Aug 12, 2021 Planning and Zoning

[1. Call to Order]

[00:01:28]

>> IT'S AFTER 6 PM WE HAVE A MEETING TO COMMENCE A MEDICAL MEETING TO ORDER.

I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS ONE NATION, UNDER GOD ONE NATION, UNDER GOD. INDIVISIBLE WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.

>> ROLL CALL PLEASE.

>> TONY AVELLO >> HERE

>> TODD ROGERS >> HERE

>> VOGEL >> ABSENT

>> LAZOWICK >> HERE

>> KAPLAN >> HERE

>> ZWEIG >> HERE

[4. Approval of Minutes]

>> APPROVAL OF MINUTES FOR JUNE 10, 2021, IS THERE A MOTION?

>> MOTION.

>> SECOND.

>> ANY QUESTIONS?

>> ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

>> AYE >> MOTION CARRIES.

>> A LITTLE BIT OF HOUSEKEEPING WE HAVE A BOARD MEMBER CALLING IN TODAY.

WE NO LONGER HAVE A STATE OF EMERGENCY AT THE STATE LEVEL OR AN EXECUTOR ORDER SO AS ATTORNEY GENERAL OPINION TO ALLOW TELEPHONIC PARTICIPATION IT'S UP TO THE BOARD TO SEE IF WERE ALLOWING TELEPHONIC PARTICIPATION. SO IF SOMEONE WANTS TO MAKE A MOTION.

>> MOTION TO ALLOW.

>> SECOND >> MOTION MADE AND SECOND.

>> ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE >> AYE

>> MOTION CARRIES, THANK YOU.

>> COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC FROM A NON-AGENDA ITEM? SEE NONE, COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC IS CLOSED. COMMENTS FROM THE CHAIR OTHER THAN TO WELCOME EVERYONE.

ANY ADJUSTMENT TO OR ALTERATION TO THE AGENDA THIS EVENING? OKAY, THANK YOU.

COMMENCE OUR FIRST PUBLIC HEARING. EIGHT A CONSIDERATION OF THE

[8.A. Ordinance 2021-013: Amending Comprehensive Plan - New Property Rights]

>> THANK YOU MR. CHAIR, GOOD EVENING. IT'S GOOD TO SEE EVERYBODY.

FOR THE RECORD, MICHELLE IN THE PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT. THE STATE LEGISLATURE PASSED THE END OF JUNE A REQUIREMENT THAT EVERY SINGLE CITY AREA OF GOVERNMENT ADOPT A NEW ELEMENT TO THE COMPANY HAS A PLAN TO PROTECT PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS.

THE STATE WILL NOT CONSIDER ANY FUTURE LAND USE AMENDMENTS OR NOR WILL THE PLANNING COUNCIL UNTIL SUCH ELEMENT IS BEEN ADOPTED AND STATE APPROVED. AND THEN ADOPTED ON FINAL READING. THAT'S WHAT THIS ONE-PAGE ELEMENT DOES.

THE LANGUAGE IS THE MINIMUM NECESSARY. IT IS MORE PRO DEVELOPMENT, PRO PROPERTY RIGHT OWNER. SO WE DIDN'T WANT TO EMBELLISH UPON ANYTHING OVER AND ABOVE

[00:05:04]

BUT A THOUSAND FRIENDS OF FLORIDA I THINK LEAGUE OF CITIES LANGUAGE AS WELL.

THERE'S NOT MUCH TINKERING NOT MUCH WE CAN DO OTHER THAN TO ADOPT.

AND THAT CONCLUDES MY PRESENTATION.

>> LET'S START WITH ANY QUESTIONS, COMMENTS. WILL START WITH DAVID.

>> WE DON'T HAVE A CHOICE.

>> CORRECT.

>> MY ONLY QUESTION WOULD BE DOING MADE A STATEMENT OF ANY TYPE THAT SAYS STATE ADOPTED THESE REVELATIONS DO WE HAVE TO DO IT OR JUST THE POLICIES ARE OKAY?

>> JUST THE POLICIES ARE FINE.

>> IF WE DID NOT HAVE THE POLICIES WE WOULD BE SUED ANYWAY BASED UPON THE LAWS REQUIRING SO WHAT ARE WE DOING?

>> I DON'T KNOW IF WE WOULD BE SUE'S SUED. IF WE HAD A LAND OF ELEMENTS COMING AND WE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO PROCESS THEM.

>> WE DON'T HAVE A CHOICE AND STATE STATUTE.

>> I WOULD ADD TO THAT IT'S REFERENCED IN THE ORDINANCE AS WELL IT'S DETERMINED BY THE STATE LAW AND STATE LAW REQUIRES IT AND WE MAY NOT BE SUED WERE NOT BE ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD WITH OTHER ITEMS POTENTIALLY.

>> MAYBE DAVID, ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?

>> NO, PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD. CANNOT GO AGAINST THE STATE. CAN'T DO THAT.

>> I THINK THE BROWARD SCHOOL BOARD IS BUT THAT'S ANOTHER STORY.

>> I DID WANT TO SAY ANYTHING SPECIFIC.

>> MY QUESTION FOR MICHELLE OR ANTHONY, AND OUR CONSIDERATION FOR THE APPLICATIONS WHAT WE NEED TO KEEP IN MIND AS IT RELATES TO THIS NEW ORDINANCE IS THERE ANYTHING WE NEED TO CONSIDER?

>> NOT SURE I UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION.

>> THIS ORDER THIS IS REQUIRED IS TO COMPLY WITH THE PROPERTY RIGHTS THE STATE IS MAKING US DO HERE. IS ANYTHING WE NEED TO CONSIDER WHILE MAKING A DECISION ON OUR APPLICATION? AS PART OF THE PROCESS?

>> PART OF THE APPLICATION IS LOOKING AT THE IMPACT ANALYSIS IT'S CONTAINED IN THE CODE WE ARE KNOW WHAT'S DONE IN BROWARD COUNTY. NOTHING SPECIAL.

>> THANK YOU. JOEL? ALLIE?

>> WHERE ARE WE WITH OTHER MUNICIPALITY'S IN BROWARD COUNTY? IS THERE OTHER CITIES OR MUNICIPALITIES?

>> I DON'T KNOW WHAT EACH CITY IS DOING BUT I KNOW THAT WE CAN'T DO ANYTHING BUT UNTIL WE MOVE FORWARD. I CANNOT TELL YOU WHAT OTHER STAGE OTHER CITIES ARE.

>> AND THE COMMENT ABOUT THIS WAY PARKLAND IS ADOPTING HAS BEEN MORE PRO DEVELOPMENT.

ARE YOU SEEN THIS, IS THAT SOMETHING WE CAN CHANGE OR THAT SOMETHING WE SHOULD TALK ABOUT MORE?

>> LET ME CLARIFY WHAT I WAS SAYING IS THAT THE PURPOSE OF THIS CHANGE STATE LEGISLATURE HAS BEEN TRYING TO PASS THIS FOR A FEW YEARS AND IS BEEN VERY PRODEVELOPMENT.

WHAT I WAS TRYING TO ARTICULATE IS THE FACT THAT WE HAVE INCLUDED THE BARE MINIMUM LANGUAGE IN TERMS OF PRODEVELOPMENT OR WE DID NOT GO ABOVE AND BEYOND JUST THE SUPPORT DEVELOPERS IS WHAT I'M SUGGESTING, WE DID THE BARE MINIMUM.

>> THANK YOU.

>> DANIEL, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS?

>> NO.

>> THEY ALMOST FORGOT YOU NATHANIEL JUST FOR THE RECORD. ANY MOTION TO OPEN ITEMS OF PUBLIC ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC THAT WISHES TO SPEAK ON THIS PARTICULAR AGENDA ITEM? SEE NONE CLOSE TO THE PUBLIC, THANK YOU. IS THERE A MOTION?

>> MOTION TO APPROVE THOSE MADE BY DEREK, AS HER SECOND?

>> SECOND >> SECOND BY TODD

>> AVELLO >> YES

[00:10:07]

>> KILTSBERG >> YES

>> ROGERS >> YES

>> OFSTEIN >> YES

>> LAZOWICK >> YES

>> ZWEIG >> YES

>> MOTION CARRIES. CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE TO THE COMMISSION OF THE CITY

[8.B. Ordinance 2021-009: Business Recreation Zoning District]

>> THANK YOU MR. CHAIR. SO THIS IS AN ORDINANCE THAT WE HAVE CREATED AT THE DIRECTION AND REQUEST OF THE CITY COMMISSION. THE PURPOSE OF THIS IS TO INCORPORATE BASIC COMMERCIAL USES AND I'M GOING TO WALK INTO THE ORDINANCE AND START BY TALKING ABOUT THE PROCESS AND THEN WALK INTO THE ORDINANCE. TO ALLOW COMMERCIAL USES BUT ALSO BY SPECIAL EXCEPTION INDIVIDUAL CONSIDERATION OF USES THAT ARE SOMETIMES REFERRED TO AS EXPERIENTIAL USE OF RECREATIONAL, I'M NOT SAYING THAT THIS IS WHAT WOULD GO HERE BUT AS AN EXAMPLE. THINGS LIKE DAVE AND BUSTERS, THAT'S AN EXAMPLE.

SO WE'VE CREATED THIS ORDINANCE TO DO THIS SO LET ME TALK ABOUT THE PROCESS FIRST BUT BEFORE WE GET INTO THIS LET ME ALSO TO POINT OUT BROADLY SPEAKING THIS ORDINANCE INCORPORATES THE LANDSCAPE CODE. IT INCORPORATES THE DESIGN ELEMENTS FROM THE PLANT COMMERCIAL DISTRICT OF WHICH HAVE BEEN IN THE CODE FOR SOME TIME TO THE BEST OF MY RECOLLECTION WE DO NOT HAVE THE IN THE CITY BUT IT'S A VERY WELL THOUGHT OUT VERY WELL ARTICULATED ORDINANCE. THAT THEY DID IN TERMS OF THE DESIGN STANDARDS SO WE INCORPORATE THAT INCORPORATES THE CRITERIA FOR SPECIAL EXCEPTION.

SOME OF THESE EXISTING THINGS IN THE CODE AND THE PURPOSE WHAT I WOULD HOPE THAT WE COULD GET THE FOCUS OF DISCUSSION ON S NOT TO GO BACK AND REVISIT ALL THESE OTHER PARTS OF THE CODE BUT THIS ORDINANCE INCORPORATES IS REALLY TO CONSIDER THE PROCESS BY WHICH THESE ISSUES OR THE REQUESTER BE PRESENTED TO THE CITY AND HOW THEY WOULD BE ADDRESSED AND APPROVED OR WHAT CONSIDERATIONS THE PROCESS FOR THAT. THAT'S REALLY THE MAIN FOCUS HERE. LET ME TALK ABOUT THE PROCESS I HAVE A BRIEF POWERPOINT.

SO YOU CAN SEE WE SET APPEAR. WE COME IN FORT REZONING APPLICATION OF COURSE THAT'S AFTER YOU HAVE ALREADY HAD A LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT IN PLACE.

ASSUMING THAT YOU NEED WHEN. YOU WOULD HAVE A PRE-APPLICATION MEETING THAT REQUIRES, RIGHT NOW THAT'S OPTIONAL BUT WE HAVE THE APPLICANT TO COME IN AND BRING TO US THE CONCEPTUAL MASTER PLAN AND THE ALTERNATIVE USES AND THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION USES LISTED NOT GENERALLY THAT'S GOING TO BE THERE BUT WE WANT TO KNOW SPECIFICALLY WHAT EACH USE WILL BE AND WHERE IT WILL BE LOCATED. AND I'M GOING TO GET THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IN A MINUTE. THEY WOULD THEN SUMMIT THE REZONING APPLICATION WITH THIS CONCEPTUAL MASTER PLAN AND IT WOULD GO TO DEVELPMENTS REVIEW COMMITTEE TO REFRESH YOUR MEMORY THE DRC IS COMPOSED OF A MYRIAD OF STAFF NUMBERS FROM ENGINEERING, FIRE, POLICE, DRP, DESIGNATED DESIGN REVIEW PROFESSIONAL AND ZONING, LANDSCAPING AND WHAT HAVE YOU.

THAT'S ALWAYS A PROCESS. REVIEW THE COMMENTS, THE COMMENTS ARE ADDRESSED, THEN A STEP THAT WE'VE ADDED AN AND I THOUGHT THIS WAS VERY IMPORTANT IS THAT YOU WANT TO HAVE REQUIRED THE APPLICANT TO CALL THE COMMUNITY MEETING AND IT WOULD BE UPON THE BURDEN UPON THE APPLICANT TO SPECIFY THE ORDINANCE DISTANCE AND NOTICE AND ALL OF THAT.

BUT I WANT A MEETING WITH THE COMMUNITY SO WE CAN HEAR FROM THE NEIGHBORHOODS AFFECTED AND WHAT THEIR THOUGHTS ARE ON THIS. I THINK THAT IS IMPORTANT AND IT'S GOING TO HELP THIS BOARD AS IT COMES FORWARD. YOU WILL HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF AN UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT THE COMMUNITY IS THINKING THAN JUST HITTING A GOAL.

SO YOU CAN INCORPORATE THAT IN YOUR THOUGHT PROCESS WHEN YOU DELIBERATE AND WILL HELP THE COMMISSION OBVIOUSLY AS WELL. I WANT THOSE MEETINGS TO OCCUR WITHIN 45 DAYS OF THE FIRST

[00:15:01]

AFTER YOU GET THE REZONING THAT WE GO FOR THE SITE PLAN AND COMMUNITY APPLICATIONS.

WE HAVE ANOTHER PRE-APPLICATION MEETING WILL BE REQUIRED. IT WOULD INCLUDE THE CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN BUT WE ALSO WANT ELEVATION, ARCHITECTURE, TRAFFIC AND MORE DETAIL WITHOUT EVERY STOP BEING SHOWN, FOR EXAMPLE. SITE PLAN OF BEAUTY TRANSFER APPLICATIONS WOULD BE SUBMITTED AGAIN THE DRC REVIEW, AGAIN ANOTHER COMMUNITY MEETING WITH REGARD TO THE SITE PLAN, PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD AND COMMISSION REVIEW.

AND THEN ANYTIME THERE'S AN ALTERNATIVE USE IS APPROVED AND IT MOVES OUT TO THE DIFFERENT ALTERNATIVE USE COMES IN IT WOULD REQUIRE A MASTER PLAN THAT HAD TO COME BACK TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD AND BACK TO THE CITY COMMISSION FOR THAT ALTERNATIVE USE, THE NEW AND DIFFERENT ALTERNATIVE USE. SO HERE ARE THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION CRITERIA THAT CONTAINED IN SECTION 60 ? 40 I WILL SUMMARIZE THEM. THEY'RE VERY BROAD.

WHEN IS, WHETHER OR NOT THE USES ALTERNATIVE USES IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD. IT'S FUNNY YOU WOULD ASK WHAT IS COMPATIBILITY MEAN? I WILL TELL YOU THEY STRUGGLED FOR YEARS AND YEARS TO DEFINE THAT THERE IS A DEFINITION IN BROWARD COUNTY FUTURE LAND USE PLAN THAT TALKS ABOUT ZONING AND HOW IT IMPACTS THINGS LIKE THAT. IT'S A LITTLE LOOSENS VERY BROAD TERM BUT THAT WAS FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE CITY. THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION CRITERIA WILL ASK YOU TO LOOK AT THE ACCESS AND THE TRAFFIC GENERATED BY THE ALTERNATE USES.

IT WILL LOOK AT THE IMPACT FACILITIES SERVICES POLICE, FIRE, WATER, SEWER WHAT HAVE YOU. IT WILL LOOK FOR CONSISTENCY WITH THE COPPERHEADS OF PLAN AND THE LAND DEVELOPING, THE ZONING CODE AND THE OTHER CRITERIA OR SPECIAL EXCEPTION CONSIDERATION IS THE IMPACT ON LIVING CONDITIONS OF RESIDENTIAL AREAS SURROUNDED THE PROPOSED ALTERNATIVE USE FOR THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION USE. IT WAS LIKE THE IMPACT OF THE PROPERTY VALUE IS ANOTHER CONSIDERATION. ADDITIONAL CONSIDERATION IS WHETHER OR NOT THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION USE WOULD HINDER DEVELOPMENT OF THIS RUNNING PROPERTY OR IMPROVEMENT OF'S RUNNING PROPERTY. AND THAT H IS A CATCHALL ANY OF THE FACTORS ARE CONCERNED ABOUT YOU CAN CONSIDER THAT. AND I STOP THERE I DID MAKE A NOTE ON THIS FOR SCHOOLS WE HAVE TWO ADDITIONAL CRITERIA THAT WE HAVE IN THE CHARTER SCHOOL WAS COMING ON LINE BUT IS ALSO GERMANE TO THIS CONVERSATION.

SO THOSE OF THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION CRITERIA. I THOUGHT WHAT MIGHT BE GOOD AT THIS JUNCTURE THOSE ARE THE ONLY SLIDES I HAD. YOU'VE GOT THE MATERIAL WITH THE JUST TO QUICKLY GO THROUGH. SEE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTURE FOR THE CITY REVIEWED THAT THEY HAVE ONE OR TWO MINOR TWEAKS THEY WANT TO MAKE TO FULLY INCORPORATE THAT. ONE OF THEM FOR EXAMPLE WAS TO MOVE THE BUFFERS ON THE CONCEPTUAL MAP WHICH WAS A GOOD CALL. SO WILL INCLUDE THAT, TOO.

WE START OFF WITH THE DISTRICT WE HAVE THE DEFINITION OF THE COMMERCIAL USES IN COMMERCIAL RECREATION USES. WE HAVE A PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT YOU CAN SEE IT'S A MIX OF INTER- AND OUTDOOR AND COMMERCIAL AND COMMERCIAL RECREATION USES.

WHILE CREATED PEDESTRIAN ARE GATHERING SPACES AND PROVIDING UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT.

WE DON'T WANT TO BE WE DON'T WANT TO SEE STRIP SHOPPING CENTERS WE DON'T WANT TO SEE A WHOLE WE DON'T WANT TO SEE IT FRAGMENTED AS WELL. IN THAT REGARD ? ? WE HAVE DESIGN OBJECTIVES STATED HERE. THE USES PERMITTED ARE THE BUSINESS AND RECREATION DISTRICT ARE ALL OF THE USES ALLOWED IN THE B1 OR B2 DISTRICTS THOSE ARE THE NEIGHBORHOODS AND COMMUNITIES SERVING COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS. SO IT WOULD BE ALL OF THOSE USES. ANYTHING THAT CAN SAY SPECIAL EXCEPTION USE WOULD STILL BE EXCEPTION USE HERE AND THEN WE HAVE THE EXPERIENTIAL USES WHICH ARE BE SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS IN ADDITION. THAT'S THE MAIN DIFFERENCE. WE HAVE NOT LISTED THEM BECAUSE WE CAN'T LIST THEM. WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO BE.

IF THERE CAN BE A RECREATIONAL NATURE WE KNOW THAT MUCH AND AS A COMFORT ENOUGH TO CONSIDER IT ON AN INDIVIDUAL BASIS AND MAKE A RECOMMENDATION. SO GO DEPOSIT THERE AND MENTION THE FACT THAT I THINK THIS WAS A CONSIDERATION WHEN WE TALKED ABOUT A WHILE BACK AND I KNOW

[00:20:08]

>> I THINK MICHELLE DID A PRETTY GOOD JOB AT SUMMARIZING IT BUT SHORT OF JUST STICKING WITH PROHIBITED UNLESS PERMITTED. IF YOUR LOGIC FOR CONSIDERATION USUALLY HAVE SOME SORT OF STANDARDS THEY CAN JUST SAY NO BECAUSE THEY DON'T LIKE THE PROJECT. MAYBE IT MIGHT BE DIFFERENT IF SOMEONE IS COMMITTED TO ANNEX INTO THE CITY THAT'S A DIFFERENT BALLGAME. BUT AS MICHELLE MENTIONED THERE'S A NUMBER OF FACTORS OR A NUMBER OF THINGS THAT SOMEONE WOULD HAVE TO DEMONSTRATE EVEN BE OF ABOVE AND BEYOND OUR TRADITIONAL SPECIAL EXCEPTION CRITERIA WITHIN THIS ORDINANCE.

>> SO TO SUMMARIZE THAT, THE CONCERN WAS DOES THE CITY HAVE A 100 PERCENT IRONCLAD WE CAN SAY NO IF WE DON'T LIKE THE COLOR OF THE APPLICANT SHOES OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT? NO, WE CANNOT DO THAT. I'M JUST GONNA BE UPFRONT ABOUT THAT.

THE ORDINANCE GOES ON AND TALKS ABOUT THE PROCEDURES AND RECURRENCE FOR REZONING PRIOR TO SUMMARIZE THAT FOR YOU IN THE POWERPOINT. ONCE THE THING IS APPROVED IT IS TO BE BUILT TO PERFORMANCE AND TALKS ABOUT APPLICATIONS GENERALLY BUT WE WANT TO SEE ON THAT SPECIAL MAP MASTER PLAN. PLAND-USE REVELATIONS WE WANT UNIFIED CONTROL WE DO NOT WANT SOMEONE COMMITTED, PICKING UP A LARGE AMOUNT AND THEN PERSONALIZING IT.

WEEVIL ONE LITTLE ONE ACRE PARCELS, THERE'S A 20 ACRE MINIM.

THE MINIMUM SETBACKS WHICH I KNOW WERE OPEN FOR DISCUSSION BUT WE HAVE A SETBACK HERE OF NOT LESS THAN 25 FEET TO ALL PUBLIC ROADS SETBACK OF NOT LESS THAN 100 FEET WITHIN THE BUSINESS RECREATION DISTRICT ABUTTING ANY TRAFFIC WAYS AS AN EQUITABLE BROWARD COUNTY DESIGNATION. AND IF THESE ALTERNATIVE PROPOSED USES OR SPECIAL EXCEPTION USES SHOULD BE A MINIMUM ONE HUNDRED FEET SETBACK OF RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY THAT DOES NOT INCLUDE THE PARKING THAT WAS SERVED THAT USE OR OTHER ASSOCIATED AREAS WITH THAT USE. THESE ARE PUT IN HERE, WE GIVE IT SOME THOUGHT BUT IT'S A STARTING POINT FOR DISCUSSION, AS WELL. THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF THE STRUCTURES WERE PROPOSING AT 35 FEET THAT'S THE MAXIMUM ALLOWED FOR SINGLE FAMILY HOME.

SITE COVERAGE, THE COMBINED AREA SHALL NOT EXCEED 30 PERCENT AND THEN OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENT HERE OFFSTREET PARKING AND LOADING. WE RECOGNIZE THE CODE FOR THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS LIKELY WILL NOT ADDRESS SOME OF THESE EXPERIENTIAL USES.

THEY KNOW WHAT THEY ARE IT'S KIND OF A NEW CONCEPT AND SO WE ARE GOING TO ASK FOR A PARKING STUDY PARKING GENERATION RATE BASED ON THE GENERALLY ACCEPTED STANDARD OF THE ITE INSTITUTION OF TRANSMISSION ENGINEERS OR SOME OTHER GENERALLY ACCEPTED TO TAKE A LOOK AT THAT.

THEN WE TALK ABOUT SOME COMMERCIAL CHARACTER WE INCORPORATE AS I MENTIONED ON THE COMMUNITY APPEARANCE STANDARDS I WAS CONCERNED ABOUT BIG-BOX BUT WE LIMITED BIG BOXES IN OUR CODE TO 50,000 SQUARE FEET MAXIMUM. SO WERE GONNA LIMIT THIS AS WELL. AGAIN, YOU SEE WERE NOT LOOKING FOR STRAIGHT ROAD USES WE WANT SOMETHING THAT IS PEDESTRIAN ORIENTED TO A CERTAIN DEGREE. THE PROMENADE IS A GOOD EXAMPLE IT'S VERY PEDESTRIAN ORIENTED. IT'S A NICE SHOPPING ENVIRONMENT FOR SOCIALIZING ENVIRONMENT. WE WOULD ANTICIPATE SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

ALL THE LANDSCAPE REGULATIONS ARE INCORPORATED IN THERE. SOME OF THESE WILL BE UNDERGROUND AND THEN HOURS OF OPERATION. I WOULD HOPE.

THIS TALKS ABOUT GENERAL HOURS OF OPERATION NOT BEFORE SEVEN AND NOT AFTER 11 NO MATTER WHAT EVEN IF THE COMMISSIONER WANTED TO GO LATER TO 2 O'CLOCK IS THE CUT OFF.

I WOULD LIKE TO, I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT YOU CONSIDER CHANGING THIS SO THAT WHEN AN

[00:25:08]

I WOULD LIKE TO RECOMMEND THAT YOU CONSIDER LOOKING AT CHANGING THE HOURS OF OPERATION NOT TO BE CARTE BLANCHE THAT'S LISTED HERE FOR THE EXPERIENTIAL USES BUT THAT EACH USE SHOULD BE CONSIDERED ALONG WITH HOURS OF OPERATION. SO WE GET KIND OF A COMPLETE PACKAGE THERE. THAT SUMMARIZES WHAT WERE DOIN .

IT'S REALLY A PROCESS THAT YOU ARE CONSIDERING. TONIGHT OF HOW WE APPROACH THIS HOW WE ALLOW SOME OF THESE USES OR DON'T ALLOW THEM OR HOW WE CONSIDER THEM AND PROCESS THEM.

I WILL WE WORKED LONG AND HARD ON THIS. WE LOVE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. IT'S A LOT TO BITE OFF ALL AT ONCE.

>> WERE GONNA START WITH ALEX, COMMENTS QUESTIONS?

>> THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THIS FORWARD. THE THOUGHT OF THIS BEING A 20 ACRE SITE REALLY LIMITS WHERE THIS COULD BE. I KNOW WHEN I'M TALKING ABOUT ANY PARTICULAR SITE OR THING IS WE TRIED WITH A LESS ORDINANCE IT'S HARD NOT TO THINK ABOUT THAT. IS THAT INTENTIONAL, OR NOT TALK ABOUT ANY POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SITE OR DEVELOP AN AREA?

>> IT NEEDS TO APPLY CITYWIDE, OBVIOUSLY, AS YOU SUGGESTED THERE IS A SITE OUT THERE.

IS THAT A YES, SIR NO?

>> YOU CAN MENTION THAT THERE'S A SITE OUT THERE.

>> WE HAVE A COUPLE OF SITES OUT THERE. IN THE FUTURE, HOPEFULLY WE HAVE HENDRIX THAT THEY COME IN AND HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY. THEN THERE'S THE GOLFERS.

THAT'S PUBLIC INFORMATION THAT'S OUT THERE. THE PROPOSAL FOR THE NSAID IT WAS ADVERTISED IN THE NEWSPAPER AND THERE'S THAT ONE AS WELL.

>> TO BUILD COCONUT CREEK PROMENADE, FOR EXAMPLE, ON THE GOLF COURSE WHAT IS THIS CHANGE DO TO HELP THAT HAPPEN IN THE FUTURE? WHAT ARE THE PROS AND CONS IF THIS IS NOT IN PLACE BUT WITH THE DEVELOPER HAVE TO DO?

>> MICHELLE YOU CAN SAY REGARDLESS WHETHER IT'S THE GOLF COURSE OR SOME OTHER LOCATION.

>> REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THE GOLF COURSE OR SOME OTHER LOCATION.

>> CAN WE ESTABLISH THAT THERE ARE DISCUSSIONS? SO WERE NOT GOING BACK AND FORTH, IS THAT APPROPRIATE, ANTHONY?

>> THIS IS GONNA BE A CITYWIDE ORDINANCE SO THERE ARE OTHER AREAS TO LOOK AT AND I WOULD JUST ADVISE YOU AND YOUR CONSIDERATION OF THE ORDINANCE NOT TO FOCUS ON ANY PARTICULAR SITE OR ANY PARTICULAR PROPOSAL THAT'S OUT THERE.

>> THAT'S WHAT I WAS LOOKING FOR, THANK YOU.

>> IT CAN REALLY BE ANYWHERE. WHAT'S THE DIFFERENCE? WERE PUTTING A LOT OF SAFEGUARDS AND REQUIREMENTS IN HIS ORDINANCE. ANY OF THE VACANT PROPERTIES THAT I AM AWARE OF 20 ACRES OR MORE IT WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH A LAND-USE A MINUTE AND THIS COULD BE FIRST AND FOREMOST. IT HAD TO MAKE IT TO THE COUNTY WHO'S GONNA LOOK AT CITY OF PARKLAND.WELL AS THE SHOULD THE LAND-USE PLAN A MINUTE BE APPROVED ALL OF THE VARIOUS JURISDICTIONAL LEVELS AND IF THEY WANT TO HAVE THESE SPIRITUAL USES DECIMATED DIFFERENTIATION FOR B1 AND B2 AND ASIC SPIRITUAL USES.

SO FOR SOMETHING THAT THE APPLICANT APPLICANT WANTS OTHERWISE THAT I JUST GO AFTER AND PLAIN OLD B1 AND B2 COMMERCIAL.

>> REGARDLESS WHETHER THIS PASSES OR NOT. THE SAME ELEMENTS COULD POTENTIALLY BE BUILT IN THESE 20 ACRES OR ANYWHERE IN PARKLAND? ASK THEY COULD BUT WITHOUT THESE PARTICULAR RECREATION USES.

>> I AM EXCITED ABOUT WHAT THE FUTURE HOLDS. I LIKE WITH THE PARKLAND COMMISSION HAS ASKED YOU GUYS TO DO. IT'S EXCITING TO SEE.

THERE'S A LOT OF DETAIL IN HER . I DON'T KNOW IF WE GO THROUGH EACH COMMENT ONE AT A TIME OR IF IT'S AT A LATER DATE I WILL DEFER TO THE CHAIR ON THAT.

YOU MENTIONED HOURS OF OPERATION, SITE COVERAGE, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANT US TO GO THROUGH.

>> ANY QUESTIONS WITH RESPECT TO THAT UNLESS I STAND CORRECTED ? ?.

[00:30:09]

>> WERE GONNA VOTE ON THIS AS IT STANDS TONIGHT?

>> IT'S AN AGENDA ITEM AND IT'S GOOD BE PROVIDED AN EFFECTIVE DATE FOR MY BOARD WITH THE RECOMMENDATION TO THE COMMISSION FOR THEM TO DO THE NEXT STEPS.

>> SO THE HEIGHT, THE 35 FOOT HEIGHT IS THAT BEEN A HARD HEIGHT AND JUST BEING EXPERIENTIAL DISTRICT NOT KNOWING WHERE IT IS I WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF REMOVING THAT OR READ LOOKING AT THAT HEIGHT RESTRICTION. I KNOW WE TALKED ABOUT RESIDENTIAL BUT SOME OF THE EXAMPLES YOU MENTIONED THERE ARE MUCH TALLER STRUCTURES.

WHEN YOU SAID 35 FOOT HEIGHT LIMIT IS THERE FLEXIBILITY ON THAT OR WHERE IS THAT COMING FROM?

>> IT'S UP TO THE SPORT TO CREATE THE FLEXIBILITY. THE LANGUAGE IS A GOOD STARTING POINT FOR DISCUSSION IT'S EASIER TO DISCUSS SO WE CAN START THERE.

I WILL SAY IN RESPONSE TO THE CONCERN THAT YOU RAISED IN MY PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE OVER WAY TOO MANY YEARS. RETAIL IS YOU KNOW TYPICALLY ON ONE STORY MAY BE TO A MOST BUT YOU GET MULTISTORY RETAIL, I HAVE NOT SEEN IT SUCCEED. EXPERIENCE OH USE MAY BE SOMETHING DIFFERENT BUT I DON'T KNOW WHAT IT IS I DON'T KNOW AND MAYBE LIKE THE HOURS OF OPERATION WERE SUGGESTED THAT THE BOARD CONSIDER LANGUAGE THAT WHEN THE USE COMES IN IT COMES WITH THE HOURS A PROPOSED OPERATION MAY BE COMES IN WITH PROPOSED HEIGHT, INSTEAD.

>> THAT'S WHAT I WOULD LOOK FOR FOR A LOT OF THESE LITTLE DETAILS EVEN OUTSIDE COVERAGE I LIKE THE IDEA OF OPEN SPACE BUT PUTTING THESE HARD 35 PERCENT COVERAGE 35 PERCENT OPEN SPACE I LIKE THE IDEA OF HAVING THAT THERE PUTTING THOSE NUMBERS SO TIGHT IT SEEMS TO LIMIT THE DEVELOPERS AND LIMIT THE THINGS THAT WE CAN DECIDE AT A LATER DATE.

OTHER THAN THAT, THOSE ARE MY MAIN COMMENTS. THE HEIGHT, THE PERCENTAGE AND THE HOURS OF OPERATION AND HOWEVER YOU WANT TO DECIDE THOSE LATER.

>> LET'S GET THEIR COMMENTS IN DISCUSSION AND THEN WHEN WE GET TO THE MOTIONS WILL GO FORWARD AND SEE IF THOSE ITEMS CAN BE INCLUDED AS PART OF THE MOTION PERHAPS.

>> MR. CHAIR, WOULD A VARIANCE PERMIT THE CHANGE IF THEY WANTED TO GO HIGHER THAN THE 35 THEY COULD COME IN WITH A VARIANCE WITH THAT BE APPROPRIATE?

>> THAT'S AN INTERESTING QUESTION.

>> I HAVE THE SAME QUESTION REGARDING HIS SETBACKS IF THEY COULD NOT COMPLY?

>> I HAVE MANY QUESTIONS AS WELL. JUST WAIT.

JOEL.

>> MICHELLE, THANK YOU FOR THIS THE PROCESS MATTERS. IT MATTERS HEAVILY.

I HAVE A QUESTION IF YOU GO BACK TO FIRST SLIDE CONCURRENCY AND HOW THAT AFFECTS THE APPLICANT ON THIS. IF AN APPLICANT HAS TO COME IN WHEN THEY COME IN THERE'S A PREAMP MEETING REQUIRED THEY ALREADY HAVE THEIR LAND-USE A MINUTE HOPEFULLY THEY WOULD HAVE THAT? THAT LAND USE AMENDMENT WOULD BE A COMEDY BY SITE PLAN IS THAT CORRECT?

>> THE COUNTY DOES NOT REQUIRE THAT.

>> SO THE PLANE IS ANY DEPARTMENT WOULD SEE THAT AFTER THEY WENT TO THE STEPS OF THE COUNTY?

>> CORRECT. WHEN THE COUNTY CONSIDERS A LAND USE AMENDMENT THE COUNTY ASSUMES A 25 PERCENT COVERAGE THAT'S HER BASELINE.

>> I WASN'T SURE HOW THAT DYNAMIC WOULD WORK IF THEY HAD THAT AFFRONT.

IF THIS GOES INTO SECTION IN THE LANGUAGE ? 4250 B2 ALTERNATE USE.

I WAS NOT SURE IF THEY HAD TO SUBMIT TO THE COUNTY WITH THE PROPOSAL, THE SITE PLAN.

YOU'RE ASKING THEM FOR ALTERNATE USES I WASN'T SURE IF THOSE A LITTLE CUMBERSOME BECAUSE ARE DOING THIS WITH AN INTENT SO THEY HAVE AN IDEA EMMA THEY HAVE A VISION AND A DON'T KNOW IF YOU WANT TO PROVIDE THEM WITH ALTERNATE.

>> THEY'D WANT GO TO THE COUNTY WITH THAT.

>> IT WOULD FALL ON US.

>> THE COUNTY HAS A VERY GENERIC 25 PERCENT COVERAGE AND THEY'LL ASK WHAT HOW MUCH WATER

[00:35:07]

THE RIGHT TO USE OR HAVE A CONCERN ABOUT THAT GENERATES A MUCH GREATER LEVEL OF POLICE SURVEILLANCE OR THE NEED FOR FIRE PROTECTION SO WE JUST WANT TO BE ABLE TO ASSESS THAT.

>> WE WILL BE ABLE TO DO THAT REGARDLESS IF THEY SUBMITTED?

>> CORRECT.

>> IF WE SUBMIT ALTERNATES THAT ARE SO OUT OF WHACK THEY'RE NOT REALISTIC IS JUST A WASTE.

>> THAT'S A CRITERION AND SPECIAL EXCEPTION. THE FACILITIES AND SERVICES.

>> I AM IN FAVOR OF ALLOWING THE HEIGHT FLEXIBILITY BASED ON SPIRITUAL USE.

>> I AGREE WITH JOEL REGARDING THE HOURS OF OPERATION. AND THE HEIGHT REQUIREMENTS.

WHERE IS THE 20 ACRES SIDE, IS THAT A STANDARD?

>> IT'S LARGER THAN THE PCD WHICH ETHIC IS 10 ACRES. I'VE A FEELING YOU WERE INSTRUMENTAL IN WRITING THAT SO THAT'S I'M SAYING DON'T TINKER WITH THAT TONIGHT.

AND THEY ARE GOOD STANDARDS. 20 ACRES WAS A NUMBER THAT WE SELECTED BECAUSE HE WANTED SOMETHING SUBSTANTIAL AND WE DIDN'T WANTED TO BE FRAGMENTED OR PERSONALIZED.

WE WANTED US STANDARD COHESIVE ENVIRONMENT.

>> ANTHONY.

>> THINKS MICHELLE. I THINK HAVING A DISTRICT THAT ADDRESSES THIS IS A MOVE IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION. YOU TALKED EARLIER ABOUT THE SUBPOENA PROCESS BUT MY BRAIN IS TELLING ME THAT PERHAPS WE SHOULD HAVE SOME DESIGN OBJECTIVES /ELEMENTS INCLUDED TELL ME WHY WE WOULD NOT WANT TO ADDRESS PUBLIC ART IN THIS DISTRICT? PERHAPS IT SOMEWHERE ELSE BUT DOES IT EFFECTIVELY ADDRESS THE DISTRICT BECAUSE ALEXI COMMITMENT TO PUBLIC ART?

>> WE DON'T HAVE PUBLIC ART IN OUR CODE. [LAUGHTER]

>> THE WORD PUBLIC ART DOES NOT APPEAR IN THE CODE AT ALL.

>> I AM NOT SEEN IN 10 YEARS.

>> I THINK MICHELLE'S POINT IS IS NOT REQUIRED IS NOT REQUIRED AS ANY THING FOR DEVELPMENTS.

>> I WOULD LIKE TO SEE PUBLIC ART LANGUAGE IN THIS DISTRICT. THE ARTIFICIAL TURF CODE ORDINANCE THAT WE APPROVED I THINK WAS RESIDENTIAL IS IT HELPFUL IN THIS DISTRICT OR DOES IT HURT THIS DISTRICT BECAUSE OF SOME WELL APPOINTED ART COMMISSION TURF USED IN THIS DISTRICT AND I DON'T RECALL WHAT OUR CODE ALLOWS. I WOULD LIKE FOR THE STAFF TO ADDRESS THE ARTIFICIAL TURF IN THIS DISTRICT. STREET PARKING.

I HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO WORK ON THEIR DISTRICT AND ESCAPES ME TO EXIT WHAT THAT MEANS NOW.

I THOUGHT START FROM THE DESIGN AND IT WAS A RESIDENTIAL TOWER THAT WAS NOT BUILT BECAUSE ECONOMY FELL OFF. I HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY AS A CUSTOMER TO GO THERE AND SIT THERE EAT AT THE RESTAURANTS AND SHOP WHEN THINGS I DON'T LIKE IN THAT PROMENADE IS THE STREET PARKING.

>> REALLY?

>> I DON'T REALLY LIKE IT, THE SIDEWALKS ARE NARROW, IT DOES NOT GIVE YOU A WOW FACTOR.

PEDESTRIANS COMING AT THAT CAR IS NOT USING THE CROSSWALKS. I THINK IT MAKES IT LOOK REALLY SLOPPY. I LIKE TO KNOW THE THOUGHTS REGARDING STREET PARKING PERHAPS OTHER PEOPLE THE BOARD WILL ADDRESS THAT BUT I LIKE THE BOARD DISCUSSION TO START ON STREET PARKING.

>> I'M KEEPING A LIST OF ALL COMMENTS AND THEN IF IT'S APPROPRIATE MR. CHAIR IT WOULD

[00:40:01]

GO TO THE COMMENTS AND I'M WRITING THEM ALL DOWN.

>> I WILL START BACK WITH PUBLIC ART.

>> I GOT THAT ALREADY. GIVE ME YOUR COMMENTS. AND I WILL GO THROUGH AND SAY PUBLIC ART. THE LIST IS GOING TO GROW. I WOULD LIKE TO ANSWER QUESTION ABOUT THE VARIANCE. SO IF YOU LOOK AT THE CRITERIA.

>> I THINK AN INITIAL FRAMEWORK IS FINE, MICHELLE, BUT HAVING THE ABILITY, A PROCESS TO MAKE CHANGES IN HAVING THE FLEXIBILITY AS A BENEFIT. I SAID VARIANCE AND HE DID NOT GET EXCITED.

>> ONE OF THE CRITERIA IS SP COMPATIBLE WITH THE CODE SOPHISTICATE VARIANCE IT'S FIN . IF YOU ARE SEEKING A VARIANCE THAT IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE CODE.

>> SO HOW DO WE SKIN THE CAT? THE INITIAL FRAMEWORK WITH THE SETBACKS AND THE HEIGHT I'VE HEARD FROM SOME OF THE BOARD NUMBERS AND MYSELF, WHAT'S THE PROCESS?

>> I THINK THERE ARE A COUPLE OF OPTIONS. IF WE WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR THAT NO VARIANCES ARE PERMITTED THAT MY RECOMMENDATION IS LET'S STATE THAT.

IF YOU WANT TO ALLOW VARIANCES FROM LIKE THE HEIGHT AND PUT IN 35 FEET AND HAVE THE VARIANCE THERE IS AT LEAST I THINK A SOLID SOLID ARGUMENT THAT THAT MAY BE MORE PROTECTIVE IN TERMS OF DISCRETION DOING IT THAT WAY BECAUSE ANY ALSO HAVE TO MEET VARIANCE CRITERIA TO SHOW THAT THERE IS SOME SORT OF HARDSHIP.

>> HOW DID THEY GET PAST THE REQUIREMENT IN A SPECIAL CRITERIA YOUR SPECIAL EXCEPTION REQUEST MUST BE CONSISTENT WITH THE CODE.

>> CERTAINLY, WE CAN MAKE THE ARGUMENT, THE APPLICATION WE CAN SAY NEEDS TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE CODE. WHEN YOU'RE SEEKING A VARIANCE YOU ARE ACKNOWLEDGING THAT YOU'RE NOT MEETING ONE PROVISION OF THE CODE WHICH I THINK IS THE POINT THAT MICHELLE IS TRYING TO MAKE. IF YOU WANT TO BE CRYSTAL CLEAR THAT THERE'S NO VARIANCES ALLOWED I JUST, AND THUS RECOMMENDED GO.

>> I'M HEARING SO FAR DESIRE TO HAVE ENOUGH FLEXIBILITY THAT WOULD BE DECIDED ON A CASE-BY-CASE BASIS. AND WE WILL GET BACK TO THAT. SO I HAVE A NOTE.

>> THE BIG BOX STORES IS THAT STRICTLY DETERMINED BY THE SQUARE FOOTAGE TO MEET THE THRESHOLD, YOU ARE BIG BOX REGARDLESS.

>> YES, WE HAVE A SECTION IN THE CODE ON BIG BOX. THE ISSUE WITH THE BIG BOX IF YOU'RE EVER FAMILIAR I'M GONNA SINGLE OUT WINN-DIXIE BECAUSE YOU BUILT WINN-DIXIE THAT THEY TEND TO GET SPACES, I COULD BUY THEM AND THEN MOVE OUT IN ANY LOCAL GOVERNMENT IS STUCK WITH THIS EMPTY BIG BOX THAT SITS THERE FOREVER AND EVER. SOMETIMES IT BECOMES A HOUSE OF WORSHIP. THE BIGGER IT IS HARDER IT IS TO REPURPOSE IT.

SO 50,000 IS A GOOD SIZE BY WAY OF COMPARISON.

>> ONE OF THE DESIGN ELEMENTS, CROSSWALKS, SINCE IT'S HEAVILY PEDESTRIAN AREA WHAT SHOULD WE BE SPECIFIED RELATING TO CROSSWALKS? A BUNCH OF LINES IN THE PAVEMENT OR SOMETHING MORE UPGRADED?

>> I UNDERSTAND THE DESIRE FOR THE CROSSWALKS BUT I DON'T UNDERSTAND?

>> DIGIT DEVELOPER CAN JUST HAVE LINES TO DELINEATE CROSSWALKS ON THE STREET PERHAPS WE WANT TO PROVIDE CROSSWALKS OR LIKE AN UPGRADED ELEMENT?

>> IF I UNDERSTAND YOU CORRECTLY, WE NEED TO ENHANCE THE LANGUAGE TO GET A SUPERIOR DESIGN THAT MAY INCLUDE BUT NOT BE LIMITED TO ALTERNATIVE PAVING MATERIALS, CROSSWALKS AND ELABORATE ON THAT.

>> COUNTRY ELEGANT CROSSWALKS.

>> ANYTHING FURTHER ANTHONY, AT THIS TIME? THANK YOU.

[00:45:04]

>> AS FAR AS STREET PARKING I WOULD NOT SAY I NECESSARILY AGREE WITH TONY BUT I THINK THAT I AM OKAY WITH STREET PARKING AS LONG AS IT IS DONE APPROPRIATELY.

WHATEVER YOU DON'T LIKE ABOUT IT ART WAYS TO MAKE IT BETTER WHETHER THAT IS NONPARALLEL, BIGGER SPACES, LARGER SIDEWALK , I'M OKAY WITH STREET PARKING. AS FAR AS THE HEIGHT RESTRICTION, WHETHER IT'S A VARIANCE, IS TO MAKE SURE THERE IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR SOMEONE TO HAVE SOMETHING DIFFERENT BECAUSE IF YOU ASK ME JUST USING THIS AS EXAMPLE BUT IF YOU TOLD ME ABOUT TOP GOLF 10 YEARS AGO SO I THINK IN MY MIND THAT IS WHY SOMEONE WOULD ASK FOR A VARIANCE THAT WE NEVER THOUGHT ABOUT. MAYBE YOU DECIDE AFTER THE VARIANCE THAT THE CODE SHOULD BE READJUSTED. I THINK IT SHOULD BE AN AVENUE FOR SOMEONE.

>> YOU RAISE A VERY GOOD POINT MR. ROGERS. AND THAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT USES THAT WE DON'T KNOW NECESSARILY WHAT THEY ARE BUT WE ARE IMPOSING RESEARCHES ON THEM ANYWAY. I THINK I AM HEARING FROM THE BOARD, GENERALLY SPEAKING, SOME BUILDING FLEXIBILITY RATHER THAN SPECIFYING HARD AND FAST RULES WOULD BE PREFERRED.

>> EXPERIENTIAL USES.

>> GOING BACK TO PROCESS DISCUSSION. WHEN SOMETHING LIKE THIS WAS CREATED IT WAS SOMETHING LIKE BENCHMARKING, WAS THIS BENCHMARKED AGAINST OTHER SIMILAR CITIES TO SEE WHAT THEY'RE DOING CONNECT?

>> CAITLIN DID GO TO OTHER CITIES TO SEE WHAT WAS GOING ON.

COCONUT CREEK, CORAL SPRINGS, BOCA RATON. TO ADD SOME FLAVOR TO THE CITY OF PARKLAND.

>> GOING BACK TO THE COMMUNITY MEETING AND THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE APPLICANT TO MAIL OUT UP TO 1000.

>> IT WAS 1000 OR 1500 FEET. A LOT OF CITIES ARE DOING THAT. IT'S NOT MAILERS.

>> IT SOUNDED LIKE AN UNDUE BURDEN BUT NOW THAT YOU CLARIFIED.

ASK IT'S NOT CERTIFIED >> IT'S NOT CERTIFIED RETURN RECEIPT.

>> TO CLARIFY IS DONE BY THE CITY. NOT BY THE APPLICANT.

>> THEY DO A MAILING CERTIFICATE AND IS NOTARIZED AND SWEAR AND AFFIRM THAT THESE WENT OUT AND THESE A MAILING LIST THAT IS GENERATED BY THE PROPERTY APPRAISER.

IT'S VERY, VERY COMMON AND A LOT OF CITIES DO IT. IT'S REALLY HELPFUL FOR STAFF FOR THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD AND THE COMMISSION. ONE THING WE CONSIDERED WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THIS HAD LANGUAGE ORIGINALLY THE SAID THE APPLICANT WILL TAKE INTO ACCOUNT REVISED PLANS AND WE TOOK THAT OUT BECAUSE YOU CAN GET ONE PERSON THAT IS NOT NECESSARILY THE MOST RATIONAL PERSON AND THE CONCERNS EXPRESSED AND IT WOULD NOT BE FAIR. SO WE WANT TO PUT THESE CONCERNS ON THE TABLE SO EVERYONE KNOWS WHAT THE PUBLIC IS THINKING.

>> CAN YOU CLARIFY BECAUSE I MIGHT HAVE MISSED BOTH, I INTERJECTED THAT THE MAILERS I THOUGHT THEY WERE PAID FOR BY THE APPLICANT AND MAILED BY THE CITY I THINK I MISSPOKE BASED ON WHAT YOU STATED.

>> WE HAVE IT SET UP THAT THERE PAID BY THE APPLICANT, SENT BY THE APPLICANT BUT THEY HAVE TO PROVIDE THE MAILING ABDICATION. THERE ARE SERVICES OUT THERE THAT DO THAT.

THEY MAKE A LIVING OFF OF THAT.

>> IN OTHER CITIES LIKE COCONUT CREEK, I WAS CURIOUS, ONE HAVE A CITY THAT'S FRIENDLY FOR DEVELOPMENT AND DOESN'T HAVE UNDUE BURDEN. IT JUST TOOK OUT TO ME.

>> PROBABLY MORE COST-EFFECTIV . EITHER WAY, WHATEVER THE PLEASURE OF THE BOARD IS.

>> THEY ARE DEVELOPING 20 ACRES, THEY CAN PAY FOR IT.

>> I WAS KIND OF THINKING THAT WAS NOT GOING TO SAY IT.

>> I THINK INITIALLY MY THOUGHT IS PROCESS. AND THERE IS ANOTHER WAY TO

[00:50:03]

AND THAT IS SIMILAR TO OUR PLANNED COMMERCIAL DISTRICT WHERE THE ENTIRE MASTER PLAN IS A SUBJECTIVE SOME SPECIFIC REZONING WHERE THEY STATE THAT ELEMENT DEVELOPMENT THERE TO PROVIDE. I DON'T SEE THAT IN HERE IS THAT THE INTENT OF THIS?

>> IN THE CONCEPTUAL MASTER PLAN WERE LOOKING FOR B1 AND B2 USES.

THE BED BATH AND BEYOND HER BATH AND BODY WORKS GOING IN WITH THE EXPERIENTIAL USES THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION WE WANT TO KNOW WHAT THAT SPECIFICALLY THOSE USES ARE.

WE WENT THIS AFFECTS SHOWING. IT'S REALLY A SITE PLAN WITHOUT ALL THE DETAIL.

IT COVERS USES HOURS OF OPERATION.

>> I GUESS, PLAN DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT WHEN WE DO A RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WE DO A COMMERCIAL DISTRICT WERE ASKING FOR SOME FLEXIBILITY WHICH IS WHAT THESE PEOPLE ARE GOING TO BE ASKING FROM US. THERE'S A COMMITMENT TO THE PLAN AND I THINK THAT THIS MASTER PLAN SEEMS TO BE A LITTLE BROAD FOR ME. I THINK WHAT I WOULD PREFER TO SEE IS A SUBSTANTIAL INCREASE DESIGN OBJECTIVES WHICH PICK UP SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE TALK ABOUT AS FAR AS THE PAVEMENTS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. SOME DESIGN OBJECTIVES WHERE WE GO OUT OF OUR WAY TO TALK ABOUT BUFFERING BETWEEN USES LIKE LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT.

BUFFERING BETWEEN RESIDENTIAL USE AND BUFFERING BETWEEN RIGHT-OF-WAY.

20 ACRES IS REALLY NOT THAT BIG OF A PIECE OF PROPERTY TO ACCOMPLISH SOME OF THESE THINGS. MAYBE THAT NEEDS TO BE MORE SEEKING GET A CAMPUS LIKE FEELING AND THE DEVELOPER CAN SET THE SKELETON THAT YOU CAN THEN PLUG IN THE INDIVIDUAL USES AND WHEN I SEE THE SKELETON I MEAN ALL THE COMMON AREAS, ALL THE FEATURES, ALL PTHE PAVEMENTS, THE WAYFINDING, SIMILAR SIGNAGE PATTERNS. I THINK WHEN I GO TO THE PROMENADE AND EVEN THE DELRAY MARKETPLACE I THINK IT'S WAY TOO TIGHT.

I THINK IT'S ABSOLUTELY, THE CONCEPT IS GREAT BUT IT'S TOO TIGHT.

I THINK THAT WE NEED MORE SPACE. I DON'T THINK IT'S PARKLAND AND I WOULD NOT WANT TO SEE THE PROMENADE IN THE CITY OF PARKLAND.

I DON'T THINK THAT THAT IS NECESSARILY SOMETHING THAT WOULD FIT WITHIN OUR CITY.

SO I AM NOT IN FAVOR OF THAT. THE EXPERIENTIAL USES THAT WE'VE LISTED TONIGHT.

I OBJECT TO ALL OF THEM. I DON'T THINK THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE NEED ONE VOTE ON THE PLANNING BOARD. I WOULD NOT WANT TO SEE A TAP OFF, I WOULD NOT SEE A BIG COMMERCIAL RECREATION LIKE AN ANDRETTI RACING. I THINK THAT THE TRAFFIC TO BE GENERATED BY THINGS OF THAT SCALE WOULD CHOKE OUR STREETS EVEN WORSE.

MY VIEW OF SOMETHING LIKE THIS WOULD BE MORE OF A LIFESTYLE CENTER.

THAT YOU SEE THAT HAS SOME OPEN AREAS, OPEN OUTSIDE RESTAURANTS AND DINING AND SHOPPING AND PROMENADE BUT NOTHING AT THE SCALE THAT WOULD HAVE MASSIVE EXPERIENTIAL TYPE OF USES.

FOR ME, THAT'S MY VIEW ON THAT.

>> I UNDERSTAND BUT THAT'S THE DIRECTION THE CITY COMMISSION GAVE US.

>> YOU GUYS WANTED FEEDBACK SO I'M GETTING SOME FEEDBACK. I THINK THAT I WOULD RATHER SEE MORE OF THE DESIGN ELEMENTS AND RESTRICTIONS OF THE PLANNED COMMERCIAL DISTRICT AND EVEN BEEFED UP PUT UP INTO THIS.

>> IT'S INCORPORATED. MAYBE I DID NOT ARTICULATE IT WELL THE CONCEPTUAL PLAN WOULD HAVE LOCATION OF BUILDING, EXPERIENTIAL, EXCEPTION USES, BUFFERS CIRCULATION.

STORMWATER AND HOW THAT'S GOING TO BE HANDLED BUT A DOZEN OF THE FINE DETAIL OF WHETHER THIS IS COBBLESTONE OR CHICAGO BRIC . THAT COMES WITH THE SITE PLANS.

>> I'M GLAD YOU SAID THAT, FOR ME, IN ORDER TO GIVE SOME GREAT FLEXIBILITY I WANT TO SEE THE COMMITMENT TO THAT. I WOULD WANT TO SEE THAT LEVEL OF DETAIL AND COMMITMENT TO THE

[00:55:01]

I AM HAPPY TO GO THROUGH ALL OF THEM BUT THERE'S A LOT. X I THINK YOU'VE GIVEN US

>> I THINK YOU GIVEN US THE FRAMEWORK OF WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING FOR.

IN TERMS OF ENHANCED ASSIGNED CRITERIA AND ART IN PUBLIC PLACES.

>> ART, SIGNAGE, LANDSCAPING, WAYFINDING, TEXTURE PAVEMENT, ARCHITECTURAL.

>> LET'S GO THROUGH, DON'T GO INTO DETAIL FINISH UP YOUR COMMENTS AND WILL GO TO NATHANIEL AND THEY WILL GET BACK TO GOING TO THE LIST THAT MICHELLE HAS AND THEN WE CAN ADD TO THEM.

>> I WILL WRAP UP. MY RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE THE DETAIL INCLUDED IN THE MASTER PLAN AND MORE OF THE COMMERCIAL PLANNED COMMERCIAL DISTRICT. WE WOULD SHOW ALL OF IT UPFRONT WITH A GREATER AMOUNT OF DETAIL BEFORE WE WOULD EVER REZONE THE PROPERTY TO GIVE THEM THE FLEXIBILITY TO DO THIS. AS IT'S WRITTEN RIGHT NOW FOR ME IT'S FAR TOO BROAD AND APPEARS TO OPEN UP THE WORLD TO ANYTHING THAT ANYBODY WANTS TO DO AND THEY WOULD HAVE TO RELY ON WHAT WE WERE TOLD TONIGHT. WE DON'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO SAY NO.

I THINK THIS IS A TREMENDOUS OPPORTUNITY FOR COMMERCIAL DEVELOPERS THAT ARE WILLING TO TAKE THE STEPS TO BRING INTO PARKLAND SUPER QUALITY DEVELOPMENT.

WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT IT'S THE PARKLAND STYLE, NOT RELY ON THEIR GOODWILL TO PUT SOMETHING SO WE DON'T END UP WITH SOMETHING THAT SOMEONE ONE DAY SAYS I THINK THAT'S TOO TIGHT OR I DON'T LIKE THE WAY THAT WAS DONE.

>> ANY KIND OF RETAIL, NATHANIEL HAS TO COMMENT.

>> WE WILL GO BACK AND LET MICHELLE ANSWER SOME OF THE QUESTIONS.

NATHANIEL, YOU ARE OBSERVED.

>> THANK YOU TO ANTHONY AND EVERYONE FOR PUTTING THIS TOGETHER.

A LOT OF CAREFUL DRAFTING HERE I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS SOME OF WHICH I SPOKE WITH ANTHONY ABOUT.

SHOULD BE IN THAT SECTION. TONY MENTIONED A GREAT ONE. I WAS ACTUALLY AWARE THAT IT WAS NOT CONTAINED IN OUR CODE. I THINK THAT FOR UNIQUE CONCEPT AFTER THEY SUBMITTED APPLICATION. I THINK WE SHOULD BE TALKING ABOUT OBJECTIVES WE HAVE ONE SHOT TO GET THIS RIGHT. THERE'S A LIMITED NUMBER OF PLACES WHERE THEY CAN OUR

[01:00:08]

THE IDEAS OF ANY DEVELOPER BE FULLY CERTIFIED ENERGY EFFICIENCY CRITERIA.

I THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE OBJECTIVE OR ALTERNATIVE ELECTRIC VEHICLE STATIONS SHOULD BE IN ANY DEVELOPMENT IN A BRD APPROVED AREA. WE ALL KNOW WE SEE EVERYDAY DRIVING ON THE COMMUNITY ELECTRIC CARS. THERE'S NO REASON WE SHOULD BE HAVING A PLAN FOR THE DISTRICT THAT DOESN'T INCLUDE A REQUIREMENT FOR AN ELECTRIC VEHICLE CHARGING STATION. I ALSO THINK THAT THERE NEEDS TO BE DIFFERENT LANGUAGE FOR PEDESTRIAN ACCESS OR NOT VEHICLE ACCESS. THERE'S ONLY A LIMITED NUMBER OF PLACES THAT COULD BE A BUSINESS IMMIGRATION DISTRICT. BASICALLY, BY THE WAY I WANT TO THANK YOU ALL I PROMISE SOME OF THIS I WOULD TAKE A SHOT EVERY TIME I HEARD SOMETHING ABOUT COUNTRY ELEGANT CROSSWALKS.

>> WHAT DID YOU SAY, COUNTRY ELEGANT'S?

>> BASICALLY, I THINK WE NEED A LOOK AT THE BIG PICTURE. THE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES NOT JUST DESIGN OBJECTIVES INFORMALLY PROUD, THE CITY SEA , THE COMMUNITY.

I THINK THAT TO BE OUR OBJECTIVE. I THINK MORE OF THOSE THINGS NEED TO BE THERE RATHER THAN JUST BE DESIGN OBJECTIVES. I AGREE WITH THE COMMENTS THAT I SAID EARLIER IN TERMS OF THEIR NEED TO BE FLEXIBILITY IN REGARDS TO SETBACK OR HEIGHT.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE HEIGHT REQUIREMENT OF THE PROMENADE WERE.

I THINK THEY MAY HAVE BEEN SAID EARLIER. I APOLOGIZE IF I REPEAT WHAT OTHERS ALREADY COMMENTED ON. I AGREE WITH THE COMMENTS THAT WERE MADE BY TONY AND BY JOHN IN TERMS OF CRITICISM OF THE PROMENADE. I SAID THE SAME THING I THINK THAT THE COCONUT CREEK PROMENADE IS A BE FULL CONCEPT AND HAS SOME ELEMENTS TO IT THAT WERE POORLY EXECUTED. I WOULD NOT WANT ANOTHER PROMENADE IN PARKLAND.

WHAT THE PROMINENT SHOULD HAVE BEEN. I'M NOT NECESSARILY OPPOSED TO MORE ON STREET PARKING. PARKING AT PLACES LIKE THE PROBLEM PROMENADE ARE POTENTIALLY PROBLEMATIC. I THINK THAT THE ON STREET PARKING IS MUCH MORE APPEALING BUT I LOOK INTO FOR WE GET TO THAT IN MORE DETAIL. ONE OF THE THINGS I WAS CONCERNED ABOUT JUST MY PERSONAL AND PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE IS THAT OPEN SPACE

[01:05:01]

SO I JUST THROW THAT OUT THERE. FOR CONSIDERATION. I ALSO THINK AND I'M GOING TO JUMP AROUND A LITTLE BIT. I WAS SO THINK THE REQUIREMENTS ARE FAR TOO NARROW.

KNOWING THAT WERE TALKING ABOUT A LIMITED NUMBER OF FUTURE PROPERTY THAT COULD EVER BE CONSIDERED AND GIVEN WHERE THEY ARE. IN MY VIEW IF THERE WAS A PROPERTY TO BE DEVELOPED ON THE WEST SIDE AND I'LL USE UNIVERSITY AS A BUFFER WHAT I CONSIDER THE WEST SIDE OF PARKLAND IF THERE'S ANYTHING THAT'S BEEN BUILT UNIVERSITY WEST IT COULD POTENTIALLY BE A BRD THEY ALL HAVE A DIRECT IMPACT ON TRAFFIC FLOW IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. SO EVERYBODY SHOULD BEGIN SOME FORM OF NOTE.

THERE SHOULD DEFINITELY BE A REQUIREMENT FOR LARGE NOTICE ON THE PROPERTY AND HOLD A PUBLIC MEETING ON WHAT'S BEEN PROPOSE . I KNOW WE DEALT WITH THE CHARTER SCHOOL WHICH I ATTEMPTED TO BLOCK THOSE MEETINGS.

THERE WERE LARGE SIGNS ON THE PROPERTY ADVISING THE PUBLIC THAT THERE WAS AN APPLICATION SUBMITTED THAT MET THE CITY REQUIREMENTS. I THINK THE CITY PARKLAND WE HAD WE HAD ABOUT 25,000 RESIDENTS AND I PERSONALLY THINK THAT ANY BRD SHOULD BE EMAILED OUT TO EVERY RECORD ON THE LIST AND THEY SHOULD BE MALE THAT GOES OUT TO MORE THAN 1000 OR 1500. UNIVERSITY EAST EAST SIDE OF PARKWAY AGAIN I THINK ANYTHING THAT POTENTIALLY HAPPENS THERE. IN TERMS OF THE MALE NOTIFICATION.

SIGNS POSTED ON THE PROPERTY. SO THAT'S MY CONCERNS IN TERMS OF THAT PARTICULAR ISSUE.

THE NEXT ONE I WANT TO TALK ABOUT IS THE ISSUE OF IMPACT ON THE ADJACENT NEIGHBORHOOD AND WHILE IN OTHERS MASTER PLAN ONE THING OF CONCERN IS ANY POTENTIAL COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT AND I APOLOGIZE FOR THE BUSINESSES THAT ARE IN IT IF I SPEAK NEGLIGENTLY OF THIS PLAZA WE DON'T WANT ANOTHER PARKLAND TOWNCENTER SITUATION. WHERE FOR WHATEVER REASON THERE WAS A DECISION MADE THAT WE DON'T WANT TO HAVE THE BUSINESSES ON THE STREET BECAUSE THE NEIGHBORHOOD ACROSS THE STREET ON THE BACK OF THE CLOSET MAKES IT LOOK LIKE YOU'RE DEALING WITH A WAREHOUSE OR AN INDUSTRIAL PARK WHEN YOU'RE DRIVING UP THE STREET.

THEN BECAUSE OF THE WAY IT WAS DESIGNED THE FRONT OF THE BUSINESSES AND THAT'S WHETHER

[01:10:02]

I DON'T KNOW HOW DO YOU FIX A SITUATION WHERE WE NEED TO BOTH THE FRONT AND THE BACK BUT WE NEED TO FIGURE THAT OUT. THERE'S ONLY A LIMITED NUMBER OF SPACES THAT BRD COULD POSSIBLY EXIST AND I WILL MAKE SURE ANYWHERE IN THOSE LIMITED NUMBER OF PLACES NOBODY IS GOING TO BE LOOKING AT AN EYESORE. AN EYESORE IS NOT THE FACT THAT HIS COMMERCIAL PROPERTY WE ALL KNOW WHAT AN EYESORE IS. SO THE NEXT THING I WANT TO TALK ABOUT HIS THE ISSUE THAT'S BEEN SPOKEN ABOUT SEVERAL MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.

THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF GOOD COMMENTS. THE ISSUE IS ONE OF COMPATIBILITY. THAT'S ONE OF THE DRIVING FOCUS IN MY VIEW IS WE DO HAVE A SITUATION WHERE WE HAVE LIMITED NUMBER OF CODE USES AND WERE GONNA BE TURNING THAT ONTO EXPAND THAT. HOWEVER, WE NEED TO PROVIDE OUR COMMISSION WITH THE BROADEST DISCRETION TO DECIDE SOMETHING IS NOT COMPATIBLE. IT IS NOT COMPATIBLE WITH THE COMMUNITIES, BUSINESSES THAT ARE NOT COMPATIBLE WITH BUSINESSES ALREADY IN THE COMMUNITY. BUSINESSES THAT ARE NOT COMPATIBLE WITH WHAT PARKLAND IS. I KNOW THAT MARIO ANDRETTI RACING IS ONE.

I NEED TO KNOW WHETHER THAT'S NECESSARILY A FOUR COMPATIBLE. I WOULD LIKE TO BE ABLE TO HAVE ? ? SO AS FAR AS DRAFTING I THINK WE NEED TO HAVE REAL DISCUSSION AND A REAL GOOD LANGUAGE TO PUT IN HERE BASICALLY IS CLOSE TO HOW THE SUPREME COURT DEFINES.

THEY SAY I DON'T KNOW WHAT COMPELLED THE COMPATIBILITY IS BUT I KNOW IT WHEN I SEE IT.

I THINK EVERYONE ON THIS BOARD AND CITY COMMISSION COLLECTIVELY KNOW WHAT COMPATIBLE IS. WE KNOW IT'S NOT COMPATIBLE AND THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY SEMI-WE SEE.

>> I WAS INSTRUCTED AND SHOWN THAT I UNDERSTAND THAT THE COMPATIBLE IS DEFINED IN OUR CODE.

>> WHERE IS THAT BY THE WAY?

>> MICHELLE. ONE MOMENT SIR.

>> SO IT IS UNDER TERMS DEFINED AND I WILL READ WHAT IT SAYS SO EVERYONE.

COMPATIBILITY MEANS LAND USES THAT SHALL INCLUDE THE STRUCTURE TO BE CONSTRUCTED AND THEY USED TO BE MADE OF THE PROPERTY. THAT OUR CONGRESS SIMILAR AND IN HARMONY WITH ONE ANOTHER BECAUSE THEY DO NOT CREATE OR FOSTER UNDESIRABLE HEALTH, SAFETY OR AESTHETIC EFFECTS ARISING FROM DIRECT ASSOCIATION OF DISSIMILAR, CONTRADICTORY, IN CONGRESS OR DISCORDANT ACTIVITIES OR STRUCTURES INCLUDING THE IMPACTS OF DENSITY, INTENSITY OF USE, TRAFFIC, HOURS OF OPERATION, AESTHETICS, NOISE, VIBRATION, SMOKE, OFFENSIVE ODORS, MASK, SHADOW EFFECT, LOCATION OF STRUCTURES AND PROXIMITY FOR RESIDENTIAL DWELLINGS OR CONDITIONS WHICH THAT ARE LIKELY TO HAVE A DETRIMENTAL

[01:15:05]

>> MICHELLE D OF THE SITE FLEXIBLE TO LOOK INTO THAT AS WELL.

>> HANG ON, JUST A SECOND. IT'S FIVE ? 3520. TERMS DEFINED.

>> ONE THING YOU MENTIONED IN TERMS OF THE DEFINITION OF COMPATIBILITY I THINK WAS ON ADJACENT SITES I APOLOGIZE I DON'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO HEAR AND HEARING BY PHONE.

THE ISSUE I HAVE IS THAT WE MAY NEED TO DEAL WITH COMPATIBILITY BEYOND WHAT IS ON ADJACENT SITES. THINGS HAVE SOME SIMILARITY THAT ARE JUST NOT COMPATIBLE WITH THE COMMUNITY AT LARGE BUT THERE MAY BE SOME TYPES OF DEVELOPMENT THAT ARE NOT COMPATIBLE THAT ARE NOT NECESSARILY ADJACENT. I THINK WE NEED TO LOOK AT COMPATIBILITY RUNNING IN TANDE . THE NEXT THING I WANT TO TALK ABOUT AND I MENTIONED THIS TO ANTHONY EARLIER WHEN I AM LOOKING AT OUR SPECIAL EXCEPTIONS CRITERIA IN THE CODE AND THE STANDARD GUIDELINES OF THE CRITERIA FOR EITHER REZONING OR SPECIAL EXCEPTION I THINK THAT THAT GOES ALONG WITH WHAT I MENTIONED EARLIER DESIGNING OUR DEFINITION WITH THE BROADEST LATITUDE THAT IS LEGAL.

I THINK WE MAY NEED TO LOOK AT IN GREATER DETAIL AGAIN RUNNING IN TANDEM WITH THIS AT ONE OF PULL THINGS UP WHERE WE HAD TO GET TO ANALYSIS BUT I THINK THAT WE DO NEED TO LOOK A LITTLE BIT CLOSER AT OUR SPECIAL EXCEPTION CRITERIA. I'VE LOOKED SINCE I GOT THIS ORDINANCE I WAS LOOKING ONLINE AT A NUMBER OF PLACES IN FLORIDA THAT HAVE SPECIAL EXCEPTION CRITERIA STANDARDS AND HOURS ARE GREAT FROM A WHILE AGO AND I DON'T KNOW WHETHER OR NOT OUR BEST PRACTICE, I JUST WILL THROUGHOUT THAT OUT I SPENT A LOT OF TIME LOOKING AT THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION CRITERIA AND THEIR APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS AND EVALUATION OF SPECIAL EXCEPTION USES IN MAITLAND, FLORIDA.

THERE SPECIAL EXCEPTION CRITERIA AND HOW THEY WENT TO THEIR APPLICATION IS REALLY EASY. I THINK THAT WE NEED TO GO BACK TO OUR SPECIAL EXCEPTION STANDARDS AND RUN THEM IN TANDEM BECAUSE AGAIN I THINK IT'S MY GOAL IN ALL OF THIS AND IN SOME PART CAME OUT OF THE MEETINGS THAT WE HAD AND IT WAS ONE THING I THINK MY TAKE AWAY FROM THAT IN THE CITY COMMISSION WAS WE HAVE TWO HEART OF A BAR OF ENTRY.

WE WOULD RATHER OUR COMMISSIONER AND STAFF LOOKING AT THINGS TO DECIDE WHETHER OR NOT THINGS ARE COMPATIBLE RATHER THAN WHETHER THINK SHOULD EVEN BE CONSIDERED.

I THINK THAT THE ORDINANCE WAS WENT A LITTLE TOO FAR IN THAT REGARD AND MOSTLY I THINK THAT WE TO LOOK BACK IN TANDEM WITH THIS ORDINANCE OUR SPECIAL EXCEPTION CRITERIA AND MAYBE LOOK CLOSER AT OUR COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS SO THAT WE KNOW.

[01:20:04]

I LIKE DEVELOPMENT I THINK THAT WOULD BE ENHANCEMENT TO OUR COMMUNITY BUT I DON'T WANT TO BE IN ANOTHER SITUATION LIKE WE WERE WITH THE CHARTER SCHOOL WHERE FOR MANY FOLKS IT WAS VIEWED AS THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION AND THERE ONLY SO MANY BOXES THEY HAD TO TAKE.

I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE DON'T HAVE THAT HAPPEN THIS GO AROUN .

I WILL CLOSE WITH SAYING, I THINK THAT THIS IS GREAT DIRECTION FOR THE FUTURE OF THE CITY FOR A LOT OF DIFFERENT REASONS. AGAIN, WE ONLY HAVE ONE SHOT TO GET IT RIGHT. I DON'T WANT TO BE IN A SITUATION 15 YEARS DOWN THE ROAD WERE LOOKING AT SOMETHING THAT WE THOUGHT WAS GREAT ON PAPER AND EXIT GOT BUILT TURNED OUT TO BE A THING WE DIDN'T WANT OR WAS NOT THAT WHAT THE COMMUNITY SHOULD HAVE.

THAT'S MY ONLY COMMENT, THANK YOU MICHELLE AND ANTHONY. REALLY GOOD WORK HERE.

I THINK WERE GOING TO BE ABLE TO GET TO SOMETHING.

>> MY COMMENTS HAVE BEEN COVERED BY PRETTY MUCH EVERYBODY.

A COUPLE SPECIFICS AND WE WILL GET BACK TO CRITERIA. THE 35 FOOT HEIGHT LIMIT.

TO SAVE TIME WE DISCUSSED THE POSSIBILITY AS JUST AN EXAMPLE OF TOP GOLF.

>> THAT WOULD BE PROHIBITED UNDER THE CURRENT DRAFT.

>> THAT WAS AN EXAMPLE USED IN THE CODE CONTRADICTS THAT PUTTING IT OUT THERE.

THE 24 HOUR FITNESS OPERATION THAT WAS ONCE APPROVED THAT WOULD ALSO BE PROHIBITED BASED ON THE HOURS.

>> I WOULD HAVE TO LOOK AT B1 AND B2 BUT I'M PRETTY SURE THAT FITNESS CENTERS ARE ALLOWED.

THIS IS SUGGESTING REGARDLESS OF WHAT THEY WANT IT CLOSES AT TWO.

LET ME CALL CODE ENFORCEMENT. I'M JUST KIDDING. HAVE A SENSE OF HUMOR.

>> THAT IS WHAT I WAS REFERRING TO.

>> I WAS GONNA NAME THIS THE BE EFFETE DISTRICT OR THE BUSINESS FRIENDLY DISTRICT.

>> THE WAY THE CODE IS WRITTEN IT WOULD PROHIBIT ANY MIXED-US , THE WAY THE ORDINANCE?

>> NO RESIDENTIAL ALLOWED.

>> SO WOULD PREVENT ANY MIXED-USE. THE COMMUNITY MEETINGS THE DEFINITION OF WHAT THE COMMUNITY MEETINGS WOULD ENTAIL IF WE CAN GET TO THAT DOWN THE ROAD.

>> WE CAN EXPAND UPON THAT.

>> AT THIS TIME WE WILL GO THROUGH YOUR LIST. ITEM BY ITEM.

INPUT FROM THE BOARD.

>> WE HAD A COUPLE OF THINGS I AM GOING TO GROUP THEM. A DISCUSSION BY SOME OF THE BOARD MEMBERS TO TALK ABOUT THE FLEXIBILITY OF HEIGHT, PERCENTAGE, AND THEN I MADE A COMMENT THAT WERE TALK ABOUT USES WE DON'T NECESSARILY KNOW WHAT THEY ARE FORGETTING HARD AND FAST GUIDELINES ABOUT HOW THEY'RE GOING TO BE DESIGNED. WE CAN CHANGE THAT LANGUAGE INSTEAD OF HAVING A MAXIMUM HEIGHT OR MAXIMUM OR MINIMUM OPEN SPACE TO SAY IT SHOULD BE

[01:25:04]

HOW TALL THEY WANT IT TO BE FOR THIS SPECIAL EXCEPTION USES. THESE ALTERNATIVE USES.

>> THAT WOULD OPEN UP TO OUR BOARD OF COMMISSION AND PERHAPS REGULATE MORE STRENUOUSLY OR DENY THE APPLICANT BASED ON A PROPOSED HEIGHT IT WOULD UNCHECK BOXES THAT OTHERWISE MIGHT BE CHECKED.

>> THAT'S TRUE AND LOOKING LONGER TERM YOU MIGHT HAVE A COMMISSION THAT SAYS HAVE ADDED IN THE NEXT COMMISSION MIGHT SAY NO, NO TOO MUCH.

>> DON'T YOU THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO HAVE AN INITIAL FRAMEWORK FOR THE SETBACKS, HEIGHT AND A PROVIDED PROCESS THAT IF THEY WANT TO CHANGE IT AND GO IN A DIFFERENT DIRECTION THEY CAN MAKE THE CHANGE. I MENTIONED VARIANCE, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE PROPER PROCEDURE WOULD BE, THE PATH OF LEAST RESISTANCE BUT I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT FOR THIS DOCUMENT TO HAVE THE FRAMEWORK ON THE HEIGHT AND THE SETBACKS.

>> I AGREED WITH THAT. THE VARIANCE WOULD BE THE MECHANISM OR THE VEHICLE BECAUSE THE VARIANCE IS SELF-IMPOSED.

>> I AGREE I DON'T THINK IT'S THE VARIANCE BECAUSE I THINK GENERALLY IF ANYONE HEIGHT BECAUSE THEY WANT TO HAVE A CERTAIN TYPE OF USE THERE VERSUS SOME ELSE.

>> THE DOCUMENT ALREADY DISCUSSES IF SOMEONE WANTS TO CHANGE SOMETHING.

IT'S JUST AN AMENDMENT TO THE DOCUMENT. THEY COME IN FOR A REZONING IS JUST AN AMENDMENT.

>> NOT FOR THE HEIGHT THAT'S HARD AND FAST. IT WOULD BE FOR THE USE.

THAT'S THE QUESTION AND DISCUSSION.

>> NO BUILDING CAN BE OVER 35 FEET. I THINK WE'VE ONLY COME UP WITH ONE EXAMPLE WHERE WE WOULD ACCEPT SOMETHING OVER 35 FEET AND THAT WOULD BE A STRUCTURE NOT A BUILDING.

>> IT'S NOT THE SAME THING. ALL BUILDINGS ARE STRUCTURES BUT NOT ALL STRUCTURES OR BUILDINGS. IN A STRUCTURE IS ANYTHING ATTACHED TO ARE FIXED TO THE GROUND. THE BUILDING HAS A ROOF. OR LIKE A TOP GOLF NET.

THOSE ARE STRUCTURES.

>> WE CAN REMOVE THE WORD STRUCTURE.

>> NO BUILDING SHOULD BE OVER 35 FEET.

>> ANTHONY, THE VARIANCE IS NOT THE PROCESS, I'M OKAY WITH THAT WHAT SHOULD BE THE PROCESS IF YOU NOT WANT TO GO WITH THE INITIAL FRAMEWORK WHICH THE APPLICANT DO?

>> YOU ONLY HAVE TWO CHOICES, WHEN, YOU SET A MAXIMUM FOOT REQUIREMENT OR 2 YOU DON'T SET A MAXIMUM FOOT GARMENT YOU REQUIRE THEM TO SET TO YOU THE HEIGHT AND THE CONCEPTUAL.

AND WHETHER YOU WANT TO CONSIDER THAT OR NOT AND I THINK ALL OF THE SAME CONSIDERATIONS WOULD APPLY THAT HEIGHT AS WELL. SO ALL OF THESE STANDARDS WOULD APPLY BUT I THINK THAT'S THE KEY DECISION. DO YOU WANT TO PUT A MAXIMUM HEIGHT IN AND IF SO, IF THEY CAN'T MEDIATE THE ANSWER IS NO AND THEY DON'T GET IT BECAUSE VARIANCE IS NOT REALLY APPROPRIATE OR DO YOU WANT TO ALLOW FOR MORE FLEXIBLY AND I'VE SEEN BOARD MEMBER MENTIONED LIKE OTHER MEANEST VALLEYS THEY DON'T HAVE HEIGHT THEY REQUEST IT FROM THE APPLICANT AND HAVE THEM DEMONSTRATE THAT UPFRONT.

>> ISE THOSE PROVIDED BY THE APPLICANT.

>> SO THEY DON'T HAVE HEIGHT REQUIREMENT.

>> A PREFERRED HEIGHT. IF THE RECOMMENDED HEIGHT IS 35 FEET MAX.

>> YOU'RE GIVING THEM GUIDANCE BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY YOU CAN'T THEN SAY NO WERE GONNA DENY IT BECAUSE YOU WERE NOT 35 FEET BECAUSE IS NOT REQUIRED.

>> LET ME ADD A QUESTION AND I'M GONNA ASK JOEL KAPLAN BECAUSE THE COMMERCIAL DEVELPMENTS. AND MURRAY. REALISTICALLY FOR COMMERCIAL USES HOW OFTEN IS THERE A NEED TO GO IN EXCESS OF 35 FEET?

>> IT WOULD ONLY BE TO SCREEN OR LYCAN ACCOUTREMENT TO BUILDING.

MOST DEVELOPERS AND LOOKING AT THIS WE LOOK IT UP A LOT OF RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITIES I CAN TELL YOU A LOT MORE A LOT GOES INTO THESE BUILDINGS AND SHOPPING CENTERS.

THEY ARE MAX AMAZING SPACE SHOPPING CENTERS WILL GO TO SHOPPING CENTERS ARE NOT NICE.

[01:30:11]

NEWLY BUILT, TILL WALK CONSTRUCTION ON AN ANGLE. NATURAL TURF OUT FRONT, ON STREET PARKING. NICE LITTLE AREA AND IN BETWEEN AREA TO SIT OUTSIDE, THE CONCEPT OF THESE DESIGNERS THEY GOING WITH. THEY ARE NOT IGNORANT TO WHAT THEY'RE GETTING INTO. THEY LOOK AROUND THEY HAVE TO LOOK AROUND BECAUSE THE LEASE ARE GONNA SUBSTANTIATE ALONG THE COMMON AREAS THINGS THEY NEED TO HAVE.

SO I THINK IT'S A GOOD THING. SO IN MY EXPENSE A LOT OF THINGS OR SAME HERE ARE TYPICALLY CAPTURED IN PRESENTATIONS AT LEAST THAT I HAVE SEEN THE CITY OF HOLLYWOOD

CORAL GABLES THINGS LIKE THAT >> GOING BACK TO THE HEIGHT, HAVE YOU ENCOUNTERED THE NEED TO GO MORE THAN 35 FEET FOR RETAIL TO BE SUCCESSFUL? HOW TALL IS COSTCO? DO YOU KNOW?

>> ELSE IS ABOUT 35 ? 38 FEET.

>> THE REASON I'M ASKING IS I'M ON THE INTERSTATE GOING TO MY HOME NORTH OF ATLANTA AND MARIETTA GEORGIA THERE'S AN AND READY RACING. THE THING WAS MAMMOTH.

IT REMINDED ME OF COSCO IN TERMS OF SIZE AND THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING.

I WON'T BEGIN TO SAY I KNOW ALL THE POSSIBLE RECREATIONAL USES BUT THE ONES THAT COME TO MIND DO NOT SEEM LIKE IT WOULD EXCEED 35 FEET WITH THE EXCEPTION OF COURSE OF TOP GOLF. I DON'T KNOW IF ANYONE HAS BEEN TO TOP GOLF, IT'S A LOT OF FUN BUT IT IS HORRIBLE TO LOOK AT.

>> IT'S HORRIBLE. I-95 AND BELVEDERE ROAD.

>> LOOK AT THE NEW PUBLIX, THEIR TOWERS ARE HIGHER THAN 35 FEET.

>> TO MY KNOWLEDGE, TOP GOLF IS NOT BEING CONSIDERED. YOU KEEP MENTIONING IT BUT IS NOT BEING CONSIDERED.

>> IT COULD.

>> WE KEEP MENTIONING IT AS IF SOMEONE IS TALK ABOUT BRINGING TOP GOLF AND MY INFORMATION I HAVE IS THAT'S NOT THE CASE.

>> I THINK THE CHARACTERIZATION OF THE EXPERIENCE WILL USES IN MY MIND BRINGING UP IN INTENSITY TO WHAT THIS IS THAT I DON'T THINK IT'S SOMETHING THAT I THINK ONE IN THE CITY AT ALL. I WOULD VOTE AGAINST EVERYTHIN .

THAT BELONGS ALONG I-95, THE INTENSITY, OR TALK ABOUT VERY INTENSE USES.

WE HAVE A SUBURBAN BEDROOM COMMUNITY WHICH HAS TRADITIONALLY BEEN SERVED BY COMMERCIAL OUTSIDE OF OUR CITIES BY DESIGN. WE HAVE A TOUGH TIME KEEPING BUSINESSES ON 441. AND THE TYPE I'M CONCERNED IS GOING TO BE THIS MASSIVE DISTRICT AND IF YOU THINK ABOUT ANYWHERE THAT IT COULD GO I DON'T THINK IT FITS.

TRUTH BE TOLD, I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU GET THERE. I JUST DON'T.

IT CAN GO ON HOMEWORK, PINE ISLAND, IT CAN'T GO ANYWHERE IT'S JUST FEELING, FEELING, FEELING. WHAT I DO THINK IS APPROPRIATE IS A WELL-DESIGNED MAYBE A MORE OUTSIDE ORIENTED NEIGHBORHOOD SHOPPING CENTER. AND THAT IS ABOUT 20 ACRE PARCEL KINDA FITS. BUT TO DO THE TYPE OF THINK THAT'S GOING TO HAVE THESE BIG MONSTER USES IT'S GOING TO BE MUCH BIGGER THAN 20 ACRES.

>> I HAD THE SAME CONCEPT BECAUSE WERE JUST A REFERENCE POINT FOR DESIGNING THE CODE AROUND AS ONE OF THE POSSIBILITIES.

[01:35:02]

>> I HEAR THAT. MY WAY OF ADDRESSING THAT AS I THINK 35 IS A HARD LIMIT.

I DON'T THINK THERE SHOULD BE A LIMIT IF IN THE EVENT THAT MY OPINION DOES NOT COUNT THE WAY THAT WE'VE DONE THIS IN EVERY OTHER CITY THAT HAS A PLANNED COMMERCIAL DISTRICT IS THE DOCUMENT CONTAINS THE ZONING REGULATIONS THAT ARE PROPOSED BY THE DEVELOPER AND IF THERE IS SOME UNFORESEEN THING THAT HAPPENS DOWN THE LINE THAT THE DEVELOPER THINKS THEY NEED ADDITIONAL FLEXIBILITY THEN THEY COME THROUGH AND THEY AMEND THE DOCUMENT WHICH COULD BE ON A SITE SPECIFIC USE. IT'S GONNA PASS ALL THE SAME CRITERIA.

>> CORRECT, I AGREE WITH MUCH OF WHAT YOU ARE SAYING. BUT WE HAVE THE HARD AND FAST 35 FEET. IT SET UP SO THAT WE HAVE SOME PARAMETERS.

WE HAVE MINIMUM SPACE, MINIMUM SETBACKS, MAXIMUM HEIGHT.

>> I WANT TO BE CLEAR, I THINK IT SHOULD BE A HARD AND FAST 35 FEET.

I DON'T THINK IT SHOULD BE ANYTHING ELSE. BUT THE WAY TO GO AROUND IT BECAUSE THAT MAY NOT BE THE COLLECTIVE WOULD BE TO HAVE THE CONTROLLING DOCUMENT WHICH IN THIS CASE IS A CONCEPTUAL MASTER PLAN WHICH I THINK SHOULD BE A LOT MORE DETAILED.

>> YOU WANT BASICALLY THE SITE PLAN.

>> A SITE PLAN THAT CONTAINS A VERY SPECIFIC BUFFER DETAILS, HIERARCHY OF STREETS, ACCESS AND CIRCULATION. LIMITED ACCESS FROM SURROUNDING.

EVERYTHING HAS GOT TO BE DEFINED AND THEN THEY CAN PLUG IN THE USES, IT WOULD NOT BE PARCELS NECESSARILY THE TO BE DESIGNATED AREAS.

>> I WILL ADD ONE THING AND FOR CONSIDERATION AND THAT IS WE HAD IN THE ZONING CODE THE PRD PLAN RESIDENTIAL DEVELPMENTS AND IT WE DID HAVE HEIGHT OR MINIMUMS OR MAXIMUMS YOU DESIGN IT YOU SHOW US WHAT YOU WANT AND IF YOU LOOK AT THE WEDGE AND OTHER COMMITTEES IF YOU RECALL WE HAD GONE IN RECENTLY AMENDED THE PRD DEPENDENT DESIGN STANDARDS BECAUSE THE QUALITY OF DESIGN WE WERE GETTING UP AT THE WEDGE BECAUSE THERE WAS NO RULES WAS NOT APPROPRIATE FOR THE CITY OF PARKLAND SO WE HAD TO GO BACK AND REDO THE PRD AS YOU RECALL TO GET STRONGER MORE STRINGENT DESIGN STANDARDS. IT CERTAINLY WHATEVER RECOMMENDATIONS THIS BOARD WANTS TO MAKE TO COMMISSION BUT JUST WANTED TO REMIND YOU THAT IS WHAT HAPPENED.

>> I HAVE A QUESTION. DEFINED IN THIS ORDINANCE, IT WAS DISCUSSED BRIEFLY BY ONE OF THE BOARD MEMBERS, THE REZONING AND THE SITE PLAN. PROCESS.

IN OTHER WORDS, SOMEONE CAN COME IN AND REZONE A PIECE OF LAND AND THEN AFTER IT WAS REZONED BRING IN A SITE PLAN FOR WHAT WAS PROPOSED?

>> NO, NO, NO IT'S SIMILAR TO THE PRD IF YOU PROPOSE TO REZONE TO THE BRD DISTRICT GIFT MUST HAVE A CONCEPTUAL MASTER PLAN TO ACCOMPANY IT. SO WHAT I HEAR IS THE CONCEPTUAL MASTER PLAN IT NEEDS TO HAVE MORE DETAIL SO IF YOU GONNA REZONE IT WE WANT MORE MEAT ON THE BONE.

>> IT COULD BE A PERCENTAGE OF, A LOT OF TIMES IS NOT DEFINED BUT THERE'S A PERCENTAGE OF.

>> NO, FOR ME IT WOULD NOT BE A PERCENTAGE. FOR SOMEONE TO COME IN AND GET THE FLEXIBILITY THAT THIS IS ASKING, THAT THIS WOULD ALLOW, SOMEONE HAS TO COME IN AND HAVE A COMMITMENT, A FIRM COMMITMENT, TO MAKING SURE THAT THE OUTSIDE APPEARANCE, THE COMMON AREA ELEMENTS, THE DESIGN OBJECTIVES ARE PUT INTO PLACE.

AND THEN WHEN THEY COME AND THEY DO AN INDIVIDUAL SITE PLAN IT HAS TO MATCH ALL OF THAT BUT WILL NEVER BE OPEN BECAUSE A BE ONE ENTITY THAT CONTROLS, A SERIES OF DEED RESTRICTIONS THAT CONTROLS THE MAINTENANCE OF EVERYTHING AND ENSURES THAT THEY MAINTAIN THE LOCATION AND THEY COME IN AND THEY DO THE INDIVIDUAL USE DATE WITH THEM ON AND THEY HAVE BEEN PLANNED OUT IN THE BEGINNING BY THE DEVELOPER. THAT ASSURES YOU GET YOUR ART YOUR PEDESTRIAN YOUR CONSISTENCY OF BUFFERS YOUR LIMITED ACCESS AND YOUR

[01:40:04]

WE HAD IT BEFORE. WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THERE IS NO GATE PUT UP BETWEEN USES.

WE WANT TO HAVE UNFETTERED ABILITY TO ENSURE THAT THE COMMITMENTS MADE BY THE DEVELOPER TOWARDS THIS MASSIVE PUBLIC BENEFIT THAT THEY ARE PROMISING IN ORDER TO GET THE FLEXIBILITY ARE PUT IN PLACE. THE WEIGHT YOU DO THAT IS WITH A DETAILED MASTER PLAN THAT SETS THOSE THINGS IN STONE. AND THEN WE CAN ADD TO THEM ALL OF THE DESIGN OBJECTIVES THAT WE TALKED ABOUT BUT THEY HAVE GOT TO BE ON THE MASTER PLAN AND THAT WAY THEY DON'T GET THE REZONE UNTIL THAT IS SET IN STONE. AND THEN, THEY COME IN FOR THE INDIVIDUAL USES THAT THEY HAVE. RIGHT NOW, OUR MASTER PLAN THAT WERE TALKING ABOUT IS PURPORTING TO ASK THEM FOR SOME OF THESE ALTERNATIVE USES THAT ARE NOT ALLOWED.

BUT WE DON'T KNOW NECESSARILY WHERE THEY'RE GOING TO GO OR THAT THEY'RE GOING TO BE APPROVED.

>> WE WANT TO KNOW WHERE TO GO SPECIFICALLY ON THE CONCEPTUAL MASTER PLAN.

>> I LIKE THE SPECIFICALLY PART.

>> IT'S GENERAL, I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE WANT IS A CONCRETE MASTER PLAN AND THEN THAT WILL GIVE THEM THE FLEXIBILITY. THE SET OF THE COMMON AREAS, ENFORCEABLE THINGS, MAKE SURE THAT WE SEE THAT THE DESIGN OBJECTIVES THAT WE'VE SET IN PLACE ARE ACTUALLY IMPLEMENTED.

WE WILL NOT BE CHASING THEM TO SEE THAT THINGS ARE DONE. OUR CODE COMP PLAN SAYS THAT WE DO THESE INNOVATIVE TYPE LAND USES WHEN THE DEVELPMENTS CAN ACCOMPLISH DESIRED DEVELOPMENT THAT WOULD NOT BE POSSIBLE WITH THE ZONING DISTRICT. IF IT'S NOT GOING TO BE THIS MASSIVE PUBLIC BENEFIT AND WERE NOT GOING TO GET THAT THEN THEY CAN HAVE A B1 AND B2 IF THEY CAN GET LAND USE PLANS. I DON'T KNOW WHY THE CITY WOULD CONSIDER THE LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT, WOULD HAVE TO BE A BIG PUBLIC BENEFIT IN ORDER TO HAVE THIS TYPE.

>> THAT'S A WHOLE ANOTHER VERY, VERY INTERESTING DISCUSSION AS WE SIT HERE RIGHT NOW BECAUSE THERE'S NOTHING TO PRECLUDE THE SPIRITUAL USES ARE GREAT BUT IT INVOLVED SOMEONE TAKING A PIECE OF THE GOLF COURSE WHATEVER SITE WE HAVE IN BUYING A FIVE ACRES AND PUTTING A STRIP CENTER EVERYWHERE.

>> THE LAND USE PLAN PREVENTS THAT. THERE'S YOUR COMPLAINT A MINUTE. ON CERTAIN PORTIONS OF THE CITY THAT ARE DESOLATED WE NEED A LAND-USE PLAN OF THEM IN ANY WAY TO PUT ANY COMMERCIAL.

>> THAT'S CORRECT. IN THE CULTURAL ZONING AND THAT'S GOOD BECAUSE ON THE PLANNING COUNCIL HEARD ABOUT IT THEY WERE LIKE SOUNDS COMPATIBLE TO ME.

LET'S NOT BE ON THAT PATH IF I COULD ASK THE BOARD TO GIVE ME SOME DIRECTION.

>> LET'S GET THE 35 FEET GET TO THE RESOLUTION.

>> DISCUSSION WEATHERSBY HEIGHT FLEXIBILITY SHOULD BE A HARD AND FAS NUMBER OR WE TAKE OUT THE HARD AND FAST AND COME UP WITH LANGUAGE THAT PROVIDES MORE FLEXIBILITY.

I JUST NEED TO KNOW A GAY ORNATE. GAY OR COMIC ? ? ?.

>> 50 FOOT BUILDING HEIGHT, IS HER SUPPORT FOR THAT ON THE BOARD?

>> ANYONE ELSE SUPPORT THAT.

>> A PARKING GARAGE? 35 FEET WILL NOT GET YOU A PARKING GARAGE.

>> I LIKE THE 35 WITH THE ABILITY TO HAVE SOME FLEXIBILITY.

>> 50 IS HIGHER OR DO YOU WANT TO KEEP IT 35 BUT IF THEY NEED TO GO 50 THEY HAVE TO DO SOMETHING IN ORDER TO GET THE 50. DAVID MENTIONED WHAT THEY NEED TO DO.

>> THE MARRIOTT IS EIGHT STORIES. MILLION DOLLAR HOMES BACK UP TO

[01:45:08]

>> DOES NATHANIEL HAVE THE ANSWER?

>> IF YOU PUT 35 FEET AS SUGGESTED IN YOUR ALLOWING SOME KIND OF OPTION TO GO ABOVE 35 FEET. I THINK THE CONCEPT OF HAVING OVER 35 FEET IT'S PRETTY UNTENABLE TO ME. I'M NOT LOOKING AT IN THE CONTEXT OF AN EXACT LOCATION BUT I DON'T ANY PLACES WHERE OVER 35 FEET WILL BE APPROPRIATE.

THE STANDARD COMMERCIAL OR RECREATIONAL IF ANYONE CAN IDENTIFY OTHER THAN TOP GOLF MORE THAN 35 FEET.

>> A COSCO.

>> I UNDERSTAND THE DIFFERENCE OF A STRUCTURE AND A BUILDING LIKE THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE BUT THE BUILDING SHOULD BE 35 FEET.

>> ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY INPUT ON THE 35?

>> WE WERE NOT HAVE AN OFFICIAL VOTE WHICH IS HAVING A DISCUSSION.

>> ONLY BECAUSE SOMEONE BROUGHT IT UP THERE MAY BE AN EIGHT STORY BUILDING IN THE WEST BUT IT WAS THERE WHEN MOST OF THE PEOPLE BOUGHT THEIR HOUSE. IN OTHER AREAS THAT DON'T HAVE ANYTHING AROUND IT MAYBE THOSE AREAS COULD BE DEFINED OR DESIGNED WITH TALLER BUILDINGS BUT IN AREAS WHERE THERE WAS NOTHING WE TALK ABOUT CONVERTING A GOLF COURSE, NO WAY. 35 AT MOST.

>> IT MIGHT BE HELPFUL IF YOU ASK AN ARM RAISE FOR 35 VERSUS THE ARM RACE FOR NO HARD NUMBER WE KNOW WHAT WE SEE IT.

>> HEARTED 35 IN THE ORDINANCE.

>> YES.

>> RAISE YOUR HAND.

>> SO THERE'S NO THIRD OPTION? I DON'T LIKE 50 EITHER BUT I'M FINE WITH 35 AS LONG AS ANYTHING ELSE THERE SHOULD BE A MECHANISM FOR SOMEONE TO BE ABLE TO SEE THERE'S A REASON THAT YOU'RE NOT THINKING OF THERE'S A REASON WHY YOU SHOULD CONSIDER THIS.

>> WE WILL FIND OUT. IF I UNDERSTAND WE SUMMARIZE AND SEE FROM SAINT CORRECTLY.

IT WOULD BE 35 FEET BUT WE WILL CREATE A MECHANISM TO GO MORE THAN THAT FOR GOOD CAUSE SHOWN.

>> I AM IN FAVOR I WANT TO BE CLEAR NO FLEXIBILITY 35 IS IT. THAT IS MY OPINION.

>> NEXT THING ON THE LIST, MICHELLE.

>> NEXT ITEM ON THE LIST IS PERCENTAGE OF OPEN SPACE. IT WAS 30 PERCENT.

>> ONE OF MY QUESTIONS SO IT WAS COVERED BUT WITH RESPECT TO THE ORDINANCE WAS CREATED BASED ON LOOKING AT OTHER CITIES AND SUCH?

>> YES.

>> THE 30 PERCENT HAS BEEN INDICATED IT'S THE MINIMUM AND IS DICTATED BY THE BUILDING COVERAGE LANDSCAPE, SETBACKS AND THE PARKING REQUIRED IS 30 PERCENT CREATES ITSELF, 30 PERCENT THE RIGHT NUMBER?

>> IT IS. ASK

>> I AM NOT REMOTELY IN SUPPORT OF THE USE OF THE REQUIRED LANDSCAPE BUFFERS AND OR PARKING ISLANDS OR ANYTHING BEING CREDITED TOWARDS THE MASSIVE PUBLIC BENEFIT WERE GOING TO GET AS THEIR OPEN SPACE. THE THING THAT MAKES IT SO

[01:50:03]

>> THE MORE OPEN SPACE YOU ASK FOR WHEN IT COMES TO COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT THE LESS PARKING AREA OF THE PROVIDE FOR PEOPLE AND THEY WILL END UP WITH THE PARKING STRUCTURE WE MAY NOT WANT.

>> CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG BUT THERE WERE NO PARKING GARAGES INITIALLY AND THEN FROM THAT MISTAKEN IT WAS A RESIDENTIAL INITIALLY.

>> THAT WAS CREATED, I DON'T.

>> I'M USING IT AS A REFERENCE TO SHOW THE VALUE OF COMMUNITY GREEN SPACE INSIDE OF A DEVELOPMENT. WE DON'T HAVE THAT AT THE PROMENADE.

YOU HAVE A BUSY STREETS WITH ON STREET PARKING AND ENOUGH ROOM TO GET ONE CAR THROUGH BECAUSE IT'S ONE WAY AND THEN THE SIDEWALKS. IT MAKES ATLANTIC AVENUE IN DELRAY WITHOUT THE GREEN SPACE BECAUSE THEY HAVE THE DOUBLE STREETS WITH THE PARKING AND HAVE A DECENT SIDEWALK. MY VIEW IS IF WE ARE NOT GOING TO GET SOMETHING OTHER THAN A NORMAL DEVELOPMENT THAT WE HAVE A B1 AND B2 BUT FROM MY PERSPECTIVE I NEED TO SEE WHAT MICHELLE CALLED PROGRAMMABLE OPEN SPACE THAT MEANS SPACE YOU CAN USE FOR EVENTS, FOR OUTSIDE EVENTS, FOR COMMUNITY GATHERINGS, PEOPLE CAN GO AND SIT NOT JUST A ROW OF SHOPPING.

WE DON'T HE JUST MORE SHOPPING.

>> LET ME ADD TO THAT IF I MAY. WHEN WE REDID THE PRD ORDINANCE THE FACT THAT WE DIDN'T WANT EVER SPACE TO BE COUNTED AS THE LEFTOVERS, IS AN INTEREST BY THIS BOARD TO CREATE SIMILAR LANGUAGE AS WE PUT IN THE PRD TO ENHANCE THE TERM PROGRAMMABLE SPACE AND DEFINE IT A LITTLE MORE?

>> IN YOUR ORDINANCE ALREADY WE TALK ABOUT CLASSES AND WE TALK ABOUT THE DEFINITION PLAZA, I WOULD LOVE TO SEE ENHANCED DEFINITIONS OF PLAZAS AND THE USE OF OPEN SPACE BECAUSE THAT'S A REAL BENEFIT. THAT'S A MAJOR THING IF WE'VE A NICE AREA, OR PUTTING ALL THESE OUTSIDE PARKING I'M SORRY EATING AREAS IN FRONT OF THEIR AND IT DOESN'T WORK AND A GREAT MANY AREAS. ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS GOING TO THE SHOPPING CENTER AND YOU CAN EVEN GET THROUGH. BUT CARMELLA'S CAYMAN AND THE PUTTING WHEN YOU GO TO CARMELLA'S IN DELRAY IT'S FANTASTIC. THEY HAVE TWO COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS WITH A ROOF OVER THE TOP AND 25 FOOT GREEN AREA IN BETWEEN WITH OUTSIDE SEATING SO IT'S A REAL INSIGHT OUTSIDE. THAT'S A USABLE OPEN SPACE. THAT'S A MUCH BETTER JAMMING SOME SEATS.

>> I THINK IF I HEAR THE DISCUSSION THAT IS GOING ON 30 PERCENT MAY NOT BE THE ISSUE IT'S WHAT IS THE NATURE OF THE 30 PERCENT IS THAT AN ACCURATE STATEMENT?

>> I WOULD BE LOOKING FOR A PERCENTAGE OVER AND ABOVE THE REQUIRED BUFFERS AND PARKING ISLANDS.

>> IS AT 30 OR 35?

>> IT'S 30. NEXT WE TALK ABOUT SITE COVERAGE OR MINIMUM OPEN SPACE?

>> THEY ARE TWO DIFFERENT SECTIONS.

>> IT CURRENTLY PROVIDES ON THE SITE PROPERTY IT REALLY SHOWS THE COMBINED GROUND AREA AND ACCESSORY BUILDINGS AND INCLUDES RESEARCHERS SHOULD NOT EXCEED 30 PERCENT.

>> THE OPEN SPACE IF WE ALREADY HAVE 35 I WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF CHANGING THIS IN PARENTHESES TO INCLUDE ALL LAND WITHIN THE PERMANENT EXCLUDING ALL LAND. THOUGH THAT 35 WOULD HAVE TO BE

[01:55:02]

>> TO POINT OUT THAT TRANSLATES INTO REQUIRING FOR IN EXCESS OF 35 PERCENT OF THE SITE AND OPEN SPACE BECAUSE YOUR EXCLUDING BUFFERS, YARDS AND THINGS.

>> IN OTHER WORDS YOUR DEFINE IT AS A USABLE OPEN SPACE.

>> EXACTLY.

>> I WOULD LOOK TO MICHELLE, YOUR INPUT, WE ARE DISCUSSING TO DEFINE IT HOW IS IT DEFINED IN THE PLANNERS TERMS.

>> TELL ME WHAT IT IS YOU WANT AND I'LL PUT IT IN THE LANGUAG .

NEXT WE WANT USABLE OPEN SPACE >> SORT OF 35 PERCENT OF THE SITE USABLE.

>> WILL THAT WOULD BE GREAT BUT THAT'S A STANDARD NO ONE CAN BEAT.

>> I THINK THE USABLE OPEN SPACE SHOULD BE OVER AND ABOVE WHAT IS NORMALLY REQUIRED UNDER OUR DISTRICTS WHICH IF THAT IS 35 PERCENT THEN I DON'T KNOW WHAT IT IS LOOK AT THE LANDSCAPE BUFFERS BUT THAT WOULD BE YOU WOULD WANT TO USABLE SPACE OVER AND ABOVE WHAT IS NORMALLY REQUIRED FOR THE BUFFERS AND FOR THE ISLANDS BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT WERE TALKING ABOUT. WE DON'T WANT THE SAME BUFFERS, WE WANT SOMETHING ADDITIONAL.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE NUMBER I . IT'S NOT NECESSARILY A PERCENTAGE OF THE SITE IF THE QUALITY OF THE USABLE OPEN SPACE.

BUT BECAUSE THIS IS GOING TO BE A REZONING AND DESIGN OBJECTIVES THAT SHOULD BE FACTORED IN TO THE DESIGN OBJECTIVES WHICH SOME OF IT ALREADY IS.

I THINK WE JUST HAVE TO MAKE SURE THE USABLE OPEN SPACE IS GOING TO BE OVER AND ABOVE THE MINIMUM REQUIRED.

>> IF I'M SAYING THIS RIGHT, WE WANT A BETTER DEFINITION OF WHAT USABLE OPEN SPACE IS AND THEN TO FIND A PERCENTAGE OF A MINIMUM USABLE, WHAT PERCENTAGE OF THE SITE IS A USABLE OPEN SPACE. I WOULD BE RETICENT TO SAY 35 PERCENT IS USABLE AND THEN ON TOP OF THAT WE HAVE BUFFERS AND LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS, ISLAND .

>> THAT'S IMPOSSIBLE TO ME. TAKE A TYPICAL SITE IF THE NORMAL REQUIRED LANDSCAPE BUFFER AND ISLANDS COMES BACK TO BE 30 PERCENT OR WHATEVER THE NUMBER IS I WOULD SAY THE USABLE OPEN SPACE HAS TO BE OVER AND ABOVE THAT. I DON'T THINK WERE GONNA BE ABLE TO DEFINE IT WITH A PERCENTAGE OF THE SITE. WHAT MATTERS IS THE QUALITY OF IT. IF YOU HAVE A NICE PLAZA WHAT WE CARE WHAT PERCENTAGE IT IS.

IF IT'S REALLY USABLE AND THE DEVELOPMENT IS GEARED AROUND IT AND IT REALLY IS AN OPEN SPACE AND MEETS THE STANDARD THAT OBJECTIVES IN THE CONDITIONS THEN WE JUST WANT THAT TO BE OVER AND ABOVE THE MINIMUM REQUIRED BUFFERS.

>> THE ONLY DIFFICULTY I HAVE WITH THAT IS IT BECOMES I DO A LOT OF EXPERT WITNESSING IN COURT FOR AND AGAINST CITIES ON CODE AND LAND USE MATTERS. AND WE ARE TALK ABOUT STANDARDS NOW THAT ARE DEFINED IN ARBITRARY. ON NOT THE LAWYER, WHAT DO YOU THINK?

>> I TEND TO LIKE STANDARDS YOU CAN APPLY IT VERY EASILY. WE STARTED OVER AND ABOVE MAKES A LOT OF SENSE BUT OTHERWISE I WOULD HAVE TO I'M JUST ON A NUMBER OUT.

MAYBE 31, IS THAT ENOUGH BECAUSE A CHECK THE BOX TO SAY YEAH WE EXCEEDED YOUR STANDARDS SO WE CHECKED THE BOX.

>> MAYBE I'M NOT UNDERSTANDING FULLY. ARE YOU SUGGESTING THAT THERE'S A NUMBER MINIMUM FOR THE BUFFERS AND THE LANDSCAPE AND ALL THAT STUFF WERE CREDIT TO PROVIDE IN ADDITION ON TOP OF THAT HARD NUMBER THE SITE PLAN SHALL FEATURE USABLE OPEN SPACE PROGRAMMABLE OPEN SPACE AND IN ADDITION TO THAT 35 PERCENT PUT A NUMBER ON IT?

[02:00:02]

>> THE WAY I WOULD DO IT IS I WOULD FIGURE OUT WHAT HER CODE CURRENTLY REQUIRES AND WE DEFINED USABLE OPEN SPACE AND THEN THE DESIGN OBJECTIVES UP IN THE FRONT ONE OF THE REASONS THAT THEY WOULD ALLOW THIS IS BECAUSE THEIR PROMISING AND COMMITTING THE PLANNING BOARD AND ULTIMATELY THE CITY COMMISSION WILL LOOK AT THEIR GOOD FAITH EFFORT ON THE PLAN AND SAY YOU KNOW WHAT, THAT LOOKS LIKE IT MEANS WHAT WE WANT FOR THE USABLE OPEN SPACE AND IF THEY DON'T SHOW IT ON THAT MASTER PLAN THEN THE ANSWER IS NO.

AT MINIMUM THEY HAVE TO MEET THE LANDSCAPE BUFFERS.

>> SOMETHING OVER AND ABOVE THE MINIMUM LANDSCAPE BUFFERS.

>> I DON'T HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS I THINK THE ISSUE IS A COMBINATION OF OPEN SPACE.

THAT'S MY MAJOR CONCERN.

>> THAT IS EXACTLY WHAT MY POINT IS. IN BOCA THEY HAD A MASSIVE ISSUE WITH THIS DOWNTOWN. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THEIR END RESULT WAS WHAT WHEN THEY BUILD THOSE CONDOS THEY STARTED TAKING CREDIT FOR BALCONIES AS USABLE OPEN SPACE.

BUT MAYBE LOOK AT THEIR NOT AS AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT THEY USE BUT AS A REFERENCE.

>> PEOPLE COUNTY PRIVATE PATIOS IS OPEN SPACE.

>> I THINK MAYBE WE USE AS WHAT NOT TO DO.

>> WAS THE NEXT ITEM ON YOUR LIST MICHELLE, PLEASE.

>> SORRY, ONE THING WE WANT TO MAKE SURE IS THAT WE LOOK AT THE QUALITY OF THE OPEN SPACE AND ITS LOCATION. THE NEXT QUESTION WAS HOURS OF OPERATION.

WE HAVE SPECIFIC HOURS OF OPERATION FOR THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION USES I HAVE SUGGESTED THE BOARD CONSIDER THE HOUR OF OPERATION FOR EACH SPECIFIC SPECIAL EXCEPTION USE, WHEN THAT USE PRESENTED TO YOU RATHER THAN SAYING IT COULD START AT SEVEN AND ENDS AT 11.

SO THE QUESTION TO THE BOARD I , ARE YOU COMFORTABLE WITH THE HOURS OF OPERATION STATED IN THE ORDINANCE AS IS OR DO YOU WANT EACH SPECIAL EXCEPTION AND THAT WOULD BE FOR ANY OF THE PERMITTED B1 AND B2 USES OR FOR THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION USES WHEN EACH ONE IS PRESENTED DO YOU WANT THEM TO COME TO YOU WITH A PROPOSED HOUR OF OPERATION?

>> RAISE YOUR HAND IF YOU WANT TO AS IS OR IF YOU WANT THE ALTERNATIVE? ONE OR THE OTHER. THE FIRST ITEM RAISE YOUR HAND IF YOU WANT IT FOR THE FIRST ITEM WHICH IS KEEPING IT AS WRITTEN IN THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE.

>> I LIKE HOW IT'S WRITTEN BUT I WOULD LIKE TO REMOVE THE LAST SENTENCE ABOUT HOWEVER IN NO EVENT SOME BUSINESSES, I LIKE EVERYTHING ELSE THAT THE CONDITION CAN GRANT AN EXCEPTION BUT LETS US REMOVE WHAT THE COMMISSION CANNOT DO. THE COMMISSION CAN DO WHATEVER THE COMMISSION CAN VOTE TO DO ANYTHING.

>> FIRST VOTE IS DO YOU WANT TO AS WRITTEN, SO DON'T RAISE YOUR HAND.

>> LET ME ASK A QUESTION, I DON'T THINK IT SHOULD BE AT ALL AFTER 11.

>> WE ARE GETTING THERE.

>> SECOND IS TO PROVIDE AN ALTERNATE AS MICHELLE STATED IF YOU DON'T RAISE YOUR HAND DOES NOT TO BE APPROVED EITHER OR CONSIDERED. THE ALTERNATIVE TO HAVE EACH SPECIAL EXCEPTION BE PRESENTED BY THE APPLICANT AT THE TIME OF THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION IS APPLIED FOR WITH THE HOURS OF OPERATION IN IT AT THAT TIME THE HOURS OF OPERATION FOR THAT SPECIFIC SPECIAL EXCEPTION WOULD BE CONSIDERED AS WRITTEN IN THE ORDER ORDINANCE IS VERSUS WHAT'S ALREADY WRITTEN THERE. RAISE YOUR HANDS.

>> I HAVE A QUESTION MR. CHAIRMAN. THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION, THE GOOD OLD SPECIAL EXCEPTION CALLS FOR HOURS OF OPERATION. IT'S IN THERE, CORRECT? NO? WHEN HAVE A SPECIAL EXCEPTION THEY SAY WE WANT TO HAVE THIS BUSINESS OPEN WITH CERTAIN HOURS. NOW?

>> WOULD BE NO BECAUSE IT WAS IN THE B1 OR B2?

[02:05:04]

>> HERE'S THE CRITERIA FOR THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION RIGHT IN FRONT OF YOU.

IT IS NOT SPECIFICALLY SAY YOU MUST STATE THE HOURS. THERE COULD BE OTHER FACTORS.

>> WE CAN MAKE IT A CONDITION OF APPROVAL.

>> I LIKE WHAT NATHANIEL SAID TO SIGNIFICANTLY BEEF UP OUR SPECIAL EXCEPTION CRITERIA.

AND NUMBER TWO, TO SIGNIFICANTLY BEEF UP OUR APPLICATION FOR SPECIAL EXCEPTION.

>> WE ARE GETTING OFF TOPIC. WE'RE DISCUSSING THE HOURS NOW.

>> I'M NOT IN FAVOR OF ANY SPECIAL EXCEPTION USES AT ALL UNLESS WE SIGNIFICANTLY BEEF UP THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION APPLICATION. SO WHEN THIS REGARD I'M IN NO TO ANYTHING OTHER THAN 11 PM. AT ALL.

>> THAT'S NOT MY QUESTION.

>> RIGHT NOW WE NEED TO RAISE HER HANDS IF YOU DON'T RAISE YOUR HAND IS LIKELY IMPLEMENTED IN THE PROPOSAL.

>> I'M HOPING IT WILL FAIL AND WILL CONSIDER A NEW AMENDMENT WERE JUST LEAVE THE 11 PM ALONE.

>> SUZANNE EVERY SPECIAL EXCEPTION USE HAS A RIGHT TO BE OPEN TILL 11?

>> I DON'T THINK THAT THERE SHOULD BE ANY SPECIAL EXEMPTIO .

>> BUT THAT'S NOT THE ISSUE.

>> ANY SUPPORT RAISE YOUR HAND SHOULD I REPEAT THE QUESTION?

>> I'M SAME TO MY BOARD RAISE YOUR HAND IF YOU SUPPORT THAT AS IT'S CURRENTLY WRITTEN IN THE ORDINANCE TO CHANGE IT TO WHERE EACH SPECIAL EXCEPTION WHEN IT COMES IN IS PROVIDED THE HOURS OF OPERATION AT THAT TIME TO BECOME PART OF THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION.

RAISE YOUR HAND FOR THAT. WE ARE NOT REMOVING ANYTHING OR CHANGING IT ENTIRELY TO ANY

APPLICANT >> THAT'S FOR HANDS.

>> I CAN'T SEE YOUR HAND, NATHANIEL.

>> YET TO FIND THAT REQUEST FOR THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION APPLICATION.

THE HOURS OF OPERATION FOR THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION CRITERIA.

>> IT'S A SUBMISSION CRITERIA AND THEN WHEN THE COMMISSION LOOKS AT AND THIS BOARD LOOKS AT AND THEN THE COMMISSION LOOKS AT THE CRITERIA FOR SPECIAL EXCEPTION THEY WILL CONSIDER THE USE, HOURS OF OPERATION AND NO GO THROUGH THE WHOLE LIST OF WHETHER OR NOT IT'S COMPATIBLE AND WE HAVE A BIG LOVELY DEFINITION OF COMPATIBILITY IT AFFECTS LIVING CONDITIONS, IMPACTS PROPERTY. THE QUESTION IS. WE GOT IT.

OKAY, HOURS OF OPERATION PER USE FOR SPECIAL EXCEPTION.

>> AT THAT TIME, HOURS OR BE DISCUSSED AND YOU CAN INCORPORATE YOUR INPUT ABOUT THE HOURS.

>> IS THERE ANYONE ON THE BOARD AS OPPOSED TO PUBLIC ART?

>> I DON'T BELIEVE THAT TO BE THE CASE SO LET'S INCORPORATE PUBLIC ART.

THERE'S A MUTE BUTTON HERE BY THE WAY.

>> MARIA GOING TO INCLUDE TOTAL PERCENTAGE OF THE DEVELOPING COST.

HOW ARE WE GONNA DEFINE WHAT WERE ASKING FOR THE ARTS.

>> WILL HAVE OUR STAFF AND ATTORNEYS LOOK AT OTHER CITY AND FOLLOW SOME GUIDELINES.

>> THE DESIGN SHALL INCORPORATE PUBLIC ART AND WILL HAVE A DEFINITION AND IT IS OUT THERE WILL DO A LITTLE SHOPLIFTING.

>> I KNOW THERE'S A LOT OF COMMUNITIES DON'T EITHER DO ONE PERCENT OR TWO PERCENT FOR COST FOR PUBLIC ART.

>> WE WILL LOOK AT IT.

>> NEXT ITEM, I SHALL.

>> NEXT ITEM, TO LOOK AT THE ARTIFICIAL TURF ORDINANCE TO MAKE SURE IT CAN BE USED WHERE APPROPRIATE. THAT OCCURRED ORDINANCE DOES NOT PRECLUDE THAT.

WHICH I THINK IT PROBABLY DOES. THE QUESTION TO THE BOARD IS, IS THE BOARD IN FAVOR OF ENSURING THAT REGULATION ALLOW THE APPROPRIATE USE OF ARTIFICIAL TURF LIKE

[02:10:08]

>> IT'S NOT IN THIS ORDINANCE.

>> WE HAVE SPECIAL TURF ORDINANCE.

>> RAISE YOUR HAND IF YOU SUPPORT THE TURF ORDINANCE AND INCORPORATE THE USE OF ARTIFICIAL TURF.

>> THAT CARRIES. THE NEXT ITEM ON THE LIST, STREET PARKING.

MAYBE WE SHOULD SAVE THAT ONE AND GO ON.

>> YOU THINK THAT WILL HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF DISCUSSION?

>> THAT HAS A LOT OF DISCUSSION.

>> LET'S HAVE A DISCUSSION.

>> LET ME MAKE A SUGGESTION TO DISCUSS AND I UNDERSTAND AND AGREE WITH THE OBSERVATIONS OF THE PROMENADE AND ALL THE GOOD POINT THAT HAS HAS AWFUL LOT OF PARKING WITH PEDESTRIANS DARTING IN AND OUT AND IT'S CONFUSING. STREET PARKING IS SUPPOSED TO BE A TRAFFIC CALMING MEASURE THAT IS WHY IT IS INSTITUTED AND IT PROBABLY DOES SLOW TRAFFIC BUT IT DOES NOT DO IT FROM AN AESTHETIC POINT OF VIE .

I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE WORDING WOULD BE BUT I'M GOING DOWN THE PATH OF THINKING ALLOWING STREET PARKING NOT ONLY IN TRAFFIC CALMING BUT WHERE IT ENHANCES THE PEDESTRIAN, I DON'T KNOW.

>> THAT'S ACTUALLY VERY GOOD. WE SHOULD HAVE A FOCUS ON STREETSCAPE DESIGN.

WHICH THE PEDESTRIAN, THE PARKING WILL BE INCLUDED. AND ALL OF THAT YOU START HEARING THE THINGS WERE TALKING ABOUT, THE USABLE OPEN SPACE, PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY ENVIRONMENT, THE STREET GATE DESIGN, THE WHOLE DEVELOPMENT SHOULD BE DESIGNED AROUND ENHANCING AND YOU HAVE SOME IN HERE THE PEDESTRIAN ENVIRONMENT AND TO THE EXTENT THAT OFFSTREET PARKING CAN BE DONE VERY WELL IF THE COMMON AREAS ARE SUFFICIENT.

IF IT'S A WELL DESIGNED THING SO I THINK YOU'RE RIGHT ON WITH THE ENHANCEMENT OF THE PEDESTRIAN ENVIRONMENT. I THINK WE PROBABLY NEED STREETSCAPE'S IN THE MASTER PLAN AS WELL.

>> I'M GONNA THROW OUT THIS FOR DISCUSSION IS THE OPPOSITE OF THE PROMENADE THAT WERE REFERRING TO AND THAT IS I AM NOT APPLAUDING THIS BUT IT'S DIFFERENT, THE WESTIN TOWNCENTER, THE ON STREET PARKING THERE'S A LOT MORE OPEN SPACE, MORE LANDSCAPING AN OPEN AREA AND JUST COMPLETELY DIFFERENT FEEL THAN THE PROMENADE.

>> LET ME ASK THIS.

>> WE MAY NOT GET WE WANT. WE MAY BE DRIVING AWAY.

>> ON STREET PARKING THE ROADWAY WHICH IS WIDER TO ACCOMMODATE PARALLEL, HEAD AND PARKING, IF YOU HAVE MORE PAVEMENT THERE. WHAT IF WE WERE TO EXPLORE SOME STANDARDS THAT LIMITED, I KNOW THAT'S A LOOSE TERM, THE ON STREET PARKING AND DID A MORE NEW URBAN APPROACH TO HAVE THE PARKING BEHIND THE BUILDINGS? WHAT ABOUT THAT CONCEPT?

>> TRADITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD DESIGN.

>> I THINK THAT PARKING BEHIND THE BUILDINGS IS NOT ALWAYS A GREAT SUCCESS.

PEOPLE WANT TO SEE ACTIVITY IN FRONT OF THESE COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS.

THEY WANT TO BE ABLE TO PULL IN AND PARK AND WHEN YOU GO AROUND THE BACK AND MAKES IT DIFFICULT

[02:15:02]

WE HAVE NICE START SHOPPING CENTERS THROUGHOUT THE CITY AND THIS IS A GERMAN JUST FLEXIBILITY SO THEY CAN'T DO IT THEN WE HAVE ZONING DISTRICTS AND THEY WORK.

WE HAVE NICE SHOPPING CENTERS IN THE CITY. THERE'S NO REASON TO HAVE A NEW REZONING DISTRICT UNLESS THERE IS THIS PUBLIC BENEFIT. I DON'T WANT TO SEE THEM NOT SUCCEED JUST LIKE I DON'T WANT TO SEE THAT. HOWEVER WE HAVE REZONING, I THINK IT'S FUNNY HINDSIGHT IS 2020, WE HAD 100 ACRES OF COMMERCIAL LAND, 100 LAND USE PLAN THAT 15 YEARS AGO THE DEVELOPERS TOLD US YOU WILL NEVER USE IT, YOU'LL NEVER EXCEEDED SO THEY CUT IN HALF TO 50 AND THEY CUT IT TO 13 AND IN THE CREDIT TO ZERO AND NESTL? PARKLAND VILLAGE RIGHT NOW. IT WAS DESIGNED TO BE EXACTLY WHAT THAT SOME OF THE SOUND LIKE IT WAS GOING TO BE. AND THAT WAS TO THE BENEFIT I THINK OF THE EXISTING SHOPPING CENTERS THAT ARE IN THE CITY BECAUSE IT TOOK A BIG CHUNK OF COMMERCIAL OFF THE FUTURE COMPETITION. SO WE PUT THIS BACK IN SOMEONE HAS TO COME IN AND GIVE US STELLAR DEVELOPMENT AND MAKE IT A MODEL OF WHAT IT SHOULD BE. EVERYONE SHOULD LOOK AT THIS AND SAY LOOK, ENVIRONMENTALLY, SENSITIVE DESIGN. AS SEEN SOME STORMWATER TREATMENT AREAS THAT HAD LANDSCAPE DEVELOPMENT OR WHERE WE DOING IT.

IT WOULD CREATE THE PLACE THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT. IT WOULDN'T BE A LOUSY SHOPPING CENTER. WE HAVE TO LOOK AT IT FROM THE REASON FOR DOING THIS IS THE PUBLIC BENEFIT. AS OPPOSED TO, WE HAVE OTHER SHOPPING CENTERS, THEY COULD DEVELOP AND THEY ALLOW GREAT FLEXIBILITY EVEN THOUGH THE TOWNCENTER.

IT'S GOT PARKING IN THE BACK IN THE WATERWAYS THEY HAVE THE WATER FEATURE.

THERE'S FLEXIBILITY SO I THINK THAT UNLESS WERE GONNA GET TO THE DEVELOPMENT THIS CAN PROVIDE THAT GREAT ATMOSPHERE THAT I DON'T THINK WE DO IT. I THINK WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT THE PUBLIC BENEFIT IS THERE. WE DO THAT WITH THE DESIGN OBJECTIVES WE TALK ABOUT MAKING SURE WE GET THAT MASTER PLAN. SO THAT THE COMMISSION SEE THE BIG PICTURE AND BE ABLE TO ENFORCE THE BIG PICTURE AND THEN WILL BE ABLE TO PLUG-IN THINGS AND KNOW THAT WILL HAVE THE LIMITED ACCESS AND THE CONSISTENCY OF THE GUIDELINE THROUGHOUT. THAT'S WHAT SHOULD SAID THOSE PARAMETERS.

>> WHERE ARE WE WITH THE STREET PARKING? IS IT IN THE ORDINANCE OR WERE TALKING ABOUT REMOVING? LEX IT'S NOT IN THE ORDINANCE IT CAME UP BUT THERE WAS GREAT POINTS HAVE BEEN RAISED IN OSAKA TO ANTHONY HERE AND THERE ARE A LOT OF DESIGNED WE TALKED ABOUT CROSSWALKS, OFFSTREET PARKING, USABLE PROGRAMMABLE OPEN SPACE AND I LIKE THE PUBLIC BENEFIT AND I WOULD SUGGEST TO YOU TO ALLOW US TO RETOOL THIS ORDINANCE A LITTLE SOMEWHAT TO INCORPORATE THOSE ELEMENTS IN THESE DESIGN ELEMENTS WHETHER IT'S PARKING OR PLAZAS OR WHATEVER INTO THE PUBLIC BENEFIT AND TO DEFINE THAT LANGUAGE WHICH WILL COVER A LOT OF THESE ISSUES.

>> I LIKE THE PUBLIC BENEFIT CONCEPTS. THEY HAVE TO DEMONSTRATE THAT WHATEVER THEY'RE GOING TO BRING GIVES A SUBSTANTIAL PUBLIC BENEFIT AND THAT WE DEFINED THAT BY TELLING THEM THE THINGS THAT WERE LOOKING FOR THAT WE NEED TO DEMONSTRATE AND HOW WHAT THEY'VE DONE OTHER PLACES THAT GETS PUT INTO A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.

SO THAT YOU CAN ACTUALLY ENFORCE IT AND MAKE SURE THAT THEY GIVE ALL THOSE THINGS THAT THEY'RE SAYING LOOK HOW THIS IS GOING TO BE. GIVE SOME OF THE FLEXIBILITY THAT I'VE HEARD YOU ALL ASK FOR AND MAYBE THINGS LIKE 35 FOOT HEIGHT IS AND IS NOT MUCH OF A

[02:20:06]

>> I THINK THAT ACTUALLY COVERS I'M GONNA READ ON THE LIST I BELIEVE THE RETOOLING WITH THE PUBLIC BENEFIT ANGLE WOULD COVER WHICH IS GOING TO BE THE HEIGHT, BIG OPEN SPACE, WE TALKED ABOUT HOURS OF OPERATION AND THAT COULD GOING TO PUBLIC BENEFIT, TOO.

THE ARTIFICIAL TURF, WHAT'S WITH THE PUBLIC BENEFIT, THE PARKING, THE FLEXIBILITY THAT WE TALKED ABOUT THE CROSSWALKS. WE CAN READDRESS A GREATER LEVEL OF DETAIL WITH THE MASTER PLAN UNLESS THE BOARD IS OPPOSED TO THAT AND THEN ALSO WE TALKED ABOUT DESIGN OBJECTIVES AND ALL THE THINGS THAT NATHANIEL BROUGHT UP ABOUT BEING ENVIRONMENT WE PROUD, LOOKING FOR CERTIFICATION IN HARDCHARGING AND NON-VEHICULAR ACCESS AND DESIGN CRITERIA.

THAT REALLY COVERS A LOT OF IT. I THINK WE COVERED MANY OF THE MAJOR CONCERNS THAT WE HAD.

THERE WAS THE ISSUE THAT NEEDS TO BE DISCUSSED AND THAT DEALS WITH PUBLIC NOTICE.

THE ORDINANCE DOES NOT NOW CURRENTLY REQUIRE THAT SIGNAGE FOR PUBLIC HEARING FOR VACANT.

BUT WE DON'T HAVE A REQUIREMENT FOR THE COMMUNITY MEETINGS SO WE DON'T HAVE A SIGN POSTING REQUIREMENT BUT WE CAN CERTAINLY ADD THAT IN TO THE ORDINANCE SO THERE'S ALSO A LARGE SIGN. THERE'S A COMMUNITY MEETING PLAN OF THE NOTICE REQUIREMENT THERE SO PEOPLE MIGHT FALL OUTSIDE OF A NOTICE RADIUS WILL STILL SEE IT WHEN THEY DRIVE BY.

>> I'M NOT SUGGESTING WERE DONE DISCUSSING THIS THIS EVENING BUT I WANT TO ASK MICHELLE AND ANTHONY IF WERE GOING TO BE LOOKING TO TABLE IT OR HOW ARE WE GOING TO GET ANOTHER LOOK?

>> YOU'RE GONNA HAVE TO TAKE ANOTHER LOOK AT IT.

>> WHAT MECHANISM ARE WE GOING TO USE? YES, NATHANIEL.

>> I WOULD LIKE TO BRING UP TWO OTHER THINGS I HAD RAISED LOOKING AT SPECIAL SESSION CRITERIA JUST MAKE SURE WE HAVE LANGUAGE IN THEIR THAT WE HAVE THE ABILITY TO SAY NO AND ALSO WITH REGARDS TO THE ABILITY ? ? WE NEED THOSE ITEMS ALSO LOOK AT IN TANDEM.

>> WE CAN DEFINE THOSE BUT WE CAN'T, WERE LOOKING TO HAVE THIS ORDINANCE COME BACK TO US.

WE ARE NOT ACROSS THE LINE AND CHANGE OTHER ASPECTS OF THE CODE TODAY UNLESS THEY ARE BROUGHT FORTH WITH MODIFICATION.

>> IF I CAN THAT ALSO, THE CABAL ABILITY COMPATIBILITY I THINK IT'S EXTREMELY BROAD AND ALL-ENCOMPASSING. I DON'T SEE A NEED TO EXPAND UPON ANY FURTHER WITH REGARD TO THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION CRITERIA. I ALSO TOOK A LOOK I THINK IT WAS LAKE PARK REALLY THOSE CRITERIA ALTHOUGH STATED A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENTLY ARE THE SAME CRITERIA THAT WE HAVE THEY SAY THE SAME THING. WHAT THOSE CRITERIA DO NOT INCLUDE THAT WE DO INCLUDE IS THAT LAST ONE WHICH IS AND ANYTHING ELSE THAT THE COMMISSION HAS A CONCERN ABOUT SO I THINK THAT IS PRETTY ALL-ENCOMPASSING. I APPRECIATE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING ABOUT THE COMMISSION TASKED US WITH BRINGING THIS FORWARD AND RE-EXAMINING OTHER ASPECT OF THE CODE NOT RE-EXAMINING OTHER ASPECT OF THE CODE THAT INCLUDED IN THIS AT THIS JUNCTURE. THAT MAY BE A PROJECT FOR LATE .

>> PERHAPS WITHIN THIS WEEK AND FURTHER WITHOUT CHANGING THE DEFINITION IN THE ZONING CODE FURTHER EXPAND UPON WHAT WERE LOOKING FOR IN A DIFFERENT WAY.

>> IT COULD GO INTO THE DESIGN OBJECTIVES.

[02:25:02]

>> IS THERE ANY FURTHER COMMENTS? I WOULD ALSO ASK AND MICHELLE DON'T GET UPSET AT THIS BUT I WOULD ALSO ASK IF ANY OF OUR BOARD MEMBERS COME UP WITH ANY OTHER IDEAS OR INPUT IF THEY WANT TO COMMUNICATE BASED ON THIS ORDINANCE THAT MICHELLE OR ANTHONY DO SO AND TO DO SO INDIVIDUALLY, OBVIOUSLY.

>> WENT AS OUR NEXT MEETING? WHEN IS OUR NEXT MEETING.

>> IT SOUNDS LIKE WERE ALL PRETTY CLOSE IF THEY COULD SHOW PUBLIC BENEFIT WE WOULD ALL BE IN FAVOR OF CHANGING SLIGHTLY AS THESE COME FORWARD. IT DOESN'T SOUND LIKE ANYONE FOR THE MOST PART IS DISAGREEING ON ANY OF THE MAJOR ITEMS OTHER THAN WHETHER IT'S MAXIMUM OR MINIMUM OR THE NUMBERS. SO ADDING THE STATEMENT IN HERE IF THE APPLICANT CAN SHOW IT'S A PUBLIC BENEFIT THAT THIS BOARD, THAT'S ALMOST THE VARIANCE YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT MECHANISM, I DON'T SEE, YES, I WOULDN'T MIND IT COMING BACK TO US WE NEED IN A FORM.

>> THERE IS A TON MORE THAT'S GOING INTO IT. ALL THE THINGS WE TALKED ABOUT HOW THE DEMONSTRATE THAT PUBLIC BENEFIT.

>> ANTHONYS GOING TO DEFINE THE PUBLIC BENEFIT SO THAT IT HAS A DEFINITION ASSOCIATED WITH IT SO IT'S NOT VAGUE AND IT'S ALSO ENFORCEABLE OR WHATEVER THE AND REQUIREMENT ARE. SO IF A DENIAL COMES FORTH IT WON'T SET US UP.

>> THE PUBLIC BENEFIT IS GOOD BE DEFINED IN THE DESIGN OBJECTIVES.

AS OPPOSED TO HAVING A SPECIFIC DEFINITION. IT WILL BE IN THEIR.

OUR COMMISSION WILL SEE AND SAY THIS IS NOT EVEN CLOSE OR THIS IS GREAT.

>> IS THERE A MOTION?

>> SO THE THOUSAND FEET AND FOR THEM TO PUT UP A SIGN AND THEN I DID GET A COMMENT ON THE ON STREET PARKING. I DON'T MIND THE ON STREET PARKING IT TEACHES PEOPLE'S DO PUSE THE CROSSWALKS.

>> I THINK THAT'S A GOOD POINT THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS WERE GONNA PUT IN TO DEMONSTRATE THE PUBLIC BENEFIT OF ON STREET PARKING AND WHERE IT'S LOCATED. SO THAT WILL BE PART OF IT.

IT DOESN'T PRECLUDE IT IT DOESN'T SAY IT'S ALLOWED CARTE BLANCHE WE WANT TO SEE WITH THE BENEFIT IS.

>> MOTION FROM ANYBODY CONNECT? I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO DEFER THIS ORDINANCE ITEM.

ITEM 8B I MAKE A MOTION TO DEFER THIS TO THE NEXT BOARD MEETING.

>> I THINK WERE NOT CAN HAV THE.

>> I HAVE A PAID TRIP TO SANTA FE, NEW MEXICO.

>> WE CAN GO TWO MONTHS OUT JUST AS LONG AS IT'S SPECIFIC MEETING DATE.

>> IT CAN BE THE FOURTH THURSDAY BECAUSE IT SAYS THAT YOU CAN MEET THE SECOND AND FOURTH THURSDAY.

>> WHAT'S THE DATE?

>> THE 23RD.

>> WE CAN COME TO SANTA FE.

>> IF THE BOARD CAN COMMIT TO WORK IN A DIFFERENT THURSDAY BUT THE BE ALLOWED?

>> CAN WE DO IT THIS MONTH ON THE 22ND?

[02:30:01]

>> THAT WON'T WORK.

>> 23RD, I CAN'T.

>> WHAT ABOUT THE FIRST MEETING IN OCTOBER?

>> THE CONCERN I'M HAVING IS THAT THE COMMISSION IS REALLY PUSHING FOR THIS TO GO.

>> LET'S INCORPORATE IN THE MEETING IF WE CAN AGREE.

>> SO YOU WOULD NOT HAVE ME. CAITLIN WOULD BE HERE, ANTHONY WILL BE HERE IN A SUBSEQUENT CLOSE SO KEEPING THAT IN MIND TELL ME WHAT YOU FOLKS WANT.

>> LET'S KEEP IT AT THE NEXT MEETING DATE.

>> SEPTEMBER 9. SOUNDS LIKE SHE'S CONFIDENT CAITLIN CAN HANDLE IT.

>> MOTION IS TO FINISH THAT WE INCORPORATE INTO FOR THE MEETING INCORPORATE THE COMMENTS FROM THIS MEETING THAT WE DISCUSSED AND DEFER THE MEETING TO SEPTEMBER NINTH AT 6 PM AND AGAIN THAT MY MOTION.

>> SECOND.

>> CALL FOR THE VOTE. ANTHONY SECOND. CALL FOR THE VOTE, PLEASE.

>> YES.

>> YES >> YES

>> YES >> YES

>> ALL ENCOURAGE ANYONE ON THE BOARD WITH ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS TO GET THEM IMMEDIATELY TO MICHELLE SO SHE CAN INCORPORATE THEM. MICHELLE, YOU ARE UP AGAIN FOR ANY COMMENTS YOU MAY HAVE FOR US.

>> NO, THIS IS THE HOTTEST THING WE HAVE GOING RIGHT NOW.

>> IT'S HOT. THAT'S BECAUSE WE HAVE NO AIR CONDITIONING.

>> ANY COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD?

[10. Comments from the Board]

>> TO IT VERY QUICK ITEMS. I DON'T THINK IT WAS MENTIONED OR NOTICED AFTER THE CELL TOWER FROM THE WATER DISTRICT WENT UP THE PALM TREE THING, I THINK IT LOOKS GREAT.

I THOUGHT IT CAME OUT REALLY GOOD. I KNOW WE HAD A LOT OF DISCUSSION ON THAT. THE SECOND THING, I NOTICED THE MEETING MINUTES HAVE BEEN MUCH IMPROVED. SO I WANTED TO RECOGNIZE THAT. THANK YOU.

>> I WILL HAVE A COMMENT AND THAT IS THAT I DID NOT OPEN THE LAST ITEM TO THE PUBLIC BUT THERE WAS NO PUBLIC PRESENT. JUST FOR THE RECORD. AND IS THERE A MOTION TO ADJOURN.

>> MOTION TO ADJOURN.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.