Planning and Zoning Board - Regular Meeting

Okay, call order. Roll call, please.

Here.

Here.

Here.

Here. Yep. Here. I almost said yes to Kennedy. I mean, you have his mic on. Can you hear me? Yes. We're good to go? OK. Approval of minutes, there are no minutes at this time. All business, there's nothing at this time. New business, public hearing, VA 2615, request for a non-administrative variance to allow a shed to be four feet higher than the primary structure and one foot setback from the property line on Edgewater Drive side of the parcel for the property located at 203 Eaton Road. Staff report, please.

Thank you, Chairman. City staff sent out public notice within 500 feet of the subject property. This application probably looks familiar. The gentleman was here the prior month in which he sought to amend his variance to allow for a three-foot front yard setback in lieu of the approved four-foot. the board had conditioned the applicant on the last time to reduce the size of the shed it appears that the shed is higher than the principal structure by about four feet city staff did review the application against article 9 section 21 100.04d and found that the applicant could not meet all six of the criteria City staff will be happy to divulge on those six criteria if the board likes. City staff are recommending not to approve.

Thank you. Thank you, Ryan. I'll open the public hearing. Is the applicant in the room? Please come to the microphone. Please state your name and address and go forward. My name is Fred Peters.

I live at 203 E.B. Rowe. I don't know what to say. I've got a permit to the city and everything else. Three-foot setback. If you measure from the outside, that thing in is three foot. I have pictures where I pull the tape on that, proving that. I've been doing everything. I've got a book trying to cover everything, but if you want to see these, it shows that it is three foot back. It is not a foot, foot and a half. The building turned out to be 17 foot tall. It's 17 foot and 3 inches tall. And the permit went through. The city said, yes, go ahead and order it. So I went ahead and ordered it. It's been $1,000. We need the grave seal documents of the permitting. And then more money put together for the water department. Everything else was another $1,000. I don't know what I'm supposed to do now.

But I'm at your mercy. Tell me what I need to do now.

OK. Brian, can you shed any light? substance as to what the gentleman just stated as far as the height and whatnot? Are we definitely over?

Yeah, we're definitely, for sure, over the height. All right.

So I know I had sent an email, but he applied for a building permit. right? The accessory structure permit specifically asked for that. Why would that not have been caught in the building permit? If it's not a piece of that, maybe it should be because it's really could have been taken care of, right? I mean, it's just I think it's an oversight, but it happened. You know,

yeah i i don't know why delena reviewed this one for me um but it might not have been clear on the plans i don't know i didn't look at the plan specifically i just know when we went out it was higher so i i can kind of speak from experience

Rarely. I mean, I'm building a 2,100 square foot addition on Magnolia up in New Smyrna Beach that's built around an existing house. They never asked for an elevation of the existing house for the permit. They didn't even ask for drawings of the old house. I mean, Edgewater's the same. I mean, all the additions and things I've built, they've never asked for the height of the existing elevation of the home.

Is the finished floor the same on the garage as it is in the residence? Do we know?

The floor's the same height as the driveway. Not so I can't get water in it, but as low as I can get it.

Yeah, so the disconnect I think is with these accessory dwelling units, the detached structures is we probably need to require the elevation of the primary residence in the application, or at least on the drawing somewhere, you know, so that it's, okay, 14 feet, 18 feet, not going to work. You know, right now, the city doesn't know what it doesn't know, because it's not like the building official is going to drive by his house and pop a tape measure out.

Well, and even if the building, even if the designs for the building say it's 18 feet tall, and the house is 18 feet tall, you're right, it's not gonna, regardless of whether those are the same, if the elevations are different, it's gonna be different.

But right now, nowhere in the application does it ask, would it have asked for his existing house?

But it did on the accessory structure, it asks for the building height, or it mentions the building not being higher than the primary residence.

But it doesn't ask for what height the existing residence is.

No, it's just a simple answer, yes or no, you know.

Right, so I was confused. We've got, I know we've got a building height issue, and then we've got the one foot property line. So it's two different issues, it's not just one issue? Am I correct in that? Because I remember originally, when we talked about this, we we wanted you to have more room off the house instead of it being right up against the house. Right, right, right. Because this is a side road. Technically, that's I think why we kind of got to where we got but I do we have a survey that shows where the actual shed is on the property now?

No, I don't have an update. I have a Wooden fence. In front of that, I have a chain link fence. The chain link fence is my property line. Due to all the vines over there, when I put my wooden fence up, I just brought my fence inside. I wasn't worried about it. But if you go to my chain link fence, ow, it is.

Three feet?

Three foot. Because when I heard that, you guys gave me the very issue that I made darn sure I was three foot off that fence.

Is your wood fence two feet away from the chain link fence? I mean, was this measured off of the wood fence or the chain link fence?

This was taken from, I guess. That's accurate, yeah. Okay. Yeah, I mean, we didn't get out and measure his property.

I got you. We don't require a survey prior to pour, do we? Like the county requirements. So like Volusia County, I get the form boards up, we get it ready to pour, the surveyor comes out, surveys the form boards, I submit that to the city, they won't give me my inspection to put concrete down until it's been verified to pretty much we're building what we say we're building where we say we're building it.

Sounds like a good ad.

Only the county requires it.

On the east side of the structure, sir, with all those vines, there's a fence underneath those vines, and that's three feet off your building? Okay. All right. Thank you, sir. Are there any other public comments on this project? You can sit down, sir. OK. At this point, I see no other public comments. I'm closing the public comments. And at this point, I need a motion on this.

I'll make a motion to approve VA 2614. I'll second.

OK, thank you. Roll call, please.

Mr. Duane? Yes. Mr. Fisher? Yes. Mr. McGinnis? Yes. Mr. Jankovic? Yes. Mr. Hatcher? Yeah. Mr. Cunningham?

Yes.

Thank you so much. Next item, VA-2617, request for a non-administrative variance to allow a fourth accessory structure to exceed the maximum allowance of two accessory structures per parcel and to allow an accessory structure greater than 350 square feet to not match the facade of the primary residence for the property located at 2729 Lime Tree Drive. Staff report, please. Thank you, Chairman.

City staff sent out public notice within 500 feet with this aerial map included. The applicant is requesting to allow for a fourth accessory structure, a 14-foot wide by 30-foot long shed. Per Article 3, Section 21-3602J, they're requesting an increase in the number of accessory structures beyond two to four. And then per Article 3, Section 21-36-02M, to not have the accessory structure, the 14-by-30-foot shed, match the principal structure's facade. City staff did review the application against Article 9, Section 21-100.04D, and found that the applicant could not meet all six of the criteria. City staff will be glad to go over any of those six criteria if the Board has any questions.

Thank you, sir. Open to public hearing. Is the applicant in the audience? Please come to the microphone. Please state your name and address and what you're doing. My name is Nancy Conley. Can you bring that a little closer to yourself? Okay. My name is Nancy Conley.

I live at 27.

I have been trying to the garage. I've put the brick on it painted the house so it is about the same color as I've tried to get the drive guy that was supposed to do it got sick and said he couldn't do anything for two months. I called another I finally got hold of another one and he's supposed to come Friday to give me an estimate of what it would cost to put that in and I know I have one too many the fourth one was an aviary that I did not know was considered a shed because it's been there 25 years. And when we, when that was put in, we were told we didn't need a permit and that it wasn't considered anything because it was an A deal. But if I need to, I will take that one down because I'm down to one bird now and I don't need All right. I don't know what else I can do. I thought I would be able to move. If I had to move a shed, I can move it onto my lot next door, but they say I can't because there's no house on it, even though it is a building lot 80 by 125.

The garage to the north of the house, is that on your property? Yes, it is. Okay. All right.

They were showing that it is like 12 foot from the property line and 9 foot from the house. All right. Because my lot, the house is on 120 by 125. It's a three-lot corner.

Now, okay. Would have any questions for the applicant?

The big shed was, did they pull a permit?

No.

I tried to, and she said I had to make it look like the house, get the drive in, and I've been trying to do that.

Without a permit?

Yeah, this is an after the fact.

Completely after.

I have paid for the permit before.

and I was supposed to hear from him within a week, and I never did, so that meant it was okay.

Any other questions?

I just, Ryan, on the staff recommendation says should the variance be approved, the board, staff is requesting that the board add the above mentioned conditions. I was a little fuzzy on what those conditions you're asking to be added to the approval.

I didn't see any conditions either. I'm assuming you mean that the other stuff gets taken out, but I didn't want to assume that.

Yeah. Based on the removal of two of the accessory structures.

Two. Okay.

That still leaves three. Okay. Well, Tommy, do you want to say something?

I was just going to say, we have a reason for what people do, the way we set them up and why. Right. Most of them have I'm just curious on the number of buildings in the storage.

That's me, but you just got me a little confused there.

Well, the one building was my husband's in it.

You would have to combine the two lots. And I would. I said I would. Well, it still doesn't.

It's still even though it's Yes. Well, right. Yeah.

I mean, so the issue even if you combine the lots, you still can only have two accessory structures. But the my hang up here is, I know you tried to go to the city, but you didn't hear back. But then don't take this the wrong way. I don't mean it to be insensitive. But the answer can't be I'm going to do it anyway. You know, I mean, you know, I mean, that's kind of, and then on top of that, you've purchased a building, you've paid someone to put it in, all without a permit. I mean, it just, it's like one thing after another after another was.

I thought the guy in the office said he was going to take care of that, and then before he brought this thing in, he said no, and that's when I went in to try and get the permit before it got here.

I do have a question for you. On a garage, you use that as a garage for your car? No, no. You use it as storage?

Right now, it's just storage because, like I said, I had no way to drive it.

All right, so you use the garage as storage, and you got the other two sheds you use as storage. So there's three. And you got the bird thing in the back, which you don't use for storage, obviously.

No, it was an AV area. I used to have a lot of those, but they've gone.

well he happened to just mention one of my concerns too was that you know you've got a history of not coming to us for permits when they're needed and uh you know so that kind of uh something that crossed my mind would admit that i i sort of really know your stuff prior to the meeting so uh that's all i have

Okay. Is it possible to get this down to two accessory units? I mean, we already know the aviary, you said you're already starting to take away. So, I mean, you got two sheds over here to the south. So, I mean, could you eliminate like the small little one so that now you're back within compliance?

Well, the small one, I've got a bunch of stuff. And like I said, the bigger one on that side, was my husband's, and he had all of his tools in it. So it would, I guess if I had to take out the smaller one, I could put all of that in the garage, but then I wouldn't really be able to use that as a garage.

Okay. I'm going to, thank you. I appreciate it. Is there any public comments on this application?

Okay, I mean, I want to make sure that we're all clear here. So if The reason that I'm trying to see if she would be willing to knock this down to two accessory dwelling units is if we don't, she's got to get rid of it.

Yeah, yeah, I understand that.

I mean, she's put a lot of money in here to end up just having to rip it down. I understand that. And the reality is the city probably could push to have the other ones taken down anyway. Right. Because of it. So, ma'am, that's why I'm asking you. I mean, is there a way that you could get it down to two accessory dwelling units and

Well, she is on what would have been a corner lot, right? Because it's right there at 28th Street. And then she owns the property to the north of that. So it's not like she's in the middle of the shores on a regular sized lot. I would think if she could remove the aviary.

It's the idea that we have these rules for a reason. And we have to draw a line at some point and say, I understand what her concerns are. She might have to get rid of some of the stuff she has. But so, you know.

My question is that based on the past, whether it's her fault or not, I understand.

Right.

But we do have violations already in place. Correct. My suggestion is would be one or two things. Either we could suspend this or have her come back at a later date once these deficiencies have been corrected, and then we can look at it again, or... Well, that would make sure that they're done. Yeah.

Or we just... Because we've had situations in the past where they say they're going to do it, and they don't do it.

Correct. And that's that. There's too many deficiencies.

Yeah. Well, you have a good point. You have a good point. And legal counsel down there?

Well, I got one more question. Ma'am, is there a way, I'm stealing this idea from somebody else, is there a way to attach the big shed to the house via a hallway? Meaning, make it part of the house, make it an addition. Yeah. Would it be possible, because I mean, if she does that, now it's not an accessory dwelling. Now it's an addition. Where are we gonna count a breezeway or does it have to be an air-conditioned space? Right, I mean I'm a fan of the breezeway just because I feel it does the same thing, but that's just me I mean because if she did that what's so ma'am the the side of the house that's next to the garage What's there two bedrooms?

Is there an exterior door there?

No, there's a window, I bet. would it be possible to take one of those windows and convert that into a door, then create a breezeway, a covered roof with a sidewalk, the whole nine yards, all the way across to that garage, and then have a connection into the garage through another door, if you wanted. And then if you got rid of your aviary, now you're down to two accessory structures. I mean, it's a lot of moving parts, but... Right. Correct, yeah, I mean, I guess that's, we'd have to lean on Ryan for that, I mean. Well, yeah, technically it would still, my understanding is a breezeway really comes down to the building official on if they're gonna rule it as connected or not.

Can I interject a question to the legal counsel? At this point, there's a lot of confusion on what's happening with this piece. As was suggested, this is denied and start from scratch. go back to where it should be, what we're saying has to be done in order to proceed with this situation.

Yeah, so you can do a couple things. You can deny it and then give feedback to the applicant so that they have a general sense of what might be accepted in the future, but that's not a guarantee, of course. Right. It could be a different board. Right. Or you can accept it with very specific conditions and timelines.

I have problems with conditions and timelines. Because we, as a city, we can't follow up on these conditions and timelines. And too many times, we've been hoodwinked. People take advantage of us.

I guess I want to just be clear that if you deny it but give feedback, you are not binding a future planning and zoning board, even if it's you guys all the same board. can give general understandings but you can't obligate a future planning and zoning board by denying saying do these things you can deny and give friendly advice yeah okay decide to do that okay if you condition it approve it with conditions that's the only way to to essentially move it forward with those conditions i'm not saying to do that one way or the other yeah to you guys but i'm just clarifying um essentially they're they're similar you know getting at similar goals but if a future planning and zoning board, she came back with an application and said, I did the things you guys said, they don't have to approve the variance if it still requires it.

Well, I thought I heard, Jim, didn't you ask, could we table it with a timetable, with a deadline?

Yes, you can do a time certain pushing it into the future.

So, I mean, if we gave her the feedback, table it for, I mean, the problem is she's going to need an engineer and that's not going to happen in 30 days. I can tell you right now. But I mean, if we gave her, if we tabled it and said 60 days, but here's what we're looking for from you to do this, gives her 60 days to effectively come back, and then I guess the if not would be what happens if it's the end of 60 days and nothing happens, then what happens next? She gets an order to take it down?

I would be more inclined just to say no. Fix the deficiencies, then reapply. That's that's just my opinion here.

I would have I would have to agree with that too.

Or just kind of.

the, if she corrects the deficiencies, as far as making sure that she has a permit, which she's applied for, making sure that there's either a path or a driveway going to that shed, making sure the facade matches, right, she corrects those still, there's really only one way, or there's really only two options for she either removes the shed, she gets a very, so that one won't be able to be corrected through this period, just make sure that we're clear on

because it's either two options either takes off the show or she gets a variance that has extra or or she puts the driveway in and gets rid of two of the other structures and now she's back in compliance you can sit down now you can sit down ma'am okay all right so at this point i'm going to ask for a motion on this item how are we going to proceed If we don't have emotion, then it dies.

Still... I'd rather see her come into compliance. Now if that means she's gotta get rid of the smaller shed, but she gets to retain the two larger ones and that aviary has to go, at least now she's inside the building code, in the land development code, then I know she's still gotta put the three foot apron in. The size of the lot really doesn't make a difference to how many structures she can have on it. I would rather see that, because that's what we've been pushing for for the last year and a half anyway. and that the front of this thing matches the facade of the house. Is that the pet peeve?

She has fixed that.

Right. So that's my inclination.

Is there a driveway that's supposed to be attached to this garage?

Yeah, because it's got the garage door. It either now has to have an egress path, so you have to have an improved apron, but you can do a path which can be rock, gravel, just means for ingress and egress. If you want to park there, you'd have to do a concrete drive.

It's too loosey goosey. Too loosey goosey. Sorry. But I'll, you know, I need a motion. If there is a motion.

I'm gonna make a motion to deny this, but ma'am, what I would prefer you do is get the property in compliance. So if you're able to get your accessory structures down to two and then get the apron and everything in, you don't need a variance for anything. You know what I mean? So I just, we're trying our best to figure out a way to make it work, but I think this is the best way to make it work. So my motion is to deny it. Do I have a second?

I'll second. Okay, we have a second. Roll call please.

Who was that second? Mr. Duane? Yes. Mr. Fisher?

Yes.

Mr. McGinnis? Yes. Mr. Andrew Kovacs?

Yes.

Mr. Hatcher?

Yeah.

Mr. Cunningham?

Yes.

Next item on the agenda, AN 2602, request for annexation parcel ID 7430-04-12-0070 from Volusia County into the City of Edgewater. Staff report, please.

thank you city staff sent out public notice within 500 feet of the subject property shown here with this aerial map the applicant is requesting to annex into the city of edgewater the parcel is located within the city's interlocal service boundary agreement and is contiguous to city limits city staff are recommending approval for the annexation of this parcel within the city of edgewater

Thank you. Is the applicant here? Please come to the microphone, state your name and address, and proceed.

Good evening. My name is . Very simple annexation . It was originally brought into the city to gain access to the parcels. But in the site plan review with the county, they wanted alignment with the roads. Edward and Alvarez. So we agreed to do that. The county is basically blessed. Brian about down can be maintained and maybe positive flooding there was that bridge over when all the various debris went in those culverts when the tide didn't come out for three days.

Thank you very much. Is there any public comments from the audience for Mr. LaCour? Come into the microphone, state your name and address, and sir, if you want to hang for the answer or rebuttal, please do so.

Okay, we need your address.

For the record. Just know we need you to tell us your address.

You have to tell us your address. You have to tell us your address.

Okay. and we live next to the Sawyers, and I think the Sawyers are the ones that had ownership of all that property, and I believe that the gentleman is now wanting to annex it. Is it that yellow rectangular section? Is that what's being annexed? We just wanted to know what the future plans are.

Oh, absolutely. I appreciate that.

Thank you.

Absolutely. Please, Mr. LaCourte.

When originally we went and we were, had been approached by the city five, six years ago when I bought the property to do affordable housing back then with all the resistance against development. We didn't do anything. Then the moratorium came along. And so I went over and I talked with the county and the county's rather confident about development today and very uncooperative. So it came up with a plan which we have submitted, which are basically three lots back there on 17. Very non intrusive. We will only do the pads and the septic tank is recessed away. We've avoided all wetlands. We will not come back and ask for any variances. and we took into consideration the other residents. These would be single-family homes, you know, with five acres of sleep, the least amount of intrusion that could possibly go there. I know these are the people that are repairing all the boats and running the boat yards down there. Is this happening? Yeah, I bet you is.

That doesn't bother me.

And it doesn't bother me. But that being said, we are 100% within the guidelines of the existing zoning with the least amount of density. The property is already in the city. This annexation is merely for access and would come in and be controlled by us.

Thank you very much, Mr. Corr. Come to the microphone, please, and speak.

My concern is just the green space. We've been there for 31 years. We've enjoyed living there. And we enjoy having our trees in the back, even though I don't own those trees. But I wonder how much would be knocked down.

The paths have been determined preliminarily. It's not going to, my intent is not to take any trees that are historic or specimen. So it's going to maintain trees other than the pad. Again, that's up to the owner. I'm not going to live there. I'm just developing real estate.

The ingress would be the yellow rectangular, and then you would develop going north or south.

Ma'am, your time is up. Thank you. I appreciate your questions. Are there any other questions for Mr. LaCour? Okay. Thank you, sir. Yes. On this topic, sir? Okay. Please state your name and address for the record.

Okay. My question is, that 16 acres, 18 acres, whatever it is back there, why is he wanting it to go from low density to high density? If you want to put three houses back there, why are we changing it? us, the people that live there, we're not stupid. We've heard them want to go back there and build houses, all kinds of houses, okay? Everybody that lives on Tatum, it's a water canal in that area. We all have certain size houses. I mean, we've all lived there for 10 years in a nice, quiet neighborhood. For some reason, this man wants to come in and now make it high density. What's the reason for it? The reason is probably because we're not stupid. The reason is sooner or later, he's gonna add a whole bunch of how it's not hard to figure out. Like the idea is, we don't understand the high density makes no sense. And if you've ever read on Tatum Boulevard, Monday through Friday, about 10 minutes to eight to 830 that high school Cars are backed up on Edgewater Canal waiting to get to the high school. And that's just what we need, is a whole bunch more houses. And that's what's going to happen. When you ask for high density, we're not stupid. So, like I said, we just don't understand why this man wants high density when it's already low density. To me, three, you talk about three, five acre lot, you know, no reason to change.

Thank you, sir. Yes, Mr. LaCroix, please. You can sit down.

The only problem I got here is that entire comment was about the zoning and not the annexation.

That's coming up next. The CPA would be... I know.

And it's low to low, so I don't really think it's... Okay, thank you for...

It actually is... My request is the three single-family lots. Yeah. I think the density is...

Yeah, so the information that was just said wasn't accurate. The request for on the next item for the comprehensive plan amendment, the scale, we're going from county urban low intensity, which is four to eight units an acre, the city of Edgewater low density residential, which is four units per acre. So it's actually technically a reduction in density from the county's future land use elements. Okay. We're up.

Thank you. Let's do that first item and get that out. So are there any other public comments on the initial topic?

The annexation.

The annexation. You're talking about the annexation, ma'am, right? Yes.

OK. Mary Forrester. I live at 1937 Edgewater Canal Road. And one thing I'm confused about, and I talked to Ryan on the phone for a little while on Friday, The property now, if I look at the property appraiser's website, it's listed as wasteland, canal runoff, and there's something else that's similar to that. I know that I have a history with this property because he bought it off of my neighbor. She was never allowed to do anything with it. But during storms, Edgewater Canal Road at Tatum was underwater. from Edgewater Canal Road, I'm gonna say a quarter mile down was a foot underwater. It gets clogged up underneath the, underneath the . So we're going from, you know, we have all of the water that's coming from Edgewater Canal where I live. You guys probably remember me speaking. I had 30 inches after Milton, 42 inches in my yard after Ian, And after the thunderstorm last fall, I had 18 inches of water sitting in my yard. I own an acre and a quarter, about half a mile down Edgewater Canal Road. The canal gets so full because it's taking everything from Oakley Preserve, it comes from Mission, it comes from along the bike trail and pushes. The canal gave us flappers, I don't know what they're called, because we would get back washed through our culvert into our yard. The other issue is traffic. That's Edgewater and everybody's thoroughfare to get to the high school. There are kids that already have trouble. I understand that it's just a few houses, But what about the construction? If they're gonna be opening that up and putting an entrance there? My concern is children's safety in that area. Edgewater Canal and Tatum are both heavy thoroughfares before and after school. I've lived there 25 years, and it just keeps getting worse and worse. The other concern, and I've talked to a lot of my neighbors, is how high is he going to go up? Edgewater doesn't have a height limit for film. Five houses, but there's 5,000 square foot houses. How high are we going to go up? Water's going to run downhill into that tiny little canal that is also getting townhouses just north of it. So that's our concern. The county residents is flooding and school traffic. It seems like there should be another way he can get into there. Is he landlocked?

Well, there's one other. There is another access further down Tatum, but it goes to the lot three, and he'd have to go through the wetlands to get to the other two. Yeah.

You know, why not put it through Edgewater? Why keep annexing the county in to Edgewater?

Ma'am, your time is up. Thank you.

To answer your question, though, it's because Daytona State owns the property next to him.

So one thing that I will say about... kind of related to this is that the city of Edgewater, Mr. La Cour, through his Sunset Key Freelot Rural Estate Subdivision, is granting the city a 50-foot stormwater easement along the entire perimeter of his property. And I have secured a 50-foot drainage easement from Daytona State that will be going to council in August. So regarding the flooding, staff is actively procuring and securing easements to expand said canal, the Gabor de canal there. And the intent is to go and reach out to Onyx and get another 50 feet and widen that whole canal, you know, out for the future. And this just so happened, Mr. LaCour was trying to do a development where it allowed us that opportunity to get all three.

Nice. That's very good. Thank you. Good to know. any other public comments on this item okay seeing none i'm going to close public comments and ask for a motion a motion to send a favorable recommendation for annexation 2602 to city council we have a second tommy second okay roll call please mr duane yes mr fisher yes mr mcginnis no

Mr. Kennedy? Mr. Jankovic? Yes. Mr. Hatcher? Yep. Mr. Cunningham?

Yes.

Next item on the agenda, CPA 2602, request for a small-scale comprehensive plan amendment for a parcel located at the east side of Tatum Boulevard and south of Josephine Street from County Urban Low Density, Low Intensity to City of Edgewater Low Density Residential with a conservation overlay parcel ID 7430-2.

04-12-0070 staff report please thank you chairman city staff sent out public notice within 500 feet of this subject property shown in yellow the applicant is requesting a small scale future land use map amendment from volusia county urban low intensity the city of edgewater low density residential with the conservation overlay i recall from just prior that the Volusia County urban low intensity allows for four to eight dwelling units per acre. The request is to go to low-density residential with the conservation overlay, which allows for a maximum of four dwelling units per acre. Again, the intent here is to create a small three-lot rural estate subdivision. As you can see, the applicable future land use being requested is... basically identical to the counties. It's actually a reduction. City staff have reviewed the application against the comprehensive plan and has found that the application is consistent and is recommending approval to state commission.

Very good. Thank you, sir. Again, Mr. LaCour, if you want to speak to this, I know you, okay. Any other public comments regarding this item? Okay, seeing no other public comments. Board, I need a motion on this, please.

Can we talk?

Oh, I'm sorry. Sure, please. I'm sorry. I'm sorry.

No.

No, you can't.

This is just putting that one parcel in line with all of the other property that's already there, right? It's already in the city. It's already under these same guidelines. It's just locking them all together.

Yeah, he wouldn't be coming before you because the minor subdivision can be processed by staff. the county wanted the road, the entrance for these two lots to line up with Edgewater Canal Road. And they would not approve of the development without it lining up with that road. And so the original road was proposed on that small yellow parcel to the south. And now it legally required the ship to the north. And that's why we're bringing this piece.

And, sir, and then the other parcel you own south, you're not putting a road in there at all? This is your only entrance to all of that? Okay. Thank you.

Okay. Any other board comments? Now may I have a motion, please?

I'll make a motion to approve CPA 2602. Second? I'll second it.

Okay, thank you. Roll call, please.

Mr. Dwayne? Yes. Mr. Fisher? Yes. Mr. McGinnis? No. Mr. Jankovic?

Yes.

Mr. Hatcher?

Yep.

Mr. Cunningham?

Yes.

Next item on the agenda is RZ 2602, request for a rezoning from Volusia County R-3A residential to R-2 low density residential with a conservation overlay for parcel ID 7430-04-12-0070. Staff report please.

thank you chairman city staff sent out public notice within 500 feet of the subject property uh the applicant is requesting to rezone from r2 or from excuse me r3a single family low density in the county to r2 low density residential with conservation overlay this allows for single family home construction City staff note that it is adjacent to like-to-like R2. City staff have found that the rezoning does meet the applicable comprehensive plan policies and is recommending approval.

Thank you. Mr. LaCour? Thank you. Public comments? Any public comments from the audience, please, on this item? Seeing nobody coming to the podium, I ask for board comments. Hold on.

Ryan looks confused.

Well, I'm just confused because was the subdivision plan not underneath as a link? It was.

It was on all of my printouts.

OK.

It's on the agenda. Yeah, it's in there.

Can I do it?

Yeah, go ahead.

I'll make a motion to approve RZ 2607 with the following conditions.

Well, which is it, 2607 or 02? Because mine says both.

RZ 2607.

I have RZ 2603.

Is it 02? Okay. Strike my previous comment. I make a motion to approve RZ 2602 with the following condition. The R2 zoning shall be limited to development of no more than two single family or three single family detached dwelling units consistent with the site plan presented to the Planning and Zoning Board on July 15, 2026. Any increase in density, any additional dwelling units, any accessory dwelling units, or any subdivision of the property shall require a new rezoning approved by the City Council.

You get all that?

She can watch it back.

I'll send it to you.

Second.

Roll call, please.

Mr. Dwayne? Yes. Mr. Fisher? Yes. Mr. McGinnis? No. Mr. Andropovics?

Yes.

Mr. Hatcher? Yep. Mr. Cunningham?

Yes.

The next item on the agenda is 20 R SP 2412. Request for a major site plan approval, the Edgewater River Oaks dry stack boat storage, marina and restaurant for the property at 161 Jones fish camp road. Staff report please.

Thank you, Chairman city staff sent out public notice within five feet of the subject property. If you recall, the applicant, Steve Housier, on behalf of Indian River Shoreline LLC, submitted a site plan for the Edgewater River Oaks Marina, phase one, back on November 18th of 2024. The applicant has undergone seven reviews by the Technical Review Committee. The city's third-party engineer, Meaden Hunt, has also confirmed that the project meets all the requirements of the Edgewater River Oaks MUPED, the City of Edgewater's Comprehensive Plan and the Land Development Code.

The total site is 18.8 acres. This specific site means about 12 and a quarter.

The project proposes a 71,550 square foot dry stack boat storage building with 338 dry slips, a 10 slip wet marina, and a 14,400 square foot restaurant with 400 seats. This major site plan application does not include the hotel, which was approved as part of the MUPUB agreement. The stormwater on site is treated through pervious pavers that have three feet of rock separation, which then discharges into that wet detention pond. That's a very basic overview of the stormwater. The applicant has demonstrated that they are meeting the pre-post development for the site, adhering to both the 25-year and the 100-year storm. City staff noted in their staff report that the applicant is meeting all the requirements and will be happy to go over any specifics that the board may have. Specifically in the staff report, city staff noted the page of the ordinance number with the corresponding sheet of the civil site plans with those corresponding code requirements being met. With that, city staff is recommending the board send a favorable recommendation to city council.

Thank you. Thank you, sir. Is the applicant in the audience? Please come to the microphone, state your name and address, and your case. Good evening.

For the record, I'm Mark Watson, attorney with Cobb-Pole. My address is 231 North Woodland Boulevard in Dillon. I appreciate the opportunity to be here with you this evening. I've got a couple of other folks here with me, as Brian indicated the opportunity. over the past couple of years is also here in order to start out by thanking staff as indicated in their report they have spent an awful lot of time working with us on this i know you have seen this a number of different times both at the zoning stage and when we came back and did an amendment to the zoning we also have finalized an agreement that the city council approved part of this process moving forward. I've got a couple of slides, a couple go through them, but I think it's got a lot of really good detail. There's been a lot of interest in this project as we've worked through it. So I want to put the information out here and walk you through it and we'll open up for any questions that you might have. So just a couple comments on what we're here for. The staff report already kind of gave you the summary but This major site plan is for phase one of the overall mixed-use component of the project. As you recall, there's an apartment or residential component that's closer to US-1. This is the portion closer to the river. And we've got a 71,550-square-foot dry stack building with 338 slips, 10-slip wet slip marina, 14,400-square-foot building with restaurant, retail, office uses in it and then 171 parking spaces with the associated stormwater and site infrastructure to support the overall development. We're not here asking for any variance to the criteria in your land development code or the PUD or any waivers from those standards. There's no deviation from any of those standards that are being proposed and we're not asking to change anything relating to the zoning or the PD, the PD that was already approved or anything relating to the comprehensive. Just the next slide kind of gives you a quick summary. Again, we've had seven reviews with your technical review committee going through and looking at the engineering detail with regard to the site plan. Approximately 20 months of review time as we've worked through that So just a quick overview of the project history, where we started. We started out here going through this board and the city council with annexation, comprehensive land use amendment, rezoning to We had the amendment that was ultimately approved in November, or that this board recommended approval of in November of 2024, and that ultimately was approved and reported in early 2026. So again, the zoning is there, the zoning is in place, and the standards that were required to meet in the site plan process are set for . So if you go to the next slide, this is just a quick summary of that. Overall, the permitted uses that are already in the MPUD development agreement, boat storage, multi-story stack storage, boat marina, docks and wet slips, restaurants, marina retail, fuel pumps, hotel, those are all consistent with the permitted uses that are assigned for the property. The boat slip allocation, 338 slips, 20 wet slips, sorry, 338 dry slips, 20 wet slips, that's compliant with the Manatee Protection Plan, and those are slips that are allocated to this property We had a maximum height of 55 feet for the dry storage and commercial buildings. The restaurant building had a maximum square footage of 28,000 square feet under the preliminary approvals in the PUD. Dry stack parking, one space for every 2,000 square feet. Open space, 25% is the minimum established in the PUD and land development code. And then our setbacks are as you see here on the slide. So in that 20-month period,

We have gone through and reviewed and re-reviewed and negotiated how to approach things like stormwater. We'll get into a little bit of detail on it because I think they've really done a unique job of how they've approached stormwater and some of the other features on the overall site plan.

City staff has recommended approval of that. Mead & Hunt has signed off on that to confirm full compliance. city to reconstruct that road. So as for the project itself, if you go a couple slides forward here, the project overview is a little bit more difficult to see on black and white blind drawing, but on the bottom of this picture you see Jones Fish Camp Road coming down. You've got two driveway connections to it, the one on the furthest east You can see those uses are actually up adjacent to the northern property down here. And you can see where the wet marina component comes out from the dry storage area. This is just, it's really hard to see the commercial site on it, but just to give you some context and kind of refresh your memory on the overall layout. how this was originally approved. There's a significant wetland area being preserved that separates that residential component from the mixed-use commercial component. That's kind of in between the two site plans here, and then the site plan we're here to talk about today is, of course, the property on the right. We can go to the next slide. Okay, so just to kind of run through the overall project, 18.8 acres. We've got the 75 on the dry storage. You see the retail building being constructed with phase one here. The maximum permitted building height under our PUD with the amendment was 55 feet. The building is coming in at 53 feet 7 inches. 338 slips. We did have an allocation of 20 So the next we wanted to kind of give you a rundown of how do we meet those standards.

So on the left hand column here, the required column is the standards that we have.

And then on the right with the proposed you see how we've complied with that. So I mentioned the height. We're below the maximum proposed height. We are exactly consistent with the number of dry boat slips that are provided. We're using about half of the wet boat slips that are being provided, about half of the approved size for the restaurant and retail building. Open space, we have a 25% minimum, but we're providing 52.6% on the overall site. Building coverage, we've got a maximum of 50%. Again, this is phase one, but right now we're at 15.9. Impervious coverage, 75% is our maximum. We've got 60% being provided. That does take into account some allocation for the forest papers. We're meeting our setbacks on Jones Fish Camp Road. We're meeting the wetland preservation and setbacks. So this is one that I think was, we spent a lot of time working on this particular aspect, and if you want to credit your staff, they I think were very creative with us and worked with us on how to really make this a different project than you've seen in . So starting with, we have language that encourages in the PUD the use of low impact development, low impact development strategies. We converted that to some of the actual features that are in the site plan. For example, the parking area has permeable papers, and those sit on top of about three feet of rock that go below that. So that allows for percolation of the water.

Otherwise, it gathers on your parking area and runs off into a pond.

This parking area is actually designed to let that seep into the ground underneath the parking lot and go into that rock layer beneath that. We actually have some of that additional exfiltration underground storage under the dry storage. building. So there's actually where you're storing boats, we actually have stormwater underneath that as well. We've got wet detention areas, which we'll see in the site plan a little bit more in a minute, and then littoral plantings that are going to be added to that. So you'll have not just a pond, but a pond that will have littoral trees and other vegetation planted around it to make it look like much more of a natural pond. And then we've got, because of how we're designing the stormwater and all that percolation and exfiltration water from a water quality standpoint as it goes through that filtration process. The treatment train you'll hear this talk about when you're talking about low impact development standards. The idea is that at each stage in how the water flows through the property, there's another benefit being provided. So here we've got rainfall coming onto the pavement and the roof. We've got permeable papers that allows a portion of that to soak in and also be treated with that filtration. You've got the retention between the drive, underneath the drive stack. You've got your wet detention in the stormwater pond. You can see that kind of little light here, but you can see that on the left-hand side of the picture in the site plan that's on your screen. That's the wet detention area, a little bit more than an acre. And that's gonna, that's where we've got littoral findings that'll be included as part of the landscape plan. You've got, as I said, the drive's retention and treatment of water coming in off of James Jones Fish Camp Road as well. And then we have a ultimate discharge that is a spreader swale that goes down and goes through the existing mangroves that are being preserved. So this, I think, was a really helpful illustration. As you look at each of, we looked at three different places on the overall property within the site plan. So what you have on the left-hand side of each group of four columns there is the kind of pre-development conditions I'm sorry, the one, you know, the farthest column is the pre development 25 year storm event. The next column is post development. So you'll see the trend as you're going through and looking at these columns, the pre development discharge rate is higher in each instance than the post development. So we're retaining not only, you know, the same volume of water and everything on site, but we're actually holding back a little bit. So we've really worked to try and make sure that, you know, we're, we're meeting

a lot of the things that we've heard from the community with regard to how we're referring to the stormwater with regard to the overall site.

And this really just takes the numbers that are in your staff report and puts them into a graphic form so you can kind of see what that illustration looks like as you look at the overall site. We talked when we went through the zoning about using best practices with regard to the marina. So here's some of the features that we've gotten included in the overall plans. We've elevated the buildings so that we're five feet above So we have that raised up so that those areas of the property are well above where they might otherwise experience inundation. We've got a closed loop boat wash. So the water that's used to wash down boats as they come back in from use goes into a recirculating system where it's then cleaned, treated, and then comes back out and is used again to wash the next day. You can see that with a lot of car washes, but this is the first time I've seen that with a boat wash facility like that. Fuel, we have a fueling facility that will be on location, but it's on its own pad with a containment system. So it's contained so that if there is any rupture in the pancreas like that, that's secondary to the payment. And then we're also treating, we're treating right now where you don't have what the existing bridge camp road doesn't have any stormwater facilities. We're now creating those and we're taking that into the property. So just quickly I'll walk through the permeable pavers. Again, it provides a higher level of treatment and a different level of treatment than you typically see. You've got 1.6 acres of pervious pavers that pre-treat the stormwater as they finish the site. So the parking field that kind of collects and filters the water instead of just shedding it off into the stormwater pond. Type D curves, those are the within that area and allow it time to percolate. We've got continuous sidewalks, and this ties into the pedestrian system we're also going to be constructing on Boone's Fish and Canip Road. And then landscape planners and other details that will make sure that the site not only functions well, but looks good. And that's been a key focus of the overall project. So moving on, I'm almost done, I promise, to shoreline protection. This is one of the things that was very important approval process. We've set up our construction. So what we mean by that is we're not doing anything beyond that 25 foot buffer off of the wetlands and off of the mangroves on the eastern end of the property. We do obviously have the one section where the marina comes out where the boats are launched, that the rest of that shoreline is being preserved with existing mangroves. We're putting The two wetlands that are on site, Wetland A and Wetland B, you've got 1.174 acres on Wetland A that are going under a reported conservation easement. We're also doing a conservation easement under the other wetland, which is just under 1.7 acres. And then we've, as I've stated, we've met and preserved all of the tree areas that we've committed to doing during the PUD approval process.

With regard to the shoreline,

We're not just kind of protecting it and leaving it as is. We're enhancing and improving it in that we're committing to remove the invasive species that are within that existing mangrove area. There are some invasives there. So we'll be taking those out so that the existing mangroves can flourish. We'll be adding some additional mangrove plantings to that as a result of that through the process. We coordinated how we were going through this design, and this was So in addition to working through all But you can see there, we've got Water Management District, Army Corps of Engineers, the Florida Department of Environmental Protection, Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, the Sovereign Submerged Lands Section of the FDEP, US Fish and Wildlife Service, and then the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services. So with that, why we're here tonight is to ask that you support the staff's recommendation of approval and forward this on to the council with the recommendation of approval. Noting that, you know, every use that we're proposing is excessive for the PUD development agreement, for any grants or waivers or any other changes to any of those standards. We've gone through a rather extensive review with the process that's brought us here. We're lowering that post-development discharge, I think, with the goal that the rights to protect it to the city . I'll stop there. If you've got any questions, happy to have them.

Phil, come up and answer them, because he's the engineer that knows all the details on the site . OK. Thank you. public hearing for public comments on this project at this point. Hang, if you have to answer questions. Does anyone want to come and speak for or against this project from the audience?

The only thing that may be worth, no, no, ma'am, you can still come up. I was just going to comment real quick. At large, they've already met the requirements of the MPUD, correct? Right. So, at this point, it's pretty much an administerial scenario. Legally, they're entitled to... I'm just trying to clarify this before everybody comes up, because this is one of the things that, when we get to this stage here and at Council, tends to get lost.

yeah so at this point so we've gone through the annexation comp plan amendment rezoning we've done a MUPUD amendment once on this property and now we're at site plan so between the Edgewater River Oaks MUPUD that was established in early 23 and then amended That development between Yardley and this one took about, Yardley was nine technical review committee reviews, this one was seven, and at this point, yes, it is an administrative decision whether or not they just met the requirements of the agreement.

Okay. Like legal counsel, you want to add something?

Yeah, I mean, yes, essentially there. I mean, if you had a very minor tweak or something that you didn't think complied based on that, but generally speaking, this isn't like we want to deny the whole project stage.

Okay, thank you. Thank you so much. That's all I just want to make sure everybody understands that that's the point where we're at now not.

Did you want to come to the microphone, ma'am? State your name and address, please. You have three minutes.

I hope that they can accomplish everything that's in those charts.

Brian will make sure that happens, ma'am. Anybody else would like to come to the microphone? Please, sir, state your name and address, please, for the record.

My name is Jim Moyer. Although I do have to say that I have responded I grew up in South Florida These are big construction projects. I don't know what the calculation of pervious is in that area. Obviously, the pavers are a good choice. I'm not sure that the filtration from the recyclable

Thank you, sir. That's what we're here for. Anybody else want to come to the microphone and speak? Please, again, state your name and address. You have three minutes.

I have a prepared statement I want to read to you here, but first let me speak to the Black Point marina that was just mentioned. straight out my front door. I know the city authorized that kind of advertising on the property, but I appreciate that. Thank you. I'm not even allowed to have a cell phone in my yard without getting H-O-A. I don't oppose the Marine at all. I think it's a wonderful project. If what has been said this evening is true and followed, how many of you walked down there and looked at the project? Looked at where they're proposing the hotel and the beach area that was originally on the sign across the street from the house. Have y'all looked at that land? How many mangroves did you see in that area? Just a minute. There's not one mangrove that's already been cleared out. It's been there that way since before I moved here. There's nothing but sand that you can see. I don't know what you witnessed when you were down there. I've seen you a couple of times. I don't know where you're getting your reporting from about mangroves and all this kind of stuff. There is nothing there. There were a bunch of forest turtles there. Don't know where they went, don't know what happened to them, don't know how they disappeared. Okay? Right next to the marina project, there's two lots. And I think a gentleman just spoke to us a minute ago about them getting cleared to leave. They were clearing those lots without a permit. Then they got a permit, and they cleared the lot. But then they came back with a bulldozer, and they finished taking the mangroves out along those lots. One of the lots that's advertised for sale now was adopted. So you're going to have this massive marina, you're going to have don't fish camp row right and we're gonna have a couple of turnarounds. That's great. And then you're gonna have these two lots that are being sold outside in separate and not zone with all of this other stuff going on. The homes, the tabloids, you got two lots that aren't even big enough for the mobile home. But they're selling them separate. And they're advertising with the dog. How's that going to fit into all this? Has the city given any consideration to that? When those were zoned out? and allowed to put 50 foot of topsoil that was filled with these lots up high enough to make them level with Jones Fish Camp Road. And the fill where it was placed, that was all wetlands. All wetlands, and you allowed them to fill in with topsoil. And then you let them come in and put netting over top of it and some grass spray. Meanwhile, our houses are covered with that black topsoil and dirt for those of us that live on the eastern end of Jones Fish Camp. I do not. Now, here's my other problem. I live on George Fish Camp Road, like I said. I'm going to have to live in a house I bought two years ago. I'm going to have to live through road construction.

Sorry, I'm sorry.

Your time is up.

Thank you.

One last thing. Please think about egress. We have one means of exit for the marina and our entire community. One means. That's it. How are you going to get 8,000 cars a day? Thank you, sir. Thank you. I would like my comments to be put into the public record.

Name and address. Address? Your address. Okay. And presently, the owner of...

boat storage, 55 feet. These are not the main concerns of our neighborhood, or most of us actually care about the neighborhood. The marina complex will increase digital traffic by 65,000 trips a day, I mean, 6500 trips a day. And on an already there. I know they say they're going to do a wonderful road for John's Fish Camp. But when we only have one way in and one way out, in the case of an emergency, we're not going to be able to get out. What happens if Boston Whaler has a fire? Or there's a gas spill? Or there's a hurricane? Or some other reason? And you have When you look at all of the traffic patterns or traffic reports that y'all were given of what's going to be increasing out there, in 2022, the traffic, the impact study showed that the new community would fully, when fully occupied, it was going to be 1,200 additional cars on that road. And also the CG was put in, adding more cars on the road, only in a shorter area. The traffic, the city granted Taylor Morrison a waiver to the two entrances requirement, even though they already knew that there were large developments being planned out in this area. Nobody took into thinking about the people who are actually going to be living out there. And when you get to this new development with the traffic study that was done by ACT Traffic Services from Indiana River to Fort Marina, they say 128, 1,280 daily trips from the multiple family homes.

Thank you, ma'am. Your time is up.

Thank you, ma'am. Your time is up. Thank you. State your name and address, sir. Jim Lovegren, 182 Jones Fish Camp Road.

My objection isn't against the marina, it's against one way in, one way out. And here is why.

One, a violation of safe ingress, egress, and the arbitrary granting of waiver. The land development code and standard life safety ordinances require a minimum of two separate points of public road access for subdivisions exceeding 100 homes to ensure emergency vehicle access. The Riverfront Estates Development has granted an explicit waiver to this rule Even Jones Fish Camp Road has its only point of ingress and egress. While the 2022 Riverfront Estates Traffic Impact Study isolated its own impact to an estimated 1,200 vehicle daily trips, this waiver was evaluated in a vacuum and failed to account for the imminent neighboring commercial development across the street. Number two, documented knowledge of cumulative infrastructure failure. The March 2023 traffic impact study completed for the Indian River Resort and Marina explicitly combined the traffic loads of all interconnected parcels. This study proved that the infrastructure would be forced to absorb close to 8,000 new vehicle trips a day as broken down previously. Three, breach of state-mandated concurrency in public safety hazards. Under Chapter 163 of the Florida Statutes of the City of Edgewood's concurrency management system, the city cannot legally approve developments that degrade a roadway's level of service below safe, acceptable thresholds. Evacuation and emergency bottlenecks. Forcing 8,000 daily trips onto a single-assist corridor in a coastal hurricane evacuation zone violates basic life-saving engineering. A single traffic accident, flooding event, Or a downed tree on Jones Fish Camp Road will completely trap hundreds of residents and resort guests, blocking fire engines, ambulances, and police from opening. Or the developer's self-created hardship problem. In Florida, zoning or property is legally entitled to a variance or special exception only if a unique, unavoidable physical trait of the land prevents them from making a reasonable use of it. The developer bought the whole 38-acre parcel of land known as River Oaks, which provided him with a direct route through his own property to access the planned marina hotel complex. He decided instead that he would sell the eastern half of the property for a quick profit, thereby eliminating his ability to have direct access to Route 1, forcing him to use Jones Fish Camp Road as its only access point. I want to point out a little bit of time here. The mangrove issue, and you can see this in your map and in your plan by aerial photographs, that somewhere in 2024, probably between April and June, somebody went in there and bulldozed 300 feet of mangroves off the shoreline and two acres of palm trees, all within the range of a gopher tortoise colony. So think about that. Thank you.

Thank you, sir. Any other comments, please? Please state your name and address. You have three minutes.

Good evening, Renee Richards, 136 Jones Fish Camp Road. This microphone really hasn't been the greatest all night, but I'll try and speak loud enough. This has been, you know, kind of a problem for some of us residents, some of them want it, some of them don't. But naturally, there is an issue about the roads. And one way in and out really is really not going to work for us. residents have been assured that they're going to have roundabouts and everything's going to be just great. And it's just going to be a problem. Because there's going to be a lot of trucks, boats with trailers, somewhat, they got to get to the dry stack to get, you know, to store their boat. And there's going to be delivery trucks to the restaurant, and to you know, the whole operation. And I'm just thinking that this is going to really be a hazard because what if somebody gets stuck in a roundabout, a delivery truck or a boat trailer, you know, some people aren't so skilled with their trailers. And it's just going to be a navigating nightmare, it seems like. And then it blocks up the whole subdivision. you know, just going to be kind of crazy. And I wish you would think about that. Because as far as emergencies, that's an issue. I just really think there needs to be another way in and out of it. When I was sold the property that I bought, I was told, oh, yeah, it's going to come down another access that's in between Dollar General, I guess, and Boston Whaler and the storage facility. And that hasn't happened. only because they didn't want to pay what they should for that property. They gave him some bogus offer and nobody's going to take it for that. But there's also going to be you know, an 8000 gallon gas tank there look near the boat launch. Is there going to be a retaining wall around that for safety? Is there going to be separate storage tank to collect waste oil from the boats during maintenance? Um, what safety measures are going to be in place? Uh, if there's a storm coming, you know, it's going to be up to withstand 150 mile an hour winds. Um, during construction, that's going to be an issue too.

All right. Did you start the time?

So there's a lot of things. Um, if it goes through as planned, there will not be enough room to provide the legally required parking spaces for a 390 room hotel. which would require at a minimum one parking space per room unless they put up a parking garage. So, I mean, there's still quite a few issues. I know they're trying to button it all down so that it sounds all pretty, but please just look at the whole issue that it's going to give us.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Any other public comments? case. Would you like to come back for a rebuttal?

Thank you, Chairman. Yeah, just briefly. Please, with regard to again, going back to the point where we are in the process, ingress and egress access points for the overall property were covered with the design of the reconstruction. We are going to be required to have that roadway fully constructed and accepted by the city prior to the final phase. So that process is going to be ongoing. But in the beginning, we have to start out by doing interim improvements to the roadway to make sure that there's continuous ability to use the roadway, we have to have maintenance and traffic plan to continue to make sure that not only the residents can continue to get in and out, but also emergency vehicles and car safety.

We've met those standards that was all done as part of you know,

And again, the specific design of the roadway, we took into account some of the comments that we heard with regard to making sure that there's ability to get around an accident or things of that nature with how that roadway was designed, both with roundabouts and also with bi-directional turn lanes in the center so there's free lanes to be able to bypass in addition to the festering facilities we're looking at. There's a couple of elements that I'm going to ask Phil to get up and talk to you specifically with regard to.

Okay, thank you.

There's so many comments been made.

I'll try to segment them so we can address them.

Phillip Hollis, 263 Menorca Beach Way, New Smyrna Beach.

All of the comments related to the room that is south

of jones fish camp road is in another drainage basin and ryan and city engineer are working with that lady and working on that problem there the clearing of those residential lots that uh were a code enforcement violation that the city got all over them and that is not us and not our property either and that's being taken care of separately that's a totally separate issue so many issues brought up It doesn't relate to us. I just want to kind of clear as many of those out of the way as I can. And yes, there was noxious vegetation removed on the shoreline in that area. And it was recognized in our agreement and everything and our permits with all of the regulatory agencies. And we have a specific procedural process of how we get back to having mangroves for the Brazilian for the shoreline that's been reviewed by every regulatory agency that there is. And we're doing what they are directing us to do and have fully cooperated in that regard. Let's see. Let's hit the road. There's two points of access to Jones Fish Camp from my property. There's two points of access to Jones Fish Camp from the subdivision to the south. When you go north, there's another route on Jones fish camp road to go through the bill to rent as well as Jones fish camp road and we put roundabouts where that traffic in our comes together. And I can tell you for a fact because I tried, Steve tried, everybody's tried to buy that alternate access. And we were just simply told no.

Okay. And that's, that's okay.

So on the and we doubled the cost of the road. We expanded significantly lane widths, roundabouts, bike trails, everything that was wanted in the city. We put the overhead power, the three-phase overhead power and everything, power, power, and light, dissipated with us. We put the power, you know, it's going underground. We're even providing a power easement on our property so that the road can be expanded And the three-phase power can get out of the way so we have more room to do lane width to increase the capacity of Jones-Fish Camp Road. Also, in our presentation, it's in the public record. I wish people would go back and look at all of the specific answers to questions that we put in there about how we're going to maintain traffic on that roadway and how we're going to treat access during the construction process of the roadway. So please look at that. It's all been covered in great detail. As it relates to the water side, over on the water side a little bit, I did the EPA box study to specifically look at what turbidity was created. We did avoidance and minimization. We reduced the capacity of the amount of fill that was removed from the lagoon four times. We reduced the amount of dredging in that lagoon by an order of magnitude. That means 10 times we 10 times what we originally started. We reduced the amount of dredging. It's the most efficient and best plan that it can be. And we worked with EPA model, Florida Department of Environmental Regulation, St. John's River Water Management, And that notice goes to Fish and Wildlife, Department of Agriculture, and the rest of the agencies, which come in and join into the process. So I'm telling you that the environmental issues in this project are covered. A bunch of gopher turtles got dumped on our property, and trust me, they're still there. We had a 100% gopher turtle survey, and they're all still there. And that's just two weeks ago. So the turtles are still there. Don't worry about the turtles. And we're relocating the turtles and following all the Fish and Wildlife guidelines on the turtles themselves. The building, the dry stack building, we are specifically working with a steel fabricator and the architects and engineers right now to make sure that whatever the code is, we want to design a minimum of 10 miles per hour higher than whatever code it is, 10 or 20, so that we make sure that whenever a hurricane comes, We closed the doors on a building that way exceeds the design requirements. And, you know, it's insured. And, you know, we've done everything we can to go above and beyond. And after that, you know, it's up to God. You can't, you know. But this is a very high-quality building. And everything that Shoreline does is quality. What else?

Anybody got any other questions?

We don't have any questions. I do. Yes, sir. Go ahead. Well, why only 10 slips? Why not 20?

We originally had 20 slips allocated to us. We recognized that we had class two shellfish waters. We were working with the FDEP, the Water Management District, We got fish and wildlife involved, and we got the Department of Agriculture shellfish section involved. And we limited it to 10 wet slips for this project because that's all we really had to have for this one, but based on the class 2 law.

Okay, I mean, my only I mean, you're building a restaurant, I'm going to assume there's going to be a boat club in here at some point, you know, just a boat club, like a freedom boat club or something like that. So I mean, just 10 slips seems to be not a lot.

Well, let me address those 10 slips, because that's a very good question. One, they're for staging to take boats in and out of the marina. Two, they're restricted, there's not any overnight mooring or they will never be rented. We're not deriving any revenues. off of those slips in the water just like there's no fuel pump on the dock in the water fueling is all in the campaign system on up on the boatyard where it's all protected we are we are a florida department of environmental protection clean marina i did the report about this stick this is everything we do how we operate and run and maintain this this rice pack marina because it's required by the FPVP, then they ship it over the water management district, and they send it over to the Corps of Engineers. And it's all the way down to the fact that we pay sales tax on our sovereign submerged land lease. And that's a part of the whole process. We have to buy the lease and pay sales tax on the money we spend for the lease to the state.

Well, no, what I meant by, so the tent slips, so I'm up and down the river every weekend. Right. River deck's awesome. You pull up to it, you go grab lunch, you get back on the boat, you go fish the rest of the afternoon, or you just go do your thing. So I can't pull my boat up here and go to the restaurant?

You can, but you're going to get on the Coconut Telegraph, right? You're going to get on VHF radio, you're going to call the marina and talk to them before you come in and when you come in.

Okay, so you're going to have a dock master.

And they will manage that process. If they're staging families early in the morning and they're staging families out and they've got 10 boats set out there ready for the families to come down and get on their boats and have a wonderful day, I'm sorry, but you may not get a slip of the tongue.

Right. Well, and my other concern is... No, no, no, I know. I'm just talking about, I mean, let's face it, there is nothing between River Deck and here, whatever it is, down in Titusville to do this. So, you know, you're going to get some boat traffic. It's going to want to come in and have a drink and have something to eat. My other concern is the parking spaces. If you've driven anywhere near Causeway Marine... Many lobster season, any fishing tournament, any Saturday or Sunday, they're parked everywhere they can because Mark doesn't have any parking there. He's got 12 spots.

You can see a sea of parking on our lot, but there's one very important thing to understand about this marina that's different from the lot. One is, there will be no boat trailers.

Right, no, I get it.

No boat trailers are allowed to park on the property. You will not on a trailer. You got to go down. And we're not doing maintenance. We're not doing maintenance. This is not a boat maintenance facility. You know, you got to you got to have your boat, you got to pull your boat out and have it maintained. As you would normally

Okay, well I mean the only reason I'm pointing out is so you got 126 parking spaces allocated for the dry slip and 41 if I remember right. I can't remember your slide. For the restaurant, the restaurant makes sense but I mean that's only one third the parking spaces for your dry slips. I mean that's. Is it really? I don't know, that's why I'm asking.

Okay.

Okay, yeah, I mean, I don't know, I'm just, you know, it could be par for the course, because, I mean, the reality is, I don't agree with the traffic study, because 6,500 cars a day is a lot, and it's a dry stack storage place, so that people are going to show up at 8 o'clock, they're going to go, and they're going to come back at 6 o'clock in the afternoon. The reality is... You can't mathematically get to 8,000-something. Correct. The reality is that

Oh, I know. Yep.

So when the traffic study was generated, do they not utilize like a dry stack traffic or are they just classifying it like storage units or something like that?

No, they classified it, but the traffic study was inclusive of the hotel. The traffic study looked at it as if the whole thing was built.

Even with the hotel, though, I mean, how many, 8,500 trips in a day?

You had to do it based on maximum permitted in the PUD. Gotcha. For the traffic study. Yeah, so the traffic study that was approved as part of the PUD process looks at those numbers. Right.

So, for example, where we've got 14,000 for an event that's built for a restaurant, 28,000 for a model. So, doubling the size of that restaurant is going to be a tremendous amount.

Oh, yeah. Right, of the same car, yeah. I know, when I saw that traffic study, I'm like, that's a lot of cars.

Right. 52.6. Open space. Well, these numbers, where are we? Building coverage, 50%, 15.9%.

We're way above.

Well, yeah, and I think what you heard from everyone tonight was, I don't think anybody's really opposed to what you're necessarily building. It really does come down to the traffic study, and for me, I just, when I read the traffic study and I'm looking at it, I'm like, that's a whole, I mean, mathematically, that would be like everyone getting in their car and driving in and out four times a day. I mean, it's just mathematically not gonna happen. Right. So, okay. That's all I had.

All right. I have some concerns. Mine are based around stormwater, as you can imagine. My understanding is that you can separate stormwater engineering, but only if additional phases are legitimately a separate project. I think that we should be accounting for cumulative impacts. There's other projects that are mentioned in the PUD, the residential component, a part of the commercial component. But we're just looking at a piece of it. And so I don't really – it's – we should look at the whole thing. You know it's coming.

Correct.

And you are, as it comes into . contained. So it's there. And so as we come back right now, what you see on the site plan for each day is what's required to service what's included. As you know, additional phases come forward. We have to go back and look at that cumulative stormwater

And that'll happen before this is complete though, right?

Well, it will come back before you as another major site. So you'll see that as another phase that will come through this thing.

Yeah, I'm just kind of thinking, like, we're just looking at assumptions. We're looking at numbers on paper as opposed to actual performance after the fact, right, as it's built. Does it perform as you expected? My other, you can answer that if you have something.

I was going to say, we've got standards in the code. So, you know, theoretically, both from a water management standpoint and the city standpoint,

Are the two systems connected? Sorry, Patrick. Are the two systems connected between this and the other phase, or are they two independent systems? That's kind of what I thought. I was just curious. But we still should understand what the down... Well, in theory, none of the water's leaving the property, so theory.

Yeah, right. Amen.

then you see this big tree preservation area on the left side of your picture all that tree preservation area drains to that as it goes through to the coastal waterway through spreader swales and other treatment plants. So it is treated multiple, multiple, multiple times. Let me tell you something about it. What low-impact development means is when a drop of water falls on the roof of the dry stack building. I perked it right underneath that same building. It doesn't go anywhere. You understand what I'm saying? The water falls on the parking lot. I perked it under the parking lot.

How many gallons of water will that hold underneath this dry stack storage? How many how many gallons of water are you talking about? Okay. Does the permitted flow rate, doesn't that supersede the pre-development? Shouldn't the permitted, because you've got them both on here, pre-develop, permitted flow, and post-develop. And when I look at permitted flow, you're barely equal to what the permit requires. I mean, I did the math trying to look, but One cubic foot per second is 7.48 gallons or 449 gallons a minute. This 10.24 that you meet, which is the 100-year, 24-hour cubic feet per second, that's 4,500 gallons. So, I mean, that's a lot of water. And so I'm assuming that the pavers were required as part, you know, pretty integral to meeting these numbers. Right. Right?

I think you would see... We wouldn't, and so when you talk about the standards that we have to meet and kind of the review for compliance with the overall standards, we have to demonstrate that we are at the pre-development condition or below it. That's the requirement. And so what we've shown in the modeling, and again, this has gone through all that review, is that we are at or below it, and so we comply with that.

Yeah, I'm really looking at I'm really looking at what the what the permitted numbers are Permitted flow, it really, I mean, if St. John's River Water Management District says, this is your permit and these are your numbers, that's what you should meet, not pre-development, in my mind.

And that's what this reflects. This is what's been permitted by the water management.

Well, in the Indian River Lagoon, it's 9.46, but you're saying you're going to be 10.24. That exceeds what's permitted. No, it's... No, 10.34 is current, or is pre-development. I'm talking about permitted. Permitted flow. 10.34 is pre-development. I know, but I'm saying permitted flow would supersede what's pre-development.

Pre-development.

Or no. Yeah, pre-development is 10.34. I see that. 9.46 is 10.24. Well, that's post-development. I'm saying permit is 9.46. So you exceed what's permitted. That's what that says. I got it right off the paperwork.

Are you looking at an old one?

No. I say permitted is below, but post is higher. That's all I'm saying. Post-development is below pre-development. take pre-development and just put it on the shelf. I'm saying permitted flow, wouldn't that be the standard that you have to be at?

Yeah, but if they load, what it was.

Can I ask, what is it you're looking at that has a. I'm looking at the permitted versus post-development flow rates that was on, in the, in the stormwater plan page.

I didn't write the page down.

Well, they're all three on here. It's just a simple comparison table. You may look at it now if you like, but I'm just saying that post is higher than what's permitted, at least for the Indian River Lagoon. You're close on wetland A, permit is 3.85, post is 3.49. And now the street is 1.19. And post-develop is 1.19. So there's not a lot of wiggle room. It's really the only point I'm trying to make. There's not a lot of wiggle room. And the pavers are really integral to meeting that performance, right? All right. Failure in that system will jump those numbers up. Correct. That's all I'm... Right. So now's my question.

Right. Right.

Yeah. Yeah.

Well, I don't know where that's representative at. I mean, I'm not an engineer. I did the best I could to look at all that 175 pages that's out there. Anyway, so I think what's necessary here is some type of monitoring or system of performance post-development. An operation and maintenance plan or agreement needs to be written in. inspection vacuum and maintain annually. I think that's important in that favor system in order to get to the numbers that you want to be at. So Yeah, that would be my biggest concern with that whole system. Because I'm concerned that we're only looking at a few nodes, right? Not the entire project. And then, like I said, pay reserves are so important to getting this number. And in my mind, the post and the permit are so close. Even though you, because I did think, I did, you know, what was one of my questions, was there a safety factor in the modeling to assume a 50 or 75% efficiency, you know, a reduced efficiency? But I didn't see that. I couldn't tell that. I'm not an engineer, but.

But to your point, legally, you'll require to make that in accordance with what's in the rules. And so if there's a need to make sure that you do that.

and I I think compliance is is important or you know somebody's got to say yeah we're supposed to be doing this and somebody needs to make sure it's being done and to your point sometimes proving this is hard but if it's proven that their design standard and what they were supposed to do with flooding failed and they negligently caused harm to surrounding properties, then they're negligent and we can sue them for that. So they have a vested interest in preventing that negligence and that liability to themselves by maintaining their systems.

All I heard was hard to prove. It is hard to prove sometimes. Yeah. No, no, you're right.

But, I mean, in all things, the law, the evidence, obviously, is the key.

That was my concern. Am I correct? Is the permitted flow, does that supersede the pre-development numbers?

what it is.

You're in St. John's River Water Management District permit. I found it.

It's section five pre versus post comparison table. That's what he's looking at. There is no page number.

I could have told you that right there.

Well, I know, but I got the page in front of it. It tells me where it's at.

Anyway, I just wanted to, I just wanted to make sure that was brought up and that that needs to be a part of, if it's already there, that's great, but I didn't see it anywhere. I'll say this one.

The legal requirement is that our

And I'm not challenging that, yeah.

Thank you. That's what I'm trying to get at.

Thank you. Any other board comments?

Yeah, I got one for Ryan. What is the permitted use for the restaurant for this facility? And the reason I'm asking questions, somebody brought it up to me. Are they allowed to have outside activities to go on, like concerts or anything outside the restaurant? Or do they have to just use it as a restaurant?

So the PUD explicitly doesn't allow for a call for that type of menu activities however they could apply for a special activity permit okay you know fire code and maximum capacity and those types of things and typically like temporary use permits special use permits have

Yeah, how this question came up was somebody was saying that they're going to have a special part of there. Is it going to increase traffic even more or whatever? So that's why it was kind of pertinent to what I was asking.

Thank you.

And that's a separate approval process that would come through with the temporary use permit. That's everything if they wanted to expand some kind of capability on a temporary basis. All right. Thank you.

Any other board comments? Okay. At that point, Can you come to the microphone, sir? Can you come to the microphone? I'm a nice guy. I don't mind.

That's just Bob.

You already developed it. That's going to come out on Alice Street, which is one of the main thoroughfares in our neighborhood from the south side and the north side of the development. It's the only connection between Riverside, Riverview Drive, and Jones Fish Camp Road. That Alice Street is going to go straight into the Yardley development. And I don't know how many homes or apartments or family homes or whatever that's going to be built in there, but it's going to be mostly, to my understanding, a duplex. And low-income houses. Well, I heard somebody mentioned it briefly a minute ago, why bring it up again. And that is going to add to know you had a hard time, I had a hard time coming to the I had a hard time getting to 6000 in one study that we first taught. But when you add in the garden, and the number of homes that are going to be going in there, the number of people that are going to live in there, the number of cars that are going to be there, our neighborhood alone, we don't even have enough parking space for our own. Okay, What's going to happen when the marina has overflow parking and they've got nowhere to park? People are just going to park along Jones Fish Camp Road. Then you've got Yardley's going to be trying to get up and down the road because we're going to have what? One way this way, one way that way, roundabouts every which way. And there's going to be a roundabout on Alice Street. The flow of that traffic coming from Yardley as Jones Fish Camp is coming the opposite way and Alice Street coming from the west side. And you've got an urgent evacuation group. That's not going to work. There is no way to egress out of our community when this project is done, when Yardley is done. I know there's supposed to be a road through Yardley and out to the other side, but that property, y'all said yourself, I'm sorry, one of y'all's mentioned, you can't buy it. You can't use it. You can't put it separately. I was told by our developer, the road was going to be between the marina and off the web, or you'll already own the property. I know that's not the case now, but we were told, a bunch of stuff about this project when we moved in, before we even bought our home. And shortly after, the sign popped up, and the builders for our community started using the sign from the marina as a selling point, telling people they could go to the beach down there for free, they could go to the pool for free, all this great stuff. Nobody ever mentioned gardening until after that.

That's not going to be a small, tiny community. There's going to be a lot of people in there, there's going to be a lot of cars.

You really need to think about that. Again, I hate to keep pounding on this second means of egress, but I'm sure every one of you up here know that this is not a safe situation. Or at least I would hope it was that. Do you have any questions for me before I leave? Thank you, sir. All right. Thank you very much for hearing me. You're quite welcome.

Mr. Chairman, just to clarify, Yardley is included in the DIA. They were approved as...

Thank you so much.

Again, I'm closing the comments and I need a motion from the board on this item.

I'll make a motion to approve SP 2412.

Second. Second. Me. Okay.

Patrick was first, me was second. Chris was second. Roll call, please.

Roll call, please.

Mr. Duane? Yes. Mr. Fisher? Yes. Mr. McGinnis?

Yes.

Mr. Jankovics? Yes. Mr. Hatcher? Yep. Mr. Cunningham?

Yes.

Okay, having seen that is, yes. I'll keep it really short. I appreciate everyone's time tonight. I know there's a longer meeting.

I wanted to give an update.

I know I had talked about it briefly, but just give you some...

news, I guess. So House Bill 399 and then I think it was 927 was just passed this year. It requires planning and building fees to be directly related.

We're not done yet. Please take the conversations outside.

And so as a result, private developers can hire private planners to review their work. and the city now has to have the direct cost in our fee schedule. So what you'll see in the new fee schedule is that unfortunately, to a certain extent, our larger building permits kind of subsidized our smaller ones. We kind of have to go away from that because we can't go based on valuation anymore, even though that's in the building code. So our new fee schedule for buildings based on square footage, Um, which we can justify that. And then for planning, it's based on an hourly rate for each of my staff members, um, in which we will have to bill. Um, and one of the challenging things about this law is it also doesn't really doesn't really allow for the benefit to the public of providing a service right because the service now has to be paid for. So any time exceeding 15 minutes of staff time will require a deposit from planning moving forward. So you got a question to call me, keep it under 15 minutes.

You don't answer anyway, so it doesn't matter. He doesn't answer anyway. So am I not correct in saying that this is now more burdensome for developers and now it directly contradicts 180?

It's not more burdensome because now they can technically shop my rate, right? They can look at what the true cost to have me on staff is, what the true cost of Delaina is, and they can shop it under this new law. So it's... Big change. We're going to work through it and that'll be on for August. As I noted, city staff are still working on stormwater. I did secure that 50 foot easement from Daytona State. I'll be securing the 50 feet from Mr. La Cour on his subdivision. And I want to point out that subdivision was originally 17 lots and we got them down to three.

I don't think he was happy about my condition, but I saw the other entrance and I was like, yeah, this isn't gonna be a bigger subdivision.

So excited about that playing out. And overall, we have just a lot of commercial and industrial coming into the city right now. Real big slowdown on residential. Two years ago, we were doing roughly about 75 to 80 houses of COs a quarter. Last year, we were at around 40 to 45 a quarter. this year we're down to 18. the building department is about half the revenue of what we normally are so city staff will keep track of that i have cut some expenses heading into the new year it's been incorporated in the budget for both planning building economic development and code enforcement And so I'll have to have Greg come to one of these meetings. Greg Laracy is my new deputy director. He's over development services, but he's helping manage code enforcement for me. But if you see Greg, say hi, he looks like Jeff. You just gotta go to him. And that's all I have.

Okay, with that, I'll adjourn the meeting.