Oct 08, 2025 Planning Advisory Board

WE ARE IN. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. GOOD MORNING.

[00:00:03]

[1) Call to Order]

PRIOR TO CONSIDERATION OF THAT ITEM, WE ASK THAT SPEAKERS LIMIT THEIR COMMENTS TO SEVEN MINUTES AND THAT LARGE GROUPS NAME A SPOKESMAN WHENEVER POSSIBLE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR INTEREST AND PARTICIPATION IN CITY GOVERNMENT.

ROLL CALL. MEMBER. BARRON HERE. ALTERNATE MEMBER COOPER HERE.

MEMBER. KREIS. PRESENT. MEMBER. FOWLER. PRESENT.

MEMBER. MAYOR HERE. MEMBER. SCHULTZ PRESENT. VICE CHAIR.

KAPPLER HERE. CHAIR. COUGHLIN HERE. THANK YOU.

LET'S STAND FOR THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE, PLEASE.

I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS.

ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.

ARE THERE ANY CHANGES TO THE AGENDA? NO, SIR.

[4) Changes to the Agenda]

SO THAT ITEM WILL BE CONTINUED TO THE DECEMBER MEETING, AND WE'LL HAVE TO TAKE A MOTION AT THE TIME.

I JUST WANT TO ANYONE THAT MAYBE THAT SEVEN D OR B B, AS IN BOY AND I HAVE A COUPLE OF CHANGES TO THE TO THE MINUTES.

ON PAGE FIVE. SEVEN D WE'RE NOT YET. YEAH, THEY'RE NOT ON THE MINUTES YET.

WE'RE STILL ON CHANGES TO THE AGENDA. SORRY, I GOTTA CALM DOWN.

WE LIKE YOUR ENTHUSIASM WITH WITH APOLOGIES. YOU MOVE EVEN FASTER THAN I DO.

OKAY. ANY PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA? OKAY. NOW, APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES SIX A THAT IS NOW A GOOD TIME.

[6.A) Approval of the September 10, 2025 Planning Advisory Board Meeting Minutes. ]

AND SO WHAT HAPPENED IS IT LOOKS LIKE LINES ONE, TWO, THREE, FOUR, FIVE DOWN.

THE LAST WORD IS KEPLER. AND IT SHOULD BE FOWLER BECAUSE THERE'S TWO REPORTS THERE.

YEAH, THERE'S TWO REPORTS ON ON VICE CHAIR KAPPLER AND NOT HIS FAULT.

IT WAS JUST A PROBLEM IN, IN IN TRANSLATING THIS.

AND SO IT SHOULD SAY FOWLER LOOKED AT THE PROPERTY CAREFULLY AND HAD NOTHING FURTHER TO DISCLOSE.

DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? DO YOU SEE THAT? YEAH. OKAY.

AND THEN THE SECOND ITEM IS JUST CLARIFICATION, I THINK FOR MY BENEFIT ON PAGE THREE, RIGHT BEFORE THERE'S A SUMMARY OF THE EMOTION THE LAST FULL PARAGRAPH THERE BEGINS DEPUTY CITY ENGINEER ALLISON.

ET CETERA. YOU SEE THAT? OKAY. AND SO. OKAY. THE SECOND LINE BEGINS.

GORDON DRIVE. AND IT SAYS GORDON DRIVE. TRANSITION TO SHARROWS.

AND I THINK WHAT THAT WAS TALKING ABOUT IS WHERE GORDON DRIVE ACTUALLY NARROWS, NOT NARROWS.

SO THAT WAS JUST A TYPO OF SOME KIND. ACCORDING TO ALISON, THAT SHE SHE HAD EXPLAINED THAT THE GORDON DRIVE DOES TRANSITION TO A SHARROW.

I ACTUALLY LOOKED UP THAT WORD, AND I COULDN'T FIND ANY EVIDENCE OF THAT WORD EXISTING. BUT IF THAT'S A WORD, THEN, THEN THAT'S FINE. YEAH.

IT'S NOT IN THE DICTIONARY I LOOKED AT. THAT'S OKAY.

SO IF THAT IF THAT'S IF THAT'S APPROPRIATE, THEN THAT'S NOT A CORRECTION.

IT'S MY ERROR. SORRY. COULD WE HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES SUBJECT TO THE ONE CORRECTION? I'LL MAKE THAT MOTION TO APPROVE THE SECOND. SECOND.

CALL THE ROLL OR ALL IMPROVE. CALL THE ROLL. NO, YOU CAN JUST.

ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE. OPPOSED? OKAY, THAT WAS EASY.

NEXT ITEM IS ITEM SEVEN, WHICH IS A PUBLIC HEARING.

[7.A) A Resolution Determining Nonconformity Petition 25-N4 Pursuant to Section 46-35 of the Code of Ordinances, City of Naples, to Allow for the Vertical and Horizontal Expansion of a Nonconforming Single-Family House on Property Located in the R1-15A Residence District at 2575 Half Moon Walk, Owned by Bernadette D.S. Watkins, More Fully Described Herein; Providing Findings and Conditions; and Providing an Effective Date.]

[00:05:03]

WATKINS. MORE FULLY DESCRIBED HEREIN, PROVIDING FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS AND PROVIDING AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

STAFF REPORT. 12 THOSE INTENDING TO TESTIFY. IF YOU COULD PLEASE STAND AND RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND.

DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE TESTIMONY YOU'RE ABOUT TO GIVE IS THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH? YES.

DISCLOSURES. EX-PARTE. DISCLOSURE. STARTING ON MY LEFT.

ANY DISCLOSURES? I RECEIVE THE CORRESPONDENCE FROM THIS MORNING.

I'VE READ THAT. NOTHING ELSE TO DISCLOSE. NOTHING TO DISCLOSE.

NOTHING TO DISCLOSE. NOTHING TO DISCLOSE. WHERE THE PROPERTY.

READ THE ADDENDUM WE HAVE AND NOTHING TO DISCLOSE.

I WALK THE PROPERTY PERSONALLY AND READ THE DOCUMENT THIS MORNING AND NO DISCLOSURES.

THANK YOU. I VIEWED THE PROPERTY, READ THE DOCUMENT WE RECEIVED THIS MORNING AND NO FURTHER DISCLOSURES BEYOND THAT.

THANK YOU. APPLICANT. THIS BUILDING GROUP, WE'RE THE GENERAL CONTRACTORS FOR MISS WATKINS. BASICALLY THE HOUSE WAS BUILT IN 1935, HAS GONE FLOODED A COUPLE OF TIMES.

SO WE'RE JUST TRYING TO RAISE IT UP. SHE HAS LOST HER BELONGINGS A COUPLE OF TIMES AND WE'RE JUST TRYING TO AVOID THAT.

IT'S THE SAME HOUSE. WE'RE JUST RAISING IT ABOUT ABOVE THE FLOOD ELEVATION.

AND I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS AS FAR AS THE THE PROJECT, BUT IT'S EXACTLY THE SAME HOUSE, JUST HIGHER ELEVATION. HOW HIGH ARE YOU RAISING IT? IT'S THE MAXIMUM ALLOWED, WHICH IS ONE FOOT ABOVE FLOOD ELEVATION, WHICH IS APPROXIMATELY FIVE FEET FROM WHERE IT IS RIGHT NOW.

FOUR AND CHANGE. THANK YOU. I WOULD SUGGEST IT'S NOT THE SAME HOUSE.

YOU'RE ADDING A STAIRWAY TO GET UP TO THE THE.

YES, WE'RE ADDING STEPS TO TO RAISE THE ACCESS.

THE MAIN ACCESS? YES. THERE'S TWO STRUCTURES ON THE PROPERTY.

ARE YOU PROPOSING TO DO BOTH STRUCTURES OR JUST THE HOUSE? JUST THE HOUSE FOR NOW. THANK YOU. THE LOOKS LIKE YOU'VE BEGUN WORK IN AT LEAST ONE OF THE STRUCTURES.

IS THAT ACCURATE? NO. EVERYTHING WAS DUE TO THE FLOODING.

SO EVERYTHING WAS JUST CLEANING UP. EVERYTHING THAT GOT DAMAGED.

THE RAW WOOD STUDS THAT ARE IN PLACE IN THE SECOND ANCILLARY BUILDING ARE NOT THERE.

I'M JUST IMAGINING THOSE. IT LOOKS LIKE FRESH CONSTRUCTION TO ME.

DO YOU KNOW WHERE IT IS? WE HAVEN'T. WE HAVEN'T ADDED ANY ANY STUDS.

WE GOT IT. BOTH STRUCTURES. IT'S FASCINATING.

THANK YOU. YES. AND YOU'VE ADDRESSED. THERE'S THREE STRUCTURES OR FOUR STRUCTURES ON THE PROPERTY.

THERE'S TWO GARAGES. WE'RE NOT. WE'RE NOT TRYING TO RAISE THE GARAGES.

IT'S NOT THE GARAGE. IT'S A LITTLE ANTI TO THE IT'D BE THE EAST.

THE EAST SIDE OF. YEAH THE GUEST HOUSE. WE'RE STILL CONSIDERING WHETHER THAT STRUCTURE IS GOING TO BE PROPOSED TO RAISE OR NOT.

WELL THERE ARE THERE ARE FRESH STUDS THAT ARE IN THERE.

THEY'RE UP. I THINK I KNOW WHAT THAT IS. WITH TWO BY FOURS.

WE'RE THE CONTRACTORS THERE, AND WE HAVEN'T PUT ANY ANY STUDS IN.

GREMLINS ARE DOING IT ON YOUR BEHALF. WHO KNOWS? BUT THANK YOU FOR CLARIFYING. YEAH. THANK YOU.

CAN YOU PLEASE IDENTIFY YOURSELF? I'M SORRY. CAN YOU PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME? JOSE LUIS LLORET. THANK YOU. YES. OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? STAFF REPORT. GOOD MORNING. CITY OF NAPLES PLANNING DEPARTMENT.

MY RESUME AND QUALIFICATIONS ARE ON FILE. COULD YOU MOVE A LITTLE CLOSER TO THE MIC? IS THAT OKAY? YES. OKAY. ITEM SEVEN A IS A REQUEST FOR AN EXPANSION OF A NONCONFORMITY PETITION.

20 5-N4 FOR THE PROPERTY LOCATED AT TWO 2575 HALF MOON WALK, LOCATED IN THE R 17.5 RESIDENCE DISTRICT OF PORT ROYAL. THE HOUSE WAS BUILT IN, ACCORDING TO THE PROPERTY APPRAISER, WHICH DIFFERS FROM WHAT THE PETITIONER HAD SAID 52.

IT WAS BUILT ACCORDING TO THE REQUIRED SETBACKS AT THE TIME, WHICH WAS 7.5FT FOR THE SIDE PROPERTY LINE.

IT HAS CHANGED SINCE THEN. THE ZONING DISTRICT HAS CHANGED A COUPLE OF TIMES AND THE SETBACK HAS CHANGED.

THE CURRENT SETBACK IS FOR THE SIDE PROPERTY 12.5FT.

THE PETITIONER IS REQUESTING TO LIFT THE HOUSE FROM THE CURRENT 4.01 NAGDCA ELEVATION TO THE 9.33 ELEVATION FOR

[00:10:10]

STAFF RECEIVED NO CORRESPONDENCE PRIOR TO THE AGENDA BEING PUBLISHED, BUT THIS WEEK WE DID RECEIVE TWO EMAIL CORRESPONDENCE THAT WERE OPPOSING THE EXPANSION OF THIS NONCONFORMITY UPLIFTING THE HOUSE. STAFF HAD SENT THE PROPERTY THE PROJECT TO THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE WITH THE CITY AND ALL PARTICIPANTS. THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT CODE ENFORCEMENT DID NOT HAVE ANY ISSUES WITH THE EXPANSION OF THIS NONCONFORMITY.

SECTION 4635 C OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE PROVIDING THE EXPANSION OF NONCONFORMITY AND ENLARGEMENT.

STAFF HAS REVIEWED REVIEWED THE STANDARDS FOR THIS REQUEST AND FIND THAT THE STANDARDS HAVE BEEN MET.

THE HOUSE WILL NOT SORRY THE HOUSE WILL NOT CHANGE IN THE CURRENT FOOTPRINT.

ALL THEY ARE GOING TO BE DOING IS JUST LIFTING IT UP.

THEY WILL ADD STAIRS TO ACCESS THE NEW ELEVATION OF THE HOUSE, BUT THOSE STAIRS ARE GOING TO BE IN THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY, WHICH ARE ALREADY WITHIN THAT FRONT SETBACK. SO THAT WILL NOT BE AN EXPANSION TOWARDS THE FRONT, ONLY TOWARDS THE SIDE WHICH IS ALREADY ENCROACHING.

SORRY. ONE SECOND. ALL RIGHT. STAFF HAS APPLIED THE CRITERIA FOR THE EXPANSION OF THE NONCONFORMITY AND FIND THAT THE CRITERIA HAVE BEEN MET. SHOULD THE PLANNING ADVISORY ADVISORY BOARD RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO CITY COUNCIL STAFF, RECOMMEND THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS THAT THE PETITION INVOLVE THE VERTICAL AND HORIZONTAL EXPANSION OF THE EXISTING STRUCTURE AND SHALL NOT APPLY TO THE REBUILDING OF NEW STRUCTURES IF THE EXISTING STRUCTURE IS DEMOLISHED OR THE NONCONFORMITIES ARE REMOVED.

AND THE SECOND CONDITION OF. SHOULD THE EXISTING NONCONFORMITY PORTIONS OF THE STRUCTURE BE DEMOLISHED, EVEN FOR A BRIEF PERIOD, THE APPROVAL DISSOLVES AND THE PETITIONER MUST OBTAIN VARIANCE APPROVAL TO BUILD ACCORDING TO THE PROPOSED PLANS, OR NEW STRUCTURES MUST BE BUILT IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE ZONING REGULATIONS OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCE AT THE EFFECTIVE TIME.

STAFF IS AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS. THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF THE STAFF? SCOTT. FOR OUR EFFICACY, COULD YOU EXPLAIN WHAT THE CURRENT NONCONFORMITIES ARE? YES. THAT ALREADY ARE IN EXISTENCE NOW RELATIVE TO.

SO THE NORTH SIDE IS ENCROACHING INTO THE CURRENT REQUIRED SIDE YARD.

THE CURRENT REQUIRED SIDE YARD IS 12.5FT AT THE NORTH END OF THE PROPERTY.

THE HOUSE IS CURRENTLY AT EIGHT FEET. AT THE TIME OF CONSTRUCTION THE REQUIREMENT WAS 7.5FT.

SO IT IS. IT DID COMPLY WHEN IT WAS BUILT, WHICH IS WHY THIS IS A NONCONFORMITY PETITION, BECAUSE THE CODES HAVE CHANGED SINCE CONSTRUCTION, WHICH ARE NOW MAKING THIS STRUCTURE NONCONFORMING.

SO IF IT WAS BUILT ILLEGALLY, THEN THIS WOULD BE A VARIANCE REQUEST.

BUT THAT'S NOT THE CASE. AND THAT'S IT. YEP. THAT NORTH SIDE THERE'S ENCROACHMENT THAT THERE ARE GOING TO BE ELEVATING.

AND THEN THEY WILL NEED MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT TO WHICH WILL ALSO BE ENCROACHING SLIGHTLY IN THE DRIVEWAYS FOR THE DRIVEWAYS ARE REMAINING AS IS.

THEY'RE NOT PROPOSING TO CHANGE ANY OF THAT. THANK YOU.

YOU'RE WELCOME. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF STAFF? WHAT DID YOU SAY ABOUT EQUIPMENT? THE EQUIPMENT BEING WHERE WHERE'S THE EQUIPMENT GOING TO BE PUT? THE EQUIPMENT IS ALSO GOING TO BE LOCATED AT THE NORTH PROPERTY LINE, WHICH IS ALREADY ENCROACHING IF YOU GO TO.

THE SURVEY SHOWS THAT THAT NORTH END IS ENCROACHING AND THEN EXISTING EQUIPMENT AND THE EXISTING EQUIPMENT IS GOING TO BE SIX FEET, TWO INCHES FROM THE NORTH PROPERTY LINE.

THE EXISTING OR THAT'S THE NEW STUFF. BOTH. BOTH.

BUT IT'S GOING TO BE HIGHER, RIGHT? CORRECT. DOES ANYBODY KNOW HOW HIGH THE HOUSE.

SO THE HOUSE IS BEING REDONE. RIGHT. SO NOW WE'RE JUST TAKING THE EXISTING PROPERTY AND WE'RE NOT TAKING THE PROPERTY.

SO THAT'S NOT BRINGING IN FILL. THEY'RE JUST TAKING THE STRUCTURE AND LIFTING THE STRUCTURE, THE EXISTING STRUCTURE AS IS RIGHT AND LIFTING IT UP.

IT'S NOT. SO IT'S TOTALLY NOT A WE'RE NOT KNOCKING DOWN CERTAIN LINES.

NO. IF THEY KNOCK THIS DOWN YOU'RE NOT ALLOWED TO KEEP THE NONCONFORMITY.

SO IT'S THE EXACT SAME HOUSE OKAY. I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS.

ONE IS THE REFER TO VERTICAL AND HORIZONTAL EXPANSION IS THE WIDER HORIZONTAL.

IS THAT PURELY BECAUSE OF THE STAIRCASE OR IS THAT JUST THE TERMINOLOGY.

THAT'S THE TERMINOLOGY. SO THE NORTH END IS ENCROACHING HORIZONTALLY INTO THAT SIDE SETBACK.

SO WHEN YOU LIFT THE HOUSE THE HOUSE IS ALREADY ENCROACHING.

AND THEN WHEN YOU GO TO LIFT IT THAT'S THE HORIZONTAL.

SO IT'S ALREADY I'M SORRY. THAT'S THE VERTICAL EXPANSION.

YEAH. IT'S ALREADY HORIZONTALLY ENCROACHING TO THAT SIDE SETBACK. SO THAT WHEN YOU GO TO LIFT IT THAT'S WHAT MAKES IT VERTICAL AS WELL. BUT THEY'RE NOT INCREASING. THEY'RE NOT

[00:15:07]

THEY'RE NOT EXPANDING HORIZONTALLY. NOT HORIZONTALLY EXPANDING. IT'S ALREADY THERE. I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THAT IN THE NOTE. AND ANOTHER QUESTION IS, HAS THERE BEEN ANY DISCUSSION ABOUT HOW THE AC ENCROACHMENT COULD BE REDUCED? WELL, THEY'VE GOT THE OPPORTUNITY OF ADDRESSING THE STRUCTURE BECAUSE THAT'S THE BIGGEST ENCROACHMENT THAT.

YES, I'VE ASKED THE PETITIONER AND IT SEEMS LIKE THAT'S NOT REALLY A POSSIBILITY FOR THEM.

THEY SAID THAT THEY DON'T HAVE A BETTER LOCATION FOR IT, BUT THEY COULD BECAUSE THAT IS A BIG ISSUE FROM FROM MY SIDE OF THINGS IS THAT THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO REDUCE THE ENCROACHMENT. AND I DON'T BELIEVE THE OPPORTUNITY IS BEING TAKEN TO THE SOUTH SIDE OF THAT.

PARDON? WE CAN RELOCATE IT TO THE SOUTH SIDE IF THAT'S GOING TO BE AN ISSUE.

MY UNDERSTANDING IS HE SAID HE COULD RELOCATE THE AIR CONDITIONING THAT'S OUTSIDE.

SO GOOD THINKING. OKAY, GOOD. SO WE GOT TO REMEMBER, IF WE APPROVE THIS TO MAKE IT IN THE MOTION.

YES. QUESTION. I SEE THAT THERE'S A WHOLE BUNCH OF SPACE ON THE RIGHT SIDE LOOKING AT THE HOUSE.

I GUESS THAT'S THE SOUTH SIDE. YOU KNOW, WOULD IT BE POSSIBLE, THOUGH, SINCE YOU'RE ELEVATING THE HOUSE, YOU CAN MOVE IT. SO COULD THEY JUST MOVE IT FIVE FEET SOUTH? THE COST OF MOVING THE HOUSE ALMOST DOUBLES IF YOU'RE GOING TO SHE WOULD LOSE SOME OF THE SPACE THAT SHE WANTS TO FIND A PATIENT THAT IS EXISTING.

YEAH, UNFORTUNATELY, WE HAVE TWO NEIGHBORS THAT SAY THAT THEY DON'T LIKE IT. SO PUBLIC COMMENT.

EXCUSE ME. JUST JUST ONE QUESTION. I MEAN, THIS MAY BE AN UNFAIR QUESTION BECAUSE THIS LETTER JUST COME IN, BUT BUT AS I VIEW THE PROPERTY, THE NEIGHBOR WHO'S COMPLAINING ABOUT THE.

AND I'M NOT SAYING THAT NEGATIVELY, I MEAN, YOU'RE BRINGING UP THE ISSUE THAT IT WOULD SHAVE THEIR POOL.

I IF I'VE GOT IT CORRECT, THE POOL THAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT IS NORTH OF THE THE STRUCTURE THAT WOULD BE MOVED.

IS THAT CORRECT? WHICH CORRESPONDENCE ARE YOU REFERRING TO THE FROM? PETER AND COLLEEN. ARNOLD. 250 GALION DRIVE. YES.

THAT POOL IS LOCATED NORTH OF THIS. AND THEN AND THIS IS THE UNFAIRNESS OF THE QUESTION, IS THERE ANY WAY TO TO TELL WHETHER AND IF SO, HOW MUCH SHADE WOULD HIT THE POOL? YOU KNOW, AT THE AT THE DEAD OF WINTER.

I MEAN, IT DEPENDS ON THE TIME OF YEAR AND THE TIME OF DAY.

RIGHT. I THINK THE ABSENT A SHADE STUDY, I COULDN'T TELL YOU.

OKAY. HOW MUCH? IT WON'T BE ALL DAY, EVERY DAY.

I CAN TELL YOU THAT, BUT I DON'T KNOW TO THE DEGREE THAT IT WILL BE.

WE DO HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT. AND THEN. DO YOU HAVE SOMETHING YOU WANT TO ASK FIRST? WHY DID YOU PICK FIVE FEET AS THE ELEVATION? WHY DID YOU PICK FIVE FEET IS HOW MUCH YOU'RE GOING TO BE ELEVATING THE PROPERTY? I MEAN, THE BUILDING THAT IS THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE FOR US TO RAISE IT IS ONE FOOT ABOVE.

ABOVE. HOW MUCH DID YOU HAVE WITH IAN? HOW MUCH WATER WAS THERE AT SIX FEET? SIX FEET? SIX FEET OF WATER. SO IT'S NOT EVEN GOING TO HELP THE NEXT IAN.

I MIGHT BE ABLE TO ANSWER THAT A LITTLE BIT. SO THE FLOOD ZONE THAT THEY'RE CURRENTLY IN IS THE EIGHT ZONE.

SO THE FEMA PLUS ONE REQUIREMENT WOULD BE YOUR DESIGN FLOOD ELEVATION.

SO THE HIGHEST THEY COULD GO FOR FEMA PURPOSES WOULD BE NINE FEET FOR THEIR PLANNING MEASUREMENTS TO START TAKING EFFECT.

SO PLANNING MEASURES FROM THE DESIGN FLOOD ELEVATION. SO IT'S FEMA PLUS ONE. SO THERE ARE EIGHT PLUS ONE IS NINE.

THEY'RE RAISING THE HOUSE TO 9.33. SO THAT'S THE CURRENT FEMA REQUIREMENTS.

SO THEIR HOUSE ALREADY HAS CURRENT ELEVATION.

THEY'RE TAKING THAT TO A HIGHER LEVEL. NO I UNDERSTAND THAT.

BUT IF THEY HAD SIX IF THEY'RE ELEVATING IT FIVE FEET AND THEY HAD SIX FEET DURING IAN.

SO THEY'RE NOT REALLY GETTING THE GOAL THAT WE'RE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH. YEAH. BECAUSE THEY'VE ALREADY GOT CURRENT ELEVATION. SO THEY'RE ESSENTIALLY SO THEY DIDN'T HAVE SIX FEET INSIDE THE HOUSE OKAY. SIX FEET WAS ON THE SIX FEET.

YOU'RE SAYING IT WAS ON THE GROUND. HOW MUCH WATER WAS INSIDE THE HOUSE? FIVE FEET IN SOME AREAS AND SIX FEET IN OTHERS.

AND PLEASE IDENTIFY YOURSELF. YES, I'M BERNADETTE WATKINS.

THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR VIEWING THIS. I DO WANT TO SAY THE INTENT FOR THIS HOUSE IS IT'S THE FIRST HOUSE IN THE AREA, AND IT IS CHARMING. AND MY HUSBAND AND I, THE INTENT WAS TO PRESERVE THIS HOUSE.

IT'S THE FIRST HOUSE IN PORT ROYAL AND ABSOLUTELY CHARMING.

AND WE DO NOT WANT TO TEAR IT DOWN. AND AND BUT THE GOAL IS TO PRESERVE IT.

BUT TO GET BACK TO YOUR QUESTION, WE HAD FIVE FEET IN SOME AREAS.

[00:20:04]

IN SOME AREAS IN FUNNY LITTLE AREAS, THERE WAS SIX FEET, BUT THROUGHOUT THE HOUSE, MOSTLY FIVE FEET.

THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE YOUR ANSWERING THE QUESTION.

NO, THANK YOU SO MUCH. SO I GUESS THE QUESTION WAS THAT MEANS THIS ELEVATION IS GOING TO BARELY.

SO. SO WHATEVER THE SIX FEET IS STILL GOING TO HAVE WATER THERE.

EVEN WITH THIS ELEVATION, I WOULD LIKE TO GO AS HIGH AS POSSIBLE TO PUT A CUSHION FOR THE NEXT STORM.

THAT'S WHAT WE INDEED WOULD LIKE TO DO. WHATEVER WOULD BE PERMISSIBLE.

BUT THIS IS A MAXIMUM WE'RE PERMITTED THAT THE CODE CURRENTLY ALLOWS.

IS THAT CORRECT? SO THE DESIGN FLOOD ELEVATION IS WHERE FEMA HAS THEIR MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS.

SO THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENT FOR THIS PROPERTY WOULD BE NINE FEET.

THAT'S WHERE ALL THE PLANNING ELEVATIONS START TAKING EFFECT.

THAT'S WHERE PLANNING MEASURES FROM. COULD THEY TECHNICALLY HAVE THEIR FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATION BE HIGHER THAN THAT? YES THEY COULD, BUT THAT'S THE MINIMUM THAT FEMA REQUIRES.

SO THEY'RE RAISING IT JUST SLIGHTLY ABOVE THAT MINIMUM. AND THAT'S BECAUSE THIS IS A ONE STORY HOUSE. SO WHEN SHE SAYS PLANNING REGULATIONS, WE MEASURE THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF YOUR STRUCTURE FROM THE DESIGN FLOOD ELEVATION.

SO YOU'RE ALLOWED 30FT IN MOST SINGLE FAMILY DISTRICTS OF OF MAXIMUM HEIGHT.

SO WE WOULD MEASURE THAT 30FT FROM THE DESIGN FLOOD.

THIS IS A LOW A LOWER HOUSE. THIS IS NOT A 2 OR 3 STORY HOUSE.

SO THEY HAVE A LITTLE WIGGLE ROOM THERE. IF THEY CHOSE TO SET THAT FINISHED FLOOR HIGHER AND LIFT THE STRUCTURE HIGHER, IT LOOKS AS IF THEY WOULD STILL BE WITHIN THOSE THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT ALLOWABLE IN THE DISTRICT.

BILL, DID YOU FIGURE OUT WHAT THEY'D HAVE TO GO ANOTHER FOOT? RIGHT. YEAH, ABOUT ANOTHER FOOT. SO I'M JUST I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND HOW MUCH IT IS.

I AGREE IT'S SILLY TO SPEND THIS KIND OF MONEY AND IN THE NEXT STORM, HAVE FLOOD, HAVE MORE FLOODING.

OKAY. YEAH. THIS IS A QUESTION FOR PLANNING. SO HYPOTHETICALLY, IF THERE WAS IF THIS HOUSE WAS TORN DOWN AND THERE WAS A NEW STRUCTURE PUT IN YOU KNOW, SPEAKING TO THE HEIGHTS AND EVERYTHING, WHAT WOULD YOU KNOW? YOU MIGHT NOT BE ABLE TO DO THE CALCULATION RIGHT NOW, BUT WHAT COULD THE POTENTIAL HEIGHT, BE THERE OF A NEW HOUSE, AND, YOU KNOW, WITH THE ONE NEIGHBOR THAT'S CONCERNED ABOUT SHADING, IF THERE'S A NEW HOUSE THERE, I'D IMAGINE IT'D BE MUCH HIGHER IF SOMEONE WERE TO.

WE'RE GOING TO SAY MAXIMIZE THE DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL OF THIS SINGLE FAMILY LOT, WHICH PRESUMABLY THEY WOULD WE WOULD MEASURE THAT MAXIMUM HEIGHT FROM DESIGN FLOOD, WHICH IN THIS CASE WOULD BE NINE, AND THEN THEY WOULD BE ALLOWED THE 30FT ABOVE THAT.

SO THIS HOUSE IS SUBSTANTIALLY LOWER THAN THAT.

SUBSTANTIALLY LOWER THAN THAT BECAUSE THE EXISTING HOME IS.

THANK YOU. HOW MUCH IS SUBSTANTIAL? I'M NOT BEING A JERK.

I JUST WANT TO KNOW WHAT'S THE. SO THIS HOUSE IS GOING TO BE 15FT SIX INCHES FROM THE DESIGN FLOOD ELEVATION WHERE 30FT WOULD BE ALLOWED.

SO THEY HAVE ANOTHER 20FT. THEY COULD GO ON TOP OF THAT. OKAY.

SO WHAT'S YOUR POINT THAT YOU'RE SAYING IS THAT IF THEY IF THEY MOVED IT OVER THE FIVE FEET THAT'S REQUIRED TO BE IN THE SETBACK, IT WOULD STILL BE 20FT HIGHER, RIGHT? AND IT WOULD BE WORSE THAN WHAT IT IS TODAY.

CORRECT. OKAY. THAT'S WHAT I WANTED TO UNDERSTAND. OKAY.

I'M GOING TO GO TO PUBLIC COMMENT. WE CAN STILL ASK QUESTIONS AT THE END.

ARE THERE IS THERE ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC THAT WISHES TO SPEAK? IF SO, PLEASE COME TO THE MICROPHONE, MAKE SURE IT'S TURNED ON, AND I REMIND YOU THAT YOU'RE UNDER OATH AND THAT YOU MUST LIMIT YOUR REMARKS TO SEVEN MINUTES. I HAVE NO SLIPS. NO ONE. OKAY.

THANK YOU. WE DO HAVE THE TWO LETTERS, WHICH WE WILL CONSIDER.

SO DISCUSSION AMONGST THE BOARD. I'M JUST GOING TO COMMENT IN SAYING THAT THE CRISIS ISSUE FOR NAPLES IN THE NEXT 20 YEARS IS FLOODING OUR RESIDENCES. AND I THINK WE HAVE TO BE FLEXIBLE IN ALLOWING PEOPLE TO SOLVE THE PROBLEM.

AND I WANT TO COMPLIMENT THIS HOMEOWNER FOR NOT GOING TO 30FT, BUT TRYING TO MAINTAIN THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE.

BOWL. CHANGE IS NEVER EASY FOR ANY OF US, BUT THE DISASTER OF ANOTHER FLOOD OF THAT MAGNITUDE IN HAVING THE CITY NOT HELP PEOPLE ACCOMMODATE IT WOULD STRIKE ME AS FAR WORSE. I ALSO WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF ALLOWING THEM TO RAISE INSTEAD OF 9FT TO 10FT, SIMPLY BECAUSE THAT SOLVES THE FUTURE FLOOD PROBLEM AS MUCH AS WE CAN PREDICT.

WHO KNOWS WHAT'S COMING? BUT THIS HAS GOT TO BE A DIFFICULT SITUATION FOR THE COMMUNITY AS A WHOLE IN NAPLES BECAUSE AS PEOPLE RAISE THEIR HOUSES, THE LOW ONES ARE GOING TO FEEL NEGATIVELY IMPACTED.

BUT I AM NOT SMART ENOUGH TO KNOW WHAT YOU DO, BECAUSE THIS PERSON COULD PUT ANOTHER 20 15FT ANYWAY ON THIS STRUCTURE AND THEN YOU'RE

[00:25:04]

ANYBODY COMMENTS. I HAVE A QUESTION OF THE HOMEOWNER.

IF IF THIS WERE DENIED AND YOU WEREN'T ABLE TO ELEVATE YOUR HOUSE AT ALL, WHAT WOULD YOUR PLAN BE? WOULD YOU KEEP THE HOUSE AS IS, OR WOULD YOU DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT? UNFORTUNATELY, I THINK IT WOULD BE TERRIBLE, BUT I THINK I WOULD JUST TEAR IT DOWN AND HAVE DIRT THERE AND LET SOMEBODY ELSE. TAKE CARE OF IT. BUT OF COURSE, THE INTENT IS TO PRESERVE THIS HOUSE.

IT IT WAS MR. SAMPLE BUILT THIS HOUSE FOR HIS MOTHER.

AND SO IT WAS NEVER SUPPOSED TO BE A LARGE HOUSE.

SHE WAS SINGLE, AND AND IT'S ONLY IT WAS ONLY A TWO BEDROOM.

PLUS THE THE LITTLE GUEST HOUSE, WHICH IS CHARMING, TOO.

I WOULD LIKE TO. IF I HAVE THE MONEY, I'D LIKE TO LIFT THE GUEST HOUSE AS WELL.

BUT ANYWAY, I WOULD LIKE TO LIFT IT AS HIGH AS WE COULD, SO I DON'T HAVE A DISASTER LIKE THIS IN ANOTHER YEAR. THESE STORMS ARE NOT GOING TO STOP. AND I DON'T THINK.

ANYWAY, BUT I APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU SO MUCH. OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? I'M JUST GOING THROUGH MY THOUGHTS. YEAH. IF YOU CAN GET MORE HEIGHT AND THAT'S WHAT YOU WANT TO DO.

I DON'T THINK THAT DECISION'S BEEN MADE BY THIS BOARD OR PROBABLY THE COUNCIL GOING FORWARD.

BUT I DO THINK, AS I MENTIONED EARLIER, TO TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO REDUCE THE AC, THE 6.2FT ENCROACHMENT, ONE, NOT THE AC ON THE OTHER SIDE, THAT'S FINE.

BUT TO SEE IF THAT CAN BE INCORPORATED THEN I'M THINKING POSSIBLY POSITIVELY TOWARDS THIS, ESPECIALLY CONSIDERING IF THIS HOUSE WAS TO BE LET'S SAY DROPPED AND SOMEBODY ELSE TAKE IT OVER AS PLANNING HAVE ERRED THAT THEY WOULD LIKELY MAXIMIZE YOU CAN GENERATE MORE HASSLES FOR THOSE RESIDENTS WHO'VE WRITTEN IN.

IT IS A LOT AND A HALF. IT'S A LOVELY LOT. SO THEY IF SOMEONE DOES IF WE IF I DID SELL, THEY WOULD BUILD.

OF COURSE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THIS MAIN STRUCTURE IS WHAT'S UNDER REVIEW HERE.

NOT THE NOT THE GUEST HOUSE. SO WE'RE NOT HERE TO TO TALK ABOUT THAT OR PUT RESTRICTIONS ON THAT BECAUSE THAT'S OUTSIDE OF THE APPLICATION.

OKAY. OKAY. DO WE HAVE A MOTION. WE GOT SOME COMMENTS.

I, I APPLAUD YOU FOR WHAT YOU'RE REALLY TRYING TO DO HERE TO SAVE SUCH A HISTORIC AND VALUABLE PROPERTY.

EMOTIONALLY VALUABLE AS WELL TO YOU? YES. THAT THAT'S TO BE APPLAUDED IN THIS DAY AND AGE.

NOT JUST TO KNOCK DOWN. TEAR DOWN, BUT. BUT SOMETIMES YOU HAVE TO CONSIDER SAVING YOURSELF FROM YOURSELF.

I KNOW, AND OBJECTIVELY, THAT'S NOT OUR JOB. SO JUST A THOUGHT AS A HUMAN BEING.

AND WHILE I APPLAUD EVERYTHING YOU WANT TO DO AND HOW YOU WANT TO DO IT.

THOSE CONCERNS ARE THERE THAT EVERYTHING AROUND YOU AND IF YOU ARE SUCCESSFUL, THAT YOU MAY RUE THE DAY SO GOOD MONEY AFTER BAD AGAIN, THAT'S A PERSONAL DECISION.

IT'S NOT OUR DECISION. BUT I CAN'T THANK YOU ENOUGH FOR THE THOUGHT THAT HAS GONE INTO THIS AND THE EMOTION THAT YOU HAVE IN IT.

SO THANK YOU FOR THINKING ABOUT IT. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU SO MUCH. SHE'S A CHARMING HOUSE. IT REALLY IS.

AND I WALKED IT. AND AND IT WOULD BE NICE FOR PEOPLE TO SEE THE FIRST HOUSE OF PORT ROYAL.

YEAH. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. I THINK I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION.

CAN I SAY SOMETHING? YES. RAISE YOUR HAND. HOW HIGH? HIGHER. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. I ALSO AM VERY SYMPATHETIC TO THIS.

CONGRATULATIONS ON LOOKING TO FIND A WAY TO ALLEVIATE THESE CLIMATIC ISSUES THAT WE HAVE HAD AND ARE HAVING.

I ALSO WOULD SUGGEST I WOULD ALSO BE SYMPATHETIC TO GOING UP HIGHER AS WELL TO ALLEVIATE THAT.

AND I DO AGREE WITH MY ESTEEMED COLLEAGUE THAT IF THE AC COULD BE MOVED TO SOMEWHERE THAT RESTRICTS KEEPS WITHIN THE RESTRICTIONS, I WOULD BE VERY HAPPY TO SEE THAT AS WELL.

AND ONE SMALL COMMENT I THINK THAT PRESERVING THIS PROPERTY IS VERY CONSISTENT WITH THE CITY VISION AND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, AND I'D JUST LIKE TO MAKE THAT POINT AS WELL. I THINK THE KEY THING FROM MY PERSPECTIVE IS IF WE'RE TO START WITH A A BRAND NEW BUILDING AND STRUCTURE AND STUFF, IT WILL BE HIGHER AND CAUSE A BIGGER PROBLEM THAN IT IS TODAY.

THAT WASN'T HIGHLIGHTED UNTIL YOU BROUGHT THAT.

BUT FROM MY PERSPECTIVE, THAT MAKES A HUGE DIFFERENCE BECAUSE EVEN IF I'M TOTALLY IN CONFORMITY,

[00:30:03]

AND HAVING LIVED AT A BARRIER ISLAND FOR MY ENTIRE LIFE IN NEW JERSEY.

AND KNOW WHAT SANDY'S LIKE AND BEEN THROUGH IAN WITH 37IN IN OUR PROPERTY AT THE GARAGE.

I FULLY SUPPORT TAKING IT UP AN EXTRA FOOT, BECAUSE WHEN YOU DO THIS, LET'S DO IT RIGHT THE FIRST TIME.

AS OPPOSED TO WIND UP WITH ANOTHER PROPERTY, ANOTHER HURRICANE THAT'S GOING TO DO SOMETHING WORSE THAN IAN.

SO I AGREE. I THOUGHT WE WERE RAISING IT AS HIGH AS WE COULD.

SO MAYBE WE SHOULD GO BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD.

ANYWAY. CAN WE MAKE A MOTION THEN? AND I GUESS WE'RE DOING WE WANT TO DO TWO DIFFERENT THINGS, ALLOW THEM TO ELEVATE IT AN EXTRA FOOT, 10FT TO 10FT.

WELL, I THINK IT'S I THINK IT SHOULD BE 10.3, 9.33 AND ABD.

SO IF YOU WASTED A WHOLE EXTRA FOOT, IT WHAT IT WOULD BE 10.5.

HOW ABOUT 10.5? WELL, THAT'S THEIR CHOICE. IT'S NOT OUR CHOICE.

ARE YOU GUYS OKAY WITH 10.5? OKAY. I DON'T SEE WHY YOU WANT TO PUT THAT IN THE RESTRICTION.

I AGREE. WELL, WE DON'T WANT IT TO BE 15FT. I WON'T PUT MEASUREMENTS IN.

NO, IT HAS TO. I THINK THE CITY DOES HAVE AN INTEREST IN GETTING IT OUT OF THE FLOOD ZONE.

BUT IT'S STILL UP TO THE PETITION AND NOT UP TO US TO MAKE IT.

BUT IF IT WINDS UP AT THE TOP OF THE HOUSE NOW BEING AS WORSE AS WORSE THAN WHAT THEY ARE A BRAND NEW PROPERTY, THAT'S NOT ABOUT TIME. THE PETITIONER WHEN THEY DON'T NEED TO BE.

WELL, I WOULDN'T WORRY ABOUT THEM GOING TEN OR 12 OR 15 EXTRA FEET.

THAT WOULD BE A COMPRESSIVE STAIRCASE. COULD WE JUST MAKE A RECOMMENDATION THAT WHEN BEFORE THEY COME TO COUNCIL, THAT THEY COME BACK WITH YOU KNOW, RELOOK AT IT AND COME BACK WITH MAYBE AN ADJUSTED HEIGHT THAT MAXIMIZES THE MAXIMUM OF 12FT.

DON'T GIVE HIM A MAXIMUM. YOU CAN SAY WHATEVER.

WELL, IF YOU DON'T GIVE HIM A MAXIMUM. THE CODE, THE CODE THE CODE GIVES A MAXIMUM.

THERE'S A CODE. THERE'S A CODE THAT GIVES A MAXIMUM.

WHAT WAS STATED BEFORE IS THAT THE MAXIMUM WAS AN INCORRECT STATEMENT.

THEY CAN GO TO MAXIMUM, WHICH THEY'RE NOWHERE NEAR IT.

BUT THEN THEY'RE GOING TO BE WORSE THAN WHAT A NEW HOUSE WOULD BE.

AND THAT'S THAT'S WHAT THAT'S WHAT. THAT'S WHAT ALLOWS US TO TO BELIEVE THAT IT'S OKAY TO DO THIS.

CAN WE PUT A MAXIMUM HEIGHT ON THERE? CAN YOU DO ANYTHING WE WANT TO.

I THINK FOR APPROVAL. I MEAN, IF YOU'VE ALREADY THE PLANNING DIRECTOR AND THE PLANNING STAFF HAVE ALREADY ESTABLISHED WHAT THE RULES ALLOW.

THE REQUEST IS FOR A SPECIFIC HEIGHT. IF YOU WANT TO PUT IN THE RECOMMENDATION FOR CONSIDERATION OF A HIGHER AMOUNT, NOT TO EXCEED WHAT THE CODE ALLOWS, THEN MAYBE THAT'S JUST THE MESSAGE YOU WANT TO GIVE TO THE COUNCIL IS THAT THEY MAY WANT TO REQUEST A HIGHER AMOUNT THAN WHAT THEY HAVE COME IN FOR WITH YOU, BECAUSE YOU'RE GOING TO GET YOU'RE GOING TO ESTABLISH A SPECIFIC YOU'RE GOING TO GET TANGLED IN BECAUSE THEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT WHAT HEIGHT BECAUSE YOU'RE ON ABOUT A HIGHER.

THEN YOU'RE SAYING THE ROOF CAN BE HIGHER. HOW MUCH HIGHER? SO I THINK WE LEAD THE PETITIONER AS THE AS THEY ARE, BUT WITH THE RECOMMENDATION THAT THEY CONSIDER THE FLOODPLAIN HEIGHT INCREASE.

I AGREE WITH THAT. IS THAT A MOTION WOULD YOU LIKE.

WELL, I CAN MAKE A MOTION. I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION THAT WE RECOMMEND THE PETITION TO COUNCIL, CONSIDERING THE TWO POINTS ALREADY PUT IN PLACE BY THE PLANNING REFERRED TO EARLY, EARLIER THE ADDITIONAL POINT THAT THE AC THAT ENCROACHES TO THE 6.2FT IS MOVED INWARDS, SO THAT ENCROACHMENT, THAT PART OF THE ENCROACHMENT DISAPPEARS AND THAT WE RECOMMEND THAT THE PETITIONER CONSIDERS THE FLOODPLAIN HEIGHT ANY INCREASE THAT WOULD BE ALLOWABLE AND ACCESSIBLE TO THEM.

IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND. CALL THE ROLL. MEMBER.

SCHULTZ. I'VE GOT A QUALIFICATION IN MY NO VOTE IN THAT.

I WOULD LIKE TO SEE YOU GO BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD AND GET WHAT YOU REALLY WANT, AND NOT PIECEMEAL THIS.

SO I'M GOING TO VOTE NO ON THIS AND ENCOURAGE YOU TO GO BACK TO THAT DRAWING BOARD.

SO I CERTAINLY APPRECIATE WHAT YOU'RE SAYING.

I THINK WE THERE WAS A MISUNDERSTANDING OF THE HEIGHT.

THAT'S WHY WE CHOSE THIS HEIGHT. WE WERE. SO THERE IS A MISUNDERSTANDING.

AND SCOTT, WE'RE JUST GOING TO RUN UP THEIR PRICES.

I MEAN, THE CITY COUNCIL CAN DEAL WITH THIS. THEN MY VOTE REMAINS.

NO. OKAY. MEMBER. CHRIS. YES. MEMBER. FOWLER.

YES. MEMBER. YES. VICE CHAIR. KEPLER. I'M GOING TO VOTE NO, BECAUSE I THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE A LIMIT ON HOW MUCH THEY'RE ALLOWED TO

[00:35:04]

BUT IF THERE WAS A REASONABLE LIMIT, THEY ELEVATE IT, THEN I WOULD SAY YES.

BUT RIGHT NOW I HAVE TO SAY NO, IT'S NOT CAPPED.

MEMBER MAYOR. YES. CHAIR. COUGHLIN. YES. 5 TO 2.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE APPRECIATE IT. NO THANK YOU.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. AND, MR. CHAIR, IF I COULD JUST MAKE ONE COMMENT I WOULD JUST LIKE TO EXPRESS OUR SYMPATHY TO THE ARNOLDS, BECAUSE I CAN UNDERSTAND HOW THIS WOULD BE CONCERNING.

AND AND JUST WANT TO SAY THAT WE DIDN'T TAKE THEM INTO CONSIDERATION.

IT'S JUST THAT THIS MAKES BETTER SENSE, I THINK, TO APPROVE IT IN MY POSITION.

AND I WOULD ENCOURAGE THE HOMEOWNER TO DO WHATEVER YOU CAN TO HELP WORK WITH THE ARNOLDS TO MAKE IT AS ACCEPTABLE TO THEM AS POSSIBLE.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THE HOMEOWNERS. I'M VERY SURPRISED THAT HE EVEN SAID ANYTHING.

HE'S ALWAYS BEEN VERY PRO THIS. SO I THINK HE WAS JUST WORRIED ABOUT HIS POOL A LITTLE BIT.

BUT I THINK HE'S FINE. I THINK HE'S FINE. THANK YOU SO MUCH.

THANK YOU SO MUCH. THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS SEVEN B WHICH IS A CONTINUANCE.

[7.B) Request for Continuance to December 11, 2025 PAB Meeting.   A Resolution Determining Conditional Use Petition 25-CU5 Pursuant to Sections 46-34, 58-503, and 50-107 of the Code of Ordinances, City of Naples, to Allow for a Cocktail Lounge in a Planned Development with Highway Commercial Zoning and to Approve an Associated Parking Needs Analysis on Property Owned by Weston Associates, LLC., and Located at 4089 Tamiami Trail North, A104; More Fully Described Herein; Providing for Findings and Conditions; Providing for Scrivener's Errors; and Providing an Effective Date.]

AND THAT WOULD BE TO THE DECEMBER 11TH, 2025 MEETING.

I'LL MAKE THAT MOTION. SECOND. SECOND. IS THAT RIGHT? DO YOU NEED A VOICE VOTE OR ROLL CALL? ROLL CALL PLEASE.

ROLL CALL. MEMBER. FOWLER. YES. VICE CHAIR. KAPLAN.

YES. MEMBER. SCHULTZ. YES. MEMBER. BARONE. YES.

MEMBER. CROSS. YES. MEMBER. MAYOR. YES. CHAIR.

COUGHLIN. YES. OKAY. OKAY. MOTION CARRIED. NEXT ITEM ON OUR AGENDA IS SEVEN C, A RESOLUTION DETERMINING

[7.C) A Resolution Determining Variance Petition 25-V5 Pursuant to Sections 46-37, 56-41, 56-45, and 56-54 of the Code of Ordinances, City of Naples, to Allow a Variance for an Encroachment into the Front Yard Setback for the Purpose of Installing a Swimming Pool, Pool Deck, and Pool Mechanical Equipment on Property Owned by Kristin Frooshani and Jason Frooshani and Located at 1275 8th Avenue North; More fully Described Herein; Providing Findings and Conditions; Providing for Scrivener's Errors; and Providing an Effective Date.]

SETBACK FOR THE PURPOSE OF INSTALLING A SWIMMING POOL, POOL DECK AND POOL.

MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT. A PROPERTY OWNED BY KRISTEN AND JASON AND LOCATED AT 1275 EIGHTH AVENUE NORTH.

MORE FULLY DESCRIBED HEREIN, PROVIDING FINDINGS AND CONDITIONS, PROVIDING FOR SCRIVENER'S ERRORS, AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE. WOULD ANYBODY WISHING TO SPEAK ON THIS MATTER BE SWORN IN, PLEASE? HI. DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE TESTIMONY YOU'RE ABOUT TO GIVE IS THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH? THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

PETITIONER. EX-PARTE. DISCLOSURES, PLEASE. THANK YOU, THANK YOU.

EX PARTE. DECLARATION. DECLARE DISCLOSURES. NO. DISCLOSURES. NO. NOTHING TO DISCLOSE.

THANK YOU. SORRY. WERE THE PROPERTY NOTHING TO DISCLOSE? NOTHING TO DISCLOSE. NOTHING TO DISCLOSE. NOTHING TO DISCLOSE.

AWARE OF THE PROPERTY? READ THE DOCUMENTS PROVIDED BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND NOTHING TO DISCLOSE.

WALK THE PROPERTY THE OTHER DAY AND NOTHING TO DISCLOSE.

I VIEWED THE PROPERTY AND NOTHING FURTHER TO DISCLOSE.

THANK YOU. APPLICANT. GOOD MORNING KRISTIN. I'M THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY.

AND HERE, AS YOU MENTIONED, FOR A VARIANCE REQUEST.

HERE IS AN IMAGE OF THE PROPERTY. AS YOU CAN SEE, IT IS A CORNER LOT.

CONSIDERED THREE FRONT LOTS AND ONE SIDE YARD.

THE LOCATION OF THE POOL WE'RE LOOKING AT ON THE NORTHEAST SIDE.

AS YOU CAN SEE HERE, I'VE HIGHLIGHTED THE DISTANCE FROM THE PROPERTY LINE TO THE AREA WHERE WE INCLUDE THE POOL.

THE CURRENT HOUSE IS NON-CONFORMING, LAWFULLY NON-CONFORMING, AND IT SITS WITHIN SEVEN, SEVEN FEET, FOUR INCHES FROM THE PROPERTY LINE. WHEN THAT'S CONSIDERED A FRONT, I THINK IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE 20 OR 25FT.

A FEW IMAGES OF THE HOUSE. IT IS TWO STORY. THE SECOND STORY WAS ADDED IN THE 90S WITH THE GARAGE.

THERE'S QUITE A BIT OF LAND, BUT THAT'S NOT CONSIDERED MY PROPERTY.

THAT'S AN EASEMENT FOR THE UTILITY ON THE EAST SIDE.

AND THEN I HAVE HERE A FEW RENDERINGS TO SHOW WHERE THE POOL WOULD BE LOCATED.

[00:40:04]

WE WOULD LOOK TO ALSO INCLUDE LANDSCAPING FOR VISUAL PURPOSES.

I HAVE HERE THE TYPES OF MATERIALS THE RENDERINGS ARE USING A RECTANGULAR SHAPED FIBERGLASS POOL THAT'S 12 BY 25FT CORINTHIAN MODEL, AS WELL AS A 48 INCH ALUMINUM FENCE WITH A 54 INCH LATCH.

THE REASON IS, YOU'LL SEE IN MY APPLICATION AS WELL, HARDSHIP.

THREE FRONTS, ONE SIDE YARD. THERE IS NO REAR YARD, WHICH IS WHAT IS REQUIRED BY CODE.

THE ORIGINAL CONSTRUCTION HOME WAS CONSTRUCTED IN 1953.

IT DID COMPLY. AT THE CURRENT TIME, CODE HAS CHANGED OVER TIME.

STRICT CODE COMPLIANCE WOULD MEAN THAT ANY OWNER WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO INSTALL A POOL, WHICH IS A RIGHT OF MANY OF THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTIES AS FAR AS NEIGHBORHOOD COMPATIBILITY. THIS IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

THE DESIGN IS IN THE HOPE IS THAT IT WOULD ENHANCE THE PROPERTY'S VALUE AND THAT WE WOULD RETAIN THE CURRENT BUILDING AS OPPOSED TO KNOCKING IT DOWN AND BUILDING ANEW. COMPLEMENTS THE SURROUNDING HOMES.

WE'RE NOT LOOKING TO DO ANYTHING DIFFERENT WITH THE HOME ITSELF.

THERE WILL BE A LANDSCAPING BUFFER, AS I SAID.

AND ADDING VALUE TO THE CURRENT PROPERTY HELPS MAINTAIN AND IMPROVE NEIGHBORHOOD CHARACTER AND QUALITY OF LIFE.

VARIANCE CRITERIA. I'M SURE YOU'RE ALL VERY WELL AWARE THAT IT THAT THERE'S UNIQUE CHARACTERISTICS OF THIS PROPERTY.

BUT THE VARIANCE IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

THERE'S NO REAL WAY TO MITIGATE THIS OTHER THAN BUILDING ANEW.

I'M NOT ASKING TO ESTABLISH OR ENLARGE THE USE.

AND THERE'S NO HARM TO SAFETY OR WELFARE OF THE COMMUNITY HERE.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. VERY GOOD PRESENTATION.

WE APPRECIATE IT. ANY QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. STAFF REPORT. GOOD MORNING, BOARD MEMBERS, JEFF BRAMMER WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT.

THE ITEM BEFORE YOU IS A VARIANCE PETITION, AS YOU'VE HEARD, FOR A SWIMMING POOL IN THE FRONT YARD.

SETBACKS. THE HOUSE IS LOCATED AT 1275 EIGHTH AVENUE NORTH.

THE MAIN RESIDENCE WAS BUILT IN 1953. A TWO STORY GARAGE ADDITION WAS BUILT IN 1996.

THE LOT IS A BIT UNIQUE IN THAT IT'S ON A CORNER WITH THREE STREET FRONTAGES, AND THIS MEANS THREE FRONT YARDS, AS YOU'VE HEARD IN THE R1 ZONING OR R1 75 ZONING DISTRICT.

THE FRONT YARD SETBACK IS 25FT. THIS CASE WITH MULTIPLE FRONTAGES.

ONE OF THOSE IS ALLOWED TO BE REDUCED TO 20FT.

THAT'S BEEN DONE ON THE NORTH SIDE AT THE TIME OF THE GARAGE, AND THAT IS ABOUT 22FT.

AND IT MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS. BUT THE OTHER TWO, THE 13TH STREET AND EIGHTH AVENUE, ARE FRONTAGES THAT REQUIRE THE 25. THE PETITIONER PROPOSES INSTALLING THE POOL CONSISTENT WITH THE EXISTING HOUSE SETBACKS AS THEY ARE NOW, AND THIS ENCROACHES INTO TWO SETBACKS, ONE ON THE EAST AND ONE ON THE NORTH.

THE EAST SETBACK WOULD BE ABOUT SEVEN AND A HALF, A LITTLE BIT LESS.

THE NORTH SETBACK, WHERE THE POOL DECK WOULD BE IS A LITTLE LESS THAN 18FT.

I THINK IT'S 17.7 OR 17.8 FEET. AS YOU'VE HEARD, THE PETITIONER PROPOSES FENCING AND THE HEDGEROW SCREENING BETWEEN THE POOL AND THE ROAD. THE MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT WILL BE PLACED ABOUT FOUR AND A HALF, 4.4 FROM THE EAST.

SETBACK. THIS ENCROACHES A LITTLE FURTHER INTO THAT FRONT SETBACK.

THE DETAILS OF THE VARIANCE REQUEST RELATE TO THREE SECTIONS OF THE LDC, ONE THAT POOLS SHALL NOT BE PLACED IN REQUIRED FRONT YARD SETBACKS, TWO THAT POOLS AND POOL DECKS ARE CONSIDERED ENCROACHMENTS, AND THEY SHALL NOT EXCEED 30IN IN HEIGHT IN THE REQUIRED SETBACKS.

THIS WILL NOT EXCEED THAT 30IN. THEIR PROPOSED ELEVATIONS ARE A LITTLE OVER A FOOT ABOVE THE AVERAGE CROWN OF ROAD.

HOWEVER, POOLS ARE NOT THAT EXEMPTION, SO IT'S STILL CONSIDERED AN ENCROACHMENT.

SO IT IT NEEDS A VARIANCE FROM THAT. AND THE THIRD ONE IS MECHANICAL EQUIPMENT WITH NEW CONSTRUCTION MAY NOT BE LOCATED IN THE REQUIRED SETBACKS, REGARDLESS OF HEIGHT. STAFF NOTICED THE PETITION TO PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 1000FT.

[00:45:05]

PURSUANT TO CODE SECTION 4637, STAFF HAS APPLIED THE CRITERIA FOR A VARIANCE FOR THE POOL, THE POOL DECK, THE POOL EQUIPMENT TO ENCROACH INTO THE FRONT YARD.

SETBACK STAFF FINDS THAT THE CRITERIA HAVE BEEN MET AND THE ADDITIONAL CRITERIA ONE, TWO AND THREE HAVE BEEN MET.

FOUR AND FIVE DON'T APPLY. SHOULD THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD WISH TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL.

STAFF WOULD RECOMMEND THE FOLLOWING CONDITIONS.

NUMBER ONE THE VARIANCE IS APPLICABLE APPLICABLE ONLY TO THE POOL, THE POOL DECK AND THE POOL EQUIPMENT AND SHALL NOT APPLY TO ADDITIONS OR THE CONSTRUCTION OF NEW STRUCTURES OR INSTALLATION OF NEW IMPROVEMENTS ON THE PROPERTY.

AND NUMBER TWO. AT THE CONCLUSION OF CONSTRUCTION AND PRIOR TO THE SCHEDULING OF FINAL INSPECTIONS, A LANDSCAPE ARCHITECT WILL PROVIDE A LETTER OF COMPLIANCE CERTIFYING THAT THE INSTALLATION OF THE HARDSCAPE AND THE LANDSCAPE ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE APPROVED PLANS.

THAT CONCLUDES MY COMMENTS. AVAILABLE FOR FOR QUESTIONS.

ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF? YEAH. WELL, BEFORE I DO, SOMEBODY'S GOT A PHONE ON AND THE RING DOORBELL IS CHIMING, SO IT'S REALLY DISTRACTING. I DON'T KNOW WHO'S GOT THE PHONE.

IF YOU COULD JUST CHECK AND SWITCH VOLUMES OFF, BUT SOMEBODY'S GOT A RING APP THAT'S RINGING AWAY.

ANYWAY, BACK TO THE QUESTIONS. FROM THE STAFF REPORT, I'M LOOKING AT POINT TWO, PAGE TEN, AND IT RELATES TO THREE THREE FOOT ENCROACHMENT OF THE PROPOSED EQUIPMENT PAD.

CAN YOU JUST TELL US A LITTLE BIT MORE ABOUT THAT? NUMBER TEN ADDITIONAL CRITERIA. ADDITIONAL CRITERIA.

ADDITIONAL CRITERIA. NUMBER TWO OH. NUMBER TWO.

ADDITIONAL CRITERIA POINT TWO. PAGE TEN. GIVEN THE EXISTING BUILDING COVERAGE AND THE REQUIRED SETBACKS, THE LOCATION OF THE POOL AND POOL DECK AND THE EAST AND NORTH YARDS IS THE ONLY LOCATION FOR THE SWIMMING POOL.

THE POOL AND POOL DECK WILL NOT ENCROACH BEYOND THE EAST AND NORTH FACADES OF THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENT.

SO WHERE THE THE FACE OF THE HOUSE IS NOW, THE POOL DECK WILL NOT GO ANY FARTHER THAN THAT.

SO THE HOUSE IS 7.47.3 AND THE DECK WON'T GO ANY FURTHER.

IT'S THE EQUIPMENT PAD THAT THE EQUIPMENT? YES.

AND THE THE EQUIPMENT WHERE THEY'RE PROPOSING TO PUT IT WILL BE FURTHER INTO THAT THREE FEET.

AND IT WOULD BE ABOUT 4.5FT FROM THE FRONT YARD SETBACK.

OKAY. OTHER QUESTIONS? YES, I HAVE A QUESTION.

IS THERE ANYWHERE ELSE THAT THE POOL EQUIPMENT COULD GO? I SUPPOSE IT CAN GO ON THE WEST SIDE, WHICH WOULD BE I DON'T I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT WOULD WOULD ALSO BE CONSIDERED AN ENCROACHMENT IF IT WENT ON THE WEST SIDE, WHICH IS CONSIDERED A SIDE YARD.

RIGHT NOW, I BELIEVE, ACCORDING TO YOUR SURVEY, THAT'S 11 NINE WHERE THE HOUSE IS.

IT COULD GO THERE, I GUESS, IF YES, YOU MAY HAVE ROOM TO PUT IT THERE.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. YES, SCOTT. I APPLAUD THE EFFORTS TO TRY TO DO THIS.

IT'S A CHARMING LITTLE PROPERTY. THE TREE. THE BIG, LOVELY TREE.

YES. HOW ARE YOU GOING TO DEAL WITH THE ROOTS FROM THAT? GOOD QUESTION. I HADN'T THOUGHT OF THAT. I WOULD TAKE SUGGESTIONS ON THAT. I'M NOT SURE. I'M NOT AN ARBORIST MYSELF, BUT IT'S A CHARMING IDEA.

IT'S A LOVELY LOT, I JUST THINK. ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? DOES ANYONE WISH TO MAKE A MOTION. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO REJECT THE PETITION. MAINLY BECAUSE OF ITS CURRENT ENCROACHMENT.

UNTIL THEY CAN RECONFIGURE THAT. AND ALSO THERE NEEDS TO BE CONSIDERATION OF THE THE TREES THAT ARE ON THE PROPERTY.

AND I THINK A PLAN NEEDS TO BE IN PLACE THAT'S ALREADY THAT'S APPROVED AT THE TIME OF SUBMISSION, BECAUSE I'M ALSO LOOKING AT THE SURROUNDING AREA AND THE POOLS THAT ARE AROUND WITH VARIOUS NEIGHBORS, WHICH DON'T MATCH WHAT'S BEEN APPLIED FOR. SO MY MY BIG CONCERN WOULD BE CURRENTLY THE PETITION PUT FORWARD, I'D RECOMMEND A REJECTION FOR APPROVAL BASED ON THOSE FROM MY SIDE OF THINGS.

THOSE TWO POINTS, THE RELOCATION OF THE PAD SO IT'S LESS INTRUSIVE AND A CLEAR PLAN TO DEAL WITH THE,

[00:50:07]

IS THERE A SECOND? UNFORTUNATELY, I WILL SECOND THAT.

OKAY. DISCUSSION. I'M VERY SYMPATHETIC TO THIS.

I IT FITS IN THAT NICHE. IT DOES BETWEEN THE NORTH AND THE WHAT, ARE WE LIVING HERE? YEAH, THE NORTH AND THE EAST. EAST SIDE. AS MY COLLEAGUE HERE, I'M CONCERNED THAT THE POOL EQUIPMENT ENCROACHES TOO FAR.

I THINK WE NEED TO LOOK AT WHERE THAT CAN GO.

AND CERTAINLY THE THE THE TREE. YEAH, I AGREE WITH THAT.

SO I THINK WE NEED TO COME BACK WITH AN IDEA OF WHERE ELSE THE POOL EQUIPMENT COULD GO.

AND I THINK WE NEED TO HEAR FROM THE CITY ARBORIST AS TO ANY EFFECTS ON THE TREE AND HOW TO MITIGATE ENCROACHMENT OF ROOTS.

I HAVE A I HAVE A QUESTION ON THIS. AND THIS MIGHT BE FOR ANDREW.

SO WHEN WE'RE CONSIDERING THIS FOR APPROVAL OR NOT SOME OF THE KIND OF ANCILLARY ISSUES THAT COME UP THAT DOESN'T NECESSARILY LIKE, FOR EXAMPLE, THE TREE, IF WE WERE TO APPROVE THIS AND THEY WERE TO MOVE FORWARD, IF THEY THEN RUN INTO PROBLEMS WITH THE TREE, NOT ALLOWING THEM TO DO THAT.

THAT'S NOT REALLY OUR PART OF OUR. WE'RE JUST GIVING THEM THE APPROVAL TO YES OR NO, WHETHER OR NOT THEY CAN DO THIS.

THE FACT THAT THEY CAN ACTUALLY DO IT WILL COME DOWN TO THE ACTUAL BUILDING PROCESS PERMITTING AND EVERYTHING ELSE.

CORRECT? YEAH. TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, I MEAN, THE THE ISSUE OF THE POOL PAD AND OR THE EQUIPMENT AND ENCROACHMENT, THINGS ARE LEGITIMATE. I THINK THE TREE ISSUE IS A LEGITIMATE ISSUE.

HOWEVER, IT'S SECONDARY IN TERMS OF JUST THE VARIANCE, BECAUSE WHEN YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT A VARIANCE, IT'S PRIMARILY ORIENTED AROUND THE HARDSHIP AND THAT THEY CAN'T MEET THE SETBACKS, BUT ULTIMATELY THEY WILL HAVE TO THE CITY HAS TREE REGULATIONS AND IT WOULD HAVE TO BE DEALT WITH ONE WAY OR THE OTHER IF YOU GRANTED THE VARIANCE, AND SOMEHOW THEY CAN'T DEAL WITH THE TREE, THEN IT'S.

IT'S MOOT. SOMEBODY SHOW ME WHERE THE TREE IS.

GOOGLE EARTH IS. WHAT'S INCLUDED IN THE DOCUMENT IS NOT QUITE AS, LET'S SAY, AS GOOD AS IT COULD BE.

IF YOU VIEW THE PROPERTY, IF YOU LOOK ON GOOGLE EARTH, YOU'LL SEE A VERY DIFFERENT IMAGE, BECAUSE SOME OF THAT THAT'S IN THE DOCUMENT IS A CUT AND PASTE ABOUT THE ONE PALM.

NO TREES ON THE LEFT TREE TO THE LEFT, WHICH IS PROBABLY FICUS.

I MEAN THE VIDEO OF THE PROPERTY, YOU CAN'T, YOU CAN'T, YOU CAN'T, YOU CAN'T LOOK AT ANYTHING THAT'S NOT ON THE RECORD.

WELL, SORRY, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN SEE WHAT'S ON MY SCREEN HERE.

MY GOODNESS. BUT THIS IS THE TREE. HOW FAR AWAY IS THAT TREE FROM WHERE THE POOL IS? THAT'S OUTSIDE OF MY PROPERTY. YEAH. SO THAT'S IN THE.

LET ME JUST BE CLEAR WHAT THEY'RE DOING AND JEFF JUMP IN TO.

BUT I BELIEVE WHAT THEY'RE ASKING TO DO IS JUST SQUARE OFF.

THERE, THERE, BETWEEN THE ELEVATED ROOF. THEY'RE SQUARING IT OFF AND IT'S ALL GOING TO BE SQUARED OFF.

THAT TREE, THAT PARTICULAR TREE IS IN THE CITY RIGHT AWAY.

AM I WRONG? AM I RIGHT ABOUT THAT OR. YEAH, THERE'S A COUPLE I IF THIS IS THE TREE IN QUESTION, A PALM TREE ON THEIR PROPERTY, BUT THERE'S A BIG OAK TREE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT ON WHICH YEAH RIGHT AWAY THE CITY TREES WHICH ARE IN THE PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY WERE THIS PROPOSAL WAS REVIEWED BY THE CITY'S ARBORIST, AND SHE DIDN'T SEE A CONFLICT WITH ANY OF THE CITY TREES.

NOW WE REVIEW FOR CITY TREES, NOT PRIVATE. YOU KNOW, ANY OF THE TREES THAT ARE ON THE PRIVATE PROPERTY WERE NOT REVIEWED BY OUR CITY ARBORIST.

BUT OKAY, SO WHEN I LOOK AT THE THING CALLED SITE PLAN, THOSE AREAS THERE ARE PROPERTY AND THE TREE IS BEYOND THAT.

YES THAT'S CORRECT. YES. OKAY. SO WELL BEYOND THAT.

SO I HAVE ONE COMMENT TO MAKE. I THINK THE CITY TREE ISSUE IS OUTSIDE THE SCOPE OF OUR AUTHORITY HERE, SINCE IT'S ON CITY LAND AND THE ARBORIST HAS SHOWN NO OBJECTION AS TO THE POOL EQUIPMENT, I THINK WE CAN JUST MAKE THAT A CONDITION OF OUR APPROVAL AND LET THIS PERSON MOVE ALONG. YOU KNOW, I'M ALWAYS IN FAVOR OF LETTING THE CITY COUNCIL GET STUFF EARLY RATHER THAN LATER, SO I'M GOING TO VOTE AGAINST THE MOTION UNLESS IT'S WITHDRAWN.

I'M NOT. I HAVE NO INTENTION TO WITHDRAW IT, BUT I HAVE NO PROBLEM ABOUT IT BEING VOTED NO. OKAY, SO I WILL WITHDRAW MY SECOND. THE SECOND IS WITHDRAWN.

THEN I'LL SECOND IT. OKAY, WE HAVE A SECOND. I'D JUST LIKE TO REGISTER MY AGREEMENT WITH THE CHAIR'S COMMENTS CONCERNING THE TREE AND THE OVERALL PROJECT.

[00:55:02]

MR. CHAIR, IF I, IF I, IF I COULD JUST BE CLEAR BECAUSE SO THE THE SECOND WAS WITHDRAWN WHICH MEANS THAT THE, THE ORIGINAL MOTION DIED. RIGHT. AND THEN THE CHAIR MADE A MOTION TO APPROVE WITH A CONDITION REGARDING THE EQUIPMENT.

CORRECT? NO, NO, THAT WAS A SUGGESTION, BUT I DIDN'T MAKE THAT.

I MADE THAT COMMENT BEFORE THE MOTION. OKAY. SO WHAT HAPPENED WAS THE SECOND WAS DRAWN AND SCOTT MOVED IN AS A SECOND ON THAT MOTION.

GOTCHA. OKAY. SO NOW I THINK WE HAVE TO CALL THE ROLL.

JUST TO CLARIFY, YOU KNOW, TO CLARIFY, THE MOTION IS TO NOT RECOMMEND OR TO GOING FORWARD, BUT JUST JUST SO WE'RE CLEAR. SO IF YOU WANT IT TO GO FORWARD, YOU'D VOTE AGAINST IT.

IF YOU DON'T WANT IT TO GO FORWARD, YOU'D VOTE IN FAVOR, RIGHT? ROLL, PLEASE. ONE SECOND.

OKAY. MEMBER. FOWLER. NO. I WOULD APPROVE THE APPLICATION AS SUBMITTED.

MEMBER MAYOR. YES. MEMBER. SCHULTZ. SCHOLZ. YES.

VICE CHAIR. KAPLAN. NO. MEMBER. NO MEMBER. CREASE.

NO. CHAIR. COUGHLIN. NO. FAILED. TWO FIVE. OKAY.

IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE THIS? I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THE APPLICATION WITH THE CONDITION THAT THE POOL EQUIPMENT BE MOVED TO A LOCATION FURTHER AWAY. CAN I MAKE A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT THAT YOU ALSO INCLUDE? THAT YOU ALSO INCLUDE THE TWO POINTS FROM THE PLANNING AS WELL? YES. THANK YOU. SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? ROLL CALL.

MEMBER. BARONE. YES. MEMBER. FOWLER. YES. MEMBER.

SCHULTZ. YES. MEMBER. CREASE. YES. MEMBER. MAYOR.

NO. VICE. CHAIR. KAPLAN. YES. CHAIR. COUGHLIN.

YES. SIX ONE. OKAY. THE MOTION CARRIED. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

AND YOU MIGHT WANT TO HAVE YOUR DRAWINGS WHEN YOU GET TO THE CITY COUNCIL, SHOW THE NEW LOCATION FOR THE POOL EQUIPMENT.

VERY GOOD. THANK YOU. AND I'D JUST LIKE TO COMMENT.

EXCELLENT PRESENTATION. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR THAT. THANK YOU. WHO NEEDS A LAWYER? THANK YOU. OKAY, THE NEXT ITEM. WE'RE ALL RIGHT WITHOUT A BREAK AT THIS POINT.

YEAH. WE HAVE YES, WE WE HAVE A TIME CERTAIN AT 11 FOR THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE, BUT IT'S 930, SO OKAY. SO NEXT IS SEVEN. A RESOLUTION DETERMINING A DETERMINING APPEAL OF AN ADMINISTRATIVE

[7.D) A Resolution Determining Appeal of an Administrative Decision Petition 25-AA2, Relating to an Appeal Pursuant to Section 2-84 of the Code of Ordinances of the City of Naples to Challenge a Staff Determination Regarding the Classification of a Proposed Project as a Marina, as Defined in Section 44-8 of the Code of Ordinances, City of Naples, and to a Staff Determination That Underground Parking Cannot be Administratively Approved, Pursuant to a Motion Approved by City Council on September 20, 2023 for the Property Owned by Viceroy Naples, LLC, Located at 599 River Point Drive, More Fully Described Herein; and Providing an Effective Date.]

MORE FULLY DESCRIBED HEREIN AND PROVIDING FOR AN EFFECTIVE DATE.

WOULD ANYBODY WISHING TO TALK BE SWORN IN ON THIS ITEM, PLEASE? DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM THAT THE TESTIMONY YOU'RE ABOUT TO GIVE IS THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH? YES.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. OKAY, WE'LL HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT FIRST, PLEASE.

ANY EX PARTE DISCLOSURES? DISCLOSURES? YOU'RE GOING TO GET ME TRAINED SOONER OR LATER.

SOONER OR LATER. NOTHING TO DISCLOSE. VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE PROPERTY, BUT NOTHING TO DISCLOSE.

NOTHING TO DISCLOSE. NOTHING TO DISCLOSE. NOTHING TO DISCLOSE.

FAMILIAR WITH THE PROPERTY? READ THE MATERIAL SUPPLIED TO US.

NOTHING TO DISCLOSE. LIKEWISE. I'VE WALKED THE PROPERTY, BUT NOTHING FURTHER TO DISCLOSE.

AND, MR. CHAIR, BEFORE WE GET STARTED, I DO HAVE A PROCEDURAL CLARIFICATION ON THIS ISSUE.

THE ISSUE REGARDING THE UNDERGROUND PARKING IS REALLY NOT AN ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL FOR YOU TO BE CONSIDERING.

THAT'S BASED ON A MOTION AND A DECISION THAT WAS MADE BY THE COUNCIL TO NOT ALLOW THE ADMINISTRATION TO MAKE DECISIONS REGARDING UNDERGROUND PARKING. SO THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY AN ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL.

SO THAT WILL JUST GO DIRECTLY TO THE CITY COUNCIL.

SO I'M GOING TO ASK YOU TO JUST FOCUS ON THE MARINA ISSUE.

[01:00:02]

PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND PLEASE PROCEED. YES.

FOR THE RECORD, MY NAME IS BURT SAUNDERS. I'M WITH THE GRAY ROBINSON LAW FIRM.

WE HAVE OFFICES HERE IN NAPLES, AND I AM REPRESENTING THE DEVELOPER OF THIS PROJECT.

AND THE OWNER, MR. HARRY ZIA, WHO WILL BE MAKING A PRESENTATION SHORTLY TO DESCRIBE THIS PROJECT.

AND ALSO WITH ME IS PETER KULWICKI THE ARCHITECT WITH PK STUDIOS.

AS WAS INDICATED, THIS IS AN APPEAL OF TWO FINAL DECISIONS.

WE'LL JUST WE'LL JUST FOCUS ON THE MARINA ISSUE AND NOT FOCUS ON THE BELOW GRADE PARKING.

BUT THE TWO. A DECISION MADE BY STAFF IN REFERENCE TO THE VICEROY PROJECT.

SO THAT FIRST ISSUE, THE ONE WE'RE GOING TO FOCUS ON TODAY, IS A DETERMINATION BY STAFF THAT THIS PROJECT DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A MARINA.

AND THEREFORE NO PART OF THE PROJECT CAN BE, NO PART OF THE LOT.

COVERAGE CAN EXCEED 40%, WHICH IS THE GENERAL LOT COVERAGE FOR PROJECTS IN THE CITY.

MARINAS ARE PERMITTED TO HAVE LOT COVERAGE OF 50%.

AND SO THE ISSUE BECOMES WHETHER THIS PROJECT IS CONSIDERED A MARINA OR WHETHER A PORTION OF THE PROJECT IS CONSIDERED A MARINA.

AND WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT A PORTION OF THIS PROJECT BEING CONSIDERED A MARINA.

THE STAFF REPORT ACTUALLY IS A LETTER THAT WE RECEIVED IN JULY DEALING WITH THIS PROJECT ON PAGE 14 SAYS WHILE THE DEVELOPMENT DOES CONTAIN SOME OF THE MARINA USES, THEY ARE NOT SIGNIFICANT ENOUGH TO QUALIFY THE ENTIRE DEVELOPMENT AS A MARINA.

BUT WE'LL CONCEDE THAT ISSUE FOR THIS PURPOSES THIS MORNING.

OUR CONTENTION IS THAT A PORTION OF THIS PROJECT IS MARINA.

NOW, THE IMPORTANCE OF THAT IS THAT AND I WILL.

LET ME MENTION ONE OTHER COMMENT IN THE STAFF REPORT ON PAGE 12.

THE STAFF STATES THE REVISED ARCHITECTURAL PLANS CALL FOR A CALL OUT.

4200FT² OF MARINA USES AND 30,695FT² OF NON MARINA USES IN THE LOT COVERAGE CALCULATION, THE MARINA USE IS ONLY 12% OF THE TOTAL LOT AREA COVERAGE, WHICH WE AGREE THAT THAT'S THE CORRECT NUMBER.

BUT THE POINT IS THAT THERE'S AN ACKNOWLEDGMENT THAT A PORTION OF THIS PROJECT IS MARINA USE.

NOW, IN ADDITION TO THE MARINA STORE THIS PROJECT HAS 12 BOAT SLIPS.

AND IF YOU TAKE A LOOK AT STATE LAW AND YOUR ORDINANCES THE DEFINITION OF A MARINA IN SECTION 50 8-865. THE DEFINITION OF A MARINA MEANS A DOCKING FACILITY CONTAINING TEN OR MORE SLIPS. AND IT SAYS IT REFERS YOU TO SECTION 40 4-8 AS WELL.

JUST FOR YOUR INFORMATION, IT'S NOT PARTICULARLY RELEVANT, BUT I THINK IT'S INSTRUCTIVE.

THE FLORIDA ADMINISTRATIVE CODE DEFINES A MARINA.

A MARINA SHALL BE EVALUATED ON THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA.

FOR THE PURPOSES OF THIS PART, A MARINA SHALL BE DEFINED AS A DOCKAGE FACILITY, PROVIDING TEN OR MORE WET SLIPS OR PROVIDING A COMMERCIAL BOAT SERVICES. OPERATIVE WORD BEING OR SO THE THE TEN OR MORE SLIPS CONSTITUTES A MARINA.

MATTER OF FACT, IN FLORIDA STATUTES SECTION 380 .0655, THERE IS AN INDICATION THAT FOR MARINAS, YOU HAVE AN EXPEDITED PERMITTING PROCESS FOR MARINA PROJECTS RECEIVING 10% OR MORE OF THEIR BOAT SLIPS FOR PUBLIC USE.

IN OUR CASE, WE HAVE 12 BOAT SLIPS, TWO OF WHICH ARE FOR PUBLIC USE, SO WE EXCEED THAT THRESHOLD IN TERMS OF ADVANCED PERMITTING. AT THE STATE LEVEL. SO OUR CONTENTION IS THAT A PART OF THIS PROJECT IS A MARINA. AND BASED ON THAT DETERMINATION, WE ARE WE'VE BEEN INSTRUCTED BY STAFF TO USE WHAT THEY REFER TO AS A BLENDED APPROACH TO CALCULATING LOT COVERAGE, MEANING THAT A PORTION OF THE OF THE PROJECT IS A MARINA, AND THEREFORE, LOT COVERAGE CAN EXCEED 40%.

CAN'T GET UP TO 50% BECAUSE THE WHOLE PROJECT'S NOT MARINA STAFF HAS INDICATED THAT THERE'S NOT A SIGNIFICANT ENOUGH.

USE MIRENA USE IN THE PROJECT FOR ANY OF IT TO BE CONSIDERED A MIRENA FOR PURPOSES OF LOT COVERAGE.

[01:05:03]

AS A MATTER OF FACT, WE ATTENDED MEETINGS IN WHICH STAFF SAID YOU HAVE TO USE A BLENDED APPROACH.

WE INQUIRED AS TO THE GUIDELINES FOR THAT, AND THERE ARE NONE, AS PETER WILL INDICATE.

THERE ARE OTHER PROJECTS IN THE CITY THAT HAVE USED A BLENDED APPROACH, AND IT TURNS OUT THAT HE ACTUALLY, HIS FIRM ACTUALLY WAS INVOLVED IN ONE OF THOSE WHERE THEY USED A BLENDED APPROACH.

AND SO THAT'S WHAT WE'RE ASKING THIS BOARD TODAY TO DETERMINE THAT FOR THIS PROJECT.

PART OF THE PROJECT IS A MARINA. AND THEREFORE THERE SHOULD BE A BLENDED APPROACH FOR CALCULATING LOT COVERAGE.

NOW, WHAT WE DID IS WENT BACK AND SHARPENED OUR PENCILS.

OUR APPLICATION ORIGINALLY REQUESTED 44.3% LOT COVERAGE, AND MR. ZIA WILL EXPLAIN THE PURPOSE OF THAT. WE SHARPENED OUR PENCILS.

WE'RE DOWN TO NOW ABOUT 41.9% LOT COVERAGE. SO WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR A WHOLE LOT OF LOT COVERAGE.

WE ARE ASKING FOR THE ADDITIONAL BASED ON THE FACT THAT A PORTION OF THIS PROJECT IS A MARINA.

LET ME INTRODUCE HARRY ZIA, WHO WILL TALK ABOUT THE PROJECT.

YOU CAN SEE FROM THE RENDERING THAT IT WILL BE A BEAUTIFUL PROJECT FOR THE CITY.

IT'S BEEN IN THE WORKS FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS.

MR. ZIA DEVELOPS BEAUTIFUL PROJECTS AND HE'LL GO THROUGH THAT.

AND THEN FOLLOWING MR. ZIA, PETER WILL GO THROUGH THE DETAIL DETAILS AS TO WHAT PORTIONS OF THE PROJECT ARE, MARINA AND HOW WE DETERMINE THAT THAT PERCENTAGE.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. BART. MY NAME IS HARRY ZIA. I'M THE DEVELOPER OF THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT KNOWN AS THE VICEROY, LOCATED AT 599 RIVER POINT HERE IN NAPLES.

THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF A HISTORY TO THIS PROJECT, WHICH MIGHT MAKE THINGS A LITTLE BIT EASIER TO UNDERSTAND WHY WE'RE ASKING FOR THIS APPEAL TO BE ENDORSED BY THE BOARD. ORIGINALLY, THIS PROJECT WAS KNOWN AS THE DEVELOPMENT, WITH FIVE RESTAURANTS CALLED THE PROMENADE ON FIFTH, WHICH WAS APPROVED WITH TWO LEVELS OF UNDERGROUND PARKING AND UP TO 50% COVERAGE OF THE LOT IN THE APPROVAL THAT WAS GIVEN BY THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. THEY NOTED THAT YOU ARE APPROVED, BUT YOU NEED IN ORDER TO KEEP THE 50%, WHICH IS THE GRACE THAT YOU GET WHEN YOU HAVE THE MARINA STATUS.

YOU HAVE TO HAVE AN APPROVAL OF TEN BOAT SLIPS.

THEY ACTUALLY WROTE THAT IN THE APPROVAL ON THE ORIGINAL PROJECT, WHICH WAS THE PROMENADE, TO DISPEL ANY IDEA THAT YOU WANT TO COMMIT AS A BULL IN A CHINA SHOP, TO TRY TO TELL PEOPLE WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO DO.

AND IN A COMMUNITY, A COMMUNITY, BY THE WAY I RAISED MY CHILDREN IN.

I'VE SPENT THE LAST 25 YEARS HERE. WE'RE WE'VE DONE SOME PRETTY GOOD THINGS, AND WE'VE BEEN THROUGH SOME DIFFICULT TIMES JUST LIKE EVERYBODY.

BUT WE CERTAINLY DID NOT WANT TO TAKE THIS APPROACH WHERE WE WERE GOING TO COME IN AND SAY, YOU KNOW, THIS IS WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO. SO WE GOT THE APPROVAL ON THE FIRST PROJECT.

MARKET CONDITIONS, SOME ISSUES WITH, YOU KNOW, SOME COMPLAINTS FROM NEIGHBORS THAT WE WE LISTEN TO, YOU KNOW, THAT THIS WAS GOING TO CAUSE A LOT OF TRAFFIC.

WE THOUGHT IT WAS GOING TO RELIEVE THE CHOKE POINT DOWN AT FIFTH AVENUE AND 41 AND AND NINTH AND 10TH.

WE REALLY BELIEVE THAT WE GOT APPROVAL FROM D.O.T..

I MEAN, WE WENT THROUGH THE WHOLE THING AND ULTIMATELY WE LOOKED AT THE MARKET CONDITIONS.

WE LOOKED AT THE WHAT WOULD THE IMPACT WOULD BE? AND WE MADE A BUSINESS DECISION. OBVIOUSLY, AS A DEVELOPER, YOU HAVE TO CONSIDER THE FINANCES, AND THE BUSINESS DECISION WAS THAT, YOU KNOW, WE COULD DO SOMETHING THAT WILL HAVE A HIGHER AND BETTER USE FINANCIALLY FOR THE PROJECT AND WILL BE MUCH BETTER FOR THE COMMUNITY. SO WE WENT BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD AND ONE LITTLE SIDE NOTE THIS PROJECT WAS DELAYED ABOUT A YEAR. THE ORIGINAL PROJECT, BECAUSE THERE WAS A PROBLEM WITH THE BUILDING OF THE HOTEL ACROSS ACROSS THE WAY THEY HAD THEY HAD LOST THEIR SPACE ON CENTRAL AVENUE TO STORE ALL THEIR LARGE PIECES OF CONCRETE, WHICH IS THE FINFROCK CONSTRUCTION METHOD. IT'S LIKE 60 FOOT SECTIONS.

SO THERE WAS NO PLACE TO PUT THEM. SO I GOT A CALL FROM CITY HALL AT THAT TIME AND ASKED ME IF I WOULD ALLOW THEM TO USE THE PROPERTY WHILE THEY WERE CONSTRUCTING THE HOTEL, SO WE PUSHED IT BACK A LITTLE BIT. FLASH FORWARD TO 2021.

WE COME UP WITH THIS NEW CONCEPT CALLED THE VICEROY.

IT TAKES THE IMPACT DOWN FROM YOU KNOW, FIVE RESTAURANTS AND 300 CARS ON SITE EVERY SINGLE DAY,

[01:10:09]

THE AMENITIES THAT CAME WITH IT WERE THE YOU GET A BOAT SLIP.

THERE'S ALSO COMMERCIAL OFFICE SPACE ON THE FIRST LEVEL.

AND WE TRIED TO, TO REDUCE THE OVERALL IMPACT AND CREATE SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE IN LINE WITH THE ORIGINAL COMP PLAN FOR THE CITY, WHICH WAS THAT WHEN YOU DRIVE INTO NAPLES, INSTEAD OF SEEING A VACANT LOT WITH PEOPLE PARKING, WE'VE HAD PEOPLE PARK MOTORHOMES IN THERE. WE'VE HAD PEOPLE FISHING IN THERE. WE'VE HAD ALL KINDS OF TRASH DUMPED THERE.

IT'S BEEN AN ONGOING I'D SAY 8 OR 9 YEARS OF MAYBE TEN YEARS NOW OF OF ISSUES DEALING WITH THAT PROPERTY.

BUT WE FINALLY GOT TO THE POINT WHERE WE HAD A GREAT PLAN.

WE DIDN'T JUST GO AHEAD AND CONCOCT THIS IDEA THAT IT'S A MARINA.

WE ALREADY HAD THE APPROVAL FROM THE PREVIOUS OUTLINING WHAT A MARINA WAS.

AND THEN WE HAD A MEETING WITH AN ADDITIONAL MEETING WITH ALL OF OUR PROFESSIONALS BEFORE WE STEPPED FOOT INTO THE VICEROY, BEFORE WE SAID, OKAY, WE'RE GOING TO DO THIS. WE SAID, LET'S GO BACK TO THEM AND HAVE A THEY HAVE THESE MEETINGS AND YOU ARE RUN THROUGH WHAT YOU'RE DOING. AND IN THAT MEETING, THERE WAS ONLY ONE CONCERN, WHICH WAS ABOUT UNDERGROUND PARKING, WHICH WAS STILL A CONTROVERSIAL ISSUE. TEN YEARS LATER WHICH WE HAD ALREADY HAD APPROVED.

AND THERE WAS ANOTHER ISSUE WITH, WITH FIRE AND TURNAROUNDS, WHICH WE HAD ADDRESSED PREVIOUSLY IN THE APPROVAL.

SUBSEQUENTLY, NOBODY BROUGHT UP THE ISSUE IN THAT MEETING THAT YOU'RE NOT A MARINA.

NOW, FOR WHATEVER REASON, RIGHT. AS LONG AS YOU HAVE THE TEN BOAT SLIPS, WHICH WAS THE CRITERIA THAT WAS PUT INTO THE APPROVAL ON THE, ON THE ON THE LARGER PROJECT, WE SAID WE'RE GOOD, RIGHT.

SO WE GO AND SPEND ALL THIS MONEY WITHOUT. AND I'M GOING TO SAY THIS BECAUSE IT IS SELF-SERVING, BUT IT IS CERTAINLY TRUE. IT IS AN ABSOLUTE DIFFICULT SITUATION TO NOT HAVE THE INPUT OF THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD PRIOR TO SPENDING HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS.

I WOULD RATHER HAVE A MEETING LIKE THIS AT THE VERY ONSET.

I'VE BEEN THROUGH THIS. I LOOK, NOBODY FEELS BAD FOR DEVELOPERS, RIGHT? WE'RE RIGHT THERE ON THE TOTEM POLE WITH ATTORNEYS AND CAR DEALERS, RIGHT? SO WE GET IT. NO OFFENSE. PRESENT COMPANY EXCLUDED.

THE THE NEW THE NEW LEGAL TEAM FOR THE CITY IS REMARKABLE COMPARED TO WHAT WAS THERE PRIOR.

SO I'M VERY GRATEFUL THAT THE LAW FIRM IS IS IN PLACE.

EXCUSE THAT COMMENT. THE POINT IS, IS THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO GET CHARITY FROM ANYBODY.

AND WE GET THAT. AND I WOULDN'T BE HERE ASKING FOR A VARIANCE WITH THE SAME VERACITY AS SOMEONE OR THE SAME.

RIGHT? AS SOMEONE WHO HAS A IS TRYING TO PRESERVE A HOME IN PORT ROYAL.

THAT WAS ONE OF THE ORIGINAL HOMES BUILT THERE. I DON'T HAVE THAT RIGHT. SO I TRIED TO DO EVERYTHING BY THE BOOK, RIGHT. AND TRY TO MAKE SURE THAT I COVERED, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF, YOU KNOW LET'S SAY I DON'T KNOW, THE WORD IS IT'S A VICIOUS DEVELOPMENT ENVIRONMENT IN NAPLES BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF MONEY TO BE MADE.

SO PEOPLE HAVE PUT RUMORS OUT ON ME AND MY FAMILY AND, YOU KNOW, ALL TYPES OF CRAZY YOU WOULDN'T IMAGINE, WHAT WAS SAID, AND YOU HAVE TO JUST LET IT ROLL OFF YOUR BACK AND NOT FEED INTO IT.

SO I HOPE AT THE END OF THIS YOU REALIZE I'M CHARMING AND I'M A NICE GUY AND I'M NOT LOOKING TO HURT ANYBODY.

I'M JUST TRYING TO DEVELOP A PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT I'VE INVESTED A LOT OF MONEY IN.

AND I THINK NOT ONLY THAT, IT'S VERY COMPATIBLE WITH THE CITY'S PLAN THAT WAS ORIGINALLY DRAWN UP TO HAVE A, YOU KNOW, SOMETHING OF A SHOWPIECE WHEN YOU COME INTO THE CITY OVER THE BRIDGE FROM COLLIER COUNTY AND YOU'RE LOOKING ON THE RIGHT, YOU HAVE THE HOTEL THERE, AND THIS WOULD BE ON THE LEFT.

NOW, THE GOOD NEWS ABOUT OUR PROPERTY IS WE HAVE ALMOST TWO ACRES.

WE ARE PUTTING IN A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF MATURE TREES AT THE VERY BEGINNING.

IT'S A TREMENDOUS EXPENSE, BUT IT'S SELF-SERVING.

OBVIOUSLY, NOBODY WANTS TO LISTEN TO THE TRAFFIC IF THEY'RE THERE. ON USING ONE OF THE UNITS.

SO WE ARE GOING TO INVEST A LOT OF MONEY. IT WORKS FOR BOTH THE CITY AND IT WORKS FOR US FINANCIALLY.

WE'RE ALSO GOING TO MAKE SURE THAT, AS YOU CAN SEE BY THE BEAUTIFUL DESIGN THAT PK, PK STUDIOS ARCHITECTURAL FIRM DESIGN THAT IT'S GOING TO BE A IT'S DIFFERENT. IT'S NOT A BOX.

IT'S, IT'S GOT AMORPHOUS SHAPES TO IT. IT'S MORE IN LINE WITH WHAT, 1960S MIAMI, LATE 50S,

[01:15:04]

I TRIED TO DO SOMETHING DIFFERENT. IT REALLY IS A SOFTER LOOK.

AND IT'S GOING TO DRAW PEOPLE TO THAT BY THESE THINGS THAT ARE GOING TO BE USING THE RESTAURANTS ON FIFTH, THEY'RE GOING TO BE USING THE WATERWAYS BECAUSE THEY COME WITH BOAT SLIPS.

SO WITH THAT SAID, THE PROJECT ITSELF IS, IS IS, I THINK, A FEATHER IN THE CAP FOR ME AS A DEVELOPER, BUT ALSO IT'S VERY COMPATIBLE WITH THE CITY'S YOU KNOW, QUALITY OF LIFE MANDATE.

YOU DON'T WANT TO BUILD SOMETHING THAT'S GOING TO DRIVE EVERYBODY CRAZY, MAKE THINGS WORSE.

YOU WANT TO TRY TO MAKE IT BETTER. SO THE WITH THAT SAID, THE ISSUE THAT SEEMS TO BE IN FRONT OF US IS, I THINK, JUST CONFUSION AND THAT IS THAT WE ARE WE HAD GONE THAT WE'VE SUBMITTED THIS APPLICATION IN 2022 AND IT WAS KICKED BACK TO US SAYING THAT YOU DON'T GET THE WHOLE 10% OF THE ADDITIONAL MARINA SPACE, BECAUSE IF YOU ARE A MARINA, WHICH WE CERTAINLY ARE BY EVERY STANDARD THAT YOU COULD POSSIBLY PUT TOGETHER THE WORDS ARE VERY CLEAR IN BOTH THE CITY CODE THAT SAYS SERVICING OF WATERCRAFT.

AND THEN IT SAYS THERE'S ALSO THESE OTHER USES, WHICH AT ONE TIME ON ANOTHER PROJECT I TRIED TO DEVELOP, WHICH IS STILL IN SOMEWHAT OF AN EYESORE. I WAS TOLD, WELL, THAT MEANS THAT YOU HAVE TO FIX BOATS.

YOU HAVE THE SERVICING OF BOATS LIKE YOU SERVICE A CAR, WHICH IS IS SILLY BECAUSE IT SAYS THE DEFINITION OF MARINA IS SERVICING WATERCRAFTS.

WELL, WHEN YOU TAKE A BOAT OFF THE OPEN WATER THAT IS SERVICING A WATERCRAFT, WHY THAT'S CLEAR AND WHY IT SHOULD NEVER EVEN COME UP IN THAT OTHER INCIDENT IS BECAUSE IT GOES ON TO SAY IN THE IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, THAT YOU MAY ALSO HAVE THESE OTHER USES WHICH ARE LISTED, YOU KNOW, ALL THESE LIKE 15 OR 16 OF THEM, AND TWO OF THEM ARE SAY YOU CAN HAVE BOAT REPAIR.

WELL, IF THE FIRST SENTENCE THAT STARTED THE CODE OUT INDICATED THAT WAS FIXING BOATS.

YOU WOULDN'T HAVE IT REPEATED LATER AS AN OPTION TO HAVE.

IT WOULD HAVE BEEN A MANDATE IF IT WAS INTERPRETED THAT WAY.

SO IT WAS PURPOSELY DONE AT THAT TIME, I THINK, TO TRY TO CAUSE AN ISSUE.

I DON'T THINK WE'RE IN THAT ENVIRONMENT ANYMORE. I THINK WE'RE WE'VE GOT LEVEL HEADED, EDUCATED PEOPLE.

I SAT HERE AND WAS VERY IMPRESSED WITH THE QUESTIONS THAT WERE ASKED.

AND I DON'T WANT ANY FAVORS, BUT I CERTAINLY WANT YOU TO USE YOUR, YOU KNOW, YOUR INTELLIGENCE AND YOUR YOUR ANALYTICAL POWERS TO LOOK AT THIS THING AND SAY, WAIT A MINUTE HERE. IT SAYS CLEARLY THAT YOUR MARINA, IF YOU HAVE TEN OR MORE BOAT SLIPS FROM THE STATE LEVEL, IT SAYS IT IN, IN OTHER AREAS IN, IN REGARDING WATERWAYS.

BUT IT ALSO SAYS IN THE CITY CITY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE THAT IF YOU HAVE A FACILITY THAT SERVICES WATERCRAFT, IT DOESN'T GIVE YOU AN AMOUNT IN THAT SECTION.

BUT IT CERTAINLY CLARIFIES THAT. IT MEANS THAT IF YOU'RE TAKING A BOAT OFF THE OPEN WATER, YOU'RE PROVIDING A SERVICE TO THAT WATERCRAFT, WHETHER IT'S A JET SKI OR A BOAT, WHATEVER IT MIGHT BE.

AND IT'S FURTHER STAMPED IN IN STONE, BECAUSE IF YOU READ THE REST OF IT, IT HIGHLIGHTS AGAIN, THAT BOAT REPAIR IS SOMETHING THAT YOU CAN DO AS AN ANCILLARY OPTION.

SO RATHER THAN TRY TO DIG IN OUR HEELS WHEN WE WERE TOLD BY STAFF THAT YOU'RE ONLY A PARTIAL MARINA, WE WENT BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD AND REDESIGNED IT AND LOWERED FROM.

WE WERE AT LIKE 47% AND NOW WE COULD GO UP TO 50 ACCORDING TO WHAT WE BELIEVE AND WHAT WE HAD BEEN APPROVED FOR BEFORE AND WHAT EVERY OTHER STANDARD HAD BEEN.

BUT WE SAID, YOU KNOW WHAT, LET'S NOT ARGUE HERE.

LET'S TRY TO REDUCE IT. WE REDUCED IT. AND THEN WE'RE TOLD, WELL, THAT'S NOT APPROVABLE BECAUSE YOU HAVE MORE THAN THE AMOUNT OF WHAT IS A BLENDED AMOUNT.

OKAY. WELL, WHAT IS THAT BLENDED AMOUNT WE ASKED IN A MEETING.

RIGHT. THERE WAS NOT JUST MYSELF, BUT SOME VERY TRUSTWORTHY PEOPLE AT THAT MEETING THAT WILL VERIFY THAT.

WE WERE TOLD WE REALLY DON'T HAVE A STANDARD, WE DON'T KNOW.

AND WE THEN WENT BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD AGAIN AND, AND TRIED TO GET TO A NUMBER THAT WAS EVEN LOWER, WHICH IS WHERE WE ARE TODAY. AND THAT NUMBER IS APPROXIMATELY 8.7% BELOW

[01:20:07]

AND ULTIMATELY, AFTER ALL OF THAT, WE GET A LETTER FROM A PREVIOUS CITY ATTORNEY STATING THAT YOU DON'T QUALIFY AS A MARINE AT ALL, WHICH WAS STUNNING TO SAY THE LEAST. RIGHT. AND SO WE WE HOPE FOR A CHANGE OF ENVIRONMENT WHERE LOGIC WOULD WOULD PREVAIL AND FAIRNESS WOULD BE EVEN EVEN HANDED.

AND THAT'S WHERE WE ARE NOW. WE'RE WE TRIED TO GO FOR APPEALS OVER A YEAR AND A HALF AGO, AND WE'RE TOLD THAT WE WEREN'T ALLOWED TO BY THE PREVIOUS ATTORNEYS THAT WERE OUTSIDE ATTORNEYS THAT WERE REPRESENTING THE CITY. WE FINALLY WERE ABLE TO TO FILE FOR AN ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL AND TO COME TO YOU AND TO SAY, LOOK, WE DON'T WANT TO ASK FOR ANY FAVORS. WE JUST WANT YOU TO CORRECT A WRONG.

ALLOW US TO MOVE FORWARD WITH YOUR ENDORSEMENT TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR APPROVAL OF THE PROJECT AS IT IS, AND WHICH IS ONLY 41.2, 41.2% WHICH IS 1.2% OVER.

AND THE REASON WHY THAT'S AN ISSUE. BECAUSE I KNOW YOU'RE GOING TO ASK. YOU'VE ASKED SOME VERY GOOD QUESTIONS. WE'VE ALREADY WE'VE ALREADY GOT THIS THING LAID OUT CONSTRUCTION WISE. WE ARE ALL WE WOULD HAVE TO GO BACK AND REDESIGN THE WHOLE BUILDING FOR THAT ONE, BECAUSE WE'VE SHRUNK IT DOWN.

REMEMBER, WE WE'RE NOT JUST TALKING ABOUT CORRECTING 1.2.

WE CORRECTED FROM 47, 48, MAYBE 49. I'M NOT SURE WHAT IT WAS.

48. WE CORRECTED DOWN ALREADY TO GET TO THAT 1.2 WHERE WE ARE NOW, AND WE SHOULD KNOW HOW TO DO THAT, BUT WE WE AGREED TO NOT ARGUE ABOUT IT AND WE AGREED TO TRY TO, YOU KNOW, SUCK IT UP AND DO THE BEST WE CAN.

AND THAT'S WHERE WE ARE. SO WE WE CERTAINLY WILL RESPECT WHATEVER DECISION YOU HAVE.

THERE WON'T BE ANY, YOU KNOW, ANY HARD FEELINGS.

I GET IT, YOU GOT TO VOTE WITH YOUR CONSCIENCE, AND WE'LL RESPECT THAT AND WE'LL FIGURE IT OUT.

BUT I CERTAINLY WOULD LOVE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.

AND MR.. SIR, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. VERY GOOD PRESENTATION AND I REALLY APPRECIATE THE BACKGROUND AND CONGRATULATIONS.

GETTING DOWN FROM 49 TO 41.2%. IT IS 41.2%. I HEARD 41.9 EARLIER AS WELL.

IT'S 41.2. YEAH. THAT'S OKAY. JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, I'M THE DEVELOPER.

I ROUND UP AND DOWN TO SUIT MY NEEDS. THE ARCHITECT ACTUALLY GIVES YOU THE RIGHT NUMBER.

WE ROUND DOWN. YEAH, YEAH. SO YOU PREEMPTED MY QUESTION.

SO TO GET THAT OTHER 1.2% OFF, YOU CAN'T YOU CAN'T DO THAT.

BECAUSE THEN THE WHOLE PROBLEM FROM WHAT I SEE WOULD GO AWAY.

YOU CAN'T YOU CAN'T DO THAT. YEAH. IT CAUSES AN ISSUE.

THAT'S GOING TO CAUSE GREATER FINANCIAL STRAIN THAT, YOU KNOW, WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT IT, WHEN YOU'RE ENTITLED TO 50% AND IT'S THE RULE AND IT'S THE LAW AND YOU REDUCE IT ALL THE WAY DOWN, YOU TRY TO HOPE THAT THERE'S SOME GIVE ON THE OTHER SIDE.

I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT ENTITLEMENT. I'M JUST TRYING TO FIND A WAY OF GETTING THIS TO GO FORWARD SMOOTHLY. SO THAT PIECE OF LAND I WALK PAST THERE REGULARLY AND I WOULD LOVE TO SEE SOMETHING BEAUTIFUL ON THERE. THANK YOU. SO BUT I'M CURIOUS, WHAT IS YOUR VISION OF HOW TRANSIENT LODGING WOULD WOULD WORK? IS THIS AIRBNB OR IS THIS.

NO, NO, NO, IT WOULD BE. THIS IS IT WOULD BE VERY HIGH.

HARD TO SAY, YOU KNOW, SOUNDING SNOBBISH, BUT WE ARE IN NAPLES, SO IT WOULD BE VERY HIGH END TRANSIENT LODGING.

SO THESE ARE ABOUT 4000FT², 40 500FT². PEOPLE WOULD BUY THEM AND THEY WOULD USE THEM FOR THEIR OWN YOU KNOW, ENJOYMENT. BUT THEY'D ALSO BE ABLE TO RENT THEM OUT.

AND SOMETHING OF THAT NATURE WOULD BE PROBABLY $25,000 A WEEK FOR THOSE UNITS, SO THEY'RE QUITE EXPENSIVE.

THEY COME WITH A BOAT SLIP. EACH OF THE UNITS ALSO HAS A ROOFTOP OASIS WITH ITS OWN PRIVATE POOL AND OUTDOOR GRILLING AREA, AND ALSO A COMMERCIAL OFFICE SPACE, AND THEN A THREE AND FOUR, 3 OR 4 CAR PRIVATE GARAGE AS WELL.

COME WITH EACH UNIT. SO THEY'RE QUITE THEY'RE BEAUTIFUL.

SO IS TRANSIENT LODGING THE RIGHT THE RIGHT TERM? IT SOUNDS MORE LIKE A CONDO WITH THE ABILITY TO RENT OUT FOR X TIMES A YEAR FOR Y PERIODS. YEAH. UNFORTUNATELY, I DIDN'T COME UP WITH THE DESIGNATION.

I MEAN, THERE'S YOU KNOW, THERE'S THE TRANSIENT LODGING DESIGNATION HAS BEEN LONG, 20 PLUS YEARS I'VE

[01:25:08]

BUT IT'S THAT'S WHAT HAS TO GO HERE BECAUSE WE WE'RE IN THE THE AIRPORT OVERLAY DISTRICT, SO YOU CAN'T HAVE RESIDENTIAL WHICH WOULD BE PREFERRED.

WOULD PROBABLY BE BETTER FOR FOR RESIDENTIAL FOR US.

AND WE'RE NOT GOING TO ASK FOR THAT BECAUSE IT'S JUST IT'S CRAZY TO DO THAT.

IT'S IT'S IN THAT AREA FOR A REASON. SO IT WOULD BE MORE LIKE A SHORT TERM YOU KNOW, ONE MONTH, YOU KNOW, TWO MONTH STAY, WHATEVER IT MIGHT BE.

BUT NOT, LIKE, PERMANENTLY LIVING THERE, YOU KNOW? OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. APPRECIATE THAT. YOU'RE WELCOME. OTHER QUESTIONS? CAN I CAN I ASK IF MR. HICKMAN COULD QUALIFY WHAT WE ARE CONSIDERING HERE? BECAUSE I THINK WE I THINK WE'RE CONSIDERING WHETHER DETERMINING THE APPEAL ON UPHOLDING THE APPEAL OR NOT, AS OPPOSED TO WHAT'S BEING APPLIED FOR, WHICH IS TWO DIFFERENT THINGS.

RIGHT. SO THE WHAT'S ON APPEAL HERE IS THAT THE CITY HAS MADE IT AN ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION.

THE CITY, MEANING THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND OTHERS HAVE DECIDED THAT THIS IS JUST DOES NOT CONSTITUTE A MARINA.

WHICH TRIGGERS CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG. ERICA, WE HAVE A CONVERSATION ABOUT THIS.

IT'S OKAY, BUT THERE'S A DISTINCTION THERE THAT IT TRIGGERS DIFFERENT FLOOR AREA RATIO AND SETBACKS, WHICH OBVIOUSLY HAS AN IMPACT ON ON THAT. SO, ERICA, IS THERE ANY CLARIFICATION NEEDED ON THAT? I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY WHAT WAS ISSUED AS AN RA, WHICH IS A REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.

THAT'S RIGHT. WHAT WAS IT WASN'T A THIS ISN'T A REJECTION OR APPROVAL.

THIS IS ESSENTIALLY THE DETERMINATION OR WHAT WAS DONE BY STAFF WAS TO SAY THAT AT THIS TIME, WE DON'T HAVE SUFFICIENT INFORMATION FOR US TO CLASSIFY THIS AS A MARINA.

NOT THAT THIS IS NEVER, WILL, NEVER CAN NEVER BE A MARINA, BUT THAT AT THIS TIME, WITH THE INFORMATION THAT WE HAVE, WE DON'T HAVE SUFFICIENT INFORMATION TO CLASSIFY THIS AS A MARINA. THAT'S WHY IT'S A REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON THAT POINT.

JUST TO KEEP THAT ALIVE IS WHILST THERE IS OBVIOUSLY CHANGING AND NEWER INFORMATION COMING FORWARD, THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE HERE FOR. WE'RE NOT HERE AS A NORMAL PETITIONER WOULD ASK FOR SUPPORT TO BUILD X OR Y.

WE'RE BEING ASKED ABOUT THE APPEAL AND THE APPEAL INFORMATION.

IF IT WAS TODAY WOULD BE DIFFERENT BECAUSE WE'VE ALREADY HEARD THAT THE BUILDING PLOT SIZES IS DIFFERENT.

THE BUILD LOT. RIGHT. SO I THINK IT MIGHT BE HELPFUL.

ERICA, IF YOU WELL, I GUESS STAFF IS GOING TO HAVE A PRESENTATION AS WELL.

BUT THE DISTINCTION OF WHETHER SOMETHING IS A MARINA OR NOT TRIGGERS OTHER PERFORMANCE STANDARDS LIKE SETBACKS AND F.A.R.

THAT OBVIOUSLY WOULD HAVE AN IMPACT ON THE OVERALL DEVELOPMENT.

THAT'S WHY I BELIEVE THAT MR. IS DISCUSSING HIS OVERALL PROJECT.

BUT IN REALITY, YES, MISS MARTIN IS CORRECT THAT THEY ISSUED A LETTER WITH MANY REQUESTS FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION OR RESPONSE.

AND I THINK BASED ON THERE WAS A THERE WAS A COMMUNICATION FROM ATTORNEY RALPH BROOKS REGARDING WHAT IS AND IS NOT A MARINA. AND I THINK THAT'S THE CRUX OF IT, IS THAT WHAT YOU KNOW, IS, IS THE AREA THAT IS GOING TO BE USED FOR WATERCRAFT VESSELS. DOES THAT CONSTITUTE A MARINA OR NOT? BECAUSE IF IT DOES, THEN STAFF HAS A BETTER IDEA OF WHAT TO DEAL WITH WITH THE PERFORMANCE CRITERIA.

SO THERE'S TALK OF I THINK WE OUGHT TO HEAR THE STAFF REPORT BECAUSE WE'RE GOING TO GO DOWN THE RABBIT HOLE THROUGH HERE.

EXCUSE ME. I THINK I BELIEVE THEY HAD ONE MORE PRESENTER.

NO, BUT I LIKE TO JUST MAKE THE COMMENT THAT STAFF TELL ME WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.

WHEN WE TALK ABOUT BLENDED. THAT FEELS LIKE COMPROMISE COMPROMISED TERRITORY TO ME, AND I LOVE COMPROMISE.

WELL, IT'S VERY IMPORTANT BECAUSE THE STAFF REPORT SAYS WHILE THE DEVELOPMENT DOES NOT CONTAIN DOES CONTAIN SOME MARINA USES, THEY ARE NOT SIGNIFICANT ENOUGH TO QUALIFY THE ENTIRE PROJECT AS MARINA.

NOW, WE WILL CONCEDE THAT FOR PURPOSES OF THIS APPEAL, BECAUSE WE'VE BEEN INSTRUCTED TO USE A BLENDED APPROACH.

SO WE NEED STAFF TO SAY YES, THE BLENDED APPROACH WORKS AND EITHER GIVE US SOME GUIDELINES OR TAKE WHAT WE HAVE PRESENTED AND USE THAT AS THE BLENDED APPROACH. THIS IS A THIS THIS WAS A FINAL DECISION BY STAFF, BECAUSE WE CAN'T PROCEED WITH THIS PROJECT UNLESS WE COMPLY WITH THEIR DIRECTION, WHICH IS THIS IS NOT A MARINA. SO THEREFORE YOU HAVE 40% LOT COVERAGE.

WE'VE BEEN TOLD TIME AFTER TIME THAT THERE ARE MARINA USES HERE.

YOU'VE GOT THE 12 BOAT SLIPS THAT QUALIFIES AS MARINA.

[01:30:03]

THAT IS CLEARLY A MARINE USE. SO AND WE'LL HAVE RESTROOMS AND THAT SORT OF THING FOR THE BOATING PUBLIC THERE THAT USES THAT.

AND SO A PORTION OF THIS IS A MARINA. THEY'RE TELLING US, NO, YOU CAN'T DO THAT.

YOU CAN'T USE A BLENDED APPROACH. WE NEED STAFF TO RECOGNIZE THAT THE BLENDED APPROACH HAS BEEN USED NUMEROUS TIMES IN THE CITY, AND THAT'S ALL WE'RE ASKING FOR. AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE AT 41.2% LOT COVERAGE.

41.9% SOMEWHERE IN THAT RANGE. BECAUSE PART PART OF THIS PROJECT CLEARLY IS A MARINA, AND WE SHOULD GET SOME ABILITY TO USE THAT IN A BLENDED APPROACH TO DETERMINE LOT COVERAGE.

THAT'S THAT'S THE WHOLE ISSUE HERE. WOULD YOUR ARCHITECT, THE ARCHITECT IS GOING TO PRESENT NEXT? YES. YOU HAVE HIM CLARIFY THE LOT COVERAGE AND THE PLAN, BECAUSE THE PLAN WE HAVE IN OUR PACKET ON SHEET A13 GIVES LOT COVERAGE CALCULATIONS AND IT PROVIDES A TOTAL LOT COVERAGE OF 44.3. SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE ALL WORKING OFF OF THAT.

HE'LL EXPLAIN THAT. BUT WE SHARPENED OUR PENCILS BECAUSE WE WANTED TO COMPROMISE AND GET AS SMALL A LOT COVERAGE AS WE COULD POSSIBLY GET.

SO THIS IS TOUGH BECAUSE WE'RE WORKING OFF OF A SET OF PLANS THAT STAFF HASN'T REVIEWED.

SO JUST JUST TO GO BACK TO MY POINT IS WE'RE WORKING ON THE INFORMATION THAT'S BEEN PRESENTED FOR US TO OBVIOUSLY TO GENERATE A DECISION OR A CONSIDERATION. THE INFORMATION THAT WE'RE NOW COMING TOWARDS US IS UPDATED INFORMATION, WHICH MEANS THE WHOLE STAFF REPORT IS NO LONGER CORRECT BECAUSE IT WAS WRITTEN AT THE TIME PRIOR TO RECEIVING THIS NEW INFORMATION.

AN EXAMPLE BEING THAT ONE OF THE STAFF COMMENTS RELATED TO ONLY 5.3% OF THE SITE WAS ACTUALLY BEING USED FOR MARINE. SO WHAT THEY WERE SAYING IS THIS IS JUST A WAY OF GETTING THIS BUILDING BASED ON THE BACK IN, IN INTERPRETED WORDS, AND THAT 12% OF THE OVERALL LOT WAS ONLY BEING CONSIDERED FOR MARINE.

NOW WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THOSE PERCENTAGES. IT MAY ONLY BE A COUPLE OF PERCENT, BUT WHAT IS THE REDUCTION OF THOSE PERCENTAGES IN TERMS OF THE MARINE PORTION? BECAUSE THE MARINE PORTION NOW MAY BE MORE A GREATER PERCENTAGE, WHICH GIVES A DIFFERENT WEIGHT TO THE ARGUMENT.

BUT WE'RE HERE TO CONSIDER MY UNDERSTANDING. THAT'S WHY I ASKED FOR MR. DICKMAN'S INPUT AND STAFF. ARE WE HERE TO CONSIDER WHETHER THE APPEAL WAS CORRECT OR WE SUPPORT THE APPEAL THAT THE PLANNING MADE, OR ARE WE NOW BEING ASKED TO CONSIDER THE PETITION WITH THE NEW INFORMATION GOING FORWARD? AND MY UNDERSTANDING WHICH I WANT CORRECTING OR CONFIRMING, IS THAT WE'RE HERE TO CONSIDER THE APPEAL THAT HAD BEEN PREVIOUSLY OR THAT WAS PREVIOUSLY PUT BY THE PLANNING. AND IF THAT'S INCORRECT, THEN I NEED TO KNOW THAT.

MR. CHAIRMAN, IF I MAY COMMENT ON THAT, WE ARE HERE ON THE APPEAL THAT WE FILED, THE CALCULATION OF THE PERCENTAGE OF LOT COVERAGE.

WE'RE YOU KNOW, WE DIDN'T CHANGE ANY OF THE DIAGRAMS. NOTHING IS CHANGING. THE APPLICATION FOR SITE PLAN APPROVAL DOES NOT CHANGE ONE BIT.

BUT WE WENT BACK AND STARTED CALCULATING SOME OF THE AREAS THAT WE THOUGHT WERE ENCROACHING INTO THAT PLUS 40% AREA.

AND THEY'RE NOT. AND SO WE'RE ACTUALLY ABLE TO, WITH THE SAME APPLICATION, THE SAME PETITION, WE'RE ABLE TO SHARPEN OUR PENCILS AND SAY, WELL, WE CALCULATED 44.7% OF 44.3%.

WE'VE GONE BACK AND WE'VE TAKEN A LOOK. WE ADDED SOME THINGS IN THERE THAT THERE WERE SOME THINGS IN THAT CALCULATION THAT WERE NOT REALLY ENCROACHING INTO THAT.

SO WE REDUCED THAT, NOT BY CHANGING ANYTHING.

AND THE ARCHITECT WILL EXPLAIN THAT. SO WE'RE HERE ON ON THE APPEAL THAT WE FILED, NO CHANGES IN ANYTHING.

IN THE DOCUMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN FILED, NO CHANGE IN THE SITE PLAN WILL OCCUR FROM THIS.

FROM YOUR DECISION TODAY. LET ME HAVE THE ARCHITECT.

IF YOU WOULD GO THROUGH THE DETAILS OF THAT. THANK YOU.

MR.. DID YOU HAVE ANYTHING ELSE YOU WANTED TO? NO, I JUST ONE OTHER THING.

WE WE'RE LOOKING FOR THE APPROVAL ORIGINALLY AT THE DESIGNATION AT THE 50% NOT TO BUILD 50%.

AND WE WERE LOOKING TO BUILD WHATEVER DESIGN FIT IN TO THE TO THE TO THE TO THE LOT THE BEST.

AND THAT'S, YOU KNOW, SO THAT WAS AT 50% WAS THE MAX YOU COULD HAVE UNDER THE DESIGNATION.

AND BY THE WAY, ONE OTHER KEY POINT WHICH WE NEVER BROUGHT UP AND IT'S OUR FAULT, ERIC, WE APOLOGIZE.

BUT EACH ONE OF THESE UNITS OWNS THE BOAT SLIP.

SO EACH ONE OWNS A PARTICULAR BOAT SLIP, THE DEED THEY'RE DEEDED TO THE UNITS, WHICH WE FORGOT OR NEVER TOLD ERICA.

SO THAT'S JUST ANOTHER DESIGNATION THAT, YOU KNOW, REALLY JUST SUPPORTS OUR SIDE OF IT, RIGHT.

WHICH WE BECAUSE ONE OF THE THINGS IN THE STATE WATER USE GUIDELINES, IT SAYS THAT ANY MARINAS SHOULD GIVE PREFERENCE TO

[01:35:10]

I JUST WANT TO THROW THAT IN THERE AS ONE LITTLE PLUS ON OUR SIDE.

BUT THE IDEA THAT WE'RE WE'RE HERE TODAY FOR THE 44% NUMBER IS NOT REALLY WHAT WE'RE HERE FOR.

WE'RE HERE FOR THE DESIGNATION OF WHAT WE ARE LIKE.

IF WE'RE WE ARE A MARINA RIGHT IN OUR IN EVERYBODY, EVERYBODY WE'VE BEEN ABLE TO TALK TO, INCLUDING WHEN STAFF GAVE US THE ORIGINAL APPROVAL BACK IN 2019 ON THE PREVIOUS PROJECT AND INCLUDING ALL THROUGHOUT THE PROCESS.

IT CHANGED FROM YOUR MARINA AND YOU HAVE THE 10% TO YOUR PARTIALLY MARINA, AND YOU CAN USE A PORTION OF THAT OF THAT THAT GRACE SPACE THAT IS ALLOWED FOR MARINAS, YOU CAN USE A PORTION.

SO WE WENT BACK AND REDESIGNED. WHAT THEY TOLD US, AND THAT 44% WAS CALCULATED AT WHAT WE KNEW AT THE TIME BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE ANY GUIDELINES. THERE'S NO NOT WRITTEN ANYWHERE WHERE IT SAYS YOU, YOU, IT SAYS IT DOESN'T GIVE YOU A ANYWHERE TO RESEARCH WHAT PERCENTAGE IS ALLOWED IN IN NOW THIS NEW BECAUSE THIS IS NOT IN THE CODE.

THIS IS SOMETHING THAT STAFF MADE IT SELF DETERMINATION AT SOME POINT.

THAT AND I DON'T THINK IT'S ALL FAIRNESS TO ERIC.

I DON'T THINK IT WAS ERICA'S. IT WAS DONE PREVIOUSLY TO HER TENURE THAT SOMEBODY HAD COME UP WITH THAT FORMULA OVER AT THE NAPLES BAY RESORT.

THEY ALLOWED THE SAME. THE REASON, THE ONLY REASON WE KNEW THAT WAS BECAUSE THE SAME ARCHITECTS WORKED FOR US THAT DID THAT PROJECT.

I THINK. I THINK THE ISSUE IS FROM MY SIDE OF THINGS.

I'VE GOT A BIG CONCERN AND THIS IS MY CONCERN.

JUST TO BE CLEAR, IS THE COMMENTS THAT YOU'RE MAKING NOW WOULD BE WONDERFUL IF YOU WERE PUTTING AN APPLICATION FORWARD.

NO NO NO, JUST JUST LET ME EXPLAIN. JUST LET ME EXPLAIN.

WOULD BE WONDERFUL IF HE WAS PUTTING AN APPLICATION FORWARD TO SEEK APPROVAL FOR CONSTRUCTION OF WHATEVER THE THE THE BUILDING IS.

WE HAVEN'T GOT THAT TO MAKE A DECISION ON WHAT MY UNDERSTANDING IS.

WE ARE HERE TO MAKE A DECISION AS TO WHETHER TO UPHOLD THE APPEAL.

AND THAT APPEAL WAS GIVEN BASED ON DIFFERENT INFORMATION THAN WHAT'S HERE TODAY.

AND THAT WAS SUPPLIED BY YOURSELF OR BY YOUR ORGANIZATION AS RELATING TO THE A 13 SHEET THAT WAS SUPPLIED AND THE CALCULATIONS THAT WERE DRAWN FROM THAT, THAT WEIGHS HEAVILY ON MY UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT I'M HERE FOR WHICH WHICH I DON'T THINK IS RELATED TO WHETHER YOU BUILD THIS PROPERTY IN THIS SHAPE OR NOT. I DON'T THINK THAT'S WHAT WE'RE BEING ASKED FOR IN MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE PAPERWORK.

YEAH, IF I COULD EXPLAIN THAT. IF I MAY, MR. CHAIRMAN.

I DON'T THINK YOU CAN EXPLAIN THAT, SIR. I THINK IT NEEDS MR. DICKMAN TO EXPLAIN THAT. ONE SECOND. MR.. SORRY, I DO.

I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. I MEAN, YOU'RE HEARING THAT THEY'VE SHARPENED THEIR PENCILS AND DONE SOME STUFF, BUT THEY HAVE ALSO NOT SUBMITTED ANYTHING LIKE THAT.

BUT SO THEY'RE STILL WRITING ON THE ON THE DOCUMENTS THAT THEY'VE SUBMITTED TO STAFF AND STAFF HAS RESPONDED TO THEY THEY CAN, IN AN ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL COME UP WITH AS PART OF ARGUMENT, JUST AS CITY CAN THE CITY CAN HAVE THEY COULD DO ADDITIONAL RESEARCH AND BE ABLE TO PRESENT THAT TO YOU AS WELL. SO I THINK THAT'S JUST ADDITIONAL WORK THAT THEY'VE DONE THAT THEY'RE PRESENTING.

BUT I DO THINK THAT THE GRAVAMEN OF THIS PARTICULAR APPEAL IS BASED ON WHAT I'VE SEEN AS A LONG SERIES OF WHAT SEEMS TO BE A DETERMINATION THAT A FINDING THAT THIS IS NOT A MARINA BASED ON SIMPLY BASED ON THE DEFINITION, THERE ISN'T A LOT OF INFORMATION IN THE CODE, AND I DON'T WANT TO GO TOO FAR BECAUSE I WANT TO HEAR FROM STAFF.

THERE'S TWO PARTIES TO THIS APPEAL. THERE'S THE CITY AND THEN THERE'S THE PETITIONER.

BUT THIS IS REALLY, I BELIEVE, ABOUT WHAT IS AND IS NOT CONSTITUTES A, A MARINA.

AND I DO THINK THAT THERE HAS BEEN A FINAL DECISION BASED ON EVEN THOUGH THEY WERE ASKING FOR MORE INFORMATION.

I THINK IT'S PRETTY CLEAR THAT THEY'VE THEY DON'T BELIEVE THAT THIS IS A MARINA.

BASED ON THE WRITTEN COMMENTS THAT I'VE SEEN, IF I COULD JUST MAKE A QUICK COMMENT BECAUSE IT'S VERY IMPORTANT.

THERE'S NOTHING IN OUR APPLICATION THAT'S CHANGING.

NO DESIGN, NOTHING IS CHANGING. NOT ONE PEBBLE IS BEING CHANGED IN THIS PROJECT AND IN OUR APPLICATION.

WHAT HAS CHANGED IS WE WENT BACK TO SEE WHAT PORTIONS OF THIS BUILDING WERE ACTUALLY ENCROACHING INTO THAT PLUS 10%.

MR. KULWICKI WILL EXPLAIN THAT THIS IS DEALT IS DEALING WITH THE BALCONIES.

[01:40:01]

WE DID NOT CALCULATE THAT CORRECTLY. WE WENT BACK AND WERE CORRECT.

CALCULATED THAT AGAIN. BUT NOTHING'S CHANGED.

THIS IS THE EXACT SAME PETITION. AND THAT'S THE POINT I WANT TO EMPHASIZE.

WE'RE NOT LOOKING TO CHANGE A SINGLE THING IN THIS PROJECT.

AND MR. KULWICKI CAN CAN FULLY EXPLAIN THAT. AND I THINK THAT CLARIFIES YOUR YOUR ISSUE.

OKAY. GOOD MORNING. PETER KALICKI, ARCHITECT WITH PEAK STUDIOS. THANK YOU.

SCROLL HERE. MOST OF MY PRESENTATIONS ALREADY BEEN TOUCHED ON IN ONE WAY OR ANOTHER, BUT I DO WANT TO PUT A FEW THINGS ON THE RECORD.

JUST AS A BROAD OVERVIEW OF THE PROJECT WE'RE PROPOSING MARINA SLIPS AND A MARINA STORE COMMERCIAL OFFICE AND TRANSIENT LODGING.

I DO WANT TO WALK YOU THROUGH THE DIFFERENT LEVELS ON THIS PROJECT, JUST AS IT RELATES SPECIFICALLY TO THIS APPEAL.

WE'VE TOUCHED ON UNDERGROUND PARKING. THAT'S NOT REALLY GOING TO BE THE SUBJECT OF OUR APPEAL HERE TODAY, BUT ON THE MAIN LEVEL, WE'RE PROPOSING A 4200 SQUARE FOOT MARINA SHIP STORE THAT'S INTENDED TO SERVE NOT ONLY THE RESIDENTS OR THE TRANSIENT LODGING USERS THAT MIGHT OWN BOAT SLIPS ON THIS PROPERTY. BUT ALSO THE BOATING PUBLIC THAT COULD STOP IN ON A SERIES OF PUBLIC SLIPS AND UTILIZE THAT MARINA STORE BEYOND THE SIX UNITS PER FLOOR OF TRANSIENT LODGING.

WE ALSO HAVE ROOFTOP PRIVATE AMENITIES THAT WILL INCLUDE INDIVIDUAL POOLS.

ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THINGS THAT HASN'T BEEN MENTIONED IS THE POOL ON THE MAIN LEVEL OF THIS PROJECT, WHICH IS ENCROACHING CURRENTLY WITHIN A 25 FOOT SETBACK.

AND I THINK ONE OF THE KEY ISSUES AS TO WHETHER THAT CAN OR CANNOT ENCROACH IS THE MARINA DESIGNATION AND HOW THAT POOL RELATES TO THE MARINA USE ON THIS SITE. AND IT'S IMPORTANT TO POINT OUT THAT BECAUSE OF THE PRIVATE POOLS THAT ARE ON THE ROOFTOP OF THIS BUILDING WE ARE PROPOSING THAT THE POOL ON THE MAIN LEVEL OF THIS PROJECT BE TIED DIRECTLY TO THE MARINA SHIP STORE AND BE AVAILABLE TO, TO THAT USE. AND THE FOLKS THAT ARE UTILIZING THE MARINA SHIP STORE TO HAVE THAT POOL AMENITY.

SO THAT IS HOW THE POOL IS DIRECTLY RELATED TO THE MARINA USE ON THE PROPERTY.

I THINK THIS HAS BEEN TOUCHED ON, BUT THIS IS AN EXCERPT FROM THE LATEST FIFTH RA LETTER WHERE STAFF FOUND THAT WE DID NOT MEET THE DEFINITION OF MARINA WHICH WE BELIEVE THAT WE DO. AND THIS IS FROM THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.

MARINA IS AN ESTABLISHMENT WITH A WATERFRONT LOCATION DESIGNED TO SERVICE WATERCRAFT.

AND IT GOES ON TO LIST DIFFERENT USES THAT MARINA MAY INCLUDE.

EVERYTHING HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW IS. ITEMS THAT WE ARE PROPOSING ON OUR SITE INCLUDES UNCOVERED BOAT SLIPS AND DOCK SPACE, OUTFITTING, RETAIL SALE, BOATING AND FISHING SUPPLIES AND ACCESSORIES.

REFRESHMENT FACILITIES AS PART OF THE YACHT CLUB BATHROOM FACILITIES.

LAUNDRY FACILITIES AND OTHER CUSTOMARY ACCESSORY FACILITIES.

SO IT'S REALLY MEANT TO BE AN AMENITY FOR THE BOAT SLIPS THAT ARE ON THE SITE.

HARRY TOUCHED ON THIS, BUT THERE WAS A SUGGESTION IN ONE OF THE LETTERS THAT THE SERVICE OF WATERCRAFT IS OCCURRING ELSEWHERE, AND THAT IS THE CASE PART OF WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN ON THIS SITE IF SOMEONE PULLS UP FOR DIAGNOSTICS, THERE'LL BE SOMEONE AT THE MARINA SHIP STORE THAT CAN DIAGNOSE ISSUES WITH BOATS AND THEN TAKE THEM OFF SITE TO REPAIR THEM AND BRING THEM BACK.

WE DON'T BELIEVE THAT SERVICE OF WATERCRAFT SERVICE, MEANING REPAIR AND MAINTENANCE, NEEDS TO OCCUR ON THE SITE FOR IN ORDER FOR THAT TO BE CONSIDERED A MARINA. JUST AS WE SAW IN THE PREVIOUS SLIDE.

MAINTENANCE AND REPAIRS. JUST ONE OF THE MANY USES THAT COULD BE USED WITHIN A MARINA ENVIRONMENT.

WE'VE TOUCHED ON THE TEN BOAT SLIP THRESHOLD.

DO YOU ALSO WANT TO POINT OUT SECTION 5294 MARINA SITING CRITERIA, WHICH STATES THAT PREFERENCE WILL BE GIVEN TO MARINA DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS THAT ARE SITED CLOSE TO THE ANTICIPATED END USE DESTINATION FOR THEIR TENANTS.

AND AS MR. MENTIONED, THE TRANSIENT LODGING UNITS ON THIS PROJECT WILL, IF NOT ALL OF THEM, CERTAINLY MOST OF THEM WILL EACH DIRECTLY OWN ONE OF THE BOAT SLIPS BEING PROPOSED.

[01:45:02]

SO, AS WE'VE ALREADY ACKNOWLEDGED, WE ARE NOT 100% OF MARINA.

MARINA IS JUST PART OF THE USES ON THIS SITE.

I'M AWARE OF OF ONE PRECEDENT WHERE THIS HAS COME UP ONLY BECAUSE OUR FIRM WORKED ON NAPLES BAY RESORT IN 2005 OR SO.

AND IN REVIEWING OUR FILES IT WAS CLEAR THAT AT THE TIME, THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT TOOK A SIMILAR POSITION WHERE THEY TOLD US THAT BECAUSE THE PROJECT WAS NOT 100% A MARINA, THAT A 50% LOT COVERAGE WAS NOT APPROPRIATE AT THAT TIME PLANNING STAFF DIRECTED OUR FIRM TO COME UP WITH A BLENDED APPROACH SOMEWHERE BETWEEN 40 AND 50% BASED ON HOW MUCH OF THE PROJECT WAS MARINA? HOW MUCH OF THE PROJECT WAS NOT MARINA? IN PREPARATION FOR THIS MEETING, AND THIS IS WHERE WE GET TO THE 44.3 VERSUS 41.2.

IT WAS POINTED OUT TO US THAT A PART OF THE DEFINITION OF LOT COVERAGE THAT HAS TO DO WITH WHICH BALCONIES AND OVERHANGS AND MEANS OF EGRESS ARE COUNTED TOWARDS LOT COVERAGE.

THE WORDING IN THAT DOCUMENT OR IN THAT DEFINITION OF LOT COVERAGE ONLY HAS TO DO WITH THE PORTION OF THE BALCONIES THAT EXCEED THE LIMITS, NOT THE PORTION THAT ARE UNDER THE LIMITS. WHEN ORIGINALLY WE WERE COUNTING THE ENTIRE BALCONY SURFACE TOWARDS THAT LOT COVERAGE.

IT'S REALLY ONLY THE PORTION THAT EXCEEDS SIX FEET OFF THE WALL, OR EXCEEDS 50% OF EACH FACADE.

THAT SHOULD BE COUNTED TOWARDS LOT COVERAGE TO AVOID DOUBLE COUNTING.

THE QUOTE UNQUOTE PART THAT'S FREE WITHIN THE CODE THE FIRST SIX FEET OR THE FIRST 50%.

SO THERE WAS NO DESIGN CHANGE. THERE WAS THE ONLY REASON THAT WE WERE ABLE TO BRING THAT NUMBER DOWN FROM 44.3 TO 41.2 AND TO THAT POINT, THE PROPORTIONALLY, THE PART OF THE PROJECT THAT'S MARINA IS GOING TO INCREASE SOMEWHAT BECAUSE THE PORTION THAT'S NON MARINA, WHICH INCLUDES THE BALCONIES, HAS BEEN REDUCED.

SO I BELIEVE CURRENTLY WE HAVE AROUND 36 TO 37%, NON-MARINE AS A PERCENTAGE OF THE TOTAL LOT COVERAGE AND THE SAME PERCENTAGE AS BEFORE OF MARINE AND LOT COVERAGE. SINCE THAT FOOTPRINT HASN'T CHANGED, THAT'S STILL 4200FT².

THE OTHER ISSUE THAT IS TRIGGERED AS PART OF THE MARINE STATUS, LIKE I MENTIONED, IS SETBACKS.

STANDARD SETBACKS IN A DISTRICT ARE 25FT. IN MARINA USES.

THE LANGUAGE IS THAT NO REAR YARD IS REQUIRED FOR BOAT SERVICE BUILDINGS OR MARINAS, NOR IS THERE REAR YARD REQUIRED FOR STRUCTURES AND DUCTS WHICH ARE INTEGRALLY RELATED IN USAGE AND FUNCTION TO EACH OTHER. AND BASED ON WHAT I DESCRIBED EARLIER WITH THE POOL ON THE MAIN LEVEL BEING DIRECTLY RELATED TO THE MARINA SHOP AND THE YACHT CLUB THAT'S PLANNED FOR THAT 4200FT².

THAT POOL IS GOING TO BE INTEGRALLY PART OF THE MARINA USE ON THIS SITE.

ALL OF THE RESIDENTS ALREADY HAVE THEIR OWN POOLS ON THE ROOFTOP OF THIS FACILITY, AND THAT POOL IS NO LONGER NEEDED FOR THAT PURPOSE.

THIS DIAGRAM JUST DEMONSTRATES IN THE RED ON THE RIGHT HAND SIDE, THAT IS THE 25 FOOT SETBACK OFF THE PROPERTY LINE.

AND AS YOU'LL SEE WE DON'T WE DIDN'T BELIEVE WE HAD TO, BUT WE DID PULL BACK THE BUILDING ITSELF, BACK TO THE 25 FOOT SETBACK LINE. JUST TO GET THE ENTIRETY OF THAT BUILDING FOOTPRINT OUT OF THE 25 FOOT SETBACK.

THE ONLY THING THAT'S A POINT OF CONTENTION RIGHT NOW IS HOW THAT POOL OVERLAPS.

AND THE REASON IT'S IT'S IN THAT LOCATION AND NOT, YOU KNOW, ELSEWHERE WITHIN THIS POOL DECK AREA IS BECAUSE OF HOW THE UNDERGROUND PARKING FUNCTIONS AND WHERE THAT NEEDS TO BE AND RELATING IN RELATION TO THE DRIVEWAYS THAT ARE BELOW THE SURFACE.

WE'LL SKIP OVER UNDERGROUND PARKING AND BELIEVE THAT CONCLUDES EVERYTHING THAT I WANTED TO PUT ON THE RECORD.

ANYTHING ELSE? OKAY. THANK YOU. I HAVE A QUESTION BEFORE YOU LEAVE, BECAUSE I GOT LOST IN YOUR PERCENTAGES A LITTLE BIT.

YOU SAID WITH YOUR CALCULATIONS, 37% OF THE PROJECT IS NON.

MARINA. IS THAT CORRECT? AS OF THE LATEST NUMBERS THAT I'VE RUN, 35.86% IS THE LOT

[01:50:09]

THE TOTAL IS 41.19% OKAY. THAT'S WHAT I WROTE DOWN 41.9% 41.191 41.2. OKAY. AND THERE SEEMS TO BE A. HANG UP OVER WHETHER MAINTENANCE IS OCCURRING ON THESE BOATS. AS A BOAT OWNER, MY MAINTENANCE IS ALL DONE BY PEOPLE WHO COME TO MY PROPERTY TO DO IT. THEY DON'T HAVE A STORE ON OUR PROPERTY, BUT THEY COME TO THE DOCKS TO DO THE MARINA.

DO YOU ENVISION THAT HAPPENING WHEN BOATS NEED REPAIR? MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THE BOATS WILL BE TAKEN NEARBY TO AN OFF SITE FACILITY FOR REPAIR.

THERE WON'T BE REPAIR HAPPENING AT AT THE PARCEL ONLY BECAUSE THERE ARE ONLY TWO PUBLIC BOAT SLIPS.

AND WE WANT TO MAKE THOSE AVAILABLE FOR PEOPLE AS THEY WANT TO COME AND GO THROUGHOUT THE DAY. BUT IF I'M A PROPERTY OWNER IN THERE AND I HAVE A BOAT AND I WANT TO HAVE SOMEBODY COME TO THE SITE, YOU'RE GOING TO PROHIBIT ME FROM DOING THAT.

I'LL DEFER TO THE DEVELOPER ON THAT. NO. EXCUSE ME, HARRY AGAIN.

NOT PROHIBITED, BUT ONLY WHAT FALLS WITHIN THE GUIDELINES OF THE CITY CODE.

WHICH IS WHAT? WHATEVER IS ALLOWED BY CODE WOULD BE THE THE THE THE CRITERIA.

SO YOU COULD IF IT WAS CLEANING AND THE CRITERIA AND THE CODE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE SAID YOU COULD DO CLEANING.

IF YOU COULD DO CHANGE SPARK PLUGS, WHATEVER IT SAYS IS WHAT WE'RE CONFORMING TO.

WE'RE NOT GOING. THANK YOU. YOU'VE ANSWERED MY QUESTION. OTHER QUESTIONS OF THE DEVELOPER AT THIS POINT BEFORE WE HEAR THE STAFF REPORT.

YEAH, I I'M SORRY. NO. GO AHEAD. I'M JUST CURIOUS.

THE THE POOL IS UNDOUBTEDLY WELL INSIDE THE SETBACK.

WHY IS THERE THE NEED FOR THE POOL WHEN THESE TRANSIENT LODGING UNITS HAVE POOLS OF THEIR OWN? SO MAYBE HARRY CAN SPEAK TO IT FROM AN OPERATIONAL STANDPOINT, BUT IT'S AS AN AMENITY FOR THE YACHT CLUB, IS MY UNDERSTANDING. YEAH. AND AT THIS STANDARD, IF YOU SEE THE NEW PROJECTS THAT ARE BEING BUILT IN TOWN THAT ARE YOU KNOW, LAST COUPLE OF YEARS, THE PRIVACY OF HAVING YOUR OWN POOL IS BECOMES IT'S IN VOGUE.

PEOPLE WANT THAT PRIVACY. THEY DON'T WANT TO BE WALKING THROUGH THE LOBBY WITH THEIR BATHING SUIT ON.

SPEEDO, IF YOU WILL. WHATEVER. YOU KNOW, PEOPLE FEEL FUNNY ABOUT THAT.

BUT HAVING THAT PRIVACY WHERE YOU CAN GO WITH YOUR WIFE AND YOUR CHILDREN AND ENJOY THE WATER, GREAT. THE POOL DOWN ON THE LEVEL WHERE THE MARINA IS, IS FOR IF YOU'RE ON YOUR BOAT AND YOU WANT TO TAKE A DIP REAL QUICK AND GET BACK ON YOUR BOAT, OR YOU KNOW, THAT WOULD PRETTY MUCH BE THE, THE, THE USE OF THAT POOL.

SO HAVING THE PRIVACY OF YOUR OWN POOL IS A MARKETING BUSINESS DECISION.

YEAH. MY QUESTION REALLY WAS WHY THE WHY THE WHY THE POOL? NOT MY QUESTION. MY QUESTION IS WHY THE POOL ON THE GROUND? GROUND LEVEL. BECAUSE OF THE IF YOU WERE ON THE BOAT AND YOU WANT TO JUST TAKE A DIP IF YOU'RE USING THE MARINA AND YOU WANT TO JUMP IN THE WATER, WHICH A LOT, IF YOU'RE A BOATER, BUT YOU GET OFF THE WATER, YOU'RE KIND OF SALTY.

WHATEVER IT MIGHT BE, YOU TAKE A LITTLE RINSE AND JUMP IN THAT POOL.

COOL DOWN. THAT'S KIND OF IT. IT'S A NICE AMENITY TO HAVE FOR THE MARINA.

IT'S ACTUALLY ESTHETICALLY BEAUTIFUL BECAUSE THE WAY THE POOL IS, IS SET UP.

IT'S ON THAT ROUNDED CORNER. WE ACTUALLY HAVE IT.

YOU'RE GOING TO BE SEEING THAT INFINITY EDGE COME DOWN FROM THE WATER SIDE AND FROM THE NAPLES BAY RESORT ACROSS THE WAY.

ALL THOSE UNITS WILL BE LOOKING AT THIS. SO WE TRY TO, YOU KNOW, IT'S MORE EXPENSIVE TO PUT THE POOL THERE THAN JUST CANCEL THE POOL.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. JUST A QUICK QUESTION. THERE'S BEEN SEVERAL REFERENCES TO A YACHT CLUB, BUT I DON'T SEE ANY DESCRIPTION OF IT IN THE I'M SORRY, THE YACHT CLUB.

I'VE HEARD REFERENCE TO IT, BUT I HAVE NOT SEEN ANY DESCRIPTION OF WHAT THAT IS.

I'M NOT SURE. WE DON'T HAVE A YACHT CLUB. IT'S IN YOUR IT'S IN YOUR PAPERS WHERE YOU MENTIONED THAT LET'S SEE, IT SAYS THE DEVELOPERS OPERATING PLAN SPECIFIES THAT THE POOL AND AMENITY DECK ARE INTENDED TO SERVE AS PART OF THE YACHT CLUB OFFERING PREMIUM SERVICES.

ET CETERA. SO THE INTENDED USE FOR THAT 4200FT² ON THE GROUND FLOOR, PART OF IT WAS TO BE A SHIP STORE.

PART OF IT WAS TO BE KIND OF A LOUNGE AREA AND HAVE SOME BATHROOM FACILITIES, SHOWER FACILITIES FOR THE BOATING PUBLIC AND FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE USING THE BOAT SLIPS.

SO IT WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, MAYBE THE YACHT CLUB IS NOT THE RIGHT TERM, BUT THERE'S A LOUNGE OF SORTS AS PART OF THAT 40 200FT².

[01:55:01]

THE RESIDENTS OWN THEM. SO IN THAT RESPECT, THEY ARE DESIGNATED FOR THOSE 12.

I GUESS YOU COULD CALL THAT A CLUB, BUT IT SHOULDN'T SAY YACHT CLUB.

BUT IT SAYS THAT THE DEVELOPERS OPERATING PLAN SPECIFIES THAT THE POOL AND AMENITY DECK ARE INTENDED TO SERVE AS PART OF THE YACHT CLUB.

AND I THOUGHT YOU JUST TOLD US THAT THE POOL THAT YOU PROPOSE IS NOW NOT INTENDED FOR THE OWNERS AND THE RESIDENTS, IT'S INTENDED FOR THE PEOPLE WHO ARE USING IT.

IT'S SPECIFICALLY FOR THE MARINA USE, FOR THE PEOPLE THAT ARE ON THEIR BOATS THAT PARTICULAR DAY.

AS FAR AS USING IT, THERE'S NO RESTRICTION ON IT.

YOU DON'T HAVE TO BE A MEMBER IF YOU IF YOU RENT ONE OF THE UNITS AND YOU GO OUT ON THE BOAT, YOU HAVE TO RENT A BOAT AND YOU GO OUT ON THE BOAT AND YOU COME BACK AND YOU WANT TO GO IN THAT POOL.

YOU DON'T HAVE TO BE A MEMBER OF THE YACHT CLUB. OKAY.

RIGHT. BECAUSE THESE ARE THESE ARE DIFFERENT PEOPLE COMING IN AND OUT.

SO THEY WOULD NOT HAVE LIKE, IF YOU'RE AT THE NAPLES SAILING YACHT CLUB, YOU CAN'T JUST GO IN AND USE THEIR POOL.

YOU HAVE TO BE A MEMBER. IN THIS CASE, YOU DON'T HAVE TO BE A MEMBER OF THE RENTING OF THE UNIT GIVES YOU THE ABILITY TO RIGHT, TO USE THE POOL. AND THERE'S A LOUNGE AND SHOWER FACILITIES AND LAUNDRY AND ALL THAT STUFF, BECAUSE SOME PEOPLE MIGHT, MIGHT DECIDE TO STAY ON THEIR BOATS FOR A PERIOD OF TIME AS WELL.

YOU KNOW, AND JUST ENJOY THAT. OR THEY MIGHT JUST BE COMING DOWN WITH FRIENDS OR GUESTS TO USE, YOU KNOW, TO MEET THEM, TO TAKE A DAY TRIP OUT ON THE BOAT AND NECESSARILY DON'T HAVE TO GO UP TO THEIR ROOFTOP POOL.

RIGHT. BECAUSE THEY'RE THERE FOR THE BOATING.

SO YOU BRING YOUR FRIENDS IN, YOU GO OUT BOATING, AND YOU ALL WANT TO JUMP IN THE POOL. THAT'S KIND OF WHAT IT WAS DESIGNED FOR. TO CLARIFY, WHEN YOU SAY TO STAY ON THEIR BOAT. A COUPLE HOURS, NOT OVERNIGHT.

YEAH. EVERYTHING IS WITHIN THE CONTEXT OF THE CODE.

I LEARNED THAT 20 YEARS AGO. SO. OKAY, SO SO SO THERE'S NO YACHT CLUB, PER SE.

I'M SORRY. THERE'S NO YACHT CLUB, PER SE. NO, NOT NOT.

CAN YOU DEFINE A YACHT CLUB? WELL, I'M JUST. I'M JUST READING FROM THE PAPERS.

I THINK WE'RE GETTING DISTRACTED FROM WHAT WE'RE SUPPOSED TO BE DOING, GUYS.

THAT'S WHY I ASKED ABOUT WE'RE HERE ABOUT THE APPEAL PROCESS.

NOT FOR THE REALLY IS, AS I UNDERSTAND IT IS THERE IS IS THIS A IS THIS DID THE STAFF PROPERLY DETERMINE THAT THIS WAS NOT A MARINA WITH. WITH RESPECT, I THINK THAT MY QUESTION WAS ACTUALLY PERTINENT FOR THAT INQUIRY.

SO I APOLOGIZE IF I WASN'T CLEAR JUST FINE. THE INQUIRY WAS WAS RIGHT.

SPOT ON. YOU'RE CORRECT. AND RAISING THE QUESTION WRONG TERMINOLOGY.

IT'S A LOUNGE FOR BOATERS. FOR EXAMPLE, A UNIT OWNER RENTS HIS OR HER PROPERTY OUT AND ALSO RENTS THE CAN RENT THE, THE BOAT, SLIP OUT. AND SO THEY'RE GOING TO BE PEOPLE THAT ARE NOT OWNERS OF THESE UNITS AND POTENTIALLY NOT EVEN TENANTS IN THESE UNITS THAT ARE RENTING THESE BOAT SLIPS THAT ARE GOING TO BE USED IN THE POOL.

THEY USE THE TERMINOLOGY YACHT CLUB. IT'S JUST A KIND OF A CLUB AREA.

JUST THE WRONG TERMINOLOGY. SO, ARE THEY THE OWNER? THE SLIPS ARE DEEDED TO THE OWNERS OF THE UNITS, BUT THEN THE OWNERS OF THE UNITS ARE GOING TO BE ABLE TO RENT THE SLIPS OUT IN SEPARATELY.

THAT'S CORRECT. OKAY. OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

YEAH. JUST SO I UNDERSTAND. SO THE ISSUE, I THINK, IS THAT THE CITY SAYS THERE SHOULD BE A BLENDED SITUATION.

I THINK WE NEED BETWEEN MARINE AND NOT BECAUSE THESE GUYS HAVE.

I HAVE THE SAME QUESTION. I MEAN, IT SOUNDS LIKE EVERYBODY MET ALL THE RULES, FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND TO BE.

SO IF THEY'RE SAYING IT NEEDS TO BE BLENDED. THEY DID A CALCULATION TO BLEND IT IN AND IT MEETS THE PERCENTAGES THEY WANT.

THEN. THEN WE'RE HOME FREE. RIGHT. OKAY. WE'RE GOING TO CLOSE DOWN THE BOARD QUESTIONS AT THE MOMENT AND MOVE TO STAFF REPORT.

YEAH I AGREE. SO MORNING. YEP. GOOD MORNING ERIC MARTIN, PLANNING DIRECTOR.

I'VE BEEN PREVIOUSLY QUALIFIED AS AN EXPERT IN PLANNING AND ZONING MATTERS, AND THAT WILL BE THE NATURE OF MY TESTIMONY BEFORE YOU TODAY. YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU AN APPEAL OF AN ADMINISTRATIVE DECISION. AS OUR CITY ATTORNEY MENTIONED EARLIER, THIS IS AN APPEAL OF TWO TOPICS, ONE OF WHICH WILL GO DIRECTLY TO CITY COUNCIL.

SO THERE'S ONE ISSUE REALLY BEFORE THE PAB TODAY, AND THAT IS RELATED TO A COMMENT IN AN RA LETTER.

SO A REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION THAT WAS ISSUED TO THE PETITIONER.

AND THAT'S RELATED TO THE USE OF THIS PROPERTY AS A MARINA.

THE HISTORY OF THIS PROPERTY HAS BEEN IN THE SITE PLAN REVIEW PROCESS SINCE 2022, WAS WHEN THE SITE PLAN WAS FIRST SUBMITTED.

THE SITE PLAN PROCESS IS A PROCESS BY WHICH A NEW DEVELOPMENT IS SUBMITTED TO THE CITY.

WE THEN DISTRIBUTE THOSE PLANS TO ALL THE DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS IN THE CITY FOR REVIEW, AND THAT IS FOR REVIEW OF COMPLIANCE WITH ALL DIFFERENT ANY APPLICABLE

[02:00:03]

SO THEY SUBMIT TO THE CITY, WE SEND IT OUT, EVERYONE GIVES THEIR COMMENTS.

WE ISSUE WHAT WE CALL AN RA, A REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.

IF ANYONE SEES INSUFFICIENCIES OR DEFICIENCIES IN THAT PLAN WE SEND IT OUT, THEN THEY WILL RESUBMIT TO US THEIR REVISIONS TO ADDRESS THOSE COMMENTS.

AND THAT IS THE BACK AND FORTH THAT YOU SEE. SO THERE HAS BEEN A NUMBER OF ROUNDS OF THAT PROCESS WHERE WE'VE ISSUED AN RA AND THEY'VE SUBMITTED A RESPONSE BACK TO THE CITY.

SO THIS THIS ISSUE HAS BEEN KIND OF BREWING, IF YOU WILL, OR HAS BEEN IN THE BACK AND FORTH STAGES SINCE 2022.

AND THE MOST RECENT RA THAT WAS ISSUED WAS IN JULY OF THIS YEAR.

AND THE I THINK IT'S COMMENT NUMBER NINE IN THE PLANNING COMMENTS RELATED TO THE MARINA IS THE ISSUE THAT THEY ARE APPEALING AT THIS TIME.

SO WE DID WORK WITH BOTH THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE AND THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND DEVELOPING THAT AREA.

AND THEN ALSO WHEN THE APPEAL WAS FILED IN THE APPEAL THAT IS BEFORE YOU TODAY.

ALSO AS NOTED, PART OF THIS WAS HANDLED BY A PREVIOUS CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.

SO THERE IS SOME DETERMINATION IN HERE THAT WAS MADE BY A PRIOR CITY ATTORNEY, NOT THE DICKMAN LAW FIRM.

SO WE HAVE A LOT OF DIFFERENT STAFF MEMBERS, A LOT OF DIFFERENT ATTORNEYS THAT HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN THIS PROJECT BECAUSE IT'S BEEN GOING SINCE 2022. SO THE THE COMMENT FROM THE STAFF WAS RELATED TO THE USE THE MARINA USE ON THIS PROPERTY.

THIS IS THE CEQA DISTRICT, WHICH IS THE WATERFRONT COMMERCIAL DISTRICT, WHICH ALLOWS A MIX OF USES.

IT IS A IT'S A MIXED USE, BUT ALLOWS YOUR WATERFRONT MIXED USES.

SO THEY DO IT. THEY IT'S TRANSIENT LODGING IS A CONDITIONAL USE.

THAT CONDITIONAL USE WILL BE REVIEWED BY BOTH THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD AND CITY COUNCIL FOR FINAL DETERMINATION FOR THE TRANSIENT LODGING ITSELF.

AND THEN THEY'RE ALSO PROPOSING THE MARINE USE.

I THINK THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF TALK TODAY ABOUT SOME OF THE MAYBE SOME REVISIONS AS AS THEY'VE BEEN REVIEWING THE RAS FURTHER.

THERE IS A LITTLE CONFUSION ON STAFF'S PART WITH RESPECT TO THE LOT COVERAGE AND THE MARINA USES, AND THAT'S DUE TO SOME CONFLICTING PLANS. SO YOU HAVE A I, I DON'T KNOW IF THEY HAVE THE LOT.

THEY HAD A LOT COVERAGE. DIAGRAM SHOWING BEFORE YOU AND THEY SHOWED THE SEPARATION OF THE MARINA USES WHAT THEY'RE CALLING THE MARINA USES AND THE NON MARINA USES THAT SHOWED 4200FT² OF MARINA USES. HOWEVER, IN THE PLAN SET THAT IS IN YOUR PACKET, WHICH IS THE ARCHITECTURAL PLANS, YOU HAVE ALSO SOME PLANS THAT SHOW A MUCH SMALLER PORTION OF THE BUILDING DEDICATED TO THE MARINA SHIP STORE.

SO YOU HAVE THE UNIT WE'LL CALL IT THE IN THE THE NORTHEAST PORTION OF THIS BUILDING.

IT'S A VERY SMALL CORNER UNIT THAT IS LABELED MARINA SHIP STORE.

AND THEN THE OTHER UNITS THAT ARE THEN ALSO INCORPORATED INTO THE 4200FT² THAT THEY'RE SHOWING ON THE OTHER DIAGRAM ARE LABELED HERE AS COMMERCIAL AND LOBBY, TRANSIENT LODGING, TRANSIENT LODGING LOBBY. SO I JUST WANT CLARIFICATION WHEN WE TALK ABOUT THE LOT COVERAGE, EXACTLY WHAT SPACE IS DEDICATED AND THAT THAT'S IN THE RA AS WELL.

EXACTLY WHAT SPACE IS DEDICATED TO THE MARINA SHIP STORE, SO THAT WE CAN BETTER CLARIFY THE ACTUAL LOT COVERAGE AND WHAT PERCENTAGE OF THAT LOT COVERAGE IS DEDICATED TO MARINA USES AND WHAT'S NOT.

SO THERE IS STILL SOME CONFUSION AND STILL SOME AMBIGUITY THERE WITH RESPECT TO THOSE PLANS.

BUT IN REVIEWING THE THIS REQUEST, WE DID DETERMINE THAT WHILE THERE ARE SOME AND I THINK THE PETITIONER AGREED AS WELL, WHILE THERE ARE SOME USES THAT ARE CLASSIFIED IN THE MARINA THE MARINA DEFINITION IN CHAPTER 44 EIGHT DEFINES THE MARINA AS AN ESTABLISHMENT WITH A WATERFRONT AND ESTABLISHMENT.

SO THE ESTABLISHMENT WITH A WATERFRONT LOCATION DESIGNED TO SERVICE WATERCRAFT.

AND THEN IT GOES ON TO ADD A MARINA MAY INCLUDE SUCH ACTIVITIES AND IT LISTS OTHER ACTIVITIES.

SO AT THE KIND OF THE HEART OF THIS IS, IS THE SPACE THAT THEY'RE SHOWING, WHICH IS EITHER THE 4200FT² OR THIS MUCH SMALLER AREA SHOWN ON A SEPARATE PORTION OF THEIR PLANS IS THAT MAKE THIS AN ESTABLISHMENT DESIGNED TO SERVICE WATERCRAFT.

AND I THINK THEY HAD MENTIONED IN THEIR RESPONSE LETTER TO THE RA THAT THEIR INTERPRETATION OF THE SERVICE WATERCRAFT WAS CUSTOMER SERVICE, NOT ANY SORT OF MECHANICAL OR ANY OTHER SERVICING.

IT'S NOT A FUELING STATION, IT'S NOT REPAIR. IT'S NOT ANYTHING LIKE THAT. IT'S SERVICING WATERCRAFT. SO WE WERE ASKING, IT'S AN RA. IT'S SAYING GIVE US MORE INFORMATION TO HELP US UNDERSTAND THIS.

WE DON'T HAVE CLEAR DIRECTION ON EXACTLY WHAT THE SQUARE FOOTAGE IS.

[02:05:01]

WE NEED MORE INFORMATION. WE NEED BETTER, MORE CLEAR INFORMATION THAN WHAT WE HAVE TODAY.

AND THAT'S THAT'S THE REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.

WE DID NOTICE THIS APPEAL TO SURROUNDING PROPERTY OWNERS.

AND WE DID NOT RECEIVE ANY CORRESPONDENCE. AND I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

SO I HAVE A QUESTION. WHAT'S THE BLENDED? I MEAN, THE STAFF LOOKING TO TRY TO FIGURE OUT THE PERCENTAGES ON A MORE ACCURATE BASIS AND THEN ALLOW A BLEND BASED UPON THOSE TWO PERCENTAGES.

I NEED MORE INFORMATION. WITH RESPECT. I NEED TO KNOW EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE DEALING WITH HERE.

I THINK THERE'S IT'S IT'S IT'S NOT CLEAR. I HATE TO SPEAK FOR ANDREW, BUT IT SEEMS TO ME WE'RE PREMATURE HERE IN THAT WE NEED MORE INFORMATION CONCERNING THE STAFF NEEDS MORE INFORMATION CONCERNING THE PERCENTAGES, AND I THINK THE DEVELOPER NEEDS TO GIVE SOME THOUGHT TO.

IF YOU ALLOW MAINTENANCE ON THE PROPERTY, IF I HAVE A BOAT THERE, AND I HAVE SOMEBODY COME IN TO SERVICE MY BOAT.

AND KEEPING WITH THE ORDINANCES, IN OTHER WORDS, NOT REBUILDING MY BOAT, BUT CHANGING THE OIL OR TUNING UP MY ENGINE ON SITE, WHICH 99% OF THE HOMEOWNERS IN THE CITY OF NAPLES DO.

DOES THAT MEET THE QUALIFICATION OF SERVICE? BUT I LIKE THE IDEA OF A BLENDED IF IF AND I'M GUESSING YOUR PERCENTAGES ARE GOING TO BE CLOSE ENOUGH, BUT I THINK YOU NEED TO COME BACK WITH MORE INFORMATION.

ANDREW, I THINK IF I COULD BEFORE YOU GO ON, BECAUSE YOU YOU ASKED NOT TO SPEAK FOR ME, SO I'M GOING TO SPEAK FOR MYSELF.

I DO THINK THAT IT'S IN YOUR. IT MAY BE A QUESTION ABOUT WHETHER THIS IS PREMATURE, BUT WHAT GIVES ME PAUSE IS THAT.

AND MAYBE IT'S JUST A PHRASING THAT STAFF USES, BUT THEY CLEARLY ARE SAYING BASED ON THE DEFINITION STAFF FINDS THAT'S A CONCLUSION.

THAT'S NOT SAYING THE DEFINITION OF MARINA IS X, Y, Z.

CAN YOU PLEASE EXPLAIN TO US WHY IT IS THAT? I KNOW THAT, THAT BECAUSE I'VE SEEN SOME OF THE DOCUMENTATION THAT THAT THAT PARTICULAR STATEMENT IS DERIVED FROM A PRIOR CITY ATTORNEY BECAUSE THEY DID ASK FOR LEGAL ADVICE FROM A PRIOR CITY ATTORNEY ABOUT WHAT DOES THIS DEFINITION MEAN? BUT I BELIEVE THAT THIS THIS PARTICULAR QUESTION ABOUT WHAT IS AND IS NOT A MARINA IS THIS A MARINA? IS IS PIVOTAL. AND I KNOW THAT THERE'S A LOT OF OTHER QUESTIONS ABOUT PERCENTAGES AND THINGS LIKE THAT, BUT THIS IS JUST GOING TO GO ROUND AND ROUND FOREVER UNTIL THAT IS DETERMINED.

BUT I DO BELIEVE IT'S RIPE FOR APPEAL BECAUSE THAT SAYS STAFF FINES.

AND MAYBE THAT'S JUST A AN INAPPROPRIATE USE OF THE WORD, BUT IT'S DEFINITELY A CONCLUSORY FINDING, I WOULD SAY. AND THAT TO TO BE FAIR, IN WHAT IS SAID HERE IS BASED ON THE INFORMATION THAT WE HAVE WE FOUND.

BUT IF THEY'RE PROPOSING TO AMEND THE PLANS, AMEND THE LOT COVERAGE, AMEND THE PLANS, AMEND THE OPERATING PLAN.

I'VE HEARD SOME CHANGES TO THE OPERATING PLAN, IF THAT IS PRESENTED TO STAFF, AND WE COULD REVIEW THE REVISED SUBMITTAL.

COULD I GIVE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE FOR THE CHAIRMAN AND THE PEOPLE TO CONSIDER IN HEARING WHAT WHAT WE'VE HEARD SO FAR, I THINK THERE'S A DISJOINT BETWEEN CURRENT INFORMATION, WHICH IS, I THINK, VERY SIGNIFICANT AND SOME ABSENCE OF INFORMATION WHICH RESULTED IN THE PLANNING COMING TO THEIR DECISION, LET'S SAY.

I THINK THAT THAT DECISION WOULD BE OR THE STAFF COMMENTS WOULD BE DRAMATICALLY ALTERED IF THE INFORMATION THAT YOU'VE SHARED TODAY WAS SHARED WITH STAFF. I THINK THEY WOULD HAVE WRITTEN A VERY DIFFERENT REPORT FROM THE APPEAL.

CURRENTLY, REVIEWING THE APPEAL IS BASED ON THE INFORMATION THAT THE STAFF HAD AT THE TIME.

IT CAN'T WE CAN'T CONSIDER ADDITIONAL INFORMATION BECAUSE THAT'S GOT NOTHING TO DO WITH THE APPEAL.

IT RELATES TO WHY THE STAFF CAME TO THE DECISION.

I BELIEVE IF THERE IS, IF YOU REQUESTED A CONTINUANCE TO, LET'S SAY, AS ONE OF THE OTHER PEOPLE HAVE DONE, TO CONTINUANCE TO DECEMBER 11TH AND UPDATED THE STAFF WITH THE INFORMATION THAT YOU'VE SHARED TODAY, I THINK YOU WOULD HAVE A VERY DIFFERENT SITUATION.

CAN I CAN I RESPOND TO THAT? MR. CHAIRMAN, JUST BECAUSE I THINK IT'S A VERY IMPORTANT ISSUE.

FIRST OF ALL, THERE IS NO NEW INFORMATION THAT WAS PRESENTED TODAY.

[02:10:03]

NOW, IN TERMS OF THE 4200 SQUARE FOOT STORE, PETER KALICKI COULD EXPLAIN THAT.

THAT IS, STAFF HAS THAT INFORMATION. IT'S VERY CLEAR THERE'S NOTHING THAT'S CHANGING IN THIS PETITION.

THERE'S REALLY NO NEW INFORMATION OTHER THAN WE JUST SIMPLY WENT BACK AND DID WE DID A CALCULATION BASED ON ON REREADING OF THE ORDINANCE. EXCUSE ME, SIR, BUT WE'RE NOT HERE AND WE DON'T HAVE THE INDULGENCE TO CONSIDER NEW INFORMATION WHICH RELATES TO A HISTORIC DECISION BASED ON INFORMATION THAT WAS AVAILABLE THEN.

SO JUST TO BE VERY CLEAR, I UNDERSTAND. I DON'T THINK ANYBODY WOULD LIKE ANYTHING BETTER THAN TO SEE THAT SITE DEVELOPED.

I DON'T THINK THAT'S THE ISSUE. BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT WE'RE HERE FOR TODAY. WE'RE HERE TO DISCUSS THE APPEAL BASED ON THE INFORMATION THAT THE PLANNING HAD.

AND I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT IF YOU CONSIDERED CONTINUING TO THE NEXT AVAILABLE TIME, YOU WOULD THEN BE ABLE TO UPDATE THE STAFF AND THE STAFF'S OPINIONS WOULD BE, I THINK, WOULD BE DRAMATICALLY DIFFERENT, WHICH WOULD ALLOW YOU A FASTER PROCESS.

I'M LOOKING AT HOW CAN WE MOVE YOU FASTER TO GET IN FRONT OF ALL THE VARIOUS PEOPLE.

AND I THINK THE FASTER ROUTE WOULD BE A CONTINUANCE, WHICH THEN WOULD MAKE IT EASIER FOR MEMBERS TO SUPPORT WHERE YOU WANT TO GO, BECAUSE CURRENTLY I CAN'T GIVE THAT SUPPORT BASED ON WHAT I'VE HEARD SO FAR.

THAT'S UNDERSTOOD. WE'RE YOU KNOW, WE'RE NOT GOING TO ASK FOR A CONTINUANCE.

WE NEED TO MOVE THIS ALONG. WE'VE GOTTEN THE SAME SORT OF RESPONSES FROM STAFF FOR A COUPLE OF YEARS HERE NOW.

NOTHING IS CHANGING IN THIS PETITION. NOW, I REGRET ASKING MR. KULWICKI TO GO BACK AND DOUBLE CHECK HIS LOT COVERAGE CALCULATIONS, BECAUSE I HADN'T ASKED HIM TO DO THAT.

WE'D BE STILL WITH THE SAME QUESTION. WE'D BE AT 44.3% LOT COVERAGE IN THE IN THE REQUEST.

BUT THE ISSUE IS, WILL STAFF PERMIT US TO USE A BLENDED APPROACH TO DETERMINING LOT COVERAGE, AS THEY HAVE DONE IN THE PAST? WE BELIEVE THAT THAT'S THE POLICY OF THE CITY.

WE BELIEVE THAT STAFF HAS ALL OF THE INFORMATION THEY NEED.

THEY HAVE THE EXACT SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THAT MARINE STORE.

THERE MAY BE SOME PICTURES, SOME OLD PICTURES THAT HAVE A DIFFERENT SQUARE FOOTAGE, BUT PETER CAN EXPLAIN THAT THE DOCUMENT THAT IS CONTROLLING HAS THE 4200FT². THERE'S NO NEW INFORMATION BEING PRESENTED TODAY OTHER THAN I ASKED, PERHAPS MISTAKENLY, TO JUST RECALCULATE AND MAKE SURE THAT 44.3% WAS THE RIGHT NUMBER.

IT MAY BE LESS. AND SO IT TURNED OUT WELL. YEAH, IT'S IT'S LESS.

BUT FOR PURPOSES OF THIS APPEAL, WE NEED A DETERMINATION THAT USING A BLENDED APPROACH IS THE RIGHT APPROACH TO DETERMINING LOT COVERAGE FOR THIS PROJECT, AS HAS BEEN DONE IN OTHER PROJECTS. I THINK MR. ZIA HAS SOME COMMENTS, BUT I APPRECIATE THE THE SPIRIT OF MOVING IT ALONG.

I THINK THAT'S THAT'S WE'VE BEEN AT THIS SINCE 2022.

AND ALL I THINK IT BOILS DOWN TO IS THAT WE WOULD LIKE, LIKE ANY OF YOU WOULD LIKE IS WHAT IS THE RULE, WHAT IS THE CRITERIA. AND WE'LL FIT IN IT. THAT'S WHAT WE'VE BEEN STRIVING FOR BECAUSE THIS ISN'T OUR FIRST PLAN.

SO IF WE CAN GET A COMMITMENT FROM STAFF THAT THEY ARE GOING TO USE THE BLENDED APPROACH, AND MAYBE AFTER THEY GET TOGETHER WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY.

WE'RE NOT SAYING I'M NOT PUTTING THAT RECORD ON THE SPOT NOW TO SAY YES, BUT COULD WE PLEASE HAVE SOME COMMITMENT THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE A CRITERIA THAT BECAUSE WE FIT INTO THE CRITERIA AS IT'S WRITTEN BY ANY STANDARD? LET'S BE CLEAR ABOUT THAT. BUT DO WE WANT TO GO THROUGH AN ARGUMENT OR A FIGHT AND END UP AT A BAD.

NO, BUT I'D LIKE TO DRAW ATTENTION. THIS IS NOT THE ARENA.

WHAT DO YOU MEAN? OUTSIDE THE ARENA? THIS ISN'T.

THIS ISN'T THE ARENA. THIS ISN'T WHAT YOU'RE HERE FOR TODAY.

YES. WE CANNOT MAKE A DECISION WHILST YOU'RE NOT GETTING PEOPLE.

THAT IS NOT WHAT WE'RE HERE FOR. WE'RE HERE TO DISCUSS AND MAKE A DECISION ON THE APPEAL.

AND I THINK WE'VE HEARD ALL WE NEED TO HEAR ON THAT.

NO, NO, I'VE SAID THIS THREE TIMES ALREADY. I'LL SAY IT 100 IF I HAVE TO.

THE BLENDED APPROACH REALLY CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG, ERICA.

THIS IS PREDICATED ON WHETHER OR NOT THIS IS A MARINA.

SO THE QUESTION IS WHAT IS AND IS NOT A MARINA? AND IT'S NOT ABOUT I DO THINK THAT THE OTHER CALCULATIONS THAT THEY'RE BRINGING IN IS, IS IN GOOD FAITH, BUT THAT'S IRRELEVANT IN MY OPINION, BECAUSE THAT WHETHER OR NOT THIS IS A MARINA IS THE QUESTION,

[02:15:03]

THAT'S A, THAT'S A THAT'S I THINK THE QUESTION MAY BE OUGHT TO BE TO STAFF IS DO THEY BELIEVE THAT THIS IS A MARINA OR NOT.

THEY'RE THE EXPERTS. IS IT ISN'T REALLY. THE QUESTION IS A PARTIALLY A MARINA, BECAUSE I THINK WE ALL AGREE THAT IT'S NOT TOTALLY A MARINA.

THE QUESTION IS, ARE THERE PORTIONS OF THIS LOT THAT ARE CONSIDERED TO BE A MARINA? I THINK THAT'S WHAT THE QUESTION IS. RIGHT, RIGHT.

SO THERE'S THERE'S NOT A LOT OF INFORMATION IN YOUR CODE ABOUT COMMERCIAL OR NONCOMMERCIAL DOCKS OR THIS.

MOST CODES HAVE A LOT MORE INFORMATION ABOUT WHAT IS A MARINA.

THE DEFINITION HERE IS WHAT IT IS. AGAIN, I THINK IF THERE THERE IS A MARINA COMPONENT ON THIS PROPERTY, THEN I THINK THAT GIVES STAFF THE ABILITY TO EVALUATE THIS DIFFERENTLY.

OKAY. OKAY. WELL THAT'S HELPFUL. AND I'M JUST GOING TO MAKE A COMMENT.

I DON'T THINK THE APPLICANT FULLY UNDERSTOOD THE NEED TO TO SHOW HOW SERVICES TO BOATS WERE OCCURRING HERE.

AND I THINK HE COULD HAVE DONE A HELL OF A LOT BETTER JOB IN THAT REGARD.

BUT PERSONALLY, I THINK A PORTION OF THIS IS A MARINA, IF THAT'S WHAT WE'RE VOTING ON.

I'M PREPARED TO GO FORWARD WITH JUST THAT QUESTION AND LET THEM SORT OUT HOW TO BLEND IT AFTER.

THIS IS WHETHER YOU COULD BE A LITTLE BIT PREGNANT.

YES. YES SIR, I TOTALLY AGREE. BUT. BUT ALSO, I UNDERSTAND THE FRUSTRATION.

DEVELOPERS LIKE TO KNOW YES OR NO. THEY JUST DON'T WANT TO HAVE TOMORROW SIT BEFORE THEM FOREVER.

SO THE STAFF, IF WE FIND IT'S A MARINA, IN MY OPINION, THAT WOULD GIVE THEM A PERCENTAGE FROM WHICH THEY COULD BLEND. IS THAT FAIR TO SAY, ERICA, THAT'S YOUR DETERMINATION TO MAKE.

MY QUESTION IS, IT'S THEIR DETERMINATION WHETHER I'M WRONG OR RIGHT, WHETHER THIS IS A MARINA.

THIS IS A PLAN THAT'S IN YOUR PACKET. SO WHEN THEY SAY THE CONTROLLING DOCUMENT, I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY WHEN I'M REVIEWING THE SITE PLAN, THE CONTROLLING DOCUMENT, THIS IS IN YOUR SET OF PLANS.

AND THERE'S ANOTHER SHEET IN HERE THAT SHOW THIS EXACT SAME THING WHERE THIS IS THE SPACE DEDICATED TO MARINA, AND THIS IS LOBBY RECEPTION AND COMMERCIAL UNIT.

AND THEN THERE'S ANOTHER SHEET IN THIS, AND IT'S IMPORTANT THAT WE GET THIS CLARIFIED BECAUSE CONTROLLING DOCUMENTS, ALL OF THE DOCUMENTS ARE CONTROLLING. SO THEN THERE'S ANOTHER SHEET THAT SHOW THE SAME MIX OF USES.

SO WHEN WE'RE CALCULATING THE SQUARE FOOTAGE I WE NEED TO ALL BE CLEAR.

THIS DIAGRAM HERE SHOWS A MUCH LARGER AREA DEDICATED TO MARINA USES THAN THAT PREVIOUS SHEET.

AND SO THIS ALSO THIS SHEET ALSO SHOWS JUST THIS AREA DEDICATED TO MARINA.

THIS IS NOW TRANSIENT LOGIC TRANSIENT LODGING SERVICE LOBBY.

AND THIS IS A COMMERCIAL UNIT. SO I WANT TO BE CLEAR CONTROLLING DOCUMENTS IS THIS THIS ENTIRE PLAN SET.

SO IF THOSE SHEETS ARE INCORRECT THEN THEY NEED TO BE CORRECTED.

CAN I JUST ASK YOU A QUESTION. IT MIGHT SOLVE THIS WHOLE THING. SO WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS THERE THERE IS A BLENDED SYSTEM, RIGHT? A CALCULATION THAT YOU WOULD USE TO DETERMINE WHAT PERCENTAGE OVER 40 WE WOULD BE ALLOWED.

YOU HAVE YOU'RE ACCEPTING THAT THAT ARGUMENT.

ALL I DID WAS ASK WHICH OF THE PLANS IS THE CONTROLLING DOCUMENT? I GET IT, IF IT'S SMALLER THEN WE HAVE LESS OVER 40.

IF IT'S BIGGER, WE HAVE MORE OVER 40, RIGHT. MY QUESTION IS IF IT'S IF IT IS A MARINA, IF IT'S 100FT² AND YOU USE THAT IN YOUR CALCULATION AS, AS YOU'VE DONE IN THE PAST, IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE COMMITTING TO THAT? I HAVE TO IN 2005, I WASN'T HERE. I DID NOT WORK FOR THE CITY IN 2005.

SO TO PROVE ANYTHING, I'M NOT ASKING YOU TO TO, TO TO TO STAMP ANYTHING.

I'M JUST SAYING FROM WHAT I'M GATHERING, FROM WHAT YOU JUST SAID IS THAT YOU'RE YOU'RE QUESTIONING HOW MUCH OF THE SPACE IS BEING USED FOR MARINA. SO THAT WOULD MEAN THAT IF IT'S 4200FT² IN YOUR HEAD THAT YOU COULD WE COULD GO OVER THE 40 BY WHATEVER PERCENTAGE.

IF IT'S LESS THAN, WE WOULD THEN BE ABLE TO GO LESS THAN WHAT WE WOULD BE AT 42.

IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO CORRECT THE RECORD? THERE HAVE BEEN A LOT OF DIFFERENT NUMBERS THROWN OUT TODAY WITH RESPECT TO THE NUMBER, THOUGH. IT'S WHETHER OR NOT HOW YOU FIGURE IT OUT.

THAT'S ALL WE'RE ASKING. LET ME LET ME INTERRUPT EVERYBODY BECAUSE WE'RE TALKING IN A CIRCLE HERE.

AND ANDREW HELPED ME. OKAY. SEEMS TO ME THAT IF WE HAD A MOTION THAT DETERMINED THAT SOME PORTION OF THIS IS A

[02:20:04]

IN MY OPINION, AGAIN, I BELIEVE THAT THEY'RE WHAT'S BLOCKING.

THIS IS NOT NECESSARILY THE NUMBERS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

IT'S LIKE WHAT IS AND IS NOT A MARINA. AND SO I THINK IF STAFF STAFF HAS MAYBE IT'S JUST, YOU KNOW, I BELIEVE THAT THERE WAS A FINDING THAT THIS BASED ON THE DEFINITION, THAT THIS DOES NOT MEET THE DEFINITION OF A MARINA.

THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE APPEALING. SO I THINK YOU THE QUESTION BEFORE YOU ALL IS IS THIS OR IS THIS NOT A MARINA? NOW, YOU KNOW, BUT IT'S A BLENDED. IT'S NOT. THE POINT IS IT'S NOT NOBODY.

NO NO NO NO, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. SO A PORTION OF THIS THING SHOULD BE CONSIDERED TO BE A MARINA.

I THINK THAT'S THE QUESTION. YES. BECAUSE. YES.

BECAUSE THE WHOLE PORTION. YES. THERE'S THERE'S TRANSIENT USE ON THERE.

THERE'S OTHER THINGS. BUT THE SECTION THAT IS FOR VESSELS AND THE THE SERVICING OF THE WATERCRAFT THAT ARE IN THE VESSELS, DOES THAT CONSTITUTE A MARINA? OKAY. I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION THAT SOME PORTION OF THIS IS A MARINA.

AND THEN I'M GOING TO THEN STAFF CAN DO WHATEVER I WANT WITH IT.

MR.. SECOND. SECOND, MR. CHAIRMAN. ANY DISCUSSION? I THINK WE'VE HAD ALL THE INPUT. I THINK WE NEED TO GET TO A VOTE.

WE HAVE A MOTION. WE HAVE A DISCUSSION. I CAN ASSURE YOU I WANT YOU TO GET TO A VOTE.

BUT I WANT TO I WANT TO BE. I WANT TO MAKE SURE IT'S THE VOTE THAT GETS US TO THE NEXT LEVEL.

AND LISTEN, IT'S EITHER THAT OR WE'RE GOING TO CONTINUE IT.

TAKE YOUR CHOICE. OKAY. CAN I INTERJECT? I THINK THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY HERE.

OKAY, FINE. HONESTLY. OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION, A SECOND AND STAFF.

THAT'S FINE. I MEAN, I CAN WORK WITH THEM AFTER A DISCUSSION RELATING TO THAT.

I CAN UNDERSTAND THAT CONSIDERATION OF PART OF THIS BEING UNIT BEING CONSIDERED AS A MARINA.

BUT THE CONSEQUENCES ARE TO THE WHOLE DEVELOPMENT IS TAKING ADVANTAGE TO ENLARGE THE DEVELOPMENT BASED ON HAVING PART OF A PART OF MARINA.

SO IF WE DO DESIGNATE PART OF MARINA, WE ARE ALSO SAYING THAT THE WHOLE COMPLEX IS IS PROPORTIONALLY A MARINA.

I DISAGREE WITH THAT. I'M JUST SAYING THAT THE MOTION IS THAT A PROPORTION OF THIS IS A MARINA.

WE'RE GOING TO RELY UPON STAFF TO TO RUN THE NUMBERS.

WE'RE WE'RE NOT IN THE DESIGN BUSINESS. SO THEY RUN THE NUMBERS.

AND IF THEY DON'T LIKE THE NUMBERS, THEY CAN APPEAL THAT.

AND THE ONLY CLARIFICATION I WAS LOOKING FOR IS THAT THAT GETS US TO THE BLENDED APPROACH.

YES IT DOES. I JUST WANT TO MAKE THAT FOR THE RECORD, THAT WAS ALL. YES IT DOES.

IT KEEPS THE BLENDED APPROACH. THERE'S A MOTION AND A SECOND CALL.

THE ROLL I HAVE BEEN ATTEMPTING THIS THING IS READ A LITTLE HISTORICAL LOOK.

YOU GOT TO SPEAK UP QUITE CLEARLY. THE HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE ON THIS IS, IS FASCINATING.

IN 65, THERE WAS AN ORDINANCE. IN 84, THERE WAS AN ORDINANCE IN 94, THERE WAS AN ORDINANCE IN 2002, THERE WAS AN ORDINANCE AND TEN AN ORDINANCE OH SIX THERE.

THE CITY HAS BEEN FIGHTING WITH THIS, AND THE DOG'S BEEN BARKING FOR A LONG TIME, AND THERE'S BEEN ORDINANCES PASSED COME AND GONE.

SO WE'RE AT A POINT NOW AND I UNDERSTAND THIS, BUT THE MASTER PLAN IS GOING TO BE THE MASTER PLAN IS.

SO I APPRECIATE ALL THIS DEBATE BACK AND FORTH.

AND IT'S A GOOD ONE. SO CALL THE QUESTION. BUT THE HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE IS VERY CLEAR THAT THIS DOG HAS BEEN BARKING FOR A LONG TIME.

THIS TIME PUTS A LEASH ON IT. THANK YOU. I'D LIKE TO HAVE THE MOTION CLARIFIED.

I DON'T THINK THAT THE MOTION IS CLEAR ENOUGH FOR ME ANYWAY.

PLEASE. MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE MOTION IS TO DETERMINE THAT A PORTION OF THIS SITE IS A MARINA.

WE'RE NOT GOING TO DETERMINE WHAT PORTION IT IS.

THERE IS SOME PORTION THAT MEETS THE DEFINITION MARINA, BECAUSE THERE ARE SERVICES BEING PROVIDED ABOVE AND BEYOND JUST TYING UP YOUR BOAT SERVICES, PEOPLE COMING IN AND SERVICING BOATS, LOOKING AFTER BOATS.

THEY HAVE A STORE. LOOK AT THE ORDINANCE. IT'S A YES OR A NO AND THEN THEY CAN APPEAL IT.

YES. SORRY. ALSO STAFF BRUCE FROM THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE.

GOOD MORNING. I NEED TO QUALIFY MYSELF AS AN EXPERT.

YES, PLEASE. AND BE SWORN IN. I WAS, I DID SWEAR.

OH, OKAY. THAT'S OKAY. SO I WORKED IN THE DEVELOPMENT FIELD FOR 40 YEARS AND SERVED FOR SEVEN YEARS ON THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD.

I'M HERE TO OFFER MY OPINION ON THE ISSUE BEFORE YOU IN IN THE PLANNING ROLE AND ASK YOUR APPROVAL FOR ME TO TESTIFY, PLEASE GO AHEAD. SO MY BELIEF IS THAT I WORKED WITH ERICA AND THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AS

[02:25:02]

I BELIEVE THERE IS A PATH FORWARD THAT WOULD RESULT IN WHAT YOU'RE TRYING TO ACCOMPLISH.

WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO URGE YOU TO DO IS TO GIVE THE PETITIONER THE OPTION TO CIRCLE BACK INTERNALLY, RATHER THAN DO SOMETHING THAT WOULD INEVITABLY HAVE TO GO TO CITY COUNCIL.

ASK CITY COUNCIL TO CONFIRM YOUR JUDGMENT THAT A PORTION OF THIS IS A MARINA, AND THEN SEND THEM BACK AGAIN TO DO THIS AGAIN.

I BELIEVE THERE'S A PATH FORWARD IF THE PETITIONER AND THE STAFF CAN WORK IT OUT WHERE WE COULD USE THE BLENDED RATE.

THIS IS, I THINK, WHAT WHAT THE CITY ATTORNEY WAS SUGGESTING TO GET TO THE CORRECT RESULT, BECAUSE WE'VE HEARD THEM SAY, I HEARD THEM SAY, I THINK YOU HEARD THEM SAY THEY CONCEDE THE POINT, WHICH PROBABLY IS A SMALL POINT, THAT THE ENTIRE PROJECT IS NOT A MARINA, BUT THAT A PORTION IS A MARINA.

AND ONCE WE DETERMINE WHAT PORTION IS THE MARINA AND ALLOW THEM TO COME FORWARD WITH A BLENDED RATE, THERE'S NO REASON FOR AN APPEAL. THERE'S NO REASON FOR ANYTHING.

THEY CAN MOVE FORWARD WITH A SITE PLAN AND WHETHER IT HAS TO GO TO COUNCIL OR NOT.

SO IT WOULD BE MY SUGGESTION TO GIVE THEM THAT OPPORTUNITY RATHER THAN SEND YOUR RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL JUST TO CIRCLE BACK AGAIN.

AND DID I GET THE GIST OF WHAT YOU WERE TRYING TO SAY ALSO, MR. DICKMAN? CORRECT. I HAVE BEEN REPEATING MYSELF AD NAUSEAM, AND I BELIEVE THAT THERE HAS TO BE A I MEAN, THEY'RE APPEALING THE DECISION ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THERE'S A MARINA COMPONENT VERSUS JUST DOCKS.

THAT WOULD QUALIFY THEM FOR A DIFFERENT CALCULATION.

NOW IT'S UP TO THE PETITIONER WHETHER THEY WANT TO WITHDRAW AND GO BACK AND AND MEET WITH STAFF AND POSSIBLY WORK THIS OUT, I STILL HAVEN'T. I THINK THAT STAFF NEEDS DIRECTION ON WHETHER OR NOT THIS IS A MARINA OR NOT.

PORTIONS OF MARINA PLEASE USE YOU KEEP. USING A MARINA IS NOT A TOTALLY A NO.

I KNOW WHAT IT MAY. IT'S A FINE DETAIL. EXCUSE ME.

I KNOW WHAT IT IS. OKAY, I KNOW WHAT IT IS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.

THE WATER DEPENDENT WATER RELATED USES A PARTIAL COMPONENT, SIR.

I KNOW WHAT THIS. I KNOW WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.

WE UNDERSTAND THAT YOU THINK WE NEED A VOTE? I DON'T.

IT'S UP TO YOU ALL. IT'S UP TO THE PETITIONER WHETHER THEY WANT TO GO BACK.

ALL RIGHT, LET ME SUGGEST THIS, BECAUSE WHAT WAS JUST STATED IS EXACTLY WHERE WE WANT TO BE, WHICH IS THAT THERE'S A PORTION OF THIS PROJECT THAT'S A MARINA AND THAT WE NEED TO SIT WITH STAFF AND COME UP WITH WHAT THE PERCENTAGE SHOULD BE.

WE HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THAT. I THINK THAT'S THE DIRECTION THAT THE BOARD WAS GOING IN.

IN TERMS OF YOUR MOTION. BASED ON THAT, I THINK WE CAN CONTINUE THIS.

I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO HAVE A DECISION. CLEARLY, I'M IN FAVOR OF THAT.

SO I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR. SO THE ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER IS SAYING THAT PART OF THIS IS A MARINA COMPONENT, AND THAT IF THEY HAD MORE INFORMATION, THEN THEY COULD GO INTO A BLENDED RATE ANALYSIS.

IS THAT RIGHT, MR.. ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY. CITY MANAGER I DEFER TO NO MR. TESTIFIED. I WANT TO KNOW WHAT WHAT YOU WERE TESTIFYING TO.

WHAT DO THEY NEED TO KNOW WHETHER OR NOT THIS IS GOING TO BE CONSIDERED A MARINA? OKAY. WHAT I WHAT I TRIED TO TESTIFY TO WAS THAT WE ALWAYS FELT THAT THERE WERE MARINA USES ON THE PROPERTY, AND THAT THE ENTIRE PROJECT, THEREFORE, WAS NOT A MARINA, AND THAT THE BENEFITS ASSOCIATED WITH BEING AN ENTIRE PROJECT AS MARINA WOULDN'T ACCRUE TO THE WHOLE PROJECT. NOW WE'RE HEARING, I'M HEARING FOR THE FIRST TIME, THERE'S AN OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE A BLENDED SOLUTION THAT WOULD SOLVE THE PROBLEM. AND THEREFORE, THAT'S WHAT I WAS SUGGESTING, IS WE NOT RECOMMEND THAT.

NOT ME. EXCUSE ME. THAT THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD NOT MOVE THIS FORWARD TO COUNCIL JUST TO CIRCLE BACK WHEN THERE IS A SHORTER PATH TO THE CORRECT RESULT.

OKAY. SO THEN IT WOULD BE UP TO THE PETITIONER.

IF THEY FEEL THAT THAT'S COMFORTABLE ENOUGH FOR THEM, THEN MAYBE CONTINUE THIS TO THE NEXT MEETING.

AND IF THINGS GET WORKED OUT FINE, IF NOT, IT COMES BACK.

OKAY. BASED ON THE ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER'S COMMENTS, WE AGREED TO AGREE TO CONTINUE THIS.

WE WILL SIT DOWN WITH STAFF AND WE WILL GO THROUGH THE PERCENTAGES BECAUSE WE'RE QUITE CONFIDENT THAT AT 41.2% AS A BLENDED RATE, WE'RE GOING TO BE FINE. SO WE WILL AGREE TO CONTINUE TO HEAR ABOUT ABOUT 20 MINUTES AGO, WHICH IS THE REASON WHY I PUT FORWARD THE FACT OF HAVING A CONTINUANCE.

SO IT WOULD BE VERY CLEAR FROM WHAT THE PETITIONER HAS HEARD FROM STAFF AS TO WHICH DIRECTION.

SO CAN WE CAN WE STOP PURSUING THIS FURTHER AND BEATING THE HORSE? HE'S ASKED FOR A CONTINUANCE. I'M GOING TO MOVE THAT.

WE CONTINUE. I'M GOING TO REMOVE MY ORIGINAL MOTION.

I'LL SECOND THAT MOTION THAT WE CONTINUE. THERE'S A SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. AYE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THANK YOU. NOW WE HAVE. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

[02:30:02]

THANK YOU. WE'RE IN. OKAY, I'LL CALL THE MEETING BACK TO ORDER.

ERICA. GOOD MORNING. COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. ANDREW, YOU WANT TO SAY SOMETHING? YES. VERY QUICKLY. JUST ON A PROCEDURAL LEGAL NOTE.

AS YOU KNOW, YOU ARE THE THE LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY FOR THE CITY.

THAT'S DRIVEN BY STATUTE. YOU ALL ARE OFFICERS, OFFICIALS UNDER THE LAW.

THAT'S WHY YOU TOOK AN OATH AND YOU HAVE TO FILE YOUR FINANCIAL, FINANCIAL REPORTS.

I AT THE LAST MEETING WE TALKED ABOUT PROCEDURALLY, HOW WOULD YOU ALL COMMUNICATE WITH ONE ANOTHER THROUGH ERICA'S OFFICE AND GET INFORMATION TO ONE ANOTHER IN BETWEEN MEETINGS? AND I WANTED TO MAKE I WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT A LITTLE BIT.

ESSENTIALLY, IF YOU ARE WANTING TO COMMUNICATE YOUR OPINIONS OR THOUGHTS ABOUT SOMETHING RELATED TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. RESERVE THOSE, PLEASE, FOR THIS MEETING FOR SO IT CAN BE DONE IN THE OPEN.

HOWEVER, IF YOU COME ACROSS A STUDY OR A REPORT OR SOMETHING THAT YOU WANT TO SHARE WITH OTHER MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, DO THAT THROUGH ERICA'S OFFICE SO THAT YOU AVOID THE SUNSHINE LAW.

NOW, I KNOW THAT MR. FOWLER HAS PREPARED A PRETTY LENGTHY STATEMENT THAT HE WANTED TO SHARE WITH YOU ALL.

AND THAT'S WHY I'M BRINGING THIS UP, IN PART AND I'M GOING I'M GOING TO SUGGEST THAT HE DOES SHARE IT WITH YOU.

IT'S TOO LONG TO READ IN TOTAL. BUT I THINK THIS IS WHERE YOU WANT TO.

HE WANTS TO SHARE IT AND SUMMARIZE IT, AND IT'LL BECOME PART OF THE RECORD.

IT'S HIS OWN OPINIONS, BUT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT IN ANY COMMUNICATIONS ESPECIALLY WITH EMAIL, BECAUSE IT'S VERY EASY FOR YOU ALL TO INSTEAD OF BLIND, YOU KNOW, USING A BLIND COPY OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

LIKE WHATEVER YOU DO, JUST DON'T BLIND COPY OR COPY ANYBODY ELSE ON THE, THE, THE BOARD WITH ANYTHING, BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE A VIOLATION OF THE SUNSHINE LAW.

I DON'T WANT ANY OF YOUR BASICALLY TO ASK ERICA'S OFFICE TO, HEY, SHARE MY OPINIONS, BECAUSE THEN THAT WOULD BE ESSENTIALLY USING THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AS A CONDUIT TO COMMUNICATE WITH OTHER MEMBERS OF THE BOARD.

SO I WANTED TO MAKE THAT CLARIFICATION. I ALSO WANT TO MENTION TO YOU ALL THAT, YOU KNOW, THIS THIS DOCUMENT, IT'S CALLED GOVERNMENT AND THE SUNSHINE MANUAL.

IT'S PUBLISHED EVERY YEAR BY THE ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE.

IT'S VERY GOOD. IT TALKS ABOUT SUNSHINE LAW, PUBLIC RECORDS, VERY EASY TO READ.

IT'S ALSO ONLINE. THIS IS A 2022 VERSION, BUT IT'S ONLINE AND IT'S RE RE REDONE EVERY YEAR AS ETHICS OPINIONS COME OUT. AND SO I, I'M SAYING ALL THIS BECAUSE I WANT ALL OF YOU ALL YOU'RE MY CLIENTS ESSENTIALLY.

AND I DON'T WANT ANY ETHICS OPINIONS FILED AGAINST YOU.

THE CITY HAS ITS OWN COMMISSION ON ETHICS, AND I DON'T WANT YOU TO HAVE TO DEAL WITH THEM EITHER.

SO I WOULD SUGGEST ALL OF YOU MAYBE GO ONLINE OR ORDER A COPY OF THIS, OR I CAN HELP YOU THROUGH THE CLERK'S OFFICE.

GET A COPY OF IT. BUT PLEASE, JUST. I WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE CLARIFY THAT, THAT IF YOU IF YOU WANT TO EXPRESS YOUR OPINIONS ABOUT WHATEVER THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, LET'S DO THEM HERE. OPEN IN THE SUNSHINE AT THE MEETING.

BUT IF YOU COME ACROSS SOMETHING THAT YOU WANT TO SHARE WITH THE BOARD TO READ, AS FAR AS LIKE REPORTS AND THINGS THAT ARE FACTUAL YOU CAN SHARE THAT. I BELIEVE THAT THAT WAS ALL I WANTED TO MAKE CLEAR, BECAUSE I MAY HAVE NOT BEEN AS CLEAR THE FIRST TIME I MENTIONED THAT.

IT'S VERY IMPORTANT THAT WE DON'T GET INTO TROUBLE IN THAT REGARD.

AND SINCE ERICA'S OFFICE IS IN THE MIDDLE OF ALL OF THIS, I'M GOING TO ASK HER IF SHE HAS ANYTHING FURTHER THAT SHE WANTS TO ADD TO THAT.

IS THAT A FAIR PROCESS? YOU OKAY WITH THAT? AND I WILL RUN ANY.

I'LL RUN ANYTHING THAT COMES TO ME. OUR JOB IS TO KEEP YOU ALL OUT OF TROUBLE WITH REGARD TO PUBLIC RECORDS AND SUNSHINE LAW, AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO. SO FOR CLARIFICATION IF I FIND AN ARTICLE IN WHATEVER ECONOMIST, WALL STREET JOURNAL, WHATEVER, WHICH I WANT TO SHARE, THAT'S ACCEPTABLE, I THINK THAT'S ACCEPTABLE BECAUSE THAT'S NOT YOUR OPINION. YOU'RE JUST SAYING I FIND THIS INTERESTING. CAN YOU PLEASE SHARE IT WITH THE REST OF THE MEMBERS OF THE BOARD? I WOULD I WOULD HAVE ONE REQUEST FOR THE CITY COUNCIL, ANOTHER BOARD I'M ON. IT IS IMPOSSIBLE TO REPLY TO ALL ON IT.

IT JUST FLAGS. IT DOESN'T GO THROUGH. SO MAYBE THE CITY COULD CONSIDER.

SO WHEN I SEND CORRESPONDENCE TO THE BOARD, YOU'LL NOTICE I BLIND COPY ALL OF YOU.

[02:35:01]

YEAH. EVERYONE SAYS DO NOT, DO NOT REPLY TO ALL ON IT.

BUT THERE ARE TIMES WHEN INADVERTENTLY, INADVERTENTLY, IT CAN HAPPEN.

SO. OKAY. THANK YOU. YEAH. JUST BE SUPER CAREFUL WHEN YOU HIT BEFORE YOU HIT, SEND THAT THERE ARE NO OTHER BOARD MEMBERS ANYWHERE IN THE CC OR BCC OR TWO OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. THANK YOU. OKAY. YOUR SHOW. ALL RIGHT.

[8.A) Update on Naples 2045, the elective changes to the City of Naples Comprehensive Plan. (TIME CERTAIN 11:00 A.M.)]

WE HAVE BEFORE YOU OUR MONTHLY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE, BUT THIS ONE A LITTLE DIFFERENT.

WE HAVE THE WHOLE CONSULTANT TEAM WITH US TODAY TO PROVIDE SOME INFORMATION FOR YOU.

SO WE MET LAST MONTH. AS YOU KNOW, WE'RE IN PHASE TWO OF THE PROJECT.

SO THIS IS THE PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT PHASE. AND WE HAVE THE TEAM HERE TO PRESENT TO YOU A COUPLE OF DOCUMENTS.

THESE WERE ALL INCLUDED IN THE THE AGENDA THAT WAS PROVIDED TO YOU.

SO YOU HAVE HAVE THEY'RE GOING TO GIVE A FULL PRESENTATION, BUT YOU HAVE DRAFTS OF DRAFTS OF THE REPORTS THAT ARE THE THE DOCUMENTS THAT THEY HAVE PROVIDED. ADDITIONALLY, I WOULD NOTE THAT AT THE LAST MEETING, THE BOARD DID SPECIFICALLY ASK THAT THEY PROVIDE EXAMPLES OF SURVEYS THAT MEMBERS OF THE TEAM HAVE DONE IN OTHER COMMUNITIES. SO THERE IS A DOCUMENT HERE.

IT'S COMBINED, BUT THERE'S A DOCUMENT IN YOUR AGENDA MEMO OR I'M SORRY, IN YOUR AGENDA PACKET.

THAT IS A COMPILED EXAMPLES OF DIFFERENT SURVEYS THAT THEY'VE DONE IN OTHER COMMUNITIES.

BUT OTHER THAN THAT, WE'LL, WE'LL LET THE TEAM TAKE IT AWAY.

GO AHEAD. GOOD MORNING. LAURA DEJOHN, HEAD OF PLANNING FOR JOHNSON ENGINEERING.

AND JOHNSON, WE ARE THE PRIME FOR THIS CONSULTANT TEAM, ALL OF WHOM ARE HERE TODAY.

AND YOU'RE GOING TO HEAR FROM TODAY. OUR MAIN GOAL IS TO BRIEF YOU ON THE WORK PRODUCTS PREPARED TO DATE, WHICH ERICA HAS ERIKA HAS MENTIONED ARE IN YOUR BACKUP MATERIAL. WE WE TOUCHED ON THEM AND PROVIDED THEM.

LAST MONTH WHEN WE SAW YOU. SO YOU'LL BE HEARING HIGHLIGHTS OF THE EXISTING CONDITIONS REPORT.

THE SUMMARY OF FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS REPORT THAT REALLY FORMS THE FOUNDATION, THE UNDERSTANDING AND.

THE THE BASELINE FROM WHICH WE'LL SPRING FORWARD IN DOING THE COMP PLAN UPDATE, AS ERICA MENTIONED.

THE GOAL TODAY IS TO GET IN FRONT OF YOU WITH THIS PHASE OF WORK, WHICH IS THE PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT PHASE.

AND GET YOUR RESPONSES AND FEEDBACK ON THE WORKSHOP ITINERARY DOCUMENT THAT WAS IN YOUR BACKUP MATERIAL.

CHRISSY IS GOING TO WALK THROUGH THAT WITH YOU.

WE LOOK FORWARD TO HEARING FEEDBACK ON THAT. ANOTHER MAIN POINT THAT YOU SHOULD KNOW IS THAT WE GO TO CITY COUNCIL WORKSHOP THIS COMING MONDAY. SO WE ARE EAGER TO ABSORB AND HEAR FROM YOU IN ADVANCE OF THAT MONDAY MEETING AT COUNCIL WORKSHOP, BECAUSE WE WANT TO BE ABLE TO REFLECT WHAT WE HEARD FROM PAB AND WHAT YOUR WHAT YOUR INPUT WAS TO US AS WE GO FORWARD ON MONDAY TO CITY COUNCIL.

SO YOU'RE GOING TO HEAR FROM CHRISTIE FISHER WITH JOHNSON.

LEANNE KING WITH CLARION, WHO'S DONE A LOT OF THE CHARACTER COMMUNITY CHARACTER RELATED WORK.

BRIANNA IS WITH THE OUTREACH GROUP WHO'S IN CHARGE OF OUR COMMUNICATIONS AND OUTREACH.

AND THEN AARON WHO SPECIALIZES IN THE RESILIENCY ASPECTS OF THE PLANNING PROCESS.

EACH EACH TEAM MEMBER WILL COME UP AND GIVE YOU HIGHLIGHTS OF THE WORK PERFORMED TO DATE.

AND LIKE I SAID, CHRISTIE WILL WRAP UP ASKING FOR THAT FEEDBACK ON PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT WORKSHOP ITINERARY DOCUMENTATION.

KRISTEN, THANK YOU. AND THANK YOU FOR HAVING US TODAY.

CHRISTIE FISHER WITH JOHNSON ENGINEERING PROJECT MANAGER ON THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT.

AS YOU SAW AT OUR LAST MEETING, THIS PROCESS IS A 22 MONTH PROCESS THAT WE BEGAN BACK IN MARCH AND WILL EXTEND OUT TO DECEMBER OF 2026. YOU'VE SEEN THIS BEFORE? IT IS KIND OF BROKEN DOWN INTO FOUR PRIMARY STAGES.

THE FIRST, WHERE WE COLLECT INFORMATION ABOUT THE CITY, ABOUT THE POLICIES THAT WE HAVE ON THE BOOKS TODAY, ON THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, ANALYZE IT AND PROVIDE INFORMATION BACK TO YOU.

AND WE HAVE THAT TODAY TO SHARE WITH YOU SOME OF THOSE HIGHLIGHTS.

THEN WE GO RIGHT INTO THE PUBLIC OUTREACH AND ENGAGEMENT AND IN THESE MONTHS, UPCOMING AND AT THE SAME TIME, WE'LL BE DRAFTING PLAN RECOMMENDATIONS. AND THEN FINALLY BRINGING BEFORE YOU PROPOSED RECOMMENDATIONS TO AMEND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THROUGH TRANSMITTAL AND ADOPTION AND STATE AGENCY REVIEW.

YOU. AS LAURA MENTIONED, OUR PRIMARY PURPOSE TODAY IS TO PROVIDE YOU WITH AN UPDATE OF THE COMPLETED TASKS,

[02:40:05]

AS WE SHARED WITH YOU AT THE LAST MEETING, WE HAVE LAUNCHED A DEDICATED WEBSITE FOR THE PROJECT.

YOU PROVIDED US SOME INPUT ON THINGS TO MAKE THAT WEBSITE A LITTLE MORE EASY TO TO ACCESS INFORMATION.

WE HAVE ADDED THAT HELP BUTTON AT YOUR SUGGESTION.

WE HAVE ALSO MADE THE CONTACT INFORMATION AND THE COMMENT FORM LINK MORE PROMINENT IN THE GREEN BAR AT THE TOP OF THE SITE.

ALSO ARE PHASE ONE TASKS ARE COMPLETED AND THESE HAVE NOW BEEN PLACED WITHIN THAT IMPORTANT DOCUMENT SECTION.

THE DIFFERENT TAB IN THERE AND THEY ARE ACCESSIBLE IN THERE WHEN YOU CLICK THE LINKS.

WE WANT TO SHARE SOME HIGHLIGHTS FROM THE SUMMARY REPORT OF THE INITIAL FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.

TODAY WITH US WE HAVE LEANNE KING FROM CLARION TO GO THROUGH SOME OF THAT INFORMATION.

THERE WE GO. GOOD MORNING AGAIN. I'M LEANNE KING WITH CLARION ASSOCIATES.

I'M A DIRECTOR BASED OUT OF OUR CHAPEL HILL OFFICE.

SO I'M GOING TO TALK TODAY A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE TECHNICAL ANALYSIS THAT WE'VE PREPARED TO DATE.

WHEN WE WORK ON COMPREHENSIVE PLANS, WE THINK ABOUT TWO PRIMARY INPUTS THAT HELP INFORM CHANGES TO THE POLICY DIRECTION IN THE PLAN.

THE FIRST IS THE TECHNICAL ANALYSIS, THE SECOND ARE THE COMMUNITY ASPIRATIONS, THE PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT FEEDBACK THAT WE GET THROUGH THE PROCESS AND COUPLED TOGETHER, THOSE HELP INFORM THE DIRECTION THAT THE THE PLAN IS GOING TO TAKE.

SO WE PREPARED A REPORT OF INITIAL FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS.

THERE ARE TWO COMPONENTS TO THAT. THE FIRST IS THE CURRENT CONDITIONS REPORT.

I'LL WALK YOU THROUGH SOME OF THE AGAIN A SUMMARY OF THOSE FINDINGS.

THERE'S A MORE IN-DEPTH DOCUMENT THAT I BELIEVE YOU HAVE IN YOUR PACKET THAT REALLY FOCUSES ON A COUPLE OF KEY COMPONENTS.

AGAIN, WE'RE REALLY FOCUSED ON THE IMPLEMENTING THE VISION ELEMENT THAT WAS ADOPTED BACK IN 2024.

AND SO WE USE THAT AS GUIDANCE FOR IDENTIFYING THE SPECIFIC PARTS OF YOUR COMMUNITY THAT WE WANTED TO EVALUATE TO HELP INFORM THAT IMPLEMENTATION.

THE SECOND PART OF THIS REPORT IS REALLY A POLICY ANALYSIS.

SO WE WENT THROUGH YOUR ENTIRE CURRENTLY ADOPTED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN USING THE VISION ELEMENT AS A LENS FOR IDENTIFYING DIFFERENT POLICIES, GOALS, OBJECTIVES THAT COULD BE STRENGTHENED.

WE'RE MISSING THOSE SORTS OF THINGS. SO THAT IS THE THE SECOND REPORT.

AND SO I'LL BE HITTING AGAIN THE HIGHLIGHTS ON EACH OF THESE. HAPPY TO TAKE YOUR COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS AS WE MOVE THROUGH.

SO IN TERMS OF THE CURRENT CONDITIONS REPORT WE LOOKED AT A LOT OF SOCIODEMOGRAPHIC FACTORS THAT HAVE CHANGED SINCE WE WERE PRIMARILY LOOKING AT 2010 2020 CENSUS AND THEN MORE RECENT 2023 ACS DATA.

THERE'S ALWAYS A LAG, SO WE CAN'T GET MORE CURRENT UNTIL YOU KNOW, A YEAR AFTER IT HAS OCCURRED.

BUT WHAT WE LEARNED AT LOOKING AT THOSE TRENDS IS THAT THERE'S A DECLINE IN PERMANENT AND PEAK SEASON POPULATIONS, AND YOU'RE ACTUALLY PROJECTED TO HAVE DECLINING POPULATION WITHIN THE CITY OVER TIME.

IN COMPARISON, THE COUNTY'S ACTUALLY PROJECTED TO HAVE GROWTH AND BE INCREASING IN POPULATION.

RELATED TO THAT? AND WITH SOME OTHER INFLUENCES, WE'RE SEEING A DECREASE IN HOUSEHOLD SIZE, PROGRESSIVELY AGING POPULATION. WE'RE ALL GROWING OLD EVERY DAY.

WHAT THAT MEANS IS, GENERALLY, THE MEDIAN AGE WITHIN YOUR COMMUNITY IS HIGHER OVER TIME.

WHEN YOU LOOK AT KIND OF SPECIFIC SNAPSHOTS IN TIME, WE ALSO ARE SEEING INCREASING SEASONAL HOUSING.

SO THOSE ARE AND INCLUDED WITHIN THAT IS KIND OF SEASONAL KIND OF VACANT HOUSING THAT'S THAT'S USED FOR A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT REASONS.

YOU HAVE A HIGH MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME, PARTICULARLY IN RELATIONSHIP TO THE COUNTY AND THE BROADER REGION.

AS YOU ALL KNOW, YOU HAVE LIMITED DEVELOPABLE LAND AVAILABLE.

SO WE'RE REALLY KIND OF LOOKING AT A REDEVELOPMENT SITUATION HERE WITHIN YOUR COMMUNITY, A FUTURE LAND USE.

YOU ALL ARE, I'M SURE, VERY FAMILIAR WITH THIS.

THIS IS AN IMPORTANT GUIDE TO START LOOKING AT.

WE WILL BE POTENTIALLY DISCUSSING CHANGES TO THIS AS PART OF THIS PROCESS.

WE'RE NOT SURE ABOUT THAT AT THIS POINT, BUT WHAT WE DO KNOW IS THAT THE CURRENT FUTURE LAND USE AS IT IS DESIGNATED, CAN ACCOMMODATE THE POPULATION PROJECTIONS. AGAIN, YOU'RE YOU'RE PROJECTED TO HAVE A DECLINE.

SO THERE'S THERE'S ADEQUATE LAND. REALLY REDEVELOPMENT I THINK IS PROBABLY MORE SO.

THE DISCUSSION AND INFILL IS MORE OF THE DISCUSSION THROUGH THIS PLAN UPDATE WHEN WE BREAK DOWN THE FUTURE LAND USE AND AGAIN,

[02:45:08]

THERE ARE DIFFERENT TYPES OF FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORIES.

THE TABLE THAT YOU SEE IN FRONT OF YOU, THESE ARE ALL OF THE RESIDENTIAL FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORIES THAT COMPRISE A LITTLE MORE THAN HALF OF THE CITY'S LAND.

AND YOU CAN SEE IN THE RED BOX AT THE BOTTOM, A LARGE PORTION OF THAT LAND IS DESIGNATED LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL WITH THE REMAINING PERCENTAGES INCLUDED IN THE OTHER CATEGORIES THERE FOR NONRESIDENTIAL LAND USES.

AGAIN, A LITTLE LESS THAN HALF, ABOUT 48%, ARE NONRESIDENTIAL, AND A LITTLE OVER ABOUT 24% OR SO ARE WITHIN CONSERVATION AND RECREATION CATEGORIES. SO ABOUT HALF OF THE NONRESIDENTIAL IS IN CONSERVATION AND RECREATION.

THE REMAINING HALF IN NONRESIDENTIAL ARE THE CATEGORIES THAT YOU SEE ABOVE, WITH AIRPORT BEING THE LARGEST, FOLLOWED BY COMMERCIAL DOWNTOWN AND THEN THE OTHER CATEGORIES.

SO AGAIN, THIS JUST KIND OF GIVES US A BASELINE FOR HOW LAND IS PLANNED FOR AND THE DIFFERENT KIND OF DENSITIES AND DENSITIES.

SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE LEARNED THROUGH REVIEW OF THE VISION DOCUMENT IS THAT THE VISION ELEMENT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS THAT THERE'S A CONCERN ABOUT REDEVELOPMENT AND HOW THAT'S HAPPENING, AND HOW THAT MIGHT BE SHAPING CHARACTER WITHIN YOUR COMMUNITY. SO WE WORKED WITH ERICA AND HER PLANNING STAFF TO PULL TOGETHER PROJECTS THAT MANY OF YOU PROBABLY ALL COME SEE COME THROUGH AS CASES BEFORE YOU AND COUNCIL TO LOOK AT CASES THAT PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN APPROVED OR ON THE BOOKS, SOME OF THEM MAY BE HAVE BROKEN GROUND, MAYBE SOME HAVEN'T, MAYBE SOME ARE FULLY BUILT OVER THE LAST FIVE YEARS.

SO WE COULD START TO GET A SENSE OF WHERE ARE THE PROJECTS OCCURRING, WHAT TYPE OF PROJECT ARE THERE, ARE THEY AND WHAT IS THE INTENSITY OF THESE PROJECTS WITH RESPECT TO DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE OR SQUARE FEET? IF WE'RE TALKING ABOUT NONRESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, TO START TO GIVE US A FRAMEWORK FOR UNDERSTANDING WHERE CHANGE IS OCCURRING AND WHAT TYPE OF CHANGE IS OCCURRING. IT WAS A TOTAL OF 106 PROJECTS, 52 WERE COMMERCIAL, 31 WERE MIXED USE AND 23 WERE RESIDENTIAL.

AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THE MAP HERE, A LARGE CLUSTERING OCCURS KIND OF IN THE OLDER PORTIONS OF YOUR COMMUNITY.

THAT MAKES SENSE. THAT'S WHERE THE REDEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL AND IT'S ALSO KIND OF YOUR 100% CORRIDOR, CORNER CORRIDOR. YOU KNOW, IT MAKES A LOT OF SENSE THAT THAT'S WHERE YOU'RE SEEING A LOT OF REDEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY.

YOU DO SEE I'LL KIND OF WALK YOU THROUGH THE YELLOW IS RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT.

SO. AND THE THE SIZE OF THE CIRCLES RELATE TO KIND OF THE INTENSITY.

HOW MANY UNITS ARE IN THERE OR THE DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE.

AND THEN THE COMMERCIALS IN RED. PURPLE IS THE MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT.

SO AGAIN, COMMERCIAL KIND OF SCATTERED THROUGHOUT THE CITY, RESIDENTIAL MORE TOWARDS THE KIND OF 40 ONE FIFTH AVE CORNER.

AND THEN THERE ARE SOME ALONG THE KIND OF NORTHWESTERN COASTLINE AREA, MIXED USE, MOSTLY CENTERED IN THE CENTRAL AREA THERE.

SO I'M JUST GOING TO WALK YOU THROUGH A COUPLE OF HIGHLIGHTS FROM THE DATA.

AND WHAT THIS SHOWED US. SO BREAKING IT DOWN, LOOKING AT JUST THE COMMERCIAL PROJECTS AND JUST THE RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS, WE LOOKED AT KIND OF AVERAGE AND MEDIAN DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE OR SQUARE FEET PER ACRE TO GIVE US A SENSE OF WHAT THAT INTENSITY LOOKS LIKE.

SO YOU CAN SEE HERE ON THE INTENSITY. FOR THE COMMERCIAL, THE AVERAGE WAS A LITTLE OVER 12,000FT².

THE MEDIAN WAS A LITTLE OVER 7000FT² PER ACRE.

FOR RESIDENTIAL AVERAGE WAS EIGHT UNITS PER ACRE AND MEDIAN WAS SIX.

WHEN WE LOOK AT THE ACTUAL KIND OF JUST KIND OF LOOKING AT SQUARE FEET OF DEVELOPMENT, NOT PER ACRE ON EACH OF THE SITES, WHAT WE FOUND WAS THE AVERAGE WAS A LITTLE OVER 26,000FT².

THE MEDIAN WAS ALMOST 11,000, WITH A TOTAL OF ALMOST ONE POINT 3,000,000FT² ACROSS.

THOSE 100 PROJECTS, IN TERMS OF THE DWELLING UNITS, THE AVERAGE FOR EACH OF THE 181 RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS WAS EIGHT UNITS PER PER PROJECT. THE MEDIAN WAS TWO. SO OBVIOUSLY A COUPLE IN THERE THAT HAD SOME KIND OF HIGHER UNIT COUNTS THAT WERE INCLUDED.

WE ALSO LOOKED AT MINIMUM AND MAXIMUM, SO WE COULD KIND OF GET A SENSE OF THE BOOKENDS OF SOME OF THESE PROJECTS AND WHAT THOSE LOOK LIKE.

SO FOR COMMERCIAL THE MINIMUM, THE ONE ON THE LOWEST END OF THE SCALE WAS A 900 ACRE OR EXCUSE ME, 900FT² PROJECT. THE MAXIMUM WAS A LITTLE OVER 250,000FT².

WE LOOKED AT MIXED USE. SO THE MINIMUM WAS 1000FT² OF NONRESIDENTIAL A LITTLE OVER 125,000.

AND THEN IN TERMS OF DWELLING UNITS ON THOSE MIXED USE PROJECTS, THE MINIMUM WAS TWO AND THE MAX WAS 150.

[02:50:03]

THERE WAS SOME, YOU KNOW, JUST SINGLE LOT DEVELOPMENT THAT'S OCCURRING. THE HIGHEST END WAS 51 UNITS.

SO THOSE ARE KIND OF THE AGAIN, THE BOOKENDS OF EACH OF THOSE 106 PROJECTS.

SO THIS IS A SAME DATA HERE, BUT JUST REALLY LOOKING AT THE NORTH END OF THE CITY SO THAT YOU CAN SEE A LITTLE MORE CLOSELY THE LOCATIONS OF SOME OF THESE PROJECTS. AGAIN, IT'S A LITTLE MORE SCATTERED HERE BECAUSE YOU KNOW, THESE THIS IS THE NEWER PART OF THE CITY.

WE DON'T ANTICIPATE AS MUCH REDEVELOPMENT TO BE OCCURRING THAT COULD CHANGE OVER THE NEXT 20 YEARS.

THIS IS A 20 YEAR PLANNING HORIZON, SO WE DO WANT TO BE CONSIDERING THE POTENTIAL FOR REDEVELOPMENT IN ALL PARTS OF YOUR CITY.

THIS AGAIN, THE CENTER AND SOUTH. THIS IS JUST KIND OF A ZOOM IN OF THOSE AREAS TO SHOW THE TYPES OF PROJECTS AND THE INTENSITY OF THOSE PROJECTS THAT ARE OCCURRING IN DIFFERENT AREAS. SO AGAIN, THIS REALLY HELPS TO KIND OF CREATE A GEOGRAPHIC UNDERSTANDING AND KIND OF THE TYPE OF DEVELOPMENT THAT WE'RE SEEING THAT MIGHT BE CREATING SOME CONCERNS AND INTEREST AND HOW WE SHAPE CHARACTER IN THE CITY OVER TIME.

SO NOW I'M GOING TO SWITCH GEARS AND LOOK AT OUR POLICY REVIEW.

SO AGAIN, THAT WAS A REVIEW OF YOUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN USING THE VISION ELEMENT AS A LENS TO IDENTIFY PLACES WHERE WE COULD BE MAKING IMPROVEMENTS.

FILLING IN GAPS, MAKING SOME ADJUSTMENTS TO THE PLAN TO BETTER AFFECT THE VISION ELEMENT.

THE FIRST ONE WAS REALLY TO INTEGRATE RESILIENCE THROUGHOUT THE PLAN.

THERE ARE MANY OPPORTUNITIES MY COLLEAGUE AARON DID HERE.

IN JUST A MOMENT. WE'LL WE'LL SHARE MORE WITH YOU ON THAT FRONT.

THE SECOND WAS ESTABLISHING THIS CONCEPT OF PLACE KEEPING.

AND THAT IS REALLY IT'S A IT'S A CONCEPT, BUT IT IS DONE IN PRACTICE IN SOME COMMUNITIES.

THE IDEA THERE IS THAT IT'S NOT ABOUT PLACE MAKING, MAKING A NEW PLACE.

IT'S ABOUT KEEPING THE PLACES THAT YOU HAVE AND LOOKING FOR OPPORTUNITIES TO DO THAT.

AND IT CAN COME IN A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT FORMS. THE SECOND IS INFUSING CHARACTER INTO GROWTH POLICY.

SO THINKING NOT JUST ABOUT LAND USE AND DENSITY AND INTENSITY, BUT ALSO ABOUT CHARACTER, AND WHAT ARE THE FUNDAMENTAL BUILDING BLOCKS OF CHARACTER THAT COULD BE BUILT INTO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IMPLEMENTING THE GREEN JEWEL CONCEPT.

SO THERE WERE DISCUSSIONS WITHIN THE VISION ELEMENT ABOUT PROTECTION OF NATURAL AREAS OF THE GREEN, AND THE IMPORTANCE OF THE GREENING OF GREEN SPACES WITHIN THE COMMUNITY WITH RESPECT TO CHARACTER.

SO WE WOULD LIKE TO KIND OF EXPLORE WHAT DOES THAT GREEN JEWEL CONCEPT MEAN AND HOW CAN WE BETTER IMPLEMENT IT THROUGH THIS NEXT UPDATE TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

AND THEN FIFTH IS REALLY MAKING THE PLAN MORE ACTIONABLE.

WE RECOMMEND THAT WE SEPARATE POLICIES. I LIKE TO THINK OF POLICIES AS GUIDANCE FOR DECISION MAKING.

SO IF YOU'RE LOOKING AT A REZONING CASE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, THOSE POLICIES WOULD HELP YOU INFORM YOU WHAT THE GUIDANCE IS WITHIN THE PLAN FROM A POLICY STANDPOINT VERSUS ACTUAL ACTIONS, IMPLEMENTATION STEPS THAT THE CITY NEEDS TO BE TAKING TO DO CERTAIN THINGS.

SO THAT'S ONE OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WE HAVE FOR UPDATING THE PLAN.

THE SO THOSE ARE KIND OF THE UP FRONT, FIVE UP FRONT FIVE OVERARCHING CONCEPTS IN THE DOCUMENT.

WE ALSO HAVE A SUMMARY WHERE WE BREAK DOWN EACH OF THE VISION ELEMENTS INDIVIDUALLY, AND TALK SPECIFICALLY ABOUT SOME OF THE INITIAL FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CONSIDERATION. THERE'S ALSO A COMPONENT TO THAT REPORT THAT'S CALLED VISION VALIDATION.

AND AS WE WERE WORKING THROUGH THAT POLICY REVIEW, WE WANTED TO IDENTIFY QUESTIONS THAT WE WANTED TO POSE TO THE COMMUNITY.

SO THAT ARTICULATES SOME OF THAT THINKING, WHICH WE THEN LEVERAGED TO GET THROUGH TO THE WORKSHOP ITINERARY THAT YOU'LL BE HEARING ABOUT HERE IN JUST A MOMENT. SO HAPPY TO TAKE ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS BEFORE I HAND IT OFF TO AARON, IF THAT'S HELPFUL.

JUST ONE SHORT COMMENT, I THINK GIVING A VIEW AS TO THE CHANGES OVER TIME, SHOWING THE THE BUILDS THAT ARE CURRENTLY IN PLACE AND HOW THAT'S CHANGED.

I THINK IT MAY ALSO BE INTERESTING TO INCLUDE THE SQUARE FOOTAGE PER CAPITA PER RESIDENT, BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE YOU SEE THE POPULATION GOING DOWN.

RIGHT. BUT THE SQUARE FOOTAGE REQUIREMENTS GOING UP MEAN STRUCTURALLY YOU'LL HAVE THE SAME SPACE REQUIREMENTS.

SO I THINK THAT MIGHT BE INTERESTING TO ADD THAT DYNAMIC TO THE OBSERVATIONS.

OKAY. MY QUESTION IS ON COMMERCIAL. WHERE DOES MEDICAL FIT IN THAT? BECAUSE OBVIOUSLY WE'VE GOT A LOT OF MEDICAL STUFF IN HERE, STARTING WITH NCH AND GOING DOWN THE FOOD CHAIN IN TERMS OF THAT ANALYSIS THAT WE DID UNDER COMMERCIAL. SO FUTURE LAND USE OR THE KIND OF EMERGING DEVELOPMENT OR BOTH WITH THE, THE CHARTS YOU SHOWED US? OR BOTH CURRENT. OKAY.

[02:55:03]

SO I BELIEVE WELL, I'M GOING TO I DON'T KNOW, EACH OF THESE PROJECTS IN INTIMATELY.

SO I'M GOING TO, I'M GOING TO TAKE A GANDER HERE AND SAY THAT I THINK THAT THOSE ARE LIKELY INCLUDED WITHIN COMMERCIAL. DOES THAT SOUND RIGHT, ERICA? YEAH. I DON'T THINK THEY WOULD BE INCLUDED WITHIN MIXED USE. SO THEY WOULD BE THEY WOULD NOT BE IN RESIDENTIAL. THEY WOULD DEFINITELY BE INCLUDED WITHIN COMMERCIAL.

AND THEN WITH RESPECT TO FUTURE LAND USE, I'M GOING THE WRONG WAY.

I THINK THAT THEY WOULD BE INCLUDED WITHIN INSTITUTIONAL.

IS THAT. YEAH. YEAH. SO THAT'S WHERE THAT WOULD COME IN IN TERMS OF THE FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATIONS.

AND SINCE YOU'VE GOT THIS SLIDE UP I ASSUME YOU'RE NOT.

WE'RE NOT LOOKING AT BEACH AREA AS PERCENTAGE OF THE CITY.

GOOD QUESTION. BECAUSE WE HAVE A SUBSTANTIAL AMOUNT OF BEACH.

YEAH. THIS IS DEPENDENT ON HURRICANES. WE DO.

YEAH. AND I AM NOT THE GIS ANALYST HERE. THAT WE HAVE ONE ON MY TEAM.

SO I'M HAPPY TO TAKE A LOOK AT THAT QUESTION.

I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT, YOU KNOW, OFF THE TOP OF YOUR HEAD, BUT I DON'T WANT TO INFORM INCORRECTLY.

YEAH. SO WE CAN GET BACK TO YOU ON THAT. I WOULD IMAGINE IT FALLS UNDER RECREATION, BUT AND I JUST HAVE TO CLARIFY, THE NCH IS ACTUALLY INCLUDED WITHIN THE DOWNTOWN MIXED USE LAND USE CATEGORY.

THANK YOU. EXCUSE ME. WHERE DID YOU FIND MOST OF YOUR INITIAL FINDINGS? SORRY. WHAT DATA DID YOU GET YOUR INITIAL FINDINGS FROM? WHERE DID YOU SAY YOU HAVE ALL THESE INITIAL FINDINGS SO FAR? WERE YOU STARTING? WHERE IS THAT DATA FROM? SO THE TECHNICAL SO THERE ARE A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT PIECES.

SO WHEN WE WERE LOOKING AT SOCIODEMOGRAPHICS, WE WERE LOOKING AT US CENSUS FOR 2010 2020 AND AMERICAN COMMUNITY SURVEY, WHICH IS ALSO THROUGH THE CENSUS FOR 2023. WITH RESPECT TO FUTURE LAND USE THE DEVELOPMENT EXCUSE ME, FUTURE LAND USE, THE RECENT AND EMERGING DEVELOPMENT.

ALL THAT DATA WAS TAKEN FROM CITY. WE COORDINATED WITH THE CITY'S GIS TO COLLECT THAT.

SO THAT'S ALL LOCAL DATA ON DEVELOPMENT AND FUTURE LAND USE WITHIN THE COMMUNITY ON THE POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS.

THAT WAS A COLLECTIVE EFFORT OF OUR TEAM. SO WE DO A LOT OF COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING WORK.

WE HAVE A LOT OF EXPERIENCE IN FLORIDA COLLECTIVELY.

SO THAT WAS USING THE VISION ELEMENT. AND THEN WALKING THROUGH YOUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, WE BROKE IT UP INTO OUR SPECIFIC TOPIC AREAS THAT WE'RE FOCUSING ON.

AND THEN THAT'S WHERE WE MADE KIND OF OUR INITIAL RECOMMENDATIONS CAME TOGETHER, DID A REVIEW OF THOSE TOGETHER, AND THEN PUT THE REPORT TOGETHER. AND TO FOLLOW UP ON YOUR COMMENT, A LOT OF THE BEACH THAT IS IN NAPLES IS COLLIER COUNTY OWNED.

AND SO I DON'T KNOW HOW YOU FACTOR THAT IN. THAT'S WE DIDN'T SPEAK ABOUT OR WE DIDN'T HAVE RECOMMENDATIONS SPECIFIC TO BEACH, BUT THERE IS AN INTERGOVERNMENTAL COORDINATION ELEMENT AS PART OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

THAT IS SOMETHING THAT WE COULD POTENTIALLY BE LOOKING AT AS PART OF THIS PROCESS.

RELATED TO THAT. YEAH. IS THERE ANY INFORMATION YOU'RE CAPTURING ON WHERE TRAFFIC IS AND NOISE AND STUFF LIKE THAT? IS THAT OR IS THAT EXCLUDED FROM THE SCOPE OF THIS? SO WE DO HAVE SOME INFORMATION IN THE CURRENT CONDITIONS REPORT ON TRANSPORTATION AND YOUR MAJOR CORRIDORS.

IF WE'RE IF YOU'RE INTERESTED IN TAKING A LOOK AT, LIKE, AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC COUNTS OR VOLUME TO CAPACITY, WE COULD LOOK AND SEE IF THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S AVAILABLE THROUGH YOUR TRANSPORTATION PLANS TO SHARE WITH YOU.

OKAY. AND ON THE NOISE FRONT, I'M NOT CERTAIN.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT KIND OF DATA EXISTS TO SUPPORT THAT.

I KNOW THAT THERE'S THE NOISE CONTOUR DATA, AND EVERY SO OFTEN, I'M IMAGINING YOUR AIRPORT DOES AN ASSESSMENT TO KIND OF SEE WHAT THOSE NOISE CONTOURS ARE AND IF THEY SHOULD BE CHANGING BASED ON NEW AIRCRAFT AND THAT SORT OF THING.

BUT WE CAN WE CAN TAKE A LOOK AT THAT, SEE IF THAT DATA IS AVAILABLE, BE VERY IMPORTANT BECAUSE THE NOISE IS GOING UP DRAMATICALLY AND IT COULD BE BECAUSE OF DO YOU THINK IT'S BECAUSE OF CHANGE IN AIRCRAFT OR WHO KNOWS, DRAMATICALLY INCREASE IN JETS.

YEAH. OKAY. AND I WOULD JUST ADD AND VOLUME. I MEAN, IT'S VOLUME AND VOLUME, DRAMATICALLY MORE TRAFFIC AND BIGGER ONES BECAUSE THEY'RE MOVING INTO COMMERCIAL ONES, BIGGER JETS.

SO IT'S BIGGER AND MORE OF THEM AND BIGGER. YEAH.

ONE THING WE CAN LOOK INTO IS WHETHER OR NOT THEY ARE WE'RE DOING THIS IN ANOTHER COMMUNITY RIGHT NOW WHERE THEY ARE IN THE PROCESS OF ACTUALLY CHANGING THOSE NOISE CONTOURS TO REFLECT CURRENT CONDITIONS. SO WE COULD SEE IF YOUR AIRPORT IS DOING ANY WORK TO THAT END AS WELL.

IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT WE HAVE MORE FLIGHTS GOING IN AND OUT OF HERE THAN OURS DOES.

YEAH. AND TETERBORO, I THINK, IS THE ONLY AIRPORT THAT HAS MORE THAN US.

AND I THINK WE'RE PROJECTED TO PASS THEM. WOW.

SO I DON'T THINK I MEAN THAT THAT IS A VERY SALIENT POINT TO A WHOLE LOT OF PEOPLE.

[03:00:01]

IS IT STILL MORNING? GOOD MORNING. I HAD TO CHECK THERE.

MY NAME IS AARON DADY. I'M AN ATTORNEY AND A PLANNER.

MY OFFICE IS OUT OF DELRAY BEACH, BUT I WORK WITH LOCAL COMMUNITIES FROM THE KEYS LITERALLY TO PENSACOLA.

ONE OF THE BIGGEST THINGS THAT I DO IS HELP LOCAL COMMUNITIES TAKE THE OUTCOMES OF VULNERABILITY AND RESILIENCY, WORK THAT THEY ARE UNDERTAKING, AND WORK ON INTEGRATING THAT INTO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND CODE.

AND THE VIEW THAT I TAKE OF IT IS THAT RESILIENCY IS SOMETHING THAT CUTS ACROSS ALMOST EVERY ELEMENT OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

MANY PEOPLE THINK THAT WE'RE ONLY DEALING WITH IT AS A COASTAL COMMUNITY WITHIN THE COASTAL ELEMENT.

AND I'M HERE TO TELL YOU I DON'T I DON'T SUBSCRIBE TO THAT.

SO ONE QUESTION. WHAT IS THE DATA THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT? THE CITY OF NAPLES IS IN A GREAT POSITION RIGHT NOW, HAVING JUST CONDUCTED A VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT AND ADAPTATION PLANNING PROCESS.

YOU'RE WORKING ON BASIN PLANS FOR STORM WATER RIGHT NOW.

YOU'RE WORKING ON A WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PLAN IN THE CRS PROGRAM.

SO THERE'S GOOD DATA, RECENT DATA, WHICH IS ALWAYS REALLY IMPORTANT TO HELP UNDERSTAND WHERE YOUR INFRASTRUCTURE IS AND HOW IT'S GOING TO BE AFFECTED BY DIFFERENT TYPES OF FLOOD RISK, WHICH IS ANOTHER REALLY IMPORTANT THING.

YOUR VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT ISN'T JUST ABOUT SEA LEVEL RISE OR STORM SURGE.

IT'S ALSO ABOUT POCKETS WHERE YOU HAVE RAINFALL INDUCED FLOODING AND YOU HAVE OLDER INFRASTRUCTURE THAT MAY NOT BE ABLE TO KEEP UP WITH CHANGING CONDITIONS OR COMBINED FLOODING EVENTS WHERE WE HAVE A KING TIDE EVENT, A LATE SEASON STORM, OFFSHORE STORM AND A RAINFALL EVENT ALL AT THE SAME TIME.

AND HOW DOES THAT IMPACT YOUR INFRASTRUCTURE? I DID WATCH THE VERY LENGTHY RESILIENCY WORKSHOP THAT YOU HAD A WEEK OR TWO AGO.

I SAT THROUGH THAT WHOLE THING. AND I WAS PART OF THAT PROCESS KIND OF LEADING UP TO IT TO MAKE SURE THAT WE WERE KIND OF TALKING ACROSS DEPARTMENTS WITH, WITH RESILIENCY PLANNING EFFORTS. SO HARMONIZING, THAT'S THE FIRST BULLET ON MY SLIDE, HARMONIZING THE DIFFERENT EFFORTS THAT YOU'VE UNDERTAKEN.

AND I WILL TELL YOU THAT I WORK WITH A LOT OF DIFFERENT COMMUNITIES.

THE CITY OF NAPLES IS IN A REALLY GOOD POSITION RIGHT NOW, AND HAVING CONDUCTED THIS WORK, OTHERS ARE STILL WORKING THROUGH THEIR VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENTS AND ADAPTATION PLANS.

SO YOU'VE GOT SOME PRIORITIES WHICH IS GREAT AND SOME GOOD DATA.

SO WORKING ON THE OUTPUTS FROM THAT MODELING YOUR STORMWATER MASTER PLAN AND YOUR FORTHCOMING WATERSHED MANAGEMENT PLAN, WHICH WILL HELP YOU UNDERSTAND CURRENT DEFICIENCIES WITHIN YOUR STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM AND HOW YOUR STORMWATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM MAY BE SUSCEPTIBLE IN THE FUTURE TO INCREASING TIDAL FLOODING.

AND WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO DO ABOUT IT? THAT'S WHAT THOSE EFFORTS ARE ABOUT.

SHORELINE WORK IS IMPORTANT. AECOM, I BELIEVE, IS WORKING ON HEIGHTS FOR SEAWALLS AND OTHER SHORELINE STRATEGIES THAT YOU CAN UNDERTAKE. THEY'VE THEY'VE DONE YOUR VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT.

SO THEY HAVE THAT DATA. AND LIKE I SAID, I ATTENDED THAT COUNCIL WORKSHOP.

ONE OF THE BIGGEST THINGS THAT YOU CAN DO IN YOUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND CODE, COMING OUT OF ALL OF THIS WORK IS MANAGING PEOPLE'S EXPECTATIONS.

THAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT IN THE RESILIENCY WORLD BECAUSE THERE'S TWO DIFFERENT POTS OF HOW YOU'RE DEALING WITH THIS.

ONE IS YOUR INFRASTRUCTURE, YOUR ASSETS. WHAT CAN THE CITY DO TO PREPARE ITS SERVICES AND ITS INFRASTRUCTURE AND ASSETS SERVING THE COMMUNITY? THE OTHER IS, WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO ALLOW PEOPLE TO DO TO THEIR PROPERTIES, YOU KNOW, TO TO KEEP UP WITH SOME OF THESE IMPACTS, THOSE THAT RAISES ISSUES SUCH AS PHIL, WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO ALLOW PEOPLE TO DO WITH THEIR SHORELINES, KNOWING THAT YOU HAVE A FORTHCOMING SHORELINE ORDINANCE EFFORT DOWN THE PATH AND MAKING SURE THAT PEOPLE CAN TAKE MEASURES ON THEIR PROPERTY BUT NOT DO HARM TO THEIR NEIGHBOR.

WE'VE SEEN THAT A LOT. YOU KNOW, PEOPLE COME IN, THEY BUY A HOUSE, IT'S ALONG THE WATERWAY.

THEY WANT TO PUT FIVE FEET OF FILL A TEN FOOT HIGH SEAWALL, AND THEN THEY'RE POTENTIALLY IMPACTING THEIR NEIGHBORS.

SO THOSE ARE THE TWO BUCKETS OF POLICY THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE KIND OF DEALING WITH.

INFRASTRUCTURE AND ASSETS IS A LITTLE BIT EASIER BECAUSE WE'VE GOT GOOD DATA ON THAT FROM YOUR VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT.

AND I'LL JUST I'VE HAD THIS CONVERSATION WITH YOUR WITH YOUR CITY ATTORNEY AS WELL.

I DON'T THINK OUTCOMES AND RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WE'RE GOING TO MAKE RELATED TO ASSETS AND INFRASTRUCTURE ARE GOING TO BE IMPACTED MUCH BY SENATE BILL 180,

[03:05:04]

HOW SENATE BILL 180 PLAYS OUT WITHIN THE CODE AND WITHIN OUR RECOMMENDATIONS IN THE COMP PLAN PARTICULARLY AND ANOTHER BIG THING THAT WE WILL BE ADDRESSING WITH SOME OF THESE STUDIES IS IDENTIFYING AND MANAGING SPECIFIC LEVELS OF SERVICE.

MOST LOCAL GOVERNMENTS, THEY ADOPTED THEIR STORMWATER LEVEL OF SERVICE 20 OR 30 YEARS AGO.

THEY HAVEN'T TOUCHED IT SINCE. OR THEY DEFAULT TO WHAT THE WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT PERMITS FOR ON SITE RETENTION AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT FOR VARIOUS TYPES OF INFRASTRUCTURE. I WOULD I WOULD SAY THAT MAYBE IT'S TIME TO LOOK AT THAT BASED ON THE OUTCOMES OF THE VULNERABILITY ASSESSMENT AND WHETHER WE NEED TO ADD A TAIL WATER CONDITION, MEANING A CONSIDERATION FOR TIDAL FLOODING THAT MAY CONSTRAIN DISCHARGE, STORMWATER DISCHARGE AND STORMWATER MANAGEMENT.

SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S REALLY IMPORTANT BECAUSE YOU WANT TO MANAGE PEOPLE'S EXPECTATIONS WITH WHAT THE CITY IS GOING TO PROVIDE WITH A LEVEL OF SERVICE.

YOU KNOW, SO YOU HAVE SOME POLICIES ALREADY WITHIN YOUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, MORE THAN MOST.

BUT I THINK ONE THING THAT WE COULD BENEFIT FROM IS, IS TEASING OUT THAT DISTINCTION BETWEEN WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO WITH PUBLIC ASSETS, CRITICAL ASSETS AND INFRASTRUCTURE VERSUS WHAT WE'RE GOING TO ALLOW PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNERS TO DO OR ENCOURAGE THEM TO DO.

BECAUSE THE CITY IS NOT NECESSARILY I'M GOING TO SAY THIS, IT MAY BE KIND OF WEIRD TO HEAR, BUT THE CITY IS NOT NECESSARILY IN THE BUSINESS OF SAVING PEOPLE'S PRIVATE PROPERTIES.

YOU KNOW, YOUR RESPONSIBILITY IS THE ASSETS AND THE INFRASTRUCTURE, MAKING SURE PEOPLE CAN GET AROUND ON THE ROADS AND THE STORMWATER MANAGEMENT AND THAT TYPE OF THING. BUT THERE MAY BE LIMITATIONS TO WHAT YOU CAN DO IN THE FUTURE.

AND WE HAVE TO RECOGNIZE SOME OF THAT. AND ALL OF THIS WORK WILL ALSO INFORM US ON HIGH PRIORITY FLOOD AREAS, SO WE KNOW WHERE WE NEED TO TARGET CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS AND WHERE WE NEED TO POTENTIALLY MANAGE EXPECTATIONS WITH REGARD TO INFRASTRUCTURE DELIVERY.

AND I CAN TAKE QUESTIONS NOW OR AT THE END. AS IT PERTAINS TO RESILIENCY, ARE YOU FACTORING IN THE VULNERABILITY OF OUR MUNICIPAL UTILITIES TO CYBER ATTACKS AND TO BE SURE THAT WE CAN'T GET HACKED ON OUR WATER TREATMENT PLANTS AND ANYTHING LIKE THAT? IS THERE SOMETHING TO DEAL WITH CYBERSECURITY AS FAR AS THE HARDENING OF OUR CURRENT COMPUTER SYSTEMS AND OUR CURRENT UTILITIES? I DON'T NECESSARILY HAVE I HAVEN'T SEEN DATA ON THAT, BUT IF THE CITY IS UNDERTAKING ANY OF THAT INFORMATION IN TERMS OF HARDENING THAT INFRASTRUCTURE, MOST OF THE HAZARDS THAT I LOOK AT ARE RELATED TO FLOOD, WIND, HEAT, YOU KNOW, TRADITIONAL HAZARDS THAT YOU WOULD LOOK AT IN LIKE A COUNTY LOCAL MITIGATION STRATEGY, BUT THAT IS ABSOLUTELY A HAZARD.

SO IF WE HAVE SOME DATA, IF WE HAVE SOME POLICY, I MEAN, ONE THING THAT A LOT OF LOCAL GOVERNMENTS DON'T NECESSARILY DO IN THEIR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS USE IT AS A TOOL TO GUIDE SOME OF THOSE CITY DECISIONS WITH REGARD TO INFRASTRUCTURE MANAGEMENT AND ASSET MANAGEMENT.

AND SO THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY TO POTENTIALLY DO THAT.

TO MY UNDERSTANDING, THERE'S REALLY NONE OF THAT BEING PLANNED FOR HERE. AND THERE'S MEL, THERE'S SOME VERY BAD ACTORS OUT THERE THAT JUST LIKE TO DO THINGS AND HOLD PIPELINES HOSTAGE AND ALL SORTS OF THINGS, BUT EASILY. WE HAVE A LOT OF WATER INFRASTRUCTURE HERE, WASTE TREATMENT PLANTS AND THE LIKE.

AND TO HAVE THAT NOT PROTECTED JUST SEEMS VERY, VERY SHORTSIGHTED.

OKAY. SO TAKING A BROADER VIEW OF RESILIENCY BEYOND JUST THOSE TRADITIONAL HAZARDS, I THINK IS WHAT I'M HEARING YOU SAY, OKAY. YEAH. AND I THINK THERE'S GENERAL AGREEMENT ON THAT.

OKAY. NOW, I APPRECIATE YOUR YOUR EXPERIENCE ALL OVER THE STATE.

DO YOU HAVE YOU REVIEWED OTHER CITIES, ORDINANCES, CODES CONCERNING BUILDING RESILIENCY AND RESILIENCY RELATED SO THAT YOU CAN KIND OF HELP US UNDERSTAND WHAT THE REALLY THE CUTTING EDGE BEST PRACTICES ARE? I'VE REVIEWED IT AND I'VE DONE IT GOOD. I'VE DONE A LOT OF WORK IN THE KEYS.

I HELPED THEM WITH THEIR SEPARATE ELEMENT OF THEIR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

THE CITY OF DELRAY BEACH IS A CITY THAT I WORKED VERY EXTENSIVELY WITH ON A RECENT COMP PLAN UPDATE FOR THEM.

I'LL JUST SAY IT THIS WAY. WE WE BAKED A LOT OF RESILIENCY COMPONENTS INTO THAT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ACROSS ALL OF THE ELEMENTS.

SO, YES, AND THAT'LL BE THE SAME HERE FOR OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IN NAPLES.

YOU'LL BE DOING THAT AS WELL, OF COURSE. THAT'S OUR PERSPECTIVE RIGHT NOW. YES.

CORRECT. AND WE HAVEN'T HEARD ANYBODY TELL US THAT THAT IS NOT THE RIGHT PERSON. I STRONGLY ENCOURAGE THAT.

[03:10:02]

I'M SURE THAT THE CITY APPRECIATES THAT AS WELL.

WELL, AND THAT THAT'S AN INTERESTING THING TO RAISE, BECAUSE IN SOME OF THESE GRANTS, THEY'RE LOOKING FOR THESE POLICIES TO BE BUILT IN AND ADDRESSING LEVEL OF SERVICE AND PRIORITIES WITH ASSET MANAGEMENT.

AND THAT TYPE OF THING IS A GOOD THING. AND GRANT APPLICATIONS TO BE ABLE TO POINT TO POLICIES WHERE YOU'RE DOING THAT.

TERRIFIC. AND THEN THE LAST COMMENT I'D MAKE, AND THIS IS MY OWN PERSONAL COMMENT, AND I'M NOT SURE IT'S THE COMMENT THAT THE WHOLE BOARD WOULD MAKE, BUT I'D ENCOURAGE YOU TO IGNORE THE THE POSSIBLE IMPLICATIONS OF SENATE BILLS 180 AND 250 IN TERMS OF I'D LIKE FOR US TO TO DO THE PLANNING THAT WE NEED TO DO WITHOUT REGARD TO WHAT THE STATE MAY DO TO TRY TO HAMSTRING THOSE EFFORTS.

THAT IS EXACTLY THE PERSPECTIVE THAT THE TEAM IS TAKING RIGHT NOW, IS TO ACADEMICALLY GO THROUGH THE PROCESS AND MAKE THE RECOMMENDATIONS THAT WE NEED.

WE NEED TO MAKE THE LANDSCAPE ON. THAT MAY BE VERY DIFFERENT IN A COUPLE OF MONTHS.

RIGHT. AND THEN I JUST ENCOURAGE YOU TO MAKE NAPLES THE SHINING CROWN OF OF RESILIENCY EFFORTS IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA.

WE WOULD LIKE TO ASSIST YOU WITH THAT. THANK YOU.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? SURE. IT IS STILL MORNING.

SO GOOD MORNING. THANK YOU. AARON. MY NAME IS BRIANA SMITH AND I AM INVOLVED.

I WORK WITH CMA OUTREACH. I'M INVOLVED WITH THE PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT PORTION OF THIS PROJECT.

THANK YOU FOR HAVING US AGAIN. WE'RE EXCITED TO SHARE WHERE WE'RE AT IN THIS PROJECT. SO JUST TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA, WE ARE IN PHASE TWO. AS CHRISTY MENTIONED, THIS IS THE VERY IMPORTANT PHASE OF COLLECTING ALL THE DATA FROM THE PUBLIC.

SO THIS IS OUR BIG PUSH. WE'RE STARTING THAT THAT EFFORT NOW.

WE DID COME AND PRESENT THIS SAME INFORMATION TO THE PRESIDENT'S COUNCIL ON SEPTEMBER 29TH.

WE'RE HERE TODAY WITH YOU TO GIVE THIS INFORMATION, AND THEN WE'LL VISIT THE CITY ON OCTOBER 13TH TO GIVE THEM THE THE SAME OPPORTUNITY TO COMMENT ON ON OUR THE PHASE OF THE PROJECT THAT WE'RE IN.

AGAIN, OUR OUR CURRENT PROGRESS IS OUTREACH AND NOTIFICATION.

WE'VE BEGUN SOME PRELIMINARY INITIAL OUTREACH, BUT THIS IS REALLY WHEN WE'RE GOING TO START TO, TO DRIVE HOME, MAKING SURE THAT THE COMMUNITY IS INVOLVED, SHARING AS MUCH INFORMATION AS POSSIBLE.

I'LL GO OVER SOME OF THE TOOLS THAT WILL BE USING AS FAR AS HOW WE'RE GETTING OUR THE WORD OUT THERE.

BUT REALLY, OUR BIG PUSH RIGHT NOW IS FINALIZING THE SURVEY FOR THE COMMUNITY.

SO WE'RE JUST ABOUT FINISHED WITH THAT. THAT SHOULD GO OUT APPROXIMATELY TWO WEEKS BEFORE THE PUBLIC.

THE FIRST ROUND OF PUBLIC MEETINGS, WHICH WILL BE ON NOVEMBER 13TH, WHICH IS LISTED HERE.

WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TWO PUBLIC MEETINGS ON THAT DATE.

ONE IN THE MORNING ON THE NORTH END OF THE CITY WILL BE AT THE FAITH LUTHERAN CHURCH, AND THEN ONE IN THE AFTERNOON TOWARDS THE SOUTHERN END OF THE CITY AT THE NORRIS COMMUNITY CENTER. SO WE'RE TRYING TO GIVE FOLKS AN OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE MULTIPLE WAYS TO PARTICIPATE ON THAT DAY, IN THE MORNING AND THE EVENING, AND DIFFERENT REGIONS OF THE CITY.

THAT'S JUST OUR FIRST ROUND. WE WILL BE COMING BACK AND VISITING, MAKING SURE THAT WE VISIT FOLKS DURING DURING PEAK SEASON AS WELL.

BUT WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE STAYED ON TRACK WITH OUR DATA COLLECTION, GETTING THE COMMENTS NOW SO THAT THE PROJECT AS A WHOLE STAYED ON TRACK TO MAKE SURE THAT WE FINISH PROMPTLY. RIGHT NOW WE DO HAVE OUR WEBSITE LIVE, WHERE AGAIN, YOU'LL START TO SEE SOME.

I'LL MENTION ON THE NEXT SLIDE, YOU'LL START TO SEE A BIG PUSH.

YOU'LL START TO SEE POSTERS AND GOLF SIGNS AND FLIERS AND MEDIA RELEASES THAT TALK ABOUT THIS WEBSITE.

IF FOLKS CAN'T COME TO THOSE PUBLIC MEETINGS, WE REALLY ENCOURAGE THEM TO GO ONLINE.

THERE'S INFORMATION ON THERE HOW TO LEARN, HOW TO PARTICIPATE MORE ABOUT THE PROJECT.

ANY COMMENTS AND QUESTIONS WE RECEIVE VIA THE WEBSITE IS THE SAME AS IF THEY ATTENDED THE PUBLIC MEETING.

SO REALLY ENCOURAGING PEOPLE THAT MIGHT NOT BE IN TOWN TO VISIT THE WEBSITE, GET ON OUR EMAIL LIST.

WE'LL BE SHARING. WE SHARE INFORMATION ALL THE TIME.

RIGHT NOW IT'S COMING OUT ABOUT MONTHLY. WE'RE SENDING UPDATES, BUT THAT WILL PROGRESS AND PICK UP AS WE HAVE MORE DATA TO SHARE AND MORE UPDATES TO SHARE. SO PLEASE ENCOURAGE YOUR NEIGHBORS AND YOUR FRIENDS AND YOUR FAMILY TO VISIT THAT WEBSITE. GET ON OUR LIST.

RIGHT NOW WE'VE GOT 125 SUBSCRIBERS TO THAT LIST, AND THAT IS IN ADDITION TO.

SO WE'RE USING THAT LIST TO SHARE INFORMATION.

BUT THAT'S IN ADDITION TO THE CITY'S LISTS, LISTS THAT WE'VE COMPILED INTERNALLY TO MAKE SURE THAT WE'RE SUPPLEMENTING ANY CITY LISTS THAT ARE GOING OUT.

SO WE HAVE MANY, MANY LISTS AND WE'RE WORKING ON THEM ALL THE TIME.

THEY'RE GROWING ALL THE TIME. SO WE'RE SHARING INFORMATION IN EVERY OUTLET THAT WE CAN FIND RIGHT NOW.

SO BUT RIGHT NOW, PRELIMINARILY BEFORE ALL OF OUR BIG PUSH 125 SUBSCRIPTIONS WE'VE GOT 18 COMMENTS OF INTEREST ON THE WEBSITE, WHICH AGAIN, THIS IS WHEN WE'RE GOING TO START TO SEE AN UPTICK IN THAT.

OUR SURVEY IS REALLY GOING TO BE THE TOOL THAT WE USE TO BE ABLE TO COLLECT THE DATA AND BE ABLE TO INFORM THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MOVING FORWARD.

SO AGAIN, WE HAVE SOME INFORMATION HERE THAT SHARES WHERE THE MEETINGS WILL BE.

[03:15:03]

AND AGAIN WE'LL PRESENT THIS TO COUNCIL ON ON MONDAY AS WELL.

WE'LL FINALIZE THIS FINALIZE THE SURVEY AND START THAT DISTRIBUTION IN THE NEXT COUPLE OF WEEKS.

WE'VE GOT OUR WEBSITE AGAIN. I MENTIONED THAT THAT'S LIVE.

YOU'LL START SEEING FLIERS AND POSTERS, POSTERS IN LOCAL AREAS.

ANYTHING THAT'S GOT A LARGE POPULATION OF VISITORS.

WE'RE GOING TO TRY TO GET INFORMATION POSTED ON STREET CORNERS.

YOUR HIGHEST TRAFFIC AREAS. YOU'LL START TO SEE NEWSLETTERS AGAIN.

THE CITY HAS ALREADY STARTED DISTRIBUTING THOSE, BUT THEY'RE GOING TO START TO COME MORE FREQUENTLY AS OUR LIST GROWS. MEDIA RELEASES WILL GO OUT. OUR EMAIL DATABASE IS GROWING. AGAIN, SOCIAL MEDIA IS GOING TO BE HUGE.

WE'VE AGAIN, WE VISITED PRESIDENT'S COUNCIL AS WELL.

AND WE'RE HOPING THAT THEY CAN HELP PUSH THAT TO SOME OF THEIR COMMUNITIES AND HOMES.

AND AGAIN, IT'S GOING TO BE A LOT OF WORD OF MOUTH TOO. WE WANT PEOPLE TO SHARE, GET EXCITED ABOUT THIS.

AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE BEGINNING TO DO. SO ON THE NEXT COUPLE OF SLIDES, I'M GOING TO PASS IT OFF TO CHRISSY, BUT SHE'S GOING TO TALK ABOUT WHAT OUR WORKSHOPS WILL LOOK LIKE, SOME OF OUR PRELIMINARY PLANS, AND DRAFT IDEAS ABOUT WHAT THE ITINERARY FOR THE WORKSHOPS WILL LOOK LIKE. BUT AFTER WE'RE DONE SORT OF TALKING ABOUT THE WORKSHOPS, I CAN HELP TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. OR DO YOU HAVE ONE NOW? I HAVE A QUESTION. NOW, YOU MENTIONED COMMUNITY. HOW DO YOU DEFINE COMMUNITY? CITY OF NAPLES.

RESIDENTS. RESIDENTS? YES. AND SO WE'LL TALK ABOUT THAT ON OUR.

WE'RE GOING TO GO OVER SOME OF THE THE IDEAS OF WHAT OUR QUESTIONS WILL BE FOR OUR SURVEY, BUT OUR INTENTION IS TO MAKE IT MANDATORY FOR FOLKS TO ENTER THEIR ZIP CODE AND THEIR ADDRESS SO THAT THEN WE CAN USE THAT DATA.

WE'RE TRACKING IP ADDRESSES. WE'LL SEE WHERE THE INFORMATION IS COMING FROM.

AND BEING ABLE TO SORT THROUGH SORT OF WE'RE NOT COLLECTING TEN RESPONSES FROM THE SAME HOUSEHOLD.

SO WE'LL GO THROUGH OUR GIS DATA AND MAKE SURE THAT THAT'S HOW YOU'RE GOING TO STOP HIJACKING.

GOOD. SO IN TERMS OF RESIDENTS, ARE THESE FULL TIME? ARE THESE PART TIME? IF THEY HAVE AN ADDRESS HERE, THEY'RE CONSIDERED A RESIDENT IN OUR BOOK.

IF THEY CAN PUT IN A ZIP CODE. AND AGAIN, WE'LL GO OVER SOME OF THE SPECIFICS ABOUT WHAT OUR SURVEY WILL LOOK LIKE AND WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR.

WE'LL HAVE A DROP DOWN MENU OF WHAT WE IDENTIFY AS CITY ZIP CODES.

AND THEN IN OTHER IF THEY ARE OUTSIDE THE CITY, WE'LL BE ABLE TO TRACK THAT DATA AND KIND OF MOVE IT TO THE SIDE AND SAY, WELL, WE HAVE FOLKS THAT ARE MAYBE OUTSIDE THE CITY THAT LIVE ELSEWHERE THAT ARE COMMENTING. WE'LL BE ABLE TO SORT THROUGH THAT.

AND OUR BUSINESS OWNERS INCLUDED IN THIS, THEY'LL HAVE AN ADDRESS IN THE CITY.

SO THAT IS OUR HOPE. YES. THEY HAVE AN ADDRESS IN THE CITY.

THEY SHOULD PUT IT DOWN AND WE'LL COLLECT THE DATA THAT WAY. SO MOVING ON TO THE TIMING OF THE OUTREACH.

THE WORKSHOPS I RAISED THIS LAST MONTH. I RAISED IT EARLIER IN THE YEAR.

I REALLY, REALLY, REALLY THINK WE'RE DOING A SEVERE INJUSTICE JUSTICE IN HAVING A WORKSHOP IN NOVEMBER, I REALLY DO. WE'VE PROBABLY GOT 20% OF THE FOLKS HERE.

ALSO, IF YOU LOOK AT THE TIMING OF THIS WORKSHOP, FIRST ONE IS AT 10 A.M.

AND THE SECOND ONE IS AT 4 P.M. IF ONE'S WORKING WITH A FAMILY, WITH CHILDREN, ONE'S NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO COME.

SO I THINK I AM JUST ASTOUNDED WITH DOING THIS.

I REALLY THINK THAT WE ARE WORKING MORE TOWARDS THE CALENDARS, THE AGENDAS OF OUR STAFF, OUR CONSULTANTS, AND NOT OUR RESIDENTS. I REALLY, I REALLY DO FEEL THAT.

AND I I'M VERY FRUSTRATED WITH IT. SO WE DID HEAR THAT AT THE LAST MEETING AND AND THE MEETING BEFORE.

YES, WE DID TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION. AND NOTHING'S HAPPENED.

YEAH. AND, YOU KNOW, THIS IS A THIS IS A 20 YEAR PLAN AND WE'RE BEING RAILROADED.

SO I DON'T MEAN TO THUMP THE DESK. WE'RE BEING RAILROADED INTO MAKING A DECISION IN A VERY SHORT SPACE OF TIME WITH WHAT I CONSIDER TO BE HIGHLY, HIGHLY INADEQUATE COMMUNITY OUTREACH. I REALLY DO, AND I AND MY FOLLOW UP QUESTION REALLY IS HOW ARE YOU GOING TO MEASURE SUCCESS? WE'VE GOT 18,000 PLUS MINUS RESIDENTS. I UNDERSTAND AT THE LAST COUNT.

HOW ARE YOU GOING TO MEASURE SUCCESS? 80% OF FOLKS RESPOND 10%, 1% AT THE MOMENT.

OKAY. THE WEBSITE'S ONLY, WHAT, 140 ODD FOLKS? I KNOW IT'S EARLY IN THE DAY. I SIGNED UP SO YOU CAN TAKE ME OFF.

I'M SURE ALL OF US HAVE SIGNED UP SO YOU CAN TAKE ALL US OFF.

WELL, THE MEASUREMENT OF SUCCESS WOULD BE IDEALLY, OF COURSE, WE WANT 100% OF RESIDENTS TO PARTICIPATE.

THAT IS ALWAYS OUR GOAL. THAT'S AN IDEAL. THAT'S A GOAL. OF COURSE, I WON'T LIVE FOREVER AND WITH GOOD HEALTH, BUT WE'RE GOING TO DO EVERYTHING THAT WE CAN TO MAKE SURE THAT NOT TO GET UP. OH. I'M SORRY. OUR INTENTION IS TO HAVE 100% PARTICIPATION, WHICH IS WHY WE'RE.

I DIDN'T ASK YOU THAT. I ASKED YOU WHAT IS THE MEASURE OF SUCCESS? I THINK THE MEASURE OF SUCCESS IS IS GAINING INSIGHT AND QUALITY DATA FROM AS MANY.

LET'S KEEP THIS. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT DATA. SO LET'S HAVE NUMBERS.

PERCENTAGES. I DON'T KNOW IF WE'VE DEFINED A MEASURE OF SUCCESS.

I THINK WE SHOULD. DO YOU NOT IF YOU IF YOU IF YOU START A JOURNEY.

IF I'M GOING TO DRIVE TO, I DON'T KNOW, BOISE, IDAHO.

I KNOW WHAT THE TARGET IS. I KNOW HOW I'M GOING TO GET THERE.

[03:20:02]

SO LET ME ASK, IS THERE A NUMBER THAT YOU'D LIKE TO SEE, LIKE WHAT IS THE DATA OR WHAT PERCENTAGE WOULD YOU QUALIFY AS SUCCESSFUL? YOU KNOW, IT'S BEEN A LONG TIME SINCE I DID STATISTICS AT GRAD SCHOOL.

I CAN EASILY COME UP WITH A NUMBER AS TO. AND I THINK WE ALL PROBABLY CAN IS WHAT WOULD A DEFINITION DEFINITION OF SUCCESS, SORRY DEFINITION OF SUCCESS BE? I THINK IT'S WAY ABOVE 50%.

SO THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WE'LL TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION AS A TEAM. WE CAN DEFINE THAT. WE CAN TALK ABOUT WHAT OUR TEAM THINKS SUCCESS IS.

I'D LIKE MORE THAN CONSIDERATION. I WOULD LIKE NEXT TIME WE MEET TO HEAR WHAT THAT NUMBER IS.

PLEASE, IF I MAY, MR. CHAIR, INTERJECT HERE. SOME OF THESE DATES GO BACK AS FAR AS THE PROCUREMENT AND THE AND THE BEFORE THE CONSULTANTS. YOU KNOW, A LOT OF THIS WAS SET A LONG TIME AGO, AND I GUESS THE THE MESSAGE CAN BE CONVEYED TO THE COUNCIL BECAUSE THEY'RE THE ONLY ONES THAT CAN MAKE THAT DECISION ABOUT CHANGING THE DATES.

SO THE CONSULTANT TEAM DIDN'T PICK NECESSARILY THE, YOU KNOW, THE THE SHOOTING.

I'M SHOOTING THE MESSENGER. THEN A LITTLE BIT A LITTLE BIT SHOT.

THAT'S LIKE BEING A LITTLE BIT PREGNANT. THAT'S THE SECOND TIME THAT'S HAPPENED TODAY.

BUT NO, I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT THAT MESSAGE WE, ERIC AND I CAN FIGURE OUT A WAY TO GET THAT MESSAGE TO THE COUNCIL WHEN WHEN IT'S DONE.

BUT I JUST DON'T WANT YOU TO THINK THAT THEY ARBITRARILY CAME UP WITH THIS PLAN.

IT WAS PART OF THE ACTUAL SOLICITATION THAT WAS DONE, MAYBE MORE MORE THAN I'VE BEEN HERE, WHICH IS A YEAR OR SO AGO. SO THAT'S PART OF IT.

BUT THE MEASURE OF SUCCESS IS SOMETHING THAT I THINK IS VALID.

YOU KNOW, WHAT DOES IS A 50% RESPONSE RATE VALID? I THINK THOSE ARE THOSE ARE REAL GOOD QUESTIONS TO ASK.

AND I JUST THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE. TURNOUT. I'M JUMPING IN.

I KNOW THERE'S STRONG FEELINGS ON THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD THAT WE NEED TO IMPROVE THE LEVEL OF PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT BY ADJUSTING DATES. AND I THINK I'M, YOU KNOW, WE SHOULD, AS A BOARD, SEND A RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL THAT MORE OF THE HEARINGS SHOULD OCCUR BETWEEN JANUARY AND MARCH.

AND IF YOU HAVE TO PUSH THE THING BACK A LITTLE BIT, YOU CAN MAKE A LITTLE MORE MONEY, BUT I THINK WE WANT WE WANT OUR POPULATION TO BE AS INVOLVED AS WE POSSIBLY CAN BECAUSE AS YOU'RE POINTING OUT, SOME OF THIS HAS GOT TO BE PUBLIC MONEY, BUT SOME OF THIS MAY BE PRIVATE MONEY. AND NOT ONLY TO HAVE THEM INVOLVED, BUT TO FEEL THEY'VE BEEN INVOLVED, BECAUSE THERE'S A FEELING THAT IN THE COMMUNITY THAT THEY'RE NOT BEING INVOLVED.

THE JOKE IN NAPLES IS ALL DECISIONS ARE MADE IN JULY AND AUGUST WHEN NOBODY'S HERE.

OKAY. MORE SO FOR THE COUNTY THAN THE CITY COUNCIL.

BUT THAT'S THE STORY, SCOTT. YEAH. THE. THERE'S AN OLD MAXIM.

YEAH, LET ME LET ME FAST FORWARD JUST A LITTLE BIT HERE.

I'LL JUMP FORWARD AND WE CAN GO BACK AND DO SOME OF THE REST OF THE PRESENTATION. THIS PROJECT SCHEDULE YOU SAW THE LAST TIME, IT BREAKS DOWN ALL THE DIFFERENT PHASES. THAT SHOWS ALL THE DIFFERENT PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT ACTIVITY THAT ARE ANTICIPATED THROUGHOUT THE PROJECT.

THERE IS A LOT OF ENGAGEMENT THAT WILL HAPPEN FROM NOW THROUGH ADOPTION, AND IT'S GOING TO BE IN DIFFERENT FORMATS.

SO THIS KICKOFF THAT WE'RE INTENDING TO DO IN NOVEMBER IS REALLY JUST A KICKOFF FOR MORE INVOLVEMENT THROUGH THE PROCESS.

WHEN WE GET TO JANUARY, FEBRUARY AND MARCH, WE WILL BE WORKING ON RECOMMENDATIONS, AND THAT REALLY IS KEY THAT THE PUBLIC GETS INVOLVED IN THAT PART SIGNIFICANTLY, BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT'S GOING TO INFECT THEM OR AFFECT THEM THE MOST.

AND WE DID WORK WITH STAFF. WE TALKED ABOUT ADJUSTING SCHEDULE AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

AND WE WILL TAKE YOUR RECOMMENDATION TO CITY COUNCIL.

WE HAVE NOT BEEN BACK TO THEM SINCE THEY SAW THIS IN JUNE.

BUT WE DO FEEL THAT NOVEMBER IS A GOOD TIME TO KIND OF LAUNCH.

AND INVOLVEMENT CAN BE ONLINE, AND IT CAN ALSO BE IN THE PUBLIC WORKSHOP.

WELL, I THINK WITH I THINK WITH LAUNCHING, BEARING IN MIND THE AVERAGE AGE OF THIS COMMUNITY IS 68 YEARS OLD.

AND SO, YOU KNOW, FOR PEOPLE OF THAT ERA PROBABLY READ NEWSPAPERS, THEY GO TO TOWN HALL MEETINGS.

IF WE WERE LOOKING AT GEN ZS OR YS OR WHATEVER, THEN YEAH, YOU KNOW, SOCIAL MEDIA, YOU KNOW, THEY DON'T COME OUT OF THEIR PARENTS BASEMENTS. SO, YOU KNOW, THAT'S A GREAT WAY OF COMMUNICATING. BUT WE HAVE TO LOOK AT OUR, YOU KNOW, THE DEMOGRAPHICS OF OUR COMMUNITY. THE THE DATES, THE DATES, AS I SEE IT SHOWS THAT THE FEBRUARY IS THE PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT.

AND THAT'S WHERE I LIVE. I'M IN THE NORTHERNMOST BUILDING IN THE CITY, AND I YEAH, IT'S WHERE WE ARE.

AND THERE'S 92 UNITS IN MY BUILDING. THERE'S SIX BUILDINGS, NOT ALL OF THEM THE SAME SIZE.

[03:25:06]

THERE'S NOBODY HERE. THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BE HERE UNTIL AFTER JANUARY 1ST.

THAT'S. THAT'S MY NECK OF THE WOODS. WE LIVE IN A DIFFERENT CITY OF NAPLES THAN YOU ALL DO. YEAH, UP THERE AT THE DMZ. YEAH. SORT OF, FOR THE MOST PART, RIGHT ON THE EDGE OF CLAM BAY.

SO WHEN I LOOK AT WHAT YOU HAVE FOR PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT, I FIND IT JUST WOEFULLY INADEQUATE.

AND AS FAR AS THE PARTICIPATION RATE, YOU CAN NEVER BE LOST IF YOU DON'T HAVE A DESTINATION.

SO ON YOUR TRIP TO BOISE OR DUBUQUE OR WHEREVER YOU ARE GOING, YOU WILL HAVE A PLAN.

BUT BUT THE PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT. I CAN'T STRESS THIS ENOUGH.

JANUARY, FEBRUARY AND MARCH. YOU HAVE THIS SORT OF ALMOST DONE IN FEBRUARY.

AND I FIND THAT UNCONSCIONABLE. I JUST DO. I WILL POINT TO A SURVEY PROCESS.

I WAS INVOLVED WITH THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEER PROJECT HERE.

ALL THE CHARETTES WERE DONE WHEN NOBODY WAS IN TOWN. IT WAS TOTALLY TAKEN OVER BY A SPECIFIC GROUP OF PEOPLE WITH SPECIFIC MINDSETS.

AND AT THAT POINT IN TIME, WE MISSED OUT ON THE OPPORTUNITY BECAUSE THE CHARETTES WERE HIJACKED, FOR LACK OF A BETTER TERM, BY SPECIFIC PEOPLE WITH SPECIFIC AGENDAS.

WE LOST OUT ON A COUPLE BILLION DOLLARS OF FEDERAL MONEY, ARMY CORPS MONEY TO PROTECT OUR BEACHES, BECAUSE THEY DID IT IN A MANNER THAT SIMPLY WAS NOT CONDUCIVE WITH HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE HERE AND WHEN THEY ARE HERE.

SO THIS THIS TIME FRAME, AND I UNDERSTAND IT WAS PUT TOGETHER A WHILE AGO BY DIFFERENT PEOPLE.

BUT THERE ARE NEW PEOPLE HERE NOW, AND THE TIME FRAME HAS TO EXTEND AT LEAST INTO MARCH.

SO, AS I SUGGESTED THE FIRST TIME. FIRST TWO WEEKS OF JANUARY, THE MIDDLE PART OF FEBRUARY, THE LAST PART OF MARCH, THAT IS WHEN YOU WILL CAPTURE THE MOST PEOPLE THAT THAT ARE RESIDENTS HERE.

TAXPAYERS HERE. WHAT THE OTHER NONRESIDENTS AND NON TAXPAYERS THINK? I FRANKLY, SCARLETT, I CARE ABOUT WHAT WE'RE DOING WITH OUR TAX DOLLARS AND HOW WE PLAN FORWARD.

THIS THIS PROJECT WAS ONE OF THE MAIN REASONS I EVEN APPLIED FOR PAB IS I WANTED TO BE INVOLVED IN THIS.

I LOOK AT THAT RIGHT THERE, THIS JUST THERE. AND YOU'VE GOT JANUARY, WHICH IS THE THE PAB CITY COUNCIL MEETING.

WELL THAT'S GREAT. ELECTED OFFICIALS AND APPOINTED OFFICIALS. THAT'S GOOD. BUT FEBRUARY YOU HAVE THE COMMUNITY MEETINGS.

THE PRESIDENT'S COUNCIL IS NOT THE BEST WAY TO REACH THE RESIDENTS, AND WE'RE JUST UTILIZING THEM AS ONE OF OUR DIFFERENT TOOLS TO BE ABLE TO GET INFORMATION OUT ABOUT THE UPCOMING WORKSHOPS. JUST FOR YOUR INFORMATION, I'M PRESIDENT OF MY CONDOMINIUM BOARD.

NEVER GOT A NOTICE. THERE'S A WHOLE SECTION OF NAPLES.

I JUST WANT TO TELL YOU, THAT'S ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE BAY, AND NOBODY KNOWS WE'RE THERE.

AND WHEN I GO IN THIS AFTERNOON TO GET MY BEACH PERMIT, THEY'LL TELL ME I DON'T LIVE IN NAPLES, AND I HAVE A SIMILAR EXPERIENCE. I'M ON THE BOARD OF MY HOA AND WE RECEIVED NOTHING EITHER.

IF WE DIDN'T SEND NOTICES OUT FOR PUBLIC FOR PRESIDENT'S COUNCIL.

BUT WE CAN FIND OUT. LET'S GO JUST TO MY LEFT AND THEN TO YOU AND THE.

CAN I FINISH? I'M SORRY. CAN I FINISH? WHEN WE ADDRESS THIS, TRY TO ADDRESS IT AT THE END OF THE LAST MEETING.

HOUSES OF WORSHIP. PEOPLE GO TO CHURCHES. PEOPLE WHEN THEY'RE HERE, ESPECIALLY GO TO CHURCHES, CIVIC GROUPS, ROTARY CLUBS, KIWANIS CLUBS. THIS IS HOW YOU REACH THE PUBLIC, THE PEOPLE THAT ARE RESIDENTS AND TAXPAYERS.

THAT IS WHO OUR TARGET MARKET IS. AND UNLESS WE HIT THAT TARGET MARKET, WE'RE GOING TO FAIL.

FAILING TO PLAN IS PLANNING TO FAIL WHEN OUR PLANNING TEN HOURS OF WORK.

IT'S TRUE. I'LL TILL THE COWS COME HOME. BUT I LOOK AT THIS ENGAGEMENT PLAN AND BEING WRAPPED MOSTLY DONE BY FEBRUARY.

THAT'S TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE. SO I'D LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION FROM OUR BOARD THAT WE WE ENCOURAGE THAT THIS PROJECT HAVE JANUARY, FEBRUARY AND MARCH FOR PUBLIC PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IN MASS, THAT WE HAVE A DIRECTION TO COUNCIL THAT THIS IS WHAT AS A PAB THAT FOR US TO REACH OUR TARGET MARKET, WHICH ARE OUR TAXPAYERS, RESIDENTS, VOTERS, THIS MUST BE DONE.

AND I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO THAT EFFECT. I WOULD HAPPILY SECOND THAT.

THANK YOU. DISCUSSION. BEFORE WE GO. WE STILL HAVE PEOPLE THAT WANT TO SPEAK, BUT WE HAVE A MOTION NOW THAT THERE'S TWO OVER HERE.

GO AHEAD. YEAH. A FEW TIMES I'VE SPOKEN ABOUT SURVEY, SURVEY DESIGN AND HOW THAT PEOPLE UNDERSTANDABLY FROM, LET'S SAY, OUTSIDE THE INDUSTRY. DON'T TAKE THAT. IT'S FULL MEANING A SURVEY DESIGN GIVES A FRAMEWORK AS INDIVIDUAL BOARDS OF ANYTHING.

WE'RE TOO BUSY TRYING TO BE PRESCRIPTIVE, AND WHAT WE END UP DOING IS STOPPING SUCCESS BY GIVING A DATE OF WHEN THE A PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT MEETING IS UNSUCCESSFUL. TO CAPTURE THAT FROM A SURVEY PERSPECTIVE, YOU RUN ABOUT WHAT SHOULD YOU USE AS A BAROMETER? IT'S A VERY SIMPLE BAROMETER TO BE USED, I THINK, IN THIS INSTANCE.

AND THAT WOULD BE LOOK AT THE PERCENTAGE OF PEOPLE WHO PARTICIPATED IN ANY PRIOR ELECTION RELATING TO CITY.

[03:30:01]

MORE THAN THAT WOULD BE UNREASONABLE. BUT THAT COULD BE USED AS A BAROMETER BY GIVING THAT AS A BAROMETER BY THOSE WHO WISH TO CARRY OUT A SURVEY. YOU ARE THEN MOVING THE ONUS OF THEM TO STRUCTURE THEIR SURVEY TO ACHIEVE THOSE PERCENTAGES.

IF THEY DON'T PERCEIVE OR THEY DON'T ACHIEVE THOSE PERCENTAGES, AS MY COLLEAGUE SAID, IT'S UNSUCCESSFUL.

THEN YOU COULD TURN AROUND AND SAID, I'M SORRY, THEN THE DATA ISN'T USABLE.

SO YOU COULD GO ON EASILY, NAIL DOWN WHAT WOULD BE A REASONABLE PERCENTAGE, AND THEN LEAVE IT FOR THE SURVEY DESIGNERS TO CARRY OUT METHODS TO ACHIEVE THOSE PERCENTAGES. BUT IT'S UNFAIR TO THEN HANDCUFF THEM TO YOUR RULES, YET YOU WANT THEM TO ACHIEVE THEIR EXPERTISE.

AND ANDREW, TO FOLLOW UP ON THAT POINT. MAYORAL ELECTION CYCLES VERSUS NON MAYORAL ELECTION CYCLES.

YOU'LL HAVE A MUCH HIGHER TURNOUT OF VOTERS IN THE MAYORAL CYCLE.

SO YOUR POINT IS VERY WELL MADE. I WOULD SAY I THINK WELL MADE POINT.

EXCEPT WE HAVE A LOT OF PARTICULARLY CANADIANS, THE OCCASIONAL BRIT WHO ARE NOT VOTERS HERE.

AND I THINK YOU WOULD EXCLUDE THOSE. AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW WHERE WHERE I LIVE.

WE HAVE A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER OF. NO, I'M NOT SAYING EXCLUDING THOSE.

WHAT I'M SAYING IS IT WILL GIVE YOU A BAROMETER.

WHAT A SURVEY. IF A SURVEY IF THERE'S A 100, IF THERE'S 100 PEOPLE.

AND IN THE PREVIOUS ELECTION YOU HAD PEOPLE COMING OUT TO VOTE, LET'S SAY 40%, THEN YOU COULD TURN AROUND AND SAY, OKAY, THAT'S EXCEPTIONAL. SO YOU CAN GIVE A TOLERANCE ON THAT TO MAYBE GIVE YOU A FIGURE OF 30, 35%, WHETHER THEY ARE VOTING PEOPLE OR OUTSIDE, THAT'S IRRELEVANT, BUT IT GIVES YOU A DECENT BAROMETER FOR A POPULATION, AND A SURVEY CAN BE DESIGNED DIFFERENTLY. FROM MY BACKGROUND, I'VE BEEN ASKED TO CREATE SURVEYS WHERE THE WELL, THE MOST DIFFICULT ONE WAS IN EXCESS OF 90%, BUT THAT ISN'T A PROBLEM.

IT CAN STILL BE ACHIEVED, BUT IT TAKES A TOTALLY DIFFERENT STRUCTURE IN A SURVEY TO TO ACHIEVE IT.

AND I THINK IF YOU GIVE PEOPLE THE PARAMETERS AND THEN ALLOW THE EXPERTS TO DESIGN A SURVEY AND HOW TO GET THAT SURVEY IN FRONT OF AND TO PARTICIPATE, THAT YOU SHOULD GIVE THEM THAT ABILITY TO DO THAT.

BUT THEY NEED THE PARAMETERS I AGREE WITH. IT'S THE TAXPAYER, THE TAXPAYER THAT PAYS THE BILLS.

WE HAVE SOMEBODY WHO HASN'T SPOKEN BILL. YEAH, I HAVEN'T EITHER.

YOU COVERED IT BY TRYING TO SAY WE NEED TO DO MORE IN JANUARY AND FEBRUARY AND MARCH.

THANK YOU. THAT'S WHAT EVERYBODY'S HERE AND I'VE BEEN WAITING AS WELL.

SO IF I MIGHT HAVE A MOMENT. AND I AGREE WITH THE TIMING.

I THINK THAT JANUARY, FEBRUARY, MARCH ARE CRITICAL TIMES FOR US TO BE DOING THIS AND, AND DOING THESE THESE SURVEYS, MEETINGS, ETC.. BUT, YOU KNOW, IN THE MATERIALS YOU GAVE US REALLY USEFUL I THOUGHT CLEARWATER AND DAVIDSON.

AND AS I READ THROUGH THOSE MATERIALS, THERE WERE VARIOUS INITIATIVES THAT I THOUGHT WERE TERRIFIC, YOU KNOW, GROUP MEETINGS, IDENTIFYING GROUPS AND DIFFERENT ORGANIZATIONS, DIFFERENT CULTURES AND YOUTH AND TRYING TO TO TO TARGET THOSE AND GET INPUT FROM THEM. INDIVIDUALS IN PERSON VIRTUALLY BY WEBSITE.

ANOTHER GOOD ONE. LEADERS LIKE THE PRESIDENT'S COUNCIL BUT EXPAND THAT AND GET COMMUNITY GROUPS AND LEADERS IDENTIFIED.

ANOTHER ONE WAS THAT I THOUGHT WAS INGENIOUS IS INTERCEPTS BY HAVING GOING TO FESTIVALS, FARMERS MARKETS, ETC. TO TO TRY TO DO THAT. I MEAN, YOU'RE MAKING A KIND OF A GRIMACE THERE, BUT BUT THAT WAS SOMETHING THAT WAS USED IN DAVIDSON, AND I THINK ALL OF THOSE DIFFERENT SORTS OF THINGS OUGHT TO BE CONSIDERED.

MAYBE NOT ALL DONE, BUT BUT CERTAINLY CONSIDERED.

AND THEN THE LAST POINT I WOULD MAKE IS THAT I'VE MENTIONED THE NAPLES 2045 TO FRIENDS WHO THEN SAY THEY GO ONLINE AND THEY CAN'T FIND IT. I TRIED TO I COULDN'T FIND IT EXCEPT FOR THE CITY SITE.

AND SO I THINK THAT THAT SHOULD BE LOOKED AT.

I'M NO EXPERT AT FINDING THINGS ON THE INTERNET, BUT IF YOU GOOGLE WW 2025.

COM IT COMES UP WITH YOUR THE JOHNSON ENGINEERING SITE AND THE, THE CITY'S WEBSITE, WHICH IS HOW I WAS ABLE TO GET ON. SO I THINK THAT THAT SHOULD JUST BE LOOKED AT AND CORRECTED IF THERE IS ACTUALLY A MISTAKE.

OKAY. JUST TO TRY TO BRING THINGS TO A LITTLE BIT OF CONCLUSION, I THINK THERE'S CONSENSUS ON TWO AREAS HERE.

NUMBER ONE, A MOTION TO GO TO THE CITY COUNCIL THINKING THAT MORE NEEDS TO BE DONE.

JANUARY, FEBRUARY, MARCH 2ND ISSUE THAT WE SHOULD BE TELLING THE CITY COUNCIL IS THAT THE CONSULTANTS SHOULD GIVE

[03:35:02]

AND IF WE CAN AGREE ON THOSE TWO THINGS TO PASS ON THE CITY COUNCIL, WHOEVER MADE THE MOTION CAN AMEND IT TO ADD THE PERCENTAGES.

YES, YES. THANK YOU. I'LL INCORPORATE THAT. AND I THINK THEN, YOU KNOW, WE'VE DONE WHAT WE CAN DO AND WE FEEL STRONGLY ABOUT IT.

WE DID DO SPEAKING IN ONE VOICE AS A PAB. ANYBODY HAVE ANY COMMENTS BEFORE WE VOTE? JUST ON THAT. WE ARE AMBASSADORS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

THAT'S THE BE ALL AND END ALL OF THIS BODY MORE THAN ANYTHING ELSE.

SO I'M JUST ON A POSITIVE NOTE. I REALLY APPRECIATE THE REFERENCES THAT YOU'RE PUTTING ON FOR YOUR INFORMATION AND SLIDES WHERE THE SOURCE IS COMING FROM.

I THINK THAT'S, YOU KNOW, REALLY WELL DONE FOR THAT, AND I GREATLY APPRECIATE THAT.

AND I DON'T MEAN TO BE THROWING THE MESSENGER UNDER THE BUS.

WE JUST KNOW THAT THE CITY COUNCIL SET THESE DATES AND EXPECTATIONS AND THEY WANT TO KNOW HOW WE FEEL.

SO THERE'S EXCUSE ME, JUST ONE COMMENT. THANK YOU.

IT'S PUBLIC KNOWLEDGE, BUT THERE IS THERE IS GOING TO BE A CITY ELECTION IN THE BEGINNING OF FEBRUARY, WHICH ADDS TO THIS AND ALSO MAYBE RAISES THE PUBLIC AWARENESS AND URGENCY AND PARTICIPATION.

SO IT'S KIND OF COINCIDENTAL IN A GOOD WAY, AND YOU SHOULD TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THAT AS MUCH AS YOU COULD.

I KNOW ABOUT POLLS AND THINGS, BUT THAT THIS INFORMATION COULD BE KIND OF COINCIDED SOMEHOW WITH THIS OR TO GIN UP THE INTEREST AS, AS NOT ONLY DID THEY VOTE, BUT WHAT THEY'RE ACTUALLY VOTING FOR.

ALL THOSE ARE GOOD POINTS. I'D LIKE TO VOTE ON OUR MOTION AND THEN LET THEM CONTINUE.

SO CAN WE JUST DO IT BY ACCLAMATION? ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

AYE. ANYONE OPPOSED? THANK YOU. PLEASE CONTINUE.

OKAY. WE'LL TRY TO LET YOU MOVE ON. LET'S SEE.

SO WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE KICKOFF WORKSHOP THAT WE WOULD BE HAVING WANT TO GO THROUGH KIND OF OUR WORKSHOP ITINERARY, WHICH IS IN YOUR PACKET, AND WE'LL GO THROUGH THAT INFORMATION.

AND WE'D LIKE TO GET YOUR ENDORSEMENT AND FEEDBACK ON HOW WE'VE GOT THIS STRUCTURED.

AT THE AT THE ENTRY, YOU WOULD, AS A PARTICIPANT INCLUDE GEOGRAPHICAL LOCATION INFORMATION ON THE SIGN IN SHEETS.

WE'LL HAVE A MAP THERE SO THAT YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO IDENTIFY WHERE YOU LIVE.

IT'LL HAVE NEIGHBORHOODS AND BUSINESS AREAS ON IT.

WHAT WE WILL DO, BECAUSE I KNOW THERE'S A LOT OF CONCERN ABOUT HIJACKING OF MEETINGS, AND WE'RE GOING TO SPLIT GROUPS UP.

PEOPLE ARE GOING TO COME IN, THEY'RE GOING TO BE RANDOMIZED AND PUT AT DIFFERENT TABLES. WE'LL PROBABLY HAVE COLOR ASSIGNMENTS OR WHATEVER SO THAT WE CAN MIX UP. AND THAT'S A GOOD AVENUE FOR PEOPLE TO COLLECTIVELY DO TABLE EXERCISES AND COME TO CONSENSUS ON THINGS.

THE MEETING FORMAT WILL INCLUDE AN OVERVIEW PRESENTATION TO INTRODUCE THE COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING PROCESS.

ANYBODY WHO'S NOT FAMILIAR WITH IT AND WHAT IT ACTUALLY DOES WILL HAVE SOME INTERACTIVE POLLING, AND THEN WE'LL SPEND THE BULK OF THE MEETING ENGAGING IN SMALL WORK GROUPS AND SHARING INPUT AND REPORTING BACK.

AND THEN WE'LL ALSO HAVE COMMENT CARDS FOR ANYTHING THAT WE DIDN'T ADDRESS THAT SOMEBODY WANTS TO POTENTIALLY PUT INFORMATION.

SO THAT WE CAN LOG ALL OF THAT INFORMATION. SO IN YOUR BACKUP MATERIALS, YOU'VE GOT A WORKSHOP ITINERARY.

IT BREAKS IT DOWN AND SHOWS YOU THE TYPES OF QUESTIONS THAT WE'RE LOOKING TO ASK. WE'RE GOING TO START OUT WITH, HAS ANYBODY EVER USED MENTIMETER BEFORE? IT'S A IT'S A POLLING TOOL THAT WE'VE USED ON A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT OCCASIONS.

IT WORKS VERY WELL TO SHOW RESULTS ON THE FLY.

SO YOU HAVE A WEBSITE, YOU HAVE IT SET UP THERE.

IT'S VERY EASY TO ACCESS. AND THE INFORMATION COMES UP ON YOUR SMART DEVICE.

COULD BE A PHONE, COULD BE A TABLET, WHATEVER YOU'D LIKE TO BRING. IF YOU DON'T HAVE ONE OR YOU'RE NOT COMFORTABLE WITH IT.

WE'LL HAVE PAPER COPIES AS WELL SO THAT WE CAN ACTUALLY GET YOUR LOG YOUR INFORMATION SEPARATELY.

AND YOU CAN ALSO PARTICIPATE. WE'LL START OUT WITH SOME DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION WE WANT TO IDENTIFY IF YOU'RE A RESIDENT, BUSINESS OWNER OR LANDOWNER, OR IF YOU'RE NONE OF THOSE BECAUSE WE WANT TO CATEGORIZE THOSE AS WELL.

IDENTIFY THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT YOU RESIDE, HOW LONG YOU'VE BEEN IN THE CITY.

SO WE CAN KIND OF HONE IN ON AND SORT LATER, LIKE WHO'S PARTICIPATING? NEW PEOPLE, PEOPLE THAT HAVE BEEN HERE 50 YEARS.

HOW LONG HAVE YOU OPERATED A BUSINESS? IF YOU ARE A BUSINESS OPERATOR, AND THEN HOW MANY MONTHS OF THE YEAR DO YOU RESIDE IN NAPLES? AND THEN AGE, AGE BRACKETS. SO THAT'LL HELP US LATER TO SORT OUT THE KIND OF INFORMATION, THE KIND OF PEOPLE THAT ARE PARTICIPATING AND FIND OUT WHERE WE MIGHT HAVE SOME GAPS AS WELL. THEN WE'VE GOT SURVEY QUESTIONS THAT WILL AGAIN BE DONE THROUGH THIS POLLING ACTIVITY.

REALLY. AND WITH THIS, WE'LL DIVE A LITTLE DEEPER INTO SOME OF THE VISION VALIDATION QUESTIONS THAT WE TALKED ABOUT AND THE KNOWN PRIORITIES THAT THE CITY

[03:40:10]

IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS THAT ARE WORD CLOUD BASED, WHERE THE QUESTION MIGHT BE SOMETHING ALONG THE LINES OF PROVIDE AN EXAMPLE OF A TREASURED PLACE IN THE CITY THAT YOU WANT TO ENSURE IS PROTECTED.

YOU PUT A 3 TO 5 WORD ANSWER. IT SHOWS UP ON THE SCREEN.

IF MANY PEOPLE SAY THE SAME THING, THAT WORD GETS BIGGER, DARKER, BOLDER, CENTRALIZED IN THE RESULTS.

FOR MULTIPLE CHOICE EXAMPLES, WE COULD DO DOT CLUSTERS WHERE YOU SEE THOSE LIVE ON SCREEN.

IT'S PRETTY EXCITING PROCESS AND RANKING. WE CAN DO LIKE BAR CHARTS OR GRAPHS AND THINGS LIKE THAT.

OKAY. LET'S SEE. MOVING ON. FOR THE MAJORITY OF THE WORKSHOP, AS I MENTIONED, WE WOULD BE FACILITATING GROUP DISCUSSION THROUGH THREE DIFFERENT TABLE EXERCISES. THE FIRST OF THE TABLE EXERCISES, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THE PARTICIPANTS IDENTIFY ON A MAP WHERE THEY THINK SMALL TOWN CHARM IS BEST REPRESENTED IN NAPLES. WITH THAT, THEY'LL BE ABLE TO WORK TOGETHER WITH WITH SHEETS ON THE TABLE TO IDENTIFY LIST THOSE PLACES OUT, NOTING THAT, AGAIN, PLACE KEEPING IS DISTINCT FROM PLACE MAKING AND THEN ASCRIBE FROM.

EACH TABLE WILL THEN REPORT OUT THE FINDINGS FOR EACH TABLE.

SO WE ALL GET TO HEAR WHAT EVERYBODY SAYS. THE SECOND TABLE EXERCISE WOULD RELATE TO RESILIENCY AND LIKELY HAZARD EVENTS.

THIS IS ANOTHER TABLE GROUP EXERCISE WHERE YOU'LL ANSWER QUESTIONS RELATED TO CONCERNS AND SUGGESTIONS ON HOW WE HOW WE HOW THEY HOW PEOPLE FEEL ABOUT HAZARD EVENTS AND THE CITY'S EFFORTS IN RESILIENCY. AND THEN THE THIRD EXERCISE AGAIN EXPLORES THIS CONCEPT OF NAPLES AS THE GREEN JEWEL OF SOUTH FLORIDA, WHICH DERIVES FROM GOES BACK. FROM THE 2007 VISIONING EFFORTS.

PARTICIPANTS WILL BE PROVIDED WITH MAPS, AND THEY'LL BE ABLE TO IDENTIFY THINGS THAT THEY DON'T BELIEVE SHOULD BE PART OF THE GREEN JEWEL CONCEPT AND THINGS THAT SHOULD.

AT THE SAME TIME. ACTUALLY, WHAT WE'RE THINKING OF, WHAT WE WANT TO DO IS A WEEK BEFORE WE HAVE THE WORKSHOP, WE WOULD RELEASE THE SURVEY. SO WE'D HAVE THE ONLINE SURVEY.

AND THAT'S IN YOUR PACKET AS WELL. THE SURVEY WOULD BE AVAILABLE TO FOR PEOPLE TO DO ENGAGEMENT OPPORTUNITIES FOR THOSE THAT AREN'T ABLE TO ATTEND THE COMMUNITY WORKSHOPS.

THEY'LL BE SECURITY INVOLVED. YOU'LL BE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE YOUR ADDRESS AND ZIP CODE.

AND THEN LATER THE DATA CAN THEN BE ANALYZED AND SORTED TO IDENTIFY IF THERE ARE ANY REGULARITIES.

IF WE WIND UP WITH TEN PEOPLE AGAIN AT THE SAME IP ADDRESS, AND WE CAN FLAG THOSE FOR REPETITIVE SUBMISSIONS AND GO THROUGH AGAIN WITH THE DEMOGRAPHIC INFORMATION, THE SURVEY QUESTIONS. AND THEN, AS MENTIONED, WE'D BE LOOKING AT COMING BACK TO THE PAB AND THE CITY COUNCIL IN EARLY 2026, BEFORE WE START PULLING TOGETHER RECOMMENDATIONS AND START TEASING OUT WHAT THESE MIGHT BE FOR THE PLAN AMENDMENTS, STARTING OUT WITH PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND OUTREACH THE PRESIDENT'S COUNCIL AND THE COMMUNITY MEETINGS.

WE HAVE MANY OTHER STEPS THAT INCLUDE PUBLIC INVOLVEMENT. AS I MENTIONED, THESE WILL INCLUDE MORE PUBLIC WORKSHOPS AS WE PREPARE THE DRAFT PLAN AMENDMENTS BOTH WITH THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD AS WELL AS CITY COUNCIL AND THEN TRANSMITTAL HEARINGS AND THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPTION.

THIS IS ALL INFORMATION WE HAD SHARED WITH YOU PREVIOUSLY.

SO WE WANT YOU TO HELP US SPREAD THE WORD ABOUT THIS IMPORTANT INITIATIVE.

THERE'S A LOT OF OPPORTUNITIES. THERE ARE A FEW OPPORTUNITIES FOR THE PUBLIC TO ACTUALLY, LIKE, TAKE PART IN A PROCESS LIKE THIS AND HELPING TO SHAPE THE FUTURE OF THE CITY.

SO WE STRONGLY DO RECOMMEND THAT RESIDENTS, BUSINESS OWNERS, AND ANY RELEVANT STAKEHOLDERS GET INVOLVED IN THIS PLANNING PROCESS AND COME AND MAKE A DIFFERENCE. AGAIN, THE WEBSITE IS NAPLES 2040 5.COM.

I RECOMMEND PUTTING IT RIGHT INTO THE THE BROWSER.

GOOGLE SEARCHING IS GOING TO TURN UP ALL SORTS OF ALGORITHMS. AS YOU MENTIONED, THERE MIGHT BE PROBLEMS TO PUT IT RIGHT IN AS A HYPERLINK.

AND OUR CONSULTANT TEAM CAN ANSWER ANY ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS THAT YOU GUYS HAVE.

I HAVE A QUESTION. YEAH. NOT IN THE BROWSER. PUT IT IN THE ADDRESS BAR.

YEAH. I HAVE TWO, TWO QUESTIONS FOR BOTH YOU AND OUR ATTORNEY.

SO I'LL GIVE YOU A REST AND GO TO THE ATTORNEY. ARE WE, AS MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, ABLE TO ATTEND THE WORKSHOPS? AND IF WE ARE, ARE WE ABLE TO PARTICIPATE AS RESIDENTS OR OBSERVERS?

[03:45:01]

IS THAT RIGHT, ERICA? WE WILL NOTICE THEM AND NOTICE TO THE PUBLIC THAT THERE WILL BE MORE THAN ONE ELECTED OFFICIAL OR BOARD MEMBER PRESENT.

SO THESE OPERATE UNDER SUNSHINE? YES. YEAH. OKAY.

AND SO YOU AS FAR AS PARTICIPATE. WHAT DO YOU MEAN IN THAT CAPACITY? WELL, CAN I SIT ON THE TABLE? YEAH. YEAH, YEAH.

AND YES. VOICE MY OPINION AS A AS A RESIDENT.

AS A TAXPAYER. YES. YES. COMMUNICATE WITH EACH OTHER IN THAT.

IN THAT BECAUSE IT'S BEEN NOTICED AS A PUBLIC THAT YOU WILL ALL BE THERE.

THE PUBLIC KNOWS WHO ALL BE THERE. AND SO IT'S NOT GOING TO BE A VIOLATION.

I KNOW WHEN WE HAD THE LAST ONE AT THE NORRIS CENTER 2 OR 3 YEARS AGO THE COUNCIL MEMBERS COULD NOT BE THERE EN MASSE.

THEY COULD NOT PARTICIPATE. THEY WERE STANDING IN THE WINGS MONITORING.

YEAH, I'M NOT AWARE OF THAT. I KNOW WE DID NOTICE THOSE SO THAT THEY COULD ALL ATTEND THOSE MEETINGS.

OKAY. THAT WAS MY IMPRESSION WAS I REMEMBER MIKE MCCABE WAS, YOU KNOW, STANDING IN THE BACKGROUND, NOT ABLE TO PARTICIPATE. YEAH. I THINK YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE SIDEBAR CONVERSATIONS ABOUT HOW YOU'RE GOING TO VOTE ON THINGS, BECAUSE ULTIMATELY THIS IS GOING TO COME TO YOU AS AN ORDINANCE. BUT SITTING AT A TABLE AS A AS A RESIDENT, THAT'S FINE. YEAH. NO, I'M VERY RULES BASED. SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR FOR THE CLARITY TO CLARIFY THAT.

COMING BACK TO THE PRESENTATION. THANK YOU. ANDREW.

HIJACKING. I'M VERY GLAD THAT YOU TOOK OUR COMMENTS TO HEART ON THAT, BECAUSE THE LAST WORKSHOP WE HAD WAS, IN MY MIND, A TOTAL DISASTER. WE, I BELIEVE, THEN HAD RANDOMIZED TABLE ASSESSMENT ASSIGNMENT, BUT THERE WAS A SPECIAL INTEREST PERSON WHO JOINED OUR TABLE, PULLED OUT A CHAIR, STUCK IT IN THERE, GRABBED THE MICROPHONE AND ELECTED HIMSELF AS THE FÜHRER OF THE OF THE MEETING.

ACTUALLY, I SHOULDN'T USE THAT WORD. BUT AS THE THE LEADER OF THE AUTOCRATIC LEADER OF THE TABLE.

ARE WE GOING TO HAVE PROOF OF RESIDENCE? CAN WE ASK FOLKS, INDIVIDUALS TO SHOW A DRIVING LICENSE? I'M GOING TO LET YOUR ATTORNEY ANSWER THAT ONE. I DON'T KNOW.

I JUST YEAH, BUT SO STATE LAW SAYS IF IT'S GOING TO BE A PUBLIC MEETING NOTICE IS A PUBLIC MEETING, SO IT'S OPEN TO THE PUBLIC. OKAY. FROM TIMBUKTU AND EVERYWHERE ELSE.

RIGHT. SO I MEAN, THE TO ME, THE LIKELIHOOD OF SOMEBODY COMING FROM EAST NAPLES OR AVE MARIA TO COME JOIN YOUR COMPREHENSIVE. I HIGHLY DOUBT IT'S GOING TO HAPPEN, BUT I DON'T THINK YOU SHOULD BE OKAY.

SORTING. SORTING OUT. OKAY, WELL, I'M NOT SO WORRIED ABOUT INDIVIDUALS.

I'M MORE WORRIED ABOUT SPECIAL INTEREST GROUPS, WHICH TEND TO BE BUSINESSES, ETC..

AND HOW DO WE IDENTIFY THAT THE BUSINESSES ACTUALLY IS IN THE CITY? AND HOW DO WE ONLY GET ONE PERSON PER BUSINESS IF THAT'S WHAT WE ARE GOING TO HAVE? BECAUSE IF YOU TAKE, I DON'T KNOW, YOU TAKE A REAL ESTATE CHAIN.

THEY'VE GOT MULTIPLE FOLKS LIKE ON EVERY STREET CORNER OR VERIZON STORES OR WHAT HAVE YOU OR PHARMACIES.

SO THINK OF IT MORE IN TERMS OF IT'S NOT A POPULARITY CONTEST WHERE SOMEBODY WITH THE MOST VOTES WINS SOMETHING.

IT'LL BE INPUT AND WE'LL BE ABLE TO FILTER AND SORT AND SHARE WITH YOU.

HEY LOOK, WE GOT TEN RESPONSES FROM THIS PARTICULAR OUR ADDRESS.

HERE IT IS. YOU KNOW, SO. SO IT'S A MATTER OF BEING ABLE TO ORGANIZE AND SHOW THAT.

AND THEN WE CAN SEE THOSE DISCREPANCIES. SO HOPE THAT YOU ARE RIGHT.

BUT GOING BACK TO THE THE ZONING WORKSHOP WE HAD IT WAS SO BADLY HIJACKED, THE RESULTS FROM MY PERSONAL OPINION AND OTHERS WERE NOT REPRESENTATIVE OF THE COMMUNITY.

IT WAS. AND I KNOW WE'VE HAD THIS BEFORE. WELL, AND FORTUNATELY, WITH ADDRESSES BEING PROVIDED, WE'LL BE ABLE TO TAKE THAT INFORMATION AFTER THE FACT AND GEOCODE IT.

SO WE'LL BE ABLE TO SHOW MAPS OF WHERE THESE.

THAT'S TELLING YOU THE TRUTH. WHAT? THAT'S TRUE.

BUT I MEAN, YOU KNOW ANYBODY AND YOU KNOW, CAN WE CAN WE GET RID OF BUSINESSES MAYBE TO PRE-REGISTER.

CAN WE GET BUSINESSES TO MAYBE PRE-REGISTER AGAIN? IT'S OPEN TO THE PUBLIC. WE'RE REALLY I MEAN IT'S BUSINESS IS PUBLIC.

WELL BUSINESSES WILL THERE WERE PEOPLE. YEAH, YEAH.

SO IF THEY'RE IF THEY'RE OPERATING IN A CITY, THEY'LL HAVE A CITY BUSINESS TAX RECEIPT.

SO WE'LL BE ABLE TO THEY SHOULD BE ABLE TO CROSS-REFERENCE THAT.

I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF DATA MANIPULATION THAT CAN FERRET OUT ANY ODDITIES.

YEAH. AND A SIGN IN SHEET. I JUST HAVE A BAD REACTION TO THE LAST ONE, AND IT.

[03:50:08]

AND BEING VERY WITHDRAWN AND DIPLOMATIC. YOU'RE BECOME AMERICANIZED.

THANK YOU FOR A POINT OF REFERENCE. IF YOU WANT TO SEE HOW A SYSTEM GOT CERTIFIED, GO.

GO TO THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS. PUBLIC CHARRETTES.

HOW THE INFORMATION WAS GOTTEN OUT. WHO GOT THE INVITES? WHO KNEW WHAT WHEN IT WAS HAPPENING, HOW IT WAS HAPPENING, THAT THAT'S WHERE IT LOST CONTROL AND THAT'S WHERE THEY SAID, NO, NO BARRIERS OF ANY KIND ANYWHERE, NOTHING STRUCTURAL.

BUT ACTUALLY WHEN YOU GOT TO THE REAL PEOPLE WHEN THEY WERE BACK IN TOWN.

THAT'S NOT WHERE THEIR HEADSETS WERE. SO IF YOU WANT TO SEE A SITUATION FAIL AND THAT COST US $2 BILLION PLUS, WE CAN'T LET THAT HAPPEN. I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION PROCEDURALLY, BECAUSE I'M NEW TO THE PAB FROM LAST YEAR.

YOU COME BACK TO US WITH A DRAFT AND THE PAB REVIEWS THAT DRAFT, AS WELL AS CITY COUNCIL.

CORRECT. OF WHAT AMENDMENTS WOULD BE WE WOULD BE PUTTING FORWARD? YEAH, THAT WOULD BE IN THE SPRING. YEAH. AND THEN AT THAT POINT THERE'S SOME INPUT ON THAT.

RIGHT. AS FAR AS WHICH ONES ARE GOING TO BE CARRIED THROUGH.

AND IT'S NOT JUST, OH, WELL, WHATEVER HAPPENS AT THESE RECOMMENDATION MEETINGS OR WHATEVER, THAT'S WHAT GOES THROUGH. THEY'RE REVIEWED BY BOTH PAB AND CITY COUNCIL.

YES, YOU'RE THE LOCAL PLANNING AGENCY. SO NOT ONLY WILL ANY AMENDMENTS THAT ARE BEING PROPOSED COME THROUGH, YOU ALL, BUT REMEMBER YOUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE HAS TO IMPLEMENT YOUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, AND THERE WILL BE NOT NECESSARILY BY THE CONSULTANT TEAM, BUT MAYBE ERIC AND I WILL HAVE TO BE FERRETING OUT LIKE, OKAY, DO WE NEED TO CHANGE CODES? THOSE CODES WILL ALSO BE THESE ARE NOTICED PUBLIC HEARINGS THAT WILL HAVE YOU KNOW, THE ABILITY FOR THE PUBLIC TO COME AND SPEAK AT THOSE PUBLIC HEARINGS AS WELL.

RIGHT. SO THERE IS AN ELEMENT OF RESPONSIBILITY ON BOTH OUR PART AS PAB AND CITY COUNCIL TO REALLY TAKE THAT INTO ACCOUNT, BUT ALSO MAKE THE BEST DECISIONS FOR THE CITY TOO.

SO THANK YOU, GARY. AND IN THE SURVEY PART AND THE AND THE DATA, ARE YOU LOOKING AT HOW LONG THE PEOPLE ARE HERE, HOW LONG THEY'VE OWNED THEIR HOME.

AND WHAT IS THE AGE OF THEIR HOME? YES. SO WE DO HAVE A QUESTION IN THE, IN THE SURVEY, WHERE WE THOUGHT IT MIGHT BE IMPORTANT TO FIND OUT HOW LONG PEOPLE HAVE RESIDED WITHIN THE CITY.

SO WE DO HAVE THAT INCLUDED IN THE IN THE SURVEY.

IF THERE'S ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS YOU THINK MIGHT BE RELEVANT, I MEAN, WE COULD CERTAINLY PUT THEM IN. WELL, AS IT RELATES TO RESILIENCY AND THINGS GOING FORWARD, WHICH IS WHAT YOU'RE DOING, IT JUST SEEMS TO ME IF YOU COULD FILTER THAT TYPE OF THING. I MEAN, YOU HAVE THEIR NAME, YOU HAVE THEIR ADDRESS.

AND THEN THESE ARE SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WERE BROUGHT UP. BUT NOW ALL OF A SUDDEN, MAYBE YOU COULD AS YOU FILTER ALL THAT STUFF THROUGH THE THAT IT COMES OUT WHERE IT'S WEIGHTED TO WHAT, WHAT WHAT MATTERS AND TO WHO TO WHOM.

HOW WOULD YOU WEIGHT THAT? ONLY IN OLDER PEOPLE, PEOPLE WHO'VE BEEN HERE LONGER, YOUNGER PEOPLE, PEOPLE WHO'VE ONLY BEEN HERE A WEEK, TAXPAYERS.

I'M NOT SAYING HOW YOU DO IT. I'M ASKING IF IT MATTERS IF YOU BRING UP GOOD POINTS, I JUST IN GENERAL LIKE THE AGE OF A HOUSE, THE RESILIENCY, YOU KNOW THAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT WHO REALLY CARES SO MUCH ABOUT THE THE STREETS THAT THE WATER, THE STORM AND WHO'S REALLY AFFECTED LIKE THE, THE PEOPLE TODAY EARLIER THEY'RE RAISING UP THEIR THE AGE OF A PROPERTY MIGHT BE INTERESTING TO HAVE THE REST I THINK YOU CAN'T SORT OUT TO AT THE AGE OF THE PROPERTY MAKES A LOT OF SENSE.

SO ON THOSE ON THOSE QUESTIONS, YOU KNOW, THERE ARE YOU KNOW, I'M LOOKING AT THE ONE THE DRAFT SURVEYS.

NOW WHILST I HAVE A LOT TO SAY ABOUT SURVEYS AND CONSTRUCTION SURVEYS, WHAT I ALSO LIKE TO ADD IS THE AMOUNT OF DATA THAT'S NOT USED. AN EXAMPLE BEING IS HOW MANY MONTHS DO YOU RESIDE IN NAPLES AND YOU'VE GOT 1 TO 03, 3 TO 6, WHATEVER. SO WHAT WHAT WHAT DOES THAT MAKE A DIFFERENCE? WHAT'S YOUR AGE RANGE? AND WHAT I MEAN IS NOT A CASE OF WHY INCLUDE IT? WHY DON'T WE THINK ABOUT WHY IT WOULD BE IMPORTANT? WHAT OTHER FACTORS COULD WE BENEFIT FROM THIS DATA? AND SHOULD IT BE? THIS IS WHAT I CALL A COOKIE CUTTER SURVEY.

SHOULD IT BE 20 TO 40, 40 TO 60, YADA YADA YADA.

WHY? WHY GO DOWN THAT RHYTHM? THERE MAY BE A SPECIFIC REASON WHY WE WANT A CERTAIN AGE GROUP TO BE IDENTIFIED FOR OTHER CITY USE.

[03:55:03]

AND ULTIMATELY IT'S THE TAXPAYERS THAT PAY THE BILLS HERE.

AND THAT'S GOT TO BE THE TARGET MARKET, THE PEOPLE WHO PAY THE FREIGHT.

WHAT THE OTHER PEOPLE FROM OTHER COMMUNITIES, THEY DON'T PAY HERE.

THEY COME AND USE IT, BUT THEY DON'T PAY THE BILLS.

OKAY. ANYTHING ELSE YOU HAVE TO PRESENT? THAT'S THE BULK OF EVERYTHING.

ANY OTHER SPEAKERS? WE HAVE SOME LUNCH WHEN YOU WANT IT.

YEAH. ON PAGE 25, YOU TALK ABOUT THE PRESIDENT'S COUNCIL.

I THINK WE TOLD BEFORE. IS THAT IS SUCH A SMALL GROUP THAT NOBODY KNOWS WHO IT IS.

I NEED IT'S PRESIDENT'S COUNCIL AND WHATEVER THE OTHER GROUP IS YOU'RE GOING TO ADD, AND YOU NEED TO PUT THAT LIST TOGETHER.

THE OTHER THING, TOO, IS I THINK THAT A LOT OF THESE THINGS HERE THERE'S NOT A PAGE THAT TALKS ABOUT HOW ARE YOU GOING TO GET COMMUNICATION THROUGH WHATEVER THE OTHER GROUPS ARE.

THEY'RE GOING TO COMMUNICATE TO THE THE RESIDENTS AND STUFF, WHETHER IT'S THE HOSE AND STUFF LIKE THAT.

BUT I THINK YOU NEED TO HAVE A PAGE HERE THAT TALKS ABOUT WHO ARE YOU GOING TO BE TALKING TO? LIKE I SAID, THE CHURCHES OR WHATEVER. WHAT ARE THE GROUPS THAT YOU'RE ACTUALLY GOING TO TRY TO REACH OUT TO IN DECEMBER TO GET MAKE SURE THAT PEOPLE ARE GOING TO TALK TO YOU ON JANUARY OR FEBRUARY AND MARCH. SO THOSE ARE TWO THINGS I THINK WE NEED TO KIND OF EXPAND A LITTLE BIT HERE SO THAT IT'S CLEAR AND WE KNOW THAT IT HAPPENS. THOSE ARE THE TWO THOUGHTS I HAD.

AND I'D JUST LIKE TO APOLOGIZE TO THE PRESENTERS WHO DID A FABULOUS JOB.

THANK YOU FOR THAT FOR SEEMINGLY SHOOTING THEM.

SHOOTING THE MESSENGER. I'M NOT GOING TO RUIN AN APOLOGY WITH AN EXCUSE, SO PLEASE ACCEPT MY APOLOGIES.

OKAY. AND THERE'S A DOCUMENT THAT I PREPARED THAT WAS PROVIDED TO JOHNSON ENGINEERING.

AND I'M GOING TO PASS THIS DOWN. I DON'T HAVE ANY STAPLES, SO IT'S KIND OF FUNKY, BUT BUT THOSE ARE MY COMMENTS THAT I PROVIDED TO JOHNSON ENGINEERING AND PROVIDED TO ERICA AND PROVIDED ERICA.

I ASKED ERICA TO CIRCULATE IT TO THE GROUP IN ADVANCE, BUT I WAS PREEMPTED BY BY ANDREW BECAUSE IT WAS NOT APPROPRIATE.

AND SO HE ASKED THAT I SHARE THIS IN THE SUNSHINE RATHER THAN BY RIGHT, RIGHT.

AND THIS WILL BE MADE PART OF THE RECORD AND IT WILL IT'LL BE MADE AVAILABLE TO THE PUBLIC.

BUT OBVIOUSLY DON'T READ THE WHOLE THING. BUT IF YOU WANT TO PARAPHRASE IT YOU'RE WELCOME TO.

AND SO I WOULD LIKE TO, TO, TO DO JUST A LITTLE OVERVIEW OF THIS TEN MINUTES.

PARDON ME TWO MINUTES. YOU KNOW, I REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR INTEREST IN EFFICIENCY, BUT I'M NOT GOING TO BE LIMITED TO TWO MINUTES IF TWO MINUTES IS NOT ENOUGH.

THAT'S ALL RIGHT. WITH YOUR INDULGENCE, MR. CHAIRMAN. IS THAT ALL RIGHT? GO AHEAD. THANK YOU, I APPRECIATE IT.

THE DOCUMENT IS IS MY COMMENTS ON THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN EVALUATION AND THE SUMMARY OF CURRENT CONDITIONS DOCUMENTS.

AND I WANT TO CONGRATULATE THE CITY PLANNERS AND AND THE CONSULTANTS JOHNSON ENGINEERING, ETC., BECAUSE I THOUGHT IT WAS VERY WELL DONE, VERY, VERY USEFUL TO ME.

AND SO HERE'S MY, MY OVERVIEW OF, OF WHERE WE OUGHT TO BE HEADING.

AND I JUST START OFF, YOU CAN SEE THAT I SAY THAT NAPLES, FLORIDA IS AT A CRITICAL POINT IN ITS HISTORY.

AND THIS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GIVES US AN OPPORTUNITY TO CHART OUT A FUTURE FOR TWO DECADES IN THE FUTURE.

I SAY HERE THAT THAT WE WILL BE JUDGED. THE CITY COUNCIL WILL BE JUDGED.

THE CITY WILL BE JUDGED IN 2045 BASED UPON WHAT WE DO NOW.

AND I WANT TO ENCOURAGE US, AND WE ARE TAKING THINGS VERY SERIOUSLY.

I FIND THAT THAT THE THREE MAJOR ELEMENTS TO ME IN THE PLAN AND THE PLANNING IS ONE WE FOCUS ON RESILIENCY.

I SAY AS A FUNDAMENTAL MATTER, THE CITY MUST VIEW RESILIENCY AS CRITICAL TO VIRTUALLY EVERY DECISION THAT THE CITY MAKES.

IT'S NUMBER ONE. NUMBER TWO. THE RESIDENTS OF NAPLES.

THE CITY, MUST PRIORITIZE THE RESIDENTS IN EVERY DECISION IT MAKES.

AND THAT'S CRITICAL TO ME. AND THEN THIS IS SOMETHING THAT WAS RECOMMENDED BY OUR CONSULTANTS.

THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN MUST ENABLE DEVELOPMENT.

THE DEVELOPMENT OF ACTIONABLE AND IMPROVED LAND USE AND OTHER ORDINANCES.

AND THAT'S WHAT I THINK. WE REALLY WANT TO COME OUT WITH THIS.

AND SO THOSE ARE MY MAJOR POINTS. AND I JUST WANT TO MENTION THAT OTHER THINGS THAT I MENTIONED IN THIS PAPER ARE QUIET ENJOYMENT.

I THINK THAT'S CRITICAL TO OUR CITY. I THINK THAT WE OUGHT TO CONSIDER VERY STRONGLY THE SPONGE CITY PRINCIPLES.

[04:00:07]

DON'T FORGET THE TREES. I THINK THAT THAT HAVING AN AN APPROPRIATE CANOPY WITHIN OUR CITY WOULD DO A GREAT SERVICE TO OUR CITIZENS IN TERMS OF TRYING TO ADDRESS EXCESSIVE HEAT. IT CAN MAKE A DIFFERENCE.

THE HISTORIC DISTRICT AND CHARMING COTTAGES. 38% OF OUR RESIDENTS RESIDENCES IN NAPLES WERE BUILT IN THE 1960S OR EARLIER, BUT THEY'RE FAST DISAPPEARING, AND I THINK THAT THEY'RE IMPORTANT TO THE CULTURE AND CHARACTER OF OUR CITY, AND WE NEED TO PROTECT THEM. EVEN GOING SO FAR AS TO PROVIDING INCENTIVES TO PEOPLE WHO HAVE THOSE PROPERTIES TO, TO MAINTAIN THEM. WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THE NAPLES MUNICIPAL AIRPORT.

THE, THE CITIZENS, THE RESIDENTS OF NAPLES ARE INCREASINGLY CONCERNED WITH THE POLLUTION AND THE NOISE THAT'S GENERATED BY THE MUNICIPAL AIRPORT. AND I THINK WE NEED TO TAKE VERY SERIOUSLY WAYS TO TO ADDRESS THOSE CONCERNS.

THE DOCUMENTS PREPARED BY OUR CONSULTANTS TALKED ABOUT THE COUNTY'S GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT VIS A VIS THE CITY OF NAPLES IN 2045. WE'RE PROJECTED AS A CITY TO BE -6% IN IN POPULATION, WHEREAS THE COUNTY IS PROJECTED TO BE PLUS 22% OR 100,000 ADDITIONAL RESIDENTS.

SO AS OUR POPULATION DECREASES IN THE CITY AS OUR AGE INCREASES IN THE CITY, BOTH RELATIVE TO OUR CURRENT POSITION AND RELATIVE TO THE COUNTY, I THINK THAT WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT WHEN WE'RE PLANNING THAT WE DON'T PLAN FOR A COUNTY WIDE IMPROVEMENT, BUT CITYWIDE AND I THINK THAT AT TIMES OUR, OUR CONCERNS WILL AND OUR INTERESTS AND OUR PRIORITIES WILL WILL CONFLICT WITH THE COUNTY AND WE NEED TO BE VERY CAREFUL ABOUT THAT. AND FINALLY, MY MY LAST POINT IS THAT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CAN'T BOW DOWN TO SENATE BILL 180 AND 250. IT'S GOT TO PRESERVE HOME RULE. AND AND THIS IS THIS IS A BIG ISSUE RIGHT NOW.

AND HOME RULE IS NOT SOME NICE CONCEPT OR SOME PRETTY PICTURE.

IT'S CONSTITUTIONALLY PROTECTED. IT'S ENSHRINED IN THE FLORIDA CONSTITUTION.

AND I THINK THAT THE PAB NEEDS TO DO ITS PART, BUT THE CITY COUNCIL NEEDS TO DO WHATEVER THEY CAN TO PROTECT HOME RULE IN IN NAPLES, FLORIDA. AND WITH THAT, MR. CHAIRMAN, IF THAT WAS OVER TWO MINUTES, MY APOLOGIES.

NOT MUCH. THANK YOU. GREAT COMMENTS. THANK YOU FOR THE TIME, I APPRECIATE IT.

HELPFUL IS THERE ERICA I KNOW THERE'S LUNCH PROVIDED WE HAVE ANYTHING ELSE TO GO ON THE AGENDA AT THIS POINT.

DO WE HAVE A. AN UPDATE. WELL, IT'S A MEMO, SO I DON'T HAVE AN UPDATE FOR YOU, BUT THERE'S A MEMO IN YOUR PACKET WITH RESPECT TO THE TRAFFIC STUDY UPDATE,

[9.A) Traffic Study Update from the Public Works Department.]

NOPE. IT'S INFORMATION. OKAY. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT.

OTHERWISE YOU'RE NOT GOING TO BE SURPRISED. BUT I DO HAVE A QUESTION.

IT SAYS IN THE CURRENT STATUS IN THE REPORT, THE STAFF REPORT, IT SAYS THAT THE JOHNSON ENGINEERING TEAM HAS COMPLETED A REVISED POWERPOINT PRESENTATION AND DRAFT REPORT. IT'S UNDER REVIEW BY THE CITY STAFF NOW, BUT IT SAYS A BRIEF PRESENTATION TO THE COUNCIL WORKSHOP IS LIKELY TO BE FOLLOWED BY A PRESENTATION TO THE PLANNING ADVISORY BOARD AT THE NEXT AVAILABLE MEETING.

AND I'D LIKE TO I KNOW THAT THAT MEETING IS GOING TO GO FORTH ON THE 13TH, CORRECT, WITH THE CITY COUNCIL.

ON THE THE PRESENTATION. CAN I JUST REALLY QUICKLY CLARIFY, PLEASE? WE ARE NOW SPEAKING ABOUT THE TRAFFIC UPDATE.

YES. FOR ANYONE WHO'S FOLLOWING ALONG, WE'VE MOVED AWAY FROM THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. IT TOOK ME A MINUTE.

I'M SORRY. THIS IS WITH RESPECT TO THE TRAFFIC STUDY UPDATE. OKAY.

AND SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT WE DON'T THINK OF AS LIKELY TO BE PRESENTED TO THE PAB.

IT NEEDS TO BE PRESENTED TO THE PAB. AND ALSO IN THE FUTURE, I THINK THAT WE SHOULD RECEIVE THESE REPORTS BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL SO THAT WE CAN COMMENT AND PROVIDE OUR ADVICE AND AND SERVE OUR FUNCTION AS AN ADVISORY BOARD WHENEVER POSSIBLE. I AM SURE THAT THE APPROPRIATE STAFF IS LISTENING TO THIS MEETING RIGHT NOW, BUT I WILL PASS THAT ALONG.

WHERE DOES THE MEETING? THANKS. WHAT JOINT MEETING BETWEEN COUNCIL AND US.

FOR WHAT TOPIC SPECIFICALLY? OH, THE. I THINK, MR.

[04:05:01]

OTHERWISE. I'M SORRY. I THOUGHT WE DID TRANSITION TO THAT ITEM ON THE AGENDA.

DID I JUMP THE GUN AGAIN? NO, NO YOU DIDN'T. WE KIND OF.

I JUST ASSUMED WE WERE DONE WITH ITEM EIGHT. OR IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE ON ITEM EIGHT? THANK YOU. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND EFFORTS.

THANK YOU ALL. IS THERE NOT ENOUGH? THANK YOU FOR COMING.

MEETING BETWEEN US AND THE COUNCIL. THERE IS AN UPDATE.

I'M NOT SEEING THAT ANYWHERE IN THE MEMO ABOUT THE TRAFFIC STUDY. THAT THERE IS AN UPCOMING WORKSHOP I KNOW IN THE SCHEDULE FOR THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

YEAH. WHEN IS THAT? THERE IS. WELL, I THINK THAT IS GOING TO DEPEND ON WHAT WE DO WITH THE SCHEDULE.

IT WAS IN THE SCHEDULE. IT WAS PROPOSED. BUT IF WE AMEND THE SCHEDULE NOW, IT LIKELY WILL MOVE.

SO I DON'T HAVE AN ANSWER FOR YOU PENDING COUNCIL'S IF AND WHEN THAT OCCURS.

WHENEVER IT DOES, WHERE WILL THAT BE? IT WOULD BE IN THIS ROOM.

IN THIS ROOM. THANK YOU. YES. OKAY. ARE WE ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? I DO WANT TO. I'M RUNNING A THING. THINK WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO BREAK BREAD TOGETHER AFTER THIS MEETING, WHICH THE FOOD HAS BEEN PROVIDED IN THE BACK ROOM.

SO JUST SO PEOPLE KNOW, IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE THAT THAT WASN'T ON THE AGENDA THAT ANYBODY WANTS TO RAISE AT THIS POINT IN TIME? YOU MEAN COMMENTS? COMMENTS, CORRESPONDENCE, COMMUNICATION, PUBLIC COMMENT AND THEN CORRESPONDENCE AND COMMUNICATION.

THERE'S THERE'S NOT A PERSON IN THE ROOM. SO YEAH.

SO WE'RE MOVING ON TO ON TO 11. YES. OKAY. I'D JUST LIKE TO RAISE 70.

[11) Correspondence and Communication]

MY CONCERN IS THIS REALLY SHOULD NOT HAVE COME TO US.

WE SEEM TO HAVE BEEN THE REFEREE. THE UMPIRE, WHATEVER.

BETWEEN A DISAGREEMENT BETWEEN THE PETITIONER AND AND STAFF, I FEEL THAT THE.

WE SHOULD HAVE COME TO THIS COMPROMISE PROPOSED BY OUR ASSISTANT CITY MANAGER WEI WEI BEFORE COMING TO US AND SAVING US TIME. STAFF TIME. AND THE PETITIONERS TIME.

AGREED. OKAY. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? YEAH. RELATING TO THE AGAIN, THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

I HOPE THAT IN THE COMING MONTHS AND YEARS IS THAT ONE MISTAKE I MADE PREVIOUSLY AS A MEMBER OF THE PAB WAS TO MOVE ITS SPEED TO TRY AND GET THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THROUGH TO MEET THE DEADLINE.

AND BEING. I DON'T KNOW, IT'S NOT LIKE ME TO BE IN ANY WAY NAIVE.

BUT IF I WAS TO REWIND THAT, I WOULD NEVER HAVE PROCEEDED DOWN THAT ROUTE.

IRRESPECTIVE OF THE TIME FRAME, WE HAVE NOW GOT A GOLDEN OPPORTUNITY TO PUT THAT RIGHT AND PUTTING IT RIGHT.

I ALSO THINK ITS FOCUS IS GOING TO HAVE A MAJOR EFFECT.

AS MY COLLEAGUE SAID, WE HAVE COUNCIL ELECTIONS COMING UP VERY SOON AND I WILL BE EXTREMELY SURPRISED IF THERE'S ANY.

CAN ANY CANDIDATES WHO DO NOT USE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AS A PLATFORM FOR THEM TO SEEK FURTHERMENT? AND IF WE GET THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CORRECT, WE CAN HAVE RATIOS.

AS ANOTHER ONE OF MY COLLEAGUES WAS ON ABOUT PROPERTIES OF AN AGE, YOU KNOW, LET'S SAY PRIOR TO 19 OR WHATEVER AGE.

THEN IF WE GET THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CORRECT, THERE WILL BE QUITE REASONABLE TO HAVE THE WILL OF THERE TO HAVE A MINIMUM PERCENTAGE OF PROPERTIES PRESERVED, WHATEVER IT IS THAT CAN BE ALL EMBRACED IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

IF WE GET IT RIGHT, IF WE CAN THEN JUST THINK IN A WILD WAY ABOUT IF WE GET THE PLAN RIGHT, WE COULD BE IN A POSITION WHERE WE ARE SEEKING DEVELOPERS TO COME FORWARD WITH IDEAS ON PLOT A TO BUILD SOMETHING, AND WE COULD EVEN GIVE THEM SUGGESTIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS, WHAT THAT SOMETHING WOULD BE AND THAT WILL BE REALLY EMBRACING THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY AND THE DEVELOPERS TO DEVELOP IN SOMETHING THAT FOLLOWS A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, AS OPPOSED TO SITTING AND WAITING FOR A DEVELOPER TO COME FORWARD WITH AN IDEA.

WE COULD THEN TURN IT UP ON ITS HEAD AND AND CAUGHT THOSE DEVELOPERS.

IN OTHER WORDS, WORK CLOSELY WITH THEM AND THE ARCHITECTS TO MAKE SOMETHING THAT REPRESENTS A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WHICH WILL BE PREDICATED ON THE VISION.

SO I THINK WE REALLY AND WE ARE THE AMBASSADORS, NOT THE CITY COUNCIL.

I UNDERSTAND THE CITY COUNCIL HAVE GOT THE RIGHT, BUT WE ARE THE AGENCY FOR THE PLANNING FOR NAPLES.

CERTAINLY ON THAT ITEM. D, THE PROPONENT WAS INTERESTED, MENTIONED THAT IT WOULD HAVE BEEN NICE IF HE'D BEEN ABLE TO HAVE SOME CONVERSATIONS EARLIER ON. I DON'T KNOW HOW WE DEAL WITH THAT, BUT WHAT I'D LIKE TO SUGGEST IS WE THINK ABOUT IT BETWEEN NOW AND OUR NEXT MEETING AND

[04:10:02]

BUT I THINK IN RECENT YEARS WE'RE DOING A MUCH BETTER JOB.

AND I JUST WANT TO AND PART OF THE PROBLEM IS THEY DON'T LIKE WHAT THEY HEAR, SO THEY WANT TO DO WHAT THEY WANT TO DO ANYWAY.

THERE'S A LOT OF DEVELOPMENT GOING ON IN THIS CITY.

SO SOMEONE'S FIGURING IT OUT. DO WE HAVE ANYBODY WITH MEDIATION? MEDIATION? NO. THAT'S NOT. BUT ANYWAY I THINK, ANDREW, THE COMMENTS ARE WELL TAKEN AND WE CAN JUST GIVE SOME THOUGHT AS TO, YOU KNOW, I DON'T KNOW. I'VE NEVER SEEN A PLANNING BOARD ENCOURAGING DEVELOPMENT, BUT IT DOESN'T MEAN WE HAVE TO THINK OUTSIDE THE BOX.

MR. CHAIRMAN, I JUST HAD ONE MORE COMMENT ON EIGHT A THE PAPER THAT I PREPARED.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE CLEAR THAT THAT WILL BE ADDED AS A SUPPLEMENT TO THE AGENDA, WILL IT NOT? BECAUSE I WANTED TO. I WANT IT TO BE OUT IN THE IN THE PUBLIC.

IT IS NOW PART OF THE PUBLIC RECORD. THANK YOU.

I'M A FINAL POINT WAS IN PRIOR MEETING, I WAS ASKED TO PASS INFORMATION RELATING TO MULTI-DIMENSIONAL BIN MODELING, ETC. I'VE PASSED THE ALL THE CONTACT AND THE RELEVANT INFORMATION OVER TO PLANET.

THEY HAVE THE BEST PEOPLE TO SPEAK TO WHO WILL GIVE THEM ALL THE INFORMATION, HOW TO AND EXPLAIN IT IN MORE DETAIL.

SO THAT'S BEEN DONE. THANK YOU. ANYBODY ELSE? SO IT'S FAIR TO SAY THAT SOMEONE SPEAKING TO CITY COUNCIL THAT THEY'RE ON THE PA CAN SAY THAT WE SPEAK FOR THE PA, THAT THIS IS WHAT WE WANT TO HAVE DONE. IS THAT FAIR, COUNCILOR? I DIDN'T HEAR YOU SAY THAT SINCE I GOT MY EARS PINNED BACK FOR ACTION AT CITY COUNCIL THE OTHER DAY, IT'S NOW UNANIMOUS THAT THE PAB HAS SAID THIS.

AND SOMEONE APPROACHING COUNCIL CAN SAY THIS IS A UNANIMOUS DECISION.

IS THAT CORRECT OR INCORRECT? SO THE SO THE OVERALL THE THE DECISION OR YOU ALL TOOK A VOTE TO COMMUNICATE TO THE COUNCIL THAT REGARDING THE COMMUNITY MEETINGS AND THE DATES BEING HELD DURING SEASON.

I'M SUMMARIZING THAT. SO YES, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WILL ERIC AND I WILL HAVE TO FIGURE OUT HOW THAT WILL BE PHRASED AND PUT FORWARD.

BUT JUST SO YOU KNOW, THERE IS A FINANCIAL COMPONENT TO THAT, THAT THAT HAS TO ULTIMATELY BE DECIDED BY.

I MEAN, THEY CAN'T JUST UNILATERALLY THE TEAM CAN'T UNILATERALLY DECIDE TO CHANGE THINGS BECAUSE THERE'S A FINANCIAL ELEMENT TO IT, THE ABILITY TO ARTICULATE THAT TO COUNCIL IN PUBLIC.

YES. IT'S NOT FOR VOTE. I MEAN, YOU I WILL INCLUDE IT IN I PREPARE AN AGENDA MEMORANDUM FOR COUNCIL.

SO OBVIOUSLY THAT THE MOTION THAT WAS MADE AND THE LANGUAGE, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE THE MEETING, WE HAVE THE TRANSCRIPT THAT WILL BE INCLUDED IN THE IN THE AGENDA MEMORANDUM THAT I PROVIDE TO CITY COUNCIL. SO BEFORE THEY CONSIDER THIS ON THE 13TH, THEY WILL, YOU KNOW, THEY'LL THEY'LL BE AWARE OF THIS MOTION.

YES, MOTION WILL ALSO BE INCLUDED IN THE SET OF MINUTES.

AND THEY DO RECEIVE THE SET OF MINUTES. BUT LET ME JUST ADDRESS THIS LITTLE.

SO THIS I REALLY WANT TO ENCOURAGE YOU ALL TO UNDERSTAND, LIKE I'M NOT TRYING TO CURTAIL ANY OF YOUR YOUR, YOUR RIGHTS TO FREE SPEECH. AND YOU ALL CAN INDIVIDUALLY COMMUNICATE WITH INDIVIDUAL COUNCIL MEMBERS.

YOU CAN'T YOU CAN'T SPEAK ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD.

WELL, THIS INFORMATION HASN'T BEEN COMMUNICATED TO THE COUNCIL YET, SO I WOULD JUST ASK YOU TO USE A LITTLE NUANCE WITH THIS AND JUST LET STAFF COMMUNICATE THIS TO THE COUNCIL BEFORE MAYBE YOU DOING, YOU KNOW MASS EMAILS OR THINGS LIKE THAT.

JUST TREAD. REMEMBER YOUR YOUR PUBLIC, YOUR OFFICIALS, YOUR LITERALLY OFFICIALS.

SO I DON'T WANT SOMETHING TO BE MISCONSTRUED AS STEPPING BEYOND YOU KNOW, SOMETHING THAT YOU SHOULDN'T BE DOING. AND IT WAS A VOICE OF THE BODY HERE TO COMMUNICATE THAT INFORMATION.

THAT INFORMATION IS COMMUNICATED VIA THE STAFF THAT THAT IS STAFFING YOUR BOARD, WHICH IS THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, THEY'RE RESPONSIBLE FOR COMMUNICATING THAT MESSAGE.

SO MAYBE ALLOW THEM TO DO THAT. AND THEN ONCE THAT'S DONE, IF YOU WANT TO HAVE YOUR OWN CONVERSATIONS WITH INDIVIDUAL COUNCIL MEMBERS, I THINK THAT WOULD BE MORE APPROPRIATE THAN JUST SENDING OUT A MASS EMAIL TO THE WHOLE CITY COUNCIL STANDING IN FRONT OF THEM, SPEAKING WHEN THEY'RE ALL IN ONE LOCATION, IN ONE WELL, ONE ROOM AS A MEMBER THAT WE'VE TAKEN.

BUT WHAT HAPPENS IF OTHER PAB MEMBERS SHOW UP AND DO IT TO IT? THAT'S ALL. EVERYBODY'S RIGHT. I DON'T KNOW. LET ME JUST MAKE A SUGGESTION HERE, I.

I DO THINK THIS WILL BE A PUBLIC RECORD. NUMBER TWO, I COULD THINK YOU HAVE AN ABSOLUTE RIGHT.

[04:15:04]

TO STAND UPON THE BOARD AND SAY FACTUALLY, THE BOARD UNANIMOUSLY SAID SUCH AND SUCH.

THE RISK YOU FACE IS THEN THEY WANT TO ASK YOU QUESTIONS.

AND AT THAT POINT YOU'RE NOT SPEAKING FOR THE BOARD.

THAT'S CORRECT. QUESTIONS. AND THEY SIMPLY SAY, I'M NOT AT LIBERTY. SO I DON'T KNOW WHETHER I.

NO, NO. YEAH. I MEAN, SO USUALLY WHEN SOMEONE'S ON A BOARD, ANY BOARD AND THEY WANT TO GO AND SPEAK AT THE ELECTED BODY'S MEETING, I ASK THAT THEY SAY I'M SPEAKING ON IN MY CAPACITY AS AN INDIVIDUAL OR MEMBER OF THE CITY, NOT ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD. THEY HAVEN'T AUTHORIZED ME TO BE HERE.

SO FOR DOING THAT, WHAT'S THAT? STILL GOT SHOT OUT OF THE SADDLE FOR DOING THAT? LOOK, YEAH, THERE ARE ETHICS THAT YOU HAVE TO FOLLOW.

UNFORTUNATELY, YOU DO HAVE TO FOLLOW THOSE RULES.

I SPOKE AS AN INDIVIDUAL. THAT'S SOMETHING WE HADN'T VOTED ON.

THIS HAS BEEN DEBATED BEFORE AT THE CITY COUNCIL.

MR. KRISEMAN, IN PARTICULAR, HAD A STRONG FEELING ABOUT THAT.

AND I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT MAYBE YOU GO BACK AND DIG THAT OUT, BECAUSE THE COUNCIL HAVE DISCUSSED THEIR CONCERNS WITH PEOPLE ON BOARD, SPEAKING BEFORE THEM ON A TOPIC THAT HAS OR MAY COME BEFORE THEM.

RIGHT. SO I MAY SO TO MY YOU KNOW, I'VE ONLY BEEN IN WORKING WITH YOU ALL, THERE MAY BE SPECIFIC RULES THAT HAVE BEEN ADOPTED THAT PERTAIN TO ADVISORY BOARD MEMBERS.

YOU KNOW, SPEAKING BEFORE THEM. AND I COULD SEE WHY THAT WOULD HAPPEN, BECAUSE IT COULD BE CONFUSING TO OTHER BOARD MEMBERS THAT ARE THERE THAT ARE LIKE, WHY IS THAT INDIVIDUAL? THEY'RE SPEAKING? IT'S SOUNDING AS THOUGH THEY'RE SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF THE BOARD MEMBERS.

SO I GUESS I HAVE TO FIND OUT IF THERE ARE ANY RULES THAT THEY'VE ADOPTED WITH REGARD TO THAT.

BUT IT'S ALWAYS BEEN, IN MY EXPERIENCE, OVER 15 YEARS, THAT IT'S ALWAYS BEEN SOMETHING THAT HAS TO BE DONE VERY CAREFULLY BECAUSE YOU YOU WANT TO BE ABLE TO SAY, LIKE, I'M SPEAKING ON MY OWN BEHALF, NOT ON BEHALF OF THE THE BOARD.

BUT THEN WHAT HAPPENS IF YOU GET INTO AN EXCHANGE AND A LOT OF TIMES YOU'RE THERE TO SERVE THE COUNCIL AND GIVE THEM ADVICE AND THEY, YOU KNOW, THEY MAY PREFER THAT YOU HANDLE THAT THROUGH THIS MEETING AND ULTIMATELY THROUGH THE THE MINUTES AND WHAT THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT CONVEYS, BECAUSE THEY'RE THE STAFF THAT'S STAFFING YOUR BOARD.

I YOU KNOW, AGAIN, I DON'T KNOW I DON'T KNOW ABOUT YOUR SPECIFIC SITUATION.

SO I'M, I'M KIND OF LIKE TRYING TO GIVE YOU GENERAL INFORMATION.

I DON'T KNOW SPECIFICALLY WHAT HAPPENED. SEEMS LIKE MOST EVERYBODY IN CITY HALL DOES WHAT SEEMS LIKE MOST EVERYBODY IN CITY HALL DOES.

WELL, TO MY CREDIT, I JUST GOT BACK FROM VACATION, SO? SO I DON'T KNOW. OKAY. IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE THAT WE NEED TO DISCUSS AT THIS POINT? I THINK I WOULD JUST LIKE TO ENDORSE WHAT ANDREW SAID ABOUT WE BEING FORCED INTO MAKING A QUICK DECISION ON THE TIMING OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. AND I FEEL THE SAME WAY.

MAYBE I'M A LITTLE BIT MORE NAIVE THAN ANDREW IS, BUT I DO FEEL THAT AND I DO FEEL THIS IS OUR OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE SURE WE DO IT PROPERLY AND NOT BE FORCED AGAIN INTO ACTING QUICKLY BECAUSE ONE, WE DON'T WANT TO BE REPENTING AT LEISURE.

OKAY. A MOTION TO ADJOURN. SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

AYE. DON'T FORGET LUNCH.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.