[1. Approval of Minutes]
[1. Public Hearing to consider COMP 24-0004 and PUD 24-0003. (District 5, Comm. Burke) (D. Selig)]
[2. Public Hearing to consider transmittal of COMP 24-0005 (B. Carson)]
[3. Public Hearing to consider transmittal of COMP 24-0002. (District 5, Comm. Burke) (B. Carson)]
[4. Public Hearing to Consider ZON-24-0004. (District 4, Comm. Condon) (M. Brown)]
[5. Public Hearing to Consider COMP0923-00012, Adoption of Proposed Amendment to FLUM Changing 3145 Acres from AG, RR, IND, CO, and COMM to PC and to Amend Urban Service Area to Include the 3145 Acres (Commissioner Burke)(E. Lehman and D. Selig)]
[01:24:22]
[01:24:25]
THAT HAVE BEEN UPDATED. OKAY IT IS NOT ON , THE RIO. A[01:24:50]
BRIEF OVERVIEW OF THE TIMELINE. YOU GUYS KNOW MOST[01:24:58]
OF THIS. THIS STARTED A LONG TIME AGO NOW. WE HAVE STARTED[01:25:06]
THIS PROCESS TWO YEARS AGO. YOU KNOW WE HAVE SPENT A LONG[01:25:16]
TIME, A LOT OF STUDIES HAVE BEEN DONE IN THE INTERIM AND I[01:25:23]
HAD MORE THAN A FEW PRE-APPLICATION MEETINGS WITH[01:25:25]
COUNTY STAFF MUCH OF THEIR CREDIT THEY KEPT LETTING US[01:25:27]
COME AND TALK TO THEM. FINALLY IN AUGUST OF LAST YEAR THEY[01:25:53]
SAID THAT'S IT LET'S GO AHEAD WITH THE APPLICATION. SO WE[01:25:54]
SUBMITTED IN SEPTEMBER. WE SUBMITTED THE PUD, DRAFT[01:25:56]
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT ALONG WITH THE ZONING CHANGE AND[01:25:57]
OBVIOUSLY WE WERE BEFORE YOU GUYS IN THE BOARD OF COUNTY[01:25:58]
COMMISSIONERS IN DECEMBER RECEIVED COMMENTS IN THE STAFF[01:25:59]
REPORT AND PUBLIC HEARINGS. WENT THROUGH TRANSMITTED TO THE[01:26:02]
STATE. WE HAD PUBLIC WORKSHOP WITH YOU GUYS IN FEBRUARY AND[01:26:07]
HEARD BACK FROM THE STATE ALSO IN FEBRUARY. IN RESPONSE TO[01:26:14]
THE REPORT WE GOT FROM THE STATE WE HAVE FILED REVISED COMP PLAN AMENDMENTS INCLUDING TEXT AMENDMENTS THAT WOULD ADDRESS SPECIFIC THINGS ON THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT ELEMENT AND WE HAVE MADE CHANGES TO THE PUD REZONING WHICH HAVE ALL BEEN SUBMITTED. KIND OF UPDATED SOME COMMITMENTS AND INFRASTRUCTURE BASED ON YOUR COMMENTS. BASED ON COMMENTS FROM THE STATE AND STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS. WE HAD SOME SUPPLEMENTAL DATA AND ANALYSIS INCLUDING SUPPLEMENTAL TRAFFIC INFORMATION THAT WAS ALSO FILED AT THE TIME TO HELP SOME OF THE STATE'S COMMENTS. THE PROCESS HAS BEEN UNIQUE. I WOULD SAY STARTING WITH THE PRE-APPLICATION WORK WITH COUNTY STAFF AND TEMPS AT TRANSPARENCY WITH OPEN COMMUNICATION IN THE COMMUNITY. SUBMITTALS I THINK ARE DEFINITELY MORE PAGES THAN MOST AND PROBABLY SOME OF THE MORE DETAILED THAT THE COUNTY HAS EVER SEEN DUE TO THE EFFORTS BY OUR TEAM. AND STAFF YOU KNOW, HERE WE ARE HERE.WE GREATLY APPRECIATE OR HAVE GREATLY APPRECIATED ALL THE FEEDBACK WE HAVE GOTTEN BOTH FROM YOU THE COUNTY COMMISSION AND FROM STAFF. THROUGHOUT THE PROCESS. SO WE MET WITH STAFF LAST TUESDAY AS A FINAL CHECK IN HERE BEFORE THESE MEETINGS AND REVIEWED AND RECEIVED THE STAFF REPORT AND COMMENTS. AND WE BELIEVE AND STAFF ARE IN AGREEMENT ON PRETTY MUCH ALL OF THE ISSUES EXCEPT TWO. BOTH OF WHICH WERE DISCUSSED AND BROUGHT UP AND HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED AT LENGTH, KIND OF WITH YOU AND AT VARIOUS MEETINGS AND THE COUNTY WORKSHOP. YOU CAN GO TO THE NEXT ONE. SO THIS WAS JUST, YEAH. THAT IS MORE OF WHAT HAPPENED WITH THE STATE REVIEW PROCESS. OBVIOUSLY AND GOING INTO HERE. GO TO THE NEXT ONE.
SO BASICALLY THE TWO ISSUES THAT WE HAVE , I THINK NOW THAT ARE THE LAST THINGS TO BE RESOLVED ARE MIX OF USES IN EACH PHASE AND OUR ABILITY AND FLEXIBILITY TO HAVE SOME SORT OF CONVERSION TABLE WHICH I KNOW BOTH OF WHICH HAVE BEEN ISSUES THAT WE HAVE DISCUSSED. AND HOPING TO HAVE A CONCLUSION. I THINK STAFF REPORT WHICH I GUESS WE WILL GET TO AFTER THIS HAS SUGGESTED THAT WE NOT HAVE ANY CONVERSION TABLE, NOT HAVE ANY ABILITY TO CONVERT RESIDENTIAL TO NONRESIDENTIAL OVER THE LIFE OF THE PROJECT AND HAS SUGGESTED THAT IN ADDITION TO OUR COMMITMENT AND THINGS WE HAVE SAID WE WANT TO DO , NOT THAT WE WANT TO DO AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IN ADDITION TO THE 22,500 FT.÷ OF COMMERCIAL USE THAT IS GOING TO BE SET ASIDE AND HOPEFULLY USED IN EVERY PHASE THAT THEY WANT US TO BUILD OUT THE
[01:30:03]
COMMERCIAL AND NONRESIDENTIAL STUFF. EVEN AND HAVE IT SIT UNTIL A TENANT COMES ALONG. SO THOSE ARE TWO THINGS THAT WHILE THE MIX OF USE IS VERY IMPORTANT TO US, IT IS IMPORTANT TO ME AND IT IS IMPORTANT TO THE COUNTY AND IT IS ALSO IMPORTANT TO KIND OF THE TENANT OF OUR DESIGN PRINCIPLES IN THIS AND FOR THAT REASON WE WENT OUT AND DID A VERY INTENSIVE MARKET STUDY TO HELP INFORM US OF WHAT MADE SENSE TO GO FORWARD WITH AND , WHICH WAS NOT A REQUIREMENT AND SOMETHING WE WANTED TO DO AND NEEDED TO DO. THE PROBLEM THAT YOU GUYS ALL KNOW, IT IS APPARENT EVERY TIME FROM SOMETHING LIKE AS BARRY , ANYTHING THAT WAS OWNED IN A CERTAIN WAY IN THE PAST AND THINGS CHANGE A LOT, GIVING THE PROJECT THIS IS A LONG LIFECYCLE. MARKETS ARE FLUID, IF THE DICTATE COULD THE MARKET EVERYTHING WOULD BE EASIER. THE COUNTY COULD GO AND BUILD TOP-OF-THE-LINE STATE-OF-THE-ART OFFICE BUILDINGS AND TRY TO GIVE THEM OUT FOR FREE RIGHT NOW AND IT WOULD NOT BE FILLED. THAT'S JUST THE WAY THE MARKET IS RIGHT NOW. WE FEEL THAT WE NEED THE FLEXIBILITY TO BE ABLE TO RESPOND TO THAT. LIKE I SAID WE HAVE ALREADY MADE THE COMMITMENT AND AGREED TO HAVE 22,500 FT.÷ OF COMMERCIAL USE FOR EVERY PHASE . ANY SORT OF CONVERSION TO MORE RESIDENTIAL UNITS OR ACCELERATION OF PHASING DID NOT PRECLUDE US FROM THAT. WE SPECIFICALLY SPELLED THAT OUT AND WE'RE NOT TRYING TO GET AROUND THE COMMITMENTS WE HAVE MADE. WE ARE JUST TRYING TO MAKE THIS A FEASIBLE PROJECT THAT'S GOING TO BE A GOOD THING FOR THE COUNTY. SO OUTSIDE OF THAT, , WE , WE ARE NOT AWARE OF ANY OUTSTANDING ISSUES, LIKE WE SAID WE MET WITH THE STATE, WE BELIEVE THE STATE HAS INDICATED , AMENABLE AND LIKE THE CHANGES WE PROPOSED AND HAVE COME THROUGH. AND I THINK THAT WAS IT FOR THE PRESENTATION. FROM US. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU GUYS HAD QUESTIONS SPECIFICALLY.>> QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION?
>> FIRST OFF, THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE, GOOD TO SEE YOU AGAIN. I AM A LITTLE BIT SURPRISD BY THE BUILD OUT.
THE REQUIREMENT FOR BUILDOUT. CAN YOU DEFINE ARE WE TALKING ABOUT BUILDING OUT THE HORIZONTAL INFRASTRUCTURE OR ARE WE TALKING ABOUT BUILDING THE VERTICAL IMPROVEMENTS ON
THOSE PARCELS? >> FROM THE STAFF REPORT, IT APPEARED THAT IT WAS BUILDING THE BUILDINGS THEMSELVES. AS A REQUIREMENT FOR US TO MOVE ON IF STAFF WANTS TO ELABORATE, THAT CAN HAPPEN, BUT YOU KNOW I THINK WE WILL HAVE AN
OPPORTUNITY. >> SO AS YOU UNDERSTAND IT AND , FORGIVE MY IGNORANCE TO THIS QUESTION. AS YOU UNDERSTAND IT WITH EACH PHASE, YOU ARE TO BUILD 22,500 FT.÷ OF COMMERCIAL AND THEN THE RESIDENTIAL IS ALSO BUILT OUT BEFORE SOLD OR BEFORE YOU HAVE CONTRACTS DOES NOT GO TO A
BUILDER TO BUILD? >> BASICALLY, THE WAY WE SET UP THE STOPPERS AND PHASING WAS THAT WE HAVE A CERTAIN NUMBER OF RESIDENTIAL UNITS IN A FACE IN THE FIVE-YEAR PHASES BEFORE THE NEXT PHASE CAN TRIGGER BEFORE WE GET TO THE NEXT SET OF RESIDENTIAL UNITS HOWEVER THERE BUILDOUT. THERE HAS TO BE INTEGRATED INTO THE PLAN ASIDE FOR COMMERCIAL AND NONRESIDENTIAL USES. WHICH IS WHAT WE HAVE AGREED TO AND COMMITTED TO. THE TIMING OF IT OBVIOUSLY YOU GUYS KNOW, HAVING A USER IN THERE IS MARKET DRIVEN COMPLETELY. NOT REALLY DETERMINED BY US. WE HAVE COMMITTED TO HAVING THE LAND AVAILABLE AND READY TO GO BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO THE NEXT PHASE SO THAT THERE ISN'T AN IMBALANCE OF MIX OF MIX OF USE
IN EACH PHASE. >> LET ME CLARIFY A LITTLE BIT
[01:35:03]
MORE. YOU HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THE HORIZONTAL INFRASTRUCTURE WHICH NEEDS TO BE IN PLACE FOR THESE COMMERCIAL OR RESIDENTIAL, YOUR CONCERN FALLS MORE TO THE VERTICAL IMPROVEMENTS AND YOU WOULD POTENTIALLY BE SITTING ON COMMERCIAL OFFICE OR RETAIL SPACE UNOCCUPIED?>> YES, I CANNOT IN ANY WAY COMMIT TO DOING THAT. IT MAKES FINANCIAL , IT MAKES THE FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY
IMPOSSIBLE. >> I WOULD AGREE. I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND WHERE YOUR HEAD IS AT BEFORE START ASKING QUESTIONS TO STAFF SO THANK YOU FOR THAT.
>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS BEFORE WE GO TO STAFF?
>> JUST TO CLARIFY AND I AGREE, THANK YOU FOR ALL THE WORK YOU HAVE DONE ON THIS. JUST TO CLARIFY. GO TO PHASE 2 , YOU CANNOT DO THAT OR WILL NOT , YOU WILL HAVE THAT NONRESIDENTIAL COMMERCIAL IN PLACE OR PLANNED CORRECT?
>> YES OR WE CANNOT MOVE IN LESS.
>> THAT'S WHAT I WANTED TO CLARIFY.
>> THAT IS ENFORCEABLE BY THE PUD AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.
>> OKAY ANYTHING ELSE BEFORE WE GO TO STAFF? THANK YOU .
PLEASE GIVE YOUR PRESENTATION.
WANTED TO CLARIFY SOMETHING IN THE AGENDA DESCRIPTION.
APPLICANT PROPOSING TO EXPAND THE URBAN SERVICE AREA TO INCLUDE 3145 ACRES TO AMEND THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP FOR THOSE ACRES TO PLAN COMMUNITY. AND THEN IT GOES ON TO SAY TO AMEND CERTAIN POLICIES FROM FUTURE LAND USE AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT AND THE CONFERENCE A PLAN THAT WILL HAPPEN AT THE BOARD, NOT PART OF THIS ITEM. SO I WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT A LITTLE BIT. SO THIS PROJECT IS LENGTHY AND COMPLICATED, AS WE TALKED ABOUT BEFORE. THIS ITEM PARTICULARLY IS THE ADOPTION HEARING FOR THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT TO EXPAND THE URBAN SERVICE BOUNDARY. IT IS THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP TO CHANGE TO PLAN COMMUNITY. WITH THAT FUTURE LAND USE CHANGE APPROVAL OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. THE WHOLE ITEM GO TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ON APRIL 23 IN THEIR MEETING.
SO I THINK APPLICANT PROPOSING TO AMEND THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP FOR THIS ACREAGE FROM AGRICULTURE , RURAL RESIDENTIAL, CONSERVATION AND COMMERCIAL. THOSE ARE THE EXISTING LAND USES TO PLAN COMMUNITY AND TO EXTEND THE BOUNDARY AS WE MENTIONED IN THE GREEN COVE SPRINGS PLANNING DISTRICT 5. HERE IS THE SITE LOCATION. CLOSE UP HATCHED AREA THAT IS THE PROJECT LOCATION. THE EXISTING LAND USE ON THE LEFT AND PROPOSED FUTURE LAND USE ON THE RIGHT.
THIS IS THE CONCEPTUAL PROJECT SITE PLAN IN THE VARIOUS VILLAGES IN THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. AND CATEGORIES OF USE THAT ARE ALLOWED IN EACH ONE. THIS IS THE OVERALL URBAN SERVICE BOUNDARY AREA. KIND OF HARD TO SEE ON THIS ONE SO I WANTED TO SHOW YOU THAT IT IS OUTLINED IN THE RED. THIS AREA IN PARTICULAR ZOOMING IN, YOU CAN SEE THAT THE AREA OF THE FIRST COAST EXPRESSWAY IS WITHIN THE URBAN BOUNDARY AND THE AGRICULTURE PROJECT SITS JUST SOUTH OF IT. IN TERMS OF PROJECT EFFECT ON LEVEL OF SERVICE , THE FIRST CRITERIA IS NOT IN THE BOUNDARY AREA SO THE MAP HAS TO BE AMENDED TO INCLUDE THAT. IN ORDER TO MAKE THE CHANGE. THERE IS CAPACITY FOR SOLID WASTE WITH RESPECT TO TRAFFIC STAFF WILL CONTINUE WORKING WITH THE APPLICANT AND DEVELOPERS OF THE GOVERNOR PARK PROJECT IMMEDIATELY TO THE NORTH TO SEE IF WE CAN GET A
[01:40:06]
ROADWAY THROUGH GOVERNORS PARK TO INTERCHANGE WITH THE FIRST COAST EXPRESSWAY. NOT A CONDITION OF APPROVAL, IT SHOULD BE NOTED THERE IS CONNECTION TO GOVERNORS PARK, TWO FROM THIS PROJECT TO GOVERNORS PARK ON THE NORTHWEST OF THE PROPERTY. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT HAS A STOPPER WITH NO DEVELOPMENT GREATER THAN 1250 UNITS ALLOWED UNTIL A TRAFFIC STUDY IS COMPLETED IDENTIFYING NECESSARY IMPROVEMENTS.DEVELOPERS AGREED TO PAY THE GREEN COVE SPRINGS AREA MOBILITY FEE FOR ANY DEVELOPMENT APPROVED PRIOR TO THE UPDATE OF THE MOBILITY FEE AND MAY USE SOME CREDITS IN PLACE PURSUANT TO STATE LAW. WITH RESPECT TO WATER AND WASTEWATER, COMMITTED TO SERVE THE SITE WITH NO DEVELOPMENT OF ANY PHASE OR SUB PHASE PERMITTED UNTIL SERVICE IS AVAILABLE. THIS IS ADDRESSED IN THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.
WITH RESPECT TO SCHOOLS, APPLICANTS ARE DEDICATING 30 ACRES FOR THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL SITE AGAINST PROPORTIONATE SHARE . THEY WILL PAY THE REMAINDER OF SHARED TO MITIGATE SCHOOL IMPACT , THE SCHOOL DISTRICT REPRESENTATIVE STATED AGREEMENT WITH THE PROPOSAL WITH RESPECT TO RECREATION, COMMITMENTS BY THE APPLICANT THEY EXCEED THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE COUNTY , APPLICANT COMMITTED 50% OF THE SITE RETAINED AS OPEN SPACE AND OF THAT 22 ACRES WILL BE ACTIVE RECREATION OPEN TO THE PUBLIC. PUD INCLUDES APPLICANT COMMITMENTS AND EACH INDIVIDUAL SITE PLAN WILL HAVE TO BE CONSIDER -- CONSISTENT WITH THE PUD AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. APPLICANT IS COMMITTED TO CONTRIBUTE 4 ACRES FOR A FIRE STATION FOR CREDIT AGAINST FEES. STAFF IS RECOMMENDING SEVERAL CHANGES TO THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THAT ARE IMPORTANT IF THE PROJECT IS TO BE APPROVED.
BOTTOM LINE IS DEVELOPMENT PLAN FROM THE APPLICATION PROVIDES FOR A MIXED-USE IMPORTANT TO GUARANTEE THE GOOD CONCEPTS THE APPLICANT HAS REFERENCED IN THIS APPLICATION AND THE PUD APPLICATION. THIS IS THE TABLE OF PROPOSED PHASING. THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT MUST BE STRUCTURED SO COMPARABLE AMOUNT OF NONRESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IS CONSTRUCTED PRIOR TO THE NEXT PHASE APPROVED FOR DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT ALLOWS FOR ACCELERATION OF RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WITHOUT PLAN NONRESIDENTIAL STAFF BELIEVES CONCEPTS ESPOUSED IN THE APPLICATION WILL NOT BE ACHIEVED. PLANNING COMMOTION VOTED 6-1 TO RECOMMEND TRANSMITTAL WITH AMENDMENT TO THE CUPBOARDS A PLAN TO ADDRESS THE DEPARTMENT COMMERCE WORK REPORT PRESENTED TO THE BOARD WITH THEIR APPROVAL. SO THIS IS THE ADOPTION STAGE.
LOOKING FOR RECOMMENDATIONS ON TWO MATTERS. ONE, WHETHER URBAN SERVICE BOUNDARY AREA SHOULD BE EXPANDED TO INCLUDE 3145 ACRES AND TWO WHETHER THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP SHOULD BE AMENDED TO PLAN COMMUNITY FOR THE ENTIRETY OF THE PARCEL.
STAFF IS RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSAL TO EXPAND URBAN SERVICE AREA TO INCLUDE BOUNDARIES OF THE PROPERTY, PROVIDING SUFFICIENT EVIDENCE THE CRITERIA FOR THE EXTENSION HAS BEEN MET AND THE PROPERTY IS LESS THAN 2 MILES FROM PROPOSED INTERCHANGE AND FIRST COAST EXPRESSWAY SEEM SUITABLE FOR SOME DEVELOPMENT, THE PLAN PROPOSED BY THE APPLICANT IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA. STAFF RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT OF THE ACREAGE TO PLAN COMMUNITY CONTINGENT UPON APPROVAL OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE PROJECT. AND I WILL DO MY BEST TO ANSWER QUESTIONS. I AM YOUR SPOKESPERSON IF IT IS A LITTLE MORE, STATED HE WILL TEXT ME THE ANSWERS.
>> QUESTIONS. >> SO THESE ARE THE TWO ITEMS WE ARE LOOKING AT TONIGHT. NUMBER TWO, YOU HAVEN'T APPROVAL OF THE FLUM AMENDMENT CONTINGENT UPON APPROVAL OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. ARE WE LOOKING AT THE DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT TONIGHT OR NOT? >> YOU HAVE THAT IN THE
PACKET. >> THE MARKED UP ONE. SO THE WORDING IS A LITTLE CONFUSING TO ME. YOU KNOW WHEN YOU SAY YOU RECOMMEND APPROVAL, CONTINGENT UPON APPROVAL OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, THE DEVELOPMENT.
>> THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WILL CONTINUE TO BE WORK ON AND TWEAKED OVER THE NEXT COUPLE OF WEEKS BEFORE IT GETS TO THE
[01:45:04]
BOARD. A LOT OF EMAILS, EVEN TODAY.>> WHO APPROVES DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT?
>> THE BOARD. >> THE BOARD OF COUNTY
COMMISSIONERS? >> YES WITH THE PUD.
>> IT IS A WORK IN PROGRESS. >> THE REASON I BRING THIS UP AS WE TALKED ABOUT THAT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT A LOT IN THE WORKSHOP WE HAD. A LOT OF MY OPINION WAS FORMED AROUND WHAT WAS PROMISED GOING INTO THAT AGREEMENT AND NOW I'M CONCERNED IT'S NOT GOING IN THERE.
>> I WILL SPEAK FOR ED WITHOUT HIS INPUT. THE INTENT WAS THAT THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, THE CONDITION IS THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BE WORKED OUT OTHER WORDS, BECAUSE IF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IS NOT IRONED OUT AND AGREE TO, THEN FUTURE LAND USE CHANGE SHOULD NOT HAPPEN BECAUSE IT'S PREDICATED ON THE DEVELOPENT AGREEMENT, HAVING ONE. NOT SO MUCH IN IT, BUT COMING TO AGREEMENT.
>> LET'S SAY YOU CANNOT AGREE IN THE NEXT THREE WEEKS , THEN IS THE RECOMMENDATION TO NOT APPROVE THE FLUM ?
>> HE IS NOT IN YES. >> I HEARD YES.
>> THANK YOU, THANK YOU. >> OKAY.
>> THE PC LAND USE CATEGORY REQUIRES ADOPTION OF A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. IT IS OUR UNDERSTANDING WE MUST HAVE AGREEMENT ON A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IN ORDER TO OBTAIN THE PC LAND USE CATEGORY. WE WORKED ON IT, IT IS INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKAGE AND I HAVE IT HERE. WE ARE IN AGREEMENT ON ALL THINGS EXCEPT THE TWO THINGS THAT MR. AGRICOLA IDENTIFIED WHICH HAD TO DO WITH A MIX OF USES. IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT, AS ONE OF THE PARTICIPANTS IN THE PROCESS THAT WE ARE IN AGREEMENT WITH ALL THE PROVISIONS EXCEPT THAT
EXCEPT FOR THOSE TWO. >> WOULD THEN INCLUDE THE
CONVERSION TABLE? >> THE CONVERSION TABLE IS ONE OF THE ISSUES OF WHICH WE ARE NOT IN AGREEMENT. AS MR. AGRICOLA JUST SPOKE WE WOULD LIKE TO RETAIN THE ABILITY TO CONVERT FROM NONRESIDENTIAL UP TO 500 ADDITIONAL RESIDENTIAL UNITS OVER THE LIFE OF THE PROJECT , STAFF DOES NOT AGREE WITH THAT AND THE OTHER IS THE ISSUE THAT WAS SPEAKING OF WHICH IS IF WE HAVE A PHASE AND IT HAS RESIDENTIAL AND NONRESIDENTIAL USES IN THAT PHASE, WHEN WE MOVED TO THE NEXT PHASE, WHAT HAS TO BE BUILT, WHAT HAS TO BE DONE AND WHAT WE HAVE AGREED TO IS A PROVISION THAT IS IN THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT DRAFT WHICH SAYS WE WILL HAVE, ON THE SITE PLAN FOR THE RESIDENTIAL OF THAT PHASE , A LAND AREA THAT IS DESIGNATED FOR A MINIMUM OF 22,500 FT.÷ OF COMMERCIAL USES THAT WILL BE ON THE PLAN, THAT WILL BE PART OF THE APPROVED PLAN AND SO EVERYONE WILL KNOW THAT, THAT'S WHERE FOOTAGE CAN GO IN THERE AT THE RIGHT TIME AS THE MARKET SAYS. THAT WE HAVE MADE PLANS AVAILABLE, FACILITATED EVERYTHING AND IT IS IN THE SITE PLAN WHERE THE ACCESS IS EVERYTHING FOR THAT COMMERCIAL , 22,500 FT.÷ OF COMMERCIAL TO GO IN THERE. WE HAVE NOT AGREED TO BUILD A SHELL BUILDING WHICH WE UNDERSTAND IS THE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION OR URGING ON US. WE HAVE NOT AGREED AND AS MR. AGRICOLA SAID WE CANNOT AGREE TO BUILDING SHELL BUILDINGS OR THAT KIND OF THING. IF WE'RE TOLD HERE TODAY THAT'S NOT WHAT THEY REQUIRE THEN GREAT WE MIGHT COME TO AGREEMENT HERE TODAY. I HOPE I HAVE EXPLAINED THAT, THOSE ARE THE ISSUES.
>> OKAY I THINK I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE I GOT IT CORRECTLY. YOU'VE GOT TO SET ASIDE ACREAGE FOR COMMERCIAL AND IF YOU DON'T HAVE A TENANT, IT'S NOT GOING TO GET BUILT. WHAT I AM MAINLY CONCERNED ABOUT AND I HAVE SAID THIS FROM THE BEGINNING OF THE PROCESS. WE HAVE SEEN TOO MANY TIMES THAT THE APPLICANT OR DEVELOPER COMES BACK AND SAYS MAN, I'VE GOT 2000 ACRE SITTING HERE AND I WAS GOING TO PUT COMMERCIAL ON THE BUT I
[01:50:07]
CANNOT SELL IT TO ANYBODY FOR COMMERCIAL. SO GUESS WHAT, I WANT TO PUT HOUSES ON IT. AND THAT IS, IF YOU DON'T HAVE THE COMMERCIAL YOU CANNOT BUILD BUILDINGS THAT YOU DON'T HAVE A TENANT FOR. YOU HAVE TO HAVE THE COMMERCIAL. MY CONCERN IS THAT THERE HAS ALWAYS BEEN A RUSH TO REALLOCATE THAT PARCEL TO RESIDENTIAL AND THEN WHEN THE COMMERCIAL OPPORTUNITY ACTUALLY DOES SHOW UP, THERE IS NO LAND LEFT. THAT'S WHAT I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND IF WE ARE ACCOUNTING FOR THAT.>> YES WE ARE NOT ABLE TO DO THAT, THAT'S NOT THE INTENT AND WE ARE NOT ABLE TO DO THAT. THE LAND HAS TO BE THERE FOR
THAT USE. >> IT WOULD BASICALLY STAY IN CONSERVATION UNTIL SUCH TIME AS SOMEONE CAME IN AND SAID I
WANTED TO BUILD SOMETHING. >> IT WOULD SHOW ON THE SITE PLAN, IT SHOWS ON THE IMPROVE SITE PLAN FOR RESIDENTIAL USE OF THAT PHASE . IT WOULD SHOW THIS IS OUR COMMERCIAL PARCEL.
YOU'RE NOT GOING TO CLEAR AND PREP IT, IT WILL SIT AND BE PINE TREES UNTIL SOMEBODY SHOWS UP AND SAYS WE WANT TO PUT A
STORE IN HERE. >> IT HAS TO BE PART OF THE
SITE PLAN. >> I'VE GOT IT I THINK.
>> THAT I'M CONFUSED. IT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING THE HORIZONTAL IMPROVEMENT OF THE COMMERCIAL SPACE WAS GOING IN AS PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT SO THAT'S NOT THE CASE I GOT CONFUSED FROM
THE EARLIER QUESTION. >> YOU ARE SAYING THE ROADS AND THE PARKING LOTS AND STUFF?
>> NOT THE PARKING LOTS, BUT ROADS AND INFRASTRUCTURE WOULD BE IN PLACE SO WHEN THE COMMERCIAL USER COMES THEY ARE
READY TO GO VERTICAL. >> THAT'S USUALLY ALONG THE PERIMETER? THEY WON'T PULL IT INTO THE PARCEL UNTIL SUCH
COLLABORATIVE. >> I KNOW THIS IS OUT OF ORDER, BUT I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND, MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND WHAT I WANT TO THANK THEM FOR HAVING THAT WORKSHOP.
THAT WORKSHOP WAS VERY ENLIGHTENING. YOU GUYS REALLY ANSWERED MOST OF THE QUESTIONS THAT I HAD A. I'M JUST TRYING TO MAKE SURE I GOT THE RIGHT UNDERSTANDING.
>> WE THOUGHT IT WAS HELPFUL TOO. ONE OF THE THINGS TO NOTE, ABOUT THE PROJECT AND PHILOSOPHY OF HOW THE WHOLE PROJECT IS DESIGNED IS UNLIKE CONVENTIONAL SUBURBAN DEVELOPMENT IT IS NOT A PART OF AND THE DARK AREAS SHOWN IN EACH OF THESE NEIGHBORHOOD NOTES AND VILLAGES AND CORNERS, THOSE AWARE A LOT OF THIS COMMERCIAL SPACE WOULD BE. SO IT'S LIKE IT DOES NOT WORK FOR US AS A DEVELOPMENT TO JUST NOT TO THOSE BECAUSE WE DON'T FEEL LIKE IT. SO IS FUNDAMENTALLY IMPORTANT FOR US TO BUILD IT. WE DO HAVE THE AREA THAT IS THE DISTRICT OR VILLAGE OR WHATEVER TO THE SOUTHWEST FROM THE BIGGER CAMPUSES AND ALL OF THAT, BUT THAT'S WHY THE NUMBER IS SMALLER THAN IF YOU LOOK AT THE TOTAL NUMBER OF COMMERCIAL OR NONRESIDENTIAL SQUARE FEET IS QUITE LARGE.
THAT'S WHY THE 22,500 IS MORE REASONABLE BY SIZE TO GO ALONG WITH THE PHASES. JUST TO CLARIFY THAT IS NOT LIKE WE CAN SIMPLY BE LIKE WE'RE JUST PUTTING IT ON HERE BECAUSE WE
WANT IT. >> WHEN YOU GO FROM PHASE 1 TO PHASE 2 ASSUME YOU HAVE RESIDENTIAL IN PLACE WHAT IS GOING TO BE IN THE COMMERCIAL ZONE AREAS BEFORE YOU WANT TO
MOVE TO PHASE 2? >> OBVIOUSLY , HOPEFULLY THRIVING COMMERCIAL. THE REASON I ANSWERED EARLIER WHEN YOU ASKED ABOUT THE INFRASTRUCTURE IN PLACE IS BECAUSE OF THAT TENANT OF THE DESIGN OF THIS PLACE AND WHAT IS INHERENTLY IN BASE ZONING, THE COMMERCIAL IS NOT A, WE WILL STICK A GAS STATION OUT AT THE ENTRANCE AT 17, IT IS INSIDE THE COMMUNITY. SO OBVIOUSLY, IF THERE'S NOTHING IN THERE IT'S GOING TO BE PROBABLY A BLANK OPEN SPACE OR A WOODED AREA AROUND THE CENTER PARK UNTIL BUILDINGS COME IN THERE. BUT THE COMMERCIAL IS INTEGRATED INTO THE COMMUNITY. SO THE INFRASTRUCTURE THAT'S GOING TO BE THERE FOR THE COMMERCIAL IS GOING TO BE BUILT BECAUSE YOU KNOW IT'S ON THE SAME BLOCK WITH THE , I GUESS WITH THE HOUSES , WITH EVERYTHING ELSE. WE ARE NOT HAVING TO RUN A
[01:55:02]
ROAD AND WATER AND ELECTRICAL OUT TO COMMERCIAL PAD THAT'S 100 FEET OR HALF A MILE AWAY FROM WHERE THE RESIDENTIAL AREAOR NEIGHBORHOODS ARE. >> I'M GOOD WITH THAT.
>> WHEN WE ARE CREATING THE FIRST VILLAGE , LET'S SAY THERE'S A STREET NETWORK AND BLOCK STRUCTURE SO THE STREETS ARE ALL CONNECTED SO IN ORDER TO BUILD SUBSEQUENT AREAS THAT ARE MAYBE JUST RESIDENTIAL, TO BUILD THE STREETS THAT WOULD CONNECT TO WITH THE COMMERCIAL. SO YOU HAVE A BLOCK. SO FOR ALL SORTS OF REASONS AND VISUAL ENVIRONMENT TO WHATEVER MAYBE WE LEAVE THOSE WOODED , WITHIN THE BLOCK JUST LIKE IF YOU GO TO A NEW SUBDIVISION WERE SIMPLY SAYS THERE'S A LOT FOR SALE AND THEIR TREES ON IT WE WOULDN'T WANT TO CLEAR IT. SO YOU WOULD END UP HAVING IT READY TO GO WITH INFRASTRUCTURE READY, BECAUSE IT DOES NOT WORK FOR US TO NOT HAVE IT ALL CONNECTED AND INTEGRATED.
>> THANK YOU. ARE WE READY TO MOVE TO PUBLIC HEARING NOW?
>> I HAVE ONE QUESTION. I'M GOOD FOR NOW.
>> DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING ELSE MR. DAVIS?
>> THE MORE WE TALK ABOUT THIS, THE MUDDIER THE WATER GETS.
IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING IF WE GET TO PHASE 1 REBUILT THE HOUSES AND WE KNOW WHERE WE WILL PUT THE COMMERCIAL WE JUST DON'T HAVE IT YET . WE BUILT OUT THE HOUSES ON PHASE 1 DOES THAT MEAN WE GO TO PHASE 2 AND STARTED THERE EVEN THOUGH WE DON'T HAVE THE 22,500 FT.÷ OR 35,000 FT.÷ OF OFFICE BECAUSE
NOBODY WANTS IT YET? >> TECHNICALLY YES THAT IS A POSSIBILITY. THE DIFFERENCE , THOUGH, AND THE WAY THAT THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IS WRITTEN PRECLUDES US FROM DOING IS LIKE WHAT WAS HAD GOING IN AND SAYING THAT'S NOT GOING TO BE COMMERCIAL SPACE ANYMORE. WE ARE GOING TO BUY HOUSES THERE.
OBVIOUSLY CAMINO PART OF THE MARKET STUDY THAT WE DID, WAS VERY IMPORTANT AND WHY I FLEW GUYS ARE WASHINGTON D.C. DOWN HERE LIKE SIX DIFFERENT TIMES WAS SO THAT WE COULD COME UP WITH A REAL NUMBER, A VIABLE NUMBER FOR THE SQUARE FOOTAGE, SOMETHING THAT TECHNICALLY ON PAPER SHOULD BE SUPPORTED BY THE COMMUNITY ITSELF. SO THE HOPE IS THERE WILL BE COMMERCIAL THERE. IS AN ONGOING TO BUILD OUT AT THE END OF THE PHASE? I DON'T KNOW, I HOPE SO. BUT YOU KNOW, THE THINKING BEHIND OUR PHASE AND THE STOPPER PUT IN IS TO PREVENT FROM ADOPTING RESIDENTIAL. BECAUSE THAT SPACE IS THERE. I DON'T KNOW A LOT OF BUSINESSES THAT WOULDN'T WANT TO BE IN THE CENTER OF AT LEAST A COUPLE BUSINESSES BE THERE WITHIN A FIVE MINUTE WALKING RADIUS OF
400 HOUSES. >> I UNDERSTAND. MY EXPERIENCE HAS SHOWN ME THAT THE HOUSING IS ONE THING , THE COMMERCIAL WILL COME. I DON'T KNOW IT WILL COME TO THE MAGNITUDE BASED ON PHASE 1 HOUSING LIMIT BUT THE DIFFICULT PORTION WILL BE THE OFFICE, 30,000 FT.÷ OF OFFICE AND PHASE 1. THAT'S DIFFICULT BUT I DON'T WANT THAT TO GO AWAY BECAUSE NOBODY WANTS TO BUILD THEIR OFFICE WHERE NOBODY IS. AT LEAST NOT Y OPERATION. SO I'M ASSUMING WE STILL HAVE THAT GOING INTO
PHASE 2. >> YES. THAT AREA, ALL OF THE NONRESIDENTIAL AREA IS SET ASIDE .
>> ONE THING I WOULD ADD TOO AND I UNDERSTAND YOUR CONCERN AND SKEPTICISM HONESTLY BASED ON WHAT YOU HAVE SEEN IN THE PAST AROUND HERE. THE INTERESTING THING IS THIS PROJECT IS UNLIKE ANYTHING YOU HAVE SEEN BEFORE. SO WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO DRAW FROM A MUCH LARGER AREA THAN YOU CURRENTLY DO. SO WILL HAVE PEOPLE WHO ARE LOOKING NOT JUST FROM AROUND HERE TO DO BUSINESS, BUT FROM AROUND THE REGION THE STATE AND MAYBE THE COUNTRY. SO THAT'S HELPFUL AND WHILE THIS IS NOT MUCH CONSOLATION AS YOU NOTE THE MORE WE HAVE THE MORE DESIRABLE THIS IS TO THOSE COMMERCIAL LOCATIONS. WE CAN'T WILLY-NILLY DECIDE NOBODY WANTED THAT OR WHATEVER. IT IS THERE, INFRASTRUCTURE IS IN
[02:00:06]
PLACE AND WE ARE MOVING FORWARD SO WHAT WE WANT TO DO IS KEEP THE MOMENTUM GOING AND AGAIN FOR US, IT IS HARD BECAUSE THIS IS A DIFFERENT TYPE OF PROJECT, BUT IT'S MORE IMPORTANT TO US PROBABLY THAN IT IS TO ALL OF YOU THAT THE COMMERCIAL COME IN. SO IT'S NOT SORT OF LIKE THE PRICE OF ADMISSION IN CLAY COUNTY, THAT'S HOW PEOPLE THINK ABOUT IT, PEOPLE COME ASKED TO TAKE IT OUT AND MOVE IT. FOR US ITS FUNDAMENTAL SO WE WILL NOT JUST SORT OF EASILY THROW ITAWAY. YOU KNOW? >> I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU ARE SAYING. I WILL GO BACK TO MY OTHER STATEMENT. ONE OF YOUR CORNERSTONE STATEMENTS IS WE WANT PEOPLE TO LIVE HERE AND WORK YOUR. IF YOU JUST HAVE THE COMMERCIAL AND THEN THE WELL DRIES UP AND YOU LOST WE HAVE NOT SEEN A DEVELOPMENT LIKE THIS BEFORE I AGREE. BUT WE HEARD THE PRESENTATION BEFORE. WE WANT TO LIVE HERE AND WORK HERE AND WE HAVE SEEN THOSE WELLS UP -- DRY UP IN THE PAST AND THAT'S WHAT THIS COMMITTEE AND OTHER PEOPLE ARE TRYING TO MAKE SURE THE WHOLE THING SHOWS UP AND NOT JUST A PIECE OF IT.
>> WELL , A GREAT WAY TO DO THAT IS FOR GOVERNMENT INCENTIVES FOR PEOPLE STARTING BUSINESSES.
OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS? I WILL DO THAT. I DO NOT HAVE ANY CARDS FOR ITEM 5. I DO HAVE ONE FOR ITEM 6. IS THERE ANYONE WHO WISHES TO BE HEARD ON ITEM 5? SEEING NO ONE OF A CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND BRING IT BACK TO THE COMMISSION
FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION. >> I WILL PUT A MOTION ON THE FLOOR. I'M GOING TO MOVE APPROVAL ON THIS. I AM PUTTING A LOT OF FAITH IN , IN MR. TREND 20. THIS STATEMENT WELL I CAN'T DO THIS UNTIL A SECOND.
>> I WILL SECOND. >> SO THAT , I AM WITH , YOU CANNOT FORCE BUSINESSES TO LOCATE SOMEWHERE AND BUILD.
YOU KNOW THE SAYING IS RETAIL FOLLOWS ROOFTOPS, GET ENOUGH ROOFTOPS WHICH IS WHY IT'S FUNNY WHEN THESE BUSINESSES SAY WE CANNOT BUILD ON THE REGULATIONS, USING CAN BECAUSE MARKET ANALYSIS HAS SAID THERE IS ENOUGH ROOFTOPS TO SUPPORT IT. SO YOU KNOW THE RETAIL WILL COME, THE OFFICE STUFF , YOU MAY SEE DOCTORS AND THAT KIND OF THINGS, IT WILL BE HARDER TO GET A LARGE OFFICE. MY REAL CONCERN WHICH I AM HEARING IS GETTING ADDRESSED WHICH IS WE WILL NOT TRY TO CONVERT THE SPACE BEING RESERVED FOR THOSE USES TO HOMES. IT AGAIN WHAT WE HAVE SEEN IN THE PAST, THERE IS A RUSH TO PUT HOMES IN THERE AND THEN SOMETIMES IT IS YEARS. I HAVE BEEN AROUND HERE A NUMBER OF YEARS AND YEARS LATER AN OPPORTUNITY COMES IN AND THE PERFECT PARCEL IS GONE. IT HAS HOUSES ON IT NOW BECAUSE OF THAT CONVERGENT. WHAT I AM HEARING AS WE WILL AVOID THAT AT ALL COSTS. I AM OLD ENOUGH I WILL NEVER SE THIS BUILT, I MIGHT SEE THE FIRST PHASE OR TWO, BUT I THINK IT IS A GOOD PROJECT AND AGAIN I WOULD LIKE TO THANK THE WHOLE TEAM FOR TAKING THE TIME TO DO A WORKSHOP FOR US BECAUSE IT ANSWERED A LOT OF MY CONCERNS.
NOW IT IS UP TO STAFF AT THIS POINT TO WORK OUT THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AND INCLUDE THE THINGS WE HAVE INDICATED ARE IMPORTANT. I'M SURE THE BCC WILL GIVE YOU
THOUGHTS AS WELL SO. >> BEFORE YOU CALL TO MOTION OR AIMING TO A VOTE , YOUR MOTION WE NEED TWO TONIGHT. WE
NEED ONE FOR THE PUD. >> WE NEED URBAN SERVICE HUNDRED AND THEN THE LAND-USE.
>> OKAY TALKING ABOUT URBAN SERVICES.
>> YES AND I ASKED THE QUESTION EARLIER SO I HAVE BEEN PREPPED WE NEED ONE FOR EXPANSION OF URBAN SERVICE AREAS.
>> IF IT'S OKAY I WILL REMAKE MY MOTION TO RECOMMEND STAFF FOR WARD ON THE URBAN SERVICE BOUNDARY.
>> AND AGREES, ANY FURTHER COMMENTS OR DISCUSSION?
>> I WILL ECHO WHAT THE COMMISSIONER SAID. THE CONVERSION TABLE I AM ASSUMING STAFF AND THE APPLICANT WILL WORK THOSE DETAILS OUT. HAVING A RIGID NO CONVERSION TABLE
[02:05:01]
THAT IS INFLEXIBLE BUT OPEN-ENDED IS NOT CONDUCIVE TO WHAT WE WANT. WE DON'T WANT PROPERTY AND IT SOUNDS LIKE THE APPLICANT IS NOT INTENDING TO DO THAT ANYWAY SO PLAY THAT IS AN EASY HILL TO CLIMB. A MANDATORY BUILDOUT AS I UNDERSTAND AND CORRECT ME IF INTERPRETATION WE RECEIVE HIS ERROR IN ANY WAY, BUT IF THE REQUIREMENT IS THAT THOSE BUILDINGS, COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS , WHETHER THEY HAVE A BUYER OR TENANT HAVE TO BE BUILT OUT BEFORE THEY GO TO PHASE 2. I WOULD STRONGLY ENCOURAGE , AS STRONG AS I CAN AS A BUSINESS OWNER THAT IS HOG TYING THE DEVELOPER AND WOULD POTENTIALLY CHOKE OUT THIS PROJECT BECAUSE THAT IS A HUGE AMOUNT OF CASH REQUIRED TO BE ABLE TO SEE THIS PROJECT FROM PHASE 1 THROUGH PHASE 2 SO, LIKE THE COMMISSIONER SAID WE ARE PUTTING NOT JUST A LOT OF TRUST IN THE APPLICANT, WE ALWAYS PUT A LOT OF TRUST IN STEP BECAUSE YOU DO A GREAT JOB. I WOULD ENCOURAGE REVISITING THAT PIECE BECAUSE I WOULD HAVE A HARD TIME WITH THAT ONE.>> IF I MAY, I THINK THAT IS JUST INVITING PROBLEMS LIKE VANDALISM AND DETERIORATION OF PROPERTY VALUE WITH EMPTY BUILDINGS SETTING AROUND THE BROKEN WINDOW SYNDROME. I THINK WE HAVE HAD ENOUGH DEMONSTRATION OF GOOD FAITH AND HISTORY AND RESEARCH TO SAY OKAY, THIS IS SOMETHING WE ARE GOING TO SUPPORT AND GIVE IT A CHANCE. WHAT MORE CAN BE
DONE? >> IF I MAY, IT IS ALWAYS A LITTLE BIT OF TWILIGHT ZONE WHEN WE ARE ON THE SAME PAGE.
I THINK WE ARE. YOU DON'T WANT TO FORCE PEOPLE TO PUT OUT BUILDINGS AS LONG AS YOU KEEP THIS SPACE OPEN WHICH I THINK
IS WHAT WE ARE WORKING ON. >> OKAY ARE WE READY TO CALL THE QUESTION ON THIS PART? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY , AND YOUR POST SAME TIME, MOTION CARRIES. NOW WE NEED A SECOND MOTION.
ON THE FLUM. >> ALAMO STAFF RAPPORT ON THE FLUM MAP WHICH INCLUDES THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.
>> ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE SAY AYE.
[6. Public Hearing to Consider PUD-0923-00012. (District 5, Comm. Burke) (M. Brown)]
ANY OPPOSED SAME SIGN. THE MOTION CARRIES. READY TO MOVE TO ITEM 6 ON THE AGENDA WHICH IS THE PUD PRESENTED BY OUR ZONING CHIEF.092300012 . IT IS REALLY WHERE EVERYTHING COMES TOGETHER.
THE APPLICANT AS YOU KNOW ZONING APPLICATION TO AMEND THE ZONING MAP FOR 3145 ACRES FROM THE AGRICULTURE AND AGRICULTURAL RESIDENTIAL TO THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT.
DISTRICT 5 AND WILL BE HEARD WITH THE OTHER ITEMS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PROJECT ON APRIL 23. . A LITTLE BACKGROUND COMING OVER THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED WEST OF U.S. 17, NORTH OF LENO ROAD SOUTH OF GOV. PARK. PRESENTLY UTILIZE PRIMARILY FOR CULTIVATED TIMBERLAND AND NATURAL AREAS AND AS YOU ARE AWARE, THERE IS A COMPANION COMP PLAN AMENDMENT WHICH YOU JUST ACTED ON WITH PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. HERE IS A ZONING MAP. YOU CAN SEE THE NORTH IS A PUD FOR THE GOVERNORS PARK PROJECT. EAST OF THE PROJECT YOU HAVE THE AIRPARK AND SOME SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ALONG WITH THE DEVELOPMENT AND THE PROCESS FOR THE RV PARK. SOUTH OF THE PROJECT, YOU HAVE A SPL SOLAR FARM AND TO THE WEST YOU PRESENTLY HAVE UNDEVELOPED AGRICULTURAL AREAS. THE PUD, THE SUBMITTAL INCLUDES PUD REGULATORY RESUBMITTED DATED 2024 AS WELL AS A EXPLANATORY
[02:10:02]
VOLUME WHICH PROVIDES SPECIFIC USE AND SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. I'M NOT GOING TO GO, IT WOULD TAKE ALL NIGHT TO GO THROUGH ALL OF THOSE IN DETAIL, BUT YOU HAVE HAD THOSE FOR A NUMBER OF MONTHS. IF THERE ARE SPECIFIC QUESTIONS WERE ITEMS YOU'RE INTERESTED IN, WE CAN ADDRESS OR DISCUSS THOSE. AS YOU ARE AWARE THE DEVELOPMENT PROPOSED WOULD INCLUDE 4000 RESIDENTIAL UNITS, 100 HOTEL ROOMS. 1,000,000 FT.÷ OF OFFICE LIGHTING, INDUSTRIAL, 640,000 FT.÷ OF EDUCATIONAL AND 340,000 FT.÷ OF COMMERCIAL USE OVERESTIMATED 30 YEAR TIME FRAME. I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT AT A MINIMUM 1500 1573 ACRES COMPRISING OF COMPRISED OF 522 ACRES OF WETLANDS, 4072 ACRES OF WETLAND BUFFERS AND 419 ACRES OF NATURAL AREA. AND WITH 160 ACRES OF CIVIC SPACE ARE PROPOSED WITHIN THE PROJECT AND WITHIN PUD DOCUMENT. THE MASTER DEVELOPMENT PUD SITE PLAN DESIGNATES THE TYPES AND LOCATIONS OF SETTLEMENTS WITHIN THE PROPERTY. THE SETTLEMENTS OVER YOU FIND VARYING DEGREES OF DEVELOPMENT OCCURRING. THERE ARE EIGHT SETTLEMENT TYPES PROPOSED IN THE PUD WITH STORAGE AND RECREATION, AGRICULTURE, COUNTRY LIVING CORNER, HAMLET, INNOVATIVE HUB AND EDUCATIONAL HUB. WITHIN EACH OF THE SETTLEMENTS THERE ARE CHARACTER DISTRICTS. AND THESE ARE WHERE YOU WILL FIND THE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND THE RELEASE OF THE FRAMEWORK FOR WHAT EACH OF THOSE VILLAGES WILL LOOK LIKE AND FEEL LIKE. THOSE, YOU HAVE HEARD BEFORE AND FROM THE STAFF PERSPECTIVE, THIS IS DIFFERENT FROM ANY PUD THAT CLAY COUNTY HAS SEEN BEFORE. MORE OF A FORM-BASED CODE THAN A STRAIGHT USE CODE LIKE WE HAVE SEEN BEFORE. THEY GET INTO A LOT OF DESIGN DETAILS WITH TYPES OF BUILDINGS AND LOCATIONS OF BUILDINGS, ROADWAY WITH, ET CETERA. EVEN AS DETAILED AS SOME OF THE , THE TYPES OF MATERIALS USED ON THE OUTSIDE OF SOME OF THE STRUCTURES. THAT WAY THEY CAN MAINTAIN THE DESIRED FIELD THAT THEY DESIRE FOR THOSE VILLAGES. THE PUD SIDE PLAN PROVIDES A NETWORK OF ROADS AS WELL AS BICYCLE AND PEDESTRIAN NETWORKS. THERE IS A VERY FOCUSED PEDESTRIAN CONCEPT FOR ALL THE THOROUGHFARES. AND THERE'S ALSO CONNECTIVITY BETWEEN THE SETTLEMENT INTERIOR TO THE PROJECT, AS WELL AS CONNECTIONS TO PROPERTIES AND DEVELOPMENTS OUTSIDE OF THE PROJECT. THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN INCLUDES AN AVERAGE OF 100 FOOT BUFFER AROUND PROTECTED WETLANDS WHICH EXCEEDS WHAT THE STANDARDS ARE IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE , SOME OF THE AREAS GO WELL BEYOND WHAT THE COUNTY WOULD NORMALLY REQUIRE.THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN SETS FORTH MINIMUM OF 320 ACRES OF PUBLIC RECREATION AREA. WITH A MINIMUM OF 22 ACRES OF ACTIVE RECREATIONAL AREA. THIS EXCEEDS THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENT IN OUR STANDARD PUD SECTION OF THE CODE. PROPOSED LANDSCAPE PLAN IS CONSISTENT WITH ARTICLE 6 OF THE COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. ONE OF THE STATEMENTS IN THE PUD REQUIREMENTS AS YOU WILL NOT SEE THE LAWN ON INDIVIDUAL PARCELS. YOU WILL SEE SOME FOR THE CIVIC SPACES.
IRRIGATION OF CIVIC SPACES ARE LIMITED TO THE RECLAIMED WATER.
PARKING AND LOADING STANDARDS FOR RESIDENTIAL AND NONRESIDENTIAL USE ARE CONSISTENT WITH WORKING
[02:15:01]
STANDARDS IN OUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. SO IN SUMMARY THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING ZONING CHANGE OF 3145 ACRES FROM AGRICULTURE AND AR TO PLANNING AND DEVELOPING, THE PROJECT MEETS THE STATED INTENT AND PURPOSE OF THE PUD ZONING DISTRICT SET OUT IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE BY ENCOURAGING DEVELOPMENT OF LAND AS A PLANT COMMUNITY ENCOURAGING FLEXIBILITY AND CREATIVITY OF CREATIVE CONCEPT SITE PLANNING PRESERVING NATURAL AMENITIES .ENCOMPASSING A MORE DESIRABLE ENVIRONMENT THAN WOULD BE POSSIBLE THROUGH THE STRICT APPLICATION AND MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS OF OTHER STRAIGHT ZONING DISTRICTS IN THE LAND DEVELOPING CODE. STAFF HAS REVIEWED APPLICATION AND DETERMINED REQUEST IS CONSISTENT WITH SURROUNDING ZONING DISTRICTS AND USES AND IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA. THE PUD ZONING IS CONSISTENT WITH PROPOSED PLAN COMMUNITY LAND-USE. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THE PUD 092300012 , SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS OUTLINED IN THE PUD WRITTEN STATEMENT CONDITION UPON ADOPTION OF THE COMP LINE AMENDMENT 09230012 WHICH YOU ACTED ON IN THE PREVIOUS ITEM AND EXECUTION OF THE REQUIRED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF?
>> QUESTIONS. IF NOT, DOES THE APPLICANT WISH TO BE HEARD?
>> WE ARE AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS. BUT I THINK, YOU KNOW AS POINTED OUT , A LOT OF DETAIL HAS GONE INTO THIS. WE HAVE A PROJECT THAT'S GOING TO STAND UP TO YOUR
EXPECTATIONS. >> ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS?
>> HAVE A GENERAL QUESTION. SO, IF THERE IS NO LAWNS WITH NO IRRIGATION, OTHER THAN CIVIC AREAS THAT WILL BE RECLAIMED WATER WHAT'S IN THE FRONT OF THESE HOMES?
>> THERE'S PLENTY OF NATURAL LAWNS THAT CAN OCCUR THAT ARE NOT IRRIGATED. I HAVE ONE. THERE'S A LOT OF NATIVE LANDSCAPING AND THINGS THAT DON'T REQUIRE IRRIGATION. IS
NOT GOING TO JUST BE DIRT. >> ALL RIGHT. I'M GOING TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND I DO HAVE ONE CARD. DIANE SHAW.
MISS SHAW. THANK YOU. ANYONE WHO WISHES TO BE HEARD ON THIS MATTER? IF NOT, WANT TO CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING AND BRING IT TO THE COMMISSION FOR DISCUSSION AND A MOTION.
>> I WILL MOVE THE STAFF REPORT.
>> SECOND? >> I WOULD LIKE DISCUSSION IF WE COULD. AGAIN, THE WORKSHOP WAS VERY HELPFUL. ONE OF THE THINGS I HEARD AT THE WORKSHOP THAT I REALLY LIKED WAS THE IDEA OF YOU HAVING A BUILDER COUNCIL. SO YOU CAN CONTROL NOT ONLY THE STYLE OF THE BUILDING, BUT THE QUALITY OF THESE HOMES GOING IN THERE. BECAUSE WE HAVE SEEN SOME LESS THAN STELLAR QUALITY HOMES AROUND HERE. SO I WOULD REALLY LIKE THAT. I LIKE NO LAWNS, I'M CURIOUS TO SEE HOW THAT WILL WORK OUT. I HAVE 1 ACRE MYSELF, WHATEVER COMES OUT OF THE GROUND GETS MODE. THAT'S THE WAY IT WORKS. NO SPRINKLERS. WE TALKED A LITTLE ABOUT IT, AT THE WORKSHOP AND AGAIN AND LEAVE IT UP TO YOUR VISION. THE IDEA, ONE OF THE THINGS I OFTEN BRING UP IS YOU GOT TO HAVE LONGER DRIVEWAYS.
IF YOU HAVE FRONTLOADED GARAGES YOU HAVE TO HAVE LONGER DRIVEWAYS BECAUSEYOU CANNOT PUT A FULL PICKUP TRUCK ON A 20 FOOT DRIVEWAY. AND NOT BLOCK THE SIDEWALK. I LIKE THE IDEA COME YOU SAID THE PLAN WAS TO SET GARAGES BACK OFF THE FRONT
OF THE HOUSE OR SOMETHING. >> NOT A HUGE FAN OF STREET FACING GARAGES. SO A LOT OF THAT WILL BE REAR LOAD ACCESS.
ALSO WITH SOME STREET PARKING, NOT STREET PARKING , AS MOST OF US IN FLORIDA COME TO KNOW WHERE YOU PARK ON THE SIDE OF THE STREET AND BLOCK EVERYTHING, BUT DESIGNATED STREET PARKING PLACES AND AREAS OUTSIDE OF THE TRAVEL LANES. AND YEAH, PLACES ON THE LARGER LOTS , IN THE MORE RURAL AREAS WHERE THERE IS NOT GOING TO BE REAR LANES , GARAGE. THE
[02:20:04]
GARAGE SETBACK STANDARD. >> WHATEVER IS IN THERE, I'M SURE. THAT IS SOMETHING YOU MENTIONED AND I WANTED TO REINFORCE THAT WAS SOMETHING I WANTED TO HEAR. BECAUSE WE WERE ALWAYS APPROVING 20 FOOT DRIVEWAYS AND THEY ARE A MESS.
OTHER THAN THAT. I DID HAVE A QUESTION BUT I DON'T THINK THIS IS THE RIGHT TIME, AFTER WE TAKE THE VOTE I WILL ASK.
>> SO ARE WE READY FOR A VOTE? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE SAY AYE. AND HE OPPOSED SAME SIGN . MOTION CARRIES. FOLLOW-UP
QUESTION FOR STAFF. >> I WANT TO KNOW WHAT HAPPENS.
THERE ARE A COUPLE OF ISOLATED PARCELS THAT LOOKS TO BE FULLY ENVELOPED IN THIS PROPERTY. WILL THEY REMAIN AGRICULTURE? RIGHT. NOTHING ABOUT IT CHANGES, SO THEY WILL NOT BE ABLE TO DO ANYTHING ON THOSE PARCELS IN THE FUTURE THAT THEY
CAN'T TODAY? >> NO. WHATEVER THEY CAN DO
TODAY . >> THEY DID NOT LOOK TO BE
REALLY HUGE PARCELS. >> NO I DON'T THINK.
>> JUST CURIOUS BECAUSE I NOTICED TWO OR THREE WERE SITTING IN THERE. WHICH I GUESS MEANS THESE GUYS WANT TO PROVIDE ACCESS. THEY CANNOT ISOLATE THEM. MORE CONCERNED ABOUT WHAT THEY MIGHT TRY TO DO IN THE FUTURE.
>> THANK YOU. I BELIEVE THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS PRESENTATIONS. WE DO NOT HAVE ANY THAT I AM AWARE OF. OLD BUSINESS OR NEW BUSINESS TO COME BEFORE THE COMMISSION.
NONE. >> I DON'T KNOW, IN JULY WHAT IS OUR MEETING DATE? IT'S NOT JULY 4 IS IT? WE ARE NOT GOING TO RUN INTO THE HOLIDAY ARE WE?
>> LET'S SEE. >> THE SECOND. JULY 2.
>> WOULD BE OUR MEETING? >> YES. I NEED TO OPEN THE FINAL PUBLIC COMMENT. IS THERE ANYONE WHO WISHES TO PARTICIPATE IN THAT? I DO NOT HAVE ANY CARDS. SEEING NO ONE I WILL CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT. NEXT MEETING SCHEDULED FOR TUESDAY, MAY 7.
* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.