City Council - Regular Meeting

To new parks, flood prevention, to community redevelopment, this is your source for updates on all the latest improvements. PSL in Progress helps you see the stories behind the projects and keeps you informed about what's happening now and what's coming soon. Start exploring today at PSLinProgress.com Welcome to PSLinProgress.com, your new go-to resource to learn about the exciting work happening in Port St. Lucie. From expanded roads to new parks, flood prevention to community redevelopment, this is your source for updates on all the latest improvements. PSLinProgress helps you see the stories behind the projects and keeps you informed about what's happening now and what's coming soon. Start exploring today at PSLinProgress.com.

Good afternoon everyone and welcome to our City Council meeting this Monday, July 13th, 2026 at 1 o'clock PM.

Madam Clerk, please call the roll. Councilwoman Morgan. Yes, ma'am. Councilman Pickett.

Yes, ma'am.

Mayor Martin. Here, ma'am. Councilman Bonner.

Yes, ma'am.

Vice Mayor Carvalho. Here, ma'am. Please stand for the invocation and the Pledge of Allegiance.

Almighty God in heaven, we ask thy blessings upon those gathered here this afternoon and upon all of the citizens of Port St. Lucie. Look with favor on our leaders and give them the insights, the wisdom, and the patience to deal with the problems and tasks coming before them. Please bless their work and their deliberations. Amen. Amen.

I pledge allegiance.

BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO PUBLIC TO BE HEARD, I'D LIKE TO SHARE OUR STANDARDS OF DECORUM THAT WE FOLLOW HERE IN COUNCIL CHAMBERS AS OUTLINED IN SECTION 11 OF THE COUNCIL RULES. OUR MEETINGS ARE TO CONDUCT BUSINESS OF THE CITY AND WE ASK THAT ALL PARTICIPANTS PLEASE UPHOLD THE PRINCIPLES OF CIVILITY, HONOR AND DIGNITY. When addressing the dais, please use proper language, direct all comments to the chair, and refrain from any and all personal attacks, disruptive behavior, or the use of profanity. In addition, outbursts or applause are not permitted. Each speaker will have three minutes, and time may not be transferred from one to another. If any of the rules are disregarded, we will provide a warning, and after that, you may be asked to leave the council chambers, and if necessary, may be removed under Florida law. We value each and every person's input, and thank you all for your participation. Would anyone like to address the council on any non-agenda item at public to be heard? Seeing no one, I'll close public to be heard. Moving on to additions and deletions to the agenda and approval of the agenda.

Move approval of the agenda.

Second. I have a motion and a second. All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA. COUNCIL, I'D LIKE TO HAVE 7G PULLED FOR SEPARATE DISCUSSION.

APPROVED CONSENT AGENDA.

SORRY, APPROVAL OF CONSENT AGENDA WITH ITEM 7G REMOVED FOR SEPARATE DISCUSSION.

SECOND.

I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIED. 7G, APPROVE CONCEPTUAL SELECTION OF CIGNA HEALTH AND LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY CIGNA AS THE CITY'S MEDICAL BENEFITS PROVIDER. MR. MARREJO? PROVIDE SOME COMMENTS? YES, MADAM MAYOR.

I WANT TO ASK NATALIE CABRERA TO COME UP AND JUST HAVE A BRIEF CONVERSATION AND KIND OF A STATUS OF WHERE WE STAND IN THE PATH MOVING FORWARD ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM. APPRECIATE IT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, MAYOR, CITY COUNCIL, NATALIE CABRERA, HUMAN RESOURCES DIRECTOR FOR THE RECORD. As Council's aware, the City is currently engaged in collective bargaining negotiations with Local 298, which represents civilian employees. Because those negotiations occur at designated dates and times, it would not be appropriate to discuss bargaining proposals at a Council meeting. However, one issue that has become public and generated questions is the City evaluation of health care options, specifically the claim that moving to an alternative health plan would result in approximately $3.8 million in savings. Before discussing the financial analysis, I want to clarify that the administration's recommendation to move the city's medical carrier to Cigna is independent of the outcome of the local 298 negotiations. The city provides medical benefits to multiple employee groups, including sworn, non-bargaining, and retirees. Any decision regarding the city's medical carrier impacts the city's overall health benefits program and is not limited to a single bargaining unit. Because healthcare represents a significant expenditure of public funds, staff believed it was important to conduct a thorough and objective evaluation of all available options. The City engaged an independent actuarial consultant to review the alternative health plan proposal and evaluate the total cost of providing health care benefits. The independent actuarial analysis did not validate the claimed $3.8 million in annual savings. The reason is that the analysis must consider the total cost of the city's health benefits program, not simply the medical premium rates. The city's current contribution rates are designed to cover the complete cost of providing the city's employee benefits package. This includes medical claims, prescription drug costs, admin expenses, reinsurance premiums, employee health clinic costs, short-term disability, long-term disability, accidental death and dismemberment coverage, life insurance, employee assistance programs and other related benefit expenses. When comparing medical plan options, all costs associated with providing the benefit program must be included to ensure an accurate comparison. Based on the proposed Cigna rates, the actuarial analysis determined the estimated total cost of the city's health care program for fiscal year 26-27 to be approximately $31.2 million. When evaluating the alternative health plan proposal, the analysis recognized that certain costs would continue regardless of the medical carrier selected. These expenses would still be incurred by the city and must be included for a complete comparison. For example, the city would continue to incur costs associated with the clinic and other benefit programs that are not included in the alternative plans medical rates. When those additional costs are added back into the comparison, the analysis determined that the alternative proposal would increase the city's annual costs by approximately 1.97 million. compared to the city's recommended plan. Additionally, the alternative proposal shifts more of the total cost of providing insurance to the city as it requires the city to pay approximately 90% of the cost while employees pay 10% of the cost. This cost sharing shift is significant as the city presently pays 81.5% of the cost while employees pay 18 and a half. Council's long stated goal was to have an 80-20 cost sharing split. The key takeaway is that a lower medical premium does not necessarily mean a lower cost healthcare program. A complete evaluation must consider all costs required to provide the city's full employee benefits package. The proposed medical plan with Cigna before you maintains the current plan design and benefit structure employees have today under Florida Blue. The transition to Cigna is not expected to result in an increase to medical coverage costs for fiscal year 26-27. The rates paid by both the City and employees will remain consistent with the current fiscal year. In addition to maintaining the current benefits and cost-sharing structure, Cigna provides employees with expanded access to in-network physicians and specialists through a larger provider network. Based on the independent actuarial review, the overall financial analysis, and the value provided to employees in the city, staff is recommending that the city council conceptually approve moving forward with Cigna as a city's medical carrier for fiscal year 26-27. Staff is also requesting authorization to continue negotiations with Cigna and finalize the necessary agreements and implementation steps to transition the city's medical plan. If approved today, information will be distributed to employees on what to expect next. Thank you.

Thank you. Any questions? You said, and I just wanted to just clarify to you, you said the city will incur more of the costs under the proposed percentage. And I just want to make sure when you mean the city, you mean the taxpayers, correct? Those are the people that are paying the bill.

Yes, ma'am.

So I just wanted to make sure that's clear.

No questions? Okay. Thank you. Thank you. I do have two people who have signed up to speak. MR. GIOVINCO? GOOD AFTERNOON.

GOOD AFTERNOON, AND THANK YOU FOR HEARING ME. I AM JOSEPH GIOVINCO. I AM THE SECRETARY-TREASURER OF LOCAL 298. I'M ALSO THE INTERNATIONAL SECRETARY-TREASURER OF THE INTERNATIONAL UNION OF ALI NOVELTY AND PRODUCTION WORKERS. WE'VE MADE NUMEROUS PRESENTATIONS TO THE CITY'S NEGOTIATING COMMITTEE. In our correspondence back and forth with the city's negotiating committee, we were not privy to certain information. And the information that we were privy to, like, for instance, the city clinic, was a separate line item outside of the benefit fund. That's what was explained to us. We've made a presentation to the city's negotiating committee based upon information that we received from the city's negotiating committee that saved the city $3.8 million. And our core shift of the $3.8 million was $800,000 for the city and $3 million for the city. workers of the city in reducing their out-of-pocket costs monthly by almost or close to 50%. Some situations were a little higher and some a little lower, but approximately it was 50%. We are recommending, as the representative of the employees of the city, that our goal is to control costs moving forward. By switching providers, by switching to Cigna from Blue Cross Blue Shield, Blue Cross Blue Shield has a larger network. I'm pretty sure of it. And I haven't been privy to that you wanted to switch. We haven't been privy to a disruption report. We provided a disruption report. We provided a prescription disruption report and it shows that Blue Cross Blue Shield is the largest network. And there'd be no disruption amongst the employees of the city and the network. I am recommending that let us go through the negotiation process, hear out, let's work through the issues. That's all we've been asking for, is to work through the issues and see what's best for the city and best for the employees of the city. That's what I'm asking for. We are getting resistance from the negotiating committee and when we've asked for information prior to meeting we don't get it and then we get it a day before at 5 o'clock before the next day or asking for is the proper information so that the city can make an educated decision on moving the health care from the existing Blue Cross plan to the union's Blue Cross plan with a significant savings. And when I say significant savings, when you look at the premiums, we went through all of this at the table. If you get the records, you will see. Is the clinic a separate line item? Yes. It's not paid out of the Blue Cross Blue Shield Fund. Yes. That's what we heard.

Now, all of a sudden... Can you please conclude your comments? Because your time is up, sir.

Okay. In conclusion, now that we're up to this point, the $1.6 million was now dumped into the actual cost when it was an outside line item prior to. Thank you very much for hearing me.

Thank you. Can you please provide some guidelines with regard to union negotiations and the city council's role versus the city manager's role and administration team, please?

Yes. So as Ms. Cabrera mentioned, there are ongoing negotiations, so there should not be any discussion here about any proposals or counterproposals, as the appropriate forum for that would take place at the negotiating table. Thank you.

MR. SEVASTA?

MR. HELLO. MY NAME IS JOSEPH SEVASTA. I AM A CONSULTANT FOR LOCAL 298. WE ARE THERE TO TRY AND ANALYZE THE DATA THAT WE WERE GIVEN. INITIALLY WE WERE GIVEN DATA FOR THE HEALTH PLAN AND THAT WAS ALL THAT WAS THERE. WE ANALYZED THE HEALTH PLAN AGAINST the data we were given. As we went on, the facts changed. First, there was what Mr. Giovanco discussed, which was the clinic, but there were also ancillary lines. They told us out of nowhere they put a $1.404 million charge on. Originally, they had it written as 1.8. We corrected that because that was wrong. $1.4 million charge for ancillary lines. Then we said, what are those ancillary lines? And they explained that, well, this is long-term and short-term. They didn't explain it. It just happened to come in a proposal from the actuarial firm, Wakely. Wakely had initially said that the program needed a 28% increase and that our numbers were wrong, even though we were competitive in saving money. So that's number one. Number two, with regard to splits, it doesn't matter whether it's 80, 20, or 90, 10. Both sides are reducing their cost. Either way, the cost reduced to both sides. The greater part of the savings, of course, was on the employee contribution, lesser on the taxpayer side, as you mentioned. But it was still a savings, also utilizing Anthem, Blue Cross. So that helped. But back to the ancillary lines. When we looked in the program, the ancillary lines are written through a separate carrier. And we assume a separate premium. We don't know how you would include short-term and long-term disability in health care. It's not part of the same program. And they put that $1.4 million charge on. And we said, well, that can't be all the cost. And it just said, and other expenses. We don't know what that is. So what's happened here is that we don't believe we're getting all the facts that are necessary to analyze this. You yourself said, this is taxpayer money. And I think that they deserve the right for us to do a full analysis, or at least for the data to be out there. All parties involved get the same exact data. And then you do the analysis. I think that that would be certainly more transparent and would alleviate any concerns that taxpayers may have. And so that is my concern. Did I make my time?

If you're concluded?

Yes. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Madam Mayor. Yes, go ahead. Since there's discussions about transparency, I really would like you to explain to the public the process of union negotiations, how we negotiate, and then for transparency purposes, that once a negotiation settlement is met, how that's transparent in the public. Can you legally explain from soup to nuts how the process worked for the city of Port St. Lucie? Because I don't want anything left on the table.

So I, I, don't really have that information. We have outside counsel who is controlling these negotiations, so I do not have that information for me to be able to accurately and competently explain that to you. And I would hate to attempt to do so and not have that information. So we can get that information. I'm not sure if staff has more information on that, but I would not want to incompetently advise you.

Well, and if I can, can I speak about my experience and my experience of the years that I've done negotiations? Typically, what we do is that we go into a negotiation process where the CEO of the company and their representative have conversations and negotiate the contract. The contract then comes forward to the city council for approval. Upon that time, everything within that contract is transparent. What was agreed to? What was the data? What was the information? All of that is transparent to the public. But shade sessions are what every city, every municipality, every business, they do what's called shade sessions to be able to discuss and negotiate. They have their sessions, we have their sessions, and then staff gets together to try and negotiate. And it doesn't, we don't formally talk about this. I think it's union, like it's union rules, if I'm not mistaken. Sorry if I am. We don't really discuss this publicly until the final negotiation is completed

the proposal comes forward and then at that point that's when we're able to actually discuss it is that would that be fair i mean can you at least tell me if i'm on the right track there i believe so um particularly given my conversations with outside counsel and the advice that i previously gave about not discussing proposals at this time that is in line with the advice that i've

given previously and I've been advised on as well I appreciate that I just want to make sure that the public understands it's not there's really nothing to hide it this is the process this is the way it works and it when we reach when we actually reach a point where the negotiations complete and we bring forward a contract that's fully transparent and fully public so just want to make sure thank you so madam mayor this is listed on the agenda as a conceptual approval can you clarify what a conceptual approval is

Yes, so the conceptual approval as explained in the agenda memo would be that what is being requested by staff is that council approve the rates as a initial step to then negotiating a contract. So this is not asking for approval of a final contract with Cigna. And as stated in the agenda memo, the final contract, if and when city staff negotiates in the city attorney's office,

successfully negotiates that that would come before council again at a future date so and just for complete clarity and transparency something that's conceptual is not binding and is not final correct it's not final okay and the the what we are conceptually approving today would essentially freeze health care rates so there would be no increase in health care costs next year conceptually under what we're approving today

Correct. That is the conceptual idea and what has been indicated to city staff and the city attorney's office as the promise of the insurer.

So it would seem to be that this would be a pretty non-controversial item to approve today because we're approving a conceptual plan that is not final. Union negotiations are still underway. And at very minimum, we have ensured that there's going to be no increase in health care for the next year. That's what we're conceptually approving. So I guess those would be my comments, that this is just common sense. Thank you.

Anyone else?

I just want to make sure that we're not bound to this, because based on the gentleman's comments, he said they didn't receive all the information in a timely manner. To me, that's a problem. That's a big issue. And I wouldn't feel comfortable ruling on something that's going to be binding unless I am sure that the other side has all the information that they needed to make a decision. And so that's where I stand.

Any other comments?

I think that's fair.

ABSOLUTELY IS FAIR. EVERYONE SHOULD HAVE ALL THE INFORMATION PROVIDED. THAT'S WHAT THE PROCESS IS ALL ABOUT. AND THOSE NEGOTIATIONS ARE GOING TO CONTINUE AS IS OUR NORMAL COURSE OF PROCESS. AND COUNCIL IS NOT INVOLVED IN ANY WAY, SHAPE, OR FORM IN NEGOTIATING WITH THE UNION. THAT IS THE ROLE OF THE CITY MANAGER AND HIS TEAM, AS WAS MENTIONED BY ALYSSA AND BY VICE MAYOR. All right. With that council, is there a motion motion to approve?

Second. Okay.

I have a motion and a second on the conceptual selection of Cigna health and life insurance company. Any further discussion? All those in favor. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Okay. We're moving on to second reading of ordinances. Ordinance 26 dash 48.

An ordinance of the City of Port St. Lucie, Florida, providing for the 16th Amendment to the Master Planned Unit Development Regulation Book and Concept Plan for the Tradition Master Planned Unit Development, Tradition MPUD, located south of the Crosstown Parkway, west of I-95, and north and south of Tradition Parkway, providing for conflict, providing for severability, and providing an effective date. Thank you.

Good evening, I mean, good afternoon, sorry. Bridget Keene with the Planning and Zoning Department. This was a quasi-judicial when it went to, for the first reading. I don't know if I need to be sworn in for just this update. This was quasi-judicial when it went for the first reading, so this is just providing some additional information. Would I need to be sworn in?

Yes.

Okay, okay.

Is the update outside of what was already... Is there new information?

It's new information based on your direction.

Okay, that's what I want to make sure we're clarifying in terms of the swearing in. If there's new information... There's Elizabeth right there.

If this is just an update regarding facilitating the conditions that council desired to be placed in the documentation that we don't need to have a new swearing in. And also we can't present additional information because I don't believe this was noticed as a public hearing again. So we're still confined to the underlying record of the first proceeding, but we discussed these conditions. So if Bridget has an update on those conditions, that's fine. Okay, great. Thank you. Okay. Okay.

So this is the 16th Amendment to the Tradition, MPUD. And just for a little background, at the June 22nd City Council meeting, the Council did recommend approval subject to the following additional conditions. And the conditions were that the MPUD shall be revised before the second reading to prohibit service stations as a permitted use for parcel 11A in the MPU document and on the MPUD concept plan. And in addition, that the ordinance would be updated before the second reading to add a condition PROHIBITING SERVICE STATIONS ON PARCEL 11A. SO I JUST WANT TO SHOW YOU WHERE WE DID MAKE THOSE CHANGES. SO THIS IS EXHIBIT B OF THE TRADITION MPUD AND WHERE IT IDENTIFIES PARCEL 11A USED FOR RETAIL AND OFFICE. IT NOW SAYS SERVICE STATIONS AS DEFINED IN SECTION 153.01 OF THE CITY CODE. THAT'S THE DEFINITION SECTION OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS. AND IT DOES CLARIFY THAT SERVICE STATIONS ARE PROHIBITED FOR PARCEL 11A. This is section four of the mixed use area, and this lists the permitted uses for mixed use. And within that, it does say service stations are listed as a permitted use, but except they are prohibited in parcel 11A. We also changed the concept plan to add a note, and that note basically says that the development of a service station, as defined in our definitions, shall be prohibited on parcel 11A. And the ordinance itself was updated. It was updated to clarify that a service station as defined in section 153.01, again, the definition section of the code is service stations are prohibited on parcel 11A. We did also clarify from some of the discussion at the June 22nd meeting that prior to the mass grading for any part of 11A, a fence shall be installed along the southern boundary of the property for the purpose of restricting access to Southwest Glenbrook Tribe. That's the road that connects to Heritage Oaks. And in addition, it also clarifies that prior to the issuance of the first building permit for vertical construction on Parcel 11A, the architectural wall and associated buffering required shall be installed along the eastern and southern boundaries of Parcel 11A. And again, this is in addition to the conditions that already were in the ordinance when it went to June 22nd. And happy to answer any questions.

Any questions? No? Okay. All right. I do have three people signed up to speak. Oh. Sorry. Oh. Mr. Curry, did you want to make a comment?

Just wanted to say good afternoon. And for the record, Brad Curry with Haley Ward here representing the property owner. Property owner and I are here to answer any questions you have. We have reviewed everything the staff presented, and we are in agreement with it.

Any questions for Mr. Curry?

Thank you.

Thank you. Ms. Pinto?

Good afternoon.

Hi good afternoon.

I WANTED TO JUST COME AND REITERATE A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT WE WENT THROUGH AND THROUGH THIS PROCESS AND I APPRECIATE YOU TAKING THE TIME TO LISTEN TO US AS COMMUNITY MEMBERS. I LIVE ON SOUTH GATE WHICH IS DIRECTLY IMPACTED BY THIS. ONE OF THE THINGS I WAS ACTUALLY THINKING THE OTHER DAY IS I KNOW IT'S AN ELECTION YEAR AND I KNOW THAT IT'S FROWNED UPON FOR ANYBODY TO PUT ANYTHING OUT THERE THAT'S A RESIDENTIAL, TO APPROVE ANYTHING THAT'S RESIDENTIAL. We don't owe it to this applicant to change the zoning as it stands right now. And that would be preferable. However, if there is going to be a zoning change, I had considered ways to mitigate some of the sound. And this may or may not be the place you can tell me. i'm thinking uh fountains that would be appropriately i know that that would help with the sound issue in those lakes that that are there um and i would like to ask the applicant or you could ask the applicant to be really really considerate of um the border by the water where there are protected species that live and nest and to have that going forward for us. So that's just a few, a little tidbit of what I've been pondering since the last time we were here. And just consider as you're going forward in your process, whether you're elected or whether you're not elected. But for the sake of this city and the growth of it, I really think having a mindset of curating businesses and where they're going to go so that we don't have problems like Fort Lauderdale, like Boca, like Tampa. have it so that we've actually, you know, curated the things that we want to be here. And I know that there's pressure on taxes and all of that. But I think that there's just such a better way to do it for everybody. Thank you for your time. Thank you.

Mr. Mucchiolo. You're next, ma'am.

Do I have to be sworn in?

I'm sorry?

Do I have to be sworn in? No. Okay. Go on. Well, thank you for letting me speak. Of course. Appreciate it. Good afternoon. My name is Joseph Mucciolo. I live within 750 feet, about 2.3 blocks from the property, and I oppose rezoning request P26026, petition MPUD, Amendment 16, which would change the zoning from residential to commercial. After attending multiple hearings, I remain concerned about the lack of transparency, excessive bureaucracy, and missing information provided to residents and decision makers. Before any hearing, the Planning and Zoning Board should receive complete plans, including occupancy layouts, wetland and environmental impact statements, traffic studies, and other essential details. The Department of Environmental Protection says it can't determine wetland status until a permit is filed which occurs after resigning approval or disapproval. Madam Mayor and council members, how can you make an informed decision without all the facts? Approval should not move forward without critical information. Residents' rights and concerns are not being fully considered. When we purchased our home, the land was zoned residential and has remained so for more than 20 years. Homeowners relied on that expectation. Changing the property to commercial use disregards residents, threatens property values, and alters the character of our community. The rights of residents, including my neighbors and myself, are being discriminated against and overlooked. The lack of transparency makes it harder for marginalized groups and affected residents to change unfair to challenge unfair changes. Without detailed building plans, occupancy layouts, wetland and environmental impact statements, traffic studies, and other essential information, this rezoning request should not be approved. When residents' concerns are repeatedly unanswered, while commercial rezoning continues, to advance, it creates the appearance of unequal treatment and rises serious concerns about whether homeowners are being fairly represented in this process. Rezoning can promote positive community change, but when the process excludes nearby residents, disregards elderly homeowners, or is applied unfairly, it raises serious legal and civil rights concerns. Residents deserve respect, a fair opportunity to challenge unjust practices and a transparent decision-making process. For these reasons, this rezoning application should not be approved. I don't know if 11B should be included without the gas station. This is other than that. Also, I thought you were going to say that if the present owner sells the property, that has to be transferred that no gas stations will be built on this property. I didn't see that either one of them presented by Bridget.

Well, I'll answer that after, sir.

Okay. Thank you. Thank you.

This is Mukalo.

Good afternoon. Good afternoon. I live 750 feet from the property, and I oppose rezoning request P26026, which would change the zoning from residential to commercial. In my view, the Planning and Zoning Board, Mayor, and Council are considering rezoning without first obtaining or releasing key information, such as building plans, occupancy layouts, wetland impacts, and verified traffic studies. This is a flawed process. Without these details, how can officials make informed decisions? Bureaucracy is replacing transparency. Approval or disapproval should wait for finalized plans. Anything else puts the cart before the horse. Rezoning without detailed plans lacks transparency and ignores how commercial development, just 750 feet, 2.3 blocks from homes, would affect residents. This property has been residential for 20 years and homeowners bought without understanding. Changing it to commercial is wrong. and should be rejected our community deserves responsible planning honest communication and a respect for quality of life this process raises fairness concerns residents will bear the greatest impact deserve the same consideration as developers and commercial interests the lack of transparency alone is ample reason to deny the rezoning request some may think commercial rezoning is the politically safer move in an election year That's only partly true. Residents oppose both commercial and residential development. What they reject is the steady loss of Florida's natural beauty. Commercial growth can quickly justify more residential growth, and that residential growth can then be used to justify more commercial expansion. A cycle erodes community character one project at a time. At some point, we must decide whether we are planning responsibly or simply allowing overdevelopment to continue unchecked. This hearing isn't about development in general. It's about one decision. Whether 9.4 acres will be taken from residential and turn commercial. Between the two options, residential is the better path. And the zoning homeowners relied on when we purchased our homes. At what point are our rights protected? As I stated, Madam Mayor and Council Members, a well-planned residential approach protects wildlife, green space, trees, drainage, home values, mental health, and the quiet character of our neighborhood. Converting this land to commercial use will permanently change the character of this area, and once that happens, it cannot be undone. For these reasons, I urge you to not rezone this property. I appreciate the chance to speak, but I left wondering whether I've been heard at all. Today it's my block, tomorrow it's yours. Thank you.

Thank you. And Madam Mayor, I apologize. While the council is able to hear public comment for informational purposes and to answer questions, I believe the hearing was closed on first reading for this, so the council may not consider what was provided new information today in deciding this item. Thank you. Yes, did you have something, Council Member Bonner?

Are we allowed to acknowledge or... In our comments, are we allowed to acknowledge some of the stuff that was said today?

Yes, it just cannot factor into your decision making, but if you want to answer questions and hear public comment, that is permissible.

I do have comments. Yes, thank you, Madam Mayor. The first thing I want to say is that Port St. Lucie City of over 260,000 people and ultimately we have to make decisions. Those decisions are not going to satisfy everybody. We listen and we consider every resident that comes forward. We consider the arguments, but ultimately we have to make one decision, and we're not always going to agree. But I, for one, am excited that we are here today and that we have come up with what I think is a positive solution for the city. Time after time, we hear that Florida's full, Fort St. Lucie's full. And I am always of the opinion that you have property rights, but you don't have a right to change what that property is. So you don't have a right to go from residential to commercial or commercial to residential. However, in this instance, a property owner has come to us and said, we want to change some residential to commercial. Port St. Lucie has long lacked commercial, which is a burden on property owners, which is a burden on homeowners. We have, I think, 4% commercial in the city. And this change would reduce the number of residential rooftops, which is something the community has said over and over again that they want. In addition, adding commercial closer to our neighborhoods reduces the length of trips, which reduces overall traffic. Because if you have commercial closer to you, your trips are shorter and it reduces the burden on the overall network. What we did hear from the community and from the residents, which was very valid, was that there was concern about ingress and egress for service stations. And so we were able to work with the applicant because I said that without that condition, I would not be able to support this because we do listen to the residents. We do have transparent processes. We have had planning and zoning public hearings. We have had several hearings here at the city. So that is what transparency is, open meetings where people can come and talk and share their opinions and be a part of the process. And so we were able to get the property owner to be amenable to that change. And so for that reason, because my concerns about ingress and egress were heard, and we've added that protection for the neighbors, I think this is positive for the community, and I will be supporting it. Thank you.

Thank you. Yes, go ahead. I just wanted to thank you guys for coming, and I wanted to respond to some of the things that you said, because much of it I agree with, and I share your frustrations. When I had the opportunity to start serving our city, I thought that I could change the world. You walk into this, I could change the world. I've lived in Port St. Lucie pretty much my whole life, born and raised in Florida, And I've watched the change happen, not just in my city, but throughout the entire state. And like you have that frustrated because I'm like, when is it going to stop? When are we going to stop growing? And I think that the conversation needs to go above our local level and really talk to our state level because you think we've got all the power up here, but much of what we do is regulated by the state. And I think that, you know, if you're willing to advocate with me, I would love to have conversations with our state officials because they need to understand what the grassroots impact is to some of the decisions, some of the laws that we have. So first of all, to curated business, I agree with you. I wish I could make a design plan of what commercial businesses would go in what areas. But unfortunately by law, I, once I allow commercial zoning, whatever falls under that zoning type, that's it. I can't tell. I can't tell a McDonald's that they can't come any more than I can tell a fancy five-star restaurant. They all are welcome. And that's kind of the way by property law and by property rights, by property rights is what's required. Nesting, another thing. I don't know if you had the opportunity to go down Becker Road when they were doing all that new construction. Regardless of whether it's residential or commercial, unfortunately, they flatten everything. And then they replant trees. And so they replant what they're supposed to. They also pay for mitigated amounts, which is allowable, again, by the way that these laws are created. But the impact would be felt regardless of whether it was commercial or residential. But that's just because the way the laws are. And then comp plans. I've been so frustrated. There are so many times where someone wants to provide me a comp plan and it says, you know, this is what we want to change it to. I'm not allowed to consider in a quasi-judicial procedure because we're here like a jury. That is not evidence I'm allowed to consider. What's going there? What's not going there? It has to be commercial or residential. That's all I'm allowed to consider. I can't force them to give me plans. I can't force them to give me site work. Now, that comes later. We can take into consideration, for example, what you said in the future site plan. If this is approved today, there will be a site plan come forward. And you said something about fountains. I don't know if that's within the property of the commercial or not. That's something that you could request. They have an art requirement of some kind. We could ask the developer, would you be willing to look at fountains? Those are things that we might be able to do with site plan. But at the comp plan approval, we're not even allowed to do that. And then, you know, rejecting all growth. I think all Floridians are frustrated with the amount of growth. And I think all Floridians need to consider any changes that we make in the state of Florida and how that could impact growth positively or negatively. And that goes beyond just this vote today. So I'm always welcome to have the conversation. I want to protect our community the same. I understand where the council's at, and I just want to say that you know, you're, you are being heard. And I think that we're, sometimes we sit up here and we have to make the hard decision that nobody really wants us to make. Um, but at the end of the day, I think that we're, we feel much of what you're going through on a daily basis. So I just wanted to share that. Thank you for coming.

Any other comments?

When this was first introduced, I was very excited that they wanted to go from commercial or excuse me, from residential to commercial because we've set up here time and time again, and ruled against going the other way. It doesn't matter which way we rule, there's always going to be somebody in opposition of it. And for me, I think that going commercial is the best possible thing for that corner. I know that's not what you all want to hear, but I honestly believe that. I drive that every day. I see it every day. You know, you all live behind it. I live right beside it. But I think, for me, I think the best possible solution would be to put commercial there instead of residential. And that's where I stand. Thank you.

Do you have anything, Councilwoman?

My standard? Ditto, ditto, ditto. We've been saying this for years. It's already been said. If it's gonna go from residential to commercial, we have heard from so many community residents no more housetops, and to go from residential to commercial. And just a few things under comments, we're going to see what comes. You don't get to see what's coming or what the building's going to look like until later on down the road. So it has been transparent. There's no denying that. And it's almost like we always get another bite at the apple. I think going forward, I will be in full support of this. Thank you.

Thank you. So just for clarification, in the condition, the gas station is prohibited, correct? It was agreed to by the applicant, correct? Correct.

Is this on? OK, yes, correct. And it's written in the MPUD so that it applies to whoever owns the property. It's prohibited on the parcel. And that's clear in the MPUD. So anybody reading the MPUD would see that, any planner with a project coming forward.

So MPUD is a master plan unit development, correct? So for everyone who doesn't understand what that acronym means. So like you said, it is ready, right? It's written into the document. It's written into the MPUD that no gas station could be there on the parcel whatsoever, no matter who owns the parcel.

Correct.

All right. I just want to make sure we're answering Mr. Mukulo's question. All right. Council, is there a motion?

Motion to approve Ordinance 26-48. Second.

I have a motion and a second. All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries.

8B, Ordinance 26-58.

In an ordinance of the City of Port St. Lucie, Florida, authorizing the conveyance of real property described as Lot 12, Block 2200, Port St. Lucie, Section 33, as recorded in Platte Book 15, pages 1A through 1B, of the Public Records of St. Lucie County, Florida to Holiday Builders Incorporated in exchange for Holiday Builders Incorporated conveying real property described as open space track Holiday Bougainvillea Platte as recorded in Platte Book 140, page 14 of the Public Records of St. Lucie County, Florida to the city, providing for conflict, providing for severability, and providing an effective date.

Thank you. Council, is there a motion?

Motion to approve Orders 26-58.

Second. I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries.

8C, Ordinance 26-59.

An ordinance of the City Council of the City of Port St. Lucie, Florida, providing for the placement of a non-binding straw ballot question on the November 3, 2026 general election ballot, asking whether the electors support amending the city's solid waste franchise agreement to increase residential curbside pickup to twice per week at an increased cost per household. providing the text of the proposed straw ballot question, directing the city clerk to provide the supervisor of elections with a copy of this ordinance, providing for conflict, providing for severability, and providing an effective date.

Thank you. Did you have a presentation this time for second reading?

I do have the same brief presentation, if you'd like me to go over that again, or I'm available for any questions.

Good.

I watched it. I think we're good. Go ahead.

I did have a question because I noticed it says proposed increase to your tax bill. And I realize it would be an increase to the tax bill. But I also just had a concern that maybe it's implying that the city is proposing some kind of increase when really this is just a question. Is there a way to make it clear that it's a question for them rather than a proposal recommended by the city?

Let me look at it. I don't see that.

Or this is updated version I'm looking at in the backup.

In the title? Yes. Is that where you're? I was going to say it's not on the straw ballot.

Okay, if it's not on the straw ballot, it's in the title on the, it says straw ballot updated language version.

Where it says straw ballot question?

I just want to make sure the city's not putting the finger on the scale.

Well, it only said proposed because it would be a proposed increase to the services. I'm not sure if we can change the language or would we have to come back?

Yes, I believe since this was already passed for first reading, we would have to come back if we made any changes and do the twos.

And we don't have enough time until we meet the deadline to do that, correct?

Correct.

Is it not up? I see what he's saying, though. It's not up. I know. So I guess you can look at it both ways, right? I understand that thought, but we can't. It will be an increase.

It will be an increase if it's saying it's proposed.

It's because it hasn't, it's, it's a question, right?

Yes. It's proposed. They're going to vote. If the vote would come back. Yes. That's the only way that it would be an increase.

Cause if you took out proposed, you can't just say increase to your tax bill. You have to say it's proposed because that's the question that we're asking.

That is why it was in the title.

So I don't know what other way we could word that. I was just thinking, even if you said potential, it's the same thing. Yeah, I mean, it would be the same thing.

It just popped into my head right now, so I...

you can look at something a million times and then yeah we have we do have to have it in by August 5th and we do have to get it translated into Spanish so we would not be able to do the two readings based on the versions that you've shown us prior to this I think this is the most clear and concise version that we've come up with so far to date yeah

And would it be on the ballot, would it look similarly like this where that line would be in a more normal font versus the bold font?

So, yes, it would be in the normal font. It's just like when you have any question, you have the title. So that's just the title. Then you have the summary.

Okay. I mean, because usually people tend to go to the bold part of the question, so they may not view it as like the way, you know, like it may not be as obvious, but. As long as it's like this and you have it laid out like that, I think. I agree with you, though. That's an interesting play on words.

And I don't want to hold it up over this because I think it's very important. As I mentioned earlier on another item, 260,000 people, you have to make one decision. There's going to be people on all sides of the decision. I've talked to people who say I barely use once a week. And then I have people that... Like you, we have several children at home. We have diapers. We need twice a week. We need the second can. And so this is the opportunity. This is the chance for the residents to choose. And so I think we need to give them the opportunity to choose. And so I would support moving this forward.

Thank you.

OK. Oh, real quick. This is off topic, but I saw this question pop up. Social media ends up asking questions, and I saw this come up. Could you explain to the public? I heard about customizing services. That came up in a discussion. It was like, why can't they customize service, do more during the summer, do less in the fall? And if I didn't know the answer to the question, I would have said the same thing. Would you like to explain, Mariana, why they can't fluctuate the service and customize the service level of pickups? And who needs a second pickup? Who needs one pick? Why can't we customize it the way we would like to?

Well, in the way you can customize it with the amount of carts that you can get, you can... purchase additional carts for an annual fee. The reason we can't customize, like we pick up less during the summer and then more is because you still need the trucks and the trucks have to run. If you let trucks sit for multiple months, you would have a lot of maintenance and a lot of issues that would come about with the trucks. And you would still have to pay for the full amount of the trucks because you would still need the additional trucks.

And I would assume the employees as well.

Yes. So you would still have all of those costs throughout the year, whether you're picking up more or less in certain months.

Thank you.

Anything else? Okay. Is there a motion? Motion to approve?

Second.

I have a motion and a second. Any final discussion? All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. 8D, Ordinance 26-60.

An ordinance of the City of Port St. Lucie, Florida authorizing the lease of real property located at 198 Northwest Marion Avenue, Port St. Lucie, Florida. TO THE AGRICULTURAL AND LABOR PROGRAM INCORPORATED, A FLORIDA NON-FOR-PROFIT CORPORATION, AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR, THE CITY MANAGER, OR THEIR DESIGNIES TO EXECUTE THE LEASE AGREEMENT, PROVIDING FOR CONFLICT, PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THANK YOU, COUNCIL.

MOTION TO APPROVE ORDERS 26-60.

SECOND. I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR? AYE. ANY OPPOSED? MOTION CARRIES. A.E. Ordinance 26-61.

An ordinance of the City of Port St. Lucie, Florida, authorizing lease of real property located at 198 Northwest Marion Avenue, Port St. Lucie, Florida, to the Boys and Girls Club of St. Lucie County, a Florida not-for-profit corporation, authorizing the mayor, the city manager, or their designees to execute the lease agreement, providing for conflict, providing for severability, and providing an effective date. Thank you, counsel.

Motion to approve.

Second. We have a motion and a second. Any discussion? All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. 8F, Ordinance 26-62.

An ordinance authorizing the issuance of not to exceed $85 million in aggregate principal amount of Port St. Lucie, Florida Special Obligation Refund Bonds Series 2026A to finance various costs related to the Floresta Drive roadway improvements, the Public Works Building Project, and the PAR Roundabouts Project, providing for a covenant to budget an appropriate legally available non-advalerum REVENUES TO PAY THE PRINCIPLE OF THE REDEMPTION PREMIUM, IF ANY, AND INTEREST ON THE BONDS, PROVIDING FOR CERTAIN RIGHTS OF THE HOLDERS OF SUCH BONDS, PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY, AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE. THANK YOU, COUNCIL.

MOTION TO APPROVE.

SECOND. I HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. 8G, Ordinance 26-63.

An ordinance to approve a conceptual plan for approximately 1.41 acres of property located at the southwest intersection of Southwest Port St. Lucie Boulevard and Southwest Sultan Drive within the LMD Zoning District for a project known as Riverview Plaza, providing for conflict, providing for severability, and providing an effective date. Thank you, counsel.

Motion to approve.

Second. I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. 8H, Ordinance 26-64.

An ordinance of the City of Port St. Lucie amending the Tradition Master Sign Program, providing for conflict, providing for severability, and providing an effective date. Is there a motion? Motion to approve Ordinance 26-64.

Second. Second. I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Aye. Ordinance 26-65.

In ordinance of the City of Port St. Lucie, Florida, authorizing the conveyance of real property lying in Section 6, Township 36 South, Range 40 East, to the Florida Department of Transportation for the construction of an interchange ramp at Midway Road and the Turnpike. and pursuant to the memorandum of agreement between the Florida Department of Transportation and the City of Port St. Lucie, providing for conflict, providing for severability, and providing an effective date. Council?

Motion to approve Ordinance 26-65. Second.

I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Moving on to the first reading of ordinances, item 10A, ordinance 26-66.

An ordinance of the City of Port St. Lucie, Florida amending the City of Port St. Lucie Comprehensive Plan by adopting the Evaluation and Appraisal Report, EAR-based Comprehensive Plan Amendments, amending the goals, objectives, and policies in the future land use element, transportation element, housing element, infrastructure element, conservation and coastal management element, intergovernmental coordination element, recreation and open space element, economic development element, capital improvements element, the public schools element, the property rights element, amending the future land use map series, and providing for the repeal of the prior data and analysis sections adopted under ordinance 20-28, providing the invalid of any portion shall not affect the remaining portions of this ordinance, and providing for an effective date. Thank you.

Good afternoon, Miss Keene. Good afternoon again, Bridget Keene with the Planning and Zoning Department. And the Planning and Zoning Department is happy to present the 2026 year-based amendments to the city's comprehensive plan. This is a complete overview of the city's comprehensive plan as well as an update. We have been working on this project since 2024, and it has included extensive public outreach as well as outreach to city staff. you know, the city administration, and then as well as workshops with city council. And we did take the information we received, especially from the city council that we just held, and that was incorporated into the updated evaluation or amendments. Pat Tyeski with Inspire Placemaking is here. She is our city consultant on this project. And Lauren Rushing with New Urban Concepts is here. She and Jonathan Paul are the city's consultant on the mobility plan, and they were the sub-consultants or are the sub-consultants for Inspire Placemaking. So I'm going to turn it over to Pat, and we're happy to answer any questions. Thank you.

Good afternoon. Good afternoon. Pat Talleschi, I'm a principal with Inspire Placemaking. So I'm going to take you through a PowerPoint that you have seen before, but for the purpose of the hearing, I wanted to make sure everybody in the public can see it too. So the agenda, we're going to go through a little bit of introductions. We're going to talk about why we're updating the plan. We're going to talk a little bit about community input, what we heard from the community. And then we'll go element by element through the changes that we're proposing, and then we'll close with next steps. So as Bridget mentioned, we have been working closely with the Planning and Zoning Department, with Mary, Bridget, and Sophia. From the INSPIRE team, you met Gabby Castro last time. She's the Deputy Project Manager. I have been serving as the Project Manager. And we have been working closely with New Urban Concepts. Jonathan Paul is online. He happens to be out of the country, but he's participating via Teams. And then Lauren will be helping me with a portion of the presentation. So Bridget mentioned that we started this in late 2024. So when we started, we did a series of kickoff meetings and we had some public involvement at that point. Then we moved into the update of the data and analysis. And again, we asked the community to help us with that too. We held stakeholder interviews and we had some public workshops. Then with that input that we received, we created what we call the community vision. That's what the community wanted to see changed in the comprehensive plan. And then in the fall of 2025, the beginning of this year, we started working on updating the goals, objectives, and policies of the plan. Now we have unveiled that draft and are now going through the adoption phase of the project. So the adoption includes a public hearing with the planning board that we had already. This hearing, which is a transmittal hearing, that means we send the comprehensive plan changes to the state for review. They take their time to do that, to review it, and then it comes back to you. So the plan is to come back to you in October for the final adoption of the plan. So why are we doing this? So the comprehensive plan is your blueprint for growth. Basically, this is the element that you have to refer to any time there is a proposal for development in the city. The comprehensive plan includes a total of 11 elements or chapters with different topics. And we're going to go through those in a little bit. Why are we updating it now? So the state statutes require all counties and cities in the state to update the plan every seven years. So our deadline is coming up. You have to send a letter to the state in September of this year. LETTING THEM KNOW THAT, YES, YOU HAVE TO MAKE SOME CHANGES TO THE PLAN BECAUSE DEMOGRAPHICS HAVE CHANGED AND BECAUSE THE STATUTES HAVE CHANGED. SO THE STATE IS GOING TO GIVE US ONE YEAR TO COMPLETE THAT PROCESS. TYPICALLY ONE YEAR IS NOT ENOUGH TO GET ALL THE PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT THAT WE WANT TO HAVE. THAT'S WHY WE STARTED EARLIER THAN WHEN THE LETTER WAS DUE. TWO OTHER REASONS WHY WE'RE UPDATING THE PLAN. ONE IS BECAUSE WE WANTED TO GO BACK TO THE COMMUNITY AND SEE WHAT HAS CHANGED. ANY PRIORITIES THAT HAD CHANGED WE WANTED TO INCORPORATE THAT. AND ALSO BECAUSE YOU HAVE BEEN WORKING DILIGENTLY ON A MOBILITY PLAN. SO WE WANTED TO INCORPORATE THOSE STRATEGIES INTO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. WHENEVER WE DO A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WE HAVE TO START WITH POPULATION PROJECTIONS. How much are we going to grow? So the state is very specific on how we do that. Some people may say, we don't want to grow any more than we have already. The state says you have to at least select the medium projection. We have to look at the county projection that the state produces. We have to do some calculations to see what our proportion of that growth is going to be, and then go from there. So the current population of the city is around 267,000. When we apply the projections that I talked about, we see that by 2050, we're going to be over 400,000 people. So it's a 20-year projection. We know that those are just estimates. But as I mentioned earlier, we get to update the plan every seven years, and then we get to adjust those projections. So basically, the bottom line is that we're going to be adding 139,000 people between now and 2050. Community inputs, I mentioned that it was very important for the city to go back to the community, review priorities and see what the hot topics were. We started with a survey, online survey in November of 2024. We had stakeholder meetings in December of that same year. And we invited a lot of people. We invited people that had attended the city university program. We invited developers, land use attorneys, citizen advisory board members, realtors, economic development council, Treasure Coast Builders Association, and even some of the local chambers of commerce. In January, we had the first public workshop. And at that point, we asked people, where are we now? It was, let's set the base. Where do you think we are? What are we liking, disliking about the city? Then in February, we were part of the citizen summit. We set up some boards and got some community input at that time. In February, we came back to the public and we said, knowing where we are now, where do you want to go? Where do you want to be in 20 years? And that was the input that we received. Then in February of 2025, staff attended FAMFest and they did the same thing. They set up some boards and got some public input. And then in April of last year, we had the third workshop. And at that workshop, we asked people, okay, we know where we're now, we know where we wanna go, help us figure out how we're gonna get there. And then the last public session that we had was the Citizen Summit of this year. So we have a summary of the public input on the project website, which is on the city's website. But to give you an idea of what we heard, we put a slide that has a summary of that input. So the first thing was promoting responsible growth. So we all know we cannot stop growth. So if we're going to grow, we want to make sure it's strategic and responsible. Number two, establishing a sense of place. The way that the city was founded, it's not your typical city that has the traditional downtown. So people were saying we need to have a place that we can call the heart of the city. DIVERSIFYING THE LOCAL ECONOMY, THE IDEA THAT PEOPLE HAVE TO GO OUT OF THE CITY FOR WORK. PEOPLE WANTED TO BE ABLE TO LIVE, WORK, AND PLAY IN THE CITY. SO THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT WE HEARD VERY CLEARLY. IN TERMS OF TRANSPORTATION, AS THE CITY GROWS, TRANSPORTATION GETS MORE CHALLENGING. SO PEOPLE WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAD A CONNECTED TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM AND AN INCLUSIVE TRANSPORTATION FUTURE. AND THAT'S WHY THE CITY HAS BEEN WORKING ON THAT MOBILITY PLAN. In terms of housing, people ask for housing diversity. We have a lot of single family homes. Young people sometimes cannot find a place for them to stay in the city if they want to start their adult lives here. And that would be a way of improving affordability. And the last one had to do with preserving and conserving nature. Most of the people we talked to were very proud of the parks and recreation systems that you have already in the city, and they wanted to make sure that that's going to be protected and continued in the future. So we're going to go through the changes that we're proposing, and we're going to take them element by element. So in terms of all the elements together, the first thing we had to do was extending the plant projections to 2050. The requirement is 2046, but we decided to use 2050 as the round number. We had to incorporate new state requirements. Up to May of this year, we were still getting new changes that we had to incorporate. We have three very important documents that the city had worked on that we needed to make sure were incorporated here. The mobility plan, the parks master plan, and the planning and infrastructure study. And then we continued to incorporate policies related to economic development and preservation of open space. So the first element of the comprehensive plan is one of the most important ones, is the future land use element. And that includes a future land use map. And the state statutes tell us that that future land use map has to show how we're going to accommodate the additional population. So the way that we do that calculation is we say, OK, how much vacant do we have that we could accommodate those new homes coming in? So we have about 44,000 new homes that will be needed by 2046. And this map shows in black, the very dark gray, vacant land that is inside of a DRI. So those are already committed, already entitled. The red shows vacant land outside of a DRI. So there are some large pieces on the northwest part of the city, but you see a lot of little dots throughout the city. Those are all the plotted lots that could be built at any time. And staff keeps very detailed information on how many of those lots we have. So knowing that we need 44,000 dwelling units by 2046, when we calculated how much we can accommodate within those vacant lands and tidal lines, we already have room for 41,000 people. As I mentioned, that may be a little bit short, but in seven years we're going to look at it again and see how we're doing. So the future land use element, some of the changes that we're proposing include, we have a future land use category called planned industrial park. So what we want to do with that one is using it to extend the opportunities that have been offered in the Southern Grove jobs quarter. So it's more like other parts of the city where we could encourage the creation of employment. So the idea with this land use category is that it's going to accommodate different types of uses. It could be industrial, manufacturing, logistics, warehouse distribution in terms of the industrial area. But we're also going to say you could have a little bit of residential. Not a lot, because we don't want to encourage industrial areas to turn into residential. But at the same time, we see the need to accommodate housing near their jobs. So 15% is the cap that we're proposing. You would have to have a minimum of 30 acres to do this type of development. And then we are including a maximum height of 100 feet. The next change has to do with two new land use categories that we're proposing. They're called activity center one and activity center two. So activity center one, the main thing is to implement the Walton and Juan master plan. So it is at a very key intersection. The city has been working on what type of development is gonna go in that corner. SO THIS CATEGORY WAS WRITTEN IN A WAY THAT IS GOING TO ALLOW FOR A MIX OF USES, A MINIMUM OF THREE, ONE OF WHICH HAS TO BE RESIDENTIAL, AND THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT WOULD BE 120 FEET, AND THE MAXIMUM DENSITY WOULD BE 25 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE. SO WE'RE MAKING SURE THAT THE PLANTS THAT HAVE BEEN IN THE WORKS FOR WALTON 1 WILL BE ABLE TO FIT INTO THIS CATEGORY. So when we were working on this category, we thought, well, what if we could use something similar for other areas, like along US 1, for some of these sites that are maybe underdeveloped? So we created Activity Center 2. So the idea is that if you have a large shopping center that is not doing well, if somebody wants to come in and redevelop that, we don't want the same type of development. We want something that is going to incorporate a mix of uses, some residential, maybe in the form of apartments, condos above. So this one is going to sort of replicate activity center one, but with lower density, lower height, and still a minimum of three uses. The next change in the future land use element has to do with the mixed use land use category. So this one has been in the books for a while now. It has not been very popular. People are not really using it because right now it's requiring vertical mixed use. So we're expanding it and we're saying horizontal mix of uses is fine. So you may have like a townhouse development right next to a office development next to a retail area. So it's making a little bit more flexible so we can start seeing more mix of uses. The last change that I have for this element has to do with voluntary annexations. So one of the changes in the statutes more recently said that we cannot make any changes that would be burdensome. But when we talk about voluntary annexations, they're coming to the city. They're asking us to approve them being annexed into the city. So here we can put some teeth in terms of we can start requiring things that in the past had not been required. Some of the requirements include making sure that we expand the network of wildlife corridors and open space. Let's look at the mix of uses that they will be proposing when they come in and make sure that we have at least 20% of non-residential. We want to know what future land use categories they're going to be asking for. We want to see a fiscal impact assessment of the proposed annexation, making sure that they meet the parks level of service that the Parks and Recreation Master Plan adopted. And they say we want to see an assessment of the expected infrastructure and transportation improvements within those areas. AND THEN FOR THE NEXT ELEMENT, WHICH IS TRANSPORTATION, I'M GOING TO LET LAUREN TAKE YOU THROUGH THOSE THREE SLIDES.

GOOD AFTERNOON, MAYOR, COUNCIL MEMBERS. MY NAME IS LAUREN RUSHING. I'M A TRANSPORTATION PLANNER WITH NEW URBAN CONCEPTS. YOU ALL ARE VERY FAMILIAR WITH MY COLLEAGUE, JONATHAN PAUL, WHO'S BEEN WORKING WITH YOU FOR MANY YEARS NOW. As Pat mentioned, he is on with us online today, so he's here to answer any questions if you may have any. We were tasked with developing the amendment to the transportation element, and you have heard this before, but I'll just give a quick recap. So the purpose of this amendment is really to reflect the city's transition from a transportation concurrency and road impact fee framework to one that's based on a mobility plan and a mobility fee framework. and that's focused on moving people safely. So these amendments are largely focused on bringing the comprehensive plan in consistency with the vision that's already been adopted through the mobility plan and mobility fee and to support the continued implementation of that mobility plan. LET'S SEE HERE. JUST SOME CLEANUP THAT WE'VE DONE. INSTEAD OF REFERENCING SPECIFIC EDITIONS OF STANDARD TRANSPORTATION GUIDANCE, WE'VE UPDATED THE LANGUAGE TO REFLECT THE LATEST EDITIONS OF THOSE HANDBOOKS AND GUIDANCE DOCUMENTS. One of the biggest changes with this amendment is probably the adoption of what we call quality of service standards. And so we've spoken to you all about this before, but quality of service standards are similar to level of service, but they measure how your transportation system is performing from the perspective of alternative modes of travel. So people walking, biking, riding scooters. you name it. And the premise of that quality of service standard is really to measure how safe the roadway system is for all modes of travel, rather than just looking at how many vehicles we're moving and how quickly we're moving them the way level of service does. And so we've developed quality of service standards for the street itself, for different types of multimodal facilities, so on-street facilities such as bike lanes, off-streets facilities such as your shared use paths and your sidewalks, as well as transit services. Those standards are based on things like what type of facility is provided, how wide the facility is, what's the posted speed limit, and what is the separation between vehicle traffic and other types of modes. And these are really meant to be more of a planning tool. Unlike level of service, they're not meant to be a binding regulatory tool. They're just an extra additional tool that you all would have at your disposal. And so we are not proposing any changes to your current LOS standards as they stand today. Moving on, the city may consider establishing multimodal quality of service standards. Let's see. And then pursuing acquisition of property for increased connectivity. So this is a strategy that the city is already implementing today. But this just specifies that strategy as a specific strategy in the comprehensive plan. to lead to more connectivity with your future roads, and also reducing the need to use eminent domain in the future. Evaluating unique roadway designs for constrained areas, so particularly in the east part of your city, east of I-95, you do have a lot of roadways that are already constrained, meaning you don't have the right of way to widen them, So this allows the city to take a look at unique roadway designs and planning concepts to provide parallel facilities for those roadways. So that can look like things like one way pairs, potentially using a canal right of way for parallel facilities to kind of disperse that traffic. So it does not again, it does not bind you to using those approaches, but it allows you to explore them. evaluating unique access management for plotted lots. So you do have a lot of roadways currently in Port St. Lucie that allow businesses and residents to directly access those lots, either through one or two driveways. This isn't really standard practice anymore because when you go to make improvements on those roadways, it does make things quite expensive. So you impact things like drainage, stormwater, multimodal, additional roadway capacity, and this can lead to projects that are sometimes three times the cost of your standard roadway improvement. And so this allows the city to look at unique approaches such as using access roads, frontage roads, spacing requirements, and other regulatory tools that would lead to a reduction of the number of driveways directly connecting to your major roads in the city. Evaluate unique approaches to add multimodal areas on residential roads. So this addresses the numerous roads in Port St. Lucie where you have no sidewalks or bike lanes and allows you to use unique approaches that we're seeing already in other cities, such as low-speed streets with traffic calming, things like advisory sidewalks and bicycle lanes and bicycle boulevards that would allow you to better accommodate multimodal travel and keep everyone safe on those residential roadways. We're also looking at increasing accessibility for the public to transportation-related maps, so updating those maps as things are changing on the street and making those maps more accessible to the public.

And I believe that's it. So with that, I'm going to turn it back over to Pat. Thank you. So the next element is the housing element. So we included some policies. One had to do with diversifying housing types. So we heard from many people that we have a lot of single family homes in the right locations. What if we have apartments and houses, condos? The land development code will be the document where you have that information. Also, bonuses and incentives. When we talk about affordable housing, we cannot ask a developer to just, you know, you have to do 15% of your housing affordable. We have to do it in a way where there are bonuses and incentives. If you provide that many housing units, then we can let you have more height or more density or something of that sort. Policies related to partnering with other agencies just like Habitat for Humanity to help us with the provision of affordable housing. For the infrastructure element, so this is water, sewer, drainage, solid waste, and aquifer recharge. We had to update some of the levels of service for sewer and water. We are asking new development that are within the utility service area to connect to the central sewer system. Encouraging the preservation of large open spaces, this has to do with aquifer recharge. And then there was a policy related to an old project that has been completed, so we removed that one. The City of Port St. Lucie combines the conservation element and the coastal management element into a single element. Some of the policies here is just protecting habitats. We have a new policy that talks about working with the county to make sure the hazardous waste disposal methods are improved and the capacity expanded. WE'RE EITHER REQUIRING OR PRIORITIZING CONSERVATION OR THE USE OF LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT FOR THE PROTECTION OF FLOOD PLANES AND WETLANDS OR SURFACE WATERS. VULNERABILITY TO FLOODING SEA LEVEL RISE, SO WE INCORPORATED SOME POLICIES RELATED TO THAT. AND THEN OF COURSE WE MENTIONED THE NATURALLY PSL GREEN SPACES AND PLACES INITIATIVE IN THAT ELEMENT. And then for intergovernmental coordination, this element talks about who the city has to work with in order to implement the plan. The city cannot do it all by themselves. So we incorporated some recommendations from the planning and infrastructure study, and we just have policies that talk about continued coordination with county, school board, regional, and state agencies. Recreation and open space, so as I mentioned earlier, you completed an update of the Parks and Recreation Master Plan, so we incorporated some of those recommendations. There was some old language related to fill the GDC, we removed that, and we included policies related to looking for funding in order to acquire conservation lands, and also implementing consistent way finding and educational signage. economic development. This one has a little bit of an overlap with some of the other elements, but this is where we stress the need to protect industrial and commercial. We have been doing that for a while and we want to make sure that it's continued to be that way. Promoting infill and redevelopment, that helps with growth. SUPPORTING THE EMPLOYMENT QUARTERS, AND THAT'S WHY THE PLANNED INDUSTRIAL LENDING CATEGORY WAS UPDATED. THE TARGETED INDUSTRIES LIST, WE LOOKED AT IT, THERE WERE SOME MINOR UPDATES TO THAT, AND JUST THE IDEA OF ENCOURAGING EMPLOYMENT TO STAY WITHIN THE CITY. Capital improvements, this is the element where we compile all the future improvements that the city's gonna have to make in order to support growth. And this is where we talk about levels of service. We updated the levels of service that we updated in the infrastructure element. And then it used to be that the state wanted these comprehensive plans to be financially feasible, so you had to guarantee certain funding mechanisms. That's no longer a requirement, so we just took that language out of the element. Public schools, so this is an optional element. This is not required because the city's not required to provide the education, the schools in the area. But the city sees this as something very important for the future of the city, and as development comes in, this is something that has to be coordinated. So there is an interlocal service agreement with the school board, and we incorporated references to that agreement. THE CONCURRENCY REQUIREMENTS THAT WERE AT SOME POINT REQUIRED, WE TOOK THAT OUT OF THE PLAN BECAUSE THAT'S NO LONGER A STATUTORY REQUIREMENT. AND THE POLICIES THAT WE ADDED HAD TO DO MORE LIKE MAKING IT MORE USER FRIENDLY, MAKING SURE THAT THERE IS A MAP THAT SHOWS ALL THE DEDICATED SITES THAT HAVE COME FROM DEVELOPMENT APPROVALS. AND WORKING WITH THE SCHOOL BOARD TO MAKE SURE THAT THE SCHOOLS ARE LOCATED IN PLACES THAT ARE WITHIN WALKING DISTANCE FROM THE RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS. We also have a property rights element. This one is pretty new. It's just a couple of years old. We're not proposing any changes. But it's an important one because it says we have to respect private property rights in the comprehensive plan. Now, when we had a workshop with the city council, there were some requests that we incorporated in the future land use element. We tighten up the policies related to voluntary annexations. We had a lot of encourage, and we should be pretty pleased, but you wanted to have something that says you shall be required to do this. One of them had to do with multiple connections to roadways to make sure we don't have subdivisions that are completely enclosed, and now you have to go all the way around a neighborhood just to get to your destination, and also requiring stop outs to adjacent parcels. The second one is related to it, is connectivity and street network to support not just mobility but emergency response. Also, making sure that any roadway multimodal infrastructure is in place in order to accommodate their development. In the transportation element, we included a policy that has to do with future mobility technologies. So the idea is that when you do an update of the mobility plan, you're going to be getting into more detail related to aerial transportation or autonomous vehicles. And as we learn more about those technologies, they should be incorporated. THE NEXT STEP, SO AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, THIS IS THE TRANSMITTAL HEARING. SO FROM HERE WE JUST SEND IT TO THE STATE FOR REVIEW. WHEN THEY REVIEW IT, THEY MAY ISSUE WHAT WE CALL THE ORG REPORT. THEY MAY GIVE US OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS OR COMMENTS, AND THEN WE'LL HAVE SOME TIME TO MAKE THOSE UPDATES, AND THEN WHEN THAT'S READY, THEN WE'LL COME BACK TO YOU, AND THAT'S WHEN WE HAVE THE FINAL ADOPTION HEARING. AND THE QR CODE HERE IS TO THE PROJECT WEBSITE. IF ANYBODY WANTS TO GO THERE, LOOK AT THE DOCUMENTS OR SOME OF THE PUBLIC INPUT SUMMARIES. And that's all I have. If you have any questions, I'll be happy to address.

Thank you so much. I know this took an amazing amount of work from all of our teams, from our consultants. Um, all of our departments to bring this together and finally get here and concert with working with all of our community partners, our residents, just everyone that we've included. Um, and it has been a huge, huge undertaking. So thanks to everyone for being able to finally bring it forward. I think we've made some great steps in preparing ourselves for the future as we continue to grow as a city with more requirements and inclusionary zoning and other things that are going to really set us up for proper planning for our future. So thank you all very much. Are there any questions? No? Go ahead.

Pat, thank you for your presentation. And like the mayor said, everything in here is important. I think we're setting ourselves and the future council up for just not some of the headaches that we've had. And the one thing that stands out to me, and I brought it up last time, was the road connections, how crucial that was. So we don't have to fight that fight anymore. It's already built in. They know they have to do it. So thank you for that.

Thank you. Anything else before we go to the public hearing? This is a public hearing. Would anyone like to address the council on this matter? Seeing no one, I'll close the public hearing. Council? Motion to approve ordinance 26-66. Second. I have a motion and a second. Any final discussion? All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. 10B, Ordinance 26-67.

An ordinance of the City of Port St. Lucie, Florida, providing for the Third Amendment to the Master Planned Unit Development Regulation Book and Conceptual Plan for Legacy Park North at Southern Grove MPUD, located west of Interstate 95, east of Southwest Village Parkway, and between Marshall Parkway and Southwest Hegner Drive, providing for conflict, providing for severability, and providing an effective date. Thank you, counsel.

This is quasi-judicial. So if anyone's going to provide testimony, they need to stand and be sworn in. Actually, before we move forward, this would be for getting sworn in for this item, which is 10B, 11A, 11B. Let me just double-check those items on the agenda.

Do you solemnly swear or affirm to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth, so help me God? I do. Thank you.

Thank you. Any ex parte communications to disclose on this item? No. All right.

Good afternoon again. Bridget came with the Planning and Zoning Department, and this is the third amendment to the – oh, by the way, I have been sworn in, and the file was sent to the city clerk's office within five days of the hearing, and I do request that it be entered into the record. So this is the third amendment to the Legacy Park North at Southern Grove MPUD. It's a request to amend the MPUD. It was submitted by Brad Wester of Driver. I think it's McAvee, Hawthorne, and Debeno, PL, LLC. The applicant is Costco Wholesale Corporation. And the property owners for the Legacy Park North MPUD of the developed parcels, or the developable parcels, are the Costco Wholesale Corporation, the Port St. Lucie Governmental Finance Corporation and Tradition Entertainment District to LLC. And just for a bit of background, the Legacy Park North MPUD, it's the zoning district for approximately 355 acres of property. It's located west of I-95, east of Southwest Village Parkway, and it's between Marshall Parkway and Hagner Drive. The MPUD is divided into two areas. One is a business park area, and that's the area that's on the east side of Sansone Boulevard. And then there's a mixed commercial area for the property that is a long southwest village parkway. And this is the area that the 200-acre Costco Depot is located. Now there is a vacant 32 point or almost 33 acre parcel that's owned by the Port St. Lucie Governmental Finance Corporation. And then there's a almost 20 acre vacant parcel that's owned by Tradition Entertainment District. And they again are within the mixed use commercial area. But approximately 22 or 23 acres of the 33 acre GFC parcel is the subject of a purchase and sale agreement between the GFC and Costco Wholesale Corporation. So this just shows you the location of the area, and it is the area over here in green. Okay, again, just another location, future land use map. It does have the NCD district. It is within the Southern Grove DRI. And there's an aerial. So basically, the whole purpose of this amendment is really to add a new use, and it's a use for a more unique type of retail use. So what we're adding is a member-based wholesale warehouse retail store over 100,000 square feet or greater, and it's for the sale of goods and services, including but not limited to bulk groceries, prepared food, electronics, et cetera. But unlike our regular retail use, this will allow for outdoor sales and storage for temporary and seasonal retail goods. And that's as shown on a site plan. And that's intended as long as it's not impacting the required parking. They can have some outdoor storage because this is a more unique area than just your general regular retail. This also will provide for automotive service facility for a tire change and repair as well as liquor sales and a fuel facility as well. Additional changes, this also does just add a minimum building size and minimal living area to the MPUD of 1,200 square feet. That's just to make it consistent with the city code. Now, it does increase the maximum allowable mounting height for all outdoor lighting fixtures, and that's going to go from 25 feet to 40 feet. above grade or pavement in the mixed-use commercial area, and that's from 35 feet to 40 feet above grade or pavement in the business park area, and this is a request of Costco. It does also update, allows for parking standards. It would allow for 20-foot-long parking stalls and a 20-foot two-way drive aisle, and that is to be permitted as part of a site plan. It just differs a little bit from city code, which requires a 9.5... width and an 18-foot depth, and then a 26-foot drive aisle. Costco prefers, or their Costco stores, they use a 10-by-20-foot parking stall, and that's just because of people shopping and having those big carts, so they like a larger parking space. And the 20-foot, a little bit smaller, 20-foot-wide drive aisle, but again, if you add up the measurements, it's the same exact measurements as our existing code, it's just designated a little differently. And again, a little change to the concept plan for the MPUD, and that was just to show some driveways to be consistent with approved and proposed site plans and existing median openings. This is the updated MPUD concept plan. This is the area that we're talking about for the future Costco, and this is the area here where the Costco Depot is. And even with the Costco, there still will be 19 acres of developable land on Village Parkway for more... COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT. SO AS I MENTIONED, THIS IS LOCATED IN THE SOUTHERN GROVE DRI. IT'S IN A REGIONAL BUSINESS CENTER SUBDISTRICT, AND THAT'S AS DEPICTED ON MAP H OF THE DRI, AS WELL AS FIGURE 1-4 OF THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT. NOW, IT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE REGIONAL BUSINESS CENTER USE, BECAUSE THAT DOES ALLOW FOR DEVELOPMENT WITH MORE THAN A MILLION NON-RESIDENTIAL SQUARE FEET, AND THAT CAN INCLUDE BOTH WAREHOUSE, INDUSTRIAL USES, AS WELL AS RETAIL, COMMERCIAL, AND OFFICE USES. as well as medical, restaurants, theaters, hotels, and institutional uses. So as I said, it has two areas, one's for business and then another area for commercial development, and that's all under this one regional business center. And that's reflected in the MPUD. So staff did analyze the proposed changes. And again, the reason for adding a use specific to a warehouse member based warehouse is it does does it does. It's a little bit different than what you would allow for regular retail. So that's why we're trying to accommodate things like the outdoor storage, the repair of tires, and basically to distinguish it from a smaller just general retail where that wouldn't be able to include those uses. The increase in the maximum height for outdoor lighting fixtures, that can be accommodated by code. The MPUD and City Code already state that lighting fixtures have to be designed and arranged so that no source of the lighting can be visible or a nuisance to adjoining property and property zoned for a residential purpose. So that should be able to be addressed and it shouldn't be an issue. Planning and Zoning Board did recommend approval of the amendment at the July 7, 2026 site plan. Actually, Planning and Zoning Board meeting the... Site Plan Review Committee also recommended approval, and the Planning and Zoning Department also recommends approval, and happy to answer any questions. The applicant is here to provide you with a presentation. I will say that we received some public comment. It was included in Legistar, and then we did receive additional public comment that I handed out today, and that also includes a brief overview from Costco about how they're addressing the traffic and access to the Costco. Okay.

Any questions for Ms. Keene? We hear from the applicant. Go ahead.

Bridget, the lighting accommodation, that's just going to be approved for this parcel. It's not going to be citywide, correct?

Well, it would be for this MPUD. So it would be for the existing Costco, the warehouse store, and then if needed, I don't think it's going to be an issue on the 19-acre parcel. That's owned by tradition. But it's a certain light fixture that Costco uses.

Okay.

Any other questions or comments? Okay, thank you. Thank you, Ms. King. Good afternoon.

Thank you. Thank you, Bridget. My name is Brad Wester, Council and Mayor. Thank you for having me today. I represent Costco on this matter. I am with Driver McAfee, Hawthorne, and Diebenau, and I'm at 1 Independent Drive, Suite 1200, Jacksonville, Florida, 32202. Let's see once we get this up. In the interest of time, I'll be brief. It's like roughly an eight slide, but I'll put this spatially into some exhibits on what we're asking for in this MPUD amendment on our parcel specifically. Definitely don't want to talk about that. Thank you. All right. Thank you very much. Okay, and again, I've got my team here with me, so if I can't answer any questions, I've got them. I've got my traffic engineer, my civil, my architect, and then a Costco representative as well. So I think we have all the bases covered. This is the subject property, as we know of. It's a larger holding that has not only the Costco parcel, but two out parcels, if you will, that Bridget mentioned in her report. This is the plat. So the parcel does have to be replatted. So we will essentially carve out, if you will, that lot two as shown. That is the Costco parcel. And then the other parcels, let's see if I can do this correctly. We have an out parcel there and then in a larger parcel here that will remain for future development. And those are publicly owned. Here's our site plan. This is a very detailed site plan. This really has a lot of civil engineering elements to it. So you see the roughly 160,000 square foot Costco itself, which is obviously noted. This is the main store area. Bridget mentioned the tire center. The tire center is integrated into the store, if you're familiar with Costco's. And then the gas parcel is up here. It is at a 16 fueling position gas facility. then you see here the demised area specifically for this costco parcel in question these are the updated landscape plans so what we've done is incorporate the full landscape package that's required by the code not asking for any deviations and what we've done is obviously the enhancement per the code is along that property edge that faces the residential communities and then of course the southern side of the costco building itself This is our photometric plan. I know it's very busy looking, but what it does is provide a photometric layout of the foot candles. the entire property and i've highlighted the boundary and the reason for this is we've asked for a a light pole increase and the reason being is it's a costco standard for that 36 and a half foot light pole but what it actually does is reduce the number of poles overall on the property when you bring the pole down you need more for that spread the higher up and this is a formula that works for costco And as you know, Costco is not open 24-7, so they go off after the hours, and then it's just mainly security lighting. But the purpose of the yellow boundary is to show that we are at 0.0 foot candle at the property edge. There are some areas that are 0.1, but by the time it gets to the center line of that main roadway, it's all 0.0. So we do meet the code requirement and exceed the code requirement, even with the height standard increase. I'm here is the elevation this architectural elevation this is a we are running a parallel course with our site plan review right now with the city and the design review with tradition itself and so they have all these documents that you're seeing here so there's the elevations this is the gas and the gas canopy and all the queuing lanes for that and then of course. the overall rendering as its position on the property noting the landscaping the remaining out partials to be developed in the future by others and the various entrance points and with that we concur with the planning department's report and as bridget mentioned this was approved unanimously at pzb last week and we are running a parallel course we have a standing meeting every two weeks with staff to go over all the site planning details as well as tradition. We have a conditional approval from tradition right now, but we are getting them some additional information before they release their final approval. So with that, I thank you very much. I stand by with my team to answer any questions you may have.

Thank you very much. Any questions? I just have one.

Okay. Just a quick one. So, and I know the conceptual plan is different, and when you look at the architectural plan, it's small, so it's hard to tell. When you're queuing for the gas, being that you have the enter point and the exit point, which is good, how many cars can you approximately queue before you're hitting road?

That's a great question. So we've done all of our traffic studies on that, and we only anticipate the peak time during A REALLY HEAVY FUELING PERIOD, TYPICALLY THAT COULD BE...

WHICH IS ALL THE TIME, BY THE WAY. I'M JUST LETTING YOU KNOW, BECAUSE I'VE SEEN A LOT OF THE COSCOS.

WE PROVIDE STACKING MORE FOR THAT, AND TYPICALLY THAT WOULD BE SOMETIMES A NAMED STORM EVENT, OBVIOUSLY WHEN EVERYBODY'S TRYING TO FUEL UP, RIGHT? AND COSCO DOES NOT RAISE THEIR GAS PRICES. But I would like to have, so I don't recite the wrong information, but we have done that study, and we're actually self-contained to accommodate all the stacking and queuing on that gas parcel itself. And there's no direct connections to the roadway. Perfect. So that those roads would come out into the internal circulation that is part of the Costco parking lot itself. But I'll have Ryan Cunningham just briefly answer that question for you specifically so we have the correct data.

Thank you.

Ryan Cunningham with Kittleson and Associates, office at 225 East Robinson Street in Orlando. So this is a 30, you mentioned 62, or sorry, 16 fuel pumps, 32 fueling positions. So 32 vehicles at the site fueling at the same time. We can fit approximately 37 more queued behind those pumps for 69 total just within the gas area before they get out into the internal circulation network.

Okay.

For sites such as this, and this is a larger, you know, 32-fueling positions, it's kind of the new standard for Costco. So a lot of the issues that you've kind of noted and seen at other older sites, we're seeing a lot less standing queues at the newer sites with more fueling positions. The average 95th percentile queue at this site is expected to be 24 queued behind the pumps. And we have space for 37. We anticipate it to be stored on site, not impacting circulation within the site.

THAT'S GREAT. I THINK ABOUT THE PALM BEACH SITE SPECIFICALLY PRIOR TO THE STEWART SITE. AND THAT ONE IS ALWAYS FUN BECAUSE YOU'RE LUCKY IF YOU PARK AND THEN YOU CAN PULL OUT. AND THEN I SAW ON THE STEWART SITE IT'S BETTER. BUT I ANTICIPATE THE SITE TO BE HEAVILY TRAFFIC JUST BECAUSE OF ITS LOCATION. IT'S A LARGER COSTCO FROM MY UNDERSTANDING THAN THE STEWART LOCATION. And the fuel is very, very popular to the point that I got to be honest, I shopped there, but I haven't fueled there yet because I don't want to get in line. So I'm glad you're queuing it faster.

And I'm glad and I apologize. I said 16 fueling positions at 16 pumps and they're double stacked. So 32 as Ryan Cunningham mentioned. I'm glad you brought up the West Palm Beach store. Yes. So Costco does go through a lot of these gas facility upgrades and expansions because they realize now that they've got a lot of metrics out there for the newer stores with the newer gas facilities that work very, very well. So you're seeing that quite a bit. And our team works together a lot around the state of Florida redoing not only the gas expansions, but the new stores with the new gas facilities and the circulation. So this is all about efficiency and not burdening the exterior roadways. But more importantly, the best customer experience to get everybody in and out. So you should go try it.

And listen, now I've got a question for fun. Being that we have the warehouse and then we also have the fulfillment center here, essentially, does that mean I will never run out of my favorite products at Costco? They'll just be delivered right from there to the store.

Second half? I'm going to answer for my client. We're going to try our hardest.

I think that'd be great. Thank you.

But we concur with the planning department. They've been great to work with. And again, we have a standing two-week meeting with full staff to kind of make sure everything's buttoned up with the site planning and engineering. And so I ask for your consideration and approval today. Thank you.

I have a question that the residents all want to know. When do you anticipate start of construction?

I love this one.

Ballpark.

I had this at PZB. So I've been told by my client that it's hard to give a date, obviously. Estimate. We want to cue everything. It's 2027. So they have about a 10- to 12-month built construction cycle once it's fully approved. But we have to close on this partial still, and we'll do that once we get all of our approvals, which is per the course. But it'll be 2027. So, you know, even if it's a year from now, summer, late fall-ish, but we're anticipating 2027 for the opening.

All right.

Thank you very much. Thank you very much.

Any other questions? No? All right. This item is a public hearing. Would anyone like to address the council? Seeing no one, I'll close the public hearing. Council? Motion to approve Ordinance 26-67. Second. I have a motion and a second. Any final discussion? All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Thank you.

10 C ordinance 26-69.

An ordinance of the city of Port St. Lucie, Florida relating to upland habitat mitigation payment in lieu of preservation. Amending section 157.06, providing for codification, providing for conflict, providing for severability, and providing an effective date.

Thank you.

This item is a public hearing. Would anyone like to address the council? Seeing no one, I'll close the public hearing. Council?

Motion to approve Ordinance 26-69. Second.

I have a motion and a second. Any final discussion? All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. 10D, Ordinance 26-70.

An ordinance of the City of Port St. Lucie, Florida, abandoning a portion of a 20-foot wide rear utility and drainage easement affecting Lot 2, Block 1170, Port St. Lucie, Section 8, according to the plot thereof, as recorded in Plot Book 12, page 18, 38 of the public records of St. Lucie County, Florida, providing for conflict, providing for severability, and providing an effective date.

Thank you. This item is a public hearing. Would anyone like to address the council? Seeing no one, I'll close the public hearing. Council?

Motion to approve.

Second. I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. 10E, Ordinance 26-71.

An ordinance of the City of Port St. Lucie, Florida, abandoning a portion of a 20-foot-wide rear utility and drainage easement affecting Lot 16, Block 719, Port St. Lucie, Section 18. According to the plot thereof, as recorded in Plot Book 13, pages 17, 17A through 17K of the Public Records of St. Lucie County, Florida, providing for conflict, providing for severability, and providing an effective date.

Thank you.

This item is a public hearing. Would anyone like to address the council? Seeing no one, I'll close the public hearing. Council?

Motion to approve Ordinance 26S71. Second.

I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Moving on to resolutions 11A, resolution 26-R40.

A resolution of the City Council of the City of Port St. Lucie, Florida, granting a special exception use pursuant to section 158.155D4 and 5 to allow retail or personal services uses exceeding 50% of the building's gross floor area. and to allow anyone used to exceed 5,000 square feet in the LMD zoning district for a project known as Riverview Plaza, providing for conflicts, providing for severability, and providing an effective date.

Thank you. Council, are there any ex parte communications to disclose?

No.

Okay.

Go ahead.

Good afternoon, Council. Madam Mayor, Mrs. City Manager, Marissa W. Latchman, Planning and Zoning Department, I have been sworn in and the Official files were provided to the clerk's office at least five days prior to this meeting. Madam Clerk, please enter the file into the record. The project before you tonight is a special exception use, P24006. The applicant is Jose Chavez and the property owner is Roselle, LLC. The location, the southwest corner of Salton Drive and southwest Port St. Lucie Boulevard and north of the C24 Canal. The request is a special exception application to allow retail and personal service uses that exceed 50% of the building's gross for area and any use that exceeds 5,000 square feet. Here's the area of the affected parcels. It's six separate parcels all owned by the same entity. As a future land use map, we have commercial low to the north and RESIDENTIAL TO THE WEST, AND WE HAVE THE RL TO THE SOUTH AND ALSO THE C-24 CANAL. THIS IS THE EXISTING ZONING MAP. WE HAVE COMMERCIAL NEIGHBORHOOD TO THE NORTH. WE HAVE RS-2, MOST OF THE SURROUNDING AND PROFESSIONAL ACROSS THE STREET, PORT ST. LUCY BOULEVARD. HAS THE CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN FOR THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. THE CONCEPTUAL ELEVATIONS. THE PROPOSED PROJECT IS ANTICIPATED TO GENERATE 669 AVERAGE DAILY TRIPS WITH 56 AM PEAK AND 78 PM PEAK HOUR TRIPS. THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT REVIEWED THE TRAFFIC ANALYSIS AND CONCLUDED THAT THE TRANSPORTATION ELEMENTS of the project are in compliance with the adopted level of service and the requirements of Chapter 156 of City Code and the Public Works Policy 1901PWD. as the evaluation criteria ingress and egress will be provided only from Salton Drive. There are no curb cuts proposed on Port St. Lucie Boulevard. The concept plan provides for 53 parking stalls, including three ADA stalls. The city of Port St. Lucie is the utility provider. An eight-foot maze runway wall is proposed along the western PROPERTY BOUNDARY TO BUFFER THE ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL AND THE PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD GRANTED A LANDSCAPE MODIFICATION SO INSTEAD OF A WALL AT THE REAR ALONG THE C-24 CANAL WE'LL HAVE ENHANCED LANDSCAPING. ALL EXTERIOR LIGHTING WILL BE IN CONFORMANCE WITH 158.221 AND SIGNAGE WILL BE IN ACCORDANCE WITH CHAPTER 155. The proposed development will be reviewed for consistency with city code and the design standards at the time of site plan review and the site plan is in review at the moment. The Planning and Zoning Board recommended approval of the special exception use application at the June 2nd, 2026 meeting. This is the end of the presentation. Do you have any questions?

Thank you. Any questions? The applicant is here. Does the applicant wish to make a presentation? This item is a public hearing. Would anyone like to address the council? Seeing none, we'll close the public hearing. Council?

Motion to approve Resolution 26R-40.

Second. We have a motion and a second. Any discussion? All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. 11B, Resolution 26-R43.

A resolution of the City Council of the City of Port St. Lucie, Florida, approving artwork submitted by Midway Glades Developers LLC in connection with the alternative equivalent proposal request for public art for the project known as Ladybug Hideaway, providing for conflict, providing for severability, and providing an effective date.

Thank you. Counselor, are there any ex parte communications to disclose?

No. I know I talked about this, I don't even know how long ago. Probably maybe two years ago.

I was going to say, we talked about the artwork, but we never talked about the site where it's going.

Correct. I know. I just want to make sure.

Yes. I just want to make sure. Right. I just want to make sure it's disclosed. We've talked about it.

We just haven't talked about the change. Yes. Okay. Good afternoon. Bethany Grubbs for the record with the planning department. I have been sworn in and the official file has been provided to the clerk release prior to this meeting. And yes, you are correct. This artwork was originally approved at an alternate location two years ago, back in May of 2024. Staff's going to give a high level presentation on the actual change requested. And then I'll turn it over to the applicant for the specifics of the application and the reason behind the change. But this is for the wild or public art originally approved in may 13, 2024 originally approved featuring 12 sculptural blades, incorporating 19 species of ladybugs. And this is a proposal to consolidate the two plazas into one installation. in an open space track abutting a wetland. And so we go from this flanking of Wilder Parkway mirrored plaza installation that was originally approved in commercial tracks to a more linear pathway between the open space wetland track more as a pathway along Wilder Parkway. And as you see on the left side, what is currently approved is an installation just abutting Midway Road for two parcels that are zoned commercial. And then the relocation request that is before you today is, if you see outlined in or circled in red, central to the Wilder Parkway between Midway Road and Glades Cut-Off Road is proposed location or relocation the public art board did recommend voting a recommendation to the city council of approval and that was at our may 18th public hearing and i'll turn it over to the applicant for their presentation got it any questions for miss grubbs no okay

Good afternoon. My name's Ellie Asper. I'm going to be representing Lacedo and Associates. Yeah, would you please? Thank you. So as Bethany said, the overview, the art has already been approved.

This is just a better location.

The reason for the change is that the two bisected plazas really didn't give a cohesive experience and taking a deeper look through the traffic, we've decided to relocate to a more centralized, cohesive experience. This is a site plan and as you can see, we have implemented the art into much more of an experience than just two bisected plazas. So as you're strolling through, there's three different nodes with a central plaza where you can come in and experience the art. This is a rendering by Mark Fuller. And something I really want to highlight here is that as you're walking along, this is like 400 feet long. So it's much more of an experience for everyone to view. These blades are also 14 feet tall. So as you're driving by, it's also a vehicular experience. We have the smaller blades of grass that are really going to allow that transition zone between the bigger ones and some of the landscaping we have. This is my favorite part. This is all the different types of ladybugs that you're going to be able to find. And even better, the art is already made. So this is one of the clusters of grass. So it's already and it's ready to be constructed. This is highlighting the nodes that you can come from the multimodal pathway and access the art. The landscape is native and it really just accentuates the art. This is a little bit about Mark Fuller. He's the artist on this project. We're so excited to have his work. And it can be implemented as soon as August if approved. So it's very exciting. Thank you. Are there any questions? Thank you. Any questions?

Yeah. Yes, go ahead. By way of just kind of like my recollection of this project, the beginning of the discussion of this was similar to what the goal for Wilder was to do what we did with Mattamy, which was essentially combine all of the art dollars to create one great accessible art piece similar to what the heart was.

Yes.

Correct. And the key word is accessibility. So back when the council started thinking out of the box with these things, it was if we're going to have art, because a lot of people, art is debatable, whether the city should be providing it, whether it shouldn't, whether developers should be providing it, whether it shouldn't. But one consensus came years ago through the council, which is we want to try to, if we're going to have art, we want to make it as accessible as possible to the public. And that's why the Mattamy Heart in the Park was just such a great story, right? Because it's centralized. I've been to that site several times. There's never a time where I'm not at that site that someone is not patronizing and being a part of the heart, taking pictures in front of the heart, the whole nine yards. The ladybug component was supposed to do the same thing. It was supposed to be integrated in a way where the public directly will access it in the commercial space. And I think that's the reason why I went ahead and said yes. My concern is there's no parking here. There's no reason for anybody to come that way. They're going to have to go out of their way to actually access it. And I don't even know what that walk is. I mean, it looks like, what would you say, a half mile at least?

I would say about there.

Yeah. So my concern is that a deal is a deal. So that was kind of a deal. The deal was we were going to combine the dollars to create accessible art in the commercial component, in the commercial node. Now we're just creating art like they would normally do anywhere else. So why would I want to do that? Why would I want to allow, you know, why would I want to change a plan of what the vision is for the art versus putting it where you guys would suggest it?

hear what you're saying and i think that it's twofold so that main corridor of wilder parkway is a central artery through the entire development and so art isn't just interactive this one is thankfully but it's also visual so sales in a median per se that's still art and you're still viewing it just like the heart when you drive i love the heart and when you drive by the heart it's a monument just for driving and so i think we need to look at the art in a two-fold perspective. Um, this is 14 feet long, so it's not like you're driving and it's like, Oh, there was a blade of grass. This is, I mean, they're 14 feet tall, it's 400 feet long, give or take. So it's really an experience driving through Wilder Parkway, you know? Um, that whole pathway is multimodal. So kids are going to be riding their bikes up to the commercial. They're going to be riding their bikes to their friend's house. It's very interactive in that sense. And I think going along with the ladybug hideaway part is that, um, the whole goal is to find the ladybugs and it to be this long experience. It can be shorter. That's why there's multiple nodes. So, you know, if it's too long, you can come out and curve out. Um, so, I do think that we need to look at this in a two different perspectives of vehicular and pedestrian.

And I agree with you. I think the challenge to get there is how many people can access the heart? A lot of people. Like when you look at instant accessibility, you're literally in the Plaza, you're in the restaurant, you go right out the restaurant. There's the heart. Take a picture in front of the heart. Enjoy the heart. Spend time with your family. There's been people who have gotten married at the heart. I mean, this particular decision would be basically putting it on Wilder. Yes, you'd see it when you drive, but you'd have to make an active decision to walk a half a mile down with your kids in the heat in Florida to actually access that if you want to interact, look at the ladybugs. The intent of what you're doing gets diluted because I'll see the blades of glass, but I won't have time to see the ladybugs. It's to me, it's more of the principle of the sense of what the purpose was for this. And now the purpose is changing and there's no way to really access it. And so the people that are going to truly enjoy it are the people that are in the development, which takes away from the whole public art experience for the general public. And I think that was the vision, but I'm only one of five. So I would, I mean, I'm not okay with it. Here comes Steve, but we'll see.

thank you great presentation um vice mayor uh council steve garrett with lucido associates um just a couple points um absolutely the original vision was two plazas um same amount of art actually this has a few more pieces that mark has created with working with greenpoint in addition to what was originally approved But at that time, one, Greenpoint hadn't exercised its purchase option for the commercial property. They have since done that. And in developing and working with the commercial partners, what we thought could occur with the commercial, and something similar. I mean, this isn't a 75 foot tall heart in tradition. What we thought at that time could happen was, yeah, leverage our experience with Mattamy and that public art element and get some type of interaction and engagement and some cool commercial adjacent to. The commercial that we're seeing come through is going to be more highway-oriented commercial. It is not going to be neighborhood mixed-use type commercial that Mattamy has at the base of the heart. And the site plans that are being developed aren't necessarily forcing engagement of the commercial directly to these plazas. So what we're finding is if we stuck with the original two plazas, and by the way, those were two plazas on either side of Wilder Parkway, right? So more than likely, people would enjoy half of this art in one moment, and most likely wouldn't cross Wilder Parkway to get to the other, right? Because they're mirror images of each other. So what we were finding is that if we went forward with those two existing previously approved locations, that they would be surrounded by a sea of asphalt and parking. The lakes had been developed to incorporate the new widening of midway and the roadway improvements and so forth. So it was just different. And then Ellie was kind enough to show a slide. where, working with Public Works, the actual commercial access point was not as far north, closer to Midway, that we thought. It's actually below where we were proposing the art. And so the majority of the vehicular movements coming in and out, east to west on the commercial plazas, would actually be separating and affecting that art experience. So with all that, we started brainstorming where would be another location and actually working with Mark, this location that's in the heart and centered within the entire Wilder project as a whole, that's accessible pretty much universally from all of the neighborhoods in Wilder. and immediately adjacent to the multimodal path, it was one of the first locations we brainstormed. The commercial locations were actually secondary, and we thought if the commercial took a certain form, it could be something really special as well. So this location provides a cohesive experience of all of the art together in a winding pathway. very accessible for the balance of the community and also it's you know wilder is based on a brand of you know introducing the wild and wilder and this was the first location that we brainstormed with mark because of the adjacent very large healthy wetland system that exists just to the east and so one thing we didn't point out on the on the plan i can probably go back to it and see if i can Yeah, so obviously north is to the left, south here is to the right, Wilder Parkway. We have the multimodal sidewalk and system here and then the meandering path. One other element is this little crushed stone pathway and seating opportunity right there. which allows another vantage point for the art pieces here, but it also allows a very long vista across that wetland. So again, it's really more immersive. It's not just the art and a concrete plaza as previously designed. It's really a more immersive experience of both the art, the natural landscape, and the adjacent wetland. But parking and accessibility from a city-wide standpoint, we can definitely look at that. We can see if there's an opportunity when working with Public Works that something could be provided there. But our thought was walkability, encouraging the multimodal system within Wilder, and doing it in an area that could be centralized for the majority of those residents within this area.

Go ahead.

thank you Steve thank you and thank you vice mayor and I definitely hear the concerns and I would like to see you know what we can do to increase accessibility for me I think it's all about the the context of the piece so the heart the heart in the park is something where that's a kind of monumental piece that you know was going to be encouraged tourism and was going to encourage special moments and weddings and things of that nature These are ladybugs. I mean, I don't want insects at my wedding. I want a nature, you know, I want to go into quiet nature and have, you know, it's more of a quiet nature type experience where you go and you reflect and you have that experience. So for me, I think that this is an improvement, so I would definitely be willing to support it.

I have to say something.

Go right ahead. We can't wait to hear what you're going to say.

If a ladybug lands on you, it's good luck. So I think it's great. I like the location. Not all locations are great. I understand that. I mean, pick the agave leaves that Coulter has. You can't stop and walk through them. I mean, we have it all over the city. We even have artwork in a lobby of a building. So I won't go there again. Or the... There's different things to look at it. I mean, I think it's fine. You're driving by. At least it's a lot better than just seeing the road or wetlands or whatever. So I think it's very nice. But I'm going to get a ladybug and make it land on your shoulder. It's not really an insect, but it is. But good luck.

You're right. We do have artwork all over the city. I enjoy looking at the spinnaker, but I look at it from a road. I don't walk up to it. But my first thought when she was giving the presentation was, where am I going to park at? I mean, I like the idea of moving it down the road away from the commercial a lot better than I do having it at the commercial. But my first thought was, if I want to go find a ladybug, where am I going to park at? RIDE MY BIKE, YEAH.

SO, I MEAN, I SEE BOTH SIDES OF THE ISSUE. I DO THINK ABOUT THE SPINNAKER AND HOW YOU'RE NOT GOING TO GO ENJOY THE SPINNAKER BY WALKING UP TO IT. THE LADYBUGS ARE HIDDEN, SO YOU'RE GOING TO NEED TO GO AND BE INTO THAT INTERACTIVE SPACE, SO I AGREE WITH THE VICE MAYOR IN TERMS OF WHAT IT WAS ORIGINALLY INTENDED FOR, BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY, IT'S NOT A HILL TO DIE ON FOR ME. LIKE WAS MENTIONED, THERE'S DIFFERENT TYPES OF ART ALL OVER THE CITY, AND THE ARTWORK ALREADY IS APPROVED, SO I'M OKAY WITH SUPPORTING IT. ANY OTHER COMMENTS BEFORE I GO TO THE PUBLIC HEARING?

IS THERE ANYTHING WE CAN DO TO ENCOURAGE THEM TO LOOK AT WAYS TO MAKE IT MORE ACCESSIBLE TO THE PUBLIC?

I'M FINE WITH THAT. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE.

COUNCILMEMBER BONNER, WAS THAT A QUESTION MORE TOWARDS ME? Yeah. Well, I can't commit at this moment that we can make it happen. We can definitely explore it. I think this is a conversation between us, Kimley Horne, Greenpoint, and Public Works to see how we can do that adjacent and do it in a safe and meaningful way. Absolutely. And again, Greenpoint has been, I think, a really great partner to the city. The Spinnaker's, again, that was mentioned on the Becker Road corridor. The true focus here was to do something, one, we have an opportunity to bring two plazas together as one, and this was really meant as an interactive art piece, not something that you're just driving by and saying, wow, that looks great. You know, Wilder is 4,000 units, a lot of entry-level and family neighborhoods, and so really it was that engagement. It was a place to encourage grandparents and parents to take their kids and, hey, we're going to go over and check out the ladybugs and have some type of interaction with it. I CAN MAKE THE COMMITMENT THAT WE WILL EXPLORE THAT. I THINK IT'S REALLY AN IN-DEPTH CONVERSATION WITH PUBLIC WORKS TO SEE WHAT COULD BE DONE IN A SAFE AND MEANINGFUL WAY.

YEAH, BECAUSE THE IDEA IS IF IT'S PUBLIC ART, IT'S NOT SUPPOSED TO JUST BENEFIT A COMMUNITY, RIGHT? SO THAT'S THE RUB. IT'S SUPPOSED TO BENEFIT EVERYBODY. SO, AND I DO AGREE WITH THAT.

MADAM MAYOR, AND, YOU KNOW, JUST IN FAIRNESS, AND LISTEN, I'M NOT GOING TO SUPPORT IT, BUT The important thing is that we're going to have future conversations about what we're going to do with these particular approvals. And I appreciate the piece. Just so you know, I wasn't excited about it. But people weren't excited about the hearts. People, when they saw the heart on paper, they were like, I'm not excited about that piece. I wasn't excited about this piece. But it was the piece that you chose, that your applicant chose. And they're paying for it, so out of respect to them, I supported it because it's subjective, it's art, with the caveat that it was going to be interactive and people could actually access it similar to the heart. That's what we were promised. That's what the public was promised. I don't know how we're going to get parking on a wetland site because it's right adjacent to wetlands. So I find that to be very difficult. I think that it changes. This completely changes the intent of what was proposed to the council and to the public. And for those reasons, I will not be supporting it. But I appreciate you coming forward. And I just wanted to share. I'm disappointed. That's all.

Fair, and I respect that, Vice Mayor. And just for clarity, there are upland areas both north and south of the site. So there is enough upland in that area. It's really just logistics and accessibility from Wilder to it and from, and it's a public works conversation we need to have. Understood, and thank you.

So what does that look like in terms of going forward with exploring that to make Council comfortable? from an accessibility standpoint?

I will say the site plan that corresponds with this is in review and is set to go to SPRC, so that would require a site plan revision.

Okay. Well, I mean, these are very fair points here about public accessibility. So is the applicant willing to revise the site plan to maybe accommodate some parking or extra accessibility for residents, since it's supposed to be public art for everyone. I know it's their property, but this is about being fairness from the original intent.

Yeah, I think, yes, we can commit to revising the site plan. I think we need to have a conversation with Public Works relative to the amount of parking, the actual access points, and absent of any significant issue that would not allow us to do that, we can definitely explore that and look to provide some public parking.

Okay.

And we can do that through, if Council agrees, through working through the site plan review process of the actual site plan application.

Yes. So what staff is talking about here, I hear the applicant saying that they're willing to work on it. So it's council's discretion whether you'd like to put a condition on this item. The site plan is under review. So really for me, the two options are place some kind of condition or You could table the item, allow the applicant to explore it to see what's possible, because they do need to talk to Public Works and determine what's available on the side of the road for safe ingress and egress, and then have us come back and report out to you. So those are kind of the two different ways. And it really depends on if the council wants to see what's going to happen. And I didn't hear that we can guarantee that there's definitely going to be parking. So it's council's discretion. Comments?

Did I hear from Steve that he would be OK with the condition so long as Public Works said it was feasible? Yes. Okay. So is there a way we can, we can shape the condition such that, um, you know, this is a condition so long as public works says it's feasible. Public works says it's not feasible. I'd still like to see it move forward because I think it's a great experience. You know, I think we should have diversity in our, in our art. You know, I mean, for everyone who likes the heart, there are people who don't like that it's in a parking lot. They wanted, they wanted a, They wanted a different kind of experience. And so I think if we're going to have public art, we ought to have diverse public art. But I think it ought to be accessible to everyone. And so I don't know how we can, but I see the attorney there. So hopefully she can.

If the applicant is amenable to it, I think you can probably place a condition on this approval indicating that at the site plan review. point or they'll reevaluate the site plan because i guess it's going through the approval process so at site plan level there will be a review of the ability to accommodate parking on the site and if determined feasible by the public works department the applicant will cooperate with the city to ensure that occurs okay but then if it's not feasible then it still moves forward correct

Good afternoon. I'm sorry was this a quasi judicial if so, I need to be sworn in Good afternoon again, so we can definitely work with them I do want some points of clarity though because right now what is being shown is outside of the right-of-way Typically, we don't allow on street parking in the city right away so we can definitely work with them and see if we can do it in their open space areas and

Their own property, but I just want to make sure that clarity is understood going forward Well, I mean, I think it would be fair for them to put it on their own On their own parcel and not because our our standard rule is not in anything in the city right away So it would have to be on their property for me

You know, I can't promise anything, but we'll definitely get creative and try and see if we can't provide some parking areas out there for sure.

So I would move approval with the condition that the applicants work with city staff to provide parking if public works determines it's feasible.

On their property?

On their property, yes.

Go ahead.

Let's say, for example, they can't.

That's my question, too.

Then what happens? Where do we go from there? Since we're approving it based on that condition, what happens if you can't find parking?

Then the artwork is provided. Staff could report back to the council that it was not feasible to provide parking.

And then?

And then the artwork would be installed as presented here to you, accessible from the multimodal pathway.

But that kind of defeats the purpose of us putting a condition on it, doesn't it?

I don't think so. We're trying to do something a little different. We're trying to make sure there's public access. If it doesn't work based on public works for whatever reason, then it can't work. But we can at least say that we're trying to do it this way, and the applicant is amenable to doing that. So I think that's fair.

yeah and the intent of my motion i didn't get a second but the intent of my the intent of my motion was that yes the applicant says that they do it public you know if it's feasible public works determines it's feasible that kind of puts the ball in our court and so but if it's not feasible i still want the project to move forward because i think it's a good project i think it diversifies our public art. I think it's a different experience, and I think that's what we ought to do with public art. We ought to have different experiences, things that can be seen and enjoyed from the highway, things that can be seen and enjoyed in a public shopping experience, or things that can be a little bit more intimate that you kind of have to get to, maybe park somewhere else and walk a bit, and then get to it and enjoy it. That's why I made my motion, but it looks like it's... No, I'm sorry for interrupting you.

I'll second it, but I just want to, for my own clarity, I wanted to ask that question before we move forward.

Can I ask a question under discussion? Can I ask a question under discussion?

This is a public hearing.

We already did.

No, I didn't open it up to public hearing yet because we're still in this process.

So, quickly, what is the likelihood from what you've seen so far of the site plan or the site itself that you feel we can get parking on there? I understand I can't bind you to this.

Yeah, so I have not intimately been involved in the site plan, but I have been back there perusing property perusing locations, so. There might be some avenues where that open space areas open up a little bit that we might be able to get a couple parking spaces. But again, I can't. Which is fine.

I'm looking at you, Steve. Yeah, that's fine for me. Yeah, it doesn't need to be. Yes.

Yeah. thank you appreciate that yes just for clarity never intended to be within the public right-of-way we do have open space upland areas both south and north of this location outside of the right-of-way that we should be able to provide a pull off of the right-of-way a couple spaces maybe three four or five an ADA space or whatever and then pull back in perfect what the uncertainty is with them I'm glad mr. short is here is That, you know, just defining the exact access point, how close it is to the art or how far away it is, you know, within that area and which one's better, north or south of the location.

And that might create a better overall plan in the sense of like you look at Crosstown, you have the small park there that has some parking and people park there and they go walking around and they can access the bridge. To me, it's about accessibility and the general public being able to access it and also being consistent. We have future developments coming forward. If we're not careful how we allow this one to move forward, you know for sure we're going to have other developers that are going to want the exact same thing, and we're not going to be able to hold them to the deal. So if it's with that condition, I'll also support it.

All right.

And then I need a public hearing.

This is a public hearing. Would anyone like to address the council? Seeing no one, I'll close the public hearing, bring it back to the council. Councilwoman Morgan, did you have something?

Well, I just wanted to say that if we're going through with this like this, with the discussion of we can't get out and interact it, then a change needs to be made because there is so much art in this city that you can only drive by. And to hold one hostage and not all of them the same way, That's where I get concerned. And so, you know, going through if the condition can be met, but if not, it still will go through because they're ready to install this in two weeks or three weeks possibly. You said August, so that's two weeks away. Um, I I'm fine.

So madam mayor, the reason why, and I'm just going to clarify it again. The reason why I'm not singling them out, they're asking for a special exception where they don't have to provide public art throughout their site. They're asking to combine all of their art resources, which there's only one, one, one piece that we've done that for in the city. And that was the heart. And that has parking and public access points, and that's why we allowed that funding. You're right, the sale you can drive through, you can't stop. But this particular piece was done specifically with that intent, that it was going to be interactive. Therefore, those dollars should be treated the same. That's the point of the principle. And I just want to make sure that we're consistent, like you want. I know you want consistency. I want to make sure we're consistent in those deals because moving forward, We're going to have developers that want to do the same thing, and I want to make sure that we're consistent.

And just one last thing. So you have other developers that do a entrance piece at each of their entrances of their developments. There's nowhere to park and walk up and see the art. So it's different. I mean, and I'm just thinking of the stairway to heaven that we have out there. You don't get out. You don't walk on it. You don't climb on it. But it is art. And then you go to another one or Vizcaya. So it's just making consistency or not holding one to a different standard than all the others. BUT THANK YOU. I'M GOOD.

I GET IT. THIS IS DIFFERENTLY DIFFERENT BECAUSE OF THE FACT THERE WAS AN ORIGINAL INTENT AND THEN THE LOCATION CHANGED. SO IT IS BASICALLY ON THIS CASE-BY-CASE BASIS THAT WE'RE ADDRESSING THIS BECAUSE OF THAT FACT THAT IT'S NOT GOING IN THE ORIGINAL LOCATION THAT WAS ALREADY TALKED ABOUT AND DISCUSSED. But if we can make that accommodation, I think that will make everybody happy, and it's a good compromise for everyone. So with that, is there a motion?

Motion to approve with the condition that the applicant will work with staff to accommodate parking on their property if Public Works deems it as feasible.

Is there a second?

I'll second.

Okay. We have a motion and a second. Any final discussion? All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed?

Motion carries. Thank you, Council. Thank you.

Mayor, if I may, just asking legal, does that conditional language need to be incorporated prior to the execution of this resolution?

Yes.

Thank you. All right. Moving on to 11C, Resolution 26-R44.

A resolution of the City of Port St. Lucie, Florida approving and authorizing the settlement of litigation, providing for conflict, providing for severability, and providing an effective date. Thank you. Council?

Motion to approve Resolution 26-R44. Second.

I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Council, do you want to break or do you want to just power through? Power through. Okay.

We're good right now. 11D, Resolution 26R45.

A resolution of the City of Port St. Lucie, Florida authorizing the City Manager to execute the State of Florida Department of Transportation utility work by highway contractor agreement necessary to relocate the City's utility facilities for the public purpose of constructing and improving Port St. Lucie Boulevard from Becker Road to Parr Drive, providing for conflict, providing for severability, and providing an effective date. Is there a motion?

Motion to approve resolution.

26-r 45 second I have a motion in a second any discussion all those in favor aye any opposed motion carries 11e resolution 26-r 46 a resolution of the City of Port St Lucie Florida authorizing the city manager to execute the utility easement agreement with Midway Glades developers LLC for the property lying in sections 3 and 10 of

Township 36 South, Range 39 East, known as Wilder, for the benefit of the city to access Floridian well sites, providing for conflict, providing for severability, and providing an effective date.

Is there a motion?

Motion approved.

Second. I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries.

11F, Resolution 26-R47.

A resolution of the City Council of the City of Port St. Lucie, Florida authorizing the issuance by the City of Port St. Lucie, Florida of not exceeding $85 million in aggregate principal amount of its City of Port St. Lucie, Florida Special Obligation Revenue Bonds Series 2026A to finance various costs related to the Southeast Flores to drive roadway capital improvements, the Public Works Building Project, and the PAR roundabouts project, covenanting to budget and appropriate legally available non ad valorem revenues to pay debt service on the bonds, providing for the rights of the holders of said bonds, making certain other covenants and agreements in connection with such bonds, authorizing a negotiated sale of said bonds, Delegating certain authority to the city manager for the authorization, execution, and delivery of a bond purchase agreement with respect thereto and the approval of the terms and details of said bonds. Establishing a book entry registration system for such bonds. Appointing the paying agent and registrar for said bonds. Authorizing the distribution of a preliminary official statement and the execution and delivery of an official statement with respect to such bonds, authorizing the execution and delivery of a continuing disclosure certificate, and providing for an effective date for this resolution. Thank you. Council?

Motion approved.

Second? I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries.

11G, Resolution 26-R48.

A resolution of the City Council of the City of Port St. Lucie, Florida, authorizing the execution of an interlocal agreement with St. Lucie County Tax Collector to collect a non-advalorum assessment against residential properties within the boundaries of the area known as the city of Port St. Lucie for the purpose of recouping the cost of voluntary culvert repair services from the owners of the properties benefited. Council?

Motion to approve resolution 26-R48. Second. We have a motion and a second. Any discussion? All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries.

11H, Resolution 26-R49.

A resolution of the City of Port St. Lucie, Florida authorizing the City Manager to execute the State of Florida Department of Transportation utility work by highway contractor agreement necessary to relocate the City's utility facilities for the public purpose of constructing and improving the Turnpike State Road 91 Midway Road Southern Ramps Interchange, providing for conflict, providing for severability, and providing an effective date.

Thank you. Is there a motion?

Motion to approve.

Second. I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries.

11-I, Resolution 26-R50.

A resolution of the City of Port St. Lucie, Florida authorizing the City Manager to execute the State of Florida Department of Transportation utility work by highway contractor agreement. necessary to relocate the city's utility facilities for the public purpose of constructing and improving West Midway Road CR712 from Glades Cut-Off Road to West of Jenkins Road, providing for conflict, providing for severability, and providing an effective date. Thank you. Is there a motion?

Motion to approve Resolution 26-R50. Second. We have a motion and a second. Any discussion? All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries.

11J, Resolution 26-R51.

A resolution of the City of Port St. Lucie, Florida, amending the Title VI and non-discrimination policy and plan, providing for conflict, providing for severability, and providing an effective date. Is there a motion?

Motion to approve.

I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries.

11K, Resolution 26-R52.

A resolution of the City of Port St. Lucie, Florida, authorizing the City Manager or his designee to execute and enter into the District 4 Maintenance Memorandum of Agreement for decorative features with the Florida Department of Transportation regarding the construction of an interchange ramp at Midway Road and the Turnpike. providing for conflict, providing for severability, and providing an effective date. Thank you. Council?

Motion to approve Resolution 26-R52. Second. I have a motion and a second. Any discussion? All those in favor? Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. Okay, we have no new business. We're on to city manager's report.

Yes, Madam Mayor. Last week, council should have received the actual budget book. And this week, I know we're going to be getting together on one-on-one so we can go through the budget book. So I know you guys are going to be hitting that budget book pretty hard. So looking forward to that. And also in the next couple of weeks, we're going to be having a workshop and we're going to get into more details on the budget. So looking forward to a lot of that. Appreciate it. Thank you. That's my update.

Thank you. Councilwoman Morgan? Short and sweet, well, kind of. He put it really big. I guess you think I'm old. This month, we're recognizing the invaluable role that parks, green spaces, and recreation programs play during Park and Recreation Month. First, we want to invite you to connect with our team in the community by following us on our new Parks and Recreation Instagrits, I mean Insta... Instagram page, I don't do the Insta thing, at PSL Parks and Rec. Okay, have fun. Also, grab those bright colors and drop into a free class, Glow and Groove Zumba. Sounds like exercise to me. On Saturday, July 18th at the Mid-Florida Event Center, it starts in parks, and you can explore all the fun at PSLParks.com. Thank you.

Go ahead.

Thank you, Mayor. Fourth of July, I went to the Fourth of July 5K, where I won. I took second place in my age group.

I was going to say, you're into 5Ks lately, aren't you? Very good.

But for full disclosure, there's only two of us in our age group, so.

And you took second place in a 5K?

The kid that beat me, even in my heyday when I was running.

That means you can do a 5K to the ladybug work.

He ran a 23-minute 5K.

Wow.

So even in my heyday, I was running 25, 26 minutes. So yeah, kudos to him. Went to the Freedom Fest that evening. By far, that is the best Freedom Fest we've ever had. The drone show knocked it out the park. There was a lot of great comments about the drone show, and I really, really liked it. So thank you to our event staff. 11 July, I went and spoke before the Riverland Veterans Club, talked about veterans events and stuff like that. So my announcement is Keep Port St. Lucie Beautiful held its annual Adopt-A-Street volunteer breakfast on June 26th, and 125 volunteers were there to celebrate the 34 years of the program. Keep Port St. Lucie Beautiful recognized this year's Golden Grabber Award winners and also acknowledged the hard work done by everyone. In 2025, adopted street volunteers dedicated 2,677 hours, performed 2,135 individual cleanups, and collected 32,025 pounds of litter. Thank you for keeping Port St. Lucie beautiful. THAT'S ALL I HAVE. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, VICE MAYOR. OUR PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT SUCCESSFULLY COMPLETED A COVERT REPLACEMENT PROJECT BETWEEN TWO HOMES ALONG SOUTHEAST WEST MORELAND BOULEVARD. THIS INITIATIVE IS PART OF THE CITY'S ONGOING COMMITMENT TO UPGRADING ITS AGING INFRASTRUCTURE AND ENSURING NEIGHBORHOODS REMAIN SAFE AND RESILIENT. RESIDENTS CAN ENHANCE SAFETY AND FUNCTIONALITY AS A RESULT OF THESE IMPROVEMENTS.

along with what we just approved to the culvert the voluntary culvert replacement program which i think go hand in hand and that's really going to help some of our residents in the city deal with those issues so thank you all right um congratulations to our police athletic league junior police academy cadets who graduated june 19th the cadets took on challenges learned new skills and gained a first-hand look at the dedication teamwork and responsibility that come with serving others The lessons they learned, leadership, respect, and perseverance will guide them throughout their lives. We are proud of you. For my report, I did attend Freedom Fest. I also attended with the mayor, and she can talk more about that, the America 250 celebration at the Articopis Nursing Home. And this morning I attended and helped welcome the ribbon cutting for another broken egg cafe over on Becker. I didn't eat. I just attended the ribbon cutting. What?

What do you mean you didn't eat?

No, no, I just go for the ribbon cutting. That's, you know, same thing with Del Taco. I didn't even eat a Del Taco. I attended the ribbon cutting. And then unlike Councilman Morgan, I don't have a birth month. I just have a birthday weekend. So we had, you know, a little get-together, family dinner time, so it was nice to relax this weekend.

Awesome. Well, thanks for mentioning that America 250 RDR COPUS because I forgot to put that on my list, but that was a great morning. Absolutely celebrating with our amazing veterans at the nursing home there. I did attend the adopt street breakfast and thanked all of our amazing volunteers and participants for all the work that they do in our city and volunteering, taking away for their daily activities to go out and collect litter. I'm so proud of them and so grateful for all of them as well. I spoke before the Realtors Commercial Alliance, had my Mornings with the Mayor event, and This weekend, I went to our history museum, Port St. Lucie Historical Society, and we did the ribbon cutting for the brick paver garden. So that was very nice. And to see some of our community leaders that really helped pave the way for Port St. Lucie Honored was very special. Also attended Freedom Fest. So I agree, it was great. I don't think I've ever seen so many people attend Freedom Fest. AND ALL THE FREEDOM FESTS THAT I'VE BEEN TO. WE DO HAVE A LITTLE HICKUP WITH THE DRONE SHOW. IT DID NOT, THE DRONE SHOW, IT WAS GOOD, BUT IT DIDN'T RISE ABOVE THE PARKING GARAGE, AND SO WE NEED TO, IF WE'RE EVER GOING TO DO THE DRONE SHOW AGAIN, WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT IS ADDRESSED. I DO UNDERSTAND AND RECOGNIZE THAT THE FIREWORKS WERE THERE, AND I KNOW THAT THE DRONES NEED A LOT OF SPACE BECAUSE THERE'S SO MANY OF THEM, BUT I THINK FROM A LOGISTIC STANDPOINT, IF WE'RE GOING TO DO IT AGAIN, WE NEED TO JUST MAKE SURE THAT WE ADDRESS THAT. LOTS OF GREAT COMMENTS ABOUT THE DRONE SHOW FOR SURE THAT I SAW AND THAT I RECEIVED, BUT THAT WAS JUST THE ONE LITTLE THING THAT WE HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ADDRESS. I LEFT MY ANNOUNCEMENT UPSTAIRS BY MISTAKE. HOWEVER, IT REFERS TO OUR CITY UNIVERSITY PROGRAM AND WE ARE OPEN FOR APPLICATIONS ON OUR CITY WEBSITE FOR OUR AMAZING CITY UNIVERSITY PROGRAM. free six-week class to learn all about Port St. Lucie, our government, how we operate, how we work with our community partners as well. And then at the end, you become an ambassador of the city through our ambassador program, which is something we're also very proud of. So that's the subject of the announcement. And with that, we are adjourned, Council.