e e e e e good evening this meeting of the Planning and Zoning commission for April 3rd 2024 will come to order please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance I pledge Al to the flag of the United States of America and to the stands na indivisible liy and justice for all roll call please Lor chairman Richardson here Vice chairman Aton here secretary Grant here member Childs here member Gad here member facon member Moscoso here alternate member Findler alternate member Rogers here School Board member Gilbert here um you might take his place if you want to member orter member Rogers uh if we there is a quorum approval of the minutes of March 20th are there any additions or deletions to make to the minutes is there a motion to approve the minutes Mr grod yes sir I'll make a motion to approve the minutes as presented no I'll second okay any discussion everybody approved say I I I anybody not approve okay the minutes are approved um before we get into the next item a couple of things uh I neglected to say is uh this weekend uh vice mayor Robinson lost his grandson I don't know the specifics um but he his grandson did pass away and I would ask for a moment of silence in honor of vice mayor Robinson okay thank you and um under new business I will uh I don't would like to take item a and reverse A and B take Item B first any disagreement with that okay everybody in agreement okay there's no quasi judicial confirmation procedures right there are two quas judicial items I can read the notice on the front of the agenda which states all persons who anticipate speaking on any public hearing item must fill out an oath card to be heard on that agenda item and sign the oath contained to there on these cards are located on the table near the entrance to the council chamber or may be obtained from the recording secretary this meeting will be conducted in accordance to the procedures adopted in resolution number 24-1 1997 those speaking in favor of a request will be heard first those opposed will be heard second and those who wish to make a public comment on the item will speak 3D the applicant may make a briefer btle if necessary a representative from either side for or against May cross-examine a witness anyone who speaks is considered a witness if you have photographs sketches or documents that you desire for the commission to consider they must be submitted into evidence and will be retained by the city please submit such exhibits to the recording secretary thank you there is no consent agenda item so the first item on o business is a golden knights Boulevard ordinance thank you chairman good evening Commissioners item AA begins on page eight of 186 of tonight's agenda packet and close for the commission's review and consideration our example buffer and screening methods the staff requests the commission recommend a specific screening method the staff will then request the hearing to be tabled to the April 17th regular meeting the ordinance will be revised and presented with the commission's recommendation at the next regular meeting um if you're a remember this item came before you at the March 6th meeting and was tabled to allow us to explore some more of the screening methods and uh to meet with the airport staff I had a meeting with uh Kevin Dy and Lisa Nicholas over at the airport Authority and unfortunately we had to cancel last minute um on March 22nd and haven't been able to uh reschedule that meeting uh since then we provided some example Graphics we wanted to um show you tonight to get some feedback on and the first one begins on page 10 of the agenda packet so there is a request to table this item because uh the representatives Airport Authority could not be here um we can discuss it or but we should table it until they're here um any discussion yes well I think we should discuss it but um I um were were you done now I guess or do you I was just going to um outline what the specific methods that were being Illustrated in the in the agenda packet okay I mean um I was going to say that I think because you were asking for um a recommendation on which one but I was thinking can we do like give them the options in the ordinance of you can do one of these and give them a set of them I don't I'm not saying all of these but that's that's an option right of saying you can do one of these sure yeah okay Mr Rod uh thank you Mr chairman um I'd spoken with staff uh earlier prior of the meeting uh concerning what I've passed out to each member and I've provided that to staff earlier and the purpose of my passing this out is I won't be available on April 17th I'll be out of the country so I won't be here for the discussion so if I can at least put forward I'm sorry if I could uh put forward at the uh prior meeting I had mentioned that within the 50 ft uh using Landscaping burn development and addition opaque buffers including walls or fences is probably the best most adequate way to buffer what was the purpose of the rule which was to obscure if you had outside storage demolition material concrete I think it was spoken about a concrete um um demolition site um so what I've written down there at least in some degree of of infantile codification took the existing rule in the uh city code and then expanded it um to uh attempt to cover what would happen if that type of improvement was to come along goldenite Boulevard wherein as I mentioned Eddie earlier if it was blue origin and you had a building front in the highway there wouldn't be a concern for such uh uh uh extensive buffering and this is only really as it's written to address one type of development which would be as it calls it outdoor unenclosed material storage you're welcome to look at that in my absence during the discussions that would be what I would put forth it's another example Eddie's got some other ones this one is a variation of the same but they all purposely try to use elevated BMS and masonary walls or fences together with Landscaping and in this particular ex example I actually put forth a an increased planting schedule you'll see it identified in red at the bottom which is the table and it's twice as much Landscaping with uh U canopy trees as was existing for I95 Frontage with that that's all I can add to this thank you chairman I was just going to add one more thing um to summarize the feedback that we got from the commission at the last meeting on this item um what we heard from the commission is that you'd like us to add some illustrations to the code so that it's not just text um the screening if it were to be opaque uh opaque screening would be preferred so um you don't want to have any transparency just 100% Opa opacity uh vegetated screening is preferred so as opposed to fences or walls vegetation um You' like to consider a burm as an option and then last is is to discourage fences or walls uh they were not visually appealing is is the kind of the summary from what we heard at the last meeting any discussion oh well uh member Rogers I just wanted to Second what member child said that I think um it would be nice to kind of get a little bit of work done on this tonight so we can pass something on and to me it seems like there are a couple it seemed to me that there were a couple of clear winners in in these designs and that uh perhaps if if it's within what we're planning to do giving an option of of two or three things um you know maybe we could pass that on and and kind of get this done Vice chairman Aon so um and I'm not sure the the right way to do this I think it's um kind of a mix of what member guard submitted and um your illustration at the top of page 10 which is kind of an opaque fairly opaque um with with natural vitation versus the illustration below with the the larger gaps which I realize for the developer it's probably more expensive but it's it's also um a much more attractive from the street side I think the challenge is I kind of what remember guard was going for is if it's a building that's got a nice uh facade on it you don't need this if it's a fairly short structure you maybe don't need it as much if you got the burn because most of especially along Golden Nights most people are going to be sitting in cars and so the side angle with the burm and the elevated uh structure you you you don't have to go very high to accomplish what you want to accomplish um but then if you've got 20 foot pile foot high piles of crushed concrete that you're trying to hide that becomes something that that you you do want something like this and my guess is there's probably maybe something that that's outside the description of outdoor stored materials but still is not visually attractive driving along golden s Boulevard that you would want the higher um um screening so I don't know I don't have a great answer or suggestion as to how we could kind of create various methods that could be applied depending on the use but it seems to me that that's that would probably be the best case if we could come up with something like that so is your preference the first view yeah my preference is the first view for maximum screening it was M too yeah and and then perhaps something that is got a nice facade or or whatever doesn't require as much screening certainly the one below it's more visually attractive probably a lot less expensive to go in and whether the fence needs to be um um you know a visually blocking or opaque or whether it's just more like I'm trying to think in the industrial park the old um um Embry a building there has a nice fence but it's not opaque um so something along those lines but um I I certainly you know agree that or that that we need something in the ordinance that depending on the use we can impose some level of pretty opaque screening when driving along an entryway to a you know a resource like the airport uh I would say too that the first view in here is exactly what I intended in the motion for that gas station it was reopening at the corner of Garden in 995 this is exactly what I intended it to be to look like and I think I'm speaking for the commission that's what it should look like uh secretary Grant uh I'm inclined to agree with the first image um now this would be uh completely down golden I Boulevard right not just one particular business yes it would be in front of that concrete Crush that's the only that's the only facility all the way down so let me let me clarify the concrete crushing facility is the property at the north northwest corner of the railroad tracks and golden knights Boulevard that property had a cup that was approved that required certain conditions that are similar to what's being proposed here and has an approved site plan so any new conditions would not apply to that property because there's an approved site plan however there are three or four other properties along golden knights Boulevard where if they were to come in with a site plan if this gets adopted that they would have to meet this standard okay I think they should just just my opinion of course because I love this this design with the with the burn and the fence on the top of the burn and then the trees and the understory in front of the trees that's that would be beautiful up and down go nice Boulevard is my opinion member Rogers um Eddie if um if someone uh one of the other properties so basically they the properties that don't have the burm are grandfathered in they don't have to have the burm you're saying could just have the properties that do not have the burm along Golden Lights Boulevard they will their grandfather in they don't have to put the burm in if if if if this were to be you know the decision this first burm with the planting so but there are other properties right now along golden I Boulevard that are in place that do not have a burm and they will not be required to have a burm they don't currently this is not a requirement so no there's there's no required burm currently if this ordinance were to be adopted with changes to require burm currently there there is no burm along golden kns Boulevard on any of the properties correct but how many properties how many separate properties are there along along there three or four I can I can verify and when you say three or four you mean three or four that are established three or four existing partials on Golden Boulevard out of a total of roughly I don't think there's any established I think they're all vacant oh really I believe so so north of golden knights Boulevard there are three Parcels that AB but golden knights Boulevard to the north uh one of them is in the county yeah so this ordinance would not apply yeah adopted uh the properties to the South there are one two three four so there are four properties to the south of golden kns Boulevard and all of them are undeveloped oh oh okay great um okay so this would not be you know just a kind of a hodg Podge if okay this has a burm this doesn't have a burm this has a burm this has a burm that doesn't have a burm it's it would be burm all the way if all the properties were developed yes okay member gr um in line with the comment that was made about trying to conserve cost for consideration with the cost of wall or BM and the comment about the illustrations which are preferred I think it's the first illustration that spins up after page uh 10 which shows a five foot BM an 8 foot wall it illustrates the plantings and it describes the plantings per linear feet what I wrote was to take this and turn the 5-ft burm to an 8ft verm and turn the 5-ft wall the 8ft wall to a 5 foot wall reducing the cost of that also that and I'm not the engineer by any measure but I'm sure that the the structural requirements for an 8 foot concrete wall are going to be different than those requirements for a shorter wall and then when I mentioned about taking the uh current Table 30-9 you if you look at the handout you'll see that the planning schedule that's in red reflects what that first illustration uh describes which for example is eight trees per 100 linear feet four under stories per 100 linear feet so it's essentially the picture is the description it's just reversing the height of the burn with the wall uh and if I may ask Eddie um since it it is a question about what if the county developed their property that's not Incorporated is it possible to reach out to the county and advise the Planning and Zoning commission at the next meeting what is the buffer requirement for Bard County if somebody were to develop a similar project just to get a feel for Mr Rogers question about burms no burms here the Gap being an unincorporated parcel is it possible to find out what that is we can uh that one parcel is already developed with a use it's a sand mine okay um so I don't know that it would be revelop it's already developed okay that wouldn't matter thank you mem Tom um I seem to recall last time we heard this they you mentioned that the uh application on the concrete crashing property had expired was I incorrect on that or has it expired I think Chelsea uh looked that up for us and and it had expired so so if they come back this would apply correct member Rogers I just you know uh I expect there are people in the audience who have construction knowledge that I don't have which wouldn't be difficult but um I do I am trying to be a little sensitive to the cost that's being osed on owners here and um I don't know whether it's cheaper to build a higher wall or bring in dirt but my impression is that bringing in dirt can be expensive um but uh I was just thinking perhaps a 13 ft you know top height uh of the wall and the burm together topped eventually by trees also um from the perspective of the road you know sitting in a car you know that line of sight is is getting you know you know you could cover you could cover a 50ft building with that I would expect with before too long um and you know it's we're trying to protect I think you know just make the line of sight look a little more appealing but I I did wonder about um the picture on page 11 these burm walls where you've got kind of what I think they call a tea wall which is like an upside down tea where the burm comes up to a wall and then stops it seems to me that that gives um it gives it gives the O the owner a little bit more room to park or or move around on the property is um is that something that we want to make sure is available or does that uh as opposed to having just BM BM on the front B on the back expensive one on the list is it what that's the most expensive one on the list building that eight six eight foot high retaining well okay thank you member Gad U just to follow up to Mr Rogers question I I think I'm correct that the the preferred standard for maintenance is 3 to one so if you squeeze a um an 8 foot burm in what's the 50 Foot open space after that you can landscape your parking lot that was already in the code the 50 ft would support a 3 to1 slope burm because you would have 48 ft to what uh8 8T 8T okay so I I I took that in consideration to to make sure that you didn't have a deficient area to try to elevate the burm or you got a very Peak burm you can't maintain and we talked about that at the last meeting about how it looks in front of not the hospital Parish Medical Center but the Parish Medical Center at Titus landing and and that's a pretty steep burm and it does a good job of buffering the vision of the bottom and some of the of the building but it's maintenance wise is it's mowing uphill um L do we have any cards on this item not on this item okay so chairman could I ask uh to summarize what I've heard so far see if that's um so what I've heard so far is that there's a preference for the option one which is the first option at the top of page 10 which includes a burm a and Landscaping and a uh continuous screen vegetated screen um so that's about four of the the options all rolled into one um I've also heard that you'd like to leave the applicant some choice in the matter so give them some flexibility if they don't want to put in the full burm that slopes on both sides if they want to do the wall that that that's still an option um and then is there anything else that I'm missing oh one more thing um what about the idea that this would this enhanced buffer would only apply to uses that that include outdoor storage of materials um was that something that was a consensus of the group no okay Rogers uh I I I kind think for the for the sake of uh you know just continuity um I think it'd be nice to that it applies to everything if we're actually starting with a blank slate here um but but I was just going to ask the rest of the group um the last one uh the very last picture the planted natural buffer with opaque screen of vegetation is that thought that it generally would not be Dependable enough you know to sort of to screen or perhaps it wouldn't be Dependable enough through all times of the year does that not appeal because to me it looked okay I mean but it depends of course on how well it's kept up and what the plant mix is and that sort of thing that is the problem we've seen so many areas where they've done that they don't keep them up Vice chairman uh member Charles uh in my opinion I think it should just be for the outdoor storage stuff I don't I don't see why we should have have to have them do a wall when there's nothing really to cover up if they have a nice building why why have a wall that's my opinion secretary Grant well my feeling is that this is the primary entrance to our airport and I think it should I think it would look better if it was the same all the way down that's just my opinion on it of course uh not just individual buildings or individual facilities Vice chairman Aon so on on kind of on that note uh the ability to kind of make it uniform I'm assuming that in entrances to those properties would come off of golden knights Boulevard is that correct or is there alternate access to the properties that are left to be developed if the property has Frontage on another road it's it's possible that their entrance could be on that other Road um I think that only applies to one maybe two other properties so should the ordinance address penetrations through the screening so if you've got to have a street level driveway um you know how far the screening gets to the driveway and what the opening looks like and all of that because my my guess is you we're going to have to have driveways into those properties and that's going to have to penetrate the screening so there probably needs to be some guidelines in there about how you know how that transition from screening to driveway to other side of driveway back to screening kind of looks any other discussion okay we've been asked to table this until the next meeting right that's right anyone want to make a motion to table to the April 17th meeting Mr chairman I'll make a motion to table the um the Golden Nights Boulevard ordinance until April 17th 2022 there second second okay roll call please member Gad yes chairman Aton yes member Childs yes member Moscoso secretary Grant yes member Rogers yes chairman Richardson yes uh next item conal use permit number one 2024 Eddie thank you this item is on page 19 of 186 the applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to allow a mini warehouse use at a vacant 8.93 acre property located west of South Street State Road 405 and south of saterfield Road the cup is required for a mini warehouse use in the light Industrial Services and warehousing M1 zoning District um this application will look familiar because the commission recommended approval of the annexation small scale Amendment and rezoning on this property that applied the industrial um future land use to the property and this is the last step in order to get the mini warehouse use as the conditional use permit you'll notice on page 26 staff is recommending one condition of approval and that's related to the hours of operations to satisfy the conditions uh the criteria the review criteria for this conditional use permit um and then lastly I just wanted to point out that there was an error on on page 24 of 186 related to uh parking it says in subsection s line line four and five the conditional use concept does not illustrate compliance with the parking standards that language is in their uh previous with a previous concept plan that we had that did not meet the minimum parking requirements and the concept plan was revised so that it now meets the parking requirements thank you are are there any questions of the staff Mr grod uh Eddie I think this question came up from me before and as I recall uh the highway road is maintained by bavard County that's not a City Maintenance roadway meaning the two-lane section of 405 in front of this property is that a county or a city maintain Road it's a State Road State Road 45 and in light of the two-lane section is there any any policy any any uh understanding memorandums and Etc whereby uh driveway penetrations and left turn movements into these sites at least consider whether improving it with a turn lane left turn lane uh would be a requirement uh I see a spattering of sometimes there's one of those and sometimes there's not and that's the purpose of my question this is a obviously a more low intensity type of use as storage goes but looking at the vehicles are going to store there uh like RVS and boats when you turn left with those you don't have a turn lane you shut down the highway traffic and is there anything in between the state the county the city for making decisions on those Lanes improvements yes whenever an application is uh for development along a state road they'll have to get a rideway use permit from the state from fdot and that's when they'll if any turn lanes are required it'll be um required at that point so their traffic engineering makes the decision if the movements are consequential they then required if they're not they wouldn't that explains why some don't some do thank you any other questions Mr Rogers um I see that on page 22 we have a listing of the different uh businesses in this area we have Construction Services Trucking um there is the solid waste Transfer Station um there's one vacant area then there's Towing Transportation uh I see a mini warehouse building Trade Services but when I go to the bottom of page 22 uh there and elsewhere I see references to the South Street plan um Eddie could you expand a little bit on what the South Street plan uh does and says because I I see here it encourages heavy industrial uses to locate in in the area between I95 and South Street so they mentioned nuis nuisances such as heat glare smoke and fumes uh you know which one might expect with heavy industrial uses so that would not be the case with this particular business but can you tell me a little bit more about the South Street plan sure uh the staff initiated the South Street small area plan because we noticed that there was a mix of uses along the South Street Corridor we have residential commercial industrial and different uh degrees of industrial there's some lighter industrial like mini warehouse and more heavy uses um so that was a plan that was prepared and we can provide a copy to you or to all the commission members that your request um and it outlines different portions of the corridor uh which area should be uh predominantly which use and so um on the map there's a colorful map that has more of the residential uses to the north and Commercial uses to the east of is that in our package no it's it's a very lengthy plan so we wouldn't want to add to your agenda but we we do have uh the plan available if you need to see it um and then the heavier industrial uses to the west of uh South Street um and this is to the west of South Street correct and um so it is currently it would be encouraging currently South Street plan a heavy industrial use in that location not a not a light industrial uh it I guess I'm asking if there's some some favor towards a heavier industrial use in this area um rather than a storage facility which is classified light industrial correct um sure let me take a look well he's looking it up uh that area of South Street from Harrison to Highway 50 on the west side has all kinds of mixed uses you got it truss company that builds trusses in there you've got a crane uh company that has a crane service in there so it's a mixture there's several many Warehouse complexes and then you got the county uh transfer station yeah that's a nice way to put it the county dump on the side and then you've got also the vegetation uh you like a chipping yard or something yeah so they got all kinds of different uses and I would say probably if you look at it dividing line is Harrison when it crosses South Street and becomes Fox Lake Road I'll just I mean I'll say where I'm going with did you have the answer I I did find where uh mini warehouse and our code is permitted in the M1 M2 and M3 zoning District so it's considered a light or industrial heavier industrial use it can be permitted in either of our industrial districts okay well I just where I'm going with it is I I just I think like some other members I I worry that we're little by little nibbling away at places where people can actually do things as opposed to to places where people sort of put things or sit and look at computer screens and that kind of things I mean this I I'm I'm I'm a little hesitant to uh continue to reduce um areas where we can do heavy industrial or medium industrial activities um so I just that's a worry for me Vice chairman Aon um just curious because I've I've got some family members in this business um and they're typically 247 does the applicant doesn't have any problem with the nine or the 6:00 a.m. to 10: p.m. restriction because I know a lot of some businesses has use those as warehouses for like stock their trucks and things before they go out on the route and some of those happen before 6:00 a.m. and I just didn't know there's no residential around there anything that really seems that it needs the 6 a.m. restriction so just curious about that was that okay with the applicant uh I would let I would ask you to ask the applicant that question but I will tell you that I I we've shared the condition with the applicant and I don't believe they would prefer the condition to be in place um the condition was recommended based on the criteria the review criteria for a conditional use permit and one of the criteria is that it be consistent with the surrounding uh properties and when we looked at what the surrounding properties hours of operations were they weren't 24 hours member moso yeah I would agree with member Rogers um I I think that um my fear is that with all of the development coming in we're going to end up being commuter City where people have to go out of Titusville in order to find jobs and so protecting this um heavy industrial use could provide more jobs if I remember um the last time um the applicant came forward he said it might provide two jobs and so I think that's something that we also need to consider um as we move forward any other discussion okay I'll open the public hearing Lord we have any cards yes Garrett George good evening uh Garrett George ceso I'm the engineer record and the uh I'm representing the applicant who's also here um just a couple items in regards to the hoursof operation we would prefer to not have those in place um it's a low intensity use low volume we're not going to have people out here working on cars and Building Things you know so having the ability to go 24/7 with gated access would be referable um and then in regards to the zoning yeah we kind of had this discussion back during the annexation rezone uh staff recommended we go with the light industrial that was sent to city council and they ultimately approved that light industrial use um so that's kind of what we're sticking with site plan hasn't changed since then so kind of sticking with what we got so any questions thank you thank you next card Chad Clevenger thank you all uh I just Echo Garrett's statements there that obviously we would prefer a 24/7 gated facility obviously the hours of operation for workers would not be 24/7 but be for people to be able to access RVs boats um you know you got a lot of fishermen in this area so there's probably a lot of need to get out there at an early time uh so we would obviously stick with that and then uh the same you know it's uh went through the annexation as a light industrial um you know fits that code so you know sticking with that and providing storage and capacity for the continued growth in this area thank you thank you any other cards no sir okay so it comes back before the commission any further discussion Vice chairman Eton um so as chairman Richardson mentioned there's a quite a few other self storage facilities in the or maybe not quite a few but some other self storage facilities close by do we know what their hours of operation are eye storage is the one that's across the street and then there's another one that's I think an RV storage it's on page 23 at the bottom the applicant Sayes the facility will operate 24 hours a day with access via controlled gate for comparison there's an existing I storage facility east of the subject property which limits access to to the facility between 6:00 a.m. and 10: p.m. and do we know about the other one that's got boats and RVs and stuff on on the west side of the road yes sir um and then just and understand the um the manufacturing or M1 um concerns but I I also sit on an NE North ofart Economic Development Zone board and and we also oversee the industrial park um out by sculptor off of Grom and generally what we hear is those types of manufacturing businesses prefer the industrial park kind of um piece and then the other thing we also hear is that companies moving into the area are also moving a lot of employees into the area and self storage facilities like this are important to the area because of the need of people moving in and needing a place to put their belongings because often they're either in temporary housing or they can't afford or get a house quite big enough for everything they've accumulated which I'm guilty of me too thank you that's helpful helpful input member member Charles yeah I as far as the hours um I don't see a problem with uh going into a storage unit um especially in that area it's not like there's you know a lot of people lot of residents would be um bothered by it so it' just be other businesses and um I'm for not having the hour restrictions put on them because I don't I don't think that it would serve a great purpose thanks I would have to agree and I'm guilty is charge I have a storage unit in a residential neighborhood adjacent to it residential neighborhood that's not gated and I've have had occasions where I have to be in there till midnight or before 6:00 a.m. and especially with this as a gated I don't I think it's more than reasonable to not have the hours it's required Mr Grant member Grant Mr Gerard was first oh well okay member grad um Eddie you mentioned that in the code it requires the common consideration surrounding properties and their hours of operation as it explains there on page 23 is 6 to1 were they conditionally approved for that voluntarily approved for that uh is it in the code it has to be 6 to10 or is it something that's subject to change if an applicant in this case were to find favor with a recommendation to not limit ours the competitor across the streets now Limited in hours it would seem natural that if that competitor like kind storage wanted to say I need to have mine be 24 for for business purposes are they able to come back and say I need to reduce that time or increase that time or is it in the code that says that's what time it is let me just look through the limitations real quick to make sure there's nothing specific about the hours there's not currently in the code any limitations on the hours specific to uh 6 to 10 it's not to say that when that facility was constructed that there weren't some requirement at that time lacking a specific standard on that property's development that would have been codified as a condition or maybe it was the codee and amended then if they chose to change their hours of operation would they be able to do that or would they be told you can't do that this facility the applicant's facility other I the point I'm making is the surrounding properties have set the Benchmark that's now put into a condition on this applicant the commissions to deciding if that's going to fly and stay with it if it doesn't then the two like kind business businesses have differential standards I would only think naturally if I was the competitor I'd want to say hey I need to be open 242 like my competitor but if it's a code if it's a conditional standard they can't do that and that's the question I have since the surrounding properties were the considered factor I think we should consider whether those surrounding properties can remove that standard if they chose to they may not to maybe it's voluntarily they only op operate those hours and that's fine but if it's a conditional standard it needs to be addressed later can they do that right so the surrounding Property Owners or properties could change their hours after uh let's say that hypothetically the commission recommends a condition of approval with the hours of limiting the hours of operations the ice storage facility that was me referenced in the report could then change the hours of operations to operate at longer hours that would not have this facility the applicant facility would not have that flexibility because of the condition imposed by the cup so there there may be the case this is the only applicant that would be conditionally restricted and the others are voluntarily for their own business model doing that so it's I think that's kind of important in the deliberation thank you Eddie secretary Grant well that was going to be my question also but not probably not as eloquent as Mr gerod down there but same thing member Childs and I was going to add you don't know for sure if their hours of operation really are 6 to 10 so they're just they might posted it you know on their website or somewhere one time and now they're they're not adhering to that anymore so uh yeah webs says 247 there you go 247 so let's let's let's not do the the uh the limiting of the hours I think but um any other discussion and would care to make a motion I'll make a motion uh I make a motion that we recommend approval to city council for 8B conditional use permit number 1-22 24 TRG Self Storage um as uh with conditions uh the staff except for the limitation of hours of operations and that they be allowed to do 247 is there second second second by Vice chairman Aon any other discussion mus chairman just just to clarify there were no other conditions that were recommended by uh staff so if you're not adopting that one condition it's just approved all right so just yeah just not that one okay any other discussion roll call please Lori secretary grants yes M Rogers no I'm going to be my lonely drum for the industrial zoning member Childs yes Vice chairman Eton yes member Gad yes member moso yes chairman Richardson yes this item will be heard at city council meeting is it next week Eddie that's correct sir April 9th April 9th okay we've changed the order of the new business we'll hear 9B first small scale compreh comprehensive plan amendment number 3-22 4 Page 133 small scale amendment number 3 2024 liman multif family um and this application will look familiar um the commission heard this request uh last fall and recommended approval and ultimately city council um did not approve the request um due to the impacts of the wetlands the applicant has revised the request to only amend the boundaries to match what was shown on the Wetland survey so that areas that are designated Uplands would be zoned R3 and have the high density residential future land use and areas that are shown as Wetlands would have the conservation future land use and the O zoning um so summary the applicants requesting a small scale comprehensive plan Amendment with resoning to correct the future land use map and Zoning designation on the property through reflect the submitted Wetland survey and construct a multif family development with up to 169 units using the R3 zoning District development standards the property lies east of the intersection of South Street State Road 405 and Swan Lake Drive generally in the vicinity to the entrance uh to Swan Lake estate's residential manufactured home park uh 125 if approved a total approved a total of approximately 11.34 Acres will have a land use designation of high density residential and R3 zoning and the remaining approximately 114.5 six acres will have a land use designation of conservation and or zoning any questions of the staff remember Rogers um Ed do I remember that uh this particular project was going to cover some of the wetlands mitigation by removing invasive species or something or am I confusing that with something else uh previously the applicant had proposed impacting some wetlands and to mitigate the wetlands that were being impacted uh to to in lie of um they were planning to propose the wetlands in propose a conservation easement over the wetlands dedicated to St John's River Water Management District and as part of that would have required the removal of invasives and enhancing the Wetland in order to receive that credit so that is no longer on the table correct they're no longer proposing uh impacts to the wetlands and um I just want to understand I guess there are two things that I couldn't quite understand so that the this is the property has been sort of looked at Again by Engineers uh and and uh certain areas have been reclassified is that how this works um uh no nothing's been reclassified um so kind of going back in time back in the 80s the city used the national Wetlands inventory map which is a very high-scale U not fine grained uh map of where the wetlands exist throughout the city and applied conservation future land use designations on those areas so that's a sort of thing that is not ground truthed that's exactly so what happens now is the comp plan says that if an applicant provides us with a wetland survey showing where that true boundary is between the wetlands and the Uplands that we will right siiz that line we will correct the line to match where the Wetland and Upland boundary is located and and this has been done by by what um entity the the the new survey a wetland survey was provided at the last application but their request was to propose a larger Upland area which would have required some filling in the wetlands in this case since the application was denied they've submitted a new request which would only show the Uplands as the R3 zoning and put everything else including the pockets of low density residential at the top in the all right so that there's kind of like that one kind of outlier piece um that's I guess farthest to the east if I got that right um it what will that be used for um I mean it's you're not speaking off um the the one that's kind of it's it's just sort of all by itself a little separated from the rest of the of the so if the request is approved there will be two areas of Upland areas uh that will be that will have the R3 zoning on it and if it's helpful in the agenda star folder there's a um a plan that was submitted or a um an exhibit showing which area are being changed from conservation to high density residential um it's called the zoning and land use exhibit what what page is that it's in the agenda star folder on the desktop it's an icon I I know we've struggled in the past with the agenda star so sorry to throw that if anyone needs help on agenda star which of the five items is it six items it's the item called zoning and land use exhibit it's a PDF document uh yeah maybe there's two ah does anyone else need help so on this um on this document you'll see at the very top there's a couple polygons that are yellow those are the areas that are currently um low density residential and they're proposed to be changed to conservation because they're shown on the Wetland survey as wetlands and then the areas in red are areas that are currently designated with conservation future land use but on the Wetland survey they were shown to be Uplands and so those areas would be right sized to the R3 zoning excuse me zoning Des um zoning district and the areas in green are the areas that are currently R3 zoning that are shown on the on the Wetland survey as wetlands and so those would be turned over to uh conservation and Teddy to summarize from the previous application they wanted to grab more of the conservation land to connect those Parcels that's right so but but that has been abandoned the idea of because obviously I mean I I can see where you would want to connect those Parcels but so will that will those two Parcels simply be built on under this proposal in separate pieces will be something really small on the on the top parcel and then something bigger on the bottom parcel so one other difference between the last appliation in this one in the last application we were provided with a concept plan of what the development would look like in this case uh a concept plan was not provided which a concept plan is not required um but what we would end up with is two polygons of high density residential and the remaining portion of the property in the conservation future land use but we the idea of connecting those two uh Uplands is abandoned correct there would be a conservation uh future land use designation between them okay uh and my last question is um I remember people talking about flooding concerns on the other side of Singleton um are you going to talk about that a little bit or uh do you have anything further to say about that because I I do live kind of back in that area and I do know that that little stretch of Singleton has a very low spot it's very very wet sometimes depending on on the weather and I just I know that they worry over in whatever the the horse name Community is um of about flooding Swan likes yeah flooding is more so related to the engineering of the site the site plan all of that for as far as zoning and entitlements on a property um we don't have uh any portion to to discuss that tonight but maybe the applicant has some information to provide on what they've seen out on the site with the outfalls uh before I call on secretary Grant next I want to remind the members don't turn turn your uh button down and then turn it off and turn it back on because you go at the end of the line the second time you do that so that's why it's getting a little mixed up here secretary Grant um Mr Glendo on page 136 of 186 um you line number one you talk about the conservation easement and or deed restriction does that mean that the remaining 114.5 68 of wetlands will remain Wetlands forever or what does that mean thank you for pointing that out that was um from the last application um where there was going to be impacts of the wetlands and so as a trade-off we were requesting a conservation easement in this case since it's just right sizing the boundaries we're no longer as a condition of approval requesting that conservation easement so that should have been stricken so the remaining wetlands are subject to being filled in at some else's wh if they're if they are impacting any of the wetlands the Water Management District may require a conservation easement or they may still place the wetlands in conservation into a conservation easement we'd have to ask the applicant the reason why I asked because I if memory serves probably doesn't but the last time when this came up there was I thought there was talk about preserving all the remaining Wetlands am I right or wrong correct so that's the use of the the conservation eement would protect the wetlands take off those development rights in uh in our code conservation allow the O zoning District allows one unit per five acres and so technically you could develop in an O area however you would still need to get any impacts to Wetlands permitted through the Water Management District uh yeah we know we went down that roow before all right thank you member moso yeah yes um Eddie on page um 140 um line 16 um it says uh therefore there is a potential Wetland impact of approximately 39 acres and so I was curious to where um that impact would be um if you could point that out or show us on um the map that would be helpful I believe that's a hold over from the last uh application I'd have to ask the applicant if they have any information on that to to clarify okay thank you okay I have a question for member Gad and member moso because you all read everything that comes out from the state I read something in the last two weeks that says um if a piece of land is deed or is a Conservation Area under the live local act the rules change and it may become developable and conservation is not is supposed to be an area that is set for conservation instead it's a holding pattern is there any truth to that that y'all have read I know you read everything everything that comes from T yeah I I would just say I just read some of the revisions for the live local act um and I didn't see that in there but that doesn't mean that um it's not um Mr Gard might have more information Chinese I'm not sure how that plays out but what I am experienced to know about is the definition difference between conservation I'm sorry the definitional difference between conservation and preservation and in the case of water management districts going through Wetland permitting their eyes towards conservation not preservation so there can be plans presented whereby you do both you develop an area of wetlands but you do so conserving the wetlands often times it means you grant a conservation easen over the balance of what you don't develop that I think Eddie's trying to say that comes to play lat when and if somebody wants to go in and develop it it's in St John's jurisdiction I'm sure and this was conservation it was not preservation right but that's what your land use talks about here is conservation and open space it's if you say preservation then you're preserving everything you're not doing anything so I think it allows the question to be asked and if you can obtain the permit through the permitting procedures you may end up being able to develop an area that was here to for a wetland area but you do so in accordance with the requirements which basically says conservation unless they want to give up what you said was part of this in the history that uh granting and you said address this applicants so addressing the applicants may be to say do you want to lay a conservation easement over all of those wetlands and give the conservation e to the to the Water Management District secretary Grant um now I was going to bring up the fact that we used to talk about zero Wetlands loss but seems like that the live local has changed the rules on everything so forget it okay this point I'll open the public hearing Lori do we have any car well first the applicant the C anyway I wasn't sure good evening members of the pnz my name is Bruce MO I'm representing the applicant um I I I'm not sure about what the lival said if it's changed um I think what the you said preservation and conservation I think the difference is conservation designation and conservation easement once an easement has been recorded I've never seen it be become anything but a conservation easement in my 40 Years of doing this we've tried twice and it was it it didn't happen um we tried to develop in a conservation in both times we were denied by the state so right now your your pro the a lot of this property is just designated as conservation per your comp plan once the development comes then certain amount of that will be put into conservation easement and then it's pretty much protected in perpetuity so um there would there is a kind of subtle difference I don't think that live local can bypass that I haven't heard and we've been paying pretty close attention to it um but anyway um we have heard this before and almost I could say forget everything you ever heard about this project because that it doesn't really have what we're doing tonight has nothing to do with what we were doing last time this time we're really just doing a correction we're not asking for anything we just have the information that we know where the Wetland line is it's not the same as what it was when the zoning designation and the land use designation was put on because that was put on by large scale maps that were done at a national level very very inaccurate so all we want to do right now is pretty much set it straight so that what is Wetlands is going to be zoned and comp planed is wetlands and what is Uplands will be zoned and comp plan as Uplands in the R3 zoning it's really that simple we're a little gun shy right now because we you know we spent a lot of money to go to commission or to go to council and we were denied so we want to see if we can at least get what we think your code requires um so we're asking for that to do a correction per your comp plan and your code to see if that flies and then once that flies and we know what we have then we can come back and actually talk about how we're going to develop this property we'll talk about are we going to impact Wetlands can we impact Wetlands if we can how much can we because now we're talking about developing in Wetlands that are Zone will be hopefully will be zoned and comp planed as conservation um so we'll be very limited on what we can do if if it becomes part of the develop M um in summary what we proposed last time was based on the recommendation of the environmental consultant saying you have this extremely large piece of property with this very large Wetland if you do this at a minimum you have enough Wetland on your property that through pres through conservation and enhancement you don't have to go buy property off site so that was the premise of that request you can forget all that all we're going to do right now is is is correct the maps so that we can now go to the drawing board and come back to you with the development proposal to discuss all the details about drainage and Wetland impacts and all that good stuff density and all that so we just want to get past step one so we can come to you with step two member moso yeah um this question is for Eddie um if this does get approved with no concept plan would this come before the p and Z again because it seems like if it's approved then it would just go to staff for you guys to um review correct that's right the only other um time that would have to go to public hearing is if there were some type of plat where you'd have to approve the prelimin the sketch plat and the final plat or if you had any uh waivers or variances that needed to go to DRC or baa so at this point it's most likely not would not come back to us corre correct thank you no matter how many units thought that so were so many units has to go to public care no no okay that's that's different a lot of lot of municipalities once you get so many units you have to go to PNC okay member Rogers um so I Mr moan Moya Moya Mr Mo I'm a little deaf um so right now you're just trying to see what you've got to work with what you're saying and um you know actually um I was one of the people who said I thought it was okay to connect the pieces you know given the fact that you guys were going to be um you know sort of cleaning up the invasive species um and that sort of thing I mean I suppose you can't really commit to it in fact I'm sure you can't commit to it but but but is that kind of in the back of your mind or is that in play to to maybe in exchange for the wetlands mitigation through removing invasive species maybe to gain some credits that would allow you to connect the people pieces um because you did get that cleared before if I recall correctly or at least by us we we by you yes but not by not by counil so if if if the development would have to have Wetland impacts um then obviously con putting in a conservation eement and doing enhancement would be on the table to to to mitigate those impacts because it still has to be a no net loss we still have to improve it so that the we don't do it by by because you got to look at the Quality and the quantity and then as the quality goes up the quantity can go down you still have a no net loss so we would do that in order to satisfy the district that's the state requirement so if we're doing if we're allowed to do some Wetland impacts for whatever purposes that might be ancillary to the development whatever we chose to do whatever becomes reasonable to do then that would be on the table to satisfy the district requirements I mean I I personally certainly am sympathetic to you know the the desire to connect the pieces of the Uplands I mean I see that you know I don't see that as being you know unreasonable um but I I guess I just um I I hope that you know that former plan is something that you all keep in mind although I suppose if it's not coming back before us again um um you know maybe it there's not much I I have to say about that but it's it seems to me that it would be a good selling point um you know uh for for the future M scoso um yeah and when you went before Council and I know this is a completely different thing that um it there was a mention of um there was concern with um possibly flooding on the south side of the property and Council had asked for any conditions to the developer and has that been anything that you have thought up or come up with a plan to prevent flooding on the south side of the property no no we haven't done any engineering to that extent I mean we we normally don't um for for zoning requests because it's that's a whole another level of cost and effort so um we will have to do that I mean your capable staff between the dot the St John's and your city engineering they'll make sure that we address the drainage you got so you're you're you're protected in three different agencies on the drainage any other questions thank you thank you any cards a Michael MAAC good evening Michael my Jack Alpine Lane I um was listening to this Water Resource values issue the the idea of the value of a wetland I've I've often wondered how some wetlands are valued more than others um so I decided to look into that and there's actually a criteria that comes down from Florida statute 373 0421 that the St John's River Water Management District follows and there's 10 environmental values and I I want you as I read this list think about how many of them actually affect the functional value of the Wetland the first one recreation in and on the water if it's a small Wetland and you can't put a canoe on it or fish in it it loses 10 points fish and wildlife habitats and the passage of fish you would expect estu resources it gets extra points if it's a saltwater Marsh you know not freshwater wetlands maintenance of freshwater storage and Supply which is exactly what you expect a wetland to do that's where we get our groundwater recharge for our portable water you cover up Wetlands you reduce your portable water you can either have it now or you cannot have it later it's one or the other a aesthetic and Scenic attributes that's a good one filtration absorption of nutrients and other pollutants sediment loads water quality and navigation yes 10 points if you can get a big boat on it with an outboard so when you hear someone say that Wetland only is graded six or eight which one of those six or eight do you really want to lose because quite frankly these are the most valuable lands that we have in Titusville they are the most biologically diverse and active Okay no net loss of wetlands is what we're striving for so I don't know if this particular I I wasn't able to study it long enough but I did have a couple of points that I I wanted to bring up soon as I can figure out where I hid my notes I think in general that the city is doing a really good job with this particular uh review um and I think that's important it's complicated it's a very complicated site um but most of all I think not all of the the conservation proposed to be changed to HDR I think those are mostly UPS now if we look at the new map and so that's that's actually kind of a good thing how much more time do you need one more minute please okay every everyone consent for yes yes take a minute so we're talking about a difference of3 acres here in this one versus you know so that actually sounds like a pretty good thing but the big hole here is there's no concept plan you're approving high density residential next to a wetland without a plan just a wave of the hand does that make sense to what's the Imp pack next to a wetland with a 15t buffer the last not least is um I would like to ask the applicant will there be impacts to Wetlands flat out I'd also like to know direct and secondary impacts because I think those things are important before you make this decision to change the zoning get a plan a person might want to know where on the site potential impacts will be thank you thank you next card uh I had a question okay uh it's Michael is it yes I'm sorry your last name again sir my Jack my Jack someone needs to write these things down Megan can you write these down for me every time every person comes up just write the name down pass it to me Mr mik you are on the uh environmental uh TV environmental yes sir um can you give uh just kind of a brief summary of your thoughts on this concept of removing um of removing invasive species to improve a wetland and what you think the value of that is obviously you speak with a much greater knowledge base than than most of the people sitting here tonight I think all invasive species should be removed and I think every property owner is incumbent to do so so when when we start talking about them like Tiddly Winks in a game as to who's going to take care of it next that's the wrong question to be asking question is why are they still there but given that this is 120 something acres and um some of it is kind of bog and it's a little hard to get out on and there's no Financial incentive to do so at least in general um besides the building they want to put up well okay but would you not agree that um I mean I was basically saying I mean I think we shouldn't be too hard on a property owner for not going out and and pulling I don't know Brazilian pepper out of a bog even though frankly it would be nice if they did but but anyway I'm just saying what's the alternative you pass it over to the St John's River Water Management District that's if they would like to have it and if they don't then it's going to be incumbent upon the developer to hand it off to some homeowners association to do the same thing because the city doesn't want the responsibility of maintaining it we shouldn't be paying for that it's this development that's causing this issue so the development needs to take care of it so why would it be any different for this development whether it's one acre or 100 acres we don't need invasives and they should be removed I agree but I think they won't get removed unless they're uh removed by the property owner and if the property owner is incentivized and the invasives are removed then to me I guess what I'm saying is is there not a a net gain okay I don't know other drainage or other impact issues aside but is there not a gain possibly for the Wetland uh and the environment in general to you know lose I don't know an acre of of wetland next to the road and and and to have the the sort of the Wetland reestablished in his Natural State okay let's look at it this way uh even if we keep all of the wetlands there we're adding 13 plus acres of impervious surfaces right so add an inch of rain to that and you've got millions of gallons of storm water that you're generating you're going to put it into the wetlands that you have next to you because that's what they do they absorb water the question is is that too much that's where the engineering comes in that's where the site plan comes in again we don't have one so we don't know what those impacts are and I think it's premature to make approvals when we don't know the whole story you know right now if he wants to change the Wetland map by all means that's what we're supposed to do we don't have to change the zoning along with it that's my point wait till you have all the data thank you Mr M uh one quick question for Eddie Eddie is this in one of the zones of special interest where they have to have you know permeable um whatever I don't want to say this is not zone of special interest but where they have to have permeable um you know parking services and things the area of critical concern is what you're describing as the city's uh well field I don't believe so let me double check it is not it is not okay member Gad I have a question perhaps for staff Andor the applicant and U Mr maac's last comment kind of focuses on my question the national inventory that set the land use and Zoning for the prod property was inaccurate I've heard that stated the inaccuracy it was broadscale it was Nationwide the applicant came through a development review presented a plan and Illustrated that but it didn't it wasn't successful wasn't approved they've come back in which they've done further surveying work evidence you use the map where the colors were on it on the page on the agenda star where those Wetland delineations have been refined to be accurate and specific specific and the applicants engineer stated that so the zoning change is just the companion application to what otherwise and an adjustment in those Wetland delineation lines and if I understand the reasoning is because the conservation land use is on properties which were not accurately depicted as Wetlands however that is the land use and that is the zoning this is an attempt to get two things to concurrently occur one is the adjustment in the wetlands line based on research data surveying and the application of what jurisdictional requirements make land a wetland and what those requirements do not make land a wetland so that's been determined the surveys Illustrated it and now in a companion sense you're bringing the zoning and land use to comport with that which is what Mr ma jaac wanted to do it's just you're compressing it into an application so that you can move forward with the development which isn't once those lines are adjusted assumes that you get your approval the zoning and land use permit only the development the zoning and land use permit conversely the land use that has been adjusted which remains conservation open space is not potentially developable less the local act um it's not potentially developable unless it gets permitting by comment about conservation land and permitting procedures somebody has a right to go through that but not necessarily are they going through it so I I think they're actually probably giv what you think's right get the survey data correct know what is a wetland what is not a wetland but the site plan that isn't a requirement I think you read that that it's not a requirement for this that site plan's going to be analyzed based on codes whether it's the city of Titusville the Water Management District Army Corps of Engineers they're not going to let the project impact what is the delineated Wetlands more accurately delineated by the applicant so I kind of think it's getting in the direction you'd hoped would be done and I agree with you that sometimes presentations are made on assumptions I assume this is what it is rather than this is the lated line thank you any other questions next card Lori I actually had one I like to do it right when you look Away Joe um Eddie just so just to be clear that if we were to approve this request it's not going to come back before us uh the whatever they want to do in the future will not come back before us it could so one other U what I mentioned before was if it if the uh property is platted um that's one one option which for R3 zoning that's a multif family use you're not going to Plat for a multif family use so that's probably unlikely however if the property was developed as a PD a plan development that includes a master plan that would come before the pnz uh but that's not to say that they would have to come before the pnz if they developed under the R3 standards as is they could submit a site plan and get it approved without coming back to pnz low next card Tom Dobson good evening uh I own the property that's immediately east of the property that we're discussing here and that property which does not show on some of these maps that are in this uh packet a large lake on that property that drains pretty much all of this area into that Lake including the neighborhoods of Country Club Heights and the neighborhoods immediately north of that that Lake reached its Max maximum capacity pretty much during Ian and it's undetermined how much of this property uh that's in this current discussion this evening actually drains into that canal and goes into that Lake also so there's some concern on my part and of course for all the people that live in my neighborhood that drainage from this is going to go as the gentleman before me said all of this impervious surface is going to cause that drainage to go in there in addition to this though there's there's also a plan of foot with this 44 acre Singleton truss that's immediately north of me and on the corner of Singleton and behind this church over here on the other side or the east side of Singleton to put in another 130 units there so that would give us a total of 300 units within a quarter of a mile there on the 405 Corridor and all of it draining in some way into my Lake which is already draining some vital neighborhoods in my neighbor neighborhood the drainage is already a major problem and that it all comes down off of Park Avenue and drains all the way down into the corner into the back of that allive Overlook and all of Vista Terrace all of those streets drain into one little corner go under two houses into a canal down to that Lake uh it will be this four or five feet deep and and and looking like a Rushing River when we have a major storm in there so anything that adds to that amount of water going into that lake is going to be a problem and that Canal goes all the way around behind uh Heritage Avenue between the apartments that are on the corner there by the YMCA there's a large Canal that runs all the way through there and all of that runs down in there so I'm kind of wondering how they're going to guarantee us that this isn't going to be a problem down the road particularly if these other uh developments come uh to fruit and they are all surrounding this property everything and some of it's higher than I am too so it's going to run down on that Lake and so we have a concern about that and not to mention all the traffic and so forth that's going to cause on 405 when uh these developments take place because that's going to be quite an intersection right there where all the homes are so that's my concern uh having been on a couple of these properties and and looked at them I know that the the areas you need any additional time okay just a little bit okay U I'm just concerned to how much more water that's going to bring onto this property it's already at critical mass right now so thank you thank you next card that was last card last card we'll bring it back to the commission well let me ask the applicant if he has anything else to say in rut yes thank you um um yeah I wasn't really thinking that we were going to talk about drainage and wetlands because we're not proposing to change the drainage or the wetlands we're proposing to make a correction which per your future land use element strategy 1.16.2 says the conservation land use shall be amended to include all Wetland areas so we want to take property that is Wetlands that that has a land use of high density residential now and take it off and correct it so the high density residential is in the Uplands not in the wetlands so we're trying to make a correction here we're not here to solve drainage problems and and Wetland impacts because we're not proposing any of that we are here to comply with your comp plan to correct what is wrong where you have high density land use in Wetlands that's all we're doing here and your staff deals with drainage and Wetland impacts on a daily basis that's where the engineering belongs and U should we decide to go with a PD because it turns out that we can get more units and we can impact more Wetlands then we'll be back if it turns out that we can develop it under R3 zoning then maybe we won't be I don't I don't know the answer to that but we spent a lot of money to get here being that we were uh Deni before we'd hate to get into spending you know 10 times more to get answers to questions that we're just asking for a simple correction to a map thank you thank you yeah much go so you say that that's all you're doing but you're also requesting a reone as well and so I think we have to take both of those in consideration it's not just the small scale Amendment it's also um you've you've connected it with the rezone and so I think that's that is super important I know that you've spent a lot of money but um the potentials of us rezoning without a concept plan and the potential of they're being flooding that's also going to cost people money as well member Gil but this is a question for staff Eddie was there a school concurrency form filled out yet or is it premature for that I don't see anything in the in our packet for so for this specific new application number we don't we have the previous School impact analysis letter from when it was a more um more dense project so this would be a lesser impact do you know what year that when that was filled out August of 2023 August 2023 mhm okay thank you member Charles yeah Chelsea um could you give us um a little for legal legal um legally what's our as far as the the um to amend the comprehensive plan we just have to as a board we have to make sure that it it's consistent with the comp plan right um that's correct and and as far as rezoning um our what's our our our Direction legally as a board to determine uh zoning is there any uh is it just to go off the comp plan 2 as far as does it does it um conform to the area um I guess what's what what reasons would we legally be able to give to not do rezoning I guess in this instance I can answer I can answer that one so the criteria that you're going to be basing the resoning decision on are in your packet on page 143 um it includes are there public facilities available to serve the site the transportation impact Solid Waste public streets being adequate to the property does the land support the proposed development uh and there's a couple others but so that's your uh your guiding post is is that impact too that's one of the so if we were to say that we didn't want to rezone this we would have to find one of these things that didn't match or where we in our opinion as a board that we thought it didn't match one of these it's a little bit more than your opinion so he Eddie provided the criteria but you're decision for the items that come before you are based on the competent substantial evidence that's provided to you and so the evidence that's provided to you is both the testimony the facts the reports the the whole report everything you've heard from the planning staff all of what you've heard tonight as that was part of the public hearing is what you consider to render your decision but you have to weigh each little piece of information that you heard and you have to weigh it as a judge to decide was this lay testimony expert testimony what how do I weigh this information compared to the totality and then use that to base your decision okay all right thank you Vice chairman anyon uh I I agree with member Gard that this is basically a correction and and the rezoning is kind of a good thing and that it's taking o um stuff that should have been R3 to o or and should have been things that should have been o to R3 um per had the maps been more detailed that would have been done from the get-go um but one thing that might make this a little clear is there like a net net calculation in here I didn't see it like what the acreage of that's going from o r to R3 is and what the net or and then how much from R3 is going to O I think there was I believe that's on the application let me so on page 147 in the narrative it says all 4.69 Acres of low density residential will be converted to conservation an additional 1.41 7 Acres of Uplands that are currently conservation will be converted to high density residential an additional 3.86 Acres of wetlands that are currently high density residential will be converted to conservation therefore the land use request is for 9.21 two acres and then there's uh the result would include include a total of 11335 acres in the high density residential and a total of 114.5 6 acres in the conservation future land use so it sounds like net net we're actually gaining conservation over what it is now correct okay that's what I thought thank you member Rogers uh Chelsea is is there any legal basis for us asking uh the making an approval of this request contingent upon going back to um the old proposal to uh I don't know um you know like remove invasive species from the rest of the land and place that into a conservation easen or is is that those totally separate things I'm sorry I'm not following you 100% well just that um I liked in their old proposal that in exchange for uh you know basically being able to fill in some Wetlands right along the road that they were going to improve with the blessing of the St John's Water Management District um the Wetland by removing invasive species which gives them sort of credits or something like that like Wetland credits but uh just but that's now removed from this but I'm I'm wondering uh can can we tie an approval of this request to uh putting that back into it sounds like you're asking to impose a condition you could ask the applicant if they'd be willing to address what you've just commented on and maybe they can speak to Okay that I I can't speak for them okay but but that's okay well then I guess I will ask the applicant um um I know you said that you're that this is not what you're here to do right now but I I wonder is that something that you might be willing to consider to put the old if if we don't impact any Wetlands we would not be enhancing the Wetland that would be a cost for no benefit um but you know if if and I I don't know how much we can can't impact that Welling at this time we haven't done that research we we we tried it didn't work um so uh we would do it proportionately based on the St John's requirement that's all I can say thank you any other discussion I've closed the public hearing I think so any further discussion or does anyone care to make a motion let's just stare each other oh member eight of Vice chairman Aon uh I move to approve item nine B um as presented small scale comprehensive plan Amendment U SSA number 32024 L multifam is there second to motion second second about member Childs any discussion any discussion roll call please member Moscoso no member Gad yes member Rogers yes Vice chairman Eton yes member Childs yes secretary Grant yes chairman Richardson I'd have to vote no I think there's uh too many things that are not addressed um and but the motion passes four to three I believe 52 um I did hear the the motion specifically said the SSA to amend the comprehensive plan ordinance but I didn't hear anything in the motion about the rezoning so I would like to ask for another motion for the resoning ordinance we look in back at you well I'll do it okay go ahead go ahead no all I'm going to do is uh approve the resoning that's all recommend approval for the resoning I'll second it okay it's been moved and seconded any further discussion roll call please member Moscoso no member Gad yes member secretary Grant yes member Childs yes member Rogers yes Vice chairman Aton yes chairman Richardson yes okay that item is to he be heard before Council when I think it's next week's meeting I didn't have it on here the council first reading is April 9th and the public hearing is April 23rd okay thank you Telson okay at this point I hate to say this Kevin does do you want to have a break if not we'll continue I think we have people here for petitions and requests I don't know if you'd want to do that before or we still got 9 A and B do we okay yeah I didn't hear anything about having a break so we're g conditional use permit 9A Municipal fleet service thank you sir item begins on page 41 the public works department is requesting a conditional use permit to replace the existing Municipal Fleet Service station with new facilities including canopy pumps Etc at 101 North Singleton Avenue a cup is required for additional storage greater than 5 gallons or use of a regulated substance as in gasoline in the area of critical concern per section 3.9.4 point4 of the Hazardous Materials technical manual the subject property is located at the northeast corner of the intersection of Garden Street State Road 406 and Singleton Avenue and is within the air of critical concern the subject property contains approximately 16.54 acres and is currently developed as a Municipal Water Production facility garage and Fleet Service Station the future land use designation on the property is public semi-public and the property is owned public the above ground fuel storage tank is proposed to be located outside of the Florida Department of Environmental protection required 500 ft minimum setback from a portable water well but within the city is required 750 ft minimum setback from o for section 3.8.1 of the city's hazardous materials technical manual the policy further states that existing non-residential uses of hazardous substances shall be allowed to continue their use provided the user shall obtain a well filled well filled protection operating permit the permit for the fuel storage use was submitted with this application the distance from the property boundary to the nearest Active water supply Supply well head is approximately 550 ft the proposed tank will be located within the same general area of the site as the tanks being replaced the proposed above ground fuel storage and distribution system shall comply with Florida Administrative Code 62- 762 above ground storage tank systems ffpa 30 flammable and combustable liquids code and NFPA 30A code for motor motor fuel dispensing facilities and all other applicable local state and federal regulations that apply to the intended facility use and operations uh the only thing I wanted to highlight for you all is that we have um diagrams of the existing conditions uh those are available on page 88 so you'll see a concrete pad with two existing fuel tanks and then the following page 89 is the proposed uh replacement thank you okay um Mr cook you want to add anything at this point sure so this is the city's second replacement of the fuel system at this location originally installed in 1978 the current tanks are from 1996 and 1999 so they're approaching their end of 30-year life they're 28 and 25 years old so we took the opportunity to consolidate them to a one split tank instead of two 10,000 gallons so reducing our capacity to 14,000 gallons uh moving it outside of our Drive path adding a covered awning with fueling operations be undercover now both fueling the tanks and fueling our vehicles um and then also we added a containment Basin for all the storm water during fueling operations which will isolate the storm water system from being able to outflow it will keep it contained while fueling is operating underneath the awning so U our tanks are monitored both the intersta layer and inventory through a a ver root system that we have on all our fuel tanks currently we'll continue that with a new setup with an advancement to the Next Generation I'd like to hear dates stated because in 1978 I was on the city council and approved that um but in the last 30 years it's been talk about the City Garage moving in fact I discuss it with Eddie at one time it was planned there wasn't a a detailed plan but they were thinking of relocating the gar to some place on 405 um is that going to happen or with the new storage tank above ground won't happen in the future what is your plan well so I'm the third Public Works director I think has asked for a new Public Works complex um so we own property and a new city hall and a new police department and a new fire station yeah uh we own property uh near the airport off of gold Knights Boulevard on the south side that we purchased from FEC uh roughly 20 years ago that was planned to be the future home for public works at 20 acres uh well it would be we're not on Golden Nights we're further down the street uh to the South actually but uh that was prior to the consolidation of Public Works back to its original scope so now we we're rethinking where our staffing is going to land because we have access to additional facilities around this City so uh a lot of it hinging on funding today we don't have a plan uh funded to move uh anything off of this site at this point but we do in the future plan to consolidate some of our services off of the Singleton site and at one time I think it was that same year 78 um I asked the I think it was development director as the city planned the screen that uh well it was the City Garage we called it then and he says the city doesn't have to screen anything and I I don't have to tell you what my reaction to his comment is but um on the east side on the west side of Singleton Avenue you've got employee parking in the grass and then gravel will that be somewhat improved hopefully in the future I know know it doesn't have anything with this storage tank but I mean it is a detriment uh for the city it you're right it doesn't set a good example for the city so right now Acom uh is doing a master plan of the garage site so part of that is consolidation of our localized services including looking at parking we did about I guess about three years now start we rent the old church to the north of our facility from the airport that used to be originally the Women's Club yes yes so we we now rent that from the airport we use that for storage and for operations so that is our parking on days that we don't park on Singleton if you ever go by when we mow Singleton we don't park on it um so the the goal is in the future yes to be parked off of it is a property not right away at that point but off of that location um but again that's going to take uh shifting of Staff off site or adjusting some of our current usage as water plant to the north um into parking which right now is not set up for that member Rogers it's Mr cook right um Mr cook is um so so there's a there's an actual City well on this site or or you said close to the site 550 ft or something like that yes it's alone Singleton we have a number Wells that are stationed along Singleton Avenue that are operational oh okay we have we have a well on the city property in the far corner there's a non-operational well but is there's a well head still there but operational Wells are on Singleton okay I mean I I have no idea what happens when it's this is a a dual it's like a a tank with a wall down the middle basically you got diesel on one side and gas on the other and then it's got a double wall outside of that inner tank yes um and you know I saw some reference to retaining walls and you know Clay impermeable material and that sort of thing is this um fueling area in some kind of a depression that in case this tank were to suffer some kind of a rupture um that uh you know that that that the fuel would be contained in an impermeable sort of pool or yeah if it were to leak it would leak onto paved surfaces uh of the yard yes but like are they flat pav surfaces are they kind of crown paav surfaces or they are they bold paav surf part of this is a containment Basin was added so the storm drains at that point will not function as storm drains they will funnel any fuel into the containment base which doesn't have an outfall unless it's opened and in the event of a leak it would be shut down to where nothing would come out uh the other advantage of this site is it's manned so there's no fueling operation when a staff member is not there so between the fire department using it they obviously with their vehicle our Salway staff are with their vehicles who are also responsible for cleanups with the fire department so so any leakage is already has onsight response okay I'm sorry I missed the pardon I just don't know this stuff so if there were a catastrophic leak the fuel goes into drains and the drains are shunted to a containment area yeah it's a containment box okay and how big is that box uh I have to find that for you I mean is like it's is it is it 10,000 gallons no I I would put it at probably about 20% of the tanks themselves okay um I I will share that we've operated these current tanks with no failures for the last 30 years both so so the the next iteration of tank is a Better Built technology than they were 30 years ago they are still still on Ste but U they are not a expected to be damaged and these are out of our Drive pass now so um this is probably going to sound a little paranoid but um given the state of the world at the moment um how confident are you that your security is up to handling someone who really wanted to do some damage to a tank like that well the site is monitored it has surveillance on it it's patrolled by the police department on the regular basis with their normal patrols it's as secure as any other above ground storage unit right now it's fenced U operation of our pumps can't be done without a key card of the city so that that that negates all the operation the only thing left would be damaged to physically damaged in the tank and in all honesty at that site adjacent to the water plant that's probably a lesser uh intrusion Point than the water facility is but but I don't see it as a a break in point that we would see people purposely going there to damage the fuel tanks M Gad um for Kevin it I I understand the difference between the fd's 500 foot well set back and um the 750 ft the city's code requires there's a differential what's the differential for why is the cities greater than fds U most of the city's well Field restrictions are more stringent than the DPS um so a lot of times our AC code is not the DP standard for well field there A step above or pushing out the Border some um in this case it's a consequence to Conformity with the standard well yeah the consequence would have been we have to put it on the South Side adjacent to buildings which would bring it into impact with with the building operation as opposed to the empty area off the drive bath so when the consultant looked at it and we s to the plane Department in the time we asked not not to have to comply with 750 and comply as best we could which is going to just north of our current site staying outs outside of the Restriction of D so the 750 established by the city's code was established for a protection Zone greater than the state of Florida's D for good reason I'm sure but in this instance the good reason's not necessarily applicable you are deviating from the 750 ft and so I'm trying to come to grips with why would you have a standard that you're not conforming with if it's a good standard and if the alternative which is a dilemma for me because I recognize the age of these tanks it's like if you leave it it's worse than if you improve it I just want to feel more comfortable about why we have a standard of 750 that was arrived at for reasons the city decided on and why deviating from that now is what's necessary I'm just having a little bit of a ju position in my own mind with that yeah this was our best fit for the tanking system at this location uh we understood that it was going to be inside the 750 um slightly um for the most of the list that welfare protection act the material is hazardous gasoline and diesel or El listed petroleum they're not a hazardous material I believe I read that so that difference between most of the material listed is deemed to be hazardous by EPA whereas petroleum is not um so what it is an impact it is an environmental impact is not listed in that hazardous to this say Wellhead so the 700 50 ft is categorical but more specifically in your proposal your category is really not applicable to the concern if you had a spill within the 7 500 feet or 550 feet or 600 feet but not the 750 it's not considered a hazardous material for the well field yeah and in the event of a spill we would also have to remove everything that was impacted so so as we've responded to diesel spills the city has the soils removed we have monitor Wells on site that are specific to the fuel system so we would be in compliant with DP on a cleanup effort if there is a spill so the goal would be there would not be a a fuel discharge that would seep into the ground that could end up in a well either way uh regardless whether we're th000 feet away or 500 feet so so I think that's the the primary goal there is to avoid any impact period you know by containment on site and I'll have one more question I think you touched on this in your presentation to respond that the city has plans they're not funded but a hope would be that someday that the facilities inclusiv of these fuel facilities would be relocated and developed possibly without a conflicting Comet with the wellfield protection Zone it would one day this would all go away in a perfect world somewhere else away from the conflicting standard yes that's true so probably 100 years from now I was going to say 30 years old ones got old standard we control somewhere I become a a senior citizen at 100 it'll be that time of year okay thank you member Rogers uh so uh just to be clear Mr cook um there there's no uh there's no feasible way really that uh or there are no plans to put some kind of a an elevated burm that you know even a kind of a hump that the trucks would just drive over to to sort of as a retaining wall for for a catastrophic spill not for 14,000 gallons at one time okay no keep mind my trucks there fueling that's an employee is not going to allow that spill just like a gas station where you have an emergency pump shut off these will have that too um so that situation or more likely is a fuel truck fueling a tank can have a a spill that that happens regularly at gas stations such those are minor um but to do a full containment that's what the second wall of the tanks are for they're they're really there to contain the full volume of the tank to keep it integrity and then like I said we have monitoring on that that alerts that there's a tank Integrity issue at that point okay any other questions I'll open the public hearing are there any cards already yes sir James Troutman hi my name is James stman um just a couple questions about the above ground storage tank is this a uh horizontal tank a vertical tank one horizontal horizontal okay uh let's see you said double walled protection correct yes as required okay as required no cathoic protection or anything of that nature uh as far as it being on the I assume it's going to be on a concrete height yeah has a concrete slab with Ballard protection uh Causeway above it okay uh one other question um the system that shuts off the drainage valves that are used for water mitigation right until a spill happens is that yeah the containment automatically seals whenever there's pumping at the site so that the storm drains aren't discharging at that point so even a rain event the storm charge storm system will not be functional it be held on site until the fueling operation is completed okay so there's some kind of electronic system that a valve turns that a manual valve or electron no electron okay just want to make sure uh previous API 650 inspector uh just want to clear up some of that so double wall protection uh you have so many years built into that when they when they do these protections uh cathodic protection things of that nature help with uh deration um I worked in the oil field industry for quite some time 10 years I've done a lot of above ground storage tank inspections um and refineries they do go through a lot of rigorous in engineering to protect the safety of you know the round uh neighborhoods and things of that nature so for something like this to be catastrophic um there's a few things that has to happen to make that a catastrophic event a lot of times the more times that I've seen human interaction has caused that most of the time it's due to uh when they're in downturn when they're refurbishing or things of that nature hot work permits things of that nature is normally when I've seen a lot of catastrophic events happen um but that doesn't mean nature right so that could happen I just wanted to touch base on that give some input as far as being a former a bugr storage tank inspector so thank you any other cards no sir okay okay any other questions of Staff anyone care to make a motion member G I'll take a stab but I'll make a motion we approve uh conditional use number two- 2024 um in accordance with the staff recommendation I second second by m member Rogers any further discussion roll call please Lori Vice chairman Aton yes secretary Grant yes member Rogers yes M Gad yes member Childs yes M moso yes chairman Richardson yes well you know when it's going to be heard before Council next Tuesday next item is petitions and requests from the public anyone want to say anything James Troutman again uh my address is 1705 Bara Avenue um I was here at the last meeting getting some information um going back from that conversation I did go to a community meeting there is a proposal or there will be in the future uh to rezone the address at 1717 Barna Avenue to a high density population or right thank you residential um currently it's slated I believe at 16 a lower grade of residential right now 17 or 16 uh single family homes I believe they will be proposing for a 48 unit Community townhouse Community my concerns and our the neighbors of uh around us concerns are they are looking for a two-story townhouse Community um our biggest concerns are of uh the height and how close adjacent our properties are to this property um my personal concerns is I probably have the majority of the land that touches property uh close to two acres so my concern is of the height and that when this comes available uh or comes up for proposal that I would like to see some consideration into of course the neighborhood and and everything but um the main factor really is is of of our adjacent neighbor Neighbors um of our privacy uh there's probably other things I can think of I just can't think of right now but mainly I just want to at least bring this up and that it will be coming down the pipeline approximately where is SL Bara um Majestic court is the the name of the street that they had developed I guess a while back um so that's uh King King Street is the next one up oh okay south of king um so there's a uh kobac there currently right now that people dump and I end up going around helping keep the grass cut they finally put up a chain across the road uh which I asked him is this public road or is this private road yeah I know what where you're talking about now yeah know exactly where it is if it was public road or private road I asked if if they could put that chain up because of The Dumping and the people that do go back there um so they did do that but mainly yeah I just wanted to bring this up that this is coming down the pipeline thank you we are concerned thank you anyone else wish to speak okay next item is presentation from Public Works utility capacity thank you for coming thank you all right so we got asked to do a presentation on the current capacity and impacted development on the capacity of the Utility Systems so just going to run through few brief things give you a system overview discuss the well fills Uh current capacities and a little bit of History the water plan the Reclamation plan some key indicators we use and then what we do for concurrency and DP permitting so just giving you a little overview of the system as a whole we operate uh two City on wellfields and one public private partnership with tiffa on our air four-wheel field uh to provide raw water through our cup consumptive use permit with St John's at 6.01 million gallons per day Max Capacity uh we also operate a an interconnect with city of Coco that supplies finished water to the city um on a daily basis as needed although we've reduced that heavily the recent years so the well Fields feed into the morning dove Water Treatment Plant which has a 16 million gallon per day capacity um That Feeds out to distribution along with Coco interconnect on the south side of town acces about 368 mies of pipe total and about 1,800 fire hydrants that in turn service our customer base which is currently uh the end of last year around 2 2,483 water customers another 19,700 Wastewater and roughly 2600 uh reuse customers so once to go to your homes if he to back through collection system of the Wastewater system both pressure and gravity another 217 miles of pipes and 109 city- owned lift stations it doesn't count the privately owned uh feed to two Reclamation plants the Osprey plant and the blue Haron plant they both uh create reclaim water U from the little graphic the Osprey is interconnected to the Blue Heron on the reclaim side because Osprey doesn't have an outfall so it outfalls its treatment capacity U effent to the blue Blue Heron once it's treated they combine and create the reclaim system which is again distributed out to the customers um the recla ReUse systems are permitted at 6.75 million gallons per day which is the maximum capacity of the Reclamation plants U we don't provide that full amount on a regular basis the plants aren't running at full capacity anything that's not siipped out the reuse the last source of waste of the reclaim system is to the Blue Heron Wetlands the constructed Wetlands is part Blue Heron treatment system um reuse distributions about 52 miles currently of pipe between the two plants and the customers that are served so just taking a look at our well fill cup um going back believe we took this one back to 2018 looking at the impact of the cup we also ran it forward to 2031 which is the end of our cup uh the red line on there is a 6.01 million gallons Max and the blue line is our traveling annual daily uh usage so February of uh this year we use about 4.4 million gallons or 72% of the cup capacity and we can't see the dates on the bottom okay what does it go up to 20331 okay and then uh on the water plant side the the plant is obviously much larger than the capacity of the well Fields the plant was built for 16 million gallons of treatment um as of February with using the same projections we we ran 4.3 million gallons through the water plant which roughly 27% of its operating capacity 27 yeah uh the Reclamation plants uh have more variability mainly due to rainfall and inii effect to the sewer system um but again this is the same Trend 2018 through 2029 this case which is the Pro ction on that plant side uh both plants are currently in rep permitting so they'll be issued another um in the next year we'll be rep permitting them for five year Cycles which I only put this up forward five years um as of February both plants operate at 5.13 million gallons per day which is 76% of their capacity uh combined and then just to give you some key indicators um that we kind of use to track um so the morning dove we take the demand which in the case of water is the highest 12mth that we saw demanding on our plant so DP asked us to look back the last 12 months and take the maximum daily flow so not our annual flows which is what we report out on those other charts we take our maximum day which in the case of the city was 5.49 million gallons which used in one day um believe it's April last year was the date uh the morning dove has no required reservations but does have development commitment around half a million gallons a day which drops its capacity between that uh demand and our commitments to a little less than 10 million gallons uh so they have 62% of the morning dub is available for development in a concurrency review just did the math on that that's roughly 40,000 homes we when we permit a we permit a water expansion is 250 gallons per day uh per equivalent house um so that's the permits that are issued and the commitments placed on the plant and until that moves to uh usage on the water supply side um in that case we look at the the previous uh average flows coming through versus our capacity the water supply does have an imposed 10% reserve on it by city council which was put in place um I believe in 20 2004 which predates the area four expansion so they asked that the well Fields be ca 10% below their actual permitted capacity capacity so that capacity drops 6 off of our well Fields again we have commitments about a half a million that leaves an excess of uh 0.34 million gallons per day on the wells roughly 6% the of the unreserved capacity 16% of the total capacity so that equates around 1400 homes using the same 250 gallons the sewer plants um in this case we have to take the ma the worse than Max month or the max 3 month month for the last year in that case for our sewer plants was around 5.13 million gallons their commitment is a little lower because we do have commitments um that are not using sewer either in the county or they they just have a differential they're not using sewer so their commitments around3 that leaves an excess of 1.3 million gallons per day on both plants sewer capacity is built at 225 gallons per house so that equates to R roughly 5,700 homes left in the sewer U both sewer plants so know it's probably a little hard to see but we each time there's a development yeah well I thought you guys I thought you guys would have these but so I apologize so so each time there's a development we do a concurrency review we check the current word capacity and Sewer capacity versus what they're proposing so in this example we used the development had 67 homes coming again so we again take up the 250 on the water side and 225 on the Wastewater and we generate whether or not there's capacity to serve in this case at that level there there is capacity to serve but this happens with each development through that comes through site plan through the planning department we do a concurrency review uh preliminarily to see that they they can be served uh the other parts of this form uh involveed the other areas like Parks uh Transportation um Eddie routes them and takes care of all these fours so that's what we do with concurrency and then the last step is every development of large scale goes through fdp permitting so this is where we actually we sign off a statement to the state that we we check our flows um we provide them reporting on our Max months our Max three months in the case of sewer we tell them what month it was so they can verify it through our reporting and then we put the load of this new development on it to show and demonstrate that there is capacity to serve um so that's kind of a back check beyond the concurrency the DP looks at before they issue a permit to expand the utility system uh on the water side that that takes the the look at the morning dove treatment facility which is um and we again take that Max day which was April last year at 5.49 million gallons were used at the water plant so I'll be happy to answer any questions uh this is the process we go through uh both in city and out of City checking for capacity look at the lights go off here I'll save my questions and I have a lot of questions uh member Moscoso yeah um can we get a copy of this could you email it out to us okay and then um this is kind of related kind of not but um I was just curious about this I saw that there was a notice um about the Blue Heron uh water facility that there was a valve issue and I was just curious how many customers is that affecting currently uh usually none uh the ReUse system combines with both plants so what happens is Osprey feeding the entire city at this point but for the last few months Osprey has been doing that anyway 84% of the Reus flow is Osprey generated uh so there hasn't been U there hasn't been a lot of impact it would impact mainly the South customers because they're missing the pumps that clip in at Blue heren okay but I live in the south end of town and has been irrigating normally um but but yeah having the whole system function with one plant down is doable having both plants out of operation would not the use would not operate yeah I um I saw the notice but I hadn't heard any complaints so I was just curious about that I think we did initially because we were in an effort to to make sure the system was fully on osprey's water we had the system open at one of our plants allowing the ReUse to depressurize so there was going to be a pressure hit for a few days but as of Friday we had closed that up and I know that most of the year irriation came back well let you know that the irrigation customers will use up the irrigation storage in a normal day during the summer it will go to zero regardless how many plantes are operating member Rogers um I Heard a number 40,000 and I heard a number 1400 can you remind me what those were yeah so 40,000 is the math the math on the morning dove facility what it has available okay and then 1400 is with the current 10% reserve on the well Fields that's what's remaining uh there's a 6% left on the well filled capacity uh so 1400 new homes is that yes Beyond what's already committed and we have a number about a half million gallons a day already committed in permits okay oh so that's what you meant when you said committed you mean like they have DP permits we commit them once their DP permits are approved and um are we how are we doing on the forever chemicals that everybody talks about uh we've done three quarters now of reviews on the morning dove finish water and through those we fall below the EPA standard for health hazard currently so there is there is an existence of but below what the EPA is set for uh the health hazard that standard is still not formalized so that's uh we're using it as what they've advertised the number to be right it has not passed all approvals to be set in stone U what we do is ucmr 5 this year which was testing for a number of chemicals in water posos being one of which and we do fall below the posos limit that has been established okay do you um you know in your industry and then obviously right next to the ocean do you foresee us going to De I don't is it desalination or desalinization um well it's desalinization okay I don't see us going there for water supply brackish water is probably the next step uh you may have seen the county is looking to go to brackish water supply which is will change your treatment process and gets a little more expensive it goes to reverse osmosis from what we use as lime softening yeah um so the process uh cost goes up but there is more brackish water at the shallow level uh which to our well fields are shallow our area four partnership is a very deep well system so it's a little different water supply but I don't foresee the city going to that um so brackish you're it's it's still groundwater yeah okay so you don't have a problem with like you know the algae toxins or something like that we we use all ground water the only the only potential surface water we would see is the Coco uh Coco does have a surface water Supply and we don't you know we don't check the source of what what they Supply to us where it's coming from because they have a well filled and surface water okay so Vice chairman Aon thank you for this I one just this is more of a comment and goes to uh what member mus go so ask for is it would be really helpful if under agenda star we had a copy of the presentation too because old guys like me following along on those screens is is really tough but it'd be great if we could uh kind of follow along on the local screen here and actually read something uh I think I heard plant were great 40,000 excess homes which is probably 100,000 is population so we should be great there but it sounds like the wellfield is our our weak spot that we're limiting limiting out at 1,600 now what's the process to bring bring more capacity on there as the the area grows and the requirement increases if if I had that right if not please clarify yeah so so the process that we're actually starting soon is we're if you remember the water supply plan that you guys adopted a few months ago we projected a water need in the next cycle of our wells 2031 is end of our well permitting so we have projected a water need beyond that so we're starting the process of changing our cup which will expand our Cup in are two and three um right now we're not discussing going to expansion of area four which is our our further north wellfield that's that's our private P public private partnership with tiffa but we are exploring the possibility of expanding two and three over the years two and three were reduced as four came on line four takes the bulk of the city's water supply currently uh purposely to allow two and three which are the shallower wells to relax and not run as much but we' we're looking to bring more in line as the salt intrusion has reduced in three in particular uh starting the process with St John's to request an expans into that cup to what level uh we'll have ride there we'll have to go back and recheck population projections and stuff to see make sure we're not you tripping too high of an ask because we don't want to reserve too much in rough numbers without getting into the more esoteric brackish water and and those kinds of things those EXP expansions you're talking about is that 500 homes 10,000 homes just I I realize you haven't completed the study but kind of what's the expectation of you know expansion without going to not Extreme Measures but U measures or or types of of water sources beyond what you currently are using I would guess we'd probably be looking at a half million gallon expansion to 6 and a half million gallons per day on the on the cup um so from a I guess from a home standpoint that's an additional 2 2400 homes uh which to put that in context that's also our city council impos Reserve right now is 10% of our our cap so that's 2400 homes that are technically Allowed by St John's but currently we have the self-imposed Restriction so that excuse me that 2400 homes does that include Apartments sorry does that include Apartments it's equivalent residential unit I did the math of what would be a home so an apartment has less water usage than a house so we base everything off of an equivalent residential unit which is a house and I kind of put that in context for everyone we we we modeled that at 250 the city population runs at about 90 gallons per person right now so we run a little less than what the state sets a standard at but Apartments would be an equivalent residential unit probably 3/4 of a home uh commercial has almost no U no impact to the water supply unless they are water dependent businesses which right now we don't have a lot of so I think we have more like 5,000 homes and apartments on the books that are going to be developed that have plans to be developed just looking at what we have permitted now we have the bulk of the subdivisions that I think have come before uh this board have been permitted uh including up to Verona village C which is recently got his DP well let's take for example the apartments that are going up at um US1 and Dairy Road that we've approved last year are they considered and they have yet to be built it's still um rof property do you know do you know the name of that one okay I don't think that one's on here it changed names but we did a preliminary concurrency assessment when it came before pnz for the PD application and then another concurrency assessment will be done when they submit a site plan request so are they accounted for or not not under that name unless they were unless they were permit under a different name I I just have them by what DP permits are name to be not what necessarily what these are uh member Childs um as far as cocoa water so you said that do we get any of our any of our water that we have in the city right now from Coco is it just in case we do need water we can get it from cocoa I pulled the numbers last month we used 86,000 gallons of cocoa water and when we get water from Coco then is it because I um when we were talking about posos testing um does that go to our treatment plant first or does it go straight out so in in other words are are we testing the cocoa water at all for those chemicals or is that on Coco to test it it's on both when Coco's water enters our system is considered a point of distribution for the city of tyu not for Coco so we do test their interconnect as well okay then they have they have responsibilities at their own plants as well once it touches our piping we're responsible for it it doesn't go to water plant because it's already treated water but you do test it at the point that it comes in we we do rout it through an Armstrong facility which is a storage facility of ours okay more to make the pH match up with the city's water um okay but yeah it's an open interconnect so it it has a valve actuator always available it's not a Mery interconnect we we have an open Flow oh okay so whenever it just just kind of comes in then okay yeah all right thank you remember Gad um Kevin a couple of questions on on annexation of property and portable water supply and Sewer Supply to unincorporated development tonight for example there was discussions where there's properties that are still within the county and not annexed but being provided I presume city services in the case of water um and one of my questions has always been since I joined the the the the group here about the area four Wells which are the well heads that are north of 5A and being a public private partnership so using kind of just a rudimentary example we'll say at the intersection of 5A and uh US1 I'm going to come into this really good idea called The Villages South and I'm going to come in with 15,000 home sites is that area accessible for City water it's obviously not contiguous so it can't be annexed and the secondary question is if it's going to be provided City water is it an annexation agreement format where you get the water if you agree to Annex when annexation is potential um yeah a multiart um our water ends just north of JJ Road it becomes the Mims water district beyond that we we don't we don't cross potable district lines so we'd have no we have no right to serve that far north so we have a finite point in which for our Cy is a responsible party to serve them for water uh Tiff is a raw water utility they have no rights uh by state by our State Licensing to provide poble water they provide only raw water so our perks sorry our Public Service Commission certifications for tiffa which a city is half partner of we Supply only raw water so the only user of tiffa is the city of tville we have a we have exclusivity to the entire cup at this point we're contractually obligated to withdraw 2.75 million gallons per day and we use 100% of it um so that utility cannot provide water to that area either as they're raw water only um when so the Gest of my question is is it potential that unincorporated development would utilize the remaining gallons where there's no oversight to the number of houses that may be presumed to be approved that would remain unincorporated but using that Water Resource that's not potential there is a potential we do provide out of City service for water uh they are they do have to do a utility service agreement which does have a annexation agreement with it once they contiguous they are open for annexation by the city and and the only caution is I'm sure you're familiar annexation is continuity and there's other criteria so you can often times provide services outside the jurisdiction and probably outside a potential short range capture where those people's value of taxes comes back to the city you're going to be providing the gallons that then I guess they say cut your nose to spite your face and that's what I'm concerned with with the with the presentation I think I mentioned that early on about the the presentation you did earlier about the the the water stuff is I come from the school of thought I was the county guy and it was happening all the time and the city people were really upset by that for good reason and that I've seen as a Le at least a likelihood potentially not necessarily a good likelihood but that in these unincorporated areas that aren't going to be able to be although the agreements in place poten eventually they come in and say I want to do the development and I need water and I sign the annexation agreement it might be 10 15 years before you get to Annex the property and that is going to reduce the the potential in a manner in which you can't calculate it you have no other than somebody going through the county I believe and getting their approval then coming to the city and saying I'm going to sign up and reserve my water so what the county does is they do ship us a availability before as the County Properties essentially when the County utilities are not able to serve them they turn and ask the city do we have availability to extend or allow to extend the mains to them um usually usually most of our out of City service is a single home that's made a request to right that's not the concern our dedicated out City service is W over uh this has an agreement with the city that we provide water service to them exchange they they they have no they have a no annexation agreement but the other homes are normally Homes Long Carpenter uh the the occasional homes and enclaves there are a number of enclaves still our County inside the city limits essentially that that those homes are served by City Water and Sewer a lot of cases and the enclaves and those existing developments in small little homes are problematic but not necessarily a concern wherein the concern would be that as the reporting goes for this volumetric uh availability and and the discussion is well how many how long will it take 1400 homes to be approved that was the discussion now the question is what if you don't approve 1400 homes or maybe 10,000 homes and it comes in as Port St John or The Villages or other like kind where that's actually what occurs and I've seen this and that's you're really in a I guess where I'm going is is there any de decisive method by which the city would say no to providing water because we're cutting our nose to spite our face yes the the city would support the city first so City properties get first come first serve uh the way the the allocations are put they're all first come first sered but for the most part at a time that if it were to be tight on supply of either water or sewer capacity the city would serve the City properties first like for example you mentioned about the 10% Reserve that you've calculated this this potential but you've kept 10% in the back pocket so as to speak that would maybe be a trigger to say we're not going to allocate any of the last 10% except the City properties yeah that's discussion we're going to have a city council is what to do with that 10% that that's my question to answer thank you member musosa so I was wondering what the criteria was to get on the list because I'm still a bit confused it if it if it's it's approved or if a site plan has been submitted um because I'm just looking at the the gis map and we have so many um developments and so for example the um the Titusville Resort and destination like that that might possibly have an assistant living facility um and there's just a lot of new developments and so I was just curious what point do they get put on that list and calculated with the numbers you're sharing with us yeah we commit them at their D permit so in some cases that predates a site plan approval um I think Veron to se is an example I don't think they've got site plan approval but they've already gotten their DP approvals uh to connect and extend a utility um so where sorry where is that in the process if you could just walk me through like oh usually I would imagine that that when the engineer feel comfortable that they've got their utility system set that they'll go and ask thep for their permitting under General permit okay so it's usually going to happen uh in the site plan process but not they're not going to wait till after site plan approval because that's their last step in the process I would guess it's going to happen a step a review or two before site plan is completed um usually the Utility side is satisfied within that process on its own um so the water mains are set the sewer infrastructure set and at that point they feel comfortable to go to DP they don't want to do it too early because those have exploration dates yeah I mean I know that not everything that I see on the gis will be built but um so everything we can assume everything that is on here is being calculated no I I believe it should be what we do at that at that stage is the preliminary concurrency assessment looking at if this does get built will we have capacity but it's not reserved at that point oh it's not reserved right okay thank you I think that answers my question and so the danger of that for development is because we are allocating first come first serve they may not get approval of a DP permit if we were to start to get to where it's tight and we don't have the ability to tell the state we have capacity those other would be held without their permits at that point okay that makes sense v um you're clearly an expert at this and I believe in in listening to The Experts um so I'm going to ask just a general question lets us sleep easier at night up here where do you start getting nervous I mean when you hear 4,000 new homes or households or 6,000 or 10,000 or whatever because we're I think our concern is that we get there before 2031 um is you know do you what's your gut well I will tell you that what we see in real operation of the pl is the commitments are too high so when they flip from commitment to actual people living in the homes they don't operate at that level so we usually get back if we're reserving a half million gallons we're going to get a portion of that back in actual usage uh we also off sudden the areas where we have reuse they don't irrigate with pole water at that point that doesn't affect our plans um so I can notice when my city engineer comes to me and goes hey we got two a large Development coming here's the number from the last month of our plan operation you know is it a concern um so not nervous at this point of where our numbers are we know they've gone up a lot because we have had a lot of development recently um I will tell you on the on the sewer plant side we're mitigating a lot of this by slip lining our lines which takes the eye and eye out of it so the volatility in the plants is going to go down we've done most of downtown already and we're progressing through that process so well um I have a question about pressure water pressure there's certain times of the day there's not adequate water pressure and um I've been told well well it's where you are it's probably your problem and it's not um I'm sure you know about the low pressure on Indian River Avenue that just occurred yesterday and today that they thought it was the person complainings problem yet they t tested the water pressure of the line supplying him on the city side and there it was low because of those new condos they're filling in at the end of any River Avenue um because there's so much development and not an expansion of what the plant produces I think the water pressure the lack of water pressure is real do you have any comment about that so so every lift station in city has a water water pressure monitoring gauge for the water system so we monitor 107 locations plus the plane itself so our lowest water pressure exists on the very south end of town in Verona right now it's it's around 43 PSI where the upper level is in the 50s South in the town me my wife complains about it all the time but not not at 3: in the morning when I get up because I have heart condition I have to go to the bathroom but uh the water pressure is great then I I had to take a video so my wife would believe me that it's not just our house pipes it's where we're living anyway so yeah South part yep so there is a lot of variability I would say a lot of the older parts of town this the lines were 2 in and they were built 2 and 4 in and that's not a current standard size anywhere those aren't able to support fir flow so they're too small um so you do have a lot of issues in those parts of town uh sometimes it is the Master Meter uh concept on a a condo or apartment complex where they put one meter in at 3 in to service 80 units and they're all competing through one one 3inch point of delivery um so we do monitor the pressure system uh we're obligated to stay above 20 of PSI which is the bare minimum we don't operate anywhere near that um we are currently we do have a consultant looking at at raising the pressure system uh which they did about 20 years ago look at raising the pressure gradient of the city up which would involve pumping changing our pump configurations U we're mainly looking at that from a fire flow standpoint to make sure we have substantial fire Flows at every point but but from time to time there are going to be uh water issues especially the older parts of town that that aren't able to serve right any more flow so with Verona and Tranquility going in South part of town will get worse will it I think Verona has always had lower water pressure than most town because it's way it's it's if you're looking from the water plant you're as far away as you can get from the city's water plant at that point U those those are the far extents of the city's system so as pipes move away they get less pressure and same as they go uphill so we really need need to take that in consideration um another question is we heard tonight about um new development that will be coming before us which we have not talked about U near Forest Hills Baptist Church and I heard of one yesterday at the corner of uh Dair and O and I don't know if it's in the city limits or not but they're proposing 300 new apartments I mean things keep happening uh Fox 35 had an article three weeks ago and I brought it up the the last pnz meeting about uh Bard county is facing a serious Water Crisis that in some areas it's mostly the south of South County the growth is 34% and um they're even talking about this is what they said don't don't pin it on me toilet to tap using toilet to tap water doesn't my dog well uh I'm really concerned about all this annexation happening and we really are not keeping tabs of it affecting our water and and Sewer lines I'm very concerned about that to the point that I brought up about the mayor of Sanford had a pause on growth for a couple a couple months till this water and sewer thing could be satisfied and they knew exactly what was going on and I'm confident that you'll take care of it but I'm not confident when I hear this new development um is planned and it'll go on and then it's first come first serve as far as a water supply so they may not be developing as much as they wanted to you know I still have these concerns any other questions VI chairman Aon so um I hadn't really thought about the pressure so thanks chairman Richardson for bringing it up um is there you mention that lift stations are monitored for pressure so I'm assum is there or are there pumps associated with lift stations that increase pressure to down the line basically so should we be looking at or maybe you already do that if a big development say you know Tranquility or something comes in that there's actually that's taken into consideration that as part of that PD they need to to put the necessary pumps in to repressurize or add pressure um to the system no we we use a water monitor at our lift station on the water system so the lift Stations don't operate they don't operate the water system no the only place that we increased pumping is at the Armstrong facility and at the morning D facility itself as they leave they the water leaves through high surface pumps that pressurize the entire system um so what development looks at because development flow and pressure are driven by fire needs so a fire hydrant has to supply a th gallons per minute added pressure so they look at the supply from the city and ensure that when they design their pipe sizing delivers that fir flow need um so that's they're mainly driven by fir flow needs very rarely would they would a development be looking to put fire pumps in in a residential development they do have some commercials that have to do fire systems to pump up the pressure internal to their buildings mainly sprinkler systems vertical you usually have to use a fire pump to get it going U right so so for um member child's problem of the South area low pressure what what's the fix well actually in that case uh so if the pressure would have dropped too far in the South area Coco Clips in at a higher pressure and boost the pressure that that's the the realistic what happens at the south end of town is the Coco system is set to come online when a pressure drop is read by the system otherwise the armstr facility is repumping water and is pumping water out um so it it it does they do when we talk about 40 45 PSI that's still a pretty good pressure level in general higher than that you start popping pipes in your house you'll hear it so so but that's uh you know any other questions Mr rers getting back to my paranoia about the um about the the gas tank um do you ever have problems with these systems being hacked no we have a high level security on our infrastructure on that side all our controls are behind a secondary firewall that's that even if I were to try to use a city computer to access a water plant I have to go to another VPN system and log in separately to each individual piece of our infrastructure so there's no way you could open up the water plant control system remotely without having the ability to log in through a number of safety precautions and then still The Operators at the plant have ultimate control of the water plant it can be shut down and run manually with no computer so yeah yeah that the luxury an old plant is the control systems can't be manually manipulate opposed to newer plants that have a lot more technology built member gr you mentioned something just a second ago Kevin it made me think when you have multiple family buildings and over time I think they're still trying to make single family detached housing be sprinkled for fire protection codes when you have multiple family buildings and they inherently have to have fire supplies for pressure for sprinkler systems is that part of the calculation when they reserve the water that portable water is being consumed but then pressures are being reserved so that the system stays energized no because fires are a different uh a different set of calculations yeah yeah the designer doing it Verona is one that that they do have sprinklered homes in Verona uh they run two two Water Services they have a fire only water service and the Water Service they're using domestically it's a I think they use a 1 in meter there instead of normal 3/4 but the the reservations the calculations for that because fires are a different uh entity that's more of our ability to serve in our storage capacities because when a fire were to happen the fire department uses up a lot of water very quickly is reuse water ever used for fire protection no no we have some reuse hydrants that used to flush our system but they're not um that system doesn't operate at the level that a fire truck would not damage it if a pumps broke to it understand any other questions any other questions thank you and that was very as the vice chairman just said that is very informative but it does bring up another set of questions just let you know we we're not piloting uh it's reclaim to you I know it's term toilet to to drinking there are a number of pallets in the State of Florida we're not one of them Daytona is the nearest one does that is currently piloting it they're taking their reclaim back to the they're they're treating it as it is trying to create drinking water so thank you City staff report no report thank you City attorney I don't have anything thank you what happened to the balloon because it's member garage's birthday today um happy birthday it got um repurposed to a staff member with the nearest next happening birthday after the last meeting it was left behind I couldn't leave it alone in this room um I have a couple things when is the um development across from the hospital supposed to come up because it was originally supposed to come up at our next meeting it's be on the agenda for 1 I don't want us to face the same thing that we have the last three times that's come up are you talking about the registry yeah so if you remember the applicant requested the item to be withdrawn um no no applicant requested the annexation portion of the item to be withdrawn and then the other portion to be tabled indefinitely I'll verify an email the commission tomorrow okay um secondly I you probably didn't get the message I left a message for you on uh your um answering answering service that um the last council meeting they gave an annual presentation about Community Development and I would like the commission to see that and I've looked at it twice it mentions the uh Tec mentions the city council mentions the board of dment and appeals but it doesn't mention us we're like ninjas and we are the local planning agency it does not mention the video that Brad showed at the last city council meeting which is an annual thing before budget the pnz is not mentioned there's videos of Tec videos of justment and appeals videos of the city council not videos of them but um they're considering the planning Department's um advice no mention of pnz anywhere and as I said we're supposed to be the local planning agency but um schedule that for the next agenda please member grod a question for Eddie if I may what what happened to the Mr maack that was here kind of made me remember the Landscaping code that bounced from pnz Back to the Tec where they I watched the video had the debate the discussion blessed it did it go to city council or is it coming back to the p and Z before it goes to city council um I believe it's still being revised based on the feedback uh we got at Tec it'll probably show up on the 17th just few things on the 17th I won't be here for any other members I'm trying to think there's one more thing but it come up I haven't received I haven't received my paycheck yet for here oh oh by the way um there's no campaigning but we do have two members of pnz that're now qualified for City Council I don't think I've ever seen two people on uh pnz well if elected I will not [Laughter] serve any other items the meeting is there for jour for