[*A portion of this video is without audio* *This meeting was joined in progress*]
[9. Bear’s Club A. Ordinance 2-22, Second Reading, Planned Unit Development (PUD) Amendment - Quasi-judicial - Amendment for the Clubhouse and Cottage Site (Phase 1B) located within a 400.9 ± acre property, south of Frederick Small and west of Palmwood Road, known as the Bear’s Club PUD to add a freestanding Fitness Center Building Site and to request waivers to setbacks, lot coverage, wall height, minimum lot area and parking. (Continued from 2/21/23) B. Resolution 7-22, Fitness Center - Quasi-judicial - Site plan application to construct a freestanding clubhouse fitness center on a 0.21 ± acre property located south of the Bear’s Club Villas Condominium (Cottages). (Continued from 2/21/23) C. Resolution 5-22, Duplex Golf Cottages - Quasi-judicial - Site plan application to construct three residential duplex buildings with a total of six dwelling units on a 1.06 ± acre property located south of the Bear’s Club Villas Condominium (Cottages). (Continued from 2/21/23) ]
[00:05:46]
>> PROVIDING TESTIMONY IF YOU'LL STAND UP TO BE SWORN IN.
[00:05:48]
>> DO YOU SOLEMNLY SWEAR THAT THE TESTIMONY YOU ARE ABOUT TO GIVE IN THIS HEARING IS THE WHOLE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH?
>> WE BEGIN WITH THE PRESENTATION BY THE APPLICANT.
>> GOOD EVENING, MAYOR, COUNCILMEMBERS, STAFF.
I'M SENIOR PARTNER WITH LUCIDO & ASSOCIATES, AND I'M VERY HAPPY TO BE HERE TODAY, HOPEFULLY WITH SOME CLOSURE ON THIS PROJECT.
LET'S SEE. I WAS ACTUALLY PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT TEAM WHEN THIS PROJECT WAS REDESIGNED BACK IN THE LATE '90S, EARLY 2000S.
THE PROJECT EXTENDS FROM FREDERICK SMALL ROAD TO DONALD ROSS ROAD INTO THE EAST TO FREDERICK SMALL ROAD.
BUT IT WAS PART OF THE FRESHMAN'S CREEK NORTH DRI BACK IN THE '90S WHEN IT WAS APPROVED, AND I WAS PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT TEAM THAT REDESIGNED THE PROJECT FROM 3,249 LOTS TO WHAT IT IS TODAY, ABOUT 360 LIGHTS AND THE TWO GOLF COURSES.
IT'S BEEN ABOUT 25 YEARS, AND THE PIECE THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TONIGHT IS, ACTUALLY WE'RE ALMOST IN THE DEAD CENTER OF THE ENTIRE TRACK, WHICH IS ABOUT 600 ACRES.
ORIGINALLY, THIS WAS THE RITZ-CARLTON AND THIS HAS ALWAYS BEEN THE BEAR'S CLUB.
THERE'S ALWAYS BEEN COTTAGES AROUND THE CLUBHOUSE.
THE TOTAL SITE AREA OF JUST THE BEAR'S CLUB IS ABOUT 400 ACRES.
THE PRESERVE AREA IS 116 UNITS, WHICH IS ABOUT 29 PERCENT OF THE PROPERTY.
THE OPEN SPACE CONSUMES ABOUT 312 ACRES, ABOUT 78 PERCENT.
YOU CAN SEE THAT ONE OF THE AREAS OF CONTENTION FOR THE PAST SEVERAL MONTHS HAS BEEN THE PALMWOOD PRESERVE AREA, WHICH IS IN THIS LOCATION HERE.
THE PROJECT THOUGH, IS TO BUILD THREE, TWO-STORY CONDOMINIUMS ON THE REMAINING 1.27 ACRE SITE, AND ENLARGE AND RELOCATE THE FITNESS CENTER FROM INSIDE THE CLUBHOUSE TO OUTSIDE THE CLUBHOUSE.
IT'S PROPOSED ON APPROXIMATELY AN ACRE AND A HALF AND LOCATED IN THIS AREA.
THESE ARE THE EXISTING COTTAGES AND HERE IS THE REMAINING 1.27 ACRES, WHICH HAS ALWAYS BEEN DESIGNED ORIGINALLY FOR COTTAGE USE AND THE OTHER PART OF THE PROJECT IS THE FITNESS CENTER, WHICH IS BEING MOVED OUT OF THE CLUBHOUSE.
IT WAS NOT ORIGINALLY DESIGNED OR CONTEMPLATED, BUT WE HAVE CONVERTED AN EXISTING AREA WITHIN THE CLUBHOUSE TO THE FITNESS CENTER, SO IT WILL BE NOW PART OF AN INDEPENDENT BUILDING ADJACENT TO THE CONDOMINIUM PROJECT AND IT'S AN IMPORTANT PART OF THE PROJECT AND DESIGN AND CURRENT NEEDS OF THE MEMBERS AND RESIDENTS.
THE EXISTING SPACE WILL BE CONVERTED BACK TO WHAT IT WAS ORIGINALLY DESIGNED FOR.
THIS 1.27 ACRE SITE WAS ORIGINALLY APPROVED FOR 14 COTTAGES.
FIVE WERE ACTUALLY BUILT AND SOLD.
THERE WAS 11 COTTAGES REMAINING ON THE SITE.
HOWEVER, IT WAS REVISED TO TWO LOTS IN 2011 THAT WERE NEVER BUILT.
IN THIS PLAN AS IT IS DESIGNED TODAY, SUPPORTED BY THE OWNERS OF THE EXISTING COTTAGE UNITS, THE MEMBERSHIP OF THE GOLF CLUB AND THE HOA.
I AM HERE ON BEHALF OF THE BEAR'S CLUB HOA AND THE BEAR'S CLUB FAMILY PARTNERS, WHO ARE THE DEVELOPERS AND OWNERS OF THE PROPERTY.
PRIOR TO ANY FINAL DESIGN, WE ARE GOING THROUGH ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW STANDARDS WITH THE COMMUNITY TO MAKE SURE EVERYONE'S ON BOARD PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION.
ALL THE UNITS HAVE BEEN RESERVED AND THERE IS A WAITING LIST.
AGAIN, THIS IS THE SITE LOCATION.
THIS IS THE EXISTING COTTAGES, THIS BUILDING RIGHT HERE IS A GARAGE UNIT THAT WAS BUILT THAT
[00:10:01]
HAS CARS IN AND IT'S BEST PART OF THE PARKING FOR THE EXISTING COTTAGES.TO THE RIGHT OF THE SCREEN, THAT'S AN EXISTING GOLF HOLE AND THEN THIS AREA IS BUFFERED BY SOME OTHER COTTAGES AND THIS AREA BY EXISTING RESERVE AREA.
THIS IS A PERSPECTIVE BEFORE THE GARAGE UNIT WAS BUILT WHICH IS IN THIS LOCATION, BUT THESE ARE THE EXISTING COTTAGES AND YOU CAN SEE THE MASSING OF THE CLUBHOUSE BUILDINGS IN THIS AREA.
THIS IS THE ENTRY TO THE CLUBHOUSE AND THE PORTE COCHERE DROP-OFF AREA.
AGAIN, SIGNIFICANT BUFFER BETWEEN THE COTTAGES, THE REMAINING SITE AND THE GOLF HOLE, AND ALSO PRESERVE AREA ON THE OTHER SIDE.
THIS IS REALLY AN INFILL SITE.
THE ONLY REMAINING VACANT PROPERTY WITHIN THE BEAR'S CLUB AFTER ALMOST 25 YEARS OF DEVELOPMENT.
AS I MENTIONED, IT'S ALWAYS BEEN APPROVED FOR SOME TYPE OF ALTERNATIVE DESIGN.
IT WAS NEVER INTENDED TO BE A SINGLE-FAMILY LOT UNTIL WE CHANGED IT IN 2011, BUT THE ORIGINAL PLAN IN 2001 CONTEMPLATED A SIMILAR DESIGN TO WHAT'S CURRENTLY EXISTING OUT THERE.
EVEN IN 2005, WE HAD ANOTHER COTTAGE DESIGN AND EACH OF THESE APPLICATIONS REQUIRED WAIVERS FROM THAT STANDARD R1 ZONING DISTRICT, BECAUSE IT WAS ALL DESIGNED AS A SINGLE COMPONENT OF THE CLUB IT WAS NEVER INTENDED TO BE INDIVIDUAL BUILDINGS CUSTOMIZED.
UNTIL 2011, THE OWNERS DECIDED TO CHANGE IT TO TWO SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS AND WE'RE HERE TODAY BECAUSE WE GOT WRAPPED ALL THOSE WAIVERS WHEN WE CHANGED THE PLAN IN 2011.
NOW WE'RE PUTTING THEM BACK IN IN ORDER TO PRODUCE WHAT WE FEEL IS A CONSOLIDATED PLAN.
THE ARCHITECT THAT DESIGNED THIS IN [INAUDIBLE] WITH PEACOCK AND LEWIS IS IN THE AUDIENCE.
REALLY WENT TO GREAT CARE TO MAKE SURE THAT THE PEDESTRIAN CONNECTIONS, THE VEHICULAR CONNECTION, THE SERVICE AREAS WERE ALL INTEGRATED WITH THE CLUBHOUSE DESIGN, WITH THE COTTAGE DESIGN.
AGAIN, THIS IS THE GARAGE UNITS THAT SUPPORT THE EXISTING COTTAGES.
THESE ARE THE THREE CONDOMINIUM BUILDINGS.
THIS IS THE FITNESS CENTER AND ALL THIS WAS DESIGNED AS ONE PROJECT.
THE WAIVERS ARE REALLY NECESSARY TO INCORPORATE THIS UNIFIED DESIGN IN A MANNER THAT'S COMPATIBLE WITH THE EXISTING COTTAGES, AND THE CLUBHOUSE DESIGN.
FOR INSTANCE, ONE OF OUR WAIVERS IS TO PUT THE POOL WITH A ZERO SETBACK AND INCREASE THE HEIGHT OF THE PRIVACY WALL FROM FOUR FEET TO SIX FEET.
BUT WE'RE PUTTING THOSE ELEMENTS THAT REQUIRE WAIVERS ADJACENT TO COMPATIBLE USES.
AGAIN, THIS IS THE GARAGE OVER HERE IT'S NEXT TO A PRESERVE AREA.
WE'RE NOT AFFECTING ANY ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS.
THE ARCHITECTURE WAS DESIGNED IN KEEPING WITH THE [NOISE] EXISTING BUILDINGS, THE EXISTING CLUBHOUSE, THE STYLE, HOWEVER, IT'S MORE MODERNIZED AND AGAIN, IT'S DESIGNED TO MEET THE CURRENT NEEDS AND DESIRES OF THE RESIDENTS AND MEMBERS THAT ARE GOING TO UTILIZE THE FITNESS CENTER AND ALSO LIVE IN THE CONDOMINIUM BUILDINGS.
WE ARE ASKING FOR SETBACKS FROM STANDARD SINGLE-FAMILY LOT REQUIREMENTS BECAUSE THESE ARE STANDARD SINGLE-FAMILY LOTS WE'RE LOOKING FOR WAIVERS, SETBACKS, THE LOT COVERAGE, LOT SIZE, PRIVACY WELL AND PARKING.
PARKING WE'VE ALWAYS HAD SOME TYPE OF PARKING WAIVER.
BOB WASSERMANN HAS BEEN WITH THE CLUB FOR THE PAST 15 YEARS.
THERE'S NEVER BEEN A PROBLEM WITH PARKING AND WE ARE ASKING FOR A WAIVER, BUT THERE'S NO ISSUE WITH PARKING BECAUSE OF THE OPERATION AND DESIGN.
THE PROJECT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE ORIGINAL DESIGN.
WE'RE STILL MAINTAINING THE 78% OPEN SPACE.
WE'RE STILL AT A VERY LOW DENSITY OF ONLY 0.3 UNITS PER ACRE.
THIS PROJECT HAS A HIGH TAXABLE VALUE WITH VERY LOW IMPACT ON PUBLIC SERVICES.
AGAIN, THE PROJECT DOES HAVE SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES IN IT, BUT AGAIN, OUR SITE IS IN THE CENTER OF THE PROJECT, SO THERE IS NO IMPACT TO ADJACENT RESIDENTS, THERE'S NO IMPACT TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC OR ANY SURROUNDING USES.
IT'S WELL BUFFERED FROM THE ADJACENT USES.
WE DON'T FEEL ITS PRECEDENT SETTING THE WAIVERS BECAUSE IT'S DESIGNED TO FIT A SPECIFIC PROJECT AND AN OPERATION THAT ENSURES COMPATIBILITY WITH THE EXISTING STRUCTURES THAT ARE DESIGNED WITH IT.
WE FEEL IT STANDS OUT FROM A STANDARD WAIVER TO A SINGLE-FAMILY LOT WHERE SOMEONE WANTS TO BUILD A SINGLE-FAMILY HOME, FOR INSTANCE.
AGAIN, WE STAND OUT, I THINK ALSO IN SUBSTANTIAL PUBLIC BENEFITS, SO WE'RE EXPANDING THE ORIGINAL STREET TREE DESIGN ALONG THE ENTIRE FRONTAGE OF FREDERICK SMALL ROAD FROM PALMWOOD ROAD TO STATE ROAD A1A.
[00:15:03]
WE'RE INCREASING THE NUMBER OF LIVE OAK TREES FROM 10 AS ORIGINALLY RECOMMENDED BY STAFF TO 42 TREES WITH SIGNIFICANT SIZE AND SHAPE.NOW, WE CREATED A PLAN THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS WITH RESPECT TO UTILITIES, PROTECTION OF THE SIDEWALK.
WE HAVE HAD SOME INITIAL MEETINGS WITH PALM BEACH COUNTY.
THEY ARE VERY INTERESTED AND FEEL LIKE THEY CAN PERMIT THIS PROJECT.
WE ARE GOING TO CONTINUE THOSE DISCUSSIONS AND GET THAT JOB DONE.
WE'RE ALSO CONTINUING TO AGREE TO THE $50,000 CONTRIBUTION TOWARDS THE TOWN GREEN.
WE FEEL THIS CHANGE FROM TWO SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES THAT COULD BE BUILT ON THE PROPERTY TODAY TO SIX CONDOMINIUM UNITS WILL INCREASE THE TAXABLE VALUE BY $20 MILLION OR MORE.
AGAIN, THEY'RE ASKING FOR REALLY NO PUBLIC SERVICES OR CREATE NO SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS.
WITH RESPECT TO THE STAFF UP DATE, WE'RE HERE TO ACCOMPLISH WHAT WE SAID WE WERE GOING TO DO, AND THAT'S TO BRING THE PROPERTY INTO COMPLIANCE WITH THE ORIGINAL ORDINANCE WHICH REQUIRED THE OWNERSHIP BY THE PALM WOULD PRESERVE TO BE IN SOME TYPE OF PUBLIC ENTITY.
WE ARE AGREEING WITH THE ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS THAT STAFF PUT IN THE ORDINANCES AND THE RESOLUTIONS WE'RE CONFIRMING THAT IN FACT, WE'VE ALREADY STARTED DISCUSSIONS WITH NORTHERN PALM BEACH AND THEY, AGAIN, ARE IN THE MODE OF ACCEPTING THIS UNDER THEIR JURISDICTION.
WE'RE PLANNING TO DO THAT PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ANY DEVELOPMENT PERMIT.
THERE IS A TRANSACTION SUMMARY THAT HAD TO BE NEGOTIATED BETWEEN BEAR'S CLUB DEVELOPMENT COMPANY AND BEAR'S CLUB FOUNDING PARTNERS.
THERE IS AN AGREEMENT TO MOVE FORWARD ON THAT AND WE ARE AGREEING WITH THE ADDITIONAL CONDITIONS PROPOSED BY STAFF IN THE ORDINANCE AND THE RESOLUTION TO GET THAT ACCOMPLISHED PRIOR TO ANY DEVELOPMENT PERMITS.
IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING THE TRANSACTION AGREEMENT, WE DO HAVE ADAM GOOTEN HERE, OUR ATTORNEY TO HELP NEGOTIATE THAT AGREEMENT.
BOB WASSERMANN IS HERE ALSO TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS REGARDING THE OPERATION OF THE CLUB. THANK YOU.
>> GOOD EVENING. PETER MYERS, SENIOR PLANNER, FOR THE RECORD.
THERE WERE THREE APPLICATIONS FOR CONSIDERATION BY TOWN COUNCIL TONIGHT.
THE FIRST IS ORDINANCE 2-22 TO AMEND THE OVERALL BEAR'S CLUB PUD, TO AMEND THE MASTER PLAN RELATED TO PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PHASE 1B, THE CLUBHOUSE AND COTTAGE SITE, SPECIFICALLY TO CHANGE 9,236 SQUARE FEET OF LAND FROM RESIDENTIAL TO RECREATION, TO ALLOW FOR A FREESTANDING FITNESS CENTER, AND TO REQUEST WAIVERS WITHIN PHASE 1B TO REDUCE SETBACKS FOR BUILDINGS, PATIOS AND POOLS, INCREASE BLOCK COVERAGE, REDUCE NEWLY LOCKED AREA, ALLOW A SIX-FOOT WALL WITHIN THE FRONT YARD, AND REDUCE THE PARKING RATIO FOR THE EXISTING CLUB USERS.
THE PROPOSED APPLICATION WILL BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE CODE SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AND CONTINGENT UPON TOWN COUNCIL'S APPROVAL OF THE PUBLIC BENEFITS PROPOSED BY THE APPLICANT.
IF THE ORDER IS APPROVED, THE SECOND APPLICATION FOR CONSIDERATION IS THE SITE PLAN, TO CONSTRUCT A FREESTANDING CLUBHOUSE, FITNESS CENTERS SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS AND RESOLUTION 7-22, AND APPROVAL OF THE PUD WAIVERS.
THE LAST APPLICATION IS THE SITE PLAN TO CONSTRUCT THE THREE RESIDENTIAL DUPLEX BUILDINGS WITH A TOTAL OF SIX DWELLING UNITS SUBJECT TO CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL AND RESOLUTION 5-22, AND APPROVAL OF THE PUD WAIVERS.
ON SEPTEMBER 22ND, 2022, ORDERS 2-22 WAS APPROVED BY TOWN COUNCIL ON FIRST READING.
PRIOR TO THE SECOND READING SCHEDULED FOR OCTOBER 20TH, 2022, STAFF PROVIDED A SUPPLEMENTAL EXECUTIVE SUMMARY TO TOWN COUNCIL INDICATING THAT THE STAFF AT TURBINE BEARS CLUB PUD IS NOT COMPLIANCE WITH CONDITION 3D1 OF ORDINANCE 12-98, AND A RESOLUTION 16-98, WHICH EVENTUALLY APPROVED THE BEARS CLUB PUD.
THESE APPLICATIONS HAVE BEEN ON THE SEVERAL TOWN COUNCIL AGENDAS AND THE MOST RECENT BEING ON FEBRUARY 21ST, 2023 WHICH TOWN COUNCIL MOVED TO CONTINUE TO DECIDE INTO THE FIRST 60 DAYS.
TYPICALLY THE STAFF WANTS THE BEARS CLUB PUD BEING COMPLIANT WITH THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL PRIOR TO MOVING FORWARD WITH THE PROPOSED APPLICATIONS.
THE APPLICATION WAS BROUGHT FORWARD SINCE
[00:20:03]
THE APPLICANTS MADE A LETTER ON JUNE 6TH AGREEING TO CONVEY OWNERSHIP OF THE PERMIT PRESERVE PRIOR TO THE ISSUES OF DEVELOPMENT PERMITS TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE CONDITION 3D1 OF THE ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTION THAT ORIGINALLY APPROVED THE BEARS CLUB.IN ADDITION, THE APPLICANT REQUESTS CONFIRMATION FROM THE TOWN COUNCIL THAT NORTHERN PALM BEACH COUNTY IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT IS THE ACCEPTABLE GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY.
IF THIS ENTITY IS ACCEPTABLE, THE CONDITIONS HAVE BEEN ADDED TO THE ORDINANCE AND RESOLUTIONS TO ENSURE THAT THE TRANSACTION OF CONVEYANCE OWNERSHIP OF THE PALMER PRESERVE TO NORTHERN PALM BEACH COUNTY IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT BE CONVEYED PRIOR TO THE ISSUES OF DEVELOPED PERMITS FOR THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.
THIS ALSO INDICATE THAT ON JUNE 16TH 2023, THE TOWN COUNCIL RECEIVED A LETTER FROM [INAUDIBLE] VIA EMAIL.
I JUST WANT TO ALSO GO OVER THE PUBLIC BENEFIT AGAIN.
ON JANUARY 9TH OF 2023, THE PUBLIC BENEFIT TO INCREASE THE NUMBER OF TREES FROM 20-42 AND TO PROVIDE $50,000 TOWARDS THE DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE TOWN GREEN.
STEPH, LIKE I SAID, AT MATURITY TIME FOR REBUTTAL. THANK YOU.
DOES COUNCIL HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE STAFF OR THE APPLICANT?
I THINK THIS IS PRETTY MUCH THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION FROM PREVIOUS MEETINGS.
THEN ONE RECORD IS SAYING I WAS IN FAVOR OF THAT APPLICATION.
I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT THE PALM WOULD PRESERVE BDD TO THE TOWN OF JUPITER.
WOULD OUR TOWN ATTORNEY HAVE ANY OBJECTIONS OR ANY REASONS WHY THAT COULDN'T HAPPEN? I THINK IT'D BE A CLEANER FIT FOR THE WHOLE PROJECT.
>> NO. WE HAVE NO OBJECTIONS TO THAT.
THAT IS SOMETHING THAT HAD BEEN DISCUSSED EARLIER WITH THE APPLICANT.
PREVIOUSLY, THERE HAD BEEN NO SUGGESTION OF THEM HAVING AN ISSUE WITH THAT.
I AGREE WITH YOUR SUGGESTION THAT THAT'S A CLEANER TRANSACTION.
WE DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT A THIRD PARTY AND ANY DEALINGS WITH NORTHERN WHICH PREVIOUSLY RESULTED IN PROPERTY BEING CONVEYED BACK TO THE DEVELOPER.
I THINK THAT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S BEEN CONSIDERED AND WOULD BE ORIGINAL LANGUAGE OF THE REQUIREMENT WOULD ALLOW FOR THE TOWN TO BE THE RECIPIENT.
>> WELL, THE QUESTION OF THE APPLICANT I'M GOING TO ASK SOMEWHAT RELATED TO THAT IF YOU COME UP.
I DON'T HAVE MY NUMBERS RIGHT, I'M SURE, BUT IT'S JUST SEEMINGLY LIKE HALF OF THE NEIGHBORHOODS IN JUPITER HAVE PROPERTY HELD BY NORTHERN PALM BEACH COUNTY IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT.
THAT'S HELD BY THE IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT.
WHEN WE LEARN HERE WHAT HAD TRANSPIRED, OH MY GOSH, NEVER WOULD MY LIFE WOULD'VE IMAGINED THAT WOULD HAVE HAPPENED.
IF WE WERE TO HAVE PROCEEDED WITH NORTHERN, I WOULD WANT TO HAVE HAD A CONVERSATION WITH THEM WHICH I WANT TO DO ANYWAY BECAUSE I WANT TO MAKE SURE IT WAS JUST UNIQUE CIRCUMSTANCES UNDER THAT HAPPENED AND NEVER HAPPEN AGAIN.
I DO THINK WE THE COUNCIL NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT HAPPENS REGARDLESS WHAT HAPPENS TO THIS PIECE.
BUT I THINK THAT'S WHY MY QUESTION WOULD BE, DOES IT MATTER TO THE APPLICANT IF WE WERE TO SAY HEARING WHAT NOW WE'VE GOT A LEGITIMATE CONCERN? IS IT ACCEPTABLE FOR YOU THAT WE WOULD JUST HAVE A DEED IT TO THE TOWN? WE'VE LOST TRUST.
>> MR. MAYOR, AGAIN, MY NAME IS ADAM GOOTEN.
JUST SOME BACKGROUND, I'M TRANSACTIONAL ATTORNEY AND ASSISTING THE APPLICANT WITH THIS PARTICULAR TRANSACTION GETTING THE PALMWOOD PRESERVE CONVEYED TO ULTIMATELY THE PARTY THAT YOU WANT TO SEE IT CONVEYED TO.
WORK WITH THE LAW FIRM OF NELSON HAGER.
THE WAY WE SET UP THE TRANSACTION WAS TO ALLOW FOR IT EITHER TO GO TO THE DISTRICT, OR TO ANOTHER GOVERNMENTAL OR QUASI GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY THAT YOU IDENTIFIED.
I DON'T THINK WE HAVE A PROBLEM IF YOU PREFER TO GO TO THE TOWN OF JUPITER BASED OFF OF THE WAY WE'VE STRUCTURED THE TRANSACTION.
PART OF THE REASON WE DID THAT WAY IT WAS BECAUSE WE WANTED TO COME HERE TONIGHT AND FIND OUT ULTIMATELY WHERE THE TOWN WANTED IT TO GO.
>> SECOND QUESTION IS, WOULD YOU BELIEVE I WAS GOING TO SUGGEST ALSO AN AMENDMENT TO THE LANGUAGE TO PUT SOME TIME CONSTRAINTS ON THAT? WHAT'S A REASONABLE TIME CONSTRAINT? IS 60 DAYS REASONABLE TIME CONSTRAINT TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN?
>> JUST BACKING UP FOR A SECOND, THE WAY THAT THE TRANSACTION IS CURRENTLY STRUCTURED WITH THE SELLER AND THE CURRENT OWNER AND UNDERSTAND THAT THEY ARE SEPARATE ENTITIES, IS THAT IT'S CONDITIONED ON TWO THINGS AS WE PUT IN THE TRANSACTION SUMMARY.
[00:25:02]
ONE, THE APPROVALS BEING ISSUED BY THE TIME OF JUPITER, OF COURSE, UNDERSTANDING THAT THE ULTIMATE PERMISSIBLE THAT'D BE ISSUED UNTIL THE PRESERVE AS IS CONVEYED TO THE PARTY THAT YOU GUYS WANT TO SEE A CONVEYED TO ULTIMATELY.THEN THE SECOND PART, I THINK IS GOING TO INFORM YOUR QUESTION IS WHO IT'S GOING TO GO TO AND HOW MUCH TIME THAT PARTY NEEDS, WHETHER IT'S IN TOWN OF JUPITER, OR THE DISTRICT TO BLESS AND GO THROUGH WHATEVER DUE DILIGENCE THAT THEY WANT TO GO TO.
I THINK THE DISTRICT HAS THEIR OWN PROCESS THAT THEY GO THROUGH WHERE THEY WANT TO SEE A TITLE COMMITMENT PHASE 1 ENVIRONMENTAL STUDY MAYBE I THINK THEY WANTED THE ENVIRONMENTAL AND SURVEYS.
IF THE TOWN IS GOING TO TAKE IT, I THINK IT'S REALLY A QUESTION BACK TO THE TOWN AS TO HOW LONG THEY WILL NEED, OR IF THEY'RE READY TO TAKE IT TOMORROW.
I THINK IT'S REALLY GOING TO BE INFORMED BY THAT THE CLOSING WILL OCCUR WITHIN 10 BUSINESS DAYS AFTER THE SATISFACTION OF THOSE TWO CONDITIONS.
IT'S REALLY A QUESTION OF IF THE TOWN IS GOING TO TAKE IT, HOW LONG THE TOWN WANTS BEFORE THEY ARE WILLING TO ACCEPT IT.
>> I SET A FOLLOW-UP QUESTION BACK.
SINCE WE'VE KNOWN SINCE 1998 THAT IT WAS GOING TO REQUIRE TO TRANSFER THIS PARCEL, WHY WOULDN'T YOU GO AHEAD AND COMPLETE THE TRANSACTION AHEAD OF TIME? WHY DOES IT HAVE TO BE CONDITIONAL? BECAUSE WHAT WE HAVE BASICALLY IS A CONDITIONAL LETTER OF INTENT, WE DON'T HAVE A FIRM COMMITMENT.
FOR OUR PREFERRED ENTITY AS A TOWN, WHY COULDN'T WE HAVE THAT COMPLETED FIRST AND THEN WE CAN GO BACK THROUGH AND LOOK AT THE REST OF THE APPLICATION?
>> THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION GOES BACK TO THAT.
IT'S TWO ENTITIES, TWO SEPARATE ENTITIES, THE BUYER AND SELLER.
THE WAY THAT THIS HAS BEEN SET UP BETWEEN THE BUYER AND SELLER IS SIMILAR TO OTHER REAL ESTATE TRANSACTIONS THAT HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN WHERE THE BUYER DOESN'T WANT TO PAY A SELLER IF THE APPROVALS ARE NOT IN PLACE.
THE BUYER IS WILLING TO PAY THE SELLER SEPARATE ENTITY TO CONVEY THE PALMWOOD PRESERVE TO THE DESIGNATED ENTITY IF THEIR APPROVAL IS IN PLACE.
OTHERWISE, AGAIN, IT'S SEPARATE ENTITIES.
THEY DON'T HAVE AN INTEREST IN PAYING THE SELLER.
THE ORDERS THAT ARE DOING THIS TRANSACTION IS TO GET THE APPROVALS IN PLACE.
JUST TO POINT OUT, THERE'S AN AGREEMENT IN PLACE BETWEEN THE BUYER AND SELLER.
THERE'S AN AGREEMENT IN PLACE BETWEEN THE BUYER AND SELLER THAT IF THESE TWO CONTINGENCIES ARE SATISFIED, THIS LAND WILL BE CONVEYED TO THE DESIGNATED PARTY.
>> IF IT'S THE TOWN, THEN THAT CHANGE THAT ARRANGEMENT THEN, RIGHT?
>> NO. ACTUALLY, IN THE WAY WE DRAFTED IT, IT'S SET UP THAT WE WILL CLOSE WHETHER IT'S THE DISTRICT, OR A PARTY, ANOTHER GOVERNMENTAL, OR QUASI GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY DESIGNATED BY THE TOWN OF JUPITER.
WE LEFT ROOM FOR THAT, THAT IT MAY BE THAT THE TOWN COUNCIL WANTED IT TO GO TO THE TOWN OF JUPITER, OR ANOTHER AGENCY.
IT'S ALREADY IN PLACE THAT IT'S READY TO CLOSE IF YOU GUYS SAY THE TOWN OF JUPITER, ITS APPROVALS, TOWN OF JUPITER AND WE ARE READY TO CLOSE AFTER THAT.
>> I GUESS IT'S JUST NOT CLEAR TO ME WHY THIS IS A CONDITIONAL BECAUSE IT WAS AN ORIGINAL REQUIREMENT OF THE ORIGINAL PUD APPROVAL.
I'M NOT SURE WHY THIS IS A CONDITIONAL.
>> I GO BACK TO THE SAME ANSWER AS FAR AS IT SITS TWO SEPARATE ENTITIES.
ULTIMATELY, THE BUYERS CAUSING THE SELLER, WHICH IS A SEPARATE ENTITY TO DO WHAT THE TOWN WANTS THEM TO DO, BUT THE BUYER WOULD NOT BE GOING AND DOING THAT AND CAUSING THE SELLER TO CONVEY IT TO THE PARTY THAT YOU WANT THIS LAND CONVEYED TO.
BUT FOR THE FACT THAT THEY ARE SEEKING THESE APPROVALS, THERE ARE TWO SEPARATE ENTITIES.
IT'S NOT THE BUYER JUST CAUSING THIS LAND TO BE CONVEYED FROM THAT THEY ALREADY OWN.
THEY'RE GOING AND PAYING A SEPARATE PARTY FOR THIS LAND TO CONVEY IT AS PART OF OBTAINING THEIR APPROVALS.
>> I GUESS I HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE TOWN ATTORNEY AS TO WHY THAT PUD HOLDER IS NOT A PART TO THIS PROCEEDING SINCE THE ISSUE OF THEM NOT BEING IN COMPLIANCE SEEMS TO BE A ROOM VERY LARGE HERE.
>> WELL, THEY WOULDN'T BE A PART OF THIS PRECEDING.
THE ACTION THAT WOULD BE TAKEN, IF THIS DOES NOT CARRY THROUGH WOULD BE A CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTION AGAINST THEM.
>> THAT'S THE HAMMER WE HAVE ON THIS TRANSACTION IS THAT IF FOR WHATEVER REASON THIS TRANSACTION DOES NOT CLOSE IF THE DEVELOPMENT APPROVALS AREN'T GIVEN, THE TOWN DOES NOT HAVE ANY REQUIREMENT TO WAIT TO TAKE A CODE ENFORCEMENT ACTION AND BEGIN THAT.
>> DOES ANYBODY ELSE COUNCIL HAVE QUESTIONS?
>> I JUST HAVE ONE QUESTION RELATED TO THE PUBLIC BENEFIT.
WE HAD SPOKEN ABOUT THIS PROJECT AT LENGTH, BUT ONE ITEM OF CONSIDERATION BY COUNSELOR MAY WAS JUST THE PARKING ON FREDERICK SMALL ROAD BY CERTAIN VEHICLES.
IN LIEU, JUST A HYPOTHETICAL AND FOR CONSIDERATION BY ALL OF MY COLLEAGUES.
[00:30:01]
THIS QUESTION WOULD BE FOR STAFF, BUT IN LIEU OF PERHAPS A $50,000 AMOUNT TO THE TOWN GREEN.WOULD THERE BE A WAY TO SOLVE A PROBLEM RELATED TO THE VEHICLE PARKING ON FREDERICK SMALL ROAD?
>> I THINK WITH THE ADDITION OF ALL THOSE TREES.
THEY ORIGINALLY HAD PROPOSED LIKE 15 TREES I THINK, AND THEY EXPANDED IT TO JUST GO FROM ALTERNATE A1A ALL THE WAY TO PALMWOOD ROAD, WHICH I ASKED THAT THE TREES BE PLANTED IN A WAY THAT WOULD PREVENT CAR CARRIERS AND THINGS LIKE THAT BEING ABLE TO PULL OVER AND PARK THERE AND OFFLOAD CARS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.
I THINK THEY'RE DOING THAT AND THE $50,000 TO THE TOWN GREEN.
>> CAN WE CLARIFY THAT WITH STAFF?
>> [INAUDIBLE] STAFF CAN CLARIFY THAT THEY ARE DOING BOTH POSTER AND THEIR CONTRIBUTION TO THE TOWN GREEN AND THE TREES ARE BOTH IN THE ORDINANCES THAT WERE [INAUDIBLE] BEFORE SOME RESOLUTIONS, CORRECT?
>> INCLUDING STABILIZING FOR PARKING.
>> NO. THIS CONTRIBUTION FOR THE $50,000 AND THE PLANTING OF THE 42 TREES IS IN THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL, BUT NOTHING IN REGARDS TO STABILIZING FOR PARKING, I DON'T THINK SO.
>> IT WOULD PREVENT IT JUST BECAUSE THE WAY THAT THE TREES WILL BE SET UP, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO PULL A CAR CARRIER OFF TO THE SIDE OF THE ROAD ANYMORE TO OFFLOAD BECAUSE MY ISSUE WAS YOU DRIVE BY THERE AND YOU HAVE TWO VERY NICE CLUBS SITTING ON THE CORNER OF FREDERICK SMALL AND A1A.
AND YOU GOT A HUGE DIRT PATCH WHERE ALL THE TRUCKS PULL OFF AND LOAD AND UNLOAD ALL THE OTHER CARS.
WE'RE TRYING TO TACKLE THAT TOWN-WIDE AND FIGURE OUT HOW TO DESIGNATE A BETTER AREA FOR THE CARS TO BE UNLOADED SO AS TO NOT CAUSE TRAFFIC PROBLEMS AND ON-SITE NEWNESS THROUGHOUT THE TOWN.
>> YES. THAT'S CERTAINLY THE INTENT IS TO PLANT ENOUGH TREES SO THAT WE COULD PREVENT THAT FROM HAPPENING.
GOING BACK TO YOUR COMMENT, MAYOR, I THINK 60 DAYS IS SATISFACTORY FOR US TO CONVEY TO THE TOWN.
WE JUST NEED TO KNOW EXACTLY WHAT DOCUMENTS THAT TOWN NEEDS IN ORDER TO DO THAT CONVEYANCE, BUT WE CAN WORK WITHIN THAT TIMEFRAME.
>> THANK YOU. WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS?
>> GOOD EVENING. REBECCA ZIZO HERE ON BEHALF OF GARY SELLERS.
I KNOW YOU RECEIVED OUR LETTER.
I JUST WANTED TO BRIEFLY MENTION THAT WE ARE CONCERNED ABOUT THE MECHANICS OF THIS TRANSFER.
WHEN THE COUNCIL SPOKE ABOUT THE CURRENT ACTIVE VIOLATION OF THE PUD AT THE LAST HEARING, POTENTIAL OPTIONS WERE DISCUSSED IN ORDER TO MAKE YOU COMFORTABLE WITH MOVING FORWARD.
I KNOW THOSE AREN'T THE ONLY OPTIONS, BUT THE MOST SIMILAR OPTION WAS TO HAVE THIS LAND TRANSFERRED TO A GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY BEFORE PROCEEDING.
I KNOW NOW 60 DAYS HAS BEEN DISCUSSED, THAT AT LEAST WOULD PUT MORE OF AN END DATE.
HOWEVER, THERE ARE STILL CONCERNS THAT IF IT IS STILL CONDITIONED ON THERE BEING SOME OUT IF THEY DECIDE NOT TO MOVE FORWARD, THIS IS AN ACT OF VIOLATION AND IT'S NOT A NEW VIOLATION.
IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE CAUSED BY THE COTTAGES PROJECT AND FITNESS CENTER.
THE OTHER THING I'D JUST LIKE TO BRING UP IS I KNOW A LOT OF THESE HEARINGS BEFORE THE COUNCIL HAVE FOCUSED ON THESE BIGGER PICTURE ITEMS BECAUSE THERE IS SO MUCH GOING ON HERE.
THERE'S A LOT GOING ON WITH THE ACTIVE LITIGATION, WITH THE GOVERNANCE, WITH THE PLA APPROVAL, WITH THE PRESERVE BEING IN VIOLATION.
I DID WANT TO JUST BRING UP AGAIN THAT THERE HAVE BEEN OTHER CONCERNS RELATED TO THE SUBSTANTIVE APPLICATION ITSELF.
SOME OF THOSE WERE ADDRESSED AT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION, WHICH WAS PRETTY SPLIT ON THIS AND VOTED IN FAVOR OF THE FITNESS CENTER SITE PLAN AND THE PUD AMENDMENT, BUT NOT IN FAVOR OF THE SITE PLAN FOR THE COTTAGES.
THAT'S WHAT I JUST WANTED TO BRING UP THIS EVENING AND JUST MENTION THAT ALTHOUGH THERE IS A COMPLICATION HERE OF TWO SEPARATE BUT RELATED ENTITIES THAT WOULDN'T PREVENT THE TRANSFER FROM TAKING PLACE AND IT WOULDN'T PREVENT A CONTRACT FROM GOING INTO EFFECT THAT HAD THAT PURCHASE AND THIS IS AN ACT OF VIOLATION.
IT COULD HAVE BEEN TAKEN CARE OF BEFORE COMING BACK.
THE 60 DAYS WAS THEIR DECISION OF HOW LONG THEY THOUGHT THEY NEEDED TO COME INTO COMPLIANCE.
ALTHOUGH THERE IS A COMPLICATION THERE THAT WOULDN'T PREVENT THEM FROM
[00:35:04]
COMING INTO COMPLIANCE BEFORE COMING FOR YOU TO HAVE YOU APPROVE THIS BIG PROJECT.THIS PARTICULAR PRESERVE IS ALSO CONCERNING BECAUSE THERE HAVE BEEN ATTEMPTS IN THE PAST TO TRY TO UNDO THE CONSERVATION EASEMENT AND DEVELOP IT.
WE'RE JUST CONCERNED ABOUT THAT AND WANTED TO BRING THAT AGAIN TO YOUR ATTENTION.
THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOUR TIME THIS EVENING. I APPRECIATE IT.
>> THANK YOU. ANY MORE PUBLIC COMMENTS?
>> WITH THAT, I GO BACK TO THE APPLICANT OR THE STAFF IF THERE'S ANY CLOSING REMARKS.
SEEING NONE, I GO TO COUNCIL TO BEGIN DELIBERATIONS.
IF I MAY, JUST SAY, WELL, THIS WAS A MESS.
I'M GRATEFUL THAT THE APPLICANT HAS WORKED TO TRY TO RESOLVE IT AND TO BRING IT INTO COMPLIANCE.
I DO SEE, IN GENERAL, WE MAY NEED TO WARD'S METHOD, BUT THE ORDINANCES RESOLUTION WOULD ADDRESS A TIME CONSTRAINT FOR WHEN IT WOULD BE DATED TO THE COUNCIL BACK OVER TO THE TOWN.
THEREFORE, THAT REMOVES WHAT WE WOULD HAVE TO HAVE AS A CODE ENFORCEMENT EFFORT.
I'M PERSONALLY WILLING TO ACCEPT THE FACT THAT WE WOULD AND WILLING TO PROCEED APPROVING THE REST TONIGHT SO YOU KNOW AS YOU PROCEED WITH AN ACTION THAT WE WOULD BE APPROVING THE REQUESTED CHANGES.
WITH THAT, I TURN TO COUNCIL IF ANYBODY HAS ANY COMMENTS YOU WANT TO MAKE.
>> TODAY, I'M GOING TO I APPRECIATE YOU GUYS WORKING HARD TO BRING THIS THING IN FOR A LANDING AND LISTENING TO ALL OUR CONCERNS.
I DO HAVE HOPE THAT HAVING THIS POTENTIALLY DEED IT OVER TO THE TOWN OF JUPITER FOR PRESERVATION GOING FORWARD, IT DEFINITELY SATISFIES A LOT OF PEOPLE'S CONCERNS.
I KNOW IT WAS A MESS IN THE BEGINNING AND THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS GOING ON, BUT I'M HOPEFUL THAT WE CAN BRING IT IN AND GET IT APPROVED FOR YOU GUYS.
I APPRECIATE YOU GUYS WORKING HARD.
I APPRECIATE YOU ADDING THE TREES THAT I ASKED FOR TO BEAUTIFY THAT AREA, SO THANK YOU.
>> I AGREE. I WAS SURPRISED BY THE PV NOT BEING IN COMPLIANCE WHEN WE HAD SPOKEN ABOUT THAT LAST, AND I DIDN'T KNOW HOW IT WAS GOING TO GO, AND SO I'M GRATEFUL THAT IT WENT THIS WAY AND THAT IT'S PRODUCTIVE AND THAT THE TOWN WILL RECEIVE THIS LAND.
I DO THINK IN THE PLANNING AND ZONING, THERE WAS DISCUSSION REGARDING THE FITNESS CENTER, WHICH WAS GENERALLY ACCEPTED BY BOTH PARTIES WITH COUNCIL AND PNC.
ON THE OTHER SIDE, THERE WAS HESITATION.
HOWEVER, WAIVERS CAN BE GIVEN WITH SUBSTANTIAL PUBLIC BENEFIT AND THERE WAS DISCUSSION OF WAS THE BENEFIT SUBSTANTIAL OR SUFFICIENT? IN LOOKING AT WHAT YOU GUYS HAVE DONE WITH THE TREES AND THE EFFORTS THAT YOU WENT THROUGH TO SECURE THE LAND, WHICH WOULDN'T NECESSARILY COUNT AS PUBLIC BENEFIT, IT WOULD BE MORE HOUSEKEEPING.
BUT STILL, NONETHELESS, I'M GRATEFUL FOR THAT EFFORT AND FOR THE CONTRIBUTION I THINK THAT THAT WOULD MEET THAT BURDEN.
I'M GRATEFUL AGAIN FOR ALL OF YOUR EFFORTS AND GENERALLY SUPPORTIVE.
>> OF ALL THOSE COMMENTS, I APPRECIATE ALL THE WORK BETWEEN THE APPLICANT AND HONORS STAFF EMPLOYEES, AND I APPRECIATE HAVING THE PRESERVE TEETED OVER TO THE TOWN AND THAT'S ONE LESS HURDLE YOU FOLKS HAVE TO DEAL WITH.
TOWN MANAGER, WE CAN PROBABLY FAST-TRACK THAT THROUGH CORRECTIVES.
IT WOULD PROBABLY TAKE LESS TIME THAN THE NORTHERN DISTRICT, SO I'M READY TO VOTE ON THIS AND I APPRECIATE EVERYBODY'S HARD WORK ON IT.
THIS REQUIREMENT TO TURN OFF THE PRESERVE LAND HAS BEEN ON FOR 25 YEARS AND IT'S NEVER BEEN COMPLETED.
TO ME, THIS NEEDS TO BE DONE FIRST.
IT'S AN OUTSTANDING VIOLATION.
I DON'T THINK IT'S GOOD PRACTICE TO IGNORE VIOLATIONS AND THEN LET THEM GET CORRECTED DOWN THE ROAD.
I THINK I AGREE WITH THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION THE MASSING OF THE COTTAGES IS TOO GREAT.
THERE ARE A LOT OF ISSUES HERE.
NOTHING HAS BEEN STRAIGHTFORWARD.
I STILL MAINTAIN THAT THERE'S ISSUES HAVING TO DO WITH THE TURNOVER OF THE HOA, WHICH IS A VERY SERIOUS MATTER.
I WAS PRESIDENT OF AN HOA FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS AND WENT THROUGH THE TURNOVER PROCESS, AND THE FACT THAT IT HASN'T BEEN TURNED OVER PROPERLY IS SOMETHING THAT IS VERY SIGNIFICANT TO ME.
IT'S NOT REALLY SOMETHING IN THE TOWN SHOULD JUST GLOSS OVER.
TO ME, THEY'RE JUST TOO MANY ISSUES HERE, THINGS THAT WEREN'T DONE PROPERLY AND AS A MATTER OF PRINCIPLE, I CAN'T SUPPORT IT.
I'M GLAD AT THE END OF THE DAY THAT THE LAND GOES TO THE TOWN,
[00:40:01]
BUT I THINK PROCESS MATTERS.I THINK WE HAVE TO DO THINGS THE RIGHT WAY.
I THINK WE HAVE TO SET THE RIGHT MESSAGE, WE HAVE TO SET THE RIGHT PRECEDENT AND I DON'T THINK THIS DOES THAT.
>> WE HAVE A MAJORITY CONSENSUS TO MOVE FORTH.
I JUST PROPOSE THAT IN THE THREE ITEMS, YOUR ORDINANCE AND THE TWO RESOLUTIONS, THAT THERE'S WORDS IF WE GO TO THE ORDINANCE FIRST, AND IT'S THE SAME WORDS THAT STAFF PUT IN EACH ONE.
IF YOU GO TO THE ORDINANCE 2-22, PAGE 6, CONDITION 9, WHICH IS PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF ANY DEVELOPMENT PERMITS, THE OWNERSHIP OF THE 15 ACRE WILL BE PRESERVE ON THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE PUD SHALL BE CONTAINED.
IT SAYS TO WHY THE TOWN OR GOVERNMENT AGENCY, DA-DA-DA.
I WOULD SUGGEST, AND I'M JUST SUGGESTING THIS BECAUSE SOMEBODY ELSE WOULD HAVE TO MAKE THE MOTION AND A SECOND OR AMEND, SOMETHING LIKE WITHIN 60 DAYS AFTER TOWN ISSUANCE OF THIS ORDINANCE AND PRIOR TO AND THEN WE WOULD JUST CONVEYED TO THE TOWN YOU WOULD DELETE TO EITHER AND THEN TO A GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY DESIGNATED BY THE TOWN.
WE WOULD BE AMENDING THE LANGUAGE TO BOTH PUT THE TIME-BOUND OF 60 DAYS AND THEN SPECIFIC TO BE CONVEYED TO THE TOWN.
NO OTHER GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY THAT WAS DISCUSSED IN QUESTION, THE APPLICANT AND THEY WERE OKAY WITH THAT.
IF THE ATTORNEY HAS ANY OTHER SUGGESTED LANGUAGES OTHER THAN THAT?
>> NO, I THINK THAT'S EFFECTIVE.
>> MOTION TO APPROVE ORDINANCE 2-22 IN REGARDS TO THE ORIGINAL CONDITION 3.D.1 OF ORDINANCE 1298 WITH A TIME-FRAME IS 60 DAYS, APPLICANT TEETS THE PUBLIC PRESERVED TO THE TOWN OF JUPITER?
>> NOW, YOU DID A MOTION JUST ON THE ORDINANCE OR THE RESOLUTION?
>> WE HAVE TO DO ONE AT A TIME.
>> YEAH. THEN MOTION TO APPROVE, IS IT 722?
WE'LL DO THEM ONE AT A TIME. [OVERLAPPING]
>> WITH THAT ONE, THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND.
WE HAVE ISSUED AN ORDINANCE LAST ATTORNEY TO MAKE THE ORDINANCE ON SHORT TITLE.
>> AN ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN COUNCIL OF THE TOWN OF JUPITER, FLORIDA APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO THE BEARS CLUB PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, PROVIDING FOR WAIVERS IN PHASE 1B REGARDING SETBACKS, LOT COVERAGE, WALL HEIGHT, MINIMUM LOT AREA, AND REDUCING THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS, AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.
>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
ALL IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
>> MOTION PASSES 4-1 WITH VICE MAYOR SCHNEIDER DISSENTING.
MAY I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND?
>> MOTION TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 722?
>> UP FOR DISCUSSION WITH THE SAME [OVERLAPPING].
>> DO YOU NEED THE SAME LANGUAGE IN THAT FROM THE PREVIOUS?
>> YES, YOU WOULD WANT TO MAKE THE SAME AMENDMENT TO THAT.
>> IT'S THE SAME LANGUAGE AS 15-ACRE PRESERVE TO BE TEETED TO THE TOWN IN 60 DAYS OF THIS ORDINANCE OF THIS VOTE.
ALL IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
>> THE MOTION CARRIES 4-1 WITH VICE MAYOR SCHNEIDER DISSENTING.
MOVING ON TO RESOLUTION 5-22, THE AFFECTED CONDITION IS 12.
MAY I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
>> MOTION TO APPROVE RESOLUTION 522.
>> THAT'S AS AMENDED THE SAME WAY.
>> AS AMENDED. IT'S THE SAME LANGUAGE.
>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.
ALL IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
>> MOTION CARRIES 4-1 WITH VICE MAYOR SCHNEIDER DISSENTING.
[00:45:06]
>> THANK YOU. MOVING ON TO AGENDA ITEM 10, RESOLUTION 423 CORNERSTONE.
[10.Resolution 43-23, Cornerstone - Quasi-judicial – Site Plan amendment to revise conditions of approval related to the marina in Resolution #27-17.]
THIS IS QUASI-JUDICIAL.DOES ANYBODY ON THE COUNCIL HAVE ANY EXPART DISCLOSURES?
>> I MET WITH THE APPLICANT AND DISCUSSED THE CHANGES.
>> I HAD A PHONE CALL WITH THE APPLICANT ON MAY 17TH, AND I GOT VARIOUS EMAILS.
>> I MET WITH THE APPLICANT AND I SPOKE WITH STAFF.
>> I MET WITH THE APPLICANT AND RECEIVE VARIOUS EMAILS.
>> I HAD SOME INITIAL CONVERSATIONS ABOUT SCHEDULING MEETING WITH THE APPLICANT, BUT IT WAS NEVER FINALIZED AND I HAVE HAD SOME COMMUNICATIONS TODAY WITH STAFF ABOUT A COST ESTIMATE FOR THE DOCK.
WITH THAT, THIS IS A QUASI-JUDICIAL HEARING AND I ASK WITNESSES FOR THE APPLICANT AND STAFF TO STAND UP AND BE SWORN IN.
>> DO YOU SOLEMNLY SWEAR THE TESTIMONY YOU ARE ABOUT TO GIVE IN THIS HEARING IS THE WHOLE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH?
>> WITH THAT, I'LL TURN IT OVER TO THE APPLICANT FOR A PRESENTATION.
>> GOOD EVENING, COUNCIL. GOOD TO BE HERE TONIGHT.
I'M EMILY [INAUDIBLE] WITH TWO GAO REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT TAKE WITH THEM ON THE CORNERSTONE PROJECT.
THE REQUESTS THAT WE PUT IN WAS TO AMEND THE SITE PLAN FOR CONSTRUCTION TIMING OF THE DOCKS, AND ALSO ADDRESSED THE MATERIAL CHANGES OF THE DOCK BY AMENDING CONDITION 8 OF RESOLUTION 2717.
WHEN WE WENT TO PLANNING AND ZONING TO OUR DETRIMENT, IT DID NOT GO THE WAY WE EXPECTED IT GO.
WE OBVIOUSLY NEEDED TO DO MORE HOMEWORK AND BACKUP SUPPORT.
WE REGROUPED AFTER PLANNING AND ZONING, AND WE MADE AN EFFORT TO SPEAK WITH THE COUNCIL AND COME UP WITH SOME OTHER IDEAS OF WHAT WE COULD BE DOING FOR THIS.
SINCE PLANNING AND ZONING, THIS IS A MODIFIED REQUEST OR OPTIONS THAT YOU COULD CONSIDER.
THE FIRST OPTION THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT IS WHAT WE TURNED IN, A REQUEST FOR THE CONSTRUCTION.
THE TIMING OF THE DOCK TO BE EXTENDED BY AMENDING CONDITION 8 OF RESOLUTION 2717.
THE SECOND OPTION TO CONSIDER IS MAYBE A PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP WHICH COULD RESOLVE THE MAINTENANCE AND POLICING ISSUES FROM THE TOWN'S POINT OF VIEW AND ALLOW PRIVATE LEASING FOR A PORTION OF THE DOCK SPACE AS INCENTIVE TO THE PRIVATE ENTITY.
THE THIRD OPTION WE WOULD LOVE YOU TO CONSIDER IS A FEE IN LIEU OF BUILDING THE DOCKS.
MARINE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPROVEMENTS COULD BE PART OF THIS.
AT THIS POINT, COUNCIL PLANNING AND ZONING, IN A VERY POSITIVE WAY, REJECTED OUR INITIAL REQUESTS BECAUSE THEY DENIED THE EXTENSION, THEY DENIED TALKING ABOUT MATERIAL CHANGES AND THEY STILL REQUIRED AN ADDITIONAL BENEFIT.
WE'RE REALLY ASKING YOU TO LOOK AT THESE DIFFERENT OPTIONS AND SEE WHERE YOU WANT TO GO.
BECAUSE WE WANT TO KNOW WHAT YOU WANT TO DO AND WE'RE GOING TO BE WITH YOU ON THIS.
THE ORIGINAL APPROVAL WAS LATE IN DECEMBER IN 2017, AND THERE HAVE BEEN A COUPLE OF SMALL AMENDMENTS THAT HAVE GONE ON.
WE'VE CHANGED THE STYLE OF THE BUILDING DUE TO THE CHANGE IN THE DESIRES OF THE BUYING PUBLIC.
[00:50:01]
CORNERSTONE SITS AT INDIAN TOWN ROAD AND US 1, SURROUNDED BY HARBOURSIDE JUPITER YACHT CLUB, SHOPS OF JUPITER, ETC.AS YOU KNOW, IT'S IT'S UNDER CONSTRUCTION.
THE CORNERSTONE DOES NOT SIT ON THE RIVER WALK.
THE TOWN OWNS THE ROAD, SO THEREFORE, THE RIVERWALK IS REALLY PART OF THE TOWNS RIGHT OF WAY.
BUT IT HAD TO FOLLOW ALL THE RIVERWALK, THE US 1, INTERCOASTAL REQUIREMENTS WITH BONUS POINTS.
GETTING BACK TO THE PUBLIC BENEFIT WAS PRIMARILY NOT ONLY BUT PRIMARILY BUILDING THE STOCK, WHICH WOULD BE A TOWN OF JUPITER DOCK, AS YOU CAN SEE HERE WITH THE ORIGINAL APPROVAL, THERE WERE TWO DIFFERENT OPTIONS FOR GETTING UP BUT FORTUNATELY, WE WERE ABLE TO GET OPTION 1 WHICH EVERYONE WANTED.
THIS IS THE PERMIT DRAWINGS AS IT NOW STANDS AND THERE WAS A CONDITION OF APPROVAL THAT KAYAK LAUNCHING DOCKS BE ADDED AND YOU CAN SEE THEM AT THE FAR LEFT OF THE DOCK SYSTEM.
OPTION 1 IS WHAT WE PRESENTED IN AS PART OF OUR ORIGINAL APPROVAL.
IN THIS PRESENTATION TO YOU AND YOUR BACKUP MATERIAL, WE ADDED OTHER SUPPORT INFORMATION THAT THE PNC REQUIRED.
SIMPLY, WE'RE ASKING FOR A CONDITION OF APPROVAL CHANGE.
THE JUSTIFICATION FOR MATERIAL CHANGES IS THAT CONCRETE DOCS ARE MORE DESTRUCTIVE IN STORM EVENTS BECAUSE THEY'RE BIGGER AND HEAVIER.
THAT'S FOR MATERIAL CHANGES, THERE'S NO SUBSTANTIAL LIFE CHANGES IN DIFFERENT KINDS OF DECK.
WHAT WE WOULD PREFER IS THE ALUMINUM FRAME THEN SURFACED DOCK, WHICH IS MUCH LIKE THE HARBOR SIDE PRIVATE DOCKS.
WE HAD TIMING ISSUES BECAUSE GETTING THE DOT APPROVAL TO ATTACH THE ACCESS POINT UNDER THE BRIDGE, THAT'S AN AREA THAT'S RUN BY THE TOWN OF JUPITER, BUT IT'S LEASED TO THE TOWN OF JUPITER.
WE DIDN'T KNOW IF IT WAS A CONSTRUCTION AGREEMENT OR IF IT WAS A LEASE MODIFICATION, AND IT TOOK A LONG TIME TO GET THROUGH THAT.
THAT'S WHAT HAS HELD US UP AND WE HAVE THE DEP PERMIT, WE HAVE THE ARMY CORPS PERMIT.
ALL WE NEED IS THE FDOT AND THEY REQUIRE FULL CONSTRUCTION DRAWINGS SO WE NEEDED TO KNOW WHAT MATERIAL WE WERE USING.
A TOWN OF JUPITER HAS ITS 2012 COMMUNITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY PLAN, AND IT IDENTIFIES THE NEED FOR 75-DAY DOCKAGE SLIPS OF WHICH 50 ARE BUILT, AND THAT'S THE REASON FROM THAT REPORT THAT THE DOCKS WERE DEEMED A PUBLIC BENEFIT WHEN WE WERE DOING THIS.
IN PART OF THIS ORIGINAL APPLICATION THAT WE ARE TONIGHT FOR THE DOCK EXTENSION, WE HAVE ADDED A PUBLIC BENEFIT BECAUSE WE'RE ASKING FOR A CHANGE IN WHAT AFFECTS THE BONUSES WERE ASKING FOR AN EXTENSION TO NOT BUILD IT, BUT ASKING FOR A TIME EXTENSION.
IN WHICH CASE WE ARE WORKING WITH STAFF AND SAYING A MARINE STEWARDSHIP PLAN FOR AROUND THE DOCKS WOULD BE A BENEFIT.
WE HAD ISSUES WITH THE CONDITION OF APPROVAL OF WHICH IT WAS THAT STAFF IT HAD TO BE SOUGHT TO ALL STAFF'S DECISION ON THE MATERIAL.
SINCE THE PLANNING AND ZONING WHERE THE CURRENT STAFF REPORT THEY HAVE, AS YOU NOTED, VERY SPECIFICALLY SAID EXACTLY WHAT THIS DOCK WILL BE MADE UP, FOLLOWING THE STAFF DISCUSSION THERE IS NO MORE DISCUSSION ON MATERIALS.
WE WOULD LIKE OUR MATERIALS TO BE ABLE TO HAVE AN OPEN DISCUSSION ON IT.
[00:55:05]
I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S TOO LATE FOR THAT AT THIS TIME.ANYWAY, HARBOR SIDE, THAT'S THE PRIVATE DOCKS.
IT HAS AN ALUMINUM FRAME WITH CONCRETE PAVERS.
SO THE HEAT ISSUE IS NOT AN ISSUE WITH THIS, WHICH IS ONE OF THE COMPLAINTS ABOUT COMPOSITE MATERIAL.
AS I MENTIONED, THE PERMIT FROM THE ARMY CORPS AND DEP HAVE ALREADY BEEN DONE.
THEY'D BEEN MODIFIED. SO THEY'RE READY TO GO.
WE'RE WAITING ON CONSTRUCTION PERMIT FROM FDOT, WHICH HAS NOTE THE MATERIALS.
A LOT OF THIS TIMING WITH DOT HAS BEEN HELD UP IN COMMUNICATION.
WE'VE TRIED TO MOVE AHEAD THOSE PERMITTING BOTH IN 2019, 2020, 2021 WE'RE ALL MOVING AHEAD.
THE CONSTRUCTION WHILE WE GOT APPROVED AT THE END OF 2017, WE STARTED CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS AND THAT TOOK QUITE SOME TIME.
SO IT WASN'T UNTIL JUNE 2020 THAT THE FIRST PERMITS WERE SUBMITTED AND THE BUILDING PERMIT WAS ISSUED IN 2021.
SO IT'S BEEN UNDER CONSTRUCTION AND THEY HOPE TO FINISH IN AUGUST, SEPTEMBER OF 23 THIS YEAR.
SO THAT ADDS ON OPTION 1, MORE OF WHAT PROBABLY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION WAS LOOKING FOR.
OPTION 2 IS TO CREATE A PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP WHERE THE PRIVATE SECTOR MAINTAINS AND SECURES THE DOCK FOR THE OFFSET, HAVE BEEN ABLE TO LEASE A PORTION OF THAT DOCK.
SO WE WOULD SEE THAT WE WOULD STILL BUILD THE DOCK AND THE TOWN COULD THEN HAVE THAT OPTION AFTER THE DOCK IS BUILT TO GO THROUGH SOME LEGAL PROCESS, PUBLIC BIDDING TO ADD THAT OPTION.
IT'S NOT SOMETHING THAT WE COULD RESOLVE NOW BUT IT COULD BE THE INTENT OF WHAT YOU'D LIKE TO DO IF YOU WANT THE DOCK, LEVEL WILLING APPLICANT WHO WOULD BID ON DOING THAT WORK.
OPTION 3 IS A FEE IN LIEU OF BUILDING THE DOCK.
PLEASE NOTE THAT IT WAS IN THE ORIGINAL STAFF REPORT WHERE IT SAID IT SHOULD BE NOTED THAT IF THE TOWN COUNCIL DOES NOT WANT THE APPLICANT TO CONSTRUCT THE DOCKS OR DOES NOT PROVIDE AUTHORIZATION TO DO SO.
A FIELD WILL BE GIVEN TO THE TOWN EQUAL TO THE ESTIMATED CONSTRUCTION COSTS CONFIRMED BY THE TOWN ENGINEER.
SO THAT IS ALWAYS BEEN THOUGHT OF JUST BECAUSE WAY BACK IN THE BEGINNING WHEN WE WERE GOING THROUGH THIS APPROVAL PROCESS, THERE WAS TALK, DO WE REALLY WANT TO DOCK? SO WE THE APPLICANT JUST SAY WHATEVER YOU WANT, WE ARE LOOKING TO EARN SOME PUBLIC BENEFIT.
AT THAT TIME WERE PRETTY LATE IN THE GAME, AND THE OWNER WANTED TO MOVE AHEAD AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE.
BUT SINCE THEN, YOU HAVE THE PUBLIC DOCKS THAT WENT FROM PUBLIC DOCKS UNDER PUBLIC OWNERSHIP TO PUBLIC DOCKS UNDER PRIVATE OWNERSHIP, YOU'VE HAD ISSUES AND YOU'VE LEARNED A LOT MORE.
SO THE PROS AND CONS, AND NOT TO SAY THERE ALL OF THEM.
SO OPTION 1, WHICH IS THE ORIGINAL ONE, POTENTIALLY REMOVES DERELICT VESSELS, WILL LICENSE THE CRA PLAN, BUT NEED A TIME EXTENSION TO GET THAT DONE.
POLICING IS NEEDED AND SECURITY AS NEEDED, AND THAT WOULD BE UNDER THE TOWN OF JUPITER SINCE THEY WOULD OWN IT.
OPTION 2, THE PRIVATE-PUBLIC PARTNERSHIP REMOVES THE ISSUE OF POLICING AND SECURITY, PUTS IT IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR.
IF WE CAN REMOVE DERELICT VESSELS BY BUILDING THE DOCK, THEN THAT IS A PLUS.
ALSO, REALIZE THIS IS CRA PLAN.
WOULD STILL NEED A TIME EXTENSION AND LEGAL PROCESSING IS IMPORTANT TO MAKE SURE YOU DO IT THE RIGHT WAY.
IT WOULD STILL BE OWNED BY THE TOWN.
IT WOULD BE PRIVATELY OPERATED AND PRIVATELY MAINTAINED.
OPTION 3, PAY A FEE IN LIEU OF NO TIME EXTENSION NEEDED AND IT OFFERS OPPORTUNITIES TO SUPPORT A LOT OF THE TOWN'S INITIATIVES THAT COULD BE PLACED TOWARDS MAYBE WATER ORIENTED ARMORING THE TOWN AGAINST CLIMATE CHANGE.
[01:00:06]
DERELICT VESSELS ARE NOT ADDRESSED AND THE PUBLIC DOCK IT'S STILL ALWAYS BE BUILT THERE IN THE FUTURE.WE TAKE THE CONDITION OF APPROVAL ABOUT TIMING WHERE THERE'S A FEE APPLIED AFTERWARDS.
THE DAMAGES WE FIND DOES NOT ADDRESS THE ACTS OF GOD OUT OF OUR CONTROL.
WE WOULD ACTUALLY PREFER THAT IF THERE IS AN AGREEMENT, THE AGREEMENT IS NOT IN THIS RESOLUTION BECAUSE THAT MEANS WE HAVE TO COME BACK TO THIS THING IF WE HAVE A HURRICANE AND HAVE TO HAVE A TIME SET ASIDE THAT WE UNDERSTAND LIQUIDATED DAMAGES, JUST NOT IN THE RESOLUTION.
SO THE OWNER SEEKS TO MODIFY THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FOR THE CONSTRUCTION TIMING OF THE DOCKS RELATIVE TO THE CEO.
WE'RE WILLING TO DO THE OTHER OPTIONS.
I'D LIKE TO SAY THAT IF IT IS THE COUNCIL'S WILL TO FOLLOW THE REQUEST OF THE RECOMMENDATION OF PLANNING AND ZONING, WHICH LEAVES A NEGATIVE ON OUR REQUESTS FOR TIME EXTENSION, A NEGATIVE ON MATERIAL CHANGE, AND AT ANOTHER PUBLIC BENEFIT FOR NOTHING IN RETURN, THEN WE WOULD LIKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO PULL THE APPLICATION IF YOU'RE TALKING THAT WAY AT THE END.
IF NOT ANY ONE OF OUR OPTIONS WE'RE GLAD TO WORK WITH YOU THE APPLICANT.
[INAUDIBLE] HAS PROVEN OVER AND OVER AGAIN THAT HE BELIEVES IN THIS PROJECT, HE'S WORKED A LONG TIME, HE BOUGHT THIS LAND A LONG TIME AGO, HE'S GOING TO LIVE IN THIS BUILDING, IT'S NOT A TURNOVER, IT'S NOT A FLIP, WE'RE SORRY THAT IT CAME TO A TIME EXTENSION ON THIS IS NOT THE INTENT, WE THOUGHT SO SOME OTHER THINGS WITH CHANGE AND WE WILL DO WHATEVER IS THE WILL OF THE COUNCIL TO CONTINUE ON THIS, AND DICK SAYS, IF YOU WANT TO TALK TO HIM, FEEL FREE TO HE'S HERE, THAT PENALIZE HIM FOR US BEING IN THIS SITUATION, BUT IF WE JUST BACKED OUT OF THIS RIGHT NOW AND BOTH THAT DOCK AND WAITED TO DO THE COS TILL THE DOCK WAS BUILT, WHICH WE CAN DO, BUT IT PENALIZES THE BUYERS.
IT DOESN'T PENALIZE HIM, IT PENALIZES THE BUYERS.
WE HOPE THAT YOU HAVE SOME OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS THIS AND I HAVE 32 SECONDS LEFT.
THANK YOU, AND I'M HERE FOR ANY QUESTIONS.
FOR THE RECORD, GARRETT WATSON WITH THE PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT.
YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU TONIGHT AN APPLICANT INITIATED REQUESTS TO MODIFY OUR 14-SLIP PUBLIC MARINA ON TOWN AND REPAIRING LANDS, AS WELL AS A REQUEST TO MODIFY THE MATERIALS FROM AN APPROVED CONCRETE OPTION TO A COMPOSITE OPTION.
AS THE APPLICANT NOTED, THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION VOTED AGAINST A TIME EXTENSION AGAINST OR ALLOWING MATERIALS WOULD BE SUBJECT TO STAFF APPROVAL, AND ALSO VOTED TO REQUIRE THE ADDITIONAL MARINE ENHANCEMENTS THAT WERE DISCUSSED.
SINCE THAT MEETING AND AS NOTED IN THE REPORT, STAFF IS TAKING A CLOSER LOOK AT THE MATERIALS AND HAS OPTED TO CONTINUE TO RECOMMEND THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED CONCRETE OPTION FOR THE TOWN.
THEREFORE, THE RESOLUTION THAT YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU TONIGHT AND THE CONDITIONS THAT ARE WRITTEN IN IT, DON'T PREVENT THE TIME EXTENSION, THEY DON'T CHANGE THE MATERIALS FROM THE ORIGINALLY PROVED CONCRETE OPTION, THEY ALSO INCLUDE ADDITIONAL MARINE ENHANCEMENTS, WHICH WAS A RECOMMENDATION OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.
AS THE APPLICANT STATED, THEY'RE WILLING TO DISCUSS OTHER OPTIONS AT THE PLEASURE OF COUNCIL,
[01:05:02]
THOSE ARE IN ATTACHMENT G, AND ALSO NOTED IN THE STAFF REPORTS.SHOULD THE TOWN COUNCIL BE SUPPORTIVE OF A TIME EXTENSION AND STILL WANT THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE DOCS, WE'VE PROVIDED SOME ALTERNATIVE LANGUAGE ON PAGES 5 AND 6 OF THE STAFF REPORT THAT COULD BE ADOPTED AS AN AMENDMENT TO CONDITION 4, AND WHAT THAT ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE WOULD DO AT THE BOTTOM OF CONDITION 4 IS IT WOULD ADD IN THE REQUIREMENT FOR A BOND, IF YOU'D STILL LIKE TO PERMIT THEM THE EXTRA TIME TO BUILD IT, AND IT WOULD ALSO PROVIDE FOR THE ABILITY TO CAPTURE LIQUIDATED DAMAGES SHOULD WE GO BEYOND THE DATE.
IN ADDITION, SHOULD THE COUNCIL SUPPORT A MATERIAL CHANGE, CONDITION NUMBER 4 AND THE RESOLUTION WILL NEED TO BE AMENDED TO STATE THE DESIRED MATERIAL OR FOR STAFF AND THE APPLICANT OR COUNCIL TO DECIDE ON THE MATERIAL.
ALTERNATIVELY, IF THE COUNCIL DESIRES TO EXPLORE ANOTHER OPTION, WHETHER THAT'S A COMBINATION OF BUILDING THE DOCK, A PUBLIC-PRIVATE PARTNERSHIP, OR SOMETHING ENTIRELY DIFFERENT, A FEE IN LIEU OF PROVIDING THE DOCKS, THE RESOLUTION WILL NEED TO BE AMENDED ACCORDINGLY.
LASTLY, STAFF HAS INCLUDED SOME INFORMATION ON A CONCURRENT ADMINISTRATIVE OF AMENDMENT THAT'S IN PROCESS RIGHT NOW, IT INCLUDES A SLIGHT AMENDMENTS TO THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED BONUS PROGRAM, THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO CONVERT ONE PARKING SPACE IN THE GARAGE TO BICYCLE PARKING.
THAT'S A MODIFICATION THAT I'VE BEEN TOLD IS BEING MADE TO HELP WITH THEIR GREEN CERTIFICATION THAT WAS ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT WAS REQUIRED AS PART OF THEIR ORIGINAL APPROVAL, AND IT REMOVES ONE HALF CREDIT THAT WAS AGAIN ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT WAS REQUIRED TO BUILD THE DEVELOPMENT.
SHOULD THE COUNCIL TO BE SUPPORTIVE OF THAT MINOR CHANGE AND ALLOWING FOR THAT ONE PARKING SPACE TO BE CONVERTED, YOU CAN EITHER DIRECT STAFF TO CONTINUE THAT ADMINISTRATIVE AMENDMENT AS PROPOSED AND MAKE THAT MODIFICATION, OR AN AMENDMENT TO THE RESOLUTION CAN BE ADDED TO REINSTATE THE CREDIT TABLE AND SHOW THAT REMOVAL OF THAT HALF CREDIT FOR THE PARKING SPACE.
THAT'S IT FOR ME, I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. YEAH. THANK YOU.
>> THANK YOU. CALLING THE COUNCIL FOR QUESTIONS AND I WANT TO GO FIRST.
I JUST PREFACING MY QUESTIONS, I DIDN'T APPROVE THIS ORIGINALLY, I'M NOT ASKING QUESTIONS WITH THAT IN MIND, I WANT TO FIND A PATHWAY FORWARD HERE.
I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE SOME THINGS GET ON THE RECORD.
A PLANNING STAFF IN THE ORIGINAL 2017 STAFF REPORT, STAFF HAD RAISED CONCERNS ABOUT, AND I'M READING FROM THE REPORT, I JUST WANTED YOU TO CONFIRM IT FOR THE RECORD.
STAFF HAD RAISED CONCERNS WITH LIABILITY MANAGEMENT, MAINTENANCE, AND POTENTIAL SAFETY AND SECURITY ISSUES WITH THE PROPOSED MARINA, AND THEN IT STATES THAT IT'S STAFF REMAINS CONCERNED WITH THOSE SAME ISSUES TODAY, IS THAT CORRECT?
>> NUMBER 2, STAFF BACK IN 2017 HAD ACTUALLY RECOMMENDED LESS BONUS POINTS EARNED FOR THE DOCK, THEN THE COUNCIL AT THAT TIME DECIDED TO AWARD, IS THAT NOT CORRECT?
>> THEN IT IS WHAT IT IS, BUT I POINTED OUT WITH THE HALF-A-POINT DISCUSSION, QUESTION FOR PROBABLY JUST GOES TO ENGINEERING STAFF.
I HAD ASKED EARLIER TODAY ENGINEERING STAFF TO PROVIDE YOUR ESTIMATE FOR THE DOCK, AND I THINK WE ALL GOT IT SENT TO US LATE THIS AFTERNOON.
TO STAFF, IS IT YOUR OPINION, DID YOU AGREE WITH THE STATEMENT THAT A CONCRETE DOCK IS MORE SUSCEPTIBLE TO DAMAGE AND CAUSING DAMAGE DURING STORM EVENTS?
>> FOR THE RECORD, THOMAS HERNANDEZ, DIRECTOR OF ENGINEERING AND PUBLIC WORKS.
I THINK FROM WHAT THE STATEMENT WAS MADE EARLIER WOULD HAVE BEEN THAT THE DAMAGE WOULD BE AS IF THE CONCRETE DOCK BREAKS FREE AND WILL BE PUSHED INTO ANOTHER STRUCTURE OR ANOTHER LOCATION.
IN THAT SITUATION THERE IS POTENTIAL OF IT, HOWEVER, OVERALL DAMAGE IF IT WERE IMPACTED, I THINK IT WOULD BE LESS LIKELY, OR IF SOMEBODY WERE OPERATING ON THE DOCK AND THEY DROP SOMETHING, IT'D BE LESS LIKELY THAT DOCK WOULD BE DAMAGED ITSELF.
>> I'M NOT ASKED THAT QUESTION, I ASKED YOU THE BASICS, I THINK THAT STATEMENT WAS HERE, SAY I JUST WANT TO GET THAT ON RECORD.
BECAUSE YOU WERE RECOMMENDED OVER AN ENGINEER,
[01:10:04]
YOU'RE THE ENGINEER FOR THE TOWN SO YOU STILL RECOMMEND THE CONCRETE DOCK OR WHAT WAS YOUR THOUGHT ABOUT THE DOCK PLANKS OR WHATEVER THAT WAS REFERRING TO THAT YOU USED ELSEWHERE?>> CONCRETE WOULD STILL BE THE PREFERRED MATERIAL THAT I WOULD RECOMMEND, THE COMPOSITE MATERIAL THAT WAS PROPOSED WAS VERY WARM, I ACTUALLY DONE A FEW TESTS IN SHOT IT WITH AN INFRARED THERMOMETER, IT SHOULD HAVE PRETTY HOT COMPARED TO SOME OF THE OTHER MATERIALS THAT WE'VE USED IN THE PAST PLUS THE EVEN CONCRETE ITSELF, SO CONCRETE BEING MORE DURABLE WAS MORE DESIRABLE THAN IT WAS NOT QUITE AS HOT AS SOME OF THE OTHER MATERIALS THAT WERE GIVEN.
>> [INAUDIBLE] A MAN HE PRESENTED, THINK MR. HARPER'S SIDE DOCKS THAT HAD CONCRETE PLANKS BUT THE REST OF THE DOCK WAS IN CONCRETE.
>> THE CONCRETE PLANKS AT HARBOR SIDE, I WOULD NOT BE IN FAVOR OF, THEY'RE ALMOST LIKE A CONCRETE TILE, THERE ARE ABOUT AN INCH THICK, I WAS ACTUALLY THERE OVER THE WEEKEND AND REALLY WHILE I WAS THERE I LOOKED AT THEM, AND MY QUESTION TO ONE OF THE DOCK MASTER STAFF WAS DO THESE BREAK OFTEN? AND THEIR ANSWER TO ME WAS EVERY DAY.
SO TO ME, WHILE THAT MAY NOT BE 100% THAT THEY BREAK EVERY DAY, IT'S ENOUGH TO SHOW TO ME THAT THEY DO BREAK REGULARLY.
>> LASTLY, DID YOU SEE WHAT THE APPLICANT'S ESTIMATE WAS FOR THE DOCK?
>> I SOLD THE ORIGINAL ESTIMATE THAT WAS SENT.
>> BUT NOT THE RECENT ONE. [OVERLAPPING].
>> YOUR ESTIMATE I JUST SUSPECT THIS STATE PRESUMABLY, I THINK WHAT WAS THE PROPOSAL TYPE ESTIMATE FROM A CONTRACTOR, YOUR ESTIMATE WAS MY PERCEPTION AND I'M NOT TRYING TO PUT WORDS IN YOUR MOUTH BUT YOU TOOK IT AS ALL INCLUSIVE OF EVERYTHING THAT WOULD BE AFTER DONE, NOT JUST THE DOCK WHERE YOU INCLUDE, SO I THINK THERE MAY BE A SCOPE DIFFERENCE.
>> CORRECT. WHEN WE LOOKED AT IT FROM A STAFF STANDPOINT, WE LOOKED AT IT FROM THE DOCK, CBI THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN REQUIRED, THE CONSTRUCTION ENGINEERING AND INSPECTION, SOME OF THE PILE DRIVING THAT WOULD, AND SOME OF THE BUILDING OF THE OVERALL FIXED DOCK AND GANG WAYS AND ALL THOSE, SO THAT'S HOW WE LOOKED AT IT.
JUST BASICALLY EVERYTHING THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN REQUIRED IN ORDER TO CONSTRUCT THE DOCK.
>> INCLUSIONS OF THE CONNECTION AND OPENING IN THE RIVERWALK?
>> WHAT WAS THE TOTAL NUMBER THAT YOU ESTIMATE? GO AHEAD.
>> THE TOTAL NUMBER WHEN YOU LOOK AT AND ALSO INCLUDED FEES AND BUILDING PERMIT FEES AND MOBILIZATION, THAT NUMBER CAME OUT TO ROUGHLY 1.6 MILLION.
AS YOU MENTIONED, THAT DID INCLUDE OVERALL, WE LOOKED AT IT FROM THE STANDPOINT OF CONNECTIONS TO THE RIVER WALK AND NOT JUST NECESSARILY THE DOC ITSELF AND THE MATERIALS ITSELF.
>> THANK YOU AND AS I JUST TURNED OUT TO MY COLLEAGUES IN FAVOR OF OPTION THREE WHAT I WAS TRYING TO GET TO THE POINT OF WHAT WOULD BE A FAIR VALUE ESTIMATE AND WHAT WE HAVE IS NO COLLABORATION IS DONE BEFORE IT CAME HERE SO TO ME THAT WOULD HAVE TO HAPPEN SO I'LL JUST TURN IT OVER TO THE STAFF NOW.
WE'RE TURNING, EXCUSE ME, COUNCIL VICE MAYOR YOU HAD?
>> I HAD A QUESTION FOR STAFF WITH REGARD TO THE MARINE STEWARDSHIP PLAN.
WE LOOKED AT OPTION 3, WHICH WAS A PAYMENT FEE AND MORE AND I WANTED TO GET A BETTER IDEA HOW THAT COULD BE COMBINED PERHAPS WITH SOME MARINE STEWARDSHIP EFFORT.
YOU'RE TALKING THE STAFF REPORT ABOUT THINGS TO HELP PROTECT THE MANGROVES OR ADDING IN THE SHELVES FOR THE OYSTERS.
>> CERTAINLY, [NOISE] THE OPTION COULD INCLUDE A COMBINATION OF THOSE, SO A MARINE STEWARDSHIP PLAN COULD STILL BE ON THE TABLE ALONG WITH THE FEE IN LIEU AND THAT WOULD BE A MODIFICATION TO WHAT'S PROPOSED IN THE RESOLUTION BEFORE YOU, BUT WE CAN STILL INSTALL SOME OF THAT SIGNAGE ON THE RIVER WALK, CAN LOOK AT IT.
WELL, WE COULD PERMIT OUT IN THAT BASIN IN TERMS OF ARTIFICIAL REEF MODULES, THINGS TO ENCOURAGE OYSTER GROWTH AND WE COULD LOOK AT THOSE OPTIONS IF THE COUNCIL DECIDES THAT.
>> DON'T TELL WHAT ABOUT THE MAYOR SAID, I WAS ALSO HERE IN 2017 AND I DID SUPPORT THIS APPLICATION.
I THOUGHT IT WAS A GREAT IMPROVEMENT OVER WHAT WAS THERE AND ITS RESIDENTIAL, WHICH IS QUIET OR LESS DAILY TRIPS IT WAS GOING TO BE COMMERCIAL.
IT WAS ALSO ONE OF THE FEW ODD PIECES OF LAND LEFT ON THE JUPITER WATERFRONT THAT IT'S LANDLOCKED BUT IT'S ON THE INTERCOSTAL.
THERE'S NO WATER ACCESS SO MY FORMER COLLEAGUES THAT WERE ON THE COUNCIL WOULD JUST LOOKING FOR
[01:15:02]
SOME IN PUBLIC BENEFIT FROM THE APPLICANT BUT THERE ARE EVEN EMILY, I WAS ONE OF THEM MAKING THE NOISE, BUT I DIDN'T WANT THE DOCKS THERE IN THE FIRST PLACE AND THE LONGER I'VE BEEN SITTING HERE ON COUNCIL, PUBLIC OWN DOCS ARE A NUISANCE TO THE TOWN WITH ACCIDENTS, LITIGATION, POLICING, AND MAINTENANCE.I NEVER WANTED ANYTHING TO DO WITH THESE DOCS, SO I'D BE TOLD IN FAVOR OF THE I GUESS, IT'S THE OPTION 3 WITH THE IMMINENT LIEU AND I THINK IT WOULD SAVE, I MEAN, STAFF'S ALREADY WASTED AND THE APPLICANT A TON OF TIME AND MONEY ON THIS ISSUE, I THINK IN MY OPINION, I THINK WE SHOULD GO WITH THAT AS OPPOSED TO MORE PERMITTING, MORE LABOR.
THAT AREA OVER THERE IS VERY SHALLOW, I'VE NEVER BEEN UP TO THE SHORE ON A BOAT, BUT I IMAGINED THERE'S ISSUES WHERE SOMETIMES IN LOW TIDES, THOSE DOCS ARE SITTING ON THE GROUND.
I DON'T THINK IT'S A GREAT PLACE FOR DOCS AND IN ADDITION TO THAT, WHEN THEY DO THAT WORK UP THE LIGHTHOUSE AND THEY DISPLACE ABOUT 30 BOATS ON THE WEEKENDS, PEOPLE ARE LOOKING FOR PLACES TO HANG OUT AND PARTY AND IT COULD BE A NIGHTMARE UP THERE SO I'M JUST LOOKING AT THE WHOLE BIG PICTURE.
I JUST THINK IT'S A GREAT IDEA.
I DON'T THINK IT'S A GREAT IDEA TO PUT THE DOCS IN THERE AND I THINK A DIFFERENT FORM OF BENEFIT AND I LIKE TO HEAR MY COLLEAGUES COMMENTS ON THAT.
>> I WANT TO SAY, I AGREE LARGELY WITH OPTION 3, I DON'T LIKE THAT THERE IS NO VISIBILITY WITH THE MANGROVES THERE.
I DO KNOW THE HISTORY AND LESSONS LEARNED FROM THAT CLUB AND OTHER PROPERTIES AND PUBLIC DOCS THAT WE HAVE AROUND TOWN.
BUT THAT'S WHAT I'M ALSO INTERESTED IN LISTENING TO THOSE WHO VOTE, SO I PADDLE AND THAT'S BEEN A REALLY INTERESTING PERSPECTIVE THEN I DO KNOW THAT WE HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT AS WELL, THAT'LL BE INTERESTED IN LISTENING TO.
I DO THINK IT SOLVES A LOT OF PROBLEMS AND I WOULD SUPPORT IT.
>> YET ONE MORE THING TO THAT, WHEN WE DISCUSSED THE DOCS IN 17, I WAS WILLING TO PUT IN WITH SOMETHING FOR THE PANEL BORDERS JUST [LAUGHTER] BECAUSE THEY NEED IF YOU'RE UP THERE.
BUT I DON'T SEE A LOT WAY, I'M UP THERE ALL THE TIME, I DON'T SEE A LOT OF TELEPORTERS ALL THE WAY UP THERE USUALLY BECAUSE THEY HAVE THE NEW ISLAND THAT THEY CAN GO INTO AND HANG OUT AND GET A REST AND ALL THAT.
>> WHAT I DIDN'T KNOW IS JUST THE DEMAND FROM THE BOATING COMMUNITY OR WHAT WAS THERE I KNOW.
PLENTY DOC ACTIVATE HARBOR SIDE OR ACTIVATE THAT RIVER WALK, WHICH WE'VE MADE PROGRESS ON HARBOR SIDE, WHICH IS DOING THAT THIS PROJECT WILL DO THAT.
I'M JUST LOOKING AT WHAT WE'RE GIVING UP IF WE GIVE THIS UP, SO ACTIVATING THE RIVER WALK IT LOOKS LIKE THAT'S HAPPENING IN OTHER AREAS.
IT WAS POINTED OUT TO ME THAT THIS WON'T BE THE BLUE CLEAR WATER OF THE INLET IT WOULD BE A DIFFERENT TYPE OF WATER WHICH WOULDN'T MAYBE HAVE THE SAME DRAW THAT YOU TAKE YOUR OTHER DOCS HAVE HAD THAT I FOUND INTERESTING.
BUT WITH MY LIMITED EXPERIENCE ON THE WATER WITH PADDLING AND LOOKING AT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION I AM GRATEFUL TO THAT SUGGESTION, THAT WE REALLY LOOK AT THE CONCERNS THAT WERE THERE IN 2017 AND SIMPLIFY THINGS.
THIS WOULD BE A HUGE UNDERTAKING FOR THE TOWN IN TERMS OF SAFETY, MAINTENANCE, AND IF OTHERS DO IT, THERE'S LIABILITY IF WE OWN THEM, BUT THEY'RE MAINTAINED OR OPERATED BY OTHERS SO I THINK, WE SHOULD LOOK AT THE FIELD.
>> I WANT TO ADD ONE THING THAT I WAS ON THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION IN 2017, AND I'VE NEVER SUPPORTED THESE DOCS.
I ALWAYS THOUGHT THAT THEY SHOULD HAVE GOTTEN BONUS POINTS FOR THE GREEN ROOF, WHICH I THINK IS MUCH MORE SIGNIFICANT THAN PUBLIC BENEFIT, THAN THE MODOCS EVERYWHERE AND MY CONCERN IF WE LOOK AT FEE IN LIEU THOUGH, IS TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S IN LINE WITH THE ORIGINAL ESTIMATE FOR WHAT THE CRA HAD ESTIMATED EACH SLIP WAS NOT THE CURRENT NUMBER WHICH IS NOW DOUBLED.
THE OTHER THING IS IN TERMS OF DOCS MEAN WE ARE DOING A CRA PLAN RIGHT NOW TO LOOK AT THE NEED AND LOOK AT WHERE WE MAY HAVE OTHER DOCS AND SO THIS WAS BASED ON THE 2012 PLAN AND SINCE WE'RE IN THE MIDDLE OF LOOKING AT WHAT WE WANT TO DO WITH THE CRA AND WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN, ALL THAT I THINK THAT WE SHOULD NOT JUMP AHEAD ON PUTTING DOCS THERE AS WAS POINTED OUT.
IT CAN ALWAYS BE ADDED LATER IF THERE REALLY IS A NEED AND IF IT CAN BE SECURED.
>> WE HAD THAT OVER DOCS TO A PRIVATE OWNER, BUT THERE'S STILL FOR PUBLIC ACCESS THAT THEY POLICE SO I THINK THAT'S THE BEST PARTNERSHIP.
THEY HAVE PUBLIC DOCS. [OVERLAPPING]
>> WE'RE SELLING THE QUESTIONS.
ANYBODY HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF OR THE APP? MOVING TO THE PUBLIC.
[01:20:02]
>> EVENING, CRAIG MAORI 2RD BLUE TILES LAID IN JUPITER.
I AM A BOATER, I'M NOT A FISHERMAN. PLEASURE BOAT.
WE USE OUR BOAT MOSTLY TAKE FRIENDS AND FAMILY TO PLACES TO EAT.
TICKY 50 TO GO ON OBAMA'S, TOMMY BAHAMAS, AND CALIBERS BE NORMAL.
THERE HAD BEEN TIMES GRANTED MOSTLY IN SEASON WHEN WE'VE HAD TO CHANGE OUR PLANS ARE CANCELING BECAUSE THERE WAS NO DOC SPACE AVAILABLE PERIOD.
AS PLEASURE BOATERS, WE WOULD LOVE TO HAVE MORE PUBLIC DOCS.
SIDE COMMENT, I HADN'T WRITTEN IT IN HERE, BUT I WANTED TO SAY IT'S NOT OBVIOUS THAT THE PUBLIC HAS ACCESS TO EVEN THE DOCS THAT ARE IN PRIVATE OWNERSHIP AT UTK, THAT'S NOT WELL-KNOWN, IS NOT ON THE TOWN OF JUPITER WEBSITE THAT THOSE ARE PUBLICLY AVAILABLE DOCS, THIS MAY NOT BE THE RIGHT PLACE FOR THIS PARTICULAR LOCATION OF A CORNERSTONE.
THE WATER IS SHALLOW, IT IS MURKY, WHICH COUNCIL OSTROM POINTED OUT.
THE OPENING IS NARROW THERE'S VERY LITTLE BOAT TRAFFIC, IF ANY THAT GOES PAST THIS AREA WHERE THE NEW SLIPS WOULD BE IT'S ALL AN INNER COASTAL WATERWAY.
IT'S NEARLY INVISIBLE FROM LAND AND I DON'T THINK WE CAN GET PERMISSION TO CUT THE MANGROVES FAR ENOUGH TO MAKE IT VISIBLE.
THESE FACTORS MAKING WAY TOO EASY FOR THIS TO BE USED FOR MISCHIEF.
UNDER-AGE DRINKING, DRUG USE, OVERNIGHT DOCKING, THAT KIND OF THING.
I DON'T THINK THE BLUE MOON WOULD FIT THERE, BUT THAT'S SEPARATE.
WE SHARE THE STAFF'S CONCERNS THAT THEY VOICED BACK IN 2017 FOR SAFETY, SECURITY, ETC.
IF THE TOWN DECIDES TO TAKE OPTION THREE, FEE IN LIEU OF, I THINK IT COULD BE USED FOR CERTAIN THINGS.
THERE ARE STILL RIVERWALK PROJECTS THAT AREN'T YET FINISHED.
THERE ARE SEAGRASS PROJECTS THAT ARE NOT YET FINISHED.
THERE'S SUNNY SANDS WHICH IS GOING TO COME BEFORE US AT SOME TIME BUT I THINK ALL OF THOSE WOULD QUALIFY FOR USE FOR THIS MONEY IF YOU TOOK A FEE IN LIEU OF.
ALL THAT SAID, THERE IS ALMOST NOWHERE ELSE IN THE TOWN OF JUPITER FOR PUBLIC DOCS.
JUST CAN'T BE DONE. THERE'S NO PLACE LEFT.
SO THERE'S A DEFINITE ARGUMENT TO BE MADE IN FAVOR OF DOCS.
IF YOU CHOOSE TO DO SO, ONE COMPOSITE DECKING IS FINE.
WHERE THEY'RE MOST WEEKENDS, EVEN THIS PAST WEEKEND, WE SEE PEOPLE WALKING ON THAT DECK BAREFOOT, THERE'S NOT A PROBLEM WITH HEAT.
IT'S NOT AN OVERHEATED COMPOSITE DECKING.
THE LENGTH OF THE FINGER PIERS FOR THESE SLIPS NEEDS TO BE DETERMINED.
I COULDN'T FIND IT IN ANY OF THE DOCUMENTS AND THAT SETS THE LENGTH OF THE BOAT THAT CAN TIE UP THERE.
WE DO AGREE WITH THE STAFF THAT A CASH BOND MAKES MORE SENSE THAN A SURETY BOND, IF YOU CHOOSE TO GO THAT WAY.
THE LIQUIDATED DAMAGES SHOULD BE HIGHER, SHOULD BE BASED ON A NEW ESTIMATE, EVEN IF THE BOND IS NOT.
I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH MANGROVES.
THEY PROBABLY SHOULD BE TRIMMED ANYWAY TO AT LEAST BE ALLOWED TO BE TRIMMED.
PRUNING OF MANGROVES IS ALLOWED, THIS IS NEEDED.
THE CRA PLAN. SIR, VICE MAYOR SNYDER, YOU POINTED OUT THAT DOES NEED TO BE UPDATED.
IT DOESN'T EVEN REFLECT WHAT DOCS ARE AVAILABLE PRESENTLY.
THE TOWN OF JUPITER WEBSITE, AS I SAID, SHOULD ALSO BE UPDATED FOR THE NUMBER AND LOCATION OF PUBLIC DOCS. THANK YOU.
>> IS THAT ALL FOR THE PUBLIC COMMENTS?
>> RETURNING. I'D ASK, EVEN THOUGH YOU OVERRAN YOUR TIME, MR. MANDY ANY CLOSING COMMENTS? I GAVE YOU A COUPLE OF MINUTES.
>> LET ME JUST SAY I WAS GOING TO SIGN UP, BUT SHE TOLD ME I ALREADY HAD A PASS.
SO I'M DICK WITHERM AND I'M ONE OF THE OWNERS OF THE PROJECT.
I LIVE IN JUPITER AND HAVE FOR 25 YEARS.
WE PLAN ON MOVING HERE TO THIS LOCATION AND WE'RE BUILDING IT LIKE IT'S VERY IMPORTANT.
THE DOC THING, I CAN GO ANY WAY WITH IT.
I'VE HEARD A LOT OF THE ISSUES HERE RECENTLY WITH THOSE PUBLIC DOCS.
WE'RE UP HIGH AND LOOKING DOWN, WE CAN SEE WHAT'S GOING ON.
I HAVE A FEELING THAT SOMEBODY IN THAT BUILDING IS GOING TO BE CALLING THE POLICE FREQUENTLY.
I DON'T KNOW THAT. THE OTHER THING IS THAT I'LL PERSONALLY TAKE THE BLAME FOR THOSE DOCS NOT BEING DONE.
[01:25:06]
ACTUALLY, WE WERE MOVING ALONG.WE WERE HAVING TROUBLE WITH THE LEAST THING THAT WENT BACK AND FORTH BETWEEN US AND THE TOWN STAFF FOR, I'M GOING TO SAY MORE THAN A YEAR, PROBABLY.
TWO YEARS WERE BACK AND FORTH.
THE DOT WAS TELLING US THE TOWN NEEDED TO MODIFY THE LEAVES.
THE TOWN WAS TELLING US WE NEEDED TO GET INVOLVED IN IT, AND IT NEVER HAPPENED.
I GUESS I SHOULD HAVE STEPPED IN AND MADE IT HAPPEN.
BUT GIVING THE EARLY CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY FOR THE BUYERS, IS IMPORTANT TO ME AND IF SOMEBODY NEEDS TO BE PUNISHED OR FINED OR WHATEVER, FINE ME.
BUT THESE PEOPLE, THEY'VE SOLD THEIR HOMES, THEIR RENTING HOMES OVER THE SUMMER AND THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE NO PLACE TO GO COME FALL.
I CAN TELL YOU THAT IT'S MY FAULT AND I'M WILLING TO DO WHATEVER NEEDS TO BE DONE TO GET THEM IN THERE.
IF YOU ALL WANT THE DOCKS, WE CAN GET THE DOCKS THERE.
I THINK WE CAN HAVEN'T DONE BY IF THEY'RE COMPOSITE.
ALL THIS INFORMATION IS 30-DEGREE DIFFERENCE IN COMPOSITE.
I HAPPEN TO HAVE A DOCK AND JONATHAN'S LANDING AND IT'S CONCRETE.
THEN IT'S COMPOSITE OF THE CONCRETE.
I TOOK THE TEMPERATURE OF BOTH OF THEM. I HAVE A PICTURE OF IT.
I CAN SHOW ANY OF YOU, AND IT'S FOUR DEGREES DIFFERENCE.
I DID IT ON A DAY WHEN IT WAS 87, 88 DEGREES AND I DID IT AT TWO O'CLOCK IN THE AFTERNOON, HIGH SUN.
I'M NOT SURE THAT 30 DEGREE DIFFERENCE IS FACTUAL.
PEOPLE HAVE SAID, THE TOWN DIDN'T GET ANY BENEFIT.
I'M GOING TO TELL YOU WHAT BETWEEN THE GREEN ROOF, THE CUPBOARD GARAGE AND SUPPORTING THAT GARAGE ROOF COST TWO MILLION BUCKS.
WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A GREEN BUILDING.
IT'S GOING TO BE CERTIFIED PLATINUM.
ONE POINT AWAY FROM PLATINUM, BUT WE'RE NOT DONE ANALYZING THE THING YET.
I THINK THAT MAYBE THAT BIKE RACK GETS US THERE.
I DON'T KNOW, BUT WE SPENT CLOSE TO HALF A MILLION DOLLARS MAKING THAT HAPPEN.
THERE WERE SOME BENEFITS TO DOING A GREEN BUILDING BACK WHEN WE BUILD IT AND WE DIDN'T TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THEM.
>> I DIDN'T ASK YOU TO WRAP UP.
I WANTED TO GIVE YOU THE OPPORTUNITY.
>> JUST HAVE ANY. GOING BACK TO COUNCIL FOR THE FINAL DISCUSSION AND ACTION.
>> IT DOES LOOK LIKE THERE'S A MAJORITY TO GO WITH OPTION THREE.
>> PART OF THAT. ONLY REASON I SUPPORTED THE DOCK IN THE BEGINNING WHEN I WAS ON PNZ WAS TO GIVE US TEETH TO GET THOSE BOATS OUT OF THERE BECAUSE THEY DRIVE ME ABSOLUTELY CRAZY.
THAT WAS MY BIGGEST BENEFIT WAS WE CAN HAVE SOMETHING TO GET THE BOATS OUT OF THERE.
I'M HOPING IF WE GO WITH OPTION THREE, THAT WE STILL HAVE SOME WAY TO RID OURSELVES OF THOSE BOATS THAT ARE SITTING THERE ROTTING AWAY.
>> ONE SUNK RECENTLY, A SEAL BOAT A LITTLE FURTHER, ABOUT 100 YARDS UP THE COAST, SO THAT'LL BE ONE DOWN EVENTUALLY.
>> I THINK THAT WHEN YOU LOOK AT IT, IS THE OPTION THREE IN LIEU OF IS THE SIMPLEST WAY, IT DOESN'T CLOSE OPTIONS.
WE GET FEE IN LIEU OF THEY'VE COMPLETED THEIR OBLIGATION.
WE COULD SEE A WAY TO GRANT THE STEEL SOONER.
THE IN LIEU OF GIVES US MORE TIME.
WE HAVE THE MONEY, WE CAN STILL DECIDE THE PERMANENT EXISTS.
I'M NOT SUGGESTING I SUPPORT THAT, BUT WHAT I'M SAYING IS IT JUST GIVES THE COUNCIL THE OPPORTUNITY TO PAUSE AS OPPOSED TO SO THAT'S FOREIGN FAVOR OF CONTINUE TO GET IT DONE.
THE ONLY ISSUE FOR ME IS WHY I WAS ASKING STAFF FOR AN ESTIMATE IS,
[01:30:03]
I DO BELIEVE THAT THEIR SHOULD BE A FAIR VALUE ESTIMATE.I KNOW THAT THE VICE MAYOR INDICATED THAT THE ORIGINAL ESTIMATE, BUT NOW EVERYTHING SHOULD BE BASED ON WHAT CURRENT COST ARE, IT MAY BE THE CASE.
THERE NEEDS TO BE SOME TIME FOR STAFF AND APPLICANT TO WORK THAT OUT.
I DON'T WANT TO DO THAT ON THE DIETS.
BUT I DO THINK THAT IS A SIMPLE APPROACH.
I THINK STAFF AND THE APPLICANT COULD PROBABLY WORK SOMETHING OUT ON THAT BECAUSE WE'RE NOT LOOKING TO GET A MAXIMUM AMOUNT OF DOLLARS, BUT WE'RE LOOKING TO MAKE SURE OF THAT.
I MEAN, I HAVE TO DO THAT AS A REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE PUBLIC JUST TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE GETTING A FAIR FEE IN LIEU OF WHAT THE OBLIGATION WOULD OTHERWISE BE.
I SEE THE VICE MAYOR WANTS TO COME, AND SO I DON'T KNOW IF MY COMMENT TO MY COLLEAGUES.
>> I JUST WANTED TO DOVETAIL ON WHAT YOU SAID.
I MEAN, THE OTHER OPTION WOULD BE THE FEE IN LIEU AT THE ORIGINAL ESTIMATE PLUS SOME MARINE STEWARDSHIP PLANS TO WORK ON THE WATERWAY THERE.
SOME OF THOSE EFFORTS COULD ALSO HELP DISCOURAGE SOME OF THE OTHER BOATS THAT ANCHOR THERE AND END UP BECOMING DERELICT.
THAT COULD BE ANOTHER WAY OF GETTING ADDITIONAL BENEFIT IF THAT'S WHAT FOLKS ARE INTERESTED IN AND ALSO HAVING IT THAT THE FEE BE WHAT IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE ORIGINALLY.
AS I SAID, I'VE ALWAYS SUPPORTED GIVING THEM CREDIT FOR THE GREEN ROOF AND I DON'T SEE WHY WE NEED TO DOUBLE THE COST OF A FEE IN LIEU PAYMENT NOW, WHEN THERE'S OTHER THINGS THAT WE COULD DO THAT WOULD REALLY HAVE ACTUALLY A LOT MORE BENEFIT I THINK TO THE WATERWAY.
I JUST SIMPLISTICALLY WAS THINKING IF YOU GET IT DOWN TO A DOLLAR, THEN YOU COULD DEPLOY THAT DOLLAR TO DO THOSE DIFFERENT THINGS.
I'M JUST TRYING TO KEEP IT AS SIMPLE AS I CAN, BUT I'M NOT OPPOSED TO THAT.
>> YEAH. I WAS CURIOUS TO THE LOGIC OF THE LOWER AMOUNT BECAUSE TYPICALLY FOR ALL PROJECTS WE WOULD UPDATE THEM TO THE CURRENT AMOUNTS FOR THE MARINE MANAGEMENT PLAN, I AGREE IT'S WORTH LOOKING AT AND THAT WE SHOULD CONSIDER IT.
IF WE GO WITH THE UPDATED AMOUNT, THAT MEANS THE TOWN COULD INITIATE SUCH A PROJECT ESSENTIALLY AND HAVE CONTROL WITHIN THE CRA, SO THAT DOES SEEM SIMPLER.
>> ALTHOUGH THE TOWN DOES THE PROJECT GOES ON THIS LONG LIST OF PROJECTS THAT HAVE TO BE COMPLETED.
WHEREAS IF THE APPLICANT WERE TO GO AHEAD AND MAKE THOSE IMPROVEMENTS, THAT WOULD PROBABLY GET DOWN A LOT SOONER.
>> BUT WE COULD, IF IT TURNS OUT WE WOULD JUST CONTINUE INITIAL MEETING FOR STAFF TO WORK OUT.
THEY COULD WORK OUT AND INCLUSIVE OF BUILDING THAT IN AS THE PART OF THE FAIR FEE IN LIEU, RIGHT?
>> I THINK THAT I'D BE OKAY WITH THAT.
>> WE WOULD VOTE CLOSE THIS OUT TONIGHT.
LET MR. RHYTHM GET HIS CO, CORRECT?
>> THEN STAFF WORKS OUT A NUMBER AND THEN WE WOULD WITH EPITOME ADMINISTRATIVELY OR WOULD WE COME BACK LATER?
>> WHAT WE WANT TO APPROACH, I'D JUST BE INCLINED TO JUST CONTINUE THE MEETING.
HOPEFULLY, STAFF COULD GET WITH THE APPLICANT COULD COME BACK ON CONSENT.
FEE IN LIEU AND IN THE FEE THAT'S ASSUMING THIS IS AN AGREEMENT REACHED BETWEEN STAFF AND THE APPLICANT AND WHAT FAIR FEE IN LIEU IS.
STAFF NOT DONE WITH UNDERSTANDING THE FEE COULD BE MONETARY FOR THE DARK AND THEN FOR THIS PLAN, WHATEVER THE FAIR VALUE OF THAT IS INCLUSIVE OF PERHAPS TO WORK TO DO THAT.
>> DO YOU THINK IT GETS A LITTLE CONFUSING? I AGREE THAT WE'RE ALWAYS LOOKING AT SEAGRASS AND MANAGEMENT, BUT WE'RE ALSO UPDATING THE CRA PLAN AND THE FEE IN LIE NEEDS TO GO TOWARDS AMENITIES LIKE THIS.
BUT WOULD IT POTENTIALLY BE WISE TO WAIT UNTIL AFTER WE HAVE THAT PLAN TO PROPERLY PUT OUR PRIORITIES TOGETHER FOR WHAT THOSE FUNDS SHOULD GO TO?
>> YEAH. I GUESS I WOULDN'T WANT IT TO HAVE THIS CONTINUE TO DRAG ON.
I'D LIKE TO BE ABLE TO GIVE THE APPLICANTS UNCERTAINTY AND RATHER NOT CONTINUE THE ITEM AND BE ABLE TO COME UP WITH AN ANSWER.
IF IT'S TOO COMPLICATED TO ADD IN THE MARINE STEWARDSHIP PLAN, THEN MAYBE THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WITH THE FEE IN LIEU SOMETHING TO CRA CAN LOOK AT LATER.
BUT I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT THIS APPLICANT HAS JUST DONE EVERYTHING THE RIGHT WAY THE WHOLE TIME, ALL THE HALLWAY.
[01:35:02]
I REALLY WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE GIVE THE APPLICANT CLOSURE TONIGHT, THAT THEY KNOW WHAT THEY NEED TO DO TO GO FORWARD TO GET THERE, THE BUYERS AND THE BUILDING AND REALLY RAD OR NOT CONTINUE THE ITEM.>> IT SEEMS LIKE THAT BUILDING'S BEEN UNDER CONSTRUCTION FOR SIX YEARS.
IT HASN'T BEEN THAT LONG, BUT IT SEEMS THAT HE NEEDS TO BE ABLE TO WRAP IT UP AND GET HIS TENANTS AND THEIR OWNERS IN THERE.
I WANT TO DO WE CAN SELECT THE SET HIM LOOSE AND THEN COME UP WITH THE FEE.
WE CAN PARK THE MONEY FOR A WHILE.
I DON'T THINK IT'S THE PLEASURE OF THIS COUNCIL LIKE WITH A CRA LIKE THAT RENDERING OF THAT DARK IS IN THE FUTURE SOMEWHERE.
I THINK IF WE DID ANYTHING THERE, I'M NOT CRAZY ABOUT IT.
SOMETHING SMALLER SCALE, BUT NOT THAT.
CAN WE PARK THE MONEY AND THEN JUST DECIDE LATER?
>> THE QUESTION IS HOW MUCH MONEY?
>> I WAS GOING TO SUGGEST THE MOTION FOR YOU ON THAT IF YOU WANT.
SOMETHING ALONG THE LINES OF WITHIN 60 DAYS OF THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS RESOLUTION, THE OWNER SHALL PAY A FEE AS DETERMINED BY THE TOWN ENGINEER, WHICH SHALL BE USED AS DETERMINED BY THE COUNCIL.
THAT GIVES YOU THE DISCRETION TO USE IT FOR ANY OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS OR TOWARDS CONSERVATION PROPERTIES OR REMOVAL OF DERELICT VESSELS OR WHATEVER YOU WANT TO DO WITH THAT MONEY.
OF COURSE, WITH YOUR UPCOMING BUDGET, YOU'RE PROBABLY GOING TO APPROPRIATE IT IN YOUR UPCOMING BUDGET, SO GOT IT.
>> OKAY. MOTION TO APPROVE THE APPLICATION WITH THE CAVEAT OF THE STAFF AND AFTERWARDS COME UP WITH A AGREED AMOUNT OF PUBLIC BENEFIT WITHIN 60 DAYS OF THIS NOTE. THAT CLOSE ENOUGH.
>> FEE MO. SORRY. I WAS LOOKING FOR THAT.
>> I WANT TO MAKE SURE I KNOW WHAT DOCUMENT WE'RE ADDING THAT TO HERE.
>> RESOLUTION 2717 AND YOU'RE MODIFYING ON PAGE D SUBSECTION 2717.
>> THAT'S THE ORIGINAL RESOLUTION.
>> YEAH. RESOLUTION 40 [INAUDIBLE]
>> THE ORIGINAL CONDITION, THOUGH, THIS IS UPDATED RESOLUTION.
>> CONDITION. BUT YOU WOULD BE AMENDING THAT ANYWAY IN THE NEW RESOLUTION, THAT SAME CONDITION.
>> I SUGGEST THAT EMOTION WAS WITHIN 60 DAYS OF THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS RESOLUTION, WE SHALL PAY A FEE AS DETERMINED BY THE TOWN ENGINEER, WHICH SHALL BE USED AS DETERMINED BY THE COUNCIL.
>> LET'S REPLACE IN WHICH WE HAD BEFORE WAS RESOLUTION.
>> OR MAYBE STAFF CAN HELP ME OUT WHAT SECTION OF THE RESOLUTION THAT IS.
>> THE 10 ENGINEER BE BASING THE FEE UPON PREFERRED CONCRETE DOC OR JUST AN AVERAGE.
BECAUSE BEFORE IT WAS JUST A PRICE PER SLIP, IT DIDN'T GET DOWN TO THE DETAIL IN TERMS OF WHAT THE MATERIALS WERE.
DO WE JUST TAKE A PERCENTAGE INCREASE FROM THAT BECAUSE TIME AND MATERIALS OR MORE NOW OR HOW WOULD THAT WORK?
>> I UNDERSTOOD THAT MAYOR SUGGESTION IS THAT THE TOWN STAFF AND THE APPLICANT WORKOUT THE AMOUNT OF THAT FEE.
I STARTED THE TOWN ENGINEER IN THERE BECAUSE THAT'S TYPICALLY THE WAY YOUR RESOLUTIONS READ WHEN YOU HAVE SOMETHING, SOMEBODY'S GOT TO DETERMINE WHAT THAT IS AND IT'S GOT TO BE AT THE UNOFFICIAL THAT DETERMINES WHAT THAT IS.
IT CAN'T BE THE APPLICANT AND STAFF DETERMINE IT.
NOW WORK IT OUT AND IT'LL BE WHAT THAT THING IS.
>> HOLD ON NOW BECAUSE WE'RE GETTING SOME APPLICANT MAY HAVE ISSUE WITH THAT MOTION.
>> REAL QUICKLY JUST TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, TOWN ATTORNEY.
THE PROPER SECTION WOULD BE YOU'D WANT A STRIKE THROUGH THE ENTIRE CONDITION NUMBER 4 ON PAGE C OF THE RESOLUTION.
THAT WOULD REMOVE COMPLETELY THE OBLIGATION FOR THE DOCS AND YOU COULD REPLACE IT WITH THE CONDITION THAT YOU SUGGESTED.
[01:40:02]
THEN IF THE MARINE STEWARDSHIP ITEMS ARE OFF THE TABLE THAT YOU DON'T WANT THEM TO BE INCLUDED, CONDITION NUMBER 5, A AND B WOULD ALSO NEED TO BE STRICKEN FROM THIS RESOLUTION.>> OKAY. MOTION TO APPROVE ORDINANCE 43 23, STRIKING CONDITION 4, 5A AND B.
WITHIN 60 DAYS OF TONIGHT'S VOTE, THAT THE APPLICANT AND STAFF COME UP WITH A CONFIRMED IN THE CONTRIBUTION TO THE TOWN REGARDING THE VALUE OF THE DELETED PUBLIC DOCS.
>> THE APPLICANT PAY THAT FEE IN LIEU.
>> APPLICANT PAYS FEE IN LIEU.
>> I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE APPLICANT DOESN'T HAVE COMMENT ON THIS.
>> YEAH. I'M WONDERING IF THEY'RE GOING TO WANT TO PULL THIS AND POSTPONE.
>> THAT'S HOW I SUGGESTED [LAUGHTER]
>> WE'D LOVE TO KNOW YOUR PARTY OVER HERE.
[LAUGHTER] THE QUESTION CAME UP FROM THE APPLICANT.
WHAT HAPPENS IF THE STAFF, AN APPLICANT CAN'T DECIDE ON A MUTUAL VALUE? IF STAFF SAYS, THIS IS WHAT THE VALUE SHOULD BE, THE APPLICANTS SAY THIS IS WHAT THE VALUE SHOULD BE.
THE QUESTION JUST KEEP, THAT WAS THE QUESTION THAT CAME UP FROM THE APPLICANTS END.
>> [OVERLAPPING] IT'S LIKE IT PROVIDES A STRONG MOTIVE TO COME UP WITH SOMETHING THAT'S ACCEPTABLE.
>> EXCUSE ME. I'M DAVID SIEGE.
I'M THE GENERAL CONTRACTOR THERE AND I'VE LOOKED AT THE BIDS AND AFTER WE GOT ALL OF THESE PRICE INCREASES, WE STARTED LOOKING AT OTHER OPTIONS.
BUYING THE FLOATING CONCRETE DIRECTLY AND SO ON AND SO FORTH.
I BELIEVE WE CAN ACTUALLY BUILD THE CONCRETE DOCS AND BE DONE WITH IT WITH ALL THE FEES AND EVERYTHING FOR UNDER $1 MILLION.
NOW STEPS IS OVER 2-6 MILLION.
I SAY IT'S A MILLION AND WE GO BACK AND FORTH AND WE CAN'T RESOLVE IT.
I THINK THERE OUGHT TO BE A MECHANISM WHERE WE EITHER GO TO AN ARBITRATOR OR INDEPENDENT ENGINEER OR SOMEBODY THAT WILL WEIGH OUT THE TWO-SIDES SAY WELL, THIS IS FAIR.
I'M NOT SAYING THAT SHOULD BE MY WAY, I'M JUST SAYING THAT I DON'T WANT TO WAIT 60 DAYS TO FIND THAT WE CAN AGREE AND THERE'S NO MECHANISM TO GET US TO A MIDDLE POINT.
>> I'M REALLY FAILING IN MY JOB AS THE MAYOR HERE OF CONTROLLING IT PER THE QUANTITY JUDICIAL HERE, BUT IT'S REALLY, IT'S UP TO COUNCIL NOW.
THANK YOU. WE REALLY HAVE TWO OPTIONS.
WE GO WITH, IF THOSE THAT WANTED TO FINISH IT TONIGHT, YOU DO A CONDITION AND THEN IT IS GOING TO BE WHAT IT'S GOING TO BE.
I THOUGHT THAT WAS LEGITIMATE WHICH IS WHY I SUGGESTED JUST HAVING A ONE MEETING CONTINUING TO THE NEXT MEETING.
WE'RE HOPEFULLY YOU COME BACK WITH THE NUMBER THAT YOU'VE AGREED WITH.
WE ALREADY KNOW WE'RE GOING TO GO WITH IT, OR IF THERE'S A DIFFERENCE OF OPINION WE HEAR IT AND WE DECIDE.
>> YEAH, AND IT'S FOR STAFF AND THE APPLICANT TO WORK OUT, I MEAN, YOU COULD GET QUOTES FOR THE MATERIALS.
>> OR WE COULD JUST PUT IN A CONDITION THAT SAYS IF THE PARTIES CAN'T AGREE, THEN WE'LL GET TO AN INDEPENDENT PARTY.
>> THE DEBATE IS GOING TO BE ABOUT WHAT'S A REASONABLE SCOPE.
I'M COMFORTABLE PERSONALLY TO THE STAFFING AND THE APPLICANTS CAN GET TOGETHER AND BE REASONABLE ABOUT IT.
BUT I'M NOT GOING TO LEAVE IT TO A THIRD PARTY.
I WOULD HAVE TO RELY UPON STAFF FOR THAT OR WE HEAR IT AND WE MAKE A DECISION.
>> I REALLY DON'T WANT TO CONTINUE THE ITEM.
IT CAN KICK THIS DOWN THE ROAD.
I MEAN, WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO FIGURE OUT A REASONABLE FEE AND LIEU.
IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE THE HIGH-END ESTIMATE FOR THE CONCRETE DOC.
WHEN THIS ORIGINALLY WAS PROPOSED, THERE WERE NO DRAWINGS FOR THIS DOC AND WE KNEW IT WAS GOING TO BE MADE UP AND THE CRA HAD AN ESTIMATE FOR THE PRICE PER SLIP.
THAT'S WHAT IT WAS AND THAT'S WHAT WE CAME UP WITH A NUMBER.
YOU CAN TAKE THAT PRICE FOR SLIP AND YOU CAN MODIFY XB TO MEET CURRENT COSTS FOR TODAY, MULTIPLY IT BY 14 AND THAT'S THE NUMBER.
>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND ON THE FLOOR DOING ON IT.
[01:45:03]
>> WE HAVE A MOTION WE HAVEN'T SET AND HASN'T BEEN SECONDED YET.
>> MY MOTIVATION IS JUST BEING SINCE IT'S SENSITIVE TO THE TIMELINE OF COMPLETING THE BUILDING AND GET THE BODIES IN THERE AND MOVE ON DOWN THE ROAD, GET THAT THING KNOCKED OUT.
THIS HAS BEEN SITTING THERE FOR TOO LONG, SO I'M JUST TRYING TO HELP, WE TRIED TO HELP OUT AND I'M SURE YOU FOLKS WILL COME UP WITH A REASONABLE NUMBER, BUT IF NOT, IT'S.
>> BUT THEN WHAT TO CONTINUING DOES TO THE NEXT MEETING IS IT FORCES A DEADLINE TO COME BACK WITH THE INFORMATION.
WE MAY WIND UP GETTING TWO DIFFERENT ESTIMATES.
THEN THE COUNCIL HAS TO DECIDE AND JUST PICK ONE IN THE MIDDLE OR WHATEVER.
>> OR WE CAN SAY THEY HAVE 30 DAYS TO COME UP WITH A NUMBER AND IF THEY CAN'T, THEN IT COMES BACK TO US FOR REVIEW.
WE'VE GOT A MOTION ON THE FLOOR.
YOU EITHER GET A SECOND OR WE GO AND ALTERNATE.
>> WELL, WE'VE HAD A LOT OF DISCUSSION NOW [OVERLAPPING]
>> THE ORIGINAL MOTION WAS FOR 60 DAYS.
>> THEY HASH OUT IN AGREEMENT AND IT STRIKES 4,5 AB.
>> WHAT I WAS SAYING IS THAT THEY HAVE 30 DAYS TO COME UP WITH A NUMBER, THEN THEY ASKED TO PAY WITHIN 60.
>> I HAVEN'T SECONDED, I WAS JUST WONDERING IF THE COUNSELOR DELANEY WANT TO AMEND THE MOTION.
>> YEAH, YOU ADDED 30 DAYS PAYING 60.
>> IT'S A FRIENDLY MEMBER IF YOU HAVE ACCEPTED IT.
[LAUGHTER] THEY AGREE TO A NUMBER 30 DAYS, PAID IN 60.
>> THAT MOTION WAS SECOND WHERE THE CONDITION IS THE NUMBERS ARE ESTABLISHED WITHIN 30 DAYS AND THEY PAY WITHIN 60.
ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION ON COUNCIL? SEEING NONE ALL IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.
>> MOTION CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.
[NOISE] MOVING ON TO AGENDA ITEM 11,
[11. CONTINUED TO TBA - Abacoa Town Center Zoning Text Amendment.]
WHICH WAS AROUND TABLE THAT'S LISTED ON THE AGENDA AS CONTINUING.I DON'T KNOW IF MY COLLEAGUES HAD SEEN THE EMAIL LANGUAGE ASKING FOR THE CONTINUANCE.
>> I DIDN'T GET THE EMAIL BECAUSE MY TOWN EMAIL ISN'T WORKING.
>> OKAY. IN ANY EVENT, I JUST WANT TO SAY FOR THE RECORD FOR MYSELF, HOPEFULLY, I'M COUNCIL EITHER AGREES OR DOESN'T, THAT WE REQUEST THIS ROUNDTABLE TO ENABLE TOWN COUNCIL DISCUSSIONS TO SEE IF SWIM PARTY POLICY GUIDANCE CONSENSUS MIGHT EMERGE.
THIS IS MY VIEW OUTSIDE ANY SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION.
THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVE, IF YOU WERE TO SEE THE EMAIL, SEEMS TO WANT A DIFFERENT APPROACH WHEREIN, THEY'RE GOING TO BE WORKING WITH STAFF TO GET THIS MORE READY FOR US TO ACT ON IT.
I'M BOTHERED BY THAT EXPECTATION.
IN FACT, I TALKED TO THE TOWN MANAGER ABOUT IT, SO I JUST WANTED TO REINFORCE ON THE RECORD WHAT WE HAD DECIDED UPON.
WE ACTUALLY HAD ASKED FOR A ROUND TABLE AND FOR STAFF TO COME BACK WITH INFORMATION.
THE BENEFIT OF CONTINUING AS THEY'VE ASKED IS NOW WE HAVE THE PRESENTATION FROM STAFF.
WE NOW HAVE SOME OF OUR ANSWERS.
WE CAN CONTINUE TO COLLABORATE INDIVIDUALLY WITH STAFF TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE WHATEVER INFORMATION WE NEED FOR THE ROUND TABLE.
BUT IT IS NOT FIRST READING, IT'S COMING BACK, IT WAS A ROUND TABLE.
I JUST WANTED TO PARTICULARLY SINCE THE APPLICANT'S REPRESENTATIVES SEEM TO SUGGEST THAT THEY NEEDED TO QUICKLY GET WITH STAFF TO MOVE THIS ALONG.
SO I WANTED TO JUST MAKE SURE THAT I'M REPRESENTING THE COUNCIL EXPECTATIONS CORRECTLY.
IT SEEMS LIKE WE HAVE A CONSENSUS ON THAT.
THEN MOVING TO REPORT TOWN ATTORNEY.
[TOWN MANAGER]
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. JUST A COUPLE OF THINGS.
FIRST OF ALL, I DO WANT TO ACKNOWLEDGE THE WORK OF THE PARKS AND RECREATION FOLKS.
WHEN YOU LOOK AT ALL OF THE THINGS THAT THEY'RE DOING IF YOU WANT TO GET A FEEL FOR THIS GO IN FRONT OF THAT COMMUNITY CENTER AND LOOK AT ALL THESE KIDS IN CAMP, HUNDREDS OF KIDS GETTING ON BUSES, THE EXPERIENCE IS JUST TREMENDOUS.
THEN YOU THINK ABOUT ALL THE THINGS THAT THEY MAKE LOOK SO SIMPLE LIKE THE JUPITER JUBILEE AND THE HOLIDAY TREE LIGHTINGS,
[01:50:02]
ALL THE EVENTS, THEY DO WORK VERY HARD OVER THERE.HAVING SAID THAT, THERE'S A LOT OF THINGS THAT WE HAVE IN THE WORKS AND WE HEAR THE MOMS VERY CLEARLY AND SO WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE GET IT RIGHT MOVING DOWN THE ROAD SO WE'RE HEARING THINGS LIKE SPLASH PARKS AND MUCH ISSUES ON SHADE AND EQUIPMENT UPGRADES AND WE'RE WORKING WITH THE COMMUNICATIONS FOLKS RIGHT NOW TO FIND A WAY TO SOLICIT INPUT FROM OUR TOWN MOMS TO SEE WHAT IT IS THAT THEY'RE LOOKING FOR AND PARTICULARLY MAYBE GET SOME CONSENSUS ON WHAT EQUIPMENT THEY MAY BE LOOKING FOR IN THERE.
DEFINITELY HEAR THEM ON SHADE AND THOSE PARTICULAR THINGS.
BUT I ALSO WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE CLEAR ON THE FACT THAT WE'RE FINISHING UP $8 MILLION IN RENOVATIONS TO JUPITER COMMUNITY PARK, THAT INCLUDES LIGHTING, SIDEWALKS, BUILDING, RENOVATIONS, PICNIC TABLES, WATER STATIONS, NEW PLAYGROUND AT EAST VIEW MANOR, ADDING RESTROOMS AT INDIAN CREEK PARK.
THAT WAS A BIG CONCERN FOR MOMS AS WELL.
$500,000 OF PLAYGROUND UPGRADE IN THE CIP.
WE'RE CONVERTING THREE TENNIS COURTS TO EIGHT PICKLEBALL COURTS AT JUPITER COMMUNITY PARK, AND CONVERTING ONE ROLLER HOCKEY RANKING ABACOA COMMUNITY PARK TO FIVE PICKLEBALL COURTS.
THAT'S A LOT OF WORK IN PROGRESS THERE AND SO WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE TO WORK ON THESE BUT WE'RE ALSO GOING TO CONTINUE TO REACH OUT TO THE TOWN MOMS AND MAKE SURE WE GET THESE PLAYGROUND THINGS STRAIGHT AND GET IT RIGHT SO, GO AHEAD MAYOR.
>> I JUST WANTED TO ADD, SO HOPEFULLY, MY COMMENTS GET TO OUR STAFF.
IT'S UNFORTUNATE THAT THOSE COMMENTS WERE MADE THE SAME NIGHT THAT WE'RE CELEBRATING THE GOOD WORK OF STAFF, SO IF YOU DIDN'T HEAR SOMETHING GO BACK AND LISTEN TO MY WORD JUST SAID WHEN IT COMES DOWN TO WHICH THE COUNCIL THAT'S OBLIGATED TO MAKE SURE WE PROVIDE THE FUNDS SO OUR STAFF CAN RUN THE BUSINESS WELL.
I THINK THEY ARE RUNNING IT WELL.
THANK YOU ACCOUNT MANAGER FOR EMPHASIZING THE FACT THAT WE'RE TRYING TO CATCH UP ON RENOVATIONS TO OUR PARKS AND WE STILL HAVE MORE WORK TO DO, NOT TO DIMINISH ANY OF THAT BUT I CERTAINLY WAS BOTHERED BY I COULD CLEARLY SEE THEIR PARKS AND RECS REPRESENTATIVE WAS CLEARLY VISIBLY SHAKEN BY THAT AND TOOK IT PERHAPS TOO PERSONAL, SO I'M REINFORCED, THE BUCK STOPS WITH ME THEN.
>> THANK YOU, MAYOR. I'LL MAKE SURE I PASS THAT ALONG.
THEN ALSO, I WANTED TO GIVE KUDOS TO THE COMMUNICATION STAFF ON THE NEW WEBSITE.
THEY'VE WORKED REALLY HARD ON THIS FOR THE LAST 8-9 MONTHS.
I THINK IT'S QUITE REMARKABLE WHEN YOU GET AN OPPORTUNITY WHEN IT LAUNCHES TO GO ON THIS SITE, I THINK YOU'RE GOING TO BE REALLY PROUD OF THE WORK THAT THEY'VE DONE.
ALSO A CLARIFICATION ON GOLF AND DRIVE, THE COMMENTS ON DOLPHIN DRIVE TONIGHT.
I WANT TO MAKE SURE THE COUNCIL UNDERSTANDS THAT THE COST ASSOCIATED WITH THAT PROJECT COMES FROM THE ENGINEERS AND ARCHITECTS AND NOT FROM THE TOWN MANAGER'S OFFICE AND SO I THINK THAT'S REALLY AN IMPORTANT POINT.
THEN ALSO, DON'T FORGET THAT THURSDAY WE HAVE A BUDGET WORKSHOP 6 O'CLOCK.
NEXT TUESDAY WE HAVE THE SPERRY APPEAL AND THEN WE HAVE THE RIBBON CUTTING FOR THE SATELLITE OFFICES FOR SENATOR HEROLD AND REPRESENTATIVE SCHNEIDER ON THURSDAY THE 29TH AT 05:00 P.M.
SO THAT'S MY REPORT, MR. MAYOR.
[TOWN COUNCIL – LIAISON REPORTS AND COMMENTS]
>> THIS IS KIND OF SILLY, BUT IT'S FUNNY, LAST NIGHT, MY DAUGHTER, WHO'S NOW 20, WAS JOKING ABOUT THE PARK ON INDIAN CREEK.
WHEN MY KIDS WERE SMALL, THEY CALL IT THE WOODEN PLAYGROUND WAS TWO BY SIXES AND IT WAS LIKE A SPLINTER FAST THAT WAS SPLIT AS FAR APART, BUT THEY LOVED IT.
>> YOU NEED TO KNOW HOW TO USE THAT PARK THOUGH [LAUGHTER].
>> BUT ANYWAY, I DON'T KNOW HOW WE GOT IN THE SUBJECT, BUT SHE WASN'T REALLY LAUGHING ABOUT WHAT LIKE HOW TREACHEROUS THAT PLACE WAS, BUT WE CLEANED IT UP. WE'LL GET THERE. WE'RE GETTING THERE.
>> SOMEONE'S BUILT IT, TO BEGIN WITH.
>> WE CALL IT AN IMAGINATION STATION.
>> AND THEN WE USED TO DIG UNDER THE SAME BECAUSE IT'S ALL SAND.
YOU COULD DIG UNDERNEATH IT AND GO UNDERNEATH THE PLAYGROUND AND YOUR PARENTS WOULD NEVER FIND YOU.
>> COUNCIL [INAUDIBLE] [LAUGHTER].
>> I HOPE I NEVER GAVE THE IMPRESSION THAT I DIDN'T APPRECIATE OUR STAFF.
I SPOKE IN HASTE AND AFTER HEARING THE MAYOR GIVE COMMENTS AFTER MY OWN, I'M NOT USED TO TYPICALLY RESPONDING TO PUBLIC COMMENT, BUT I WAITED IN LINE.
THIS IS ONE OF THE MOST POPULAR CAMPS IN THE COUNTY FOR GOOD REASON.
I ABSOLUTELY SEE ALL THE WORK THAT THEY DO AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY'RE CELEBRATED AND I HOPE THAT THEY KNOW THEY ARE.
[01:55:04]
WITH REGARDS TO PARKS, WHAT I WANTED TO CONVEY AND WHAT I HOPE I CONVEYED WAS THAT THE TOWN IS ACTIVELY WORKING ON THIS ITEM.IT'S THE COMMUNITY INVESTMENT PLAN, THE CIP, WHICH IS OUR FIVE-YEAR CAPITAL PLAN.
WHEN I FIRST READ IT AS A RESIDENT ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THIS DYESS, I WAS LIKE, OH MY GOODNESS, THIS IS GREAT.
WE'RE GETTING LIGHTS HERE AND WE'RE GETTING NEW PLAYGROUNDS.
WHY DON'T THEY KNOW ABOUT THIS? THAT'S BEEN A RECOMMENDATION I'VE MADE IS WE NEED TO SHARE WHAT WE'RE DOING OR WHAT WE'RE PLANNING TO DO, WE DON'T DO THAT ENOUGH SO THAT PEOPLE KNOW IT'S COMING.
ANOTHER RECOMMENDATION I HAD MADE WAS, I DO THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO INCLUDE INPUT FROM PARENTS, ALL PARENTS, AND ALL DIFFERENT AGE GROUPS.
I'VE ALSO HEARD COMMENTS FROM THE ELDERLY WANTING EXERCISE EQUIPMENT NEAR PARKS AS WELL SO JUST, RECREATION HAS SUCH AN IMPORTANT JOB AND HELPING ALL DIFFERENT GROUPS OF PEOPLE BE ABLE TO ENJOY THE TOWN THAT WE LIVE IN.
I THINK I'M GLAD THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE DOING THAT GOING FORWARD.
I'VE SEEN THE PLANS FOR THE EASTVIEW MANOR PARK, WHICH IS REALLY EXCITING AND I WANT TO SHARE THEM AND I WANT TO CHEERLEAD WHAT THE TOWN HAS BEEN DOING.
THEY HAVE BEEN TALKING ABOUT BATHROOMS, INDIAN CREEK PARK.
AS A MOM, I CAN SAY THAT'S HUGE BECAUSE THAT'S ONE OF OUR LARGEST PARKS AND WE WOULD OFTEN BRING OUR KIDS THERE, BUT A LOT OF THEM ARE VERY YOUNG AND YOU CAN'T STAY THERE LONG OR HAVE A LARGE GROUP WITHOUT RESTROOM FACILITIES, SO THAT'S JUST GREAT.
IT'S ALSO IMPORTANT THE CONTEXTS FOR THESE DIFFERENT PLAYGROUNDS.
THE PLAYGROUND NEXT TO THE OLD TOWN HALL IS VERY SPECIAL TO A LOT OF PEOPLE.
IT'S A PART OF OLD JUPITER, THAT'S GOING TO BE VERY DIFFERENT FROM AN ABACOA COMMUNITY PARK PLAYGROUND OR CINQUEZ PARK PLAYGROUND, SO YOU HAVE TO TAKE THE PLAYGROUND OR PARKING CONTEXT AND IT'S IMPORTANT TO HEAR FROM THE RESIDENTS AND THE NEIGHBORS OF EACH OF THOSE PARKS.
IT'S SOMETHING I'M VERY PASSIONATE ABOUT.
THIS HAS BEEN A PET PROJECT FOR A WHILE, JUST ASKING AND LEARNING AND GIVING LOTS OF RECOMMENDATIONS, SO THE TOWN, WE ARE ALL AWARE OF IT, WE HAVE BEEN WORKING ON IT FOR YEARS.
WE HOPE TO SHARE MORE OF THE GOOD WORK THAT'S BEING DONE BY THE RECREATION TEAM AND BY ALL THE STAFF.
BUT THAT IS WHAT I HAD WANTED TO CONVEY AND I HOPE I DID.
IF NOT, I HOPE I'M DOING SO NOW.
THE OTHER SMALL ITEM IS THE CELL TOWERS IN MALLORY CREEK.
I JUST WANTED TO SAY THAT I'VE BEEN TO THE ABACOA POA BOARD MEETING TODAY. ON THURSDAY.
I'LL BE GOING TO THE PRESIDENT'S COUNCIL PRESENTING JUST THE UPDATES THAT WE'VE RECEIVED FROM THE OCTOBER 2022 REPORT, FROM OUR LEGAL GUIDANCE ON THAT AND JUST TALKING ABOUT WHAT WE CAN CONTROL AND WHAT WE CAN'T CONTROL GOING FORWARD AND MAKING SURE THAT THERE'S A PROCESS IN PLACE FOR FUTURE TOWERS, AND THAT'S IT.
>> I ECHO WHAT EVERYBODY SAID ABOUT OUR PARKS AND REC DEPARTMENT. THEY REALLY DO A GREAT JOB.
MY SON IS IN THE CAMP RIGHT NOW AND I CAN BARELY GET HIM HOME BEFORE HIS PASSING OUT THE BACKSEAT OF THE CAR BECAUSE HE HAD SO MUCH FUN WITH THE CAMP AND THEY REALLY DO A GREAT JOB.
THAT'S PRETTY COOL. YOU GET THE PRO CARE APP AND STUFF AND YOU GET UPDATES THROUGHOUT THE DAY WHAT THEY'RE DOING, WHERE THEY'RE GOING UNSIGNED AND SIGNED OUT, STUFF LIKE THAT.
THEY SEND ON A MESSAGE SAYING, HEY, WE'RE POSITIVE PICKUP RIGHT NOW FOR YOUR GUYS SAFETY.
SO THEY REALLY DO A GREAT JOB OVER THERE.
I THINK NED'S RUNNING MOST OF THE CAMP.
HE'S DOING A GREAT JOB AND KRISTEN RUNNING THAT DEPARTMENT, SHE'S REALLY DOING WELL OVER THERE.
>> SO I'M AFRAID OF ITEMS JUST QUICKLY.
IT'S A MEXICAN OPERATIONALLY AND OUR TPA MEETING AND IT GETS HIM IF WE THINK ABOUT WE HAVE ROADS, WE HAVE UNROLLED BIKE CLAIMS AND WE HAVE BICYCLE-PEDESTRIAN PATHWAYS.
SOMEONE ASKED A QUESTION, IMMEDIATELY STRUCK ME ABOUT THE EMERGENCE OF WHAT I'M GOING TO CALL BATTERY-POWERED MOTORCYCLES.
BECAUSE I'M NOT SURE THAT THERE'S A DESIGN THAT TAKES THOSE INTO ACCOUNT AND SMELLY BEEN OBSERVING THOSE.
SO IN FACT, ON THE WAY HOME THAT NIGHT, IT WAS INCREDIBLE.
WHAT I OBSERVED WAS RAINY, WET CONDITIONS.
I'M GOING TO CALL THEM BATTERY-POWERED MOTORCYCLES BECAUSE THEY MOVE A LOT QUICKER THAN BICYCLES.
SO I'M NOT SURE IT SHOULD BE IN BICYCLE LANES, BUT I OBSERVED THIS PERSON NORTHBOUND MILITARY TRAIL, AND BIKE LANE NORTHBOUND THEN CHOSE TO CUT ACROSS DOWN ROSS ROAD, WEAVING THROUGH CARS, AT PRETTY GOOD SPEED, AND THEN GET INTO THE OTHER SIDE TRAVELING NORTHBOUND AND SOUTHBOUND BIKE LANE, GETTING TO THE MILITARY TRAIL ROAD INTERSECTION,
[02:00:04]
CROSS WITH THE RED LIGHT QUICKLY, AND THEN GO WESTBOUND AND QUICKLY DOING THE SHOPPING CENTER.I SHOULD HAVE GRABBED AT MY PHONE AND TOOK SOME PICTURES, BUT NONETHELESS, I WANTED TO ASK CALL POLICE TO ADVISE ABOUT STATE LAWS FOR SUCH DRIVERS.
I THINK THIS IS GOING TO BE A SERIOUS EMERGING ISSUE BECAUSE WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND ALL OF US WHERE THEY WERE ENTITLED TO RIDE BECAUSE LIKE I SUGGEST THAT AS FAST AS IT WAS MOVING.
NO BIKE WOULD MOVE THAT QUICKLY.
THAT WAS NOT A BIKE, SO I DON'T THINK IT SHOULD BE IN THE BIKE LANE.
I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT JUST WHEN THEY FIRST CAME OUT WITH THE BICYCLES THAT HAD LITTLE POWER TO THEM.
SO I THINK THAT'S AN ITEM THAT WE NEED TO ADDRESS GOING FORTH AND IT'S AN OPPORTUNITY, PARTICULARLY SINCE WE HAVE LEGISLATORS THAT'LL BE HERE NOW IS IF IT TURNS OUT THAT THE LAWS HAVEN'T YET TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT THAT NEW VEHICLE THAT NEEDS TO.
SO I'D LIKE SOME FOLLOW-UP ON THAT.
I'M NOT SAYING IT HAS TO BE DONE IMMEDIATELY, BUT BECAUSE I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE.
IN FACT FROM WHERE IT WAS IN THAT CAR I SAW ANOTHER ONE.
NOT AS BAD, BUT SO IT'S INCREDIBLE.
>> I HAVE MANY BIKE. A LOT PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES HAVE E-BIKES AND SO THERE ARE SOME PEOPLE WHO ABUSE THEM AND SOME OF THEM CAN GO 25 MILES AN HOUR AND SOME OF THEM CAN'T.
I JUST WANT IT TO JUST CAUTION THAT YOU DON'T NECESSARILY RESTRICT PEOPLE WITH DISABILITIES WHO USE E-BIKES TO FORCE THEM ON THE ROAD AND NOT ALLOW THEM TO BE IN A BIKE LANE.
>> BUT I THINK THERE'S A DISTINCTION JUST SO YOU KNOW THAT I WAS MAKING THERE'S E BIKES.
I WOULDN'T CALL THIS AN E BIKE AND CALL IT A MOTORCYCLE.
IT JUST SEEMS LIKE IT'S GETTING A LOT MORE.
>> BEEFIER GO FASTER AND WHATEVER.
SO I'VE NEVER HAD AN ISSUE AND NEVER HAD A PROBLEM WHEN I SAW PEOPLE ON THE INITIAL ROUND OF BIKE.
THEY WERE EACH ON THE ROAD, THAT IS BIKE, WHATEVER IT WAS GOING DOWN MAPLE WOOD.
COUPLE OF DAYS AGO, I WAS OUT WALKING MY DOG.
ONE GUY IS ON THE ROADS BIKE LANE WRONG SIDE OF THE STREET AND THE OTHER GUYS ON THE OTHER SIDE AND THEY WERE CRISSCROSSING ACROSS THE STREET AND THEY'RE GONE PRETTY.
IT'S NOT THE SMALL-ENGINE BICYCLE.
THEY'RE MUCH FASTER, BETTER ACCELERATION IT.
>> THERE ARE COMMUNITIES THAT ARE PUTTING ORDINANCES IN PLACE THAT ADDRESS THESE ISSUES AS THEY COME ONLINE.
SO I BELIEVE OTHER COMMUNITIES IN PALM BEACH COUNTY MAY HAVE ALREADY DONE SO.
>> BUT AGAIN, I'M DISTINGUISHING ANOTHER VERSION OF THE MARKET PRODUCT, WHICH IS MUCH FASTER VEHICLE AND PEOPLE DRIVE THEM VIEW IT AS THAT.
SO I WOULDN'T WANT THEM IN A BIKE LANE.
I WOULDN'T WANT THEM DRIVING LIKE THAT IN THE BICYCLE-PEDESTRIAN PATHWAY.
QUITE FRANKLY, WOULDN'T WANT THEM IN THE BIKE LANE.
COMING ACROSS A BIKER OR SOMEBODY BORN IN ONE OF THOSE BIKER IT'S AN ASSESSED.
>> ARE THEY FAST ENOUGH TO GO INTO REGULAR UNFEELING? IT'S BETWEEN HER.
>> WELL, OUR POLICE HAVE TO DEAL WITH THIS WHETHER WE GET INVOLVED OR NOT.
I JUST REALLY WAS JUST OBSERVING IT AND IF WE NEED TO INFLUENCE LEGISLATION OR WHATEVER BUT INTERESTINGLY, AT THE TPA, WE'D HAVE TO COME UP WITH DEALING WITH THAT.
TRULY IN PLANNING AND WHATEVER.
NEXT ITEM I JUST WANTED TO SHARE IS THAT THE BEER IS CALLED OUT COBE ACHIEVED.
WAS ACHIEVED BY CREDIBLE ALIGNMENT BETWEEN TOWN COUNCIL MEMBERS, TOWN MANAGER, AND STAFF.
TO REALLY THINK ABOUT IF YOU LOOK, THE STAFF WAS DIRECTING AND WHATEVER WE REALLY DID ACHIEVE A SIGNIFICANT OUTCOME.
THIS TOWN COUNCIL, TOWN MANAGER AND STAFF TEAM HAS COLLECTED WE HAD MORE BENEFICIAL ACHIEVEMENTS IN THE PAST YEAR THAN EVER BEFORE AND I JUST WANTED TO SAY THANK YOU TO MY COLLEAGUES, TOWN MANAGER AND STAFF.
WOW. WITH THAT, OUR TOWN MANAGER, ANNUAL PERFORMANCE EVALUATION, IT WANTS TO BUY US ON 61.
IT IS OUR ACCOUNTABILITY COLLECTIVELY, I WISH LATE, ADDICT COMPLETE MINE, INCLUDING THE FINAL PERFORMANCE REVIEW MEETING WITH MR. KACH LAST WEEK.
JUST ASK THE OTHERS DO LIKEWISE.
>> I'LL SEE ANYTHING ABOUT THEM.
>> I UNDERSTAND AND I DIDN'T EITHER.
IT'S AN OBLIGATION OF THE CONTRACT.
IT SNUCK UP ON ME, BUT REALLY WERE THE ONES ACCOUNTABLE FOR DOING THIS EVALUATION.
I'M JUST ASKING EACH ONE OF US TO DO IT.
WHEN EVERYBODY IS COLLECTIVELY DONE, THEN WE'LL SCHEDULE JUST A CONVERSATION
[02:05:02]
BECAUSE THEN WE NEED TO DECIDE ABOUT COMPENSATION ADJUSTMENT.THEN JUST LASTLY, PEDESTRIAN CROSSWALKS IN THE MAIN LANE TOWN MANAGER WEEKLY REPORT.
ENGINEERING STAFF HAD RANKED 11 POTENTIAL PEDESTRIAN CROSSING LOCATIONS.
THERE WAS NO SEPARATE RANKING BY POLICE, WHICH I WOULD HAVE LIKED TO HAVE SEEN.
IN FACT, I'M GOING TO ASK FOR A SEPARATE ONE THAT WAS REFERENCED TO SAYING THAT WE ASKED THE POLICE AND THEY AGREED.
BUT I COULD TELL YOU, I'VE OBSERVED THAT THERE'S SOME OF THESE LOCATIONS, PARTICULARLY OUT IN FRONT OF MY NEIGHBORHOOD.
WELL I'VE SEEN THE POLICE THERE ARE A NUMBER OF TIMES TRYING TO OBSERVE AND ENFORCE MOVEMENTS ACROSS THERE AND I DO THINK THIS IS A DEVICE THAT COULD HAVE SPARED OUR POLICE DEPARTMENT FROM GOING THERE.
QUITE FRANKLY, AS OFTEN AS I THINK THEY HAVE, THEY GO THERE WHENEVER, FOR EXAMPLE, THE CROSSING GUARDS FEELS IT DOESN'T FEEL LIKE IT'S A SAFE CROSSING.
IT'S THE ONLY CROSSING ON THE LIST THAT'S ACTUALLY AN INTERSECTION.
I'M GOING TO PUSH FOR THAT BUT THIS IS ONE.
IT'S IN A STRATEGIC PLAN I'VE ADVOCATED FOR IT.
I THINK WE ALL DO ALL ELEVEN, I'M JUST ASKING YOU ALL TO LOOK AT THE LIST.
WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE LIST, AND IF YOU HAVEN'T DONE THIS, THERE ARE THE GARDENS, GO BY THE HOSPITAL, THE ROAD GO NORTH FROM HOSPITAL, THERE'S A SCHOOL, THERE IS A PEDESTRIAN CROSSWALK.
THAT'S THE FIRST TIME I NOTICED THAT A FEW YEARS AGO.
YOU EVER GO DOWN TO COSTCO, WHICH I DO FOR GAS ON WEEKENDS.
IF YOU GO ON MACARTHUR BOULEVARD ON THE OTHER SIDE, THERE'S A SCHOOL IN ONE SIDE AND THE PARK ON THE OTHER.
THE GARDENS HAS GOT FIVE OR SIX PEDESTRIAN CROSSWALKS INTEGRATED WITH A SPEED SIGN.
THE GARDENS IS WAY AHEAD OF THE TOWN ON PEDESTRIAN CROSSWALK DEVICES TO IN EVERY SITUATION IS UNIQUE.
WE DON'T HAVE A SITUATION LIKE THAT, BUT I'M GOING TO SUGGEST IT'S OVERDUE FOR US TO INVEST IN THAT AND PROTECTING PEDESTRIANS AND BICYCLISTS AT THESE CROSSINGS.
I'D ASKED YOU ALL TO GO BACK TO THE 5191 AT SOME POINT IN TIME, WHETHER IT'S IN CIP OR WHATEVER, I'M GOING TO AGAIN KEEP ADVOCATING. WHY NOT DO THEM ALL? BECAUSE WE COULD JUST CONTRACTING AND ENDURING.
BUT THAT'S A COUNCIL DECISION I'M JUST ADVOCATING THAT AROUND SCHOOLS AND ACTIVE CROSSWALKS, THIS WOULD REALLY BE A SAFETY IMPROVEMENT AND QUITE FRANKLY COULD OFFSET THAT WHAT'S HAPPENING SOMETIMES WITH POLICE HAVING TO BE DISPATCHED TO BRING PEOPLE IN A BETTER SAFE BEHAVIOR SO WITH THAT, THAT'S ALL I HAD AND. [OVERLAPPING]
>> MAYOR, I WOULD LIKE TO JUST ADD TWO POINTS.
YOU BROUGHT UP TWO BIG ITEMS. ONE IS THE ANNUAL REPORT FOR A TOWN MANAGER AND I JUST WANT TO SAY HOW IMPORTANT THAT IS FOR ALL OF US TO COMPLETE BECAUSE IF WE REMEMBER PREVIOUS DISCUSSIONS AROUND THE PREVIOUS TOWN MANAGER AND IN THE PAST, IT'S ALWAYS BEEN IN THE CONTRACT, BUT IT HADN'T BEEN DONE.
ONE THING I WOULD LIKE TO RECOMMEND THAT WE DO IS JUST MAKE SURE THAT A PUBLIC RECORD IS CREATED THAT CAN BE FOUND.
I TRIED TO FIND ONE ON THE PREVIOUS TOWN MANAGER AND COULD NOT, AND THAT WAS MY ONLY PUBLIC COMMENT THAT I GAVE DURING THAT ENTIRE INCIDENT.
I DO THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO CREATE A PUBLIC RECORD.
I WILL CERTAINLY DO MY PART TO CREATE ONE.
I HAVE BEEN HAVING CONVERSATIONS WITH THE TOWN MANAGER ABOUT PERFORMANCE AND IT'S SO IMPORTANT.
I THINK BECAUSE HE DOES SUCH AN EXCELLENT JOB, IT'S EASY TO START [LAUGHTER] WITH THEM.
WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE FUTURE HOLDS, WHAT FUTURE TOWN MANAGERS HOLD THE SEAT.
WE ALL ARE SUBJECT TO EVALUATION AND WE JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE PROCESSES IN PLACE WHEREBY RESIDENTS CAN UNDERSTAND THE PERFORMANCE OF OUR TIME MANAGER AND HOW IT GOES FORWARD.
THAT'S A VALUE THAT'S IMPORTANT TO ME, THAT CAME FROM THE PAST INCIDENT LESSONS LEARNED THERE.
I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THAT KNOWN.
THE SECOND ONE IS WITH TRANSPORTATION ITEMS GENERALLY, WE'VE HAD A LOT OF TRANSPORTATION ITEMS BROUGHT UP IN COMMENTS AND THERE'S JUST A LOT TO LEARN FOR THE REST OF US THAT AREN'T ON TPA.
I THINK WE HAVE TO VERIFY THAT THOSE WOULD PROVIDE THE BENEFITS IN OUR TOWN AND OUR CONTEXT AND THERE'S A LOT OF LEARNING THAT NEEDS TO GO WITH THAT.
AGAIN, I'M LEARNING IN THE CONTEXT OF THE CHAMBER AND STRATEGIC PLANNING AND I DON'T KNOW HOW TO GET THE INFORMATION ON ALL THESE DIFFERENT ITEMS TO BE ABLE TO CONTRIBUTE.
[02:10:06]
I FEEL LIKE YOU WILL BRING UP A LOT OF DIFFERENT ITEMS AND WE CAN PROPERLY EVALUATE THEM WITHOUT HAVING THAT SAME BACKGROUND AND TRANSPORTATION.I DON'T KNOW HOW TO ADDRESS, BUT I WANTED TO FLAG THAT.
THOSE ARE JUST TWO THOUGHTS I'M GOING INTO THIS RIGHT NOW.
>> RIGHT ON THAT ONE UNDER PEDESTRIAN CROSSWALKS IT IS IN OUR STRATEGIC PLAN.
>> I WAS MAKING THE AWARENESS OF WHERE THEY ARE IN PLACES THAT Y'ALL MIGHT TRAVEL, MAYBE YOU'VE SEEN IT.
I'M JUST SAYING GO AND SEE WHAT THOSE ARE.
IN FACT THE COUNTIES HOPEFULLY FINALLY BEGINNING TO PROJECT ALONG A1A.
THEY WERE ADDING 24 PEDESTRIAN CROSSWALKS.
THERE ARE DEVICES THAT ARE PRETTY COMMON PLACE WE JUST DON'T YET HAVE THEM ON JUPITER.
WE CAN PROCEED DOING A FEW AT A TIME OR WE CAN REALIZE WHEN THE COST COULD DO MORE AT ONCE, BUT ULTIMATELY, IT ENDED UP IN THE WEEKLY REPORT.
ALL I'M DOING HERE IS JUST DRAWING ATTENTION TO IT.
BECAUSE I DO KNOW I'M WELL AWARE OF THE CROSSING GUARDS FEELING OF SAFETY CONCERNS LEAVING THE SHORES.
I ALSO HAVE A UNIQUE INTERSECTION OF ALSO OBSERVED A POLICE OUT THERE TRYING TO OBSERVE IT AND ENFORCE I GO OUT THERE EVERY DAY.
THIS IS JUST AWARENESS, IT MAY BE WEEKS, MONTHS BEFORE WE GET BACK TOGETHER.
BUT I THOUGHT THIS IS ONE PLACE TO MORE THAN JUST A REPORT SAYING, HEY, GO HERE AND GO HERE AND SEE.
THERE ISN'T ANY LEARNING ON TPA, THE BEST THING TO DO IS SEE HIM WORKING AND CONCLUDE WHETHER IN YOUR OPINION THEY HELP OR NOT.
>> I JUST WANTED TO GO BACK TO THE TOWN MANAGER EVALUATION.
WE NEVER AGREED ON A STANDARD FOR THE EVALUATION OR METRICS SO WITHOUT THAT, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE FIVE DIFFERENT EVALUATIONS BASED ON FIVE DIFFERENT THINGS.
IN THE BEGINNING I HAD WANTED TO STANDARDIZE IT, BUT WE NEVER GOT TO DO THAT.
WE WANT TO COME UP WITH SOMETHING LIKE THAT OR EVERYONE JUST.
>> IN HIS CONTRACT IT WAS STATED WE WERE GOING TO COME UP WITH IN SIX MONTHS.
I USED WHAT WAS ATTACHED NOT COMPLETELY, BUT I TOOK INTO ACCOUNT WHICH IS SOMETHING THAT YOU ADVANCED.
I'VE DONE IT IN A WAY THAT I'M COMFORTABLE WITH DOING IT.
IT'S A WRITTEN DOCUMENT AND I'M COMFORTABLE WITH IT SO I DON'T THINK WE HAVE TO HAVE NECESSARILY THE SAME FORM.
WE ALL HAVE TO HAVE SOME BASIS FOR SAYING WE EVALUATED HIS PERFORMANCE AND HERE'S HOW WE EVALUATED AND HERE'S THE BASIS FOR THAT JUDGMENT.
I THINK I'VE DONE THAT AND I'M JUST ASKING EVERYBODY ELSE DO LIKEWISE.
>> I REGRET THAT ONLY BECAUSE OF MY CONVERSATIONS WITH THE TOWN MANAGER ABOUT PERFORMANCE AND HOW I LIKE TO DO THAT GOING FORWARD.
JUST RECOGNIZING THAT THIS IS AN EXECUTIVE POSITION AND THIS IS A VERY HIGH LEVEL POSITION WITHIN THE TOWN.
LOOKING AT SOME OF THE METRICS THAT WE HAD DISCUSSED EARLIER AND RECOGNIZING, I DO WANT TO CREATE A PUBLIC DOCUMENT THAT RESIDENTS CAN REACH IT THEY NEED TO, BUT I DON'T THINK IT NEEDS TO GO BEYOND THAT.
I THINK IT'S SUFFICIENT. I'M PLEASED WITH THAT.
>> JUST MAKE PUBLIC THE ORIGINAL WHITEBOARD.
THE FIRST DAY HE CAME INTO OFFICE.
>> I GUESS I HAVE TO THROW MY STICKER CHART AWAY THEN BECAUSE THAT'S HOW I WAS DOING.
>> REMEMBER WHAT I SAID? YOU SURE YOU WANT TO DO THIS.
>> WHAT'S VERY INTERESTING, AND I'LL JUST ADD THIS MAYOR.
I HAVEN'T HAD AN OPPORTUNITY FOR EACH OF YOU.
BUT IN OUR ONE-ON-ONES, I'M JUST PROVIDING A LIST OF THE ACCOMPLISHMENTS OVER THE LAST YEAR.
WHAT'S REALLY REMARKABLE WHEN YOU PUT THAT LIST TOGETHER, IT POPS RIGHT OUT AT YOU THAT IT MAY BE THE TOWN MANAGERS EVALUATION BUT NONE OF THESE THINGS CAN GET DONE WITHOUT THE TOWN STAFF, WITHOUT THE COUNCIL.
IT JUST REALLY POPPED OUT IT'S ALL OF HER EVALUATION.
IT JUST HAPPENS TO FALL BACK ON ME SO IT'S JUST PRETTY MARKETABLE.
WE'VE ACCOMPLISHED A LOT IN THE LAST YEAR.
>> I DO APPRECIATE THE DOCUMENTS THAT WE CREATE JUST BECAUSE THEY ARE POTENTIALLY MORE DETAILED THAN ANY OTHER METHODS.
>> THANK YOU [INAUDIBLE] AND NOW I CALL THE MEETING TO CLOSURE. THANK YOU.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.