for silent invitation followed by pledge of allegiance is uh just to make sure Rabbi Mandel is not here. Okay. Silent invitation followed by the pledge. >> Amen. I 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. >> Thank you and welcome. Call the role. >> Councilman Foley >> here. >> Councilman Keer >> here. >> Councilman Green >> here. Vice Mayor Grubs
>> here. >> Mayor Stan >> here. We have everybody in attendance tonight. Happy St. Patrick's Day. Um, if you weren't here for the previous council meetings, we passed a motion that if you get up to speak tonight and you're not wearing green, you have to
donate was it 100 or 500 to 500 to the parks and recck fund. So hopefully you got your green. >> All right. >> All right. Item four, public comments on consent agenda items only. Do we have any public comments on consent agenda
items 6 through 11? Come on up, Robert. >> Robert, where's the green, man? Come on. >> Go right ahead. Welcome, >> council members. Robert Reinhagen, 1425, Dexter Drive, Port Orange. Um this um
item 11 uh first amendment of the BIK economic incentive agreement and it talks about uh relocation of tortoises in the amount of 14,685 uh that they want to add so that the CRA
reimbures them. Um I'm not sure that we've done that in the past or not or the city has done that but um they're moving in they're moving them they have to be moved. Um I I think um they should pay the cost and maybe some
co cost sharing but not just the whole thing. Thank you. >> Thank you Robert. Anybody else on consent agenda item 16? >> Mr. Mayor, give me one second which is out >> now. >> Yep. I need to have it removed. Yes,
>> Mr. Mayor. I need to have uh item 11 removed from consent. If I could get a motion, if I can make a motion to do that, I'll second that. >> We have a motion in a second to remove item 11 from the consent. All in favor signify by saying I. >> I oppose.
>> Okay, we have 11 removed. Can I get a motion to approve items 6 through 10? >> So moved. And and five as well. >> Five through 10. So move. >> Sorry. 5 through 10. Yeah. We have a motion. We have a motion and a second to approve consent agenda items 5 through
10. Call the role. >> Councilman Foley. >> Yes. >> Councilman Keer? >> Yes. >> Councilman Green? >> Yes. >> Vice Mayor Grubs? >> Yes. >> Mayor S? >> Yes. That brings us to item 11, approval of first amendment of the BIK economic incentive agreement pursuant to the
Eastport CRA Redevelopment Plan and Land Department Code, chapter 20. >> Uh, Mr. Mayor, I need to declare a conflict on this particular and I will not be voting. >> Okay. >> I am uh my my company is uh is employed
by Bick. >> Understood. >> Any further discussion council? >> I just want to ask actually a quick question about this Wayne. Uh so this is an additional uh $14,685 um for go for tourists, but I thought we
already gave them >> considerable money for this. >> That's correct. that's in the package. They they've gotten an incentive related to the permit fees in there and this is an addition to it. At the time, I think when they asked that we we just modified to allowing gopher tortoises as one of the options, but
>> just adding it because at the time they got in there, they weren't aware there were that many tortoises on the site. >> Okay. Because I I know we agreed to do something monetarily already with them. And so, you know, actually toh to Robert's point, >> it's a relatively new addition that go
to relocation is an op is an eligible activity for the incentive. >> Okay. All right. >> Anything else, Jason? Anything? No. >> Yep. >> All right. Nothing else. We'll have the clerk call the role with uh Councilman
Green abstaining. >> I didn't hear the motion. >> Get a motion to approve item 11 on the consent agenda. And I'll second it for record. >> Call the roll. >> Councilman Foley. >> Yes. >> Council member Ger. >> Yes.
>> Councilman Green. >> Abstain. >> Vice Mayor Krabs. >> Yes. >> Mayor Stler. >> Yes. 40 with one abstain. Moving us to item C. We will recess as the council and magically appear as the town center CRA for the regular meeting.
>> Is that me again? Did I say that? >> You work center. >> All right. Uh, if I could get a I want to call to uh call to order the annual meeting of the Port Orangetown Center Community Redevelopment Agency. Uh, would you call the role?
>> Scott Stonner >> here. >> Jonathan >> here. >> Tracy Grubs >> here. >> Sean Ger >> here. Lance Green >> here. >> All right. So, can I get a motion to elect the chairman? >> I'll make a motion uh to nominate Councilman Sean Gford as the chairman.
>> A second. I have a motion to second. Any other motions? Being none, signify by saying I. >> I. >> I. >> Uh, can I get a motion for the vice chair? >> Go ahead, Sean. You've been nominated.
>> All right. I'll make a motion that we nominate Scott Stilton to be vice chair. >> I'll second. Have a motion and a second. Any other nominations? Being none, all those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. I
have nothing. Um, is there any objection to the notice of this meeting? >> Hearing none, the notice is accepted. Do I have a motion to approve the minutes of the August 5th, 2025 regular meeting,
December 9th, 2025 regular point of order here? >> Sorry, real real quick point of order, Matt. >> I'm sorry. Go ahead. >> But did we not just elect Shawn as the new chairman? Is he not supposed to take over at item four? >> Yeah. Congrats, Sean. >> Oh, yeah. >> Oh, thank you. >> Perfect. >> Yeah, >> she's all yours. >> Appreciate that. Can't wait till the next one comes up.
>> Yeah. Does it pay the same? >> You were doing a fantastic job. >> Double. This one pays double. >> Former chairman Green. >> Okay. Being the chair, do I have a motion to approve the minutes of the August 5th, 2025 regular meeting in December 9th, 2025 joint special meeting with the city council. >> So move.
>> Second. >> Roll call, please. >> Scott Stner, >> yes. >> Jonathan Fley, >> yes. Jobs. >> Yes. >> John Hipper. >> Yes. >> Green. >> Yes. >> All right. Now, item number five is the Port Orange Town Center CRA annual
report for uh year ending 202425. Do I have a motion to accept the uh the year 2024 225 annual report for the Port Orange Town Center Community Redevelopment Agency. >> So moved. >> Second.
>> Roll call, please. >> Scott Stner. >> Yes. Yes. Jonathan, >> yes. >> Tracy Grubs, >> yes. >> Or Sean Gipper, >> yes. >> Green, >> yes. >> Okay. Do we have a This is a public hearing. Do we have any public comments in reference to our town center
community redevelopment agency? All right. Being none, um, council, any comments? >> I've got none. >> None here. No, sir. >> You don't want to go away party? >> No, we're good. >> Okay. With no final comments, uh, no further business. be brought before the members of the Port Town Center
Redevelopment Agency. There being none, this meeting is adjourned. >> Keep it going. >> All righty. >> All right. We will now uh stay in recess as the council and revisit as the
which one are we now? Eastport and I'll take that over. >> Appreciate that. >> I call the annual meeting of the Eastport business community center redevelopment aging to order. Roll call. >> Scott >> here. >> Jonathan >> here. >> Tracy Grubs >> here.
>> Green >> here. Sean >> here. >> And we have an election of a chairman. Do I have a motion to nominate a chairman? >> Move to nominate Councilman Tracy Grubs to serve as the chairman of the Eastport Business Center Community Redevelopment Agency.
>> I'll second that. >> You can't secondary. I will second it. >> I'm so quickly to get off this thing. >> You second it. All right, roll call, please. >> Scott, >> yes. >> Sean Foley, >> yes. >> Tracy, >> yes. >> Oh, yes.
>> Sean Gford, >> yes. >> An election of vice chair. Do I have a motion to nominate a vice chairman? >> Have a motion for uh Lance Green, vice chair. >> I'll second. >> All right. I have a motion and a second. Roll call, please.
>> Scott Stner, >> yes. >> John, >> yes. >> Tracy Gross, >> yes. >> Green, >> yes. Sean. >> Yes. >> So I know what this just did. So >> is there
any objections to the notice of the meeting? >> Hearing no objection. The notice is accepted. Do I hear a Do I have a motion to approve the minutes of the August 5th through 2025 regular meeting, September 2nd, 2025 joint special meeting, and the
November 18th, 2026 joint special meeting. So moved. >> Second. >> Call the roll. >> Scott, >> yes. >> Jonathan Foley, >> yes. >> Tracy, >> yes. >> Green, >> yes. >> Sean, >> yes. Item five, the Eastport Business Center
CRA annual report for fiscal year 2024 25. >> Do I have a motion to accept the fiscal year 202425 annual report for the Eastport Business Center Community Redevelopment Agency? >> So moved. >> Second.
We get a roll call. >> Scott Stner, >> yes. >> Sean, >> yes. >> Tracy Gross, >> yes. >> Green, >> yes. Sean Gford, >> yes. >> Okay, so call for public comments. Okay, final comments from council. We're
still ready. >> Prior to the vote and we voted, so I jumped that one. Sorry. Item six is approval of the first amendment of the Bick economic incentive agreement uh persuant to the Eastport CRA redevelopment plan and land
development code uh chapter 20 targeted uh businesses. I have a motion and a second. Uh motion to approve item six, approval of the first amendment of the BIK economic incentive agreement pursuant to the Eastport CRA
Redevelopment Plan Land Development Code LBC Chapter 20. >> I'll second it. >> Do we have uh any call from public comments? >> Mr. Chairman, I will be abstaining from this one as my company does business with Vic.
>> Okay. Yes, sir. Uh final comments other than Lance hearing none. Do a call to roll. >> Scott, >> yes. >> Jonathan Foley, >> yes. >> Tracy Grubs, >> yes. >> Green, >> abstain. >> Sean Gford,
>> yes. Any further business to brought before us for the members of the Eastport CRA Redevelopment Agency? >> Uh being none, we'll adjourn to our normal council minutes and meeting. All right. And that'll bring the council
back into session. Uh section E, recognition and proclamations. I've got a couple here to read for you guys tonight. Whereas since our nation's founding, Americans America's sons and daughters have given their lives and service to
our country each day. As Americans, we enjoy the freedom of peace, prosperity, and independence. These are virtues upon which the United States was built and ideals that bind us together as a nation. And whereas 59 years ago, in 1967, nearly 500,000 American troops
served in South Vietnam along with approximately 850,000 troops of our allies. And whereas on Vietnam War Veterans Day, we pause to remember that freedom comes at a great cost. Throughout history, American military personnel have stood tall to oppose the
enemies of freedom. Many of these brave servicemen and women gave their lives to their liberty and uphold the promise of our democracy. And whereas Vietnam Veterans of American Chapter 1048 seek to preserve the strength camarad
camaraderie among its members and maintain true allegiance to the government of the United States of America. Now therefore, I, Scott Stilner, mayor of the city of Port Orange, Florida, do hereby present this proclamation in remembrance of Vietnam War Veterans Day and urge all citizens
to show respect for our veterans and continue to remember and appreciate the sacrifices they have made for freedom. And this one is for Sunshine Week. Whereas James Madison, the father of the federal constitution, wrote that consent
of the governed requires that people be able to arm themselves with the power which knowledge gives us. And whereas every citizen in our participatory democracy has an inherent right to access to government meetings and public records. And whereas an open and
accessible government is vital to establishing and maintaining the people's trust and confidence in their government and in the government's ability to effectively serve its citizen citizens. And whereas the city of Port Orange is committed to openness and transparency in all aspects of its operations and seeks to set standards in
this regard. Now therefore, I Scott Stillner, mayor of the city of Port Orange, Florida, do hereby proclaim the week of March 15 through the 21st, 2026 as Sunshine Week in Florida. All right, public participation. I think we've got
one here. Dan Morris, come on up. >> Good to see you, my friend. >> How you doing? My name is Dan Morris and my address is 3393 Tory Boulevard in New Beach, Florida. And I'm here tonight, first of all, say good evening, Mayor Stilner, um, Vice Mayor Kubs, and other
councilmen. Wayne. I'm just here to really do two things. One, I'm representing the South Daytona Port Orange or as a Port South Daytona chamber. I've been in my seventh year of uh being on the board. I'm an immediate past chair. It's been wonderful to be uh around all of you and working with the
Port Orange most important client. So, I'm taking notes and I'll give an update at our next board meeting. Secondly, I'm here representing a new business I started called Pet Evolution. And we opened about six weeks, seven weeks ago, and I can want to let you know that
working with the planning department, Tim Burman, all of the inspectors, um all of the um um permitting, you name it, was outstanding. And I can tell you from a
franchise that has 25 locations, they came back and said it, Port Ranch was probably the best they've ever worked with. It was so incredibly smooth. Not that they cut us any breaks, but they certainly let us know how to fix a problem if we saw it. And that got fixed
very quickly. I'm lucky I had a great construct construction manager, a wonderful construction team, and just great people that work for me. It's a great It's always been a dream to have a business in Port Orange. So, I'm very excited. If you don't know it, I'm a ve I'm a pet lover. So, part of the mission
of Pet Evolution is to help pets live a good life. And if you've ever seen pets that haven't been treated right in a grooming or bathing or just don't have great food, it brings a tear to your eyes. So, this business, we've got the greatest people, I can let you know tonight that we've been open for seven
weeks. Just today, we've reached 100 five-star reviews. >> Wow. If you get a chance to read them, it'll bring a tear to your eye because that's what we're here to do. So, thank you for all of the support that you've given us and I look forward to making competition a landmark in this city.
>> Excellent. >> Thank you. >> Very good. Good to see you. >> All right. That'll bring us to comments and additional items starting with council on May 1st tonight. Uh I want to say a week ago Saturday we had the uh opening day for little league baseball
and softball uh here in the city of Port Orange through our parks and recck program. Parks and Rec did an incredible job. Uh pun intended when they say they knocked it out of the park. Um the fields looked great. The attendance was uh was was awesome. It's great to see
all the kids out there and and we appreciate uh you guys including us to to celebrate that opening day. It's it's it's a blast to go out there and see how excited those kids are to get out there and run around and make some friends and and learn a little bit about playing baseball and softball. So, great job
parks and wreck. We appreciate that. Um, this one actually is for uh council as a whole. I'd like to get your consensus on something. Um, we have on the uh agenda every meeting an opportunity for the city attorney and the city manager to
make comments. Um, I would like to get your um, there there's three things that I think are all really, really important to all of us that I want to make sure always stay in the forefront, even if there's not something specific tied to it on the agenda. So, I'd like to have y'all's consensus for the city manager
section that we add a subsection. Subsection one would be that he always gives us an update on our storm water mitigation projects, um, what's going on with any of the funding mechanisms and things like that. And sometimes there's going to be just a couple of brief
things that that Wayne will be able to share with us and sometimes there might be some more in depth, but I want to make sure that that stays in the forefront of the city council and that it's always on our radar and the public realizes that and sees that. Uh the second item I would like to always have some kind of a comment on as an update
on where we are with our parks and recck bond projects. Um that's a big one. There's a lot the the public uh voted on that. they entrusted us to get those projects going and then they have funded those things and I want to make sure that also there's some comments on on
that just where we're at in those things. Um there won't be always things that need our vote, but we need to be able to speak to them because I've actually had several people from the opening day of parks and wreck where we at some of these things. So we just need to have those uh conversations briefly
from the city manager. And the third thing will be the Riverwalk project area. What's going on with that comments that can be there? I know I know to some degree, Wayne, that that there will be some things with that particular one. For sure. And actually with the other one that may involve property and our real estate folks and things like that
that that may need to stay between you and your staff as they work through some of those details because we always want the citizens to get the best bang for the buck and and sometimes we got to be careful about things that get set up here. But all that will wash out in the in the public eye anyhow. So, I'd just
like to see if you guys are good with that and make sure we've got consensus that we'll add that to the agenda. It'll just be a brief section on there that that we'll he'll know, hey, we want you to at least touch on these three things every time. So, you guys good with that? >> I agree with that. Yeah, >> good. Yeah, that's good. Okay. We have
any questions on that one? >> Let me know. >> Okay. I just want to make sure, you know, I just want to make sure that we're all on the same board on the same page with that stuff. So, um, we we had some we had a a really unusual and
stressful, uh, couple of days over the past weekend involving some incidents that involved our police department and our surrounding, uh, law enforcement agencies. brief comments. A lot of that stuff is still under investigation, but I just
want to say um how proud I am of our police officers and our local law enforcement and EMS partners and fire for all the things they do. And and we have seen in the past weekend things come out of nowhere when you least expect them. You know, you they're not
always Friday night 10:30, 11 o'clock at night. Mhm. >> Sometimes they're Sunday morning at 6:00 a.m. And uh sometimes they they happen when officers are even on their way home >> and they and they got to get back engaged and get involved. And so we know a South Daytona officer uh who who was
shot twice is in recovery uh expected to to make a recovery and is doing well, but keep him in your thoughts and prayers as well as the appreciation of our officers that have been involved in absolutely >> some really unusual incidents. And and just for a comment about this, I watched
a um uh an interview by Sheriff Chitwood. I think it was yesterday or today. They're always colorful. Uh but you know, he made a comment about something that I think truly needs to be understood. You know, the state of Florida is a very pro- second
amendment state. And with legislative changes, we are going to see, when I say we, I mean our law enforcement professionals and residents of Port Orange, more and more and more people carrying guns. And the the there's almost an assumption that everybody you
encounter has one because they can now. And and that's okay. Uh but I I think that to say that when people start looking at these things and going, why are we having more and more and more and more gun related incidents? Well, because we have the freedoms uh of the Second Amendment and
we we we value those in the state of Florida, inherently there are going to be more out there. And then I also think you've got the element of mental health and those roads don't always align. And so there's just going to be things like that that are going to happen. So, but I'm I'm proud of the way our folks are responding and doing the best. Uh they
will always learn from it. Um there will always be opportunities uh for debriefings with those folks to to uh to learn more and more about that and and but nonetheless they know that they have our support and that's what's really important to us. So and that's all I got
for right now. How about you Reed? >> Uh no I think you covered a lot of it especially just uh our first responders. Um, you know, I I spent a lot of time actually because my job on social media and so I see not only Facebook but Instagram and Tik Tok and uh Tik Tok has
a great way of getting things in front of you very quickly as they happen. Um, and to see what's going on in our county right now with spring break and things uh is is really crazy. So, not only are my thoughts and prayers with all of our officers as they're out there serving here in Port Orange, but also with the
whole county. Um, and and really appreciate our fire department today and EMS and everything. they had to spring into action and and um like you said, just goes to show it's not always Friday at 10:30 at night. It's well said. So um but no, otherwise I think uh I think I'm good.
>> Rosie, >> no. Echoing the both of y'all. Um uh the PD uh just so blessed that you know as tragic as Sunday was that everybody is safe and thoughts and prayers out to the
whole team. So, can't say anything more than that. I'm glad everybody is is good. Um, one of the things you said earlier, uh, with Wayne dealing with the projects, I had a couple individuals reach out to me and it's always trying
to make sure that we have the water projects in front of people so they know that we haven't forgotten. Um, and I just publicly just wanted to make sure that if he's out there listening, I've left a message for him. But uh the Cambridge project literally starts this
spring. Now saying it starts this spring doesn't means it gets completed in the spring. It's a long thoughtout project. It will finish in the spring of probably 2027. It's about a year to do it. So that Cambridge project starts here in a couple months. Uh saying that though, we
uh finishing up a project that uh if you haven't been down on Jackson Street and Oak Street and tying another project in with Parks and Rex with a memorial park, that whole area has transformed. And uh it's it's worth a drive to go down there
and see everything that's taken place because it's it's just turning out beautifully. So, I think the residents down there, uh, the storm water and what has happened there is going to be great. Uh, parks and wreck, uh, thank you for the extra signage on the boat ramp area.
Uh, great placement. That's going to help out for the frustrations as the hot weather comes back. It was here, but it disappeared today. So, hopefully the hot weather will come back again. Um, but with Dan and Pet Evolution, um, thank
you for reaching out to Art House. Um, I'm gonna take up my quick minute because Art House at the end, one of the things Art House did is they contracted with Pet Evolution and painted the side of the building as a mural for the pets.
It is absolutely cool what they did. Now, sitting on the board of Art House, the proceeds that came out of that actually goes back to the city in some way because what they're going to do is the proceeds they profited off of that actually goes to the mural project for
the down under the bridge for all the columns that they're doing. So, they're raising monies in different ways. So, this was a way for a business in Port Orange to support them and then in turn it comes back around and they're supporting back to the city. So, a lot of things happening inside the city with
those type of pieces. So, thank you for the opportunity. >> That's it. >> All right. Uh so obviously the last uh couple weeks with our fire department and police department has been excruciating to watch and some of the
things that have happened and so proud of the young people that work with those departments and what they're going through and the way they're handling things. It's it's it's amazing. Um, which which brings me to a point that
one of the things that we've done over the last two years has gone to Tallahassee for local issues primarily around flooding and and trying to capture revenue that they receive up there coming back into our city. But I think we really need to be pushing for
legislation that keeps criminals in jail because it looks like the majority of everything that's happening, if you look at the history of the person that's committing the crime, they've committed it before. And at when when does it end? It usually ends when they finally kill
somebody and now they're locked up for life or maybe close to it. And that's to me just it's it's it's horrible to see victims victimized again over and over again by the same perpetrators. I mean
just pull the reports of who gets arrested and and they've been there before and the social media now they'll even tell you this guy's 10th mugsh shot 10th. So, I don't know what we can do as
a city the next time we go to Tallahassee and start pushing some something has to change. And this is I've been complaining about this for years. It's It's so sad to see repeat offenses. And I know we can't incarcerate everybody forever, but
the length of these offenses are offensive to me and my family and the citizens of our city. We're trying to protect them. And then before he gets the report done, they're probably back out on the street and something's got to be done and we got to make we and I
don't think we were up in Tas no one was up there making that awareness and we just see it over and over again whether it's in our city, South Daytona, New Simra Beach, Daytona. It's it's it's really uh it's almost it's almost
embarrassing that we have to deal with that. Uh, with that being said, uh, I'm sorry I missed the opening day for spring baseball, but I was not in town. And did you throw a strike? >> I did. >> Oh, good. Very good. >> And and the and the 9-year-old, uh,
young lady that was catching, she was on it. Like, I thought for a moment she was going to visualize somebody stealing second and throw down. >> All right. >> I mean, she was she was ready for it. She was all about it. Yeah. It was a great time. We missed you. >> And we get a city's manager's report every week. Does that go out to the
public as well? because that's got some great information on what we're doing. >> It is definitely a public document. I think that there's a lot of different ways that information gets out there for sure. Some people are going to watch meetings. Some people are going to read things like that. Some people are going to the city social media pages, you
know, things like that. I I if you're we'll finish. >> So, yeah, I'm curious if Mr. Springer, does that go to like everyone who has a water account or does is it just to us? >> The newsletter goes to to everyone who
has the water account. So, >> okay, >> that is the public facing document. >> Okay, that's fantastic. That's some great information. So, we're not keeping anyone in the dark if they just open that up and look because you know there's some remarkable things going on in the city that we just don't talk about up here, but that report has it
every week and I think that's phen phenomenal. So, keep up the good work there. That's all I have, >> Mr. Green. >> Well, I think you guys just about covered it all, but uh again, I'm going to just say kudos to the rec department. Great job on opening day. That was uh fantastic. Once again, um again, I'm not
an ultra overly religious guy, but I'm going to say, man, our police department was blessed this weekend with some of the events that happened and thank God they were protected. Um, I am still going to say that I do feel that there is a need for our community to have a
direct non-emergency line to the police department. So, um, I'm still not really getting uh the information I need to get on that, but you know, I know I know there's a lot in because it's integrated with the sheriff, but I still feel the
need. So, other than that, I'll leave it at that. All right. Anything else? >> All right. Uh, Mr. City attorney. >> Uh, none for tonight. >> Nothing. Huh. Okay. City man. >> You didn't have a list of three things for him to report on.
>> By the way, I didn't I guess I should have prefaced that you don't necessarily have to do that this >> I got a couple of them. I can and I do want to start the same thing that that you guys have all been saying about our our police and fire department. So, public safety is the city's top priority. has been strategically where
where we focus everything on and spent a lot of time on the phone with the police chief and the fire chief the last couple days and seeing them in person and uh that's usually not a sign that that things are going really well. Um but the the type of person that it takes to do those jobs. I grew up I'm an office
person. I'm not a I don't do that for a living. And and the the bravery and the skill set it takes to be that kind of person and do that job daytoday and the things that they see and and the risk that they put themselves in is truly special. And Port Orange is extremely fortunate to have the chiefs that we have and have all the people and all
those departments that do that work. And I know when I talk to them, I know we've got the best protecting our citizens. Uh no matter what those bad guys are going to do, we have a solid group of people out there. I'm very proud of them and appreciate everything that they do for us in that. So, thank you all for all what you've done.
And then on to the stuff that you you asked me about. So, for storm water, Cambridge, we've talked about this recently. So, this is the first of the major flooding projects to get close to construction. So, it's already been mentioned once tonight. Uh it's the area, it's the second largest area where
we've seen flooding. Uh the project finished design and permitting. It's getting ready to go out to bid. So, construction will start this spring. So that's the first major project where you will see it will be under construction during hurricane season. It will not be completed until till the 27 season, but it will be under construction. The
design for the second largest area, the sugar forest project, is approaching 60% now. So we're moving from conceptual drawings into ones that have way more engineering detail and starting to move forward with that project and getting it closer. There's also movement on some of
the transform 386 projects which as we talked about before once they became transform 386 the county takes over control of the project. Soona and powers are both projects that you're likely to see activity coming on first. So those are the first two that we have contracts
getting close with the county to start moving those forward. The portona project is one of the ones where we've got some money in the budget from the state this year. So, we're fortunate when they come back together to to adopt a budget in Tallahassee, we may get some money for that project moving forward. Um,
one of the things we've been doing, so everybody who has any kind of trees in their yard has probably had 15 to 20 bags every two weeks of leaves in your yard. So, fortunately, we have four street sweepers and they have been out constantly. We were doing pretty good until yesterday when the rain came and
then knocked everything down and washed it right down into the drains. So, they have been out. They were out all day the day before and then it's still clogged up out here in front because so many leaves, but they have spent hours and hours and hours running around. So, I know a number of the residents in the neighborhoods, they the the drivers pay
attention to to where they go and they know the neighborhoods where we have the hardest challenges with all these leaves and so they've been out in those hard-hit areas all day long today and we've got a couple thanks from citizens for doing that. So, in addition to the the larger projects, I think you also mentioned Jackson Oak being almost done.
For anybody that was that ever been on that road when it was just a big open ditch, to go see what it looks like now to go down Jackson and see that sidewalk, how much safer it is as a place to be. Uh, so there there's maintenance, there's smaller projects, there's bigger projects. Never the maintenance never ends. It's it's like
anybody with their own grass and yards. So, we just constantly keep going out there. And I think one of you guys has mentioned that that's in the newsletter fairly frequently, too. all the maintenance that's going on. So, it's a it's a multi-pronged approach of major projects, middlesize projects, small projects, and and non-stop maintenance.
So, that's that's what's going on with uh with that the parks project. So, city center expansion. So, we we flip land with the county or school board. We got the park over here. Uh we've got final design plans now in for those fields. So, that will be going out to bid and
starting construction here in the next several months because that's ready ready to go. So that's the first of those big projects you'll see start moving forward. And then on Riverwalk, so that's been out now for about a month and a half or so. We had a bunch of preliminary calls and and early on we
were getting a lot of calls from people that were just looking to do apartments. So we kind of made it clear. I had a couple of pretty, you know, hey, look, this is not the direction we're going. We don't just want to see an apartment down there. And then within like three or four days of that, we got a another call from a company out of Tampa. And
that that was probably I would say for for just meet and greet like hey who are you? What are you about? What are you thinking? Uh they're going to come over here in a couple weeks and see us and visit the site. Uh but that was as close to a I said when we got when we were getting off the phone I said that ballpark we're in is a is a small
ballpark more like Wrigley Field, not a not a big giant one. We're actually that close together in concept. Now it's an early meeting and a concept meeting but they this group fully understood the idea of mixed use. uh the idea that that the critical thing for us is a destination, a place for people who live
here because all of us, most of us are probably not going to go live in one of those apartments down there. We get that that helps because you're going to have people that can afford that kind of an apartment. They probably will spend $8 on coffee, but for most of us, you're not going to go down there that much. And and so they got the idea that some
rooftop amenity and a cluster of entertainment and dining options down there to work with tiki docks is is where to go. So, in that that that one was probably the most positive call I've had since back in the Bristol era as far as somebody on the phone saying what we wanted to hear. It's got to move from
saying what we want to hear to putting a dollar amount out there and showing up and signing contracts, but that was good given the uncertainty in the market and the fact that interest rates are kind of they didn't keep going down like we thought they might. Uh we weren't really sure what might come out of this, but that that's a step in the right
direction. So, we're making progress there. as they come and visit on site or we get other calls, I'll continue to brief you guys on that. I think that that's covered all three of them. >> Yeah, I wasn't expecting pretty job well done. Okay, thank you. I don't have anything else. >> I just comment uh I do want to say thank
you, Wayne. Um you you have done a very good job keeping our real estate agents in check. He he flat out tells them don't don't even waste time just bringing us some big old apartment complex. So, I appreciate uh him and his
staff and actually uh our real estate representatives buying in fully and understanding the vision and what that project area is going to have to be in terms of scope and and sticking to that because >> it's it it's not just about finding the first one that steps up, it's the right one. So, >> appreciate that.
>> Can I ask a question on that? So Wayne, on that though, so are did we reach out maybe to some of the other respondents to the RFP before Bristol to see if they were still interested? >> They have they they have because Collier
is so large they have their own international listing. It's been posted on all the services and then the people that were around they have contacted them as well. I think at least one of them is one of them though, one of the ones that we had before turns out to be
maybe more of a buy and hold person. So they've got other projects in the region that they have bought the property and then haven't actually built anything going back to the same time we started with Bristol. So >> they're they're put the other thing we're pushing is that we're not interested in that. It's not an investment. Don't buy the land and wait
10 years to build on it. We want to see something coming out of the ground. So they're they're they're trying to find those people who respond to that correctly, but they have reached out. Yes. Gotcha. Thank you. >> Appreciate it. Thank you. Item 17,
citizen advisory board for the TPO. >> Welcome, sir. >> Good evening. >> Bobby Ball with the CAC of the TPO. We had our regular monthly meeting. Um it was a pretty standard meeting for us. A couple of up updates to the two-year and the five-year work programs. Um nothing really to speak of. Um, other than I did
volunteer and got reappointed to be on the uh tips up committee ranking group which is uh actually puts all the Port Orange projects up there near the top as much as I can. So that's the best I could do there. And then the only other interesting project which Clyde Morris Boulevard is is um looks like it's going to go to construction. It's not a Port
Orange project, but it's still between Belby Avenue and just past ISB and they're doing some uh streetscape changes and a tunnel underneath the um underneath the road connecting the two sides of the street for Riddle. So just an interesting project that's coming up. Very good. That's it. >> Any questions for Bobby? >> Thank you.
>> Thank you, Bobby. >> Thank you, sir. Appreciate you. >> Item 18, first reading of ordinance number 20 26-2. That's an ordinance of the city of Forens County, Florida relating to comprehensive planning amending the future land use map of the comprehensive
plan. the future land use designation for approximately 56.53 acres consisting of 52.96 acres from Valuchia County agricultural resource one unit per 10 acres and 3 point approximately 3.57 acres from Valuchia County urban low
intensity 0 to 4 acres 0 to four units per acre uh to the city of Portorn's rural transition 0 to2 units per acre for property generally located north of Charles Street and west of Airport Road authorizing transmitt to required agencies provide for
conflicting ordinances severability and effective date. >> Can I get a motion in a second to put the item on the floor approval? >> Get a motion for ordinance 2026-2. >> Second. >> Have a motion in a second. Do we need to
open item 19 as well? >> Yes, please. >> All right, we'll do that now. Item 19 is the first reading of ordinance number 2026-3. That's an ordinance of city pornia county reszoning of approximately 56.53
acres consisting of 52.96 acres from Valuchia County A1 prime agriculture and approximately 3.57 acres from Blushia County A2 rural agricultural to city of Port Orange R20SF single family residential for property generally located north of Charles Street and west
of Airport Road. authorizing revisions to the official zoning atlas, providing for conflicting ordinances, repeal uh providing for severability, and providing an effective date. >> We get a motion for ordinance number 2026-3. >> I'll second that, too.
>> There's a motion and a second on the floor. >> Good. Good evening, Penelopey Cruise Planning. Um, as was stated, the subject property is located on the west side of AP Airport Road, north of Charles Street. It was annexed into the city of Port Orange in June 2025.
Um in October of 2025, um the applicant came forward with the next steps after annexation, which is to apply for a city future land use and zoning. The applications that were submitted and brought before council in October were not approved by the city council. At
that time, the applicant was proposing a future land use amendment and resoning to a planned unit development for a 113 unit um single family home development on the subject property. Now, according to the land development code, um when a resoning application is denied by city
council, a subsequent application for a similar resoning um on any property um of the same parcel cannot be submitted within a period of 12 months from the date of the same um from the date of that denial. Um, the applicant has now submitted a different resoning
application. Um, they're proposing to reszone to a conventional zoning category, not the PUD zoning category that was previously approved. Um, they're proposing to reszone to the R20 single family zoning district. And because this current request is a different classification, um, a
determination has been made that um, it is not considered a similar zoning district. and therefore they're able to move forward and we're able to consider the current requests that are before you. So, just some background on that. Um, just like we discussed last time,
the property has the majority of the property has been cleared. Vacant pasture land with a single family home, detached garage, pole barn, uh, located on the northeast corner of the property. And based on the aerial imagery that we have access to, it appears to have been cleared pasture land for at least since
1978, if not further back. Um, the property generally has a flat topography, slight east to west slope containing only man-made agricultural drainage features, including shallow north south trenches, east west drainage ditches, and a cattle pond. The only
surface waters on site are the man-made agricultural ditches and the cattle pond. The environmental analysis um that was provided includes a review of the Valuchia County wetland mapping obtained from the county's website uh which indicates that there are no
jurisdictional wetlands uh identified on the property. Um and so based on this mapping as well as other data collected in the field by the their environmental consultant the assessment concludes that does not have any jurisdictional wetlands and there are no proposed wetlands uh therefore anticipated with
any proposed development. So with the first item that was opened today, the applicant was requesting to change the future land use designation from 52.96 acres of Alia County agricultural resource and 3.57 acres of Valuchia County urban low inensity to
city of Port Orange Rural Transition, which has a density range of 0 to2 units per acre. This rural transition future land use designation is intended for lands near Spruce Creek and its tributaries, particularly properties that lie between agricultural uses and
established residential neighborhoods with residential development limited to no more than two units per acre. The subject property has been reviewed um and analyzed then meets the locational criteria for this future land use um transition category as it is situated
adjacent to the spruce creek bordered by agricultural land to the south and developed residential neighborhoods to the north, northeast and west. Urban services are available in the airport road rideway to serve the site and the proposed R20SF zoning aligns with the
maximum density allowed. And according to the infrastructure impact analysis in the staff report, adequate capacity exists for public infrastructure and services to accommodate the proposed amendment. With the second item that was open, the applicant is requesting to reszone the
subject property from 52.96 acres of Valuchia County A1 and 3.57 acres of Valuchia County A2 to City of Port Orange R20SF. The dimensional requirements um for the R20SF category are shown here on the slide and then the staff report.
According to the land development code, this R20SF single family residential zoning district is intended to function as a transitional zoning category between rural lowdensity areas and medium to higher density residential areas. And its purpose is to help protect existing res agricultural areas
in rural res residences while also allowing for appropriate appropriate residential densities. If the future land use amendment and resoning are approved, the developer paid his homes intends to submit a development application for 50 lot
single family residential subdivision resulting in a density of approximately one dwelling unit per acre which is consistent with and actually lower than the density of the surrounding area. So based on meeting the review criteria in each of the staff reports that were in the packet, staff is recommending approval of the proposed future land use
amendment and resoning. staff is here to answer any questions and I believe the um the applicants development team is also here with a presentation. >> Back to us. >> Yeah. >> All right. Very good, Penny. So, I'm going to I'm going to start because I
want you to clarify something for me and I'm going to ask to please do your best to talk in layman's terms um as much as you can. So look looking at these agenda items, one thing that really jumped off
uh at me was was that we have the future land use application request. I may be saying that incorrectly. That's correct. >> That is for zero to two units per acre, >> which would would in my mind that what that does is that paints a picture of up
to about 112 113 units. But the the endgame here, if I can say it that way, is the applicant wants to build 50 homes on this property, right? So, and that's >> basically going to be done through the zoning. So, my my question is, don't we
have a proper designation that can be applied as the future land use designation that matches where we're trying to go? Like if we're trying to get to 50 homes on this property that totals about 56 acres, >> don't we have a designation where we can
do one unit per the acre that that matches that and mirrors that? Can you talk about that? Explain the difference between future land use uh designation versus zoning and how that ties together. >> Yeah. So, every property has a future
land use designation and a zoning designation. The future land use designations in the comprehensive plan. It's kind of the larger um overarching kind of like big picture. There's usually a range of density. Um we have to analyze the maximum when we do our analysis. And then your zoning has to be
consistent with the land use. So it can the zoning can never allow more density than the land use. It can allow less, but you generally want to find something that's within that range. We have something called a future land use and zoning matrix, compatibility matrix. Um,
and so every future land use is on one side and next to it there's a list of zoning categories that are consistent with the future land use that basically would fit within that range of density that's allowed. Um, R20SF is one of the
zoning categories that's listed as a consistent zoning category for the rural transition. um which is why the applicant chose that one because at the time when they were contemplating um reapplying they weren't sure exactly of a layout and exactly how many fewer lots
they wanted to come back with like fewer than the original 113. So, the R20 um although it's not the one acre lot zoning, um the the R20 allowed them to cluster the lots and provide for more
open space and more uh more storm water while still just limiting the number of lots. The engineer of record basically told us um you know, when you're doing conventional zoning, it's not like a PUD where you can negotiate some some things and have some deviations and some flexibility written into your master
development agreement. With conventional zoning, you're following the code black and white. There's not really a lot of wiggle room. So, when trying to put together a concept plan for their client, they basically said in order to meet all the standards of the land
development code, really all they could fit was 50 lots. like they basically said this is what we're getting to meet all the drainage requirements, the the uh city standards for roadway widths, sidewalks on either side, minimum lot
sizes, um open space on the lots and everything, the the buffers, tree preservation, that's all they can fit is 50 lots. Um, so although if you take the 20,000 square foot lot and kind of divide it into the total acreage, yeah,
the the raw number gives more than than than 50 lots, but they can't they their engineer has said he can't fit more than 50 on the property. Um, and so that's why they're saying that that this is what if this gets approved, this is what we're coming back with. But at the time
they chose that category versus some of the other ones that are listed as compatible zoning to give them the flexibility to cluster the lots and have flexibility to have more open space and storm water.
So when you say an at the time, if if if today was the at the time moment, >> you could apply that other future land use designation and still have the same end result. >> You mean a different zoning category? >> Uh well, I don't know if it's zoning or
if it's a future. >> The future land use is they're not they've never proposed a different land use. The land use is always zero to two. The zoning >> is a zero one. >> No, we do not. Um well >> we have agriculture. >> Okay. >> But yeah it's it's
>> so there's no land there's no land use zone or designation for one residential unit per acre. >> We have the I think it's the a yeah the a but they didn't >> the city homes designation or something. >> Yeah. Yeah. The agriculture but that was
>> follow on a map. Yeah. That was never really discussed a different land use category. was more the zoning um looking at a different zoning and we do have different zoning categories that have larger lot sizes. Um, but again, this is the one that they decided to go with and
they could speak to it more because of at the time they were trying to have that flexibility to cluster the lots and make sure they had enough design space to meet minimum lot standard requirements cuz the zoning categories that have um like a a lower density, like a one unit per zone, lower density
um have larger lot size requirements. And so it doesn't it didn't give them as much flexibility to to lay out the lots and have that open space and storm water. That was my understanding of the reason they chose the R20SF to go with it. >> Okay.
>> I might come up with something else, but let's hear let's hear from these folks. We will start with you. >> Just making sure I'm going follow up on Scott's question. Just making sure I actually understand what you're saying. Basically, if we did the one unit per acre, then every single lot would have to be a minimum of an acre versus by
doing it this way, you can have halfacre lots and have big open zones or whatever. And that and that's how it kind of compiles it together is that it gives them more flexibility in how they can lay it out. >> Correct. So for example, if they were to use say um like a rural transition or
not yeah rural transition um zoning or an agriculture zoning. It's a minimum 1acre lot size, right? >> So you're basically using >> the whole land up for just lots. Doesn't even really give you enough room to put in your roadways with your minimum 50ft
rightway. >> Right. and drainage. Um, so this allows you to get the 50 lots but still provide the infrastructure and that open space and cluster the lots. >> That's kind of how I understood it. I just want to make sure because then you're basically if you did 56 it's 56 acres point and whatever. If you did the
oneacre designation >> you're talking Yeah. Okay. You you've capped it at 56 but reality is by time you do infrastructure and you put in you know everything else you're never getting there versus this way you can still get the 50 homes and you get the infrastructure. Makes perfect sense to me. So I'm fine with that. What I want
to talk about and and this is going to be a huge thing. This is how I'm going to get to yes or no is how we got from this being denied before to where we're looking at it again and it hasn't been the full 12 months >> because that that's my only
>> that's or that's my my real hangup that I have is is that the previous zoning was a PUD as I understand it and now we're looking at this R-20. And so they're completely different, but yet they're not totally different because we're still building single family homes on 56 acres. So I'm just trying to
understand how because it talks about, you know, when, you know, it's a subsequent a subsequent application being a similar reasoning. We're saying this isn't similar. So that was the determination that was made by the community development staff and the legal
department reviewed that and um made a determination that this was not similar because it was more than half of a reduction in the number of units and it was not a PUD zoning. It was a conventional zoning and because it was a reduction in over half of the original
request that it was not similar. >> Okay. because that's that's I feel like that's the only question I've been asked is is why we're not waiting 12 months to review this. That's that's been the one thing I've been asked about the most. >> So, I'm good on questions for now. I want to hear what the public has to say.
I'll probably have one or two more, but um I'm good for now. >> Okay, >> Tracy. >> So, stemming off of what uh Rea u Matt, what is the legal ease? I mean, we're we're hearing one thing, and I
have to agree with Reed, you know, seems like the same application. Do we have recourse back on this related to the 12-month period? >> Yes. >> I I would say there's, you know, that your ordinance on that topic doesn't
give you, you know, any very specific criteria. Um, so you know, I think she very well stated what we thought, you know, was the significant differences that would have allowed it to be different, a a different zoning application that can move forward. I
mean, you're free to to certainly interpret that differently. There's I don't have a lot of criteria to go by to say this is what's substantially different, this is what is not. Um, so you know that we we can only weigh it with, you know, the facts that we have in front of us, which, you know, we've
we've stated, I think, what the differences are. >> Um, but if it's that if that's not different enough, I mean, you know, you're you're free to make that interpretation. >> Okay. >> U the one question I do have is is we got it down where they're saying 50 lots.
>> If we approve this and the engineer comes back and goes, "Hey, we've tweaked it." Could they come back in and say there's more homes to be allowed on there? I mean, what where's that stop at? >> I mean, I think there's been a public
discussion of 50. Um, I'm sure the applicant will state just like he did at planning commission. Um, that that that's their cap. That's their max. That's what they're committing to is no more than 50. Um, >> but is that a hard line?
>> Technically not. Um, I know from a staff standpoint, if they brought something forward, you know, that we would say this is not what you this is not what you presented at a public hearing. >> Okay. >> Um, there there could be some additional
ways to to strengthen that, but it's it's up to the council, you know, what your prerogative is on that. >> Really like to hear from the applicant on that that they don't come back, you know, and they come back and they say it's 70 and we're talking 50 now. That's that's an issue. >> Yeah. We don't need to be going back and forth
with the applicant >> or the citizens. >> And and I will add that they're they they had to reapply to the Blush County School District for an adequacy determination and they only applied for 50 units. >> Okay. >> So, >> right. That's it.
>> That's I have nothing. >> Nothing yet. >> Nothing from you. >> I um so I'm I'm just struggling with that. like I feel like that future land use designation doesn't match where we're trying to go. So that's just in my and I get that things kind through the
application process, >> they start off one way and they go the other. My I guess my my thing is is you know the last year or so we have followed some legislative stuff coming out of Tallahassee >> and and I'm a I'm a big supporter of land ownership rights. I really am. And
I think we should be that as a as a as an elected body. And so, you know, I'm not a anti-build, anti-development. I want good developments and I want good products. And I know this particular builder developer has produced a lot of really good ones. And so I, you know,
that all all that to say, I just feel like it it doesn't look right in terms of having an FLU looks different than where we're trying to get to. And I and I understand the the application process. And then as you get farther down that process when you start looking
at the actual zoning designation and and what can go there. I'm just that's just where in my mind I'm I'm kind of hung up a little bit on that. So, but we'll um well let's we'll hear from the applicant and we'll we'll come back to you for some follow-up questions to to Tracy's point. I will say as you're as you're
reflecting I think his question I would like to hear more on when you say there may be other ways to strengthen that. I want to know what those are tonight. So >> would you like me to speak to that? >> Would you like to? Yeah, sure. Go right ahead. >> Um, so what one thing you could do, I don't want to steal anyone's thunder,
but um, one thing you could do is um, you could amend the ordinance tonight to add a a policy that goes with the future land use amendment. Basically, a a property specific policy. We've done this in the past. There's a property
specific policy that limits the specific number of units in square footage. Say for example at the Wood Haven property um there was one at the Hammock Preserve PUB there was a policy addition with that land use amendment and a few others throughout town. Um and so basically what happens is in addition to just a
map amendment there would be a text amendment in the future land use element that basically lists these three parcels and says any de development on these three parcels is limited to a density of one unit per acre.
And that's that's legal. That's >> that's your you're then that's their max density. They could never do anything more than that without coming back with another future land use amendment to remove that policy. >> And that's a ratio, right? If we do it like that, is that set up like a ratio? >> It's it's just a gross density, >> right? So what I'm saying is I guess
what I'm saying ratio. So let's say I have 50 acres of land >> and I want to do something like that. I'm not I'm not going to be held to I've got to build a home on each one acre. You can still build 50 homes on 50 acres, but the homes might set on halfacre lots or 3/4.
>> Correct. It's a gross density and then your zoning and your your site in your subdivision >> and that can be amended in. >> Huh. >> And that that can be amended in tonight. >> Yes. But I'll defer to the attorney as far as um you know if that can be done tonight or
whether you know we need to do anything different with the ordinance again. >> Right. Well, let's let's we'll hold on that then for right now and let's hear from the applicant. Thank you, Penny. Well done. >> Welcome, sir. >> And I didn't wear green, so I am
>> sorry about your box. >> Get the bucket. >> I'll donate time. >> Okay. Um, good evening, Joey Posey, 420 Southn Nova, attorney for the applicant. and uh and I'm going to touch on a lot of what I heard uh but to try to move
through some of this uh presentation and talk about it when we get to those pertinent points. uh as uh Penny had pointed out um you know she pointed out the zoning future land use the the relative entitlements on the property where we're trying to go from this and
um as she had mentioned in the uh um the narrative of how we got here the you know the original ask and the original um representation was the 113 that was stated in the staff report. you know, we've been very transparent throughout this process that that was the original
request and u you know, moving forward, of course, you know, that's, you know, it happens the way it happens. But, you know, tonight here, what we're asking for is that strength zoning category. Uh, and the, uh, request itself, just by implication of applying the zoning category is 50 units. That's the
maximum. Um, you know, I think a good example is if you look over at probably Quiet Place is probably a good example. uh there's no necessarily storm water tracks that are identified independent of the lots or you know maybe not a private roads is not probably a good example for that but those are the type
of things that you have to less out immediately when you're talking about net acreage that you can utilize for density. So um to you know the that's just how all modern subdivisions are done. You know those tracks are set aside you can't uh pack in more homes. So if you're talking in terms of raw
numbers, it makes sense that that when you hear that it's the 0 to2 that you know there's this hypothetical maximum of 113 arguably but uh that's an impossibility. If you apply the R um the R20 single family standards, the
hypothetical maximum is 50 out and that's just it. It's just by implication of code, storm water standards, roadways, open space. uh those minimums are outlined in the code and you can't avoid them which is a a very big distinction in process when we're
talking about that substantial uh reszoning request distinction. You know of course we have a density distinction that's uh massive in terms of what you would be entitled to. uh but you have a very different design criteria that you know has to apply the code minimums that
don't have deviations and uh you know just the rule character is very different that when you're talking about 50 units versus 113 units um that's double that you know from a neighborhood perspective I would imagine that looks very different uh on a zoning
perspective um the future land use part of this um again this is the zoning category that Kenny had mentioned uh this is the zoning map. Um, you know, we're surrounded by PUDs. Um, and by their nature, you know, this is actually the uh I think the the property that may
be a little bit of a distinction in this map because it's not going to be a PUD if approved tonight and moving forward. And that is a straight zoning category uh using a city um R20 uh standards. Um and interestingly enough, uh applying a
future land use of anything but 0 to2 actually is the the odd man out when it looks like what the minimum density is from the zoning or the future land use maps perspective. And uh Penny touched on this and you know some of what was the rub in trying to figure out what the appropriate future land use moving forward would be would be the compatible
zoning districts that would that are outlined in the comp plan. but also that that 50 number is very close to the one and it wasn't clear at the application stage well you know where what side are we falling on are we going to be 1.01 01 or are we going to be 0.99? So that
number was relevant in that regards. Um and that's where I would imagine that a lot of what moved forward with staff is uh you know from a policy perspective it's it's compatible. It's a compatible district that we'd want to move to. Um I think the uh unintended consequence that
um maybe helps alleviate concerns is that as Penny mentioned, you have to analyze the maximum when you talk about impacts. So from a perspective of application and moving forward in our analysis, we actually had to analyze an impact that never would be possible.
We'd be half of it. And you know from a you know policy setting perspective on concurrency for the city and master planning what uh they do with you know storm water or you know utilities u you know traffic uh highest and best you
know hypothetical density in a future land use perspective is not something that's even achievable but we have to analyze it. Uh the other thing that Penny had mentioned that um we were also talking about this internally that made sense from our perspective is you know the
representation is 50 units and if that moves forward then you know the the project's designed to be that you know whether it takes a policy perspective to get there. um you know one gross unit per acre is accomplishes that goal or whatever language moves forward there's
no problem with that and you know from a policy setting perspective that becomes the ceiling that's not the floor anymore there's no range of 0 to2 it's the ceiling is 50 and anything below that is how city staff's going to apply their standards to >> are you stipulating to that requirement
>> yes and we have no problem stipulating to that uh as a condition uh moving forward uh as part of risk again out of transparency that's that is what the applicant >> which is the policy that Penny was educated >> correct yes and that would be specific language in your comp plan relative to this property and you would have to
amend a comp plan to get there if you ever wanted to deviate from it >> okay um history of the site I'm this is just again some old knowledge of how we got here it's been many iterations um the current proposal um you know this is
just a generalized example it still would have to go through subdivision Uh it's a proposal that cuts the density in half u which theoretically is 50 units. Um the nice part about this is if you apply the minimum standard you get to about a 20% impervious coverage which is
very low for subdivision. Uh here's another example. Uh there's a lot of ways to skin this cat. And you know from a subdivision perspective that would be something that would have to be reviewed with staff but um you know that's a requirement that still is a step that they would have to go through. And really what you're setting is the
minimum guidelines that come from a density perspective and you know the ground rules that whoever you know from PIS's perspective what they move forward with has to abide by. >> Um it's a compatible zoning district from a rural perspective uh it's a
minimum 100 foot uh which a has to be a halfacre in terms of minimum watt area has on property is 60% uh the hypothetical maximum is 50 lots. It achieves a lot of the goals that were raised that we have heard over the last several months in terms of larger lots,
less density, less impervious. The property is included with cattle pasture. So, it's um, you know, impacted standpoint. It's, you know, one of those infills that you look for when you're talking about what would probably be an appropriate site. Even though I'm of course I recognize that folks can differ
about what the appropriate use is, but from a development perspective that this this makes sense from uh you know what I would imagine as a developable site. Uh no waiverss or variances. Nothing is being requested as part of this. Um again like I said roadway capacities
were an analyzed at the highest and best use of you know up to two uh units per acre. And again you we're half of that. Um we again representations are the same. no connections to Charles Street uh except for emergency vehicles as was the as has always been the case and um
you know the part about this and you all are obviously familiar with the PIS family that you know they've remained involved and you know even with you know just from their perspective the outcome that they were disappointed with that they still see this property as a a potential for uh the betterment of the
community and and in that respect it's I do applaud them for you know sticking it out uh but Um, you know, again, trying to be receptive to neighbors. A lot of what's happened post the last hearings, it was, you know, a lot of outreach to the neighborhoods, trying to make sure that they're engaged. Uh, in terms of
the fly in especially, uh, and how um, just just the the nature of how that transpired. uh we actually do have a conceptual agreement with them that's been signed to reach uh an understanding on how this property uh will move
forward and how we can help them. So again, it's a lot of doing the right things independent of just this zoning request in a vacuum. >> Conceptual agreement signed by who? >> The uh the HOA president and the >> of the fly. >> Correct.
>> Okay. and u and obviously the contract purchaser um obvious the benefits that we had um had mentioned it's rule in character just as this property again at 50 units that's a halfacre lots uh you
you have the spin-off of the you know obviously the jobs the businesses you guys have heard this before in other projects and uh and it's it's a filling a developable pocket that's a major step down in density that it establishes again those ground rules uh it's less runoff to Spruce week. Um, you know, we
have the St. John's requirements that kicked in this year for those heightened standards in terms of, you know, nutrient uh, treatment and how the project has to be designed. We do have the engineer available too that he's welcome if you have any specific questions as to that. Just keeping in mind that, you know, the subdivision
still needs to be designed and, you know, those perspectives, but we we're readily we're ready and available for those questions and, you know, further protecting the creek in that regard. So outside of that um you know it's it it makes sense from an overall policy
perspective of how the map again lays out in terms of density. It's a major step down uh especially for the area and anything that's in the jurisdiction of the city. Uh it's compatible uh from a both a future lane use and a zoning perspective and uh to alleviate further
concerns about the representations of the applicant and moving forward. It's, you know, there's no no issue with the policy change to cap that ceiling of what the density is possible on this property to make sure that that always stays the case. So, with that, um, I'm
available for questions. Uh, we have the team here, too. And, uh, that's the presentation. >> We'll see if anybody wants to ask any questions at the time. >> So, again, I think what we're what we're saying here, Mr. >> We'll come back to us in a minute. Do you have any questions for him specifically? >> Well, no. I'm just in general just
talking about in general about what the zoning is that again he's talking about 50 houses or 50 uh 50 lots on 56 acres. So it would be one for one but that's not the case because if you look at these layouts you know you've got way
more I mean these lots could be smaller than halfacre lots in in reality because of the amount of roadways dry ponds and wet ponds. That's the stuff that makes the difference. not necessarily the lots and lot sizes more so the common area to
me is what makes the difference. So when we talk about this zoning of 0 to two, obviously that's a maximum could be zero. You know what I mean? But am I correct? So I just want to clarify that. >> Anything else? >> Not yet.
>> Nothing. Praise God. >> Read. >> Oh, yeah. I'm loaded over here. >> Um all right. This this question, I guess I'll start here. Uh Joey, >> um why why R20 and not another PUD with
the same number of homes? And can you explain? >> I I think the hesitation was making sure we didn't trip anything that we thought may be controversial and create a an image that you know when you hear peed, it doesn't matter what form that PUD takes,
>> right? And I I think that's the narrative we didn't want to get caught in even though there's there's you can easily design a PUB that's substantially different from the project. That's that's that's a truth. >> But whether that matters for how folks
perceive the project very different. And that was what the judgment call was that if we call it a PUD, it doesn't matter what we design. That in in essence it's going to be the same PUD that was here last October. it's not going to be a new
PUB. So to achieve the goal, well, there's a zoning category that has that minimum halfacre lot requirement and let's just pursue that. And that way from you're talking apples and oranges. It's it's very different that, you know, we're being transparent about the minimum requirements and when you look
at it in a vacuum, you say, "Oh, this is different. This is this has this is a zoning category that has a rule nature to it. This is a zoning category that is a negotiated agreement that can look like this, but in terms of our perception of it is a peed. >> Okay.
>> All right. I appreciate that's a great answer to that, too. >> Um, Lance, and we're getting into lot size just a little bit. Is there anything, and this might be actually a penny question. Is there anything in here that actually requires minimum lot size um for that concern? Cuz yes, it's
it's unit per acre, but it still would have to be at least quarter acre lots if I'm doing >> it's >> or it had to be more than that, wouldn't it? >> 20,000. >> It's 20,000 square feet, 100 wide. >> Correct. >> We'd have to meet that. >> That was listed on the on one of the slides there and also in the staff report dimensional requirements. It has
a 20,000 foot lot area and a minimum lot width of 100 feet. >> Good. Okay, that takes care of that, too. Um, I'm going to ask these questions and and I'm hoping you give me an answer, but I also understand this is with respect to the business because I I understand what it's like to do business
and don't not be able to necessarily give away some information. >> Um, do you do you know what the average square foot of the home goal is by any means at all? Ballpark. >> Okay. >> Excellent. Any idea on what we're t like a price target at all or is it too early
for that? 800 conveyed to. >> Okay, that you know that's a great straight answer. I appreciate that. Um and that actually kind of answers what was going to be my last question is that you know when you guys were here with the same piece of property we had 113
homes and we talked about reducing that you you said almost almost verbatim is we couldn't cut any homes because we couldn't make any money. >> So then we're here and we've cut over half the homes. Now, clearly that's because we're going up in square footage and we're going up in in size and lots
and everything, but that's that is going to be something that's one of the things that I was watching back the last meeting and sitting here today is how we go from we can't cut any to we cut 63 and that I need you to >> and I do have an answer for that. Um,
and I think Jim cut me off when I'm saying too much, but but um, you know, the the real risk with that path was that at the current contract price, with the current contract requirements, it that was truth that we didn't have a choice, >> right?
>> So, the moment that became set in stone on the outcome is the moment that Jim had nothing, >> right? >> Because you can't obviously move forward with this project at what was agreed to on that side of the deal with the design. So over the next took it was
several months to work out the terms of that detail. That's where this became a feasible project again to move forward with because it we had to work with three separate owners. >> Okay. >> And that was the real risk and that was the part of this process that became uh
essentially a dice roll. you you know you don't know the wins of three people and what their perspective is going to be and that would be the largest portion of why we're back here and half the units is a feasible project. >> I appreciate you answering that again. Like I said I know I don't want you to
show your hand too much but I still want want to try to acquire information. So um I don't really think I have anything else to say until I at least hear from the audience. I'll have at least one more comment then but otherwise I'm I'm good on questions. >> Okay. So, I I will just say that um I
appreciate your your interest and willingness to to uh to exercise this this policy change that Penny is briefing us about. And and at some point here, I'll be asking uh I guess maybe the city attorney to walk us through
what we would need to do to to to put that because that does make me feel better. It to me at least in my mind and I understand staff's explanation and your explanation and Mr. pays everybody's I I got that. But the way I see it, I see it.
>> I guess there is a way to make that look the way it's intended to be. I guess >> it's a smell test, right? >> Understood. Understood. >> Look test, whatever we want to call it. But, um, just out of curiosity, >> if if if you if this works out and you've got 50 lots, let's say, and
somebody comes in and says, you know what, I want to build a really big house. I want to buy two lots contiguous and build a big house. Can that be done? Uh yes, all they'd have to do is meet the minimum subdivision standards for that cat zoning category. So there'd be no issue. >> So you could conceivably
>> you may have a if there's an interest, you may have less homes and just bigger of them. >> You looking to move, Scott? >> Nope. >> 50 is the hypo hypothetical ceiling maximizing the property. >> Got it. >> Understood. That was one that was just my question. All right. Why don't we uh
I know for sure we got at least one vote gentleman that wants to speak. Um, Victor Lopez, Paul Lopez, welcome, sir. >> Good evening. I'm sorry I didn't wear green, but this is the uniform of the day. >> You, my friend, get a pass.
>> Um, Mr. Pis, I want to thank him very much. I've made a number of concessions which are very palatable to all people in Spruce Creek, especially myself since I face that property. But there are two items that I would like to address the council with. First is when you rejected this the first time, one of the things
that you took into consideration was the fact that the Spruce Creek water basin report was in progress. That basin report is due out possibly by April, maybe by June, I would say, and that has not been considered. It may totally confirm everything that the planning has
done, but it is not yet out. The second item I will address to the city attorney. When this item first came to the planning commission back in last year, Mr. Schmidt recused himself from voting, saying he was the accountant for
Mr. Pis for 30 years. This time he voted in favor of passing it on to the council. Had he not had he recused himself, it would have been 22. The item would not come before you. What facts and circumstances changed to avoid the appearance of nepotism and an ethics
violation? >> Anything else? No, that's okay. >> I will I will go ahead and let the city attorney respond to that because I know he's got the answer because it's already been asked. >> Yeah, we we had uh actually received a a written statement by the commission member Schmidt that he no longer uh was
engaged uh by Mr. Pis and there or at the time of the vote there was there was no longer a conflict and and as required by state law uh where there is no legal voting conflict, you are required to vote. >> Right. Okay. Very good. All right. Anybody else in the public wish to speak
to this? >> Can we clarify one more thing? >> Sure. We're We're back to council now. So, go ahead. It's your turn. >> Yeah. So, if if our planning commission doesn't approve a project, they can still bring the project to us. Correct. >> Absolutely.
>> I just want to make sure he understands that and everyone else does. The planning commission makes a recommendation. It doesn't mean it ends there. It's still got it's still going to come to us. Am I correct? So, I just want to clarify that because a lot of things are said at that podium that
aren't true and we got to make sure that the public understands that that we can have a project fail at planning commission and they can still bring it forward to us. We still then make that decision. We take it to consideration. >> And and just to clarify what the city
attorney just said is that that issue was raised. City attorney looked into it. there is not a conflict any longer because that employment relationship no longer exists and then by and because of that the commission member is required
by law he does not have an opportunity to abstain in that scenario. Is that right Matt? >> That is correct. >> Okay. And I'm and I'm not an attorney but I got that pretty close. So so yeah so back to us. Um Penny you want to you want to come back up? Um,
any any you guys have any additional questions? I'm going to ask Penny and Matt to help coach us through um this this change of a policy property policy ordinance in a minute and how we would go about doing that. But any any
technical aspects or questions for Penny on the >> Penny, you can you can give a a yes no to this pretty much, but um can you just kind of >> um back up what Mr. Posie was saying about the PUD versus R20 and that they're really it's they're pretty handinand. There's not like one
disadvantage or advantage one way or the other. >> So in this case, >> we wouldn't be able to bring forward to you a PUD because it would be a similar zoning district. Okay. >> That was that was the main consideration. >> A PUD was denied. We can't bring you back. >> I just wanted an answer. Thank you.
>> What else you got? >> I don't think I have any more technical questions. I do notice that this property we talked about it's on Charles Street. We already have a Charles Street on the east side of Port Orange. Do we have the ability to rename that road? I know it's not really in topic to what we're doing here right now. >> It's a county road, but you know, we
have contacts we could discuss, but there's people with addresses linked to it and bills and >> Yeah, I understand. >> Foley Road or >> No, please. Anything but >> Tracy? >> No, I'm good. >> Okay, Lance, anything else? >> Not yet. >> Not yet. All right, Sean. No. Okay. So
then I guess that brings back to me. So I I I would definitely in my assessment of this see this as a very significant change from where this was uh what you I think you said six months ago that seemed like it was
>> October that long ago. But I think it's a very very significant change in the in the volume and the density of the units. Um, and and in my in my mind, I would say that that that box, at least for me, to be able to this could come back inside of 12 months is is is worthy.
It's okay. It's it's definitely not the same project. And as I see it. Yeah, I get it. They're building homes. That's about it. Um, what I would like to see is if there's consensus here on council, I really like to see us tighten up by with that policy
change that you mentioned that they've stipulated to and walk us through how to do that. I just think that it makes for a >> nicer, neater package. It looks the way it's supposed to be. I think it's functional and clearly it's it's it's uh what they're willing to do as well. So,
and I truly appreciate that. How do we do that? Okay. So, basically the the ordinance would need to be amended in two places. The title block, >> which ordinance? >> The future land use the the first one um -2. The the title block would be amended to also add or reference to a text
amendment. Um and an exhibit would be added to the ordinance that also that shows the proposed text amendment to the future land use element. And it would be to add policy 1.4.8. And that policy would would be written
to read um it would list the three parcel numbers and say parcel X, Y, and Z. I don't have all their numbers memorized right now, but parcel X, Y, and Z. Any any development on parcel X, Y, and Z has a gross density limited to
one unit per acre. >> C XYZ cumulative Yeah. Yeah. I mean, we'll wordsmith it, but I went back and saw the last one that we did. So the next the the policy number in order for this would be it would be um proposed policy 1.4.18
>> and and you're going to so this is two readings anyway. So so we're going to have an opportunity to bring you back on second reading a revised ordinance that has everything that she just mentioned. I think we generally got to understand, you know, if that's the will of the council, what I'd ask for is on ordinance number 2026-2,
whoever made the motion and and second, if we could just withdraw that, we can we can make a new motion with an amendment to the ordinance as Penny has discussed and then we'll bring that back to you on second reading with those revisions to implement this stipulated
policy cap of one unit in the aggregate per acre. >> Okay. Okay. So you need >> who who was the main motion, right? >> So >> you got all that. >> Well, and that's on item number two. >> You're welcome to You're welcome to have him coach you through this. >> That's on the first the first item that was opened. Ordinance 2026-2.
Sorry. >> First item number two. >> Okay. So we still have discussion on that, Mr. Mayor. So I'm I'm a little confused. >> Jump right in. >> So I'm I'm confused to what we're saying here. We're we're we're going to put down a text amendment that says
one house per acre. We're going to make the future land use designation match what it is the applicant is actually wanting to do. >> So instead 0 to two. >> So so the future land use category that's been applied for has the range of
0 to two and what is being discussed is in addition to the the land use change to add a policy on top of it that caps it at actually one unit per acre. It doesn't provide for the whole range. Although the category allows zero to
two, the policy will limit the property to just one unit per acre >> which is what the applicants >> but okay. So >> gross density >> gross density over the 56 acre >> correct. >> Okay, understood. >> So it actually become it actually
becomes a a maximum of 56 homes but >> correct theor >> theoretically not 50 but 56 but it's a way to do it. It's a way to do it. So and this doesn't I I I want to just say I want to give some credit to Mr. PIS and Posie and and the entire team here. You don't have a developer come back
around a second time all the time and and work this hard to reduce density and try to bring a good project to the city and everything else. You know, we we become so anti-development at a county level in a lot of things. And you know, not every project is bad, you know, and and so, you know, I think you guys being
willing to be so amendable and flexible and come in and and make some serious concessions and go talk to the HOA that isn't even Port Orange voters and and go sit with them and talk to them and make sure that they were going to be okay with this because of the number of residents that live there. you guys have
done a lot of homework and things and so I you know if we're able to get this in writing without delaying you um that would make me pretty happy here at this point. >> I would concur. >> All right. I'm going to put this ball in your court with with the oversight of
the city attorney. Tell us what we got to do here. >> So first step is withdrawing the motion specifically for ordinance number 2026-2 the future landings designation. >> Okay. We're going to withdraw uh 2026-2. >> Your motion and your second withdrawn as well.
>> Yes. >> Okay. So, now you can start fresh. >> Then we'll start with a fresh motion on uh ordinance number 20 26-2 with adding to the policy 1.4.18.
Amend the development use of gross density of one unit per acre. >> I I like it. You good with that? >> We're good with that. All right. Do we have a second? Second. >> We have a motion and a second. Any further discussion for council on it? >> I think
>> good to call the role. >> So we call the role. >> Anybody else in the public want to come back and get in the middle of all that? You're welcome to it. No. Okay. Back to council. Last chance for discussion. >> So we call in the role for this project.
>> Just for item 18 just just to change the the future look. There'll be a policy change in that future land use a minute. the amendment to be one no more than one unit per acre as opposed to up to two units per acre intro. >> Okay. >> Okay. Clerk, call the RO. >> Councilman Foley. >> Yes.
>> Councilman Gford. >> Yes. >> Councilman Green. >> Yes. >> Vice Mayor Grubs? >> Yes. >> Mayor S? >> Yes. 5. >> All right. We don't need to amend anything on this one. >> There's a second ordinance. There's no amendment necessary here that I'm aware of. >> All right.
>> We're not going to we're not going to make this muddied anymore. All right. I'll have the clerk call the role on ordinance number 2026-3 with a motion and a second already on the floor. >> Mr. Mayor, so is again is this the final of this project being approved?
>> This is the zoning portion. So the first one was future land use. This is the R20S zoning. >> Okay. >> Councilman Foley. >> Yes. >> Councilman Gford. >> Yes. >> Councilman Green. >> Yes. >> Vice Mayor Grubs. >> Yes. Mayor Sto. >> Yes. 50.
Thank you guys for all the work y'all put into it. >> All right, that brings us to item number 20. First reading of ordinance number 2026-4, LDC amendment chapters 2 and 16, outdoor donation bins and temporary storage
containers. >> Sure. That's a uh that's an ordinance of city wishing for amending the land development code chapter 2 definitions and interpretations in chapter 16 miscellaneous regulations relating to outside storage establishing standards for outdoor donation bins and establishing standards for temporary
storage containers on non-residential properties associated with construction and renovation projects providing for repeal of conflicting ordinances severability and an effective date >> all you >> good evening penalty crews planning again >> we need a motion >> oh yes that's what I was waiting Hang on
a second. >> We got a motion for ordinance uh number 2026-4. >> Second. >> Go ahead. >> Motion to second on the floor. >> All right. Penelopey Creek Planning. Um so the proposed amendments in this package are intended to enhance the existing code as part of the city's
ongoing maintenance. We try to bring forward code amendments. Original land development code was adopted in like 1996. And so every year we try to bring a few code amendments to kind of clean it up, bring it up to date. Um these particular amendments that were just opened include issues addressed when applying the code including regulations
for outdoor donation bins and temporary storage containers. Uh so the proposed amendments are to chapter 16 to establish some clear consistent and enforceable standards to outdoor donation bins. Um, previously the we were having to handle this
situation with um, classifying them as service areas. And service areas really in the land development code apply to mechanical equipment and elements that are associated um, with a principal building such as their dumpster, um, HBAC's, things like that. Donation bins
are are typically owned and operated, you know, managed by a totally different owner than the property. So they're really not service areas for the principal structure. So um this amendment adds a clear definition for the donation bin and establishes standards for addressing location size,
appearance, number, operation and maintenance. Um and the regulations are designed to improve the aesthetics, public safety and ensure uh functionality and clear enforcement mechanisms for for code enforcement. Um all the details of that are are in the staff report. Um the next part of it is
regarding temporary storage containers. So chapter 16 establishes regulations for temporary storage containers um on uh on residential property. And we have regulations for just standard outdoor
storage for non-residential property that has to be screened and things like that. Wasn't really clear standards for temporary storage on non-residential. Um and so again, this has been an issue that codes had some, you know, hasn't had clear enforcement regulations on. Um
so under this proposed amendment, temporary storage containers would be permitted um in association with active building permits or approved site improvements uh for the duration of that permit. Um and some flexibility if there's things that you need to go on, you know, moving in, things like that
after you get your CO. Um, and then they have to be removed obviously once you get your CO certificate of completion, final inspection, um, with some flexibility built in there for situations when you're still trying to move everything in. Um, and it's basically consistent standards now for
for all the different properties in the city. So, um, that's really it for this first part, this this first ordinance. I'm here to answer any questions you may have. >> Anybody have any questions for Penny? >> I didn't have any questions on this. I did bring this up to uh Wayne and Robin
and I just wanted to make sure something when the CEO was done is you know everything being cleared out and I Lance I thought of you and your business and what I just went through doing my business and reging it and getting everything done. Sometimes you have a a
container sitting there even though you got the CO and it's trying to get it picked up all your tools and everything packed up and moved. And um the one thing they pointed out and it's it's in the thread here. It says may grant approval for unique unique circumstances
for extensions when warranted, you know, 30 days, whatever it is once the co's done to get your stuff off the premises and and that nature. So thank you for bringing that up. Containers have become a huge business.
>> It uh it makes sense to to stay on top of this and clean things up a little bit. Anybody in the public want to speak to this? Robert, come on up. Mayor, council members, Robert Reinhagen, 1425 Dexter Drive, Port
Orange. Uh, with regard to the uh outdoor donation bins, I think you should just drop the whole thing. Uh, because why do you care? Um, as long as it's between the owner of the property and this donation outfit, what they do
with their bins, who cares, you know, as long as they don't put it in the parking space. But that's really a code enforcement action. And so the rest of it you don't need, I don't think. So, thank you. They almost always get put in the parking spaces for sure. Anybody
else in the in the public want to speak to it? Come on up and thank you for wearing green. >> Because you because you've got on so much green, we're going to forgive Robert and his $500 client for not wearing anything. >> I think we just make them pay her. >> Okay, you're good. Yeah,
>> I remember that it was St. Patrick's Day. >> I'm Shirley Rice. Uh 760 by Row Drive, Port Orange. Does this apply with all the codes that Penny read
to private property or is it just businesses? because to make a private individual like us go through uh all this code business like we had a pod in the front of our house
on our property for two years at our expense and we didn't do anything with the city and the city didn't care because we were still flooded twice. So that's my point. I'll let I'll let
Penny speak to that for you. >> Thank you. >> Good question. >> Thank you. >> Anybody else from the public? >> Penny, can you come up and address that? I think I pretty much know all the answers to that, but >> um so the code actually already has
these same standards for residential properties. Um and they it is very similar to what's being proposed for non-residential that you're allowed to have temporary uh structure uh stoages like pods for the duration of active construction, remodeling, permitting.
Sometimes what you're doing doesn't need a permit. That's why there's that flexible language added because sometimes you're just having to rip out carpet that might have gotten wet or what have you and that doesn't require a permit. Um but that's where we have the flexible language. the one thing that
doesn't require a permit, but that's where we have the flexible language where obviously you're going to have things that you need to store and things like that. So, yeah. So, the same same provisions apply to residential properties. >> Mhm. >> I'm really surprised to hear you say that.
>> Penny, before you all go away, just one more quick question. >> Some neighborhoods have these little like libraries like like where they'll >> you know what I'm talking about. This no way in affects that either, right? Okay, cool. Just
>> bird feeders are still okay, right? >> Come on, guys. I'm not that >> back to council. Anybody got any more questions? >> All right, I'll have a quick call roll. >> Councilman Foley. >> Yes. >> Councilman Gford. Yes. >> Councilman Green. Yes. >> Vice Mayor Grubs. >> Yes.
>> Yes. 50. >> You want us to meet you chair? >> Welcome. I feel bad you have to stand all night. Item 21, first reading of ordinance number 2026-5. >> It's an ordinance of the city of Ports Lucian County, Florida, amending the land development code, chapter 2 definitions and interpretations, chapter
14, architectural design, and chapter 15 signs relating to design criteria, updating the method for determining whether a color qualifies as an earth tone or pastel to align with current paint industry standards. relating to permanent sign types, specifically murals, clarifying that murals are
excluded from paint regulations, except that reflective and fluorescent paints remain prohibited, providing for repeal of conflicting ordinances, severability, and effective date. >> Move from uh ordinance number 2026-5. >> Second. >> Second. >> We have a motion, a second. The item is
on the floor. When all of us ran for election, this was all on our campaign. I mean, we this is when we were talking about this, so >> this is a really fun This is a really, really big one tonight. >> We all have opinions about Earth Tones, so we could be here till 11. I'm just saying. >> Figures planning. Yeah, this is this is
a real This is really in the weeds with planning here. So, I have um a lot of details here that I can get into about LRV and all that stuff, but basically at the end of the day, what this amendment does is it just gives the planning staff a much more
clear cut, transparent way to determine if proposed colors meet code or not. Because right now, for years, um the definition of earth tone was the paint has to have 5% black content or this percentage of white content. And when you call Home Depot or Lowe's or Shervin
Williams, which I've done many times, they're like, "Yeah, it doesn't really work that way." Um, we have different bases that we mix paint with and there's different types of white bases that we mix and it's not I can't tell. And sometimes based on the shading or tone, I might use a little bit of this and
that. So, I could never do the math to tell you what the percentage of white content is in that color. So, and they were kind of they would they would kind of reply back like, "Well, what are you that's crazy like that? that's not correct. Um so all the experts um in the
industry have said you know LRV is the way to go. Um and so that that's basically what this is doing is giving us a a black and white kind of literally literally um a number like is it this number or not? And it makes it much
clearer for staff to be able to determine if it meets the code. And then obviously when we were looking at that, you know, we realized that the the mural provision that we put into the last update for um for the sign chapter didn't really say, you know, that they were exempt for the colors. And it just
takes away that flexibility for artists to provide unique, you know, murals if they were bound to do murals that are only earth tones and pastels. >> So if they're painting Nemo, you can actually look like >> Yeah. Exactly. >> That doesn't have to be a topiary intent. >> Exactly. So that that's kind of the the
quick and dirty of it. Okay, thank you. Cal, any questions? >> Beautiful murals around Port Orange. >> There's a long there's a long-standing saying around these parts that was crafted probably before I was born that Port Orange was different by choice and not by chance.
>> Yes, sir. >> I hope this was not one of those choices. >> Are we slow? Are we slowing down there in your department? >> No. >> We had to dig something up. No, but we we deal with we deal with having to give people answers on the color almost every
day. So, >> okay. >> This makes y'all's job easier, though. >> Much easier. All for it. >> Much easier. >> Anybody in the public want to speak to this? >> Back back to council. >> Uh you you can definitely tell when you ride around the city whether you're in a neighborhood that has an HOA or not.
>> If you're in a neighborhood that has an HOA, >> pretty consistent. You get outside that, you're going to be like, "Oh, look at that house and that color." You know how many different shades of white there are? >> Oh, there's a bunch. >> I like. >> So, all right. Quick, call the roll. >> Council, excuse me. Councilman Foley, >> yes. >> Councilman Gford,
>> yes. >> Councilman Green, >> yes. >> Vice Mayor Grubs, >> yes. Mayor Stler, >> yes. 50. Council committee reports. Item 22, First Step Shelter. >> Yes. We had our meeting last Monday and so far first shelter has housed over,5
people and 93% of those housed for at least uh from two years ago are still in housing. So it's working. Uh we had our annual banquet uh earlier in the year and we uh generated uh more than $47,000
than the previous year. So fundraising is working out well and um we had an audit and the audit report came back clean and they have over $2 and half million dollars in the bank and we discussed ways for that money to start working um for itself maybe putting more
money in some secured CDEs. So things are going really good at first step shelter. >> Awesome. >> Um move on to the chamber. got a report today from our former chairman and now business owner in Port Orange. You got a fantastic facility there, by the way.
It's amazing. Uh they had a new membership uh reception this morning. I believe we had eight new members presenting today. >> So chamber's uh doing very well, a lot of energy, a lot of uh different
businesses uh joining. So, it's exciting to see new faces and people from relocating from South Florida, opening businesses here in Port Orange and making their home here in Port Orange and their business here in Port Orange as well. Very exciting. >> Some business been here for a long time
are now joining for the first time. >> And and I want to thank you for your connection and involvement with the chamber. So, you know, every all we all have different lives and different schedules and lots of different commitments, but the chamber is important to us and it is very nice and beneficial for us to have somebody like
yourself who stays very well connected to what's going on. They do a lot for the community. They are they are very uh well appreciated. Um I love what they do for new businesses. I know you and I we had a chance to go to a ribbon cutting the other day. It's a car wash, right? How exciting can a car wash be?
>> It can be pretty darn exciting. It can be pretty cool. >> Like Yeah. I mean, you're like, "Oh my god, look." I mean, here they are doing a rivet cutting. It's packed. It's so packed. There's nowhere to park. Not because we're there, but because people are coming to get their cars clean. So, >> well, it was free car wash day. >> Yeah, free car wash day. But, but
nonetheless, >> I'm a member. My parents are a member. They love that car wash. And, uh, if they take a tour of that facility, it's amazing what they do there. >> So, uh, yeah, it's good to see. >> Great event. Great event. How about Art House? Mr. So Art House, one of the big things is the county uh cultural grant
was awarded to everybody. So that brings funding into art house. Uh so for the summer programs for the kids that allows us to have the art house to have grants available for the summer kids. So that's
that's a big thing. Um and then mural projects. Uh we just talked about the one they just did for Pet Evolution and again proceeds come back full force to the city to help out with the murals in the down under. So hopefully more murals will come out because they get to see
the great work they did out there for Dan and his team and uh other people will take up on it. But that's it. >> Outstanding. And the round table elected officials met. I was not able to attend the meeting but fortunately for me this is one that staff goes to as well. So a
lot of the stuff that comes out of the round table for elected officials is a lot of very very similar information that we all picked up pick up collectively in other boards and committees. But Wayne, anything in particular related to Port Orange? I know and and by the way for those that don't know there's a lot of things that
will get discussed in that meeting too that don't necessarily pertain to Port Orange or or have as big an impact as it does in one city versus another. Yeah, the majority of this one, probably more than half of it was on affordable housing, but the topics that were related to us, there was a conversation about transform 386. It's one of the
regular items kind of what you brought up tonight. Uh th those storm water items are going to be regular briefings for almost everything all the governments are doing. So, transform 386 comes up. They talk about the process of the projects. I mentioned those earlier today. It also talks about how well we
coordinate and there's also individual properties that are being purchased under that program. So, we've brought some of those forward as well. Uh in addition to that and the storm water, there's a flooding subcommittee in the region. So both of them's briefings generally just go over what we've done. The the county has a dashboard, a
newsletter, a bunch of different ways that they are getting the word out as well to communicate about projects. We submit to them. They don't because there's 16 cities. They don't put something from every city and every one, but we make sure they have stuff. So, and I think the most recent one, they went through the information that we had
in one of our newsletters on the maintenance that we'd done recently, and Robin mentioned that when she was doing her presentation, that with the selective use of outside consultants to get to the harder to reach ditches in the city, we have now had the highest level of maintenance that we've ever had in the history of the city, getting in there and doing that. So, that was one
of the things that was reported in there and talked about briefly. >> Excellent. Um, also if you and if you could between you and Robin, I know particularly because you guys really stay up on top of it, but also with the city attorney. Um, maybe at the next meeting if somebody could just give us
an overview and put on the agenda if you want on some of the legislative updates out of Tallahassee, specifically the ones that that will pertain to things we've got going on in the city of Port Orange. So, a few things here. Some takes a little a little while to shake out. Yep. So, it takes a little while to
shake out, but whenever that's appropriated, we can do that. That'd be great. >> And wait to get some of the final information, but at this point, it it does appear that the whole bunch of the bills that might have affected us did not make it through that process. So, it's a little be a little easier to report because I think we're down to like four or five of them that were
>> Okay, sounds good. And and and just the last thing, um gentleman standing in the back of the room back there by the double doors, I just want to recognize him. That's Sergeant Jim James Machete. Uh we call him Fish. Um he is he is a a gentleman that has served the Port
Orange Police Department for how long? >> Uh 18 years. >> 18 years. Um I had the pleasure and honor of working with him for many many years at the police department. I don't get to see him very much. He's um he uh apparently has taken the initiative to
uh dye a little bit of gray in the beard. >> Uh but um it's always good to see you. Thank you for what you do and continuing to serve. Um, Sergeant Vachet is one of the best I ever worked with and served. So, it's great that we still have him in our police department. Anything else to
come before us tonight? >> Mayor, one quick thing. Um, I wanted to say it during council comments and I forgot to. Um, tonight the Valuchia County Council had an agenda item that was uh item N on their consent and it was a $850,000
expenditure approval to go out for a feasibility study to figure out what it would cost and what it would look like to fourlane Williamson Boulevard from Madlin over the bridge to Town West there. Uh, Mr. uh, Councilman Reinhardt called me today to tell me about that.
Um, and it did pass. So, we will get to find out just how expensive that is and who uh who we need to start asking to help. So, but they did um it's a great first step uh for them to do that for sure and uh something that would benefit
Port Orange. So, >> you got to spend $85. >> All right, have a good night, guys.