Mar 03, 2026 Planning Commission

[Call to Order]

[00:00:05]

>> WELCOME, EVERYBODY. WELCOME TO THE MARCH 3, 2026 CLAY COUNTY PLANNING AND COMMISSION MEETING. THE MEETING IS CALLED TO ORDER. AT THIS TIME, PLEASE PUT YOUR CELL PHONES ON SILENT OR VIBRANT. YOU FLEED TO TAKE A CALL, PLEASE STEP OUTSIDE. YOU NEED TO LEAVE THE MEETING DO SO QUIETLY.

AT THIS TIME, COMMISSIONER NORTON WILL LEAD US IN THE PLEDGE.

>> PLEASE RISE. REMOVE YOUR COVERS. I PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE, TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER

GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. >> MY NAME IS PETE DAVIS.

I'M THE CHAIRMAN CLAY COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION. OTHER STAFF AT THE MEETING WE HAVE BETH CARSON. WHO A IS DIRECTOR OF PLANNING AND ZONING.

WE HAVE DOETY SELIG, OUR CHIEF PLANNER. WE ALSO HAVE JAMIE HUBDA ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY. CALEB RUSSSINGER AND REAL ESTATE.

AND OUR COUNTY MANAGER. I THINK I GOT EVERYBODY. I DON'T SEE ANYBODY ELSE.

WE LIKE TO THANK DEPUTIES ASH AND HANDEL. FROM THE CLAY COUNTY SHERIFF'S OFFICE PROVIDING SECURITY FOR THIS EVENING. MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS.

TO MY RIGHT, COMMISSIONER NORTON. COMMISSIONER RALPH PUCKHABER, COMMISSIONER MARY BRIDGMAN AND TO MY RIGHT COMMISSIONER MICHAEL BOURRE, COMMISSIONER ANZALONE WILL BE LATE. THE CLAY COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION IS ASSISTANT TO THE CLAY COUNTY BOARD COUNTY COMMERCES OR THE BCC. ALL PLANNING COMMISSIONERS ARE VOLUNTEERS, RESIDENTS OF CLAY COUNTY. WE SERVE TWO-YEAR TERMS. COMMISSIONER DUTIES ARE OUTLINED IN SECTION 163. WE HEAR APPLICATIONS OF PLAN AMENDMENTS AND REZONING. MOST OF THE DECISIONS MADE ARE RECOMMENDATION TO THE BCC.

THE BCC WILL HAVE A FINAL SAY ON SECOND TUESDAY OR THE FOURTH TUESDAY THREE WEEKS FROM TODAY.

THE BCC STARTS AT 4:00 P.M., ZONING AND LAND USE MATTERS START AT 5:00 P.M.

PLEASE CHECK THE COUNTY WEBSITE FOR SPECIFIC AS FAR AS THE AGENDA.

WE'RE ALSO WELCOME TO THE PUBLIC TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AS CITIZEN APPLICATION IS BACKBONE OF OUR FORM OF GOVERNMENT. YOUR PRESENCE HERE IS IMPORTANT.

IF THERE'S AN ITEM ON THE AGENDA YOU WISH TO SPEAK ABOUT, OR YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT DURING THE OPEN COMMENT PERIOD, PLEASE FILL OUT ONE OF THE COMMENT CARDS WHICH WILL BE FOUND IN THE ENTRY AND GIVE IT TO MS. BLANCHETT. THERE'S A THREE MINUTE TIME LIMIT.

TIME IS KEPT BY THE LIGHT ON THE PODIUM. RED LIGHT INDICATES TIME IS UP.

[1. Approval of Minutes]

NEXT ITEM IS PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD. AT THIS TIME, ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC MAY COMMENT ON ITEMS NOT INCLUDED ON THE AGENDA BUT PERTINENT TO THE BUSINESS OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION. I BELIEVE I HAVE TWO CARDS. THEY WERE MARKED PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD. MR. CHAPMAN AND MR. DEACON. IS IT MICHAEL?

[00:05:01]

MICHAEL CHAPMAN. ARE YOU HERE? I WILL CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD. NOBODY COMING FORWARD. WE WILL MOVE ON.

>> THEY MAY HAVE LEFT. >> OKAY. THEY WILL TAKE IT TO THE BCC.

ALL RIGHT. THE PROCESS SCHEDULE FOR THE SCHEDULE PART OF THE MEETING WILL BE EACH ITEM ON THE PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE PRESENTED BY MEMBER OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING DEPARTMENT. STAFF WILL INDICATE WHETHER THEY RECOMMEND APPROVAL FOR THE LAND USE ZONING. NEXT THE APPLICNT WILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK FOLLOWING APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION, I WILL OPEN THE FLOOR FOR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO OFFER THEIR VIEWS.

YOUR TIME IS FOR STATING YOUR VIEWS. NOT FOR ASKING QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT. MEMBERS OF THE STAFF OR THE COMMISSIONERS.

YOUR COMMENTS ARE TO BE DIRECTED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION. IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK DURING THIS HEARING, WILL YOU NEED TO TAKE THE OATH. IF YOU AREN'T SURE.

TAKE THE OATH. STAFF, APPLICANT AND PUBLIC HAVE A CHANCE TO STATE THEIR VIEWS THE FLOOR WILL BE CLOSED AND APPLICANT WILL HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO POND.

COMMISSIONERS WILL DISCUSS THE MATTERS OR ENTER A DECISION. I THANK YOU AND COMMEND YOU FOR YOUR PARTICIPATION IN THIS PROCESS. WE NEED MS. BLANCHETT.

WE'RE WAITING ON MS. BLANCHETT. SHE'S GOT TO SWEAR EVERYBODY IN.

FOR ANYBODY WISHING TO SPEAK DURING THE COMMENT PERIOD PLEASE RISE AND MOVE TO THE CENTER IF

YOU CAN. MS. BLANCHETT WILL SWEAR YOU IN. >> RAISE YOUR RIGHT-HAND.

DO YOU SWEAR OR AFFIRM THE TESTIMONY YOU ABOUT TO GIVE WILL BE THE WHOLE TRUTH AND NOTHING

BUT THE TRUTH SO HELP YOU GOD? THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> THANK YOU.

[1. Public Hearing to consider ZON 25-0038. (District 4, Comm. Condon) (B. Carson)]

WE'LL NEED ONE VOTE ON THIS. >> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. THIS ITEM, ZONE 2528 IS SCHEDULED TO GO BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AT THEIR MEETING MARCH 24TH.

LAST MEETING OF THE MONTH. THE APPLICANT FOR THIS ITEM IS JANICE FLEET.

SHE IS ACTUALLY THE AGENT ON BEHALF OF THE OWNERS JACKIE CARTER.

THE LOCATION OF THE PROPERTY IS 5408 COUNTY ROAD 218. WHICH IS LOCAL IN THE CLAY HILL AREA. PLANNING DISTRICT. THAT IS IN COMMISSION DISTRICT FOUR. THE APPLICATION IS A REQUEST TO REZONE 1.0338 ACRES PROFESSIONAL OFFICE. THE PROPOSED USE FOR THE PROPERTY WILL BE FOR DUNKIN DONUTS. THIS IS LOCATED WITHIN CLAY HILL OVERLAY DISTRICT.

UP ON THE LEFT IS A LOCATION OF THE PROPERTY. IT IS LOCATED EAST OF COUNTY ROAD 218 JUST SOUTH OF THE INTERSECTION OF MALLARD AND BLUE JAY DRIVE.

THE AREA ON THE RIGHT SHOWS IT'S A VACANT PARCEL. ACROSS FROM A CHURCH.

UP ON THE LEFT IS THE EXISTING ZONING. SUBJECT PARCEL. THE PROPOSED ZONING IS THE SAME AS WHAT IS ADJACENT TO THE SOUTH. THAT LOCATED SOME OF THE ADJACENT ZONINGS ON THE MAP ON THE RIGHT ON THE PROPOSED ZONING.

IT'S KIND OF A HODGEPODGE OF DIFFERENT ZONINGS IN THIS AREA. THE PINK IS THE CHURCH.

THE GREEN IS AR, WHICH IS RESIDENTIAL. THE SIGNS THAT WERE POSTED AND THE PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN 350 FEET OF THE PROPERTY THAT WE NOTIFIED.

REGARDING THE MATTER. WITH THAT, STAFF FINDS THAT CRITERIA FOR REZONING THE

[00:10:04]

THE MIDDLEBURG CLAY HILL, CAC VOTED 7-0. SHE RECOMMEND APPROVAL.

DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR ME? >> ANY QUESTIONS FROM STAFF?

>> I HAVE ONE. I KNOW THAT IN THE WRITEUP, IT SAID THAT WITH BUFFER AND SO ON WOULD BE. THERE'S RESIDENTIAL BEHIND THIS PARCEL.

IT'S ACROSS THE STREET. DO THEY HAVE TO BUFFER TO THAT? >> IT'S A PRIVATE STREET.

THEY WOULD NOT. IT'S NOT IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO IT.

>> IT WAS A PUBLIC STREET WOULDN'T THEY HAVE TO BUFFER? THE STREET BECOMES THE BUFFER?

>> YES. THE STREET IS THE SEPARATOR. IF THEY HAD PARKING THAT WAS UP AGAINST THAT STREET, IT WOULD HAVE TO HAVE LANDSCAPING BETWEEN THAT PARKING AND THE STREET.

>> IS THE APPLICANT HERE? >> YES, I'M MS. FLEET. I'M THE APPLICANT.

JUST FOR -- THIS IS CONVENTIONAL ZONING. WE DO HAVE A PROPOSED SITE PLAN THAT I SEEN. THE RETENTION IS IN THE REAR. THAT WILL PROVIDE A BUFFER TO THE RESIDENTS BEHIND IT. PROBABLY MORE SO THAN THE DOLLAR TREE IS RIGHT NEXT DOOR TO THIS PROPERTY. IT WILL HAVE MORE BUFFER THAN THE EXISTING DOLLAR TREE.

ALSO, THERE'S AN EXISTING DUNKIN IN AT THE BP STATION. THAT WILL -- THEY WILL RELOCATE TO THIS DUNKIN. THEY KNOW THEY HAVE TO MEET THE CLAY HILL DISTRICT.

THAT WAS A FIRST THING WHEN I SAW THIS PARCEL. I SAID, OKAY, THIS IS WHAT YOU GOT TO BE. THEY SENT THE ARCHITECTURALS TO THEM.

THEY WILL MEET THAT. IT'S NOT A PUD. IT WAS FUNNY.

THE NEIGHBOR THAT LIVES BEHIND IT, I WAVED TO HIM. I WANTED TO SEE.

THEY WAVED BACK AND SAID THANK YOU, NICE. I WAS EXPECTING TO HAVE TO TALK TO HIM ABOUT IT. THEY SEEM FINE WITH IT. I HAVE A VERY POSITIVE MEETING WITH THE CAC FOR THE AREA. THEY WERE VERY POSITIVE ABOUT WHAT WE WERE DOING.

I THINK IT WILL -- IN THAT AREA, THIS WILL BE ONE OF THE FIRST IN THAT AREA THAT WILL MEET THOSE STANDARDS. I THINK IT'S VERY POSITIVE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THAT AREA.

ALSO, THE PROPOSED, WHICH I WILL KNOW WHEN IT COMES TO DEVELOPMENT AND THE DRC IN LOOKING AT THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN THAT I HAVE SEEN, THEY'RE GOING TO CONNECT THE DRIVE -- EQUAL TO THE CHURCH ACROSS THE STREET. IT WILL BE A SAFE ACCESS FOR EITHER SIDE. THEY HAVE A DRIVE-THRU. ANY QUESTIONS FOR YOU?

I CAN KEEP GOING ON. >> I HAVE A QUICK ONE. I THINK YOU JUST ANSWERED IT.

I WAS CURIOUS WITH THAT PS1 ACROSS THE STREET WAS. THAT'S A CHURCH?

>> YES, SIR. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? I GOT ONE. I THINK THE REGULATION CALLS FOR AN ACCESS ROAD FROM THE REAR ALSO. IS THAT TRUE?

THAT'S GOING TO BE MY QUESTION. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> THANK YOU.

>> I'LL OPEN PUBLIC HEARING. I DON'T HAVE ANY CARDS. ANYBODY WISH TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM? SEEING NONE. I WILL CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD AND BRING IT BACK TO THE COMMISSION FOR DISCUSSION AND DECISION.&

>> MR. CHAIR, I'LL MOVE THIS STAFF REPORT ON THIS ONE. >> SECOND.

SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE.

OKAY, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THE NEXT ITEM IS PUBLIC HEARING CONSIDER COMP 260018.

[2. Public Hearing to consider COMP 26-0018 and PUD 26-0010. (District 1, Sgromolo) (D. Selig)]

[00:15:08]

>> AS YOU SAID, THESE ARE TWO PAIRED ITEMS. THEY WILL BE GOING TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ON MARC. JANICE FLEET IS THE APPLICANT FOR THIS ITEM.

THE PROPERTY IS AT SOUTHWEST INTERSECTION OF COUP ROAD 220 AND PLANTATION DRIVE.

THIS IS AN OAK LEAF DISTRICT. DISTRICT ONE. IT'S ONE PARCEL.

THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN APPLICATION CHANGES JUST A PORTION OF THIS PARCEL.

IT'S THE SOUTHERN PORTION FROM RURAL FRINGE TO COMMERCIAL. THEN THE PUD.

THEY'RE AN EXISTING -- IT'S PCD ZONING ON THE NORTHERN PART OF PARCEL.

IT'S PS UP WITH ON THE SOUTHERN PORTION. THIS WILL BRING THE PCD ZONING OVER THE ENTIRE PROPERTY. SIGNS WERE PLACED AND ON THE RIGHT YOU CAN SEE THE AREA WHERE MAILOUTS WENT. ON THE LEFT IS THE AREA. IT'S IN SOUTHERN PORTION.

THAT IS JUST THE PORTION THAT IS COVERED BY THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHANGE.

WHERE FUTURE LAND USE IS GOING TO CHANGE. THAT PIECE OF PROPERTY ORIGINALLY BELONGED TO THE CHURCH. THE PROPERTY OWNER BOUGHT IT FROM THEM AND DIDN'T CHANGE THE ZONING. WHICH IS WHY IT STILL HAS PS1 ZONING ON IT. THIS IS THE EXISTING ON THE LEFT.

THEN PROPOSED ON RIGHT. PROVIDING COMMERCIAL OVER THE ENTIRE PARCEL.

FOR THE ZONING, YOU CAN SEE THAT PS1 IN PINK. WHICH IS ON THAT SOUTHERN BOUNDARY AND THEN PROPOSED REZONING WHICH WOULD COVER THE ENTIRE PARCEL.

THE EXISTING PCD ENVISIONED USE OF A CAR WASH. TUNNEL TYPE THAT'S POPULAR.

THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN ON THE WESTERN SIDE OF THE PROPERTY AND A LARGE STORM WATER RETENTION ON THAT SOUTHERN PORTION OF THE PROPERTY. THE NEW PCD WOULD BE PRINCIPLE USE OF A CONVENIENCE STORE WITH PUMPS AND DUNKIN DRIVE-THRU. IN THIS CASE, ACCESS COMES IN OFF 220 BUT ALSO OFF OF PLANTATION. YOU HAVE CANOPY WITH A GAS STATION OUT FRONT AND THE CONVENIENCE IN THE MIDDLE. AGAIN, THE SOUTHERN PORTION OF THE PROPERTY WILL BE RETENTION FACILITY. THE DRIVE-THRU ENTERS ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE BUILDING. IT RUN ALONG THE BACK OF THE BUILDING.

THEN EXIT MORE OR LESS TOWARDS THE PLANTATION. THE PCD AS ITS WRITTEN INCLUDES LONG LIST OF USES. THESE ARE -- I'M NOT SURE. THAT'S KIND OF A FAMILIAR ONE WE'RE SEEING. IN ADDITION, INCLUDED THE BANKS AND FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS WITH DRIVE-THRUS AND DRIVE-IN RESTAURANTS. CONVENIENCE STORES WITH GAS PUMPS AND THEN ALCOHOL SALES. RESTRICTION OF USE IS THE SALE AND DISPLAY MUST BE CONDUCTED ENTIRELY WITHIN THE BUILDING. THE CAC, VOTED FOR 4-1 TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL FOR THE PLAN CHANGE. AND RECOMMEND APPROVE FOR PUD CHANGE.

STAFF LOOKED AT CRITERIA FOR BOTH, AND RECOMMENDS APPROVAL. I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY

QUESTIONS. >> ANY QUESTION FOR STAFF? >> I HAVE A QUESTION.

I THINK THE APPLICANT MIGHT WANT TO ANSWER IT TOO. I WILL PUT YOU ON THE POT A LITTLE BIT. THIS SORRY, THIS PREDATES YOU. THIS PARCEL WAS ORIGINALLY ZONED BA. WHEN THEY WANTED TO PUT THE CAR WASH ON THERE, THEY CAME IN AND DID A PCD TO ADD THE CAR WASH AND AS YOU SAID, BASICALLY IT'S BA WITH A CAR WASH.

THAT'S WHAT THIS IS IF YOU GO THROUGH IT. IT SEEMS THIS -- THEY NO LONGER WANT THE CAR WASH. WHY IS THIS A PCD? BECAUSE IT APPEARS THEY CAN DO

[00:20:03]

I DON'T SEE THAT WE'RE GETTING ANYTHING ENHANCED HERE. I'LL MAKE THE COMMENT.

SO THE APPLICANT WHEN SHE SPEAKS IS IF IN FACT THEY WANT TO STAY WITH THE PCD, THEN WHY DO NEED THOSE OTHER USES? LET TALK ABOUT THE USES WE NEED FOR THE PCD AND GET RID OF THE REST OF THEM. THOSE ARE SOME OF THE THINGS THAT ARE IN MY HEAD ABOUT THIS

ONE. LET'S HEAR FROM EVERYBODY. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM STAFF? I GOT A COUPLE. ON ONE OF YOUR SLIDES THERE, IT SHOWS WHERE THAT IS. THIS ADDON DOWN ON THE SOUTH SIDE THAT APPEARS TO BE ENCROACHING IN THE RESIDENTIAL AREA. WOULD THIS BE CONSIDERED AT ENCROACHMENT INTO RESIDENTIAL ZONING CLASSIFICATIONINGS? IT'S GOT RESIDENTS EAST, WEST

AND SOUTH. >> YES, IT'S RURAL FUTURE LAND USE.

IT'S PS1, WHICH IS THE CHURCH. THEY OWN ALL OF THIS PINK PARCEL TO THE SOUTH.

THAT PORTION AND THE PROPERTY WAS THE CHURCH'S AND PURCHASED BY THEM.

IT'S NOT ENCROACHMENT BECAUSE THEY ALREADY OWN THAT PIECE. IT'S A CONSOLIDATION LAND USE

AND ONE ZONE ON THE PARCEL. >> I HAVE ONE OTHER QUESTION WHEN YOU'RE DONE.

>> THAT LEADS ME TO ANOTHER QUESTION. THAT WAS PART OF THE ORIGINAL PARCEL, WHY WAS NOT THE BA ZONING FOR THE WHOLE PARCEL INSTEAD THE NORTHERN PORTION OF

IT? >> I DON'T KNOW WHY IT WAS DONE THAT WAY.

>> I CAN TELL YOU WHY IF YOU LOOK AT THE MAP. IT'S NOT MAJOR ROAD.

>> WHEN THEY DID -- WHEN THE COMP PLANE DONE BACK IN '92, YOU'LL SEE IT IF YOU PUT THE MAP UP THERE. IT WENT SO MANY FEET OFF THE HIGHWAY AND DREW A LINE AND SAID THIS IS COMMERCIAL AND THIS IS NOT. IN MANY CASES, WE'VE SEEN MANY OF THEM, THEY SPLIT LOTS IN HALF WHEN THEY DID THAT. IT DIDN'T FOLLOW THE COMMERCIAL.

DIDN'T JOG ALONG AND FOLLOW THE EXISTING LOTS. IT DREW A LINE OF 200 FEET.

SAID THAT'S YOUR COMMERCIAL. THAT'S HOW YOU END UP WITH THIS KIND OF THING.

THAT CHURCH IS ON THAT PROPERTY SITS WAY BACK DOWN THAT PROPERTY.

IT'S NOT EVEN CLOSE THAT A END. IT'S OPEN. NOTHING THERE.

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? APPLICANT?

>> JANICE FLEET AGAIN. I WILL ADDRESS SOME OF YOUR QUESTIONS.

MY CLIENT, WHO DOES DUNKIN, THAT'S OTHER ONE AS WELL. HE'S DEVELOPING.

PURCHASED IN THE PROCESS OF PURCHASING IT. IT'S ONE PARCEL NOW.

MIGHT HAVE BEEN TWO PARCEL. I'M NOT SURE IF THEY BOUGHT IT FROM THE CHURCH.

I THINK IT WAS WITH THE PREVIOUS OWNER. HE PURCHASED A PARCEL AND THEN IN THE PREVIOUS PCD FOR THE CAR WASH, THEY MAINTAIN THE LAND USE EVEN THOUGH THE RETENTION -- IF LOOK AT THE SITE PLAN FOR THE PREVIOUS CAR WASH, WAS IN THAT RURAL FRINGE AREA.

IT WAS THE RETENTION AREA. I GUESS TECHNICALLY, THEY FELT -- YOU CAN SEE THAT THAT IS IN THE RURAL FRINGE AREA BUT THEY DIDN'T IN THE PREVIOUS PCD, EVEN THOUGH IT WAS A UNIFIED PLAN AND

[00:25:01]

THIS TIME WHEN I STARTED THIS PROCESS, WE WERE TOLD TO GO PCD TO PCD.

I CAN UNDERSTAND YOUR CONCERNS, YOUR COMMENTS. AND DO THE LAND USE CHANGE.

WE WERE GOING ALONG STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS WHAT THEY FELT.

MAYBE THE THOUGHT GOING BACK TO BA, I DON'T KNOW IF IT CAME UP WITH STAFF IN CONVERSATIONS.

THE REASON I ADDED ADDITIONAL USES, WE DOING DUNKIN DONUT DRIVE-THRU, EVEN THOUGH THE SITE PLAN IS TIED, THE PCD IS TIED TO THE SITE PLAN WRITTEN DESCRIPTION.

SOMETIMES THINGS CHANGE AND THEN YOU DON'T HAVE THAT USE. YOU MIGHT USE THE SAME BUILDING BUT THERE'S ANOTHER USE, FIVE YEARS DOWN THE ROAD THAT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE.

I DIDN'T THINK WHEN I CAME UP -- WHEN I DID THE WRITTEN DESCRIPTION THEY WERE NEGATIVE TO THE AREA. IF THEY WERE, ANOTHER PREVIOUS PUDS COME BEFORE YOU, I WOULD LIMIT IT TO KIND OF THE GOOD THINGS OF A PARTICULAR ZONING CATEGORY.

I DID I THINK LIMITED NOT EVERYTHING THAT'S ALLOWED IN THE PA.

THAT'S MY REASON FOR ALL THOSE OTHER USES. IN CASE THE CONVENIENCE STORE DIDN'T MAKE IT AND THEY WANTED TO THE PUT SOME OTHER RETAIL ESTABLISHMENT.

IF THEY WERE GOING TO CHANGE THE SITE, THEY WOULD HAVE TO COME BEFORE YOU WITH A PCD.

AGAIN PCD ZONING. THAT'S KIND OF WHY WE'RE HERE. I UNDERSTAND YOUR CONCERNS.

I'M NOT ARGUING WITH YOU. THIS IS WHAT WE WORKED UNDER. BECAUSE IT IS KIND OF A ONE USE.

THE ONLY QUESTION I WOULD ASSUME THE LAST PCD IS BECAUSE TO GET THE CAR WASH YOU HAVE TO BE A HIGHER ZONING THAN BA. MAYBE THAT'S WHY THEY DID IT THE LAST TIME AND CONTINUED IT ON.

DODIE THROWING IN THIS TOWARD THE END. IT WAS A PREVIOUS WHEN WE

ORIGINALLY STARTED DEALING WITH THIS. >> ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE

APPLICANT? >> MS. FLEET, YOU DIDN'T ANSWER THE BIG QUESTION THAT I HAVE.

WHICH IS WHEN WE DO A PCD, IT SUPPOSED TO CREATE SOMETHING BETTER THAN WE CAN DO WITH REGULAR ZONING. SUPPOSED TO ENHANCE IT SOMEHOW. OTHER THAN THE FACT WE'RE

GETTING A SITE PLAN, WHAT ELSE ARE WE GETTING FROM THE PCD? >> I THINK THE BENEFIT IF YOU GO TO THE SITE PLAN. IT IS A SITE PLAN. BECAUSE OF THE PCD, WE'RE BEING BETTER BUFFERS IN THE RESPECT THAT WE HAVE THE RETENTION AT THE SOUTHERN END, WHICH IS BETTER AS A BUFFER BETWEEN THAT AND THE CHURCH. THE DRIVES.

YOU'RE KNOWING UP FRONT THE DRIVES ARE EQUAL TO THE MCDONALD'S NEXT DOOR TO MAKE THAT'S EASIER. RIDE IN AND RIDE OUT. NOT TO SAY THAT DRC MIGHT NOT REQUIRE THE SAME REQUIREMENTS. THIS WAY IT'S PART OF THE ORDINANCE.

IT HAS TO BE DEVELOPED THAT WAY. YOU ARE GETTING THAT. YOU'RE SEEING THIS UP FRONT.

IT'S TALKING TO SOME OF -- GOING TO THE CA CS THAT I'VE GONE TO RECENTLY OVER THE TIME.

THEY LIKE SEEING IT. I THINK THAT'S THE KEY IS IT DOES ALLOW FOR MAKING SURE THAT WE ARE DOING THESE THINGS THAT ARE NEEDED. THAT WAS ONE OF THE THINGS THAT CAC GROUP. THE ONE THAT DOES THIS AREA. AT LEAST YOU KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO -- THE LAYOUT IS WHAT IT'S GOING TO BE THE BUFFER TOWARDS THE BACK.

THEY COULD HAVE DONE BUFFERS ON THE SIDE OR DIFFERENT THING LIKE THAT.

IT WAS NOT THAT WAY. >> QUESTIONS? >> I JUST DO WANT TO POINT OUT THAT I COMPARE. I LOOKED AT THIS. THE PERMITTED USES ARE WORD FOR WORD WHAT'S OUT OF BA. WORD FOR WORD, RESTRICTIONS ARE WORD FOR WORD.

THE ONLY THING THAT'S MISSING ARE THE CONDITIONAL USES THAT ARE AVAILABLE IN BA.

THEY ARE NOT PART OF THIS APPLICATION. MY QUESTION WOULD BE WHY WE HAVE

ALL THOSE EXTRA USES IN A PCD? >> SOMETIMES WE LIMIT IT. THAT WAS MY REASON FOR DOING IT.

[00:30:08]

>> I APPRECIATE THE -- I AGREE. IT IS LIKE PICK ONE OR THE OTHER.

THE WHOLE CONCEPT OF THE PCD WAS TO LOCK PEOPLE IN TO A PARTICULAR USE.

YEAH, I WOULD AGREE. FRANKLY, HAVE ALWAYS BEEN A FAN OF PCDS BECAUSE IT WELCOME PEOPLE -- LOCK PEOPLE IN. THAT'S THE WHOLE PURPOSE OF IT CHECK AND BALANCES.

>> I LOVE PUD, AND PCDS. EXACTLY, WHAT YOU CAN DO. THAT'S ONLY REASON I ADD SOME

ADDITIONAL USES. WE CAN TAKE A MAP. >> THERE NEEDS TO BE SOMETHING ELSE FIVE YEARS FROM NOW. I'M IN FAVOR OF THE PROJECT. I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THE PROJECT. I DO THINK IT'S A GOOD IDEA TO BE DISCIPLINED TO THE PROCESS.

I THINK IT'S THE WAY I WOULD SAY IT. >> OKAY.

>> ONE OTHER THING THAT'S MISSING HERE. YOU HEAR ME SAY THIS OVER AND OVER. IT'S ONE OF MY THINGS. I REALLY DIDN'T SEE ANY LIGHTING

IN THIS? >> I THINK WE ARE THE LIGHTING --

>> I DIDN'T READ IT. >> IT WAS THE DESCRIPTION. >> DOES SAY IT?

>> YES. THAT'S INCLUDED. >> REAL QUICK.

QUESTION TO STAFF, IS THIS SITE PLAN PART OF THE APPLICATION? >> YES.

>> YOU REALIZE IF YOU CHANGE THAT, YOU GOT TO COME BACK TO SEE US AGAIN?

>> I UNDERSTAND 100%. THAT'S WHY THE USERS ARE NOT AS IMPORTANT I GUESS THE SITE PLAN FROM A PLANNING PERSPECTIVE. IF WE DO ANYTHING THAT DOESN'T HAVE THAT SQUARE AND WANT OMOVE IT, WE'D HAVE TO COME BACK TO YOU. ALLOWS SOME FLEXIBILITY IN THE

BUILDING IF THERE WAS SOMETHING ELSE. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. I DON'T HAVE ANY CARD ON THIS. DOES ANYBODY WISH TO SPEAK TO THIS AGENDA ITEM? SEEING NO ONE. I WILL CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING.

BRING BACK THIS COMMISSION FOR A RECOMMENDATION AND DECISION. >> MR. CHAIR.

THERE'S TWO ITEMS WE'RE LOOKING AT HERE. ONE IS THE LAND USE.

I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY ISSUE WITH THE LAND USE. YOU'RE KIND OF UNIFIEDS A LOT WHEN YOU TO THAT OFTEN. I HAD MY SAY ABOUT PUD. I'M KIND OF WITH MR. GARRISON.

I DON'T HAVE AN ISSUE WHAT YOU TYING TO DO OR THE SITE PLAN. I DON'T LIKE THIS BIG PARAGRAPH OF ADDITIONAL USES. WHEN WE GET TO THE PCD. I'M GOING TO VOTE NO ON THAT.

IF YOU CLEAN THIS UP BY THE TIME IT GETS TO THE BCC, YOU MAY HAVE -- IT WILL BE THE MINUTE.

IT'S NOT THAT I DON'T SUPPORT THE PROJECT. -- THE IDEA OF PCD IS TO BE MORE SPECIFIC NOT LESS SPECIFIC. I WILL TELL YOU EVERY TIME I SEE ONE OF THESE WITH THIS LIST OF USES AND A PCD, I DOUGHNUTLIKE. IT'-- I DON'T LIKE IT. IT'S NOT THE PURPOSE OF PCD OR PUD. THIS WHAT THE PREVIOUS ELECT DID.

[00:35:01]

I THINK I VOTED NO WHEN IT CAME THROUGH LAST TIME. >> I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM.

BECAUSE IT IS A PUD. IF YOU RECOMMEND TO TAKE OUT THAT LIST OF USES AS PART OF

YOUR RECOMMENDATION. >> THAT'S MY OPINION. THERE'S OTHER PEEP HERE.

>> I UNDERSTAND. >> I'M JUST TELLING PEOPLE IF THEY WANT TO DO THAT.

WE SHOULD HAVE A PROBLEM. >> JANIS, I WILL ASK A QUESTION. I KNOW WE'RE MOVING IT BACK TO THE COMMISSION. ARE YOU SURE THAT YOU DON'T WANT TO RELOOK AT YOUR PCD PIECE? IF YOU DO STRAIGHT INNING, THEN YOU HAVE ALL THE USES AVAILABLE. YOUR CLIENT OR CUSTOMER HAS THOSE STRAIGHT USES AVAILABLE FOR THE SEEN ZONING AS OPPOSED TO PGD -- I WANT TO MAKE SURE

THAT'S THE DIRECTION YOU WANT TO GO? >> THAT THE DIRECTION OF STAFF.

TO HAVING TO HAVING TO START OVER AGAIN. >> FOR THAT PIECE YOU WOULD NOT?

UPPER. >> WE HAVE TO GO BACKWARDS AND GO THROUGH THE WHOLE PROCESS AGAIN. HE'S FINE WITH IT. I UNDERSTAND THAT -- MY CLIENT BUILDS DUNKIN. HE DOESN'T CARE -- FOR SOME REASON IT DOESN'T MAKE IT -- THAT'S WHAT'S HE'S BUILDING. HE'S PRETTY -- PEC PCD POEED TOE SPECIFIC.

IF WE NEED TO NARROW IT DOWN. >> THAT'S WHY I MADE THAT COMMENT.

>> STRAY ZONE ALLOWS MORE USE. >> MY CLIENT DOES NOT WANT TO OPEN IT UP.

EAST VERY -- >> ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? WE NEED A RECOMMENDATION FOR THE

COMP 260018. >> I WILL MOVE THE STAFF REPORT ON THE COMP PLAN PORTION.

>> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION. TR

>> BEFORE WE DO A MOTION ON THAT ONE. I THINK WE HAVE TWO WAYS WE CAN GO HERE. AS IT IS, WE ALREADY KIND OF SAID WE LIKE THE IDEA.

WON'T LIKE THE LIST. WE CAN SUPPORT IT WITH A RECOMMENDATION THAT THE USES PERMITTED BY REMOVED. EXCEPT FOR THE ONES THEY NEED FOR THEIR PROJECT.

>> I WOULD SUPPORT THE SECOND ONE. I LIKE THE IDEA.

PCD WITH THE REMOVAL OF ANY USES NOT REL ASSISTANT TO THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT FOR CHEF --

FOR THIS ZONING PLAN. >> ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

[3. Public Hearing to consider PUD 25-0009. (District 5, Burke) (B. Carson)]

>> THIS ITEM CAME BEFORE YOU IN JANUARY. LIKE THE YUM TIM WE JUST HEARD, IT HAD A LONG LIST OF PROPOSED USES FOR THE PUD. AT THAT MEETING, THE AGENT FOR THE APPLICANT OFFERED TO AMEND THAT LIST AND IT WAS DECIDED. THEY WERE CAND -- I DON'T HAVE A

[00:40:12]

>> KELLY HARTWIG. WE HAVE DONE -- WE'VE TAKEN A LOT OF COMMENT WE GOT FROM THE BOARD. WE STARTED RENOVATING THE S SITE PLAN.

WE'RE NOT READY TO MODIFY THINGS. WE WANT TO CHANGE THE WORDING.

MY GOAL IS TO ASK FOR ANOTHER CONTINUANCE IF 30 DAYS. THIS GOING TO HELP.

ENO WE'LL HEAR INN -- >> YOU'RE REQUESTING CONTINUATION.

>> CONTINUATION UNTIL THE NEXT MEETING EITHER TWO MONTHS. >> IF I QUESTIONS FOR THE

APPLICANT? >> ONLY ONE THAT I HAVE IS A MONTH ENOUGH? WE DO HAVE A POLICY THAT WILL ONLY HOW -- YOU WANT TWO MONTHS. THAT'S MINE.

>> IT TAKES THE TWO MONTHS. >> MR. CHAIR, AFTER WE HEAR THE PUBLIC COMMENT THERE'S SOMETHING

I WANT TO ADD MYSELF. >> I WILL OPEN PUBLIC HEARING. I HAVE THREE CARDS.

SPIN EDDIE KNIGHT AFTER THAT. GIVE US YOUR NAPE AND ADDRESS

AND WHO YOU ARE. >> THANK YOU FOR HAVING US TO SPEAK.

MY NAME IS JOE -- MY HUSBAND AND I MOVED HERE IN 199666. OI HIGHWAY 17 WAS TWO LANES AT THAT TIME. WE WERE GONE FOR FOUR YEARS AND CAME BACK IN 1972 AND NOW IT'S FOUR LANE. WE PROGRESS. QUESTION WE -- WE CALL IT PROGRESS. HAS STAFF HAS BEEN HELPFUL PULLING OUT SOME INFORMATION, THAT PROPERTY THAT'S BEING REQUESTED FOR CHANGES IN ZONING, THAT ONE TIME WAS AGRICULTURE.

PROBABLY THE WHOLE COUNTY WAS AGRICULTURE. A PORTION OF IT WAS SOLD TO THE STATE OF FLORIDA. I IMAGINE IT HAS TO DO WITH THE FOUR LANES HIGHWAY 17.

IN ADDITION TO THAT, LATER ON, THE PROPERTY WAS SOLD TO LITTLE CHAMP.

I DON'T RECALL IF THEY WERE THE ONES THAT PUT IN THE KANGAROO STATION.

IS IS STILL WORKING. KANGAROO STATION. THERE WAS A REQUEST FOR HAVING A KANGAROO STATION, GAS STATION. ALL OF US WHO WERE THERE, WHICH WAS ONE QUARTER OF THE FOLKS THERE NOW, SAID NO, WE DON'T WANT THAT INTENSE USE. WE TALKED BACK-AND-FORTH WITH COMMISSIONERS AND ZONE AND IT WAS AGREED VERBALLY. I THOUGHT IT WENT INTO SOME SORT OF PUBLIC RECORD. ANYWAY, WHAT WE ALL DECIDED WAS THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY IS

[00:45:16]

WE DECIDED, OKAY, HAVE THE GAS STATION. WE NEED TO HAVE A BUFFER BEHIND IT. THERE WAS LANGUAGE THAT WAS WRITTEN YEARS AGO THAT ESSENTIALLY AGREED WITH JUST WHAT WE WANTED AND LEAVE A NATURAL BUFFER.

AT THAT TIME, I THINK IT WAS 10. THAT WENT ALONG 209. THEN, THE USE CHANGED.

ACROSS THE STREET WHAT HAPPENED WAS THE RACETRACK THEY BUILT A GAS STATION AND BASICALLY, THIS GAS STATION, WHICH I THINK FOUR PUMPS, COULDN'T COMPETE. IT CLOSED AND IT SOLD OUT.

THE CURRENT APPLICANT IS ASKING FOR USE THAT IS MUCH MORE INTENSE THAN WE FEEL IS REASONABLE AND WE FEEL THERE ARE SEVERAL ISSUES. ONE IS THE SAFETY IN THE AREA INCREASED TRAFFIC IF THEY OPEN UP AND GET RID OF THAT BUFFER WHICH WAS ALSO REQUEST TO PUT AN ACCESS TO 209. THE FOLKS THAT COME DOWN 208 ARE FLYING THERE THERE.

THERE'S BUS STOP AT THE CORNER THERE. CHILDREN ARE OUT THERE.

YOU'RE PRESENTING A SAFETY ISSUE. PLUS, WE FEEL LIKE IT IS A DECLINE OF THE USE FOR OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. IT'S JUST ADDING OPENING UP FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE ANYBODY ON HIGHWAY 17, THEY ARE FREE TO TRAVEL.

SOME OF THEM ARE NOT THE PEOPLE THAT WE WANT TO HAVE THEM VISIT OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.

WE ARE REALLY OPPOSED TO THE PLAN AS EXIST TODAY. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. >> WHAT STREET DO SHE LIVE ON? >> IT'S A PRIVATE ROAD OFF MOHAMMED BLUFF ROAD. THE ROAD WAS ADDED WHEN THE STATE FIRST BOUGHT THAT

PROPERTY. >> MR. KNIGHT. >> MY NAME EDDIE KNIGHT.

I'M GOING TO READ MINE. BARE WITH ME. I'M HERE TO EXPRESS MY CONCERNS FOR ZONING APPLICATION NUMBER 250009. THAT SEEKING MAJOR BUSINESS EXPANSION ON COUNTY ROAD 209. FROM BB5 TO PCD THAT WILL AFFECT MANY LONG ESTABLISHED NEIGHBORHOODS OF HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE IN CLAY COUNTY. THIS AREA IS HIGHWAY 17 AND SHOULD BE TREATED WITH CULTURAL DIGNITY, LOGIC AND RESPECT FREE OF COMMERCIAL EXPANSION.

PROPOSED PLAN IS TO EXPAND THIS COMMERCIAL SITE. THAT INCLUDES MAGNOLIA POINT, RIVERA ESTATES, FIVE OAKS, VIRGINIA LANE AND PLEASANT POINT.

IT WILL SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASE TRAFFIC, COMMERCIAL NOISE, LIGHT POLLUTION AND POSSIBLE INCREASE IN NEIGHBORHOOD CRIME. COUNTY ROAD 209 IS ONE OF THE LAST NONCOMMERCIAL ROADS IN CLAY COUNTY. ABOUT THE BUFFER ZONE. IF YOU HAVE THE PROPOSED INGRESS AND EGRESS ON HIGHWAY 209, THEN YOU CAN'T HAVE A CONTINUOUS BUFFER ZONE.

WE ASK YOU TO KEEP THE EXPANSION OR ANYTHING ON THE BUSINESS SIDE OF THE PROPERTY, WHICH IS HIGHWAY 17. WE ASK YOU TO KEEP BUSINESS STRUCTURES OUT OF THESE HISTORICAL FAMILY NEIGHBORHOOD. WE URGE YOU TO DENY ANY PROPOSAL THAT WILL CHANGE THE STRUCTURE AND FOOTPRINT OF COUNTY ROAD 209 IN THESE FAMILY NEIGHBORHOODS. THIS ALONG WITH HIGHWAY 17 IS

[00:50:16]

>> THANK YOU MR. KNIGHT. KATHY KNIGHT. >> I RECEIVED THE PERIMETER BUFFER C AND THIS OTHER INFORMATION. I KNOW YOU'LL HAVE THIS.

IT'S TO PROTECT US. I'M READING HERE 100 FEET T75 FEET, 25 FEET.

I'M NOT TELLING YOU ANYTHING NEW. I THINK THAT YOU ALL NEED TO STICK TO THIS. 209 LIKE MY HUSBAND SAID IS THE RESIDENTIAL SIDE.

I TALKED TO MY COUSIN. THEY SAID THAT WE COULD USE HER NAME.

HER NAME MARTHA HARRIS. SHE LIVES ON MOHOMMA BLUFF ROAD. LIVED THERE 63 YEARS.

I WOULD HOPE THAT YOU WOULD RESPECT THE CITIZENS MORE WHAT WE WANT, ESPECIALLY THOSE LONG STANDING ONES BEEN HER FOR 60 YEARS AND 40 YEARS. BEFORE YOU SAY YES TO THIS.

I'M ASKING YOU TO SAY NO. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, MS. KNIGHT.

DOROTHY GILLILAND. I HOPE I DIDN'T BUTCHER YOUR NAME TOO BAD.

>> I AM NEW TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. I'M VERY CONCERNED BECAUSE I AM IN FIRST HOUSE.

WHEN WE BUILT THE HOUSE I HAD TO COME BEFORE YOU. THE BUFFER WAS EXPRESSED TO HAVE THAT BUFFER ON THE SIDE OF MY HOUSE. I FEEL THAT IT'S GOING TO BE VERY CONGESTED. THERE'S A LOT OF TRAFFIC THERE. I AM AGAINST IT.

I LOVE THE RESTAURANT AND IT'S ONLY A BLOCK AWAY FROM ME. I FEEL LIKE MORE BUILDINGS THERE IS GOING TO CAUSE MORE CONGESTION AND MORE PEOPLE COMING DOWN THE ROAD.

THIS IS MY DAUGHTER. I LIVE ON HER PROPERTY. >> ONE OF THE PROBLEM THAT WE HAVE. 30-FOOT BUFFER IN FRONT OF OUR PROPERTY WHICH WE WANTED THAT BUFFER THERE ANYWAYS. CLAY COUNTY ELECTRIC DECIDED TO COME AND CUT MOST OF IT DOWN AND EXPOSE US THAT REQUIRED US TO PUT UP A FENCE TO TRY TO KEEP OUT THE HOMELESS THAT ARE ACROSS THE STREET. YES, WE'RE AGAINST IT MAINLY BECAUSE OF THE INGRESS AND EGRESS ON 209. THE REDUCTION OF THE BUFFER. RIGHT NOW WE CAN'T SEE THE RESTAURANT. WE CAN SMELL IT. WE CAN'T SEE IT.

>> THANK YOU. COULD YOU GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS?

>> MELISSA ALEX, 1449. >> WOULD YOU -- I'M TRYING TO STAY AHEAD OF OUR CLERK HER.

FILL OUT ONE OF THOSE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. IS THERE ANYBODY THAT WANTS TO SPEAK ON THIS AGENDA ITEM? I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND BRING IT BACK TO THE

COMMISSION FOR FURTHER DISCUSSION. >> MR. CHAIR.

I I WANTED TO DISCLOSE THAT I RECEIVED ABE-MAIL -- AN E-MAIL FROM MR. KNIGHT AND OTHER COMMISSIONERS MIGHT HAVE. I THINK MAYBE GARRISON. I READ IT.

I WANT TO SHARE THAT I HAD RECEIVED THAT AND READ IT. >> THANK YOU.

[00:55:11]

>> MR. CHAIR. I KNOW THAT A COUPLE OF THE COMMISSIONERS WEREN'T HERE LAST TIME. I KNOW THAT THE APPLICANT CONTINUATION.

I THINK THAT'S A GOOD IDEA. WHAT I HEARD JUST NOW WAS SOME OF THE THINGS THE BUFFERS, MAYBE A SITE REDESIGN MIGHT BE LOOKING AT. U.S. 17 IS A BUSINESS HIGHWAY.

IT SEEMS NOT TO BE THAT PART OF IT THAT'S THE PROBLEM. MAYBE THE DESIGN IS A SITE.

I FOUND A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT WERE LACKING IN THIS PLAN THAT CONCERN ME.

NUMBER ONE WAS LIGHTING. I BROUGHT IT UP EARLIER. I THINK AT A MINIMUM, LIGHTING STANDARDS NEED TO BE PART OF THIS. THAT WILL HELP KEEP THE LIGHT AWAY FROM THE NEIGHBORS AND THEIR OWN PROPERTY. THE USES THAT ARE PROPOSED, DON'T KNOW THAT THEY HAVE ANY REAL ISSUES WITH THE USE PROPOSED.

THE PARKING IS VERY LIMITED. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE THEY WEREM IS.

IF YOU GOING TO USE SHARED PARKING, YOU HAVE TO BE MORE SPECIFIC ABOUT WHAT PERCENTAGE OF BUSINESS YOU'RE GOING TO ALLOW IN THERE THAT ARE DAYTIME VERSUS NIGHT TIME? IF YOU SAY, WE WANT TO LET RESTAURANTS IN THERE. YOU DON'T LIMIT IT THEN IS THERE ENOUGH PARKING IF ALL THOSE TIME. MAYBE NOT.

I HAVEN'T SEEN THE SITE PLAN. SAME THING IF YOU SAY WE'RE GOING TO PUT BUSINESSES IN THERE. SAME PROBLEM WITH THE DAYTIME PARKING.

THERE MAY NOT BE ENOUGH SPACES. YOU ALREADY TALKED ABOUT THE BUFFER AND THE LIGHTING.

WHICH KIND OF THE MAIN THINGS THAT I WANTED TO BRING UP AT THIS TIME.

I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE ONE COMMENT IF I MIGHT JUST TO THE AUDIENCE. THAT PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY ZONED BB5. I MIGHT WANT TO LOOK AT LAND CODE AND SEE WHAT BB5 ALLOWS TODAY. RIGHT NOW, USES PERMITTED, BOWLING ALLEYS, SKATING RINKS, THEATERS, MINIATURE GOLF COURSE, BARS, TAVERNS, ESTABLISHMENTS WITH ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES, GO CARTS, TENNIS CART, PICKLEBALL COURT, PAINT BALL, VOLLEYBALL, BOAT, ZIP LINE.

THOSE ARE THE ONES THAT ARE PERMIT AND RESTAURANTS INCLUDNG SELLING LIQUOR.

THOSE AREN'T EVEN CONDITIONAL USES. THOSE ARE COME AND GET A BUILDING PERMIT AND PUT THEM UP. THEY HAVE A LOT OF FLEXIBILITY WITH THIS PROPERTY ALREADY.

WHAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR I THINK IS THE BEST OUTCOME POSSIBLE. >> I JUST HAVE A COMMENT.

I WANTED TO TAKE A SECOND TO THANK THE COMMUNITY THAT CAME TONIGHT.

IT'S NICE TO HAVE A MEETING WHERE EVERYBODY IS RESPECT OF. SPEAKS VERY SUCCINCTLY AND HAS A VERY CLEAR DIRECTION. EVERYBODY WAS VERY RESPECTFUL. THIS IS OUR -- THIS IS THE WAY OUR GOVERNMENT WORKS. EVERYBODY HAS A VOICE. EVERYBODY COMES IN AND TALKS AND SHARES THEIR VIEWS, THEIR OPINIONS, THEIR CONCERNS. THEN DECISIONS ARE MADE.

I WANTED TO THANK ALL THE COMMUNITY MEMBERS FOR COMING IN AND SHARING YOUR THOUGHTS.

WITH THAT, I'M HAPPY TO SUPPORT THE CONTINUANCE FOR TWO MONTHS. >> YOU NEED A MOTION?

>> ONE SECOND. I DO HAVE ONE COMMENT. MOSTLY TO THE APPLICANT.

THAT IS WORK WITH THE RESIDENT. THEY'VE VOICED THEIR CONCERNS AND STUFF LIKE THAT.

I UNDERSTAND YOU'RE TRYING TO MAXIMIZE YOUR RETURN ON YOUR INVESTMENT.

THIS LOOKS AWFUL BUSY. THIS LOOKS -- I DON'T KNOW WHERE YOU'RE GOING TO PUT THE -- IF

[01:00:08]

I DON'T THINK THE SHARED PARKING IS GOING TO WORK. I THINK YOU NEED TO -- I CAN'T TELL YOU WHAT TO DO. I THINK I WOULD TONE THIS DOWN A LITTLE BIT IF NOTHING ELSE.

BUFFERING IS ONE THING. 209 IS A TRACE TRACK. I AGREE WITH THAT.

THEY COME OFF 17 AS A DESELL LANE INTO AN AIRPORT. THAT'S NOT YOUR FAULT.

THAT'S THE WAY IT'S DESIGNED. WE GOT TO GET BETTER PROTECTION FOR THE RESIDENCE AND THE KIDS.

WITH THAT, I WILL TEND THE MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE. >> MR. CHAIR, I'LL MOVE THIS FOR CONTINUANCE FOR TWO MONTHS. WHICH WILL BE TO MAY. I NEED THE DATE.

MAY 5TH. MR. CHAIR, I MOVE THIS ITEM TO BE CONTINUED TO OUR MEETING ON

MAY 5TH OR SOON THEREAFTER AS IT CAN BE HEARD. >> MOTION AND SECOND ANY FURTHER

DISCUSSION? >> I LIKE TO HAVE A QUICK QUESTION ABOUT THE 100-FOOT

BUFFER, WHERE DID THAT COME FROM? >> THE CLIENTS REACHED OUT TO ME BECAUSE THEY BELIEVE THAT THERE WAS SOME DOCUMENTATION SOMEWHERE IN THE PAST THAT REFERRED THAT BUFFER. I DID NOT FIND ANYTHING IN MY SEARCH.

I DON'T THINK THEY HAVE EITHER. WHAT OUR TEAM HAS SHARED WITH THEM IS OUR CURRENT LANDSCAPE CODE, THE BUFFERS. THE C BUFFER IS FOR INDUSTRIAL. THAT WOULD NOT BE APPLICABLE.

IF THEY HAD ANY PARKING THAT UP TO THAT ROAD, 209, THEY WOULD HAVE TO HAVE A 15-FOOT BUFFER.

IF THEY DON'T HAVE ANY PARKING, THERE'S NO REQUIREMENT FOR A BUFFER.

THAT WILL BE NICE TO GO ABOVE AND BEYOND. THAT'S SOMETHING WE ALWAYS TALK

ABOUT AND SOMETHING FOR THE PCD. >> I WANT TO SAY 100-FOOT BUFFER --

>> WE HAVEN'T FOUND RESTRICTIONS OR ANYTHING. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> OKAY. READY? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR OF THE MOTION

SAY AYE. >> ANY OPPOSED? THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

THIS HAS TO GO BCC? >> NOT YET. IT STOPS HERE.

ALL RIGHT. >> SEE YOU Y'ALL IN TWO MONTHS. WE HAVE ONE OTHER AGENDA ITEM

[1. Excessive Lighting]

>> I WANT TO BRING THIS UP. I THOUGHT THAT BILL'S PRESENTATION ABOUT SOME OF THE PROBLEMS ON 218 WAS VERY INTERESTING. I AGREE WITH EVERYTHING THAT HE SAID. I MYSELF, HAVE SOME -- YOU GUYS ARE HEARD IT OVER AND OVER AGAIN. I'M A DARK SKY GUY. I THINK IT'S NECESSARY THAT WE TRY TO DEAL WITH LIGHTING IN A POSITIVE WAY. CERTAINLY, DONE SO.

IT ACTUALLY HAS SOME OBJECTIVE MEASUREMENTS IN IT. IT DOESN'T SAY THINGS LIKE EXCESSIVE LIGHT. IT TALKS ABOUT LIGHT MEASUREMENT AND WHAT THEY CAN BE AND SO ON.

WHICH IS BETTER BECAUSE YOU CAN'T -- IT'S HARD TO REGULATE OR ENFORCE SUBJECTIVE STUFF.

GOT TO BE MORE OBJECTIVE. I JUST TOOK SOME PICTURES OF WHAT I CONSIDER TO BE A REALLY BAD OFFENDER. JUST TO SHOW YOU HOW BAD IT CAN GET.

WE START OFF. THIS IS THE PARCEL THAT I'M GOING TO USE AS AN EXAMPLE.

IT'S A SMALL CONVENIENCE STORE. IT'S AN OLD CONVENIENT STORE. IT WAS BUILT ORIGINALLY AS A GATE GAS STATION BACK IN THE '75. IT'S AN OLD CONVENIENCE STORE.

[01:05:07]

AS YOU CAN SEE, IT'S THE CONVENIENCE STORE. THERE'S LITTLE CANOPY OUT THERE AS A TWO PUMP GAS CANOPY. THAT'S ALL THAT'S ON THIS PROPERTY.

THESE ARE SOME PICTURES I TOOK AT IT. THIS IS LOOKING AT THE SIDE OF THE BUILDING. THIS IS THE BACK OF THE BUILDING, SORRY.

ACROSS THE BACK OF THE BUILDING, THERE ARE FIVE LIGHTS ON THAT LITTLE BUILDING ACROSS THE BACK OF THAT BUILDING. THEY ARE NOT AIMED DOWN. LOOK HOW MUCH FLIG FLIGHT -- LIG UP THE PLACE NEXT DOOR. THIS IS COMMERCIAL. IT'S NOT NECESSARY.

IT'S NOT AS EGREGIOUS. YOU SEE THE GAS CANOPY. THERE ARE SEVEN LIGHTS ON THAT GAS CANOPY. SEVEN LIGHTS. THERE'S FOUR UNDERNEATH THE CANOPY AND SEVEN ON THE TOP. THE ONES ON THE TOP ARE CLEARLY POINTING OUT.

THIS IS THE SIDE OF THE SHOP. YOU CAN SEE THE BACK AND ON THE SIDE WE GOT THREE LIGHTS.

THESE ARE NOT LIKE PAR FLOOD LIGHTS. THESE ARE VERY HIGH INTENSITY LIGHTS. THEY ARE THREE OF THEM POINTED OUT IN THERE.

THAT'S THE GAS CANOPY. THIS IS JUST TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA.

YOU CAN SEE THERE'S A LIGHT POLE ON THE CORNER THAT PROPERTY TOO. THAT'S GOT -- THERE'S THREE LIGHTS ON THAT. LOOKS LIKE TWO IN THIS PICTURE. TWO OF THEM ARE SO CLOSE TOGETHER. IT'S ACTUALLY THREE. THE NEXT ONE.

THIS IS JUST A SHOT YOU CAN SEE THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING A LITTLE.

LIGHT POLE THAT I JUSTED TALKED. THE CANOPY, THE NEXT ONE. ONE OF THEM BURNED DOWN NOW.

IT'S NOT WORKING. THIS IS THE FRONT OF THE BUILDING.

I CAN COUNT FOR YOU. ON THE FRONT OF THAT BUILDING, THIS IS NOT AAWAYAWAY.

THIS IS ON -- THERE TEN LIGHTS ON THE FRONT OF THAT BUILDING. ON THE SIDE THERE, THERE'S THREE DOWN THAT SIDE. RIGHT ON THE EDGE OF THE PICTURE, YOU'LL SEE THE ROOF OF THE ADJACENT BUILDING WHICH IS COMMERCIAL. THEY GOT THREE LIGHTS AND A SPACE THAT'S PROBABLY AT THE MOST 8 FEET WIDE THERE. LIGHTING THAT UP.

NOT TO MENTION THERE'S A LOT OF OTHER CODE PROBLEMS WITH THIS PLACE.

THAT'S JUST THE CANOPY AGAIN. IN THIS CASE, THERE'S ANOTHER LIGHT POLE OUT THERE.

YOU SEE KIND OF IN THE BACK A LITTLE BIT. THAT HAS -- IT LOOKS LIKE ONE BIG LIGHT. IT'S ACTUALLY FIVE LIGHTS. FIVE SEPARATE LIGHTS IN ONE FIXTURE COMING OFF THAT ONE. THESE ARE THE HOUSES ACROSS THE STREET.

I TOOK THESE PICTURES AT NIGHT. THESE PEOPLE HAVE TO FEEL LIKE THEY'RE LIVING NEXT TO A PRISON YARD. I CAN'T REALLY SEE IT WELL IN THIS PICTURE.

THEY TRYING TO BLOCK -- THESE LIGHTS ARE ON ALL NIGHT LONG AND THEY'RE TRYING TO LIVE IN THESE HOUSES. THEY GOT ALUMINUM, THEY GOT CARDBOARD TO STOP THE LIGHT.

THAT'S JUST LITTLE CLOSE UP. THAT'S FIVE LIGHTS ON TOP OF THAT SIGN FACING THE PARKING

LOT. >> WHATEVER THAT IS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE ROAD, DOES THAT

CONFORM? >> PRETTY MUCH. IT'S MOSTLY USED IN THE DOWN LIGHTING. IT MAINLY JUST LIGHTS UP HIS PUMP AREA.

HE'S GOT LIGHTS UNDER THE CANOPY. HE DOESN'T HAVE ANY LIGHTS SHEENING OUT ANYWHERE. THERE'S A BETTER PICTURE OF IT. THAT'S NOT BAD.

THAT'S KIND OF TYPICAL FOR A GAS STATION. YOU CAN SEE ALL THOSE LIGHTS ARE SHIELDED FROM GOING OUT. THEY MOSTLY GO DOWN. IT'S VERY BRIGHT AT THE PUMPS.

EVEN ON THE SIDEWALK, IT'S NOT THAT BRIGHT. THIS IS A BUSINESS THAT JUST TO THE RIGHT OF THIS, IF UP THERE OR THE HOUSES WE JUST LOOKED AT, THIS IS A BUSINESS THAT SITS ON

[01:10:01]

THIS IS AN OLD GAS STATION RIGHT DOWN THE STREET. EVEN THEY ARE MAINLY USING CANOPY LIGHTS. THIS IS WHAT WE LOOK LIKE FROM SPACE AT NIGHT.

WITH ALL THAT SAID. I WANTED TO SHOW YOU THE PICTURES.

ON THAT ONE LITTLE STORE, THEY HAVE SIX LIGHTS ON THE BACK OF THE BUILDING.

THREE ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE BUILDING, THREE ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE BUILDING, TEN ON THE FRONT, FOUR UNDER THE GAS CANOPY, SEVEN ON THE TOP OF THE GAS CANOPY P THREE ON THE LIGHT POLE AND FIVE ON THE GAS SIGN POLE. THAT'S 44 HIGH INTENSITY LIGHTS ON THIS LITTLE PIECE OF PROPERTY. IT'S CRAZY.

IT'S UNDER BA ZONING, GRANDFATHERED IN. IF YOU LOOK AT BA ZONING UNDER LIGHT, THIS IS WHAT THE REQUIREMENT IS. ARTIFICIAL LIGHTING USED TO LIGHT THE PREMISE SHALL BE DIRECTED AWAY FROM ADJACENT PARTIAL OR AG PROPERTY.

THAT'S PRETTY WEAK. THEY'RE NOT COMPLYING WITH THAT. OTHER THAN THE LI LIGHTS THAT AE SHINING ON THE HOUSES, I DON'T THINK IT'S CODE ENFORCEMENT. I DON'T THINK OUR CODE SAYS ANYTHING ABOUT HOW MUCH LIGHTING YOU CAN HAVE ON A PIECE OF PROPERTY.

>> I DON'T THINK IT DOES NECESSARILY EITHER. THERE IS CONCERN ABOUT SAFETY FOR THE ROAD. OBVIOUSLY, IT'S LIGHTING UP AND DISTRACTION AT THAT INTERSECTION. I THINK WE CAN TAKE A LOOK AT IT.

>> I BRING THIS UP JUST BECAUSE IT'S VERY -- LIKE BILL USED TO HAVE, THE LANDING STRIP OUT THERE AND THE KANGAROO IT USED TO BE. I THINK THEY FIXED SOME OF THEIR

LIGHTING. IT'S STILL BAD? >> IT HASN'T CHANGED.

>> IN ORANGE PARK, THEY BUILT -- I DON'T REMEMBER THE GAS STATION.

I THINK THAT WAS SPEEDWAY. THEY HAD A LOT OF LIGHT. THIS IS JUST LIGHTS ON THE BUILDING. HONESTLY, IT HAS TO GO BY THERE AT NIGHT WHEN IT'S DARK.

YOU THINK YOU'RE IN A PRISON YARD. >> THE QUESTION THAT I HAVE, FROM A NUANCE PERSPECTIVE, IS THERE ANYTHING THAT CAN BE USED TO TAKE THAT OFF THE HOUSE WHERE

THEY HAVE RIGHT BUT DON'T HAVE TO PUT UP WITH THIS? >> NOT IN OUR GENERAL CODE.

WE IT IN THE MASTER PLAN. DODIE, WILL PUT THE COMMENT. WE DON'T HAVE A APPLICABLE TO THE REST OF THE COUNTY. WE PUT IT IN A LIGHTING PLAN IS REQUIRED.

WE PUT IT IN THE RECOMMENDATION THAT IT MEET THE STANDARDS. WE CAN'T HELD THEM TO IT.

THAT'S SOMETHING WE DO WANT TO AMEND. I WOULD THINK IF IT IS A SAFETY CONCERN WITH THE ROAD, I WOULD THINK WE WOULD HAVE THE BASIS TO BE ABLE TO DO SOME CODE

ENFORCEMENT OR TALK WITH THEM AND SAY, -- >> TO YOUR POINT, THOUGH, I READ IT RIGHT OUT OF BA. WHICH IS WHAT THEY ARE ZONED. ONLY THING YOU CAN'T SHINE LIGHT IN RESIDENTIAL AREA. WHICH THEY ARE CLEARLY DOING. OTHER THAN THAT, I'M NOT SURE THE QUANTITY OF LIGHTS THAT THEY HAVE. ANY OF THAT VIOLATES ANY CODE WE HAVE OTHER THAN THE FACT THAT THEY ARE LIGHTING UP THOSE HOUSES ACROSS THE STREET.

[01:15:04]

>> YOU MAY HAVE TO TAKE THIS LITTLE PIECE AT A TIME STARTING WITH THE RESIDENTIAL PIECE AND

THE SAFETY PIECE. >> I THINK WHAT WE'RE GOING TO RUN INTO RIGHT NOW IS IDEALLY, I KNOW WE TALKED ABOUT IT. WE TAKE THE LAKE ASBURY STANDARDS AND MAKE THEM COUNTYWIDE. THE PROBLEM I THINK THAT WE'RE GOING TO HAVE WITH THIS IS SB180 MAY STOP US FROM DOING THAT RIGHT NOW. IT'S GOING TO BE MORE RESTRICTIVE IF WE DO THAT. THAT'S SAD. I THINK THAT'S WHAT WOULD HAPPEN. THIS HAS TO BE WRITTEN INTO -- IF YOU SAY LAKE ASBURY APPLIES TO THE WHOLE COUNTY, IT HAS TO GO INTO THE LDR AND SOMEONE IN TALLAHASSEE WILL LOOK AT THAT BECAUSE IT'S MORE RESTRICTIVE BECAUSE OF S BUN 180 -- SOCIAL SB180.I DRIVE BY THIS ALL THE T.

EVERY NIGHT, EGO BY -- I GO BY IT. OVER THE YEARS T WASN'T THAT BAD. I MOVED IN THAT AREA 40 YEARS I LIVED IN THAT AREA. IT USED TO BE A PRETTY TYPICAL LITTLE THING. OVER THE YEARS IT GOTTEN -- EVERY YEAR MORE LIGHTS GO UP.

>> THEY MUST BE SELLING A LOT OF GAS OUT THAT TWO PUMP. THAT'S EXPENSIVE.

THAT'S NOT CHEAP. >> IT'S JUST A GOOD EXAMPLE OF WHAT WE DON'T WANT.

THAT'S ALL. >> MR. CHAIR. IF I CAN FOLLOW-UP ON SOME OF RALPH'S COMMENT AND ASK A QESTION. WHAT BECAME OF UPDATING THE LDRS? I KNOW THERE WAS SOME ISSUES. WHERE DOES THAT STAND?

>> THAT'S STILL ON HOLD. WE WERE NOT HAPPY WITH THE DRAFT THAT WE WERE PRESENTED.

IT'S ON US TO REDEVELOP A NEW DRAFT AND BETWEEN STOCK SHORTAGES AND SOCIAL -- SB180.

>> IT WAS THE ONE PASSED LAST YEAR. THE GIST OF IT SAYS YOU CAN'T DO ANYTHING MORE RESTRICTIVE THAN WHAT YOU HAVE RIGHT NOW IN ANY COUNTIES THAT WERE AFFECTED BY THE HURRICANE TWO YEARS AGO, THE PROBLEM IS ALL 67 COUNTS FALL UNDER THAT.

IT'S REALLY A STATEWIDE GOSH DO WHAT WAS THE PURPOSE OF IT? >> THE BILLER SAID -- THE BUILDER SAID WE NEED TO GO BACK IN AND REBUILD THESE AREAS BUT THE LOCAL GOVERNMENTS ARE TAKING ADVANTAGE OF THE FACT THAT WE HAVE TO DO A LOT OF BUILDING TO CHANGE THEIR CODES.

WE DON'T WANT TO BUILD UNDER A DIFFERENT CODE. THEY SAID YOU CAN'T MAKE ANYTHING WORK. I THINK THE TERM THAT'S IN THE LAW IS MORE RESTRICTIVE THAN WHAT EXIST. IF YOU PUT ANYTHING IN THAT PUTS ANY ADDITIONAL REQUIREMENT IN

THERE? >> FROM NOW UNTIL END OF TIME, I GUESS.

>> IT SUPPOSED TO LAST FOR THREE YEARS. I THINK IT RENEWS IF WE GET

ANOTHER HURRICANE. >> I WOULD AGREE. I ALWAYS THOUGHT STRONGER, BETTER COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT CODES ARE IMPORTANT. WE FOUGHT FOR WHAT WE GOT IN CLAY HILL. I OFTEN SAID WHEN CLAY HILL IS LEADING THE PACK ON COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS -- I LIVE THERE FOR 40 YEARS BY LOVE THE PLACE, OBVIOUSLY.

IT SEEMS INTERESTING THAT WE, WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THIS REALLY NICE PLACE LIKE ASBURY.

THE REST OF THE COUNTY, GO AHEAD AND DO WHATEVER YOU WANT TO DO. IS IT POSSIBLE, IS THAT A PIPE DREAM TO THINK THAT IT'S SO IMPORTANT THAT WE'LL A COUNTYWIDE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT STANDARD THAT WOULD MIMIC THE LAKE ASBURY OR THE CLAY HILL?

>> NO, IT'S NOT A PIPE DREAM. WE NEED TO BE ADOPT POLICIES THAT ARE POTENTIALLY RESTRICTIVE BUT I THINK ONE THING THAT'S GOOD TO SEE IS OTHER EXAMPLES THAT COMMISSIONER PUCKHABER PRESENTED. THOSE ARE MORE RECENTLY BUILT PROJECTS THAT HAVE PUT IN DOWN

LIGHTING AND CUT OFF LUMINARIES. THE NEWER PROJECTS DOING THAT. >> THEY ARE REQUIRED TO DO IT IN

OTHER COMMUNITIES. >> I THINK A LOT OF BUILDER AND DEVELOPERS APPRECIATE THAT.

THE PROBLEM IS, THE REGULATIONS WE DO ARE NEVER FOR PROBABLY MOST OF THE PEOPLE WHO DOING

[01:20:05]

THIS ONE IS A REALLY EGREGIOUS EXAMPLE. THAT'S WHY I USED.

I THINK THERE ARE OTHER BUILDINGS WITHIN HALF MILE OF THAT AREA THAT ARE VERY NICELY DONE. NICE DOWN LIGHTING. THEY KEEP THEIR LIGHTS LOW.

THAT KIND OF THING. WE CAN'T MAKE ANYBODY DO THAT OTHER THAN IN MOST AREAS OF THE COUNTY, WE CAN SUGGEST IT. I KNOW THAT STAFF DOES SUGGEST IT.

ALL THE TIME. WE C >> I WOULD HAVE CONCERN WITH THE AFFORDABILITY AND THE PRICE. LIKE ASBURY IS MORE FLUENT. ENACT A BROAD SWEEPING REQUIREMENT WHAT MIGHT BE SIGNIFICANT UPGRADES WILL AFFECT AFFORDABILITY.

THAT WOULD BE MY CONCERN. >> IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO MAKE ANYBODY UPGRADE.

GOING FORWARD, YOU CAN MAKE IT A REQUIREMENT. IF COST WAS A REAL BIG THING, YOU DO NEED TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT. I DON'T THINK IT'S ALMOST IMPOSSIBLE TO GO BACK TO SOMEONE AND SAY WE DON'T LIKE WHAT YOU DID.

YOU NEED TO CHANGE IT. ORANGE PARK HAS THEIR OWN SET OF RULES.

IN GENERAL, YOU CAN'T DO THAT. >> YOU CAN TELL WHERE BRANDEN FIELD MASTER PLAN STARTS.

SIGNAGE IS DARRENT LANDSCAPING D LANDSCAPING IS DIFFERENT. DRIVE THROUGH THAT STRETCH, YOU GET SOUTH OF THE AREA INTO MIDDLE PART OF THE PROPERTY, IT GOES BACK UP AGAIN UP.

GET THE NEW DEVELOPMENT. I HATE THE REALLY TALL TACKY SIGNS.

THAT'S WHAT LED TO PUSHING FORWARD WITH THE MASTER PLAN TO PUT THAT BP IN.

GUILTY IT'S DARK. A MILE AWAY YOU CAN READ THE SIGN.

IS THAT NECESSARY? I DON'T THINK SO. IT HAD NO SIGN, PEOPLE WOULD STILL BUY GAS THERE. I'M IN FULL STRONG SUPPORT OF UPDATING THE LDRS.

I'LL VOLUNTEER SOME OF MY TIME. >> I'D BE WILLING TO SIT ON WORKSHOPS OR THINGS THAT CAME UP. I DON'T THINK THERE'S A LIMIT. YOU GOT TO REALIZE.

THE SHORT HANDED RIGHT NOW. WHEN THEY ARE FULLY STAFFED, THEY ARE STILL SHORT HANDED.

THEY ARE DOING A GOOD JOB. I THINK PART OF OUR JOB AS PLANNING COMMISSION IS TO GIVE SOME SUGGESTIONS LIKE THIS FROM TIME TO TIME AND HOPEFULLY THEY GET TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT WHEN IT'S

POSSIBLE TO TAKE THEM INTO ACCOUNT. >> DO YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE OPENINGS AND THE STAFF. JUST TO MAKE IT KIND OF -- ANYBODY MIGHT BE WATCHING OR VIEWING. CERTAINLY THE COMMISSIONERS MAY WANT TO KNOW WHAT WE HAVE AS FAR

AS OPEN SEATS THAT WE'RE LOOKING FOR QUALIFIED INDIVIDUALS. >> SURE, WE HAVE A ZONING CHIEF POSITION THAT IS OPEN. IT IS ADVERTISED ON THE WEBSITE NOW IF ANYONE INTERESTED.

WE ALSO A SENIOR PLANNING COMMISSION WHICH IS NOT POSTED. THAT POSITION HAS BEEN OPEN FOR

LONG TIME. >> YOU TWO PEOPLE SHORT NOW OF --

>> YES. >> YOU CAN FILL THOSE IF YOU HAD SOMEBODY? I KNOW THERE WAS SOME TALK WITH THE WHOLE PROPERTY TAX ANYTHING. -- FOR THE PEOPLE THAT ARE

[01:25:19]

I KNOW THAT SOUNDINGS TERRIBLE. I'M ON THE PLANNING COMMISSION. HOW MANY PEOPLE WORK IN YOUR

DEPARTMENT? >> I THINK I LOST TRACK OF THE COUNT.

I THINK WE HAVE NINE POSITIONS TOTAL. PLANNING AND ZONING STAFF.

WE DO EVERYTHING REVIEWING LANDSCAPING PLAN, DODIE AS A CONSERVATION PROGRAM ALONG WITH DOING REZONING APPLICATION SUPERVISING THE STAFF WHICH IS THE FRONT LINE.

THAT ANSWER QUESTIONS MAY AND PHONE CALLS FROM EVERYTHING WHAT I CAN DO WITH MY SITE.

CAN I BUILD A HOUSE ON THIS PROPERTY. THERE'S A LOT OF TIME YOU HAVE

TO DO DIGGING. >> TOTAL OF NINE PEOPLE >> YES.

>> NINE POSITIONS TWO ARE OPEN. YOU HAVE SEVEN PERSON STAFF RIGHT NOW?

>> YES. >> BETH IS THE SENIOR PERSON IN THE STAFF?

WITH US. THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL. >> I THINK WE CAN PUT ONE TOGETHER. THE WAY OUR WORK DAY PROGRAM IS IT ABREAKS -- IT BREAKS IT APART. JUDGE SOMETHING THAT WILL HELP US REMEMBER WHAT YOU JUST

COVERED. >> WE CAN DO THAT. >> OKAY.

>> THANKS FOR LISTENING TO ME, BY THE WAY. >> YOU BRING UP A VERY VALID POINT. WHAT IRRITATES ME WHEN YOU DRIVING DOWN THAT ROAD, ONE OF THESE LIGHTS SHINING RESTRICT DOWN THE ROAD. YOU TRYING TO SEE THE ROAD.

ALL OF A SUDDEN YOU FEEL LIKE SOMETHING IS LANDING AN AIRPLANE.

NEXT MEETING IS APRIL 7TH. MARY TOLD ME SHE WILL NOT BE HERE.

SHE'S HAVING CATARACT SURGERY. DON'T FORGET TO CHANGE THE CLOCK ON SUNDAY.

ANYTHING ELSE? MEETING

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.