[CALL TO ORDER] [1.  Project Update Presentation by WGI] [2.  Full - Group Session Discussion and Questions] [00:38:34] >> I WOULD JUST LIKE TO GO BACK TO THE ADU, ACCESSORY DWELLING [00:38:39] UNITS AS RELATED TO RESIDENTIAL VERSUS COMMERCIAL AND YOU'RE [00:38:44] RECOMMENDING FOR COMMERCIAL IT'S 30%? [00:38:48] >> I THINK TO CLARIFY, THE 30% WILL BE A GOOD STARTING POINT [00:38:54] FOR BOTH RESIDENTIAL AND NONRESIDENTIAL BECAUSE YOU DON'T [00:38:59] WANT TO HAVE TWO EQUAL SIZE RESIDENTIAL HOMES IN A SINGLE [00:39:05] FAMILY LOT. OTHERWISE, IT WILL BECOME A LOT [00:39:09] WITH TWO HOMES. OKAY. OTHERWISE, YOU BECOME A COMPLEX. YOU KNOW. OR A TRIPLEX. >> WHAT ABOUT THE NON-DEZ [00:40:28] RASHLY? >> I'M NOT SURE WHETHER 30% -- IS THAT WHAT IT IS NOW IN THE CODE? >> NO. THIS IS A RECOMMENDED PERCENTAGE. >> DO WE HAVE A PERCENTAGE? >> NO. >> WELL I WOULD BE OPEN THEN TO SEEING IF ANYBODY ELSE HAD SUGGESTIONS. OTHERWISE, I WOULD LEAVE THAT AT 30%. >> OKAY. ALL RIGHT. >> I LIKE THE HEIGHT -- I LIKE ADDING IN A HEIGHT RESTRICTION SIMPLY BECAUSE OF THE -- SO I MEAN IT'S A REAL ISSUE IN ONE PARTICULAR NEIGHBORHOOD THAT THEY'RE ZONED -- I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S ZONING OR LAND USE AND I'M NOT GREAT AT USING THE RIGHT TERMS BUT THESE ARE LARGER LOT SIZES ZONED AR AND WHAT HAS HAPPENED IS THEY'VE STARTED BUILDING -- THEY BRING IN THE METAL FABRICATED GARAGES THAT ARE THE EQUIVALENT OF AN AIRPLANE HANGER. >> RV IS TYPICAL, VERY HIGH STRUCTURE. >> I DON'T KNOW IF WE WANT TO ALLOW FOR RVS. THEY MIGHT MAKING SURE IT'S NOT HIGHER THAN THE HOME NOW THAT YOU SAY THAT. THAT'S A GOOD POINT. SO I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THAT ONE. STAFF MAY WANT TO KIND OF CONSIDER IT. WE DON'T WANT TO MAKE IT SO RESTRICTIVE THAT WE ELIMINATE USES THAT ARE ALREADY THERE. I AGREE WITH -- I MEAN, WE DON'T WANT HUGE -- >> RIGHT. >> I THINK -- WHAT DID YOU HAVE -- >> SUGGESTING MAYBE THERE'S SOME EXCEPTIONS FOR ACCESSORY STRUCTURES LIKE AIRPORT HANGERS, THE PRIVATE AIRPORT AND YOU CANNOT BE -- IT'S ACCESSORY TO A SINGLE FAMILY HOME AND IT'S ON A HUGE LOT THEN IT COULD HAVE THAT EXEMPTION ON THE HEIGHT. BUT NOT LIKE SOMEBODY'S GARAGE. IT COULD BE THREE STORY HIGH. MUCH TALLER THAN THE PRINCIPLE STRUCTURE. >> I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH WHAT YOU HAVE AS FAR AS THE HEIGHT RECOMMENDATION. >> SO WE WILL THINK OF SOME EXAMPLES AND WE WILL LIST THEM OUT WHAT WOULD BE CONSIDERED EXEMPT FROM THE HEIGHT EXEMPTION. >> WE SAW CARPORTS FOR RVS THAT ARE HIGHER THAN A HOME. MAYBE -- BECAUSE WITH RESPECT THIS HAPPENS IS -- I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT NEIGHBORHOODS THAT HAVE, LIKE, HOAS AND RESTRICTIONS. THOSE ARE DONE BY THE HOA,GY WES, OR WHATEVER BUT I'M TALKING MORE ABOUT WHEN THEY DON'T HAVE THAT AND IT WOULD PROBABLY CROSS ALL FIVE DISTRICTS. NOT YOURS MAYBE NOT -- YOURS MAYBE. >> >> SOME OF THOSE OLDER NEIGHBORHOODS IN ORANGE PARK PEOPLE WHO HAVE THE RVS, YOU KNOW, TYPICALLY -- >> AND JUST ONE MORE IF I COULD. GOING BACK TO THE MEASUREMENT AS IT RELATES TO PROPERTY LINE TO PROPERTY LINE IN TERMS OF EXEMPTION I THINK USED CHURCH AND BAR, RESTAURANT, WHATEVER. HOW DOES THAT WORK GOING FROM PROPERTY LINE TO PROPERTY LINE WHEN YOU HAVE TWO EXISTING LOCATIONS IN LET'S SAY A STRIP MALL. WHAT DO WE USE THEN? TUNNELING OF THE BUILDING? THE FRONT DOOR? >> I THINK THERE'S ANOTHER METHODOLOGY OF HOW TO FROM DOOR TO DOOR THE CENTER LINE PART OF THE PORTAL. THAT'S IN THE CODE SECTION 35 AT THIS POINT. >> OKAY. SO THAT'S NOT CHANGING. WE'RE STILL GOING TO BE USING IT THAT WAY. >> YES. >> AND WOULD THAT BE THE SAME FOR BEING OFF THE STRIP MALL AND ACROSS THE STREET MEASURING TO THE FRONT DOOR OF THE ACTUAL BUSINESS FROM THE FRONT DOOR OF THE PROPERTY LINE FROM THE OTHER LOCATION? >> THAT'S ANOTHER EXAMPLE THAT I THINK WE WILL CLARIFY HOW TO MEASURE LIKE DIFFERENT SCENARIOS AND PUT IT IN THE CODE LIKE IF YOU HAVE SOMETHING MORE STRAIGHTFORWARD THAT I JUST SHOW IT IN THE GRAPHICS AND THEN WE HAVE ANOTHER SCENARIO FROM DOOR TO DOOR AND THEN THE THIRD SCENARIO THAT YOU MENTIONED AND WE'RE GOING TO PUT THAT IN THE CODE. IN THE GRAPHIC FORMAT. >> THE SCENARIO HE'S TALKING ABOUT WE HAD A REAL LIFE EXAMPLE SO WE HAD A SITUATION COME TO US FOR A MEDICAL MARIJUANA FACILITY IN A STRIP MALL THAT WAS ACROSS [00:45:05] BLANDING BOULEVARD FROM A CHURCH THAT HAS A SCHOOL ON THE FAR PROPERTY SITED AND SO BASED ON OUR CURRENT CODE IT WAS NOT ALLOWED. AND THEY WERE ASKING FOR AN EXEMPTION FOR IT. AND IT WAS A VERY INTERESTING PROPOSITION BECAUSE THE CHURCH AND SCHOOL SIT ON A CORNER SO THERE WAS REALLY QUITE A DISTANCE BETWEEN THE SCHOOL AND THE FACILITY. >> THE SITE LINE WAS BLOCKED BY THE CHURCH STRUCTURE. >> I SEE. >> FROM THE SCHOOL TO THE FACILITY. >> IT'S ALWAYS EASY WHEN YOU PICK UP PROPERTY LINE TO PROPERTY LINE OR WHATEVER BUT THEN IT STARTS GETTING -- AND I THINK THAT'S WHERE WE NEED TO HAVE IT SPECIFIED. THERE'S NO ROOM FOR INTERPRETATION. THIS IS WHAT IT IS. >> YEAH BECAUSE YOU END UP DEALING WITH THE -- >> IN THAT SAME VEIN I WAS INTERESTED IN CLARIFICATION ON WE SEEM TO HAVE MORE PLACES OF WORSHIP GOING INTO MORE FORMER STRIP MALLS IN CLAY COUNTY ESPECIALLY IN THE NORTHERN PARENT OF THE COUNTY AND HOW DOES THAT AFFECT THE CODE AS FAR AS LIKE THEY DON'T HAVE TO COME AND ASK FOR PERMISSION TO GO IN THERE DO THEY? THEY DON'T CURRENTLY. SO THEN HOW DOES THAT AFFECT ESTABLISHMENTS THAT MAY HAVE ALREADY BEEN THERE? >> THAT'S A BIG RESTRICTION FOR ASSISTING IN PLACES THAT THEY SELL ALCOHOL AND DRINKS ON THE PREMISES. SO, YEAH. THAT WOULD. >> IT WOULDN'T IMPACT THOSE EXISTING TENANTS OR EXISTING USES THAT ARE ALREADY IN PLACE IF SOME HOUSE OF WORSHIP WANTED TO COME IN BEHIND THEM AND GO NEXT DOOR THEY WOULD BE ABLE TO DO THAT. >> AND WE'VE HAD EXAMPLES OF BOTH IN THE PAST IF THE RESTAURANT OR WHATEVER WAS ALREADY IN THE STÈRE AND THE CHURCH WANTED TO MOVE IN, OBVIOUSLYING THAT'S THEIR DECISION MAKING TO DECIDE WHETHER THEY CAN PUT UP WITH THAT OR NOT. AND THE REVERSE WE'VE SENT THE RESTAURANT OWNER TO THE CHURCH TO MAKE A DETERMINATION AND REMEMBER IT'S GOT TO BE 51% FOOD REVENUES TO BE A RESTAURANT AS OPPOSED TO BEING A BAR SO WE SENT THE RESTAURANT OWNER TO THE CHURCH TO SEE IF THERE WAS AN OBJECTION DEPENDING ON THAT AND THEN WENT FROM THERE. >> OTHER QUESTIONS, CONCERNS SCENARIOS YOU WANT TO DISCUSS IN FEEDBACK? >> I CAN GIVE AN UPDATE IF THERE'S NO OTHER QUESTIONS I CAN GIVE AN UPDATE ON THE TIMELINE MOREING FORWARD. -- MOVING FORWARD. OKAY. SO, AGAIN, JUNE 14TH IS WHEN THAT SECOND DRAFT WILL BE POSTED AND THAT'S GOING TO INCORPORATE STAFF'S COMMENTS. IT'S GOING TO INCORPORATE THE COMMENTS THAT WE HEARD FROM THE STAKEHOLDERS AND IT'S GOING TO INCORPORATE SOME OF THOSE CHANGES TO THE NUMBERING SYSTEM, FOR EXAMPLE, THAT MARIA MENTIONED. IN JULY AND AUGUST THEN WE'RE GOING TO BE WORKING ON TAKING ANY FEEDBACK WE CONTINUE TO RECEIVE, FEEDBACK WE'VE RECEIVED FROM YOU GUYS TODAY. ANY FURTHER FEEDBACK FROM THE STAKEHOLDERS. JUNE AND JULY WE'RE GOING TO WORK TOWARDS THAT THIRD DRAFT. WE KIND OF HAVE THREE CONCURRENT PROCESSES GOING ON HERE. SO THIRD DRAFT OF ARTICLE 3 AGAIN WILL BE DURING THAT JUNE AND JULY PERIOD. IN AUGUST WE'LL JUMP BACK TO ARTICLE 7 SO IF YOU REMEMBER ARTICLE 7 IS THE SIGN CODE AND WE ACTUALLY STARTED THAT THE FIRST ARTICLE THAT WE TACKLED AS PART OF THIS PROCESS. THAT'S BEEN IN LEGAL REVIEW FOR QUITE SOME TIME. WE EXPECT TO GET THAT BECOME HERE SHORTLY AND HOPE THAT CAN BE DISTRIBUTED FOR FINAL REVIEW IN AUGUST AND THAT ARTICLE 7 SIGNAGE CODE WILL BE ADOPTED IN SEPTEMBER. AUGUST AND NOVEMBER THEN WE'RE GOING TO WORK -- ONCE AUGUST HITS, WE'RE GOING TO BE WGI WILL BE TURNING OVER THE MAJORITY OF THE WORK, COUNTY STAFF WILL BE WITH R TAKING THE LEAD ON FUTURE MEETINGS AND REVISIONS. SO STARTING AUGUST THROUGH NOVEMBER THEY'LL BE WORKING ON MAKING CHANGES TO THAT DRAFT 3. SO THAT DRAFT 3 WILL THEN HOPEFULLY INCORPORATE ANY ADDITIONAL FEEDBACK THAT WE'VE RECEIVED AND THEY'LL BE WORKING ON MAKING THOSE EDITS. AN IMPORTANT PART OF WHAT'S ALSO BEEN HAPPENING IN THE BACKGROUND OF THIS PROCESS IS THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN UPDATE. [00:50:02] THERE'S BEEN THROUGH THIS PROCESS WE IDENTIFIED SOME LANGUAGE THAT'S IN THE COMP PLAN PARTICULARLY AS IT RELATES TO THE MASTER PLANS. SOME LANGUAGE ABOUT DENSITY AND INTENSITY. IT'S REALLY ZONING LANGUAGE THAT SHOULD BE IN THIS ARTICLE 3. SO WE'VE BEEN KIND OF PULLING THAT OUT OF THE COMP PLAN, PUTTING IT INTO ARTICLE 3 WHERE IT BELONGS. THAT REVISION AND TRANSMITTAL OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THAT NEEDS TO BE IN PLACE BEFORE THE ADOPTION OF ARTICLE 3 MOVES FORWARD. SO THAT'S A PROCESS THAT JUST TAKES TIME BUT THAT'S THE ORDER THAT IT HAS TO GO IN. VERY IMPORTANT. SO THAT TRANSMITTAL OF THAT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS ANTICIPATED THEN IN JANUARY OF 2024. FOLLOWING THAT ADOPTION OF THAT, ANY FINAL CHANGES, DRAFTS TO ARTICLE 3 CAN BE WORKED ON THROUGH NEXT SPRING AND FINAL ADOPTION WILL BE KIND OF LATE NEXT SPRING FOR ARTICLE 3. SO IT'S A LONG PROCESS BUT WE'VE GOT KIND OF THREE SEPARATE THINGS THAT ARE HAPPENING HERE AND IT ALL SORT OF HAS TO FALL INTO PLACE IN GO IN THE RIGHT ORDER IN ORDER FOR IT TO WORK. DRAFT COPY OF THE CODE, AGAIN, THAT FIRST DRAFT IS AVAILABLE ONLINE IF YOU NAVIGATE THROUGH THE COUNTY'S WEBSITE YOU'LL GET TO THIS ANNOUNCEMENT HERE. WHAT'S ON THERE, AGAIN, RIGHT NOW IS THIS FIRST DRAFT. SECOND DRAFT WILL BE AVAILABLE JUNE 14TH. EMAIL DODI IF ANYBODY NEEDS COPIES OR ANY DIFFICULTY ACCESSING THAT. AND THEN WE STILL HAVE OUR WEBSITE PUBLIC COMMENTS LDC CHANGES AT CLAY COUNTY GOV.COM IS AVAILABLE IF WE STILL ARE TAKING COMMENTS AND FEEDBACK FROM THE PUBLIC AS WELL. AND THAT REALLY CONCLUDES OUR PRESENTATION AND IF THERE'S ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS, WE'RE HERE TO ADDRESS THOSE AND THEN WE'RE DOING THE SAME WORKSHOP THIS AFTERNOON WITH PLANNING COMMISSION. >> ONE OF THE HOT ISSUES IN THE COUNTY AND MUNICIPALITIES ARE AIRPORTS, AIR PARKS, FLIGHT OPERATIONS. DODI, HELP ME OUT. WHERE DO WE EMBED THIS STUFF? ARTICLE 3? TELL ME WHERE WE'RE AT WITH THAT. >> YES. SO WE HAVE A DRAFT. WE HAVE A COUPLE OF LEGAL QUESTIONS WE STILL NEED TO RESAFIL. BUT IF ANYBODY HAS ANY COMMENTS OR -- THAT YOU WAT TO INCORPORATE, COMMISSIONER, I KNOW YOU'VE HAD SOME THOUGHTS AS WELL ON THE CODE. BEYOND THAT, YES. WE'RE GOING TO INCORPORATE IT INTO ARTICLE 3. IT CAN BE DONE THROUGH THIS PROCESS. IT WOULD PROBABLY BE A LITTLE EATSER TO DO IT KIND OF AS ONE ADOPTION FOR ARTICLE 3 CHANGES. IF THAT'S AMENABLE TO YOU AS OPPOSED TO ADOPTING IT NOW AS A STANDALOAN AND THEN WE REINCORPORATE A LITTLE EASIER IN THE END. BUT WE'LL TAKE YOUR DIRECTION WHICH WAY YOU WANT TO GO. >> I PERSONALLY THINK IT CAN BE ADOPTED AS PARTED OF THIS MAJOR CHANGE TO ARTICLE 3. >> THAT WOULD BE EASIER. >> IT SHOULD NOT BE A STANDALOAN DO IT LATER TYPE THING. >> RIGHT. OKAY. YES. AND WE HAVE INCORPORATED SOME OF THOSE INTENDED -- BECAUSE THERE REASONABLY PRUDENT PERSON DEFINITIONS RIGHT NOW IN OUR ARTICLE THAT LETS THEM KNOW THESE ARE GOING TO CHANGE APPROXIMATE IT SHALLY DEPENDING ON WHAT WE DO. WE'LL INCORPORATE THAT. >> THANK YOU. >> MADAME CHAIR. COUPLE OF POINTS OF CLARIFICATION. ONE, WE'LL MAKE SURE THAT EACH COMMISSIONER GETS A DRAFT COPY. THERE'S A LOT OF PAPERWORK AND HOMEWORK ON THIS WORKING WITH FAA, FDOT AND OTHERS TO GET US TO A GOOD POINT WITH THIS. I THINK WE'RE REALLY AHEAD OF THE CURVE ON THIS COMPARED TO OTHER COUNTIES WITHIN THE STATE. ALMOST -- IT'S FINAL PRODUCT WOULD BE A GREAT THING. SECOND THING IS THIS TIMELINE ANGELA THAT YOU MENTIONED AND I'VE DOUBLE CHECKED EVERYTHING ONLINE WITH WHAT'S AVAILABLE. RED LINED. CLEAN COPY. AND THAT THAT'S ON HERE. IF WE COULD UPDATE THE PROJECT TIMELINE ON OUR WEBSITE AND IF YOU PROVIDE THAT GRAPHIC WE'LL UPDATE IT SO THAT EVERYBODY IS CLEAR OF WHERE WE ARE BECAUSE IT KIND OF EXTENDS, THE TIMELINE ONLINE INTO HERE IN JULY 2023. SO DEFINITELY WANT TO GET THAT EXTENDED OUT. >> OKAY. >> AND THEN ONE POINT OF CLARIFICATION TOO AND JUST MAYBE [00:55:01] UP FOR DISCUSSION IF WE HAVE 40% FOR RESIDENTIAL, WOULD THERE BE A REASON WHY WE WOULD JUST NOT DO 40% FOR COMMERCIAL? AND IF THERE WOULD BE A DISCUSSION ABOUT THAT? AGAIN, MAYBE THERE'S A REASON WHY TO KEEP COMMERCIAL AT 30. I DON'T KNOW. RIGHT HERE SITTING RIGHT THIS MINUTE BUT IS THAT A DISCUSSION THAT WE NEED TO HAVE? >> I THINK >> SOME IDEAS? >> OKAY. ALL RIGHT. PERFECT. OKAY. GOOD. SO THOSE WERE THE ONLY THREE ITEMS THAT I HAD AND JUST FOR POINTS OF CLARIFICATION. >> I HAD ONE POINT OF FEEDBACK. IT ACTUALLY CAME FROM I THINK SOMEONE WHO LIVES IN COMMI COMMISSIONER BURKE'S DISTRICT AND GAVE FEEDBACK ON SO HE -- SO HE WAS TRYING TO READ REZONING SIGNS. AND OUR SIGNS ARE VERY LARGE AND THE PRINT IS VERY SMALL. AND WE USE TERMINOLOGY ON THOSE THAT IS NOT CLEAR TO THE PUBLIC AND SO THIS RESIDENT STOPPED TO TAKE A PICTURE OF THE SIGN BECAUSE HE STOPPED TO READ THE SIGN, A SHERIFF'S DEPUTY PULLED OFF THE SIDE OF THE ROAD AND SAID HE COULD NOT STOP WHERE HE WAS STOPPED OR WHATEVER AND SO -- BUT HE SAID THEN CAN I TAKE A PICTURE OF IT AND ANYWAY, HE BRINGS UP A GOOD POINT. WE PUT UP SIGNS BUT THEY SAY SOMETHING LIKE GOING FROM UC 10 TO UC 16. I'M USING THAT AS AN EXAMPLE. BUT TO THE GENERAL PUBLIC, THAT DOESN'T TELL THEM WHAT THE PROPOSAL IS FROM THAT -- SO I DON'T KNOW HOW WE CAN INCORPORATE BETTER COMMUNICATION, BETTER TRANSPARENCY TO THE PUBLIC TO SAY THIS IS CURRENTLY ZONED RESIDENTIAL AND SOMEONE IS TRYING TO TAKE IT COMMERCIAL OR THIS IS CURRENTLY ZONED FOR SINGLE FAMILY HOMES ONE PER FIVE ACRES AND WE'RE TRYING TO TAKE IT TO TEN PER ACRE OR -- I'M NOT SAYING THAT WE WANT TO GET INTO THE WHOLE INTENTION OF THE -- HE GAVE THAT FEEDBACK -- I THOUGHT IT WAS VALUABLE FEEDBACK. BUT I THOUGHT IT WAS VALUABLE. WE ALSO DON'T ADDRESS THOSE SIGNS COMING BACK DOWN THERE'S BEEN ONE UP AT THE CORNER AT 315 AND 16 FOR TWO YEARS. OTHER QUESTIONS, COMMENTS BEFORE WE MOVE FORWARD? SO I'M INTERESTED NOW TO -- THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> WE HAD PUBLIC COMMENT AT THE BEGINNING. I'M JUST INTERESTED TO KNOW WE [PUBLIC COMMENTS] HAVE QUITE A FEW MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC HERE. I WAS GOING TO OPEN UP PUB LIB COMMENT AGAIN TO SEE IF ANY OF YOU HAVE ANYTHING NOW THAT YOU'VE LISTENED TO THE PRESENTATION THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK TO US ABOUT. >> HI. SUSAN FRAZIER. Y'ALL KNOW MY ADDRESS. SO THE ONLY THING I BRING UP IS ALITTLE BIT OF HISTORY ABOUT THE ALCOHOL DISTANCE AND IT JUST CAME TO LIGHT BECAUSE OF ALL THE CONVERSATION YOU ARE HAVING THIS AFTERNOON. THE COUNTY TOOK A BIG DISCUSSION ABOUT ALCOHOL DISTANCE FROM CHURCHES AND MOSTLY RELIGIOUS INSTITUTIONS. SEVERAL YEARS AGO IN BLAKE ASBURY AND ONE THING THE COUNT TIP FINDS SIT CANNOT ATTRACT SITDOWN YOU RESTAURANTS OR QUALITY RESTAURANTS YOU'RE TRYING TO GET AND IT WAS MADE CLEAR THAT THAT IS BECAUSE THERE ARE CHURCHES EVERYWHERE AND YOU EXCLUDE ONE FOR THE OTHER SO I WOULD SAY THAT DEBATE WAS ROBUST AND THERE WERE CHANGES TO THE ALCOHOL DISTANCE REQUIREMENTS MADE BY ORTS UNDERSTANDS AT THAT TIME. THERE WAS ACTUALLY A PF2 CHURCH ZONING GOING ON IN LAKE ASBURY THAT WOULD HAVE PRECLUDED RESTAURANTS EVERYWHERE. AND SO THE PEOPLE WHO HAD PROPERTY AND HAD INVESTED IN PROPERTY AND THE RESTAURANT WAS THEIR NEXT ASPIRATION ACTUALLY GOT UP AND SAID YOU'RE PRECLUDING AN INVESTMENT I MADE FOR YEARS AND YEARS BY THIS ONE DECISION. SO I AGREE THAT IT'S WORTH ROBUST DEBATE AND IT'S BEEN HAS HAD BUT IT WAS ABOUT THE ASSEMBLY USE. THE RELIGIOUS USE IN THE STRIP CENTERS AND THAT THEY CREATE A BUFFER BOUNDARY AROUND THEM UNINTENTIONALLY. SO I ENCOURAGE YOU TO GIVE THAT A LOT OF THOUGHT BECAUSE THERE'S BOTH SIDES TO THAT CONVERSATION. >> THANK YOU. ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENT? >> I HAVE A QUESTIONED REGARDING THAT. >> SURE. BUT IF IT'S 51% FOOD THEN IT'S NOT -- THERE'S NOT A PROBLEM WIT. RIGHT? ISN'T THAT WHAT I JUST HEARD? [01:00:02] >> TO BE CONSIDERED A RESTAURANT AND NOT BAR, IT HAS TO HAVE REVENUE DID YOU ARRIVED BID THE ESTABLISHMENT HAS TO BE 5 #% FOOD OR IT'S 50 PLUS ON THAT SIDE. SO OTHERWISE IT'S CONSIDERED A BAR AND IT'S TREATED DIFFERENTLY IN THE CODE AS BAR COMPARED TO RESTAURANT. >> SO THE ONE IN LAKE ASBURY, FOR EXAMPLE, IF IT'S A RESTAURANT WITH OVER 51% FOOD AND THEY CAN PROVE THAT IT WOULD NOT BE AN ISSUE CORRECT? THAT WHAT I'M HEARING? >> WELL, AGAIN, IT DEPENDS ON THE CODE. WHY WHAT LAKE ASBURY HAS AS A REFERENCE WHETHER IT'S DIFFERENT OR THE SAME FROM THE REST OF THE COUNTY. >> MIKE. DO YOU WANT TO COME UP? >> I THINK IT WAS FIXED VERY MUCH TO ACCOMMODATE RESTAURANTS AND CHURCHES. SO IF YOU'RE MAKING A REVIEW, BE AWARE OF WHERE THAT LINE IS AND DON'T CROSS BACK OVER BECAUSE I THINK IT WAS REMEDIED AND SO THE WAY YOU WRITE THE CODE NOW IS CONSISTENT WITH THE WAY IT IS TODAY I THINK YOU'RE GOING TO BE OKAY. >> OKAY. THANK YOU. >> WE DO FREQUENTLY HEAR MORE RESTAURANTS SO WE WANT TO BE AWARE OF THAT. DID THAT CLARIFY? >> YES. >> OKAY. >> GO AHEAD. >> YES. THANK YOU SO MUCH. THANK YOU FOR THIS PRESENTATION. FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO COME HERE. MY NAME IS WILLIAM SCHAEFER. 1935 SILO OAKS PLACE MIDDLEBURG, FLORIDA. I'M HERE AS A RESIDENT AND ALSO I OWN AN ENGINEERING COMPANY AND I'M ACTIVE ON THE NORTHEAST FLORIDA BUILDERS ASSOCIATION. I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO HAVE THESE PRESENTATIONS AND FOR THE OPPORTUNITY FOR THE STAKEHOLDERS TO BE ABLE TO PROVIDE FEEDBACK TO THE USE DRAFTS. I JUST WANT TO SAY THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> THANK YOU. ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENT? [COMMISSIONERS' COMMENTS] OKAY. THANK YOU. >> SO I'LL COME BACK TO COMMISSIONER COMMENTS. COMMISSIONER, DID YOU HAVE ANY? >> COMMISSIONER >> I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. JUST A QUICK COMMENT. I LIKE THE IDEA OF USING GRAPHICS. I THINK THAT MAKES THINGS A LOT EASIER GOING FORWARD AND CERTAINLY CLARIFIES THAT A SINGLE GLANCE RATHER THAN HAVING TO GET SIX PEOPLE TO TRY TO INTERPRET WHAT WAS SUBMITTED BY THAT PARTICULAR CODE WHATEVER THE CASE MAY BE. SO I THINK WE'RE GOING NO IN RIGHT DIRECTION AND I'M GLAD SUSAN MENTIONED IN TERMS OF THE RESTAURANTS THERE ARE CERTAIN THINGS THAT WE'VE SORT OF ADOPTED THAT I THINK WE NEED TO KEEP IT THAT WAY RATHER THAN MOVING FORWARD AND UNDERSTAND WHY IT WAS PUT INTO THE CODE IN THAT FASHION. SO I THINK AS WE MOVE FORWARD THOSE THINGS WILL WORK THEMSELVES OUT. >> YEAH. AND I AGREE WITH YOU. I REALLY LIKE YOUR CHART THAT -- AND YOU GAVE THE EXAMPLE OF THE AGRICULTURAL USES IN THERE AND THEN YOU GAVE ALL OF THE DIFFERENT CATEGORIES. SO WE FREQUENTLY IT SEEMS TO BE THE FLAVOR OF THE MONTH RIGHT NOW WE GET HIT ON SOCIAL MEDIA A LOT ABOUT CAR WASHES. AND STORAGE BUILDINGS. AND SO I THINK IT WOULD BE -- SO WHEN YOU DO THAT AND YOU MAY ALREADY -- OBVIOUSLY WHEN YOU'RE AT CS, IT WOULD BE VALUABLE TO LIST THE USES THAT ALL OF THESE THINGS CAN BE AND THIS PARTICULAR ONE AND NOT JUST LIMITED TO AND IN FACT WE TYPICALLY DON'T EXCLUDE SPECIFIC LOCATIONS FOR THAT SAME REASON. THERE SEEMS TO BE NOT A LOT OF CLARITY IN THE PUBLIC THAT IF YOU'RE WITHIN A SHONING OR LAND USE YOU CAN DO ANY OF THESE. -- ZONING OR LAND USE YOU CAN DO ANY OF THESE. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? ANYTHING ELSE? COUNTY MANAGER, ANYTHING ELSE? * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.