Planning and Zoning Board - Regular Meeting

Mike's on. Listen, you got 15, you got time.

6.30. All right. No, my cell phone is 6.30. Okay.

I don't think this is working.

Before we get started, I'd like to respectfully request that all electronic devices are set on non-audible notifications, airplane mode, or whatever, so that we're not disturbed during the meeting. I'd like to call the Planning and Zoning Board meeting of Wednesday, August 12, 2026 to order. May I have a roll call, please?

Mr. Dwayne? Yes. Mr. Fisher? Mr. McGinnis?

Yes.

Mr. Kennedy? Mr. Andrakowicz? Yes. Mr. Hatcher? Here. Mr. Cunningham?

Here.

Okay, thank you. Approval of minutes. First item, AR2026-2072 and AR2026-0273. I guess I have to read the minutes. Did the board? Okay. Yeah. We request to approve the minutes.

Did the board of everyone have a chance to review the minutes?

Oh, I'm sorry. I'm sorry. They didn't say that. I'm just looking at my script here. Thank you. OK. Has all the board members had a chance to review the minutes for the past two items that we've mentioned? Yes. Yes. We've got to do it one at a time. I know. Are there any questions? No. All right. So we're taking the first item, request to approve the April 15th, 2026 Planning and Zoning Board meeting. Do I have a motion on that?

I'll make a motion to approve. Second. Okay.

We have a first and a second.

Who is second?

McGinnis. Tommy. Roll call, please.

Mr. Duane? Yes. Mr. McGinnis?

Yes.

Mr. Andrew Kovacs?

Yes.

Mr. Hatcher? Yep. Mr. Cunningham?

Yes. Next item, AR 2026-0273, request to approve the May 13, 2026 Planning and Zoning Board Minutes as the board members have a chance to review them.

Yes.

I believe we all have. Any questions on this item? No. All right. I look for a motion.

Make a motion to approve.

Okay. Second. Thank you. Roll call, please.

Mr. Duane?

Yes.

Mr. McGinnis? Yes. Mr. Andrakowicz? Yes. Mr. Hatcher? Yep. Mr. Cunningham?

Yes. Okay, thank you. There are no old business, new business. First item, VA-2618, request for a non-administrative variance to allow a 10-foot yard buffer, a reduction in the landscape requirement, and a max building ratio of 32.2% for the property located at 2224 Hibiscus Drive. Staff report, please.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The request before you today is for the property at 2224 Hibiscus Drive. The applicant is requesting against Article V, Table B1, a max building ratio of 32.2 percent in lieu of the required 30 percent and the applicant is also requesting a reduction in the width of the landscape buffer from 15 feet to 10 feet however the applicant is maintaining the planting quantities within that type 8 landscape buffer from table v4 city staff did send out public notice within 500 feet of the subject property with this aerial image attached here is the site plan that has been undergone review by planning and zoning staff this is showing that 10 foot setback there's actually when city staff made the updates to the code we had changed the landscape buffer to 15 feet however we didn't change that setback in b2 and so there's a little bit of an incompatibility there so the applicant is requesting a reduction in that side width

I have one question, Ryan. I believe we were just given a document that the percentage was reduced to 32%, not 32.2. Is that correct?

Yes, that's what the applicant had provided.

OK, because we just got something minutes ago that, therefore, we humbly request a variance to allow building coverage to be 32%, not 32.2%.

Yeah, so this is a site plan that's in the process. OK. And so if they revised it prior to me publishing the agenda,

I just want to make sure.

So if that's what he stipulated to in the email, then if the board wants to grant that variance, I would tie it to that email if that's what he stipulated to.

Is the applicant here?

I am. OK. That was my next thing we were going to get to. All right. Thank you, Ryan. Let me open up the public hearing. Is the applicant here? Yes. And could you please come to the microphone and state your name and address for the record?

Yeah, Brent Merlson, 4836 South Atlantic, New Smyrna Beach.

Question. I know Tom's not coming back until Friday. Correct. I emailed him already. Have you already started working on the building itself or are we only on the site plan?

So mechanical's done, the building engineering is done, all the site plan is done. So he was under the impression that 32 was the acceptable number, and that's why we've gotten to this far with it. We sat down with Ryan in the city and kind of worked through this. We are still, as far as our setbacks go on this, we are still putting in a total of 295 plants on a 12,000 square foot lot. So we have 14 canopy trees, 36 understory trees, and 245 shrubs on this piece of property. I've just done two on guava within the last year, and this number has almost doubled as far as our tree count. We're not asking for less trees. It's just we designed everything and have quite a bit of money in this so far. And there was just a miscommunication between the meetings that we had and Tom's interpretation with it. And I wish he was here right now, but he did provide that letter stipulating it. And I do see that he did 32% instead of 32.2%. But if you know Tom, he's been having some health issues right now, and it's kind of tough for him. So it's kind of twofold, but just trying to make this go through. We've been working on this quite a bit with Ryan.

Is it just going to be a steel building with the 36-inch panels, or are you going to do the five-foot tilt wall and then the steel above it? Steel building. So just straight? Correct. That's where I'm doing the math. Sorry, I'm the contractor. Because I know they're all going to look at me in a second. Yes, we are. Well, so is the building actually 73? I mean, I know we're splitting hairs, or is it 72? Because 72 works out to a full panel. You know, I don't have that number. Is Tom doing the engineering, or is it Darwin or somebody?

It's all done already. It's done from the manufacturer who builds the building.

Gotcha. Yep.

And I think the length fell on the panel because the truss is running two or four feet or something like that. It dropped on that corner.

So that's what I'm thinking. The building's probably not 73. It's probably 72 because that would make a three-foot panel even. No one's going to make a, especially a metal panel, no one's going to do like a one-foot metal panel. Okay. That's going to be a pain. Makes sense. But where I'm going with this is it might not be 32% by the time. That's why I was asking about the, I wish we had the building plans because then that would tell us actual, not proposed. Gotcha.

The city does have everything.

We submitted a full package. You know what it is? Could you add some light on this? I mean, where I'm going with this is, is it 32 or is it like 30.05? Because there's a two-foot change in the size of the building.

And also on the west side of this building where our main drainage right there, behind that is residential, but there is a, I believe it's a 10 or 14 foot buffer for power right there. So we are still considerably far off of our, you know, our residence to the west of us. And we are putting up, well, you see all the trees plus a six foot privacy fence as well.

For me, it's not about that. So the last several meetings, if people have been paying attention, we've been really obviously stormwater is a hotbed hot button issue right now. So we're trying to find a ways to keep everything inside of our LDC right now, because at least then we can, you know, we're holding to our stormwater stuff. Sure. That's why I was wondering about the building. I actually made a note that actually emailed Tom. I was like, Are you back in town?

Yeah, unfortunately not.

I think he is, but he just scheduled himself not so that he can check on emails. That's nice. It is 73. Who put half a panel in here?

Can I ask you a question, sir, while you're approaching?

Mark Marsett, I'm the general contractor. I just pulled it up. It is 73, confirming what Ryan just found out.

Oh, loves doing the building.

That is strange, Chris. Very strange.

Yeah, it is.

They showed it at two foot.

It still wasn't an even number.

For the record, sir, could you please... That's Mark Marset, 2830 Needle Palm Drive, Edgewater, Florida. Thank you, sir.

So, Ryan, I got a question for you. You do have a note in here granting that variance would have caused a detriment to the public welfare and impaired the purpose of the intended development code. Obviously, the staff's response was no.

i really think it really wouldn't hurt that they can improve this area no no obviously an improvement building this to what the standard is is an improvement oh yeah um the reason staff say that is it more along the lines of the intent of the code is to meet the code right there's rules So that's really kind of the vein of thought in relation to that question that city staff respond to.

And that's why we have variances. Yeah. Exactly. OK.

So this swell in the back, in the wet area, that will meet our stormwater runoff and keep everything on site?

Yeah. I didn't have the actual rate of it, but yes. OK.

The stormwater did exceed the coverage of the flood.

Okay.

Okay. What size is the lot? 13,000 something? 680. 13,680? In our calculations, it's a 100-year flood. Yeah. Mm-hmm. I'm almost positive Tom called me on this about a month ago because he was asking about the landscape of it. Where are we? I mean, it's, I mean, it really just comes down to the, I mean, we're talking 100 square feet difference.

Yeah. Between 32 and 30. Okay.

I was wanting to see the plans because it was just knowing how these buildings are put together. Typically, they try to stick at a two foot or a three foot panel. So it's just weird that you have an odd number on the length. Okay. So, I mean, if it became a 72-foot building because that's an equal panel, whether it's a two or a three, now it drops it to 31%. You know what I mean? I mean, we're talking 100 square feet difference between 30 and 32.

What we can do is go with what the paperwork in front of us says, all right? Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Is there any public concerns or any from the public who want to speak to this issue? Seeing nobody coming to the microphone, thank you, gentlemen. I'm going to close the public hearing and open it to the board. Do the boards have any other questions for the gentlemen?

No.

OK. Seeing there's no other board questions, I call for a vote.

I'd like to make a motion to approve the variance for VA 2618. Do I have a second?

Second. Thank you. Roll call, please.

Mr. Duane?

Yes.

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

Yes.

Next item on the agenda is VA 2619, request for a non-administrative variance to allow a driveway width to be paved to the property line and to allow for two accessory structures to have a reduced size and rear yard setback on the property located at 2023 Lime Tree Drive. Staff report, please.

Thank you. Just a correction, 3023, Mr. Chairman. Did I say? Yes, sir.

I'm sorry. 3023, okay.

Just for the record. Yes. The request before you, as indicated, is a request against Article 3, Section 21-3602, Galawa Shed, size 320 square feet, to be placed three feet from the rear and side yard setbacks in lieu of the required 10-foot requirements in Article 3, Section 21-36-02-H, within Article 5, Table B-1. The applicant is also requesting against Article 3, Section 21-36-02, to allow a carport size 200 square feet to be placed zero feet from the side road setbacks in lieu of the required 10 and 20 feet based on the requirements in Article 3, Section 21-36-02-H. And lastly, the applicant is requesting a variance from Article five section 21 dash 5202 will allow a driveway to be paid to the property line in lieu of the five foot requirement. City staff did send out public notice within 500 feet of the subject property with this aerial map shown on the screen above. This is the plot plan that the applicant provided, and this is kind of the aerial view that city staff used to help identify the accessory structures in question. City staff did review the application against Article 9, Section 21-100.04 , non-administrative variance. and found that the applicant could not meet all six of the criteria. City staff will be glad to go through each of the criteria if the board has any questions or concerns. City staff are recommending deny.

My only concern is the items that are in question for variance are already there. And that's one of my concerns. I know this picture doesn't show part of the driveway that's there already in the carport. But is the, thank you, Mr. Ryan. Is the applicant in the audience? Yes, sir. Come to the microphone, please. State your name and address.

Richard Goral, 3023 Lime Tree Drive, Edgewater.

Okay. Talk to us. Yeah, how did this all come about?

Well, the driveway was, it's been here for about 10 years. It was gravel, and it was crushed concrete. And then I paved over it, because I have a vacant lot next to me, and it kept growing up through my gravel. And the rocks kept getting stuck in my tires, too. So I just put pavement over it.

Okay. And then how about this 16 by 20 shed in the corner over here?

That was placed there back in 17, I believe. The inspector passed it where it was sitting. It's about four and a half foot off the fence on the side and I think three and a half off the back.

Okay.

Where do you start? Well, I mean I did a little bit of research on this property and it looks like you're using some of the same Google photos so you purchased it around 2017? 2016 or 17. So at that time on the side of the house over here was one of those 10 by 20 white you know things you buy at home depot carports that look like on the at least on google and the shed was only a shed it didn't have the extra roofs off to the side those showed up probably around 2021 yes if i look around there and then all the concrete sidewalks got poured probably around that same time too yes sir so So it's definitely grown over the years. I'm actually, because the shed was out of compliance from day one, even when he bought the property. So I can't believe the title agency didn't catch that. Title company didn't catch that. I can, but. So, you know, sir, I mean, last month we had an elderly woman in here that had kind of the same situation going on. She had a lot of different detached structures on her property and was asking for one more. In her case, she asked the city for a permit and was told she couldn't get one because of certain reasons and did it anyway. Mr. Duane at that time brought up that we have these land development codes for a reason. For me, the shed being that it was there from day one is a thing. The carport on the side with the concrete right up to the line. My house on Tamarind, I had a neighbor that had that. It was not great, because all the water just runs off of it onto the other person. To me, there's a reason why we have the side setbacks the way we do. So for me, the shed in the back corner, in the back corner, is it technically legal? No. To move it would be a pretty great expense, but I think it could be moved. The side carport though, I mean, that's you're talking about there's there's no way that in a rainstorm, the water doesn't leave your property. It's it definitely is going to go to the side. Um, so that's my biggest hang up is that that side driveway, the carport, that whole thing. I I know it's an expense, but I mean, for me, I just I don't think I can get on board with that.

I was gonna cut it and put downspouts onto my property.

Yeah, but even still, I mean, it's just, you know, I mean, other than, and that's still a lot of runoff running onto other people's properties. And I mean, understand that this is coming from years of us getting pretty sternly talked to and sometimes yelled at because of the subdivisions and everything going on and water leaving the property and flooding other people's property. So again, that's why we have these codes, to protect everyone's interest, not just one. So for me, that's kind of where I'm at with it. I don't know about the other members.

Well, one of the things that I want to read, what Stefan points out, is placing a carport on a zero-foot setback and paving directly to the property line creates significant planning and engineering concerns regarding site runoff, as Chris pointed out. roof drop line discharge onto adjacent lots, roof enclave encroachments, maintenance access, and Florida building fire code separation requirements. So that's, as Chris pointed out, that's a concern. That's a major concern. And I have to agree with what you said.

Well, and I mean, we've got an email from, I believe it's the people that own the vacant lot. And they're basically saying the same thing. It doesn't, I mean, quickly reading through here, it doesn't appear that, the issue definitely seems to be the side over there with the zero lot line.

So that's kind of where I'm at. That, too, was my biggest concern, having a zero setback.

It just doesn't sit well with me. OK. So basically, can I clarify something that the accessory building you have a problem with?

The carport and the driveway. It was there when he bought the property. He didn't move it. All he's done through the years is expand it. I think all he's really done is just added a roof or some type of an overhang or something. It doesn't actually look like you expand it. You just added some roofing or something like that? Roofing, yes.

I have an outdoor kitchen there.

That's what I thought. Is it roofed over or can water fall through it?

I have gutters all around and downspouts running onto my property.

I mean, you know, if you look at it from a non-impervious calculation. And I mean, obviously, we're not going to do that right now. But I mean, he's really doesn't have any more impervious than someone with a pool deck. You know, I mean, that's, to me, that's a trade off. So I just keep coming back to the side. The side for me is the and it's in it stinks because you already poured the concrete because there could have been a few ways that you could have done it. with keeping it pervious so that the runoff stayed where it did, you know, instead of now being shed somewhere else. Are you talking about the carport? Yeah, the carport side. I mean, it's, you know, I get it, the rocks. I have an asphalt, I have a recycled asphalt driveway. I get it. You drive down the road and all you hear is ting, ting, ting for the first mile. And it's a pain to keep the weeds out. All right. Yeah.

OK, good. Thank you, sir. I'm going to open it to the public now. Any public members who would like to speak to this variance application? seeing no one approaching the microphone thank you sir i appreciate your time thank you board board any any other questions board or concerns board members all right you know you know i'm coming to you for the oh i know i'm going back to the director over there i know because we have to be clear on this one well

I think we all kind of agree the shed is the moot point here. It really just comes down to that side carport, right? Correct.

So from what I'm understanding, if the board is okay with the shed, The easiest motion to make would be to approve VA 2619 with request number one, the first variance, because that's the applicable variance for that specific request. The other two are for the carport and the driveway.

So we'd have to have another motion for that, two separate motions.

I will defer to Francesca, but I would think that if you approve the variance for the one and there's nothing else in the variance, that is what is granted. I wouldn't necessarily think you would have to cancel out the other two.

For the record, we would always exclude it. For the record, should it be mentioned that we did not?

Yeah, well, read the motion and that's it. Are you trying to approve just part of?

Sir, I have one more question for you. The carport on the side, and I'm sorry, you're going to have to come up to the microphone. I'm sorry, I'm going to make you get up again. I'm sorry. I should have asked it before. The carport that's on the side, is it like an aluminum structure or is it one of those like galvanized steel carports with the heavy tarp over it?

No, it's wood.

So it's an actual wood carport. Yeah. Okay. All right. Shoot.

Yeah, it would all be. But do we have to mention what we're not approving? You could say only to the extent of. Like excluding part two and three. I'm inclined here.

to almost do a partial approval, but I'd like to see the issue, yes, the carport's illegal, no, it's not supposed to be there, nor is the concrete. The standing issue though is the runoff, the stormwater. That's what we're trying to make sure in the end. So is there a way that we could give him, because I mean, let's face it, these variance applications are expensive. Um, is there a way we could give him time to try to come up with a solution to handle the runoff like a curb or something that would funnel that rainwater back onto his property?

So, um, so in this case, if you you would want to put in the motion and specify that because if he doesn't get the variances, it becomes a code case, right? And so if the intent is we're okay with how it's paved in the carport, and the concern is we want him to address stormwater, then the motion would be approval of the items with the condition that he retains the stormwater on his property. for that area. And then he would have to typically city staff don't like to tell someone how to do it. You know, it's up to them to decide with their qualified contractor who can give them the price quotes and whatnot, depending on their situation, what is the appropriate technique or construction technique that he needs to do to resolve the stormwater issue. But you would need to specify that because if without that condition, it'll become a code case.

That's a code case. My only concern is if we do a stipulation like that, how do we know it's going to be done? Who's the follow-up? City staff. So I rest my case.

I have one quick question. If we deny the request, when would the applicant be able to correct some of this to be able to reapply for a variance for the shed

without so so for the items that the applicant has applied for for the variance tonight if he was denied there's there's really the next course of action in the land development code is that he can appeal to city council um and in this case if the city council was denied then the next step is really circuit court otherwise he could resubmit but he would have to change the variants obviously you can't reapply for the same one that was just right right yeah to resubmit correct yeah good question that cleared that up for me too we come back to the motion chris i know still trying to

I think we are all in agreement about item number one, that that's okay. The shed? Correct. Yeah, for the shed. We're talking specifically for item number two.

So can we make a motion to approve the shed and then make another motion to disapprove? That was my question before. So we need two motions.

I only do compound complex. Have you figured that out yet? I've been rehearsing all day.

We're trying our best to help you out here.

We are. Yeah. Thank you. It's not easy.

Well, that's what I'll do. The problem is I don't have the full agenda thing in front of me. Where's yours so I can read off the number one? Thank you.

I would just do a requested action number.

Gotcha.

With the VA, right?

Yeah. Motion to approve VA 2619, requested action number one, denying requested actions numbers two and three. Make sense?

Do I have a second?

Second.

Okay. Roll call, please.

Mr. Dwayne, yes. Mr. McGinnis, yes. Mr. Jankovic, yes. Mr. Hatcher, yes. Mr. Cunningham, yes.

Next item on the agenda is CU-2603, request for a conditional use permit to allow for an RV and boat storage facility for the property located at South Ridgewood Avenue, west of Starboard Avenue, and east of San Remo Subdivision. Staff report, please.

Thank you. City staff sent out public notice within 500 feet of the subject property. The applicant, Jeffrey Siler, is requesting to allow a conditional use permit for RV and boat storage facility within the B3 Highway Commercial Zoning District for these subject properties. If you recall, the City Council in this body recommended approval, and the City Council approved a second reading for the rezoning of the B3 Highway Commercial. Outdoor storage is conditional use in B3 Highway Commercial. And as such, they have to meet the requirements of Article III, Section 21-92.04 for conditional uses. and that in order to approve a conditional use permit, the Planning and Zoning Board must make the following findings of fact, that the application is consistent with the Land Development Code for the zoning district that it's located in, it's compatible with existing and proposed uses, and it meets the concurrency management system found within Article 9. oh sorry 11 of the city's land development code city staff have reviewed the subject property with the surrounding land uses and zoning district and found that it is compatible with the proposed uses staff received the following comments from the fire department that if there were gates that they'd be provided with a knock box click to enter city staff did not receive any other comments from the public or from the technical review committee City staff recommend approval for CU 2603.

Thank you, Ryan. I appreciate it. Is the applicant in the audience? Yes. Could you please come to the microphone and state your name and address and anything else you'd like us to know about?

Jeff Siler, 906 North Jericho Drive, Castleberry, Florida. Okay. And I don't know that there's really anything in particular that you need to know other than what we've kind of presented. We're still in the early stages. We don't have a final, final layout for it because we're still working through some environmental stuff and all that. But I mean, it's a pretty straightforward project.

Okay.

I have a question. Are you going to have an electric gate? Yes. So it will be electric? Yes. And you're willing to take and follow the law here for that? Oh, yeah. Absolutely, yes. OK. Thank you.

My understanding is that these are going to be sold to individuals?

It's a little different concept than your normal boat and RV storage. They were setting up as a condominium type of situation where they'll actually own their spaces as opposed to renting them.

and they'll be responsible for all the maintenance there?

Yeah, there will be a condominium association that will be responsible for the common airways and the fence and all that stuff, yes.

Being that this is on US-1, is this gonna trigger a traffic study?

City staff right now don't anticipate that this would trigger the TPO's requirements for a traffic study. It is typically 100 p.m. peak hour trips or 1,000 average daily trips. We'd be lucky if we get over 200 trips a day.

So here's why I'm asking. You all know where I live. So at 5.30 in the afternoon, when you're heading south on this road, you've got everyone making the last split decision second to turn by the Burger King. And then you've got the people that are trying to merge over to get into Walgreens. And then you've got the other traffic coming out of Walgreens or going in and out of the gym. And this is 100 feet away from all of that. And I'm just trying to get into the turn lane to turn on Volco Road.

So what's your point?

I kind of want a turn lane. I kind of want a deceleration lane here. Something that they can get. And the reason I'm saying this is we're not talking about a car. We're talking about a truck pulling a boat or an RV or a classic. It's not something that's going to get out of the way very quickly.

yeah we've had preliminary discussions with the department of transportation and we're we're they had the same concerns so we're we're working with them okay on on those issues okay that's good so what i want so this is the conditional use he's already gotten his preliminary he got his zoning

He's got a zoning, so does he have to come back with a site plan on any of that to us, or?

No, the site plan, I'm almost certain it'll be under, well, yeah, there's no billing, so yeah, it'll be a minor site plan.

so it wouldn't come to us by trc gotcha is there any way and i hate to do it to you but only because i almost got clipped three times in the last week and i've almost hit two other people um and and really it's because of this the turn going into the shell gas station and it's the same turn lane that goes into volco road so you've got some people that merge off lay on their brakes turn into the shell station and then you got other people like me that try to go past it but then you always have the one guy that lets off the brake and keeps coasting through the turn lane and we will talk about the church across the street well yeah don't yeah yeah yeah don't yeah we'll get me started so i mean it sounds like you're already having these conversations about a turn lane Is there a way we could tie a turn lane into the conditional use or something so that, I just didn't know.

It's a conditional use permit, so it's conditional.

And the ultimate decision on a turning lane would be FDOT? Or no, or can we make it?

No, so typically the way the TPO is set up is that we typically don't require a TIA, a traffic impact analysis, unless you trip those trip counts, or you're gonna trip PMP trip counts, so left hand, right hand turn movement over a certain threshold. When you do trip those, then we require the full-blown methodology where you tell us what you're gonna study, And then then you get to do the transportation impact study. So the methodology sets up how many miles of roadways you have to analyze in relation to where your project is, the growth of the growth pattern that the city is assigning to this area for traffic, etc. So that in this case, though, for minor projects, no, we don't require it. And that's because the city is part of the Volusia Flagler TPO, right. And so to get funding, you would buy

My civil engineer is here, George.

Oh, is that the guy that's speaking up here? Okay, state your name and address, sir. George Miles, 4575 Acorn Way. So we have been working with DOT. I've been working with DOT, and their current, or a sport department.

Maybe back up there, maybe back up. I think you're catching the reverb from this.

I think it is. So right now we're in a little bit of a debate with them because we want to keep the driveway on that south side where the road easement is, and they're actually telling us they want it on the north side, and we're going back and forth with them because we have the road easement that we want access to. So anything you could do on your side to help push that, that is welcome on our side. Mainly due to, I know the developer that owns that lot there and what his intentions are down the road. Definitely keeping that gap will be handy for us as far as keeping a little bit of space. And overall, we are going to have sewer and water. We've planned for everything on this. It's just really... That fine-tuning detail, I understand what you're saying. As far as a turn lane, would it be difficult to put something in there? No, because the sidewalk's already moved back.

Oh, yeah.

That had to do with when I talked to FDOT, it actually has to do with the other lots that they were moved back years ago when they actually redid them to plan on having more turn lanes because of sites like this.

Well, and the power lines are on the other side of the road, so you don't have to worry about moving those.

Right. So... But... Turn lanes would not, depending on how big a turn lane, you want a full decel lane, 300 feet, what are you looking at?

I mean, preferably something that started at the beginning of the property and yeah, basically turns into, now why are they wanting you to put it on the north side? We can't, we don't know.

It doesn't make any sense. He mentioned that he thinks people will pull out and try and hit that median, run across the road and try and make a U-turn if they want to go back north.

So do the same thing that people already do now, coming out of water and going to the gym? Right. Just watch George do it.

Yeah, so the concern is that when they come out of there, they're diving across three lanes, essentially. The two lanes and getting that turn lane. And that is their concern. And I understand their concern, but I also know putting, there's a road there. We have access to that road. There's no reason to not use it. The only option we had was considering putting an exit at the north, and it was an exit only, at that northeast corner. So basically they'd turn out into the turn lane, and then they could go if they wanted to try to get across that. But they really just don't want people diving across the road either way. Right. Especially towing a boat.

I wonder if that's why they put in the little knock-down bollard things in the middle of the cross. That's another story. I mean, it only took a day, and two of them were knocked out. That's how we cure it.

We'll tell them we'll pay for the rubber little bollard things right out there on the road to go back and then...

Well, I mean, the idea of an exit only coming out of the north isn't a bad idea, but I don't know how much that would take up space on you. All right, but it sounds like you're not opposed to the turn lane decel idea. Because again, mainly it's just because, I mean, you know, even, I mean, look at how close you are to the shell turn. I know. I mean, that's, and then at some point, that piece of property, and then the guy next to it.

At some point, that whole thing is going to be in.

That's what I mean. It's just going to be a long turn lane. Yeah.

Yeah, I know that they said for the lot on the north side that they are going to have to do one.

I'm pretty sure there's going to be a light at Volco.

I think that they said they had to do a desal lane for that north lot, and then they were going to have to do an excel lane to get back on because of its use as a commercial lot. They were going to have a thrift store in there at one point. It was Marines, and it was a thrift store, and I'm not sure what's going on there.

All right.

That's all I had, the turn lane, literally the first thing I wrote. Thank you, gentlemen. I appreciate it. Thank you. Thank you. Anybody from the audience would like to come up and discuss or talk about this subject item? Please state your name and address, sir, for the record.

Paul Buseri, 123 San Remo.

Yes, sir.

I have a couple of questions. The property line is shown there, and then the darker line, is that supposed to be a fence around the property? Does this property have to be fenced?

At the, so yes, so under the straight zoning, it has a, I think it's a class C or it's a class B, regardless, it has a six foot masonry wall or fence, plus a 25 foot rear buffer on that back.

So the rear buffer is beyond the limit of the storm water retention pond?

Correct.

And there's going to be a shrubbery around it or trees or what type of?

Yeah, so.

Because this is mainly this whole, that whole area basically is gonna be asphalt now.

Yeah, it would be cleared as part of the development. There is a 15% tree preservation requirement in the city's code, so you would have that. The landscape buffer specifically, They vary. So on the rear right there, I think he's going to have 50 shrubs for 100 linear feet. We up the landscape buffer pretty extensively, I would say it's probably denser than Mount Doris now. So typically, it's five or six canopy trees, seven understory trees per 100 linear square feet or linear feet. I believe that back a little over 200. So you know, you're going to have 30, 40, I wouldn't be surprised if there's less than 60 trees.

So all the existing trees basically are going to be taken down, the large trees?

Part of the development, yeah. So there's specimen trees that you'll have to provide a tree survey for, and that's all that cycle.

OK, my other question is a sewer that goes back to the west. That sewer is for sewage, not for water runoff. Where does the water runoff from the retention pond go?

So the applicant will either have to design to a 100-year closed basin, meaning he'll have to hold all the water or have to get it eased and send San Remo.

Well, San Remo's retention pond is just to the west of this. Correct. The north... South. It's southwest. And the last time we had a large rain, the water comes up above the sewers in that street, and the street fills with water. So my concern is with all this asphalt and that retention pond, where does that water go?

So right now, it all runs back to you guys, because that's how the property grades. So in pre development, on South Ridgewood, you're at elevation 20. And the back of San Remo, the back of what is used, what's his name's lot about 15. And so right now, the property all drains towards you guys. Okay, so vegetated. And that's why there is a stormwater pond to account for the water that's running on to the impervious area that can't be absorbed by the

My concern is, though, that when that pond fills completely, the water doesn't go towards the south where it's supposed to go. It stays in the pond and runs into the street to the north.

Sir, your three minutes are up. Thank you, sir. Pardon? Your three minutes are up.

Okay, so has anybody looked at that?

Yeah, it'll be looked at as part of this development. Your pond, though, sir, is designed to a 25 year storm. And that's really important. So the code today that the city is enforcing of new development is 100 year 13 inch storm. your subdivision there is a 25 year storm, and your overflow is actually established. I was looking at your plan today. For the two subdivisions there, you're actually your overflow on your pond is at the same level as the back of curve of that cul-de-sac. And so you will see water come into that cul-de-sac during very high rain events, because that's where the overflow is set.

this property is at a higher elevation than santa rima correct it will be it already is now i was going to say it already is yeah so there'll be no additional landfill on it i i can't say that for sure okay thank you thank you any any other resident wants to speak to this item okay seeing nobody approaching the microphone yeah okay please state your name and address for the record

Debbie Hinkle, 121 San Remo. My understanding is that if y'all are going to overflow into our pond, they will be required to update our pond to 100-year?

They would have to demonstrate that your pond isn't going to have any negative externalities. And they would have to secure that easement with HOA. So Mr. Siler will need to work with his engineer to determine whether he wants to design to a 100-year closed basin or if he's going to pursue trying to work with your subdivision.

Interesting. Thank you.

Thank you. Anybody else in the audience like to speak to this item? Seeing nobody else coming to the microphone. Board, do you have any questions, board members?

On top of the stormwater pond, could you just design additional storage underneath the asphalt? That way, the pond could be 100 a year and then throw the extra storage under the asphalt and

Yeah, I mean, he's 100 years on steroids. Now he's allowed to design the pond. I mean, he has to design it to meet the city code. Right. And now that we have the stormwater master plan, everyone's model, stormwater reports thrown in that through the third party engineers. So in this case, you know, because there's not necessarily complete public, there's not a public conveyance here for public outfall. So he has the options here, right? So you could get that easement and then try and work with San Remo and his engineer would try and design something that will pass city code and not have negative externalities on San Remo. or he designs to a 100-year closed basin, and essentially he has to hold this large quantity of water, and nothing leaves the site until all that water is retained.

Right. Well, I mean...

And so that's kind of the option when you're in a close. This is not necessarily completely closed. It's closed in the sense that there's not a direct public conveyance route, as in San Remo and all these other where we have the canals, or like in Florida shores where you have 18th Street canal, right? Yeah, very defined conveyance system of how the water.

So I think this might have been what the other lady was asking a few seconds ago. So say he designs to work with San Remo and secure an easement. So the process of making sure that there's no negative on them, he either has to find a way to make his system work with their 25 year or does he have to upgrade their 25 year to do that?

Yeah, so I'm not an engineer. So I don't know, say, you know, I don't know if he necessarily is going to the challenging part will be that, you know, the time at which the rainfall, the time at which that 25-year pond is topping versus the time concentration of when the 100-year pond is overflowing and how that relates.

Well, that's kind of where I'm going. I mean, based on what you said, I mean, their system already is a quarter of what his is going to be to start with, and it almost sounds like it was designed intentionally so that all the overflow goes to the cul-de-sac in the back. You know, I mean, based on how you just said the overflow is set. So no matter what, when their pond overflows, they're going to have water in their street. And that's going to happen way before his 100-year average gets close.

Yeah, and I'm not sure why. I mean, I'm not sure. Well, I probably can guess why they did that. But, you know, yeah, so that cul-de-sac always in a hundred year rain event, that cul-de-sac will always have water sitting in it. And that's just because that's how that was designed and permitted. Right. With the elevation of the berm for the outfall.

That's what we deal with now. Seems like the best outcome here is they just decide to hold all their water on the end because there's no way.

I mean, just, you know what I mean?

The San Remo side is going to have a problem way before he does.

Any other board member questions? Seeing no other board member questions, I call for a motion.

I'll make a motion to approve CU 2603 with the condition that there is a traffic turn lane on US 1.

I'll second it. I turn there all the time, too. Roll call, please.

Yes.

Yes.

Yes. Yep.

Yes.

Thank you. Next item on the agenda is VA 2621, request for a non-administrative variance to allow an accessory structure without a principal structure and to reduce the side and rear setback to 10 feet to allow a proposed storage slash carport structure with partial siding for the property located at 601 North Ridgewood Avenue.

staff report please thank you chairman uh city staff sent out public notice within 500 feet with the subject aerial map uh the applicant has made a correction um the carport structure is wants to be replaced with a kind of like full barn in a sense instead of a carport so i just want to make that correction to start so the applicant is requesting seven variances um against the land development code The first one is Article 3, Section 21-3602, to allow an accessory structure with partial sidings sized at 1,500 square feet placed on a lot without a principal structure, a typical variance per Article 5, Table B-1, to allow a carport, in this case it would be the base building, to be placed five feet from the south side yard setback in lieu of the required 25-foot yard setback. the structure in line with the fence on East Nath Avenue of the parcel. Per Article 5, Table B1, allow the structure to be placed 10 feet from the front yard setback in lieu of the required 40 feet based on the requirements in Article 3, Section 21-3602H. Per Article 5, Table B1, to allow the structure to be placed 10 feet from the rear yard setback in lieu of the required 25 feet for Article 3, Section 21-36-02K, to permit an accessory structure to exceed the principal structure's gross square footage. For Article 20, Section 21-640-04, to remove the facade requirement for the structure, since it's behind a fence. And for Article 20, Section 21-640-08, to allow metal panning at the sidewalls on the partially enclosed structure. 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. If you recall, this originally was approved on a site plan for a kind of a food truck port. Correct. And the applicant is requesting now to change it.

I just want to emphasize when you were writing, reading those request actions, action five, that there is no existing principle structure on this property. I think that's a big key to this whole issue. That's not Edgewater. That may be Samsula, but it's not Edgewater. That's just my feeling on that. Hopefully you've got the point.

Man, shots fired, Bob, on Sam Sula.

Gee, Tom.

I know. The hell, I don't know anybody in Sam Sula, anyhow, so.

Well, you're gonna.

Oh, you're gonna. Is the applicant in the audience, please come to the microphone, state your name and address, and talk to us.

Timothy Coonley, 3154 Eels Grove Road. Okay. The lot, it's a very small lot. Can't really do much on it. We've done the best that we can with it. That back area is just open and there's no shade, no coverage, no anything.

And hence the variance meeting, trying to get some shade, whole barn area back there. You understand you are the entrance to the city of Edgewater. You do understand that from the north to the south. You're one of the first things that people see past the beautiful hang ten car wash. I'm making a serious point here, sir. So that's my issue.

Entrance or exit, however you see it, yes, I understand that. You do see a Shell gas station previous to me and you also do see Lily Rose. You don't see that from the road. That is set behind Ridgewood, that L shape. And it's behind a six-foot privacy fence.

Are you no longer going to do the food truck stuff or are they just going to be under it?

Really, the food trucks didn't take a lot of traction because of lack of shade. It was really hot. People would go back there and they weren't comfortable. But we are also asking for a conditional use permit for storage. Kind of the same thing. if i could find a vendor that can make it work back there with the shade and create the ambiance that we've envisioned then that would be great that's what we wanted we wanted more food options in the community and it just didn't really pan out the way we wanted it to and then so the pole barn you're not going to pave under it you're just going to leave it dirt grass Correct. It's gravel.

So now we're still going to have some watershed from the roof. What are they going to have to do in respects to their stormwater now? Are they going to have to file an entire site plan with the stormwater calculations and all of that to go with this pole barn?

because well he put in stormwater at the outset on the site when he redid the concrete at the beginning he's got that front kind of swale and this when he so this is kind of an old image that we use right um so this is now there's a kind of a fence this area back here is fenced and then this up here has the same parameters this and here is his storm water currently for all this impervious here and so he would just gutter to his yeah but what we don't know is if the current storm water is going to calculate for a 1200 square foot roof i mean at the end of the day i just had to calculate it for a gutter

It's a very important point.

He still would be under the requirements for a pod.

No, I don't mean a pod. Again, we all know sitting here that the storm warning thing is a hot-button issue. I want to make sure that the four people watching it on TV hear us talking about it.

All the water on that road tends to flow right to that corner on that ridge wouldn't go into our retention pond anyway. The retention area that we have there. Everything on that property on our property is sloped to that retention area.

Let me ask you this to get around the principal structure scenario. So you're wanting to use it as conditional use as warehousing and storage. What if he built like a small 10 by 10 office underneath the 30 by 60 structure? Now it's primary structure. Correct. And you got an office.

Question, could a 20 by 10 shed serve the same purpose?

I'd rather see concrete and walls and incorporated into the, you know what I mean? If it's incorporated into the structure, it's incorporated. I mean, a shed's just another detached structure, you know?

Well, that's already on the property, that's why. I gotcha, yeah.

I mean, if we made it something permanent with the building, now it's a primary structure.

I.e., a primary structure.

Yeah, now it's a primary structure, so, and it gives you an office. Turn it into bathrooms. Does it mean if you're gonna have storage or something like that?

Well, he's got the accessory kind of restroom. Oh, okay.

You're trying to think of something to make it not look like it's a pole barn just sitting there. You know what I mean? I know why you're doing what you're doing, but at the same time, I'm like, all right, how do we not make it look like a pole barn in the middle of nowhere?

There are a couple of restrooms there and a janitor closet.

That's what made me think about the office or something, because I was like, well, if you do that, now it's purposeful.

This is a better aerial frame. So you can see this is the storm water pond here. This is a new concrete that he had done part of that site plan with the bathroom. Here is the, this is sod in here. These are the gravel pads that were used for the food trucks to park in and this was the associated parking with that. Recall we gave him a gravel parking lot to reduce storm water on this site. And so these were the gravel pads for the food trucks and they had, I think at one time Mr. Coonley had benches back here. So that's the restroom ice machine and then back there is where the food trucks

I was gonna say there's two of them in there. Well, so the concrete block building that's right there next to the ice machine, does it qualify as a primary structure? Expand it, make it an office.

Make that middle room an office.

And then the side you're wanting to put the siding on, you're wanting to put it on the side facing NAP or which side were you wanting to do the siding?

East-west. Okay. East-west, probably on NAP too. The sun comes up east-west. Yeah. That's the main thing.

Now, storage-wise, because I'm looking at your entrance here, you're not thinking like RVs and boats, are you?

No, I mean, if somebody, yeah, I mean, if someone wanted to park a boat there, I wouldn't see a problem with it.

It's not big enough for an RV. It's going to take a highly skilled individual. Very comfortable with backing up.

Yeah. Might open it up more after that.

Well, I was just, where I was going with that is, is the next thing going to be opening up on the net?

Right.

So that storage you're talking about, you could physically have boats and RVs there?

No. I mean, not RVs, no. An RV would never fit through there. You'd have to plow the fence.

If it's a boat, we're talking like... A 14-foot skiff. A flat skiff.

We're not talking 30-foot, reddy white, soulless Everglades.

No, I understand. I want to make sure I understand what's going on.

They'll make it to the entrance. Okay.

Thank you, sir. I appreciate it. Good? Yes. Anybody in the audience would like to come and speak to this item that's on the agenda presently? State your name and address, please. You have three minutes with which to talk.

Edie Lawrence, 108 East Snap. And I'm empathetic for what you're doing.

We went to the food trucks.

I just want clarification about for stormwater, when you're getting the variances for the setback, are you taking down the wooden fence? OK, so that's going to stay there. You're trying to just get, you're going to encroach on the stormwater area.

Speak into the microphone, please.

I just want to see if with his variance regarding stormwater, where the stormwater is, is he going more towards the fence, past the fence, inside the fence? I'm concerned with stormwater.

Staying within the fence and keep off of the inside.

Interior? Yes. OK. And now it's going to be parking boats?

I mean, it's kind of up in the air. I still want to do food trucks there. I really do. I feel like with shade, maybe the right vendor or two, it can still happen. But just keeping an open mind towards any concept. Just trying to make this spot useful.

OK. I understand the business. I understand. As long as he retains the wall and there's not a, because there was an 80% reduction number in your report, those are the things that were concerning to me. OK. Very good. Thank you.

Thank you for your time. Appreciate it. Anybody else want to speak to this item? Board members, any other questions for the gentleman? No.

A question I have is that if this doesn't go and you're talking about storage, you know, 12 by 8 trailers and things on that order, would he not have to have a different type of permit if he's going to use it for storage other than

so on the next item is a conditional use permit request to do outdoor storage and b3 highway commercial okay i'm i'm ahead i'm sorry yeah we'll address that the next time okay seeing no other questions from the board do i have a motion for this item i'm working on it he's working on it i am

I can see the wheels turning.

Are you opposed, because if you're gonna do like a wooden six-by-six pole barn, something like that, is that what you're thinking instead of a metal carport?

Yeah, because when I spoke to the carport people...

Sorry, I know.

You have to come to the microphone. You did me like you did me. No, I did, I did.

Do I have to state my name again?

Yes.

Timothy Cooney, 3154 Eels Grove Road. When I spoke to the carport people, they had said to me that, what I was looking for they won't be able to basically happen because of the clearance like they have the five foot posts yeah and if you wanted to go in then you're it's not gonna happen yeah it's not gonna work and then I spoke to a guy who does pole lines and he actually does poles and he said you can get clearance yeah no problem yeah you put in girders girders from pole to pole so are you opposed to framing in a building or something?

Well, no, no. So I'm coming back to the whole primary structure scenario here. So would you be willing to, inside this 30 by 60 footprint, like in a corner, I don't care what corner, just frame in and pour a slab and make it like a 10 by 10 or a 12 by 12 office, office, you call it whatever you want, but something that kind of...

I mean, I really wouldn't be opposed to it at all. I think that would be fine. I would really, you know, the economy ain't the strongest, right? So I'm not trying to just spend money on stuff. No, I know. I do have a 20 by 10 shed that I've referenced. It meets all the requirements, even more so as far as tie downs. I just don't understand why that wouldn't work the same. So, I mean, that was eight grand. So building another structure, I can't even imagine how much these materials are going to cost me now. So it just piles up, piles up.

I can tell you, but I won't. Could we find a way to use, so say he takes the existing shed and we put it on pier footings. It already is. And then he sheet rocks it. I mean, like actual pier footings.

Sonnet tubes.

Pier footings. And then he sheet rocks it and air conditions it.

Yeah, the board can make the condition on the variance.

It's like it's going to be a she shed basically when it's done.

Would you do that? It's already done.

Yeah. Already sheet rocked and air conditioned power plywood walls.

It's got spray foam insulation, no power to it yet. I do have a window unit.

Okay. Well, it's because where I was going with this is, I mean, going back to what you were saying about still wanting to utilize the space for food trucks already, I'm thinking, you know, you know what fans up in the ceiling, you know, I mean, having shade is one thing, but it's 111 a day in the shade. Where would that structure be, sir? Well, if he leaves it where it is, it's sitting already there.

It's sitting back here in this corner right here. In the northeast corner.

Go back to the good picture.

Do you have a better picture, Brian?

And it is five feet off each property line.

But is it under 240 square feet? It is.

I'll bet and get on this one. Keep the ball rolling.

There you go. Got it.

Yeah, so it's back. Maybe.

That's even worse.

This is an old picture. What did you find, like, 2010? That's an old, yeah, that's... There we go. Now we switch to the new hottest.

Okay, so it's back there in the back. So basically... Is that it back there? Yeah, so the 30 by 60... Oh, back here.

Yeah. Okay. Okay, with the red roof. Yeah. All right. And you could convert that to an office, sir? Easy peasy. Okay. And that would qualify for the permanent structure? That would make it a permanent structure, I think. Primary structure. Is that correct, Brian?

So you're gonna gonna do just so I'm very clear. The shed is now becoming an X is becoming a primal structure primary structure, because we're gonna make it hard. Are we still doing the carport? Oh, our whole barn is becoming the accessory.

I guess so. I'm just trying to figure out a way to check the box on the principal structure.

You're going to need to add a variance in here that the accessory structure is allowed to exceed the pride principle.

Oh, that's right.

See if it was just built into the primary structure.

Okay, I got you. You can't do it that way.

You can still do that. It's just we'll need to make sure that

Well, that's going to fall back onto what Bob's going to ask is, who's it going to fall on to make sure that he doesn't turn that shed into a... What's the oversight?

I won't say it. I'll reserve decision on that one. Okay. I mean... All we can do is try. All we can do is try, right? So, Mr. Chris. Why does it always have to be me? Because you create these conversations.

You create these things and you just keep moving.

Okay. Okay.

Motion to approve, where are we at? CU 2604? 2621. VA 2621. VA 2621. All right, motion to approve VA 2621 with the condition that the existing shed is converted into a primary structure. Do I add the additional variance now as part of this? Yes. Also allowing the 30 by 60 or less accessory structure to exceed the height of the principal structure, not to exceed 12 feet in maximum height. All right, y'all can get the rest of it.

That makes sense. All right. Is that motion okay?

Do I have a second?

I'll second it.

I was waiting to see if any.

Roll call, please. We're trying. Yes. No. Yes. Yep.

Yes.

OK, thank you. Next item on the agenda. Let me just get this one here. This is done. Next item on the agenda is CU 2604, request for a conditional use permit to allow for a warehouse and storage unit within a partially enclosed carport and have an ice dispensing machine for a property located at 601 North Ridgewood Avenue. Staff report.

Thank you, Chairman. City staff sent public notice within 500 feet of the subject property with the attached aerial imagery map. The applicant is allowing in the B3 highway zoning district, the use for warehousing and storage, which requires a conditional use permit. City staff noted that when we did the original conditional use permits and variances, we did not add Again, even though the board had considered it, we didn't actually have it in motion when it was done about a year and a half ago. So the APPIN is requesting a conditional use permit for warehousing and storage use, as well as an outdoor storage for the use of an ice vending machine within the B3 Highway Zoning District. As noted before, for a conditional use permit, there is consistent with the actual land development code regulations it's compatible with existing and proposed uses and meets the concurrency management system city staff believe the current layout is conducive to having this type of small building and that the transportation conservancy management system has already been met and the use is really a de minimis it's actually a decrease in the amount of trips that would be coming to the site if he was to fully convert it to just Okay.

I'm not going to drag you up here because we've been through this. How does this variance affect what Chris just placed on the books?

This is conditional use.

This is a conditional use. Right. So what you've allowed right now is you've allowed him to build a storage unit that he does not have the right to use as a storage unit.

Okay.

So that is where we're at right now with the current variance.

Okay. Who made the motion last year and left out the ice dispenser? Was it me? Don't say it probably was.

Okay. Any public concerns or any voices of opinion on this item? seeing nobody coming to the microphone board members do you have any more further questions for this gentleman i think we we beat him up enough yeah okay i need a motion now somebody else can do it i make a motion to approve uh cu 2604 do i have a second second second tommy roll call please

Yes. No.

Yes. Yep. Yes. Next item on the agenda, SP 2605, request for a major site plan approval to construct a 28,320 square foot indoor-outdoor pickleball recreational facility with a yoga studio and related site improvements for the property located at 2945 West Park Avenue. Staff report, please.

Thank you, Chairman. City staff did send out public notice within 500 feet of the subject property shown here on this aerial map that was included in the public notice. This is showing the proposed site and the areas of construction. And here is the proposed landscape plan. So the applicant, Joseph Hopkins, on behalf of DMG 104 LLC, submitted for a major site plan on March 27th of 2026. gone through reviews by the Technical Review Committee and our third-party engineers at Cohen and Associates. The Technical Review Committee and the third-party engineer find that the major site plan meets the criteria within the City of Edgewater's comprehensive plan, land development code, and the mixed-use plan unit development agreement. The site plan before you illustrates that proposed 28,320 square foot total site consisting of 25,360 square feet for covered pickleball courts and the auxiliary building of 2,960 square feet, completed with a yoga studio, outdoor seating, parking, and on-site stormwater treatment. The applicant has provided a total of 56 parking spaces. Forty of those parking spaces are provided for the 10 pickleball courts. Both spaces are provided for the mixed-use building, and four handicapped spaces are provided. The applicant also provided a photometric plan showing 0.0 limits at the property boundaries. The development incorporates the required landscape buffers demonstrated on sheet L1, shown here on the screen in front of you. the required landscape buffers include along west park avenue and air park road provide a total of 100 trees on site with 57 to remain and 43 new trees planted the pud required 68 total trees in accordance with the pud the applicant has prepared a quick claim deed for the city council for a 50-foot triangle at the corner of the southeast corner of Air Park Road and West Park Avenue to accommodate a signalized intersection in the future. The applicant has also provided a 12-foot multimodal trail extension from the River to Sea Trail. In accordance with the MPUD agreement, city staff will be paying the applicant $57,724 in multimodal impact fees for the construction of the 12-foot trail that will be extended to the intersections. of West Park Avenue. A performance bond in the amount of 78,000 has been provided, and the city will perform an inspection and release the performance bond upon completion. This stormwater project, oops, sorry, so this is showing the extension of the River to Sea Trail based on the MUPUD agreement with the design standards for said trail. Stormwater management is provided onsite by retention retain 1.35 inches of runoff to achieve an 80% reduction in total nitrogen and phosphorus. The stormwater management system on site is designed to attenuate for both the 25-year and 100-year 24-hour storm event, and a portion of the site does sit in the 500-year flood zone. As such, city staff did require compensating storage on a per-cup basis in accordance with Article 4 of the Land Development Code. The applicant is bringing in 6,685 cubic feet of fill. However, they're providing a 7,153 cubic foot cut, which is actually more than cup for cup. City staff, I recommend the board send a favorable recommendation to City Council for SB 2605.

Thank you. Thank you, Ryan. Is the applicant in the audience? Would you please come to the microphone, state your name and address and Talk to us.

Good evening, Mr. Chairman, members of the board. My name is Joe Hopkins. I'm an engineer with the performance group in Daytona Beach at 100 Marina Point Drive. Just to cap what Ryan said, this project, the design is consistent with the PUD that you all approved. It's also consistent with the land development code in all aspects. We went through a series of reviews with your consultants and staff, and here we are. It's in compliance, and I'm here to answer any questions that you have. I also have the owner with me as well. If there's any operational questions, he'd be happy to answer those as well.

Thank you. Does any board members have any questions at this time for the applicant? Well, we don't control the traffic lights.

No, so this site didn't trip, average daily trip, so we didn't require TIA. Okay. So city staff wouldn't be able to require a traffic signal. We'd have to perform it, and the site didn't meet the threshold within the TPO guidelines.

Okay.

Well, I'll tell you exactly why I was asking for that as well. speed right across Air Park Road and almost got hit double. And I just see a problem coming in the future. I'm leaning on the safety side is what I'm doing. So I don't have a problem with the project.

I just have a problem with the possible traffic.

And as long as they're going this far, I myself would like light installed with the project, that's all.

Unfortunately, stupid is as stupid does. I've seen people go through red lights. So unfortunately, and I totally understand your concern and your question, but

You have to put some common sense into people.

My wife and I ride every day on our bikes. And it's dangerous out there. People just don't care. They don't care about anybody but themselves. And it's a sad comment. But I'll get it. Any other board questions?

I have a question. What type of exterior lighting and that is going to be on the property and is that going to affect the residents that will be north of this property?

No sir, not at all. We're using LED lights. There's some pole mounted fixtures in combination with some wall packs that will be installed on the building itself. We did a photometric plan Ryan can maybe pull that up. And we showed the light distribution is contained within the property.

Very good. I can empathize for that question, because I had something just built behind me. And LED light was installed. There were four poles. One of the poles was facing to the north. Well, that light distribution We'll hit everything off. And the owner of the property knew that was going to be a concern as soon as I called him. And he was very responsive. They shut that hole off. And they ended up putting a shield on it. So it goes this way instead of, oh my god.

The design of these fixtures are pretty sophisticated these days. And we're able to really program them on the paper and measure the distribution.

good okay okay fine if i may one one more question on the hours of operation and that's how late in the evening are is this going to be operated again i'm concerned about the neighbors from the north state your name and address sir please yeah dave goddickson 1901 lismore court new smyrna um as of right now we're planning on probably seven to ten i think

There's a chance people won't play that late. But that's what most facilities that we're competing with are. Usually go to 10 or 11. I don't think that we need to go past 10. So probably 7 to 10 right now.

Very good. Thank you. I appreciate it, gentlemen. Thank you. All right. Thank you.

Just to make one point. There is a pretty big buffer between our property and the trail. So the trail actually is an insulator. There's a strong line of vegetation between our property and the trail that will be preserved. So we've kind of insulated from those folks to the north as well. Thank you. Thank you very much.

Anybody in the audience that would like to come and speak to this item, please state your name and address, and you have three minutes with which to talk.

Mary Forrester, 1937 Edgewater Canal Road. I didn't talk to Jim, but I am just north of where they're going to be. Three of my neighbors actually called me today asking if I was coming tonight because they have concerns. And I'm going to express the concerns to you. My concern, biggest, and I talked to Ryan about this, is school traffic. Everything that is from whatever that development is down by 95 and Indian River Boulevard to everything south, On Air Park Road, Glenwood, the other two places, and the west side of Florida Shores, Airpark Road is their avenue to the middle school and the high school. I have to be careful in the morning when I let my ducks and my chickens out, and it sounds crazy, because the traffic on my street increases tenfold from 7 o'clock in the morning till about 8.30 or 9, it's school traffic. And he is right. They fly down the road. At the end of last year, and I've noticed it, the two days kids going to school this year is an increase, because my dog hates them, in e-bikes. So imagine all of that traffic going up. It splits. Part of it, a lot of it, my street takes, because my street is one mile straight. Tatum takes the rest, but they have the S curve, so a lot of people avoid Tatum. During heavy rain, Edgewater Canal, if we get a lot of traffic, part of the road will fall right into the canal. This is going to increase traffic. One of the concerns my neighbor had was noise. She lives right by Massey Road. There is not a big vegetation buffer there. i know i've lived there 2002 i bought my home i can hear people at night talking on the trail if they're going especially in the morning especially if there's a heavy cloud cover you can hear it we can see flashlights on the trail even as far away as i live i can see it's close we're not saying don't build it we're saying build it safe for the children going back and forth to school. I agree with him. New Smyrna Beach just made the developer put in a traffic light on 10th Street before they approved the development that's being built across the street from the high school because of the children's safety. When they redesigned Park Avenue, you can see that they put in a turning lane, not only going to Air Park on north, but also going Air Park south because of the traffic in that area. It's not good. And turning, and Ryan and I had a crazy discussion about this, when he asked for a comparable intersection, there isn't one close, except Mission and Park might be a good comparison. But he pointed to the driveway of the recycling center when you guys approved it before. just it's got to be safe if you build it that's our concern keep the kids safe middle not only the middle school but the high school that's and we would appreciate it thank you thank you anybody else like to come into the microphone and speak to this item general would you would you like to come back and address that concern from the from the young lady

this project i think is going to be great for the community you know it's we're doing it for the kids too like we have aspirations of sponsoring you know the high school and the middle school because it's turning into a college sport and there's scholarships now and there's a lot of cool things that we can do so I think from a pure traffic perspective, it's going to be pretty light, because you're talking about eight courts for a full four people per court. That's not a lot of people for hours at a time. That's 30 people for two hours or something. That's a pretty light load. So I don't really foresee us being a high traffic contributor, I would say. And we are doing some things to keep the sound down inside of the structure, too, because even the players don't necessarily like it. So we're doing a good job of, I think, just making it really a high-end facility that is going to be spaced well, have common area, have sound deadening, things of that nature as well.

Very good. Thank you, sir. I appreciate it. OK. We have a question for Ryan. Yes, please.

When would a traffic study be required? What are the parameters for the traffic study to take a start if people wanted a light there? What has to be met?

So this area, so it's probably no surprise that West Park Avenue is going to get extremely busy with a million square feet of industrial being built in Parktown on top of the additional 250,000. Really, it's those guys that are really the triggering point. That next building is the trigger point. So city staff have gone out for contract with our traffic engineers, Stanley consultants, to evaluate whether a traffic light or a roundabout park down is going to be the next is that the first, that's really the first light to address. And then further down, this would be the second one. And then eventually, with hopefully with the old mission road improvements, there'll be a one at West Park and old mission. for the future.

I can definitely see that happening. I'm a total advocate for roundabouts. Very good.

So that's really, I mean, right now, Traffic is, there's more traffic, yes, towards the school. There's also another school coming in in that area. So this whole area has a lot of traffic and it will have more traffic for the foreseeable future. One of the things about this development, when we took it through the entitlement process, the city staff were trying to activate the trail system, extend the trail. So the council approved the Dale Street connection. This is kind of this development with the parameters of setting up that multimodal trail is kind of setting up the framework with the FDOT grant that I'm currently working on to put a sidewalk all the way down Silver Palm, the 30th to Airpark Road there. the eventual goal is to get down to airpark road, that 12 foot this 12 foot multimodal to run all the way down, so that we will have, you know, because so one of the challenging things about transportation traffic is that you'll appreciate this is that one of the lessons we've learned, especially in being from Southern California, you can build roads all you want. But we have 18 lane freeways. doesn't really matter how many roads you build. And we have a lot of constrained right of ways due to stormwater, due to wetlands, due to private property in general. And so it, one of the things that city staff are working on, and the city already has a great, we kind of already have this plan in motion is to activate the city through trails to encourage multimodal, whether it's e bikes, walking, rollerblading, whatever it may be, for other modes of transportation, And part of that, too, is that the city's impact fee, because the city doesn't own any arterial or collector roads, the county gets all the impact fees for traffic. So I'm not allowed to build. I should say I'm not allowed to build. I don't have the funds to build the roads. Per unit, the county gets about six grand. I get $350. So $350 gets me about 10 feet of sidewalk. is activating the trail part of that development. Unfortunately, the way that planning is set up and the way that growth management is set up in Florida, it requires people to come in to turn stuff. We don't put stuff first. I know that's a hard thing for a lot of people. It requires the growth to occur and

Very good. Okay, thank you.

I appreciate that, Ryan.

Anybody, any other board members have any questions? Okay, seeing no other questions, I need a motion on this item.

I'll make a motion to approve it, SP 2605.

Do I have a second? I'll second it. Thank you, Tom. Roll call, please. Mr. Wright?

Yes. No. Yes.

Yes.

OK, thank you.

Thank you very much. Thank you, gentlemen.

next item on the agenda good luck fellas next item on the agenda is rv 2601 request to con to consider the revocation of the oakwood cove development agreement repealing ordinance number two zero zero eight dash zero dash thirteen and the amended restate restated residential planned unit development agreement recorded on 4-10-2017, an official records book, page 7383, page 3437, as well as any other PUT agreement or amended non-formally recorded for the 110 plus 110.66 plus or minus acres property located at parcel id three three seven three four four dash zero six dash zero six dash zero zero one zero staff report thank you chairman sorry that was a mouthful of a title city staff sent out public notice within 500 feet of the subject property shown here on the map

also sent a certified letter to the property owner roughly about 45 days ago. The staff did not receive any comments back from the property owner. The request before you today is to repeal the existing residential plan unit development agreement for failure to comply with the RPED agreement. Ordinance 2008-0-13 established the residential plan unit development agreement between the City of Edgewater, Florida acres. An amended and restated PUD agreement was subsequently recorded on April 10th of 2017 in the official record book 7383, page 3437. The Oakwood Cove amended and restated agreement was in section 3, denoted as duration of agreement, stated that the developer's failure to initiate construction by July 5th, 2018 may result in the city's termination of the agreement. City staff first received the preliminary plat and construction plan approval submittal on April 27th of 2023. The applicant last submitted for preliminary plat on November 26th of 2024. The applicant failed to submit an updated transportation impact analysis and a proportionate fair share agreement between the developer of Volusia County and the City of Edgewood. City staff have reached out to the applicant to inform the city they are no longer pursuing the application. City staff sent a certified letter to the property owner of the city's intent to revoke the PUD and gave 30 days to respond with a course of action to comply with the terms of the development agreement and to correct the deficiencies. No response has been received by staff as of today. City staff with the City Council for the City of Edgewater should determine if it is in the best interest of the public health and safety and general welfare of the community and considered a repeal of ordinance number 2008-0-13 of the amended and restated PUD agreement and any unreported amendments, thereby revoking the existing RPUD framework. The motion from city staff is to send a favorable recommendation to city council for the revocation of the Oakwood codes.

RPUD agreement.

Thank you so much. This is a first for us. It is. We've never had anything like this come about. It's a first for me, too.

Yeah, so, okay. It's a first for everyone.

So, I'm going to ask, is the property owner, is anybody that is connected with this property in the audience that want to talk? Okay, seeing nobody raising their hand or anything. Does anyone in the audience want to speak on behalf of this revocation? Please, please state your name and address and just what you want to talk about.

Donna Hemmingsen, 1210 Old Mission Road, New Smyrna Beach. And if you repeal it or revoke it, thank you very much. What would it take for somebody else to come in and get an agreement to develop that. What would that take? Brian, I'm going to throw that to you.

So the property, so today what we're doing is failure to comply with the development agreement to the terms cited, specifically construction, to commence construction within the time frame specified. So it doesn't mean that the property essentially will have an RPUD designation. However, it doesn't actually have any of the, So the applicant could, the property owner could resubmit or an applicant could resubmit to re-entitle the property. It does have a future land use designation of low density residential.

But it would be starting from square one.

Yeah, essentially, yeah. We would have to come in and it would have to go through the entitlement process again. The city council would have to give them that RPUD designation. And then they would have to resubmit for preliminary plan again. and then we'd go through preliminary plat, the traffic study, and then we'd go to final plat, and then finally construction.

So you're talking years?

Oh, good. A long time. 20 years? 20 more years. I don't think I'll see it in my lifetime. What's that? I don't think I'll see it in my lifetime.

What's that?

I don't think I'll see it in my lifetime.

Good, just give me 20 more years. That's all I want. And I thank you all. I really do. Thank you. It's part of the conservation of Turnbull. You know that.

Oh, I understand. We need it for the stormwater. I understand.

Save that property for the stormwater.

We're trying, ma'am. Thank you.

City staff are working with the city of New Smyrna Beach, who has a bond to buy property. Yeah. So we are working with Tony and Volusia County, whether we haven't really figured out what's the next steps, whether, you know, if it's going to be a joint thing, if we're going to go after Florida Forever, if New Smyrna Beach is ready to, if New Smyrna Beach is going to be willing to pull the full trigger, then I'll de-annex the property and I'll take it from that property. and purchase it, and then we kind of come in for stormwater.

Oh, thank you.

Very good. Thank you. That was good. Beautiful. Keep the footage. Thank you very much. Anybody else from the audience have any statements to make on this item, please? State your name and address, sir.

good evening roy bishop at 149 flamingo road edgewater um my family owns are you bishop of the bishops yes sir uh nice to meet you a junior yes roy bishop my dad clyde bishop um he started the business back in 71. yeah and he's still with us he's actually still on the property okay um is he behaving himself i'm sorry is he behaving himself he works like a fiend sun up and sundown he's an animal Our property butts up with this on three sides. We had about three, five acres out there. When it originally came through the PUD, it was just another PUD, another development going in. But after our historic flooding that we had, two of them right down the street, we had waves of water come up from the back side, south side of the property and encroach the back side of it. It was horrific. And we've been there since the early 80s. It'd be a blessing if you could rescind this and keep it for water management, turn it into a park or something like that. There's so much wetlands back there. It doesn't really make sense to try and put the houses back in there that the contractor was trying to build at that time. But if there's any way you could to rescind that, we'd be grateful.

After this step, the next step is city council. So just understand that. I think we're going to do the right thing here. But yeah, good luck. Fantastic. Thank you. Appreciate it. I appreciate it. Please state your name and address, ma'am, please.

Yes, Christine Meeks-Lenane, 1681 Cadiz Avenue. Again, thank you for considering resettling. Old Mission, Mission Oaks is where we live. And after the last hurricane, as they built up Oakleaf Preserve. It was a river running down and everybody went through Ole Miss and you couldn't get through there. So thank you. We'll try.

Thank you. Okay. I don't see anybody else coming to the microphone. Does anyone else have any questions before I ask for a motion?

This would be a great place to put in a mountain bike park.

There you go.

He wasn't even listening.

Okay, all right. Do I have a motion on this final item?

I'd like to make a motion to approve the considered revocation of local code development agreement.

And I have a second?

Second.

Whoa, who did second?

Go ahead, go ahead. Jim can have it.

You got it, Jim. Okay. Roll call, please. Mr. Ray? Yes. Yes. Mr. Govett? Yes.

Mr. Chaffer? Yep.

Mr. Cunningham?

Yes. Thank you. And that concludes. Oh, wait.

I still got my report. Yes.

are you looking at me when you say that he's saying yes she's saying i don't think you talk about shopping the review process and all that so under the new state law there's a couple new state laws that have come down the pipe and so city staff had to make pretty quick changes so what you'll see is that under the new laws we basically have to our time and our fees, it has to be proportionate.

Oh, yes, you did mention that.

And so the fee schedule was adopted by the council on Monday. And so what that means is planning staff will be billing on 15-minute increments. So if you need help from the planning department, I just want to be upfront at the beginning, try and keep it to 15 minutes because I'm going to have to start charging.

Do I have to pay? Want to talk to you?

Really?

Oh, bro.

even for planning and zoning?

So I can go up to 14 minutes? 14 minutes. And that's free? That's free.

Okay, just want to make sure. So how are you supposed to bill a volunteer on a board to discuss city business?

The city would probably have to pay that out.

Does that mean I get to bill the city now as a contractor for being on the board?

It's four or 15 minutes of staff time. Well, yeah, but from each other for two minutes and then come back.

Right.

I haven't worked out the parameters.

Yeah.

The answer is no, I can't wait to see this one.

That's it. The important part of the other part of that that's really important is so the city now has for planning staff, we have our hourly rates. But the other part of the law and really why we have to go to an hourly hire a private planner to do the review on the city's behalf instead of the city.

Crazy story. Did I tell you guys about the business I just started a few minutes ago? I heard something about it.

And so city staff are only allowed to make sure that they have can't review for substance if they use a private provider. So part of this is to show, hey, look, the city is development services directors at 107. You go use X, Y, and Z planning firm. They're at 250. So it's also an attempt to hopefully get people to use planning staff because we are more affordable than private industry. And so that's hopefully that will be the result. and that I won't be having to come up here and say to you, I didn't review this, don't ask me questions. But it's here for approval. Because that will be kind of how it will be transpiring.

So that's my other question, though. So how's this supposed to work? So say, a year and a half from now, Glenn Storch has his own review company in house. Doesn't he have to give you a report?

He does. He does, but I'm not allowed to review it for consistency. I'm only allowed to review the application materials to make sure that everything was supplied correctly. So there's a TIA, there's a check, there's...

So please tell me there was something in this law that prohibits an attorney that's representing a developer from also doing the...

There's conflict of interest, yes, but you still can hire private providers. So say you have X doing the engineering and the planning, you can then pay Y firm to review, you pay X firm.

And then couple that with you can also get private provider building inspections, so you could almost entirely cut the city out.

Correct.

Good job, Tallahassee.

Will you still be doing the staff report?

Yes.

Because even though you don't review it.

Correct. So if someone uses a private provider, that's the other thing, because there's all the administrative and all these other things. Right. It has a minimum fee of $1,000. I think it's about $1,200 at the city, plus all, any hours over what, so the fee schedule, the way it's set up is it's a deposit based on the estimated number of hours that I've calculated that our staff takes per application type. And if you go over that, you just get billed out hourly. And so every time there's a review, so if you want your comments back from the city and you think you're not gonna pay the city, you're not gonna get your comments. So every time there's a new set of comments coming, we'll send you an invoice.

So this is only large-scale stuff, not like an addition or a new construction?

This is not for building permits. This is for applications and planning. Just making sure. The other thing, though.

Well, like all the stuff in Parktown. So all that stuff in Parktown? Is that why I didn't hear back from that guy?

The other thing, too, though, is so we've now instituted zoning permits. So you will now need a building permit, unless exempted by state law, $7,500 new law. So because of that, because building permits could get exempted for work less than $7,500, we've now instituted zoning permits for everything. So regardless of what you do at the city, for the land development code, you'll need a zoning permit in addition to a building permit, unless the state has exempted you from that with a preemption.

I didn't even know about this.

So anything not structural, less than $7,500, no longer needs a building permit.

You gotta be kidding me. You know how many people are all of a sudden gonna be building crap on the side of their houses?

That's why we institute analysis. Wow, wow, wow, wow. For every application, in addition to a building department.

I mean, that's insane. Wow. You're gonna have to come down here. No, I'm actually one of the few that actually does it the right way. is that all sir so at that point meeting adjourned my god holy mackerel so we're going to cut the funding and then we're going to cut the funding again wow i'm going to take away every way that the city can make money good luck those batteries are dead

I've got to see if I can get her back. I don't know what she did.