Jul 02, 2024 Planning Commission

[Call to Order]

[00:00:10]

>>> 2ND 2024.

>>

EVERYONE PLEASE STAND. >> 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 BRIDGEMAN I'M CHAIRMAN CLAY COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION. I NOTICED SOME OF THE GENTLEMAN IN THE AUDIENCE -- THE CAPS DURING THE PLEDGE. WE HAVE A RULE CAPS ARE NOT TO BE WORN DURING THE MEETING. IF YOU WOULD PLEASE DO

THAT WE APPRECIATE IT. >> MINUTES FOR TONIGHT'S MEETING WILL BE TAKEN BY ANGIE HACKER RECORDING SECRETARY FROM THE CLERK OF COURTS OFFICE. WE THANK YOU FOR THAT.

>> WE HAVE ADDITIONAL STAFF FROM THE COUNTY PRESIDENT. I HAVE BETH CARSON. OUR INTERIM DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND ZONING. WE HAVE DODIE CEILING OUR CHIEF PLANNER. WE HAVE TANGENT MCCOY OUR SENIOR PLANNER. WE HAVE OUR ZONING CHIEF. AND I BELIEVE I SAW KELLY HENRY. I KNOW I DID.

ECONOMIC AND DEVELOPMENT SERVICES COORDINATOR.

ITEM WE ASK YOU A COMMENT CARD AND

GIVE IT TO MISS HACKER >> AT THIS TIME WE ASK THAT YOU PUT PHONES ON SILENT OR VIBRATE. IF YOU NEED TO TAKE A CALL DURING THE MEETING PLEASE STEP OUT -- AND IF YOU NEED TO LEAVE THE MEETING PLEASE DO SO QUIETLY. I WANT TO INTRODUCE HELMA. THE FIRST ITEM

[1.  Approval of Minutes]

OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A

SECOND PICK IN THE DISCUSSION? >> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR PLEASE

SIGNIFY. >> MOTION CARRIES. NOW AT THIS TIME WE HAVE OUR FIRST PUBLIC COMMENT. PERIOD. THIS ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS FOR AT THIS TIME I DO NOT HAVE ANY CARDS FOR THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD. BUT I WILL OPEN --

[00:05:28]

>> ALL OF THE PLANNING COMMISSIONERS ARE VOLUNTEERS.

WE ARE APPOINTED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. WE SERVE TWO-YEAR TERMS AND MUST REAPPLY IF WE WANT TO CONTINUE TO SERVE. AS I SAID EARLIER THE COMMISSION DECISIONS ARE ADVISORY TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. NOW THE PROCEDURE THAT WE FOLLOW IN THE MEETING AND I HOPE THIS IS HELPFUL TO YOU. IS THAT A MEMBER OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING STAFF WILL PRESENT THE APPLICATION TOGETHER WITH THE COUNTY'S RECOMMENDATION ON THAT. FOLLOWING THAT, THE APPLICANT WILL HAVE A CHANCE TO SPEAK . AND THEN AT THAT TIME MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WHO WISH TO SPEAK ON THE MATTER WILL BE ABLE TO BE HEARD. SPEAKING TIME IS LIMITED TO THREE MINUTES PER PERSON. AND THERE ARE LIGHTS ON THE PODIUM THAT WILL HELP YOU KEEP TRACK OF YOUR TIME WHEN IT GOES TO YELLOW YOU'RE GETTING CLOSE TO THE END OF YOUR THREE MINUTES. NOW EVERYONE WHO WANTS TO SPEAK WILL NEED TO TAKE THE OATH JUST LIKE YOU WOULD IF YOU WERE IN COURT PROCEEDINGS. WE WILL DO THAT ALTOGETHER , AND IF YOU'RE NOT SURE WHETHER YOU WANT TO SPEAK OR NOT GO AHEAD AND TAKE THE OATH. WE WILL MOVE TO THE CENTER OF THE ROOM EVERYBODY TAKE THE OATH AT THE SAME TIME AND THAT WILL TAKE CARE OF THAT. AS I WAS SAYING? AFTER WE HAVE THE PRESENTATION OF THE ZONING DEPARTMENT AND THEN THE APPLICANT AND THEN THE PUBLIC SPEAKS, THE MATTER COMES TO THE COMMISSION FOR DISCUSSION. AND A MOTION. AT THAT TIME WE WILL MAKE A DECISION IF IT IS FOR A RECOMMENDATION IF IT IS APPROPRIATE. SO, AT THIS TIME IF YOU WISH TO PARTICIPATE AND THINK YOU MIGHT WANT TO MAKE SOME PUBLIC COMMENT, PLEASE TAKE THE OATH WHICH MS. HAGGARD WILL ADMINISTER.

>>

[1.  Public Hearing to consider COMP 24-0006. (District 5, Comm. Burke) (D. Selig)]

CHIEF PLANNER. >> GOOD EVENING. THIS FIRST ITEM IS A LARGE-SCALE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT TO CHANGE FUTURE LAND USE. I'M GOING TO BECAUSE WE HAVE A LOT OF NEW FOLKS TONIGHT LITTLE BACKGROUND ON THE PROCESS.

>> I'M HAVING TROUBLE HEARING. >> IS THAT ANY BETTER?

>> CAN YOU ALL HERE? >> THERE WE GO. THANK YOU.

>> APPRECIATE IT. OKAY, SO I WAS SAYING BECAUSE WE HAVE A LOT OF NEW FOLKS TONIGHT I'M KIND OF GIVING A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND SO THEY KNOW WHAT'S EXPECTED THE BOARD WILL HEAR THIS ITEM TWICE. YOU AS A PLANNING COMMISSION HERE IT TONIGHT. AND MAKE A RECOMMENDATION. IT IS SCHEDULED TO GO TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS JULY 23RD. THAT MEETING IS FOR THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TO MAKE A DECISION TO TRANSMIT NOT TO APPROVE THE PROJECT, BUT TO TRANSMIT THIS FUTURE LAND USE CHANGE TO THE STATE. THE STATE HAS 30 DAYS TO PROVIDE COMMENTS. WHEN I STATE THE STATE IT GOES TO A BUNCH OF AGENCIES AT THE STATE LEVEL AS WELL AS THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT. WHO ALL SEND COMMENTS BACK TO OUR STAFF AND THEN WE PROVIDE THAT TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AT A SECOND MEETING. THAT SECOND MEETING IS WHEN THE BOARD WOULD MAKE A FINAL DECISION ON THE PROJECT.

THAT WILL PROBABLY BE THE SECOND SEPTEMBER MEETING IS WHAT WE ARE ANTICIPATING. JUST KIND OF WANTED TO LET FOLKS KNOW THE PROCESS A LITTLE BIT.

>> THE APPLICATION THIS IS -- >> THIS IS JUST LAND USE THAT

WE HAVEN'T SEEN THE PUD YET. >> YES I WILL.

[00:10:02]

>> SO THE APPLICANT IS -- THE PROJECT LOCATION IS AT THE SOUTHEAST AND ACTUALLY NORTHEAST CORNER OF COUNTY ROAD 315 AND 315 LETTER A. IN THE SPRINGS PLANNING DISTRICT. THIS IS COMMISSION DISTRICT 5 COMMISSIONER BURKE. THERE ARE FOUR PARCELS INVOLVED. THE APPLICATION TONIGHT IS THE FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION CHANGE. IT WOULD BE GOING FROM AGRICULTURAL AND RURAL PRESIDENTIAL TO RURAL FRENCH.

THERE IS AN APPLICATION THAT HAS BEEN SUMITTED BUT THE APPLICANT FOR A COMPANION REZONING APPLICATION. WHICH WOULD GO FROM HIS EXISTING ZONING TO A ZONING CALLED PUD WHICH IS PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT. THAT WILL BE HEARD BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION BUT NOT UNTIL AFTER THE TRANSMITTAL OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN WE GET THE COMMENTS BACK. SO SEPTEMBER AGAIN TIMEFRAME. THAT APPLICATION IS PART OF THE PROJECT AS A WHOLE. THEY NEED BOTH OF THOSE.

>> THE PROPERTIES ARE HERE ON THE LEFT IS THE BLACK AND WHITE SHADING. YOU CAN SEE THE PARCEL BOUNDARIES. ON THE RIGHT WE'VE GOT THE AERIAL WITH THE PROJECT IN YELLOW. THESE TWO REPRESENT THE BEFORE AND AFTER IF YOU WELD ON THE LEFT WE HAVE THE FUTURE LAND USE AS IT EXISTS NOW. THE WHITE IS THE AGRICULTURAL FUTURE LAND USE. THE YELLOW IS THE RURAL RESIDENTIAL. AND NO I DON'T KNOW WHY THERE IS THIS ODD DELINEATION ON THE MAP WHY IT IS A DIAGONAL LINE. IT SEEMS A BIT INCONGRUOUS TO HAVE FUTURE LAND USE LINE RUNNING DIAGONALLY THROUGH A PARCEL. BUT THAT IS THE WAY IT IS ON THE MAP. ON THE RIGHT IS THE PROPOSED CHANGE TO RURAL FRENCH. AND THESE OTHER ZONING MAPS THIS DOES NOT PLAY INTO THE APPLICATION TONIGHT. BUT THEY WILL BE REQUESTING THE SAME SORT OF CHANGE BECAUSE THE ZONING IS THE SAME AGRICULTURAL AND AGRICULTURAL RESIDENTIAL TO PUD. SO BEFORE AND AFTER IS THERE. THE PROJECT THAT IS THE REASON FOR THIS APPLICATION. IS A PROPOSED SINGLE FAMILY HOMES SUBDIVISION. 177 LOTS. THE APPLICANT IS ASKING FOR A MAXIMUM OF 214 UNITS. THAT CAN GO INTO MORE DETAILS ON HOW THAT LAYS OUT. THEY ARE PROPOSING SEVERAL BENEFITS THAT ARE NOT REQUIRED BY THE ZONING CODE. THROUGH THAT PUD APPLICATION. I'M JUST LETTING YOU KNOW A LITTLE BIT AHEAD OF TIME WHAT THAT WOULD BE. THEY ARE ANTICIPATING PROVIDING 36 ON STREET VISITING PARKING SPACES. THEY ARE PROPOSING TO DONATE THREE ACRES ON THE NORTH PART OF THE PARCEL AT 315 AND 315 A. FOR USE AS A PUBLIC PARK. THEY ARE PROPOSING TO DONATE 300,000 DOLLARS TO CURRENT CONSTRUCTION FOR A RIGHT TURN LANE. ON 315 IF YOU'RE HEADED SOUTH ON 315 IT WOULD BE THE RIGHT LANE THAT YOU WOULD TURN WESTBOUND ON. STATE ROAD 16. PRIOR ACTIONS THE SPRING CAC HURT THIS ITEM JUNE 12. THERE WAS A MOTION TO APPROVE THAT RECEIVED A VOTE OF 2-2. THERE WERE NO OTHER MOTIONS PRESENTED. AND THE CAC CHAIR IS HERE. WE WILL GIVE HIS PRESENTATION LATER. JUST FOR CLARITY SAKE IT PROVIDED THE SITE PLAN THAT IS PART OF THE ZONING APPLICATION. SO YOU CAN HAVE A MENTAL PICTURE OF KIND OF HOW THAT IS LAID OUT IN CONCEPT. THERE IS A WHITE PARCEL IN THE MIDDLE ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF 315 A. THAT IS OWNED BY ONE OF THE APPLICANT'S OF THE PARCEL. BUT IT IS NOT PART OF THE PUD.

RETAINING PART OF THE LAND. SO IT IS NOT BEING PROPOSED TO BE DEVELOPED AT THIS TIME. BUT THAT IS WHAT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE 177 UNITS AND THE 214 COMES IN. THE PARCEL WAS IDENTIFIED WITH SIGNAGE. IN MULTIPLE LOCATIONS. LETTERS WERE MAILED OUT TO EVERYONE WITHIN THE 350 FEET OF THE SUBJECT PARCEL. AND STAFF HAS LOOKED THROUGH THE CRITERIA FOR

[00:15:05]

THE APPLICANT IS HERE TO MAKE THEIR PRESENTATION. THEY HAVE A

POWERPOINT AS WELL. >> IF YOU WOULD AND I FAILED TO SAY THIS EARLIER ANYONE WHO SPEAKS IDENTIFY YOURSELF BY NAME AND ADDRESS BEFORE YOU BEGIN.

>> I THINK OUR TECH GUY WENT BACK THERE TO TRY TO GET IT.

>> HE IS WORKING ON IT. >> DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS

FOR ME ? >> MEMBERS OF THE COMMISSION

HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? >> I DO.

>> YOU CAN KEEP THEM. >> IT IS THE STAFF REPORT AND I JUST WANTED -- YOU DID THE STAFF REPORT ?

>> YES >> SOME OF THE STAFF FINDINGS I JUST WANTED SOME CLARIFICATION. THIS IS WHEN WE DO THE ANALYSIS REGARDING URBAN SPRAWL. ABOUT PROMOTING NUMBER ONE, ABOUT IT SAYS THE PROPOSED FUTURE LAND USE CHANGE WOULD ALLOW THE PROPERTY TO BE DEVELOPED WITH A HIGHER DENSITY THAN CURRENTLY ALLOWED. IS THAT WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO DO , IS THAT THE PURPOSE OF THAT? THE OTHER ONE IS NUMBER THREE ABOUT URBAN DEVELOPMENT RADIO STRIP OR ISOLATED RIBBON PATTERNS. YOU PUT THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT DOES NOT CREATE AN ISOLATED PATTERN.

I JUST MENTIONED AND I WANT TO COME BACK TO THESE. DID WE GET

THE MICROPHONE FIXED? >> I BELIEVE THE MICROPHONE HAS BEEN FIXED. IS IT THE PLEASURE OF THE COMMISSION WE HEAR THE APPLICANT'S REPORT AND THEN COME BACK TO QUESTIONS. PLEASE

PROCEED. >> MY ADDRESS IS 12740 GRAND BAY PARKWAY WEST SUITE 2350 JACKSONVILLE 32258. THANK YOU

FOR THE TIME. >> I CAN SPEAK UP. I DID NOT WANT TO YELL INTO THE MICROPHONE.

>> SO THANK YOU FOR THE TIME. LET'S SEE HERE.

>> HERE WE GO.

THERE WE GO. I FIGURED IT OUT. SO THANK YOU. BLAIR KNIGHTING WE HAVE WE REPRESENT -- HOMES AND WE ALSO HAVE ZACH HERE ON BEHALF OF -- HOMES. WE HAVE ONEIDA AS OUR ENVIRONMENTAL AND I'M KIND OF JUST REITERATING WHAT -- HAD SAID ABOUT THE LOCATION WHAT WE ARE REQUESTING. I WANT TO MAKE SURE IT IS CLEAR. WE ARE RIGHT HERE IN THE MIDDLE OF GREEN COAST SPRINGS THE FIRST COAST EXPRESSWAY ON THE CORNER OF 315 AND 315 A. 72 ACRES APPROXIMATELY. WE ARE ASKING FOR RURAL FRANCH UP TO 214 UNITS. THE MAXIMUM THREE UNITS PER ACRE. THIS IS OUR EXISTING LAND USE CATEGORY. THIS IS THE PROPOSED LAND USE. HERE IS THE ZONING I KNOW WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT THE ZONING TONIGHT AND I FEEL LIKE WE SHOULD TALK ABOUT THE ZONING JUST A HOLISTIC APPROACH. WE ARE ASKING FOR A PUD FOR 214 UNITS. THIS IS THE EXISTING ZONING. AND THIS IS THE PROPOSED ZONING. SO, STAFF HAS ALREADY MENTIONED THAT STAFF ANALYSIS DOES AGREE WITH OUR ANALYSIS THAT IT DOES MEET THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. SOME OF THE HIGHLIGHTED ELEMENTS WE WANTED TO BRING UP IS THAT IF YOU ARE WITHIN THE URBAN SERVICE AREA WHICH WE ARE, THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DISCOURAGES DENSITIES LESS THAN THREE UNITS PER ACRE. AND THEN WE WANTED TO TALK ABOUT THE PUBLIC BENEFIT OF THIS PROJECT. BECAUSE IT IS A LAND-USE AMENDMENT. WE WANTED TO JUST TALK ABOUT THREE OF THE MAIN PUBLIC BENEFITS NOT ONLY ARE WE PROVIDING BENEFIT TO OUR RESIDENTS WITHIN THE COMMUNITY.

[00:20:03]

AND THEN ALSO, ONE OF THE MAJOR ONES IS WE HAVE HEARD THERE ARE SOME QUEUING ISSUES AT THIS IS TO CHANGE THIS INTERSECTION. WE TALKED TO D.O.T. AND THEY DID A STUDY. OF THIS INTERSECTION.

THEY HAVE DETERMINED A SIGNAL IS NOT WARRANTED. BUT THAT THE COUNTY SHOULD CONSTRUCT A RIGHT TURN LANE. IT IS IN THE COUNTIES CIP BUT IT IS NOT FUNDED. IT IS WAY OUT. SO WE FELT THAT IF WE CAN'T GET A SIGNAL HERE IF WE CAN'T PUT A SIGNAL HERE, WHAT IF WE CONTRIBUTE TO THAT RIGHT TURN LANE. AS PART OF OUR PUBLIC BENEFIT. THAT IS WHAT WE ARE

OFFERING. >> AND THEN JUST QUICKLY TO GO THROUGH THE PROJECT OVERVIEW. I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT EVEN THOUGH THIS IS A LAND-USE TRANSMITTAL WE WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE BENEFITS OF OUR PROJECT. THE MINIMUM LOT WIDTH WOULD BE 50. MNIMUM LOT AREA WOULD BE 5000 SQUARE FEET. WE HAVE A 10 FOOT POLE PERMITS OR BUFFER SURROUNDING THE PROPERTY EVEN THOUGH IT IS NOT REQUIRED. THAT WOULD BE IMPORTANT. AND THEN WE ARE PROVIDING ON STREET PARKING FOR OUR GUESTS WE WILL MEET THE LAND DEVELOPING CODE FOR OPEN SPACE ACTIVE RICK . IT IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE EXISTING SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENT. I WILL TOUCH ON THAT IN THE NEXT LIFE. AND THEN THE SITE DEVELOPMENT, WE ARE ALIGNING WITH THE PETERS CREEK WATER TREATMENT PLANT. IT WILL COME ONLINE IN 2025. HOME CONSTRUCTIONS WILL NOT START UNTIL 2026 WITH THE BUILDOUT OF THIRD 2030. WE HAVE SCHOOL CONCURRENCY. WHEN WE WERE AT THE CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMITTEE, THEY DID ASK US TO MEET THE CURRENT REQUEST FOR 25 FOOT SETBACK. CURRENTLY THE LAND OF ELEMENT CODE ONLY REQUIRES 20 AND MAYBE -- CAN SPEAK TO THIS BECAUSE I'M NOT AN EXPERT.

CURRENTLY THERE IS AN AMENDMENT TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TO CHANGE THAT TO 25 FEET. FROM THE RIGHT-OF-WAY TO THE GARAGE.

WE AGREED AT THE CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMITTEE WE WOULD ABSOLUTELY MEET THAT WITH THIS PROJECT. I JUST WANTED TO SHOW YOU WE JUST DID A QUICK EXHIBIT TO SHOW THE GARAGE INTO THE RIGHT-OF-WAY WILL HAVE 25 FEET. WE WILL MAKE SURE NO CARS ARE SHOOTING ON THE SIDEWALK. WE UNDERSTAND THAT IS A CONCERN

FOR THE COUNTY. >> THEN QUICKLY WE DO BELIEVE THIS PROJECT IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA. IF YOU CAN LOOK AT THIS MAP THE NEW INTERCHANGE IS A MILE AND A HALF FROM THIS PROJECT. AND RIGHT TO THE WEST OF US ON 315 IS THE PETERS CREEK BUSINESS PARK PUD. THIS IS APPROVED FOR 4 1/2 MILLION SQUARE FEET OF NONRESIDENTIAL. AND 227 SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES. ACCORDING TO THEIR SITE PLAN THE PETERS CREEK BUSINESS PARK PUD THE RESIDENTIAL HOMES WILL BE ADJACENT TO 315. THOSE 227 SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES WILL BE DIRECTLY WEST OF US. ON 315. AND THEN THE SARATOGA SPRINGS PUD IS THREE UNITS PER ACRE. THE SAME REQUEST IS US. JUST DIRECTLY TO THE NORTHWEST OF US. MAGNOLIA WEST -- TECHNICALLY IN THE CITY BUT THEY ARE 12 UNITS PER ACRE. IF YOU LOOK TO THE SOUTH OF US, BETWEEN OUR PROPERTY AND STATE ROAD 16 THERE IS A MIX OF LOT SIZES. DIRECTLY TO THE SOUTH.

THERE IS ONE ACRE .3 ACRES. IT IS NOT REALLY CONSISTENT IN TERMS OF LOT SIZES TO THE SOUTH. AND THEN I DID WANT TO BRING UP THAT THE COUNTY HAS I GUESS IN THE LAST THREE OR FOUR YEARS THEY ADOPTED A NEW IMPACT FEE. AND ALSO WENT FROM CONCURRENCY TO MOBILITY. MAYBE FIVE YEARS AGO. SO IN ADDITION

[00:25:06]

A LOT OF PEOPLE DON'T WANT TO HEAR THAT BUT THAT IS THE TRUTH. POPULATION IN FLORIDA IS INCREASING AND THERE IS A HOUSING SHORTAGE. THERE ARE THREE PUBLIC AND IF IT'S TO THIS PROJECT. AND WE DO HAVE SCHOOL CONCURRENCY WE ARE TIMING WITH THE INFRASTRUCTURE AND PROVIDING 4.4 MILLION AND IMPACT FEES. AS A PLANNER I HAVE TO TALK ABOUT PRINCIPLES.

THE DESIGN OF OUR SITE IS EFFICIENT DESIGN. THERE IS A MIX OF RESIDENTIAL LAND USES AROUND US. IT IS AN EFFICIENT DESIGN. AND ALSO YOU WANT TO MIX OF HOUSING TYPES. TO SUPPORT ANY COMMERCIAL THAT MAY COME WITH THAT NEW INTERCHANGE.

SO, IT MAKES A MORE VIBRANT COMMUNITY WHEN YOU HAVE A MIX OF LAND USES. THIS STAFF FINDINGS WE WANTED TO POINT OUT STAFF IS AND SUPPORT. SOME OF THESE QUOTES RELIEF FROM HER PUD STAFF REPORT. THAT REALLY IS NOT RESIDENT RELEVANT FOR THE LAND USE. ESSENTIALLY THERE IS A HIGH MARKET DEMAND FOR THIS AREA AND FOR THE SITE. I'M HERE IF YOU GUYS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. DO WE HAVE QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION AT THIS

TIME? >> I WILL MAKE A COUPLE COMMENTS TO WHAT YOU SAID. I THINK THE PETERS BUSINESS PARK THE 315 REALIGNMENT WE TALKED ABOUT THAT YEARS AGO. AND I THINK THAT THE BUSINESS PARK IS ON THE HOOK TO DO THAT ROAD.

UNTIL THAT BUSINESS PARK IT GETS BUILT THE ROAD DOES NOT GET REALIGNED. IT IS PART OF THEIR DEAL. I DID WANT TO ASK THE RIGHT-OF-WAY YOU WANT TO DEDICATE TO THE COUNTY ON KNOWLES ROAD WHICH IS 315 A. I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH YOU ARE DEDICATING. DO YOU YOU KNOW WHAT THE WIDTH OF THAT

RIGHT-OF-WAY IS ON 315? >> ON KNOWLES ROAD? SMITH 315

>> YES IT IS 50 FEET IN WIDTH. THE RIGHT-OF-WAY.

>> THAT IS NOT ENOUGH. >> BUT OKAY. 50 FEET.

>> THAT IS ESSENTIALLY WHAT MATCHES THAT IS OUT THERE. I WOULD AGREE NORMAL LOCAL ROADS ARE 60 FEET NOW. YOU CAN ESSENTIALLY MAKE THE 50 FEET IN A RURAL.

>> THAT IS A SECONDARY COUNTY ROAD. MOST OF THOSE ARE 100 FEET RIGHT-OF-WAY. I LIVE ON ONE.

>> THAT IS DEFINITELY UNDERSIZED. THE OTHER THING AND I UNDERSTAND CLEARLY WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE LAND USE HERE. I'M GLAD YOU MENTIONED COUPLE THINGS ON THE PUD. YOU ARE CORRECT WE ARE PUSHING TO GET DRIVEWAYS TO 25 FEET. WE DON'T CARE THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE IS CLOSER. WE NEED THE DRIVEWAYS TO THE GARAGE TO BE 25 FEET. THE OTHER THING THAT I NOTICED IN THE PUD WHICH WE WILL COMES UP. WE JUST TALKED ABOUT THIS LAST MONTH ON ANOTHER PROJECT. I DON'T SEE ANY INTERCONNECTS TO THE OTHER PROPERTIES. YOU ARE BUILDING A NEIGHBORHOOD A CUL-DE-SACS. WE ARE TRYING TO GET AWAY FROM THAT. EVENTUALLY THE PEOPLE TO THE WEST OR EAST OF THIS PROPERTY I UNDERSTAND ON 315.

ON 315 YOU DON'T WANT A BUNCH OF INTERSECTIONS ON 315. BUT TO THE WEST OF THE PROPERTY SOONER OR LATER MEANING, NEXT YEAR, 10

[00:30:01]

>> THOSE ARE JUST SOME MOSTLY COMMENTS. YOU MADE A GOOD POINT. TO MEET THIS STILL LOOKS LIKE AN ISOLATED DEVELOPMENT.

AT THIS TIME. EVENTUALLY THE STUFF AROUND IT MAY CATCH UP.

IT DOES SEEM ISOLATED. SINCE EVERYTHING AROUND IT IS NOT THERE YET. I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOUR COMMENTS AT THAT MIGHT BE.

>> I WILL ADDRESS THE CUL-DE-SACS REAL QUICK IF YOU DON'T MIND. SO, WE DID TRY TO DESIGN THE CUL-DE-SACS IF MR. I DON'T KNOW -- THE SELLER RETAINED PARCEL IF YOU CAN SEE THIS CUL-DE-SAC WE CAN CONNECT TO THE NORTH. TO THEM IF THEY EVENTUALLY SELL. IF THE COUNTY SO CHOOSES WE COULD HAVE A CONNECTION TO 315 A TO THE NORTH IF THAT PARCEL EVER SELLS. AND THEN WE DID LOOK AT HAVIG A CONNECTION TO THOSE TO THE RECTANGLE CUT OUT ALONG 315 TO INTERCONNECT EVENTUALLY MAYBE WE COULD HAVE CONNECTION BETWEEN THOSE PARCELS. WE DID NOT WANT TO TRY TO CONNECT TO THE EAST PARCEL BECAUSE THAT IS

A LARGER AGRICULTURAL PARCEL. >> AND THEN TO ADDRESS THE ISOLATE IT. WE DO FEEL THAT BECAUSE IT IS SO CLOSE TO THAT INTERCHANGE. IT IS A MILE AND A HALF. IF YOU LOOK AT THE 315 REALIGNMENT, I KEEP USING THE THING. THERE IS COMMERCIAL.

THAT IS APPROED ALREADY ZONING. IF YOU LOOK WE ARE WHAT -- MAY BE 1000 FEET FROM SARATOGA SPRINGS. THAT HAS THE SAME ZONING. AND ALSO THE PETERS CREEK BUSINESS PARK PUD HAS THE SAME ACTUALLY A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN US FOR RESIDENTIAL. 227 UNITS APPROVED DIRECTLY TO THE WEST.

>> COMMISSIONER GARRISON >> ONE QUICK QUESTION OR A CLARIFICATION. YOU MADE THE COMMENT YOU GUYS THE DEVELOPER WAS GOING TO PAY $4.4 MILLION AND IMPACT FEES. IN REALITY THE PEOPLE BUYING THE HOMES ARE PAYING THE IMPACT FEES IS THAT

CORRECT? >> WE HAVE TO PAY IT BEFORE WE ACTUALLY SELL THE HOMES. I THINK IT IS PRORATED. AT THE TIME. IT IS NOT WHEN THEY MOVED IN THEY BUY IT. THE DEVELOPER

-- >> BUILT INTO THE PRICE OF THE PROPERTY IS MY POINT. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT I'M NOT A FAN OF IMPACT FEES. IT IS THE WORRY OF THE WORLD THESE DAYS. THAT IS HOW GROWTH IS FUNDED. IT HAS TO BE FUNDED SOMEHOW. THE CONSUMER PAYS WHATEVER THE USER FEE OR TAX. IT IS ALWAYS ADDED TO THE COST OF THE PROPERTY. I WANT TO MAKE THAT POINT.

>> THANK YOU. >> ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION AT THIS POINT? EXCUSE ME --

COMMISSIONER DAVIS. >> THANK YOU. SO AT THIS TIME IT IS APPROPRIATE TO GO TO THE PUBLIC HEARING WHICH I WILL OPEN. I WOULD LIKE TO ASK RYAN OF THE CITIZENS ADVISORY COUNCIL FOR SPRINGS SPEAK FIRST. THEN WE WILL GO TO THE

OTHERS. >> AND PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. AND THEN PROCEED.

>> RYAN MARCY'S 1699 SHEAD ROAD. 32043. THE CHAIRMAN FOR THE CAC SPRINGS. WE HAD A VOTE WE TALKED FOR ABOUT 52 MINUTES ON THIS. OUR VOTE WAS 2-2. ONE OF OUR COMMUNITY MEMBERS WAS NOT HERE. IT WAS MY VIEW AND I THINK ANOTHER ONE WAS BECAUSE OF THE 315, AND THE PETERS CREEK NOT BEING THERE THAT IS WHY WE VOTED NO. THE OLD THE OTHER TWO VOTED YES BECAUSE IT WAS A BETTER OF TWO EVILS. OF THE 12 VERSUS THREE PROPERTIES.

THAT IS WHY THEY VOTED YES. >> EXPLAINED THAT RATIONALE

>> THEY SAID IF THIS WERE TO GO AWAY, THEN SOMEONE ELSE COMES IN THEY WOULD PUT 12 UNITS IN ACRE. THE TWO OF US SAID 315

[00:35:01]

OTHER THAN THAT DO YOU GUYS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR ME?

>> ANY QUESTIONS? >> I HAVE ONE QUICK QUESTION.

FIRST OF ALL THANK YOU FOR CHAIRING THAT CAC. THAT IS A VERY IMPORTANT VEHICLE FOR PEOPLE TO HAVE INPUT. YOU WERE HERE PREVIOUSLY I THINK WE THE PROJECT MAGNOLIA WEST --

>> THAT IS NEXT DOOR TO MY HOUSE.

>> THE ISSUE WAS NOT SO MUCH CUL-DE-SAC -- COMES A PASS-THROUGH. IT WAS MAGNOLIA WEST.

>> I FORGOT IT IS SOMETHING SPRINGS.

>> WILL SPRINGS. I THOUGHT YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT THE ONE THAT PULLED BECAUSE THERE WAS SO MUCH --

>> THAT IS WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT. I JUST WANTED TO CONFIRM THAT THAT LOCATION. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS?

>> QUICK QUESTION. DID YOU ALL WHAT WERE THE OTHER ITEMS YOU DISCUSSED ? DID YOU TALK ABOUT I'VE READ SOME EMAILS CONCERNING A COUPLE RESIDENTS HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT FLOODING.

DID YOU TALK ABOUT THAT? >> WE DID NOT TALK ABOUT

FLOODING. >> WATER DISTRIBUTION OR

ANYTHING LIKE THAT? >> UNFORTUNATELY WE DID NOT HAVE ANY PEOPLE HERE. TO COME UP AND TALK SPEAK ABOUT THAT.

THAT NEVER CAME EXCUSE ME. NONETHELESS DISTRIBUTION OF WILDLIFE AND HABITAT MORE TRAFFIC CONGESTION AND LACK OF INFRASTRUCTURE. THOSE ARE SOME OF THE POINTS THAT MY FELLOW

CHAIR -- >> HOW WAS YOUR ATTENDANCE?

>> ZERO >> THANK YOU.

>> ANYBODY ELSE? >> OUR SECRETARY WAS ABSENT.

>> I BELIEVE SHE IS RIGHT HERE. SHE'S GOING TO COME UP AND

TALK FOR HERSELF. OKAY. >> ANYTHING ELSE AT THIS TIME ? THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE AND THANKS FOR YOUR SERVICE. IS THE TIMER WORKING ? I DID NOT SEE ANY LIGHTS GOING ON.

>> AT THIS TIME -- -- YES. THE LADY FROM THE SPRINGS CAC.

>> AND PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS. FOR THE RECORD.

>> MY NAME IS STACY REED MY ADDRESS IS 3411 BROWN ROAD GREEN COVE SPRINGS FLORIDA. NOW YOU KNOW THAT I'M ON THE SPRINGS CITIZENS ADVISORY COUNCIL. I CAME ABOUT THAT BECAUSE OF MY INVOLVEMENT A FEW MONTHS AGO WITH [INAUDIBLE] ISSUE. KIND OF HOW THIS ALL WORKS IT WAS PRESENTED TO US WE COULD HAVE A CITIZENS ADVISORY COUNCIL. THESE ISSUES WOULD COME TO US BEFORE THEY WOULD COME TO YOU GUYS. I STEPPED UP AND VOLUNTEERED. AND I APPRECIATE YOU. I KNOW I WANT TO SAY I KNOW THAT YOU GUYS LIKE US ARE VOLUNTEERING YOUR TIME. I FEEL LIKE YOU ARE DOING IT BECAUSE YOU CARE ABOUT CLAY COUNTY. I WAS NOT ABLE TO ATTEND THE MEETING. I REALLY WANTED TO BUT WE HAVE PLANNED OUR FAMILY VACATION. COULD NOT CHANGE THAT. I DID ASK FOR THE MINUTES. I READ THROUGH ALL OF THAT. I WOULD HAVE 100% VOTED AGAINST THIS. I FEEL LIKE MUCH LIKE SHEAD ROAD DEVELOPMENT WILL SPRINGS ALL OF THOSE ISSUES, THERE IS NOT THE INFRASTRUCTURE. I FEEL LIKE THAT IS SOMETHING WE ALWAYS ARE TALKING ABOUT. WE DO NOT HAVE THE INFRASTRUCTURE IN PLACE TO HAVE THESE TYPES OF DEVELOPMENTS. TO HAVE 214 MORE HOMES ON TWO MAIN ROADS. THAT BACKUP TO DIRT ROADS. I FEEL LIKE I'M PRETTY PLUGGED INTO THE COMMUNITY. I SEE ALL THE COMMENTS ABOUT HOW THE COMMISSIONERS THEY ARE BOTHERED BY THE DEVELOPERS. THEY ARE RUNNING CLAY COUNTY. I DON'T BELIEVE THAT. I BELIEVE THEY

[00:40:02]

HAVE TEENAGERS -- >> EXCUSE ME JUST A MINUTE. IN DEFERENCE TO THE SPEAKERS THAT WE HAVE, PLEASE DO NOT MAKE ANY AUDIBLE COMMENTS, CLAP ANY OF THAT , WE ARE HERE TO HEAR WHAT PEOPLE HAVE TO SAY. AND OUR RULES DO NOT PERMIT FOR THAT.

SO PLEASE DO NOT COMMENT WHEN SOMEONE ELSE IS SPEAKING. DO NOT CLAP. DO NOT INTERRUPT THEM SO WE CAN HEAR WHAT THEY ARE HERE TO SAY. IT IS VERY IMPORTANT WE DO THAT. THANK

YOU. >> I MEAN PEOPLE YOU ALL NEED TO UNDERSTAND THIS IS HOW KIDS DRIVE TO CLAY HIGH SCHOOL. YOU ARE HAVING TEENAGERS DRIVE EVERY DAY MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY

ON -- >> GO AHEAD

>> ON THAT ROAD TWICE A DAY IN THE MORNINGS AND IN THE AFTERNOONS. SO ADDING 200 TO 4 OR 500 MORE CARS ON THOSE ROADS IS A SAFETY ISSUE. IT IS A SAFETY ISSUE. SO UNTIL THE INFRASTRUCTURE CAN BE PUT INTO PLACE BY ALL MEANS PEOPLE CAN SELL THEIR LAND AND GET DEVELOPED. I AM TIRED OF DRIVING DOWN RUSSELL ROAD AND SANDRIDGE IN 209 AND IT JUST BLOWS MY MIND THAT THIS HAS BEEN ALLOWED TO HAPPEN. SO PLEASE DO NOT LET THAT HAPPEN AGAIN HERE.

>> THANK YOU MS. REED. I APPRECIATE THAT. THE NEXT CARD

I HAVE IS FOR KIM STACY. >> AGAIN, ADJUST THE MICROPHONE

SO WE COULD PICK UP YOUR VOICE. >> CAN I ASK A QUESTION? I'M CONFUSED ON THIS JUST A LITTLE BIT. IS TALKING ABOUT RURAL FRINGE AND THINGS LIKE THAT IN THE APPLICATION IT HAS NOTHING ABOUT RURAL FRINGE. I'M KIND OF OFF ON THAT. IT TALKS ABOUT

THE PUD, -- >> IS STACY -- I THINK IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS OF A TECHNICAL NATURE IT IS A GOOD IDEA TO

TALK TO MEMBERS -- >> SHE SAID SHE DID NOT

UNDERSTAND IT. >> SO LET'S JUST GO ON. IT IS

CONFUSING. >> IS A LITTLE CONFUSING TO

THAT. >> MY NAME IS KIM STACY. MY

ADDRESS IS ON THE CARD. >> 2248 STAUFFER ROAD .

>> I'M GOING TO TRY I GUESS I'M GOING TO COME BACK A COUPLE TIMES. IT IS REALLY CONFUSING. I'M GOING TO DO THIS. MY NAME IS KIM STACY I AM OPPOSITION OF THE REZONING OF OUR HISTORIC AGRICULTURAL RURAL RESIDENTIAL LAND TO BE REZONED TO THE PUD . I AM HERE TO EXPRESS MY STRONG OPPOSITION TO THE PROPOSED OR OTHER REZONING OF 315 AND 315 A. 3725 COUNTY ROAD 315 A TO PARCELS AT 2750 -- AND ONE PARCEL AT COLLEGE PHOENIX ALABAMA WHICH DOES NOT GET THE ADDRESS. THAT IS IN PROBATE. WHILE THE LOCAL COMMUNITY MAY BE UNABLE TO PREVENT DEVELOPMENT IT WILL BE A DETERMINE OH TO THE AREA NEAR NEARLY [INAUDIBLE] IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF 315 A AND 315 AND THROUGHOUT THE COUNTY ARE COMPLETELY OPPOSED TO THE DESTRUCTION OF OUR COUNTY. AND WILL COST TRAFFIC AND SAFETY PROBLEMS. CREATE MORE PROBLEMS FOR THE SCHOOL [INAUDIBLE] DESTROY WILDLIFE HABITAT AND STRIP AWAY OUR AGRICULTURAL RURAL RESIDENTIAL LAND THAT EXISTS IN OUR CLAY COUNTY COMMUNITIES. WILDLIFE HABITS HAS BEEN [INAUDIBLE] AND DEVELOPMENT WILL DESTROY THE HABITAT AND PLAN DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY SHOULD CONSIDER AND CONTINUE [INAUDIBLE] ON THE LOCAL WILDLIFE. HABITATS. WE COULD TALK ABOUT THE WETLANDS BUT I DON'T HAVE TIME TO GO TO THAT LATER. THE BOARD AND DEVELOPERS TOOK NO CONSIDERATION OF EXISTING RESIDENTS CLAY COUNTY [INAUDIBLE] WAS PUT ON BY THE MASSIVE HOUSING PROJECTS GOING ALL OVER CLAY COUNTY. THERE IS NOWHERE YOU CAN ESCAPE THIS. [INAUDIBLE] CANNOT HANDLE THE APPELLATION OF THE NEWCOMERS AND THE CARS ON THE ROADS.

[00:45:02]

>> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU MS. STACY. THE NEXT CARD IS FOR DAVID ETHERINGTON.

>> AND PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.

>> 3817 FLOYD ROAD. 32 -- >> THANK YOU.

>> I AM NOT A MEMBER OF ANYTHING LIKE THESE PEOPLE ARE.

I'M A RESIDENT. I'VE LIVED THERE SINCE 1968. WE DON'T NEED THIS TRAFFIC IN OUR AREA.

>> WE DON'T NEED IN THIS IN OUR AREA. IT IS BAD ENOUGH AS THE LADY MENTIONED IT IS BAD ENOUGH THE HIGH SCHOOL DOES COME THROUGH THERE EVERY DAY. TWICE A DAY. WE JUST HAVE TO BE EXTRA CAREFUL ANY TIME YOU PULL OUT ON THE HIGHWAY. WITH 400 OR 500 MORE CARS, YOU'RE GOING TO TELL ME THEY'RE GOING TO COME IN THERE AND REDO THE ROADS ? THE LADY MENTIONED A LOT OF THINGS THAT THEY WERE GOING TO DO TO HELP THE AREA. I DON'T SEE THAT HELPING US IN ANY WAY. WE DON'T NEED THREE ACRES . OF PARK. WE WOULD RATHER RIDE DOWN THE ROAD AND SEE OUR TREES STILL THERE. SO, WE DON'T NEED THAT. AND SOMEBODY IMPACT FEES.

I HONESTLY BELIEVE SOONER OR LATER WE SOMEHOW WILL END UP PAYING THE IMPACT FEES. I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT WORKS. AND I DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW KNOLLS ROAD HOW THESE PEOPLE HAVE THE RIGHT-OF-WAY -- ARE THEY GOING TO GET THE COUNTY THE RIGHT-OF-WAY TO A ROAD THAT HAS BEEN IN THERE FOR 50 OR 60 YEARS. IT HAS BEEN GRADED BY THE COUNTY AND THE MAIL RUNS UP AND DOWN IT. I DON'T SEE HOW THEY ON THE RIGHT-OF-WAY TO THAT ROAD. SO, I'M NOT -- I KNOW IT USED TO BE THAT IT WAS TAKEN TO THE COUNTY TO GET OVER BECAUSE OF THAT. THEY TOOK CARE OF IT. SO IT BELONGS TO THE COUNTY. SO I DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW THEY ARE GIVING THE COUNTY THE RIGHT-OF-WAY THAT THEY'VE HAD FOR HOWEVER MANY YEARS. I KNOW THAT FOR A FACT BECAUSE I'VE LIVED THERE SINCE 1968. I'VE GOT SOME OTHER THINGS TO SAY BUT I CAN SAY IT IN THE THREE MINUTES. I THINK A PRETTY WELL I'VE GOT THE MOST PART. THE PEOPLE IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD FLOYD ROAD THEY WILL BE BACK -- [INAUDIBLE]. NOBODY MENTIONED THE CRIME THAT IS GOING TO COME IN THERE WITH SO MANY PEOPLE.

THERE IS GOING TO BE I DON'T KNOW. I'M SHUTTING UP. THANK YOU FOR LISTENING TO ME. I HOPE IT DON'T PASS. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU MR. ETHERINGTON. I NEEDED TO MENTION THAT -- I THOUGHT OUR ASSISTANT COUNTY MANAGER HAD JOINED US. SHE IS HERE. SOMEWHERE. CHARISSE STEWART OUR ASSISTANT COUNTY MANAGER WAS WITH US AND SHE WILL JOIN US AGAIN. THANK YOU MR. ETHERINGTON. THE NEXT CARD MARKET WILLING MEN.

>> MARK WILL AMEND. >> MY NAME IS MARK WILL AMEND.

[00:50:10]

I'VE LIVED IN THIS SUBDIVISION TRAFFIC IS GOING TO INCREASE POTENTIALLY 400+ MORE CARS. SO THE IMMEDIATE AREA. TWO LANE ROADS AND LACK OF TRAFFIC SIGNALS AT 16 AND 315 16 AND 315 A , 16 AND RAMBLE ROAD AND 315 AND 315 A ARE GOING TO MAKE THIS A TRAFFIC NIGHTMARE. KNOLLS ROAD IS A CUT THROUGH ROAD. THE POSTED SPEED LIMIT IS 25 MILES AN HOUR. WE ALREADY HAVE A SPEEDING ISSUE THAT THE SHERIFFS DEPARTMENT CAN'T DO ANYTHING ABOUT. THE TRAFFIC OR THE INCREASED TRAFFIC IN THE AREA IS A SERIOUS SAFETY ISSUE. AND WILL LEAD TO AN INCREASED AND TRAFFIC ACCIDENTS. SCHOOLS ARE ALREADY EXPLODING -- WHAT WILL HAPPEN WITH THE INCREASE TO STUDENTS THAT WILL BE PLACED IN THESE SCHOOLS? WE ARE ZONED AR AND AG FOR A REASON. A PUD IS NOT COMPATIBLE WITH OUR AREA. WE DO NOT WANT THIS IN

OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. >> THANK YOU.

>> THE NEXT CARD I HAVE IS FOR ROLLS KNOLLS. MS. KNOWLES.

>> PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. YOU CAN MOVE THE MICROPHONE CLOSER TO --'S MEN IS THIS GOOD?

>> I'M ROSA KNOWLES I LIVE AT 2098 KNOLLS ROAD #32043. FIRST I WOULD LIKE TO SAY I AM NOT OPPOSED TO SOMEONE SELLING THEIR LAND. I DON'T THINK EVERYONE CAN LIVE ON THE LAN THEIR GRANDPARENTS HAD AND THEIR PARENTS HAD. OUR GOAL IS FOR OUR CHILDREN TO GROW UP IN A HAPPY PLACE OF THEIR OWN.

HOWEVER, I AM OPPOSED TO THE COUNTY THINGS THEY SHOULD DO WITH THE SAID PROPERTY WITHOUT CONSIDERATION TO THE CURRENT RESIDENCE IN THE LIFESTYLE WE ENJOY. I OPPOSE ZONING CHANGES IN FUTURE LAND DESIGNATION. THAT INCLUDE PUD. OUR TRAFFIC IS ALREADY SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASED. PEOPLE WHO LIVE HERE KNOW THAT TWICE A YEAR WHEN CLAY COUNTY SENIORS GRADUATE ENTERING THE CLAY COUNTY FAIR TRAFFIC IS DEADLOCKED FOR MILES. IT IS UNAVOIDABLE. THE PROPOSED PUD IS NOT COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING LAND USES. IT IS A PERSONAL INSULT TO SAY THAT IT WILL IMPROVE THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THIS SURROUNDING AREA. I COULD NOT FIND ANY MENTION OF AGRICULTURAL USE, ONLY PHRASES THAT SUCH AS THREE UNITS PER ACRE. AND FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF NEIGHBORHOOD WHICH ALLOWS FOR 12 UNITS PER ACRE. IN REFERENCE TO THE BYPASS MENTIONED, AND THE PROPOSAL THERE ARE EXITS OFF OF INTERSTATES AND HIGHWAYS ALL ACROSS THE STATE AND COUNTRY.

THEY DO NOT REQUIRE IMMEDIATELY TO PUT IN SUBDIVISIONS. I FEEL THIS PAST CAN THIS BYPASS CAN COME RIGHT ON THROUGH WITHOUT ANY MORE HOUSES AND TRAFFIC. I FEEL THE $300,000 ALLOWANCE FOR A TURN LANE FOR THE INCREASE OF 315 TRAFFIC IS TREMENDOUSLY INSUFFICIENT. I WOULD PROBABLY ONLY SLIGHTLY RELIEVE THE EXISTING TRAFFIC. OUR ROADS CANNOT KEEP UP WITH THE EXISTING INCREASED TRAFFIC NOW. AS THE CLAY COUNTY RESIDENT I STRONGLY OPPOSE THE APPLICATION FOR REZONING. STATES AND IMPLIES. I AM IN OPPOSITION OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT. THANK

YOU FOR YOUR TIME. >> THANK YOU MS. KNOWLES.

>> THE NEXT CARD I HAVE IS FOR HAROLD KNOWLES. HAROLD KNOWLES

JUNIOR. >> AGAIN PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS BEFORE YOU BEGIN YOUR COMMENTS.

>> I'M HAROLD KNOWLES JUNIOR. MY ADDRESS WAS ROUTE TO -- WE GOT 911 SYSTEM IT WENT TO 2098 KNOLLS ROAD. I'VE BEEN THERE FOR A WHILE. THIS YOU DID A REAL NICE JOB WITH EVERYTHING.

[00:55:01]

THAT IS JUST THE WAY IT IS. MY WIFE AND I [INAUDIBLE] TODAY.

I'M RUNNING THE SPEED LIMIT 35 THE GENTLEMAN BEHIND ME HAS SOMETHING REAL IMPORTANT. I PROMISE YOU HE WAS 65 OR 70. IT HAPPENS ALL THE TIME. I'M ON FARM EQUIPMENT UP AND DOWN EVERY TIME I PULL OUT I'M TAKING A CHANCE. I'M USUALLY ON A BIGGER PIECE OF EQUIPMENT. BUT I DON'T WANT TO KILL SOMEBODY ACTING A FOOL AND A LITTLE CARPET THEY'RE GOING TO TAKE THE LAKE. IT IS NOT WANT TO BE GOOD ANYWHERE. WHEN WE HAD THE DEPUTY SHERIFF OUT THERE DURING TRAFFIC I TELL THEM -- I OWN THAT DRIVEWAY. YOU PARK RIGHT HERE. IT IS HARD. THE REASON YOU BUILD A PARK THAT SOUNDS REAL NICE.

THAT'S GOOD. BUILD A PARK. THESE PEOPLE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO. MY KIDS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD'S HAVE HOUSES SCATTERED -- KIDS PLAY IN THE YARD. SO IF IT GOES THROUGH WE WOULD NEED A PARK. BUT -- [INAUDIBLE] THE NUMBERS A WHILE AGO -- UP TO 214 UNITS. YOU ARE PLANNING ON PUTTING IN A PARK.

IS THAT LOCKED IN OR ARE WE GOING TO -- WE CAN DO THE PARK RIGHT NOW? WE HAVE TO PUT SOME MORE HOUSES OVER THERE. THAT WOULD BE SOME OF THE CONCERNS I HAVE BEFORE -- I DON'T WANT [INAUDIBLE] INFRASTRUCTURE CATCHES UP. WE GET THAT TURN LANE THAT WAS SLIGHTLY RELIEVE THE TRAFFIC NOW. LIKE I SAY IT IS NOT SOMETHING I HEARD. I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME AND I

OPPOSE IT. >> THANK YOU MR. KNOWLES. THE

NEXT CARD I HAVE IS FOR JOHN -- >> I WOULD LIKE TO -- REMIND THOSE SPEAKERS YOU SHOULD DIRECT YOUR COMMENTS TO THE COMMISSION. SO, WE ARE HERE TO LISTEN TO YOU AND PLEASE DIRECT THEM TO US AND NOT TO ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE. MR. -- IF YOU WOULD STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS AND GO AHEAD WITH THEIR

COMMENTS. >> JOHN -- MY ADDRESS IS 357 -- 32043. MY NEIGHBORHOOD EMPTIES ONTO 315. I'M A RETIRED FIREFIGHTER PARAMEDIC FROM JACKSONVILLE FLORIDA. I HAVE SEEN JACKSONVILLE GROW AND GROW. MY FIRST FIRE STATION WAS ON THE NORTH SIDE. THEY BUILD SUBDIVISION AFTER SUBDIVISION AFTER SUBDIVISION OUT THERE. TO THE POINT WHERE IT WAS A NIGHTMARE BEFORE THEY DECIDED TO WIDEN THE ROADS. BECAUSE OF THAT IT WAS DIFFICULT FOR US TO GET TO CALLS FOR SERVICE. FIRES HAZMAT SPILLS. YOU PICK IT. DIFFICULT FOR US TO GET TO THESE INCIDENTS. BECAUSE OF THE TRAFFIC. BECAUSE OF THE TWO LANE ROAD WITH A DITCH ON EITHER SIDE. MY QUESTION IS, HOW LONG AFTER THEY PUT THIS SUBDIVISION IN NOW THAT IT WAS BROUGHT UP ALL THE STUFF ON THE OTHER SIDE OF 315 IN THE CORNER OF 16 BEFORE THE ROADS ARE WIDE AND? BEFORE THE CITIZENS OF CLAY COUNTY -- ARE MADE SAFE AGAIN. BY NOT HAVING -- DISRUPTED BUT THE TRAFFIC. EVENTUALLY THE CONSTRUCTION THAT WILL GO ON ON 315 AND 16 BECAUSE OF THE GROWTH GOING ON.

I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME AND YOU HAVE A WONDERFUL EVENING.

>> THE NEXT CARD I HAVE IS ROBERT GREEN.

>> MR. GREEN >> I AM ROBERT CRANE I LIVE ON

[01:00:18]

>> THANK YOU MR. GREEN. I HAVE A CARD FROM GEORGE GOODRICH.

>> GOOD EVENING. AS ONE OF THE LAST REMAINING GOOD RICHES ON THE PROPERTY I WOULD LIKE TO THANK EVERYBODY FOR SHOWING UP

AND SPEAKING THEIR MIND. >> COULD YOU STATE YOUR NAME

AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD? >> GEORGE GOODRICH 3776 COUNTY

ROAD 315 ALPHA. >> MISS KNIGHTING YOU DID A GREAT JOB EXPLAINING THE PROPOSAL. I KNOW IT IS A TOUGH JOB YOU DID A GOOD JOB EXPLAINING IT. IT IS A GOOD ROUGH DRAFT IN MY OPINION. LOOKS LIKE IT NEEDS A LOT OF HOMEWORK. A LOT OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION IS NEEDED. STONES UNTURNED. AS FAR AS THE REALIGNMENT OF 315 A THAT DATES BACK TO THE 1990S. THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT THAT AT COUNCIL MEETINGS BACK THEN I ATTENDED. WHAT WE TALK ABOUT NOW -- MAY NOT BE WHAT HAPPENS IN THE FUTURE. SOMETHING THAT HAS NOT BEEN SAID THE SUBDIVISIONS AGE. THEY TAKE A TOLL ON HIM FOR STRUCTURE FUTURE PUBLIC WORKS COSTS. BY SAYING THIS IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDINGS, IT IS NOWHERE NEAR COMPATIBLE IF YOU RIDE AROUND THE NEIGHBORHOOD. IF YOU LOOK AT WHAT WE HAVE OUT THERE. THE REASON WE HAVE LAND-USE ORDINANCES IS TO KEEP THINGS MORE COMPATIBLE WHERE YOU DON'T GO FROM A TO Z AND 30 FEET. IF CURRENTLY WE ARE AT I BELIEVE ONE DWELLING PER FIVE ACRES. YOU'RE GOING TO PUT UP NEXT TO YOU MULTIPLE UNITS PER ACRE. IT DOESN'T REALLY MAKE ANY SENSE. IT GOES AGAINST THE WHOLE THEORY OF HAVING THE ZONING HAVING THE LAND USE CODES. SOMETHING WILL BE DEVELOPED THEY ARE. I THINK EVERYBODY IS IN AGREEMENT AND ACCEPT IT. MOST PEOPLE ACCEPT THAT FACT. GROWTH DOES WANT TO HAPPEN HERE. THIS IS A GREAT PLACE TO LIVE. WE HAVE A GREAT COMMUNITY. GREAT WEATHER. BUT HOW IT IS DEVELOPED NEEDS TO BE CORRECT. THE FACT THERE IS A PARCEL IN THE MIDDLE OF THE PUD THAT IS NOT BEING DEVELOPED CONCURRENTLY DOESN'T SEEM TO BE COMPATIBLE WITH ME. I QUESTION HOW THEY CAN CLAIM SCHOOL CONCURRENCY WHEN IT SEEMS TO ME EVERYTHING I HEAR FROM THE SCHOOL BOARD IS THE SCHOOLS ARE ALREADY OVERCAPACITY. THE ROADWAYS I'M CONSTANTLY IN COMMUNICATION WITH CLAY COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE PUBLIC WORKS. REFUSE DEBRIS ALONG 315 A -- IT IS AN ONGOING DISCUSSION. CLAY COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE PARK IN MY MOTORCYCLE. THEY CAUGHT SCHOOL KIDS GOING 89 MILES PER HOUR ON 315 A. THE ROADS ARE NOT READY FOR THIS. FIVE YEARS FROM NOW MAYBE THEY ARE. THEY ARE NOT READY. THEY ARE ALREADY OVERBURDENED. THEY REPAVED 315 EIGHT LAST YEAR. IT IS STARTING TO CRUMBLE. THE NEW PAVEMENT.

IT WASN'T BUILT ON THE RIGHT STABILIZED BASE EARLY. WE ARE CREATING ADDITIONAL -- THE FLOODING CONCERNS ARE ONGOING.

[01:05:05]

NATURAL THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. I HAVE ONE MORE CARD. BUT IT DOES NOT SAY WHAT MATTER. IS MR. CLINT NELSON HERE ? DID YOU WANT TO SPEAK ON THIS MATTER OR ANOTHER ONE?

>> I DO NOT HAVE ANY ADDITIONAL CARDS ON THIS MATTER. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE IN THE AUDIENCE WISHES TO BE HEARD ON AGENDA

ITEM NUMBER ONE? >> IF NOT I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. AND GIVE THE APPLICANT A CHANCE TO

RESPOND TO THE COMMENTS. >> THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE EVERYONE WHO HAS SPOKE. WE UNDERSTAND THERE ARE SOME CONCERNS. I HAVE BILL SCHILLING HERE HE IS A TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER. HE WILL SPEAK. I WANT TO TALK ABOUT SOME OF THE CONCERNS. SO, WE ARE OFFERING INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS WITH THIS PROJECT. PARK SPACE THE RIGHT TURN LANE. DONATING KNOWLES ROAD. WE UNDERSTAND KNOWLES ROAD IS PROBABLY MAINTAINED BY THE COUNTY AND THAT IS WHY WE WANT TO DONATE AND DEDICATE THAT TO THE COUNTY. WE ARE NOT SAYING THEY HAVE NOT BEEN MAINTAINING IT. WE JUST SAY THAT IS PROBABLY IN THE BEST INTEREST OF THE COUNTY TO HAVE THAT ROAD. WE DO BELIEVE IT IS COMPATIBLE AS I HAVE STATED. WE HAVE SCHOOL CONCURRENCY. IN TERMS OF THE WATER IN FLOODING WE UNDERSTAND THERE ARE SOME SLOW PATTERNS THAT GO THROUGH THE SITE. WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT AND THE COUNTY ARE VERY CLEAR ON MAKING SURE WHATEVER IS COMING ON TO OUR SITE AND THE PRECONDITION WE CANNOT MAKE WORSE IN THE POSTCONDITION. SO WHATEVER IS FLOWING THROUGH OUR PROPERTY NOW WILL CONTINUE TO FLOW THROUGH OUR PROPERTY. WE ARE PROVIDING IMPACT FEES. I UNDERSTAND THAT IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD WITHIN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD WE ARE PROVIDING PARKS. ONLY ARE WE OFFERING TO DEDICATE THE PARK LOCATION OUTSIDE OF OUR PROPERTY BUT WE ARE ALSO OFFERING PARKS WITHIN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. CURRENTLY THE PORTIONS OF THE PARCEL ARE -- IT COULD BE CLEAR TOMORROW IF THEY WANTED TO. AND THEN I THINK I'VE HIT ALL OF THOSE. I THINK BILL SCHILLING WILL TALK ABOUT TRAFFIC.

>> >> I'M BILL SCHILLING. 207 40 GRAND BAY PARKWAY WEST. JACKSONVILLE FLORIDA. 32258. SO I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT. I'M A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER LICENSED IN FLORIDA. MY SPECIALTY IS IN TRAFFIC ENGINEERING AND TRANSPORTATION PLANNING. I WANT TO TAKE A COUPLE MINUTESTO RESPOND. CERTAINLY I'VE HEARD THE CONCERNS ABOUT TRAFFIC. I'M GOING TO DO MY BEST TO GET BACK TO THE SITE PLAN SITE. I MAY BE GOING THE LONG WAY. I WANTED TO POINT A COUPLE THINGS OUT. THIS MAY BE GETTING A LITTLE BIT MORE AND WHAT I WOULD CALL THE PUD LEADS. I THINK IT IS IMPORTANT BASED ON THE COMMENTS WE'VE HEARD TONIGHT SPECIFICALLY REGARDING TRAFFIC. ONE OF THE THINGS I WANT TO POINT OUT IS RIGHT NOW FROM AN OVERALL SUBDIVISION STANDPOINT WE ARE LOOKING AT THREE DIFFERENT ACCESS POINTS. WE'VE DONE OUR BEST AND I KNOW THERE WAS A CONCERN RAISED REGARDING CONNECTION POINTS . WE'VE TAKEN A GOOD DEAL OF EFFORT AND ENERGY TO DISTRIBUTE OUR CONNECTION POINTS. SO THERE IS NOT A LOADING OF TRAFFIC OF ALL THE TRAFFIC IN THE SUBDIVISION IN ONE LOCATION. SO WE DO HAVE TWO DRIVEWAY CONNECTIONS TO 315 A. THE ONE DRIVEWAY CONNECTIONS AT 315. THAT WILL HELP DISTRIBUTE OUR TRAFFIC OVER THE ROADWAY NETWORK IN THIS AREA. I DID HEAR SOMEONE AND I MAY NOT HAVE HEARD THEM CORRECTLY.

CONCERNS ABOUT OUR TRAFFIC ACCESSING DIRECTLY TO KNOWLES ROAD. RIGHT NOW WE DO NOT HAVE A DRIVEWAY CONNECTION TO KNOWLES ROAD. INTENTIONALLY DO NOT HAVE A CONNECTION TO KNOWLES ROAD. I WANTED TO MENTION THAT AND POINT THAT OUT. ALSO WANTED TO TAKE A MINUTE AND TALK ABOUT 315. THE D.O.T. DOES ACTUALLY COUNT 315 EVERY YEAR. BASICALLY PROVIDES AN ANNUAL AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC. WE PULLED THAT DATA PART OF THE DATA IS ACTUALLY IN THE STAFF REPORT AS WELL. WHAT WE'VE SEEN IS THE TRAFFIC VOLUMES ON 315 HAVE BEEN HIGHER IN THE PAST. SO PRE-PANDEMIC THE VOLUMES ON 315 WERE 5100

[01:10:02]

FOR LACK OF BETTER TERMS. >> YOU SAY D LIKE DELTA?

>> YES SIR >> IS AROUND 12,000 VEHICLES A DAY. SO TODAY COUNTY ROAD 315 HAS A SIGNIFICANT AVAILABILITY OF CAPACITY ON IT. AND CERTAINLY IS NOT OVERCAPACITY.

AND CERTAINLY THERE ARE NO OVERCAPACITY SITUATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN IDENTIFIED IN THE STAFF REPORT. I WANT TO OFFICIALLY SHARE THAT. AND HAVE THAT ON THE RECORD.

ADDITIONALLY WE FULLY INTEND TO COMPLY WITH THE COUNTY'S MOBILITY FEE PROGRAM. THAT PROGRAM WAS PUT IN PLACE TO REPLACE CONCURRENCY. TO OFFSET THE IMPACTS TRAFFIC IMPACTS OF PROJECTS . AGAIN AT THIS PROJECT ULTIMATEY WERE TO BUILD OUT AT THE FULL 214 UNITS, WE WOULD BE LOOKING AT ABOUT NUMBER $1.57 MILLION THAT WOULD GO TO FUND TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS THROUGH THAT MOBILITY FEE PROGRAM. AGAIN THAT NUMBER AND MAKE IT HIGHER. THAT IS BASED ON TODAY'S MOBILITY FEE RATES. WHICH WILL LIKELY INCREASE BY THE TIME THIS PROJECT IS CONSTRUCTED. AND THEN FINALLY AGAIN TO TOUCH ON THE IMPROVEMENT AT 315 AND 16, CERTAINLY WE UNDERSTAND THAT THE D.O.T. HAS LOOKED AT THAT INTERSECTION. AGAIN THE VOLUMES TODAY I SHOULD SAY THE VOLUMES AT THE TIME THE D.O.T.

COUNTS AT THAT INTERSECTION DEMONSTRATE THAT THERE IS NOT ENOUGH TRAFFIC THERE TODAY TO WARRANT A SIGNAL. FROM THE STUDY THE D.O.T. DID THEY DID RECOMMEND THE COUNTY CONSIDERED THE RIGHT TURN LANE. THAT IS WHY WE HAVE PROPOSED IT. WE FEEL THAT IS A BENEFIT BENEFICIAL IMPROVEMENT THAT NOT ONLY WILL BENEFIT FUTURE TRAFFIC THAT IS GOING TO BENEFIT SIGNIFICANTLY EXISTING TRAFFIC TODAY. ESPECIALLY AS THE INTERCHANGE OPENS AND WE HAVE FOLKS THAT WILL BE TRAVELING WEST TO GET TO FIRST COAST EXPRESSWAY. THOSE ARE A COUPLE OF ADDITIONAL ITEMS I WANTED TO SHARE. I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS AS WELL. WE WILL TURN IT BACK OVER TO

MS. KNIGHTING. >> DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE CURRENT

LEVEL OF SERVICE IS ON 315? >> IT IS NOT D RIGHT NOW.

>> IT IS NOT D SO I DON'T HAVE THE NUMBERS IN FRONT OF ME. I DANGEROUSLY I WOULD HAZARD TO GUESS IT IS BETWEEN D AND

LITERACY. AND C. >> ONE COMMENT ON SOMETHING YOU SAID. YOU MAY HAVE MISSED OR UNDERSTOOD MY COMMENT ABOUT THE INTERCONNECTIVITY. I CAN SEE THAT YOU'RE PLANNING A CERTAIN NUMBER OF AXES. MY ISSUE AND I BRING THIS UP ALL THE TIME. IT IS NOT WITH YOU GUYS. WE HAVE TO PLAN. WE ARE A PLANNING COMMISSION. ONE DAY THAT PARCEL TO THE EAST IS GOING TO BE DEVELOPED. I DON'T KNOW WHEN. IT MOST LIKELY WILL. WE NEED YOUR ROAD NETWORK PUTS ALL THE TRAFFIC OUT ONTO 315. MY POINT IS, IF I LIVED IN YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND WANTED TO GO TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT MAY ONE DAY BE THERE TO THE EAST I DON'T HAVE TO GO OUT TO 315 TO GET THERE. THAT IS MY POINT. WE NEED TO START INTERCONNECTING THESE NEIGHBORHOODS. WHEN WE ARE BUILDING DOWN. SO THAT IN THE FUTURE WE ARE NOT DUMPING ALL THE TRAFFIC OUT ON THE MAIN ROAD TO GET I CAN SEE WHERE I WANT TO GO BUT I HAVE TO GO TO THE MAIN ROAD. THAT IS WHAT WE

ARE TRYING. >> TO AVOID.

>> I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY THAT. >> THAT IS HELPFUL.

>> I'M HERE IF YOU HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS.

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE APPLICANT AT THIS TIME?

>> I'VE GOT A COUPLE. >> COMMISSIONER DAVE

>> I LOOKED AT YOUR MAP OF YOUR PLOT OUT HERE. AND YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT -- YOUR PARKS. THREE OF THEM SCHEDULED FOR THE AREA. I THINK A TOTAL OF 120,000 SQUARE FEET. AM I

[01:15:05]

>> THEY ARE VARIOUS IN SIZE. I THINK THAT ONE --

>> ONE IS LESS THAN A QUARTER OF AN ACRE. THE OTHER IS 2 1/4 ACRES. MY CONCERN THE POLICY IS 10% OF YOUR GROSS ACREAGE WOULD BE DEVOTED TO RECREATION. YOU MADE A STATEMENT IN THERE -- YOU HAVE THE 10% BUT IT IS OPEN SPACE. IS OPEN SPACE PART OF

THAT? >> ACTUALLY -- YOU PROVIDE 10% OF OPEN SPACE . 4% OF THE 10%. HAS TO BE ACTIVE RECREATION.

>> THE POLICY I READ WAS RECREATION SPACE MUST BE EQUAL TO OR GREATER THAN 10% OF THE GROSS ACREAGE. OF THIS 10% 4%

MUST BE USABLE RECREATION. >> I'M CONFUSED BUT ANYWAY. MY POINT IS, BY THE TIME YOU BOIL THIS DOWN YOU'VE GOT ABOUT LESS THAN A HALF THAT OF AN ACRE FOR RECREATION. THAT IS LEFT. IF YOU GET DOWN TO 4%. IS THAT ENOUGH FOR 214 HOMES?

>> WE WILL MEET THE CODE FOR THAT. AS YOU CAN SEE ON THIS SITE PLAN WE WILL HAVE A TRAIL THAT GOES AROUND THE BIG POND AND ALSO THROUGH THE RECREATION WE HAVE NOT ACCOUNTED FOR. WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE IT WITH OUR PUD WE SAID WE WANT TO MEET THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. WE WILL PROBABLY EXCEED THAT WHEN WE GET TO THE PUD POINT. AND WE CAN DEMONSTRATE THAT WITH THE

PUD. >> OKAY I THINK THAT IS INSUFFICIENT BUT WE WILL MOVE ON. ON YOUR RETENTION PONDS ARE

THEY RETENTION OR DETENTION? >> YOU ARE ASKING A PLANNER AND ENGINEERING QUESTION. BUT, THEY SHOULD BE RETENTION PONDS. AS

FAR AS I KNOW. >> THAT MEANS YOU'RE GOING TO MAINTAIN 100% OF RUNOFF ON SITE.

>> WE HAVE NOT DONE THE ACTUAL CIVIL DESIGN YET. HOWEVER THAT HAPPENS, I CAN'T REALLY SPEAK TO YOU AT THE PLANNING STAGE.

THIS IS A LAND-US AMENDMENT. >> WHAT IS YOUR PLAN ATTACHMENT YOU PROBABLY DON'T KNOW. I'M CONCERNED ABOUT WHEN YOU REACH CAPACITY WHERE IS YOUR DISCHARGE POINT GOING TO BE ?

>> GOOD QUESTION. THAT IS THE QUESTION ONCE WE GET INTO ENGINEERING WE WILL NOTE THAT THE ANSWER TO THAT. AT THIS POINT WE ARE NOT DESIGNING THE SITE YET.

>> BUT WE WILL MEET PRE-AND POST WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT REQUIREMENTS IN THE COUNTY. I WILL BE QUITE FRANK THE COUNTY IS VERY SPECIFIC ON LOOKING AT HOW THE DRAINAGE PATTERNS GO AND MAKING SURE WE DO NOT BLOCK THE DRAINAGE PATTERNS.

>> THANK YOU. >> YOU MAY WANT TO CLARIFY WHAT PRE-IMPULSE MEANS. NOT EVERYBODY MAY UNDERSTAND THAT.

>> SO WE WILL HAVE TO REQUIRE WE WILL THE REQUIRED TO MEET THE PRE- . SO BEFORE WE EVEN DEVELOP ANYTHING THEY CALCULATE WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE. WHEN WE GO IN WITH WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT WE WILL HAVE OUR PLAN OUR CIVIL DESIGN. WE HAVE TO SHOW THAT IN THE POST AFTER DEVELOPMENT, WE ARE NOT MAKING IT WORSE THAN WHAT WAS IN THE PRE-. REALLY ESSENTIALLY THAT IS WHY IT IS CALLED PRE-AND POST. IN THE PRE-DEVELOPMENT YOU CANNOT MAKE IT WORSE THAN THE IN THE POST DEVELOPMENT.

>> WAS THAT -- >> IF I MAY JUST ADD SOME CLARITY. I'M NOT A CIVIL ENGINEER. ME QUALIFY THAT WHEN THERE IS A RAINFALL EVEN TODAY BEFORE THE PROPERTY IF THE PROPERTY ANY PROPERTY THAT GETS DEVELOPED THERE IS AN ANALYSIS TO FIND OUT HOW MUCH WATER FLOWS OVER THE PROPERTY AND MOVES ONTO THE LOWER PROPERTY DOWNSTREAM. WHEN IT IS ENGINEER DESIGNED NO MORE THAN THAT AMOUNT OF WATER CAN FLOW OFF DURING A RAINFALL EVENT OF EQUAL SIZE OR QUANTITY. THAT IS THE PRE-AND POST. THE PREVIOUS BEFORE CONSTRUCTION. THE POSTERS ASKED HER CONSTRUCTION. THE AMOUNT OF WATER THAT FLOWS OFF THE PROPERTY. THE CIVIL ENGINEER IS GOING TO REQUIRE ANY DEVELOPMENT TO MAKE SURE THAT THEY RETAINED THE AMOUNT OF WATER THAT COMES ON THAT SITE. MINUS WHATEVER WAS ALREADY FLOWING OFF THAT SITE ON A -- CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG. FOR CLARITY I WANT TO MAKE SURE EVERYBODY UNDERSTOOD

THAT. >> THANK YOU.

>> DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE COMMISSION? ARE WE READY TO BRING IT BACK FOR DISCUSSION?

>> I MAY HAVE SOME QUESTIONS FOR STAFF. THE APPLICANT MAY

ANSWER THEM. >> AT THIS TIME I THINK WE ARE

[01:20:01]

OR A MOTION. >> OR YOUR QUESTION.

>> I GUESS -- I WANTED TO ASK STAFF -- HOW DID YOU DETERMINE THIS IS NOT AN ISOLATED PROJECT? WHEN I LOOK AT IT ON THE MAP IT LOOKS PRETTY SLICK TO ME. YOU'VE GOT TO GO -- I WILL TELL YOU. THIS IS PARTIALLY TO THE COMMISSION.

YOU GUYS KNOW WHERE I LIVE. MOST OF YOU. I LIVE IN AN AREA WITH LARGER LOTS. THAT WAS THERE LONG BEFORE THE POPULATION EXPLOSION IN THIS COUNTY. AS I LIVE IN THIS COUNTY FOR ALMOST 4 YEARS NOW I HAVE WATCHED IT CLOSE IN ON US.

WE HAVE FOUGHT DESPERATELY TO KEEP THESE DEVELOPMENTS OUT OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. AND AS AN EXAMPLE, ACROSS THE STREET FROM ME A DEVELOPER AND WANTED TO PUT 42 HOUSES IN THERE. WAY OUT OF CHARACTER FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD. WE NEGOTIATED WITH THAT THE LAPEL DEVELOPER AND THEY ENDED UP PUTTING 11 HOUSES IN THERE. ACTUALLY THEY ARE NICE. IS THAT OF THE BACKSPACING THE ROAD. WE HAVE THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE FACING THE ROAD. THERE ARE THINGS YOU CAN DO TO DEVELOP PROPERTY IN AREAS LIKE THIS. AND YET MAINTAIN THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. I HONESTLY THINK THIS IS A PROJECT MAYBE WHEN ALL THIS OTHER STUFF HAPPENS LOOKS APPROPRIATE. BUT I DON'T THINK IT LOOKS APPROPRIATE RIGHT NOW. IT IS TOTALLY OUT OF CHARACTER. I UNDERSTAND I HAVE EMPATHY FOR WHAT A LOT OF THESE PEOPLE THESE CITIZENS RESIDENTS ARE SAYING. I HAD THE SAME FEELINGS EVERY TIME I SEE IT. CONSTRUCTION TRUCK IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD I GET NERVOUS ABOUT IT. TO ME IT IS NOT A BAD PLAN. IT DOESN'T LOOK BAD. I JUST THINK IT IS AHEAD OF ITS TIME. I DON'T THINK IT IS READY TO BE APPROVED YET. I WOULD BUY THE LAND AND SIT ON IT. WHO KNOWS WHEN. IF ALL THAT OTHER STUFF HAPPENS MAYBE THIS STARTS TO LOOK MORE ATTRACTIVE.

EVEN IF THE ROADS CAN ACCEPT THE TRAFFIC RIGHT NOW, TO ME THAT IS NOT THE ISSUE. I'M REALLY FOCUSED ON THIS IDEA ON THE CHARACTER THAT WE HAVE IN THIS AREA. WITH -- AND THE STAFF REPORT IT SAID THERE IS NO AGRICULTURE IN THIS AREA. I GOT AT LEAST A LETTER FROM ONE PERSON AND I THINK MR. KNOWLES INDICATED HE IS RUNNING AGRICULTURE. SO, I THINK WE ARE TRYING TO GET TO CLOSE INTO AN AREA THAT WE PROBABLY SHOULD LEAVE ALONE. AT LEAST FOR THE TIME BEING. I WILL MAKE ONE MORE COMMENT. TO MY FELLOW COMMISSIONER MR. --. I WELL UNDERSTAND THE WHOLE THING THAT HE JUST EXPLAINED ABOUT WATER RUNOFF. I THINK THE ENGINEERS RUN THE CALCULATIONS. I LIKE ENGINEERS. I'M KIND OF IN ENGINEERING GUY. BUT SOMETHING IS FLAWED WITH THE METHOD THEY USE. BECAUSE I'VE SEEN IT AND HEARD IT TOO MANY TIMES. THAT WOULD YOU HAVE A DEVELOPMENT EVEN THOUGH ALL THOSE CALCULATIONS LOOK GOOD. WHY DO THE NEIGHBORS END UP WITH FLOODED YARDS AND THEY ARE DONE? THAT IS KIND OF IN A SIDE COMMENT. WE DISAGREED ABOUT THAT BEFORE. I JUST DON'T I THINK IT IS IT IS NOT

APPROPRIATE AT THIS TIME. >> OTHER COMMENTS FROM MEMBERS

OF THE COMMISSION? >>

>> I HAVE A QUESTION -- >> DOES THE COUNTY HAVE ANY IDEA HOW MUCH THAT RIGHT TURN LANE IS GOING TO COST ? VERSUS THE $300,000 DONATION THE ORGANIZATION IS WILLING TO MAKE

TOWARD IT? >> I DON'T KNOW AT THIS TIME.

I HAVE NOT HAD A CHANCE TO TALK TO ENGINEERING TO GET THEIR INPUT ON IT. HOPEFULLY BEFORE THE BOARD MEETING WE WILL HAVE

INFORMATION ON THAT. >> TO CONTINUE IN THAT SAME LINE OF QUESTIONS. I'VE BEEN THE COUNTY A LONG TIME. ABOUT

[01:25:02]

TO GO THREE MILES. LIGHT TRAFFIC. THE BUILDUP. IT IS JUST THE BEGINNING. BECAUSE WE HAVE SO MUCH GROWTH COMING ON IN THIS PART OF THE COUNTY RIGHT NOW. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE -- SOMEONE MADE A COMMENT ABOUT AND I'M A FIRM BELIEVER. I BELIEVE WE SHOULD BE EXPANDING OUR ROADS. PRIOR TO GIVING CONSENT TO BUILDERS ESPECIALLY AT THE VOLUME THAT THE ARE TRYING TO PUT HOMES IN RIGHT NOW. TO CONTINUE TO DO THIS. I FEEL WE ARE PARTLY RESPONSIBLE FOR THAT. AS A PLANNER LOOK AT THAT AND SAY LET'S FIX THIS PART BEFORE WE INTERJECT THAT PART. THAT IS A COMMENT. I KNOW WE DON'T HAVE ANY INFORMATION ON ANY OF THAT RIGHT NOW. THAT IS MY FEELING. I FEEL THAT WITH THE AMOUNT OF HOMES WE ARE BRINGING IN THE AMOUNT OF CARS TO THE COMMUNITY. WE ARE NOT TAKING THE INFRASTRUCTURE INTO CONSIDERATION. AS MUCH AS WE ARE ALLOWED DEVELOPMENT TO

HAPPEN. >> THANK YOU. DID YOU WANT TO

SPEAK? >> I WILL DISAGREE WITH THAT STATEMENT. THE REASON I WILL DISAGREE IS WE AT A STATE LEVEL, THEN PETITIONING TO PUT IN THE OUTER BELTWAY FOR OVER 20 YEARS. TO HAVE THAT COME INTO CLAY COUNTY. ANTIOCHUS ULTIMATELY THROUGH ST. JOHN'S, COUNTY AND INTO 95 AND THROUGH I 10. THAT IS UNDERWAY. WHY WOULD WE OR OUR PREDECESSORS ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND OTHER MEMBERS BE PETITIONING TO HAVE THAT OUTER BELTWAY HERE IF WE ARE NOT EXPECTING GROWTH ? ONE IS THE OUTER BELTWAY IS HERE AND COMING PLAY COUNTY.

THAT DOES OPEN UP A LOT OF THE ROAD CONGESTION THAT WE HAVE RIGHT NOW. THE OTHER IS CATHEDRAL OAKS WHICH IS UNDER CONSTRUCTION. THAT GOES EAST AND WEST. DIRECTLY NORTH OF THIS PROPERTY. AND WILL TIE IT WILL ADD MORE CONNECTIVITY THROUGHOUT THE COUNTY. IN A MAJOR WAY. I BELIEVE THAT GRANTED THE TIMING MAY NOT HAVE BEEN ABSOLUTELY PERFECT BUT WHEN WE ARE DEALING WITH STATE AND LOCAL REAL GROWTH IT IS HARD TO MESH THAT COMPLETELY. ON SCHEDULE. THAT OUTER BELTWAY IS UNDER CONSTRUCTION. IN MY OPINION I HUMBLE OPINION THIS WHOLE AREA IS POSED FOR GROWTH BECAUSE OF THE ACCESS RAMPS ONTO THAT OUTER BELTWAY. IT COMPLETELY MAKES SENSE THAT A DEVELOPER WOULD LOOK TO TARGET AN AREA LIKE THIS. I WOULD SAY THE PLANETS BEFORE US ENCOURAGE THAT. ALONG WITH OUR BCC MEMBERS FROM PREVIOUS COMMISSIONS. THE OUTER BELTWAY AND CATHEDRAL OAKS ARE HUGE COMPONENTS THAT HAVE NOT BEEN HIGHLIGHTED. ACCESS STANDPOINT IF RESEARCHER STANDPOINT AND CONGESTION STANDPOINT. I DRIVE THIS ROAD BY THIS PROPERTY AT LEAST TWICE A DAY. SOMETIMES FOUR TIMES A DAY. I'M WELL AWARE OF THE TRAFFIC ON THIS ROAD. THE DUMP THAT IS ON THIS ROAD. ALL OF THE THINGS. THE COMMUNITY IN THE AREA. I AM VERY FAMILIAR WITH THIS LOCATION. AND SO I THINK THOSE OUTER BELTWAY I THINK THE CATHEDRAL OAKS PROVIDES AN INFRASTRUCTURE AND WILL PROVIDE AN INFRASTRUCTURE ONE COMPLETE TO OFFSET ALL OF THE CONGESTION THAT WE SEE ON SANDRIDGE AND IN

[01:30:04]

>> EXCUSE ME FOLKS IN THE AUDIENCE PLEASE DON'T REACT AUDIBLY TO ANYTHING THAT IS SAID BY ANYONE WHO IS SPEAKING.

THAT IS OUR RULE. PLEASE ABIDE BY IT.

>> THANK YOU. >> WE HAVE SARATOGA SPRINGS PUD. HOW MANY UNITS DO WE HAVE PLANNED ON THAT ONE ?

>> 5000. >> IT IS CLOSE TO THAT.

>> WE HAVE PETER CREEK PUD. HOW MANY DO WE HAVE?

>> ABOUT 230. >> AND IN MAC WEST WHICH IS

ALREADY THERE. HOW MANY UNITS? >> I DON'T KNOW I DON'T HAVE

ANY RECORDS. >> WHEN THE COMMENT IS MADE THIS DOES NOT CONFORM OR IS AN OUTLIER I DISAGREE. THIS IS ANOTHER PUD THAT ABSOLUTELY BLENDS TO WHAT WE ARE SEEING IN THAT AREA. THIS IS A GROWTH AREA. I SEE THIS AS CONFORMING TO WHAT WE HAVE IN THAT AREA ALREADY. LET ME JUST SEE IF THERE WAS ONE OTHER. WE TALKED ABOUT THE TURNING LANE REQUIREMENT. IS THE TURNING LANE A REQUIREMENT OR IS THAT SOMETHING THEY ARE OFFERING TO DO ABOVE AND BEYOND?

>> IT IS NOT REQUIRED. >> AND THEN I JUST TALK FOR A SECOND ABOUT BONDED ROADS. YEARS AGO THE COUNTY DID NOT HAVE A BONDED ROAD PROGRAM. NOW WE DO. THAT IS WHY WE SEE ALL THIS DEVELOPMENT AND ROAD CONSTRUCTION ALONG SANDRIDGE.

WE HAVE A BONDED ROAD PROGRAM. IT IS A VERY INTRICATE AND DETAILED PROGRAM. BUT THE COUNTY IS MAKING SUBSTANTIAL STRIDES IN MAKING SURE WE HAVE THE ROAD INFRASTRUCTURE IN PLACE THROUGH THIS BONDED PROGRAM. WHICH IS OPENED UP A LOT OF MONEY FOR THE COUNTY TO BE ABLE TO CREATE THE INFRASTRUCTURE NEEDED FOR THE GROWTH. WITH THAT THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. LET ME ASK THE COMMISSIONERS WHEN YOU FINISH SPEAKING TURN OFF YOUR MICROPHONE. DO WE HAVE

COMMISSIONER DAVIS ? >> TO A CERTAIN POINT I AGREE WITH ALL THE PEOPLE HERE. THE TRAFFIC -- MAY BE 315 HAS REACHED CAPACITY. THE PROBLEM IS NOBODY WANTS TO DRIVE ON THAT ROAD -- WE SAY WE'VE GOT 5100 CARS A DAY. THEY ARE NOT ALL THERE AT THE SAME TIME. THE BULK OF THEM ARE OUT THERE WHEN I WANT TO GO ON THAT ROAD. IT IS A TRAFFIC JAM. I DON'T THINK THE INFRASTRUCTURE IS READY FOR THIS. I DON'T THINK THERE IS SUFFICIENT PARK SPACE IN THIS DEVELOPMNT. 214 HOMES.

YOU'RE GOING TO PUT LESS THAN HALF AN ACRE. OF PARK SPACE.

BUILD A TRAIL SO WE CAN -- SOMEPLACE ELSE. I'M DEEPLY CONCERNED ABOUT WATER RUNOFF. THE DEVELOPERS COME AND PICK WE HAVE ALL THESE RETENTION PONDS. THEY HAVE OUTFLOWS PUNCH THROUGH THEIR RETENTION PONDS AND THE WATER IS GOING NEXT DOOR. I WOULD HATE TO SEE MR. KNOWLES FARM FLOODED OUT BECAUSE I MIGHT BE -- GROWING OUT OF HIS -- I DON'T KNOW.

MAYBE HE IS GROWING --. BUT UNTIL THE INFRASTRUCTURE IS THERE TO SUPPORT SOMETHING OF THIS MAGNITUDE. I HEAR WHAT YOU SAY ABOUT SARATOGA SPRINGS. SARATOGA SPRINGS IS STILL OUT THERE AS WELL AS THE OTHER DEVELOPMENTS. MAY BE THE INFRASTRUCTURE WILL BE THERE BY THE TIME THEY GET BUILT OUT I DON'T KNOW. CURRENT STATE I THINK -- FOR THAT PARTICULAR LOCATION IS A LITTLE BIT HEAVY. FOR WHAT THEY WANT TO DO. IN ITS CURRENT FORM. I CAN'T SUPPORT IT.

>> COMMISSIONER NORTON. >> LET ME SAY THAT I APPRECIATE EVERYTHING THAT EVERYONE SAID TONIGHT. I LOOK AT INFRASTRUCTURE. I UNDERSTAND COMMISSIONER WHAT YOU ARE SAYING ABOUT THE BELTWAY AND EVERYTHING ELSE AROUND IT. THE LOCAL ROADS HAVE TO MESH WITH IT. IN THIS CASE I THINK THE OUTER EXPRESSWAY AS WE CALL IT IS SETTING THE STONE FOR WHAT

[01:35:06]

I'VE EXPERIENCED THIS BECAUSE I DON'T HAVE 40 YEARS OF LIVING IN THIS COUNTY. I ONLY HAVE EIGHT. I CAME FROM FAIRFAX COUNTY IN VIRGINIA . SIX TIMES THE POPULATION RIGHT NOW. AND I EXPERIENCED THE TRAFFIC BECAUSE THE LOCAL ROADS COULD NOT KEEP UP WITH THE DEVELOPMENT. COMMISSIONER TALK ABOUT SOME OF THE TRAFFIC . I CAN TELL YOU THAT WHAT I'VE SEEN IS LEGENDARY. BECAUSE IT WASN'T THERE. THIS IS A PROJECT THAT I THINK IN ITS RIGHT TIME WILL MAKE SENSE. BUT NOT NOW. AS A RESULT ESTHER GOODRICH YOU BROUGHT UP A POINT ABOUT MORE HOMEWORK TO DO. I AGREE WITH YOU SIR. IN THAT RESPECT I

CAN'T SUPPORT THIS EITHER. >> THANK YOU. ARE WE READY TO

BRING THIS -- >> COMMISSIONER GARRISON

>> I KNOW THERE WERE SEVERAL COMMENTS ABOUT SCHOOL CONCURRENCY. I WANT TO EXPLAIN SCHOOL CONCURRENCY TO THE PUBLIC. SCHOOL CONCURRENCY IS BASED ON NOT ONLY THE ZONE THE DEVELOPMENT IS APPLYING FOR. IT IS ALSO BASED ON ALL THE CONTINUOUS ZONES. AT THIS POINT IN TIME WHEN A DEVELOPMENT PUTS AND AN APPLICATION FOR SCHOOL CONCURRENCY I HAVE TO LOOK AT NOT ONLY THE SCHOOLS IN THAT ZONE WHETHER CLAY HIGH SCHOOL SPRING PARK ELEMENTARY AND I BELIEVE LAKE ASBERRY IN THAT ZONE. BUT I ALSO HAVE TO LOOK AT ALL THE CONTIGUOUS ZONES. I HAVE TO LOOK AT BELIEVE IT OR NOT FOR HIGH SCHOOL KEYSTONE. I HAVE TO LOOK AT FLEMING ISLAND HIGH SCHOOL. I HAVE TO LOOK AT ALL THE ZONES THAT TOUCH THAT. IF THERE IS SPACE IN THOSE ZONES BY LAW STATUTORILY I HAVE TO ALLOW THOSE SEATS TO BE RESERVED. SO, WE TALK ABOUT SCHOOL CONCURRENCY WE DON'T JUST LOOK AT THE IMMEDIATE AREA. WE HAVE TO LOOK AT ALL THE CONTIGUOUS AREAS ALSO BY LAW. WHEN THEY SAY THEY HAVE BEEN GRANTED SCHOOL CONCURRENCY THAT ISSUE. THEY HAVE BEEN GRANTED SCHOOL CONCURRENCY BASED ON THIS POINT IN TIME.

DOES THAT MEAN LATER ON DOWN THE ROAD SARATOGA SPRINGS COMES TO FRUITION THAT THE SCHOOLS WILL FILL UP? PROBABLY. WE CAN'T DETERMINE THAT AT THIS POINT IN TIME WITH THEIR APPLICATION. THIS WILL COME TO VOTE AND I WANT YOU TO UNDERSTAND THAT MY VOTE IS BASED ON STRICTLY WHETHER THEY HAVE MET THE REQUIREMENTS FOR CONCURRENCY OR NOT.

>> COMMISSIONER GARRISON >> THANK YOU. THANK YOU GUYS FOR THE PRESENTATION. WITH ALL SINCERITY THANK YOU ALL FOR BEING HERE. MOST OF US SAT RIGHT OUT THERE FOR YEARS. THE LADY THAT JOINED THE CAC I'M TICKLED THAT WE HAVE A CAC FOR A RAPIDLY GROWING AREA. WHATEVER MY COMMENTS MAY BE ARE MY COMMENTS BASED ON MY RESEARCH AND MY STATE OF MIND ABOUT THIS ISSUE. I DON'T MEAN TO BE PATRONIZING AT ALL. LET ME REMIND THE COMMISSIONERS WE ARE NOT HERE TO DISCUSS THE SPECIFICS OF THE DEVELOPMENT. WE ARE HERE TO VOTE ON WHETHER THIS GETS TRANSMITTED TO THE STATE FOR FURTHER REVIEW. TO CHANGE A LAND USE CATEGORY. IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE TO FORGIVE ME FOR READING A BIT. LET ME JUST SHARE SOME STUFF OUT OF THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT. THE PURPOSE OF THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT IS TO EXAMINE THE EXISTING LAND USES. AND DETERMINE PRESENT AND FUTURE LAND USE NEEDS SUCH AS THE AMOUNT OF LAND NEEDED TO ACCOMMODATE FUTURE GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT. THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT IS AN IMPORTANT PART OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. IT DEALS WITH FACTORS INFLUENCING FUTURE GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT IN CLAY COUNTY. IT CONTAINS A BASIC STRATEGY AND PHYSICAL PLAN TO GUIDE THE LOCATION, THE TIMING OF THE DENSITY AND THE INTENSITY OF FUTURE LAND DEVELOPMENT. THE NUMBER ONE GOAL FOR FUTURE LAND USE GOAL TO EFFECTIVELY MANAGE GROWTH AND DEVELOPMENT DESIGNATED AREAS FOR ANTICIPATED FUTURE DEVELOPMENT WHICH SET OF FIVE MARKET DEMAND IN A COST EFFICIENT AND ENVIRONMENTALLY ACCEPTALE MANNER. THE LADY WAS CONFUSED ABOUT THE IDEA OF RURAL FRIENDS. LET ME READ TO YOU WHAT RURAL FFRENCH THE DEFINITION . THIS DESIGNATION IS RESERVED FOR LAND ACCESSIBLE TO EXISTING URBAN SURFACES.

LOCATED IN THE AREAS WHERE EXTENSION OF CENTRAL WATER AND SEWER SERVICE CAN BE EASILY PROVIDED. DENSITY SHOULD BE A MAXIMUM OF THREE UNITS PER NET ACRE. A MINIMUM OF ONE UNIT PER ACRE. THIS DENSITY CATEGORY IS ALMOST EXCLUSIVELY CHARACTERIZED BY SINGLE-FAMILY DETACHED HOUSING UNITS BUT MAY INCLUDE TO A THREE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENTS. IF

[01:40:06]

SOCIETY MOST BASIC NEEDS AND I APOLOGIZE FOR READING. IT IS IMPORTANT TO GET THIS AND. WHAT IS ASCITES BASIC NEEDS IS SHELTER. HOW WE PRESERVE THE HOUSING WE HAVE IN PLANS ACCOMMODATE FUTURE RESIDENTS REFLECT UPON THE QUALITY OF LIFE WE ENJOY. IT IS IMPORTANT TO CONSIDER WHERE WE LOCATE NEW RESIDENTIAL AREAS THIS DECISION WILL DRIVE THE DETERMINATION AS TO WHERE PUBLIC INFRASTUCTURE WILL BE LOCATED. THERE IS A MAP A SLIDE HERE. I DON'T THINK -- PRESENTATION. THAT SHOWS THE URBAN SURFACE AREA. IT IS AND THE FUTURE LAND USE ELEMENT. IT IS A CLEAR MAP RIGHT THERE MAY BE THAT ONE. IT IS IN THERE.

YOU HAVE A MAP. THE URBAN SURFACE AREA IS CIRCLED IN RED.

THE POINT I'M TRYING TO MAKE IS THAT THE ENTIRE REGION OF THE COUNTY IS WITHIN THE URBAN SURFACE AREA. I READ THE EMAILS THE OPPOSITION LETTERS. AND REACHED OUT TO CCU A. THERE IS ALREADY ADEQUATE WATER AND SEWER SERVICE THERE. THERE IS INTENDED FUTURE GROWTH BECAUSE OF ALL THE DEVELOPMENTS THAT ARE COMING. AGAIN I LIVE OUT IN A RURAL AREA. YOU COULD NOT GIVE ME ONE OF THESE LOTS. YOU COULD NOT PAY ME TO LIVE IN THIS DEVELOPMENT. I FEEL YOUR PAIN IN THAT REGARD. I WANT TO SHARE SOME NUMBERS. THE COUNTY'S GROWTH CLAY COUNTY POPULATION GROWTH CURRENTLY OUR COUNTY IS HAS 232,000 PEOPLE.

JUST 10 YEARS AGO THREE YEARS AGO JUST THREE YEARS AGO IT WAS 10,000 PEOPLE FEWER. WE HAVE GROWN 10,000 PEOPLE IN JUST THREE YEARS. 2020 WE HAD A POPULATION OF 200 -- 142. WE HAVE INCREASED 90,000 PEOPLE IN 23 YEARS. THE PROJECTED POPULATION GROWTH WHICH IS WHAT THIS PLAN IS INTENDED TO ADDRESS CLAY COUNTY SHALL PROVIDE APPROPRIATE LAND-USE CATEGORIES. THAT IS WHAT THIS IS ASKING FOR. CHANGE THE LAND USE CATEGORY. AND LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS TO ALLOW FOR A VARIETY OF HOUSING TYPES. ADDITIONAL DWELLING UNITS NEEDED TO MEET RISING POPULATION BY 2040. IN 2040 WE EXPECTED TO HAVE TO HUNDRED 75,000 PEOPLE IN CLAY COUNTY.

THAT IS 43,000 MORE PEOPLE THAN NOW. 19% INCREASE. BUT THE YEAR 2050 WE ARE PROJECTED TO HIT 300,000 PEOPLE. MY POINT IS AND IT IS OBVIOUSTO ALL OF US. WE ARE GROWING. WE ARE EXPLODING.

WE ARE NOT GOING TO PROVIDE HOUSING WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO? PUT UP GATES UNTIL PEOPLE THEY CAN'T MOVE THE CLAY COUNTY? WE WOULD LOVE THAT. I LIVE WHERE I LIVE BEHIND MY HOUSE IS 50 ACRES. THE ONLY REASON IT IS NOT DEVELOPED THERE IS NOT WATER AND SEWER. AT SOME POINT SOMEBODY IS GOING TO PUT SOMETHING BACK THERE. I'M GOING TO STAND AT THE FENCE AND CRY. IT IS A FACT OF LIFE. THAT IS WHERE I'M AT.

THIS AREA HAS BEEN DESIGNATED BY CCU A IS PART OF THEIR URBAN SURFACE AREA. MULTIPLE MENTIONS OF THE STATE 23 FIRST COAST EXPRESSWAY. WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT. 1 POINT A BILLION-DOLLAR INVESTMENT AND INFRASTRUCTURE. WHAT DID PEOPLE THINK WAS GOING TO HAPPEN WHEN THEY PUT A BRAND-NEW INTERSTATE? WHAT IS HAPPENING IS WHAT THE PEOPLE WANTED. THEY WANTED GROWTH. THE GENTLEMAN HAS BEEN HERE SINCE 1968. YOU PROBABLY REMEMBER WHEN THE BRIDGE WAS OPEN. I THINK IT WAS 1973. IF YOU WANT TO MANDARIN PRE-BUCKMAN BRIDGE LOOK LIKE SOME OF THESE TWO LANE ROADS THAT ARE HERE NOW. NOW GO TO MANDARIN AND WHAT DO YOU SEE? THAT IS WHAT IS GOING TO HAPPEN IN CLAY COUNTY. AFFORDABILITY IS AN ISSUE. YOU CAN HAVE EVERYBODY ONTO A THREE ACRE LOTS. YOU HAVE TO HAVE APARTMENT COMPLEXES. YOU HAVE TO HAVE A VARIETY OF LOT SIZES.

THE GENTLEMAN MENTIONED I PICKED UP IN THE REPORT 2019 CHIPS ON 315 5100 A DAY. TODAY THERE WERE 4600. DECREASED 500

[01:45:02]

SUPPORTING IT. >>> IS THERE ANY OTHER MEMBER

THAT WISHES TO SPEAK? >> I'VE LISTENED TO THE COMMENTS. AND FRANKLY NOTHING EITHER -- GARRISON SAID NEGATES WHAT I SAID. I WANT TO EXPLAIN THAT. YES, WE HAVE FUTURE LAND USE FOR A REASON. THERE IS NOTHING IN THE FUTURE LAND USE DEFINITIONS ANYWHERE THAT SAYS WHEN AN AREA STARTS TO BUILD UP THAT YOU HAVE TO GO IN AND MOVE IT FROM THIS LAND-USE TO THIS LAND USE. THIS PARCEL HAS A FUTURE LAND USE WHICH I BELIEVE IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD IT SITS IN. BY SAYING THAT GROWTH IS INEVITABLE IT IS. I WAS BORN IN FLORIDA. I HATE WHAT HAS HAPPENED TO THE STATE. BUT IT HAS HAPPENED. WE DON'T HAVE TO DESTROY EVERY PIECE OF OLD FLORIDA JUST TO ACCOMMODATE A BUNCH MORE LITTLE TIKI TACKY PUD HOUSES. THERE ARE PLENTY OF OTHER PLACES IN THIS COUNTY THAT THESE KIND OF PROJECTS CAN GO. THESE PEOPLE HAVE A SENSE OF COMMUNITY. THEY HAVE A SENSE OF NEIGHBORHOOD AND A CHARACTER OF LIFE THAT THEY EXPECT . IT IS NOT OUR RESPONSIVE WE SHOULD NOT BE THROWING GRENADES INTO THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD JUST BECAUSE WE HAVE MORE RESIDENTS. YES, AND I THINK TO MR.'S POINT IT IS ABOUT 40,000 APPROVED BASICALLY HOUSES. IF THEY EVER COME OUT OF THE GROUND. THAT IS GREAT. LET THEM BUILD WHERE THEY ARE APPROVED. THIS NEIGHBORHOOD HAS ITS OWN LITTLE CHARACTER. THE IDEA THAT WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO KEEP PUSHING THEM AND UNTIL EVERYBODY LEAVES? THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO THE WAY THAT THEY LOVE. AND YES WE PUT IN THE FIRST COAST EXPRESSWAY. I DID NOT SEE ANYWHERE IN ANY OF THAT. I WAS HERE WE TALKED ABOUT IT LONG BEFORE IT WAS APPROVED NOT ANY ONE OF THOSE SAID WE ARE GOING TO BLOW UP EVERY NEIGHBORHOOD THAT IS NEAR THIS THING. THERE IS PLENTY OF LAND FOR THESE KIND OF PROJECTS TO GO. AS I SAID 10 YEARS FROM NOW WHATEVER IN THE FUTURE, IT MAY MAKE PERFECT SENSE. BUT WE SHOULD NOT BE IN THE BUSINESS OF DESTROYING NEIGHBORHOODS. THAT

IS WHAT THIS SOUNDS LIKE. >> IF I MAY PLEASE.

>> THIS IS LIKE GROUNDHOG DAY. WHEN WE HAVE THESE DISCUSSIONS.

IT IS A GOOD THING THAT WE HAVE A DIFFERING OPINIONS. EVERYBODY KNOWS WE ARE JUST PASSING OUR OPINIONS TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. THEY HAVE THE TASK OF ACTUALLY MAKING THE DECISION AND DECIDING WHAT TO DO. I DON'T THINK SAYING NEW DEVELOPMENT I DON'T THINK WE ARE DESTROYING ANYTHING. YOU SAY YOU DON'T LIKE URBAN SPRAWL. WE HAVE A URBAN SURFACE AREA. THIS IS INSIDE THE URBAN SURFACE AREA. THERE ARE PLENTY OF PLACES IN THE COUNTY. YOU THINK PEOPLE ARE NOT GOING TO COMPLAIN ABOUT IT? THEY PUT IN THIS 50 ACRES AND SOMEONE GETS ENOUGH MONEY TO PUT IN THE WATER AND SEWER. YOU THINK MY NEIGHBORS ARE NOT GOING TO COMPLAIN ABOUT IT ? WHEREVER WE GO PEOPLE ARE GOING TO BE UPSET. AGAIN WE WILL NEVER AGREE. WE KNOW THAT PICS MET THANK YOU. I THINK IT IS TIME FOR US TO ENTERTAIN A MOTION. DOES ANYONE WANT TO PUT A

[01:50:01]

MOTION ON THE TABLE? >> I MOVE THAT WE RECOMMEND TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS THAT THIS APPLICATION FOR CHANGE IN A FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORY TO RURAL FFRENCH IS APPROVED AND PASSED FORWARD TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. WE SUPPORT THAT IDEA. MOVED ONTO

THE STATE. >> IS THERE A SECOND

>> IS THERE FURTHER DISCUSSION? >> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR -- SHOW

OF HANDS. >> WE'VE GOT FOUR. ALL THOSE

OPPOSED? >> SO THERE IS NO RECOMMENDATION FROM IT WAS 4-4. NO RECOMMENDATION ON THIS MATTER FROM THE COMMISSION. AT THIS TIME I'M GOING TO

>>> WE RECONVENED THE JULY 2ND MEETING OF THE CLAY COUNTY

[2.  Public Hearing to consider COMP 24-0013 and PUD 24-0005. (Dist. 5) (M.Brown)]

>> MADAM CHAIR JUST ONE CORRECTION. THIS IS SMALL-SCALE LAND-USE CHANGE. IT WILL NOT BE TRANSMITTED.

>> I'M SORRY >> JUST WANTED TO MAKE THAT CORRECTION. I WILL DO THE PRESENTATION DEALS WITH BOTH THE LAND-USE CHANGE AND REZONING . I WILL LEAVE THAT OUT AS WE GO THROUGH. IT WILL TAKE TWO VOTES. ONE FOR EACH AT THE END OF THE HEARING. THE APPLICANT IS 3305 HIGHWAY 17 GCS LLC. JANICE FLEET. THE REQUEST IS FOR IS SMALL-SCALE LAND-USE AMENDMENT FROM RURAL FFRENCH TO COMMERCIAL. AND A COMPANION ZONING MAP AMENDMENT FROM BA TO BB AND AR -- TO PCD PLANNED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT. IT IS IN THE SPRINGS PLANNING DISTRICT. WHICH IS COMMISSION DISTRICT 5 COMMISSIONER BURKE.

BOTH ITEMS WILL BE HEARD AT THE JULY 23RD BOARD MEETING. THE ENTIRE PARCEL IS 4 POINT TO TWO ACRES IN SIZE. IT HAS BOTH SPLIT ZONING AND SPLIT LAND-USE. THE LAND-USE AMENDMENT WILL CHANGE 0.63 ACRES OF THE PARCEL FROM RURAL TO COMMERCIAL. RESULTING IN THE ENTIRE PARCEL BEING COMMERCIAL.

THE ZONING MAP REQUEST WHICH CHANGE THE TOTAL 4.33 ACRES FROM THE BB, EA OR BA TO ACTUALLY AND AR WHICH THREE ZONING DISTRICTS WHICH PRESENTLY -- PARCEL TWO -- ZONING DISTRICT PLANNED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT. PARCEL HAS APPROXIMATELY 530 FEET OF FRONTAGE ON HIGHWAY 17. NORTH ÚOF THE SUBJECT PARCEL YOU HAVE PROPERTY THAT IS DESIGNATED COMMERCIAL. WITH BB ZONING. IT CONTAINS AN EXISTING COMMERCIAL USE AS WELL AS THE RESIDENTIAL IN THE REAR. SOUTH OF THE PRESENT PARCEL YOU HAVE AN IMPROVED EXISTING PUD WITH RURAL FFRENCH FUTURE LAND USE. THAT PARCEL IS DEVELOPED WITH A SKILLED NURSING FACILITY. WEST ACROSS 17 AS UNDEVELOPED PROPERTY WITH COMMERCIAL FUTURE LAND USE AND COMMERCIAL ZONING.

EAST OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LAND DESIGNATED RURAL FFRENCH WITH AR ZONING. IT IS DEVELOPED WITH THE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. THE PURPOSE OF THE PROPOSED LAND-USE AMENDMENT AND COMPANION ZONING CHANGE IS TO FACILITATE THE DEVELOPMENT OF A RESTAURANT WHICH WOULD INCLUDE A SPACE TO HOLD EVENTS. HERE IT SHOWS ALL THE TWO MAPS. YOU SEE THE LAND-USE ON THE LEFT. AND THE ZONING ON THE RIGHT. UNDER THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN

[01:55:07]

WOULD GENERATE APPROXIMATELY -- [INAUDIBLE]. THERE IS CENTRAL WATER AND CENTRAL SEWER. AVAILABLE TO THE SITE PROVIDED BY CITY OF GREEN COVE SPRINGS. THEY HAVE ADEQUATE CAPACITY OF BOTH TO SUPPORT THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT. COUNTY HAS ADEQUATE SOLID WASTE CAPACITY. THERE IS NO SCHOOL IMPACTS ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PROJECT. NO IMPACT REGIONAL SIGNIFICANT HABITATS. AND THE PARCEL IS NOT LOCATED IN A LAND-USE IMPACT AREA FOR CAMP LAND. THE REQUESTED LAND-USE CHANGE DOES MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF FUTURE LAND USE POLICY 1 POINT FOR .8.

TO ALLOW ADDITIONAL COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT -- SMALL-SCALE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT TO BE AMENDED AND ONTO THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP. THE WRITTEN STATEMENT SUBMITTED ASSOCIATED WITH THE PCD PERMITS AS I INDICATED PREVIOUSLY -- EVENT USES AT THE SITE. WITH OUTDOOR SEATING FOR MUSIC. IN LOOKING AT IT STAFF RECOGNIZES THERE IS RESIDENTIAL TO THE EAST OF THIS EXISTING RESIDENTIAL. THERE IS WETLANDS ASSOCIATED VEGETATION WITH THOSE WETLANDS THAT PROVIDE A BIT OF A BUFFER.

STAFF BELIEVES THAT ALLOWING THE BELIEVES THAT THERE IS A POTENTIAL OF AN ADVERSE IMPACT WITH OUTDOOR AMPLIFIED MUSIC OR SOUND ASSOCIATED POTENTIALLY ASSOCIATED WITH THE -- STAFF AS PART OF OUR RECOMMENDATION IS REQUESTING THAT RESTRICTION BE ADDED TO THE PCD . THAT AMPLIFIED SOUND OUTDOOR SOUND , NOT INDOOR AMPLIFIED OUTDOOR SOUND WOULD BE PROHIBITED AFTER 11:00 P.M. DAILY. HERE IS A GENERAL SITE PLAN. IT IS SHOWING THE LOCATION. WITH 17 TO THE SOUTH. ANDY AR THE RESIDENTIAL WOULD BE JUST ON THE PART THE AREA DIRECTLY OPPOSITE OF U.S. 17. IN SUMMARY THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A LAND-USE CHANGE OF 0.63 ACRES FROM RF TO COMMERCIAL. CHANGE THE ZONING FOR THE ENTIRE 4 POINT TO TWO ACRE SITE PLAN COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT. THERE ARE ADEQUATE UTILITIES PROVIDED BY LING CLOVIS RINGS. STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE APPLICANT AND DETERMINE THE REQUEST IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA. ESPECIALLY WITH THE ADDED RECOMMENDATION OF STAFF FOR THE LIMIT ON OUTDOOR AMPLIFIED SOUND. THE REQUESTED PCD ZONING IS ALLOWED IN THE PROPOSED COMMERCIAL FUTURE LAND USE.

WITH THAT STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF PLAN 24 DASH 0013 TO AMEND THIS FUTURE LAND USE MAP FOR 063 ACRES FROM RF TO COMMERCIAL. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF PUD 24 DASH 005 AMENDING THE ZONING MAP FOR 4 POINT TO TWO ACRES TO PLANNED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT. CONTINGENT ON APPROVAL OF THE LAND-USE CHANGE. AN ADOPTION OF THE AMENDMENT OF THE TO THE PCD WRITTEN STATEMENT THAT THE AMPLIFICATION OF OUTDOOR SOUND BE PROHIBITED AFTER 11 P.M. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OF

STAFF. >> HOW DID YOU DETERMINE THE

11:00 P.M.? >> IT SEEMED LIKE A REASONABLE -- STAFF BELIEVES IT PROVIDES SOME FLEXIBILITY TO ALLOW SOME EVENTS THAT WOULD GO NORMAL HOURS. TO A MORE LATER BUT NOT

[02:00:05]

TO MIDNIGHT. >> IS THERE ANY COUNTY ZONING WITH THE RESIDENT POTENTIAL RESIDENTIAL AREA BEING IN THAT VICINITY -- IS THERE ANY ZONING ORDINANCE ON SOUND?

>> THERE IS A SOUND ORDINANCE AND THE GENERAL CODE FOR THE

COUNTY. >> WHAT IS THAT TIME?

>> IT IS NOT SPECIFIC AS TO TIME. IT HAS A CERTAIN DECIBEL READING THAT IS TAKEN BY WHOEVER HAS THE SOUND MACHINE.

USUALLY IT IS THE SHERIFF DEPUTY. THEY HAVE TO BE OUT THERE AND IT HAS TO EXCEED WHATEVER I DON'T HAVE THE SPECIFIC. IT HAS TO EXCEED THAT FOR I BELIEVE 15 MINUTES

DURATION. >> AT 2:00 IN THE MORNING --

>> THEY CAN DO IT AS LONG IT IS BELOW A DECIBEL THE DECIBEL?

>> THAT IS WHERE THAT COMES FROM. STAFF'S BELIEF THAT THE 11:00 HOUR GETS FLEXIBILITY TO THE DEVELOPMENT. TO BE ABLE TO HAVE SOME USE. AND IT STILL PROTECTS THE RESIDENCE TO THE

EAST. >> I WAS GOING TO ASK THE SAME QUESTION ABOUT NOISE. 10:00 SEEMS MORE REASONABLE TO ME.

AND MAYBE 11:00 -- I DON'T KNOW. THAT IS PART OF THE PCD.

>> THAT WOULD BE PART OF THE PCD.

>> IS NOT DEFINED. FOR SOME REASON IN MY HEAD IT WAS 10:00.

YOU CAN MAKE A NOISE COMPLAINT AT 10:00.

>> I DON'T BELIEVE OUR SOUND ORDINANCE HAS A TIMEFRAME.

>> ARE THERE OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS?

>> THIS COULD ALSO BE SEVEN DAYS A WEEK. THERE IS NO RESTRICTIONS WHETHER IT IS FRIDAY OR SATURDAY NIGHT?

>> NOT STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION DOES NOT DIFFERENTIATE BETWEEN

WEEKEND VERSUS WEEKNIGHT. >> SEVEN DAYS A WEEK UNTIL 11:00 AT NIGHT. 10:00 SEEMS -- CONSIDER THAT [INAUDIBLE] WITH

HOMEOWNERS. >> I WAS GOING TO WAIT UNTIL THE APPLICANT SPOKE. SINCE YOU BROUGHT THIS UP I THINK WE ALL SAW THE SOUND IS KIND OF AN ISSUE ON THIS ONE. I DID NOT SEE ANYTHING ELSE THAT BOTHERED ME. I ACTUALLY -- MY CONCERN IS NOT WITH THE DECIBEL LEVEL. BUT THE MUSIC THAT PASSES FOR MUSIC TODAY. WHEN YOU GET THAT -- GOING, THERE ARE HOUSES 200 FEET THAT IS HOW FAR THEY ARE. IT IS WETLANDS. 200 FEET AWAY.

AND THAT IS GOING TO BE ANNOYING WHETHER IT IS AT 7:00 AT NIGHT OR 11:00 AT NIGHT. ALTHOUGH I'M MORE OF A LATE RISER, I KNOW A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT ARE IN BED LONG BEFORE 11:00 AT NIGHT. I HAD AND WAS GOING TO OFFER A SOLUTION. WHAT I THINK CAN FIX THIS PROBLEM. IT IS SIMPLY TO REORIENT THIS RESTAURANT SO YOU BLOW ALL THE SOUND OUT TO 17. PUT THE DECK IN FRONT OF THE RESTAURANT , SO THEY CAN BLOW IT ALL NIGHT LONG. ALL PEOPLE ARE GOING TO HEAR CARS GOING DOWN 17. THE PROBLEM IT IS ORIENTED TO THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE BEHIND IT

RIGHT NOW. >> ARE THERE OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS FOR STAFF BEFORE WE HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT?

>> IF NOT WE INVITE THE APPLICANT TO COME FORWARD.

>> THANK YOU. >> JANICE FLEET ARCHITECTS PLANNERS 11557 HIDDEN ARBOR WAY. JACKSONVILLE. I THINK THE I UNDERSTAND YOUR CONCERNS. WHICH IS UNDERSTANDABLE. WHEN MIKE ASKED ME ABOUT THE 11:00, JOE WAKENS IS DEVELOPING AND HE% COULD NOT BE HERE TONIGHT. IT IS GOING TO BE A BARBECUE. I'M NOT SURE TO BE HONEST HOW MUCH OUTDOOR ENTERTAINMENT WILL BE.

HOW OFTEN IT WILL BE. BUT THEY JUST WANTED TO HAVE THAT OPPORTUNITY. I LIKE YOUR IDEAS I WAS NOT INVOLVED IN THE DESIGN. I THINK THAT MAKES SENSE. THERE IS A GOOD FROM

[02:05:04]

WETLANDS ON BOTH SIDES. >> IT IS ABOUT 200 FEET.

>> SO THE -- YOU GUYS KNOW ME WELL ENOUGH. IF WE NEED TO SWITCH THE TIMNG A LITTLE BIT -- TO HELP GET YOUR APPROVAL THE 10:00 ON WEEKDAYS OR 11:00 I DON'T SEE THAT AS A PROBLEM.

SWITCHING THE BUILDING I CAN'T GIVE YOU THAT. IT MAKES I THINK IT MAKES SOME SENSE. I WAS NOT INVOLVED IN THE DESIGN. I CAN TALK ABOUT THAT BETWEEN NOW AND THE BCC THAT MAKES SOME SENSE.

ONE OF THE THOUGHTS WAS TO HAVE SOME VIEWS OF THE WETLANDS.

I'M SURE. MAYBE IT COULD BE REORIENTED SOMEWHAT. THAT MAKES SENSE IN THE FINAL DESIGN. THE REASON WE WENT THROUGH THE WE HAD TO GET THE LAND USE CHANGE WAS TO GET THAT PIECE INCLUDED SO WE WOULD HAVE THE WHOLE SIDE UNDER ONE COMMON LAND USE. THE PCD WE PRIMARILY WENT THROUGH THIS PROCESS FOR THE UNIFY PLAN. BUT ALSO AND I KNOW WE HAVE DISCUSSED THIS BEFORE. YOU HAVE THE PA ZONING THAT LIMITS YOU TO 2500 SQUARE FEET OF A BUILDING WHICH IS NOT LARGE ENOUGH FOR THE RESTAURANT THEY WANT TO HAVE. THE GUY SAID IT IS WANT TO BE A BARBECUE. AND WE ALSO WANTED TO BE ALLOWED TO HAVE ON-SITE ALCOHOL SALES. TO GET UP TO YOUR ZONING THAT ALLOWS THAT THERE'S A LOT OF BAD STUFF WE WOULD NOT WANT THEY DON'T INTEND TO DO IT.

WORKING WITH STAFF THAT IS WHY WE CAME UP WITH THE PCD. SO THAT WE COULD ATTEND IF YOU SEE PRIMARILY IT IS A RESTAURANT ALLOWING SOME EVENT VENUE. I ADDED SOME OTHER COMMERCIAL USAGE. IF FOR SOME REASON THE RESTAURANT DOES NOT FLY THEY DON'T HAVE TO COME BACK. OTHER RETAIL IF THEY WANT AND A LOT OF TIMES STORES HAVE A LITTLE RETAIL STORE IN THEIR RESTAURANT SELLING THEIR T-SHIRTS. AGAIN IF IT DID NOT GO YOU TO PUT A PROFESSONAL OFFICE OR SOMETHING WITHOUT HAVING TO COME BACK AND REZONE IT AGAIN. WHAT I CALLED THE BAD STUFF -- WE DID NOT INCLUDED. THAT IS WHY WE LIMITED IT TO THE WRITTEN DESCRIPTION. THAT WE HAD. AND THE SITE PLAN. AND MAYBE WE COULD WORK A LITTLE BIT ON THE DECKS. REDESIGNED THIS IS JUST THE FIRST SCHEMATIC DESIGN. WE DID GO TO THE SPRINGS. IT WAS THEIR FIRST MEETING. SECOND MEETING. WE GOT FULL RECOMMENDATION. THEY WERE ALL AT THE MEETING AND THEY RECOMMENDED APPROVAL. THEY LIKE THE IDEA. IF THIS AND WITH THE AREA. YOU'VE GOT THE OTHER ALCOHOL 'S ALONE I DON'T KNOW WHAT IT IS CALLED NORTH OF IT. YOU HAVE THEWIND DAYS. IT IS IN A COMMERCIAL AREA OF THE COUNTY. RIGHT THERE ON 17. IT IS AN INFILL PARCEL. WE ARE NOT PROMOTING URBAN SPRAWL. THAT IS REALLY WHAT -- ANOTHER BUSINESS IN THE COUNTY. WHICH WE NEED.

RESTAURANTS AND HOPEFULLY IT WILL BRING PEOPLE. I LIKE THINGS THAT BRING PEOPLE TO NEIGHBORHOODS. THEY DON'T HAVE TO ALWAYS STRIVE TO OTHER PARTS OF THE COUNTY AND INCREASE TRAFFIC. HOPEFULLY THE PEOPLE IN THE AREA THIS WILL BE THEY WILL BE ABLE TO USE THIS RESTAURANT. THE IDEA IF THEY MIGHT HAVE SOME VENUES. THE SECRETARY -- CAC WAS COMPLAINING. SHE SAID DON'T HAVE TOO MANY WEDDING VENUES.

BECAUSE SHE DOES THAT. THAT IS REALLY NOT THE INTENT. IF THEY WANT TO HAVE RESTAURANTS RENT OUT THEIR SPACE FOR THOSE EVENTS. THEY WANTED TO MAKE SURE IT WOULD NOT BE ALLOWED.

THEIR GOAL IS A RESTAURANT WITH SOME ALLOWING SOME OTHER VENUE.

WHATEVER RESTRICTIONS WE KNOW IT IS A PCD. THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO PUT ON I THINK EVEN THOUGH HE IS NOT HERE. I CAN CONVINCE HIM WE WILL TRY TO ABIDE BY IT AS WE MOVE FORWARD

SO WE CAN GET YOUR SUPPORT. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR --

FOR THE APPLICANT ? >> COMMISSIONER GARRISON

>> 7 TO 12 IF YOU'RE SELLING ALCOHOL. THE WAY THEY JUDGE IT IS ORDINARY HEARING ABILITY INSIDE OF A RESIDENCE. IF YOU'RE INSIDE YOUR HOUSE AND YOU CAN HEAR IT FROM WITHIN FIVE MINUTES THAT IS A COMPLAINT. NOTHING IS ALLOWED FROM 12 TO 7 THAT YOU GET HERE BEYOND THE BORDERS OF THE

[02:10:01]

PROPERTY. >> 11:00 IS LESS THAN 12

OBVIOUSLY. >> THANK YOU.

>> COMMISSIONER GARRISON ANSWERED MY QUESTION. I WAS GOING TO ASK ABOUT USED TO BE CALLED THE REHAB'S ALONE WHICH IS RIGHT NORTH OF THIS PARCEL.

>> I DRIVE BACK THAT A LOT. >> I HAVE NOT HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO PARTAKE. GOD BLESS THEM. IS THERE ANY KIND OF A TIMEFRAME A QUESTION FOR BOTH. IS THERE ANY KIND OF A TIMEFRAME FOR THEM ONE NOISE OR DECIBEL LEVEL? ANYTHING FOR

THAT PARCEL? >> STAFF IS NOT AWARE OF

ANYTHING FOR THAT. >> I APPRECIATE YOUR CLARIFICATION. BECAUSE 11:00 SOUNDS BETTER THAN NOON. THEN MIDNIGHT. I LIKE OTHERS REFLECTION THAT MAYBE WE ARE GETTING OLD. 10:00 WOULD BE MORE REASONABLE IF IT IS A BARBECUE PLACE. IF IT IS A BAR AND A DANCE CLUB THAT IS DIFFERENT. IF THIS IS BARBECUE, --

>> THEY JUST CLOSE BECAUSE I TALKED TO COURTNEY. THEY JUST

CLOSE LAST WEEK. >> 10:00 FOR A PLACE SERVING DINNER IS FULLY ACCEPTABLE. I WILL LEAVE IT THERE.

>> IS THAT -- SEVEN DAYS A WEEK? JUST WEEKDAY AND WEEKEND?

>> I WILL LEAVE IT TO THE COMMISSION FOR DISCUSSION. I WOULD DO IT 10:00 EVERY NIGHT. BUT AGAIN -- I GO TO BED EARLY.

>> DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE

COMMISSION? >> THE SALOON YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT THEY DON'T TYPICALLY HAVE OUTDOOR ENTERTAINMENT.

EXCEPT ON ONE OCCASION. OCCASIONALLY THEY WILL HAVE A SPECIAL EVENT IT IS USUALLY IN THE AFTERNOON. SO, IT IS HARD TO COMPARE WITH WHAT THEY ARE DOING. IT IS MAINLY AN INDOOR

DRINKING PLACE. >> I'M NOT SURE HOW MUCH THEY ARE GOING TO DO OUTSIDE. IT IS PROBABLY GOING TO BE AFTERNOON OR SPECIAL EVENTS. THAT KIND OF THING. EVERYBODY KNOWS THE

INTENT OF THE BARBECUE. >> ARE WE READY TO OPEN TO

PUBLIC HEARING? >> I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS MATTER. I DO NOT HAVE ANY CARDS SPECIFICALLY IDENTIFYING THIS ITEM. I SEE NO ONE COMING FORWARD TO SPEAK ON IT. IS THERE ANYONE WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON THIS?

>> I UNDERSTAND THE CAC SUPPORTED THIS. DO YOU WANT TO

COMMENT ON THAT? >> GO AHEAD.

>> AGAIN RYAN MERCIES. WE SUPPORT THIS 6-0. WE APPROVE IT. ANYTHING TO YOUR -- TALKING ABOUT THE SALOON. AROUND WHY I LIVE IN SHEAD ROAD WE CAN HEAR WHEN THEY HAVE NO SPECIAL EVENTS. AT MIDNIGHT. IT CAN GET PRETTY LOUD. IT WOULD BE AWESOME IF IT WAS 10:00. WE DID NOT TALK ABOUT TIMEFRAME. THAT WOULD BE AWESOME. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS I'M HERE .

>> ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. MERCIES? THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE AND FOR SPEAKING. IS THERE ANYONE ELSE WHO WANTS TO BE HEARD ON THIS MATTER WAS NOT IF NOT I'M GOING TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. AND BRING IT BACK TO THE COMMISSION FOR A

MOTION DISCUSSION AND MOTION. >> A BIT OF DISCUSSION. I DON'T HAVE ANY ISSUES. I THINK THIS IS PROBABLY GOOD. WE COULD USE ANOTHER ENTERTAINMENT ITEM IN THE COUNTY. IT IS A GOOD LOCATION ON 17. AS SOME OTHER PEOPLE NOTICED WE ALL PICKED UP ON THE NOISE ISSUE. SO, I DON'T CARE IF IT IS EVEN LATER. MIDNIGHT WOULD BE FINE WITH ME. IT IS THOSE HOUSES BACK THERE. I WOULD NOT SAY I'M FREQUENTLY THERE.

WHITEY'S FISH CAMP FOR EXAMPLE THEY HAVE A LOT OF MUSIC. THOSE HOUSES ACROSS THE WATER FROM THEM WHITEY'S WAS THERE BEFORE THEY WERE THERE. THEY KNEW WHAT THEY WERE GETTING INTO. I'M MORE CONCERNED WHEN YOU'VE GOT PEOPLE SUDDENLY SHOWS UP THEY DID NOT KNOW ABOUT. I'M FINE WITH WHATEVER TIME. I REALLY THINK A BETTER SOLUTION AND MAYBE BETWEEN YOU'VE GOT A SITE PLAN. YOU'D HAVE TO CHANGE THAT. I REALLY THINK A BETTER SOLUTION IS -- I DON'T KNOW BECAUSE OF THE PROPERTY YOU CAN JUST SPEND THIS THING AND PUT THE DECK OUT. THE RESTAURANT BECOMES THE BACKSTOP AND ALL THE NOISE GOES TOWARDS

[02:15:02]

THE HIGHWAY. >> THAT COULD POTENTIALLY BE A PROBLEM. ACROSS THE OTHER SIDE OF THE HIGHWAY.

>> HE IS SO FAR AWAY. >> HE IS NOT 200 FEET FROM THIS. SO, I WILL SUPPORT IT WITH WHATEVER NUMBER YOU GUYS COME UP WITH. BUT I'M GOING TO ASK THE APPLICANTS GO BACK TO HER CLIENT AND BRING UP THIS ISSUE. IF YOU COULD REARRANGE THAT AND MAKE THE BUILDING -- IF YOU USE THAT DECK, FOR STUFF PEOPLE ON 17 ARE GOING TO SEE EVERYBODY ON THAT DECK. IT IS GOING TO DRAW MORE BUSINESS. IT GIVES WORK FOR LOCAL MUSICIANS.

THERE'S A LOT OF REASONS TO DO IT. WE JUST NEED TO TRY TO HELP THOSE PEOPLE THAT LIVE BEHIND IT.

>> OTHER COMMENTS BEFORE WE ENTERTAIN A MOTION?

>> DO WE HAVE A MOTION? >> I WILL MOVE THE STAFF.

BEFORE WE DO THAT I GUESS WE SHOULD TALK ABOUT THE TIME. IS THERE A CONSENSUS THAT WE WANT 10:00 RATHER THAN 11:00?

>> IF IT IS A RESTAURANT 10:00 SEEMS TO BE FINE.

>> YOU WILL RUN INTO AN ISSUE OF ENFORCEMENT. THE ORDINANCE

IS 12:00. >> IF THEY LOOK AT REDIRECTING THE SOUND THEY WON'T HAVE AN ISSUE AND THEY CAN ALWAYS COME BACK AND ASK. I MOVED THE STAFF REPORT WITH -- WITH CHANGING

THE 11:00 ACTUALLY TO 10:00. >> WE HAVE A MOTION. IS THERE A

SECOND? >> FURTHER DISCUSSION?

>> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY -- IN THE OPPOSED? SO WE HAVE MR. NORDEN OPPOSING. AND THE MOTION CARRIES. THANK YOU.

>> THAT WAS FOR THE LAND USE. >> OKAY SORRY ABOUT THAT. THANK

YOU. >> I WILL REMAKE MY MOTION. AND THAT THE TIME IS FOR LAND USE. WE APPROVE THE LAND USE.

>> WE HAVE A SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR. ANY OPPOSED. NOW, THAT MOTION CARRIES. WE NEED A MOTION ON THE ZONING.

>> ON THE PUD I RECOMMEND STAFF REPORT WITH THE CHANGE THAT THE

11:00 BE CHANGED AT 10:00. >> THE MOTION AND A SECOND.

APPROVAL OF THE PCD CHANGING THE NOISE LIMIT OUTDOOR NOISE LIMIT TO 10:00 FROM 11:00. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR. ANY OPPOSED SAME SIGN. MOTION CARRIES. HANK YOU.

[3.  Public Hearing to consider ZON 24-0006. (BF CC Carwash) (T. McCoy)]

>> ITEM NUMBER THREE ON THE AGENDA. IT IS A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER 24 ¿ 0006 WHICH IS PRESENTED BY MCCOY OUR SENIOR

PLANNER. >> WE ARE HERE TO DISCUSS 24 ¿ 0006 A PUBLIC HEARING TO AMEND THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. THIS APPLICATION WAS BROUGHT FORTH BY INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT LLC AND RIGHT WORKS REAL ESTATE. THE AGENT IS MARK SHELTON OF KIMBERLY HORN. THE ZONING TEXT AMENDMENT TO ARTICLE 3 TO ADD A CARWASH IN CONJUNCTION WITH A CONVENIENCE STORE THAT INCLUDES GAS STATIONS OR GAS PUMPS AS A CONDITIONAL USE IN THE BRANDON FIELD COMMUNITY CENTER DISTRICT. THIS APPLICATION WILL GO BEFORE THE BCC HEARING ON JULY 9TH. AND THEN HAVE A FINAL

HEARING ON JULY 23RD. >> AS USUAL WE PUBLISH THE NOTICE FOR THE COMMUNITY TO HAVE A NOTICE FOR THIS PROJECT.

AS PER OUR CODE. THE BACKGROUND THE APPLICANT HAS APPLIED AGAIN TO AMEND ARTICLE THREE SECTION 3 DASH 3P AS WELL AS THREE DASH 33 A , 33B 9 OF BRANDON FIELD LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS TO INCLUDE THE CARWASH IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE CONVENIENCE STORE THAT INCLUDES GAS PUMPS. SO, AS THE IN THE

[02:20:10]

WE INCLUDED LIMITATIONS THAT IT WOULD NOT BE DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL ZONING AND THAT IS ADJACENT MEANING THEY WOULD NOT SHARE A LOT LINE. LIMITATIONS ON LIGHTING WOULD LIMIT THEM TO USE LIGHTING ONLY AS A USE THAT WOULD ASSIST THE CUSTOMERS ON SITE AND NOT AS A PROCESS OF ATTRACTING ADDITIONAL CUSTOMERS. ALSO THERE WOULD BE SCREENING BARRIERS THAT WOULD MEET THE BRANDON FIELD ARTICLE SIX SECTION 6.6 OF THE LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS. AND THIS WOULD ALSO GIVE SOME FLEXIBILITY TO ALLOW SOME COVERING OF THE BU A AREAS -- AND KEEP CUSTOMERS OUTSIDE OF THE ELEMENTS

INCLUDING RAIN OR SUN. >> THE DESIGN REQUIREMENTS ALSO INCLUDED THE LIMITATION ON THE SIZE OF THE BUILDING WHICH WOULD BE A 10,000 SQUARE FEET . WHICH WOULD BE THE COMBINED CONVENIENCE STORE AND CARWASH USE. THERE SHOULD BE NO MORE THAN EIGHT GAS PUM ISLANDS AND EACH ISLAND SHOULD HAVE NO MORE THAN TWO GAS PUMPS. THE BUILDING SHOULD BE ORIENTED TO

THE PRIMARY STREET FRONTAGE. >> AND SO LOOKING AT THE BRANDON FIELD COMMUNITY CENTER AREA, IT WAS DETERMINED THAT MOST OF THOSE AREAS ARE BETWEEN 30 TO 50 ACRES IN SIZE. AND THEY ARE GENERALLY SET UP TO SERVICE A POPULATION OF ABOUT 25 THOUSAND PEOPLE. THEY WEREN'T REALLY DESIGNED TO BE A BIG BOX TYPE LOCATIONS. LOOKING AT ARE RESTRICTIONS THAT WE'VE ALREADY APPLIED WE FEEL THAT WE MET THOSE STANDARDS. AND THIS IS WHY THE STAFF HAS RECOMMENDED TO

APPROVE 24 ¿ 0006. >> DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS

FROM FROM MS. MCCOY? >> I HAD ONE THAT CAME TO MIND WHEN I WAS LOOKING AT THIS. I DID NOT I SEE A LIMIT OF 10,000 FEET ON THE CONVENIENCE STORE AND THE CARWASH. WHEN I LOOK AT THIS I PICTURE WHAT YOU SEE AT A LOT OF GAS STATIONS. WHICH IS JUST THAT SMALL LITTLE CARWASH OFF TO THE SIDE. THAT YOU CAN GET WHEN YOU BUY GAS. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT STAFF FEELS THAT THIS LANGUAGE WOULD PREVENT SOMEBODY FROM BUILDING A LITTLE TINY CONVENIENCE STORE IN THREE AND THREE OR FOUR CARWASHES AND CALLING IT A CONVENIENCE STORE WITH GAS? I WOULD LIKE TO SEE SOME KIND OF LIMIT THAT I THINK EVERYBODY KNOWS WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT. THE LITTLE GAS STATION. THIS DOES NOT TURN INTO WHERE THEY HAVE THREE OR FOUR OF THOSE NEXT TO EACH OTHER AND A LITTLE CONVENIENCE STORE. AND THEY ARE TRYING TO SLIDE IT IN AND UNDERNEATH THIS. THAT IS ALL. I DID NOT SEE THAT WE WERE ANY LANGUAGE THAT WOULD ENSURE THAT

DID NOT HAPPEN. >> MY QUESTION IS -- ARE WE TALKING SCRUBBY BUBBLES. ARE WE TALKING THE SIMPLE DRIVE-THROUGH ? WASH AND SCRUB AND YOU GO ON YOUR WAY AFTER YOU FILL YOUR CAR UP? I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH IT. I JUST

WANT MORE DEFINITION. >> SHOULD WE HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT? WE WILL ASK THE APPLICANT --

>> I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED ON THE MAP THAT CAME WITH THIS PARTICULAR PACKAGE. I CAN'T IDENTIFY WHERE THIS LOCATION IS ON THIS PARTICULAR MAP IS IT ALL OF THOSE?

>> YES IT WOULD BE ALL OF THOSE THAT YOU SEE IN PINK WOULD HAVE THE ZONING CHANGE APPLIED TO THEM. SO THAT AS YOU CAN SEE THERE WOULD BE QUITE A FEW OPPORTUNITIES TO ADD A CARWASH IN THE BRANDON FIELD AREA. IN THOSE LOCATIONS.

>> THE LOWER LONG BAY AREA. >> LONG BAY ROAD? OKAY.

[02:25:08]

>> IF I MAY THANK YOU MADAM CHAIR. FIRST OFF GREAT REPORT.

THANK YOU. THIS IS THE FIRST REPORT I'VE HEARD FROM YOU. I WASN'T HERE. I ACKNOWLEDGE MY TRANSGRESSIONS. GREAT REPORT.

THANK YOU. I WANTED TO ASK ABOUT THE SITE LIGHTING COMMENT. AND SO IT IS TO GET DIRECTION WHEN THEY ARE ON SITE. DOES THAT MEAN WE ALSO HAVE ILLUMINATION SINCE THIS IS AFTER DUSK THEY'RE GOING TO LIKE THE SITE WITH DOWN LIGHTING. I'M ASSUMING. AND THEN ALSO ARE THEY ABLE TO PUT A SIGN UP ON THE ROAD THAT IS LIT OR ARE THEY ONLY ALLOWED A MONUMENT THAT HAS NO LIGHTING ON IT?

>> WE HAVE NOT GOTTEN TO THAT MUCH OF A DETAIL OF IT YET. THE LIGHTING WOULD NOT BE LIKE A FLASHING LIGHT. OR A NEON TYPE OF LIGHTING TO ATTRACT CUSTOMERS. THAT WOULD NOT BE

ALLOWED. >> THANK YOU.

>> ARE WE READY TO HEAR FROM THE APPLICANT?

>> PLEASE PROCEED. >> GOOD EVENING. OKAY CAN YOU HEAR ME? MARK SHELTON I'M A CERTIFIED PLANNER. MY ADDRESS 12 740 GRAND BAY PARKWAY WEST SUITE 2350 JACKSONVILLE FLORIDA. 32258. FIRST OF ALL I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME TODAY. THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE THE CLAY COUNTY. I KNOW IT IS TOUGH WHAT YOU GUYS DO. WITH THAT I APPRECIATE THE HARD WORK OF -- MIKE WORKING WITH US ON THIS APPLICATION. I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY A COUPLE THINGS WITH YOU. DEFINITELY THERE IS NO INTENT TO HAVE A SMALL CONVENIENCE STORE WITH EIGHT GAS PUMPS AND A BIG CARWASH. TODAY'S WORLD THAT COMMERCIAL ENTITY DOES NOT EXIST. IT IS BIGGER. SECOND OF ALL WE ARE LOOKING SOUTH OF LONG BAY. ALL THE -- AREAS ARE ADJACENT TO THE ACTIVITY SENSORS WHICH ALLOW CARWASHES BY RIGHT. AS A STEP DOWN WE THOUGHT IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE TO HAVE A CONDITIONAL USE WITH A LOT OF STIPULATIONS. THOSE STIPULATIONS WERE TO HAVE EXTRA LANDSCAPING , EXTRA LIGHTING .

MAKING SURE THE LIGHTING DOES NOT IS NOT OBNOXIOUS. TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE HOURS OF OPERATION TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE ORIENTATION CONSISTENT WITH THE BRANDON FEEL OVERLAY. THE OTHER SUPPLEMENTS OR CRITERIA THIS IS PURELY TO HAVE STAFF COMFORTABLE WITH THIS. FOR IT NOT TO BE TAKEN ADVANTAGE OF ELSEWHERE. ALSO ALL THE -- IS ADJACENT TO A COLLECTOR ROAD.

WHEN IT IS NOT ADJACENT TO RESIDENTIAL. THIS LIMITS TO THE MAJOR COLLECTOR ROAD SUCH AS PLANTING AND OTHERS IN THAT AREA. WITH THAT APPRECIATE YOUR TIME. I WILL SIT BACK FOR ANY

QUESTIONS. >> QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT?

>> AT THIS TIME I GUESS WE ARE READY TO OPEN IT FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING. I WILL DO SO. I DO NOT HAVE ANY CARDS ON THIS. IS THERE ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WOULD LIKE TO BE HEARD ON

THIS MATTER? >> SEEING NO ONE COMING FORWARD I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

>> CHARISSE MIGHT KNOW. TO MIKE'S QUESTION ABOUT THE SIGNAGE. I DON'T KNOW IT OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD FOR BRANDON

FIELD. DO YOU? >> SO, I'LL MAKE A MOTION THAT

WE APPROVE THE STAFF REPORT. >> SECOND

>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION?

>> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR. OPPOSED SAME SIGN. MOTION CARRIES.

[4.  Public Hearing to consider ZON 24-0014. (District 3, Comm. Renninger) (T. McCoy)]

>> THANK YOU. >> ITEM NUMBER FOUR IS THE PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER 24 ¿ 0014. ALSO PRESENTED BY MS.

MCCOY. >> REVIEW OF ZONING CODE 24 ¿ 0014. THIS IS THE APPLICATION BY ALBERT BARHAM AND LYNN PARR HIM TRUSTEE. THE AGENT IS PATRICIA ORTEZ. FROM ORTEZ

[02:30:03]

COMMISSIONER LINIGER AND THE PLANNING THE BOARD -- THE BCC HEARING WILL TAKE PLACE JULY 23RD.

>> SO YES AS REQUIRED WE DID OUR NOTIFICATIONS. POSTING

SIGNS AS WELL. >> THE BACKGROUND FOR THIS PROJECT IS THE SUBJECT IS LOCATED DIRECTLY WITH DIRECT ACCESS TO BLANDING BOULEVARD AND MAJOR THOROUGHFARE. THE REZONING IS A REQUEST TO FACILITATE THE DEVELOPMENT OF AN AUTOMATED CARWASH. A USE PERMITTED BY RIGHT IN THE BB THREE ZONING DISTRICT. THE CURRENT LAND USE IS COMMERCIAL WITH A FAR OF 40%. THIS MAP SHOWS THE IDENTIFIES THE DIFFERENT PARCELS THAT ARE AND THE OWNERSHIP ON THOSE PARCELS.

AS WELL AS THE COMMERCIAL LAND USE. THE ZONING ANALYSIS, THE LAND IS DESIGNATED AS THE IS DESIGNATED FOR BB THREE ARE ESTABLISHED TO PROVIDE AREAS FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF SPECIAL COMMERCIAL FACILITIES WHICH REQUIRE ACCESS BY MOTOR VEHICLES OF ALL TYPES INCLUDING TRACTOR-TRAILER UNITS. THE SPECIALTY BUSINESS DISTRICT BB THREE IS MORE RESTRICTIVE THAN THE HEAVY BUSINESS DISTRICT BB FOR WHICH IS WHAT IS CURRENTLY ON THE PROPERTY. POTENTIALLY REDUCES THE INTENSITY OF THE PERMITTED USES AT THIS LOCATION. TO MITIGATE THE IMPACT TO ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL BB THREE ZONING DISTRICT REQUIRES A 25 FOOT SETBACK. IN A TYPE B PERIMETER BUFFER ONE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT IS COME IS ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL WHICH WE CAN SEE IN THE ADJACENT PARCEL SUMMARY MAJORITY OF THIS COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT IS BUFFERED BY COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT. WE HAVE A MULTI FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IN THE REAR. TO THE EAST OF THE PROJECT. AND THIS IS THE EXISTING ZONING. AND THE PROPOSED ZONING. AS YOU CAN SEE THE BB 4 IS A LITTLE BIT MORE INTENSE. THAT ENTAILS MAJORITY OF THE PROPERTY. WHERE AS THIS PROPOSAL WITH TAKE IT TO THE BB 3 OVER THE ENTIRETY OF THE PROPERTY. THAT WOULD BE A

LITTLE LESS INTENSE. >> BECAUSE OF THESE FINDINGS STAFF HAS LOOKED AT THE ZONING THE POTENTIAL FOR AUTOMATED CARWASH IS CONSISTENT WITH THE INTENT OF THE SPECIAL BUSINESS DISTRICT. IT ALIGNS WITH THE ZONING REGULATION AND LAND-USE POLICIES. THE REQUIRED SETBACKS AND BUFFERS WILL MINIMIZE POTENTIAL NEGATIVE IMPACTS TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES. ALTHOUGH THE APPLICANT IS CURRENTLY CONSIDERING A CARWASH ONCE REZONED THE PROPERTY CAN ACCOMMODATE MANY OTHER SPECIAL BUSINESS USES. THE PROPERTY IS FOR SALE. SO A NEW PURCHASER MAY CHOOSE TO DO SOMETHING ELSE. HOWEVER WITH THIS REZONING WE WILL BE DOWN ZONING THE PROPERTY TO A MORE RESTRICTIVE USE WHICH COULD POTENTIALLY BE MORE COMPATIBLE WITH THE AREA.

>> FOR THAT REASON THE STAFF RECOMMENDS THE APPROVAL OF 24

DASH 0014. >> DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR

MS. MCCOY AT THIS TIME? >> SO, IF I'M READING THIS RIGHT, PERMITTED USES ARE NOT CLUBS BARS TAVERNS AND OTHER ESTABLISHMENTS WHERE ALCOHOL IS SERVED. AND THEN ALSO UNDER FIVE ADULT ENTERTAINMENT SEXUALLY ORIENTED BUSINESSES AS DEFINED. ARE THOSE CURRENTLY ALLOWED IN THE BB 4 ?

>> MAJORITY OF THEM ARE ALLOWED IN THE BB 4 AS WELL AS HEAVY COMMERCIAL USES. SHEET-METAL HEATING VENTILATING AND AIR CONDITIONING. COMPANIES PEST CONTROL SERVICES. SO SOME OF THESE MORE INTENSE USES ARE THE ONES THAT I WAS REFERRING TO WHEN I SAID THAT THIS ZONING WOULD DOWNS ON THIS PROPERTY.

>> THOSE ONES I READ OFF ARE PERMITTED IN THE BB 4. AND ALSO IN THE BEAT 3. THIS MAY BE A QUESTION IS THIS ONE OF THE PARCELS THAT WAS IDENTIFIED AS A ALLOWABLE FOR ADULT

[02:35:02]

THEM? >> I DON'T BELIEVE IT WAS. BUT I CAN'T GIVE YOU 100%. BUT I DON'T I'M TRYING TO RECALL THE MAP AND I DON'T BELIEVE IT WAS ONE OF THOSE PARCELS.

>> REALIZING IT IS ALLOWED IN BOTH CURRENT AND PROPOSED, MITIGATES MY QUESTION. FOR THE EDIFICATION OF THE COMMISSION, AND NEW MEMBERS OF STAFF IT PROBABLY WOULD BE GOOD TO MAYBE WE LOOK AT WHERE THOSE PARCELS ARE AT. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT AGAIN. IT HAS BEEN YEARS UNTIL WE WERE UP TO TWO IN THE MORNING HAVING THAT DISCUSSION. MAYBE JUST SOMETHING TO REMIND THE COMMISSINERS OF WHERE THE PARCELS ARE. BUT THANK YOU SO

MUCH. >> I WAS NOT AWARE THEY WERE SPECIFIC PARCELS JUST LOOKING AT THE CODE.

>> I DON'T THINK THIS IS ONE OF THOSE AREAS. RIGHT UP THE STREET IS A DAY CARE CENTER. THERE IS A CHURCH AS WELL.

>> ACTUALLY I CAN LOOK AT THERE IS A CHURCH THE PS ONE IS THE PAIN. THAT WOULD BE A CHURCH. THIS ONE PROBABLY WOULD NOT BE

ALLOWED. >> THE BIG ONE TO THE NORTH IS THE CHURCH. THE LITTLE ONE JUST TO THE SOUH I THINK IS A

DAYCARE. >> COMMISSIONER NORTON DID YOU

HAVE A QUESTION? >> IT MAY BE PREMATURE. BUT LOOKING AT THIS SITE, WHAT ACCESS POINTS OFF OF SUZANNE WOULD BE ALLOWED -- I'M THINKING WHAT IS A LONG THERE.

RESIDENTIAL OR DAY CARE AND EVERYTHING ELSE. HOW PEOPLE ARE GOING TO TURN THAT LIGHT AND TURN INTO THAT PARCEL. THAT IS A CONCERN I HAVE. IT MAY BE THAT IS SOMETHING TO BE ADDRESSED DOWNLINE WITH WHOEVER COMES FORWARD WITH THEIR PLAN.

>> AT THIS TIME WE INVITE THE APPLICANT TO COME FORWARD.

PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.

>> PATRICIA ORTIZ. MY ADDRESS IS 2810 NORTH CENTRAL AVENUE TAMPA FLORIDA. 33 602. AS YOU KNOW THE SITE IS LOCATED AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF BLANDING AND SUZANNE. THAT IS A SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION. IT IS ACROSS THE STREET FROM BLANDING CROSSINGS WHICH IS ROUGHLY 260,000 SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL SHOPPING. THE SITE IS COMPRISED OF TWO SEPARATE ZONING LOTS.

INTENDED TO BE JOINED AND DEVELOPED IN UNISON AS A CARWASH. THE TOTAL LAND AREA IS 1 POINT FOR 3 ACRES. IT IS SPLIT ZONE BETWEEN THE TB ZONE AND THE BB 4 ZONE. THE BB ZONE ALLOWS CARWASH USE. THE BB 4 ZONE DOES NOT ALLOW CARWASH USE. TO ALLOW OUR PROPOSED USE OF CARWASH WE NEED TO HAVE A REZONING. NO NEW REZONINGS TO THE BB DISTRICT ARE ALLOWED. I THINK THAT SUMS UP WHAT OUR PROBLEM IS. WE CAN MEET ALL OF THE DEVELOPMENT PARAMETERS SETBACK BUFFERING SCREENING ETC. AND TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, ACCESS IS CURRENTLY PROPOSED FROM BLANDING BOULEVARD. THE SITE CURRENTLY HAS 60 LINEAR FEET OF FRONTAGE ON BLANDING. OUR NEXT STEP WOULD BE TO COME THROUGH THE DEVELOPMENT REVIEW COMMITTEE WITH SITE PLANS WERE ALL OF THAT WOULD BE SUSSED OUT. IN REGARDS TO THE DOWN ZONING, ALLOWING A CARWASH IS A DOWNGRADE FROM THOSE USES ALLOWED IN THE B 4 ZONE. WE WOULD BE WILLING TO ACCEPT A CONDITION THAT WOULD LIMIT THIS TO CARWASH DEVELOPMENT IF THAT WOULD MAKE YOU MORE

COMFORTABLE. >> I DON'T KNOW IF THAT IS

SOMETHING THAT YOU ALL DO HERE. >> WE CAN'T DO THAT. FIRST OF ALL. YOU WOULD HAVE TO O TO A PCD OR SOMETHING. WHEN YOU ARE FINISHED SPEAKING I HAVE A COMMENT.

>> I CAN ANSWER QUESTIONS. >> I DON'T REMEMBER WHO WAS ON HERE WHEN WE DID THIS. THE SOUTHERN PARCEL WE -- RECOMMENDED THAT WAS REZONED TO BE BEFORE. WE DID IT TO BEFORE

[02:40:06]

>> BECAUSE PEOPLE CAN TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THAT TRAFFIC LIGHT

TO GET INTO THEIR MORE EASILY. >> AT THIS POINT WE ARE JUST IN THE DESIGN PHASE. I CAN ONLY LOOK AT WHAT WE HAVE SKETCHED UP. AS IT GOES THROUGH THE DRC SITE DEVELOPMENT.

>> I JUST MADE THAT COMMENT BECAUSE YOU MENTIONED THAT.

THERE IS A LITTLE OFFICE BUILDING RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET FROM THIS. THERE ARE TWO. THE ONE I'M THINKING OF

USED TO HAVE AAA IN IT. >> THE ENTRANCE TO THAT IS NOT ON BLANDING. IT IS A TRIANGULAR PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT SITS RIGHT IN THE TRIANGLE OF THAT INTERSECTION. THAT ENTRANCE IS OFF OF SUZANNE. IF YOU WANT TO GO TO THAT BUILDING TURN ON SUZANNE. IF ANYONE IS COMING FROM THE NORTH HEADED SOUTH ON BLANDING THIS WOULD BE HARD TO GET INTO. WITH THE TRAFFIC LIGHT U-TURN ON SUZANNE. BUT THAT IS PART OF THE DESIGN.

>> A COMMENT ON THAT. I THINK THAT INTERSECTION IS A SPLIT INTERSECTION. I THINK THERE IS A MEDIAN IN THE MIDDLE OF IT.

IF YOU TURN RIGHT OR YOU TURN LEFT INTO IT YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO COME DOWN FURTHER AND DO A U-TURN. YOU'RE GOING TO DO A MAJOR REWORK ON THAT AND THE SECTION IN ORDER TO GET

SOLE ACCESS OFF OF SUZANNE. >> DO WE HAVE FURTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FOR THE APPLICANT? ARE WE READY TO MOVE THE PUBLIC HEARING? READY FOR PUBLIC HEARING. THANK YOU. I'M GOING TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. I'M GUESSING MR. NELSON THIS

IS THE ONE -- >> SO, I DON'T SEE ANYONE COMING FORWARD FOR PUBLIC HEARING. SO I WILL CLOSE THAT.

>> I MOVE THE STAFF REPORT. >> I SECOND

>> FURTHER DISCUSSION OR COMMENTS WAS NOT ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SIGNIFY. ANY OPPOSED SAME SIGN. MOTION CARRIES.

[5.  Public Hearing to consider ZON 24-0012 (M. Brown)]

>> THANK YOU. >> THE LAST ITEM ON OUR AGENDA THIS EVENING NUMBER FIVE IS A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER 24 ¿ 00 12 WHICH IS PRESENTED BY MIKE BROWN ARE ZONING CHIEF.

>> MADAM CHAIR AND BOARD I'M GETTING SET UP. THIS IS ONE YOU REQUESTED TO COME BACK TO YOU TWO MONTHS AGO IN MAY. REQUEST TO COME BACK THERE WERE SOME ISSUES. STAFF HAS ATTEMPTED TO ADDRESS THOSE ISSUES. JUST TO BE UPFRONT ESPECIALLY WITH COMMISSIONER -- STAFF DID NOT CHANGE EVERYTHING. WE CAN WE WILL DISCUSS THOSE. ZONING 24 DASH 0012. JUST REAL QUICKLY, STAFF INITIATED CHANGE TO THE CODE. AMENDING SECTIONS OF THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT DON'T ZONING DISTRICT. IT WILL BE COUNTYWIDE. CODE CHANGES REQUIRED TO HEARINGS. THE FIRST READING IS SET FOR NEXT TUESDAY JULY 9TH. THE ADOPTION HEARING WILL BE JULY 23RD. HERE ARE THE I WILL GO OVER THE CHANGES FROM THE MAIN VERSION THAT YOU'VE HEARD ALREADY. ADDED THE REQUIREMENT FOR THE WRITTEN DESCRIPTION TO INCLUDE SPECIFIC DISCUSSION OF HOW THE PROPOSED PUD IS COMPATIBLE WITH EXISTING AND PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OF THE AREA. AND ASSOCIATED NEIGHBORHOODS. IT CHANGES THE MAXIMUM PERCENTAGE LOT COVERAGE FROM JUST A FLAT 50% TOTAL FOR ALL STRUCTURES. 240% FOR THE

[02:45:02]

>> WE ARE TALKING ABOUT ONLY APPLIES IN THE PUD'S.

>> THIS IS ONLY FOR PUD'S. >> WE HAVE A NUMBER OF WE'VE RUN INTO A NUMBER OF ISSUES WHERE AND SOME OF THE EXISTING PUD'S ESPECIALLY THE OLDER ONES WHERE THERE WAS NO LOT COVERAGE IDENTIFIED, OR THE PUD ORDINANCE IN THOSE CASES HAS A LIMIT OF 30%. WE'VE RUN INTO A LOT OF WE'VE RUN INTO THE ISSUE WHERE THE PRINCIPAL STRUCTURE THE RESIDENTIAL STRUCTURE IS USING UP ALL THE ALLOWABLE LOT COVERAGE. STAFF HAS DECIDED TO STAY WITH THE EXISTING FOUR YEAR REQUIREMENT FOR SUBSTANTIAL CONSTRUCTION. WE HAVE NOT HAD A PROBLEM WITH THAT. COMMISSIONER -- BROUGHT THAT UP AS SOMETHING TO LOOK AT. WE'VE LOOKED THAT HAS NOT BEEN AN ISSUE SO STAFF DECIDED TO GO BACK AND JUST STICK WITH WHAT WE HAVE. IT SEEMS TO BE WORKING. WE REINSTITUTED THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF GARAGE SALES ALLOWED. THAT WAS A DISCUSSION AND CONCERN. READ WE REINSTITUTED OR MAINTAINED THE MINIMUM LOT WITH FOR NEW LOTS WATERFRONT LOTS AT 100 FEET. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I KNOW WAS BROUGHT UP AND DISCUSSED WAS THE MINIMUM ACREAGE SIZE ALLOWED FOR PUD'S. STAFF STILL BELIEVES THAT ONE ACRE IS A REASONABLE CHANGE FROM THE PRESENT FIVE ACRES. SO I'M SURE THERE WILL BE SOME DISCUSSION ON THAT. AND THEN ALL THE OTHER ITEMS THAT WE THAT WERE PROPOSED FOR CHANGES AND MAY STATE THE SAME. SO, WITH THAT STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF THIS VERSION OF THE PUD ORDINANCE. CHANGES. IS HOPING TO ANY QUESTIONS OR DISCUSSION.

>> QUESTIONS? >> SO, WE WERE GOING AND I'M GOING NOW TO LOT COVERAGE. THE PROPOSED LANGUAGE GOES FROM 50% TO 40% FOR THE RESIDENCE AND 10% FOR ANCILLARY STRUCTURES.

WHAT HAPPENS TO THOSE AND I REALIZE THIS APPLIES TO A PUD.

I APPRECIATE -- FOR CLARIFYING THAT. IN AN OLDER PUD WHERE THEY MAXED OUT AND THEY ARE AT 50% OF THEIR LOT COVERAGE WHICH IS ACTUALLY -- THEY ARE AT 50%. ARE YOU SAYING THE PROPOSED LANGUAGE SAYING THEY CAN PUT A SMALL STORAGE BUILDING IN THERE

TO PUT THEIR LAWN MORE IN? >> THAT HAS BEEN ONE OF THE ISSUES WE HAVE RUN INTO. WHAT ARE PUD SAYS NOW IS 30%. THIS WILL GIVE SOME ADDITIONAL FLEXIBILITY TO THE HOMEBUILDERS TO HAVE TO GO UP TO 40%. IT GUARANTEES SOME ABILITY FOR THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE FOR FUTURE HOMEOWNERS THAT PURCHASED THERE THAT THEY WILL HAVE AT LEAST SOME ABILITY. THAT IS THE PRIME EXAMPLE OF WHY WE MADE WE'VE BEEN LOOKING AT THE PUD WE INCLUDED THIS IS ONE OF THE CHANGES.

>> THE CONCERN I'VE GOT AND THAT , IT IS OBVIOUSLY A RIGID DOCUMENT. IF A HOMEOWNER THIS IS NOT THE BUILDERS. FOLKS WHO HAVE TAKEN OCCUPANCY AND HAVE BEEN IN THEIR HOME AND THEY GO TO HOME DEPOT AND THEY BY THEMSELVES ONE OF THOSE LITTLE BARN STORAGE BUILDINGS. AND THEY SLAP IT UP THERE WITH NO PERMIT. HOW DO WE ENFORCE THAT? BASICALLY WE ARE SAYING EITHER WE ARE GOING TO ALLOW PEOPLE TO PUT UP UNPERMITTED STRUCTURES WHICH WE DON'T DO. OR WE HAVE TO HAVE SOME MECHANISM TO ALLOW

[02:50:05]

>> IS THERE ANY MECHANISM THAT ALLOWS THAT?

>> IT COMES DOWN TO -- IT HAS TO GET PERMIT IT. IT IS SUPPOSED TO BE PERMITTED. THAT IS WHERE WE CATCH IT. IS THAT THE PERMITTING STAGE. IT COMES IN FOR A PERMIT. ONE OF THE THINGS WE LOOK AT AND THE ZONING SIDE IS LOT COVERAGE.

>> THERE IS NO OPTION FOR THEM TO I DON'T KNOW IS THERE A

VARIANCE THEY CAN APPLY FOR? >> NOT IN THE PUD. BECAUSE A PUD IS SPECIFIC FOR THAT DEVELOPMENT. AND ARE STRAIGHT ZONING DISTRICTS RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS WE ALSO HAVE LOT COVERAGE PERCENTAGES. THIS DOES NOT ADDRESS THAT IN THOSE CASES WE DO SEE HOMEOWNERS SEEKING A VARIANCE TO INCREASE.

>> THIS IS A CONVERSATION WE CAN HAVE AMONGST THE COMMISSION. DO YOU THINK STAFF WOULD BE AMENABLE TO 50% LOT COVERAGE FOR THE HOUSE AND 10% FOR ANCILLARY STRUCTURES?

>> IF YOU WANT TO RECOMMEND THAT AS A BOARD WOULD BE WILLING TO PRESENT THAT TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS

AS A RECOMMENDATION. >> THANK YOU.

>> I THINK I'M ON THE SAME WAVELENGTH AS COMMISSIONER BARRE. I LOVE WHEN THAT HAPPENS. WE ARE NOT GOING TO BE THERE THE WHOLE TIME. BUT, I'M NOT TOO CONCERNED WITH THE CURRENT LANGUAGE IN HERE. AND I THINK WITH YOU WERE CONCERNED WITH IS PEOPLE AND YOU HATE IT WHEN I DO THIS. BECAUSE THE DEVELOPER TOOK ADVANTAGE OF THE ENTIRE ALLOWABLE SQUARE FOOTAGE THAT THEY COULD BUILD THE HOUSE. THEY DID NOT BOTHER TO TELL THE POOR PEOPLE THAT BOUGHT IT. GUESS WHAT -- YOU CAN'T DO ANYTHING ELSE BECAUSE I USED ALL THE SQUARE FOOTAGE.

SO I THINK WE NEED TO LOOK AT SOME RELIEF FOR THOSE FOLKS.

I'M FINE WITH THE 40 AND THE 10% THAT IS IN HERE. THIS SHOULD BE SOME PATHWAY, SOME OPTIONING SOMETHING SO THAT WHEN ON THE POOR HOMEOWNERS THAT BOUGHT A PROPERTY AND I WANT TO GO GET A SHED FROM MY LAWN MORE. AND I'M GOING TO BE A GOOD CITIZEN AND GO GET A PERMIT WHICH I'M SURE EVERYBODY DOES. AND THEY TELL ME I CAN'T DO IT. MY REALTOR DID NOT TELL ME. THE BUILDER DID NOT TELL ME. UNLESS I READ MY COVENANTS OR WHATEVER I PROBABLY WOULD NOT KNOW. THAT OUGHT TO BE A MECHANISM FOR THOSE PEOPLE TO GET SOMEWHERE

TO PUT THEIR LAWN MORE. >>>> I SEE THE SHIRTS THEY ARE WEARING OVER THERE. THEY IN A C SOMEBODY BUYS A PROPERTY LIKE THAT AND THEY PUT A BASIC SHED UP, LESS THAN TWO 50 FT.÷, COUNTY WILL NOT KNOW. AM I CORRECT?

>> THEY HAVE THE COMPLAINANT GO THROUGH CODE.

>> I FEEL LIKE ANY OF THE CLARIFY SOMETHING. IT'S GOT A B FLORIDA BUILDING CODE. IN THE COUNTY DOESN'T TRUMP THE FLORIDA BUILDING CODE. THAT IS REQUIREMENT OF EVERYBODY IN THE

STATE. >> THEY DON'T NEED A PERMIT TO

DO IT. >> I DIDN'T REALIZE I'D NEEDED A PERMIT IN CLAY COUNTY. THEY HAVE TO MEET THE FLORIDA BUILDING CODE REGARDLESS. I WANTED TO CLARIFY. I DON'T WANT PEOPLE WATCHING ONLINE TO GET THE WRONG IDEA.

>> PERHAPS WE SHOULD OPEN PUBLIC COMMENT?

>> I WILL ASK MR. NELSON ABOUT IT.

>> I'M NELSON, MY ADDRESS IS FOUR 817 NELSON, MY ADDRESS IS FOUR 817 YACHT BASIN DR., JACKSONVILLE, FL. 3225. WE ARE HERE AS OF LAST YEAR, MAY OF LAST YEAR. WE STARTED GETTING PERMIT APPLICATIONS DENIED DUE TO LOT COVERAGE BEFORE THAT TIME. IT WAS NOT MUCH OF AN ISSUE . IT WAS NOT ON MY RADAR.

[02:55:01]

THAT'S WHAT WE DID. >> I DON'T REMEMBER THAT.

>> I DISTINCTLY REMEMBER THAT.

>> I DO HAVE HERE TWO PAGES IF YOU GUYS AND ANYBODY IS INTERESTED. I DON'T HAVE A PRESENTATION FOR THE COMPUTER.

BUT I DO HAVE, A MAP AND I'M NOT VERY TECHNICALLY SAVVY.

BLACK DOTS OF THE MOST RECENT CANCELLATIONS NOTATED DUE TO LOT COVERAGE. DENIALS AND THE PROPERTY ALREADY OVER LOT COVERAGE. IT'S A COUPLE OF BULLET POINTS I PUT TOGETHER. I LOVE SEEING THIS. THIS HAS BEEN AN INTERESTING FIRST TIME EVER IN A COMMITTEE MEETING. BUT WHY WE ARE HERE ON THE SHED SIDE IS THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE AS A BUSINESS IN CLAY COUNTY.

OBVIOUSLY WE WANT THIS SO SET IN CLAY COUNTY. WE ARE A NATIONWIDE COMPANY AND WE SELL THE BILLING THROUGH HOME DEPOT AND WE BUILD THE BUILDINGS TO THE FLORIDA BUILDING CODE. THEY ARE ENGINEERED AND WE HAVE STANDARD PLANS AND THEY ARE ENGINEERED FOR FLORIDA WHEN CODE DEPENDING ON THE AREA WE ARE IN. WE DO WHEN CODE HIGH VELOCITY IN MIAMI AS WELL. WE CAN MEET ALL OF THEM THE FLORIDA REQUIRES FOR THE SITE SHED. WITH THAT BEING SAID, WE DO EVERYTHING CORRECTLY. WE HAVE THE GC LICENSE IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA AND WE PERMIT EVERY SHED REQUIRING A PERMIT. IF I CAN BUILD IT WITHOUT A PERMIT, I'M COMING TO THE COUNTY.

>> YOU NEED TO TALK TO MR. BROWN OVER THERE. I MIGHT'VE BEEN SHARING AT THE TIME THAT CAME THROUGH.

>> I DON'T REMEMBER THAT. >> I HONESTLY DO REMEMBER THAT.

>> WELL, LOK BACK AND I THINK IT'S THERE.

>> I WILL START WORKING WITH YOU GUYS MORE OFTEN PEOPLE GET A PUT BACK INTO PLACE. FOR NOW, WE WILL LOOK INTO IT.

>> 99.99% SURE THAT WE DID THAT.

>> I DON'T KNOW WHETHER TO ASK THAT. FOR THE RECENT EXPERIENCE IS MAY 2023, I'VE BEEN THERE 2 1/2 YEARS. MAY IS WHEN IT GOT ON THE RADAR WE WERE HAVING AN INCREASE OF CANCELLATIONS IN THE CLAY COUNTY AREA. WHAT CAUSED IT SPECIFICALLY I CAN'T SPEAK TO. WE WENT TO ELECTRONIC PERMITTING AND IT WAS PROBABLY EASIER TO CATCH IT AT THAT POINT. I'M GOING TO BRING IT UP SO I'M NOT KNEELING. THE FACT IS IT IS CLAY COUNTY RESIDENCE NEEDING SHEDS, THEY GO TO HOME DEPOT AND CAN BUY IT AND PUT IT UP AND NOBODY EVER GETS A PERMIT AND THERE IS NO GROWTH MANAGEMENT RELATED OR SETBACKS MET OR WHEN CODE MET.

HOPEFULLY THEY COME TO TOP SHED AND THERE ARE COMPETITORS I HOPE DO THE SAME THING WE DO. WE DO PERMIT IT AND CITE BUILD AND MEET THE FLORIDA WHEN CODE. WE ARE TRYING TO FIND AN OPTION FOR THE CUSTOMERS LOOKING FOR A STORAGE OPTION TO DO IT THE CORRECT WAY. THAT'S WHY WE COME TO YOU BECAUSE WE RUN INTO A LOT OF HOMEOWNERS THAT ARE OVER LOT COVERAGE. WE MADE WIND OF THE ZONING CHANGES PROPOSAL COMING. WE REACHED OUT AT THE END OF LAST YEAR EARLY THIS YEAR. WENT DOWN WITH MIKE BEFORE. STARTED WORKING WITH STAFF GETTING THE IDEA OF WHAT CAN WE DO IN THIS IS THE AVENUE WE HAVE COME TO. THE 40% AND 50% IS GREAT. AS LONG AS THERE IS AN AVENUE FOR CLAY COUNTY RESIDENCE TO GET AN ACCESSORY STRUCTURE. WE ARE LISTENING TO THE CAR WASHES AND THINGS AND SO BE IT. I THINK I PASSED NINE STORAGE BUILDING FACILITIES DOWN THE HIGHWAY BETWEEN HERE IN MY OFFICE. IF HOMEOWNERS CAN HAVE A SHED IN THEIR BACKYARD AND WITH THE LEGAL WAY, WOULD YOU NEED TO USE THE HUNDRED OF ACRES FOR THE STORAGE BUILDINGS? THAT'S ANOTHER IDEA AS WELL. I MADE BULLET POINTS AND DID NOT STICK TO THEM. BUT I DID PUT IN HERE THE LAST 90 DAYS WE HAD 10 SHEDS CANCEL IN THE CLAY COUNTY AREA. I NOTATED THEM AND IT'S $52,000 OF OUR BUSINESS BASED ON THE AVERAGE TICKET FOR THE 10 BUILDINGS.

IT'S HUNDRED THOUSAND DOLLARS A YEAR OF THE IMPACT IN THE BUSINESS AND ROUGHLY 40 CLAY COUNTY RESIDENCE A YEAR ON AVERAGE. THAT ARE GOING TO FIND ANOTHER OPTION SOMEWHERE ELSE THAT THEY ARE NOT LEGALLY ALLOWED TO GIVE US THE ACCESSORY STRUCTURE IN THE PROPERTY. THAT'S MY BUSINESS IS ONE SHED SELLER IN CLAY COUNTY.

>> CAN I ASK A QUESTION? >> YES. TO FORGOT YOUR NAME,

I'M SORRY. >> PLANS.

>> CLIENT ? OKAY. WHAT IS IN HERE IS, WHAT STAFF RECOMMENDED WITH THE 50% , I'M SORRY, 40% FOR RESIDENTS AND 10 FOR

[03:00:03]

>> IF THAT'S THE CASE, IS IT 200? KIND OF WHAT YOU MEAN YOU

NEED MORE THAN THAT? >> THE AVERAGE SHED IS AN 8 X 12. IT IS 96 FT.÷. SO, WE DO SHED INTO GARAGES AND ST. JOHNS COUNTY. 60 FEET LONG AND 30 FEET WIDE AND ALMOST 30 FEET TALL. FOR THE AVERAGE HOMEOWNER IN CLAY COUNTY RESIDENCE, AND 8

X 12. >> THAT'LL SOLVE THE PROBLEM WITHIN THE PLANT. THAT'LL BE THE SIGNIFICANT NEED OF THE

CLAY COUNTY RESIDENCE. >> DID YOU SAY 10% OF THE HOUSE

10% OF THE --? >> IT'S WHAT IT READS.

>> THE LOT SIZE FOR THE 2000 SQUARE POUNDS.

>> THE MATH ISN'T THERE. >> SOUNDS LIKE YOU MIX HOUSE

AND LOT. >> THE POINT IS ARE WE ALLOWING THE SQUARE FOOTAGE FOR THE BUILDING?

>> I THINK WE ARE. >> I HAVE A QUESTION AND I WANT TO CLARIFY THE DEFINITION IN TERMS WE ARE USING. THIS ONLY RELATES TO A PART. PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT. ARE WE SEEING KENNY ROLLBACK THROUGH THERE? ARE WE SAYING ACCESSORY

DWELLING? >> NO. LOT COVERAGE OF ANY

KIND. >> ACCESSORY STRUCTURES. 80 USE ARE A SPECIFIC TYPE OF BUILDING THAT IS COVERED.

>> TO ANSWER THE QUESTION, WHAT RESEARCH I WAS ABLE TO HEAR ACCORDING TO THE FLORIDA BUILDING CODE. IF IT IS UNDER 200 FT.÷, IT TAKES EXEMPT FROM A PERMIT. I AGREE WITH MICHAEL.

ZONING CODE CANNOT TRUMP THE FLORIDA BUILDING CODE.

EVERYBODY KNOWS THAT. >> IF I MAY, THE LOCAL COUNTY HAS, THAT I CAN SPEAK TO, THEY REQUIRE 70 FT.÷ OF THAT, NO PERMIT. CLAY COUNTY IS ALL STRUCTURES ARE PERMITTED. -- IS HUNDRED SQUARE FEET OR LESS, NO PERMIT. DEPENDING ON THE COUNTY, THEY HAVE BEEN A CIVIL REQUIREMENTS. I HAVEN'T GONE

TO TRY TO OVERRIDE THAT. >> IF I MAY, I'M SORRY.

>> GO AHEAD. >> CODE ALLOWS FOR THE COUNTIES TO BE MORE STRINGENT. BUT NOT LESS STRINGENT THEY CAN'T WATER DOWN THE CODE BUT THEY CAN ADD TO THE CODE. THAT'S

WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT. >> I HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU.

WHAT IS THE BLACK DOTS REPRESENT?

>> THE 10 MOST RECENT CANCELLATIONS. MOST OF THE SOUTHERN HALF OF THE COUNTY WE DON'T HAVE CANCELLATIONS.

THAT'S NOT A BIG AREA OF MARKET FOR US AND IT'S MORE ABOUT PORTABLE AND BIGGER LOT SIZE AND PORTABLE SHED

BUSINESS. >> THANK YOU, THAT'S HELPFUL.

>> I DIDN'T GET MY QUESTION ANSWERED. IS THE WAY THIS IS WRITTEN ACCOMMODATE THE NEEDS OF THE AVERAGE HOMEOWNER? ARE WE PUTTING IN ENOUGH SIDES IN HERE? TO ELIMINATE THE PROBLEM? THAT THE GENTLEMAN HAS DESCRIBED?

>> CAN I ADD THIS? >> BASICALLY, WE'RE LOOKING AT A 50 X 100 LOT, 5000 FT.÷, CORRECT? IF THEY TAKE 50% AND BUILD 2500 FT.÷ HOUSE, THAT LEAVES THEM WITH 2500 UNDERDEVELOPED PLAN IN THAT LOSS? IF YOU GO 10%, THAT'S A MAXIMUM OF SEWAGE AND 50 FT.÷ STRUCTURE.

>> 10% OF THE LOT. >> OF THE WHOLE LOT?

>> 250 TO 500. TO 10% OF THE LOT. GIVE US ENOUGH ROOM TO

SOLVE THE PROBLEM. >> FOR THE EVERYDAY CUSTOMER, WE DEALT WITH, THE MAJORITY OF THEM, THE AVERAGE TICKET WAS $5200. THAT'S A 10 X 12 SHED PRICE ROUGHLY.

[03:05:04]

>> THAT WAS THE QUESTION. >> THAT ANSWERS MY QUESTION ON THAT ITEM. I HAVE SOME OTHER STUFF I WANT TO ASK ABOUT.

>> IT'S NOT PART OF THIS. IT'S NOT PART OF WHAT WE ARE LOOKING AT HERE ON THE HUD. MIKE TOUCHED ON IT I THINK AND SOMEBODY DID. WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE POD HERE. THIS'LL AFFECT HUD'S GOING FORWARD. IS IT RETROACTIVE TO THE ONES THAT

THEY GAVE US TODAY? >> THE PUD THAT DID NOT HAVE A LOT COVERAGE IDENTIFIED IN THEM? IF THERE'S A COVERAGE ALREADY IDENTIFIED, THEN THIS WON'T OVERRIDE THAT. WE HAVE A NUMBER OF THE OLD PUD, THE OLDER ONES DID NOT ADDRESS LOT COVERAGE. THAT'S THIS NEW STANDARD WOULD APPLY TO THOSE

CASES. >> OKAY.

>> WHAT IF UNDER THE NEW STANDARD, ONE OF THE OLD LOTS DOESN'T HAVE ANY ROOM LEFT ON IT TO ADD A BUILDING?

>> WE WOULD BE IN THE SAME SITUATION.

>> I DIDN'T KNOW THIS UNTIL JUST TONIGHT. EVEN TAKING THAT TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT FOR VARIANCE IS NOT AN OPTION IN A

PUD? >> NOT FOR PUD. IT WOULD BE REQUIRED REZONING TO CHANGE THE PUD REQUIREMENTS. LIKE YOU SEE TODAY, THE RECOMMEND APPROVAL WITH CONDITIONS. AND THOSE CONDITIONS HOLD FOR THE PUD. NOBODY CAN GO AROUND GOING TO

THE PLM WITH THE CHANGES. >> ARE YOU SAYING IF WE SAID WE ARE FINE WITH THIS, WE WANTED TO ALLOW PEOPLE ACCESS TO A VARIANCE? THAT WE CAN PUT THAT IN HERE?

>> I'M THINKING --. >> SHE HASN'T HEARD ME WHEN

SHE DOES. >> BECAUSE THAT WAY, I SAY IT'LL BE FAR MORE APPROPRIATE TO DIRECT STAFF TO LOOK INTO THAT. RATHER THAN TRYING TO CHANGE IT HERE BECAUSE IT WAS

NOT ADVERTISED. >> THIS TAKES CARE OF MOST OF

THE PROBLEM IT SOUNDS LIKE. >> WHAT HAPPENS IF YOU WANT AN OUTDOOR KITCHEN AND THE STRUCTURE AROUND THE OUTDOOR KITCHEN. IS THAT CONSIDERED THE SAME THING?

>> THAT'S THE SECTION STRUCTURE. RIGHT?

>> YEAH. I'M OKAY. I GOT IT AT THIS POINT, FOR THAT ITEM.

>> I THINK WE ARE IN PUBLIC HEARING STILL.

>> IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE YOU WANTED TO STAY, MR. NELSON?

>> NO, I APPRECIATE IT. >> I THINK WE NEED TO CLOSE THE

PUBLIC HEARING. >> AND BRING IT BACK TO THE

COMMISSIONER. >> I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION, THOUGH. YOU SAID THAT THE ISSUE IN THE GARAGE SALE, WE INSTITUTED THAT, OR DID YOU PUT IT BACK IN?

>> IT IS BACK TO THE WEIGHT WAS ORIGINALLY IN A YEAR.

>> ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION AND EMOTION?

>> YES. WE TALKED ABOUT THE LOT COVERAGE FOR THE SHED. AS YOU GUYS KNOW, I WILL TALK ABOUT IT, I'M SORRY THAT WE SPENT SO MUCH TIME ON OTHER STUFF. BUT I DO HAVE SOME QUESTIONS ON THIS

OUTSIDE OF THAT. >> GO AHEAD.

>> WHEN YOU HAVE THE AD REQUIREMENT FOR WRITTEN STATEMENTS AND BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, REQUIRING THE APPLICANT TO DESCRIBE THE PROPOSED POD WILL ACCOMPLISH MORE DESIRABLE OUTCOMES THAN WOULD BE POSSIBLE THROUGH THE APPLICATION AND MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS OF THE CODE. CAN YOU FLESH IT A LITTLE BIT FOR ME? I'M TRYING TO UNDERSTAND BECAUSE I WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE 1 ACRE IN A MINUTE. WHAT WOULD BE , DO YOU HAVE AN IDEA OF AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT SOMEBODY WITH SAY THAT MAKES UP HUD MORE ATTRACTIVE THAN THE ZONING? FOR ENHANCING THE LANDSCAPING SETBACKS AND BUFFERING.

>> THOSE TYPES OF THINGS. THAT IS MORE OF AN EXAMPLE OF TODAY.

THE ADDITION , ADDITIONAL RECREATION AREA OUTSIDE OF WHAT IS REQUIRED BY THE ZONING DISTRICT AND LAND-USE. GOING ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT THE STRAIGHT ZONING, WHAT IS DONE IN STRAIGHT ZONING. THE PUD IS SUPPOSED TO BE BY THE DEFINITION, BETTER THAN YOUR STRAIGHT ZONING DISTRICT. THAT GIVES THEM THE OPPORTUNITY TO SHOW WHAT THEY HAVE DONE TO GO

[03:10:04]

>> I APOLOGIZE AGAIN. BUT I WILL GO ON THIS FOR A MINUTE BECAUSE THIS TO ME IS A VERY BIG ISSUE AS YOU HEARD FROM IT.

I HAD NO PROBLEMS WITH ANY OF IT EXCEPT THE ACREAGE OF THE PUD. 1 ACRE TO ME IS WAY TOO SMALL. I THINK THE 5 ACRES ARE FINE AND I DON'T SEE ANYTHING TO MAKE IT SMALLER. IN MY OPINION, THIS IS A DEVELOPERS DREAM. AND IT WILL LITERALLY , YOU LIVE IN A SUBDIVISION OR DRI OR WHATEVER, YOU HAVE TROUBLE UNDERSTANDING PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN AREAS WITH THE LARGER LOT HAVE LIVED THERE FOR A REASON. THEY WANT TO BE THERE. I WILL GET TO IT IN A MINUTE. THE AREA I LIVE IN THAT BILL LIVES, IT'S HUGE AND BIG AND OVER FIVE ANCHORS OUT THERE. IT'S A DIFFERENT ISSUE. THERE'S A NEIGHBORHOOD WHERE I LIVE. AN AREA DEVELOPED WAY BEFORE EVERYBODY DECIDED TO MOVE THE CLAY COUNTY. YOU GO DOWN MY STREET AND THOSE LOTS ARE 2 ACRES AN ACRE AND A HALF AND 2 ACRES. THE DEVELOPERS, THIS WILL BE A GIANT HOLE THEY CAN WALK THROUGH OPENING UP ALL THESE LITTLE LAWS IN THESE OLDER NEIGHBORHOODS TO COME IN AND SAY , THAT AN ACRE LOT AND I WILL DO A PUD IN THERE.

EVERYBODY ELSE IS SITTING WITH THE RESIDENTS ON A LARGE LOT LIVING THERE FOR 20 OR 30 YEARS. THE DEVELOPER WILL SAY I BET I CAN GET SIX HOMES IN HERE ON THIS LOT. THEY WILL COME IN WITH THE REASON IT'S BETTER THAN THE STANDARD ZONING. THEY SAID IT WAS OVER AND OVER AGAIN. THERE'S MORE TAX BASE WITH MORE HOUSES. IT'S A BETTER USE OF THE LAND THAT IS A SUBJECTIVE OPINION. WE BUILT STUFF THAT'LL BE MORE AFFORDABLE. THE REAL REASON IS TO SIMPLY MAKE MORE MONEY. THEY DON'T CARE. THE PEOPLE INVOLVED IN THE TRANSACTION IS CURRENTLY AN OWNER LEAVING THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THEY DON'T CARE. IN THE DEVELOPER WHO WILL DO WHAT THEY DO THEY WILL LEAVE BEHIND AND YOU MAY NOT SEE IT THIS WAY, A BLIGHT ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD. YOU HAVE THESE OLDER HOMES ON BIG LOTS AND 1 ACRE IS NOT A BIG LOT. YOU THINK IT IS BUT IT IS A SMALL LOT. YOU JAM US MUCH STUFF IN IT AS YOU CAN. IT'S COMPLETELY OUT OF PLACE AND DOESN'T FIT IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD THEY USED TO CALL IT BLOCKBUSTING THE OLD DAYS. YOU MAKE IT AN UNDESIRABLE BLOCK AND NEIGHBORHOODS 11 PEOPLE START LEAVING. THEY COME IN TO START DEVELOPING. THEY ARE NOT WAY OUT ON THE FRINGES OF THE COUNTY. THERE ARE SOME OF THE URBAN SERVICE DISTRICTS. WHERE YOU HAVE THESE LOTS. ONCE THAT FIRST PART COMES IN, THE NEXT DEVELOPER WILL SAY THAT IS THERE AND YOU CAN'T DENY ME AND I WANT TO DO THE SAME THING. THIS IS SOMETHING YOU HAVE TO STOP BEFORE IT STARTS.

PEOPLE HAVE LIVED HERE FOR A REASON AND ARE HAPPY TO LIVE THERE. WE SHOULDN'T BE IN THERE MAKING IT EASIER TO DESTROY THOSE COMMUNITIES. WE SAT HERE LONG ENOUGH TO KNOW WE HAVE SEEN SOME PRETTY POORLY CONCEIVED PUD WE APPROVED. THEY WERE ON 5 ACRES. CAN YOU IMAGINE WHAT THEY WOULD DO ON 1 ACRE OR 2 ACRES? TRY TO PUT IT IN PERSPECTIVE, YOU LIVE IN A SUBDIVISION IN A DRI. HOW DO YOU LIKE IT IF THERE WAS AN

[03:15:08]

THAT. >> DID YOU WANT TO SPEAK?

>> I HAD A QUESTION. WHAT WAS THE RATIONALE FOR TAKING IT DOWN FOR 5 TO 1 ACRE? TO ALLOW MORE INFO FOR OPPORTUNITIES.

FOR BASED ON THE EXPERIENCE WE HAVE HAD. THEY BROUGHT UP THE EXAMPLE , THAT I BROUGHT UP IN MAY. WE HAD A 2 ACRE PARCEL.

NON-FOR PROFIT WANTED TO DO SMALLER HOMES ON AND THE ONLY WAY IT COULD BE DONE IS THROUGH THE PUD PROCESS. THEY COULDN'T DO IT BECAUSE IT WAS 2 ACRES IN SIZE.

>> DO WE HAVE A LONG LIST OF PEOPLE AND PROJECTS READY TO

GO? >> THERE ARE A COUPLE THAT I CAN THINK OF IN MY MIND. TWO NOT-FOR-PROFIT THAT RAN INTO THAT PROBLEM. IT WAS TWO SEPARATE ENTITIES DEALING WITH THE SAME BOTH OF THEM WERE DEALING WITH VETS. I TAKE IT BACK. THAT WAS A FEW YEARS AGO THAT WAS LOOKING AT A TINY HOME. WAS TIED TO DEVELOPMENT WITHIN FURNITURE WITH 5 ACRES.

IT WAS THOSE TWO EXAMPLES. THAT WAS THE REASON. THAT I COULD NAME OUT SPECIFICALLY. I CAN'T TELL YOU WHETHER SOME OTHERS DID NOT COME IN AND EVEN ASKED BECAUSE OF THE FIVE-ACRE LIMIT.

THOSE ARE TWO SPECIFIC ONES THAT ARE MORE RECENT WITHIN THE

PAST TWO YEARS. >> THANK YOU.

>> COMMISSIONER DAVIS? >> THIS IS A CONCERN. I CURRENTLY AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER --. WE NEED TO FIGURE WE WILL DO THIS. WHO KILLED THE GOLDEN GOOSE. THE STATE AND THE COUNTY OS ALL TAX DOLLARS. IT'S BECAUSE WE BROUGHT IT BACK. THE , I WOULD HATE TO SEE THE VALUE OF MY INVESTMENT GO DOWN BECAUSE WE HAVE A 1 ACRE PUTT. MY NEIGHBOR DIED AND THEY SOLD IT TO SOMEBODY WHO WANTS TO BUILD SEVERAL SMALL HOMES IN IT. IF WE HAVE A PROBLEM, WE HAVE TO FIGURE OUT A BETTER WAY TO DO IT. THEN TO CREATE AN AVENUE FOR SOMEBODY TO COME IN. WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD LIKE THAT. I REMEMBER THE FLOATING ISLAND. I GOT AN ACRE AND A HALF. PEOPLE

ARE WAITING FOR ME TO DIE. >> REMEMBER A PUD DOES NOT

[03:20:06]

>> I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. TWO IF YOU PROVIDE THE PATH,

YOU CAN TURN INTO A ROAD. >>

>> COMMISSIONER GARRISON? >> THAT'S ALL RIGHT. YOU DON'T LIKE LITTLE DEVELOPMENT, YOU DON'T LIKE DEVELOPMENT AND YOU WANT EVERYBODY TO LIVE ON A 2 ACRE LOT. THAT'S NOT REALISTIC. THE FACT THAT SOMEBODY APPLIES DOES NOT MEAN HE WILL PASS IT. I GET WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND IF YOU LOOK UP WHAT IS THE NUMBER ONE REASON OR MAIN REASONS HOUSING IS UNAFFORDABLE. GOOGLE THAT PHRASE AT THE TOP OF THE LIST. ZONING. ZONING. ZONING. YOU BROUGHT FORTH THE IDEA OF THE 80 YOU. THE RIVERSIDE. YOU HAVE THE MAXON GARAGE AND ALL THIS OTHER STUFF. THAT'S ALL IT'S ASKING FOR. I'M NOT HUNG UP ON MONICA. FIVE SEEMS LITTLE EXCESSIVE. THE FACT THAT SOMEBODY HAS AN ACRE AND A HALF LOT DOESN'T MEAN THEY WILL TURN INTO A SUBDIVISION. I'M MORE ON THE SIDE TRYING TO STRIKE A BALANCE TO PROVIDE MORE AFFORDABLE HOUSING. WE ALL, THEY GAVE US A PRESENTATION ABOUT HOUSING AFFORDABILITY. BEING FLEXIBLE WITH ZONING IS A WAY TO DO THAT. I'M FINE WITH THE 1 ACRE. I DO COMPLETELY UNDERSTAND THE PROBLEM.

EVERYBODY IS ON AN ACRE AND A HALF AND SOMEBODY PASSES AWAY AND THEY SELL IT AND THEY COME IN AND MAKE IT A GOOD LOBBYIST AND GET A GOOD PEOPLE CONVINCED TO PASS IT. AND THEN YOU HAVE FOUR OR FIVE HOUSES ON THE ACRE. THE GUY NEXT DOOR, HE DID IT AND I WANT TO DO IT. I DON'T KNOW WHAT'S BAD ABOUT IT. BUT IT WILL DEVELOP A PIECE OF PROPERTY FOR THE HECK OF

MAKING EVERYBODY ELSE MAD. >> JUST THE PHILOSOPHICAL STATEMENT. HE SAID A COUPLE THINGS TONIGHT. THE DEVELOPER IS MAKING MONEY. IT'S ALMOST LIKE YOU RESENT THE FACT THAT DEVELOPERS MAKE MONEY. IT'S A CAPITALIST SOCIETY. THE PRESENT THE PUBLIC FOR MAKING PROFIT ON THEIR GROCERIES? DO WE NEED TO FREE FOOD FREE HOUSING? ANYWAY. THAT'S OFF THE PLANE. I'M

FINE WITH IT. >> COMMISSIONER GARRISON MAKES AN EXCELLENT POINT AND I APPRECIATE EVERYBODY'S THOUGHTS. I APPRECIATE THE LAST STATEMENT. I DON'T THINK DEVELOPERS ARE THE ENEMY BUILDERS ARE THE ENEMY. A LOT OF FOLKS ARE TRYING TO DO GOOD FOR THE COMMUNITY. I HATE TO PAINTBRUSH THAT SOME PEOPLE USE ALL DEVELOPERS AND BUILDERS ARE BAD BECAUSE I DISAGREE WITH THAT. I HAVE A COUPLE QUICK QUESTIONS FOR MR. BROWN. IF SOMEBODY COMES IN FOR PUD, ON A 1 ACRE LOTS, ARE THE MINIMUM REQUIREMENTS THEY HAVE TO MEET THE DENSITY WHICH YOU ALREADY ADDRESSED. DO THEY HAVE TO PUT IN A PRIMARY ROAD AND A CUL-DE-SAC AND SOME OF THOSE THINGS THAT WE SEE REQUIREMENTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT?

>> IF IT BECOMES A SUBDIVISION, YES. PAVED ROADS.

>> THREE OR MORE UNITS? >> YEAH. DEPENDING ON HOW THIS DEVELOPS. YOU KNOW, AND THE SITUATION. AN ACRE, IF IT IS A SUBDIVISION, YOU HAVE TO DO THOSE THINGS.

>> INCREASED SETBACKS IN A PUD MORE THAN WHAT THE BASIC REQUIREMENTS ARE. IT'S PROBABLY ANECDOTAL . IF YOU HAVE 1 ACRE PARCELS, IT'S NOT A BIG SUBJECT, YOU'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO PUT IN A PRIMARY ROAD, CUL-DE-SAC, 120 FEET ACROSS I THINK IS ANY REQUIREMENT FOR A CUL-DE-SAC.

YOU ATE UP THE WHOLE 1 ACRE. WHEN YOU LOOK AT YOUR ENHANCED SETBACK. MY POINT IN THIS IS, I DON'T THINK YOU CAN PUT A PUD WITH MULTIPLE UNITS ON MONICA. I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH THE 1 ACRE. I'M IN THIS CASE ALIGNED. I DON'T THINK IT'S DOABLE BECAUSE OF OTHER REQUIREMENTS THAT A PUD HAS.

BUT IT MAY LET SOMEBODY PUT IN 3 ACRE PUD HAVING TO GO THROUGH ALL THE APPROVAL PROCESS NEEDS DENSITY. THERE'S A LOT OF STEPS AND IT'S NOT CARTE BLANCHE APPROVAL. I'M GLAD TO HEAR ABOUT THE VETERANS BECAUSE I DIDN'T REMEMBER WITH THE DRIVER WAS BUYING BEHIND US. THE TINY HOMES. I THINK TINY

[03:25:01]

EVERYTHING YOU HAVE TO DO. STORAGE RETENTION FOR THE STORM WATER. PUT IT ON ONE WEAKER , THAT IS MORE THAN 1 ACRE. I SAY THAT TO SHARE A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND ON IT. I DON'T HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THE WEIGHT IS WRITTEN.

>> I RESPOND TO THAT REAL QUICK? THE DEVELOPERS AND TWO OF THEM HERE. NOBODY IS SAYING WE ARE AGAINST DEVELOPMENT OR SAYING WE ARE AGAINST SMALLER LOTS AND STUFF LIKE THAT. THEY HAVE 16 UNITS PER ACRE SOMETIMES MORE THAN THAT ALL THE WAY DOWN TO THOSE THAT WENT OUT THERE FOR LONG TIME LUCKY ENOUGH TO BUY PROPERTY WHEN IT WAS INEXPENSIVE. WHAT I'M TRYING TO GET ACROSS IS WE NEED TO PROTECT PEOPLE THAT HAVE INVESTMENTS IN THEIR HOMES WHERE THEY ARE LIVING NOW BECAUSE IT IS. ARE THE PEOPLE WHO WERE VETERANS -- I'M A VETERAN -- I DON'T HAVE TO LOOK FOR A TINY HOME TO LIVE IN. IF W■E NEED TINY HOMES ND I SAID IT ON MORE THAN ONE OCCASION, WE NEED TO DEVELOP A CATEGORY AND GET BUSY WITH IT

IS THAT OF TALKING ABOUT IT. >> I'M NOT SAYING THE 1 ACRE, PUD IS A BAD THING. I'M SAYING IF YOU PUT IT IN, THE PEOPLE THAT HANDLE THE ACRE LITERALLY IN THE RESIDENTIAL AREA WITH A BUNCH OF OTHER 1 ACRE PARCELS, THE COUNTY NEEDS PROTECT THEM.

PROVIDE THEM SOME INSURANCE. THAT THEY WON'T SELLOUT BECAUSE HE'S GOING INTO A NURSING HOME. AND HE SOLD TO A FLIPPER WHO WILL COME IN AND WORK HIS WAY AND DESTROY THE NEIGHBORHOOD. THAT'S THE ONLY THING I WILL SAY. I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THE WHEN A GOOD THING OUTSIDE OF THAT.

>> I'M ALL FOR IT. I BUILD HABITAT HOMES AND ALL KINDS OF THINGS. AND WE DO HAVE A NEED FOR IT AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING IS AN ISSUE HERE. WE HAVEN'T FIGURED OUT THE EQUATION TO FIX IT. IF WE FOCUS ON THE TINY HOLES, WE CAN ACCOMPLISH IT.

BUT WE HAVE TO STOP TALKING ABOUT IT AND START DOING

SOMETHING. >> THIS IS FOR THE COMMISSIONER. THE POINT YOU BROUGHT UP ABOUT THE RESTRICTIONS. MY QUESTION WOULD BE, IF NOT 1 ACRE, WHAT DO YOU THINK FROM YOUR PROFESSION AND YOUR PROFESSIONAL OPINION? WHAT THE ACREAGE SHOULD BE. 3 ACRES, 2 1/2 AND FOUR? WE ARE MAKING RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE STAFF. RIGHT ? PART OF IT IS TAPPING TO THE EXPERTISE AND BACKGROUND IN YOU AND SAY, MR. GARRISON AND OTHERS. THAT'S MY QUESTION FOR YOU. NOT TO PUSH ON THE SPOT. TO THAT'S OKAY, I'M USED TO BEING ON THE FIRING

LINE. >> WAS THE MINIMUM ACREAGE OR SQUARE FOOTAGE, AND I UNDERSTAND COMMISSIONER DAVIS IS SAYING ABOUT CONCERNING HOW DO YOU PROTECT YOUR NEIGHBORS?

[03:30:05]

THAN THAT. FOR THAT --. >> THAT BRINGS UP A POINT. TO FEEL COMFORTABLE TO VOTE FOR THE APPROVAL, I NEED TO KNOW MORE. PART OF IT IS YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU DON'T KNOW. AT LEAST FOR MYSELF, THAT'S WHAT I'M DEALING WITH HERE.

CONSEQUENTLY, I WOULD ASK MAYBE WE PUT IT ASIDE AND ASK THE STAFF TO COME BACK WITH MORE INFORMATION. IN ORDER FOR US TO

EVEN MAKE A DECISION. >> MDM. CHAIR, I DON'T THINK WE SHOULD DELAY ACTION ON THIS JUST FOR THIS ISSUE. IF THAT'S KIND OF THE FEELING. I WOULD SAY PUT IT BACK TO 5 ACRES AND LEAVE IT WHERE IT WAS AND LET'S BRING IT UP AS A SEPARATE ITEM IN THE FUTURE. BECAUSE I DON'T THINK WE WANT TO HOLD UP ANY OF THE OTHER STUFF THAT IS IN THERE.

>> DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? >> I WANT TO MAKE THE USE OF THE COMMENT THAT WE CAN CLARIFY. MAYBE I KEEP TRYING TO SAY. I LIVE ON A PARCEL THAT IS AR ZONING. THE SETBACKS ON MY PROPERTY OR 20 FEET ON THE SIDE. IF SOMEBODY CAME IN TO DO A PUD, YOU CAN READ THE LANGUAGE. THEY GET TO DECIDE WITH THE SETBACKS AND WHAT THEY WILL BE. IT WON'T BE 20 FEET ANYMORE. IF MY NEIGHBORS HOUSES 40 FEET FROM ME, IF WE ARE BOTH RIGHT ON THE LINE, SUDDENLY, THEY ARE MOVING AWAY MUCH CLOSER TO ME. THAT'S AFFECTING ME. THAT'S THE POINT PETE WAS MAKING AT SOMEONE. IF YOU WANT TO DO THAT, I WILL MAKE A MOTION THAT SAYS, EXCEPT THE STAFF REPORT. CHANGE IT BACK TO 5 ACRES. AND THAT'LL BE MY MOTION. AND THEN I WOULD LIKE TO TALK MORE BECAUSE I THINK WE HAVE A COUPLE OF THE THINGS WE SHOULD TALK ABOUT. 89 BEFORE YOU MAKE THE MOTION, I WOULD LIKE TO TAG ALONG WITH THE COMMON AND ASK THESE GUYS HOW MANY UNITS DO YOU THINK YOU CAN PUT ON AND WHEN ACRE PUD?

>> MIKE SAYS YOU CAN'T DO IT.

>> HOW MANY HOUSES DO YOU THINK YOU CAN PUT ON ON THE PROPERTY?

>> IF I WERE A CIVIL ENGINEER WE COULD ANSWER THE QUESTION.

>> YOU ARE ASKING TECHNICAL QUESTIONS WE ARE NOT LICENSED

QUITE FRANKLY TO ANSWER. >> IS A BUILDER, YOU'RE NOT

GOING TO BE HELD TO IT. >> WHAT'S A REGULAR SUBDIVISION LOTS? A QUARTER OF AN ACRE? WHAT'S THE DEPTH ON

THE 40 FOOT? >> 50 X 120 WILL BE A STANDARD

LOT. >> 6000 FT.÷ IN THE ACRE. YOU DID THE MATH AND YOU GOT SEVEN HOUSES. YOU CAN'T PUT SEVEN HOUSES AND YOU HAVE ACCESS AND DRAINAGE AND THAT SORT OF

STUFF. >> HOW MANY HOUSES.

>> IT DEPENDS ON THE PROPERTY. IT DEPENDS. JUST SAY FOUR OR FIVE. WE NEED TO MOVE THE ITEM. IF THE ONLY THING WAS FOR THE TINY HOME, LET'S FIND A WAY TO DO THE TINY HOMES. DON'T HOLD IT UP. IS THAT THE ONLY THING. I'M GOING TO RESTATE IT. I WANT TO MOVE THE STAFF AT WAR. AND DELETE THE MOVE TO 1 ACRE.

LEAVE IT AT FIVE. AND GET IT AFTER WE VOTE ON IT. I WANT TO

TALK ABOUT IT SOME MORE. >> AWESOME.

>> ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION BEFORE WE CALL THE QUESTION?

>> HE SAID AFTER WE VOTE ON IT.

>> AFTER WE VOTE ON IT? >> ARE WE READY TO CALL THE QUESTION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR, SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? SAME SIGN, MOTION CARRIES.

>> ARE WE DONE WITH THAT ITEM? IN DISCUSSION, I FELT THIS WAY FOR A LONG TIME. WE NEED TO DO SOMETHING FOR TINY HOUSES.

[03:35:03]

>> I THINK WE MIGHT NEED A PRESENTATION ON IT. THE LITTLE BIT OF READING THAT I HAVE DONE ON IT SUGGEST THAT THESE ARE DEVELOPMENTS WHERE PEOPLE DON'T HAVE MOTOR VEHICLES. I THINK WE NEED A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT WE'RE

TALKING ABOUT HERE. >> CAN WE DO THAT? WE DID ONE UP IN JACKSONVILLE. THEY BUILT LIKE A CENTRAL COURTYARD WITH THE HOUSES AROUND IT ARE SOME RING. I REMEMBER READING ABOUT

IT. >> WE NEED A PRESENTATION BEFORE WE WEIGHED INTO THE AREA, FRANKLY.

>> CAN WE ARRANGE IT? >> WE CAN ASK TO LOOK INTO IT.

EVEN IF IT IS A REQUEST AND SUGGESTED READING. I DO NOT

FEEL EDUCATED ON THIS AREA. >> I HAD ONE OTHER ITEM THAT I WANTED TO MENTION. IN OUR DISCUSSION ON THE PUD, WE TALKED ABOUT THE COVERAGE FOR THE SHEDS BASICALLY. I THINK THERE IS STILL A PROBLEM WE DIDN'T REALLY DEAL WITH. WHICH IS NUMBER ONE, THE EXISTING PEOPLE THAT CAN'T DO ANYTHING.

HOW CAN WE CREATE A MECHANISM FOR THEM TO DO SOMETHING? DO WE NEED TO LOOK AT SOMETHING IN THE GENERAL CODE AS WELL? NOT

JUST THE PUD ABOUT IT? >> AS PART OF THE CODE UPDATE, WE ARE LOOKING AT EACH OF THE STANDARD RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS.

ADDRESSING LOT COVERAGE AMONG OTHER THINGS. AND ONE OF THE NEW THINGS HE WILL SEE. AND I HOPE IT DOESN'T DRIVE ANYBODY CRAZY. WE ARE LOOKING AT IMPERVIOUS SURFACE. WHICH WE DON'T HAVE NOW. SOMEBODY CAN PAVE THEIR WHOLE. AND I'VE SEEN THE WHOLE LOT. THAT'LL BE ANOTHER PIECE ADDING TO THE RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT. WE ARE LOOKING INTO THAT.

>> THE WRAP UP IS OF THE PERSON, NOT A PUD AND OTHER ZONING, YOU HAVE A PROBLEM WITH NOT HAVING ROOM TO PUT A SHED ON IT TODAY, THEY CAN GO TO THE VARIANCE. THEY CAN GO TO THE BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT WITH THE VARIANCE. I'VE BEEN TO THE MEETINGS AND I'VE SEEN PEOPLE COME IN WITH THOSE REQUESTS AND THEY GENERALLY APPROVE THEM. NOT ALL THE WAY, YOU CAN'T SAY IT'S AUTOMATIC BUT GENERALLY, OKAY. WE ARE LEFT WITH OLD PUD THAT DON'T HAVE ANY ROOM AND WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO

WITH THOSE. >> GO GET A PERMIT.

>> AT THIS POINT, WE HAVE NO PRESENTATIONS FOR THIS EVENING.

[Old Business/New Business]

>> I APOLOGIZE I DID NOT GET IT ON ANY BUSINESS. WE HAVE A SCHEDULING CONFLICT FOR THE SEPTEMBER 3 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. STAFF WILL BE OUT FOR TRAINING THAT DAY. WE SUGGESTED WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 28 OR THURSDAY, AUGUST 29. WE HAVE AVAILABILITY IN THE BOARDROOM. FOR THE SEPTEMBER MEETING.

IT'LL BE A 5:00 PM. >> AS FAR AS I KNOW, EITHER ONE OF THEM. I DON'T HAVE MY CALENDAR IN FRENEMY. USUALLY, .

--. >> I'M CHECKING MY CALENDAR

HERE. THOSE LOOKING FOR ME. >> WEDNESDAY, WEDNESDAY 28TH

AND AUGUST, 29TH. >> THE THURSDAY? THE 29TH? THAT TAKES CARE OF THAT. ALL RIGHT.

>> 5:00 PM, YEAH. WE WILL REGULARLY SCHEDULE FOR AUGUST

6. >> SEPTEMBER 29?

>> YES. >> AUGUST 29, SORRY.

>> I SWORE I HEARD SEPTEMBER. AUGUST 29.

>> IS THAT TAKES CARE OF THAT, WE NEED TO HAVE THE FINAL PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD. I DON'T HAVE ANY CARDS. OPENING THE FINAL, PERIOD. SEEING NOBODY COME FORWARD, I WILL CLOSE. THE

[03:40:01]

>> WAIT, AUGUST QUESTION TO A DUCHESS AT THE 29. TO THAT THE

SEPTEMBER MEETING. >> WE WILL MEET TWICE IN AUGUST.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.