You're too much a rabble robber. I pledge allegiance to the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Can we make enough room right here somewhere? If everybody stooped down a little bit. Can you scoot this way a little bit? The problem is I can't go. You can't go nowhere. You can't. You've got to have a microphone. Let's push your chairs down. Right. Oh, yeah, that's right here. Take it right over there. Right between Eric and my... There you go. Carry it. Okay, while they're getting situated there, this is the Planning and Zoning Board slash Local Planning Agency. It's an advisory board which makes recommendations to the county commissioners who will make the final decision on these items. Item H3, H5, H7 are LPA items. Items on today's agenda will be heard by the county commission on September 4th at 5 p.m. When a motion ends in any kind of a split vote, a roll call vote may be taken to ensure accuracy. As a reminder, each member who makes a motion or a second needs to turn their microphone on so that their voice is on the record. Speakers with public comment on agenda items will only be given three minutes. Please spell your last name for the record. At this time, if any board member has had any ex parte communication regarding any application, please disclose so now. All right, seeing that, I need an approval for the P&Z Minutes from June 26th special meeting and July 14th. We'll go with June 26th first. Move for approval. A motion by Deb, a second by... I approve. Erica. Second. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Now I need a motion for the July 14th meeting. Move for approval. Second. A motion by Deb, a second by Erica. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? That passed unanimously. Okay. Item H2 has been removed from the agenda, and I am going to replace item H2 with items H7 and 8 for Mrs. Delmonico. Okay, you'll be moving into the two spot. Okay, item H1, please. Thomas Doherty requests to change the zoning classification from GU to RU-1-7 under application 25Z-00007, tax account 2301907 in District 1. All right, and sir, are you the applicant? Yes. Your name and address, and can you spell your last name for the record? Thomas Doherty, D-A-U-G-H-E-R-T-Y. And a little bit about what you're wanting to do. I just want to build a small house on that lot. And you need to change the zoning for that? Correct. Is there anyone in the audience who want to speak for or against this item? All right, seeing that, I bring it back to the board. We got any questions for the applicant? Mr. Chairman, I make a motion we approve or recommend approval. I second. Okay, a motion by Robert, a second by Erica. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? That passed unanimously. Thank you. And before you come up, Ms. Delmonico, is there anyone here for the item H-2, the NDW Consultants, LLC? Okay, that's been pulled from the agenda. I don't know if you all just want to stay here or you're welcome to leave. We need to. He can't make it in attendance today. Excuse me. We need to have you continue it to a date certain. And the next. We need to have you continue it to a date certain. And that would be September 15th if you. I'll need a motion to table this until September 15th. Make a motion we table this until September 15th. Second. We got a motion by Robert to table item H-2 to September 15th. A second by Deb. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Aye. All right. And just to answer the question, we just received an email from the applicant about less than an hour ago that he was not able to attend. So that is why we're asking for the continuance. What this is about, including the board. We would appreciate it if you would at least hear us out. I mean, we're all here for a reason. And even if he can't be here, you could hear our reason. So if it could be tabled again, can it happen again like this? Or could we get a day or two's notice so we could change our schedule? Because like you folks, this is in our working day. We have staff here who's going to answer that question, sir. Yes, sir. So based on our code, an individual is allowed to request, as a matter of right, generally it's up to the board's discretion, but generally they're allowed to request one continuance. And based on the meeting last month, the request was continued by the board to get additional information. So this is the applicant's first requested continuance. Not based on the request from the applicant. They're only entitled to one request. The P&Z board is not allowed to grant a continuance beyond one. And this is his first. You satisfied with that? No. Is there a reason the board can't hear it from us today? Is his attorney not here? I'm sorry? Is his attorney here, President? I have no idea who his attorney is. He's the only applicant on the application. He does not have anyone representing him. Can you table it an extra month? Could the board do that? That's, it's to the board's discretion. I mean, you can continue it to a date certain. Not to interrupt, but I have to let my boss know ahead of time before I can take a day off. I mean, I don't know about everybody else here, but this cost me a lot to come here because I feel strongly about it. Sir, we understand that. That's why everyone's here? Yes, sir. And so, you know, this just dropped in our lap like seven minutes ago. So, so I bring it back to the board. Do we want to give table it? Do we have a date for a month from today? Yes, sir. That was the September date that you guys already agreed to continue it to September 15th. We've taken a vote. It's been tabled to September 15th. Yes, sir. We did. So it'll be here at Planning and Zoning and that's September 15th. Can I get a bit of clarification, Mr. Chair? I can't even see you, Mr. Chair. That... Hold on one second, sir. You need to turn your mic on. Hold on for a minute. That the applicant had one chance to push this off, and the applicant had that chance today, and so the applicant does not have another chance to push it off himself. Is that correct? Yes. That's what he explained to him. Yeah. That's what I thought. No, sir. The applicant, including their representatives, are only entitled to one extension or one continuance. All right. Thank you. Okay. We're going to be moving to item H7 and H8. Item H7 and H8 are companion applications, so I will read them into the record together. However, they will need separate recommendations. Still, Florida Properties, LLC, being represented... I'm sorry. Ladies and gentlemen, could you all please keep it down, because we're moving on here. Thank you so much, though, for working with us. Let's give it another go, Ms. Trina. Item H7 and H8 are companion applications. I will read them into the record together, but they will need a separate recommendation. Still, Florida Properties, LLC, being represented by Kelly DeMonaco, request a small-scale comprehensive plan amendment under 25S.11 to change the future land use map designation from NC and Res.2 to CC under application 25S.S.006, located in District 1. And item H8, Still, Florida Properties, LLC, again represented by Kelly DeMonaco, request a zoning classification change from AU to BU-1 under application 25Z.0019, located in District 1. Okay, ma'am, could you state your name and address and spell your last name, please, for the record? Yes, I will, and good afternoon. My name is Kelly DeMonaco, D-E-L-M-O-N-I-C-O, and I'm here today representing the property owner, Steve Packard, who joins me in the front row. So thank you for your time consideration today. We are here today to request, here's the subject property, as you can see in the image in front of you, outlined with the black box. Our whole goal of today's request is to seek BU-1 zoning, and in order for the property to have BU-1 zoning, we're looking at a change of the future land use designation. On the left is the current designation. It's a mix of the Res.2 and the yellow and the pink neighborhood commercial. And in order to get the BU-1, we would seek a future land use, as you can see on the right, the red, which is community commercial. This is an extension of the existing community commercial and the BU-1 and BU-2 to the south. So the reason that we're requesting a BU-1 zoning district is because the property owner would like to utilize this property to assist small businesses through the use of, it's called different things. It's either Flex Space or Flex Warehouse. There's a lot of different names for it. But it's the type of structure where each of the units for those small businesses have a small office and a storefront in the front with a large roll-up door. And then they have flexible space that they can use for storage or for fabrication. So a lot of these users, what they're focused on is builders and contractors. Think AC, plumbing, electrical, cabinet makers, things like that. All of those uses, because we want them all to be inside, that's why we're seeking BU-1. We don't need to seek BU-2, which would allow the more heavier commercial uses and the outdoor type uses. We have met with Commissioner Delaney. This is in her district after we had made the application to make sure there weren't any major concerns to consider. When we were looking at the design of this site, which we're not bringing the design before you today, but we are aware there are some wetlands on the west side of the property, so our design would be sensitive to that. It would push the building and the impervious surfaces to the east closest to U.S. 1. This request is consistent with the comprehensive plan and the land development regulations, and we would really appreciate today a recommendation for approval and are happy to answer any questions. All right. Before we go there, Ms. Delmonico, is there anyone in the audience want to speak for or against this item? That's very good news. Seeing that, I bring it back to the board. We have any questions for the representative? I guess my only question is, so it says there in 2007 there's a MIMS small study area, and it says that really what we want to do is make this, you know, that if this property is developed, that the services are, you know, providing goods and services to MIMS residents. So would that be the case? Yes. I would foresee this is where small businesses would set up shop for the residents of this area and maybe other companies who need, like, satellite locations throughout different parts of the county. There's not a lot of places up in MIMS that have this type of use available. Okay. And then one of the other things I read was that the board may wish to consider mitigating the potential intrusion of this land use into surrounding residential areas by limiting this to only flex contractors with no outside storage, so maybe a binding development plan. I don't believe BU-1 allows for outdoor storage. We wouldn't be opposed to limiting that because that's not what we need to do here, but I think BU-1 protects that unless I'm missing something. Yeah, I'm just reading staff notes. Okay. Yeah. Yeah, we would prefer just a BU-1 zoning that we develop within those constraints because the other thing is the use that we're proposing there, it's like 15 different uses, so it's not like a single category, it's pulling things from different contractors and cabinet makers, and, you know, someone could go in there with just an office or something. So we do like the idea of allowing all the BU-1 uses. So I guess my question is, does BU-1 allow for no outside, you can't use outside storage with BU-1? That is correct. Okay. All right. I don't know why that was in here then. Okay. All right. Thank you. No problem. How many units, if you don't mind? Sure. We're still in the conceptual phases of design because we haven't done the engineering work for the land, but in just a sketch that we had a local engineer work on for us, we had nine, but again, that's not based on engineering standards. And so these are about 1,700, 1,800 square foot units. So it would have the roll-up door and the office space with a bathroom in it, and then it could be used in compliance with the BU-1 zoning. Thank you. Any other questions for the applicant? I'm assuming these are leases? Yes, sir. Not purchases. And who maintains the common grounds once you're all leased up? The property owner. Okay. Would take care of that. The whole time. The property owner who would be leasing out the units. All in the common ground areas. Yes, sir. You don't rely on the leasees, right? Correct. Thank you. They would just be focused on the inside of their units. Thank you. You're welcome. Okay. I need a motion, board. Mr. Chair. I make a motion to approve. Hold on one second. We'll hold that motion. Ms. Trina. So staff would just like to, I guess, clarify or have the applicant state on the record that they understand that no warehousing will be permitted with this use. It is for flex contractor offices, but no warehousing. We just want to have that on the record. Yes. Yep. It would have the storage as part of the business and their associated uses, but warehousing, as in you just have it only used for storage, we agree that that's not allowed use in the zoning district. Okay. Ms. Erica, can we continue, please? Absolutely. I will make a motion to approve. Second. Okay, we got a motion on item H7 by Erica, a second by Anna. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? And now I'll need a motion for item H8. I'll make a motion. We recommend approval of item H8. Second. On item H8, a motion by Robert, a second by Debbie. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Any opposed? That passed unanimously. Thank you, everyone. Thank you. Item H3. Item H3 and H4 are companion applications. We will read them into the record together, but they'll need a separate recommendation. Cobblestone 2, RVG LLC, being represented by D. Scott Baker, requests a small-scale comprehensive plan amendment under 25S.12 to change the future land use map designation from Res. Res. Res. Res. Res. 1, res. Res. 1, res. Res. 2, cc. and nc to Res. 6 under application 23 SS0006 located in District 3. Item H4. Cobblestone 2, RVG LLC, being represented by D. Scott Baker, request a zoning classification change from tr-3 and ru-1-9 to all tr-3 with a bdp under application 25z 00038 located in district 3 okay sir if you could state your name and address and spell your last name for the record sure good afternoon i'm scott baker i'm an attorney with zimmerman law firm in orlando 315 east robinson street suite 600 32801 and my last name is spelled b-a-k-e-r it's easy okay a little bit about what you're wanting to do here sure um this as you just heard it's a comp plan amendment and companion rezoning there is i want to be clear at the outset that there's no new development proposed there's no changes at all proposed what happened is my client purchased the property about two years ago lender looked carefully at the zoning situation and realized there was some inconsistency between the zoning and the future land use so the future land use today would not allow this park and that's so the park has been there probably since the late 60s maybe early 70s it's developed at a relatively high density at six units per acre so it's an existing non-conforming use we and we'd like to make the zoning and the land use be consistent um the and we're also proposing to do a binding development plan to cap the zone or the unit count sorry the unit count where it is today so nothing news plan and the reason we do that is it helps out with one making the lender happy when they see that there's no you know inconsistencies but number two is if we want to do any kind of um improvements to the property not add units but perhaps do a rec center or do some kind of amenity or something we're we're non-conforming as we sit here today and it and it puts us in a situation where we have to go through a lot of additional steps at the county to get approval there's also a small little house up on us1 that we'd like to use and it's zoned or i get your zoning it's are you dash thank you very much um it's are you something dash one so we can't use that as an office uh unless the whole thing is zoned tr3 which allows mobile home parks so if any residents are here i want them to be assured nothing's changing out there we just need to make it legally consistent and have a unified zoning and land use approach all right do we have any questions for the representative board we'll see in that then i'm going to move out to the audience do we have anyone want to speak for or against this item all right sir you stood up first ma'am you're you'd be second i have just questions well you're going to have to come up here to the microphone and state your name and address for the record and spell your last name for us too all right my name is david fields f-i-e-l-d-s and my address is 5930 river grove drive and i don't know how you guys pronounce it down here it's miko and it's 32976 okay so i have about 100 questions so and i know that's not what we're here for today i got that but there's no answers on this what are they actually wanting to do is my first question well we don't know any of that information sir the thing is is either you're for the rezoning or against it because we're just the planning and zoning and i understand that and that's what i can't find out from the notice that was posted is what are they wanting to do what's the rezoning that they want to do that's my question which i can't get answered from the post or from anybody else and then i also have comments for whomever is in charge after the meeting about again the information on the post because it doesn't i've been to three different buildings and this can be on the record i have no problem with that i've been to three different buildings and nobody exactly knew until i got to the last one which was over in building a and it's the planning and development at least that lady knew where i needed to be in which building but i still didn't get what room i needed to be into until i talked to the information lady out front so the complaint is your reorganization rezoning notice doesn't have any of that information on it it just said this build this address which covers this whole facility abc and i don't know how many buildings you got now the other thing is is on the rezoning notice it doesn't tell me what they want to do what zoning they're changing what zoning they want to improve any of that and i can't find that out and i've tried to ask people and nobody can tell me well not blaming you guys i'm just saying as far as the notice goes yeah so i don't know if i'm against it or for it because i can't find out what they're doing so if that makes any sense to you because hopefully you guys know what kind of rezoning they're wanting to do if you're here for a yay or nay vote so right now my vote is i abstain but i would like to find out what it is they're wanting to do okay okay well we don't know that ourself neither we just know the zoning changes so then how can you approve or disapprove if you don't know what they're doing because if it's compatible with surrounding properties etc etc we can go on forever so is it compatible you don't know that either correct no we do know that okay so but you don't know what it is they want to do you just know it's compatible with other properties do you want to chime in here seriously anybody well mr chair you don't have to go back and forth with members of the public they're allowed to ask questions but it's up to the discretion of the board if they want to engage in dialogue um i'm sure there's staff in the back that can assist you with explaining what the request is for sir okay great i don't have a problem with that either i can even step outside i just i'm here today to find help what the heck they're wanting to do and i don't know because i live there so if you would look back to the back the gentleman standing up if you'll follow him outside we thank you thank you we can move on all right do you want to speak ma'am well you might want to follow him out and he can explain what's happening here took me four nights of finally being able to sleep all right a sign like that is just not good for old people anyone else want to speak for or against this item mr chair yes just a suggestion if i may um if we want to wait for those two individuals to have a chance to speak with staff then maybe they could come back and either say for or against or at least have a better understanding of what the request is for oh that's at the discretion set it over to the side and continue on it's up to you and the board yes sir but that'll be my recommendation all right items three and four then we'll just scoot over to the side until you all have your time and we're going to go to item h5 and six i have a question if i might sir it seems like the applicant kind of gave a rundown of what they were looking to do is he allowed to join them out there and give them a brief explanation of what he said prior to that gentleman walking in the back door i mean personally i think that would be up to him i thought the applicant was very concise and straightforward what you were planning and i just thought that might streamline things a little bit so we'll hit items five and six i'm sorry the what ma'am can i say something about the river ground the zoning that they're trying to they're fixing to come back in if you want to join that meeting and then when they come back in i'll allow you to speak sure yeah no it's fine thank you okay you did this to me henry holy cow i don't know this is quiet as john's ever been i'm glad you're here mr trina i'm sorry about this but item five and six maybe we can get through something here item h5 and h6 are companion applications i will read them into the record together however they will need a separate recommendation city point landfall llc being represented actually by bruce moya and kim rezenka request a small scale comprehensive plan amendment under 24s point 11 to change the future land use designation from res 1 res 2 res 4 and nc to cc and res 4 under application number 24 ss 0009 located in district 1 city point landfall llc being represented by bruce moya and kim rezenka request a change in zoning classification from eu and rp with an existing bdp to pud with the removal of existing bdp under application 24 pud 0003 located in district 1 before you begin i'd also like to state on the record we actually just received an email a resubmittal of the city point pdp so obviously i have not had time to review that as i just received it in email about half an hour ago good evening mr chairman members of the pnz my name is bruce moya representing the applicant if this all looks familiar it should it should it came to you a few months ago and this board did approve it based on the previous layout but if you recall when you did approve it you made a suggestion that we meet with the neighbors which we did we met with the neighbors we also met with the district one commission office and we submitted a plan that is very different from what you approved um based on the input we got from the residences so uh they had some pretty pretty significant comments and we made some very significant changes uh we basically had over 100 people in the first meeting and we changed i think every major comment that they had including removing access from the subdivision street to the north uh to making it off of us-1 so now this project solely accesses off the us-1 we've reduced the commercial to about half of what we had proposed before we removed the access and parking on off of indian river drive we removed all the townhouses and it is all only single family with a small piece of commercial in the front which is proposed for indoor rv storage very very small non-intensive use so we think we've we've gone over and above and met all their requests um and then we had a follow-up meeting just a couple days ago where we went ahead and showed them that this is what we did so we went from about 100 people down to about 18 people at the second meeting and there's a couple things that we were willing to also change based on the what came up out of the meeting um there was concerns about the um uh i made a list here about minimum floor area so we have no problem uh stating that the minimum floor area for these houses would be the same as what is to the north and that subdivision so they'd be compatible be the same um and that when we did the uh the plat that we would put the wetland into conservation which we pretty much do anyway so we will do that um uh there was some stormwater questions um and concerns because any river drive is very low um it's just barely above the indian river and the drainage there is not very good so we think we have an opportunity when we work with staff once we get into the design that we can maybe help help that somehow um a little difficult because the wetland goes all the way up to the edge of pavement um and the county has no right-of-way there uh actually the road is on our property through a prescriptive easement and um so um and then there was a comment that if we find coquina on the property that maybe we could build a seawall with it i don't know if that we can do that or not but if if we can we'll sure try um also uh we did have comments from staff and i apologize for the timing um but we had come to you guys before we were finished with staff review the first time and now we had some pretty minor comments that we felt we've addressed um mostly open space we've added the if you've been out there there's an existing what's left of an existing dock out there that we should now we're showing that on the plan that that would be part of our open space um we re re re configured the walkway to get it farther away from the neighbors to the north and um uh that was pretty much all the things that we changed and there was some other minor planning comments but nothing significant that would change the the layout of what you're seeing now so i hope that gives you an idea of what we've done i hope you're happy that we did listen to the neighbors and we did make a lot of changes and we're hoping that we can get your approval i'm here to answer any questions that you have all right i'll open up the questions from the board to mr bruce i just want to say thank you for meeting with the residents like you guys said you did and you went back and worked with them and i'm i'm pleased with the outcome glad that you guys did that hard work thank you i'd like to say the same thing i'm really impressed that you you know took the time and met with everybody made the necessary modifications so i don't know i i just am thrilled that you did that thank you mr chairman yes sir hi bruce hey john how you doing good um what's the elevation of this project going to be um it well it's going to vary uh this has this site basically slopes from us1 continuously to the river um it does fall quite a bit once you get about two-thirds from us1 it has a drop off so uh we would pretty much maintain that that configuration so some of the buildings will be higher than the others as you go all the construction is on the top side of the bluff okay um i'm a little disappointed for the residents that they didn't figure out that if you had maintained your entrance at round tree road that you could have fixed that problem on round tree which floods all the time because it's very low and now you're not using it at all and so they they don't benefit from that um i'm a little concerned about the elevation change though because highway one is quite high compared to all the surrounding area there you're coming straight off of one correct yes sir and then you're going to slide down uh toward the river correct so where's all that water going to end up well now it just winds up all across the road and into the river um so we're going to contain all that uh through our retention ponds and treat it before it ever has a chance to go to the river probably store most of the water that that you probably won't even see discharged in most storms but in the bigger ones you would uh so we think there's there's it's going to be an improvement because now you're going to get treated water going to the lagoon instead of just a a hill that just runs right off into the road um and then also i think we can work with the county to see if there's any way we can improve the drainage system on any river drive you're going to raise everything up i'm not going to raise the road unless the county wants to raise the road or lower highway one yeah we'd be happy to give them the room to do that but it's going to be hard between the river on one side and the wetland on the other yeah i drove in that area and and it's it's almost eight feet from highway one to the bend at river at um roundtree road oh it's more than that more than that yeah more than that yeah us one's at about 20 and the river roads are about i didn't have my level with me so i wasn't it closer to 20 feet than it is 20 feet so so there there you know when you first presented this to us um i thought it was a benefit of what you were doing by introducing your entrance at roundtree because then you would have raised that elevation down there but evidently they did not they didn't opt for that they did not want that entrance no that's a shame okay thank you thank you any other questions for the or for the applicant okay all right if i'm going to move out to the audience there does anyone want to speak for or against this item okay ma'am we'll start with you and if you could state your name and address for the record and spell your last name my name is sandra kennedy k-e-n-n-e-d-y and i live at 3711 warwick drive which is um a little bit north of this development um the entire development in that area has one entrance in and out basically from indian river drive and that's city point road otherwise we have to drive far north to get out that whole area floods but interestingly the area where this development is isn't the flooding area yet but it will be with the development the area that floods the worst right now is where the retention ponds already sit near us1 um in the twin lakes area you've got retention ponds all over the place um and fdot just moved a project that was supposed to be at this project this area this property down to uh my backyard a ditch line that went through my backyard and now the bottom of that ditch line is flooded continuously when it rains and when hurricanes come and that doesn't mean a hurricane hits us it just means if a hurricane comes anywhere nearby we flood like crazy and the hills weep for months after the hurricanes and the water washes over indian river drive and then it comes up from the lagoon also so this project which i'm adamantly against the change in the density in the zoning it is going to increase the flooding because it's going to make it more impermeable the water will just run right off and when you talk about putting a retention pond if everybody is on a flat elevation that pond is great it'll funnel the water down but what's going to happen is when the water funnels down it goes to indian river drive and that is a historic road it's a former indian trail and it would be an outrageous cost for the county to have to raise that road and not only that but it would destroy the country bucolic nature of that area the historic nature we've got historic churches on that road we have old historic houses on that road and this is not your indian river drive in coco where it's on a bluff this is all the way down at the bottom where the road is very low um so this project is certain to cause flooding um another thing is that it's completely uh not um compatible with the surrounding area right now all of the surrounding areas are very large lots uh full acre or more or half an acre and single family homes and the only thing that has a higher density park chester was built back in the 60s or maybe the 50s before planning and zoning functions existed before probably before this was even brevard county and so to go back to that and that's basically eliminating all of our planning function the planning consisted in setting the development plan that we have now the zoning that we have now is most appropriate do not increase that density please just leave it as it is okay thank you ma'am thank you sir would okay yes sir go ahead and if you also would state your name and address and spell your last name for the record my name is joseph mclean i live at 34 it's m-c-c-l-a-i-n i live at 3449 indian river drive um i just i just want to bring your attention that that just uh governor de santis and the um florida department of environmental protection uh are really focused on indian river lagoon and they're spending a lot of money and so is so is bevard county spending a lot of money to clean that up and um my problem is um i haven't heard exactly what they want to do but the flow down if it goes through the the grass and everything else and comes out it pretty much cleans itself i understand that having a retention pond when it fills up and spills over it goes straight out into the lagoon and as far as i'm concerned when it floods that much it's going to stir up the water stir up the the uh all the ingredients that the indian river is trying to eliminate and clean up so what doesn't uh kill all the the grassy areas um and i think that if you know i i would hate to see this board uh go ahead and not consider that when the governor and the environmental control have really spent money or aren't are in the process of spending the money to clean it up if it just flows out like most of the areas right through a pipe then we've lost a lot of the issue of of having a clean water so i have yet to hear an exact and then who is going to maintain it afterwards those those reservoirs fill up i mean those and if they don't maintain it you're going to have the same thing in four or five years and it's going to be filled and spilled over so my concern is the river is is uh getting you know um the environmental uh flow off of that hill by the time you put cement you put asphalt roofs you put people washing their own cars all rushes down right straight down to that retention pond and when that gets down to the retention pond some of it lays in the bottom some of it settles but if there's a lot of splash as you know it will stir that up and run it out my concern thank you thank you sir yes sir if you could come on up sorry about that i was actually pointing to you but he came up no you're fine come on if you could state your name and address and spell your last name for the record my name is keith wessner w-e-s-s-n-e-r i'm the owner of 3430 u.s highway 1 coco so that's a long lot that's just south of this lot um so i purchased that property um previous to this company purchasing their lot um with knowledge of the environmental conditions on site and the zoning there i'm planning on just building a single family residence for my family um so i'm opposing um the the change in the zoning that's allowing we don't even know how small those lots are but they are certainly less than quarter acre that will be abutting my property um the other concern i have is um the retention pond that is there to collect that water is along my property and along all that ridge there's a weep in the coquina so there's a fissure in the coquina that is like a spring it's constantly especially in the summer bubbling up water i have ponds on my property that are 15 20 feet above the river that hold water that that bubble up and overflow down into the river this plan has retention water or retention pond that is concentrating all that storm water right into that spot where i think you're going to have a a storm water and an environmental issue there that they don't really understand and i i just don't think it's a great idea to reduce the zoning to res for it to to stack more houses in there that's just going to make that issue worse um with the with the water retention all right thanks okay thank you sir okay sir in the back and also if you could state your name and address and spell your last name for the record thank you for having me my name is robert dyer i live at 3513 indian river drive coco florida i'm going to try to talk fast so hopefully you guys can listen fast with me this proposal represents a fundamental and detrimental shift to the character of our quiet single-family riverfront neighborhood this developer's request to change the land use of community commercial and the zoning of pud is a direct contradiction to the tranquil residential environment that has defined this area for generations the proposed change would allow for the construction of 50 or more units and rv storage a significant increase in density from the handful of homes that would be permitted under the current zoning this dramatic increase in residential units and potential for commercial activity is not logical fit for our community's needs we moved here for peace not to live next to a high density development while the developer and others suggested in previous meeting these new homes could raise property values i would argue that this is a misconception of why our community exists people don't purchase these properties to flip to the highest bidder these are considered forever homes places where families intend to settle down and pass on to the next generation this neighborhood isn't built on speculation it's built on the foundation of long-term stability and quality of life the proposed changes threaten to erode the foundation not enhance it the developer is in an engineering firm and while they may be experts in engineering physical structures their proposed demonstration a critical failure failure to engineer trust and tranquility with the surrounding homeowners a project that lacks the support of the community will directly impact it is a project that is not well engineered for success i ask you as a fellow board member on another board and public servants to listen to the constituents who live here the people of bevard county already have concern that all undeveloped land will become high density apartment complexes or storage units this proposal which includes both validates those fears your vote to deny these requests would demonstrate your commitment to listen to listening to the people you serve and to protecting the unique character of our community tonight i want to challenge you i challenge you to be bold and ask the hard questions of the developers i ask you to look at this proposal and think deeply about whether it truly serves the long-term interests of our community if for any reason you find yourselves not asking questions i ask that you reflect on why you chose to serve on this board you chose to serve your community and in this moment your community needs you to act as if this project were happening on your own doorstep it is discouraging to see a consistent pattern where board members are slow to ask bold and curious questions and instead often simply congratulate applicants for meeting with neighbors while neighbor meetings are a start they do not replace the rigorous critical review that the proposal demands please do not mistake the smaller number of people attending these meetings for a lack of community opposition for many young working families like mine it is constant struggle to balance work family and time and resources needed to continuously engage in these public forums our inability to attend every meeting does not mean that we are in agreement with this proposal i know my time is up you can see me as a historian or expert in this community if you'd like to call me back up thank you all right thank you is there anyone else like to speak for against this item sir also if you could state your name and address and spell your last name for the record my name is james suderman my address is 3469 indian river drive i am directly south of this proposed uh pud could you spell your last name please sir it's almost like superman with a p instead a d instead of a p it's s-u-d-e-r-m-a-n-n-n okay thank you um i'm here representing myself my wife and several of our neighbors who are worried about this developer's request to change the florida land use map and zoning from its current flu configuration which also includes an overriding overriding binding development plan this plan has been in place uh for several years and when the current landowner of this development bought it this binding development plan was in place so he knew what he was buying um so the the developer and uh their engineer are back before you with a new revision which does address several of our concerns that we had and expressed at the meetings but it continues to ignore our prime underlying concern which is too much density the developer continues to ask for the florida land use plan to be changed to res 4 4 4 units per acre for the entire 10.86 acres of residential area in his proposed uh pud so even though the 10.8 acres times 4 units per acre results in a potential of 44 units on this land his pud calls out for only 23 units and 23 units and 23 units happens to be uh more than three times the number of units he is currently allowed to build under his p bdp changing to a greater allowed density will necessarily uh except exurbate our ongoing flooding problems which is illustrated here in this uh little picture this land that you see the green part is the green part on your map that was just handed out to you that is that is the it's the the indian river drive directly east of his wetlands boundary so you can see that it's not just like a little bit of flooding between the indian river itself uh rising up and the water coming off of the hills uh even with the fact that most of that land is permeable right now it still runs off and it meets right there at the river and this uh this flooding goes on up and down the road so um so his pud shows a drainage plan that uh that collects all this runoff and directs it eastward towards thank you sir so anyhow still out flooding is there anyone else would like to speak for or against this item okay ma'am if you could come on up and state your name and address for the record and spell your last name also my name is diane burrows b-u-r-r-o-u-g-h-s and i'm at 381 chester drive and that's in the park chester development and sir mr john hoppengarten i'd like to correct you on the statement earlier that you stated about being round tree being a flooding area we've been there since um 2017 and that that has not flooded the entrance so um we are just thankful that the developer did take the entrance off of the park chester area um but i would like to speak also to the concerns raised for the flooding um it is significant flooding on indian river with that artesian well that's there um my concern is that not enough is being done to make sure that we're not going to have unnecessary runoff and by increasing the amount of housing per acre by ignoring the binding development agreement that is currently in place it is going to put um that area at more risk for flooding so i just wanted to state my opposition to that while we are thankful for the concessions that the developer has made not enough is is being done and that the binding development plan needs to stay in place thank you okay thank you does anyone else want to speak for or against this item because i'm going to close it for public comment he looks like he wants to raise his hand okay all right i'm going to close it for public comment sir you've already had a shot at us so anyhow seeing that if you could come back up mr bruce and if you would like to address some of those concerns you heard but now let me get this right we voted on this we pretty much approved it yes sir advised you to go back to the public yes sir you went back to the public yes sir 100 people so in the meeting yes sir made all these changes yes sir even though you were approved yes and now got it down to what six or seven or whatever yes thank you you're welcome um one point i did want to make um maybe more than one but the there was some talk about this being you know high density um this is really not true this is actually less than two units per acre um the lots to the north of us are 0.2 acres so you and they have no open space no retention pond so they're more like four maybe five units the acre and there's some that are 0.3 that might be three plus units per acre so we're lower than the surrounding um we actually even on the for the existing homes so to our north we kept those lot sizes the same size as their lots so we'll be but up to them we're not putting small lots up against big lots we're putting the same size lots up against the same size lots so um so lower density we you know i think you can see from the pictures that road floods because any river actually topped the bank and went into the road i think that was pretty clear um and then for uh the engineers in the room um you know vacant property still provides pollutants to the river it's a direct discharge so that those numbers are quantitative and then we we look at that and then we're we're we're tasked to that we can't exceed that even though we pave and put asphalt down and put in buildings our post development rate has to be less than what was existing um and then this is going to be subject to the brand new dep rule that's going to come into effect december 31st so these ponds will be like no ponds you've ever seen before these will be the best stormwater ponds uh in in the county um that because we don't have any like them they're changing the rules so the water leaving the site will be cleaner than any other water and there's if you look at the map there's probably maybe maybe a handful of stormwater ponds between state road 528 and titusville on the east side of us1 so we'll be one of the only properties that's that's handling and treating our own stormwater to help with what we're trying to do with the indian river lagoon so um i think we have demonstrated that this is going to be a benefit um so unless you had any other questions uh i would hope that you would approve our project let me bring it back up here to the board do we have any questions for mr boyo before we make a motion i just did two clarifications we have questions there was a comment about an artesian well can you speak on that if there is one is it being capped if there is one it'll be capped st john standards we'll have to abandon it properly and then i think there was a question about the uh stormwater function and the operation and maintenance of that do you want to maybe talk about the requirements to put in like i know um things that i work on we are now required to put in an operation and maintenance plan that's reviewed by permitting agency we have to put a budget together so the hoa knows what it's going to cost i assume you're going to be subject to those same rules do you want to talk about that just for a second yeah so now currently there's been changes in the rule that that took effect a little while ago and it's going to get even more restrictive in the in the near future that the homeowners association will help will be the maintenance entity of the stormwater system so they'll have to maintain it we have to actually submit what that entails what does that mean maintain a stormwater pond well you know nowadays it means wait for it to stop working and then you you do something about it well not anymore we actually have to tell them what they have to do how often they have to do it and how much it's going to cost them so they can budget their homeowners fees to make sure they address it so that's required now so you're going to see that they're going to be mandated to to maintain the system um like like we've never had to do before and they'll know exactly what that entails and how much that's going to cost them do we have any other questions from the board was there an attempt to come up with a design that exists within the existing bdp or it was this something that kind of just did not take any of that into consideration so for one thing the bdp only only is for a portion of the property it doesn't extend to the entire property the and if you if you use the bdp and the existing zoning that's on the property and lane you see you could get about 22 units and we're proposing 23 and then the commercial of course is on the corridor which is us1 which is all commercial pretty much all commercial now so that's compatible um and what's weird is that the higher density land use is in the wetland and the lower density is in the upland so basically what we're doing is we're just because we can't put higher density and we don't want to build in the wetland of course but we can't shift that density up hill we have to do the the lane use chains to cover the entire property in order to move those units to the uplands so if the if the bdp that's on it now um allows for more density but it's in the wetlands there wouldn't there's very low likelihood that anything would have ever been built there anyway so it's it's probably would not have more density overall right if you toes not to mitigate through the wetlands right yeah off-site mitigation i mean you could yeah okay i'm just curious thank you um was this this the property that used to be a a uh nursery no okay i don't think so the nursery there's a nursery to the north north yeah okay uh yeah northeast yeah roger any other questions for the applicant well i'm going to say i believe you went above and beyond miss kim yourself also to try to resolve and handle all these issues the surrounding neighborhoods had thank you chair if i may yes ma'am for consideration before you make your recommendation we do have at the end of the staff report that part of what they're proposing for recreation is a dry retention bond so your recommendation would include whether or not that is to be approved that needs to be waived by the board and the other thing is again what you would be approving today the pdp that's in your packet is different from maybe different from the pdp i received an email right at the start of the meeting so staff has not had time to review that so if you want to make a recommendation today it would need to be um have a clause in there that after staff have has reviewed this the resubmitted pdp that it would be approved based upon staff approvals of that resubmitted pdp yes ma'am i mean it's a public record at this point it's been entered into the record i'm sure it'll be part of the packet that gets brought before the board of county commissioners if i could i know i'm done but uh i did go over those points that we what we did change that's all we changed is what i went what i stated earlier there was like four things and most of them were stuff that came from the from the public meeting that we're agreeing to okay mr moya for just question so for the dry retention it looks like on the plan that you've got a like a raised walkway or something going across down to the wetland observation deck on there so that's part of the there's a dry retention area but that's part of the open space right and then we're also going to propose to to to reconstruct the dock and that will also be part of our open space thank you there also appears to be a new dock connected to that dock going across the wetlands leading to maybe a crosswalk to the pond on the uh to the um river to the dock on the river so briefly scanning it over that's a change that i see so far um on there and again if you read um in the staff report uh section 62 1102 states that the in order to use that as open space it it needs to be with water and this is proposed to be dry and it's supposed to have a perpetual level of water quality acceptable for recreational purposes there is no active and we've asked there is no active proposed on the pdp and he is they are required to provide active and passive right now the only thing that's identified on the pdp is passive so we need where's your active yes go ahead do you guys have a response for that since you just did that submittal um if it'll meet the requirement we'll add a top lot to the plan will that meet it for active okay we'll add that to the so i would chairman i would make a motion that we approve subject to the applicant working with staff on this a recent uh submittal to confirm the open space active and passive recreational open space that that gets sorted out okay i need a second we need this is stickler for details i make a motion to approve the comp plan request first please second oh so we're going to go item h5 first we got a motion to approve by anna a second by robert all those in favor say aye aye any opposed i'm opposed opposed sorry opposed opposed we have three opposed did you get it okay anna now h6 so i'd make a motion to approve h6 subject to the applicant working with staff to refine and satisfy both the active and passive recreational open space requirement motion by anna on item h66 second by debbie all those in favor say aye aye any opposed i the same three mr eric ruth okay those passed so in in your last motion you missing some items removal of the bdp and and and it would be approved based once staff approves the pdp so it would be three conditions working with staff for the open space yeah approval of the resubmitted pdp by staff correct and removal of the bdp well said okay thank you so amended okay we're back to item h3 now again do i need to read that into the record again item h3 and h4 there are companion applications i will read them into the record together but they'll need a separate recommendation cobblestone 2 rvg llc being represented by d scott baker request a small-scale comprehensive plan amendment under 25 s.12 to change the change to future land use map designation from res 1 res 2 cc and nc to res 6 under application 23 ss 00006 located in district 3 and cobblestone 2 rvg llc being represented by d scott baker request a zoning classification change change from tr 3 and r u dash 1 dash 9 to all to all tr dash 3 with a bdp under application 23 z 00038 located in district 3 okay mr baker would you like to come back up and if you could again state your name and address for the record scott baker 315 east robinson street suite 600 orlando florida 32801 and if you could just hit the high spots mr baker about what you're looking to do sure consistent and mr chair i only spoke to one lady outside there was another group talking to your staff so i i think i addressed her question she's right over there um so what we're doing nothing that's kind of the simple answer correct um just changing zoning to make it and and land use to make everything consistent with each other you're just changing words yes and colors on your map okay so while you stand right there does there anyone want to speak for or against this item okay then i'm going to close it for public comment and i'm going to bring it back to the board do we have any questions for the applicant mr baker come on or come on back up yes sir mr john i was i don't have a copy of the existing bdp sir there is no existing bdp there is none we're going to enter into one as a condition do you have a proposal approval bocc approval do you have a proposed yes has that been submitted um it was provided to me by your staff and we have no issue with the form so so they gave it to you and you have to agree to it and then you'll give it back yes i submitted it to our client for signature okay i've given them a template and so they just need to add in the information in the template but basically what they're proposing is to limit the unit count to the existing what's already there which is i think 173 units they don't want to add anymore so they're just that's what's going to be in the bdp it's just a limit what's there okay i i made a count on the aerial and i came up with 178 units maybe i miscounted i think it is 178 it is 178 so it's 100 it's six units per acre though i can tell you that okay so if the bdp states 173 you're going to have to get rid of five units sir i just don't have that bdp in front of me i know the form is approved and if we will i think we didn't even put a unit count in there i think we put we can never exceed six units per acre which is what we have today but i'm happy to add a total you know because the staff said that they they had stipulated 173 units and there are currently 178 on that site so don't get tied up with 173 right that's on the bdp because it'll hold you back you'll have to pull oh i see yeah you see what i'm saying sure and thank you for pointing that out okay any other questions for the representative i'm going to need a motion for item h3 i move to approve with adding the bdp to cap the current existing units i second got a motion by debbie on item h3 a second by erica all those in favor say aye any opposed that passed unanimously item h4 i'm sorry mr chair the bdp should be on h4 not h3 h4 is the land use okay i fixed that and i just moved to approve h3 as written are you going to second a second i second sorry okay item h3 as written a motion by deb a second by anna or erica i'm sorry all those in favor say aye all right any opposed item h3 passed now we need a motion on item h4 h4 i go ahead and approve that we do the bdp to cap to the current existing units and i will second on item h4 we got a motion by debbie a second by erica all those in favor say aye aye any opposed and that passed unanimously good good luck with the county commissioner sir all right so i guess we get to say meeting adjourned nope we have 89 i'm trying debbie work with me here you got something left i know you may want to adjourn but i don't look we can't we got there's one left i think other side turn it over there we go item h9 item h9 5125 south llc i don't want to say this last name kachi oddy and daniel wazerman request a cup for alcoholic beverages for on-premise on-premises consumption accessory to a bar and game hall in suite three in bu1 zoning classification under application 25z 00021 located in district two is the applicant here okay and we can still move forward if the board wants to i was hoping they'd bring some samples can we continue this till they show up because i have some questions of the of the owner you got questions on a cup look at their parking that would have to be a vote correct uh yes sir it's going to be september 15th it's the next pnz lpa meeting i'll make that motion to continue to september 15th second we got a motion by john a second by eric to continue item h9 to september 15th all those in favor say aye aye any opposed aye i'm sorry ma'am did you have something to say oh i'm reading that is facing for this item for this item yes but i'll come back on september okay thank you very much any other comments about board then i'll say it again debbie meeting adjourned the opinions expressed by any member of the public during any period of public comment do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of the board