e e e e e e e e e e e all right good morning it is actually just turned 10:30 so today welcome to the Joint meeting of the board of County Commissioners and the Planning Commission okay do want to welcome our Planning Commission members here and Madam chair thank you for being here today okay um we are going to move this thing we're not going to be in a rush but we're not going to belabor the points either I think everybody's had time to go through it so I am going to call this meeting to order I've asked commissioner Pickins to do the invocation and Commissioner Adam Zach to do the Pledge of Allegiance please rise if you're able to do so our heavenly father we just thank you for his glorious today and all the blessings in it father God we just thank you for the opportunity to gather here as Comm Commissioners the Planning Commission staff our consultant father God to just discuss and and um and move forward the the the document that's before us father God just guide us and lead us in jesus' name we pray amen amen the flag back join me in the pledge i al to the flag of the United States of America and to the for it stands one nation under God indivisible with liy and justice for all thank you commissioner Pickins and commissioner adamac and again I want to thank all the hard work of the committee to get us to the point we're at today our planning staff and our Administration staff and our consultant Mr Spofford who's back home again almost like the third time you've been around so we appreciate that so right now we're going to open up our um the floor for public comment and again most of you know that we're going to keep our public comment to 3 minutes that you will be timed commissioner Wilson will time you and you'll hear the uh beep go off you're not going to be escorted out of the room but please try to wrap it up if you haven't done so so far and um our first it's not working today it's not plugged in here it is so our first Speaker this morning Michael wber if you would come forward please and state your name and address for the record good morning Mr chairman Commissioners uh Michael Woodward 517 South Francis Street interlockin I see uh a laptop is already deployed here and I want to avoid accidentally pressing any keys I should not while I arrange my notes so if you'll give me a we'll give you a Little's Indulgence for that purpose I'd appreciate it we will sir thank you all right the proposed Land Development code that you have before you includes the creation of a new County decision-making body called the administrative deviation committee seriously that's what it's called Uh found on page 336 of your packet page 329 of the draft Land Development code I wish to bring to your attention four potential issues regarding the composition of the committee the scope of its power public notice of its meetings and the relabeling of administrative variances as deviations the four-person administrative deviation committee is to be composed of the County Administrator the director of Planning and Development the director of Public Works and a staff planner that means that given the County's current prioritization of generic administrative background over subject matter expertise when hiring department heads only one member of the committee is likely to have relevant professional subject matter expertise and he or she will be the lowest ranking member of the committee do we really think the staff planner is going to tell his boss and his boss's boss that they're wrong about something with giving serious thought to his job security in this County it appears that the administrative deviation committee will exercise all of the powers currently vested solely in the director of planning and development in regard to administrative variances Plus at the committee's discretion most of the powers and functions that are now assigned currently to the Zoning Board of adjustment including deciding on variances and special use permits it should be noted that when the current Land Development code was written giving administrative variance Powers solely to the director of Planning and Development the director was an experienced professional planner and it was assumed that future directors would be similarly qualified it should also be noted that the deviation committee will have unbridled discretion to choose which special use permits and other matters it wants to decide and which ones it will allow to go to the zboa thus creating procedural uncertainty for applicants and the general public the proposed code revision does provide for appeals of administrative deviation committee decisions to the zboa an arrangement which does however add another layer of procedural complexity the administrative deviation committee meetings will be technically open to the public but for meetings not involving special use permits variances or vesting determinations the only notice the public will actually get of the meetings will be a notice posted at the County Administration administration building 3 days before the meeting section 45- 836 of the proposed Land Development code draft relabels administrative variances as administrative deviations however they always were and still are variances deviation is part of the definition of variance a deviation from Land Development requirements a variance is a deviation and a deviation is a variance but variance is the term that's normally used so why are we starting to call some variances deviations it may be seen as a way to avoid having to provide the full public notice required for variances and also as a way to circumvent the application of some of the variance criteria required by the code and traditionally by state law note that on the bottom of page 317 of packet page 310 of the draft a reference to section 45- 833 has been crossed out that is the section that contains the issuance criteria for variances I do not presume to advise you on the right or the wrong of the administrative deviation committee but I respectfully suggest that it merits your scrutiny thank you Mr vber any questions I have one comment Mr you have the floor did you notice in there that there was an appeals process built in that was different than anything ever in the past that any decision from the administration Devi administrative deviation committee could be appealed by any one commissioner to the board of County Commissioners or it could be appealed to the zboa I did notice that okay I thought that was a very interesting provision uh but uh uh fairly complicated when to wrap someone's head around maybe that's just me thank you sir I have a comment on yes sir Mr Adam I didn't before he spoke but that actually was the one area of it that concerned me because as a commissioner how do we know what every deviation that comes forward would be to say whether or not we wanted it to be routed towards so that was actually one area of it that actually was a concern of mine not necessar everything that you said some of what you said is something stuff was in my head but that was the one area of concern for my was that process so may I you may Mr Turner um I think that the concern was is the one thing that I've learned this commissioner's learned since before I was here and even since you never know what case is going to blow up in somebody's face um you will know commissioner whenever something goes wrong or one one becomes controversial or whatever somebody will let you know and so at that point all you have to do is one commissioner say okay I have concerns over this this case bring it to the to the board of county commissioner for an appeal that's what was tried to put in there where there would always be a way to get it to somebody other than just a deviation committee if something came up thank you Mr chairman thank you thank you I will say I've learned in this business too there's always unintended consequences so but we're trying to move things forward faster better for our citizens so I'm sure it's a growing process so all right um moving on to our next thing is our agenda is there any more public comment and seeing nobody else coming up for public comment Mr chair I do have a question Mr pck you have the floor because I'm sure we're going to discuss the administrative deviation committee further but on page 367 um in section 45- 1081 in a and in C it refers to the zoning Board of adjustment and an administrative review committee is that another committee or are they one in the same or is this a misprint read Mr would you like and you can answer that and then we'll go right into your presentation just wanted to get that clarified before we move forward for me let me go ahead and pull it up here on the screen I believe it to be just a typo I think it's supposed to to be administrative review administrative review committee is Administrative deviation committee I think that's just a type of yeah if it's referring to both in this for an administrative deviation it should only refer to the administrative deviation committee good catch Mr yes it's ref yeah the Zoning for adjustment or the administrator Review Committee so it's the administrative deviation committee is what this should be is that correct yeah now there is a procedure now the administrative deviation committee could at its so discretion consider any variance um if they don't want to hear a variance then it would go to the Zoning Board of adjustment so that may be the issue I haven't pulled it up yet I think that answer is our question so so it's just a typo then yeah okay so far I'm fine I've noted it for the record okay so Mr spford if you'll go right into the your LDC re revisions and if you'll set the stage of what today is going to look like over absolutely all right well it's good to be back in putham County I see a lot of familiar faces um some I don't recognize so for those of you that don't know me um my name is Ray spalford um I'm a vice president vice president of planning at England Tims Miller or etm or headquartered in Jacksonville with offices in Orman Beach Daytona Beach and Orlando um I'm a resident of putam County live in East placa with my wife uh Sandy and I've actually been a planner here at the county back in and now I'm going to age myself early 90s from like 91 to '94 and then came back again um early 2000s had the opportunity and privilege to work on the better place plan uh that led to the 1 cent sales ctax and that has definitely done a good thing for the county um so I've been in planning for over 34 years and we we mostly do a lot of work uh for private land owners or developers so we work in a lot of different local governments across the state and we work with a lot of different Land Development codes we have done some uh rewrites of Land Development codes um so we we have the experience but as a local citizen you're not going to get a cookie cutter uh template in this code you know I understand the local issues uh more than you would uh get from a national planning firm that coming out of Jacksonville um so I'm going to go ahead and get started the first first important point is this is not a complete rewrite uh it looks like there's a lot of changes I will say a lot of those changes are uh as a result of uh capital izing defined terms we just did a full cross out of an uncapitalized term and then u in Redline underline of the of the defined term um and so it looks like a lot but we really only wanted to address the most important issues and these have been identified by staff um over the last few months we've met a number of times uh commissioner Turner uh invited us to meet as well and he's been a part of our review process U so it's not a complete rewrite uh we've only addressed some of the more urgent items and I'll go through a lot of these what I'd like to do is go through this presentation and save comments and questions for the end because I may answer your question as I go through this um this is a high level review of of the major changes um also we would need at least uh in my opinion one more um adoption hearing for the County Commissioners to adopt the code and as we go through this today at the end we can discuss uh the if there's a desire for more meetings or not um I do want to uh emphasize that we have some issues in the code where we're inconsistent with state law or the comprehensive plan and we want to get these taken care of as soon as possible uh in the draft we've added uh recent approvals that have gone through over the past few months have been approved by the County Commissioners uh you may recall some of these uh they deal with utility dimensional standards uh where we changed the minimum acreage for well and septic from one acre to the state standard of a half acre uh there were changes in accessory uses and structures uh type three family subdivisions and the um table on floor area ratio and imperer surface coverage uh was also o updated as previously approved I recognize that this is very dry boring stuff and and not used to doing a PowerPoint presentation without more Graphics so bear with me I know it's dry okay there are changes in there um for consistency with the comprehensive plan uh we eliminated the agricultural 2 references and we remove references to the density Point score language uh we have made changes to comply with state law um there the state has preempted local government ability to regulate certain things including uh mobile food vendors uh there was a request as we were going through this to change a setback from a water body we didn't make that change and the reason is that there is a policy in the comprehensive plan that has the same standard so you'd have to change the comprehensive plan first before you change the the Land Development code provision uh State also preempted regulation of Home occupations and use of recreational vehicles as a temporary shelter there are changes for internal consistency uh you know there's a uniform definition now for immediate family member and then all the different references to the Departments or the directors of the department tried to make those all consistent throughout the document uh we initially didn't want to touch any of the permitted uses th this came from staff um later in the process so we did make some changes that we thought were uh pretty much no-brainers so we added Parks and Recreation as per permissible use in residential districts and not require a special use permit we also added educational uses uh as a permissible use by right in agriculture um there's a number of act schools currently in the EG zoning District so they would be a non-conforming use under the current code uh for accessory dwelling units um this is really a form this could be a form of uh affordable housing and it especially for family members um we clarified that the accessory dwelling units did not count against the density requirement of the comp plan and we reduced the minimum parcel size to be consistent with the Utility change from uh the dimensional standards uh we also clarified that you can have the typical amenities in an accessory dellum like a kitchen uh so the one change we did not make is it cannot be rented out that's still in there uh so I just want to clarify that we updated a number of the parking or the minimum number of space standards uh to be consistent with what we're seeing you know and Industry standards uh older zoning codes typically have require a lot more parking spaces than are actually needed um we also uh added an alternative parking calculation that can be reviewed and approved administratively by the department of planning and development services because there are a number of uses that have unique uh parking demands that are not covered under the the code and in that case a parking demand study could be provided to staff for review and approval we did add an administrative deviation process that replaces the administrative variance process the current administrative variance process uh there's a number of things that can be uh varied from in the current code most of those are either approved by the director of Public Works or the director of planning and development services so this uh administrative variance or administrative deviation process creates a new administrative deviation committee and U the idea was that you would have no one single person with the ability to make all these deviations uh it does it the uh ADC is comprised of the County administrator or designes I think the idea at this point in time would be the two Deputy County administrators and uh the directors of Public Works and planning and development and we also have a staff Planner on there as well so what they're authorized to Grant an administrative deviation four includes the uh minimum dimensional standards of the zoning code that would be things like minimum lot area minimum lot width uh could also deviate from landscaping and buffering and screening requirements uh maximum lot coverage height uh a number of the de development design and Improvement standards uh as an example the current code requires all residential homes uh driveways to have a paved apron um I think you'll find in certain circumstances that's not necessary um also there the ADC has a discretion to approve special use permits variances investing determinations I will note that the um the public and notice for an ADC to review a special use permit or variance is the same public notice that the Zoning Board of adjustment would be required to provide so there's two different public notice requirements under the administrative deviation committee if it's a special use permit or variance the same as a normal variance going to the Zoning Board of adjustment and then the public notice is less uh for other types of De deviations we also um revised and clarified some of the subdivision regulations we added a type four subdivision which would apply only in residential zoned areas uh in the property would have to have adequate Frontage on and direct access to a county maintained pave Road you could divide uh up to 10 Lots all of the Lots would have to otherwise meet the comprehensive plan density requirements or or all the other dimensional standards of the Land Development code there are a number of other uh local governments that have this provision as well we also added um two additional exemptions to the subdivision regulations uh this is really to encourage some of the more that commercial centers industrial parks if there are no new stre streets being um created uh and they have Frontage on a highway or pave Road otherwise um and the driveway access then they would not need to go through the platting process and then if you're recombining lots in a previously platted subdivision uh you would not also need to go through a A platting or replat as long as it's consistent with the comp plant the preliminary plat process is now to be approved administrative administratively through DRC uh I think it's a lot to go through both required to go through a preliminary plat go to planning and County Commission and then come back with a final plat and go through planning and County Commission again so a preliminary plat will be approved by DRC and then they'd have to come back with a final plot that would go to Planning Commission and the County Commission we uh tried to streamline and simplify the development review process um the current code lists a number of application requirements for example uh one of the requirements for a plat is to provide a tree survey right so we're taking all those requirements out and creating a new development review manual when you first establish the development review manual that would be required to be approved by the County Commission and then uh any changes thereafter would be reviewed and approved by the new uh administrative deviation committee um the idea there is that having application requirements in the code could create a situation where somebody appeals because you didn't submit all the documentation that's listed in the code so we want to avoid that um you also want to be able to um put all those requirements in a single document that's easy to to review uh we replace the classes of development activity with minor and major reviews um and we Define a minor subdivision uh as a new subdivision or resubdivision into 10 or less slots that does not require does not create um a new roadway or extend any public utilities that would be a minor subdivision a minor development would be any new or alteration of an existing multif family residential or non-residential development uh for which uh the multif family is eight or less dwelling units and five or less acres and the non non-residential is 5,000 square fet or less got ahead myself here in less than three acres uh I'm going to go through these next couple flowcharts of how the how the each of these would proceed through the development review process so for a minor development a pre-application and a uh preliminary site development plan which is essentially a site plan that's uh two scale and the preliminary development order are all optional an applicant would have the option to come in with a final site development plan which if it is a uh commercial building of 10,000 square ft um or excuse me if it's a commercial building less than 5,000 square ft then they could come in with engineering construction plans and that would be reviewed by the DRC uh they would get that approval which is called the final development order and then it could go straight to get a building permit the same thing with a minor subdivision again this is 10 or less Lots it's optional for pre-application and pre preliminary site development plan review uh and the preliminary development order is also optional um these could go straight to a lot split procedure and reviewed and approved by the DRC and staff and then to the building permit uh the major development all major development would require the pre-application and a preliminary site development plan review Once approved that then that the staff issues in order and then uh they can come back with the engineered construction plans uh once that's approved then they're onto the building permit for subdivisions over 10 acres or if they're ex creating new roads or extending utilities then again that's pre-application is required as well as a preliminary plan the final plan uh and then the preliminary plan you would also have a staff review and approval of the preliminary plat and then the final development plan would be reviewed engineering plans along with a final plat that would come before the two commissions for approval and then final plat recording and then on the building permit finally um as we're going through the code and updating sections we realized the definitions were buried in the code one hard to find all the definitions were not capitalized as a defined term so it wasn't very user friendly so we created a new article for definitions we the def a lot of definitions were spread throughout the code as well U and so we move those definitions um to this new Article 13 if they applied throughout the code if they applied only to a specific section of the code we left them in that section uh and then all all those defined terms are now capitalized and we try to make it easier on ourselves in word so it's what what happens is it it strikes through the term that's not capitalized and underlines the term that's capitalized so it looks like a lot that is the end of my presentation and um available for questions or comments than Mr stoford Mr Turner you're recognized for speak okay um Ray I want to go through this just a little bit I've made some notes and some comments and and most of the this is stuff that I think this committee and this joint committee needs to um discuss if everybody would turn to page 34 um there's a uh we're basically talking about accessory uses on parcels and it and um under under item D which is on page 34 it basically says that for um for 5 Acres a larger or Bonafide Farms would be number one you could have an accessory an accessory structure but then it says between two and 5 Acres basically 4.99 that you could only have one accessory structure of up to 250 square ft I'd like to propose that that be changed to 12200 Square ft if you got 5 Acres of property ought to be able to build a barn that's 1,200 square ft on your property um the the and the item number four was added that basically that you can um that you can ask for an administrative deviation or or take it to the I think it needs to be added or take it to the zboa one or the other and ask for permission if um if you want to build an accessory structure on your two acres so two acres of land's a fairly good siiz piece of property and and it's actually happened this uh particular instance happened where they owned two acres across the street from their Farm they wanted to build their Packing House on the two acres across the street from their Farm but because it wasn't contiguous they couldn't do it I mean there wasn't even anybody they could ask permission to do it because they did it wasn't contiguous so it was a 2 acre parcel by itself that's something that could have went to the deviation committee or to the um or to the zboa and I'm I feel fairly confident they probably would have had that ability but the code didn't allow it until now to ask that permission so I think that needs to be changed um can we do these one page at a time does anybody have any heartburn on those recommendations and if you're not hollering at me Mr chairman yes one question I would have it's an umbrella question is is there a list of objective decisionmaking tools that would determine whether something goes to the ADC or to the zboa Robert if you don't mind I'm going to try to keep this very pointed today has anybody got any heartburn on the recommendations Mr Turner made and we'll get back to yours I have saw an accessory structure so your second example I mean we've had a similar example happen in District 5 where how do we get that where it can apply to a person who owns two properties and there's there's an instance that we're trying to work through with an individual that owns a home here and owns the five acres across the street their son is involved in 4 and they can't build a shed to house a pig on on that property because it's well the zoning and everything else how do we make sure that's Incorporated that's how we just did I mean we just did it by allowing you to go ask the deviation committee for a deviation to this before you couldn't even ask you just couldn't do it period so how do we just allow that to be allowed I guess is what I'm asking well I don't I don't know we'd want it to be allowed because then what you're what's going to Happ through regular permitting process well yeah through the regular process right now they will be allowed under the new one but currently it's not right see that what if you start letting anybody just build any time they want to on these properties you're going to start having pole barns and campers pop up everywhere all over the county so you've got that's what this this has been trying to offset throughout the year so um and that's just one campers are covered in a different section I understand they are but that's an Enforcement issue that's not a yes sir okay so no one has any heartburn I believe we can move forward with on let me clarify that item D2 would be 1,200 feet and four would be any other May apply for administrative deviation or the zboa I have one other question yes sir Mr Adam that what about concerning this in concerning this and I don't know if it concerns this because it wasn't addressed anywhere else but this may be a place we could address it what about like in this instance where the the family wants to have their accessory structure so they' go through this process to get this barn or whatever built on the property across the street from their house what about fencing because there's also limitations on the ability to fence in a piece of property that isn't and that's not considered an accessory structure but is there a way we can include fencing because that animal may need fencing yes only correct correct so how do we get this into there's residential zoning where people own large pieces of property why don't you put that as a question for later on when we get Mr Turner has a Flor right now on these items Mr Roberts I will not get with you in a minute as soon as he's done okay okay good concerning this page right here I just I just picked that out Justin as all I did I'm not hell been on 1,200 square feet it's just that 250 was ridiculous what would your recommendation be I mean 22500 ft I think that's a probably reasonable size I don't have any issue with that Mr chairman did they give anybody else heartburn I would I would yeah okay all right so let's uh make that change to 2500 or and on item four or zboa and that's specific the five acres or Mar so perfect okay Mr Turner you still recognized sir okay on page 193 um I just want to make sure that we go over that um that table 7.02 again I I don't think that these have been changed yet to the to the imper surface maximum impervious surfaces that we've passed last year in the plan along with the lot widths and stuff that was actually passed last year so could we just make sure that we look at that and and I think we had talked about it before but I haven't seen any changes yet in that I don't think these numbers are accurate from what our comp plan currently reads so we updated the next table 702b on page 198 we'll go back and verify that the uh percentages on on the previous table 702a are updated as well okay if we would I just I just want to make sure that they're accurate at this time for what we've already done Mr Turner Mas a question can't we just refer to our comp plan and not have that table in there or is that would should the table be in there has to be in there thank you and there's a 702a and a 702b okay so Mr Turner you still have the floor yes sir I'm digging okay um on page 329 uh the first paragraph of the administrative deviation committee I think that page 329 45 40 45- 950 the membership of that committee um I I think that needs to be discussed a little bit among the committee and the in the commission um the County administrator or the design or his design the director of Planning Development Services um the director of Public Works and at the very least we need to add in there that it's our head planner not just a member of Staff but our um what is your title senior planner senior planner okay wow that's quite that's quite the mouthful did that come with a raise he eats lunch every day okay so we need to put that in there and I think and then it could be the design the the director of Planning Development Services the director of Public Works and the U which are the two people right now that can make the administrative uh deviations that the committee will now make and so it would be B basically the designate of the County Administrator and the senior planner so if we could add that in there the senior planner Mr Turner I have a question for you on that and I'm sure others do I felt like this is one that was I think was a good move but it did give me a little heartburn are you saying the County administrator or desic knes or because it's written as desic knes or desic KNE and I think that's important are we going to have three or four people designated or are we going to have one person design it I think the S could be struck and it would be just design County administrator or his designate okay I also felt like it was a very um heavily administrative committee but I don't know I'm with Mr Woodward when you said the same thing I don't know what the answer there would be so maybe we get up and running with it and then find out what the problem is but that's my only two U comments I have Mr adamj you had a com comment about that too earlier I guess my my question was on no I already made my comment on it but my other com additional comment on is how prevalent is the administrative deviation Committee in other communities that's a good question yeah there are a few others um city of Jacksonville has an administrative deviation process uh that I know of and then there's a deviation process in Klay County as well I believe because tonight I'm I'm not a huge government person so we'll say trust but verify to be nice about it I don't like this at all based on that alone um so I just am not for extra committees and extra things especially not to give and I I trust the people that are in the seats today but we don't know who's going to be in the seats tomorrow we don't know their misgivings or how great of a people they are going to be I think this opens us up to a lot of possibilities of whether it's corruption or the visualization of corruption any of that stuff I just think it opens us up to problems that we don't need um in my opinion I think it it's a liability so Mr most I'm not trying to interrupt you most of the things that are the deviation committee is going to do is already done by one person the administrative deviations the heartburn that I have over that is if one of them if one of them goes south on him his got one man with a Target on his back instead of a committee of people that have made this decision they always have the opportunity to not hear that decision that it have to go to the zboa just like it does right now so the can I can I make a suggestion can is there is there room on that board for us to have a someone from the public one or two members of the public to represent that in a fashion to kind of balance that board out um possibly a developer Builder or somebody that has some technical expertise in the development side of that but can represent the general public on the common sense side of it on that review so that it's not so administratively heavy one at large member I would say two I mean it's still heavy on the administrative side with at least three members if we put two public members on that that would be a I think a step in the right direction as far as making having a common sense approach to how those things get handled and not making it look making it look a little better to the public as far as being rep the public being represented on that board Miss Wilkinson oh I'm sorry Miss Roberts we already have two citizen boards would it be rather than having another citizen at large would it be appropriate to say a design from zboa or a design from the puam County Planning Commission to be called in or to be available someone from those two bodies uh to give balance to this because right now this is taking everything out of of the the hands of the public hands of the the lay people and uh if we put somebody in there that is not elected or not an employee of the county it might give it better uh footing and better standing most of the things that uh this D iation committee would do has nothing to do with the Planning Commission most of the stuff that the Planning Commission hears is by Statute got to go to the Planning Commission the deviation committee can't change zoning they can't change the future land use map Best of my knowledge they can't do any of that statute dictates it go to the Planning Commission so you know if you wanted to put a member of the zbaa on there I don't have any problem with it with the but it's supposed to be the idea of administrative deviation is for for small things that are already being deviated by one person would be deviated by a committee now and so instead of one staff member which is what it's done right now it would be done by by a a committee of four administrative Committee of four instead of one person making those decisions how often is this year used pardon me how often is there an administrative deviation all the time so this is something that happens frequently regularly yes yes M for the current you got turn your does the current Administration um administrative process um are they authorized to do special use permits currently I I didn't understand your question there the new the new Administration deviation committee has the discretion to approve special use permits does the current administrator no have that ability now currently special used permits go to the Zoning Board of adjustment all of them do this is there I guess back to Susan's question is there like a a metric or something that okay this one will be heard administratively or this one's going to go to zboa there's none provided in this draft no so no it would be the sole discretion of the committee to pick and choose which specially use permit applications they take up I think that the reason that that it was looked at from that direction is because the deviation committee is not going to want to take on anything that they know know right up front is going to be controversial big controversial the idea of this is try to make is try to make it where you don't have to wait four months and pay $750 to get a five foot deviation on a setback when there's nothing but Woods beside you I know we're trying to make it right we're trying to make it more user user friendly yes that's why we built yeah basically basically the decision of the committee would would decide whether it went to them or that they would wasn't going to hear it and they had to go through the normal review process it's just like right now if you came in and asked for an administrative deviation on a on a variance or a setback or something the U person that has allowed right now to do that can do the same thing said no I'm not going to do that you need to take that to zboa so it wouldn't be any different than it is now with the exception it's going to be a committee that hears it instead of one person that hears that deviation I I think a lot of my heartb burn lies with a special use permit being something that can be approved by the ADC without public input that's why we built the appeals process and there um we buil it in we built it in there to where it could be appealed by the agreed party to the zboa if it was a problem or it could be appealed by any commissioner to the board of County Commissioners for them to hear it either one that's not in there now I guess it just bothers me that we're letting an administrative group take away the responsibility of zboa on a special use permit I really have heartburn with special use permits being allowed by the ABC well that that's noted and I certainly um see your but I think that trying to streamline the process and make it easier on the public to me outweighs the the concern that that concern I just I think that trying to streamline the process and not make somebody wait four months for on to go to the zboa and through the process or three months probably uh depending on where you hit in the cycle when you put turn in your application versus being able to go try to get this handled within possibly 30 days if it's something that they'll take up in here because they don't feel like it's going to be an issue I'm fine with that for setbacks and for for variances I'm just not fine with that for a special special use permit that's okay good Mr ad like you'll have the floor in just a moment Mr Morris I want to get back to you real quick you proposed two at large members MERS I don't think anybody had heartburn on that but I don't think we clarified who that was we kind of went down I think it just I think this committee is not going to work if we make it as big as the zboa is and just go on so I think the whole idea of it was to be was to be basically what they can do right now which is an administrative review by one person that's going to be an administrative review by committee and they do have a a couple more things that they can take up but it's mainly to try and make the process streamlined I really don't have a problem with putting one at large member on there from the public um to be selected by the board of County Commissioners or in the business of development or doesn't need to be it could be somebody that the board feels like would have an interest in that it could be an attorney it could be a all kind of different things you know a land use attorney or all right I promise Mr Adams act that I give him the floor yeah if this administrative deviation committee was only doing what's already done by one person I think the way it's written and the way it stands is fine um I agree with the others that spoke um in the situations that currently go to the zboa I don't think it's an appropriate use if we have if we have a deviation that doesn't need to go to zbaa because it's acceptable we need to write it as an acceptable thing is just a use case not have it be something that even needs to be reviewed by anyone that that's the answer if that's what we're trying to avoid is these things that are just so simple that they don't need to go to zbaa then we just need to have it written into the language that they're allowed um that's the real answer if they're not allowed then they need to go to zva that's I hear you thank you Miss Wilkinson thank you I agree um I don't like the idea of the picking and choosing Which special use gets approved by staff administratively I think one of the ways we can deal with that is can we just simply strike through the special use permit side of this and allow the committee may add its discretion here and act upon variance non-conforming uses that kind of stuff I am the section that I'm having heartburn with I have to agree with M Roberts on is the special use permit portion of that all right Mr uh Mr Commando you have a FL thank you Mr chair so the special use permits actually the one area where I'd say it's more appropriate for an administrative decision and the reason why is because the way our laws are written when you have set criteria as a commission as to within your ordinance as to what the criteria is to obtain a special use permit once that criteria is met there's no more discretion so there's no findings of fact there's no understanding what the community thinks the permit by law um it's almost a ministerial Act of approving it and there's a lot of case law that comes back against commissions and boards that tend to use their own judgment when it comes to approving a special use permit so in that category I think that's the one category that actually is more appropriate for an administrative type decision it's not quasi judicial like you're thinking where like for a zoning you have to make those particular findings and with those findings you weigh what's coming before you in public comment thank you thank you Mr Commander all right any further comments on this uh I think we can land though I think what I've heard today is adding a one one at large member assigned by the BC okay is that what we're good and we'll keep the other uses in based on what our attorney conversation Miss Wilkinson so if this is something that happens frequently like a daily basis you're going to have somebody who's from zboa or on one of the other Committees of that's they're going to be available that much I mean you guys meet once a month this is these the idea of this and I know I waffled a little bit but um the idea of this was to streamline the process so now you bring in and I understand the the idea that we want to have somebody who is not at the county level that they're a a peer if you will in the community but how is that going to happen whenever you you need somebody available almost daily or several times a week I mean do you guys look at you we say frequently what is frequently every week every day three times a day I mean what would you at least weekly okay so I guess the point that I'm making is if we added a another person to the committee um from the outside is somebody going to be available once a week or twice a week I think they're going to have to know that a ahead of time yeah and understand the rules going in that maybe every Friday maybe every Wednesday uh maybe two Wednesdays a month I really I really don't believe Mr chairman it'll be that often I believe it'll be at the very most twice a month that the ABC would actually convene and meet they've got to they've got to advertise their meetings just like zboa and whatever does um and so it does take some notice yeah I would Envision it being very similar to the DRC committee meetings I I make a suggestion possibly designate an alternate Mr Morris can you speak designate yes designate an alternate for the per the citizen at large on the board designate two or three of them have them rotate I mean there's a bunch of solutions to the problem of attendance speaking as a citizen that sits on a board I anybody that is interested in the Position will make available the time sure they will sure they that's Robert I think what Mr Commando said is very pertinent and if if this is something that is by right that the law says you may do but it just needs some sort of a an approval at the county level I see no reason why that can't go just to an administrative board but anything that is not by right by law would have to go before zboa I think that's what Mr Commando was saying and I think that makes a lot of sense I don't think this would be a way to streamline the process for simple situations that need some sort of approval but the law says you can do it so let this ADC do that without a citizen input but then anything that is beyond that would go before zboa U Mr Adam that and then we're going to wrap this up move so I guess because we have the members so to speak that for the most part that would be a part of this board what would be an example of a special use that a board wouldn't approve and what would be I mean we're not quantifying anything we're just talking gibberish in a way what would be an example of something that it's a special use set wouldn't be decided there what's an example of something that would be a simple one I guess Zack or somebody yeah thank you Commissioner Adam Zach I can take that question I actually have two examples that we are currently um one we've already taken to Zoning Board of adjustment uh one is going to be coming up on the Zoning Board of adjustment um a horse and residential one zoning district with an acre and a half for 18 months uh as it's being rehabilitated we put them through the Zoning Board of adjustment for $750 application it was off of a private road don't really see any issue with that I think that the ADC would have agreed to go ahead and Grant them that use the second one a 7 and 1 12 acre artificial Pond where The Spoils of that pond remain on site on a 94 acre parcel it's an agricultural pond that's going to be used for fish 94 acre parcel I don't think that the Zoning Board of adjustment special use permit was necessary for that either I think that the ad would have agreed to grant that property owner a 7 and a half acre pond so what would be an example one that would that you deny that you would think needs to go like do you have one from history that you really think should have went to zboa any borrow pit there you go but but there again though that's that again that's Zach if we don't have Zach we have someone different and we say we approve this that committee can go out bur it's fine but we got an appeals process built in where if they make the wrong decision it can go to cboa or to the board right now it can't even come to the board that's you're assuming that public awareness exists and it's very limited so but that's just my opinion I'm I'm against it Mr attorney you should have the floor sir okay can we move to page 333 please the uh development review manual that they that they've got to come up with that the county should have always had one in item C it says that once it's U sub it's completed and submitted to the board for approval by resolution the department will be authorized to change or modify the development review Manel at at any time following I I don't agree with that at all if that was if that was originally approved by the board of County Commissioners any changes need to be made need to be approved by the board of County Commissioners or at least the ADC um I can see so much wrong with this statement in other words the board go in and approve a document and immediately it starts changing without even asking anybody just through policy in the office that you know we don't paint buildings wide anymore so you're wanting to strike that last sentence completely well I want to strike following initial approval of the development review manual and make it read the department shall be authorized to change or modify the development review manual at any time with approval of from the administra deviation committee or by the board of County Commissioners I'd rather be the board of county commissioner that suits me that one too all right anybody have any comment on that item I think we're good there so commissioner sh you have the floor I don't have a whole lot more Mr chairman um and actually my last one I figured it out on my own I had it in there about the in the U where they took the um definition out of the the body of the Land Development code and put it actually in Article 13 of the def in definitions they had to put in there that um that any material change in appearance of a structure was was uh deemed to be development and I took that as it if I painted my building a different color I had to get a permit but then on the next page on item B3 it says that paint is excluded so it gives you a big long list of exclusions to development so like I said I figured that out so I think that's all I have for right now Mr chairman thank you and I have just a couple uh real quick and M Robert I'll go to you on page 45 recreational vehicle is temporary shelter you Mr Spofford referred to that we were preempted um there's a lot of preemptions that happen at the local level um I'm not going to say everything as bad I'm just saying there's preemptions there um but in this case explain what that preemption to me is because I can tell you in in District 4 the West End of the county to towards the North and the West we're seeing a lot of RVs being used um so what are we what are we preempted by right there the preemption comes in in the case of a declaration of a state of emergency okay so the the preemption is actually at the bottom of page 47 and the permit is not required to use an RV as a temporary shelter in the case of a state of emergency uh for a natural disaster so is it a state of emergency declared by the governor at that point for a natural disaster not immigration not correct something okay okay I'm good with that and the last thing on the revised subdivision on your your um PowerPoint display something that I've noticed and I just probably just need to be cleared up on it just a little bit the lot swiit section remember that yes um is that by the county or by other agencies in the county and I don't I don't want to be flipping I'm just saying sometimes a lot split done somewhere else and by the time we get it so it seems to cause problems at that point and I could be wrong I don't know the lot split procedure is a staff level administrative review by initiated by planning and development and Zach you can add to this if You' like um so it would be a lot split that happened in this building or at this Planning and Development not somewhere else yes yeah that's the only two questions I believe Jack is there input from other departments that's correct whenever we process a lot split it's not only reviewed by Planning and Zoning it's also under County Surveyor um public works for Access uh Property Appraiser and Florida Department of Health okay thank you Mr Robert you had some questions what page was a lot split that was on your it was in your the PowerPoint presentation PowerPoint there it was right here under revised Clarity of subdivision so I think it's 45-1 033 Mr Robert you have the floor um on page 82 we're talking about animals that may be kept like farm animals I think we need to add sheep if we're going to list and enumerate animals sheep are becoming more and more popular I know I see them a lot in Hispanic sheep sheep sheep sheep Lambs I see them a lot sheep sheep are they there yeah I'm sorry uh it's on a different line and I didn't see it yeah try to throw a little levity there but gave you a sheep sound but nobody got it have me worried I thought I miss I thought you said geese cuz I was fixing to tell you we got plenty of geese tell somebody I've heard that before okay up in up in a we don't list sheep but down in we uh List It Down Below in uh yeah let's just want to add she in the list add top under Section A Y I don't think anybody has a problem with that no question on same page um wait a minute Mr Morris is that refering on the same page I didn't know is it referring to sheep I'm referring to that section she I I didn't know if you wanted to go ahead I I'm fine you don't mind okay she relinquish the floor to you sir okay um in section two there uh 100 foot setback for uh agricultural shelter from property lines of different ownership um some of those Parcels are kind of small I think that on page 82 on page 82 yep it would be section B number two okay I see it if place of shelter provided must be 100 feet or more from residence of different ownership is that that's from that is that from a residential structure is that from from the the lot line the way I read it it's a resident a different ownership does that that would be that res that would be from the home the home house yeah house and I've run into several times in District 5 so it it has always been the structure okay I'm fine with that okay Mr R you still the floor um I think I'm good right now I I have a an overall couple overall questions but they can wait okay we can wait till the end anybody else have any anybody from the Planning Commission or board need to go Page by Page or I do okay Miss Wilkinson you have the floor you Rec right let me get there this was very interesting reading wasn't it on page 348 348 procedure for review of subdivisions um section 45-10 33 says there will be six kinds of subdivisions I'm not sure I that is a little confusing the six one are exempt subdivisions say that again so there's um type one two three four exempts uh and then the lot split so that's six different okay wait a minute I think we all need to get to the right page 34 348 348 what section again 45-10 33 classification of subdivisions there shall be six kinds of subdivisions okay so I've got the one two 3 4 what's on 348 on mine 45- 1033 number number six is at the bottom there there shall be five and it now says six say that again commissioner page 350 is the sixth one are on page 350 yeah just okay all right thank you I had the same problem because type five had so much information in it that I didn't okay I kind of glazed over six that's okay I didn't want to recreate the wheel it's not the best worded but six types of sub this was a lot of to comprehend it really was um so on Section on the following page 349 says type three subdivisions which shall be limited to family subdivision in agriculturally zoned areas so my question is what about rural residential how do how does that's only referring to the zoning designation but not the land use so rural residentials the land use is it not okay all right um I want to make a comment Z here recognize um commissioner Wilkinson we do allow for uh type three subdivisions um it's on 45136 page 351 all type three subdivisions may be approved in areas designated Agriculture and the putam county comprehensive plan which would be the future land use map and have a zoning so we would not consider a family subdivision in the rural residential future land use category um however they would be able to consider a either a plotted subdivision or if approved the type for subdivision that Mr Spofford is recommending okay thank you for that Clarity um also on page 349 you know um 5e any parcel that contains 30 Acres or greater so I guess my question is why 30 Acres because some green belts are can be 10 acres so why do we have to where did we get 30 Acres from is that something that we have to do or can we make a change good question um it's not a section of the code that we have changed uh I'm not sure where the 30 Acres came from and I don't know if staff knows either because usually 10 acres is the minimum for a green Bel so an agriculturally zoned area so that was my thought processes can that be 10 acres um the reason it was at 30 acres is our residential density for the conservation future land use map is one residential unit per 30 Acres um so this is This falls under like the exempt subdivision so they wouldn't have to go through a lot split procedure or a formal subdivision um if they're going to create a 30 acre parcel that is not intended for development maybe it's for a conservation easement something like that okay so what if a pled subdivision um wanted to replat but it doesn't meet the density requirements I know that's discussed in here a little bit any new plaid is going to have to meet the density requirements so if it's a replat at um we would just have them come into compliance with the future land use category that's present on that land or go through a map amendment to meet a new density that they're trying to obtain okay um going to the next page 350 um type two subdivision thought I was also asking what about roal residenti residential can that be added so it says type two subdivisions may be approved in areas designated agriculture can we add Ral residential in that either we can but the intention of the type two subdivisions is to have um a gross density of one unit per 10 acres rural residential allows uh between two units per acre to one unit per two and a half acres so it' be kind of flipped for what the density allowance of the residential or rural residential land use allows for okay could you modify yeah go ahead please could you spell not a rural residential based on certain guidelines maybe would that work to solve the problem well I think that's what the type four okay that's what type four is going to yeah type four um I'm going to go back to page 351 we um and I know this has been discussed but there's no Chang has been made about the 66 foot wide easement that's required by the county for type three subdivisions and and I think of my neighbor I think of Mr Kramer so Mr Kramer owns several hundred acres in Bon he um has three houses on them on it none of them are on the county road they're all in the middle of the Hayfield if you will and they have a good access and road so I I still have some heartburn about making um land owners family subdivisions have to build on a County Road or have the 66 foot easement I think 66 is really huge I mean that's full two-lane traffic um Mr Kramer is a great example because he has a great Road right and most people who are going to give or uh you know a transfer land to their family members they don't necessarily need 66 feet right away to get in and out of their property so I I would like to see that changed to something more reasonable um like 30 ft or something that's half that size I don't understand why we have to have 66 so two problems I don't like the 66t wide easement and I don't like um that they have to be on a on a county maintain Road Mr Turner would like to make com um I think that the problem that they're trying to avoid here for real is that when they cut out a piece of property in the middle of the Hayfield and give it to one of the children or whatever ever how big it is but they have road that drives through their property to get to it is if that child or that family member ever sells that house then the easement that goes up to it needs to have some kind of a of a substantial width to it to where you could get in and out of it with other things that you need to and 30 foot just isn't enough so you know I don't know that 66 is not too much but I don't know that 30 is a little bit too small to be able to get something in and out if somebody fences at all from the Hayfield you know if you buy the house in the future I think that's why the the the easement is in there that you have to have a good easement getting into the house but okay Mr Grimes do you have a comment for Public Safety excuse me and in LDC the the Public Works director has the ability to take it down to 35 ft up from that 66 foot wide easement so I mean I think it can be addressed I mean they have the ability to do that um We've ran into it a few times as of recently where somebody says well I got 30 right and we brought that to the board and that was one of the things we tried to address in the meeting amongst the I don't remember the acronym that was used for the this this administrative deviation committee yeah was it to give them the ability to go oh man we got 34 right besides having to wait for the next bard of County Commissioners meeting something like that was able to go to them as far as down to like 30 we'd ran into it on East Dixie Street where we had to have somebody wait the two more three more weeks for a person to be able to petition the board to be able to take down on East Dixie Street where we had Public Safety went out Public Works went out all of the department heads went out and says yeah we can still make access to this residence on East Dixie Street without having to widen and open up the full entire 66 ft so that was part of the discussion but as of this time the Public Works director has the ability to take it down to 35 by our current LDC but it doesn't say that in there well I understand what you're saying but I would also say that a lot of County roads aren't 66 ft wide I 100% agree with you so we're requiring an individual to do something that we're not necessarily doing so how if I may Mr chairman how could we get this I know that it said I know that Public Works is allowed to go down to like you just said how do we put that in there where this could go to ADC or whatever it's it's already it already it's already in there so okay so it's already in there that they can just doesn't fall in this section I guess the deviation it's not proper no it's a design and Improvement standard that is one of the things the ADC can grant a deviation for okay and then I just have one other comment in this section uh definition of family so um we've um said parent stpp parent this is on paragraph 3 page 351 in most counties isn't family defined by blood or marriage to the third degree and which is the legal terminology which would cover most you know nieces nephews I mean in my I have a niece I'm very close to if I if I had a 100 acres I might would be wanting to give her uh some property but it doesn't necessarily allow for this so would we could we Define family as the legal terminology of Blood by blood or marriage to the third degree yeah I'm looking in I say something when we used to do that here remember that Mr spafford I think the old way we used to do that and we found that um there was people that were adopted there was people that um I have a family I have a kind of family you know and they the kind of family means just as much to me as my regular family does so I think we tried to kind of look outside the fact of how could we help those people who um who weren't blood rated but we could but they still cared about each other and and they still bought land for that purpose so I think that we did that a long time ago when I first got here to make that more pable for um to try to Define what a family really is and not just the blood family so there there's my comment yeah includes in-laws and adoptive parent and child F well again the legal terminology of by blood or marriage would fill in you're saying that this is more lenient I think it I think it it's a bigger umbrella that we can bring people under that you don't have to have blood relation to make that work Mr chairman if I may it's also the family that's listed in the LDC is the same family types that's defined in the comp plan so we would have to do a text amendment in order to mimic the two okay all right well that that clar that that's too much work right okay okay um let me see if I have anything else one other Mr so you have your letter yes sir I just we've already moved on from it I just wanted to clarify the 60 foot 66 foot ride away when we require those when we're looking to new subdivisions things like that that takes Al also takes into consideration the drainage and utilities and all that that we that we would put in you know that's why we have the ability to go down to 35 for these certain types of lot splits and things of that nature because those that won't necessarily to be required but when we're looking at subdivisions we look at utilities and drainage Wilson Mr Pickins has a comment on concern you have a comment oh no none of yours I've got a couple oh okay questions I'll put you back on the Planning Commission I'm sorry that you don't have lights over there but um M Robert you do so but you're Matt Reynolds right now when you hit that button so I didn't mean it was flashing to turn it off that's fine you're fine you're fine miss wson you still have the floor thank you on page 352 um relocation due to an employment or Educational Opportunity uh what happens if somebody gets sick um and they have to move to Texas because they have a major illness and so they want they need to be closer to the hospital or something like that so this allows for that exemption of the relocation but I feel like it needs to be um a little bit more widened to allow some other um leniency do you see what I'm saying yeah is that in section c and d section d section D relocation so this is under um still family uh subdivisions yep so we got employment educational opportunity and I would like you know or health reasons I think there should be something added in there because somebody could certainly have a major you know illness and have to move out of state to to a closer hospital what you're saying is um if I may you're want on D you're saying you want to add Health employment or educational opportunities yes yes or health reasons or whatever yes sir he does anybody have a problem changing due to Health employment or educational opport how do you what then you sell the floor D answer this has to do with the reason the sale of the type three um subdivision so if somebody had a major health issue then they may have to sell that property that's what I'm it'd be a permanent yeah how do you define that though I mean I think what's to stop someone from saying I don't feel good I'm going to Texas seriously I mean you're just saying I don't know how you would Define I mean like well you only have stage one wait till it's four well how are we defining no I'm being serious I know I said it flippantly but it's I think it's a personal decision I mean employment is the same way you could say I got a job at Disney but that doesn't mean you got a job at Disney so you could say anything you come in and say you have an education is there any burden approve and because it refers to the Florida statute if someone says I need to sell this because I am transferring to Texas what is the burden of proof there yeah permanent residence yeah permanent res I tell you what I we can take a look at this a little closer yeah I just think that would be I would appreciate that um because it seems like we're trying to get around things that we may not need to get around maybe we don't need to I mean Rich so if it was Health if we added health to that right that person would have to establish that their new residence was in that state for that to apply I mean that's what it sounds like commissioner Wilkinson's asking yeah if you're asking for an exemption you're just you're trying to provide a basis for that exemption so if we had somebody that came in today and said I want an exemption because I'm changing jobs and moved to Texas do they have to come in and show us that they actually reside in Texas I would hope not I don't I don't want to be the heavy hand think we've drilled that far down into making people provide proof of those things so why have this rule then you can just do whatever you want have you read the whole document I I'm not being physici I kind of am but I'm not it gives an the rule is convoluted then because you can just come and say whatever you want can you ask commission it's a turn we're trying to make this a whole lot more difficult than what it is yeah can we just eliminate the exemptions and reduce the time frame to one year like a owner Builder exemption for construction and just get rid of all the exemptions okay say that a little louder because I had a hard time hearing you on that so um just eliminate all the exemptions there and reduce the time for sale from five years to one year that does the same thing that the owner Builder exemption does through statute for a for someone that wants to build their house it provides that they they have control over it for a year and then they're allowed to sell it um I don't see much difference between owner Builder requirements at a statutory level versus lot split requirements to a family member family has it for one year um even if they moved they could certainly control it for a year and then sell it I think what we were if you I think we did we did go from 10 years to five years and I think the the the the reason we did that is so that you didn't have people creating subdivisions just you know I agree with that but I also feel like that's the that's kind of the statutory mindset of the owner Builder exemption for on the building side of residences so if I I as an owner if I as an owner of a piece of property want to go build a house and I don't want to hire a contractor I want to do it all myself the Florida Statutes allow statutory Provisions for me to build my house but one of the requirements is when I'm done with with construction and received my CEO for that house that I'm not allowed to rent lease or sell that house for 12 months after the co is issued so from from the standpoint of the state not wanting homeowners to be General Contractors it follows that the same kind of thing should follow to the to the property side of that so if one year is good enough for me to be able to hold a house and the state not feel like I'm being a general contractor with it it kind of falls to the I feel like it would apply to this situation as well if I as a family member want to give it to my kid and they want to build a house on it or whatever once they've owned that thing for a year if they want to sell that property I don't I don't see an issue with that it's not the same Mr chair no it's not what commissioner Wilkinson is the actual basis as to why you do it so this is an exemption that allows to circumvent the the lot split subdivision requirements so in doing that what happens is you run the risk of allowing what are called legally non-conforming and then by virtue of this exemption you're allowed to build on them even though they're legally non-conforming to shorten that period of time you run the risk of having a lot more legally non-conforming Lots throughout the county so right now we're just going to change the word Health in there commissioner W you help the floor um that's all I have okay Mr Pickins you had a comment yeah thank you chairman hary on um um Mr spalford back to the home occupation I guess it's home occup pa uh occupied businesses um on page 37 um I guess what you were saying that we've been pre-entered by the state and they give us the um I guess regulations of what is allowed and what is not allowed yes they did so this language is almost word for word from the Florida statute that preempted the regulation of Home occupations okay all right what I thought and with this to Planning and Zoning that really does our Cod enforcement people uh department is that who's going to enforce um something like this yeah they would be required to Mr P may I ask a question or for so could we reference also home home occupation because Florida statute changes quite frequently so maybe we could just in definition say see Florida statue or whatever I mean we can list some of the ones we know now but I can guarantee you it's going to be more and more coming up we can add a statute reference there yeah okay I think that's solv some of the problem just so you're clear the Florida statute doesn't Define what a home occupation is it really talks about intensities and effect on the surrounding properties but we really wouldn't want to reference you can I'm just telling you just just doesn't provide a definition like I think you're thinking never mind we'll leave it alone Mr picks you sell the floor yeah I'm just concerned because I have this in my area I think we're going to see this U more and more is um the enforcement mechanism but I'll get with you on that it clearly the issue we're having on Mclean Boulevard is parking um you know in a residential section with heavy equipment and we're not able to enforce that so I see that as a problem um all right another one and this is just just a clarification of of wording is um on page 386 and it's scratched out with blue but it's got Mobile Home Means A manufactured home that does not fall within the definition of a manufactured building but then a module homes um manufactured home that falls within the definition of a manufactured building so I don't know if I'm missing something on this did you say it again I'm having a little okay on page 386 um up at the top middle of the page it's got Mobile Home Means A manufactured home that does not fall within the definition of a manufactured building okay yes but it says mobile home means a module home means a manufactur home does fall within the definition so I know that's nitpicky but picked up on it so I guess it refers up to the top then then a typo doesn't matter a manufactured home that does not fall within the definition of manufactured building in statute 5533 okay so I guess I misunderstood is a mobile home is not a manufactured building it's not a modular home a mobile home is not a modular home even though they may look exactly the same that's right they're not they are not the same because it's some kind of a of a all that's the difference between them basically is the sticker on the door and the way that they they actually um it's who reviews the construction pardon me it's who it's who that's who reviews the construction one's done by DMV the other one's held to the Florida building code yeah but they're they're two different entities all together even though they may be exactly the same they're two different entities I mean two different things okay all right thank you that's all I got right now all right does anybody else have anything okay I think we covered a lot of ground um Mr Morris you have something oh I'm sorry where we going yeah we can um on page I do want to ask a question though it is 122 um do we have a lot to go through or one thing on everything I that's fine page what sir page 80 I'm sorry page 38 38 section two there under special use permit they have crossed out with the exception of bonafide agricultur uses for agricultural zoning District don't believe that needs to be omitted kind of against anything that limits agricultural use stuff it looks like they're being I don't know why that was omitted we'll check that's number two special use yes sir okay anybody know why that was struck page 38 38 38 number two special use permit they struck with uh special use permit with the exception of bonafide B agricultural uses and agricultural zoning districts was struck why was that struck thank you have any idea I'll look into it I'm not sure what why it was struck either may have been a typo okay so it might have been a typo thank you for catching that Mr mois well could we un strike that one yeah let's unst strike that I think the the group decides that and that's the only comment you had yes sir all right Miss Roberts I know Miss Roberts you have the floor you had a few comments and then we'll wrap this up okay so we're we're wrapping up toward trying to get to a vote is that where you're going or what are what are you what are you proposing we do next well uh let's hear your comments because I think we got a lot further than what I intended today or I thought we would get so um then we'll refer to Mr Spofford as what's next after that I guess one of the concerns I have is that this is not a complete review of the LDC right we have had things come before Planning Commission that we have deferred text amendments on saying that they would be addressed when we did the revision of the LDC and I think Mr Mars you are imminently familiar with one of them was the whole issue surrounding mobile Sawmills I had that noted in here but I didn't bring and um I mean that's something that we had said specifically and it was in our motion not to handle it was that it would be handled when the LDC review was done so I think there probably other instances that's the one that comes to mind because it's the most recent in my memory and but I think it's something that needs to be addressed have you had any other Pro I mean I'm pretty sure we have because when we started doing the comp plan working through that we we would come upon something that well that's in the LDC and we'll address it at that that time um this is mainly procedural that was changed it wasn't any of the the nitty-gritty about what can be done where kind of thing so I'm concerned about that and I'm going to go ahead and just throw the let me let me say this real quick I think if there if there's things that is causing the Planning Commission or the zoning board problems we need to be be aware of that and that needs to be dealt if you're saying we're going to deal with that at the LDC this is the day to do that right you know so that's the one that comes to mind right now but I know these are things that have come up been noted in minutes through the years I go back 12 years but um that's one of the issues I have and I'm going to go ahead and say the 500 pound gorilla in the room Planning Commission had no input whatsoever into any of the the uh updates in the document we got the document two weeks ago um This concerns me because with the the comp plan we did a thorough review for you and we brought it back to you with a lot of revisions in it I'm not proposing that we stall this process maybe we adopt this one today or begin the process of adopting this one but then set a deadline when we're going to go through and do a more thorough review um of the document um and do it as this document defines the Planning Commission shall bring this to the County Commission um I understand the the logic and the reasoning and I understand one of the reasons why we weren't that involved with it is because I was unable to be a part of anything a year ago um but i' I'd like to see us go ahead and put in writing and let the County Commission charge the Planning Commission with doing this within you know not going back and changing major provisions but going through the details and getting down into the weeds okay but I want to say this not everybody that's sitting here today been involved in this either so I had to painstakingly go Page by Page like a lot of us did did and fall on the sword where I thought it was necessary I think commissioner Turner did an excellent job this morning going through the pages that he did that that that he remembered brought concern I remembered things that brought concern commissioner Wilkinson remembered things that brought concern so I think now if you want another bite at the Apple go back to the Planning Commission and say do we remember the things that brought us concern and we'll be glad to to entertain that nobody we're trying to make a document that's going to work and going to streamline government and that's my opinion of this document okay I appreciate that and I understand that and I'm okay I'll go along with you on that my other question is did we resolve the issue of special use permits being handled by the ADC yes we did are they going to be handled by the ADC they are now a lot of us didn't like that but what Mr Commando said I think was good language to insert in I think so too okay yeah okay Mr Turner you got a comment you wanted to make what we're going through right now Mr chairman was never intended to be a Land Development code rewrite I've been here 6 and A2 years and the first meeting I had when I walked in the door I started chirping on we need to rewrite the Land Development code that sells like it's real easy but it's 6 and A2 years later and this is the best I've been able to do I know it's a hard process no I'm great if you want to this commissioner would love for you to take it up and go Page by Page and go all the way through it with whatever recommendations you want to come up with but that's not what was intended to be done here today okay it was to change a couple of things to make the code more pable that's what we're trying to do and it took six and a half years to get to to this today six and a half years I know the government works slow but that's like real slow trust me sir I understand the whole idea of having a joint meeting today between the the County Commission and the Planning Commission was because this is not a major rewrite this is just certain things that we're trying to move forward we we were hoping that we could maybe get the Planning Commission to go along with the changes that were made today with the discussions and the revisions that were made today and move it forward to the County commission for discussion and possibly approval and if you want to take up the Land Development code God bless you I'm there for you Miss Robert but like I said I've been trying six and a half years and this is as far as I've gotten okay Mr Adams I get a comment about that it's very similar to his and it's a balance I guess I I think you guys should definitely bring to us anything that you think needs to be changed I have no problem if you guys want to take Beyond this and take that up that's I think that's a great idea if you I don't know if he's have the Cycles or the will for that um that's all I'll say to it you you said most of it um all right good Miss Robert anything else for the good of the order on it I would just like to know what the you know we haven't had a chance to discuss any of this but this is probably not the form for that well Mr F what's next now tell us based on what you've heard today tell us what you perceive is what's next we get a recomendation well part of this will be a deferral to your county attorney for the required you know adoption hearings I would think at a minimum we have to um take care public comp comment today revise the code and have another adoption hearing uh likely next month yeah yeah so back in June we'll have another adoption hearing that'll come that before the board of county commissioner corre at that point yes okay what about the if there's any really major things the Planning Commission want to bring up that they felt problems can that be incorporated well I would encourage any planning Commissioners to to provide me all any comments like The Sawmill mobile sawmill I'm not sure what that issue is if you want to provide me information I'd be happy to look at it I just Mr Morris has extensive information Hang on we're gonna we're GNA hang on Mr Turner sound understand how m 2 I understand delineation there Mr Turner has the floor right now all that's fine guys and I understand your deal with with saw meals I get all this I do but it's not included in this Mr spafford was hired to do a certain thing as a consultant all the things we're talking about doing is outside of what we hired him to do so if you want this done you need to talk to to uh Zach and Brian and it needs go through staff and channels for Land Development code changes it's not in he's being gracious as he can be by not Grimson up there over this but this is not within what we hired him to do we hired him to make specific staff recommended changes okay it's normal procedure anytime you have any right issues typically you would go through your staff I'd be happy to look at them too just letting you know now procedurally as I understand this code as it stands today before we can move on to that second hearing Planning Commission is going to have to vote to recommend that this document as amended today uh be approved and send that to the County Commission the County Commission is going to have to vote to adopt what we send and then it goes to the second uh Board of County Commission meeting right yes I believe that is correct that's what's up for discussion today correct clarify that so well the Planning Commission will as will need to provide their recommendation to the County Commission which would be today which would be today right right would have to recommend to move the document forward right as a modified as modified as modified as modified today through the discussion with the changes we made today all right so is a planning commit it's gonna so I'm going to relinquish this and get let Susan take Miss Roberts take over and call Planning Commission meeting to order is that what I'm hearing we're already no you're you're already in it as joint meeting right okay so it's going to be up to the Planning Commission then to recommend to us today to modify what we've talked about I'm speaking only to members of the Planning Commission the task before us at this point is to vote on whether or not to move forward the document as it has been amended today to the county Comm commission for adoption and submission to the state is that correct correct um doesn't go to the state be for adoption goes to the County commission for adoption but then don't doesn't the the county have to send this to the state for review no they they'll send it to mun code to update it online so this is not like the comp plan where the state has correct no State review on this no State go there's no transmittal requirement for zoning okay motion order I would I would say a motions in ordered a second I have a motion and a second do I have discussion what's motion again approve AC we would do any we can do further review at a later date if we choose to speaking to my microphone seems a little backward to me to approve something today that we the Planning Commission really thinks that we should be doing a little more review on you know we were given two weeks to look at this thing and and frankly I'm a working man I didn't have a lot of time to devote in two weeks to really going through this as much as I'd like I really think we deserve that opportunity to look at it one more time before there any votes taken okay everybody heard Mr Hafner are there any other comments okay hearing none are we ready to vote let's do a roll call vote Mr Hodes yes yes Mr Miller Morris yes Mr dantos Mr Frolic yes Miss U forner Mr h no I will vote yes reservedly thank you okay so we got a recommendation you know what we're going to do we'll have another meeting in June to um take the recommendations don't you all have to vote on that today as no we're going to vote first vote no it's going to come to us in June you have to do two votes on this no no we're good all right so um next item Clerk of the Courts not here County attorney Mr Commando nothing additional thanks sir County Administrator Mr sug I have nothing additional sir and any commissioner comments from the board of county commissioner Mr adamac Mr Turner I have none Mr Pickins M Wilkinson I would just like to say thank you for bringing the family subdivision forward thank you and I want to say my final comments how much I appreciate the Planning Commission joining us today um and I want to thank Mr Turner Comm Turner for all this hard work along with our staff to move this forward Mr spford thank you for your hard work I know it's uh it needs some more but we'll get to that point but thank you very much and we appreciate it if there's no further comments yes sir Mr Turner I appreciate the accolades but the heavy lifting here was done by staff and Mr spafford our consultant I just attended a couple of meetings thank you this meeting's adjourned thank you e e