May 06, 2025 Planning Commission

[Call to Order]

[00:00:08]

>>> WELCOME BACK EVERYBODY. THIS IS THE MAY 6, 2025 CLAY COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. WILL YOU PLEASE LEAD US IN THE PLEDGE. BACK RISE PLEASE. 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. >> THANK YOU. LEASE HAVE A SEAT.

MY NAME IS PETE DAVIS AND I AM THE CHAIR OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING. THE MINUTES WILL BE TAKEN BY CHRISTINE AND THE RECORDING SECRETARY FROM THE CLERK OF COURTS OFFICE. STAFF MEMBERS PRESENT ARE JENNI BRYLA, ZONING CHIEF AND MARSHALL, THE DIRECTOR OF THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND WE ALSO HAVE, KELLY. KELLY HENRY IS HERE FROM THE ECONOMIC SERVICES THAT DEVELOPMENT COORDINATOR. AND I SAW -- WHITAKER AND WE ARE GLAD YOU ARE HERE. ALSO PRESENT FROM THE LEGAL DEPARTMENT IS THE ASSISTANCE ATTORNEY JD --. I THINK I HAVE GOTTEN EVERYBODY.

AND WE WOULD ALSO LIKE TO DEPUTIES -- THANK FOR HER. WITH ME ARE HOWARD NORTON , MARY BRIDGMAN AND ON MY LEFT IS MICHAEL BOURRE, COMMISSIONER BILL GARRISON AND OUR SCHOOL REPRESENTATIVE IS --. MOST OF THE DECISIONS MADE BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION ARE RECOMMENDATIONS OR REFERRED TO AS BCC. BCC WILL HAVE THE FINAL SAY AT THEIR MEETING ON THE SECOND TUESDAY ONE WEEK FROM TONIGHT OR THE FOURTH TUESDAY THREE WEEKS FROM TONIGHT. THE BCC MEETING STARTS AT 4:00 P.M.

VENTING AND LOAN USE MATTERS STARTING AT 5:00 P.M. PLEASE CHECK THE BCC AGENDA ON THE CLAY COUNTY WEBSITE. IF THERE ARE ITEMS ON THE AGENDA TONIGHT THAT YOU WISH TO SPEAK ABOUT PLEASE FILL OUT ONE OF THESE CARDS WHICH CAN BE FOUND IN THE ENTRY AND GIVE IT TO MISS . AT THIS TIME, PLEASE PUT YOUR CELL

[1.  Approval of Minutes]

MOTION? EXPECT SO MOVED. >> SECOND.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. THOSE IN FAVOR, AYE .

>> AYE . >> OPPOSED? THE MOTION PASSES.

ON THE AGENDA WE HAVE A SECTION FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. AND A MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC MAY COMMENT ON ANY ITEM NOT INCLUDED ON THE AGENDA BUT PERTINENT TO THE BUSINESS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION. I HAVE ONE CARD -- THEY CHECKED FIRST PUBLIC COMMENT. DO YOU WISH TO SEE BEAK -- SPEAK TO THAT OR A SPECIFIC ITEM ON THE AGENDA.

WHICH AGENDA ITEM DO YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT? NUMBER ONE. OKAY. IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK DURING THE PUBLIC COMMENT SECTION. I WILL OPEN PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD AND I SEE NOBODY COMING FORWARD SO I WILL CLOSE IT. WE ALWAYS WELCOME THE PUBLIC TO PLANNING COMMISSION MEETINGS AND THAT IS THE

[00:05:10]

AS PART OF THE PRESENTATION, STAFF WILL INDICATE WHETHER THEY RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST OR CHANGE. NEXT, THE APPLICANT WILL HAVE A CHANCE TO SPEAK. AFTER THE PRESENTATION I WILL OPEN THE FLOOR FOR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO OFFER THEIR VIEWS. IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK, PLEASE FILL OUT A CARD AND GIVE IT TO MISS BLANCHETTE AND THEN YOU WILL HAVE TO TAKE THE OATH WHICH MISS BLANCHETTE WILL ADMINISTER. IF YOU ARE NOT SURE IF YOU WILL SPEAK, PLEASE GO AHEAD AND TAKE THE OATH ANYWAY.

YOUR SPEAKING TIME WILL BE LIMITED TO TWO MINUTES. THE TIME IS FOR YOUR VIEWS AND NOT TO ASK QUESTIONS OF STAFF OR COMMISSIONERS. COMMENTS WILL BE DIRECTED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION. IF YOU SEE THE LIGHT TURNED RED IT IS TIME TO WRAP IT UP. THE APPLICANT AND THE PUBLIC HAVE ALL HAD THEIR CHANCE TO STATE THEIR VIEWS, THE FLOOR WILL BE CLOSED AND PUBLIC COMMENT APPLICANT WILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO RESPOND TO THE COMMENTS BY THE PUBLIC. OKAY. AT THIS TIME, COMMISSIONERS WILL DISCUSS THE MATTER IF NECESSARY AND RENDER A DECISION. THANK YOU ALL FOR ATTENDING AND YOUR PARTICIPATION. BEFORE WE BEGIN PUBLIC HEARING, MISS BLANCHETTE WILL SWEAR IN ANYONE WHO WISHES TO SPEAK IN FAVOR OR OPPOSITION OF AN APPLICATION. IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK YOU NEED TO STAND AND TAKE THE OATH.

>> DO ALL SOLEMNLY SWEAR OR AFFIRM THE TESTIMONY YOU ARE ABOUT TO GIVE WILL BE THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH, SO HELP YOU

[1.  Public Hearing to consider PUD 25-0002 (District 5, Comm Burke) (J. Bryla)]

GOD? THANK YOU. >> OKAY. THE FIRST AGENDA ITEM IS A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER PUD 25-0002 . AND MISS BRYLA

WILL GIVE US REVIEWS . >> THANK YOU, CHIEF. THIS IS RELATED TO PUD 25-0002. SO, THE REQUEST IS TO CHANGE THE CURRENT ZONING FROM BA-2 TO PCD TO ALLOW FOR A CPA OFFICE. THE PROJECT HAS BEEN HEARD BEFORE BUT AS A DIFFERENT REQUEST. THIS IS LOCATED IN DISTRICT FIVE, AND THAT IS COMMISSIONER BOURRE. IT IS LOCATED ADJACENT TO U.S. HWY 17 AND FRASER ROAD. YOU CAN SEE THE AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH ON THE LEFT THAT SHOWS THE MULTIUNIT DEVELOPMENT TO THE NORTH OF THE PROJECT. AND ON THE GRAPHIC ON THE RIGHT IT SHOWS THE PARCELS THAT WERE NOTIFIED OF THE HEARING. SO THE CURRENT ZONING IS COMMERCIAL. ZONING BA-2 AND THIS IS A PROFESSIONAL OFFICE AND COMMERCIAL ZONING HOWEVER IT HAS LIMITATIONS OF 2500 SQUARE FEET. THE ZONING TO THE NORTH OF THE PROPERTY IS PUD WHICH IS A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT WHICH IS A MIXED USE RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY WITH COMMERCIAL INCLUDED. THE GRAPHIC ON THE RIGHT SHOWS THE PCD ZONING IF APPROVED. THE GRAY COLOR ALONG U.S. HWY 17 IS ALL OF THE COMMERCIAL ZONING . SO THIS GRAPHIC -- AS THE ZONING DISTRICT IN THE AREA OF THE SUBJECT PARCEL AT -- THE PROPERTY TO THE WEST IS DEVELOPED WITH A SINGLE-FAMILY HOME THAT WAS DEVELOPED IN 1958. THIS WOULD REQUIRE CONDITIONAL

[00:10:07]

>> ANY QUESTIONS FROM STAFF? >> I DO HAVE ONE. THIS DRAWING IS PART OF THE PACKAGE. WAS IT PART OF THE APPLICATION? IS THIS WHAT THEY ARE OBLIGATED TO BUILD IF APPROVED?

>> YES. IT CANNOT FREE FROM IT WITH ANY GREAT EXTENT. IT MAY

HAVE MORE TREES OR -- >> THEY CAN'T MOVE THE BUILDING

AROUND AND ALL OF THAT? >> NO.

>> THANK YOU. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY. IS

THE APPLICANT HERE? >> THE APPLICANT IS THE AGENT.

>> GOOD AFTERNOON, MR. CHAIRMAN AND FELLOW COMMISSIONERS, JOSH COCKRELL. THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE HERE AND PRESENT THIS EVENING AND I ALSO HAVE OUR CIVIL ENGINEER CHARLIE SONG AND THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY, STANLEY HUNT. I WAS BROUGHT INTO THIS PROJECT TO TAKE A SECOND LOOK AT THIS. WHEN IT CAME BEFORE YOU IN EARLY NOVEMBER AND FINAL APPROVAL WAS IN LATE NOVEMBER THIS PROJECT WAS PRESENTED, YOU MIGHT RECALL AS REZONING CONVENTIONAL TO BE A. IT IS NOT -- BA. IT IS NOT WHAT I WOULD HAVE DONE THAT WHEN PRESENTING THIS, I TOOK A LOOK AT THE CONCERNS FROM THE -- THAT CAME TO THE COMMISSION IN NOVEMBER AND I TOOK IN THEIR CONCERNS AND TRIED TO PRESENT A PROJECT THAT WOULD WORK. SOME OF THE THINGS I WANT TO HIGHLIGHT FOR YOU, CURRENTLY, AND STAFF CAN WEIGH-IN IF NEEDED, SOME OF THE USES, BA-2 IS IN THE AREA. THE NEIGHBOR TO THE WEST HAS THE DUAL USE PARCEL AND THE HOUSE IS NONCONFORMING AND SITS ON BA-2 ZONING. THE PARCELS TO THE SOUTH ARE ALSO BA-2. ACROSS THE STREET IS BA-2 AND BB. SOME OF THE MORE HIGHLY UNDESIRABLE USES ARE BB BUT UNFORTUNATELY THEY ARE GRANDFATHERED IN. THIS IS PRIME FOR DEVELOPMENT . WE HAVE SEEN 17 GROW OVER THE DECADES AND TRAFFIC WILL CONTINUE ON 17 SO IT IS GETTING DEVELOPED WHETHER IT IS TODAY OR TOMORROW. THE QUESTION IS WHAT KIND OF DEVELOPMENT AND RESPONSIBILITY DEVELOPMENT DO WE AS A COUNTY WANT TO SEE. WE HAVE A CPA FIRM THAT WANTS TO DEVELOP THIS

[00:15:02]

IT CAN BE TWO BUILDINGS NO LARGER THAN 2500 SQUARE FEET IF THE LOT AND PARKING ALLOWS. IT ALLOWS FOR BUILDINGS TO BE BUILT ADJACENT TO THE LOT LINE. WE HAVE A NEIGHBOR TO THE WEST TODAY AND I PROVIDED YOU SITE PLANS THAT THE ENGINEER PUT TOGETHER. TODAY, IF WE WERE TO BUILD TODAY, I COULD BUILD TWO DIFFERENT SIZED BUILDINGS AND YOU CAN SEE THE SITE PLANS THERE. PUTTING THE BUILDINGS ON THE LOT LINE OF THE NEIGHBOR BECAUSE BA-2 AND ADJACENT TO COMMERCIAL I CAN PUT A BUILDING ON THE LOT LINE AND NOTHING CAN BE DONE ABOUT IT. THAT IS MY RIGHT AND WE DON'T WANT TO DO THAT. WE WANT TO DO RESPONSIBLE DEVELOPMENT UNDERSTANDING THERE IS A NEIGHBOR. WE WERE TO OFFER THAT RESIDENT THEIR CONCERNS. WE ARE PROVIDING A BUILDING SETBACK LIKE PRESENTED WITH BA, PUTTING THAT BUILDING UP AGAINST 17. THE DAYS THAT WE TALKED ABOUT IT, I KNOW MR. GARRISON, WHEN YOU WERE AT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, WE SEE BLANDING BOULEVARD AND THE PARKING IS HIDEOUS. WE NEED TO BE RESPONSIBLE -- DO RESPONSIBLE DEVELOPMENT WHEN IT COMES TO COMMERCIAL. THE BUILDING IN THE FRONT HAVE ENHANCED LANDSCAPING ALONG 17 AND ORIGINALLY WHEN I APPLIED FOR THIS WE DID A 1542 SQUARE FOOT. WE REDUCE THIS.

THERE IS A 90 FOOT BUILDING SETBACK FROM THE BUILDING ITSELF TO THE PROPERTY LINE ITSELF. ON THE WEST SIDE NEIGHBOR. WE ARE GIVING 90 FEET AND DOING A SIX FOOT FENCE CURRENTLY. WOODEN SLATTED. WE ARE PUTTING IN, WHICH IS NOT REQUIRED, WE ARE PUTTING IN AND OFFERING A 10 FOOT VEGETATIVE UNDISTURBED LANDSCAPE BUFFER BETWEEN THE PARKING LOT AND THE NEIGHBOR TO THE WEST. THE NONCONFORMING LOT TO THE WEST. WE ARE PROVIDING THAT. THE THING WE ARE REQUIRED IS A LANDSCAPE BUFFER TO THE NORTH. WE ARE PROVIDING THAT ALONG WITH ENHANCED LANDSCAPING AND MORE TREES TO HELP BUFFER, ALLEVIATING CONCERNS THAT THEY HAD THAT WE HEARD AND UNDERSTOOD AND SPEAKING WITH THE NEIGHBOR TO THE WEST HIS COUNSEL, WHO I HAVE BEEN IN CONSTANT CONVERSATION WITH, I SAY THE NEIGHBOR MENTIONED WOULD YOU BE WILLING TO PUT IN AN ENHANCED LANDSCAPE BUFFER OR CONSIDER 10 FEET AND WE DIDN'T HAVE THAT AT THE TIME. WE HEARD THE CONCERNS AND PUT IN THE 10 FOOT UNDISTURBED LAND BUFFER. THE BUILDING ITSELF IS 4000 SQUARE FEET AS MENTIONED AND IT IS A TWO-STORY BUILDING BUT THE HEIGHT OF IT IS SHORTER THAN THE RESIDENTIAL HOMES TO THE BACK. I PROVIDED AN ILLUSTRATION IN THE PHOTOS TODAY. AS PART OF THIS PCD, BA-2 IS ALLOWED. BUT WE HAVE DONE TO ALLEVIATE TRAFFIC CONCERNS THAT WE HEARD FROM THE PREVIOUS MEETINGS IS WE TOOK OUT --. SO IN THE FUTURE THERE IS NO MEDICAL OFFICE. LESS THAN WE WANT IS HIGHER TRAFFIC THAT MEDICAL OFFICE CAN BRING SO WE WE REMOVED MEDICAL OFFICE AS A USE. IN ADDITION TO THAT THE BUILDING ITSELF WILL PROVIDE A SOUND BARRIER, BUFFER TO NOISE BEING IT IS A TALLER BUILDING.

WE HAVE ENCLOSED DUMPSTER THERE AS WELL. IMPROVED CURB AND GUTTER AND THAT IS THE ROADWAY ITSELF ALONG FRASER ROAD WILL BE PAVED AND THAT HAS TO BE PAID TO COUNTY STANDARDS AND WE ARE PROVIDING THAT AND PROVIDING THE BIKE PATH ON 17 AS WELL AND PROVIDING ENHANCED LANDSCAPING. WE HAVE CURD HEARD CONCERNS AND TAKEN THAT INTO CONSIDERATION. WE BRING THIS TO YOU IN ORDER TO ENSURE WE ARE TAKING RESPONSIBLE DEVELOPMENT AT HAND HER. -- HERE. WE NEED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT. IT IS GOING TO GET DEVELOPED IN THE MATTER IS HOW DO WE WANTED TO BE DEVELOPED? IT DO WE WANT ATTRACTIVE DEVELOPMENT? DO WE WANT UNSIGHTLY DEVELOPMENT? WE HAVE TO MAXIMIZE AS A PROPERTY OWNER, THE SPACE THAT WE HAVE SO THAT THE CPA FIRM CAN OPERATE

[00:20:03]

YOU TODAY. >> DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY

QUESTIONS? >> I WAS TRYING TO LOOK UP THE REGULATION FOR PROPERTIES. CAN YOU TELL ME WHAT THE REQUIREMENT IS FOR A 4000 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING?

>> I WILL DEFER THIS BUT IF I RECALL RIGHT IT IS ONE PER 250

SQUARE FEET. >> OKAY. THANK YOU.

>> I HAVE A QUESTION IF I MAY. THIS IS THE OFFICIAL?

>> THIS IS THE OFFICIAL SITE PLAN.

>> WHAT IS THIS? >> THE PACKET I GAVE YOU IS IF WE WERE TO BUILD TODAY. THIS IS SHOWING WHAT WE CAN DO TODAY BY RIGHT AS BA-2. IS IS MAXIMIZING SQUARE FOOTAGE IN THE BUILDINGS THAT WE WOULD NEED TO PUT TO SUPPORT THE CPA FIRM. IF WE WERE TO BUILD TWO BUILDINGS TODAY, THIS IS WHAT WE COULD DO AND THESE ARE A COUPLE OF ORIGINAL CONCEPTS WE WERE WORKING ON IF WE WERE NOT ABLE TO GET TWO STORIES.

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. >> AT THIS TIME, WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. THE FIRST CARD I HAVE IS STANLEY HUNT. THE NEXT CARD I HAVE IS DEAN CLAXTON. FOLLOWING HIP HIM IS RICK TINKLER. -- TINKLER -- HINKLER .

>> GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS PLEASE.

>> DEAN CLAXTON. FRASER ROAD. WE ARE ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF FRASER ROAD FROM THE PROPERTY OF DISCUSSION AND MY CONCERN IS, THE BASIS OF MY OPPOSITION TO CHANGING THE ZONING IS THE SIZE AND NUMBER OF PERSONNEL THAT WOULD BE OPEN TO ACQUIRING THAT AND THE REASON BEING IS THE TRAFFIC DIFFICULTIES WE ALREADY ENCOUNTER IN AND OUT OF FRASER ROAD AND ON U.S. HIGHWAY 17 NAMELY ON THE NORTH SOUTH SIDE OF 17 WHICH IS SEEMINGLY WORSE THAN THE SOUTH NORTH SIDE OF 17. SO THIS WOULD BE EXACERBATED GREATLY BY THE TYPE OF ALTERATIONS THAT ARE BEING OFFERED. OR BEING DISCUSSED. AND, MY CONCERN IS JUST THE HAZARD CREATED BY THE ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC AND FOR THAT NUMBER OF PERSONNEL COMING IN AND OUT OF FRAZIER AND ON AND OFF 17 IN BOTH DIRECTIONS. PRESUMABLY POSSIBLY EVEN REQUIRING COUNTY ALTERATIONS TO THE INTERSECTION WHICH, TO ME, WOULD FURTHER COMPLICATE THE SITUATION ON US-17. THAT IS PRETTY MUCH ALL I AM BASING IT ON AND I WOULD PREFER TO SEE A SITUATION OR A FACILITY THAT COULD JUST BE -- COULD BE -- COULD RESULT FROM

[00:25:18]

>> THANK YOU, MR. CLAXTON. MR. HINKLER.

>> RICK BAKER, 1530 FRASER ROAD. I HAVE BEEN A RESIDENT ON FRASER ROAD ALMOST 40 YEARS AND I AM HERE TO OPPOSE THE CHANGE IN ZONING GOING FORWARD FOR MULTIPLE REASONS. I KNOW YOU HEAR A LOT OF STUFF EVERY DAY. WE WERE HERE IN NOVEMBER. RIGHT NOW THERE ARE 12 RESIDENTS, 12 PEOPLE THAT LIVE ON FRASER ROAD THAT CAN OPERATE A CAR. THE PARKING LOT HOLDING 15 OR 16 FOLKS AND WE ARE TALKING DOUBLING THE AMOUNT OF PEOPLE THAT ARE GOING TO COME IN AND OFF OF THAT ROAD POSSIBLY. I KNOW YOU LOOK AT A LOT OF STUFF. THAT IS THE OPENING OF FRASER ROAD RIGHT NOW . TO GET ONTO THAT LOT RIGHT THEY ARE WOULD BE IN THE MIDDLE OF THIS. RIGHT NOW WE SIT THERE BECAUSE THE TRAFFIC ON 17, WHEN A UPS OR AMAZON TRUCK COMES AND DELIVERS THINGS, THERE ARE TIMES WHEN WE SIT THERE FOR MINUTES GETTING ON AND OFF THE ROAD. THE TRAFFIC ALONE, JUST GETTING IN AND OFF OF THAT FACILITY IN THAT AMOUNT OF SPACE, MY GRANDKIDS AND OTHER KIDS ARE UP AND DOWN THAT ROAD EVERY DAY AND MOST OF THE RESIDENCE GO TO THE MAILBOX TO GET THEIR MAIL AND THAT IS ON THE ROAD. IT JUST DOES NOT MAKE ANY SENSE AND I UNDERSTAND THAT THE OWNER PLANS -- OWNERS PLANS BUT CHANGING THIS ZONING LATER DOWN THE ROAD, IF AND WHEN SOMETHINRE BUSINESSES, FUTURE USES, IT IS JUST MORE AND MORE TRAFFIC. WE HAVE BEEN HERE . WE HAVE BEEN THERE AND WE HAVE LIVED WITHIN OUR PARAMETERS. WE PAY OUR TAXES AND WE DO EVERYTHING WE ARE SUPPOSED TO DO AND THE GENTLEMAN BOUGHT THE PROPERTY KNOWING WHAT IT WAS ZONED AT. HE HAS THE RIGHT TO DO WHATEVER HE WANTS TO DO WITH THE WAY IT IS DONE AND I THINK HE NEEDS TO LIVE WITHIN THE RIGHTS OF IT AND DO WHAT HE IS SUPPOSED TO DO THE WAY HE BOUGHT IT AND IF NOT, THE RESIDENTS OF THE ROAD WILL BE THE ONES PAYING THE PRICE. WE HAVE BEEN DOING WHAT WE ARE SUPPOSED TO DO ALL ALONG. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU, MR. BAKER. NEXT IS CHELSEA BAKER SHAW. THEN I HAVE

-- BAKER. >> GOOD EVENING. I AM CHELSEA BAKER SHAW ON FRASER ROAD. AND I HAVE LIVED FIVE HOUSES ON FRASER ROAD. COMMERCIAL PROPERTY AT THE END OF THE ROAD NAMED AFTER MY GRANDFATHER WAS ZONED AND INTENDED FOR BUSINESS LIKE THIS WHICH IS A STRAIGHT OVER FROM FRASER ROAD. A SMALL RESIDENTIAL -LOOKING HOME OR COMMERCIAL BUSINESS CAN TAKE PLACE HOLDING JUST A COUPLE OF CARS AT A TIME. WITH HIS CURRENT BA-2 ZONING WE ARE ASKING ACCESS TO HIS BUSINESS BE FROM THE ROAD, FROM 17 WHERE THIS DRIVE ACCESS POINT ALREADY IS OFF OF THE TURNING LANE AND NOT FROM OUR PRIVATE ROAD. THERE IS ALREADY ACCESS.

THE PROPOSED REZONING, AGAIN, IS SOMETHING THAT WILL IMPACT THE QUALITY OF ALL OF OUR LIVES AND SAFETY WITH A POSSIBLE FIXING CAR PARKING LOT, ACCESS TO THE BUSINESS FROM OUR ONE LANE ROAD

[00:30:03]

WE ASK THAT HE ABIDE BY THE CURRENT ZONING. THIS IS NOT THE PLACE FOR A LARGE-SCALE TWO STORY COMMERCIAL BUILDING WITH A 16 CAR PARKING LOT. HE PURCHASED A PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT DOES NOT FIT HIS NEEDS WHICH IS HIS FAULT. AND NOW THAT IS FALLING ON US WHERE WE LIVE, PLAY AND REST. -- IS NOT AN ATTORNEY BUT HERE IN MENTEES REZONING WITH HIS MISSION STATEMENT, "HELPING LAND USE AND ZONING PROJECTS CUT THROUGH THE RED TAPE AND GET PAST THE ROADBLOCKS." WE'RE NOT RED TAPE. THEY ARE PROPOSING A SIDEWALK DOWN OUR ROAD, A CROSSWALK CROSSING THE ROAD AND CONTINUING ONTO HIS PROPERTY. AS MY DAD SHOWED YOU THERE IS NO ROOM FOR TWO CARS LET ALONE A SIDEWALK DOWN HERE AND A

CROSSING ACROSS. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. TRINA BAKER. THEN

WE HAVE SUZANNE RYDER. >> MY NAME IS TRINA BAKER AND I LIVE AT 1530 FRASER ROAD. I STRONGLY OPPOSE THE REZONING FROM BA-2 TO PCD . -- THAT WE ALL ENJOY LIVING ON FRASER ROAD.

PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO PLACE HERSELF AS A RESIDENT OF OUR ROAD AND VOTE ACCORDINGLY. MR. HUNT PURCHASED THIS PARCEL IN BA-2. I DON'T LIKE THE IDEA OF A BUSINESS ENTRANCE OFF OF MY ROAD BUT I HAVE NO ISSUE WITH MR. HUNT PUTTING HIS BUILDING THERE BUT I TAKE GREAT ISSUE WITH REZONING HIS PARCEL TO PCD THAT WILL ALLOW TO FURTHER BUSINESSES SHOULD IT BE SOLD.

HERE ARE THE MAIN REASONS I OPPOSE REZONING. NUMBER ONE IS TRAFFIC. IT ALLOWS FOR HEAVIER TRAFFIC ON OUR OVERBURDENED ROAD. TRAFFIC ON 17 IS TERRIBLE AND IT IS SINGLE LANE SO GETTING ON AND OFF OF IT IS A NIGHTMARE. THE TRAFFICTHAT WILL BRING WITH REZONING TO PCD INCREASES THE POSSIBILITY OF --. A PCD ZONING ALLOWS FOR UNWANTED BUSINESSES AS WELL AS FUTURE RESIDENTS AND THIS WOULD BRING HEAVIER TRAFFIC TURNING ONTO AND OFF OF OUR ROAD WHICH BRINGS ME TO SAFETY. MY GRANDCHILDREN RIDE THEIR BIKES ON THAT ROAD -- RIGHT PAST THE ENTRANCE OF THIS BUSINESS. THE RISK OF INJURY TO MYSELF, MY GRANDCHILDREN, ANIMALS IS GREATER THAN THE PCD. THERE IS A CAUTION CHILDREN SIGN ON THE ENTRANCE TO THE ROAD FOR A REASON. NEXT IT IS A PRIVATE SINGLE LANE ROAD. IT IS MAINTAINED BY THE RESIDENTS AND NOT INTENDED FOR THE TYPE OF TRAFFIC A PCD WOULD BRING. THE REPORT SHOWS WHY THIS WOULD BE A GOOD THING AND IT TALKS ABOUT THE GROWING COUNTY AND DEMANDS FOR PROFESSIONAL OFFICE PROPERTIES. LINES 117 THROUGH 119 FOR RECOMMENDATIONS STATES, "THE COMMITTEE MET ON APRIL 19, 2025 TWO THROUGH THE ITEM AND OFFER A RECOMMENDATION OF 5-0." NOT ONE PERSON FROM THE SPRING CITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE LIVES ON FRASER ROAD AND THEY HAVE NO IDEA WHAT IT MEANS TO LIVE THERE AND NEITHER DOES MR. HUNT.

FRASER ROAD IS NOT A PART OF THE SPRINGS DISTRICT . ON PAPER IT MAY FALL INTO THE NEW PLANNING DISTRICT BUT IT IS NOT.

EVERYTHING AROUND OUR ROAD IS CHANGING BUT WE ARE LIFELONG CITIZENS OF AN OLD PRIVATE ROAD WITH MY GRANDFATHERS NAME THAT WILL NEVER BE A PART OF THE SPRINGS DISTRICT. MR. HUNT LAST ATTEMPT TO REZONE HAS FAILED AND HE HAS SINCE HIRED JOSH COCKRELL AND HE STATES ON HIS WEBSITE, "HELPING LAND USE AND ZONING PROJECTS CUT THROUGH THE RED TAPE AND GET PAST THE ROADBLOCKS." I AM NOT REDTAPE OR A ROADBLOCK. MY FAMILY IS NOT REDTAPE OR A ROADBLOCK AND MY NEIGHBORS ARE NOT. MORE THAN

[00:35:02]

PROTECT US AND PUT OUR QUALITY OF LIFE FIRST AND GIVE US A NO

RECOMMENDATION FOR THIS. >> IS IT RYAN? THEN WE HAVE BEN

-- . >> OKAY. I AM SUZANNE RYAN AND I AM THE WEST SIDE PROPERTY OWNER. THIS IS MY HOUSE WHICH HAS BEEN VASTLY MISREPRESENTED TO ALL OF YOU IN THIS. THIS IS MY HOME.

THIS IS HOW CLOSE THIS PROPERTY IS. WHERE MY HOUSE AND MY FRONT DOOR, MY FRONT WINDOWS ARE WELL. THIS IS THE PROPERTY. HIS TREES ARE OVER HERE. WHILE I DO UNDERSTAND HE IS ALLOWED TO BUILD WHAT HE WANTS TO BUILD, I GET IT. HE BOUGHT THE PROPERTY, WE COULD NOT AFFORD TO BUY IT WHEN IT WAS FOR SALE. BUT I DO STILL HAVE MAJOR CONCERNS. I WORK FROM HOME. IF THESE PEOPLE DO NOT MAKE THE DRIVE IN THEY WILL BE TURNING AROUND IN MY YARD AND I DON'T WANT TO HAVE TO PUT UP A BARRIER, A CHAIN, NO ENTRANCE FOR PEOPLE TURNING AROUND ALL DAY LONG. I DO NOT WANT A TWO-STORY BUILDING IN MY FRONT YARD. AS YOU CAN SEE IT IS MY FRONT YARD. THE COUNTY, YEARS AGO, I DON'T KNOW WHEN THEY DID IT, BEFORE I WAS IN THE HOME, THOUGHT IT WAS A GREAT IDEA TO TAKE EVERY PIECE OF PROPERTY ON BOTH SIDES OF 17 AND REZONE THEM 100 FEET IN TWO COMMERCIAL PROPERTY WHICH IS PART OF MY PROPERTY AS WELL BUT THE REST OF THE PROPERTY THAT WAS ZONED AS AGRICULTURAL RESIDENTIAL AND IT IS FULLY 100 % RESIDENTIAL AND MY WEALTH SITS RIGHT WHERE THE PROPERTY LINE IS. I DON'T KNOW WHY THE PROPERTY LINES ARE LIKE THAT BUT THAT IS WHERE IT IS AND THAT IS OUR WELLHEAD AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT TYPE OF DEVELOPING COULD DISRUPT OUR WELL. SO, IT IS RIGHT THERE, RIGHT NEXT TO EVERYTHING ON TOP OF US. AGAIN, OUR ROAD IS A QUIET PRIVATE ROAD ASIDE FROM DELIVERIES THAT COME IN. WHAT IS IT GOING TO DO? WHEN EVERYBODY SAYS WE HAVE TO GET OUR MAIL FROM THE ROAD, THEY MEAN 17. OUR MAILBOXES ARE LINED UP ON 17. WE HAVE CARS CONSTANTLY HITTING OUR MAILBOXES AND KNOCKING THEM OUT SO MORE TRAFFIC COMING IN ON OUR ROAD, NOT FROM THE 17 ENTRANCE, BASICALLY, THAT IS MORE TRAFFIC AND A HIGHER RATE OF US POSSIBLY GETTING HIT WALKING OUT TO THE MAILBOX TO GET OUR MAIL. YOU CAN'T PARK A CAR THERE. I PULL IN, I STOP, AND I RUN THE RISK OF SOMEBODY SLAMMING INTO MY CAR. IT IS A RISK EVERY DAY AND NOW THERE WILL BE MORE PEOPLE COMING INTO THAT ENTRANCE RIGHT IN THE FRONT. I HAVE SMALL GRANDCHILDREN. AGES THREE AND UNDER AND THAT IS ALSO A CONCERN AND I DON'T WANT PEOPLE LOOKING FROM THE TOP STORY OF THIS BUILDING INTO MY FRONT WINDOWS.

THAT IS MY MASTER BEDROOM AND MY FAMILY ROOM SO THEY CAN SEE EVERYTHING AND I DON'T WANT TO FEEL LIKE I AM LOCKED IN A JAIL AND KEEP MY CURTAINS SHUT 24/7 BECAUSE EVERYBODY ELSE CAN SEE WHAT I AM DOING INSIDE MY HOUSE.

>> THANK YOU, MISS RYAN. MR. --. THEN WE HAVE MR. HUNT. NOT YET,

MR. HUNT. >> --, 3771 MAIN STREET. I OWN A PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT IS IN FRONT OF WHERE THE PLANNING AND ZONING IS LOOKING AT 16 -- ACRES .

>> IS THIS ON THE FIRST AGENDA ITEM OR LATER ON? WE ARE STILL

ON NUMBER ONE. >> I AM ON NUMBER TWO. I HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH NUMBER ONE. I WILL STEP ASIDE .

>> I WILL PUT NUMBER TWO ON YOUR CARD.

>> I DID PUT -- I PUT IT ON THE CARD.

[00:40:04]

>> IT'S ALL RIGHT. NO PROBLEM.

>> I APOLOGIZE . >> THAT'S ALL RIGHT. MR. HUNT.

>> THANK YOU. THERE HAS BEEN SO MUCH BROUGHT UP THE BIGGEST THING I WANT TO STRESS IS WE HAVE BEEN LOOKING AT THIS FOR A LONG TIME AND THE TWO BUILDING CONCEPT -- WILL YOU PLEASE RAISE

THE MICROPHONE UP? >> IS THAT BETTER?

>> YES . >> PLEASE GIVE YOUR NAME AND

ADDRESS. >> STANLEY HUNT , --. THE TWO STORY CONCEPT THAT WE CAN DO TODAY CAN HAVE JUST AS MUCH SQUARE FOOT AND JUST AS MUCH PARKING, PERHAPS MORE BECAUSE WE ARE NOT GOING TO DO ANY BUFFER WITH THE NEIGHBOR WITH THE TWO BUILDINGS. WE WILL HAVE TO BUILD RIGHT ON HIS PROPERTY LINE WITH THE BUILDING RIGHT THERE. NO TREES, NO FENCE, BECAUSE WE WILL NOT HAVE ROOM FOR IT. THE TWO BUILDINGS WILL REQUIRE EVERY SQUARE FOOT THAT WE HAVE. SO TO SAY THAT THE PUD WILL INCREASE AND MAKE IT MORE OF A PLACE FOR A BIGGER BUSINESS AND PARKING SPACES IS NOT FACTUAL AND IN FACT THE PUD IS REDUCING WHAT IS ALLOWED THERE AND THE BIGGEST THING IS CARS COMING IN ALL DAY LONG. -- AFTER THIS IS APPROVED NO MEDICAL IS ALLOWED. SOULLESS INTRUSIVE ZONING AND I THINK THAT IS THE BIGGEST MISUNDERSTANDING THAT SOMEHOW WHAT WE ARE REQUESTING HERE IS GOING TO ALLOW MORE PARKING SPACES AND MORE SQUARE FOOTAGE.

IT IS THE OPPOSITE BECAUSE IF WE DON'T HAVE THE BIG BUFFER BETWEEN THE NEIGHBORS WE WILL HAVE MORE SQUARE FOOTAGE AND MORE PARKING SPACES. SO YOU ARE PROBABLY ASKING THEN WHY ARE WE EVEN TRYING TO DO THIS PCD? I HAVE BEEN IN CLAY COUNTY FOR 19 YEARS WORKING WITH CLAY COUNTY BUSINESS OWNERS. 11 GREAT AND PRO PLOY EASE -- EMPLOYEES. WE WANT TO BE PROUD OF THE BUILDING. EVERY TIME I LOOK AT THE TWO BUILDING CONCEPT, I JUST CAN'T THINK OF ANYTHING ELSE BUT IT LOOKS LIKE A CHEAP MOTEL AND I JUST DON'T THINK THAT IS WHAT WE WANT IS THE FIRST COMMERCIAL BUILDING THAT PEOPLE SEE WHEN THEY DRIVE OVER THE BLACK CREEK BRIDGE AND I DON'T WANT TO SPEAK FOR THE NEIGHBORS.

IF I WAS A NEIGHBOR I WOULD THINK I WOULD WANT THAT BUILDING WAY OVER HERE AND NOT A PARKING LOT THEN TREES WITH THE BUFFER FOR SOUND RATHER THAN A BUILDING WITH NO FENCE AND NO TREES.

WOULD YOU MIND PULLING UP THE PICTURE WITH THE RENTAL HOMES? AS FAR AS THE TWO STORY, THE HOUSE IS RIGHT THERE ALL LINED UP, THOSE TWO-STORY HOUSES, THOSE ARE RIGHT ON THE PROPERTY LINE, RIGHT NEXT TO THEIR HOUSE. THE BUILDING WE ARE SUGGESTING HAS A HUGE BUFFER BETWEEN OUR BUILDING AND THEIR HOUSE SO, IF THERE IS A BEEF TO ME IT SHOULD BE WITH THESE RENTAL HOUSES THAT WERE ALLOWED WITH FOUR CARS PER RENTAL. THAT IS WHAT IS -- THE TRAFFIC. I EXPERIENCE THAT TRAFFIC TOO. 8-10 EMPLOYEES ARRIVE IN THE MORNING AND TWO OR THREE GO OUT TO LUNCH. AT OUR OFFICE, AT 5:00, IT IS A FIRE DRILL. EVERYBODY IS OUT OF THERE. THIS IS A FLOW OF A TRAFFIC SITUATION AS YOU COULD

ASK FOR. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. AND, WE HAVE MR.

ALEX HARDEN. >> I THINK I NEED TO SWEAR HIM

IN. >> MR. HARDEN.

>> GOOD AFTERNOON. I HAVE A HANDOUT.

>> YOU NEED TO TAKE THE OATH BECAUSE YOU WERE A LATE ARRIVE

OR. >> DO YOU SOLEMNLY SWEAR THE TESTIMONY YOU ARE ABOUT TO GIVE WILL BE THE WHOLE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH, SO HELP YOU GOD.

>> I DO. WHILE SHE IS HANDING THAT OUT I AM ALEX HARDEN WITH THE DOUGLAS LAW FIRM AT 124 -- JACKSON EACH FLORIDA HERE ON BEHALF OF THE RYAN FAMILY IMMEDIATELY TO THE WEST OF THE PROPERTY YOU ARE HEARING ABOUT. WE HAVE APPRECIATED WORKING WITH

[00:45:05]

ADJACENT TO THIS IS BA-2. BA-2 WOULD ALLOW FOR ZERO FOOT SETBACK IF YOU ARE ADJACENT TO A COMMERCIALLY ZONED PROPERTY.

THERE IS A STRIP OF THE RYAN PROPERTY THAT IS BA-2 THROUGH NO FAULT OF THEIR OWN. THIS WAS PART OF THE COUNTY ZONING THAT 100 FEET FROM 17, THEY ZONED IT BA-2 AND THEIR HOUSE WAS BUILT IN THE 40S OR 50S. THEY HAD NO KNOWLEDGE THAT THEY WERE EVEN PARTIALLY ZONED COMMERCIAL BUT THEY ARE PART AGRICULTURAL AND PART BA-2 SO, BECAUSE OF THAT ONE TRIP, THAT SPLIT ZONING, THAT MEANS THAT BA-2 CAN HAVE A ZERO FEET SETBACK. THE STAFF REPORT ADDRESSING THAT THEY COULD BUILD ZERO FOOT TODAY IT MISSES THE PICTURE A LITTLE BIT. WHILE THEY MAY BE ABLE TO, ADDRESSING THIS IN THE CONTEXT OF A PCD REALLY MISSES THAT THIS IS A RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY. THIS IS AT THEIR HOME. SUZANNE WORKS FROM HOME. HER BEDROOM WINDOW FACES THIS PROPERTY. WHILE I HAVE MET WITH JOSH AND WE HAVE ADDRESSED SOME OF THE CONCERNS AND WE APPRECIATE THEM WITH THE 10 FOOT UNDISTURBED BUFFER BUT, THIS REALLY IS, THE TWO-STORY BUILDING ALONG 17 PRESENTS CHALLENGES FOR FAMILIES THAT LIVE HERE. THEY ARE VERY SENSITIVE TO THE ROAD AND THEY LIKE THE CHARACTER OF THE AREA AND THAT IS WHY THEY CHOSE TO LIVE HERE. THERE IS A REASON YOU CAN'T BUILD OVER 2500 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING IN BA-2. IT IS NOT AN ACCIDENT IT IS BECAUSE BA-2 IS MEANT TO BE A ZONING DISTRICT COMPATIBLE WITH RESIDENTIAL AND LOW SKILL COMMERCIAL USES. IT IS SUPPOSED TO BE YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD OFFICE. SO, WHILE THERE ARE A LOT OF CONCESSIONS IN THE PUD THAT ARE SUPPORTIVE OF THE NEIGHBORS AND ADDRESSES THE HEIGHT AND THE SETBACKS, THE SIZE OF THE BUILDING IN IS MISSING THE CHARACTER OF WHAT BA-2 IS MEANT TO BE. I AM HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS AND WE LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH THE APPLICANT AS THIS GETS CLOSER BUT WE WILL STAND BY FOR FURTHER --.

>> I HAVE ONE QUESTION. IS THIS A CURRENT REVIEW OR IS THIS

TAKEN OFF OF GOOGLE EARTH? >> THAT WAS TAKEN OFF OF THE COUNTY GIS SYSTEM SO IT IS RELATIVELY CURRENT. YOU WILL NOTICE IT LOOKS LIKE THERE ARE TWO PARCELS BUT ALL OF THAT IS THE PROPERTY OF THE APPLICANT SO THERE IS NOT A GAP BETWEEN THE RYAN PROPERTY AND THE COMMERCIAL PROPERTY. THAT WAS AN ABANDONED ROAD THAT WAS INCORPORATED INTO THE RYAN PROPERTY SO LOOKING AT THE AERIAL, THEY WOULD BUILD RIGHT UP TO THE RYAN'S PROPERTY

LINE. >> I HAVE A QUESTION. THAT SPACE, WHAT THAT IS BELONGS TO WHOM?

>> IT BELONGS TO THE APPLICANT. THEIR SITE PLAN INCORPORATES BOTH OF THOSE LINES BUT THE LINE THERE IS -- .

>> SOMEBODY MADE A COMMENT EARLIER THAT THE RESIDENTS, THE RYAN SCOTT THAT IS A NONCONFORMING LOT. IS THAT

CORRECT? >> THAT IS NOT. ONE, IT IS A SPLIT ZONE PROPERTY. IT IS PERSILY -- PARTIALLY AGRICULTURAL AND PARTIALLY BA-2. IT CAN BE USED FOR SINGLE-FAMILY

HOME . >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? THANK YOU, SIR. IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TOSPEAK ABOUT AGENDA ITEM NUMBER ONE. SEEING NO ONE I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND BRING IT BACK. WITH THE AGENT LIKE TO --

>> THANK YOU, COMMISSIONERS. A COUPLE OF THINGS I DO WANT TO

[00:50:01]

THIS IS A PROFESSIONAL OFFICE. MEDICAL OFFICE. WHAT I CAN DO TODAY AND THE PCD IS NOT DIFFERENT EXCEPT FOR ONE THING.

THE ONLY THING I AM PROPOSING DIFFERENT WITH REGARD TO THE USES ITSELF, AND I WANT THIS COMMUNITY TO UNDERSTAND, THE ONLY DIFFERENCE TODAY, IN THIS PCD, BA-2, WHAT I CAN DO BY RIGHT IS I AM TAKING OUT MEDICAL OFFICE. NOTHING ELSE CHANGES.

LITERALLY TAKING OUT MEDICAL OFFICE WHICH IS A HIGHER TRIP GENERATOR. BA-2 DOES NOT ALLOW FOR RESTAURANTS AND OTHER USES AS SUCH. I UNDERSTAND THAT THEY ARE UPSET THE DEVELOPMENT IS COMING BUT THEY ARE MISS CONTROLLING -- MISCONSTRUING WHAT I CAN DO TODAY. THIS PROFESSIONAL OFFICE SPACE. I AM DOING THEM A FAVOR BY TAKING OUT THE MEDICAL AND UNDERSTANDING THEIR CONCERNS ABOUT TRAFFIC AND SUCH AND HIGHER INTENSITY. THERE IS NO RESTAURANTS COMING. IT CAN'T BE ALLOWED AND IF IT WERE TO CHANGE FROM A DECADE -- A DECADE FROM NOW SOMEBODY WOULD HAVE TO COME APPEAR THAT CAN COMB THROUGH THE RED TAPE AND APPEAL TO YOU GUYS AND THE NEXT COMMISSION AND SAY I WANT TO CHANGE IT TO SOMETHING ELSE. WHO KNOWS WHAT THE COUNTY WILL LOOK LIKE 10 YEARS OR 20 YEARS FROM NOW. NONE OF US DO. ALSO, ABOUT THE PRIVATE ROAD. THE ROAD IN FRONT OF THIS PIECE A PARCEL THAT ALIGNS WITH MY CLIENT, THAT MY MY CLIENTS PERSONAL ABUTS TO IS A PUBLIC ROAD. IT IS COMMERCIALLY ZONED. HE HAS TO BRING IT UP TO COUNTY STANDARDS. HE OWNS THAT PART OF IT THAT HE HAS TO BRING UP SO THAT WHEN HE DOES DEVELOP IT, WHEN HE BUILDS ON THIS PARCEL, WHICH HE IS GOING TO DO ONE WAY OR THE OTHER, HE HAS TO BRING IT TO COUNTY STANDARDS AND THAT MEANS PAVING THAT SECTION OF THE ROAD TO THE PROPERTY LINE. HE HAS TO DO CURBING AND GUTTER STANDARDS. IT IS HAPPENING ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. THAT SECTION IS NOT PRIVATE. IT IS HIS PIECE AND IT HAS TO BE DONE NOW. I WANT TO HIGHLIGHT A COUPLE OF OTHER THINGS. YOU HEARD SEVERAL FOLKS HERE TONIGHT AND A LOT OF THEM ARE FROM THE SAME FAMILY. I THINK THERE ARE 10 OR 11 HOUSES AND WE HAVE HEARD FROM THE SAME FAMILY MEMBERS AND I RESPECT AND UNDERSTAND THAT AND CHANGES TOUGH. WE HAVE SEEN A LOT OF THAT BUT WE ARE TRYING TO DO IT THE RIGHT WAY, RESPONSIBLY AND NOT SOMETHING WITH TWO BUILDINGS LOOKING LIKE A HOTEL. WE WANT THIS TO BE AN ATTRACTIVE BUILDING. THERE ARE TWO STORY BUILDINGS BEHIND THE STORE. LOOKING INTO HER WINDOWS. WE HAVE A 100 FOOT OPAQUE FENCE AND WE ARE PROVIDING THAT 10 FOOT UNDISTURBED VEGETATIVE LANDSCAPE THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO DO. WE ARE PROVIDING 90 FEET WITH PARKING. WE ARE PROVIDING THAT.

I HAVE APPEALED TO YOU AND THERE WAS A CONCERN BROUGHT UP AND WE WOULD LOVE TO BE ABLE TO ENTER OFF OF US-17 ON THE ENTRANCE THAT IS THERE BUT FDOT WILL NOT ALLOW WAS. WE HAVE TRIED. FDOT WILL NOT ALLOW US AND THAT IS WHY WE HAVE THE ENTRANCE OFF OF FRAZIER. -- FRASER ROAD. I APPEAL TO YOU TO SUPPORT THIS SO THAT WE CAN HAVE AN ATTRACTIVE BUSINESS. WE HAVE BEEN FIGHTING FOR BUSINESSES TO DEVELOP YOUR. LET'S DO IT THE RIGHT WAY. AND DO WITH THE RESPONSIBLE WAY. THANK YOU, SO MUCH.

>> MR. CHAIR. >> EXCUSE ME.

>> MR. CHAIRMAN. >> I HAVE A QUESTION. YOUR CLIENT, IF HE THE ONLY ONE -- IS HE THE ONLY ONE THAT IS GOING TO

OCCUPY THE BUSINESS? >> YES .

>> THERE WILL BE NO OTHER BUSINESS IN THERE?

>> THAT IS CORRECT. >> ONE OF THE QUESTIONS I WANTED TO ASK YOU ALREADY ANSWERED IS WHY YOU CANNOT COME IN OFF OF US-17. IT LOOKS LIKE FROM THE DRAWING, WHICH LOOKS LIKE FROM A SURVEY, THERE IS IN FACT A CURB CUT THERE ALREADY SO, I DON'T

[00:55:03]

>> CHARLIE, I'M GOING TO ASK YOU TO COME UP. WE HAVE OUR ENGINEER HERE THAT IS WAY MORE INTELLIGENT ABOUT THIS STUFF

THAN I AM. >> MY NAME IS CHARLES SONG AND I

AM WITH -- ENGINEERING. >> EXCUSE ME -- YOU NEED TO BE

SWORN IN? >> I ALREADY WAS.

>> 715 ORANGE AVENUE IN -- COAST SPRINGS. THE QUESTION IS WHY CAN'T WE USE THE CURB CUT THAT IS EXISTING AND THAT IS BECAUSE IT IS TOO CLOSE TO FRASER ROAD. THEY HAVE RULES ABOUT HOW CLOSE ACCESS POINTS CAN BE AND THE FIRST THING THEY LOOKED AT IS SAID YOU ARE GOING TO NOT ONLY HAVE TO USE FRASER ROAD AS YOUR ACCESS POINT THAT YOU ARE ALSO GOING TO HAVE TO REMOVE THE EXISTING CURB CUT AND THEY WILL MAKE US REMOVE THAT EVEN THOUGH ITIS IN THE FDOT RIGHT AWAY. THAT IS THE RULES.

>> SO, IT IS NOT SOMETHING THAT GETS AUTOMATICALLY GRANDFATHERED IN? THEY ARE ABLE TO TELL YOU CANNOT HAVE IT?

>> CORRECT. WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A RIGHT IN AND WRITE OUT.

IF WE WERE TO USE THAT CUT, WHICH THE FDOT DOES NOT ALLOW, YOU WOULD HAVE TO GO UP 17 AND COME BACK AND THAT IS THE WAY IT IS BUT IT IS THE FDOT WAY TO TRY TO LIMIT ACCESS POINTS THAT ARE TOO CLOSE TO EACH OTHER AND WE FIND THAT TIME AND AGAIN.

>> ANOTHER QUESTION. I HATE TO GIVE PEOPLE -- WE KEEP TALKING ABOUT THE BUFFER FACING ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY.DID ANYBODY TAKE A LOOK AT DOING A SIMPLE LINE OF SIGHT DRAWING TO SHOW IF YOU ARE IN THE UPPER FLOOR OF THAT BUILDING AND YOU LOOK OUT AND DOWN WITH THAT BUFFER, WITH THAT FENCE, HOW FAR CAN YOU SEE? WE HAVE SEEN THOSE DRAWINGS BEFORE AND IT SAYS, SOMEBODY ON THAT UPPER FLOOR WITH THAT BUFFER, THE ONLY THING THEY WILL BE ABLE TO SEE IS THE ROOF OF THAT HOUSE. DID ANYBODY

LOOK AT THAT? >> I AM THE CIVIL ENGINEER. BUT THE ARCHITECT MADE SOME RENDERINGS.

>> ARE YOU THE OWNER? >> THE BUILDING IS DESIGNED IS NOT AS TALL AS THE RENTAL HOUSE TO STORIES SO WHATEVER THE LINE OF SIGHT THAT THE RENTAL HOUSES HAVE INTO THAT, HOURS WOULD BE

LESS. >> THE QUESTION IS, DID ANYBODY LOOK AT THIS AND WOULD BE ABLE TO SAY -- ALL YOU ARE SAYING RIGHT NOW IS IT WON'T BE ANY WORSE THAN THESE OTHER HOUSES.

IM ASKING HOW IT SPECIFICALLY WILL BE FROM THIS BUILDING. THAT

IS MY QUESTION. >> TO ANSWER THE QUESTION, NO,

SIR, IT HAS NOT. >> I WOULD SAY YES TO DO THAT

BEFORE YOU GET TO THE NEXT. >> CONSIDERING THE FACT, THE BUILDING IS 90 FEET SETBACK FROM THE PROPERTY LINE. TAKE INTO ACCOUNT AN UNDISTURBED BUFFER WHICH WE DON'T HAVE TO DO TODAY, ENHANCED TREE PLANTINGS THAT WE DON'T HAVE TO DO TODAY AND FENCING. BEHIND THEM, TWO STORY BUILDINGS BEHIND THEM ARE NOT SETBACK NOWHERE NEAR TODAY. WE ADDRESSED ALL CONCERNS HEARING THAT THE LAST TIME. THE BOTTOM LINE IS THEY JUST DON'T

WANT ANYTHING BUILT HERE . >> ONE THING I DON'T RESPOND TO WELL IS THIS IS WHAT WE CAN DO. I AM TRYING TO UNDERSTAND EXACTLY WHAT IT IS YOU ARE TRYING TO DO. THE OTHER COMMENT I WANTED TO MAKE, MR. CHAIR, BEFORE YOU MOVE ON, IN THE PUD

[01:00:05]

>> I THINK THAT WAS THE MAXIMUM AMOUNT. WITH THE REPRESENTATION OF THE BUILDING IT SAYS 4000 SQUARE FEET.

>> I GOT THAT BUT IT IS PART OF THE WRITTEN PROPOSAL AND IF THE PROPOSAL IS FOR A 4000 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING THE WRITTEN PART OF THIS SHOULD MATCH THE PROPOSALS SO, I AM SAYING THAT NEEDS TO BE UP DATED BECAUSE THE WRITTEN STATEMENT, ONE OF THE THINGS I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYBODY UNDERSTOOD IS THIS DRAWING RIGHT HERE IS PART OF THE ORDINANCE. IF THIS PASSES THIS IS PART OF THE ORDINANCE AND THIS IS ALL THEY CAN BUILD.

IF THEY WANT TO BUILD SOMETHING DIFFERENT THAN THIS THEY HAVE TO GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS AGAIN. SO, IT IS NOT LIKE THEY ARE GOING TO PUT UP A BUILDING AND GOD KNOWS WHAT WILL GO IN IT. IT WILL BE RESTRICTED TO PROFESSIONAL OFFICES AND I DID WANT TO SAY THAT I APPRECIATE THE APPLICANT REMOVING MEDICAL OFFICES FROM THIS BECAUSE THEY ARE HIGH-TRAFFIC OFFICES AND THAT IS WHERE THE CARS ARE GOING TO BE COMING IN AND OUT BUT, THOSE, I THINK WERE WERE MOSTLY WHAT I WAS CONCERNED ABOUT.

THANK YOU. >> IF I MAY, THE GRAPHIC THAT IS DEPICTED ON THERE, THAT WE REMOVED THE BUILDING DIMENSIONS, WHAT WE SHOWED ON THERE BASICALLY WAS THE MAXIMUM BUILDING SIZE IT COULD BE SO IF YOU WERE TO GET A RULER AND MEASURE IT IT IS QUITE A BIT BIGGER. WHAT THAT DEPICTS IS THE LARGEST BUILDING THAT COULD FIT IN THE SPACE THAT IS ALLOWED.

WHEN WE GO TO DEVELOP IT WE WILL STILL HAVE TO ABIDE BY COUNTY REQUIREMENTS IN TERMS OF PARKING AND AT THAT POINT WE WILL BE CONSTRAINED BY JUST HOW MUCH PARKING AND BUILDING THE SITE CAN PHYSICALLY HOLD SO WHAT YOU ARE SEEING THERE IS NOT A DEPICTION OF 4000 OR 4250 BUT A BUILDING COULD GO HERE AND IT

CANNOT BE ANY LARGER THAN THIS. >> SO YOU ARE RESTRICTED TO THE PARKING. YOU KEEP TALKING 4000 SQUARE FEET AND THAT IS NOT

WHAT'S IN THIS. >> THE NEXT PART THOUGH, THAT GOES TO THIS IS THE BUILDING COULD ACTUALLY BE LARGER THAN 4000 SQUARE FEET OR 4250 AND HAVE AREAS THAT ARE NOT PART OF OFFICE SPACE SO STAIRWELLS AND AN ELEVATOR WHICH WOULD NOT CONTRIBUTE TO THE PARKING REQUIREMENT WOULD STILL BE REQUIRED FOR PUBLIC SAFETY AND A GOOD BUILD. AGAIN, THE FOOTPRINT OF THE BUILDING, WE REMOVED THE DIMENSIONS AND TOOK THAT FROM BEING CONFUSING AND CONSTRAINING SO IF WE SAID, THIS IS A 2000 SQUARE FOOT FOOTPRINT OF A TWO STORY BUILDING AND NOW WE GO TO ASK AN ARCHITECT TO PUT SOMETHING HERE AND THE COUNTY SAYS IT CAN'T BE LARGER THAN THAT, SORRY. YOU ARE JUST GOING TO HAVE TO NOT HAVE AN ELEVATOR AND THAT IS WHY IT IS DEPICTED THE WAY IT IS. INSOMUCH AS THE PUD DESCRIPTION DESCRIBES THE SIZE OF THE BUILDING, THAT DRIVES IT. THE DRAWING SPECIFICALLY INDICATE SOMETHING AND WE ARE CONSTRAINED BY THAT AND WE TRIED OUR BEST TO LIMITED WHILE STILL BEING AN ACCURATE

PICTURE. IF THAT MAKES SENSE. >> I WOULD LIKE FOR THE STAFF TO TALK ABOUT THIS PCT -- PCD VERSUS BA-2 AND FUTURE SALE UNTIL THE ZONING WOULD CARRY FORWARD. THERE WERE SOME COMMENTS MADE THAT IF IT WERE PCD IT COULD BECOME SOMETHING

ELSE. >> IT CAN BECOME SOMETHING ELSE BUT IT WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE REZONING PROCESS.

>> THAT IS THE PART I WANT TO MAKE SURE EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS.

THESE DETAILS CARRY FORWARD. >> IT IS TIED TO THIS USE AND

[01:05:03]

>> WHEREAS IF IT WERE BA-2 THAT REQUIREMENT IS NOT THERE.

SOMEBODY CAN COME IN AND DO WHATEVER THEY WANTED TO WITHIN

THE BA-2 CLASSIFICATION. >> YES, SIR.

>> THE OTHER THING, I AM DISTRACTED BY THIS DISCUSSION ABOUT THE SQUARE FOOTAGE. THE IDEA THAT YOU COULD PUT MORE THAN ONE BUILDING ON THERE. I WOULD LIKE SOMEBODY TO TALK ABOUT THAT. IN BA-2. HOW ARE YOU GOING TO FIT TWO 2500 SQUARE

FOOT BUILDINGS? >> UNDER THE BA-2 CODE A BUILDING CANNOT EXCEED 2500 SQUARE FEET. IT DOES NOT STATE THAT YOU HAVE TO BE LIMITED TO ONE BUILDING ON THE SITE. YOU CAN PUT AS MANY BUILDINGS ON THE SITE. IT JUST CANNOT EXCEED 2500 SQUARE FEET WHILE ALSO MEETING THE PARKING CODE.

>> SO THE FLORIDA AREA RATIO. YOU HAVE GOT PARKING REQUIREMENTS AND RETENTION AND DRAINAGE REQUIREMENTS. THIS DRAWING THAT YOU HANDED US WITH THE BLUE LINES HAS A 1947 AND 1300. DOES NOT TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION PARKING SPACES?

>> THE ENGINEER SAYS IT DID. >> IT WAS ONE OF THE EARLIER CONCEPTS OF WHAT ALL COULD WE PUT ON HERE TO MAXIMIZE THE SQUARE FOOTAGE. GIVEN THE CONSTRAINTS THAT A SINGLE BUILDING CANNOT EXCEED 2500 SQUARE FEET AND MEET PARKING REQUIREMENTS AND THIS WAS AN EARLY CONCEPT THAT WAS DRAFTED BY THE ARCHITECT THAT SCRATCHED THAT ITCH AND NONE OF US EVER LIKED IT AND WE DID NOT WANT TO DO THIS. THIS IS WHAT WE HAVE TO

IMPROVE UPON. >> IF THIS WERE, THIS BLUE LINE, THE SITE PLAN WENT FORWARD, WILL YOU TELL ME ABOUT NOT HAVING TO COMPLY WITH THE BUFER REQUIREMENTS?

>> ACCORDING TO THE CURRENT CODE THERE ARE BUILDING SETBACKS ALONG THE NORTH AND SOUTH PROPERTY LINES OF 25 FEET AND NO BUILDING SETBACK AND LANDSCAPE SETBACKS WITHIN THE BUILDING SETBACK AS WELL SO FROM THAT POINT IT MAKES THE MOST SENSE THAT IF I AM GOING TO MAXIMIZE THE AREA THAT WE HAVE, WE WANT TO MOVE IT AS FAR REST AS POSSIBLE. OTHERWISE I AM WASTING SPACE BETWEEN THE BUILDING AND THE NEIGHBORING PARCELS OR US-17 BY NOT BEING ABLE TO PUT THE BUILDING ANY CLOSER BUT I COULD PUT PARKING CLOSE TO THERE SO THE WAY THE ZONING ENCOURAGES DEVELOPERS TO CROWD THE PROPERTY LINE AND PUT PARKING ALONG 17.

>> SIR, JUST TO ADD TO THAT THEY WOULD BE REQUIRED TO PUT CANOPY

TREES. >> OKAY. THE LAST THING I WOULD SAY, THIS IDEA OF PUTTING WRITTEN PLAN 4250 SQUARE FEET AND I LOOK AT THIS AND IT SAYS 4000 FEET. WE IN THIS INDUSTRY, I AM IN THE DEVELOPMENTS INDUSTRY SUFFER FROM, PEOPLE QUESTION OUR INTEGRITY SOMETIME AND I AM IN THIS BUSINESS. IF YOU SHOW ME SOMETHING THAT SAYS 4000 SQUARE FEET I AM EXPECTING 4000 SQUARE FEET AND NOT SOMETHING THAT WILL BE BIGGER. I WOULD JUST ENCOURAGE YOU AS YOU MOVE FORWARD TO BE VERY SPECIFIC ABOUT WHAT YOU ARE SAYING AND COMPLY WITH IT. IF IT IS GOING TO BE 40 TO 50, 4250. IF YOU SOME SHOW ME SOMETHING THAT IS 4000 AND IT IS 4250, WE SAY WHAT? THEY CAN DO WHATEVER THEY WANT. JUST BE CLEAR WITH YOUR LANGUAGE.

>> OKAY. >> WE STILL HAVE NOT CLOSED THE

PUBLIC HEARING. >> I WAS DOING SOME WORK AND ACCORDING TO THE APPLICATION THIS IS .588 ACRES AND 25,000 OR SO SQUARE FEET AND A 40% FAR. SO, THEY CAN DO A LITTLE OVER 10,000 SQUARE FEET FOR OFFICE AND FOR SPACE ON THIS PROPERTY.

[01:10:02]

>> IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE THAT WISHES TO SPEAK ABOUT THIS? SEEING NONE I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. AND BRING IT BACK TO THE COMMITTEE. I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION. ON THEY STEPPED RIGHT UP IT SPECIFIES .88 ACRES AND ON THE APPLICATION IT SAYS

.40 ACRES. AM I MISREADING THAT? >> I THINK WE DID QUESTION THAT WITH THE AGENT AND IT WAS A RESULT OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY.

>> IT WAS THE RESULT OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY VACATION.

>> ALL RIGHT. ANY COMMENTS? >> I GUESS I CAN START IF I MAY, MR. CHAIR. A LOT OF MY QUESTIONS WERE ALREADY ADDRESSED. THE PCD AND POTENTIAL CHANGE THEREAFTER WAS ADDRESSED BY STAFF AND I APPRECIATE THAT. THE ROAD IMPROVEMENTS ALONG FRASER ROAD, I HAVE A CONCERN AND THERE WERE COMMENTS MADE THAT IS A DIRT ROAD AND PRIVATE AND THAT WAS ADDRESSED. THERE WAS THE ACCESS.

SECONDARY ACCESS OFF OF 17. ONE QUESTION THAT I DID WANT TO CLARIFY, IF I MAY, THIS SITE PLAN THAT WE HAVE RECEIVED SHOWS THAT THE BUILDING RUNS PARALLEL WITH US-17. THAT CANNOT CHANGE IF THIS GETS APPROVED. THEY CAN'T REPOSITION THE BUILDING SOMETHING ELSE ON THE SITE AS LONG AS THEY MAINTAIN PARKING

SPACES? >> THIS GRAPHIC WOULD BE TIED TO THIS PCD SO IT HAS TO BE SUBSTANTIALLY SIMILAR TO WHAT

THEY ARE PRESENTING. >> I JUST WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT THE BUILDING IS NOT GOING TO SHIFT TO THE WEST SIDE OR NORTH

SIDE. >> THE ONLY OTHER CLARIFICATION WOULD BE, BECAUSE THERE HAS BEEN SOME MIXED MESSAGING, ANY MOTION, AND I AM HAPPY TO MAKE THE MOTION, I WANT TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE STAFF REPORT BUT WE NEED TO CLARIFY IT IS A 4000 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING AND IT CAN GO LESS THAN BUT IT CANNOT GO ABOVE THAT. THAT WOULD BE MY ONLY CLARITY.

>> I WILL SECOND THE MOTION. >> A MOTION ON THE FLOOR HAS BEEN SECONDED. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION?

>> I WOULD LIKE TO THANK THE RESIDENTS OF FRASER ROAD FOR BEING HERE. I LIVE IN AN AREA THAT HAS BEEN SUBJECTED TO A LOT OF GROWTH AND WE FOUGHT IT AND TRIED TO ACCOMMODATE SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WERE DONE TO MINIMIZE THE IMPACT AND THE TRUTH IS, ON THIS ONE, I DO FEEL LIKE THE DEVELOPER, THEY HAVE BEEN REJECTED TWICE I THINK AND THEY HAVE GONE BACK AND COME BACK AND THERE IS ALWAYS A CAVEAT THAT YOU CAN SAY NO 100 TIMES. YOU ONLY HAVE TO SAY ONCE -- SAY YES ONCE SO WHEN YOU HAVE A PLAN THAT APPEARS TO ADDRESS NOT ALL BUT A LOT OF THE CONCERNS, THE ADDITIONAL BUFFERING THAT IS NOT REQUIRED, THE OPAQUE BARRIER. THE REMOVAL OF MEDICALS FROM THE OFFICES BECAUSE IF YOU LOOK AT BA-2, THERE ARE SEVERAL THINGS IN BA-2 BUT, MEDICAL BEING THE ONE. YOU HAVE SEEN THE TRAFFIC. EVERY 10 MINUTES THERE ARE PEOPLE COMING AND GOING. THIS IS MORE OF AN OFFICE ENVIRONMENT. I DON'T THINK THE TRAFFIC WILL BE THAT BAD IT WILL BE WORSE THAN WHAT YOU HAVE NOW DURING COMING AND GOING HOURS BUT, I REALLY WOULD HAVE OBJECTED TO THIS BEFORE. I AM STILL NOT 100 % BEHIND IT BUT AS LONG AS IT INCLUDES THE LIMIT OF 4000 FEET. THIS SITE PLAN IS PART OF THE ORDINANCE. A LOT OF TIMES WE GET CONCEPTUAL PLANS AND WHAT IS BUILT IS COMPLETELY DIFFERENT BECAUSE WE HAVE THESE PCD THAT ONLY HAVE WRITTEN

[01:15:07]

>> MR. CHAIR . >> AS I UNDERSTAND, THE WAY THAT THE PARKING SPACES ARE CALCULATED, IT IS LEAVING SQUARE FOOTAGE. WHERE BODIES ARE GOING TO OCCUPY. BODIES DON'T OCCUPY ELEVATORS AND STAIRWELLS. WE ARE SPLITTING HAIRS NOW. I THINK THE INTENT IS THE PARKING SPACES ARE LAID OUT AND I WOULD MAYBE TO DEFER TO THE CIVIL ENGINEER AND SAY, 4000 SQUARE FOOT OF WORKABLE SPACE IS ALLOWABLE. IF THE BOARD WANTS TO CAP IT AT 4000, THAT IS THE BOARDS OPTION. I UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY ARE TRYING TO DO AND I AM PROBABLY NOT DESCRIBING IT VERY WELL.

>> SO THE BUILDING CAN BE LARGER.

>> YES. >> WE ARE DONE.

>> MR. CHAIR. THERE HAS TO BE A TERM FOR -- AND LIVING SPACE.

THERE HAS TO BE SOME TERM. >> GROSS SQUARE FOOTAGE.

>> GROSS SQUARE FOOTAGE IS THE TERM?

>> I WOULD LIKE IT TO SAY 4000 GROSS SQUARE FOOTAGE. IF YOU ARE

OKAY WITH THAT . >> I AM FINE WITH THAT.

>> ANY OTHER COMMENTS? >> CAN I ASK ANOTHER QUESTION? JENNI, IF PROPERTY IS SOLD UNDER THE CURRENT ZONING WE ARE TRYING TO DO HERE, THE APPLICANT RIGHT NOW IS SAYING HE WILL OCCUPY THE BUILDING HIMSELF FOR THE BUSINESS. IF THAT PROPERTY IS SOLD UNDER THIS ZONING, CAN A COMPANY OR PERSON BUYING THIS PROPERTY, CAN THEY DIVIDE THAT HOLDING UP AND RENT OUT UNITS IN THAT BUILDING? CAN IT BECOME A MULTIPLE --

>> FOR ADDITIONAL CPA OFFICES? >> NO .

>> IT WOULD HAVE TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE USES AND

APPROVALS TIED TO IT. >> SO ONLY A CPA CAN GO IN

THERE? >> I'M GOING TO DISAGREE WITH THAT BECAUSE IT SAYS THE PROPOSED PCD IS PROFESSIONAL OFFICES HAVING GROSS FLOOR AREA -- SO AS LONG AS IT IS PROFESSIONAL OFFICES, THEY CAN DO THAT BUT, THEY ARE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO PUT. I DON'T SEE THE ISSUE.

>> MY CONCERN IS, BUILDING THE OFFICE BUILDING THAT I AM IN, THERE ARE MULTIPLE BUSINESSES IN THAT BUILDING. THE PARKING AREA IS A CERTAIN SIZE. IF THAT BUILDING IS SOLD AND AN OCCUPANT COMES IN OR THE OWNER COMES IN AND WANTS TO DIVIDE THAT UP INTO MULTIPLE OFFICES WITH 16 PARKING SPACES, WHAT HAPPENS WITH THE

OVERFLOW. >> IT IS THE SAME AMOUNT.

>> BUT WHAT HAPPENS IF A BUSINESS COMES IN THERE AND THEY

[01:20:03]

>> THAT IS WHAT I AM SAYING. AS THE ZONING CHIEF I WOULD LOOK AT -- THAT IS INTENDED WITH THIS PCD SPECIFICALLY AND IF OTHER PIECES WANTED TO COME IN UNDER THIS PCD I WOULD SAY YOU DON'T THERE. THEY WOULD HAVE TO AMEND THE PUD AND COME BACK TO DO WHAT

THIS APPLICANT IS DOING. >> OKAY.

>> ANY OTHER COMMENTS? OKAY. WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE FLOOR THAT HAS BEEN AMENDED. CALL FOR A VOTE. THOSE IN FAVOR?

>> AYE . >> OPPOSED?

>> AYE. >> MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU,

[2.  Public Hearing to consider COMP 25-0006 and ZON 25-0005 (District 4, Comm. Condon) (J. Bryla)]

>> CHAIR, BEFORE I BEGIN THE PRESENTATION I BELIEVE THE APPLICANT WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A REQUEST.

>> YES . >> I AM FRANK MILLER AND MY ADDRESS IS ONE INDEPENDENT DRIVE SUITE 2300 IN JACKSONVILLE. THE APPLICANT HAS HEARD FROM THE COMMUNITY ADVISORY COMMITTEE AND IN VIEW OF THEIR COMMENTS, THEY WOULD LIKE TO ASK FOR A CONTINUANCE TO ALLOW US TO REVIEW, DIGEST, AND EVALUATE

THOSE COMMENTS. >> OKAY. SO, IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING WE HAVE TO HAVE A VOTE ON THAT BUT THOSE THAT ARE HERE TO SPEAK ON THAT WILL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO THAT OR THEY CAN DEFER UNTIL IT COMES BACK THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

WHAT IS YOUR DEFERRAL REQUEST? >> TO THE FIRST TUESDAY OF JUNE.

>> OR SOON AFTER. >> OR SOON AFTER. DO WE VOTE ON THAT FIRST? OKAY. I HAVE SEVERAL CARDS ON THIS ONE. I WILL GO THROUGH THE NAMES AND YOU CAN CHOOSE TO EITHER SPEAK NOW OR YOU CAN DEFER UNTIL MR. MILLER COMES BACK IN JUNE. JUNE 3RD.

AND YOU CAN ALSO SPEAK AS WELL. OR YOU CAN WAIT UNTIL JUNE 3RD.

THE FIRST NAME I HAVE IS BRITT --. DO YOU WANT TO SPEAK NOW OR

DEFER? >> I WILL DIFFER.

>> SCOTTY. >> I

>> MR. ROCKENBOCK. >> I OWN THE PROPERTY THAT IS IN FRONT OF WHERE THEY WANT TO -- AND WHERE THE 16.634 ACRES ARE.

>> WOULD YOU GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.

>> BEN ROCKENBOCK, 3771 MAIN STREET . I AM QUESTIONING BECAUSE THE 16.34 ACRES THAT THEY ARE WANTING TO REDEVELOP, I OWN THE PROPERTY IN THE FRONT THAT IS ON THE CORNER OF PINETREE AND 218 AND MR. SCHAFER, WHO IS ALSO ONE OF MY CLIENTS OWNS THE TWO BRICK HOUSES THAT ARE THERE WHERE PUBLIX ROAD COMES OUT IF YOU ARE AWARE OF IT. THAT ROAD IS A HAZARD. THE TWO BRICK HOUSES, A CAR WENT THROUGH ONE OF THEM, UNFORTUNATELY. LUCKILY NOBODY WAS IN IT. MR. SCHAFER OWNS THE TWO BRICK HOUSES AND I OWN ALL THE WAY TO PINETREE SO THE 16 ACRES BEHIND US, THAT PROPERTIES SLOPES AND COMES DOWN TO A DITCH THAT COMES THROUGH THE COUNTY AND THE COUNTY ACTUALLY MAINTAINS. THEY ARE GOING TO FLOOD MY PROPERTY EVEN MORE IF I ALLOW THAT 16 ACRES TO BE DEVELOPED. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE DEVELOPER TO BE ABLE TO LOOK AT THAT BECAUSE THAT ALSO GOES

[01:25:01]

FINALLY ENDED UP TAKING OUT THE RETENTION POND, WHICH THEY FIXED THERE AT 218 ACROSS FROM CVS BECAUSE CVS AND WALGREENS HAVE WATER ALL AROUND. MY PROBLEM IS IF YOU TAKE THIS 16 ACRES, WHERE ARE THEY GOING TO TAKE THAT WATER? THAT WATER AND THE WAY THAT LAND SLOPES GOES RIGHT INTO MY PROPERTY SO YOU JUST FLOODED MY PROPERTY COMPLETELY. I HAVE HERE, I CAN SHOW YOU THREE OF THE PARCELS ARE BA-2. 1.81 ACRES IS BA-2 AND SIX ACRES IS AR AND THAT BACKS UP TO THE TOWNSEND PROPERTY. THE TOWNSEND PROPERTY COMES STRAIGHT DOWN AND THERE IS A DITCH THAT RUNS THROUGH HERE AND THIS IS WHERE THE DITCH RUNS THROUGH THAT GOES UNDERNEATH BLANDING BOULEVARD THAT COMES OUT TO THE RETENTION POND AT BLACK CREEK. I HAVE AN ISSUE ONLY BECAUSE THEY HAVE NOT ADDRESSED, IF YOU ARE GOING TO GIVE THEM A PERMIT TO BE ABLE TO PUT THAT HOUSING DEVELOPMENT, WHERE IS THE STORM WATER GOING TO GO? IT IS GOING TO COME ONTO MY PROPERTY BECAUSE OF THE WAY IT SLOPES. YOU JUST DECREASED MY COMMERCIAL VALUE WHICH IS THREE ACRES ON PUBLIX ROAD AND 1.9 ACRES. MR. SCHAFER, WHO IS SITTING IN THE ROOM WITH ME RIGHT NOW OWNS THREE OF THE ACRES. AND HE IS ALSO REGISTERED. BECAUSE, WE HAD THIS TO BE DEVELOPED BUT NOW THAT YOU ARE TELLING ME YOU'RE GOING TO PUT A SUBDIVISION BACK THERE OR HOUSING, DEPENDING ON WHAT TYPE IN, WHERE IS THE WATER GOING TO GO? IT IS GOING TO COME DOWN THAT AND GO THROUGH THAT GOALIE. YOU CAN SEE THAT.

>> LET'S WIND IT UP PLEASE. >> THAT IS FINE. THAT IS ALL I

HAVE TO SAY. >> THANK YOU. THEY POSTPONED AND

I HAVE A PROBLEM. >>

>> YES, SIR. >> WITH THE PERMISSION OF THE CHAIR IT IS A BIT OUT OF THE ORDINARY, MR. ROCKENBOCK, MR. MILLER, I WOULD RECOMMEND MEETING WITH THEM. THEY HAVE ASKED FOR DEFERMENT. IF IT IS DEFERRED BY THE BOARD I WOULD RECOMMEND YOU MEET WITH THEM AND TALK ABOUT YOUR CONCERNS SO THAT MAYBE SOME OF THIS CAN GET HAMMERED OUT.

>> I APPRECIATE THAT.

>> THE NEXT CARD I HAVE IS CHRIS --. DIFFER? AND JOE SCHAFER. DO

YOU WANT TO SPEAK NOW OR DEFER? >> THE FOLKS ON THE OTHER CASE HAD THIS. I HAVE A PICTURE ON MY PHONE. CAN I SURE THIS?

>> CAN YOU GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.

>> JASON SCHAFER COUNTY ROAD 218 AND --. CAN I SHOW YOU ALL THIS PICTURE? MY ISSUE THAT I HAVE -- MY ISSUE IS I HAVE UP TO NINE WRECKS PER YEAR IN MY YARD AND BOTH OF MY HOUSES HAVE BEEN HIT AND ONE HAS BEEN TOTALED BY A CAR GOING THROUGH IT. THE FIRST

[01:30:06]

DOWN IN MY YARD. >> CAN YOU GET IN FRONT OF THE MICROPHONE. THE RECORDER IS NOT PICKING YOU UP.

>> I AM CONCERNED WITH THE TRAFFIC. I AM NOT OPPOSED TO SELLING OR DEVELOPING PROPERTY. I HOPE MY NEIGHBORS DO SELL IT AND DEVELOP IT. I WANT TO SELL MY PLACE AND LEAVE BECAUSE I AM, BOTH HOUSES HAVE BEEN RUN THROUGH BY DRIVERS. CARS TOTALLY IN THEM AND THE COUNTY NEEDS TO DO SOMETHING ON MY CORNER OR I AM GOING TO GET KILLED BECAUSE THEY HAVE DESTROYED A HOUSE, THE TRUCK. ONE WAS HIT TWICE AND THE OTHER ONE RAN THROUGH THE UTILITY ROOM AND DESTROYED IT AND IF I HAD NOT GONE TO WENDY'S FOR A CHEESEBURGER I WOULD BE DEAD BECAUSE THE PICKUP TRUCK WAS THROUGH THE UTILITY ROOM. I WANT TO KNOW WHAT YOU ARE GOING TO DO TO MAKE A TRAFFIC SAFETY AN ISSUE AT THAT INTERSECTION. IT HAPPENS LITERALLY ALL THE TIME. NINE WRECKS IN MY FRONT YARD WHERE THERE ARE VEHICLES FLIPPING. NOW I AM NOT EVEN BEING NOTIFIED. IF FRIENDS HAD NOT TOLD ME I WOULD HAVE THOUGHT IT WAS A HIT AND RUN. I WOULD'VE THOUGHT THEY DROVE OFF BUT THEY FLIPPED THE CAR IN MY YARD AND NOBODY TOLD ME ABOUT IT. MY ADDRESS WAS NOT ON THE ACCIDENT REPORT AND THEY WERE IN MY FRONT YARD SO I AM CALLING THIS TO YOUR ATTENTION NOW BECAUSE I AM GATHERING EVIDENCE TO FIND OUT HOW MANY WRECKS ARE TAKING PLACE ON MY PROPERTY. THERE NEEDS TO BE A BARRIER OR SOMETHING BECAUSE I AM GOING TO BE KILLED THERE. I HAVE TO SLEEP ON THE BACKEND OF MY HOUSE BECAUSE THEY HAVE HIT THE FRONT END OF IT. THEY PUT CARS TOTALLY THROUGH THEM SO THAT IS MY ONLY ISSUE AND THAT IS WHAT I WANTED TO TALK ABOUT.

I AM ALL FOR SELLING IT. I JUST WANT TO KNOW THAT YOU ARE GOING TO DO SOMETHING ABOUT THE TRAFFIC BECAUSE PEOPLE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE ROADS AND THE HAZARDS. NAME SOMEBODY ELSE THAT IS HAD THEIR HOUSE DESTROYED AND HIT BY DRIVERS WITH THE TRUCK IN THEIR FRONT YARD OR NINE WRECKS IN A YEAR IN THIS COUNTY OTHER THAN ME. IT IS A VERY DANGEROUS INTERSECTION.

>> MR. SCHAFER, MR. MILLER, DO YOU HAVE HIS NAME AND NUMBER?

>> WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON AGENDA ITEM NUMBER TWO? IF NOT I WILL BRING IT BACK TO THE COMMISSION .

>> I MOVE CONTINUANCE TO BE HEARD ON JUNE 3RD AT 5:00 ORS AS

SOON THEREAFTER AS POSSIBLE. >> ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? OKAY.

I HAVE A MOTION TO CONTINUE. THOSE IN FAVOR?

>> AYE . >> OPPOSED? THE MOTION PASSES.

>> IS THAT BOTH FOR A AND B? >> DO WE NEED TO HAVE A VOTE ON BOTH OF THEM? IS THAT A YES? SO WE NEED TO ADD A MOTION.

>> MY MOTION WAS FOR THE COMP PLAN AMENDMENT TO JUNE 3RD OR AS

SOON THEREAFTER AS POSSIBLE. >> SECOND .

>> ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE . >> AYE.

>> OPPOSED? AND THE SECOND ONE .

>> SAME MOTION FOR THE ZONING APPLICATION, ZON 25-0005.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION. THOSE IN FAVOR?

>> AYE . >> OPPOSED? MOTION PASSES.

[3.  Public Hearing to consider ZON 24-0033 (District 3, Comm. Renninger) (J. Bryla)]

[01:35:03]

>> AGAIN, JENNI BRYLA PRESENTING ZONING 24-0033 AND THIS IS LOCATED IN DISTRICT 3. IT IS A REQUEST TO CHANGE THE ZONING

FROM AGRICULTURAL/RESIDENTIAL -- >> EXCUSE ME JUST A MINUTE. MR. MILLER, IF YOU HAVE DISCUSSION, PLEASE TAKE THAT OUT TO THE HALLWAY. THANK YOU.

>> AS I WAS SAYING THIS IS A REQUEST TO CHANGE THE ZONING FROM AR, AGRICULTURAL/RESIDENTIA L TO RD-4, MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO PROVIDE A 52 UNIT TOWNHOME COMMUNITY. AS YOU CAN SEE BY THE AERIAL THAT THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED ON, BETWEEN LANDING BOULEVARD TO THE WEST AND MOODY AVENUE TO THE SOUTHEAST. THE GRAPHIC ON THE RIGHT INDICATES THAT THE PARCELS THAT WERE NOTIFIED ABOUT THE PROJECT AND THE CURRENT ZONING OF AR, AGRICULTURAL/RESIDENTIAL IS LIKELY WHAT OUR PLANS WERE IN THE AREA BUT AS IT DEVELOPMENT HAS ENSUED THE AR TRANSITIONED INTO COMMERCIAL AND HIGHER DENSITY RESIDENTIAL ZONED PROPERTIES. THE GRAPHIC ON THE RIGHT SHOWS THE PROPOSED ZONING IS CONSISTENT WITH THE OTHER RD DISTRICTS. YOU CAN SEE IN THE GRAPHIC ON THE LEFT THAT THE AR, THERE ARE STILL AREAS OF AGRICULTURAL/RESIDENTIAL THAT REQUIRE HIGHER ACREAGES PEARL LOT BUT IT APPEARS THAT THOSE MIGHT BE SPLITS AS THOSE LOTS ARE SMALLER AS WELL. SO STAFF DID ANALYZE THE ESSENTIAL ELEMENTS OF THE REZONING AND FOUND IT WAS CONSISTENT WITH THE INFILL POLICIES OF THE COUNTY. SO THE FUTURE LAND USE WILL NOT CHANGE. THIS ALLOWS FOR 10 UNITS AND AS I SHARED THIS IS CONSIDERED AN INFILL DEVELOPMENT. THIS PROJECT IS PROPOSING NINE UNITS WHICH IS UNDER THE MAXIMUM. SO THERE IS NO CAC FOR THIS AREA OF THE COUNTY AND THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING 52 TOWNHOMES FOR A DENSITY OF NINE UNITS TO THE ACRE AND STAFF DID FIND THE CRITERIA HAS BEEN MET AND STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF 24-0033 AND I AM HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY

QUESTIONS. >> ANY QUESTIONS FROM STAFF?

>> I JUST WANT TO CONFIRM. THE ACCESS IS ON TWELVE OAKS DRIVE?

>> YES, SIR. >> BACK GATE IS AT THE END OF TWELVE OAKS. IT IS A GREAT LOT BUT, THAT IS THE ENTRANCE.

>> THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN IS IN YOUR REPORT. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE HAD A CHANCE TO LOOK AT IT.

>> THERE IS NO REQUIREMENT FOR ALTERNATE ACCESS BECAUSE OF THE

NUMBER OF UNITS? >> THAT IS MY UNDERSTANDING.

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? IS THE APPLICANT HERE?

>> MR. CHAIRMAN. MY NAME IT IS MIKE HERZBERG AND I AM NOT THE APPLICANT BUT IM HERE IN PLACE OF FOLKS HUXFORD AND I WILL BE SPEAKING ABOUT THE PROJECT . THIS IS A 5.7 ACRE PROPERTY. I WANTED TO POINT OUT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS URBAN CORE. SO THIS IS INTENDED FOR HIGHER DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE COMMUNITY. 52 TOWNHOMES WOULD BE PROPOSED AND US STAFF NOTES -- AS STAFF NOTES THIS IS A LOGICAL

[01:40:08]

>> DO WE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? IS THERE ANYBODY

ELSE? >> I HAVE ONE. IF THIS INFILL WAS ALLOWED, TWELVE OAKS DRIVE IS PRETTY NARROW. IS THERE ANY PLAN TO HANDLE THAT ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC?

>> I THINK TWELVE OAKS IS A PRIVATE ROAD .

>> THROUGH THE CHAIR, THE ENGINEER HAS BEEN MEETING WITH THE FIRE MARSHAL AND THE STAFF SO I KNOW THEY ARE MEETING ALL OF THE CRITERIA. I CANNOT SPEAK WHAT HAS HAPPENED THUS FAR BUT I KNOW THEY ARE ADDRESSING AND SPEAKING WITH COUNTY STAFF.

>> I GUESS THE QUESTION ON THE FLOOR IS DO YOU PLAN TO MAKE ANY

IMPROVEMENTS TO THAT ROAD? >> I THINK AGAIN THEY WOULD MAKE ANY IMPROVEMENTS AS REQUIRED TO OBTAIN DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS FOR

THIS PROJECT. >> THE OTHER QUESTION, IS IT A

PRIVATE ROAD OR NOT? IT IS? >> IT IS A PRIVATE ROAD AND THEY WOULD HAVE TO OBTAIN ACCESS RIGHTS TO BE ABLE TO USE IT.

>> DO YOU HAVE THAT AS PART OF YOUR PLAN?

>> I DO NOT HAVE THAT INFORMATION IN FRONT OF ME, MR. CHAIR. I AM HAPPY TO REACH OUT TO THE ENGINEER AND ASK THAT BUT I WOULD ASSUME WE HAVE MADE THAT OTHERWISE THE APPLICANT SPENT QUITE A BIT OF MONEY HIRING ENGINEERS AND STAFF TO LOOK AT

THAT. >> OKAY. ANY QUESTIONS? THANK

YOU. >> IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS AGENDA ITEM? SEEING NONE I WILL NOT OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. I WILL JUST BRING IT BACK TO THE COMMISSIONERS. I HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING. DOES ANYBODY WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? NONE. I CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

>> THIS IS ACTUALLY MY NEIGHBORHOOD SO, I AM FAMILIAR WITH IT. I WILL GIVE YOU SOME INFORMATION THAT IT SEEMS LIKE THERE IS SOME SPECULATION. IT IS URBAN CORE 10 AND IF YOU GET JUST A LITTLE SOUTH OF THIS THERE IS STILL AN AWFUL LOT OF AR THAT SITS IN URBAN CORE 10 WHICH WOULD NEVER BE APPROPRIATE TO BE DONE AT A HIGHER DENSITY HOWEVER THIS PARTICULAR LOT IS SURROUNDED BY A LOT OF RB AND OTHER DENSITY. THE PS ONE TO THE SOUTH IS A CHURCH THAT SITS ON MOODY ROAD SO IT IS PROBABLY AN APPROPRIATE PLACE TO DO THIS KIND OF DEVELOPMENT. TWO CONCERNS. ONE IS TWELVE OAKS IS A PRIVATE ROAD AND I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHAT WOULD BE HAPPENING WITH THAT. IT IS NARROW AND I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE EVER BEEN DOWN TWELVE OAKS BUT I USED TO KNOW SOMEBODY THAT LIVED BACK IN THERE. IT IS NOT A VERY LONG ROAD AND IT HAS GOT, I THINK THEY ARE CONDOS. ON BOTH SIDES THERE ARE A BUNCH OF CONDOS. THAT IS WHAT IS ON TWELVE OAKS.

JUST BEFORE YOU GO ONTO THIS PROPERTY THERE ARE TWO OR THREE SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES. THAT IS ALL THAT IS ON THAT ROAD. THEN YOU GO INTO THIS PARCEL HERE. YOU KNOW, THE BIGGEST CONCERN WOULD BE -- I AM PRETTY SURE THAT TWELVE OAKS -- COURTNEY MAYBE YOU CAN ANSWER -- THE GENTLEMAN WHO OWNS THAT PROPERTY NOW USES TWELVE OAKS AND HE HAS ACCESS RIGHTS DOWN TWELVE OAKS NOW. IF IT IS DEVELOPED, WOULD HE HAVE TO GET NEW PERMISSION? OR DOES THE PERMISSION TO ACCESS FOLLOW THE PROPERTY? DID I MAKE MY

[01:45:01]

QUESTION CLEAR ENOUGH? OKAY. >> I DON'T KNOW WHAT HIS SPECIFIC ACCESS RIGHTS MAY BE BUT I BELIEVE UNDER OUR REQUIREMENTS AND OUR CODE WE WILL REQUIRE SOMETHING SPECIFIC SINCE IT IS A PRIVATE ROAD. THERE HAS TO BE SOMETHING IN WRITING. WE WON'T JUST ALLOW SOMETHING THAT YES, I HAVE ACCESS. THAT IS WHAT WE HAVE DONE ON OTHER PROJECTS. THEY

HAVE TO HAVE AN EASEMENT. >> SO, THE CURRENT PROPERTY OWNER HAS EITHER WRITTEN OR MORE LIKELY JUST GRANDFATHERED IN

STUFF. >> YES.

>> BECAUSE HIS PROPERTY IS GOING TO CHANGE HANDS AND USES, WHATEVER HIS ARRANGEMENT IS DOES NOT FOLLOW THE PROPERTY.

>> I DON'T KNOW THAT FOR SURE BECAUSE IT DEPENDS ON WHAT THE ARRANGEMENT IS. I JUST KNOW THROUGH DRC THEY WILL REQUIRE

THAT. >> LET'S JUST SAY THEY DID NOT GET THAT PERMISSION AND IF REZONING IS CHANGED I JUST GOT A PIECE OF PROPERTY THEY CAN'T DO ANYTHING WITH IT.

>> IT WOULD NOT MAKE IT THROUGH DRC WITHOUT APPROVAL.

>> WITH THE ZONING WOULD CHANGE .

>> RIGHT. >> SO SOMEBODY WOULD COME BACK AND GET DIFFERENT ZONING OR THEY WOULD HAVE TO FIGURE OUT A WAY TO GET OUT OF THERE. WE NEED TO THINK ABOUT IT. THERE IS SOMETHING ON THIS MAP THAT I WAS WONDERING ABOUT. THERE IS SOMETHING THAT LOOKS LIKE A RIGHT-OF-WAY OR MAYBE IT IS JUST AN EASEMENT BUT IT COMES OFF OF MOODY AVENUE.

>> WHICH MAP, SIR? >> I'M NOT SURE IF IT IS REALLY CLEAR. IF YOU LOOK WHERE THE CHURCHES, PS ONE, THERE IS A LOT TO THE SOUTH AND A LONG SKINNY SOMETHING THAT GOES UP AND OVER NEXT TO THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY. DO YOU KNOW IF THAT IS AN

EASEMENT? OR WHAT THAT IS? >> IRONICALLY ENOUGH I DID LOOK AT THAT PROPERTY WHEN I WAS ANALYZING THIS SITE AND IT IS SEPARATELY OWNED. IT IS PRIVATELY OWNED.

>> OKAY. THAT'S ALL I HAVE HERE.

>> I KNOW WHAT IT IS. >> YES, SIR?

>>

RECORD? >> CAN YOU COME UP AND IDENTIFY YOURSELF SO WE CAN GET THIS ON THE RECORD. DID YOU TAKE THE OATH? SPECTER YOU SOLEMNLY SWEAR OR AFFIRM THE TESTIMONY YOU ARE ABOUT TO GIVE IS THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE

TRUTH? >> YES .

>> I AM TIM CRIPPS AND I LIVE -- THAT IS RIGHT BEHIND MY HOUSE AND THERE IS A BUFFER THERE. I AM HERE TO MAKE SURE THAT BUFFER IS GOING TO STAY THERE AND IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS. IT USED TO BE A ROAD BUT HE NEVER LEFT IT WIDE ENOUGH TO BE A ROAD SO IT IS DEAD SPACE. NOBODY CAN BUILD ON IT OR DO ANYTHING BUT GIVES ME A BIT A GOOD BUFFER. I LIVE RIGHT, WHERE THAT LITTLE PIECE ENDS, MY NEXT-DOOR NEIGHBOR OWNS IT. MINUS THE VERY FIRST HOUSE RIGHT THERE. I CAN SEE EVERYTHING THAT IS GOING TO BE BUILT THERE AND THAT IS WHY I'M HERE JUST TO SEE WHERE THE BUFFER IS. IT IS JUST A DEAD SPACE AND NOBODY CAN DO ANYTHING WITH IT. IT IS JUST AN EASEMENT OR WHATEVER. THERE IS NOTHING ANYBODY CAN DO WITH

IT. >> THANK YOU.

>> ANY OTHER COMMENTS? THE ONLY COMMENT I HAVE IS ARE WE PULLING THE TRIGGER ON THIS TOO SOON? WE ARE GETTING READY TO APPROVE A PIECE OF LAND LOCKED PROPERTY. AND CHANGE THE ZONING ON IT. IF IT IS LANDLOCKED YOU HAVE TO GET ACCESS TO THE -- LEGALLY, I GUESS. BUT, AT THIS MOMENT, HE DOES NOT HAVE IT.

>> I THINK I WOULD ASK -- IF THIS IS ONE OF THE STEPS ALONG THE WAY. I WOULD MAYBE JUST OFFER --

>> I DON'T THINK WE NEED TO DO FOR THIS. I THINK THIS IS GOING TO BE ON THE APPLICANT. I AM 100% CONFIDENT THEY HAVE VETTED THIS BUT UNFORTUNATELY, MIKE HERZBERG DOES NOT HAVE THIS. I HAVE NOT TALKED TO MIKE HERZBERG IN QUITE SOME TIME BUT WE GO WAY

[01:50:06]

CENTS. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?

>> I WILL MAKE THE MOTIONS. I VOTE THAT WE APPROVE THE STAFF

REPORT. >> I WILL SECOND.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE

. >> AYE .

>> OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. OKAY. GOOD LUCK. WE ARE DOWN TO PUBLIC

[4.  Public Hearing to consider ZON 25-0012 (District 1, Comm. Sgromolo) (J.Bryla)]

>> JENNI BRYLA, ZONING CHIEF HERE TO PRESENT THE REZONING OF 25-0012 TO ACCOMMODATE A CONVENIENCE STORE WITH GAS PUMPS. SO, THIS IS IN DISTRICT 1 AND THIS CONSISTS OF TWO PARCELS TOTALING 2.61 ACRES AND THE REQUEST IS TO CHANGE THE EXISTING ZONING OF BA-2 AND PCD TO BA TO ACCOMMODATE GAS. THEY WANT THESE BOTH CHANGED TO BA OR NEIGHBORHOOD BUSINESS DISTRICT.

HERE YOU CAN SEE THE AERIAL. THE PARCELS ARE LOCATED AT THE INTERSECTION OF COLLEGE ROAD AND 220. THE GRAPHIC ON THE RIGHT ILLUSTRATES THE PARCELS THAT MAKE UP THE PROJECT. THE CURRENT ZONING AS MENTIONED, THE PARCEL FOR THIS TO THE WEST IS BA-2 WHICH IS TYPICALLY OFFICE AND TO THE EAST IT IS ZONED PCD COMMERCIAL TO ALLOW FOR A COMMERCIAL ICEMAKER ON THE PROPERTY. HISTORICALLY. AND THERE YOU CAN SEE THEY WOULD BOTH BE REZONED TO BA-2 TO ALLOW FOR UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR BOTH PARCELS. THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE TWO LOTS WE CREATE A UNIFIED DEVELOPMENT PLAN WITH CONSISTENT ZONING AND LAND USE ACROSS THE LOT. I DID REVIEW THE EIGHT CRITERIA AND FOUND THAT THE REQUEST WAS CONSISTENT WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. AND AGAIN, THERE IS NO CAC -- FOR THIS AREA. AND STAFF DID FIND THAT THE ZONING MET THE CRITERIA AND THEREFORE RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF 25-0012. I AM HAPPY TO ANSWER

ANY QUESTIONS. >> QUESTIONS FROM STAFF?

>> I HAVE ONE QUESTION. >> YES, SIR.

>> DID THE STAFF INVESTIGATION TALK TO THE SCHOOL BOARD REPRESENTATIVES? THE SCHOOL IS RIGHT NEXT -- ALL OF THE WALKING TRAFFIC THAT GOES RIGHT ACROSS 220.

>> NO, SIR, I DID NOT REACH OUT TO THE SCHOOL BOARD INDIVIDUALLY

BUT, PAUL IS HERE TO RESPOND. >> ZONING CHANGE NOTICE IN THE MAIL AND I REVIEWED THOSE AND CONSIDERED THAT AND I FEEL THERE IS NO RISK.

>> SO YOU DO NOT? >> I DO NOT.

[01:55:02]

>> OKAY. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY. IS THE APPLICANT HERE? YOU ARE UP AGAIN.

>> MY NAME AGAIN IS FRANK MILLER AND I AM 1 INDEPENDENT DRIVE SUITE 300 IN JACKSONVLLE. THE GOAL HERE IS TO REESTABLISH THIS CORNER AS A 711 WITH GAS PUMPS SPECIFICALLY RIGHT NOW, 711. IF YOU ARE FAMILIAR WITH THE CORNER IT HAS GOT PRICES. A FOOD STORE AND I THINK A TATTOO PARLOR THERE ON THE CORNER. AS YOU MOVE ALONG COUNTY ROAD 220 TO THE WEST IS A RESIDENCE THAT IS IN THE COMMERCIAL LAND USE CATEGORY AND THE GOAL IS TO CHANGE THE ZONING TO BA WHICH WOULD ALLOW A CONVENIENCE STORE AND SALE OF ALCOHOL OFF -- FOR OFF PREMISE CONSUMPTION. THE DESIGN RIGHT NOW, AND I DON'T HAVE THE ÚAUTHORITY TO PRESENT THIS TO YOU, BUT JUST SO YOU KNOW BECAUSE IT IS OFTEN A QUESTION, THE DESIGN WOULD BE WITH SEVEN DOUBLE PUMPS WHERE IT IS BOTH SIDES AND ABOUT A 4800 SQUARE FOOT CONVENIENCE STORE BUILDING.

THE PLAN WOULD HAVE A 25 FOOT SETBACK AND THERE IS A PARCEL BETWEEN THIS PARCEL AND THE SCHOOL SO, I THINK I MEASURED SOMETHING LIKE ALONG THE ROAD I THINK IT IS OVER 500 FEET ON THE BACKSIDE IT MIGHT BE HALF OF THAT. SO IT IS NOT IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO THE SCHOOL PROPERTY. THERE WILL BE A RIGHT IN AND WRITE OUT. ON COLLA DRIVE COMING SOUTH AND THERE WILL BE RIGHT IN AND THEY WRITE OUT BECAUSE YOU WILL NOT BE ABLE TO CROSS COLLEGE AND THERE WILL ALSO BE A RIGHT IN AND RIGHT OUT ACROSS 220 BECAUSE YOU WILL NOT BE ABLE TO CROSS 220 AND TURN AND GO EAST. THE DESIGN WOULD ALSO CERTAINLY MEET THE FIRE REQUIREMENTS AND THE OTHER CRITERIA FOR DEVELOPMENT AND THE PLAN HAS ABOUT 25% OPEN SPACE ON IT. I THINK THIS IS A GOOD THING AND I THINK IT CLEANS UP THE CORNER. ACROSS THE STREET IS ANOTHER GAS STATION AND IT IS A COMMERCIAL NOTE AND WE DID REVIEW THE COLORS DRIVE INITIATIVE. I THINK THAT IS WHAT IT IS CALLED. AND THEY ARE WANTING ANYTHING THAT WE SAW IN IT THAT WOULD AFFECT THIS, WILL HAVE SIDEWALKS ALONG 220 AND ACTUALLY THERE IS AN EXISTING SIDEWALK ON COLLEGE BUT IT WILL PROBABLY BE RELOCATED. RIGHT NEXT TO THE STREET AND IT MAY BE WIDENED. BUT WE WILL SATISFY THE CRITERIA BUT UNDER THE COLORS DRIVE INITIATIVE WE DID NOT SEE ANYTHING THAT WOULD SPEAK NEGATIVELY FOR THIS REQUEST. SO, WE URGE YOU TO BLESS IT AND WE THANK STAFF FOR THEIR RECOMMENDATION AND I WOULD BE

HAPPY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS. >> ANY QUESTIONS OF THE

APPLICANT? >> WILL THEY BE DEMOLISHING THE CURRENT CONVENIENCE STORE THAT IS THERE NOW?

>> YES. >> WHAT ABOUT THE ICEMAKER?

>> YES . >> HOW FAR BACK DOES THE PROPERTY GO? DOES IT GO BACK TO WHERE THE TATTOO PROPERTY IS?

>> YES . >> SO THAT WILL BE GONE?

>> YES. >> DO THEY GO ALL THE WAY BACK TO WHERE THE ASSISTED LIVING IS? DOES THAT PROPERTY GO BACK THAT

FAR? >> I BELIEVE IT DOES. IF YOU LOOK AT THE MAP, THE ONE JUST TO THE NORTH OF THAT, THAT IS WHERE THE SENIOR LIVING CENTER IS. THE BIG SQUARE JUST TO THE NORTH OF THAT ONCOLOGIST WHAT YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT. I DRIVE BY IT ALL THE TIME AND I DON'T REMEMBER THE NAME OF IT BUT IT IS THE

SENIOR LIVING. >> SO, WHAT IS THE DISTANCE FOR SELLING ALCOHOL TO A SCHOOL PROPERTY?

>> I DON'T BELIEVE FOR OFF-SITE CONSUMPTION WE HAVE ANYTHING IN

[02:00:02]

THE CODE. >> OKAY. THAT WOULD BE MY ONLY

OTHER CONCERN. >> I KNOW IT IS A CONVENIENCE

STORE NOW. >> WE ALWAYS CALLED IT -- MALL BECAUSE YOU COULD BUY ANYTHING IN THERE. IT WILL BE A LOT OF

DIFFERENT RETAIL SINCE THEN >> YOU COULD BUY GUNS,

AMMUNITION AND FOOD. >> DO YOU KNOW IF THE OLD POST OFFICE STUFF IS STILL IN THERE? OR WAS IT REMOVED?

>> I DON'T KNOW. I AM SORRY. >> MY REASON FOR ASKING THAT QUESTION TO YOUR CLIENT IS, YOU KNOW IN THE BACK CORNER, IT WAS THE -- AND I MEAN, I USE THAT POST OFFICE WHEN I FIRST MOVED THERE. IT WAS STILL OPEN. AND IT HAD THE LITTLE PO BOXES AND YOU COULD MAIL PARCELS AND GET STAMPS AND ALL THAT KIND OF STUFF. IF THAT IS STILL IN THE BACK CORNER OF THAT STORY IT WOULD SURE BE NICE TO GIVE THE HISTORICAL SOCIETY THE OPPORTUNITY TO SALVAGE THAT BEFORE THE WRECKING BALL HITS THAT BUILDING. THAT IS A PIECE OF HISTORY.

>> I WILL RELAY THAT. >> I DON'T KNOW IF IT IS STILL THERE. IT MAY HAVE BEEN REMOVED AT SOME POINT.

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? THANK YOU. WE APPRECIATE IT. WE WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. SCOTTY, DO YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT THIS? SEEING NO ONE, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC

HEARING. >> MR. CHAIR I WILL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE STAFF REPORT BUT I WOULD LIKE THE

OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK. >> A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY

DISCUSSION? >> I WILL SAY THIS WITH SOME SADNESS THAT WE ARE DOING THIS BECAUSE WHEN I MOVED TO THIS COUNTY ON THAT CORNER RIGHT THERE, THE ONLY THING ON THAT CORNER WAS PRICES STORE. IT WAS THE -- POST OFFICE AND IT WAS BASICALLY A COUNTRY GENERAL STORE AT THE TIME. OVER THE YEARS MCDONALD'S HAS GONE IN ON THIS CORNER. GATES GOD THE ZONING TO PUT A CARWASH UP ACROSS THE STREET. THERE IS A CONVENIENCE STORE ON THE OTHER CORNER. IT IS COMPLETELY CHANGED. THIS IS KIND OF SAD BECAUSE IT IS A PIECE OF OLD CLAY COUNTY THAT IS GOING TO BE LOST AND ANY PIECE OF THAT, LIKE THE POST OFFICE IN THERE, IF ANY OF THAT CAN BE SALVAGED, I DON'T CARE IF THE HISTORICAL SOCIETY PUTS IN A WAREHOUSE BUT I HOPE IT IS SOMETHING THAT YOU WOULD OFFER TO LET THEM GO IN AND DO THAT BECAUSE IT CERTAINLY, LIKE I SAID, I REMEMBER WHEN THERE WAS NOTHING ON COUNTY ROAD 220 EXCEPT THIS STORED AND WHITE EASE AND BOBBY JONES. THAT WAS IT. YOU CAN DRIVE FROM US-17 AND GO WEST AND YOU WENT BY WHITE EASE, BOBBY JOE'S AND THEN -- AND PLANTATION DRIVE WAS A DIRT ROAD BACK THEN. IT IS SAD TO SEE IT GO. BUT, THERE IS NO LEGITIMATE REASON TO TRY TO HOLD ONTO IT. BUT THAT POST OFFICE WOULD BE

COOL TO KEEP. >> I HAVE A LOT OF FUNNY STORIES ABOUT THAT. THAT, IT WAS LIKE STEPPING BACK IN TIME. AND SO,

WITH THAT, ANY OTHER COMMENTS? >> I SEE YOUR PRICES STORE AND

RAISE YOU A -- GROCERY. >> DONE. ALL RIGHT, ALL THOSE IN

FAVOR OF THE MOTION? >> AYE .

>> OPPOSED? THE MOTION PASSES. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. YOU ARE DONE HEARING FROM ME TONIGHT.

>> WE ARE DONE. OUR NEXT MEETING IS JUNE 3RD.

>> WE HAVE ONE MORE PUBLIC HEARING. PUBLIC COMMENT .

>> OH, THAT IS RIGHT. >> ONE MORE PUBLIC COMMENT. I

[02:05:03]

>> ARE YOU SURE, SCOTTY? >> KEEP THE

>> THAT WAS A POST OFFICE AND TELL THE POST OFFICE OPENED ON COLLEGE DRIVE. THAT IS WHEN THEY CLOSED THAT. THE PRISON FARM WAS THERE. A LOT OF PEOPLE DON'T KNOW THAT. WHERE THE COLLEGES

TODAY, THAT WAS A PRISON FARM. >> ALL RIGHT. COMMISSIONER

BOURRE. >> DO WE STILL HAVE A CAMP -- AND HAVE THEY BEEN INVITED TO COME HERE?

>> THERE IS BUT THEY ARE ONLY INVITED WHEN THERE IS AN ISSUE.

>> HE WAS COMING PRETTY REGULARLY THEN IT STOPPED.

>> BUT IS THAT STILL THE SAME? >> I'M JUST CURIOUS. WE HAVE NOT SEEN HIM IN A LONG TIME. I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THEY HAD A

VOICE? >> SO, QUICKLY, I WANTED TO BRING EVERYONE UP TO DATE AND TALK ABOUT THE FLEMING ISLAND PRESERVE PUD. YOU HAVE UNANIMOUSLY DENIED IT. IT DID GO ON TO THE BOARD ON DECEMBER 10TH AND IT WENT ONTO THE BOARD AT THAT TIME. IT WAS DENIED THEN THE APPLICANT INITIATED A PROCESS UNDER FLORIDA STATUTE THE APPLICANT HAD INITIATED A PROCESS UNDER THE FLORIDA STATUTE CALLED THE FLORIDA LAND USE ENVIRONMENTAL DISPUTE RESOLUTION ACT WHERE A SPECIAL MAGISTRATE IS AGREED UPON AND WE WENT THROUGH THAT PROCESS WITH THEIR REQUEST FOR A REHEARING, OR JUST A REQUEST FOR THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE. AS PART OF THE STATUTORY PROCESS YOU ATTEND THE MEDIATION AND IF THAT IS NOT SUCCESSFUL YOU PROCEED TO A HEARING IN FRONT OF THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE. THE HEARING WAS HELD ON APRIL 1ST. THE MAGISTRATE RENDERED HIS OPINION ON THE VERY END OF THIS MONTH. IT WAS ACTUALLY APRIL THE 30TH. BECAUSE IT IS NOT ACTUALLY SIGNED. IT WAS THE 30TH? AND, YOU KNOW WHAT, I GRABBED THE WRONG DOCUMENT. SO, HE ENTERED HIS OPINION AND BASICALLY ON SOME PROCEDURAL ISSUES HE HAS RECOMMENDED THAT IT BE REHEARD SO, THAT RECOMMENDATION HAS TO BE BROUGHT TO SPECIAL MAGISTRATE TO THE BOARD WITHIN 45 DAYS OF THE DECISION. WE ARE LOOKING AT, WITH THE CHAIR, TO SET IT FOR CONSIDERATION AT THE BOARD MEETING NEXT WEEK. WE WON'T BE -- UNTIL THE AGENDA IS SET WHICH SHOULD BE TOMORROW. BASICALLY TO KIND OF GIVE YOU AN IDEA THE TWO PROCEDURAL ISSUES, ONE WAS THAT HE FOUND THAT THERE WAS NOT A FORMAL DISCLOSURE OF EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS SO THERE WERE CERTAIN THINGS THAT THE BCC REPRESENTATIVE FELT LIKE SHOULD HAVE BEEN DISCLOSED SO HE IS JUST ASKING WHICH THE LAW PROVIDES THAT IF YOU BELIEVE THERE IS PREJUDICE IS TO HAVE ANOTHER HEARING. THE SECOND IS REALLY AS YOU HAVE ALL SEEN, IS ONE OF THE APPLICANT MENTIONS, THE STAFF REFERS TO EIGHT CRITERIA IN THE CODE IN THE REPORT AND SO, ON TWO DIFFERENT ISSUES, ONE BELIEVES THAT THE CODE JUST SAYS MAY. HE BELIEVES IT SHOULD SAY "SHALL." IN RENDERING A DENIAL IT IS HIS OPINION THAT THE BOARD SHOULD FOLLOW THOSE EIGHT CRITERIA AND SO, STAFF MAY RECOMMEND APPROVAL AND GO THROUGH THE EIGHT WITH THE BOARD AND THE MOTION TO DENY GOES THROUGH THE EIGHT AS WELL AND SET FORTH THE EVIDENCE OF WHY THEY DESERVE THE DENIAL. AT THIS TIME I DON'T KNOW IF IT WILL COME BACK TO YOU BEFORE IT GOES BACK TO THE BOARD. THAT IS A PROCESS THAT THE BOARD WILL NEED TO DECIDE IN THEIR

[02:10:01]

>> SO, THE TIMELINE ON THIS, IT WILL GO TO THE BOARD, MAKE A DECISION THAT WILL COME BACK TO US?

>> YES. THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE WAS THE THAT IT NEEDED TO BE

INCURRED BY THE BCC. >> OKAY.

>> ANYTHING ELSE? >> NO .

>> THANK YOU . >> I DO HAVE ONE QUESTION. I KNOW ABOUT THE CRITERIA AND I KNOW ABOUT THE SUBSTANTIAL -- AND ETC. BUT THE FACT IS, IF IT WAS THAT STRAIGHTFORWARD YOU WOULDN'T NEED THIS BOARD. YOU WOULDN'T NEED THE BCC. ALL THE PLANNING STAFF WOULD HAVE TO DO IS -- AND IT IS A DONE DEAL. THE PROCESS INCLUDES A LAND PLANNING AGENCY AND IT INCLUDES THE COUNTY COMMISSION SO THERE IS SOME FLEXIBILITY IN HOW WE INTERPRET THOSE RESULTS, RIGHT?

>> YES. THE LAW IS CLEAR THAT YOU CANNOT MAINTAIN STATUS QUO AS LONG AS YOU HAVE SUBSTANTIAL --.

>> WE JUST CAN'T BE ARBITRARY.

>> YES. YEP. >> JUST BECAUSE YOU DON'T LIKE THEM, YOU CAN'T DENY IT BUT, IF HE HAS A PROJECT YOU CAN.

>> OKAY. >> YOU JUST GO THROUGH THE CRITERIA AND SHOWED SUPPORT FOR IT.

>> DO WE HAVE TO DO THAT ON ALL DENIALS GOING FORWARD?

>> THAT IS THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE OPINION. HIS OPINION WOULD HAVE TO BE THAT YOU GO THROUGH ALL OF THE CRITERIA.

>> MAY I? IF THE BOARD DOES DECIDE TO HEAR IT DO THEY DECIDE

WHETHER OR NOT TO ACCEPT IT? >> IF IT IS ON THE AGENDA, NEXT MEETING, WHICH I BELIEVE IT IS, THEIR SPECIFIC RULE IS WHETHER TO ACCEPT, DENY, OR MODIFY THE SPECIAL MAGISTRATE RECOMMENDATION SO THEY CAN EITHER ACCEPT IT AND HAVE A REHEARING OR THEY CAN DENY IT AND NOT GRANT THE REHEARING OR THEY CAN RECOMMEND A MODIFICATION.

>> IF THEY DENY IT THAN WHAT IS THE APPLICANT LEFT WITH?

>> THE APPLICANT WOULD -- NEXT DOOR.

>> THESE EIGHT CRITERIA, WOULD THAT BE PART OF THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT THING TO INCLUDE ON THEIR REPORT?

>> THAT WILL BE SOMETHING THAT I THINK -- WILL HAVE TO MAKE THE

DECISION. >> WE DO INCLUDE THOSE IN THE REPORTS THAT YOU HEARD TONIGHT.

>> THIS IS A LITTLE BIT -- ON THIS TOPIC, GOING TO ONE OF THE TRAINING SESSIONS THAT WE WENT TO ONE TIME, SOMEBODY THERE WAS FROM A DIFFERENT COUNTY SAYING THAT WHEN THEY DID THEIR STAFF REPORTS, AND WENT THROUGH THOSE CRITERIA, THEY ACTUALLY GAVE THE PLANNING COMMISSION -- AND HERE IS WHY YOU CAN SUPPORT IT AND HERE IS WHY YOU CAN'T. ACTUALLY PROVIDED THE SIDES OF IT.

>> THAT IS WHAT ST. JOHNS COUNTY DOES.

>> I KNEW IT WAS WANT OF THE COUNTIES AROUND HERE. SO WE MAY BE MAKING MORE WORK FOR STAFF. I JUST COULDN'T REMEMBER WHAT

COUNTY. >> I DON'T KNOW IF IT IS ANOTHER COUNTY BUT WE JUST KNOW THAT.

>> IT WOULD HAVE BEEN ONE OF THE NORTH COUNTIES IN THIS AREA.

THAT IS WHAT THEY DO. >> OKAY. THANK YOU. IF THERE IS

NOTHING ELSE -- >> I WOULD JUST LIKE TO SAY, THANK YOU TWO COURTNEY. ALTHOUGH YOU THINK SHE IS NOT PAYING ATTENTION, SHE CAUGHT US NOT HAVING ENOUGH MOTIONS TONIGHT

>> WE HAVE A LAWYER THAT

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.