOCUMENTS. THEY DID MAKE RECOMMENDATION THAT DURING THE SITE PLAN APPROVAL OR THE SITE CONSTRUCTION PLANS, THAT THEY DO ADJUST SOME OF THEIR PLANS WITH THE TREE DISPOSITION PLANS FOR THE SLASH PINES, AND ALSO UPDATE THE LANDSCAPE PLAN TO NOTE SOME OF THE CHANGES THAT MEET THE CIVIL PLANS. THE APPLICANT HAS INCORPORATED THE FOUR REQUIRED ARCHITECTURAL ELEMENTS, WHICH INCLUDE STOREFRONT WINDOWS, WOOD COLUMNS WITH BRACKETS, AND AWNINGS. THE PROJECT IS REQUIRED TO ADD A PUBLIC ART APPROVED BY THE SEPARATE APPLICATION BY THIS BOARD. THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING WALL MURALS AND A FOUNTAIN. AND YOU CAN SEE THE FOUR DIFFERENT ELEVATIONS OF EACH SIDE OF THE PROPOSED BUILDING. AND THESE ARE JUST SOME CONCEPTUAL

[00:35:04]

WE DO HAVE THE APPLICANT AND THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY IN THE AUDIENCE. GO AHEAD SIR.

THANK YOU. GOOD AFTERNOON. FOR THE RECORD, GEORGE MISSIMER WITH KOTLIN HEARING HERE TONIGHT ON BEHALF OF THE OWNER AND THE APPLICANT, I HAVE BEEN SWORN IN. NO OBJECTIONS TO STAFF'S PRESENTATION. VERY THOROUGH. WE DO HAVE A SHORT PRESENTATION WITH A FEW SLIDES THAT WE CAN GO OVER. IT'S A LOT OF THE SAME INFORMATION, SO WE'LL TRY TO KEEP IT SHORT. WE ARE REQUESTING A MAJOR PUD AMENDMENT FOR THIS SITE PLAN. IT'S A LITTLE BIT OF A STRANGE PROCESS FOR THIS PARTICULAR DEVELOPMENT. AVONLEA WHEN IT WAS CREATED. THE ORIGINAL APPROVAL REQUIRES THAT ANY SITE PLANS COMING FORWARD NEED TO BE MAJOR AMENDMENTS TO THE PUD, EVEN THOUGH THEY DON'T MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF BEING A MAJOR DEVELOPMENT. SO TYPICALLY THIS IS A PRETTY SMALL SITE PLAN. IT'S LESS THAN 7000 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING AREA, SO THAT WOULD NEVER TRIGGER A PUBLIC HEARING, BUT SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE IT'S WITHIN THE PUD AND THERE WAS A PRIOR CONDITION OF APPROVAL THAT REQUIRED ANY CHANGES, ANY SITE PLANS TO COME BACK BEFORE THE BOARDS. THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE. WE MEET ALL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. THERE'S NO REQUESTED WAIVERS OR EXCEPTIONS. WE HAD A GREAT DEVELOPMENT TEAM AND DESIGN. THERE WAS A FEW SLIDES IN STAFF'S PRESENTATION WHICH REFERENCED ANOTHER PROPERTY I JUST WANTED, JUST FOR CLARITY.

THERE WAS A COUPLE ELEVATIONS THAT WEREN'T MATCHING OUR EXACT BUILDING. WE HAD AT ONE POINT, MULTIPLE PROPERTIES THAT WERE COMING AS ONE AMENDMENT. AND THROUGH THIS PROCESS, YOU KNOW, THERE WAS STILL SOME WORK TO BE DONE ON THOSE OTHER PIECES. AND SO WE'RE BRINGING THIS ONE SEPARATE FIRST, BECAUSE IT'S NOT CONNECTED TO SOME OF THOSE OTHER PROPERTIES. SO THIS IS BY ITSELF, BUT THERE'S A LONG HISTORY OF THE AVONLEA PUD. SO MR. NICK SCHROTH IS PROBABLY MORE EXPERIENCED THAN ANYONE TO BE ABLE TO PROVIDE A LITTLE BIT OF CONTEXT JUST FOR THIS BOARD, A LITTLE BACKGROUND. SO I'LL LEAVE IT TO NICK. HE'LL PROVIDE A LITTLE BIT MORE CONTEXT FOR THE OVERALL PIECE. GOOD EVENING BOARD. NICK SCHROTH FOR THE RECORD, 623 PALM STREET, CITY OF STUART. I'VE BEEN SWORN IN. SO THE AVONLEA PUD IN CONCEPT WAS A 50 ACRE. PARCEL OR BECAME A 50 ACRE PARCEL OVER TIME, IT STARTED. THE CONCEPT STARTED IN 1997 WHEN FRANK WALKER ANNEXED THAT LAND INTO THE CITY OF OF STUART. I DON'T KNOW IF EVERYBODY KNOWS FRANK, BUT FRANK WALKER'S KIND OF OLD NAME. AND JENSEN, HIS DAD, DID A BUNCH OF STUFF. FRANK GREW UP THERE LAUGHING. I'M SURE YOU KNOW FRANK. IN 2001, FRANK DEVELOPED THE AVONLEA COMMERCIAL AVONLEA COMMERCE CENTER CONDOMINIUM, AND THAT WAS KIND OF THE FIRST PIECE OF AVONLEA. THERE'S ANOTHER AVONLEA INDUSTRIAL PARK, WHICH WAS ALSO DONE BY FRANK. BY FRANK, BUT UNRELATED TO THIS 50 ACRE PUD. AND THEN IN 2005 AND I WASN'T INVOLVED IN THIS, BUT, YOU KNOW, THROUGH THE YEARS, I'VE GOTTEN MY HISTORY LESSON ON IT. BUT THE HAI GROUP PURCHASED A NUMBER OF THE PARCELS, EITHER FROM FRANK OR OR IN SOME SORT OF FASHION THAT INVOLVED, YOU KNOW, FRANK HAVING A CHUNK OF AVONLEA IN THE HAI GROUP, HAVING A CHUNK OF AVONLEA. THEY HAD PROPOSED IT AS 411 RESIDENTIAL UNITS, PLUS 180 COMMERCIAL RESIDENTIAL UNITS, AND THEN SOMEHOW FATHOMED UP LIKE 377,000FT■!S OF COMMERCIAL GOING ON THIS 50 ACRE SITE IN 2014. SO SOMEWHERE ALONG THE LINE THROUGH THE GREAT RECESSION THAT WENT INTO FORECLOSURE WITH PNC BANK, IT WAS ORIGINALLY FIDELITY FEDERAL, AND THEN THAT GOT TAKEN OVER BY NATIONAL CITY, AND THEN PNC ENDED UP WITH IT. SO A LOT OF PRIDE WASHED OFF THE DEAL DURING THOSE YEARS. AND SO WHEN WE GOT IT OR WHEN WE WERE LOOKING AT IT, WE THOUGHT, YOU

[00:40:02]

THAT'S ABOUT 25,000FT■!S. AND I THINK IT HAS 4 OR 5 LIVE WORK UNITS IN IT. AND THEN IN 2015 WE APPROVED THE OR THE CITY APPROVED THE NEW AVONLEA PUD, WHICH ESTABLISHED THESE LOWER DENSITIES AND INTENSITIES AND KIND OF SET THE RESIDENTIAL AREA AND THE COMMERCIAL AREA.

THIS WAS THE ORIGINAL PLAN. SO THIS IS, YOU KNOW, 411 UNITS PLUS 180 COMMERCIAL RESIDENTIAL UNITS. AND THE AREAS YOU CAN SEE THE RESIDENTIAL THERE. THE PUD WAS KIND OF CENTERED AROUND THESE WETLAND AREAS THAT WERE FRANK SPENT A BUNCH OF MONEY RESTORING THESE AND KIND OF, YOU KNOW, HE TELLS THE STORY OR TOLD ME THE STORY THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE WAS A TIME WHERE YOU COULD WALK FROM BAKER ROAD ALL THE WAY SOUTH TO DIXIE ACROSS THIS SITE, BECAUSE THE WETLANDS AND, YOU KNOW, HAD BEEN SO OVERGROWN WITH CLIMBING VINE AND MELALEUCA AND EVERYTHING ELSE. AND SO FRANK HAD GOTTEN IN THERE PRIOR TO THE PROPERTY GOING INTO FORECLOSURE AND CLEANED ALL THAT UP AND ESTABLISHED THE MASTER DRAINAGE SYSTEM. SO YOU HAVE THIS IS ACTUALLY THE WATERSHED FOR I THINK IT'S JENSEN ESTATES, WHICH IS LIKE NORTH AND NORTH OF ALL THAT COMMERCE CENTER STUFF TO THE NORTHEAST OF THIS AND THAT WATER ALL FLOWS THROUGH HERE. IT'S KIND OF IT'S TREATED THROUGH HERE AS, AS STORMWATER TREATMENT RETENTION AREAS BEFORE IT GETS INTO HANEY CREEK AND THEN ULTIMATELY FLOWS OUT INTO HANEY CREEK. SO A LOT OF THIS WAS A RESTORATION OF THAT. THE HEADWATERS OF THAT HANEY CREEK, HENCE THESE KIND OF ODD PARCEL SHAPES WHICH MAKE IT HARD TO, YOU KNOW, WORK DEVELOPMENT AROUND. BUT IT DID IN THE END, LIKE WE DEVELOPED PARCEL TWO AND PARCEL 12 AND THOSE, THOSE UNITS ALL HAVE, YOU KNOW, REAL NICE VIEWS, A LOT OF THEM BACK UP TO PRESERVE.

AND, AND THEY'VE, THEY'VE BEEN, YOU KNOW, HIGHLY SOUGHT AFTER. SO IN MY WORLD, THAT'S KIND OF YOUR MEASURE OF SUCCESS. IF PEOPLE LIKE THEM AND BUY THEM AND PAY A BUNCH OF MONEY FOR THEM, THEN YOU'VE DONE SOMETHING RIGHT. SO WHAT WE'RE KIND OF LEFT WITH TODAY, AVONLEA COMMERCE CENTER HAS BEEN BUILT. IT'S 23,700FT■!S, AD THAT'S INCLUSIVE OF FIVE LIVE WORK UNITS. AVONLEA. PARCEL ONE HAS BEEN SITE PLAN APPROVED FOR 9381FT■!S OF COMMERCIAL OFFICE, WHICH IS ABOUT 10,000FT■!S LESS THAN THE PUD APPROVES. PARCEL TWO HAS BEEN DEVELOPED WITH 30 TOWNHOMES. PARCELS THREE THROUGH NINE ARE KIND OF INDIVIDUAL. UNITS OR LOTS, AND PARCEL THREE IS BEING IMPROVED WITH THE 22,800 SQUARE FOOT OFFICE WAREHOUSE. RIGHT NOW, PARCEL TEN IS PROPOSED FOR IT HAD BEEN PROPOSED FOR 80 APARTMENTS. IT'S PART OF THE PUD, SO THOSE WOULD BE COMMERCIAL RESIDENTIAL UNITS IN CONCEPT THAT IS PART OF.

ORIGINALLY OUR APPLICATION WAS PART OF PARCEL TEN, PARCEL 11, PARCEL 13 AND PARCEL 14 AND 15.

SO IT WAS KIND OF THAT SOUTH SIDE OF, OF OF AVONLEA THAT GOT CAUGHT UP. AND SO WE'RE LOOKING TO MOVE FORWARD WITH PARCEL 11, WHICH IS OUR APPROVAL THAT WE SEEK TONIGHT IS 6827FT■!S OF COMMERCIAL SPACE, WHICH IS ABOUT 8200FT■!S LESS THAN THE MX ESTABLISHED BY THE PUD. PARCEL 12 IS DEVELOPED WITH 32 TOWNHOMES. PARCEL 13 HAD BEEN PROPOSED AS PART OF THAT APPLICATION FOR 185 APARTMENTS. PARCEL 14 AND 15 AGAIN WAS PART OF THIS ORIGINAL APPLICATION, AND IT WAS GOING TO BE KIND OF A SISTER PARCEL TO OUR OUR RETAIL EAST. WE WERE GOING TO HAVE LIKE A RETAIL WEST. PART OF THE CONFUSION ON THE ARCHITECTURE HERE IS WE WERE

[00:45:04]

AVONLEA IS ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE ROOSEVELT BRIDGE. JUST BEFORE YOU ENTER INTO RIO. THE LOT 11 IS LOCATED ON THE EASTERN END AT THE INTERSECTION OF DIXIE AND CARDINAL, JUST SOUTH OF BAKER ROAD. ZONING PART OF AVONLEA. IT'S ALL CONSISTENT WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS AND THE PUD IN TERMS OF ALLOWED USES. NICK TOUCHED ON THIS, BUT THE MASTER PLAN FOR AVONLEA PERMITS UP TO 15,000FT■!S OF BUILDING AA ON THIS SPECIFIC PARCEL. AGAIN, THAT'S KIND OF A BUBBLE PLAN WHERE THEY PUT OUT A NUMBER OF HOW MUCH COULD BE THE MAXIMUM THROUGH SITE PLANNING, PROVIDING PARKING, LANDSCAPE BUFFERS, ALL THAT GOES INTO THAT DESIGN WORK. IT'S REALLY NOT FEASIBLE TO GO MORE THAN 7000FT■!S. SO THAT'S THE REASON THAT THERE'S LESS THAN WHAT'S APPROVED ON THE MASTER PLAN. HERE'S JUST A AERIAL VIEW SO YOU CAN SEE HOW IT FITS IN. YOU CAN SEE SOME OF THE OTHER RESIDENTIAL PARCELS THAT HAVE BEEN DEVELOPED. THIS REALLY IS ONE OF THE FIRST COMMERCIAL PIECES WITHIN AVONLEA TO COME FORWARD. WE THINK IT'S A REALLY GOOD COMPLIMENT TO THE RESIDENTIAL, PROVIDE SOME NEIGHBORHOOD SERVICES. WE HAVE A MIXTURE OF USES PROPOSED IN THE BUILDING, INCLUDING RESTAURANT, RETAIL AND OFFICE. A LITTLE BIT CLOSER VIEW AGAIN, ABOUT JUST UNDER 7000FT■!S OF BUILDING AREA. SO VERY SMALL PERCENTAGE OF THE SITE, EXTENSIVE OPEN SPACE AND LANDSCAPE AREA, MUCH MORE THAN WHAT'S REQUIRED. JUST KIND OF WORKED OUT THAT WAY IN TERMS OF DESIGN OF THE PARKING LOT AND HOW MUCH HARDSCAPE WE NEEDED TO HAVE TO SUPPORT THE FACILITY.

SO YOU GET A REALLY NICE COMPLIMENT TO THAT INTERSECTION. IT'S GOING TO MAKE IT LOOK REALLY GREAT. THERE IS EXISTING TREES ON THE SITE, PRIMARILY PINES, WHICH ARE REALLY TERRIBLE FOR RELOCATING. IT'S VIRTUALLY IMPOSSIBLE UNLESS THEY'RE FAIRLY SMALL, SO WE'RE SAVING AS MANY AS WE CAN AROUND THE PERIMETER OF THE SITE, AND THEN ALSO MITIGATING ON SITE BY PLANTING BACK NEW PINES PRIMARILY ALONG THE BOUNDARY OF THE WETLAND AREA TO THE TO THE WEST OF THE SITE. THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS OF THE OVERALL PUD ARE ARE PRETTY SPECTACULAR. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR KNOW IS HERE, YOU CAN ANSWER ANY OF THEM ABOUT THE ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS OUT THERE. BUT THE RESTORATION WORK THAT WENT IN YEARS AGO, IT'S REALLY PAID OFF AND IT'S QUITE BEAUTIFUL. ANYONE WHO'S DRIVEN BY IT, I'M SURE YOU'VE NOTICED ORIENTATION AND CIRCULATION OF THE SITE. WE HAVE TWO ACCESS OR ONE ACCESS POINT, ONE EXIT ON CARDINAL, BUT THERE'S NO DRIVEWAY ON DIXIE, SO A LITTLE BIT OF A LESS TRAFFIC STREET, BUT YOU HAVE AN ENTRANCE AND AN EXIT. PROVIDE A NICE FLOW CIRCULATION, PROVIDING ENOUGH PARKING FOR THE BUILDING. AGAIN, ALL OF OUR LAND DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS ARE BEING MET. THERE'S NO WAIVERS OR EXCEPTIONS BEING REQUESTED. FROM A TRAFFIC PERSPECTIVE. AS AS JODY MENTIONED, THERE'S NO COMMENT ON THE TRAFFIC. WE'RE WE'RE WELL WITHIN THE ACCEPTABLE LIMITS OF THE SURROUNDING ROADWAYS, ONLY ADDING ABOUT 518 TRIPS PER DAY. AGAIN PROVIDING A SUFFICIENT PARKING FOR THE PROPOSED MIX OF USE. THAT

[00:50:04]

THAT'S IT. THE APPROVED MASTER PLAN ONLY INCLUDED A MAXIMUM SQUARE FOOTAGE FOR WHAT COULD BE BUILT. AND SO IT WAS APPROVED SUCH THAT WHEN WE CAME FORWARD WITH THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN, WE'D HAVE TO COME BACK AND MODIFY THE PUD TO ESTABLISH WHAT WAS ACTUALLY GOING TO BE BUILT. SO WE'RE SIMPLY ASKING FOR APPROVAL OF LOT 11 FOR OUR 6827 SQUARE FOOT COMMERCIAL BUILDING. SO PRIOR WAS APPROVED FOR UP TO 15,000FT, AND YOU'RE ASKING FOR IT TO BE CLARIFIED THAT YOU'RE ONLY GOING TO USE ABOUT 7000FT, AS WELL AS APPROVING THE SPECIFIC SITE PLAN, LANDSCAPE, CIVIL ARCHITECTURE, ALL THOSE DETAILS. AND IF IT'S STRICTLY THE POINT NINE ACRE PARCEL WE'RE LOOKING AT, THAT'S THAT'S PART OF THIS. OKAY. THAT'S CORRECT. WHAT WHAT SORT OF OBJECTIONS HAVE COME UP ABOUT THIS FROM YOUR PERSPECTIVE? THERE'S BEEN NO OBJECTIONS OTHER THAN REALLY THERE WAS A CONFUSION WITH, I THINK, A RESIDENT WHO HAD SENT IN A NOTE. THERE WAS AN OLDER NARRATIVE WHICH DESCRIBED A FLORIDA VERNACULAR ARCHITECTURE OF ONE OF THE OTHER PARCELS. THAT WAS AT ONE POINT PART OF THIS APPLICATION, WHICH IS NOT PART OF THIS, THIS APPLICATION CURRENTLY. SO THAT WAS JUST A CONFUSION. HE SAID. LOOKING AT LOT 11, THAT THAT ARCHITECTURE IS NOT FLORIDA VERNACULAR. NO, IT'S NOT. SO THAT'S JUST A DISCONNECT THERE. BUT OTHER THAN THAT, WE'VE HEARD NO OBJECTIONS ON THIS DEVELOPMENT.

OKAY. THANK YOU. YEP. I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION. I NEVER GOT TO GET MY HANDS ON YOUR LANDSCAPE PLAN TO CRITIQUE IT. YOU HAVE 79 TREES PROVIDED. DO YOU KNOW HOW MANY OF THOSE ARE PALMS VERSUS HOW MANY OF THOSE ARE SHADE TREES? YEAH, VERY FEW OF THEM ARE PALMS, PRIMARILY THE ROYALS ALONG THE PERIMETER. ALL THE INTERIOR TREES ARE OAK TREES. AND THEN THE PINE TREES ARE DOTTED ALL ALONG THE WESTERN BOUNDARY. I'D SAY ROUGH FIGURES. IT'S PROBABLY LIKE AN 80% CANOPY. TREE VERSUS PALMS. NICE. OKAY. AND JUST TO COMMENT, I HEARD BALD CYPRESS AND I SINCE I'VE BEEN ON THIS BOARD, I'VE SEEN THEM PROPOSED IN A LOT OF WRONG PLACES. AND I THINK THIS IS WE'RE FINALLY PUTTING THEM OR PROPOSING THEM IN THE RIGHT PLACE. SO HAPPY TO SEE THAT. THANK YOU. TWO QUESTIONS. I SEE YOU HAD A COPY. IT LOOKED LIKE A COFFEE SHOP PROPOSED. HAS THERE BEEN ANY STUDIES INTO THE VIABILITY OF THAT? SO AT THIS POINT, YOU KNOW, WE'VE BEEN IN THIS PROCESS I THINK THREE YEARS. SO I'M A COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE BROKER BY TRADE. I'VE BEEN A COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE. I'VE BEEN IN COMMERCIAL REAL ESTATE IN THIS AREA FOR OVER 20 YEARS. WE THINK THERE'S DEMAND FOR TENANTS IN THIS AREA. WE THINK THERE'S DEMAND FOR, YOU KNOW, THOSE KIND OF SMALL SHOP SERVICES. WE'RE WILLING TO, YOU KNOW, BET MOVING THIS PROJECT FORWARD ON THAT. BUT WE HAVEN'T SIGNED UP ANY TENANTS. IT'S KIND OF PREMATURE IN THE PROCESS TO DO THAT. WE WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, LOOKING TO TALK TO

[00:55:05]

PUBLIC ART IS THE ONE THING YOU GUYS MAKE THE FINAL DECISION ON. YOU'RE NOT AN ADVISORY. THAT'S THE ONE AREA THAT YOU CAN. PUBLIC ART COMES TO YOU. YOU ARE THE DECISION MAKER. IT'S NO RECOMMENDATION. WHATEVER YOU VOTE ON AND APPROVAL IS IT. IT DOESN'T GET PUSHED ON TO THE COMMISSION. SO I JUST WANT TO POINT THAT OUT TO YOU. THANKS. THANK YOU. SIR, I HAVE A QUESTION. AS I LOOK AT THAT, I'M NOT LOOKING AT THE MAP, BUT IS THAT PRETTY SWAMPY? TO THE WEST SOUTHWEST OF THAT EXACT PARCEL? IS THAT. YEAH, THAT'S PART OF THE REST RESTORED WETLAND AREA. OKAY. AND SO I'M ASSUMING THAT THIS, THIS POINT NINE ACRES IS PRETTY DRY BEFORE YOU EVEN GET STARTED. YEAH. THERE'S NO WETLANDS ON THE POINT NINE. SO YOU'RE BALD CYPRESS ARE GOING ON THAT SOUTHWEST WEST SOUTHWEST SIDE. YEAH. PREDOMINANTLY IN THE IN THE WESTERN CORNER. JUST JUST A FOOTNOTE, BUT IT IS PRETTY DRY TO START WITH. YEAH. JUST A FOOTNOTE FOR YOU, CYPRESS. WHEN YOU PLANT THEM IN WETLANDS DIRECTLY IN STANDING WATER, YOU DON'T THEY DON'T GROW AS WELL. THEY'LL SURVIVE. THEY'LL LIVE. BUT LONG TERM THEIR GROWTH RATE IS SIGNIFICANTLY LESS THAN IF THEY'RE NEAR WATER. SO WHEN YOU PLANT CYPRESS UP A LITTLE BIT HIGHER FROM THE WATER TABLE, THAT'S IN DIRECT PROXIMITY TO STANDING WATER, THEY DO GREAT.

SO IDEALLY YOU WANT A CYCLICAL RISE AND FALL OF THE WATER TABLE. YEAH. TO WHERE THEY'RE NOT THEY'RE NOT THEY DON'T HAVE WET FEET CONSTANTLY. CORRECT. YEAH. AND I WAS GOING TO ASK NICK HOW I REALLY FEEL ABOUT THE ART. BUT I THINK I'M GOOD I'M GOOD, I'M GOOD. ALRIGHT. SO.

BOARD MEMBERS GOOD OKAY. YEAH. GO AHEAD. MICROPHONE. SORRY. LEARNING ON THE JOB HERE. THERE WAS A COMMENT FROM STAFF ABOUT THAT. THIS IS A NET WETLAND SETBACK. SITUATION AS DETERMINED BY SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT. THERE IS NO VARIATION REQUESTED FOR WETLAND SETBACK FOR THIS PARCEL CORRECT. YEAH THAT'S CORRECT. IT WAS BAKED INTO THE OVERALL MASTER PLAN APPROVAL. AND THAT SET WHAT THIS BOUNDARY WAS. SO IT WAS PLATTED WAS PLATTED SUCH

[01:00:01]

AND THEN SOME OF THEM WAS THE TREE MITIGATION THAT I HAD READ INTO THE RECORD. SO WE WILL WE'LL POPULATE THOSE THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS OKAY. BECAUSE WHAT I SAW WAS MASTER PARCEL PLAN. SO IT SEEMED LIKE IT WAS BROADER THAN ARTWORK OR TREE PLACEMENT. WE ARE NOT DOING ANYTHING TO THE MASTER PLAN. I'M SORRY MISS, I'M HAVING A LOT OF TROUBLE HEARING YOU. I'M SORRY. VERY MUFFLED. OKAY. IS THAT BETTER? I'M SORRY. WE ARE NOT DOING ANY CHANGES OR AMENDMENTS TO THE MASTER PLAN. IT IS TO THE MASTER PLAN. THIS LOT 11. OKAY, SO JUST TO BE VERY CLEAR, THIS NUMBER 27 TO BE POPULATED, THERE'S REALLY NOTHING THAT'S TO BE ADDED LATER, CORRECT? NO. NO BAIT AND SWITCH HAPPENING HERE. NO, NO, I MEAN THE MASTER. THERE WAS A POINT IN TIME WHERE THE MASTER PARCEL PLAN WAS GOING TO BE AMENDED WHEN TEN, TEN, 11, 13, 14 AND 15 WERE PART OF THE APPLICATION. THAT CREATED SOME CONFUSION. THAT IS PROBABLY PART OF THINGS BEYOND MY CONTROL AND WHY JUST 11 IS HERE, BUT THAT THE MASTER PARCEL PLAN THAT WAS APPROVED IN 2019, I THINK IS WHAT WILL BE, AND THAT IS WHAT WILL STAY. AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE, YOU KNOW, MOVING FORWARD UNDER. WE'RE NOT CHANGING ANY OF THAT. OKAY. AND THEN TIGHTER THAN THE MASTER PARCEL PLAN, EXHIBIT D WAS APPROVED PLANS AND DOCUMENTS.

IT SAYS THE CORNERS EAST PARCEL D PROJECT AND USE THEREOF SHALL COMPLY WITH THE FOLLOWING DRAWINGS TO BE POPULATED AT FIRST READING. I BELIEVE THAT'S THIS SITE PLAN. THAT'S THE SITE PLAN. THE REASON I THINK JODY'S SAYING THAT THAT ISN'T CURRENTLY POPULATED IS IF IT COMES OUT OF THIS BOARD WITH A, YOU KNOW, RECOMMENDATION TO MOVE A TREE OR TO DO WHATEVER, THEN THEN THAT GETS DISCUSSED AND DELIBERATED AND POPULATED INTO THE FINAL ORDINANCE.

UNDERSTOOD. AND MY ONLY COMMENT WOULD BE THAT WE ASK THAT THAT BE PUT INTO THE RECORD RATHER THAN JUST THE POWERPOINT, BECAUSE I THIS I THINK THAT'S THE FIRST TIME I'M SEEING IT.

IT WAS NOT PART OF THE PACKET, OR AT LEAST IT DIDN'T REFERENCE IT IN THE DOCUMENTS. WE HAD UNDERSTOOD. AND THEN I LOOKED AT PART OF THE STUDY DONE BY MCKINSEY. AND I DON'T KNOW IF YOU IF ARNO IS WITH MCKINSEY, I DIDN'T QUITE ARNO IS ON ENVIRONMENTAL MCKINSEY'S TRAFFIC GOT IT. THERE WAS A IMPACT FEE STUDY THAT WAS DONE IN 2012. MY ONLY QUESTION IS IF THERE'S A NEWER IMPACT FEE STUDY THAN THAT THAN 13 YEARS AGO, AND ANYBODY WHO'S GOT AN ANSWER, FEEL FREE TO FIELD THAT ONE. YEAH, THE CITY WOULD BE THE ONES TO INITIATE IMPACT FEE STUDIES. AND I MEAN, YOU KNOW THAT. NO, I'M NOT ASKING YOU TO DO IT. I WAS JUST CURIOUS IF A NEWER ONE EXISTED. SO THE LAST IMPACT FEE STUDY WAS DONE IN 20. WE ADOPTED IN 2022. OKAY. SO THE STUDY THAT WAS REFERENCED BY MCKINSEY MENTIONED 2012. SO I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH THAT HAS CHANGED SINCE THEN, BUT I THINK THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE RELEVANT HERE. I'M PRETTY SURE JODY WILL CHARGE ME THE. CHAIR. I MEAN, COMMISSIONER, I MEAN BOARD MEMBER. BAIRD. SO IN OUR TRAFFIC, IN OUR IMPACT FEES THAT WERE DONE IN 2022, A LOT OF OUR IMPACT FEES WERE DECREASED BECAUSE WE ARE A BUILT OUT COMMUNITY. SO THE IMPACT FEES WOULD BE LESS THAN WHAT WAS DONE IN 2012. AND THIS THIS IS NOT SO MUCH ABOUT FEES, BUT MORE ABOUT THE TRAFFIC DATA THAT WAS USED FOR THE LAND USES. RIGHT? AND THEN FINALLY LOOK LIKE THIS WAS STARTED FOUR YEARS AGO, LIKE 2022, I BELIEVE WAS THE INITIAL YOU KIND OF GET NUMB AND LOSE TIME, LOSE TRACK OF TIME AT SOME POINT. NO AND AND NOT TOUCHED ON ANYTHING FINANCIAL OR DEVELOPMENT PLANS OR WHATEVER. BUT JUST FROM A ZONING STANDPOINT, HAS ANYTHING CHANGED THAT WOULD TOUCH ON WHAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR TODAY FROM THE INITIAL FILING OF THIS AND BRINGING IT HERE TODAY? I DON'T KNOW, I MEAN, I'M, I, I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THAT QUESTION IS GEARED TOWARD. BUT, YOU KNOW, WE'RE WE'RE HAPPY TO BE HERE TODAY, YOU KNOW, ASKING FOR APPROVAL. AND, YOU KNOW, WE'D LIKE TO MOVE FORWARD. AND IF YOU WANT TO, YOU KNOW, MEET AND CHAT ABOUT, YOU KNOW, THE

[01:05:04]

AND PETITIONER ANY OTHER ANY OTHER TESTIMONY. YOU GOOD. ALL GOOD SIR. THANK YOU. ALRIGHT.

I'D LIKE TO CLOSE THE HEARING AND ASK THE BOARD TO FORMULATE A MOTION. I'LL MOVE TO BRING IT TO A VOTE. HAVE A MOTION. HOW ABOUT A SECOND? I'LL SECOND. ALL RIGHT. ANY PUBLIC COMMENT INSTEAD OF MOTION TO BRING IT TO A VOTE. WE GOT A MOTION FOR APPROVAL. IT'S PROBABLY SORRY.

MOTION TO VOTE ON THE APPROVAL FOR THE SPECIFIC RIGHT AMENDMENT. I WILL SECOND. I HAVE NO PUBLIC COMMENT, CHAIR. NO PUBLIC COMMENT. ALRIGHT. AND MARY I'M SEEING THIS DOES NOT RECALL ROLL CALL. IT IS A ROLL CALL OKAY. ALRIGHT ALRIGHT MARY GO AHEAD. THAT'S OKAY. ROLL CALL SORRY I AM OKAY. BOARD MEMBER. WHALEN. YES. BOARD MEMBER. YES. BOARD MEMBER.

JAMES. YES. BOARD MEMBER. LAUGHLIN. YES. BOARD MEMBER. DEBORAH. YES. VICE CHAIR. MOSER.

YES. CHAIR MCCRYSTAL. YES. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. BYE, GUYS. THANK YOU. STAFF UPDATE. THE

[4. ADVISORY BOARD ORIENTATION REVIEW AND PUBLIC RECORDS PRESENTATION]

NOW I'LL INTRODUCE MYSELF AS MARY KENDALL, THE CITY CLERK. THERE WE GO. AND I THINK LEE IS GOING TO JOIN ME. LET'S SEE, I COULDN'T EVEN IT WAS SO BIG I COULDN'T EMAIL IT. IN MY RECEPTION, THIS WAS ALL THIS STUFF. FLOW THROUGH THESE TREES. I KNOW. RIGHT? 120, 300 AND

[01:10:10]

THIS IS WE CAN COMMUNICATE BACK AND FORTH AS THE PRESENTATION GOES. BUT I'LL TRY AND MAKE IT AS CLEAR AND SIMPLE AS POSSIBLE. SO WE'RE GOING TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT PUBLIC RECORDS ARE AND WHAT APPLIES TO YOU AS BOARD MEMBERS, ELECTED OFFICIALS AND APPOINTED BOARD MEMBERS ARE SUBJECT TO PUBLIC RECORD LAW AND THE SUNSHINE LAW. SO BOARD MEMBERS ARE RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR RECORDS AND MUST PROVIDE THEM IF REQUESTED. MANY OF YOU HAVE ALREADY GONE THROUGH THIS. WE TALKED ABOUT IT LAST YEAR, BUT FOR ANYBODY WHO'S NEW AS WELL, IT'S NOT BAD TO HAVE A REFRESHER AS WELL. WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT THE DUTY TO PRESERVE AND NOT DELETE YOUR RECORDS. SOME PLACES ALLOW YOU TO TURN IN YOUR RECORDS AS YOU GET THEM, WHEREAS YOU HAVE THEM. AND THEN YOU CAN JUST TAKE THEM OFF OF YOUR OWN DEVICES. WE ASK THAT YOU HOLD ON TO THEM AS LONG AS YOU'RE A BOARD MEMBER, BECAUSE WITH EVERY NEW PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST THAT COMES IN, IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE BOARD MEMBER TO HAVE THOSE RECORDS. I CAN GO BACK IN WHAT I'VE SUPPLIED TO SOMEBODY BEFORE, BUT I CAN'T SWEAR THAT THAT'S EVERYTHING. SO THAT HAS TO COME FROM YOU. WE'RE GOING TO UNDERSTAND WHAT BOARD MEMBER RESPONSIBILITIES ARE AT THE TIME OF BEING A BOARD MEMBER, AS WELL AS WHEN YOUR TERM EXPIRES. AND IF YOU'RE NO LONGER A BOARD MEMBER. OKAY. WHAT IS A PUBLIC RECORD? A PUBLIC RECORD IS ANY RECORD MADE IN CONNECTION WITH THE TRANSITION TRANSACTION OF OFFICIAL CITY BUSINESS, REGARDLESS OF ITS FORM. SO REGARDLESS, EMAIL, VOICEMAIL, TEXT MESSAGE, SOCIAL MEDIA, ALL OF THESE THINGS ARE PUBLIC RECORDS. IF THEY ARE DISCUSSING CITY BUSINESS OR ANY TYPE OF BUSINESS THAT MAY COME BEFORE YOU AS A BOARD MEMBER. AND IT IS THE CONTENT THAT IS THE PUBLIC RECORD. IT'S NOT NECESSARILY WHERE IT'S KEPT. SO IF YOU HAVE A PERSONAL CELL PHONE AND SOMEBODY IS TEXTING YOU AND IT'S A FRIEND OF YOURS AND THEY'RE ASKING ABOUT WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN ABOUT THAT AVONLEA PROJECT, THINGS LIKE THAT. IF YOU ENGAGE IN A CONVERSATION ABOUT THIS PROJECT THAT COMES BEFORE THE BOARD, THAT IS PUBLIC RECORD. YES. WHAT IF YOU'RE A RECIPIENT OF SOMETHING AND YOU DON'T RESPOND LIKE, FOR EXAMPLE, THE DEVELOPER WROTE AND ASKED FOR A MEETING. I NEVER RESPONDED, I WASN'T ABLE TO SCHEDULE IT, SO I NEVER RESPONDED. IS THAT BECOME A PUBLIC RECORD? IT DOES.

HIS HIS CORRESPONDENCE TO YOU DOES BECOME PUBLIC RECORD. WHAT'S BEST IS FOR YOU TO EITHER SNAPSHOT THAT AND WE WERE GOING TO GO OVER ALL THOSE LITTLE THINGS, BUT SNAPSHOT THAT IF IT'S A TEXT, IF IT'S AN EMAIL, SEND IT TO YOUR CITY ASSIGNED EMAIL ADDRESS. SO EACH ONE OF YOU AND I'M KIND OF SKIPPING AHEAD, BUT EACH ONE OF YOU HAS RECEIVED A CITY ASSIGNED EMAIL AND THAT'S TO PROTECT YOU. ANY CORRESPONDENCE THAT GOES BACK AND FORTH. IF WE GET A PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST FOR YOUR COMMUNICATIONS ON A PARTICULAR PROJECT, WE JUST GO RIGHT INTO THE EMAIL SYSTEM. WE DON'T HAVE TO BOTHER YOU. IT'S WHEN IT INCLUDES MORE INFORMATION THAT YOU MAY HAVE IN TEXT OR A LETTER, YOU KNOW, SOME OTHER FORM OF COMMUNICATION, BUT SENDING IT ALL THROUGH YOUR EMAIL OR PROVIDING IT TO US WHEN YOU HAVE IT IS HELPFUL. LET'S SEE, IS PUBLIC RECORDS LAW APPLICABLE TO YOU? YES, LIKE WE JUST DISCUSSED, ANY ELECTED APPOINTED BOARD MEMBERS ALL HAVE TO ABIDE BY THE THE PUBLIC RECORDS LAW. IT KIND OF SPECIFIES THEIR EMAILS, TEXTS, WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS, PUBLIC RECORD AND THE BOARDS THAT IT APPLIES TO. SO OUR CITY COMMISSIONERS ARE ALL SUBJECT TO SIGN LAW. AND AND I'LL GO OVER THAT. SORRY, I'M SKIPPING AHEAD. PUBLIC RECORDS LAW AND CRA, CRB AND LPA. SO WE JUST KIND OF IDENTIFIED THAT YOU'RE LEGALLY RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PRESERVATION OF THOSE RECORDS. ACCORDING TO CHAPTER 119 PUBLIC RECORDS LAW, AND IT IS THE

[01:15:02]

AND THAT'S KIND OF WHAT WE'RE DOING RIGHT NOW. JUST MAKING SURE EVERYBODY'S UP ON IT. AND IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT PUBLIC RECORDS WE'RE HERE TO HELP. NOT ONLY TODAY, LEE AND I CAN ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS, BUT IF YOU THINK OF SOMETHING AFTER THE FACT, OF COURSE, ALWAYS REACH OUT. ORIENTATION PACKET. YOU GUYS RECEIVED AN ORIENTATION PACKET FROM SUSI.

IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN AN EMAIL THAT INCLUDED A BUNCH OF ATTACHMENTS. IT INCLUDED A CALENDAR FOR ALL OF YOUR MEETINGS, THE PUBLIC MEETINGS, INCLUDING THESE MEETINGS. I HAVE IT OVER ON THE OTHER COUNTER. I MEANT TO BRING IT WITH ME, BUT IF THERE'S ANYTHING THAT I MENTIONED THAT YOU DON'T HAVE AND YOU WANT A COPY OF, JUST LET ME KNOW. ALSO, THERE'S LIKE A TOOLS WE PROVIDE LIKE HELPFUL TOOLS, WHICH INCLUDES EMAIL ADDRESSES OF CITY EMPLOYEES THAT YOU MAY BE IN CONTACT WITH OR WANT TO, YOU KNOW, ASK QUESTIONS OF THE BYLAWS WHICH ARE NOW EMBEDDED INTO THE CODE. AND JUST SOME HELPFUL INFORMATION PROVIDED LINKS TO PUBLIC RECORDS LAW, VARIOUS THINGS THAT YOU WOULD NEED AS A BOARD MEMBER. ALSO, EACH ONE OF YOU SHOULD HAVE RECEIVED THE ETHICS GUIDE TO THE SUNSHINE AMENDMENT AND CODE OF ETHICS LAW. IT'S ABOUT AN I WANT TO ■SAY 80 PAGE BOOKLET THAT I THINK WE TRY TO PROVIDE TO YOU IN A FULL BOOKLET. AND THEN THERE'S ALSO A LINK IN THE HELPFUL TOOLS, AND THEN LET'S SEE ALSO UPON APPOINTMENT YOU WERE ASSIGNED THE EMAIL ADDRESS. HAS ANYBODY HAD ANY TROUBLE WITH THAT OR HAS EVERYBODY BEEN ABLE TO CONNECT TO IT AND RECEIVE EMAIL FROM US WITHOUT YOUR OKAY BOARD AGENDAS? AND OF COURSE ANY CORRESPONDENCE WILL GO THROUGH THAT EMAIL ADDRESS.

WHAT THEY DID IS THEY HAD IT ROLL TO A PERSONAL EMAIL ADDRESS THAT YOU PROVIDED AS WELL, BECAUSE WE FOUND WHEN WE ONLY SUPPLIED A CITY EMAIL ADDRESS AND WE EXPECTED EVERYBODY TO GO CHECK IT, PEOPLE, YOU'RE NOT USED TO IT. AND PEOPLE WERE MISSING EMAILS ALL THE TIME. SO IT SIMPLY ROLLS OVER TO YOUR PERSONAL EMAIL ADDRESS AS WELL. THAT'S A BIG YEAH. IT HELPS DOESN'T IT. AND THEN WE JUST ASK WITH THAT EMAIL ADDRESS. THAT'S A GREAT PLACE FOR YOU TO ANYTIME YOU GET CORRESPONDENCE, SAY AN APPLICANT WANTED TO SEND YOU SOME INFORMATION ON SOMETHING YOU'RE GOING TO BE VOTING ON, FORWARD THAT TO THE EMAIL ADDRESS. THEY SHOULD BE USING YOUR CITY EMAIL ADDRESS. BUT IF THEY'RE NOT, IF SOMEHOW THEY GOT AHOLD OF YOUR PERSONAL EMAIL, JUST FORWARD THAT EMAIL. AND THEN SAME THING WITH ANY TEXT MESSAGES WE SUGGEST LIKE SNAPSHOTTING THEM. SOME PEOPLE HAVE TEXT MESSAGE SOFTWARE THAT THEY CAN DOWNLOAD THEIR TEXT MESSAGES. SO WHATEVER YOU HAVE AND WHATEVER'S EASIEST, BUT JUST TRY AND KEEP IT ALL IN ONE PLACE. IT'S HELPFUL. AND THEN THAT LITTLE IN THE BOX IS JUST A SUGGESTION THERE OF MAYBE A STANDARD RESPONSE IN AN EMAIL THAT YOU RECEIVE THAT YOU COULD, YOU KNOW, SIMPLY TELL PEOPLE TO EMAIL YOU CITY BUSINESS AT YOUR, YOU KNOW, YOUR CITY EMAIL ADDRESS. AND THIS IS JUST KIND OF GOING THROUGH, YOU KNOW, SOME OF THE DIFFERENT THINGS, THE WAY YOU WOULD RECEIVE RECORDS AND WHAT WE SUGGEST YOU DO WITH THEM. JUST LIKE WE ALREADY MENTIONED, TEXT MESSAGES, SCREENSHOTS IS WHAT I DO. IT'S A LITTLE OLD FASHIONED, BUT I TRY NOT TO TEXT CITY BUSINESS ANYWAY. WE TRY AND KEEP IT AT A MINIMUM. IT'S NOT

[01:20:02]

WE COULD HAVE A PACKED HOUSE OF PEOPLE, ONE OF THE PUBLIC HEARINGS, LIKE WE DIDN'T HAVE MANY PEOPLE OTHER THAN THE APPLICANTS HERE TODAY ON THESE HEARINGS. BUT IN THE LAST YEAR OR TWO, I THINK THERE'S BEEN A COUPLE THAT WERE VERY HOT TOPIC, AND WE HAD A PACKED ROOM IN HERE, AND EVEN THE SHERIFF SHOWED UP AT ONE OF THEM AND MADE A STATEMENT IN ABOUT HIS OPINION ON THE DEVELOPMENT. SO STUFF LIKE THAT, YOU'RE PROBABLY WE MAY GET A PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST AND THEN ULTIMATELY LITIGATION AND BOARD MEMBER WILL KNOW THAT WE CAN GET REQUESTS FOR PRODUCTION AND SUBPOENAS AND LITIGATION. BUT THE PUBLIC RECORDS LAWS ARE A LITTLE BIT MORE BROAD THAN WHAT WE CAN DO IN IN BOARD MEMBER, WHEN WE PRACTICE LAW, WE CAN MAKE OBJECTIONS FOR A LOT OF REASONS TO AVOID TRYING TO PRODUCE A BUNCH OF RECORDS. BUT IN PUBLIC RECORDS LAW, WE DON'T HAVE AS MANY OBJECTIONS PER SE. AND SO RELEVANCY IS NOT AN OBJECTION YOU CAN MAKE ON PUBLIC RECORDS. SO IF IT'S PUBLIC RECORD, IT'S A PUBLIC RECORD. IF SOMETHING LIKE THAT COMES UP AND IT GETS OVERWHELMING, I THINK OUR CITY COMMISSIONERS GET A LOT MORE PUBLIC. I KNOW THEY GET A LOT MORE PUBLIC RECORDS THAN OUR ADVISORY BOARDS, BUT THERE IS SOFTWARE. ONE'S CALLED AMAZING. THAT'S VERY GOOD AT COLLECTING TEXT MESSAGES. YOU KNOW, ESPECIALLY GOING BACK A COUPLE OF YEARS. AS FAR AS THE POTENTIAL CRIMINAL LIABILITY OR EXPOSURE THAT YOU GUYS HAVE BY BEING ON THIS BOARD. I WANTED TO POINT OUT SOME THINGS. IF YOU IF YOU VIOLATE THE PUBLIC RECORDS LAW NEGLIGENTLY, IT'S A CRIMINAL INFRACTION OR NONCRIMINAL INFRACTION, AND IT COULD BE ORDERED UP TO I THINK IT'S $500 FINE FOR THAT. IF YOU INTENTIONALLY VIOLATE THE PUBLIC PUBLIC RECORDS LAWS, THEN IT CAN BE A MISDEMEANOR UP TO $1,000 AND ALSO JAIL TIME. SO THAT'S SOMETHING YOU NEED TO TAKE SERIOUSLY. YOU DON'T WANT TO INTENTIONALLY VIOLATE ANY OF THE PUBLIC RECORDS, BUT THERE

[01:25:02]

THERE IS ATTORNEY'S FEES. SO, YOU KNOW, WHEN THEY MAKE A PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST AND THEY REQUEST A RECORD AND WE DON'T RESPOND OR PRODUCE A RECORD THAT WE HAVE, THEY CAN FILE A LAWSUIT. THEY DON'T GET DAMAGES AGAINST THE CITY. WHAT THEY DO IS THEY GET ATTORNEY'S FEES SO THEY COULD SPEND A BUNCH OF HOURS AND RACK UP A BUNCH OF ATTORNEY'S FEES. AND THEN THE COURT ORDERS US TO PRODUCE THE RECORD. BASICALLY, I WANTED TO TALK ABOUT A COUPLE OF THINGS BEFORE YOU GET TO THE LAST SLIDE, AND ESPECIALLY WITH SOCIAL MEDIA, AND IT'S NOT ON OUR SLIDE PRESENTATION, BUT IT COMES UP A LOT. SO YOU JUST NEED TO BE CAREFUL. AND WHEN YOU ARE POSTING ON SOCIAL MEDIA, EVERYBODY DOES THAT. YOU KNOW, IF IT IS SOMETHING THAT'S GOING TO COME BEFORE YOU AS A BOARD ESPECIALLY, YOU'RE GOING TO WANT IF YOU FEEL COMPELLED TO COMMENT ON A POST GOING ON FACEBOOK OR ONE OF ONE OF THE OTHER SOCIAL MEDIA, YOU MIGHT WANT TO, I WOULD RECOMMEND TAKING A SCREENSHOT AND SENDING IT TO YOUR EMAIL ADDRESS. AND LIKEWISE, IF SOMEONE'S ASKING YOU A QUESTION ON FACEBOOK, YOU MIGHT WANT TO FORWARD A SCREENSHOT OF IT. EVEN IF YOU DON'T RESPOND TO IT TO YOUR CITY PROVIDED EMAIL ADDRESS JUST SO THAT IT'S THERE. I WOULDN'T RELY ON YOU KNOW, PEOPLE CAN DELETE POSTS AND COMMENTS UNDER THEIR POST ON FACEBOOK ALL THE TIME. AND, YOU KNOW, I DON'T WANT YOU TO BE LIABLE WHETHER IT'S INTENTIONALLY OR NOT, INTENTIONALLY OR VIOLATING THE PUBLIC RECORDS LAWS. AND I LOOKED THROUGH A COUPLE OF CASES AND, AND IT MORE HAD TO DO WITH COMMISSIONERS. BUT ONE PARTICULAR COMMISSIONER IN ESCAMBIA COUNTY, HE HAD A FACEBOOK PAGE AND THINGS THAT WERE COMING UP. HE WOULD PUT ON HIS FACEBOOK PAGE AND ALLOW PEOPLE TO COMMENT, WHICH IS A GREAT TOOL FOR POLITICIANS TO USE, AND GETTING FEEDBACK FROM THE FROM THE RESIDENTS. HOWEVER, HE HE WAS BLOCKING CERTAIN RESIDENTS FROM MAKING COMMENTS BECAUSE THEY DISAGREED WITH HIM. AND SO THE FEDERAL JUDGE RULED THAT THAT WAS IN VIOLATION OF OF, YOU KNOW, THE LAW. SO ANOTHER THING WAS THAT SAME PERSON THAT WAS TRYING TO COMMENT ON HIS FACEBOOK PAGE, THEN SENT A BUNCH OF PUBLIC RECORDS REQUESTS ABOUT HIS SOCIAL MEDIA STUFF. AND I THINK THERE WAS LIKE 25,000 POSTS THAT HAD TO BE REVIEWED BY A JUDGE. AND SO A LOT OF IT WAS PERSONAL BECAUSE IT'S ON HIS PERSONAL PAGE. SO THE JUDGE HAD TO STILL REVIEW ALL THESE POSTS TO SEE WHAT WAS CITY RELATED AND NOT. SO, ALTHOUGH WE MIGHT HAVE AN ARGUMENT THAT CERTAIN SOCIAL MEDIA POSTS ARE NOT PUBLIC, THE JUDGE MIGHT STILL READ YOUR SOCIAL MEDIA POSTS. SO I JUST PUT THAT OUT THERE, BECAUSE THERE ARE SOME RECENT CASE LAW WHERE A FEDERAL JUDGE HAS RULED IN THAT FASHION. AND OF COURSE, A LOT OF OUR DISCUSSIONS ON PUBLIC ISSUES AND DEVELOPMENT ARE BEING DONE ON FACEBOOK CURRENTLY. SO I JUST WANTED TO GIVE YOU A COUPLE OF TIDBITS ON THAT. AND WITH THAT, I'LL TURN IT BACK OVER TO MARY. YEAH, WITH JUST A LITTLE SIDE NOTE, PUBLIC RECORDS REQUESTS IN GENERAL.

WE'VE MANY TIMES RECEIVED REQUESTS FOR PUBLIC RECORDS OF TEXT MESSAGES BETWEEN EMPLOYEES AND THINGS LIKE THAT, AND IT CAN HAPPEN BETWEEN BOARD MEMBERS. AND SO YOU KIND OF HAVE TO WATCH WHAT YOU SAY, WHAT YOU PUT IN WRITING, BECAUSE IF EVEN IF IT WAS RELATED TO CITY BUSINESS, BUT THEN IT TALKS ABOUT A COWORKER, ANOTHER BOARD MEMBER OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, AND IT'S NOT SUCH A NICE LIGHT. IT'S STILL IS PUBLIC RECORD AND AND COMES TO LIGHT. SO SURE, SOMETHING JUST POPPED IN MY HEAD THAT I PROBABLY SHOULD SAY, LET'S SAY SOMEONE ELSE IS POSTING ON SOCIAL MEDIA AND TWO OF YOU ARE COMMENTING ON IT AND IT'S COMING UP THE NEXT MEETING. THAT COULD BE THAT COULD BE A SUNSHINE VIOLATION, BECAUSE YOU GUYS ARE NOT SUPPOSED TO COMMUNICATE ABOUT AN AGENDA ITEM OR SOME ISSUE THAT'S GOING TO COME BEFORE YOU. OUTSIDE OF OUR ADVERTISED MEETINGS. BUT WHEN THIS IS A NEW AREA OF LAW, SOCIAL MEDIA AND THE FLORIDA SUNSHINE, BECAUSE IT'S IT'S ALL NEW AND THERE'S NOT A LOT OF CASE LAW OR ACTUALLY, THAT INTERPRETS WHAT COULD BE A VIOLATION. SO YOU JUST GOT TO BE VERY CAREFUL. THE SUNSHINE MEANS THAT YOU GUYS DELIBERATE AND DISCUSS ITEMS IN THE SUNSHINE, NOT IN THE SHADE. ALL RIGHT. AND SO ANYTIME TWO OR MORE OF YOU GET TOGETHER AND DISCUSS SOMETHING THAT'S A VIOLATION OF SUNSHINE WHEN IT'S OUTSIDE OF AN ADVERTISED MEETING HERE TODAY. SO THAT'S WHY I WANTED TO POINT OUT THAT SOMEONE MIGHT BE ABLE TO ARGUE, IF YOU GUYS ARE BOTH HAVING A CONVERSATION ON FACEBOOK, ON A POST THAT YOU'RE COMMUNICATING

[01:30:03]

THE TRAFFIC CALMING STUFF I'VE BEEN DOING IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD THAT'S NOT IN THE CRB, LIKE ALL THOSE EMAILS AND TEXT MESSAGES. DO I HAVE TO GATHER ALL OF THOSE IF YOU'RE ASKING? YES. SO ANYTHING CITY, NOT JUST CR, NOT JUST WITHIN THE CRA, IT'S CITY OFFICIAL BUSINESS IS WHAT THE OFFICIAL CITY BUSINESS IS WHAT THE LAW SAYS. I MEAN, IT WOULD BE ARGUABLE THAT IF. YEAH, IT'D BE ARGUABLE, YOU KNOW, IN A COURT OF LAW THAT IF SOMEONE ASKED YOU FOR SOME, SOME DOCUMENTS ABOUT THE WATER DEPARTMENT THAT YOU HAVE NO IDEA ABOUT AND NOT ANY INVOLVEMENT IN NEVER WILL OR THE POLICE DEPARTMENT, I THINK IT WOULD BE ARGUABLE, BUT I WOULD OBVIOUSLY FORWARD ANY SUCH REQUEST TO US AND LET US HANDLE RESPONDING, OBVIOUSLY.

OKAY. BUT I, I DON'T THINK THAT'S PROBABLY GOING TO COME UP. I YOU'VE BEEN ON THIS BOARD FOR A WHILE. I DON'T HAVE YOU HAD A PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST SINCE YOU'VE BEEN HERE? I DON'T I DID OKAY. IT WAS TOOK ME A LONG TIME TO WRITE. SO SOME OF THEM CAN BE AND IT'S IF IT'S A BIG TOPIC. I HAVE ONE IN MY MIND WHERE THE SHERIFF CAME UP THAT THAT WAS A BIG ISSUE. WE WE ENDED UP IN LITIGATION IN THAT WE YOU MIGHT HAVE GOTTEN ONE. SO IT COULD HAPPEN OVER THIS YEAR. WE COULD HAVE A DEVELOPMENT PROJECT COME THROUGH THAT'S VERY POLITICAL.

OKAY. THANKS. OKAY. AND I ALSO THINK IF YOU'RE YOU HAVE THOSE RECORDS AND YOU'VE BEEN

[01:35:03]

BUT WE TALKED ABOUT HOW IT HAS TO BE FROM THE POINT OF LIKE BEING SWORN IN. WE WAITED TO GIVE THIS PRESENTATION UNTIL&-PT THE LAST MEETING WE DIDN'T. SO JUST SO YOU'RE AWARE, COMMISSION ON ETHICS, FINANCIAL DISCLOSURE. IT'S JUST SOMETHING THEY ASK YOU TO GO IN AND YOU DO THE FIRST ONE AS A NEW BOARD MEMBER. I CAN SEND THE LINK AROUND TO EVERYONE TO YOUR CITY EMAIL THAT THAT CAN MAKE IT A LITTLE BIT EASIER. SO WE'LL TAKE CARE OF THAT IN THE MORNING. AND THEN BY JULY 1ST OF EVERY YEAR, THAT'S WHEN YOU'RE REQUIRED TO DO YOUR REGULAR FORM ONE. AND YOU WANT TO DO THAT. IT'S ALL ONLINE NOW. IT USED TO BE A PAPER FORM THAT WAS SUBMITTED TO THE SUPERVISOR OF ELECTIONS, BUT NOW IT IS ALL ONLINE, MAKING IT MUCH EASIER FOR EVERYONE. AND THEN EXITING BOARD MEMBERS, THERE'S AN ADDITIONAL FORM, FORM ONE YOU STILL HAVE TO DO. IT'S ALWAYS FOR THE PRIOR YEAR. SO WHAT YOU FILL OUT THIS YEAR WOULD BE FOR 2025. SO FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO JUST BECAME BOARD MEMBERS IN 2026, EVEN IF YOU'RE NOT A BOARD MEMBER IN 2027, YOU HAVE TO FILL OUT THE FORM FOR 2026. SO YOU'RE COMPLETING THE FORM FOR THE YEAR THAT YOU WERE A BOARD MEMBER. AND FORM ONE, F IS THE FORM THAT YOU WOULD DO AT THE TIME THAT YOU LEAVE THE BOARD. SO IF YOU'RE NO LONGER A BOARD MEMBER, THAT IS A BOARD, A FORM THAT YOU HAVE TO COMPLETE. OKAY, WE ALREADY COVERED SUNSHINE LAW, SO I JUST WANTED TO GO OVER THESE TAKEAWAYS. YES, THIS BOARD IS SUBJECT TO SUNSHINE LAW AND PUBLIC RECORDS. I THINK WE'VE DISCUSSED THAT ENOUGH. I THINK EVERYBODY'S GOT THAT ONE. IT IS YOUR RESPONSIBILITY TO MAINTAIN ALL BOARD BUSINESS RELATED RECORDS EXCEPT FOR EMAILS THROUGH YOUR CITY EMAIL ADDRESS. AS I MENTIONED, WE WILL TAKE CARE OF THAT. IF THAT KIND OF A REQUEST COMES IN, YOU WILL BE CONTACTED BY THE CITY. IF THERE IS A REQUEST, AND WE'LL LET YOU KNOW EXACTLY WHAT WE NEED FROM YOU. DO YOUR BEST TO LIMIT ANY CITY RELATED TEXTS OR COMMUNICATION ON PERSONAL DEVICES. IT JUST IS SO MUCH EASIER. BUT OF COURSE, IF YOU DO HAVE SOME, LIKE WE SAID, FORWARD TO YOUR CITY EMAIL AND WHEN SEPARATION OCCURS, SUBMIT ALL PUBLIC RECORDS REQUESTS OR ALL PUBLIC RECORDS THAT YOU HAVE TO THE CITY CLERK. AND THAT IS BASICALLY IT. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS? WE COVERED EVERYTHING. ALL RIGHT I THINK WE'RE GOOD. THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU MARY. YOU'RE WELCOME.

THANK YOU. I'D LIKE TO ADJOURN THIS MEETING RIGHT NOW.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.