Mar 05, 2024 Planning Commission

[Call to Order]

[00:00:13]

PLEASE STAND BY FOR REALTIME CAPTIONS.

>> WELCOME TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF MARCH 5TH, 2024. THE MEETING IS NOW CALLED TO ORDER. THE COMMISSIONER WILL NOT LEAD US IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE.

>> I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS ONE NATION UNDER GOD INDIVISIBLE WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.

>> MY NAME IS MARY PITCHMAN. I AM CHAIR OF THE CLAIRE CONNIE COMMISSION. THE MINUTES WILL BE TAKEN BY CHRISTINE BLANCHET.

THANK YOU, MRS. BLANCHET. OTHER STAFF PRESENT TONIGHT INCLUDE ED --. THE DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND ZONING. LET'S SEE. MIKE BROWN. THE ZONING CHIEFS. CARSON. THE DECORATIVE DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND ZONING. DODIE. AND THE CHIEF PLANNER. WE HAVE COURTNEY --. THE COUNTY ATTORNEY. COURTNEY HAS A GUEST THIS EVENING. LEAH WEST IS A THIRD-YEAR STUDENT AT UF LAW. MY ALMA MATER AND COURTNEY'S ALMA MATER. THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. AND JAMIE --. THE ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY IS PRESENT. OTHER ANYBODY PRESENT THAT I NEED TO INTRODUCE? THANK YOU FOR PROVIDING SECURITY FOR THE PROCEEDINGS THIS EVENING. IF THERE'S NOBODY ELSE I NEED TO INTRODUCE IN THE AUDIENCE, I WANT INTRODUCE MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS. TO MY RIGHT.

VICE CHAIR PETE DAVIS. AND THEN WE HAVE COMMISSIONER HOWARD. AND COMMISSIONER --. TO MY LEFT, WE HAVE COMMISSIONER MICHAEL GRAY. AND WE HAVE REPRESENTING THE COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD, WE HAVE LANCE ADDISON.

AND THIS EVENING, WE HAVE KEPT IN SAN JOSE. THANK YOU ALL FOR BEING HERE THIS EVENING. THE FINAL SAY MARCH 12, WHEN WEEK FROM TONIGHT. FOR MARCH 26, THE FOURTH TUESDAY ONE WEEK FROM TODAY. THREE WEEKS FROM TODAY. THE ZONING PORTION OF THE BCC MEETING IS HELD DURING REGULAR BCC MEETINGS. IT STARTS AT 4:00 P.M. ZONING AND LAND-USE MATTERS ARE HELD AT CERTAIN TIMES ON 5 P.M.

PLEASE CHECK THE AGENDA FOR THESE ITEMS. IF THERE'S AN ITEM ON THE AGENDA TONIGHT THAT SHE WISH TO SPEAK ABOUT'S, FILL OUT ONE OF THE COMMON CARDS YOU CAN FIND JUST OUTSIDE THE ROOM. AND GIVE IT TO MISS BLANCHET. WE ASK YOU PUT YOUR CELL PHONES ON SILENT OR VIBRATE. IF YOU NEED TO

[1.  Approval of Minutes]

A MOTION? >> THE MOTION IS ACCEPTED.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSIONS? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, POLICE SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? THE MOTION CARRIES. THE NEXT ITEM IS A PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD. ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC CAN COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT INCLUDED ON TONIGHT'S AGENDA PERTINENT TO THE BUSINESS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION. SO, IF YOU WANT TO DO THIS, WE DO NEED A COMMON CARD. I DO NOT HAVE A COMMENT CARD FOR THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD. BUT I WILL GO AHEAD AND OPEN IT. SEEING NOBODY COME FORWARD, I WILL CLOSE IT. AND WE WILL MOVE TO THE NEXT AGENDA ITEM. IS THERE ANYONE HERE TONIGHT WAS NOT ATTENDED ONE OF THE MEETING SO FAR? LET ME GO THROUGH WITH THE PROCEDURE IS. ONE OF THE THINGS I LIKE TO EMPHASIZE IS THE ATTENDANCE

[00:05:02]

ALL THE PLANNING COMMISSIONERS OR VOLUNTEERS. APPOINTED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. WE SERVE TWO-YEAR TERMS THAT WE MUST REAPPLY IF WE WANT TO CONTINUE TO SERVE. AS I SAID EARLIER. COMMISSION DECISION AND ADVISER TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. EACH ITEM ON PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA AS PRESENTED BY THE MEMBER OF THE ZONING STAFF. AS PART OF THE PRESENTATION, THE APP INDICATES WHETHER THEY HAVE RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE REQUESTED LAND-USE FOR THE ZONING CHANGE. THE APPLICANT CAN THEN HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK. FOLLOWING THE APPLICANT PRESENTATION, MEMS OF THE PUBLICLY OFFER THEIR VIEWS. IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK, YOU WANT ME TO DO SO AND DO SEVERAL THINGS. FILL OUT ONE OF THE COMMON CARDS AND GIVE IT TO MISS BLANCHET. YOU WILL ALSO NEED TO TAKE THE OATH WHICH MISS BLANCHET WILL ADMINISTER BEFORE WE BEGIN. IN JUST A FEW MINUTES BEFORE WE BEGIN THE HEARING. IF YOU ARE NOT SURE WHETHER YOU WANT TO SPEAK OR NOT, PLEASE GO AHEAD AND TAKE THE OATH OF THE TIME.

THE SPEAKING TIME WILL BE LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES.

LIGHTS ON THE PODIUM WILL HELP YOU KEEP TRACK OF THE TIME.

GREEN MEANS YOU'RE IN THE TIME. YELLOW, YOU ARE GETTING TOWARD THE END. RED, THREE MINUTES ARE UP. YOUR TIME IS FOR STATING HER VIEWS. FOR ASKING MEMBERS OF THE STAFF OR THE COMMISSIONERS. YOU CAN DIRECT QUESTIONS TO THE STAFF FOR THE COMMISSIONERS AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE HEARING ON THE MATTER OUTSIDE OF THE MEETING ROOM. AND MIGHT HAVE TO STAY FOR THE REMAINDER OF THE MEETING AND HE MAY NEED TO CONTACT THEM IN PERSON OR BY PHONE DURING REGULAR OFFICE HOURS. AFTER YOUR COMMENTS, THE APPLICANT WILL HAVE A CHANCE TO RESPOND TO COMMENTS. IF DESIRED. OKAY. AT THAT TIME, THE COMMISSIONERS WILL DISCUSS THE APPLICATION IF NECESSARY, RENDER A DECISION. I HOPE THE EXCLAMATION -- EXPLANATION IS HELPFUL AND THANK YOU FOR PARTICIPATING IN THE PROCESS. WE WILL ASK MISS BLANCHET TO ADMINISTER THE OATH THIS TIME. IF YOU WILL PLEASE STAND AND MOVE TOWARDS THE CENTER AISLE. DO SOLEMNLY SWEAR TO AFFIRM THE TESTIMONY

[1.  Public Hearing to consider COMP 24-0001. (District 2, Comm. Compere) (B. Carson)]

ON THE AGENDA IS A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER SEAL MP 24 E- 0001. PRESENTED BY BETH CARSON AND DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF PLANNING. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> THE APPLICATION WAS PRESENTED BY -- . THE REQUEST IS A SMALL-SCALE LAND-USE AMENDMENT TO CHANGE FROM RURAL RESIDENTIAL TO MASTER-PLANNED COMMUNITY. IN THE DISTRICT, THE COMMISSIONER DISTRICT 2. IT WILL BE HEARD BY THE BCC WITH THE LAST MEETING THIS MONTH. THEY ARE LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF --. WEST OF THE INTERSECTION .

THE PROPERTY WOULD BE FOR SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL --.

THIS IS A PUBLIC NOTIFICATION. THEY WILL BE MAILED OUT TO AND THE PERSONS LOCATED BUFFER. ON THE LEFT, THIS IS THE EXISTING LAND-USE. IT IS ADJACENT TO --, AND IT IS NEXT TO IT. AS YOU ARE LOOKING AT THE SITE TO THE NORTHEAST OF THE PROPERTY, IT IS THE SCHOOL. IT IS THE EXISTING ZONING LOCATED WITHIN THE MASTER PLAN AREA. THIS IS A LITTLE DIFFICULT TO SEE AND IT IS THE LAND-USE MAP WITH THE ZOOMED OUT VIEW OF IT. IT IS KIND OF A POCKET AREA. OF TRANSITION BETWEEN THE PINK WHICH IS THE GRANITE FILLED ACTIVITY CENTER WHICH IS WHERE WE INTEND TO HAVE ALL OF THE COMMERCIAL RESIDENTIAL FROM UP TO 20 UNITS PER ACRE. IT IS MUCH

[00:10:02]

THE GREEN IS JENNINGS FORREST. THE SUBDIVISION IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO THE FOREST IS AN EXISTING SUBDIVISION. NORTH AND SOUTH ARE THE NEWER SUBDIVISIONS THAT ARE BOTH IN THE FRS THAT TOOK ADVANTAGE OF THE BONUS DENSITY AND DEVELOPED USING THE MPC STANDARDS FOR DEVELOPMENTS. SO. THIS IS THE SAME MAP WITHOUT THE BLUE LAYER WHICH IS A SUBDIVISION LAYER AND YOU CAN SEE THE NAMES OF THE SUBDIVISION. THE YELLOW WAS THE ROLE RESIDENTIAL AND LIGHT BROWN IS THE BE FRS. BE FRS IS TO THE DENSITY BONUS. THE ROLE RESIDENTIAL CAN DEVELOP THE DWELLING UNIT FOR THE ACRES. THE UTILIZE THE BONUS DENSITY, THEY CAN DEVELOP THE UNIT PER ACRE. WITH THE MPC. THEY DEVELOP THE ONE DWELLING UNIT PER ACRE UP TO 12 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE. IT'S LOCATED IN THE URBAN SERVICE AREA WHERE IT IS AVAILABLE AND PLAN TO BE EXTENDED. THE TRAFFIC IMPACTS WILL BE MITIGATED THROUGH THE MOBILITY FEES THAT ARE DUE. THE CURRENCY IS REQUIRED FOR THE DEVELOPMENTS. SOLID WASTE CAPACITY IS AVAILABLE. AGAIN.

ACCRETION IMPACT FEES LIKE MOBILITY FEES ARE DUE AT THE TIME OF DEVELOPMENT. THE SITE IS NOT LOCATED DOES NOT CONTAIN ANY REGIONALLY SIGNIFICANT HABITATS. IT IS GENERALLY FLAT ON THE SITES. THERE ARE NO HISTORIC STRUCTURES LOCATED WITHIN THE PROPERTY AND IT IS NOT LOCATED IN THE -- AREA. IT IS LOCATED 4/10 OF A MILE FROM THE GRANITE PEEL ACTIVITY CENTER. IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO GRANITE FILLED MPC. AND ELEMENTARY SCHOOL. IT IS FOR THE HIGHER DENSITY. THE MASTER PLAN IS A TRANSITION AREA BETWEEN THE GRANITE FILLED ACTIVITY CENTER AND LOWER DENSITY RESIDENTIAL STATE FOREST. IT IS PERMITTED IN THE RANGE. UP TO THE 12 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE. THEY GO DOWN TO THE ONE DWELLING UNIT PER ACRE. AS HE TRANSITIONED FURTHER WEST. THE WAY FROM THE INTERSTATE AND ACTIVITY CENTER. WITH THAT, STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL. AND -- TO SEE IF YOU HAVE QUESTION.

DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS AT THE TIME?

>> WHAT ALLOWS THEM TO GO FROM THREE UNITS TO 12 UNITS

PER ACRE? >> GRANITE FILLED MPC HAS THREE SUB ZONES. SUBDIVISION, VILLAGE CENTER AND VILLAGE ZONE. AND THE NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER. THEY ARE NOT BASED ON WHERE THEY ARE LOCATED WITH MPC IS LOCATED. THE MORE RURAL AREAS OF THE VILLAGE IS THE NEXT STEP IN. IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER IS MORE YOUR COMMERCIAL CENTER. THEY CAN SERVE AS THE VILLAGE NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER. MAY WANT TO HAVE THE VILLAGE CENTER WHICH IS THE NEXT HIGHER DENSITY. LOCATED NEXT TO THE ACTIVITY CENTER RADIATING DOWN

TO THE LEAST --. >> IN THE CASE OF THIS PARCEL.

CHEMICAL TO THE 12 UNITS PER ACRE?

>> IT PROBABLY WILL NOT. THEY COULD, BUT I DON'T THINK THEY CAN GET THE HIGH DENSITY OF THE SITES. THEY WANT THE AMENITIES ON THE SITES. THEY MAY NOT BE ABLE TO GET THE DENSITY ON THE SITE. THIS REQUIREMENTS FOR SO MUCH RECREATION FOR THE NUMBER OF UNITS. IS A LITTLE BALANCE THEY HAVE TO STRIKE.

>> ONE OTHER QUESTION. SOMETIMES I'M A LITTLE UNSURE WITH THE GRANITE FIELD. THE INTERCONNECTIVITY IS POSSIBLE.

THAT REQUIRES CONNECTION BETWEEN NEIGHBORHOODS. WHICH CAN BE CHALLENGING. THE INTENT IS TO HAVE MORE OF A COLLECTIVE

[00:15:03]

>> OKAY, THANK YOU. >> I HAVE THE EXACT SAME QUESTION. I GUESS WE CAN CALL IT A MINIMUM AND A MAXIMUM. IF IT IS THREE PER ONE ACRE, THAT IS A THIRD OF THE UNIT PER ACRE. ALL THE WAY UP TO 12 UNITS PER ACRE. WHAT ARE THE

VARIOUS CATEGORIES? >> WHAT YOU SHOULD HAVE IN THE HEART IS YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD CENTER.

>> COMING OUT FROM THAT, THERE ARE NUMBERS THAT GO WITH THESE AND I DON'T HAVE THEM RIGHT NOW. NEXT ONE OUT AS THE VILLAGE ZONE. IN THE FURTHEST OUT IS YOUR LEAST DENSE WHICH IS YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD. IT'LL BE THE SUBURBAN ZONE.

>> THAT'LL BE THE 12 UNITS PER ACRE?

>> I BELIEVE SO. >> IT SEEMS A WIDE SPAN. THE MINIMUM TO THE MAXIMUM. 36 TOTAL DIFFERENCE. AND I'M CURIOUS. TO ANSWER PROGRESSIVELY. WHAT DETERMINES

WHAT THE DENSITY CAN BE. >> THE VILLAGE ZONE IS 6 TO 12 UNITS. I'M NOT SURE THE SUBURBAN ZONE IS 1 TO 3. ONE UNIT PER THREE GROSS ACRES. UP TO THE SIX UNITS, BASICALLY.

>> THE MAXIMUM WOULD BE, 12 UNITS?

>> RIGHT. >> I DON'T KNOW IF I MISSED IT. I WENT THROUGH IT THOROUGHLY. I'M SURE THE APPLICANT WILL EXPLAIN IT. THEY RECEIVED EXACTLY WHAT THEY WERE ASKING FOR IN TERMS OF THIS. TO THEIR LOOKING FOR THE

GRANITE FILLED MPC. >> I KNOW. IT IS THE NUMBER OF

UNITS. >> IS NOT TIED TO ITS. THE SUB ZONES LOOK AT THAT AND DEVELOPMENT WILL BE YOU.

>> THEY ARE APPLYING FOR THE MPC WHICH COULD BE ANY OF

THOSE. >> IT COULD BE IF IT MERITS IT. THEY COULD MEET ALL THE REQUIREMENTS.

>> RIGHT. >> COMMISSIONER NORTON HAS A

QUESTION? >> THE 10 ACRES. HOW MUCH LAND WOULD HAVE TO BE SET ASIDE FOR PARKS AND RECREATION?

UNITS THEY ARE DOING. >> LET US ASSUME THE MAX.

>> YOU WILL TEST ME TONIGHT, REALLY.

>> WE WILL SEE HERE. 50 TO HAVE 300 SQUARE FEET OF SINGLE-FAMILY PER EACH UNIT. 300 SQUARE FEET.

>> YOU'RE KIND OF LOOKING AT THIS. WHO DECIDES WHAT SECTION IT IS IN. WE GO BACK TO THE LARGER MAP THAT YOU HAVE UP THERE. THE ACTIVITY CENTER IS IN PURPLE, RIGHT? IT'S NOT

WITHIN THE PURPLE. >> THIS IS THE ACTIVITY CENTER.

>> WHERE IS THE VILLAGE CENTER?

>> THE GRANITE FILLED ACTIVITY CENTER WAS SERVED WHILE IT

[00:20:04]

>> I'M NOT QUITE FOLLOWING HOW DOES THE VILLAGE. THE VILLAGE CENTER? TO ME THE SUBURBAN. THAT'S WHY I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHO MAKES THIS CALL?

>> AT THE END OF THE DAY, IS THAT THE CALL?

>> THE STUFF WILL LOOK AT THAT. THE IDEA IS THE HIGH DENSITY IS NEAR THE BE FAC. THE HIGHER DENSITY OF THE VILLAGE ZONE

WILL BE APPROPRIATE. >> I DON'T WANT TO DEBATE THE POINT WITH YOU. HOW DO YOU JUMP FROM VILLAGE CENTER TO

RULE? >> THAT IS YOUR FAULT. THAT IS FOR YOU TO LOOK AT. WHAT WE'RE POINTING OUT IS IT IS A POCKET THAT IS LEGISLATED TO BE HIGHER INTENSITY. IF YOU LOOK FROM THE NORTH AND SOUTH. THEY ARE SMALLER LOTS AND HIGH DENSITY. IT IS BE A FOREST. LOWER DENSITY DISTRICTS. THE BONUSES CAN GO TO THE MPC DESIGN STANDARD. FOR THE

DEVELOPMENTS. >> ONE QUESTION FOR THE SCHOOL BOARD. SINCE THIS PARCEL TOUCHES THE SCHOOL BOARD PARCEL. DOES THE SCHOOL BOARD WITH THE SECURITY WE HAVE AROUND SCHOOL. THOUGH PUT A CONNECTION DIRECTLY INTO THE SCHOOL FROM THE PROPERTY? PROBABLY A WALKWAY.

>> >> WE HAVE A SINGLE POINT OF ENTRY. WE DON'T ALLOW , IT IS EXACTLY SINGLE POINT OF ENTRY.

CAN THEY PUT A SIDEWALK ADJACENT TO IT? ABSOLUTELY.

>> ANYBODY IN THE PARCEL THAT WANTED TO GO TO THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL WILL HAVE TO GET ON A BUS WITH THE PARENTS WILL DRIVE AND GO DOWN JENNINGS ALL THE WAY AROUND THE SCHOOL.

I THINK THAT'S WITH THE POINT OF ENTRY IS.

>> IT IS USUALLY AT THE FRONT OF THE SCHOOL. THE SCHOOLS THAT ARE MONITORED FOR DISMISSAL AND I BELIEVE SO.

CERTAIN SCHOOLS DO HAVE THAT. BUT AS FAR AS I KNOW, TO MY KNOWLEDGE, AND DON'T QUOTE ME ON IT, THE MAJORITY OF THE

SCHOOLS ARE SINGLE FUNDED --. >> THE REASON I'M ASKING IT, LANCE, ON MOODY AVENUE DOWN TOWARDS ORANGE PARK. I FORGET WHAT ELEMENTARY. WHAT ELEMENTARY IS THAT? LAKESIDE.

I KNOW THERE'S A SIDEWALK THAT RUNS NEXT TO THE SCHOOL AND GOES BACK TO THE SUBDIVISION BEHIND THE SCHOOL.

AND A LOT OF KIDS USE THE SIDEWALK TO GET TO SCHOOL.

>> ON THAT SIDE OF IT? >> YES.

>> I DON'T KNOW THAT SIDEWALK. IF IT IS ON SCHOOL PROPERTY OR SOME OTHER STRIP OF PROPERTY. THERE IS A BIG NEIGHBORHOOD BACK THERE THAT KIDS CAN WALK ON THE SIDEWALK. TO THE FRONT OF THE SCHOOL AND GALINDO. THEY DON'T HAVE TO GO ALL THE WAY AROUND LIKE THIS TO GET TO IT. THAT IS WHAT I WAS ASKED.

>> COMING IN THROUGH THE SCHOOL PROPERTY? THROUGH THE

GATE? >> IT IS OUTSIDE THE FENCE AROUND THE SCHOOL. BUT I DON'T KNOW IF IT IS ON THE SCHOOL

PROPERTY. >> OUTSIDE THE FENCE AND AROUND

THE SCHOOL? >> THE FENCE GOES TO THE PROPERTY LINE. IT WILL NOT GO ON OUR PROPERTIES. FOR THE MOST PART. ANNA PREVIOUSLY BEFORE WE WENT TO THE SINGLE POINT OF ENTRY. THERE WERE OTHER OPEN UNITS AT THE GATE THAT WERE MONITORED BY STAFF. AS FAR AS I KNOW. WE HAVE ALL BUT ELIMINATED ALL THE POINTS OF ENTRY. FOR OBVIOUS REASONS AND SECURITY REASONS. AS FAR AS THIS PARTICULAR PARCEL. IT

[00:25:07]

>> YES. THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR. I HAD A QUESTION RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET FROM OLD JENNINGS. COUNTY CORONER. IT IS STELLA COURT. I THOUGHT IT WAS INTERESTING. DODIE. AND CEDRIC DRIVE. THE LOT ALONG THE ROAD. ARE THEY 50 FOOT

PRODUCTS? >> I'M NOT SURE WHICH ONES

YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT? >> IT IS THE COUNTY CORONER.

ON THE SITE PLAN AND ARIAL. YOU HAVE SAID WERE CONTRIVED.

THE PULLS IT OFF OF OLD JENNINGS AND SAY WHICH COURT THAT RUNS OFF OF THAT. LOOKS LIKE THERE WERE 50 FOOT LOTS.

CHECK. FROM CONFORMING STANDPOINTS. WE ALREADY HAVE PRODUCT ACROSS THE STREETS. IT IS THE 50 FOOT BY HUNDRED AND 10 PRODUCT IT IS WHAT THEY ARE PROJECTING NOW. LOOKING AT THE SITE PLAN, THEY DON'T HAVE ANY GREEN SPACE IN HERE. THEY WOULD PROBABLY LOSE A LOT OR TWO FOR THAT. BUT IT DOES LOOK LIKE WE HAVE THE SAME PRODUCT IN THE AREA? IT COUNTS FOR THE CONCEPT OF DENSITY. I WAS CURIOUS IF YOU KNEW WHAT THE

LOT SIZES WERE, THAT IS ALL. >> PROBABLY IS THE LARGER LOTS.

>> ANY FURTHER QUESTION FOR THE COMMISSION BEFORE WE HEAR FROM

THE APPLICANT? >> I KNOW SOMEBODY THAT LIVES IN THERE. WITH THE 50 FOOT LOTS. THAT IS NOT A NEW SUBDIVISION. IT'S BEEN THERE FOR QUITE SOME TIME. THAT WAS THERE. IT WAS PROBABLY SPRAWLING WHEN IT WAS PUT IN.

HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT? PLEASE COME FORWARD AND GIVE US THE NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. AND PROCEED.

>> THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK. MY NAME IS MAX ANDREWS. WE THINK STAFF OF THE SUPPORTS. FOR APPROVAL ON THE PROJECT. WE ARE SEEKING THE MPC DIRECTLY ADJACENT. IT IS NOT OUR INTENT TO DO 12 UNITS PER ACRE AS THE SITE PLAN YOU REFERENCE INDICATED WERE LOOKING FOR 50 FOOT LOTS.

JUST THE TALKING POINTS. COMMUNITY DIRECTLY TO THE EAST OF IT. THAT IS ALSO IN THE BROWN. THE MPC DISTRICTS ARE DOING 40 FOOT WIDE LOTS AND 50 FOOT WIDE LOTS THAT IS DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY. WE ARE ESSENTIALLY NEARING VATS. WE CANNOT DO 40 FOOT WIDE LOTS DUE TO THE PHYSICAL CONSTRAINTS AND SITES FOR THE MPC CODE. YOU NEED AN ALLEYWAY BEHIND THE LOTS. THEY ARE ONLY SOME ODD FEET WIDE.

BASICALLY ATTEMPTING TO DO THE WIDE LOTS. STAND BY FOR

QUESTIONS. >> DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS?

>> THE 50 FOOT LOT SINGLE FAMILY DETACHED.

>> ANYTHING ELSE FOR THE COMMISSIONER?

>> THEORETICALLY. LET'S SAY YOU DID THE 15. HOW MANY HOMES

ARE YOU PUTTING IN THERE? >> IS THE SITE PLAN IN FRONT OF YOU REFERENCED? AND THE PLANT CHANGED AGAIN. IT MAY OR MAY NOT REFLECT ON THE PLAN.

>> YOU APPLIED FOR THE CONCURRENCY. IF YOU CHOOSE TO RAISE FROM 34, WHICH I GRANTED CONCURRENCY FOR. YOU HAVE TO GO THROUGH AND GET AND APPLY FOR , OKAY.

>> ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. I BELIEVE THAT'S ALL YOTHIS TIME. I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS PARTICULAR MATTER. IS THERE ANYBODY WHO

[00:30:10]

SPEAK? >> HELLO. WILLIAM SCHAFER.

1935 SILO OAKS PLACEMENTS. FLORIDA. I OWN THE -- AND CHAIR GROUP FOR THE HR PROJECT. 30 UNITS IS THE MAXIMUM WE WILL GET ON IT. THE REASON WE CANNOT GET 12 UNITS IN ACRE IS BECAUSE THE CONFIGURATION OF THE PROPERTY ONLY ALLOWS --.

IF YOU ARE CONCERNED ABOUT THERE BEING 10 OR 12 UNITS OF ACRE FOR FIVE POINT SOMETHING 10 UNITS PER ACRE. WE WILL NOT GET ANYTHING CLOSE TO THAT. WE CANNOT PHYSICALLY FIT THIS ON HERE. I'M HERE FOR ANY OTHER QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE RELATED TO SPEAK ON THE MATTER? I DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER COMMON CARD.

I'M SORRY? THAT'S FOR THE SECOND . I WILL RECOGNIZE YOU

AT THAT TIME. THANK YOU. >> I WANT TO ASK THE APPLICANT.

WHAT ARE THE SETBACKS THEY'RE PROPOSING?

>> AM UNFAMILIAR WITH WHAT IS REQUIRED WITH THE QUICK COUNTY I THINK. AND DEUEL COUNTY. WE DO 20 FEET. I WOULD ASSUME THE

SAME. >> OKAY, THANK YOU.

>> I HAVE A CLOSE TO PUBLIC HEARING. I PROBABLY OUGHT TO DO THAT. AND BRING IT BACK TO THE COMMISSION FOR DISCUSSION.

AND/OR MOTION. COMMISSIONER?

>> I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUICK QUESTIONS. THE PROPERTY IS ZONED GRANA FIELD PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT? IT IS A LAND-USE CHANGE. WILL THERE BE A CHANGE IN THE ZONING OR IS IT

REQUIRED? >> THE MASTER PLAN IS A PUD.

IT IS A LITTLE BACKWARDS FROM THE REST OF THE COUNTY. THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE IS LAND-USE CATEGORIES PROVIDED ,

PROVIDING THAT CRITERIA. >> THERE WAS A COMMENT HERE THAT THERE IS ADEQUATE TRAFFIC. ESPECIALLY WITH ONLY 30 LOTS.

WHO DETERMINES THAT? THERE ARE NO NUMBERS LISTED ANYWHERE

. WHO MAKES THIS JUDGMENT? >> WE HAVE THE MOBILITY FEE SYSTEM SO THEY PAY INTO THE SYSTEM.

>> OKAY. THAT WAS ALL MY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU.

>> ANY OTHER DISCUSSIONS OR A MOTION?

>> I HAVE AN OBSERVATION. I HAVEN'T BEEN ON THE FULL ROAD DURING --. SEEING HOW CLOSE IT IS. ANYBODY COMING OUT OF THAT PROPERTY WILL BE CHALLENGED TO TRY TO MAKE A LEFT TURN. AT TRAFFIC. SCHOOL TIME TO GO AROUND TO THE SCHOOL. LET ME PUT THAT OUT THERE FOR CONSIDERATION.

>> THANK YOU. ANY FURTHER COMMENTS OR DISCUSSIONS?

>> I WOULD LOVE TO COMMENT ON THIS STUFF. I WILL GIVE YOU MY THOUGHTS. LOOKING AT THE MAP. IT ACTUALLY MAKES SENSE TO CHANGE THIS. BECAUSE IT DOES EXPAND THE MPC AREA. BUT ONE OF THE QUESTIONS . WHAT WE END UP WITH IS ANOTHER CUL-DE-SAC OFF OF OLD JENNINGS ROAD. YOU GOT MPC NEXT TO THAT. WE AS A COUNTY AS DESIGN ENFORCERS. WE SHOULD BE MAKING AND BUILDING A ROAD SYSTEM THAT CONNECTS TO THE REST OF IT.

THERE ARE ALTERNATE EXITS IN AND OUT OF THE COMMUNITY. THAT IS MORE OF A GENERAL PROBLEM. THE OTHER ONE IS. NEXT PARCEL OVER WILL COME AFTER MPC. WHEN DO YOU DRAW THE LINE AND SAY WE ARE NOT GOING ANY FURTHER IN THIS DIRECTION? WERE GOING TO BUILD IT ALL THE WAY OUT TO THE FOREST. YOU KNOW? IT'S NOT URBAN SPRAWL BECAUSE OF EVERYTHING AROUND IT. I REMEMBER. BEEKLEY. THAT WE HAD SOMETHING ABOUT ANOTHER PARCEL WEST OF IT A LITTLE BIT. WE HAD A DISCUSSION ABOUT CHARACTER NEEDING TO STAY A RURAL CHARACTER. HOW FAR DO

[00:35:01]

TO --. >> ALL OF THAT STUFF IN YELLOW WOULD'VE EVENTUALLY BEEN BY HIGH DENSITY. IT IS A QUESTION OF IS THAT THE INTENSE? WAS THE INTENSE THE WAY WE SET IT UP TO LEAVE THE AREA FOR THE RULE? LIKE IT IS TODAY. IT IS A QUANDARY. THOSE ARE MORE GENERAL QUESTIONS. THAT WE NEED TO THINK ABOUT. AS WE MOVE FORWARD. WHERE IS THAT

LINE? >> MADAM CHAIR?

>> WE ACCEPT THE APPLICANT'S IDEA OF A PROPOSAL FOR 30 TO 40 HOMES WITH THE LOT. YOU RUN IT OUT TO THE LEFT WITH THE REST OF THE CONCURRENCE. YOU CAN RUN THE MATH AND SEE OLD JENNINGS ROAD WILL GET INCREDIBLY CROWDED OVER TIME.

UNLESS THERE IS SOMETHING THAT WILL AFFECT THE INFRASTRUCTURE TO HANDLE IT. WE HAVE CREATED HER OWN BOTTLENECK. IT IS JUST

AN OBSERVATION. >> WHILE WE ARE HAVING A PHILOSOPHICAL DISCUSSION. IN THE INTEREST OF MOBILITY FEES.

PUT IN PLACE TO FUND THE INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENT.

IT'LL GO ALL THE WAY DOWN TO FOX MEADOW. WHY WOULDN'T IT? IT HAS HUGE DEVELOPMENT THERE. DR HORTON , THE CONNECTION MAKING YOUR WAY THROUGH. THAT ENTIRE AREA IN MY MIND WILL DEVELOP THE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. I DRIVE ON THAT ROAD FAIRLY REGULARLY. YOU CAN SEE THIS FIVE YEARS AGO. IT WAS INEVITABLE. INTAKE THE LONG BANK AND CUT THROUGH THE MIDDLE PART ALL THE TIME. THE MOBILITY FEE SUPPOSED TO FUND THE TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE. BUT I DON'T

SEE ANY OTHER WAY TO STOP IT. >> THAT'S WHY WE RECOMMEND

--. >> MADAM CHAIR IF I MAY. I WILL ADD TO THE CONVERSATION AS IT COVERED MOST OF IT. THE INTERCONNECT TIVOLI ETWEEN THE SUBDIVISIONS AND TIER POINTS.

IT DOESN'T ALL DUMP OUT ONTO THE MAIN ARTERY. BUT IF YOU LOOK AT THE SITE PLAN AND I BELIEVE IT IS A REQUIREMENT.

THEY'VE ALREADY CONTEMPLATED THE CONNECTION TO THE ADJACENT PROPERTY. IN THIS CASE. THEY'RE SHOWING IT TO THE WEST. I DON'T KNOW FOR THIS EAST OR WEST OR WHAT MAKES SENSE. THEY WILL SPREAD THE LEWD FROM THE MAIN ARTERY TO BETWEEN THE COMMUNITY. AT LEAST TO A CERTAIN DEGREE IN ORDER TO SPREAD IT OUT A LITTLE BIT. THEY ARE STUCK BECAUSE THEY WILL DUMP ONTO OLD JENNINGS. IN OTHER SITE PLANS I'VE SEEN WHERE THE CONNECTION IS IN PLACE. IT ALLEVIATES THE PRESSURE BECAUSE THEY CAN GO TO ALTERNATES MAIN ARTERIES. I WILL THROW THAT IN FOR THE MIX AND MOVE TO APPROVE THIS SO WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR AND MOVE INTO THE DISCUSSION.

>> DO WE HAVE A SECOND? >> I WILL SECOND THE MOTION.

>> WE HAVE A LOT OF PARCELS THAT NEED TO BE DEVELOPED IN A WAY THAT CREATES MORE OF A NEIGHBORHOOD OF INDIVIDUAL CUL-DE-SACS. YOU KNOW? THE BIGGER SUBDIVISIONS KIND OF SIT IN THE PLAN WHEN THEY DESIGN. YOU GET ONE MORE PARCEL AND PRETTY SOON GOING DOWN OLD JENNINGS. YOU GET THE EXITS THAT SERVE ONE NEIGHBORHOOD. THAT IS ONE OF A GENERAL COMMENT TO THE STAFF. THAT WE NEED TO BE LOOKING AT A WAY A LITTLE MORE HOLISTIC DEVELOPMENT OF THE PARCELS.

WE WILL END UP WITH SOMETHING WE WOULD NOT WANT.

>> FURTHER COMMENTS AND DISCUSSION. ARE WE READY FOR A VOTE? CALL THE QUESTION. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE.

[00:40:05]

[2.  Public Hearing to consider ZON 24-0005 (renumbering of Art. III, Sec. 3-5) (D. Selig)]

PRESENTED BY CODY, OUR CHIEF PLANNER.

>> YES, GOOD EVENING. THIS ITEM IS JUST A RENUMBERING OF THE CONDITIONAL USES THAT ARE IN ARTICLE THREE IN SECTION 3 E- FIVE. THEY HAVE GOTTEN A BIT OUT OF ORDER ALPHABETICALLY. WE WANT TO CLEAN IT UP A LITTLE BIT AND RESERVE A SPACE THAT WE REALIZE WE WOULD NEED AS WE WERE LOOKING AT POSSIBLY HAVING AIRPORTS IN THE CODE. WE WOULD NEED TO ADD. ITEM NUMBER TWO THERE. WE ARE LOOKING TO ANTICIPATE THAT. AND GET EVERYTHING BACK IN ALPHABETICAL

ORDER. >> DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? PUBLIC HEARING. I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON IT. IS THERE ANYBODY WHO WISHES TO SPEAK ON THIS MATTER? IF NOT,

I WILL CLOSE IT. AND NOW. >> I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO

IMPROVE -- APPROVE THE REQUEST. >> A MOTION AND A SECOND. ALL

[3.  Public Hearing to Consider ZON-24-0003, Proposal Addressing Land Clearing Disposal Conditional Use (E. Lehman, D. Selig)]

ITEM THREE ON THE AGENDAS PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER ZEAL WHEN 24 E- 0003. PRESENTED BY MISS --. MAYBE

>> THIS IS ALSO STAFF SPONSORED ORDNANCE. THIS ONE AFFECTS A CONDITIONAL USE AND IT IS LAND DEBRIS DISPOSAL FACILITIES. WE ARE PROPOSING TO ADD THE WORD OFFSITES INTO THE DEFINITION. TO CLARIFY THAT IT IS A FACILITY THAT IS NOT PART OF DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY. BUT IT IS A FACILITY WHERE LAND DEBRIS FROM CLEARING COMES AT THE FACILITY TO BE INCINERATED OR CHIPPED OR WHAT HAVE YOU. WE HAD A LITTLE BIT OF CONFUSION BETWEEN ACTIVITY OF LAND CLEARING THAT OCCURS ON THE PROPERTY. IT IS PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROCESS PROPERTY. IT DOESN'T FALL UNDER CONDITIONING USE.

IT IS A SPECIFIC FACILITY. WE PROPOSE CHANGING THE LIMITS OF THE ZONING DISTRICT IN WHICH THE USE IS ALLOWED. IT IS ALMOST ALL OF THE ZONING CODES. WE ARE PROPOSING TO CONTINUE WITH AS AN ALLOWED USE IN THE LIST OF DISTRICTS. WE FEEL IT IS THE MOST APPROPRIATE. AGRICULTURAL AND INDUSTRIAL AND VARIOUS DIFFERENT TYPES TO THE PUBLIC AND ONE PRIVATE AND AN EXCAVATION SITE. WE WOULD BE REMOVING IT FROM THE LIST. SORRY, I GOT OUT OF LINE. IT IS LISTING ALL OF THE BUSINESS ZONING DISTRICTS. AND THE NUMBER RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICTS. WE FEEL IT WAS APPROPRIATE. WE WANT TO TAKE THE OPPORTUNITY TO CLEAN IT UP, IF YOU WILL.

>> STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL FOR THE LANGUAGE IT

WAS WRITTEN. FOR THE ITEM. >> DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION IS AT THIS POINT?

>> THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. THE DEBRIS FROM THE SITE DEVELOPMENT AND ENGINEERED SUBDIVISION, THE DEBRIS WOULD NOT GO TO THE FACILITY. I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND. IT WAS THE CUSTOMER FOR THIS? IF IT IS NOT FOR DEVELOPMENT?

>> THERE ARE A COUPLE FACILITIES LIKE THAT OF THE COUNTY. I HATE TO CITE A NEGATIVE REFERENCE.

[00:45:08]

FACILITY. >> I THOUGHT IT WAS GOING TO LOCKDOWN A DEVELOPMENT. AND CAUSE MORE COST ONTO THOSE WHO WANT TO HOPEFULLY KEEP THE COST DOWN BY SHIPPING THE MATERIAL THAT COULD NOT DISPOSE OF IT ON SITES. YOU

ANSWERED IT, THANK YOU SO MUCH. >> ANY OF THE QUESTIONS AT

THIS TIME? >> I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THANK YOU. THEY WERE STORING MATERIAL THAT DID NOT COME FROM THEIR SIDE. WE WILL HAPPY TO VOTE IN FAVOR.

>> JUST A QUESTION. THE ONES LEFT EAR. THIS SEEMS TO BE ALMOST A BUSINESS LIKE A PERMANENT THING.

>> IT IS A BUSINESS. YES. >> THE ONLY ONE IN THE LIST THAT PROBABLY CONCERNS ME IS, THERE ARE TWO OF THEM. ONE IS A PLANNED INDUSTRIAL. COULD IT BE MISUSED TO PUT ONE OF THE FACILITIES SOMEWHERE THAT WE PROBABLY DON'T WANT TO GO? THE WAY P CITY GETS MISS YOU SOMETIMES? OR THE OTHER ONE IS THE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL. THEY INDUSTRIAL SELECT. IF THIS IS A FACILITY, FEELS APPROPRIATE FOR THAT ZONING.

>> LOOKED AT THE INTENT AT THE BEGINNING OF EACH ONE. THERE IS AN INTENSE. THEY SEEM TO BE THE APPROPRIATE PRICE. YOU HAVE EVEN MORE CONTROL FOR THE SITE. LIKE A TAILOR TO ZONING

DISTRICT. >>

>> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION IN A

[1.  Live Local Presentation]

LEGISLATURE. >> IT DOES.

>> THE REMEMBER WHO ASKED ABOUT THIS. IT'S THE BOARD'S REQUEST FOR INFORMATION ABOUT THE LOCAL ACT. WE ORIGINALLY WILL BRING THE TEAM IN JANUARY. I'M GLAD WE WAITED NOW. IT WASN'T INTENTIONAL BUT NOW WE HAVE MORE INFORMATION ABOUT PENDING LEGISLATION. LIVE LOCAL ACT TO GIVE YOU AN OVERVIEW.

IT WAS CREATED LAST YEAR . ABOUT THIS TIME. SENATE BILL 102. IT IS CREATED TO CREATE INCENTIVES TO DEVELOP AFFORDABLE HOUSING. AND MORE OPPORTUNITIES AND PLACES THAN WAS PREVIOUSLY ALLOWED. BECAME EFFECTIVE THE FIRST OF JULY LAST YEAR. IT ALLOWS LOCAL GOVERNMENT TO APPROVE AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENTS IN COMMERCIAL, INDUSTRIAL AND MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENTS PROVIDING AT LEAST 10% OF UNITS ARE AFFORDABLE. IT REQUIRES DIFFERENT LOCAL GOVERNMENTS WOULD APPROVE AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT IN THE SAME COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL AND MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENTS. PROVIDED THEY PRODUCE AT LEAST 40% OF THE UNITS AT AN AFFORDABLE RATES. AND THEY MAINTAIN THEM FOR A

[00:50:01]

PROHIBITS LOCAL GOVERNMENT FROM RESTRICTING BUILDING HEIGHT BELOW THE HIGHEST CURRENTLY ALLOWED FOR COMMERCIAL OR RESIDENTIAL WITHIN ONE MILE OF THE AFFORDABLE DEVELOPMENT PROJECT SITE. WITH THREE STORIES, WHICHEVER IS HIGHER.

REQUIRES THESE PROJECTS TO BE ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED. AND REQUIREMENTS WOULD EXPIRE OCTOBER 1ST 2033. IT IS A 10 YEAR PERIOD. THE 30 A REQUIREMENT EXCEEDS THAT. WE HAD TWO PROJECTS. SINCE THE LAW TOOK EFFECT. AND IT CAME TO THE COUNTY STAFF. ONE WAS WITHDRAWN. SEEKING FLORIDA HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION FUNDING THAT IS A LOTTERY TYPE SYSTEM. THE PROJECT DID NOT MEET THE CRITERIA FOR THE FUNDING CYCLE. THEY HAVE WITHDRAWN. BUT WE DO HAVE ONE CURRENTLY IN THE REVIEW PROCESS.

>> TALKING TO A LOT OF PLANNERS ACROSS THE STATE WITH A LOT OF CONCERNS ABOUT THE ACT. AND THE LOCAL ZONING ELIMINATES THE PUBLIC HEARING PROCESS FOR THE PROJECTS.

ENCOURAGES DEVELOPMENTS IN COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL AREAS WHICH MAY OR MAY NOT BE COMPATIBLE WITH RESIDENTIAL USE IN TERMS OF QUALITY OF LIFE DEPENDING ON THE INTENSITY OF THE COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL. THERE'S NO ENFORCEMENT MECHANISM. THAT'LL ACT TO ENSURE THE REQUIREMENTS ARE MAINTAINED AFTER THE PROJECT IS APPROVED. CURRENTLY. AS OF THE SUITE. THERE WERE TWO BILLS IN THE LEGISLATURE HOSPITAL. IT HAS BEEN REPLACED BY SENATE BILL. THEY PASSED IT ON THE SEVENTH. IT WENT THROUGH THE HOUSE AND WAS PASSED ON THE 28TH AND ENROLLED IN THIS PENDING TO THE GOVERNOR. NOT SURE WHEN IT WILL HAPPEN. THE SESSION ACTUALLY ENDS ON FRIDAY OF THIS WEEK. I NEVER FULLY UNDERSTOOD EXACTLY HOW THE PROCESS OF SENDING BILLS ONTO THE GOVERNOR WORK AND THERE IS A COMPLICATED SYSTEM FOR DETERMINING WHICH ONE. YOU WILL GET THE BILL IN FRONT OF THEM AND ACT. I WOULD ASSUME. IT'LL TAKE EFFECT UPON THE FIRST OF JULY OF EVERY YEAR. WE WON'T REALLY KNOW UNTIL IT GOES TO HIM THEN HE HAS 10 OR 15 DAYS TO ACT ON IT. A SUMMARY OF WHAT THE BILL DOES. ASSUMING IT IS PAST. IT SAYS LOCAL GOVERNMENT MAY NOT RESTRICT THE FLOOR AREA RATIO OF THE PROJECT. BELOW HUNDRED AND 50% OF THE HIGHEST FLOOR AREA RATIO CURRENTLY ALLOWED FOR THE LOCAL REGULATIONS. THE FLOOR AREA RATIO FOR THE COMMERCIAL INDUSTRIAL. ANY NONRESIDENTIAL PORTION OF A PROJECT. THIS WOULD ONLY PLAY TO A MIXED-USE. THEY WOULD BE PROVIDING RESIDENTIAL AND SOME OTHER USE COMMERCIAL RETAIL. THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IN THE ADJACENT TOUR MORE SIDES OF THE PARCEL FOR SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL. IT IS A LEAST 25. THE COUNTY MAY RESTRICT THE HEIGHT OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT BUDGET FOR THE PERCENT OF THE TALLEST BUILDING ON ANY PROPERTY ADJACENT TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF HIGHEST CURRENTLY ALLOWED HEIGHT FOR THE PROPERTY ITSELF. FOR THE THREE STORIES, WHICHEVER IS HIGHER. VELTMAN UNDER THE ACT MUST BE TREATED AS CONFORMING USE EVEN AFTER 30 YEARS OF AFFORDABILITY. AND AFTER SENSITIVE LEGISLATION. I DID ADD ONE SORT OF STIPULATION.

THAT IS NOT QUITE THE TEETH WE WERE LOOKING FOR OR HOPING FOR. IT DOES SAY IF IT VIOLATES THE AFFORDABILITY

[00:55:02]

SO. THAT IS THE ONE PIECE . >> WHAT IS RECOURSE?

>> IT DOESN'T SAY ANYTHING. >> FROM ACCOUNTING STANDPOINT.

IT REVERTS BACK TO A NONCONFORMING USE. WHAT IS THE STANDPOINT ON THE RECOURSE FOR THAT? OR WE DON'T HAVE ONE YET THAT IS THE CASE AND IS BRAND-NEW.

>> I LEARNED ABOUT IT THE DAY BEFORE YESTERDAY. I'M NOT SURE. WE HAVEN'T HAD ANY TIME TO TALK ABOUT IT.

>> IF IT GOES THROUGH, WE WILL GO BACK TO WITH SOME ADDITIONAL

INFORMATION. >> THE GOVERNMENT REDUCES THE PARKING REQUIREMENT FOR THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT UNDER THE ACT BY 20%. LOCATED WITHIN A QUARTER-MILE OF A TRANSIT STOP ACCESSIBLE FROM THE DEVELOPMENT. HALF A MILE FROM A MAJOR TRANSPORTATION HUB. ACCESSIBLE FROM THE DEVELOPMENT. OR IF IT HAS ALTERNATIVE PARKING AVAILABLE WITHIN 600 FEET. IT ELIMINATES PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR MIXED-USE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS IF IT IS WITHIN A LOCAL GOVERNMENT DESIGNATED TRANSIT ORIENTED AREA. WHICH WE REALLY DON'T HAVE ANY DESIGNATED AREAS. THE COURSE LOCAL GOVERNMENT TO MAINTAIN THE WEBSITE A POLICY CONCERNING PROCEDURES AND EXPECTATIONS FOR ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL UNDER THE ACT. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT FOR THE QUARTER-MILE OF A MILITARY INSTALLATION MAY NOT BE IN MINISTRY LOVELY APPROVED. CLARIFIES PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT UNDER THE ACT BE GRANTED A BONUS FOR HIGH DENSITY OR FLOOR AREA RATIO ABOVE LIMITS ALLOWED UNDER THE ACT IF IT SATISFIES THE CONDITIONS FOR THE BONUS. THE BONUS MUST BE ADMINISTRATIVELY APPROVED. AND THAT THE ACT DOES NOT APPLY TO IMPACT AREAS AS DEFINED UNDER THE FORCE THAT SHE. MIX CHANGES TO THE AD BELOW PROPERTY TAX EXEMPTION FOR NEWLY CONSTRUCTED DEVELOPMENT AND APPLIES THOSE CHANGES RETROACTIVELY TO THIS YEAR. SO APPEARED A SUMMARY. THESE ARE PROJECTS AND MULTIFAMILY MIXED-USE RESIDENTIAL. COMMERCIAL AND INDUSTRIAL MIXED-USE RECORDING ADMINISTERED OF APPROVAL ONLY.

THEY REQUIRE TO PROVIDE FOOD PERCENT OF THE UNITS RENTED -- 40% OF UNITS AT AFFORDABLE RATES FOR A MINIMUM OF 30

YEARS. >> QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS?

>> I HAVE A QUESTION. SORRY, DUTY.

>> IF IT HAS A PUD ZONING. AND A COMMERCIAL LAND USE.

DOES IT APPLY? FOR >> I'M NOT SURE IF THE STAFF HAS FINALLY ANSWERED THE PUD. PART. BECAUSE IT IS NOT ADDRESSED ANYWHERE. THEY TALK ABOUT THE ZONING DISTRICT. IF THE FUTURE LAND USE IS COMMERCIAL BUT YOU HAVE A PUD.

AGAIN. >> I WOULD ASSUME. THAT'LL BE ONE HE WON'T HAVE AN ANSWER TO BECAUSE SOMEBODY WILL BRING SOMETHING LIKE THAT TO THE TABLE WITH RESPECT.

>> OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS?

>> 40% OF RESIDENTIAL UNITS IS BE RENTED AT AFFORDABLE RATES.

WHAT ABOUT THE SITUATION WHERE THAT IS A DEVELOPMENT THAT IS

FOR SALE. >> THIS APPLIES TO ONLY

RENTERS. >> ONLY RENTERS. OKAY.

>> ON THE VERY FIRST LIGHT. HE HAS SOMETHING ABOUT 10% ON

THERE, TOO? >>

>> THE GOVERNMENT IS ALLOWED TO APPROVE THEM

>> WE WOULD NOT HAVE TO CHANGE IT TO A RESIDENTIAL OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT TO APPROVE IT AS LONG AS IT HAS 10%. WE ARE NOT REQUIRING TO IMPROVE IT?

>> THAT'S THE DIFFERENCE. >> SEE YOUR POINTS. I DON'T

[01:00:02]

AND GO RIGHT ABOUT THE BUSINESS. THEY BECOME ESSENTIALLY GRANDFATHERED IN.

>> HE TALK ABOUT ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL. WHAT CONSTITUTES ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL? DOES IT GO THROUGH THE PLANNING COMMISSION? WHAT IS IT IS SOMETHING ELSE?

>> IT DOESN'T COME TO YOU. IT IS A REZONING THAT NEVER COMES

TO YOU OR THE PROPERTY. >> WHO HAS OVERSIGHT ON THIS?

>> THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE. THEY WILL LOOK AT THE LAYOUT OF THE BUILDINGS. LIKE THE APARTMENT AND MULTIFAMILY USE AND MIXED-USE.

>> THEY WON'T HAVE A SAY IN IT EITHER?

>> THAT IS CORRECT. >> THEY LOOK AT OFFICIALS.

>> THEY HAVE TO TELL YOU THEY ARE ELECTED.

>> WHAT IF THERE ARE SOME THINGS THAT IT IS A DONE DEAL ?

ONE IS? >> IT IS ON HIGHWAY 220. NOT

WEST OF THERE. >> THAT WAS A -- RIGHT?

>> THAT'LL BE COMMERCIAL. >> ANYTHING FURTHER ON THIS MATTER? AT THIS TIME, WE NEED TO CONSIDER ANY OLD BUSINESS OR NEW BUSINESSES. ANY OLD ONLY BUSINESS TO COME FOR THE

[Public Comment]

>> ROUGH ALE, 27 --. LONGTIME RESIDENT OF 20+ YEARS.

U.S. VETERAN. MY CHILDREN HAVE BEEN IN SCHOOL HERE IN THE COUNTY. I WAS HERE LAST TUESDAY TO SPEAK FOR THE COMMISSIONER.

ABOUT THE RUSSELL RETREAT IN THE BUILDING SITE ADJACENT.

MY NEIGHBORS AND I HAVE TALKED ABOUT THE CONSTRUCTION. NONE OF US , WE ARE ALL BASICALLY UPSET ABOUT THE WAY THIS IS BEING DONE. THERE IS A CONCERN ABOUT --. I DID MEET WITH SOMEBODY FROM ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT. THEY MET ME ON SITE AND LOOKED AT IT AND THEY HAD THE BUILDER IN THE SAND AND DIRT THAT HAD WASHED INTO THE PROPERTY. ENOUGH TO KEEP

IT UP. >> THE LAND. I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY THEY WERE ALLOWED TO BUILD THE PROPERTY UP FIVE FEET HIGH. HE FIGURED FIVE FEET. SIX FOOT. SIX INCHES OF CONCRETE. TWO-STORY BUILDING. PLUS THE PEAK FOR THE ROOF. 30+ PEAKS. THAT'S BASICALLY ME FROM HERE TO BE WITH GENTLEMEN IS SITTING. A WALL AND NOTHING BUT HOUSES WITH HEIDI. I'VE NO INFORMATION. WE KNEW SOMETHING WAS COMING AND WE HAD NO IDEA EXACTLY WHAT. THERE IS APPROXIMATELY, ACCORDING TO THE WEBSITE. I HAVE NO IDEA HOW CLOSE OF THE PROPERTY LINE AND NO IDEA HOW CLOSE THEY

[01:05:04]

IT IS ALREADY UNDER CONSTRUCTION. I REALIZE THAT.

I DON'T THINK ANYBODY HERE WOULD LIKE FOR YOUR NEIGHBOR TO EMBRACE THE ELEVATION BY FEET AND BUILDING A TWO-STORY HOUSE ON TOP OF IT. WE ARE LOOKING DOWN. NO MATTER HOW HIGH OF OFFENSE I PUT UP. IT IS EASY. THEY BUILT AMOUNT FOR THEMSELVES. OTHER CONCERNS. 51 HOMES. WE LOOKING AT ABOUT 150 CARS COMING FROM THE NEW PROPOSED NEIGHBORHOOD. I HAVE NOT HEARD FROM ANYONE OTHER THAN THE ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT. I SENT AN EMAIL TO THE COMMISSION 'S OF THE PLANNING OF THE BUILDING. I DON'T KNOW IF I HAVE TIME. I DON'T KNOW IF ANYBODY HAS SEEN IT OR HEARD IT. I WILL TRY TO GET IT OUT TO YOU. I WILL SKIP LITTLE BIT. I WAS HERE LAST TUESDAY. REGARDING THE RETREAT DEVELOPMENT ADJACENT DEPARTMENT OF SILVER CREEK HILLS. THREE MINUTES IS NOT ENOUGH TO REALLY DISCUSS AND REALLY HEAR WHAT IS GOING ON.

LOOKING AT THE INFORMATION . DEVELOPMENT IS 51 HOMES. AND THE AVERAGE PROBABLY, 375. LOOKING AT ABOUT A $20 MILLION DEVELOPMENT. THERE'S A LOT OF EXCITEMENT FOR THE BUILDING TO DO NOTHING BUT CONTINUE BUILDING. IT IS NOT COMPATIBLE WITH THE CHARACTERS OF THE ADJACENT NEIGHBORHOOD. IT IS A HIGH DENSITY PROJECT THAT WILL BRING 150 CARS OVER THE CONGESTED ROAD. MY NEIGHBORS ARE CONCERNED ABOUT THAT . IT IS TWO LANES, ONE GOING EACH WAY WITH BACKUPS ON THE SENSING SIDE. ISOLATE WHETHER TEMPLETON AREA. I LITERALLY DROVE 45 MINUTES ON A GOOD DAY IN OVER AN HOUR. AND I AM SURE IT IS NOW EVEN WORSE. AT LEAST I DON'T HAVE THAT PROBLEM.

LOOKING AT CONGESTION. THE FLOOD HAZARD. QUALITY-OF-LIFE ISSUES. WE DID NOT ASK FOR THIS. WE DID NOT ASK FOR A WALL OF HOUSES TO THE VOTE NEXT TO US. WHY WAS IT OKAYED? THERE IS BRADLEY CREEK. NOT EVEN HALFWAY DONE WE ALREADY HAVE A TRAFFIC ISSUE. THERE'S CROSS CREEK AND NOW THIS.

WHICH ROAD WILL SUPPORT ALL OF THIS? IT IS BASICALLY RIDICULOUS TO QUALITY RETREATS. ÚIT IS NOT A RETREAT. IT IS A HIGH DENSITY PROJECT. TWO-STORY HOUSES. WE NEED TO FIND OUT WHAT CAN BE DONE. TO MAKE IT RIGHT. THAT IS WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR. I DON'T KNOW. I HAVE NO OTHER INFORMATION. I DON'T KNOW IF ANYBODY HERE CAN PROVIDE ME WITH WHAT IS GOING ON AND WHAT IS BEING BUILT?

>> IS THERE A STAFF PERSON THAT CAN HELP? I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH THIS PARTICULAR ONE.

>> THE COUNTY MANAGER WILL GET IT TO THE RIGHT PERSON. THANK

YOU. >> TO THE BUILDING AND PLANNING AND COMMISSIONERS. MY COMMISSIONER LAST NIGHT. THEY'VE BEEN MAKING THE ROUNDS WE DON'T HANDLE IT BUT THIS APARTMENT DOES. I CALLED AND THIS DEPARTMENT DOES. AND NOW IT IS OUT THERE. SOME OF MY NEIGHBORS ARE SHY. I SPOKE TO MY NEXT-DOOR NEIGHBORS. THEY

[01:10:08]

THERE WERE BULLDOZERS MOVING IN THE END. THEY DON'T CARE.

THEY JUST WANT TO MAKE MONEY.

>> I SHOULD'VE MENTIONED. THIS IS THE COUNTY MANAGER, SHERRY STEWART HAD JOINED US. YOU CAN GET HER CARD AND GET IN TOUCH WITH HER. REQUESTING MEETING. THANK YOU. I DON'T HAVE ANY FURTHER CARD FOR THE PUBLIC COMMENT.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.