##VIDEO ID:51R4K_D9JHU## [Music] [Music] [Music] exp yeah you can't given requirement that we like want to get [Music] mad yeah next next year um all right got 99% battery got make this [Music] Qui mine say 30 again I know another AC time Z when I go to when I go to Des it s switches F on my phone [Music] serly good evening welcome to veto city council chamber members um yeah welcome to and Obed to the city council if you uh stand up and join me in the Pledge of Allegiance Pledge of Al to the flag of the United States of America the for stands one nation [Music] godice if you can join me in a moment of silence [Music] thank you like to call this meeting to order it is Monday November 5th 4th uh 2024 exactly 6:30 all members of council are present we have no ceremonial items tonight first order of business is approval of the minutes what is the favor or councel I make a motion to approve the minutes of September 30th 2024 work session second I have a motion to Second any discussion okay we'll take a vote all those in favor say I I I I opposed okay next up is public comment I have no written requests is there anybody that wishes to speak tonight okay sir I haven't got it filled out yet you don't need to fill it out you can just come up thank you okay just state your name and your address again my name is Charles Zer and and I live at 1054 wow will Lake Circle oito Florida uh and I'm also a crossing guard as you guys know from last beating uh and I'm coming here for one other thing to add to my complaint about those paper bricks that are being put on the corners of the thing and after talking to Megan I'm actually in the wrong meeting I should be up at seol in one of their meetings and complaining to them for this rough and poor installation of paper bricks in the corners of these uh units uh I also found out that uh red brick absorbs heat and that is also another complaint as you stand there for that hour to get those kids across so not only are they pretty they're nonfunctional and they safety no they've got a problem because the installation uh and I don't think they'll ever get any better because you can trip on them very very easily that's my total of what I'm going to say about the paper bricks cuz I know that I don't think I'm going to get anything done even though they really need to be done before somebody gets hurt also I'd like to know whose uh great idea it was to bring the king uh the High School Road on out to Pine Avenue uh there and dump extra traffic on to Pine Avenue I didn't hear about that and uh it don't help anyway cuz we have enough high schoolers going down that road to get out of school from the back 40 so why are they putting in another road to don't more traffic out there is what I want to know so that's all I've got for tonight great thank you thank you is there anybody else that wishes to speak tonight all right seeing none we'll close public comment next up is the consent agenda what is the favor of council I'll make a motion to approve the consent agenda as presented second all right have a motion and a second any discussion okay well we'll take a vote all those in favor say I I I opposed okay next up we have uh public hearings and we have ordinance number 1752 repeal and replace the Land Development code Mr Hall can you read the ordinance by title only absolute mayor ordinance number 1752 an ordinance of the city of oido Florida amending the Land Development code of the city of Ido repealing existing articles 1 through 18 create a new creating a new article one Preamble creating a new Article 2 Administration creating a new article 3 development or development agreement orders and permits creating a new article four zoning districts regulations creating a new article 5 other specific uses and structures creating a new article 7 non-conforming situation creating a new article 8 architectural design creating a new article 9 concurrency management creating a new article 10 floodways flood planes drainage and erosion create a new article 11 streets and roadways streets and sidewalks create a new article 12 Landscaping tree planting and buffer requirements creating a new Article 13 parking creating a new article 14 sign creating a new Article 15 environmental preservation creating a new article 16 utility ities creating new article 17 recreational facilities and Open Spaces creating new article 18 basic definitions and interpretations providing for legislative findings and intent providing for conflicts providing for separability providing for codification providing for scrip erors and providing an effective date great thank you Mr cop could you give us a brief background uh thank you Deputy Mayor this is the first of two required public hearings that the city council must conduct for the adoption of the Land Development codee uh tonight our Consultants Miss Eliza Juliana Lano and Miss Katie McGruder from kimley harmmer here they're going to give you a presentation uh there's also a couple of items that Dr karea needs to review with you as well uh when they are finished the night we would ask that you uh schedule a public he SEC the second public hearing for November the 18th 20124 and I'll turn it over to miss Juliana see thank you for having us here this evening is that TV working [Music] do we need it to to proceed go ahead um my name is Eliza Giuliano this is Katie McGruder will be um giving you an overview of the change the major changes to the code much of this material will be material that you've heard before but a couple things may be new um Dr K is also going to go over some of the specific changes that have happened since uh we were in front of you in the work session um so we can go on to the next slide so to start with um we we want to share this information both back to you as well as for the public and who may be attending in the public record um the purpose of the Land Development code update of course is to implement the comprehensive plan and this is something that the council approved um that was something that was important to communicate throughout the process that this does not change things that are in the comprehensive plan it describes and gets into more detail and provide standards that enable the things that that are in the comprehensive plan and um there's also some other things that the Land Development code needs to do such as provide for flexibility we know real sites have real variants and that no code however perfectly written can address every single possibility that may come um to the city so it needs to provide some flexibility at different levels whether it be at the staff level LPA or at the council level and overall to make the city a better place by minimizing negative impacts and maximizing the benefits of new development next slide um some of the main comprehensive plan objectives that were top of Mind as we were putting together the update were preventing urban sprawl and redeveloping blinded areas that includes compact Compact infill and Redevelopment more generally pedestrian oriented Urban Design was a major focus of the update because that's something that wasn't necessarily as built into the code in its previous form um another issue was the full service Community which includes a variety of housing types transportation and living and cultural options there's a number of issues related to sustainability there's also issues around preservation and protection whether that be natural historical or Community preservation next slide and I'm going to hand it off to Katie yeah so the first step in tackling the LDC was to reorganize the table of contents so previously the code included Landscaping parking architectural lighting and signage really scattered throughout the code and more by development type so we've moved these to their own respective section of the LDC next SL in the administration article two uh the land use administrator which who is the city manager is getting more Authority on Redevelopment site orders and Architectural design orders uh Redevelopment site orders were typically reviewed by the land use administrator for 20% of a deviation or less and now that is 30% and then architectural design orders uh previously came to the city council for um any request for a deviation and now up to 20% can be reviewed through the land use administrator additionally uh updated the LPA membership number from 5 to 7 and added some public Outreach um section to require that a developer must mail a notice to Property Owners within 500 ft of the property next slide please in article 3 in development agreements there's been an established ment of planning Horizons for development agreements that did not typically have an expiration date and an addition of a new application called a minor subdivision plan and this is to streamline the missing middle housing types of eight Lots or less next slide then this table was created to uh show the correlating future land use districts with the zoning districts this wasn't previously available uh so this makes it more clear which zoning districts could potentially fall within each of those future land use categories next slide this is a snippet of table 4.2 which has been updated to include the new target areas um also height has been added to this table to keep all of those sort of minimum lot use regulations in the same place next slide a new zoning District called r1c has been created to apply to the Milton Square Washington Park Jack ja and Heights SD's Edition neighborhoods uh this is an area with pretty typically ploted 28t wide Lots there's not an existing zoning District within the LDC that would cover this uh adequately so a new zoning district has been created so that these are no longer non-conforming next slide additionally a new mixed use zoning district has been created and that correlates with the the new future land use designation for mixed use and then a consolidation of two industrial zones to one i1 and I2 are now just I next slide this is a zoomed out version of the updated zoning map so this now includes the downtown and other target areas the new r1c zoning district and um just to to mention there's been a lot of changes to the zoning districts we've mentioned but the uh the conventional zoning districts for the most part are staying unchanged next slide lastly we have the permitted uses table so this adds all of the new uh zoning districts as well as Consolidated a lot of the uses got rid of some of the Antiquated uses and then you'll see a new letter M here and that indicates that it is allowed however it's only allowed if it's part of a mixed use development and that's actually dictated by a polic policies in the comp plan next slide I'll pass it back to Eliza um so there's a number of bonuses for intensity and density that are outlined in the comprehensive plan the Land Development code goes into detail of describing how those bonuses are calculated in response to different types of Provisions that the developer would be providing and of course this is the intent is to um essentially reward developments for doing things that the city wants to see happen whether that be more affordable or Workforce housing Green Building or other sustainability measures open space or Civic space cultural facilities certain Transportation uh supportive of multimodal Transportation um as well as targeted Industries so certain creating certain types of higher value jobs or historic preservation next slide um articles 5 six and seven um I'll start with article six because it's the easy one it's gone but most of those Provisions have simply been moved to to other sections of the code um so the content is not necessarily gone because uh because the chapter is gone um Article 5 deals with accessory structures and it tries to bring again kind of organizing all the accessory structures into one place um and establishes new standards for accessory dwelling units article 7 deals with non-conforming situations most of this has not changed from the existing code um the one thing that is new is a requirement that non-conforming lots for instance if someone own owns two lots next to each other both of which are too small they're required to combine them in order to create a lot that does conform to the requirements of the zoning District next slide articles uh eight and nine deal with architectural design and concurrency architectural design there's some new standards around transparency as well as other architectural standards specifically for town homes and multif family buildings um also new is design standards for parking garages and within concurrency the only real change here is essentially bringing the chapter up to date with what the city's been doing around the Mobility plan and the mobility fee next slide article um 11 streets and sidewalks one some significant things in this article are that all roadways are in are expected to accommodate bicycles in some way for roads that are 30 m hour up the actual code language is above 25 M an hour but since we don't have 26 mph roads that basically means 30 m hour up um those roads are required to have protected bicycle Lanes um under under that so the 25 miles an hour and below are unmarked shared lanes and then within downtown dead end streets are prohibited which means essentially culdesac are also prohibited within the downtown core and downtown transition future land use designations next slide um we also address buffers specifically within those target areas those areas that are intended to be connected Compact and mixed use essentially we really want to remove most of the buffer requirements in these areas because the idea is that they should be connected we should minimize the barriers for people for people who might want to walk from a residential um building to a coffee shop or whatever use other uses they might be seeing as a destination in that area it also provides an incentive for these typically more constrained sites to redevelop because they just don't have as much room to accommodate extra space for for buffers especially if they're essentially um counterproductive to the other goals of the district District next slide um with respect to parking there are some changes to the parking requirements um again the focus here was in the Target area so because there's a kind of Park one strategy the idea that maybe you would park and then go to a couple different stores rather than driving from store to store within the district or that you might be walking from your residence or office to one of these uh retailers or coffee shops you don't necessarily need as much parking it's more of a shared parking model um now there were also some uses that in looking at the table were really out of sync with what we're seeing required Elsewhere for these uses so in those cases those parking requirements were reduced Citywide we also added for mixed use developments the option to to do shared parking essentially if you have people users that are coming at different times of day you don't need two parking spaces for cars that are not going to be there at the same time um also added were bicycle parking requirements and requirements that if you're having a drive-thru you have to accommodate all that vehicle queuing on your site next slide K all right so um then there was a real overhaul of the sign code um so we added some graphics here that help to Define what is counted as sign area so um as you can see on the bottom right that would count towards your sign area it's the background of the sign however if that's wrapped around the building as more of an architectural treatment it would not be counted towards the sign next slide uh so wayf finding signs or directional signs um will not count towards your copy area we think they're pretty essential to get people to their destination uh there is a limitation on how many of these signs you could have on the access points to avoid sign clutter um so you can have a total of three per development site or one per access point or driveway next slide for freestanding signs um added additional thresholds that were smaller for different types of businesses and then adjusted the maximum size of the sign proportionally to those different size businesses next slide getting into Article 15 for environmental preservation um there's a new process for tree replacement and Survey I know that we talked about this at length at our Workshop um so we'll hit the highlights here uh tree survey will be required for all trees above eight um diameter at breast height inches on the proposed development site you take the total removed inches with the total preserved plus proposed new inches to determine what your mitigation requirements are going to be next slide so this table shows uh basically it's an incentive to keep your larger trees on the site so the bigger the tree the more replacement inches that you have to provide um so this encourages the preservation of existing trees next slide so once you've done the calculation if there's still a balance to meet the mitigation requirements the developer or applicant has two three options you can plant additional trees on the site increase the caliper of the trees that you plan to plant or contribute to the tree mitigation Bank next slide So In Articles 16 through 18 uh 16 is utilities and there were just some minor edits there and the rec Recreation facilities in open space clarified the types of open space and a minimum open space by development type is set up and then in basic definitions and interpretation we took all of the different uh definitions from all over the code and located them into into one place added some new terms removed some Antiquated terms next slide so on October 22nd there was was a joint work session where uh both boards unanimously supported the draft of the LDC coming forth to the public hearing process um since then LPA has supported um at their hearing to come forward um with the draft to city council for two readings um I'll hand it over to Dr Korea to go over the minor changes that have happened since that joint work session [Music] good evening mayor deputy mayor council members um first of all we are super excited to be here tonight with the um first public hearing for the LC this has been a very very long process and here you we just have the calculation of how many meetings we had with the ldcc was 25 meetings uh 56 hours of in the meetings with the LPA 12 meetings 24 hours so it has been a long process but we managed to get on October 22nd The Joint recommendation uh from both uh boards and in on October um 29th LPA recommended um the draft for um for city council so here we are next slide please we um we have I'm going to review um some amendments that were done um during the The Joint session then um review some changes that staff has proposed after the LDC um um ldcc and LPA s uh joint session that we took to LPA and then I have three items that I still would like to have direction from Council tonight um next slide please so in the joint session uh with the uh both ldcc and LPA we uh agreed to man to propose R1 C r1c zoning which is a new zoning to the R2 zoning District as to the uses in the table of permissible uses except for Multiplex this was a request from um Mr Tom McNamara and that was the intent um of the of us anyway so um that was approved and then U that was reflected in the in the table of permissible uses we also discuss allowing and that is in the draft to um surface parking to be allowed in the um downtown core downtown neighborhood and the CIA zoning District as a by right use and not as a special exception that was also approved the third um item there is the projecting signs and um uh we brought it as part of the consensus and I'm going to discuss that's one item that I would like to have Direction because there was a discussion to allow larger projecting signs um limit their number on the on the building and allow it to count towards the maximum allow allowable area for the building sign area but staff proposed language um detailing that direction um and the proposed standards was to give maximum projection of 3 ft and that was that was agreed upon 3 ft from the wall so it would project 3 ft from the wall but staff proposed one sign per Frontage and with a maximum of 36 ft if it would be in the facade or 45 Square ft if it would be in the corner I'm going to come back to to um discuss that because um I was point it was pointed out to me today that that was not what the joint session agreed upon and that's correct so I'm going to come up uh to that point and ask for um Direction the other discussion that we had was to um and this was just a clarification to clarify the transportation program the bonus for transportation program the code before said up to 50% of the bonus and gave a list of possible you know um enhancements to get the bonus but did not um establish maximum criteria for each one so we proposed in the board both boards agreed upon so these were the consensus next slide please um these were amendments that were done after the joint session and there was were proposed to the LPA one was to clarify um also language in another section of the bonus as to Structure Parking and which would the language that was proposed said that if at least 25% of parking above the minimum required is available to the public for short-term parking then the applicant would be eligible for 50% of the available bonus or density or or intensity bonus if a lower or higher percentage of parking is provided then the de bonus would be adjusted uh proportionately that is the other one um um issue that I would item that I would like to have clarification and I I'll bring that back one um other item that we changed that we added a new row to the freestanding business signs and both um M Mrs McGruder already mentioned that before the code started the free standing signs um for a range for buildings that would have square footage up to 75,000 Square ft and the rule was 5 Square ft by right plus 1 Square ft per th000 um square fet of building so a building like McDonald's which has 5,000 square feet would have an allowance of 10 square fet in in um in freestanding sign and today they have 40 by code so we created another category um because most of our buildings are actually smaller than than that range up to 75,000 so we created a smaller category giving by R the 40 Square fot that they have today and and LPA was okay with that next slide please um these were minor changes that we had to do um also um at that point when we presented to the LPA it was not under the draft but they agreed to change and for us to amend the the draft to incorporate one was just a scrivener's error to include the word site to a title um the other one was brought by our City attorney to include the new section in Article 5 to deal with the state mandate language um referring to communication facilities in public RightWay so that is something that you know we um we had to do and and that was incorporated article 12 we changed also we we scaled back a little bit because the proposal for in this is was for vehicular um use area Landscaping um and buer requirements so this was for um um um a strip of landscape in between parking spaces where we would have to have a walkway or you know u u pedestrian path um the code said that that area had also to be landscaped and it gave so the word Shaw was changed to May because we uh thought it would be too much to have the landscape trees in in the in sidewalks in that strip of of uh of for which is really for a pedestrian pathway um so we we changed that Article 15 we also brought it back um our quote today for uh actually article 14 for the um signage has a landscape area on the base and it gives a minimum square footage for that landscape area in some of the freestanding signs that language was not reflected in the code so we brought it back in the zoning map uh it was a proposal to um change the Zoning for Central Lake Park our Amphitheater in the city parking lot to PL and um um in the next um slide shows where the change is can you go to the next slide please Madison um so that is the the the rectangle in red in yellow that shows you know changing just our our land to pli and that also makes sense and the um LPA uh recommended the change as well next slide please so this is where one of the first item that we would like to have Direction so in the joint session and we had a very Lively discussion um in the joint session it they the they end up lending on having one projecting sign for building side so if a building has four sides they could have four you know projecting signs and we are talking about some folks um call it blade sign it's the long you know vertical um sign that is projected to the building a maximum 3 ft from the wall of the building which we agree with and the sign area being up to the mass maximum square footage that is allowed to the building uh wall um to the sign building area the wall building sign area which can be up to 200 square fet um and there were two issues that was brought by staff one is that uh when we allow one sign to have all the allowable square footage then we may have issues if you have multiple tenants that compete we have this issue with the mall so the mall sometimes you know the property owner gives a huge sign to one um um uh uh vendor or one one store and then we have issues how to um approve other signs for other tenants so we wanted to have some limitations so that this case could not come up again the other thing is really an issue of character um and I will show some pictures so the proposal from staff was to have one project sign put building Frontage maximum 3 ft from the wall with one sign um per Frontage up to 36 square fet or one in the corner up to 45 Square ft um and then those those Square footages would count would be deduct deducted from the um total sign area that the building would have for the wall so if we can have next slide so this is and it's a little bit hard to see but Parkplace has 45 square feet in signage so if I give 200 square fet then it's the you know sign to the right right it would be 3x 66 um of course the building would I I don't show here but the building would be higher right than what is showing there but it would be completely out of the character of the projecting signs that we have the 45 Square ft is the largest do we have today at that time it was a huge deviation and now we giving by by right and um so we would like to bring that to council I have another slide showing some pictures of urban areas with signs and I don't we do not have the the height of those signs you can you can see the stories right so one is three stories um the other one that I think the the the longest one has four stories so a store is usually 40 10 ft so 40 feet in height you know or um that is for input what you're looking for input well that this one I need an input so if you either you we have no limitations people can bring a 200 ft sign or would have a limitation and what would be the limitation I just don't want to make this complicated I mean if we do a Max 200 foot area they're obviously not going to put one taller than the building but then if they can chunk it into separate ones I mean I I guess I don't see the issue with putting more than one on the same face if we have a Max area limitation well in that sense we did not disagree both ldcc joint session and staff okay recommended one um either we would say Frontage because it's really you're not going to put in the rear but you know there was I think there was um a comment well let the property owner decides where to put the sign you know if they want to put in the rear they would put in the rear but we did not disagree on how many signs per Frontage or per facade or face of the building they wanted one per side we said one per Frontage what we disagreed with is how much I'm go with staff's recommendation I I'm leaning towards giving more space to the business owner I don't think people are going to go outrageous with it and I don't see any reason for us to limit how much signage they have if that is what the ldcc and the LPA is is recommending that was yeah I'm leaning towards limiting it to the 45 feet I don't want to see a bunch of signs out there plus I don't want to see tenants not being able to put signs in front of their buildings if if it's uh the space is exceeded that was what one of the concerns of staff and Caron Bley or zoning cordinators here and she's the one that deal with that I'm with the 45 ft too M so the staff are recommendation okay so our staff recommendation is 36 in the in 45 in the corner we can change to 45 the maximum that's fine I'm okay with that y okay directional that have consensus and one per Frontage or one per um buauty facade I I'd say one per facade because if you're walking per front edge well count Frontage though but the staff recommendations is per Frontage right so fine with that I really don't care about signs to be honest I uh I feel like we over regulate them um if we're making it reasonable for a business owner to put up a sign and say I'm here um I I I mean no one is going to build a multi-million dollar building and make it look hideous at least I would hope not and if they are the right size they could still do it so whatever you guys decide is important to you I'm on board I I think the more signage the better so I'm glad that you're yall are okay with 45 over 36 okay so what's the next thing well again is it one per one per size one per front edge per size really okay who whose side is it just me for per side okay frontes okay fine next slide please um the other one is this um language that we proposed um we work um discussing again and the so this is the bonus this is new language um we wanted to clarify that the uh staff recommendation now is to have at least 25% above the minimum required number of parking spaces is available for um single if it's single use it's above the minimum so if it's only a multif family building to be able to have the bonus you have to provide parking above the minimum because you you're not going to compete with residential if it's mixed use then it's 25% of the existing you know um number of of parking that you have but didn't we designate certain areas as mixed use inherent like inherently but as an area so you may have single use buildings even in the downtown you can have only a Parkplace right it doesn't need to be vertical mixed use but we but but everything is considered mixed use overall yes but not not the the the site itself right so if I come with a mix use um uh with a only Apartments project and I want to have the bonus then I have to provide additional parking to serve for the mix used area otherwise I will be competing with the minimum required requirement for a parking for for an apartment this residential we have to kind of protect the the parking for the residential because you or do we I mean I don't think we need to protect anything I the less required parking I think the market will set the the tone for that and the lenders to even build it I look the free market this is not required though this is for bonus density so they get more density it's over the this is yeah this is to give the density yeah I I don't agree with staff's recommendation on this me either I guess my question here is aren't we trying to Define what gets you a bonus right like in regards to parking yeah so we saying so then how how if we don't Define it how do you have a developer coming and say hey put two extra spots do I get 50% density no so like so if you do not put above the limit is that if you provide 25% of your parking that is available to the public you'll be eligible for the bonus even if it ate into your yeah required parking if if if it's not a matter if if you're not concerned about competing with the residential but it's kind of it it brings a a situation that we do not have today that's a free density bonus though not really if I have 100 spots that I'm required to put in and then I say 25 of them won't be locked down for my development and you can use them even though we know my property needs them now I can build 50% bonus more is that correct like minimum requirement 25% above the minimum required well this is the language that that yeah that's the language over there for so the way it is right now it's 25% above the minimum for both the the language that we are proposing saying for single family we keep the 25% above for mixed use you can be for commercial for the office space it can be 25% of your own own um um um number to be available to the public I'm I'm not following this but you guys all know that I I do not believe in parking minimums at all so whatever is closest to that I'm all for that and I think it is not remove the above the minimum yes for you yes I'm in favor of this so I'm in favor of the staff's recommendation yeah I'm trying understand it I I thought it was the other way around than how you just explained it so so it's actually the for for residential it stays the same regardless and and then for mixed use you can designate your your minimum 25% of your minimum requirement so you have let me go back because I think I may not have been so the original language did not have the minim above the minimum uhhuh when we went to LPA we we brought them above the minimum because we thought as cons tuer is thinking this has to be above the minimum to be granting bonus okay and then we thought we went too far because maybe for the commercial it's it's not an issue of competing right but with residential if I have restaurants at night and people are coming back to to their home we need to protect the the spaces for the um the residential use so it had to be above the minimum for residential use but for the commercial and office could be 25% of your available you know um you number of parking spaces available to the public that would count but you could fix this with fees like if if I I once lived in Boston and I had to pay for to be guaranteed a parking spot and in Winter Park in some places the cost of rent is a separate consideration from the cost of parking and I think that is ultimately not immediately but in the next probably 15 to 20 years that's probably where this is headed but if we if we are requiring that parking to be available to the public well it doesn't mean you're not allowed to have a person from an apartment park there it means that they can but if somebody else gets there first they get to be there and the apartment person has to look for a different place and I don't have any problem with a competitive parking situation that may encourage people who live in apartments to have less vehicles or people who are coming to the restaurants to get their away besides driving a car I think that's exactly what we're aiming to do in these mixed use areas council member Britain got an opinion uh I agree with staff's recommendation we got a consensus thank you moving forward um the other the last topic that I would like to bring is a discussion that we did not have in our work session and it's um allowing bars um so the way that um the ldcc and the LPA um discussed and we um uh the proposal was to allow bars in mu and I I'll I'll read it mu um actually even I'm having an issue a new DC um Marketplace MP and MIT hammock Corridor as a special exception and the proposal um that we are having or we would like to have um clarification if you would be open to allow as a permissible use in all the target areas so remove the special exception to the Mitch Hamet Corridor and allowing also in DN so downtown neighborhood in CA and also in C to yes I I don't like spe that being a special exception it doesn't make any sense so I would normally agree but given the history that we've had in Ovito uh I still think that we need to keep it as a special excep exception to to make sure that we can somewhat regulate it and make sure that we don't end up basically with college bars all over Ovito but where in a special exception it it doesn't make any sense you you single out one property owner and say only on this property is it going to be a special exception but all the properties owned by the other same people they get to have it by right it just is a it's a challenging argument I guess I'll bring up I I did bring this up in our meetings and my reasoning was right now where we allow it which is just the core areas is essentially saying all the biggest developers in the city can have bars and essentially make a big party scene if they wanted to and none of the small lots and and transition areas would have the same opportuni so I just wanted to make it fair well they'll still have the same opportunities it's just a special exception it's not a special exception in in any of the transition areas it's just core areas right on here it's not even a special exemption it's a no so when there is a blank it's prohibited so right now it's only a special exception M um um uh mic Corridor it's allowed by right in this C downtown core and that is to replicate the the park and uh in Marketplace and in mu which is a new zoning District the mix use and and we are proposing well to also allow in C2 which is the most intense commercial zoning District we have and then to allow in downtown neighborhood and in downtown uh core as a as a as a right in a CA and remove the special exception to MIT hammock Corridor that's that's the proposal so I guess at the at the bare minimum I would at least request we make it somewhat possible as a special use in the transition areas as well special exception special exception if that's what we can consensus for I I don't see the need for it but I just want to make it at least possible for some of these smaller Property Owners to fre and I I'm even more generous than that I I think we should make it allowed by right on Mitchell hammock it's a a major road it doesn't make any sense to limit that particular place I'd prefer to see it allowed by right all these places youall know that I'm anti-al exception uh like either you hit the criteria or you don't it's a a difficult situation to put somebody in to say you know invest in this idea and then come up here and then three of us could vote and either you it's up to us whether you're going to get it or not with a special exception scenario I still think that I mean should want a little bit more control over it because it can get out of hand really quick but it needs to be fair as Miss Tu said I'm not totally against the special exemption I also see that we're not 15 years into this 20-year Plan and there's a lot of these areas haven't developed yet so it doesn't make sense for a bar to be in there but I I don't like the fact that right now it says absolutely not in any of those areas so maybe the that's why I'm saying maybe the in between cuz I agree with you if I writ straightforward but if we're we're looking for a ease into it I get that as well so I guess it's up to you too I I get rid of this for Mitchell hammock get rid of the special exception get rid of Mitch hammock special exception that's all we're really talking about here right no no we were talking about adding um special exceptions to the downtown the downtown neighborhood downtown neighbor yeah downtown cor Central Central Avenue I'm I'm fine with the special exception for that can I just clarify one thing because Katie just brought me something we sparked some yeah this is intense over here you would think we've had enough conversations over this no problem we're all good okay okay so is that so where are special exceptions required now no I think there's three for eliminating the special can you answer question so to today is only allowed in um in park the code today the code that we are proposing as it is right now is allowing as a special exception only M Corridor by right in um Marketplace in the mall in downtown core in nu which is a new zoning District that we do not have u in the map yet in the this new proposal is could we expand it to downtown neighborhood um CA and C2 and GW is whiteway in m in in m h Corridor then remove the special exception to allow by rights okay yes Council I think the big question you need to add or at least what I how I see this is when you require special exception you're requiring this applicant to go through two public hearings there's a public hearing at the LPA and there's a public hearing before city council and so when you look at the use and you that's how I would be looking at it do I I would ask myself is this a use that needs to require two public hearings in that zoning district and when you look at the zoning districts that are currently in the current proposal you you've only got four uh three of them have it's permissible and then one which is Mitchell hammock Corridor which is West Mitchell hammock Road uh which we had planned to be a more of a commercial Corridor anyway uh should it be a special exception there the staff's recommending that it be permissible staff's also recommending that we expand where it's permissible one being C2 which is the most intensive commercial that we have uh and then as well as the downtown neighborhood the Central Avenue Gateway the Gateway West and then uh the uh changing Mitchell hammock to commiss but that's really the biggest question is when you look at a special exception you're saying okay you're going to go through two public hearings in order to get your use and it's not we're not talking about site development we're just talking about to get your use and so that's one of the things I think that the staff looked at and especially in looking at these zoning districts looking at the lot structures Within These zoning districts that whether or not a special exception really is it too honorous for this type of use in these zoning districts so that's just one of the things that I know I look that when they brought it to me and I said no those should be permissible but you know like I said we'll we'll follow what direction you give us I think if there would be a more protective one would be would be to downtown neighborhood cuz the other areas are really C2 is the most intense you know commercial all the other areas have a lot of commercial you know I don't like making uh hurdles for small business owners so I like putting a pee there but there's five of us so how often do I agree with staff I this is this is a special day for me but yeah I I like your your thought of not creating those hurdles you U we'll just go with the staff recommendation okay so we'll change the permisso zoning so thank you very much our staff you know our recommendation is to city council to read ordinance 1752 by title only conduct a public hearing and schedule the second public hearing for November 18th and then if the motion could include the Amendments that we discussed that would be great thank you okay so that's this public hearing it is open to the public to come up and make any comments do I have anybody in the public that wishes to address yes sir if you could state your name and your address stevenh shank uh one 12 Boardwalk Avenue Avo Florida uh to is one that we just that you were just talking about uh the discussion was very Lively and I got kicked hard on that one because I was all against it uh it's expanding uh any of the bars to the areas except the downtown core um my reasoning being I live through a little bit of a hardship that we we went through previously but it's focusing on the areas that you want to expand and not allowing it and allowing them to grow like I said 10 to 15 years these are long-term things um it's not about really restricting these are just strictly bars not 50% Food Plus that kind of thing these are just strictly bars and allowing the bars and that atmosphere to be in a c two certain areas that are we're hoping and we're putting our efforts into growing and letting them be very special uh Mitchell hammock my recollection because again I went down in flames on this one was that uh it was allowed but maybe it was for special exceptions only but it was definitely allowed and for special exceptions um but that was kind of the reasoning that we all uh talked about uh in ldcc I think when we got together we agree all of us agreed on that but ldcc there was a a big discussion uh the other one is that what's going to be blade signs whatever they call um but I'll call them blade signs that's my easiest name that I re recall them from um we had a good discussion on that and I urge you to go listen to it because I I'm going to disagree with the presentation was very one-sided uh first of all when I saw it it was that wasn't the recommendation at all and that's why I brought it up was that wasn't our recommendation but from The Joint Committee um on the on the sides versus the frontages uh we can give you a couple of buildings that uh Winter Springs there's Dr Fisher putting up a building that if he was only limited he's sitting behind a McDonald's he wouldn't be allowed to put the blade sign on the back sign where it would be seen versus the other places where it's not going to be seen he had signage available in his Frontage then he's at McDonald's there's a beautiful street that everybody passes by great blade sign can go right there and will work perfect you're not giving it to them you just restricted him from that so I would say all the sides the reality is it's restricted by the height Ellington beautiful sign out there you can see the coffee sign right in it if you go look at the Ellington sign there's a great coffee sign right under it you're not missing anything so I'd urge you to relook at that again listen to the discussion that went on that is said no maximum if a building if if a somebody takes the whole bottom floor and they want to put two signs up on each side that go from the Second Story to the top why should they not be allowed it's the building owner that's his Marquee if he wants to sell that right as a right let them you're restricting them to and if it then the others have to come forth a little bit they get signage it's not like they get nothing but if they want to come forth the other the other alternative that we were that were talking about was having lots of little signs along the way and we decided that was kind of garbagey to just have lots of little protruding signs out versus allow this blade sign and go up so I'd urge you to go listen to the conversation it's probably about 10 minutes long because it keeps going on um but I'd say the presentation was a little skewed to One Direction but I believe belied ldcc and The Joint Committee was very adamant it was a unanimous decision to say allow these allow the way uh use use whatever again they're saying up to 250 we don't need 25 story buildings that are going to do that so if we did then that would be a cause of concern and that's all the signage again if they want to use all the signage in that method let them thanks thank you is there anybody else in the public who wishes to make a comment all right seeing none we'll close public comment what is the pleasure of council I move we uh schedule a public hearing for November 18th 2024 for ordinance number 1752 second excuse me you make you she needs it to be with the Amendments with amendments with amendments um but on that note um my preference as expressed before is to allow the signage on each side of the building is that something that you guys would consider having heard that that is unanimously suggested by both the LPA and the ldcc I'm on board I'm on board I'm on board okay so as amended including each side uh and uh I had also um asked LPA to check out some ideas for amendments to adus um is there any appetite at all for for discussing that at this time no okay I will skip it um so this is to me a highly uh improved but still imperfect document uh and I'm looking forward to uh tweaking the things that still that we have yet to discover we haven't quite got right yet so the motion is what now again to se schedule a second public hearing for ordinance number 1752 on November 18th 2024 as amended including everything discussed before is this sufficient Mr Hall okay and also changing the sign situation to be a sign on each side of the building versus just the frontage no maximum with no maximum all right so there's our motion do we have a second okay no Max wait do do we have Clarity on this no maximum square footage everyone on board okay so that is the motion is a second or wonderful second did we have a second there we go we got a motion in a second can I just clarify so we are going to adopt ldcc LPA joint session proposal okay yes okay motion to Second any discussion okay I kind of already discussed so I'm good okay Council woman tuer no I just want to say thank you to staff and and the folks from kimley horm I know this was a huge push to get over the finish line so I appreciate you guys working so hard on this council member Britain good Republic I am good as well so let's take the vote all those in favor say I I I all right Mr Deputy Mayor if I could I'd like to say a special thank you to two individuals in this room and that's Mr shank and Mr Jackson who served on our ldcc and Mr Lopez oh and Mr Lopez as well on our LPA uh they put in a lot of work on this project and so I'd like to express my appreciation to their no we appreciate everything you guys did and everybody else that's on the Land Development code and on the LPA thank you thank you okay next up we don't have any first reading orces we have resolutions and first resolution is number 4513 d24 work order for State lobbying Services Mr Cobb can you give us a brief introduction actually Mr Kelly is going to give the staff presentation yeah it was kind of kind of no wasn't it [Music] thank you mat um good evening mayor Deputy Mayor and city council members uh tonight we have uh resolution 4513 d24 work order for State lobbying Services uh which will lay out the responsibilities of our state lobbying contractor gray Robinson for FY 2425 uh covering the uh 2025 uh State legislative session uh that St uh session begins on March 5th and and uh run 60 days unless they go into overtime uh through May 2nd so uh What uh gray Robinson's responsibilities will be and continue to uh assist the city with uh our state Appropriations requests for Grant services and uh advice uh they're uh being as well as uh lobbying the individual branches of government the legislative branch and executive branch uh for the city they'll also uh maintain contact with key State Legislative uh members of our delegation uh and also um keep us informed of what's going on in the individual committees uh in Tallahassee during the session and also during uh committee weeks and when they are out and about in the community also back uh like to point out back in uh what was it June uh 24th of this year uh we had a work session and uh you all requested some uh conflict of interest language in that uh work order uh We've uh come up with that language and and inserted in there specifically addressing uh what the city and grey Robinson will do if the in the event there is a conflict and also in the event uh of of some um perception of conflict and as well not not only between uh greay Robinson and individual clients but not clients as well and that extends to drafting legislation so uh mine would you go to the next slide also thought I'd update you on uh the recent State Appropriations um with the city of avido with GRE Robinson uh assisting on the lobbying side so 20123 uh we had uh some success with a high water rescue vehicle uh that vehicle is currently in construction and it is scheduled to hopefully be delivered next summer so summer of 2025 I know it's been a long time but uh it just seems to take longer and longer with these things um also in 2023 we're uh fortunate to get funded for a septic to sewer study uh that study is underway by Carell uh engineering our contractor um they are expecting to be done sometime around February of next year um going a little further back we also have the Ido Boulevard Trail connector in 2022 uh that project actually um is slated to either be uh in construction or starting construction shortly uh this week um yes uh it um it did hit a speed bump or two along the way with some title issues um with some land but uh those have all been worked out the extensions have been signed with the state and the funding uh is in place to begin that so then going back obviously a couple of Appropriations for solary Park which is uh completed project and Ido on the Park parking lot so they have um brought success to Ido and uh we're happy for our partnership next slide pleas mine um so just going back to 20124 we did uh have two Appropriations that made it into the uh state budget but were unfortunately vetoed uh they at the last minute by uh the governor uh 900,000 for the uh West hammock uh water tank and $500,000 for the Round Lake Park Community Center uh looking ahead for 2025 um we are uh discussing some uh upcoming projects that may be able to uh get funded uh we we want to take a look at our sales tax dollars and what happens tomorrow with the election uh because they do like a match and uh we uh are in discussion with the fire department to uh utilize some of those sales tax funds for the training facility and possibly uh look at that so that list is in development and should be done uh hopefully here pretty soon um next slide and speaking of bars uh that we already U discussed um we have been working on the Arts and Entertainment District that we also uh discussed with you uh back in June um you'll notice this map might be a little more limited than the last map uh we brought to you in June uh it is uh slightly smaller because uh we have met with uh members of our state delegation and as well as some other uh uh local leaders in uh Church groups that uh uh suggested maybe uh that we scale back into areas that are not yet developed I keep don't extend the district in areas that are not yet developed speak about the downtown core and bring it back to them when those areas are developed so what we would have is basically just the oito on the park development uh if we were to uh um go forth with that um meeting with representative Smith he said that they've done numerous uh entertainment districts over his time uh upwards probably of of 20 or more so the they're becoming more and more common in the state so and again it just as a refresher that is a uh allowing uh restaurants and well not necessarily and any bars in the area to have a consumption off- premise license to uh allow folks to leave uh the establishments and U with an open container of alcohol in in a city designated cup would be the plan so uh we have made progress we have support from our uh legislative uh delegation including Senator broer and Senator Smith and then obviously tomorrow we'll tell a tale on uh whom else might be uh representing the city so uh that's a little update on on the lobbyist activities over the last um few months here since we've U met in June and I uh next slide uh it's recommended that uh city council adopt a resolution 451 13-24 and uh I'm here as well as Mr Cary from grey Robinson is here to answer any questions that you might have you brought up uh representative uh Smith but it really doesn't cover our area any more representative Palencia does do we have contact with her I know um we've talked to their staff um she does have a contentious election tomorrow she does have that and um we'll see how that uh ends up okay fair enough fair enough fair enough I mean we just don't see her Chris she I can't say that she's been engaged with me quite a bit over the last couple years her staff is is involved here and well I have seen her and we have uh discussed several issues she did sponsor one of our Appropriations requests last last time as well as um representative Smith who's more senior member of the legislature and and representative Smith does he he's not our representative but he does out for our best interest he always has okay any other questions any other questions okay so uh I don't have any written requests for people to speak uh is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak at this time okay seeing none we will close the public comment all is the pleasure of councel I move we continue resolution 45132 24 to December 2nd 2024 [Music] a motion do I have a second on that okay do I have another motion I make a motion to adopt resolution number 451 13-24 second all right I have a motion and a second any discussion no they they're doing a great job for us and I appreciate everything that they do for us I know that there was a little bit of an issue there but I think it's been resolved and I think um we can move forward and and uh still get all the Ben benefits um that that gray Robinson has provided us and Chris has provided us thank you very much council member Britain um ditto thanks Chris all right Council tuer no I agree with that okay Madam mayor well our state level lobbyist has something to show for the effort and I do appreciate that every single time out of respect for the election that is a little bit influx I do think there is value in making the decision later uh but yeah if if we're gonna do it now I I've got no no beef with with the job you guys are doing what so move to vote all right take the vote all those in favor say I I opposed thank you Chris all right next up is resolution number 4514 das24 Federal lobbying Services piggyback contract and work order it's you again thank you deor what an good evening again mayor Deputy Mayor city council members uh now what we have before you is resolution 451 14-24 uh a piggyback and work order for federal lobbying services for FY 24 and 25 uh similar uh scope and responsibilities although this uh is directed to the federal government Washington uh they'll identify and help us with Grant um proposals they'll identify and uh help us in formulating community Project funding requests also known as earmarks uh the'll Lobby the legislative and executive branches for us and maintain contact with our uh uh Congressional Delegation senators in Washington DC as well as committee heads and members of uh key committees in Washington um next slide please mine um now I'd like to go over a little bit of uh what they have brought to the table over the last uh uh few years um back in 2022 uh we we did uh receive Community Project funding for uh Force main uh construction that uh is to help us get off of the percolation ponds um uh that are behind City Hall here and then in 2023 we worked on uh the 426 419 phase 3 uh project and it was a officially a county submission but it was a partnership between the two of us um the county it being their RightWay and their Road um they submitted the grant uh the the request for Community Project funding which was uh approved uh submitted by representative Cory Mills and approved and uh passed into the budget next slide please um now we have a few pending projects that uh have made it uh in into the hopper with uh Congressman m we have uh three we're lucky we did very well um we have LED lighting uh which is for uh external uh ball field and pool lighting at Shane Kelly Riverside Park in the Aquatic Facility uh and then we have police technology for 500,000 that is uh covering body cams tasers um and then how far that money can go uh would be to also hopefully include licensed plate readers or virtual reality training uh devices to use those uh uh use that equipment and then lastly we have a Sweetwater Creek restoration uh which is a mil 250,000 and that would uh do uh base Creek stabilization uh flood protection water quality improvement type uh as part of the Basin management action plan Lake Jessup so uh these are currently um I guess I would say they were they were in process um we're not I don't expect to see any action on them throughout uh the rest of this year obviously with the presidential election tomorrow and uh the makeup of Congress in question in a lame duck session after that uh typically everybody just sort of hunkers down and we are in a uh continuing resolution which continues the previous federal budget uh through December I believe so that that would stay in uh effect till December then Congress would have to either pass a budget um which I doubt they would until after uh January when they would swear in the new members and the new president so you're looking at like at least four months five months before you even know if this is solid uh correct okay so it it yeah unfortunately it does not operate like the state where they have to have to pass a budget every year uh they can play a little loose with it and operate under the continuing resolutions next slide please mine uh so lastly we have um a uh authorization which is a little different uh than an appropriation um an authorization is basically it sets the project as a priority or it puts it in a project list and then uh gives um Credence to the request uh funding so there is no uh technical funding yet um but this is uh passed in the 2024 water W Bill water res resources development act and this is for our LFA test Wells so it's it's okay that we don't have the funds now because we are a number of years away from actually constructing those Wells um but uh Congressman Mills did assist with the lobbyist in getting us uh $10 million uh authorized in that so now what we would do is would we would go in a federal budget when it's appropriate and request that as an appropriation and then they turn and look at the uh Water Resource development act as justification for that large expenditure CU typically if you noticed uh the numbers in the other community Project funding requests were in the million 500,000 range about what we'd see in the State uh State bill um but so this is much larger and so that does give us Credence for act and asking for that larger amount so um that's sort of an update of of what uh the lobbyists have been up to uh and uh it is recommended that the city council adopt resolution 4514 d24 and I'm I can answer any questions that you might have questions okay thank you all right I have no written request to speak is there anybody in the audience that wishes to speak tonight okay seeing none we will close that what is the pleasure of council make a motion to adopt resolution number 4514 d24 second all right I have a motion to second any discussion well I I would say that uh Congressman Mills office and Maurice uh cin uh it they've worked very well together I've been up there twice in the last year and both times the lobbyist came out and met with us and and got those projects on the list and I will say that it's going to be more competitive in the years to come because some of our colleagues that went up uh in May did not know that congressman has has a budget for projects and I think he has each Congressman has a limited budget so it's going to become a little bit more competitive in the future so we're going to need the support um going forward Cil tuer I'm good all right M May well I would prefer to continue this one uh until December 2nd and the reason uh for that it's even more striking at the federal level we do not know how the elections are going to turn out and federal level lobbyists are not typically agnostic so there's a level of partisanship there and I don't think it is wise for us to to lock this in I also appreciate that Mr Kelly uh pointed out that Congressman Mills put these things on the list and I think we all realize how well we work together and I don't need I don't think we need the middleman um and I think Mr Kelly has given too much credit to our lobbyist for a lot of work that you're doing so we find the grants we fill out the grants and our staff is doing all the work and we're just following the rules the preet out rules for how do you win alloca how do you win Appropriations how do you win grants how do you you how do you succeed in these things and it really has very little to do with the lobbyist so I I would rather if if you guys are open to discussing this at least after the election I think that would be a prudent thing for us to do were you going to change a motion no okay your second no we've gone over this lot okay very good let's go ahead and take a vote all those in favor say I I opposed n okay we are on no discussion items we're on a city manager report uh thank you Deputy Mayor I only really have one thing mine can you uh pull up uh this weekend we we launched our um debris management um dashboard I think is what it's called so we just wanted to show it to you it's been up actually been updated to today uh we're currently in phase one which is our vegetative uh debris collection and the first thing that comes up when you click on to it the the first page that meline went to was our hurricane Milton page and so there's a thing there it's there's a picture of the map you click on the map and then the first thing that comes up is the debris collection update and this is where we'll be updating folks as we progress through like I said finishing out the first phase and then we'll be going into the second phase and it gives it gives an idea of what we're doing uh today uh I can say that we're about 74% done with the uh with the first phase of vegetative collection uh we have five vehicles in the city on the uh today as well this week the uh C what we call CND which is mostly fence panel uh that's starting this week and they're going to start on the east side and work West that way they don't get in get into conflict with the vegetative trucks that are in the west side of west side of the city and you can see that we're going to update this box as we go go through this m all you have to do is say I've read the message and hit okay and then the map will appear and uh M if you could scoop the map over to the left a little bit uh you can do it there we go perfect uh green means that we the streets have been checked uh cleared uh the brownish orange color that's uh those haven't been done yet uh we do have some gated communities in the city and so the GED communities we have to have special approval from femo first thing we have to have is a right of Entry uh agreement in those and once we get the right agreement then we we um we can go into those communities we also have to apply to FEMA for an application but if as long as we have the agreement they'll let us go ahead and go in the red ones are ones where we don't have the agreement just yet the yellow ones we do have the agreement so we'll be able to move forward with those as well so I see that live oak is still green Live Oak is green because most of the except for a you and that's one of the things there are spots around town that were missed uh it could have been that the truck went by and the stuff wasn't out there and they came out was out there it could be that the the stuff was placed next to something either like a light pole or storm water inlet or near a tree that was low hanging that they couldn't get the claw in there there may have been reasons why they couldn't get it uh they may have just missed it quite honestly well how do how are we going to get it not missed because it's happening all over town that we're missing a lot one of the things that we're doing is uh we're going we're setting up a an online form that people can fill out we'll get the form we're going to be funneling that to the contractor and say Hey you missed this on the first phase you need to go and we need to make sure that it's done uh and so but anyway like I said we're about 74% done they anticipate F being done with the first phase this week and uh which is great since we've been doing it for about two weeks now and then they'll be starting into the Second Sweep and they're once again they're going to start on the east side and go west so I just wanted to show this to you this is on this is on the city's web page and uh people can go in there is a search button up on theer right hand corner which you can type in your address and it'll take you right to your right to your home uh the legend is out is showing right now but there is a legend button up there there's also some layer buttons the layer button only really has one layer and that's the layer that you see uh there's another button there where you can pull up aerial photos if you want to if you want to the base map Gallery there and you can also share it with people which is the farthest button onto the right but I just wanted to show this to you like I said we've covered about 74% uh about 10,000 cubic yards have been collected so far today so just wanted to share that with you and um that's my report Dey May Okay so attorney's report uh just one quick thing mayor uh a few minutes ago you mentioned the PACE program and the changes I didn't know whether you wanted a discussion or um where we stand I looked looked into it and the city has signed on to the program what program the pace PACE program the proper the PACE program yeah and you there's some recent changes to it and you had mentioned that it came up and and so I looked into it and and Mr C furnished me the copy of the resolution where the city has signed on to it so we're part of the PACE program now so the only but we can opt out yeah that would be the only if the city eled to opt out we would that's what're what I think all of us kind of were interested in learning about is when's the next possible opportunity to opt out to try to make life easier for the property appraiser and have no predatory loans lingering that we're assisting with okay I can get all the details if you want to when when I when I saw that when I found out that we had opted in I thought well is stopped out but I don't know whe that's what you were looking for if want to know what the update was cuz all they did was basically change to do do a truce and lending type thing and I've gone through all the pros and cons and there's you know it's all over the board as what it is so forth I didn't know whether um you wanted to look in want me to look into how do we opt out or and I can do that if that's what you want that would be great I will do that thank you that's it nothing else for me okay great first up council member tuer okay um first of I had Mr Kelly start sending me he sent me the first one of like the month summary of what we were getting into the city on our fix it forms I was just curious on what's actually being reported and it and it came it was easy to see and you can actually see what residents are reporting kind of make sure we're keeping our eyes on anything so if anybody else is interested I thought it was really useful thank you for sending that to me um the other thing I wanted to bring up is a sign ordinance if we can revisit that and fix this so we're not getting a million phone calls over candidate signs at polling locations I would like that to come up in the future so it's not just election day it's early voting and we can put the issue to rest if I have consensus to revisit that yes okay across the board so can we get that um and then I don't know if anybody else received this email about the mall stop signs came up again as being a hazardous intersection with the stop signs I know we put flags on top is there any I guess indicator of what we're doing with the intersection of the mall or how that's progressing Bobby's got an update cuz I sent him the email over the weekend too okay thank you just has a second opinion I had the county go out and look at it today with their staff and the only the only two issues they could find wrong with it where the stop signs weren't the same size for whatever reason I'd haven't noticed it but I guess they're not quite the same and the you ever seen the little rectangular sign at the bottom it says all way so you got a stop sign it says all way we didn't have those that's the only complaint they had I think it's a habit issue right I'm sorry it's a habit issue yeah and and my comment is you know based on my experience here is if you can run a stop sign you can run a traffic signal you can run a red light I mean the cheap tell you they just don't see them my my in-laws almost got hit this weekend in that same intersection um because a car just completely blew through it they they just don't see it I've heard that and we're going to put some put flash on we put Rumble rumble strips or something in front of them just to alert people or anything because we make it one lane it's going to cause a bad accident over there it really is I guess you know with this it's a habit thing but if people are doing the right thing there's clearly a lot of people not so I don't if there's something we can do to prevent someone who's not paying attention to pay attention more it keeps coming up we've had a lot of emails about this one um but I know it's been long time so people are used to it yeah from a traffic perspective as an injuring perspective I would I have a counter opinion of that yeah but could we could we put the motorcycle cops out there and started enforcing it um one other I guess I agree with you because there's really nothing wrong with the intersection but did we put like flashing lights to say the intersection has changed and leave them up there for a month because I know they've done that they weren't up there for a month cuz we had to move them out is there any way to put those back cuz that's an easy fix right just a temporary right now they could go back yes cuz they're not being used so maybe that's what it is like hey pay attention we changed it cuz I think that's what it is I think it's a habit issue well what about a stop like a flashing stop sign ahead or I mean anything we have another Improvement that we're working on is to put flashers on those stop signs okay because it's it's a problem it's going to cause a bad accident it really is uh the answer about the motorcycle officers we will be putting an increased enforcement out on that on on that intersection we have been pretty lenient with trying to just warn people cuz obviously it's a change we get that it's a you know used to a red light red light's not there so we mostly have been giving warnings unless they have other violations on their license or something like that that's probably going to change uh because it's time to get people's attention and before the accident does happen so yes we will be out there um not not all the time but we will have a greatly increased presence there so okay you know it might be impractical and I don't how long is this going to uh be in place till we get a new light Mr Brit I'll share with you what I shared with Mr bford earlier is it currently we are getting a scope of services from one of our Consultants to look at it do a warrant analysis to see if it technically should be there in the first place the signal because they installed it with the mall development way back when so none of us have any there's no memory of any or what um exper thank you that's exactly what I'm looking for um institutional knowledge um about what happened there and why so I I suspect they just put it in at the time and and now if we do the run the numbers and see is a signal Justified if it is we'll go back and we'll put the arm in but understand it's $7 to $100,000 of money we haven't budgeted and then it'll take at least four months at a minimum to design it and to order the thing because it took 12 weeks just to get the Mast arm for the the turn lane at Lockwood Mitchell hammock so it's a long it's going to be there for a while so there's nothing wrong getting people used to it that's what I'm hearing well back in the old days if you had a four-way stop a lot of times there was a sign on a cable hanging over the intersection that stop stop stop stop and people came up they look up and they see that and they noce stop I think I've seen pictures of what you're talking about yeah it's you know it's probably you go on a highway you know it's mostly a a rural place you know you're going down the highway 50 mph and there there's a sign hanging up above the intersection that says stop because they don't have a light there and they don't miss it but flashing flashing lights on the stop sign yeah there there's more things we can try I thought the flags would be enough obviously there's still people running it um to me when I go up to it of course I know it's there it's very visible it's not hiding in plain side anymore so a lot of it still you know but I'll go back to if somebody wants to run it they will so yeah and while you're up here um to Mr zuber's Point have we had a chance to reach out to the county and talk about I've done two things I've had our inspect look at it he was supposed to follow up with the fdot project manager I've also emailed the fdot project manager asked them to have their inspector look at it to see if it meets ADA compliance if it meets ADA compliance they're not going to do anything right if it doesn't they'll fix it okay so all right they're they're aware of it now so thank you yep great thank you Mr W and I would just say uh Happy election day tomorrow so May the odds ever be in your favor thank you all right Madam mayor on on the election day signs want to make sure that our code enforcement people and anybody involved in that are aware that tomorrow even though we have previously said that signs are not allowed on city-owned property turns out our ordinance says they are which I guess nobody had ever really read closely until the last couple of weeks um so I don't know who needs to know that but I've said it out loud and now we know that though previously they were excluded from Center Lake Lane and in front of City Hall under our own ordinance now they are allowed and we are and we are aware of it yes tomorrow okay tomorrow only tomorrow until we have a discussion about doing something perhaps that is different from that um but at least we have something looser than ever previously thought before that can happen on Election Day uh wanted to bring up the idea of a Bike Rodeo uh at least once a week somebody will will reach out with concerns about a kid W walking or biking to school and wishing there was a bus stop or some some like grown-up that could go with them and back in the day uh we used to have these bike rodeos and I think it was the sro's who did that and while it may not be practical at each individual school I think it would be kind of a neat idea to include somehow at one of our maybe like a movie night everybody bring your like we close down Cinder Lake Lane or or something so just throwing it out there because it is a recurring theme of parents not really knowing how to help their kids learn how to ride bikes assertively and buses not being available so idea for for everybody and um that's it okay council member poock no report wow just feel like I want you to say something your last few times okay all right moving on all right all right I am up next um first off again hats off to police and fire for that issue we had last week with the uh the driver hitting to the fire hydrant and then uh I understand we had an officer go down in the water and one of the uh well the paramedics or engineer went down yeah and they're okay yeah the truck okay will be it will be got to dry out so again the hats off to you guys for for the work you guys do here in the city also we've got Veterans Day on Monday and that is 5:00 start five five to 5 to six at the uh the tribute in Center Lake so obviously a very special day and we thank all all the Veterans for for all that they do um I know we had just had bark and Brew uh I know I wasn't able to make it it's one of our better events I'm assuming that it went well I didn't hear complaints or anything he was the weather was a factor but it looked like folks were having a good time a little wet it was wet but the dogs jumped extra high that job extra high there you go you know so again great event I mean just it was a bummer that was scheduled on the same day that ECF had a home football game so and that is all again and also um Good Luck to all the candidates out there I know we had one in the uh in the hall tonight uh good luck to the to the other one as well and all the county State and National candidates and that's all I got council member Britain I really don't have anything either just uh yeah good luck to the candidates okay very good up next we got upcoming meeting dates we got Monday November 18th 6:00 C that is still going on yes all right and then Monday the 18th 6:30 regular session and then Monday November 25th work session tenative tenative uh it's good for Mr Paul [Laughter] it's be on we're working on something all right anything else with get the order we are adjourned for