##VIDEO ID:BLG9Jh24siI## e very surprised you ready okay everybody ready yeah yes sir okay it's 4:05 and I'm going to call this meeting to order roll call chair Kim Penny here Vice chair bville here board member Hopkins here board member mccristal here board member Moser here and board member Noble here and I got a motion to approve the agenda please so moved and I got a second second we have a motion by Mark a second by Andy to approve the agenda all in favor I I any opposed passes unanimously can I got a mo motion to approve move the last minutes oh who should we give it to yeah I'm just waiting ahead second all in favor I I okay uh comments from the public I don't see any cards comments by board members anybody want to make a comment wait ah this is on non-agenda item okay do any of the board members have any comments see none action items who's Chris you're going to take this or panel's going to take this uh I am okay Chris it's all yours uh thank you um of oh the pledge I was going to say something you should have Mark will you lead us in the pledge please I will I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the stand one nation under God indivisible with liberty and justice for all I can do invocations if you want to but are you going to help us with this uh yeah chair compeny I I just uh for the record City attorney Lee baget I think we need to read the ordinance in the record like we normally do I'd be happy to do it it's kind of been my job yeah anyway uh this is action item number two uh ordinance number 2532 d224 an ordinance of the city Commission of the city of Stewart Florida amending the city's official zoning map to rezone a 2.4 acre parcel located at 710 Martin Luther King uh Boulevard being more described in exhibit a attached for major Amendment to the existing commercial planned unit development also known as cpud zoning designation to allow a vocational training facility only providing directions to the city clerk providing for repeal of all ordinances and conflict providing for an effective date and for other purposes thank you Bru thank you chair uh members of the board for the record my name is Chris mccraine I'm the principal planner with the development department and tonight I'll be presenting agenda item number two for a reone petition to reestablish the existing commercial plan unit development zoning designation for the project lift development uh so pursuant to Land Development codes um public notice requirements on September 19th 2024 the applicant mailed uh notice to all adjacent Property Owners located within 300 ft of the subject parcel uh to provide details of the requested development and the date and time of tonight's public hearing additionally three signs were posted on the property with this same information uh so the 2.4 acre parcel formerly known as the Vista Village shopping center is located at 710 Southeast Martin Luther King Jr Boulevard and is bounded by Southeast Tarpon Avenue to the east Southeast Lake Street to the South and Martin Luther King Jr Boulevard to the north uh this site is located within the CRA and East Stewart neighborhood so the subject partiel is currently designated by the commercial plan unit development or cpud zoning designation um the properties situated to the north south and west are designated by the general residential office or grro and the properties to the South are Zone single family duplex or F sfd uh properties to the East are Zone business mixed use or bmu the subject partiel and all rounding properties are designated by the East Stewart future land use designation um East Stewart future land use applies uh to lands within the CRA and is specific to the east Stewart neighborhood and permitted uses include low density and multif family residential commercial office Recreation and mixed use projects so a little backstory uh the project was presented to the crb and LPA on August 6th and 8th of 2024 and recommended for approval with condition to be forwarded to the city commission however on uh during the first reading before the city Commission on August 26th the commission recommended that the CRA Revis their bmu reone petition and instead proposed that project lift development be proposed under the uh commercial plan unit development which is the existing zoning designation uh this also eliminated the need for minor development plan application for the administrative site plan approval or the major Urban code conditional use ition uh to deviate from any of the code sections um but I would like to point out that nothing has changed on the site plan since the board's review and approval of it on the 6th um and as the only reason we're here before you is to uh request a recommendation of approval of ordinance 2532 d224 for a major Amendment to the existing commercial Planning Development zoning designation which would allow for vocational training facilities only as a permitted use under the cpud and it would approve the final plan for the project lift development so as stated before this is Staff recommendation um and the staff and the applicant are available to answer any questions that the board may have does anyone have any questions for staff yes sir go ahead uh question I believe is that the uh City commission meeting a a lady got up and said uh I'm having a hard time supporting this because it's only you only have 16 students and then someone from who represented project lift said no it's 60 um so could we clarify that well I'm not on this particular item because we're here for a zoning for to not even a zoning change anymore so I don't know that wouldn't that wouldn't really have anything to do with us approving or or not this item if the applicant wants to say anything when it's his turn great but it's it's not your main to whether we approve this or not at this point any other questions Tom I have a question Frank any other questions what's the zoning now so the current zoning is commercial plan unit development uh there there is no active approvals under the plan unit development zoning designation um so what we're requesting today is to amend that existing zoning designation to propose the the final site plan and the permitted use of the vocational training under the existing zoning so we've taken the existing C cpud and then we're just it doesn't have anything approved in it right now and we're just adding to that what um uh with that that CPU UD um at at this point what uh what happens if uh it's no longer occupied by project left so any approvals that would be that would any future use of that property would have to come before the commissions for approval so if if hypothetically if this was to go through and be approved as vocational learning only that would be the only use that would be permitted under this site plan so any future use of this site would have to come back for amendments to the major for the Pud okay two more questions where are we with the East Stewart um zoning is that in place now uh is how does that interplay with what we're doing right here the the overall form based code that was adopted in 2023 so the form based code is in place uh it's currently as I showed the zoning map here so everything thing around this property is is under the East Stewart form based code um zoning designations such as except this except this cpud this cpud was was I believe panol can speak a little bit more on the the history of it but it was it was during the rezoning of this area it was kept as a cpud because there was thoughts of of redeveloping this site for project LIF and for this development when we were going through the the form based code so it never was overhauled or or given a new zoning designation we we retained the existing cpud what was it before the cpud I I'm not sure what that was before that probably might be able to answer that one Zing before we had bmu grro and sfd those are the three zoning that exist in East Stewart the form based code did not change those zoning designation those Z zoning designation remained so before 2002 it was probably just general zoning R1 R2 B1 B2 one of those zoning designation and then when that um when the uh when the fil when the when the project was developed that's when it was designated cpud and last question I promise do we do we have I'll stop you at some point that's good yeah go ahead um do we have an educational zoning within the city like School locational just an educa yeah for educational institutions only I believe we do we do have an Institutional and is there any reason why we wouldn't use it here uh vocational school for some reason was not one of the allows used in East Stewart um and so that's why we were that was one of the conditional use that we were asking for as part of the original application but not with the cpud we don't need to ask for conditional use because it is one of the permitted use that's we're requested but if we if we've gone with this with the form based code and and everything wouldn't it be easier to to just uh have a specific modification to the educational Don uh designation to allow for vocational uh than to you know keep this cpud in place with the commercial zoning behind it and not knowing what the state might do at some future date so you're saying keep bmu use one of the use a bmu zoning on it instead of cpud use yeah with the whatever educational zoning we have and modify it if it doesn't allow for vocational then modify it for vocational so that this would qualify right we would have to amend the code Land Development code to um add vocational school as one of the allowed uses in E St it's not the T right now it's just not in one of the used listed in in the in the um in the code we would have to amend the code to list that Ed okay for E Stewart but regardless I think the direction from the board from the city commission is that they want to keep the existing zoning um because there were some concerns with the with the bmu Zoning for multif family development in the future so um this kind of restricts with just Vocational School use yeah I'm not talking about bmu I'm talking about you know a specic we have a specific Zoning for education I don't understand why it's not available in Stu E Stewart right and it's just something that was not caught when we did the rewrite we could have we could have just listed that as one of the use allowed in bmu uh but in order to use that in order to um to have that use listed we can't just use one of the urban District we can't just put um urban center as as one of the Zoning for the site it has to be either bmu um sfd or uh grro those are the three used uh those are the three zoning in East Stewart so in order to allow vocational school we just have to change the list of permitted uses has nothing to do with the Z and and the zip is in process can it be done during the zip it could okay that would have to be discussed and sure that discuss it at at If an item any other questions um did this is sort of related did Treasure Coast Regional planning is that who did the forign base yeah um just maybe at a later meeting could we get them to clarify why education was left off in East Stewart I don't was it a community desire prob listed so we just kept all the uses that are allowed right now we didn't want to add anything more to it okay um so we just cleaned up if anything that doesn't really make sense one of the use that doesn't make sense doesn't exist anymore we probably remove those but we didn't add any New Uses okay thanks any other questions for staff does the applicant want to add anything you know your staff the applicant maybe you're wishing at some point in the future you trade sides Bob do you want to say anything Bob zacho CEO project lift um Mr mccristal uh you know the um the amount of students that were serving there does run on three different shifts I think I've explained it to this board uh probably before as first shift is career career Rising shift starts at 8 o'clock in the morning goes until 2:30 in the afternoon that's going to run anywhere between 16 and 20 students every single time we do that program then the second shift starts in the in the afternoon goes until it starts at 3:30 in the afternoon goes to 6:30 those are teens that are uh still in high school and doing the trainings those typically run between 20 and 30 in those groups um closer to 30 at at most times and then we have a third shift which is the full Apprentice programming which goes typically from 5:30 to 10:30 at night three days a week so that we can do full Apprentice programming for electrical and giving kids jobs outside of project lifting that way I hope that clarifies your question um but um but thank you for for bringing it up any other questions for the applicant seeing none right do we have any public comment we do we have two do you want to first one is Fay James [Music] Miss James you will have three minutes okay good evening um board and thank you I just like to say I'm fa James and I've lived in East stort all my life I was born here and I've seen some changes that really concern me ande preservation of our East Stewart Heritage um segregated Community not by choice but because of Law and we build our community and we have businesses and Entrepreneurship and education this particular project that I'm concerned with um the I heard the cpud have been learning I'm back in school what all this means but my my problem is this is a historic area in East St the Gary store and the history that goes with that store and I don't know if it's been allocated thought about any type of place to have some Heritage shared in a uh signage somewhere in if this building happens I don't even know how many stories it's going to be but project lift I have no problem with them but to me it sounds like it's uh a personal club and if you're not a member of it you're not invited I don't know how large this building is going to be if for 60 students but I think it needs to go back with coding for uh to be re-evaluated that needs to be stopped right now and think about more of a multi-purpose usage of that building for the community as well and I don't know if project LIF is the owner of it paid money for it and it's their property but I think they're connected with the school board and those children that go there are special because they for some reason I'm not going to say but whatever it is it seems to be excluding people that live in the East Stewart neighborhood and surrounding communities I don't understand why it's so Cutthroat and so precise it should have more type of zoning so that it can be multi-purpose usage at some point and I don't know if we're invited into project LIF and we live right there in our community so I do have an issue with that I'm asking that you go back and review to take a look at resoning again take a look at how project lift is really going to lift us in our community that has been there all our liveses and I'm very concerned about this and part of our history should be known about this Gary store and I don't know if project lift is even interested in doing that and representing the community that they're coming into I don't know if the city of steart if you all are concerned about how we want to preserve our neighborhood in East Stewart but it's important to us and we feel like we're going to be excluded that it's only going to be for those 60 students and no one else and that bothers me thank you Mr James Christie thank you very much boy for allowing us to speak on this and I agree with a lot that Miss James said regarding the history and what one change will do to a community um and no disparages against against any set population or anything but storeart training school was a school that produced great individuals out of East store my dad and my mom attended there and several other people that went on to do great things but now it's a remedial school when I pass by there at school time I see guards outside and I feel funny about that will the G property is a historic property like I said in the previous meeting it has historic value to the community that's real I had a store in there other people had a store in there and to did great things for the morale of the community now that's going to be a remedia vocational tech place we have veterans places on Martin Luther King Boulevard we have psychiatric places on Martin Luther King are we have all this stuff coming in and he stood is not a depository to throw anything that you want there I'm concerned about how the city um originates these things with entities outside the community there's entities inside the community that may not get any money all this grant money that's flowing everywhere but they have purpose they have missions and some of them will be great to work with and have projects that they can put in the community that will benefit us we're concerning the St Bob is a great person his program is great I researched it good good program no disparages against Bob anybody but in Easter we are concerned about it seemed like what gets put in there without a significant input from us thank you anyone else Mr Joseph Cooper Joseph Cooper 906 Southeast night street thank you I think the uh just the comment on the Zone I think the only CPU the keeping it in place is probably the most appropriate thing for project lift and just on the side know I believe that as in construction I know that it's important that we can we're losing too many trades people and so with project LIF program is it's going to be impactful because some of the kids or some of the the teenagers are going to be able to get these trades going and so I think we should definitely I think you should guys vote should vote to to amend to change the amendment alter the amendment to keep it as a cpud and to make a project LIF project approve this project thank you thank you you want to speak Helen yeah um I think really Helen McBride from Flamingo Avenue oh thank you very much I appreciate that um and I think you should listen to the neighbors that live in that area and that that were born and raised there but I'm reading this like that gentlem Mr Christie said there was a training school there so training U you know the vocational training you have it right here but I'm concerned it says zoning designated to allow a vocational training facility only now the city bought this land it's our land we're going to rent it out for dollar a year for 99 years but why the word only would have God forbid we all know we we progress in into the future we may not need this type of a training uh facility but by putting the word only you're we the taxpayers paid our money to buy this land you're zoning Us in uh but it just don't I don't like the word only I don't like sending rent and land out for a dollar a year either but I don't know I think you you need to listen to the people that live in East Stewart this doesn't sound right to me but that's just me thank you thank you don't forget to fill out your card is there is that it that's all okay back to the board does anyone have any other questions for staff or for the applicant none I do go ahead who do you want you want Staff first um yes okay um so looking at the vocational training facility only only language that's that's it I guess I'm listening to miss Fay you know if um you know if the applicant wanted to do something on the weekends with the community or engage with the community can they or is it just vocational school you know you talked about entrepreneurship if there was some Entre entrepreneurship happening here over the week I'm thinking like what if E Stewart wanted to have a weekend Market or something is that allowed would that be considered or it's not vocational so we can't do it I guess I'm just wondering how much flexibility is in that language Let let's let's why don't we have panel once again go through the financing how we got here why don't we also go through why we're here um so back in 2022 I don't have the timeline with me uh we actually uh it was actually during covid sorry so it was about 2019 2020 uh we applied for the cdbg co grant that was um advertised through the state and uh we applied for the grant uh we received about $4.7 million grant for job training center it's a specific use that we got the the the grant for um and then uh uh we actually uh inspected the building in initially we wanted to you know um just rehab the building and save the building uh but when we inspected the building um it was just not cost feasible to to um just rehabit so uh we we had to uh take a different approach and um do new construction so I went back to the state and I said hey we have to change the scope of the project uh we're going to need additional funding uh and so they did provide additional funding so we're about at we're at about $6.3 million for the project again the goal is economic development so we have to create 50 jobs uh through the program and we have to demonstrate that within the fiveyear period and it has to be new created jobs uh for low and moderate income families so there's certain guidelines we have to meet with this grant um and so that's our goal for the next five years if we want to expand to other uses in the future once the our obligations are completed we can always come back it could be part of the lease agreement that you know we want to revisit this in five years to look at different options okay so within that first five years five years from the completion of the construction so nothing else can happen on the right it has to be for economic development purposes okay I mean would entrepreneurship right and I think he is planning to do some programs like that okay B why don't you come up for a minute oh panel one other thing even the money to purchase the land is done through the grant correct correct that we took it from our treasury right nothing has all tied into the grant if we don't have the if we don't do what we said we give everything back and we will have to pay 1 Point 1.6 million plus all the administration cost and any time loss we would have to pay for all of that back for the for the land okay Bob why don't you besides your program and your people say your program as if it's a little thing how many thing how many things do you train for well I mean I can give some size and scope as to project lift's historical data and kind of moving forward with with where we are so I think everybody knows that it started started here in Stuart and that was um my my Miss was working with teens and young adults who were struggling with drugs and alcohol mental health issues not um you know not disabilities developmental disabilities this is not that type of program this is uh for teens that are struggling in particular areas some of it's generational poverty compon components and how we work I'm a licensed psychotherapist and I was very frustrated with the fact that we weren't giving kids opportunities throughout our community to um have clear-minded decisionmaking to be able to keep these jobs as as pointed out earlier is that the trades are dying in our world a great replacement behavior for depression anxiety stress attention deficit hyperactivity um substance use disorders is the skilled trades right put a 2800 degree oxy assetline torch into a kids's hand and you will see that person change right and they will change for a long time 70% of our country does not have a college degree that means we need to be paying attention to what it is that we can train with them so as you can see um through we have a campus in in Palm Beach county in the Bel Glade area um we have a campus in Fort Pierce we have a campus in in Palm City um we have 6 we actually have 65 employees uh 15 full-time therapists uh case managers um it's a pretty robust program as it relates to job Readiness employability uh mental health counseling and skilled trades training every single teen and young adult that comes into project lift is paid for the work that they do what we're doing is making sure that they understand that a paycheck is something that they can be proud of and they also learn skills like in real time this is not a job training program that doesn't uh doesn't value the experiential components we fully value the experiential component that means our kids that come into project lift have to deal with the HR department they have to deal with payroll they have to learn who suda and FICA are right because right now when they look at their paychecks they think somebody's stealing from right so for us to be able to head that off down the road and I'm going to use Joe a couple times as the example but he has to hire these guys right and the companies like him have to hire them and you know what happens is they walk into his office and they go you stole from me suda who's suda who's F and then they get fired for their bad attitude right instead we head all of that stuff off right off the bat um 21 uh program uh Specialists those are uh coordinators directors um uh instructors we're talking about skilled trades training in carpentry um uh welding Mig TIG stick and plasma cutting uh we do uh automotive repair uh we have small equipment operations so these young folks are learning how to use skid steers in back hose because I get can tell you right now regardless of whatever if we're no growth zero growth or whatever growth you're still going to drive down the road and see a bunch of skid steers and then we got to have kids that know how to drive them and be able to get used to it so they're not afraid of it also it is an amazing replacement behavior for substance use disorders when you have dignity hope and pro and promise in a future because of something that you're really really good at that 99.9% of the rest of the world isn't good at you you you learn to be to be great I'm sorry I can go on and on 13 years of delivering high quality is 14 years now uh 30,000 feet of training space um uh and we're you know we're we're funded you know we're not coming into into City and into the City and saying panal knows this we're not coming into the city and saying I need Operational Support for the next 10 years I don't have my hand out for that right and and in fact I'm not asking the the E Stewart for any money either like we're basically going in and saying here's what we can do here's how we're going to do it and oh by the way we're going to put some kids in in this world they can Boomerang back to East Stewart with pride and come back into the community and really develop and grow it right it starts somewhere I'm a Martin lifelong Martin County resident uh grew up uh in Jensen Beach played all my sports I told that story already I this is I I love this place there's nothing more um uh more beautiful for me than to be able to do something like this and be able to come in and really pour out my talents and and my staff's talents into this area so let me ask you some questions instead MH so as you said city of Stewart is not giving you a dime well not yeah for operational dollars no no operational dollars of course as part of the grant we're going to help with the construction and so forth correct yeah and you anticipate having how many kids in this program so throughout the entire let's not even call them kids how many students so throughout the entire year we'll have in all likelihood just over 300 teens that go through the program through the through the entire year and where will you draw these teens from and students from they'll be coming from and we talked about this before they'll be coming from The Martin County Stewart area right it's it'll be a great facility about a third of the teens that we work with currently throughout of our our facility have to be transported from the East stward area over to our other facilities so that we can teach the trainings and do the mental health processes this is a great opportunity for us to really concentrate on on giving priority to East Stewart and making sure that I someone asked me in a community meeting you know will you prioritize and absolutely I I I mean I don't know how else to to hold me accountable to that but certainly come and call me out if you think that we're not but we can prioritize our E Stewart our E Stewart teens and young adults uh with no problem at all that's that's the way it goes does anyone have any other questions for Bob I do uh yes sir go ahead Andy he was waiting uh go ahead Darr you good okay so maybe it was in August we I remember you get you did a presentation and some of the same folks were here um and I remember making the comment at that time maybe uh it would be a good opportunity for folks from the community to get with you oneon-one and see what type of collaborative effort or help or support that could be garnered as as any of that taking place since we had that conversation Mr and chrisye and I have had played played a bit of phone tag on it and we do have conversations pretty regularly after these meetings and and connect and I I do think that there's common ground at least I those are conversations that I've had with him and um actually I I'm not just one person and I'll answer the question no this is not back and I did you know I was outside um after the meeting um uh that we had I think out here uh with u probably six or seven of the community members that were here having conversations about what it is that they wanted to see happen and and me being able to say come come see what we do at project lift let's let me show you how this all works so um I would say that I would love to at least Mr chrisy and I is where only one I can speak on because of the direct connect is that um I think that we are committed to getting together I've also had um uh Mr Smith over at um at project LIF for tour and we uh um you know I I think it was a really really good um good conversation I didn't I didn't really feel like there was any any Vibes that were going in an opposite direction and I I felt good about I mean I I continue to feel good about it you know the conversations that I have thank you do you have any other questions any no Aaron um I just had a question about uh panel mentioned that you had plans for some type of entrepreneurial aspect of it what could you just elaborate on that a bit yeah absolutely I know that there's um there's a lot of movement for you know wanting to get teens with entrepreneurial Spirit to the training that they need so collaborations with uh financial institu institutions that understand business models to be able to help and create business so we've had that happen several times out of project lift already but it's never been a formalized program and Mr Christie's me mentioned it to me on several occasions as well um I have no no doubt that um having a formalized program that's related to entrepreneurialship that that looks a little bit different than the way project lift does things normally right now uh would I don't think that would be a problem at all yeah no that's great because one of my worries about the project was that originally there was supposed to be some kind of uh entrepreneurial business uh incubator aspect to it so if we can keep something still along those lines I think it'd be great I 100% agree with you Mr Hawkins It's like we are um we're committed to making sure that the that the things that are being said here I what I really loved was the historical component you know I would love to talk to somebody more about how we can make uh pieces of that um uh canonized so to speak over over the next you know whatever 50 hundred years right and I I think we'd have to go through a different uh different board for like historical PL or something yeah that'd be something different no I mean I'm not Bob yeah that's all yeah I'm good you have one other question for Bob um yeah or the board uh no don't ask the board ask Bob if you disc I don't know who this should be directed at but I'm looking for some context for my own understanding has there on this site has there been any communitybased project put forth before on this site from East Stewart has anybody put a project for this particular site forward panel do you know anything about that no we had the public meetings where we asked the community to we were they were invited to give input we just didn't get any real input on on different use that they would like to see on the pro on the site but there was an opportunity for discussion but we didn't get anything and to my knowledge and Mr Christie is is different because you've been there a lot longer than me but since 20 2013 nothing has been done there until Mr Gary gave the naac p a free space to have their offices I'm glad Jim is in the background Jim charsky we've had we had meetings with the gares to do something we had meetings with others to buy it to do something and this is the first time in the decade that I've been around this property that something will eventually be done on it so we could say all we want about what happened years ago but it's been empty for 10 12 years so please you had your chance Miss Brickley to speak so thank you Bob you could sit down unless anyone else has any questions yeah sure quick thank you go ahead okay so you just verbally committed to actively seeking out recruiting students from the East Stewart area MH yes sir that goes a long way uh and the the 50 jobs is is that in in five years as as something that has to be done are those the uh the employees of your facility is that is that what the 50 jobs me or or creating 50 other yeah they're the the they graduating from the program and getting job gainfully employed outside of somewhere else okay and also you know the commitment to making sure that what our open positions are offered uh locally to the to the uh to the neighborhood as well so I'm talking about staff positions yeah so a question I had again the the uh um uh the offering to actively recruit students from East Stewart area to get them job ready goes a long ways but here's the thing you need to convince the people East Stewart I I want to hear some people from East Stewart supporting this and it sounds like you just got to get that message across and them that's all I have thank you okay thank you Mr thank you so if we have nothing else does the board want to discuss this or can I get a motion and then we can discuss the motion if you want I'll I'll move you'll move for approval can I get a second pleas second now we can discuss now we can discuss does anyone have further discussion I I do I have a couple things um you know I I think that um I think that panol and and staff has done a pretty decent job getting trying to get the word out um I do have a problem just like Frank does that you know as we've gotten into this we' found out that there are some concerns from the community about this project not about the project not not about the end user of the project but about where it's at what it does whether it helps the community and does the community need something else and so um I I kind I agree with Frank from the standpoint that I I think that um we need to to go back and get some Buy in I think you know having Bob talk to a larger group of people as to what actually is going to happen there and what they're committed to doing and having people have an opportunity to ask questions about it I think is a I think it's a really good thing and one of the big complaints we get is people don't you know is that boards don't listen they just go do their thing and um and they don't get the input of the public and so I think that you know we can afford to you know to give a little time to get the word out there and find out that we're making the right choice and going down the right path um and then the other thing that I would would be concerned about is that and and at a point we have this money coming in if we don't spend it we got to pay it back it's it's not coming out of our pocket locally it's coming from someplace else um which is still our money but I understand that but we don't want to give it to everybody else in the state we'd rather keep it ourselves so I think it's important for the community to understand why more why we're doing this and what we're doing as well and what the financial implication of not doing it would be so anyway that's my comment I have a question on that question to well to carry that conversation so I guess I'm confused because I I appreciate your point and Frank's but I'm I'm hearing from panel and others that this has been vetted publicly it's been through a process this isn't like a new item that we're just discussing tonight I mean what how much vetting do we what's what's adequate vetting 6 months a year I mean everybody has had an opportunity to put forth a competitive project that's the way this works I mean this is a viable project that's been put forth what what am I missing something I mean what what is enough fetting if I could comment on that a bit I think that what is needed is a formal explanation of what happened with this project because I mean I myself was a bit um concerned when I heard that it was just going to be a vocational training school um originally the idea was to have a business incubator there was to have retail there um and then also have vocational training and then also have training in other uh other fields uh cyber security was something that was brought up uh digital uh marketing and other things like that was brought up having training in other fields that people would be able to take advantage of so I think that the community Comm was for the idea originally that was being talked about there and then because of other partners that left the program or left the left the initiative uh it ended up just being a vocational training school so I think maybe just a formal explanation to the community about what happened and how we got here might go a long way um because a lot of people aren't aware of that of that whole ordeal um I think we're just calling only at vocational training school because of the use but when we actually we have an agreement with um with project lift which calls out incubator and other types of use other type of training programs that would be offered so I think that's something we could expand on in the agreement as far as what kind of training programs we want to see there right and when you know when you mentioned entrepreneurship and you said there's it could be a it could be a formal program I mean that's I'm comfortable with that uh moving forward with this as long as there's some aspect there y that is the agreement yes okay there anything else no other discussion want to take a roll call please board member MC Crystal no board member Hawkins yes Vice chair breckbill no board member Moser yes board member Noble yes chair C Penney yes passes five2 I'm sorry 42 okay text Amendment to the Land Development code section non-medical marijuana here we go you want to read it Lee before you start of ordinance number 2531 d224 an ordinance of the city Commission of the city of Stewart Florida amending and restating the city City's Land Development codee more specifically amending Section 2.6.2 3 entitled reserved and inserting supplemental use standards for non-medical marijuana dispensaries amending the land use table in section 2.2.2 to include non-medical marijuana dispensary as an allowable use under certain conditions amending section 3.1.3 to establish parking requirements for non-medical marijuana dispensaries within the urban code districts uh amending Section 6.1.1 3 to add off street parking requirements for non-medical marijuana dispensaries amending chapter 12 definitions for conforming terms amending Chapter 30 of the code of ordinances to prohibit smoking in public parks and recreational areas providing for severability providing for conflicting Provisions providing for codification providing an effective date and for other purposes uh good evening uh Mr chair board members uh Ben Hogarth Community Services Department for the record um want to bring this issue before the board um really as a courtesy from staff I know it's a little bit of a unusual um ordinance to bring before the crb uh this is something that came up uh quite a few months ago the uh City commission at the time was discussing uh the possibility for Amendment Three which is about B initiative this year um for the public if for anyone that does isn't aware um recreational marijuana also known as personal use marijuana is on the ballot this year uh during the uh general election in November if the ballot passes um the state legislature is going to be having to look at um regulation of marijuana not just at a medical level but also um recreationally the city commission at the time um had determined that it would be in the best interest of the city to look at uh zoning requirements for um where both existing uh medical marijuana dispensaries were were located in the city but also um any future uses uh including from those establishments but also other future businesses that could be set up um so as a result staff kind of was looking um more or less at mostly zoning code um but also updating our code of ordinances uh on where smoking is prohibited in our Parks so the Amendment um would address really both the Land Development code and the code of ordinances for the crb's purposes what we really wanted to do is um get into and educate where the commission has D um has directed staff to uh basically make the zoning allowable uses in the city and I'm going to actually pull this up um this map up which is hold on a second do this right Chris yeah over here okay so it's it's difficult to see on this map and we're making an improved map for when we get to uh the second hearing on the October 14th meeting uh what we're looking at here is essentially going to be I'm going to look down here a exclusion Zone and it's it's going to be listed um named a little bit differently in the in the final draft the exclusion Zone would be somewhere no matter where in in the future zoning changes or how it changes we wanted an exclusion Zone that could survive potentially um the commission at the time had directed us to look at the downtown area uh essentially to establish an exclusion zone so that uh medical dispensaries and medical sales couldn't occur in this area um the concern of course being as we've seen in in some towns out west and other states that first adopted marijuana um recreationally uh there would be several businesses kind of co-located in one place and it and it really changed the down town of some cities or or or communities in in other states so there was a concern there that that could happen if too many dispensaries were co-located in one place so for the most part what we see in the ordinance um is both an exclusion Zone um that we've drafted and is being amended for the October 14th meeting uh it's drafted to the extent that it extends east along Ocean Boulevard all the way to montere um that far east as per the director from the commission at the first meeting um so although we don't have that on this map that will be then I just wanted to make sure that the crb was aware uh of what this exclusion Zone would look like it obviously touches the community redevelopment area inclusion right sorry so what was that sir you said inclusion uh the oh sorry the exclusion my my bad um so this exclusion Zone will be included in in that discussion but the map will extend to the East and I just wanted to throw that out there was what we're looking this map doesn't even go as far east as um Palm Beach Road it will extend much further than that East to Monteray um the obvious you know difference here is that all of the frontages along the South here that touch US1 and or AB but US1 those are not included in included in the exclusion Zone um and the reason for that is the commission directed staff to try and make sure that any future uses were pushed out to US1 so one of the the one of the primary directives for staff was to was to try and uh make sure any zoning um that was affected was on US1 and uh so I could pull up um also some of the buffers that we looked at uh between 500 and when we took this to the LPA uh 2500 feet buffers the problems with uh the problem with 2500 foot buffer and I'm going to just show this right now uh just to show you why we're kind of going two different directions here we're we're both um this is a 2500 buffer if every institution whether it's a school or a church or something in between if every institution had a 2500 buffer essentially what we've done is um prohibited the activity in the entire city um and that was a concern by staff and so in our discussion with the LPA and our discussion with um the commission during the first hearing was um you know what are the other uh methods that we can use to regulate this um or I should say relegate this activity to US1 um as best as we can without outright prohibiting it and that and that's become kind of a challenge because when I show you the 500 foot uh buffer in comparison you'll see um really there's such a huge difference between the impact and that 500t buffer when you include this on top top of the exclusion Zone most of the exclusion Zone that we've already covered um sits where most of the institutions are all the way out to Monteray so it's it's like having double coverage when we do both the the purpose of the exclusion zone is to make sure if any zoning in the urban code especially changes in the future that exclusion Zone survives those changes um and and that was really Our concern as as code AS Parcels change as zoning changes how how can we kind of maintain um in perpetuity that that Legacy of protecting the downtown so that's the direction we received from the commission and and we really have two layers of protection there uh certainly any kind of recommendations or Thoughts by um by the board here would would help us as we go forward to the the second hearing for the city commission which will be a a lot more thorough hearing um about these details and it's not an easy issue to address staff is actually still in the process of a changing some of the um drafts we've already made um to better kind of align with the feedback we've already received uh we don't know what the exact buffer distances should be and and and it's difficult for us to provide a recommendation um even to the city commission and to staff at at 500 ft um we've covered a lot of area but there's there's really two things we're trying to balance one is protect the downtown which the exclusion Zone kind of does on its own and and two um set distance requirements that that the the community is comfortable with from from schools especially but also potentially churches or other uh Community institutions and it's diff it's a difficult balance because um you know between 500 and 2500 feet foot buffers um you potentially outright prohibit the activity and we're concerned about doing that as well um so before I go into anything else I I just like to ask if um I know this is kind of a confusing issue because these Maps but if there are any questions um about that part in particular any questions for staff seeing none keep on going um and really just not to get into um uh to everything all at once just to show you Parks um there it is so if we were in in law right now medical marijuana dispensaries um have a 500 foot buffer minimum um from schools and that's common with like alcohol um uh statutes as well there's a lot of school related buffers in law if we were just buffering from our parks at 2 200 ft this is how much area um would essentially be excluded already so I'm using this as an example um again our our biggest issue has been the distance requirement so you know between 5 00 and 2500 ft is there a happy medium in between there um we're going to try and show that at the commission hearing but certainly any feedback you can the exclusion Zone itself or these buffer distances what what really is is the community um how how does the community feel about those two um as far as the the language of the ordinance um I don't have the the latest drafts um here that staff has worked on but in in looking at the uh ordinance itself or any of the backup materials first I just want to know if the community board had any concerns or issues with uh either the LDC changes or the the smoking um change that we're doing in the regular code of ordinances I I have a question yes sir no not for you but for you so we taking a motion are we making a motion or anything on this even though it says roll call I believe it's just staff recommendation Lee is that it staff if I'm wrong staff recommendation Lee yeah I guess we're just trying to see your uh input on so it's really a discussion item there's a discussion but also I we want to whether you guys approve it or not do you want us to approve it well that's yeah that's what's uh in the agenda that's what I'm seeing that's why I'm asking the question so but we're as um what are we approving well as Ben mentioned we're it's still in progress of being changed um we did go go before the LPA on it and they they wanted 2500 ft and it would cover the entire city but we didn't have a visual map to show them at the time so they might so let me ask you a question as our [Music] attorney if we make this too restrictive are we are we open to court challenges uh obviously and we we still don't know exactly what the state's going to preempt so so it's on the ballot in November and then they have six months to write the leg the enabling legislation but we thought um you know it Ben and I looked at online some some um polling and it looks like it's going pass it's pass so we just wanted to get ahead of the game I'm not saying you should I'm just asking you know questions you want us to have some recommendations I guess guess we're looking for guidance uh like we said the LPA said 2500 feet um and and again we did not have visuals you guys taking 2500 ft from schools and churches is what what he has what you have up there now that's correct these would be U so the difficulty is that we had is that sometimes there are these maybe 9 to 9 to noon you know Elementary School you know level programs that are run out of churches and it's difficult for staff to kind of track and identify all of these when we even when we looked at just like the elementary middle schools that everybody's very familiar with almost the entirety of the city at a 2500 foot buffer would be excluded um which could potentially be problematic so Aaron do you have any questions or you have any comments otherwise we can be here for the rest of the night um no not really I mean I think just it makes sense to just treat it how you were saying how we treat alcohol and 500 feet from schools and other institutions seems reasonable and uh I don't have a problem with anything else I think the buffer zone is fine okay to um sorry to clarify also um and because it's sometimes unclear with when we say this the exclusion Zone and right now the 500t buffer both would survive at the same time so they would both be concurrent so if if anything fell within the exclusion Zone obviously that use is not permitted there um if it fell within a 500t buffer but was outside the exclusion Zone that would also not be permitted so I just wanted to be clear that both of those right now in the code as it's drafted is um exist Frank uh question how many existing Medical marijuana operations are3 are already are already inside the proposed exclusion Zone a good question uh sir that so we have six total that staff has identified in the city okay and inside the exclusion Zone um none really okay there are what I will say is this also um in the code drafted we have buffer distance requirements from dispensary to dispensary also and and there are three of those six that are within um what normally would be distance requirement um prohibitions that we're putting into this uh draft ordinance we have to just out of legal concerns I believe we're we've carved that out as a grant their grandfathered in in the in the new draft okay so here's where I stand there I am totally against any exclusion Zone any type of uh treatment making one part of the city different than the rest uh uh making it prohibitive in parts of our city doesn't fly with me um enforcing uh marijuana use in public places we don't have enough cops to uh take care of traffic enforcement all right so how how effective or how ambitious are we going to be in busting the guy smoking some weed in the park especially in today's world where one could argue that those who smoke it are in better control of it than those who accidentally eat too much of it so I need we need to come back on that I think what I really have to do is is come up with a uh maybe a middle of the road on the uh uh requirements around churches and schools uh I'm surprised that none of those medical marijuana places aren't already in the exclusion Zone um and so am I am I seeing this right the exclusion zone is basically all the downtown area like Oola and all the shops downtown and stuff right so yes uh unfortunately I can't show the it's what we wanted to do is be able to show each parcel on a map and now that the the exclusion Zone has extended even further east than what you're seeing on screen now um it would be impossible to both show how far east it goes and show the parcelization at the commission hearing we're going to be doing kind of both so that everybody can seees how far it goes down but this exclusion Zone according to the last drafts go all the way down to Monteray so it's pretty far east where we're sitting right here right now and all the downtown shops and uh Memorial Park and East Ocean Boulevard area are in the exclusion Zone yes or no yes sir okay gotcha um I would argue that I think the the original Panic was seeing what has happened in other cities like Denver was first seeing how for some reason all your head shops ended up being in in just one part of the city I can see not wanting that to happen in any part of our city there again brings it back to I'm against any type of exclusion Zone but I can see some ordinances that uh make sure that there is ample space in between those operations and come up with a happy medium on this on the on the on the square footage away from churches and schools and I'm thinking as far as enforc ing the use in public that's going to be I can tell you right now that's going to be a wink and a nod anyways so I guess that's where I stand thank you and and we appreciate the feedback the one clarification I would make um for for the public record as far as what this uh this draft Amendment does as far as uh regulating smoking uh we are preempted from regulating any kind of smoking Beyond uh what what occurs within our public Parks we've taken an interpretation um that the boardwalk for example on the Riverwalk downtown is part and contiguous of our park so we've included that also whether that would Prevail in court or not Lee and I couldn't tell you probably get we've we've discussed but the the the point is is that you know we've taken the position that we know state law doesn't preempt that in fact they allow us specifically to um regulate smoking only there but as far as public streets and sidewalk walks um which you know would be very difficult to enforce that is not something we are allowed to enforce we are preempted on that side so I just wanted to clarify that H okay my that was GNA be my question so the exclusion zone is for sales not for smoking exactly the everything that we talked about for distance requirements and uh use and Zoning is exclusively for retail sale of marijuana okay and the um prohibiting in the Parks recre and within like proximity to City buildings is that within them and there's no setback on those so the weight there are two distance requirements we drafted um distance requirements that have a linear distance from entrance to entrance when you go from business to b or dispensary to dispensary um but it's as the crow flies from um the parcel when we talk about uh the 500 or 2500 foot buffer distances okay um I guess I'm on the opposite end of the spectrum as Frank I'm just thinking about like you know walking my kids through downtown and the sidewalks on Oola are five and six feet wide and um it's not a smell I enjoy um and I don't want my kids smelling it but you're saying in terms of public sidewalks there's nothing that can be done well at the local level we preempted I I would be surprised if the state didn't in its adoption or they they'll have to in 6 months as Lee was basically stating once the once the amendment is passed in 6 months it actually becomes active so it's not lawful even until 6 months afterwards the state legislature will convene its um session in March so I'm sure during their conforming Bill language that they're going to include you know concepts for for that okay yeah all right thank you you're welcome thank you Andy so the idea of an exclusion zone is an trying to address an issue of compromise correct I mean the idea of not being near schools and churches you know that's that's the idea of an exclusion Zone correct so the the exclusion Zone came up as a as a concept because our Our concern is that day one we wanted to make sure we identified where along US1 because that was really the direction of the commission but where along us one what zoning uh future land uses would that make the most sense so obviously the business district industrial cpud ipd and for the crb's purposes we also included Urban Highway because north of the bridge is where those Urban Highway along um US1 is uh again the direction was to avoid the downtown district um the historic downtown in particular that was really where it was hyperfocused to to buffer it the problem is is that if for example I'm not saying this is going to happen but if for example the entire Urban code just disappeared and suddenly everything reverts to like downtown I mean reverts to business one or business two but in the code that we adopted here sud it it says the urban code um is where it's allowable uh but the exclusion Zone goes away in zoning changes but it's allowable in business if it's allowable on business suddenly downtown now it's allowable and that really defeats the intent of of what we were directed um to do so the point of the exclusion zone is to survive any kind of zoning change in the future yeah well I think medical marijuana uh regardless of what people think is is here it's probably not going away uh but it does create a moral dilemma for some and um so I just wanted some clarification on on the idea of an exclusion Zone and and I think it sounds to me like it's a compromise relevant to schools and churches that there be some buffer between those and and the sale of that product correct correct in the exclusion Zone I I should bring up these Maps they're a little bit better the exclusion Zone if you can see relative to where all these institutions are marked on the map and you can kind of visualize in your in I apologize that we don't have a good visual for that right now where that exclusion zone right now is and where it would be all the way to montere covers probably at least 2third of the institutions you see on this map just in itself yeah okay thank you Mark that that map is 2500 yeah sorry for clarification again this is the 2500 foot buffer map from institutions so I remember a long time ago and Tom you might have been on the commission at that point it was a long long um when we were looking at medical marijuana the commission took action prior to the amendment change so that they could get into a position for this very same reason and so the question came up why aren't there any you know they're surprised there's not any places in the the for medical marijuana in the dispensary area because the city Commission passed an ordinance that said that you had to be in the area that's defined for uh primarily prescription medications which is 600 feet I think or 600 from the hospital I think that worked really well I don't know why from a dispensary standpoint you know we're not going to continue with that it it was obviously it it had it stood challenge um and so I asked you know kind of rethink that and look at that to see if there's a reason there um the other thing is I think it is important to try to to locate it to a specific area of of town because right now it's still illegal federally and so therefore it's still a cash business largely even though they've loosened up on the banks so you know we've there's going to be a lot of cash walking around um and so probably be better if it was in the same area as the medical marijuana dispensaries which are probably going to be the primary ones that are going to open up the the leading one in the county is right next to my house um so I probably come High to most of the meetings after that but I'm just saying just from the smoke BL number but but anyway I'm just saying it's it's that's where the you know so I know as soon as it's not MediCal it's going to he's going to be a dispensary so uh I think that's an important issue to look at and then um I think that uh we have a liquor restriction downtown and so I think it's 30% of the square footage downtown is restricted to you're allowed to have alcohol other than beer and wine you're allowed to have alcohol in that area beyond that you can't the other businesses in that area can't so once that 30% of the 100% is allocated there's none available and I think we're going to need something like that down town because there are going to be places that open up where you know you can go in and smoke just like you can go in and drink and we have to have restrictions otherwise all of downtown will be like that we'll have shops like that so I think it's important that if we're going to allow this is dispensary if we're going to allow use we should have some restrictions on the use in downtown based on some sort of square footage calculation just like we have now for alcohol anyway that's mine Aon did you have something else no good well you know I've given us a lot of thought through the years and I'm going to vote for the amendment I haven't used pot in almost 60 years so I don't even like I don't like the way it smells you got like 45 you got you got 15 years on me so but I think we make too big a deal out of everything and what do we trying to restrict what's going to happen if it's you know like 200 ft before closer to a church is that mean that church is going to stop you know being a church is it is the parishioners going to go away same thing with schools I mean it's regulated you got to be no no one who has this license is going to be selling it to people who are under 21 because they want to keep their license this is not street drugs are trying to take it off the street so I'm almost like Frank in this regard I I just think we we want to do something if we if if we were going to do we have to do something because it's expected we do something but I would Mark you're right I would go and say what we did with medical marijuana use the same parameters use the same parameters as we do with liquor and not try to get a whole new setup because who's going to you know who's going to end up uh using it I mean at at some point we have to let adults be adults and I just don't think we should go crazy about regulating business and try to make it so hard that we end up in a pickle so we already know that the way we regulate liquor sales works why not just piggyback on that legislation and everything else goes away and if it I don't and I don't even remember what it is I think it's I think it's 00 ft for liquor and I think we just just leave it alone and just say if you could sell liquor you could sell pot you know in a store and just just let the market handle it Frank okay just real quick two things so my problem with an exclusion Zone and it is different than just the 2500 ft it's it is something totally different okay it says to other residen in this other residents in the city outside of the exclusion Zone it says to them well you know now you got a better chance of the evil weed stores coming near you and and I don't like that and I don't know if anyone saw the city commission meeting but it's was like 10:30 at night and I gave some comments which I prefaced with you're listening to a certifiably crazy man who's out past his bedtime and I simply said this the crb board spends 3/4 of his time doing something to make the downtown area artsy fartsy and the in place for people that love Arts to come and I can tell you this it makes no sense to make it absolutely impossible not to open up one place that sells weed in the heart of that downtown shopping district because the artsy fartsy people love their weed so it just makes no sense to me okay but the main thing I'm reason I'm against the the uh exclusive Zone where you can't have it period is again it's call it call it fair or unfair the again the moral the moral part of this is the people the parents you know the the grandparents that know what weed is and many still considered a great a gateway drug and something like this says we're going to push all possible weed stores legal weed stores closer to you and and the whole city isn't being treated fairly as a whole that's all I have so what you really have is six people here with six different perspectives I was I was going to say I I probably agree with Tom and Frank and Mark on this I mean just go with what we already have for the liquor issues and maybe an exclusion or not exclusion Zone but a a limit on the types of establishments that could have uh you know one of the smoke in rooms or something like that that they have in other places and and and the n and and the uh and the square footage in between those types of uh uh facilities will prevent again what everyone's afraid of seeing what happened in the other big cities where first I don't know why but it just happened to where they all did congregate in in one part of town so you can you can you can prevent that with again without the full restrictive area yeah so so just to clarify it in your characterization are are we saying we're in agreement generally of the exclusion Zone that's proposed no probably we're not I don't think I don't think we have a need for the exclusion Zone we just follow what we I think we should just follow what we what we do so let me just I would make a motion to that effect that we I would make a motion that we overlay the the marijuana dispensary system it's not dispensary I mean the the marijuana sales sales Recreation with the medical marijuana restrictions in terms of location and and sales and um that we uh in we limit it downtown in accordance with the same methodology we use for the liquor so so the saturation District like um yeah okay I I don't think I would be for that okay there's a the set for clarification and and Chris might be able to better answer the saturation disc District I think the 30% was correct there's only so I believe businesses have to kind of apply in it's like a first come for the square footage and for that percentage of use whatever we said yeah so that's that's basic Chris mccre for the record so the ex um saturation District only allows up to 30% of the total building area to be occupied by uh bars that are selling alcohol um and I believe at this point we are actually full with uh but we're not full forx yet well yeah I'm just talking about the saturation alcohol District um but yeah so once that that square footage is is taken up then no more businesses can apply for a business tax receipt within the city I I I don't think we should go there with with this I think we should just use the same logic we used with how we sell we allow liquor to be sold whatever that is it'll just become real simple for everybody I I I don't want to interrupt a motion but we're hearing such I mean this is good feedback for us for staff because it's it's been very difficult to to try to gauge it um we haven't had a lot of discussion yet um it sounds like from what I'm hearing at least uh the exclusion zone is not the most popular idea but on the other hand just it being kind of proliferated throughout the whole downtown is something that's not the most desirable either it it does sound like there's at least some consensus and and I'm trying to see if this is correct that the that the buffer distances is still an idea that is I won't say popular but an idea that um might help us better situate these locations and these uses rather than the exclusion zone is that I I would say use the same buffer zones that you use for liquor now and that way okay we've already established them and we don't have to remake the caral and and it's ille exactly Frank and it's we've already done it no one has said oh no we don't like the way you you've come back and and made that and because I wouldn't be surprised in a lot of places unless the enabling legislation forbids it you're going to see someone selling beer and pot in the same store yeah so for the record um what's really interesting about the way we I can't compare it to anything else that I've studied as far as other states and how they've adopted this the State of Florida when it first adopted uh medical marijuana in 2016 the the state in their conforming Bill sort of made the you remember the five nurseries they they made basically a I want to call it a monopoly but they chose the winners of each region and they allowed every 100,000 new people that sign up for medical marijuana card um up to four new medical marijuana treatment centers can be licensed and I think we're up to like 22 now in the state these businesses um my point about that is uh the ballot initiative that we're seeing um in November directly ties into that because the first businesses that are going to be allowed to sell recreational Mar marijuana day one are the medicinal marijuana businesses and then the state has the ability to license others after that if it wants um so we know of six that exist in the city right now and I believe five of the six or four of the six are on us one itself right now so again let's just go with what we know and we could be here all night and I don't want to be here all night well I do think I I agree I don't have a problem with modifying my motion or what I agree with with what you're saying Tom but I do think that we have to have some restrictions downtown otherwise downtown is going to become a bar in marijuana District that's what our concern has always been that's why we have the 30% of square footage well then we then we're going to have 60% of stores selling some sort of uh product that makes you wacky well we can always we can always come back to that at another time and then also you know if we're putting if we're putting limits between stores between places that can sell it already then you won't get well you might be able to do two in downtown that could do it you know so I think I think we'd be we' be all right and don't worry about it commission's not going to listen to a word we just said yeah probably so for the also for the for the record um I I put up on the map here uh the existing six dispensaries and their locations there's one north of the bridge um that's marked out uh there's the three right here that um very close to one another forget what shopping center that is and then two kind of in the southern uh yeah mon and you got one on yeah and and I believe one was called grow healthy um one might be a true leave um okay so do you have enough Direction you don't really need a motion do you um no we we appreciate the feedback though because that's great that's where we've been let's move on thank you all right discussion and deliberation on the business Improvement reimbursement grant program guidelines to the rest um you outside I think he's going uh can we just take a little break if we have two of our board members yeah e e e e e e e e e okay back on the record and discussion deliberation on business Improvement reimbursement grant program guidelines good afternoon crb board members Jordan pingston CRA program manager for the record as you aware the intent of the business Improvement grant program is to further the CRA plan objectives to eliminate blight by assisting property and business owners in the Redevelopment of existing buildings and site improvements improve property values by creating an aesthetically attract active Frontage that is inviting and improve visitor experience and stimulate private investment within the CRA to give you some brief history the property Improvement Grant um was launched in 2009 to encourage visible exterior improvements to commercial and residential properties within the CRA the grant program provided a matching Grant of up to $4,000 per property that Grant was eligible for improvement such as Windows Doors signage Landscaping Roofing architecture Landscaping parking lots decorative sh and other improvements the program had successful applications for projects including signs awnings new windows Landscaping architectural design roof repairs forch enclosures and driveways the program was amended in 2016 and 2017 and renamed into the business Improvement reimbursement program or burp the program provided a reimbursement Grant of up to $10,000 per property to match private funds the grant was available to commercial businesses for exterior improvements that enhance the property with the Improvement including windows and door Replacements decorative shutter signage Landscaping parking lots driveways and Street Scapes um and then other exterior facade improvements were considered on a case-by casee basis the program was amended again in 2018 to replace the eligible exterior improvements from exterior signage to replacement of non-conforming poll signs to conforming freestanding or monument signs to encourage and provide financial support with bringing exterior signage into compliance with the Land Development code at the direction of the board the program was significantly amended in in 2021 to encourage commercial property owners to upgrade Landscaping on private property and to bring it into compliance with the city's landscape code were feasible since many of the properties in the CRA were constructed prior to the adoption of the code also in 2021 the evaluation Matrix was amended to further encourage the property owners to provide landscape improvements as part of the overall site improvements and restrict funding for improvements such as replacement of windows and doors replacement of existing awnings exterior painting and lighting and decorative shutters over the years the business Improvement grant program has not only benefited the commercial businesses located within the CRA but in conjunction with other programs and projects our department offers it has helped the CRA meet our mission which is to plan for a sustainable economic future while protecting and enhancing the unique character of the city this program has provided local businesses within the CRA with some Financial relief for improvements such as curb stops resurfacing restriping mural preservation entry wave improvements pavers benches Monument signage awnings exterior paint impact Windows Gates fences bike racks metal roofs and Landscaping just to name a few it is important to note that the majority of the improvements were not contingent on meeting a landscape requirement prior to 2021 to date the city has funded 43 businesses and has invested 300,000 to property owners ERS under this program with a 40% return on investment this calculation does not account for the surrounding properties that ultimately would have appreciated property values as well due to neighboring improvements overall the business Improvement Grant has generated over 120,000 in Tiff for the CRA and has contributed to the 20% average increase in Tiff Revenue over the past 5 years this item was presented to the crb on June 4 2024 and the CRA on June 24 2024 the board discussed deliberate and deliberated regarding the burp guidelines and suggested removing the landscape requirements restrictions for awning replacement and broadening the overall scope of eligible improvements the board also recommended creating a separate landscape program that would focus on bringing commercial properties into compliance with the city's Land Development code where feasible and would be offered year round staff has developed a separate commercial property landscape Improvement program program that will address landscaping and irrigation which will be discussed in the next agenda item the program should be designed to support revitalization efforts to reduce Spight and improve the appearance of building facades that have an impact on the value of the property and marketability of surrounding areas staff has made amendments to the agreement that reflect the intent of the program's Mission which has been successful in past years for City businesses the CRA will continue to do Outreach to promote the program which includes Distributing life electronic newsletters to the city contact list Distributing Flyers to local businesses mailing postcards to local business owners and social media Outlets the grant provides funding for a comprehensive enhancement to buildings facade a facade is defined as the principal faces of a building that is on the public Street eligible projects will include replacement repair or addition of at least two of the following building facade materials or elevation enhancement for examples bricks stucco siding stairs ramps decorative features um exterior architectural amenities um those are excluding downtown outdoor dining program establishments exterior lighting or fixed structures that improve visibility and safety awnings and canopies new ore Replacements um decorative fences but no metal no metal chain link fences um parking lots driveways and streetscaping which would be um benches shade trees or bicycle racks um exterior cleaning and painting replacement of impact or non-impact energy efficient windows and doors sidewalks on private property replacement of wall air conditioning units on the building to energy efficient central air conditioning systems replacement of non-conforming pole signs to conforming freestanding Monument signs dumpster enclosures and architectural engineering or landscape architectural services um for design to be funded and there's a maximum of $500 for that if they um choose to implement that um staff does recommend that for extensive landscape improvements that the applicant will also utilize the commercial landscape Improvement program um and it is important to note that all enhancements must be located on private property and comply with the zoning and building codes and that any eligible expenses incurred prior to the execution of the burp agreement or work performed without um the correct permits will not be eligible for reimb M after an application is submitted staff will review it for completeness and score it using the evaluation criteria standard shown on the screen um Grant applications must score a minimum of 50 points to be considered for funding a score of 50 or more points does not guarantee funding and all funding is contingent on the remaining funding availability staff is hopeful that these revisions will ensure the success of the program and encourage applicants to apply some key topics St would like Direction on are the revised eligible improvements and the evaluation criteria standards after staff receiv receives feedback the revised program guidelines from crb and CRA the resolution to adopt the program will come back before the boards in November um and that concludes staff's presentation and we hope that you'll open the board for discussion okay you want to put back up the Matrix I guess that would be the easiest way oh one slide over now all we need to do is be able to read it yeah okay does anybody want to go I know more go I'll go I start off I'll start off then we'll get it we'll get the discussion going you prefer the light off um pardon me you prefer the light off so you can see it better or I don't think it matters I can talk in the dark um I I appreciate what this program is trying to do and I appreciate the changes that we made over a period of time I think they've been good changes but um it's still in my opinion has become a situation where people who really don't need the help are getting it and um because it's not enough money to really make a difference it's it's kind of throwaway stuff it's stuff that you add to your project because you're getting half of it funded by the city and even then we're having trouble finding people that will come forward and request it um I would you know these this program is very successful from the standpoint of bringing tax dollars back to us you know and and so I think it's an important program to have available to encourage people to go out and make these changes so that we can get some of those tax dollars I frankly would like to see it be larger and a loan that gets paid back um and I I would just like to see some sort of a program like that where it will support some bigger projects but um we get Revenue out of it comes back in the form of interest on the note and we get additional tax dollars um the other thing is that on any of these programs I think when a Project's presented there should be a uh with that should be what the expected increase in property values is going to be because if it's none then we shouldn't be doing it but if it's something that's going to increase you know the market value of the property the ability relase it uh you know whatever or the surrounding properties then I think it makes sense uh for us to to do that if it's it's actually going to put dollars in our pocket Mark we went down the case of the loan and we couldn't do it and uh and I don't really remember the technical reasons why maybe either panel or Lee could tell us why the city can't be loaning money and getting interest there was a real reason why we couldn't do it maybe you need more tell for these kind of discussions sure about the policy just based on the resources we just don't have the resources to manage a program have to loan out money and then uh that's outsourced that that there's people there's Banks spending money to Outsource outour it's I mean that's it's not significant dollar could do it in house and it's a very minimal um you know exp to the C do you have a reason why we we couldn't make the loans reason I don't know I I don't know I'd have to research get back to you maybe at the next video I mean I I remember specifically this came up maybe six seven eight years ago I wasn't here obviously yeah obviously and uh Mike mortell gave us a explanation why not just this board I think it was the commission um why it was not why you could not lend the money there was specific reasons why but again and I don't know how I mean unless we're going to not us but the commission's going to say well let me give you a million dollars to loan out I don't know what we we would accomplish doing it that way would doing it now well and I I will say 40% return on our investment right and I I would I would say too along this lines and and maybe this is not specifically this the same issue but you know we're supposedly encouraging mixed use properties in downtown walkable properties mixed use properties that's more well we're supposed to be but but along those lines um and this happened in this was happening in 2007 before the market collapsed you can't right now in today's market you can't borrow money to buy a mixed use property not from a bank or a financial because SBA won't fund residential and and res Fanny May and Freddy Mack won't fund business so you've got situation and that happened we had properties that were turning from mixed use to either Pure commercial so they could get funding um or in some cases residential but they couldn't get it on the residential because of the zoning that was there so try to get try to get a loan on a piece of property in in the Fraser Creek Edition for example um with his zoning that's there you won't get it because Benny May Freddy Mack won't loan on that you're going to be looking at SBA at best and that means that over 51% of your property has to be used for business so I think a loan program is something that we need to start looking at anyway and and I think it's something that we should will you come will yeah so this item is actually going to come in in a form of a resolution for adoption next month so we'll have a response ready for for a loan PR program yeah and what and and I think we also have to talk about how much we want this program to be I mean right now it's like maybe $100,000 $50,000 or 50,000 then we usually crank it up a bit no only one year we cranked it up a little bit by $8,000 it was like yeah $8,000 and some change to accommodate all the applications $50,000 even less if we're only $50,000 is this program even worth forget about our time our time is nothing but staff time to go through it all and to go find people to give them the money I don't know I don't know I don't know if it pays to continue at $50,000 I agree I mean I think that when we uh when we uh provide a match they're spending the money elsewhere in the business you know invest reinvesting into the business or they could be um doing additional interior uh improvements that they don't have to spend you know since we're matching for our exterior so I mean I can't give you each case like that how are they spending their money but that's how we have to view it that if they're not if we're providing a match we're assuming that they're actually investing into the business in different ways Andy no nothing um I I just want to say I like the changes I like that we pulled out um landscape and made it its own separate thing um not now but I think something we could think about in the future is do we want to face out funding or language um around the parking lots with resurfacing and asphalt um just as a city and consider you know uh perious surfaces porest asphalt uh papers things that sort of benefit um you know the entire city in terms of storm water again if we keep it at $50,000 we'll even be able to do less if we start to do parking lots yeah so well we are are paying to resurface them and so I'm just like maybe we don't want to pay to resurface them anymore is what I'm saying or or the recommendation could be that if they do pervious type of resurfacing then that would qualify versus just asol you know yeah that could be one of the but down the road I don't think it needs to happen right away yeah Frank no comments but except that's like the smartest thing the board M an next me ever said I like it for personal businesses to to encourage more perious you know surface and not encourage nonp perious surface I like it that's all uh no I agree with the changes and I like your comments I agree with those I think one of the other thoughts I've seen in in other municipalities around the country is forgivable loans so you structure it instead of it could be a loan but it has conditions that would allow for forgiv Ability so it's really still an incentive Grant but it's structured as a loan and if you meet the requirements or there's some appreciable benefit to the community then then it it actually goes away or it graduates downward to nothing that's I've I've had experience with that yeah so we say we want to leave the program at 50,000 we want to increase it or do we want to just get rid of the program I mean again there's a lot of work for staff and I don't and and I see the ma Matrix that we made 40% more and so forth and so on how did we determine that anybody can answer how do we determine that you know uh that that we got more Tiff out of it I mean well we looked at all the properties um when before they were funded so that's the basis value and then what the value is today so we we did we looked at the actual we also look at properties that didn't do anything and they what they went up right and surrounding area probably increased also I mean it's hard it's you know it's hard for me to tell you that whether they would increase or not without this Improvement you know I think it's hard to argue to get rid of something in favor of what just to get rid of it I mean I think I never liked this program personally so I would have no problem voting to get rid of it because I don't really believe we should be giving money to businesses I do believe we should be giving money to people to fix their homes but I I'm not a big believer in businesses and at $50,000 I don't think it makes a hell of a lot of difference one way or the other so I don't know do you have enough or do you want more uh well we would need to know um whether you support the program or not first of all and if you support the program do you agree with the criteria the guidelines I believe I think that I think you have good guidelines I think I agree you've honed in very good guidelines then we have this support to bring it back as a resolution so we're not killing the pro program yeah and as a separate note about I guess we're not going to kill the program because the commission is not going to kill the program so why why would we uh about loans I I think that's something that we should learn about sure yeah we'll look into get okay I'm sure Mr mortell could pontificate on that and to confirm did you want to establish that you wanted to get rid of the asphalt option I think we should leave it alone right now let's let's get the programing you know okay redone yeah I think it's something to just think about down the line okay okay next discussion of Del deliberation on commercial landscape Improvement reimbursement grant program [Music] guidelines all right good afternoon crb board members Jordan Pinkston C program manager for the record today's staff would like to discuss the proposed guidelines for the new commercial landscape Improvement reimbursement grant program the city of Stuart community redevelopment agency commercial landscape Improvement program or clip is an incentive program designed to encour encourage irrigation and visible exterior landscape improvements to commercial businesses in the CRA to meet the city's Land Development code requirements commercial businesses are essential to the fabric of downtown Stewart for the past 15 years the CRA has offered businesses Financial relief for improvements made through the burp program over the years program incent in initiative have shifted and the guidelines and evaluation Matrix were amended to encourage upgrades of landscaping and trees to promote shade walkability and bring business in businesses into compliance with the city's Land Development code staff and business owners have found it increasingly difficult to fund their facade and building improvements along with additional landscape requests for the burp program the crb and the CRA supported staff to implement a separate program focusing on Grant assistance for business owners that plan to do sign significant landscape improvements the commercial landscape Improvement grant program can be used in conjunction with a burp application or applied for independently the CRA recognizes that many properties within the community redevelopment area were construction were constructed before adoption of the city's current landscape code this has left the CRA with many commercial properties that provide little if any aesthetic appeal it is the intent of the CRA to rectify the situation by encouraging all eligible applicants to upgrade land landcaping along the perimeter of the commercial property that abuts to a public rideway and interior parking lot Landscaping to enhance the visible appearance of the property and provide shade along streets to improve walkability and promoting e economic Vitality within the CRA if there are site limitations the applicant may consider planting shade trees within the city's rideway adjacent to their property and this may include but not be limited to Asphalt removal plant materials exer scaping and native plants and shade trees um for this program irrigation is a requirement for reimbursement the CRA has allocated 25,000 of CRA Tiff funding for a for fiscal year 2025 to budget for this program the grant program provides a reimbursement of up to $5,000 of public funds per property to match private funds to pay for the design and completion of landscape improvements the commercial landscape Improvement program shall provide 50% matching Grant reimbursement for eligible landscape improvements up to the $5,000 which are consistent with and further the implementation of the city of Stewart Redevelopment plan in the city um Land Development code funds may be used for one or more of the following types of enhancements landscaping around buildings and lot perimeter for buffers parking lot islands and green space installation of irrigation systems Demolition and removal of asphalt concrete imperious surfaces to add landscape areas the following is not eligible for funding on its own but it may be funded as part of a more of a comprehensive landscape Improvement decorative walls fencing Planters hearts and Hardscape plazas similar to the burp the applicant shall assume responsibility for maintenance of the improvements funded with the grant for a minimum of three years failure to maintain this can negatively impact the future funding of projects for the subject property and the program will will not reimburse a grantee for work previously done or already underway prior to the CRA board's approval of the grant it is the intent of the CRA to fund applicants on a first come first serve basis staff will review the proposed improvements and conduct a site visit applicants even those that meet the elil eligibility criteria may not be approved if the project conflicts with the objectives and goals of the city's Land Development code if the applicant is applying for the burp as well um which is strongly encouraged that applicant must complete the application form for both programs but may submit them together with the required attachments as one package acceptance of the application to one program does not guarantee approval of both programs staff is excited to implement a new program that we believe will create a more visually appealing commercial property and promote economic vitality and bring commercial properties back into compliance with the Land Development code within the CRA um after staff receives Fe back the program guidelines from crb and CRA the resolution to adopt the program will come back before the board in November and with that staff would like to request um open for discussion okay we are open for discussion is there any discussion have uh one comment and one question one the first thing is I just want to say I'm really happy to see that the demo of impervious surfaces included I think that's great um question is is can the irrigation be um temporary like I know sometimes they do establishing irrigation to get the plants living for the first six months and then ideally if they're native they can survive on their own um we were getting from all the boards that they want a a permanent irrigation and that's the whole reason of creating a separate program okay any others I think this is the first year so we should go with it and then we can always tweak it as time goes on like we did with the burp so I think you've guys done a good job so let's see how it goes for me is is the dollar amount I mean is that $25,000 that's one project probably right well no because it's a $5,000 that'll fund five okay so you're just like burp so you're talking about 5,000 okay if they max out yeah all right I'm just curious so again one of these ones that you know it's it's too little either should be I think sometimes not at all or something more but I think it's a good idea it's the first year to get a look at it but I wouldn't support funding this on an ongoing basis at these levels if uh if it does turn out to to work out from that standpoint any just comment do we have anybody else want to say anything else about it if not do you have enough yes okay Mo to H hold on a second go ahead Frank under the uh the uh staying legal on the Sunshine Law Thing Mark uh is very fascinating and and it just was amazing to me that as much as the politics of getting rid of the evil car and making our all new cities and towns walkable and workable and no one's going to need those evil car cars and public transportation is going to take care of everybody you're telling me that mixed use development runs into a major road block from institutions that lend them the money MH yeah how come no one knows about I didn't I don't know I mean I'm not saying I should know about it but bu I appreciate you I appreciate you you're not if you're not real estate business you don't know different funding sources are for different things it's it's amazing to me mhm it is and it it's counterproductive to what we're trying to do right but it is what it is are there any other comments that have nothing to do with commercial landscape Improvement seeing none Andy you have anything no I'm good Jour we are we are