##VIDEO ID:rmYDlxIIPQk## we're gonna do the do the do the PCB first P okay of pnz I got so we're ready welcome it's 5:30 on October 17th 2024 we will now call the meeting of the Planning and Zoning Board for the village of taquesta to order Megan Meg can I have a roll call please yes uh Leslie Dasher here Teresa miio here Elizabeth shower Sher Ambrose here Jean Mel Downey here Marice sa Fury here Marco VZ here Jared Gaylord thank you okay if I can have approval of the agenda tonight's agenda is there any changes okay I'll make a motion to approve the agenda for tonight second all in favor approved and um we will approval of the previous meeting minutes for July 18th 2024 does everything look right okay if I can have a motion I'd like to make a motion to approve the minutes from July 18th 2024 okay I'll second it okay all in favor I okay uh minutes are previous minutes are approved okay we have one agenda item SPM 424 application from Tam West realy Inc for a minor site plan modification for new paint colors on the existing County Line Plaza in the C2 zoning District Miss wall oh no that's you yeah that's me are you the presenter yes I am okay ready yes I said best all right so good afternoon everyone this is going to be County Line Plaza we are coming back for cite plan modification 0424 which is going to be talking about the roof color and some new locations of the previously approved paint colors so we know our property County Line Plaza it's right here US1 Village Boulevard these are the current conditions we're all very familiar with them on the left hand side we have the previously approved colors on the right you'll see the new proposed roof color I do also have a board here you want to pass that around the colors are a little more accurate on the board than they are on the TV okay so what you're going to see here is the Northeast facing the faade with the new proposed roof color again North facing facade with the roof color the East faing so this is a color key um we've got the pois is the main body of the building that was kind of what was encouraged in our last meeting Solstice will be the secondary Thunderbolt is going to be the column bases and awnings icve the internal walkways and overhang the public storefront and linen ruffle is going to be all of the trim and enhancements and of course bottom right there is down for the proposed roof color so as I mentioned before there are some alterations in the color locations on the left hand side is what was approved with SPM 224 the solstice was really more of the main color and the Polaris was a backup your Polaris is here and the solstice is here with the new submission the Polaris takes like a larger roll so we' got polar front and the solstice in the back I have some better images as well so current conditions this is what was approved here we have pois here we have Solstice that was the approval and this is what they are now proposing with the increase in Polaris okay we got some more Vantage points this is with the new color locations and F roof sorry about the I did not know I could not figure out how to do this for you guys uh this is the best I came up with but like we talked about pretty good it's good that's a lot for your eyeballs but like we talked about uh with the color key you've got Polaris that's your main body of the building now Solstice is going to be up here uh linen ruffle is your trim Thunderbolt is the awnings and then all the bases and I there's a couple little plants down here icy Bay is going to be the internal walkway and downpour is the RO another one I'm trying to figure out the linen ruffle are we seeing a clear uh color of linen is it's not really pink is it no it's not pink uh if the color board come back it's like it's a clean color yeah one of the pictures look deceiving yeah this is very different than what we're seeing watch the mic oh whoa who so all of these colors except for the downpour were the ones that you looked at in the last approval so none of that has changed just some of the color locations and of course adding the roof color okay so this is an elevation we hadn't seen previously it is the Jersey diner again I wanted to call out like this color right here is the Polaris and the upper one is the icy Bay it looks a lot different I think here than what you would see on the board Monument signs this is something that we didn't get to look at before but this is what they are proposing you've got your One vertical Monument sign here in the middle of the property Polaris and L ruffle and then the lower entryway signs you've got 1 two three coming down us one Laris Lin ruffle and there's Thunderbolt called out Thunderbolt called out as well but it's for like the mechanics the trim the the little things that you're really not going to see when you're stand there or in this photo uh thank you for your time and attention thank you thank you okay are there any board questions for Meg are we having another presentation just uh is it that's it isn't it so the applicant is here to to speak I she's not going to give a presentation though but she's here to answer any questions did you want to come up and give us your name and address for the record please yes harb and I'm at 564 US1 northa okay thank you any questions for Miss Cara I have a question about the roof okay the roof color is going to change the roof itself is going to remain yes we actually have the same Barrel tiles that you have on this building um they obviously look very different with the orange tone that's on there now just like I was noticing on your building the subtle color that's here makes it look totally different um but the plan was that we would have I think the approval was that we would have six months to see how that looked once the painting was finished and then if everyone decided that it didn't work then we would move forward with painting the roof so that's why we went ahead and just proposed the color so we would have that already done and in place if we did need to do it we wouldn't have to go back through the whole process all right okay this is just a comment I'm going to make only because I live in county line Plaza I do business everywhere in there I do too my I'm one of those spend your money locally so the roof when it's painted will be repaired for those entities that have leaks in the roof well we have just recently sealed one whole section we just finished oh thank you yes that's just was finished probably three weeks ago okay just in time um we will be moving forward some of those roofs are still under warranty so we can't actually touch them or do any modifications um we still have to work within those warranties but as those Fade Away um yes the roof issues there are constant that's it's constant in every shopping you're not alone it's constant yeah we're getting that under control and I actually hired a new roofer when I came on and it's we're actually ahead of the game um so yeah we're making progress with that it's terrible when you look up and see the St ceiling oh and that's and that's what I've told them as soon as that was re uh sealed change the ceiling tiles as soon as we know the leak is fixed change the ceiling tiles and another comment that has nothing to do with your colors I love them they're beautiful um but who is responsible for power washing the sidewalks when all the restaurants have tables outside we have that's an issue too um because we typically do them several times a year periodically we've been putting it off hoping excuse me hoping that when the painting started all the pressure washing would happen um so we did not do them last month like we normally would um but Buco um the ice cream shop any place that serves food and especially alcohol and has tables that's where it's the worst I happen to feel like you know that's a little bit of a gray area I feel like sometimes those tenants need to be responsible for that additional cleaning um because it's not fair to my one person that I have to constantly be out there cleaning up every other week when kids have spilled ice cream and I've removed some of the benches at the plaza because it was a place for not only not only people to sit and have fun that's fine um it was attracting some of the homeless Community where they were eating and drinking and what have you oh excuse me so we're trying to work with that um because that's one of my pet peeves and I'm glad you're addressing that because you know if you're going to do all this beautiful stuff and then exactly you got once it's all cleaned and done um the individual tenants that need above and beyond will be responsible for paying for that we'll still help them do it um but if they don't do it we will charge it back to them and we're going to do it for them otherwise we'll stay on a routine basis and my person also if it's touchup if it's just a oneoff situation I take a picture of it send it to him we have a plan for how he cleans spot cleans it um so and that and keeping the windows clean all right I'm a little OCD when it comes to those things so I'm on it you would think that would be in their leases yeah well sidewalk situation is not side no it's really Beyond the Doors and in but if you think about normal wear and tear you know we don't ask people in publ to come out and clean the sidewalks extra because they have a lot of traffic that just comes with business um but if it's a restaurant or a bar where people sit and they spill things and yeah yeah that's a little different be in the lease yeah so it's uh we have the um we have the ability to work that in even though it's not in writing it there's a clause that says basically the property your property and your unit has to stay to certain standard so we can kind of determine what that standard is and unfortunately that's not necessarily been done as much in the past so now it's a little bit of a curve for everyone but I think overall people are really happy about it because even though they may not like it at the moment they see that it's best overall for everybody thank you any more questions I have a few comments um so I wanted to say I appreciate very much that you tried to incorporate the comments um of the LPA from the last meeting into this revision um and to the extent that the Polaris color reads more blue than gray when it's on the building I I do think that this is an improvement um I also think that having more icy Bay on the building under in the walkways is also an improvement um and it's better than the solstice because I do think it reads more blue than gray uh or more blue gray and I like the blue um part um but after considering these changes I still think that the all gray color scheme doesn't fit well into the village in this location because it's not harmonious with the surrounding buildings um with especially with a coastal color scheme going in next door with the reserve um and I I'll leave it that that because I did explain at the last the same my thoughts of the last meeting um are still still hold true I think um also I wanted to address the Dunkin Donuts briefly because it was mentioned in our backup um I also don't think that the gray scheme here is harmonious with that building which creates a quandry for this proposed color scheme because in my view the Dunkin Donut shops colors shouldn't have been approved because they violate the prohibition against symbolic colors particularly the orange um and the conflict with this application is the reason why I think that check on the symbolic colors is so important because I don't think anything goes very well with that orange color um so I don't think it's fair to hold the rest of the building Hostage to the orange color here um it's going to visually it visually dominates now and I think it that orange is going to be even more obvious when the rest of the plaza is painted in this gray scheme um so I just want to make that note for the Future Part in particular um that we need to make sure that the symbolic color piece doesn't doesn't hold back other good improvements I think it would be hard for any any color game to coordinate well with that um and that's true of a lot of the other ones and I think that's why that's in the code um that's all I had to have to say Okay Sher okay yes uh any public comments okay uh closing board comments J you can I just make one one staff comment so this if you approve this tonight you'll essentially be modifying the original approval from last time so remember that that that they were to come back and modify the roof color and create a master sign program within 6 months so they've satisfied the roof color but not the master sign program so if someone's making a motion tonight and wants to continue that I would recommend making that part of your condition that they still have to come back within six months of completion of painting with a master sign program okay so the thing yeah the other thing I just remembered that when I was looking at the scheme online um the entrance when you enter and it says County Line Plaza is that in here m oh sorry there you go there it is okay I have one question about the master sign does that include all of the individual store I know we discussed that last time and you were plan we've already kind of let tenants know that that's coming because that will be responsibility for each particular unit okay um we just are trying to get started with this project before we get full blo season before we started understood okay great I look forward to seeing that okay and if we're done I guess we're ready to to proceed can I ask a question of you guys yes we approved color Andor roof change where the purle dragon Dojo is I'm trying to remember the colors do you guys remember that oh where the what was the purple dragon the dojo and the um EV and all that and I'm trying to remember didn't that have gr in it as well it it wasn't the similar it was it was a roof Improvement right yeah they're painting everything painting yeah painting I think it's more like a it's a different tone of gray I can probably a very broad ter I guess I feel like a lot of to to Marie's point though I feel like a lot of what we've approved recently is going in a more gray Direction so like the the change on to Questa Drive was going to a gray and cream scheme and then there are some other so I guess I was thinking about it harmoniously more in that sense rather than just the Reserve I guess the ones I'm I'm not so much objecting to gray as an accent color as the like whole understand building and like I said last time I think part of the problem is the architecture here makes it very hard to break up and the building so that you don't have a solid Mass um and I am to totally sympathetic to the quand the problem that that presents um but that's the that's if we had facade changes and we could make the individual storefronts look more like individual storefronts that's what I would like to see going forward so I do want to put that on the record for there's Dee development or there's nowhere to do it I I understand that this is just paint this time and my my only comment is overall I like the plan and the nice thing about the gray is down the road there's a lot of colors that go with gray you know if you wanted to add and if you look on a whole long scheme of Grays this has a lot of blue and green that's very this is very hard to tell about looking at this that is more accurate but it really does have more of a coastal flare to it than it does a gray taupy well it's funny Marie said she sees blue and I'm seeing green it's both I see blue green that's what it is there you go and it is Coastal and I think maybe we'll see more of that when it's actually done yeah I mean it's hard to tell from the square y but I think it's going to show up okay if um board comments staff comments uh we can proceed with the recommendation or no this is a final this this will be a final vote final and and if we want to include the um signage sorry okay can I get a motion I forgot how to include the signage you would just say that within six months of completion of painting the property owner must apply for site plan modification to create an updated Master sign program for the entire Plaza you just said you you so I would make a motion to approve this as presented with with what I just said just said with with whatever Jay just said so approved with previous condition yeah okay okay do I have a second I'll second okay okay um so the motion on the floor is to rec to approve SPM 4-24 uh with the um with the expectation of the signage plan coming forward in six months after painting is done uh all all uh all in favor I I I all opposed I'm sorry no okay SPM is approved thank you so Qui okay and any more comments we uh we get a motion to adjourn I'll make second okay all in favor I I all opposed okay okay and we can move on next to the local planning agency we're ready okay okay it is 559 on October 17th 2024 and we're now calling the meeting of the local planning Agency for the village of dequest order and Meg can will you do roll call please yes chair Leslie Dasher here Vice chair Teresa magio here member Elizabeth shower Sher Ambrose here Jee mled Downey here marcea Fury here Marco Valdez here Jared Gaylord okay and if I can have approval of the tonight's agenda motion to approve second all in favor favor I I uh the agenda is approved and the approval of the previous meeting minutes for July 18th 2024 I make a motion to approve the minutes from July 18th 2024 second okay all in favor I I okay previous meeting minutes are approved okay and our first agenda item is ordinance 9-24 flood plane management and Mr Cameron and I'll I'll read the ordinance in since D Dylan's um in New York City right now so good for him okay an ordinance of the Village Council of the village of test of Florida amending the taquesta code of ordinances at chapter 78 zoning article X11 flood damage prevention to update the effective date of the current applicable nfip flood insurance study and flood insurance rate maps and by revising certain definition and correcting occasional scriveners errors and non-substantive internal inconsistencies providing that each and every other section and subsection of chapter 78 zoning article XI flood damage prevention shall remain in full force and effect as previously adopted providing a conflicts cause a severability clause and authority to codify providing an effective date and for other purposes and Mr Cameron if you'll state your name and address for the record please uh it's Wayne Cameron uh 345 us to drive okay um flood plane management uh manager and building official uh good evening everyone thanks for having me here um this is more regardless ordinances as you already determined it's more of a housekeeping monitor than anything else a little bit of background uh from 2011 uh the Florida Department of Emergency Management has been working with the communities um within the nfip to help transition ordinances make them in compliance and making sure that they're uniformity with the code as the code changes of taking place what you're going to look at us tonight is the ordinance which makes a change because of the new flood maps that are coming out with an effective date of December 20th 2024 back next one um this is the letter of final determination from Fimo um FEMA periodically uh through their studies revise uh the flood maps based upon uh various factors conditions climate change um hurricanes floods so on um and in this final determination as part of the continued our continued eligibility in nfip program we are required to adopt or show evidence that we we've adopted a flood Lane management regulations as part of our ordinances so we have our current ordinance which is um the backup documents in front of you and you see in that the highlighted changes that were made and lastly um just letting everyone know that the uh flood map information is available on The Village's website and this is how it's located um under the building department Flood information that's the link to it and it allows you to basically put your address in and you'll able to know what your flood map looks like your flood zone looks like and give you a quick example of that right now and that's available to all the residents I'm picking a rting address here because it will show very easily what their existing flood zone is and what the new map will show so I use this one to show the difference in uh elevation on the proposed map so this was currently a elevation five with a free board of one making it six so the new one's a foot higher at six with a free board of one making it seven and so an ff of s is the minimum flood elevation that that structure we built at so if you have any questions i' be more than happy to ask them okay board is there any questions from Mr Cameron I do have a question um so in the definition section 78832 in Market the definition of market value um the St stri struck through part on um at the beginning the change here seems to me to be substantive so I was wondering why that was why that is being included um so the market value as it's defined in that in the striketh language is sort of is what I understand is the actual te techbook definition of market value um and I'm concerned that we might need another term if we're defining it as the cash value determined by an appraiser um something like apprais value and so the reason for my comment is that in general I don't think it's a good idea to have um to define a term that has a common meaning as something other than that accepted meaning um and that first sentence it seems to me is an objective reference that we might want to keep so it would in other words that the Willing buyer willing seller definition is what I would expect the appraisers to be using and I'm sure that they have guidelines that require them to do it but I like having it in code too so that just to prevent any so the changes that were made was done you can go back back to the the slides but basically let go back I one where in it's from the determination letter let's go to the determination letter so the changes that were made was done from uh the based on the recommendations that were made from the Florida Department of Emergen management okay they looked at the document and they compared that from what FEMA defines from their substantial damage substantial Improvement and that's where they're asking that the continuity is the same so it's we're not the ones that's making the changes it's their recommendation that these changes be made okay do they do you know why they recommend not having a definition of market value that conforms to like the general I I don't know what the answer would be i' have to to contact UM as I said they've they've decided that it's it stems from what femus directs us to be in terms of how they defin substantial damage substantial Improvement and what they determine the market value and and and the uh those those definitions and what they basically said was that we try to keep them consistent throughout right so it's the same if you look in the female handbook the definition should be the same that we're looking at here okay and so FEMA doesn't defines it as what the qualified appraiser independent appraiser says is market value or the cash value well as you know it that's all subjective the so you get one oper has one number another another number and then they'll that's why they'll give comps and they'll have four or five comps of what those values are and to take an average and determ what that's market value would look like right no I understand how it would how it's determined the concern I have is that if we take out that I it seems to me that so looking at this if if it were to we someone were to be asking what is market value because I assume in this case they end they didn't like what the independent appraiser came up with if we've removed the objective reference of willing buyer willing seller not under compulsion and with reasonably full knowledge right then there it is whatever the independent appraiser says in that so they and I'm not sure if that works against in this in this in this in the context of this ordinance and the other ordinances if that might pose a problem for a resident in particular is what my concern is here I don't know what that answer is okay um because I in a judge who was looking at it if you had the standard definition in it and you take it out is going to assume that you took it out and so that definition doesn't necessarily apply I would think and that's why the situation where I wouldn't want people to be in where they couldn't argue the standard definition of market value if they had a problem and maybe it doesn't happen come up very often but there that's the concern I have there's a memo online on floridad disaster.org that outlines the Florida guidance for amending the definition of market value I haven't had time to read I just founded Googling it so there might be something in there that speaks to it it seems like there's a pretty substantive reason for the suggestion being made but it does say actual cash value so that would be the price at which property changes hands right so in that case it would seem to me seems easier to leave it in because it's just a that's cash value is already in there it seems like their issue is relating to how damages impact an appraised value so that may be the basis for the change I don't again just found I haven't had a chance to read it that wasn't my question I have a question I don't know if this ISC can we wait till public comments um the other reason why this struck me was that in section 78 787 um it looks like if we go to this definition it could potentially make that awkward to apply because in subsection one the building official and the flood plane administrator have to estimate the market value and this is a quote or require the applicant to obtain an appraisal of the market value and that latter requirement could end up being circular if we've defined market value as the value that is determined by the appraiser and I realize that I'm that is that the appraiser should be using the standard definition of market value my concern is just in the situation where there's a potential problem or some where someone is not happy with the market value but it does say and the other it's not well so but it also says the tax appraiser the assessed tax but that's one of the options you have I'm not sure it's an option it's an one of the two and where so you can use that from the I mean okay I yes it is one of the possibilities but I think that's the option for the building official or the flood plane administrator not the resident who's been affected I think it's just a definition not not judgment it's just a definition well but the market value affects what you're right the the the definition of market value and what that that amount is would have an effect on how certain other parts of this ordinance work right yeah Wayne can you how does that affect the actual application of the ordinance are you aware the ordinance itself you mean changing the definition you saying no the market value how does it how does it actually how is it relevant to the actual code itself so the market value it's it's related to substantial damage right so to determine substantial damage it's 50% or greater of the market value of destru so that's all the formulas are all tied together um that's why you're right you're you're you're stressing how are you defining it right um again this came from them as as that that we needed to change okay the definition to be in conformance with what femur um has if necessary and we have to come back after after well we kind of run into a time constraint because the map being adopted if we don't adopt this tonight then we're not going to be in compliance because I have to go to council um in November for a reading yes um if we have to come back with a definition and get clarification on this I'm not I don't have the information so I have to check with Florida Department of Emergency Management if it's okay to make the change on this and I'll make that change before it becomes the ordinance so I do have that much time to resarch this particular component so if that's what the board's wishes are I can look into that and make sure so you're if I understand you're you're you correctly you don't want to make a change to the definition you're want to remain the way it is I would like to leave in the standard definition of market value the price at which property changes hands between seller with with the reasonable reasonably well informed and not under I can see if we can add that I will talk to Legal I mean I I or what I really would like to know is the rationale for FEMA's recommendation the rationale is really they want to keep things consistent with their their definitions in their handbook and everything else do they Define cash value then in their they have definitions of everything they've got a book of definitions and I guess my other question is if it's a FEMA handbook is it in Federal statute to or is it subject to change it should be in statute all the stuff it should be in statute so I just don't have it I'm not prepared I don't I I didn't research it but it struck me when and then and then they also have you if you can't find it then you always use work just as as as as your definition yeah that's actually that was my concern is that if we have the if we're removing the standard definition that then if someone's in a bind and wants to apply the standard definition so so what happens here from the flood from a flood in the reality standpoint that we're talking about here if the evaluation is made as you so right indicated by the flood plane manager which is which is me so I'll make a determination based upon what is the market value and how I determine a market value and what that substantial damage is and whether this structure is substantially needs needs needs to be brought to the new elevation as determined by the ordinance in the flood plane uh management section of the code so what I am saying is that I can always look at because code does give me the latitude how am I going to determine that this is one tool but there's other definitions throughout the code the Florida Billy code has a definition as well okay okay um however I will take the consideration that you're referring to here and make that you know I'll check with the legal department regarding the definition if you're comfortable with this I would be comfortable I understand and then before it gets to an ordinance I'll I'll I'll raise that to council um as a concern that that the LPA has yeah regarding this particular definition I don't have that concern no I don't either um I don't have okay if we're ready move on want to public comments um Jared I only oh could you come to the podium and give your name and address for the record please Meg oh sure Jared Gord for the record 20 moral Oak Circle I just was asking really a question if the market value related to like the 50% rule so if you damag if you are rebuilding at 50% and you hit that threshold and you're below flood elevation then you have to ra incture as it it references and I mean in looking at the prior definition of market value it I was wondering when when you first read it you're thinking maybe it's because they're excluding the value of buildings and structures because right right and and just looking at the land because you could have extremely valuable piece of land that a willing buyer seller would be willing to purchase right it's to exclude those things so um so yeah it wasn't that piece but because you see that sometimes we have a very valuable piece of land thank you Jared any other public comments okay public comments are closed and did you have any comments no comments we have so I just want to say I'm perfectly comfortable passing this I would like to ask the to get that clarification just to make sure that we're not making that we aren't removing something that we don't we could leave in if we needed to okay and that's something Wayne can do even if it's not part of the motion right yeah okay and so we're looking at here to recommend approval of this and possibly with just to please look further into the clarification of that of that uh definition of put market value okay okay can I have a if we're ready we have a motion motion to approve with Rec with the recommend to recommend approval to recommend for approval with um if you could all the building officials look into the market value okay if we could have an update at the council meeting that would be great okay I second that okay okay so the motion on the floor is for ordinance 924 flood plane management to recommend approval with please looking at further into the market value definition okay and uh all in favor I I all opposed okay the motion passes thank you thank you Mr Cameron okay and we will move on to ordinance 1124 parking regulations and I will be reading this one as well right so ordinance 1124 is an ordinance of the Village Council of the village of taquesta Florida amending the taquesta code of ordinances at chapter 78 zoning article X off Street off Street and on street parking and loading regulations by amending section 78691 minimum standards to update ada8 parking space requirements in conformance with the Florida building code section 7869 6 off Street loading spaces to provide loading space requirements for multif family residential uses and section 78705 required number of parking spaces to provide parking space requirements for multif family residential uses providing that each and every other section and subsection of chapter 78 zoning article X off Street and on street parking and loading regulations shall remain in full force and effect as previously adopted providing a conflicts Clause a severability clause and authority to codify providing an effective date and for other purposes and and I will be giving this presentation after I get a sip of water after that great all right um so this is ordinance 1124 um it's a parking code update next slide Meg so in in 2023 The Village Council retained The Firm McMahon to conduct a parking study relative to existing multif family residential uses in the village um the goal of the parking study was was just to determine whether our exist multif family parking code standards are adequate um as you know we've you know had a few different multif family projects come through in recent years and there's some expectations that you know that there could be some additional ones in the future so we just wanted to kind of Truth our code and make sure everything was um you working adequately um three existing residential developments were identified to conduct data on um we wanted to ensure that it was conducted during peak season so it was done in February of 2024 um next slide Meg U we also selected three different um developments and three different zoning districts um that are all you know slightly unique um Lighthouse cove's a large kind of a large one in our mix use District um blairhouse West is a little bit smaller it's you know right here on quest to drive and then seam Miss is on Beach Road um so they're all kind of unique in their own way um next slide Meg so our parking uh the parking accumulation analysis showed that the parking demand was 1.29 spaces .94 spaces and 1.2 spaces respectively with an average parking rate of 1.12 per dwelling unit um this is below our code requirement of two two spaces per multif family unit so it shows that it's it's generally working okay um but the analysis um and and discussion did did point out that we do not have a guest parking code which can lead to complications especially when there's um multif family that's in a parking structure um so Seaglass would be a good example of that um you know they've only got I think four parking spaces U four guest spaces and then everything is in the garage and um you know there's been a lot of myself included people have noticed that they're parking at Coral Cove Park including um service Vehicles so um you know the the council elected to direct staff to to require 0.25 guest parking spaces per dwelling unit in multif family pretty standard in line with what other municipalities do and there is also provision that those spaces um cannot be behind um uh some sort of gate or something they have to be open and accessible to the public so in the case of um even if you had a um multif family with a parking garage they could still be in the parking garage but it it couldn't be behind a gate next slide Meg um it was also pointed out that the village does not have any loading zone requirements in multif family projects um so again at Seaglass um a lot of the Ser service vehicles are parking in Coral Cove um we've I've heard I can't think of the name of the Departments over here on um Seabrook but I think they even have issues where you know when people are moving in the moving trucks blocking traffic or service Vehicles always blocking traffic um so it makes it difficult to to kind of keep the flow of parking moving and um sometimes there can be external impacts too where those people end up going and parking in the right away maybe on Beach Road or or somewhere else so um The Village Council directed staff to to require one loading zone per multif family development but there's also a provision in there where the council can require an additional loading loading zone if needed so in a unique situation like maybe a really large multif family project or a mix use project they may say you know we need two spaces here um so so that's how that's written there's also a provision where you know let's say it was a smaller project like let's say someone just happened to buy a half acre parcel and do a six unit townhouse project on it um that they can they can show that they wouldn't have demand for a loading zone so there's there's you know ability for Council to require more but the applicant can also um has a little bit of leeway to to to um request less also on the parking code standards we have a lot of different ways that that an applicant can reduce their parking um they can do a parking demand study you can do kind of shared parking agreements so even though we're requiring you know probably a little bit more than it appears is required there's always a path to for them to to to get less if if there's an actual case for that and our parking um Consultants kind of said that's the best way to do it right set the bar kind of high and if you want to give some some leeway make them prove to to the council and the village why there should be you know a reduction in parking okay uh next slide um also while I was updating our parking code I noticed um it was something I've had on my list of things to tweak in our code was um we just had a small thing where it wasn't compliant with the Ada standards so we just made a little bit of a tweet week there and then took some language that's in I think the Florida building code um just to clarify a few things with our Ada parking section um so I think um The Village attorney and I are you know feel that it's consistent with Ada and um we're comfortable with that and that's my presentation okay very good thank you okay are there any board questions for Jay I have some comments um so I agree with the study that the village is totally deficient in guest parking um and the example that you mentioned um is one of the ones one of the ones that comes to mind immediately um I think this is because of two Trends the gating of parking spaces in new buildings and I think that's likely to continue so I do want to see things outside of Gates or the guest guest parking spaces outside of gates and um two there's an increase in in service traffic generally um especially in the more expensive residential units those seem to have a lot more service traffic um deliveries and ser service providers um I think both of those Trends have resulted in increased traffic and sometimes overflow from building the buildings in question um and I do think it's really wrong for buildings to have guests in service related parking that are spilling into lots that are either for public parks or into their neighbors Lots um that's a totally unacceptable situation that needs to be remedied um so I support the addition of the 0.25 guest parking spots per unit um but I noticed that in the Green Acres code they have 1 half um spot per unit and I would be open to if my fellow board members would be interested in that to increasing um maybe not to point5 um but a little bit more to make sure that we don't find ourselves in a bind because I do did notice some of the other places I'm not as familiar with Green Acres parking situation um but I know some of the other municipalities have some parking issues um with their they when and they're closer to the proposed 0.25 guest parking so I'd be open to because I want to make sure that in the future as we have more people and more units that are being developed that we don't have are creating a another problem too and especially if we have the latitude that Jay just mentioned about the um they can show us that they don't really need it um and we have the latitude to to change it for them um on a case-by Case basis I think that would be justified um especially given the dramatic increase in deliveries and service vehicles that we've seen um I have one other point um on Section 78 696 I was I think we might want to lower the building square footage for the loading space for the at mixed use district from 10,000 square ft to something smaller um because the permitted uses in mixed use include a maximum 5,000 foot Comm commercial units and some of those Parcels aren't necessarily going to have a 10,000 foot commercial piece with their if the in under the 20% has to be commercial right yeah an 80% residential um so if they don't hit the 10,000 square feet they wouldn't have to have a loading dock is that correct J because my concern here is that if we have a building that has ground FL floor commercial but doesn't have 10,000 square fet there they don't have to have a loading space or the the Lo loading space for the commercial that's separate from the residential and I would think that we would want that because at least from my perspective as a potential tenant in a in a mixed use building I think that those should be separate the residential loading dock so movein would not be affected by the general deliveries to the retail space or the commercial space 696 is that what you said yeah in 696 yeah Okay but well it doesn't say mixed use it just says commercial industrial right but I think so if you're in a mixed use area you have to have commercial and residential and my concern is that if you have a small enough lot and you don't have 10,000 square fet of commercial space you don't need a dedicated loading dock for that um or loading area and I would I just thinking that for the the the lifestyle of our residents there that it would be better I think to have separate commercial separate residential rather than trying to for them both to be using the same space and that that's the one I think in all the other once you get above 10,000 square F feet you have to have it so that would take care of that for them but in the smaller buildings I mean it really it I realize it depends on what the commercial use is um whether you need it but then they could come and tell us we don't need it because it's going to be a lawyer's office so they're not gonna I mean but if it's going to be a small grocery store I would like them to have a load their own loading dock because you wouldn't want to have to share that with the residents I I actually I think that's a good you found I think a pretty good missing Gap in the code um but to your point yeah there may be some uses in the mixed use that wouldn't need that so if if the board was open to it I don't know that we could solve it on the Fly tonight but we could we could before it goes to the council could make it say something like cuz the other one let's see the other one section D gives says you Village Council M discretion require additional loading spaces in multif family we could probably say in a you know in a mixed use project um where appropriate the council may require an additional loading zone space for the commercial component of the mix use development right okay I yeah I I would think if if we could tie it to businesses that are likely to have regular deliveries so yeah I mean I there I'm sure there are a bunch that don't so those you can exempt it would I think it would be okay to exempt for that as long as that use doesn't change though I mean I commercial can be anything um so I would want to make sure that there's I just think having them separate is probably a good thing for I don't think if to your point I don't think though you'd want to exempt him because just because it's a lawyer's office today doesn't wouldn't be a grocery so I wouldn't write in an exemption I would I would go in I maybe it's a special exception where they have to can I don't know if we can do that I think you'd have to have it it's tied to the use and if the use changes then they need to have space at least so for so maybe what they do is leave open space that they had extra of that they could convert into a loading area if they needed it down the road that might be how I I hadn't we can we can play around with us for Council I I think it's a good suggestion but I also don't want it to be too prescriptive too because there are are could be some instances where someone's doing like a small townhouse project again back to that with like 10 10 units and they have like a little coffee shop in the bottom and you know we wouldn't want to require it in that case but if someone was doing 9,000 ft for a restaurant that's going to be getting weekly deliveries we would want that so um yeah well now since this doesn't even say mixed use can that be added to you can make you can make the recommendation for Council to consider that it's something that hadn't come up um and and it may never it may never come up but to Marie's point it it could come up I I think it's actually it's a good addition in my opinion yeah and then maybe you know instead of just any commercial it would be required to have one space unless unless they can show that they don't need it or something like that you know like you know she said 5,000 square ft but if it's a restaurant or a a grocery store or something like that then they would need that loading space and um but maybe we just work on the Lang I would yeah I would even just create a separate section called um e under D where it says the Village Council May at its discretion require additional loading spaces and in mixed use developments during the site almost almost mirroring what's n d and leaving it kind of open-ended um I think that's that's probably the best way to do it okay okay and other other board comments can I just make one addend in there is to with the intent to separate the loading areas from the of the residential and the commercial in your I'm okay with generally I think with your I just want to make sure that every in in the future that they understand why we're putting that in there to say to flag for them that yeah so it say it could even say provide an additional loading space in addition to loading spaces required for residential and a mix use development yeah well they can't park right in front of your door you know your my townhouse they can't park right in front of my town you know appropriately placed I was just envisioning like a movein situation and your moving truck wait having to wait for the and that conflict isn't what that I think we can avoid it yeah here it's good okay the other board comments okay uh we can open to public comment Marco name and address for the record please Marco Valdez 102 be with Trail uh I would caution against raising the guests uh spaces to 05 because you think about it that's two to one so that means for every residents every two residents set a guest space which is more asphalt which is you know I think that it's probably a little over constrained so I would caution you know is quarter maybe the right number I don't know but 50% is definitely too high is in my opin 025 The Proposal is 0.25 but I I think um Miss supery said5 has more so yeah but they also have three I think they also have like three spots for they're they're they I think they're the ones that also have three uh three spaces per unit as well so I think they also have more a lot more parking in general so I just caution the board that I'd be careful with the 50% yeah yeah thank you thank you any other public comments okay public comments are closed and do we have any further comments from the board yeah just to be clear I wasn't necessarily saying go all the way to 0 five but maybe a little more um I know some some of them it it's just my concern was we had West pal and they had a very small amount it looked like and I know they have there's not it's not necessarily always easy to find a parking space there for if you are in the guest parking space I'm okay with the 0.25 um but I'm looking down the road I have concerns that we might not have that that even that might not end up being enough if every developer M maxes out the buildings yes and they will okay and um no other board comments okay how would you like to handle making a motion here I can make the motion to um motion to approve um with amend amend sorry amend the the end to with the change that I guess can we delegate to Community Development to add a recommendation um that we include for the on Section 78 696 an additional well I'll leave it to your discretion to how to put it in but to include the ability to have separate loading docks even for the even if they don't hit the 10 the m in in the mixed use District even if their commercial space does not get to the 10,000 square foot yeah I think I think I'm pretty clear on what what do and there needs to be a mixed use space because we don't even have that on the list per se that's not spelled out okay and is there a second second okay okay the motion on the floor is for ordinance 1124 parking regulations is to recommend approval with further discussion regarding mixed use space and additional uh lowering the square footage required for loading space is that is that more or less what we discussed okay okay um all in favor I any opposed okay Mo the motion passes okay great and if are there any other staff comments I just have one one quick thing to to raise attention to so last year you know I think that the pzb LPA meeting was pretty close to to the holidays and Christmas time and I think we ended up pushing the meeting up a little bit this year it's planned to be um the 19th which I know is kind of it's like the Thursday right before people will probably start leaving for Holiday Vacations so does the board we don't have to decide this tonight but maybe we could decide it by November but would would you want to or prefer to move it up a few days maybe to Monday or Tuesday the 16th or 17th and does anyone have any conflicts on those days so we're talking about December December 16th it' be a Monday we're home so well November I think the November meeting is the 20th right it's the 21st 21st is that Thanksgiving weiv no Thanksgiving one week later okay it's late this year so 21st is November that's set that's yeah that's set no he's talking about but we're talking about December December yeah no conflict to move it earlier I'll have to check but maybe the 16th we can discuss which is a Monday that's three days earlier and I can I can send an email out to everybody do it yeah send it out and okay yeah it'll work just put on your radar if we know it an event it's okay yeah yeah we're we're here so it's not an issue okay any other board comments okay one quick one um one thing that I'd been thinking about was we have good pres slide presentations and I was wondering if um staff could put those online for the residents who would like to see them um somewhere on the like maybe after the meeting is done um but all of them like the ones that come from you and the ones from that are coming from applicants too okay just so we have available on YouTube no not on YouTube so I think on YouTube they're getting us but on the what I meant was put the slide decks up afterwards like if you could link them into to the agenda afterwards just so especially with um with projects that come through so people can see EAS easily find them because it's sometimes hard to see if looking watching at home okay one thing one thing we're we're starting to do is is um create something on the website where we we'll have like uh it's what Palm Beach Gardens has where they have like projects in review like recently approved projects projects under construction so Meg's um kind of working on that she's she's our um website whiz right now so um we are going to start doing that type of thing um and so like for instance right now we have two applications in um well one just came in yesterday but another one that are actual like major site plans they're not they're the 358 Cypress project remember that car museum that came to you last year and then um there's a the old Bank of America building we just got a submitt for that wow um and so those are plans that I think people will want to see as they come through so we want to you know put things on there or like when conceptual presentations come through um so we're going to we'll work on that but okay y we'll I'll see if I can find a way too to put so we're doing that with our EAC we're putting up all the presentations that are given because we have so many great EAC presentations um so we could Meg will create have to create a presentation tab now where people can go there and find our old presentations it might be maybe under the Planning and Zoning I know we have I think there is a website there we could do it under the planning zoning board actually I don't I'm not I'll leave that to your discretion whatever makes sense but and along the same thought I I do try to find occasionally like like these ordinances we recommend approval and what happens okay you know so I think you can find them on there like when they finally do get past that you can see what changes were accepted or wouldn't that wouldn't that be under the council you can find them through the council but they're you know I don't know how easy it is to find them I mean we could always put the ones that come through our come through the LPA onto there right like the live local this one some of the other ones that you guys have reviewed well there there's like if you look at the code um pages I think it says new what's new or something like that so you can look it up but it could be months before it so it's but I'm always curious as to you know did they reject everything we said or like it they generally like you guys do pretty good job well I'm sure they you know modify things and they all have opinions and the the commercial code got adopted last night by the way and they they took four of your seven oh yeah so pretty pretty good pretty pretty good oh okay that's good to know I I just think it'd be good to have all of them because even the flood plane things so people have our building officials presentation on it which I think is nice to have for general knowledge all right Meg more work for you and I do have one not related question but it is about a the ordinance like for the um uh artificial turf um that did pass but who knows about it I mean we have we know two people that have since put artificial turf in their backyard and the question was did you get a permit no because nobody knows you know they don't know and I know someone too yeah and how who is told um because there's I walked into Home Depot and they have a big sign up for artificial turf and it's like are these people told that you have to check with the individual municipalities or worry about that they're not going to care but it's but I'm just curious as to how would the residents ever know well I I sort of get confused with that because I I've been a homeowner for many many years and I any time I ever did anything I went and said does this require a permit we've done that as well yeah yeah I just automatically do it is this okay or do we have to get a permit for this m so it's um it seems kind of strange that they would just not even think about that yeah I was kind of surprised because they said oh well so and so did it too and it's like oh I didn't know list yeah I mean appearing everywhere right now it is it was in um I think it was in the smoke signals and I know this the the Friday news it appeared in a bunch I I think the and I think it was also on I sure I saw it on one of the other online things that I think the clerk's office has been doing a good job as best they can yeah the printed one yeah yeah and and the building department deals with it on on permits but of course you know people can do unpermitted work right they could they can put a meth lab in their backyard and if we don't know about it we don't know about it so um okay so I guess it's just spread the word I don't know yeah yeah um okay are we ready OT oh go ahead uh the suggestion about the presentations you know would be hand i'm visually impair so you know it really helps would help me as well or maybe not to do aead time but you know make it available at the time of the presentation or something because looking it on iPad is very convenient you know uh but the backup is great I can blow it up and read whatever I need to do that's cool but if there's already prepared presentation uh I understand you may not want to put on the website because it's public thing but you know sitting board member you at least we can get presentation I know and I hate to say it but like a lot of times we're still working on it like week of because unfortunately we have we typically I me because you already done the public notice so this just the presentation of what's to be presented if you have we could email it out beforehand too and I'm I I my suggestion was it like the next day would be I mean I realize it for decision purposes it's it would be helpful to have it the day I I was thinking more in terms of making it easy for people who for residents who would like to watch it but if it can be out the day of that on the if you watch the uh YouTube it shows the the screen isn't it you're watching the YouTu sometimes but I think actually so I don't me to prolong the meeting I I actually prefer the since it's a public meeting I think we should just have the video stream and then if we that's why I would and sometime it's a little uneven and whether it's always up and I'm not talking about just our meetings but also the council meetings and so forth and so just to make sure that the information is available I'm just looking for clarification so the presentations are on the agenda like you can see them beforehand and the public has access to them but you want them on the pzb website well the slide decks aren't though right CU in our backup we usually don't have this yeah they're usually not on there I mean sometimes they get in like I think yours is in for the the paint project but like but mine I was I did I did my presentation this morning I know that council meeting last night I'm like swamped all right well if you can great but yeah was that okay we can have a a motion to make a motion to I'll second okay all in favor we are adjourned good to see everybody we have a meeting next month yes um yeah we should we should I will not be at the November meeting just so you know I'm in business travel okay that sounds fun oh I have not heard that I will to go check on it tomorrow was like