Jan 07, 2020 Planning Commission

[Call to Order]

[00:00:04]

>> WE ARE GOING TO CALL THE MEETING TO ORDER. GOOD EVENING.

I HOPE THAT DIDN'T GIVE ANYONE A HEART ATTACK. FIRST OFF, HAPPY NEW YEAR AND WELCOME, EVERYBODY. WELCOME TO THE CLAY COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION

[Pledge of Allegiance]

IF YOU NEED TO TAKE OR MAKE A CALL WE WILL ASK YOU TO STEP OUT INTO THE VESTIBULE TO DO SO. AT THIS TIME WE WOULD LIKE TO ASK YOU TO PLEASE RISE AND WE

WILL BE LED IN THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. >> I PLEDGE OF 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.

>> WE WILL START TONIGHT'S MEETING OFF WITH INTRODUCTIONS. I AM MICHAEL BOURRE I'M THE CHAIRMAN.O MY FAR RIGHT IS KELLIE COLLINS. SHE'S THE RECORDING SECRETARY.

EXT TO KELLY IS JIM FOSSA HE'S OUR SCHOOL BOARD REPRESENTATIVE.

NEXT TO JIM IS COMMISSIONER ROBERT VAHALLA AND WE HAVE COMMISSIONER BRENDA JOHNSON, BELINDA. I APOLOGIZE. BELINDA JOHNSON.

VICE CHAIR RALPH PUCKHABER AND TO MY LEFT IS COMMISSIONER BRIDGMAN, AND THEN TO THE FAR LEFT IS CLAY COUNTY PLANNING AND ZONING DIRECTOR ED LEHMAN ANNEXED TO AND IS OUR COUNTY ATTORNEY COURTNEY GRIMM. AND THEN WE HAVE OUR CAMP BLANDING REPRESENTATIVE LIEUTENANT COLONEL LEONARD. WE ALSO HAVE OUR CHIEF OF ZONING, CHUCK WILLIAMS ICHIEF PLANNER CAROLYN MORGAN. WE HAVE ÃI THINK THAT WAS THE LAST FROM STAFF, IS THAT CORRECT? WE WOULD ALSO LIKE TO THINK OUR REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE LAW ENFORCEMENT FOR BEING HERE AND TAKING CARE OF US AND I'VE VIP JUST WALKED IN.

WE HAVE COMMISSIONER DAVID HENDRY WAS A PAST MEMBER OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION AND NOW SITS AS A COUNTY COMMISSIONER. THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE TONIGHT, SIR. THE CLAY COUNTY PLANNING COMMISSION IS AN ADVISORY BOARD TO THE CLAY COUNTY BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISIONERS. THE DECISIONS BY THE SPORT RECOMMENDATIONS ONLY. JUDY BCC WHO HAS THE FINAL SAY AT THEIR MEETING WHICH FOR THIS MEETING WILL BE JANUARY 28. IF THERE IS A SPECIFIC ITEM ON THE AGENDA YOU WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON, PLEASE FILL OUT ONE OF THE COMMENT CARDS. THEY LOOK LIKE THIS AND THEY ARE IN THE BACK VESTIBULE. THE PUBLIC COMMENT. AT THE END BEGINNING AND END OF THIS MEETING ARE FOR ANYTHING YOU WANT TO SPEAK ABOUT OTHER THAN THE ITEMS ON THE PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA FOR THIS MEETING. YOU WILL HAVE THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK. OUT OF CURIOSITY, HOW MANY FOLKS IS THIS THE FIRST MEETING TO THE PLANNING AND ZONING COMMISSION? PTHANK YOU SO MUCH.

FIRST, THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. WE LOVE PARTICIPATION FROM OUR COMMUNITY. THE WAY THIS WORKS IS WHEN I CALL YOUR NAME WHEN WE HIT YOUR AGENDA ITEM I WILL CALL YOUR NAME AFTER I HAVE RECEIVED REPUBLIC COMMENT CARD, YOU COME UP HERE TO THE PODIUM. ON THE RIGHT-HAND SIDE OF THE PODIUM THERE ARE THREE LIGHTS.

THERE'S A GREEN LIGHT, A YELLOW LIGHT AND A RED LIGHT. YOU WILL HAVE THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK IN THOSE LIGHTS HELP TO INDICATETO YOU HOW MUCH TIME YOU HAVE LEFT.

IF THE RED LIGHT GOES SOLID I WILL ASK YOU TO PLEASE WRAP UP AND SIT DOWN.

WE WANT TO MAKE SURE EVERYBODY HAS ENOUGH TIME WHILE THEY ARE HERE TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION.

ALSO, ANY COMMENTS WILL BE DIRECTED SOLELY TOWARDS THE COMMISSION.

IT WILL NOT BE TOO ANYONE ELSE IN THE GROUP NOR WILL IT BE TOO ANY OF THE STAFF MEMBERS.

IT WILL ONLY BE TOO THE COMMISSION. THAT BEING SAID, WE ARE GOING TO OPEN UP ÃWE ARE GOING TO PLOOK FOR A MOVEMENT ON THE APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM

[1.  Approval of Minutes]

NOVEMBER 5 > MOVED TO APPROVE >> SECOND

>> WE HAVE A FIRST AND A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? I HAVE LOST IT.

THANK YOU. WE SKIPPED OUR DECEMBER MEETING AND CLEARLY HAVE GOTTEN A LITTLE RUSTY OVER 60 DAYS. WE WILL OPEN UP OUR FIRST PUBLIC COMMENT.

AGAIN, WHEN WE OPEN UP PUBLIC COMMENT YOU CAN COME TO THE PODIUM AND SPEAK ABOUT ANYTHING OTHER THAN WHAT'S ON THE AGENDA. SEEING NOBODY COMING UP TO THE

[1.  Public Hearing to Consider Rezoning Application Z-19-18 BA-2 to BB-3]

[00:05:01]

FROM BA-2 TO BB-3. WHO'S GOT THAT TONIGHT? >> THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION THIS APPLICATIONS IN 1918 THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CHANGE IN ZONING FROM BA-2 TO BB-3 AND THE PARCEL IS APPROXIMATELY .69 ACRES AND IS LOCATED WITHIN THE KIMMICH OR FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORY. THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CHANGE OF ZONING IN ORDER TO EXPANDING THEIR EXISTING BUSINESS OF SURROUNDING ZONING IS TO THE NORTH AND THE EAST IS AR. SOUTH BABY THE WEST IS U.S. HIGHWAY 17. THIS IS AN AERIAL VIEW OF THE SITE AND A FEW PHOTOGRAPHS.

THE APPLICANT CURRENTLY OWNS G AND M TONY AND G AND M TIRE AND LUBE TO THE ADJACENT NORTH OF THE PROPERTY. THE APPLICANT HAS BEEN USING THE PROPERTY TO STORE TOWED VEHICLES AND VEHICLES AWAITING SERVICING VEHICLES FOR INSURANCE PURPOSES.

THE APPLICANT WAS CITED WITH CODE ENFORCEMENT IN VIOLATION DUE TO THE FACT THAT BA-2 DOES NOT ALLOW FOR THE CURRENT USE. IF APPROVED APPLICANT WILL BECOME COMPLIANT IN THE CASE WILL BECOME CLOSE. STAFF REVIEWED THE APPLICATION AND DETERMINE THOSE [INDISCERNIBLE] WITH THAT STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF APPLICATIONS IN 1918.

>> ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? GOLF?

>> GIVE ME AN IDEA WHERE THIS IS 117. >> PROBABLY DO YOU RECALL WHERE

15 A INTERSECTS WITH 17? >> SOUTH OF GREEN? >> IT USED TO BE A BAR AND IT'S NOW A FEED STORE. IT'S PROBABLY 500 FEET SOUTH OF THAT, IF NOT MORE.

>> THANK YOU. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? RIGHT.

HEARING NONE, IS THE APPLICANT HERE? OKAY.

IF THE APPLICANT IS HERE, SIR, IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO ADD ANYTHING TO THAT, YOU ARE WELCOME TO. VERY GOOD. THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE.

AT THIS POINT WE WILL OPEN UP PUBLIC COMMENT. I DO NOT HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT CARDS. I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND OPEN UP PUBLIC COMMENT IF YOU HAVE SOMETHING YOU WOULD LIKE TO SAY, YOU CAN COME UP AT THIS TIME.

SEEING NOBODY APPROACH, WE WILL CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT. WE WILL BRING IT BACK TO THE

COMMISSION FOR DISCUSSION. >> I WOULD GO AHEAD MAKE A MOTION.

I WILL MOVE THE STAFF REPORT ON THIS AND IF I CAN GET A SECOND. >> SECOND.

>> OKAY. IT'S ALREADY BE BE ON BOTH SIDES OF THIS PARCEL WHICH IS MORE INTENSE THAN BB-3. SO WE ARE CERTAINLY NOT IMPACTING ANYBODY.

I THINK IF WE WORK THEY WOULD BE HERE TO VOICE BACK. >> ANY OTHER ÃWE HAVE A FIRST AND SECOND.ARON DISCUSSION. ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? HEARING NONE, WE WILL LOOK Ã THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. AS A REMINDER, THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS IS GOING TO TAKE THIS UP AGAIN AT THEIR JANUARY 20 MEETING. WE WILL MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER

[2.  Public Hearing to Amend the Land Development Code to Add RV and Boat Storage as a Conditional Use in IA and IB Zoning]

>> THANK YOU MR. CHAIRMAN. THIS IS A STAFF INITIATIVE PROPOSAL TO ADD AS A CONDITIONAL USE IN IA AND IP THAT'S POWER INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICTS LAND AND RV BOAT STORAGE AS I NOTED IN MY MEMO HERE RIGHT NOW RV AND BOAT STORAGE ALLOWS CONDITIONAL USE IN BB-2. BB-3, PB FOUR, AND PUD. IT ALLOWED IN THE PLANNING INDUSTRIAL PROJECT. WE HAVE HAD A NUMBER OF REQUESTS AND A FEW INQUIRIES FROM PEOPLE THAT WOULD LIKE TO ESTABLISH RV AND BOAT STORAGE AND INDUSTRIAL AREAS BUT IS NOT A CONDITIONAL USE ALLOWED THERE. I KNOW THE ST. JOHNS COUNTY DOES IDENTIFY THOSE RV STORAGE AS A TYPICAL LIGHT INDUSTRIAL USE AND ALLOWED BY RIGHT THAT TYPE OF USE IN THEIR INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSING AND HEAVY INDUSTRIAL ZONING DISTRICTS.

OUR PROPOSAL IS CONSISTENT WITH ST. JOHNS COUNTY AND OUR NEIGHBORS TO THE EAST ALLOW ALREADY. WE SEE NO REASON WHY RV AND BOAT STORAGE WOULD BE INCOMPATIBLE WITH INDUSTRIAL USE NOR DO WE SEE ANY SITUATION WHERE INDUSTRIAL USE WILL BE PINCOMPATIBLE WITH RV AND BOAT STORAGE AND RECOMMEND AMENDING THE CODE TO ADD THIS AS A

CONDITIONAL USE UNDER INDUSTRIAL DISTRICT. >> THANK YOU.NY QUESTIONS?

>> AND WHEN THE RV AND BOAT STORAGE ÃIS THAT INSIDE OR OUTSIDE ONLY, OR CAN THEY PUT

[00:10:06]

UP Ã >> IN PID IT'S INSIDE. CHAD DO YOU NOTICE?

>> THE LAST ONE THERE IT SPECIFICALLY THOSE REGULATIONS WERE THE INSIDE IS PRIMARILY THE OUTSIDE STORAGE FOR THE BOAT AND RV. WE HAVE ONLY HAD ONE INQUIRY FOR ANY TYPE OF THE INSIDE STORAGE AND I WAS AT THE ONE OFF OF COUNTY ROAD 220.

OTHER THAN THAT IT'S ALWAYS AN "WHAT ABOUT BUFFERING ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY?

>> THAT'S WHY WE KEPT THE CONDITIONAL USE IN THERE. WE KIND OF TOYED WITH IT AND IT SHOULD BE WE FELT THE CONDITIONS WERE IN PLACE TO DO THAT AND THERE'S AN OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENT AND THERE'S A LANDSCAPING REQUIREMENT AND THERE STILL A PAINTING REQUIREMENT FOR THE DRIVE THAT'S THERE. IT CAN BE AN ALTERNATIVE MATERIAL WHERE THEY STORE THE BOAT AND RVS AND THAT'S WHY WE WANTED TO REMAIN TRUE TO THE CONDITIONS WE HAVE WE ARE GOING INTO A COMMERCIAL SETTING AND WE ARE GOING INTO AN INDUSTRIAL SETTING AND INDUSTRIAL PROJECTS EVEN THOUGH THEY ARE INDUSTRIAL BY NATURE HE IS STILL A PARKING THAT REQUIRES LANDSCAPING AND BUFFERING AND IT REQUIRES ANY OF THAT ESPECIALLY VERY INTENSE BUFFERING BECAUSE IT'S ADJACENT TO ANY TYPE OF RESIDENTIAL OR AGRICULTURAL.

>> STOOD.>> ONE OF THE QUESTION, CHAD. >> HE KEEPS DEFERRING TO

>> NOW WHEN YOU ASK A QUESTION I WILL DEFER TOO. [LAUGHTER]

>> I WOULD EXPECT MOST OF THIS WILL PROBABLY BE AFTER STORAGE. SOMETIMES THEY WANT TO PUT THOSE TEMPORARY METAL COVERS, YOU KNOW WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT, OVER IT.

WHAT HAPPENS IF THEY WANT TO DO THAT? ARE THEY JUST ALLOWED TO DO

THAT BECAUSE IT'S INDUSTRIAL OR IS THAT A SEPARATE REQUEST? >> THEY ARE REQUIRED A PERMIT.

SO IF THEY GO VERTICAL WITH THE STRUCTURAL COVER WHICH WE DON'T REALLY HAVE AN OBJECTION TO, I MEAN, THEY ARE COVERING AND IT'S STILL GOING DEEPER MEAL MATERIAL IF THEY HAVE AGGREGATE MATERIAL THEY ARE STORING UP BUT THEY WOULD BE REQUIRED TO HAVE A PERMIT TO INSTALL A

STRUCTURE. >> OKAY. THAT'S ALL.

>> THE ONLY COMMENT THAT I WILL ADD IS THIS OPINION IS KIND OF A NO-BRAINER.V AND BOAT STORAGE IS CERTAINLY A LIGHTER USE THAN INDUSTRIAL ON A SITE. THE SITE ALREADY HAS INDUSTRIAL TO ME THIS IS SOMETHING WE PROBABLY SHOULD HAVE ALREADY DONE.

I WANTED TO TAKE A SECOND AND JUST POINT OUT THAT OUR DIRECTOR OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SERVICES JUST MADE HER ENTRANCE. THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE.

SEEING NOBODY APPROACH WE WILL CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT AND BRING IT BACK FOR EMOTION.

>> I WILL MOVE THE STAFF REPORT >> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A FIRST AND A SECOND. IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION?

>> I AGREE IT'S KIND OF A NO-BRAINER. AND I AM HOPING THAT WHAT THIS MIGHT DO WHILE THEY ARE WAITING FOR INDUSTRIAL TO COME IN. THAT WOULD BE HOPEFULLY

PRESERVED FROM THAT POINT. >> SEEING NO OTHER COMMENT ON COMMENT.

>> IF I MAY ADD BECAUSE IT'S A CONDITIONAL USE ITEM IT WILL BE HEARD ON THE 14TH AS WELL AS

THE 28TH. >> THE 14TH AND THE 28TH? OKAY.

THANK YOU MR. WILLIAMS. 4 PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER REZONING. TO KNIGHT BOXX AND OLD

JENNINGS. MR. WILLIAMS IS ASSURANCE? >> YOU SKIP ONE.

[3.  Public Hearing to Consider Rezoning Application Z-19-20 AG to AR 5581 Carter Spencer]

>> PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER REZONING Z1 920 AG TO AR 5581. ON CARTER SPENCER ROAD.

>> THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CHANGE IN ZONING.

PARCEL IS APPROXIMATELY 12.9 ACRES LOCATED WITH THE ACT FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORY BEING PROPOSED TO BE AMENDED UNDER CONFERENCE PLAN AMENDED 1907 YOU SAW THIS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED AND SENT IT FOR THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING CHANGE IN ZONING IN ORDER FOR IT TO BE MORE CONSISTENT WITH PROPOSED LAND USE. THE DESIGNATION REQUIRES A MINIMUM OF 20 ACRES ON THE PARCEL IS 12.91. THE SURROUNDING ZONINGS ARE ALL BAG WE ARE LOOKING AT POTENTIALLY AN ADMINISTRATIVE BUT THE APPLICANT WANTED [INDISCERNIBLE] THIS IS AN HOTOS THE STAFF IS READ THE ITE APPLICATION TO DETERMINE THE

BEST CONSISTENT [INDISCERNIBLE] ON JANUARY 28, 2020. >> IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS FOR

[00:15:01]

STAFF? >> I HAVE A QUESTION. IT HAS TO DO WITH THE OWNERSHIP. THEY WARRANTY DEED IS TO TRIMCO AND MICHAEL SCOTT ZIMMERMAN.

MY QUESTION IS WHAT IS THE RELATIONSHIP OF TRIMCO SERVICES TO ZIMMERMAN?

>> IF I UNDERSTAND HE WAS PART OF TRIMCO SERVICES BUT NO LONGER EXISTS.

>> HUNDRED PERCENT OF THE OWNERSHIP Ã >> WITH MR. ZIMMERMAN IS HERE

HE CAN EXPLAIN. >> THANK YOU. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? VERY GOOD. IS THE APPLICANT PRESENT?

>> THE APPLICANT IS NOT PRESENT. SO AT THIS POINT WE ARE GOING TO MOVE INTO PUBLIC COMMENT. ANYBODY HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT? PLEASE COME FORWARD. SEEING THEN WE WILL CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT AND BRING IT

BACK TO THE COMMISSION. >> MOVED TO APPROVE. >> I WILL SECOND THAT

>> WE HAVE A FIRST AND A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION?

[4.  Public Hearing to Consider Rezoning Application PUD-19-11 AR to PUD Knight Boxx and Old Jennings]

>> NOW WE WILL MOVE INTO ITEM NUMBER 4. PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER REZONING APPLICATION PUD 1911 AR TO PUD KNIGHT BOXX AND OLD JENNINGS.

>> THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CHANGE IN ZONING FROM AR TO PUD.

IT'S LOCATED WITHIN THE URBAN CORE FUTURE LAND USE CATEGORY APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CHANGE IN ZONING ORDER TO DEVELOP SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLINGS.THE SURROUNDING ZONINGS ARE TO THE NORTH THEY ARE PUD AND RD THREE. TO THE SOUTH IS PS ONE TO THE EAST IS KNIGHT BOXX RD. WITH A CROSS KNIGHT BOXX RD. IS RB AND TO THE WEST IS RB.

THIS IS AN AERIAL VIEW OF THE SITE AND JUST A FEW SITE PHOTOS.

THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A CHANGE IN ZONING FROM AR TO PUD TO DEVELOP SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL UNITS LOCATED WITHIN THE URBAN CORE FUTURE LAND USE.

THE LOT SIZE IS 4800 SQUARE FEET. LIVING AREA OF 1500 SQUARE FEET. DEVELOPMENT WILL CONTAIN A RECREATION WITH OPEN SPACE IN THE FORM OF A PLAYGROUND AREA OF THE FIELD WALKING PATH PROPOSED AROUND THE RETENTION POND. THIS IS A PROPOSED SITE PLAN. THERE'S AN ENTRANCE FROM KNIGHT BOXX AS WELL AS AN ENTRANCE FROM OLD JENNINGS RD. A STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE APPLICATION DETERMINING ITS CONSISTENT AND COMPATIBLE AND WE RECOMMEND APPROVAL.

>> THANK YOU MR. WILLIAMS. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? >> CHAD, THE BLACK AREA IS ONE THAT HE WANTS TO REZONE. IS IT A DIFFERENT OWNER WITH THE TOP TWO PORTIONS OF THE

GRAIN? >> YES. THOSE ÃTHE BLACK OUTLINE IS

THE ACTUAL LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY. >> IS A DIFFERENT OWNER.

>> DIFFERENT OWNERSHIPS. >> AND THAT'S AG? >> AR.

>> WHAT ARE THE SIZE OF THE LOTS OF THE ADJOINING PROPERTY? >> FOR RB THE MINIMUM SIZE IS

60 FEET.> AND THEY ARE GOING 40 FEET HERE. >> 40?

>> YES, 40. AND I HAVE TO DISCLOSE I HAD A CONVERSATION WITH CURTIS HEART

OVER THE PHONE CONCERNING THIS REZONING. >> ALL RIGHT.T THIS TIME UNLESS THERE'S ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM THE COMMISSION Ã GO AHEAD.

>> I ALSO NEED TO DISCLOSE THAT CURTIS HEART CONTACTED ME AND ASKED IF I HAD ANY QUESTIONS,

WHICH I DID NOT, AND THAT WAS IT. >> VERY GOOD.

AT THIS TIME WE WOULD ASK IF THE APPLICANT IS PRESENT. [INDISCERNIBLE]

>> MR. HEART, IF WE COULD HAVE YOUR ADDRESS, PLEASE? >> 8051 TARA LN.

IF YOU COULD LEAVE THE SITE PLAN UP IT WILL HELPED ME EXPLAIN.

THIS IS 8051 TARA LN., JACKSONVILLE, FL. IT'S 27.6 ACRES ON THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF KNIGHT BOXX RD. AND OLD JENNINGS AND WE ARE REQUESTING AR TO PUD. THIS IS IN THE ORDER URBAN CORE WE CONSIDER THIS A REDEVELOPMENT AREA. THERE ARE SIGNS OF AN OLD HOUSE IN HERE AND WE WILL BE REMOVING THAT. THERE IS AN EXISTING CITY RIGHT-OF-WAY THAT HAS NEVER

[00:20:02]

SO THAT TRAFFIC PATTERN WORKS REALLY WELL IF PEOPLE WANT TO GO NORTH.

WHEN PEOPLE WANT TO GO NORTH ON KNIGHT BOXX AND WANT TO CLOSE OUT THE CAN, THE OTHER WAY.

THERE'S ONE POSITIVE THING ABOUT PUTTING A SITE PLAN THAT YOU CAN LOOK AND SEE HOW WE HAVE DONE IT. THERE IS A LARGE CHURCH IMMEDIATELY TO THE SOUTH.

YOU CAN SEE THERE IS A NICE PIECE OF WETLAND, AND WE HAVE DONE OUR COMPENSATORY STORAGE RIGHT NEXT TO THE CHURCH ALSO SO THAT THERE IS PLENTY OF BUFFER BETWEEN US AND THE CHURCH. TUESDAY WEST, THERE IS A NICE PIECE OF WETLAND AND WE PUT OUR RETENTION POND TO GIVE SOME BUFFER BETWEEN US AND THE EXISTING HOUSING DEVELOPMENT.

THE SITE NOW IS PRETTY HEAVILY WOODED. LET'S SAY.

ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY IS A MAJOR WETLAND AND, OF COURSE, THE SOUTH SIDE.

KNIGHT BOXX IS A FOUR-LANE HIGHWAY, SO WE ARE BASICALLY BUFFERED ALL THE WAY AROUND.

WE TRIED TO BUY THE PIECE THAT YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT, THE GREEN.

WE TRIED TO BUY THOSE. THOSE ARE ESTATES OR SOMETHING AND WE WERE VERY UNSUCCESSFUL.

WE WOULD LIKE TO STILL BUY THEM. THEY ARE VERY OLD HOUSING STOCKS AND MOBILE HOMES RIGHT THERE. THERE IS A MULTIFAMILY ÃIF YOU'VE BEEN DOWN OLD JENNINGS, THERE'S A MULTIFAMILY DEVELOPMENT RIGHT AS WE COME OUT OF OLD JENNINGS, AND THAT'S WHAT WE ARE COMPETING WITH. AND THIS WOULD BE ENTRY-LEVEL, WORKFORCE HOUSING, $200,000 STARTING HOMES. THESE WOULD BE VERY NICE HOMES, BUT THEY ARE ENTRY AND WORKFORCE HOUSING. I WOULD BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE. IF YOU WILL NOTICE WE HAVE A RECREATION AREA FOR CHILDREN.

MOST OF THE PEOPLE THAT BUY IN THIS LEVEL HOUSING WOUND UP HAVING CHILDREN SO YOU HAVE A NICE PLAYGROUND FOR CHILDREN, AND WE HAVE A WALKING TRAIL AROUND THE LAKE SO YOU CAN WALK AROUND THE LAKE AND GET SOME EXERCISE. I'M GLAD TO ANSWER ANY

QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE. >> ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT?

>> THESE LOTS ARE 40 FEET WIDE? >> YES, THEY ARE. >> ,A CAR GARAGE?

>> TWO. TWO CAR GARAGE +2 SPACES IN FRONT OF THE GARAGE IS.

SO WE CAN PARK FOR CARS. I KNOW LOTS OF PEOPLE DON'T PARK IN THE GARAGE.

I UNDERSTAND THAT. THEY CAN CERTAINLY PARK IN THIS GRUDGES.

>> BECAUSE I NOTICED THE MINIMUM SETBACK THE FRONT SETBACK IS ONLY 20 FEET.

>> YES. AND THAT'S PLENTY OF ROOM TO PARK A CAR.

>> I HAVE A PICKUP TRUCK AND I HAVE MEASURED IT. IT'S 20 FEET LONG AND NOBODY PULLS RIGHT UP TO THE DOOR OF THE GARAGE SO WHAT ENDS UP HAPPENING IS THEY END UP EITHER BLOCKING THE SIDEWALK, PARKING IN THE STREET, AND WHEN YOU HAVE ONLY 40 FOOT LOTS, YOU END

UP CREATING ALMOST A LITTLE SLUISLAM HERE >> THAT'S THE STANDARD ON A 60

OR 80 FOOT LOCK. >> IT'S ALWAYS BEEN A COMPLAINT OF MINE BECAUSE IF YOU GO INTO ANY OF THESE DEVELOPMENTS ON THESE EXTREMELY NARROW LOTS Ã AND I DON'T KNOW IF YOU REMEMBER THE LAST ONE WE HAD THAT WAS 40. 45 WAS THE LAST ONE THAT WAS CRAZY NARROW. BUT YOU GO BACK THERE IN A YEAR OR SO, THESE HOUSES HAVE THREE OR FOUR CARS AND THEY ARE PARKED ALL OVER THE YARDS, THEIR PARK ON THE SIDEWALKS.

IT JUST TURNS INTO A SLOPPY MESS BECAUSE LOTS ARE TOO SMALL.

SO I REALLY DON'T HAVE ANY OTHER COMMENT I JUST WANTED TO ADD THAT.

>> I JUST HAVE A QUICK QUESTION FOR STAFF. THIS 20 FOOT MEET THE

REQUIREMENTS OF THE COUNTY? >> YES. >> LET ME CLARIFY.HAT'S WHAT THEY ARE REQUESTING IN THIS PARTICULAR ZONING DISTRICT FOR THE PUD BUT IN OTHER ZONING DISTRICTS IT COULD BE 25 OR 30, IT DEPENDS ON THE ZONING DISTRICT AND IN THIS PARTICULAR

CASE THEY'RE ASKING FOR 20. >> THIS WOULD BE THE EXACT SAME HOUSE ÃAND DOING A DEVELOPMENT ON CANDLEWOOD DRIVE 182 LOTS THERE. 50 FOOT LOTS.

IT'S THE EXACT SAME HOUSE AND SAME DRIVEWAY AND PARKING SPACES ARE THE SAME.

THESE HOMEBUILDERS WOULD BUILD THE SAME SIZE HOUSE ON A 40 OR 50 OR 60 FOOT LOTS.

WE ARE HAVING TO COMPETE WITH TOWNHOMES ACROSS THE STREET AND SINCE WE ARE COMPETING WITH 15

[00:25:02]

AND WE WILL LOSE SOME OF THESE. 2 IS THE MAXIMUM THAT WE WILL PROBABLY LOSE SOME OF THIS IN DESIGN. AS YOU DESIGN THESE THINGS YOU END UP LOSING LOTS AS ANYBODY THAT'S DESIGNED THOSE NOSE. I'D BE GLAD TO ANSWER ANY MORE QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE.

>> MR. HEART, YOU JUST MENTION THAT THE MULTIFAMILY ACROSS THE STREET ÃHOW WATER THIS?>

THOSE ARE 15 TO MAYBE 18. >> I BEIEVE THEY RANGE FROM 15 TO 20.

AND THERE'S ALSO A PLATTED SUBDIVISION THAT WAS NEVER BUILT THAT'S MULTIFAMILY.

AND IF MEMORY SERVES, THOSE WERE 20. THE KIND OF A PIECE OF PROPERTY FROM THAT THAT WAS PART OF THE UNDERDEVELOPED PORTION BUT I DON'T RECALL WHAT THOSE WERE.

I REMEMBER IT WAS CALLED JENNINGS COURT WAS THE NAME OF THE SUBDIVISION AND THEY WERE

20S. >> THANK YOU. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE

APPLICANT? >> I JUST HAVE ONE. I KNOW THAT YOU ARE TRYING TO PUT AS MANY HOMES ON THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT YOU CAN, BUT WHAT IS THE OBJECTIVE OF GOING

TO THE 40 FOOT LOTS INSTEAD OF 50 FOOT LOTS? >> WE ARE COMPETING WITH

MULTIFAMILY PROPERTY AROUND US. >> I KNOW BUT THAT'S MULTIFAMILY.

THESE ARE HOMES. >> I KNOW. I WOULD NOT FEEL THAT IF I CAME IN HERE AND ASK YOU TO DO IT TO A MULTIFAMILY. BECAUSE I AM RIGHT NEXT TO MULTIFAMILY. SO WE WOULD RATHER BUILD SINGLE-FAMILY AND MULTIFAMILY ENTITIES WILL START IN THE 200S. THIS IS NOT LIKE WE ARE BUILDING AN $85,000 SINGLE-FAMILY HOME. THESE WILL BE 200,000 AND

ABOVE. THESE ARE VERY NICE HOMES. >> I KNOW YOU MIGHT NOT BE ABLE TO ANSWER THIS, BUT WHAT WOULD THE PROPERTY VALUE ASPECT OF SOMETHING WHEN YOU HAVE ALL OF THE EXISTING OTHER NEIGHBORHOODS WITH 60 FOOT LOTS AND STUFF, WHAT DOS THAT DO TO THE PROPERTY VALUE OF THEIR HOMES FIRST A NEW DEVELOPMENT, AND COMMIT

>> I DON'T THINK I CAN PROFESSIONALLY ANSWER THAT. NOT BEING A CERTIFIED

APPRAISER. >> THE ONE THING THAT I WILL ADD ÃFIRST, IS THERE ANY MORE QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT BEFORE WE BRING IT BACK? MR. HEART, THANK YOU?

>> JUST ONE THING.OU SAY YOU ARE COMPETING WITH THE MULTIFAMILY ACROSS THE OTHER

SIDE OF OLD JENNINGS. >> IN GENERAL AREA. >> IN GENERAL?

HOW MANY UNITS ARE THERE? >> HE'S GOT SOME SLAB SPORTS BUT I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY UNITS

IS GOING TO BUILD IN THERE. >> I THINK CURRENTLY IT'S LIKE 6 TO 8 AND HE PROBABLY DOESN'T HAVE ENOUGH ROOM FOR MANY MORE. HE'S GOT A PARCEL WHICH MAJOR COMPETITION REALLY ISN'T ALL

THAT MUCH. >> WELL, YOU DON'T JUST COMPETE WITH WHAT'S THERE, YOU COMPETE WITH WHAT THE MARKET CAN BEAR IN THAT AREA AND WE ARE ACTUALLY PROBABLY SELLING ABOVE WHAT THE AVERAGE HOME PRICE IS. IF YOU GO ON DOWN THIS IS OLD HOUSING STOCK URBAN CORE AREA

AND WE ARE COMPETING WITH OLDER STOCK. >> THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU, MR. HEART. >> ALL RIGHT. WE ARE GOING TO OPEN UP PUBLIC COMMENT ON THIS. ANYBODY WHO HAS ANYTHING TO SPEAK ON, PLEASE COME FORWARD.

SEEING NOBODY APPROACHING THE PODIUM, WE WILL CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT AND BRING IT BACK TO THE COMMISSION FOR DISCUSSION. I AM GOING TO START THE DISCUSSION WHICH I DON'T NORMALLY DO. I HAVE DRIVEN THIS LOT, I ACTUALLY DRIVE IT ABOUT EVERY DAY. I KNOW THAT THERE IS SOME DILAPIDATED ÃTHERE'S SOME OTHER WORDS I CAN USE ÃTHERE'S PRETTY SHADY HOUSES ON THIS PARCEL RIGHT NOW.

I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THOSE GO. AND WITH THE AFFORDABILITY ÃWE ARE ALWAYS TALKING ABOUT AFFORDABLE HOUSING WE ARE TALKING ABOUT FINDING HOMES THAT ARE ECONOMIC FOR OUR COUNTY. YOU KNOW, I THINK THIS IS A GREAT ÃAND WE HAVE TALKED ABOUT THIS BEFORE. I THINK THIS IS A GREAT SOLUTION TO MAKING SURE WE ARE PROVIDING OUR CITIZENS WITH AFFORDABLE HOMES. THE OTHER THING THAT I WILL SAY IS MR. HEART PRESENT REPUTATION AS A DEVELOPER PRECEDES HIM. HE'S BEEN DOING THIS FOR THE 20 YEARS I HAVE KNOWN HIM AND CERTAINLY A LOT LONGER. SO I WOULD JUST SAY, QUALITY OF

CONSTRUCTION STANDPOINT I WOULD HAVE NO ARE THERE ANY OTHERS? >> I HAVE A COMMENT.

I ALSO ÃWELL, I DROVE IT IN ANTICIPATION OF THIS MEETING. NOT ONLY ARE THE MULTIFAMILY HOMES WITH THE COMMON WALL CLOSE BY, BUT NOT TOO FAR AWAY, THERE ARE WHAT APPEAR TO BE APARTMENTS OR CONDOMINIUMS. SO WHEN I PUT IT IN THE CONTEXT OF THAT, I THINK IT MAKES ÃAND WHAT YOU JUST SAID I THINK IT MAKES A LOT OF SENSE. IT'S KIND OF AN INTERIM STEP AND WHEREAS I APPRECIATE COMMISSIONER PUCKHABER'S COMMENTS ABOUT PARKING, I CAN

[00:30:07]

>> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> MR. CHAIRMAN, I AM REAL HESITANT ON 40 FOOT LOTS. WHAT ARE WE GOING TO HEAR NEXT YEAR OR TWO YEARS FROM NOW?

>> 30. >> WE'VE ALREADY HEARD 60 DOWN TO 45.

ADMIRAL HESITANT ABOUT THAT. >> THAT'S A CONCERN OF MINE TOO.

I DON'T LIKE 40 FOOT LOTS. >> OKAY. ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS, QUESTIONS? HEARING ON, WE WILL BE LOOKING FOR EMOTION.

>> AND MOVE THE STAFF REPORT. >> WE HAVE A FIRST. IS THERE A SECOND? I WILL SECOND AS THE CHAIR. I BELIEVE I'M ALLOWED TO DO THAT.

I'M GOING TO HAVE TO PASS THE GAVEL ON TO MR. PUCKHABER. >> WE HAVE A SECOND FROM MR. BOURRE. ALWAYS IN FAVOR FOR EMOTION TO SUPPORT THE STAFF REPORTS CALLED]

AND I WILL PASS THE CAMELBACK. >GAVEL BACK. >> THIS WILL BE HEARD AGAIN OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. OUR DECISION HERE IS A RECOMMENDATION TO THAT BODY. WE WILL MOVE FORWARD INTO AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 5.

[5.  A Public Hearing to consider CPA 2019-11 to amend from BF Rural Suburb to BF Master Planned Community on 98.18 acres.]

MASTER-PLANNED COMMUNITY ON 98.18 ACRES. >>

>> THIS IS PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER CPA 20 1911. THE LARGE-SCALE AMENDMENT AND IT'S FROM THE F RURAL SEPARATE TO RESIDENTIAL AND BE F RURAL RESIDENTIAL TO BE F MASTER-PLANNED COMMUNITY. THE APPLICANT IS STIPULATING THE DENSITY OF 1.53 SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING UNITS WITH BUFFERS ON THE EAST AND WEST LOCATED ON LONG BAY ROAD AT OLD JENNINGS RD. AT LONG BAY ROAD. IT'S PLANNING DISTRICT 2 MR. BOLO'S DISTRICT. THE APPLICANTS ARE MR. JOHNNY CARTER AND JOAN PADGETT TRUST AND NOW TERROR GROUP. THIS WILL GO TO THE BCC FOR ITS CONSIDERATION ON THE 28TH AND THAT WOULD BE A TRANSMITTAL HEARING AND IT WOULD STILL HAVE TO HAVE AN ADOPTION HEARING AFTER WE RECEIVE IT BACK FROM THE STATE. THIS IS A MAP OF THE PROPERTY.

THE TAX PERSONAL NUMBERS ARE LISTED THERE. IT'S 98.18 ACRES.

A FEW PICTURES. THE TWO ON THE LEFT SIDE ARE FROM OLD JENNINGS RD.

, AND THE TWO ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE ROAD ARE FROM THE OTHER ROAD.

THE EXISTING USE IS BE F RURAL SUBURB AND THE AFFORDABLE RESIDENTIAL.

THERE'S A SMALL SECTION OF THAT IN THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE PROPERTY.

THIS IS THE SITE. RURAL SUBURB ALLOWS ONE DWELLING UNIT PER FIVE CHRIS ACRES AND ONE DWELLING UNIT PER GROSS ACRE WITH DENSITY POINTS. RURAL RESIDENTIAL ALSO ALLOWS ONE DWELLING UNIT PER FIVE CHRIS ACRES AND ONE DWELLING UNIT PER GROSS ACRE WITH POINTS AND UTILITIES. THE POINT SYSTEMS ARE DIFFERENT FOR THOSE TWO CATEGORIES, BUT THE LITTLE PIECE THAT'S WERE RESIDENTIAL PROBABLY GENERATE ANYTHING IN TERMS OF POINTS ANYWAY. THE PROPOSED LAND USE IS THEY ARE ASKING FOR THE F MASTER-PLANNED COMMUNITY THAT HAS A DENSITY RANGE OF ONE DWELLING UNIT PER THREE GROSS ACRES TO 12 DWELLING UNITS PER GROSS ACRE AND THE APPLICANT HAS STIPULATED THAT THEY WOULD BE ASKING FOR 1.53 SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING UNITS PER GROSS ACRE.

AND THEY ARE PROFFERING BUFFERS OF 50 FEET EACH ON THE EAST AND WEST SIDE.

SO THE PROPERTY. THE SUBJECT PROPERTIES WITHIN THE WATER AND SEWER SERVICE

[00:35:05]

THE STORM WATER MANAGEMENT WOULD BE PROVIDED AS PART OF A SITE DEVELOPMENT.

THE SITE CURRENTLY INCLUDES THE LAND CLEARING DISPOSAL SITE, RESIDENTIAL, OTHER STRUCTURES AND SOME VACANT LAND. STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION IS A LITTLE LONGER THAN USUAL.

WE WOULD SUGGEST THAT THE BOARD CONTINUE THE APPLICATION SO THAT THE CURRENT OWNERS CAN REALIZE OWNERSHIP UNDER THE CONTROL OF ONE ENTITY. AS IT IS APPLIED FOR NOW, WE HAVE THREE DIFFERENT APPLICATIONS FROM EACH OF THESE PEOPLE, AND I HAVEN'T SEEN ANY DOCUMENTATION THAT IT'S UNDER ANY KIND OF PURCHASE OR AGREEMENT OR ANYTHING ELSE THAT WOULD CLARIFY THAT IF WE CHANGE THIS WE DIDN'T END UP WITH THREE DIFFERENT THINGS GOING ON. THE APPLICANTS ARE ASKING FOR THE INCREASED DENSITY OF 1.53 DWELLING UNITS PR ACRE WHERE THE BASE DENSITY AGAIN IS ONE DWELLING UNIT PER FIVE ACRES.

AND THAT ONLY CAN BE INCREASED TO ONE DWELLING UNIT PER ACRE IF CERTAIN DENSITY BONUS CONDITIONS CAN BE MET. DENSITY BONUS CONDITIONS IN RURAL SUBURB HAVE TO DO WITH PROVIDING ADDITIONAL UPLAND AREAS AROUND PC AND AND THERE IS NO PCN ON THIS PROPERTY.

SO THERE IS NO WAY THAT THEY CAN GET THOSE DENSITY BONUS POINTS.

THEY ARE NOT ÃTHERE IS A COUPLE OF OTHER WAYS TO GET IT IF THEY WERE CLOSER TO AN ACTIVITY CENTER THEY COULD HAVE GOTTEN TWO UNITS PER ACRE. BUT AGAIN, THEY ARE NOT MEETING THOSE REQUIREMENTS. THAT SAID, WE HAVE AN ALIGNMENT DRAWN ON THE MAP, BUT I'M NOT SURE THAT IT'S EVER BEEN ENGINEERED, BUT THE PROPOSED ALIGNMENT FROM LONG BAY ROAD TO COME DOWN AND JOIN UP WITH LONG BAY ROAD THAT EXTENDS SOUTH FROM OLD JENNINGS RD. DOWN TO LANDING. AND THAT WOULD BE A GREAT THING.

BECAUSE THIS LONG BAY ROAD ULTIMATELY ENDS UP IN TIMES SO YOU WOULD HAVE A NICE ÃLINE ROAD WHICH IS WHAT WE HAVE PDRAWN IT ON OUR MAPS PAST. WE DON'T HAVE IT.

IT'S BUILT TO SONG SPARROW DRIVE WHICH IS AT THE END OF TWO CREEKS.

THERE IS A SUBDIVISION IS GOING TO BE GOING IN IN PINE RIDGE WHICH WILL TAKE IT ABOUT HALFWAY DOWN THE EDGE OF THAT PROPERTY BUT THEN THERE IS THE PINE RIDGE PROPERTY ISN'T INCLUDED IN THIS APPLICATION. SO THERE IS A GAP BETWEEN THE TOP OF THIS PROPERTY AND WHERE THE ROAD IS GOING TO END FOR PINE RIDGE. AND ON THIS PROPERTY, YOU WILL SEE THERE IS A LITTLE HATCHED AREA THAT IS NOT INCLUDED THERE WHERE THE ROAD WOULD LOOK LIKE IT'S JOINING. THE PROPERTY IS NOT PART OF THE APPLICATION.

SO WITHOUT THAT PROPERTY, WE HAVE A LITTLE KIND OF FUNNY JOKE RIGHT THERE AT THE ROADWAY. WE HAVEN'T WORKED WITH THE ENGINEER AT LEAST RECENTLY.

THERE MAY HAVE BEEN SOME WORK DONE 10 OR MORE YEARS AGO BEFORE I CAME, I BELIEVE.

BUT WE HAVEN'T DONE ANY KIND OF WORK TO FIGURE OUT WHETHER SUCH AN ALIGNMENT IS FEASIBLE AS IT LOOKS IN THAT NICE DRAWING. BUT IF IT WERE FEASIBLE IT MIGHT BE SOMETHING THAT WAS WORTH A LITTLE BIT OF AN INCREASE OF DENSITY IN ORDER TO OBTAIN.

BUT WITHOUT UNITY OF CONTROL, I DON'T SEE THAT WE ARE READY TO GO THERE YET.

WE HAVEN'T LOOKED AT A DEVELOPMENT PLAN PREVIOUSLY WITH LAND USE AND ZONING YOU DON'T HAVE TO HAVE LOOKED AT A PLAN DEVELOPMENT PLAN BUT THIS IS COMPLICATED AND THERE HAVE BEEN TIMES WHEN THE APPLICANTS PROFESSIONAL HAS PROVIDED US DRAWING WELL AHEAD OF THE TIME THEY PICK UP THE LAND USE AND ZONING. THIS MIGHT BE KIND OF USEFUL TO KNOW WHAT ENGINEERING IS OUT ON THIS AND HE WOULD BE RECOMMENDING THAT THEY COULD BE WORKED OUT. ADDITIONAL INFORMATION AND ASSURANCES IN OUR OPINION ARE NEEDED PRIOR TO ANY AMENDMENT WHICH IS SEEKING ADDITIONAL DENSITY IN LIEU OF DENSITY PROGRAM. THIS IS NOT THE RURAL RESIDENTIAL OR RURAL SUBURB DENSITY PROGRAM. SO THEY'RE ASKING FOR SOMETHING THAT WE CAN'T GIVE IN TERMS OF EXTRA DENSITY BY CHANGING IT TO MPC AND ESSENTIALLY ITS SPOT ZONING OF MPC IN THE MIDDLE OF

[00:40:05]

O THAT IS ÃTHAT'S THE PRIMARY THING WE HAVE BEEN TRYING TO SAVE PRIMARY CONSERVATION NETWORK IN BRANAN FIELD AND THE SQUARE AT THE TOP OKAY, SO THE SQUARE AT THE TOP, THIS IS TWO CREEKS. IT'S BASICALLY A SECTION. I HAVE ONE UNIT PER ACRE MAY HAVE MANAGED TO SAVE ALL OF THE PCN AND QUITE ADDITIONAL UPLAND AREA.

THAT'S HOW THEY GOT THERE DENSITY BONUS POINTS. THIS PROJECT DOWN HERE IN THIS AREA IS PINE RIDGE. AGAIN, THEY HAVE SAVED ALL OF THIS PCN OVER HERE UP TO THIS LINE, AND THEY HAVE ADDITIONAL OPEN SPACE IN THEIR PROJECT AS WELL, AND THAT'S HOW THEY GOT THERE DENSITY BONUS POINTS. THESE WERE PLOTTED PRIOR TO BRANAN FIELD BUT THERE ONE ACRE LOTS. AND WE HAVE GOT ALL OF THESE LARGER ACRE LOTS UP IN HERE.

TO THE SOUTH OF OLD JENNINGS RD. IS THE PROJECT, LINDA LAKES.

AND SOUTH IF THAT IS AZALEA RIDGE. BOTH OF THEM ARE DONE.

THERE'S A LOT OF OPEN SPACE IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE THE ONE UNIT PER ACRE.

THIS PROPERTY DOESN'T HAVE PCN AND SO WE ARE NOT GUARANTEED OF ANY SPECIAL OPEN SPACE AND IT SEEMS LUDICROUS TO HAVE SOMEBODY SET ASIDE ALL OF THIS LAND.

THEY WOULD CHANGE IT TO SPOT ZONING A BC. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS I

WILL BE GLAD TO TRY AND ANSWER THEM. >> ANY QUESTIONS FROM STAFF?

>> I DO HAVE ONE. THE PICTURE THAT WE HAVE IN OUR PACKET ÃI'M NOT SURE WHAT THAT

WOULD BE. >> THE PHOTOGRAPH. >> THIS LINK

>> TO HAVE ANY IDEA WHEN THAT WAS TAKEN? ASK THE LOOKS LIKE BIG RETENTION PONDS ON THE PROPERTY. AND I DON'T NECESSARILY SEE THAT ON YOUR SATELLITE. MY POINT IS WHAT'S CURRENTLY THERE? WHAT IS THE CURRENT CONFIGURATION OF THAT PARTICULAR PARCEL OF THAT

PARTICULAR SITE? >> IS DONE ON 10/4, IT SAYS. >> WAS ASKED THAT.

LET'S ASK THE APPLICANT WHEN THEY COME UP HERE THAT MIGHT BE A QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT

>> I DON'T KNOW. OUR GIS ABOUT THE USE RELATIVELY RECENT MAPS.

>> ANYTHING ELSE? >> NO, THANK YOU. >> ANYTHING ELSE?

FROM THE COMMISSION? AS FAR AS QUESTION AND STUFF? >> NOT TO STAFF, BUT I KNOW WE ARE GOING TO GET A PRESENTATION IN A MOMENT. AND SO I'M GOING TO GIVE A LITTLE BIT OF WARNING SO I CAN ADDRESS THIS. WHEN I FIRST SAW THIS APPLICATION, I HEARD A LOT MORE INFORMATION, BUT THE FIRST THING I SAW THIS APPLICATION, I SENT DOTTED LINE ROADS. BECAUSE I KNOW THERE IS A ROAD PLAN THROUGH THEIR AND I ALREADY HAD A PROBLEM WITH ONE OTHER PARCEL THAT ALREADY HAS RESURRECTED WE HAD A PATIENT IN HERE A FEW MONTHS AGO WERE THEY WANTED TO ELIMINATE A DOTTED LINE ROAD.

IT'S BECOMING A HABIT. WE NEED ROADS, WE NEED THE CONNECTIVITY AND WE HAVE TO GET THE RIGHT OF WAY ESTABLISHED BEFORE WE START DOING ELSE WITH THIS PROPERTY.

I JUST WANT TO PUT THAT OUT THERE SO THE APPLICANT CAN ADDRESS THAT.

>> ALL RIGHT. ANYTHING ELSE? OKAY.

THEN WE AT THIS TIME WE ARE GOING TO ASK THE APPLICANT TO COME FORWARD.

MRS. FRAZIER, ALWAYS A PLEASURE >> GOOD EVENING. >> SHE IS TALLER THAN I AM

>> SUSAN FRASER CONSULTING 3517 PARK ST. IN JACKSONVILLE. I'M GOING TO HAND OUT AND ARIEL BEFORE I START. SO I WOULD LIKE TO CLEAR UP SOMETHING THAT THE STAFF SAID

[00:45:26]

THERE IS A CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE OF TERROR GROUP OWNS A PIECE ALREADY AND THEY HAVE A CONTRACT FOR PURCHASE ON THE OTHER TWO PARCELS. THEY ARE NOT SEPARATE.

THE STAFF REPORT SAYS THERE ARE SEPARATE APPLICATIONS BUT THE WAY THE APPLICATION FORM IS PROVIDED TO YOU ON THEIR WEBSITE, THE COUNTIES WEBSITE, IS IF YOU HAVE MORE THAN ONE NAVY UPTURN IN SEPARATE SHEETS. SO THE ARIEL THAT I GAVE YOU IS ACTUALLY CURRENT.

I THINK IT'S 2018. THIS SITE WHICH IS OPERATED BY MR. CARTER WHO OWNS THE LARGER PIECE YOU SEE TO THE WEST AS A DEBRIS DISPOSAL FACILITY, THERE'S BEEN A BORROW PIT USE THERE AND SO WHAT YOU ARE SEEING NOW IS IT'S PRETTY MUCH THE STATE OF THE PROPERTY.

AND SO THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN WOULD UNDERTAKE IN ORDER TO DEVELOP WOULD UNDERTAKE THE REMOVAL OF ÃTHERE IS TREES THAT HAVE BEEN CUT, DEBRIS DISPOSAL THAT IS THE AREA HERE IS ON THE PROPERTY. AND SO THAT HAS A STACK OF TREES THAT HAVE DECOMPOSED TO THE POINT THAT THEY ARE NO LONGER ECONOMICALLY VIABLE FOR ANY USE AND SO THEY HAVE TO BE HAULED OFF AND ACTUALLY PAID FOR THE DISPOSAL. THE BORROW PIT AREA ITSELF WOULD BE A STORMWATER FACILITY FOR THE DEVELOPMENT. SO THEY HAVE ACKNOWLEDGED THAT THAT IS A CONSTRAINT ON THE POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT FOR THE PROPERTY.

SO WE HAVE A SINGLE APPLICATION. THIS IS NOT SEEKING TO BE RURAL SUBURB WITH SOME EXCLUSIVE DENSITY BONUS. IT'S SEEKING TO BE A MASTER-PLANNED COMMUNITY LAND-USE. AND SO THE AND-USE CATEGORY WE ARE SEEKING ALLOWS DENSITY UP TO 20 PER ACRE AND WE ARE SEEKING TO THAT AT 1.53.

THAT'S A SPECIFIC NUMBER THAT YIELDS 150 LOTS. IT CORRESPONDS TO A SITE PLAN THAT WOULD BE DEVELOPED. AND SO THE ÃLINE ROAD IS PART OF THE LAKE ASBURY.

THE BRANAN FIELD MASTER PLAN AND IS THE LAST PIECE OF LONG DAY AND IT'S A CORRECT STATEMENT THAT WHEN IT CONNECTS FROM BOMBAY TO JENNINGS TO THIS PROPERTY, IT WILL TAKE IT ALL TO THE TYNES AND THE EXPRESSWAY AND THIS IS PART OF THE ROAD NETWORK WE ALL WANT.

WE ARE NOT HERE TO SEEK TO REMOVE THE ROAD BUT TO COMMIT TO BUILDING IT.

AND SO THAT THE PROPERTY IS OWNED AND THE ALIGNMENT THAT'S THERE IS A CONNECTING CORRIDOR.

IT IS IN ALL LIKELIHOOD NOT GOING TO LOOK EXACTLY LIKE THAT, BUT IT'S GOING TO GO FROM POINT A TO POINT B. SO THERE WILL BE A DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND IT WILL MOVE SO PROBABLY THE TRIANGLES ON THE EASTERN PORTION OF THE PROPERTY ARE DEEPER AND ALLOW DEVELOPMENT ON BOTH SIDES OF WHAT WILL BE THE LONG DAY EXTENSION. AND SO TO THE NORTH OF THE PROPERTY ÃI'M SORRY I CUT IT OFF ÃWHEN YOU COME TO THIS POINT RIGHT HERE, LONG BAY RIGHT-OF-WAY EXTENDS FROM PINE RIDGE TO THE NORTHERN POINT OF THIS PROPERTY.

IT HAS BEEN DEDICATED AS PART OF THE APF OBLIGATIONS IN BRANAN FIELD, CLAY COUNTY OWNS THAT RIGHT-OF-WAY. WHEN THIS DEVELOPMENT IS DONE, THE RIGHT-OF-WAY THAT CAN BE DEDICATED TO THIS PROPERTY WOULD BE THE APPROPRIATE WIDTH WITH THE APPROPRIATE DESIGN CHARACTERISTICS FOR THE SPEED AND THE GEOMETRY THAT'S REQUIRED FOR LONG DAY AS AN APF ROAD TO THIS PROPERTY. THE ONE THING THE LANDOWNER DOES NOT OWN THE CORNER, THAT LITTLE CORNER THAT'S THERE, AND THEY JUST DON'T OWN IT AND OFFERS HAVE BEEN MADE AND THE PARTICULAR OWNER HAS NOT AGREED TO SELL IT. AND SO IF CLAYTON COUNTY WISHES TO HAVE A CONNECTION BETWEEN LONG BAY FOR THE RIGHT-OF-WAY ENDS IN THE NORTHERN AND IN THE LONG BAG THAT EXIST ALREADY, THEY MAY HAVE TO BUY SOME OF THAT RIGHT-OF-WAY.

AFTER THEY BUY THAT RIGHT-OF-WAY? EVERYBODY IN BRANAN FIELD IS SUBJECT TO AN APF FEE AND THAT FEE IS FIVE PERCENT OF THE DEVELOPABLE LAND THAT YOU OWN.

SO IF YOU OWN 100 ACRES, AND THERE IS NO APF ROAD THAT RUNS THROUGH YOUR PROPERTY ÃTHIS IS EVERYBODY IN BRANAN FIELD AND SO THE WAY IT WORKS IS IF I HAVE A PIECE OF PROPERTY ÃIF YOU WANT MY RIGHT-OF-WAY I HAVE TO GIVE YOU FREE OF CHARGE FIVE PERCENT OF MY LAND AS A MATH

[00:50:04]

IT WAS A PIECE OF PROPERTY IN THE APF ROAD DIDN'T ATTACH TO IT, I HAVE TO WRITE A CHECK TO CLAY COUNTY THAT HAS A MARKET VALUE BASED ON FIVE PERCENT OF THE MARKET VALUE OF MY LAND SO YOU HAVE TO TURN IN AN APPRAISAL AND THE CLAY COUNTY CAN REFUTE THE APPRAISAL AND IT CAN BE BACK AND FORTH. AT SOME POINT YOU DECIDE WHAT THAT LAND IS WORTH, AND THAT CHECK IS WRITTEN TO CLAY COUNTY. AND WHAT DOES IT DO WITH THAT MONEY? IT BUYS THE PIECES OF THE APF ROAD THAT IT HAS TO WRITE A CHECK FOR. SO THERE'S A BANK ACCOUNT FOR ANYBODY IN BRANAN FIELD WHO HAS DEVELOPED SO FAR, AND THERE'S LOTS OF DEVELOPMENT THERE SO FAR WHERE THESE MONIES HAVE ACCRUED. AND SO WE DON'T OWN IT. IF WE ALL DID WE WOULD BE HAPPY TO WORK WITH YOU AND HAPPY TO MAKE IT PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN BUT WE DO NOT OWN THAT.

SO WHEN I READ THE STAFF REPORT, THERE'S A LOT ABOUT URBAN SPRAWL AND SPOT ZONING AND THINGS LIKE THAT THAT WOULD LEAD YOU TO BELIEVE THAT WE ARE KIND OF HANGING OUT THERE IN THE MIDDLE OF NOWHERE. BUT I WAS HERE WHEN BRANAN FIELD WAS DEVELOPED.

I WAS ATTENDING DIRECTOR. AND ALL THE AREA OF RURAL SUBURBS TO THE WEST OF THE EXPRESSWAY IS EXACTLY AS DESCRIBED. IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE WORLD DEVELOPMENT. AND IT IS ONE UNIT PER FIVE ACRES UNLESS YOU HAVE PCN ADJACENT TO OR ON YOUR PROPERTY. AND SO ALL OF THE DEVELOPMENT YOU HAVE HER DESCRIBED, BOTH WINDOW LAKE'S AND AZALEA RIDGE WHICH ARE SOUTH OF OLD JENNINGS PINE RIDGE AND TWO CREEKS NORTH OF OLD JENNINGS, THEY HAVE THE PCN, THE GREEN THAT'S RUNNING TO THIS MAP ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY. SO THOSE PROPERTIES COULD ACCESS THE ABILITY TO GO FROM ONE UNIT PER FIVE ACRES TO ONE UNIT PER ACRE.

AND ALL OF THEM DID. ALL THE DEVELOPMENT IN BRANAN FIELD TODAY IN RURAL SUBURBS USED A DENSITY BONUS. AND IT WAS SET UP TO PROTECT THE BLACK CREEK CONSERVATION.

IT WAS TO CREATE BUFFERS TO THAT CONSERVATION AREA. THIS PROPERTY IS JUST SO LOCATED LIKE SOME ARE LOCATED WITHOUT ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY, THIS PROPERTY IS LOCATED SO IT'S NOT NEXT TO ANY PCN. SO THIS OWNER, IN ANY WAY SHAPE OR FORM, CAN'T REACH OUT AND CREATE THE DENSITY BONUS THAT EVERYBODY ELSE BECAUSE OF THEIR LOCATION WAS ABLE TO PROVIDE.

AND SO WHEN YOU LOOK AT THIS, IT LOOKS LIKE YOU HAVE THIS WORLD DEVELOPMENT AND WE ARE SEEKING SOMETHING IN THE MIDDLE OF THAT BECAUSE THE SQUARE THAT'S THERE WHICH IS THE PROPERTY WE ARE TALKING ABOUT WOULD BE BROWN. AND EVERYTHING AROUND IT WOULD NOT BE BROWN. AND THAT'S KIND OF ÃYOU ARE THINKING THAT SPOT ZONING.

WEALTHY BECAUSE OF THE CLUSTERING, THE WAY THE PLAN WORKS, WHEN YOU GET THE CLUSTERING ABILITY IN RURAL SUBURBS, SEA COVE SAID OH, SO LOOK AT MPC AND BUILD JUST LIKE THAT. BUILD UNDER THE MPC PART OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS.

SO EVERY DEVELOPMENT YOU SEE OUT THERE IS BUILT UNDER THE MPC STANDARDS.

MIX OF LOT SIZES, 55 AND 70S. PARKS AND RECREATION, ALL THE REQUIREMENTS THAT GO ÃALL THE DEVELOPMENT YOU SEE WHEN YOU DRIVE THROUGH TWO CREEKS AND AZALEA RIDGE THEY DEVELOPED UNDER THIS STANDARD. IF WE GET THIS LAND USE CATEGORY, WE ACTUALLY WILL DEVELOP UNDER EXACTLY THE SAME STANDARDS. WHEN YOU DRIVE FROM LAND O LAKES ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF OLD JENNINGS AND YOU CROSS INTO THIS PROPERTY INTO THE DEVELOPMENT THAT WILL PROPOSE YOU WILL NOT BE ABLE TO TELL THE DIFFERENCE.

THE LOT SIZES THE SAME THE PARK REQUIREMENTS OF THE SAME, THE LOT DIVERSITY IS THE SAME.

IT'S EXACTLY THE SAME LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS THAT APPLY.

SO WHEN YOU LOOK AT THIS, YOU THINK WOW, IT'S STILL OUT THERE.

AT 1.53 WE ARE ACTUALLY EXACTLY WHAT'S OUT THERE TODAY. SO IF YOU GIVE ME THE NEXT SLIDE, SO WHAT I DID TO ILLUSTRATE THAT IS I TOOK THE AREA WHERE THE DEVELOPMENT OCCURS, PINE RIDGE TWO CREEKS LAND O LAKES AND AZALEA RIDGE. THERE YOU GO.

AND I MADE THEM BROWN BECAUSE THEY ARE DEVELOPED UNDER MPC STANDARDS.

WHEN YOU DRIVE THROUGH ALL OF THOSE COMMUNITIES, EVERYTHING THAT'S IN BROWN WILL LOOK EXACTLY WHAT COULD HAPPEN ON THIS PROPERTY. LOT SIZES, PARKS, CONNECTIVITY, SMALL BLOCK LANES. ALTHOUGH STANDARDS APPLY TO THESE DEVELOPMENTS.

AND BUT FOR THE OPEN SPACE WHICH IS REQUIRED IN RS WHEN YOU DRIVE DOWN THE STREET, WHAT YOU DRIVE DOWN IS THE SAME THING YOU DRIVE THROUGH IN THIS PROPERTY.

SO WHEN ÃIF YOU GO TO THE NEXT ONE THIS PROPERTY IS APPROVED FOR A CHANGE SO NOT KNOWING IF

[00:55:12]

>> ON THE LAST PAGE IF THIS PROPERTY IS BROWN BECAUSE WE WOULD ACTUALLY HAVE MPC LAND USE IS EXACTLY THE SAME AS THE DEVELOPMENT TO THE NORTH AND TO THE SOUTH.

SO WHAT ÃI THINK WHEN RURAL SUBURBS WAS WRITTEN IN THE MID-90S AND WE WERE HERE PUTTING UP THE MASTER PLAN TOGETHER WE WROTE THE WORDS AND THE WORDS SAY RURAL.

IT'S NOT RURAL. IT'S SUBURBAN. IT'S SIDEWALKS AND 55 FOOT LOTS AND PARKS AND EVERYTHING THAT YOU DRIVE THROUGH IN BRANAN FIELD TODAY IS UNDER STANDARDS THAT WOULD APPLY TO THIS PROJECT. SO THE ONLY REASON WE ARE HERE IS WE DON'T HAVE PCN TO KIND OF WRAP OURSELVES AROUND TO GET A DENSITY BONUS SO WE CAN BUILD WHAT'S ALREADY BEEN BUILT OUT THERE. SO WE BELIEVE THIS THAT WE ARE SAYING THAT WOULD APPLY TO THE PROPERTY AND WE ARE COMMITTING IN THEÁTHE CONDITIONS FOR THE SUPER BOWL THAT THERE WOULD BE A 50 FOOT BUFFER TO THE WEST AND TO THE EAST.

IF YOU ARE IN RURAL SUBURBS, AND YOU HAVE THE DENSITY BONUS, HAVE A 50 FOOT BUFFER TO ADJACENT RURAL LANDS, AND SO THAT'S WHAT WE WOULD DO. WE DO NT HAVE A BUFFER TO THE NORTH BECAUSETO THE NORTH OF US IS PINE RIDGE. AND PINE RIDGE WILL BE OUR TWIN. EVERYTHING WE BUILD WE WORK TO THE NORTH OF US.

IN THE END WE BELIEVE THE PATTERN ISN'T RURAL WHICH IS JUST WHAT IT SAYS IT SAYS LOW DENSITY RURAL SUBURBS. WHEN YOU DRIVE THROUGH THEIR ITS MASTER-PLANNED COMMUNITY BECAUSE ALL OF THOSE DEVELOPMENT, DEVELOPMENT HAS BEEN CLUSTERED ON THOSE PROPERTIES. AND SO THIS LAST ALMOST 100 ACRE PARCEL ALLOWS THE CONNECTION OF A LONG DAY TO CREATE THE FULL CONNECTION. IF YOU REMEMBER WE DID THIS TO THE NORTH UP AT THE BLUE. SEE WHERE THERE'S THE BLUE AND THE BROWN PARCEL WAY UP BY THE BLUE? THAT WAS THE WEST BANK PROPERTY I DID THIS CHANGE ON ABOUT FIVE YEARS AGO NOW. SAME THING. TIMES BOULEVARD WAS GOING THROUGH IT. IT WAS ADJACENT TO USES DENSITIES THAT WERE SIMILAR TO WHAT WAS REQUESTED IN THE COUNTY CHANGE THAT ALSO APPEARED TO MPC UNDER A PLAN AMENDMENT LIKE WE ARE CONSIDERING TONIGHT. SO THAT PEACE IS THE PIECE APPEARED. JUST TOUCHED IN THE CORNER BY THE BLUE.

SO THE COLORING JOB I DID IS INTENDED TO SHOW THAT WHILE THAT MAP LOOKS LIKE IT'S ALL RURAL IT'S NOT BECAUSE IT'S BEEN CLUSTERED IN THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS APPLY TO THOSE DEVELOPMENT APPLY TO THIS ONE IN THE EXACT SAME MANNER. AND SO THIS IS ÃTHE OTHER THING IS THAT THIS IS NOT A RURAL AREA ANYMORE. WHEN PINE RIDGE WAS BUILT WATER AND SEWER HAS BEEN BROUGHT TO THE NORTHERN BOUNDARY OF THIS PROPERTY SO THERE'S WATER AND SEWER SERVICE TO THIS PROPERTY. THIS IS NOT AN AREA OF WELL AND SEPTIC TANKS IT FRONTS ON TO JENNINGS AND IT WILL BE SERVED BY LONG DAY WHICH WOULD TAKE A RIDE TO THE EXPRESSWAY ON THE APS SYSTEM THE WAY IT'S BEEN DESIGNED TO DO. THE WATER AND SEWER AT THE FRONT DOOR. IF YOU LOOK AT THE MAP THAT YOU HAVE IN YOUR HAND ON THE LAST PAGE ONE THING THE COUNTIES MAP DOES NOT SHOW FOR ALL THE SCHOOLS.

SO WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT DENSITY AND USE IN THIS AREA YOU HAVE TIMES ELEMENTARY, YOU'VE GOT THE NEW CHARTER SCHOOL. THE CHARTER SCHOOL ABUTS THIS PROPERTY.

WHEN YOU LOOK AT THIS PIECE RIGHT HERE THAT'S THE BRAND-NEW CHARTER SCHOOL.

YOU COME UP PINE RIDGE. AND PEOPLE STACK UP ON PINE RIDGE TO PICK UP THEIR KIDS BECAUSE THIS ROPE DOES NOT EXIST TODAY. WHEN THIS ROAD EXISTS PEOPLE WILL BE ABLE TO PICK UP CHILDREN AT THE CHARTER SCHOOL AND COME AND GO ON PINE RIDGE.

RIGHT NOW THEY COME ÃON LONG BAY. THEY COME TO PINE RIDGE AND THEY QUEUE UP FOR HALF A MILE AND THERE'S NO OUTLET BECAUSE THIS IS THE LAST PIECE OF THE PUZZLE. SO I WOULD OFFER TO YOU THAT THIS IS ACTUALLY THE FULFILLMENT OF WHAT BRANAN FIELD WAS SUPPOSED TO BE. IT MAXIMIZES EXISTING FACILITIES. IT'S ADJACENT TO TWO SCHOOLS, CHARTER SCHOOL AND THE PUBLIC SCHOOL AND THE SCHOOL DISTRICT HAS ANOTHER SCHOOL SITE AND THEIR NEXT SCHOOL IS ONE UP ON

[01:00:05]

ALL OF THOE BLUE BOXES ARE THE SCHOOLS AROUND THE AREA. IT IS LESS THAN A MILE FROM THE BRANAN FIELD ACTIVITY CENTER. YOU WANT TO PUT HOUSING, YOU RD- WANT TO PUT IT NEXT TO THE HOSPITAL AND ALL THOSE ACTIVITIES AND EMPLOYMENT CENTERS ARE IN THAT LOCATION.

SO NOT ONLY IS IT NOT DIFFERENT THAN THE PATTERN THAT'S THERE, IT ACTUALLY SUPPORTS BE IN FULL AND IT'S THE URBAN SPRAWL BECAUSE WE ARE GOING TO USE THE SERVICES OF THOSE HOUSES WHERE THE JOBS ARE CLOSEST. SO REALLY, I THINK WE ARE REALLY SAYING THAT THIS IS Ã THERE'S NOT A CURRENT RURAL PRESIDENTIAL CHARACTER IN THIS AREA.

THERE ARE OPEN SPACES BUT THE CHARACTER OF THE DEVELOPMENT IS EXACTLY THE CHARACTER THAT THIS PARCEL WOULD HAVE. AND THAT THE CONCERN THIS COULD BE DEVELOPED IS PRETTY DISPARATE BECAUSE IT'S NOT SINGLE OWNERSHIP. WE HAVE TALKED TO STAFF AND THERE IS ADEQUATE TIME BETWEEN NOW AND ADOPTION OF THIS THIS WOULD BE TRANSMITTED TO THE DO AND IT WILL COME BACK FOR APPROVAL UNTIL APRIL OR MAY. TO ACCOMMODATE ANY AGREEMENTS.

THE FULL INTENTION IS THAT THE RIGHT-OF-WAY IS CONVEYED TO THE COUNTY UNDER THE APS SYSTEM AND THAT WE HAVE A DEVELOPMENT THAT MATCHES WAS THERE TODAY. I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY

QUESTIONS. >> I WILL START THE ROUND ROBIN.

I APPRECIATE THE PRESENTATION. IT CERTAINLY ANSWERED QUESTIONS THAT I HAD WHEN I WAS REVIEWING THIS THE OTHER DAY. SO THIS WILL BE DEVELOPED ULTIMATELY ÃIF WE WERE TO MOVE THE TRANSMITTAL INTO ONE ENTITY. ALTERA OKAY

>> ALTERA BUILT PINE RIDGE. >> I APPRECIATE YOUR CLARIFICATION ON THE UTILITIES BECAUSE THAT WAS TO BE MY NEXT QUESTION. GOING TO PUT A WELL AND SEPTIC OUT THERE? THAT'S NOT THE CASE NOW. ULTIMATELY THIS IS TO COMMISSIONER PUCKHABER'S POINT, THE EXTENSION OF LONG BAY THE CONSTRUCTION OF LONG BAY.

I DO HAVE A CONCERN ABOUT YOUR COMMENT REGARDING THAT PARCEL WHERE IT TIES IN.

I BELIEVE IN PROPERTY OWNERS RIGHTS AND A STRONG FIGHTER OF THAT AND SO I AM GOING TO ASK YOU TO CLARIFY MORE. WHEN YOU SAY YOU USED THE DESCRIPTION THE PROPERTY OWNER WOULD HAVE TO GIFT THAT PROPERTY ÃLET ME FINISH THE QUESTION ÃGIFT THE PROPERTY TO THE COUNTER OR EVEN WORSE IN MY OPINION PAY THE COUNTY TO GIVE THE PROPERTY THAT THEY OWN TO

DO PLEASE CLARIFY WHAT ARE THE REQUIREMENTS? >> SO IF YOU DEVELOP IN BRANAN FIELD THAT IS AN OBLIGATION AND IT'S AN ADOPTED POLICY AND ENCUMBRANCE OF PLAN.

EVERY ONE HAS THE OBLIGATION AND IT TAKES DEDICATION WITHOUT COMPENSATION.

AND SO IN LAKE ASBURY THEY HAVE WHAT'S CALLED LOW IMPACT DEVELOPMENT.

TO SOMEONE LIKE THIS PARTICULAR PARCEL THIS ONE, IT WOULDN'T APPLY WITH THAT.

ALL THE DEVELOPERS PEOPLE DOING 50 LOT AND 100 LOT SUBDIVISIONS ARE REQUIRED TO MAKE THAT DEDICATION. THEY DEDICATE A RIDE AWAY IN ORDER TO BUILD EACH PIECE OF THEIR PUZZLE TO GIVE THE COUNTY A PIECE OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY. THE SYSTEM IS SUPPLIED

THROUGHOUT MOST OF THE MASTER PLANS. >> I APPRECIATE THE CLARIFICATION. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE COMMISSION UNDERSTOOD.

SO IT'S THE DEVELOPER WHO IS THE ONE WHO IS GIFTING. IT IS NOT THE PRIVATE CITIZEN

WHO IS INVOLVED IN ANY OF THAT? >> IS THE LANDOWNER WHETHER IT'S A DEVELOPER OR PRIVATE CITIZEN. IT'S THE CONDITION OF THE DEVELOPMENT PERMIT

>> ARE THERE ANY QUESTIONS Ã LET ME FINISH GOING THROUGH MINE.

YOU MENTIONED 55 A LOT TO KNOW WE ARE LOOKING AT .75 ACRES IS THAT WHERE WE ARE GOING TO BE

SITTING?>> LOT SIZES AND MPC YOU HAVE TO HAVE A DIVERSITY OF LOT SIZES SO YOU HAVE TO HAVE A LOT SIZE AND THEN ANOTHER LOT SIZE. EVERYTHING HAS BEEN DONE IN PINE RIDGE IS 55'S AND 70'S. I THINK TWO CREEKS MIGHT BE SIMILARLY SITUATED.

WHEN YOU GO THROUGH BRANAN FIELD YOU SEE TO LOT SIZES AND THAT'S A REQUIREMENT.

SO THIS WOULD BE THE STANDARDS WHAT YOU SEE OUT THERE TODAY AND THIS WOULD APPLY TO THIS.

[01:05:07]

SO THE LOT SIZES THAT ARE THERE ARE PROPOSED TO BE 55 AND 70. >> DID YOU SAY THEY ABUT EACH

OTHER OR THEY HAVE CLUSTERS OF 55? >> THEY USED TO BE IN A BLOCK.

ARE THEY NOT ANYMORE? >> WITHIN THE BLOOD. >> SO WHATEVER APPLIES WE WOULD

DO. >> YOU DID CLARIFY THE BROKER WOULD BE THE RETENTION POND.

I WAS GLAD TO HEAR THAT CONCERN. AND THEN WHEN WE BRING ABOUT, JIM, I'M CONCERNED ABOUT SCHOOL CAPACITY. SO WHEN WE BRING IT BACK WE WILL TALK ABOUT THAT. THAT'S MY QUESTIONS. DOES ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY?

>> THE 1.53 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE THAT'S GOING TO BE STIPULATED?

>> >> IS THAT BASED ON THE ENTIRE ACREAGE INCLUDING RETENTION

PONDS AND SO ON? >> THAT'S THE WAY IT IS EVERYWHERE.

>> SO IT'S NOT THREE QUARTER ACRE LOTS WHAT YOU SEE OUT THERE EVERYWHERE.

>> I WILL HAVE SOME MORE. >> DO YOU HAVE ANY FOR THE APPLICANT?

>> YES. SO LET ME UNDERSTAND THIS. WE'VE GOT THIS LITTLE CUT OUT PIECE ON THE SOUTHERN EDGE ON THIS PROPERTY. DO I UNDERSTAND THAT BECAUSE THE OWNERS WANT TO DEVELOP THIS PROPERTY A REASON TO IMPROVE IT IS THE CONSTRUCTION OF ROAD LONG BAY TO THE NORTH AND LONG WAY TO THE SOUTH. HE HAD TO GIVE UP SOME OF HIS

PROPERTY? >> THE DESIGN DETERMINED THAT I DON'T KNOW THIS AT THAT POINT.

I CAN'T PUT ANY DRIVEWAYS ON THEM. THEY ARE JUST LIKE TYNES AND PINE RIDGE THAT HAVE TWO BIKE LANES SO THEY ARE NOT A ROBUST SERVICE MY DEVELOPMENT.

I HAVE TO GIVE YOU THE RIGHT WAY. SO THE CONSTRUCTION HAS TO BE THE STANDARD. SO IN THE DESIGN COMES THROUGH, IF IT DOESN'T MEET ANY OF THE PROPERTY THAT WOULD BE EVERYBODY'S HOPE THAT'S WHAT WOULD HAPPEN.

IF THE DESIGN DOES NOT IN THE PIECE HAS TO BE ACQUIRED. >> WHY WOULD I WORRY ABOUT IT IF I DO THAT PROPERTY OWNER WOULD HAVE TO GIVE YOU SOME OF HIS PROPERTY?

>> BECAUSE YOU WOULD HAVE TO PAY THEM FOR IT AND SO THE INCENTIVE IS ÃNO ONE WANTS TO

PLACE SOMEONE JUST BECAUSE. >> I DON'T OWN IT, SO I CAN'T TAKE IT.

ONLY CLAYTON COUNTY ÃTHIS IS A PUBLIC ROAD THE COUNTY WOULD HAVE TO SAY THAT CONNECTION IS FOR THE PUBLIC BENEFIT AND IT WOULD HAVE TO DECIDE IS IMPORTANT TO ACQUIRE IT.

>> THE ONLY REASON IT'S A BENEFIT IS BECAUSE THIS DEVELOPER WAS TO DEVELOP THE

SITE. >> NOT REALLY. IF THIS SITE STAYS VACANT RIGHT NOW THERE'S A GAP BETWEEN LONG BAY AND OLD JENNINGS AT LONG BAY AND JENNINGS AND NOBODY CAN RIVAL THEUPPER PART OF THE DISCUSSION WILL BE BUILT TYNES FROM THE NORTH END, REMEMBER THE VERY NORTH OF TYNES, THROUGH THE PROPERTY, THROUGH OAKLEY'S AND THE EXPRESSWAY, THE COUNTY ÃTHAT ROCOCO. AND SO THE PEOPLE WHO DRIVE ON THAT ARE THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN BRANAN FIELD TRYING TO GET TO THE EXPRESSWAY. IF THIS PROPERTY STAYS VACANT TODAY THIS ROAD WAS BUILT EVERYBODY WOULD DRIVE ON IT. IT'S A ROAD FROM THE 5000

MOZZARELLA >> UNDERSTAND BUT DOES THE COUNTY HAVE A PLAN TO BUILD THE

ROAD? >> THE PLAN IS CALLED THE BRANAN FIELD PLANTS WAS ON THE MAP. IT'S A CONNECTION WE THINK IS A PRIORITY.

IT'S NOT SOMETHING WE ARE PROPOSING HAS BEEN ON A PLAN SINCE 2006.

OR ACTUALLY, BEFORE THAT. BUT SO THE COUNTY HAS SAID WE WANT TO GET FROM POINT A TO POINT B ON A MULTIPLE ROAD AND THIS IS ONE OF THEM AND IT'S NOT THAT

>> OKAY.THANK YOU. ED, JUNIOR WHERE THAT ROAD IS ON PRIORITY FOR BUILDING LEE

COUNTY? >> IS NOT IN THE TIP BUT IT IS KNOWN AS A DASHED LINE RD. IN BRANAN FIELD SO IT'S IDENTIFIED BY THE COUNTY WHEN THEY ADOPTED BRANAN FIELD AS A FUTURE ROAD

CORRIDOR AS PART OF THE ROAD SYSTEM. >> THANK YOU.

[01:10:04]

IF YOU HAVE A CARD IF YOU WILL PLEASE BRING IT UP AND GIVE IT TO KELLY A REPORTING SECRETARY SHE WILL MAKE SURE THAT WE CALL YOUR NAME. WE ARE GOING TO START OPENING UP PUBLIC COMMENT. IF YOU DON'T HAVE A CARD THEN PLEASE GRAB ONE IN THE VESTIBULE AND FILL IT OUT REAL QUICK. YOU DELIVERED OVER HERE TO MY

FAR RIGHT, YOUR LEFT IN THE MEANTIME, ÃTHANK YOU, MA'AM. >> SO AND JUST AS A REMINDER WHEN YOU COME UP WE NEED YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS, PLACE AND WE WILL START WITH DAN

>> 4246 BATTLE HORN COURT I LIKE THE LOGIC OF MRS. FRASER'S PRESENTATION.

I LIVE IN FOXBOROUGH SO I SEE IT ALL THE TIME. I HAVE A BUSY LITTLE AREA OVER THERE LONG BAY HAS BEEN A LOT GOING ON. I THINK THE WHAT SHE SAID ABOUT THE WHATEVER YOU CALL THAT. IT IS THIS JUST A BIG HOLE. THERE'S SOME OF THE YARD SO I AM PERSONALLY FOR THEM IN THE AREA I HAVE RENTAL PROPERTY ON LONG BAY.

I WOULD SAY THIS AS MAYBE THAT'S PART OF THE PLAN, TOO, THAT OLD JENNINGS DOES GET TIED UP IN THE MORNING GOING TOWARDS LANDING. BECAUSE THERE IS SCHOOL AND A LOT OF BUS AND THE TRAFFIC HAS BEEN BACKING UP AND IT'S STARTING TO BACK UP A BIT.

I CAN ONLY IMAGINE IT WOULD BE BACKING UP MORE. BUT IF THIS ROAD SOUNDS LIKE IT WOULD RELEASE SOME OF THAT TRAFFIC. IT'S PARTLY BECAUSE OF TYNES.

BY THE WAY, I WANTED TO MAKE ANOTHER COMMENT CHAIRMAN BRAY I AGREE WITH YOU ON THE LAND OWNERSHIP AND I ALSO AGREE WITH YOU ABOUT PEOPLE HAVING A RIGHT TO THEIR PROPERTY NOT HAVING TO TAKE ÃTHE TAKING CALLS AND ALL THAT. SO I THINK THAT'S SMART, BUT I ALSO THINK THAT PERSON WHO HAS THAT PIECE OF PROPERTY MAY BE SOMETHING COULD BE WORKED OUT WHERE THEY GET A NICE HOME ON B SIDE. THERE'S ALWAYS A WAY TO DEAL WITH PEOPLE TO GET SOMETHING LIKE THIS THROUGH. I AM FOR IT.

OVERALL I'M FOR IT.HAT'S IT. >> THANK YOU, SIR. >> OUR NEXT CARD IS FROM CAROL SUNDBERG. DID I SAY THAT RIGHT? IF YOU DON'T MIND COMING FORWARD AND AFTER CAROL IS HANS MANKANEP. I KNOW I SCREWED THAT UP.

IF YOU WOULD GIVE US YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS. >> I'M NOT SURE THIS IS THE

PROPER TIME Ã >> YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS >> CAROL SUNDBERG THE ADDRESS IS 6225 KINGSLEY LAKE DOCTOR AND MY COMMENT IS MORE OF A GENERAL COMMENT, NOT IN PARTICULAR TO THIS AGENDA ITEM, SO I THINK I NEED TO BE AT THE END OF THE MEETING.

>> THANK YOU SO MUCH. THAT'S GREAT. >> YOU WILL CALL ME AGAIN?

>> YES, MA'AM, I WILL. >> HANS MANKANEP 1960. I ALSO HAVE PROPERTY ON HATCHER ROAD, WHICH IS THE ROAD THE BORDERS THE FAR WEST EDGE OF THIS PROPERTY IN QUESTION.

I AM A LONG-TERM RESIDENT AND BUSINESS OWNER AND I AM OPPOSED TO THE FUNDAMENTALS OF WHAT THIS WILL DO. I FEEL LIKE IF WE HAVE RESUMED THIS TO MASTER PLAN, IT OPENS UP A PANDORA'S BOX. AND THAT WOULD BE THAT THEY ARE ALLOWED TO PUT MULTIFAMILY DWELLINGS AND A MASTER PLAN AND IN THAT PROPERTY WHERE IT IS, IT'S NOT NEAR THE CORE OF THE FIRST COAST EXPRESSWAY, WHICH IS MY UNDERSTANDING WHAT THE MASTER PLAN IS SUPPOSED TO BE.

SO THAT'S BEING PUT FAR AWAY. I ALSO DISAGREE WITH THE CALCULATIONS.

I'M NOT SURE HOW THEY CAME UP WITH 1.53 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE, BUT IF THAT'S WHAT THEY SAY THEY ARE GOING TO DO, THAT'S ONE THING, BUT AS I HAVE SEEN IN THE PAST WHEN THE PROPERTY GETS RESUMED, THEY CAN PRETTY MUCH DO WHATEVER THE ZONING WILL ALLOW THEM TO DO.

[01:15:01]

WEST SIDE. >> THANK YOU. NEXT, WE HAVE NO ONNOLAN NORWOO.

>> NOLAN NORWOOD. SUZANNE DRIVE. I APOLOGIZE IF I'M NOT GOOD AT SPEAKING IN FRONT OF PEOPLE. FIRST I WANT TO SAY I WORK IN THE UTILITY INDUSTRY AND IN IT SO I UNDERSTAND THAT YOU CAN'T STOP PROGRESS.BUT I AM OPPOSED TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF THIS LAND, PARTICULARLY AS THE FORMER GENTLEMEN ADDRESS, WHEN THEY ZONE SOMETHING, THEY WILL BEGIN WITH ONE NUMBER AND THEN END WITH ANOTHER. I HAVE SEEN THAT HAPPEN, PARTICULARLY WITH THE LAND ABOVE THIS SITE. THEY ZONED IT AT ONE LOT SIZE.

I'VE SEEN IT ON OUR GIS MAPS AT WORK, AND THE PROPERTY ABUTS RIGHT UP TO MY FATHER'S PROPERTY, AND NOW THE LOTS THAT WERE GOING TO BE .75 ACRES ARE MUCH SMALLER.

THE ONE THING THAT IS UNIQUE ABOUT THIS IS THIS WILL NOT BE ÃIF YOU LOOK AT THE BIGGER MAP WHERE THESE SIZE LOTS ARE PLACED ALONG ÃYOU KNOW, THE EXPRESSWAY, THE BUFFER IS ALL OF OUR PROPERTY. WHEREAS THIS WILL BE RIGHT ON THE INTERSECTION OF OLD JENNINGS AND LONG BAY, WHICH IS ALREADY HEAVILY CONGESTED. AND I HAVE LIVED THERE I LIVE FOR ALMOST 35 YEARS AND THE BIGGEST THING THAT I WOULD LIKE TO STRESS IS I AM SO RELIEVED THAT STAFF WAS HESITANT ABOUT DEVELOPING THIS TO BEGIN WITH BECAUSE I WAS REALLY CONCERNED.

IT IS THE CONGESTION AREA. MY MOTHER RECENTLY HAS LOST SOME OF HER VISION, SO WHEN SHE DRIVES, THE MORE CONGESTED AN AREA IS, THE MORE WORRIED I GET WHEN SHE LEAVES.

SO TO THINK THAT YOU ARE GOING TO HAVE POTENTIALLY 300 MORE PEOPLE COMING RIGHT OUT OF THIS INTERSECTION WITH NO BUFFER, YOU KNOW, IT'S GOING TO CHANGE WHERE I LIVE, BASICALLY.

AND I UNDERSTAND YOU CAN'T CHANGE THAT, BUT WHERE THAT'S PLACED IS THE PROBLEM IN MY MIND. I KNOW THE PREVIOUS ZONING WAS ONE HOUSE PER 4 TO 5 ACRES WHICH IS VERY GENEROUS IN MY MIND. THAT'S A LOT OF LAND FOR A HOUSE, BUT THE CONCERN THAT IS 1.53, THAT'S ONE THING. BUT THE HUGE GAP TO WHERE IT CAN GO UP TO 12 UNITS PER ACRE REALLY CONCERNS ME ESPECIALLY BECAUSE THIS SEEMS LIKE IT'S STARTING OFF ON SHAKY UNCERTAIN GROUND TO BEGIN WITH. WITH SO MANY THINGS INVOLVED.

NOT TO MENTION IF THE GENTLEMAN I THINK THAT HIS LAND IS IN QUESTION, I'VE LIVED THERE FOR OVER 30 YEARS. KNOW HIM. HE IS A REALLY GOOD GUY. I WOULD HATE TO SEE HIM GET PENALIZED IN SOME WAY, SHAPE OR FORM BECAUSE OF THIS PROJECT. THAT'S ALL I HAVE.

THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, MR. NOLAN. >> THAT IS THE LAST OF THE CARDS THAT I HAVE. IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS? SEEING NOBODY APPROACHING Ã YES, SIR? SIR, IF YOU WILL COME ON UP AND IF YOU WILL DO ME A FAVOR AND GIVE US YOUR NAME AND YOUR ADDRESS AND WHEN YOU ARE DONE

IF YOU WOULD FILL OUT A CARD >> I AM GARY NORWOOD 4008 SUZANNE DOCTOR OFF OF BADGER.

THE CONCERN I HAVE IS WITH HATCHER BEING THERE AND THE TYPE OF ROAD IT IS WE GET A LOT OF TRAFFIC ALREADY FROM THE HOUSES WE HAVE. OTHER GOING TO BE SOME KIND OF ROAD THEY'RE GOING TO PUT INTO HATCHER ROAD WAS GOING TO CAUSE US A LOT MORE ISSUES BECAUSE THE PROPERTIES BEHIND US NOW HOUSES THEY'RE GETTING READY TO PUT ALL OF THOSE HOUSES BEHIND US. I MEAN, THEY TOOK A LOT OF LANDSCAPE OUT OF THEIR.

THERE USED TO BE A LOT OF CEDAR TREES AND STUFF AND THESE LOTS WILL BE SMALL.

WE HAVE ALREADY GOT PEOPLE OUT THERE BURNING OUT, CARS AFTER SPINNING OUT, PEOPLE COMING ACROSS OUR COMPANY NOW. I MEAN, THIS IS WHAT WE HAVE TO DEAL WITH, THIS STUFF HERE.

WE ARE CONCERNED ABOUT THAT. >> THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. AND IF YOU WILL DO A SPEAKER

[01:20:01]

CARD FOR US. THANK YOU SO MUCH. >> IF THERE ARE NO OTHERS THEN I WILL CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT AND WE ARE GOING TO BRING IT BACK TO THE COMMISSION.

>> COULD I PLEASE MAKE SOME COMMENTS? >> YES, MA'AM.

>> THANK YOU. SO I THINK SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT WE ARE HEARING ARE RELATED TO WHAT MPC COULD BE, THAT MPC ALLOWS MULTIFAMILY. IF IT'S APPROVED AND I THINK IN THE STAFF REPORT AND I DON'T KNOW CAROLYN IF YOU HAVE A SLIDE OF THE STAFF REPORT, BUT THE VERY LAST PAGE SHOWS YOU WITH THAT AMENDMENT LOOKS LIKE. AND THERE'S A STAR ON IT, AND IT SAYS 1.53 UNITS PER ACRE. AND 50 FOOT BUFFERS. AND SO I DON'T KNOW WHO IN THIS ROOM HAS DONE A DEVELOPMENT REVIEW BY MRS. MORGAN AND GOTTEN ONE INCH MORE THAN THE 1.5 UNITS APPROVED, BUT I HAVE NOT BEEN ABLE TO DO THAT. AND SO I WOULD JUST OFFER ASSURANCE TO ANYONE THAT IF THE COMMITMENT AND THE APPROVAL HAVE A CAP ON IT THAT THAT WILL BE MAINTAINED BY THE STAFF WHEN THE FINAL SITE PLANS COME THROUGH.

SO THIS COULD NOT BE ÃSO FOR THOSE OF YOU WHO LIVE IN THIS AREA, IF YOU DRIVE THROUGH PINE RIDGE NOW AND YOU DRIVE THROUGH LINDA LAKE THIS IS EXACTLY WHERE IT WILL BE.

NO BETTER OR NO WORSE BUT IT WON'T BE ANY SMALLER THAN THAT AND WILL BE ANY BETTER THAN THAT. IT WILL NOT BE MULTIFAMILY USE. AND THERE WILL BE NO ACCESS TO HATCHER. HATCHER IS A DIRT ROAD AND IF WE PROVIDE ACCESS WE WOULD HAVE TO PAY BUT AND SINCE LAST ÃWE WOULD ACCESS DIRECTLY ONTO Ã ACTUALLY ON TOO LONG BAY EXTENSION. THIS PROPERTY, UNLESS THE SITE PLAN WORKED OUT, IT WOULD PROBABLY NOT HAVE ACCESS ON OLD JENNINGS. IT WOULD PROBABLY HAVE ACCESS STRAIGHT ON LONG BAY. SO PEOPLE ENTERING AND EXITING WOULD BE ABLE TO GO NORTH AND NOT GOING ON JENNINGS. THIS IS A BYPASS TO JENNINGS AND THE INTERCESSION THAT'S THERE. THEY CITE ÃTHE ALIGNMENT THAT YOU SEE FOR THE RIGHT OF WAY IS JUST THE OWNERSHIP. RIGHT NOW ALTERA GROUP OWNS THAT PIECE OF THIS DEVELOPMENT PARCEL. WHEN THEY DO THEIR SITE PLAN THEY WILL MOVE THAT ALIGNMENT OVER SO THERE IS DEVELOPMENT ON BOTH SIDES OF LONG BAY. IT WILL BE EVENLY DISTRIBUTED THROUGHOUT THE PROPERTY AND NOT A LOT OF HOUSES ON ONE AND A LOT OF HOUSES ON THE OTHER.

REALLY WHAT I HEARD WS THAT YOU ARE RIGHT MPC IN THE CODE COULD B-12 UNITS PER ACRE.

IF THIS IS APPROVED IT WOULD BE CAPPED AT 1.53. AND THAT'S REALLY WHAT YOU'RE

SAYING AND THE SUBDIVISIONS THAT ARE AROUND YOU. >> SO MRS. FRASER AND WANT TO CLARIFY. SO THE APPLICANT IS GOING TO ADD 1.53.

THERE IS NO WIGGLE ROOM, THERE IS NO CHANGING MIDSTREAM AFTER ÃYOU ARE ASKING FOR A 1.53?

>> CORRECT. SO THE COMP PLAN IF IT'S APPROVED, WOULD HAVE A NOTE IN

THE POLICY AND IT WOULD SAY THIS PARCEL, 98.18 ACRES, 1.3. >> LET'S BE CLEAR, THOUGH, THEY COULD ALWAYS COME BACK AND ASK FOR A CHANGE IN THIS. OKAY?

>> I'M TRYING TO CLARIFY WHAT THEY'RE ASKING NOW. >> IS NOT IN WRITING.

>> IT IS IN WRITING. IT'S THE APPLICATION IS FOR THAT.> OKAY.

IF WE CAN PAUSE FOR ONE SECOND. STAFF? >> I WOULD JUST POINT OUT THAT PINE RIDGE AND JEW CREEKS AND ZOE RICH AND LINDA LAKE ARE ALL ONE UNIT PER ACRE, NOT 1.53 UNITS. SO THIS REQUEST IS NOT QUITE THE SAME AS WHAT THOSE THINGS HAVE. IT'S A REQUEST TO HAVE 1/2 A UNIT MORE PER ACRE AND IT'S A REQUEST NOT TO HAVE TO PROVIDE ANY OF THE IMPROVEMENTS FOR PRESERVATION OR CONSERVATION LANDS OR APPLETS NEXT TO THE PCN THAT THOSE PROJECTS HAD TO DO.

SO THERE IS A LOT MORE THAT THEY ARE GETTING OUT OF THIS THAN WHAT THE JEW CREEKS, PINE RIDGE, AND LAND O LAKES, AND ZOE RICH PEOPLE HAVE GOTTEN. > UNDER THE LAND USE WE ARE

REQUESTING, NONE OF THOSE APPLY. >> THAT'S WHY IT'S SPOTS THE ZONING BECAUSE THE LAND USE YOU ARE REQUESTING IS NOT ADJACENT TO ANY OF THEM.> ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU. WE ARE GOING TO BRING IT BACK TO THE COMMISSION AT THIS POINT. WE ARE GOING TO BRING IT BACK TO THE COMMISSION FOR

DELIBERATION. >> I JUST HAVE A QUESTION. AFTER THE RECOMMENDATION FROM THE STAFF TO CONTINUE THIS, THIS IS NOT AN OPTION ON THE BLOCK?

>> WE BELIEVE THERE'S NO ISSUE THAT CAN'T BE RESOLVED IN THE TIME BETWEEN NOW AND ADOPTION, AND SO THERE'S NO JEOPARDY HE WILL BE FORCED TO ADOPT IF WE ARE UNABLE TO PRODUCE WHATEVER JUSTIFICATION IS REQUIRED. AND IF WE DO, YOU WANT ADOPTED. SO THIS IS JUST SENDING IT TO THE STATE TO SAY ÃWE ACKNOWLEDGE THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE WORKED OUT, BUT WE HAVE

[01:25:03]

PROBABLY THREE MONTHS OR MORE TO MAKE THAT HAPPEN. >> THANK YOU.

>> CAN WE CLARIFY THAT? >> LET ME JUST MAKE SURE ÃCAN YOU CONTINUE?

>> ALL I WANT TO SAY IS I AGREE WITH STAFF, THAT IT IS SPOT ZONING BECAUSE I LIVED HERE MY WHOLE LIFE. HATCHER WROTE, I DON'T KNOW WHERE ALL OF THE HATCHER'S ARE BUT THAT'S ALL IT WAS ON THAT ROAD ÃTHAT'S ALL THAT LIVED BACK THERE BACK THEN.

BUT ALL THIS IN YELLOW, GUYS, THEY HAVE 5 TO 10 ACRES. SO YOU ARE PUTTING IN THIS, 1.53, ON AN ACRE. IT JUST ÃIT'S NOT COMPATIBLE. AND THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT PINE RIDGE OR WHATEVER, WELL YOU HAVE GOT ALSO LAND IN BETWEEN THOSE, IN BETWEEN THIS SECTION HERE THAT THEY WANT TO REZONE. SO I PERSONALLY CANNOT GO ALONG WITH THIS SINCE YOU HAVE GOT

LARGE LANDOWNERS AND IT JUST DOESN'T FIT. >> OKAY.

MR. PUCKHABER? >> A COUPLE OF THINGS. FIRST OF ALL, THIS IS A

TRANSMITTAL HEARING, CORRECT? >> THIS IS JUST THE PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING.

THE TRANSMITTAL WILL BE WITH THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS. >> SO IF IT GETS TRANSMITTED,

WHEN IT COMES BACK FOR FINAL ADOPTIONO US.DOESN'T COME BACK >> IT DES NOT COME BACK TO

YOU. >> SO WE DON'T GET TO SEE THIS AGAIN.

THAT'S THE POINT I WANTED TO MAKE. I THINK SUSAN'S ANSWER IT SOUNDS LIKE WE DID. THIS IS OUR LAST CHANCE TO LOOK AT THIS.

AS A PLANNING COMMISSION. SO WITH THAT IN MIND, AND THERE'S A COUPLE OF THINGS.

I ACTUALLY SUPPORT KIND OF THE STAFF REPORT. THERE ARE WAY TOO MANY LOOSE PIECES ON THIS. LIKE, WHY ARE THESE PARCELS NOT UNDER THE SAME OWNERSHIP? OBVIOUSLY, THAT SOUNDS TO ME LIKE THERE'S SOME CONTRACTS OUT THERE FOR SALE, AND THEY ARE NOT GOING TO EXECUTE THOSE CONTRACTS UNTIL THEY GET THIS ZONING CHANGE OR THIS LAND-USE CHANGE. THAT'S A POTENTIAL PROBLEM FOR ALL KINDS OF THINGS DOWN THE ROAD. I THINK THE PARCELS SHOULD BE CONSOLIDATED, I THINK WE SHOULD SEE A PLAN OF ÃI AM A LITTLE CONCERNED ABOUT THE DENSITY AS IS BELINDA AND OTHERS.

I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IT MORE THAN THE ONE ACRE AREA. IT'S STILL GOING TO BE A LOT OF HOUSES IN THEIR, BUT I AM REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT THIS WORLD.

BECAROAD. I STILL THINK THE TYNES EXTENSION, THE COUNTY GOT STUCK WITH THAT BECAUSE THERE'S A RIGHT-HND TURN IN THE MIDDLE OF THE ROAD.

WHERE WE HAVE RIGHT AWAY THROUGH MAYFAIR OFF OF LANDING. IT GOES LIKE THIS GOING THROUGH THE MAYFAIR AREA DOCTOR. IT'S NOT A GOOD CONNECTOR ROAD LIKE IT WAS INTENDED TO BE.

I WOULD LIKE TO SEE WHERE THAT ROAD IS GOING TO BE. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE ALTERA SAY HERE IS THE PROPERTY WE ARE GOING TO GIVE YOU FOR THAT ROAD AND NOT BE SCREWING AROUND WITH THE ALIGNMENT LATER ON AND MAKE SURE OUR ENGINEERS ARE HAPPY WITH THAT.

A SITE PLAN AT LEAST A PRELIMINARY ONE WOULD BE NICE. I ALREADY MENTIONED THE DENSITY, AND IT WORKS OUT ÃIN GENERAL, I AM NOT SURE THAT I DON'T SUPPORT THIS BECAUSE I GO UP AND DOWN OLD JENNINGS WORK FREQUENTLY. I HAVE A FRIEND THAT LIVES WAY OUT AT THE END OF IT PAST FOX MEADOW. SO I HAVE SEEN ALL OF THE DEVELOPMENT GOING ON OUT THERE. I REMEMBER WHEN THE ONLY THING ON OLD JENNING WAS WOODPECKER PLACE. THE OLD SLIM WHITMAN'S PLACE OUT THERE.

BUT THE DEVELOPMENT IS GOING TO HAPPEN BECAUSE OF THIS ROAD. AND WHAT WE HAVE TO DO IS TRY TO DO IT SENSIBLY. WE HAVE TO HAVE ROADS ARE CORRECT.

I ÃIF I WAS FORCED TO TONIGHT I WOULD VOTE DENIAL ON THIS. I WOULD VOTE FOR A CONTINUANCE.

I DON'T LIKE THE ARGUMENT. I'M SORRY BUT I DON'T LIKE THE ARGUMENT THAT WE HAVE TIME UNTIL THE APPROVAL OR THE ADOPTION BECAUSE I AM DONE AFTER THIS MEETING.

I HAVE NO MORE TO SAY. BECAUSE IT WILL COME BACK TO THIS BOARD.F WE DO A CONTINUANCE YOU GUYS WORK SOME OF THESE PROBLEMS OUT AND WHEN STUFF COMES HERE AND SAYS WE THINK WE HAVE WORKED OUT A SOLUTION SOMETHING WE CAN SUPPORT, THEN THERE IS A GOOD

CHANCE I CAN SUPPORT IT. THAT'S ALL I WANT TO SAY. >> THANK YOU.

>> I DO HAVE A QUESTION FOR THE REPRESENTATIVE. THE CENSUS OF HOMES IS 2.7 KIDS PER HOUSEHOLD? SO YOU ARE LOOKING AT ALMOST Ã YOU ARE LOOKING AT ALMOST 300?

[01:30:09]

>> HERE'S MY ISSUE WHEN THE SCHOOLS WERE BUILT OR DESIGNED OR PLANNED THIS WASN'T PART OF IT. WE WERE LOOKING AT THE WAY IT WAS BEFORE.

AND MS. FRAZIER IS CORRECT THAT WE DID BUY SOME PROPERTY UP THERE.

BUT THAT WAS KIND OF WHAT WE WERE FORCED TO DO. I WAS GOING TO BE TURNED INTO SOMETHING WE DIDN'T WANT TO BE TURNED INTO. RIGHT NOW THE STUDENTS WOULD BE ZONED FOR TYNES AND TYNES NOW IS ALMOST AT 100 PERCENT WITH LINDA LAKES BEING DEVELOPED AZALEA RIDGE STILL BEING DEVELOPED TO CREEKS AND PINE CREEK STILL BEING DEVELOPED.

IF THIS WAS BUILT THESE STUDENTS WOULD END UP HAVING TO GO HAVING TO GO TO [INDISCERNIBLE] AND THE HIGH SCHOOL RIGHT NOW IS AT CAPACITY SO THEY WOULD HAVE TO GO TO REACH MORE. THEY COULDN'T GO UP TO OAKLEAF UNLESS WE DID A REZONE.

SO THIS ÃWHAT WE ARE LOOKING AT HERE IS NOT WHAT WE HAD PLANNED.

DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? >> YES. ABSOLUTELY.

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY. I WILL JUST SAY AS KIND OF MY COMMENT. AGAIN, I LIKE THE FACT THE DEVELOPER WILL PUT THAT ROAD IN. THAT WILL BE AN EXPENSIVE ROAD AND THE FACT THAT THAT'S PART OF THEIR BAILEYWICK THE FACT THEY WILL LOCK IN THE MAXIMUM UNITS OF 1.53, I THINK, IT CERTAINLY ADDRESSES SOME OF THE CONCERNS OF DURING PUBLIC COMMENT.

SO ÃWERE GOING TO DO. THEY WERE GOING TO PROVIDE THAT LATER.

THAT RIGHT-OF-WAY. >> I MISUNDERSTOOD. I'M SORRY.

I THOUGHT THE APPLICANT SAID THEY WERE GOING TO BUILD THE ROAD.> I HAVEN'T HEARD THAT

THEY ARE BUILDING IT YET. >> WELL, BEFORE WE VOTE CAN I HAVE THE APPLICANT CLARIFY

THAT? >> IT HAS TO BE IN THE APPLICATION.

>> THE PUBLIC FACILITIES REQUIREMENT IN THE Ã >> I JUST NEED A YES OR NO.

>> NO. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH. I APPRECIATE IT.

WELL, WE ARE AT THIS POINT BRING IT BACK FOR A MOTION. IF THERE IS ONE FROM THE

COMMISSION. >> WELL, I WOULD MOVE A CONTINUANCE.

I WOULD LIKE TO SEE OUR STAFF CONTINUE TO WORK WITH THE APPLICANT AS THEY WOULD LIKE TO

AND SEE IF WE COULD WORK OUT SOME OF THIS STUFF. >> THE APPLICANT HAS TO AGREE.

>> THEY DON'T HAVE TO AGREE. >> THEY DON'T HAVE TO AGREE TO CONTINUE?

>> YOU CAN CONTINUE WITHOUT THE CONCURRENCE. >> AND SHE DOESN'T WANT TO DO

IT. >> RIGHT. >> I HAVE A MOTION Ã

>> WHERE ARE WE HERE? >> ALL RIGHT. SO LET'S STAND BY FOR A SECOND.

WE HAVE A MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE. DO WE HAVE A SECOND?

>> WE CAN CONTINUE IT Ã >> FIRST WE'RE GOING TO FIND OUT WHAT DIRECTION WE ARE GOING AND THEN WE WILL BRING THE APPLICANT UP. WE HAVE A FIRST?

>> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A FIRST AND TWO SECONDS.

NOW AT THIS POINT I AM GOING TO ASK OUR COUNTY ATTORNEY, DO WE NEED TO HAVE THE APPLICANT APPROVE A CONTINUANCE?

TO A CONTINUANCE? >> MAY I GIVE MORE THAN A ONE WORD ANSWER?

>> YES, MA'AM >> THE DISCUSSION HERE TONIGHT IS CAN WE RESOLVE OWNERSHIP.

CAN WE RESOLVE THE ALIGNMENT OF THE ROAD. IF YOU ARE ASKING ME TO COME BACK WITH AN OWNERSHIP COMMITMENT EITHER IN A CONTRACT FOR SALE AND AN ALIGNMENT, THEN THE CONTINUANCE ALLOWS US TO DO THAT. IF THE CONSENSUS IS THIS IS A SPOT ZONING AND THAT'S AN APPROPRIATE DEVOTE IS NOT GOING TO CHANGE IN ALIGNMENT.

AND SO I HAVE TO ASK YOU IF I BRING BACK TO ANSWERS ARE YOU VOTING FOR IT BECAUSE NOTHING ELSE WILL CHANGE AND IF INSTEAD YOU REALLY INTEND TO SAY NO I WILL TAKE A NOKIA

>> I WILL JUST BESPEAK FOR MYSELF I HAVE ABSOLUTELY NO ISSUE WITH THE 1.53.

IF THERE'S WATER AND SEWER AVAILABLE AND WE ARE PUTTING IN A BUNCH OF WELL AND SEPTIC AS LONG AS THEY CONFORM TO THE DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS OF THE COUNTY IN THIS AREA, I DON'T HAVE AN ISSUE WITH THE QUANTITY OF UNITS. OBVIOUSLY I THINK WE HAVE ONE ON THE SCHOOL SITE. I DON'T KNOW. THAT WILL BE JIM'S BAILEYWICK.

SO SPEAKING FOR MYSELF, MY CONCERN IS THAT ROAD. AND WHERE IT LANDS AND HOW THAT HOMEOWNER IS GOING TO BE AFFECTED AT THE END OF THE DAY WHEN THE ROAD GOES IN.

[01:35:05]

THAT'S MY FEELING ON IT. NOT THAT WE NEED TO ANSWER THE APPLICANT AND THE QUESTION BUT

AGAIN, WE ARE IN CONVERSATION APPEARED >> MR. CHAIRMAN, THEY ARE NOT GOING TO HOLD UP DEVELOPMENT WAITING FOR THAT ROAD. AND THEY ARE NOT GOING TO PUT THE ROAD IN, SO THERE WOULD BE WAITING FOR THE COUNTY TO PUT IT IN, AND AS I HAVE HEARD, THAT ROAD ISN'T ON ANYBODY'S PRIORITY LIST. SO DEVELOPING THE PROPERTY WITHOUT THAT ROAD, IS THAT DOING THE PEOPLE WHO ARE GOING TO BUY THAT HOUSE IS ANY JUSTICE? IT'S NOT GOING TO ADDRESS THE COMMENTS WE HEARD THAT THE ROAD IS GOING TO BE GREAT FOR RELIEVING CONGESTION BECAUSE IT'S NOT GOING TO BE DONE WHEN THE PROPERTY IS DEVELOPED AND WE DON'T KNOW WHEN IT WILL BE DONE.

AND I WILL STRESS IT. ARE YOU DOING THE PROPERTY Ã THE FUTURE PROPERTY OWNERS ANY

JUSTICE BY NOT HAVING THAT ROAD AS A PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT? >> OKAY.

ANY OTHER ÃANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OR CONVERSATIONS? SO I AM GOING TO ASK A VERY DIRECT QUESTION BECAUSE IT'S BEEN ASKED AND NOT ANSWERED.

WILL THE APPLICANT CONSIDER OR AGREE TO A CONTINUANCE. IT'S A YES OR NO ANSWER.> I

PREFER A VOTE. THANK YOU. >> YOU PREFER A BOOK?

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. >> I THEN HAVE TO WITHDRAW MY MOTION. I WILL WITHDRAW MY MOTION OF THE SECOND GRADE.

>> ARE GREAT. >> I SUBSTITUTE A MOTION. I ÃI CAN'T REALLY RECOMMEND THE STAFF REPORT BECAUSE THAT'S A CONTINUANCE. I WOULD RECOMMEND DENIAL.

>> SECOND. OKAY. WE HAVE A FIRST AND A SECOND FOR DENIAL OF THE APPLICANT. IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL RIGHT.

WE ARE GOING TO GO TO ITEM NUMBER 6 PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER CPA 2019 Ã13 TO AMEND

FROM COMMERCIAL TO URBAN CORE. MS. CAROLYN, IS THIS YOURS? >> I'M GLAD THAT HAPPENS TO

SOMEBODY BESIDES ME. >> I WOULD SUGGEST YOU CHANGE THE PASSWORD.

NICE JOB, ED. [LAUGHTER]

[6.  Public Hearing to consider CPA 2019-13 to amend from Commercial to Urban Core (16) on 4.19 acres.]

>> SORRY FOR THE DELAY. THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 2019 Ã13 WHICH IS A SMALL-SCALE LAND-USE AMENDMENT FROM COMMERCIAL TO URBAN CORE 16 IT IS LOCATED AT 515 COLLEGE DRIVE. IT'S IN THE DOCTORS INLET PLANNING DISTRICT COMMISSION DISTRICT 5 MR. HENRY'S DISTRICT.

THE AGENT IS OUR PATRICK GAYLE MERCY SUPPORT SERVICES IN THE APPLICANT IS RIVER CHRISTIAN CHURCH. THIS WOULD ÃI DIDN'T CHANGE THE DATE ON THIS.

I AM SORRY. THIS WILL GO TO THE BOARD ON THE 28TH OF JANUARY, 2020.

THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS THIS TRIANGLE, IT'S A CUT OUT. THERE IS AN EXISTING COMMERCIAL USE IN MY CUTOUT. IT WAS A CHURCH AND NOW IT'S BEEN OFFICE USE.

THESE ARE SOME SHOTS OF A PROPERTY. THE RIVER CHRISTIAN CHURCH

[01:40:01]

AND THIS IS THE LAND ON ALL SIDES OF IT >> CAROLYN, JUST TO BE CLEAR, THE BUILDING THAT YOU ARE SHOWING IN THE PICTURE IS ON THE PART OF THIS THAT'S NOT

PART OF THE SITE >> THAT'S THE PARK IS NOT INCLUDED, YES.

>> OKAY. THE PART WE ARE TALKING ABOUT IS COMPLETELY UNDEVELOPED.

>> RIGHT. WELL, IT WOULD INCLUDE WHERE THE SIGNS ARE, I WOULD BELIEVE.

THE MAJORITY OF THE BUILDABLE PART OF THE PROPERTY IS BETWEEN THE RV STORAGE AREA AND Ã

>> I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE EVERYBODY IS CLEAR THAT THE BUILDING ISN'T IN THIS AREA

>> BASICALLY THE BUILDING IS NOT CUT OUT AND THE #IS EVERYTHING ELSE.

EXISTING LAND USE FOR THE PROPERTY CURRENTLY IS COMMERCIAL, AND EXISTING ZONING IS CURRENTLY BB-2. THE COMMERCIAL HAS A FLOOR AREA OF.40.

THE URBAN CORE 16 WOULD ALLOW 16 DWELLING UNITS PER NET ACRE. THERE IS A REQUIREMENT THAT IT BE ON THE TRANSIT LINE AND IT IS ON THE BLUE LINE FOR CLAY COMMUNITY TRANSIT.

LEVEL OF SERVICES LOCATED IN WATER AND SEWER SERVICE AREA. IT DOESN'T REALLY GENERATE VERY MANY TRIPS. THE COUNTY HAS RECREATION CAPACITY AND THEY WOULD HAVE TO DEVELOP STORMWATER MANAGEMENT FACILITIES WITH THE BUILDING THEY WOULD BE BUILDING THE SITE IS REPURPOSED FROM THE PREVIOUS PLACE AND RELIGIOUS ASSEMBLY. IT'S A PORTION OF THAT SITE.

STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF PROPOSED URBAN CORE 16 LAND-USE AND THIS WOULD BE THE FIRST TIME WE HAVE APPLIED. WE INTRODUCED IT IN THE COMP PLAN WE ADOPTED IT IN JUNE 2018 AND THERE ISN'T ANY EXISTING SO THIS WOULD BE THE FIRST PLACE WE HAVE DONE IT.

ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE SITE IS AN ELDER CARE FACILITY. CASSIE GARDENS.

AND THERE IS ANOTHER RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT TO THE NORTH OF IT THAT'S SOMEWHAT SIMILAR IN NATURE. SO IT'S IN OUR OPINION A GOOD AND FULL PROJECT AND IT IS A MIXED USE OF THIS SITE APPROPRIATELY, AND PROBABLY THE WORST THING IS THE PARKING OF THE VEHICLES OR THE RECREATIONAL VEHICLES, BUT THE FACT IS THE SITE ALREADY HAS QUITE A BIT OF TREE COVER ALONG THE SOUTH BOUNDARY, SO WHEN YOU ARE ACTUALLY STANDING OUT THERE, IT ISN'T NEARLY AS NOTICEABLE AS IT IS FROM THE AERIAL.

>> OKAY. HOW MANY ÃI'M GOING TO START OFF HOW MANY UNITS ARE THERE GOING TO BE ÃTHIS IS A 4+ ACRE PARCEL. HOW MANY UNITS WILL THEY BE

ABLE TO PUT ON IT? >> I THINK THEY CAN GENERATE 67 BUT THEY SUGGESTED 60.

IT IS NET ACRES OF THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF DEVELOPMENT IS GOING TO BE BASED ON WHAT IS NOT WETLANDS, AND I THINK THERE MIGHT BE SOME WETLANDS ON THAT SITE.

>> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? OKAY. THANK YOU. THAT WAS EXCELLENT.

IS THE APPLICANT HERE? APPLICANT, IF YOU WILL COME UP. MY HEAD ISN'T SWINGING AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT I'M DOING. IT'S GETTING LATE. SO IF YOU WOULD, SHARE WITH US

WHAT YOU WANT TO DO. >> OKAY. I WILL SHARE WITH YOU BRIEFLY WHAT MERCY SUPPORT SERVICES IS AND SO THAT YOU KNOW WHAT WE HAVE ÃIF WE COULD HAVE YOUR

NAME AND ADDRESS. >> MY NAME IS PATRICK HALE I AM THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR FOR MERCY SUPPORT SERVICES. PMY PERSONAL ADDRESS AND CLAY COUNTY IS 775 AARON CT. 32073.

>> THANK YOU. >> MERCY SUPPORT SERVICES AS AN ORGANIZATION THAT HAS BEEN AROUND SINCE 2010. BUT WE CAME OUT OF AN ORGANIZATION THAT WAS MERCY NETWORK, WHICH WAS THERE SINCE 2003. SO JUST TO FAST-FORWARD, THE THINGS THAT WE HAVE DONE SO FAR ARE PURPOSE IS EMPOWERING PEOPLE WHO ARE CIRCUMSTANTIALLY IN NEED FOR SUSTAINABLE INDEPENDENT FUTURE. AND SINCE WE HAVE BEEN IN EXISTENCE, WE HAVE HELPED OVER 159 FAMILIES TO GET FROM WHERE THEY WERE TO SELF-SUFFICIENCY

[01:45:01]

>> THAT'S AN OUTSTANDING MISSION. >> THANK YOU.

>> IS THERE ANY QUESTION FOR THE APPLICANT? >> I JUST HAVE ONE.

ARE YOU GOING TO KEEP THE BUILDING THAT'S THERE AND BUILD AROUND THAT?

OR IS THAT BUILDING GOING AWAY AND MAYBE REDO THE WHOLE SITE? >> NO.

THE BUILDING IS ABOUT 7000 SQUARE FEET AND WE ARE GOING TO KEEP THAT FOR OFFICES AND THE WRAPAROUND SERVICES WE ARE TALKING ABOUT WILL BE HOUSED IN THAT AS WELL.

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

>> I HAVE A QUESTION. COULD YOU SHARE WITH ME WHAT IS THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN RIVER

CHRISTIAN CHURCH AND MERCY SUPPORT SERVICES? >> RIVER CHRISTIAN CHURCH IS THE SELLER OF THE PROPERTY AND MERCY SUPPORT SERVICES AS THE BUYER.

>> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH. ALL RIGHT.

WE WILL OPEN UP PUBLIC COMMENT. I ONLY HAVE ONE CARD. ERIC?

>> I WITHDRAW >> EXCELLENT.HANK YOU, SIR. >> PUBLIC COMMENT IS OPEN IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO COME UP TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION, PLEASE DO SO NOW.

SAYING NOBODY APPROACHING THE PODIUM, WE WILL CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT AND BRING THE BACKWARD

DISCUSSION. >> MR. CHAIR I WILL GO AHEAD AND MOVE THE STAFF REPORT.

I'D LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT. >> SECOND. >> DISCUSSION?

>> WE HAVE A COMPANION ZONING COMING UP RIGHT BEHIND US, BUT YOU KNOW, I LIVE NEAR THIS.

I GO DOWN THIS ROAD CONSTANTLY. I WILL TELL YOU THIS IS AN EXCELLENT LOCATION FOR THIS FACILITY. RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET IS CASSIE GARDENS WHICH I THINK Ã

I DON'T THINK RETIREMENT HOME IS THE RIGHT TERM >> ELDER CARE FACILITY

>> ELDERCARE APARTMENTS OR WHATEVER. SO THERE ARE MULTIFAMILY ACROSS THE STREET, A RETENTION POND, A STORAGE YARD NEXT TO IT. I THINK THERE'S A CREEK THAT PRUNS PRETTY MUCH ALONG THIS PROPERTY SO NO ONE CAN REALLY BUILD UP TO THE BACK OF IT ANYWAY. AND I WOULD ALSO POINT OUT THAT IT'S RIGHT DOWN THE STREET FROM THAT ÃWHO WAS THAT GROUP? THE GIRLS? PACE.

THIS IS RIGHT DOWN THE STREET FROM THE PROPERTY. IT'S ONLY A FEW ÃCOULDN'T BE

MORE THAN 1/4 OF A MILE DOWN THE ROAD >> ANOTHER GREAT MISSION

>> YES. I WHOLEHEARTEDLY SUPPORT THIS >> EXCELLENT.

WE ARE STILL OPEN TO DISCUSSION. ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS OR CONCERNS?

THANK YOU FOR BEING HERE. >> WE HAVE TO DO THE ZONING. >> WE HAVE ONE MORE.

THIS IS A COMPANION ZONING FOR THIS >> DO WE HAVE A SECOND ON THAT?

>> YES. >> I'M SORRY. THANK YOU.

>> EXCELLENT. CAROLYN? >> I DON'T KNOW IF WE NEED TO

[7.  Public Hearing to consider rezoning from BB-2 to RD-4 at 515 College Drive]

GO BACK TO READ BUT IF YOU WOULD CARRY US THROUGH? >> THIS IS THE COMPANION REZONING FROM BB-2 TO RD-4 AND ON THE SAME PORTION OF THAT TAX PARCEL THAT WE SHOWED YOU, THEY CUT OUT IN THE 4.19 ACRES. TO THE NORTH IS RB AND TO THE EAST IS RB AND TO THE SOUTH IS BB-2 AND RD-4 AND RB ARE TO THE WEST. BUT AS ESTHER PUCKHABER POINTED OUT, IT DOES LOOK TO ME LIKE THERE'S GOING TO BE NOTHING ADJACENT TO THE EAST OF THIS

[01:50:07]

AGAIN, YOU CAN SEE THERE IS WETLANDS AROUND THERE. STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL.

>> OKAY. WE ARE GOING TO FORGO BRINGING THE APPLICANT BACK UP.

WE ARE GOING TO OPEN UP PUBLIC COMMENT. IF ANYBODY HAS ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS ON THIS ITEM. WE WILL CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT. WE WILL BRING ABOUT FOR

EMOTION. >> ONE QUESTION. CAROLYN, THE RD-4 ZONING DOES NOT INCLUDE THE PARCEL WITH THE BUILDING ON IT? THAT WILL STAY Ã

>> IS GOING TO STATED COMMERCIAL AND THE BB-2 ZONING >> FOR THAT BUILDING

>> FOR THEIR OFFICE BUILDING. SO ESSENTIALLY THERE'S GOING TO BE A NEW PARCEL

>> WRAPPING AROUND THIS. >> IS ALL IN THE OWNERSHIP OF THE SAME PEOPLE.

THE PROPERTY APPRAISAL WON'T SEPARATE THEM, AT LEAST NOT ON THE MAP, MAYBE.

>> OKAY. I WILL MAKE A MOTION. I MOVE THE STAFF REPORT

>> SECOND >> WE HAVE A FIRST AND A SECOND.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION?

>>

FOR THAT CLARIFICATION. >> MR. CHAIR, I WAS JUST READING THE OTHER DAY MR. HENDRY, THAT THE NEWEST THING NOW IS NOT MR MS IT'S MX SO THERE IS NO GENDER BIAS.

SO WE CAN GO THERE. >> LET'S GET BACK ON TRACK. ALL RIGHT.

[Public Comment]

THIS WILL BE OUR LAST PUBLIC COMMENT. >> AGAIN I AM CAROL SUNDBERG WE RESIDE AT 6225 KINGSLEY LAKE DOCTOR AND THAT SHOULD BE VERY SHORT.

WALLY AND I ARE IN THE PROCESS OF CONSIDERING BUILDING ANOTHER RESIDENCE ON THE EXISTING PROPERTY, SO WE RESEARCHED THE ZONING ON IT AND CAME IN MONDAY TO TALK WITH THE FOLKS IN THE ZONING DEPARTMENT. AND WE WERE REALLY SURPRISED AND SHOCKED TO FIND OUT THAT THE ZONING FOR ALL OF THE PROPERTY IN AND AROUND KINGSLEY LAKE EXCEPT ÃIS A R2 WITH A USE CODE OF RR, RURAL RESIDENTIAL. THAT IS THE MAXIMUM DENSITY OF ONE UNIT PER FIVE ACRES. NOW, IN THIS AREA, THERE IS ONLY ÃIT'S BEEN PLOTTED OR THE LOTS HAVE BEEN DRAWN FOR MANY, MANY YEARS. MY HUSBAND'S PROPERTY WAS HIS PARENTS ' AND THEY MOVED THERE ÃTHE HOUSE WAS BUILT IN 1944. BUT THERE WAS ONLY ONE LOT IN THE ENTIRE AREA THAT EXCEEDS FIVE ACRES. SO EVERY LOT THAT HAS BEEN ZONED IN THIS AREA IS NONCONFORMING. AND THAT MAKES NO SENSE TO US.

WE DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY THEY WOULD ASSIGN A ZONING CODE IN WHICH EVERY SINGLE PLOTTED LOT IS NONCONFORMING, THEREBY MINIMIZING ANY OPPORTUNITY FOR ANYBODY TO BUILD ANYTHING OR TEAR DOWN ANYTHING AND REBUILD AND DO ANYTHING WITH IT. I WAS WONDERING IF YOU COULD

ENLIGHTEN US AS TO THE REASONING ABOUT THAT REZONING. >> THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS FOR THE PUBLIC HEARING OR PUBLIC COMMENT.

? SEEING NOBODY APPROACHING THE PODIUM WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC COMMENT. AND I WOULD LIKE TO ASK STAFF IF WE CAN TO BE ABLE TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION. WE DON'T NEED TO ANSWER NOW BUT AS LONG AS WE ARE ABLE TO

COMMUNICATE THAT BACK >> I WILL JUST SAY THAT'S NOT UNCOMMON IN THIS COUNTY.

THOSE PARCELS ON CARTER SPENCER ROAD WE JUST CHANGED THEY WERE ALL NONCONFORMING.

THERE'S A TON OF AREAS IN THE TANGLEWOOD AREA THAT ARE AR AND THAT'S COMMON THROUGHOUT THE COUNTY. WHY IT WAS DONE HERE, I DON'T KNOW.

>> I BELIEVE THAT THE COUNTY ALLOWED A LOT OF ONE ACRE TYPE ZONING PRIOR TO THE STATE

[01:55:10]

AND WE HAVE A COUPLE OF STRANGE WAYS TO GET AROUND WHAT OUR INTENDED LAND USE AND ZONING

IS. >> BUT A LOT OF THOSE NONCONFORMING LOTS ARE

CONSIDERED LOTS OF RECORD, RIGHT? >> THEY ARE LOTS OF RECORD SO THEY CAN BE BUILT ON. SPLIT A LOT UNDER IT IS WHAT'S HAPPENING.

>> RIGHT. >> WHAT ABOUT THE NEW SECTION, YOU KNOW, THAT NEW SECTION THAT

WAS SOLD? I DON'T KNOW MUCH ABOUT THAT. >> IS A COVE, I BELIEVE.

>> KINGSLEY COVE IS A DEVELOPMENT. >> IS A PUD.

>> OH. I REMEMBER THAT ZONING WHEN IT CAME IN.

>> THE COUNTY DIVIDED IT. >> HAVE YOU TALKED ÃCHAD IS GONE.

>> WE ÃI HAVE MET THIS LADY. WE CAN LOOK INTO IT. >> I THINK THE ANSWER WOULD BE IS IF THERE IS A MODIFICATION TO ANYBODY'S PROPERTY, PERSONAL PROPERTY THEY NEED TO BRING IT FORWARD FOR REVIEW AND AT THAT POINT THAT'S WHEN WE WOULD CLEAN UP AT LEAST THAT PARCEL.

WAS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? SHE RAISED HER HAND.

>> YOU WILL FIND OUR STAFF CAN BE VERY HELPFUL, YOU KNOW, HOPEFULLY AND WORK SOMETHING

OUT. >> SO ARE THERE ANY OTHER OLD BUSINESS OR NEW BUSINESS? I WOULD LIKE TO AGAIN THANK OUR LAW ENFORCEMET FOR BEING HERE AND PROTECTING US AND KEEPING US SAFE. WANT TO GO ON RECORD AS MR. PUCKHABER AND I ARE A LITTLE BIT CONCERNED AND LEFT OUT BECAUSE MR. VAHALLA AT CHECKERBOARD CHARTS ON AND WE

DIDN'T GET THE MEMO. >> DID YOU CHECK YOUR EMAIL? >> YES, I DID.

>> ARE WE GOING TO ADJOURN TRADITIONALLY?

>> AT THE JANUARY 28 MEETING WE WILL BE TAKING THE CONSIDERATION OF APPLICANTS FOR THE VACANT POSITION OF BRENDA AND I KNOW THAT BELINDA YOU HAVE IT RESIGNED YET, BUT YOU HAVE SAID YOU ARE NOT GOING TO REAPPLY. SO YOUR POSITION AS WELL MAY BE REPLACED ON THE 28TH. IT MAY NOT. AND THEN WE GET THE NEW

PLANNING COMMISSION THAT'S WHEN WE READ WORK IT. >> OKAY.

>> IT IF YOU DON'T GET ANYBODY IN MY PLACE, I SHOULD BE HERE? > YES.

>> THERE ARE OTHER WAYS YOU CAN KEEP YOUR JOB. >> I WOULD LIKE TO READ INTO THE RECORD. I DID RECEIVE AN EMAIL FROM BRENDA KICSAK WHO HAS BEEN A LONG-STANDING MEMBER OF THIS BODY AND IT READS AS FOLLOWS. DEAR CHAIRMAN AND FELLOW BOARD MEMBERS, AS MY CURRENT TERM WAS COMING CLOSE TO THE END, I THOUGHT LONG AND HARD ABOUT FEELING OUT ANOTHER APPLICATION.Y DECEMBER I KNEW I WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO CONTINUE ON THE BOARD FOR ANOTHER TWO YEARS SO I DECIDED TO RESIGN.

TO SAY THIS IS BITTERSWEET IS AN UNDERSTATEMENT. I HAVE DEEP RESPECT FOR EACH OF YOU AND CONSIDER IT A GREAT JOY AND PRIVILEGE TO HAVE SERVED ALONGSIDE YOU.

YOUR PASSION AND CONCERN FOR CLAYTON COUNTY IS EVIDENT AND I KNOW 20/20 WILL BE A BUSY YEAR.

I ALSO WANT TO THANK THE CLAY COUNTY STAFF WHO ARE ALWAYS ATTENTIVE AND PROMPT IN ANSWERING MY QUESTIONS. LASTLY, MY GRATITUDE EXTENDS TO THE BCC WHO ALLOWED ME THE OPPORTUNITY TO SERVE. I TRULY WISH EACH OF YOU THE BEST AS YOU CONTINUE TO MAKE THOUGHTFUL RECOMMENDATIONS TO THE BCC SINCERELY, BRENDA KICSAK.

>> AND SHE WILL BE MISSED. >> TO THAT AND IS THERE ANY OTHER BUSINESS? AN HEARING ON, WE ARE ADJOURNED.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.