In other council actions, multiple discussions focused on the development and preservation of affordable housing. A resolution was passed to reserve building permit allocations for a development project intended to address the village’s affordable housing crisis. The council heard from representatives of Habitat for Humanity, who proposed building eight single one-bedroom rental units on one of the village-owned properties. Despite concerns raised about the environmental impact and the suitability of specific developers for such projects, the council debated the allocation of affordable housing units and the potential rezoning of properties to facilitate development.

The council also tackled the issue of properties not accounted for by the village, ultimately granting Transfer of Development Rights (TDR) to affected properties. While there was concern about setting a precedent and the authority of the planning director in decision-making processes, the council voted to approve the resolution with the provision that the planning director would have the discretion to make decisions on specific applications without necessitating a return to the council for approval.

Furthermore, the council addressed a site plan application related to 103 Sunshine Boulevard, where the staff recommended denial due to code violations and noise ordinance violations associated with the property. After a heated discussion and public comments, the council voted to deny the application.

The meeting also featured a debate on a proposal for a new facility to rehabilitate injured dolphins, which was described as a critical need for the region. Despite concerns over the property size and the potential impact on the environment, the representative for the facility stressed the importance of providing care for injured marine mammals and the goal of releasing them back into the ocean. The council voted to approve the resolution for the facility, which included an administrative variance approval for eight parking spaces.

Additionally, a discussion ensued regarding a variance request for the construction of two affordable housing units on a small lot. The council ultimately denied the request, addressing concerns about overdevelopment and the quality of life for residents in affordable housing. An ordinance amendment related to land development regulations was approved, with the council emphasizing the necessity for affordable housing and addressing the definition of “fronting” for clarity in the regulations.