[0:00] >> mayor: all right. Good morning, everybody. It is 9:40. We do have two brief meetings

[0:07] this morning before our regular meeting starts. And so we're going to call this first of those to order.

[0:13] this is the board of trustees retiree health and trust fund. And we so one item on the agenda.

[0:20] is there a motion to adopt the agenda, commissioner hayes-santos. >> second.

[0:30] >> mayor: all in favor say aye. [chorus of ayes] all opposed? That motion passes.

[0:36] the only item on here we1 is the 2022 gainesville retiree trust fund update. With that we will recognize you.

[0:46] welcome. >> williams johnson, investment officer for the city. Board members.

[0:53] just some background on this item. Earlier this year the board met and requested that staff update

[1:03] the investment policy statement for this retiree trust fund to restrict investments in russian and bella russian securities.

[1:14] that is the main update in this investment policy statement in accordance with the board's direction.

[1:19] there's also an update to the investment rate of return assumption. We're reducing that from 9.9% to

[1:28] 9.75% in line with the city's pension plans. And really that's a come by nation of input from the state

[1:39] division of retirement, our actuary and our investment managers. There is sort of a more

[1:45] conservative trend in investment rate return assumptions that the state pushes on local government plans, and this reflects that.

[1:55] >> mayor: okay. Thank you, mr. Johnson. Appreciate the update. Commissioner hayes-santos.

[1:59] >> thank you, mayor. I move that we adopt the new policy. >> second.

[2:05] >> mayor: motion and a second to adopt the new policy. Any members of the public here to speak to this item?

[2:11] back to the commission. All in favor say aye. [chorus of ayes] all opposed?

[2:21] that motion passes unanimously with commissioner duncan-walker absent. We will reconvene our next

[2:31] meeting at 9:45. We are adjourned. . >> mayor: good morning.

[4:49] this is the meeting of the board of trustees for gainesville general employees pension plan. September 15th.

[4:55] we have three items on the agenda today. Is there a motion to adopt the agenda?

[5:00] >> so moved. >> second. >> mayor: motion and a second to adopt the agenda.

[5:04] all in favor say aye. [chorus of ayes] all opposed? That motion passes unanimously

[5:09] with hayes-santos and duncan-walker absent. The first order of business is fy21 actuary evaluation report

[5:21] for the gainesville employee plan. Mr. Johnson, welcome back. >> board members, thank you.

[5:27] just an overview of this. We prepare or we have an external actuary prepare an evaluation of the pension plan

[5:36] every year. The intent is to evaluate the plans, assets and liabilities. And a funded status for the plan

[5:43] and then also to develop the contribution rate required by the city for the upcoming fiscal year.

[5:50] it's two. Year lag. This is the fiscal year '21 actuarial evaluation.

[5:55] it will term the fiscal year '23 employer contribution rate. The employee contribution rate is fixed at 5%.

[6:02] according to this, the fiscal year '23 employer contribution rate is being reduced from 5.53% to 5.09%.

[6:12] the actuarial report discusses the reasons for that. The primary reason is very good returns in fiscal year '21 and

[6:22] that affected the funded status of the plan. And caused a slight reduction in the contribution rate required.

[6:30] >> mayor: good news all around. Thank you, mr. Johnson. Any questions or is there a motion?

[6:39] commissioner arreola. >> mr. Mayor I'll move the recommendation. >> mayor: is there a second?

[6:44] >> second. >> mayor: motion to approve the 21 actuarial evaluation and employee the contribution rate

[6:52] of 5.09% based on that '21 valuation report. Any members of the public wish to speak to this motion.

[7:01] back to the commission. All in favor say aye. [chorus of ayes] all opposed?

[7:05] that motion passes unanimously with duncan-walker absent. Next is gainesville investment policy update.

[7:12] we'll go back to you, mr. Johnson. >> this item is very similar to the retiree health fund

[7:20] investment policy update. The only change here is again the restriction of russian and bella russian securities.

[7:29] and that issue was made at the request of the board back at their june 16th meeting. >> mayor: very good.

[7:36] we have two recommendations that are identical. I think that was a cut and paste sort of duplication there.

[7:42] are there any questions or is there a motion to approve the recommendation. Commissioner saco.

[7:48] >> mr. Mayor, I move staff recommendation. >> mayor: is there a second? >> second.

[7:54] >> mayor: motion and second to approve the recommendation which updates the direction given from the commission regarding russian

[8:01] bella russian investment. Any members of the public wishing to speak to that? All in favor say aye.

[8:11] [chorus of ayes] all opposed? That motion passes unanimously with duncan-walker absent.

[8:16] last is application for disability retirement for connie tomlinson. >> good morning.

[8:26] [inaudible] director. And I am going to present your ability to review and hopefully approve the application.

[8:37] she's worked for the city for about 18 years, been a component of the employ retirement plan is a disability retirement option

[8:47] for those due to an accident or injury, no longer able to perform the essential functions of their job continuously.

[8:58] ms. Thomson's file was reviewed. Due to progressiveness of her illness, it's unlikely that she'll be able to return to do

[9:11] her job and the disability review committee recommends acceptance and approval of the application for ms. Thomson.

[9:18] >> so moved. >> second. >> mayor: motion and a second that we approve the application

[9:23] for disability. Are there any questions or any members of the public wish to speak to this?

[9:28] okay. Back to the commission. All in favor of the motion say aye.

[9:32] [chorus of ayes] all opposed? That motion passes unanimously with commissioner duncan-walker

[9:37] absent. Do we have anybody here for general public comment? Okay.

[9:41] any member comment? All right. We will then be adjourned. We'll reconvene our regular city

[9:48] commission meeting at 10:00. . >> mayor: so just remove that from the agenda.

[23:04] >> and refer it [inaudible] >> mayor: thank you, commissioner. Commissioner duncan-walker.

[23:16] >> that you, mr. Mayor. That was one of my concerns so thank you, commissioner chestnut for that.

[23:22] I would like to pull d2 and d5. I nona there were a couple of questions. We wanted to have them get a

[23:39] little bit of clarity. >> mayor: okay. Pull and put on regular. >> the modifications shown on

[23:52] the screen and also move to the agenda and placed on a future general policy committee meeting.

[24:01] and that d2 and d5 from consent -- I guess in the end of the afternoon? >> mayor: I expect those to be

[24:20] short. I don't expect them to be long. Let's try to put them at the end of the morning agenda.

[24:38] >> mayor: we'll move to the commission to approve the agenda as modified. All in favor say aye.

[24:43] [chorus of ayes] >> mayor: all opposed? That motion passes unanimously. Madam clerk.

[24:48] anyone here for early public comment? >> no. F1 boss sum creek state lighting

[24:59] with the recommendation that the commission award the project to musco sports lighting. >> mayor: any comments or turn

[25:17] it over to ms. Wade. Ms. Wade, welcome. >> good morning, mayor and commissioners.

[25:22] thank you for the opportunity to provide you with a short update on the possum creek skating project.

[25:32] all right. Perfect. So this past april you asked me to explore what it would take to

[25:38] light possum creek skate park. I hired a lighting designer who is local and we worked with them and the sports lighting company,

[25:45] musco sports lighting to gather that [inaudible] in the amount of $152,000 to light possum creek yum creek skate park.

[25:58] we would have to light the parking lot and we thought it would be responsible to light the path to the rest room as

[26:05] well if we were going to extend the hours of the facility. So we would [inaudible] install the infrastructure so we could

[26:13] have gru rental lights in the parking lot and that lit path to the rest room. >> mayor: look at that.

[26:38] >> delayed a little bit. >> here's an image. A lot of people are not familiar with foot candles, an odd even

[26:57] of measure. If you think about the lighting you see in your average baseball field, it would be similar to

[27:02] that. We would be averaging about 24-foot candles. And a lit path to the rest room

[27:23] facility on site. There are some long-term operation maintenance costs that would be associated if you were

[27:29] to approve this project. We're estimating that would be $15,000 a year, which could be paid for by wild spaces at least

[27:38] for some duration. That cost would include the gru rental lights, the bulk of the cost and then the additional

[27:44] electricity cost for the musco sports lights and then the additional trash pickup because we think this facility would get

[27:51] a lot of use. Maybe some additional rest room cleaning as well. We need to feel that out.

[27:57] about $15,000 a year is the long-term cost. So staff is recommending to move forward with this proposal

[28:05] pending your discussion, of course. And we are looking at lighting the park and that parking lot

[28:10] area to about 9 p.m. That obviously could be extended with permits and other authorizations.

[28:16] we were thinking that 9 p.m. Might be a good starting point just to kind of get the neighborhood used to having that

[28:22] facility with the expanded hours of use. I did take a measurement of the southern edge of the skate park

[28:28] and we're about 430 feet away from the closest neighbor to the south, just do give you a head's up.

[28:35] and with that, pending your questions. >> mayor: okay. Thank you.

[28:40] commissioner hayes-santos. >> thank you, mayor. When would you expect it to open up with the new lights?

[28:46] >> so there are some delays right now with some electrical equipment, hand holds and junction boxes.

[28:54] we're seeing four to six months lead time in getting those items in. So this projects would not take

[28:59] place overnight. I'm thinking probably, because of the manufacturing delays on those specific gru-required

[29:06] item% the rental lights, we're looking maybe six months after we execute the contract, worst-case scenario.

[29:14] >> I would like to move that we adopt staff recommendation. >> second. >> mayor: motion and a second

[29:19] that we approve the recommendation. I think you covered this but I want to make sure for people who

[29:26] are listening or go back and watch this. The lighting will be sensitive to light pollution, correct, so

[29:33] it will be downward facing and very directional lighting. We're not lighting the whole park.

[29:39] it will be very focused and directed at the skate park, correct? >> that is correct, mr. Mayor.

[29:44] so if you look at this slide, this shows the foot candles. You can see 50 feet outside of the skate park or even a more

[29:56] truncated area, the lighting level goes basically to zero. Those lights would not extend past the skate park and the

[30:06] parking lot. >> mayor: I want to make that clear. That's a big priority and I'll

[30:12] let you know in some of the neighborhood walks aye had, people are supportive of improved lighting and lighting

[30:18] on some areas that we don't have it, like the rail to trail areas. But they also don't want their

[30:25] entire sort of neighborhood lit. They want it very focus on the areas where there would be, you know, activity.

[30:31] so I think this is an important sort of standard to set as we're looking at expanding lighting opportunities and going back

[30:41] retroactively and improving lighting when we have an opportunity to do so. Commissioner duncan-walker.

[30:47] >> thank you, mr. Mayor. Thank you, betsy. I wanted to ask if there was any kind of plan at this time to

[30:54] light other parks. I know that as I've driven, you know, throughout the city at different places, we do have a

[30:59] lot of opportunities to provide lighting in other places and I'm just curious if we have thought forward, if there's some sort of

[31:06] plan in that regard. >> yes, ma'am. That is a great question. So we actually have a lighting

[31:10] overhaul project that has an approved budget and we're currently working with a consultant.

[31:16] we're looking at eight different facilities. A lot of that work would be updating and upgrading our

[31:23] current infrastructure and then we have a handful of multipurpose fields and other facilities that we want to add

[31:28] lighting to. So that is in the works. We'll be bringing that to you soon for that discussion.

[31:35] >> wonderful. Thank you for that, betsy. The newly-brought-on unity park is one I pass frequently.

[31:43] I get a lot of calls from constituents to respond to that area. And that park gets a lot of use

[31:49] which is a good thing. I cannot remember the hours of operation but I can tell you that I've seen some of our

[31:54] younger neighbors utilizing the park space kind of as it starts to get a little dark. That will be interesting to see

[32:00] what this overhaul project entails as we move forward and what projects you have listed on it.

[32:08] >> yes, ma'am. >> thank you, betty. >> mayor: commissioner ward. >> thank you, mr. Mayor.

[32:12] thank you, ms. Wade. I appreciate you listening to the community. I know one of the first meetings

[32:18] I had as a commissioner back in 2017 was with some folks who really passionately were trying to get some additional hours for

[32:25] the skate park. And I'll say additional safe hours for the skate park because one of the issues is that it

[32:33] gets used anyway after dark and it's exceedingly dangerous to have a bunch of young people who are fairly well convinced that

[32:41] they are invincible out riding skateboards in the dark at one of our parks. This is a safety measure frankly

[32:52] and one that I think will be well-received from the community. This is not part of the general

[33:02] government budget and it's another highlight of the value that wild spaces public places brings to our community.

[33:09] thank you. >> mayor: thank you. Madam clerk, anybody from the public signed up to speak toe

[33:13] this item? We have a motion on the floor to approve the recommendation. All in favor of the motion say

[33:20] aye. [chorus of ayes] all opposed? That motion passes unanimously.

[33:23] thank you, ms. Wade. Appreciate it. Excited for this. I really am.

[33:26] all right. So up next, madam clerk. >> we have our f2, distributed solar generation intake to gru

[33:37] system item with the recommendation that that the commission hear a presentation from staff and accept a memo

[33:43] confirming the validity of gru's distributed solar generation intake policy from the interim general manager.

[33:52] >> this is tony carol, our acting officer and will give a brief presentation. In addition in the backup is a

[34:02] memo that will give a broader scope of the motion from the uab, their understanding and recommendation to continue with

[34:11] the policy that we have in place and with better understanding for the community and for people that are interested in this

[34:17] topic, that there are exceptions to our two megawatt limit per circuit. And so mr. Carroll will give

[34:29] that update and be available for questions. >> mayor: welcome. >> good morning, mr. Mayor and

[34:34] city commissioners. Thank you for the opportunity to present this topic to you. During today's question we're

[34:48] trying to answer the question of why does gru have a limitation of 2 mega watts per distribution circuit.

[34:58] we'll also talk about the results of a third-party study where we hired a third party to validate our assumptions or tell

[35:07] us what we should be doing. And thirdly, we'll be talking about the legal requirements and limitations.

[35:12] and then finally we'll discuss the conclusions. Okay. First of all, we have an energy

[35:21] deliver service guide which has been adopted as a city ordinance. I think it was done back in

[35:27] 2011. And so in our energy delivery service guide, in section 8, we addressed the fact that the

[35:35] maximum amount of pv generation, which is the total aggregated output of all pv generation interconnected to gru system

[35:44] that can be interconnected on any gru feeder shall not exceed 2 mega watts. This was based on a study done

[35:55] in california about 11 years ago. I won't go into all of the details of reading all that's

[36:02] written up there, but basically the study that was done in california 11 years ago suggested that 2 mega watts was

[36:10] a good limit to have on a distribution feeder. As an example, last year we were contacted by the big store,

[36:20] target, where target was wanting to install 900kw of solar pv on their roof top. And on that particular circuit

[36:30] we already had 1.4 mega watts of solar pv connected. And that was on the circuit feeder number 936.

[36:41] and so we told them that impact study would be required and they asked us how much it would cost. And so during this time we were

[36:50] also coincidentally contacted by university of florida and they were interested in showing us what their capabilities were and

[36:58] what they could do in this area. And so we entered into a, just sort of a gentleman's agreement with the university of florida

[37:06] department of electrical engineering and they performed a study on this particular circuit.

[37:12] and that study showed that the maximum amount of solar pv that could be added to the 1.4 existing solar pv was 700kw

[37:22] instead of the requested 900kw. With that additional 700kw added to the mega watts, that brought the total solar pv on that

[37:35] particular circuit to 2.1 mega watts. And university of florida study indicated that anything

[37:41] exceeding 2.1 mega watts would cause an overvoltage during lightly loaded conditions. That made us feel much better

[37:50] and for the most part validated our 2-megawatt rule that that was a good starting point. And it was a good rule of

[38:01] measure. >> mayor: okay. If you could please pause for a question from commissioner ward.

[38:07] >> thank you, mr. Mayor. So would you back up one -- I want to get the wording right. Can you explain to us -- I think

[38:15] I know but I want to make sure that we're clear. What is overvoltage during lightly-loaded scenarios mean?

[38:22] >> okay. We have -- are required by the public service commission to keep our service that we provide

[38:34] plus or minus 5%. So for an example in a typical residential home, your voltage is going to be 120 volts at the

[38:44] wall outlet and then at places where you have your clothes dryer and your stove you're going to have 240 volts.

[38:52] all right. So plus or minus 5% is what we are required by the public service commission to keep our

[38:58] voltage limits within. And so in this case, during a lightly loaded condition on that particular circuit, say on a

[39:07] cool night when air conditioners aren't running and, you know, no heat is on, then adding more than the 700kw and exceeding 2.1

[39:22] mega watts would cause an overvoltage and in that case it exceeded plus 5% of 120, 120 volts.

[39:30] >> what is the effect of that to the system and to users? How does that impact? >> it could damage equipment

[39:38] consistent -- overvoltage would damage equipment, just like consistent undervoltage. >> it's a safety issue and an

[39:51] equipment load issue. >> mayor: reliability. >> it isn't just a -- it's not just a number on a spread sheet.

[39:58] it's an actual thing that can damage equipment, reliability and safety, my understanding. >> yes, sir.

[40:04] that's correct. >> thank you, mr. Mayor. >> mayor: thank you. >> okay.

[40:10] so now we're going to be talking about the results of a third-party study that we had performed on our system.

[40:16] and during this discussion I'll be talking about, you know, what the actual third-party request from gru, what gru provided the

[40:29] third party and then we'll be talking about their modeling and analysis criteria, the results of their study.

[40:35] and then we'll use some examples of how we're applying the study to our system. Okay.

[40:44] now this slide is showing -- shows three different things. On the far left-hand side we're looking at the total number of

[40:56] customers, solar pv customers that we have throughout our entire system. And we've got 262 customers that

[41:05] are solar feed customers which we no longer offer that option. And the remaining customers are 860 net emergency metering

[41:17] customers. That's what people apply for today, is net metering option. In the middle we're looking

[41:24] at -- we've got it broken down into the number of customers per phase. At the top it shows we've got a

[41:30] 153 three-phase solar pv customers. And then on phase a, b and c, it's 327, 307 and 329.

[41:46] we try to keep it balanced. It's not the same circuits so sometimes we don't have the ability to balance as well as we

[41:55] would like to. I'll talk about that later. And on the far right-hand side, that is the total number of mega

[42:01] watts that we have in solar pv generation that's connected to the system at this time and it's 31.2 mega watts total.

[42:09] keep that number in mind. I'll bring that up on the last slide when I talk about the conclusions.

[42:15] 32.2 mega watts. Okay. Now part of the challenges that we have when we're performing a

[42:26] study and whenever we're using solar pv is the fact that solar pv can affect, you know, our primary wires, our main feeder,

[42:36] our laterals. It can have effect on loads, both residential, commercial and industrial.

[42:41] it can have an effect on voltage regulation. It can have an effect on our protected devices, such as fuses

[42:48] and circuit breakers and relays and reclosures. It could also affect our scada ems system, the system fault

[42:59] current and also can cause reverse power flow. Whenever the third party was developing their model, what

[43:06] they requested from gru, they wanted to know, okay, just as a question that you asked, commissioner, was that -- they

[43:16] wanted to know, okay, what are your voltage limitations. We told them plus or minus 5%. And they wanted to know what's

[43:24] the balance on the circuit. So we had to provide them -- for every circuit we had to provide them what our balance -- how

[43:32] well-balanced are these circuits. We have some single phase load and some three-phase load.

[43:38] different circuits are balanced differently. I got ahead of myself there. Sorry.

[43:49] so after we provided all of this information, we work hand in hand with them. We provided them a model that we

[43:55] use for load flow and then they tweaked that model and added all of the solar pv that is connected on our system and then

[44:05] they ran their study. All right. And I'm not -- I don't have time to talk about all of the

[44:09] circuits, but what their study showed was that we can actually -- some circuits are not -- shouldn't have more than

[44:17] 2 mega watts connected to it. Actually should have less than 2 mega watts connected to it. But our other circuits can

[44:24] handle more than 2 mega watts. It all depends on the load that's on the circuit and the configuration of the circuit.

[44:32] for example, I'm going to talk about two different substations here. The first one is kellie west

[44:38] substation. We have two transformers there. T-30 transformer is size dollars at 33.6mva.

[44:48] and two of the feeders connected to it are feeders number 280 and 282. On feeder 280 we have a negative

[44:56] number there, negative 4.7. And the reason that's a negative number is because that number is actually one of the backup

[45:04] circuits that feeds shands hospital. And it actually has generation connected to it.

[45:11] that's why that's showing up as a negative number. We can't add any more -- any solar pv to that because it's

[45:19] got existing generation connected to it. Circuit number 282, it can host up to 3.19 mega watts, which

[45:26] obviously that's greater than 2 mega watts. So we learned something there. And then we talk about the other

[45:34] transformer out of kelly west, t-29, that's a larger transformer and it's 56mva. And you can seize thousand four

[45:43] circuits connected to that transformer, the hosting pv capacity range anywhere from 1.01 mega watts up to 2.02 mega

[45:54] watts. And so again, we're seeing that 2 mega watts was a pretty good number as a starting point

[46:05] before we had a more detail study performed. Ironwood substation, that has three feeders coming out of it.

[46:17] and the solar hosting capacity at that location would be, it ranging anywhere from 2.55 up to -- no 1.44 up to 4.17 mega

[46:30] watts. Those are some examples of what the study showed us. Now this is a map that shows

[46:38] gru's entire distribution system. And what we're looking at here, as you can see there's three

[46:46] different colors. And the blue color are the circuits that have up to five mega watts of solar pv

[46:53] connected. Those would be the circuits that have the feeding customers connected to them.

[47:03] all of the yellow, those are the circuits that have up to 2.5 mega watts connected to them, or less.

[47:08] and so we would have to do, on those circuits, depending on the feeder, we would have to have an impact study done on that

[47:17] particular circuit if a commissioner requested to add any more load to those. All of the area that you see in

[47:24] red, those are the lightly-loaded circuits that have small amounts of solar pv connected to them.

[47:31] those are the areas that would easily host more solar pv connection because they all have less than 0.5 mega watts

[47:40] connected to them. Okay. Next we're going to talk about the legal requirements and

[47:47] limitations. And the florida statutes require the city to develop a standardization interconnection

[47:57] agreement and net metering program. And so this section 366.91-2d defines net metering as billing

[48:09] where customer owned renewable generation is allowed to offset part or all of the customer's electricity consumption on site.

[48:19] 27-37, a gainesville code of ordinances establishes the city's net metering program. And section 27-36 is the

[48:29] gainesville code of ordinance which adopts the energy delivery service guide which I mentioned before has been adopted as an

[48:36] ordinance. Okay. The city ordinance on net metering states that it is the

[48:45] intent of this section to promote the use of customer-owned renewable generation to offset part or all

[48:51] of the customer's electric consumption. And the net metering program is only available to the city's

[48:57] electric customers who have constructed or are willing to construct customer-owned renewable generation at no cost

[49:04] to the city and willing to execute an interconnection agreement in the form and substance as provided by the

[49:11] city. Okay. Reference the energy delivery service guide before.

[49:17] section 8 establishes the process and requirements for solar pv connection. Section 9 is allowed to protect

[49:26] the gru system while allowing solar connection. Any studies or upgrades to gru's transformers or distributions

[49:33] are at the expense of customer-owned. And this is interpreted by the florida public service

[49:42] commission. Gru service guide is a living document. Okay.

[49:48] here we list some examples, benchmarking examples where other utilities in the state of florida also have a 2-megawatt

[49:57] limit on their distribution feeders. Jacksonville electric authority, florida power and light and also

[50:03] ocala electric utility. I'll add that ocala takes it a step farther. They do not allow their

[50:12] customers who want to install solar pv to exceed their existing service rating. Gru is willing to allow

[50:21] customers to install larger units that exceed the rating but they would have to pay for the upgraded of the service and the

[50:27] transformer if it is over 90% of the rating. Okay. Conclusions.

[50:37] gru energy delivery service guide follows the utility's best practice and allow pv solar and distribution circuit feeder.

[50:48] the host capacity results indicate that some circuits or feeders can only host less than 2 mega watts while others host

[50:56] more than 2 mega watts. If a customer wants to connect to one of those circuits that's going to exceed 2 mega watts or

[51:02] exceed what the study shows would be allowed on that particular feared, the third-party study, then the

[51:09] customer would have to pay for an impact study to ensure that other customers and gru equipment would not be

[51:16] negatively impact. In addition if it is determined that the utility distribution system upgrades are required to

[51:22] connect the additional solar pv, the customer developer would have to bear the cost of that also.

[51:27] and just as an example, we ran some recent numbers just to throw out there. A typical impact study would

[51:39] cost, for a 500kw or larger, say for a commercial installation, it's going to range anywhere from 15,000 to $46,000,

[51:48] depending on the complexity of the study and what all is connected to the circuit and the type of inverters that the

[51:57] customer is proposing to install, et cetera. Now for a typical, say a residential customer, maybe less

[52:04] than 10k w, we're looking at around $5,000 for an impact study. And in those cases if the

[52:11] transformer, say a single-phase transformer that serves a typical home needs to be upgraded, that could cost about

[52:19] $6,000. And if it was a commercial or industrial customer where a three-phase transformer was

[52:25] going to have to be upgraded or replaced, that could be as much as $30,000. Just to throw out some numbers

[52:33] for you. All right. Lastly, what I'll talk about is -- well, what we plan to do

[52:38] is we plan to have a new hosting capacity study ran and performed every three years. So we stay on top of this.

[52:46] because we're constantly receiving interconnection requests. We probably receive seven or

[52:53] more per week from customers. This data was based on numbers back in june. And so even these numbers aren't

[52:59] accurate today because we've had that many solar connection requests since that time. And remember when I talked about

[53:08] the 31.2 mega watts of solar pv that's connected today on our system, on the distribution system?

[53:19] now in 2019 we had an area control era study performed by the same company who performed the hosting capacity study for

[53:31] us. What that study showed is that for gru's entire system, the way that our dynamic generation is

[53:37] today, that the maximum amount of solar pv that gru can host on its entire system is somewhere between 40 and 75 mega watts.

[53:46] and this is due to the dynamic generation capacity and recovery resources and also the requirements of the balancing

[53:55] authority. And so you could take 75 and subtract 31 from it and, you know, at some point, unless we

[54:05] change the generation portfolio, you know, we're going to reach a limit where we're going to have to stop allowing connections,

[54:13] you know, in future years. >> mayor: okay. Thank you very much. Do you have another slide with

[54:23] the recommendation? >> let's see. I think... >> mayor: thank you very much.

[54:30] we do have some questions. Stick around. I'll start with commissioner arreola.

[54:33] >> thank you, mr. Mayor. Can you go back one slide, please. >> yes.

[54:37] >> thank you. First, thank you for the work. About a year ago a lot of what you said would have been foreign

[54:45] to my understanding. But after installing these for about a year, a lot of it makes sense.

[54:51] but what I want to ask about is really this last page, because, number one, when you say the customer must pay for an impact

[55:02] study. You were throwing out a bunch of numbers out there. What did you say was an estimate

[55:08] for an impact study for 15-kilowatt, 1500? >> that could be between 5,000 and 15.

[55:20] we've tried to nail down some estimates. We were told that anything less than 10k w would be around

[55:27] $5,000. But then the other number jumped to 100kw. >> so my concern here is we

[55:35] don't want to deter folks from setting up solar array systems because of an impact study. And those -- I mean, that's part

[55:47] of the cost. And I get that. But there has to be -- well at least from the gru's

[55:54] perspective, we have to have a set schedule for what those studies are going to cost. And we need to try and keep them

[56:01] as low as we can. Because some of those costs are very, very high that you mentioned.

[56:07] secondly, my other question was, are we still having meter delivery delays and things like that?

[56:17] is that still affects -- >> yes. >> that's city affecting our getting out to completed sites

[56:23] and things like that. >> mayor: mr. Cunningham, you want to jump in? >> yes.

[56:28] I'll start reverse order. I'll hit the first. So we are -- everybody is still experiencing world supply chain

[56:35] challenges with different materials and different things like that. We are getting a lot more of the

[56:42] electric meters and the pieces of the patter meter in the next several months to really start the mass deployment for the ami

[56:49] project. But -- so a lot of that is coming. But we are still seeing those

[56:55] delays as those things occur. Second thing is kind of talking about the cost of the impact study.

[57:01] just to contextualize it, this is the -- the impact study is only required if you're exceeding the 2-megawatt limit.

[57:09] so until we start bumping up against that there isn't an impact study and we're connecting them.

[57:17] but as we're getting more and more, that is going to become an issue. And I want to give a big

[57:22] picture, you know, an electric distribution system wasn't initially designed and built for generation at the end points.

[57:29] and that's why you have some of these limitations. One of the things we're -- you know, this is really a part,

[57:39] customers putting in solar pv is part of working toward net zero for the community and very good, as you're stating.

[57:46] we want that to be a part of the overall path forward. But we've got to balance that with how we operate our system

[57:53] and we've got to balance it with -- we can't have those systems costing other customers more money.

[57:58] so we have to be careful about the cost there and we have to balance the quality of power and our ability to provide power to

[58:07] other customers. That's why these impact studies, that's what they do, allow to make sure that we're not

[58:12] impacting power to the rest of our existing customers. So couple more things I just want to touch on.

[58:19] one is our office of sustainability, one of the things that they're looking at in this coming year is really

[58:27] looking as this grows, as solar pv is going to grow, how do we bring that into the system in a way that balances both of those

[58:37] elements, both the cost and the ability to provide power. And then lastly, we're still -- it's sort of on a slightly

[58:46] different note. We're pursuing getting 50 mega watts solar in the system that will be system solar as well as

[58:53] pursuing other options going forward if there are other ways to expand our system solar. I wanted to give that broader

[59:00] context. This isn't a recommendation slide but the recommendation really is for us to continue on

[59:05] the path that we're on now using that policy with the exceptions of the impact studies when we start bumping up against those

[59:11] limits. >> thank you. No, I appreciate that. It's very important because, you

[59:16] know, one of the worst-case scenarios that I've seen is folks, they're excited to get solar on their roof, they pay

[59:23] for an array,it gets up and never passes inspection because of any number of technical issues.

[59:31] one of those things would be the dcs. So thank you for getting this back to us.

[59:40] I think it's important information for us to have based on the direction that we're trying to go for renewable

[59:48] energy and the dynamic generation capacity may change, you know, in any given number of decades here in the future.

[59:57] thank you. >> mayor: thank you. Commissioner ward. >> thank you, mr. Mayor.

[59:59] a few things I wanted to clarify. When we say between 40 and 75 mega watts, that's a

[1:00:08] conglomerate system-wide, but it breaks down by circuit. So a lot of that could be in one -- if we -- if archer road,

[1:00:25] if every business suddenly put solar on their roof top, that maximizes, way overmaximizes what's possible there.

[1:00:34] and it's that up while other circuits around town could be nearly empty, correct in. >> yes, that's correct.

[1:00:44] >> so that's a conglomerate, 40 to 75. But it really doesn't break down across the city in a specific

[1:00:59] sort of way. So if you would go back to the map that showed where the current installs are, it's not a

[1:01:12] neighboring issue. Going down waldo road, those are all businesses for the most part in the blue.

[1:01:20] those are, I'm guessing, apartment complexes down in the butler plaza area, may be targeted and that sort of thing,

[1:01:29] right? Very bottom of the screen there. >> I think that's correct, yes. >> and yeah, like the mall and

[1:01:38] other -- so it's commercial that is -- that has over 5 mega watts on the system right now for the most part.

[1:01:46] >> yes. >> because those red areas, those are neighborhoods. >> yes.

[1:01:51] >> and I don't know where the -- I have no idea where the circuits are on the system an how that breaks down and I don't

[1:01:57] need to know right now. But my guess is that we're a good little way for a lot of neighborhoods from reaching that

[1:02:05] maximum. Is that fairly accurate? >> if memory serves me correctly, commissioner, I think

[1:02:15] we've got seven circuits that are presently either already at 2 mega watts or, you know, very, very close to 2 mega watts of

[1:02:27] solar pv connected to them. >> and how many circuits do we have? >> 70.

[1:02:31] >> 70. Okay. All right. And we can probably count those

[1:02:36] seven just looking at the map, where the blue stuff is, right? >> well, the blue stuff is our -- part of them.

[1:02:46] and the yellow are up to 2.5 mega watts. Some of the yellow are going to be --

[1:02:51] >> they're starting to get close. >> yes. >> okay.

[1:02:53] all right. Well that helps me. I appreciate this. This is all good information.

[1:03:01] >> if I had to guess -- excuse me -- I think that the majority of our requests, and my colleagues can correct me if I'm

[1:03:10] wrong, are on the west side of town. Is that right? >> yeah, because that's where

[1:03:16] the request would be for, particularly with a spike in build this summer, people want to take control of their system.

[1:03:23] >> right. >> in at all possible. Doesn't mean it's possible to do that.

[1:03:29] it's interesting how that works out. There's more yellow east of 13th street than I would have

[1:03:37] thought. So that's great. That's good news. This is manageable.

[1:03:42] we can come up with a way to do this going forward. But this is the conversation we needed to have to figure out

[1:03:48] what's next as we go through the process mr. Cunningham was describing. It's not that it's not possible.

[1:03:56] it's just that we have to understand it better. >> yes, sir. >> and I do think it's really

[1:04:00] important for people to understand that -- it was important for me to understand, let me say, that it's not an

[1:04:08] arbitrary number. That we're not just saying oh, that's the maximum you can have just cause.

[1:04:14] but if they plug too much in -- just like if we plug too much into this, something bad is going to happen.

[1:04:20] >> correct. >> and maybe that means that your equipment breaks or maybe it means there's a fire or any

[1:04:25] number of bad things that can happen. But it functions very much like -- we all know there's only

[1:04:32] so much we can plug into one of these strips. But we don't think about how that relates back up the system.

[1:04:38] so it's important for me to make that connection, no pun intended. Thank you.

[1:04:44] I appreciate it. >> mayor: one quick question. I'm going to play the role of the selfish neighbor here.

[1:04:55] let's say that you know, I just want to put a 10k w, you know, rooftop array on my home. Do an impact study.

[1:05:06] shows that the transformer that I'm on needs to be upgraded. Don't my neighbors also benefit from that upgrade?

[1:05:16] >> in certain situations. If your neighbor -- if you have neighbors who have served from the same transformer, yes,

[1:05:22] that's correct. >> mayor: and look, it's not a reason for me to like move this thing in a sideways direction,

[1:05:31] but that's something, mr. Manager, I think we need to talk about. If I go in -- what would be the

[1:05:35] cost of a typical transformer upgrade in a residential neighborhood. >> for a residential

[1:05:43] neighborhood, around $6,000. >> mayor: so if I pay for that to get my solar and then my neighbors next to me, now they

[1:05:52] have capacity and can put their solar up without that, you know, I mean, I don't know. That's maybe a tragedy of the

[1:06:00] commons kind of thing. But, you know, I think we need to think about that, like how do we assess that upgrade.

[1:06:07] everybody benefits, right. So typically when there's a private benefit to something, we try to equitably distribute that

[1:06:19] to all of the folks impacted by it. I don't see an easy way to do that right now.

[1:06:24] it's sort of going to be up to me. I really, really want solar. And frankly with the $6,000 it's

[1:06:30] still going to be a net economic benefit to me over a 20-year period. It will.

[1:06:35] just not as much. But there is a front-end cost there that unless I can sort of finance that or do, you know, a

[1:06:47] property assessment, you know, at zero percent. Anyway, I think we need to try to figure that out.

[1:06:54] because it really could be a barrier to entry for folks that are, you know, that are looking to do it for the economic

[1:07:09] benefit, not necessarily some social good or environmental positive impact. I don't have an easy solution to

[1:07:18] that. I'm not pretending to like figure that out from the dais today.

[1:07:22] but, you know, it is something we, I think, should talk about. You know, I do have some -- I think with some -- I think there

[1:07:35] could be some cooperative agreements or other things like that. If you're friendly with all of

[1:07:39] your neighbors and they're into it, I don't know. Not to ramble too much. But I recently built a fence and

[1:07:46] the fence that I erected benefits two of my adjacent neighbors. Before I did it I spoke to them,

[1:07:54] would you be willing to split the cost of the portion of your fence. And they were both gracious and

[1:08:01] say yes, absolutely. I'm benefiting from this as well. Good neighbors will do that but

[1:08:08] we can't craft public policy hoping that people are nice to each other. If that were the case we would

[1:08:15] not need government. If we were angels, we would have no need for government. So we have to remember that as

[1:08:21] well. But anyway, I think, you know, if we can put a pin in that. Get the people that are much,

[1:08:28] much smarter than me at gru and that are, you know, part of this industry out there to be thinking on ways to account for

[1:08:37] that, you know, because I don't think there's any way in the next couple of years we don't need to come back and really

[1:08:45] revisit this and figure out how are we going to make it much more -- just how can we reduce the barriers to more and more

[1:08:55] distributed generation. Because that's just where we're going, right. I mean that's just the sort of

[1:09:02] long-term truth of the industry. So I just kind of wanted to bring that up. >> mr. Mayor, can I comment just

[1:09:10] briefly on that? >> mayor: yeah, of course. >> yeah, I don't have the solution today.

[1:09:15] but this is very common in the utility city, extension policies and how you deal with this issue that we're describing here.

[1:09:24] a developer puts in a certain size line, other people benefit from that size line. That developer puts in a lift

[1:09:32] station, other developments in the future benefit from that lift station. So there are some things that we

[1:09:38] could do that are out there. It's not always clean and perfect, but I think there are solutions like that that we will

[1:09:47] definitely evaluate and be recommending. And this is why we are really putting this on the goals and

[1:09:52] objectives this year of the office of sustainability is to try to figure out what is this going to look like going

[1:09:58] forward. And especially as we're getting a lot more inquiries into this realm, how is that going to kind

[1:10:06] of fold into the utility as we march forward. We will be addressing those issues as part of that

[1:10:12] evaluation. >> mayor: great. Thank you. Commissioner hayes-santos.

[1:10:16] >> move staff recommendation. >> mayor: I don't -- I think it was just informational. Oh, there is a recommendation to

[1:10:23] accept the memo. Okay. Thank you. Motion to accept the memo.

[1:10:27] is there a second? Second. Okay. Thank you very much.

[1:10:30] madam clerk, anybody signed up to speak to this item. Back to the commission. All in favor of the motion say

[1:10:36] aye. [chorus of ayes] all opposed? Motion passes.

[1:10:40] the uab also heard this item and sort of approved of the current policy but also the future sort of intention to look at this

[1:10:52] more deeply and come back with some recommendations. Madam clerk next item. >> f3, status update of the

[1:10:59] department of financial services and the fiscal year 2021 annual audit with a recommendation that the city commission hear an

[1:11:06] update on the status of the department of financial services and the fiscal year 2021 annual audit.

[1:11:11] >> mr. Mayor, members of the commission, this is a financial update. Ms. Wong is here, the acting

[1:11:17] director of the finance department. This item is here, mr. Mayor, because I thought it was

[1:11:23] probably appropriate at this time to give the board an update. We're approaching the end of the

[1:11:26] fiscal year. I think when we spoke to the board last clearly we were not going to make the june deadline

[1:11:32] to finish the financial statements for '21. We were fast forwarding of course towards the end of the

[1:11:39] fiscal year to complete. We're not there. Why are we in this predicament. I just thought it was important

[1:11:46] to just kind of summarize where we are relative to why we are at this point. I think back in january we had

[1:11:53] the report from the state auditor general who outlined several findings that had been outstanding since fiscal 2018

[1:12:02] and we also had our internal auditor do a report on our internal controls of our audit on our internal controls that

[1:12:09] pointed at findings as well. So what we have unfortunately endured probably for the last four or five years is

[1:12:17] inconsistency in staff. We've had a lot of staff turnover. Quite frankly even between the

[1:12:23] period of january and now we did hire a financial services director and a controller. The financial services director

[1:12:31] had some health issues and of course had to step away. The controller, sue wong, is now acting as our finance director.

[1:12:38] so we've had some staff turnover, we've had some vacancies. Those vacancies have been

[1:12:45] attacked quite aggressively. You'll hear how we've been able to fill many of the vacancies. There is a power point.

[1:12:55] I'm not sure, but at any rate, we have some process break downs and that is because of the platform, work day as we call.

[1:13:11] the data conversion with work day has not worked well since it was implemented in july of 2021. And the configurations and

[1:13:20] mapping in terms of information has not worked well as we have tried to close down the audit for 2021.

[1:13:25] and so with that I just kind of wanted to paint that background and have ms. Wong talk through where we are.

[1:13:32] we are making progress but we will not make the end of the fiscal year in terms of having the '21 audit closed out.

[1:13:38] and with that I will pass over to ms. Wong. >> so good morning, mayor and commissioners.

[1:13:46] sue wong, acting finance director. Thank you for having me today. I met some of you and watched

[1:13:56] videos of you, of the commission meetings before I got here. So I'm very happy to be here to give an update on the 2021

[1:14:04] annual audit. And also provide a status update on the department of financial services as ms. Curry just

[1:14:19] mentioned. Do have a power point. >> does broadcast. >> are we able to --

[1:14:25] >> broadcast. Can broadcast pull it up, please and thank you. Oh, good.

[1:14:41] the mayor is back. [inaudible] >> mayor: I'm out. Two minutes, madam manager, two

[1:15:05] minutes. >> you'll have to proceed. I don't know that they are prepared.

[1:15:08] >> sounds good. So 2021 annual audit, so I am happy to report that we made significant progress in our

[1:15:21] areas. So that includes revenue, expenditures, receivable, payable, cash and investment,

[1:15:29] capital assets, single audit, long-term liabilities. So it's a lot. So we've made progress in all of

[1:15:36] these areas. So currently we are down to two things. So one is bank reconciliations.

[1:15:44] the other one is -- there we go. So we are down to two things at this point. One is bank reconciliations.

[1:16:01] the other one is analytics, which is the year over year analysis of all accounts. Without these two areas being

[1:16:09] completed the auditors cannot wrap up the rest of the testing. So that's our focus point at this, at this moment.

[1:16:19] it's the number-one priority for my department. So we are all hands on deck. And this includes the support

[1:16:26] from our external consultant and the gru team and ms. Claudia rasnick. Without their help and support

[1:16:41] we wouldn't be where we are today. In particular I want to give a shout out to mr. [inaudible],

[1:16:46] the controller at gru. So he's been very instrumental in getting all of the requested materials ready for the auditors

[1:16:55] and getting it done and checked often. So as ms. Curry said, unfortunately, you know, due to

[1:17:01] these challenges, we cannot meet the 9/30 deadline. We know it's our number one priority.

[1:17:12] we're working as hard as we can to get audit done as soon as possible. Once those two areas are done,

[1:17:20] the auditors can finish up the testing and then we can start the, prepare for the [inaudible] management discussion and

[1:17:29] analysis and then prepare the schedules in the statistical session of the book. So ms. Curry mentioned those

[1:17:38] challenges that we are facing. I'm not going to go into that. I think the commission is well-informed of the challenges

[1:17:47] that my department is facing. One thing I do want to point out is an erp implementation is very challenging process in the best

[1:17:58] of times. So many government entities, you know, when they go through an erp implementation, they

[1:18:07] encounter difficulties. And it's a daunting task. So we are not alone. I just want to point that out.

[1:18:15] so facing these challenges, so what do we do. So I came on board on june 13th.

[1:18:24] so it's been three months and two days, I think. So I have been thinking long and hard about this approach for the

[1:18:34] path forward. So after discussion, this is what I would like to share with the commission today.

[1:18:42] so we're adopting a three-prong approach. So essentially on the left side -- so the top down.

[1:18:49] so we need to do the analytical reviews and reconciliations. Those reviews include major revenue analysis, major

[1:18:59] expenditure analysis, major -- the budget actual analysis. We need to if do year-over-year analysis.

[1:19:10] we need to do the bank reconciliations, the balance sheet account reconciliations. Only by doing this high-level

[1:19:25] analysis can we catch mistakes and try to find the solutions. To the right of the chart, I call it bottom up.

[1:19:33] so essentially workday is full of data. We want to make sure when data first enter into workday that

[1:19:40] they are accurate. So the accounting division within my department is working very hard with the receipt side,

[1:19:49] the cash receipt, accounts receivable, so on the disbursement side, the payables, the payroll.

[1:19:57] this also goes to the centralized departments. We want to make sure that when data first into workday that

[1:20:07] they're accurate. In between the high-level analysis and make sure the data entry into workday, so we want

[1:20:15] to focus on three things. So essentially we need to focus on system, we need to focus on our people and we need to focus

[1:20:23] on processes. So what do I mean by that. So system. I want my accounting folks to

[1:20:35] become expert in workday, in our erp. This does not mean that they need to be programmers.

[1:20:41] however, they need to know how data are entered into work day. They need to understand how the mapping works in workday.

[1:20:50] they need to understand how sub ledgers flow into general ledger. They need to understand the

[1:20:54] roll-ups, the hierarchies in workday. So to provide tending and support for my hiring folks.

[1:21:10] it's called financial systems architect. We have made an offer to a highly-qualified individual.

[1:21:16] so this person is certified in workday -- in multiple areas of workday. So I believe -- so hopefully I'm

[1:21:26] not getting it wrong, but she's qualified in workday payroll, in reporting, in hr, I believe. So she's going to come and help

[1:21:37] us in everything workday related. So to provide tending and support.

[1:21:44] so people. So when I came on board in june -- so we had four accountants in my department and

[1:21:53] these are the four hardest working accountants that I've ever known. So kudos to them.

[1:21:59] since then we hired a new accounting manager and we hired a senior accountant. So they both started last week.

[1:22:08] so my team is actually expanding. So we bring those folks on board.

[1:22:15] it's my job to build them up, to provide tending, to make sure, you know, we -- my divisions are talking to each other.

[1:22:25] that, you know, we understand that we work together. This is our number. This is our report.

[1:22:32] so process. I have been really drilling down to my folks, you know, understanding the whys of we're

[1:22:43] doing things is very important. We need to understand and document the processes. So to help us with that -- so we

[1:22:51] hired a long-time city employee who has since retired. We brought her back. Her name is ms. Marta.

[1:23:03] I think a lot of you know her. If you see her, run into her, please say thank you to her for coming back and give us a

[1:23:11] helping hand. So she is tasked with process documentation. I think with her being

[1:23:21] intimately familiar with the city's processes, procedures and policies, she is a very good choice to help us to finish up

[1:23:30] the -- or even start and finish up the documentation. And that also will free my accountants up in focusing on

[1:23:38] doing bank reconciliations, account reconciliations. Working with my other operations team.

[1:23:47] so I am very hopeful by making these changes, by bringing those folks on board that it gives us a path forward.

[1:23:58] these are the priorities that we are focusing on. Most of it is based on the previous year's audit findings.

[1:24:11] if you look, most of them are normal accounting functions. So our goal is to make sure that those functions are functioning.

[1:24:18] I am really happy to report that we are making progress in all of these. So we are working on it.

[1:24:26] so, for example, month end close. We haven't closed our month in I don't know how long.

[1:24:36] it's been a long time coming. We have a team working on it. We are compiling the month-end close checklist.

[1:24:44] I'm in the process of drafting a memo to distribute to all departments that coming in october, the beginning of our

[1:24:51] fiscal year, that we are going to close the month end. It is very important because once we start closing the

[1:24:58] months, then we can start preparing and distributing the quarterly financial reports so that people can, you know,

[1:25:06] gather reports and review them and give us feedback. So that's in progress and I'm very happy with the progress

[1:25:15] we're making on that. So bank reconciliations. I'm devoting two to work on bank reconciliations.

[1:25:29] I have weekly check-ins with them so if they run into road blocks or the deposits into workday do not match up to the

[1:25:39] deposits in the bank, what do we do. I'm here to provide support for them.

[1:25:44] and we're working very hard on it and I have every confidence that it's going to be caught up and be kept up to date.

[1:25:51] so I'm not going to go into all of that. But I just want you to be aware that those are very important to

[1:25:58] us. Those are the priorities. Those are our normal accounting functions that, you know, we

[1:26:06] want them to start functioning. So in summary, so it takes time to get us to where we need to be.

[1:26:24] it needs strategic planning. It needs for us to lay out all of the plans so that we can stay on course.

[1:26:30] we are actually carrying out these plans to achieve our goals and we are adopting a team approach to tackle these issues

[1:26:42] and come up with the solutions. We also need to keep monitoring the staffing level in the accounting division because I

[1:26:54] truly feel, in my department we have momentum now that we need to come up with, you know, succession plan, the backup

[1:27:03] plans. If there's a setback in my department -- we all know we had plenty of setbacks.

[1:27:11] if there's a setback that we can get back on our feet very quickly and get our visions going.

[1:27:17] so it's doing to be a long journey. It's going to be an exciting journey.

[1:27:24] it's going to be a rewarding journey. So I see myself in this journey as a mentor, as a guide, as a

[1:27:34] cheerleader, as a psychiatrist at times. But I am absolutely convinced I have the right team with me.

[1:27:44] we are working on the right things. We are headed towards the right direction.

[1:27:53] so all I'm asking is everybody's understanding and patience. I am absolutely sure we are doing the right thing.

[1:28:02] so with that I conclude my presentation this morning and will be happy to answer any questions you have.

[1:28:10] >> mayor: all right. Thank you very much. We appreciate that so much. Madam manager, anything you

[1:28:15] wanted to add? >> thank you, mr. Mayor. I just wanted to say this month really will conclude the

[1:28:26] participation of the gru staff that was working with us. Without their support we would not be here.

[1:28:31] so I really want to thank general manager cunningham and the support that you provided through your staff with claudia

[1:28:38] rasnick and mr. Lynn loria and others. Phenomenal. Thank you.

[1:28:45] but they will be going back to gru and attending to the issues that they have clearly have to there.

[1:28:51] >> mayor: thank you. Commissioner arreola. >> thank you, mr. Mayor. I want to commend you and your

[1:28:56] team for all of the work that you've done. As the manager just said, it was a team effort.

[1:29:02] you know, I want to say from my perspective, my view of the role of the commission, patience and understanding is a bare minimum.

[1:29:08] we need to be proper advocates to really support all of the resources that you all are going to need, not even just in this

[1:29:17] next year but going forward. Because obviously it was a series of years of mistakes and so in order to prevent, you

[1:29:29] know, anything like that from happening in the future, this commission needs to be prepared to support our office and I

[1:29:34] would hope that commissioners take that message to heart. Because it is -- it's a lot of work and certainly I don't want

[1:29:43] it to go unnoticed that the effort that you all have put into really to get into the mind seth to be able to tackle this

[1:29:52] issue and then be able to do it is -- it's, honestly it's very impressive. I want to commend you all for

[1:29:59] the work that you've done. Thank you. >> mayor: thank you. Commissioner duncan-walker.

[1:30:04] >> thank you so much, ms. Wong. I wanted to pull my mask down just for a second so you could see the smile on my face.

[1:30:12] and I wanted to say welcome. You have jumped in, I mean, head first. And your presentation today has

[1:30:19] been so impressive. What I noticed was the attention to detail, the spirit of team work.

[1:30:26] and I just want to say welcome. I want to say thank you. I cannot speak for all of my colleagues but it sounds like

[1:30:34] there may be a consensus that you will have the support of everyone here to continue in the work.

[1:30:38] we do understand the mountain that is ahead of us. It's very serious. And we thank you for your work,

[1:30:45] your professionalism and your optimism. So we certainly look forward to that being maintained throughout

[1:30:50] this process. And I'll just say again thank you very much. And welcome.

[1:30:56] >> mayor: thank you. Commissioner chestnut. >> thank you. Thank you, mr. Mayor.

[1:31:00] I want to congratulate the manager. The manager inherited this. This audit situation.

[1:31:08] and under her leadership we are about to solve it. We're well on the way. And I want to thank gru interim

[1:31:18] manager and his staff for jumping in and lending the support to help us through this. It's been a team effort and I

[1:31:26] just appreciate the effort everyone put in in tackling the issue. Thank you.

[1:31:32] >> mayor: thank you. Commissioner ward. >> thank you, mr. Mayor. And thank you to ms. Wong, and

[1:31:37] welcome. I am pleased to know that you watched our meetings and still chose to do this.

[1:31:45] and I also want to thank the manager as well, as commissioner chestnut said. This is a multiple manager

[1:31:52] issue. And we have now reached a point where I think we have, I feel like we have the consistency

[1:32:02] that is necessary to move forward here. And consistency really is the key.

[1:32:09] a revolving door at the top does not get this problem solved. That is important to remember as we go forward.

[1:32:20] I'll reiterate what everyone has said. Whatever resources you need, madam manager, and ms. Wong,

[1:32:27] whatever you need -- and any of our charters. If you need resources, we need to know.

[1:32:33] and I think that's part of the issue going back years is nobody said hey, we need resources. So if you need the resources,

[1:32:41] let us know before we have an issue. I would much rather hear that we need more people before we --

[1:32:52] before it's too late. We can make plans. We can move things around to support the additional

[1:32:59] resources. But it's really hard to do that after the fact. So thank you for being here and

[1:33:06] for the effort that has been put in. And everybody that has worked on it top to bottom, I feel like we

[1:33:12] are in a good place. I look forward to bringing more folks on as we have the new budget.

[1:33:19] and I think we're going to get there sooner rather than later. Thank you. >> thank you.

[1:33:23] >> mayor: thank you. >> we still have to finish the '21 audit so that's what we're working on right now.

[1:33:28] that is still a task that is clearly very important. So we're driving. >> mayor: thank you.

[1:33:34] I appreciate ms. Wong, thank you for taking over an unexpected and emotionally difficult circumstances.

[1:33:49] that's hard to do no matter what. And you've done a superb job of that.

[1:33:54] you know, I also want to thank everyone from the manager, ms. Curry, to mr. Cunningham and his team, as well as the

[1:34:05] auditor. We've done everything we can to be very upfront about our situation and make sure that

[1:34:14] we're communicating clearly. And you know, we'll continue to do that, I know. And we're in such a better

[1:34:26] circumstance right now than we were six months ago. And so -- and it hasn't been small progress.

[1:34:36] it's been large leaps. And there is still of course, as you've been very clear, some work left to do.

[1:34:44] but we can see the point at which we're going to be caught up and then operating under improved standards and

[1:34:56] expectations once we get there. So thank you everybody that's put time into this. Our city is much better off for

[1:35:03] it. There's no action. This was an informational item. But madam clerk, do we have

[1:35:08] anybody signed up to speak to it? Welcome. >> good morning, jo beaty.

[1:35:19] I won't repeat what everybody said, but I was listening to this as I was driving over and I can't tell you -- ms. Wong?

[1:35:28] do I have her name correctly? I can't tell you how impressed I was with her, especially her approach to her team building,

[1:35:38] her wanting people to understand. As a teacher, I guess that's the way I look at things.

[1:35:42] you know, you need to give them the picture, not just tell them what to do. But give them the tools to do it

[1:35:48] themselves. And her whole framework and approach to what she wants her team to know and understand the

[1:36:01] underpinnings of how this works. I just found her whole presentation very impressive. It's the first really heartening

[1:36:09] presentation I've heard in a long time from anybody here and I just want to thank her and welcome here.

[1:36:17] and I hope we get a lot more hires like that and that you can fill some of the empty seats and we can move forward.

[1:36:26] thank you. And thank you, ms. Wong. >> mayor: thank you. Anybody else, madam clerk?

[1:36:31] all right. Thank you all very much. Up next, madam clerk. >> one clarity.

[1:36:38] do you want to go to d2 or to the resolutions. >> mayor: let's do the resolution.

[1:36:42] and then we can get to those items pulled from consent. >> g1, acceptance of faa aip grant no. 3-12-0028-051-2022 in

[1:36:54] the amount of $14,882,613 from the u.s. Department of transportation, federal avison ration administration with the

[1:37:02] recommendation that the commission adopt the resolution and authorize the mayor and city attorney to execute and the city

[1:37:07] clerk to certify the grant agreement. >> good morning. Just quickly, this is a -- we

[1:37:18] routinely bring these faa grants that go to the airport authority to the city commission because the city commission is the owner

[1:37:25] of the underlying land that the airport sits on. I act as your ex-officio. This is designed to approve the

[1:37:50] taxi ways up at the airport and then also the general aviation apron. And these are all improvements

[1:37:57] that will help build capacity for the airport. I think just so the commission has an understanding of

[1:38:03] magnitude, I was talking to mr. Pensga the other day and over the last 20 years this city commission and former city

[1:38:13] commission have approved approximately $150 million in grants that have gone to the airport.

[1:38:18] it's pretty substantial investments in east gainesville and to a driver of economic impact on the east side of town.

[1:38:27] thank you. >> mayor: thank you, mr. Bredfeldt. And the outcomes of those

[1:38:32] approvals certainly show. The airport looks phenomenal, functions incredibly well. I've been flying out of there

[1:38:40] off and on for many, many, many years and it's really almost unrecognizable today compared to say, 20 years ago.

[1:38:47] that's a testament to you and your leadership, mr. Pensga and really pleased with where we are with that.

[1:38:55] commissioner hayes-santos. >> I move resolution 2022-477. >> second. >> mayor: motion and a second to

[1:39:03] approve the resolution. Any members of the public wish to speak to this, madam clerk? >> I don't really want to speak

[1:39:13] to. Just a comment. You said about the changes in 20 years.

[1:39:17] the first time I came to the gainesville airport was in 1972 when I came to meet my future in-laws.

[1:39:23] and I want to tell you at that point as I recall, it was like a [inaudible] and there was no terminal.

[1:39:30] and so you talk about the changes in 20 years. That's the changes in close to 50 years.

[1:39:37] and I can't believe it. It is a very nice facility. I just wanted to -- you prompted a memory.

[1:39:44] thank you. >> mayor: thank you. Okay. Then with that we have a roll

[1:39:49] call vote. >> commissioner arreola is absent. Commissioner chestnut.

[1:39:52] >> aye. >> commissioner saco. >> aye. >> commissioner duncan-walker.

[1:39:55] >> aye. >> commissioner ward. >> aye. >> commissioner hayes-santos.

[1:39:58] >> aye. >> and mayor poe. >> mayor: aye. That motion passes unanimously

[1:40:01] with arreola absent. All right. To our pulled items, madam clerk let's start with d2.

[1:40:08] >> all right. Item d2 on page two, southwest 62nd boulevard connector construction award 2022-345 with

[1:40:21] the recommendation that the commission award the build southwest 62nd boulevard connector to watson construction

[1:40:33] company, llc in the amount of 16,137,456.98 and authorize the city manager or designee to enter into a construction

[1:40:43] agreement with watson construction company, llc and any other necessary documents with southwest 62nd boulevard

[1:40:52] connector subject to approval of the city attorney or designee as to form and legality. Ms. Manager?

[1:41:02] >> mr. Brian singleton is here to provide any explanation. >> brian singleton, acting public works director here to

[1:41:12] present on the southwest 62nd boulevard connector project. The purpose of the project is to

[1:41:18] complete the interconnected roadway grid in the southwest portion of the city in accordance with the city and

[1:41:24] county's comprehensive plans. It also will reduce congestion on i75 and 20th avenue, newberry street and archer

[1:41:36] roads. Here is an overview of the area just laying out some of the different projects that have

[1:41:42] been completed in the area over the past ten years or so. West of the interstate, the county has been expanding

[1:41:52] southwest 8th avenue grid network. That was recently completed last year.

[1:41:57] coming over the interstate 20th avenue you, that is a future project for the county four-leaning that bridge and

[1:42:04] providing a dedicated pedestrian connection over the bridge. Just on the other side in front of cabana beach in that coral

[1:42:15] color, that's the roadway alignment that we're presenting today that connects into the new roadway grid that was recently

[1:42:21] completed by butler plaza as well as celebration pointe. And then south of archer road, the city completed southwest

[1:42:33] 40th boulevard project connecting archer road down to 34th street at the post office that was opened three or four

[1:42:40] years ago. And then on the other side of williston road, we've currently analyzed southwest

[1:42:47] 42nd terrace extension to provide an alternate alignment to williston road. Correctively all of these

[1:42:56] projects are expanding the interconnector roadway grid so that to reduce the congestion on the surrounding roadway network.

[1:43:07] this project was established by federal highway and fdot delivered through local agency grants.

[1:43:16] county started it in 2007 through a pd and e studdie. We looked at 11 different routes.

[1:43:28] ultimately the route we're presenting today is -- was determined to be the best route through the mtpo.

[1:43:35] from 2014 to 2016 the preliminary report was put together and then from 2016 to 2022 we received federal aid

[1:43:51] approval of the alignment, fdot completed the right-of-way acquisitions and the city completed the design.

[1:44:03] corridor is 1.4 miles in length, right-of-way varies. There will be 11-foot travel lanes, 10-foot shoulders with a

[1:44:14] 7-feet bike lane and a 10-foot-wide multiuse path on the northeast side of the roadway.

[1:44:21] here's another snapshot of the corridor. At the left side is cabana beach where there will be a tomorrow

[1:44:31] water pond constructed. South where the -- about a 330-foot-span bridge will be placed coming down to the

[1:44:46] northern end of clark-butler boulevard where that hard bend in the road is at today at the walmart existing pond there will

[1:44:56] also be reconfigured and expanded. Prior grant awards. Internally to the city and

[1:45:06] county has been $18.5 million to date. Total -- excuse me, 8.5 million to date.

[1:45:18] total funding has been 15. 4 million, including all of the environmental reviews, regulations, right-of-way, et

[1:45:33] cetera. For the construction phase, fdot is providing 13.1 million for the construction.

[1:45:42] the city -- we're proposing the city to fund 3 million for the construction. Fdot is also providing the

[1:45:50] construction engineers and inspections fund in the amount of about $2 million. Duration.

[1:45:58] we're expected to start in november. There will be some lane closure restrictions.

[1:46:07] the roadways listed there. Butler boulevard, 20th avenue, 24th avenue, 43rd street, any lane closure wills be

[1:46:15] required to be done at night so that way it won't impact the traveling public. Then in front of cabana beach

[1:46:22] lane closure wills be restricted from being in the peak hours for the same reasons. There will be two closures

[1:46:32] required that vary north end of butler boulevard will have to be reconstructed through a closure. That will occur from february of

[1:46:46] next year through july of next year. Traffic will be rerouted via southwest 25th avenue and then

[1:46:55] a section of cabana beach will be closed september through december. This was coordinated with cabana

[1:47:07] beach and the butler boulevard closure was coordinated with butler enterprises. Our recommendation is to award

[1:47:15] the bid to watson construction in the amount of 16.1 million and to authorize the manager to enter into the agreement and any

[1:47:25] other documents to move the project forward. And with that I'll yield to any questions.

[1:47:29] >> mayor: thank you. Appreciate that. Commissioner chestnut. >> thank you.

[1:47:35] well this is quite, quite impressive. It's going to be a great addition to the community.

[1:47:40] I want to know if watson construction is a local company. >> they are based out of newberry.

[1:47:46] so they are local to alachua county, they're not just incorporated into the city limits.

[1:47:53] >> that's what a I'm looking for, alachua county or gainesville that we're using a local company.

[1:47:59] mr. Mayor, I will move staff's recommendation. >> second. >> mayor: motion and a second to

[1:48:03] approve the recommendation. Commissioner arreola. [inaudible] >> mayor: madam clerk, do you

[1:48:10] have anybody signed up to speak to this item? [inaudible] okay.

[1:48:18] >> hello. Jo beatty. This was on the consent agenda. I'm glad it was pulled off.

[1:48:29] I don't understand you commissioners approving something like $16 million and trying to approve it on the

[1:48:34] consent agenda. This was an excellent presentation. As I've said before when I keep

[1:48:42] asking to have things pulled off the consent agenda, it's not always that they are controversial, it's that we're

[1:48:48] paying for it. When somebody sees $16 million being paid on the consent agenda, no discussion, no

[1:48:56] questions, no presentation, it's wrong. One of you when you ran for office said where is the

[1:49:05] transparency. I spoke to you. This is mr. Arreola, by the way, he's going to bring us

[1:49:13] transparency. Never once have you really helped get things off the consent agenda and made things

[1:49:20] transparent for the public. I was notably to be here for the consent agenda. This was an excellent

[1:49:33] presentation. Where the connectors are, you want people off I-75. I discovered one by accident.

[1:49:42] I went down the street. Where does this go? Came out on archer road. Wow.

[1:49:54] if you did this more and presentations like this more, what you were doing, how you are spending your money -- sometimes

[1:50:01] how you are misspending it -- things like this would only benefit people. Benefit you, the traffic.

[1:50:07] the more people that know this is the map and we have connectors and you can bypass dangerous I-75, it's going to

[1:50:16] happen. You're not helping educate people and you're not being transparent.

[1:50:22] I think you need to look at your rules. Commissioners, you need to stop allowing things to just be

[1:50:28] put -- that are not routine to just be put on the consent agenda. You have times when I've asked

[1:50:34] you to pull off a list of the meetings you were going to have. You're passing your calendar on the consent agenda or passing

[1:50:42] that you got an award. That's nice for the public to know. So some of these things as

[1:50:49] agenda items are really to inform the public and to let us know, give us an opportunity if we disagree.

[1:51:07] it doesn't make sense. I would ask you to all listen to this. I think you should listen to mr.

[1:51:16] chestnut the other day and he apologized for not scrutinizing the consent agenda more. >> mayor: thank you, miss

[1:51:24] beatty. Anybody else signed up to speak to this? Commissioner ward?

[1:51:32] >> thank you. I don't entirely disagree with miss beaty on much of the substance.

[1:51:47] it's important to know we've had hours of discussion on this project. This is not new.

[1:51:52] this is the final award of the bid. Tpo and commission meeting over the course of four years, we've

[1:51:59] had many, many hours of discussion. It goes way back. There you go.

[1:52:07] this is not a new item. There have been many hours of discussion on whether or not to do it more than once and what

[1:52:15] path it would take more than once and the complexity of having to acquire right-of-way and all that sort of thing.

[1:52:25] I'm pleased that we are nearing the end of the project. But please don't think that this very serious project just popped

[1:52:35] up and got dropped off on the consent agenda, because there have been many, many hours of discussion on it over the years.

[1:52:42] thank you. >> mayor: mrs. Duncan-walker. >> mr. Mayor, I want to say thank you to staff for a really,

[1:52:50] really nice presentation and the work that is about to be done that is surely to give us a safer alternative.

[1:52:57] I just really appreciate you. Thank you for indulging me today and showing the public what it is we're about to enter into.

[1:53:04] thank you. >> mayor: commissioner saco. >> I want to thank staff. It's such a good presentation,

[1:53:11] even if he hadn't been there to give it, even being in the back you could follow along. Not everybody has to get the

[1:53:19] information on the meeting, they can go online to all the transparent materials and read it, whenever they have team, if

[1:53:24] they can't make the meeting, find the reporting. This video is pretty hard to download and have the bandwidth

[1:53:30] for that. You can find it online and follow along with all the materials.

[1:53:34] I think staff made a really accessible acceptable follow along with really good maps and step by step explanation.

[1:53:44] so thank you very much for making that accessible in the meeting and off the meeting. Thank you, mr. Mayor.

[1:53:51] >> mayor: thank you. I'm just grateful we're at the end of this process. As you said, it's been 15 years.

[1:53:56] we spent -- every since I've been an elected official, which is about 15 years, hundreds of hours of public discussion.

[1:54:09] it involved massive amounts of community involvement. The chamber was very involved. Our legislative delegation was

[1:54:19] very involved. It was not easy. There were many controversial points that we had to work

[1:54:23] ourselves through. And to the folks that will be sitting here over the two years of this project will be under

[1:54:32] construction, you will get more -- you will get some -- once roads start getting shut down and people's lives start

[1:54:42] getting disrupted, you'll continue to hear about it. But I'm glad that we're to the point of awarding the bid.

[1:54:50] I'm glad it's going to a local company. You know, so much work has gone into getting it to this point.

[1:55:02] thank you all and look forward to letting the next group do the ribbon cutting, or whatever, dirt moving, whatever it is

[1:55:12] that's going to happen. Commissioner arreola. >> I was just going to add to the history.

[1:55:17] I remember there was a time when it was almost not going to happen. This commission rallied together

[1:55:25] and was able to get one of the county commissioners to swing their vote. Here it is now.

[1:55:30] so sometimes things come down to just one elected official voting, but it obviously takes a team effort to make sure that

[1:55:38] these things actually happen and shovels get moving dirt. So looking forward to it. Actually used to joke the first

[1:55:47] time I became aware of local government as an entity was when I was driving on 62nd boulevard back in high school wondering

[1:55:55] who is in charge of this road. It's just falling apart. Now here we get to see its nature.

[1:56:07] thank you. >> mayor: all in favor of the motion say aye. [ chorus of ayes ]

[1:56:10] opposed? Motion passes unanimously. Our next item is d5. >> that's right.

[1:56:20] [ reading d5 ] to the amount of $400,000. Authorize manager to execute the agreement, amendments and any

[1:56:40] other documents for solar powered litter and containers, online monitoring, subject to approval by the city and

[1:56:53] legality. >> good morning. These are solar powered litter containers that we plan to place

[1:57:01] around the community. They compact, so we get up to three times more litter in them, which reduces our collecting

[1:57:10] cost. I'm sure you're familiar with them. We have quite a few in the

[1:57:15] midtown area and downtown area. A few years back, couple of years back, we presented a plan to zero waste subcommittee

[1:57:21] giving an idea of where we're going to place these. We're not just going to put them in midtown and downtown.

[1:57:27] we've identified other areas outside of those places that attract litter and have significant amounts of litter,

[1:57:34] pedestrian traffic and things like that. We probably will revisit that a little bit.

[1:57:39] litter does kind of tend to move around a little bit. Those are our goals and intentions.

[1:57:45] >> mayor: okay. Thank you. Any questions from the commission or is there a motion?

[1:57:49] commissioner hayes-santos. >> move staff recommendation. >> second. >> move and second.

[1:57:55] madam clerk, anybody signed up to speak to this item? Okay. Come on up.

[1:58:03] thank you. >> once again, jo beaty. I'm going to need the overhead. When did the city commission

[1:58:18] approve this going up for bid? Was there ever a decision by this body that we needed solar-powered trash containers?

[1:58:31] >> mayor: we've been looking at waste collection for a long time. I don't know the specific dates.

[1:58:36] >> it was before this commission, and there was a majority vote for solar waste collection bins?

[1:58:47] >> mayor: I cannot speak to a specific. >> no, you can't, because there probably wasn't.

[1:58:52] okay. First of all, has anybody ever looked up these big belly waste bins to see other people's

[1:59:02] experience? You know, this seems to me -- I guess you don't want to answer any of my questions.

[1:59:10] I just was reviewing the agenda last night. When I saw this, I was like let me see what these are.

[1:59:18] first of all, you could rent them. You're buying them, as I understand.

[1:59:21] you're buying them with the maintenance agreement, a bid for $307 five essentially. You're now going to authorize

[1:59:31] $400,000, almost a 33% increase. But looking them up, they are not all -- first of all, here is a picture out of commission with

[1:59:47] another waste bin there. It takes up a lot of sidewalk room. There's another picture.

[1:59:56] in this article, recycling fails. A mix of garbage and recycling getting picked up.

[2:00:06] as part of your process, have you included the downtown business owners to see if this was good?

[2:00:13] do you know the negatives of this? Do you know the maintenance problems?

[2:00:19] I guess it's things like this, you know, you got the letter from deo about the way you got the decision on zoning.

[2:00:30] I told you tonight that I saw that that decision was made. I told you, if you read their letter, what they are talking

[2:00:38] about, this is the way you make all decisions. You don't ask questions. You put it off on the consent

[2:00:43] agenda. My time is going to run out. But you know, do this outin the open.

[2:00:50] please, I would appreciate it if commissioners wouldn't try to negate citizens comments and spin it.

[2:00:56] if I had not asked for that to be pulled, if that was not on the regular agenda, you wouldn't have had the opportunity to log

[2:01:07] staff for the years of work. Just because it's been done for years. >> mayor: thank you.

[2:01:11] thank you. Thank you. >> somebody is looking at the agenda for the first time and

[2:01:14] you guys are not transparent. >> mayor: thank you very much. Thank you. Commissioner ward.

[2:01:20] >> thank you, mr. Mayor. So when we are accused of doing the wrong thing, it is important to let the public know that that

[2:01:32] information may not be entirely accurate. To this particular item, as was mentioned earlier, the zero

[2:01:40] waste subcommittee had an extensive on this. I think it was september of 2021.

[2:01:51] I might not be correct on that, it's off the top of my head. We had an extensive discussion right here on the commission.

[2:02:01] it went into the 2022 fiscal budget. There were remarks about it then as well.

[2:02:06] this is not brand-new. It simply is not. We have had extensive discussions about it, staff did

[2:02:16] extensive work on it. It was in the public and it is on video. I appreciate that you found a

[2:02:21] municipality in australia that had some difficulties with it. I'm glad that was made available to us.

[2:02:30] yes, research was done on this. What's exciting about it is we're talking about putting litter containers in locations

[2:02:40] where they have not been before. If that is not beneficial to the community, I don't understand something.

[2:02:47] I think this is positive and we have had discussions about it. It's fine to disagree. But to say that we have not is

[2:02:55] simply not accurate. I will correct that at every possible opportunity. Thank you.

[2:03:00] >> mayor: commissioner hayes-santos. >> thank you, mayor. We already have these in our

[2:03:05] downtown. We have extensive experience with it with our staff and with our community.

[2:03:12] I know one by starbucks on the southeast 1st street but there's multiple ones throughout our community already.

[2:03:21] also want to touch on the consent agenda. We're not a small city. We have hundreds of millions of

[2:03:29] dollars in budget. We can't have a presentation on every single item or we will get nothing done.

[2:03:39] we will -- everything is already 10 hours, the days worth of meetings we have presentations on every single item.

[2:03:46] I think items that are controversial or there's people that don't want to vote for them, those are the ones to pull

[2:03:53] but we can't pull every single item or we will shut down the city. Thank you.

[2:03:58] >> mayor: thank you. Madam clerk, call for a vote. All in favor of the motion say [ chorus of ayes ]

[2:04:05] all opposed? Motion passes unanimously. All right. We have reached the end of our

[2:04:10] business for this morning. >> mayor: all right good afternoon. We're going to call this meeting

[2:04:15] back to order. Regular city commission meeting, september 15th, 2022. And madam clerk, I will turn it

[2:04:21] over to you. >> I believe our first item is early public comment. >> mayor: do we have anybody

[2:04:26] signed up for early public comment? >> I do have one name for early public comment.

[2:04:30] I'm not sure if it's for the morning issue -- already spoken? Oh, hi. >> mayor: speak from the heart.

[2:04:42] [laughter] >> sorry. >> so sheila pane with the labor coalition.

[2:04:47] we helped push through the rental rights ordinance, and I apologize, I am in the middle of cutting up a tree --

[2:04:57] >> mayor: which item are you speaking towards? >> n-1. I'm in the middle of cutting up

[2:05:02] a tree, it fell down in one of my client's yards. So good thing I didn't have one of y'all's [choppy audio].

[2:05:10] so, up because it was something that kind of didn't get taken up when all the other property renters' rights ordinance was

[2:05:21] being passed. And it's become more and more apparent, especially during covid, that it's super

[2:05:28] important. And when we met with you all the last few years, you all said that your security deposits and

[2:05:34] other issues had been stolen, no one ever gets it back. And, I hope this is mediation process between landlords and

[2:05:44] tenants will be robust enough to cover other issues also that come up between landlords and tenants.

[2:05:52] that will keep it from going into the courts. Because, tenants just give up at that point.

[2:05:59] and my last -- so I'm hoping it can have the kind of robust element that like the wage recovery, wage theft ordinance

[2:06:11] had. They've collected over $100,000, and they predict that perhaps twice as much as that was

[2:06:19] recovered, since when employers are contacted, and they know they're in the wrong, they just go ahead and pay without it even

[2:06:28] going through. And pine ridge. This has come up a lot. So, when all that stuff with

[2:06:36] pine ridge, ongoing thing that we need and organize with the tenants there. They, when the last landlord

[2:06:47] sold those 84 units, they had no -- nothing was passed on, so there would be no record if they paid.

[2:07:00] even if they were trying to figure out if they needed to move from pine ridge they did not have a way to recover their

[2:07:05] security deposit. There was no lease, and they're in a bad problem. I talked to miss geneva this

[2:07:12] week. She couldn't get some stuff because she can't prove. So for people that have to pay

[2:07:17] for another security deposit, first and last, when they already have it somewhere, keep them in bad housing.

[2:07:27] that's what we're finding out at pine ridge. They don't have another security deposit to come up with.

[2:07:32] so thank you very much. >> mayor: thank you, ms. Pane. Anybody else kind up for early public comment?

[2:07:37] okay. Then we will move on to general public comment. >> we have ms. Jo beaty.

[2:07:54] >> good day again. Two things. I read with dismay the article about the arrest of somebody for

[2:08:08] alleged e-mails and threats and stuff. Read the articles. And in there, this person

[2:08:13] clearly said he suffers from ptsd, was a war veteran, and I don't understand. You sit there and pass ordinance

[2:08:28] so the homeless anywhere in this whole town can have an open container anywhere because you don't want people getting

[2:08:37] arrested over things like that. You have civil citation so people who have pot and small enough pot, young people don't

[2:08:47] get an arrest record early on. So you also have a mental health team with the police department and I don't understand why a

[2:08:58] good upstanding person in the community is arrested when clearly he says he's got ptsd. It seems to me that you've got a

[2:09:09] mental health team that, why does he need to be arrested, and have a mug shot and stuff, why is he not granted similar kinds

[2:09:17] of privileges? You know he could have been baker acted. To see if he was really in a

[2:09:26] mentally stressed, you have a mental health team that could go out. And I don't understand, you

[2:09:31] know, for the hypocrisy of the way the city works, and the way you work and allow these things to happen.

[2:09:39] so, I would really like to hear a little bit of comment on that and I'd like to never see something like this again.

[2:09:44] I'm sure this probably happens often. It may be that this person frequently speaks against some

[2:09:50] of the things you all would like to see rushed through. But I'll stop on that. I wish you'd think about it.

[2:09:59] I'd sure like to hear you discuss how something like that goes on in this welcoming city. The other thing is that I really

[2:10:08] have a problem with, you know, every time citizens speak, we've got to have it spun by the commissioners.

[2:10:17] you can't just accept our comments. You determine what the truth is. Commissioner ward who soon hopes

[2:10:28] to be our mayor needs to set the record straight. You know, I ask for things to be off the consent agenda not for

[2:10:39] myself, but for the public. You certainly took the opportunity, when things were pulled, to thank staff and that.

[2:10:48] look at these things as an opportunity and a public service announcement. We pay your salary.

[2:10:53] we pay the taxes. We pay for these projects. >> mayor: thank you ms. Beaty. >> please be more considerate of

[2:11:00] the citizens. >> our next speaker is tana silva. >> hello.

[2:11:10] of all the many items on today's agenda the most consequential issue is why isn't the commission discussing the letter

[2:11:21] from the state deo and the three options it outlines and the objections it raises. The mayor is not an executive.

[2:11:28] seven people are elected to represent the city with equal votes. The mayor has no authority to

[2:11:33] decide issues like this. Experience tells me the mayor has an explanation of some kind, and commissioners and staff will

[2:11:43] let it go. Please don't. The letter gives the commission opportunity to finally open a

[2:11:49] long overdue, honest discussion of equitable development. In the process the commission can set an example of respectful

[2:11:58] dialogue. We've experienced the opposite. And I'll spare everyone some recent examples.

[2:12:05] don't be afraid of difference. On and off the dais. That's part of your job. So, I would appreciate an answer

[2:12:15] to my question, really two questions. One is, the city sent a mistaken document on the first round.

[2:12:25] doesn't that restart the review clock? And the second question is, when will the commission discuss the

[2:12:36] state deo letter and respond to it as a body of representative elected officials? >> mayor: madam clerk?

[2:12:46] >> I believe this is johnny booth? >> hello. Sovereign -- king johnny booth.

[2:13:07] -- notice reminder about the campaign, human trafficking, through star and through notice. Through notice goes out through

[2:13:17] the constituents for like the 116 congressional parliamentary congress, which is now known as the 107th king parliamentary

[2:13:27] congress for like notice you know, notice at any kind that states decide that genocide is people in any kind of way.

[2:13:37] I also talk about the reshaping the president -- the present in order to cause a better grander future.

[2:13:47] not the whole going over the past acting government, what confuse from the old past [indiscernible] within this

[2:13:59] past. Now, florida, seminole, swamp plains, territory, known as a sovereign state, not an

[2:14:11] independent state. I was just wondering how long was florida going to go along with the rest of what's going on

[2:14:18] with the united states where they are under that notice since 2012. I just want to see constituents

[2:14:28] work more on what's really on their agenda and stuff. I hear everyone complaining about all this other stuff but

[2:14:35] they got all these agencies that just want to take all these other complaints, too. Which is why I do believe that

[2:14:40] you did create all these other agencies within the start-up of the united states. Thank you.

[2:14:48] >> mayor: thank you. Madam clerk? Okay. Thank you.

[2:14:55] for the person who got arrested, that was a decision made between the state attorney and the gainesville police department.

[2:15:07] it was not a city ordinance. It was a state statute that was violated so we'll leave that up to the court to determine and

[2:15:16] the issues addressed in the letter from deo will be part of a discussion october 4th at a special meeting for the second

[2:15:27] reading of the comp plan amendment. With that, madam clerk? That the issues in a letter from

[2:15:39] deo will be addressed at the october 4th special meeting. Madam clerk? >> our next item is l-1,

[2:15:47] quasi-judicial final plat for oaks preserve phase two a cluster subdivision 2022-488. A resolution of the city of

[2:15:54] gainesville, florida, approving the final plat name oaks preserve phase two, a cluster subdivision located in the

[2:15:59] vicinity of 5105 southwest archer road, gainesville, florida, as more specifically described in this resolution,

[2:16:05] authorizing the city manager to execute a security agreement to secure required public improvements, accepting the

[2:16:11] dedication of the public rights-of-way easements and other dedicated portions as shown on the plat, providing

[2:16:17] directions to the city clerk and providing an immediate effective date. >> mayor: mr. Castillo, welcome.

[2:16:21] >> good afternoon, mayor and commissioners. For the record my name is juan castillo.

[2:16:26] I'm a planner with the department of sustainable development. I'd like to begin by

[2:16:34] apologizing. Came to my attention today that there were three items not part of the backups associated with

[2:16:40] this item. Those are three images for the plats itself. That we'll be discussing.

[2:16:44] those images are in my presentation. And I have them here physically. But again, those would be part

[2:16:51] of my presentation, as well. So the item before you this afternoon is the proposal for the final plat for the oaks

[2:17:05] preserve cluster subdivision phase two. And it is the second part following the adoption of the

[2:17:11] oaks preserve cluster subdivision design plat. The first phase was approved back in june 17th of 2021.

[2:17:24] so the property in question is located west of southwest 50th terrace between southwest archer road, and southwest 57th avenue.

[2:17:35] phase two is the portion, the southernmost portion of the proposed -- that is this portion right here.

[2:17:57] you can see it more clearly here. This is what we will be talking about today.

[2:18:02] here you can see the phase one which is the northern most portion of the cluster subdivision.

[2:18:08] making that connection with archer road, and the second phase which is the item before you today.

[2:18:18] the proposal is 33.36 acres in the size, and is adding 115 residential lots to the area. Most of the uses in the area

[2:18:29] [choppy audio]. Here, you have a more zoomed in version of the northerly part of the proposal before you today.

[2:18:45] this shows the connection to phase one, which is part of the cluster subdivision that makes the connection with archer road.

[2:18:54] as well as the connections to abutting properties, and the majority of the residential lots being proposed today.

[2:19:08] this is another zoomed in version, kind of moving towards the middle more. Here you start seeing the

[2:19:19] southern connection and the majority of the single lot residential cluster right here, along with connections to

[2:19:25] abutting properties. Lastly this is the southernmost part of the cluster subdivision phase two.

[2:19:34] again showing connections to abutting property, remaining residential lots associated with this phase.

[2:19:45] with that, staff has reviewed the proposal before you this afternoon, and finds that it is consistent with the approved

[2:19:54] design plat, along with the city's comprehensive plan, planning development code, zoning regulations and technical

[2:20:04] reviews for public works, gru, fire and environmental. Thank you so much for your time, and I am here and available for

[2:20:12] any questions you may have. >> mayor: all right. Thank you very much, mr. Castillo.

[2:20:16] commissioner hayes-santos? >> thank you, I move resolution 22-488. >> mayor: motion and a second to

[2:20:23] adopt the proposed resolution. Madam clerk is there anyone signed up to speak to this item? Okay then we will move back to

[2:20:29] the commission for a roll call vote. >> commissioner saco? An sent.

[2:20:34] commissioner hayes-santos? >> aye. >> commissioner ward? >> aye.

[2:20:36] >> commissioner arreola? Commissioner chestnut? >> aye. >> commissioner duncan-walker?

[2:20:41] >> aye. >> mayor poe? >> mayor: aye. That motion passes unanimously

[2:20:45] with saco absent. And madam clerk, before you read the next item into the record, I apologize, I told mr. Fulton

[2:20:53] that he could introduce a new member of his staff, and I forgot to do that before we got to our business items.

[2:21:00] but I'm super excited about this introduction. Because, well I know what an incredible that we're getting.

[2:21:08] and we are so lucky as a city to have him as part of our team. Mr. Fulton, if you'll do the honors.

[2:21:15] >> thank you, mayor and commissioners. I wanted to come in and introduce a new member of our

[2:21:19] staff in the office of inclusion. We've had the opportunity to continue to build about the

[2:21:23] skills of the staff here in the office, and so we had a compliance investigator position that came open, had applicants

[2:21:31] apply and we've selected our next compliance investigator allows us to be able to do as I shared with you many times in

[2:21:39] private, inreach and outreach activity in terms of training as well as get our cases handled quicker in a more sufficient

[2:21:45] amount of time. And so the recent why I want to bring this to you as well is because zhu is a former reichert

[2:21:53] house kid. He's a gentleman that this city has supported, and so to have a reichert house kid come home,

[2:22:04] and I'm going to let him tell you his story, but to allow him to be part of our family in an employee capacity I'm excited to

[2:22:12] do it. Without further ado I'd like him to share a few words. >> mayor: thank you.

[2:22:17] good to have you. >> thank you. Thank you, commissioners. Thank you myer.

[2:22:21] my name is zhu. I am here from gainesville. I grew up here. My brother also is here locally.

[2:22:31] he's a local police officer. We both attended the reichert house growing up. And that program was very

[2:22:46] beneficial to our life, and to our upbringing. Our father was not present with us, so, we had various male

[2:22:53] mentors in our life to kind of steer and guide and direct us in the right direction so we can become productive citizens

[2:23:02] within our city and our county. After graduating from the east side, I eventually attended the university of florida, and I

[2:23:09] went on to go to law school at uf. After law school I went to work for a private firm for one year.

[2:23:18] and there was a position open at the state attorney's office and I was glad to take that position and come back to my local

[2:23:25] community. And I served in that role for seven years at the state attorney's office prosecuting

[2:23:30] felony cases. And I was happy when the opportunity presented for me to do some work in equity.

[2:23:37] one of my passions is civil rights. Which is one of the reasons why I went to law school to do some

[2:23:44] civil rights work. So I'm excited to be here with the city and help out as much as I can and be involved in our

[2:23:50] city, as much as I can. >> mayor: thank you. And -- ma'am, we don't allow cheers or jeers in the chamber.

[2:23:58] thank you. Despite having a mediocre economics and government professor in your time out at

[2:24:07] santa fe you somehow persevered through all of that to accomplish incredible things. And I'm just so thankful you're

[2:24:13] bringing your experiences to our city, and specifically to the department of equity and inclusion, you're going to be a

[2:24:22] tremendous addition and asset, and we just hope that you really enjoy your time here. So it's good to have you

[2:24:27] introduced to the larger community. >> thank you. >> mayor: thank you.

[2:24:33] all right, thank you mr. Folston. Appreciate you taking the time to do that.

[2:24:37] all right, madam clerk next item. >> l-2, quasi-judicial final plat for grand oaks at tower

[2:24:42] phase three, a cluster subdivision 2022-504. A resolution of the city of gainesville, florida, approving

[2:24:49] the final plat name grand oaks at tower phase three, a cluster subdivision located in the vicinity of southwest 17th road

[2:24:55] and southwest 68th terrace. Gainesville, florida, as more specifically described in this resolution, authorizing the city

[2:25:01] manager to execute a security agreement to secure required public improvements, accepting dedication of the public rights

[2:25:09] of way, easements and other dedicated portions as shown on the plat, providing directions to the city clerk and providing

[2:25:15] an immediate effective date. >> mayor: all right, thank you. Welcome. >> thank you, mayor,

[2:25:18] commissioners, forrest eddleton, the acting director of the department of sustainable development.

[2:25:23] and I've also had the pleasure of working as sort of one of the planners in a long line of distinguished planners that have

[2:25:34] worked on this project. Started off with andrew persons working on it for the design plat, and then, of course,

[2:25:39] planner lawrence calderon worked on this for several of the other phases. So, it is an honor to be able to

[2:25:46] sort of step in to this one, and continue it here in the third phase. So this is grand oaks at tower.

[2:25:54] this is the third phase of a development that you all I'm sure are familiar with. This has been going on for quite

[2:26:02] some time. So the phase that we are looking at today is this top phase here. It's 83 lots, about 24 acres,

[2:26:11] and it is the continuance of phase one and phase two that you all have seen before. As you see on your screen here,

[2:26:20] this started with the design phase back in 2018. Which was approved by the drb, the development review board.

[2:26:30] went on to be approved by the city commission in the design plat stage, and phase one and phase two have also been

[2:26:36] reviewed and approved by this body. So this is the survey of the entire area you'll see on this

[2:26:48] screen. The northern phase here. We have g-2 and g-3 which show you in more detail the lots up

[2:26:54] close. And of course, as you are all familiar, really, this is the final plat approval stage, as I

[2:27:04] said, comes in a long line of reviews and approvals that have happened over time. And, the staff's really

[2:27:14] responsibility for this final plat stage is to review it for compliance and consistency -- consistency with the

[2:27:21] construction plans that have been reviewed and approved by several agencies and departments and staff, and of course, that

[2:27:29] those construction plans are in consistency and compliance with the design plat, the comprehensive plan, and the land

[2:27:37] development code. So with that, staff finds that this phase three does meet the requirements and standards of

[2:27:44] the comprehensive plan, and development code, and is consistent with the previous phases and the design plat.

[2:27:51] and are recommending approval. >> mayor: okay. Thank you very much. Commissioner hayes-santos?

[2:27:55] >> thank you, mayor, I move ordinance 2022-504. >> second. >> mayor: thank you, motion and

[2:28:02] second to adopt the proposed resolution. Madam clerk, anybody signed up to speak to this item?

[2:28:07] okay. Then move back to the commission for a roll call vote. >> commissioner ward?

[2:28:11] >> aye. >> commissioner chestnut? >> aye. >> commissioner saco?

[2:28:13] >> aye. >> commissioner duncan-walker? >> aye. >> commissioner arreola?

[2:28:17] >> aye. >> commissioner hayes-santos? >> aye. >> and mayor poe?

[2:28:20] >> mayor: aye. That motion passes unanimously. Next item, please. >> resolution number 2022-346,

[2:28:28] sixth budget amendment to fiscal year 2022 general government financial and operating plan budget, with a recommendation

[2:28:34] that the commission adopt the proposed resolution. >> mayor: okay, madam manager. >> okay, members of the

[2:28:42] commission, this item is the sixth budget amendment for fiscal year 2022 operating budget.

[2:28:48] susan boyd is here, acting budget manager. This item went to finance committee on august 31st, and it

[2:28:54] was recommended for approval -- for consideration and approval by this body today. And with that, ms. Boyd?

[2:29:01] >> good afternoon. This is -- >> mayor: I'm sorry to interrupt, can you pull that mic

[2:29:07] up a little? >> this is the sixth amendment to our fiscal year '22 general government financial operating

[2:29:14] plan. The last amendment was done in april, on april 21st of this year.

[2:29:18] and I'm just going to kind of summarize things. General fund amendments, revenue appropriations of $630,000, this

[2:29:26] included $230,000 from the florida department of corrections for the inspire program with the police

[2:29:34] department which funds four violence interrupter positions. It was also -- sorry, general capital project funding.

[2:29:44] expenditures under this were movement of some funds from public works, which should have been capital for some hvac,

[2:29:53] roofing, plumbing and electrical work. And then there was $40,000 that was allocated for the busing

[2:30:00] program. Expenditure adjustments between departments included $150,000 for some extended assistance for

[2:30:07] the finalizing [choppy audio] between departments for positions that were made from different departments back and

[2:30:16] forth. This also included the addition of 5.5 new positions. City manager had added a special

[2:30:27] events coordinator and communications and assistant director and the city auditor, this was dilution of a position.

[2:30:35] this is one that she had previously added as her charter authorization at the beginning of the year, and after some

[2:30:40] looking at it decided she didn't want to move forward with that so we were removing that. The compliance manager and

[2:30:46] equity and inclusion and then four positions that were approved by the city commission. Special revenue fund amendments.

[2:30:56] this included allocations of approximately $800 in the american rescue plan, and then some funding from the

[2:31:05] transportation mobility program. Sorry. So the expenditures for american rescue there was roughly 7.8.

[2:31:14] there was funding to new programs and then some funding for some programs that's closed, and then reallocated to

[2:31:20] different programs. This also included $1.1 million that was tmpa funding for the 62nd boulevard arterial

[2:31:30] connector, and some weatherproofing at the parking garage. And also $250,000 for a

[2:31:37] southwest 62nd boulevard rts hub. And then $90,000 for medieval fair.

[2:31:45] under special revenue, there was allocation of $1 is.2 million in new awards and grants, and then reconciliation of some grants to

[2:31:56] reduce the fund balance by 1.2. New grants included 10.6 million for the fta for the bus and bus facilities for east side

[2:32:05] transfer station, and $300,000 from fta for the american rescue plan as well as planning restoration with rts.

[2:32:13] under debt service we allocated an additional $38,000 of interest earnings for those funds.

[2:32:19] and under capital projects we utilized the fund balance and transfer between multiple projects for about $4.2 million.

[2:32:30] this also included $1.7, which was funding that's transferred from various different projects for additional funding required

[2:32:36] for southwest 62nd boulevard. This includes $683,000 for a couple of wild spaces, public places programs.

[2:32:45] and let's see, under the proprietary funds, enterprise funds, this was rts this was funding for a vehicle, and also

[2:32:57] we had corrections to the fund balance from previous. And we returned some funds to fund balance.

[2:33:03] under internal service, we had allocation of primarily this allocation of 842,000 for operating expenses for fleet,

[2:33:15] and then there was an addition of 695,000 from other departments for purchase of various vehicles.

[2:33:22] and that was it in the budget amendment. Then we had, ms. Curry handed this to you guys, we had a

[2:33:31] revision to this, we were requesting to amendment attachment a to move $52,700 from the feasibility studies

[2:33:42] under the arpa program into the human rights coalition program. >> if I may, members of the commission, this is a revision

[2:33:53] to attachment "a" on page 7 specifically the human rights coalition was initially allocated $35,000 by the board.

[2:34:01] we are asking for a revision for that to be up creased to $87,713 directed from the commission a couple of meetings or so ago in

[2:34:13] order to accommodate that in the arpa funding and we are asking that the feasibility study line be reduced from 250 to 197,288.

[2:34:23] >> mayor: okay, thank you madam clerk -- I mean madam manager. Ms. Boyd thank you, I appreciate the presentation.

[2:34:29] turn to commissioner arreola. >> thank you, mr. Mayor. Thank you. I'd like to go ahead and move

[2:34:36] that we adopt resolution 2022-346. >> second. >> mayor: motion and a second to

[2:34:41] adopt the amended budget resolution with the updated attachment "a" that the city manager just referred to.

[2:34:53] commissioner chestnut? >> thank you. This amendment is part of the whole resolution?

[2:35:05] >> mayor: yes, ma'am. >> okay. Well, I want to vote against this amendment because of the

[2:35:17] manner in which it was done. At the end of the budget process, we moving forward, this particular entity has not been

[2:35:27] recommended for funding. There were other people that have come to us for funding that -- who were not recommended

[2:35:33] by -- agency and they were turned down. I just don't like the way this was done, preferential treatment

[2:35:46] for one group but not all and I don't think that was fair. It's not fair to the taxpayer. It's not fair at all.

[2:35:53] so thank you. >> mayor: okay, thank you commissioner chestnut. Madam clerk, do we have folks

[2:35:58] signed up to speak to this item? Okay. Then, this is a roll call vote. Madam clerk?

[2:36:05] >> commissioner hayes-santos? >> no. >> commissioner ward? >> aye.

[2:36:10] >> commissioner chestnut? >> no. >> commissioner arreola? >> aye.

[2:36:14] >> commissioner duncan-walker? >> no. >> commissioner saco? >> aye.

[2:36:20] >> and mayor poe? >> mayor: aye. That motion passes 4-3 with hayes-santos, duncan-walker and

[2:36:27] chestnut in dissent. Next item, please? >> our next item is land use change of 13.943 acres of

[2:36:35] property located northeast of the intersection of southwest williston road and southwest 13th street and west of

[2:36:42] southwest 13th street and 36th place. Ordinance 211146 a-an ordinance of the city of gainesville

[2:36:49] florida amending the future land use map of the comprehensive plan by changing the land use category of approximately 13.943

[2:36:56] acres generally located northeast of the intersection of southwest williston road and southwest 13th street and west

[2:37:02] of southwest 13th street and south of southwest 36th place more specifically described in this ordinance, the city of

[2:37:10] gainesville urban mixed-use, providing directions to the city manager, providing a severability clause, providing a

[2:37:15] repealing clause and providing an effective date. >> mayor: thank you. Mr. Simmons?

[2:37:20] >> mr. Mayor, commissioners, I believe that item was moved to the evening agenda because of a notification.

[2:37:30] I have an agenda -- >> mayor: is that correct, madam clerk? Per our update?

[2:37:35] we did move a couple things I know. N-1? >> mayor: okay.

[2:37:44] thank you, mr. Simmons. All right. Then next item, please. >> item -- our next item is n-1,

[2:38:00] ordinance amending the residential rental unit permit program, ordinance number 211438-a.

[2:38:06] an ordinance of the city of gainesville, florida, amending the residential rental unit permit program by amending

[2:38:11] chapter 14.5, article one titled residential rental unit program providing directions to the codifier, providing a

[2:38:18] severability clause, providing a repealing clause and providing an effective date. >> mayor: okay.

[2:38:22] thank you this is the second reading. Commissioner hayes-santos? >> thank you.

[2:38:28] mayor, after our last meeting, at that last meeting we gave direction to staff to draft some amendments, adding the rental

[2:38:39] mediation program and also adding some checklist. With the aclc, and state attorney's office to have a

[2:38:46] version of that, and I would like to move ordinance 211439-a, and the version. >> second.

[2:38:56] >> mayor: okay motion and a second. And can you read the attachment? Number in the backup so we --

[2:39:08] >> 022 -- >> 220- -- >> it's second reading -- >> mayor: okay.

[2:39:24] [inaudible] okay so it says "a" on here mr. Attorney pip just want to make sure for the record we're

[2:39:29] referring to the right version. >> the version I think that's been moved would be the one that was added by commissioner

[2:39:42] hayes-santos with the slight modification to the first reading [inaudible] reading we endeavored to encapsulate those

[2:39:53] revisions, and I think [inaudible] commissioner hayes-santos of the agenda, which is the -- motion.

[2:40:10] >> mayor: is it possible for you to pull that up? Madam clerk? Supposed to call during dinner

[2:40:22] time. Yeah, if that's faster. Madam clerk, the attorney has a paper copy.

[2:40:29] I think it's important if there are modifications before the second reading that we show them clearly.

[2:40:36] okay, so no changes on that page. I think page three is where -- >> that was the first of the two

[2:40:50] changes. Right, commissioner? >> yes. >> mayor: yeah, I think --

[2:40:55] >> taken out the requirement to also attach the entirety of the ordinance itself. Concern with that with the just

[2:41:04] sort of an overload [inaudible] and the other slight change -- >> mayor: page 6, line 203. >> the noncodified part of the

[2:41:17] ordinance, section 3. The effective date of the ordinance -- shall create [inaudible]

[2:41:34] >> mayor: thank you. Just want to put it on for the agenda. Commissioner hayes-santos made a

[2:41:37] motion to adopt the ordinance as amended, that we just were presented. And that is included in the

[2:41:47] backup as the hayes-santos version. Who was the seconder of that? Okay.

[2:41:53] saco was the second. Madam clerk, who do we have signed up to speak today? No one.

[2:42:01] >> our first speaker followed by jen powell, followed by tyler ford. >> hello.

[2:42:10] I wanted to mention that the affected parties do not know about this. People were just sent their

[2:42:15] landlord permits a few weeks ago. And there could have been a notice in there saying that

[2:42:19] there was a revised ordinance being discussed. Nobody knows about this. It's just a fluke that I saw

[2:42:25] that on today's agenda. And it could have been easily included. So I think this is improper

[2:42:31] because the affected parties do not know about it. And yet they were build $140, instead of $122 like last year,

[2:42:38] for their permits. And it could have been included. So there's no excuse not to include it.

[2:42:43] I also want to know, is air conditioning, central air conditioning required by code? I don't think it is.

[2:42:49] and yet you're requiring people who do spend several thousand dollars to put programmable thermostats in.

[2:42:56] I tried that, and it's too complicated. So we're spending $50, and then we're told the tenant doesn't

[2:43:02] want it. Why are you telling what kind of permits -- what kind of programmable need to be put in?

[2:43:11] I think that's improper and should not be required. Also you're requiring us to have an air conditioning man look at

[2:43:17] every two years. For those of you who are homeowners, do you have an air conditioner man look at yours

[2:43:21] every two years? They're going to know that it's required, and they're going to say oh, it's $100 for 15

[2:43:27] minutes, if that much. I think that's wrong, as well. In terms of showerheads. You're revising that in the new

[2:43:32] ordinance. Showerheads and faucet aerators. In the old ordinance it said 2.2.

[2:43:41] that doesn't even exist in gainesville. I had a friend buy 20 online and now it's changed to 2.5.

[2:43:46] because he was following the old ordinance. Now this is -- it's all wrong. You're making people spend money

[2:43:52] they don't have to spend. Even raising the permit to $140, you know, you say you want affordable housing.

[2:43:57] and then you want housing that meets all these luxury standards. Well, which is it, affordable or

[2:44:03] high priced houses? Because right away $140, to make the same amount of money, the landlord has to charge another

[2:44:10] $10 or $11 a month rent. And the tenants say why are you raising our rent? I'm saying I have to do it

[2:44:16] because I'm being forced to do these things. One guy I told them I have to put more insulation in your

[2:44:22] attic. He said why, my insulation is great, my temperature once it gets there, it stays there.

[2:44:27] I'm being forced to do that. So I'm just saying, this is not proper. People are were not noticed and

[2:44:33] you're putting provisions in here that were not identical and people spent money trying to meet that and now they can't use

[2:44:38] it. He actually said to me, well maybe I'll send them the box of 20 aerators and charge them.

[2:44:46] >> mayor: thank you. Madam clerk? >> jen powell, followed by [indiscernible].

[2:44:53] >> mayor: welcome. >> hello commissioners. My name is jen powell. I am a citizen of gainesville

[2:44:58] and I am also a renter. Nobody is forcing anybody to be a landlord. That's a choice.

[2:45:06] I am here to speak in support of the rental housing mediation program. I believe it's a good start, and

[2:45:13] I support creating a venue for landlords and renters to resolve their dispute amicably. But city staff must inform

[2:45:24] renters seeking mediation of their options in the courts if they're landlord refuses to cooperate as well as provide

[2:45:29] renters with the names and numbers of free or low cost legal clinics for the vulnerable, such as three

[2:45:34] rivers. Finally, city commissioners and staff should look to the county's wage recovery program

[2:45:39] as a model to add teeth to this mediation program. I have been very lucky in my 25 years of being a renter in

[2:45:49] gainesville. I've had some excellent landlords. None of the landlords that I

[2:45:54] have had would have a problem with any of the things in this ordinance. It's just basic -- basic safety,

[2:46:04] basic health, and also yes, we need to do something about the extreme electric bills that some of the properties, so, yes,

[2:46:15] insulation does make a big difference. I've lived in a house with excellent insulation.

[2:46:21] I've lived in a house with none and the one with none my electric bill was equivalent to my month's rent.

[2:46:27] granted this is years ago, but that just was the case. So I am in support of these modifications.

[2:46:32] and I feel that we could even go further than that but this is a good start. Thanks.

[2:46:37] >> mayor: thank you. >> tyler forest. >> good afternoon, commissioners.

[2:46:48] first, thank you for voting on this. And for passing it the first time.

[2:46:54] and thank you for making these very minor adjustments, and I hope that you all vote for it again.

[2:47:01] just to be clear, these are not luxury standards. These are basic housing standards that are recognized

[2:47:10] across our country. Indeed, I would bet that not a single one of you would buy a house that didn't meet these

[2:47:17] same standards. That's why they're deserving of everybody. Right?

[2:47:22] so, also, I want to support the rental housing mediation program and note that it's a good start. But I also support creating a

[2:47:31] venue for landlords and renters to resolve their disputes amicably, but city staff and commissioners must make sure to

[2:47:37] inform renters seeking mediation of their options in the courts, if their landlords refuse to cooperate.

[2:47:45] as well as provide renter with the names and numbers of free or low cost legal clinics for the vulnerable such as three rivers.

[2:47:53] finally commissioners and staff should look to the wage recovery program as a model to add teeth to the mediation program.

[2:47:59] I would just add that we learned that the wage recovery program has returned over $100,000 to the pockets of workers who were

[2:48:06] robbed. So it's clearly a successful model. And I hope you'll do so.

[2:48:10] thank you. >> I want to just double-check, rick stransky did you want to speak to this item?

[2:48:20] >> mayor: okay. Thank you all for your thoughts. Ma'am, if you -- >> I just wanted to say that

[2:48:28] section 8 demand sense electoral heating -- >> mayor: hold on. >> section 8-

[2:48:35] >> mayor: ma'am. Hold on, hold on, if you want to speak to our items, right next to where you're sitting there's

[2:48:40] a sign-up sheet and we'll tell you which one. You can of course speak to this one now but that's how our

[2:48:46] process works. Take that card and fill it out. >> thank you. >> mayor: go ahead.

[2:48:53] commissioner hayes-santos? >> yeah, thank you, mayor. I just wanted to address the showerheads and the 2.2 to 2.5.

[2:49:00] the 2.5 change means it's actually higher. So you can still use a 2.2 gallon or 1.8 or anything below

[2:49:07] 2.5. Just can't use above 2.5. So those showerheads are still useful.

[2:49:13] thank you, mayor. >> mayor: commissioner saco? >> thank you, mr. Mayor. I'm of course in support this --

[2:49:21] this -- of this ordinance and the changes we've made to it. I do want to add just how important it is to have another

[2:49:27] option for security deposit recovery or other issues. I helped one friend pro bono, he had left the house in better

[2:49:40] shape than when he moved in, after a couple years the landlord refused to return the security deposit.

[2:49:47] didn't really follow any of the regulations or statutes, statutory requirements of, tell me within so many days why I'm

[2:49:55] not getting it back. So, I helped him file in court. I had to tell them that if he made less than a certain income

[2:50:03] you have the option of indigent support, the courts don't often tell you there. Often folks think they have to

[2:50:13] pay several hundred dollars just to recover $1,000. So programs like this at give an option to our community and an

[2:50:22] opportunity to be as many of our neighbors has said I think is worth whatever we are putting into it.

[2:50:29] that really is invaluable to those who think they don't have an option to think that they need an attorney [choppy audio]

[2:50:43] and even with an attorney advising him, filing for free, helping him look over everything that he was filing, it still

[2:50:55] took nine months for this friend of mine to recover the security deposit. I think at that point, he was

[2:51:04] going to use that as a security deposit in the second place. So, this is -- this is an important thing that we're

[2:51:10] doing. And I hope you all -- >> mayor: thank you. Ma'am, you don't have to fill

[2:51:16] out a separate card for each item if you just want to put the items you want to speak to on your card.

[2:51:22] however you want to do it. Did you want to speak to this item? Sure, yeah, that's fine.

[2:51:32] I saw you grab a few cards. You can do one and just put the different items on the agenda that you'd like to speak to, and

[2:51:38] the clerk can call you up. If you want to speak to this item before we move on, come on up.

[2:51:43] tell us who you are. >> thank you so much. Mayor poe, my name is wendy noone.

[2:51:49] I'm a researcher, therapist at helping hands. So I'm a researcher. Hrs does two things.

[2:51:58] one, they demand ac and heat but it doesn't need to be central. And the second thing, they demand nearly inspections to

[2:52:08] care --. >> mayor: thank you. And once you have that filled out give it to the clerk here

[2:52:13] and she'll call you up. Real quick, this is kind of looking down the road with this. Obviously this is a really

[2:52:25] important first step. I want to thank everybody who has been really intimately involved with this process for a

[2:52:31] long time, including some folks sitting up here on the dais, and out in the community, it's taken a lot of work, a lot of

[2:52:37] collaborative effort. But this isn't an ending point. We're going to have to pay attention to how this is working

[2:52:44] and if there are things that can be improved a year or two years down. Come back and make this

[2:52:50] modification. And I think the aspect is one of those things. Once the mediation process is in

[2:52:58] place, it's a lot easier to sort of add to it, and augment it. So I agree I think definitely the wage theft mod s&l a great

[2:53:15] one, it really helped quite a few people. We're about to talk about fair chance hiring in the next weeks

[2:53:21] and months here, and there's a similar conversation going on with that. The sort of silver lining there

[2:53:30] is once the process and the mediation is -- has been in place for awhile, folks quite trying to file it.

[2:53:40] because they know that they're going to not only get caught, they will be held accountable. And so I expect there are going

[2:53:47] to be a small number of landlords who choose to not comply, or to abuse the system. They will get held accountable,

[2:53:56] and then it will become common knowledge that you just have to follow the rules, and we'll see a number of mediations drop

[2:54:04] quite a bit after this. So it's an important time of year to come up here, but it's going to add such value to our

[2:54:17] renters which make up about two-thirds of our community. Each group of our neighbors that will be positively impacted by

[2:54:24] this. So, with that, madam clerk, we do have a motion on the floor to adopt on second reading the

[2:54:30] modified ordinance, which was shown on the overhead by mr. Nee and labeled in the backup with commissioner hayes-santos' name.

[2:54:43] please call the roll call vote. >> commissioner chestnut? >> aye. >> commissioner hayes-santos?

[2:54:46] >> aye. >> commissioner saco? >> aye. >> commissioner arreola?

[2:54:49] >> aye. >> commissioner ward? >> aye. >> commissioner duncan-walker?

[2:54:51] >> aye. >> and mayor poe? >> mayor: aye. Passes unanimously.

[2:54:55] thank you, all. Thank you. All right. Now go out there and do more

[2:55:01] good work. Or take a nap and do good work tomorrow. All right, madam clerk.

[2:55:05] >> next item is ordinance number 2022-343 repealing of the student community relations advisory board.

[2:55:14] an ordinance of the city of gainesville, florida, repealing division 15, student community relations advisory board chapter

[2:55:19] 2 of the city code of ordinances, providing directions to the codifier, providing a severability clause, providing a

[2:55:26] repealing clause and providing an immediate effective date. >> mayor: thank you, commissioner hayes-santos?

[2:55:29] >> thank you, mayor. I move ordinance 2022-343 second reading by title only. >> mayor: motion and second to

[2:55:36] adopt the proposed ordinance on second reading. Any members of the public wish to speak to this?

[2:55:40] ? Okay. >> commissioner arreola? Commissioner chestnut?

[2:55:44] >> aye. >> commissioner saco? >> aye. >> commissioner duncan-walker?

[2:55:46] >> aye. >> commissioner ward? >> aye. >> commissioner hayes-santos?

[2:55:49] >> aye. >> and mayor poe? >> mayor: aye. That motion passes unanimously

[2:55:53] with arreola an sent. Next item. >> noise ordinance amendment 2022-275 an ordinance of the

[2:56:01] city of gainesville amending 15-2, 15-3, 15-5, 15-6, 15-7 and 2-339 code of ordinances relating to noise, providing

[2:56:11] directions to the codifier, providing a severability clause, providing a repealing clause and providing an immediate effective

[2:56:16] date. >> mayor: commissioner hayes-santos? >> I move ordinance 2022-275 on

[2:56:20] second reading by title only. >> mayor: motion and a second that we adopt the proposed ordinance on second reading.

[2:56:27] anybody signed up to speak to this? ? >> yes, we do have one speaker,

[2:56:31] mr. Rich stransky. >> mayor: welcome. >> my name is rich stransky. Thanks for giving me the option

[2:56:40] to speak. Mayor, commission, I live-I own a house about 20 years, about ten blocks, a couple blocks

[2:56:51] [inaudible] and it kind of turns out coincidentally I kind of have this personal noise issue and it kind of came up right

[2:56:59] this month, and I thought this might be an appropriate venue -- anyway I'm asking a question, where do I go?

[2:57:06] what can I do? I look at the current regs and as of a few months ago it seemed applicable to the current code.

[2:57:12] and I was looking at particularly the fact that I was a person with sensitivities and I thought, I realize now that

[2:57:23] portion of the code was unconstitutional in the state. My inference is, and I haven't done a lot of research, my

[2:57:29] inference is the changes are associated with the need to delete that portion of the code. It looks like primarily the

[2:57:36] change is associated with what I just have to infer is probably about the biggest noise problem that the code didn't really

[2:57:43] directly address quantitatively is noise in cars. Mine's different. The regulations say for my

[2:57:52] concern, I'll get to exactly what it is in a minute, I think what they say is it's like readily curable within 200 feet

[2:57:59] of the property boundary, then the code applies. Now that doesn't apply in my case.

[2:58:04] I'm talking about my neighbor across the street have a really loud air conditioner, and really loud for years.

[2:58:13] I e-mailed code enforcement, they said the police enforce that. I called the police, they said

[2:58:18] they're not going to be a problem, they drove their car around the block. This house is kind of in the

[2:58:23] middle of the block. They drove around the block, didn't really hear any noise that they thought was -- I left

[2:58:29] that there. And I go well maybe I'm not a reasonable person. So I started talking to all my

[2:58:34] neighbors. Does this bother you? And so I think there are nine houses that border the street

[2:58:39] around the subject property. And I've spoken to seven of the nine, and I was really surprised, I've never spoken to

[2:58:49] any of them about the noise before. They're as irate as I am. I hear this noise, it doesn't

[2:58:55] meet the 55 decibels at night 200 feet of property but it's 55 decibels at property boundary. It's 40 decibels where I sit on

[2:59:04] my patio. The average noise on my patio is like 24 air decibels. It's an air conditioner, it's on

[2:59:11] 24/7. Doing this for years. It's only become a big concern to me because now I sit out

[2:59:17] there, my mom moved in a couple years ago, the virus, she has dementia, this is what we do. We sit out by the street to

[2:59:24] greet our neighbors. That's social. It's really personal. So it seems like this new

[2:59:29] changes to the regs don't really apply to me. I'm wondering is there any place for me to go.

[2:59:34] I called the landlord -- the landlord of the property -- >> mayor: sir, sir -- >> they have no concerns at all.

[2:59:43] >> mayor: okay I think to answer your first question probably not. If it's not meeting the

[2:59:46] threshold legally, that doesn't give us a lot of options. But, based on our last item, and what you're telling us, if it's

[2:59:55] a rental property, that landlord is absolutely bound by our new tenants right ordinance, and air conditioners are, as you just

[3:00:07] heard, an aspect of that. And so, can he just give his information to you? Or do you want him to give it to

[3:00:17] one of those five gentlemen behind? Who do you want to give it to? [inaudible]

[3:00:24] [laughter] our newest senior member. So, the gentleman in black right behind you, give your

[3:00:31] information to him, and he'll follow up with you, because it does sound like if there's an inspection of that property, and

[3:00:39] specifically that air conditioner, it will not be in compliance. I can't make that determination

[3:00:43] from the dais. But we certainly can administer this new process we just approved, and possibly get you

[3:00:52] some relief through that process. Since the noise ordinance is probably not going to help you.

[3:00:59] give your an tact information to andrew and he'll follow up with you. And someone will come out.

[3:01:04] okay, thank you. Madam clerk, anybody else? Okay. With that we'll move to a roll

[3:01:10] call vote. >> commissioner saco? >> aye. >> commissioner hayes-santos?

[3:01:15] >> aye. >> commissioner ward? >> aye. >> commissioner arreola is an

[3:01:17] september. Commissioner chestnut? >> aye. >> commissioner duncan-walker?

[3:01:20] >> aye. >> and mayor poe? >> mayor: aye. That motion passes unanimously

[3:01:23] with arreola an sent. All right. Next item, please. >> our next item is voluntary

[3:01:31] annexation of 25.38 acres much property on west side of I-75 and northwest of southwest 8th avenue, ordinance 210956.

[3:01:41] an ordinance of the city of gainesville, florida, annexing approximately 25.38 acres of privately owned property

[3:01:47] generally located on the west side of interstate 75, north of southwest 8th avenue, as more specifically described in this

[3:01:53] ordinance, as petitioned for by the property owners pursue and to chapter 171 florida statutes, making certain findings,

[3:02:00] providing for inclusion of the property in appendix one of the city charter, providing for land use plan, zoning and subdivision

[3:02:06] regulations and enforcement of the same, providing for persons engaged in any okay ration, business trade or profession,

[3:02:12] providing directions to the city clerk, providing a severability clause, a repealing clause and immediate effective date.

[3:02:17] >> mayor: thank you, madam clerk. Commissioner hayes-santos? >> thank you, mayor I move

[3:02:21] ordinance 210956 on second reading by title owned. >> second. >> mayor: motion and second to

[3:02:27] adopt the ordinance on second reading. Anybody signed up? >> no, sir.

[3:02:33] commissioner ward? Commissioner chestnut? Aye. >> commissioner saco?

[3:02:36] >> aye. >> commissioner duncan-walker? >> aye. >> commissioner arreola is

[3:02:39] absent. Commissioner hayes-santos? >> aye. >> and mayor poe?

[3:02:41] >> mayor: aye. That motion passes unanimously with ward and arreola absent. >> voluntary annexation of 9.945

[3:02:48] acres of privately owned property generally located northwest of intersection of southwest williston road and

[3:02:54] southwest 13th street. Ordinance number 210734 a. An ordinance of the city of gainesville, florida, annexing

[3:03:02] approximately 9.945 acres of privately owned property generally located northwest of the intersection of southwest

[3:03:08] williston road and southwest 13th street as more specifically described in this ordinance, as petitioned for by the property

[3:03:16] owners pursuant to chapter 171 florida statutes, making certain findings, providing for inclusion of the property in

[3:03:22] appendix a of the city charter, providing for land use plan, zoning and subdivision regulations and enforcement of

[3:03:28] the same, providing for persons engaged in any occupation, business trade or profession, providing directions to the city

[3:03:33] clerk, providing a severability clause, repealing clause and effective date. >> thank you, mayor, I move

[3:03:40] ordinance 210734-a. >> second. >> mayor: motion to adopt on second reading.

[3:03:47] roll call vote. >> commissioner hayes-santos? >> aye. >> commissioner ward?

[3:03:52] commissioner chestnut? >> aye. >> commissioner arreola? >> aye.

[3:03:56] >> commissioner duncan-walker? >> aye. >> commissioner saco? >> aye.

[3:03:58] >> and mayor poe? >> mayor: aye. That motion passes unanimously with ward absent.

[3:04:05] n-6 was removed and referred to a future meeting. >> comprehensive plan amendment, transportation mobility element

[3:04:13] 2022-522. Ordinance number 200732-a, an ordinance of the city of gainesville, florida, amending

[3:04:21] the comprehensive plan of the city of gainesville by amending transportation element number policy 10-2-1, relating to

[3:04:30] vacating city rights-of-way providing directions to the city manager, providing severability clause, providing a repealing

[3:04:35] clause and an effective date. >> mayor: thank you, commissioner hayes-santos. >> thank you, mayor.

[3:04:38] I move ordinance 200732-a on second reading by title only. >> mayor: is there a second? >> second.

[3:04:44] >> mayor: motion and a second to adopt the proposed ordinance on second reading. Anybody signed up to speak to

[3:04:49] this? Roll call vote. >> commissioner duncan-walker? >> aye.

[3:04:52] >> commissioner arreola? Commissioner saco? >> aye. >> commissioner chestnut?

[3:04:56] >> aye. >> commissioner ward? Absent. Commissioner hayes-santos?

[3:04:59] >> aye. >> and mayor poe? >> mayor: aye. That motion passes unanimously

[3:05:02] with ward absent. Next item. >> our next item is text change amending the land development

[3:05:09] code relating to right-of-way vacations. Ordinance number 200731-a an ordinance of the city of

[3:05:18] gainesville, florida, amending the land development code, relating to vacating city rights-of-way by amending

[3:05:22] section 30-3.41, right-of-way vacations providing directions to the codifier, providing a severability clause, repealing

[3:05:32] clause and an effective date. >> mayor: commissioner hayes-santos? >> thank you, mayor, I move

[3:05:36] ordinance 200731-a by second reading by title only. >> second. >> mayor: motion and a second.

[3:05:44] anybody signed up to speak to this item? >> no, sir. >> mayor: roll call vote.

[3:05:49] >> commissioner chestnut? >> aye. >> commissioner hayes-santos? >> aye.

[3:05:52] >> commissioner saco? >> aye. >> commissioner arreola? >> aye.

[3:05:56] >> commissioner ward? >> aye. >> commissioner duncan-walker? >> aye.

[3:05:59] >> and mayor poe? >> mayor: aye. That motion passes unanimously. We have reached the end of our

[3:06:03] business for this afternoon. Is there any commission comment at this time? Okay.

[3:06:08] then we will be in recess until 5:30. >> mayor: okay. Welcome, everybody.

[3:21:00] let me get this on tight. Okay. Going to call this meeting back to order.

[3:21:07] madam clerk, I believe the first order of business is the pledge of allegiance. >> yes, sir.

[3:21:12] >> mayor: if all would join me if they're willing and able for the pledge of allegiance. [ pledge of allegiance ]

[3:21:32] >> mayor: thank you and please be seated. Okay. Madam clerk, our first

[3:21:35] proclamation, please. >> our first proclamation is peace takes practice 365 day. >> mayor: okay.

[3:21:43] thank you. We are in the midst of welcoming week this week and we also have the international day of piece

[3:21:55] and just use this opportunity to remind everybody that they're invited to join us this sunday at the martin luther king jr.

[3:22:03] center for the international festival and longest table event. It goes from 11:00 to 6:00.

[3:22:09] it's free. There's going to be music and food and dancing and just an overall good time.

[3:22:15] and at 4:00 is the longest table. It's an event we've been holding for several years where folks

[3:22:23] show up, actually intentionally are seated with folks they didn't show up with, break bread, talk about their life and

[3:22:32] their ideas. We do ask that you sign up for that. It's free.

[3:22:36] but if you go to the city's website and just sign up, because we want to make sure we have enough food and everybody

[3:22:42] has a place. But we hope you can be there for that. It's going to be a wonderful

[3:22:47] event and we are glad to be back doing it again. This proclamation peace takes practice 365 day.

[3:23:00] whereas, people in cities, communities and villages worldwide have engaged in the international day of peace in

[3:23:04] diverse and meaningful ways since 1981 by participating in various activities such as a noon-time moment of silence,

[3:23:12] festivals and community events. We speak peace. And whereas, the united nations has declared stress a global

[3:23:21] epidemic that is costing the american economy $300 billion a year. We seek a peace practice.

[3:23:29] and whereas, each year the international day of peace is observed around the world on the 21st of september, devoting

[3:23:36] this day to strengthening the ideals of peace through observing 24 hours of nonviolence and cease-fire.

[3:23:46] we embrace a peace practice. And whereas, climate action for peace brings a clear message that the global climate

[3:23:53] emergency is a real threat to security and stability. We light the path for peace. And whereas, members of the

[3:24:02] gainesville civic groups, individual and at the wellness network have come together to foster a peace takes practice

[3:24:09] 365 initiative by welcoming all citizens to become peacebuilders, establishing a peace practice in every moment

[3:24:16] of every day. I am peace. Now, therefore, I, lauren poe, by the authority vested in me as

[3:24:23] mayor of the city of gainesville, do hereby proclaim september 21st, 2022 as peace takes practice 365 day in the

[3:24:33] city of gainesville and invite all our neighbors to join me to speak peace, embrace peace, light a path for peace and

[3:24:44] become peacebuilders by establishing a peace practice 365 days a year. In witness whereof, I have

[3:24:49] hereunto set my hand and caused to be affixed the official seal of the city of gainesville, florida, this 6th day of

[3:24:54] september, 2022. Thank you so much. And please say a few words. [applause]

[3:25:04] >> thank you very much, mr. Mayor, fellow commissioners. This work of peace does not require any funding, it does not

[3:25:14] require any legislation. All it requires is a desire to greet the eyes in the mirror with a determination to find

[3:25:24] peace and harmony within so that it can be your act in every moment of the day with all those that you interact with.

[3:25:36] I'm so pleased to have the organizations that have embraced this message of peace and we welcome all communities, all

[3:25:43] groups to participate in this national event. I am pleased that park run, which has been happening in

[3:25:51] gainesville for the last four years, and your wonderful kristin who facilitates that park run at depot park has

[3:26:01] embraced this. So on saturday morning we invite everyone to join us for an international day of peace

[3:26:08] sidewalk/run, depot park, arriving about 7:15. It will start at 7:30. Sit a 5k.

[3:26:17] and I will ask chris ten if she will come and tell us about it. Is that okay, mr. Mayor? >> good morning.

[3:26:26] or good evening, everybody. So chris tan bryan. I'm here as the event director for park run in gainesville.

[3:26:36] as many of you know I talk about park run all of the time. But it has been an honor to partner with the wellness

[3:26:43] program to hold this international day of peace workrun. Parkrun is a misnomer, it is a

[3:26:52] run, walk, jog, a combo of anything. Your fitness level and ability. We're going to have a lot of

[3:26:59] festivities on saturday. 7:15. I understand there's going to be a beautiful song of peace sung.

[3:27:05] one of my friends is coming to do -- help people do a chalk art on the sidewalk of peace so that you can come and just add your

[3:27:15] colors and your message to have peace. We're going to have people cheering everyone on no matter

[3:27:23] if you're just out there to get moving or if you're there to, you know, try to get a personal best.

[3:27:28] you'll get cheered on to the very end. And no one finishes last at parkrun.

[3:27:34] we have tail walker to come behind everyone. So everyone -- no one will finish last.

[3:27:40] so please come, get your walking shoes on and join us, getting moving. We'd love to have you out there.

[3:27:46] thank you so much for your time. [applause] >> on the 21st is the international day of peace.

[3:28:00] we'll be making an announcement at the gtec, gainesville technology and entrepreneurial center throughout the year.

[3:28:11] when I found out that venus hit a minimum of a thousand balls a day, I realized I was playing tennis at the level that I hit

[3:28:22] balls. We want to encourage a peace practice 365 day as week. We're very pleased and we're

[3:28:27] asking everybody to rise early that morning and take a pause, 70 seconds and just say the word peace.

[3:28:33] I'm so happy top ronnie here from moms demand action who have joined us. Your fellow former commissioner

[3:28:40] helen warren with the climate action for peace, sue blight who is home watching this on television and many other

[3:28:47] organizations who are joining in this effort because we know that peace takes practice 365 and in every moment.

[3:28:56] and mr. Mayor, thank you so much for this opportunity. We thank you very much for that proclamation.

[3:29:01] thank you. [applause] >> mayor: thank you, pamela and all of your supporting

[3:29:09] organizations, individuals. We really both appreciate it and need it. Madam clerk, our next

[3:29:16] proclamation, please. >> our next proclamation is ronald mcdonald house charities day of action.

[3:29:22] >> mayor: who is here from the ronald mcdonald house. You, buddy? Okay.

[3:29:27] we're going to still read they proclamation. We'll make sure that they get it.

[3:29:37] whereas, the mission of ronald mcdonald house charities of north central florida is to create, find and support

[3:29:42] programs that directly improve the health and well-being of children and their families. And whereas, since 1982, ronald

[3:29:47] mcdonald house charities of north central florida has been keeping families close to their seriously ill children,

[3:29:54] providing comfy beds, home-cooked meals, and all of the comfort of home to families seeking medical care for their

[3:29:58] child. And whereas, volunteers are the heart of our organization and play a vital role at our ronald

[3:30:05] mcdonald house. Whether it's coordinating a family activity, cooking a meal for our families through our

[3:30:16] visiting chef program, or committing to a weekly shift, our volunteers make a tremendous difference in the lives of our

[3:30:19] families. Now, therefore, I, lauren poe, by the authority vested in me as mayor of the city of

[3:30:23] gainesville, do hereby proclaim september 30th, 2022, as ronald mcdonald house charities day of action in the

[3:30:31] city of gainesville and invite all our neighbors to join me and observe this day with activities and acts of kindness that

[3:30:37] demonstrate and celebrate selfless giving as we work towards our mission to keep families close to their

[3:30:43] seriously ill child. In witness whereof, I have here unto set my hand and caused to be affixed the official seal of

[3:30:53] the city of gainesville, florida, this 17th day of june, 2022. [applause]

[3:30:57] all right. Madam clerk. >> our next proclamation is essential workers' appreciate

[3:31:05] month. >> mayor: who is here for this proclamation? All right.

[3:31:08] welcome. Whereas, the city of gainesville, florida, like all cities throughout the world, has

[3:31:17] gone through a deadly pandemic crisis the likes of which have not been seen for a century. And whereas, essential workers

[3:31:23] kept the critical parts of our economy running during the pandemic. And whereas, while many of us

[3:31:28] were told to stay at home, these workers had the responsibility during an outbreak to continue operations, putting their lives

[3:31:34] in danger. And whereas, the city is deeply indebted to its essential workers, those people who put

[3:31:41] themselves at risk to get us through the worst of times these last two and a half years. Now therefore, I, lauren poe, by

[3:31:47] the authority vested in me as mayor of the city of gainesville, do hereby proclaim october 2022 as essential

[3:31:53] workers' appreciate month in the city of gainesville and invite all our citizens to join me along with our businesses,

[3:31:59] churches, and civic groups, to honor and thank our pandemic heroes during the month of october.

[3:32:05] in witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and caused to be affixed the official seal of the city of gainesville,

[3:32:08] florida, this 7th day of september, 2022. Please say a few words. >> I'm glen terry, representing

[3:32:24] the essential workers' project here in gainesville. And this is, this is like a big, big thank you card to everyone

[3:32:31] in our city who has been an essential worker these last two and a half years putting theirselves at risk, like it

[3:32:40] says, to get us through real bad times that we're much too aware of. What it will be, a series of

[3:32:52] events that essential workers are invited to. Restaurants giving essential worker discounts and what not,

[3:33:02] creating a series of events during the month that we're going to invite the essential workers too.

[3:33:08] and of course there's a wide range of those. So they can have a good time. We're going to recognize and

[3:33:15] thank them. It is very important and I appreciate your support for this project.

[3:33:20] thank you. >> mayor: thank you, mr. Terry. [applause] madam clerk.

[3:33:30] >> our next item is early public comment. >> mayor: anybody signed up for early public comment.

[3:33:35] >> we do have a few. The first is alex posa. >> mayor: tell us which items you're speaking to.

[3:33:46] if it's more than one you have five minutes, fit's one, you have three minutes. >> this is about the planned

[3:33:53] development on southwest 2nd and southwest 10th street. >> mayor: okay. Thank you.

[3:33:58] >> I'm alex posa. Gainesville needs more dense, transit oriented housing. There are those who complain

[3:34:08] this is just luxury housing, but luxury housing is just a marketing term for new. Expensive apartment is still

[3:34:15] cheaper than a detach single-family home. Additionally, this development contains set aside for

[3:34:28] affordable units. This week the county commissioner voted down a proposal for affordable housing

[3:34:34] and the city commission should step up. Besides access to affordable housing, the carbon footprint

[3:34:42] will be much smaller. The difference between carbon usage between high and low-density living is

[3:34:48] astounding. Those in the dense areas have a quarter of the footprint. Thanks to having a barrier in --

[3:34:59] mostly cooling, heating are significant lower than detached homes. Further, carbon savings come

[3:35:08] from a low car burden. Instead of the two units per ache, this will continue more than 180 per acre.

[3:35:20] climate change is our most pressing issue. Any government that has any interest in averting disaster

[3:35:30] must make density part of its plan. This development would sit on four bus routes and about a

[3:35:37] tenth of a mile from two more. This is the sort of density that is necessary to help rid our city of car dependency.

[3:35:46] unfortunately for the planet and the 1 point human lives lost to tragic violence every year, people generally take the most

[3:35:55] convenient form of transport, which unfortunately is almost cars in america, rather than the safest or cleanest, which might

[3:36:03] be pedestrian, biking or bus. Opponents will say that this needs more affordable housing or other things to kill it by a

[3:36:11] thousand cuts. It's true, a proposal can always be better. But gainesville isn't looking at

[3:36:15] this or another density proposal. It's looking at this or the status quo of surface parking

[3:36:22] lots and one-story buildings. Thank you. >> mayor: thank you. Madam clerk.

[3:36:26] >> early comment speaker is jason sanchez. >> mayor: could you go to the next person?

[3:36:36] that's it? Okay. Thank you. [inaudible]

[3:36:43] >> mayor: did they call in? No. Okay. Thank you.

[3:36:46] okay. Appreciate that. And those items will come up in just a moment.

[3:36:51] but next, madam clerk, our next item. >> our next item is resolution 2202-479.

[3:36:59] resolution supporting dual naming northeast 25th street dual name in honor of willie fred powers I with the

[3:37:12] recommendation that the city commission adopt the resolution supporting the

[3:37:23] request to dual name ne 25th street between ne 8th avenue and ne 10th ave as willie fred powers I way.

[3:37:26] >> mayor: boy, that looks good. Do we have anybody to present this? [laughter]

[3:37:40] >> mayor: well, I mean, just a little description would be good. >> we have a dual naming policy.

[3:37:46] it's in your backup. Anytime that there's a community member that the public would like recognized, a petition can

[3:37:56] be circulated. One was submitted. It's in your backup. The resolution has the

[3:38:01] information reporting mr. Powers. >> mayor: excellent. Thank you.

[3:38:04] I think we have the family of mr. Powers here. You want to come on up? Come on up.

[3:38:17] everybody. Everybody. So I want to thank the family -- sorry about that.

[3:38:49] that was a little close. I want to thank the family of mr. Powers for bringing this to us and allowing us to

[3:38:58] memorialize him in something that will be lasting and endure in the community. It's very meaningful for all of

[3:39:07] our neighbors and I know it's meaningful for you. We would just love if one or more of you would like to share

[3:39:13] a little bit about him and give our community a little deeper understanding of the contributions he's made to our

[3:39:18] community so we can celebrate along with you. I'll leave it up to y'all. >> I guess, I guess being his

[3:39:27] son I get this honor. But I want to first off thank the city commission for this honor.

[3:39:33] it will probably make it a little easier to ride down this street again. Thanks for my sister, katherine

[3:39:41] scott, for bringing this to us. Because he meant a lot, not only to us but to a lot of the people in the duval heights area.

[3:39:49] I guess I'm stuck for words. I haven't been that way before. But I'm humbled for a young black man from pelham, georgia

[3:40:03] to make an impact in the city that he made not only in duval heights but, you know, the east side and also southeast side of

[3:40:13] gainesville. So with that being said, I just want to thank everyone for this honor and I know my family would

[3:40:19] want to thank everyone for this honor. I guess that's about all I have to say.

[3:40:26] thanks. >> mayor: thank you. [applause] >> mayor: thank you all for

[3:40:40] being here. We're going to make this official real quick, if you don't mind.

[3:40:44] this is an official resolution. Commissioner hayes-santos. >> I move the resolution. >> second.

[3:40:54] >> mayor: motion and five seconds there to approve this resolution. Commissioner duncan-walker.

[3:40:59] >> thank you, mr. Mayor. I wanted to acknowledge the legacy, the importance, the brilliance, the human being that

[3:41:11] mr. Powers was. And to be able to sit here and look out at the living legacies that are a part of him is so

[3:41:21] incredible. And I want to thank my colleagues, I want to thank staff for making this possible.

[3:41:27] it is important for us to remember and commemorate the individuals who have sacrificed and given so much to our

[3:41:40] community and mr. Powers did that. Did that. This is a wonderful and

[3:41:44] important way to immortalize his memory as we drive through east gainesville, duval heights, my home, will remember and

[3:41:54] celebrate him always through that naming. Thank you everyone who made this happen and thank you to the

[3:41:59] powers family for being here. His memory lives on. >> mayor: thank you, commissioner.

[3:42:06] [applause] so we have a motion. Was there anybody else signed up to speak to this?

[3:42:12] we're going to move to a roll call vote. >> commissioner saco. >> aye.

[3:42:15] >> commissioner hayes-santos. >> aye. >> commissioner ward. >> aye.

[3:42:18] >> commissioner arreola. >> aye. >> commissioner chestnut. >> aye.

[3:42:21] >> commissioner duncan-walker. >> aye. >> and mayor poe. >> mayor: aye.

[3:42:26] that motion passes unanimously. It is now so named the official willie fred powers street. Congratulations.

[3:42:40] [applause] y'all, we've got a bunch of other interesting items on our agenda.

[3:42:44] you're welcome to stick around the whole night with us if you would like or we'll let you get on and celebrate with

[3:42:49] yourselves. Thank you for joining us. All right. Madam clerk, our next item,

[3:42:58] please. >> okay. Our next item is the petition pb-21-00219, amendment of the

[3:43:07] future land use map from urban mixed use high to planned use district 2022-536 with the recommendation that the city

[3:43:19] commission approve petition pb-21-00219 with conditions. >> mayor: thank you. >> thank you, mr. Mayor and

[3:43:27] welcome. My name is forrest, planner with the department of sustainable stable development and currently

[3:43:33] the acting director for the department. I'll be presenting both positions pb-21-219 and later

[3:43:41] pb-21-220 which are requests by chw on behalf of ca ventures. The petitions before you this evening have a land use change

[3:43:52] from urban mixed use high to planned use development coupled with associated rezoning from urban 9 to planned district or

[3:44:01] pd. As you are all away were the pud and pd designations are intended to provide a means for property

[3:44:09] owners to propose unique or innovative projects that the existing comp plan and land development code language may

[3:44:17] not have contemplated or addressed directly. This proposal requests relief from several criteria and

[3:44:24] regulations in order to facilitate providing workforce rate housing in perpetuity. And workforce rate is defined as

[3:44:34] households earning between 50% and 80% of the area median income. Specifically this proposal

[3:44:42] request, increase to allowable height, increase to allowable density, changes to building placement, modification to

[3:44:51] compatibility requirements related to historic districts which I'll describe many in more detail on some following slides.

[3:45:00] just to give some description real briefly through the next couple of slides to orient you to the site, you can see here,

[3:45:07] the yellow is the subject property. We have the invasion square area outlined here.

[3:45:14] and then the sort of brownish reddish you see here is the university heights south historic district.

[3:45:26] it is immediately to the west, as you can see here, of the existing infinity hall development.

[3:45:36] and this image is showing the existing 100-foot compatibility buffer that is associated with the university heights historic

[3:45:48] district. So you can see up in the northwest corner here of this image that this is the actual

[3:45:55] district itself that aligns with some of the property boundaries. The 100-foot buffer limit is right here in the blue, sort of

[3:46:02] blue dotted. And shows you overlaid with the black and white dotted area here the project outline itself.

[3:46:11] and that will orient you to some of the main issues or topics of discussion here going forward. So the current land use is the

[3:46:22] umuh, urban mixed use high. And you can see the areas around it. To the west is the same land

[3:46:31] use. To the east is the downtown land use, which is the most intensive land use district.

[3:46:38] and then you can see in the sort of coral or pink here that it is the lower intensity land use district that is associated with

[3:46:48] the historic district. Here is the existing zoning. It aligns or is consistent with the underlying land use, which

[3:46:59] of course we are discussing now and currently. But also just to give you an idea of the overall discussion

[3:47:06] of the land use and zoning at the same time. We have the most intense district here to the east, which

[3:47:11] is downtown, and the u-9 district here which is existing. And we have this district that goes along with the existing

[3:47:22] historic district. So some of the building details. I'll leave a detailed description of the building to

[3:47:32] the applicant and their team. I'll give a brief overview. You can see we have the east elevation.

[3:47:37] and this would be looking from infinity hall. And you have on this portion of the project, the 12 stories.

[3:47:44] and then to the north here on this portion is the five stories. This would be the south

[3:47:51] elevation. So this is of course looking from the south to the north. This is the longest facade

[3:47:56] proposed for the project. This is the roundabout area that you may be familiar with here. And then over to the east is the

[3:48:08] infinity hall. You can see on this, this is the 12 stories. There's a brick facade on the

[3:48:14] first floor. The entrances have direct entrances to units with stoops and primary entrances that

[3:48:21] connect directly to the sidewalk. This would be from the west elevation.

[3:48:26] this is looking from what is now the swamp 2.0 restaurant that's coming online right now. There are buildings and

[3:48:36] structures basically where we would be looking here. But this is looking, again, towards the east.

[3:48:41] and you can see what is trying to be depicted here is a recess in the building. This is empty space, if you

[3:48:48] will. It's a little bit more shaded here to show that the building has been lowered in these areas

[3:48:56] in an attempt to address compatibility with the historic district. So in effect really, that

[3:49:03] creates this cutout on the building itself. And this taller, skinnier section here, which has been

[3:49:10] referred to or discussed certainly at the plan board meeting as a blade or something to that effect.

[3:49:17] a skinny portion, skinny and tall portion of the structure here. And then this is looking from

[3:49:26] the north towards the south. This gives you a better more close-up view of the smaller building that is closer to the

[3:49:33] historic district here from that direction. So here are some of the details at issue here.

[3:49:42] so the baseline buy right information is made more complicated that typical development due to the historic

[3:49:49] district compatibility buffer. And this table attempts to lay out the existing buy right uses or land use and zoning

[3:50:02] designations here and criteria. And it also attempts to put that historic -- the historic district compatibility buffer

[3:50:12] directly next to some of these parameters or figures that we're looking at. And then of course all the way

[3:50:18] on the right-hand side here are really what would be the proposed maximums. So I'm happy to go through each

[3:50:27] one of these numbers if you would like. Or if there are questions on them.

[3:50:30] but I'll avoid going block by block slide by slide here unless you all would like me to. Policy 4.1.3 of the comp plan

[3:50:46] outlines the criteria for changes in the future land use. And typically I wouldn't go item by item here since a larger

[3:50:53] discussion is included in the staff report that was presented to the plan board. And of course the plan board

[3:51:00] discussion itself is available as a record. But of course as ever, I'm happy to answer any questions or go

[3:51:10] through this line by line or item by item if you would like. Generally speaking, staff has found that the proposal is

[3:51:18] generally consistent with the comprehensive plan in that it directly addresses several goals and policies of the

[3:51:24] comprehensive plan, including the future land use element, the housing element and the transportation element.

[3:51:34] and more specifically in speaking directly to section 30-3.17 of the ldc, the proposal is consistent in that it

[3:51:43] provides multiple housing options, including workforce rate and student housing. It adds increased density to a

[3:51:50] mixed-use area with protecting and promotes transit options through closing curb cuts and adding pedestrian access.

[3:51:59] the proposal conform to the pd purpose by offering a unique development in that 10% of the units will be dedicated to

[3:52:08] workforce rate housing in perpetuity with equal access to finishes across the units that will be provided.

[3:52:17] staff has provided an analysis of code and comp plan language requirements. However, whether a proposal is

[3:52:23] unique or innovative enough is largely in the purview, of course, of the plan board when the was discussed before the

[3:52:31] plan board and now of course before you all here this evening. By offering workforce rate

[3:52:38] housing in perpetuity, staff believes that the threshold of innovative has been met. Internal compatibility largely

[3:52:46] refers to how uses relate to each other within the project area. And since this is two buildings

[3:52:52] in one campus, if you will, with equal access to user, the proposed internal compatibility is consistent with code

[3:53:00] requirements. External compatibility refer to the proposal's relationship to the surrounding neighborhood and

[3:53:07] area. Several improvements are proposed that will enhance the external compatibility, such as

[3:53:12] street level pedestrian access to units, closing of curb cuts and increase in density and intensity in an area between uf

[3:53:21] and downtown. However, there are significant concerns with the proposal's compatibility, massing and scale

[3:53:28] with surrounding properties. Particularly within the historic district compatibility buffer. The northwest and south sides of

[3:53:36] the project, as you saw in the previous images, are within the compatibility buffer and are adjacent to one and two-story

[3:53:45] single-family structures and small-scale multifamily structures. The image on the slide shows a

[3:53:51] top-down street-level view of the proposed building from 2nd avenue. And you can see this is the top

[3:53:57] down section here. And this is looking more from the street level. In attempting to address this,

[3:54:06] the applicant has worked with site to reduce height and massing on the portions of the property that are within the

[3:54:13] compatibility buffer. This is why the building has been designed with the cutout or the blade shape.

[3:54:18] the significant increase in density and intensity should be strongly considered by the commission as a part of any

[3:54:25] final decision, of course. The project is located at the meeting point between the invasion square district and the

[3:54:32] university heights south historic district with the primary entrance and the prominent roundabout at

[3:54:39] 2nd avenue and 10th street. At the time the district was designated in 2002, the area that was left out that you saw

[3:54:47] of the historic district, this sort of blank space in the center or in the middle was done so due to the buildings not

[3:54:58] being historically significant in this area. And as noncontributing structures would have resulted

[3:55:05] in a weaker proposal for historic district designation at the time. Today the district contains 150

[3:55:12] contributing structures and 32 noncontributing structures. That is within this entire darker area here.

[3:55:20] 150 contributing structures. And the 32 noncontributing structures. By establishing the district the

[3:55:29] city commission found that the area is significant to city planning, architecture and local history.

[3:55:34] the staff report goes into much greater detail on the district and we have the city's historic preservation man planner here to

[3:55:42] answer any specific questions you may have on the historic district. Again, here is a slide showing

[3:55:52] where the building is and where it is proposed. And its relation to some of these structures that within the

[3:55:58] staff report have additional images of the structures themselves. Again, here's the slide showing

[3:56:13] the 100-foot compatibility buffer. Just to refresh. It sticks out here and extends

[3:56:18] from the historic district that is to the north and then of course as you saw, there is portions of the historic

[3:56:24] district that are down here to the south that are not shown on the image. But this is the portion of that

[3:56:29] district that is affecting the parameters for development on the site here today. The buffer was created to limit

[3:56:40] directly adjacent development that's out of scale with the districts, either visually or through the intensity of use.

[3:56:48] in addition to limiting height to four stories, the buffer requirements also limit multifamily development to no

[3:56:53] more than six dwelling units per building and shall be in the form of single-family attached or small-scale multifamily.

[3:57:02] so these are some of the pictures that go along with those structures within the historic district that had the

[3:57:08] designation of being contributing structures or noncontributing. And I'll just go through these

[3:57:16] to give you an idea of the surrounding properties in that historic district. So these are moving along the

[3:57:26] southern side of what we showed in that image there and are really concentrated along that sort of cutout area that you saw

[3:57:35] from the historic district. So I'm sure many of you are familiar with this area and are likely familiar with many of

[3:57:41] these structures because it is a big throughway or avenue between downtown and of course campus. And you can see some of the

[3:57:54] brick facade on many of the structures here. And this is the roundabout you can see on the eastern side or

[3:58:04] the right-hand side here, the existing infinity hall. And this would be where the building is proposed today.

[3:58:18] another short of infinity hall gives you an idea of the existing massing and use of the street here.

[3:58:29] and a look down the avenues that we're discussing, down the thoroughfares here. So in reviewing the proposal,

[3:58:37] staff also reviewed priest planning efforts and the existing architecture of the area.

[3:58:42] as you can see from the images, the existing character and primary corridors in the invasion district is largely

[3:58:49] that of three to five-story buildings with more modern materials. The proposed project proposed a

[3:58:57] nod to the historic district by crowding most of the ground floor in brick. However, above the ground floor

[3:59:02] the majority of the facade is clad in materials that are not typically found within the historic district but within the

[3:59:09] invasion district. So while these images show what has been built, it's important to point out that this is not

[3:59:15] necessarily the limits of what is allowed by right today. Also important to point out are the previous planning efforts

[3:59:23] that have been undertaken in this area. Specifically the 2018 multimodel corridor's visions study and the

[3:59:31] 2012 invasion square master plan. The visioning study was largely geared towards planning for

[3:59:37] creating ideal conditions along the corridors but also analyzed existing densities and recommendations for potential

[3:59:45] infill. The study recommended providing careful infill developments with residential neighborhoods and

[3:59:52] that care should be taken to not provide development that will overwhelm existing neighborhoods.

[3:59:58] the 2012 innovation square master plan focused on a innovative research committee. The goal was to 0 combine the

[4:00:11] two motivation to provide a highly-walkable and livable neighborhood. It's important to point out that

[4:00:16] previous planning efforts do not carry the weight of law on code or regulations. However, these efforts provide

[4:00:25] insight as to long-term vision for the area. These are planning tools but should not be construed as

[4:00:32] sources of requirements of restrictions. And you can see some of the imagery and 3rd graphics that

[4:00:42] were put together to discuss this invasion square. And so of course as I mentioned before and as you are all aware,

[4:00:51] the comprehensive plan and the intent of the pud and pd elements of the comprehensive plan are intended to allow the

[4:01:00] consideration of unique, innovative or narrowly-construed land use proposals. Because of the specificity of

[4:01:07] the land use, regulations can be found to be compatible with the character of surrounding land uses.

[4:01:13] and the pd districts are intended to provide a particularized zoning district that recognizes unique

[4:01:20] conditions. And this proposal provides for the 10% of proposed units to be reserved for households earning

[4:01:28] 50% and 80% of the area median income in perpetuity. So despite challenge to compatibility and surrounding

[4:01:37] character, by offering 10% of the units as workforce rate units in perpetuity, staff believes this proposal meets the

[4:01:46] tension of unique and innovative. Staff reviewed it as it relates to the comprehensive plan and

[4:01:55] code. And where there are conflicts, the proposal asked for relief from the conflicts and proposed

[4:02:02] a unique future to offset. Whether it's unique in the mind of you all, of course, is entirely up to you all.

[4:02:13] and with that staff recommends the approval of both pb21-219, also the associated of pd21-20 with the conditions that you see

[4:02:25] here. And with that I will answer any questions or I'm happy to turn it over to the applicant to

[4:02:36] discuss the project in further detail. >> mayor: thank you. Commissioner arreola, did you

[4:02:40] have a question before we turned to the applicant? >> I guess my question was the order of operations for

[4:02:44] presentations. >> mayor: we'll get the applicant. So we'll invite the applicant

[4:02:51] up. >> thank you. >> thank you and good evening, mr. Mayor, members of the

[4:03:06] commission, madam city manager, mr. Cumming ham and our clerk. I'm executive vice president of chw professional consultants and

[4:03:15] I'm here tonight, happy to be here with our client ch ventures. Tommy is in the front row, jay

[4:03:24] who is an architect and patrice boyce behind tommy as the project attorney. Also my favorite introduction is

[4:03:33] seth wood, the newest professional planner and graduate of the university of florida who has work directly on

[4:03:41] the application and we're proud to employ our gator graduates in this effort. We're here tonight to talk to

[4:03:48] you about a proposed project -- I'm going to harken back to a few years ago and a few commissions ago where a seated

[4:03:56] commissioner named warren nielsen said something that is salient. Parking lots are place holders.

[4:04:03] and we have a project that's been proposed on a parking lot on the northwest corner in the invasion district.

[4:04:13] as a bit of mechanical background, I want to talk about the land use, those will apply to the zoning in some cases and

[4:04:22] back into the land use. We had public notification of this project as part of the application process.

[4:04:27] we had a couple people attend it from the university of florida and one gentleman actually attended the actual neighborhood

[4:04:39] workshop for this project. The timeline that you can see here, we started this not quite a year ago but pretty close to a

[4:04:46] year ago. Was our first step meeting, the neighborhood workshop before the holidays.

[4:04:50] we submitted the application before christmas break. And through the months of february through april we worked

[4:04:56] with staff on several different designs for this project. And we were at the plan board back in may.

[4:05:04] seems like a lifetime ago but it was earlier this year. And we've glad to be here tonight because we feel like we

[4:05:10] have a really great opportunity. This would be the second project that had a mandatory perpetual workforce housing component in

[4:05:18] the city of gainesville in effectively the innovation district with walking distance to campus, the jobs and the huge

[4:05:30] investment that santa fe college has made downtown and to the burgeoning district itself. I said at the plan board and I

[4:05:38] will repeat that tonight. We could take 15 to 20 acres in west gainesville and build an apartment complex with hundreds

[4:05:45] of parking spaces and deforest a tremendous amount of land. Or we could take a parking lot and turn excite an urban

[4:05:54] residential building. And I don't know him other than tonight's comments, alex posa said, this has a tremendous

[4:06:04] impact on the carbon effect. This has a tremendous impact on the energy efficiency and the safety of our city by placing

[4:06:13] people within walking, bicycling, scooting and transit distances of many features, education, recreation, jobs,

[4:06:22] employment, social and cultural opportunities. We would probably not be here if we had the zoning across the

[4:06:29] street which is where the dt zoning is. And having walked the streets of new york last week for several

[4:06:40] days, one of the things I noted is things can live harmoniously. And when people are on the ground walking from block to

[4:06:46] block, they don't go, I just transferred from one zone to another. They just look at the space

[4:06:52] created there. And I would offer that these parking lots here, their time has come where they're no longer

[4:06:58] being needed as parking lots but they're place holders to infill or city with residents and employees of our downtown

[4:07:05] university and santa fe college features. This is key because we are proposing two multistory

[4:07:14] buildings that would sit here next to infinity hall right kiddy corner to the I district. Residential amenities will be

[4:07:26] across the entire development. Everybody will live in equality with equal access to the features of the building with

[4:07:32] such as the gym, and the ride trip program, the zip cars, the vehicles, and the ability to get from here to any destination

[4:07:43] easily and comfortably. Placing people where they can build off of the resources of the existing sidewalk network.

[4:07:51] the existing transit network. The existing bicycle lanes is so important in our community. That being said, we are taking

[4:08:00] aged sidewalks and turning this into enhanced pedestrian realm which will also increase the safety of not only the residents

[4:08:08] in this building but the residents of the entire community. When you bring in crime

[4:08:15] prevention with environmental design techniques and more eyes on the street and residential stoops to the street, you're

[4:08:22] creating a window onto the world to improve the quality of life in this area. This of course adds additional

[4:08:29] urban housing where it is needed in town and it adds a diversity of housing. Because we are placing market

[4:08:37] rate and in perpetuity through the mechanism of the pud, the planned use district and the planned development zoning one

[4:08:44] those will occur in perpetuity. Some of the opportunities that we see as I stated a second ago is to improve the form and the

[4:08:53] character and safety of the pedestrian realm in the urban core. And increasing this housing

[4:08:58] supply in our most redeveloping portion of the city, the I district. And what it does that other

[4:09:04] projects have not yet done is added workforce housing right downtown which is walkable, bikeable and transit friendly.

[4:09:14] so here's the context area that we're looking at here. And you can certainly see, here's the invasion district,

[4:09:20] the site of the former alachua county general hospital. This sits right across the street, right next to infinity

[4:09:28] hall. This is the university of florida campus, just a few hundred feet to the west.

[4:09:33] these are all projects that are in play in this portion of town that's building between the university and downtown and

[4:09:42] along the 13th street corridor. In the last several years each one of these spaces have come

[4:09:48] forward and have been candidates for redevelopment. As part of the data and analysis we looked at the walk score of

[4:09:57] the community. We have a tremendously high walk score because we are so close to campus, so close to santa fe

[4:10:06] college downtown center, so close to the I district and so long to the downtown along what I call the hipster highway,

[4:10:15] which is 2nd avenue here. In fact, our walkable score here is a walker's paradise and a biker's paradise too at 93 and

[4:10:27] 99 points respectfully out of 100. Some of the multimodel strategies that go along with

[4:10:33] this project are as follows. There will be a shared vehicle program for all residents. Unlike in other buildings that

[4:10:40] have but in an abundance of parking with there will be only a hundred parking spaces here because most people will rely on

[4:10:50] their shoes, their bike, skateboard, scooter own other means like transit to get along here.

[4:10:56] this will allow macro ability solutions. If you're working here in the I district, it's across the street

[4:11:04] or just down a couple of blocks. We're going to put in preferred parking for green vehicles and there will be electric charging

[4:11:12] stations built in this building. The building will have mechanical parking in it, ground-level parking and

[4:11:22] residents who don't want to use their cars, they will be placed in the air of the podium of the structure.

[4:11:29] there will be a scooter share program and a charging area for scooters. We will have a bicycle actual

[4:11:35] locker area and a maintenance area that will be built in for residents so that they can work on their bike if they need to

[4:11:41] change a tube or tighten up a chain, it will be built into the building. And of course this is on

[4:11:46] existing transit routes. So these an example of one of the maintenance frames and maintenance stations.

[4:11:58] so looking at this project we have just over one acre of land here. And again, really the zoning

[4:12:04] density and intensity that we seek is right across the street. What the dt is. And we'd like to selectively use

[4:12:12] it on the portion of land which as you can see is a single-story building, and a parking lot and primarily a parking lot and

[4:12:19] single-story medical building. These are the views here today that you see. Older but still functional

[4:12:27] sidewalks and there's a good tree line that's in here. We will be building this should you approve this, to the urban

[4:12:34] transect standards. And these things, like the aged alley, will be brought up to more modern standard where that

[4:12:42] will be clearly delineated. And what we will be doing also is removing all of the curb cuts on 10th and on 2nd in favor

[4:12:52] of access off of this alley. And that is what the alley looks like from the reverse angle looking east toward infinity

[4:13:01] hall. This is the single-story medical building on the north side and you see infinity here in the

[4:13:07] background of this shot. And then this is again looking down that alley here. In addition, all of these

[4:13:13] utilities will be undergrounded. They will no longer be [inaudible] based utilities and we'll be cleaning up this area

[4:13:21] from an urban design perspective by getting rid of the curb cuts. So effectively we have the second highest land use in the

[4:13:36] city. We would like to have the ability to have the density that exists right across the street

[4:13:42] here and cons trait I along 2ened and portions of 10th here. That's why we're requesting the

[4:13:49] planned use district which also in turn then would encode the perpetual workforce housing in the project in perpetuity.

[4:13:57] we would like to remove the u9 zoning in favor of a planned development zoning which would effectively give us similar

[4:14:07] rights as to what's already across the street here on this side of the intersection. As forrest showed you in his

[4:14:12] presentation, that buffer district extends through and causes what we call a blade-like form of this building.

[4:14:20] and I'm going to show you several iterations of designs that we considered through the course of this application and

[4:14:26] how we got there. But most importantly, what we're asking for is very little in form and increased density.

[4:14:36] the maximum building height that would be allowed under the current future land use and zoning is 116 feet.

[4:14:42] we could make this building work with about four feet of additional height. It's not a tremendous height

[4:14:50] difference that we're asking for. The historic district limits it to four stories and 60 feet.

[4:14:57] we can build the building within 60 feet but we would like to have five floors in that building instead of four.

[4:15:05] for density we are looking for a boost here. We would like to see the density raised up so that we can

[4:15:10] effectively have that one acre of land be what would equate to as a complete full apartment-scale project.

[4:15:19] so we would have 379 beds going up to 557 beds. And of course under the buy right type scenario, there's no

[4:15:29] requirement for workforce housing, but we were proposing to place in here 10% of the units interspersed throughout

[4:15:36] the building in an equitable manner, workforce housing in perpetuity. So as you can see, this aerial

[4:15:46] shows you here that the standards are really the jump in the density. The pud is requesting the

[4:15:52] approximate density allowed on the other side of 10th street. A seamless transition from what one would see from the ground

[4:16:00] here as possible on this side street. We'd like to see it on this parking area here.

[4:16:06] when we talked at the plan board, we talked about the setback and currently what the code requests.

[4:16:14] the code says that within 100 feet of the district you have to have a step down in the building.

[4:16:20] and we understand that. There's also another portion of the code that says there shall be no more than six dwelling

[4:16:28] units per wild spacing and it shall be in the form of either single-family dwellings, attached or a small-scale

[4:16:35] multifamily. That has not been consistently applied around the area. So we are requesting relief from

[4:16:41] that because that is important. On the block north of us, this is the back of hub 1 in about the 10 to 1200 block of

[4:16:51] university avenue. You see there are eight stories out here and they are a little step-down, but they did not

[4:16:57] design that in the form of a small-scale apartment nor single-family nor attached dwellings.

[4:17:03] I'm going to speak about the land use in the presentation. We have another presentation that deals specifically with the

[4:17:12] zoning should we go there. But I want to let you know that a full set of pd development standards have been included

[4:17:19] that staff reviewed, twice now, prior to the plan board and prior to tonight recommended that you approve for this

[4:17:27] project. Relative to the workforce housing with, this will place a rent limit tight unit at 50% of

[4:17:34] the adjusted median or area median income of $686 for a one bedroom or $823 for a two-bedroom in perpetuity.

[4:17:44] and that means forever in this building. We know that workforce housing is needed and we believe this

[4:17:53] brings an answer to that. There's a constant' diverse demand. While there are people -- and I

[4:17:57] think mr. Mayor stated this to me -- that make six figures or more at university of florida, there are folks that make well

[4:18:06] under four figures or five figures. And you reminded me, mr. Mayor, as commissioners, we're in that

[4:18:12] category too. So this enables the administrators and the staff members and the custodians and

[4:18:19] maybe the single moms and single dads to be able to live problem mate to uf or santa fe college or in any of these spaces and

[4:18:29] not have to live and spend a tremendous amount of time in time and transit or a lot of their income in getting to town.

[4:18:35] this allows this workforce to live proximate to key jobs such as uf health and the va center. This forces people to live where

[4:18:50] resources don't exist. It forces people to have longer commutes which places more pollution in our environment and

[4:18:56] more congestion on our roads. That's unnecessary when we can take a parking lot next to tin no vegas district and two blocks

[4:19:03] from campus and turn it into housing. And what it does then, because some people can't get over these

[4:19:08] impediments, it creates underemployment in our community. And so I would argue very

[4:19:14] strongly that urban infill is a way to solve a lot of the problems that we see. The workforce housing here will

[4:19:21] increase the city's ability to retain and attack essential workforce because they can live right across the street from

[4:19:28] where they work. It will encourage more pedestrian bicycle transportation right downtown

[4:19:33] and facilitate the existing transit routes. I'm glad that mr. Posa said there are multiple routes that

[4:19:41] serve this. And it reduces the strain on our system and public utilities by using existing water lines,

[4:19:47] electric lines, gas lines, fiber optic because that system is built right there. We're infilling a piece of the

[4:19:58] puzzle. This is not taxes resources and placing people out in western alachua county.

[4:20:03] the pud conditions include 10% of the units to be constructed in perpetuity. There will be antic wit cabal

[4:20:12] market rate, equitable access to all amenities for all tenants. There will be subsidy vouchers that have been put in place with

[4:20:21] the gainesville housing authority and the memorandum of understanding is the legal document that has been tested,

[4:20:27] adopted here at the city and will be used. And we're proud to say that prior to getting to the plan

[4:20:33] board we actually had the mou adopted and we have that document already prepared for this project.

[4:20:41] so when looking at a comprehensive plan amendment -- and this is a single acre -- we are creating a unique,

[4:20:49] innovative and narrowly-construed land use proposal with unique design features that might otherwise

[4:20:55] not be allowed in the underlying land use category. We've had to come up with an innovative way to make this

[4:21:04] building work and to bring all of these components of land on one acre of land. There's consistency and

[4:21:15] compatibility with the surrounding land uses. I wanted to stop there for a second.

[4:21:19] we want to talk about additional data and analysis we've done since the plan board. There was discussion of

[4:21:29] unraveling the thread of the neighborhood or the character of the land. I've done some work to show you

[4:21:39] how this does strongly not impact the character of the area and creates what we would like to call the halo effect.

[4:21:45] when those new residents live there, they will support the next restaurant, perhaps a clothing store or another type

[4:21:53] of business and bring the fabric closer together. The environmental constraints are major.

[4:22:04] you have no floodplain, you're not deforesting any portion of the city. We're converting asphalt to

[4:22:15] land. And we're creating it in the urban core which is where it needs to be.

[4:22:19] moreover, this affects affordable housing in a positive manner and affects our transportation system in a

[4:22:26] manner by using nonsingle occupied vehicles as a primary way of getting around in the community.

[4:22:33] we have looked at the facilities of water, sewer, obviously gas and electric and everything, and this is fine.

[4:22:41] we don't have to have any additional acreage in this category created overall on the future land use map by merely

[4:22:49] doing a pud. This certainly discourages urban sprawl because it gives folks an area to live on one acre in

[4:22:57] town. And the need for job creation, capital investment and economic development, this has positive

[4:23:04] effects on the future land use element, the housing element and the transportation element of our comprehensive plan.

[4:23:10] and there's no need to modify the land use categories and development plans with antiquated subdivisions because

[4:23:16] this is not a subdivision. It's a parking lot, effectively. So let's look at a little bit of what we did in the process.

[4:23:25] we had three primary design consideration. The first that we submitted in december, when we began to work

[4:23:33] with staff, proposed an e or reverse e-shaped building that was 12 stories and 172 feet with 327 units and 810 beds.

[4:23:44] infinity hall is here and this is the only ca ventures project here at 931 west university avenue.

[4:23:50] we began with work with staff after we submitted this and we came up with a refined design when trying to make this

[4:24:00] building have a little more articulation. And we sculpted the top of the e off and flipped it along

[4:24:07] 2nd avenue to modulate it a little bit more. Staff still wanted us to come back with a proposal that had

[4:24:14] less massing on the building itself. And so while we were working with architectural revisions, we

[4:24:23] did adopt the mou from the housing authority with their expectation of 32 units in this building being delivered.

[4:24:31] once the plan board saw and what forest presented in our presentations earlier here is what we call a blade, which

[4:24:41] makes and brings the billing height down here on the north side -- we are looking to the east here, toward downtown, to

[4:24:50] 60 feet here, adjacent to the historic district. But with five floors in it as opposed to four.

[4:24:56] and what it does, where that blue line sculpt through here, it takes this portion of the massing of the building and

[4:25:05] brings this down to 60 feet. It was a long evening at the plan board. We had tie votes.

[4:25:11] and there was a 3-3 vote on the land use and a 3-3 vote on the zoning and we asked somebody, please flip your vote one way or

[4:25:18] the other so we can come to the commission and talk about this. Because this wasn't a full board that night.

[4:25:23] it with us a really long discussion and we didn't have this slide where we can kind of look at comparison and contrast

[4:25:29] of the full massing reversed e, sculpted out e and what I'm considering the step-down design here.

[4:25:39] this is what's being presented to you this evening. It reduces the number of affordable housing units from 32

[4:25:46] down to 20. So it's about a 50% reduction was we've lost a good mass of the building.

[4:25:55] unbeknownst to us that evening, there was a presentation and resolution from the historic preservation board that came

[4:26:06] from. They had heard this project about a month before we got to the board, unbeknownst us to.

[4:26:13] and what this resolution contains, you see my pdf notes on here. This talks about wide spread

[4:26:21] reinvestment being harmed here and setting a dangerous precedent when in fact similar height, mass, scale and number

[4:26:28] of floors exists in every direction around this project. And we're glad that we saw this. It's little ironic that that was

[4:26:37] notarized the day after the plan board meeting and we had not known about that happening or we would have gone to the hpb and

[4:26:48] talked to them about this project. This is the historic district and it does have a unique notch

[4:26:52] in it, which presents a really interesting thing. Because when you come off of here with a hundred-foot buffer,

[4:26:59] it creates a buffer where you can really utilize the height of the zoning district but elsewhere along the edge you

[4:27:06] can't. It's a little easier to see it like this. We took the historic district

[4:27:10] and google earth and made it oblique of that district. Here's 13th street, here's the university of florida campus,

[4:27:18] here's norman hall, here's 2nd avenue, here's the hub one under construction and here is the site of the old alachua

[4:27:29] general hospital here. The core of the I district. This is how the district looks. We carefully went around the

[4:27:36] entirety of the district. And right across the street from this proposed project is infinity hall.

[4:27:45] infinity hall has five stories a I cross the street. To the north of the project is the hub.

[4:27:53] and the hub, the 100-foot penetrates well into that portion of the building. Here's another example on the

[4:28:01] north side of the district where there's a 4/8 story building into that red area which is the buffer -- I did that color-wise

[4:28:12] so you can see how it clips the building. The college manor building here, that old building, that's five

[4:28:18] stories in height. To the south here is the lynn court apartments, it has five stories or five floors within

[4:28:25] the 100-foot area. And then over here on the south side is cascades. And cascades, as you can clearly

[4:28:33] see here, sits inside that hundred-foot buffer with five stories. So my argument to you all is

[4:28:40] that what we were proposing now, looking from the northwest to the southeast across the historic district, that has five

[4:28:51] floors within a hundred feet. This has four and eight floors within the hundred feet. That has five stories within the

[4:28:58] hundred feet. That has five stories within a hundred feet. And that has five stories.

[4:29:04] our proposal was to step down and bring the height down inside that. But we'd like to have the fifth

[4:29:09] floor in there as opposed to four floors. We don't think it's tremendously detrimental to the area.

[4:29:17] this pocket is a really unique, challenging area. But the context area has multiple examples where an extra

[4:29:24] height lives in that buffer without detriment to the neighborhood or to the historic district.

[4:29:34] when you look at the property values -- and we went back after the plan board and took 2016, '17, '18, '19, '20, '21 and the

[4:29:46] current assessed values of these problems in here to see if the increase of these newer buildings like infinity or the

[4:29:53] hub or cascades has had a negative effect on investment in the district. This is what we found.

[4:30:02] we investigated dozens of property that exist in this portion of the district. Out of all of those properties

[4:30:12] we grouped them as to where they were, whether they were adjacent to the hub or to infinity or college manor or cascades.

[4:30:22] our results show that in every instance, every one of those properties continued to appreciate in value.

[4:30:29] because of the halo effect of investment in the district. In other words, a taller building in an area of downtown

[4:30:38] did not take the value out of people's property. Moreover, we did find a couple of anomalies in there.

[4:30:48] but when we looked at the average assessed value of all of the properties in this area, this is when the hub -- excuse

[4:30:54] me, when lynn court came online, the y axis represents value, the x axis represents time. Each time another building was

[4:31:03] brought in there, you can see values overall in all of the properties continue to appreciate.

[4:31:10] this is not the detriment. The halo effect of urban investment is noted and a stabilizing effect on this area

[4:31:28] of the city. So when talking about investing in historic properties, one thing did change from the plan

[4:31:43] board tonight's meeting. One of these properties here was homesteaded. Every single property that

[4:31:50] exists on the north side of 2nd a, the south side -- excuse me, 1st avenue. The north side of 2nd.

[4:31:58] every one of these properties is a piece of commercial-owned real estate. I greatly value the fact that

[4:32:04] neighborhoods are an important component because they are where neighbors are formed. Do understand the reality that

[4:32:12] this is rental commercial property and yet it is all appreciated in value. So there is not one homesteaded

[4:32:20] residential home in here and they have all still continued to rise in value because of the effect of the innovation

[4:32:28] district and the university's investment here, c a's investment here, the hub's investment here and this will

[4:32:35] not harm the district one bit. From a perspective of safety these existing curb cuts in common with the sidewalk will be

[4:32:51] removed and the access to the building will be off of the alley making these continuous sidewalks here with the only

[4:32:57] opening left the existing public alley here east-west. This shows you the floor plan. And on the ground wu can see the

[4:33:06] parking spaces where they will have mechanical car lifts above them. That's how we end up getting 93

[4:33:14] parks spaces in this building is by lifting cars off the ground. And that's a small number of parks spaces in here.

[4:33:21] I don't like elevations. They don't really tell a good story. They very much look very blank

[4:33:27] and kind of ghostly. But what I do like is when you look at the way things look like today, sweger have an existing

[4:33:37] road network on-street parking. We need a little relief to allow this ground plain to go to a three to four-foot sidewalk to a

[4:33:50] pedestrian realm that is appropriately scaled for people to walk side by side with a building set back with

[4:33:56] protective zones, with adequate lighting underneath the canopies to illuminate the streets. And then residential doors and

[4:34:05] nodes that are created all along 2nd avenue. And then there's actually little coves in here where people can

[4:34:13] have friends over and utilize those as social recreation-type spaces. But this today, while

[4:34:22] functioning as a sidewalk, is different than transitioning to an urban design space. Looking across that parking lot

[4:34:31] today you see this view. Hopefully tomorrow or I'd say in a couple of years you would see this view.

[4:34:40] this corner was cafford here along this edge to mirror what's on infinity hall. This was a skateboard recreation

[4:34:53] area. But we put in all of this glass lighting to provide eyes on the street to improve the safety as

[4:35:00] well as letting light transduce from this balcony and canopy here to keep this as a well-lighted portion of our

[4:35:09] urban area. This view shows you, looking to the north. This is the outdoor congregation

[4:35:19] space as someone would come into the main entrance of the building. On-street parking would remain.

[4:35:34] and that's the future view along that area. Stoops going up to balconies and then cove areas for groups to

[4:35:43] gather, study and enjoy each other's presence. For these reasons your staff have reviewed this across all of

[4:35:52] the professional departments of the city and to the plan board they recommended approval. We truly believe that infill can

[4:36:00] and does occur without detriment to the fabric of the city. And that's why your staff have once again reviewed this and

[4:36:08] provided to you in their staff report this evening a recommendation that this land use amendment be approved.

[4:36:14] I thank you very much for your time. I know that was a tremendous amount of information.

[4:36:18] we've been working on this for just about a year. So a lot of things have happened.

[4:36:24] thank you. We're here for any questions you may have. >> mayor: thank you very much.

[4:36:28] I appreciate the presentation. Let's go to the commission. We're going to start with commissioner arreola.

[4:36:32] >> thank you, mr. Mayor. I appreciate the presentation and all of the thoughtfulness that's gone into it.

[4:36:40] workforce housing, affordable housing, it's got a lot of promise. It does.

[4:36:51] mr. Mayor, I see a few lights but I'd like to go ahead and put the motion on the floor to accept the staff's

[4:37:00] recommendation. >> mayor: is there a second? >> second. >> mayor: motion and a second to

[4:37:04] move the staff's recommendation with the attached conditions. Thank you, commissioner arreola. Commissioner hayes-santos.

[4:37:08] >> thank you, mayor. I heard the motion on the floor but I believe we should go forward with one of the original

[4:37:17] two proposals that had more housing. We have an opportunity to give over 800 people homes.

[4:37:23] that's homes over their houses. We have over 80 people who will get subsidized affordable housing.

[4:37:29] that is incredibly needed in our community. And this is where it should be. This is a high-opportunity area,

[4:37:36] public transit, work, schools, daily necessities, grocery stores, a doctor's office directly across the street.

[4:37:43] everything you want is here and this is where we should be putting as much as possible the sites of affordable housing.

[4:37:48] and the proposer wants to build more and we should let them build that. If we go with the smaller

[4:37:54] version that's on the current motion, we will tell 300 people that they can't have a home here.

[4:38:00] and it will also mean there will be 50% less affordable housing as part of that -- close to 50% less affordable housing as part

[4:38:08] of the project. I hope we don't let our -- there are definitely some people who are going to speak out against

[4:38:13] this. But 300 people can have homes here where they want to live. Over 50% increase in the amount

[4:38:22] of affordable housing that can be in this project. This project should move forward for a variety of reasons.

[4:38:28] it will reduce pressure in near. By neighborhoods. I represent district 4 and university park and one of the

[4:38:35] biggest complaints I get is students moving into that neighborhood. This will reduce the amount of

[4:38:39] pressure. University is not increasing the number of students in their school.

[4:38:46] so they will be able to go here. It will let people live close to school and employment. And also we shouldn't just

[4:38:54] have -- I've heard we should only have tall building along the biggest major corridors. I don't think we should just

[4:39:00] have them there. Our biggest corridors 13th and university have the most noise pollution and the most car

[4:39:07] pollution as well. Southwest 2nd is a major corridor, doesn't have a lot of traffic but it the most biked

[4:39:19] street in our city and amazing transit opportunities there as well. I mentioned many times on the

[4:39:24] environment, this will reduce urban sprawl, climate change. I think this will probably be the most climate-friendly

[4:39:30] building in the city when this is built when you look at a per capita basis with the very limited amount of parking per

[4:39:37] building and with how walkable and bikeable this area is. That's the development we have to have.

[4:39:43] we do have a climate crisis. Talking about affordable housing is not just for ten years or 20 years.

[4:39:49] this is for the life of the building. And people on the gainesville housing authority's list, close

[4:39:54] to 3,000 people are on that list. There will move them forward. They're going to directly get

[4:40:00] that property. And I don't know what the market rate is going to be but looking in this area already, this will

[4:40:08] be at least a thousand dollars off the monthly rent for a one bedroom. That's a significant difference

[4:40:14] in people's lives. We can give more people that opportunity. This will make safety better,

[4:40:19] better lighting, less cars. These same people are going to be here. They're moving here.

[4:40:24] they'll move further out and have to drive in. Walking distance. Looking at this area within a

[4:40:32] five-minute walk there's a bus that goes by almost every five minutes. This is one of the most

[4:40:39] transit-rich areas and we should put as many people here possible as we can. For compatibility, within a few

[4:40:47] hundred feet there's a 12-story building under construction on the corner of university and 8th street.

[4:40:56] there's a building on construction on university avenue. You this is a tall building area

[4:41:04] and it should be. It's next to the university, between downtown where we should have density and capacity for

[4:41:09] that. While it is in that hundred-foot zone, this project is not the historic district.

[4:41:14] but historic buildings can be tall. And I think you can create amazing mixing between modern

[4:41:21] next to historic. And we don't have to set our city just in amber. We can make amazing kind of

[4:41:28] changes there. And people make neighborhoods not buildings. Commissioner duncan-walker, I

[4:41:36] read in the "gainesville sun" about alachua county's vote that they had yesterday or two days ago about the project on

[4:41:45] southeast 15th street. You wrote -- you said I believe the only way you set up people for success is to put them

[4:41:52] directly in an environment where it already is. This area is accessible. There are doctors' offices,

[4:42:00] grocery stores. But we have to be intentional about where we put it and put people close to where the

[4:42:06] resources are so they can thrive. This is where we should be putting affordable housing.

[4:42:11] and I hope that we move forward with the larger version. Thank you, mayor. >> mr. Mayor, could you put the

[4:42:18] staff's recommendations back up on the board. >> mayor: yes, we can. Do you have that?

[4:42:25] or we could go back to the staff. Madam clerk, do you have control, madam clerk?

[4:42:31] folks in the back, yeah, if we could go back to the staff presentation and then the staff recommendation slide towards the

[4:42:39] end. That was written a little bit bigger. Thank you, commissioner

[4:42:44] chestnut. Commissioner saco. >> thank you, mr. Mayor. You came up and I was going to

[4:42:51] ask you to come up anyway. Thank you. I have a question. Why did -- why did staff reject

[4:42:57] the first two options in greater detail, just why. >> the main reason was because of the extra extent of the

[4:43:05] massing and scaling. So we didn't really reject them at that stage. We went back to the applicant to

[4:43:12] say here's what are some of the consideration and concerns that we expect our community to come at us with.

[4:43:17] what can we do to address that. What are you able the do to address that. And to their credit they went

[4:43:23] through several iterations to move to where this proposal is today. >> so this is already trying to

[4:43:30] take into consideration some of the concerns, although in theory it should have been fine. Like technically fine prior.

[4:43:39] >> I'm not -- well, technically if we had gone ahead and gone through this same process and showed that building with the

[4:43:45] full extent, yes, this process can allow or accept that also. >> we could have had the technical option of saying,

[4:43:53] yeah, go with that one. But the applicant has at least try to -- to try to reconform to some of those standard and

[4:44:03] preferences for the community. >> that is true. >> I appreciate the back and forth option of communication

[4:44:09] with the community to recognize the needs and the willingness to work with it. I think we could get a lot done

[4:44:15] around here if we did more of that. To that end, you know, I'm on a similar page to commissioner

[4:44:22] hayes-santos. I wish we had the bigger one. It breaks my heart to know that we're cutting the affordable

[4:44:28] units by half, more than half. That said, I do want to be considerate, as staff knew that would be one of the real

[4:44:40] sticking points for the community. I want to be considerate of that.

[4:44:44] and on the other hand I kind of like the look of the building now. It's an interesting focal point

[4:44:55] of how did you get that shape. Every city has a building like that. It's the [inaudible] building in

[4:45:02] my view which is why is it like that, why is that there, a conversation starter when people visit.

[4:45:08] I'm mostly trying to joke about that. But I think it has gainesville level of quirk, let's call it.

[4:45:18] that said, I do appreciate what's being done with the sidewalks and the expansion of the lighting.

[4:45:26] those are great enhancements for the neighborhood and great enhancements for the community [inaudible].

[4:45:38] a surface lot, the worst use of land I have ever seen in my life. I do have one kind of comparison

[4:45:46] to offer. Growing up in miami, coral gables is not far away. And if there is a rock on the

[4:45:57] ground, they are try to commemorate. You can't touch the rock. The rock is historic.

[4:46:03] anything say see, they will try. That said, their downtown which is -- it's like a mile long, I want to say -- has buildings of

[4:46:15] every height, up to 12 or 13 stories. The building next door will be five and across the street will

[4:46:22] be a one, one and a half-ish, a stall one-story building. And a whole subdivision of housing at that one story, that

[4:46:31] whole swath down. The city has not burned down to the ground. Or lost property value.

[4:46:38] so I think it serves as an example of you can have a very dense and rich environment intermixed with buildings of not

[4:46:50] identical height and it functions very well. That is very walkable. It has a variety of options for

[4:46:58] housing, for employment. It has a little trolley that goes by. I don't think it dissimilar to

[4:47:07] our beloved toaster that is no longer here with us. I think it has great potential and I'm excited for it.

[4:47:15] I will go forward with staff's current recommendation out of consideration that if it were the whole bulk of it would be a

[4:47:24] lot for a neighborhood to look at. But we aren't the first place to have something like this and I

[4:47:36] think if coral gables can survive with their tree and green spaces with similar building ace cross the street, I

[4:47:46] think we can do the same. Thank you, mr. Mayor. >> mayor: commissioner arreola and hayes-santos do you mind if

[4:47:57] I get the commissioners that haven't spoken yet? >> I honestly wanted to ask a question of staff and the

[4:48:03] seconder but I can wait. >> mayor: okay. Thanks. We'll go to commissioner ward.

[4:48:11] >> thanks, mr. Mayor. Lots to talk about. There are many things, I'll say to the applicant, many things to

[4:48:16] recommend this. I will say to folks who oppose it, many things to recommend against this.

[4:48:21] I will say to my colleagues, specifically commissioner saco, city staff has not cut the number of potential affordable

[4:48:34] units. That is entirely up to the applicant. It's not our job to be concerned

[4:48:42] with their finances nor will I suggest that we should be. They picked 10%, not us. And that's a reality.

[4:48:56] I would love to see more. Twenty is nice. It's a start. It's not great.

[4:49:08] I think we're about to prove that it's possible to do this with the building next door. Is there anybody from the

[4:49:14] housing authority here tonight, by the way? Any representative? Okay.

[4:49:19] >> I'm not seeing any. >> that's all right. There are a number of procedural issues that I have with this.

[4:49:35] I'm trying to keep my impression of whether or not I think it's too big, too small, whatever, out of it.

[4:49:42] the reality is that we have two boards that this body appointed who said don't do this, because a 3-3 vote is a failure.

[4:49:54] so two boards that we appointed said don't do this. This body chose form base code right about five years ago.

[4:50:11] one of the reasons that we implemented form-based code was to cut down on the number of pds.

[4:50:20] to say that these are the rules. And if you abide by the rules, you can build. But as is fairly predictable, we

[4:50:30] fall back into the habit -- and I don't blame the applicants for this at all for coming to us saying, hey, you can change the

[4:50:39] rules. Will you change the rules for us. I don't hold that against you at

[4:50:43] all. But we implemented form-based code specifically so that we would have fewer pds.

[4:50:49] because our city is dotted with pds now and that doesn't always make sense. I completely understand what

[4:50:58] we're trying to accomplish. I'm a fan of density where it makes sense and where the code says we should do it.

[4:51:06] but we picked u-9 at this spot and we -- this body 20 years ago asked for a historic designation for the adjacent neighborhood.

[4:51:21] and we can't pretend that those things didn't happen. They're realities. I'm very interested in hearing

[4:51:32] from -- and I know this will take a little while, but because we have some folks here, I would like to hear from, from our

[4:51:46] historic presentation staff, if possible. I know there is or was a plan board member here.

[4:51:52] it would be nice to hear their perspective. And I would also like to hear from the chair of the historic

[4:51:58] preservation board who is here. That will take a little while but I would like their perspectives.

[4:52:09] madam manager, do you mind if I call up the historic presentation. >> mayor: if it's a citizen on

[4:52:17] the citizen board, they can have the same time as a citizen. But yeah, if we want to invite ms. Coffman up, if that's okay

[4:52:26] with the manager. >> yes, mayor. >> thank you, mr. Mayor. >> mayor: of course.

[4:52:38] >> thank you, ms. Coffman. I'm just interested in hearing your perspective on this. And -- you were with the

[4:52:46] historic preservation board when they made their decisions. I would like to hear your thoughts.

[4:52:52] >> mr. Mayor, members of the commission, I won't take up much of your time. As you know, staff has

[4:52:58] recommended approval of this project. And forrest actually did a really wonderful job of going

[4:53:06] through all of the issues. Though we recommended approval there are issues and most of that is because there is a

[4:53:16] historic district there. And I appreciate you giving me just a couple of seconds just to point out some things to you.

[4:53:22] unlike the lorax, I speak for the historic districts. The character of that district, I'm sure you've been through it.

[4:53:30] there's a lot of revitalization happening. Some of the developers that you know do a great job of saving

[4:53:37] what's there and building new stuff around it. So that is happening. The thing about the hundred-foot

[4:53:47] buffer, you know, we're talking about four stories is allowed currently and they want five stories.

[4:53:52] this is the only district that allows the four stories. The rest of the historic districts you could build up to

[4:54:00] three stories in that hundred-foot buffer. So at whatever time you created that buffer for the historic

[4:54:06] districts, this was the only district that you gave four stories to. They also want to go from six

[4:54:14] dwelling units to 204 max. And forrest has been through all of that with you. What I do want to point out to

[4:54:23] you is that the hundred-foot buffer line that you saw the overview map of didn't show you the south side of the 12-story

[4:54:33] face of the building, which is potentially about half a block long. So that 12-story face of the

[4:54:39] building is directly across the street from the historic district. It is all historic buildings.

[4:54:47] they're all contributing structures on that side, on that block. The issue is that southwest

[4:54:54] 2nd avenue is so wide with the median and the hundred-foot goes right to the property line. So it didn't go into the

[4:55:03] property and therefore it didn't affect, you know, how they could build or what they're proposing to build right there.

[4:55:11] but I want to make sure you understand that 12-story building, the 12-story piece of it is facing the historic

[4:55:20] district. And that's about all I really want to point out to you. Our residents and property

[4:55:29] owners that live there, they already live under an additional regulation because they're in an historic district.

[4:55:36] and I think in return they kind of expect to be protected by the codes we already have in place. Thank you for your time.

[4:55:44] >> thank you. >> mayor: thank you, ms. Coffman. >> since I have you as a captive

[4:55:48] audience can I tell you one thing totally off topic. But last month was my first year anniversary at the city and I

[4:55:56] love it so much. I have the best coworkers and team to work with. You're very fortunate to have

[4:56:03] the people you have in the planning department and the sustainability department. It's been really great.

[4:56:09] thank you. >> mayor: thank you. And congratulations. >> do you have any questions?

[4:56:13] >> I'm good. Thank you. Thank you, mr. Mayor. >> mayor: okay.

[4:56:16] thank you. Commissioner chestnut. >> thank you. Thank you, mr. Mayor.

[4:56:21] and thank you, commissioner ward. You were leading down the path that I wanted to take as well.

[4:56:28] I'm sitting here. Am I mistaken or is the public mistaken -- where's the 12 stories coming from?

[4:56:39] sitting here it would seem that that's not what you're talking about. >> we'll go to the elevations.

[4:56:51] does this help with answering the question? So we've got the first floor, one, two, three, four, five,

[4:57:04] six, seven, eight, nine, ten, 11, 12. >> thank you. Because I heard four, then I

[4:57:10] heard five. But the public is talking about 12. And 12 not being compatible with

[4:57:17] the historic district, that is the reason that the plan board turned this down and that is the reason I believe that the

[4:57:24] historic preservation board turned it down. So as a matter of compatibility. And that is what concerns me.

[4:57:35] now when we talk about -- I guess the greatest caveat that everybody uses now is to say that they're going to give

[4:57:42] housing, 10%, 5% house in perpetuity. Tell me exactly how many units are we talking about of

[4:57:52] affordable housing that we would end up with here? >> the 20. >> twenty.

[4:57:58] so the community is trading not having a compatible structure, violating its historic preservation board

[4:58:12] recommendation, violating the plan board recommendation to get 20 units that really may not end up being there anyway.

[4:58:24] so I'm just concerned that if we keep modifying and not standing by our own standards, then what, what do our standards really

[4:58:37] stand for. What does it really mean. I think that this building is out of character with the whole

[4:58:43] surrounding area. And historic preservation is important to me. Thank you.

[4:58:49] >> mayor: thank you. We'll go back around. Commissioner arreola. >> yeah.

[4:58:55] I just wanted to get a clarification. So how exactly are the affordable units maintained

[4:59:02] affordable in perpetuity? I'd like to get that explanation for the commission just to clear up any misconceptions.

[4:59:08] >> with the memorandum of understanding and the executed agreements with the housing authority.

[4:59:13] and deed restrictions. >> it's guaranteed affordable housing with those units? >> yes.

[4:59:22] >> okay. So clearing that up. I understand all of the arguments being made.

[4:59:32] there is going to be some give and take always. A project like this is going to have an impact, but that delta

[4:59:47] going to be overall good for folks who are now going to be able to get into these homes. I appreciate folks who disagree

[4:59:56] with me. That's okay. But the housing crisis in gainesville isn't going to get

[5:00:04] any better without new housing. Thank you. >> mayor: commissioner hayes-santos.

[5:00:11] >> thank you, mayor. I was wondering if the maker or the seconder would be interested in proposal number two, which is

[5:00:19] what the applicant came back with. It still has the more housing but it broke it up and reduced

[5:00:23] the massing of the structure and it still kind of gives that quirkiness that commissioner saco was talking about but it

[5:00:38] provides more affordable housing. >> what is the difference. >> mayor: I think you'll have to

[5:00:43] go back to the applicant's presentation. >> three hundred units or... >> as soon as that comes back up

[5:00:55] I'm happy to put that back there. I think what you wanted to see was that.

[5:01:14] and, mr. Mayor, may I add one thing? I believe these are very complicated issues and when

[5:01:21] we're talking about the land use. I do want to state, though, this building, if you were to look at

[5:01:28] a form-based code envelope or box, the reason that this one is sculpted is because this -- >> mayor: you pointed that one.

[5:01:39] thank you. >> why don't I point at the one you all can see. Yeah.

[5:01:43] that the reason this is the tall portion is because this is outside of the historic district buffer.

[5:01:49] there is no buffer -- or the buffer I should say from the south side does not extend over and touch -- does not touch.

[5:01:58] that's why this blade was increased in size here and here. Wherever the buffer touched, these building heights here are

[5:02:06] within the volume of the 60 feet of the district. So the only area that is elevated up.

[5:02:16] we call these jelly models because it shows you the plates of the floors. But that massing was placed

[5:02:22] along because it is not in the district. I realize there are structures across the street but they do

[5:02:27] not place a regulatory buffer in the portion of the projects. The buffer comes from the north in that little nook that's

[5:02:34] created. It swipes through this building and these two. That's why this was brought

[5:02:39] down. This is the second option where the e effectively was turned from a reverse e and flipped so

[5:02:46] that along 2nd avenue there would be areas for interior setbacks, you could have amenity areas here and it gives more

[5:02:56] playfulness. This was an interim opportunity or an option where we looked at taking that big bolt of a

[5:03:02] building as a solid shape and inverting these areas to create courtyards and gardens. I appreciate the analogies being

[5:03:13] made. Having watched the streets of new york and chelsea and soho last week, it's completely

[5:03:19] normal to have two story billings next to other buildings and they live harmoniously. Neighborhoods are built by

[5:03:29] built. This obviously we lost a chunk of the building here. Cuts the number down to 20 in

[5:03:37] perpetuity. >> mayor: so I think the question was did you want to change your motion.

[5:03:44] >> I have a question, then. >> I think it will depend -- >> mayor: we have a motion on the floor.

[5:03:51] so unless the maker wants to change that, let's go ahead and stick with this which is the staff recommendation which is

[5:04:01] represented by the third option here. Commissioner saco. >> thank you, mr. Mayor.

[5:04:07] quick question. If you go with option two, what is the height of the that stand-alone building.

[5:04:16] >> the stand-alone building here was taller at 12 but it can be knocked down to make it this. >> and you don't have the

[5:04:22] numbers for that? >> I know that jay could probably tell me really, fairly quickly if he took six floors or

[5:04:29] six plates out of there, how many units would be lost. >> so let him calculate the math.

[5:04:35] but my question then becomes because that is inside the zone. That is inside the buffer zone. That's why we made that one the

[5:04:43] smaller one. >> that's correct. >> I do believe in our code. I do believe making exceptions

[5:04:49] if there is a benefit. I personally think that would be an excessive deviation at that point just because of the 12

[5:04:58] stories. It is immediately inside that zone. And I think we should respect

[5:05:03] this zone. >> that building is really cut very heavily by the hundred-foot arcs off of here.

[5:05:08] >> it's a weird -- it's a weird shape. I think we've all acknowledged that one.

[5:05:14] >> agreed. >> but that said, I'm willing to consider that second plan if the stand-alone building abides by

[5:05:24] the buffer limitations. You know, as far as, you know, do we do what our code tells us. Yes.

[5:05:37] are we allowed to deviate from it. Yes. >> have we followed those.

[5:05:41] yes. >> has staff approved that. Yes. We have not done anything not

[5:05:45] lord allowed by our code. This isn't me going up with a marker and designing with a scribble this is how we're going

[5:05:54] to outline the city. We're doing what we are required and you have met those requirement.

[5:06:00] you have met your requirements, we are meeting our requirements at the suggestion of staff. Our personal likes and dislike I

[5:06:08] don't think should play much into this. Because well above that, this provides housing.

[5:06:17] and I had someone the other day tell me, housing shouldn't have to be apartments. You're right.

[5:06:24] fine. But an apartment is housing. And to someone who is desperate for housing, that is better than

[5:06:30] a palace. When my family got here, we literally had nothing and didn't speak english, a really terrible

[5:06:40] run-down apartment was home because we were sheltered and my parents could be independent and keep me independent together in

[5:06:48] that hovel of an apartment. That matter to people. >> it does. >> so everybody likes living in

[5:06:56] a mansion. Maybe. I wouldn't. It's a lot of cleaning.

[5:07:01] but it provides housing. And if we could make a little modify to keep within that buffer and respect that buffer,

[5:07:07] I'd be fine with it. I do have a question. Would you require it to be a pd to have that condition of

[5:07:17] affordability in perpetuity? To seal it in you need it to be a pd? >> yes, mr. Mayor.

[5:07:23] the reason we're choosing the pud-pd mechanism, not just to work on the geometry and the roundabout is to permanently

[5:07:32] encode in the land use ordinance and in the zoning ordinance that this will have workforce housing universities forever in the

[5:07:39] building. Not only then is there the mou and the deed restriction, there is a zoning and a land use

[5:07:44] ordinance that mandates that that will always have the workforce housing units in it in perpetuity.

[5:07:51] >> it's triple clad. >> yeah. Yes. Mr. Mayor, yes.

[5:07:58] as commissioner saco is saying, the pud allows us to do that. We couldn't do u-9 with perpetual workforce housing in

[5:08:08] it. There's in way to condition straight zoning so we have to go the pud-pd route.

[5:08:13] >> I knew the answer but I appreciate when it helps out with the expert. So if anybody could give me that

[5:08:20] modify -- the modification to two... >> so the delta, mr. Silverman is telling me, is that you lose

[5:08:39] here about 50 units by taking those floors here on the north stand-alone building out. So about ten units per floor,

[5:08:48] five plates, jay, if I'm saying that correctly. >> [inaudible] >> we're going down seven plates

[5:08:54] and be losing about 50 units by taking the height out of here. Which you can kind of see hiding here or behind here on the

[5:09:02] north. We lose about 50 units there. >> that's 50 units so five affordable units.

[5:09:08] which I'm not great at math. Leaves us at 27. >> that would push the number from 20 back up to 27.

[5:09:15] >> okay. If the maker of the motion is okay with that, that is what I am comfortable with so that we

[5:09:21] are respecting the hundred-foot boundary. That's what I would be comfortable with if any changes

[5:09:27] were to be made. And to just close up, I know our boards may not necessarily always agree with what we do,

[5:09:36] but our boards weren't elected. They were picked to advise. And we can listen to that advise and then we seven can use our

[5:09:43] own individual critical thinking skills to determine what our electorate asked us to do and entrusted us to do.

[5:09:53] and sometimes that's build housing. Something being old might be really great.

[5:09:58] but you can't house a bunch of families in one older building. Just because something is old doesn't mean it's important.

[5:10:08] I'm going to value housing humans over preserving where someone stood once to tie their shoes.

[5:10:15] thank you, mr. Mayor. >> mayor: commissioner ward. >> thank you, mr. Mayor. Just very briefly.

[5:10:24] you don't need a pd to build a deed restriction in. Correct? I mean, am I missing something

[5:10:32] there? I mean I understand you don't want to. And I don't blame you.

[5:10:36] that's not -- you're not here to build specifically affordable housing, but you could build a deed restriction in under the

[5:10:43] current code. >> well that would be a de facto condition on the pd and the zoning.

[5:10:51] the flip side of that coin that we encountered in the other project that jerry and I did with this very same formula was

[5:10:59] well, how does the city -- how does the city ensure if there is some kind of breach of that deed restriction.

[5:11:05] we don't really have any standing to enforce that. So we really need that regulatory standing in our

[5:11:12] zoning and pud. You've got to have the whole package. And that was in discussions with

[5:11:18] the city, with staff. We have to develop a restrictive covenant if it gets recorded and it provides ability for the city

[5:11:29] to to -- the city doesn't really have informal rights because our agreement is with the gainesville housing authority as

[5:11:37] adopted by this board and the pd and pud by reference. We try to knit the whole thing together for you.

[5:11:45] so just a stand-alone deed restriction would not work for you, in my opinion. >> so we couldn't enforce but

[5:11:53] you could build, you and the housing authority and whoever you sell or rent to could certainly have that restriction

[5:11:59] built in. The city of gainesville just couldn't enforce it. >> yes.

[5:12:04] and the interest was in the part of your staff, your legal staff to have enforceability because you've made a promise to the

[5:12:09] public by virtue of your vote that you're providing these units in perpetuity and you certainly want to be able to

[5:12:16] stand behind that. >> right. So yeah, it's a relatively minor point.

[5:12:20] >> no. It's very important. >> you could make that deal. We just can't enforce it.

[5:12:27] >> it wouldn't work according to your legal staff. >> it wouldn't work for us to enforce it.

[5:12:33] >> correct. >> yes. And the public interest in having that ability.

[5:12:37] and then, mr. Mayor, on the question that came up regarding 10%, where that came from -- and I think in the other project we

[5:12:45] did we explained to this board that the lending community is new to this consent. They're comfortable with ten.

[5:12:53] we try to push them to 15. We're not there yet. But we've got to have proof of concept with a couple of the

[5:12:59] projects and then I think you'll see the number increase as we move along. So ten is better than nothing.

[5:13:05] thank you. >> thank you, mr. Mayor. >> mayor: thank you. >> on that point --

[5:13:13] >> mayor: I'll get right back to you, commissioner. Commissioner arreola. >> I'm willing to accept the

[5:13:17] friendly amendment. >> mayor: is the staff recommendation with conditions with the exception of creating

[5:13:29] that smaller stand-alone building under the parameters of the third option there, but then everything else the second

[5:13:39] option. >> the second option minus seven stories. >> mayor: thank you.

[5:13:44] does the seconder accept? >> yes, mr. Mayor. >> mayor: commissioner chestnut. >> thank you.

[5:13:51] mr. Mayor, I have been here a short time and we've had developers come up and I want to be certain that I'm hearing this

[5:13:58] correctly. We've had developers guarantee that we were going to have housing, affordable housing in

[5:14:04] perpetuity. So now I'd like for the staff to answer, so you're saying that is not something that is true?

[5:14:12] that is not something that is going to stand? Is that what I'm hearing? >> no.

[5:14:17] >> that's what it sounded like you were saying. >> no. We're saying --

[5:14:22] >> mayor: let's let our staff answer. That's really a question for our staff.

[5:14:29] >> so the three projects that have incorporated -- sorry. Andrew persons, special adviser. The three projects that the city

[5:14:37] commission has approved in the past year have all been pd-zoned properties. So there's the lincoln ventures

[5:14:45] project which was the one on university avenue. There's archer place which is out on old archer road.

[5:14:51] and then the project before you tonight. So those are all pd-zoned properties.

[5:14:57] and as the discussion was -- the pd zoning is additional -- is essentially a condition to allow the city commission to put

[5:15:07] conditions on the development, including the requirement for affordable housing. I think all told, depending on

[5:15:14] what happens here tonight, the city will have added 68 perpetual affordable housing units between those three

[5:15:24] projects for zero dollars to the city. So it is a little bit -- I'm not speaking about this project but

[5:15:31] sit a prof of consent with these three projects with the pd zoning. The city is looking at how do we

[5:15:37] take this from what it is today, which is essentially sort of an ad hoc process into something, baking it into your actual

[5:15:45] regulations that this is a requirement for all project other a certain size. >> thank you for the

[5:15:52] clarification. >> mayor: thank you, commissioner chestnut. >> thank you.

[5:15:58] >> thank you, commissioner chestnut. Commissioner hayes-santos. >> thank you, mayor.

[5:16:04] >> putting value on the cost of the unit it's around 10 million dollars. >>mayor: I will reserve my

[5:16:14] comments until after we hear from the neighbors. I know you've been here for a while and been patient.

[5:16:20] we appreciate that. Ma'am clerk, I will turn it over to you to hear from the public.

[5:16:28] >> taylor simmons. >> just in case anyone is new. You have three minutes.

[5:16:36] you have to introduce yourself. When your time starts you will see a green light.

[5:16:40] when you have one minute left you will see a yellow. When the red light comes on that means your time is

[5:16:48] expired. >> welcome. >> hi, I'm a junior at the university of florida.

[5:17:09] I kind of have to speak from the heart a little bit because of what's been said. My hope is that the

[5:17:16] commission pursues a pd. I want to build as many houses for people as possible.

[5:17:24] I understand neighborhood character in historic districts. We also have to understand

[5:17:31] we are talking about university heights south and the innovation district. If you've ever gone through

[5:17:38] this area, you know, I think everybody understands it's a denser area. I don't think that this kind

[5:17:46] of urban density is so out of the question. I think as the planners pointed out, there are

[5:17:53] larger complexes north, south, east and west. And so too, I think we should pursue the project

[5:18:03] it's not necessarily out of character in the area. Just across the street there's -- there's a

[5:18:12] complex. At the end of the day what we are talking about this area is mostly a parking

[5:18:17] lot. I want this area to be developed. I want to use it

[5:18:22] productively. I want to use it to house people. It's a great area.

[5:18:25] it's a great area for opportunities. It's a great area for walkability.

[5:18:32] and I think it would be a -- I think it would be shame for the city to reject this.

[5:18:40] thank you. >> mr. Mayor, commissioners, I'm bill warner. I'm a preservation architect

[5:19:02] and realtor and vice chair of the preservation board. The structure located on the northwest corner of west

[5:19:15] university avenue and 13th street is not a standard that I would like to see set in our community.

[5:19:24] generally, and for the proposed site specifically. What the developer has proposed in terms of scale

[5:19:37] gives the finger to the historic preservation in our community. Generally and to the

[5:19:44] university heights district specifically. It is a failure in our code that when a right-of-way

[5:19:54] puts the subject property a matter of inches beyond the edge of the district, that it's considered not

[5:20:09] contiguous. We are experiencing strong developer interest in maximizing every square foot

[5:20:18] possible. And building it as cheaply as possible without regard to the negative impact on

[5:20:26] the setting. Fortunately we have guidelines and standards for properties within our

[5:20:35] historic districts. It's time to develop guidelines and standards for the properties within our

[5:20:43] commercial areas. They have figured out how to develop in historic district -- why can't the

[5:21:03] applicant. >> next speaker is michael hill. >> he might still be here.

[5:21:10] we will come back to him. >> vivishna maholty. >> that's okay. Thank you, mayor and

[5:21:28] commission members for providing me and the rest of your constituents with the opportunity to speak today.

[5:21:34] I'm a freshman at the university of florida and a member of gainesville is for people a group fighting for

[5:21:43] housing. I'm here today to speak in favor of both petitions. This proposed development is

[5:21:48] a much-needed part of gainesville's effort to alleviate our housing crisis.

[5:21:53] I'm originally from tampa, florida. I had chemistry toucher in my senior year named mr. K.

[5:22:09] he was an associate professor at the university of south florida. Despite this he struggled to

[5:22:16] afford the increasing rental rates in his apartment. His share of the rent had soared from nearly 800 to

[5:22:23] closer to 1400. I know that you can all empathize with his story. Why should a hard-working

[5:22:30] immigrant teacher struggle to afford housing near his place of work. Similarly, why should anyone

[5:22:36] in gainesville students and residents alike struggle to afford increasing housing cost?

[5:22:44] this complex along with all other new housing developments will work to reduce housing cost in

[5:22:51] gainesville. We should not discourage development in this already dense vibrant and walkable

[5:22:57] area of our city. We should, in fact, encourage this development. The proposal includes 10%

[5:23:03] workforce housing and it is located across from the already-constructed infinity hall dorms.

[5:23:10] this housing project with affordability units located in a dense bustling area. It's replacing a parking

[5:23:18] lot. I think that a housing building providing many units to our citizens sound

[5:23:23] a lot better than a parking lot. This proposal will protect and prevent uf students from

[5:23:30] pursuing housing in existing gainesville neighborhoods. And it will work to provide competition in the

[5:23:37] marketplace and against other housing units in the area. It will send a clear message

[5:23:41] to all constituents, we value affordability over aesthetics. Councilmembers, I strongly,

[5:23:49] strongly urge you to approve the land changes to tune of full 12 stories to maximize this housing development and

[5:23:57] build gainesville core into a more dense mixed use neighborhood. As well as to provide more

[5:24:04] housing units to uf students and local community members. Limiting the number of stories of this development

[5:24:10] is unnecessary. It will only prevent the full benefits of this project from taking effect.

[5:24:15] thank you very much for your consideration today. >> thank you. >> madam clerk.

[5:24:21] >> next speaker is peter mcneese followed by melanie barr. >> good evening

[5:24:33] commissioners, mr. Mayor. >> I'm a resident and a civil engineer and building contractor and licensed real

[5:24:46] estate broker. I've spent the better part of the last 15 years of my professional career building

[5:24:55] infill develop development projects in the university heights south area that are compatible with the historic

[5:25:02] building that are there now. I know it can be done right. Surely there's some limit as to what you will approve.

[5:25:11] if the applicant came with 20-story building would that be considered too much? What we found here is that

[5:25:19] there's a loophole that developers can use to circumvent if rules we have in place by offering a 10%

[5:25:28] workforce. They really are getting a windfall in 184 market rate student apartments within

[5:25:37] two books of -- blocks of the university of florida. I'm pro development. And I agree this parking lot

[5:25:45] should be developed. And it should be developed -- I would like to have seen something more

[5:25:52] compatible with the community. But I would like to encourage the commission not

[5:25:57] to expect the applicants to offer more than 10% workforce housing. Because if you are willing

[5:26:05] to accept 10% that's all they are going to offer. Where I as I think you should ask for more in

[5:26:10] return. Because this is a big ask. And that 100-foot buffer put in there by code to prevent

[5:26:17] these large multifamily projects from being built. This is the specific purpose of that buffer zone.

[5:26:25] the other thing is that developers are often very shrewd how they present this to you.

[5:26:33] they talk about market rate housing. But formula, that they use includes tioga and hale

[5:26:41] plantation which have high incomes. When you use the metropolitan gainesville

[5:26:45] area to calculate what the rents are going to be, it's almost double what they would be if you only

[5:26:52] included the median household income in the city of gainesville. People that live inside the

[5:27:00] perimeter of gainesville in general have -- they make half of what you make in that general metropolitan

[5:27:07] area that they would like to use when calculating rents. I ask you consider that as well and I know this has

[5:27:13] been recommended that you approve with conditions and perhaps that's something that is a condition that you

[5:27:20] can ask for that they change the calculous. >> clerk? >> melanie barr followed by

[5:27:38] jennifer murphy. >> hi. I think everybody knows who I am.

[5:27:43] I'm a historic preservationest. Back in the day when I first got involved in that you had

[5:27:49] to personally own historic house in order to preserve it. Because there was no

[5:27:54] historic districts. Back in '82, 40 years ago I bought my first historic house.

[5:28:06] I bought it to save it. Because people were closing in porches. Putting metal windows in.

[5:28:13] taking out footed tubs. I wanted to restore this house correctly. Now historic districts are

[5:28:20] enacted. And we hope that we can restore the neighborhoods correctly.

[5:28:24] and I'm going to show you this map. I'm showing you a map. You did see something like

[5:28:34] this earlier. And this is the site we're looking at today. So the historic district

[5:28:45] circles around this site. I know exactly why. Because I was out photographing houses and

[5:28:51] there was some lovely historic bungalows on this site. Beautiful high-quality

[5:28:58] bungalows because this was not a historic district that could be prevented. I saw this building being

[5:29:05] built. I saw one of the bungalows become a parking lot. Now we are here today

[5:29:10] talking about allowing a is 12-story building there. If we only had the historic district intact at that

[5:29:17] point we wouldn't be having this discussion. Now we have it. And I think as the staff

[5:29:23] person for the developer mentioned that on the perimeter, it's mostly five story building with one

[5:29:32] 8-story building. I think five-story buildings would be a good choice to have that building there.

[5:29:39] instead of what they are proposing. If you saw the picture it's a massive block.

[5:29:46] and if you are coming up the district, you are looking at the giant wall that blocks the sky or driving along.

[5:29:54] that's a concrete canyon. Very inappropriate for the center of the historic contradict.

[5:29:59] you see all the little bungalows here. That's what they will be looking at.

[5:30:03] this prompt is 100 feet from them, from the end of their property. And it's a terrible view.

[5:30:08] think about this visually. A lot of you were raised in gainesville or lived here a long time.

[5:30:14] and you would think you want to keep gainesville, gainesville. Another thing they didn't

[5:30:21] mention is the large trees at the perimeter. They show a sidewalk there. We need to keep gainesville

[5:30:26] green. We need to keep the trees and houses and the neighborhood.

[5:30:30] this is not a neighborly building. This is a massive block wall that will block the sky, be

[5:30:38] uncomfortable to drive-by. >> appreciate it. >> you're in a canyon. >> that's not part of the

[5:30:45] historic district. >> thank you. >> madam clerk. Hello, I'm brigitte murphy.

[5:30:57] I'm a master's student within the university of florida within the urban and regional planning

[5:31:04] department. As also a member of the historic board on the student seat it's really

[5:31:17] disheartening to see this drop for good planning ethics and community protection especially when

[5:31:22] it comes to historic preservation. I don't know if you have ever really visited these

[5:31:27] type of apartments, especially at night time. They are student housing apartments.

[5:31:33] it's the same type of rental properties. And I know affordable housing is an issue.

[5:31:38] but still it isn't being pushed for me. It doesn't seem like that's the focal point.

[5:31:44] just developing more units that are going to go to students and I've lived in gainesville for five years,

[5:31:51] which really isn't that long. But even during my short time here I've seen so many

[5:31:57] of the buildings come into neighborhoods. I live in the community north of campus.

[5:32:01] I have just -- the identity has completely changed. And now it's beginning east of campus.

[5:32:11] and we talked about dangerous precedents and things like that. It's true and I know you

[5:32:17] want development and it's good for the innovation district. At the certain point, the

[5:32:23] advisory boards do advice. Because they care. They are not elected. But they do care.

[5:32:28] that's why they come out. They why that go and take the time to do these things. Because it's important to

[5:32:33] their community the ones that they live in. I can't imagine in another five years what it will look

[5:32:42] like. How many more of the building and districts will be here.

[5:32:46] if historic district wasn't protected the way that it is. It's likely it wouldn't be

[5:32:50] there as well. The university heights south is well protected because it has protections.

[5:32:55] because it has the laws that protects it. I fully believe without them a bulldozer would have been

[5:33:01] in the future a long, long time ago. I don't think this should be approved.

[5:33:06] I think there's more compatible housing that can be built. Especially architecturally.

[5:33:13] it's sad to go with the one-floor brick and then continue up and considering it's 12 stories high and you

[5:33:18] will be faced with a solid silver wall after coming out of canopies and trees to kind of clashes.

[5:33:26] the mass of the building is ginormous. Across the street you have regular-sized home.

[5:33:37] if you approve it, you should be tough with the conditions of approval. Architecturally you should

[5:33:45] limit height. Don't be desperate spore development, because development will come to

[5:33:50] gainesville. And I think you should be more prideful and have more faith in your community.

[5:33:55] >> thank you. >> madam clerk. >> our next speaker is jennie tucker followed by

[5:34:00] robert mounds. >> hi. Mr. Mayor and the city commissioners, I'm jenny

[5:34:09] tucker. I'm very nervous. This is my second time in city hall.

[5:34:14] the first time I couldn't find the gate. I'm here. I'm propelled to tell my

[5:34:21] opinion. I'm strongly opposed to this project for three reasons. First, I want to acknowledge

[5:34:26] that the developers do very good job. They have very good sales method to show you selective

[5:34:34] picture of the historically preserved houses in the neighborhood. There are a lot of beautiful

[5:34:40] houses in the neighborhood and the pictures you see are selective. There are a lot more

[5:34:44] beautiful houses not shown. And also the developers present a force. They ask you between a

[5:34:55] parking lot and 12-story new building. But this is not real choice. The parking lot has been

[5:35:01] there because it has been waiting for a good opportunity to be developed. The default is not remaining

[5:35:10] a parking lot. The alternative could be a four-story beautiful house, beautiful building, also

[5:35:18] providing housing to the neighborhood. I don't think the developers presented feasible

[5:35:24] alternatives here to present their project. The second reason they talk about 10% house workforce

[5:35:34] housing. But the reality is that only students -- or mostly students live there.

[5:35:42] the 10% workforce housing given to how be students live there, very few other people would choose to live

[5:35:50] there. We know what students are. They are very active. And sometimes are loud.

[5:35:57] I just want to keep this in perspective. The second reason opposing it; this is a beautiful

[5:36:08] prehistory preservation area. Gainesville known for own speciality and beauty.

[5:36:12] it's not a miami. We don't want gainesville to become miami. Generations of faculty and

[5:36:20] students remember their time they have had at florida. One of the most important schools in the country and

[5:36:29] the best in the state. And they remember the memories that are spent. They didn't want to come

[5:36:35] back to see this brick wall. The third reason I'm against it. It's not fair.

[5:36:41] we have the historical preservation code. And houses in that area have been observing the code

[5:36:47] following the regulation. We have been trying hard to preserve what is there. To have new roofs and now

[5:36:58] you have a 12-story building just half the distance from here to there. That's a new 12-story

[5:37:08] building. >> that's your time. >> thank you so much. >> followed by jason

[5:37:14] sanchez. [inaudible] first, process. Very disappointed with an

[5:37:25] issue of this high public importance that you took a motion and tally-whacked your vote before you heard

[5:37:36] from the public. The meeting included nothing about the plan board. They didn't tell you today

[5:37:42] that the plan board voted this down by 4-2. Some of you know it. The backup didn't include

[5:37:51] citizen comment from the plan board. It didn't include the blistering critique of this.

[5:37:57] another developer. Who owns property across the street. I don't understand that.

[5:38:04] the developer tried to tell you there was three times. No it wasn't. Yes.

[5:38:10] partly but it was 4-2 against it. Dismiss it if you wish. They voted unanimously to

[5:38:22] oppose it. That wasn't in the back up either. Process, my god.

[5:38:28] the real thing boils down to the fact that you know if we were talking about building condominiums here which

[5:38:35] people in their 30s and 40s need which incoming faculty need and by the 2016 u.s. Strategic plan says what is

[5:38:45] needed in order to attract high-quality faculty. It might be a different story in terms of height and

[5:38:52] density. We're not talking about that. We're talking about the

[5:38:55] standard with two additional floors, with 10% workforce housing. Mostly filled with a student

[5:39:07] rental. Would a nurse or young professional couple want to live in that standard?

[5:39:12] is that realistic even at the cut rate? Why aren't developers motivated to build housing

[5:39:23] that people your age actually need and not more student housing. It's greed.

[5:39:29] under the existing zoning there's incentive for affordable housing for workforce housing and they

[5:39:36] could get the two extra floors from six to eight. Why is that not enough? Because of greed.

[5:39:44] going to 12 just to get what you would have gotten if you were building a six-story building.

[5:39:50] you can get eight. There's a reason why stepped down from downtown zoning to the one to two-story

[5:39:57] historic district. It's amazing to me that no one has mentioned that. They've acknowledged that,

[5:40:05] yes, we're marketing it to students by the bedroom just like every other student apartment building.

[5:40:12] are they selling condominiums. Is anyone going to live is there with a family and

[5:40:16] children? >> thank you. >> madam clerk. >> next speaker jason

[5:40:21] sanchez followed by thomas hawkins. >> thomas. I don't think mr. Sanchez is

[5:40:31] here. >> thank you, mr. Mayor. >> that looks good. When it sit up there on the

[5:40:51] plan board. Don't understand why people can't get it straight. I only brought a couple of

[5:40:56] copies. I knew I would have slides up here. I want to thank you

[5:41:01] mr. Mayor. I didn't know before romes meant what it meant to not be home in the evenings.

[5:41:09] thanks for what you have been doing for the last two terms. We in development code have

[5:41:15] this provision. Multifamily development adjacent to the historic district cannot have more

[5:41:20] than 6 dwelling units per building. We been talking about height.

[5:41:24] as though we're just asking for a little bit more. The height is not the limiting factor in this

[5:41:30] area. What guarantees a reasonable transition between the historic district form and

[5:41:36] the form allowed adjacent to the historic district is the transition area with the number of units per building

[5:41:45] is six. I think -- I would go through this quickly. We've seen this historic

[5:41:50] district. Land adjacent. That's your 100 foot buffer looks like.

[5:41:58] see the area shown in blue is the area where development is limited to six units per building.

[5:42:05] the proposal in this comp plan amendment is to allow up to 204 units per building.

[5:42:13] I know the applicant will split that between two structures. The comp plan amendment

[5:42:17] doesn't say how many per structure. But the change is not minor. It's absolutely blowing out

[5:42:24] of the water the standards that everybody else with a similarly situated property has to deal with.

[5:42:30] it's absolutely not a minor adjustment at all. That change is 3,300% increase.

[5:42:40] it's going to be split between two buildings we may look at something like 400% in 2000 and 800%.

[5:42:47] it's still absolutely massive increase. We have a legal term for what's going on here.

[5:42:51] it's spot zoning. When you destroy the zoning scheme that everyone else has to follow to give

[5:42:58] special preference to one property owner. That's spot zoning. It's a quote from the

[5:43:03] florida supreme court. I want to appreciate you commissioner the last time I was here.

[5:43:08] like three years ago you emphasized spot zoning is something we can't do. You're absolutely not

[5:43:14] supposed to. That's what this is. The bottom line is we can do better.

[5:43:20] the previous speaker noted that it's not a trade off between urban development and a parking lot.

[5:43:26] it's not like we have to take this project to get nothing. Lots of development is

[5:43:31] happening in our community consistent with our rules. And that is much better. I would ask you reject the

[5:43:40] proposed comp plan amendment and deny the motion town floor. I think we will see progress

[5:43:45] in the neighborhood that's better. >> thank you so much. >> thank you.

[5:43:49] >> just one more call from michael hill. >> thank you. >> thank you.

[5:43:56] >> also appreciate everyone sharing their thoughts. I will for the sake of my colleagues, share mine.

[5:44:06] I will not -- I will not start with the issue at-large, which is we have a significant lack of housing

[5:44:15] in our community. Specifically significant lack of housing in our urban core leading to escalating

[5:44:24] housing costs, lack of access to mobility, dependency on an automobile for any and all travel.

[5:44:34] and I will get specifically to this particular project. The first reason I support it and you know supported

[5:44:44] the original motion and certainly support the modified motion is that -- I'm sorry, did we

[5:44:55] not get a speaker. >> she's an effected party which is for the quasi additional portion which is

[5:45:03] the next item. >> to be an effected party for quasi-judicial item which is the next item.

[5:45:12] [inaudible] the first reason I support this is because we have heard from our neighbors

[5:45:30] consistently about their concern with displacement and gentrification in some of our historic

[5:45:36] neighborhoods. By building significant amounts of housing on land that does not displace.

[5:45:49] there's no better example of that than a parking lot. With this, you get significant amounts of new

[5:45:56] housing without forcing anybody out. It is in as we saw one of the most walkable, bikable

[5:46:08] and transit oriented neighborhoods in our city. In fact, I think probably the most.

[5:46:15] it -- as you saw it's also compatible with the surrounding development. This type of development

[5:46:20] exists on all sides. And we also saw that most of that development was within the 100-foot buffer.

[5:46:32] and received approval. Those developments have not destroyed the neighborhood. They have added vibrancy.

[5:46:42] they have added the opportunity for people to live, work and play in a compact area.

[5:46:49] I also -- I support that the -- while this would get approved as apud and pd. They are conforming to the

[5:46:59] standard for the zones which adds to the urban form. We have had countless hours of discussions about

[5:47:12] affordable housing. We understand the great cost of affordable housing if done by the city.

[5:47:20] we understand the significant barriers to affordable housing. We need to take advantage of

[5:47:31] every single unit of affordable housing that we can add to our stock that doesn't tap into the city's

[5:47:38] limited resources. And so that is the main reason I support the amended motion is that will include

[5:47:46] 7 families that are now able to live near where they work, where their kids go to school, where they shop and

[5:47:56] where they can access amenities. I cannot -- I cannot allow anybody to minimize the

[5:48:10] impact that, that has on those families that will take advantage of that. This project is not in a

[5:48:24] historic district. It is not. Other projects are in the buffer the same as this and,

[5:48:34] again, have not somehow ruined the neighborhood. In fact you heard many people today speak about how

[5:48:40] much pride they have in their neighborhood. To think somehow this project would tip the

[5:48:45] neighborhood, it will got. I think the economic data that was shown is significant.

[5:48:51] I also just want to point out that we need much more of this type of dense development to address our

[5:49:00] challenges with climate change. I hope that all of you have been able -- if you haven't

[5:49:05] read the full report at least the executive summary of the cool climate project done by the university of

[5:49:11] california berkeley. They conducted an extensive study of over 700 cities globally and looked at what

[5:49:20] the largest impact local government and local communities can have on climate change.

[5:49:26] by far the largest impact is greater urban density. It's not close to the next biggest impact.

[5:49:36] we also know through and, again, I will reference a study that the university of ucla put out which was

[5:49:46] really several different peer reviewed study on market housing cost and all new market rate housing

[5:49:57] lowers upward pressure on rents. Whether dedicated affordable or not.

[5:50:08] we have to stop finding ways to reduce housing in our community. We can go over a long list

[5:50:15] of housing projects that have come before this commission, or the commission across the

[5:50:20] street. And we have found ways to deny it. And that has further and

[5:50:26] further and further exacerbated our affordable housing crisis. This is a good project.

[5:50:34] you might not like how it looks. It might you know, I do appreciate the comment that

[5:50:44] I heard from one of our neighbors that don't we want to keep gainesville, gainesville?

[5:50:53] look, I grew up here. I was raised here. I was -- I went westwood and the university of florida.

[5:51:01] I flung burgers for ten years before I become a teacher. Gainesville changes.

[5:51:09] that's what I low about it. It's a dynamic city and it grows and evolves. There's no more appropriate

[5:51:17] place to have high density urban development than between the university of florida and our downtown.

[5:51:24] if we want to take the pressures off of our more traditional neighborhoods, the way the do that is offer

[5:51:31] this high-density housing that I guarantee you the day they open their doors will be 100% occupied.

[5:51:38] guaranteed. They will be preleased and on moving day every one of those including the

[5:51:46] affordable units will be occupied. That is a clear market signal that the demand for

[5:51:51] our housing is so much higher than our supply is able to offer, and so if you are interested in preserving

[5:51:58] more traditional neighborhoods this is absolutely something I encourage you to support.

[5:52:06] I know this is hard. Change is uncomfortable. It always has been. But there are far too many

[5:52:15] benefits and advantages to this proposal than there are and I meant there always are trade offs that will cause

[5:52:28] uncomfort or change. But not nearly enough for me to consider denial of this petition.

[5:52:39] I will support the motion on the floor, which is for the modified with the smaller lower heights smaller

[5:52:52] building and the larger main building. And with that, we will go back for another round of

[5:53:01] commission comment and then we will move to a vote. Commissioner saco. >> thank you to everyone who

[5:53:10] has commented. I have two points generally. I don't know which one to go first.

[5:53:16] let's go with this one. All this housing is going to be luxury housing. Because of where we are, not

[5:53:24] just in gainesville or the u.s., all housing is a luxury right now. And people don't have the

[5:53:30] luxury of saying, well I want to live in this type of housing. You need shelter.

[5:53:37] your kids need a place to sleep. Something is better than nothing.

[5:53:42] and I guarantee you that people who are on the gainesville housing authority wait list, those

[5:53:48] are hundreds of families will be incredibly grateful for this. As commissioner hayes-santos

[5:53:57] said earlier. It's something we can keep in perpetuity by law without a penny coming from the

[5:54:03] city. And to subsidize those units -- 27 units twelve months, at about let's say

[5:54:11] $850 for 20 years. That's millions of dollars. That we don't have to pay and we help at-risk families

[5:54:23] have shelter. And it's in shelter by the looking of it near amenities.

[5:54:31] I hate that it's come to this point. But all housing is now a luxury.

[5:54:38] and to the other point I don't like generalities. I don't like speaking in generalities.

[5:54:45] not everybody wants a single family home. Not everybody wants an apartment.

[5:54:51] I think some of the best times of my life living in the rental where the landlord took care of

[5:54:57] everything and I didn't lift a finger. That was awesome. When I was in family I

[5:55:02] wanted to different situation. People want different things.

[5:55:04] some people live in a house in gainesville. Some live apartment. Some in a condo by the

[5:55:11] beach. People do different things. People want different things.

[5:55:19] and to that end, people are very different. Every individual person is different.

[5:55:25] I say it every time. It happens in this chamber. Students are not criminals. I was a student at the

[5:55:35] university of florida. I didn't get arrested. It wasn't selling drugs out of my condo.

[5:55:39] I was not blasting music. I was not doing any of the things that every student -- the students that

[5:55:46] did show up -- unfortunately you were told you are all criminals that you are disruptive and will make

[5:55:52] noise and no one wants to be near you. That's not fair. You're not.

[5:55:56] you all seem very nice well spoken human beings. If we come into this room two miles from the

[5:56:05] university, please, please refrain from saying that students are a problem. Students contribute millions

[5:56:12] to our economy. Will the apartment have students? Yes.

[5:56:16] >> will it have families. >> yeah. Will some of the students be grad students who have

[5:56:21] families. People can be two things. >> yeah. Housing the housing.

[5:56:27] people who live in house ring people. Thank you, my -- mr. Mayor. >> up next commissioner

[5:56:36] ward. >> thank you mr. Mayor. >> many, many thoughts here. For me and obviously from

[5:56:41] everybody else. One of the things we haven't talked about that, that weighs on my mind is that

[5:56:52] zoning map on my computer while the presentations were going on. Literally across the street

[5:57:00] as the applicant pointed out is 12 to 14 stories. All downtown. Some of that is actually

[5:57:13] already been raised and then they gave up on the project. Not to take the building down to build 12 to 14

[5:57:23] stories. I know this is property that's available. I get it.

[5:57:26] it's available because it's a weird lot. What we're trying to do -- what the applicant is

[5:57:34] trying to do. It's not a judgment. It's a reality. You try to make the most you

[5:57:39] can out of an opportunity on a really weird lot. The reason it's a weird lot is because this body some

[5:57:48] years ago literally cut corners to create the most -- largest possible historic district even

[5:58:00] though it really didn't fit. They had done what made sense looking at that map and cut the historic

[5:58:08] district off at 2nd avenue, where it made sense, we wouldn't be having this discussion at all.

[5:58:16] but they did. They cut corners there to try to get a little bit more and created a problem for

[5:58:21] folks down the road. The parking lot is going to be built on. It sounds like we're going

[5:58:31] to get 12 stories tonight. I'm not voting for that. But we've got to stop and, again, this is not a

[5:58:41] judgment against the applicant. But just because a salesman gives us a story does not

[5:58:47] mean that, that's the only story. The market has limitations. And it's absolutely true

[5:58:59] that supply and demand is a real thing. I don't want to get into the supply of housing.

[5:59:08] but there's the opportunity to build 12 or 14 stories on many blocks heading east from this very property.

[5:59:17] this very property is by our own rules available for a mix of four-stories, and eight stories.

[5:59:28] that's fairly dense. It's not as dense as what the applicant asking for. It's okay to ask for it.

[5:59:36] we don't always have to say yes when someone asks us to bend the rules. It's not bending the rules.

[5:59:43] we built the back door into the process. Because times it's necessary.

[5:59:49] it's not always necessary. We are essentially ignoring with the of our own maps to make this happen.

[6:00:05] when there are not necessarily available to this developer right now today, but when there are

[6:00:12] available many, many blocks of 12 to 14 stories to be built on by our own rules. I don't think that it is our

[6:00:25] job to guarantee profit. And I think in other circumstances you would all agree with me on that.

[6:00:37] I'm a little bit frustrated in our willingness -- a lot frustrating in our willingness ignore the rules

[6:00:46] that we put in place. Thank you. >>mayor: commissioner duncan-walker

[6:00:54] >> thank you mr. Mayor. I will try to be brief. I don't want to ignore our rules.

[6:01:01] I don't want to ignore the plan board. I don't want to ignore the historic preservation board.

[6:01:08] I don't want to ignore existing community that we seem to always allow to slide down to the bottom of

[6:01:14] the list whenever anything like this comes up. There are countless people who are in need of

[6:01:25] affordable housing. I will tell you that I can appreciate what seems to now be becoming a trend of

[6:01:32] including workforce for affordable housing in new developments, you've heard us say countless time.

[6:01:38] we wish its more. It's not enough. And that's the truth. But this is what you are

[6:01:44] bringing to the table. That's fine. Because it's your project. You get to bring what you

[6:01:48] want. And we all get to support what we want. I won't be able to support

[6:01:56] this. I want to take just a moment to say to my colleagues and thank you, commissioner

[6:02:11] hayes-santos for noting my comments at the county. It's truly what I believe. In the spirit of the

[6:02:16] innovation that we all cheer on and want to see, to me a couple of things. First, the inclusion of even

[6:02:33] more affordable workforce housing in projects coming up. We will not do that.

[6:02:39] to my colleagues and I will say and this is unrelated to this. What would really be

[6:02:44] innovative if we actually got behind the county and supported the letter that they just wrote regarding

[6:02:52] the affordable housing developer and relocating that. That could come right down

[6:02:58] to the urban core on a city-owned property. Has nothing to do with this. Possibly a future

[6:03:05] conversation. But if we're going to talk about affordable housing, to me that's the affordable

[6:03:11] housing conversation. I appreciate it being included. Please don't get my wrong.

[6:03:17] but when I think about it. That's how I think about it. It's more than 10%. Thank you all for bringing

[6:03:29] it forward. I won't be able to support this tonight. Thank you.

[6:03:37] >> thank you mr. Mayor. >> I think two things. I think we're kidding ourselves if you think that

[6:03:44] a family of four is going to move into a project with -- that is student housing.

[6:03:51] it's not going to happen. You're not achieving what you think you are. That's one.

[6:03:57] two, I think going forward and I would like this going forward to staff, when people come in with the pud,

[6:04:06] it's not 10% housing. If they want to develop here in gainesville, let's go to 20%.

[6:04:13] let's go to 25%. Let's make it really, really matter. Because 10% does not.

[6:04:19] thank you. >> commissioner hayes-santos. >> thank you, mayor.

[6:04:24] >> we are following the rules and the process and our comp plan which prioritizes affordable

[6:04:29] housing and protecting the environment and moving forward projects that reduce urban sprawl.

[6:04:34] thank you, mayor. >> thank you. >> really do appreciate all of the conversation.

[6:04:39] it's you know these are not simple issues. You know if they were, then they would sail through

[6:04:47] without a lot of comment. I do appreciate folks taking time to share their thoughts and a lot of work has gone

[6:04:54] into this. And you know, sincere and thoughtful comments from all my colleagues.

[6:05:01] with that madam clerk, I will move to roll call vote in the motion is essentially for the middle what we see

[6:05:10] up here the middle proposal but with the reduced height on the smaller building that we see on the right with the

[6:05:19] other conditions attached. Madam clerk. [roll call] >> that motions passes 4-3

[6:05:37] with duncan-walker and chestnut in die scent. >> the next item quasi-judicial-rezoning from

[6:06:06] urban transsecond. >> we will be in recess until 8:30. >> welcome back.

[6:18:08] we're call this meeting back to order. The item has been read into the record.

[6:18:14] v-2 on rezoning of the urban transect zone to planned development. This is the companion zoning

[6:18:27] for the land use we just heard for any of you following along at home. >> thank you mr. Mayor.

[6:18:35] I don't have a separate presentation or a substantively different presentation for the zoning

[6:18:41] portion of this. But, again, I'm happy to answer questions on it or go through any of these details

[6:18:50] as needed. >> okay. We'll just ask you to be on standby in case there's

[6:18:56] follow up questions. But we appreciate that. That's pretty much standard procedure when we have

[6:19:02] companion. We don't do two different presentations. The applicant, would you

[6:19:07] like to give a presentation? >> yes. >> thank you. Come on up.

[6:19:18] >> I'm aicp certified planner. I've been a planner for 32 years.

[6:19:25] we appreciate your support during the land use. I will go through the zoning.

[6:19:29] I may go rapidly. Because this a quasi-judicial proceeding. I want the facts in the

[6:19:36] record. And hook everything that we said from the application, the future land use

[6:19:41] application as well as our presentation staff's presentation all combined into this quasi-judicial

[6:19:47] proceeding. Quickly, this did go through the public notification process and the neighborhood

[6:19:51] workshop was held. We had two representative from the university of florida and one business

[6:19:55] owner attended. It's process began in october of 2021 and we're here september 15th, 2022

[6:20:02] for first reading in front of the commission. The request that was before you a moment ago was a small

[6:20:08] kale comprehensive plan amendment on 1.2 acres. And now you are hearing the rezoning application which

[6:20:14] would be a dt. The only that will implement pud planned use district land use zone and we're

[6:20:22] requesting the planned developing classification. We believe this is important project because it has a key

[6:20:27] innovation district adjacent to it and with two multistory building containing exemplary

[6:20:40] residential. Added urban housing supply and diversity. As well as market rate 10%

[6:20:46] of the unit are workforce housing. We can't go higher because financial underwriters won't

[6:20:52] will let us go there. We are in fact limited to 10% for our banking industry in the opportunities that we

[6:21:01] feel are viable here this helps achieve the highest best use of innovative urban location which is currently

[6:21:07] a parking lot. We seek to improve the form safety and the pedestrian realm of the corridor along

[6:21:13] 2nd avenue and 10th street and the alley way that is between the two structures that will increase the

[6:21:20] diversity in gainesville urban core and workforce housing which transit friendly.

[6:21:28] it's located approximately 2 blocks from the university of florida. One block to the northwest

[6:21:32] of innovation district. And about three blocks from santa fe college downtown center.

[6:21:40] this is in an area tremendously redeveloping over the last several years. And, in fact, this project

[6:21:45] sits in between several other projects of similar size, scale and mass and number of stories.

[6:21:50] this area of town is a very highly mobile area meaning that it supported walkability on said walks.

[6:21:58] bicycle lanes, transit. It has the ability to not be dependent on single occupant automobiles.

[6:22:05] in this building we will be putting several multi-modal strategies related to this. Scores a 93 on the

[6:22:11] walkability of the walk score looking at city's all over the united states of america.

[6:22:15] there will be a shared residential vehicle program. Which will be partnering with zip car, car to go and

[6:22:21] other similar services here. And there will be preferred parking for green vehicles. The structure will

[6:22:26] incorporate structured mechanical parking lifts in there to get vehicles into the building.

[6:22:32] and electrical vehicle charging station. There's a scooter sharing and charging program

[6:22:37] associated with this and generous bicycle amenities including shared and maintenance facilities for

[6:22:43] the resident. This adjacent to transit routes in the urban core of gainesville.

[6:22:50] we're looking at second avenue. We are trying in our design to preserve many of the

[6:22:56] trees that are out there that exist in, in between the actual backup curb and the property line.

[6:23:03] I know there was a comment during the land use phase of that. We're working to try to

[6:23:07] preserve those because they are out further. And we also want to be cognizant of the gainesville

[6:23:12] regional utilities system that's in there and cause the least amount of disruption stormwater and so

[6:23:19] forth along those areas. This is looking down the alleyway which will be reconstructed.

[6:23:23] the utilities will go underground here. That increase dramatically. The existing parking land

[6:23:35] and medical building will be replaced by multistory structure. And this will effectively

[6:23:41] take land that is urban, mixed out high intensity that's adjacent to turban core land use across the

[6:23:48] street and change this to planned use district. Request then is to place the only zoning that is come

[6:23:55] patable with the planned use district bying the planned develop over the top of u-9 underlying zoning.

[6:24:03] the reason we request unique features about this. There's 100-foot buffer that intersects other buildings

[6:24:11] and causes the form of the building to be as depicted in the slides previously. This will take the building

[6:24:18] height up to approximately 126 feet, 1 inch which is slightly taller than what's allowed in u-9.

[6:24:28] this increases the density from 125 units to 204. And at this point in the presentation I would like to

[6:24:36] make a comment about some paper slides that were placed on here that says this is 3,000% increase.

[6:24:43] that's improper allocation and improper application of the actual city of gainesville code.

[6:24:50] that same language and that same discussion was proffered at the plan board and the planned board your

[6:24:57] plan board attorney mr. Shaun mcdermott stated that not the way the land development code is applied.

[6:25:05] if you are in the zone one touch of that zone causes only six dwelling units to to applicable across the

[6:25:13] entirety of the property. He opined the city has twice prevailed in challenges with the department of

[6:25:20] administrative hearing in tallahassee and in twice now has been ratified and the fact that the stepdown only

[6:25:26] applies to the area that is within the buffer. That being said, we are seeking to effectively have

[6:25:35] dt type land use parking adjacent to infinity hall. As you can see behind other buildings on first avenue,

[6:25:44] one block to the north side of this their exist building that are already penetrating into the buffer and four

[6:25:50] stories and eight stories along university avenue and not appearing. We're seeking specifically

[6:25:56] from land development section. The proposed pd development standards are largely

[6:26:07] consistent in terms of storefront, street treatment, set backs, a minimum set backs along here

[6:26:16] as well as compensating for the fact there's an existing roundabout at 2nd and 12th that we have to work around.

[6:26:23] the requirements aren unchanged so the code is implemented through this process.

[6:26:30] this action will in perpetuity place workforce housing at 50% of the area -- adjusted median

[6:26:41] income for the gainesville area in that building and one bedroom will be 686 and two bedroom will be 823.

[6:26:49] about 1,000 less than current market cost. The workforce housing is needed in the community.

[6:26:59] we incorporated that into this. We feel this is questioning to bolster the long-term

[6:27:05] viable of the urban core. We do have an existing memorandum of understanding that has been adopted by the

[6:27:13] gainesville housing authority. You can see pam davis' signature on here prior to

[6:27:20] the public hearing earlier this spring. This property is consistent with the land development

[6:27:25] code 30-3.14. That's why it heard before you in the public hearing. That's why heard at the

[6:27:33] planning board. Because it's consistent with criteria of 30-3.14. Meets all the criteria and

[6:27:40] twice now your staff both at the planning board, staff report and the city commission staff report have

[6:27:45] told you that their recommendation and professional guidance is to adopt the rezoning

[6:27:50] amendment. Therefore, under article 3 of planned development this property and this request

[6:27:57] before you meets all the criteria of the land development code and also in section 30-3.15.81.

[6:28:07] flexibility sustainability using land and infrastructure. Reduces transportation needs

[6:28:12] conserves energy and maximizing preservation of natural resources because wear not working in a

[6:28:18] greenfield. Land development code 30-3.15.8.2 allows for integration that would not

[6:28:28] be provided for in other districts. The pd allowing us to do that across here because we

[6:28:33] have different sized buildings as we also have different density being considered here.

[6:28:39] land development code 30-3.15.8.3 will allow outstaying and inknow surveytive nonresidential

[6:28:47] development that integrate housing type. We have workforce housing and internal and external

[6:28:54] comfortable travel as we talked about here. We will be able to have people walk, bicycle,

[6:28:59] schooler, take transit and other means to get to myriad of locations in and around the urban area.

[6:29:06] 30-3.15a4 allows flexibility to be changing needs in our society changing technologies and economics.

[6:29:15] and consumer preference and allows forking newity and imagination in the planning and development of large

[6:29:21] tracks. This relatively small track. These things still apply. Urban lifestyle and for

[6:29:28] housing. The pd introduces new housing to gainesville. It's residents and enhances

[6:29:35] access an opportunity for all. 33.15.a.5. Coordinated building in

[6:29:45] relationship with in-fill development. Allows coordinated develop of two building on small

[6:29:51] in-fill site. Eliminates the lack of planning or piecemeal development.

[6:29:55] it's pedestrian scale and the major folkous of the redevelopment that follow rezoning along there and has

[6:30:02] residential units that will open to the street front and sidewalk area. Pedestrian realm enhancement

[6:30:07] include widened sidewalk and streetscaping. Removes redundant driveway cuts and pedestrian driveway

[6:30:16] sidewalk conflicts around the entirety of the perimeter. Section review criteria hat

[6:30:24] been met. City staff testified twice. This conforms with consistency with the plan

[6:30:31] external compatibility has been demonstrated as well as the intensity of the develop.

[6:30:36] plaza and recreational areas will be included throughout the building plan and some places on the roof.

[6:30:43] environmental constraints there are none on the site. There's no floodplains no other environmental concerns

[6:30:48] and external transportation access and internal will occur from the core of the site from the alley for

[6:30:55] vehicles and then all other units and amenity will have access to public street the parking structure on the

[6:31:01] north side. Lastly it provides for range of transportation choices because resident can use

[6:31:06] cars, bicycles and other vehicles as well as transit lines. The reason we request this

[6:31:11] because the historic district creates a unique little pocket and thereby places a buffer around

[6:31:17] portions of this property and so only certain areas can be developed to the actual massing of what the

[6:31:26] requested. We conducted research and the property value analysis of all surrounding

[6:31:30] properties and looked at the year 2016, 27, 28, under no scenarios into any other real estate value depreciate

[6:31:44] when larger building were built in the district. We looked cascades and also the hub to the north.

[6:31:52] there's no evidence at all this will hurt or injure the property values of the surrounding properties.

[6:31:58] moreover there's not any properties that surround the property that are homestead. Every single property around

[6:32:03] there is a commercial rental property. And as stated we are be removing driveway connection

[6:32:10] points and session point with sidewalk and only access from the alleyway internal to the actual

[6:32:17] block. I'm showing the elevation. But now showing the street view.

[6:32:22] parking lot will be replaced by building that has large glass front facade. It will make the second

[6:32:33] avenue safer for pedestrians as well as having many pedestrian doors and actual residential unit that will

[6:32:39] open on to the street. And this view shows on 12th street north of the roundabout shows how the

[6:32:47] building designed to compliment the infinity hall across the street with railing to prevent this to

[6:32:53] become ad hoc skateboard park. This area is looking at directly north from second

[6:33:01] avenue from the roundabout showing there's a large gathering area at the entrance to the building

[6:33:07] without door social places. Part of the actual pd. Then down second avenue you see there's not only doors

[6:33:16] going into residential unit but alcoves within the building that allow additional social

[6:33:22] interaction and people to study or invite friends over and have like a live, play, study environment right here

[6:33:29] along second avenue here. Over the course of the project we looked at several designs.

[6:33:36] during the course of the project we had memorandum of understanding executed with the housing authority and

[6:33:40] the last design that was brought forward single blade along second in which we changed about 15 minutes

[6:33:47] ago. And you are looking at hybrid alternative of this building here with the rear

[6:33:54] building dropped down within the historic district to represent 271 units with 698 to 700 beds.

[6:34:03] we'll have to get the math exact. This will deliver 27 workforce housing units into

[6:34:09] the community. There was resolution adopted that brought out some language about this would

[6:34:17] set precedent. Based on research following the planning board we looked at the actual historic

[6:34:21] district covering this portion of the city, and noted that immediately across the street infinity

[6:34:27] hall has five storyings within the 100-toot buffer. To north the hub on university has four story

[6:34:34] and 8 stories within the buffer. To the west collar manor five story building within

[6:34:40] the buffer. Further to the south, is lynn court which is five stories within the buffer.

[6:34:46] on the outside of invocation cascades five story building within the 100-foot of buffer.

[6:34:55] all different direction north, east, west and south that buffer has allowed five story buildings.

[6:35:02] there's no precedent staff. City staff recommended in the planning board report they approve the project.

[6:35:10] they had 3-3 vote. They asked for one more vote to come to the commission. And then the planning board

[6:35:16] gave us 4-2 to come forward to you. City staff reviewed their professional staff report

[6:35:21] and have concluded again this should be approved with conditions as you did in your last, you will support

[6:35:27] this and I'm sorry I had to read that fast. Now I know how you feel when you ask me to read

[6:35:34] something. >> did you want to add something? >> mr. Mayor, attorney for

[6:35:42] the applicant, very briefly. Because this quasi-judicial hearing. I want to be clear that we

[6:35:49] are moving and offering the chw presentation from the land use hearing this evening as well as the

[6:35:56] zoning hearing we are in now. The staff reports for both land-use and zoning.

[6:36:01] the land use and zoning applications submitted by chw and the record of the plan board proceeding and

[6:36:08] the entire record of the land-use proceedings that you heard this evening. Thank you very much.

[6:36:14] >> thank you very much. I appreciate it. Thank you. Turn back to commission.

[6:36:19] commissioner hayes-santos. >> I move petition pb-21-0020 with conditions and modified as necessary to

[6:36:29] meet the direction given. >> second. >> madam clerk, do you clear the motion?

[6:36:40] [inaudible] consistent with approval from the land use item. Second.

[6:36:50] commissioner arreola, madam clerk anyone signed up to speak for this item? >> vihsne, taylor simmons.

[6:37:08] melanie barr, brigitte murphy. Jenny tucker. Robert max, jason sanchez.

[6:37:15] >> thank you then we'll turn back to the commission and they will call a vote. [roll call]

[6:37:31] >> motion passes 4-3 with duncan-walker and chestnut in dissent. Land use change 1.63 acres

[6:37:42] of property located at 1905 south main street. An ordinance of the city of gaines, florida amending the

[6:37:50] future land use map of the comprehensive plan by changing the land use category of approximately

[6:37:56] 1.63 acres of property generally located at 1905 south main street. As more specifically

[6:38:03] described in this ordinance. Providing a repealing clause and providing an effective date.

[6:38:09] >> we won't go through that yet. This is legislative matter for the land use change.

[6:38:15] I will go right to you. >> I will be presenting ld-2200005 the land use change and then the

[6:38:33] associated zoning that goes along with it which ends in a four there. I will be going through a

[6:38:43] couple of slides here. But fortunately, I feel like a fair amount of my work has been done since a lot of

[6:38:51] conversation and discussion has been pud. This is undoing a pud and some land use decisions that

[6:38:58] were made in the past. So for the land use it's changing from office to the urban mixed use.

[6:39:05] and the office designation really was established at the time to be underlying or supportive of the pd that

[6:39:12] was established at that time. That pd zoning was very, very restrictive and

[6:39:19] prescriptive and is directly written or crafted to support an office and pretty much strictly just office

[6:39:28] and specifically what you all may remember or recognize as the george young office that has been

[6:39:34] vacant for sometime now. And so really as a practical matter or practical nature of this it's to remove that

[6:39:44] antiquated land use and replace it with a more current and appropriate land use and then zoning

[6:39:51] ultimately. You can see the project location here between south main street southeast 16th.

[6:39:59] this is wastewater treatment facility. And, of course, south main street here.

[6:40:05] down in the southwest corner is the outer age of the kirkwood neighborhood here. Which then extends to the

[6:40:13] south and the west of that direction. And actually on this slide, I will go ahead and point

[6:40:19] out, I will speak to it a little bit later. There is the -- there's a water conveyance here that

[6:40:25] is at least part creek and part manmade that then flows to the south and connects with coakley pond and

[6:40:36] ultimately sweetwater branch which flows into the wetlands pack. There was some discussion in

[6:40:40] the planning board and also acting environmental coordinator I will go ahead and go over some of those

[6:40:46] issues there. This is the underlying land use. As I said it was to sort of

[6:40:55] support the desire at the time to have the george f. Young and you will notice around it that there are

[6:41:03] urban mixed use to the north here already which also you will see have zoning assigned to them.

[6:41:10] residential multifamily to the east. The conservation that's associated with some of the

[6:41:16] resource here. Conservation area that as we discussed at some previous items some weeks ago is

[6:41:25] largely a buffer from the multifamily to the north and the single family neighborhood that is

[6:41:32] kirkwood to the south and west here. Also important to point that this office designation even

[6:41:40] though it's 1.63 acres the next closest office land use designation is more than a half mile away.

[6:41:50] this is the zoning that shows the existing pd. This pd is the one that we're really discussing

[6:41:58] here. You can also see that roughly the same time other pd was used for this site

[6:42:07] the land was tailored and crafted to support or be associated with the repair shop that's on the corner

[6:42:13] here as we spoke about in the previous item this simply is really not the way that planning approaches the

[6:42:20] application of zoning or land use today. X currently established on this site, and it is one of

[6:42:37] those zones and this becomes an important criteria for the applying zoning that I will go over.

[6:42:51] these are the project details for the site. You can see you can see the existing land use and

[6:43:00] zoning. It's 13,000 square feet of office space never fully built out.

[6:43:05] there's the existing georgia f. Young site there today. Just the one office building.

[6:43:11] and again it's vacant and has been vacant for quite sometime. The proposed land use and

[6:43:25] zoning will go to the urban mixed use which is 60 dwelling units per acre by right.

[6:43:31] and then with a special use permit that could be increased and then the associated zoning is the u-6

[6:43:39] which is the 50 dwelling units per acre by right. To as a note when the applicant came to staff and

[6:43:50] requested or sought feedback on what we would support or be supportive of in this area.

[6:43:56] we suggested to go ahead and use the u-8 zoning that would make that one solid district in the area and

[6:44:05] after neighborhood workshop and some neighborhood feedback the applicant came back with a request for

[6:44:12] slightly less intense zoning districts. Just a note that there's been some of that back and

[6:44:18] forth and listening while the project has been developed before bringing it to the planning board and

[6:44:25] you here this evening. It is important to point out, though, of course that this is a significant

[6:44:33] change, of course. The change in the land use will go something that's very restrictive and

[6:44:39] prescriptive to something that is what we are more familiar with today on projects that we see

[6:44:47] recently and currently. Some of the criteria for the changes to the land use, again, as usual.

[6:44:58] I won't go through each one of these in complete total detail as the staff report goes over that.

[6:45:05] but I do want to take the opportunity to go back to the environmental impacts and constraints here.

[6:45:11] and I will go back to that first slide just to point out again that this is the beginning of a creek and the

[6:45:20] more natural creek. It turns into what we would consider as the natural creek to the rear of this

[6:45:28] tanglewood apartments down here. We didn't evaluate in detail what the environmental

[6:45:34] resource is. This close to the highway. Because it does not actually go on to the property and

[6:45:44] over time what happened here is that any of the water that did originally and I mean prior to the city being

[6:45:51] developed, did flow to the south and east here and over time it has been developed over this intersection and

[6:45:58] really today what was possibly in the distance past is a creek is now in a pipe and runs under south

[6:46:07] main street. It is a man made water conveyance system. And that has different

[6:46:13] applications for what gets protected in the comprehensive plan and the so really in effect here, what

[6:46:21] could happen at the most, this would be treated as a totally natural creek. If we evaluated it and if that

[6:46:29] is what the resource assessment came back as. And in that case. During that development, during

[6:46:36] the application for development, the maximum distance from the top -- the brink and slope of brink is 150 feet of a buffer.

[6:46:46] it can go all the way down to 35 feet and we make that an assessment or judgment when we get an actual assessment of the

[6:46:58] feature. That would not have a direct impact on the land use change or the zoning necessarily.

[6:47:07] we'll go back to the criteria are to the land use changes here. And we'll go for the short

[6:47:23] version in the land development code. And then this, of course also goes through the rezoning

[6:47:31] criteria. And one of the aspects here that I briefly mentioned is that there is a requirement that it

[6:47:42] be at least ten acres and we have discussed this ten acre limitation and other petitions if we wanted to bring it up here

[6:47:50] this evening. It's adjacent to a transect zone. That limitation does not apply

[6:47:58] in this case. I did mention that there is a significant difference in the umu versus the office land use,

[6:48:05] and the difference between the pd zoning and the u-6 zoning that's being requested. And of course it's important to

[6:48:14] acknowledge the potential maximums. However, it's -- staff believes it's the narrowness of the uses

[6:48:21] allowed today that's left the property vacant and we believe that the flexibility of the umu land use designation will

[6:48:30] appropriately guide future land uses and allow things like what is being proposed in reality today, like day care, which is

[6:48:39] not currently allowed on the site. And with that, staff recommends approval of ld-22-00005 and

[6:48:51] ld-22000004 zoning without conditions. And if there are any questions, happy to answer them, the

[6:49:01] applicant is here as well. And I believe has a presentation. >> thank you very much.

[6:49:06] we'll invite the applicant or their designee up to make their presentation. >> I'm clay swagger and I'd like

[6:49:37] to highlight a few things in addition to what has already been presented to you. This property is located at 1905

[6:49:43] south main street. It's 1.6 acres. The old george f. Young engineering building.

[6:49:54] there are two requests for you tonight, the land use change from office to urban mixed use umu, and the rezoning from td to

[6:50:04] u6, I'll talk about that in a moment. There's some action needed by the city in our opinion.

[6:50:11] there's a new owner. This pd is expired. There's really no modern zoning regulations that apply to this

[6:50:18] property. And because of those reasons we're before you tonight asking for these map changes.

[6:50:25] this is the existing city land use map showing the land use. You can see the urban mixed use leads to the northwest and

[6:50:36] northeast in multifamily to the east and the proposed land use map tonight is umu in the -- I don't know what color that is

[6:50:49] it. Lighter purple? The zoning map today is pd planned development.

[6:50:57] this property was approved as a pd. The place up the street was also done as a pd.

[6:51:16] that's a step down from the u8 zoning. Adjacent to the property to the north and to the northwest.

[6:51:31] the building has been vacant now pretty much the entirety of 2022, waiting for potential action on these zoning changes.

[6:51:43] one of the first renters could be a day care. We had a neighborhood workshop back in december.

[6:51:53] there are quite a few neighbors from the kirkwood neighborhood that came out. And we're concerned about some

[6:51:59] of the potential uses of the property. Because of that, we did proactively as applicant decide

[6:52:07] to lower our request on the zoning from u8 to u6. That takes more of the high intensity uses off the table.

[6:52:14] those are itemized and there are some others. Mini-storage hotels, car washes, vehicle sales and repair.

[6:52:39] the pd is expired, we have a vacant building. Back in 2017 the city instituted the transect zoning plan.

[6:52:50] and the properties to the north of us were put in u-8 zoning. Many of the old pd's were not put -- were not changed into

[6:53:01] transect zoning, if they were it would already be zoned u8 is my estimation. There are several policies that

[6:53:08] show consistency with the comprehensive plan. Most of them are regarding revitalizing urban areas,

[6:53:18] discouraging sprawl. We have facilities in the area. It's really ripe for some new development activity right along

[6:53:27] main street which is an arterial roadway. This is another policy discussing the discouragement of

[6:53:34] urban sprawl by redevelopment in urban areas. As I mentioned, I don't want to repeat myself, but there are

[6:53:45] multiple facets of why this is compatible with the area, with the land use and zoning pattern to the north and the step down

[6:53:52] approach on this property. And also consistency with multiple family zoning to the east.

[6:54:00] there are no environmental features on the property, no wetlands, no flood plains, no creeks, no surface waters, there

[6:54:07] are potentially some of those to the south, but they're not on this particular site. If any redevelopment would come

[6:54:14] along, they would have to comply with any set backs that would apply at that time. The application would support

[6:54:19] the urban redevelopment concept. And there are public facilities available to serve the property. There are certain criteria as

[6:54:30] forest mentioned when you propose a transect zoning you need to have at least 10 acres, and the pd right now has old

[6:54:41] antiquated references to a code that's no longer in effect, none of us have a copy of it probably in this building.

[6:54:48] and we've got the urban transect zoning to the north. So the plan board did hear this item, and I believe unanimously

[6:54:55] recommended approval. Your staff recommends approval, we believe that we've met all the criteria for you to consider

[6:55:01] and approve these items, and with that, I'd appreciate your consideration on it, and be happy to answer any questions

[6:55:08] you have tonight. >> appreciate it. With that, we'll move back to the commission.

[6:55:13] are there any further questions or is there a motion? Commissioner hayes-santos? >> thank you, mayor.

[6:55:21] I move ordinance 2022-424 on adoption reading by title only. >> second. >> mayor: madam clerk, do you

[6:55:33] have anyone signed up to speak to this item? >> no. >> mayor: we'll move back to the

[6:55:38] commission for a roll call vote. >> commissioner duncan walker? >> aye. >> commissioner arreola?

[6:55:44] >> aye. >> commissioner saco? >> aye. >> commissioner chestnut?

[6:55:48] >> aye. >> commissioner ward? >> aye. >> commissioner hayes-santos?

[6:55:52] >> aye. >> mayor poe? >> aye. That is approved unanimously.

[6:56:05] the next item? >> ordinance number 211146 a an ordinance of the city of gainesville florida, amending

[6:56:14] the future land use map of the comprehensive plan by changing the land use category of approximately 13.943 acres

[6:56:24] generally located northeast of the intersection of sw willis ton road and sw 13th street and west of southwest 13th street

[6:56:35] and south of southwest 36th place. >> mayor: I'm sorry I was confused.

[6:56:44] before we do that, can we take up the companion zoning item we just heard and come back to this one?

[6:56:50] >> okay. >> mayor: I apologize. It's simpler. We're going to come back to the

[6:56:56] one you're interested in. >> z 1? >> ordinance number 211225 an ordinance of the city of

[6:57:09] gainesville florida, amending the zoning map atlas by rezoning approximately 1.63 acres of property generally located at

[6:57:18] 1905 south main street. Providing directions to the city manager, severability clause, repealing clause and effective

[6:57:25] date. >> mayor: thank you, mr. Edelston. >> mr. Edelston with the

[6:57:31] department of sustainable development. This is the same presentation that is for the companion, I am

[6:57:37] here to answer any questions you may have outstanding. It is. I believe it's been requested we

[6:57:45] have a formal quasi judicial hearing. I'm going to turn to our city attorney for some guidance.

[6:57:52] >> thank you, mr. Mayor, and I'll try to be brief. As you know, the commission sits for a general zoning case, as

[6:58:01] opposed to setting policy, a proceeding is required. Rule 13 of your city commission rules provide the procedures for

[6:58:10] conducting with formal and quasi formal hearings. The commission will hear all testimony offered, examine the

[6:58:17] evidence presented and deliberate and a motion will be made. An informal hearing as we made

[6:58:23] earlier this evening, the formal hearing is an oral order. The written order be placed on the commission agenda for

[6:58:39] approval. Additionally, your rules, rule 13-c set forth the order of presentation a formal quasi

[6:58:49] judicial proceeding if one is requested by a party or an affected party. That order, I'll run through it

[6:58:56] quickly, first a, determination of affected party status, swearing-in of all the parties, disclosure of any inadvertent ex

[6:59:05] parte communication, introduction of the matter by the staff, the petitioner's presentation, staff

[6:59:11] presentation. Any affected party for or against the presentation. A rebuttal, presentation by the

[6:59:17] petitioner staff and then a closing by the parties and affected parties following public comment and deliberation

[6:59:29] by the commission. So the first order to proceed here is to determine if there has been a request for a formal

[6:59:39] hearing by a person considering themselves as an affected party. >> mayor: can you give us guidance on what determines what

[6:59:50] is or isn't an affected party. >> in general, someone who has an interest in property, real property within 400 feet of the

[6:59:58] subject property. We do have one individual who has asserted affected party status.

[7:00:08] I'm not sure if it's by virtue of owning property within 400 feet of the subject property or having some sort of

[7:00:18] representative capacity of the organization within 400 feet of the subject property. Perhaps we could have --

[7:00:25] >> mayor: all right, let's invite her up and then it will be up to the commission to determine whether they are

[7:00:30] indeed an affected party or not. I want to be clear, while she comes up to introduce herself, our rules state there is only

[7:00:46] one stipulation for being an affected party. >> you must have interest in a property within 400 feet of the

[7:00:54] subject property. Yes. >> mayor: okay. >> mayor: just introduce

[7:01:02] yourself, and then I think the issue the commission needs to determine is whether you own real property or have interest

[7:01:09] in real property within 400 feet of this proposal. >> jane bowman, I received a card from the city stating that

[7:01:16] I was an affected property because a person -- because of the -- a strip of land right next to the property.

[7:01:30] it's 15701-50300 which you will find, from your own records. And I'm a representative of the neighborhood.

[7:01:42] I'm also the person that pays the property taxes. All of that is on record. >> mayor: of that property

[7:01:50] that's within the 400 feet? >> yes. The strip. >> mayor: it sounds to me like

[7:01:54] you do meet the criteria for an affected party. Do we do that through a motion or without objection?

[7:02:00] >> I think without objection. It's up to the commission to decide, but -- >> mayor: without objection.

[7:02:06] we'll determine that miss holten is an affected party in this matter. >> thank you.

[7:02:12] >> mayor: next, we do the swearing-in of the parties, and so we need the representative for the applicant.

[7:02:17] we need our city staff representative. And the affected party. And I'll let you -- madam clerk,

[7:02:27] that's you, yeah. Just give us a moment. We haven't done a formal quasi judicial hearing in a while.

[7:02:40] we're knocking the rust off a little bit. >> do you swear or affirm the testimony you're about to give

[7:02:44] is the truth? >> it is the truth. >> mayor: you are sworn in. Attorney, what is your next

[7:02:55] order of business? >> if any member of the commission has had annex par tay communication regarding this

[7:03:03] matter. >> mayor: if you'll define ex parte communications? >> communication with one of the

[7:03:08] parties on the matter that's about to come before you on this hearing, and then if any communication has been made then

[7:03:16] a statement as to whether or not they can still be an unbiased decision maker. An unbiased decision maker being

[7:03:25] someone you need to meet in order to assure due process in this matter. >> mayor: does anyone wish to

[7:03:32] disclose any ex parte communication on this matter? Seeing none, it looks like no one has had any ex parte

[7:03:41] communications. >> we move on to the introduction of the matter by the staff.

[7:03:44] >> mayor: the staff has done. >> we can incorporate that into the hearing. The petitioner will be able to

[7:03:49] make a presentation or incorporate the presentation provided. >> mayor: we'll have the

[7:03:56] petitioner up first, and then staff and then affected party? >> yes. Followed by staff and affected

[7:04:01] party. >> mayor: very good, one moment and we'll give you a chance to make your presentation.

[7:04:10] >> good evening mr. Mayor and commissioners I'm clay swagger. I just gave a presentation, it's on file and in your backup

[7:04:20] material as part of the record of this hearing, all of the findings that were in that presentation and the

[7:04:25] justification report is also in the backup material, I would submit to you for consideration on this rezoning.

[7:04:32] I would also like to state that the rezoning proposed tonight is u6 is consistent with the umu land use designation that was

[7:04:45] just approved by the city commission. Section 30-4.2 of the land development code indicates the

[7:04:53] compatible zoning districts with urban mixed use umu land use. Those include umu 6, 7 and 8. I am requesting of you the

[7:05:02] lowest density and intensity that's now compatible with the land use designation of umu. If you have any questions I'll

[7:05:13] be hear to answer. >> mayor: thank you very much. It's staff's opportunity to make their presentation.

[7:05:27] >> good evening mr. Mayor, same as before. I'm happy to make the presentation again if it's

[7:05:32] helpful? >> mayor: any desire to have him do that? We're good.

[7:05:36] and then the affected party, I think they have up to 10 minutes, is that correct? >> 15.

[7:05:52] >> mayor: all right, it's your opportunity here. >> thank you, commissioner. I studied all the documents and

[7:06:00] today I made a discovery of the certain area of the muni code which I had not previously looked at.

[7:06:06] that was to do with land use and zoning next to a nature park. And what we find is the con is part of an h park, which

[7:06:18] restricts the use of that property. I can show you a picture -- I should show you that just in

[7:06:36] truthfulness here it says -- right there, it says welcome to nature park, city of gainesville.

[7:06:48] I hadn't thought about that until I came across the muni code which states quite clearly if there's a nature park, the

[7:06:59] nature park will be -- if any property lies within the 400 feet of the park or preservation area is regulated as set forth

[7:07:10] in this section. The maximum building height shall be 35 feet. There's a comment about lighting

[7:07:17] [ inaudible ] the main thing is to do with the height of the structure. It depends what the applicant

[7:07:30] plans to do with the land. There are some expansions or alterations, existing uses, rules that I can draw your

[7:07:39] attention to hear. Depending on what the expansion is, after june '92 which it will be over 2,000 square feet, I

[7:07:49] don't know. Or 20%, the entire statute should be in compliance with this statute.

[7:07:59] any new uses shall meet all applicable requirements of the section. The city manager has to enforce

[7:08:07] it. This is part of the muni code I discovered this afternoon, I would have discussed it in my

[7:08:14] piece before. What I was focusing on actually was the policy toward wetlands and buffers.

[7:08:20] making sure that those are very carefully followed. And I ask that for a very specific reason that I will

[7:08:30] present to you now. Is, if you look at this map, which is my -- the work -- the only way I could do it, what you

[7:08:40] have here is on this -- all this orangey color is the city conservation, city owned land. The orangey part is a flood

[7:08:55] plane. What you got is a whole system of water, that goes from the edge of the property as you see,

[7:09:02] is city owned, what you have, you have a creek coming out here, it leads into what's called culper pond, a regulated

[7:09:13] body of water. I have talked about these -- this area to the state department of protection and the

[7:09:20] st. John's water river management district about the issue with plants. I've had the discussion with

[7:09:28] them, those would be regulated bodies of water. There's a pond here which is highly contaminated, in terrible

[7:09:39] condition, I have been trying for years to have it fixed. The water flows and goes into tumbling creek.

[7:09:46] and that goes all the way around into bevins. Which goes out of prince prairie.

[7:09:54] this whole system is very much impacted by any water flow, storm water because it moves down and through.

[7:10:06] anything by the way, from the south of the city comes this way. So there is an interest of many

[7:10:12] people that would -- could possibly be affected by any storm water, increasing storm water, that's what I brought up

[7:10:19] first of all when I came as an affected party. To make sure all storm water stayed on site.

[7:10:25] I was totally unaware of the nature park element. I brought that to your attention.

[7:10:31] in terms of what people have said, I looked at the map, what you can see is, we have -- it appears the strip was brought to

[7:10:44] abut. There's a tiny strip that was incorporated into -- you can't see it, it's incorporated into

[7:10:50] the two parcels to abut. I'm not arguing with that, it's the truth, it's right there. 2 would make more sense to put a

[7:10:59] line across here, and say we're not going to go into the transect zone. That's way up here.

[7:11:07] that's the intention to have the transect zone up here where you have above southwest 16th. And I took a look at other

[7:11:16] documents which are about zones and transect zones in the city. The city documents. They're very few pedestrians.

[7:11:26] I think urban zone would be the most sensible zone to have for this as a transect zone. And urban zone.

[7:11:36] it's not particularly intense or dense. When you go to urban zone, have you all these allowances, which

[7:11:44] does allow a day care. I was told at the plan board meeting, no, no, no day care isn't allowed.

[7:11:54] I was misinformed by who said no. That is that one, the other aspect of it is, let's see if I

[7:12:05] can find that in my presentation. Certain things that were said or not done, I don't believe the

[7:12:15] environmental impact has been done appropriately was taken into consideration for things. So in fact what happens is, the

[7:12:24] statements are not correct. The issues. Compatibility, I would say no. U-6 is not compatible.

[7:12:37] protection of wetlands has not occurred or considered, I would claim. Zoning, I would say u-1 fits

[7:12:45] very well, it's part of the transect zone, it would be the beginning transect zone as it comes down.

[7:12:52] compliance with the comprehensive plan. They take into consideration within your own rules, I think

[7:12:58] 35 feet is what I said. So the issues with zoning, buffering storm water compliance, materials.

[7:13:14] so north and south, you can read my own things, in general, a small one story building. Some apartments in the rear.

[7:13:24] I don't think it's justified to go much higher than that. So what else happens here? Yes, plan board, clarification

[7:13:34] of plan board staff. I wrote down here staff errors, of any properties within half a mile, proper land use

[7:13:43] [ inaudible ] will the proposed use of the property be impacted by any creeks, lakes, wetlands, native

[7:13:55] plants or greenways. No. That was clearly stated at the plan board.

[7:14:02] that's clearly untrue. There is an abutting -- [ inaudible ] there's tumbling creek, a pond,

[7:14:11] the prairie. There are impacts. I don't think the allowance of a six story building possibly

[7:14:18] could even have student apartments or such things is appropriate for that location. U1, urban -- the -- what we just

[7:14:27] said here, the urban zone 1 and u-1 allows a day care which is what I believe the applicant seeks.

[7:14:36] it is much less intense, it is much more sensitive to the use of the site. So I basically ask that -- this

[7:14:48] is u1 here, can would be three foot. Is that 35 feet, whatever? And so the map -- so that's

[7:14:58] basically my basis is upon what is in the surrounding area, what the code says has to be done. When you're right next to a city

[7:15:06] park. So I don't know if there are any questions to me, does that come next or how does that work?

[7:15:15] >> mayor: mr. Attorney? [ inaudible ] >> an opportunity for rebuttal by the petitioner and staff.

City Commission 2022-09-15

Agenda

Transcript