[00:00:03] >> WE DID NOT HAVE A CHAIR AT THE LAST MEETING AND [ELECTION OF OFFICERS] ELECTED AN ACTING CHAIR FOR THAT MEETING UNDER ROBERT'S RULES. WE AGAIN DO NOT HAVE A CHAIR, SO I'M GOING TO OPEN THE MEETING, CALL IT TO ORDER, AND THEN I'M GOING TO TAKE NOMINATIONS FIRST FOR A CHAIRMAN AND THEN FOR A VICE-CHAIR. THE FLOOR IS NOW OPEN FOR NOMINATIONS FOR CHAIR. >> I'D LIKE TO NOMINATE TERI GROOMS FOR CHAIR. >> ARE THERE ANY OTHER NOMINATIONS? SHE NOMINATED TERI GROOMS. ARE THERE ANY OTHER NOMINATIONS? HEARING NONE, THEN BY ACCLAMATION, MS. GROOMS IS THE CHAIR. THE FLOOR IS NOW OPEN FOR VICE-CHAIR. ARE THERE ANY NOMINATIONS? WOULD YOU LIKE TO BE? WE NEED A VICE-CHAIR. >> [LAUGHTER] I'LL NOMINATE MB HAGUE. >> ARE THERE ANY OTHER NOMINATIONS? BEING NONE, BY ACCLAMATION, MS. HAGUE IS THE VICE-CHAIR. MS. GROOMS, IF YOU WANT TO TAKE CHAIR'S SEAT AND THE GAVEL. >> WE HAVE TO SWITCH? [NOISE] I COULD SIT HERE, I'M FINE. [BACKGROUND] LET'S SEE. ELECTION CHAIR. DO WE HAVE ANY CHANGES TO THE MINUTES FROM THE APRIL 12TH? [CALL TO ORDER] >> YOU HAVE TO CALL THE ROLL. >> THAT'S RIGHT. I'M SORRY. SEE, I GET ALL MIXED UP. >> COMMISSIONER PATEL? >> HERE. >> COMMISSIONER FORE? >> HERE. >> CHAIR GROOMS? >> HERE. >> VICE-CHAIR HAGUE? >> HERE. >> COMMISSIONER HELD? >> HERE. >> COMMISSIONER KIRN? >> HERE. >> COMMISSIONER PINTEL? COMMISSIONER WEISMAN? COMMISSIONER DUNNING? >> HERE. >> THANK YOU. [MINUTES] >> NOW WE CAN MOVE ON TO THE APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES FROM THE APRIL 12TH, 2022 MEETING. DID ANYBODY HAVE ANY CHANGES? >> MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES AS SUBMITTED. >> I'LL SECOND IT. >> ALL IN FAVOR? >> AYE. >> AYE. >> IT PASSES UNANIMOUSLY. WE ARE SIX TO NOTHING. [LAUGHTER] [CITIZEN COMMENTS] >> MADAM CHAIR, THE NEXT ITEM, CITIZEN COMMENTS, IS FOR COMMENTS FOR ITEMS THAT ARE NOT ON THE AGENDA. >> YES. WE ARE ON CITIZEN COMMENTS, WHERE WE GET THREE MINUTES TO THE CITIZENS TO TELL US WHAT'S ON THEIR MIND ON ANY ITEMS THAT ARE NOT ON TONIGHT'S AGENDA. MADAM SECRETARY, DO WE HAVE ANY CARDS? >> YES, WE DO. MASON TORRES, IF YOU WOULD COME TO THE PODIUM AND STATE YOUR NAME PLEASE. >> MASON TORRES, 6814 MITCHELL STREET. I WAS GOING TO TALK ABOUT SANTE CIRCLE. I WAS TOLD BY PETER THIS IS GOING TO NEXT MONTH'S AGENDA, BUT I THOUGHT I'D PLANT THIS IDEA FOR EVERYBODY. PART OF THE PLAN FOR THE SANTE CIRCLE DEVELOPMENT, WHICH IS NEAR ISLAND WAY IN LIMESTONE CREEK ROAD, IS TO PUT A TRAFFIC CIRCLE AT THE DEVELOPMENT AND THEN A TRAFFIC LIGHT AT THE LIMESTONE CREEK ROAD AND ISLAND WAY INTERSECTION. ALTHOUGH THIS IS AN OKAY SOLUTION, I WANTED TO GAUGE THE PUBLIC SENTIMENTS. ON MONDAY, MAY 9TH, 2022, YESTERDAY, FROM 1:40 PM TO 02:40 PM, I HELD ABOUT 11 BY 17 SIGNS SAYING TRAFFIC LIGHT HERE, AND I WAS GAUGING THE RESPONSE FROM PEOPLE TRAVELING SOUTHBOUND ON LIMESTONE CREEK ROAD. I GOT ABOUT 90 RESPONSES OF PEOPLE WHO WERE BACKING UP AT THAT INTERSECTION. SEVENTY EIGHT PEOPLE SAID YES, THUMBS UP OR ROLLED THEIR WINDOWS DOWN,12 PEOPLE SAID NO. SO 78 YES,12 NO. OF THE YESES WHO I COULD GET A FOLLOW-UP RESPONSE, I SAID, HOW ABOUT A ROUNDABOUT? THESE PEOPLE ACTUALLY HAD TO ROLL DOWN THEIR WINDOWS TO TELL ME YES OR NO. [00:05:01] OF THESE, I GOT ALMOST HALF THE PEOPLE TO RESPOND. SO 37 PEOPLE SAID YES AND 11 PEOPLE SAID NO, SO THAT'S ABOUT THREE-QUARTERS OF THE PEOPLE WHO HAD ACTUALLY RESPONDED TO THAT SECONDARY QUESTION. SIDE NOTE, I SAW 11 PEOPLE ON THEIR PHONES AT THIS INTERSECTION. [LAUGHTER] BASED ON THIS SURVEY, I WOULD LIKE TO PROPOSE TO YOU GUYS AND THEN TO THE COUNTY A TURBO ROUNDABOUT AT THE INTERSECTION OF LIMESTONE CREEK ROAD AND ISLAND WAY. THE TRAFFIC NUMBERS ARE UNDER THE REQUIREMENT FOR A ONE LANE INTO A TWO LANE, TWO LANE ON THE MAJOR, ONE LANE ON THE MINOR. ROUNDABOUTS ARE 50 PERCENT SAFER THAN TRAFFIC LIGHTS [NOISE] AND THAT A TURBO ROUNDABOUT HAS ABOUT 40 PERCENT LESS POINTS OF CONFLICT COMPARED TO A NORMAL TWO LANE ROUND ABOUT THAT YOU'D SEE IN THE PLAN FOR SANTE CIRCLE SIMILAR TO THE ONES NORTH OF ABACOA. IF YOU GUYS WANT THIS PRINTOUT I HAVE OF A TURBO ROUNDABOUT, I CAN PASS THIS AROUND IF ANYBODY WANTS TO SEE IT. >> THAT'S FINE. WE DON'T USUALLY COMMENT ON ANY OF THE PUBLIC COMMENTS ON TONIGHT'S MEETING, BUT THEY'LL TAKE DOWN YOUR INFORMATION AND PASS IT ON FOR THE APPROPRIATE DEPARTMENTS. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH. >> MADAM CHAIR, I BELIEVE WE HAVE TWO ADDITIONAL CARDS ON THIS TOPIC, FELINDA HOLLAND RIOS AND THEN DR. MICHAEL MAYWEATHER. IF YOU'D LIKE TO COME TO THE PODIUM AND SPEAK. >> YES. GOOD EVENING. >> STATE YOUR NAME PLEASE. >> MY NAME IS FELINDA HOLLAND RIOS. I'VE BEEN A NATIVE IN THE COMMUNITY FOR 52 YEARS. THIS IS THE ACTUAL FIRST TIME THAT I'VE HEARD OR WE HAVE HEARD OF ANYTHING OF THIS NATURE COMING INTO OUR COMMUNITY. WE ARE LOOKING TO FIND OUT THE IMPACT OF A MENTAL HOSPITAL OR HOSPITALS OR ANYTHING. I DON'T KNOW WHAT STUDY HE DID, BUT IT WAS NONE OF US INCLUDED IN THAT AYE OR NAY, WHETHER A ROUNDABOUT OR ANY OF THIS THAT'S COMING INTO OUR COMMUNITY. I KNOW THAT WE'RE NOT ANNEXED INTO THE TOWN OF JUPITER, BUT WE ARE PART OF JUPITER, WE ARE UNINCORPORATED PALM BEACH COUNTY. WE HAVE GRAVE CONCERNS AND ISSUES CONCERNING THIS MAGNITUDE OF A PROJECT COMING INTO OUR COMMUNITY. WE WORKED HARD ACROSS THE STREET AS WELL FOR THE ROAD YEARS AGO THAT WAS GOING TO BE RAN PAST OUR PARK AND OUR CHILDREN, SO IT'S OF CONCERN TO US. I DON'T KNOW WHO WE NEED TO REACH OUT TO MEET TO FIND OUT. >> THE STAFF WILL TAKE YOUR COMMENTS AND THEY CAN REACH OUT TO YOU WITH WHAT'S HAPPENING WITH THAT DEVELOPMENT. >> OKAY. YES, THAT'S FINE. >> THEY HAVE YOUR INFORMATION, WE JUST DON'T TYPICALLY TALK ABOUT [OVERLAPPING] THEM. >> NO, THAT'S OKAY. I KNOW IT'S GOING TO BE ON THE NEXT AGENDA, AND AS YOU CAN SEE, THE CONCERNED CITIZENS THAT SHOWED UP TONIGHT. >> ABSOLUTELY. [LAUGHTER] >> ENFORCED, AND THERE'S PROBABLY HUNDREDS OR MORE. >> YES. THE PLANNING AND ZONING STAFF CAN TAKE YOUR COMMENTS AND THEN THEY'LL REACH OUT TO YOU AT A LATER DATE. >> DR. MICHAEL MAYWEATHER? >> HELLO. GREETINGS COUNCIL AND MAYOR. I DON'T SEE HIM. >> NO, WE ARE THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, WE'RE NOT THE TOWN COUNCIL. [OVERLAPPING] >> OKAY, GREAT. [LAUGHTER] THIS HAS BECOME [NOISE] AN ISSUE OR A CONCERN TO THE COMMUNITY. STANDING AS THE PASTOR OF THE MOUNT CARMEL MISSIONARY BAPTIST CHURCH, WHICH IS THE OLDEST CHURCH OF NORTHERN PALM BEACH COUNTY, AND IS THE HISTORICAL LANDMARK WITH MANY THINGS. HOW MANY MINUTES DO I HAVE, TWO? >> THREE. >> YEAH. >> THREE MINUTES? >> YEAH. >> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. THIS IS PROBABLY AS SMOOTH AS TENNESSEE WHISKEY FOR ME TO SAY. [00:10:03] I'M ASKING THE BOARD AND THE PLANNING TO BE JUST AS SWEET AS A BRANDY OR STRAWBERRY WINE, WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT. WE WANT THE CONCERNS TO BE MET FOR THE COMMUNITY. THE ISSUES THAT PRIMARILY CONCERNS US IS THAT YOU'RE PLANNING TO DO A MENTAL HOSPITAL. THE HOSPITAL IS FINE, I THINK THE CENSUS WOULD CALL FOR IT. HOWEVER, THE MENTAL HOSPITAL IS A CONCERN BECAUSE WE HAVE NOT ONLY THE PARISHIONERS AND THE RESIDENTS, BUT WE HAVE A SCHOOL THAT THE COMMUNITY HAS GREETED AND IT HAS WELCOMED WITH OPEN ARMS, AND THAT IS THE ERNIE EIS SCHOOL OF AUTISM. MANY OF YOU ALL PROBABLY HAVE NOT SEEN IT OR DON'T KNOW IT, BUT I WITNESS IT ON AN EVERYDAY BASIS PASSED IN THE CHURCH WITH THE CEMETERY. WHEN YOU HAVE TO COME OUT AND YOU FIND PEOPLE LAYING ON GRAVES, THAT IS NOT EVEN A PART OF THE COMMUNITY, AND PEOPLE WHO IS OUT THERE DOING MANY OTHER THINGS IN THE CEMETERY, IT RAISES AN EYEBROW, AND IT RAISES A CONCERN TO ME AS THE PASTOR. MY JOB IS TO HELP ANYONE, AND I DO THAT WITH OPEN ARMS. BUT IT WOULD BE A CONCERN TO ME TO WHERE PEOPLE SUCH AS THE ERNIE ELS FOUNDATION OR THE SCHOOL, THE CHILDREN WITH AUTISM THEY DON'T KNOW. THEY'RE NOT ABREAST OF WHAT IS GOING ON WITH ONES WHO HAVE MENTAL ILLNESS AND THINGS TO THAT NATURE. WE ALL KNOW THAT IF YOU BRING A HOSPITAL IN OF SUCH KIND, PEOPLE ARE GOING TO LURK AND STAY AROUND. [NOISE] I GUESS I'LL COME BACK AT A LATER TIME. I WILL RESPECT THEIR TIME. >>THANK YOU. I WAS GOING TO SAY I WOULD ENCOURAGE EVERYBODY WHO'S HERE TONIGHT IF THEY WANT TO EMAIL THE COMMISSION, AND EMAIL TOWN STAFF WITH YOUR CONCERNS, GET IT INTO THE PUBLIC RECORD AND THEN WE GET TO SEE EVERYBODY, BUT I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU ALL TO COME TO THE NEXT MEETING AS WELL. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH. >> ANTHONY ROBINSON? >> MY NAME IS ANTHONY ROBINSON. I'M HERE TODAY, I JUST FOUND ABOUT THIS MEETING. MY FAMILY LIVED IN THAT COMMUNITY ALL MY LIFE. WHAT I SEE THAT'S GOING ON IN THE COMMUNITY IS, HE SPOKE ABOUT THE ERNIE ELS SCHOOL AND STUFF LIKE THAT, BUT WHAT I SEE IS, YOU GUYS ARE GOING TO BE REZONING THE AREA, BUT HOW I LOOK AT IT IS THE PEOPLE THAT COME FROM THE NORTH, THEY COME HERE, THEY BUILD UP, BUY UP, AND THE PEOPLE THAT LIVED HERE, WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO PAY THE TAXES, AND THEN I JUST HEARD HIM SAY ABOUT A MENTAL HOSPITAL. MY THING IS, WE'RE ALREADY DEALING WITH A LOT OF TRAFFIC, A LOT OF SOME OF EVERYTHING GOING ON, BUT WHAT I CAN'T UNDERSTAND IS, WE'RE TAXPAYERS, HOW DOES JUPITER REZONE SOMETHING AND WE DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT? BECAUSE I DIDN'T KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT IT. I JUST FOUND OUT TODAY AT WORK. MY THING IS, DO YOU GUYS NOTIFY US, JUST LIKE ANYBODY ELSE THAT YOU WANT TO TAKE OVER, AND SAY, HEY, TALK TO ONE OF THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, OR THE TOWN OF JUPITER, TALK TO THEM AND TRY TO FIND OUT WHAT'S BEST FOR US, BECAUSE THESE PEOPLE THAT ARE COMING IN, IS LIKE THE PARK OUT THERE. THEY LOOK AT US LIKE, WHAT ARE WE DOING THERE? THAT'S HOW FAST THEY GROW OUT THERE. MY THING IS, ALL I WANT IS I'D LIKE TO HAVE ALL THE INFORMATION, HOW IS IT GOING TO IMPACT US, WHAT IT'S GOING TO COST US, BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO COST US, BUT EVENTUALLY, IT'S GOING TO MOVE US UP. I WAS SHOCKED TO HEAR ABOUT A MENTAL HOSPITAL. I CAN'T BELIEVE IT, BUT I DON'T NEED TO SAY ANYTHING ELSE. I GUESS I'LL WAIT TILL I GET ALL THE FACTS INSTEAD, BUT YOU GUYS NEED TO GET OUR OPINION. THE PEOPLE THAT DID LIVE THERE. >> YES, I ENCOURAGE YOU TO COME TO THE NEXT MEETING. THIS IS A FIRST READING FOR THAT APPLICATION THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT? >> WE DID. >> JUST FOR THE [INAUDIBLE] IT'S JUST THE PED, [00:15:02] IT DOESN'T INCLUDE ANY, AND IT'S TENTATIVELY FOR NEXT MEETING, BUT WE WILL CONTACT EVERYONE WHO PROVIDE THIS INFORMATION AND DISSEMINATE ANYTHING. >> VALERIE BROOKS? >> YES. >> MY NAME IS VALERIE BROOKS. I RESIDE AT 6933 PALM GARDEN STREET IN JUPITER. I BECAME A RESIDENT THERE IN 2019, I PURCHASED THERE. WHEN I CAME INTO THE COMMUNITY, I BECAME ACTIVE AS A PART OF THE ADVOCACY GROUP AND HAS CULMINATED INTO BEING THE PRESIDENT OF THE ORGANIZATION. WE RECENTLY LEARNED AND I KNOW THIS IS AN ONGOING GROWTH FOR THE COMMUNITY THAT THE SANTI CIRCLE, WHICH WAS PRIOR BACON OR SOMETHING OF THE NATURE, CAME IN AND THEY WANTED TO SPEAK TO US, AND SO WE INVITED THEM TO OUR RECENT MEETING. THAT'S WHEN WE LEARN THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE 144 BEDS OF MENTAL HEALTH HOSPITAL AS WELL AS A 40 BED ACUTE CARE SETTING. BAPTIST HEALTH AND ARCADIA. IN OUR INTEREST TO KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO BE HAPPENING IN OUR COMMUNITY WE'VE ASKED TO MEET WITH THEM AND AS WELL AS TO MEET WITH THE ORGANIZATIONS, LEAD BOTH THE ARCADIA AND BAPTIST HEALTH. WHAT IS OF GREATER CONCERN TO ME AS A PROVIDER OF CARE IS THE DISCHARGE PROCESS. WHEN IT COMES TO MENTAL HEALTH. I'VE BEEN A CHIEF NURSING OFFICER FOR MENTAL HEALTH HOSPITAL. I DO KNOW THE PROCESS, AND WHEN WE WERE SPOKEN TO AT THAT MEETING, WE WERE TOLD THAT BAPTIST HEALTH GIVEN UP SOME OF THEIR BEDS TO THIS 144 BED HOSPITAL. I DO KNOW THAT BAPTIST HEALTH IS A BIG HOSPITAL SETTING IN SOUTH FLORIDA. WHAT'S GOING TO BE HAPPENING IS PEOPLE ARE GOING TO BE BUSSED FROM SOME OF THOSE OUTER HOSPITALS INTO OUR COMMUNITY. WHEN IT COMES TIME FOR DISCHARGE, THERE WON'T BE GOOD ENOUGH DISCHARGE FOR THEM AND THEY WILL BE TAKEN TO THE NEAREST BUS STOP, WHICH IS GOING TO BE BUILT RIGHT THERE IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, AND THEN THAT'S WHERE THEY WILL BE DISCHARGED TO BECAUSE THERE'S NO GREAT DISCHARGE PLANNING FOR A PERSON WITH MENTAL HEALTH, AND THERE'S NO INSURANCE FOR THEM, THERE IS NO PLACE TO GO. THEY'RE GOING TO BE DISCHARGED TO OUR STREETS, AND LIKE EVERYBODY ELSE'S CONCERN IS THAT WHERE ARE THEY GOING TO GO? WE'RE RIGHT THERE NEAR 95 IN THE TURNPIKE. THAT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT WE WANT. THAT'S GOING TO ATTRACT A LOT OF DIFFERENT PEOPLE RIGHT THERE INTO OUR COMMUNITY. WE CAN'T AFFORD TO MOVE NOW. IT'S EXPENSIVE TO MOVE, AND SO WE WANT TO HEAR FROM THEM WHAT WILL BE THE STRATEGIC PLAN THAT THEY WILL HAVE FOR US? WE DON'T HAVE POLICE OFFICERS ALREADY. NOBODY IS APPLYING TO THE POLICE DEPARTMENT. THEREFORE, FOR SECURITY PURPOSES, THAT IS ALSO A CONCERN FOR US. THAT'S MY TAKE ON IT AND I WILL BE AT THE NEXT MEETING AS WELL. >> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> THERE ARE NO MORE CARDS. [APPLAUSE] >> MR. BAIRD DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY? >> YEAH, I JUST WANTED TO EXPLAIN TO THE AUDIENCE THE PROCESS THAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN AT THE NEXT MEETING. IT'S MINI MEETING OF THIS PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION TO DISCUSS THE OVERALL PLAN FOR THAT SITE. WHAT THIS BODY DOES IS MAKE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE TOWN COUNCIL SO YOU'LL HAVE BEEN AT LEAST ONE PROBABLY TWO, BECAUSE IT'S A PUD PLANNED DEVELOPMENT. WE'LL HAVE TWO HEARINGS OF THE COUNCIL. IN TERMS OF YOUR ADVOCACY FOR YOUR COMMUNITY, WE SHOULD BE ADVOCATING TO NOT ONLY THE MEMBERS OF THIS COMMISSION, BUT THE JUPITER TEAM COUNCIL. BECAUSE MANY RESIDENTS DON'T ACTUALLY LIVE IN THE TOWN OF JUPITER. YOU ALSO DO HAVE ANY ELECTED OFFICIAL THAT IS RESPONSIBLE FOR YOUR AREA AND THAT WOULD BE COUNTY COMMISSIONER MARINA. WE MIGHT ALSO CONTACT [INAUDIBLE] WAS VERY PROTECTIVE OF BEING INCORPORATED AREA AND ADVOCATED ON THEIR BEHALF. TO ENGAGE IN THE PROCESS, AND CONTACTED ANY ELECTED OFFICIALS. THESE ARE APPOINTED OFFICIALS. THEY DON'T GET PAID THE BIG BUCKS, BUT THEY ARE GOOD LISTENERS, [00:20:01] AND I'M SURE EVEN IF YOU HAVE IMPORTANT INFORMATION YOU PROVIDE THEM, THEY WILL TAKE OVER THAT INTO CONSIDERATION. LASTLY, [INAUDIBLE] WHO SAID THEY WERE PLANNED. HER DEPARTMENT, IS THE DEPARTMENT THAT IS TAKING IN THE APPLICATION FROM THE APPLICANT WHO IS PROVIDING INFORMATION ABOUT WHAT WE'RE PLANNING TO DO WITH THE PROPERTY THAT THEY OWN. THEY WILL BE EVALUATING THAT APPLICATION IN ORDER TO ADVANCE YOUR ADVOCACY FROM YOUR COMMUNITY IN THAT POSITION, WE WILL MAKE SURE YOU GETTING CONTACT WITH [INAUDIBLE] AND HER STAFF AND WILL LET THEM KNOW YOUR CONCERNS. >> IF I COULD JUST ADD ONE THING. IT IS STILL VERY EARLY IN THE PROCESS. THE APPLICATION FOR THE MENTAL HOSPITAL OR THE REHAB HOSPITAL, AS THEY'RE CALLING IT, IS STILL NOT THROUGH OUR PROCESS. IT HAS NOT BEEN OFFICIALLY TENDED. IT HASN'T BEEN SCHEDULED FOR MEETINGS, SO THERE'S STILL PLENTY OF TIME. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE EVERYBODY RECOGNIZES THAT. >> I'M GOING TO SUGGEST DON'T WAIT. >> WE WON'T. [LAUGHTER] [BACKGROUND]. >> WE'RE NOT SLEEPING. >> THANK YOU, MR. BAIRD, FOR THAT EXPLANATION. I DIDN'T WANT TO LEAVE THEM WITHOUT HAVING SOME INFORMATION. YOU DON'T HAVE TO STAY IF YOU DON'T WANT TO CAUSE THE REST OF IT IS NOT THAT EXCITING. [LAUGHTER]. WE ARE DONE WITH CITIZENS COMMENTS. CORRECT? >> YES. [B1. 1114 Sioux Street] >> WE'RE MOVING ON TO NEW BUSINESS AND IF I CAN PREY ON ATTORNEY BAIRD, TO GIVE A BRIEF EXPLANATION TO OUR NEWEST MEMBER WHAT THE DEFINITION OF ACTING AS THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT MEANS THERE IS THIS BEING OUR PLANNING AND ZONING. >> WELL ON ALL APPLICATIONS THAT COME BEFORE THIS BOARD EXCEPT FOR VARIANCES YOU MAKE A RECOMMENDATION. ON VARIANCES AS THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT YOU'LL MAKE THE FINAL DECISION. YOUR FINAL DECISION IS SUBJECT TO AN APPEAL TO THE CIRCUIT COURT. IF ONE OF THE PARTIES TO THAT DECISION DOES NOT LIKE IT. THESE TYPES OF CASES, ALTHOUGH WE OPERATE IN A QUASIC, WHAT'S CALLED A QUASI JUDICIAL CAPACITY FOR ALL OF THE APPLICATIONS. IN THIS ONE, YOU'RE GOING TO MAKE A FINAL DECISION. WHAT THE COURTS AND WHAT THE LAW HAS PROVIDED IN THESE CIRCUMSTANCES IS THAT [NOISE] WITNESSES ARE SWORN IN TO TESTIFY, THEY'RE TO TESTIFY ABOUT THE FACTS OF THEIR APPLICATION. IN THE STAFFS CASE, THE FACTS OF THEIR EVALUATION OF THE APPLICATION, YOU APPLY THE SEVEN CRITERIA THAT EXIST, THAT IF MET, IF ALL SEVEN ARE MET, ENTITLE AN APPLICANT TO THAT VARIANCE. IF THEY DO NOT MEET ALL SEVEN OF THOSE CRITERIA, THEN THEY ARE NOT ENTITLED TO THAT VARIANCE. YOUR ROLE IN THIS IS DON'T ANYONE GET ROGUE FEVER OVER THIS? BUT YOUR ROLE IS TO ACT AS JUDGES AND TO EVALUATE THE FACTS PRESENTED BY THE APPLICANT AND IT'S AGENTS, PLANNERS, ENGINEERS, WHATEVER THE APPLICANT MIGHT HAVE AND SIMILARLY TO CONSIDER THE TESTIMONY THAT YOU'RE GOING TO HEAR FROM THE ATTENDANCE PROFESSIONAL STAFF, ABOUT THEIR EVALUATION OF THE APPLICATION. ONCE YOU HEAR ALL OF THAT, THE PROCESS FOR THE BOARD IS YOU TAKE QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT AND THE STAFF. AFTER YOU'VE EXHAUSTED YOURSELF WITH QUESTIONS, WHICH YOU WILL DO SEQUENTIALLY ACROSS THE BOARD SO THAT EVERYONE HAS AN OPPORTUNITY. IF THEY DO HAVE QUESTIONS THEY ASK THEM. YOU WILL GO INTO WHAT IS CALLED DELIBERATION, WHERE YOU ACTUALLY DISCUSS AMONGST YOURSELVES WHAT YOU'VE HEARD, WHAT YOU THINK ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THE VARIANCE CRITERIA HAS BEEN MET. AT THAT POINT, SOMEONE WILL HOPEFULLY MAKE A MOTION EITHER TO APPROVE OR DENY THE VARIANCE, AND YOU WILL VOTE ON IT. IF THERE'S ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE ABOUT THAT PROCESS, I'D BE HAPPY TO TRY AND ADDRESS THEM. IF NOT, WE'LL SWEAR THE WITNESSES AND GET STARTED. >> ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ON THAT? OKAY THANK YOU. YOU WANT TO DO THE SWEARING IN? >> YES, BUT I FORGOT ONE CAME FIRST. [00:25:01] [OVERLAPPING] THERE'S ANOTHER THING CALLED EX PARTE COMMUNICATION. THIS IS PART OF THE WHOLE QUASI JUDICIAL JUDICIAL THING. WHEN WE LAWYERS ARE ENGAGED IN A HEARING, WE'RE NOT ALLOWED TO TALK TO THE JUDGE IN HER CHAMBERS ABOUT THE PARTICULAR ISSUE. THAT'S CALLED AN EX PARTE CONVERSATION. THE IDEA IS THAT ALL OF THE FACTS THAT ARE IMPORTANT TO YOUR DECISION-MAKING NEEDS TO BE DISCLOSED PUBLICLY IN THIS MEETING. IF YOU'VE HAD ANY CONVERSATIONS WITH EITHER THE STAFF OR THE APPLICANT AND ITS AGENTS OUTSIDE OF THESE CHAMBERS BEFORE THIS MEETING ABOUT THIS FIRST VARIANCE APPLICATION, YOU ARE REQUIRED TO DISCLOSE [NOISE] WITH WHOM YOU SPOKE AND THE NATURE OF THAT CONVERSATION. FOR EXAMPLE, I SPOKE ABOUT THREE OF THE VARIANCE CRITERIA WITH THE APPLICANTS AGENT, AND WHETHER OR NOT THAT CRITERIA HAD BEEN MET. WE'LL GO SEQUENTIALLY, BUT IF YOU HAVE HAD NO EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS, YOU JUST SIMPLY NEED THE STATE ON THE RECORD, NO DISCLOSURE. IF YOU HAVE HAD AN EX PARTE CONVERSATION WITH THE STAFF OR APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVES, THEN YOU NEED TO DISCLOSE THE NATURE OF THAT CONVERSATION AND WITH WHOM YOU SPOKE. >> THIS IS ON FOR AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 1, 1114 HISTORY. >> YEAH. WE ALSO DO IT ON SITE PLANS. BUT YOU DON'T MAKE A FINAL DECISION ON SITE PLANS, BUT WE GO THROUGH THE SAME ROUTINE FOR PURPOSES OF TRANSPARENCY. >> DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY DISCLOSURES, COMMISSIONER? >> I SPOKE WITH GARRETT WILSON. [NOISE] >> I GOT TO SPEAK INTO IT. >> I SPOKE WITH GARRETT WATSON, PRINCIPAL PLANNER ABOUT THE CRITERIA AND IF IT HAD BEEN MET. ALSO, I SPOKE WITH COUNCILMAN SNYDER ABOUT THE CRITERIA AND IF IT HAD BEEN MET, AND I ALSO DID DRIVE BY THE PROPERTY. >> A PERFECT DISCLOSURE. [LAUGHTER] >> COMMISSIONER KAREN. >> I SPOKE WITH JOHN STICKLER ABOUT THE CRITERIA AND WHETHER OR NOT THEY WERE MET. >> COMMISSIONER HAGUE. >> I CAME TO PLANNING AND ZONING, HAD A LONG CONVERSATION WITH GARRETT. WE TALKED ABOUT THE CRITERIA, WE TALKED ABOUT THE UNIQUENESS OF JONES CREEK, WE TALKED ABOUT THE CIP THAT THE TOWN HAS CONCERNING JONES CREEK, THEIR DIFFICULTY FOR BACTERIA AND ALSO FOR SEDIMENT. >> COMMISSIONER PATEL. >> I SPOKE WITH STEPHANIE THORBURN ABOUT THE APPLICATION AND ABOUT TWO OF THE CRITERIA. >> COMMISSIONER DENIM. >> I HAVE NO DISCLOSURES. >> I HAVE NO DISCLOSURES. >> WE CAN SWEAR IN OUR WITNESSES FOR THIS ONE. >> OKAY, IF YOU'RE GOING TO TESTIFY AS THE APPLICANT OR THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE OF OUR STAFF FROM THIS, PLEASE STAND AND RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. ARE YOU TESTIFYING OR NOT? >> FOR BOTH? >> I'M SORRY, WHAT? >> FOR BOTH, TESTIFYING. >> WE'RE JUST DOING THE VARIANCE RIGHT NOW. DO YOU SWEAR THE TESTIMONY YOU'RE ABOUT TO GIVE IS THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH? >> YES. >> THANK YOU. >> NOW WE CAN HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT. [NOISE] >> THANK YOU ALL COUNCIL MEMBERS. MY NAME IS STEVE WINCE. I OWN THE PROPERTY AT 114 SUE STREET. I'VE BEEN THERE FOR ABOUT FIVE YEARS. WHEN I MOVED IN, THE SEA WALL WAS A RAILROAD TIE ROTTING SEA WALL. I MANAGED TO GET BY FOR FIVE YEARS NOW AND I'M LOSING MY BACKYARD SLOWLY INTO JONES CREEK. I'VE BEEN BEFORE THE TOWN COUNCIL A NUMBER OF OCCASIONS HELPING TO ORGANIZE MY NEIGHBORHOOD, TO RESTORE JONES CREEK BY ORGANIZING TO PURSUE A VEGETATIVE TRIMMING ALONG THERE TO PREVENT SOME OF THE VEGETATIVE DEBRIS WHICH HAS BEEN ACCUMULATING IN THE CREEK AND [NOISE] CONTRIBUTING TO A BACTERIAL LOAD THAT IS 75 TIMES IN EXCESS OF WHAT WOULD TRIGGER A BEACH CLOSURE. WE HAVE A GYM OF A RESOURCE IN OUR BACKYARD THAT IS JONES CREEK RIGHT IN THE HEART OF JUPITER. BUT IT IS SUFFERING FROM VERY POOR WATER QUALITY FOR REASONS THAT HAD NOT ENTIRELY BEEN IDENTIFIED DESPITE SOME OF THE GREAT EFFORTS OF LOCKS I HAD YOU RIVER DISTRICT AND BUD HOWARD AND THIS JUPITER TO INVESTIGATE THE SOURCE OF THIS BACTERIAL LOADING. [00:30:04] TO MY ISSUE, IT IS MY INTENT TO TRY TO REDUCE THE SEDIMENT LOADING THAT'S COMING FROM MY BACKYARD AS IT'S SLOWLY ERODING INTO JONES CREEK. I INTEND TO DO THIS WITH A VINYL SHEET PILE WALL WITH A CONCRETE CAP ON IT. WHEN I SUBMITTED MY PERMIT APPLICATION FOR THIS PROJECT, IT WAS BROUGHT TO MY ATTENTION BY BUILDING STAFF THAT MY INTENDED TOP OF WALL ELEVATION OF 5.67 FEET WAS IN EXCESS OF THAT ALLOWED BY THE CODE. I LEARNED THAT THE TOP OF WALL ELEVATION AS REQUIRED BY THE CODE WAS 4.0. I WAS A LITTLE TAKEN ABACK AND GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO PURSUE A VARIANCE BY SUBMITTING THIS. I BELIEVE THAT THERE ARE THREE FACTORS THAT ARE RELEVANT TO THE COMMISSION'S ATTENTION HERE. THAT IS THE PROXIMITY OF THE EXISTING STRUCTURES AND THE EXISTING WALL ELEVATION. THE SUGGESTED RETURN DEPTH AS FAMILIAR WITH SEA WALLS CONSTRUCTED THERE TURNS GO BACK TO THE PROPERTY AND THE PROXIMITY TO FLOOD ZONE, SUB-ZONE A85. I DON'T WANT TO SPEND MORE TIME THAN IS ABSOLUTELY NECESSARY GOING THROUGH THIS. [LAUGHTER] BUT I GUESS THIS IS MY CHANCE TO MAKE MY CASE. SEEMS LIKE MORE IMPORTANT ISSUES THAT HAVE BEEN DISCUSSED HERE BEFORE I CAME BEFORE THE COUNCIL SO I'M GOING TO TRY TO DO MY BEST TO SUM THESE UP. THE INCREASED WALL HEIGHT OF 16 INCHES FROM ELEVATION FOUR TO 5.65, I BELIEVE IS A VERY MODEST INCREASE. JUST TWO DOORS DOWN, THE FAMOUS FLOOD ZONE CHANGES TO WHERE THIS WOULD NOT BE AN ISSUE AND I COULD BUILD IT AT THAT EXACT HEIGHT. I DON'T WISH FOR SPECIAL TREATMENT, ALL I WANT TO DO IS REPLACE WHAT'S THERE IN-KIND. THE EXISTING TOP OF WALL ELEVATION FROM MY SURVEY IS 5.65 AND I'VE BEEN LOSING MY BACKYARD AND I JUST WANT TO REBUILD THAT WALL AT THAT HEIGHT SO I CAN LEVEL MY BACKYARD TO SOME CLOSER TO LEVEL TO STOP LOSING SOCCER BALLS AND THINGS INTO THE END OF THE CREEK. MY DECK IS SLOPING AND SLOWLY FALLING IN. EACH DAY I WALK OUT ON MY DOCK, I CAN SEE THAT THE STEPS ARE SLIDING FURTHER AND FURTHER. SO IT IS MY HOPE TO ALLOW MY CONTRACTOR TO MOBILIZE THIS AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. THERE WERE SOME CONCERNS RAISED, I BELIEVE IN THE REVIEW THAT THE TWO CONDITIONS WERE NOT MET. I DON'T RECALL EXACTLY WHAT THOSE CONDITIONS WERE [LAUGHTER] SPECIFICALLY BUT I DO BELIEVE THAT MY HOPE AND MY INTENTIONS FOR SATISFYING THIS CRITERIA HAD BEEN PREPARED. THANK YOU. CRITERIA 4 WAS THAT THE VARIANCE GRANTED IS THE MINIMUM VARIANCE THAT WOULD MAKE POSSIBLE THE REASONABLE USE OF THE LAND, BUILDING OR STRUCTURE. [NOISE] TO THAT, I BELIEVE IT WAS A FEELING IN MY PART THAT HAVING A MORE LEVEL BACKYARD WITH A SMALL SWALE FOR STORM WATER RETENTION, WOULD PROVIDE GREATER USE OF MY BACKYARD THAN A MORE STEEPLY SLOPED BACKYARD. THE OTHER COMMENT WHICH WAS INDICATED TO NOT BE SATISFIED. [NOISE] THERE IS NUMBER 4. GARRETT, DO YOU RECALL WHICH? >> NUMBER 3. >> NUMBER 3. THERE WE GO. I'M SORRY, THE LITERAL INTERPRETATION OF THESE PROVISIONS IS AT THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS WOULD OTHERWISE DEPRIVE THE OWNER OF THE RIGHTS COLONY INTO OTHER PROPERTIES WOULD CAUSE UNNECESSARILY UNDUE HARDSHIP. UNNECESSARY UNDUE HARDSHIP, THOSE ARE VERY STRONG WORDS TO USE. THE SUGGESTION WAS MADE OF CONSTRUCTING A STEM WALL, [00:35:01] STEPPED FURTHER INTO MY PROPERTY. THIS COST WOULD ADD NEARLY $6,000- 8,000 OF ADDITIONAL COSTS TO THIS PROJECT. WELL, COST ALONE IS NOT THE PRIMARY DRIVER FOR THIS DECISION. CONSTRUCTING IT WOULD POTENTIALLY UNDERMINE THE SLAB AND SHED THAT I HAVE ALONG WHERE THAT STEM WALL WOULD NEED TO BE CONSTRUCTED. I THINK I'LL YIELD HERE. I THINK I'VE RAMBLED FOR LONG ENOUGH AND TAKEN UP ENOUGH OF YOUR TIME, SO I APPRECIATE EVERYONE'S CONSIDERATION IN THIS MATTER. THANK YOU. >> [NOISE] NOW I HEAR FROM GARRET WATSON FROM THE TOWN'S PLANNING AND FUNDING DEPARTMENT. >> GOOD EVENING COMMISSION. FOR THE RECORD, GARRET WATSON WITH THE PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT. AS THE APPLICANT STATED, THE VARIANCE REQUEST IS TO EXCEED THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF A BULKHEAD IN THIS AREA BASED ON ITS FLOOD ELEVATION BY ABOUT 18 INCHES, 1.67 FEET. I WANT TO TOUCH ON A COUPLE OF THINGS BRIEFLY TONIGHT RELATED TO HISTORY, BOTH OF JUST THE GENERAL CANAL SO YOU CAN UNDERSTAND ITS CONDITIONS. THEN SECOND AS TO WHY THAT LIMITATION WAS PLACED IN THE CODE IN THE FIRST PLACE. THEN I'LL COVER THE TWO CRITERIA NOT MET. FIRST REAL BRIEF HISTORY, IT'S IN THE STAFF REPORT THAT I WANT TO COVER IT HERE ON THE RECORD. THE CANAL WAS DUG OUT OF ORIGINAL DRAINAGE FLU, JONES CREEK, SOMETIME IN THE LATE '50S, POSSIBLY REAL EARLY '60S. BASED ON AERIAL IMAGERY AT THAT TIME, IT WAS BASICALLY LEFT AS A SUPER STEEP BANK OUT OF SUGAR SAND. SO AS YOU CAN IMAGINE, EVERY TIME IT RAINED, THE SAND WAS JUST DUMPING INTO THE CANAL. OVER THE YEARS, MANGROVES FILLED INTO THAT AREA. MANGROVES SEEDLINGS' PROPAGATE VERY QUICKLY. SOME HOMEOWNERS TOOK THE OPPORTUNITY TO GO AHEAD AND STABILIZE THEIR SHORELINES, LIKE THE APPLICANT'S PROPERTY, SOME OF THEM HAVE RAILROAD TIE WALLS, SOME OF THEM PUT IN MORE FORMAL WALLS A FEW YEARS LATER WHEN THAT TECHNOLOGY WAS COMING ONLINE. CONCRETE BAGS HAD BEEN USED. THERE'S ALSO OTHER REAL INTERESTING DEBRIS OUT THERE IF YOU GET A CHANCE TO GO OUT THERE ON THE KAYAK. BUT IN GENERAL, PEOPLE WERE SCRAMBLING TO STABILIZE THAT SHORELINE OVER TIME. SOMETIME IN THE EARLY 2000S, THE TOWN FUNDED A PROJECT TO CLEAN UP THAT CANAL, TRIM SOME MANGROVES, DO SOME DREDGING. THAT DREDGING TOOK PLACE BASICALLY FROM TODD STREET, WHICH IS ABOUT THE MIDDLE OF THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, ALL THE WAY BACK UNDERNEATH LOXAHATCHEE, ALL THE WAY BACK UP TO WHERE THAT HAMMERHEAD CANAL IS. THAT WAS PART OF THE TOWN SCOPE. THEN THE JUPITER INLET DISTRICT DID SOME SPOT DREDGING OUT TO THE LOXAHATCHEE RIVER AS PART OF THAT PROJECT. AS THE APPLICANT STATED AGAIN, THE TOWN HAS PLANNED A PROJECT THAT THE APPLICANT HAS BEEN WORKING ON SPEARHEADING FOR THE COMMUNITY INVESTMENT PROGRAM IN ORDER TO TRIM THOSE MANGROVES, TRY TO OPEN UP SOME OF THAT CANOPY, TRY TO GET SOME SUNLIGHT IN THERE TO HELP WITH THE BACTERIA ISSUE. THAT'S THE STATE OF THAT CANAL JUST IN GENERAL. REAL QUICK, A BRIEF HISTORY ON WHY THAT LIMIT WAS CREATED TO BEGIN WITH. WE NOTED IN THE REPORT, THAT IN 2015, WE ADOPTED NEW REGULATIONS THAT HAD TO DEAL WITH ENCOURAGING LIVING SHORELINES. THE POINT OF INSTALLING THE HEIGHT LIMITATION WAS REALLY TO BALANCE A PROPERTY OWNER'S FLOOD PROTECTION WITH THE IMPACTS THAT CAN BE CREATED DEPENDING UPON HOW NEW PROPERTY OWNERS COME IN AND ELEVATE THEIR PROPERTIES. WHAT HAPPENED? WHAT WAS HAPPENING AT THE TIME IS THE STAFF WAS GETTING PERMANENT REQUESTS FOR PEOPLE TO KNOCK DOWN A HOUSE, PUT FEET OF FILL ON A PROPERTY, RUN RETAINING WALLS DOWN THE SIDES OF THE PROPERTY, HAVE LARGE SEAWALLS. THERE WAS SOMETIMES SEVEN OR EIGHT FEET OF EXPOSED WALL AND BASICALLY ELEVATING THE PROPERTY OVER THEIR NEIGHBORS. AS YOU CAN IMAGINE, THAT CAUSES SOME ISSUES WHEN RAINWATER IS FLOODING, THINGS LIKE THAT. WE WERE TRYING TO LOOK AT A HOLISTIC APPROACH AT THE SAME TIME TO DEAL WITH THOSE FLOODING ISSUES AS WE WERE LOOKING AT ADOPTING LIVING SHORELINE REGULATIONS. THAT CODE SECTION THAT WAS ADOPTED BASED ON THAT LIMITATION WAS SET BASICALLY TO ESTABLISH A BASELINE THAT WAS FAIR FOR EVERYBODY. EVERYBODY WOULD BE MORE OR LESS IN LINE WITH THEIR NEIGHBORS, AND PEOPLE COULD ADJUST THEIR FLOODING THROUGH OTHER MANNERS BUT THEY WEREN'T ADDING A BUNCH OF FILL TO THEIR PROPERTY AND IMPACTING THEIR NEIGHBORS. THE SITUATION THAT CREATED THE NEED FOR THIS MAXIMUM IS NOT REALLY PRESENT IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD. THE HOMEOWNER IS NOT LOOKING TO KNOCK DOWN THE HOUSE AND ADD THREE FEET OF FILL TO THEIR PROPERTY. THE HOUSES THEMSELVES ARE MOSTLY NOT IN A FLOOD ZONE, THEY'RE IN X. IT'S NOT AS IF THAT SAME SITUATION EXISTS HERE. JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE I COVERED THAT. AS IT RELATES TO THE VARIANCE CRITERIA SPECIFICALLY, REAL QUICK, THE TWO THAT WE SAID WERE NOT SATISFIED IN THE REPORT WERE CRITERIA NUMBERS 3 AND 4. [00:40:02] THOSE CRITERIA ARE TRADITIONALLY VERY DIFFICULT TO MEET BECAUSE STAFF HAS TO TAKE A VERY STRICT AND LITERAL INTERPRETATION OF THE CODE. AS YOU'LL NOTE IN THE REPORT, CRITERIA 3 RELATES TO THE CODES IMPACT ON THE OWNER'S RIGHT TO THAT LOT. THAT IS A SINGLE-FAMILY HOME LOT THAT IS ZONED SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL, SO STAFF STRICT INTERPRETATION OF THAT IS THAT THE RIGHT OF THE OWNER ON THAT LOT IS TO BUILD A SINGLE-FAMILY HOME WHICH CURRENTLY EXISTS. AGAIN, A VERY STRICT INTERPRETATION OF THAT VARIANCE CRITERIA. CRITERIA NUMBER 4 IS ALONG THE SAME LINES, AND IT ASKS ABOUT THE REASONABLE USE OF THE LAND AND WHAT WOULD BE REASONABLE ON A SINGLE-FAMILY HOME ZONED LOT, AND THAT WOULD BE THE CONSTRUCTION OF A SINGLE-FAMILY HOME, WHICH EXISTS ON THE LOT. AGAIN, THAT'S ANOTHER VARIANT STRICT INTERPRETATION OF WHAT'S REASONABLE. SHOULD THE BOARD AGREE TONIGHT THAT THE APPLICANT HAS MET THE BURDEN TO GRANT A VARIANCE, THAT THEY'VE MET ALL SEVEN CRITERIA, STAFF HAS INCLUDED A CONDITION OF APPROVAL ON THE LAST PAGE OF THE REPORT, THAT'S PAGE 5. THAT HAS TO DEAL WITH MAINTAINING THE MANGROVES ON-SITE. NOW, I WANT TO BE CLEAR, THE APPLICANT DOES NOT PROPOSE TO REMOVE ANY MANGROVES, THAT'S NOT PART OF THE CIP PROJECT FOR TRIMMING THE REMOVAL OF ANY MANGROVES BUT SOMETHING LIKE THIS IS ESSENTIALLY AN INSURANCE POLICY FOR THE TOWN; THAT SHOULD MR. WINCE MOVE AWAY AND A NEW HOMEOWNER COME IN AND WISH TO REMOVE THE MANGROVES BY THEIR OWN MEANS, THAT WE WOULD HAVE SOMETHING ON THE RECORD THAT SAID, "NO, THOSE MANGROVES, WERE SUPPOSED TO STAY. WE HAVE THEM ON A SURVEY," AND WE COULD IMPLEMENT THE CORRECTIVE ACTION THERE. JUST WANTED TO POINT THAT OUT TO YOU AND I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. DO YOU WANT TO TAKE CITIZEN COMMENTS FIRST OR DO YOU WANT TO DO QUESTIONS? I KNOW. [OVERLAPPING] COMMISSIONER PATEL, WOULD YOU LIKE TO KICK US OFF? YOU NEVER GET TO GO FIRST. [LAUGHTER] >> I LOVE TO. QUESTION FOR GERALD. WITH THEM BEING THE ONLY ONE BUILDING THE WALL, BUT WE HAVE A STUDY OF THE EFFECT ON THE TWO NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES ON, LET'S SAY, A SIX MONTHS OR A YEAR OUT, HOW THAT'S GOING TO AFFECT IF THE OTHER TWO DO NOT DECIDE TO BUILD THEIR OWN WALLS? >> TO COVER THAT BRIEFLY FOR YOU, THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES, THE ONE TO THE EAST HAS A WALL SIMILAR TO MR. WINZ. INTO THE WEST, THERE'S SOME HAPHAZARD SHORELINES STABILIZATION, AND [LAUGHTER] THE EXISTING WALL IS ALREADY AT A LITTLE OVER ELEVATION FIVE. MORE OR LESS, THE CONDITION STAYS EXACTLY THE SAME WITH THE WALL. >> BUT ARE THE NEIGHBORS AT THE SAME HEIGHT? >> MORE OR LESS WITHIN A LITTLE BIT, A COUPLE OF INCHES, MAYBE. >> OF THE APPLICATION OR WHAT EXISTS? >> OF WHAT EXISTS TODAY. >> WHICH IS AT APPROXIMATELY FIVE FEET? >> CORRECT. YES. >> SO NOT AT THE 5.7, BUT AT THE FIVE? >> THEY'RE PROBABLY SIX INCHES. DO YOUR NEIGHBOR TO THE EAST HIGHER THAN YOU, MR. WINZ CAN ANSWER THAT. >> I FORGOT THE ADDRESS, SORRY. QUESTION TO YOU. >> IF THERE'S A FENCE ON THAT DESIGN PROPERLY. AT THE FENCE ON EITHER SIDE OF MY BACKYARD. I CAN SEE THAT MY NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY IS ACTUALLY JUST HIGHER THAN MINE. AS MINE HAS BEEN LOSING SOIL, THEIRS HAVE CURRENTLY BEEN RETAINING SOIL BETTER. I'D SAY IT'S MAYBE FOUR OR FIVE INCHES TALLER ON THEIR PROPERTIES. I THINK I'VE ANSWERED THE QUESTION. >> YES. THAT ANSWERS MY QUESTION. ACTUALLY, I'M GOOD. >> COMMISSIONER RAY. >> QUESTIONS FOR GERALD FIRST. WHEN WE SPOKE EXTENSIVELY, YOU AND I SPOKE ABOUT THE UNIQUENESS OF JONES CREEK. THAT THE PEOPLE THAT HAD SINCE TRADITIONALLY A SHORELINE WOULD BE SLOPED LOWER. BUT WOULD IT HAPPEN IN JONES CREEK WHEN THEY DUG IT OUT THAT IT CAUSED VARIOUS STEEP INCLINE FROM THE WATER TO PEOPLE'S PROPERTIES. THE PEOPLE THAT DIDN'T DO ANY SHORELINES STABILIZATION, THEIR BACKYARDS ERODED PRETTY MUCH, CORRECT? >> CORRECT. >> THE ONES THAT DID GO AHEAD AND STABILIZE THEIR PROPERTY IT ENDED UP TO BE PROBABLY THE HEIGHT OF THE APPLICANT'S PROPERTY, WHICH IS ABOVE WHAT THE CODE ALLOWS FOR A BULKHEAD. WE BASICALLY, WE'RE LOOKING AT THIS, WEREN'T WE? THAT THE PEOPLE THAT DIDN'T STABILIZE IF THEY BROUGHT IT UP TO CODE, [00:45:08] IT WOULDN'T BE MUCH FOR THEM JUST TO FILL UP TO THE FOREFOOT MARK, WHEREBY IF THE PEOPLE HAD TO MEET CODE, THEY ACTUALLY WOULD HAVE TO DO A LOT MORE ENGINEERING AND BUILD MORE RETAINING WALLS AND BUILT THE WRAPAROUND SIDES IN ORDER TO LOWER THEIR PROPERTY LEVEL TO THE FOREFOOT THE CODE WAS MEETING. I KNOW HOW DIFFICULT IT IS FOR THE TOWN TO MAKE A CODE THAT WILL BE FAIR TO ALL. BUT DID THE TOWN REALLY LOOK AT JONES CREEK AT THAT TIME AND SAY, LOOK, WE'VE GOT AN AREA HERE WHERE THE EXISTING SHORELINES ARE MUCH HIGHER THAN WHAT THE CODE IS GOING TO BE ASKING PEOPLE TO DO IF PEOPLE GO AHEAD AND THEY BUILD BARRICADES BACK THERE. >> JONES CREEK WAS NOT SPECIFICALLY INVESTIGATED. THE LIVING SHORELINE INITIATIVE WAS MORE AN APPROACH TO LOOK AT HOW WE COULD POSITIVELY IMPACT THE LOCKS HETCHY RIVER AND THE NATURAL PROPERTIES. THERE WAS A CONCERN THAT A LOT OF THE PROPERTIES ALONG RIVER SIDE AND ALONG THE RIVER THAT EXISTED WITH A VERY NATURAL EDGE WOULD START TO TRY AND HARDEN THAT EDGE AND WE'D START TO LOSE THE CHARACTER. WE WERE REALLY HYPER-FOCUSED ON THAT AREA IN THE CANALS THAT ARE REALLY MORE DIRECTLY OFF IT LIKE THE FEC CANAL. WE OF COURSE EXEMPTED ALL OF THOSE CANALS OFF OF THE NORTH SIDE OF CENTER STREET THAT ARE JUST WALLS. THERE'S NO MANGROVES THERE. THOSE ARE THE AREAS WHERE WE WERE REALLY FOCUSING ON. WE WEREN'T REALLY LOOKING AT THE JONES CREEK. IT'S SO HAPHAZARD THAT DEVELOPING SOMETHING AT THAT TIME WOULD HAVE BEEN DIFFICULT AND IT WOULD TAKE AN EFFORT IF THAT IS SOMETHING THAT IS NECESSARY IN THE FUTURE, TO DESIGN A SOLUTION THAT'S EQUITABLE FOR ALL AND WORKS OUT. >> TWO HOUSES AWAY, THE RESIDENT COULD BUILD A HIGHER WALL DUE TO CODE. BUT WHERE THE APPLICANT IS RIGHT NOW HE CAN'T. WOULD YOU SAY THAT THIS IS AN INSTANCE WHERE THE CODE DOES NOT FIT THE NEEDS OF JONES CREEK? >> PERHAPS, DEPENDING UPON THE PROPERTY AND THE CIRCUMSTANCES AND WHO FORMALIZE THEIR SHORELINES CIVILIZATION VERSUS THOSE WHO DIDN'T. AGAIN, IT WASN'T SOMETHING THAT WAS NOT AT THE FOREFRONT OF OUR THOUGHT IN 2015. IT WASN'T REALLY WHY THIS WAS DEVELOPED. IT'S A PRETTY UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCE THAT WASN'T REALLY THE TYPICAL THAT WE WERE AIMING FOR. >> SO DEP GAVE THEM A CERTIFICATE OF EXEMPTION, A VERIFICATION FOR EXEMPTION. BECAUSE DEP IS BASICALLY WORRIED ABOUT STOPPING SEDIMENT FROM GOING INTO THE WATERWAYS. IS THAT CORRECT? >> THAT'S CORRECT. IN MY PAST CONVERSATIONS WITH THEM, SEDIMENT RUNOFF HAS BEEN ONE OF THEIR PRIMARY CONCERNS, AND THE REASON WHY THEY ISSUE SEAWALL PERMITS AND ARE SO HAPPY TO DO SO. >> THANKS, GERALD. I'VE GOT A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT. >> YES. >> I KNOW I'VE SEEN YOU DURING COUNCIL MEETINGS THAT YOU'VE BEEN VERY INVOLVED WITH JONES CREEK BACK THERE WORKING WITH THE RESIDENTS AND DAVID BROWN WITH WATER QUALITY. I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU'VE ACTUALLY GONE AROUND TO ALL YOUR NEIGHBORS AND REALIZE THAT THE NEIGHBORS THERE HAVE A RESPONSIBILITY TO HELP WITH THAT WATER QUALITY AND ACTUALLY HAVE LOOKED FOR CONVINCING PEOPLE THAT THEY NEED TO PROVIDE YOUR LAB IN FOR AN ASSESSMENT. IS THAT RIGHT? >> THAT'S ACCURATE. >> YOU'VE DONE A LOT OF WORK TO TRY TO KEEP THE WATER QUALITY AND BASICALLY SOLVE SOME OF THE PROBLEMS THAT ARE BACK IN JONES CREEK? >> YES, THAT'S ACCURATE. >> IS THAT CORRECT? IF YOU WOULD HAVE TO MEET CODE, YOU WOULD HAVE TO DO A LOT MORE WITH YOUR PROPERTY IN ORDER TO ENGINEER DIFFERENT RETAINING WALLS AND STEP WALLS, LIKE YOU SAID, WHILE SOMEBODY THAT WOULD HAVE FLIPPED THEIR PROPERTY A COUPLE OF DOORS DOWN WITH NO STABILIZATION. I DON'T HAVE ANY MORE QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. >> COMMISSIONER KAREN. >> NO QUESTIONS. >> COMMISSIONER HALT. >> NO QUESTIONS. >> COMMISSIONER GUNNY. >> I APPRECIATE YOU DOING WHAT YOU'VE DONE. I'VE BEEN IN THE SAME SITUATION YOU WERE BUT IN ANOTHER CITY AND I KNOW ABOUT WHAT YOU'RE FACING AND I AM CONCERNED THAT MAYBE YOU'RE TRYING TO DO THE RIGHT THING. MAYBE SOME OF YOUR NEIGHBORS HAVEN'T, MAYBE THEY'VE DONE THIS ON THEIR OWN WITHOUT STAFF APPROVAL OR ANYBODY, THEY JUST DID IT ON THEIR OWN FROM WHAT I'M READING THROUGH HERE. I APPRECIATE YOU TRYING TO DO IT THE RIGHT WAY, THE RIGHT THING, AND GOING THROUGH STAFF. [00:50:01] I GUESS [NOISE] I DON'T WANT TO START A PRECEDENCE BY DOING THIS BUT AT THE SAME TIME, THERE'S SOME VALUE-ADDED AS TO DOING WHAT YOU'RE PLANNING ON DOING AND I THINK WE NEED TO TAKE THAT IN CONSIDERATION. SOUNDS LIKE YOU'RE TRYING TO WORK WITH YOUR NEIGHBORS ON THE QUALITY OF THE CREEK AND TRYING TO GET THE WATER CLEARED SO I THINK WE NEED TO TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION AND I APPLAUD YOU FOR YOUR EFFORTS. >> THANK YOU. >> FOR STAFF, WHAT WOULD THE GENERAL IMPACT BE IF WE ALLOW THE VARIANCE LIKE HE'S TALKING TO OTHER THAN JUST FORMALITY? ARE THERE ANY OF YOUR NEIGHBORS THAT ARE AGAINST WHAT YOU'RE DOING? >> I'VE HEARD NO FEEDBACK FROM MY NEIGHBORS. >> I'VE RECEIVED ONE PHONE CALL FROM A NEIGHBOR THAT JUST HAD SOME QUESTIONS AS TO WHY THEY RECEIVED SOMETHING IN THE MAIL BUT AFTER REPEATED ATTEMPTS, I WAS UNABLE TO CONTACT AND I BELIEVE THEY'RE HERE TONIGHT. IN TERMS OF YOUR FIRST QUESTION, VARIANCES ARE ALL ON A CASE-BY-CASE BASIS SO THERE'S NO PRECEDENT SET BY THIS. BUT I WILL TELL YOU IN THE PAST, WHAT SPURRED THE LIVING SHORELINE INITIATIVE, THAT WAS THE 2015 CODE INITIATIVE, WAS THREE VARIANCES IN 2013 BECAUSE BEFORE THAT TIME, WE ACTUALLY DID NOT ALLOW SEAWALLS AT ALL. BUT WE WANTED TO FIGURE OUT BECAUSE THOSE THREE VARIANCES WERE APPROVED, THE COUNCIL ASKED US TO LOOK AT AN INITIATIVE WHERE WE COULD BALANCE THE IMPACTS OF A HARDENED SHORELINE WITH ENCOURAGING MORE LIVING SHORELINES. WE ACTUALLY TOOK THAT AND DEVELOPED THE CODE THAT WE HAVE TODAY. IT IS POSSIBLE THAT SOMETHING LIKE THAT HAPPENS AS A RESULT OF THIS BUT IN TERMS OF A SECONDARY VARIANCE COMING ALONG, THAT WOULD BE EVALUATED BASED ON THE SPECIFICS OF THAT CASE. >> PERHAPS IF HIS INITIATIVE WAS APPROVED, MAYBE OTHER NEIGHBORS WOULD SIGN ON TO DO THE SAME THING AND MAYBE WE WOULD HAVE A HEALTHIER WATER LINE AND MAYBE PROPERTY VALUES WOULD INCREASE TOO? >> THAT'S CERTAINLY A POSSIBILITY. >> THAT'S ALL I HAVE. THANK YOU. >> [OVERLAPPING] ONE QUESTION. THERE WAS A NOTICE POSTED AT THE PROPERTY AS I HAD DISCLOSED THAT I HAD DRIVEN BY IT. IS IT FORMAL THAT THE STAFF SENT A LETTER TO THE NEIGHBORS ALSO? >> FOR VARIANCES? >> FOR THE VARIANCES. >> THE REQUIREMENT IS THE ADJACENT OR I'M SORRY, A BUDDING PROPERTY OWNER. THAT WOULD BE THE PERSON DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET FROM [INAUDIBLE] DIRECTLY NEXT DOOR ON BOTH SIDES, AND THEN THE PERSON ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE CANAL. I BELIEVE WITH THE ORIENTATION OF THE LOTS, IT ACTUALLY ENDED UP BEING TWO TECHNICALLY BUDDING LOTS SO TWO HOMEOWNERS ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE CANAL GOT NOTICES. >> THANK YOU. >> I'LL TALK TO YOU, MR. WATSON. WITH THE TWO UNSATISFIED CRITERIA, THERE'S TECHNICALLY REALLY NOTHING THAT THE HOMEOWNER CAN DO TO SATISFY THOSE. IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE SAYING BECAUSE THE HOUSE HAS ALREADY BUILT AND THAT'S WHAT THE MAIN, THE PRIMARY. >> THAT'S THE STRICTEST INTERPRETATION OF THOSE AND AS I STATED IN MY PRESENTATION, THOSE ARE TYPICALLY THE MOST CHALLENGING FOR VARIANCES TO ME. I BELIEVE MOST OF THE VARIANCES THAT I'VE WORKED ON PERSONALLY HAVE HAD THOSE AS NON-SATISFIED. >> THEN THE INTERPRETATION OF THE DEPRIVES THE OWNER OF RIGHTS COMMONLY ENJOYED BY OTHER PROPERTIES IS THAT SO THE EROSION IS ERODING HIS PROPERTY. THAT'S NOT PART OF WHAT YOU WOULD CONSIDER A RIGHT OF THE HOMEOWNER. >> THAT CAN CERTAINLY BE A CONSIDERATION OF YOURS. JUST HOW WE'VE TRADITIONALLY HANDLED THAT CRITERIA IS LEVELING IT, TAKING THAT LEVEL BACK TO THE ABSOLUTE MINIMUM OF WHAT IS THE RIGHT OF THAT PERSON WITH THAT PROPERTY OWNERSHIP AND WE USUALLY GO BACK TO WHAT IS THE USE ALLOWED IN THE ZONING. IN THIS CASE, SINGLE-FAMILY ZONING. LIKE I SAID, THAT'S TAKING IT BACK TO THE VERY STRICTEST INTERPRETATION OF THAT. >> ANOTHER QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT. I THINK YOU PROBABLY ADDRESS THIS IN YOUR OPENING STATEMENTS BUT WHAT IS THE ISSUE WITH JUST NOT GOING OVER THE 18 INCHES OR TAKING THE 18 INCHES AWAY? >> SURE. THERE WERE A FEW ISSUES THAT I TRIED TO POINT OUT IN THE VARIANCE REQUEST. THE FIRST WAS MY DECK IS SINKING AND SO FROM ONE CORNER TO THE OTHER, IT NOW PITCHES ABOUT HALF A FOOT DOWN SO I'VE LOST ABOUT HALF A FOOT OF SOIL IN THAT CORNER. SECOND, HERE WE GO, LET'S CREATE AN ILLUSTRATION. WHERE THE BRICK EXTENDS TO THE RETURNS ON THE PROPERTY, IF IT WERE BUILT AT THAT LOWER ELEVATION, [00:55:03] THE RETURNS WOULD BE UNDERGROUND FOR THE ABUTTING PROPERTY SINCE THE SOIL IN THAT AREA IS 5.67 FEET. THEN IF THE TOP OF WALL WERE TO BE CONSTRUCTED AT FOUR AND WHEN YOU COME BACK TO SEVEN FEET FROM THE PROPERTY OR FROM THE EDGE OF THE SEAWALL, I'M A FOOT UNDERGROUND TO THE TOP OF WHERE THAT WALL CAP WOULD BE. MY NEIGHBOR AND I SHARE A FENCE WHICH IS IN RATHER NEEDFUL STATE OF ATTENTION AND I WOULD LIKE TO CONSTRUCT A NEW FENCE ALONG THE TOP OF THAT WALL AND CONSTRUCTING THE FOOTINGS FOR THAT FENCE UNDERGROUND CONNECTED TO THE CONCRETE WALL CAP IS NOT PREFERABLE TO BEING ABLE TO KEEP THAT CONCRETE WALL CAP ABOVE GRADE WHERE THE FENCE CAP, WHERE THE FOOTINGS WOULD MEET IT. >> THANK YOU. >> YES MA'AM. >> ARE THERE ANY COMMENT CARDS ON THIS? >> WHEN YOU'RE DONE, I'VE GOT ANOTHER QUESTION FOR GARRETT. >> WAS JUST GOING TO OPEN IT UP TO ANYBODY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS. >> WHAT WOULD IT TAKE GARRETT FOR STAFF IN THE TOWN TO LOOK AT JONES CREEK AS ITS OWN OVERLAY OR FOR ITS OWN DISTRICT WITH ITS OWN SPECIAL NEEDS? YOU'RE ONLY GOING TO NEED TO WAIT FOR A COUPLE OF MORE VARIANCE REQUESTS OR STAFF INVESTIGATED JONES CREEK WITH THE CIP AND ALL THE WATER QUALITY ISSUES AND ALL THE SEDIMENT RUNOFF TO FEEL LIKE IT. >> I'M GOING TO SUGGEST THAT THAT'S REALLY A TOPIC FOR ANOTHER DAY, THIS IS A SPECIFIC HEARING. I THINK YOU'RE AT THE POINT WHERE YOU'RE ABOUT TO DELIBERATE. BECAUSE YOU HAVE SOME NEW MEMBERS I WANT TO MAKE A SUGGESTION TO YOU IN TERMS OF HAVING TO EVALUATE THINGS. I DID THIS THE LAST TIME WE HAD A PRETTY LARGE TURNOVER WITH THE BOARD. IN TERMS OF YOUR BALANCING THE STAFF'S FINDINGS VERSUS THE APPLICANTS' FINDINGS, IF YOU LOOK AT THE STAFF REPORT ON PAGES 1-1 TO 1-6, YOU SEE THE STAFF'S RECITATION OF THE SEVEN CRITERIA AND WHAT THEIR RATIONALE FOR EITHER MEETING OR NOT MEETING THOSE. IN THE APPLICANTS' APPLICATION, IF YOU LOOK AT PAGES 111 AND 112, YOU SEE HOW THE APPLICANT REBUTS OR ATTEMPTS TO ARGUE THAT CRITERIA 3 AND 4 HAVE BEEN MET. I HAVE TO WRITE A FINAL ORDER FOR YOU, WHATEVER YOUR DECISION IS WHEN YOU'RE DONE, IT'S HELPFUL FOR ME. IF YOU, FOR EXAMPLE, SAY, WELL, I FIND THAT THE CRITERIA HAS BEEN MET. IF YOU BELIEVE THE APPLICANTS' REASONING ON CRITERIA 3 AND 4 CARRIED THE DAY, THEN NOTE THAT. IF YOU BELIEVE THAT THE STAFF REPORT IS OKAY AS WRITTEN, THEN WE WOULD SAY I WOULD BASE MY MOTION THAT THE CRITERIA HAS NOT BEEN MET BASED ON THE STAFF REPORT. DO YOU UNDERSTAND WE REALLY GOT TWO CRITERIA IN PLAY, 3 AND 4? IF YOU WANT TO GO THE APPLICANTS' WAY, YOU'RE GOING TO FIND THAT PER THE APPLICANTS' ARGUMENTS 3 AND 4 HAVE BEEN MET. IF YOU GO ON THE STAFFS' WAY, YOU'RE JUST GOING TO GO WITH THEIR REPORT WHICH SAYS THEY'RE NOT MET. >> DOES ANYBODY ON THE COMMISSION HAVE ANY COMMENTS ON WHAT MR. GARRETT SAID OR ON THE PRESENTATION? >> YES, COMMISSIONER PATEL. >> HI. START WITH CRITERIA 3. MY UNDERSTANDING AFTER HEARING THE APPLICANT AND THE STAFF AND KNOWING THE HISTORY OF JONES CREEK, I DO THINK THAT THE CRITERIA IS SATISFIED BECAUSE I THINK IT DOES DEPRIVE USE OF HIS BACKYARD AND HIS DECK TO A CERTAIN DEGREE. HE WOULD BE DEPRIVED OF RIGHTS THAT ARE COMMONLY ENJOYED BY SINGLE-FAMILY HOMEOWNERS AND I THINK THAT'S AN IMPORTANT THING TO PUT. CRITERIA 3 IN MIND, KNOWLEDGE SEEMS LIKE IT'S SATISFIED. CRITERIA 4 BECAUSE THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES [01:00:05] ARE AT THE LEVEL OF WHAT HE IS REQUESTING THE VARIANCE TO BE AT. I FEEL THAT AGAIN, IT IS SATISFIED BECAUSE IT IS THE MINIMUM VARIANCE THAT WILL MAKE REASONABLE USE OF THE LAND AND MINIMUM BECAUSE IT IS MATCHING THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES. ANYTHING HIGHER WOULD'VE BEEN AN ISSUE BUT I THINK THIS IS THE MINIMUM THAT WOULD NEED TO BE. IN MY JUDGMENT, BOTH CRITERIAS HAVE BEEN SATISFIED BY THE APPLICANT AND THAT WOULD BE MY UNDERSTANDING. BUT I ALSO THINK THAT I AGREE WITH STAFFS' CONDITION OF APPROVAL THAT BEING THAT THE CRITERIA IS SATISFIED, WE DO WANT TO PUT THE RECOMMENDATION INTO IT AND THAT'S MY SUGGESTION. >> COMMISSIONER DUNNING, DO YOU HAVE ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? >> WELL, I PREFER PRETTY MUCH WITH YOUR STATEMENTS, ALSO I THINK THAT THE GREATER GOOD IS TO [INAUDIBLE] HAVE TO SAY. BUT THIS IS A SPECIAL CASE, AND FOR ITEM 3 AND 4. I THINK IT'S TO THE MUTUAL BENEFIT OF ALL THE NEIGHBORS. I WANT TO ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO DO SOMETHING SIMILAR TO WHAT HE'S DOING. ALSO, AND I DON'T WANT TO NEGATE THAT ON ANY MEANS. IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE [INAUDIBLE]. >> THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER HELD? >> I CONCUR WITH EACH ONE OF OUR COMMISSIONERS' RESPONSES. >> COMMISSIONER KIRN. >> AGREE AND SUPPORTIVE. >> COMMISSIONER HAGUE. >> I AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER PATEL. I GO FURTHER ON, I KNOW OUR BURDEN IS NOT WHETHER WE LIKE IT OR WHETHER WE THINK IT'S THE GREATER GOOD, OUR BURDEN IS TO SEE WHETHER OR NOT HE HAS MET THE CRITERIA. HE SATISFIED IT FOR CRITERIA 3, AS FAR AS COMMONLY ENJOYED BY OTHER PROPERTIES IN THAT AREA, THE PROPERTIES ALLOW THEIR BACKYARDS TO ERODE, [LAUGHTER] IF YOU WANT TO CALL IT ENJOYING. THIS APPLICANT DOES NOT HAVE THAT SAME ENJOYMENT, SO HE HAS DEFINITELY MET THAT BURDEN, AND I AGREE HE'S MET HIS BURDEN FOR CRITERIA 4 AS WELL. >> I WOULD CONCUR WITH MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS. DOES SOMEONE WANT TO MAKE A MOTION? >> I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO USE APPLICANT'S CRITERIAS FOR BEING SATISFIED FOR THE VARIANCE BY PRECONDITIONS SUGGESTED BY STAFF TO GRANT THE VARIANCE OF THE HEIGHT TO BE AT 5'6". >> SEVEN. >> IF WE MAKE THE MOTION TO APPROVE THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST WITH THE SUGGESTION THAT THE STAFF HAS, LET ME SEE. >> THE CONDITION [OVERLAPPING] WITH THE MAINTENANCE. >> I WAS GOING TO READ IT. >> I'LL SECOND. >> ALL IN FAVOR? >> AYE [OVERLAPPING]. >> AYE. [INAUDIBLE] YOU'VE GOT YOUR VARIANCE. >> THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE]. >> THAT WAS REALLY AN EFFORT FOR THE FIRST TIME WITH THE NEW BOARD, AND WE'VE HAD SOME LEADERSHIP FROM A COUPLE OF THREE, FOUR BOARD MEMBERS. BUT THE THREE NEWCOMERS REALLY ASSESSED THIS PROCESS PRETTY QUICKLY AND CAME UP WITH PROBABLY A WELL-BALANCED APPROACH HERE. MY COMPLIMENTS TO YOU. >> WOW. [NOISE]. I DON'T THINK I'VE EVER HEARD THAT BEFORE. >> NO. >> NOPE. >> OKAY, SO MOVING ON. >> [OVERLAPPING] I'M TURNING OVER A NEW LEAF? >> YES. WHO ARE YOU? [LAUGHTER] [B2. Alice Kitching-Benton House] >> MOVING ON TO AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 2, THE ALICE KITCHING-BENTON HOUSE. DO WE HAVE TO SWEAR IN ANY PEOPLE? OKAY. >> YES. IF YOU'RE GOING TO TESTIFY ON ASSIGNMENT, PLEASE STAND AND RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. DO YOU SWEAR THE TESTIMONY YOU'LL GIVE IS THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH. >> YES. >> THANK YOU. >> DO WE HAVE ANY EX-PARTE DISCLOSURES ON THIS ITEM? >> I DO. COUNSEL SCHNEIDER, I JUST SPOKE ABOUT THE APPLICATION. >> OKAY. >> COMMISSIONER KIRN. >> I DROVE BY. >> I SPOKE WITH JOHN STICKLER ABOUT OF THE PARKING AND GENERALLY, THE HISTORIC DESIGNATION. >> THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER HANK. >> NOTHING TO DISCLOSE. >> COMMISSIONER PATEL? [01:05:01] >> I PROBABLY TRIED TO BUY IT ALMOST EVERY OTHER DAY, AND I'VE SEEN THAT PROPERTY FOR A VERY LONG TIME, SO I'M QUITE AWARE OF IT. >> THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER DANNY. >> I DROVE BY THE PROPERTY ALSO AND LOOKED AT IT ON GOOGLE EARTH, AND ALSO OF OUR CITY GIS MAPS ALSO. >> THANK YOU. I'M AN EX PARTE DISCLOSURE, BUT I LIVE RIGHT AROUND THE CORNER FROM THIS HOUSE, SO I SEE IT MULTIPLE TIMES A DAY, AND HAVE SINCE I WAS A SMALL CHILD, SO THAT'S IT. MOVING ON, WE CAN HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT. STATE FOR THE RECORD YOUR NAME AND ALL THAT. >> ABSOLUTELY [NOISE]. >> DO I HAVE THE PROJECTOR? >> DO WE HAVE THE PROJECTOR? >> YES. IT'S ON HERE [NOISE]. >> I HAVE A FUN ONE FOR YOU GUYS TONIGHT. I'M MELISSA KOSTELIA ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT, WITH COTLEUR AND HEARING. I HAVE THE ALICE KITCHING-BENTON HOUSE FOR YOU. I HAVE THE HONOR AND APPLICANT. THEY ARE THE OWNER AND OPERATOR OF THE WILD ORCHIDS SALON. THEY HAVE BEEN THERE FOR 20 YEARS IN BOKEH. THEY HAVE BOTH BEEN RESIDENTS OF JUPITER FOR 15 PLUS YEARS. THEY LIVE IN JUPITER FARMS, AND THEY HAVE A STUDENT WITHIN THE PUBLIC SYSTEM AND THE TOWN OF JUPITER. THIS PROJECT WENT BEFORE THE HISTORIC RESOURCE BOARD WITH THE UNANIMOUS APPROVAL FOR THE LOCAL HISTORIC DESIGNATION AND A CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATE DENSE TO MODIFY THE STRUCTURE. IT WAS NOTED THAT THIS IS THE FIRST LOCAL DESIGNATED SITE THAT WAS NAMED AFTER A WOMAN IN THE TOWN OF JUPITER. WE JUST THOUGHT IT WAS RATHER INTERESTING THAT WE WERE REQUESTING AND ADAPTIVE REUSE FOR A BEAUTY SALON. IN THE 1930S, THIS WAS A MEETING PLACE FOR GROUPS AND CHURCHES' ACTIVITIES, AND ALICE KITCHING ACTUALLY HOSTED SEVERAL WOMEN'S CLUB MEETINGS AT THIS LOCATION. THE SITE IS LOCATED SOUTH OF CENTER STREET AND WEST OF LOXAHATCHEE DRIVE. IT'S APPROXIMATELY 0.17 ACRES. IT IS WITHIN THE R1 SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS AS A HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL FUTURE LAND USE. THE SUBJECT REQUEST THIS EVENING IS FOR A SITE PLAN AND A SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR AN ADAPTIVE REUSE FOR A BEAUTY SALON. THIS IS THE EXISTING STRUCTURE AS IT IS TODAY. WE ARE REHABILITATING THIS FRONT ELEVATION BY REMOVING THE ENCLOSED PORTION OF THE BUILDING THAT WAS ENCLOSED BY ITS SEPARATE OWNERS IN 1970S, AND WE'RE RESTORING THE FRONT PORCH. THIS IS A SKETCH THAT WAS PREPARED BY THE OWNER TO SHOW THE ADA ACCESS THAT WE HAVE ON THE SITE TO THE BUILDING. WE'RE UTILIZING HARDY PLANK WINDOWS AND WE'RE PROPOSING A NEW ADA DOOR TO ACCOMMODATE THAT. OUR DETAILINGS AND THE ROOF EVE MODIFICATIONS ARE MORE HISTORICALLY SIGNIFICANT TO THIS ERA. TO REORIENT YOU, NORTH IS TO THE LEFT. THAT RESTORED PORCH COMES IN THE ADA ACCESS, COMES THROUGH THE FRONT DOOR AND THE OWNER IS PROPOSING TO RENOVATE THE BATHROOM TO BE ADA ACCESSIBLE. YOU WILL HAVE ITEMS SIMILAR AND COMPARABLE TO A BEAUTY SALON, HAIRDRYER SINKS, WE HAVE A SPOT FOR HAIR EXTENSIONS, THE EMPLOYEES WILL HAVE A BREAK ROOM, THEY'LL HAVE SOME STORAGE AND THE REST OF IT IS FOR UTILITIES. THIS IS THE SITE ON AN AERIAL, AND THIS IS THE SITE PLAN AND BEING IMPOSED UPON THE SITE. WE'RE PROPOSING ABOUT 1,200 SQUARE FEET, AND THAT IS PARKED AT THE RETAIL SERVICE REPAIRED RATES. WE HAVE FIVE ACQUIRED PARKING SPACES AND WE'RE PROVIDING FIVE ON THE SITE, FOUR UPPER AND THE FRONT, AND ONE IS TO THE REAR OF THE BUILDING. WE HAVE A SIDEWALK CONNECTION FROM CENTER STREET TO THE FRONT OF THE DOOR. WE'RE PROPOSING A SMALL MONUMENT SIGN AT THE PROJECT ENTRANCE, AND PROVIDING PEDESTRIAN AMENITIES THAT ARE COMPARABLE TO COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES. WE'RE ALSO ENHANCING THE LANDSCAPE. WE HAVE A 10-FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER AND A FIVE-FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFERS ON BOTH SIDES OF THE PROPERTY. I JUST WANTED TO GO OVER A COUPLE OF CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL JUST TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF VISUALLY WHAT THEY LOOK LIKE. THIS IS THE 16 FOOT PLOTTED ALLEY TO THE REAR. [01:10:04] STAFF IS RECOMMENDING A CONDITION OF APPROVAL TO INCREASE THIS TO ABOUT 20 FEET, AND THEY'RE PROPOSING A FOUR-FOOT EASEMENT TO ACCOMMODATE THE CODE REQUIREMENTS IN THE CODE AS IT IS TODAY. THE OWNER IS PROPOSING TRUEGRID. IF YOU'RE NOT FAMILIAR WITH THAT, IT IS A PERVIOUS MATERIAL THAT IS USED FOR THESE [INAUDIBLE] DESIGNATED SITE. IT'S PERMEABLE, IT IS MADE OF GRAVEL. THE SUBJECT SITE IS BEING IMPROVED WITH THE ALLEYWAY AND THE FOREFOOT IN THE PARKING SPACE WITH THIS TRUE GRID, IT HELPS WITH DRAINAGE. THIS IMPROVEMENT IS GOING TO COST THE OWNER ABOUT $11,000 AND THERE'S A CONDITION OF APPROVAL THAT ONCE SUGGESTING THAT WE IMPROVE THE ALLEYWAY TO NORTH LAS, THE [INAUDIBLE] ROAD. IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT BOTH THE RESIDENTS TO THE NORTH AND TO THE SOUTH ARE RESIDENTS WHO WE ZONED. THE OWNER TO THE SOUTH, THIS IS ACTUALLY THEIR ACCESS TO THEIR PRIVATE DRIVEWAY. WE WOULD REQUEST THAT YOU SUGGEST A DELETION OF THIS CONDITION APPROVAL WHEN IT GOES TOWARDS THE TOWN COUNCIL, AS IT ISN'T AN UNDUE [INAUDIBLE] TO THE PROPERTY OWNER. THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT COSTS TO RESTORE THE PORCH AND TO REHABILITATE THE FRONT ELEVATION. WE'RE PROVIDING ADA ACCESS, IMPROVING THE ALLEY DIRECTLY BEHIND THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. THE OWNER IS COMMITTED TO IMPROVE AND PERMIT AND CONSTRUCT THE ALLEY SOUTH OF THE SUBJECT SITE. WE ARE PROVIDING CROSS ACCESS ALONG CENTER STREET. THIS ALLEY IS ONE WAY AS MANY ENCUMBRANCES THAT ARE WESTWARD AND UTILITY POLES AND TREES WITHIN IT. THE APPLICANT IS AN AGREEMENT WITH REDUCING THE REARED PATIO SETBACK AND ADDING THE LANDSCAPE HEDGE. THIS IS THE CROSS AXIS THAT I WAS DISCUSSING. THE CROSS ACCESS WILL BE FROM WILLETT AVENUE THROUGH THE CENTER STREET PROJECT THROUGH THIS PROPERTY. THE CONDITION OF APPROVAL FOR SIGNAGE, WE MEET ALL OF THE CONDITIONS AS STATED, WITH FOUR FEET IN HEIGHT. IT'S VERY RESIDENTIAL IN NATURE. IT'LL BE AN EXTERNALLY AND ILLUMINATED BY LANDSCAPE LIGHTING. WE'RE NOT PROPOSING ANY WALL SIGNS AND THE WINDOW SIGNAGE IS LIMITED TO ONE SQUARE FOOT. I WOULD LIKE TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. >> THANK YOU. NOW WE'LL HEAR FROM PETER [INAUDIBLE] FROM THE TOWN PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT. >> THANK YOU FOR THAT INTRODUCTION. FOR THE RECORD, PETER [INAUDIBLE] FOR THE PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST FOR A SITE PLAN AND SPECIAL EXCEPTION FOR AN ADAPTIVE REUSE OF AN HISTORIC HOUSE FOR BEAUTY SALON. CONTINGENT ON THE APPROVAL OF THE CONCURRENT LOCAL HISTORIC DESIGNATION BY THE TOWN COUNCIL AND SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS AS SHOWN IN EXHIBIT 1. AS MS. CASTELLO REVIEWED, I WOULD LIKE TO GO OVER SOME OF THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AND ALSO JUST BASICALLY TALK ABOUT ADAPTIVE REUSE. ADAPTIVE REUSE IS ESTABLISHED AS AN INCENTIVE FOR PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNERS TO SAVE AND PRESERVE IN PLACE HISTORIC STRUCTURES BY ALLOWING LIMITED COMMERCIAL USES WHEN A BUILDING IS LOCALLY DESIGNATED HISTORIC. ADAPTIVE REUSE IS A BALANCE BETWEEN LIMITED COMMERCIAL USERS IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS. STAFF REVIEW OF THE SITE PLANNING AND SPECIAL EXCEPTION APPLICATIONS CONSIDERED THE INTENSITY OF THE USE AS WELL AS THE PROXIMITY AND IMPACTS TO SURROUNDING HOMES. AS IT WAS STATED, TO ENSURE THAT THE PROPERTY IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE CHARACTER OF THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD STAFF RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL RELATED TO SIGNS CONSISTENT WITH THE REQUEST SO THAT IN THE FUTURE OF OTHER SIGNAGE COMES IN, IT WOULDN'T BE ANY LARGER OR MORE THAN WHAT WAS REQUESTED INITIALLY. THE ADAPTIVE REUSE CODE REALLY SPEAK TO SIGN REGULATIONS. BUT AS LONG AS IT WAS FOUND TO BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND RESIDENTIAL CHARACTER IS WHAT IS REQUIRED TO MEET THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION CRITERIA. THE EXISTING ALLEY IS 16 FEET WIDE. THAT'S WHAT WAS PLOTTED ORIGINALLY. CODE REQUIRES 20 FEET. THE APPLICANT IS PROVIDING 20 FEET BEHIND THEIR PROPERTY SO THAT, THAT CONDITION IS MET ALTHOUGH TOWN CODE ALSO REQUIRES THAT IT BE PAVED WHEN YOU ARE USING A ROADWAY OR STREET OR AN ALLEY THAT IS UNIMPROVED IN JUPITER. [01:15:01] IT HAS TO BE IMPROVED ACCORDING TO TOWN CODE TO BE ABLE TO USE IT. IF THE APPLICANT SHOWED PARKING SPOT ON THE ALLEY, SO THEREFORE, THAT'S WHY THE CONDITION OF APPROVAL REQUIRED IT TO BE PAVED. LET'S SEE. THERE'S A PATIO SETBACK THAT NEEDS TO BE MET, 7.5 FEET. IT WAS SHOWN AT ZERO, SO WE'RE ASKING FOR THAT. ACROSS ACCESS EASEMENT NEEDS TO BE REVIEWED AND THEN ALSO THE APPLICANT IS PROVIDING FIVE FEET OF RIGHT AWAY TO PALM BEACH COUNTY AS A CONDITION OF APPROVAL. WITH THAT, IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, WE CAN GET INTO THE DETAILS. LIKE TO RESERVE THE REST OF THE TIME TO DO THAT. THANKS. >> THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER DANIONA. >> A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT. HAVE YOU HAD ANY COMMUNITY INPUT FROM THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITY ON WHAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR IN DEVELOPMENT? >> YEAH. WE SPOKE TO THE GENERATION CHURCH THAT OWNS THE PROPERTIES, JASON TO THE STRUCTURES. WE'VE HAD DISCUSSIONS WITH THEM. >> THEIR COMMENTS WERE? >> WELL RECEIVED. YES, THEY ARE SUPPORTING THE CROSS ACCESS. WE'VE ALREADY TALKED TO THEM ABOUT THAT. WE HAVE A DRAFT AGREEMENT IN PLACE, SO THEY'RE ALL FOR IT. >> NO CONCERNS. >> NO CONCERNS. >> THEN THE OTHER QUESTION IS JUST FOR INTEREST, A MONUMENT YOU SAID YOU'RE GOING TO PUT ON THERE? >> A MONUMENT SIGN. >> I'M HOPEFUL THAT BE OF? >> IT'S A FREE-STANDING STRUCTURE THAT HAS GO BACK, THERE. >> I SAW THAT. THAT'S WHAT IT IS. >> CORRECT. THAT'S A MONUMENT SIGN. >> OKAY. >> YES. >> I GOT YOU. THANK YOU. >> YOU'RE WELCOME. >> NO FURTHER QUESTIONS. COMMISSIONER ANN FOR THE APPLICANT. >> MY UNDERSTANDING IS ACCORDING TO THE APPLICATION, THERE ARE SIX WORKSTATIONS. IS THAT CORRECT? >> THAT'S CORRECT. >> THERE'S PROPOSING FIVE PARKING SPACES AND ONE HANDICAP. IS THAT GOING TO BE ADEQUATE ENOUGH CONSIDERING HOW MANY OPERATORS YOU MIGHT HAVE CLIENTS? I JUST TRIED TO GET MY HANDLE ON OVERFLOW AND WHERE PEOPLE WOULD BE ABLE TO PARK OTHER THAN THOSE SPACES. >> OF COURSE. THE BEAUTY SALON AS MANY SALONS ARE HAVE WORKSTATIONS. THEY'LL BE SIX EMPLOYEES, BUT THAT'S THE THEIR HOME-BASE. THERE WON'T BE THAT MUCH OVERLAP WHEN IT COMES TO AS MANY CLIENTS AS BEING SEEN AT ONE TIME. THIS IS GOING TO BE A LONG-TERM PLAN RIGHT NOW. IT'S JUST THE OWNER OF THE SALON IS GOING TO BE IN THERE AND I BELIEVE HER MOTHER IS GOING TO BE ONE OF HER EMPLOYEES. THIS WILL GROW OVER TIME TO BE THE SIX WORKSTATIONS. BUT AGAIN, THE APPOINTMENTS ARE NOT LIKELY TO OVERLAP AND HAVE THAT MANY PEOPLE INVOLVED IN THERE. ALSO THERE IS OPPORTUNITIES TO PARK THE EMPLOYEES CARS ELSEWHERE ON THE CROSS ACCESS ON THAT GENERATION CHURCH SITE. >> THANK YOU. [INAUDIBLE] >> A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT. I WAS JUST CURIOUS ON THE ADA MODIFICATIONS. ARE THOSE REQUIRED BY ADA CODE BECAUSE I THOUGHT THERE WAS SOME CRITERIA WHERE IF IT WAS AN UNDUE HARDSHIP, YOU DIDN'T NEED TO DO THAT. I DIDN'T SEE ANYTHING IN THE CONDITIONS FOR APPROVAL ABOUT ADA COMPLIANCE. >> I THINK IT'S THE BEST FOR STAFF, BUT I THINK IT IS BEST OF YOUR ABILITY OR THERE'S SOME LANGUAGE IN THERE THAT YOU COULD ASK FOR SOME WAIVER. BUT WE ARE PROPOSING THE RAMP, THE CONNECTION TO CENTER STREET AND THE ADA BATHROOM. WE'RE WIDENING THE DOOR TO MEET THAT CRITERIA. WE'RE NOT REQUESTING ANY RELIEF. >> OKAY. >> JUST TO FOLLOW UP ON THAT AS PART OF THE HISTORIC LOCAL DESIGNATION AND THE SUBSEQUENT CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS, YOU CAN REQUEST RELIEF FROM THOSE THINGS. THEY WERE NOT REQUESTED BECAUSE THEY WANTED THEIR PATRONS TO BE ABLE TO ACCESS. THEN JUST TO FOLLOW UP ON THE PARKING, WHILE THEY ARE MEETING THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS, THERE ARE ALSO ALLOWANCES IN THE CODE, SPECIFICALLY FOR ADAPTIVE REUSE TO NOT MEET THE REQUIRED PARKING. FOR EXAMPLE, SIMS HOUSE PROVIDES ABOUT HALF THE AMOUNT OF THE REQUIRED PARKING AND THAT IS A MORE INTENSIVE USE BEING A RESTAURANT. >> ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS [INAUDIBLE]? >> NO QUESTIONS. >> COMMISSIONER PATEL. >> APPLICANT SINCE YOU'VE TALKED OF GENERATION CHURCH, HAVE YOU TALKED ABOUT A PARKING AGREEMENT WITH THEM LIKE A SHARED PARKING AGREEMENT FOR THE PURPOSES OF AN EMPLOYEE'S BECAUSE TO THE POINT THAT OUR FALL COMMISSIONER MADE, IF IT DOES GO TO SIX STATIONS, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT 6 PLUS 6, 12. THAT MATH DOESN'T ADD UP WITH THE FIVE SPOTS. [01:20:03] >> YES. AT THIS POINT, THERE'S ONLY A CROSS ACCESS AGREEMENT THAT'S BEING PROPOSED, BUT SHARED PARKING HAS BEEN DISCUSSED. HOWEVER, THIS PROJECT DOES STAND ON ITS OWN, SO WE WEREN'T REQUESTING THAT AT THIS TIME. >> I UNDERSTAND. IS THE WINDOWS SIGN FACING CENTER STREET? >> THE WINDOW SIGN OR THE MONUMENT SIGN? >> THE WINDOW, YOU SAID YOU ALLOWED ONE WINDOW SIGN? >> CORRECT. THAT WOULD BE FACING CENTER STREET. >> OKAY. >> YES. >> THIS IS PROBABLY MORE OF A QUESTION FOR STAFF. DOES ADA WORK ON TRUEGRID OR GREEN PARKING? >> IT CAN BASED ON CERTAIN COMPASSION, BUT THE ADA SPACE'S IN THE FRONT, IT'S PROPOSED FOR PAVEMENT. >> I UNDERSTAND. NOW QUESTION TO APPLICANT, SORRY. APPLICANT, WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO CONSIDER TRUEGRID AND OR GREEN PARKING FOR YOUR FRONT? IT WOULD REDUCE YOUR COST, IT'LL ALSO LOOK BETTER OFF OF INDIAN TOWN ROAD AND FOR THE RESIDENTS PURPOSES. I DON'T HAVE MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS AGREE ON THAT BUT, AT LEAST IT'S A THOUGHT. >> I HAVE THE HONOR HERE. IT WAS DISCUSSED EARLY ON, BUT WE THINK WE DIDN'T WANT TO GO TO SOMETHING PAVED, BUT I'LL LET HIM SPEAK TO THAT. >> I'M STACY. I WOULD LIKE TO DO TUMBLE BRICK. THAT'S MY IDEA FOR THE FRACK DRIVEWAY. THERE'S A NICE BRICK PAVER, NOT ASPHALT. TRUE GRID. IF YOU KNOW WHAT IT IS. IT'S FILLED WITH 5,200 ROCK WHICH IS A REGULAR DRILLING ROCK. >> I UNDERSTAND. >> THEY'RE VERY STARK AND I WANTED IT TO LOOK QUAINT IN THE STARK. >>I THINK MY QUESTION IS, I UNDERSTAND WHERE THE STARK'S POSITION IS AS FAR AS THE ALLEY. BECAUSE IT'S USELESS TO JUST DO YOUR SECTION. THAT'S WHY THEY'RE REQUESTING THE ALLEY, AND THERE'S A COST ASSOCIATED WITH THAT. I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT IF THERE'S A WAY TO MITIGATE YOUR COST ON YOUR OWN PARKING LOT UP ON, AND STILL MAKE IT LOOK GOOD WITHOUT PUTTING IT OVER TO YOUR [INAUDIBLE], BECAUSE I REALLY APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT YOU'RE DOING AN ADAPTIVE REUSE. DEALING WITH HISTORIC PROPERTIES IS NOT CHEAP AND NOT EASY, AND WHATEVER WE AS A TOWN CAN DO TO HELP YOU, I THINK IS IN THE BEST INTERESTS FOR EVERYBODY, AS LONG AS IT AESTHETICALLY LOOKS CORRECT. >> SURE. >> THAT'S WHERE MY CRITERIA IS COMING UP WITH A QUESTION. I'LL LET THAT GO TO DISCUSSION, BUT AT LEAST I GOT THE ANSWER THAT YOU ARE WILLING TO LOOK AT OTHER STUFF BESIDES [INAUDIBLE] >> WE'RE ALWAYS OPEN TO SUGGESTIONS, YES. >> WHICH MIGHT HELP YOU MAKE THIS PROJECT BETTER, CORRECT? STEPH, IF THEY GO THROUGH EITHER BREAK OR TRUE GRID OR GREEN, THEY CAN STILL SATISFY ADA REQUIREMENTS? >> GREEN. ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT GRASS? >> YEAH. >> THE TRUE GRID? I'M NOT SURE ABOUT THAT AND GIVEN USAGE, IT DOESN'T TYPICALLY WEAR WELL, SO IT'LL END UP BEING. >> MUDDY. >> YEAH. >> YES. OKAY, SO PROBABLY GRASS IS NOT THE IDEA, BUT IF THEY WERE TO GO WITH ANOTHER STYLE OF PAVER OR SOMETHING. >> WELL, PAVERS ARE GOING TO BE MORE EXPENSIVE THAN ASPHALT. ASPHALT AND TRUE GRID ARE PRETTY COMPARABLE IN PRICE. >> YOU WOULD BE OPEN TO LOOKING AT THE OPTION OF THEM DOING POSSIBLY THE BRICK PAVERS LIKE THEY'RE SUGGESTING FOR LOOKS PURPOSES? >> YES. WE HAD ADVISED THE APPLICANT TO PUT IN, BECAUSE HE WASN'T SURE, SO IF HE'S GOING TO PUT IT ON A PLAN, THEN HE'S GOING TO HAVE TO BUILD IT ACCORDING TO THE PLAN. BUT IF HE PUTS IN ASPHALT AND THEN UPGRADES, THAT'S AN UPGRADE. THAT'S WHY HE CHOSE TO PUT AN ASPHALT [OVERLAPPING] >>IT'S JUST A STACK OF [INAUDIBLE], IT DOESN'T COME TO US. >> YES. >> OKAY. THAT'S FAIR. I THINK THAT'S ALL. NO MORE QUESTIONS. >> THANK YOU. I HAVE QUESTIONS FOR STEPH. MR. VICKRICH. ON THE OUTLAY, THE PROPERTY TO THE EAST IS OWNED BY THE CHURCH AND THEY USE THAT AS A PARKING LOT CURRENTLY. WHY WOULDN'T THEY BURDEN-SHARE FOR THE IMPROVEMENTS TO THE ALLEYWAY? >>THEY OWN THE PROPERTY BUT IT ISN'T PART OF THE GENERATION CHURCH SITE PLAN PROPER. [01:25:01] >> THEY USE IT AS A PARKING LOT. THEY'RE USING THE PROPERTY AS PART OF THEIR BUSINESS. SO WHY WOULDN'T THEY? >> THEY DON'T HAVE A SITE PLAN APPLICATION IN. THEY DON'T HAVE A REQUEST FOR A BUILDING PERMIT OR ENGINEERING PERMITTING, SO THEY COME IN FOR THAT, THEN THAT'S HOW WE JUST LIKE THIS APPLICATION. THAT IS HOW WE REQUESTED. THIS REQUIREMENT FOR AN ALLEY AND ACCESS IS A CODE REQUIREMENT AND IT IS NOT UNLIKE MANY APPLICATIONS WHERE SOMEONE'S USING ACCESS THAT THEY HAVE TO PAVE IT AN IMPROVEMENT LIKE FOR EXAMPLE, AN EXTREME CASE OF THAT WOULD BE ISLAND BY ITSELF. YOU HAVE TO BUILD IT, IN ORDER TO USE IT. >> IF THEY DON'T HAVE A SITE PLAN AMENDMENT, IS IT ZONED TO BE A PARKING LOT? I KNOW THIS IS OFF THE TOPIC, BUT. >> YEAH. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. >> UNDERSTOOD. [OVERLAPPING] BUT IT'S IN ADJACENT TO THEIR PROPERTY, AND THAT COULD AFFECT THEM FINANCIALLY BECAUSE THEY ALSO USE THAT ALLEYWAY. >> WE CANNOT PLACE A CONDITION ON AN APPLICANT OR PROPERTY OWNER THAT IS NOT IN FRONT OF THE BOARD. SO THAT'S WHERE WE DID NOT MAKE A CONDITION FOR SOMEONE ELSE. THERE'S PROBLEMS WITH PROVIDING A CONDITION FOR SOMETHING THAT THIS APPLICANT CAN'T PERFECT. >> THANK YOU. I HAVE NO OTHER QUESTIONS. [INAUDIBLE] >> YES WE DO. FRANK [INAUDIBLE], AND THEN AMY LAW. >> MY NAME IS FRANK [INAUDIBLE] AND I HAVE A SHOP IN CENTER PARK PLAZA. IT'S ABOUT A 100 YARDS TO HOTEL, EAST OF WHERE THEY ARE. MY BIG THING IS HOW CAN THEY ACTUALLY EVER GET THAT BUILDING TO PASS THE HAIRDRESSING ASSOCIATIONS, SANITATION, WHICH IS A HOSPITAL GRADE WHEN YOU GOT A 100-YEAR-OLD BUILDING AND THEY DEFINITELY HAVE TO HAVE BLACK MOLD IN THIS THING. I DON'T SEE HOW THEY COULD PUT TWO DOORS THAT YOU CAN'T HAVE A DOOR GOING INTO THE SALON AND YOU GOT TO HAVE A SEPARATE DOOR FOR THE SALON AND THE SEPARATE DOOR FOR THE HOUSE. THE SAME WITH THE BATHROOMS, CANNOT BE IN THE SAME PART OF THE HOUSE WHERE CUSTOMERS GO IN. IT'S ALL PART OF THE SANITATION WHICH IS HOSPITAL GRADE. >> WE DO NOT TYPICALLY RESPOND TO THIS SUGGESTION COMMENT, WE JUST TAKE SOME NOTES AND STEPH LISTEN. [OVERLAPPING] >> I JUST WANTED TO BE ABLE TO GET THIS THING PASSED AS A HAIRDRESSING SHOP, WANTED TO MAKE SOMETHING ELSE OUT OF IT. I HAVE A STORE THERE THAT I RENT CHAIRS OUT. THEY COULD RENT THE CHAIRS, THEY CAN DO WHAT THEY WANT TO DO WITH THAT AND MAKE IT SOMETHING ELSE OTHER THAN THE HAIR DRESSING SHOP. >> THAT WOULD BE UP TO THE APPLICANT TO DECIDE. >> I UNDERSTAND. I'M JUST SAYING, THAT'S BESIDES THE POINT. THE POINT I'M GETTING IS, THAT I DON'T THINK THEY COULD GET THAT AND IF YOU HAVE ONLY FIVE PARKING AND YOU'VE GOT TO WORRY THAT THE PEOPLE IN THAT CHURCH THERE DON'T SELL IT, OR WHATEVER IT IS, AND THEN THEY DON'T HAVE THE PARKING LOT AT ALL. MY STORE HAS A LOT OF PEOPLE WORKING IN IT NOW, BUT I HAVE EMPTY CHAIRS THAT I CAN DO. THE COURSE OF TRYING TO DO WHAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT. I HAVE A QUARTER OF A MILLION DOLLARS SITTING IN MY STORE. THERE'S NO WAY THEY COULD PUT IN TO, BECAUSE I HAD TO CHANGE ALL THE ELECTRICAL, TEAR IT ALL OUT, AND PLUMBING AND EVERYTHING REDONE COMPLETELY. THAT'S A SHOPPING CENTER THAT'S ONLY 50 YEARS OLD. DAD AT THAT TIME WAS PROBABLY 30 YEARS OLD. I'VE BEEN IN THIS TOWN FOR 40 YEARS AND I KNOW THE BUSINESS. I'VE BEEN IN THIS BUSINESS A LONG TIME, AND I DON'T SEE HOW THAT COULD PASS THE STATE BOARD OF HEALTH PART OF IT. BECAUSE I LOOKED AT THE PLANS MYSELF. WHEN I SAW FIVE PARKING SPACES, WHAT DID THEY DO WITH? THEY HAVE SIX PEOPLE WORKING IN THERE. THAT MEANS 12 PEOPLE, 12 CARS COMING IN THAT PLACE AT LEAST, DOESN'T MAKE SENSE. I SEE WHAT THEY ALLOW. THEY HAVE OTHER DIFFERENT CATEGORIES OTHER THAN A HAIRDRESSING SHOP, WHICH IS THE ONLY ONE THAT WOULDN'T FIT IN THAT PLACE. >> THANK YOU FOR THE COMMENTS. YOU HAVE 10 SECONDS IF YOU WANT TO SAY ANYTHING. [01:30:02] >> THAT'S ALL FOR NOW. >> [NOISE] THANK YOU. >> OKAY. >> AMY LAW. >> HI. I'M AMY LAW. I'VE BEEN IN THE AREA FOR 28 YEARS, AND THERE WAS NO COMMUNITY INPUT WITH ME UNTIL I WAS DRIVING BY, AND SAW THE SIGN. AND OTHERS, A LOT OF NEIGHBORS THAT CANNOT BE HERE TONIGHT THAT ARE NOT HAPPY ABOUT A BEAUTY SALON BEING IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND NO PARKING. THE SIMS HOUSE, THEY HAVE SHARED PARKING, BUT, I'VE GOT PICTURES, PHOTOS, THEY'RE ALWAYS PARKED ON PINE GROVE NEXT TO THE COLOSIO'S, ONE STREET OVER PINE GROVE. I'M NOT SURE THE OWNERS DO NOT LIVE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. I'VE LIVED IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD SINCE IT WAS A CRACK HOUSE AND I WOULD CALL THE POLICE, AND PROSTITUTION, AND I'M GLAD THINGS HAVE CHANGED. BUT I DO NOT WANT A HAIR SALON. I THINK THERE'S A BETTER REUSE FOR IT TO MAKE IT HISTORIC. THERE IS 80 PERCENT OF BEAUTY SALONS GO OUT OF BUSINESS THE FIRST 18 MONTHS. I'M NOT SURE WHO THEY'RE GOING TO SERVICE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD BECAUSE THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE ON THE NORTH SIDE OF CENTER STREET, AND WE'RE GOING TO EVENTUALLY KNOCK DOWN THE REST OF THE APARTMENTS THAT ONE BUSINESS PERSON OWNS ON CENTER STREET AND THEN ALL THE GUATEMALANS, OR PEOPLE THAT ARE IN THE SERVICE BUSINESS THAT LIVE HERE, AND WE'VE BEEN A SANCTUARY TOWN. THEY HAVE NO PLACE TO LIVE BECAUSE THEY CAN'T AFFORD TO LIVE IN JUPITER ANYMORE. HAIRDRESSERS, I THINK THERE'S A BIG PROBLEM. THEN WITH THE REDOING THE BRIDGE, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE ALL THE TRAFFIC FROM ALTERNATE A1A, TURNING ONTO CENTER STREET, GOING TO THE PARKING FROM THE CHURCH, AND THEN TO PULL ONTO CENTER STREET. THERE'S EVENTUALLY GOING TO HAVE TO BE A TRAFFIC SYMBOL THERE I BELIEVE. I THINK THERE'S A BETTER USE. A LOT OF THE NEIGHBORS ARE NOT HAPPY, ESPECIALLY THE GENTLEMAN THAT JUST PURCHASED THREE LOTS FOR A MILLION AND TEN. HE'S NOT HAPPY, AND HE COULD NOT BE HERE TODAY BECAUSE HE WAS IN MIAMI. HE'S NOT HAPPY IF HE BUILDS THREE HOUSES ON THOSE THREE LOTS ON THE CORNER, LOXAHATCHEE AND EDMUND STREET. HE IS NOT HAPPY. LET SEE. MAYBE AN ART GALLERY, OR A BED AND BREAKFAST, I DON'T KNOW. TRAFFIC, THE CHURCH, PEOPLE, THAT'S THE ONLY INPUT. NO ONE CAME KNOCKING ON MY DOOR. I'M THE ONE THAT KNOCKED ON OTHER NEIGHBORS' DOORS TO FIND OUT WHAT THEY THOUGHT ABOUT IT. SO WE'RE HERE TODAY TO TURN SOMETHING OLD INTO NEW AGAIN. HOW MANY BEAUTY SALONS DO WE HAVE IN JUPITER? [NOISE] DO WE NEED ANOTHER ONE? >> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> OKAY. SO WE'RE ON TO LIBERATION. CAN ANYONE START US OFF? ANY COMMENTS? QUESTIONS? >> WELL, I GUESS WHAT I'M WONDERING AT THIS POINT, I DON'T KNOW DURING THIS TIME, IF I CAN ASK STAFF. AS FAR AS ADAPTIVE REUSE, IS IT STAFFS' RESPONSIBILITY TO FIGURE OUT WHEN THIS USE IS REQUESTED IF THEY'RE GOING TO MEET THE HEALTH REQUIREMENTS OF CERTIFICATION TO ACTUALLY BE A BEAUTY SALON? WHAT'S YOUR ANSWER FOR THAT? >> AS FAR AS THE CHANGE OF OCCUPANCY THAT'S REVIEWED BY THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT, AND THEY REVIEWED THIS APPLICATION, AND WHEN IT COMES IN FOR A BUILDING PERMIT, THEY'LL REVIEW IT AS WELL TO FORMALIZE THAT. >> THEY WILL HAVE TO GET WITH THE HEALTH COUNTY OFFICIALS IN ORDER TO GET THEIR LICENSE, WHICH IS TYPICALLY PLACED ON THE PROPERTY AT THE DIFFERENT STATIONS. I WOULD NOTE THAT THIS IS NOT GOING TO BE USED AS A HOUSE. IT IS PROPOSED FOR COMPLETE USE AS A COMMERCIAL ENTITY AS A BEAUTY SALON. >> IF THEY CANNOT GET CERTIFICATION TO USE IT AS A BEAUTY SALON, THEN WHAT DOES THAT DO TO ANY OF THE APPROVAL AS AN ADAPTER FOR USE AS A BEAUTY SALON? [01:35:08] >> WE WOULD HAVE TO CONSULT WITH PALM BEACH COUNTY. IT'S INCREASINGLY DIFFICULT BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE BUSINESS TAX RECEIPTS, AND THOSE WERE THE THINGS THAT WE WOULD REQUIRE. BUT WE COULD MAKE A CONDITION OF APPROVAL TO REQUEST THOSE TYPES OF THINGS AS PART OF THIS TO VERIFY THAT THOSE THINGS ARE PROVIDED. IT IS NOT UNUSUAL TO HAVE AN OLD BUILDING RE-USED FOR COMMERCIAL. MANY PLACES DO IT AROUND THE STATE AND COUNTRY, SO IT'S NOT IMPOSSIBLE. IT IS SOMETHING THAT JUST HAS TO BE FOLLOWED THROUGH. SO IF THE BOARD IS CONCERNED ABOUT THAT, WE CAN ADD A CONDITION OF APPROVAL REQUIREMENT. >> ANYTHING FURTHER? COMMISSIONER. >> FROM READING THE REPORT, THERE WAS A BUILDING INSPECTION DONE. WHEN THAT WAS PERFORMED, WAS THERE A MODELED TEST PERFORMED DURING THAT TIME? >> BUILDING INSPECTION? >> YEAH, THERE WAS A REPORTING HERE OF THE QUALITY OF THE WORKMANSHIP, THAT IT WAS A GOOD CONSTRUCTION STRUCTURE. >> THAT WAS PART OF THE LOCAL HISTORIC DESIGNATION AND THE CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS. PLANNING AND ZONING DOESN'T LOOK AT THOSE TYPES OF THINGS SPECIFICALLY, BUT THOSE ARE THINGS THAT BUILDING WOULD BE INTERESTED IN AS PART OF THE BUILDING PERMITS. I WOULD NOTE THAT THIS HOUSE HAS BEEN AIR-CONDITIONED. IT WAS LIVED IN, IT'S NOT BEEN SITTING THERE VACANT OR FALLOW. IT HAS BEEN TAKEN CARE OF OVER THE YEARS. WE VISITED THE HOUSE, IT IS AIR-CONDITIONED AND UNTIL THE PROPERTY OWNER OWNED IT, IT WAS RENTED OUT. >> OKAY. THANK YOU. >> COMMISSIONER [INAUDIBLE]. >> I SUPPORT WHAT MS. [INAUDIBLE] SAID AS FAR AS IF WE DO APPROVE THIS, I THINK THAT SOMETHING SHOULD BE PUT IN THERE, WITH REGARDS TO THE HEALTH CONCERNS, AND THE CRITERIA THAT WAS MENTIONED HERE ALSO [INAUDIBLE] ABOUT THAT. IT'S PRETTY MUCH ALL L HAVE. >> COMMISSIONER PATEL. >> AS FAR AS THE HEALTH DEPARTMENT, ALL THAT'S CONCERNED, THEY HAVE THEIR OWN CRITERIA AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT HAS THEIR OWN CRITERIA. I THINK I'M FAIRLY COMFORTABLE THAT IF WE GIVE THEM THE ABILITY TO GO WITH THE USE, AT THE END OF THE DAY, THEY'RE NOT GOING TO GET A LICENSE UNLESS THEY'RE ABLE TO DO IT. I'M ASSUMING THE APPLICANT'S AWARE OF THE CRITERIA THAT HE NEEDS TO MEET TO GET TO THAT IF THEY HAD BEEN IN THE BUSINESS FOR A VERY LONG TIME, WHICH IS WHAT I HEARD IS PART OF THE APPLICATION. I'M NOT TOO WORRIED ABOUT THAT. I DO THINK THAT I WOULD LIKE TO PUT A CONDITION IF IT'S NOT THERE THAT THE WINDOW SIGN THAT THEY'RE DOING WILL ALWAYS BE FACING CENTER STREET AND NEVER TOWARDS THE RESIDENCES BECAUSE THERE ARE WINDOWS ALL AROUND. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT DOESN'T HAPPEN. THAT WOULD BE ONE OF THE CONDITIONS I WOULD PROBABLY GOING TO PUT IN. PROBABLY AND I DON'T KNOW IF WE CAN DO THIS OR NOT IF THIS IS NOT PURVIEW, BUT [NOISE] AT LEAST HAVE ENCOURAGED SOME WAY OF DOING A SHARED PARKING AGREEMENT WITH GENERATION CHURCH FOR THE FUTURE PURPOSES BECAUSE MAYBE RIGHT NOW THEY MIGHT NOT NEED IT, BUT IN THE FUTURE I DO SEE POSSIBLY BECAUSE THEY'RE LANDLOCKED. WHERE IS EVERYBODY GOING TO PARK? THEY CAN'T PARK ON CENTER STREET AND IF THEY END UP PARKING ON THE OTHER LOTS THEN THEY PROBABLY NEED SOME FORM OF PERMISSION OR SOME AGREEMENT IN PLACE. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THAT DONE AHEAD OF TIME AS OPPOSED TO WAITING AND REACTING WHEN THE PROBLEM DOES COME INTO PLAY. I ALSO THINK THAT WE DO GIVE THE ABILITY FOR THEM TO CHANGE THAT FRONT. RIGHT NOW THERE'S NO TREES. I KNOW THEY ARE PLANNING TO PLANTS SOME BUT IT'S STILL WIDE OPEN. I MAKE THAT LEFT TURN OFF [INAUDIBLE] ALL THE TIME AND THAT'S JUST GOING TO MAKE IT VERY HARD. IT TAKES AWAY FROM THE ADAPTIVE REUSE. IF WE CAN COME UP WITH A BETTER PAVER SYSTEM OR MORE ECOLOGICALLY FRIENDLY WAY OF DOING IT OR SOMETHING WHICH THE APPLICANT'S MORE AGREEABLE TO MAYBE HAVE THAT AS AN OPTION WHICH WILL BE OUT AT STAFF REVIEW SO THEY DON'T HAVE TO DO A BURDEN OF COMING BACK FOR ANY OF THOSE PURPOSES TO EITHER US OR TO COUNSEL. THAT WOULD BE MY ONLY THOUGHTS ALONG IT. [01:40:03] I'M ALWAYS BEEN FOR ADAPTIVE REUSE AND FOR HISTORIC PROPERTIES AS LONG AS THEY'RE DONE PROPERLY AND MAINTAINED PROPERLY AND SO FAR, I HAVEN'T SEEN ANYTHING THAT'S OF CONCERN ON THIS SPECIFIC PROJECT FOR IT NOT BEING DONE TO THE STANDARDS THAT IT SHOULD BE DONE TO. THAT'S MY TAKE ON IT. >> [INAUDIBLE] >> I AGREE ON THE SHARED PARKING. IT'D BE A GOOD IDEA TO GET SOMETHING IN PLACE NOW. I KNOW IT'S DIFFICULT TO FIGURE OUT EXACTLY WHAT THAT'S GOING TO LOOK LIKE. BUT IT SEEMS LIKE IT WOULD BE AN EASY COMPLIMENTARY USE WITH THE CHURCH AND THE SWAN. AS FAR AS THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND LICENSURE, I THINK THAT SEEMS TO BE A LITTLE BIT OUT OF OUR PURVIEW. PERHAPS WE ALLOW THAT TO TAKE CARE OF ITSELF. AS YOU SAID, THEY'D BEEN IN THE BUSINESS FOR A LONG TIME. I'M ASSUMING THEY KNOW THEIR BUSINESS AND THEY KNOW WHAT IT'S GOING TO TAKE TO GET AN OPERATING LICENSE FOR THAT FACILITY. THAT'S MY OPINION. >> THANK YOU. I WILL SAY THAT I, OF COURSE, WHOLEHEARTEDLY SUPPORT ADAPTIVE REUSE AND CAMPAIGN TO GET IT PART OF OUR TIME CODE, WHICH I'M VERY EXCITED ABOUT THE PROSPECT. THE ONLY RESERVATION THAT I HAVE IS THE PARKING. I WOULD NOT FEEL COMFORTABLE WITH APPROVAL. I USED TO WORK IN HAIR SALON. WHAT I KNOW WHAT IT'S LIKE WHEN YOU GOT SIX LADIES IN THERE AND SOMEBODY'S IN THE EXTENSION ROOM AND THERE'S NAILS AND SALONS. FOR ME, THE SHARED PARKING AGREEMENT IS GOING TO HAVE TO BE A CONDITION OF APPROVAL. THEN WORKING OUT BETWEEN THE CHURCH, AND THAT LIVING IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD AND KNOWING WHAT THEY DO WITH THEIR FESTIVALS AND EVERYTHING AND THE OTHER PARKING LOT. YOU WOULD HAVE TO WORK THAT OUT LIKE ON A SATURDAY. IF THEY'RE HAVING A CARNIVAL AND YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE A SALON THAT'S FULL OF PROM GIRLS, THEN YOU'RE GOING TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE A PLACE TO PARK WHEN THEY COME IN. THAT WOULD BE MY CONDITION. DOES ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY OTHER COMMENTS? >> WELL, MY OTHER COMMENTS WAS I'M NOT NECESSARILY WANTING US TO CONSIDER PUTTING ANYTHING ABOUT. THEY HAVE TO SHOW THAT THEY HAVE THEIR LICENSE. IT WAS JUST A QUESTION TO STAFF ABOUT THE ADAPTIVE FOR USE, WHAT IF THAT KIND OF THING. I'M TOTALLY COMFORTABLE WITH THAT. LIKE OTHER COMMISSIONERS SUBSET, I AM CONCERNED ABOUT THE PARKING. THAT WOULD BE A CONCERN OF MINE. COMMISSIONER PATEL, WERE YOU THINKING MORE OF SOMETHING AS FAR AS THE PARKING IN THE FRONT MORE OF A PERVIOUS NATURE, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOMETHING THAT'S MORE PERVIOUS RATHER THAN ASPHALT IN THE FRONT TOO. I AGREE WITH EVERYTHING THAT YOU HAD BASICALLY SAID ON YOUR COMMENTS. >> YOU CAN COMMENT. YOU CAN TALK. IT'S A DISCUSSION. [LAUGHTER] >> THANK YOU. >> I THINK RETAINING THE CHARACTER OF THIS HISTORICAL HOME IS ONE OF THE UTMOST IMPORTANCE FOR ALL OF US, AND I BELIEVE THE APPLICANT HAS STATED THAT TOO. >> DOES SOMEONE WANT TO TAKE A CRACK AT CRAFTING A MOTION? >> I'LL TAKE A CRACK AT THAT. GO WITH APPROVAL WITH STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS, WITH ADDITIONAL CONDITION OF GENERATING A SHARED PARKING AGREEMENT WITH THE, AND I'M GOING TO SAY SURROUNDING PROPERTIES AS OPPOSED TO USE SPECIFYING, TRYING TO COME UP WITH SOME OTHER FORM OF POSSIBLY A PERVIOUS SOLUTION FOR THE PARKING LOT IN THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING, AND ALSO TO LIMIT THE WINDOWS SIGN FROM ALWAYS BEING IN THE WINDOWS FACING CENTER STREET SO THAT IT DOESN'T HURT THE RESIDENCES, BUT THAT'S MY MOTION SIR. >> I SECOND. >> ALL IN FAVOR? [BACKGROUND] MOTION PASSES [INAUDIBLE]. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> WELCOME TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. >> THANKS. >> DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANYTHING THEY WANT TO SAY BEFORE WE ADJOURN? >> I WOULD LIKE TO JUST SAY ONE THING. WE HAVE A NEW PLANNER, THATCHER HART. HE IS A JUPITER, RAISED HERE, WENT TO SCHOOL HERE. HE'S BRAND SPANKING NEW, SO I WILL JUST WANTED TO WELCOME HIM [APPLAUSE]. >> YOU'RE WELCOME. >> HE LIVES IN AVOCA TOO. >> THAT LOOKS LIKE A MILITARY CUT. [LAUGHTER] >> WELCOME. I'M GOING TO HAVE A LOT OF FUN WITH YOU. [LAUGHTER]. >> THANK YOU. I'M HAPPY TO BE HERE I LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH ALL OF YOU. THANK YOU. >> NICE TO MEET YOU. >> THE ONE THING THAT WE FORGOT TO SAY IS SO GLAD THAT COMMISSIONER PATEL IS BACK AND WELCOME TO OUR NEW AT-LARGE ALSO, OUR ALTERNATE. [01:45:05] >> YES. WE GOT OFF KILTER THERE IN THE BEGINNING. I WAS GOING TO WELCOME YOU. >> I MUST SAY I'M HONORED AND HUMBLED TO BE HERE WORKING WITH YOU FOLKS. WITH THE ASSISTANCE OF FELLOW COMMITTEE MEMBERS, I WOULD JUST WANT TO PROTECT AND PRESERVE JUPITER AND ENHANCE OUR LIFESTYLE AND KEEP IT UNIQUELY JUPITER. >> NICE. I WOULD LIKE TO THANK THE COUNCIL IN TRUSTING IN ME AGAIN AND APPOINTING ME IN THIS POSITION. HOPEFULLY MY WORK IS SPEAKING FOR ITSELF AND I GUESS THE COUNCIL IS ACKNOWLEDGING THAT. [OVERLAPPING] >> THANK YOU. GLAD TO HAVE YOU BACK. >> I WANT TO THANK THEM FOR THAT. >> YOU'RE IN THE POSITION NOW YOU CAN DO ALL THE MOTIONS SO [LAUGHTER] >> I DON'T HAVE TO STARE AT EVERYBODY TO GET SOMETHING [LAUGHTER]. >> MAKE SOME THINGS UP. [LAUGHTER] >> I LOVE IT. YOU GOT SOME FANTASTIC PEOPLE RUNNING THIS BOARD. I LOVE IT. >> IT'S 08:49 WE'LL CALL IT ADJOURNED. [BACKGROUND] * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.