[CALL TO ORDER] [00:00:08] >> WELCOME EVERYBODY TO THE OCTOBER 6TH, CLAY COUNTY COMMISSION MEETING. THE MEETING IS CALLED TO ORDER. AT THIS TIME, WOULD YOU PLEASE PUT YOUR CELL PHONES ON SILENT OR VIBRATE. IF YOU NEED TO TAKE A CALL, PLEASE STEP OUT OF THE ROOM INTO THE HALL. AT THIS TIME, WOULD YOU PLEASE RISE AND JOIN ME IN THE PLEDGE? I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL. MY NAME IS PET. I'M THE CHAIRMAN OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION. THE MINUTES TONIGHT WILL BE TAKEN BY CHRISTINE BLANKENSHIP FROM THE CLERK'S OFFICE OF THE COURT. STAFF PRESENT TONIGHT, WE HAVE WITH CARSON, THE PLANNING DIRECTOR, HE IS A NEW GUY SO BE GENTLE WITH HIM. ON THE LEFT, WE HAVE ZACH GRAHAM GRAHAM, THE DEPARTMENT AND JAMIE CALEB RISING HER -- AND KELLY, E STOOD HERE? FROM ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT. AND FOR THE COMMISSIONERS, ON MY RIGHT, VICE CHAIRMAN, COMMISSIONER TOZER, COMMISSIONER RALPH PUCKHABER, COMMISSIONER BARRY BRIDGMAN. ON MY FAR LEFT, SCHOOL BOARD REPRESENTATIVE, PAUL BEMENT AND WE HAVE BILL GARRISON AND JOE AND THE ONE -- US LEARNER -- HE DID NOT WANT TO BRING WHAT HE HM TONIGHT. THE PLAY -- CLAY COUNTY COMMISSION IS THE CITIZENS ADVISORY BOARD TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OR THE BCC. ALL THE COMMISSIONERS ARE VOLUNTEERS. AND RESIDENTS. WE SERVE TWO YOUR TERMS. THE COMMISSIONER'S DUTIES ARE OUTLINED IN SECTION 163-POINT 3174 OF THE FLORIDA STATUTES. THE APPLICATION FOR COMPREHENSIVE LAND BEEN -- AMENDMENTS AND LYNN CODE DEVELOPMENT AND REZONING'S. MOST DECISIONS MADE BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OR RECOMMENDATIONS BY THE BCC. THE BCC WILL HAVE FINAL SAY AT THEIR MEETING ON THE SECOND TUESDAY OR THE FOURTH TUESDAY THREE WEEKS FROM TODAY. THE BCC MEETING STARTS AT 4:00 P.M. ZONING AND LAND START AT 5:00. PLEASE CHECK THE BCC AGENDA ON THE CLAY COUNTY WEBSITE. ALSO, I FORGOT TO INTRODUCE OUR DEPUTIES TONIGHT. WE HAVE DEPUTY ASH AND DEPUTY FRANK. I WON'T BUTCHER YOUR LAST NAME. >> HE TOLD ME IT WAS SMITH. I DID NOT WANT TO PASS THAT UP. WE ALSO WELCOME THE PUBLIC TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING AS CITIZENS PARTICIPATING IS THE BACKBONE OF THE REPUBLICAN FORM OF GOVERNMENT. THE YORK -- YOUR PRESENCE IS IMPORTANT AND APPRECIATED. IF THERE IS AN ITEM ON TONIGHT'S AGENDA THAT YOU WISH TO SPEAK ABOUT OR YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT DURING THE OPENING COMMENT PERIOD, PLEASE FILL OUT ONE OF THE COMMENT CARDS. THAT IS THESE LITTLE WHITE CARDS IN THE VESTIBULE AND PLEASE GIVE IT TO MS. MISS BLANCHETTE. THERE IS A THREE MINUTE TIME LIMIT FOR EACH COMMENT. TIME IS KEPT BY THE LIGHTS ON THE PODIUM. [APPROVAL OF MINUTES] THE RED LIGHT INDICATES TIME IS UP. IN THE FIRST ITEM FOR ACTION ON THE COMMISSION TO HIS APPROVAL OF THE MINUTES OF THE SEPTEMBER MEETING OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION. DO I HEAR A MOTION. >> SO MOVED. >> SECOND. >> MOTION AND SECONDED. ANY DISCUSSION? THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. >> AYE. >> THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA MEETING IS THE OPEN COMMENT PERIOD. AT THIS TIME, YOU CAN TALK ABOUT ANYTHING PERTAINING TO THIS COMMISSION BUT NOT ON THE AGENDA. SO WE WILL OPEN THE OPEN COMMENT PERIOD. AND I DON'T HAVE ANY CARDS ON THIS. IF ANYONE WISHES TO SPEAK GENERALLY, AND I SEE NONE. I WILL CLOSE THAT. THE PROCESS FOR THE SCHEDULED PART OF THE MEETING WILL BE EACH ITEM ON THE PUBLIC HEARING AGENDA WILL BE PRESENTED WITH A MEMBER OF THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT. AS PART OF THE PRESENTATION, STAFF WILL INDICATE IF THEY RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF REQUESTED LAND USE ZONING OR LAND DEVELOPMENT CHANGE. NEXT, THE APPLICANT WILL HAVE AN [00:05:03] OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK. FOLLOWING THE APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION, I WILL OPEN THE FLOOR FOR MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO OPEN VIEWS. YOUR TIME IS FOR STATING USE AND NOT FOR ASKING QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT, MEMBERS OF THE STAFF OR THE COMMISSIONERS. THE COMMENTS ARE TO BE DIRECTED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION. IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK TONIGHT DURING THE HEARING, YOU WILL NEED TO TAKE THE OATH WHICH MS. MISS BLANCHETTE WILL ADMINISTER MOMENTARILY. IF YOU ARE NOT SURE IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK, TAKE THE OATH ANYWAY. AFTER STAFF, THE APPLICANT AND THE PUBLIC HAVE ALL HAD A CHANCE TO STATE THEIR VIEWS. THE FLOOR WILL BE CLOSED FOR PUBLIC COMMENT AND THE APPLICANT WILL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO RESPOND TO COMMENTS BY THE PUBLIC. THE COMMISSIONERS WILL DISCUSS THE MATTER IF NECESSARY AND RENDER A DECISION. AGAIN, THANK YOU AND YOU FOR PARTICIPATING IN THE PROCESS. BEFORE WE GET STARTED, THOSE THAT WISH TO SPEAK AND NEED TO BE SWORN IN, CAN YOU PLEASE RISE AND MOVE TO THE CENTER? THAT WILL BE HARD TO DO. >> RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. DO YOU SOLEMNLY SWEAR AND AFFIRM THE TESTIMONY YOU GET TODAY WILL BE THE TRUTH, THE WHOLE TRUTH AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH SO HELP YOU GOD? THANK YOU. >> OUR FIRST AGENDA ITEM TONIGHT IS THE FLORIDA RECREATION DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM. >> GOOD EVENING. I'M THE SENIOR GRANT WRITER AT THE CLAY COUNTY. I'M HERE TONIGHT TO BRIEF THIS YEAR'S GRANT APPLICATION. THE PROGRAM IS OFFERED TO THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION. THE GRANT APPLICATION IS ON THE AGENDA FOR THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING FOR NEXT TUESDAY, OCTOBER 13TH. IF WE RECEIVE APPROVAL ON THE APPLICATION, WE WILL BE MOVING FORWARD. WE ALSO WILL BE HOLDING PUBLIC COMMENT MEETINGS AND WE HAVE SENT OUT SURVEYS UNDER THIS APPLICATION TO GARNER COMMUNITY INPUT AS IS REQUIRED BY THE GRANT PROGRAM. THERE IS NO SPECIFIC ASK OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION TONIGHT. IT IS A REQUIREMENT UNDER THE GRANT REQUIREMENTS THAT WE PRESENT THE APPLICATION AND THE PROJECTS TO AN ADVISORY BOARD SO THE ADVISORY BOARD IS THE LUCKY BOARD TO GET TO HEAR ABOUT THE GRANT APPLICATION. TO GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND, FRDAP STANDS FOR FLORIDA RECREATION DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE PROGRAM. THEY PROVIDE ASSISTANCE TO LOCAL GOVERNMENTS TO THE CREATION OF AND IMPROVEMENTS TO OUTDOOR PARKS. SO WE CAN ASK FOR UP TO $200,000 FOR TWO SEPARATE APPLICATIONS WHICH WE WILL BE DOING IN THE GRANT CYCLE. WE HAVE TWO DIFFERENT PARKS. MOODY AVENUE PARK AND DOCTORS LIKE PARK THAT WE WILL BE PURSUING A 200,000-DOLLAR $200,H ONE. A LITTLE BIT OF INFORMATION ABOUT THE APPLICATION AND THE PROJECT TIMELINE. WE ARE LOOKING AT A DEADLINE OF OCTOBER 15TH. SO NEXT WEEK. AFTER WE SUBMIT THE APPLICATION, THERE IS A RANKING PROCESS THROUGH FDAP. THEY WILL RANK THE PROJECTS. AFTER THAT IS COMPLETE, THE PRIORITY LIST WILL GO TO THE STATE LEGISLATURE FOR CONSIDERATION DURING THE STATE BUDGETING PROCESS. AND THEN AWARDS ARE CONTINGENT UPON LEGISLATIVE APPROVAL. IF WE ARE APPROVED, THEY WILL BE ISSUED AFTER JULY 1ST OF THE SCHOOL YEAR 2028. WE HAVE THREE YEARS TO COMPLETE THE PROJECTS THAT WE APPLY FOR UNDER THE GRANT PROGRAM AND WE ALSO HAVE TO MAKE SURE THAT THE PROJECTS DESIGNATE THE USE OF THE SITE FOR PUBLIC USE AND THE BENEFIT OF THE GENERAL PUBLIC. >> LIKE I SAID, WE ARE GOING FOR DOCTORS LIKE -- ISSUES LIKE PARK IMPROVEMENTS AND MOODY IMPROVEMENTS AND ASKING FOR A 200,000-DOLLAR REQUEST FOR BOTH OF THOSE. A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE TYPES OF IMPROVEMENTS WE ARE LOOKING TO PUT UNDER THE GRANT ASK FOR DOCTORS LIKE PEER WE HAVE FISHING IMPROVEMENTS AND KAYAK CANOE LAUNCH AND REPLACING THE BALL PIT. REPLACING THE PARKING LOT. 88 SIDEWALKS, PICNIC TABLES, GIRLS AND BENCHES AND ALL OF THE AMENITIES. WE ARE GOING TO PUT THIS IN THE PROJECT. IF YOU CAN SEE HERE, THERE ARE PICTURES. THERE IS THE BULKHEAD OUT THERE. THE AREA WHERE THE KAYAK AND CANOE LAUNCH IS. THAT WOULD BE INSTALLED. THERE ARE A COUPLE OF MORE PICTURES. THE PARKING LOT. WE WOULD LIKE TO RELOCATE EXISTING ADA PARKING ACROSS THE PAVILION OUT THERE AND TRANSITION THE CURRENT SPACE TO AN 88 ACCESSIBLE PICNIC AREA. HERE ARE MORE PICTURES HERE. WE HAVE ADDING TREES AND LANDSCAPING AND PICNIC TABLES AND BENCHES AND INSTALLING ADA ACCESS TO THE PAVILION OUT THERE. WE DO UNDERSTAND FOR DOCTORS [00:10:01] PART, THAT PROJECT EXCEEDS THE $200,000 FROM THE GRANT APPLICATION BUT IT HELPS REVIEW THE STATE PROJECT AS A WHOLE AND HOLISTICALLY SEE THE ENTIRE PROJECT. FOR MOODY AVENUE PARK, THIS INCLUDES REPLACING RUBBER SURFING IT AND REPLACING MULTIUSE PLAYGROUND AND REPLACING THE DRAINAGE SYSTEM. WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE POURING IN PLACE AND MULCH INSTALLED -- SORRY. THAT WAS ALREADY INSTALLED IN 2020. WE WOULD LIKE TO UPDATE THAT AND GIVE DRAINAGE SYSTEM IMPROVEMENTS OUT THERE AS WELL. JUST A LITTLE BIT ABOUT MOODY AVENUE. THAT IS THE ONLY ADA COMPLIANT WITH THE FULLY ACCESSIBLE PLAYGROUND THAT WE HAVE IN CLAY COUNTY. WE WOULD LIKE TO MAKE SURE THAT WE CAN KEEP IT UPDATED AND MAKE IMPROVEMENTS TO THAT PARK AS IT IS FULLY ACCESSIBLE FOR THOSE WITH DISABILITIES. ARE THERE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION? I WOULD BE HAPPY TO TAKE THEM. >> I HAVE ONE. HALEY, I'M NOT SURE EVERYBODY KNOWS WHERE THE PARKS ARE. ESPECIALLY IN THE AUDIENCE. YOU MIGHT WANT TO EXPLAIN WHERE THEY ARE. I KNOW WHERE THEY ARE. >> NO PROBLEM. >> THE ONE WITH THE FISHING PIER IS BASICALLY AT EAGLE HARBOR RIGHT THERE ON THE LAKE. RIGHT AT LAKESHORE DRIVE. OF COURSE MOODY AVENUE PARK IS ON MOODY AVENUE. >> THAT IS CORRECT. >> BEHIND THE WALMART. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS. [3. Public Hearing to consider ZON 26-0025. (All Districts) (C.  Curington). This application is a Text Amendment to Article III of the Land Development Code, Sec. 3-27(b)(2), Permitted Uses, to add Walk In Testing Laboratory, within the Shopping Center District (BSC).  ] >> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME TONIGHT. >> THE NEXT AGENDA ITEM IS PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER ZON 26-0025. AND MR. GARRISON. >> I'M A CONTRACTOR ON THIS PROJECT. AND SO I WILL RECUSE MYSELF. >> GOOD EVENING EVERYONE. CHRIS CARRINGTON, SENIOR PLANNER WITH CLAY COUNTY. THE FIRST ITEM TODAY IS THE TEXT AMENDMENT LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. OUR APPLICANT IS GARRISON GENERAL CONTRACTING AND THE REQUEST IS TO AMEND SHOPPING CENTER DISTRICT TO ADD WALK IN TESTING CLINIC AS A PERMITTED USE OF USES PROMOTABLE TO BE ASKED TO THE -- EXPANDED TOO. SURFACE ESTABLISHMENT SUCH AS BARBER, BEAUTY SHOP, ET CETERA, TO ADD AND WALK IN TESTING LABORATORY IN THE CODE. THE BSC DISTRICT WAS PROVIDING FACILITIES WITH DEPTH LIKE A SHOPPING CENTER RATHER THAN A STRIP TYPE CENTER. THIS WAS INTENDED TO PROVIDE A VARIETY OF GOODS AND SERVICES AND NOT DESIGNED FOR SINGLE USE ACTIVITIES. THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST TO ADD A WALK IN TESTING LABORATORY TO THE LIST OF PERMITTED USES WITHIN THE SHOPPING CENTER DISTRICT. STAFF HAS RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF THIS TEXT AMENDMENT. I WOULD BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE. >> ANY QUESTIONS FROM STAFF? >> I'M RANDY AND WORK POINT LABS. THANK YOU FOR THE CONSIDERATION OF OUR APPLICATION TO ADD WALK IN LABS TO THE CURRENT LIST OF PERMITTED USE OF THIS PROPERTY. I THINK YOU MIGHT ALL HOPEFULLY HAVE A PRESENTATION. THESE ARE COPIES -- PICTURES OF THE OTHER THREE LOCATIONS THROUGHOUT THE BALL COUNTY. THIS WOULD BE THE FIRST IN CLAY COUNTY. CURRENTLY, ANY LAB TEST NOW HAS OVER 260 LOCATIONS THROUGHOUT THE UNITED STATES. THEY DO ALL FOLLOW THE SAME GEOGRAPHICAL FOOTPRINT. WE ARE A LOCALLY OWNED FRANCHISE AND A SMALL BUSINESS OWNER. WE HAVE TWO BRANDS INSIDE OF A SINGLE LOCATION THAT SERVE EMPLOYEES TO EMPLOYERS. WE ARE TYPICALLY A RETAIL STOREFRONT THAT PROVIDES LOCAL BUSINESSES AND THE COMMUNITY WITH ACCESS TO LABORATORY TESTING AND SPECIMEN COLLECTION SERVICES, MUCH LIKE OTHER SERVICE BASED RETAIL TENANTS. SERVER DIRECT AND CUSTOMER FACING. WE CURRENTLY OPERATE THREE LOCATIONS IN DUVAL COUNTY. ONE AT THE BEACHES, ONE AT MANOR AND ONE DOWNTOWN MURRAY HILL. WE ARE MEMBERS OF THE CLAY COUNTY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, JACKSONVILLE CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, NORTHEAST FOR THE BUILDERS IN CLAY BUILDERS PICK THE SERVICES WE PROVIDE AT ANY LAB TEST NOW INCLUDE CLINICAL [00:15:02] LAB TESTING COLLECTIONS, DNA TESTING AND DRUG TESTING. WE ARE CONSIDERED A MEANS WE DO NOT PERFORM ANY COMPLEX TESTING ON SITE. WE ARE A COLLECTION SITE ONLY. ALL OF THE LAB SPECIMENS ARE SENT OUT TO OUR LAB ANALYSIS. AND THE FEDEX, UPS OR LOCAL CARRIERS. AND WE ARE REGULATED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH. THEY PERFORM INSPECTIONS OF THE FACILITIES TO ENSURE THAT WE ARE COMPLIANCE ON OSHA REGULATIONS, BLOOD-BORNE PATHOGENS THAT WE HAVE NEVER FAILED AN INSPECTION AND SEVEN YEARS. OUR STORE DEMOGRAPHICS ARE TYPICALLY -- WE ARE A RETAIL STORE SPACE. THERE WERE ABOUT 1000-1300 SQUARE FEET. WE DO LIKE RETAIL STOREFRONTS BECAUSE WE ARE OPEN ON SATURDAYS AS WELL. THE ANCHOR STORES ARE TYPICALLY STORES LIKE PUBLIX OR TRADER JOE'S. SPACES, HIGH-TRAFFIC AREAS AND CENTERS THAT ARE DESIGNED FOR QUICK IN AND OUT VISITS. THE CUSTOMER MIX CREATES STEADY PROTECTABLE FOOT TRAFFIC CONSISTENT WITH SHOPPING CENTER ENVIRONMENTS THAT COMPLEMENTS OTHER WELLNESS AND PERSONAL SERVICES. SO NAIL SALONS AND HAIR SALONS AND OTHER WELLNESS TYPE BUSINESSES. WE ARE BUILT AROUND CONSUMER ACCESS AND CONVENIENCE OFFERING ACCESSIBLE WAYS FOR PEOPLE TO MANAGE THEIR HEALTH THROUGH LAB TESTING. CURRENTLY, THE PUBLIX SUPERMARKETS, HOLDINGS AND PRIME REALTY AND NOW CLAY COUNTY PARK CENTERS IS THE LANDLORD. I DON'T KNOW IF I MENTIONED THE ADDRESS. THIS IS AT 950 BLANDING BOULEVARD UNIT NUMBER SIX. THAT IS A PUBLIC SHOPPING CENTER AS WELL. AND THEN A QUICK TIMELINE OF ANY LAB TEST NOW. THEY HAVE BEEN A FRANCHISE. THEY DEBUTED THE FRANCHISE CONCEPT 20 YEARS AGO, IN 2007. THEY HAVE BEEN IN THE JACKSONVILLE MARKET FOR 17 YEARS. WE HAVE BEEN THE OWNERS OF ANY LAB TEST NOW IN THE MARKET FOR SEVEN YEARS. WE STARTED IN 2019, PURCHASING THE ENTIRE JACKSONVILLE MARKET TO INCLUDE CLAY COUNTY. IN 2021, ANY LAB TEST OPEN IS 200TH LOCATION. WE WERE 201. IN 2024, WE DID RELOCATE ONE OF THE STORAGES FROM THE AIRPORT ACCESS DOWN TO MURRAY HILL. IN 2024, WE EXPANDED THE BRAND TO INCLUDE ARC POINT LABS AS THEY BECAME A JOINT VENTURE WITH LAB TEST NOW UNDER 2025, WE WERE ABLE TO PURCHASE ALL THREE TERRITORIES FOR ARC POINT LABS IN THE JACKSONVILLE MARKET AS WELL. THAT WILL ALLOW US TO ANY LAB TEST NOW OR ARC POINT LABS. A FEW MONTHS AGO, WE DID SIGN A LEASE TO OPEN THE FOURTH LOCATION IN CLAY COUNTY WHICH IS WHERE WE FOUND OUT THE SHOPPING CENTER WAS NOT APPROPRIATELY ZONED FOR OUR BUSINESS. SO WE WOULD LIKE TO ASK THAT WE CAN GET THAT ZONING ADDED, OR THE USE OF IT ADDED FOR ZONING SO WE CAN OPEN THE FIRST BUSINESS IN CLAY COUNTY IN 2027. ANY QUESTIONS? >> ANY QUESTIONS? >> I WANT TO CLARIFY. IT SOUNDS LIKE YOUR OPERATION IS REALLY LIKE A LAB CORE REQUEST WALK IN COLLECTIONS FACILITY? >> IT IS VERY MUCH SIMILAR. >> OKAY, THANK YOU. >> >> JUST THAT WALK IN TESTING WAS NOT EXPLICITLY LISTED AS A USE. THIS WOULD EXPLICITLY ALLOW CLARIFICATION. >> APPLICANT AND TO MAKE SURE THEY CAN DO WHAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO DO WITH THE PARCEL. THANK YOU. >> OTHER QUESTIONS? >> I HAVE A QUESTION. IT'S NOT REALLY COMPLETELY PERTINENT TO THIS APPLICATION. BUT IF THIS IS A PROBLEM FOR SPECIMEN COLLECTION, I THINK WE PROBABLY SHOULD LOOK AT SOME POINT ABOUT ADDING IMAGING CENTERS, YOU KNOW. THEY ARE OFTEN LOCATED IN SHOPPING CENTER ENVIRONMENTS AND IT'S DIFFERENT FROM THIS BUSINESS. I THINK THAT IS SOMETHING STAFF MIGHT HAVE ORIGINATED AT SOME POINT. >> THANK YOU. >> ONE QUESTION. LET ME GET THIS STRAIGHT. IF I NEED MY BLOOD DRAWN AS A RESULT OF AN ORDER, I WOULD COME TO YOUR SHOP AND YOU WOULD DRAW THE BLOOD AND SEND IT OFF? >> THAT IS CORRECT. [00:20:02] >> HE WOULD TAKE CARE OF FILING ALL CLAIMS AND THAT SORT OF STUFF? >> WE DO NOT TAKE INSURANCE AT OUR LOCATION. WE ARE CASH ONLY BUSINESS. WE DO COLLECT FOR PEOPLE WITH INSURANCE. WE JUST DON'T FILE THE INSURANCE. THAT WOULD BE BETWEEN QUEST OR LAB CORE WHERE WE SEND THE BLOOD CORE BLOOD WORK TO BE DONE. >> >> YOU WOULD PAY THE FEE. THE INSURANCE WILL BE BILLED FOR THE ACTUAL LAB TEST. >> OKAY. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> WITH THAT, I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. I DON'T HAVE ANY CARDS ON THIS AGENDA ITEM. DOES ANYBODY WISH TO SHARE THEIR THOUGHTS ON THIS QUICK SEEING ON, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND BRING IT BACK TO THE COMMISSIONER FOR DISCUSSION. >> MR. CHAIR, IF YOU ARE READY, I WILL MAKE A MOTION. >> I WILL MOVE THE STAFF REPORT TO ADD THE WALK IN TESTING LABORATORY. >> DO YOU WANT US TO ALSO -- >> I'M GOING TO ASK BETH OR DODI THIS. DO WE WANT TO MOCK THIS UP WITH THE IMAGING CENTERS NOW OR DEAL WITH THAT LATER? LATER, RIGHT? LATER. >> WE HAVE A MOTION. SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. >> OPPOSED? [4. Public Hearing to consider COMP 26-0026. (District 4, Comm. Condon) (C. Curington) This application is a FLUM Amendment to change 1.53 acres from Rural Residential (RR) to Branan Field Institutional (BF-Inst).] THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THE NEXT AGENDA ITEM IS THE PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER COMP 260,026. CARRNGTON. >> THIS IS A SMALL-SCALE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OF FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT. THE HEARING WILL BE OCTOBER 27TH. THE APPLICANT IS PRINCE OF PEACE MISSIONARY BAPTIST CHURCH AND THE AGENT IS ALBERT TO GET IT. THE LOCATION IS ON BRONCO ROAD IN AND MIDDLEBURG AND THIS IS THE OAKLEAF BRIDGE PLANNING DISTRICTS. IT IS ONE SINGLE PARCEL AND 1.5M RURAL RESIDENTIAL TO INDISCERNIBLE ] INSTITUTIONAL. HERE IS OUR NOTICE AND OUR PROPERTY OWNERS THAT WERE NOTIFIED. HERE'SHERE IS A LIST OF THE PROY OWNERS CONTACTED. ON THE LEFT IS THE PARCEL LOCATION MAP. THIS IS OFF OF THE LONG BAY ROAD ON BRONCO ROAD. ON THE RIGHT IS THE AERIAL MAP. THE MAPS ON THE LEFT, THE EXISTING LAND USE MAP IS ON THE LEFT AS HE CAN SEE. IT IS RURAL RESIDENTIAL AND ON THE RIGHT IS THE PROPOSED LAND USE MAP WITH THE HERE'S THE CURRENT ZONING MAP. ON AUGUST 31ST, THE OAKLEAF BRAND APPROVAL OF THE ITEM. STUFF ON THE CRITERIA FOR THE COMPETENCE OF PLAN AMENDMENT HAS BEEN MET AND RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AS WELL. QUESTIONS. >> THANK YOU, CHRIS. IS THE APPLICANT HERE? >> DO YOU WANT TO SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS OR LET IT STAND? >> GOOD AFTERNOON. AS A MEMBER OF THE PRINCE OF PEACE BAPTIST CHURCH -- AND HAVE ALL THE SPECIFICATIONS. >> DETERMINED DAVIS AND EVERYONE ELSE AND THE VICE PRESIDENT, I'M NEW AT THIS. WE HAVE BEEN DOING OUR BEST AS A NEW CONGREGATION TO FOLLOW THE RULES TO ACQUIRE THE MISSION TO BUILD A SMALL CHURCH IN THIS AREA. WE WANT TO BECOME PART OF THIS AREA AS WE WERE OUT LOOKING FOR A PLACE TO TO THE COMMUNITY. IN THIS PARTICULAR COMMUNITY, WE FOUND SHE IS NO LONGER THERE. I CAN'T REMEMBER HER NAME. SHE TOLD US IT SHOULD NOT BE A PROBLEM. IF WE WERE TOLD IT WOULD BE A PROBLEM, WE WOULD GO AHEAD WITH [00:25:02] THE PURCHASE OF THE LAND. WHEN YOU PURCHASE THE LAND, THEN IT'S LIKE, WAIT A MINUTE. THIS IS A DIFFERENT TYPE OF ZONING WHICH BROUGHT US TO WHERE WE ARE HERE TODAY TO GET PERMISSION. WE ARE NOT PLANNING ON BUILDING A MEGA- CHURCH. MEGA CHURCH. THE BUILDING WE ARE PLANNING ON BUILDING -- WE PLAN ON BUILDING TWO SMALL BUILDINGS. ONE BEING THE FELLOWSHIP HALL TO WHERE WE CAN EAT AND HAVE COMMUNION WITH ONE ANOTHER. THAT BUILDING WILL BE 3200 SQUARE FEET. AND THEN WE ARE LOOKING AT THE SANCTUARY WHICH WILL BE THE SECOND PHASE OF OUR ACQUIRING THE LAND. AND THAT IS 6561 SQUARE FEET. 81, BY 81 81 SQUARE-FOOT BUILDIG WHICH BRINGS US TO ABOUT 9761 SQUARE FEET WHICH IS BELOW THE MAX WHICH SHOULD BE 10,000 SQUARE FEET. OTHER THAN THAT, I SPOKE WITH ONE OF THE RESIDENTS THE LIVES DIRECTLY TO THE WEST OF THE PROPERTY. SHE WAS THE ONLY ONE I WAS ABLE TO GET IN CONTACT WITH. AND WE HAD A VERY GOOD CONVERSATION. SHE WAS CONCERNED WITH WHETHER OR NOT WITH BUILDING THIS BIG GIANT CHURCH -- THAT IS NOT THE INTENTION. THE INTENTION IS TO BUILD A NICE FACILITY WHERE WE BECOME PART OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND BLEND IN WITH THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE THERE. BECAUSE THE BECAUSE THE PROPERTY IS SO CLOSE TO GOING TO LONG BAY, WE FIGURED IT WOULD PROBABLY NOT BE A PROBLEM OR WE WOULD NOT HAVE BOTHERED WITH IT. WE DON'T WANT TO BE TOO FAR INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THEN YOU HAVE A LOT OF TRAFFIC. BUT OUR CONGREGATION IS SMALL. I HAVE WITH US A COUPLE OF OUR DEACONS AND MINISTERS AND THE CHURCH CLERK WHO ARE HERE. WE WANTED TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS ANYBODY MAY HAVE ABOUT WHAT WE WANTED TO DO. A COUPLE OTHER PEOPLE THAT FOUND OUT ABOUT IT, A COUPLE OF RESIDENTS, THEY HAD A FEW QUESTIONS LIKE, HOW TALL WAS A BUILDING GOING TO BE? WHERE WE GOING TO HAVE A LOT OF LIGHTNING AND ALL THIS KIND OF OF -- THINGS. I WAS PREPARED TO ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS BUT LISTENING TO -- EXCUSE ME, CHAIRMAN DAVIS, HE WAS SAYING ALL THINGS SHOULD BE DIRECTED TO THE CHAIR. SO THIS PRESENTATION IS WHEN I'M LETTING YOU KNOW THAT WE WOULD LIKE TO CONTINUE FORWARD WHERE WE CAN BECOME PART OF THE COMMUNITY THERE AND BRANDON FIELD. AND WE JUST WANT TO BE GOOD NEIGHBORS AND SERVE THE COMMUNITY. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH. ANY QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? >> YES. >> HOW LARGE DO YOU THINK YOUR CONGREGATION WOULD GROW TO? >> LAST I SPOKE WITH -- LIKE I SAID, THE RESIDENT THAT LIVED TO THE WEST OF THE PROPERTY, IF THE LORD WOULD SEE WE GET THIS CONGREGATION VERY LARGE, WE WOULD MOVE. BECAUSE THAT WOULD BECOME A DISRUPTION AND WE WOULD PROBABLY NEED MORE LAND ANYWAY. AS YOU HAVE NOTICED, MOST CHURCHES, IF THEY START OFF SMALL, THEY START TO EXPAND ON THE FIRST THING THEY DO IS LOOK FOR SOMEWHERE ELSE TO GO. >> YOU WILL BE BUILDING IT OUT ALMOST TO THE MAX OF WHAT YOU ARE ALLOWED TO ON THAT SAYS PROPERTY. >> EXACTLY. >> FROM A PLANNING PERSPECTIVE, I'M LOOKING DOWN THE ROAD. IF YOU MOVE, WILL YOU SELL THAT BUILDING? AND HOW MUCH OF A CHANGE TO THE ZONING WILL AFFECT WHO MAY OR MAY NOT GO INTO THAT PROPERTY? THAT IS THE ONLY QUESTION I HAVE. >> RIGHT. >> I HOPE YOU'D -- I HOPE YOU DO GROW SO THAT YOU CAN MOVE. >> THANK YOU. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? THANK YOU VERY MUCH, SIR. >> YES. >> CHRIS, THIS IS YOURS, RIGHT? IN THIS -- AND I KNOW WE DID THIS A FEW MONTHS AGO, THIS BRANDON FIELD INDUSTRIAL. BUT I DON'T SEE -- JUST LOOKING, I DON'T SEE IT IN HERE. WE KIND OF KNOW THE GENERAL THING THAT THE INSTITUTIONAL DOES. I LIKE THINKING ABOUT THE NEXT TENANT ON THE PROPERTY. I WANT TO KNOW WHAT THEY CAN DO IF THIS CHANGE IS MADE. HOW TALL THE BUILDING IS THEY CAN PUT UP. THEY ARE ALREADY AT THE 10,000 [00:30:04] SQUARE FOOT MAXIMUM. WE KNOW THEY CAN'T GET INTO BUILDINGS AND A BIGGER. BUT IF THEY WERE TO TEAR THOSE DOWN AND START FRESH ON THIS PARCEL, WHAT IS KIND OF THE LARGEST THING THEY CAN PUT THEIR SHIFT? IT IS LIMITED IN SIZE TO 10,000 SQUARE FEET AND A FLOOR AREA RATIO, 50% I BELIEVE. AND THE USES WOULD BE LIMITED TO PLACES OF WORSHIP, PUBLIC OWNED FACILITIES INCLUDING WATER AND WASTEWATER, PRIVATE SCHOOLS, DAYCARE CENTERS, POLICE AND FIRE STATIONS, LIBRARIES, MUSEUMS, PARKS AND PUBLIC RECREATION FACILITIES AND COLLEGES OR TRADE SCHOOLS. >> LIMITATION OR 35 FEET WE WOULD GO WITH. >> IT IS THE 35 FEET. >> LET ME BE CLEAR ON THIS. SOME OF THIS I'M ASKING FOR THE AUDIENCE TOO. YOU HAVE 10,000 SQUARE FEET IN A SINGLE STORY BUILDING. IF I WENT 35 FEET AND BUILT A THREE-STORY BUILDING, DO I GET 10,000 SQUARE FEET ON EACH FLOOR SHIFT? NOW. >> IT IS A TOTAL FLOOR SPACE OF 10,000 SQUARE FEET. >> OKAY. >> WE WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. I WILL START AT THE TOP. >> MAY I INTERRUPT YOU FOR A SECOND? >> IS A CAC SITTING HERE? DO WE WANT TO HEAR FROM THE CAC PERSON? >> THIS IS THE CITIZEN ADVISORY COMMITTEE CHAIRPERSON. >> GOOD EVENING. STEVE VAN BLOOM, ADVISORY COMMITTEE CHAIRPERSON FOR CAC. I WOULD BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> CAN YOU GIVE US INSIGHT INTO THE DISCUSSION YOU HAD ABOUT THE PROS AND CONS OF WHY IT MAY OR MAY NOT BE APPROPRIATE? >> YES OR. SIR. THERE WAS A CONCERN ABOUT TRAFFIC AND THEN THE SURROUNDING RESIDENTIAL AREAS AND WE WERE ALSO KIND OF CONCERNED ABOUT IF -- I DON'T WANT TO CALL IT A NUISANCE BUT SOME SORT OF DISTURBANCE, WHAT KIND OF THINGS LIKE THAT. WE ARE TALKING WITH THE CHURCH MEMBERS. THEY SEEM TO HAVE SETTLED ALL THE CONCERNS WE HAVE HAD. I BASE THIS OFF OF THOSE THERE WAS ANOTHER CHURCH FURTHER UP THE ROAD. IT IS NOT A VERY LARGE CHURCH. I HAVE GERMAN PASTOR. THERE DOESN'T SEEM TO BE A LOT OF TRAFFIC. AND SO MY PERSONAL VOTE ON THIS WAS FOR RECOMMENDED APPROVAL. >> WAS THERE ANY CONCERN THAT THIS IS BACK OFF OF LONG BAY. IT IS NOT THAT FAR OFF. BUT THE ROAD IT IS ON, -- >> BRONCO. >> BRONCO. IT IS NOT GOING TO BE ALL THE TIME. SUNDAY MORNING AND PROBABLY WEDNESDAY. >> RIGHT. >> THERE WILL BE TRAFFIC IN AND OUT FOR A PERIOD OF TIME. >> WE DID DISCUSS THAT. AS I UNDERSTAND IT, THERE IS ONE ENTRANCE INTO THE ROAD. A DEAD END. AND SO I WAS THINKING THERE WAS NOT A LOT OF TRAFFIC ALREADY ON THE ROAD. EXCEPT FOR RESIDENTS COMING AND GOING. TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, I DON'T RECALL THE DISCUSSIONS OF THAT PARTICULAR SUBJECT. BUT WE SEEM TO BE SETTLED WITH CONCERNS THAT WE HAD. >> THANK YOU. >> I HAVE A QUESTION, MR. CHAIR. WERE THERE ANY RESIDENTS PRESENT A SHIFT? THERE WERE NO MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC EXCEPT FOR THE APPLICANT'S. >> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, SIR. >> ONE OTHER QUESTION. IS THERE ANY PLAN -- I DON'T SEE THE MAP. I DON'T HAVE A COPY OF THE MAP. AND YOU PLAN TO EXTEND THE ROAD OR CONNECTED TO SOMETHING ELSE WHERE IT WON'T BE A DEAD END IN THE FUTURE? >> I DON'T THINK IT IS POSSIBLE. >> THE FOREST IS ON THE OTHER END. >> THAT'S WHY I AM ASKING. I DON'T HAVE A COPY OF THE. >> LONG BAY WILL BE EXTENDED NORTH. IT WILL BECOME A FAIRLY BUSY ROAD EVENTUALLY. >> OKAY. THANK YOU. >> OKAY. THE FIRST SPEAKER IS JENNIFER SMITH. OKAY. YOU DON'T WANT TO SPEAK. [00:35:01] YOU ARE JUST SAYING NO, RIGHT? >> >> I'M SORRY? >> >> OKAY. WE WILL SEE WHAT LEAVE GOT COMING HERE. >> ITEM 10? >> ITEM 10. THE LAST ONE. >> LET ME SORT THROUGH THIS REALLY QUICK. WE ALSO HAVE ANOTHER CARD. IT IS EMILY MCKESICK. >> I HAVE TO READ THIS INTO THE RECORD. ANOTHER CARD AGAINST GAIL AUSTIN. ANOTHER CARD AGAINST JOAN GRANATO. AND ANOTHER CARD AGAINST MARTY PHILLIPS. ANOTHER CARD AGAINST GLORIA ALLEN. AND ANOTHER CARD AGAINST JOAN VINSON. THESE ARE THE CARDS FROM THE SPEAKERS. WE WILL START WITH JOHN BARNETT. >> >> GOOD EVENING. FIRST, I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT THAT I DON'T INC. ANY OF MY NEIGHBORS GOT THAT NOTIFICATION. WE WERE FIRST NOTIFIED WHEN WE SAW THE SIGN ON THE PARCEL. SO I WOULD LIKE THAT LIST. MY NAME IS JOHN BARNETT. I'M HERE TO OPPOSE COMP. >> PLEASE GIVE US YOUR ADDRESS. >> 3430 BRONCO ROAD. I HAVE BEEN THERE FOR 43 YEARS. I'M HERE TO OPPOSE COMP 260,026, THE REQUEST TO CHANGE APPROXIMATELY 1.5 ACRES ON BRONCO ROAD FROM ] TO PRESIDENTIAL TO BRANDON FIELD INSTITUTIONAL. I WANT TO MAKE SOMETHING VERY CLEAR. THIS IS NOT OPPOSING A CHURCH OR RELIGIOUS USE. IT IS ABOUT WHETHER THIS PARTICULAR PARCEL ON THIS RURAL RESIDENTIAL ROAD IS AN APPROPRIATE LOCATION FOR AN INSTITUTIONAL LAND USE DESIGNATION. BRONCO ROAD IS A RURAL RESIDENTIAL ROAD. THE SURROUNDING PROPERTIES ARE RURAL RESIDENTIAL. THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE HERE BOUGHT THEIR HOMES AND LAND WITH REASONABLE EXPECTATIONS THAT THIS RURAL RESIDENTIAL CHARACTER WOULD BE PROTECTED THROUGH THE COUNTY'S COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. THE COUNTY DESCRIBES THE FUEL MASTER PLAN AS A LONG-RANGE STRATEGY INTENDED MANAGE GROWTH AND PIECEMEAL DEVELOPMENT. THAT IS EXACTLY WHY THIS APPLICATION DESERVES CAREFUL SCRUTINY. CHANGING ONE SMALL PARCEL IN THE MIDDLE OF AN ESTABLISHED RURAL RESIDENTIAL AREA IS THE KIND OF ANCHOR MENTAL LAND AGREEMENT A LAND-USE CHANGE THAT CAN ALTER THE CHARACTER OVER TIME OF AN AREA. THIS DESIGNATION DOES NOT SIMPLY AUTHORIZE ONE SPECIFIC BUILDING. THE COUNTY'S NEWLY ADOPTED INSTITUTIONAL CATEGORY FROM THE SEVERAL PUBLIC AND COMMUNITY SERVING USES AND ALLOWS DEVELOPMENTAL INTENSITY UP TO A 50% FLOOR AREA RATIO. THE QUESTION BEFORE YOU SHOULD NOT SIMPLY BE WHETHER THE CURRENT APPLICANT HAS GOOD INTENTIONS. THE QUESTION IS WHETHER INSTITUTIONAL IS THE APPROPRIATE LAND-USE DESIGNATION FOR THIS PROPERTY. LAND-USE DESIGNATIONS REMAIN WITH THE PROPERTY AND CAN BE SOLD. OWNERS, ORGANIZATIONS AND PLANS CAN CHANGE. IF THIS PARCEL IS APPROPRIATE FOR THE INSTITUTION TODAY, WHAT IS THE PLANNING BASIS FOR SAYING THE NEXT PARCEL ALONG BRONCO ROAD IS NOT. I RESPECT WE ASK YOU TO PRESERVE THE ESTABLISHED RURAL RESIDENTIAL PATTERN OF BRONCO ROAD AND RECOMMEND DENIAL OF TRAN 20 -- COMP 26-0026. >> THANK YOU. ROB MCCANN SICK. MICHELLE MURRAY. >> GOOD EVENING. I'M MICHELLE MURRAY. I LIVE AT 3991 BRONCO ROAD WHICH IS -- WHICH I SPOKE TO PASTOR JENKINS. IT IS DIRECTLY HITTING THEM TO PIECES TWO PIECES OF MY PROPERTY. I'M ASKING YOU TO RECOMMEND DENIAL FOR COMP 26-0026. MY CONCERN IS STRAIGHTFORWARD. BRONCO ROAD WAS DEVELOPED AS A RURAL RESIDENTIAL ROAD, NOT AS AN INSTITUTIONAL CORE DOOR. THIS MATTERS EVEN MORE BECAUSE OF WHAT THE COUNTY RECENTLY ADOPTED. DURING THE SEPTEMBER 1ST [00:40:01] PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING, COUNTY STAFF EXPLAINED THAT THE NEW BRANDON FIELD INSTITUTIONAL REGULATION SPECIFICALLY ALLOWED PLACES OF WORSHIP SMALLER THAN 10,000 SQUARE FEET ON LOCAL ROADS. THAT MEANS THE COUNTY RECOGNIZED THE INSTITUTIONS -- INSTITUTIONAL USES COULD NOW OCCUR ON ROADS LIKE THIS. BUT SIMPLY ALLOWING A USE OF THE LOCAL ROAD DOES NOT MEAN THAT EVERY LOCAL ROAD OR EVERY PARCEL ON THE ROAD IS AN APPROPRIATE LOCATION FOR SUCH USE. THAT DETERMINATION STILL NEEDS TO BE MADE BASED ON THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE INDIVIDUAL PROPERTY AND THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOOD. BRONCO ROAD IS A RURAL ROAD SERVING HOMES AND ACREAGE PROPERTIES. BEFORE CHANGING IS PARTIAL TO INSTITUTIONAL, THE COUNTY SHOULD CAREFULLY CONSIDER TRAFFIC GENERATIONS, INGRESS AND EGRESS, PARKING, DRAINAGE, LIGHTING, WHICH IS VERY CONCERNING FOR ME. I'M RIGHT NEXT DOOR. EMERGENCY ACCESS, THE EFFECTS OF NEIGHBORING RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES AND REMEMBER THAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT ONLY AN ACRE AND A HALF BASICALLY. 1 ACRE .53. WHEN YOU ACCOUNT FOR THE BUILDING PARKING, SETBACKS, STORMWATER, SEPTIC FACILITIES, REQUIRES LANDSCAPING AND BUFFERING FROM NEIGHBORING HOMES THAT IS NOT A LARGE PIECE OF PROPERTY. THE BURDEN SHOULD THEREFORE BE ON DEMONSTRATING THAT THE SITE CAN REASONABLY ACCOMMODATE INSTITUTIONAL DEVELOPMENT WITHOUT TRANSFERRING IT, ITS IMPACT ON TO BRONCO ROAD OR SURROUNDING RESIDENTS. WE ARE NOT ASKING YOU TO JUDGE THE APPLICANT. WE ARE ASKING YOU TO JUDGE THE LAND USE DECISION. AND BASED ON THE SIZE AND PARCEL, THE NATURAL BRONCO ROAD AND THE SURROUNDING RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES, WE BELIEVE INSTITUTIONAL IS THE WRONG DESIGNATION FOR THIS LOCATION. PLEASE RECOMMEND DENIAL OF COMP 26-0026. AND I JUST WANT TO SAY THAT WE DID NOT SEE -- NONE OF US WERE INFORMED. I CALLED THE COMMISSIONER. SHE CALLED ME BACK IN THE DAY AFTER I TALKED TO HER, I RECEIVED, IN THE MAIL, SOMETHING TALKING ABOUT ADJACENT REZONING. >> PLEASE ADDRESS THE COMMISSION. >> I HAD TO THEN CALL AND FIND OUT. I ONLY SAW THE BIG YELLOW SIGN. LIKE I SAID,. >> THANK YOU MS. MISS MURRAY. LEAVE GOT YOUR POINT. ROB MCCANN SICK. >> GOOD EVENING. I LIVE AT 4028 BRONCO ROAD. I WOULD LIKE TO FOCUS ON COMPATIBILITY, AND LONG-TERM CONSEQUENCES OF THE LAND-USE CHANGE. THE COUNTY RECENTLY CREATED THE BRANDON FIELD INSTITUTIONAL LAND USE CATEGORY DURING THE PROCESS. THE COUNTY STAFF EXPLAINED THAT THIS CATEGORY COULD PERMIT PLACES OF WORSHIP, PRIVATE SCHOOLS, DAYCARE CENTERS, PUBLIC FACILITIES, LIBRARIES, MUSEUMS AND OTHER COMMUNITIES SERVING USES. THE MAXIMUM INTENSITY ESTABLISHED AT THE BF INSTITUTIONAL IS 50% FLOOR RATIO. THAT IS SUBSTANTIALLY DIFFERENT FROM THE RURAL RESIDENTIAL CURRENTLY GOVERNING THIS LAND. DURING THE AUGUST 11TH COMMITTEE COMMISSION, THE COMMISSIONERS STATED A CHURCH WANTED TO LOCATE WITHIN THE BRANDON FIELD MASTER PLAN AND THERE HAD NOT BEEN PREVIOUSLY BEEN ZONED FOR LAND CATEGORY TO MATCH THE PROPOSED USE. THEN DURING THE SEPTEMBER 1ST PLANNING COMMISSION, A HEARING ON THE NEW INSTITUTIONAL REGULATIONS, COUNTY STAFF SPECIFICALLY STATED THAT A CHURCH APPLICATION WOULD BE COMING THE FOLLOWING MONTH. NOW, THIS COMMISSION IS CONSIDERING COMP 2626. THE TIMELINE DOES NOT MEAN THE APPLICATION SHOULD AUTOMATICALLY BE DENIED BUT IT DOES MEAN THE APPLICATION DESERVES CAREFUL AND AN INDEPENDENT SCRUTINY. CREATING A LAND-USE CATEGORY IS ONE DECISION. DETERMINING WHERE THE CATTERY BELONGS IS ENTIRELY DIFFERENT DECISION. THE EXISTENCE OF THE BRANDON FIELD INSTITUTIONAL DOES NOT MEAN EVERY PARCEL REQUESTED FOR% THAT DESIGNATION IS APPROPRIATE LOCATION. THAT BRINGS US TO MOST IMPORTANT QUESTION BEFORE YOU TONIGHT. SHOULD THIS SPECIFIC 1.5 ACRES OF RURAL RESIDENTIAL PARTIAL BE PERSONALLY CHANGED TO INSTITUTIONAL? THIS DECISION SHOULD NOT BE BASED SOLELY ON THE CURRENT APPLICANT OR WHAT THEY INTEND TO BUILD TODAY. THE COMMISSION IS NOT SIMPLY IMPROVING ORGANIZATION FOR ONE PROPOSED BUILDING. IT IS CHANGING THE FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF THE PROPERTY. THE CURRENT OWNER CAN CHANGE. THE ORGANIZATION CAN CHANGE. THE PROPOSED PLANS CAN CHANGE. BUT THE LAND-USE DESIGNATION WILL REMIT. THAT IS WHY THE COUNTY SHOULD CONSIDER WHAT THIS DESIGNATION COULD REASONABLY ALLOW OVER TIME. NOT SIMPLY WHAT ONE APPLICANT SAYS. IT INTENDS TO DO TODAY. THIS IS ALSO WHAT IS CALLED THE ISSUE OF A PRESIDENT. [00:45:02] IS INSTITUTIONAL IS CONSIDERED APPROPRIATE FOR THIS PARCEL TODAY, WHAT IS THE PLANNING BASIS FOR DENYING THE SAME REQUEST ON THE NEXT AVAILABLE PARCEL ALONG BRONCO ROAD COME ALONG WAY ROAD OR OTHER NEARBY RURAL RESIDENTIAL ROADS TOMORROW? COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING IS SUPPOSED TO PROVIDE CONSISTENCY AND UNPREDICTABILITY RESIDENTS SHOULD NOT HAVE TO WONDER WHETHER INDIVIDUAL RURAL RESIDENTIAL PARCELS WILL BE CONVERTED ONE AT A TIME OR AS PROPERTIES BECOME AVAILABLE. AGAIN, THIS IS NOT IN OPPOSITION TO A CHURCH OR RELIGIOUS USE. IT IS ABOUT WHETHER THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY IS AT AN APPROPRIATE LOCATION FOR INSTITUTIONAL LAND-USE DESIGNATION. IF THERE IS A COMPELLING PLANNING REASON WHY THIS SPECIFIC 1.5-ACRE PARCEL NEEDS TO BECOME INSTITUTIONAL, THAT REASON SHOULD BE CLEARLY DEMONSTRATED. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, SIR. >> I HAVE ONE CARD. BRUCE HUTCHISON. YOU MARKED ON HERE THAT YOU LIVE ON BRONCO ROAD. YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT ITEM 10 SHIFT? YES. >> COME DOWN. >> GOOD EVENING. I HAVE LIVED ON 419 BRONCO ROAD FOR ABOUT 35 YEARS. >> GIVE US YOUR FULL NAME FOR THE RECORD. >> BRUCE MARSHALL HUTCHISON, I HAVE LIVED ON BRONCO SINCE IT WAS A DIRT ROAD. MY CONCERN IS YOUR BUILDING A CHURCH BASICALLY ON ONE POINT 53 ACRES. YOU WILL HAVE TO HAVE RETENTION POND AND A PARKING LOT. AND IT IS NOT BIG ENOUGH. AND IT IS GOING TO CAUSE TRAFFIC AT THE END OF BRONCO BY A LONG DAY GOING IN AND OUT EVERY SUNDAY AND EVERY WEDNESDAY NIGHT. SO I'M DEAD SET AGAINST THIS. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, SIR. APPRECIATE IT. IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE THAT WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS AGENDA ITEM? YES MA'AM. DID YOU HAVE A CARD? >> >> KENDRA >> YES, I DID. >> GOOD EVENING EVERYONE. MY NAME IS SANDRA STAMENS. I LIVE AT 4180 BRONCO ROAD. I BOUGHT THAT PROPERTY BECAUSE I DID NOT WANT -- WHERE THEY CHARGE YOU SO MUCH A MONTH AND MONITOR YOUR WEEDS. I WANTED A RURAL, RELAXING COMMUNITY. AND THIS IS WHAT I FOUND THERE. I'M VERY HAPPY THERE. AND I WANT TO SAY THAT THE SPEAKERS BEFORE ME SPOKE SO ELOQUENTLY AND WHAT MY FEELINGS ARE. I'M A CHURCH GOING WOMAN. I'M NOT OPPOSED TO A CHURCH. BUT EVEN WITH WHAT THEY ARE DESCRIBING, EVEN FOR THE TIME THEY WOULD BUILD IT, THEY ARE NOT GOING TO HAVE -- WHERE IS THE PARKING LOT? WE ARE GOING TO BUY SOMEBODY ELSE'S PROPERTY? I'M TOTALLY OPPOSED. BUT I APPRECIATE MY FORMER SPEAKERS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> THANK YOU, MAN. I HAVE YOUR CARD. YOU HAVE BEEN FOUND. I HAVE THREE CARDS. I WANT TO CLARIFY THIS. THE AGENDA ITEM ON THIS ONE IS FOUR. YOUR CARD WAS MARKED AS 10. I HAVE THREE OTHER CARDS MARKED 10. I WANT TO MAKE SURE YOU ARE GOING TO SPEAK ON THE AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 10. THAT IS LEROY VICKERS, KIM SHOEMAKER. WE ARE GOOD? ALL RIGHT. DOES ANYONE ELSE WANT TO SPEAK ON THIS SHIFT? >> MY NAME IS HELENA CORNELL. MY ADDRESS IS ON FILE. THANK YOU AGAIN FOR ALL THAT YOU ARE DOING TRYING TO EVALUATE. THIS IS MY FIRST TIME HEARING THIS ONE. I DO REMEMBER WHEN SOME OF THE [00:50:01] VERBIAGE WAS BEING CHANGED. TO MAKE UP FOR A PARCEL THAT HAD FALLEN INTO THIS CATEGORY. IT IS VERY DISHEARTENING AS A REALTOR THAT SOMEBODY WOULD HAVE SOLD THIS TO THEM AND DID NOT CHECK THE ZONING AND ENCOURAGED THEM TO DO THE DUE DILIGENCE THEY NEEDED BECAUSE OF SITUATIONS LIKE THIS. I TOTALLY UNDERSTAND THE NEIGHBORS AND THE PROBLEMS THEY ARE HAVING. AS A CHRISTIAN, IT STINKS BECAUSE WE WANT TO HAVE THE CHURCHES. BUT THIS REZONING IS VERY DIFFICULT. INSIDE OF ALL OF THIS RESIDENTIAL. ONE OF THE THINGS I WANT TO POINT OUT, AS I PULLED UP REALLY QUICK, LA PETITE DAYCARE ON COUNTY ROAD 220, ACCORDING TO THE PROPERTY APPRAISER'S OFFICE, THAT IS SITTING ON LESS THAN 1 ACRE OF LAND. THIS IS A DAYCARE WHERE MY KIDS ALL WENT. THE PROPERTY APPRAISER SAID IT IS LIKE .91 OF AN ACRE. I KNOW THE PARKING SPACE THERE WAS NOT ALWAYS THE BEST. BUT THEY ARE BUILDING THE BUILDING WAS ABOUT 5000 SQUARE FEET. WHEN THEY GET THIS INSTITUTIONAL ZONING, DEPENDING ON HOW THIS GOES, YOU CAN HAVE SITUATIONS LIKE THIS WHERE YOU HAVE A PARCEL THIS SIZE THAT DOES FIT DIFFERENT THINGS. AND SO, THOUGH ZONING, THE ZONI, COULD TOTALLY CHANGE THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND EVERYTHING THAT GOES ON THERE. AND SO, I UNDERSTAND THE CONCERNS AND I WILL APOLOGIZE ON THE REALTOR'S BEHALF. I DON'T KNOW WHO IT WAS. THEY SHOULD NOT HAVE CLOSED ON THIS PROPERTY AND SPEND THEIR MONEY UNTIL THEY GOT THIS THROUGH, TO KNOW THAT THEY WEREN'T INVESTING THAT MONEY ON SOMETHING THAT THEY COULDN'T ACTUALLY DO. SO THAT JUST HURTS MY HEART AS A REALTOR AND AS A CHRISTIAN AND EVERYTHING ELSE. SO THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> DOES ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? YES MA'AM. DO I HAVE YOUR CARD TOO? >> YES. LORI VICKERS. >> OKAY. >> GO AHEAD. >> MY NAME IS LORI VICKERS. I LIVE OVER ON 3529 TRAIL RIDGE ROAD. I'M ALWAYS OVER AT MY MOTHER'S HOUSE. SHE BOUGHT THIS PARCEL OF LAND. SHE HAS TWO-POINT SOMETHING ACRES. SHE WAS NOTIFIED WITHOUT EVEN HAVING A SAY. NO, SHE DOESN'T WANT ANOTHER HOUSE. BUT SHE CAN ONLY PUT ONE OTHER HOME ON THERE, AND THERE WERE OTHER PROPERTIES GRANDFATHERED IN AND HAVE MULTIPLE HOMES ON THEIR PROPERTIES. THAT IS BESIDE THE POINT. SHE WAS NOT GIVEN A CHOICE ON THAT. BUT TO HAVE SOMETHING RIGHT THERE AT THE NECK OVER EMERGENCY VEHICLES HAVE TO COME IN, AND THERE IS TRAFFIC. EVERY SINGLE TIME I GO TO HER HOUSE WHICH IS ALMOST DAILY, THERE IS ANOTHER CAR PASSING ME ALL THE TIME. THERE ARE PEOPLE WAITING AT THE EDGE OF BRONCO ROAD FOR THEIR CHILDREN TO GET OUT OF SCHOOL. THERE IS A BAPTIST CHURCH RIGHT AROUND THE CORNER. THERE IS ANOTHER CHURCH RIGHT ON THE ROAD AND DOWN THE ROAD AND EVERYTHING ELSE. AND I DON'T CARE. IT DOESN'T MATTER WHICH CHURCH YOU GO TO OR WHATEVER. I LOVE CHURCHES. BUT IT'S LIKE, IT'S NOT IN THAT SETTING. THERE IS NOT ENOUGH PARKING. THE 10,000 SQUARE FEET ON 1.53 ACRES, IS JUST NOT ENOUGH. BECAUSE THEY AREN'T GOING TO HAVE ENOUGH PARKING TO PUT ALMOST 10,000 SQUARE FEET OF THE BUILDING. THEY ARE JUST NOT GOING TO HAVE IT. I LIVE ON OVER AN ACRE OF LAND MYSELF AND THERE IS NO WAY WE COULD PUT A 10,000 SQUARE-FOOT BUILDING AND HAVE PARKING. SO I'M JUST GOING TO ADD TO THAT. >> THANK YOU SO MUCH. APPRECIATE IT. >> ANYBODY ELSE WANT TO SPEAK ON THIS AGENDA ITEM? SEEMED NONE, WE WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND BRING IT BACK TO THE APPLICANT. DO YOU HAVE ANY FOLLOW-UP STATEMENTS? >> DO YOU WANT TO ADDRESS ANY OF THE ISSUES? >> DO YOU WANT TO DO A FOLLOW-UP? >> I UNDERSTAND WHAT THEIR CONCERN IS. I SEE NOW AS ALL OF THEM HAVE SPOKEN, THE PROBLEM IS NOT WITH US AS A CHURCH. THE PROBLEM WITH THEM IS WITH THE ZONING. I CAN UNDERSTAND THAT. THE THING I'M LOOKING AT AND THE MEMBERS ARE LOOKING AT IS, WHEN YOU SEE 1.53 ACRES, I'M GOING TO [00:55:02] GIVE THEM SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT. ALL OF THEM MAY OR MAY NOT KNOW A RESTAURANT CALLED ORANGE BUFFET. IT IS LOCATED ON BLANDING BOULEVARD. ORANGE BUFFET, THE SIZE OF THAT BUILDING IS 9600 SOMETHING SQUARE FEET. THAT IS HOW LARGE ORANGE BUFFET IS. THE SIZE OF THE PROPERTY THAT ORANGE BUFFET SITS ON IS 1.56 ACRES. THE AMOUNT OF PARKING SPACES THAT ORANGE BUFFET HAS IS 116 PARKING SPACES FOR THEM BEING HANDICAPPED. SO IT IS THE SAME SIZE AS WHAT WE ARE LOOKING AT PURCHASING. AND OUR BUILDING IS ONLY APPROXIMATELY 75 SQUARE FEET LARGER. YOU ARE LOOKING AT 100 PARKING SPACES. I'M JUST LOOKING AT THE MATH. NOW, AS YOU NOTICED, WE ARE A SMALL CONGREGATION. LOOKING UP RESEARCH ON HOW MANY PARKING SPACES SHOULD BE AS FAR AS A CHURCH, LOOKING AT SQUARE FOOTAGE, ONE OF OUR DEACONS DID THE DUE DILIGENCE TO LOOK THAT UP. EACH PARKING SPACE IN THE CHURCH IS CONSIDERED A MINIMUM OF THREE PEOPLE. THAT IS THE MINIMUM. WHICH WE KNOW FAMILIES SHOW UP WITH MORE THAN THAT. BUT A 10,000 -- TAKING UP 10,000 SQUARE FEET IS NOT GOING TO BE AS LARGE AS A LOT OF PEOPLE THINK. THAT IS WHAT I LIKE THE QUESTION YOU ASKED TRICK IS THAT 10,000 EACH LEVEL? NO. IT DOESN'T WORK THAT WAY. SO WE DID OUR DUE DILIGENCE TO MAKE SURE WE WEREN'T GOING TO BE A PROBLEM WITH THAT SIZE OF A LOT AND THAT IT WOULD ACCOMMODATE WHAT WE WERE LOOKING FOR. AS STATED PREVIOUSLY, WE CAME TO SEE IF IT WOULD BE A PROBLEM AND WE WERE TOLD IT WOULD NOT BE. THAT IS THE ONLY REASON WHY WE MOVED FORWARD. WE WANT TO BE GOOD NEIGHBORS. WE ARE ONLY GOING TO BE AROUND ON SUNDAYS. 9:00 IN THE MORNING UNTIL ABOUT 12:00. WE ARE GONE. YOU WILL SEE US WEDNESDAYS FROM 6:30 -- ONE OF THE DEACONS WILL PROBABLY OPEN AT 6:30. WE WILL BE THERE FOR BIBLE STUDY. 8:15, WE ARE GONE. SATURDAYS, YOU MIGHT SEE OUR WOMEN SHOW UP FOR A MEETING WHEN THEY COME TOGETHER FOR THE WOMEN'S MEETING. SATURDAY, THEY WILL BE THERE FOR A LITTLE WHILE. THEY ARE GONE. BASICALLY, LOOKING AT 24 HOURS IN A DAY. WE MAY SPEND 10 HOURS A WEEK. I DON'T UNDERSTAND THEIR WE WANT TO BE GOOD NEIGHBORS. WE WANT TO BE A PART OF THIS COMMUNITY. AND I DO BELIEVE THAT WE CAN BE A BLESSING TO THIS COMMUNITY IF THEY WOULD JUST GIVE US A CHANCE. >> ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? >> THANK YOU, SIR. APPRECIATE IT. WE WILL BRING IT BACK TO THE COMMISSION FOR DISCUSSION AND A MOTION. >> TALK ABOUT THIS FOR A MINUTE IF IT'S ALL RIGHT. WHEN I FIRST SAW THIS APPLICATION, I IMMEDIATELY HAD CONCERNS ABOUT ITS LOCATION. SO LET'S RECOGNIZE A COUPLE THINGS AND MAKE MY POINT. LONG BAY ROAD -- AND EVERYBODY WHO LIVES OUT THERE, THAT ROAD WILL BE EXTENDED NORTH AND TIE INTO OAK LEAF. LONG BAY ROAD IS A DIRECT LINK BETWEEN MIDDLEBURG AND OAK LEAF. AND WHEN WE GET THE MONEY TO DO THAT, EVENTUALLY THAT WILL HAPPEN. THAT WILL CHANGE THE CHARACTER OF LONG BAY ROAD. AS OF NOW, TODAY, IT IS VERY RESIDENTIAL IN THE AREA. MY CONCERN IS NOT WITH THE CHURCH. I CERTAINLY THINK SOME OF WHAT THEY ARE DESCRIBING IS DOABLE. I'M MORE CONCERNED WITH THE FACT THAT THIS PARCEL GETS CHANGED TO SOMETHING THAT COULD BE MISUSED. THE REVEREND OR PASTOR SAID IT HELPS TO GROW AND MOVE BUT WHEN THEY DO, THE PARCEL IS GOING TO SOMEBODY ELSE. AND WHEN IT DOES, THAT IS WHEN I THINK THE REAL PROBLEM CAN COME IN. THE EXAMPLE OF THE ORANGE BUFFET ON BLANDING, I HAVE DRIVEN BY HUNDREDS AND HUNDREDS OF TIMES. THAT THING IS STUCK TO THE PROPERTY LINES AND WEDGED IN THERE. THAT IS REALLY A GOOD EXAMPLE OF WHY A BUILDING THIS SIZE IS NOT A GOOD IDEA. THE SIZE OF A PARCEL. [01:00:05] SO, AND THEN I HAVE MY USUAL CONCERNS ABOUT LIGHTING AND ALL THAT STUFF. I DON'T THINK THIS IS AN APPROPRIATE -- I DON'T CARE WHO IS ON THIS PROPERTY. I DON'T THINK IT IS AN APPROPRIATE LOCATION FOR THIS ZONING. >> ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? >> I WOULD LIKE TO ECHO COMMISSIONER PUCKHABER'S REMARKS. AND LIKE EVERYONE ELSE, THIS IS NOT A POSITION TO THE CHURCH OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THAT. AND SOMETIMES IT HELPS ME TO HAVE A BIG PICTURE VIEW OF THESE PARCELS. IF YOU PULL UP THE PROPERTY APPRAISER'S MAP, THAT WAS VERY HANDY. IT SHOWS YOU EACH INDIVIDUAL LOT. I APPRECIATE YOU POINTING OUT THE FACT THAT THE ROAD DEAD ENDS INTO THE FOREST. IF THIS APPLICATION -- IF THE LOT WERE ON LONG BAY ROAD, I WOULD BE HAPPY TO SUPPORT IT. THE FACT THAT IT IS INTERNAL AND IT IS ONLY ONE LOT IN BUT IT IS STILL INTERNAL, AND IT IS THE PERMANENT CHANGE OF THE LAND USE APPLICANT AT ALL. IS INCOMPATIBLE. AND SO I WILL HAVE TO OPPOSE IT FOR THAT REASON. >> MY VIEWS ON THIS THING IS, I DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW THIS BF INSTITUTION CAME INTO BEING. I COULDN'T FIND IT ANYWHERE IN ARTICLE THREE. >> WE DID IT LIKE TWO MONTHS AGO. >> WE DID? WE NEED TO UPDATE THE FILE THEN. OKAY. IN RESPECT TO THAT, THIS PARCEL IS SURROUNDED BY RURAL RESIDENTIAL ALL THE WAY AROUND. 360. TO ME, THIS IS JUST ENCROACHMENT INTO A RESIDENTIAL AREA NUMBER ONE. NUMBER TWO, IT SMELLS LIKE SPOT ZONING. I KNOW THAT IS A TERM THAT IS OLD AND PEOPLE DON'T USE IT ANYMORE BUT WHEN YOU JUMP OVER A RESIDENTIAL AREA AND GO TO SOMETHING ELSE -- LIKE MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS, I HAVE SERIOUS CONCERNS ABOUT WHAT HAPPENS NEXT. SO FOR THAT REASON, I CANNOT SUPPORT THIS. THIS IS NOT FAIR TO THE RESIDENTS OF BRONCO ROAD. AND WITH THAT, I WILL ENTERTAIN A MOTION AND MOVE FORWARD. >> MR. CHAIR, I JUST WANT TO ECHO THE COMMENTS ABOUT THE REAL ESTATE. THAT WAS MALPRACTICE FOR SOMEONE TO SO WITHOUT CHECKING THE ZONING FIRST. I DON'T KNOW IF THERE IS ANY RECOURSE FOR THE CHURCH GROUP. BUT REAL ESTATE PROFESSIONALS ARE LICENSED TO HAVE A CODE OF ETHICS AND I'M GOING TO ASSUME THE PERSON WAS IGNORANT AND DIDN'T KNOW WHAT THE CIRCUMSTANCES WERE. BUT TO IMPLY THAT YOU CAN PUT A CHURCH ON A PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT IS RURAL RESIDENTIAL IS, IN MY OPINION, MALPRACTICE. >> YES. >> IF I CAN, I'M GOING TO GIVE AN OPINION ON THIS. IF WE WERE TO LOOK AT THIS -- AND THE MAP IS NOT UP RIGHT NOW BUT IF WE WERE TO LOOK AT SOMETHING IN A RURAL RESIDENTIAL AREA AND SOMEONE CAME IN AND WANTED TO GET A ZONING CHANGE AND PUT A COMMERCIAL PEOPLE -- PIECE OF PROPERTY THERE, WOULD BE DO THAT? WE WOULD NOT. BECAUSE IT IS NOT CONFORMANT. I KIND OF SEE THAT IS KIND OF THE SAME THING. I FEEL BADLY WITH WHAT YOU GUYS HAVE GONE THROUGH AND I AGREE WITH HELENA THAT YOU WERE SOLD L OF GOODS THERE BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW ANY COMMISSION THAT WOULD ALLOW SOMETHING LIKE THIS. EVEN WITH THE CHANGE IN CODE NOW. IT JUST DOESN'T MAKE SENSE TO PUT SOMETHING LIKE THAT IN A RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY LIKE THIS. I MIGHT BE ABLE TO PALLET IT A LITTLE MORE IF IT WAS ON THE CORNER LOT. BUT IT ISN'T. IT IS WITHIN. AND THAT PRESENTS A PROBLEM. SO I'M NOT SURE WHETHER YOU HAVE A CASE AGAINST THE REALTOR OR NOT. BUT FOR THAT REASON, I CAN'T SUPPORT IT. IT DOESN'T INFORM TO THAT PARTICULAR NEIGHBORHOOD, THE TYPE OF ZONING YOU ARE TRYING TO GO FOR. >> WITH THAT, MR. CHAIR, I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND MAKE A MOTION THAT WE RECOMMEND AGAINST THE STAFF REPORT AND RECOMMEND DENIAL OF THIS CHANGE. >> MOTION AND SECOND. [01:05:01] ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? >> MR. CHAIR, BEFORE WE TAKE A VOTE ON THIS, I'M CURIOUS ABOUT ONE THING. I HEARD TWO PEOPLE SAY THEY DID NOT GET THE NOTIFICATION LETTER. CAN WE PUT THE LIST BACK UP AND SEE IF THEY WERE ON THE LIST? THE PEOPLE THAT SAID THEY DIDN'T GET IT, ARE YOU ON THAT LIST? >> LETTER AND THEY ARE ON THE LIST? >> >> 350 FEET. >> THAT IS WHAT I WAS TRYING TO DETERMINE. I WANT TO MAKE THAT CLEAR TO EVERYBODY. THE ORDINANCE AND THE COUNTY, YOU HAVE TO BE WITHIN 350 FEET OF THE AFFECTED PARCEL TO BE NOTIFIED BY THE COUNTY. OTHER THAN THAT, YOU HAVE TO WATCH FOR THE SIGN. IF THE IDEA IS TO NOTIFY PEOPLE WHO ARE REALLY ADJACENT TO THE LOTS, WE ARE NOT NOTIFYING EVERYBODY IN THE COUNTY. I DON'T THINK ANYBODY DIDN'T GET NOTIFIED THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN. I JUST WANTED TO MAKE THAT POINT SO PEOPLE WOULD UNDERSTAND WHAT THE PROCESS IS WITH THE NOTIFICATION. WITH THAT, I'M DONE. >> MOTION ON THE FLOOR. SECOND. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. >> OPPOSED. >> SUPPORTING THE MOTION. >> OPPOSED, SAME SIGNED. >> OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. APPRECIATE IT. ALSO, THIS IS JUST OUR RECOMMENDATION AS IT GOES WITH THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. THIS GOES TO THE BOARD ON WHAT DAY SHIFT? OCTOBER 27TH. >> THIS GOES TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ON THE 27TH OF OCTOBER. 5:00. >> AND THEY WILL HAVE THE FINAL SAY. >> BECAUSE OURS IS ADVISORY ONLY. [5. Public Hearing to consider ZON 26-0024 (District 4, Comm. Condon) (C. Curington) This application is a rezoning to change a single parcel of land (7.05 acres) from Agricultural (AG) to Agricultural/Residential (AR).] >> THE NEXT ITEM IS PUBLIC HEARING CONSIDERS ZON 260024. >> THE NEXT ITEM IS -- >> HOLD ON A SECOND. GIVE THEM ONE MINUTE. IF NOT I WILL GET DEBBIE FRANK TO HELP. YES SIR. >> DO SO. >> OKAY, CHRIS. >> THE NEXT ITEM IS ZONING 26-0024. THIS WILL BE THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING OCTOBER 27TH AS WELL. THE APPLICANT IS DAVID HARRIS. THE LOCATION IS WEST OF MCCALL AND ROAD NORTH OF LONGBRANCH ROAD. THE DISTRICT IS MIDDLEBURG CLAY HILL. THIS IS COMMISSIONER INDISCERNIBLE ]'S DISTRICT. THIS IS SINGLE PARCEL. ZONING 26-0024 WOULD MAKE THE FOLLOWING ZONING CHANGES. CHANGING 7.05 ACRES FROM AGRICULTURAL, TO AGRICULTURAL RESIDENTIAL. ON THE LEFT, WE SEE THE NOTIFICATIONS AS WELL AS THE PICTURE OF THE SIGN AND THOSE WHO WERE NOTIFIED. ON THE LEFT SIDE, WE HAVE THE PARCEL MAP AND ON THE RIGHT SIDE IS THE TWO PARCEL MAP FROM AG, TO AR. ON THE LEFT IS THE EXISTING ZONING AND ON THE RIGHT IS THE PROPOSED ZONING. WE CAN SEE LONGBRANCH AND MCCLELLAN AS WELL AS THE PROPERTIES. WE HAVE AGRICULTURAL TO THE NORTH, EAST AND WEST AND AGRICULTURAL AND AGRICULTURAL RESIDENTIAL TO THE SOUTH. ON JULY 25TH, MIDDLEBURG CLAY HILL COC VOTED TO APPROVE THE ITEM AND STAFF HAS FOUND THE CRITERIA FOR THE REZONING APPLICATION HAS BEEN MET AND RECOMMENDS APPROVAL AS WELL. >> ANY QUESTIONS FROM STAFF? >> WHAT IS THE LAND USE ON THIS? >> IS THIS AT BRANDON FIELD? >> WHAT IS THE LAND USE ON THIS? >> THE ZONING IS CURRENTLY RURAL RESIDENTIAL. >> WHAT IS THE MINIMUM SIZED [01:10:01] WHAT THEY NEED FOR A HOUSE UNDER THAT? UNDER THE ZONE. IT IS CURRENTLY AG. >> 5 ACRES. >> ONE, OR FIVE. >> I WILL ASK THIS QUESTION. IF THE CURRENT ZONING IS AG AND THEY ONLY NEED 5 ACRES TO PUT A HOME ON IT, WHY -- THEY HAVE 7 ACRES ALREADY. WHY DO WE NEED THIS? 20. THAT WAS MY QUESTION. THANK YOU. >> WHAT WAS THE ANSWER? >> 20. 20 ON THE AG. >> WE GOT IT RIGHT. >> IS THE APPLICANT HERE? CAN YOU SHARE YOUR THOUGHTS? >> HAVE HIM COME UP. >> WE NEEDED FOR THE RECORD. >> MY NAME IS DAVID HARRIS. I MET 10,008 PEBBLE RIDGE DRIVE IN JACKSONVILLE. AND WE ARE WISHING TO REZONE THIS IN ORDER TO PUT A FIST -- PUT A SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING HERE. >> THANK YOU SIR. WE APPRECIATE YOU STEPPING FORWARD. CAC, YOUR MEMBER? NOT HERE? >> OKAY. I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. I DON'T HAVE ANY CARDS. DOES ANYONE WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS AGENDA ITEM QUICK SEEING NONE, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND BRING IT BACK TO THE COMMISSION TO DISCUSSION. >> I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE APPROVAL OF THE APPLICATION PLEASE. >> I WILL SECOND THAT. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. >> OPPOSED. >> THANK YOU, SIR. APPRECIATE IT. >> ITEM NUMBER FOUR. [6. Public Hearing to consider PUD 26-0009 and DEVOA26-0001. (District 5, Comm. Burke) (B. Carson). A. PUD 26-0009  This application is a Rezoning to change 1,265 acres from Agriculture District (AG) and Commercial and Professional Office District (BA-2) to Planned Unit Development (PUD).  B. DEVOA26-0001  This application is an Amendment to the Development Order for the Governors Park DRI. ] ON SOMEBODY'S AGENDA, IT IS SIX. >> HERE COMES THE FUN. >> GOOD EVENING. THIS ITEM IS PUD 26-9. THIS HAS AN APPLICATION WHICH IS THE DEVELOPMENT ORDER 26,001. THE AGENTS FOR THIS ITEM ARE ENGLAND SIMPSON MILLER AND ROGERS TOWERS. THE LOCATION OF THE PROPERTY IS EAST OF SPRING BANK ROAD. IT IS LOCATED WITHIN THE SPRINGS PLANNING DISTRICT. IT IS IN COMMISSIONER BURKE'S DISTRICT WHICH IS DISTRICT FIVE. THERE ARE MULTIPLE PARCELS INVOLVED WITH US. INCLUDING THE PARCELS BEING ADDED TO THE GOVERNOR'S. AS WELL AS THE GOVERNORS PARK LAND. PUD 26-9 WILL CHANGE THE ZONING OF APPROXIMATELY DISTRICT TO COMMERCIAL AND OFFICE DISTRICT TO PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT. AGAIN, THE DEVELOPMENT ORDER WOULD AMEND AND RESTATE DEVELOPMENT ORDER CURRENTLY IN PLACE FOR GOVERNORS PARK. THIS IS THE NOTIFICATION. THE PEOPLE WE NOTIFIED WITH THIS. THEY ARE WITHIN 350 FEET OF THE PROPERTY. IT IS A SIZABLE PROPERTY. YOU CAN IMAGINE THERE ARE A LOT OF PEOPLE NOTIFIED. BECAUSE OF THIS SIZE, WE ALLOW THE APPLICANT TO HAVE A LARGER R SIZED SIGNS. THESE ARE LOCATED AT LOCATIONS THAT ARE OBVIOUS TO THE PUBLIC. THEY WOULD BE TRAVELING BY THEM. THE MAP ON THE LEFT IS THE PUD MAP SHOWING THE PARCEL AND THIS PARCEL, AS YOU SEE, THE HATCH PART SOUTH OF 16, SPRING BANK ROAD. IT EXTENDS TO THE EXISTING GOVERNORS PARK. THAT IS THE GBAR BRANCH PARK BEING ADDED TO THE GOVERNORS PARK. THE MAP ON THE RIGHT IS THE REZONING. JUST A MAP OF THE LOCATION. [01:15:05] THE MAP ON THE LEFT IS THE PROPOSED LAND USE. BACK IN JULY, THERE WAS A LARGE-SCALE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT THAT WAS TRANSMITTED. THE BOARD RECOMMENDED TRANSMITTAL FOR IT. AND SO THAT WAS TRANSMITTED JULS RESPONDED WITH NO OBJECTIONS, RECOMMENDATIONS OR COMMENTS. I JUST WANTED TO UPDATE YOU ON THAT. THAT IS NOT BEING DISCUSSED TONIGHT. THIS IS THE NEXT STEP TO THE READ -- REZONING. FDOT HAD TECHNICAL COMMENTS BUT THAT WAS NOT AN OBJECTION TO WHAT WAS BEING PRESENTED IN THOSE HAVE BEEN ADDRESSED BY REVISED STUDY THAT ADDRESSED THOSE CONCERNS THAT FDOT HAD. THIS IS THE PHASING PLAN THEY ARE PROPOSING FOR GOVERNORS PARK DRI. THEY ARE NOT INCREASING THE NUMBER OF RESIDENTIAL UNITS. THEY SHIFTED THEM A LITTLE BIT. SO YOU HAVE 5500 SINGLE-FAMILY, 1500 MULTIFAMILY. THEY ARE LOOKING TO DEVELOP OVER 2 MILLION SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL RETAIL. OFFICES 350,000. HOTEL ROOMS WOULD BE 200. THEY HAVE REMOVED THE LIGHT INDUSTRIAL FROM THIS AND WE WILL EXPLAIN FURTHER WHY THEY HAVE DONE THAT AND THEY HAVE THE OPTION FOR AN 18 HOLE GOLF COURSE. THE MAP ON THE LEFT'S EXISTING G ZONING. HOW YOU SEE IT SURROUNDED BY AG AND AR. IT ALSO HAS THE DEVELOPMENT TO THE SOUTH AND THE MAP ON THE RIGHT IS THE PROPOSED ZONING. THIS IS THE SITE PLAN IS -- THAT IS INTENDED TO GO WITH IT. IN FRONT OF THE ORDINANCE. YOU SEE THE NEW RANCH DISTRICT WILL BE OCCUPYING THE CURRENT PARCEL. THERE HAS BEEN A SHIFT IN THE TOWN CENTER ALIGNMENT A LITTLE BIT. FROM WHAT WAS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED. THERE IS THE POTENTIAL FOR RELOCATING THE HIGH SCHOOL FURTHER NORTH. AND PROBABLY MOST SIGNIFICANCE IS THE ROAD EXTENDING SOUTH INTO AGRICOLA. >> THE WHAT? >> THE SPINE ROAD. >> THE MODIFICATIONS INCLUDED A REDISTRIBUTION OF THE USES WITH THE NEW RANCH DISTRICT RECONFIGURATION OF THE TOWN CENTER RELOCATION OF THE HIGH SCHOOL AND INCREASE IN THE PARK LAND. THE SPINE ROAD, AS I MENTIONED. SIDEWALKS AND ALLEYS HAVE BEEN INCREASED IN SIZE AND A REFERENCE TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE FIRE PREVENTION CODE AS STANDARDS FOR FIRE ACCESS HAVE BEEN ADDED. PERMITTED USE ADJUSTMENTS HAVE BEEN MADE TO ACCOMMODATE HOSPITAL, FREESTANDING EMERGENCY ROOMS AND SIMILAR MEDICAL USES. OTHER CHANGES WERE TO EXPAND SERVICE BUSINESSES AND INDOOR ENTERTAINMENT AND ALLOW FOR TAVERNS TO BE LOCATED INSIDE OF A MULTITENANT STRUCTURE. THERE HAS BEEN A SLIGHT REDUCTION IN PARKING STANDARDS BASED ON IT BEING A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT. NO REDUCTION IN SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL PARKING HAS BEEN CHANGED. NO CHANGE THERE. THEY DID ADD AN ON PREMISE MONUMENT SIGN ALONG THE ARTERIAL AND COLLECTOR ROADS NOT TO EXCEED 25 FEET IN HEIGHT AND 300 SQUARE FEET AND THE SIGN AREA AS WELL AS ADDING FOUR ON PREMISE SIGNATURE MONUMENTATION SIGNS ADJACENT TO THE EXPRESSWAY HAVING A MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF 80 FEET AND A SIGN FACE OF 700 SQUARE FEET. THE MODIFICATIONS TO THE DEVELOPMENT ORDER INCLUDED THE REVISED MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO ADD THE NEW ACREAGE, REALIGNMENT OF THE VILLAGE CENTER FOR BATTALION BOULEVARD WHICH IS THE SPINE ROAD GOING SOUTH AND THEY ADJUSTED THE OPEN SPACE WETLANDS IN OPULENCE BASED ON THE LATEST WETLAND DELINEATION THEY HAD. THE UPDATED THE LAND USE EXCHANGE TABLES IN THE LAND USE PHASING TABLE AND SPOKE ABOUT THAT. AND THE TRANSPORTATION SPECIAL CONDITION 23 TO CHANGE THE TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT THRESHOLD TO BUILDING PERMITS RATHER THAN CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY AND ADD TIME PARAMETERS FOR BONDING AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE PARKWAY WHICH IS THE BYPASS AND THEY UPDATED THE TRANSPORTATION MITIGATION MAP. THE PRIOR ACTION ON THIS IS ON SEPTEMBER 9TH, 2026, CAC VOTED 6-0 TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL. WITH THAT, STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE CRITERIA FOR REZONING AND FOUND THAT THE APPLICANT -- APPLICATION HAS BEEN MET AND RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF 2609. THE DEVELOPMENT ORDER, STAFF DID NOT HAVE ISSUES WITH THE PROPOSED CHANGES TO THE AMENDED AND RESTATED DEVELOPMENT ORDER. STAFF DID HAVE A CONCERN WITH THE PROVISION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING AS REQUIRED AND SPECIAL [01:20:02] CONDITION 25 AND WOULD RECOMMEND THE THIRD THRESHOLD FOR THE PROVISION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING BE RE-EXAMINED IN LIGHT OF THE REVISED PHASING PLAN WHICH DOES NOT REFLECT 2,500,000 SQUARE FEET OF NONRESIDENTIAL BUILDOUT. THE THRESHOLD CAN ONLY BE ACHIEVED THROUGH EXCHANGES. IT COULD BE ACHIEVED BUT ONLY THROUGH EXCHANGES. WITH THAT, THE APPLICANT HAS A PRESENTATION. I CAN ANSWER QUESTIONS OR WE CAN MOVE TO THE PRESENTATION. >> I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION. WHAT ARE THE LIGHTING STANDARDS IN HERE? I COULD NOT FIND THEM ANYWHERE EXCEPT FOR A REFERENCE TO WHAT IS IN THE LDR FOR COUNTYWIDE STANDARDS. >> WE REQUIRE A LIGHTING PLAN BUT WE DON'T HAVE ANY COUNTYWIDE STANDARDS. WE GENERALLY LOOK TO AS VERY ANO BOUNDARIES. >> BUT THAT IS JUST A HOPE THAT WE DO THAT, RIGHT? >> WE DO REQUIRE THE PLAN BUT YES, WE HAVE NO STANDARDS FOR THE COUNTY. >> THANK YOU. >> AT SOME POINT, AT THIS POINT ARE FOR THE APPLICANT'S APPLICATION, I WANTED TO DISCUSS THE SIGNAGE. THAT WAS SHOCKING. I DON'T KNOW IF NOW IS AN APPROPRIATE TIME. WHO CAME UP WITH THE? I HAVE TO BE HONEST WITH YOU. I WENT BACK AND LOOKED AT THE CURRENT ORDINANCE. I HAVE BEEN AROUND LONG ENOUGH TO HAVE SEEN ALL THE BATTLES OVER SCIENCE. TO SAY WE ARE GOING TO ALLOW SIGNS THAT ARE 80 FEET TALL, THE BUILDING IS ABOUT 65 FEET TALL. SO TALKING ABOUT SIGNS TALLER THAN THE BUILDING. 700 SQUARE FEET OF AREA. >> I'M SURE THEY WILL TALK WITH YOU ABOUT THAT. WE HAVE TO REMEMBER THAT THEY HAVE AN INTERSTATE RUNNING TO THE PROPERTY. >> I UNDERSTAND. OUT OF CLAY COUNTY. >> APPLICANT. >> GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS. GOOD TO BE BACK BEFORE YOU. FOR THE RECORD, AND THE INDISCERNIBLE ] VICE PRESIDENT OF PLANNING WITH ] AND MILLER. HERE TONIGHT WITH ME IS KEVIN KRAMER, WITH BCI PARTNERS, PCI , REPRESENTING THE LAND OWNERS. ALSO HAVE -- AND OUR TEAM INCLUDES CASEY DENTON OR MATTHEWS, REED MCDANIEL AND THOMAS HATCHER HERE TONIGHT. WE HAVE THIS ONE PRESENTATION. I KNOW YOU HAVE A LONG AGENDA TONIGHT. SO I WILL TRY TO KEEP IT BRIEF. TO BE HONEST, WHEN WE FIRST PUT IT TOGETHER, WE DID NOT HAVE THE STAFF REPORT. BUT BETH HAS DONE A GOOD JOB OF BEING THOROUGH ON THE LIST OF CHANGES WE HAVE ASKED FOR. YOU MAY RECALL WE WERE HERE BACK IN JULY AND SINCE THEN, ALTHOUGH THE COMP PLAN -- IT IS NOT BEFORE YOU TONIGHT BUT TO GIVE YOU AN UPDATE, WE DID HAVE A REVIEW BY THE STATE REVIEWING AGENCIES. THERE WERE NO OBJECTIONS. WE DID RECEIVE D.O.T. TECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS. WE PROVIDED THEM WITH A REVISED TRAFFIC STUDY AND THEY HAD NO FURTHER TECHNICAL RECOMMENDATIONS. WE CONTINUED TO WORK WITH D.O.T. ON THE INTERCHANGE AS WELL AS THE THESE MAPS, THE ONE ON THE LEFT AS COMPARED TO THE ONE ON THE RIGHT. REALLY THE TWO BIGGEST CHANGES YOU WILL SEE ON THE RIGHT, THE INTERCONNECTIVITY FROM CLAY DAIRY PARKWAY DOWN THROUGH WIN WENT OUT TO U.S. 17. AND OBVIOUSLY ADDING THE GBAR RANCH PROPERTY TO THE NORTH. SO I WILL GO QUICKLY THROUGH THE SLIDE. BETH HAS COVERED MOST OF THE PROPOSED CHANGES. ESSENTIALLY, THE NO ADDITIONAL RESIDENTIAL UNITS AND ADDING RANCH PROPERTY MEANS THERE IS A REDUCTION IN OVERALL RESIDENTIAL DENSITY. WE ARE ESSENTIALLY MOVING SOME NONRESIDENTIAL FROM AGRICOLA TO GOVERNORS PARK AS WELL BECAUSE OF THE INTERCHANGE. AND WE ARE INCREASING THE COMMERCIAL AND ACCELERATING THE PHASING OF BOTH COMMERCIAL AND OFFICE. WE DID PROVIDE SOME REVISED VERIFICATION FOR WATER CONSERVATION PLAN AND A METHOD OF THE METHOD OF IMPLEMENTATION. THE TRANSPORTATION MITIGATION PLAN, WE HAVE AN ADDITION OF THE PAYMENT TO THE COUNTY, FOR STATE ROAD IS 16 IMPROVEMENTS OF $670,000. AND PRIOR TO PHASE FOUR, THE FULL CONNECTION OF THE FOUR LANE CLAY DAIRY PARKWAY NEEDS TO BE [01:25:01] BONDED AND UNDER CONSTRUCTION ALL THE WAY UP TO STATE ROAD 16. WE INCREASE THE CIVIC SIZE FROM THREE, TO 4 ACRES. THERE WAS A FIRE STATION CONTRIBUTION IN THE CURRENT ORDER. AND IT WILL BE SUBJECT TO IMPACT FEES WHICH IS FAR MORE THAN THE CURRENT CONTRIBUTION. ONE OF THE OTHER BIG CHANGES WAS TO INCREASE THE PROJECT PARK SIZE TO 100 ACRES. 'S WE HAVE A TOTAL OF 140 ACRES. AND WE WILL WORK WITH THE SCHOOL DISTRICT STAFF ON THE SCHOOL SITE LOCATIONS AND HAVE THESE CONCEPTUAL AGREEMENTS ON THE TWO ELEMENTARY SCHOOLS AS WELL AS THE HIGH SCHOOL SITE. BOTH COVERED THIS IN THE STAFF PRESENTATION AS WELL. THIS IS THE ADOPTED MASTER PLAN. YOU SEE THE TOWN CENTER SURROUNDING THE EXPRESSWAY INTERCHANGE. AND THE CONCEPTUAL LOCATIONS OF PROCESS -- OF PROPOSED SITES. THIS WAS THE LAST APPROVAL IN 2019. WITH THE ADDITION OF NORTH, WE ADDED THE RANCH DISTRICT. WE SHOWED THE TWO ELEMENTARY SCHOOL SITES AS WELL AS THE HIGH SCHOOL SITE. WE ADDED THE VILLAGE CENTER DISTRICTS AT THE STATE ROAD 16 CONNECTION WITH CLAY DAIRY PARKWAY. THE PLAN ON THE LEFT AGAIN COMPARES THE EXISTING CONDITION TO THE PROPOSED CONDITION. AGAIN, NO INCREASE IN RESIDENTIAL UNITS. 7000 UNITS. THIS IS A SLIGHT INCREASE IN THE NONRESIDENTIAL FROM FOUR TO -- 2.24, TO 2.35 MILLION SQUARE FEET. WE STILL HAVE THE GOLF COURSE HOLES AND HOTEL ROOMS. THE RED AREAS ARE THE CURRENT PLAN COMMERCIAL AREAS. ON THE LEFT, YOU CAN SEE THE PURPLE SOUTH OF THE EXPRESSWAY. THAT WAS INITIALLY THOUGHT OF AS INDUSTRIAL PARCEL BUT THAT, WITH THE PETERS CREEK INDUSTRIAL PARK TO THE NORTH, JUST ACROSS STATE ROAD 16 AS WELL AS THE INDUSTRIAL FUTURE LAND USE ZONING TO THE EAST ACROSS 15A, APPLICANTS ARE JUST NOT SEEING A MARKET INDUSTRIAL AT THIS LOCATION. ESSENTIALLY, THE INDUSTRIAL ANCHORAGE BECOMES THE REGIONAL PARK ACREAGE. AND YOU CAN ALSO SEE THE INTERCONNECTIVITY TO THE SOUTH INTO AGRICOLA THAT WILL ULTIMATELY CONNECT OVER TO U.S. 17. THIS MAP JUST ADDS IN THE AGRICOLA PARCEL. YOU CAN SEE HOW THE ROADWAYS BEST CONNECT AND THE FULL CONCEPT PLAY FOR ALL THREE PROPERTIES. BENEFITS, NO INCREASE IN RESIDENTIAL UNITS. WE HAVE THE INTEGRATED ROADWAY NETWORK. THE SCHOOL SITE LOCATIONS HAVE BEEN WORKED WITH THE SCHOOL DISTRICT AT LEAST CONCEPTUALLY. THERE IS ABOUT A 113 MILLION-DOLLAR REGIONAL ROADWAY INVESTMENT. ABOUT 82 MILLION IS EITHER UNDER CONSTRUCTION NOW OR WILL BE EMINENCE WITH THE CONSTRUCTION OR INTERCHANGE RAMPS. THERE IS SUBSTANTIAL COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT TO CREATE JOBS. AND THERE IS OVER 77 MILLION POTENTIAL ANNUAL AND AGAIN, BECAUSE IT IS CONTROLLED BY BTI PARTNERS, I CANNOT EXPRESS ENOUGH THAT YOU CAN DO A LOT MORE THINGS, LIKE THE INTEGRATED ROADWAY NETWORK. DOING THE LONG-RANGE MASTER PLAN PLAN, HAVING PRODUCT DIVERSITY. I THINK THAT IS A BIG BENEFIT OF THIS PROJECT TOO. IF YOU HAVEN'T BEEN OUT THERE, YOU CAN -- THERE IS A PICTURE OF CLAY DAIRY PARKWAY LOOKING NORTHWEST. YOU CAN SEE CLAY DAIRY PARKWAY IN THE FOREGROUND OF 15A. THE FIRST TWO NEIGHBORHOODS OR UNDER CONSTRUCTION. NEIGHBORHOOD IS OLDER CREEK AT BARRINGTON. AND THEN LOOKING SOUTH, WE HAVE DAVID WEEKLY HOMES. CONSTRUCTING THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD, THE PRESERVED. I DO WANT TO ADD ONE CLARIFICATION IN YOUR PACKETS AND IN THE STAFF REPORT. WE HAD AN ERROR ON THE OFFICE SQUARE FEET IN PHASING. THE CORRECT PHASING SHOULD BE 163,500 SQUARE FEET IN PHASE ONE. AND 186,000 SQUARE FEET IN PHASE TWO FOR A TOTAL OF 350,000. JUST FOR CLARIFICATION. YOU DID HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT THE [01:30:02] SIGNAGE. I CAN SHOW YOU SOME PLANNED SIGNAGE. >> WHILE YOU ARE PULLING THAT UP, I'M CURIOUS. I'M READING FROM THE APPLICATION, OR THE STAFF REPORT RATHER. LET ME FIND THAT. PAGE NINE, LINE 104, IT IS A STATEMENT TO THE EFFECT THAT A STANDARD WAS ADDED. YOU HAVE OUT OF THE STANDARD? OR THIS AS PER THE PUD? SO IT IS NOT IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE SIGN ORDINANCE? >> WITH IT BEING A PUD, THEY CAN CREATE THEIR OWN. >> I WANTED TO CLARIFY THAT WHAT THEY ARE SUGGESTING DOES NOT COMPLY WITH -- >> CORRECT. WE DON'T HAVE THAT LEVEL OF SIGNAGE. >> THAT BRINGS UP ANOTHER QUESTION. IF IT IS THE PUD, IF WE APPROVE THE PUD, WE ARE APPROVING THE SIGNAGE, IS THAT WHAT YOU ARE SAYING, COMMISSIONER? >> YES. >> IF WE DON'T APPROVE IT, WE ARE DISAPPROVING THE SIGNAGE. IS THAT HOW WE DO THIS? >> LET ME JUST SAY THAT I'M 100% IN FAVOR OF WHAT YOU GUYS ARE DOING. 110%, IF THAT IS POSSIBLE. WHEN I READ THAT, I SAW A 80-FOOT AND I ABOUT FELL OVER. I HAD TO GO SCRAMBLING AROUND AND LOOKING. YOUR MEMBER THE DEBATES OVER BILLBOARDS. TECHNICALLY, THAT IS A BILLBOARD. AND THAT IS THE FIRST THING UNDER PROHIBITED SIGNS, BILLBOARDS. SO THAT IS MY STARTING POSITION. >> HAVE A SIGNAGE ELEVATION ON THE SCREEN FOR YOU TO LOOK AT. THE IDEA WAS THAT THAT WOULD BE ALONG THE EXPRESSWAY. AND THIS IS ASSUMING THAT THE BTI CONSULTANT CAME UP WITH IT. >> OKAY. >> A PICTURE IS WORTH A THOUSAND WORDS. >> I KNEW THE QUESTION WOULD BE ASKED. I'M GOING TO ADD TO IT. >> LET ME JUST CLARIFY THE POINT. IF THIS GETS APPROVED AT SOME POINT, THIS IS EMBEDDED WITHIN THE PUD. THE NEW SIGN STANDARDS ARE ALLOWED WITHIN THE PUD. DOES THAT OPEN UP ANYTHING ELSE? OR IS IT STRICTLY -- >> IT IS STRICTLY THE PUD. I'M SURE SOMEBODY MIGHT COME ALONG AND SAY YOU ALLOWED AT GOVERNORS PARK. LIKE BRANDON FIELD AND IS VERY, THEY DON'T ALLOW THESE ANYMORE OR ANYTHING THIS LARGE -- IT IS PROHIBITED. >> I'M GOING TO FOLLOW BEFORE YOU ANSWER THE QUESTION. I AS WELL WAS SHOCKED WHEN I READ THIS. AND THE REASON I WAS SO SHOCKED -- I DON'T CARE WHERE THE SIGN IS, IT WILL BE THE TALLEST SIGN WE HAVE IN CLAY COUNTY. AND THE SECOND ISSUE IS, IF IT IS ALLOWED IN THIS PUD, I GUARANTEE THE NEXT PERSON THAT COMES IN WILL SAY, BUT THEY DID IT AND WE ARE GOING TO HAVE FIRST COAST EXPRESSWAY WITH THESE HUGE SIGNS ALL ALONG IT. WITH GPS AND OTHER WAYS OF FINDING THINGS THESE DAYS. THERE IS NO NEED FOR SIGNS THIS LARGE. YOU CANNOT FIND ONE. THERE DOES THE IDEA OF A PUD IS TO DO BETTER. THERE ARE SEVERAL REFERENCES IN HERE TOO. THIS IS WHAT THE LDR REQUIRES OR THE LAND CODE. THE IDEA BEHIND THE PUD, IF YOU READ A PUD, IS YOU NEED TO DO BETTER THAN STANDARD. 80-FOOT SIGN IS NOT BETTER. IT IS THAT SIMPLE. MAKE THE ARGUMENT YOU WANT TO MAKE BUT IT IS THAT SIMPLE. >> KEVIN KRAMER PTF PARTNERS, 4798 NEW BROAD STREET ORLANDO, 32,814. IT CERTAINLY IS NOT INTENDED TO BE A BILLBOARD. IT IS A MONUMENT SIGN. KIND OF STOUT AFTER THE YEAR AS YOU ARE GOING DOWN 95 IN BREVARD COUNTY. THEY HAVE SIMILAR SIGNAGE ON 95. I SHOULD SAY MONUMENTATION. BETH, I RECALL AT DRC, WE TALKED ABOUT REQUIRING UNIFIED SIGN PLAN. THE LANGUAGE WOULD BE ADDED. WAS THAT ADDED? >> SO IT ISN'T JUST ENOUGH -- THIS WAS THE INTENT. IT IS NOT ENOUGH JUST TO HAVE [01:35:05] THE LANGUAGE IN THE PUD ALLOWING THE SIZES. WE HAVE TO SUBMIT A UNIFIED SIGN PLAN TO THE COUNTY THAT WILL SHOW SIMILAR TO THIS. IT WILL SHOW THE RENDERINGS. IT WILL SHOW THE LOCATION. IT WILL SHOW THE NUMBERS OF THOSE. THIS IS LIKE MONUMENTATION SIGN FOR THE OVERALL COMMUNITY WAYFINDING SIGN. TO TELL YOU WHERE TO FIND THE RECREATION AREA AND WHERE TO FIND THE AMENITIES AND THAT KIND OF THING. AND A UNIFIED PLAN THAT GETS SUBMITTED TO THE COUNTY FOR REVIEW AND APPROVAL, FOR THE DETAILS. SO IF THE LANGUAGE DIDN'T MAKE IT IN THERE THAT WAY, WE CERTAINLY WOULD ADD THAT. I KNOW THAT WAS THE DISCUSSION AT DRC. AND CERTAINLY, NOT A BILLBOARD. IT IS A BIG DEVELOPMENT ON A BIG NEW HIGHWAY. SO IT IS NICE TO HAVE SOME NICE WELL DONE MONUMENTATION LIT UP WITH SOME NICE LIGHTING AT NIGHT NIGHT. NEVER INTENDED TO BE A BILLBOARD OR ANY OTHER -- NONE OF THE COMMERCIAL USES OR ANYTHING ELSE ON THE SIGN. IT IS JUST THAT WOULD BE IN THE PLAN. CERTAINLY WILLING TO ADD LANGUAGE IN THEIR AS NEEDED TO PROVIDE COMFORT. >> I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A CLARIFICATION. THE UNIFIED SIGN PLAN HAS CERTAIN STANDARDS FOR HEIGHT AND SIGNED -- SIGNED PHASE. THERE ARE THRESHOLDS TO EXCEED THAT AND ARE CAPS ON THAT. ANYTHING BEYOND THAT, YOU HAVE TO GET THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONER'S APPROVAL TO GO LARGER THAN THOSE. SO THE SIGN PLAN IS APPROVED ADMINISTRATIVE LEAVE BY STAFF AND ANYTHING LARGER THAT EXCEEDS THOSE THRESHOLDS IS A BOARD APPROVAL. >> UNDERSTOOD. >> WITH THEWHAT THE COMMISSIONEE CONCERNED ABOUT, YOU CAN CALL IR WHATEVER. BUT THE HEIGHT IS THE ISSUE. AND THAT SETS THE TONE FOR THOSE TO FOLLOW. MY OTHER CONCERN ALSO IS ABOUT A MILE FROM THERE, WE HAVE AN AIRPARK. WILL THAT BE A HAZARD OR NAVIGATION FOR THOSE PEOPLE? THEY ARE NOT FLYING 740 SEVENS. THEY ARE FLYING PIPER CUBS AND THEY ARE FLYING AT LOW ALTITUDE. I DON'T KNOW WHERE THAT WILL BE BUT IT COULD POSSIBLY BE IN THE FLIGHT PATH. >> I'M NOT SURE OF THE FLIGHT PATH. THE INTENT IS THESE MONUMENTS ARE AT THE INTERCHANGE. ONE OF THE REASONS FOR THE HEIGHT IS THAT IT IS ELEVATED. THE HIGHWAY ELEVATES AND COMES UP OVER THE TOP OF THE NEW CLAY DAIRY. SO YOU'RE PROBABLY 25 FEET IN THE AIR OF THE ROADWAY. SO WE WANT TO LIFTED UP. THE POINT IS WE ARE SEEING IT FROM THE FIRST COAST EXPRESSWAY. ELEVATED HIGHWAY BRIDGE CROSSING CROSSING. >> WE ARE CERTAINLY OPEN TO ADJUSTMENTS IN THE LANGUAGE. WE WANT TO DO MONUMENTATION. IT IS A NICE BIG COMMUNITY. WE WANT TO HAVE MONUMENTATION THAT CAN BE SEEN FROM THE FIRST COAST EXPRESSWAY. IF WE NEED TO PUT GUARDRAILS ON THAT, MORE THAN WHAT IS ALREADY IN THE TEXT, CERTAINLY WILLING TO DO IT. DEFINITELY, IT WOULD BE PART OF THE UNIFIED SIGN PLAN REVIEWED BY STAFF. >> TO CONTINUE THE DISCUSSION IF I MAY, CHAIRMAN, I LIKE THE UNIFIED SIGN PLANS ON THE MASTER SIGN PLAN WE ARE WORKING ON. I LIKE THAT. THAT IS AESTHETICALLY PLEASING. BUT IT'S THE CLICHÉ, THE CAMEL'S NOSE. SORT OF LIKE THE CHURCH. IF YOU ALLOW THAT, THEN WHAT? I CAN PROBABLY FIND SOME HEIGHT HEIGHT -- AT LEAST ONE GUY ON RECOMMENDING BODY -- 80-FOOT TALL SEEMS RIDICULOUS TALL. AND I THOUGHT TO MYSELF, HOW TALL IS THIS BUILDING? IT IS KNOWN FOR STORIES OR 60-65 FEET TALL. SO ANOTHER 20 FEET BEYOND THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING. IT SEEMS EXCESSIVE. WE DON'T HAVE THE HISTORY IN CLAY COUNTY. BATTLES OVER SIGNS AND BILLBOARDS TRYING TO IMPROVE THE APPEARANCE OF THE COUNTY. THAT LOOKS GOOD. IT IS HARD TO IMAGINE THE SCOPE OF AN 80-FOOT TALL MONUMENT LIT AT NIGHT. I GET YOUR POINT. YOU WANT PEOPLE DRIVING BY, THERE WAS A COOL PLACE. LET'S GO CHECK OUT WHATEVER. I GET THAT. I HAVE BEEN AROUND THIS LONG ENOUGH. THIS IS -- POLLUTION AND SIGNAGE. THIS LANGUAGE IS COVERED UP AND [01:40:01] CRAPPY SIGNAGE. SO WHEN I SAW THAT -- I WILL QUIT RAMBLING. THANK YOU. >> WE DON'T WANT IT OVERLY SIZED. WE WANT TO APPROPRIATELY SIZED AND TO LOOK GOOD. I DON'T KNOW IF THERE IS A WAY BETWEEN NOW AND THE COMMISSION MEETING, MORE CAN BE DONE TO LOOK AT THE. TO REFINE THE HEIGHT AND SOME EXAMPLES. >> WHAT IS THE MAXIMUM POSSIBLE? >> WHAT IS THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT IN THE SIGN PLAN SHIFT? OFFHAND, I DON'T KNOW THE. >> FOR THIS PLAN? >> ONE OF THEM IS 85. 85 FEET. >> NOT THEIRS. >> 50-FOOT IS THE THRESHOLD FOR THE BILLBOARD. THOSE ARE PROHIBITED. >> WE, NOT ME, BUT THIS BOARD APPROVED RECOMMENDATION OF A 40-FOOT SIGN LAST MONTH. IF YOU WILL REMEMBER. AND I DIDN'T LIKE THAT ONE EITHER. BUT IT GOT APPROVED. I ASSUME THE BCC APPROVED IT. >> THAT WAS AT ORANGE PARK MALL? >> RIGHT. >> WHICH IS TWICE THE HEIGHT OF THE MOVIE SIGN ALREADY THERE. >> THAT WAS PART OF A MASTER SIGN PLAN. >> I DON'T WANT TO GET BOGGED DOWN ON THIS. AS LONG AS THAT IS IN HERE. >> CAN WE SWITCH TO SOMETHING ELSE FROM IT AND HERE THAT I WAS CONCERNED ABOUT. ONE OF THEM, I DID NOT QUITE UNDERSTAND. HOPEFULLY RAY OR SOMEBODY COULD UNDERSTAND IT A LITTLE BETTER. I HAVE TO FIND IT REALLY QUICK. BUT THIS THING ABOUT PALM TREES AND WHY THAT WAS SPECIFICALLY PUT IN HERE. I THINK IT HAD TO DO WITH THE AMOUNT OF SHADE BEING PROVIDED. PALM TREES DON'T PROVIDE SHADE. IF YOU EVER GO TO -- IN YOUR PLANNER, YOU KNOW THIS, YOU GO TO PLANNING STUFF. THE FIRST THING THEY DO IS SHOW YOU A STREET WITH PALM TREES ON IT AND SAY, THIS IS USELESS FOR PROVIDING SHADE. YOU NEED CANOPY TREES. >> IT WAS INTENDED FOR THE TOWN CENTER, MORE URBAN AREAS IN THE PROJECT. >> WHERE PEOPLE ARE ON THE STREET WALKING AROUND AND NEED THE SHADE. THAT IS WHY I WAS ASKING. ARE WE ELIMINATING SHADE FROM THE AREAS WHERE PEOPLE ARE OUT WALKING? >> NO. WE ARE NOT ELIMINATING SHADE. >> MY COPY I'M LOOKING AT, IT STARTS ONLINE 97. THE LANDSCAPING AND PARKING STANDARDS. MINOR CHANGE INCLUDING A LIMITATION ON PALM TREES AND VILLAGE RESIDENTIAL VILLAGE RESIDENTIAL AREA AND A REDUCTION OF REQUIRED SHADE COVERAGE POINTS IN THE VILLAGE CENTER. >> IT SAYS BOTH THE CHANGES ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE CURRENT LDC. AND I MENTIONED THAT AS PUD, WE SHOULD BE DOING BETTER THAN THE LDC. YOU KNOW, YOU GUYS LIVE IN FLORIDA. IT IS ONLY GOING TO GET HOTTER EVERY YEAR NOW. WE HAVE GOT TO PROVIDE SHADE. SO I WAS WONDERING IF YOU COULD EXPLAIN TO ME EXACTLY WHAT IS HAPPENING IN THAT PARAGRAPH. >> IS PARAGRAPH C YOU ARE POINTING TO? >> I DON'T KNOW. MINE HAS LINE NUMBERS ON IT. IT IS LINE 97. I'M IN THE STAFF REPORT. I'M SORRY. >> WHERE IS IT? >> 36TH. >> I'M NOT SURE IT IS GOOD OR BAD. I JUST DIDN'T UNDERSTAND WHAT WAS GOING ON. >> I WOULD LIKE TO CLARIFY THAT THE CANOPY TREES WHICH ARE IN PARKING LOTS TO INCLUDE PALM TREES. THERE IS TYPICALLY A LIMITATION ON HOW MANY PALM TREES. WE DO WANT TO MIX. WE DON'T WANT IT TO BE ALL PALM TREES. THE VILLAGE VILLAGE CENTER, THEE THEY MADE WAS, WE HAVE THREE LEVELS OF SHADE POINTS. ONE IS RESIDENTIAL. ONE IS MORE URBAN AREA AND ONE IS HIGHLY URBANIZED. AND SO WE SHIFTED TO THE HIGHLY URBANIZED AS FAR AS POINTS. SO YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE MORE OF A PARKING LOT AREA AND MORE STRUCTURES. MORE COMMERCIAL. LESS GREEN SPACE. >> DOES THAT TRANSLATE TO HAVING MORE SHADE IN THOSE MORE DENSE AREAS? >> WHERE YOU WOULD HAVE ALL THE STORES. >> YOU WOULD HAVE AN APPROPRIATE AMOUNT. YOU HAVE THE PARKING LOTS AND THE BUFFERS AND WHATEVER AROUND IT THAT IS REQUIRED. LIKE I SAID, AGAIN, CONSISTENT [01:45:01] WITH OUR CODE. THIS BEING DRI, IT IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT. >> JUST TO CLARIFY, DOES IT TEND NOT TO REDUCE THE SHADE FOR PEDESTRIANS? YOU COULD REDUCE -- YOU COULD USE PALM TREES. BUT ONLY UP TO 25% OF THE POINTS YOU COULD USE PALM TREES FOR YOU. >> I JUST WANTED TO UNDERSTAND WHAT IS GOING ON THERE. LIKE I SAID, IT IS JUST GETTING WORSE AND WORSE. WE NEED TO HAVE SOME SHADE. SO CAN I MOVE TO MOVED TO MY LA? WOULD THAT BE OKAY? WE ARE KIND OF OUT OF ORDER HERE. LIGHTING. >> I DIDN'T SEE ANY LIGHTING. ANY REAL LIGHTING STANDARDS AND HERE OTHER THAN SAYING YOU WOULD COMPLY WITH THE COUNTY LIGHTING STANDARDS WHICH ARE WHOLLY INADEQUATE. SO WE USUALLY RECOMMEND THAT WE PUT -- IS IT LIKE ASBURY, BETH? THAT WE ACTUALLY GET THE LANGUAGE IN THERE THAT SAYS WE WILL COMPLY WITH STANDARDS FOR LIGHTING. I DON'T THINK IT IS IN HERE. I COULDN'T FIND IT. IF IT IS IN HERE, WE COULDN'T FIND IT. >> THIS IS AN AMENDMENT. THE ORIGINAL DID NOT HAVE THAT IN THERE. WE HAVEN'T GIVEN LIGHTING ANY THOUGHT YET. >> PLEASE DO. >> BUT I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHAT THOSE STANDARDS ARE. AND DON'T OBJECT TO THEM GOING IN. JUST WANT TO UNDERSTAND THEM FIRST. THAT'S ALL. >> THANK YOU. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? >> JUST TRYING TO FIND A HEIGHT OF OUR SIGN, EXISTING CODE. THE ONLY ONE I CAN FIND IS 50 FEET. AND SO I WOULD OFFER THAT FOR WHATEVER IT IS WORTH. >> OKAY. THANK YOU ALL. >> THE UNIFIED SIGN PLAN, THAT IS IN THEIR? THE RE- TAUGHT -- THE REQUIREMENT TO DO IT? >> YES. YOU WOULD COMPLY WITH THE ARTICLES OF STANDARD SIX REGARDING ANY FUTURE MASTER SITE PLAN AS IT MAY BE AMENDED. SO I'M WONDERING IF YOU MIGHT WANT TO STRIKE THIS SECTION THAT YOU ADDED AS FAR AS THE SIGNS AND HAVE THAT BE CONSIDERED IN YOUR MASTER SITE PLAN? >> YES. >> OKAY. >> WHAT DID WE JUST AGREE TO? >> GO AHEAD, BETH. >> NOT TO PUT WORDS IN HER MOUTH. ON THE STRIKETHROUGH PAGE, THEY HAVE HAD THE ON PREMISE MONUMENT SIGNS ALONG ARTERIAL COLLECTOR ROADS. THE PARAGRAPH, IF THEY WOULD WANT TO, THEY COULD STRIKE THAT AND YOU COULD MOVE FORWARD WITH THIS. WITH THAT REMOVED. AND THEN THEY WOULD DO THE SITE PLAN. BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE EXCEEDING THE THRESHOLD. YOU WOULD HAVE TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. >> THAT WAS KIND OF THE INTENT. >> DO WE GET A LOOK AT THAT? >> IT GOES TO THE BOARD. >> STRAIGHT TO THE BOARD. >> THE ALTERNATIVE WOULD BE THAT WE WOULD DENY THIS AND THEY WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK. >> AND IF THE BOARD REJECTED IT, THEN IT WOULD COME BACK. >> THEY WOULD HAVE TO AMEND IT. >> OKAY. THANK YOU. WITH THAT, I WILL OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS ITEM. I DON'T HAVE ANY CARDS. DOES ANYBODY WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS AGENDA ITEM? >> SEEING AND HEARING NONE, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING AND BRING IT BACK TO -- IS THERE ANYTHING ADDITIONAL YOU WOULD LIKE TO SHARE WITH US? WE WILL BRING IT BACK TO THE COMMISSIONERS TO DISCUSS AND RECOMMEND. >> WE PRETTY MUCH DISCUSSED IT. I'M GOING TO MOTION THAT WE RECOMMEND DENIAL TO NOT ACCEPT THE STAFF REPORT. I WILL BASE THAT STRICTLY ON TWO ITEMS, SIGNS AND THE LIGHTING. AND UNTIL WE HAVE A DOCUMENT IN FRONT OF US, NOT SOMETHING THAT GETS DONE AFTER THIS, I CAN'T SUPPORT IT. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE LOCKED D INTO WHAT WE ARE RECOMMENDING. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? >> CHAIR. >> YES. [01:50:05] >> THE LIGHTING AND THE SIGNS. WHAT IS THE CODE? WHAT IS THE REGULATION ON THE LIGHTING YOU ARE REFERENCING? >> CRANFIELD STANDARDS. >> IS IT MOSTLY -- IT IS DOWN LIGHTING AND LIGHT PATHS AND A LOT OF THINGS THAT SHOULD BE DONE. MAY I, MR. CHAIR? I WILL SAY NO TO THIS BECAUSE IT'S NOT IN HERE. YOU STILL CAN GO TO THE BCC AND MAKE THE SAME ARGUMENT YOU'RE MAKING HERE. THEY MIGHT HAVE A DIFFERENT POINT OF VIEW ON IT. I WANT TO MAKE IT VERY CLEAR. AND IT WILL BE IN THE MINUTES. I DON'T HAVE ANY PROBLEM WITH THE PROJECT. I THINK OVERALL, AS BILL SAID, I THINK IT IS A DECENT PROJECT. AND IT IS A 30 YEAR TIME HORIZON WHICH MEANS, I PROMISED EVERYBODY THAT YOU GUYS WILL BE BACK HERE IN THE NEXT 30 YEARS AT SOME POINT ASKING FOR CHANGES OR MORE HOUSES OR THIS OR THAT. SO THERE IS PLENTY OF TIME BUT I WANTED VERY CLEAR. THAT IS WHAT I STATED IT, THESE ARE THE TWO THINGS THAT BOTHER ME PERSONALLY. I DON'T KNOW ABOUT ANYONE ELSE. WHEN THE BCC LOOKS AT THIS, IF YOU ADDRESS THOSE BY THE TIME WE GET THEM, YOU ARE GOING TO SEE THAT IN THE MINUTES. THAT IS MY >> MR. CHAIR, MR. PUCKHABER, MAY I ASK YOU IF YOU CAN CONSIDER A MOTION TO APPROVE WITH TWO CONDITIONS RELATED TO SIGNAGE AND LIGHTING? >> THAT WOULD BE A TURNING QUESTION. CAN WE DO THAT? >> WE HAVE A MOTION ON THE MOTIR AND THE SECOND. >> I CAN RESEND IT. >> OKAY. >> THIS IS FOR STAFF. REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THE LANGUAGE OR LIGHTING IS IN THIS PARTICULAR DOCUMENT, WHEN THEY GO TO ACTUAL CONSTRUCTION AND SO ON AND SO FORTH, DON'T THEY JUST HAVE TO FOLLOW THE? DOESN'T THE COUNTY ENFORCE THAT? >> YOU HAVE TO FOLLOW WHATEVER POLICY IS APPLICABLE. SO THE PUD HAS LANGUAGE. YOU FOLLOW THAT. THEY ARE REQUIRED TO SUBMIT THE SITE PLAN. I'M SORRY, THE LIGHTING PLAN BECAUSE THERE ARE NO TRUE STANDARDS IN THE COUNTY FOR LIGHTING OTHER THAN, IF YOU'RE LOCATED -- >> WE SPECIFICALLY HAVE TO SAY BRANAN FIELD? >> YES. >> THAT WAS MY QUESTION. >> I DON'T OBJECT TO HAVING THAT IN THEIR. THE LIGHTING, WE HAD NOT REALLY GIVEN IT. I DON'T HAVE AN OBJECTION TO THIS. WE HAD NOT GIVEN IT MUCH THOUGHT. IF IT IS AN ESTABLISHED STANDARD THAT YOU HAVE BEING IMPLEMENTED THROUGHOUT THE COUNTY, WE ARE FINE ADDING THAT HERE IF IT MAKES THE BOARD MORE COMFORTABLE. THAT WE WILL COMPLY WITH THAT STANDARD. AS FAR AS THE SIGNS GO, I'M OPEN TO -- I'M REALLY LOOKING FOR A SUGGESTION OF WHAT TO CHANGE THE LANGUAGE TO. REGARDING THE HEIGHT. DESIGN REMINDS ME OF A SIGN I WOULD SEE ON INTERSTATE 95 AND NOT A LOCAL EXPRESSWAY. I ALSO UNDERSTAND YOUR POSITION. THAT IF THE SIGN IS BEING ERECTED BY AN OVERPASS THAT COULD POTENTIALLY BE 25 FEET HIGH, YOU WOULD NEED THE EXTRA HEIGHT. MY PROBLEM WITH IT, I DON'T NECESSARILY OBJECT TO. I KNOW THOSE ARE RENDERINGS AND NOT ACTUALS. BUT TO MR. PUCKHABER'S ARGUMENT EARLIER, YOU PUT IT UP AND SOMEBODY ELSE WILL WANT TO DO IT TOO. THERE IS NO WAY WE CAN GO BACK AT THAT POINT AND SAY, WE CAN'T ALLOW YOU TO DO IT BUT THEY WERE ALLOWED TO DO IT. IT PUTS US IN A PRECARIOUS SITUATION. >> I KNOW WHAT IS BEING ASKED HERE. PERSONALLY, I WOULD LIKE NO SIGN. HOWEVER, A REASONABLE SOLUTION TO IT WOULD BE THE 50 FEET. BECAUSE THAT IS THE HIGHEST SIGN WE ALLOW IN THE COUNTY RIGHT NOW. THAT WE SHOULD NOT ALLOW ANYTHING OVER 50 FEET. >> IF I'M UNDERSTANDING THE LANGUAGE RIGHT, BOTH, THEN BETHE WERE TO MODIFY THE 80, OR 85 -- I BELIEVE IT IS 80. BUT THE MAX HEIGHT, DOWN TO 50 WITH THE UNIFIED SIGN PLAN LANGUAGE IN THEIR, IF I UNDERSTAND IT RIGHT, IF FOR SOME REASON WE FEEL WE NEED A 70-FOOT OR SO, WE HAVE TO COME BACK BEFORE THE BOARD TO DO THAT, RIGHT? IS NOT ALLOWED WITHOUT COMING FOR AN AMENDMENT. IS THAT CORRECT? >> THAT WOULD BE TO THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND NOT TO US. >> I GUESS I WOULD SAY I'M FINE WITH 50 FEET. WITH THE UNIFIED SIGN PLAN [01:55:02] LANGUAGE. >> OKAY. THIS WILL BE WHERE THE TOWN CENTER IS, CORRECT? >> CORRECT. >> THE UNIFIED SIGN PLAN SHOWS WHERE THEY ARE LOCATED. WE ARE FINE RESTRICTING IT DOWN TO A 50-FOOT HEIGHT IF THAT IS THE HEIGHT IN THE COUNTY. >> I DON'T KNOW IF ANYONE HAS ASKED THIS QUESTION BUT IS THIS TOWN CENTER GOING TO BE ANYTHING SIMILAR TO WHAT IS OUT IN OAK LEAF RIGHT NOW OR ST. JOHN'S TOWN CENTER? WILL IT BE SHOPPING? WILL IT BE GROCERIES? WILL IT BE HOME DEPOT, LOWES OR THAT KIND OF THING? WILL IT BE SHOE STORES? WHAT IS THE PLAN FOR THAT? >> YES TO ALL OF THAT. >> THIS IS THE CONSOLIDATED -- I MEAN, THE TOWNCENTER IS VERY LARGE. I'M NOT SAYING IT IS THAT BIG. BUT IT IS A CONSOLIDATED MIXED USE COMMERCIAL PARCEL. RIGHT THERE AROUND ON ALL FOUR CORNERS. >> WE ARE NOT TALKING ABOUT 10 STOREFRONTS. TALKING ABOUT A LITTLE BIT LARGER OR A LOT LARGER. >> EXACTLY. >> WE HAVE MEDICAL USE CONTRACTED. THIS IS OFFICE AND COMMERCIAL RETAIL. AND FRANKLY, WE ARE UNDER CONTRACT FOR THE ] COMMERCIAL. >> I'M FINE WITH THE 50 FEET. >> MR. CHAIR, IF MY SECOND WILL ALLOW IT, I WILL WITHDRAW MY MOTION. I WILL WITHDRAW MY MOTION AND I WILL RESTATE IT. I'M GOING TO TRY TO GET ALL OF THIS IN THERE. I'M GOING TO MOVE THE STAFF REPORT WITH THE FOLLOWING RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CHANGE. ONE IS A MASTERS SIGNING PLAN WILL BE INCLUDED, MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF THE SIGNS WILL BE 50 FEET. HOPEFULLY, THOSE WILL BE VERY LIMITED. THE SECOND THING IS THAT THERE WILL BE A REFERENCE TO FOLLOW THE BRANDON FIELD LIGHTING STANDARDS CLEARLY INCLUDED. AND I THINK THOSE WERE THE REAL TWO POINTS. >> MOTION. SECOND. DISCUSSION. ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. >> OPPOSED. SAME SIGN. >> THANK YOU, SIR. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> THE DISCUSSION. >> SEE YOU ON THE NEXT ONE. >> THE NEXT AGENDA ITEM -- >> RALPH, DO YOU WANT TO REPEAT THAT? >> DO WE NEED THAT SAME LANGUAGE ON THE DEVELOPMENT ORDER, BETH SHIFT? IT HAS THE EXCHANGE TABLES. WE DID NOT TALK ABOUT THE OFFER EXCHANGE TABLES, LAND-USE PHASING, TRANSPORTATION. I DON'T SEE ANYTHING IN HERE REGARDING EITHER LIGHTING OR -- DOES THAT NEED TO BE RECOMMENDED TO BE ADDED TO THIS? OR IS AS FINE AS IT IS? >> I THINK IT IS FINE AS IS. I'M NOT SEEING IT. >> FOR THE RECORD, THE GOVERNOR INCLUDED DETAILS LIKE LIGHTING AND SIGNAGE THAT IS TYPICAL FOR A PUD. >> OKAY. YES, COURTNEY. OKAY. >> WE NEED A RECOMMENDATION FOR THE DEVELOPMENT ORDER. >> TO WE HAVE TO HAVE A PUBLIC HEARING ON THIS? >> WE ALREADY HAD THAT. THIS IS ALL PART OF THE AGENDA ITEM. >> IN THAT CASE, I WILL GO AHEAD AND MOVE THE STAFF REPORT ON 26-01. >> 26,001. SECOND, ANY DISCUSSION? THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. >> OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. [7. Public Hearing to consider PUD 26-0007 and DEV_AGREE2026000002. (District 5, Comm. Burke) (B. Carson). A.  PUD 26-0007 This application is an amendment to the PUD for the Agricola Development. B.  DEV_AGREE2026000002 This application is an amendment to the Development Agreement for the Agricola Development.] >> OKAY. PUBLIC HEARING CONSIDERING P PUD26-0007 >> THANK YOU MR. CHAIR. I FORGOT TO MENTION. BOTH OF THE LAST ITEMS AND THIS ITEM WILL BE GOING TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ON THE 27TH. AGAIN, THE APPLICANTS ARE MILLER AND ROGERS AND TOWERS ARE THE AGENTS FOR THE ITEMS. THIS IS FOR THE AGRICOLA PUD LOCATED SOUTH OF STATE ROUTE 23 [02:00:08] WEST OF U.S. 17, SOUTH OF GOVERNORS PARK. IT IS LOCATED IN THE SPRINGS DISTRICT. COMMISSIONER BURKE'S DISTRICT. THIS INVOLVES FIVE PARCELS. AND THE PUD PROPOSES TO RE- AMEND AND RESTATE THE BEAUTY FOR AGRICOLA DEVELOPMENT ORIGINALLY DEVELOPED UNDER ORDINANCE 202,414, IT HAS HAD A CHANGE IN OWNERSHIP AND THAT IS PART OF THE REASON FOR RESTATING THE PUD. THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT PROPOSES TO AMEND AND RESTATE AS WELL. ON THE LEFT IS THE SITE LOCATION. THEMTHE MAP ON THE RIGHT SHOWS U THE AERIAL. NONE OF THIS HAS BEEN DEVELOPED TO DATE. THE PARCEL NOTIFICATION WITHIN 350 FEET. AGAIN, A LARGE PARTIAL PROJECT. WE ALLOW THE LARGER SIGNS. THE AGRICOLA DEVELOP AND HAS A PRIMARY THOROUGHFARE NETWORK WHICH IS IMPORTANT TO SEE. THIS WAS AN ISSUE WHEN IT WAS APPROVED INITIALLY. THE CONCERN WAS THAT THERE IS NO CONDUCTIVITY TO THE NORTH. THAT HAS BEEN REMEDIED WITH THE CONNECTOR COLLECTOR ROAD THAT WILL BE COMING SOUTH FROM GOVERNORS PARK WHICH WILL ALLOW CONDUCTIVITY BACK-AND-FORTH. THIS APPLICATION WAS PRECEDED BY COMP 2610 WHICH WAS A TEXT AMENDMENT TO REMOVE THE POLICY WHICH WAS A THRESHOLD FOR A TRAFFIC STUDY TO BE SUBMITTED TO THE STATE BY THE 1251ST BUILDING PERMIT. JUST TO GIVE YOU AN UPDATE ON THAT, THERE WERE NO ISSUES ON THE ACTUAL REQUEST, WHICH WAS TO REMOVE THAT POLICY FROM THE COMP PLAN. D.O.T. DID HAVE CONCERNS -- TECHNICAL CONCERNS, ABOUT THE ANALYSIS AND THAT HAS BEEN REMEDIED. THE APPLICANT HAS REVISED THEIR ANALYSIS TAKING INTO CONSIDERATION FDOT'S CONCERNS AND THAT HAS BEEN RESUBMITTED. D.O.T. DID REQUEST ICE AND ALSO SWITCHES INTERSECTION CONTROL EVALUATION. REMEMBER THAT THIS WAS SURROUNDING THE TWO INTERSECTIONS, WHERE THERE WOULD BE ACCESS AT LAUREN CAP -- LONA ROAD AND BELLAMY ROAD. SO D.O.T. IS REQUESTING THERE IS INTERSECTION CONTROL EVALUATION AT THE TIME THE INTERSECTIONS ARE COMING INTO PLAY, BEING DESIGNED. AND THAT REQUIREMENT HAS BEEN INCLUDED TO END THE PUD AS WELL AS THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. BUT AGAIN, D.O.T. HAD NO ISSUES WITH THE REMOVAL OF THE POLICY AND THIS ESSENTIALLY REPLACES IT. THEM UP ON THE LEFT IS THE EXISTING ZONING. THE YELLOW INDICATES IT IS INDISCERNIBLE ] AND AGAIN, IT IS GOING TO PUD. THE MAP ON THE LEFT IS THE REVISED SITE PLAN. IT STILL CONTAINS THE 3145 ACRES AND THE COMMITMENT TO HAVE 50% OF IT AND OPEN SPACE. IT ALSO WILL HAVE A MINIMUM OF 160 ACRES IN COMMON AREAS, 22 OF WHICH WILL BE ACTIVE RECREATION AND THEN 160 ACRES WILL REMAIN PUBLIC RECREATION LAND. THAT WAS ALL PART OF THE ORIGINAL. NOTHING HAS CHANGED. THE ORIGINAL LAND USES ARE AT THE FIRST TABLE. TIMING WAS BROKEN OUT OVER SIX PHASES AND THE REVISED IS DOWN BELOW. WE HAVE SOME SLIGHT CHANGES. THE HOUSING NUMBERS HAVE NOT CHANGED. THE INDUSTRIAL WAS REMOVED. I'M SORRY. WAS REDUCED. JUST SLIGHTLY. YOU HAD A MILLION AND OFFICE ANX LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AND NOW YOU HAVE ROUGHLY 700,000 IN LIGHT INDUSTRIAL. SO REDUCED A LITTLE BIT BUT YOU HAVE THE PETERS CREEK BUSINESS PARK NEARBY. >> THE PRIOR ACTION ON SEPTEMBEC VOTED 6-0 TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL. THE STAFF'S REVIEW OF THIS, THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING AN AMENDMENT TO THE PUD TO UPDATED BASED ON THE NEW OWNERSHIP AND THE DESIRED CONDUCTIVITY THAT IS NOW AVAILABLE TO THE ADJACENT DEVELOPMENT AND LARGER TRANSPORTATION NETWORK. STAFF FUNDS THE REVISED PUD CARRIES FORWARD THE INTENT OF THE ORIGINAL PUD AND RECOMMENDS APPROVAL PUD 26-07. REGARDING THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, STAFF HAS REVIEWED THIS AND FOUND THAT HONORS THE PRIOR COMMITMENTS OF THE PUD AND THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT PLANS AND AGAIN, THE ICE ANALYSIS HAS BEEN INCLUDED IN THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE FUTURE. WITH THAT, STAFF RECOMMENDS APPROVAL OF AGREEMENT 260,002. [02:05:08] THE APPLICANT ALSO HAS A PRESENTATION. DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? >> ANY QUESTIONS FROM STAFF? >> OKAY. >> GOOD EVENING. IS IT POSSIBLE TO GET IT ON THE SCREEN AS WELL? >> OKAY. ARE YOU GUYS ABLE TO SEE IT. OKAY. GOOD EVENING. I'M KC INDISCERNIBLE ] AND MILLER. THIS IS FOR THE PUD MODIFICATION AND THE AMENDED AND RESTATED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR AGRICOLA. WE HAVE THE SAME TEAM MEMBERS HERE AS WE HEAD FOR THE PRIOR APPLICATION INCLUDING KEVIN KRAMER FROM BTI PARTNERS, THE MASTER DEVELOPER. FROM ETM, WE HAVE MYSELF, HUGH MATTHEWS, REED MCDANIEL WHO IS THE PROJECT ENGINEER, THOMAS HATCHER, THE TRAFFIC ENGINEER AND RACE BUFFER. ALSO FROM ROGERS TOWERS, WE HAVE ELLEN APPLICATION THAT IS A COMPANION TO COMPETENCE OF PLAN TEXT A MINUTE THAT CAME TO YOU OVER THE SUMMER. WE ALSO HAVE THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT MODIFICATION THAT IS PRESENTED TODAY IN THE PUD MODIFICATION. IN COMBINATION, THE PURPOSE OF THESE THREE APPLICATIONS IS TO REEVALUATE THE TRAFFIC WITH CONNECTIVITY TO GOVERNORS PARK. CLARIFY AND SUPPLIED THE DEVELOPMENT CRITERIA FOR AGRICOLA AND MAINTAIN THE OPEN SPACE AND BUFFER COMMITMENTS. TOUCHING ON THAT QUICKLY BEFORE WE CAN BEGIN, AND BETH DID TOUCH ON THIS SO I WILL GO QUICK. THE ORIGINAL AGRICOLA DEVELOPMENT HAD A COMMITMENT TO MAINTAIN 50% OF THE PROPERTY AND STEWARDSHIP WHICH EQUATED TO APPROXIMATELY 1550 ACRES. WE ARE MAINTAINING THAT. 320 ACRES OF PUBLIC RECREATION LAND WHICH IS BEING MAINTAINED AND THE GREENWAY CORRIDORS. NONE OF THAT IS CHANGING. WE ALSO HAD A COMMITMENT FOR A NO BUILD ZONE ADJACENT TO THE HOLLER AIRPARK TO HELP WITH THE HEIGHT LIMITATION FOR THE APPROACHING OF THE AIRPLANES TO THE LANDING STRIP. THAT IS NOT GOING AWAY. WE ALSO HAD A 300-FOOT BUFFER FROM THE AIRPARK AND THAT IS BEING MAINTAINED. IN ADDITION, THE DEVELOPER WILL MAINTAIN A WALKABLE PEOPLE FIRST COMMUNITY AND HAVE UNIFIED COMMUNITY CONTROL THROUGH HOA COVENANTS AND RESTRICTIONS, PRODUCT BLEND AND A LIMITED UNIT COUNT TO WHAT WAS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED. ONE THING THAT HAS CHANGED SINCE THIS PREVIOUSLY WENT THROUGH WAS PTI HAS PURCHASED GOVERNORS PARK AND AGRICOLA. WHEN AGRICOLA ORIGINALLY CAME THROUGH, THE STAFF HERE AT CLAY COUNTY WANTED TO SEE AN INTERCONNECTED ROADWAY FROM AGRICOLA UP TO GOVERNORS PARK. THERE WERE TWO SEPARATE OWNERSHIP SAID THAT TIME AND THEY CANNOT REACH AN AGREEMENT TO DO THAT. SO AGRICOLA WAS APPROVED WITH ACCESS TO AND FROM 17. ONE OF THE FIRST THINGS THAT PTI DID AS THEY BROUGHT THEIR PROPERTY UNDER THE OWNERSHIP. THEY EVALUATED GOOD MASTER PLANNING AND WANTED TO PROVIDE FOR THE INNER CONDUCTIVITY. SO THEY CONDUCTED A TRAFFIC STUDY. THAT BROUGHT US TO WHERE WE ARE TODAY. THE TRAFFIC STUDY REVIEWED HAVING THE INTERCONNECTIVITY BETWEEN AGRICOLA AND GOVERNORS PARK. WHEN THEY PROVIDED THE CONNECTION BETWEEN THE TWO DEVELOPMENTS, IT SHOWED THAT THERE WAS NO LEVEL OF SERVICE FAILURES ATTRIBUTABLE TO THE AGRICOLA PROJECT BY MAKING THAT CHANGE. AS PART OF THAT, THE TRAFFIC STUDY HAD FINDINGS THAT THE AGRICOLA DEVELOPMENT SHOULD PLAN TO CONSTRUCT THE CENTRAL SPINE ROAD MAKING THAT CONNECTION TO GOVERNORS PARK AND PUSH IT OUT TO 17 PRIOR TO PHASE THREE DEVELOPMENT. IT ALSO FOUND THAT THERE MAY BE A NEED TO EXPLAIN PORTION OF CLAY DAIRY PARKWAY FROM MEDALLION BOULEVARD WHICH IS THE ROAD THAT STEMS DOWN FROM CLAY DAIRY PARKWAY AND UP TO THE FIRST COAST EXPRESSWAY AND INTERSECTION CONTROL EVALUATIONS AT THE CONNECTIONS TO 17. >> ONE OF THE GREAT THINGS ABOUT HAVING A MASTER DEVELOPER WHO HAS THE OPPORTUNITY YOU'D TO CONTROL THE ENTIRE CORE DOOR, IS THAT YOU GET GREAT PLANNED ROADS. AS A RESULT, WE STILL HAVE A MULTITUDE OF ROADS GOING IN BETWEEN THE GOVERNORS PARK PROJECT AND THE AGRICOLA PROJECT WHICH WILL BE FUNDED BY THE DEVELOPER AND AVAILABLE FOR POTENTIAL SO ON THE LEFT, YOU HAVE THE EXISTING PUD THAT WAS APPROVED BY THE BOARD A COUPLE YEARS AGO AND ON THE RIGHT, YOU HAVE WHAT [02:10:02] IS PROPOSED. WHAT YOU ARE GOING TO SEE HERE IS THE ACCESS FROM AGRICOLA HAS CHANGED. PREVIOUSLY, AGRICOLA HAD TWO ACCESS LOCATIONS ON 17. ALL THE TRAFFIC CAME IN FROM 17 AND EXITED AT 17. AND IT ALSO HAD A LOOP ROAD THAT CAME FROM A DIRT ROAD THAT IS SOUTH OF THE HISTORIC BELLAMY ROAD. IT IS NOT HISTORIC BELLAMY ROAD BUT IT IS A ROAD FURTHER TO THE SOUTH OF THAT AND IT ALSO HAD AN OPTION FOR ALL THE TRAFFIC TO PUSH OUT AT LONO ROAD. WITH THE MODIFICATION, THE TRAFFIC STUDY NOW HAS THE ACCESS OUT TO 17 ON THE NORTHERN END OF THE PROPERTY AND GOES UP NORTH INTO GOVERNORS PARK. THERE IS ALSO AN AXIS LOCATION DONNA LEE NOT ROAD TO ACCESS THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE PROPERTY. YOU NO LONGER HAVE THE ROADWAY CONNECTION THAT GOES THROUGH THE AIRPORT BUFFER OR THE NO HEIGHT ZONE. ALTHOUGH THERE MAY STILL BE A NEED TO CONNECT IN THE FUTURE BUT AS OF RIGHT NOW, THERE IS NOTHING PLANNED TO OCCUR THERE. PREVIOUSLY, ALSO, THE PUD HAD AN EDUCATIONAL HUB SETTLEMENT TYPE. AND IT ALSO HAD THE INNOVATION SETTLEMENT TYPE. WITH THIS MODIFICATION, WE HAVE COMBINED THE TWO. BECAUSE THE PREVIOUS EDUCATIONAL HUB WAS INTENDED FOR A MAYO CLINIC OR COLLEGE CAMPUS OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT TO COME IN. BUT THERE IS NOT A MARKET DEMAND FOR THAT. WE HAVE NOT ELIMINATED THOSE USES FROM THE PUD BUT INSTEAD COMBINED IT WITH THE INNOVATION DISTRICT. SO IF SOMEONE WERE TO COME IN THE FUTURE, THAT WOULD BE AN OPPORTUNITY. ALSO, AS BETH PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED, THE PUD WILL MAINTAIN ITS 4000 DWELLING UNITS. BUT WE DID REDUCE THE NONRESIDENTIAL INTENSITY FROM APPROXIMATELY 1.9 MILLION SQUARE FEET, TO ABOUT 950,000 SQUARE FEET. AND THE PURPOSE OF THAT IS THAT WE NOW HAVE THE CONDUCTIVITY WITH GOVERNORS PARK WHO WILL BE THE CENTRAL HUB OF ALL OF THE JOB CREATION. IT WILL HAVE ALL THE GOODS AND SERVICES THAT WILL BE NEEDED FOR THE AGRICOLA COMMUNITY. SO THE MEMBERS WILL BE ABLE TO TRAVEL UP THE SPINE ROAD TO GOVERNORS PARK TO GET WHAT THEY NEED. ALTHOUGH THE VILLAGE CENTER IN AGRICOLA WILL STILL ALLOW FOR SOME NONRESIDENTIAL USES, FURTHER NEIGHBORHOOD USES. THEY WILL HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY FOR A NEIGHBORHOOD MARKET OR GROCERY STORE AND THINGS OF THAT TYPE. SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT D.O.T. CAME BACK WITH AFTER THEY REVIEWED THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT YOU GUYS TRANSMITTED PREVIOUSLY IS THAT THEY WANTED SOME OF THE CONDITIONS THAT WERE OUTLINED IN THE TRAFFIC STUDY TO BE MEMORIALIZED IN THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. SO AS PART OF THAT, YOUR AMENDED AND RESTATED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WHICH WAS INCLUDED IN YOUR PACKAGES, INCLUDED A COUPLE OF ADDITIONS. ONE OF THOSE ADDITIONS IS THAT PRIOR TO THE 2251ST RESIDENTIAL PERMIT, THE CENTRAL SPINE ROAD WILL CONNECT TO OUT TO U.S. 17. SO THAT IS THE GLOWING RED FAT -- ROAD AND RED IN YELLOW. THE PORTION SHOWN AND RED WILL BE FOUR LANES AND THE PORTION IN YELLOW WILL BE A MINIMUM OF TWO LANES. PICK THE SECOND COMMITMENT INCLUDED IN THERE WAS BELLAMY, OR THE MASTER DEVELOPER, WILL BE REQUIRED TO CONSTRUCT A THIRD NORTHBOUND LANE ONTO THE GREEN COAST SPRINGS BROADWAY TO THE FIRST COAST EXPRESSWAY. THIS IS HIGHLIGHTED IN PINK AT THE GOVERNORS PARK PORTION OF THE DEVELOPMENT. ALSO, PART OF THE REQUIREMENT IS THAT THE DEVELOPER WILL BE REQUIRED TO CONSTRUCT DUAL TURN LANES ON AND OFF THE INTERCHANGE LAMPS PRIOR TO THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE PHASE FOUR DEVELOPMENT FOR AGRICOLA. UNLESS OTHERWISE APPROVED BY D.O.T. THEY MIGHT HAVE ANOTHER IDEA IN THE FUTURE BUT THIS IS WHAT THE IDEA IS CURRENTLY. AND THE THIRD THING THAT THE D.O.T. ASKED US TO INCLUDE IN THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, WHERE WE HAVE THE RED DOTS, IS THAT WE WILL BE COORDINATING WITH THEM THROUGHOUT THE LIFE OF THE PROJECT. 'S AT THE TIME WE PUT IN THE CONNECTION AT 17, ON EITHER END, OR BOTH, DEPENDING ON THE TIMING, AT BOTH TIMES WE MAKE THOSE CONNECTIONS, WE WILL BE REQUIRED TO COORDINATE WITH D.O.T., CONDUCT A CONTROL OF VALUATION ANALYSIS TO DETERMINE THE SIGNAL IS A SHOWN ASIAN ANDE INTERSECTION NEEDS TO LOOK LIKE AND JUST OVERALL COORDINATION WITH D.O.T. SO THAT THEY WILL STILL BE PART OF THE PROJECT AS IT MOVES FORWARD THROUGHOUT ITS LIFE. LASTLY, WHAT WE ARE HERE FOR TODAY, IS A RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL. THE AGRICOLA PUD MODIFICATION ON THE AMENDED AND RESTATED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. THESE APPLICATIONS MEMORIALIZE THE COMMITMENTS OF THE -- RELATED TO THE EVALUATION OF TRAFFIC INCLUDING THE CONDUCTIVITY WITH GOVERNORS PARK AND THEY CLARIFY AND SUBDIVIDE THE DEVELOPMENT CRITERIA WHICH I [02:15:03] THINK YOUR STAFF DOES YOU CAN LOOK TO YOURSELF TO CONFIRM THAT IS TRUE. AND IT MAINTAINS THE COMMITMENTS FOR OPEN SPACE, BUFFERS AND WALKABILITY. I WILL GO AHEAD AND NOTE THAT THERE IS NO LIGHTING STANDARDS IN AGRICOLA. ONE OF THE THINGS WE WILL GO AHEAD AND OFFER TODAY IS THAT WE WILL ADD IN THE LIGHTING STANDARDS TO MEET THE CRITERIA FOR THE BRANAN FIELD OVERLAY. THAT IS ALL I HAVE. I. I WILL STAND BY FOR ANY QUESTIONS. >> I JUST HAVE ONE. >> WHEN AGRICOLA WAS FIRST PROPOSED, THEY TALKED ABOUT THE AG ARMS THINGS. I. I FORGET WHAT THEY CALL THEM. TRANEIGHT HOOD. IS THAT MAINTAIN? >> 'S STEWARDSHIP DISTRICT ALLOWS FOR THE AGRICULTURAL USES. IT IS ENCOURAGED. AND IT WOULD ALLOW FOR THE ACTIVITIES TO TAKE PLACE WHERE YOU WOULD HAVE A NEIGHBORHOOD. AND INSTEAD OF A TYPICAL AMENITY CENTER, IT WOULD BE FARMING. SIMILAR TO WHAT YOU HAVE AT SARATOGA SPRINGS FURTHER TO THE NORTH. >> THAT IS ALL. >> THANK YOU. >> I WILL OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING. I DON'T HAVE ANY CARDS ON THIS AGENDA ITEM. >> YES SIR. MR. ROSENBERG. >> THE ONLY OTHER GREAT THING ON THIS. THE LANGUAGE FOR GOVERNORS PARK. >> GIVE US YOUR NAME AND WHY YOU ARE HERE. >> ANTHONY ROSEMARY, FIRE MARSHAL FOR CLAY COUNTY. WE ARE HERE BECAUSE SOME OF THE DIAGRAMS FOR THE ROADWAYS THROUGHOUT AGRICOLA IS SHOWING 20-FOOT WIDE ROADWAYS. 10-FOOT WIDE ACCESS ROADS. AT GOVERNORS PARK, THERE 24-FOOT WIDE ROADWAYS AND 25-FOOT ACCESS ROADS. THIS SHOULD BE ABLE TO MAKE AN ADJUSTMENT. THE SAME LANGUAGE FOR GOVERNORS PARK AS FAR AS FIRE DEPARTMENT ACCESS ROADS. JUST ASKING FOR THAT TO BE TRANSFERRED OVER TO AGRICOLA. >> WITH THE MORE NARROW ROADS, IF ANYONE IS ON THE ROAD, HE WOULD HAVE TROUBLE GETTING TO A FIRE, WOULDN'T YOU? >> YES SIR. AND THERE IS A TENDENCY IN SOME OF THE EXISTING NEIGHBORHOODS THAT WE HAVE SEEN WHERE IT'S NOT DESIGNED FOR PEOPLE TO PARK ON THE SIDE OF THE ROAD BUT THEY DO DO. WHEN THEY DO, IT CREATES ISSUES FOR US. >> TALKING ABOUT A DIFFERENCE OF 4 FEET? >> YES SIR. >> ISN'T 24 FEET THE NEW ZONING REQUIREMENT FOR A NEW ROAD NEW D CONSTRUCTION? >> YES BUT WE ARE TALKING ALLEYS. >> SORRY. >> THE NICE THING ABOUT THE LANGUAGE AT GOVERNORS PARK IS A DEFER TO THE CURRENT LDC AND THE FIRE PREVENTION CODE. AND IT IS NICE THE WAY THEY WORDED IT. IT GIVES YOU ROOM FOR A LITTLE BIT OF DISCUSSION SO THEY CAN WORK THROUGH SOME THINGS. AGAIN, THAT IS KIND OF WHAT WE ARE ASKING FOR IN THIS PROJECT. THE SAME THING. DOES THE ABILITY TO BE ABLE TO TALK THROUGH SOME OF THESE THINGS. >> HOW WOULD WE MAKE THAT ADJUSTMENT? >> WOULD BE A RECOMMENDATION OR WOULD IT BE AN AMENDMENT? HOW DO WE DO THAT? >> IT IS PART OF YOUR RECOMMENDATION ALONG WITH THE LIGHTING. >> THANK YOU. OKAY. >> GOOD CATCH. THANK YOU. >> PUBLIC HEARING? >> WEEK. DOES ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM? SEEING NONE, I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. >> THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. I THINK IN RELATION TO THE ALLEYS, ONE OF THE THINGS WE HAVE DESIGNED IT -- WHEN YOU HAVE THE ALLEY ACCESS, THAT IS TYPICALLY BEHIND THE HOME AND YOU HAVE A STANDARD ROAD IN FRONT OF THOSE. SO THE ALLEY IS A SECONDARY AXIS WHERE THE GARAGE IS AND WHERE THE VEHICULAR ACCESS WOULD BE. ONE THING WE WOULD LIKE TO MAINTAIN IS SAFETY FOR OUR COMMUNITY AND HAVING A HIERARCHY OF STREETS. SO BY HAVING THE LARGER ROADWAY AT THE FRONT OF THE HOME, IT WOULD ALLOW THE FIRE ENGINES TO HAVE ACCESS TO THOSE HOMES. THEY WOULD BE WHERE THE FIRE HYDRANTS WILL BE LOCATED. THE FIRE HYDRANTS WILL BE LOCATED AT THE ALLEYS AND THE HOSES WOULD BE LONG ENOUGH TO WRAP AROUND THE BUILDINGS AS REQUIRED BY NFPA. THOSE ARE THE THINGS HE WOULD LIKE YOU TO CONSIDER. THE HIERARCHY OF THE ROADWAY [02:20:02] SYSTEMS, MAINTAINING SAFETY. ONE OF THE ISSUES WITH HAVING 2Y IS THAT PEOPLE ARE GOING TO BE MORE INCLINED TO DRIVE FASTER ON THE ROADWAY. YOU WILL HAVE CHILDREN PLAYING AND CARS PARKED. IT JUST DOESN'T SEEM LIKE IT WOULD BE THE SAFEST OPTION. >> KEVIN KRAMER, BT OF PARTNERS. MY ADDRESS IS ON RECORD. RETAR ENGINEER. WHO IS DESIGNING THE ROADS? >> DANIEL WITH ATM. I THINK THE QUESTION IS IN REGARDS TO THE ACTUAL WIDTH OF THE ROADWAY. ACCORDING TO NFPA, WE ARE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE A 20-FOOT UNOBSTRUCTED WIDTH. THAT IS THE STANDARD WE ARE TRYING TO FOLLOW. IN ALL CASES, ON ALL ROADS. IN PARTICULAR, EVEN ON THE ALLEY ROADS, WE ARE STILL PROVIDING THE 20 FEET OF UNOBSTRUCTED WIDTH FROM FACE OF CURB, TO FACE OF CURVED. THERE ISN'T ANYTHING LESS THAN THE 20 FEET MINIMUM. AND IN ADDITION TO THAT, A LOT OF THE RESIDENTIAL STREETS -- AND I DON'T KNOW IF THIS IS NECESSARILY IN THE TEXT. BUT THE INTENTION AND THE RESIDENTIAL STREETS IS TO ACTUALLY PROVIDE A SLIGHTLY WIDER SECTION AS WELL, TO HAVE 13-FOOT LANES. IF THERE ARE PEOPLE PARKING ON THE STREET, THERE IS ADDITIONAL SPACE FOR EMERGENCY VEHICLES AND OTHERS TO DRIVE THROUGH WITHOUT HAVING TO DO THE CONSTANT INDISCERNIBLE ] THAT YOU SEE IN THESE TYPES OF COMMUNITIES. >> THE LANGUAGE -- WHAT DOES OUR LANGUAGE SAY FOR THE ALLEYS? THAT THE FIRE MARSHAL WANTS TO CHANGE? >> I HAVE A FEELING WE ARE ALREADY MEETING IT IN OUR DESIGN DESIGN. >> IF THE MAIN ACCESS ROADS, AS HE IS SAYING, ARE THE ONES IN THE FRONT AND THE ALLEYS ARE ACCESSED, AGAIN, WE CAN WORK WITH THAT. I THINK THE LANGUAGE AND SOME OF THAT SAID THE ALLEYWAY WOULD BE THE MAIN ENTRANCE INTO -- >> THE GARAGE IS. >> IF THAT IS THE WAY WE ARE GOING, IT WILL HAVE TO BE ADDRESSED. THE MAIN ADDRESS IS OUT ON THE MAIN ROAD. WE CAN WORK WITH YOU ON THE ALLEYWAYS. >> THE MAIN ACCESS INTO THE GARAGES ARE THE ALLEYS. BUT WHEN IT IS AN ALLEY LOT, THERE IS A ROAD IN THE FRONT AND THE GARAGE IS FACING BACKWARDS TO THE ALLEY. >> THE ADDRESS ON THE SCREEN WE HAVE BEEN GOING TO IS >> CORRECT. ON THE STREET. >> AGAIN, WE CAN WORK WITH YOU ON THE ALLEY SIZE. >> WE WOULD ALSO BE HAPPY TO TAKE YOU THE ALLEY OPTIONS WITH THE FRONT DOOR IS ON THE MAIN STREET, IF YOU'RE INTERESTED. >> JUST SO THERE IS NO CONFUSION, THE MAIN STREET IS 2. THE MAIN STREET IS 24 FEET. >> MINIMUM. >> OKAY. >> SO EVERYBODY IS HAPPY WITH THAT? >> SO WE ARE GOING TO 24? >> DOES IT NOT SAY THAT? >> IT SAYS THAT FOR THE STREET. >> THEY HAVE TO BE 12-FOOT ROADWAYS SO THAT IS 24 FEET. >> WE WILL MAKE THAT CHANGE. >> THE PROBLEM WITH THAT THE NARROW STREETS IS WHEN TWO CARS PARKED LIKE THIS, AND I HAD SOMEONE IN MY FAMILY HAVE THIS PROBLEM IN THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD. AND THE EMERGENCY VEHICLES COULD NOT GET THROUGH THE STREET AT 1:30 IN THE MORNING. AND THEY ARE WAKING PEOPLE UP IN THEIR HOMES TO GET THE CARS MOVED SO THE EMERGENCY VEHICLES COULD GET THROUGH. SO IT IS REALLY IMPORTANT TO MAKE SURE THERE IS PROPER ACCESS FOR THESE EMERGENCY VEHICLES TO GET THROUGH. >> WE AGREE. I WANT TO MAKE SURE THE LANGUAGE THING THE RIGHT THING. AND HERE, ARE WE SPECIFIC ABOUT A STREET AND ROAD? AND THE ALLEY? >> WE DO HAVE -- THERE IS A STREET AND THERE IS AN ALLEY SECTION. THERE IS ALSO A FIRE EMERGENCY ACCESS SECTION AS WELL. >> I WOULD JUST SAY -- IN CASE IT DOESN'T SAY THAT, ALL OF THE STREETS OR ROADS AS DEFINED IN HERE ARE A MINIMUM OF 24 FEET. >> IT CURRENTLY DOES SAY 20 AND I WILL MAKE THE ADJUSTMENT TO BE 24 FEET AND I CAN PROVIDE THAT TO YOU TOMORROW. >> I THINK THIS -- 20 WAS THE [02:25:03] ORIGINAL PUD. THAT IS WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY APPROVED. I KNOW WE ARE DESIGNING IT IS 24 ALREADY. >> OKAY. WE AGREE TO THAT CHANGE. >> THANK YOU. >> ALL RIGHT. PUBLIC HEARING. BACK TO US. >> DO A MOTION? >> IF WE ARE READY FOR IT. >> I'M READY. LET ME SEE IF WE CAN GET IT. WE ARE GOING TO MOVE APPROVAL OF THE STAFF REPORT WITH THE FOLLOWING CHANGES, RECOMMENDATIONS. THAT BRANAN LIGHTING STANDARDS WILL BE MEMORIALIZED OR ADDED INTO THE DOCUMENT. SO WE GET THE LIGHTING. AND THEN, I'M GOING TO PUT IT IN THE MOTION EVEN THOUGH I KNOW IT IS GOING TO HAPPEN, THAT ALL ROADWAYS WILL BE A MINIMUM OF 2L MAKE THAT CHANGE ANYWAY. >> THAT CAPTURES IT. >> I THINK THAT IS ALL WE NEEDED IN THIS ONE. >> I WILL SECOND THE. >> MOTION SECONDED. ANY DISCUSSION? >> THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. >> OPPOSED. SAME SIGN. AND WE NEED THE ] ORDER, RIGHT, BOTH? >> THIS ONE HAS A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT TOO. >> >> I WILL GO AHEAD AND MOVE THE STAFF REPORT ON THIS LONG NUMBER, THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. DEV >> AS STATED. >> MOTION. SECOND ON THE DEVELOPMENT ORDER. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR, SAY AYE. OPPOSED, SAME SIGN. >> MR. CHAIR, CAN I SAY SOMETHING WHILE WE HAVE THE INTENTION -- ATTENTION OF THE MAIN MAN HERE? >> SURE. >> I'M ALSO QUITE CONCERNED, AS I THINK MANY PEOPLE IN THE COUNTY ARE, THE WE KIND OF EASED OUT THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING ISSUE OUT OF GOVERNORS PARK. AND WHILE I'VE GOT YOUR EAR, I WOULD REALLY HOPE THAT YOU GUYS LOOK INTO THE, THAT WE DO SOMETHING, OR YOU DO SOMETHING TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING ISSUES. THERE WAS A COMMITMENT THAT IS GONE NOW. I SO THAT SAW THAT IT WAS REMOV. I MENTIONED THIS LAST TIME WE LOOKED AT THIS. IF YOU HAVE MORE LAND AND YOU ARE GOING TO HOPEFULLY HAVE BIGGER LOTS OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, WE DO ALLOW ADU'S IN THIS COMMUNITY, OR THIS COUNTY, WHICH IS AN EXCELLENT WAY TO HAVE A SECONDARY BUILDING ON THE SAME PARCEL THAT CAN BE RENTED OUT. IT IS EXCELLENT FOR SINGLE MOTHERS WITH CHILDREN AND THAT KIND OF THING. SO I JUST WANTED -- WHILE I HAVE YOUR ATTENTION. THANK YOU. >> MR. CHAIR, MAY I? >> I WANTED TO LET YOU KNOW THAT AGRICOLA DOES ALLOW FOR ADU'S AND WE PUT IN IT CONDITION THAT THE ADU'S BE ALLOWED TO BE CONSTRUCTED AT THE SAME TIME AS THE PRIMARY RESIDENCE SO IT DOES NOT REQUIRE THE HOMESTEAD. SO IT WOULD BE PERMITTED FOR THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING. SO YOU WILL SEE SOME OF THE. >> THANK YOU. EXCELLENT. [8. Public Hearing to consider COMP 26-0024 (District 4, Comm. Condon) (D. Selig)This application is a Small-Scale Comprehensive Plan Amendment to the 2045 Future Land Use Map (FLUM). The application would change a single parcel of land from Branan Field Rural Suburbs (BF-RS) to Branan Field Master Planned Community (BF-MPC).] >> OKAY. >> GOOD EVENING. THIS IS A SMALL SALE COMP PLAN COMP 2624. IT WILL BE HEARD BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ON OCTOBER 27TH. APPLICANT IS MR. TRAVIS SIMPSON WITH THE PROPERTY IS A SINGLE PARCEL ON THE WEST -- WEST SIDE OF INDISCERNIBLE ] MURRAY ROAD HALFWAY BETWEEN OLD JENNINGS AND HILLS DISTRICT WHICH IS COMMISSIONER CONDON'S DISTRICT. THE NAVIGATION WOULD CHANGE THE FUTURE LAND USE FROM BRANDON FIELD RURAL OF SUBURBS TO BRANDON FIELD MASTER-PLANNED COMMUNITY. SIGNAGE WAS PLACED AND MAIL OUTS WENT OUT TO THE BUDDING PROPERTY OWNERS, AS YOU CAN SEE ON THE MAP. AND WE HAVE QUITE A FEW PROPERTY OWNERS THAT WERE NOTIFIED THAT FELL INTO THAT BUFFER AREA. THE PROPERTY HERE IS, THE PARCEL IS THE RED HATCH ON THE LEFT AND WE HAVE IT IN THE YELLOW ON THE RIGHT. [02:30:03] YOU CAN SEE THE EAST SIDE OF THE PARCEL. THE LEFT, WE HAVE THE EXISTING FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION WHICH IS THE RURAL SUBURBS WHICH IS THE PEACH COLOR. ON THE RIGHT, WE HAVE THE PROPOSED. THE MASTER-PLANNED COMMUNITY IS THE DARK BROWN COLOR. WE HAVE ANOTHER AREA OFF OF OLD JENNINGS IF YOU CONTINUE NORTH ON ALLEY MURRAY, ALLIE MURRAY, E DISTRICT. THIS IS THE ZONING MAP FOR BRANDON FIELD. EVERYTHING IS THE BRANDON FIELD PUD. THE ITEM WENT TO AUGUST 31ST TO THE OAK LEAF CAC. THEY VOTED 4-WANT TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE ITEM. THEY HAD A CONDITION THAT THE SOUTH ENTRANCE TO AZALEA RIDGE SHOULD BE USED ONLY FOR EMERGENCY SERVICES. STAFF LOOKED AT THE CRITERIA AND FOUND I WILL BACK UP TO THE AERIAL TO EXPLAIN THE COMMENT THAT WAS MADE. I CAN'T POINT TO THE MAP BEHIND YOU LIKE I USUALLY DO. YOU CAN SEE GREEN RIVER GREEN RS THE ROAD ALONG THERE. AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE YELLOW BOX, THERE IS A WHITE LINE THAT COMES DOWN TO GREEN RIVERPLACE. THAT WAS THE INTENDED CONNECTION. YOU KNOW OUR CODE, ESPECIALLY IN THE MASTER PLAN, REQUIRES CONDUCTIVITY BETWEEN SUBDIVISIONS ALONG THE PERIPHERALS. SO THAT WAS AN INTENDED FUTURE CONNECTION THAT THE APPLICANT HAD STATED TO STAFF WHEN THEY FIRST APPLIED WOULD BE A POTENTIAL FIRE CONNECTION THAT COULD THEN BE NEGATED BY FIRE GIVEN THE ACCESS. THEY, MEANING THE APPLICANT, IS GOING TO HAVE TO PROVIDE A SECONDARY ACCESS IN SOME FASHION. AND SO, THAT WAS I THINK WHERE THE COMMENT CAME FROM. CERTAINLY THE CAC CHAIR COULD GIVE YOU MORE DETAIL. I THOUGHT I WOULD USE THAT MAP TO KIND OF EXPLAIN WHERE THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT. >> SO THE SUBDIVISION TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER, THAT IS INDISCERNIBLE ] RIDGE? >> YES. >> AND WE HAD ONE LETTER THAT CAME IN THAT I PASSED OUT THAT WAS IN OPPOSITION FROM A LOCAL RESIDENT. >> DOES EVERYONE HAVE THAT LETTER? >> YES. >> ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? >> JUST ONE. WHEN I LOOK AT THE, WHAT YOU JUST REFERENCED, DODI, THAT IS ALREADY PLOTTED AS A ROAD AND THE OTHER SUBDIVISION, RIGHT, WITH THE INTENTION THAT IT WOULD CONNECT TO THE PROPERTY. >> RIGHT. IT WAS A REQUIREMENT WHEN AZALEA WAS CREATED, THAT THERE BE CONDUCTIVITY. >> OKAY. >> I WOULD LIKE TO -- IF THE CAC INDIVIDUALS ARE HERE, THE OBJECTION, THERE WAS A 4-1 VOTE. I WOULD BE CONCERNED WITH WHAT THE ONE OBJECTION WAS. >> GOOD EVENING AGAIN. STEVE VAN BLOOM. OAKLEAF BRANAN RIDGE CAC. TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, THE NO VOTE ON THE RECOMMENDATION WAS BASED OFF OF A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT THINGS. ONE OF THEM WAS FROM -- BASED OFF OF THE APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION. THEY SAID THAT WHEN ASKED ABOUT CONVERSATIONS WITH THE NEIGHBORING MEMBERS OF THE ROAD, THEY SAID THERE WAS QUITE A BIT OF -- FEEDBACK ABOUT THE NEW DEVELOPMENT. SECONDLY, THE -- THERE WAS ALSO CONCERN BASED OFF THE ROAD PLAN BECAUSE THERE WAS A PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OF THE STREET OF ALLIE MURRAY TO BE PAVED. AND THE PLAN THAT THE GENTLEMAN GAVE US WAS THERE IS NO SET OWNERSHIP ON THE ROAD. BECAUSE SOME OF THE PROPERTY LINES GO TO WHERE THE ROAD IS. SO WITH THAT ALONE, THE PERSON THAT VOTED NO SAID THEY DIDN'T FEEL COMFORTABLE APPROVING THAT UNTIL IT WAS ADDRESSED AND SORTED OUT. AND THEN, THE CONDITION IS, WE FELT THAT IF THAT PROPERTY DID [02:35:01] CONNECT WITH THE AZALEA RIDGE DEVELOPMENT, IT WOULD JUST BE A THOROUGHFARE AND I THINK A LOT OF THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE THERE WOULDN'T REALLY APPRECIATE THAT. I KNOW IF I LIVED THERE, I WOULD NOT APPRECIATE THAT. >> ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? >> NO. >> ONE QUESTION. THE CONNECTING ROAD, IS THERE A DIRECT LINE OF SIGHT? NOT NECESSARILY SIGHT, BUT PATH FROM THE PROPOSED NEIGHBORHOOD THROUGH THE RESIDENTIAL AREA TO A FEEDER ROAD? IS THAT THE CONCERN? >> YES SIR. ALTHOUGH YOU BUILD IT TO BE TOWARDS THE THURSDAY AGREEMENT WAS -- THE CONVERSATION WENT, IF YOU PUT THAT IN THEIR PLACE DOES AN EMERGENCY ROAD FOR A FIRE SERVICE TO GET THROUGH, THAT WOULD BE SATISFACTORY TO OUR CONCERNS. BUT IF IT WERE SOMETHING THAT THE RESIDENTS COULD ACCESS AND GO IN AND OUT OF THAT DIRECTION, IT TURNS INTO A THOROUGHFARE THROUGH THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO GET FROM ONE AREA TO ANOTHER AND WE BELIEVE THAT PROPER TRANSPORTATION WILL GO ON THE AROUND. >> THE QUESTION IS, IF WE TREATED AS AN EMERGENCY ROAD, HOW DO YOU RESTRICT TO THE FOR R EMERGENCY USE ONLY? >> A GATE. >> THERE IS NO GATE. YOU CAN'T GATE IT. OTHERWISE, THAT WOULD HAMPER ANY FIRE RESCUE TRYING TO GET THROUGH THERE. I'M JUST THROWING THAT OUT THERE. OF A QUEST -- AS A QUESTION BUT THERE IS PROBABLY NO ANSWER TO THE. >> I DON'T HAVE AN ANSWER TO THAT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR ME? >> I WAS GOING TO SAY WE HAVE A LOT OF THAT SITUATION THROUGHOUT THE COUNTY. MY UNDERSTANDING IS AZALEA RIDGE IS ALREADY A GATED COMMUNITY. WHEN THAT HAPPENS, THE APPLICANT DOING THE DEVELOPMENT DESIGNATES THIS AS AN EMERGENCY ONLY EXIT. AND THE GATE -- THERE IS PROVIDED A LOCKBOX OR SOME OTHER ACCESS THAT THE FIRE DEPARTMENT HAS ACCESS TO SO THEY CAN GET THE ACCESS IN OR OUT BUT THE RESIDENTS CAN. THAT PROVIDES THAT SECURITY THAT AZALEA RIDGE IS KEPT SEPARATE. THEY ARE A GATED COMMUNITY. THE FIRE DEPARTMENT CAN GET INTO THE GATE NOW I'M SURE AND THEY WOULD GO THROUGH THIS GATE IF THEY ABSOLUTELY NEEDED TO. BUT ONLY AGAIN, IN THE CASE OF AN EMERGENCY. >> THAT WAS THE DESIRED RESULT AS SHE EXPLAINED IT. >> THANK YOU. >> ANY QUESTIONS OF STAFF? APPLICANT. >> TRAVIS OF NEW CREATIONS DEVELOPMENT. HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. THE PURPOSE OF THE REZONING IS DENSITY. GOING FROM BORS TO NBC. IT IS ONE STEP UP IN THE DENSITY. BRANDON FIELD DENSITY REQUIREMENT. ONE OF THE THOUGHTS -- I GUESS, LET'S GET TO THE ROAD STUFF HERE. ONE OF THE THOUGHTS FOR ACCESS TO THIS PARCEL WAS THROUGH FREEDOM OF AZALEA RIDGE INITIALLY. THE ISSUE WITH THAT IS THAT FREEDOM OF AZALEA RIDGE HOA ZONED THE ROADS. THEY ARE NOT COUNTY OWNED. WE WOULD HAVE TO GET APPROVAL TO THE HOA. THEY HAVE, AT THIS TIME, SAID THAT THEY ARE NOT OPEN TO DISCUSSION FOR THAT. SO, TO GET IN TO FREEMAN, -- TO GET INTO AZALEA RIDGE, YOU HAVE TO GO THROUGH AZALEA RIDGE. SO AZALEA RIDGE IS COUNTY OWNED ROAD. YOU CAN'T SEE IT ON ON THIS MAP. BIG NEIGHBORHOOD. YOU CAN GET TO FREEDOM OF AZALEA RIDGE AND THEY HAVE A GATE AND THE HIS COUNTY OWNED ROAD AND THAT IS A 55 PLUS COMMUNITY. SO AZALEA RIDGE -- IN THE COMMUNITY. YOU GET TO FREEDOM OF AZALEA AND HE GETS TO 55 PLUS. THE ONLY REASON ON OUR PLAN THAT WE HAVE THE ACCESS ROAD CONNECTING AT THIS TIME IS BECAUSE THE COUNTY ASKED US TO WITH DRC. PERSONALLY, I COULD CARE LESS IF WE HAD THE ROAD THERE. BUT I BELIEVE IT WAS FOR EMERGENCY SERVICES, IS WHY THEY WANTED IT. IF YOU LOOK AT AZALEA RIDGE, IF YOU WERE TO ZOOM OUT AND SEE WHERE LANTANA LAKES CONNECT, THEY ARE CONNECTED THROUGH A ROAD AS WELL. LANTANA LAKES IS AN HOA OWNED ROAD COMMUNITY AS WELL THAT OWNS THEIR OWN ROADS. THEY DO HAVE A GATE LIKE DODI SAID WITH A LOCK ON IT THAT IS ONLY ACCESSED BY EMERGENCY SERVICES. IF THAT IS WHAT THE COUNTY ONES, WE ARE HAPPY TO DO THAT. WE PERSONALLY AREN'T LOOKING TO DO THAT. AS FAR AS THE ROAD -- AS FAR AS PAVED ACCESS, THAT LEAVES US [02:40:02] ALLIE MURRAY ROAD. ALLIE MURRAY ROAD HAS BEEN ON THE PAVED LIST AS MY UNDERSTANDING IS IN THE PAST. IT IS NOT CURRENTLY ON THE PAVED LIST. AND I BELIEVE IN THE FUTURE, IS TO HAVE THE PAVED ROAD AND HAVE THAT AS A CORRIDOR BETWEEN ROAD. AT SOME POINT, THAT WILL PROBABLY HAPPEN. THE GOOD PART ABOUT THAT HAPPENING NOW IF THE DEVELOPMENT GETS APPROVED AS WE WOULD PAY FOR IT AS OPPOSED TO THE COUNTY. WE WOULD ONLY BE GOING FROM THE SOUTHERNMOST PART OF OUR PARCEL TO OLD JENNINGS. SO WE WOULDN'T PAVED THE WHOLE PASS-THROUGH. BUT IT IS A GOOD CHUNK OF IT. AT LEAST HALF OF IT. AND SO THAT IS WHAT WE WOULD BE LOOKING TO DO. AS FAR AS THE OWNERSHIP OF THE ROAD, WE ARE WORKING TO THE DETAILS ON THAT. IT IS A LITTLE HAIRY. TO BE HONEST, WE ARE NOT 100% THERE. WE WOULD HAVE TO WORK THAT OUT. WE WOULDN'T JUST GET INTO IT. THIS IS ALSO PROCESS THE COUNTY WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH AT SOME POINT IF THEY WANTED TO PAY THIS ROAD. SO WE ARE KIND OF SPEARHEADING IT IN A WAY FOR THE COUNTY AND FIGURING OUT WHAT THE ISSUES ARE AND HOPEFULLY WORKING THROUGH THEM. I DID GO PERSONALLY TALK TO EVERY RESIDENT ON THIS ROAD THAT IS UP TO OLD JENNINGS ROAD. I DID -- QUITE HONESTLY, I HAD ABOUT A THIRD THAT WERE ABSOLUTELY NO. WE DON'T WANT THE ROAD PAVED. THEY JUST WANTED THEIR WAY OF LIFE TO BE MAINTAINED. THEY LIKE THE DIRT ROAD ASPECT. HAD ABOUT A THIRD THERE WERE ABSOLUTELY YES, WE WANT THE ROAD PAVED. REASONS WERE, THE DUST AND THE MUD ON THE CARS AND PROPERTY VALUE INCREASING FOR THEM. AND I HAD ABOUT ANOTHER THIRD THAT WERE KIND OF IN DIFFERENT. THEY COULD GO ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. SO THAT IS KIND OF WHERE IT STANDS NOW. FREEDOM AZALEA RIDGE IS LESS THAN A 10-YEAR-OLD COMMUNITY. WE ARE LOOKING AT SIMILAR LOT SIZES. ACTUALLY A LITTLE BIT BIGGER. I THINK THEY MAINLY HAD 50'S AND 60'S OWNED WE ARE LOOKING AT 60'S AND 80'S. LOOKING AT THE PARCEL, WE COULD FIT 99 HOUSES ON IT. CURRENTLY, 76. WE ARE LOOKING TO BE REASONABLE. THE PARCEL IS DIRECTLY ACROSS THE EAST OF BFAC WHICH IS A COMMERCIAL OFFICE RETAIL ZONING. ALSO A HIGH DENSITY MULTIFAMILY ZONING. AT SOME POINT, I'M SURE THE PERSON, THE DEVELOPER THAT OWNS THAT, WILL WANT TO DEVELOP IT AND WE FEEL THE BFIPC IS A TRANSITION POINT BETWEEN THE BFRS BETWEEN THAT DENSITY IN THAT SIZE OF A PARCEL. AND I THINK ADDING ROOFTOPS, THAT MAY BRING THE BUSINESSES AS FAR AS DEVELOPING THAT PIECE, WOULD HELP THAT PERSON JUSTIFIED DEVELOPING BUSINESSES OF THEIRS. SO THAT COULD BE A BENEFIT TO THAT AS WELL. ANY QUESTIONS SHIFT? I JUST HAVE ONE. WHEN YOU ARE SPEAKING, IF YOU ARE LOTS ARE GOING TO BE BIGGER BIGGER -- NEXT DOOR THAN AZALEA, WHY DO YOU NEED HIGHER DENSITY? CAN YOU EXPLAIN THAT? >> ABSOLUTELY. THE CURRENT ZONING WITH THE DENSITY PROGRAM WOULD GIVE US 37 UNITS. THERE IS JUST NOT -- HONESTLY, WHEN IT COMES TO THAT, IT COMES DOWN TO THE NUMBERS. THERE IS NOT ENOUGH THERE BASED ON THE PRICE OF THE LAND AND THE PRICE TO PAY THE ROAD FOR THE PROJECT TO WORK. SO WE NEEDED TO GET DOUBLE THAT ESSENTIALLY, 76. SOME -- IT WILL BE SOME OF THE SIMILAR SIZING. THEY HAVE SOME 60S IN THEIR COMMUNITY WHICH WE WILL BE DOING DOING. AND WE WILL BE ADDING 80S. I BELIEVE WE HAD 57-80S UNLESS THAT IS BACKWARDS. 57, AND 19. I CAN'T REMEMBER EXACTLY. >> LET ME ASK YOU, HOW DID THE NEIGHBORHOOD NEXT DOOR DO WITH -- I SEE THEY HAVE A LOT OF OPEN SPACE. IS THAT HOW THEY GOT THE DENSITY? >> YES. THERE IS THE DENSITY INDISCERNIBLE ] THE BFRS. IF YOU SET ASIDE ENVIRONMENTAL LAND AND OPEN SPACE. >> OKAY. >> YES, I THINK THAT PROJECT WAS A COUPLE HUNDRED ACRES IN THEY HAD THE ABILITY TO. >> I'M DONE. >> I APOLOGIZE. WHAT PART OF ALLIE MURRAY ROAD ARE YOU COMMITTING TO PAVING? >> THE COUNTY ASKED US TO DO, FROM THE SOUTHERNMOST PART OF OUR PARCEL THERE, UP TO OLD JENNINGS ROAD. >> PART OF THE REQUIREMENT ALSO [02:45:02] WILL BE TO ADD A TURN LANE. AT THE PARCEL, A LEFT-HAND TURN LANE INTO IT. THAT IS IN ANTICIPATION OF THE SOUTHERN PART OF ALLIE MURRAY TO BE PAVED AT SOME POINT I'M SURE. >> THE LEFT TURN LANE WOULD BE ON ALLIE MURRAY. >> YES. GOING INTO THE SUBDIVISION TO THE SOUTH. IT WOULDN'T BE AS INITIALLY BUT DOWN THE ROAD I'M SURE IS WHAT THEY WERE THINKING. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS SHIFT? NOW. >> THANK YOU. >> OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING. I HAVE CARDS. BUT BECAUSE OF THE WAY THE AGENDA WAS NUMBERED, I'M NOT SURE -- WHO WANTS TO SPEAK ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM? WE WILL START WITH YOU. IF YOU WILL GIVE ME YOUR NAME. >> MY NAME IS SUSAN JONES. I LIVE AT 4097 SPRING CREEK LANE WHICH IS PART OF THE FREEDOM OF AZALEA RIDGE. ONE THING THEY DIDN'T TELL YOU IS THEY CAME TO OUR HOA MEETING AND OFFERED US $500,000 TO OPEN UP OUR ROADS AND GATES PERMANENTLY. THEN THEY WANTED US TO ALLOW OTHER PEOPLE, THAT IS 100 HOMES, IS WHAT WE WERE TOLD, TO BE ALLOWED TO USE OUR FACILITIES. WE HAVE A POOL. WE HAVE A DOG PARK. WE HAVE A BOCCE BALL COURT. IT'S NOT A BIG DEAL. BUT WE ARE ALL 55 PLUS OR OLDER TO LIVE THERE AND MY QUESTION IS, IF THE AMENDMENTS OR THE RULES WOULD EVEN LET THEM DO THAT. YOU HAVE TO BE A CERTAIN AGE TO LIVE THERE. IF WE OPEN IT UP, THAT GIVES THEM JUST A FREE REIGN TO RUN TO THE COMMUNITY. WE ALREADY HAVE PROBLEMS WITH THAT GOING THROUGH, COMING INTO AZALEA RIDGE, AND GOING OUT BRONCO TO AVOID THE CORNER THAT IS THERE. AS THEY SAID, ROADS ARE PRIVATE. WE HAVE TO PAY TO DO ANY CHANGES OR UPKEEP FROM THEM. AND THEY WANT US TO HAVE THE ROADS OPEN DURING CONSTRUCTION. SO WE HAVE ALREADY BEEN THROUGH THAT ONCE AND WE DON'T FEEL LIKE WE SHOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH IT AGAIN. WE HAD PROBLEMS WHEN THE GATE WAS OPEN WITH CHILDREN AND ADULTS FROM THE OTHER PART OF THE COMMUNITY COMING IN TO THE POINT THAT WE HAD TO CONTACT THE POLICE FREQUENTLY TO GET THEM OUT. NOW THAT THE GATES ARE CLOSED, WE DON'T HAVE THAT ISSUE. BUT IF THEY ARE GOING TO OPEN UP THE BACK -- AND BELIEVE ME RIGHT NOW, THERE IS NO ROAD THERE WHATSOEVER. THERE ARE BOLLARDS THERE SO YOU CAN'T EVEN CONSIDER IT IS A ROAD. IT IS ALL GRASS AND ALL FENCED ALL THE WAY ACROSS THERE. SO IT IS -- IT HAS NEVER BEEN A ROAD. WE CALLED THE ROAD TO KNOW WHERE BUT IT HAS NEVER BEEN USED AS JUST A ROAD. SO THAT IS OUR ISSUE. WE FIGURE WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO PAY TO PUT IN SOME KIND OF A SENSE. A MORE SUBSTANTIAL SENSE IF THEY FORCE THAT ROAD THROUGH THERE. TO KEEP PEOPLE OUT. >> THANK YOU. >> YES MA'AM. >> MY NAME IS HARRIET CHITWOOD. MIND -- MY ADDRESS IS 429 GREEN RIVER PLACE. I'M PART OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD OF 130 HOMES IN AZALEA RIDGE. FREEDOM OF AZALEA RIDGE. THERE ARE MANY CONCERNS AND OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. ONE OF THEM WAS, ONLY CERTAIN PEOPLE GOT LETTERS. NOT ALL OF US GOT LETTERS ON THIS. I HAPPEN TO LIVE ON GREEN RIVER WHERE THEY WERE WANTING TO USE IT AS A ROAD TO WORK ON THE PROPERTY, ET CETERA. SO I'M CONCERNED FOR POPULATION DENSITY, NOISE FROM THE CLEARING, BEAUTIFUL TREES THERE. IT IS A BEAUTIFUL PIECE OF PROPERTY. THAT WILL ALL BE GONE. SO THERE GOES OUR GREEN TREES AND DUST FROM THAT. REMOVAL OF THE TREES. NOISE FROM ALLIE MURRAY IF YOU PAY FOR IT. AND WE WERE WORRIED ABOUT WATER RECLAMATION BECAUSE WE HAVE THAT AND BECAUSE OF THE DROUGHT THIS SUMMER, WE HAVE ALL BEEN ON RESTRICTION FOR THAT. NOT ALL RESIDENTS ARE NOTIFIED. THE MAIN ROAD WOULD HAVE THE GET GO THROUGH FROM GREEN RIVER TO THE PROPERTY THAT HE IS TALKING ABOUT. [02:50:03] I MOVED HERE FROM SEATTLE, WASHINGTON. I MOVED HERE BECAUSE IT IS RURAL. AND IT IS COUNTRY. MOST PEOPLE IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AND THE SURROUNDING AREA, THAT IS WHAT THEY WANT. THEY WANT A RURAL COMMUNITY JUST LIKE BRONCO ROAD. WE WANT SMALL TOWN FRIENDLY SOUTHERN FLORIDA. AND I DON'T WANT TO SEE IT CHANGE TO SHOPPING CENTERS AND PAVED ROADS. AND THERE IS ENOUGH TRAFFIC ON OLD JENNINGS THAT THERE IS A LOT OF RACING ON THE ROAD TOO. AND I COULD JUST SEE IT ON ALLIE MURRAY TOO. THOSE WERE MY ARE MY CONCERNS. >> THANK YOU. I SAW SOMEONE ELSE'S HAND. DOES ANYONE ELSE WISH TO SPEAK ON THIS AGENDA ITEM? >> OKAY. I WILL CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. APPLICANT. >> WHERE IS THE GATE? WHAT ROAD IS THE GATE ON? >> I'M CONFUSED ON THIS. >> I'M LOOKING AT A BIGGER MAP. THERE IS A LITTLE CONFUSION. I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED TOO. WE MENTIONED A MEETING WITH THE HOA. I WOULD HAVE LOVED TO HAVE BEEN THERE. WE WERE NOT THERE. I BELIEVE THEY HAD AN HOA BOARD MEETING AND THERE WAS A PROPOSAL DONE VIA E-MAIL TO ALLOW US TO ACCESS THE ROAD TO THAT PARCEL IN LIEU OF PAVING ALLIE MURRAY ROAD. THE HOA ENDED UP JUST SAYING NO. I DIDN'T GET ANY REALLY GOOD REASON. IT WAS ALL DONE VIA E-MAIL. IT WAS NEVER DISCUSSED TO USE THE ROAD FOR CONSTRUCTION. I HAVE NO IDEA WHERE THAT IS COMING FROM. I DON'T KNOW IF THE BOARD TOLD THE RESIDENTS THAT. THAT WAS NEVER TALKED ABOUT. THAT IS NOT GOING TO BE THE INTENDED. WE HAVE NO INTENTION OF USING THE ROADS BECAUSE WE ARE NOT ALLOWED TO. WE ARE NOT ALLOWED TO GO TO THE HOA OWNED ROAD. JUST TO BE CLEAR, WE ARE NOT USING THE ROADS. BUT YES. IT IS A STUBBED OUT PEACE THAT IS NOT FULLY CONSTRUCTED. BUT YOU COULD EASILY PUT A ROAD THERE. IT IS MAYBE 100 FEET WORTH OF PAVEMENT YOU WOULD HAVE TO PUT IN. IT IS ON THE PROPERTY APPRAISER SITE. YOU CAN SEE WHERE IT IS STEPPED OUT. I WANT TO BE CLEAR THAT WE ARE NOT DOING ANYTHING WITH THE ROADS OR THE COMMUNITY AT THIS POINT BECAUSE THEY ARE SAYING NOW THAT I CAN'T DO ANYTHING WITH IT. I DON'T KNOW WHERE THAT IS COMING FROM. THAT IS ALL I HAVE TO SAY. >> WHAT YOU ARE SAYING IS YOU ARE NOT ENCROACHING ON ANY PART OF THE HOA. ABSOLUTELY NOT. ZERO. >> ZERO. >> PART OF THE PROPOSAL WAS, IF YOU ALLOW US TO USE YOUR ROAD, A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF MONEY CAN GO TOWARD THE CDD OR HOWEVER WE STRUCTURE THAT. I ALSO WAS OPEN IF THEY DID ALLOW US TO USE THE ROAD IF THEY WOULD CONSIDER BEING A 55 PLUS COMMUNITY IF THAT IS WHAT THEY WERE GOING TO REQUIRE IN ORDER TO ANNEX INTO THE HOA AND FACILITIES. WE WERE OPEN TO THAT. THEY SHUT EVERYTHING DOWN AND DON'T WANT IS USING IT. SO THAT IS FINE. BUT WE ARE NOT GOING TO BE 55 PLUS IF THAT IS THE CASE. WE WILL PAVE VALLEY MURRAY ROAD BUT WE WON'T BE IN THEIR COMMUNITY AT THE COMMUNITY AT ALL. SO THERE IS REALLY NO ISSUE THERE. >> SO THERE IS NO ROAD ACCESS AT ALL? >> ZERO. >> ON THE SITE PLAN, IT HAS US CONNECTING. THAT WAS STRICTLY BECAUSE THE COUNTY WANTED IT FOR EMERGENCY SERVICES. IF THE COUNTY WANTS TO CHANGE THAT, I'M TOTALLY FINE WITH THAT. >> WOULD THERE BE ANY BEEN SEEING OR BUFFER BETWEEN THE TWO COMMUNITIES? >> I HAVE NOT GOTTEN TO THAT POINT TO BE HONEST WITH YOU. I IMAGINE PROBABLY. THERE IS DEFINITELY A BUFFER AS FAR AS VEGETATION IS CONCERNED BECAUSE IT IS A REQUIREMENT IN THE PLAN, THE MASTER PLAN. WE HAVE NOT GOTTEN TO THAT STAGE. I CAN'T SAY 100% ON THAT. >> THANK YOU. >> QUESTIONS? >> I HAVE ONE FOR STAFF. THE GENTLEMAN JUST MENTIONED A BUFFER. WHY WOULD WE REQUIRE A BUFFER BETWEEN TWO RESIDENTIAL -- >> WE WOULDN'T, RIGHT? >> WITHIN 10 FEET OF THE PROPERTY LINE >> RIGHT. >> IT'S NOT THE KIND OF BUFFER WE USE. >> OKAY. >> BRINGING IT BACK TO COMMITTEE. I WOULD JUST LIKE SOMEONE TO EXPLAIN THE CONDUCTIVITY PIECE. [02:55:01] I KNOW THAT IS AN ISSUE. >> IT IS HARD TO SEE ON THE MAPS. >> I OFTEN USE THE PROPERTY APPRAISER'S SITE OR YOU CAN GO TO GOOGLE EARTH TO LOOK AT THINGS. THERE WAS DEFINITELY A ROAD THERE. NOT A ROAD THAT CONNECTS TWO PIECES OF PROPERTY BUT THERE IS AN ENTRANCE. >> OR THE RIGHT OF WAY OR WHATEVER TERM YOU WANT TO USE. THE QUESTION IS, WHAT IS THE PURPOSE? IS IT STRICTLY FOR EMERGENCY ACCESS SHIFT? IT IS NOT SO MUCH THAT IT WAS DESIGNED FOR EMERGENCY ACCESS AS IT IS CONDUCTIVITY. THAT IS THE WAY THE CODE IS WRITTEN. WHEN YOU HAVE A GRIDDED STREET NETWORK, WHAT YOU HAVE IS THE OPPORTUNITY FOR CARS TO GO IN DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS AND IT REDUCES TRAFFIC CONGESTION. THE WAY WE BUILD TODAY TYPICALLY WITH SUBDIVISIONS THAT ARE NOT CONNECTED, YOU WIND UP WITH THE CARS SPEEDING ONTO ONE ROAD WHICH CREATES MORE CONGESTION. THE CODE WAS TRYING TO CREATE MORE CONDUCTIVITY BETWEEN VARIOUS SUBDIVISIONS AS THEY GROW. BUT THE CODE IS WRITTEN SOME TIME BACK. AND SORT OF PREDATES THE DESIRE BY THE BUILDING COMMUNITY IN FLORIDA TO DO THESE MORE ISOLATED SUBDIVISION DESIGNS. WE WOULD STILL BE REQUIRING SOME KIND OF A SECONDARY ENTRANCE. THAT WAS AN OBVIOUS SORT OF -- BECAUSE IT WAS ALREADY A CONNECTION INTENDED THERE, IT MADE -- HYPOTHETICALLY, IT MADE IT A LOGICAL POINT FOR AN EMERGENCY CONNECTION. HOWEVER, THE APPLICANT HAS A LONG STRETCH OF ALLIE MURRAY. YOU COULD DO A MAIN ENTRANCE AND THEN AN EMERGENCY ENTRANCE TO SATISFY INTERNAL ACTIVITIES. >> AND COMPLY WITH THE IDEA OF THE CODE WITHOUT THIS ACCESS. >> RIGHT. >> OKAY. >> DO WE HAVE ANY SCHOOL REQUIREMENTS, MR. BEMENT? >> I DON'T HAVE ANY CONCERNS. SO THIS WOULD ADD ABOUT 38 STUDENTS TO THE STUDENT BODY WHEN IT IS FULLY DEVELOPED OUT. THAT IS NOT A LOT OF STUDENTS IN THAT PARTICULAR AREA. IT IS NOT A STRUGGLE WITH CAPACITY. SO NO STRUGGLE -- NO CONCERNS ON MY SIDE. >> OKAY. >> I JUST WANTED TO ADDRESS SOMETHING ONE OF THE SPEAKERS SAID. WE MENTIONED IT EARLIER. SHE DIDN'T GET A NOTIFICATION. I WANT TO SAY IT AGAIN. YOU GET A LETTER IF YOUR PROPERTY IS WITHIN 350 FEET OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY. YOUR 351 FEET AWAY, YOU DON'T GET A LETTER. YOU HAVE TO RELY ON LOOKING FOR THE SIGNS WERE THAT KIND OF THING. 350 FEET. AND I'M NOT SURE WHERE THAT IS. BUT I KNOW IT WOULDN'T GET THIS WHOLE SUBDIVISION. THE OTHER THING YOU MENTIONED, BILL, IS THERE IS A RIGHT-OF-WAY THERE. I HAVE A FEELING THAT YOU CAN'T GO INTO A GATED COMMUNITY EXCEPT MAYBE AS A CRASH GATE OR SOMETHING. AND I WANTED TO ADDRESS REALLY QUICK, THE COMMENTS ABOUT CLEARING THE LAND. YOU KNOW ME. I'M A BIG TREE LOVER. THE FACT IS, THE WHEN THE SUBDIVISION HERE -- AZALEA RIDGE, WAS BUILT, THEY CLEARED A LOT OF TREES TO BUILD THE HOUSE YOU ARE LIVING IN NOW SO UNFORTUNATELY THE WAY WE ARE GOING IN THE STATE, NOBODY GETS TO BE THE LAST PERSON IN. WITH THAT, I MAKE A MOTION TO GO AHEAD AND APPROVE THE STAFF REPORT. >> WE HAVE A MOTION. >> I SECOND IT. >> WE HAVE A MOTION TO SECOND IT. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR SAY AYE? ANY OPPOSED... OKAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. [9. Public Hearing to consider COMP 26-0028 (D. Selig)This application is a Large-Scale Comprehensive Plan Amendment to address the requirements of HB399 (residential compatibility).] OUR NEXT ITEM PURE PUBLIC HEARING 26.00.28. YOU WANT A BREAK? DO WE NEED A BREAK? WE'VE GOT SOME LENGTH TO GO WITH THE LAST ONE. [03:00:02] CHRI KRISTEN, DO YOU NEED A BREAK? >> THIS IS A LARGE-SCALE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE EVENT -- >> WAIT A SECOND. >> OKAY, I WILL WAIT. OKAY. >> OKAY. THIS IS A LARGE-SCALE TEXT AMENDMENT AND IT WILL BE HEARD BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OCTOBER 13TH. IT STEMS FROM A BILL THAT WAS PASSED BY THE LEGISLATURE THIS SUMMER AND IT IS HOUSE BILL 399. THIS WAS SECTION SIX IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY OF THAT MUCH LARGER BILL. IT'S TOPIC IS RESIDENTIAL COMPATIBILITY. WHAT IT REQUIRES IS LAND DEVELOPMENT REGISTRATIONS HAVE TO ASSESS COMPATIBILITY OF ALLOWABLE RESIDUAL USES OF THE RESIDENTIAL ZONING DISTRICT. IT DOES NOT APPLY TO RURAL AGRICULTURAL CONSERVATION, OPEN-SPACE, MIXED-USE, INDUSTRIAL, OR COMMERCIAL USES AND IT DOESN'T APPLY TO DEVELOPMENTS WITHIN PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS OR MASTER-PLANNED COMMUNITIES. THOUGH IN ORDER TO ADDRESS THE BILL, WE ARE PROPOSING ONE NEW POLICY AND AN AMENDMENT TO EXISTING POLICY. THE NEW POLICY WOULD BE 1.4.10 AND IT WOULD BE WITHIN THE FUTURE LANDINGS ELEVATED SO IT WOULD APPLY NOT IN THE MASTER PLAN. AND SPECIFICALLY IT WOULD BE WITHIN THE RURAL RESIDENTIAL, RURAL RESERVE, RURAL FRINGE, URBAN FRINGE, AND THE HERB IN THE 416 LAND USE CATEGORIES. AND THE URBAN 416 ALLEGES CATE CATEGORIES. THE FUTURE LAND USE POLICIES 1.4.3. THIS WOULD WOULD BE SPECIFICALLY WITHIN ASBERRY'S LAND USE COMMUNITY. THE TEXT WOULD BE THE SAME IN BOTH AND WE STAYED IN USE FOR THE LAND USE CATEGORIES. THE COMPATIBILITY OF RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT SHOULD BE ACHIEVED THROUGH LAND DEVELOPMENT, CODE REGULATION WITH A LIST OF VARIOUS BEAMS OF REGULATING, WELCOME COMPATIBILITY. MOST OF WHICH ARE THINGS THAT WE DO IN MOST IF NOT ALL SUBDIVISIONS, ZONING DISTRICTS CURRENTLY. SO WE HAVE DONE THINGS LIKE LANDSCAPE AND SETBACKS, FINISHED LIGHTING STANDARDS, PARKING, ALL OF THAT. WHAT WOULD BE DOING THROUGH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE REGULATIONS, WOULD COME BACK A LITTLE LATER BUT THIS IS THE SETTING STAGE FOR THAT. THE STAFF IS RECOMMENDING THAT THIS ITEM BE APPROVED FOR TRANSMITTAL BECAUSE IT BECOMES LARGE-SCALE AND LARGE-SCALE REQUIRES TWO HEARINGS. SO WE WOULD'VE TRANSMITTED TO THE STATE TO GET IT APPROVED AT THIS TIME. >> ANY QUESTIONS FOR STAFF? >> YES. YOU KNOW THAT. >> ALL OF THIS IS PRETTY GOOD BUT IF I UNDERSTOOD AND YOU KNOW THE LEGISLATION BETTER, THE IDEAS WILL WE HAVE A NEIGHBORHOOD OF A 1 ACRE LOT HERE AND SOMEBODY WANTS TO BUILD A NEIGHBORHOOD RIGHT NEXT TO IT OF 40-FOOT LOTS. AND WE ARE LOOKING FOR A WAY TO TELL THE GUY OR THE PERSON WHO WANTS TO DO THE 40 LOTS THAT WE CAN IMPROVE IT IF YOU DO THESE FACTORS AND YOU DETAIL A LOT OF THEM OUT HERE BUT THE ONES I DON'T SEE IS DENSITY. DOES THIS LEGISLATION ALLOW US [03:05:02] TO SAY OKAY, THESE ARE 1 ACRE LOTS AND YOU WANT TO DO 40-FOOT LOTS? HERE'S HOW WE CAN MITIGATE THAT. THEN THE SECTION CAN BE SMALLER LOTS. CAN WE DO THAT TYPE OF MITIGATION? THAT'S MY QUESTION. DOES THE LEGISLATION PROHIBIT THAT OR IS NOT AN OPTION. MY POINT IS IF THAT'S AN OPTION, I'D LIKE US TO HAVE THE OPTION. WE MAY NOT USE IT. DO THAT ESSENTIALLY. YOUR AUSPICES AND THE BOARDS IN TERMS OF CHANGING MENUS. THAT IS A REGULATION OF DENSITY SAYING THIS IS OR ISN'T APPROPRIATE. >> I THINK I MISUNDERSTOOD WHAT THIS LEGISLATION WAS TRYING TO DO THAT BECAUSE IT SEEMS LIKE THIS LEGISLATION WAS BASICALLY TRYING AGAIN TO FORCE OUR HAND TO SAY THAT YOU CAN'T DENY THIS. YOU CAN'T RECOMMEND A DIAL OR RECOMMEND AGAINST IT AS LONG AS IT'S RESIDENTIAL AGAINST RESIDENTIAL. >> IT SORT OF SAYS THAT. THE LAW GOES ON TO SAY IF THE APPLICATION OF MAY NOT DENY AN APPLICATION ON COMPATIBILITY GROUNDS UNLESS THE DENIAL INCLUDES WRITTEN FINDINGS MEASURES INADEQUATE DOES NOT EXIST. >> I THINK THAT CIRCLES BACK IN MY ORIGINAL QUESTION. YOU PROPOSE YOU GOT TO BUILD A SECTION OF LARGER LOTS TO GO FROM LARGE TO MEDIUM LOTS TO SMALL LOTS. IT TRANSITIONS. >> IT DOES NOT MENTION THE WORD BUT I'VE SEATED ANYWHERE. >> FOR ME THAT'S THE SIMPLE SOLUTION AND NOT SURE THAT IT'S OFFERED AS AN OPTION AND BOTH SAID IT BEST. YOU CREATE A TRANSITION ZONE. YOU DO NOT GO FROM THIS DENSITY TO THIS DENSITY, PAYING. THE TRANSITION TO THE OTHER DENSITY. YOU TRANSITION FROM THE DENSITY TO THE OTHER DENSITY. >> WE CAN DO THAT IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AND TAKE A LOOK AT THAT AS WELL. >> THAT WOULD MAKE IT MORE RESTRICTIVE. THE INTENT OF THE LEGISLATION WOULD BE MAKE IT LESS RESTRICTIVE I THINK THAT THE LEGISLATION TO MAKE IT JUST APPROVE STUFF WHETHER IT'S THE RIGHT PROJECT OR NOT. >> SOMEBODY COMES IN AND YOU WANT TO PUT 40 LOTS. KOBO FOR EXAMPLE. THERE'S NOTHING PROHIBITING T THAT. >> STAFF CAN SAY IT'S NOT REALLY A GOOD IDEA ALL I WANT TO KNOW IS CAN WE CREATE A TRANSITION GOING ON. I LIKE TO THINK OUR OPTIONS. >> RIGHT. >> THERE WOULD BE NO 40-FOOT LOTS OF FOR UP TO YOU. >> WE'LL TAKE A LOOK AT THAT. >> IT JUST SEEMS LIKE THAT'S OFF THE TABLE. IN PHASE DENSITY. >> I APOLOGIZE. >> IF THAT'S THE CASE, WHAT WOULD YOU DO? CONTINUE THIS? BRING IT BACK. >> WE ARE IN AN OBLIGATION IT NEEDS TO BE IN EFFECT FEBRUARY 1ST. NEEDS TO BE WE NEED TO MOVE FORWARD SO IF YOU WANT TO COME BUT YOU, BREAK A RECOMMENDATION BUT WE DO LAND DEVELOPING CODE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT, WE'D BE HAPPY TO DO THAT. >> WE MIGHT NOT WANT TO ASK A QUESTION. WE ASSUME WE CAN HELP DEVELOP A TRANSITION ZONE AND WE ASKED THEM TO SAY, THOUGH, YOU CAN'T DO THAT. >> DOESN'T HAVE ANY IMPACT ON US WITH OUR BUFFER ZONES IN THIS [03:10:05] SORT OF STUFF IF WE NEED THAT TO HELP? >> WE ARE ACTUALLY WORKING WITH FOLKS TO LOOK BACK TO THE LAND ANYWAY SO WE'VE ASKED THEM TO TAKE A LOOK AT THIS SPECIFICALLY AND PROVIDE US WITH SOME EXAMPLES AND OPTIONS. >> RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? >> WE HAVE A COUPLE HERE. >> PUBLIC HEARINGS, DOES ANYBODY WISH TO SPEAK TO THIS AGENDA ITEM? CLOSE IT TO BRING IT TO THE COMMISSION. WE'LL JUST BRING IT BACK TO COMMISSION. >> I WILL MOVE THE STAFF REPORT. I THINK THEY HEARD OUR CONCERNS AND WE ARE UNDER A TIME CONSTRAINT. AND IT'S TALLAHASSEE. >> WE HAVE A MOTION TO SECOND THE DISCUSSION. THAT'S ALL RIGHT. GLAD TO SEE YOU WOKE UP. >> WHAT ARE WE VOTING LOG? SAID THAT THE TALLAHASSEE AT THIS POINT? >> THANK YOU. >> WE GOT THE MESSAGE. HERE IS OUR RESPONSE. >> WHAT IT COMES BACK AND GO STRAIGHT TO THE BOARD. >> JUST READING IT IS SO VAGUE. WHAT ARE WE EVEN DOING. >> ALL IN FAVOR SAY I FELL BACK [10. Public Hearing to consider COMP 26- 0020 and ZON 26-0019; COMP 26-0021 and ZON 26-0020; COMP 26-0022 and ZON 26-0021; COMP 26-0023 and ZON 26-0022; and COMP 26-0025 and ZON 26-0023.  (District 5, Comm. Burke) (B. Carson) A.  COMP 26-0020 This application is a Small-Scale Comprehensive Plan Amendment to change the future land use designation of 1 acre from Agriculture (AG) to Industrial (IND) . B. ZON 26-0019 This application is a Rezoning to change 1 acre from Agricultural District (AG) to Heavy Industrial (IB). C.  COMP 26-0021 This application is a Small-Scale Comprehensive Plan Amendment to change the future land use designation of 8.96 acres from Agriculture (AG) to Industrial (IND). D.  ZON 26-0020 This application is a Rezoning to change 8.96 acres from Agricultural District (AG) to Heavy Industrial (IB). E. COMP 26-0022 This application is a Small-Scale Comprehensive Plan Amendment to change the future land use designation of 1.72 acres from Agriculture (AG) to Industrial (IND). F. ZON 26-0021 This application is a Rezoning to change 1.72 acres from Agricultural District (AG) to Heavy Industrial (IB). G. COMP 26-0023 This application is a Small-Scale Comprehensive Plan Amendment to change the future land use designation of 32.79 acres from Agriculture/Residential (AR) to Industrial (IND). H. ZON 26-0022 This application is a Rezoning to change 32.79 acres from Agricultural District (AG) to Heavy Industrial (IB). I. COMP 26-0025 This application is a Small-Scale Comprehensive Plan Amendment to change the future land use designation of 41.75 acres from Agriculture/Residential (AR) to Industrial (IND). J. ZON 26-0023 This application is a Rezoning to change 41.75 acres from Agricultural District (AG) to Heavy Industrial (IB).  ] AYE ALL OPPOSED OUR LAST AGENDA ITEM IS BROAD. >> WE SAVE THE BIGGEST FOR THE LAST. THESE ITEMS ARE ALL RELATED AND THAT'S WHY WE'VE PUT THEM TOGETHER. THEY ARE TIED TOGETHER UNDER A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THAT WE'LL TALK ABOUT IN THE BIT IT'S. THESE ARE FIVE COPPERHEADS OF PLANNED BED BIDS AND FIVE RESULTING COMMITMENTS. YOU'VE SEEN THIS BEFORE. WE PLANNED TO TAKE THEM TO THE OCTOBER 13 BOARD MEETING. TO THE PLAN WILL BE CHANGING. WE HAVE TO ASK FOR A CONTINUANCE DUE TO A PUBLICATION ERROR. OR AN ADVERTISING ERROR. WE WILL BE TAKING IT AS WE HAVE CONTINUANCE THROUGH THE 22ND MEETING. THOSE OF THE DATES WE ARE LOOKING AT. THE AGENTS FOR THESE ITEMS WHO ARE BOTH HERE TODAY, THE LOCATIONS OF THE PARCELS AND I WILL SHOW YOU MAPS COMING UP ARE SOUTH OF COUNTY ROAD 209 SOUTH. THESE ARE LOCATED IN THE SPRINGS DISTRICT. FIVE DIFFERENT PARCELS. THE COPP COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CHAS FROM INDUSTRIAL AND THE RESULTING WILL CHANGE THE ZONING FROM AGRICULTURAL TO HEAVY INDUSTRIAL. THESE WILL LOOK FAMILIAR TO YOU. YOU LOOKED AT THEM, REVIEWED THESE BACK IN '24. '24 AND '25. YOU CAN SEE THE ONE PARCEL IS ISOLATED BETWEEN 226 AND THE OTHER FOUR PARCELS ARE TO THE EAST ALONG B I WANTED TO GIVE YOU HIS EMAIL PICTURE. THE PARCELS ARE IN THE LOWER RIGHT CORNER. YOU CAN SEE THE PURPLE IS IN THE INDUSTRIAL. ALSO WANTED YOU TO SEE THE ROAD NETWORK. 226, COMING UP ON GREEN COVE SPRINGS. EXPRESSWAY ARE COMING FROM THE WEST TO THE EAST. AND THERE IS A ROAD THAT CONTINUES FROM U.S. 70 DOWN TO 226, J.P. HALL ROAD. VERY CONNECTED ROADS HERE. THE MAP ON THE LEFT IS OUR 350-FOOT BUFFER PERSONAL NOTIFICATION MAP AND THE RIGHT IS OUR SIGNS AND THE SIGNS INDICATE 27. WE WILL BE CHANGING THAT AND TAKING IT FOR CONTINUATION NEXT WEEK AND THE FULL BOARD OF THE 27TH. THOSE WERE THE PEOPLE WE CONTACTED THROUGH THE LETTERS. THE MAP ON THE LEFT IS THE EXISTING CLUBE. YOU SEE THE THREE PARCELS TO THE LEFT ARE AGRICULTURE AND THE TWO TO THE EAST ARE AGRICULTURE RESIDENTIAL. THE GRADES AROUND THE GLOBE IS THE BAY YARD AREA WHICH IS CONSERVATION IN THE PURPLE IS [03:15:02] INDUSTRIAL THAT EXISTS ALREADY. THE MAP ON THE RIGHT IS THE PROPOSED CHANGE FOR ITS BIG CHANGE TO INDUSTRIAL LAND USE. THIS IS THE EXISTING BUILDING ON THE LEFT ALTHOUGH GREAT IS AGRICULTURE. SO IT'S ALL AGRICULTURE LAND USE RIGHT NOW. THE PURPLE IS THE INDUSTRIAL AT THE MAP ON THE RIGHT, YOU SEE IT'S ALL FIVE PARCELS BEING CHANGED TO HEAVY INDUSTRIAL AND THAT IS THE REQUEST. BACKGROUND ON THIS PRAYER YOU SAW THIS IN 2024-25. WITH THE SAME REQUEST THAT WE HAVE TODAY AT THE TIME THERE IS DISCUSSION ON A TRAFFIC STUDY REQUESTED AND THAT HAS BEEN PROVIDED WITH THE NEW APPLICATIONS. DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT HAS BEEN PROVIDED WITH THE FOLLOWING COMMITMENTS FOR ROAD IMPRO IMPROVEMENT. THE FIRST IS THEY'D REALIGN WITH COUNTY ROAD TWO TO 26. AT THE INTERSECTION OF 209 SOUTH AND LEFT TURN LANES FROM COUNTY ROAD 209 SOUTH AND 226. THE NEXT IS IMPROVED TO COUNTY PAVED ROAD STANDARDS INCLUDING 60 FEET WIDE OF WAY AND PAVEMENT WIDTH. THEY HAVE TO PROVIDE PAID PAVED ACCESS TO DEVELOPMENT. THIRD ONE IS TO 24-FOOT WIDE PAVEMENT TO 50-FOOT WEST OF J.P. HALL WHICH IS THE SOUTH ROAD WEST OF J.P. HALL TO THE IMPROVED INTERSECTION OF 209 SOUTH. THIS WOULD INCLUDE THE RAILROAD CROSSING WHICH WOULD HAVE TO BE IMPROVED. THEY BE REQUIRED TO INSTALL SIDEWALKS FROM 50 FEET WEST TO THE POINT OF 50 FEET BEYOND THE DEVELOPMENTS' MOST EASTERN POINT DRIVEWAY FOR THE ALTERNATE HE WOULD BE THEY CONTRIBUTE TO THE SIDEWALK VIA LIVE CON LOUVRE CON PRETTY MUCH THIS IS EVERYTHING THAT COULD BE DEVELOPED IT INDUSTRIAL AND IT ALSO INCLUDES THE LIGHTER CATEGORY OF LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AND SELECT DISTRICT. VOTED 2-4 TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL MEETING THEY DENIED IT. AND BOTH ON THE COPPERHEAD SUPPLIER TO BED MID AND RESULTING APPLICATIONS, STAFF HAS REVIEWED THE CRITERIA FOR THE PLANT A BIDS WHICH FOUND THAT THEY WERE MET AND RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT AND HAS VIEWED THOSE ODU APPLICATIONS AND THEY MET THEIR CRITERIA AS WELL. HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OR WOULD YOU LIKE TO LOOK AT THE MAP? >> I HAVE ONE QUESTION. SO THE PARCELS ARE AS THEY ARE. THE SUBDIVISION IS BEING PROVIDED DIFFERENTLY. IF I READING? >> DIFFERENT LANDOWNERS. OKAY. OKAY. >> OKAY. >> DID YOU GO BACK TO THE MAP FOR A LITTLE BIT, THE ZONING M MAP? THE PART THAT IS CATTY CORNER TO THIS THAT IS NOT PART OF THIS ZONING, ALL THAT GOING ON IN THE AIR. IT IS NOT ALREADY ALL I.D. NOW. >> IF IT'S DEVELOPING. >> IT'S NOT ALL DEVELOPED. >> IT'S DEVELOPING. >> IT'S GOING IN THERE. >> THANK YOU. >> THAT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, WAS THERE ANYTHING ABOUT J.P. HALL BOULEVARD AND THAT IMPROVE OR IS IT A LITTLE TOO LATE ROAD. >> I DON'T BELIEVE THERE'S ANYTHING THERE ABOUT IMPROVING THAT. >> I'M JUST CURIOUS. >> IN THE APPLICATION HEADING INTO THIS? >> NELL, JUST THE HEAVY INDUSTRIAL. AND WHATEVER IS PERMITTED. [03:20:01] >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? APPLICANT, COME FORWARD PLEASE. MIGHT AS WELL BOTH OF YOU COME UP. >> JUST WANTED TO SAY GOOD EVENING AND A GOOD NIGHT. GREEN COVE SPRINGS FLORIDA. THIS IS NOT THE FIRST TIME I HAVE BEEN HERE. THAT WAS A YEAR AND A HALF AGO. WHEN I SAY FOUR. THE FOUR SET WITH THE FENCE AND IT'S GOT GOOD THINGS AND IT'S GOT BAD THINGS. THE TWO OF THE FOUR. I COULD'VE DOCKETED THAT. HERE'S WHAT I WANT TO TELL YOU ALL ABOUT. WE ARE TALKING ABOUT GROWTH IN THIS AREA. YOU JUST TOOK OUT FOUR OR 500 SQUARE FEET OF INDUSTRIAL OUT OF 11,000. THAT'S FINE. THERE INDUSTRIAL PARK, THEIR TIME FRAME CHECK UP THERE WAS 2. WE GOT 11,000 HOMES AND GOT 2,000 HOMES. WE GOT 45,000 PEOPLE. TO THINK THAT THEY WERE NOT GOING TO GET JOBS, THEY COULD JUMP ON THE INTERSTATE IN THE MIDDLE OF AGRICOLA AND GOVERNORS PARK A JUMP UP THERE AND THEY COULD HEAD TO JACKSONVILLE. WONDERFUL. WE'VE GOT 25% OF PEOPLE IN CLAY COUNTY WHO DO THAT AND THAT'S WHAT THEY COMPLAINED ABOUT. OUR RESIDENTS WHO TRAVEL IN THE NOBLE AMOUNT OF TIME AND THE QUALITY OF LIFE ISSUE WE ARE TALKING ABOUT HERE IF I CAN HAVE A JOB HERE? WE'VE GOT ABOUT TWO MEDICAL JOBS, HOTEL STAFF, RESTAURANT STAFF, THAT'S ALL GREAT. WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT IS INDUSTRIAL JOBS. SOLID JOBS THAT ARE BEING BUILT RIGHT NOW HITTING QUARTERS. THIS IS NOT A UNIQUE PIECE. TO SAY, IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. NOBODY LEAVES AND DRIVES IN FRONT OF ANYBODY ELSE'S HOUSE. NOBODY LEAVES THAT OR WILL EVER DRIVE FROM ANYBODY'S HOUSE. IT'S AROUND BY 9,000 SPACES OF INDUSTRIAL AREAS SO THEY AREN'T GOING TO IMPACT ALL THE SEVERAL DISCUSSIONS ABOUT STICKING SOMETHING IN THE MIDDLE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. PEOPLE WHO LIVE ON 200 LLOYD ARE GOING TO BE IMPACTED WHEN THEY GET TO THE STOP SIGN AND WHEN THEY TURNED LEFT. SOME OF THEM GO STRAIGHT BUT SOME OF THEM GO LEFT. IF YOU REMEMBER THE LAST TIME WE HAD TO THIS MEETING THE COMPLAINT WAS 226. EVERY TIME WE HAVE A FIRE TRUCK OVER THE LONGER FEEL LIKE I'M BEING RUN OFF THE ROAD. I DON'T THINK IT'S 20 FEET BUT I KNOW THIS. THE OTHER PART THAT'S IMPORTANT WITH THIS DEVELOPMENT IS THAT IN THAT DEVELOPMENT WHOLE ORDER, WE WHY DID THAT TO 24 FEET WHICH IS WHAT J.P. HALL FELL BACK DESIGN FOR THATAND THAT'S A 24-D ALL ACTUAL REALITY NOT GOING TO GET A WHOLE LOT MORE BECAUSE DEVELOPMENT DOWN SOUTH ON 209 IS IT GOING TO TAKE PLACE. WHAT THAT CREATES IS THAT'LL RESURFACE IT, AND I'M SURE THEY WILL, BUT THEY ARE NOT W WHY DID YOU WHY DID I THEY ARE NOT WHY DO GET THEY ARE GOING TO SWING OUT TO2N WILL, BUT THEY ARE NOT WHY DID ON THAT LESS THAN 20-FOOT SEGMENT AND EVERYONE THAT'S COMING HOME ON THAT SEGMENT IS GOING TO HAVE TO GO PULL OVER, GET OUT OF THE WAY. THIS, THAT, WHATEVER. THIS ALLEVIATES THAT. THIS IS A SOLUTION. THIS IS NOT A PROBLEM AREA. THE COMPLEXITY OF THE MENU IS GOING TO CHANGE. I DO NOT KNOW, IT'S ON THE LIST. BUT AS THE CROW FLIES, IT'S THE CLOSEST ROAD OVER THE WETLAND BEING PRESERVED OBVIOUSLY THAT'S ABOUT TWO AND A HALF FOOTBALL [03:25:02] FIELDS. SIX OR 700 FEET FOR THE CLOSEST ROAD TURNING IT, IT'S HALF A MILE. WE ARE CHANGING AN AREA FROM RURAL CLAY COUNTY AND NOW DOING THIS. THIS IS SURROUNDED BY 9,000 ACRES OF CONSERVATION A AREA. PEOPLE HAVE SAID, MY GOSH, YOU'LL HAVE HUGE IMPACT ON THE CONSERVATION AREA. A SECOND MOST REGULATED STATE BEHIND CALIFORNIA WHEN IT COMES TO LAND. WE HAVE ST. JOHNS RIVER WATER MANAGEMENT. WE'VE GOT FISH AND GAME, WE'VE GOT FEMALE. WE'VE GOT EVERY AGENCY KNOWN TO BAD THE REALITY IS THIS PARTICULAR DEVELOPMENT CAN SIT ANYWHERE AND EDIT HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE STUDENT RULES AND THE SAME BUFFERING. WATER AND SEWER SERVICE IS GOING TO BE PROVIDED BY THE PEOPLE OF GREEN COVE SPRINGS. THE WALL TELL THE WELL IS BEING TAPPED. THE ABILITY TO PROVIDE THAT BY THE CITY OF GREEN COVE SPRINGS AND THERE'S NO SEPTIC TANK TO BE DONE. IT'S ALL CITY WATER AND SEWER. THE LAST THING I'LL ADDRESS IS WHY I BE HEAVY. THE ENTIRE AREA THERE IS SEVERAL DISTRIBUTION PLACES BASED IN AS AN OPERATION THERE, THAT'S SEVERAL NEAT COMPANIES, WE TALK ABOUT PETERS CREEK, THEIR MARKET PLACE IS GOING TO BE THE BIG DEVELOPMENT. THE ADVERTISER THERE IS ONE TO HOUSE A SQUARE FOOT 1 2,000 SQUARE-FOOT BUILDING. YOU CAN'T FIND 2-ACRE TO PUT A SMALL BUSINESS ON. YOU CAN HARDLY FIND FIVE. THAT'S WHAT WE BELIEVE ON 209 NORTH. HE DEVELOPED A GOOD LITTLE BUSINESSES, LOCAL BUSINESSES THAT PROVIDE JOBS -- BY THE WAY, THEY PROVIDE PROPERTY TAX. I DO NOT HAVE TO REMIND ANYBODY DOUBT THAT THE LEGISLATION GOES THROUGH, WE ARE GOING TO WASH -- EVERYBODY IS GOING TO WISH WE HAD MORE BUSINESSES, MORE PROPERTY ASSESSMENTS AND LESS HOMES -- I'M A REALTOR. NOT GOING TO SAY WE ARE STUCK WITH HOMES. THE TRANSACTION, THANK GOODNESS. I AM A REALTOR AND HOLMES WILL BE GOOD FOR BUSINESS. THEY ARE GOING TO SUSTAIN OUR QUALITY OF LIFE. AND THAT'S THE BIG PART OF THIS. THAT HELPS THE QUALITY OF LIFE EVERYBODY ACROSS THE COUNTY. AGAIN, UNLESS PEOPLE GET TO 209, THEY DRIVE NORTH AND THEY PASS ALL THEIR NEIGHBORS AND GET THAT STOP SIGN AND THEY LOOK TO THE RIGHT AND THEY ARE GOING TO SEE IT. UNTIL THEY GET THERE, THERE IS A SIGNIFICANT BUFFER. HE'LL NEVER SEE. WHEN YOU GET THE STOP SIGN THEY TURNED LEFT. THEY ARE GOING TO SEE IT. THEY'LL NEED TO LET ANOTHER TRUCK GO BY OR CARGO BUYING. THEY'LL GET ON TWO TO 26 OF WHY DID ROAD AND THEY'LL GO SHOPPING AND PUBLIC CENTER AND THEY'LL GO WHEREVER THEY ARE GOING TO GO. BUT THEY ARE GOING TO TAKE THAT ONE STRETCH AND IT'LL BE A WHOLE LOT SAFER AND IF WE DO NOT DO THIS DEVELOPMENT IT WON'T BE ANY SAFER. IF IT'S THE MONEY AND NOT ON THE LIST, I'VE BAGGED IT TO BE ON THE LIST. SO THAT'S MY PAGE AGAIN. I DO NOT THINK WE CAN FIND A BETTER PLACE CLOSER TO THE INTERSTATE SURROUNDED BY DEER, WHICH WE'LL LEAVE ALONE. I PROMISE WE'LL LEAVE THAT ALONE BY LAW AND BE GOOD NEIGHBORS TO THEM AND GOOD NEIGHBORS TO PROVIDE JOBS AND GOOD JOBS TO A LOT OF PEOPLE. >> I GOT A QUICK QUESTION. BETH MIGHT'VE ACTUALLY SAID THIS WITH THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT. SO YOU GUYS ARE GOING TO WIDEN 226 TO 50 FEET WEST OF J.P. HALL [03:30:03] BOULEVARD? >> 50 FEET TO J.P. HALL -- WHATEVER. >> JUST PAST THE INTERSECTION. >> YES, SIR. >> THAT WOULD WORK ON BAYARD ROAD. AT WHAT POINT WILL THAT BE DONE ON THE DEVELOPMENT THAT YOU WANT TO DO ON THAT? >> A BUILDING PERMIT, HAVE TO GET IT DONE. >> BEFORE THE FIRST PERMIT YOU HAVE TO GET THAT DONE. THAT'LL BASICALLY GIVE YOU -- VEHICLE ALL THE ROAD IMPROVEMENTS HAVE TO BE DONE PRIOR TO THE FIRST. >> SO YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE A LOT OF CONSTRUCTION ON THAT. I'M JUST LOOKING AT THE MAP OF THE ROAD. A LOT ONES TO GET OUT OF THE FIRST COAST EXPRESSWAY. THERE IS A BACK WAY AROUND TO GO -- >> AROUND 209? >> YEAH. >> IT'S ACTUALLY LONGER THAT WAY TOO. >> TO GET TO THAT BUT I WAS THINKING IT WOULD GO UP AND HIT 16 AND COME ACROSS THAT WAY. QUESTION. I GUESS... REGARDING THE ROADS AGAIN. THAT FIRST EDITION ROUTE, I GET THAT. BUT IF THAT SECTION OF 226 IT'S NOT GOING TO HAVE ANYTHING DONE WITH IT. THIS REALLY ISN'T A PLANNING ISSUE. IS THERE ANYTHING THE COUNTY CAN DO TO LIMIT TRAFFIC ON THAT SECTION OF THE ROAD, RESTRICTED SO THAT WE FOR SOMETHING TO GO UP WITH J.P. HALL. THERE ARE NO TRUCKS ALLOWED. >> CAN WE STAY -- IS NOT YOU, IT'D BE MORE THAN COUNTY. >> MORE PEOPLE THAN ME HAVE TO ADDRESS THAT ONE. >> HAVE TO ADDRESS THE WORST-CASE SCENARIO SO CAN WE FORCE THEM NOT TO GO ON THE ROADS. >> REAR RICHARD SMITH, COUNTY ENGINEER. IT IS A PUBLIC ROAD SO WE CAN'T STOP THEM. THEY DO IT ONCE AND THEY'LL LEARN IT'S NOT THE BEST WAY TO GO. IT'S GOT AN INDEX SCORE OF AROUND 80-90. I'M NOT LOOKING AT IT EXACTLY. THE FIRST QUARTER OF NEXT YEAR, COUNTY ARE. WE'LL DO EVERYTHING WE CAN TO DISCOURAGE THEM CONTINUING. >> WEIGHT LIMITS? >> THERE IS NO WEIGHT LIMIT BECAUSE THERE IS NO BRIDGE. >> IS NOT ONLY WEIGHT RESTRICTED, IT'S A SINGLE LANGUAGE. SO 209 IS NOT A PARALLEL ROUTE TO GO 17 SOUTH. YOU'VE GOT TO TURN THAT DECOY -- I THINK DECOY IS YOUR ONLY OPTION. SO 226 IS AN INTERESTING ROAD BECAUSE IT'S GOT CONSERVATION ON BOTH SIDES OF THE ROAD. BEING CONSTRUCTED NEAR THE END OF 17. WE HAVE A VERY LIMITED BUDGET AS IT STANDS IN THE FUTURE. IT WAS ABOUT LESS THAN 1500 CARS A DAY ON IT. AND NO DRIVEWAYS. WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE ROAD AND THE WAY IT'S CONFIGURED. IT'S NOT REALLY A SHORTCUT ANYWHERE. WHILE WE'D LOVE TO RESURFACE IT ON THE LIST, WE WENT TO CHECK IT OUT. IT'S NOT WHEN A FIRE TRUCK RUNNING. IT'S ONE ANOTHER SEDAN IS COMING. YOU ALMOST CAN'T HAVE TWO FASTER CARS GO FAST. >> THE MIRRORS WOULD SMASH. >> IF THE MIRRORS DON'T SMASH THE ROAD CONTINUES TO CRUMBLE ON THE SHOULDERS. WHAT WE RESURFACE, WE CAN RESURFACE THERE. >> WAS MOST INTERESTED IF THERE WAS A WAY FOR US TO FORCE THE TRAFFIC NOT TO USE IT SO IT DOESN'T CRUMBLE WORSE. >> WE CAN DRIVE THE TRUCKS BUT WE DID RECENTLY IS THE DEVELOPMENT IS TIGHTENED COLLINS [03:35:03] CONCRETE. THEY WERE DEVELOPING, THEY WANTED TO GO TO WORK BECAUSE WE ARE BUILDING A BRIDGE. WE LET THEM OPENING UP BEFORE THEY WERE COMPLETED THEY HAVE A NO RIGHT TURN SIDE ON THEIR E EXIT. AGAIN YOU CAN'T DRIVE THE TRUCK BUT WE ARE TAKING THEM A LEFT OUT ACROSS THE RAILROAD TRACKS AND GOING TWONINE. SO WE ARE DOING WHAT WE CAN WITH REGULATORY WAYS BUT AS FAR AS PHYSICALLY? IT'S DIFFICULT TO GET THIS SHARE OF WRITE TICKETS WITH EVERYTHING GOING ON THE COUNTY. A LIMITED AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC ENFORCEMENT. >> IMMED WE MAY NEED THOSE TO SUPPLEMENT OUR BUDGET. >> YOU WAIT ALL DAY TO WAIT FOR A CAR TO GO DO SOMETHING. >> I WAS JUST CURIOUS IF WE HAVE ANY OPTIONS. >> IT DOES HAVE THE NO RIGHT TURN SIGNING. WE HAVE THE SAME THING WITHIN EDUCATION. >> DOES YOUR PARTNER HAVE ANYTHING TO HAVE? >> HE'S MORE TECHNICAL. I'M MORE OF A PITCH MAN. THERE'S ONE QUESTION WE CAME UP FROM THIS PROPERTY. I DO NOT THINK IT'S GOING TO BE A PROBLEM BUT MAYBE YOU CAN JUST SPEAK AUDIT BECAUSE IT WOULD BE INDUSTRIAL LAND THERE IS SOME CONCERN THAT SOMEONE WOULD GO IN AND LIVE LOCAL TO PUT A BUNCH OF APARTMENTS THERE. >> WE SAID WE'D DO WHATEVER IT TAKES. >> YOU'D LIKE THAT, RIGHT? >> NO PROBLEM WITH THAT. WE KNOW WE NEED TO DO TO SAY NO. THAT'S WHAT WE NEED. WE DON'T NEED MORE HOUSES. >> IS OPTIONAL. >> ANY OTHER QUESTION? I OPENED UP THE PUBLIC HEARING. TWO STACKS OF CARDS HERE. I'LL READ THE ONES FIRST. THESE ARE AGAINST THAT DO NOT WISH TO SPEAK. THAT IS THAT. I HAVE THREE CARDS WHO WISH TO TALK TO US AND I'LL START WITH TRISH ROSS. I WILL PUT YOU LAST. MARY E SCHUMACHER. >> I'M ASKING YOU TO RECOMMEND OF THE POST COPPERHEADS OF BIG BEND. >> CAN YOU MOVE THE BIKE TOWARDS WHERE YOU ARE SPEAKING? >> I LIVE IN THIS HOUSEHOLD, HOMESTEADER OVER TWO YEARS. I'VE WATCHED CLAY COUNTY GROW TREMENDOUSLY FOR FOUR DECADES AND ALSO UNDERSTAND THAT IT'S IMPORTANT TO CONSIDER THE LONG-TERM EFFECTS OF DECISIONS THAT YOU MADE TODAY. ONE OF OUR CONCERNS IS THERE ARE PLENTY OF AREAS THAT RELY ON GROUNDWATER SUPPLIES. THIS LAST YEAR BROUGHT SERIOUS DROUGHT CONDITIONS WHILE FIRE CONDITIONS, HEAVY INDUSTRIAL ZONING COULD INVOLVE A BROAD LAID INCLUDED USES THAT COULD REQUIRE GREATER AMOUNTS OR DEMANDS OR BASIC PERMITS FOR GROUNDWATER WITHDRAWS. ABOUT SUGGESTING THAT THIS WOULD HAPPEN. I SIMPLY ASK YOU FOR THE POTENTIAL OF LONG DEMAND WOULD BE GRANTED IN THE LEVEL OF ZONING. I'M ALSO CONCERNED ABOUT THE WETLANDS, THE CONSERVATION LANDS AND THE DRAINAGE. THIS PROPERTY CONTAINS WETLAND SURROUNDED BY A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF CONSERVATION LAND. HEAVY RAINS LAST NIGHT, THE WATER WE OBSERVED ON COUNTY ROAD 209 SOUTH WHICH I TRIED TO DRIVE THROUGH TODAY COVERED APOLLO'S [03:40:03] TWO LANES IN THIS AREA NEAR A RECENTLY DEVELOPED PROPERTIES ISN'T NECESSARILY BECAUSE OF THE PROPERTIES. I ASKED YOU TO CONSIDER 209 -- I'M SORRY. I ASKED YOU TO CONSIDER COUNTY ROAD 226 AS A NATURAL LAD USE BOUNDARY. 226. SOUTH OF 226, THE AREA REMAINS PREDOMINANTLY AGRICULTURE MAINTAINING THE CHARACTER INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AND RULING CONSERVATION AREAS. WHY MOVE THE BOUNDARIES FURTHER SOUTH? I APPRECIATE THE ROAD AND INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS THE CODEVELOPER HAS CHOSE TO MAKE BT THE APPROPRIATE LONG TERM FOR THE APPROPRIATE LOCATION, I'M NOT AGAINST DEVELOPMENT BUT I BELIEVE THE INTENSITY OF DEVELOPMENT SHOULD BE FIT FOR THE LOCATION. I'VE CALLED AREA HOPE FOR OVER 40 YEARS AND I HOPE THE DECISION TO PROTECT THEIR FAMILIES I CALL IT HOME FOR THE NEXT 40 YEARS. TWO THINGS TO BRING TO LIGHT THEY'LL BACK THE ATTENTION, I REMEMBER COMING DOWN WHERE THEY WERE DOING THE COPPERHEADS A PLAN FOR FLORIDA AND WE SAID WE DO NOT WANT TO CHANGE ONE HOUSE PER ACRE AND WE WERE TOLD BASED ON CONSERVATION AND THE LOCATION THAT THEY WERE REQUIRED TO DO ONE HOUSE PER 5 ACRES AND TO BE THE CHANGE EVEN THOUGH WE CAME DOWN AND OBJECTED TO THAT. NOW WE ARE TAKING CONSERVATION WETLAND AREAS AND PUTTING STUFF INTO THE AREAS WHERE WE LOST OUR ONE HOUSE PER ACRE, WHAT ELSE THEY'LL BACK DOWN AT ONE HOUSE PER 5-ACRE. AT THIS TIME I DO NOT BELIEVE THERE IS AN AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, MATT SHOEMAKER >> THANK YOU, MS. SHOEMAKER. >> I LIVE ON 5743 COUNTY 209 SOUTH. I LIVE APPROXIMATELY 5 MILES SOUTH OF THIS AREA. ON 200 DIED. I HAVE 32 ACRES THERE HAD BEEN THERE FOR 27 YEARS. THAT AREA, I DO NOT KNOW IF YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH THE AREA SPECIFICALLY BUT 209-226, THERE'S A CREEK THAT GOES THERE. THERE IS TOO BIG WILDLIFE CONSERVATION AREAS ON EACH SIDE OF THE ROAD. THAT AREA IS A CONNECTION. IT'S HEAVILY TRAVELED IN ALL STORES EDIBLES TRAVEL THROUGH THERE. I'VE BEEN TRAVELING ON THAT ROAD FOR 27 YEARS. INDUSTRIAL GOING THERE AND IT WAS MENTIONED THAT WE ARE NOT IMPACTING AN AREA, NOT IMPACTING YOUR NEIGHBORHOOD. YES YOU ARE. YOU ARE IMPACTING THAT WILD POINT. PLUS 200 DIED SOUTH TO LET YOU GO THERE. THE FLORIDA ROCKIES ARE ALREADY GOING TO BE A BIG IMPACT TO THE TRACK TO BE DOWN THERE. IS THAT A NEIGHBORHOOD OR HOUSES NOTIFIED WITH WHATEVER THE RULE IS OF 305 FEET OF THE AREA? NO. THAT'S ALL CONSERVATION. WE DID SEE THE SIGNS. LIKE I SAID I LIVE 5 MILES DOWN SOUTH OF THAT ROAD THAT IMPACTS MY NEIGHBORHOOD. THE ONLY TRAFFIC WISE BUT DRIVING TO MY HOME, THERE IS MILLION-DOLLAR HOMES DOWN THERE. THE ROAD, THE ACCESS TO MY HOUSE FROM GREEN COVE SPRINGS, ON 298 MILES BEFORE YOU CAN GET ANYWHERE. GETTING BACK TO 17 OR ANY OTHER ACCESS TO OUR HOMES. ALL THE HOMES DOWN A MILE PATH THAT CONNECT IN ALL THE WAY FROM THE RIVER GOING DOWN 209 TO SEE HEAVY INDUSTRIAL, RELEASE OF THE CONSERVATION AREA. WHY ARE WE PUTTING IT IN A CONSERVATION AREA? PUT IT SOMEWHERE OUTWARDS. OUT IN THE MIDDLE OF FIELD SOMEWHERE. I HAVE A LOT OF CONCERNS ABOUT IT. THERE IS A STREAM THAT GOES. THE TRAFFIC IS GOING TO BE BACK. IT'S A MESS COMING IN WITH TRAFFIC AND TRUCKS. GOING TO IMPACT THE VALUE OF MY HOME. BUT IF I WANT TO SELL MY HOME OR HAVE SOMEBODY COMING DOWN THAT ROAD YOU WANT TO PASS A HEAVY INDUSTRIAL AREA. THEY DON'T. GOING TO DECREASE THE VALUE OF MY PROPERTY. [03:45:01] I WISH... >> YOU CAN FINISH. >> OKAY. THMS. ROSS? >> MY NAME IS TRISH ROSS. I EXPECTED WITH ALL THE CARDS THAT THERE'D BE A BUNCH MORE PEOPLE. SO I DON'T DISAGREE WITH SOME OF THE THINGS SAID TONIGHT WITH THE 23 COMING THROUGH AND THE NEED FOR JOBS. HOWEVER THE POINT I DISAGREE WITH... CAN YOU FLIP ONE OVER? IT JUST LOCATION OF THIS PROPERTY HAPPENS TO BE ON THE SOUTHEAST QUARTER OF 229 AND SOUTH BAYARD ROAD. IT'S SURROUNDED BY CONSERVATION LAND. WE ALREADY GOT THE INDUSTRIAL ON THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF 209. JUST AFTER A DAY'S WORTH OF RAIN WE HAD STANDING WATER, A FOOT'S WORTH OF WATER AND I'VE NEVER SEEN IT BEFORE ON THE NORTH AND CLOSER THE OVER PASS ON THE 43. 43. VOTERS IN THAT SCHOOL BUSES COULDN'T RUN THEIR NORMAL ROUTE TODAY BECAUSE OF THAT THERE WAS STANDING WATER OVER THE ROADS SO ALL OF IT THAT'S BEING CONSTRUCTED IS ALREADY AFFECTING THE ROADWAYS. OBVIOUSLY ADDING TO THAT IS GOING TO AFFECT SOME OF THAT. THAT NEEDS TO BE CHANGED BUT JUST TAKING A COUPLE WIDENING THAT TO 50 FEET WEST OF J.P. HALL ROAD DOESN'T DO ANYTHING FOR THE RESIDENTS. WE CAN GET TO J.P. HALL ROAD AND SNEAK AROUND IN THE CROSSOVER TRAFFIC THAT'S RIGHT THERE TO GET TO THE NEED TO STORE ORGAN SOMEWHERE ELSE. TO GET TO THE FEED STORE OR GET SOMEWHERE ELSE. SOMEWHERE WHERE IT WAS NOT PASSED BEFORE, I WOULD JUST ASK THAT THERE WOULD BE SOME MORE, SOMETHING MORE SET IN PLACE THEN SOMETHING THAT'S IMPORTANT FOR THE ROADWAYS TO GET US TO TRAVEL AS THE GENTLEMAN BEFORE ME SAID, I LIVE HALFWAY DOWN 209. BUT THAT'S OUR ONLY ROUTE OUT TO GO TWONINE NORTH. IF YOU LIVED OUT THERE THAT'S THE WAY WE GO TO TOWN IN THE GROCERY STORE. EVENTUALLY WE'LL GO TO PUBLIX AND IT COMES TO AGRICOLA AND ALL OF THAT. WE JUST NEED TO THOUGH IT'S BEING DONE PROPERLY. WHY ASK OF YOU IS IF WE ARE GOING TO REMOVE THIS. PUT THE PROPER WORDING AND STRUCTURES THERE FOR THE RESIDENTS. SO WE HAVE PROPER ROADWAYS IN PLACE. PROPER STRUCTRES. >> ANYBODY ELSE WISH TO SPEAK. DID YOU TAKE THE OATH, SIR? >> I LIVE AT 5608 COUNTY ROAD 209 SOUTH. I WOULD ASK YOU TAKE CONSIDERATION OF THE TRAFFIC SITUATION THAT THIS IS GOING TO IMPACT ON COUNTY ROAD 209 SOUTH AND COUNTY ROAD 226. I READ THE TRAFFIC STUDY THAT WAS DONE AND IT MAKES AN ASSUMPTION THAT MANY PEOPLE ARE USING J.P. HALL ROAD. SO FAR WE'VE SEEN WHEN THEY DEVELOP THE PROPERTY WAS THE DUMP TRUCK STAYED ON 226 AND WE SEE THE IMPACT, COMPLETELY TORN UP OVER THE SHOULDERS ARE BAD AND WE HEAR THAT THAT'S NOT EVEN GOING TO BE CONSIDERED TO BE REDONE OR REPAVED. JUST DOING IT TO J.P. HALL ROAD EDGES DO NOT THINK IT'S GOING TO MAKE A TRUCK DRIVER CONSIDER TAKING A DIFFERENT WAY TO STAY ON 226 AND WE DO NOT KNOW THE NUMBER OF DUMP TRUCKS TO DEVELOP THIS PROPERTY, WHAT OTHER DAMAGES AND IT'S GOING TO CONSIST AFTERWARDS. TO BE ABLE TO GET IN AND OUT OF OUR HOUSING. [03:50:01] 209 SOUTH IS A WRITER BECOMING A PROBLEM, THE OTHER COMPANIES THAT ARE BUILT HERE, THE TRACTOR-TRAILER STOPS ON 209. WE HAD TO WAIT AND GO AROUND THOSE TRUNKS. THEY DON'T PULL AROUND ALL THE TIME FOR THEY STAY ON 209 SOUTH AND BLOCK THE TRAFFIC. OTHER THING IS WE NEED TO GO ALL THE WAY DOWN TO D COIT ROAD AND DECOY ROAD IS ALREADY POOR CONDITION. NOT GOING TO BE PASSABLE IN A GOOD WAY FOR LONG. NEXT TIME. I JUST ASK YOU TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION. WE DO NOT KNOW WHAT KIND OF BUSINESSES ARE GOING TO BE IN THE INDUSTRIAL. WE DO NOT KNOW HAVE A CHANCE IT'S GOING TO BRING IN. A LOT OF THINGS TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION BEFORE IT CAN BE DEVELOPED. WE DON'T HAVE ANY PLAN TO DO ANYTHING TO IMPROVE 209 SOUTH OR 226 ALL THE WAY AROUND SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> THANK YOU, SIR. >> ANYBODY ELSE? WE'LL CLOSE PUBLIC HEARING. >> THANK YOU I COULD NEVER FIGURE OUT WHO COULD LEAD THAT INDUSTRIAL PARK AND HEAD SOUTH ON 209. 1 MILE, 5 MILES, 8 MILES ON DECOY ROAD, I COULD NOT FIGURE OUT DOING BUSINESS IN THE COUNTY IN NORTHEAST FLORIDA, GREEN COVE SPRINGS GOING TWONINE. THEY ARE GOING TO GO ACROSS 206. THEY AREN'T GOING TO GO UP 209. ALL THE OTHER REASONS, 209 IS NOT GOING TO WIDEN IT SOON. 226 BECOMES A SAVER ROAD FOR EVERYBODY. AND IT DOESN'T CHANGE ANY NEIGHBORHOOD, ANY HOUSE ON THAT ROAD GOING SOUTH. NOT ONE TRUCK, NOT ONE DUMP TRUCK, NOT WANT ANYTHING WILL LEAVE THERE AND UNLESS SOMEBODY HAS TO DELIVER A LOAD OF DIRT. THERE IS NO BUSINESSES THERE AND TAKING IT TO ENVIRONMENTALLY -- WE CAN TAKE ENVIRONMENTAL AT ANY PLACE IN THE COUNTY. WHEREVER YOU CAN DO BUSINESS, YOU HAVE TO PUT, YOU GOT RESTRICTIONS ON ALL THE ENVIRONMENTAL WITH 50 ACRES OF THE WILL LITTLE PROPERTY AGAINST 9,000 -- I DO NOT KNOW, NOT EVEN A TENTH OF A PERCENT. I SUSPECT THAT THE BEARS, THE PANTHERS, THE DEER, THE HAWKS, WHATEVER'S IN THERE WILL HAVE PLENTY OF ROOM FINDING A HOME AND THEY'LL STILL BE ABLE TO CROSS THAT. SIGNIFICANT TO THE SOUTH. THAT CANNOT BE TOUCHED. THAT'S NOT A PART OF THIS PROPERTY. WE WILL CHANGE IT, WE WON'T HYPE IT, WE WON'T DO ANYTHING BECAUSE IT'S NOT OURS. THAT IS OWNED BY THE BAY YARD -- THE DIP IN 209 A GOOD LITTLE BIT, THERE'S NO BUSINESS TO DEVELOP THEIR BECAUSE OF THE DIP. THE REALITY IS DOING THE JOB OF LIGHTING IT UP AND DOING THE WORK THAT THEY DO AND NEVER CORRECTED IT. IT HAS FLOODED IN THE PAST AND HASN'T HAD ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE ROCK OR ANYTHING ELSE. IT'S JUST A POORLY ENGINEERED PIECE OF PROPERTY. AND SO, AGAIN YOU LOOK AT THE TRAFFIC STUDY AND COMMON SENSE SAYS WHEN I COME OUT AND GO NORTH ON 209, I LEFT ON 226. AM I GOING TO GO ALL THE WAY DOWN PAST THAT FIRE STATION. THE DEVELOPMENT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT AND THE TRUCKS THAT WE ARE BEING TALKED ABOUT, THEY ARE ALL GOING TO GO OUT TO 226 WHERE THEY CAN PRACTICALLY CROSS THE ROAD AND DO THE BUSINESS OF THE FILLING DELI BUILDING TO DEVELOP ITS ACROSS THE WAY. AND EVERYBODY IS GOING TO DO IT. CAN'T GET ANY CLOSER. I DON'T CARE. WHAT SCHOOL ZONES ARE GOING TO GO ACROSS THOSE TRUCKS GOING OUT. YOU LOOK AT THIS PROPERTY ON 15 A, HOW MUCH IS HE GOING TO IMPACT. I GET IT. THE IDEA OF THE INTERSECTION HAVING THE INDUSTRIAL PARK, I'D PROBABLY BE THERE TOO. BUT AT THE END OF THE DAY WE THINK IT'S A VERY GOOD MOVE FOR THE COUNTY AS A WHOLE AND WE ACTUALLY THINK WE ARE GOING TO [03:55:02] IMPROVE FOR EVERYBODY THAT LIVES SOUTH ON 209. THEY DON'T THINK IT'S GOING TO GET ANY BETTER IF NOTHING IS GOING TO GET DONE THAT 18-FOOT IS GOING TO BE 17 BY THE TIME WE TURN AROUND. >> WE'VE GOT A QUESTION. >> I'VE GOT A QUESTION. >> WE JUST THOUGHT YOU WERE THROUGH. >> SOMEBODY MENTIONED UTILITIES. WHAT ARE YOU GOING TO ASK FOR UTILITIES OUT THERE. >> CITY. >> OUT AND GREEN COVE. >> THEY ALREADY BRING IT DOWN BRINGING IT THE REST OF THE WAY WE'VE GOT SEVERAL DISTRIBUTIONS. >> YOU'LL GET WATER AND SEWER. OKAY. >> I THINK THE STORMWATER WILL BE INFUSED AS WELL. >> LET ME TALK ABOUT THAT ONE. ONE OF THE GENTLEMAN MENTIONED A BUNCH OF DUMP TRUCKS. WHY DO YOU THINK THEY ARE GOING THEY'LL? >> GOING TWO26? WELL... RICHARD SAID CEMENT TRUCKS ARE GOING OUT DOWN ON 209. I DO NOT KNOW. PROBABLY HAULING IN DIRT RIGHT NOW. IF YOU LOOK AT THE AMOUNT OF DIRT DOWN 209, THEY DUG A LOT OF STORM PONDS. I USE THAT DIRT BECAUSE THEY HAVE BEEN BRINGING IN THIRD. QUITE HONESTLY EVEN FOR THE STOP ON 209, GIVING YOU THE LAKE. >> THAT'S THE ONLY IMPACT RIGHT NOW. I DO NOT THINK ANYBODY IS HAULING DIRT. DIRT IS A BIG COMMODITY AND I CAN TELL YOU THIS, WHETHER WE HAVE THAT WERE NOT, IF SOMEBODY IS TAKING IT DOWN 209 IT'S ONLY GOING TO PROP UP THAT INTERSECTION RIGHT THERE. BECAUSE THE COME UP TO 209, UNDER 226 AND IT JUST GETS WORSE AND WORSE. >> I WANT TO ASK MR. SMITH SOMETHING. I JUST COME UP I DO NOT GO TO THIS AREA OF THE COUNTY TOO OFTEN. I JUST WANT TO KNOW ABOUT WHAT THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT WITH 209 FLOODING. IS THAT AN ONGOING PROBLEM? DO WE KNOW ABOUT THAT? >> HAS BEEN ALERTED WHEN THE UNDERPASS WAS BUILT THEY BUILT A NEW POND IN THE NORTHWEST CORNER AND PROBABLY A BATTLE WE ALL WANT TO WATCH, I WANT TO SEE THAT ONE. THAT RAILROAD HAS BEEN THERE 126 YEARS? ALL OF A SUDDEN IT'S GOING TO WASH AWAY AND WE HAVE VIDEO FOR THE COUNTY MANAGER THAT SHOW THE WATER REALLY RUSHING THROUGH THE AREA. IF YOU LOOK AT THE ST. JOHNS RIVER WATER MANAGEMENT RAINFALL DATA IT RAINED LAST NIGHT FROM ABOUT 6:30 -- NOT 6:00, BUT ABOUT 7:30. 5.7 INCHES. THAT 5.7 INCHES EXTENDED ALL THE WAY FROM JUST NORTH OF HERE ABOUT SOUTH, ALL THE WAY -- I GOT INTO THE HEAD OF RAINFALL LAST NIGHT. IT WAS TOUGH. IT WAS BETWEEN FIVE AND 5.7 INCHES. THE BULL'S EYE RIGHT AROUND 16 AND 17, THAT INTERSECTION WITH SOUTH SIDE. WHAT I'M GETTING AT IS THAT SWAMP IS WHERE THE WATER GOES. AND IT WAS FLOWING THIS WATER WAS FLOWING AS HARD AS IT COULD, 4:00 THIS AFTERNOON. SCHOOL BUS DID GET THROUGH BECAUSE I WATCHED HER, I DON'T KNOW IF THERE WERE MULTIPLE SCHOOL BUSSES, HAVE TO CHECK WITH THE FOLKS THERE. BUT THE SCHOOL BUS, DID GET THROUGH GOING SOUTH OF 2009. BUT THE WATER WAS -- WE THINK [04:00:01] PART OF IT IS A DESIGN THE DOT DID, AND WE HAVE A AUTHORITY THAT ALERTED, THEY WERE ON SITE TODAY, AND WE HAVE TALKED TO THE URBAN DESIGNER UP IN JACKSONVILLE. >> WAS THERE RECONSTRUCTION OF 2009 BECAUSE OF 23 THAT CAUSED THAT? >> IT LOOKS LIKE A RECONSTRUCTION -- IT LOOKS LIKE THEY JUST POUNDED SOME WATER, AND REALLY -- AS FAR AS CONSTRUCTION SITES GO, WHERE THEY ARE BUILDING, IT WAS DRY. THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT IT WAS REMARKABLE. THERE IS ONE AREA IF THIS GOES THROUGH THAT IT WOULD HAVE TO BE TAKEN CARE OF. WE HAD TO PUT UP A HIGH WATER TOWER ON BAYSWATER ROAD. SO THAT PART DON'T LOOK GOOD. AND YOU CAN SEE THE WATER SIGN FROM 209. THAT WILL GET FIXED. IN OTHER WORDS WITH THIS, THAT WILL BE RELOCATED, REDESIGNED AND RE-ENGINEERED TO WHERE WE WON'T HAVE THAT ISSUE. BUT IT'S -- >> 209 IS THE OLD 17 RIGHT? LIKE REALLY OLD U.S. 17? >> IT IS A STATE ROUTE. 17 IS STATE ROUTE 15. 209 IS 209. THERE COULD HAVE BEEN SOME OVERLAP THERE. >> I WAS JUST WONDERING -- I MEAN THE WHOLE ROAD, IT'S BEEN THERE FOREVER. >> IT'S BEEN THERE FOREVER IT'S BEEN RESURFACED, RESURFACED IT ALL THE WAY DOWN TO THE BRIDGE. WE ARE NOT TAKING IT ALL IN OR REPAVING, IT GOES TO A DIRT ROAD AND THEN A SINGLE LANE BRIDGE THAT ACTUALLY THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT BUILT BACK IN THE 70S I HAVE BEEN TOLD. A VERY GOOD APPROACH BUT ONLY WIDE ENOUGH FOR ONE VEHICLE. >> IS THAT NORTH OR SOUTH? I'M LOOKING AT THE MAP AND I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT, YOU SAID THERE COULD BE WEIGHT RESTRICTIONS ON 209. THERE IS NO WAY THEY CAN GET TO THE ROAD? >> THEY CAN GET TO DECOY BUT SOUTH HE CAN'T GO TO 17. >> OKAY. >> AND DECOY IS ON THE RESURFACING LIST FOR NEXT YEAR, 27-28, THAT IS ONE OF THE ONES WE WANT TO GET TO. IT WILL BE IN PRETTY GOOD SHAPE. THEN THERE WILL BE ANOTHER ONE WE WILL WORK ON A YEAR AFTER THIS. BUT 15A IS NOT ONE WE WANT -- IT'S -- IF IT GETS TO THE POINT PEOPLE START USING IT, IT MAY BE PRIORITIZED UP TO IT. >> THANK YOU. OKAY ANY QUESTIONS, DISCUSSION? READY FOR A MOTION? >> WE ARE GOING TO TAKE THESE ALL AT ONCE CAN I GET TEN DIFFERENT MOTIONS. >> I JUST WANT TO COMMENT ON A COUPLE OF THINGS FOR THE VOTING IS, I WAS CONCERNED -- I AM CONCERNED THE WAY THIS PIECE OF LAND STICKS INTO THE CONSERVATION AREA. IT IS -- I THINK THE ISSUE WILL BE THAT FOR THE UTILITIES OUT THERE. THAT SHOULD HELP A LOT WITH THE WATER AND THE PROBLEMS WITH THE POLLUTION. AND SO NOBODY CAN PUT APARTMENTS OUT OF THERE. BUT WE DO NEED -- WE HAVE TO HAVE INDUSTRIAL LAND. IT SEEMS LIKE ANYWHERE YOU WANT TO PUT IT, SOMEBODY IS UNHAPPY ABOUT IT. SO PUT IT WHERE NOBODY IS, WELL, I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO DO HERE. IT DOES AFFECT PEOPLE BECAUSE OF THE LIMITED ROADS IN THE AREA. JUST MY THOUGHTS. >> WE ARE DOING TEN MOTIONS? >> ONE AT A TIME. WE NEED A MOTION ON COMP PLAN 26-00. >> SECOND. >> WHERE DOES THE LIVE LOCAL -- IN THE COMP PLAN OR ZONING, THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT? OKAY. DO WE NEED A MOTION ON THAT? SO HOW DO WE -- HOW DO WE ENSURE THAT IT GETS INTO THE DEVELOPMENT? >> WE CAN HAVE THAT REVISED IN PART OF THE BOARD PACKET. >> ALL RIGHT. I AM BIG ON GETTING THINGS IN WRITING. [CHUCKLING] OKAY, AS LONG AS IT IS IN THE MINUTES THAT MISS ROYAL HAS [04:05:01] READ, AND PUT IT IN THE DA BEFORE IT GETS TO THE BOARD, I AM OKAY WITH THAT. >> IS THERE A MOTION AND SECOND? >> SECOND. TO RECOMMEND TO APPROVE THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION. >> ANY DISCUSSION? ALL IN FAVOR AYE? ZONING 267-0019, TO REZONE FROM AG TO IB. >> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND, ANY DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE? ANY OPPOSED? COMP PLAN 26-0021. >> SECOND. >> ANY DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE? ANY OPPOSED? ZONING 26-0020. AG TO IB. >> MOVED. >> ANY DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. ANY OPPOSED? COMP PLAN 26-0022, 1.72 ACRES. MOTION? >> SECOND. >> SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE? ALL OPPOSED? ZONE 26-0021, 1.72 ACRES. >> I WILL MOVE THAT. >> SECOND. >> MOTION AND SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE? OPPOSED? COMP PLAN 26-0023, 32 ACRES TO INDUSTRIAL. >> MOVE APPROVAL. >> MOTION. >> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A SECOND ANY DISCUSSION? THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED? ZONING 26-0022, 32.79 ACRES. MOTION? >> SECOND. >> AND A SECOND. DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE. OPPOSED? COMP PLAN 26-0025, 41.75 ACRES TO INDUSTRIAL. >> SO MOVED. >> MOTION. >> SECOND. >> AND A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? ALL THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE? ZONING 26-0023, 41.75 ACRES TO IB. >> SO MOVED. >> SECOND. >> AND SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? THOSE IN FAVOR SAY AYE? OPPOSED? OKAY. THAT COMPLETES OUR AGENDA. I HAVE ONE MORE ITEM TO DO, AND THAT'S THE PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD. WE WILL OPEN TO THAT, DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANYTHING THEY WISH TO ADD? SEEING NONE I WILL CLOSE THAT. >> MR. CHAIR, BEFORE YOU ADJOURN -- OUR NEXT MEETING WILL BE IN NOVEMBER. ON THAT SAME DAY AS THE ELECTION, YEAH? I MEAN IT'S -- THE DATE IS THE THIRD. THAT IS THE FIRST TUESDAY OF NOVEMBER, ISN'T THAT ELECTION DAY? >> YES. >> OKAY WE TYPICALLY DON'T MEET ON ELECTION DAY. USUALLY BUMP THE MEETING TO A THURSDAY OF THAT WEEK. >> IF IT'S THE PLEASURE OF THE COMMISSION. >> WE USUALLY DO THAT. THE NEXT MONTH IS ELECTION DAY. >> CORRECT. >> NORMALLY WE HAVE IN THE PAST POSTPONED OUR MEETING OR RESCHEDULED TO THE THURSDAY OF THAT WEEK. >> I DON'T RECALL EVER RESCHEDULING IT. >> NO? >> NO. >> SO WE DO MEET ON ELECTION DAY? OKAY. I KNOW WE CHANGE IT SOMETIMES. OKAY. I ALREADY VOTED SO. [CHUCKLING] >> OUR NEXT MEETING IS NOVE NOVEMBER THIRD, ONE LAST THING I WOULD LIKE TO BRING UP, THIS IS A QUESTION -- IT SEEMS TO BE A TOP ITEM ON OUR ZONING AND STUFF LIKE THAT, WE ALL KEEP REFERRING TO THE RENFREW PLAN, WHY DO WE NOT HAVE THAT? >> BECAUSE IT WAS NEVER ADOPTED THAT WAY, IT WAS ADOPTED AS A MASTER PLAN OR INTENDED TO BE [04:10:03] FOR THE REST OF THE COUNTY. AND THE. >> BILLY: 80 RIGHT NOW WE CAN'T DO ANYTHING THAT WOULD BE MORE RESTRICTIVE OR BURDENSOME ON PROPERTIES. YOU CAN WILLINGLY SUBJECT YOURSELVES TO IT BUT WE CAN'T FORCE THAT. >> WE SHOULD HAVE DONE THAT TWO YEARS AGO? >> WE HOPE WE GET THROUGH SP-1. >> BEFORE WE ADJOURN, ANOTHER THING? >> OKAY. >> IS THERE ANYTHING WE SHOULD BE LOOKING AT WITH RESPECT TO -- THIS WAS ONE OF THE ITEMS FROM EARLIER ON, THE ALI ROAD? WITH RESPECT TO -- YEAH, JUST SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE HAVE HEARD TONIGHT, IS THAT SOMETHING WE SHOULD BE TAKING A LOOK AT AND MAYBE CONSIDER CHANGING IN THE CODE? >> I KNOW WE REFERENCED THE FIRE CODE IN CERTAIN PORTIONS OF OUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, YES, WE PROBABLY NEED TO TIGHTEN IT UP A BIT AND WE CAN WORK WITH THE FIRE MARSHAL AND SEE AS WE DO OUR COACHING. WE CAN KEEP THAT IN MIND. >> I WOULD LIKE TO SUGGEST THAT. >> OKAY ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR * This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.