Sep 09, 2021 Planning and Zoning

[1. Call to Order]

[00:00:08]

>> GOOD EVENING, EVERYBODY. WE'RE GOING TO COMMENCE THE PARKLAND, FLORIDA PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING.

AT THIS TIME, I'M GOING TO DIAL IN NATHANIEL.

>> HELLO. >> HEY NATHANIEL, YOU'RE ONNER FOR OUR MEETING. WE'RE GOING TO CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER AND THEN RISE FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.

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

JUSTICE FOR ALL. >> WELCOME, EVERYONE.

ROLL CALL, PLEASE.

[4. Approval of Minutes]

>> THANK YOU. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM PRIOR MEETINGS, IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES? THEY WERE ALL PROVIDED IN OUR PACT.

>> YEAH, MOTION TO APPROVE. >> SECONDED BY?

>> MOTIONED BY JOEL, SECONDED BY TODD.

CALL FOR THE VOTE. >> ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

>> AYE. >> THANK YOU, MOTION FOR THE MINUTES CARRIES AND PASSES. AT THIS TIME, FIRST I WANT TO WELCOME NATHANIEL. WE'RE ALL GLAD THAT YOU'RE DOING WELL. I WANTED TO JUST THROW THAT OUT THERE AND ALSO WELCOME TO OUR COMMISSIONER.

[5. Comments from the Public on Non-Agenda Items]

IF THERE'S ANYBODY FROM THE PUBLIC THAT WISHES TO SPEAK ON AN ITEM NOT ON THE AGENDA THIS EVENING, RAISE YOUR HAND.

SEEING NONE, I'M CLOSING THE -- OH, I APOLOGIZE, THERE'S ONE.

PLEASE COME UP TO THE DIAS AND STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AND YOU WILL HAVE 3 MINUTES TO ADDRESS OUR BOARD ON A NONAGENDA ITEM. YES, SIR.

THANK YOU. >> SIR, I NEED YOU TO STATE YOUR NAME AND SPELL YOUR LAST NAME FOR THE RECORD.

>> [INAUDIBLE] >> DID YOU GET THAT?

>> I NEED YOUR ADDRESS AS WELL. 6761 NORTHWEST 117 AVENUE, PARKLAND. THANK YOU.

I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION BASICALLY ON THE REZONING OF GOLF COURSE, WHICH I UNDERSTAND HAS NOT BEEN DONE YET AND I WANT TO EXPRESS MY OPINION, BASICALLY, TO THE FACT THAT I THINK ANY REZONING IN THAT RANGE, IN THAT AREA WOULD BE TOTALLY DETRIMENTAL TO THE IMAGE THAT PARKLAND HAS.

PARKLAND SHOULD BE AS NAMED, PARKLAND, INSTEAD OF A MAY JUROR SHOPPING CENTER OF WHICH WE HAVE SEVERAL WITHIN THE RANGE OF WHERE THIS IS EXPECTED TO BE BUILT.

I KNOW THERE'S CURRENTLY NO ZONING TO ALLOW THAT AND THIS IS THE COMMISSION THAT WOULD ALLOW THAT TO TAKE PLACE AND I STRONGLY URGE THE COMMISSION TO NOT REZONE THAT AREA BUT TO KEEP IT AS A PARK, THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTION.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. JUST FOR THE RECORD, WE ARE THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD VERSUS THE COMMISSION, WHICH IS THE ELECTED OFFICIALS. THE ADVISORY BOARD BUT FEEL FREE TO ADDRESS ADDRESS THE COMMISSION ON YOUR --

>> I INTEND TO DO THAT. >> JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE

YOU'RE AWARE. >> BUT THE ZONING IS IN YOUR

HANDS, ISN'T IT? >> YES, THANK YOU.

>> SO THAT'S MY PRIME CONCERN. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. ANYBODY ELSE FROM THE PUBLIC WHO WISHES TO SPEAK AT THIS TIME? SEEING NONE, I WILL CLOSE IT TO

[00:05:04]

THANK YOU. >> PETER LECHOSKI.

11294 NORTHWEST 72ND PLACE. I WOULD LIKE TO SUPPORT WHAT THIS GENTLEMAN MENTIONED. I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE REASON WHY WE HAVE TO CHANGE THE ZONING TO ACCOMMODATE A DEVELOPER AND WHAT IS THE NEED FOR MORE SHOPPING TO INCREASE THE TRAFFIC? I'M ASSUMING ALL OF YOU GENTLEMEN LIVE IN PARKLAND SO I'M ASSUMING YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH THE TRAFFIC WE FACE RIGHT NOW.

THE PUBLIC, THE SCHOOLS, IF YOU DRIVE IN THE MORNING, IT TAKES 15 MINUTES TO GET FROM PARKLAND RESERVE TO HURON BAY MARRIOTT.

THAT'S NOT GOING TO MAKE IT ANY BETTER FOR THE RESIDENTS.

I WAS REVIEWING A BOARD MEETING FROM A FEW DAYS AGO AND IT SOUNDED LIKE WE'RE MORE CONCERNED ABOUT THE DEVELOPER'S NEEDS THAN THE RESIDENTIAL NEEDS.

I DON'T KNOW IF THERE ARE ANY RESIDENTS WHO WOULD ASK FOR MORE NIGHT LIFE NEEDED AT PARKLAND, CHANGING THE HOURS OF OPERATION BEYOND 11:00 TO ACCOMMODATE FOR STRA RESTAURANTS AND MOST OF US HERE SUPPORT RESIDENTIAL LIFE.

WE DO WANT TO GO AND HAVE MORE FUN.

WE CAN GO TO SOUTH BEACH OR FORT LAUDERDALE.

I AM CONCERNED ABOUT GIVING FLEXIBILITY TO THE BUILDERS AND THE QUALITY OF LIFE. FOR ALL OF US AS WELL AS OUR CHILDREN, SO I STRONGLY RECOMMEND, I STRONGLY ASK THAT WE DON'T CHANGE THE EXISTING ZONING LAWS TO ACCOMMODATE DEVELOPERS. WE KEEP WITHIN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS' NEEDS. I'M NOT SURE IF YOU REVIEW IN THE FEEDBACK THAT COMES FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD, BOTH PARKLAND RESERVES AS WELL AS HURON BAY NEIGHBORHOODS.

I'M SURPRISED WE DON'T ADVERTISE AND ENCOURAGE THOSE MEMBERS TO COME TO THE MEETING SO THEY CAN VOICE THEIR OPINIONS, HOWEVER, IF YOU LOOK AT THE GROUPS, THE SOCIAL MEDIA GROUPS THAT ARE THERE, I DON'T SEE A LOT OF SUPPORT FOR A PROJECT OF THAT MAGNITUDE IN PARKLAND. WE DO HAVE AREAS THAT ARE ZONED FOR THAT TYPE OF CONSTRUCTION AROUND PARKLAND.

I'M NOT CLEAR WHY WE HAVE TO CHANGE OUR CURRENT ZONING TO ACCOMMODATE A DEVELOPER WHO IS INTERESTED NOT IN OUR RESIDENTIAL GOOD WILL AND KEEPING WITH OUR PARKLAND

TRADITIONS. >> THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS, APPRECIATE IT VERY MUCH. THANK YOU.

>> PETER? I JUST WANT TO VERIFY, YOU LIVE

ON 72ND STREET? >> YES.

>> ANYBODY ELSE FROM THE PUBLIC WANT TO SPEAK ON A NONAGENDA ITEM AT THIS TIME? YES, SIR, COME UP TO THE DAIS, THE PODIUM AND STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.

THANK YOU. >> GOOD EVENING, I'M NELSON REINHARD. I LIVE AT 11509 NORTHWEST 72ND PLACE IN BAY COVE. MY CONCERN WITH THE PROJECT AS IT GOES IS FOR THE SECURITY OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.

I LIVE IN AN AREA WHERE IT'S ACCESSIBLE FOR SOMEBODY TO WALK IN, THE CANAL DOESN'T JUST CONTINUE TO GO.

LOOK I LOOK AT PROPOSALS ONLINE, I SEE WALK WAYS THAT ARE OPEN TO THE GOLF COURSE AND THAT'S REALLY CONCERNING TO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. I DON'T SEE ANY BARRIER THAT'S GOING TO KEEP A NEW PUBLIC THAT'S COMING IN TO HAVE FUN FROM OUR NEIGHBORHOODS. SO I WOULD REQUEST THE PLANNING AND ZONING TO LOOK CAREFULLY AT WHAT IMPACT THIS COULD ADD TO

[00:10:06]

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE FROM THE PUBLIC? YES, SIR? I WANT TO REMIND EVERYBODY THAT THIS IS OPEN FOR A NONAGENDA ITEM. WE DO, AT THIS TIME, DO NOT HAVE SCHEDULED ANY HEARINGS ON ANY DEVELOPMENTS ANYWHERE IN THE CITY OF PARKLAND WITH RESPECT TO THE COMMENTS THAT ARE BEING MADE. YOU CAN CONTINUE TO MAKE THEM BUT I WANTED TO PUT THAT ON THE RECORD.

>> ALL RIGHT, I'LL BE QUICK. >> YOU DON'T HAVE TO BE QUICK.

I'M JUST SHARING WITH YOU A FACTUAL STANDPOINT.

THIS IS BASED ON NONAGENDA ITEMS AND NOT ONLY IS IT NOT AN AGENDA ITEM TONIGHT, WE DON'T HAVE A SCHEDULED MEETING ON ANY

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT. >> THAT'S CORRECT, CHAIR,

NOTHING HAS BEEN SCHEDULED. >> ALL RIGHT, I WILL JUST VOICE

MY OPINION. >> NEIL BASS, 11664 NORTHWEST 69TH PLACE. I'M IN OLD BROOK AND LOOKING AT THESE PLANS, I'M JUST STANNED. I'M ACTUALLY FLOORED BY THE FACT BY THENNED. I'M ACTUALLY FLOORED BY THE FACT BY THE FACT TNED. I'M ACTUALLY FLOORED BY THE FACT BY THE FACT TNED. I'M ACTUALLY FLOORED BY THE FACT BY THE FACT TSNNED. I'M ACTUALLY FLOORED BY THE FACT BY THE FACT TTNNED. I'M ACTUALLY FLOORED BY THE FACT BY THE FACT TUNNED. I'M ACTUALLY FLOORED BY THE FACT BY THE FACT THAT WE HAVE CON THIS FAR. I DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW IT'S POSSIBLE THAT WE BUILD A MONSTROSITY OF A COURSE.

THIS IS A DISASTER AND I THINK THIS IS GOING TO DESTRAIGHT PARKLAND AND IT'S AN EMBARRASSMENT WEAND IT'S AN EMB HPARKLAND AND IT'S AN EMBARRASSMENT WE HAVE COME THIS FAR. THAT'S MY OPINION.

IT'S UNFORTUNATE WE HAVE COME THIS FAR.

IT'S NO QUESTION A VAST MAJORITY OF PEOPLE IN PARKLAND WILL BE AGAINST SUCH PROJECT. I WILL SPEAK FOR MYSELF BUT I'M FLOORED. I'M NOT HAPPY.

>> THANK YOU, SIR, ANYBODY ELSE? LOOKING TO MAKE SURE I DON'T MISS ANY HANDS LIKE I DID BEFORE.

SEEING NONE. COMMENTS FROM THE PUBLIC IS NOW CLOSED. I DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER COMMENTS OTHER THAN THE ONES I MADE PREVIOUSLY.

SENSE WE ONLY HAVE ONE AGENDA ITEM, THERE ARE NO OTHER CHANGES

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

CONSIDERATION OF AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF PARKLAND, FLORIDA AMENDING ARTICLE 10 OF APPENDIX B OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCES, LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, BY CREATING DIVISION 42 BUSINESS RECREATION ZONING DISTRICT TO PROVIDE FOR THE CREATION OF THE BUSINESS RECREATION ZONING DISTRICT, PROVIDING FOR DISTRICT REGULATIONS AND CONDITIONS, PROVIDING FOR SPECIAL EXCEPTION CONSIDERATION OF CERTAIN ADDITIONAL COMMERCIAL AND COMMERCIAL RECREATION USES SUBJECT TO LIMITATIONS, PROVIDING FOR CONFLICTS, SEVERABILITY, CODIFICATION AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

ORDINANCE 2021-009. >> GOOD EVENING, CAITLIN FOR THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, I THINK FOR THE GOOD OF THE PUBLIC HERE, I GE U.S. WANT TO CLARIFY A COUPLE OF POINTS ON THE HERON JUST WANF POINTS ON THE HERON BAY. CURRENTLY IT HAS R3 LAND USE AND IT HAS A1 ZONING AND THE BRD IS AN ADDITIONAL ZONING DISTRICT THAT COULD POTENTIALLY ACCOMMODATE COMMERCIAL RECREATION USES. THAT SAID, THERE'S NOTHING TO PRECLUDE THE FUTURE DEVELOPER OR APPLICANT TO COME IN FOR A PLANNED USE AMENDMENT. THEY COULD SEEK A COMMERCIAL LAND USE LAND AMENDMENT AND SEEK SUBSEQUENT REZONING FOR ANY ONE OF THE EXISTING REZONING DISTRICT.

THEY JUST WOULDN'T HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY, SOME OF THAT FLEXIBILITY FOR SOME OF THAT COMMERCIAL AND COMMERCIAL

RECREATION USES. >> THANK YOU.

CAN YOU ALSO EXPOUND IF IT'S TRUE AND ACCURATE THAT WHAT WE'RE SEEING THIS EVENING IS NOT DESIGNATED FOR MY PARTICULAR LOCATION IN OUR CITY? IS THAT ACCURATE?

>> CORRECT. THERE ARE SIZE LIMITATIONS FOR THIS DISTRICT BEING THE MINIMUM OF 20 ACRES SO THAT'S THE LIMITING CRITERIA AND THERE'S ADDITIONAL CRITERIA THROUGHOUT SOME OF THE LANGUAGE THERE, BUT AT THE MINIMUM, PAR SILL SIZE IS 28 CL SIZE IS 2EL SIZE IS

28 ACRES. >> THANK YOU.

[00:15:01]

>> WE'LL MOVE TO THE TOPIC AT HAND.

OF COURSE MICHELLE WAS HERE AT THE LAST MEETING SHECHLT DID A GREAT JOB PRESENTING THE BRB, THE BUSINESSDID A GREAT JOB PRESENTING THE. DID A GREAT JOB PRESENTING THE BRD, THE BUS DID A GREAT JOB PRESENTING THE BRD, THESDID A GREAT JOB PRESEN BRD, THEHDID A GREAT JOB PRESENE BRD, THEEDID A GREAT JOB PRESEN THE BRD, THE B DID A GREAT JOB THE BRD, THE BUSINESS RECREATION DISTRICT.

I KNOW THERE ARE DIFFERING OPINIONS ON THE OVERALL CONCEPT BUT WE WERE TASKED WITH CREATING SOME LANGUAGE TO BRING FORWARD FOR CONSIDERATION BY COMMISSION SO WITH THAT SAID, WE'LL WALK THROUGH SOME OF THE CHANGES THAT WERE PROPOSED AS PART OF THE LAST MEETING AND OPEN IT UP FOR DISCUSSION AND QUESTION AND PAN THIS. SO IT SOUNDED LIKE THERE'S DISCUSSION ABOUT THE DEERFIELD PDD DISTRICT IS SOMETHING THAT WAS CONSIDERED A SIMILAR DISTRICT TO LOOK AT IN TERMS OF REFERENCE MATERIALS SO WE DID THAT AND IT LOOKS LIKE WE ARE SUBSTANTIALLY FURTHER ALONG IN DEVELOPING SOME OTHER CRITERIA THERE. WE HAVE A LOT MORE LANGUAGE IN THE BRD AND MANY OTHER DISTRICTS SO I THINK WE'RE MAKING GOOD PROGRESS THERE. WE WENT AHEAD AND ADDED ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE TO ADDRESS THE PUBLIC PURPOSE AND THE REQUIREMENTS FOR INNOVATIVE DESIGN.

WE REVIEWED SOME OTHER CITIES' REQUIREMENTS FOR THE MASTER PLAN CRITERIA, LARGELY THE EXISTING LANGUAGE THAT WE HAVE IN THERE PULLED FROM THE MASTER PLAN CRITERIA FOR THE PCD, WHICH IS, OF COURSE, AN EXISTING DISTRICT THAT WE HAVE AND WE ADDED ADDITIONAL LANGUAGE TO THAT, BUT FELT THAT THE MASTER PLAN CRITERIA SUBMISSION REQUIREMENTS AT LEAST WERE ALREADY VERY STRONG AND PRETTY ALL ENCOMPASSING THERE AND DON'T WANT TO GO TOO FAR THAT WE'RE DEVELOPING A SITE PLAN, IT NEEDS TO BE DISSTINT AND SEPARATE. WE DID MAKE SOME TWEAKS TO THE MASTER PLAN, THAT BEING SAID. WE NOTED THE POSTING REQUIREMENTS FOR THE COMMUNITY MEETING.

THE COMMUNITY MEETING WAS REQUIRED AT THE TIME OF REZONING AND, AGAIN, AT THE TIME OF SITE PLAN APPROVAL AND THAT'S SOMETHING NEW FOR THE CITY OF PARKLAND THAT I THINK EVERYONE IS REALLY ON BOARD WITH TO GET SOME OF THAT COMMUNITY INPUT AND FEEDBACK AHEAD OF SCHEDULING A PUBLIC HEARING.

SO THERE WILL BE REQUIREMENTS CONSISTENT WITH THE NOTICING REQUIREMENTS FOR A VACANT PARCEL SO THAT SHOULD LOOK FAMILIAR TO PEOPLE WHO HAVE SEEN THOSE SIGNS BEFORE.

I KNOW THERE WAS A DISCUSSION ON SITE AND OPEN SPACE, BASED ON MICHELLE'S NOTES, IT LOOKED LIKE THE FINAL CON SEN CUSS WAS TO BUILD IN FLEXIBILITYSENSUS WAS D IN FLEXIBILITY LIKE THE PCD IS STRUCTURED TO DETERMINE WHAT IS APPROPRIATE FOR THOSE STANDARDS ON A CERTAIN LOT WE DID PROHIBIT PUBLIC ONLY STREET PARKING EXCEPT WHEN A PUBLIC NEED IS DEMONSTRATED.

I KNOW THERE'S DISCUSSION ABOUT THE DESIGN CONSIDERATIONS AND IMPACTS ON ON-STREET PARKING AND UNTIL THERE'S A PUBLIC PURPOSE DEMONSTRATES, WE DID PROHIBIT THAT ON-STREET PARKING.

WE MODIFIED THE LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS IN CONJUNCTION AND PARTNERSHIP WITH OUR LANDSCAPE AND ARBORIST CONSULTANTS.

THAT ADDRESSES ARTIFICIAL CURVE AND COMMERCIAL DISTRICT AND NOTING THAT IT WOULD BE TO BE DETERMINED AT THE TIME OF APPROVAL FOR THOSE ALTERNATIVE PROPOSED USES.

KIND OF A HIGH LEVEL SUMMARY OF THE CHANGES YOU SEE IN THE STRIKE THROUGH AND UNDER LINE THERE.

IF WE WANT TO HAVE SOME DISCUSSION, Q&A ABOUT THAT, WE ALL REVIEWED THE LANGUAGE SO WE'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY

QUESTIONS FOR YOU. >> OKAY, I THINK WE'RE GOING TO START WITH DAVID FOR QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, INQUIRIES.

>> OKAY. >> I THINK WE BEGIN WITH THE GENERAL STATEMENT. I KNOW THAT THE PLANNING STAFF WAS TASKED TO DRAFT SOME LANGUAGE BY THE COMMISSION.

THEY PUT TOGETHER AN ORDINANCE THAT WE WORKED ON EXTENSIVELY AT OUR LAST MEETING. IN OUR LAST MEETING, I HAD SOME CONCERNS ABOUT THE BROAD LANGUAGE THAT WE HAVE IN HERE AND, QUITE FRANKLY, I THINK IT GOT MORE BROAD.

I HAVE TREMENDOUS CONCERNS THAT THIS WOULD BE AN OPEN ENDED INVITATION FOR A DEVELOPER TO PRESENT WHATEVER THEY WOULD WANT TO THE CITY AND THE CITY WOULD BE HARD PRESSED TO PROVIDE ANY

[00:20:04]

THE ORDINANCE TALKS ABOUT A DESIGN OBJECTIVE THAT IT SHOULD BE A DESTINATION FOR THE COMMUNITY AND AREA RESIDENTS.

I SAID IT AT THE LAST MEETING AND I WILL SAY IT AGAIN.

I'M OPPOSED TO THAT, I THINK IT'S NOT REMOTELY COMPATIBLE WITH NOT ONLY THE CITY, WITH THE CITY'S ENTIRE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, BUT WITH THE ORIGINAL HERON BAY DEVELOPMENT ORDER.

WE WERE PROMISED A GOLF COURSE COMMUNITY IN EXCHANGE FOR FLEXIBILITY TO BUILD THIS RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY, WHICH WAS BUILD, AND NOW 30 YEARS LATER WE'RE SAYING, WELL, THE GOLF COURSE DOESN'T REALLY NEED TO BE A GOLF COURSE AND ONLY THROUGH A SERIES OF MACHINATIONS ARE WE TRYING TO FIND WAYS TO PRESERVE WHAT WAS PROMISED TO BE KEPT IN PERPETUITY AS A GOLF COURSE.

SO MY CONCERN IS THAT NOT JUST WITH THE HERON BAY DEVELOPMENT OR ANY PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OF HERON BAY, BUT WITH WHAT MIGHT BE THEN IN SOME OF OUR OTHER AREAS IN THE CITY THAT ARE NOT YET ZONED OR MAY NOT YET BE IN THE CITY, I DON'T KNOW WHERE SOME OF THE THINGS OF THE SCALE THAT I HAVE SEEN PROPOSED THE NSID WOULD EVER FIT IN THE CITY. THIS IS MY OPINION.

I THINK IT IS OPPOSITE AND IN CONFLICT AND CERTAINLY AT A MINIMUM INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE GOALS, OBJECTIVES, AND POLICIES OF OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. WITH THAT, I WOULD LIKE TO GO THROUGH BECAUSE, LIKE I SAID, IF I'M NOT THE DECIDING FACTOR, I WOULD LIKE TO GO THROUGH EACH OF THE CRITERIA, AND I WILL GIVE SOME COMMENTS WHERE I THINK MY CONCERNS LIE.

I THINK ADOPTING THIS ORDINANCE IN ANY FORM OF FASHION AT THE MOMENT, CERTAINLY IN THE CONDITION THAT IT'S IN, WOULD BE A MISTAKE FOR THE CITY AND IT WOULD PUT US IN A BAD POSITION COMPARED TO WHERE WE WOULD BE OTHERWISE [INAUDIBLE] MAYBE THERE'S ONE WE SHOULD LOOK AT BUT I HAVEN'T SEEN IT AND WE'RE TRYING TO CRAFT AN ORDINANCE FOR SUCH A DEVELOPMENT AND I THINK IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO DO. SO WITH THAT, I WILL JUST START AT THE FIRST. UNDER THE DISTRICT DEFINITIONS, UNDER COMMERCIAL USES, WE HAVE A BRIEF DEFINITION AND LAND AREAS PREDOMINANTLY CONNECTED TO THE SALE AND RENTAL AND DISTRIBUTION OF PRODUCTS. I CAN'T FOR THE LIFE OF ME IMAGINE WHAT RENTAL ACTIVITY WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD GIVE FLEXIBILITY TO A DEVELOPER TO CHANGE OUR PARAMETERS.

I THINK OUR DEFINITION OF COMMERCIAL USE MAY NEED TO CHANGE IN OUR CODE AND/OR FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS DISTRICT.

IT SEEMS TO ME TO BE CONTRARY TO THE REST OF THE ORDINANCE.

THE REST OF THE ORDINANCE WOULD SPEAK TO AND IN MY MIND AN IDYLLIC SMALL SCALE NEIGHBORHOOD SHOPPING SENTER THAT HAD SOME ENVIRONMENTAL, SOME SIGNIFICANT ENVIRONMENTAL OPEN SPACE AND DEVELOPMENT TECHNIQUES AROUND SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT SALE, RENTAL AND DISBUGS OF PRODUCTS, THAT DOESN'TTRIBUTION OF PRODUCTS,

[00:25:01]

>> TO CLARIFY, AS YOU WERE STATING, THAT IS THE EXISTING DEFINITION THAT'S WITHIN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE SO YOU WOULD HAVE TWO OPTIONS THERE, YOU COULD CHANGE THE TERM COMMERCIAL USES FOR THE ENTIRE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE OR FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS DISTRICT WHICH MAY HAVE IMPACTS ON THOSE USES SINCE WE DEFAULT TO B1 AND B2 USES AND THE FLEXIBILITY OF THOSE UNNAMED USES AS THE ALTERNATIVE PLANNED USES BUT YOU ARE CORRECT, THAT'S THE EXISTING DEFINITION SO WE WOULD HAVE TO LOOK AT THE IMPACT OF THAT ACROSS THE WHOLE CODE.

>> I WOULD BE LOOKING AT A NARROWER DEFINITION AND MAYBE IN SOME OF MY OTHER COMMENTS, WE COULD PICK IT UP IF THEY GET MOVED. I THOUGH WE ELIMINATED AND MOVED INTO ANOTHER SECTION LANGUAGE THAT TALKED ABOUT BENEFITS, BUT WHAT WE HAVE LEFT IS THE LAST STATEMENT, WHICH IS THE BRD IS INTENDED TO ALLOW FOR CONSIDERATION OF THE ADDITIONAL USES BEYOND THOSE PERMITTED BY RIGHT IN THE B1 AND B2 DISTRICTS SUBJECT TO THE LIMITATION AND CONSTRAINTS HEREIN, AND I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ADEQUATE RESTRICTIONS AND CONSTRAINTS WRITTEN INTO THIS ORDINANCE AND I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ADEQUATE CONSTRAINTS WRITTEN INTO OUR CODE.

WE TALKED ABOUT BEEFING UP THE CRITERIA AND I WOULD BE STRONGLY IN FAVOR OF THAT, BUT TO HAVE A DISTRICT THAT IS INTENDED TO ALLOW FOR ADDITIONAL USES BEYOND THE B1 AND B2 IS VERY SCARY LANGUAGE TO ME. THAT'S A VERY BROAD STATEMENT AND I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ADEQUATE SAFEGUARDS OR PROTECTIONS IN OUR CODE TO SAFEGUARD THAT FOR THE CITY TO SAY NO, SO I WOULD REEVALUATE THE PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT.

I THINK WE NEED TO REALLY HAVE VERY DETAILED DESIGN OBJECTIVES, PUBLIC BENEFIT GOALS, AND SAFEGUARDS SO THAT BEFORE ANYBODY WOULD EVER GET TO THE FLEXIBILITY OFFERED BY SUCH AN ORDINANCE, THAT WE WOULD BE SURE THAT THE DEAL IS A GOOD DEAL FOR THE CITY, WAY OVERABOVE WHAT COULD BE ACHIEVED WITH B1 AND B2. THEN GO DOWN TO DESIGN OBJECTIVES AND I KNOW WE SPENT A LOT OF TIME TALKING ABOUT ENVIRONMENTAL OBJECTIVES, STREETSCAPES, LIMITATIONS AND DIFFERENT TYPES OF DESIGN CRITERIA AND WE JUST -- THEY'RE JUST NOT IN HERE. I WOULD STRONGLY RECOMMEND WE REMOVE THE GOAL OF BEING A DESTINATION FOR THE AREA.

ANY ONE OF THOSE PROPOSALS, ANY ONE OF THEM WOULD SAY, WELL, WE'RE GOING TO BE A DESTINATION. ANYTHING THAT'S GOING TO BE DESIGNED TO ATTRACT FROM OUTSIDE THE CITY MEETS THAT DESIGN OBJECTIVE AND WE DON'T HAVE ANY SAFEGUARDS TO TELL THEM NO.

THE FIRST THING, NO, I'M A DESTINATION, SO WE HAVE A VERY DIFFICULT -- WE'RE TOO LIMITED IN OUR DESIGN OBJECTIVES AND WE SPENT A LOT OF TIME TALKING ABOUT THE DIFFERENT TYPES OF DESIGN OBJECTIVES AT THE LAST MEETING AND THEY DIDN'T MAKE IT IN HERE. I KNOW THEY WANTED TO MOVE THIS THROUGH FAST SO IT'S NOT A COMMENT ABOUT OUR PLANNERS, IT'S JUST WE'RE TRYING TO CRAFT AN INTRICATE ORDINANCE WITH A STOPWATCH AND THINGS ARE GETTING LEFTOUT AND THIS COULD HAVE DEVASTATING CONSEQUENCES IF IT DOESN'T GET DONE RIGHT.

TO QUOTE NATHANIEL, WE'VE GOT 1 SHOT TO N SHOT TO E SHOT TO D THINK WE HAVE IT. WHEN I GO TO 104240, WE'RE BACK AT THIS COMMISSION CAN APPROVE JUST OTHER COMMERCIAL AND COMMERCIAL RECREATION USES AS ALTERNATIVE PROPOSED USES AND WE DON'T HAVE ANY LIMITATIONS ON WHAT THOSE ARE OR ANY SAFEGUARDS OTHER THAN A REFERENCE TO LATER SECTIONS WHICH TALKS ABOUT MEETING THE DESIGN OBJECTIVES, WHICH I THINK ARE TOO LIMITED.

SO I DON'T THINK ANY USE THAT MIGHT BE PROPOSED THAT WE WOULD HAVE ADEQUATE PROTECTIONS AND SAFEGUARDS IN OUR CODE TO SAFELY

[00:30:08]

WE ALSO TALK ABOUT THE APPLY CAT SHOULD DEMONSTRATE THAT THE PROPERTY HAS UNIQUE PROPERTY CONSIDERATIONS BUT WE DON'T DEFINE THE UNIQUE PROPERTY CONSIDERATIONS OR DEFINE WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR. AS I LOOK AROUND, THE REMAINING AREA IS THE SAME AS WHAT PARKLAND WAS, FARMLAND THAT WAS LAND USE ANDRY REZONED. REZONE. HERON BAY, THAT WAS PROMISED TO BE A GOLF COURSE FOREVER BUT I DON'T THINK THAT WOULD BE THE UNIQUE CONSIDERATION IS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT SO WE SHOULD DEFINE WHAT THE UNIQUE PROPERTY CONSIDERATIONS ARE. STAYING IN THE SAME SECTION, WHEN WE GET DOWN TO THE MASTER PLAN, NUMBER TWO TALKS ABOUT A GENERAL SCHEMATIC PRESENTATION OF THE PLAN. I DON'T WANT TO SEE GENERAL LOCATIONS. MY VIEW OF ANY MASTER PLAN FOR SOMETHING LIKE THIS, WHETHER IT BE A HARD AND FAST DETAILED DET MASTER PLAN WITH ALL THE BENEFITS AND DETAILS CEMENTED WITH DEED RESTRICTIONS, DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS SO THAT WE WOULD BE ASSURED THAT EVERYTHING THAT WAS PROMISED WOULD BE DEVELOPED.

SO WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE GENERAL REPRESENTATION, FOR ME I DON'T WANT TO SEE A BUBBLE DIAGRAM THAT SAYS MAYBE WE'LL DO THIS AND MAYBE WE'LL DO THAT. I WANT TO SEE THE BUFFERERS, THE HIERARCHY, THE ACCESS, THE CHARACTER OF ALL BUFFERS AND STREET FURNITURE, THE STREETSCAPES I WANT TO SEE EVERYTHING. I WANT TO SEE THE DESIGN CRITERIA THAT WOULD ENSURE THE REST OF THE DEVELOPMENT WOULD BE COHESIVE AND CAMPUS LIKE SO IT WOULD FIT INTO WHAT THE MASTER PLAN WOULD BE AND THAT'S KIND OF A REOCCURRING THEME IN THE MASTER PLAN. I WANT TO SEE THE DETAILS.

I DON'T THINK THE MASTER PLAN SHOULD BE GENERAL.

I WANT TO SEE THE IRON CLANKED LAYOUT OF WHAT THE PROPOSED MASTER PLAN WOULD BE. ALSO IN THE MASTER PLAN, WE SHOULD HAVE A DESCRIPTION OF ALL THE ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFITS, THE APPLICATION OF ALL THE PUBLIC OPEN SPACE THAT WE TALKED ABOUT AND ALL THE BENEFITS. THEY SHOULD ALL BE IN THE MASTER PLAN SO THAT EVERYTHING CAN CONSTANTLY BE REFERRED BACK TO THE MASTER PLAN, DOES THIS COMPLY? I THINK THERE SHOULD BE ARCHITECTURAL GUIDELINES OR AT LEAST SOME RULES FOR CONSISTENCY AND COMPATIBILITY INTO THE MASTER PLAN. WHEN WE GET TO NUMBER SEVEN, WE TALK ABOUT THE GENERAL LOCATION AND SIZE OF THE FACILITIES AND OPEN SPACE, THAT SHOULDN'T BE GENERAL.

I THINK THAT SHOULD BE SPECIFIC. WHERE'S IT GOING TO BE? HOW BIG IS IT GOING TO BE? SO WE CAN HOLD A PROSPECTIVE

[00:35:04]

SAME THING GOES FOR NUMBER 10 WITH THE DEPICTION OF THE STREETSCAPE PLAN. WE SHOULD SEE IT.

THE ONLY WAY TO ENSURE THE COMPATIBILITY AND SKINLIGHT PSI THROUGHOUT ACONSISTENCY THROUGHOUT A DEVELOPMENT LIKE THIS IS TO SEE WHAT IT'S LIKE UP FRONT, TO HAVE ONE AGENCY BEING RESPONSIBLE FOR PUTTING THAT IN PLACE AND THEY CAN DO THE SEPARATE DEVELOPMENTS AFTERWARDS BUT THEY WOULD HAVE -- EVERYTHING WOULD BE SET IN STONE, FOR LACK OF A BETTER TEN.

SO FOR NUMBER TEN, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE DETAILS.

ALSO IN THE PLASTER PLAN, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE TIME FRAME, A SPECIFIC TIME FRAME FOR COMPLETION OF ALL OF THE PUBLIC AND COMMUNITY FACILITIES, OPEN SPACES, ROADS, ANYTHING THAT IS DEEMED TO BE PART OF THE PUBLIC BENEFIT OVER AND ABOVE WHAT CAN BE ACHIEVED WITHIN THE NORMAL B1 OR B2.

I THINK THAT SHOULD ALL BE ON A TIMETABLE IN THE ORIGINAL MASTER PLAN DEVELOPMENT ORDER SO IT CAN BE -- WE CAN BE ASSURE THAT HAD ANYTHING THAT WOULD HAPPEN WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH ANY PROMISES THAT WERE MADE TO THE CITY. JUST AS A HOUSEKEEPING THING IN D, 2C TALKS ABOUT THE INTENT OF A REQUIRED WORKSHOP, WHICH I THINK SHOULD BE THE COMMUNITY MEETING TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE LANGUAGE OF THE SECTION. WHEN IT COMES TO NUMBER THREE IN THAT SAME SECTION WHEN IT TALKS ABOUT THE SIGNAGE, IT COULD BE THAT THERE WOULD BE A PORTION OF THE PROPERTY THAT WOULD BE REQUESTING BE REZONED. THE BIG 600 ACRES THAT HE HENDRICKS, IN THE MIDDLE OF IT. IN THIS CASE, POSTING THINGS ON THE BOUNDARIES OF THE PROPOSED SITE WOULDN'T BE ANY GOOD FOR ANYONE SO WE NEED TO HAVE BOUNDARIES FOR ANY LAND OWNED BY THE OWNER SO IF THEY'RE DOING ONLY A SMALL PIECE, SOMEONE WOULD KNOW A PORTION OF THIS BIG CHUNK OF LAND IS BEING REZONED SO THAT PEOPLE WILL ALWAYS BE ABLE TO SEE THAT THERE'S A HEARING COMING ON AND WE CAN HAVE MORE PEOPLE PARTICIPATING EVEN LIKE WE DO TONIGHT. WHEN WE GET TO 104270, WE NEED TO DO A BETTER JOB CLARIFYING THE MASTER PLAN AND THE INDIVIDUAL BUILDINGS THAT MAY COME.

I GUESS IN MY VIEW, THE MASTER PLAN WOULD SET ASIDE AREAS THAT WOULD BE SPECIFICALLY DENOTED THAT WHILE WE DON'T KNOW THE ARCHITECTURE OF THOSE BUILDINGS AND WE DON'T KNEE THE PARKING LOT LAYOUTS OF THE BUILDING BUT THEY WOULD COME BACK FOR A SITE PLAN AFTER THE MASTER PLANWOULD AFTER THE MASTTHEY WOULD COME B PLAN AFTER THE MASTER PLAN ADD BEEN APPROVED, WE SHOULD CLARIFY THAT BECAUSE IT DIDN'T READ THAT WAY.

I THINK THAT'S THE INTENT, THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE A MASTER PLAN AND WHEN AN INDIVIDUAL BUILDING COMES THROUGH, THEY GO BACK AND DO A SITE PLAN. DURING THE PRE-APP MEETING IN 10A, THE LAST THING ON THE 10A REQUIREMENTS IS JUST LISTED AS TRAFFIC GENERATION RATES. HERE'S REALLY WHERE I THINK WE'RE GOING TO NEED TO SPECIFY WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE, MEANING A TRAFFIC STATEMENT FROM A TRAFFIC ENGINEER DEMONSTRATING THE PROJECTED TRAFFIC AS OPPOSED TO JUST THE TRAFFIC GENERATION RATES. SOMEONE WILL COME IN AND SAY, WELL, HERE'S WHAT THAT MUCH COMMERCIAL GENERATES.

[00:40:02]

I THINK DURING THAT PRE-APP MEETING THEY SHOULD BE SHOWING HOW WE SHOULD ADD ANOTHER CRITERIA TO THAT SHOWING HOW THE PROPOSED INDIVIDUAL SITE PLAN COMPLIED AND FURTHERED THE OBJECTIVES OF THE OVERALL MASTER PLAN.

IN C, UNDER THAT SAME SECTION, WE TALK ABOUT MILESTONES AND TIME LINES. I THINK WE SHOULD BEEF THAT UP AND ALSO INCORPORATE IT INTO THE -- LIKE I SAID BEFORE, INTO THE MASTER PLAN SO WE KNOW EXACTLY WHEN EVERYTHING IS GOING TO BE BUILT BOTH AT THE MASTER PLAN SECTION AND AT THE SITE PLAN SECTION SO THERE'S NO -- IN THE EVENT THAT YOU HAVE SOMEONE BUILDING A BUILDING, THEY HAVE TO SHOW THAT THEY'RE CONSISTENT.

IN 104280. WE TALK ABOUT APPROVAL OF REZONING IS CONDITIONED UPON UNITY OF TITLE.

I THINK WE NEED TO BEEF THAT UP TO SAY THAT ALSO HAS TO BE APPROPRIATE DEED RESTRICTIONS OR OTHER RESTRICTIONS OF RECORD THAT CEMENT THE OBLIGATION OF THE DEVELOPERS TO COMPLY AND MAYBE CEMENT THE ENFORCEMENT. MAYBE THERE ARE FINES FOR NONCOMPLIANCE, WHATEVER. THE ENFORCEABLE PART ON THE CITY, WE WON'T HAVE TO RUN AROUND TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT IS OR ISN'T REQUIRED AND IF WE'RE REQUIRING A UNITY OF TIGHTING, I THINK WE SHOULD BE REQUIRING OBLIGATIONS INI THINK OBLIGATIING, I THINK WE SHOULD REQUIRING OTING, I THINK WE SHO REQUIRING OALING, I THINK WE SH REQUIRING OLNG, I THINK WE SHOU REQUIRING OENG, I THINK WE SHOU REQUIRING OBLIGATIONS IN SOME FORMAT. IN 104280-B.

LIKE I SAID LAST TIME, I THINK 20 ACRES IS TOO SMALL.

I DON'T THINK YOU CAN ACHIEVE THE TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT THAT WE WOULD WANT TO SEE THAT WOULD REALLY GIVE YOU MANAGE BETTER THAN A B1 OR B2 IN 20 ACRES. I THINK THAT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE A BIG COMMITMENT OF LAND AND RESOURCES IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE SOME OF THESE VERY SPECIAL THINGS THAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR.

20 ACRES JUST SEEMS LIKE ANOTHER SHOPPING CENTER.

UNDER THE MINIMUM SET BACKS ON C1, WE TALK ABOUT SET BACK OF 25-FEET ABUTTING ALL PUBLIC, I THINK IT SHOULD BE OR PRIVATE ROAD RIGHTS OF WAY. WE ALSO DISCUSS IN 3 IN THAT SAME SECTION THAT ALTERNATIVE PROPOSED USES WILL BE SUBJECT TO A MINIMUM SET BACK OF 100-FEET TO ANY RESIDENTIALLY ZONED PROPERTY AND THAT WOULD BE THE CLOSEST INDOOR AND OUT DOOR EXCEPT WE DON'T KNOW REMOTELY WHAT THE ALTERNATIVE PROPOSED USES ARE RIGHT NOW. WE WOULD NEVER KNOW THAT UNTIL SOMEONE HAD PROPOSED THEM. PUTTING ONLY -- AND I SAY ONLY A 100-FOOT SET BACK IN, IT MAY BE THAT SOMEBODY PROPOSED USE THAT WE DIDN'T THINK SHOULD BE WITHIN 500-FEET OF RESIDENTIALLY OWNED PROPERTY. I WOULD WANT TO EXPAND THAT A MINIMUM OF 100-FEET OR LARGER AS DETERMINED BY THE CITY COMMISSION WHEN THEY KNOW WHAT IF ANY ALTERNATIVE USES ARE PROPOSED AND/OR IF THEY APPROVE ANY ALTERNATIVE USES.

AT THE LAST MEETING, WE TALKED A LOT ABOUT FUNCTIONAL AND PR PROGRAMMABLE OPEN SPACE SO WE WOULDN'T GET SANDBAGGED BY SOMEONE SAYING WELL, WE GAVE YOU OPEN SPACE AND THEN IT BECAME GREEN SPACE THAT WASN'T USABLE. WE TALKED ABOUT PUBLIC SQUARES, ENVIRO ENVIRONMENTAL PRESERVED TYPE AREAS WHERE PEOPLE COULD BENEFIT FROM THEM.

IN THIS SECTION, WE ADDED LANGUAGE WHICH I THINK JUST

[00:45:05]

AND THEN WE CHANGED IT IN FAVOR OF JUSTIFICATION FOR PROPOSED RELEVANT SITE DATA. I CAN'T GET BEHIND THAT FOR IT, THAT'S HOW WE HAVE FLOODING IN OTHER COMMUNITIES.

I WOULDN'T REDUCE ANY OF OUR DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS FOR THAT. I THINK THIS IS WAY TOO BROAD AND WE DON'T HAVE ADEQUATE SAFEGUARDS IN OUR PLAN.

WHEN IT COMES TO THE REMOVAL OF SECTIONS E, F, AND G, I THINK THEY SHOULD STAY IN AND MAYBE BE INCREASED.

WHEN WE GET DOWN TO E AND TALK ABOUT ON-STREET PARKING, WE DIDN'T TALK ABOUT PROHIBITING ON-STREET PARKING OUTRIGHT.

WE TALKED ABOUT IT BEING INCORPORATED SAFELY AND DONE WELL IF IT'S TREATED RIGHT AND IF IT HAS A GOOD STREET SCAPE BUT THAT LANGUAGE DIDN'T MAKE IT IN, RATHER WE JUST AGAINLY SAID WHEN A SUBSTANTIVE PUBLIC PURPOSE IS DEMONSTRATED BUT WE DON'T HAVE ANY EXAMPLE OF WHAT THAT SUBSTANTIVE PUBLIC PURPOSE IS. DESIGNED TO PROTECT PEDESTRIANS, NOTHING LIKE THAT, JUST THAT IT NEEDS TO HAVE A SUBSTANTIAL PUBLIC PURPOSE. THAT'S A VERY VAGUE THING AND WE WOULD BE IN A POSITION TRYING TO FIND REASONS TO SAY WE DON'T HAVE STANDARDS AND THEN YOU JUST SAY NO.

WHEN WE GET DOWN TO COMMERCIAL CHARACTER, I THINK THIS IS FROM OUR EXISTING CODE, WE TALK ABOUT USE OF PLAZAS.

WE TALK ABOUT CREATING A SPECIAL DEVELOPMENT PARAMETER, SPECIAL TYPES OF THINGS THAT WE WOULD HAVE AND I DON'T SEE THAT IN HERE. ALSO IN THAT SECTION, THAT'S WHERE WE WOULD BE TALKING ABOUT THE PROGRAMMABLE OPEN SPACE.

TO RECAP, AS YOU HEAR MY COMMENTS, I THINK THAT AS WRITTEN, THE ORDINANCE REALLY DOES MORE TO OPEN US UP TO PROBLEMS THAN IT DOES TO ACHIEVE A SUPERIOR PLANNING AND PUBLIC BENEFIT TYPE DEVELOPMENT. I THINK IT REALLY OPENS US UP TO MAJOR INCOMPATIBILITY AND PUTS US IN A DISADVANTAGED POSITION FOR DEVELOPERS THAT WOULD COME IN BECAUSE I DON'T THINK THAT WE'VE DEFINED THE PARAMETERS THAT WE NEED, THE OBJECTIVES THAT WE NEED AND I DON'T THINK WE HAVE THE SAFEGUARDS TO SAY NO TO SEEMINGLY ANYTHING THAT ANYBODY WOULD WANT TO PROPOSE.

I KNOW I SAID A LOT BUT I'M OPPOSED TO THE ORDINANCE AS IT'S WRITTEN AND IN AN UNRELATED STATEMENT, I'M OPPOSED TO EVERY ONE OF THE OPTIONS THAT I SAW AND I SHARE THE CONCERNS OVER

[00:50:08]

BEAUTIFUL COMMUNITY, A MODEL OF TRADITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD PLANNING AND AREAS AND IT WAS GRIDLOCKED.

WE'RE ALREADY CHOKING ON TRAFFIC AT PEAK HOURS.

ONE OF THE PROPOSALS SAID THE ROADS COULD BE DESIGNED REALLY WELL BUT IF CONGESTED, THEY COULD BE AN ENOUGH INFLUENCE AND THE ROADS COULD FUNCTION AT D, E, AND F AND THAT'S UNACCEPTABLE TO ME. I THINK THE SCALE OF SOME OF WHAT I HAVE SEEN IS NOT REMOTELY CONDUCIVE TO OUR CITY.

I THINK THIS ORDINANCE DOES MORE TO ALLOW THAT TYPE OF THING AND WE WOULD BE BETTER OFF WITH NOT ADOPTING IT.

THOSE ARE MY COMMENTS. >> I HAVE A QUESTION FOR ANTHONY. WITH RESPECT TO OUR CONVERSATION AND DISCUSSION ON THE ORDINANCE, I'M NOT IN A POSITION, ALTHOUGH I CAN DIRECT A POSITION OR A THOUGHT, ARE WE GOING TO OPEN OUR INTERNAL CONVERSATION AND DISCUSSION WITH RESPECT TO COMPARISONS AND THINGS THAT ARE NOT SITE SPECIFIC? HERON BAY, FO EXAMPLE, THE PROMENADE AND COCONUT CREEK.

I'M JUST ASKING SO WE CAN HAVE A PARAMETER.

OTHERWISE, EACH ONE OF US, ME INCLUDED, WILL TALK ABOUT ALL THE DIFFERENT DEVELOPMENTS WE HAVE SEEN LOCALLY AND IN OUR

TRAVELS. >> YEAH, SO ANTHONY, CITY ATTORNEY, I THINK IT'S OKAY TO SPEAK TO EXAMPLES BUT IN CONSIDERING THIS ORDINANCE, I WOULDN'T FOCUS ON A SPECIFIC SITE BECAUSE THIS IS CREATING POTENTIALLY A DISTRICT, IF APPROVED, THAT COULD BE AVAILABLE FOR MULTIPLE SITES IN THE CITY SO LONG AS THEY MEET THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS SO THAT WOULD BE MY DIRECTION. IN GIVING YOUR RECOMMENDATIONS, YOU SHOULD FOCUS ON THE ZONING DISTRICT AS A WHOLE AND NOT FOCUS ON ONE SITE SPECIFIC LOCATION BUT IT'S CERTAINLY OKAY TO TALK ABOUT COMPARABLE SHOPPING CENTERS AND OTHER PLACES AS EXAMPLES AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE.

DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? >> IT DOES, THANK YOU.

TODD, YOU ARE NEXT, SIR. >> THANK YOU.

DAVID. THAT WAS VERY THOROUGH, THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.

I AM NOT GOING TO GO LINE BY LINE.

SINCE OUR LAST MEETING, AND, AGAIN, I KNOW WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT HERON BAY BUT I SAW THE PROPOSALS, I LIVE IN HERON BAY AND SO DO ANY FRIENDS. IT MADE ME THINK OF SOMETHING CALLED THE ABLING PARADOX. IT'S DEFINED AS GROUP OF PEOPLE DECIDE ON A COURSE OF ACTION [INAUDIBLE] IN THE GROUP.

IT INVOLVES A COMMON BREAKDOWN OF GROUP COMMUNICATION IN WHICH EACH MEMBER MISTAKENLY BELIEVE THAT IS THEIR OWN PREFERENCES ARE COUNTER TO THE GROUPS AND DOES NOT RAISE OBJECTIONS, A DESIRE TO NOT ROCK THE BOAT. SO I'M NOT SURE IF I'M ROCKING THE BOAT OR NOT, I DON'T KNOW WHOSE NEEDS WE'RE ADDRESSING OR NOT ADDRESSING BUT I HAVE TO TELL YOU I'M DIZZY.

I FEEL LIKE IT'S GROUP HUG REDO AND IT'S REAL HARD NOT TO THINK OF SOMETHING WHEN IT'S OUT IN YOUR FACE, SO THAT'S WHERE MY MIND IS RIGHT NOW AND I APOLOGIZE IF IT BOTHERS ANYBODY WHERE MY MIND IS. SO WHEN I WAS THINKING ABOUT THIS, IT MADE ME THINK, AND DAVID MENTIONED THIS, WHAT IS THE TIME LINE? IS THERE A RUSH? LET'S GO BACK TO WHERE WE GOT OUR ORIGINAL MARCHING ORDERS AND WHAT ARE THOSE MARCHING ORDERS? TO CREATE AN ORDINANCE FOR THE

[00:55:04]

ARE WE ANY BETTER IF THIS IS PUT THROUGH?

>> WELL, YOUR QUESTION CALLS FOR A POLICY DECISION SO I WILL ADDRESS IT IN TERMS OF WHAT I THINK THE ORDINANCE DOES AND THE DIRECTION UNDERSTOOD THE COMMISSION GAVE, WHICH WAS TO PREPARE AN ORDINANCE, TO ALLOW FOR CONSIDERATION, TO CREATE A DISTRICT THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR CONSIDERATION FOR ADDITIONAL COMMERCIAL AND COMMERCIAL RECREATION USES THAT ARE NOT CURRENTLY PERMITTED IN YOUR COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS.

YOU HAVE CURRENT COMMERCIAL DISTRICTS AND SOMEBODY HAD A PROPERTY WITHOUT AN EXISTING COMMERCIAL ZONING COULD SUBMIT AN APPLICATION FOR REZONING. THE CAN DIFFERENCE WITH THIS DISTRICT IS THE ABILITY FOR THE CONSIDERATION OF ADDITIONAL COMMERCIAL AND COMMERCIAL RECREATIONAL USES THAT ARE NOT CURRENTLY ALLOWED IN B1 AND B2. AN EXAMPLE OF THAT COULD BE SOME OF OUR RECENT DISCUSSIONS LIKE A GROUP AND I'M NOT GOING TO GET INTO THE DESIGN OBJECTIVES. I'M NOT THE DESIGNER.

MY WIFE IS THE DESIGNER IN THE FAMILY.

I WENT TO LAW SCHOOL SO YOU DON'T WANT TO HEAR FRE ME ON THAT BUT THIS IS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION AND WOULD BE SUBJECT TO OUR EXISTING SPECIAL EXCEPTION CRITERIA AS WELL AS THE REGULATIONS INEXISTING SPEC CRITERIA AS WELL AS THE REGULATO OUR EXISTING SPECIAL EXCEPTION CRITERIA AS WELL AS THE REGULATIONS IN THERE IN ORDER TO GET SUCH THINGSES A ACCESS, TRAFFIC GENERATION, ROAD AND INTERSECTION CAPACITY, AVAILABILITY AND IMPACTS ON UTILITIES, COMMUNITY FACILITIES, PHREN STRINFRASTRUCTURE, SO ALT THOSE ARE NOT SPECIFICALLY STATED IN HERE, IT REFERENCE THAT IS THAT WOULD BE SPECIAL EXCEPTION. I KNOW THAT'S NOT A DIRECT ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION BECAUSE I THINK IT CALLS FOR A POLICY DECISION AND I'M THE LAWYER AND NOT THE BEST TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION. I DON'T KNOW IF CAITLIN HAS ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS BUT JUST GENERALLY, THAT'S THE ORDINANCE

BEFORE YOU. >> THANK YOU.

JUST A COUPLE MORE COMMENTS AND I'M NOT GOING TO WASTE ANYMORE TIME FOR THE REST OF THE BOARD TO SPEAK BECAUSE I KNOW A SEVERAL MEMBERS OF THE BOARD ARE MORE PLANNED IN THE LAW AND WHATNOT. GOING BACK TO HAVING RESTAURANTS AND EVERYTHING, I LIKE TO IDEA OF WORK, LIVE, PLAY.

I WOULD LOVE TO BE ABLE TO WORK WITHIN THE CITY I LIVE IF AND GO OUT AND HAVE DINNER OR ENTERTAINMENT AND I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT TOP GOLF OR RACING CAR THING, BUT I THINK THERE'S A LACK OF QUALITY RESTAURANTS WITHIN THE CITY OF PARKLAND AND THE CLOSEBY CORAL SPRINGS. I'M NOT ANTIDEVELOPMENT AND I DON'T THINK ANY OF US SHOULD BE AND IT'S IMMINENT THAT THERE ARE GOING TO BE 20 PLUS ACRE SITES ALL OVER PARKLAND BECAUSE WE KNOW THAT'S THE IDEA TO THINK ABOUT.

THE ONLY OTHER THING IS I WILL LISTEN TO MY FELLOW BOARD MEMBERS. THE ONE THINGLY SPECIFIC SAY ABOUT NOTICING, AND I BELIEVE DAVID TOUCHED ON THIS, TOO.

I DON'T CARE WHERE YOU'RE BUILDING IN TODAY'S CITY.

IN TODAY'S WORLD OF TECHNOLOGY AND SOCIAL MEDIA, I DON'T KNOW WHY YOU WOULDN'T NOTICE EVERY SINGLE RESIDENT BECAUSE IT AFFECTS EVERY TAXPAYER. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S TABOO, OUTSIDE OF THAT, I WILL PASS IT ON.

>> THANK YOU. ANTHONY?

>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. I THINK WE'RE RUSHING THIS ORDINANCE. THE LAST MEETING I SPEAK TO IN A

[01:00:03]

IF WE WERE TO HAVE THIS DISTRICT AND SOMEONE WANTS TO DEVELOP, THIS IS WHAT YOU HAVE TO FOLLOW. THIS RIGHT HERE IS SCARY.

IT'S VAGUE. WE WERE TASKED HERE BY THE CITY COMMISSION TO DEVELOP THE FRAMEWORK ABSENT AN APPLICATION OR LOCATION, WE WERE TASKED WITH PUTTING TOGETHER A FRAMEWORK AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO WORK ON.

THIS FRAMEWORK IS THIN, SHABBY. I MADE A REQUEST THAT CERTAIN THINGS BE INCLUDED IN IT AND THEY WERE IGNORED.

THERE WAS NO PUBLIC ART MENTIONED IN THE DOCUMENT.

TEXTURED CROSSWALKS WERE NOT MENTIONED.

BUFFERS ARE JUST WORDS THAT ARE VAGUE.

WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT HERON BAY BUT IF I LIVED IN HERON BAY, I WOULD BE SCARED AS HELL ABOUT THIS.

I WILL BE VOTING NO ON THIS. I AGREE WITH MR. OFSTEIN ON MANY OF THE THINGS HE MENTIONED. I WILL NOT BE GOING OVER THEM AGAIN BUT I WILL NOT BE SUPPORTING THIS ORDINANCE THIS

EVENING. >> THANK YOU, ANTHONY.

NATHANIEL? YOU ARE RECOGNIZE, SIR.

>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. I WOULD LIKE TO ECHO THE COMMENTS MADE BY MR. OFSTEIN AS WELL AS MR. AVELLO AND THEIR CONCERNS. I REMEMBER AT THE LAST MEETING, I THINK EVERYBODY, OR SEVERAL PEOPLE COMMENTED THAT WE HAVE ONE CHANCE TO DO THIS RIGHT AND IF WE DON'T DO IT RIGHT, WE WILL BE REGRETTING IT FOR THE REMAINDER OF THE TIME THAT WE AND OTHER PEOPLE SERVE. I, FOR ONE, DO THINK THERE SHOULD BE A BRD. [INAUDIBLE] MOVED TO ANOTHER SECTION. I THINK THE BRD HAS TO HAVE A UNIQUE BENEFIT, A UNIQUE DESIGN THAT WOULD NOT OTHERWISE FIT WITHIN B1 AND B2. IF WE'RE GOING TO ALLOW SOMEONE TO HAVE FLEXIBILITY IT NEEDS TO BE SOMETHING SPECIAL.PI'M NOT G MR. OFSTEIN MENTIONED, MOST OF WHICH I AGREE WITH WHOLEHEARTEDLY AND TONY JUST MENTIONED AS WELL SO I'M GOING TO SKIRT THE SPECIFICS IN THE ORDINANCES BECAUSE AT SOME POINT WE'RE GOING TO GET AN ORDINANCE AND THERE ARE THINGS I WANT TO SEE WHICH I MENTIONED IN THE LAST COMMENT.

IN 10-4210, THE PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT, I THINK WE NEEDM.

IN 10-4210, THE PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT, I TE.

I 10-4210, THE PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT, I TE.

IN 10-4210, THE PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT, I TTI.

IN 10-4210, THE PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT, I TN.

IN 10-4210, THE PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT, I TG.

IN 10-4210, THE PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT, I THINK WE NEED TO HAVE THAT IN THERE. WE NEED TO HAVE IN THIS PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT REFERENCE ABOUT UNIQUE DESIGN AND A COUPLE OF BENEFIT THAT IS WOULD NOT BE PERMITTED.

THE REASON FOR THAT IS BECAUSE THE LAST SENTENCE IN THE PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT ENDS WITH AND PROVIDED [INAUDIBLE] THE BRD DISTRICT. IF WE WERE TO GO WITH THIS AS CURRENTLY WRITTEN, ALL IT SAYS IS THE PRIMARY PURPOSE -- [INAUDIBLE] INVITING DEVELOPMENT.

THERE'S NO RECORD NOW IN THE PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT THAT IT HAS TO HAVE UNIQUE PROPERTIES AND CONSIDERATION, UNIQUE DESIGN, AND SPECIAL PUBLIC BENEFITS.

THAT'S NO LONGER PART OF THE PURPOSE.

IT'S A MUCH MORE LIMITED PURPOSE.

THE OTHER QUESTION HERE, WELL, I'LL GET TO IT WHEN WE GET INTO THE DOCUMENT. THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION USES THE

[01:05:02]

I'M CONCERNED THAT BECAUSE IT'S A LANGUAGE THAT WE WILL BE SETTING OUR COMMISSION UP TO NOT BE ABLE TO SAY NO.

THEY JUST VIEW THE PROPOSAL AS NOT HAVING PROPERTY CONSIDERATIONS, NOT HAVING A SPECIAL BENEFIT.

AS CLOSE TO CARTE BLANCHE, AND I KNOW YOU CAN'T, BUT AS CLOSE AS YOU LEGALLY CAN TO SAY NO. I THINK THAT THE SPECIAL SECTION CRITERIA SHOULD BE BEEFED UP AS PART OF THE CREATION OF A BRB.

10-4250, I GUESS THE QUESTION THAT I HAVE FOR ANTHONY IS WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THINGS LIKE INNOVATIVE DESIGN WITH DEVELOPMENT IN ZONING REGULATION, DEMONSTRATING THAT A PROPERTY HAS UNIQUE PROPERTY CONSIDERATIONS USING THE LANGUAGE OF BENEFITS NOT OTHERWISE ACHIEVED.

THOSE WERE IN IN O IN R IS IN A THEMSELVES -- [INAUDIBLE].

THE QUESTION I HAVE IS IS THERE ANY OTHER LANGUAGE THAT CAN BE USED OR TIGHTENED UP SO THAT IT IS TO THE COMMISSION ULTIMATELY TO DETERMINE WHAT ARE UNIQUE PROPERTY CONSIDERATIONS? WHAT ARE SUBSTANTIVE BENEFITS NOT OTHERWISE ACHIEVED -- [INAUDIBLE] THAT'S THE COMMENTS I HAVE AND I HOPE YOU CAN TALK ABOUT THAT A LITTLE FURTHER AT SOME POINT THIS EVENING.

IN THE MASTER PLAN REQUIRED, I AM NOT ONE FOR MICROMANAGING ANY ORDINANCE AND I COMMENTED ON THIS LAST MEETING AND PREVIOUS MEETINGS ON SIMILAR TYPES OF ISSUES.

IF WE WANT THINGS LIKE PUBLIC ART, IF WE WANT THINGS LIKE ALTERNATIVE FUEL STATIONS, IT NEEDS TO BE REFERENCED OR IT WILL BE DIFFICULT FOR SOMEONE TO SAY WELL, THERE'S NO PUBLIC ART HERE. I DON'T THINK I SAW ANYTHING IN TERMS OF PROGRAMMABLE, USABLE PUBLIC OPEN SPACE IN THAT SECTION. THAT'S IN 10-4250C.

MOVING ONTO D, I THINK IT WAS TODD ROGERS WHO COMMENTS ON THIS AS I MENTIONED AT THE LAST MEETING [INAUDIBLE] IN TERMS OF TRUE NOTICE AND HOSTING ON THE PROPERTY, I THINK THAT ANY REQUEST FOR A PRD REZONING SHOULD BE COMMUNICATED TO AS MANY IF NOT ALL THE RESIDENTS OF THE CITY BECAUSE IN TERMS OF THE REZONING OF ANY PROPERTY IN THIS SIZE, THE BRD WOULD IMPACT

[01:10:07]

COMMENTS. >> THANK YOU, NATHANIEL.

I'M GOING TO RECOGNIZE ALEX AT THIS TIME.

>> THANK YOU, CHAIR. CAITLIN, THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR YOU AND THE PLANNING GROUP FOR PUTTING THIS TOGETHER.

I THINK A LOT OF THE COMMENTS BEING MADE TONIGHT IS KIND OF BACKTRACKING FROM WHERE WE WENT FROM LAST TIME, THE LAST MEETING. I FELT AT THE LAST MEETING WE ASKED THE PLANNING TEAM TO MAKE IT MORE OPEN AND NOT SO RESTRICTIVE BECAUSE WE WERE DEBATING OBJECT HEIGHTS AND SETBACKS AND THESE DETAILS THAT WE DIDN'T KNOW WHAT WAS COMING IN. SO WE HAD ASKED, I THOUGHT WE ASKED THEM TO GO BACK AND WRITE SOMETHING THAT WOULD ALLOW IT TO BE MORE OPEN TO SUBMIT A MASTER PLAN, TO REALLY UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY'RE LOOKING FOR AND THEN WE WOULD BE BRINGING IT TO COMMISSION, SO I REALLY APPRECIATED WHAT HAPPENED IN THAT SECTION 10-4280 WHERE WE STRUCK THROUGH THE OLD E, F, AND G AND THEY ADDED IN THAT SECTION D THERE.

IT STILL REFERENCES THE CITY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, IT STILL GAVE THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD THE FIRING POUR NEEDED AND THE TEETH NEEDED TO ENSHORE THE CITY COMMISSION WAS PROTECTED BY GOING THROUGHPROTECTED BY GOING GRCITY COMMISSION WAS PROTECTEDY GOING THROUPROTECTED BY GOING T GROUP, CITY STAFF.

THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT WE AGREED TO.

I APPRECIATED WHAT THEY DID THERE, REMOVING THAT, I THOUGHT IT GAVE US TEETH TO PROTECTION US AND OUR DECISIONS IN THE FUTURE. GETTING TO A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAILS, THE DESTINATION, BACK TO THE BEGINNING DESIGN OBJECTIVES. Y, THIS IS SUPPOSED TO BE A DESTINATION. I LIKE HOW THOSE FIRST FIVE CATEGORIES ARE WRITTEN AND THE PURPOSE OF THE DISTRICT, WE CAN ADD THAT BACK IN THERE BUT I FEEL LIKE WE WERE PROTECTED THE WAY IT'S BEING PRESENTED TO US TONIGHT.

I ALSO LIKED HOW WHAT WAS WRITTEN IN 104250 ABOUT THE INNOVATED DESIGN AND I THINK THAT GIVES US, AGAIN, MORE TEETH TO REALLY ANALYZE WHAT IS PRESENTED TO US AT THAT TIME.

WHAT IS COMING? I KNOW WE HAVE SEEN SOME STUFF IN THE PAPER, BUT THAT COULD BE A PIE IN THE SKY.

WE COULD BE TALKING ABOUT SOMETHING COMPLETELY DIFFERENT IN 5 YEARS FROM NOW, SO I REALLY THINK THAT GIVES US SOME TEETH IN THE FUTURE BECAUSE WE HAVE NO IDEA WHERE THESE 20 ACRES WILL BE AND WHAT THEY WILL LOOK LIKE. WHEN YOU GET TO THAT SECTION C, I HEARD COMMENTS EARLIER ABOUT GETTING MORE DETAILED WITH THE MASTER PLAN AND IT SOUNDED LIKE WE'RE GETTING MORE INTO A SITE PLAN. THAT'S THE BALANCE THERE.

YES, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE MORE ON THE TRAFFIC AT THAT LEVEL.

THAT SECTION C, MAYBE I MISSED IT, BUT WE ADDED THAT SECTION 5, THE OVERALL CIRCULATION PLAN, WHICH I THINK IS VERY IMPORTANT, BUT I THINK WE SHOULD SEE TRAFFIC GENERATION AND TRAFFIC AT THAT LEVEL BECAUSE THAT IS THE NUMBER ONE CONCERN ABOUT ANYTHING ON THE STREETS, ANY 20 ACRES OR ANY DEVELOPMENT IS TRAFFIC. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOME SORT OF TRAFFIC GUIDELINES AND THE PROGRAMMING OPEN SPACE, THOSE ARE TWO THINGS WE CAN ADD

[01:15:02]

I SEE IN THAT SECTION E WE TALK ABOUT THEY HAVE 18 MONTHS FROMNG IN THERE WITH DATES. I SEE IN THAT SECTION E WE TALK ABOUT THEY HAVE 18 MONTHS FROM A BUILDING PERMIT BUT IF THEY GET A CO, LET'S SAY A COSTCO COMES IN AND THEY GET A CO ON THE COSTCO, HOW DOES PHASING WORK FOR 1, 2, AND 3 IF IT'S A MASTER PLAN ON A 50-ACRE SITE OR A 100-ACRE SITE? IT'S STILL NOT CLEAR HOW WE'RE GOING TO HANDLE A 20-YEAR IMPORTANT ON 150-ACRE SITE. SHOULD THEY JUST HAVE THIS BRD OPEN AND WE'RE CONSTANTLY AMENDING IT? I THINK THE ANSWER IS YES. OTHER THAN THAT, YES, WE DID TALK ABOUT THE PUBLIC OR PRIVATE ROADS ON 4280C1.

I THINK IT SHOULD BE PUBLIC OR PRIVATE ROADS BECAUSE WE DON'T KNOW THERE. I KNOW THERE WAS A LOT OF NOTICE ABOUT PUBLIC COMMENTS TONIGHT. IF WE'RE DOING A DEVELOPMENT, THE COMMUNITY AT LARGE IS VERY WELL CONNECTED IN THE CITY OF PARKLAND. YES, I DON'T MIND INCREASING THOSE NUMBERS AND PUTTING MORE BURDEN ON THE DEVELOPER, BUT I DON'T THINK, I GUARANTEE -- I DON'T WANT TO GUARANTEE, I WOULD ASSUME THE WHOLE COMMUNITY AT LARGE REGARDLESS WHETHER YOU LIVE WITHIN 1,000 FEET OR 5 MILES, YOU'RE GOING TO KNOW ABOUT THIS DEVELOPMENT BECAUSE IT'S GOING TO BE A PRETTY SPECK T THIS WHOLE ROOM WILL BE FULL AS WE DID WITH THE CHARTER SCHOOL. I'M NOT AS CONCERNED WITH THAT LANGUAGE, PER SE. AND MY LAST COMMENT WAS THE ON STREET PARKING. I DON'T RECALL US SAYING WE PROHIBITED IT. I THINK THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION ABOUT IT COULD BE DANGEROUS.

IT SEEMS A LITTLE DANGEROUS BUT THERE ARE WAYS THAT DOES TRAFFIC CALMING. SO, YEAH, I WOULD TAKE THAT -- I WOULD PERSONALLY LIKE TO SEE THE WORD PROHIBITED REMOVED BECAUSE I DO THINK THERE ARE WAYS TO DO ON STREET PARKING THAT ENCOURAGES TRAFFIC CALMING AND ENCOURAGES PEDESTRIANS TO USE CROSSWALKS AND NOT JUST JUMP OUT INTO THE ROAD WHEREVER THEY PLEASE AND THAT'S THE IDEA OF ON STREET PARKING.

OTHER THAN THAT, I GUESS I'M THE ODD MAN OUT TONIGHT BUT I WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF THIS WITH MINOR TWEAKS.

I THOUGHT THIS WAS WHAT WE ALL DISCUSSED IN THE LAST MEETING.

THERE ARELING TEA THINGS WE COULD DO HERE AND THERE, BUT THIS SEEMS TO ME WHAT WE WERE DISCUSSING.

>> THANK YOU, JOEL. YOU ARE NOW RECOGNIZED.

>> I THINK THIS IS WHAT WE ASKED FOR OF THIS BOARD.

DO I THINK THAT THERE ARE SOME MODIFICATIONS THAT WOULD NEED TO BE MADE? YES.

I THINK WE WOULD STILL NEED TO ADD MORE.

THE NOTIFTHE NOTIFICATION IS A . THERE'S ONLY TYPICALLY ONE WAY IN AND ONE WAY OUT OF THESE COMMUNITIES.

YOU LIVE ON ONE END OF THE COMMUNITY AND THE DEVELOPMENT IS IF THAT RANGE. YOU'RE NOT GETTING THE NOTICE

[01:20:01]

THE PUBLIC, THERE'S ANOTHER PARCEL OF LAND THAT MAY COME INTO THE CITY AT ANY GIVEN TIME SO IT'S NOT JUST HERON BAY THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT HERE. THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF COMPARISONS TO COCONUT CREEK AND WHETHER OR NOT WE WANT IT TO BE A DESTINATION. WE DON'T WANT IT TO BE JUST ANOTHER SHOPPING CENTER SO WE HAVE TO LOOK AT THE COMPLEXITIES OF WHAT GOES INTO SOMETHING LIKE THIS.

AM I IN FAVOR OF A 2-INCH BOOK SPECIFYING EVERYTHING DOWN TO A TEE? NO, I'M NOT.

BY THE TIME THOSE BOOKS ARE GENERATED, MOST OF THE ITEMS IN THERE ARE ANTIQUATED AND BETTER THINGS HAVE COME OUT.

THE CONSTRUCTION AND DESIGN WORLD IS CONSTANTLY EVOLVING.

WE WOULD HAVE TO BRING ON A CONSULTANT, GENERATE THAT BOOK AND THAT BOOK WOULD BECOME THE BIBLE FOR DEVELOPING IN THE CITY. WE RETAIN THE CONTROL.

IF SOMETHING WITHIN THOSE -- LIKE I SAID, DESIGN IS ALWAYS EVOLVING SO WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CONTROL EVERYTHING THAT COULD EVEN BE THOUGHT OF OR EXTRAPOLATED FROM THAT SO THAT GETS DICY TO ME. IT BEGS THE QUESTION OF IS THIS NECESSARY? IS THE BRD NECESSARY IF WE HAVE THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION AND CAN BEEF UP THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION? THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION, I HAPPEN TO LIKE IT AND I AGREE WITH CERTAIN THINGS THAT WERE SAID BASED ON THE FACT THAT THIS IS GOING TO END UP BEING ANOTHER GROUP HUB, SEEING ONE OF THE PROPOSES, THERE WAS A GROUP HUB PROPOSED, IRONICALLY.

I THINK THIS STILL NODES WORK BUT THIS IS WHAT WE ASKED FOR IN THE TIME FRAME. THE HERON BAY DEVELOPMENT SPANS TWO MUNICIPALITIES AND HAS FOUR GOVERNMENT ENTITIES.

HERON BAY HOA HOLD ALL THE CARDS FOR THE MOST PART FOR CERTAIN THINGS AND THIS GENTLEMAN CAN SPEAK TO THAT GOING FORWARD.

WE DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW IT'S GOING TO -- THERE'S STILL NO CONTEMPLATION OF HOW IT'S GOING TO BE PERMITTED, WHETHER IT'S MULTIPLE PERMITS BETWEEN THE CITY OF PARKLAND AND THE CITY OF CORAL SPRINGS. IS ONE CITY GOING TO HOLD THE PERMIT AND ANOTHER PAY THE FEE? I HAVE BEEN IN A SITUATION LIKE THAT SO THERE'S A LOT THAT GOES TO IT.

WE WERE ASKED TO PROVIDE SOMETHING TO THE COMMISSION AND THIS DOCUMENT, PENDING SOME OTHER CHANGES, SOME MY COLLEAGUES I AGREE WITH AND OTHERS I DON'T AND WHAT WE WERE ASKED TO DO. NOW IT BEGS THE QUESTION OF WHETHER OR NOT THIS WHOLE BRD IS NECESSARY IF WE'RE GOING TO RETAIN CONTROL NO MATTER WHAT WITH ANYTHING WE DO BECAUSE THE WAY OUR CODE IS WRITTEN, IT'S NOT EXPRESSLY BURPEDED.

IT'SPERMITTED. IT'S NOT ALLOWED.

AND WE WILL RETURN TO SENDER. OTHER THAN THAT, THOSE ARE MY COMMENTS. THERE'S NO NEED TO GO BACK AND

GO THROUGH ALL THE LINE BY LINE. >> THANK YOU, JOEL.

NEIL? >> THANK YOU.

AS MANY OF YOU KNOW AND I THINK JOEL ALAWSUITED TO IT, I'M THE PRESIDENT OF THE HERON BAY COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION.

I'M PROUD OF THAT AND I'M PROUD TO REPRESENT THE 10,000 RESIDENTS OF OUR COMMUNITY. WHEN I LEFT HERON BAY THIS EVENING, I MARVELLED AT THE BEAUTY OF DRIVING AND SEEING THE WIDE, OPEN GREEN SPACE. TO THINK THIS IS NOT ABOUT HERON BAY, THIS IS ALL ABOUT THE GOLF SPACE.

THE ORDINANCE MAKES IT EASIER, NOT MORE DIFFICULT FOR DEVELOPMENT TO TAKE PLACE ON THE GOLF COURSE.

THAT'S THE REALITY. JOEL IS RIGHT.

RIGHT NOW IF IT'S NOT IN THE CODE, IT HAS TO TAKE AN

[01:25:01]

IF YOU MEET THE CRITERIA, BASICALLY YOU CAN BUILD.

THAT, TO ME, IS A HUGE MISTAKE. I WILL, TONIGHT, VOTE NO ON THE ORDINANCE BUT MORE IMPORTANTLY, I THINK THE DISCUSSION IS NOT PROPERLY FOCUSED. THE DISCUSSION ISN'T ABOUT HOW DO WE MAKE IT EASIER TO CREATE A BUSINESS DISTRICT? AND EXCUSE ME IF I REFLECT BACK ON PROBABLY BEING A SENIOR CITIZEN AT THIS POINT, BUT MANY OF YOU MIGHT HAVE HEARD THE NAME ROBERT KENNEDY AND HE HAD AN EXPRESSION USED IF HIS EULOGY.

SOME MEN SEE THINGS THAT ARE AND ASK WHY.

I DREAM THINGS THAT ARE NOT AND ASK WHY NOT? HOW DO WE CREATE MORE GREEN SPACE, NOT HOW DO WE CREATE A SITUATION WHERE A DEVELOPER CAN COME IN AND CHANGE THE CONTOUR OF OUR ENTIRE COMMUNITY? PETER'S OUT THERE, PETER'S HEARD ME SAY THIS AT OTHER MEETINGS. I SEE NEIL WHO IS A FRIEND.

MR. REINHARD. OUR GOAL IS TO PROTECT THE COMMUNITY AND THE PUT IN AN ORDINANCE THAT MAKES IT EASIER FOR DEVELOPMENT TO HAPPEN IS A TREMENDOUS MISTAKE.

AS JOEL POINTED OUT, OUR ASSOCIATION HAS A SIGNIFICANT ROLE TO PLAY, AND WE WILL, BUT IT'S A PARTNERSHIP WITH THE CITY OF CORAL SPRINGS AND THE CITY OF PARKLAND WORKING TOGETHER, THE CHALLENGE SHOULD BE HOW DO WE KEEP THE SPACE GREEN? NOT HOW DO WE RESTRICT THE SIZE OF THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDINGS AND EVERYTHING ELSE. I'M GOING TO VOTE NO TONIGHT AND I'M GOING TO EXPRESS THAT AS OTHERS WILL AT THE CITY COMMISSION MEETING AND PLU COMMISSIONER BRYER LIVES IN HERON BAY. YOU CANNOT SAY THIS GENERIC.

THE ISSUE NOW TONIGHT IS HERON BAY'S GOLF COURSE AND I WILL VOTE NO. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, NEIL. [APPLAUSE]

>> DEREK, YOU'RE UP. >> DEREK, I NEED YOU TO COME TO

THE PODIUM. >> I WILL KEEP IT SHORT BECAUSE WE PRETTY MUCH BELABORED ON MOST OF THE POINTS HERE.

WHAT WE WERE ASKED TO DO AND WHAT WE WERE KAFKETASKED WITH F THE CITY COMMISSION WAS THEY WANTED THIS ORDINANCE.

LIKE JOEL AND ALEX SAID, WE BELABORED ON IT.

THE DOCUMENT THAT'S THERE IS PRETTY MUCH WHAT THEY ASKED US TO DO. I AGREE THERE ARE SOME THINGS THAT NEED TO BE TWEAKED HERE AND THERE, AND THEY SHOULD BE.

BUT ESSENTIALLY THAT'S THE TASK AT HAND.

IF WE'RE NOT FORIT, WE'LL VOTE AND EVERYONE WILL VOTE AND VOICE THEIR OPINION AND IF IT DOESN'T GO FORWARD IT DOESN'T GO FORWARD. WHAT WE WERE TASKED FROM THE CITY COMMISSION, I FEEL THIS DOCUMENT IS THAT.

IT DOES NEED A LITTLE MORE TWEAKING SO WE CAN VOTE TO FURTHER DO THAT, BUT THAT'S OUR TASK AT HAND AND THAT'S PRETTY

MUCH MY COMMENTS ON IT. >> THANK YOU.

I WANT TO ASK ANTHONY IF UK YOU CAN SHED SOME LIGHT ON A COUPLE OFYOU CAN SHED SOME LIGHT ON A COUPLE OF T YOU CAN SHED SOME LIGHT ON A COUPLE OF T YOU CAN SHED SOME LIGHT ON A COUPLE OF TYOU CAN SHED SOME LIGHT ON A COUPLE OF THINGS STATED TONIGHT O FAR WITH RESPECT TO INCORPORATING AN ORDINANCE TO HELP MOLD OR GUIDE THE FUTURE OF THE BRD AND WHETHER OR NOT A LAND OWNER CAN BE PROHIBITED FROM DEVELOPING ON LAND THEY OWN. IN OTHER WORDS, CAREFUL WHAT WE WISH FOR. WHAT HAPPENS IF WE DON'T CREATE THIS BEFORE US? WHAT CAN AND CAN'T THE LAND

OWNER BUILD AS-IS? >> I WILL TRY TO SPEAK GENERALLY. SOMEONE COULD COME IN THAT DOES NOT HAVE A CURRENT COMMERCIAL ZONING DESIGNATION AND ASK TO BE REZONED. THEY COULD DO THAT NOW.

THEY COULD ASK TO BE REZONED TO YOUR EXISTING B1 OR B2 DISTRICT OR YOUR PCD DISTRICT DE ALLOWS COMMERCIAL USAGE.

[01:30:03]

THERE'S NOT EVEN A SPECIAL EXCEPTION, IT'S PROHIBITED.

THEY COULD TRY TO LOBBY TO CHANGE IT AT THAT POINT.

SO THE DIFFERENCE HERE IS REALLY THE ALLOWANCE OF ADDITIONAL USES NOD ON THAT LIST BY SPECIAL ENJOYS EXCEPTI EXCEPTION SUBJECT OF THIS CRITERIA.

A DEVELOPER IS PROBABLY ONLY GOING TO SELECT IF THEY WANT USES NOT IN B1 AND B2 BECAUSE THERE ARE ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENTS, ADDITIONAL HOOPS, THINGS YOU NEED TO GO THROUGH AND IT'S A POLICY DECISION WHETHER OR NOT WE SHOULD CONSIDER, EVEN AS A SPECIAL EXCEPTION, THOSE ADDITIONAL USES THAT ARE NOT CURRENTLY PERMITTED.

I KNOW THAT DOESN'T SPECIFICALLY ANSWER YOUR QUESTION BUT IF AN EXISTING PROPERTY OWNER RIGHT NOW HAS A PROPERTY NOT ZONED FOR COMMERCIAL, THEY MAY HAVE TO GET A LAND USE AMENDMENT BUT IF THE LAND USE IS APPROPRIATE, THEY COULD REQUEST AN EXCEPTION BUT THEY WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO SUBMIT AN APPLICATION OR HAVE CONSIDERATION BY SPECIAL OPTION EXCEPTION OF ANY ADDITIONAL EXCEPTION OF USES NOT ALLOWED.

DOES THAT -- >> YES AND YES.

I WAS TRYING TO LEARN FOR MYSELF AND WHAT WOULD -- AGAIN, YOU DID ANSWER WHAT WOULD HAPPEN WITH INACTION? FROM A COMPATIBILITY STANDPOINT, IF A TRACT OF LAND IS ZONED ONE WAY AND NO OTHER USE COULD BE HAD THAT'S COMPATIBLE, IT WOULD

BE STAGNANT AS-IS. >> I WILL GIVE YOU ANOTHER SPECIFIC EXAMPLE. IF SOMEBODY WANTED TO HAVE A GROUP HUB IN A SHOPPING CENTER, T PROHIBITED RIGHT NOW.

SO YOU CAN'T REZONE TO ANOTHER ZONING DISTRICT THAT ENABLES A GROUP HUB. SO THIS ORDINANCE, AND WE CAN TALK ABOUT CHANGES AND TWEAKS BUT THIS ORDINANCE WOULD ALLOW FOR A CONSIDERATION OF A USE LIKE THAT AND THERE ARE OTHER EXAMPLES. THAT'S ONE WE TALKED ABOUT RECENTLY BUT RIGHT NOW, IF SOMEBODY PROPOSED THAT, THERE'S NO DISTRICT THEY COULD REZONE TO WHERE THAT WOULD BE PERMITTED.

>> SO IN READING THROUGH THE ORDINANCE, I, TOO, AGREE THAT IT WAS REVISED BASED ON -- I DIDN'T DO A COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS, BUT FROM MY RECOLLECTION, WE EACH VOTED ON DIFFERENT CRITERIA AND SOME MADE IT INTO THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE AND OTHERS DIDN'T.

THINGS THAT WERE I THOUGHT TO BE ADDED WERE THE ALTERNATIVE FUEL STATION CHARGING, THE PAVERS, THE CROSSWALKS, DECORATIVE ALTERNATIVES TO JUST ASPHALT, IF YOU WILL.

PUBLIC ART AND A MYRIAD OF THINGS THAT WERE TOUCHED ON BY MY COLLEAGUES HERE. BACK TO MANY YEARS BACK AND I'M NOT GOING TO BELABOR IT BUT WE WERE GOING TO HAVE A DESIGN BOOK AND IT DIDN'T COME TO FRUITION BECAUSE I THINK I WILL PARAPHRASE THE WAY I INTERPRETED IS RESULTING NONEXISTENCE OF THE DESIGN BOOK AND IT WAS BE CAREFUL OF YOU WISH FOR.

WE WERE GOING TO CREATE A DCUMENT THAT HAD WHAT PARKLAND COUNTRY CLASSIC PARK LIKE CHARACTER AND COMPATIBLE WITH ITS TAR ROUNDING ADJACENT PROPERTY THAT WAS CONSTRUCTED AND ALONG THE LINE AS YOU SEESU PROPERTY THAT WAS CONSTRUCTED AND ALONG THE LINE AS YOU SEE NOW HAVE COME ALONG PROJECTS WITH DIFFERENT DESIGN CHANGES THAT CHANGES WITH THE TIMES AND STUFF BUT IT'S A DIFFICULT CHALLENGE THAT WE HAVE.

THE FACT THAT THE COMMISSION, FROM WHAT I HEARD, HAS DIRECTED STAFF TO CREATE THIS ORDINANCE AND A COUPLE OF MY COLLEAGUES SAID WE WERE, AS THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD, WE WERE

[01:35:05]

WE WILL OPEN IT UP FOR MORE COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS AMONG OURSELVES AND THEN OPENING IT UP TO THE PUBLIC AS WELL.

DAVID? >> I DON'T KNOW WHAT MEETING EVERYBODY WAS AT. THIS IS NOT WHAT WE ASKED FOR.

THERE WERE PEOPLE IN FAVOR OF A MORE BROAD ORDINANCE, SURE, THAT'S WHAT WE GOT. THERE WERE OTHER THINGS THAT ARE JUST NOT IN HERE, BUT HAVING SAID THAT, WE'RE THE LOCAL PLANNING ORGANIZATION. THESE THINGS ARE NOT IN OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FOR COMMERCIAL USE.

SOMEONE HAS TO CHANGE THE PLAN THAT'S BEEN ADOPTED AND AMENDED BY THE CITY SINCE INCEPTION. THIS IS IMPORTANT STUFF.

IT'S NOT JUST A REZONING SHOULD I B1, B2, OR THIS.

THIS IS A MAJOR CHANGE TO THE VERY FABRIC OF THE ENTIRE LAND USE PLAN IF ITS INCEPTION WHEN DESIGNED BY CORAL RIDGE PROPERTIES AND THEN BY WCI LABOR.

HERON BAY WAS BUILT BECAUSE OF A PROMISE IT WAS GOING TO HAVE A GOLF COURSE. THERE'S NO WAY THEY WOULD HAVE GOTTEN A FLEXIBILITY FOR THE DIFFERENT HOUSING TYPES AND DENS DENSITIES IT GOT IF NOT SURROUNDED BY THE GOLF COURSE. YOU CAN GO BACK TO THE ORIGINAL MEETINGS. WHEN WE DISCUSS A DESIGN BOOK, I DON'T THINK WE NEED A DESIGN BOOK AND IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE A VERY BROAD ORDINANCE OR A DESIGN BOOK BUT IT HAS TO BE A WELL WRITTEN ORDINANCE WITH THE DETAILS OF THE THINGS THAT WE LIKE. WE TALKED ABOUT, AND I CERTAINLY SAT SAID UP HERE, WEAID UP HERE BE.

WHAT'S WHAT'S WHAT'S BEST FOR . WE WANT TO SET THE STANDARDS.

A BROAD STANDARD, BROAD MAY BE GOOD IN OTHER AREAS.

BROAD ZONING IS TERRIBLE. THAT'S WHAT LEADS TO LOSSES AND DISCREPANCY. A SET BACK.

THERE'S NO BROAD SET BACK. IT'S 25-FEET OR 100-FEET.

THERE'S NO ROOM FOR INTERPRETATION THERE.

THE THINGS WE'RE TONGING ABOUT ARE DEFINABLE CRITERIA THAT WOULD BE SOMETHINGDEFINABLE CRIE SOMETHARE DEFINABLE CRITERIA TH WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD SAY IF WE CAN PROVIDE THIS KIND OF DEVELOPMENT, WE CAN GIVE SOME TYPE OF FLEXIBILITY.

IT'S EXACTLY WHAT NEIL WAS TALKING ABOUT.

IMAGINE WHAT IT COULD BE AND SAY WHY ISN'T IT THAT? OUR JOB IS TO SAY WHAT'S THE STANDARD THAT WE WANT? AND THEN PEOPLE HAVE TO LIVE UP TO IT.

WE DON'T HAVE TO TAKE JUST WHAT ANYBODY WANTS TO GIVE US AND SAY WELL, WE DID OUR BEST. IT'S JUST NOT THAT SIMPLE AND THE ISSUE WE HAVE HERE, THIS IS A FUNDAMENTAL CHANGE TO OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN BEFORE IT'S A ZONING.

IF THE ZONING IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, IT DOESN'T EXIST, SO THESE THINGS ARE GOING TO HAVE AN EXTENSIVE AMOUNT OF ANALYSIS, PUBLIC IMPACT CIRCULATION INFRASTRUCTURE THAT HAS TO HAPPEN.

THERE'S A COMPATIBILITY DISCUSSION AND I DON'T SEE HOW ANYONE THINKS THAT WHAT WE TALKED ABOUT INSIDE OF THIS CAN ENSURE THAT ANYTHING IS GOING TO BE COMPATIBLE.

AT OUR LAST MEETING, ANTHONY TOLD US WE CAN'T JUST SAY NO.

THE SPECIAL EXCEPTION CRITERIA, AS IT STANDS, IS NOT SUFFICIENT.

I TAKE ANTHONY AT HIS WORD.PI H 30 YEARS.

I'M TELLING YOU THIS IS BROAD. OUR SPECIAL EXCEPTION CRITERIA DOES NOT GIVE US THE ABILITY THAT SOME OF OUR BOARD MEMBERS THINK WE HAVE JUST TO HAVE SOMEONE COMING IN TO SAY THAT, I DON'T LIKE THAT, GOOD-BYE. WE DON'T HAVE THAT ABILITY.

THAT'S WHY WE HAVE TO TAKE THE STEP OF PUTTING IN THE GOALS AND OBJECTIVES AND THE STANDARDS OF WHATWY WANT AS OPPOSED TO TRYING TO DEAL WITH IT INSTEAD OF HAVING TO BE IN THE UNFORTUNATE POSITION SAYING WELL, THE BROAD THINGS WE PUT IN THERE, WE CAN'T

[01:40:04]

WE DON'T WANT TO EVER BE IN THAT POSITION.

THEY WILL ARGUE ABOUT IT AND THEY WILL HAVE A RIGHT TO ARGUE ABOUT IT. WE MET THE THINGS YOU SAID YOU WANTED VAGUELY IN YOUR CODE. WE MET THE DESTINATION AND THAT'S A CRITERIA. IF WE DEPTH HAVE THOSE OTHER DEMONSTRATABLEON'T HAVE THOSE O DEMONSTRATABLE CRITERIA IN THERE, WE'LL BE IN NO POSITION TOABLE CRITERIA IN THERE, WE'LL BE IN WE'LL BE IN NO POSITION TO SAY NO. I DID MAKE NOTES IN THE LAST MEETING AND I LOOKED AT THE MINUTES AND I PAID ATTENTION.

AS THE LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY, THIS IS OUR JOB.

WE CRAFT THE ORDINANCES. THE COMMISSION SETS THE POLICY AND IT COMES TO US FIRST. WE DON'T JUST PAT THEM ON THE BACK AND SAY YEAH, IT MIGHT BE GOOD IF WE DID THAT.

WE ROLL UP OUR SLEEVES AND THE COMMISSION, IF THEY LIKE IT, GOOD, IF THEY WANT TO CHANGE IT, GOOD, BUT WE HAVE DONE OUR JOB, AS LONG AS IT TAKES TO DO OUR JOB AND WE SHOULD NEVER GIVE NOT A FINAL PRODUCT TO THE CITY COMMISSION.

HAVING SAID THAT, AS IT STANDS, THIS ORDINANCE FOR THE REASONS WE DISCUSSED TONIGHT I DON'T THINK HELPS THE CITY, I . I TH IT HEARTS THE CITY. I THINK IT'S A LONG WAY AWAY FROM BEING THE STANDARD WE WOULD LIKE IN THE CITY.

>> IT'S NOT JUST WHAT'S GOOD FOR THE CITY, IT HAS TO BE WHAT'S CITY.OR THE RESIDENTS OF THE - THIS, AS WRITTEN, IS NOT GOOD

FOR THE RESIDENTS OF THE CITY. >> THANK YOU FOR THE CLARIFICATION. I MEANT THE HEALTH, SAFETY, AND WELFARE OF THE CITIZENS OF THE CITY.

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS?

>> I HAVE A COMMENT. YOU MENTIONED, MR. CHAIRMAN, THAT IF WE DON'T APPROVE THIS, OTHER THINGS CAN HAPPEN.

THEY CAN GO AHEAD AND COME UNDER A DIFFERENT ZONING.

I DON'T LIKE THAT BOOGEYMAN THEORY THAT IF WE DON'T DO THIS, SOMETHING ELSE WILL HAPPEN. WE HAVE TO ADDRESS WHAT WE'RE GOING HERE AND WE NEED TO DO IT EFFECTIVELY.

AS I SAID IT EARLIER, THIS IS REAL THIN.

IT'S DEVELOPER FRIENDLY AND THE RESIDENTS OF PARKLAND SHOULD BE SCARED AS HELL THAT WE'RE CONSIDERING SOMETHING LIKE THIS.

AS ALLEN SAND EARLIER, THERE WERE THINGS IN HERE -- [INAUDIBLE] MICHELLE WROTE THESE THINGS DOWN AND THEY WERE JUST LEFT OUT. I HAVEN'T EVEN SEEN FROM DAY ONE DOES THE STAFF RECOMMEND THIS BRD.

I DON'T THINK THEY'RE ON THE RECORD WHETHER THEY'RE FOR THIS OR NOT. MOST OF THE THINGS WE GET HAVE THE STAFF SUGGESTS OR RECOMMENDS AN APPROVAL OR NOT.

I DON'T SEE ANYTHING ON ANY DOCUMENT THAT THE STAFF

RECOMMENDS. >> CAITLIN, AS A PROFESSIONAL PLANNER, DO YOU THINK THIS ORDINANCE IS A GOOD IDEA FOR THE

CITY? >> AS ANTHONY INDICATED EARLIER, THIS IS A POLICY DECISION THAT WE HAVE BEEN TASKED WITH CRAFTING THIS ORDINANCE AND SOMETHING THAT WE CAN BRING FORWARD TO CITY COMMISSION SO AS TONY INDICATED, WE HAVE NOT PUT FORTH A RECOMMENDATION BECAUSE IT'S A PROJECT WE WERE TASKED

WITH. >> I HAVE A QUESTION FOR ANTHONY. MANY OF US KNOW, EXPLAIN OUR OPTIONS WITH RESPECT TO -- AFTER YOU DO, I'M GOING TO OPEN IT UP TO THE PUBLIC. EXPLAIN OUR OPTIONS THIS EVENING WITH RESPECT TO THE COMMISSION EXPECTATIONS, WITH RESPECT TO

THE ORDINANCE. >> I DIDN'T HEAR ANY SET DEADLINE OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. YOU ARE THE ADVISORY BOARD.

YOU'RE TASKED WITH MAKING A RECOMMENDATION.

I THINK YOU HAVE A FEW OPTIONS. ONE, PERHAPS YOU CAN DRILL DOWN ON ADDITIONAL FEEDBACK AND DEFER IT AGAIN AND COME BACK TO YOU POTENTIALLY ONE MORE TIME, SEE HOW THAT GOES.

TWO, YOU COULD TAKE A VOTE ON WHAT'S IN FRONT OF YOU WITH SOME

[01:45:05]

THOSE ARE YOUR PRIMARY OPTIONS. ONE, DEFER IT, DRILL IT DOWN AND GET TO MORE SPECIFICS. IT COULD BE A MOTION TO APPROVE WITH AMENDMENTS OR RECOMMEND DENIAL.

I KNOW THE COMMISSION IS SEEKING RECOMMENDATION AND GUIDANCE FROM THIS BOARD ON THIS ORDINANCE. THEY WILL WANT TO HEAR THAT.

>> I THINK THAT BASED ON THE FACT THAT WE'RE TASKED AS THE PLANNING BOARD, I DON'T THINK THIS ORDINANCE IS READY TO GO TO THE COMMISSION. I THINK IT NEEDS WORK.

WE'RE NOT ALL GOING TO AGREE ON THIS DAIS, I UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT I THINK IT NEEDS WORK TO GET IT TO A LEVEL -- AGAIN, NOT WITH EF EVERYBODY'S APPROVAL BUT MORE SUBSTANTIVE CRITERIA TO PROTECT THE CITY AND MORE IMPORTANTLY TO

PROTECT THE CITIZENS. >> MR. CHAIRMAN.

I KNOW WE'RE TALKING ABOUT A POTENTIAL MOTION, BUT I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM THE RESIDENTS. I DON'T KNOW IF SOMEONE IS

SHOUTING OUT A MOTION. >> NO, NO, I WANTED TO OPEN IT UP TO THE PUBLIC BUT I WANTED TO GET TO A POINT THAT WE ADDRESSED WHAT WAS IN FRONT OF US AND WHAT OUR COLLEAGUES' COMMENTS WERE THUS FAR. I'M GOING TO OPEN UP TO THE PUBLIC. WHEN YOU COME TO THE DAIS, PLEASE, AGAIN, EVEN IF YOU SPOKE EARLIER, STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. WE'RE GOING TO KEEP EACH INDIVIDUAL TO 3 MINUTES. I DON'T KNOW IF WE HAVE OUR TIME CLOCK OR NOT. IF SOMEBODY IS GOING TO REPEAT SOMETHING THAT SOMEBODY ELSE SAID, THAT'S FINE, YOU CAN REFER TO ANOTHER PUBLIC SPEAKER AT THAT POINT IN TIME.

OTHERWISE YOU HAVE 3 MINUTES. WHO IS GOING TO GO FIRST? STEP UP, PLEASE. WE'LL START FROM THIS SIDE OF THE ROOM AND MOVE OVER. RAISE YOUR HAND SO WE KNOW HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE GOING TO SPEAK. SIX, THANK YOU.

WELCOME. >> I'M STILL PETER.

THAT HASN'T CHANGED.

[LAUGHTER] AND ADDRESS IS STILL THE TIME.

>> I'M VERY MUCH ENCOURAGED BY WHAT I HEARD HERE TONIGHT.

NEIL, A SPECIFIC THANKS TO YOU. I THINK YOU EXPRESSED, AS CHAIRMAN OF THE HERON BAY, WHATEVER WE ARE CALLED, AUTHORITY OR SOMETHING, I THINK YOUR STAND FOR THE COMMUNITY HAS BEEN MUCH APPRECIATED AND DAVID, I THINK YOUR COMMENT WAS ALSO VERY GOOD. WHILE I CAME HERE SOMEWHAT DESPAWN DAINTY, I'M A LETTING ENCOURAGEONDENT, I'M A LETTING ENCOURAGE THAT HAD WE'RE NOT GOING TO TURN PARKLAND INTO CORAL SPRINGS. I MOVED IN HERE SPECIFICALLY BASED ON WHAT PARKLAND WAS SUPPOSED TO BE AND I DO HOPE, GENTLEMEN, THAT YOU WILL DO THE BEST YOU CAN TO KEEP IT THAT WAY. AGAIN.

I APPRECIATE THE SUPPORT I HEARD HERE TONIGHT.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> THANK YOU, SIR.

>> MAY NAME IS CHAN LEC LLE AND >> MAY NAME IS CHAN LEC LLE I'A

RESIDENT HERE. >> YOUR ADDRESS.

>> 11887 NORTHWEST 69TH PLACE. >> THANK YOU.

>> DO YOU NEED MORE? I SPEAK FOR TWO REASONS, FIRST, AS A RESIDENT, WE CHOSE PARKLAND BECAUSE WE LIKE THE WAY IT IS.

[01:50:01]

WE HAVE AL GREEN SPACE AND QUIE STREETS.

I LOOKED AT THE PROPOSAL, A COUPLE OF THE COLORED PICTURES WITH NICE STUFF. WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT'S GOING TO BE. IT'S VERY SCARY.

COMMERCIAL IS FOR MAKING MONEY PURPOSE, IT DOESN'T REALLY CONSIDER RESIDENTS. IF YOU LOSE MONEY, YOU WILL KEEP THE DEVELOPMENT, WE DON'T KNOW WHERE WE WILL BE LEFT AT, WHERE THIS CITY IS GOING TO BE. SECOND IS AS AN ENGINEER.

I'M AN ENGINEER AND I'M IN THE CONSTRUCTION BUSINESS AND IT'S HARD TO SAY, YOU KNOW, IF THE CONSTRUCTION ITSELF IS GOING TO CAUSE A RIFT ON THE PEOPLE IN THE AREA.

THAT'S THE ANOTHER AREA WE DON'T KNOW.

THE LAST THINGS I HEAR SO MANY TIMES AND WE TALK ABOUT COCONUT CREEK, YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT THE WHOLE AREA.

THE PROMENADE IS BY THE LANDFILL.

IT'S OPEN TO ALLOW COMMERCIAL GROWTH.

WE DON'T HAVE THAT HERE IN PARKLAND.

WE'RE BOUNDED BY THE EVERGLADE. WE DON'T HAVE MUCH OPEN.

WHAT'S THAT GOING TO BE FOR US? THE TRAFFIC, WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT'S GOING TO BE. WE ALREADY HAVE A LOT OF SCHOOLS. WHAT WILL THIS COMMERCIAL BRING TO US? THAT'S IT.

WE DO ASK YOU ALL COMMITTEE MEMBERS TO CONSIDER THIS.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> NEIL BASS 11664 NORTHWEST 69TH PLACE.

I'M E ENCOURAGE THAT HAD YOU'RE ENCOURAGED BUT I'M NOT ENCOURAGED. I'M AMAZE THAT HAD WE'RE HERE CONSIDERING THAT MONSTROSITY IN MY COMMUNITY OF HERON BAY, MAKING THE SHOPPING CENTER THE 23RD LARGEST SHOPPING CENTER IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA, UNSEATING ROSEMARY SQUARE.

THAT'S CURRENTLY THE 23RD LARGEST SHOPPING CENTER, IF MY MATH IS CORRECT. THIS IS HUGE AND IT'S GOING TO BE UNBELIEVABLY DISRUPT I HAVE TO THE RESIDENTS OF HERON BAY AND ALL OF THE RESIDENTS IN THE SURROUNDING AREA.

I HAVE SEEN THINGS ON SOCIAL MEDIA ABOUT HOW, WELL, MOST OF THE DEVELOPMENT IS IN CORAL SPRINGS BUT HERON BAY WOULD BE MUCH MORE IMPACTED. I DON'T THINK THEY HAVE A CLUE WHAT'S GOING ON SO ALEX, YOU MADE A COMMENT EARLIER AND I BELIEVE YOU SAID PARKLAND RESIDENTS WERE IN THE KNOW AND KNOWLEDGEABLE AND AWARE OF WHAT'S GOING ON.

I COULD NOT DISAGREE MORE. THERE ARE FEW PEOPLE UNDERSTAND WE ARE IN A FAMILY COMMUNITY AND PEOPLE THAT LIVE HERE ARE BUSY, THAT'S WHY THERE'S NOBODY HERE. VERY FEW PEOPLE ARE HERE.

THEY'RE BUSY, THEY HAVE WORK TO DO, FAMILIES TO TAKE CARE OF, AN THEY CAN'T BE BOTHERED GOING TO THESE MEETINGS BECAUSE THEY THINK SOMEONE ELSE WILLINK SOME CARE OF IT.

THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BUILD THE 23RD LARGEST SHOPPING CENTER IN FLORIDA IN MY COMMUNITY. I CANNOT UNDERSTAND FOR LIFE OF ME HOW WE ARE HERE RIGHT NOW AND EVEN ENTERTAINING THE POSSIBILITY OF THIS PROJECT. IT IS EMBARRASSING, HUMILIATING, DISGUSTING. I HAVE BEEN HERE FOR 9 YEARS.

I HAVE A LOT OF FRIENDS IN THE COMMUNITY AND I GUARANTEE YOU THEY DON'T HAVE A CLUE WHAT'S GOING ON.

I'M GOING TO SPEAK WITH THEM ABOUT THIS MEETING AND WHAT I'VE

[01:55:03]

THEY DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON. WHEN THEY DO, THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BE HAPPY. THIS IS A RIDICULOUS PROPOSAL THAT NEEDS TO BE SCRAPPED. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. NEXT, PLEASE.

>> THANK YOU. >> MY NAME IS BO LU.

I LIVE AT 6890 NORTHWEST 116 AVENUE.

12 YEARS AGO WE MOVED FROM CORAL SPRINGS TO PARKLAND BECAUSE PARKLAND IS DIFFERENT. IT'S A LAND OF GREEN, A LAND OF PARK AND NOW PEOPLE ARE LEAVING PARKLAND BECAUSE IT'S NO LONGER THE OLD IMAGE WE HAVE AND THEY'RE MOVING TO PALM BEACH GARDENS WHERE IT'S MORE LIKE THE OLD PARKLAND.

IN THE FIRST 2 DAYS WE ESTABLISHED A FACEBOOK GROUP AND GENERATED INTEREST FROM ABOUT 300 PEOPLE INA FACEBOOK GROUP A INTEREST FROM ABOUT 300 PEOPLE ESTABLISHED A FACEBOOK GROUP AND GENERATED INTEREST FROM ABOUT 300 PEOPLE IN 2 DAYS.

THE RESIDENTS ARE CONCERNED AND THERE ARE A LOT OF NEGATIVE COMMENTS ON THE BOARD BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE USED TO SEEING DEVELOPERS BUY INTO THE CITY AND CHANGE THE COVENANTS IN THE STROKE OF A PEN. I'M ENCOURAGED TO SEE THAT THE BOARD TODAY HAS GIVEN SERIOUS THOUGHT ABOUT THE FUTURE OF PRKLAND AND I HOPE YOU CAN CONTINUE TO DO SO AND KEEP PARKLAND GREEN. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> ROBERT TANKOOS, 6771 NORTHWEST 117TH AFTER. I WON'T SAY I'M ENCOURAGED BUT THERE WERE POSITIVE COMMENTS AND THAT WAS GOOD.

MY FAMILY AND I MOVED TO PARKLAND A YEAR AGO.

WHEN WE CAME HERE, WE WERE TOLD THERE WAS A RESTRICTIVE COVENANT AND NOTHING WOULD BUILT ON THIS GOLF COURSE IN SIX OR 7 YEARS SO WE THOUGHT, OKAY, WE DON'T HAVE TO THINK ABOUT THAT BUT NOW YOU SEE ALL THESE PLOTS THAT ARE BEING DEVELOPED COMING RIGHT TO MY BARK YARD. I THOUGHT THE ZONING BOARD WOULD NOT ALLOW ANYTHING LIKE THIS TO OCCUR IN THIS TYPE OF COMMUNITY.

IT'S SHOCKING TO ME THAT THIS WOULD BE PRESENTED, YET EVEN CONSIDERED. I WOULD EXPRESS MY CONCERN THAT THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD NOT EVEN THINK ABOUT CHANGING THE ZONING FOR WHAT'S CLEARLY IN THE CENTER OF A RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY. IT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN THOUGHT OF, IT CANNOT BE ALLOWED TO HAPPEN.

>> THANK YOU. >> PETER LECHOWSKI 11294 NORTHWEST 72ND PLACE. THANK YOU FOR LISTENING TO US AND THANK YOU TO THE PUBLIC WHO CAME IN AND EXPRESSED THEIR VIEWS. I WOULD ENCOURAGE THE COMMISSION TO VOTE. I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT'S THE PURPOSE OF -- YOU THOUGHT YOU DISC MEETING IS NOT REFLECTED, I DON'T UNDERSTAND THE PURPOSE.

LET'S VOTE ON IT, WHAT'S THE POINT OF DELAYING IT? I WOULD LIKE TO ENCOURAGE YOU TO DO THAT AND WHETHER YOU BELIEVE

IT'S RIGHT OR WRONG. >> THANK YOU.

[02:00:02]

ANYONE ELSE FROM THE PUBLIC? >> MY NAME IS JAMES WRAY.

I LIVE AT 1070 NORTHEAST [INAUDIBLE] CIRCLE.

WE MOVED TO HERON BAY BECAUSE WE PERCEIVED HERON BAY TO BE AN EXCLUSIVE PART OF PARKLAND. WE LIKED PARKLAND BECAUSE IT'S AN EXCLUSIVE PART OF SOUTH FLORIDA.

WE DIDN'T OBJECT TO HIGHER PRICES.

I THINK MOST RESIDENTS MOVED HERE FOR THE SAME REASONS.

PROPERTY IS SELLING AT $400 A SQUARE FOOT.

PEOPLE ARE NOT CONCERNED WITH DOLLAR VALUES.

THERE'S BEEN PROPOSITIONS THAT THIS DEVELOPMENT WOULD LOWER TAX BASES. PEOPLE MOVED HERE NOT FOR REASONS, IN MY OPINION, TO HAVE A LOWER TAX BASE OR TO HAVE THE CHEAPEST PROPERTY TAXES, THEY MOVED HERE BECAUSE, FOR ITS NAME SAKE, IT'S PARKLAND. IT'S NOT A STRIP MALL.

IT'S NOT LIKE UNIVERSITY WHERE WE HAVE RETAIL ESTABLISHMENTS.

AS TODD MENTIONED HAVING A PLACE TO LIVE, WORK, AND PLAY, I HAVE A RELIEF DRIVING DOWN CORAL RIDGE AND IT GETS DARK.

I LIKE THE SEPARATION. I DON'T LIKE THE BUSTLE.

I MOVED HERE TO GET AWAY FROM THAT.

PROTECTIVE COVENANTS EXIST FOR A REASON.

TO MODIFY THOSE IS CONTRARY TO WHY I BOUGHT INTO THIS COMMUNITY. DAVID, I APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS. IF YOU GO TO THE TABLE WITH ANYTHING LESS THAN PRECISION, YOU'RE SETTING YOURSELF UP FOR FAILURE SO I ADVOCATE FOR YOUR DETAIL.

I HAVE GONE HEAD TO HEAD WITH NEIL AT HOA MEETINGS.

I ADVOCATED FOR RESIDENCE DIDN'TS TO BUY IT TO PROTECT IT.

I NEVER HAVE AGREED WITH WHAT YOU SAID MORE TONIGHT.

>> LET THE RECORD SHOW. .

>> YES, LET TH>> YES, LET THE R AGREE FOR ONCE. THANK YOU FOR

TAKING THE TIME TO LISTEN. >> THANK YOU.

ANYONE ELSE FROM THE PUBLIC? I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC COMMENT SECTION AT THIS TIME. ANY OTHER FURTHER COMMENTS OR

QUESTIONS? >> I WANT TO MAKE SURE THE PUBLIC IS AWARE THAT WHAT YOU MAY HAVE SEEN ON THE SDI WEBSITE IS NOT WHAT IS IN FRONT OF US TONIGHT.

WE'RE TASKED WITH SOMETHING SPECIFIC FROM THE COMMITTEE.

WHAT WAS SUBMITTED IS NOT WHAT WE'RE TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION.

>> AND AS LONG AS ALL THE USES WITHIN ANYTHING IN THOSE DEVELOPMENTS, LIKE A GROUP HUB, IF THEY HAD A PUBLIX AND A SUBWAY, THEY COULD BUILD IN THOSE MASTER PLANS?

>> YEAH, I KNOW THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT ONE SPECIFIC SITE AND I UNDERSTAND WHY AND I WILL SAY THIS.

WITH RESPECT TO THE HERON BAY GOLF COURSE, I WILL SPEAK TO THE PORTION IN PARKLAND. THE CITY DOESN'T HAVE JURISDICTION OVER CORAL SPRINGS. THE CURRENT ZONING IS AG AND THE ZONING IS R3. BEFORE ANYTHING COULD BE BUILT ON THE PARCEL WITHIN PARKLAND, THERE WOULD NEED TO BE A LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENT, REZONING, ALL OF THOSE WOULD COME BEFORE THIS BOARD FIRST, AGAIN, WITH PUBLIC NOTICE TO EVERYBODY FOR A RECOMMENDATION TO YOU BEFORE IT GOES TO THE COMMISSION.

I WILL JUST STATE THAT AT THE OUTSET TO THAT IS NOT BEFORE YOU BUT THIS IS AN ADDITIONAL DISTRICT, SO THEORETICALLY, IF THEY GOT THROUGH THE LAND USE PLANNED AMENDMENT AND GOT TO THE ZO AMENDMENT AND GOT TO THE ZONING AND WANTED TO REZONE BUT THERE ARE OTHER COMMERCIAL OPTIONS AND I THINK THAT GOES TO

YOUR QUESTION. >> IF THEY WERE TO REZONE, THEY WOULD HAVE TO BRING IN A SITE PLAN, CORRECT? REZONING DOESN'T HAPPEN WITHOUT A PROPOSED SITE PLAN?

>> THEY WOULD NEED TO PROPOSE A SITE PLAN.

>> AT THE TIME OF THE PROPOSED REZONING.

>> NO. >> THE MASTER PLAN SUBSEQUENTLY THE SITE PLAN AND THE COMMUNITY --

[02:05:02]

>> ALSO -- >> WAIT, WAIT.

I WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR. IF SOMEBODY WANTED TO REZONE A PROPERTY TO B1, IF THEY HAD AN UNDERLYING COMMERCIAL LAND USE, THEY WOULD NOT NEAT A SITE PLAN. THEY A SITE PLAN.

THEY JUST E A SITE PLAN. THEY JUST D A SITE PLAN.

THEY JUST ASK FOR THE REZONING. IF ANYONE WANTED TO REZONE A PART OF THE STE WITH A LAND ZONE ZONING DESIGNATION, THEY WOULD ASK FOR A REZONING AND IF THEY WERE GOING TO ONE OF OUR CONVENTIONAL ZONING DISTRICTS, THEY WOULD NOT NEED A SITE PLAN.

IF THEY WANTED TO GO TO A PLANNED COMMERCIAL DISTRICT OR PLANNED RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT WHERE THEY'RE GETTING FLEXIBILITY, THEN THEY WOULD NEED A PLAN BUT JUST TO REZONE DOES NOT REQUIRE A SITE PLAN. REZONING IS JUST TO BE

CONSISTENT WITH THE COMP PLAN. >> WITH THE PUDS WE HAVE, YOU SAID A MASTER PLAN WOULD BE REQUIRED.

>> NOT A SPECIFIC SITE PLAN. >> THAT'S CORRECT FOR OUR PCD AND POTENTIALLY IF THIS IS DEMENTED THE BRD.

BOTH OF THESE MASTER PLANS CONCURRENT WITH THE REZONING.

>> ALSO, FOR THE RECORD AND FOR THE PUBLIC, WE, AS OUR BOARD SITTING HERE, ARE RECOMMENDING AN ADVISORY BOARD TO OUR CITY COMMISSION. OUR VOTE WOULD MOVE THE ORDINANCE HOWEVER IT IS MOTIONED, APPROVED, DENIED, WITH ANY MODIFICATIONS TO IT, TO THE COMMISSION FOR THE ULTIMATE VOTE. WE ARE A RECOMMENDING AND ADVISORY BOARD. OUR VOTE WOULD CARRY THIS ORDINANCE OR ANY OTHER PETITION BEFORE US TO THE CITY COMMISSION FOR THE ULTIMATE VOTE, APPROVAL, DENIAL, INCORPORATION INTO

PARKLAND RULES AND REGULATIONS. >> MR. CHAIRMAN, ANTHONY, ON THE LAND USE AMENDMENT DOES THE CITY COMMISSION HAVE THE FINAL APPROVAL ON THAT OR ARE THERE APPROVALS BEYOND THE CITY.

>> I WILL TRY TO DO THIS WITHOUT GOING THROUGH A FULL TUTORIALS.

THEY WOULD ALSO NEED TO GO TO THE COUNTY AS WELL.

THE LAND USE MAP WOULD NEED TO BE CONSISTENT.

JUST LIKE IT COMES HERE FOR YOUR RECOMMENDATION, IT NEEDS TO GO TO THE PLANNING COUNCIL AT THE COUNT LEVEL FOR THEIR RECK MEN DECISION SO THERE'S A NUMBERMEN DECISION SO THERE'S A NUMBER OF STEPS. IT WOULD TAKE SOME TIME BEFORE ANY SHOVELS COULD GO IN THE GROUND, TO SAY.

>> JUST LIKE WE REVIEW ANY COMPATIBILITY ISSUES WHEN COMMERCIAL IS GOING IN SURROUNDING RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD, THE COUNTY HAS SIMILAR CRITERIA WHERE THEY'RE LOOKING AT COMPATIBILITY AND COMPATIBILITY IS THE MAIN USE FOCUS AND AT THAT LEVEL, THEY CAN APPROVE OR DENY SO THAT'S THE HIGHEST LEVEL AT THAT TIME OF APPLICATION.

>> AND DOT WOULD HAVE A SAY AS WELL BASED ON ACCESS TO THEIR ROADS. RECOMME.

RECOMMES.

>> I GROW WITH THE GENTLEMAN WHO SPOKE ABOUT VOTING TONIGHT.

I'M NOT OPPOSED TO THE BRD BUT I'M OPPOSED TO THIS LANGUAGE.

I DON'T THINK THIS IS GOOD WORK FOR US TO SEND BACK AND SAY

WE'LL GO WITH THIS. >> I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A

MOTION. >> OKAY.

>> WE'LL SEE IF WE CAN GET A SECOND.

I'M NOT OPPOSED TO A WELL-CRAFTED BRD ORDINANCE FOR OUR CITY, HOWEVER, THIS IS THE SECOND TIME WE HAVE SEEN IT.

WE HAVE VAST DISAGREEMENT ABOUT IS THIS THE ORDINANCE WE THOUGHT WE WOULD GET BACK. MY VIEW IS THAT THIS NEEDS A CON MORE WORK, SIGNIFICANTLY MORE WORK.

FOR THAT REASON, I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION TO DENY THIS ORDINANCE, REJECT THE ORDINANCE FOR THE REASONS STATED IN ALL OF

[02:10:04]

ADOPT IT. >> SECOND.

>> OKAY MOTIONED BY DAVID AND SECONDED BY NEIL.

CALL FOR THE VOTE, PLEASE. >> NEIL VOGEL.

>> IF WE VOTE YES, IT'S TO REJECT?

>> HE MADE A MOTION TO DENY. >> YES TO DENY.

>> OKAY, THAT'S IT. >> GELEE KAPLAN.

>> YES. >> YES TO DENY.

>> DAVID. >> YES.

>> TONY? >> YES.

TODD? >> YES.

>> NATHANIEL. >> YES TO DENY.

>> CHAIRMAN MURRAY ZWEIG. >> YES.

>> MOTION UNANIMOUS TO DENY. >> SO IT WILL GO TO COMMISSION WITH A RECOMMENDATION OF DENIAL AND THEY WILL DECIDE WHAT THEY

WANT TO DO. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

AT THIS TIME, I WANT TO ASK ANTHONY WITH RESPECT TO ANY SCHEDULING ISSUES WE HAVE TO DISCUSS.

>> CAITLIN AND I AND CITY STAFF WERE TALKING EARLIER.

IN TERMS OF THE NEXT MEETING, WE'RE GOT GOING TO DEAL WITH THE BRD AT THE NEXT MEETING, CLEARLY, BUT WE HAVE APPLICATIONS COMING IN WITH RESPECT TO GATOR ACRES, THE PARCEL IN THE NORTHWEST CORNER THERE AND THE COMMISSION IS CONSIDERING THAT ANNEXATION ORDINANCES ON SECOND READING ON THE 13TH AND WE HAVE GOTTEN APPLICATIONS FOR ZONING, SITE PLAN, THINGS OF THAT NATURE. WE BELIEVE IF THE APPLICANT SUBMITS THE COMMENTS BACK, IN TERMS OF GETTING ANNEXATION IN FOR THIS CURRENT LEGISLATIVE SESSION, WE ARE ON SOMEWHAT OF A TIGHT TIME LINE BUT THE INTENT IS THAT THESE ITEMS WOULD GO TO THE COMMISSION IN OCTOBER TO MEET THE DEADLINE FOR THE LEGISLATIVE DELEGATION ON THE ANNEXATION.

IF THE BOARD WAS AVAILABLE RATHER THAN AN OCTOBER MEETING BECAUSE IF THIS IS NOT COMING BACK TO YOU, I DON'T THINK WE HAVE ANY OTHER BUSINESS ORDINARY REASON THIS THAT WE WERE TALKIN SEPTEMBER MEETING IF THE BOARD WAS AVAILABLE, WE LOOKED AT THURSDAY BECAUSE THAT'S GENERALLY WHEN WE WE HAVE OUR MEETING, ON SEPTEMBER 30TH IN LIEU OF AN EARLY OCTOBER MEETING TO CONSIDER REZONING AND SITE PLAN FOR THAT UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT THAT'S BEING PROPOSED.

>> SO THE APPLICANT WANTS TO SQUEEZE IT IN?

>> THERE'S AN ANNEXATION FOR GATOR ACRES WHICH IS 4.77 ACRES AND THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING TO COMBINE THAT WITH TWO OTHER PROPERTIES THE APPLICANT OWNS WITHIN THE CITY AND COMBINE THEM TO DO A UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT. IN ORDER TO GET THE ANNEXATION IN BY A CERTAIN TIME TO THE LEGISLATIVE DELEGATION FOR THEM TO CONSIDER IT, MORE IMPORTANTLY, WE HAVE TAKEN CARE OF THAT WITH RESPECT TO THE COMMISSION LEVEL, IT'S THE UNDERLYING ZONING AND SITE PLAN AND OTHER RELATED COMPONENTS THAT WOULD BE COMING BEFORE YOU AND SO WE'RE LOOKING TO SEE IF YOU ARE AVAILABLE ON SEPTEMBER 30TH, ON THURSDAY, AND IN LIEU OF THE OCTOBER MEETING AND WHETHER WE COULD HAVE

QUORUM. >> LET'S GO ACROSS THE BOARD.

>> THIS IS CONTINGENT ON THE APPLICANT ADDRESSING ALL REMAINING DRC COMMENTS WHICH THEY MADE A COMMITMENT TO DO IN

TIME. >> I SAY WE PUT IT ON THE APPLY

WANT FIRST. >> RIGHT BEWE SCHEDULE THE

MEETING. >> YEAH, IF WE DON'T HAVE THE TIME TO ADDRESS IT WE'RE NOT GOING TO DO IT.

>> I'M GOOD. >> I'M AVAILABLE.

>> DAVID? >> I THINK I'M FREE BUT I NEED TO CHECK WITH MY BOSS TO SEE IF WE HAVE ANY FAMILIAL

[02:15:01]

>> YEAH, WE CAN UPLOAD THAT THROUGH CIVIC CLERK WHICH IS HOW

THE AGENDAS ARE NOW DISTRIBUTED. >> AND DEREK ACKNOWLEDGED HE WOULD NOT BE AVAILABLE, FOR THE RECORD.

DEREK WOULD NOT BE AVAILABLE. >> NATHANIEL, WOULD YOU BE AVAILABLE ON THE 30TH OF SEPTEMBER FOR A MEETING?

>> SURE, I'M NOT GOING ANYWHERE. [LAUGHTER]

>> AMEN TO THAT. >> THANK GOD.

>> ALL RIGHT, DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION?

>> YES, THANK YOU. >> CAITLIN, ANY COMMENTS OR

QUESTIONS? >> NO, JUST IN FOR A LONG

[10. Comments from the Board]

MEETING ON THE NEXT ONE. >> OKAY.

ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM OUR BOARD MEMBERS?

>> MOTION TO ADJOURN? >> NOT YET.

I JUST WANT TO REITERATE THAT NATHANIEL, WE'RE HAPPY YOU PARTICIPATED IN OUR MEETING, KEEP IT UP.

>> GET WELL SOON. >> GET WELL SOON.

>> THANK YOU MUCH. >> MOTION TO ADJOURN.

>> SECONDED. >> WHO SECONDED IT?

>> EVERYBODY. >> TODD.

ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, EVERYBODY, FRO

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.