##VIDEO ID:Pgv4SfNYETk## we got have roll call please Mr chair before you do the roll call we have one member of the commission who asked to come in remotely we can't allow that until you all vote whether you're willing to let him do that all right I can get a motion yes I'd like to make a motion that we allow Pat Patterson to come in remotely for um the December 19th plrc meeting second so we have a motion to allow Mr Patterson to come in remotely from uh from Shelly m and uh second from Mr Stony all in favor I I motion passes is he available are you on with this Pat Yanda could you please Monitor and let us know if he comes in okay yes all right if he comes in let me know uh we don't have any minutes to go over today so we'll move on to the chair comments and that is if you Mr chair we need to we still need to continue with the role okay sorry I thought we finished the roll call member Craig sorry go ahead Craig they just called you oh here member Shelly here member sixma uh member Patterson has not joined yet um member Mills is absent member Costa here thank you thank you for keeping me on track all right so we have no minutes to go over so we'll move to chair comments that is if you wish to speak on any subjects today please fill out the form at the back of the room and hand it to Yolanda uh we'll be limiting you to a 3 minute uh time limit and uh quick question for legal being that there's only four assuming the pat doesn't join us it requires a unanimous for variances for variances only okay thank you and with that I'll turn it over to Mr Storia for a legal comment uh thank you uh Mr chair this is for uh members of the public that Decisions by this body on special exception cases and cases which rezone Real Property from one classification to another per to the zoning ordinance are recommendations only to the County Council and do not constitute a final hearing new evidence may be introduced at the County Council public hearing decisions on variances made by this body constitute final action subject to an appeal to the County Council and what this means is that no new evidence may be presented at the time of the County Council public hearing on the appeal an agreed party that appeals such a decision is confined to the record made before this body hearings by this body on rezonings special exceptions and variances are quasa judicial in nature meaning that this body is acting more like a court and must take into account all oral written or demonstrative evidence presented their decisions on on these cases must be based on competent substantial evidence in the record and competent substantial evidence has been defined as that a as that evidence a reasonable mind would accept a support a conclusion thank you thank you Mr chair thank you and then we'll move on to expart Communications and we'll start to my right none none and I have none uh do we have any items to be contined to withdrawn yes sir we have one item it's variance 254 it did not meet due public notice so we are requesting it to be heard at the January 16th public hearing I move to continue that item to the January 16th meeting so we have a motion on the floor to continue case v- 25004 to the January 16th 2025 meeting uh in a second from me from Mr sixma correct MH um all those in favor I I all those okay I motion passes 4 to zero moving on to uh old business unfinished business you would read that to the record pleas yes sir case number 020 excuse me 024 d245 ordinance 20246 amending chapter 72 of the code ordinances to allow for shipping containers as accessory [Music] structures good morning Mr chair and good morning uh this is a third edition of the proposed Shing container ordinance to presented to you at the uh August 15th and then excuse me August 15th yes and October 17th P ourc hearing um at the last meeting there was we had several discussions regarding uh placement of a the solid waste containers excuse me ship containers on the agricultural zone property uh as well as the number of them uh so what I've done is gone through and amend the proposal ordinates to address some of those comments and also added a comment uh was remiss in not including the agricultural zonings that are applicable in the oine local plan and since the listed uses are the same as in all the other a zonings as far as the explicit uh type of agricultural uses and permissions I've included them in the ordinance as well um and just reminder this is something that was directed by uh count for staff to prepare and submit to them and to address initially uh commercial and Industrial zone property and we've listed that um then we got into at the workshop meeting putting on agricultural products uh prop properties because of the nature of Agland sometimes that are using these structures so we are adding this to the code as a permitted accessory structure and tied in with that uh if I can direct you to pay page um two excuse me page eight of the agenda item and item number uh two were some of the changes of the ordinance was that the ship container would be allowed in conjunction with ag use on the specific agricultural lands indicated uh also referenced if they were uh permitted or properties classified by the property appraiser they would be exempt from this code provision except for uh the would have to meet the flood management flood has a management ordinance of the county and also as directed by the commission at the last meeting preparation of the number of units so add a language that shipping containers shall be limited to two containers on property with a minimum parcel size of 2 and half acres with one additional container per 5 acres of land up to a maximum of six shipping containers per parcel um and beyond that uh we have a clarification on page nine is line one previously it was referenced as being a minimum 1 acre of ups and after discussion between uh member of the public and the commission that language has been changed to one acre of non wetlands and pretty much beyond that there were a few little uh tweaks of the language grammatical type stuff but by and large this is uh the CH essentially the change that were made in conjunction with our last public hearing be happy to address any comments or questions uh the inter building official Mr Nick Mur is here I think there may be some questions about building permitting and location so forth so he is available to answer any of those questions if you have desire for that all right thank you Mr Ashley um does anybody have any questions before I get started with questions all good uh first off before I can I talk with the building official first sure nice badge by the way thank you good morning good morning Nick Ventura interim building official and congratulations on your new promotion thank you eventually they'll update the website to show us show the same uh so give me if you would please give me an understanding of how does the Florida building code classify or does it even classify or recognize the shipping containers well they're directly not written into the building code but we would be taking them from their original designed use as a shipping container for for for transporting goods and using it as a structure similar to like a shed or any other accessory building so then it would need need to meet the requirements of the floor building code okay and so so that so basically as as if it were an accessory structure a general accessory structure yes sir so that requires it then to be strapped down tied down yes some some some means of a continuous load path just like you would provide for for like a shed that's a modular building that's Del buil built off site that and then set um because we're not I guess perit they're not going to be temporary they're going to be permanent so um you would want some kind of tie downs to keep them from becoming um mobile I did print off some pictures from mo one of the most recent hurricanes um where a uh rolloff container similar in weight to probably a 8X 20 um shipping container landed on the roof of a home in Palm Beach County [Music] and what about the requirement uh while she's passing those out what about the requirement of uh being on a concrete pad or stabilized structure as opposed to directly on the on the deck any references to that in the building code um well there would have to be some kind of foundation but similar to a uh um shed they they have the um built on like a skid so that and then then set and and anchored down so they kind of have their permanent foundation kind of built with them but since these were these were never intended to be technically used as a storage building or accessory building they were um for transporting goods M you you you you probably would want some kind of solid foundation to set them on to keep them from settling or moving and then anchor them down okay that's where you and I disagree but that's okay that's why you're in your position and I'm over here um I the picture it this appears to be a tornado shot as opposed to a hurricane shot and the differential between a rolloff container weighing at 2500 lb empty versus a shipping container at 9,800 lb empty it's a pretty substantial difference there yeah um but yeah this I mean yes could anything happen absolutely I mean we could be hit by a meteor tomorrow and STI with the dinosaur so thank you you're welcome now back to Mr Ashley if anybody's has any questions please this is a very I I like to run things Loosely just go ahead and interrupt me don't wait for uh to be called out um I want to get clarification on page eight which are the changes that were made which we're getting closer I think to where I was hoping we would be but I want to make uh be sure that on page8 uh that's paragraph two where you've added in conjunction with agricultural use I'm going to stop there you list out all the zoning and then you have or Bonafide agricultural so on that first sentence are you referring to the quote unquote hottie Farms that we've discussed before is that what we're talking about there well right now the the op potential to get an accessory or a principal uh type of agricultural structure either you have the classification issued by the property appraisers office right or we have the uh non-residential Farm building affidavit where you come in and tell us you have an existing operation and you're wanting to put a building up on the property or some structure in conjunction with that and list out what is the what's on site what's the purpose for it hay storage or equipment what have you and certify that you know in accordance with the state staty you have a farm and then if we we approve that and often we do we looked at double check there's their existing use then you are exempt from a building permit under that process as well and that's outside of being a bonified agricultural use is that correct right because based on that that's if you're already bifi bonified you you would have that but also you get the classification so if you come in and showed us that you have an agricultural operation occurring or have the need for it that's where the affidavit process that is conducted by staff it's reviewed uh internally and then we when signed off and then you're exempt from a building permit what are the criteria for that well checking what the are the existing agricultural use of the property um we can look at the Aerials and you know the information from the applicant that is an affidavit they're telling us that's what they're doing uh we do have the Fire and Building review the permit as well for checking on that what's being proposed and if the information we reive or glean from available aerial or tax property information indicates that's what's occurring then we will sign off yeah and it's a rarity that they are denied yeah so this so this doesn't take care of the of the small farm that has for instance three Cows as opposed to five with the Bonafide a uh 20 some OD chickens a ex a Litany of uh different animals on site they are actually an agricultural use in a in a hobby Farm situation in other words they're not selling to the general public they would still not have that exemption or that classification that you just referred to is that right right it's just well if uh just like if just have your crappie if you don't have an agricultural use at all then you go through the normal permitting process like for any other accessory structuring yeah and that's that's where I that's that's where I have the problem um with this whole ordinance is that we're basically now taking the uh a high percentage of the people that I represent in my district uh being three that uh are not a bonafied a but are in fact in a let's call it a hobby Farm type of scenario where those these containers are already on site and this passes we put them correct directly in the crosshairs of C- compliance no doubt about it uh and we're not talking one like one or two or three we're talking several hundred and I think this is we're it's it's an over it's a little bit of an overreach in my mind okay um let's go to the let's go to section same paragraph As section A which is the uh the flood Hazard management ordinance again that seems a little heavy-handed to me as well are you talking about a page 10 or uh yeah I'm say on a page eight so okay well that's something 82 a okay um that is something we can't get out of that's State Statute do matter if you have an A exemption or not any structure that's placed in the 100-year flood plane M has to get a flood permit so it has to be reviewed for that purpose and receive it's not a building permit it's another type of permit that uh is reviewed uh by our CRS coordinator and I believe the building staff maybe as well uh because of the flood zone flood Hazard management ordinance requirement so any flood zone outside of X needs to have a needs to have to go through this process yes so by definition of in the same in the chapter in section 72 so an accessory structure and I'm quoting now typically constitutes a minimal investment not to be used for human habitation under designed to have minimal flood damage potential based on that sentence right there why are we putting them through this process if the if the the it's not a loss of life it's not a loss of it's a minimal minimal uh monetary value but yet we're putting them through this whole process as if this was a dwelling am I am I missing something am I not understanding something well the requirement is based on statute statute and I can prer to legal for that so so it's not just it's it's the the flood proofing criteria of of um and this also applies to even if you have an ad classification you know your non-residential Farm building on a farm is exempt from the building code it is explicitly by Statute not exempt from the flood plane requirements so even that even that Barn that pole barn that a farmer constructs needs to get a flood permit and needs to meet the structural criteria um which includes um you know meeting the base flood elevation um some flood proofing criteria uh keeping things above where the um the I forgot what the what the criteria is but there's there's Provisions um in the adopted flood plane management Provisions that apply to all accessory structures you talking about putting floodgates Flopper Gates inside these shipping containers similar like like you do with enclosed barns these days is that what we're is that what we're talking about yeah so um structures under 600 square ft can use have the option instead of being above the base flood elevation they could put in flood vents to to meet those um requirements and in a in a in a hermetically sealed steel structure which makes no sense it kind of defeats the entire purpose of shipping containers that's that's where I'm having trouble with this yeah but the flood requirements are also written into the building code so it does say um accessory structures do you have to meet it and like poo said um even the Farm building on a farm is exempt from a the Florida building code but it's it it's specifically not exempt from flood zone requirements so it would still need to meet those okay anybody have any questions for these folks any other discussion because I I mean I know I'm pretty much in the same float that I was the last time we saw this and um my inclination is to continue this once again because the other um the other member of this part of this panel that is not here today uh who was also a very vocal on opposition and changes to this is not here today to vote right and um I'm just it's not it's not to the point where it's not it's not it's not in any form where I can accept it in its current form I just this my this is my personal opinion I don't know how the rest of you guys feel but um one thing I want to ask Scott also if maybe I'm Overlook it here but if there going to be any stipulations on location where they're placed I mean you don't want them in front of somebody's house um yeah that is not for the a part if you're if you're going to meet the ACT provision that we just discussed you're exempt from all the regulations other than the number and the flood plane issue um the other criteria um that are listed in the rest of you know rest of the page 8 9 and 10 that would apply to those non a use properties and the commercial industrial so there are you have to meet setbacks you do have to be behind the principal structure okay and not in a landscape bees buffer and all these things that's that's expressed in the rest of the code M Mr chair see people putting into front yard putting putting these things like oh well well we've had that discussion as far as um uh Barns and stuff especially when you're dealing with five and 10 acre Parcels that that I mean the front yard is still is basically pasture right so and in the in the first set series of classifications he has up here the RC's through the uh through the OCR um you're going to have some of that that is considered forward of the frontal the front facing portion of the house or mobile for that matter just because of the nature of a farm this is not in a residential section and I think that would be the same criter that we currently use with accessory structures that we see variances for all the time um you had a comment for me did you call me um if you please um we have actually had a request from I believe one of the council members to move this on to council so um if it's okay with you all could we please get a list of your specific comments that we could include in our agenda item so that the board is aware of your comments but that we can get it to them to meet their request can I request can I uh ask who requested that um I was just told through in the hallway this morning that the one of the board members had requested I did not ask which one initially did come from the board M um and they're looking to see it go there it has been viewed by you all three times now Y and we want to make sure and incorporate your concerns um but we also have to meet our requirements to get it moved on to the next Le level as well so we can move it with a recommendation of denial yes sir that's your option okay all right before we get to that point then we do have an email here from um a member of vCard basically contesting again the issue about the solid foundation um May I just make a comment it's it's it's from the executive director of vard okay executive yes so it was a it was a group decision okay right and and my concern is that they reference as a temporary structure and it's not intended to be a temporary structure and it was changed from the last review uh version where we had a specific on what type of foundation and we changed it to just say a solid foundation uh however that may be addressed as through a building permit before it was asphalt concrete that was mended based on our discussion just to have some sort of solid foundation so whatever that that can mean under the building code uh is what our intent is and like I said to make sure it's set in place is able to be anchored and not shift around um so they I didn't have any con I I sent the information I talked to them uh I got that back earlier this week and but my concerns they reference being a temporary and you know it is going to be a permanent set if it was going to be temporary we wouldn't even get into most of this but as as Miss Smith said you know if if it's your desire to list up what the main concerns it sounds like is it's still more the agriculture properties and the permitting um like you've indicated there's not much we can do about the flood Hazard issue that were directed by state statute on that um so if there's any other element to this that you want us to incorporate if you were to approve or deny and pass it on to council here is the concerns or questions or maybe suggested modifications from the PC we certainly have to include that in the agenda item to Council okay a real quick question back for Nick did you you said there was 600 ft Square ft for the flood gates yes 600 that's your ma that's your max limit yes so these containers are typically going to be 800 it's 40 by 20 so they're about 800 ft so they're just over um yeah just it doesn't I I get what you're saying I understand the the flood the the flood thing but it just it makes no sense to have these containers cut into um for that purpose but okay yeah I can give you a list of my concerns and we can go our hope would they would not be placed in the flood plane but if they're on the agricultural property where they we' be exempt and telling them where they place it if they do put in the flood plane then that's the requirements for the flood Hazard regulations are going to apply so so you you can remove that section but we're still going to have to apply it um because this is just kind of if if if someone reads our code and they're looking at all the requirements for uh the placement of these uh shipping containers you know we want them aware that hey there's this flood plane issue you're going to have to deal with regardless of um whether or not you have an ad classification or your property is CL is Zone agricultural or you're even using it as a um agricultural use um we have to make sure that access structure complies with the flood plane regardless and and what Paulo brought up is an important issue because recently uh a lot of people don't realize that in agricultural property they have to meet that and since if they're exempt and they're putting the structure out there they're kind of getting hit after the fact of that the land Dev elment code has the flood Hazard uh management requirements and when we find out about the structure they're getting into a Cod compliance issue because you didn't get a flood permit and that's not something that's highlighted really in the zoning orian where we typically deal with the general permitting of things so was important to put that language in there to even though you may be exempt I need you need to be aware this could this will affect you no matter what and just like any other principle or accessory structure permissible by the ordinance um nobody from V is there nobody to speak on the subject and there's nobody here from vCard either no I noticed that all and I did uh pass a draft off to the citizen who was in the last two meetings and I have not received any uh commentary from him okay since then all right so well well my before we even call this for um um a motion the my two biggest issues are number one the fact that um the requirement to have this on a uh solid foundation uh being concrete or or asphalt uh becomes problematic for me I think that um putting it right on the deck is is sufficient for these particular containers and and yes they are they can they can become permanent but in most cases these are temporary in the standpoint that they're there for possibly a year to two years some have been there forever which become more of a permanent structure uh and that we're not deal dealing with the situation of the units that are already out there and now we're going to go back and pass this ordinance and try to enforce it retrospectively to all the containers that are out there whether they were out there legally illegally however you want to look at it but they're there we we have to acknowledge that they're there and there's no provision to there's no work around for that um secondly the the Mr chair before you leave that that one yeah um instead of saying uh the wording that's in there now what if we said on a stable surface okay well and then that stabilized stabilized in what fashion what's a stabilized surface Give me a definition so stable would work what's a definition depends on the definition of stable I mean I think I think the ground I think the ground on my farm is pretty stable to just drop it right on I think it would be uh suggest something to prevent shifting and settling I mean that's the purpose of of having it than more than just plain on um uncompacted ground but um I'm not a Geotech I don't know what type of you know uh compaction or or if you're on solid pasture ground that's that's what I'm saying but the moment you call out for stabilized surf or stable surface you're going to require a like you said a compaction test so we're adding layers of yeah bureaucracy yeah for for no for no reason so that's that's one of my issues number two is the the classification between like I said I want to call let's call them a hobby Farm versus a bonified agricultural use I think that they are while one is in the business of commercially selling product the other one is in the business of primarily um providing for either uh localized and or Farmers Market type units which is not a wouldn't classify as a Bonafide agriculture I think that they should be included in that exemption uh concern the um like on page on page eight down when you get to down to C and one where you've listed all the other classifications including industrial public uh and uh and business uses there I don't there I don't foresee a problem having it having a lot of these the teeth that this has apply to this particular scenarios which I think that's what precipitated this entire process was a a commercial application that was trying to use a storage container on site I think that's where this all came from down from months ago uh and so I don't see that as a problem there in a commercial environment that yes there you've got more of a public safety issue than you do on a individual uh plot of land or Farmland so those are my those are my biggest concerns right there Mr chair can I ask Scott a question Scott on I guess page 8 lines 1 and two when it says shipping contain are used in conjunction with agricultural use so we're not talking about Bonafide Farm is that intended to include Hobby Farms and agricultural use on land classified as as any any well if it's in con Junction with any agricultural use whether it's commercial or not I mean it's the use of how uh the general storage of it uh on those particular zoning classification that makes it exempt I mean we can can we just put in you know after agricultural use comma including Hobby Farms do we even have a definition for Hobby Farms but uh we don't yeah I mean that's that's a that's just kind of an example of an agricultural use that doesn't is not a Bonafide Farm you don't need your ad classification it doesn't have to be for a commercial purpose correct but it's still I mean that's why we have these agricultural uses and a zonings that don't require that AG classification well you want to in conjunction with commercial or non-commercial agricultural use or land I mean is is is it required to be commercial when we talk about agricultural use in our definition well that's the extent because in the rural classifications you can have AG use like keeping of animal raising crop but not for resale not soomal not for commercial element right versus an agricultural it allows for raising packaging processing the products you raise so we can clarify as that commercial or non-commercial agricultural use including Hobby Farms if you just want to be very specific in include that well I I have no obje to including that I guess we just have to come up with a definition or find what is the most common definition I'm sure it's out there somewhere about Hobby Farms um but I have no objection to including that language that or just covered under non-commercial agricultural yeah something along that lines I think with those couple of tweaks um send kick it over to the council and let them let let them bounce it around for a bit I think we've done I mean we've done everything we can at this point at my end as a clarification Mr chair we just want to go back to your first concern and make sure we're using the correct wording yes will it be solid or stable or delete as opposed to so I would say stable as opposed to solid because stable stable indicates to my in my mind stable Foundation would be my pasture is pretty well packed down it's pretty stable as opposed to a solid foundation indicates now that you've got some kind of additional whether it be aggregate asphalt concrete that would I would consider that as a solid versus a stable in other words you don't want to sit it on you don't want to sit it on soft sand you don't want to sit it in the swamp but if it's a a dry dry patch of pasture I think I would consider that to be stable ground so just to repeat then we're going to address your first concern by putting the word stable in stable well address your second concern about a by including commercial and non-commercial do we want to include the word Hobby Farms if you have a definition for it I mean that's how I that's what I call it because that's the best that differentiates your bonifide egg from your you know your mom and pop farm from your Bonafide EG farm so I think we can just probably go with non-commercial agricultural use right we can probably uh I would say suggest the noncommercial and then we could say um which's the synonymous with that definition like because I'm looking the zonings that you've got CL that you've got lumped into that paragraph too are basically the ones I'm most concerned about the ones down towards below are a little more um uh more residential rural residential than they are Hobby Farms I mean some of those folks are going to have Gardens but I doubt they're going to have Hogs and chickens and and and and P and and CS rather but the first up top is my biggest focus at the moment paragraph two so yeah we can include those then um you're you're getting closer to getting my approval yes what else you got just going back to the flood plane I know you expressed that concern however that's something that we have to do by law regardless yeah that is that's a whole another crawl that uh that [Music] let me let me defer back can I get back to Nick for a minute please let's talk let's talk about let's talk about Barnes for a second before we talk about this [Music] so what triggers what triggers the flood gates or the flood flaps on a barn is it the height of the barn is it the height off the deck is it the elevation is it just in general what yeah so any structure placed in in the flood plane um would have to be a 1T above base flood elevation if not there's that exemption if it's 600 ft or less you have the other option of putting in the flood vents now like a open pole barn doesn't have to meet those requirements cuz it's open water FL flows in and out but for for an inclosed structure that that those are really the two options you'd either have to elevate it um 1T above base flood elevation if it's less than 600 ft you would have the option to put in the flood vents so I'm out in the middle of a 40 acre pasture and I am in AE Zone I would either have to bring that up a foot above BF yes sir to get away from or or if it was the smaller container the 8 by 20 you have the option to leave it leave it below face flood but put in um flood vents so yeah so if I'm at in the middle pasture and I'm adding a I'm adding probably a foot to two foot to get it up to that point now it's no longer a a drivein drive out if I'm storing hay in there because now I'm I'm having to make a ramp to get into the container and out of the container okay I get I get and there's no there's no workarounds on that no because that that's actually written into the Florida building code as well so okay all right so long as you're on X you're fine anything outside of X you're you're tied to a Floodgate yes okay well that one I can't do much about unless I get on the building code board anything else no okay well um I guess I'll entertain a motion if we got one um let me try this one sure well hang on before you start is Mr Patterson joined us no okay all right go ahead um I'll make a motion that uh we forward case number or forward ordinance 24-5 oh that's the case number ordinance 202 24-16 amending chapter 72 of the code of ordinances to the County Council [Music] um with the recommendation of approval subject to the pdrc comments do that look you um or we have to name them defer back to staff on that one well you're looking for changes to uh section 7 propose section 723 mhm 10 uh B2 regarding uh the agricultural use allowing for uh commercial or non-commercial a sites Hobby Farms whatever language we can kind of craft to incorporate that idea and then also you're looking at proposed subsection C Roman numeral 4 on the foundation change the uh shipping container shall be placed on a stable Foundation to prevent shifting and settling so could Scott's comments just be incorporated into what you just yeah basically the four the three items that we or four items that we've touched on are part will go as part of this package forward she doesn't have to repeat all this okay I'll second her motion okay thankk you all right so we have a motion on the floor my intent uh case 0-24 d005 to forward to the County council with a recommendation or approval with the multiple uh pdrc comments correct yes um all those in favor I I all those opposed I'm in favor I I by the way so that's four to four to zero so senat to the council let them kick it around for a bit thank you thank you good it was grueling but thank you now part of the process thank you Nick made some very good comments Mr chair yeah appreciate those all right Right Moving on if you would read the next case please yes sir case number v- 25-5 variance to the minimum yard requirements on Urban single family residential R9 zoned property all right and this is Mrs Harris Mr Mr oh sorry Mr Harris my B the applicant the applicant is seeking after the fact you st closer to the mic please yeah the applicant is seeking after the fact variances to allow an existing wood and walkway and an elevated wood deck to remain in their current location variance one is to reduce the side yard from 7 ft to 0t for the deck variance two is to reduce the side yard from 7 ft to 0t for the walkway the subject property is a narrow Ocean Front lot and developed with a single family residence built in 1973 and two detached garages it is on Urban single family residential with the urban low intensity future land use the property is located within the coastal Coastal High Hazard area excuse me and seaword of the coastal Coastal Construction Co control line the original deck and walkway were in place prior to the applicant's purchasing the property in 1998 but were but were rebuilt in 2022 without obtaining the required permits after the hurricane damage a notice of violation was issued requiring the applicant to resolve the issue staff recommendation is to approve variant one and two with conditions as it meets three of the five criteria the applicant must apply for a building permit within 60 days of variance approval second the applicant must remove the portion of the deck that located offsite I'm available for any questions you may have I have a quick question uh Courtney is this is so did I hear you right this is a rebuild after the hurricane yes and that triggered the the variances all right anybody have any questions for staff no no questions for staff do we have um is the applicant present would you like to come forward please state your name and address for the record uh Chad hogi uh 1902 Highway 382 LJ Georgia all right you've heard the staff um comments do you have anything to add uh I'll only add that my mother um has some mental health concerns that are the resulted in this deck being built on a permit okay that I'm now working to resolve okay perfect so is it complet the deck's now completed the deck is completed just waiting to get your after the facts okay any questions for the applicant no do we have any public public participation no all right thank you um since we have no public participation and there's no other questions I will entertain a motion I'll be glad to make a motion please that we approve case number B- 25-5 subject to the two staff recommendations second I have a motion on the floor uh for Case v- 25-5 by Miss shadley seconded by Stony sixma um any comments let's take a vote then all those in favor I I all is opposed passes unanimously next case yes case number z d 24-16 resoning from the prime agriculture A1 zoning classification to the transitional agriculture A4 zoning classification and this is Kristen Ray good morning morning uh so the applicant is requesting a resoning of two 5 acre Parcels from the prime agriculture A1 to the transitional agriculture A4 zoning classification in 1971 the two Parcels were combined and then were split sometime between 1976 and 1978 at the time of the split the A1 had a Min minimum of 5 acres in 1984 the lot area requirement increased to the 10 acres parcel one is located to the north is developed with a single family residence and parcel two it's located on the south is developed with a mobile home did you get that on the screen please right thank you L can you repeat that again please all the parcel one is located to the north that Northern Square there is developed with a single family residence and then parcel two that located located to the uh South there is developed with a mobile home okay uh lot sizes surrounding the subject properties um Range anywhere between 4 acres to 40 acres um many of the adjacent part Parcels do meet the uh the norm L size of the 10 acres um there is um a 7 4 ACR site approximately 341 ft to the West um that was rezoned to A4 um they already had an approved unrecorded subdivision um which made it a vested parcel um that resoning allowed the applicant to kind of rearrange the parcels within the approved subdivision and a lot of transition between zoning classifications uh the proposed A4 zoning has a minimum laot area of 2.5 acres um both Parcels are approximately 5 acres in size uh with the um which can then potentially be split into four 2 point Sorry 2.5 acre Parcels uh the future land use for the property is rural which allows a maximum density of one dwelling unit per 5 Acres um A4 is conditionally compatible with the rural future land use designation based on the comprehensive plan Matrix however splitting Parcels 1 and two below the current 5 Acres would not meet the density requirement for the rural future Landes the resoning itself is not likely to create an impact upon environment or natural resources and it's not anticipated to have an impact on public health welfare safety or morals of the surrounding area however staff's recommendation is to forward resoning to County Council for final action with the recommendation of denial uh due to being inconsistent with the comprehensive plan I'm available for questions any questions for staff what was the you say morals that's what or morals is that what you said I know there's morals that's what I was I was like it won't affect the morals well that's good to know I didn't I don't know that we I don't remember hearing that in the code before yeah it's one of the criteria for reason okay thank you can we go to the screen that shows the uh existing zoning and then the proposed zoning page please it's in our packet uh yeah there we it's in the pack yes I've seen it on the packet the reason I'm asking for this one here so I'm looking at the uh the current zoning so this property is currently zoned A1 and I'm assuming that everything to the left of it is also A1 that's that parcel right there yes sir right beside right beside it and then and then you transition over into A4 correct that's the rezoning that's about 341 ft to the lest okay about 74 acre parcel yes sir and so if these two Parcels were actually combined as one um other words it was a 10 acre Parcels opposed to two individual 5 acre Parcels would they be able to subdivide based on the the what we passed recently no no um what I'm hearing is it's a it's a density issue so into the comprehensive plan okay so the comprehensive plan has a maximum density which they can't meet if they divide it so the thing about com plan it's you know it's sensory to the constitution in terms of growth um we cannot issue a development order that is inconsistent with the comprehensive plan hence the staff's recommendation for denial um because there's no comprehensive plan Amendment traveling along with this the only thing we can look at is the existing comp plan density limitations so it's creating too many dwelling units um That's essential without a comp plan change yes okay so all right any other questions for staff no is the applicant [Music] present yes name and address for the record please Linda Barry uh 2088 and 2080 okay they they a few years ago gave the second parcel another another address so they're two separate when we bought this property in the can you get closer to the mic please I'm sorry when we bought this property in the early 90s we were told it was a 10 acre parcel I didn't figure out out until the first taxx period that it was two separate pieces M um and um been told all along that that one of them I think the back one is counted as a non-conforming is that right I'm old so I'm hoping I'm understanding everything so so um being the age we're at Mid 7 here my husband and I it's it's getting uh we still do uh uh sell eggs and uh board some horses and do meet our EG requirements okay on the property uh and the front and the back and and do pasture in both areas um but it's getting a lot of work for us and uh We've um we've had um I've been told all along I either need to combine it or change the zoning I would like to change the zoning we have family that would like to buy all or part of the front piece uh which would be very helpful to us of course at our age and um uh so that's kind of what I'm aiming at is to be able to do that now you had said that like the property right next door to us you see the little line behind behind it that's two separate pieces of property I don't the one that has the little curve line I think it's 7 Acres and three or something like that that's been there since we bought it um always been two different people owning that I don't know if that's A1 or not but um they've all that when we when we first moved out there was pasture and just you know cows and now if you to the and looking at that down the road there they've divided all that from 2 and A2 Acres up to about five acres that's even on the other side of the road and I know they've done that to that that A4 area too so there is a precedence to even go down to like the two acres two and a half like half of that front property um that would just be very beneficial to us and it would solve the non-conforming deal the um you heard what staff said about the uh not having a comp plan change amendment to go along with this say it again sir yeah mentioned it repeat that for you would you repeat the uh about the comp plan oh the it's a of course can explain better but um fundamentally um all development orders including rezonings must be consistent with the comprensive plan here the comprensive plan has a maximum density uh provision so you know um doing a rezoning uh would create a situation that exceeds the maximum density limitations of the comprehensive plan people right next door to us and the people just right down the street all have big houses now on 2 and a half acres or 2 acres and three acres and and that sort of thing what is the difference the difference is that it's it's a zoning and a comp plan change issue and you are currently zoned A1 which is uh what do we say 5 acre minimum 10 10 they the others so that's why yeah and you're be splitting this down um staff is recommending denial and I'm going to point something out to you here real quickly that uh we are two people down today for short two people which means that you would need a unanimous decision from this panel to move this forward or a dies for a year so I'm giving you the option right now to um to ask for continuance okay uh until we have a full staff and at the same time to go back and do a little bit more homework with regards to how the comp plan may help your situation here a comp plan change Amendment may help this situation what how do I do a comp plan well I'm not an attorney that's why I would suggest you consult the land attorney this is getting terribly expensive okay so okay so okay so I've got to get an attorney to write up we would like to have it divided of it eventually yes I would suggest that you consult somebody who is an expert in land use and subdivision um and first off I the first thing I would suggest that you ask for continuance from this board to to move this forward to the January meeting to give yourself some breathing room because if it dies here you're basically locked out for anything for at least a year correct is that right if it gets denied not by count not by this board but by County Council by Council because it's final action then yes um they cannot reapply for another year okay so certainly then I would want to continue what I'm not understanding is how if if right next door they're on small properties that have infected one guy has trying to do an Airbnb which is not allowed next door and the the the other properties right there within site are are all smaller and have one big house on them or whatever we're looking up at the map okay okay all right so you're looking up at the map you talking the properties to the left of your Parcels or to the right of your parcel what I'm looking at it yep okay to the left the one that has the little Loop down and shows two properties uhhuh okay right that one's I think three and seven or something like that I've been told and then right next door of course they've divided it and there's people building houses on those and across the street on down to the left is a bunch properties that they've divided and there was a big pasture there that they've divided in anything I think it was 2 and A2 and there was some that were three and then they had one guy on the corner that's been totally flooded out that was a was a five I believe on as you make the curve on that road um so I don't I'm not quite understanding why the density we're not planning on putting a subdivision in there and you fact you couldn't I mean you could divide it as much as uh divide that front piece in half is and the back piece has has our home on it would never be divided it's the way it's the way things are built if we divided anything it would just be that front piece Mr chair I can answer that question for you there's several things going on here um one is the A1 zoning which is now one home per 10 acres right historically um prior to 1984 I believe the early it was a much smaller requirement so you could I think 10,000 square ft 5 oh sorry 5 Acres um so you were allowed to do that back then um that's one thing that's happening so the older homes you see out there they were allowed to do that at that time before these are all brand new homes and then the second issue that's going on is if you look at those smaller homes on that A4 and I think that's what you were talking about earlier Mr Costa y um that is an old um exempt subdivision it was vested so that's why they're allowed to do what they're doing what what this application is trying to do is take the current standard in order to subdivide but we have the 1 to 10 acre requirement now so even if um everybody wanted to approve this it's also against our subdivision regulations so they'll come in for a subdivision and we'll have to deny that as well correct that's the parcel the front parcel on Kick lighter that's to the left if you're looking to the left that front front parcel was just purchased and it has a brand new home on it so that isn't I mean maybe maybe it was divided earlier I don't know that was a non I'm assuming that was a non-conforming parcel an assumption on my part would have to research the specific Parcels to brand new beautiful home across the street on down to the left where you see those divisions okay and on down farther was divided it was a pasture that's been that way since we moved in that was divided into anywhere from a 2 and 1/2 piece to they sold them at 2 and2 three three and I think a five there was like four or five they split it into like four or five pieces big beautiful homes on them are you referring to the bottom of the screen where it says uh the one side's label borrow pit the other one says Sand Pond is that you referring to that area or to the left far left oh the A3 okay that's a different zoning classification all together A3 yeah so that but they they're divided into like two and a half to three when they sold those off and then the one on the corner where they make a turn that you can't see on this MH is is a 5 acre right okay so I don't know about older old that wasn't supposedly divided before and they divided that and the guy owned the stuff across the street too so he divided some of that to be able to be putting houses on and lot of new houses out there y you're dealing with three different you got two different zoning or three different zonings in there you got A1 A4 and A3 each one of them has a different requirement for lot size versus uh um and home size for subdivision so if there's not you're not you can't you're not looking at it from it's not Apples to Apples basically so your apples to apples are everything on your A1 side which is one per 10 acres which you obviously have two 5 acre Parcels currently so you're quasa in that 10 acre uh uh Arena again if you would like to us for us to to consider a a motion to continue I'd be more than happy to put that motion on the floor for you would you anybody somebody make that motion for her one could just because I really hard to understand this I think it'd be a little more to be it behoove you to to seek professional Counsel on this one right and it more than likely you'll probably get to the end your the any your means where you want to get to if you go that route okay all right otherwise denial and yeah yeah you get denial and then you're just going to be refiling yeah okay um oh I refile I'm back to the same couple thousand fees exactly by continuing you don't have to refile you basically are continuing the motion we're on F in come here there you go trying I'm trying to steer your right you got the date of January meeting 19th 19th okay 19th of January is that good enough for staff or should we give her to February it's January 16th 16th thank you I thought I heard 16th okay 15th or 16th 16 okay um I'm go to that would also give I would give her more time yeah because the holidays I give you till February and find out what's the date of February meeting please that oh she's looking sorry 20th the day after my birthday for be a lucky day for you um I move the case number v- 25-5 be continued to the February we're on2 how am I reading the wrong one okay thank you um uh case z- 24-16 now I forgot the date February 16th 20th 20th okay be continued to our February 20th plrc meeting okay motion on the floor to continue case z-2 4-16 to the February 20 20th 2025 meeting uh by uh Miss Edith Shelly and second by Stony sixma uh any discussion on the motion all in favor I all opposed motion passes thank you for your time I appreciate it Lu know a good lawyer you got names for me I would appreciate [Music] it moving on to the next case and the final [Music] case you ready to read that in the record yes case number uh o- 25- 003 ordinance 2025 d04 04 update to the 5-year schedule of Capital Improvements for concurrency monitored public facilities FY 2024 2025 through 2028 2029 again this is Kristen Ray so this is the schedule of Capital Improvements it's an annual requirement by the state of Florida to ensure that we're meeting the level of service requirements and the comprehensive plan the County Council is required to approve an ordinance for the concurrency monitored elements each year we coordinated with Parks traffic traffic engineering development engineering Solid Waste utilities and School District to collect the data we reviewed the County Council approved Capital Improvements plan for the fiscal year 2024 to 2025 through fiscal year 2028 to 2029 found all concurrency monitored facilities currently meet the level of service standards our public works department is working on some CH changes to the storm water ordinance which will be presented to the PLC in January uh we do recommend forwarding the schedule to the County council with a recommendation of approval and I'm available for questions any questions for staff What's the total number What's the total dollar amount here is there a particular page on that I I know everything is broken down by individual um uh building or structure you will not see a total dollar number on that that's only a small component okay of our budget got it that has to do specifically with um concurrency okay there not 15500 pages right yep yeah go ahead on page 51 um talking about the airport Barn it says the facility is rented and I was wondering who owns the facility is that relevant in any way so I can't really talk on the capital Improvement plan projects that are located in the attachments um but I can get you the contact for the um uh person that does that created that project so you be able to to ask the question I just found that section confusing and I was just wondering you know with a $22,000 seems like a lot of rent for a year and when you're looking at this plan this is already a board approved plan oh it is yeah okay thank you yep all right do we have any other comments from staff I mean uh from U the p please go ahead um the um not going to be able to find it now the project hold on a minute the ATV park is that has that already been what page I'm not finding it okay um about the Motocross park yeah the Motocross Park thank you has that been uh approved I'll direct I'll go back to staff I believe so but if it's in the budget if you saw an item in the budget that has been approved so it's it's budgeted but there's no location so it's technically it exists as ear Mark or it's it's just a budget exercise so to accountants that exists to everyone else it doesn't um so the original location of over by the uh air by the RC that's off the table we we were under yeah that's off the table or it's it's off the table um County Council made a motion to not consider that particular area and to look at other areas including other areas in the landfill but not in that so there is a budget for it just a location is nothing has been decided on where it is or whether or not it's going to go it's just been by by when Council approved the budget they approved it with you know an allocation for the Motocross so they've earmarked x amount for this Motocross park does that have a um does that budgetary number that allocation does it have an expiration date if not used by X and it rolls back into the general fund or that that would be me speaking outside of my wheelhouse um okay so I we can I can clarify I can get with budget and finance and can get you the answer I'd be curious cuz they I mean they could take 5 years trying to locate a you know find a location in the meantime that money is sitting there that could easily be better spent someplace else potentially true all right they were going to put on 415 by your health it was on well it's not too far from my house and I I know that the the land owners that were around this proposed area he was n too happy about it uh I mean honestly I wouldn't either if you know list the motorcycles going you know B 12 days it is a pet project 12 days you know 12 hours a day running motorcycles but I think if you get it if you're able to find a place within the landfill property itself that's perfect the only ones are going to complain of the buzzards at that point well it it one time years ago they try to put it by to MOA dump mhm yeah yeah yeah yeah be less impact but but but then the last I heard they were trying to put it across from the jail and he was oh on Indian Mound Road or whatever that is yeah right next to the strip club they never built that one Mr chair um get a motion on the yes we're working on that we're we're working towards that goal we're getting way off here way off so I will take a motion on this case if we're done discussing any other discussion any further discussion no all right I'll take a motion I'll find that ordinance 2025 04 be fored to County Council or I mean in concurrence for recommendation of yeah are we okay I'll second where's our terminology here so we are find this concurrent all right so we have a a motion on the floor for case 0-25 d003 that we forward to the County council with a recommendation of concurrence is that correct yes I thought 04 though that's the ordinance number it's case number 0 0253 that's a recommendation any discussion on the motion but they're checking oh they're checking to make sure we got it right yes okay uh the motion is fine you're just um approving it for consistency with the comprehensive plan and adding the consistency with the comprehensive plan to the motion um still a second yes yes I'm the second any discussion all those in favor I any opposed passes unanimously all right so we are done with new business um moving on to other public items no sir staff comments just very quickly um I believe Yolanda left you each an application on your desk March 31st everybody's appointments are up it's an odd year so odd-numbered year so um you all will be uh need to reapply for your positions come this can be submitted online correct or emailed back to you yes and we're early in the process we just wanted to give it you ahead of time early okay all right so this and the financial is due by what February of next year Carissa green Carissa green would be in touch with you to provide all those okay so this is just informational got okay uh any other staff comments yes sir commission comments anyone I have one um thank you for making today uh go as Flawless as potentially could uh with my first time behind this uh behind this Podium so thank you for that good question we had a few hiccups but hey we got through it um short of that the I want to wish everybody on staff a Merry Christmas and everybody on the pdrc as well merry Christmas happy New Year happy New Year and um and we'll see you next year I hope that uh I hope that Pat comes out through this well and see him um at our next meeting as well do we have a um timeline on the missing chair position or missing uh member position we have asked the third floor to put that on the County Council agenda to make an appointment okay but again they will have to reapply in March as well okay so that's the that we just have the one vacancy correct that's correct pointed by the chair okay so we would be they would be appointed in Jeff feat it going to be maybe one or two meetings if they didn't get reappointed is that what you're saying well an application yeah oh that's what I'm saying reappoint for January I guess to start he could start uh he would start whenever I mean potentially you could have a situation where you know the chair's appointment serves for a meeting two meetings and then have to get reappointed reappointed um that's that's that's a potential situation okay um it was just I mean we've been with that one this long it seemed like we were just start in well or April where it hurts us is on meetings like this where we're down to four you know um okay and uh and press and citizen comments Al it's the end of the year you need to say something to us on that's to quiet if we have nothing further then this meeting is adjourned