Economic Development Board. Five, like five, two. Okay, we got it now. Eliza Giuliano, Kim Lee Horn. Item 2 overview of the workshop of objectives and expected outcomes. Okay, so hey, everybody can hear me. Great. So we've already done the introductions. The next section of the workshop is going to be a little bit of a presentation. From me, my name is Eliza Harris, Juliano. I'm with Kimlee Horne, the consultant that's working on this visioning effort. And we're going to tell you a little bit about the effort. Some folks in the room have already heard this a few times, and I'm sorry if I bore you. But some other people may be less up to date on what's been going on. So we want to make sure everybody was on the same page before we get into the detail. So we can, are we, yeah, go to the next slide. So the purpose of this project, and I don't know if everybody can see these, but you have the slide deck in front of you as well. It's two, update three documents. So the first is an update to the 2008 vision plan. The second, and through that process, also identifies strategic opportunities for the city. The second document will be updating as part of this effort is the community redevelopment area plan, so the CRA plan, and the third document is the SEDS plan, the comprehensive economic development strategy plan. So all of these documents work together to move the city forward, and to the extent that they overlap with the vision, then that's gonna be part of this update, but it's not limited to updates related to the extent that they overlap with the vision, then that's going to be part of this update, but it's not limited to updates related to the vision. And that's one of the reasons that we want to hear from everybody here today. So we've spent some time, which I'll go over, talking with the public and getting their input on how the vision might affect these documents, but to the extent there's more technical elements, that's why we want to be in front of this group today. Next slide. So those are the three documents we're here to talk about today. Vision plan, SEDS and the CRA plan. Next. So the first thing was really a purpose of the whole project. The reason we're here today is to hear from you on those three documents. So this is what we've done to date. This vision plan happened back in 2008, but in terms of the current update, that started three documents. So this is what we've done to date. This this visioning the vision plan happened back in 2008, but in terms of the current update that started in April of 2023 when we had the public kickoff for the vision plan. Since then, we've had two community vision surveys, two community vision forums. We've also had a couple of updates to city council. The most recent community visioning forum was last month in July. And then of course, we're here today for this joint leadership workshop. Next. So we do keep referring back to the 2008 vision. So we wanted to very briefly go over that. It's a longer document if anybody wants to dig into it. I was actually here in this room as part of the Sharet for the 2008 vision plan, so I'm proud to have been part of this community for a long time through that effort. But there are some things from that vision plan that were validated by this process in terms of the public engagement, and there are some things that have changed since 2008, and we've learned a few things. So we're trying to wrap all of that into the updated vision plan. One of the things that we think has pretty much stayed the same is the vision statement. The things that people wanted to see for the city back in 2008, like caring about the environment, wanting a safe, clean, accessible place to live, the idea of a small town feel, all of those seem to continue to ring very true to the people that we've talked about in the public meetings over the last couple of years. The image that you see on the top of the slide here is the vision plan, the physical vision plan that we came up with for Park Avenue back in 2008. The idea of having a kind of central gathering place here on Park Avenue, we think there is still some resonance to that, but the scale of the vision that we drew back in 2008 probably isn't a good fit for the city of Edgewater. So what we're talking about now is kind of a scaled back version of that that is a better fit for that small town feel that people have been talking about. Next slide. So in terms of the public engagement, as I mentioned, we've had two surveys and two forums that kind of line up with each other. So these are some hot topics from those engagements. During the first survey, we heard a lot about connecting with nature, preparing for growth, and again, that small town feel. During that first forum, we heard about the need for the community to have a cohesive identity, the desire for more amenities like shopping and dining and concerns about things like traffic and environmental protection. During the second survey, that was a little more specific based on things we'd heard during the second survey, that was a little more specific based on things we'd heard during the first survey. But we focused in on things like, was there support for a community center, which there's a strong yes, and we understand that's already moving forward under the city's leadership. Things like sidewalk improvements had support while it's housing diversity. During the second forum, we heard again that desire for a small town field concerns about water quality and a desire for better walking and biking. Next slide. So some of the key takeaways from that first survey, taking care of edgewater's natural resources and making sure that there's public access to those natural resources, chief among them, of course, being the waterfront. Getting increased access to dining shopping and community events, a bigger variety of dining, and making sure that if there's growth that's going to happen in the city, the city's prepared for that. And again, small town fields. So you see the repetition here in some of the themes. Next slide. During the second survey, we did a more detailed priority survey. This one, if you really want to study it, you probably need to look at the notes here. But some of the takeaways from this is if you look at what this survey did, was it will ask everyone to rank among the things that we were talking about, which did they think was the top priority for the city, as well as ranking two through eight. So among that, if you just look at the top three, what we see is the top people who ranked something within the top three, we see waterfront access projects, the new community center, and development within walking distance of the waterfront. And then probably a close third maybe would be the underground utilities. That right? No, not under, sorry, sidewalk improvements. So this can be start to talk about the city doesn't have unlimited funds. How do we start to prioritize what's important in the near term? Next slide. So in putting all this public input together, we came up with three draft themes. The first was enjoying and protecting the outdoors, small town feel and sense of place and growing opportunity. And by the way, just speaking of the survey results, I believe that you got the full survey results prior to this meeting, but if you didn't, you can certainly access that through City staff. So I'm going to talk a little bit more about those three draft themes for those who haven't heard them. Next. The first, as I said, enjoying and protecting the waterfront. So some of the strategies that we see around this are expanding waterfront access options. And then there's some continues. The city is already working hard to improve water quality through some of the stormwater investments and grant funded work that's happening. Cities are already investing in parks and trails and that's something the citizens value and want to see continued. Next. We asked what kind of waterfront access, since this was a really high priority for people, what kind of waterfront access, since this was a really high priority for people, what kind of waterfront access do people find most valuable? Just gonna read through the top four here. Parks and green space came out on top followed by walking and biking trails, waterfront dining and fishing docks. Next slide. So continuing on enjoying and protecting the outdoors, how do we get that waterfront access? Well there are city owned properties already that have the opportunity for more investment, chief among those being the property next to Boston Whaler, which the city is already working hard to look at the opportunity for a second larger boat ramp in that location. There's been recent improvements to Menard May Park, which is also a waterfront park. But there's also opportunities, for instance, if development is going to happen on the waterfront to work with the people developing that property to make sure there's some sort of public access. Public access doesn't just mean parks. It also means if there's a restaurant that has a waterfront view, that's something that most people would be able to access at some point as citizens within edge water. Next slide. Water quality. Cities are already secured over $16 million in grants for water quality which is spectacular and is already working on extending reclaimed water access in order to conserve potable water. Reducing dirt roads to improve water quality. The new concept we've introduced as part of the vision is to think about opportunities for green infrastructure. For instance, if there are streetscape improvements like the ones that might happen on Park Avenue, could you have some green infrastructure as part of that? And the picture you see is some green infrastructure that our groups have done for another community up the road where they've basically incorporated pretty attractive facilities that treat water into park space. So there are ways to have dual functions where you have things that are both providing the semisetic value to the community as well as doing that water-actuality treatment. Next slide. As I mentioned, recent improvements to may, may, may park. Excuse me. Not that happens to be a waterfront park, but there's also other parks that have seen investment in the city recently such as like analysis neighborhood, rotary and rotary parks. The cities in the process of securing creating a new pickle ball facility at Hawks Park, as well as investments in the trail systems funded by the state's central program. Next slide. So those are all areas that first theme. We really see, we certainly see the room for continuing to do more, but also a lot of great work that's already been done that's consistent with what the citizens are saying that they value. Theme two, small town sense of place. So the two kind of practical things that we see under this are the community center and park avenue, park avenue, park avenue gathering place. Next slide. So the community center, as we said, we know that's already kind of moving forward, but we did get, we did, that was part of the survey and the majority of respondents saw that is valuable, saw that as something they wanted to move forward. So that is moving forward into design and programming and starting to think about funding. Next slide. So I really want to focus on the one that, that is something that we have kind of more offer on, which isn't already in progress, which is Park Avenue. So this is what Park Avenue looks like on a certain piece of it today. This is actually city-owned property. So I mentioned earlier, there was a pretty robust idea of what Park Avenue could be in the future back in 2008. Well, a few years have passed, and that hasn't happened, right? So a couple of reasons why that is. But one of them is because maybe that vision was a little bit more than the market was ready for, a little bit more than the community was ready for. So what we started to think about as part of this vision is how do we scale that back to be the right size for Edgewater? So if you go to the next slide, this is breaking that up rather than having big buildings into smaller buildings that could be invested in once at one at a time. So this is what could happen just on a few lots that are owned by the city within the city edgware. And start to create that kind of main street feel. Another change in this updated vision that we're recommending is talking about, rather than talking about downtown Edgewater, which is the way it was referred to in the 2008 vision, talk about main street because that main street really evokes that small town feel, evokes more the scale that we think makes sense here. Next slide. the city's . So this is a sketch of where those city owned properties are. So where you see the orange, that's the city controlled property. So that's really where the city might be able to play a role in kind of getting this thing jump started. And there's other lots that could be potential redevelopment opportunities. But that would be at the discretion of the property owner Next slide So why talk about Park Avenue as a Main Street? Well, we heard people want shopping and dining. We heard they want to be close to the water This is a location where both of those things might happen. Also, when you talk about this smaller scale, smaller buildings, usually mean smaller businesses that are more likely to be locally owned and start to fuel the economy in a really direct way because insofar as small business money since to recirculate within the economy rather than going back to an owner that lives somewhere else. We also heard that there really is a need for a stronger sense of identity within the community. And having that place that is strongly associated with Edgewater is one of those things that helps communities to build that identity. So having a place where it can be date night or it can be a Saturday afternoon stroll with your family, those are the kinds of things that happen on Main Street. So these are things that we believe would both support the county, the city, culturally, as well as economically. And when we asked what kind of development people wanted to see within, walking distance to the waterfront, parks again came up really high, dining was a close second. Next. So the third theme is growing opportunity. One of the things that we heard was that the community wants more amenities. Many of the community members wanted to see those, make sure those amenities included family-friendly options. So not just grown up oriented type of kids. We also heard concerns throughout the process about the available housing and whether it fit everybody's needs and whether it's affordable to people who live here now or people who wanted to live here in the future. There's a desire that the community has been working on for some time to bring in higher quality jobs. And we also think it's important as we talk about growing opportunity to also make sure we're talking about how that affects the city budget, making sure that's a fiscally responsible path. Next slide. So we hear a lot about wanting more restaurants, including family-friendly options. So we did a little bit of analysis of, if we're talking about Longhern's Stake House, or Olive Garden, one of these bigger institutions, they're looking at 75 to 100 customers a day to just a break even. If you want something like big box, like a Costco, they're looking for 200,000 people within five miles in order to support that Costco. So the reason we bring this up is just to say from a business standpoint, the amenities like restaurants and larger retailers tend to closely track population. So while we want to see more of those coming in, usually those will go in the same direction as population. Next. coming in, usually those will go in the same direction as population. Next. We did, we asked some questions about housing. So we heard some of the strongest answers we heard were about people wanting ownership opportunities and also wanting lower prices, whether it be for rent rental or for home ownership. And we heard a substantial number of people said they are looking for rental options. Next slide. So one of the ways we look at this is in terms of housing types. When we asked about what types of housing are needed in the community survey, We heard from, you know, this, you can see the distribution of housing types that were mentioned in the survey. So about 50% single family, 20% apart, 20% town homes, 14% duplexes, 15% apartments. That's on the left. And if you look on the right, you can see the housing the city has now. So they're not to say that the housing the city should have would 100% match what's on the left. But right now, it looks kind of looks like there's a mismatch. There's a lot more opportunity right now to find a single family home in Edgewater than any other type of housing. Which is not surprising, that's where it's historically been. But we do see within the survey that there are people who want multiple options. Next slide. So in terms of growing opportunity, or last thing in growing opportunity, talking about fiscal responsibility. This is a graphic from a nonprofit called Strong Towns, which really focuses on building towns that are strong both fiscally, culturally, economically. And one of the things that they really emphasize is that you have to have a balance between what your expectations are and what your kind of funding sources are. So having a balance between taxes, number of people served, and the type of services that you have. So basically you have to have enough people paying taxes to get better services. Next slide. So with that, the way this is structured is to have kind of an overview of each of the documents and the progress we have to date on the documents and then to have an open discussion about each of those. That is going to be the longest presentation that I'm going to talk at you, so apologies. From here it should be more brief. But this is, I'd like to hand the mic back for questions and discussion at this point. Thank you. Well, we can start at that end of the table if there's any kind of questions we'll go around in order. Anyone have any questions? Or see something that's missing. What did we not hear in the public meeting that we just know about the future of the city? So we might go page by page like slide by slide or just in general based on everything you just said. Because I made notes on like nine different pages. Well, let me also. OK. OK. The stack of my business cards. And you certainly email staff. They will get information to me. But you also are welcome to send me any comments that you don't get out during this meeting later as well and I will share those with city staff and make sure that we have all that information as well. But not to camp anybody down but we do have a lot of people to hear from. So. Yeah. Well, I mean, like some of my first question was, you know, please speak in the microphone. I'm sorry. I forgot it's working. I'll take it off. Yeah. Please, please speak in the microphone. I'm sorry. I forgot it's working. I'll take it off. Yeah, this is going to try me nuts. So like one of the first things I've got on the enjoying protecting outdoors, love the outside. I grew up here. Along with George, anybody else? Like expanding waterfront access. I know we've got the area there next to Boston, Wheeler. Where else along the river do we have the opportunity to actually buy that property or expand that access? I'm a paddleboard person. So, Menard May Park, as much as it's accessible Monday through Thursday, not on the weekend. It's forget it. So that was one of my questions. Trying to launch a paddle board at a boat ramp is chaotic at best. That's one of those, one of the things that a lot of people that I know because they know I'm on the planning and zoning board, they're constantly asking me about water quality efforts. So I think the question there was, how is the city spending the funding for the water quality? That's at least what I that's the biggest question I probably get because people know I'm here. Although I'm on planning and zoning board, I tell them it's not my thing. Kind of the same part with waterfront access on the parks and the trails, but I did see where they were talking about the Roberts Road to Dale Road extension, so that would be awesome. My biggest question was on park avenue with like the multi-use stuff. So would the city own the buildings or would they own the real estate and then like 99 year lease it to a developer. Yeah, so at the vision level we haven't figured all of that out. We can certainly talk about possibilities. I think those are the next right questions. What often happens is if it's if it's city owned land and they could do a 99 year lease, you could sell it. But what you would do is you'd create some sort of RFI process or RFQ process where you'd say, this is what we want to see on this lot. We only want developers who want to build this thing. So as part of the contract with the developer, you have to build what we want. And then obviously, the developer gets a profit margin in there in order to take the risk to build it, but they'd have to follow, you know, as the owner, you can put whatever limits, you far above and beyond what you can do with just zoning and design guidelines or something like that, as the owner, you can put whatever restrictions you want. Okay. But, you know, you may limit your buyers to the extent you restricted. Okay. And then, so I know we're still in the vision process, but me being on planning and zoning also just spent seven days in Boston. So as soon as I saw the little picture of the rendering of what Park Avenue could be, which I think is awesome, the first thing that went through my head is I sat in Little Italy for an hour and a half last Monday while a rider truck delivering pizza dough to Regina's pizza blocked access for an hour and a half. And that's all I can envision on Park Avenue now. So, I think in the process of envisioning this, probably should put some type of a public or an alleyway in the back. I know we're kind of cartwaying from the horse on this but because Park Avenue is small enough already. And I mean someone like Ms. Dolbo there she she knows about the restaurant. I mean it's it's going to be a thing that's going to happen on that move on to the next meeting. A couple. This is just really from a museum standpoint. We know that in the next 20 years, the west side of 95 is going to be dramatically increasing the number of units that are potentially for permit or what an excess of 12,000. That's basically the number of units that are potentially for permit or what an excess of 12,000. That's basically the size of the city of edgewater right now. How does the vision of 2008 that was started and it's been tweaked? How is that going to tie in the other side of edgewater to make it feel cohesive? Because as you grow, it's more difficult to do that. So that's one question. The second thing is, we like to talk about housing and this is just with me, this is just a point of, I think it's something that really needs to be addressed is that we've had two opportunities in the last six months to bring what I thought was a really solid project. And then you get nimbis in here that say, I don't want that next to me. And then these guys cave and they say, okay, well, we'll just not approve it. I mean, that's just the way I see it. So, and I'm not saying it's just you guys, because some of these guys have also done the same thing. I think that if it's a viable project, it needs to be strongly considered. Well, I'll just state something to that as well. The thing that we need to look at on larger pictures, how much density we're allowing for unit. I mean, that was that project, I think the E.R. Furnciffe, that was going to double the level of density for one project. I think that that needs to be talked about on a wide variety as well when we're talking about economic development. How many units are allowed for a acre? Well, Mr. May, let's address that because I was very much for that particular project. And I think that was addressed very clearly through the project. Now, my question to the council was you didn't have enough nerve to bring a motion against that issue. At least we brought a motion. But when it went to council, you didn't have a negative or a positive motion you just let it die without this but that's that's not a way to do business I'm sorry and I'm on planning and zoning and I know the feeling you have to sometimes put your big boy pants on big girl pants on and step forward and do something to the city that's correct. So I think from a facilitated standpoint, one thing we're trying to do here is have the conversations ahead of time that help to facilitate when it comes down to a particular project that those decisions have already been made. I mean, one thing that we often recommend is kind of proactively rezoning the areas that are desirable so that it's not being considered on a case-by-case basis. Getting back to an odd-mate park have Has any consideration been done about residents versus non-resident use of that park over the weekends? And what was the result, you see? Why not? Microphone, please. I also, parking is limited and there are some suggestions that we may wear to higher a port time, stored in the weekends to charge non-charge out of towners, maybe residents get a tag or something so they wouldn't know who they are. There's not enough parking there so I was told to pay the person who would be there part-time Thursday or Friday through Sunday to monitor it. And I was also told that since there was grants, grant funding in it, that we were not able to charge. I'm not sure, you know, that we were not able to charge because we had funding for the project. Because because we have very, very limited space along the water. We know that most of our waterfront is residential. There's a few spots in the city other than Boston, Wales, but that's futuristic that people can even approach the water. You can't get near the avenue program because it's just beyond overcrowded so that that's parking is another consideration for futuristic uses of land down there. Where are the people going to park? Big problem. And we just limited so much with what we have available on our frontage of waters unless we take over people as backyards which we can't do that legally. But you know, Riverside Drive is beautiful, that is all residential. So that's a big consideration. And I think what George pointed out, the big focus in the future is West of 95. I mean, what they're gonna be building West of 95 is close to Disney World living as you possibly can get, really. And I think that's gotta be a consideration in this big picture. I just want to say one thing guys I've been here 20 years next month and I love it here. I'm dying here, but let's be honest. Small town feel left this town 10 years ago. Facebook, let's build, I want to talk about, well now we got a talk about, you can't drive down Roberts Road. I mean, it comes a point where we got to balance it out. It would be nice to go to the west, but this ain't a small town no more, it's sad to say. I do see, I do see in this, the mainstream concept that does have parking. That's resource parking possibility. We did, yeah, we looked at the opportunity for structured parking to help alleviate some of that, but certainly there's, you know, if you've got a couple businesses starting off, then it would go over time. Yeah, I just was speaking to where you were like, you know, I was not going to say that. Yeah, so that would be interesting to, you know, maybe do that. And then I don't know, I kind of like the idea of keeping a lot of the stuff, this main street feel over here, over on this side, because it's a lot of us live, like minutes from here, and I think that'd be great to be able to bring the kids over and hang out and shop and we try to go to the Minami Park as well and it is difficult on the weekends for sure It's crazy over there, but I mean we can also drop off everything go drop our car off and then ride our bikes over so I don't know I feel like like you know when you say that You know we want to be closer to 95 so people can have more access to Orlando and stuff. But that gives our Orlando more access to us too. So are we really building for visitors or are we trying to build for our community here to try and keep it as small as we can, and even though it's already continued to grow in this building and building and building. But yeah, I would like to try and focus a little bit more on the people that are already out here and live here and that are here instead of what's going to be built out there in the future. Just just to get back to my original question that got us to devolve on this whole side topic that was not my intent. But you mentioned rezoning as one of the things. So is that part of the vision process is like, oh yeah, here's areas that are zoned in properly. You know, we look at all the the blight on US one with the mobile homes that really, you know, that just sustain on the city, that, and then you show what it could be, and you're like, wow, that's pretty incredible. Is that being thought through? I mean, are those are things that, like, at being actively discussed, that could potentially happen down the road? So when we get to the SEDS plan and the CRA plan, actually, I forget, there's some overlap between the two. We will specifically mention some of the implementation steps, which include for Park Avenue, certainly rezoning, and because what we showed is not possible under the current zoning, as well as considering rezoning for other housing types elsewhere in the city. To the extent that we're talking about that, we have not this project is not at the level of detail to identify where that might happen elsewhere in the city, but you know if you're going to have more housing types you have to be somewhere. So moving forward, it looks like we can't do this main street until this facility is over on the west side. What's the time frame? We're talking five years down the road from now. So this building is going to be, this area is going to be part of that map, right? And it's got to all move. Well, so one thing that's changed since the 2008 vision is we've tried to identify some approaches that would be much more incremental. So you could build those buildings one at a time. So it wouldn't necessarily have to be all at the same time. So we see this as those are empty lots. That could move forward with City Hall still here. But certainly you get some level of synergy and you get some level of velocity than, yeah, then more of the mainstream might redevelop, but it wouldn't have to be all at once. I'm going to go back to one of the projects I'm assuming. So, I want to help it, and then, No, it came back. So in that meeting, I know we were talking about density and things like that, but during that meeting for planning against. Yeah. Oh, is that what it is? There you go. Y'all should. During that meeting, I'm sure if you're all over watching the meeting or you watch the videos, of course, everybody in edgewater landing was against it. After about an hour of people coming up and saying the same thing over and over and over and over and over again, I kind of got a little impatient and I wanted to remind everybody that two agenda items prior to that we had to adopt by law new codes that basically said that that same guy that was sitting in the chair right here could just simply by way of a site plan go I'm putting in low income housing. Here you go. And I've reminded everyone in there's water landing about that. So the best possible outcome for that was that apartment complex Because if not now that guy can just say I'm putting it in there So anyway, so I and this might not be the place to do it Maybe we do need to throw another symposium together Ryan and just so that we are on the same page with city council with what kind of multifamily housing do we want? I'm not I don't honestly feel that apartment complex along right there. I'd rather see it closer to 95, but given that agenda item that we had to vote on by law, that was the best possible outcome for that space now. So I think we need to like said tonight's probably not the right night, but maybe in the future, let's have another meeting to discuss okay Make sure we're all on the same page here With what we want to do so that we're not bouncing back and forth between each other And I agree with that We as groups have become more cohesive together knowing what we want which is best for the city I'm worried about the the project coming up on 442 that was discussed at last penny zoning board that was recommended not to Approval for a council. I don't know if we can talk about that right now or not But that's another project that's going to be a great project for the city and it's it and the developers gonna spend a hundred million dollars they're gonna invest in us and I'm just worried that we're going to let that slide through without investigating and doing our due diligence to make sure that we're turning every rock over to make sure there's nothing that we can do to help this project happen. So this is a good conversation to have. What do we win edgewater? But that project, they'll be, you know, high-paying jobs. You know, it's going to take care of our seniors from, you know, 55 and up. So take them all the way through. I mean, it's like a, it's a wonderful thing. And it's something that's needed in edgewater. And I just, I don't idea that we can sit down together and talk and see or each other at and give and take and hear other options or other opinions, something that maybe we're not thinking about. I hate to see something else slip through our fingers because of the loud voices in the room. So that's all. I voted me. I didn't say it, but it's because of where it was. Well, what we want is eventually see. Yeah, right. Can you hold the microphone a little differently? Yep. I'll try. Okay. Well, what the more water space is just out of the question for us. We can't provide any more water space than we have. I mean, people want that, but we don't have that available. This can't be. things like this park avenue here. That's a good idea. But we had talked that one too. Things happen and we didn't get even through that. But there's a lot of things we're seeing in this visioning thing that we've all said is already planned Center um The Minard Park There's about how to lot a lot of complaints about that and there's a way we can please that without having I don't want to go into this right now, but there's a phase that we can do. Not that I'm on a leg. But I think what we need to do is concentrate on what can we expect? What we want to see the city look like in 10, 15 years. We're not looking at that. We're being need to look at the picture of it. Do you want the effort and all to fix Park Avenue and make it the downtown that we all want? No. I'm going to create a whole different, especially with Hall, going to be out that way too. So we need to look, I think, and we can't just be picky on things. We have to look at what. As we. for them with what. Regarding the community center, I think that keeping the community center over on this side is a great idea to keep it near the water because we can have so many different programs for kids. Like I don't think we have any programs for kids with water safety, marine life, anything like that in the area. And my main focus is, so they have like things that they come out of the water, they come out on the river and do things out here. Yeah, yeah, I volunteer with the kids at the elementary school, we go over and learn how to swim in the pool. But to be on the river is a different story. So being out on a boat is a different story. So being out on a boat is a different story. I mean, there's been kids that go out on a boat that don't follow the tides and don't follow the weather and they get lost and don't come back. So that's a big part of what I would really like to kind of just personally would love to focus on being a community center here on this side near the water, not out by 95. I mean, we can have one there too, maybe, you know, just two different areas, but I would really love to kind of have something over here where we use our resources that we have. We use the property that we have to kind of grill our young community. Just want to. Just one other question and these projects, these future projects are beautiful. They would add so much to our city. The big question and people always are concerned, taxes and how do we pay for it? That's really the bottom line. We could have the best and vision in the world, but if we can't afford it, it's going to text the people who it's supposed to benefit. That's the question. How do you balance that? Well, and I think some of the things we're talking about are revenue generating things. Like the upzoning portion of FARC Avenue would certainly be revenue generating things like the the upzoning portion of park avenue would certainly be revenue generating to the extent that people invest in but you know investing in the streetscape on park avenue would would have cost to it. One of the reasons I think that we noted the inclusion of green infrastructures that might make the project eligible for grants that it would otherwise be eligible for. So that in addition to just being a nice thing to do and protecting the river, which right now the water just flows straight down the street into the river with all the muck that it picks up, that could also provide a monetary source as well. I'm going to go ahead and I don't really think we were scaling it back because we couldn't, I think it was a lot of it had to be scaled back because the original plans for Park Avenue, a lot of those properties got bought up and developed by other people. So I think we just kind of scaled it back out of necessity more so than that was our plan to do so. One of my first concern and this is something I've said at a lot of different things and I'm probably gonna get some my roles for it possibly. But that city hall is labeled a mixed use project. I'm still, I'm not comfortable with, I mean, it was originally needed to be used for just city use, so depending what that mixed use means, I would have concerns if we were planning on doing anything with it and that's something other for use of the residents. So do we have something that we have looked at for that? Is a question is, well, one of my first questions and I'll keep going and I don't know if you have an answer for that or not. Well, I can tell you that that graph, that particular graphic was created pretty early in the process. We ultimately didn't pursue further kind of visualizations or investigations on that site because we realized it was up for discussion in terms of what might be appropriate. And then also about the green infrastructure, there's a lot of talk of using that in park Avenue. I think it should be also discussed to be incorporating that other places where put it, you know, but this a lot of this is to put the focus on park, but I think we could also beautify and incorporate that into other parks and other spaces locally, just to beautify the entire area as well. Because I think that, I mean, the visions for the city as a whole. And then the other thing I wanted to touch on as far as we're talking about the attainable housing and the affordable housing. And it was talked about that one project will could for the low income housing, but that's all based on what's affordable as per the county. So what's necessarily affordable for a county wide average is not affordable here. So as some of those last numbers that I was given are still more than people locally can afford who are looking for affordable housing. So I don't even think calling that affordable housing. It's still what I like to say is affordable to who because a lot of people still can't afford to what that is because that's county wide not what is normal for edge water. And then also the other comment I had you're talking about I do have a concern as far as we're talking about the mobile homes that were there and if they were a blight, but then where are those people going to go? So is if somebody buys that up, are they going to be offered somewhere that they can live, that they can afford? I don't want to see our people that are already here, that are struggling to afford to live here now be displaced. And that was also my concern as far as the density and that other project that I think that that project should have been far more workshopped. It just came up as an item on our agenda that we were changing a very large amendment to our code. And I think that needed to be a large discussion like this and not just an agenda item with some mild discussion. That needed to be sat down and workshoped before we looked at doubling our entire density. And that was concerning from a point of doubling density in the first place, but also for the people who could come in with live local because if that opens up the door for anybody to come in with live local and build to that double density on any commercial lot anywhere. So if we open that floodgate, that's not a floodgate. We can shut down. And that was a big concern. Just so we don't know that I'm not thinking about that all willingly on that one project. My concern was if we doubled that there, then people could have come in. I mean, we could have doubled that density in that gentleman could have said, oh, I'm going to do a live local anyway and still done it. And he could have done it at max max density instead of now he's coming in and it's half the density of here. So those are just some thoughts I had. Thank you. Some questions I'm hearing out in the community is the first vision workshop was around 2008. What has been implemented on a city level since that vision has taken place? So one big thing is the establishment of the CRA as well as certain investments along Bridgewood Avenue in collaboration with DOT. I think that the staff might be able to get into a little bit more of that, but we're actually gonna get into some more detail on the CRA and the funding stream there and how it compares with some expectations in a little bit later in the agenda. This vision study does it cover of any of the infrastructure need an unpark avenue to have this take place and does it cover a base dollar figure as Mr. Bob and you have x stated how much it potentially would cost the tax dollars even they had the infrastructure put in place or if a developer would take care of that but do we have a general knowledge of how much infrastructure would be needed or have we obtained a traffic study to even know if the current state of park avenue can handle the number of traffic that would be implemented on that road on a certain number a month or a year. So the some of the next steps we'll talk about a little bit later in the presentation, but we have not gotten to that level of detail. Some of the recommendations would be to obviously do change the comp plan a rezoning which might require other studies as well as a kind of more specific master plan. There are estimates in the CRA plan of certain investments across the city and what they might have cost in 2008 dollars not necessarily in current dollars. Thank you. Yeah I want to ask one question. Big one. Here. Sorry. When I was on the one in 2008, we did accomplish some of the things that we set out, but then we have kinds of things happen that stopped us from it. But what are we visioning? The future, are we visioning right now? And if we are visioning it right now for the near future funding is an issue. You know that we need to consider and we also need to I think as a sit. The home. 9% homes. So if we bring as you showed the lot for the big lots and co you know for those. Any number of people, house tops before they'll come in there. Well we don't even have, we have the people to supply the jobs. We just have, so we're working in that way and I think one of the things in this vision is we have to consider the generations that are coming before us. I mean, when I had to listen to the prayer and that, you knew every, that it started growing and how, how, how, how, how can Carol Florida sure is like what's going to be coming? Family. We're not. And in it. I mean, at the issue that we have to address as a city. I'm sorry. I know once a community sent that's fairly easy. Complete. If we had the funding where we were going to do it and all people want it down here. This property is prime property. We're sitting on a gold mine right here. Do we want to select, do we want to use an indie center? Well, you know, those are the issues that I think we should be looking at. What we're going to do, I want to point. OK. I do want to note two things. One, we probably should move to the next topic pretty soon. And also we haven't heard anything from this set of the room. So, well, do, does this, if you don't mind, does this side of the room have anything to add before we circle back? I'm out of your column, I should. I'm sorry I was late, I coach up in Daytona. So I got here as soon as I could. Christine, Tony. Yes, I know. I had to Christine, sorry. Yes, I know. I had to. All right. So I have a couple of things that struck me as we were going through here. I'm looking at waterfront dining being something that came up. People want to see that. But a marina is way down on the list. I'm just going to point that out as you've got there are 100 boat trailer spaces coming in to down by Boston, not just people that live here, that's people coming from somewhere else to, yes. So I, you know, I know it's something to wrap our heads around, but if you build something that gives access to the water, people are going to come to it. And I don't know that it's possible to say, you know, somebody lives in Deltona, they're not allowed to bring their boat trailer over and launch from there. So I just want to point that out. It's it's a nominee that's that's useful for a lot of different people. So anyway, and that's that's in a great spot, but it's not in a great spot because it's far from town. So just going to point that out that you right we've watched we've watched all we've watched Elliot's and the Roadhouse down there that you know they struggled because There one big customer kind of was Boston Whaler and so anyway Cost of maintenance the green The green infrastructure and with rain reclaimed water, you get grants, green infrastructure. Cape Canaveral was an example of it. I just, the cost of maintenance for things like that has to be put into the equation because if you look at the Esplanade that's up in Daytona right now, it's beautiful. But that's being, the maintenance is being paid for by a private people. It's not the city of Daytona or and maybe it's a mix of it, but it's not just the city of Daytona that has said, if you build it, we'll take care of it for the rest of its existence because it's a some of that stuff is big ticket items. If that makes sense, the maintenance that they have a security company like like 24-7 in there, or it's guarded. So anyway, I do like the new improvements to Monard May. It's nice seeing it, you know, brighter and the shade. And so I'm happy to see that when I go on Riverside. Small town, feel a small town. Small town's a great thing. And then, but people want to come because it's a small town. It's like New Sumerna. They made themselves so cool that everybody wants to be part of it. Who owns the property? So Park Avenue, the main street, I'd like main street better than the downtown. I was downtown was always like sort of a, I did not like that term ever, really. Yeah, it's downtown makes me, yeah, and it's sort of separate too. I don't know. Main street is more like, yeah, that's where you go to get your hair concept with the five lots additional potential for private development. Potential commercial development. So those are already like commercially developed. So I'm not really sure why. What does that mean? Like to change who's there or, I'm not really sure what, how that came about mixed use project for down here. And I believe that the deed restriction has been, it's not an issue anymore. That's gone and done and dealt with Anyway I love that they want dining you know that that was the everybody want a great restaurant But we can't most people can't afford a great restaurant. AM Cafe, I love them. They're great. They're awesome. Just putting a plug in for them. They're consistently good food. So, and not like a crazy price. So that's the kind of thing that should be looking for not, you know, Costco and longhorn. We don't need a Longhorn steakhouse here. I don't, I just don't, I don't see that ever as a, I don't know, it's my take on that. And I hope people that they want something other than a, you know, then auto part store or whatever. Basically a responsible planning, high quality jobs, housing variety and attainability. Which is interesting because only 50% people wanted a single family house. They want housing variety and attainability. So, the people are telling you what they want. They want to have something other than single family home projects. So I'm just saying that's their trying to tell planning and zoning and the council that that's what they want to see. So I'm just going to echo that having the discussion with it and having the year staff go back and try to make something that you guys are comfortable with that the people might be comfortable with, I think that's important. Like being able to have the conversation and having, you know, like, oh heck no, that's not going to work. We don't want to see that, but what can you come back with that we could maybe see happen? So that's, I'm just going to say that that's from saying saying just a bold no is is a hard thing to hear I think if you're a developer and you hear enough knows and then it just becomes we'll go somewhere else even though the people have told you they're looking for a mix of housing. It's hard to buy a house now. It's hard for people to buy a house. They can't afford it. So all right. Those are my two cents Hopefully they were positive And they were All right, so from my perspective I've been on the planning I mean the economic development board for all these years And I've been hearing about these planning and zoning projects. And I've got to say that, you know, the conversation really hasn't changed. We can't afford it. We want this, we want that, we can't afford it. City paid for retail strategies to come in. And that was a three year study. And each quarter they came back and said, you don't have enough rooftops, you don't have enough disposable income. We probably still don't have enough disposable income. Where do we get the disposable income? Jobs. Industrial jobs, manufacturing jobs, commercial jobs. So the SIDS, which we haven't gotten to yet, talks a lot about infrastructure. We need infrastructure to bring jobs. We also need the zoning. We have a lot of industrial development property, but we need more if we're going to sustain this community. Volusia County as a whole has a shortage of industrial zoning. This live local can also go in industrial zoning. And this is where these conversations are great because everybody gets back up. Planning and zoning gets back up. Council gets back up. The staff gets back up. And economic development gets back up. So I applaud this forum and I think you need to have more of them so that everybody's working together and supporting the staff. And until you really address the tax base, okay, so we're talking about residential housing and we know what's coming. But until you diversify that tax base and the diversification of the tax base funds a lot of this industry and commercial activity use less services and cost the city less than residential so until we start flipping that we're going to be singing the same song because this is I mean I forget how many years I've been on economic development, but the song has been the same. So, I can't look forward to the next part of the presentation and we talk more about sets. That sounds like a pretty good segue. Whenever I'm given the green light, I'll be happy to go to the next section. Okay, thank you. Next slide. And actually, if I may take the liberty, what I'd like to do is just motor through the next two presentation sections and consolidate the discussion sections, because I know you guys had some questions that because these are so closely interrelated, I think some of the CRA stuff will help to answer questions you might have from the SEDS plan, and then we don't have to have another break. So the SEDS plan has six goals, five goals, excuse me. And we're gonna go through each one of the goals and talk a little bit about what we already think is gonna change based on the consultant and some of staff input, and then look to you all to say additional things that you think need to be addressed if appropriate. Again, you know, it's a two hours a long time and it's a short time. So if you guys have other thoughts after this meeting, please do email the staff or email me so that we can get those on the record as well if you don't have a chance to share everything you'd like to share if you something comes to mind later. So let's go to goal one. Oh, sorry, before goal one, we have some broad, higher level stuff. So next slide. So growing opportunity in the public meeting, we talked about some of the already ongoing efforts basically that are coming out of the SEDS plan, including partnership around building manufacturing and manufacturing and technology within the city, the partnership with Team Volusia. All of these are efforts around bringing more high quality jobs into the city that are ongoing. Next slide. We also getting into more specifics around how we would achieve that housing variety and attainability. As we said, identify where it belongs, right? It doesn't belong everywhere. So where could more housing variety be appropriate, which could lead to future land use and zoning changes, where those would be best fit. We would, our planning assumption is that U.S. one would be one of the locations where that would be, at some points along U.S. one, there'd be opportunities for that. You see properties that are struggling or not seeing additional investment. So that's one of the triggers that we might make sense to have some more rooftops. And so what you see here, and I will say this came up earlier in I think both sides of this coin, you see on the top an image of an existing mobile home park, on the bottom an image of what that might look like as a multi-family project. We see we're hearing on the one side that these mobile home parks are a concern, you know, potentially an eye sore, but on the other side they're also affordable housing. So the hope would be that if you bring in multi-family here that that would also be more affordable than some of the other alternatives. So definitely some tension there. Next slide. So jumping into goal one, we didn't really see a lot of changes, certainly from the vision plan perspective here. It's really just continuing to be engaged in these partnerships to try to bring in those better, those higher wage jobs. Next slide. Goal 2. Positioning edgewater for economic growth. So here there's some language already about improving internal access and circulation. Some additional connection opportunities were identified by the staff that could be added for specific roadways. But also being specific that connectivity is also important for residential and commercial, not just for industrial and that has both economic and transportation value. Improving infrastructure, some additional opportunities that we're discussed were expanding the municipal service area to the south all the way down to aerial roads so that some of those county properties could be incorporated into the city system as well as addressing additional stormwater deficiencies. Next slide. So interesting stormwater deficiencies didn't come up at all on the SEDS plan today. So adding that seems important given the level of conversations that we had about it. Moving on to the next goal, elevating community image and urban services. So this really closely aligns with some of the already aligned based on the 2008 vision with some of the park avenue discussions we've been having. Talking about changing that language to Main Street instead of downtown throughout that and really updating that language to reflect what we see as a more current vision. Big piece here and when we talk about why I didn't park Avenue happen, there was a little recession around 2008 if you all remember that that certainly was a factor. But also the land use and future land use and zoning right now still doesn't allow any of this to happen. So that that's certainly a barrier. So mending that comprehensive plan and land use and land development code as well as preparing a specific master plan for any sort of public investments, which would start to get to that level of detail about what are the specific specific investments, what order would they happen, how much would they cost. 3.2 already really talks about a civic center, which meets a lot of what the discussion is around a community center. So this has been been a discussion for a while. So there's not really anything needed to be added in terms of the community center. It's already in there. Next. Continuing on goal three, no change to expanding healthcare and medical services that we could see improving bicycle and pedestrian circulation. no change to expanding health care and medical services that we could see. Improving bicycle and pedestrian circulation right now it talks a lot about trails. One thing that's already happening is implementing the 2013 bicycle and pedestrian plan. Something that we saw as a need to be added was to be more explicit about sidewalks and walkway and bikeway connectivity in residential and commercial development. So more within the neighborhoods, whether new or old, rather than just kind of the longer distance trails. Next, this is a minor change, just changing transportation to transit because 3.5 is really just about transit. It's not about transportation as a whole. Next, 3.6. Just kind of updating some of the language around attainable and diverse housing, not saying something terribly different, but just using language that's a little more current. But, you know, again, as we talked about, if this is going to be realized, that requires changes to the comprehensive plan to increase density, and to specifically to do that in locations where it makes sense, particularly locations that have good access so that people are able to to get the services they need without traveling long distances and putting so many more trips on the road. We also talk a lot about missing middle housing so the the market and zoning tends to be good at producing single-family houses and big apartment complexes. But there's a whole world of housing types in between that are possible, but often are kind of zoned out. So you want to have zones that allow smaller duplexes, quadplexes, townhouses, but don't necessarily allow the full scale multifamily if you want to see that broader diversity of housing rather than just the two ends of the barbell. And we also think it's important to think about if you are going to allow different types of housing to make sure that if the community cares about the design that it's going to be contributing, that you can accompany those increases in potential development with increases in design standards. And also increases in transportation standards. So for instance, if you want people to be able to walk, you need to make sure there's sidewalks and probably trees because we live in Florida and it gets hot on the sidewalk. If you don't have trees, Those kinds of things. Next slide. Now we're moving on to goal four. Improving existing public access facilities didn't see any changes there. 4.2, identifying and promote development of waterfront sites. So at the time this was written that referred specifically to one site, which I was the Boston Whalersite? Yeah, specifically referred only to the Boston Whalersite. So we're recommending adding another goal that fairly similar language, but that just says, any development that might happen on the waterfront, that this should be considered to have some sort of waterfront access. We know there's a property that was been discussed as a small restaurant that might be on the waterfront,. We know there's a property that was been discussed as a just a small restaurant that might be on the waterfront and that's something that would you know be in line with everything we've been talking about. So even those small opportunities could be important. Next slide. Goal five. So we laid out all the all the objectives for you here but really don't see a lot of changes other than for 5.6 to consider adding a mixed use zone. Now this is very typical in communities that we work in. A lot of communities just don't have any zone that allows for more than one use, particularly residential and retail to be in the same building or even on the same lot. And Edgewater is one of those communities. So in order to support small businesses, to support kind of more modern gathering places to have some mixed-use zones. Of course, we've talked about the fact that Park Avenue might be a good place for that, but it doesn't have to be the only place for that. And I will say, of course, the new development on the other side of 95 actually does have mixed use built into that but there aren't any conventional zones that are mixed use within the city that I'm aware of. And then objective seven, 5.7, just changing that to recognize that cities are ready been doing a great job of pursuing grant opportunities for recreational projects. So it's not just investigating. It's continuing to pursue those and not limiting to echo grants, but there's other grants out there that see you also taking into account. And I think that's it for our goals. Next slide. Okay, so we're going to keep going here. Like I said, just to kind of push through. Next slide. Next slide. So we're going to talk about a little bit about the CRA and then we can kind of comment on them together. So these are the primary and community objectives within the CRA, talking about the transportation infrastructure. Here there is talk already about storm water management, utilities, parks and open space, infill development, historic preservation, funding mechanisms, as well as the community objectives, those are short of more current events. So things like code enforcement and supporting existing businesses. Next slide. So the 40 year plan talks about having up to $58 million in capital projects, as well as $53 million in revenue. Now you see there's a gap there. So the expectation that grants would make up that gap. Now looking at just, it's been about 10 years since this plan was done in August of 2014. So now we're in August of 2024. So 10 years later, we're not hitting those numbers yet. And we'll talk a little bit more about why. So the plan showed $4.5 million in capital projects, we're at half a million. That's pretty big difference, right? Revenue side, the revenue by that time would have been 1.9 million, we're at 1.58, so not quite as far behind, so that gap again, big part of that gap is grants. Next slide. But the other thing I think that's important to note is that, you know, this plan was done in 2014. What takes a little while to put the CRA in place and actually start bringing the money in, so you'll see zero dollars of revenue in those first two years since 2014, so the CRA really hasn't been up and running since 2014. It's really more like 20. This is where my glasses aren't making, aren't in the job done, but 2016, I believe. So that's 2016 is the first year that the CRA actually saw revenue come in. And the revenue at that time was coming in kind of slower than what was projected. At this point, we kind of caught up. So now, if you look at the last couple of years, we're meeting or the CRA's meeting or exceeding the projected revenue year on year, but it's taken a little while to get there. So when you talk about why things haven't happened yet, part of it is just taking a little while to get the funds flowing and get them enough of them to really do any sort of major capital projects. Next slide. So this is the actual revenue that's come in against the actual expenditures. So you'll see it's uneven, which makes sense because you want to build up a little bit of savings and then start to do some bigger projects. So in the third to last year there, a big project happened, right? That required a little more than what was available just based on that year's revenue. Next slide. These are some of the projects that the CRA has done. Demolishing a property that wasn't in good shape, doing some surveys, water mains along US1, doing facade improvements. Those are grants to small businesses to improve their buildings, doing an affordable housing grant, associated with the housing authority, and as well as some work with some other rigid avenue properties. So starting to get those projects going. Next slide. And the biggest of those is the water main. That's the big chunk of the project. Another thing that's important to understand about the CRA is that there are for some pretty, so because Volusia County is a charter county, they have oversight on what the CRA can do. Many of you may already know this, but let me, I'll go on in case some people don't. So that includes, strictures in the CRA plan that CRA dollars can only be spent on capital projects or on staff time directly associated with capital projects. So if we come up with a fun idea like, Sierra should fund a festival while they can't do that with because of the way that it's structured. Maybe the city could do it, but the Sierra can't necessarily fund it. The also, there's also requirements that the county gets to say in when the plan is changed and that projects can't be done unless they're in the plan. So just some some limitations on what the city staff can do relative to the CRA. Now hopefully it's lots of good things that can still happen but just understanding those constraints is important. Okay and also that the there's some like this the county really because some of this fund money is coming out this the county really because some of this fun money is coming out of the county general fund they have an interest in trying to get these serious to wind down as quickly as possible which is not necessarily the same interest as the city so that's just kind of an ongoing negotiation. Next slide. So based on the vision plan there's needed updates to the CRA plan. We would include a lot of the CRA plan is actually focused on the 2008 vision. So in the addendum that we're doing, we would talk about this new visioning process and what changed as a result of that, the themes that we talked about, you know, really continuing a lot of current efforts related to the outdoors theme, talking about how the park avenue strategy would have changed since 2008 and updating those images so that they're reflecting what's appropriate based on what we know today rather than what we knew in 2008 and adding some strategies relative to the attainable housing. Next slide. So some of the concrete next steps that I heard the group asking for earlier, on Park Avenue, revising that comp plan and land development code to allow the pretty picture that we saw, assuming everybody thinks that's a good idea, potentially creating a bid process for those properties that the city owns to get those, if there's agreement that those should be developed to help jumpstart this main street, to put together a bid process for bringing a developer to do that development. I will say during the public involvement, we did have some existing property owners who were already excited about it, might go ahead and do it without the city doing that bid process on their own properties. So we're kind of expecting that the city would be the first end, but it's possible that with the rezoning in the comp plan, maybe the city wouldn't be the first in. Somebody else might might go ahead and make that leap. Thinking about design guidelines for park Avenue. So if you want it to be a quaint Florida Main Street, you know, we have an idea in our heads of what that might look like, that to make sure that that's what happens. You really want to accompany that increase in opportunity for the private sector, with expectations from the public sector about what you want that to look like. And we talked a little bit earlier about having a master plan for what specifically public investments might look like in the Main Street, including green infrastructure, taking down the power lines is something that's come up a lot. It's there a little bit of an impediment to kind of the ultimate vision for what that might look like. And if you look at the image on the right, you can see both the orange and the yellow in that on Park Avenue and you can see the boat ramp at the end. That's all single family. So right now, none of this can happen just legally, right? Next slide. The only real big change to the capital projects that we noted is the removal of Northern Gateway Park because of structural issues that that can't happen anymore, so that needs to be updated. Fortunately, probably a lot of the language about what could happen on Park Avenue is sufficiently broad that it doesn't necessarily need to be changed in terms of the capital projects. It's just that it might look a little different, might look a little different than what it looked like in 2008. Next slide. I'm done talking at you and here to and I should have also mentioned my colleague Nathan Milch is in the back here furiously taking notes as well so if I didn't if you don't see me riding it down he's got it he's been asleep back here the whole time and it's being recorded Just two quick points I promise we can go home. Ms. Dolbo bought up a great point about grants and my wife and I had a rec center not too long ago and Mr. Barlow found us an amazing grant from the United States Congress and we were so psyched and then we read the fine print. And a lot of times as Mr. Noble pointed out these grants come with like restrictions. Unfortunately we're a town that has term limits. So a lot of us here talking about all this stuff might not be here when a lot of this goes down, but it might be a good idea to put in not to jump on the grant so quickly and really look at what they, because our grant, we had a rec center, it's Ms. Power and Remembers, we wanted to make sure that half of our kids were below poverty level to the point where they wanted the families to provide their paycheck stuff every month. And I wasn't going to ask anybody to do that. So the opposite of progress is Congress. So we got to be careful. Unfortunately, I don't believe in term limits. This woman couldn't serve us anymore. I mean, I wish there were in term limits. This woman couldn't serve us anymore. I mean, I wish there were no term limits in this time because we got, and in a lot of what we're sitting here doing, you're young enough to keep doing it, but you can't. So I'd say we can go home now. And I will add just one more functional thing. You all have all of the objectives from the SEDS plan if you want to look at that. So if you need to jog your memory about something that you wanted to mention on the SEDS plan specifically. Are any other questions or comments? Catch, Christie. So just one thing, the picture with the mobile home park, which has actually been cleaned up quite a bit that one, the owners that came in there several years ago, done to me a pretty good job, and my mom lives off of Furnall or on Furnall. So I go that way, I see it all the time, and they're continuing to keep that pretty cleaned up, which is one thing. But with putting apartments in that's east of route one, which means it's height restricted. So that if you're, if you're going to look at putting an apartment, it's knowing that an apartment night might need a fourth floor to be viable or whatever, that I'm not sure if you're going to be able to see that in the next few minutes. Knowing that an apartment might need a fourth floor to be viable or whatever that that would be an issue on the east side of room one. The community center is on 442 It's not going to be here. I don't think it's not supposed to be here. Actually, I should have mentioned these exhibits back here, also here for your reference. That's a citywide map. That is the location of the new city hall, which is slated to include the community center. And the park out, which is close to the park avenue in the rendering. So which there's a room out there, room enough that it could be useful more than something right here. Here is would be restricted just due to parking. We've had things out here where parking is an issue. All right. Yeah, the middle level housing. That's, I mean, that's amazing that that's in there. That's added in there. Was that one of the amendments? It says amend to include that. Yeah, thank you for that. Any waterfront, this was seeds 4.2. Any waterfront access, not just Boston Whaler, not just by Boston Whaler. And I know there's a restriction to the amount of docks that you can put in. That's a, that's a why I was. John's waterway or one of those things. There's a, we, the state of bed water has a set number of docs that are allowed to be put in. So I'm just going to put that out there. If you have, you know, a certain amount going in at Boston Whaler that that's going to take up a pretty good chunk of those if I'm understanding that right. There is going to be waterfront in theory in Deering Park or in that in those complexes there's something like sweet water if anybody has been to sweet water by Gainesville, up in Gainesville. So while it's not the river, it is an ecological like it's supposed to be a pretty cool hopefully that's the plan with wildlife and birds and a place to go a place not just for the people that live there but for anyone to go and visit it. So I just want to point that out that while this while the river is waterfront there are other places that that can be useful as waterfront. No gateway park. I was like one of the first things. Yeah, there was a contest to name the park. It just never happened. I already want to know is that still going to be a car wash? Maybe. Anyway, yeah. Yeah. Yeah. It would be great. No, no, no, there's nothing against that. I know it's not going to be a park. It would be great if we had the sign saying, welcome to the ad water. Power line change and amendments to the CRA. What triggers a need to go in front of the county council or a CRA amendment? Like if you take out the capital project and you have a What triggers a need to go in front of the county council or a CRA amendment? Like if you take out the capital project of the Gateway Park, is that trigger? That's a change to the CRA, but does that mean? So sit on. The CRA is required to go before the county council every five years and give an update, a status update, and then with that any changes would also be approved by the CRA board. We go to city council and then ultimately the county council just as with along the update. But mostly that the mention that Eliza made was that if we wanted to make a major change like for example proposing something with affordable housing or a different kind of project or a different kind of goal if we wanted to add a goal that was different from we tried to leave the CRA language nice and vague when it was originally approved and written. So if you wanted to make a major change to the CRA language nice and vague when it was originally approved and written. So if you wanted to make a major change to the CRA, those would have to be approved as well. But mostly it's just a requirement to go before County Council every five years. Give a report what we've accomplished. Okay. Where we are kind of a status update if you will. So I didn't because of COVID, but we need to do that. Sam, will this adendum go, the CRA addendum will go before the county? Yes, so if it's County. It'll go before the CRA board first and then blessed by the city council and then it'll go to County council. So unless, I mean, I, this may be a little bit of speculation, but I think unless there's changes to the big changes to the amount of money being asked to the county. There's probably not going to be a ton of pushback from the county. I don't think so. I just I was curious about that what the what the timing would be on that. The other comment I have so that the revenue right now has caught up and is actually above what was projected for the CRA, which is pretty nice. Year over year, but still not, cumulatively haven't caught up. Right. But the expenditures aren't up there, right? So there were 4 million shy of expenditures. But to me, that's almost, it doesn't mean that the money, some of it hasn't come in. It's just that we haven't put, made the big project and haven't had to go for a grant. I mean, so some of the dollars are earmarked for specific projects. For example, the DOT is going to redesign the intersection here at 40, excuse me, Park Avenue and US 1. So one of the items in the CRA plan is to enhance your intersections and wayfinding signs and things like that that you'll see in the CRA budget. So we've been setting them there as a project and adding to it kind of like in the CRA fund So that when that comes available that there's money in there to do that project. Right, okay So I mean I just I'm not taking that as a negative that we haven't spent that much and just the the one caution for the city leaders is to don't do a new smirna and wait until year 19 and a half and be like oh my god we we need to spend this or the money goes away they take it from us so don't let it get to that point well there's a CRA and another county where it was all reverted back to the county general fund because it wasn't spent that I'm aware of. I don't, I'm not suggesting that that's where this, we're at the very beginning, we're in the early stage of this program. We just have a few things. I'm happy to see that the expanding in the healthcare and medical services, which is going to bring a higher pick job and help our tax base a little bit. And make use if we do that with Park Avenue. I think it's wonderful. Homes over top, apartments over top, and then shopping with the big sidewalks, outside dining, little shops with whatever they may do, hairdressers or boutiques, whatever, I think it's wonderful. And the bike path that we're getting, that's continuing to grow, F2-AT is going to work the bill for the bike path connecting a couple, the park, the whistle stop to Rotary Park. And it's not going to cost edgewater anymore. It's going to be paid for by the FDOT. And sidewalks for a big one in the vision so we're getting that which is wonderful in the pedestrian walkway. I do have a question on Object of 5.1. Establishing local incentive policies and programs, what does that look like? What does that mean? Or how will we do it? That's an existing program. So I might have to defer to Samantha on that. Do you have more detail? 5.1. Some of the local incentive policies and programs? So those are, for example, we have tax abatement that's available for those targeted industries that are creating 10 jobs or more. Those are some incentives that are on the book. And the past we've had, you had, during the recession we had, obviously wouldn't make sense now, but as an example of that, the time we had some incentives that would waive some of the fees for like a business coming into town and things like that that were available to be waived. We also had the Dirt for Jobs program in Parktown through Florida and Land Navigation District. So local incentives and policies and programs, we have some of those, and it's probably time, some of those have sunsetted to bring some of those back. And also just to kind of keep up on the times and what other communities are offering, and maybe some of those we could do something similar as we move forward. How do we attract those businesses? For example, we created that space commerce overlay district and then there's some next steps on that. What does that mean? That would mean maybe a quicker to getting a permitting completed or making it more shovel ready so that when those space commerce companies come to town that they can try to get up and building you know and open by in six months that's usually their time frame so just be kind of and developing those further and bringing them all the way to fruition with Council's blessing, of course. Microphone microphone. Are we with pork Avenue? We did with that. Are we kind of shovel ready for some of those projects? I know we have the one million square foot manufacturing starting. So that that area there, we, we are we geared more towards shovel ready when people come in because of our planning on a park town. I'm sorry park town. Thank you. Yes. Yes. Park town. No, no, no. But are we on that page in that area. So, Onyx development is working on their first building that's about 115,000 square feet. And then they want to start kind of the process for the second building so that they can have, you know, it's all about the cost of money right now, right? So that's not totally up to the city. But it's just that I think development services does a great job of trying to expedite permitting and trying to make that as short and as easy as possible with online submittals and quick return around a review and things like that that we can help get them up and going faster. Thank you. Further questions or comments. All right. I had a couple of comments. So we're talking about allowing different kinds of housing for the missing middle and just my first thought is we have already got 12,000 homes approved. So some of that is going, it shouldn't some, or some of that be accommodating that and giving us more of the missing middle the things we already have approved. Is that taken into account of some of the numbers we've been looking at? That, no, that's a good point. That isn't included. And then, that we're going to be included. And then. There will be some multi-family out out west. That's what I'm talking about. And then I did want to address because also. And I've got a couple things that are all kind of going back to the same point point. But you've mentioned in the comment that you had a property owner that was excited on Park Avenue. That's my district and I've had a lot of people that are on that street and just off of that street who are not excited about it. And I do and I'm not one that I'm just here. I'm going to say no to everything, but I do think the surrounding people matter and they should be brought into these conversations and that we need to be able to work with some of the people that are in that area that will be directly affected by it. And I think they should be brought into some of those conversations too. I know the edgewater landing projects come up a couple of times that I sat down with that developer and I tried to speak with him and he did a community meeting and the people were talking, but he wasn't really willing to budge on his project to change anything of what their concerns were. There were a lot of those people that I spoke to. I know we're saying there's a lot of newbies and whatnot, but a lot of those people that spoke to said, well, if, you know, there was slightly less, but he wasn't willing to change anything. So I think some of the people that we have to work with need to look at because I know the property owner who wants to build one thing matters, but I also think that if there's 500 people next door to it that are having an issue, they need to take some of that into consideration as well. But I mean that with any project. I think that we need to work with people who are willing to work with the current community members to move forward and kind of find a middle ground versus just, this is what I want, this is what I'm going to do. And I think we need to work with more of that and getting everybody together on the same page. Because I think a lot of, a lot of this comes off as anti-growth, but I think it's just certain that some people just want to see that the people who are still here matter and that we are taking a lot of that into consideration. And that's not really a question, but just kind of a point I wanted to bring up. Thank you. And by no means limited to questions, the point is to get your all's input. I'll piggyback on what you said. No, it's cool, Bob. I got it. So to kind of piggyback off what you said, we talk about it quite a bit at our planning and zoning meetings when the PUD agreements come up from the developers. That's when all the neighbors show up and they don't want it, they don't want it, they don't want it, they don't want it, they don't want it. So the problem is we needed them to show up three years before that. We needed them to give us their input five years before that. That yeah, I didn't just decide on Monday, he was going to put in a thousand home subdivision, he decided that. And it, you know, so a lot of that is we do want the feedback, especially me. I'm the tree thing, me, I'm the tree guy. I don't want to keep seeing them just level it down. I want them to leave as much of the trees up as they can. So my resounding theme, every PUD agreement has been, leave it all on. Only take out what you have to. So which inherently is going to start reducing the densities down because they're not going to be able to fit as many lots so I guess as the city especially since this is a visioning thing how can we get how do we get the feedback from the surrounding area well ahead of it even coming in front of PUD? They're are fun of coming to Pliant planning and zoning so that we've already got all this feedback. We've already had those workshops, those symposiums with the surrounding owners and like we're talking about with Park Avenue right now. Now's when we need to start having those discussions so that as Mr. Ryan starts bringing these changes of zoning to us, we're doing it with everybody's input from around us, not just, okay, it's on our agenda. We've got to do something with it, you know, because that's the one thing I've noticed in my years of being on planning and zoning is, even though the city sends out emails and they put things up on their web page and they put signage up Most of the citizens don't show up and give us their feedback Until it's time to vote and then they show up It's too late You know and some stuff we can't legally stop them from doing. They own the property. They're allowed to do it. The best we can do is try to get the best possible deal for the surrounding people. So that's the one thing I would like to see us as edgewater be better about is how, I don't know what the mechanism would be short of literally knocking on their door and saying okay listen You live on a thousand acres of trees Chances are developers gonna come in and want to buy those trees and put a subdivision Start talking to us now Not five years later. So that's my big I love you're out of way To get that input well ahead of it literally showing up in front of us on the agenda. Thank you. I'd like to say I think the Planning and Zoning Board does an excellent job and I thank you for all of your service. I mean, y'all have been in the works for years come before you and you all have them all teed up and ready to go and then they get shut down because that was years of investment and lots of planning on the part of the developer. So therefore when the developer. So therefore when the developer comes and they've already been through planning and zoning and done all this preliminary work with the staff before they ever get to planning and zoning and then they're shot down people in the public are looking and they are deciding are they going to risk even looking at investing their capital here if they bring it this far and it's shut down and another one is shut down. These economic development strategies were put in place back in 2008 and they've been a road map and the city and the The staff all came together and they put them in writing So everybody to the next people who came along and the next people came along had a road map They were already there and so as for this downtown main town, Main Street, I like the Main Street. It's a destination. It's a place everybody goes. So and I look for the city. We have all the planning going on on the west side of 95. The side deserves a main street. We've been talking about it for years. Why we haven't gone ahead and changed that zoning banel. I don't know. And then city. Talking about doing the building and paying for funding, all of these things, and you've got your building fund for the city hall. I don't see how the city is gonna be responsible for building these buildings here. So we need to have a plan and go ahead and put in your architectural design, whatever it is, and open it up to developers. That would give the city revenue to build city hall. We have to get into revenue, the physically responsible side and the revenue side, then more to diverse your tax base, the easier it is to fund all these things. So with all that said, a lot of this is planning and zoning, planning and zoning. Planning and zoning is extremely busy. Very lucky, Ryan played is overflowing. And now we see all of these economic development strategies that go hand in hand, CRA, the grants. My concern is who's going to carry this forward? We have had a very strong leader for economic development for several years, many years. And my concern is how this is going to be accomplished moving forward. Any comments from you? Mr. City Manager? We're actively looking for somebody to request. the committee. Mr. City Manager. We're actively looking for somebody to request. Okay. I wouldn't aware of that. So. Okay. Thank you for watching. See you later. Bye.