God and Father in heaven we come to you now Lord break hearts for all the blessings on us we thank you for this day for rain most of all Lord we thank you for you for father we thank you for our County our elected officials we ask this morning go that whatever we accomplish to your will we always be careful you honor and praise chist to of the United States of America the stands one nation indivisible Justice for welcome T night to the County Commission meeting I'm Ro now with as many public hearings we have I will mess up somewhere so please bear with us we have one addition to the agenda item number 8 a and consent an additional M application for joh n we have one removal from the agenda item number 25 Mr P ask be remove the agenda additions 27 which one1 the board I have no OB move 27 and 31 to consent how is number 33 that work how about number 4 A any addition additions or deletions 33 number 33 update on Green Street Paving okay anything else with a motion by commissioner PA to adopt the agenda Amendment second by commissioner patteron all favor say I all say sign motion carries need motion to approve minutes from July 17th special meeting August 30 motion by commission Brown second by commissioner pson all say I all motion car um had see disclosure comc give you hands up I may be stopping from time to time to take care of the public hearing give you hands up time that being said go from there I would like to the moving the board meeting some that happen tonight we're not hway too much I know nothing else and it get time full tonight and I know we're also looking at the courtroom buddy and the staff's working on that so hopefully we'll be able to address that pretty quick number 11 the board receive an update from the c order Association requested by the board on September 7th I saw them but there you are I am here I'm give the same cat with earlier I may sto you in a few seconds I apologize go ahead uh I I apologize for not being at the last uh County Commissioner meeting that you held I was actually at the Dixie County Commissioner meeting that evening it was the same or that day it was the same time uh we we did uh sign the agreement between Dixie County and Steen Hatchy so we are prepared to provide Wastewater services to Gina and we've got that agreement in place uh and we're moving forward with that the the plan at this time is we're we're moving forward with trying to create a Gua if you will now we've we've recently hired an attorney at of Tallahassee uh Mr Michael spilman that represents a firm that used to represent the city of Tallahassee and what we passed him with doing is giving us list of governance options so we can look at what our options are as far as a gway as far as some other government entity that will allow us to get the funding for these projects and and make it a regional utility and everything that we had talked about before so that is still moving forward we also uh have hired Tammy Ray of hll engineering for administrative Services uh she since then hired Danny Collins who was uh Governor Boyd's assistant and put him on her staff to go after legislative and Congressional Appropriations for our projects so all that's moving forward uh we have a meeting tomorrow with Swan riverwater management to go after some other funding uh for some of these projects through Swan River Water Management and look at the availability of property for water plants and such and that meeting scheduled for tomorrow we're going to present uh another option to Dixie County on Thursday at their County Commissioner meeting and that's basically we're we're going to seek some Appropriations and some funding under the Dixie County umbrella for the water plant we're going to put in Dixie County now all of these things that we're putting together are moving toward this Gua at the same time part of the agreement with Dixie County added the Dixie County Commissioner for Gina to our order board we've amended our uh bylaws and that amendment is up before the membership on the 3rd of October at our annual meeting and what we've done to our bylaws and I I spoke with Mr be earlier is we added also the Taylor County Commissioner Fortin Hatchy to our board those those two positions so our board will go from being a seven member board to being a nine member board with representation from both Dixie and Taylor counties on it you know to in order to to basically give equal representation to both counties and to have County Commissioner involvement in our process so that we're not operating outside of your knowledge basically because where we're headed is basically a regional utility that you will own you know the the counties will own in addition to us I mean we're we're not going to be out there by ourselves it's it's going to be governed by the counties and by us uh and I I talked to Mr be about it and uh because I wanted him to know before this meeting that that was being thrown at him also with uh adding the County Commissioners were giving the option of the County Commissioners or their appointee and basically we we gave them that option so that we weren't throwing them to the wolves and we understand their time is valuable and they don't have time always to come to all our meetings and participate and everything but they can appoint a representative to that position and and that would be an option well we don't we don't yeah absolutely absolutely we're not appointing him to our board what we're doing is we're we're we're making that position available to him if if he doesn't wish to fill that position or this board doesn't wish to fill that position that's totally it's your option right right and all yeah yeah right and and what we what we're looking for is we're looking for your participation in in this process we we don't want to be out there doing something that that you would disapprove of I mean that's that's not what we want and and by the same token Dixie County we wouldn't want to do something that they don't that they disapprove of uh so this whole process is is still moving forward we're still working on it don't yes it has as as a matter of fact uh we had a meeting talking about our the the agreement we just signed and I actually brought it up I brought it to the meeting and said you know you have copies of this this is the direction that we would like to go and uh they had seen it and you know they they had it uh I I don't know what their complete reaction to it is or what have you uh and I'll tell you what we're doing with forming this Gua is to a large extent plagiarizing that document uh and and and you know because it's already created and it's already there and it's and and and as I I told Dixie County I I presented it to them and we talked about it and I told them that this is a good document this is a good plan and and and and I've since then taken that same document giving it to our new attorney uh that's going to give us these governance options and giving it to our uh administrative uh Services people and they're going to take it and put this all together and we're going to try and pull the two counties together and and make this happen any question from the board I think it's all good last we had we had developer here from a little bit disappointed your organization from the perspective of SE and I'd like to know and understand more about that why you guys are not stepping forward uh your last meeting was what was the date of that last meeting meeting V7 the last meeting a the seven Thursday morning meeting okay that was well I should have asked what month that was in because uh and I have right here in front of me the application from ideal Fish Camp that's dated June 2906 ideal Fish Camp came to us and and filled out this application of Mr Gregory Preble and Mr Steve bchi I do believe uh so they were fully aware and and basically already on board with sewer we we had already had the discussions we had already talked about uh putting sewer of their project after your last meeting uh there was a one of our board members was at that meeting and he immediately called me and I immediately called them because he said they were there and they didn't know anything about us and I called them and said you were there and didn't know anything about us and I have your paperwork right here in front of me and and they you know apologized and and explained that you know they knew they were on board they knew what was going on the next day they came to my office and basically we drafted contracts to deliver service to their development I wasn't at that meeting I don't know what transpired in this room I don't know you know what they were saying but I was a little upset when I got a call from one of our board members that someone was before this board telling you that they hadn't heard of us and I had already drafted contract for them this is conflicting information well here's their develop told us on on this document is their completion date uh is 607 and we meet that timeline by five months you know I mean we we have no problem meeting that timeline and we explained that to them in the meeting with them when they filled this document out I mean it let me stop you just for a second um item number 17 the board received proposal for construction of par side improvements to 161 we did not hold that public hearing we received no bids for that item number 18 the board received bids for pedler County bird rack platform I didn't think a second to stay there platform Construction project reconstruction projects up for this date at 6:15 p.m. a big Committee of clay olon Justin sath and Brienne Hoover clay going come for open for us continue on I have to do he's come here and do it we can keep on with you okay so as as far as uh as our process and what what we've been doing and to to kind of bring you up to speed on the process of us contacting these developers or them contacting us normally what happens they come to us for water they have to come to us or they don't get water uh when they come to us for water we discuss sewer and and how to meet the needs of their project we have them fill this form out that basically gives us who's your engineer uh so we have a contact to get site plan so that we uh have timelines on their project so we understand where their project is and then we move into uh basically the contractual port por of it and sometimes that may take months and sometimes that may take days and and it's basically to meet their timeline when they have a timeline that's out uh they're not they don't have site plans for instance but they're planning a project it may be six months before they're back in my office again but I've got this document that says we've talked to them and then when they come back in my office ready to come before your board for their site plan or what have you then um uh we come up with contracts and that sort of thing and and we move through this process uh one of the things after that meeting uh that that we did at the recommendation of our board member is we contacted your building department we set up a meeting for tomorrow afternoon because we we need to better uh document what we're doing and what their requirements are so we can we can figure out what do they need and what do we need to provide them for these projects 3:00 in the afternoon yeah I I couldn't be there because I have that Swan order management meeting and I was told that 3:00 was fine that it would be going on any questions me concern have developer up here tell me one thing I hear a different thing you got an application I do want to watch that because good develop go forward we need to have and some of these devel I'm not sure what happen there yeah and I I hope you guys continue it sounds like y'all did your work conc right and and that's sort of what I'm looking for tomorrow from this other meeting is is what coordinating this uh this communication so that we know what what you need what you need to have in front of you when somebody approaches you and says we've never heard of Steen Hatchy Water Association and you can go well apparently you have right here's your your application to Steen hatche Water Association I don't think he said that he didn't know no think they know you and when did the application you're talking about when did that application go for it was June 29th is when they that's the official application they applied for you to for for us to provide water and sewer to their project is is when they came to to us and said we'd like watering sewer and uh and we sat down with them we looked at their site plans at that point we looked at uh the availability because depending on where these projects are we may not be able to meet their timeline I mean that's that's a realistic expectation you know in the future if there may be a development that's 15 mil north of where we're putting in Pipeline and we can't meet their requirements without a huge amount of funding to run a pipeline to them and and we have to look at those options so every one of them we evaluate individually this one in particular the pipeline is already running right in front of their property you know through part of their property so it's it's no issue as far as as putting this development online okay appreciate all your efforts thank you I heard where I want to hear be asking those questions going to coordinate how we're going to provide information to the public on who they need contact about SE receive the information our have a question hurricane vulnerability of new things going on and Gina and I didn't know where to refer him or to find out about would you all be the ones okay thank you thank we have two bids from the bird racks the first one being for $80,000 from Maryland Marine Construction Incorporated the second one being 59,6 185 and it's from shippers Marine shippers Marine shippers Marine Construction Incorporated bu the dep's office has both the bids time being 620 or shortly therea the board hold the first of she hearing set for this dat at 6:20 p.m. concerning Amendment LDC 6-1 removing the 15 acre exemption on private roads and to consider the first reading of proposed ordinance stopping set Amendment I'll ask for a motion to read by Title by Mr second second Mr P all say I all same sign go forl count County development Cod Amed section 42-47 devr orer as as each has at least on an existing County maintain Road and division of land into two or more Parcels of 40 acres or greater as as on existing roading thanil anyone from the public wish to address the amendment can you just say what that means English I appr you want to read it yes go ahead designation of plans is major minor development generally for purposes of the subdivision all development plans be designated by the plan direct either minor or major developments set in except notand SE and subsection of this SE any division of where you need to listen okay any division of land into two or more Parcels of 15 Acres ofer got that Each of which has at least 60 ft of on an existing County maintain Road and any division of land into two or Parcels of 40 acres of Greater Each of which has at least of existing private or private serving not more than 24 acres is exemp from thisly the land B code allows property to be divided into par aners are larger if they run on an existing access way which may be a private easement or just a uh strip where people have been driving that appears to be a road in you know ownership is not changed this would change that so that the 15 AC parles would have to run on County Main Road that's the main your question Jack I would suggest you why are both of those ACR and any division land 40 AC at least exist and is the right word yes explain more clearly the 24 part you lost well when you reach the threshold of 4 acre Parcels that are divided off of a private roadway or evenement the maximum that can be done as 24 par 2448 and I'm techically not the author but that would the maximum that you could do that before you would have to do Road improvements would be 24 now the 15 AC Parcels of the 6 foot on the public FL that would be a flag Lott my question is let's say they on a buing a county road where they it's requiring 60t of front not a 60 we got that was a question was asked earlier was how much R requ now this would not require specific RightWay with if it's a county main the policy we used in the past and that's what I foree as being used on the 40 acre Parcels is that we do a site visit and if it looks like a road and You' can drive out it like a road and we all agree that it's a road then we consider the road we don't you know look at the wi most of the time you don't have a rideway there anyway right the public down my name is Dale R uh I'd like to save myself some time and y'all too and all the ordinance tonight that's on the agenda uh I have some problems with except for the two on the signs and the peline rways our ldr is and I've used this quite often as as like our Bible and development I don't mean to be that Sac religious in saying that but it is a book and and you got one section here that affects something and you change this and you Chang the meaning somewhere else uh one of the major concerns I have in all these three that we talking about now on the 15 AC flag lot and reason why I'm mentioning all three I'm not going to get back up here I hope that you remember on talk about these other ones that I don't get back up and stutters spill around but on all three of them there in our ldr and comprehensive plan there is an exemption for Family Division of property that relates only to divisions only to density you have to meet all the other requirements of the uh ldrs if I want to give my daughter one acre in Shader Grove which I can't give none of y'all we decide that other other night but if I want to give them a 1acre requirement a lot up there we still got to meet all the other requirements uh one of the things that y'all need to be considering tonight is the fact the the effect that it has on economic value I know that urban sprawl is a bad word but then again when you look at what urban sprawl is in development there's not too much difference that urban sprawl to me is uncontrolled development where development is good if we want to do things like this tighten up development one thing you're doing you're taking away the ability of me I own 85 Acres okay and I have a private road that goes into it that you can't drive down nothing say invite you everybody's invited but before you change this I can go in there and break this up and if I want to sell my land I'm going to have to go in there and pave that road because of this I actually have a 70t rway gun in the mine but based upon this you you're affecting the value of my land if we don't have development what we're going to end up is we all going to be in apartments and town houses we keep looking at South Florida we don't want to be like Miami day County where everybody lives right on top of each other and when you when you do this when you pass this approve this uh these uh requirements you're going to restrict anybody own any property the ability to go in and subdivide it break it up into if somebody want to sell 15 AC year this year 15 it's kind of like a retirement fund that's what it is the most people's retirement you you're going to Pro prev them do it so what's going to happen is somebody's going to come in and buy your property at a wholesale price develop it and get a big price out of it you know and as as property goes on and it's subdivided more and more there are other requirements of our existing rules that would require paying and building the roads so you know if you get in there you get outside the 15 acre exemption and it's on if if we don't have an existing Road or uh E's not going to it you can't do it no way if you build a road you're going to have to build a road you're going to have to go through SW River you're going to have to get Erp you're going to have to hire surveyor yeah that's good I like that but anyway it's it's not good for the public it's not Goods economical value uh we have a different opinion on what good development is and what's bad inini River Preserve has been viewed by this board as a bad example of what what's going on their process included coming to the tech review committee meeting with the tech Review Committee taking the county manager County engineer and county road department manager out to look at it they see how this looks like a road and you're meeting the requirement the only thing that and then they took it for we took it for the plan and Zoning Board I said yeah you meeting all of our requirements the only thing that I see is that they didn't do is get an Erp permit from SW River Water Management District and they're working on correcting that today a similar a project very similar that what I call the Yellow Jacket pro project is out on County Line Yellow Jacket area up in there we brought that up into and and uh took it for the district boorder Management District they didn't have a problem with it we didn't have to do nothing and so you know you you look I did this yesterday then I can do this today you I can do the same thing today and that's theas of what happened with the in River preserves I think some of the things that we could do to uh presentent that in the future find My Notes cuz I don't have a real good memory uh we had we we talked about a few times before the board and uh Mr gor you don't like a disclosure statement being required I understand that you know I mean but then again everybody that buys a piece of property should know what they're buying they should know if the county road or whatever and if I do a disclosure statement I come this road is maintained by this homeown Association or this road is maintained by the county with msbu tax attached to it I think we should do that this is in a flood zone you know I like the idea that the district has now the district is giving Danny yall a computer that you can go online and look see if it's in Wetlands or anything like that you ain't seen one well they said they was going to do it but anyway I think that's a good idea that when they go into the building and planning department you can look and see where you're getting into and that's a good checkpoint on new develop these 15 Acres no you can't build into Wetlands we don't want to build in don't want L nobody build into a wetlands in a flood plane we want to make sure that they're high enough above the flood of Planet they're not flood it um some of these pieces of property are 20 mi from an existing power line somebody's got to pay for that power to get put in there they need to know that you going to have to pay $3,000 a mile orever what the cost is to get power run to your house and you going to have to pay you know large bill each month to pay for that that's where the disclosure statement would would uh help force uh another a clause in every Homeowner associ Association or property owner association should be that if the entity fails then the county has the right to impose the msbu tax on the property with only a public hearing and notification of the owners and so a lot of times Property Owners Association just don't do what they're supposed to do and y'all's hands are tied and done I believe y Creek where we had the problem with the roads several of but anyway but anyway if if we didn't we require that on all homeowners associations and basically what I'm asking you to do is let's going approve these tonight let's go back to the drawing board hold some workshops and I got a lot of input this is just some of it that I'd like to bring and but I want type you here and I can sit here and talk to you a long time but uh and I'm not going to speak on the other one but the other three the flag lots and the road issue is uh all related to these same ISS items issues any questions for me just for clarification I'm not against disclosure more government regulation oh I understand exactly and so face is cringe when you said that I want to make sure they understand I'm not well I I understand your uh hesit to impose new regulation that's what we're doing tonight you know you're doing tonight you're tightening up the strains you know you're trying to prevent urban sprawl and I understand that I understand it you good development does not necessarily mean that you're not going to I just want to clarify not again I think everybody should I know that exactly I know exactly where you stand thank you for listening to me and hope you'll consider what I asked my name is Meg I live in Ste Hatchy um first of all I happen to agree with Mr Ral that I think that all of these Clauses that we currently have that have been continually modified through the years probably need to be looked at in whole so that each Clause is in conjunction and working properly with all others as a contract writer I would do that myself I can't imagine that I would allow a contract change to occur without a full um review so I do agree that that needs to be done however um unlike Mr Ral I disagree that the property values would be decreased if they were required to put in infrastructure to support this type of uh division of property and the reason I think that is because obviously if you have a piece of property that has full access for fire power sewer water Emergency Medical Services versus a hopefully maintained no offense to the county but they're not always done maintained road that is typically at least in Steen Hatchy number of times covered with large Boulders or have grass on them or just or potholes it just makes it that much more difficult to take care of the people that are going to move there my biggest concern about this is that as a tax paay I listened for the last 38 days all of you in conjunction at different meetings talk about the fact that we don't have enough money for the infrastructure if we possibly allow people now to go down this route without requ iring them to put in the infrastructure then I have to pay for it 15 years down the road when they continue to sell that property and you put the roads in I'm the one that has to pay everybody has to pay here but they've already reaped the benefit of this and so I have a problem with any development getting done without the full infrastructure being put in that's what I feel about that counc Howard are you stand rising to your approach yes sir that's good Mr Conrad my name is Trey Howard I'm here for two reasons tonight first reason is selfish uh hopefully one day when my father passes on he will leave me some land no no no no I don't want him to pass on but hopefully when he does when he does e y I'm the only child of an only child so maybe I'll get what a little bit of land they've accumulated how's that is that better that sounds better I'm sorry I do not want my father to pass away he we're trying to build a house and he's my only savior in the house building a house a pregnant wife and starting a new job if that don't make you drink I don't know what will so for clarification you want to wait after the house is built to right right but the first thing is I'm being stingy and I do also represent several developers stingy too all developers are St but uh this will affect them as well so I'm here for two reasons tonight um first off I understand when I looked at what was sent to planning and zoning board for these that this was done in an effort to maintain roads and create infrastructure um I truthfully believe that there are less restrictive means as Daryl pointed out a while ago to carry out these um Mr Dale came up with some good ideas and I think there are a lot of other people in the county that could come up with good ideas I do think we need a way to maintain these roads Mr be has stated that M or excuse me that homeowner associations don't work homeowner associations in the past haven't worked here but that doesn't mean that we can't work with the county attorney people in the community to make a homeowner association that has some teeth to it um they are out there um actually the one that uh ITA did up in north in the county has some pretty big teeth in it uh has a way of collecting the fees I don't know if you've seen it Mr con but it's it there's money in there to collect if somebody doesn't pay which I don't think was in the ones that you saw earlier there are ways other ways to collect money to maintain roads than imposing this um you're looking at 15 acres is what we got now in this exemption on an existing Road basically in my mind and Danny you can correct me if I'm wrong we're going to bump it up to 40 but only 24 units which you know there's a magic number in there I don't know what that is but to me it's already 15 that's worked in the past that's a pretty big chunk of land it's not to some of us in this room but to a fell that's lived in St Pete all his life on a quarter acre 15 acres is a big place and he doesn't want to move up here to a pave Road he does however want to move up here to a nice Road he wants to move up here where he can come and go two wheel drive traffic an ambulance can get to his house fire truck can get to his house and I believe there is a less restrictive means other than this exemption or excuse me than this amendment tonight and I would ask respectfully that y'all vote no on this amendment and that we do have a workshop a public Workshop to create something else thank you'all for your time anyone else you want as long as you're not my wife you can ask all the questions you want well Mr Dale pointed out a couple he pointed out homeowner association with a backup msbu and it may be it's an msbu I just I don't have the solution right now but I think it requires us to sit down when I say us I mean the community as a whole with the Commissioners in a public workshop and come up with a less restrictive means I'm sorry problem not having to have pay have any problem when you start building houses and you know people when they build a house they're expecting fire department show up and I know that Beyond Reason and people to be able to land grind but at the same time you know what we're looking for how do you sure that you get you know a Home Owners Association that supposed to when the state of has recognized that homeowners associations don't workor problem and that's a very valid point there have been in the past we had a public this we had Workshop had a lot of discussion I agree this is not the best like sou you know about something AC and there's agreement that that have some but what we got look at is we're going to be expected to provide those services and how you do that without being tax and I agree with you interrupt you we've talked before and and I think an msbu is a wonderful thing some people some of the folks I work for don't think it's a wonderful thing but I in my heart of hearts I believe that is a way you know the money gets collected you know the money's there there's 100% private msbu available for a private road um and Mr Conrad making shed some more light on that for yes sir yeah and I I agree with you 100% um but if if we if y'all enact this tonight then it's going to jump me up to 40 acres at my house and that's that's y'all's option I just would request that we we do if if it if it takes setting up an msbu for the private roads then you know to me it's about compromise you know you want to way y'all want to way to take care of these roads and I understand that for whole you I don't want my granddaddy to have to pay for somebody else you know I want him to pay for his road and his part of the taxes but I don't want him coming up here and having to pay his part of the taxes to build a road for some fell coming up here buying a bunch of land and and and I agree with Mr be on that but by the same token I also don't want this to be taken away from him he would never sell but if he did this is a less restrictive option for him if that's what he wants to do and I just hate to see that bumped up to 40 acres just because we want to get Services I'm sorry for that so you're proposing we leave it at 15 Acres yes sir and that you can divide land in the 15 acre tracks with on private roads if you're wanting the private road to be for an mpu to be set up take care of the needs of the private road rather than what what's describe here I would prefer that rather than the language we have here yes sir well existing rul says it's on existing Road oras exemp you know okay once you get out where you have existing Road or E then on rules you got to build a road whatever get there you going to get under water man District rules that say that you got to have a Erp someone has to maintain those road so you going have to go through the process you know Brad iations I think the problem here is if you don't pass this then you don't because the rules say that if you have existing roads there they don't have to come to us they don't have to do anything so what we're doing is Now setting up methodology so the developers have to come and they have to come and look at our standards but right now just all they have to do right now is planning board say yep you're doing 15 AC and there's there's loging roads out there you don't have to you don't have to do anything and so they're above in my research Madison County has taken County totally took out uh Crystal River uh they looked at me and said I foret what cryst river is they looked at me and she said why are you thinking that way and basically I just tell you a quick story of thisiss I got real well um she we we discussed two about two hours and uh the way she became a commissioner was through this process is basically she came VA and uh homeowners associations no Road no nothing and uh the lady that she was having to help her neighbor try to take care of she was having to take her and so if you want good communities and I have this in my district already you know uh neighbor pointing out those people won't pay their dues and and so you just set up a lot of Dynamics and a lot of things and and I think this is one of those areas we' had in our plan we never foresaw the kind of development we're seeing today and we've got to have some way to manage because if we don't get infrastructure today 15 years from now whenever you have a 15 acre parcel and it's subdivided you know if a buffet lives there and they have four kids and then you know according our rules the family Rules they can subdivide that and now you got you know a number of homes on 15 acres and and no road to I think that's that's a key issue and that's a burden we don't want to put and that's not good I just one comment I'm not against changing the rules okay and but I feel like and you said we had a public workshop on this we had my understand we discussed in count meeting that was we were here that afternoon know here anyway you know there are some other rules changes in here that need to be made and what I like to see that on it so have a workshop other Chang made youing about I think yeah I read not and I still can't figure out how how it does all right and the staff does see going to look it up why you're looking it up basically what it up look it up family exemption is for density requirements only it has to meet all other I'm have to speak to that also you may sit down like being home and I think I I'm just going to summarize for the board what I read in both the comprehensive plan and the land B toe the comprehensive plan contains mandatory language that requires a building permit be eligible for property conveyed between family members that's in the comprehensive plan it treats such transfers as non-conforming Parcels that shall continue to be eligible for the issuance of residential building permit subject to setback and concurrency Land Development code specifically exempts division of land among family members from submittal and recordation requirements for lot splits the definition of minor development within the Land Development code in my opinion is incapable of superseding the authority of the provisions of the comprehensive plan in short division of property among family members does not meet the definition of development requiring plating okay now before Meg a I want to ask instead translate that so everybody understands it pretty in a well the comp plan says that family members can divide part property and they will be eligible for a building permit the land vment code can't supersede that that's exactly right hang on one minute Mr GRE okay Mr D 6 every one of our land use districts has this language and what you can be you I'm in SE 42 382 and it's in all the subsections and it's also listed in I got another reference on and it's all district classifications and after it say transfer property to members of the principal owners immed family is liable without regard to limitation provided that all other op requirements are development so you're going to require me to give them a 60t access out 6 Frontage yeah understand 60 front it's a 60 access toer and and here's where we talk about all three of the the proposed changes that I have been concerned with I am not trying to we do need to riew the but I feel like in this Present written stage we can do a better job and now they did not create this Lang sorry some of us agree with you on that statement so go ahead okay one thing we keep changing things and we don't say where we coming from in our comprehensive plan and I appreciate the board allow me to serve on the plan on the board about 10 years I had selfish reion because I wanted to understand these rules and regulations for that my business okay I think I'm a better surveyor in the fact that I can go to the Bible and what person chapters need to look at on side part in our contracts that we do with developers we tell them they have to comp language we do and we tell you up you got to meet re we're not interested in working with but in poliy I think it's i86 it says a partial land between family members of desent for purpose of grantee the transaction personal resal Lo shall be eligible for issue Assurance of residential building permit even though the par is nonconforming as the size and the con conveyance takes place after comprehensive isn't that just what D it is it is but you said that the comens I and and but I can't find I understand I it didn't you're saying it doesn't I'm saying it doesn't the not my point is is that this exemption only covers the density requirements all the other requirements you have to meet including set set backs in concurrency that planning is aoly different issue that's not addressed by the con plan and say only in my opinion the cost plan clearly supersedes the landf code in my opinion in that that properties divided by family members are eligible for a building permit period I I understand that very and person but you want to make sure that these rules are written so that they could be live by we had a different person in the planning loing department at one time that required every family that wanted to do this to come to for plan own Bo we had to come from Alabama to attend a on board meeting and member division of property has never there's never been a flat submitted or reported by there's been some before the board that uh had properties they wanted to buy less than one or where there were questions and I can't speak to what came for the board if I wasn't directly involved but if it doesn't require planning then they're not going to be subject to Road WIS or EAS and change tonight need to be Revisited I'm I'm not against do you have aend change language I don't as building departments over there yeah like say if you look at loot splits in the land code section 42128 it specifically that family members is excluded from subm and recordation Mr Green a question I don't say something said something toight he be Mr Green you talk about this part family part and I was in I Hader and I didn't have enough land for my father-in-law and mother-in-law to move when I went to do it I couldn't get a permit and they said the only way I can get a permit is go before the board commission commission St my case the reason that I wanted them to be there and what the purpose was they couldn't be there there and they couldn't be there just because I had the land for them to be there and had for to sit there they had to be a reason for them to need to be there so we used the health Reon need someone close to them to help take care of and that's the way they done their if you wanted to go by the RO you know you w't bring it down and you had to go before the Lord and give them a good reason if it was had reason they accepted my reason and granted it but they said when they die or pass away this this land cannot be resold or redone you got to they make them good reasons they board you know listens to what their reason you got 10 AC and want there one not that's you go case and then they would either accept or not thank you Mr one I have a person problem with the issue of D to family members because when the family members we're all going and they start to sell that property off I'm back to the same problem of the county having to PVE the road to get to that new house and I just have a problem with that so I would just suggest that if if you're going to look at these pass what you have build the the group and have them go look at the the rest of the rules in total if you choose not to do that then I think you need to also put into place something that says because we know this is an issue and something we want to resolve we're going to retroactive it back to this day of the or whatever the the second or something like because you have have put a at point and say this board got have another he way to go play up Gary doesn't keep me on task quite as well as any does he'd pop she' have pop me by now so anything else sure go ahead now you're not want your dad to die or anything I want him to out heads up he's in the back of the rooms of Hill first hand we've already texted him so don't worry yeah sorry about that Keith go ahead I've got one question and then um maybe just a brief suggestion the 24 Parcels that's referred to in there is that new Parcels or we've got a road with 22 Parcels on it if we create two more Parcels does that kick us into the regulation more Parcels is not M creation the way I would look at it is if you got two or three independent Parcels now I would consider them in so it' be creating 24 new Parcels on on a road but I think the intent of all this can be work the acreage you know 15 to 40 acres I'm not sure how that really solves a problem I think you can leave it at 15 acres and create a workable Road standard we've got four standards out there now I think the fourth the graded Road standard maybe you've got okay pave Lime Rock graded so three standards the um the graded Road standard looks good for building a new graded Road it can't be applied on any existing roads you know or most existing roads in the county and I think you need to revisit that and maybe create a fourth that is a standard that you can apply to an existing Road bring it up to a to a passable standard but I think you can if you can work on that exist standard for the existing roads keep it at 15 Acres with a workable Road standard you know any new development that Water Management District is going to get involved and through the Erp process they'll they'll have some rules that be more restrictive than anything that um anything I think y'all will be able to implement but you I just like for you to revisit these rules and maybe there was a public Workshop but wasn't um wasn't able to attend it but I think you need some more some more input maybe follow the follow the lead of your Planning Commission they voted to at least look at that road standard and voted not to not to adopt these other amendments and I'd like for you to you look at what they've done and follow that thank you John are you raising your hand and stretching I'm stretching but I do have an opinion no problem I I couldn't tell if youying get my attention just you stretch anything further item number 20 the board to hold I didn't make that motion while ago I re I read it 24 says Bo consider setting second public hearing on Tuesday regard pass above proposed ordinances I number 20 the board to hold the first first of two public hearings set for this day 6:25 p.m. concerning the amendment of LDC 6-2 regarding the flag lot design and Road Frontage and to consider the first reading of the proposed ordinance adopting said Amendment motion to read by title long motion motion by commissioner paage second by commissioner Brown all have say I I go for it of County Florida aming development is amended adding a new section 42720 en lot standards and restriction by adding a requ that lot less than 10 ACR not have a link greater than three times the WID that locks less than 10 acres located and Def a flag lot as being 10 ACR orer size ACC Street anyone from the public wish to speak on this else the uh and and I would this was lot of my language here but the reason that but it did come before the they it before the 10 acres is presently in the comprehensive plan as being the Threshold at which you no longer have to comply with a 3: one ratio for lot design up to that size the length of the lot can't exceed three times a week and that's why 10 acres was utilized it presently in the code a worthable number that's if I one com problem that anyone else 21 the board to hold the first two heing set for this date at 6:30 p.m. or thereafter concerning Amendment LDC 6-3 regulating off sight sign size and location and to consider the first reading on the proposed ordinance adopting Amendment I'll hand a motion read by title only motion by commissioner Brown second by commissioner Patterson I'll M say I I oppose same sign County Section 4261 defining a defition of and sign by 4266 sign 426 off by adding requ that off signs cannot exceed 32t and are limited to anyone from the community wish to speak to this one Dian that but anything to do big ugly bills do it allow Big Bill so that we can look more like South Florida here that seems to be what people want to do is be more like lose our Rural and look more like places people are escaping from actually if I understand correctly and I could be wrong it's more restrictive correct conr more like a of theang yeah and these are holy my faults for the record Danny said it was fly his fault We the uh part of this was just correction of the code where there were conflicting sections and portions were moved to the definition section where they belong the main changes are that offsite offsite signs are going to be limed to 32 square ft in size and limited to one sign per parcel or loot which makes them much less intrusive and you can't have a dozen of them scattered along one piece of property the other change was actually um spoken to and addressed by the board at earlier time and they express their desire to allow portable signs such as realtor signs that have relevance to the joining property so that was included in this so we could do it all at one time those are the only uh real changes that there are there no there was no so let me ask a question Dan what this does is eliminate the large windies H in billboard sign there will be no more offsite offsite PL offsite on well onsite would be on the same property that the business is located I have a billboard sign 19 North I think it says okay now let let me address that yeah now the code presently and will still exempt signs that require a state or federal permit oh okay this this is on County Roads essentially Road Road this this is County Roads basic this is refering to gets into the Beach area did I explain it to you better D it's what you want in essence it's making it more restrictive so you won't see more of these P County roads now state roads we don't control so okay yeah um anyone else before we go to the next one since these are getting lengthy does the board want to break or just keep all right number 22 board to hold the first public hearing set for this dat 6:35 p.m. concerning Amendment LDC 0604 for the number of lot threshold for Paving roads and to consider the First Amendment reading of the proposed ordinance motion to read by title question if yall would indulge go ahead this item was tabled by the planning board I don't know that it would be proper for the board to hear I doubt that it would be uh there was no there was not a vote recommending to deny it was tabled therefore there was no recommendation they based it primarily on the fact that the greated growth standard was not available to the public for a minimum of 10 days prior to the hearing before the planning board second a motion to table by commissioner Brown got by commissioner Patterson and I was unsure what to do that's why I'm standing here say right and just re advertise it and right clay has a question you ask question do we need a motion to table or just let it go Miss Pat Jack you move your motions motion withdraw wasn't a problem with advertisement the problem was they did not have the drawing 10 days prior they only had two days PRI the planning board attorney's advice to the planning board was that the public should have been able to view this graded Road standard 10 days prior to the meeting and based on that primarily now they may have had other reasons but uh they chose to table it in Li of recommending to deny it we have to advertise again it has be totally done over again for days do we have to adver the 10 days available for review now well if it's a part of the packet then it's available to review that's not a problem the board also understands that this uh proposed amendment is fairly intertwined with 06- one and and that the impacts are related reason for this wasn't adver the reason for this we're going to take away 15 AC exemption this is in R develop do we really want line do we want to go to our L stand the whole purpose of this is to kind of help out the developer on the 15 AC in other words to give them the other Amendment item number 23 the board will hold the first of two public hearings set for this date at 6:40 p.m. concerning Amendment LDC 6-5 allowing power/ rail Lan Rail lines outside of the industrial land use category and to consider the first reading on the proposed ordinance adopting the set Amendment motion to read by title motion to read by title motion by commissioner Pion Paige all favor say I I'll oppose same sign contraction C 4248 subsection 111 and 42 482 use Group by aming the of service byroads leing distribution Serv 69 KV or L and Del R and TRS from the definition of small scale industrial and Del electricity substations and distribution lines greater than 69 the of indust providing oh I'm sorry anybody want speak this iot I have question does two questions first does this make it easier for the proposed coal plant to do business in Taylor County I would assume as much I would answer that question I think it would keep board from having to change 69 greater power line rways or rways we have classy that indust dun CH so and from paperwork probably makes it EAS but you don't want you don't want that deem industrial because once you deem an industrial then what you're going to do is anywhere on that track if somebody wants to come in the ldr since it's continuous you can put an industrial site there other words it make it easier for them to get an industrial site there you that IND I heard and also heard industrial the argument for in the amendment language was that you want to avoid having sers of industrial property on someone's agricultural or rural residential Etc and so sliver might be however wide you no more it's hard to imagine much industry on sver so that would be right your neighborhood Industrial I appreciate that however I've heard much discussion here about allowing things and so I would wonder that that would be a realistic although somewhat produc producing I would question your example as being valid one but I understand what you're saying and I feel that we have a a habit of you know of such responses my second question had to do with the ease of the paper shle now I hear you sayas that's my we got power P Energy Center folks here they can speak to where it' be easier for them I think it' be easier if we do it the way we good evening my name is Carolyn repple I'm an attorney from Tallahassee representing the participants in the Taylor Energy Center and I've been following this amendment to the uh Land Development regulations because we will require a a rail spur and some uh transmission lines associated with the Taylor Energy Center and so this is of interest to us uh first I would say from a policy perspective you do not want slivers or ribbons of industrial zoning throughout the county wherever you have Rail lines or transmission lines and in fact it's my understanding that your existing Rail lines and transmission lines in fact are not zoned or are not in industrial uh uh districts uh and in fact uh I'm advised by Mr Griner and others that they don't recall why this provision or when this provision got into the L the ARs and that doesn't seem to make sense and it doesn't for exactly the reason that uh commissioner be mentioned if you have these ribbons of industrial uh districts running through your county then any property owner along that ribbon of industrial district can make the argument that they should be rezoned industrial because they are now consistent with the adjacent land use which is this industrial ribbon so it it opens you up for some mischief uh in the future uh but perhaps more importantly from my perspective from a legal perspective is that this revision to your Land Development regulations is required to bring it into compliance with statute under uh chapter 163 uh there are certain there is a definition of development that can be regulated by comprehensive plans and Land Development regulations certain activities are Exempted from that definition of development both the creation of Rights of way and the construction of Rail lines and power lines among other things are Exempted from that definition of development and that is because it wouldn't it wouldn't B benefit any of us if every local government could impose different regulations on these linear facilities that go through multiple local government jurisdictions and that is why the Public Service Commission has been given exclusive authority to regulate the transmission power grid for example and the Department of Transportation has authority to regulate The Rail lines uh and both of those authorities because they are uh condemning authorities they have the power of emminent domain they have oversight by the courts they can't just go in and and condemn you know Place one of these linear facilities wherever they want with no oversight the court looks at whether they have considered things like land use environmental impacts alternative routes safety planning future planning uh and so there is oversight for these activities but the legislature has not given that oversight to local governments for good reason and so again I think the overriding legal reason to adopt this amendment is to bring your Land Development regulations into compliance with Florida Statutes thank you anyone else hearing none I go to the next public here if you would indulge me real quick while we're here number 24 the board consider sending second public hearings on the Tuesday October 17th 2006 regarding the passage of the above proposed ordinances motion by commissioner be second it by commissioner Bren all favor say I I if the board will indulge me one more number 33 Green Street Paving update can we get that now so the staff want leave they can sure that is that okay to do it now yes sir we we are finishing our construction the the plans and the layout we have our goal is to finish the design by October to have an RFP ready to bring to the board for approval by mid October early October mid October have the board approve it and then once the board has approved it to advertise it once the advertisement is complete we plan to have our bids received by December when does the trouble with the we have to finished by if I remember correctly December 2008 I would have to go back and look at that documentation I think we were officially awarded the bid though after July the fiscal year started this year for the State of Florida if I remember correctly but we can verify that make sure that in good shape talking about it we feel comfortable we can get it done make bu of and I can tell you that that project is on the top of the list app thank you ma'am back on track number 12 the board received an update on the Department of Community Affairs DCA issues were requested by the board on September 7 2006 attorney DCA we didn't get very far with them we request audience I don't knowne their complaint we also red at that me some of the documents that we had also some of the support we not able to do that right now we have our response yeah one of the things you said and I I didn't I meant to try to back P that Florida counil did in that doc she said it's a four lane Highway off the bead is that that that's what she told us on I don't remember D you check make sure that doesn't I'm wondering if it has two lanes coming out one coming out one out see or something like that I don't know that was that was one of her things I I'll tell you I was very disappointed in that conversation um I really would had no negoti myself and that we'll go up and we're know Valerie very positive we show this different valer still going back to the same concept never was I did it never was there it was four and uh you know one of the questions I have we got into the situation because DC asked us to clarify the high area that correct it would came about as part of the E process you know I couldn't give you a specific time or date when that person I would like I would like us documentation find out why we we were asked to clarify this this is not something this I don't have any information for that what their point to is documentation that they provided from the initial adoption of the compreh plan where they recognize that 4 par I any ask um anyway the board allow us to go up TR to discuss one more time but you know I was very disappointed I was very disappointed out of the gate here that's I have no OB youc I have con what's her name please Kelly Marc wassu the only that everybody was there station people here were different folks were there Mee DCA as talking the was not meca shut as I recall we didn't get a good explanation about why she wasn't there ad thiss to a lot ofus anyone else before we do a break I I just made a mistake too did anyone wish to speak on item 33 Green Street hearing them have a 5 minute recess I asked I asked to pull more before I did that though doing good I about