[Music] [Music] [Music] [Music]
Hey, hey, hey. [Music] Hey, [Music] hey, hey. [Music] [Music]
[Music] [Music] Hey, hey, hey. [Music]
[Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] Heat. Hey, Heat.
[Music] [Music] If everyone would please stand and Mr. Robert, could you lead us to the pledge of allegiance? >> I can't stand up. >> Sit in the audience. >> You're too much a rabble, Rob. Yeah.
>> 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. >> I'll sit down.
>> Can we make enough room right here somewhere? >> If everybody scoots down a little bit. >> Can you scoot this way a little bit? >> The problem is I can't go. >> You can't. There are no way. How to have a microphone. >> Just push your chairs down.
>> Oh, yeah. That's >> right. Take it right over there. >> Right. Right between Eric and and there you go. >> Carry it. >> Okay. why they're getting situated there. This is the planning and zoning
board/local planning agency. It's an advisory board which makes recommendations to the county commissioners who will make the final decision on these items. Item H3, H5, H7 are LPA items.
Items on today's agenda will be heard by the county commission on September 4th at 5:00 pm. When a motion ends in any kind of a split vote, a roll call vote may be taken to ensure accuracy. As a reminder, each member who takes
makes a motion or a second needs to turn their microphone on so that they can so that their voices on the record. Speakers with public comment on agenda on agenda items will only be given three minutes.
Please spell your last name for the record. At this time, if any board member has had any exparte communication regarding any application, please disclose so now. All right. Right. Seeing that, I need an
approval for the PNZ minutes from June 26, special meeting, and July 14th. We'll go with June 26 first. >> Move for approval. >> A motion by Deb, a second by
>> I approve. >> Erica, second. >> All those in favor say I. >> Any opposed? >> Now, I need a motion for the July 14th meeting. Move for approval. >> Second.
>> A motion by Deb, a second by Erica. All those in favor say I. >> Any opposed? That passed unanimously. Okay. Item H2 has been removed from the agenda
and I am going to replace item H2 with items H7 and 8. for Mrs. Del Monaco. Okay, you'll be moving into the two spot.
Okay. Item H1, please. >> Thomas Dohy request to change zoning classification from GU to RU-1-7 under application 25Z00007, tax account 2301907
in district 1. >> All right. All right. And sir, are you the applicant? >> Yes. >> Your name and address. And can you spell your last name for the record? >> Thomas Dockerty. D A U G H E R T Y. >> And a little bit about what you're wanting to do. >> Uh, I just want to build a small house
on that lot. >> And you need to change the zoning for that. >> Correct. >> Is there anyone in the audience want to speak for or against this item? >> All right. Seeing that, I bring it back to the board. We got any questions for the applicant?
Mr. >> Chairman, I make a motion we approve or recommend approval. >> A second. >> Okay. A motion by Robert, a second by Erica. All those in favor say I. >> I. Any opposed?
That passed unanimously. >> Thank you. >> And before you come up, Miss Del Monaco, is there anyone here for the item H2, the NDW Consultants LLC? Okay, that's been pulled from the
agenda. >> I don't know if y'all just want to stay here or if you're welcome to leave. We we we need to >> he can't make it in attendance today. >> Excuse me. We we need to have you continue it to a date certain. And the
next we need to have you continue it to a date certain and that would be September 15th. If you >> I'll need a motion to table this till September 15th. >> Make a motion we table this till September 15th.
>> Second. You got a motion by Robert to t table item H2 to September 15th. A second by Deb. All those in favor say I. I. >> Any opposed? >> I >> All right.
>> And just to answer the question, we just received an email from the applicant about less than an hour ago that he was not able to attend. Um, so that is why we're asking for the continuence. Can I ask a question please?
>> Can it be tabled again? I mean there are a lot of people that come and obviously if it was an emergency we would understand that but everybody knows what this is about including the board. >> We can appreciate it if you would at least hear us out. I mean we are all
here for a reason and even if he can't be here you could hear our reason. So if it's could be tabled again, can it happen again like this or could we get a day or two's notice so we could change
our schedule because like you folks this is in our working day. >> We have staff here is going to answer that question sir. >> Uh yes sir. So based on our code, um, an individual is allowed to request, as a matter of right, generally it's up to the board's discretion, but generally
they're allowed to request one continuance and based on the meeting last uh month, the request was continued by the board to get additional information. So this is the applicant's first requested continuence.
>> So it could happen again, >> not based on the request from the applicant. They're only entitled to one request. The PNZ board is not allowed to uh grant a continuence beyond one and this is his first.
>> Is everybody satisfied with that? >> No. >> Is there a reason the board can't hear it from us today? >> Is his attorney not here? >> I'm sorry. >> Is his attorney here present? >> I have no idea who his attorney is. He
is the only applicant on the application. He does not have anyone representing him. >> Can you take it an extra month? >> Could the board do that? >> That's it's it's to the board's discretion. I mean, you can you can
continue it to a to a date certain. >> Not to interrupt, but I have to let my boss know ahead of time before I can take a day off. I mean, I don't know about everybody else here, but this cost me a lot to come here because I feel strongly about it. >> Sir, we understand that. That's why everyone's here.
>> Yes, sir. >> And so, you know, this just dropped in our lap like seven minutes ago. >> So, so I bring it back to the board. Do we want to give table it? Do we have a date
for a month from today? >> Yes, sir. That was the September date that you guys already agreed to continue it to September 15th. >> Taking a vote. It's been tabled to September 15th. >> Yes, sir. >> We did.
>> So, it'll be here at planning and zoning and at September 15th. >> Can I get a a bit of clarification, >> Mr. Chair? >> I can't even see who's talking. I just want to make sure
that >> Hold on one second, sir. You need to turn your mic on. >> Hold on for a minute. >> That the applicant uh had one chance to push this off and the applicant had that chance today and so the applicant does
not have another chance to push it off himself. Is that correct? >> Yes, that's what he explained to him. >> Yeah, that's what I thought. representative of the applicant have a chance to do it in the future? >> No sir. The applicant including their representatives are only entitled to one
extension or one continuence. >> All right. Thank you. >> Okay. We're going to be be moving to item H7 and H8. Item H7 and H8 are companion applications, so I will read them into the record together. However, they will
need separate recommendations. Still, Florida Properties LLC being >> I'm sorry, ladies and gentlemen. Could y'all please keep it down cuz we're moving on here. Thank you so much though working with us. >> Let's give it another go. Miss Trina,
>> item H7 and H8 are companion applications. I will read them into the record together, but they will need a separate recommendation. Still Florida Properties LLC being represented by Kelly De Monaco request a smallcale
comprehensive plan amendment under 25S.11 to change the future land use map designation from NC and RES 2 to CC under application 25SS 00006
located in district 1. And item H8, still Florida Properties LLC, again represented by Kelly De Monaco, request a zoning classification change from AU to BU-1 under application 25Z
000019 located in district 1. >> Okay. Ma'am, could you state your name and address and spell your last name, please, for the record? >> Yes, I will. And good afternoon. My name is Kelly Del Monaco. D E L M O N I O.
and I'm here today representing the property owner Steve Packard who joins me in the front row. So, thank you for your time consideration today. We are here today to request Here's the subject property as you can see in the image in front of you outlined with the black
box. Our whole goal of today's request is to seek BU1 zoning. And in order for the property to have BU1 zoning, we're looking at a change of the future land use designation. Um on the left is the current designation. It's a mix of the
res 2 and the yellow and the pink neighborhood commercial. And in order to get the BU1, we would seek a future land use as you can see on the right, the red, which is community commercial. This is an extension of the existing community commercial and the BU1 and BU2
to the south. So, the reason that we're requesting a BU1 zoning district is because the property owner would like to utilize this property to assist small businesses through the use of it's called different things. It's either flex space or flex warehouse. There's a
lot of different names for it, but it's the type of structure where each of the units for those small businesses have a small office and a storefront in the front with a large rollup door and then they have flexible space that they can use for storage or for fabrication. So,
a lot of these users, what they're focused on is builders and contractors. Think AC, plumbing, um electrical, um cabinet makers, things like that. all of those uses because we want them all to be inside. That's why we're seeking BU1.
We don't need to seek BU2, which would allow the more heavier commercial uses than the outdoor type uses. Um, we have met with Commissioner Delaney, this is in her district, um, after we had made the application to make sure there weren't any major concerns to consider.
Um, when we were looking at the design of this site, um, which we're not bringing the design before you today, but we are aware there are some wetlands on the west side of the property. So our design would be sensitive to that and would push the building and the imperous services to the east closest to US1.
This request is consistent with the comprehensive plan and the land development regulations and we would really appreciate today um a recommendation for approval and are happy to answer any questions. >> All right, before we go there, Miss Del Monaco, is there anyone in the audience
want to speak for or against this item? That's very good news. Seeing that, I bring it back to the board. We have any questions for the representative? I I guess my only question is so it says
there in 2007 there's a MIM small study area and it says that really what we want to do is make this um you know that if this property is developed that the services are you know providing good and services to Mim's residents. So would
that be the case? Yes, I would foresee this is where small businesses would set up shop um for the residents of this area and maybe other companies who need like satellite locations throughout different parts of the county. There's not a lot of places up in Mims that have
this type of use available. Okay. And then one of the other things I read was that the board may wish to consider mitigating the potential intrusion of this land use into surrounding residential areas by limiting this to only flex contractors
with no outside storage. So maybe a binding development plan. I don't believe BU1 allows for outdoor storage. Um we wouldn't be opposed to limiting that because that's not what we need to do here. But I think BU1 protects that unless I'm missing something.
>> Yeah, I'm just I'm just reading staff notes. Okay. So, >> yeah. >> Yeah, we would we would prefer just a BU1 zoning um that we develop within those constraints because the other thing is is the use that we're proposing there. It's like 15 different uses. So, it's not like a single category. Um it's
pulling things from different contractors and cabinet makers and you know, someone could go in there with just an office or something. So, we do like the idea of allowing all the BU1 uses. Okay. So, I guess my question is does BU1
allow for no out you can't use outside storage with BU1? >> That is correct. >> Okay. All right. I don't know why that was in here then. All right. Thank you. No problem. How how many units if you don't mind?
>> Sure. We're still in the the conceptual phases of design because we haven't done the engineering work for the land. But in just a sketch that we had um a local engineer work on for us, we had nine. But again, that's not based on
engineering standards. And so these are about 17,800 square foot units. So it would have the rollup door and the office space with a bathroom in it and then it could be used um in compliance with the BU1 zoning. >> Okay.
>> Thank you. >> You're welcome. >> Any other questions for the applicant? >> Yeah. Um I'm assuming these are leases. >> Yes, sir. >> Not purchases. >> Correct. >> Correct. And and who maintains the
common grounds once you're all leased up? >> The property owner. >> Okay. >> Would take care of that >> the whole time. >> The property owner. Um who would be leasing out the unit? >> Ground areas. Yes, sir. >> You don't rely on the less, right? >> Correct. Yep. They would just be focused on the inside of their units. >> Thank you.
>> You're welcome. >> Okay. I need a motion, board. >> Mr. Chair, I make a motion to approve. >> Hold on. One second. We'll hold that motion. Miss Trina. >> So staff would just like to I guess clarify or have the applicant state on
the record that they understand that no warehousing will be permitted with this use. It is for flex contractor offices, but no warehousing. We just want to have that on the record.
>> Yes. Yep. It would have storage as part of the business and their associated uses, but warehousing as in you just have it only used for storage. We agreed that that's not an allowed use in the zoning district. >> Okay,
Miss Erica, can we continue, please? >> Absolutely. I will make a motion to approve. >> Second. >> Okay, we got a motion on item H7 by Erica, a second by Anna. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Any opposed? And now I'll need a motion
for item H8. >> I make a motion. We recommend approval of item H8. >> Second. >> On item H8, a motion by Robert, a second by Debbie. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Any opposed?
That pass unanimously. >> Thank you everyone. >> Thank you. Item H3. >> Item H3 and H4 are companion applications. We will read them into the record together, but they'll need a
separate recommendation. Cobblestone 2, RVG LLC being represented by D. Scott Baker requests a smallcale comprehensive plan amendment under 25S.12 to change the future land use map
designation from res 1, res 2, CC, and NC to res 6 under application 23 SS 00006 located in district 3. Item H4,
Cobblestone 2, RVG LLC being represented by D. Scott Baker requests a zoning classification change from TR-3 and RU-1-9 to all TR-3 with a BDP under application
25Z 00038 located in district 3. >> Okay, sir, if you could state your name and address and spell your last name for the record. >> Sure. Good afternoon. I'm Scott Baker. Uh, I'm an attorney with Zimmerman Law
Firm in Orlando. Um, 315 East Robinson Street, Sweet 600, 32801. And my last name is spelled B A K E R. It's easy. >> Okay. And a little bit about what you're wanting to do here.
>> Sure. Um, this, as you just heard, it's a comp plan amendment and companion resoning. There is I want to be clear at the outset that there's no new development proposed. There's no changes at all proposed. What happened is my client uh purchased a property about two
years ago. Lender looked carefully at the zoning situation and realized there was some inconsistency between the zoning and the future land use. So the future land use today would not allow this park. Um and that's um so the park
has been there probably since the late 60s maybe early 70s. It's developed at a relatively high density at six units per acre. So, it's an existing non-conforming use. We and we'd like to make the zoning and the land use be
consistent. Um the and we're also proposing to do a binding development plan to cap the zone or the unit count, sorry, the unit count where it is today. So, nothing news planned. And the reason we do that is it helps out with one making the lender happy when they see
that there's no, you know, inconsistencies, but number two is if we want to do any kind of um improvements to the property, not add units, but perhaps do a rec center or do some kind of amenity or something, we're we're
non-conforming as we sit here today. And it it puts us in a situation where we have to go through a lot of additional steps at the county to get approval. There's also a small little house up on US1 that we'd like to you and it's zoned R I get your zoning. It's RU- Thank you
very much. Um, it's RU something-1. So, we can't use that as an office. Uh, unless the whole thing is zone TR3, which allows mobile home parks. So, if any residents are here, I want them to be assured nothing's changing out there.
We just need to make it legally consistent and uh have a unified zoning and land use approach. >> All right. Do we have any questions for the representative board?
Well, seeing that then I'm going to move out to the audience. Do we have anyone want to speak for or against this item? All right, sir. You stood up first. Ma'am, you you'd be second. >> I have just questions.
>> Well, you're going to have to come up here to the microphone and state your name and address for the record and spell your last name for us, too. >> All right. My name is David Fields, Fi L Ds,
and my address is 5930 River Grove Drive. And I don't know how you guys pronounce it down here. It's mo and it's 32976. Okay. So, I have a about a hundred questions. So, and I know that's not
what we're here for today. I got that, but there's no answers on this. What are they actually wanting to do is my first question. >> Well, we don't know any of that information, sir. The thing is is either you're for the reasonzoning or against it because we're just the planning and
zoning. >> And I understand that and that's what I can't find out from the notice that was posted is what are they wanting to do? What's the reasonzoning that they want to do? That's my question which I can't get answered from the post or from anybody else.
And then I also have comments for whomever is in charge after the meeting about again the information on the post because it doesn't I've been to three different buildings and this can be on the record. I have no problem with that. I've been to three different buildings
and nobody exactly knew until I got to the last one which was over in building A and it's the planning and development. At least that lady knew where I needed to be in which building. But I still didn't get what room I needed to be into until I talked to the information lady
out front. So yeah, the complaint is your reorganization reszoning notice doesn't have any of that information on it. It just said this build this address which covers this whole facility ABC and I don't know how many buildings you got.
Now, the other thing is is on the resoning notice, it doesn't tell me what they want to do, what zoning they're changing, what zoning they want to improve, any of that. And I can't find that out. And I've tried to ask people and nobody can tell me.
>> Not blaming you guys. I'm just saying as far as the notice goes. Yeah. So, I don't know if I'm against it or for it because I can't find out what they're doing. So, if that makes any sense to you, because hopefully you guys know what kind of resoning they're wanting to do if you're here for a yay or nay vote.
So, right now my vote is I abstain, but I would like to find out well what it is they're wanting to do. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Well, we don't know that ourselves neither. We just know the zoning changes. So, >> then how can you approve or disapprove if you don't know what they're doing? >> Because if it's compatible with
surrounding properties, etc., etc., we can go on forever. So, is it compatible? >> You don't know that either. Correct. >> No, we do know that. >> Okay. So, but you don't know what it is they want to do. You just know it's compatible with other
>> properties. >> Do you want to chime in here? >> Seriously, anybody? >> Well, Mr. Chair, you don't have to go back and forth with members of the public. They're allowed to ask questions, but it's up to the discretion of the board if they want to engage in dialogue. Um, I'm sure there's staff in the back that can assist you with
explaining what the request is for, sir. >> Oh, okay. Great. I don't have a problem with that either. I can even step outside. I just I'm here today to find out what the heck they're wanting to do. >> And I don't know >> because I live there. >> Sir, if you would look back to the back,
the gentleman standing up. If you follow him outside, we can we can move on. All right. >> Oh, no. I'll be back. Yeah. Hey, >> don't go too far. I just need to >> I won't I won't I want to I'm going to go visit with him. I'll be right.
>> I'm >> No, I don't want to see you. I want to see him. >> Do Do you want to speak, ma'am? >> Well, I can just really quick. I have the same concerns. >> Well, you might want to follow him out and he can explain what's happening here. >> Took me four nights of finally being
able to sleep. >> All right. >> A sign like that is just not good for old people. Anyone else want to speak for or against this item? >> Mr. Chair, >> yes. >> Just a suggestion if I may. Um, if we want to wait for those two individuals
to have a chance to speak with staff, then maybe they could come back and either say for or against or at least have a better understanding of what the request is for. That's at >> set it over to the side and continue on. >> It's up to you and the board. Yes, sir. But that would be my recommendation.
>> All right. items three and four. Then we'll just scoot over to the side until you all have your time and we're going to go to item H5 and six. >> I have a question if I might. Sir, it seems like the applicant kind of gave a rundown of what they were looking to
do. Is he allowed to join them out there and and give them a brief explanation of what he said prior to that gentleman walking in the back door? I >> mean, personally, I think >> that would be up to him. I I thought the applicant was very concise and straightforward in what you were
planning. >> Yeah. >> And just I just thought that might streamline things a little bit. >> So, we'll hit items five and six. >> I'm sorry.
>> The what, ma'am? Can I say something about the river the zoning that they're trying to the general >> they're fixing to come back in. If you want to join that meeting and then when they come back in I'll allow you to speak. >> Sure. Yeah. No, that's fine. Thank you. >> Okay.
You did this to me, Henry. Holy cow. I don't know. This is quiet as John's ever been. >> I'm glad you're here. I'm afraid to jump. >> Miss Trina, I'm sorry about this, but item five and six. Maybe we can get through something here.
>> Item H5 and H6 are companion applications. I will read them into the record together. However, they will need a separate recommendation. City Point Landfall LLC being represented actually by uh
Bruce Moya and Kim Rzena uh request a smallcale comprehensive plan amendment under 24S.11 to change the future land use designation from res 1, res 2, res 4 and NC to CC and res 4 under application
number 24 SS00. 00009 located in district 1. Cityoint Landfall LLC being represented by Bruce Moya and Kimra Zena request a change in zoning classification from EU and RP with an
existing BDP to PUD with the removal of existing BDP under application 24 PUD 003 located in district 1. Before you begin,
I'd also like to um state on the record we actually just received an email a resubmitt of the cityoint uh PDP. So obviously I have not had time to review that as I just received it in email
about half an hour ago. Good evening, Mr. Chairman. Members of the PNZ, my name is Bruce Moy representing the applicant. If this all looks familiar, um it should it should it came to you a few months ago and this board did approve it uh based on the previous layout, but if you recall when
you did approve it, you made a suggestion that we meet with the neighbors uh which we did. Um we met with the neighbors. We also met with the the district one commission office um and we submitted a plan that is very different from what you approved um
based on the input we got from the residences. So uh they had some pretty pretty significant comments and we made some very significant changes. Uh we basically had over a hundred people in the first meeting and we changed I think every major comment that they had uh
including removing access from the subdivision street to the north uh to making it off of US1. So now this project solely accesses off US1. We've reduced the commercial to about half of what we had proposed before. We
removed the access and parking on off of Indian River Drive. We removed all the town houses and it is all only single family with a small piece of commercial in the front which is proposed for indoor RV storage. Very very uh uh non
non-intensive use. Um so we think we've we've gone over and above and met all their requests. Um and then we had a follow-up meeting just a couple of days ago where we went ahead and showed them that this is what we did. So, we went from about 100 people down to about 18
people at the second meeting. And there's a couple things that we were willing to also change based on the what came up out of the meeting. Um, there was concerns about the um uh let me make I made a list here
about minimum floor area. So, we have no problem uh stating that the minimum floor area for these houses would be the same as what is to the north in that subdivision. So they'd be compatible, be the same. Um, and that when we did the, uh, the plat that we would put the
wetland into conservation, which we pretty much do anyway, so we will do that. Um, uh, there was some storm water questions um, and concerns because Indian River Drive is very low. Um, it's just barely above the Indian River and the drainage
there is not very good. So we think we have an opportunity when we work with staff once we get into the design that we can maybe help help that somehow. Um little difficult because the wetland goes all the way up to the edge of pavement. Um and the county has no rightway there. Uh actually the road is
on our property through a a prescriptive easement and um so um and then there was a comment that if we find coina on the property that maybe we could build a seaw wall with it. I don't know if that we can do that or not, but if if we can, we'll we'll sure try. Um, also, uh, we
did have comments from staff and apologize for the timing. Um, but we had come to you guys before we were finished with staff review the first time and now we had some pretty minor comments that we felt we've addressed. Um, mostly open space. We've added the if you've been
out there, there's an existing what's left of an existing dock out there that we now we're showing that on the plan that that'll be part of our open space. Um we re re refig configured the walkway to get it farther away from the neighbors to the north. And um uh that
was pretty much all the things that we changed. And there was some other minor planning comments, but nothing significant that would change the the layout of of what you're seeing now. So, I hope that gives you an idea of what we've done. I hope you're happy that we did listen to the neighbors and we did
make a lot of changes and uh we're hoping that we can get your approval. I'm here to answer any questions that you have. >> All right, I'll open up questions from the board to Mr. Bruce. >> I just want to say thank you for meeting with the residents like you guys said you did and you went back and worked
with them and I'm I'm pleased with the outcome. Glad that you guys did that hard work. Thank you. I'd like to say the same thing. I'm really impressed that you, you know, took the time and met with everybody, made the necessary modifications. So, I
don't know. I I just am thrilled that you did that. Thank you, >> Mr. Chairman. >> Yes, sir. >> Hi, Bruce. >> Hey, John. How you doing? >> Good. Um, what's the elevation of this project going to be?
>> Um, it well, it's going to vary. Uh this has this site basically slopes from US1 continuously to the river. >> Um it does fall quite a bit once you get about twothirds from US1. It has a drop off. So uh we would pretty much maintain
that that configuration. >> So some of the buildings will be higher than the others as you go. >> All the all the construction is on the top side of the bluff. >> Okay. Um, I'm a little disappointed for the residents that they didn't figure
out that if you had maintained your entrance at Roundtree Road, that you could have fixed that problem on Round Tree, which floods all the time because it's very low and now you're not using it at all and so they they don't benefit from that. Um,
I'm a little concerned about the elevation change though because Highway One is quite high compared to all the surrounding area there. You're coming straight off of one. Correct. >> Yes, sir. >> And then you're going to slide down
uh toward the river. >> Correct. >> So, where's all that water going to end up? >> Well, now it just winds up all across the road and into the river. Um so, we're going to contain all that uh through our retention ponds and treat it
before it ever has a chance to go to the river. would probably store most of the water that that you probably won't even see discharged in most storms, but in the bigger ones you would. Uh so we think there's there's it's going to be an improvement because now you're going to get treated water going to the lagoon instead of just a a hill that just runs
right off into the road. Um and then also I think we can work with the county to see if there's any way we can improve the drainage system on Indian River Drive. >> You got to raise everything up. >> I'm not going to raise the road unless the county wants to raise the road. Then we >> lower highway one. Yeah, we'd be happy
to give them the room to do that, but but it's going to be hard between the river on one side and the wetland on the other. >> Yeah, I drove in that area and and it's it's almost 8 feet from Highway One to
the bend at River at um Round Tree Road. >> More than that, I think more than that. >> Yeah, more than that. Yeah, US one's at about 20 and the river roads are about I didn't have my level with me so I was >> it's closer to 20 feet than it was 20T. So >> So there there you know when you first
presented this to us um I thought it was a benefit of what you were doing by introducing your entrance at Roundtree because then you would have raised that elevation down there but evidently they >> they did not >> they didn't opt for that. >> They did not want that entrance. No
>> shame. Okay. >> Thank you. Thank you. >> Any other questions for the or for the applicant? >> Okay. >> All right. If you I'm going to move out to the audience there. Is anyone want to
speak for or against this item? >> Okay, ma'am. We'll start with you. And if you could state your name and address for the record and spell your last name. My name is Sandra Kennedy, Keen Ned DY, and I live at 3711 Warwick
Drive, which is um a little bit north of this development. Um the entire development in that area has one entrance in and out basically from Indian River Drive and that's City Point Road. Otherwise, we have to drive
far north to get out. That whole area floods. But interestingly, the area where this development is isn't the flooding area yet, but it will be with the development. The area that floods the worst right now is where the
retention ponds already sit near US1. Um, in the Twin Lakes area, you've got retention ponds all over the place. Um, and FDOT just moved a project that was supposed to be at this project, this
area, this property down to uh my backyard, a ditch line that went through my backyard. And now the bottom of that ditch line is flooded continuously when it rains and when hurricanes come. And that doesn't mean a hurricane hits us. It just means if a hurricane comes
anywhere nearby, we flood like crazy. and the hills weep for months after the hurricanes and the water washes over Indian River Drive and then it comes up from the lagoon also. So this project which I'm adamantly against the change
in the density in the zoning it is going to increase the flooding because it's going to make it more impermeable. The water will just run right off. And when you talk about putting a retention pond, if everybody is on a flat elevation, that pond is great. It'll funnel the
water down. But what's going to happen is when the water funnels down, it goes to Indian River Drive. And that is a historic road. It's a former Indian trail. And it would be an outrageous cost for the county to have to raise that road. And not only that, but it
would destroy the country buolic nature of that area. the historic nature. We've got historic churches on that road. We have old historic houses on that road. And this is not your Indian River Drive in Coco where it's on a bluff. This is
all the way down at the bottom where the road is very low. Um so this project is certain to cause flooding. Um another thing is that it's completely uh not um compatible with the surrounding area
right now. All of the surrounding areas are very large lots, uh, full acre or more or half an acre and single family homes. And the only thing that has a higher density, Parkchester was built back in the 60s or maybe the 50s before
planning and zoning functions existed before probably before this was even Bvard County. And so to go back to that and that's basically eliminating all of our planning function. The planning consisted in setting the development plan that we have now, the zoning that
we have now is most appropriate. Do not increase that density. Please just leave it as it is. >> Okay. Thank you, ma'am. >> Thank you, >> sir. Would Okay. Yes, sir. Go ahead.
>> And if you also would state your name and address and spell your last name for the record. My name is Joseph Mlan. I live at 30 or it's MC CL A I N. I live at 3449 Indian River Drive.
Um, I just I just want to bring your attention that that D uh Governor Dantis and the um uh Florida Department of Environmental Protection
uh are really focused on Indian River Lagoon and they're spending a lot of money and so is so is Bvard County spending a lot of money to clean that up And um my problem is um I haven't heard
exactly what they want to do, but the flow down if it goes through the the grass and everything else and comes out, it pretty much cleans itself. I understand that. Having a retention pond
when it fills up and spills over, it goes straight out into the lagoon. And as far as I'm concerned, when it floods that much, it's going to stir up the water, stir up the the uh all the
ingredients that uh the Indian River is trying to eliminate and clean up. So, what doesn't uh kill all the the grassy areas. Um, and I think that if you know I I
would hate to see this board uh go ahead and not consider that when the governor and the environmental control have really spent money or are in the process
of spending the money to clean it up. If it just flows out like most of the areas right through a pipe, then we've lost uh a lot of the issue of of having a
clean water. So I have yet to hear an exact and then who is going to maintain it afterwards? Those those reservoirs fill up. I mean those and if they don't maintain it,
you're gonna have the same thing in four or five years and it's going to be filled and spilled over. So my concern is the river is is uh getting, you know, um the environmental
uh flow off of that hill. By time you put cement, you put asphalt roofs, you put people washing their own cars, all that rushes down right straight down to that retention pond. And when that gets down to the retention pond, some of it
lays in the bottom, some of it settles, but if there's a lot of splash, as you know, it will stir that up and run it out. >> My concern. >> Thank you. >> Thank you, sir. Yes, sir. If you could come on up.
>> Sorry about that. I was actually pointing to you, but he came up. >> No, you're fine. Come on. If you could state your name and address and spell your last name for the record. >> My name is Keith Wesner, Wes SS Neer. Uh I'm the owner of 3430
uh US Highway 1 Coco. So that's a long lot that's just south of uh this lot. Um so I purchased that property um previous to this company purchasing their lot um with knowledge of the environmental
conditions on site and the the zoning there. I'm planning on just building a single family residence for my family. Um, so I'm opposing um the the change in the zoning that's allowing we don't even know how small those lots are, but they
are certainly less than quarter acre that will be abuing my property. Um, the other concern I have is um the retention pond that is there to collect that water is along my property and along all that
ridge. There's a weep in the coina. So there's a fissure in the coina that is like a spring. It's constantly, especially in the summer, bubbling up water. I have ponds on my property that are 15, 20 feet above the river that
hold water that that bubble up and overflow down into the river. This plan has retention water or retention pond that is concentrating all that storm water right into that spot where I think
you're going to have a a storm water and environmental issue there that they don't really understand. And I I just don't think it's a great idea to reduce the zoning to res for it
to to stack more houses in there. that's just going to make that issue worse um with the with the water retention. >> All right. >> Thanks. >> Okay. Thank you, sir. Okay, sir. In the back.
And also, if you could state your name and address and spell your last name for the record. >> We'll do. Thank you for having me. Uh my name is Robert Dyer. I live at 3513 Indian River Drive, Coco, Florida. I'm going to try to talk fast, so hopefully you guys can listen fast with
me. This proposal represents a fundamental and detentrimental shift to the character of our quiet single family riverfront neighborhood. This developer's request to change the land use of community commercial and the zoning of PUB is a direct contradiction to the tranquil residential environment that has defined this area for
generations. The proposed change would allow for the construction of 50 or more units and RV storage, a significant increase in density from the handful of homes that would be permitted under the current zoning. This dramatic increase in residential units and potential for
commercial activity is not logical fit for our community's needs. We moved here for peace, not to live next to a highdensity development. While the developer and others suggested in previous meeting these no new homes could raise property values, I would argue that this is a misconception of
why our community exists. People don't purchase these properties to flip to the highest bidder. These are considered forever homes, places where families intend to settle down and pass on to the next generation. This neighborhood isn't built built on speculation. It's built on the foundation of long-term stability
and quality of life. The proposed changes threaten to erode the foundation, not enhance it. The developer is in an engineering firm, and while they may be experts in engineering physical structures, their proposed demonstration, a critical fail failure to engineer trust and tranquility with
the surrounding homeowners. A project that lacks the support of the community will directly impact a is a project that is not well engineered for success. I ask you as a fellow board member on another board and public servants to listen to the constituents who live here. The people of Bvard County already
have concerned that all undeveloped land will become highdensity apartment complexes or storage units. This proposal, which includes both, validates those fears. Your vote to deny these requests would demonstrate your
commitment to listening listening to the people you serve and to protecting the unique character of our community. Tonight, I want to challenge you. I challenge you to be bold and ask the hard questions of the developers. I ask you to look at this proposal and think deeply about whether it truly serves the
long-term interests of our community. If for any reason you find yourselves not asking questions, I ask that you reflect on why you chose to serve on this board. You chose to serve your community. And in this moment, your community needs you to act as if this project were happening
on your own doorstep. It is discouraging to see a consistent pattern where board members are slow to ask bold and curious questions and instead often simply congratulate applicants for meeting with neighbors. While neighbor meetings are a start, they do not replace the rigorous,
critical review that the proposal demands. Please do not mistake the smaller number of people attending these meetings for a lack of community opposition. For many young working families like mine, it is constant struggle to balance work, family, and time and resources needed to continuously engage in these public
forums. Our inability to attend every meeting does not mean that we are in agreement with this proposal. I know my time is up. You can see me as a historian or expert in this community. If you'd like to call me back up. Thank you. >> All right. Thank you. Is there anyone else like to speak for
against this item? Sir, also if you could state your name and address and spell your last name for the record. >> My name is James Sudterman. My address is 3469 Indian River Drive. I am
directly south of this proposed uh uh PUB. >> Could you spell your last name, please, sir? >> It's almost like Superman with a P instead a D instead of a P. It's s u d e r m an n.
>> Okay. Thank you. Um, I'm here representing myself, my wife, and several of our neighbors who were worried about this developer's request to change the Florida land use map uh and zoning from its current flu
configuration, which also includes an overriding overriding binding development plan. Uh this plan has been in place uh for several years and when the uh current land owner of this development bought
it, this binding development plan was in place. So he knew what he was buying. Um so the the developer and uh the their engineer are back before you with a new revision which does address several of
our concerns that we had and expressed at the meetings. Um but it continues to ignore our prime underlying concern which is too much density. The developer continues to ask for the
uh Florida land use plan to be changed to res 4 units per acre for the entire 10.86 acres of residential area in his proposed uh pud. So even though the 10.8 8 acres times
four units per acre results in a potential of 44 units on this land. His pud calls out for only 23 units. And 23 units happens to be uh more than three times the number of units he is
currently allowed to build under his P uh BDP. Changing to a greater allowed density will necessarily uh exab exerbate our ongoing flooding
problems which is illustrated here in this uh little picture. This land that you see the green part is the green part on your map that was just handed out to you. That is that is the it's the the
Indian River Drive directly east of his wetlands boundary. So you can see that it's not just like a little bit of flooding between the Indian River itself uh rising up and the
water coming off of the hills. Uh even with the fact that most of that land is permeable right now, it still runs off and it meets right there at the river. And this uh this flooding goes on
all up and down the road. So um so his pud shows a drainage plan that uh that collects all this runoff and directs it eastward towards >> Thank you sir. >> Okay.
So anyhow still have flooding. >> Is there anyone else would like to speak for against this item? Okay, ma'am, if you could come on up and state your name and address for the record >> and spell your last name also.
>> My name is Diane Burroughs. B U R R O U G HS and I'm at 381 Chester Drive and that's in the Park Chester um development. And sir, Mr. John Hoppping, I'd like to correct you on the statement earlier that you stated about being
Roundtree being a flooding area. We've been there since um 2017 and that that has not flooded the entrance. So um we are just thankful that the developer did take the entrance off of the Parkchester area. Um but I would like to speak also
to the concerns raised for the flooding. Um it is significant flooding on Indian River with that arteesian well that's there. Um, my concern is that not enough is being done to make sure that we're not going to have unnecessary runoff.
And by increasing the amount of housing per acre by ignoring the binding development agreement that is currently in place, it is going to put um that area at more risk for flooding. So, I just wanted to state my opposition to
that. While we are thankful for the concessions that the developer has made, not enough is is being done and that the binding development plan needs to stay in place. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. Does anyone else want to speak for or
against this item? Because I'm going to close it for public comment. He looks like he wants to raise his hand. Okay. All right. And I'm going to close it for public comment. Sir, you've already had
a shot at us. So, anyhow, seeing that, if you could come back up, Mr. Bruce, and if you would like to address some of those concerns you heard, but now, let me get this right. We voted on this. We pretty much approved it. >> Yes, sir.
>> Advised you to go back to the public. >> Yes, sir. >> You went back to the public. >> Yes, sir. >> 100 people so in the meeting. >> Yes, sir. made all these changes. >> Yes, sir. >> Even though you were approved. >> Yes, sir. >> And now got it down to what, six or
seven or whatever. >> Yes. >> Thank you. >> You're welcome. Um, one point I did want to make um maybe more than one, but the there was some talk about this being, you know, high density. Um, that's just really not true. This is actually less
than two units per acre. Um the lots to the north of us are 02 acres. So you and they have no open space, no retention pond. So they're more like four, maybe five units the acre. And there's some that are.3 that might be three plus units per acre. So we're lower than the
surrounding. Um we actually even on the for the existing homes to our north, we kept those lot sizes the same size as their lots. So when we butt up to them, we're not putting small lots up against big lots. for putting the same size lots up against the same size lots. So, um,
so lower density. We, you know, I think you can see from the pictures that road floods because the Indian River actually topped the bank and went into the road. I think that was pretty clear. Um, and then for, uh, the engineers in the room. Um, you know, vacant property still
provides pollutants to the river. It's a direct discharge. So, that those numbers are quantitative. And then we we look at that and then we're we're we're tasked to that we can't exceed that even though we pave and put asphalt down and put in buildings. Our post development rate has
to be less than what was existing. Um and then this is going to be subject to the brand new D rule that's going to come into effect December 31st. So these ponds will be like no ponds you've ever seen before. These will be the best storm water ponds uh in in the county.
um that because we don't have any like them. They're changing the rules. So, the water leaving the site will be cleaner than any other water. And and there's if you look at the map, there's probably maybe maybe a handful of storm water ponds between State Road 528 and Titusville on the east side of US1. So,
we'll be one of the only properties that's that's handling and treating our own storm water to help with what we're trying to do with the Indian River Lagoon. So, um I think we have demonstrated that this is going to be a benefit. Um so, unless you had any other
questions, uh I would hope that you would approve our project. >> Let me bring it back up here to the board. Do we have any questions for Mr. Voya before we make a motion? >> I just two clarifications questions clarify. There was a a comment about an artisian well. Can you speak on that? If
there is one, is it being capped? >> If there is one, it'll be capped to St. John's standards. We'll have to abandon it properly. >> And then I think there was a question about the uh stormwater function and the operation and maintenance of that. Do you want to maybe talk about the requirements to put in like I know um things that I work on we are now required to put in an operation and
maintenance plan that's reviewed by permitting agency. We have to put a budget together so the HOA knows what it's going to cost. I assume you're going to be subject to those same rules. Do you want to talk about that just for a second? >> Yeah. So now currently there's been changes in the rule that that took effect a little while ago and it's going
to get even more restrictive in the in the f near future that the um homeowners association will have will be the maintenance entity of the storm water system. So they'll have to maintain it. We have to actually submit what that entails. What does that mean maintain a storm water pond? Well, you know
nowadays it means wait for it to stop working and then you you do something about it. Well, not anymore. we actually have to tell them what they have to do, how often they have to do it, and how much it's going to cost them so they can budget their homeowners fees to make sure they address it. So, that's
required now. Um, so uh you're going to see that they're going to be mandated um to to maintain the system um like like we've never had to do before and they'll know exactly what that entails and how much that's going to cost them. >> Do we have any other questions from the
board? Was there an attempt to uh come up with a design that exists within the existing BDP or was this something that kind of just did not take any of that into consideration? >> Yeah. So, for for one thing, the BDP only only is for a portion of the
property. It doesn't extend to the entire property. the and if you if you use the BDP and the existing zoning that's on the property and lane use you could get about 22 units and we're proposing 23 and then the commercial of course is on the corridor which is US1 which is all commercial pretty much all
commercial now so that's compatible um and what's weird is that the higher density land use is in the wetland and the lower density is in the upland so basically what we're doing is we're just because we can't put higher density And
we don't want to build in the wetland of course, but we can't shift that density uphill. We have to do the the lane use change to cover the entire property in order to move those units to to the uplands. >> So if the if the BDP that's on it now um
allows for more density, but it's in the wetlands, there wouldn't there's very low likelihood that anything would have ever been built there anyway. So, it's it's probably would not have more density overall, right?
>> If you chose not to mitigate for the wetlands, >> right? >> Yeah. Offsite mitigation. >> I mean, you could. >> Yeah. Okay. I'm just curious. Thank you. >> Um, was this this the property that used to be a a uh nursery?
>> No. >> No. Okay. >> I think so. >> The nursery. >> There's a nursery to the north. >> Yeah. Okay. >> Uh, yeah. Northeast. Yeah. >> North or >> any other questions for the applicant?
>> Well, I'm going to say I believe you went above and beyond, Miss Kim, you yourself also to try to resolve and handle all these issues the surrounding neighborhoods had. >> Thank you, >> chair, if I may. >> Yes, ma'am. for consideration before you
make your recommendation. We do have at the end of the staff report that um part of what they're proposing for recreation is a dry retention bond. So your recommendation would include whether or not that is to be approved. Um that
needs to be waved by the board. And the other thing is again what you would be approving today. The PDP that's in your packet is different from may be different from the PDP I received in email
right at the start of the meeting. So staff has not had time to review that. So, if you want to make a recommendation today, it would need to be um have a clause in there that after staff have
has reviewed the sub the resubmitted PDP that it would be approved based upon staff approvals of that resubmitted PDP. different. >> Yes, ma'am. I mean, it's a public record at this point. It's been entered into uh the record. I'm sure it'll be part of the packet that gets brought before the
board of county commissioners. >> If I could, I know that I'm done, but uh I did go over those points that we what we did change, and that's all we changed is what I went what I stated earlier. It was like four things and most of them were stuff that came from the from the public meeting that we're agreeing to.
>> Okay. >> Mr. Moya, for just quick question. So for the dry retention, it looks like on the plan that you've got a like a raised walkway or something going across down >> an observation deck on there as well. >> So that's part of >> the open space. >> There's a dry retention area, but that's part of the open space.
>> And then we're also going to propose to to to reconstruct the dock, and that will also be part of our open space. >> Thank you. There also appears to be a new dock connected to that dock going across the wetlands leading to maybe a
crosswalk to the pond on the uh to the um river to the dock on the river. So briefly scanning it over. That's a change that I see so far >> um on there. And again, if you read um
in the staff report, uh section 62102 states that the in order to use that as open space, it it needs to be with water and this is proposed to be dry and it's supposed to have a perpetual level of water quality
acceptable for recreational purposes. There is no active and we've asked there is no active proposed on the PDP and he is they are required to provide active and passive. Right now the only thing
that's identified on the PDP is passive. So we need where's your active? >> Yes. Go ahead. >> Do you guys have a response for that since you just did that submitt? Um, if it'll meet the requirement, we'll add a top lot to the plan.
>> Will that meet it >> for active? >> Okay, we'll add that to the submit. >> So, I would chairman, I would make a motion that we approve subject to applicant working with staff on this recent uh submitt to confirm the open space, active and and passive
recreational open space that that gets sorted out. >> Okay, I need a second. >> We need plan first. Mrs. Stickler for details. >> I make a motion to approve the comp plan. A request for us, please.
>> Second. >> So, we're going to go item H5. First, we got a motion to approve by Anna, a second by Robert. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Any opposed? >> I'm opposed. >> Opposed.
>> Sorry. Opposed. >> Opposed. >> We have three opposed. Did you get it? >> Okay, Anna. Now, H6. >> So, I'd make a motion to approve H6 subject to the applicant working with staff to refine and satisfy both the
active and passive recreational open space requirement. >> Second. >> Got a motion by Anna on item H6, a second by Debbie. All those in favor say I. I. >> Any opposed? I
>> the same three Mr. Eric Ruth. Okay, >> those pass. >> So in in your last motion, you missing some items removal of the BDP and
and it would be approved based once staff approves the PDP. So it would be three conditions. Working with Stafford open space. Y >> approval of the resubmitted PDP by staff. >> Correct. >> And removal of the BDP.
>> Well said. >> Okay. Thank you. >> So amended. Okay, we're back to item H3 now again. Do I need to read that into the record again? >> Item H3 and H4, there are companion applications. I will read them into the
record together, but they'll need a separate recommendation. Cobblestone 2, RVG LLC, being represented by D. Scott Baker request a smallcale comprehensive plan amendment under 25S.12
to change the future land use map designation from res 1, res 2, CC, and NC to res 6 under application 23 SS 006 located in district 3 and cobblestone 2
RVG LLC being represented by D. Scott Baker request a zoning classification change from TR3 and RU-1-9 to all to all TR-3
with a BDP under application 23Z 000038 located in district 3. >> Okay, Mr. Baker, would you like to come back up and if you could again state your name and address for the record?
Okay. Scott Baker, 315 East Robinson Street, Sweet 600, Orlando, Florida, 32801. >> And if you could just hit the high spots, Mr. Baker, about what you're looking to do to be sure consistent. >> And Mr. Chair, I only spoke to one lady outside. There was another group talking
to your staff. So, I I I think I addressed her question. She's right over there. >> Um, so what we're doing, nothing. That's kind of the simple answer. >> Correct. Um, just changing zoning to make it and and land use to make everything consistent with each other. >> You're just changing words.
>> Yes. And colors on your map. >> Okay. So, while you stand right there, does there anyone want to speak for or against this item? Okay. Then I'm going to close it for public comment. I'm going to bring it back to the board. Do we have any questions for the applicant? Mr. Baker,
come on. Or come on back up. Yes, sir. Mr. John, >> I was I don't have a copy of the existing BDP. >> Sir, there is no existing BDP. >> There is none. >> We're going to enter into one as a condition.
>> Do you have board approval? BOCC approval? >> Do you have a proposed? >> Yes. I don't >> Has that been submitted? >> Um, it was provided to me by your staff and we have no issue with the form. So, >> so they gave it to you and you have to agree to it and then you'll give it back.
>> Yes, my I've submitted it to our client for signature. >> Okay. >> I've given them a template and so they just need to add in the information in the template, but basically what they're proposing is to limit the unit count to
the existing what's already there, which is I think 173 units. >> They don't want to add anymore. So, they're just that's what's going to be in the BDP is just to limit what's there. >> Okay. I I made a count on the aerial and
I come up with 178 units. >> Maybe I miscounted. >> I think it is 178. >> It is 178. >> So, it's 100. It's six units per acre, though. I can tell you that. >> Okay. So, if the BDP states 173, you're
going to have to get rid of five units. >> Sir, I just don't have that BDP in front of me. I know the form is approved and if we will I think we didn't even put a unit count in there. I think we put >> we can never exceed six units per acre which is what we have today.
>> But I'm happy to add a total unit. >> No, because the staff said that they they had stipulated 173 units and there are currently 178 on that site. So don't get tied up with 173 if that's on the BDP because it'll hold you back.
>> You'll have to pull >> Oh, I see. Yeah. You see what I'm saying? >> Sure. And thank you for pointing that out. >> Okay. >> Any other questions for the representative? I'm going to need a motion for item H3. >> I move to approve with adding the BDP to
cap the current existing units. >> I second. >> Got a motion by Debbie on item H3. A second by Erica. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Any opposed? >> That pass unanimously.
>> Item H4. >> I'm sorry, Mr. Chair. The BDP should be on H4, not H3. H4 is the land use. >> Okay. I fix that and I just move to approve H3
as written. >> M. Are you going to second? >> I second. I second. Sorry. >> Okay. Item H3 as written. A motion by Deb, a second by Anna or Erica, I'm sorry. All those in favor say I.
>> Any opposed? Item H3 passed. Now we need a motion on item H4. >> H4. I go ahead and approve that we do the BDP to cap the current existing units. >> And I have a second
>> on item H4. We got a motion by Debbie, a second by Erica. All those in favor say I. >> I. >> Any opposed? And that passed unanimously. Good. Good luck with the county commissioner, sir. >> All right.
So, I guess we get to say meeting adjourned. >> Nope. We have >> I'm trying. Debbie, work with me here. >> I got something left. >> I know. You may want to adjourn, but I don't think we can. Oh, we got there's one
left, I think. >> Other side. Turn it over. >> There we go. Item H9. >> Item H9. 5125 South LLC. I don't want to say this last name. Kachi Odie and Daniel Werman request a
CUP for alcoholic beverages for on premise on premises consumption accessory to a bar and game hall in suite 3 in BU1 zoning classification under application 25Z 000021
located in district 2. >> Is the applicant here? Okay, then we can still move forward if the board wants to. >> I was hoping they'd bring some samples. >> Can Can we continue this till they show
up? Because I have some questions of the of the owner. >> You got questions on a cup? Look at their parking. >> That would have to be a vote, correct? >> Uh, yes, sir. Certain. It's uh going to
be September 15th. It's the next P&Z LPA meeting. >> Yeah, I'll make that motion to continue to September 15th. >> Second. >> We got a motion by John, a second by Eric to continue item H9 to September
15th. All those in favor say I. I >> any opposed? >> I did. >> Sorry, >> ma'am. Did you have something to say? >> Oh, I was I was here to talk about the property that is
facing the >> for this item >> for this item. Yeah. But I'll come back on the 15th of September. >> Okay. Thank you very much. Any other comments by board?
>> Then I'll say it again, Debbie. Meeting adjourned. The opinions expressed by any member of the public during any period of public comment do not necessarily reflect the views or opinions of the board of county commissioners of Bvard County, Florida, Space Coast Government Television, or
the program sponsor and are solely those of the presenter. The board of county commissioners of Bvard County, Florida, Space Coast Government Television, and the program sponsor hereby expressly disclaim any and all responsibility or liability for any defamatory or slanderous statements expressed by any member of the public during any such
period. [Music] [Music] [Music] Hey, hey, hey.
[Music]