Jun 18, 2024 Town Council

>> VICE MAYOR SANDSTROM.

>> ACTING TOWN MANAGER MORETO.

>> COUNCILOR DELANEY.

>> ACTING TOWN ATTORNEY BAIRD.

>> WE BEGIN TONIGHT WE HAVE A PRESENTATION I THINK BY OUR FIRE CHIEF.

[1. Jupiter Fire Rescue department (JFRD) update - Introduction of Deputy Chief Stephen Shaw. #]

>> GOOD EVENING, MAYOR, COUNSEL.

WHILE SOME OF YOU HAVE HAD THIS OPPORTUNITY TO MEET STEVEN PERSONALLY, I REALIZED THAT WE HADN'T TAKEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO FORMALLY INTRODUCE HIM TO THE COUNCIL AS WELL AS THE PUBLIC.

I'D LIKE TO FORMALLY INTRODUCE YOU TO DEPUTY CHIEF STEVEN SHAW WITH JUPITER FIRE RESCUE.

STEVE BEGAN HIS CAREER AS A VOLUNTEER WITH CORAL SPRINGS FIRE DEPARTMENT A LONG LONG TIME AGO, BUT EVENTUALLY MOVED OVER TO FORT LAUDERDALE FIRE RESCUE, AND IT'S TRULY A TESTAMENT TO HIS DEDICATION WHAT HE ACHIEVED THERE.

HE STARTED AS A FIREFIGHTER PARAMEDIC, STEADILY CLIMBED THE RANK, SERVING AS A DRIVER ENGINEER, A LIEUTENANT, TRAINING CAPTAIN, BATTALION CHIEF OF TRAINING AND THEN ON IN SPECIAL OPERATIONS, AND THEN ONTO ASSISTANT CHIEF OF SUPPORT SERVICES OVER BOTH TRAINING AND EMS THERE.

IN ALL, HE DID 25 YEARS OF SERVICE AT FORT LAUDERDALE FIRE RESCUE BEFORE RETIRING.

NOT ONLY THAT THOUGH, HE'S A REGISTERED NURSE, HE'S HUSBAND, TECHNICIAN, FIRE INSTRUCTOR, AND A SOMEWHAT RARE AND SPECIALIZED ROLE, HE'S A BOARD CERTIFIED COMMUNITY PARAMEDIC.

HE HOLDS THE ACCREDITATION TITLES OF CHIEF TRAINING OFFICER AND CHIEF FIRE OFFICER.

HAS AN MBA FROM FLORIDA ATLANTIC UNIVERSITY, HIS COMMITMENT AND DEDICATION IS JUST UNWAVERING BECAUSE HE'S CURRENTLY ALSO ENROLLED IN THE EXECUTIVE FIRE OFFICER PROGRAM AT THE NATIONAL FIRE ACADEMY.

HE'S WELL KNOWN NATIONWIDE, HE'S AN AUTHOR.

HE'S AN INSTRUCTOR AT THE LARGEST FIRE SERVICE CONFERENCE IN THE WORLD, FDIC.

HE ALSO RUNS A PODCAST ON FIRE SERVICE LEADERSHIP THAT'S LISTENED TO NATIONWIDE.

HE'S A MEMBER OF THE FLORIDA URBAN SEARCH AND RESCUE TASK FORCE TEAM 2.

THIS IS THAT SPECIALIZED TEAM THAT GETS DEPLOYED ALL OVER THE WORLD TO MAJOR DISASTERS.

BEYOND THAT, HE'S JUST AN INCREDIBLE PERSON.

I WAS JUST WANTED TO INTRODUCE YOU TO STEVE AND GIVE HIM A CHANCE TO FORMALLY SAY A FEW WORDS TO YOU AS WELL.

>> GOOD EVENING, MAYOR, COUNCIL, AND ALL THE RESIDENTS AND EVERY HERE THIS EVENING.

I WANTED TO SAY HELLO, INTRODUCE MYSELF.

THANK YOU FOR ALL THAT, CHIEF DONATO.

IT'S BEEN NINE WEEKS SO FAR, AND I CAN SAY WITHOUT A DOUBT, I HAVE NEVER BEEN BUSIER IN MY ENTIRE LIFE. BUT I LOVE THE WORK.

IT JUST REWARDING, BEING ABLE TO BUILD THE FIRE DEPARTMENT FROM THIS LEVEL, INCORPORATING NOT ONLY OUR EXPERIENCES AND BEING PART OF THAT TEAM, BUT TAKING THE RELEVANT AND PERTINENT ITEMS OF TODAY FOR EVERYTHING FROM EV VEHICLES, MEDICAL PROCEDURES, WHAT HAVE YOU AND PUTTING THEM ALL INTO THE BASE OF WHAT IT'S GOING TO BE NO DOUBT A WORLD CLASS FIRE DEPARTMENT.

THANK YOU FOR THAT OPPORTUNITY.

I WILL SAY TO THE RESIDENTS, THE STRUGGLE I HAVE IS I WANT TO GET OUT THERE AND MEET MORE PEOPLE.

THE RELATIONSHIPS I'M BUILDING, THE TALKS I'M HAVING, I CRAVE THEM.

I WISH I COULD DO MORE SO I'M TRYING TO BALANCE THAT IMMENSE TASK LIST I HAVE, WHICH IS RIDICULOUSLY LARGE.

WITH TRYING TO GET OUT THERE AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE, WHETHER IT'S ARRIVING TO SOMEBODY'S HOUSE OR INADVERTENTLY

[00:05:01]

HITTING A BINGO MEETING THAT WASN'T PREPARED TO SEE A COUPLE OF WEEKS AGO, BUT EVERY CHANCE I GET TO TALK TO SOMEBODY IS AN OPPORTUNITY, I RELISH THOSE.

THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY AND THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY.

>> THANK YOU AND WELCOME.

>> MOVING ON TO CITIZEN COMMENTS.

[CITIZEN COMMENTS]

THIS IS THE TIME FOR NON AGENDA ITEMS SPEAKERS ARE LIMITED TO 3 MINUTES.

ANYONE WISHING TO SPEAK IS ASKED TO STATE HIS HER NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD PRIOR TO ADDRESSING TOWN COUNCIL.

DO WE HAVE ANY CITIZEN COMMENTS?

>> YES. VERSUS ERIC WHITES.

AFTER ERIC, IT'S LISA REAL.

>> GOOD EVENING, ERIC WHITES, 230 OCEAN GRAND BOULEVARD, JUPITER, FLORIDA.

I'M TALKING ABOUT THE FIREHOUSES.

MY SONS COME TO VISIT DOWN HERE AND I'M GOING TO TAKE THEM UP ON ROUTE 1 TO SHOW HIM THE NEW BRIDGE, AND THE SON IS GOING TO GO.

HEY, DAD, LOOK, THERE'S A FIREHOUSE ON THE RIGHT OR DAD, LOOK THERE'S ANOTHER ONE ON THE LEFT.

THAT'S WHAT WE WANT TO STOP.

THIS WOULD BE RIDICULOUS TO HAVE A FIREHOUSE HERE AND A SECOND FIREHOUSE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE STREET.

I WROTE TO AND I COPIED YOU ALL, AND I WROTE TO COMMISSIONER MARINO, AND YOU HAVE THE RESPONSE, AND SHE WRITES BACK.

AS FOR JUPITER TAXPAYERS, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WHOEVER IS SUPPLYING THE SERVICES, THE CITIZENS ARE GETTING THE BEST POSSIBLE ATTENTION.

ONLY TIME WILL BEAR THIS OUT.

IS VERY NICE. IT MEANS NOTHING.

IT DOESN'T MEAN SHE'S GOING TO DO ANYTHING FOR US.

I THINK WE NEED TO SPEAK UP MORE.

WE NEED TO GET THE COMMUNITY TO SPEAK UP.

I DON'T HAVE A SKIN IN THE GAME WHETHER WHO RUNS THE FIREHOUSES BUT THE LAST THING I WANT TO SEE IS ANOTHER SET OF FIREHOUSES ACROSS THE STREET FROM ANOTHER FIREHOUSE I THINK YOU'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT MAKING SOME LAND AVAILABLE BY THE PARK, I THIS IT IS PARK.

THAT'S ALL I WANT TO SAY.

I'M HERE, I'M FIRED UP ON THIS.

THIS REALLY TICKS ME OFF.

I SENT YOU A COPY OF THAT AND I WISH SOMEBODY WOULD SPEAK UP AND I WISH YOU GET THE COMMUNITY GOING TO CONTACT THESE PEOPLE.

WHEN I GET A COMMENT LIKE THIS, CITIZENS ARE GETTING THE BEST POSSIBLE ATTENTION, ONLY TIME WILL BEAR THIS OUT MEANS NOTHING TO US.

ERIC WHITES, I THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

I'M GOING TO KEEP JUMPING ON THIS.

BUT YOU CAN'T LET THIS GO.

WE DON'T WANT TO HAVE MULTIPLE FIREHOUSES AND THE MONEY THAT IT TAKES TO PAY FOR THEM. THANK YOU.

>> LISA VRELAN AND CINDY LOFT.

>> GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS LISA VRELAN, AND I LIVE IN THE HEIGHTS.

I'M NOT A FIREFIGHTER.

I'M NOT A MEMBER OF THE UNION.

I DON'T WORK FOR THE COUNTY.

I DON'T WORK FOR PALMEACH COUNTY FIRE RESCUE.

I'M NOT A PAID ACTRESS.

I'M A CONCERNED RESIDENT OF JUPITER.

I'M CONCERNED WITH THE PROPOSED LAND USE CHANGE FOR CINQUEZ PARK.

WHILE IT WAS DISCUSSED AT THE LAST PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING WHERE THE CONVERSATION WAS JUST ABOUT CHANGING THE LAND USE AND NOT WHAT IT'S FOR, YET WE KNOW WHAT IT'S FOR.

THOSE COMMENTS WERE SAID.

IT WAS WIDELY KNOWN WHAT THIS LAND USE CHANGE IS FOR AND ONCE AGAIN, YOUR TOWN RESIDENTS ARE UPSET ABOUT THE CHOICES YOU ARE MAKING THAT ARE IMPACTING THEM.

CINQUEZ PARK HAS BEEN IDENTIFIED AS THE SITE FOR A FIRE STATION.

MANY OF US HAVE ALREADY TOLD YOU HOW IMPORTANT THIS PROPERTY IS TO THE COMMUNITY, AND YOU QUITE LITERALLY WANT TO PAVE PARADISE AND PUT UP A PARKING LOT.

SEVERAL RESIDENTS SPOKE AT THE LAST PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING, AND QUITE FRANKLY, NONE OF THEM WERE IN SUPPORT OF THIS LAND USE CHANGE.

SEVERAL SPEAKERS WERE CARVER AVENUE RESIDENTS WHO WILL HAVE TO ENDURE THE CONSTRUCTION PROCESS AND THEN HAVE A FIRE STATION IN THEIR DRIVEWAY AND A PERMANENT NEIGHBOR.

FIRE STATIONS DO NOT MAKE GOOD NEIGHBORS.

HOW IS THIS FAIR TO THOSE RESIDENTS? HOW IS THIS FAIR TO THE RESIDENTS AND VISITORS WHO USE THIS SPACE FOR RECREATION, REST AND RELAXATION, AND A MEETING SPOT? UNFORTUNATELY, THEY HAVE BECOME AN AFTERTHOUGHT IN THIS WHOLE MESS YOU'VE CREATED.

IT'S OUTRAGEOUS TO ME THAT RESIDENTS CONTINUE TO BE DISMISSED AND WHEN THEY TELL YOU TIME AND TIME AGAIN HOW YOUR DECISIONS ARE GOING TO GREATLY IMPACT THEM.

LASTLY, I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS A FEW COMMENTS THAT WERE MADE AT THE MAY 21 COUNCIL MEETING SINCE I WAS NOT ABLE TO ATTEND THE LAST TOWN COUNCIL MEETING.

AT NO POINT SHOULD A SITTING MEMBER OF THE TOWN COUNCIL EVER TELL RESIDENTS THAT THEY SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF THEMSELVES WHEN THEY SPEAK UP.

[00:10:02]

RESIDENTS FOUND THE OFFICIAL POSTING FROM DECEMBER THAT STATED CINQUEZ WAS NOT AN OPTION.

NOTHING IS MORE DISCOURAGING TO SOMEONE WHO COMES BEFORE THEIR TOWN GOVERNMENT ONLY TO BE SPOKEN DOWN TO, CALLED LIARS, AND THAT THEY SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF THEMSELVES.

COUNCIL SHOULD NEVER TELL THE RESIDENTS THAT THEY WERE ELECTED TO SERVE, THAT THEY HAVE SO HAD IT, AND WHOEVER IS POSTING SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF OURSELVES.

I FIND THOSE COMMENTS TO BE EXCEPTIONALLY DISTASTEFUL AND DISRESPECTFUL AND IT HAS NO PLACE IN THIS TOWN.

NOTHING SAYS YOU AREN'T LISTENING LIKE A HANDFUL OF INSULTS.

>> CINDY LOFT, THEN KRISTIN HENRY.

>> I AM CINDY LOFT, STILL A JUPITER RESIDENT.

I'M HERE FOR THE DASH CAMS FOR SAFETY OF CITIZENS AND OFFICERS ALIKE.

MY CRIME WAS DRIVING THROUGH AN UNDERSERVED NEIGHBORHOOD IN YOUR COMMUNITY.

I'M GOING TO SHARE COMMENTS MADE BY A HIGH RANKING OFFICER FROM ONE OF THE LARGEST POLICE DEPARTMENTS IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA FROM LAST YEAR.

THE OFFICERS IN THE HOUSE WILL UNDERSTAND THESE COMMENTARIES BETTER THAN I DO.

ALONG WITH THE DEPO, I'D LIKE TO SEE A TIMESTAMP OF THE OFFICERS RADIO TRANSMISSIONS TO SEE PRECISELY WHAT TIME HE INITIALLY CALLED IN THE TRAFFIC STOP AS OPPOSED TO WHEN HE RAN HER TAG NUMBER ON THE COMPUTER IN HIS CAR.

A LOT OF TIMES THESE AGGRESSIVE YOUNG COPS WILL FISH ON AREA LOOKING FOR PEOPLE BUYING DOPE OR PROVIDING THEM.

OFTENTIMES THEY WILL RUN THE TAG NUMBER AND WHEN THE REGISTRATION COMES BACK, THEY WILL RUN THE REGISTERED OWNER'S NAME FOR POSSIBLE WARRANTS OR DL SUSPENSION.

THEN THEY WILL CALL IN THE STOP DOLLARS TO DOUGHNUTS NO PUN INTENDED.

THIS IS OR IN HER CASE DONE BEFORE HE CALLED IN THE TRUMPED UP REASON FOR THE STOP.

IF THIS IS PROVEN, AND IT OFTENTIMES IS CLARIFIED BY THE ELECTRONIC TIME STAMP FROM FCIC ON THE COMPUTER, THE OFFICER IS LYING.

IN OTHER WORDS, IF HE SAW HER, RAN HER, THEN A MINUTE OR TWO LATER, CALLS IN THE ATTEMPT TO STOP, IT PROVE THAT HE'S UNTRUTHFUL AND THE WHOLE REASON FOR THE ENCOUNTER IS A LIE.

AS FAR AS HER NOT PULLING OVER, THERE WAS NO SAFE PLACE TO DO SO.

NOBODY CAN SAY WHAT SHE DEEMED TO BE SAFE AND WELL LIT.

IT WAS FOR HER SAFETY AND HIS.

THE OFFICER REPORT STATES I HAD NO ACTIVE TAIL LIGHTS AND ACTIVATED THEM UPON SEEING HIM.

PLEASE SIT IN YOUR CAR AND TELL ME HOW THAT IS DONE.

I WAS MET WITH 11 COPS, GUNS, DOGS, RIGHT HERE AND ARREST FOR DRIVING TO A SAFE PLACE.

THEY REFUSED TO DO A WELLNESS CHECK ON MY YOUNG DAUGHTERS, SURVIVING A STROKE, AFTER I REPEATEDLY TOLD THEM SHE HAD A STROKE.

SHE WAS HOME ALONE AND SHE WAS MISSING A SKULL PLATE.

PLEASE, FOR YOUR SAFETY, CALL 911 IF YOU'RE BEING PULLED OVER BY JPD AS THAT BEHAVIOR WAS MILITANT AND TERRIFYING.

LET'S SPEAK OF GRATITUDE.

TOMORROW IS MY 60TH BIRTHDAY I HAVE REFLECTED ON MY 60 YEARS OF LIFE.

I REALIZE I AM BLESSED BEYOND WORDS.

THE TRAGEDIES AND TRAUMAS I HAVE EXPERIENCED IN MY LIFETIME WILL NEVER BE OVERSHADOWED.

MY STRENGTH AND ABILITY TO APPRECIATE THE BEAUTY AND EXPERIENCES I HAVE BEEN SO BLESSED TO ENJOY.

SOMEHOW, I ALWAYS MANAGED TO LAND ON MY FEET BETTER AND WISER.

MY EXPERIENCE WITH JPD IS NOW PART OF MY JOURNEY.

THERE IS ANOTHER BOX I CAN CHECK FOR LIFE EXPERIENCE, AND I WILL NEVER BE A JANE DOE BECAUSE I AM NOW IN THE FBI DATABASE.

I AM WORLD TRAVELED.

I'VE EXPERIENCED SO MANY DIFFERENT CULTURES AND TRADITIONS.

I HAVE LIVED IN FOREIGN COUNTRIES AND LEARNED SECOND LANGUAGE AND I'VE HAD THE AUTO BOND DREAM.

I WATCHED A MIRACLE UNFOLD IN FRONT OF MY EYES AND SAW THE INCREDIBLE POWER OF PRAYER AS I WITNESSED MY DAUGHTER RAISED FROM THE DEAD.

TODAY, SHE'S SINGING, LEARNING HOW TO PLAY KEYBOARD AND TEACHING AGAIN.

AFTER EVERYTHING I HAVE BEEN THROUGH, I DO BELIEVE MOST PEOPLE ARE GOOD AND I STILL BELIEVE MOST COPS ARE GOOD.

WHAT THOSE COP DID THAT NIGHT WAS TAKE AWAY MY FOCUS OF GRATITUDE THAT TRULY MATTERED.

THEY TOOK MY ABILITY TO CARE FOR MY DAUGHTER.

I PRAY THAT SOMEDAY I CAN FEEL TRUE FORGIVENESS AND HAVE THE ABILITY TO SHOW THEM KINDNESS IF I SEE THEM ON THE STREET.

I WILL ALWAYS STAND BY TRUTH.

THANK YOU FOR LISTENING TO MY GRIEVANCES THESE MANY MONTHS WITH KIND FACES.

I ONLY WISH ALL OF YOU PEACE AND PROSPERITY.

AS THIS IS THE LAST TIME I WILL SPEAK AS IT IS TIME FOR ME TO TURN THE PAGE. THANK YOU, EVERYONE.

>> KRISTIN HENRY. SORRY, HENNY.

[00:15:06]

>> GOOD EVENING, MAYOR, COUNSEL.

FIRST OF ALL, CONGRATULATIONS.

MR. SHAW, THERE'S NO DENYING YOUR QUALIFICATIONS AND ACHIEVEMENTS IN YOUR STATUS.

COUNSEL, DID YOU KNOW THAT AN EMERGENCY FIRE APPARATUS SIREN IS GENERALLY 120-140 DECIBELS? A LEAF BLOWER USED TO CLEAN OUT THE BASE IS 90-100 A CHAINSAW, 115-120.

THAT'S NOT JUST THE CALLS THAT GO OUT DAILY, BUT THESE ARE JUST SOME OF THE THINGS THAT ARE GENERALLY CHECKED DAILY AT THE FIREHOUSE.

THE BRIGHT LINE WAS MEASURED AT 118 DECIBELS STANDING TEN FEET FROM THE TRACKS, CITED IN THE TC POM.

IT WAS COMPARED TO THE 120 DECIBELS OF AN EMERGENCY VEHICLE SIREN.

ACCORDING TO THE NATIONAL COUNCIL ON AGING, THAT'S ENOUGH TO CAUSE DISCOMFORT TO THE HUMAN HEARING.

ACCORDING TO THE PURDUE EXTENSION, JUST 70 DECIBELS CAN FEEL UNCOMFORTABLE FOR A DOG, 85 AND UP START TO CAUSE DAMAGE 140 DECIBELS IS IMMEDIATE DAMAGE OR LOSS OF HEARING.

RIGHT LINE IS ALWAYS A POPULAR TOPIC, AND MANY OF YOU HAVE EXPRESSED DEEP CONCERNS FOR THOSE THAT HAVE SAID THE LOUD HORNS HAVE AFFECTED THEIR QUALITY OF LIFE.

COMPARING THOSE NUMBERS, HOW CAN YOU DENY BUILDING A STATION NEXT TO A DOG PARK AT THE END OF A RESIDENTIAL STREET WILL NOT CAUSE CONCERN FOR DAILY QUALITY OF LIFE? IT WOULD BE A SHAME TO BACK UP ONE GROUP ONLY TO IGNORE A SIMILAR CONCERN OF ANOTHER.

WE HAVE A RESCUE DOG.

WE DON'T KNOW HIS BACKGROUND, BUT HE CAN HAVE SOME ANXIETY.

EVERY SINGLE TIME THE GARDENERS ARE OUTSIDE WITH A LEAF BLOWER, HE RUNS TO THE ROOM AND SHAKES LIKE ONE.

IS IT TRAUMA OR IS IT THE NOISE? WHEN WE FIRST MOVED A FEW YEARS AGO, OUR FIRE ALARM WENT OFF JUST OPENING THE OVEN A COUPLE OF TIMES.

WE'VE SINCE TAKEN CARE OF IT, BUT EVERY TIME HE HEARS THE STOVE CLICK ON, HE RUNS INTO ANOTHER ROOM SHAKING CONDITIONED TO THE LOUD SOUNDS HE HEARS.

IT'S EASY TO SAY THAT THE SOUNDS WON'T AFFECT ANYONE WHEN IT IS IN YOUR BACKYARD.

FIRE STATIONS DO NOT BELONG IN A PUBLIC PARK OR PLAYGROUND.

I LIVE A MILE AND A HALF FROM STATION 16 AND THOUGH THE SIRENS DON'T TROUBLE ME, I DO HEAR THEM MULTIPLE TIMES A DAY.

I'M SURE IF I SHARED A DRIVEWAY THAT THOSE SIRENS WOULD TROUBLE ME MORE.

IN THE WORDS OF JONI MITCHELL, DON'T PAVE PARADISE TO PUT UP A PARKING LOT BECAUSE YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU'VE GOT TILL IT'S GONE. THANK YOU.

>> [APPLAUSE] THAT WAS THE LAST ONE.

>> CONCLUDING CITIZEN COMMENTS, COUNSEL,

[2. June 4, 2024 Town Council Meeting Minutes. ]

WE HAVE BEFORE US THE MINUTES TO THE JUNE 4TH TOWN COUNCIL MEETING, AND THERE IS SOME MINOR CORRECTIONS ON THE DAIS.

IF THERE'S NO OTHER CORRECTIONS, I'LL TAKE A MOTION ON WHAT WE HAVE BEFORE US.

>> MOTION TO APPROVE AS AMENDED.

>> SECOND.

>> MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.

>> [OVERLAPPING] AYE.

>> MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.

MOVING ON TO THE CONSENT AGENDA,

[CONSENT AGENDA]

THIS IS ITEMS 3-9 ON THE AGENDA.

DID ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC HAVE A CONSENT AGENDA ITEM THEY WANT TO PULL?

>> NO, MAYOR.

>> DOES ANY MEMBER OF THE COUNCIL HAVE A CONSENT AGENDA TO PULL?

>> SEEING NONE, FIRST AGENDA ITEM 3, ORDINANCE 224 IS QUASI-JUDICIAL.

DOES COUNSEL HAVE ANY EX PARTE DISCLOSURES ON THAT ITEM?

>> I HAVE NONE.

>> SEEING NONE, I'LL TAKE A MOTION AND A SECOND ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.

>> MOTION TO APPROVE.

>> MOTION AND A SECOND. I'LL ASK TOWN ATTORNEY, MR. BAIRD, PLEASE READ ORDINANCE 224 IN SHORT TITLE.

>> ORDINANCE 224, AN ORDINANCE TO THE TOWN COUNCIL OF TOWN OF JUPITER, FLORIDA, AMENDING THE TOWN'S OFFICIAL ZONING MAP.

THE REZONE APPROXIMATELY 1.62 ACRES OF PROPERTY LOCATED BETWEEN THE INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY AND US HIGHWAY 1, ACROSS FROM BURT REYNOLDS PARK FROM COMMERCIAL GENERAL, TO THE US 1 INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, CORRIDOR DISTRICT, WATERWAY COMMERCIAL, AND ENTERTAINMENT SUBDISTRICT, PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF LAWS IN CONFLICT, AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

>> A MOTION AND A SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.

>> [OVERLAPPING] AYE.

>> MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUSLY.

MOVING ON TO THE REGULAR AGENDA, PUBLIC HEARING,

[10. Ordinance 17-24, First Reading, Cinquez Park – Comprehensive Plan Future Land Use Map Amendment. (Second reading 7/16/24) ]

AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 10, ORDINANCE 1724 FIRST READING.

I TURN IT OVER TO STAFF FOR PRESENTATION.

[00:20:05]

>> GOOD EVENING, MAYOR, MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL.

MY NAME IS MARTIN SCHNEIDER, I'M WITH THE TOWN'S PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT.

I'VE GOT A BRIEF PRESENTATION ON THE CINQUEZ PARK FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT.

AS YOU'RE AWARE, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS THE CINQUEZ PARK PROPERTY, WHICH IS 13 TOTAL ACRES.

PART OF IT IS THE DOG PARK, AND PART OF IT IS A PASSIVE PARK.

A LITTLE BACKGROUND; IN 2008, THE TOWN ACQUIRED THE 13.1 ACRE CINQUEZ PARK SUBDIVISION PARCEL, 10 ACRES OF WHICH WAS PURCHASED WITH OPEN SPACE FUNDS, WHICH RESTRICTS DEVELOPMENT OPTIONS IN THAT 10 ACRES.

THREE ACRES WAS PURCHASED WITH GENERAL FUNDS, WHICH ALLOWS THE OPTION FOR DEVELOPING MORE OTHER ACTIVE USES ON THAT THREE ACRES.

IN 2014, SITE PLAN AND A SPECIAL EXCEPTION APPROVAL WAS APPROVED FOR PASSIVE PARK AND DOG PARK, IN A FUTURE PLAYGROUND.

IT ALSO INCLUDED FOOD RETAIL ON THE THREE ACRE AREA IN THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE PROPERTY.

OPTIONS FOR THAT THREE ACRE PARCEL RANGED OVER TIME.

AGAIN, PART OF IT WAS ENVISIONED FOR A PLAYGROUND.

FOOD RETAIL WAS MENTIONED SUCH AS A COFFEE SHOP OR CONCESSION STAND.

THIS IS NOW THE AREA PROPOSED FOR A POTENTIAL FIRE STATION IN THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THAT PROPERTY.

IN 2016, THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP WAS AMENDED AS PART OF THE EVALUATION APPRAISAL REVIEW FROM COMMERCIAL AND HIGH-DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO RECREATION.

THAT'S THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP DESIGNATION FOR THE ENTIRE PROPERTY AT THIS TIME.

IN MAY 21ST, 2024, JUST RECENTLY, CINQUEZ PARK WAS SELECTED AS THE LOCATION FOR THE JUPITER FIRE RESCUE DEPARTMENT WESTERN STATION IN THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE CINQUEZ PARK PROPERTY BY TOWN COUNCIL.

A CONTRACT WAS APPROVED TO DEVELOP THE SITE PLAN, WHICH WILL BE COMING TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION ON JULY 9TH, AND THE TOWN COUNCIL ON JULY 16TH.

THOSE WILL BE COMING TO YOU AGAIN, THAT SITE PLAN AND THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION.

THIS SHOWS THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP.

RIGHT NOW, ON THE LEFT IS THE EXISTING, WHICH THE ENTIRE THING IS RECREATION.

THE PROPOSAL TONIGHT IS TO CHANGE THE SOUTHWEST CORNER THREE ACRES TO PUBLIC INSTITUTION.

ON THE RIGHT SIDE, IS THE EXISTING ZONING MAP, WHICH WILL NOT CHANGE.

THE ENTIRE 13 ACRES IS CURRENTLY PUBLIC INSTITUTION, SO THE PUBLIC INSTITUTION FUTURE LAND USE THAT'S PROPOSED WILL BE CONSISTENT WITH THE EXISTING PUBLIC INSTITUTION ZONING, WHICH IS ON THE CINQUEZ PARK.

THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE PUBLIC INSTITUTION POLICY IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, WHICH IS POLICY 1.3.17, AND THAT'S UP ON THE SCREEN.

ONE PART I WANTED TO BRING YOUR ATTENTION TO IS SOME OF THE RANGE OF USES INCLUDE GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS, FACILITIES, AND OPERATIONS, FIRE AND EMERGENCY RESCUE OPERATION CENTERS, POLICE STATIONS.

ALSO NEAR THE END, IT SAYS PUBLIC RECREATIONAL FACILITIES AND SITES ARE USES WHICH ARE PERMITTED IN THIS LAND USE DESIGNATION, SO THAT ALLOWS YOUR CONTINUED PARK USES, BECAUSE THE PROPOSED FIRE STATION MAY NOT TAKE UP THE ENTIRE THREE ACRES, YOU MIGHT HAVE ROOM FOR A PLAYGROUND OR OTHER PARK USES TO REMAIN ON THAT LOCATION.

THE KEY FINDINGS IN CONCLUSION, THE PUBLIC/INSTITUTION FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION IS APPROPRIATE FOR THE PROPERTY TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE EXISTING ZONING OF PUBLIC INSTITUTION, AND THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OF A FIRE STATION TO ENHANCE PUBLIC SAFETY.

THE CURRENT ZONING OF PI, PUBLIC INSTITUTION, ALLOWS FOR EMERGENCY AND PUBLIC SAFETY SERVICE FACILITIES, INCLUDING AMBULATORY, POLICE, AND FIRE STATIONS AS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION USE.

THOSE WILL BE COMING BACK WHEN YOU DO THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION AND SITE PLAN.

PUBLIC RECREATION FACILITIES AND SITES ARE PERMITTED IN THE PUBLIC/INSTITUTION FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION, SO THAT'S CONSISTENT.

THE PROPOSED FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION WILL NOT IMPACT THE SITE ENVIRONMENTALLY OR RECREATIONALLY, AND THE PROPOSED CHANGE WILL HAVE NO NEGATIVE IMPACTS ON PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES,

[00:25:06]

MEANING THE INFRASTRUCTURE THAT'S IN PLACE IN THE AREA WILL BE ABLE TO MAINTAIN THE FUTURE PROPOSALS.

THE PROPOSED LAND USE CHANGE FOR SUBJECT PROPERTY WILL RESULT IN A DECREASE IN THE POTENTIAL AVERAGE DAILY TRIPS.

OBVIOUSLY, ANY USE YOU ADD WILL ADD ACTUAL TRIPS, BUT THE LAND USE CHANGE WOULD ACTUALLY DECREASE WHAT THE POTENTIAL AVERAGE DAILY TRIPS COULD BE ON THAT PROPERTY.

WITH THAT, THE UPDATES AND NEXT STEPS, THE FUTURE LAND USE AMENDMENT RECEIVED RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL FROM THE LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY, WHICH IS THE SAME AS THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.

THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT WILL GO TO THE JULY 16TH, TOWN COUNCIL MEETING FOR ADOPTION, IF APPROVED TONIGHT.

DETAILED SPECIAL EXCEPTION AND SITE PLAN.

FIRE STATION APPLICATIONS WILL GO FIRST TO THE JULY 9TH PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION MEETING FOR THEIR RECOMMENDATION, AND THEN IT WILL COME TO THE TOWN COUNCIL, ALONG WITH THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT ON THE JULY 16TH TOWN COUNCIL FOR YOUR DETERMINATION.

BUT WITH THAT, I CAN TAKE ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU.

>> COUNCIL, HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? BEING NONE, DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT?

>> YES, WE DO. FIRST, WE HAVE CRAIG MAURI.

AFTER CRAIG IT'S KYLE [INAUDIBLE].

>> GOOD EVENING. CRAIG MAURI, 23 OF BLANCA ISLES LANE, JUPITER.

I WANT TO RETURN TO FIRST PRINCIPLES.

ONE OF THE MOST IMPORTANT RESPONSIBILITIES OF GOVERNMENT, ANY GOVERNMENT, IT'S TO PROVIDE FOR THE SAFETY AND SECURITY OF ITS CITIZENS, THAT INCLUDES FIRE AND RESCUE.

WITHOUT OUR OWN FIRE RESCUE SERVICE, THE ONLY WAY FOR THE TOWN GOVERNMENT TO PROVIDE THAT RESPONSIBILITY WAS TO CONTRACT WITH SOME OTHER ORGANIZATION.

THERE WEREN'T 20 VENDORS TO PICK FROM OR 10 OR EVEN THREE, FOR TOWN JUPITER SIZE, THE ONLY OPTION WE HAD WAS PALM BEACH FIRE RESCUE, AND THEY KNEW IT, HENCE THEIR REFUSAL TO NEGOTIATE ON ANY OF THE 10 CONCESSIONS THAT THE TOWN STAFF WANTED THE NEW CONTRACT, HENCE THE INCLUSION OF THE UNFUNDED FUTURE ITEMS WITHOUT A REQUIREMENT TO EVEN NOTIFY THE TOWN OF JUPITER BEFORE WE WERE ON THE HOOK FOR NEW STATIONS, NEW STAFF, WHATEVER.

NO COMPETITION, NO NEGOTIATION, HENCE THE DECISION TO OPT-OUT OF THAT ONEROUS CONTRACT.

PALM BEACH COUNTY INSISTED ON THE 36 MONTH TERMINATION CLAUSE, JUPITER DIDN'T, AND THEY INSISTED ON THE WORDING IN THE CONTRACT AT THE END OF A FISCAL YEAR BY PROVIDING AT LEAST 36 MONTHS PRIOR WRITTEN NOTICE, AND HERE WE ARE.

IN ORDER FOR OUR LOCAL GOVERNMENT TO FULFILL ITS OBLIGATION TO PROVIDE FIRE RESCUE SERVICES WHILE WE BUILD OUR OWN, PALM BEACH COUNTY FIRE RESCUE WILL PROVIDE THOSE SERVICES AT WHATEVER COST THEY DECIDE.

IN ORDER TO MEET THAT OBLIGATION AFTER THE TERMINATION, WE HAVE TO BUILD OUR OWN SERVICES TO BE OPERATIONAL NO LATER THAN OCTOBER 1ST, 2026.

REGARDLESS OF THE OUTCOME OF THE CURRENT LITIGATION, REGARDLESS OF THE OUTCOME OF A REFERENDUM, IF THAT'S THE COURT'S DECISIONS, WE STILL HAVE TO BE PREPARED.

YOU'RE DOING THE RIGHT THING TO MEET YOUR OBLIGATIONS TO OUR RESIDENTS.

PLEASE CONTINUE, YOU HAVE OUR SUPPORT.

>> KYLE.

>> GOOD EVENING, MAYOR, COUNCIL.

I JUST PLEASE ASK YOU TO CONSIDER ANOTHER LOCATION.

JUST EVEN ON MY WAY OVER HERE TODAY, THERE WAS A PICKUP SOCCER GAME GOING RIGHT WHERE THE SITE OF THIS JUPITER FIRE STATION IS SUPPOSED TO BE GOING.

YESTERDAY, THERE WAS A CLASS OF ABOUT 15 INDIVIDUALS WITH THEIR DOGS DOING A DOG TRAINING CLASS.

THERE'S ALMOST SOMETHING GOING ON EVERY SINGLE DAY IN THIS FIELD AT THAT PARK.

THIS STATION IS GOING TO BE A DISSERVICE TO THE AESTHETICS OF THE PARK, AND ALSO THE PHYSICAL FUNCTIONING OF THE PARK AS WELL.

THERE WAS A SURVEY DONE YEARS AGO ASKING WHAT WE WANTED AT THAT LOCATION, WE DID NOT WANT A PLAYGROUND OR ANYTHING ALONG THOSE LINES.

WE'RE HAPPY THE WAY IT IS RIGHT NOW.

IT'S A VERY LOVELY PARK, IT'S QUIET.

[00:30:02]

WE CAN HEAR BIRDS, YOU DON'T HEAR ANY ENGINES, YOU DON'T HEAR ANY SIRENS, YOU DON'T HAVE A PLACE OF OPERATION GOING ON RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET.

THERE'S ALSO AN EYEGLASS DOCTOR SITTING RIGHT NEXT DOOR TO MY HOUSE.

THERE IS A LOT ABOUT PUBLIC PARKING SITTING RIGHT THERE.

I HAVE A FEELING THIS FIRE STATION IS GOING TO KILL THAT BUSINESS.

IT'S A FAMILY-OWNED AND OPERATED EYEGLASS STORE, AND LOTS OF PEOPLE GO TO THAT AS OF RIGHT NOW AND YOU PARK RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET WHERE THAT FIRE STATION IS SUPPOSED TO BE GOING.

I HAVE YET TO TALK TO A SINGLE NEIGHBOR OF MINE.

I LIVE RIGHT ON CARVER RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET WHERE THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BE BEING BUILT.

I HAVE NOT HEARD ONE OF THEM SAY THAT THEY WORK FOR THIS FIRE STATION.

I WAS TOLD THAT WE WERE REACHED OUT TO, I WASN'T PHYSICALLY REACHED OUT TO BY ANY ONE OF YOU, PHYSICALLY.

I GOT A TEXT MESSAGE FROM ONE OF MY NEIGHBORS SAYING, HEY, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A LITTLE CONVERSATION ABOUT THIS FIRE STATION, [INAUDIBLE] THE FIRE CHIEF AND FRANK AS WELL, AND THEY SAT DOWN AND TALKED WITH US, BUT IT WAS NOT WIDELY KNOWN, WAS MAYBE FOUR HOUSEHOLDS THERE OFF OF THE WHOLE STREET.

THE PUBLIC DID NOT HAVE MUCH KNOWLEDGE ON THIS.

WE HAVEN'T HAD ANY INPUT.

YOU GUYS AREN'T LISTENING TO US, YOU'RE JUST DOING WHATEVER YOU WANT TO DO.

SO PLEASE, WOULD YOU AT LEAST JUST LISTEN TO US? YOU WENT TO A THREE, FOUR VOTE LAST TIME AT THE PLAN ZONING COMMISSION.

NO ONE PERSON THAT CAME UP HERE WAS FOR THIS.

THAT PARK IS A GREAT PLACE.

PEOPLE TRAVEL MILES AND FROM DIFFERENT COUNTIES TO GO TO THAT DOG PARK.

THIS FIRE STATION IS NOT GOING TO BE DOING THAT DOG PARK A SERVICE.

SO PLEASE RECONSIDER.

THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE]

>> NEXT YOU HAVE JACK.

>> I CAN'T REACH.

>> THERE YOU GO.

>> MY NAME IS JACK AND I DON'T LIKE LOUD NOISES.

PROBLEM IS, A FIRE STATION IS A LITTLE FACTORY OF LOUD NOISES, AND WORSE, I LIVE ON CARVER AVENUE NEXT TO WHERE THE FIRE STATION, AKA NOISE FACTORY IS GOING TO BE BUILT.

THINK ABOUT IT. LOUD NOISES DISTURB YOU, AND YOU HAVE TO LISTEN TO THEM EVERY DAY.

TO ALL DOG OWNERS, DOGS HAVE THIS AIM THING.

THE FIRE STATION IS INCONVENIENTLY BUILT NEXT TO A DOG PARK.

ALL YOUR PARK TURNING INTO RAGING RUFFERS. THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE]

>> KYLE.

AFTER KYLE IS LEANNE.

[NOISE]

>> NUMBER.

>> I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD HAVE A FIRE DEPARTMENT BECAUSE, ONE, MY BROTHER IS AUTISTIC AND HE MIGHT NOT BE ABLE TO PLAY WITH ME WITHOUT HIS HEADPHONES ON.

TWO, IT'S NEAR A DOG PARK AND IT WILL SCARE THE DOGS.

THREE, SIRENS SCARE ME TOO.

FOUR, I HAVE TWO FOSTER KITTENS AND A FOREVER CAT WHO IS OLD AND MIGHT GET SCARED FROM THE SOUND OF THE MACHINES.

FIVE, I WANT A PARK AND DO NOT CHOP DOWN MY FAVORITE TREE.

YOU CAN PUT THE PARK NEAR THE PALM TREES BECAUSE I DO NOT WANT COCONUT WATER.

NO, I DON'T JUMP. [APPLAUSE]

>> ANN.

[00:35:01]

>> GUYS, RIGHT NOW IS NOT THE TIME FOR THIS DISCUSSION.

[LAUGHTER] [BACKGROUND] WELL HASH THAT AT HOME, GUYS.

THOSE TWO BUNDLES OF JOY ARE MINE AND WE LIVE ON CARVER AVENUE.

AS A FAMILY, WE HAVE CONCERNS FOR PUTTING THE FIRE STATION AT THAT LOCATION.

HONESTLY, I HAD CONCERNS ABOUT SWITCHING FROM OUR EXISTING FIRE DEPARTMENT TO BEGIN WITH.

HOWEVER, MY SIGNATURE ON THE PETITION WAS DISCARDED FOR NOT LOOKING ENOUGH LIKE MY SIGNATURE AS PART OF THE EFFORTS TO WHITTLE DOWN THE SIGNATURES ON THAT PARTICULAR PETITION.

HOWEVER, AFTER THE PARK WAS PURCHASED, IN RESOLUTION 3814, THE COUNCIL'S DOCUMENT AT THAT TIME SPECIFIED THAT ALL 13 ACRES WERE OPEN SPACE.

EVEN THOUGH SOME OF THEM WERE PURCHASED FROM DIFFERENT MEANS, I THINK THERE WAS A GENERAL UNDERSTANDING FROM THE CITIZENS THAT THAT PARK WOULD BE USED FOR RECREATIONAL OR SIMILAR USAGES INSTEAD OF FOR SOMETHING LIKE A FIRE DEPARTMENT.

THE PROPOSED USAGE DOESN'T MEET THE CRITERIA FROM 27176 SECTION FOR FUTURE USE AMENDMENTS BECAUSE THE INITIAL CRITERION, NUMBER 1, REQUIRES THAT ALL OF THE SERVICES BE WITHIN TWO MILES OF THE LOCATION, WHICH, ACCORDING TO THE MOST RECENT MAP PROPOSED BY THE FIRE CHIEF DOES NOT MEET THAT STANDARD OF POLICY 1317 FOR POLICE AND FIRE LOCATION.

THE FOURTH CRITERION REQUIRES A CHANGE TO THE NEEDS AND OUR NEEDS FOR FIRE SERVICE HASN'T CHANGED.

OUR POPULATION IS STILL BEING SERVICED BY THE EXISTING FIRE DEPARTMENT, AND WE DON'T NEED ADDITIONAL STATIONS TO WHAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE.

THE FACT THAT IT'S BEEN DECIDED TO DISCONTINUE THE CURRENT SERVICES AND ADD NEW SERVICES, IN MY OPINION, DOES NOT MEET THAT CRITERIA BECAUSE WE DO NOT NEED TO TAKE LAND THAT IS NOT CURRENTLY BEING USED FOR FIRE SERVICES AND CREATE ADDITIONAL FIRE SERVICES BECAUSE THERE IS NOT AN ADDITIONAL NEED.

THERE IS THE SAME BASE NEED OF FIRE SERVICES, WHICH WE DO NEED TO PROVIDE FOR, AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE DO.

I APPRECIATE BOTH DEPUTY SHAW, WHO SEEMS, FROM MY CONVERSATION WITH HIM, LIKE A GREAT GUY AND WELL QUALIFIED, BUT ALSO OUR CURRENT FIRE SERVICES WHO ARE SERVICING JUPITER.

FOR THE FLOWN AMENDMENT, THERE ARE SEVERAL IMPACTS THAT WERE NOT MENTIONED.

ONE, THE IMPACT TO THE POPULATION.

RIGHT NOW, THERE IS A HIGH DENSITY OF RESIDENTIAL AREA BOTH ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE PROPOSED SITE AND ON THE SAME STREET AS THE PROPOSED SITE.

THIS POPULATION INCLUDES MY SON WHO HAS NOISE SENSITIVITY DUE TO AUTISM.

WE ALSO HAVE VETERANS WHO HAVE PTSD, SOMEONE WITH WHO SUFFERS FROM MIGRAINES FROM A RECENT BRAIN INJURY, AS WELL AS A LOT OF OWNERS WHO HAVE DOGS WHO ARE SENSITIVE TO NOISES.

THERE'S ALSO A POTENTIAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT THAT WAS NOT NOTED, INCLUDING VOCS FROM THE FIRE STATION AS WELL AS ADDITIONAL DIESEL EXHAUST THAT DOES NOT CURRENTLY EXIST TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

I HAVE HEARD THAT THE NEW TRUCKS WILL HAVE LOWER EMISSIONS, AND I AM WAITING TO SEE THE DETAILS ON THAT TO MAKE A FINAL JUDGMENT ON THAT IMPACT.

BUT IT WILL ALSO IMPACT THE RECREATION AND WILL HAVE A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON THE TOWN'S RECREATIONAL FACILITIES TO THE ADJACENT PARK, WHICH MAY AFFECT NON-REACTIVE DOGS AND CREATE A SPACE THAT IS EITHER NOT SAFE OR NOT WELCOMING TO DOGS WHO VISIT, NOT ONLY FROM JUPITER, BUT FROM SURROUNDING AREAS.

THE IMPACT OF THIS WILL NOT ONLY IMPACT THAT USAGE AND ENJOYMENT BUT WILL ALSO IMPACT LOCAL BUSINESSES WHO COUNT ON THE ADDITIONAL REVENUE THAT THEY ARE RECEIVING FROM OUT OF TOWNERS OR NEIGHBORING TOWNS COMING TO CINQUEZ PARK, SPECIFICALLY BECAUSE IT IS THE BEST DOG PARK WITHIN 30 MILES.

>> I HAVE TO ASK YOU TO WRAP UP BECAUSE YOU'RE WAY BEYOND TIME.

[00:40:03]

>> ABSOLUTELY. I BELIEVE THAT THERE WILL BE A TRAFFIC IMPACT FOR THE EMERGENCY VEHICLES AND BASED ON THE CURRENT TRAFFIC STRUCTURE, I AM CONCERNED THAT THE EMERGENCY VEHICLES WILL BE STUCK IN FIVE BACK TO BACK LIGHTS WORTH OF TRAFFIC THAT MAY NOT BE ABLE TO CLEAR OUT IN TIME DESPITE HAVING THIS ADVANCED GREEN LIGHT FOR THEM.

BUT THE LAST ITEM THAT I WANTED TO MENTION AND POSSIBLY ONE OF THE MORE IMPORTANT ONES IS THAT CINQUEZ PARK IS NOT ONLY A DOG PARK, IT IS NOT ONLY OUR NEIGHBORHOOD PARK, BUT IT'S ALSO A HISTORICALLY RECOGNIZED SITE AND ITS SIGNIFICANCE WAS TO PRESERVE THE GATHERING SPACE OF JUPITER RESIDENTS WHO WERE NOT ALLOWED TO COME TO TOWN COUNCIL MEETINGS, WERE NOT ALLOWED TO CREATE THEIR OWN MEETING SPACES OR SERVICES.

CINQUEZ PARK HISTORICALLY HAS PROVIDED THAT TO THE COMMUNITY.

I THINK TAKING A LOCATION THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE HONORING THIS AGAINST THE WISHES OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD IN ORDER TO BUILD THIS GOVERNMENTAL BUILDING, I THINK REALLY SPITS IN THE BASE OF WHAT THAT HISTORICAL SITE WAS MEANT TO BE.

THANK YOU. [APPLAUSE]

>> THAT WAS THE LAST ONE, BUT THERE WERE FOUR WHO DID NOT WISH TO SPEAK WHO WERE NOT IN AGREEMENT OF THE PROPOSAL.

>> THANK YOU. OKAY. TURNING BACK TO COUNCIL FORE ANY FOLLOW UP QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS IN THE MOTION?

>> I JUST WANT TO GO ON RECORD AND SAY, OBVIOUSLY, JUST LIKE LAST TIME, I'M NOT SUPPORTIVE OF THIS.

I CAN'T LOOK AT MY RESIDENTS IN THE FACE AND TELL THEM THAT THEY BOUGHT A HOUSE NEXT TO A PARK TO HAVE SOME PEACE AND QUIET AND THEN WE'RE JUST GOING TO PUT A FIRE STATION RIGHT NEXT TO WHERE THEY LIVE.

I WOULD NEVER DO THAT TO ANYBODY IN THE TOWN NO MATTER WHERE THIS IS GOING TO GO.

AS I SAID BEFORE, I'M VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THE TRAFFIC, ESPECIALLY GOING WESTBOUND IN THE AFTERNOONS, UNLESS WE'RE GOING TO PREEMPT FOR TRAFFIC LIGHTS AT THE SAME EXACT TIME.

THEN WHO KNOWS HOW LONG IT'S GOING TO TAKE FOR TRAFFIC TO START MOVING IN THE DIRECTION SO THAT THE TRUCKS CAN GET THROUGH? UNLESS I SEE A LIVE REPRESENTATION OF THAT HAPPENING FOR TRAFFIC TO BE ABLE TO CLEAR OUT SO THAT THESE TRUCKS CAN RESPOND TO CALLS, ESPECIALLY IN JUPITER COUNTRY CLUB, SONOMA ISLES, WHICH FOR THE MOST PART, WHEN TRUCKS ARE RESPONDING THERE NOW, WE'RE UTILIZING A PALM BEACH COUNTY STATION FROM JUPITER FARMS BECAUSE THEY CAN GET THERE A LOT QUICKER.

I'M VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THE RESPONSE TIMES GOING WESTBOUND FROM THE STATION AND JUST ON TOP OF IT, DISTURBING THE PEACE AND QUIET OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD FOR THESE NEIGHBORS THAT ARE HERE.

I JUST CAN'T AGREE WITH IT TONIGHT.

[APPLAUSE]

IN THE FUTURE, I'M SURE WE'RE GOING TO HAVE MUTUAL AID WITH THE COUNTY FIRE AND THAT WILL STILL EXIST, BUT WE'RE GOING TO PREEMPT A LIGHT SYSTEM WHICH PALM BEACH COUNTY DOESN'T.

YOU GUYS JUST HAVE TO PLOW THROUGH THE TRAFFIC.

I BELIEVE THAT WOULD EQUAL OUT.

FOR EVERYBODY HERE, WE'VE LOOKED AT ALL OUR OPTIONS, AND DON'T FORGET WE WERE BACKED INTO THIS BY PALM BEACH, BY THE COUNTY.

WE'RE REACTING TO A SITUATION WHERE WE'RE DEALING WITH PUBLIC SAFETY.

DO WE WANT TO PUT A FIRE STATION NEXT TO THE DOG PARK? MYSELF AND THE MAYOR, WERE HERE IN THE FORMATION AND THE APPROVAL OF THE DOG PARK.

IT'S SACRED TO US WHEN WE'RE NOT GOING TO TOUCH THE DOG PARK.

BUT IT'S ACTUALLY LOCATION WISE WHEN YOU ANALYZE THE CALLS AND THE LOCATION TOWARDS AREAS THAT ARE AT THE HIGHEST INCLINATION FOR FIRES, IT'S THE BEST LOCATION AS OUR CHIEF DONATO HAS STATED IN THE PAST.

IT'S BEEN A VERY DIFFICULT SITUATION, BUT WE HAVE TO DO WHAT WE HAVE TO DO.

IN REGARDS TO THE PARK, IN MY OPINION, THE GRASS FIELD IS GOING TO REMAIN.

WE'RE GOING TO LEVEL IT OUT, KEEP IT GRASSY, THE STATION WILL GO IN.

WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT THE SITE PLAN TONIGHT, BUT IT'S GOING TO BE AT THE BACK OF THE PARK, THE BANYAN TREE STAYING, SO IT'S GOING TO BE AS LEAST INTRUSIVE ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS POSSIBLE.

>> THERE'S AT LEAST A COUPLE OF PRIMARY ISSUES.

ONE IS THE INCONVENIENCE AND THE NOISE FACTOR,

[00:45:01]

WHICH IS CLEARLY GOING TO BE A PROBLEM.

WE TALKED ABOUT THAT BEFORE AS WELL.

THE NOISE SEGMENT THAT WE'RE MOST CONCERNED ABOUT IS FROM WHEN IT PULLS ONTO THE STREET UP UNTIL INDIANTOWN ROAD BECAUSE THE NOISE IS GOING TO BE ON INDIANTOWN ROAD ANYWAY.

THE INTERSECTION ITSELF IS NOT GOING TO BE THAT MUCH DIFFERENT.

IT'S THAT SEGMENT BETWEEN THE FIRE STATION AND THE INTERSECTION, AND WE'VE GOT A COMMITMENT TO TRY TO MINIMIZE, IF NOT ELIMINATE, THE USE OF SIRENS IN THAT SECTION.

ONCE IT GETS TO THE INTERSECTION, OBVIOUSLY, IT'S GOING TO HAVE TO BLOW THE HORN AT THE INTERSECTION, BUT THEY DO THAT ANYWAY.

WE'RE GOING TO WORK ON THAT AND IT'S AN OBVIOUS PROBLEM.

IT'S A PROBLEM THAT BOTHERS ME.

I DON'T LIKE THE IDEA THAT NEIGHBORS ARE GOING TO HAVE TO HEAR SIRENS COMING OUT OF THAT FIRE STATION.

WE NEED TO DO EVERYTHING WE CAN DO TO MINIMIZE OR ELIMINATE THE NEED FOR USING THE SIREN WHILE STILL ON THAT STREET, EXCEPT RIGHT AT THE INTERSECTION.

THE SECOND ISSUE IS SOMETHING THAT COUNCILOR MAY HAVE BROUGHT UP.

THERE ARE FOUR PLUS INTERSECTIONS GOING WESTBOUND THAT ARE PROBLEMATIC THAT BLOCK THE TRAFFIC FLOW.

THAT WILL BE A PROBLEM FOR WESTBOUND RESPONSES.

FOR EASTBOUND RESPONSES, THAT'S FOUR LESS INTERSECTIONS THAT HAVE TO BE GRAPPLED WITH.

IF YOU LOOK AT THE CIRCLES OF THE POPULATION THAT'S BEING SERVED BY THE STATIONS, THE MAJORITY OF IT IS TO THE EAST OF THIS LOCATION.

I THINK OVERALL, IT'S GOING TO BE A TIME SAVER, INCLUDING THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE WESTBOUND LAG OF TIME AND THE EASTBOUND IMPROVEMENT OF TIME.

I DON'T THINK THAT SITUATION HAS IS IMPORTANT.

IT'S CRITICALLY IMPORTANT THAT THE CITIZENS ON THAT STREET ARE CONSIDERED IN THIS.

AGAIN, WE'RE GOING TO WORK VERY DILIGENTLY TO MINIMIZE, IF NOT ELIMINATE, THE USE OF SIRENS ON THE STREET, EXCEPT RIGHT AT THE INTERSECTION.

>> I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO FOCUS ON WHAT THIS ITEM IS AND WHAT IT IS NOT.

I KNOW THAT THERE'S A LOT OF INTEREST IN DISCUSSING THE SITE PLAN, BUT THAT IS COMING AFTER.

THERE ARE A SET NUMBER OF CRITERIA FOR THIS LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT.

I DO BELIEVE, BECAUSE THE ZONING HAS BEEN PUBLIC INSTITUTIONAL, IT MAKES SENSE TO KEEP IT CONSISTENT.

THE FUTURE LAND USE WITH THAT ZONING.

I'M INTERESTED IN HAVING THAT SPACE REMAIN FLEXIBLE, ESPECIALLY FOR RECREATION NEEDS.

THE FACT THAT IT DOESN'T PRECLUDE MORE ACTIVE RECREATIONAL USES IS IMPORTANT TO ME.

I WANT TO CLARIFY JUST SOME ON PUBLIC COMMENT I HAD HEARD POPULATION IMPACTS.

IN THE STAFF RESEARCH, WHAT THAT MEANT WAS JUST AN INCREASE IN DENSITY.

IF WE HAVE RESIDENTIAL COME IN AND THERE'S AN INCREASE IN DENSITY THAT WOULD THEN REQUIRE SCHOOLS OR ADDITIONAL SERVICES, THAT'S THE POPULATION IMPACT THAT THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT.

A LOT OF WHAT WE HAVE BEEN DISCUSSING AND WHAT WE'VE HEARD IS MORE RELEVANT TO THE SITE PLAN, WHICH WILL COME AFTER.

BUT FOR THE PURPOSE OF THIS FUTURE LAND USE AMENDMENT, I DO UNDERSTAND THE NEED TO MAINTAIN THAT CONSISTENCY WITH THE CURRENT ZONING.

I DO SEE THAT IT'S IN THE AREA THAT WE KNOW THAT THERE IS A PROPOSED FIRE STATION GOING IN AND THAT IT WOULD SERVE THE AREAS AROUND IT.

IT DOES MEET, ACCORDING TO OUR STAFF AND IN MY OPINION, THE FOUR CRITERIA OUTLINED HERE.

I THINK THIS IS A DIFFERENT DISCUSSION THAN THE SITE PLAN DISCUSSION, WHICH WE ARE GOING TO HAVE.

IN TERMS OF TRAFFIC, ENVIRONMENT, SITE SOUNDS, I LOOK TO STATION 16, I LIVE NEAR STATION 16, MAYBE TWO-MINUTE WALK, I KNOW THAT A RESIDENCE MORE OR LESS ESSENTIALLY SHARES A FENCE WITH STATION 16.

IT'S IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO A RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY.

I ALSO KNOW THAT STATION 18 IS IN A PARK.

WE HAVE CURRENT STATIONS WITH PALM BEACH COUNTY FIRE THAT ARE IN A PARK AND ARE NOT JUST ACROSS THE STREET FROM A RESIDENCE, BUT IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO A RESIDENCE AND I HAVEN'T HEARD OF NEGATIVE IMPACTS THERE.

THIS PARK IS BORDERED BY INDIANTOWN ROAD, ONE OF THE BUSIEST PARTS OF TOWN, OUR MODERN MAIN STREET, AND CENTER STREET, WHICH IS OUR HISTORIC MAIN STREET.

IT HAS ALWAYS BEEN A VERY BUSY SOMEWHAT LOUD PART OF TOWN WITH CALLS.

I DO WANT TO CONTINUE TO ADDRESS ALL OF THE NEEDS THAT RESIDENTS ARE SHARING.

I DO THINK IT'S IMPORTANT THAT THEY'RE SHARED.

I KNOW THAT SOME RESIDENTS ARE WORKING WITH STAFF ON SPECIFIC ITEMS THAT MIGHT HELP MAKE FOR A BETTER SITE PLAN,

[00:50:03]

FOR EXAMPLE, THERE'S A RIDGE IN THE GREEN FIELD WHERE SOCCER PLAYERS CAN TRIP OVER THIS RIDGE.

IT'S A PIPE. IF THAT CAN BE FLATTENED OUT AND CREATE A MORE ENJOYABLE GREEN SPACE, THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE DESIRABLE, AS WELL AS THE NUMBER OF SMALL TREES THAT ARE BLOCKING SOME OF THAT SOCCER PLAY.

ALL OF THAT IS NOT FOR TONIGHT, THAT'S FOR THE SITE PLAN DISCUSSION.

BUT I DO THANK EVERYONE WHO HAS COME OUT TONIGHT.

I RECOGNIZE SOME AND THANK YOU KYLE FOR TALKING ABOUT OUR MEETING.

I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR MORE AND DISCUSS MORE ABOUT HOW WE CAN MAKE THIS AN ASSET FOR THE COMMUNITY AND I REALLY FEEL IT WILL BE.

I'M GOING TO LEAVE MY COMMENTS THERE.

>> SORRY, WE'RE NOT HAVING DISCUSSIONS.

I'M GOING TO SUPPORT THIS TONIGHT.

JUST SO THE PUBLIC KNOWS, WE ARE ALL LISTENING.

AS THE VICE MAYOR INDICATED, THERE'S ISSUES THAT WOULD BE ADDRESSED IN SITE PLAN, WHICH IS NOT ON THE AGENDA TONIGHT.

ALSO, I HAVE EVERY CONFIDENCE THAT OUR FIRE DEPARTMENT, GOING TO BE AN EXTRAORDINARY GOOD NEIGHBOR AND HAVE ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROLS IN PLACE TO BE A GOOD NEIGHBOR.

I PASSED STATION 19.

I'VE PROBABLY PASSED LITERALLY HUNDREDS.

I WOULDN'T BE SURPRISED IF IT'S 1,000 CALLS IN THE YEARS THAT I'VE LIVED IN THE SHORES, AND THEY ON, CENTRAL BOULEVARD, DON'T COME OUT, BLARING THE HORN, NEVER HAVE.

THEY'RE RESPECTFUL, THEY COME OUT, AND THEY DON'T USE THE SIREN UNTIL THEY GET TO INDIANTOWN ROAD.

A LOT OF THIS WILL BE HANDLED, I'M SURE, WITH ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROLS.

I UNDERSTAND RESIDENTS BEING CONCERNED ABOUT THE UNKNOWN, BUT I JUST WANT TO EMPHASIZE THAT I KNOW THAT COUNTY IS NOT DOING ON CENTRAL BOULEVARD ON STATION 19.

THERE'S NO REASON WHY WE WOULD DO IT IN THIS CINQUEZ PARK STATION.

WITH THAT, I'LL TAKE A MOTION IN A SECOND ON ORDINANCE 17-24.

>> MOTION TO APPROVE.

>> SECOND.

>> MOTION A SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR, SIGNIFY BY SAYING AYE.

>> [OVERLAPPING] AYE.

>> OPPOSED?

>> THE MOTION CARRIES ORDER 1 WITH COUNCILOR MAY DISSENTING.

>> MAYOR, MAY I READ THE ORDINANCE?

>> READ IT ON SHORT TITLE.

>> ORDINANCE 17-24, AN ORDINANCE OF THE TOWN COUNCIL, THE TOWN OF JUPITER, FLORIDA, AMENDING ORDINANCE NUMBER 57-89, THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OF THE TOWN OF JUPITER, PROVIDING FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION AND FUTURE LAND USE MAP FOR A PROPERTY OF APPROXIMATELY THREE ACRES LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF INDIANTOWN ROAD IN CARVER AVENUE, FROM RECREATION TO PUBLIC INSTITUTIONAL, PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, PROVIDING FOR THE REPEAL OF LAWS IN CONFLICT, AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

>> THANK YOU FOR REMINDING ME THAT.

MOVING ON TO AGENDA ITEM 11,

[11. 954 Old Dixie Highway - Quasi-judicial - Site Plan Amendment to delete a condition of approval associated with offsite parking.]

954 OLD DIXIE HIGHWAY.

THIS IS QUASI-JUDICIAL.

DOES COUNCIL HAVE ANY EX PARTE DISCLOSURES?

>> I SPOKE WITH MR. REEDY ABOUT IT.

>> TO DECLARE ABOUT?

>> JUST TO REMIND ME OF THE THINGS WE DISCUSSED DURING MY TIME ON PLANNING AND ZONING.

NO NEW MATERIAL, JUST REMINDING ME WHAT WAS PREVIOUSLY DECIDED.

>> I HAVE NONE.

>> I MET WITH MR. REEDY AND STAFF AT TOWN HALL A FEW MONTHS AGO DISCUSSING JUST IN GENERAL, THE ITEM, ITS CONTEXT, AND THAT'S IT.

>> NO DISCLOSURES.

>> THIS IS A QUASI-JUDICIAL ITEM.

I'D ASK THAT THOSE EXPECTING TO POSSIBLY GIVE TESTIMONY AT THIS HEARING TO STAND AND BE SWORN.

>> DO YOU SOLEMNLY SWEAR THAT THE TESTIMONY YOU'RE ABOUT TO GIVE IN THIS HEARING IS THE WHOLE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH?

>> THE APPLICANT?

>> GOOD EVENING, MEMBERS OF THE TOWN COUNCIL.

I'M BRIAN CHEGUIS, I'M PRINCIPAL PLANNER OF IPLAN & DESIGN.

I'M HERE THIS EVENING, REPRESENTING MY CLIENT, MR. DAN REEDY,

[00:55:02]

THE OWNER OF ONSHORE CONSTRUCTION & DEVELOPMENT, AND THE OWNER OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY 954 NORTH OLD DIXIE HIGHWAY.

MR. REEDY CAN'T BE HERE THIS EVENING.

IN HIS STEAD IS HIS DAUGHTER, HATTIE REEDY, WHO IS REPRESENTING THE FAMILY HERE TONIGHT.

WE'RE HERE AFTER THREE YEARS OF SITE PLAN APPROVAL SEEKING A MINOR SITE PLAN AMENDMENT, NOT A COMPLEX ASK.

WE HAVE ONE CONDITION IN OUR SITE PLAN APPROVAL THAT'S HOLDING US UP TO PROCEED ON TO BUILDING PERMIT RELEASE, AND THE CONDITION OF APPROVAL THAT WAS RELEVANT AT THE TIME OF SITE PLAN APPROVAL IN 2021, NO LONGER RELEVANT.

CONDITIONS HAVE CHANGED, AND I'M GOING TO SHOW YOU THAT THIS EVENING.

WE ARE THE LAST COMMERCIAL LOT ON NORTH OLD DIXIE HIGHWAY, HIGHLIGHTED IN RED.

THIS TO OUR NORTH IS A RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY.

IT'S THE CHURCH'S PROPERTY, THEY USE IT FOR PARKING.

TO OUR WEST IS RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES, AND NORTH OLD DIXIE HIGHWAY, AS WELL AS THE RAIL TRACKS ARE ALL UNDER FEC CONTROL, MAKES UP OUR EASTERN BOUNDARY.

SMALL PROPERTY. IT'S ABOUT A SIXTH OF AN ACRE IN SIZE, AND THE LAST COMMERCIAL UNDEVELOPED PROPERTY ON NORTH OLD DIXIE HIGHWAY.

THIS PLAN THAT I'M PUTTING ON THE SCREEN RIGHT NOW TELLS THE TALE OF THE WHOLE APPROVAL BACK IN 2021.

THIS IS THE APPROVED PARKING PLAN THAT WAS APPROVED AS PART OF RESOLUTION 67-21, AND IT RUNS WITH THAT DEVELOPMENT ORDER.

105 CENTER STREET TO CONTROL AND SPEARHEADED BRINGING THROUGH MAJORITY OF PARKING THAT EVERYONE FELT WAS REQUIRED ALONG NORTH OLD DIXIE HIGHWAY TO CLEAN UP THE ROADWAY AND TO PARK IT APPROPRIATELY AND WITHOUT VARIOUS PEOPLE GETTING AGREEMENTS WITH FEC, BUT DOING SO IN A CONTROLLED MANNER.

WE IMPLEMENTED ON STREET PARKING, PARALLEL, SOME LANDSCAPING, SIDEWALK, HEDGE FENCE, HANDICAP ACCESSIBILITY.

THE SUBJECT PROPERTY HIGHLIGHTED IN RED 954 NORTH DIXIE HIGHWAY AT THAT TIME WAS OWNED BY MR. REEDY, AS WELL AS THE PROPERTY NEXT TO IT, 946 NORTH DIXIE HIGHWAY WHICH WAS ONE OF THE FAMILY OFFICE, AS WELL AS 938 NORTH DIXIE HIGHWAY, THE ONE THAT'S RENDERED TWO OVER FROM THE SUBJECT LOT.

THAT PROPERTY WAS THE HOME OF ONSHORE CONSTRUCTION & DEVELOPMENT, WHICH WE ALL KNOW IS A SUCCESS STORY, OPERATING IN JUPITER FOR DECADES, A SMALL LITTLE FAMILY-OWNED COMPANY THAT GREW OUTSIDE OF ITS OWN BOUNDS AND NEEDED TO MOVE.

ULTIMATELY, DAN MOVED ONSHORE CONSTRUCTION FROM NORTH OLD DIXIE HIGHWAY OVER TO INTERCOASTAL POINTE, WHICH IS A COMMERCIAL PROPERTY, LOTS OF PARKING, LOTS OF OFFICE SPACE.

WITH THAT, WE WERE APPROVED ON JUNE 15TH BY THIS COUNCIL.

MAYOR KURETSKI WAS HERE.

COUNCIL PERSON DELANAY WAS HERE.

THERE ARE SOME NEW FACES, SO THIS IS A LITTLE BIT OF HISTORY TO CATCH YOU ALL UP.

OUR SITE PLAN WAS APPROVED AND WE HAD A CONDITION ATTACHED TO IT TO BE PART OF THE PARKING STUDY BECAUSE ONSHORE CONSTRUCTION WAS CONTRIBUTING TO THE PARKING OUT IN THE RIGHT OF WAY.

WELL, SINCE THEN, WE'VE ASKED FOR A DEVELOPMENT ORDER EXTENSION PER FLORIDA STATUTE 252-363, WHICH KEEPS OUR SITE PLAN ACTIVE AS WE HAVE BEEN SEEKING TO OBTAIN BUILDING PERMITS, BUT CONDITION 5 IS HOLDING US BACK.

WE THINK THAT CONDITION 5 SHOULD BE REMOVED BASED ON THE FOLLOWING CHANGES OF CONDITIONS ON NORTH OLD DIXIE HIGHWAY.

MR. REEDY HAS DIVESTED HIMSELF FROM NORTH OLD DIXIE HIGHWAY.

HE SOLD 938 NORTH OLD DIXIE AND 946 NORTH OLD DIXIE PROPERTIES TO OFFICE USERS, AND THOSE USES COMPLY WITH THE PARKING.

WE HAVE NO PARKING ISSUE AT THE NORTH END.

HE DID THIS IN 2022.

THE REQUIRED CONSTRUCTION OF THE OFF-SITE PARKING, IF THIS CONDITION IS REMOVED, WILL REMAIN WITH THE 105 CENTER STREET PROPERTY, WHICH IS PART OF THE APPROVAL FOR THE SITE PLAN PZ 67-21.

WE ALL KNOW THAT AT NINE O'CLOCK IN THE MORNING ON A TUESDAY, WHEN YOU GO ON TO THE NORTH DIXIE HIGHWAY, THE PARKINGS AT THE SOUTH END BECAUSE EVERYONE'S ACCESSING THE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY AT THE CORNER.

[01:00:03]

THE OFFICES AT THE NORTH ARE PRETTY MUCH QUIET NOW, NOW THAT ONSHORE CONSTRUCTION IS NO LONGER ACTIVE ON THAT QUARTER.

THE HISTORIC PARKING THAT WE'VE DEALT WITH FOR DECADES ON NORTH OLD DIXIE AND HAVING PARKING AGREEMENTS IN THE RIGHT OF WAY HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE 954 NORTH OLD DIXIE OFFICE BUILDING SITE.

THEY HAVE NO PAST, THEY'RE NOT DEVELOPED TODAY, SO THEY HAVE NO ISSUE TODAY, AND WE DON'T EXPECT IT IN THE FUTURE BECAUSE THEIR SITE PLAN COMPLIES FULLY WITH THE TOWN'S CODE.

THAT'S HOW IT GOT APPROVED IN 2021 BY YOU ALL.

STAFF REPORT TALKS ABOUT THE MILESTONES ASSOCIATED WITH OUR SITE NOT BEING MET, BUT TRULY, THOSE ARE THE MILESTONES THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN MET BY RESOLUTION 67-21, WHICH RAN WITH 105 CENTER STREET.

PARKING HAS TO GET BUILT IN THE MAJORITY FOR THE MAJORITY USER, AND THAT HAPPENS TO BE AT THE SOUTH END OF THE CORRIDOR FOR THE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY AT THE CORNER OF CENTER STREET IN NORTH OLD DIXIE HIGHWAY.

AGAIN, WE'RE IN FULL COMPLIANCE WITH THE CODE.

I THINK THE LAST ITEM OF THIS IS THAT ONCE THAT PARKING IS CONSTRUCTED, ONCE ALL 22 SPACES ARE IN PLACE, THERE WILL BE NO FUTURE ABILITY FOR PEOPLE TO PARK WILLY-NILLY OR HAVE SIDE AGREEMENTS WITH FEC BECAUSE THE PARKING WILL EFFECTIVELY BLOCK ANY FUTURE NON-CONTROLLED PARKING.

THAT'S WHY I THINK WAS THE HEART OF THIS ISSUE: HOW DO WE CONTROL THE PARKING, ORGANIZE IT TO THE BENEFIT OF THE SURROUNDING COMMUNITY, AND AS WELL AS FOR THE BUSINESSES AND TO ENSURE THAT CERTAIN USES DON'T COME INTO THIS CORRIDOR, THAT MAY BE TOO HEAVY IN TERMS OF INTENSITY, SUCH AS A CONTRACTOR'S OFFICE, SUCH AS A PROPERTY MANAGEMENT COMPANY THAT MAY HAVE MULTIPLE PROPERTY MANAGERS.

THOSE ARE HEAVY INTENSE USES, MAYBE NOT THE RIGHT PLACE FOR IT HERE ON NORTH OLD DIXIE HIGHWAY.

WE WENT TO YOUR COMMISSION PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD IN MAY, AND THEY RECOMMENDED AN ALTERNATE CONDITION.

THEY BASICALLY PILED ONTO THE CONDITION THAT STAFF HAD ALREADY CREATED OR HAD SUGGESTED THAT THERE WAS A PARKING PROBLEM, WE SHOULD BE ABLE TO AT LEAST SUPPLY THREE SPACES.

THEY WENT AHEAD AND SAID, IF THERE'S A PARKING PROBLEM, JUST BUILD ALL 22 SPACES, SO COMPLETELY THE OPPOSITE OF WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR UNDERSTANDABLY BECAUSE THERE'S 15 YEARS OF HISTORY, AND THERE'S A 40-PAGE STAFF REPORT THAT GOES WITH IT AND YOU'D HAVE TO REALLY BE AROUND FOR 15 YEARS OF THIS TO UNDERSTAND HOW TO PASS YOUR WAY THROUGH IT.

WE'RE SEEKING TO MODIFY THAT LANGUAGE OF THAT CONDITION.

WE PROVIDED THIS WITH STAFF, GAVE IT TO YOU THIS EVENING, AND HERE'S THE CLIFFS NOTES VERSION OF IT.

TOWN DETERMINES WE HAVE A PARKING PROBLEM.

PROPERTY OWNER IS GOING TO HAVE TO FIX IT WITHIN SIX MONTHS, 180 DAYS.

IF THE PARKING GETS CONSTRUCTED BY SOMEONE ELSE AS PART OF FULL SATISFACTION OF RESOLUTION 67-21, THEN THIS CONDITION THAT WE'RE MODIFYING OR CONTINUING TO CARRY FORWARD SHOULD BECOME NULL AND VOID BECAUSE THERE SHOULDN'T BE ANY ADDITIONAL BURDENS ON THIS PROPERTY THAT NO OTHER PROPERTY HAS TO SUFFER BECAUSE OF THE PAST.

IF IT DEVELOPS AS AN OFFICE, IT'LL CONTINUE TO HAVE NO PROBLEMS IN THE NORTH END OF THE CORRIDOR.

WE KNOW WHERE THE ISSUE LIES TODAY.

WITH THAT, WE'RE HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE.

I WOULD ASK THAT ANY REMAINING TIME BE RESERVED FOR ALLOWING ME TO RESPOND TO STAFF'S PRESENTATION AND/OR QUESTIONS FROM YOU ALL. I THANK YOU.

>> STAFF?

>> GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND TOWN COUNCIL.

FOR THE RECORD, PETER MEYER, SENIOR PLANNER STAFF.

THE ITEM FOR CONSIDERATION TONIGHT IS A SITE PLAN AMENDMENT TO DELETE CONDITION 5 OF RESOLUTION 20-21, WHICH REQUIRES THE CONSTRUCTION OF 22 OFF-SITE PARKING SPACES PRIOR TO THE ISSUANCE OF A CO FOR THE OFFICE BUILDING.

THE APPLICANT AGREED TO THIS CONDITION OF APPROVAL WHEN THE DEVELOPMENT ORDER WAS APPROVED BY TOWN COUNCIL IN 2021.

THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING TO MOVE FORWARD WITH GETTING PERMITS AND CONSTRUCTING THE OFFICE BUILDING AT 954 NORTH OLD DIXIE WITHOUT ENSURING CONSTRUCTION OF THE OFF-SITE PARKING LOT ALONG OLD DIXIE.

THE APPROVED SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE PROPOSED OFFICE BUILDING IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE TOWN CODE, SPECIFICALLY MINIMUM PARKING REQUIREMENTS WITH THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST THE DELETION OF CONDITION 5.

HOWEVER, THE POTENTIAL OF CREATING A PUBLIC SAFETY ISSUE IS STILL VALID AS IT WAS RAISED IN 2021, APPROVAL OF THE CONCURRENT DEVELOPMENT ORDER, SINCE THE USE IS LIKELY TO RESULT IN OFF-SITE PARKING OCCURRING IN DISORDERLY MANNER ALONG NORTH OLD DIXIE HIGHWAY.

IF THE OFFSET PARKING AREA REQUIRED BY CONDITION 5 IS NOT CONSTRUCTED, IN MAY,

[01:05:01]

THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION DIDN'T SUPPORT ELIMINATING CONDITION 5 AND RECOMMENDED APPROVAL WITH A MODIFICATION TO THE CONDITION DOES NOT REQUIRE THE APPLICANT TO BUILD THE PARKING SPACES NOW, BUT WITH THE OBLIGATION TO CONSTRUCT THE 22 SPACES IF A PARKING STUDY REQUIRES IT, OR IT'S RELIEVED IF ANOTHER OWNER TAKES ON RESPONSIBILITY OF CONSTRUCTING IT.

AS NOTED IN BRIAN'S PRESENTATION, THE APPLICANT HAS ISSUES WITH THE MODIFIED ADDITION RECOMMENDED BY THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.

SOME BACKGROUND ON THE APPLICATION OF THE AREA, THE BLOCK IN WHICH THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED WAS ORIGINALLY ZONED RESIDENTIAL PRIOR TO 1978.

LATER, A PORTION OF THAT AREA IS REZONED TO COMMERCIAL.

SOME OF THE EXISTING HOMES WERE CONVERTED TO COMMERCIAL USES ON SMALLER LOTS.

TYPICALLY SMALL INDIVIDUAL COMMERCIAL SITES EXPERIENCING PEAK DEMANDS ARE NOT ACCOMMODATED WITH A SINGLE-USE PARKING LOTS BECAUSE THEY DIFFER, BECAUSE THEY OFFER NO FLEXIBILITY FOR SHARING LIKE MULTI-TENANT DEVELOPMENTS DO, AND SMALL DEAD-END PARKING LOTS MAKE IT DIFFICULT FOR LARGE VEHICLES TO MANEUVER.

THESE CHARACTERISTICS RESULT IN EXTERNAL IMPACTS ON SURROUNDING PROPERTIES.

SPECIFICALLY IN THE AREA OF NORTH OLD DIXIE, RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORS HAVE COMPLAINED ABOUT THE PARKING OCCURRING ON THE EAST SIDE OF OLD DIXIE.

PARKING ISSUES IN THIS AREA HAVE OCCURRED FOR ABOUT 17 YEARS BETWEEN MULTIPLE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY OWNERS.

THREE OF THE OWNERS, INCLUDING THE APPLICANT, COORDINATED ON A PLAN TO RESOLVE THE ISSUES IN ORDER TO ADDRESS THE RESIDENT CONCERNS.

IN 2021, TOWN COUNCIL APPROVED RESOLUTION 67-21 TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN ON-SITE PARKING AREA WITH 22 PARALLEL PARKING SPACES ON THE EAST SIDE OF OLD DIXIE.

THIS PARKING AREA WAS INTENDED TO RESOLVE THE INADEQUATE PARKING ISSUES.

THE OWNER OF 105 CENTER STREET, WHERE THE LOCOMOTIVE COFFEE SHOP IS LOCATED, HAS BEEN AN APPLICATION IN COLLABORATION WITH ONSHORE CONSTRUCTION AND THOMAS MELHORN, FORMERLY KNOWN AS CHRISTIAN THOMAS, LATER THROUGH THE PROCESS.

THOMAS MELHORN NO LONGER IS PART OF THE COLLABORATION.

TODAY IT APPEARS THAT THOMAS MELHORN HAS AN INDEPENDENT LEASE WITH FEC AND ALSO A PARKING ON OUT THERE IN FEC, THE UNIMPROVED PARKING LOT.

PLEASE NOTE THAT 105 CENTER STREET HAS NO OBLIGATION TO CONSTRUCT THOSE SPACES TODAY.

THEY ARE ABOVE AND BEYOND THE REQUIREMENT OF THE EXISTING NON-CONFORMING RETAIL BUILDING.

ON THE SAME NIGHT, THE TOWN COUNCIL APPROVED THE CONSTRUCTION OF TWO STORY OFFICE BUILDING ON 954 NORTH OLD DIXIE.

AT THE TIME OF THE APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED OFFICE BUILDING, THIS APPLICANT ALSO OWNED THE TWO ADJACENT OFFICE BUILDINGS TO THE SOUTH WAS ALSO MET THE MINIMUM PARKING REQUIREMENT ON-SITE, BUT FREQUENTLY UTILIZED THE FEC AREA FOR ADDITIONAL OFF-SITE PARKING.

IN 2022, THE APPLICANT SUBMITTED A BUILDING PERMIT FOR THE APPROVED OFFICE BUILDING, WHICH COULD NOT BE ISSUED SINCE CONDITION 5 HAS NOT BEEN SATISFIED.

IN 2022, IT ALSO STOLE THE TWO EXISTING OFFICE BUILDINGS WHERE ONSHORE CONSTRUCTION WAS LOCATED WITHIN THE SAME YEAR.

IN 2022, ALSO THE OWNER OF 105 CENTER STREET WAS ISSUED AN ENGINEERING PERMIT FOR THE OFF-SITE PARKING OR REQUIRED TO BE CONSTRUCTED PURSUANT TO CONDITION 5.

PROCEEDING WITH THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE OFF-SITE PARKING AREA, HAS NOT MOVED FORWARD IN TIMELY MANNER SINCE THE APPROVAL.

>> WHEN THE OFFICE BUILDING APPLICATION WAS SUBMITTED, IT WAS EVIDENT BASED ON A FLOOR PLAN THAT AT THE PEAK PARKING DEMAND WOULD LIKELY EXCEED THE PROPOSED ONSITE PARKING.

TO ADDRESS THIS CONCERN, CONDITION 5 WAS A REQUIREMENT OF THE 2021 APPROVAL TO ADDRESS TOWN CODE SITE PLAN REVIEW CRITERIA 5 REGARDING PUBLIC SAFETY.

THE APPLICANT HAS NOT REVISED THE FLOOR PLAN OR REDUCED THE SIZE OF THE BUILDING TO ADDRESS CONCERNS RAISED AND SUBMITTED THIS REQUEST TO LIMIT THE REQUIREMENTS FOR CONSTRUCTION OF THE OFFSITE PARKING.

IN CONCLUSION, THE TOWN COUNCIL HAS FOUR OPTIONS TO CONSIDER.

ONE, ACCEPT THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST TO DELETE THE CONDITION, TWO ACCEPT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDED MODIFICATION TO THE CONDITION.

THREE, PROPOSE A NEW MODIFICATION TO THE CONDITION OR FOUR, DENY THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST.

THEN PLANS ON STAFF WILL CONTINUE TO HOLD OFF ON ISSUING A BUILDING PERMIT UNTIL CONDITION 5 HAS BEEN SATISFIED.

IF THE TOWN COUNCIL PROVIDES DIRECTION TO MOVE FORWARD WITH A MODIFICATION OR DELETION OF THE CONDITION, STAFF WILL PREPARE A RESOLUTION FOR THE TOWN'S ATTORNEY REVIEW, TO BE PLACED ON THE AGENDA FOR THE JULY 16, 2024, TOWN COUNCIL MEETING.

I'D LIKE SAY THE REMAINDER OF TIME FOR REBUTTAL. THANKS.

>> COUNSEL, HAVE ANY QUESTIONS?

>> I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS FOR STAFF.

THERE'S A LOT OF MOVING PARTS HERE, AND I WAS HERE BACK IN 2021, WHEN WE STAFF SPENT A LOT OF TIME AND EFFORT HASHING OUT THE AGREEMENT FOR THE LOCAL OWNERS TO ARRANGE WITH FEC FOR THE OFFSITE PARKING.

[01:10:05]

WAS THEIR APPLICATION PUT IN? IT JUST DISAPPEARED.

WHAT WAS THE STATUS OF THAT?

>> FROM MY UNDERSTANDING, THE OWNER OF 105 CENTER STREET IS THE ONE THAT IS TAKING CONTROL OR CHARGE TO GO TO FEC, AND APPLICATION HAS NOT BEEN SUBMITTED MY KNOWLEDGE TOY FOR THAT PARKING LOT.

THERE WAS SOME DELAY BECAUSE OF BRIGHT LINE USING THE AREA FOR STAGING.

THEN THAT WAS A LOT OF DELAY. THEY COULDN'T DO ANYTHING TO SUBMIT THE APPLICATION TO FEC WAS WAITED.

>> THERE WAS STAGING MATERIALS AND ALL THAT?

>> YES. THEY COULDN'T DO ANYTHING ANYWAY, BUT THEY DID GET THE ENGINEERING PERMIT, MEANWHILE IN 2022.

BUT THAT'S BECAUSE SITING IN THERE AND IT'S EXTENDED SO STILL ACTIVE PERMIT, IT'S JUST THEY HAVE NOT SUBMITTED.

THEN I DON'T KNOW IF I MENTIONED, BUT FEC ACCORDING TO 105 CENTER STREET HAS CHANGED OWNERSHIP, AND THEY ASK DIFFERENT REQUIREMENTS.

I KNOW THAT THEY HAVE OWNER OF 105 CENTER STREET WORKED WITH THE TOWN ENGINEER AND TRY TO SEE IF THERE'S AN ALTERNATIVE TO THEY'LL BUILD THE GENERAL DESIGN OF THAT PARKING ON STREET PARKING AREA FEC WOULD NOT ALLOW CURBING OR HAVE THE SOLID IMPROVEMENTS THEY WANT THE MOST REMOVABLE, SOMETHING THAT THEY CAN BE EASILY ACCESSING FIBER OPTICS ON THE GROUND.

THEY TO DIG UP EASILY AND HAVE CONCRETE SIDEWALKS OR CURBING.

>> I HEARD THERE'S A NEW OWNER OF 105.

>> NO, 105 IS THE SAME OWNER, BUT FEC HAS A NEW OWNERSHIP.

>> BUT THE LOCOMOTIVE BUILDING THAT WAS PURCHASED A FEW MONTHS AGO, THERE'S A NEW OWNER FOR THAT, CORRECT?

>> I'M NOT AWARE OF THAT.

>> YES. JOHN, ARE YOU AWARE? NO. I HEARD THAT WHOLE PROPERTY, RALPH'S THE COFFEE WAS SOLD, AM I CORRECT?

>> RALPH'S STAN UP BAR HAS JUST BEEN PURCHASED, BUT 105 CENTER STREET STILL HAS THE SAME OWNERSHIP.

>> OH, IT DOES.

>> THAT WAS THAT WAS THE OWNER FROM 2021, AND IT'S STILL THE CURRENT OWNER TODAY.

VINCENT POSINO IS THE OWNER AND RALPH SANU BAR HAS BEEN PURCHASED.

[OVERLAPPING].

>> THANK YOU. I JUST ALWAYS HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT REMOVING CONDITIONS OF A SITE PLAN APPROVAL.

THIS BLOWS UP THE WHOLE PLAN OF HAVING THAT WHOLE STRETCH REPAVED MARKED AND PUT INTO SERVICES OFFSITE PARKING, CORRECT? IS THAT DEAD IN THE WATER WHAT WE APPROVED A WHILE BACK?

>> MAKE SURE YOU'RE DIRECTING YOUR QUESTION.

>> I'M STILL WITH STAFF. I'M SORRY.

>> THE PLAN THAT WAS APPROVED IN 2021, IT'S POSSIBLY STILL MOVE FORWARD WITH ALTERNATIVES TO THE MATERIAL LIKE USING OTHER MATERIALS INSTEAD OF CONCRETE.

>> I UNDERSTAND THAT. BUT YOU SAID THERE WAS ONE OWNER THAT'S ALREADY HE'S MADE HIS OWN AGREEMENT WITH FEC, CORRECT?

>> SO HE'S OUT OF THE DEAL SO THE ORIGINAL ALL THE OWNERS GETTING TOGETHER AND DECIDING TO DO THIS, THAT'S GONE, RIGHT?

>> YEAH. IT IS VINNY, 105 CENTER STREET, THAT'S THE ONE.

>> I GUESS THAT'S IT FOR NOW.

>> I GOT A QUESTION FOR YOU WHILE YOU'RE STILL UP THERE, PLEASE.

THE OWNER OF 105 IS NEGOTIATING THE DEAL ON HIS OWN, BUT IS THE DEAL STILL FOR 22 SPACES?

>> EVEN THOUGH HE'S ALONE, HE'S STILL SEEKING THE 22 SPACES?

>> WE'RE NOW AWARE THAT THE CONTRACTOR OFFICE HAS MOVED OVER TO A PLACE WHERE IT'S MORE APPROPRIATE OVER THERE WHERE BOSTON MARKET USED TO BE.

HAVE YOU GOTTEN ANY NEIGHBOR COMPLAINTS ABOUT THAT AREA SINCE THEY'VE MOVED AWAY?

>> I HAVE NOT.

>> HAVE YOU ANY PERSONAL KNOWLEDGE OR ANECDOTAL KNOWLEDGE FROM ANY OF STAFF THAT THERE'S STILL A PROBLEM OUT THERE?

>> I MADE SOME OBSERVATIONS A FEW TIMES OUT THERE AND THERE'S PARKING OCCURRENCE, SO IN FEC RIGHT AWAY, NOT AS MUCH ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE I THINK IT'S SEMINOLE AVENUE, WHICH IS THE EAST WEST STREET THAT'S NORTH OF THE AT BUILDING.

I THINK IT'S [INAUDIBLE] I CAN'T REMEMBER THE STREET NAME, BUT SEMINOLE. THANK YOU.

THERE ARE SOME SOME PROPERTIES THERE THAT EXHIBITING PARKING TRAILERS IN THE PARKING LOT AND WHERE VEHICLES ARE PARKING, THOSE ARE THINGS THAT WE'VE OBSERVED.

THE PARKING IN THE FEC RIGHT AWAY, BUT THAT'S ALL I'VE KNOW NOTHING LIKE BEFORE WHEN ONSHORE CONSTRUCTION WAS THERE.

>> NOW, THE PROPOSED CONDITION IS IF IN THE FUTURE, THE PROBLEM MANIFEST ITSELF AGAIN, THAT THEY WOULD BE COMMITTED TO AT LEAST PICKING UP SOME OF THE SPACES IT LOOKS LIKE.

[01:15:03]

>> THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION CONDITION?

>> YES.

>> IF THERE'S A PARKING STUDY THAT REQUIRES IT, ARKANSAS SAYS THEY NEED TO BUILD THAT.

>> DO WE HAVE A TIME FRAME WE WOULD LIKE TO DO THAT LIKE A YEARLY LOOK AT IT A YEAR FROM NOW? WAS THERE ANY TIME ASSOCIATED WITH THAT IN YOUR MIND?

>> WE PROBABLY NEED TO CONSIDER THAT. I DON'T HAVE A TIME FRAME.

>> BUT WHAT WOULD YOU THINK WOULD BE REASONABLE, A YEAR?

>> I DON'T KNOW WHICH ONCE THE PARKING STUDY IS DONE, THEN WE COME BACK AND HOPE COUNSEL, THEN THE COUNSEL CAN MAYBE IT'S TIME TO GO THROUGH PERMITTING AND YOU KNOW FEC WOULD IMAGINE.

I DON'T KNOW A TIME FRAME TO BE HONEST.

>> THANK YOU.

>> ONE FOLLOW UP QUESTION.

THE AGREEMENT THAT 105 HAS WITH FEC, THAT'S FOR ALL THE SPACES?

>> THEY DON'T HAVE AN AGREEMENT WITH FEC THAT I'M AWARE OF.

>> THEY'RE APPROACHING FEC FOR AN AGREEMENT.

>> RIGHT.

>> OKAY, SO IT'S FOR ALL THE SPACES?

>> ARE THEY PLANNING ON KEEPING THEM FOR THEIR OWN PROPERTY OR SO IF THIS APPLICANT NEEDED SPACES, WHERE WOULD HE GO AND DO WE WANT TO BE IN A REACTIVE MODE?

>> THE 105 CENTER STREET WOULD BE IN CONTROL OF THE PARKING SPACES.

THERE WAS THE 0.91% CONTROL OF THEM TO BE ABLE TO MAINTAIN THEM AND SHARE THEM WITH THE OTHER OWNERS THAT HAD TO ENTER INTO.

>> WE DON'T KNOW.

>> IDEAL IS THEY SHARE, BUT THOSE SPACES ARE ABOVE AND BEYOND THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE CODE, SO THAT THEY CURRENTLY USED TO INCREASE ANY INTENSITY ON THE SITES.

THE 105 CENTER STREET USE THOSE 22 SPACES TO INCREASE THEIR INTENSITY, AND OTHER SPACES ARE ABOVE AND BEYOND PARKING.

>> IT'S STILL VERY VIVID IN MY MEMORY OF THE RESIDENTS DOWN AT LANDS END AND LOCAL RESIDENTS COMING TO COUNSEL, EMAILING CALLING, SAYING PARKING IS A DISASTER.

THERE'S DERELICT TRUCKS PARKED THERE, IT WAS A MESS, AND I DON'T WANT TO GO BACK IN TIME.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT STAFF IS OKAY WITH THIS AND THIS IS A DELICATE DECISION, I THINK.

>> THIS WAS A NOTICED PUBLIC HEARING.

WE DIDN'T HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS AT THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION.

I KNOW PETER HAD ONE CONVERSATION.

[OVERLAPPING].

>> I'M JUST KIDDING SORRY. CONTINUE.

>> THE NEIGHBORS HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO VOICE THEIR OPINIONS.

THERE MAY BE SOME HERE I'M NOT SURE IF WE HAVE PUBLIC COMMENTS FOR THIS HEARING.

BUT I DON'T KNOW DIRECTLY WHETHER THEY'RE SATISFIED.

WE JUST KNOW THAT THE POTENTIAL OF THESE CONDITIONS RESURFACING OR OCCURRING AT THE NEW BUILDING ARE A POTENTIAL BECAUSE OF THE CHARACTERISTICS THAT PETER WENT OVER IN THE PRESENTATION.

WHEN YOU HAVE A SMALL SITE THAT ONLY PARKS TO THE MINIMUM FOR THE USES THAT ARE REPOSED THERE WHEN THAT USE PEAKS, THERE'S NO OPTION BUT TO PARK ON SOMEONE ELSE'S PROPERTY OR WITHIN A PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY OR IN THIS CASE, FEC AREA THAT'S WHY WE POINTED THAT OUT.

THE FLOOR PLAN INDICATES OCCUPANCY COULD EASILY EXCEED THE NUMBER OF SPACES THAT ARE AVAILABLE IF VEHICLES ARE SINGLE OCCUPIED WITH PEOPLE COMING TO THAT LOCATION FOR WORK OR SERVICES.

IT HAS THAT POTENTIAL I THINK IF WE HAD SOME TYPE OF CONDITION FOR THE FUTURE, IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE TO RUN FORWARD BECAUSE AS PROPERTIES GET SOLD OR BUSINESSES CHANGE THEIR RENT, THE DEMANDS ON THOSE BUSINESSES AND THOSE LOCATIONS CHANGE ALSO.

>> THANK YOU.

>> IT IS RATHER COMPLICATED.

WHILE I HAVEN'T DEALT WITH FEC DIRECTLY, LIKE EVERYTHING WE GET IS SECOND HAND, WE DON'T GET ANYTHING IN WRITING.

THERE'S NOT MUCH RELIANCE ON WHAT WE'RE BEING TOLD SECONDHAND.

>> I KNOW [OVERLAPPING] I DON'T KNOW.

>> I UNDERSTAND THEY'D LIKE TO DEAL WITH ONE ENTITY.

>> WELL, I'M SORRY, I'LL WRAP IT UP.

BACK AND WAS AT 21 WHEN WE GOT ALL THIS HANDLED, IT WAS EXCITING TO LIKE THIS IS GOING TO FINALLY GET FIXED AND NICE PARKING SPACES REPAVED ALL THAT, AND IT JUST SORT VANISHED, SO ANYWAY.

>> I THINK THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF CHANGES AND FRUSTRATIONS OVER THAT PERIOD.

>> THANK YOU.

>> I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS FOR STAFF SO JOHN COULD IT BE YOU. NUMBER 1.

WANT TO BE CAREFUL HERE, I WANT TO STAY COMPLETELY GROUNDED ON THIS APPLICATION FOR 954 OLD GROUND OLD DIXIE HIGHWAY BECAUSE WHILE THE OTHER IS INFORMATIVE, IT'S NOT RELEVANT TO WHAT WAS COMMITTED IN THIS APPLICATION.

THIS PLACE, THIS AREA, I THINK IT'S PRETTY CLEAR AND I'M GOING TO SAY SOME THINGS AND ASK YOU TO CONFIRM YOU AGREE OR NOT.

IT'S ALL FROM YOUR REPORT, STAFF REPORT.

THIS AREA, IN LARGE PART,

[01:20:02]

HAS HAD PARKING ISSUES FOR DECADES.

IN LARGE PART DUE TO THE FACT THAT IT WAS RESIDENTIAL ALLOWED TO BE COMMERCIAL.

EVERYBODY WAS UNDER PARKED.

>> WELL, THEY WEREN'T ACTUALLY UNDERPARKED, THE PARKING.

>> I UNDERSTAND.

>> THEY'RE VERY SMALL AND THEY'RE DIFFICULT MANEUVER.

>> ALONG CENTER STREET?

>> YEAH, ON FRONT ON CENTER STREET LIKE 105.

>> I UNDERSTAND BUT THE WHOLE GROUP IS WHAT I'M JUST SAYING.

WHILE ON STORE ONSHORE CONSTRUCTION HAS MOVED, AND CERTAINLY SOME OF THEIR VEHICLES WERE AT ISSUE.

THE STAFF REPORT IS PRETTY CLEAR THAT ON TWO OR THREE OCCASIONS IN THE LAST MONTH OR SO, THE STAFF CHECKED, STILL WAS PARKING IN THE FEC RIGHT AWAY, CORRECT?

>> YES. THAT APPEARS TO BE MORE ASSOCIATED WITH THE 105 BUSINESS ON THE SOUTH END, AND THEN NEAR SEMINOLE, THAT IT'S MORE ASSOCIATED WITH THOMAS MELHORN, AND THE BUSINESS THAT'S PARKING AND STORING TRAILERS IN THEIR PARKING LOT, WHICH IS BEING DEALT WITH SEPARATELY THROUGH CODE COMPLIANCE AT THIS TIME ONCE WE BECAME AWARE OF THAT, ADDING TO THE AGGRAVATION.

>> BUT THE ORIGINAL APPROVAL OF THIS APPLICATION THE ONE THAT'S BEFORE US TO CONSIDER MODIFICATION.

IT HAD AGREED TO CONSTRUCT PARKING SPACES THAT WAS VERY CLEARLY KNOWN THAT WOULD BE USED BY OTHER PROPERTIES, CORRECT?

>> YES. THE WHOLE CONCEPT WAS A SHARED TO HAVE THIS MULTIPLE PARTIES PARTICIPATE AND I'M PRETTY SURE THERE WAS A REQUIREMENT THAT THERE COULD BE NO RESERVATION OF THOSE SPACES SO THEY WOULD BE FIRST COME FIRST SERVE.

>> IT WAS A SHARED SOLUTION THAT CAME BEFORE US, AND EACH PERSON OF THAT SHARED SOLUTION GOT THE CONDITIONS THAT THEY STEPPED UP AND COMMITTED TO AT THAT TIME.

>> YEAH. THERE WAS NO OBJECTION TO THE CONDITION WHEN IT WAS MOVING FORWARD AT THAT TIME.

>> WE ALL KNOW THAT FEC IS CHALLENGING TO DEAL WITH, SO IT'S NOT SURPRISING ABOUT THAT.

BUT I GUESS WHAT I'M HEARING FROM STAFF IS YOU BELIEVE THAT THERE'S STILL SOME ONGOING DIALOGUE, I GUESS TO GET A LEASE THAT THAT WOULD ENABLE THE CONSTRUCTION TO HAPPEN, CORRECT?

>> YEAH. I DON'T KNOW IF.

>> IT'S HEARSAY.

>> IF THE TOWN ENGINEER HAS ANYTHING TO ADD ON THAT, POTENTIALLY, RELATED TO FEC AND CURRENT POTENTIALS.

>> I WANT TO BE CAREFUL.

>> I JUST HAVEN'T HAD ANY CONVERSATION WITH THEM ON THOSE MATTERS.

>> BUT TO AGREE THEY WERE DOING THAT, I GUESS IT SEEMED LIKE THERE WAS AN AGREEMENT YEARS AGO THAT, WELL, SOMEBODY IS GOING TO GET THE LEASE, SOMEBODY ELSE IS GOING TO CONSTRUCT IT, AND THAT'S WHAT WE HAVE IN THIS CONDITION.

FOR THE RECORD, I WAS THE ONE DISSENTING VOTE ON THIS APPLICATION, BUT MY DISSENT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE PARKING IT WAS IN AGREEMENT WITH BRINGING THE PARKING TO RESOLUTION.

STAFF, THIS THOUGHT OF A FIX WITHIN SIX MONTHS, I'M GOING TO JUST SAY MY OPINION BECAUSE IT'S BEEN CLEAR FOR DECADES.

WHAT IS STAFFS? THAT'S NOT EVEN PRACTICAL TO EVER ENFORCE IT, RIGHT?

>> IT WOULD BE CHALLENGING.

>> CHALLENGING.

>> WHERE WOULD THEY GET THE SPACES? WHAT'S IMPRACTICAL? WE BURDEN OURSELVES. WE'VE DONE THIS A NUMBER OF TIMES WITH AN IMPRACTICAL CONDITION.

WHILE I APPRECIATE TRYING TO FIND SOLUTIONS, WHAT CAME BEFORE US FROM P AND Z AND WHAT IS BEING ASKED, IN MY OPINION, IS AN IMPRACTICAL SOLUTION BECAUSE WE HAVE AN EXASPERATED MORE CHALLENGING PARKING PROBLEMS. WE'D HAVE THEM DO A STUDY, TAKES MONTHS AND MONTHS TO DO.

WE CONCLUDE THERE'S A SHORTAGE AND THERE'S NO PRACTICAL SOLUTION.

THE ONLY PRACTICAL SOLUTION IS WHAT'S ALREADY IN THE CONDITION.

I JUST WANT TO SIGNAL THAT IF THE APPLICANT CAME BACK FOR ALTERNATIVE DESIGN ON THE SPACES, THAT'D BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE FOR ME, SOMETHING THAT I COULD POTENTIALLY SUPPORT.

I JUST WANT TO I KNOW I'M STILL IN QUESTIONING HERE, BUT I JUST WANT TO POINT THAT OUT BECAUSE I'VE HEARD THAT.

BUT TO JUST SAY THAT, LET'S JUST TAKE A LEAP OF FAITH DESPITE EVERYTHING WE HAVE HERE THAT THERE WON'T BE PARKING ISSUES.

I CAN'T DO THAT BASED ON WHAT STAFF GAVE ME HERE.

DO YOU WANT TO CONVINCE ME OTHERWISE?

>> IT'S A COMPLICATED SITUATION THAT'S BEEN BROUGHT FORWARD.

THAT'S WHY WE HAD CONTEMPLATED A SCENARIO MAYBE WHERE THEY WOULDN'T BE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE ALL

[01:25:02]

OF THE SPACES BECAUSE CERTAINLY THERE'S NOT AN EXPECTATION THAT THEY'RE THEMSELVES GOING TO GENERATE THE NEED FOR 22 SPACES, BUT SOMETHING MORE IN LINE WITH THE ACTUAL BUILDING NUMBER OF ROOMS AND THE LIKELY OCCUPANCY OF THE BUILDING AT SOME POINT IN THE FUTURE.

THAT'S WHY WE HAD ESTIMATED MAYBE THREE OR MORE SPACES WOULD BE MORE IN LINE WITH THE AMOUNT OF OVERFLOW PARKING THIS SPECIFIC USE MIGHT NEED.

THEN WE WOULD NEED TO SORT OUT SOME OF THE ISSUES WITH THE SITE PLAN APPROVAL THAT EXIST OR 105 FOR ALL THOSE SPACES AND WHETHER THEY COULD BUILD A PORTION OF THOSE SPACES OR AN APPROVAL SOMEONE ELSE HAS.

>> JUST TO CLARIFY, FOR 105, IS THERE ANY OBLIGATION OR CONDITION OF APPROVAL OR ANYTHING WITH 105 TO OBLIGATE THEM TO BUILD THOSE SPACES?

>> WHAT OBLIGATIONS EXIST IN TERMS OF THE 22 SPACES? WE HAVE THIS ITEM BEFORE US.

>> ONLY THIS ITEM BEFORE YOU.

>> NO OTHER PROPERTY HAS THE OBLIGATION?

>> HAS THIS PROPERTY EVER BEEN BUILT ON?

>> THE OWNER DID ONCE OWN THE TWO PROPERTIES IMMEDIATELY TO THE SOUTH OF THIS PROPERTY.

THE IDEA WAS REPRESENTED IN 2021, AT LEAST THAT THERE COULD BE SHARED PARKING AMONG THOSE THREE PROPERTIES SO THAT THEY CAN MOVE PARKING AROUND AS IT'S ONE OWNER.

>> I THINK IT WAS ACTUALLY AT THAT POINT, IT WAS PROBABLY FOUR PROPERTIES.

THE TWO THAT WERE DEVELOPED BY ONSHORE, THE SUBJECT PROPERTY THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TONIGHT, THE THOMAS CHRISTIAN AT THE TIME PROPERTY THAT'S JUST ONE LOT DOWN SEMINOLE TO THE WEST OF OLD DIXIE.

THEN THE 105 PROPERTY ON CENTER STREET.

>> IN NO WAY CAN THIS PARKING MEET THE MINIMUM PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR ANY DEVELOPMENT BECAUSE OF ITS TEMPORARY NATURE, IS THAT RIGHT?

>> CAN YOU REPEAT THAT?

>> THESE 22 SPACES COULD NOT COUNT IN THE CODE TOWARDS PARKING FOR A DEVELOPMENT BECAUSE THEY ARE TEMPORARY IN NATURE IN THE FVC RIGHT OF WAY.

>> THAT'S CORRECT. NOT UNLESS. THERE WAS A WAIVER OR SOME TYPE OF PUD THAT ALLOWED THAT.

>> THIS IS MORE ABOUT QUALITY OF LIFE, PUBLIC SAFETY, BUT ALSO INADEQUATE PARKING.

CAN YOU PLEASE EXPLAIN WHAT THE CODE SAYS WITH INADEQUATE PARKING? I KNOW IN 2021 THAT WAS DISCUSSED THAT ROGER DEAN, FOR EXAMPLE, HAS THESE 2,000 EXTRA SPACES BECAUSE THERE WAS AN OBSERVED NEED FOR ADDITIONAL PARKING.

WHAT DOES THE CODE SAY ABOUT INADEQUATE PARKING? IF SOMEONE HAS MINIMUM PARKING, BUT THERE IS OBSERVED INADEQUATE PARKING, WHAT ARE THE ''SYMPTOMS'' AND THE REMEDIES?

>> I'M GOING TO BE PARAPHRASING, BUT IT SAYS ESSENTIALLY THAT IF ALL OR NEARLY ALL OF THE SPACES, ON-SITE ARE BEING USED TO FULL CAPACITY, AND THERE'S ADDITIONAL PARKING OCCURRING ON OTHER PROPERTIES OR IN PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAYS, OTHER AREAS, THAT WOULD BE CONSIDERED INADEQUATE PARKING IF IT HAPPENED ON TWO OCCASIONS, ONE WEEK AND THE NEXT WEEK.

IF THAT OBSERVATION OCCURRED, THEN THE PLANNING DIRECTOR HAS THE ABILITY TO REQUEST A PARKING EVALUATION AND STUDY AND RECOMMENDATIONS BY THE PROPERTY OWNER ON HOW THEY CAN REMEDY THAT ADEQUATE PARKING ISSUE.

THEN THAT'S PRESENTED TO THE COUNSEL FOR DECISION ON HOW TO WHAT TO ACCEPT SO FAR AS THE MITIGATION.

>> DID THE OWNER IN 2021 OF THIS PROPERTY, WHO WAS THE SAME OWNER WITH THE APPLICATION TONIGHT, DID HE AGREE AND ACCEPT THE TERMS OF THE 22 SPACES? WAS THERE ANY OBJECTION, ANY DISCUSSION IN TERMS OF THIS CONDITION BEING PLACED ON THAT APPROVAL?

>> NO. THERE WAS AN OBJECTION AT THAT TIME.

>> HE WOULD KNOW THEN IF HE WAS GOING TO SELL THE PROPERTY OR HE HAD CONTROL OF THOSE OF MULTIPLE PROPERTIES AT THAT POINT.

UNDER ANY FORESEEABLE FUTURE, HE DIDN'T RAISE ANY ISSUES.