[Music] oh [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] [Music] for [Music] [Applause] [Music] [Music] oh e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e what no no yeah the June 20th 24 2024 hearing for the planning and Land Development regulation commission is now called to order and if I could get everyone to please silence any audible devices you have and if you could please join me for the Pledge of Allegiance I pledge allegiance to the flag United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands one nation God indivisible withy and good morning everyone I would like to thank you for joining us this morning and Miss Tucker could I please have the roll call hi good morning members uh member Craig here member Costa here member Patterson here member sixma here chair Mills here and our County chair representative is currently vacant thank you Miss Tucker uh we do have minutes from the May 16 2024 meeting any discussion on those minutes for a motion motion to approve May 15 meeting I'm sorry Mr 6man do you mind speaking into the mic we didn't get that thank you I'm making a motion to approve the May 16th meeting I mean minutes I'm sorry second second I got a motion on the floor to approve the uh minutes for May 16 2024 for Mr 6man and second from Mr C any discussion on the motion all those in favor signify by saying I I any opposed motion carries unanimously okay if anyone like to speak for against the cases being heard today if you could please fill out a form at the back of the DI here and hand it to miss cira to my immediate left and we and we will be limiting you to a three minute time limit after the comments have been heard I will give the applicant an opportunity to address any concerns the speakers have and answer any questions the Commissioners may have and at this time I'd like to turn it over to Mr sorya for legal comments thank you Mr chair this is for the uh members of the audience and for any applicants that decisions on this body by special on special exception cases and cases which reone a real property from one classification to another purum to the the zoning ordinance are recommendations only to the County Council and do not constitute a final hearing so new evidence may be presented at the County Council public hearing however 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 um at the time of the County Council public hearing on the appeal an agreed party that appeals such a decision is confined before the record made before this body hearings by this body on rezonings special exceptions and variances are Quasi 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 these cases must must be based on competent substantial evidence on the record and competent substantial evidence has been defined as that evidence a reasonable mind would accept to support a conclusion thank you Mr chair thank you Mr Sor and while we're on legal comments I would like to ask the commission to disclose for the record any expart indications that have occurred before or during the public hearing at which is a vote is to be taken on any quasa judicial matter and I'll start with my immediate right with Miss U Craig Craig sorry about that I have none thanks okay I did have a conversation with Randy stalard with on PUD 24-2 Mr Patterson I had a phone call from um someone on a case but no discussion okay I I had a just a call really didn't go any detail on from Alex Ford on the Kraken Road case okay and I also had a call from Mr Alex Ford on case V2 24048 and also received an email from Mr Randy Stallard on PUD 24002 okay we do have a presentation to be presented before us today um from Mr I'll let him introduce himself through the chair good morning my name is Mark mcmanis and I'm the community planning liaison for Naval Air Station jackville Naval Station mport part of my responsibilities includes Pine Castle range I'm also the military representative to the vucha county County Planning Commission pursuant to Florida statute 163 3175 typically I comment uh none of the issues that have come up in the last year have really had any interest in the Navy we've had no objections to anything so you haven't seen me uh but today uh spoke with Miss Smith about coming down and providing you an overview of Pine Castle to tell you what's going on and then to go over uh the Navy's recommendations on what development guidelines you should consider when uh discussing the Pine Castle range I brought with me uh Mr Don Heaton who is the range director for Pine Castle so I'm going to ask him to come up and go over the range itself and talk about the operations and then I will uh follow him up with talking about some of the development guidelines the Navy recommends for around Pine Castle so um I will uh come back in a moment but uh for now Mr Heat hello my name is uh don heon I'm director of the Navy's uh Pine Castle range complex uh Pine Castle range complex is uh three various ranges that are that are that are different from each other uh that makes up the entire range complex if you're looking at the map to the north uh you can see a Rodman range up there uh that's around putam County as we're circling around clockwise uh uh you could see Valia County and and that's where the Lake George uh range is at and then to the bottom uh you can see the Pine Castle range uh the Pine Castle range was the first range of of the complex uh that started and and training at the range complex started in 1941 uh World War II it was uh back then uh initiated by the war department establishing the lake Bryant bombing and Gunnery Range uh uh with there uh during that time it was very instrumental uh in in training for for World War III uh actually the war department and the Army Air Forces acquired uh 4,587 Acres around what what is now the Pine Castle bombing range during that time uh so 1951 uh late late George was was started during that time and of course Robin came in a little bit later in 1961 but after World War II ended uh the the war department turned the land back over to the US Department of Agriculture uh the forest service and then in 1951 uh the Navy came along and and decided to utilize a central portion of that old Lake Bryant bombing Gunner range uh for a training range and and so the Navy entered into an agreement uh with the USDA for service uh for for what is now the Pine Castle uh bombing range to the north uh we we have the the Rodman uh uh range and and that's uh 2,690 Acres of Navy owned property uh there's only aert bombing practice bombs no high explosive uh bombs that that occur there at the Rodman range if you looking at the the image to the left it shows its location a little bit north of the aquaa river uh uh little little bit to the uh southeast of the Rodman Reservoir and across Florida Barge Canal uh the center picture shows an aerial image you can make out like a little Village complex uh and uh and that is for for very restrictive inert bomb training and then over to the right uh uh you'll see some designations for some helicopter landing zones uh the robin range provides a unique uh environment of some uh wet land uh uh hardwood type uh environments for uh uh pilot rescues and and down Pilots uh and confined area Landing zones uh uh in there so so the big training uh uh purpose for Robin is uh helicopter training moving down to Lake George which uh which does border valua County uh the Navy has a 2X 7 Mile use area uh that that will have splash down points again it started in in the early 50s uh Navy's been using it continuous uh uh since then uh it's an outstanding uh place for helicopters to do uh countermeasures training against electronic warfare enemy threats uh uh the Navy owns a couple of Halfacre plots on the uh east side of uh Lake George uh designated Pine Island and non mile Point that's where we have a couple of towers uh set up there with some cameras and and zoom surveillance cameras in there that we can look at that area to make sure there's no boers in the area uh if the Navy is going to going to do some training there at Lake George uh we we put safety on the pilots uh the pilots uh uh will observe the area and make sure the area is clear of any any boers or anything uh in that area before they they would drop their their inert practice concrete filled uh M shapes in there uh but it's uh because it's overwater it does provide an outstanding uh uh uh environment for for the electronic counter counter measures with helicopters and flares against some enemy threat radar systems and finally moving to the South is the Pine Castle impact range and and that that's been utilized by the Navy continuously since uh 1951 uh a year ago we uh entered into uh year one of another 30-year uh special use uh permit with the USDA Forest Service uh uh Pine Castle is very unique in the fact that that it provides uh high explosive bomb training i' it's the only place uh for the Navy's Atlantic Fleet uh that they can that they can do some uh live bomb training uh with that the Pine Castle is uh in in the middle of Central Florida uh with with near offshore areas off off of Daytona Beach and and Jacksonville so that provides a unique environment for Atlantic Fleet aircraft carriers uh to to be there off the coast uh uh to prepare uh aircraft uh to to launch weapons at the Pine Castle range uh in there they they utilize the restricted airspaces that that flies across all the range complex so if we're training at the Pine Castle bombing range uh we we're actually flying in parts of of Luccia County as are using the restricted uh airspaces to to drop their weapons at the Pine Castle bombing range uh with that uh VCH County most likely won't notice the the noise from the aircraft but uh depending upon environmental conditions uh you may notice the impulse noise uh from from the high explosive uh bombs that we'll train at Pine cleat that concludes the operational portion of the I'll turn it over to Mark okay um the information presenting VI comes from what we call the range air Installation compatible use Zone manual or rikus because we're the government we love acronyms uh so the rikus is a follow on to an environmental study that was conducted for operations at Pine Castle to consider the impact on the environment as well as the local citizens and then the rikus document looks at zoning and provides recommendations for local uh local jurisdictions on what development the Navy would recommend be around the range we consider health safety and Welfare the health of the people on the ground the safety of aircraft flying over them and things falling off aircraft and hitting the ground and exploding and then the welfare kind of that quality of life of airplanes flying over your house is kind of annoying and we understand that um starting with the end of mind you have this handout this is the compatible use guidelines so when I look when I discuss the different range zones the rcz range compatibility zones just take a reference of this so when we talk about rcz 1 2 and three this is what the Navy would recommend as the development that should happen in these areas uh not as much uh on valua County it's pretty much just Lake George uh rc3 the airspace way get into it is about 35% of putam County uh so belu is not impacted as much so talking about rcz one range compatibility Zone one this is points on the ground where things are falling off aircraft and hitting the ground in the case of Pine Castle they're exploding up up to a 2,000lb bomb uh Lake George it is in nert um so at Lake George it would be a shape uh the shape weighs 2,000 lb but it would be a mine we also do as Don uh discussed uh chaff and flares flares are infrared decoys for heat seeking missiles I personally as a helicopter pilot have done those over Lake George uh the forest service would prefer we jettison the 3,000 degree magnesium flares over a body of water than over the national forest for obvious reasons so that is why we tend to do that there um but for the only area that's R cz1 in valua is the area of Lake George and if we're actually dropping in there uh uh don can go into more detail if You' like the Navy puts out public notice we have boats out there to patrol it we have the cameras in use and then the pilots are required to verify that the range is clear so there's no one out there fishing we don't want to drop on a on a on a fisherman rcz 2 this is the point of airspace where an aircraft is committed to the attack profile it's on Final the master arm in the aircraft is turned on which means the weapons rack the weapon everything is energized in the system the only thing preventing that bomb from departing the aircraft is the pilot has not hit the button yet so the aircraft is committed to the attack at the Target area um rcz 2 as you can see uh it's mostly just overwater of Lake George for valua County uh rcz 2 for Lake George extends up into putam County into some areas that are currently under development um and then rcz and there we can see rcz 2 for Lake George and you can see it's mostly it's just overw waterer rcz 3 is the airspace that is set aside by the FAA for operations at Pine Castle it's restricted airspace so that means that when it's active no you know someone that's flying their cessa is not allowed to enter this airspace our airspace butts up against uh the NASA airspace down to Patrick and Cape Canaveral uh SpaceX had a scrub a launch they to reschedule it it was during when we had a comp 2x which is the aircraft carrier conducting operations into Pine Castle uh DOD had to tell NASA no it went all the way up to uh the White House and the dod prevailed so if we can tell Elon Musk no obviously the the Navy values operations here uh rcz 3 the big thing under there uh it's the east coast of Lake George and the southern ends of Lake George which is in vuia County the Navy's recommended guidelines is no more than two single family homes per acre uh I don't know if it made of the news down here uh putam County had a sonic boom back in February uh two Air Force jets I want to say that again Air Force jets went Super Sonic at 500 feet and damaged a lot of homes uh I got the initial noise complaints and I responded and gave them the uh public affairs officer for the Florida National Guard and let them deal with it but um so we we deal with uh a lot of airspace issues that happen so that's why we want to try to keep uh the population density as small as possible once again I will say it it's a recommendation to valua County um understanding theia County can do what they choose to do uh here you can see this is rc3 that is all the airspace for Pine Castle range so parts of it could go up uh active for example up north at Rodman as a helicopter pilot I would conduct Landings up there and they would just activate the area restricted area 2906 if it was just helicopters when Lake George or Pine Castle actual the impact area are active they're going to activate the whole thing because we do not want people intruding we'll have hornets flying at 300 knots 300 feet getting ready to drop ordinance the pilots are kind of fixated on the target they're concerned about making sure they hit the target the last thing we need is a local puddle jumper for flying through trying to cut through so uh that is always a concern for us noise as the person that answers the noise complaints for the Navy uh this one's of personal interest of mine uh so when there's a complaint about operations at Pine Castle uh there's a noise complaint line it is put out a noise complaint email address it's put out publicly uh through all the local media and uh so for Lake George this is the only real noise that intrudes into York County just to give you an idea uh a whisper is 30 DB the office printer uh the laser jet in your office is about 50 DB and a normal conversation nonamplified is about 60 DB so you can see here uh at for Lake George that's the 50 to 55 deel line so that's the average over a day so when Lake George is active with jets flying the average noise of the course of a day is like a laser printer in your office um it's not necessarily that intrusive it could be annoying if it's happening repeatedly and I understand that but it shouldn't be causing uh welfare issues for for individuals Pine Castle itself the uh the range noise Contours Do not extend into valua County but as Don referenced when a 2,000 pound uh laser guided swimming pool is dropped uh it will definitely you will feel the Cump uh and once again we respond to that if there is damage we refer it to the Navy Tor claims office and then we investigate to see if the Navy actually caused damage and if we do cause damage then we make good uh and make sure the person is whole uh detonations could be heard up to 50 miles away and that will definitely intrude into valua County um so with that being said I'm standing by for any questions you may have uh on behalf of Commander Kendall the commanding officer of pine range uh I will be extending an invitation to the the commission as well as the planning staff to come visit Pine Castle uh to come see operations go on see what happens meet the people on the ground uh just to give you a little more context of what we do in the importance as Don referenced this is the only Navy controlled bombing range on the East Coast um for an aircraft carrier to go overseas it needs to do endtoend training uh the pilots can learn to drop a bomb but what we need to do is that the the ordnanceman on the carrier needs to be able to go down to the bowels of the carrier break the bomb the guidance unit out build that up put it on the elevator move it up to the flight deck the Squadron ordinance men need to take that weapon load it up on the aircraft do the systems checks then the pilot needs to finish the job by dropping the Bomb On Target this is the only place on the East Coast we can do that because this is the only place we can drop live on the east Co Coast so if Pine Castle were to go away for some reason there is no plan B so the Department of Defense has no interest in jeopardizing this or losing this so um with that being said standing by for any of your questions thank you Mr mcmanis any questions for Mr if I have a quick question for you uh at any time are zones one two and three all active at the same time um has that occurred yes if if you're dropping so if someone's going to be dropping on on Pine Castle range then rcz one is active because that's where the bomb's actually hitting and if we go back to uh you can see here Pine Castle impact which is the image on the right uh the postage stamp is the range per the range boundaries but the the amoeba on the outside is the potential fragment danger zone so if rcz 1 is active that means the bomb's hit in the ground rcz 2 is obviously active because the aircraft was on Final to drop it and then rc3 was active because so rc3 could be active for Just Two aircraft doing airto a or helicopter training uh if ordinances being dropped then two and one would be activate three is activated as restricted airspace the others are they they're not we don't necessarily turn them on it's just a uh if those operations are going on then that area is on average how how many days or how many hours do you guys operate on uh on a sorty let's say so for Pine Castle for live is 35 days a year about yeah yes about 35 days year so 35 days a year so um the Navy property and the special use permit is the postage stamp uh we have to close off the safety danger zone outside the farest service gives us we're allowed to do that up to 35 days a year um for Lake George and Rodman uh it all depends it could be conceivably it could be 365 days a year it's it's honestly not um it will come in uh spurts as squadrons prepare to go overseas uh we'll use Rodman to do a lot of there are landing zones cutting the trees uh we'll do a lot of rescue exercises so as a squadron is ramping up to go overseas they'll be going there every night for a month and a half and then there's another Squadron ready getting ready for another couple months so it may be inactive it may it may not be in use for like a month so it kind of happens Lake George has not been as active recently um if you consider the last 25 years of DOD operations it's been Overland uh Lake George uh for dropping ordinance is for mines that has not been a concern but if you look at uh recent press releases of the focus of Department of Defense now we anticipate a significant uptake on Lake George as uh w at se becomes more of a a focus of the Navy as opposed to Overland well regarding Lake George so you're dropping basically in bombs which are concrete yes sir containers if you will uh do you go back and recover those or we just stack them up uh they're stacking up right now um uh the fourstar headquarters in norfol is working with the EPA to determine how are we doing that uh what what is the endgame of cleaning that eventually it will have to get cleaned up they just they're they're trying to figure it out um and the challenge will be um Lake George is a very muddy bottom and so uh a 2,000 pound weight hitting at 300 knots is going to go pretty deep and bury itself so that will be a challenge but it's make a good base for uh building upward I guess yes sir uh when you're not when the zone is not active is that section in Lake George open to the public yes sir so part just yes recreationally we we only close it when we are dropping ordinance into it and then we publicly notice it and then we have Patrol boats out um so hopefully uh at least 30 days public notice so people are aware but I also realize that not everyone reads the paper correct as as I get um we did have uh one individual asked if we could move uh the Pine Castle range to some place more isolated uh when I explained to her in 1941 Okala was fairly isolated still kind of is uh but yes all right thank you yes sir Mr Patterson do you have a quick question yeah I I had the experience one time out on State Road 40 getting gas and I looked up and I almost touch the the plane flying overhead I thought came out of my shoes there um and I'm on Navy guy so I'm okay there the um I understand that around Lake George is a large Nest Eagle nesting area is there is there so uh the the Riku is actually discusses Eagle sir um so we have not as far as we know bothered Eagle nesting and there are a few ranges Mississippi uh and around Louisiana specifically the Eagles uh they're smaller ranges just inert only but the uh the Eagles actually when the aircraft show up to dve top 25b inert weights um the Eagles then start circling because those weights typically flush the small game that is uh in there and so the Eagles actually uh it has been noticed as soon as the Navy Jets leave the Eagles start circling looking for their meals um so we uh the so the Eagles are addressed in here and as well as in the environmental impact study uh but there was no there's been no noted uh interference with eagle nesting and Aviation operations and when you look at I mean a lot of airports have Eagle nests surrounded because typically it's it's a large open area and typically near water and Eagles either are looking for fish or small furry game that tend to be located in in the the open area okay thank you yes sir M Craig do you have a question um what methods do you use for public notification and how much in advance do you give um so we put out a a weekly email when Pine Castle will be active uh any of the ranges for uh for Pine Castle impact for a nert or live and that goes out to our public affairs officer pushes it out to all the local media uh it's available on our Facebook page uh I've pushed them many times to Miss Smith uh for dissemination locally uh and so our public affairs officer pretty much every week is sending out a here's Pine Castle schedule next week it's also on the nas jaacks website if we're using Lake George in dropping live that would be put out through local media uh through our public affairs officer to say Lake George these particular days will be closed um the operations I did on Lake Jers as a helicopter was uh we had small boats pretending to be enemy craft trying to get past and I was the blocking Force trying to Pro protect a a Navy high value unit the south end of the lake um and so the I was dog fighting a boat it was a lot of fun uh but yes that's that's something that gets put out at least a month ahead of time and then we uh every week we send out the weekly updates okay I do have one question yeah well actually a couple questions what's what's the rate of mishaps I mean so since 1951 I am unaware of any mishaps on this range when it became a fulltime Navy range Don yeah there's years ago they aircraft M there was some I I'm just thinking more like some things getting dropped or falling off planes hitting they hous of people so the Army Corps of Engineers recently did a big it's called a formerly used defense site fuds study uh the Army Corps is responsible for cleaning up the the old bombing ranges uh the lake Bryant range consisted of five bombing areas two two and a half depending on how you want to cut it are incorporated into the larger safety danger zone of Pine Castle so there's one to the southwest of it and one to the northeast of it that the AR and so the Army Corp is inspected all five they found a a Vietnam aab bomb that was a nerd it was a training bomb and they found a 5-in parachute flare dropped so to illuminate that was the only unexploded ordinance they found doing a survey of the entire property um so that being said there's uh plenty uh around Pine Castle impact on the ocal national forest there's lots of signage that says if you find something that looks like a bomb it is it could be call 911 uh the Navy bomb squad is out of Naval Station mport they are on a 60-minute ready notice to deploy down to uh determine if something is found in the Okala National Forest that they think may be a military explosive the Navy will come down to deal with it so the forest service or Maran county is not incurring those costs um though occasionally something's found uh I I don't want to say there's a nice piece of shrapnel on my desk that made a really nice Keepsake uh from Pine Castle shrapnel but uh I'm sure there are plenty of hikers that have found shrapnel for Lake George unless someone's going scuba diving and digging down in the mud I don't anticipate any and it's only been in nert there so there will be no danger in Lake George but Pine Castle itself uh hopefully all all people will find outside the postage stamp would be shrapnel that potentially could have flown out there and anything as soon as they drop uh Dawn and his Crews do a sweep of the area to make sure that you know we we know when stuff's falling off aircraft so they track it and they go find it one other question is Mr Costa brought up was the the debris of the concrete cuz I mean you could basically walk across M Lake Georg is shallow any any accidents with boers hitting stuff in the water no sir but the 2000 concrete I can't see it I mean of course it's going down a lot but as much as y'all drop it seems like somebody some boers would have some accidents out there yes sir now um Lake George was used a lot um back when remember Cecil Field uh so they had S3s the S3 Viking that aircraft dropped mines we had the p3s at an of shville and that aircraft dropped mines uh the p8 has replaced the P3 mines are not in their inventory for dropping and the S3 has been retired so the only aircraft dropping mines are F-18 hornets and the Hornet is all stationed in Virginia so they're not coming down here to do M training and as I referenced earlier the last 25 years the Navy's been focused on Overland fight um against Insurgency um so the the war at sea has not been a concern so we have not used Lake George much in the past I don't think we've dropped last four or five years yeah but but we anticipate we just got visited by the fourstar at norol that owns the entire East Coast Fleet uh or his staff that runs ranges and they told us to be prepared to expect an uptick I don't know how to describe an uptick m uh in operations if that's one a year if that's 10 a year but we expect Lake George to be used more often I can imagine the times around they're going to be using a lot more but you know but you did say that's the only place on the East Coast for for live for live yeah yes sir where did the f-18s go so they can drop Navy dare up in Virginia they can drop a nert okay um Avon Park further south of us you can drop live there but that's the Air Force and they charge a very heavy rate uh you can also go to egland and that's that's a fabulous facility and the Air Force charges extravagantly to use it that's more of a test and evaluation we used to have the Aus down in Puerto Rico but that was shut down uh in the Clinton Administration um so the only Navy controlled East Coast bombing range is Pine Castle so if we were to lose it we'd be forced to go to the Air Force down at Avon Park uh or go uh the Navy does not want to bring a aircraft carrier into the Gulf of Mexico with all the fishing all the the Sport and the oil platforms and aircraft carrier we just not mixing well there right plus shallow water yes sir I I had had to laugh when Don was mentioned protocol with before they started bombing was get all the boats out I bet if somebody didn't listen the first bomb that went off they moov pretty quick but thank you very good information yes sir okay any other questions for Mr MCD all right sir well thank you so much sir it's been very informative this morning thank you Jo Navy okay all right we uh going to move on here uh do we have any items to be continued or withdrawn Mr Smith no sir okay okay we do have some unfinished old business we're going to call a little bit of both here uh so if I can get the first case read into the record Mr C if you can read the first case yes Mr chair it's 0-24 d004 ordinance 2 202 24-6 five lot subdivisions okay good morning Miss McFarland you good morning thank you Carol mcfarling planning and development services director um this is the second time this ordinance is coming to you clay Irvin did a presentation in February um there was a lot of discussion um Clay's not here today um but clay and I worked 5050 on this so I can certainly answer any of the questions that you have um the County Council gave Planning and Development staff um Direction in June of 2023 to come up with a common sense way to do large acreage splits um so we're looking at you know large farm Holdings a lot of times the situations that you'll see with this are you know older farmers who um it's time for them to retire they can kind of cut out their house and have a smaller house so they can Agee in place and sell the larger farm so they're not doing that anymore um so again this is this is common sense ways to do large acreage splits oh I have the thing okay did I do it wrong I did all right not entirely sure sorry about that Kelly all right thank you um so this is just as I was saying an alternative easier path for the development of large acreage um I did use the word Easy Button a lot in the staff report I hope that wasn't too annoying um but again this is all common sense measures so if you have a property that um is a bit more complicated so if you there's questions about whether there's going to be enough land to build or where the access is going to be um if you have to build New Roads that can still go through the more traditional path of subdivision so this isn't you know a way to find all of the different ways that large acre could be subdivided there's still a process for this this is just a common sense way to do it in places where we you know it's very obvious that all of the minimum requirements can be met um I'm assuming you just uh don't want me to go through the whole pres the whole ordinance again we can just talk about the changes or do you no we can just talk about the changes all right great so in the February discussion the Planning Commission asked for I think the word fleshed out was was used there were some questions about implementation um so we took that to heart staff multiple staff members took a look at the ordinance again um we looked at uh one of things is clarifying that the Land Development managers the approving body section 72537 um if you read it some parts are approved by the county development engineer some parts are approved by the land development manager so just making it very clear who the approving body is on that um also clarified that a storm water management permit is required the original uh ordinance said stored water management is required so we're making it clear that there's an actual permit process and permit needs to be issued you know reviewed by the development engineers and then issued uh also clarified that the subdivision cannot result in new streets this is something that going back and listening to all of the discussions and the presentations I think it was assumed that we were talking about subdivisions where no new streets would be created but if you read the words of the ordinance it really didn't say that explicitly so we did add that um so if that's something we need to talk about we can certainly do that here um um also from the plrc requested that some of these be allowed on unpaved roads the original ordinance specifically said paved roads um so we we did allow for that um but in order what staff's recommendation is that in order to allow on unpaved roads that we also have a fire safety review for the subdivision and if the road does not meet the standards of being able to support emergency vehicles I.E a firet truck needs to be able to get to the house um then they may need to make improvements to the unpaved road so that the fire trucks can make it I believe that's 20 ft wide uh with 13 and 1 12 ft of clearance to the top and a 6in stabilized base um also something that the Planning Commission asked for was to um add some language that if they're going to be New Lots added to private roads that the applicant needs to provide some sort of documentation proving that new units can be added to that road um a lot of private roads have a maintenance agreement between all of the parties that own property on that road and um sometimes those covenants can have restrictions that say you know certain number of homes are allowed or you know a certain subdivision is allowed in that configuration and doesn't allow for anything else so they'll need to give us uh copies of that we don't always have covenants and resp restrictions filed in our databases they'll be on the clerk's office but if you don't know exactly you know how to search for it um it won't come up so they'll need to give us copies of any restrictions I do want to add or make two points that's not in the presentation one is that there is a very small error in the staff report if you go to page two that um top paragraph number six at the end of the paragraph there's a sentence fragment stack refer uh staff recommends that if and it doesn't say anything that was an error um that needs to be stricken apologize for that and the other item is that after publication Environmental Management staff had a question of um if it was clear enough in the ordinance that chapter 50 requirements for tree preservations area is um if there's enough in the ordinance to make that clear to the applicant so chapter 50 requires 15% tree reservation area for New Lots um it does say in the ordinance it's um sub paragraph J on page six of seven that all other provisions of chapter 50 apply but there was a question as to whether it's obvious to a lay person or a property owner reading this ordinance it should be clear to them exactly what's going to be required um and what documents they'll have to provide so staff is recommending a change on the floor um of course it's up to you guys how you want to vote for uh sub paragraph A10 AI so we're looking at line 65 to add to the end of that um where it says historic trees comma flood Plains comma floodways comma and proposed tree preservation areas as applicable so um you can certainly discuss that and staff recommendation um is to add that into the ordinance that would have to be part of the motion if that's how you want to proceed so with that that is my presentation um and I'm certainly here for questions should you have any yes I have a question go ahead Mr CER on number four first page regarding the uh new public streets and obviously your your slide is you reduce the number of words on here so we cannot result this cannot the subdivision cannot result in New uh publicly maintained streets is that is that correct correct P paved roads for instance but what about named roads in other words if we're teeing off of a main artery that's no longer going to be you know thoroughfare a it's going to be called something else so it's does that fall into this no results in no new streets so there's really two subparagraphs um that apply if you're looking at the ordinance page five of seven um towards the bot bottom sub paragraph e and f e is one more time I'm sorry one more time on that sure uh page five of seven sub paragraphs E and F so you're looking at line 86 down e says no new streets or access easements shall be dedicated to or accepted by the public in other words the county doesn't want have want to have to accept responsibility for infrastructure improvements specifically roads that are built for these types of subdivision and this is the easy button right when you start talking about dedicating roads to the county they have to meet County standards we have to have ASB belt diagrams for those so this just makes it clear that um County will not be dedicating will not be accepting maintenance for any New Roads subparagraph F talks about the parent property must have access to an existing public Street whether paved or unpaved subject to meeting emergency access requirements in chapter 54 so um so paved or unpaved it's quiet as to whether it's priv then G goes in and talks about um existing private easements may be accessed if the applicant can prove they have clear and free rights so there's a couple of different scenarios where you could have the New Lots so it could be a public road or a private road it could be paved or it could be unpaved can that be I'm sorry Mr Costa but can that be accessed by easement it can parent compan because you know as long as it can be accessed by the easement to the paved or unpaved Road it can be the way it's written now on that sub paragraph G it can be accessed via an existing private easement so this is up for your discussion right so um if it towards the end you're deciding that you want to change that is 100% your right to do so but what what I want to make sure of is a lot of these properties are located off of an easement not necessarily so the parent property would not necessarily AB but a paved or unpaved Road it would AB but an easement would that be considered access to the public put to the paved or unpaved Road correct yes sir okay I just want to get clarification on that um are you through Mr okay the other thing too is these properties are classification of a agricultur zoning going back to your tree preservation now are we putting additional uh restrictions on agricultural property if they do this five lot subdivision for the tree preservation um not necessarily because all of those exemptions are worked into chapter um 50 um there there may be some situations especially with new developments where additional tree requirement Supply I think what we're going to have here more than anything is agricultural use type properties wanting to subdivide uh a larger parcel here because we are talking about 2 and a half acre Parcels minimum so my question to you is why are we doing a tree preservation on agricultural property into this ordinance and talked a lot to our um environmental pering manager our County Forester and um a lot of these places they they already have areas that have to be protected anyway they have Wetlands they have environmental sensitive lands they are in the Norma or the Eco overlays we don't anticipate that this is going to be creating any additional burdens again chapter 50 has so why are we putting in in it why why are we putting it in the ordinance um we just want to make it clear that there may be circumstances where the easement may be or preservation area may be required for chapter 50 that Mr chair this these that requirement applies to areas that are not Bonafide agriculture that do not have the agricultural classification if they are intending to turn it into a large lot you know uh single family for lack of better word subdivision that's not a farm operation that's that's residential property and the tree preservation Provisions apply to the noncl non- agriculturally classified areas but doesn't it already apply to that for non- bonified agricultur use as as if without this ordinance well yes if they are doing any type of subdivision as Carol said this is basically reiterating so if someone looks at this they understand what codes apply they don't have to dig deep into chapter 50 which already applies to um agriculturally zoned property that are not uh classified as Bonafide agriculture if they do the same thing if they go through the planning process or if they you know divide once you know that f 15% uh preservation provision applies um but we want this to be kind of someone takes a look at it and understands the the what they need to do and they don't spend a lot of time digging into other areas of the code so we're not adding an additional layer to the A1 A2 or A3 I guess A1 two A2 A4 forestry resource layer of zoning is that what you're telling me yes all these Provisions already apply if they want to do a residential type development in those zoning categories and I think too um if these New Lots do later get a bonafied agricultural use than the number of exemptions that they'll have more exemptions to chapter 50 as well this is what I'm trying to avoid I don't want to avoid in having if you've got a piece of property that you want in make into a pasture and so and it's an agricultural property I don't want inter into this layer of restriction of this for of this tree preservation on agricultural property if it's in the code already under chapter 50 I do not think what needs to be in the uh ordinance to where it can be misconstrued as you go into an agricultural piece of property and if I want to clear it for pasture I've got to leave 15% of the trees in on the property if you want to clear it under your if you're using it as bonafide agriculture you know you can ignore most of the the county rules and regulations I mean that's that's the right to Har act so it it doesn't matter where it's located if you're using it as agriculture use it as agriculture um that's I mean this is for the purpose of having someone with a a large lots and they want to easily subdivide without having to go through the process but we do have uh minimum environmental stand standards that adhere to um any type of subdivision and if you are using that property as Bonafide agricultural you know use and you've got the uh you know proper designation go ahead and use it that's that's you know well it's if it's already in chapter 50 correct yes okay then why are we putting it in this ordinance here for the same reason as the reminder that you know someone takes a look at this and they need to understand every single thing that they should be doing because the whole goal is to make this easy for a person okay so we're not adding any additional layers of tree preservation to agricultural property that is not already there when you say agricultural property you mean agriculturally designated property not just zoning zoning I'm talking about zoning then yes yes we do this all the time people divide you know agriculturally zoned property they want to you know they want to have multiple houses we require you know the 15% tree preservation so there's nothing nothing new is is that's my question okay okay so that's why you're putting in there just for notification yes sir okay the other thing I had a question was um your storm water plan right now now we can do that through an Affidavit of of drainage control why is that not applied here here when you can do it on when the minimum size parcel is going to be two and a half acres so one of the issues that was discussed at the February Planning Commission storm water and drainage we've got flooding issues everywhere in the county so this was a way to make sure that you actually have an engineer looking at the subdivision because the section 72537 is is approved by Land Development staff um so this is a way to make sure that the county development engineer is involved in the process okay what happened to that easy button of subdivisions if you if we're adding the extra layer there because right now if I have a piece of property and right now all I have to do is get an Affidavit of drainage control for that I do not have to go through an engineer to tell me on that large piece of parcel and a lot of these problems that we're having is from high density it's not necessarily 2 and 1 half acre minimum size partials so me personally I like to see the Affidavit of uh drainage control be implemented in there as an option rather than having an engineer coming in unless there's if if there's notification that there's going to be an issue but usually that size of a parcel we're not having that big of an impact on storm water not when you're looking at one residential development on two and a half acres so what we do what we would do in that case is return that subparagraph D to what it was in February when it was first heard um which is a what you would be doing is from 56 page five out of seven uh sub paragraph D would be striking in accordance with Section 72 788 storm water manag management permit review must be approved so that would be the phrase that would be stricken um if you want to add in instead of storm water management permit review an an Affidavit of compliance be submitted that that is okay that's what it is currently is it not um I believe so you get that affidavit that affidavit happens at the building permit stage it's a way to make sure ahead of time that we still have that compliance again making it very clear to the property owner how this is going to play out during our first discussion um with Mr Irvin was is that on the storm water side we didn't want to have to do all that storm water planning before you went through the permitting process because that is addressed then and part of that being addressed then you're allowed to do an Affidavit of drainage control currently so to require that an engineer come in and do an engineering review on this is just an additional layer of another hurdle for the property owner to have to go through uh when this got all brought about it was for people that had large pieces of property that wanted to give it to their children or whatever without having to go through the subdivision process and that's why you have a minimum size I think that's why uh is it e A3 is not including this because the parcel sizes okay so I think an affidavit would be more just as beneficial as anything rather than having to go through an engineer to go out there and look at the drainage control on the storm water okay I mean I don't know if the rest of the board feels the same way I do on this but can can I um clarify that um it doesn't necessarily have to be an engineer that turns in the storm water management permit there are a lot of Provisions for exemption a lot of these types of scenarios would end up getting um what we call a preliminary storm water management permit um it means that they're exempt from certain requirements but they still have to show us you know where is the water going to flow they have to draw the squiggly lines on the paper the if it's um if there's a th Square F feet of impervious non-residential area um then they would have to get an engineer involved but that's that's not what we're talking about here this is going to be below the threshold of having a full-blown permit most likely it'll be me that preliminary storm water management permit which is reviewed by the county development engineer okay I don't have one of those affidavits in front of me but I believe it states that you have the opportunity the county staff has opportunity to go out and look at that do they not they do and you're right that is part of the normal building permit process I just don't want to add any more to it me personally oh I'm with you you know so that's where I'm at with that uh because we are looking at large Parcels it'd be different if we were looking at 60 foot Lots I get it I get it I get it 100% but we're looking at large parcels and agricultural Zone properties that this would probably never come up but everyone that come that it seemed redundant for them to have to do it if let's say I've got 40 acres and I want to make three lots out of it this size Lots two and a half is the very bare minimum and a lot of these larger Parcels are going to be a lot larger than two and a half acres if you by the five rule subdivision so I I think in that case just to I'm sure Paulo could help you as well that subp paragraph D in that case if that's your motion would be um um to use the language that was originally presented in the February that would be my recommendation well the original one required is uh a storm water Paulo can you help me out on this what was the original one so I can because that was a some of concern too that's what brought all this about which section are we're in I'm looking at the old version so um paragraph So it's was storm water plan for the individual ual Lots shall be included and we will require the issuance of any permits for the development of the New Lots so it was just a general storm water plan um you can provide you know storm water permit or or or just put or storm water affidavit as an alternate means so if someone wants to wants to provide either or we're not fine we're not you know I just don't want to add additional as long as they can still use their affidavit drainage control which is in place today without on any property that when you go to pull in a per permit you have to have that in lie of a storm Order Plan correct yeah we'll write we'll write it in so that it's either the permit through um 80 I think that's 72 the Stow management permit review or the Affidavit of drainage control to demonstrate adequate drainage so it provides a choice so you can do an affid of are you going to tell me you gonna put that in there well yeah you can do what you currently can do I'm not asking for anything more and above but currently you can use an Affidavit of drainage control to eliminate this storm water plant correct and and the language also reads um um to be approved before the issuance of any building permits so it does not have to be done at the subdivision exactly right yes okay any other questions okay all right thank you so much do we have any public participation on this okay we're going to close the for public participation open up for commission discussion or motion we got changes on here right are we going to leave this the language the way it is no we're going to make the changes you're going to make the change all right oh could I have I'm sorry could I have Miss McFarlin come back up for a moment of course I'd have put it in this note during your presentation I didn't have it outlined you got you come up you said it had to be a 6inch stabilization base where do you come up with that number the six inches that is from the national FL Florida uh sorry National Fire Prevention Association standards which are adopted by reference in chapter 54 of our code of ordinance okay so we already have that in place correct okay that's all I that's all I had it there okay so are we uh to in I guess as far as the motion goes the um under 72537 d d to include an affidavit you can provide an Affidavit of drainage control and Li of a storm water plant one more time CU that okay and also I guess the easement was addressed as far as as long as they can the parent property can be uh accessed to an easement correct Mr Paulo and yes so it can be the easement can be paved or unpaved we just require demonstration that the existing easement you know will support any additional Lots um if you're talking about you know I'm talking about the parent the parent property itself if the parent property right now is not on a paved or unpaved road it's on an easement yes so I don't want it to kick it out because it's not on a paved or unpaved road because the access with the easement would allow it to to adhere to the paved or unpaved Road yes so long as that easement meets the um the NFPA standards right you know yeah I get that okay so that we don't need to address anything there is that what you're telling me I don't believe so I think I think the three sections basically covers um the the parent parcel and the types of access it can go it can that needs to exist prior to that so it can be an unpaved easement um they may need to do improvements to the unpaved easement to make it to make it meet you know far standards okay but they okay because an unpaved public road is because there there again it may not be a public road that goes to the parent property it could be the easement uh whether it's however you want to look at it there that we that it's not adjacent to unpaved or paved Road public road I just don't want to get it locked in to where because a lot of these properties they're accessed by easements whether it be 20 foot or 60 foot you know I think I think what he's saying though if the easement will support you know the the traffic and whatnot that you can use easement to a paved Road that's what that's the point I want to get yeah and that's what we need verif paved or unpaved Road you know Miss Ming um I think what I'm hearing um is that section sub paragraph F the parent parcel must have access to an existing public Street it might be that must have have access may need further well the access as long as it can be any easement that's my question right I think that we can work on that so that the have access is clearly defined okay and I understand that you would want that to be to include easements correct yes yeah yeah there's some conf some uh we'll clarify between f and g because G definitely implies that these New Lots can take access off an existing easement you know the parent parcel should also be able to take access off of an existing easement um you know so long as there are free and clear rights to it so we'll we'll clarify that um make sure FN F subsection F and subsection G play nice together okay my next question is do we need to wait for the clarifications and rewriting to move this thing forward just going to suggest I don't believe so we can like I'd like to vote on a clean copy personally with all the language in here not uh relying on it being changed after we voted yes I would I would incur with that okay just just to dot the eyes and cross the t's okay so make me a motion um all right well I'll make a motion on case -24 d004 um that we see that we yeah that we table this back until it comes back with a clean copy with the changes would be recommended on uh paragraph uh 72537 d f and I believe H as well do we have changes on H or no I have I think so definitely d& or rather dnf sorry dnf okay I'll second that motion okay I got a motion from Mr C as stated and a second from Mr sixma any discussion on the motion all those in favor signify by saying I I any opposed motion carries unanimously thank you m par okay if I could get the next case Mr CA the O finished next case is v-24 036 application of Sunburst construction agent for the owners requesting a variance to the dock and Boat House regulations on Urban single family residential R3 zone property property is located at 1701 shell Harbor Road and Pearson thank you Mr Costa Miss Smith this one is yours yes sir uh this item was continued by the pdrc in May because the applicant was not present and the commission had questions for them the property is on Lake George and Pearson the applicant is requesting a variance to allow a dock greater than 750 squ ft in size the pending building permit notes that the dock size is 1,320 square ft it includes two covered boat SS clip a dock and a walkway the applicant states that they need the extra square footage for Ada access for a family member staff did find that this fails four of the five criteria for approving a variance we did note that the property is very wide and it doesn't appear that it will be injurious to the surrounding area um but we do recommend denial of this variance okay thank you Miss Smith any question for staff hearing none is the applicant present could I get you come forward sir good morning sir you've heard us you you get your name and address for the record uh my name's Aaron Chavez we're at 1958 Alis drive and aser okay you've heard the staff report anything you'd like to add to that I just wanted to see what I can do your guys' recommendation for us to have this push forward for approval okay all right right any questions for the applicant no Miss Craig go ahead uh I'm curious that the the length of the dock 276 ft seems awfully um long uh the reason why we did that is because the at the shoreline it's very shallow so we wanted to push it out in order for us to reach that 5 foot high um the dock the walkway yes ma'am okay any other questions Miss Craig okay any other questions from staff I mean from board all right do we have any public participation all right sir thank you we're going to close the four for public participation open up for commission discussion or motion well seeing I don't see any um detrimental value to this to the surrounding area so on I would make a motion that we on case v-24 036 um uh that we accept the or pass the variance uh based with the one staff recommended condition okay um if you mind me no go right ahead just that previous presentation does that get into those areas on Lake George this St it'd be on the outskirts I think it's in the south end of that bombing range yeah like Jord the the bombing rages are in the center of the of the lake these guys are on the outskirts but they will definitely you'll you're definitely going to feel the impacts that's for sure here front row seats Mr chair traditionally um the the uh the military and the um the Schoolboard comments when you have applications before you that you know increase residential density or they uh you know they have an potential impact on the facilities that are to be protected um here it's a it is a you know they can have a house and this is kind of an accessory structure that goes with the house um I mean they they are here they can they can comment but you're not increasing the actual density of you know of the the land that is that can that is already there okay okay do we have do they have to have a special permit for that to to put this dock in uh potentially with maybe the D or with the Army Core just for the dock but I'm not aware of anything special well that's what I'm saying okay yeah so in fact we do have the homeowner does have a d permit that expires August 14th of this year and the US Army of uh Army Corps of Engineers years already did a a layover um of this property as well okay and they had to approve a permit for a dock build previously yes running against the clock go ahead Mr I didn't mean to interrupt you no we're good you want me to reate the motion do please all right on case v-24 036 make a motion that we approve the variance uh with the one staff reced condition second okay I've got a motion to approve variance V 2436 with the one staff recommended condition for Mr Costa and a second from Mr Patterson uh any discussion on the motion hearing none all those in favor signify by saying I I any opposed motion carries unanimously okay that takes care of our um old business M unfinished old business like I like to call it to satisfy all parties uh so we're going to move into our new business and Mr CA could I get the next case read in please next case v-24 041 application of and pronounce the name for you but uh anelo godinho owner requesting a variance to the minimum yard requirements on Urban 2 family residential R six zone property property is located at 35 21 Cardinal Boulevard Daytona Beach okay thank you Mr Costa and Miss Smith this one is yours also hello the applicant seeks to reduce the north side yard on their property from 10 feet to 3.42 feet for a single family home that will be demolished and replaced this is a legal non-conforming parcel uh the residence was built in 1948 at 1,088 square feet they want to demolish the house and rebuild it in the current footprint it is a 50ft wide lot side side yard setbacks are 20 ft combined so it's either 10t on each side or 8 and 12 feet the South Side yard is already 10 feet and then the north side yard is 3.2 3.42 feet it is a very modest sized home at 34 by 32 square fet there is a garage that straddles the property line it will remain a non-conforming structure and it can stay place until it's damaged at 75 Beyond 75% as determined by the property appraiser the applicant uh does not wish to get a variance for the garage the application does meet four out of five of the of the criteria for recommending approval for the single family residents and the request is to rebuild in the setback instead of Shifting the footprint is a result of the applicants action so we couldn't recommend approval for that criteria there is only one cran that the applicant failed and we are required to recommend denial because it doesn't meet all five criteria I'm available for any questions which is the one that failed the applicant requested it oh the applicant requested it that's the only failure yes okay and also it's it's going back in the exact same footprint correct that's my understanding yes sir okay was this a hurricane damage by Chance the applicant is President ask that he can answer that question all right any other questions for staff the property line what is what is the other property it's the adjacent property to the East and it looks like historically they shared a garage they they entered it from the same driveway and shared the garage at some point but again the applicant is present and can provide that information okay okay any other questions for the um staff no all right is the applicant present I I am in Selmo godino and I'm at 248 Bald Eagle Run Lake Mary Florida okay you've heard the staff report anything You' like to add to the report um just that house obviously built in 1948 it's 76 years old been there with that same setback for all that time without any incident the neighbor directly north of me also has three point something setback uh if I was to go lose six and a half feet by going to 10 I would lose over 200 square feet which is equivalent to five bathrooms 5 by six or equivalent to a 10x 20 garage uh a 15 by 14 master bedroom I would lose a tremendous amount uh obviously this complied way back when they built it it complied for 32 years after that until 1980 when you change the setbacks being that it's such a narrow lot I would want you know I need to keep it as big as I can all right do we have any questions for the applicant yeah what's the what's the cause for the rebuild was it Dam hurricane damage or just deteriation no it's 76 years old I mean the wiring doesn't meet code I'm sure the Plumbing's galvanized pipe none of the windows meet code the doors don't meet code ESS the windows doesn't meet code which would mean cutting the windows new headers I mean it's almost not cost effective you tearing down to the to the to the slab or taking the slab out and reporing I would tear it completely out the slab has a slight dip in it foundation and stff uh it's just it wouldn't make sense to pour a lot of money into it as it is understood thank you the roof is looking pretty rough too well we just had uh a recent hurricane last year and I'm going I knew I was going to try to redo it so I didn't want to spend money on no no I agree okay any other questions for and all the homes in the area have four foot five foot three something so I think some of the zoning requirements correct me if I'm wrong Miss Smith or five feet is that what then that that's correct and the applicant is correct in this area they are very small Lots with very small homes and um many projects have come to you to get variances in this area well one of the main concerns about the sidey yards is being be able to access it for Fire Control um let me ask you this sir uh would you able would you be able to do this with a five feet because some of our zoning classifications have a 5 foot yard setback you're asking for 3.42 which is well it's a weird number I was going to try to change it to like four make it a nice round figure so I get awn M through there basically well that's what I'm saying because of the Fire Control and everything the lot of the zonings require a five foot I do have 10 on the other side pardon me I do have 10 on the other side yeah in fact I have 12 point something okay my question was is would would the footprint work for you if it were 5et yes it would I would prefer the most I can get obviously right I mean it's only a th000 square foot as it is now mhm I plan to retire there and by the time I have one bedroom where the kids going to sleep if they visit me well the reasons these setbacks come into play is because you have to have access in the event of an emergency or something to access the rear yard whether you know I'm just saying that's normally the reason those setbacks are put in play right and I totally get that um I guess my only point would be that all the other homes are that that way this one has been that way for 76 years and I without any problem yeah well that was just a suggestion that's all and if I was to remodel it then it would stay at 3.42 for the next 100 years so I mean yeah okay I just want to be more comfortable okay all right okay do we have any public participation on this all right we're going to close the floor for public particip a open up for commission discussion or motion I I would say because the existing footprint is the way it is that I'd like to just see it the way it is since he has a 10 fet around the other side so that was just a suggestion yeah no I and I appreciate that I'm willing to uh make a motion here case b2441 uh make a motion for approval with the two staff recommendations second okay I got a motion on the floor from Mr sixma to approve variance V 24041 with the two staff conditions and a second from Mr Costa any discussion on the motion yeah that house and I were built about the same time so I hope nobody's going to tear me up one of these days well we were going to say something to you about that okay all those in favor signify by saying I I I any opposed motion carries unanimously thank you very much thank you all right Mr C could I get the next Case Case v-24 043 variance to reduce the minimum yard requirements on Urban single family residential R3 and resource Corridor RC zoned property located at 410 South Peninsula Drive Fort Orange thank you Mr Costa Mr Shams this one's yours hi good morning the applicant is requesting one variance to reduce the north side yard from 15 ft to 6 in for a new dock boat house and boatlift uh the property is currently developed with a single family home and approximately 624 square feet of dock structures uh they're looking to replace what's there and marginally expand to 648 Square F feet uh the property itself is 50 ft wide which is a bit atypical of the R3 zoning um which requires 75 ft but the property since it is developed with a permitted structure uh satisfies or non-conformity ordinance um the constrained width presents the challenge for the property owner when designing as they our code requires 15 fet on each side which leaves them about 20 ft of width um so what the applicant is proposing is a width of 3 ft when you count all the structures together uh it's they're attempting to replace a dock built in 1987 which is nearly in nearly the same location and the reason for doing so is to accommodate their boat without entering the neighbor's property uh however staff had to recommend denial as the Varian is failed to meet four the five criteria um mainly because this is not the minimum variance that could be requested as the doc could be designed to be smaller and it would expand a non-conformity though should the pdrc find evidence to approve staff recommends three conditions and I'm available for comments or questions thank you Mr Shams any questions for staff Mr Shams you said there's an existing structure there now yes sir and what's the setback on it um I believe believe it's either one foot or three foot let me get that like yes if the applicants here they can answer that question I don't have that exact figure is the applicant present yes you want to come forward sir good morning sir if I could get your name and address for the record Michael Buck 4010 South Peninsula all right sir you you've heard the staff report anything You' like to add to that so your question was uh what what was the What's the clearance right now of the existing dock yes sir and on the North side it's 3 and A2 ft and on the south side it was 12 feet so basically I'm just trying to replace that uh existing dock with the same thing I have but the thought was to move it to the North property line um so I would only have to request the variance on the North side and the South Side would have a 15t clearance so uh that's that's the reason that the it's slightly different than what it is existing but the the intent was to just replace a 30-year-old dock with the exact same thing I have yes sir I understand that so in lie of requesting a variance on the what did you say the South Side on the North side uh the uh reducing the variance from uh 3 and 1/2 ft to 6 in and then that allows me to have a to a 15t clearance on the South Side okay so and currently it's a 12 foot set back on the South Side on the south side it's 12 feet and 3 and A2 ft on the North side okay and it's been like that for 30 years right more than 30 years right that's why I was wondering what the existing structure look like on there okay okay anything else you'd like to add uh no it's a 50ft lot uh and it's typical of uh the other docks in my neighborhood and the other properties of my neighborhood are all 50 foot lots and there I mean the picture you have a you have a uh another view that shows all the other docks that are similar to mine you're on page 11 of 19 you can see the existing Dock and all the adjacent docks are these are these some boats or something on the North side in this picture that looks like it goes all the way to the property line but is that a structure or are those some k a couple of kayaks kayaks okay okay okay do we have any questions for the applicant no all right do going to ask something so we moving the whole walkway to closer to the North side it's it's starts at the same place but in the end yes it it sort of veers that way it sort of veers that way to make it s but the the structure itself because like said it looks like it's on on the line all the way across it will be on the line right right now actually it's uh it's 3 and 1/2 ft from the line and so when it's rebuilt it would be right on the line 6 Ines off off the line actually approximately how far I I see the the uh your neighbor next to you once you go to line do you have any idea what distance there is right there between the two of you guys on the North side wild gas I would say it's 25 to 30 ft okay you would agree with that difficult to tell from a picture but it's fine so it's plenty of room to get boats by okay yeah but it's too shallow yeah but yeah yeah uh but yes boats can get back there I've been back there not on purpose yeah okay okay any other questions for the applicate no okay do we have any public participation for for this okay hearing now we're going to close the fourth public participation and open commission discussion Mr Sor is it advertised as a variance if we were to could he possibly get the variance on the south side two today he's not asking for that yes in the event we were to make it the same footprint as it currently is I'm just concerned about encroaching more on the property owner to the north that's all so long as it's not the same variance then yes he can come back um I think the the criteria is it would be a three foot he's right now he said 12 foot know I think the question was can he come back for the southern section if he need no can we could we do that today is what I'm asking oh can you can you put in South Side he's not requesting that today because he was going to go ahead and move at the 15 feet right because but if he takes the 15 ft he needs 6 in on the North side he could leave it as ex existing footprint at three and a half on the North side and 12 on the South if we need the existing footprint if you if if the commission decided to not Grant this variance and to basically allow him to replace it at the same position he would need to come back because it would require a variance both on the North side and the South Side okay that was my question okay one thing I want to ask hey also um the neighbors got their notices on this right okay no no and no objections okay okay all right I'm ready to make a motion on this okay go ahead okay uh I'll say case b244 three um give our approval with the three staff conditions four four yep okay four staff conditions oh I'll take it back I'm sorry I read the wrong paragraph you're correct three three three three yeah three staff conditions and we got a second okay I'm just looking at this okay I got a motion on the floor to approve variance V2 24043 the three conditions for Mr six and a and a second for Miss Craig uh any discussion on the motion all those in favor signify by saying I I I any opposed motion carries unanimously okay next case yes next case please v-24 044 application of John Cornel owner request in a variance to increase the maximum loot coverage on a PUD Z property the property is located at 2531 cross country Drive Port Orange thank you Mr Coston Mr Shams this one's yours uh good morning uh the applicant is requesting one variance to maximum loot coverage from 30% to 37% for an outdoor patio expansion uh the property is approximately uh 13,000 ft and developed with a 28,000 ft residence and a 1500t airplane garage both structures were construct constructed in 1992 and the current owner purchased the home in 2020 uh the existing structures total about 4,400 sare ft which is approximately 34% um So based on the current structures lot coverage is already exceeded um the applicant wants to ex replace and expand the patio for additional outdoor living space due to disrepair uh the expansion would be approximately 342 sare ft which would expand the non-conformity um if approved the structures in total would be about 47 uh 50 square ft or 37% overall staff recommends denial as the variance fails through the five criteria but should the peel the PE the RC approve staff recommends one condition I'm available for comment or question thank you Mr Shams any question for staff no hearing none is the applicant present come forward sir good morning sir could I get name and address for the record uh my name is John Cornel uh 2531 cross country drive as stated I bought the house about four and a half years ago uh it's located in the Spruce Creek flying Community a planned uh unit development and subject a property owner association and Architectural Review Committee oversight um built in 19 1992 uh review of the POA architectural drawings for the property indicate that it was in fact still is as built uh in 1992 which exceeded the 30% lock coverage by 4% uh as stated on the northwest corner uh of the rear of the house is a narrow l shaped porch um the porch framing is deteriorated the roof's leaking and the structure needs to be removed and Reed in order to have more comfortable outdoor living space I'm proposing a modest increase of 340 Square ft uh to widen the porch and create a more functional Leni uh as required by the community's bylaws and regulations the plans submitted here have been reviewed by the Architectural Review Committee and unanimously unanimously approved the committee chairperson and one other member are adjoining property owners uh so it's my um request that you please approve the variance um thank you I can answer questions all right any question for the app I do um Mr C this uh the Bonnie or was it redel ryel or rle that sent the uh letter of support is she on the Planning Commission she is the chair chair yes of the arc review okay thank you any other questions for the applicant do we have any public participation forms for this one all right sir we're going to close the four for public participation open up for commission discussion or motion I'll make a motion case v-24 d44 uh that we approve the variance with the one staff recommended condition second okay I got a motion on the floor to approve variance V2 24044 with the one staff condition from Mr Costa and a second from Mr Patterson any discussion on the motion all those in favor signify by saying I I any oppos motion carries unanimously Mr CR could I get the next one please case v-24 046 take it back 045 application of Robert Gast owner requesting a variance to the minimum yard requirements on transitional agricultural A3 Zone property property is located at 323 Van Hook Road in Dand thank you sir and Miss Ray this one's yours good morning the applicant is Seeking a variance to reduce the South front yard from 40 feet to 20 feet for a single family residence uh the subject property is currently developed with a single family residence that was built in 1957 and it already encroaches into the setback at 30 ft uh the proposed single family home would replace this one um the property is a flag shaped lot and was subdivided in 2023 uh staff's recommendation um is for denial as a request fails to meet four of the five criteria should the PLC find that the applicant has provided competent substantial evidence there is one condition provided for your consideration I'm available for questions thank you Miss Ray any questions for staff just clarification this is on a curve section of Road yes sir okay thank you okay any other question okay is the applicant present could you come forward please and state your name and address for the record sir my name is Robert Gast and I live at 295 Van Hook Road okay you've heard the staff report anything you'd like to get add to it yes so there is a large clump of live oak trees that I'm trying to keep and if I move it back the 40 ft that's required I would have to cut down six of the trees um this is a picture showing the live oak trees on the left side and the existing home in the front which is where I'm building would like to build a new home in the same location um and then if you go to the next picture that shows the other the rest of the trees on the right side with the same old dwelling there and then if you go to the last picture it will will show you a view down to the neighbor's house and um the palm tree and the oak tree in the front yard would stay there as is and the home would go between the larger trees that are already existing on the property and the other reason for the reducing the front yard setback is because currently the remainder of the property from my property line to the roadway is owned by the people across the street when they built the roads originally they cut through corners of lots so the first 50 feet of my yard isn't mine and then my property line starts and then I got to go 40 ft back from the already 50 ft off the road so that is why I'll still be um around 65 to 70 ft off of the road which is farther than the neighbor's house that exists is off the road so that is the reason why I want the reduced front yard all right sir uh any questions for the app okay that last picture makes the house look really nice okay do we have any public participation for to this one okay okay thank you sir we're going to close it for for public participation open up for commission discussion or motion I am ready to make a motion on this go ahead Mr uh case B24 045 make a recommendation of approval with the one one uh um staff condition staff condition I think it's only one right yeah yep just one one staff I'll second okay I've got a motion on the floor for Mr sixma to approve variance V2 2445 with the one staff condition and a second from Mr Costa any discussion on the motion all those in favor signify by saying I I I any oppos motion carries unanimously Mr CA case v-24 046 application of Tai and Coran uh McDonald owners requesting a variance to the minimum yard requirements on a prime agricultural A1 zone property property is located at 170 wri Grove Road in oakill okay thank you Mr CED Miss Ray this one's yours the applicants are seeking a variance to the South front yard from 100 fet to 75 ft for a proposed mobile home uh the subject prop property is heavily treade and has a pond to the southwestern portion of the property uh it is currently developed with a 2,400 ft Barn uh the property does have an agricultural classification through the property appraisers the property has three front yards and one side yard there is a 30 foot Ingress egress easement to the north right Grove Road to the East and gator bait Lane to the South staff's recommendation is for denial should the peer receive find that the applicant has provided competent substantial evidence there is a condition provided for consideration we did also receive a letter of support um from an adjacent neighbor I'm available for questions thank you Miss Ray any question for staff okay is the applicant here good morning sir could I get your name and address for the record yes Ty McDonald 170 right Grove Road all right you've heard the staff report anything You' like to add to that trying to keep it where it's at um I was unaware there could be three front yards on a property when I originally did the site plan I guess cuz my neighbor has a right of way on his property that the setback goes from 50 ft to 100 we have it set at 75 I was plenty out of that but uh trying to keep there we already have our well I mean our existing well over there and a septic permit's already in place for where it's at if I have to to move it I'm probably to take out some more oak trees I pull a 40ft trailer home every night so trying to avoid from doing that on the other side of the property is plan past trying to get past River there so I don't want to have to move at the opposite side of my entire property as well all right any questions for the applicant I think I'd stay away from that gator bait Lane if I was you I haven't seen any yet okay okay do we have any public participation for for this one all right sir we're going to close the floor for public participation open up discussion or motion make a motion on case B-24 046 approve the variance with the one staff recommended condition second okay I got a motion on the floor from Mr CA to approve variance v24 046 with the one staff condition any second for Mr sixma any discussion on the motion all those in favor signifi by saying hi any opposed motion carries unanimously next case v-24 047 application of caros Marquez owner requesting a variance to the minimum yard requirements on Urban single family residential R4 zone property the property is located at 8th Avenue land thank you Mr Costa M Ray this is yours the applicant is Seeking a variance to reduce the West front yard from 25 ft to 10.9 ft for proposed single family residence uh the property is currently vacant and heavily treed the property contains Wetlands on approximately 6,982 Square ft on the Eastern portion of the property uh the single family residence was placed as far west to avoid the w Wetlands but it does encroach into the 25t Wetland buffer staff's recommendation is for denial um should the PE PEC find that the applicant has provided competent substantial evidence there are two conditions provided for consideration I will also add the environmental per permitting reviewed the application and had no objection I'm available for questions thank you Miss Ray any questions for staff I'm curious Miss Craig go ahead if they have no objections to it what is this about the Wetland mitigation permit being required or there being a hold on the Wetland permits I believe there's a wetland alteration permit we issue Wetland alteration permits for the buffer impacts as as well so as as demonstrated on the chart you can see they're not affecting the Wetland area however because you know there's not they are put placing the house in the Wetland buffer impacts the Wetland buffer require Wetland uh Wetland alteration permit we do have a letter from our environmental permitting team in the staff report that says they have no objections to the request okay thank you any other questions for staff okay is the applicant present good morning sir could I get your name and address for the record uh Carlos marz uh 2375 7 Oak Drive stcloud okay you've heard the staff report anything you'd like to add to it uh yes so the reason why uh we mentioned the hold on the permitting for the wetlands is that if we do not move the house forward then we would be into the Wetland and uh is our understanding right now that uh there's a hold Statewide on the permitting for mitigation of wetlands and that is why we're asking for the variant to move it forward that way we only have to deal with the permitting here at the county for the buffer and yeah that's my comment on the question that you have okay so I'm sorry the so this this variance is to basically move the house out of the Wetland area yes to avoid okay now now it's clear yes yes okay much better thank you right okay all right any other question any questions for the applicant okay you're aware that the Wetland buffer there you stand a chance in a heavy rain event of having quite a bit of water there as long as you're aware of that I'm aware okay you raise it up I'm wor all all right do we have any public participant okay we're goingon to close the for prop participation open up for commission discussion thank you uh just one more question uh is there anything that we could do to move it forward that way we can have it approved or well we haven't approved the variance yet so but if it becomes then you would have to talk to staff with about that okay thank you okay all right with that I'll make a motion on case v-24 047 that we approve the variance with the two staff recommended conditions second okay I've got a motion on the floor to approve variance V2 24047 with the two staff conditions for Mr Costa and second for Mr Patterson any discussion on the motion all those in favor signify by saying I I I any opposed motion carries unanimously okay if I can get the next one case B-24 048 application of Landis Graham French attorneys at law agent for the owners requesting a variance to the accessory dwelling unit U regulations on transitional agricultural A3 zone property property is located at 371 McCracken Road Lake Helen thank you Mr Costa Mr Smith this one is yours this is a 9 and a half acre site in the A3 zoning classification the applicant is Seeking a variance to allow an accessory dwelling unit to be greater than 50% of the size of the principal structure this is an existing structure unfortunately um the applicant's husband had passed away and he took care of most of the business at the house and she found after the fact that this was not permitted so she's trying to resolve the issue and wants to get an after Thea building permit she cannot get that building permit unless she addresses the size of the Adu the Adu is 1,423 square ft the maximum that would be allowed in this case is 1,83 square ft the principal structure is 2155 Square ft the ad U has been in place since 2011 it's a large parcel it's been in place for a very long time and it would create a hardship to required to remove to remove 340 Square ft to bring it into compliance with the zoning ordinance there are multiple letters of support in the file from the neighbors and we do recommend approval the applicant has asked the applicant's agent has asked for one correction to condition number three to sit to Now read no additional expansion and add the words to to the Adu may occur without a new variance and and we support that change and the applicants agent is present and that there was three conditions on that yep three okay okay any questions for staff no all right heing n your turn M chairman Alex Ford 145 EAS Avenue to and um Miss Reeves is also here in the audience and uh she came to me initially with great trepidation she had discovered that the property had some improvements that had been made without permits and um just didn't want that hanging over her head uh she found out after her husband died about these lack of permits and uh so she took a very bold step of self-reporting and then coming to staff and asking for how do we how do we get out of this situation staff was very uh helpful and we after going through the getting it surveyed and uh doing some investigation working with staff we determined there was really only one variance that was necessary and that's what's here before you today that's to uh approve a Adu in excessive 50% of the size of the principal structure uh as Miss Smith noted it's a pretty modest increase we're asking it's been there a long time we have neighborhood support I don't know if any of y'all got a chance to drive out there but it's a it's a kind of you know God's Little you know Piece of Heaven here on Earth it's a really nice piece of property and they've done a good job uh the neighborhood neighborhood supports it they're great relations with the neighbor this is a type of thing that uh we ask that you uh would consider and if you have any any questions be happy to answer them otherwise I ask that you adopt the staff recommendation with the revision to the uh the one condition okay thank you Mr Ford any any questions for the applicate all right do we have any public participation for okay we're going to close the four for participation open up for commission discussion or motion make a motion case V2 44- 048 that we approve the variance with the uh was it three staff recommended conditions with the addition of uh ex no additional expansion to the Adu be written into that third condition second yeah okay I got a motion on the floor to approve variance V 24048 with the with the three staff recommended conditions with the exception to the clarification on condition three to make it just to the Adu itself and for Mr Costa and a second for Mr six any discussion on the motion all those in favor signify by saying I I any opposed motion carries unanimously all right Mr cost the next case B-24 053 application of Gary and Mary ranck owners requesting a variance to increase maximum lot coverage on Urban Mobile Home mh5 Zone property property located at 167 Douglas Street in Edgewater Mr Shams this one's yours good morning again so you may remember this case from last month uh but upon further review staff did determine an additional variance was necessary to increase maximum lock coverage um they're they're applying for a variance to increase the lot coverage from 35% to 45% for an inground pool uh the existing principle and accessory structures uh total about 3,70 Square ft which is 47% lot coverage So the applicant's plan is to reduce the size of the patio which would in turn reduce the lot coverage on site to 45% um overall staff is recommending approval as they meet 55 criteria and I'm available for comments or questions thank you Mr chams any question for staff is the applicant present the applicant is not present okay do we have any public participation fors okay we're going to close the floor for public participation open up for commission discussion I hate giving approvals without applicant present I know me to is this the same one we had before if I can just clarify please that was actually a staff error we should have included that loot coverage last month they were here for that meeting um now you put it that way approve everything completely different so we're just trying to do some clean up here so they can get their building oh okay well in that case I prepared to make a motion on case v-24 053 close the floor for public I have a commission discussion or a motion okay Miss Miss Craig you had a question um I'm I'm curious about this part where it says it's unclear if the requirements of the class to Overlay can be met is that an issue for us to be concerned with no ma'am when they go in for a building permit they'll they will have to apply for that and they'll see if they need to do those things which the class two permit would be um landscaping and storm water controls and they have to meet those in order to get the building permit okay any other questions okay I'll open it up for discussion or a motion go ahead motion uh case v-24 053 uh that we approved the variance with I think it's one condition I don't is one condition actually with no staff recommend no conditions right okay I got a motion on the floor to approve variance V2 24053 from Mr cost and a second for Mr sixma any discussion on the motion all those in favor signify by saying I I any opposed motion carries unanimously okay Mr cost could I get the next one case v-24 054 application of David Wagner owner requesting a variance to the minimum yard requirements on split Zone transitional agricultural A3 and urban single family residential R3 zone property property is located at 1655 South Glenco Road in new samna Mr Ray Miss Miss Ray this one's yours the applicant is Seeking a variance to reduce the West rear yard from 40t to 30 ft for proposed attached garage U like you mentioned it is split zoned A3 and R3 uh the proposed structure is to be built within the A3 zoning classification um so it is subject to those uh minimum yard requirements um the proposed garage is greater than 500 square fet and therefore is required to meet the principal structure setbacks um the STA recommendation is for denial however should the pdrc find the applicant has provided competent substantial evidence one condition has been has been provided for consideration I will also note um the West property that it does encroach is a County Park thank you okay thank you Miss Ray any questions for staff all right is the applicant presid okay if you want to come forward sir and give us your name and address for the record Larry gross I'm representing Mr Wagner at 1655 South Glenco okay and what's your address sir my address is 2011 Barracuda Boulevard new smna beach all right you've heard the staff report anything you'd like to add to it not at the moment just just that just here to answer questions huh yeah it it is backing up to the county Frisbee Golf Course and just that there is you know a lot of traffic and a lot of talking and he's just looking for a buffer from his residents okay all right any questions for the applicant do we have any public participation okay we're going to close the for for public participation and open up for commission discussion okay guys let's do it second I'm sorry Mr I know I thanks Kelly uh motion for approval for case V2 4054 with one staff recommendation still second okay I got a motion on the floor from Mr 6man for V 2454 for approval with the one condition and a second from Mr Costa any discussion on the motion all those in favor signify by saying I I do we need to wait for No we can do it with four with four okay as long as we don't have a descent yep okay so that passed motion carried four to zero Mr Patterson had Ste away okay our next case please p-2400 two application of Allen Engineering Group Inc agent for the owners requesting a rezoning from Urban single family residential R4 zoning classification to a planned unit development with a residential subclassification PUD the property is located at 525 East Kentucky Avenue in Deland thank you Mr Costa uh this one is Mr Shams hi good morning the applicant is requesting a resoning from R4 to PUD to construct 50 uh market rate townhous townhouse units uh we did receive two letters of opposition which have been provided to you the property is approximately 8.61 acres and the applicant has agreed to dedicate uh rights of way along the western Southern and Eastern boundaries to the county after dedication the area being used for the site is approximately 7.8 Acres uh the Pud will be developed in one phase and is expected to commence in 2025 the project is within the city of D's utility service area and will be serviced by Central utilities uh staff did find the project meets the County's PD requirements and will dedicate 20% or approximately 1.56 Acres as common open space uh there will be a 20 foot wide landscape buffer along every boundary and a maximum Building height of 35 ft which is consistent with adjacent uh residential zoning classes uh the proposed PUD is consistent with the existing Urban medium intensity future land use designation and comp plan policies related to Urban and fi development and discouraging urban sprawl under the current future land use um the property can yield a maximum uh of 68 dwell units so they are well well below that um as regards to traffic the current R4 zoning could generate about 499 daily trips and the proposed PUD as uh applied for could generate 366 daily trips so it is an overall decrease of traffic um so overall staff recommends forwarding to the County council with a recommendation of approval um I'm available for comments or questions any questions for staff Miss Craig how can the traffic requirements be reduced if we're talking about adding 50 housing units um so it's comparing the maximum yield of the site with under R4 which is 68 single family units so when you propose 50 it is a decrease I see okay you're welcome okay any other question for staff one other question sure um and and it just may be my unfamiliarity with it but on pages 37 39 to 40 it mentions 54 units and the the um I'm Sorry Miss Craig do you mind speaking a little closer to the microphone sorry thank you on pages 37 39 and 40 it's uh it mentions 54 town home units as opposed to the 50 in this request and I'm wondering is that just because there was a change from the February 19th presentation Miss Craig I think I can answer that question for you what you're reading is our staff comments uh typically applicants who are proposing developments will come in for a staff review before they apply or at the beginning of the application process they came in with this number initially and after receiving all their comments came in with their final plan okay any other questions Mr Shams this R4 zoning um the original zoning that is now that's for single family this is considered multiple multiple family correct so town homes are considered attached single family so they's still going to be uh individual owners it be individual so it would be considered single family yes sir see Fe simple okay and I have one more question uh there any idea where why there was no comment by the school board the school board reviewed the project and found they have uh the capacity to meet School concurrency concurrency I thought I saw in here that it's specifically said there was no comment by the school board so miss Craig that again is the staff review comments for every project that comes in we require it to go through school concurrency we do have the school concurrency letter thank you okay any other questions all right is the applican present Mr Woods good morning sir all right happy to be here this morning uh for the record Michael Woods the law firm cob Cole 231 North Woodland Boulevard here today on behalf of the applicant uh and excited to be here uh to discuss us uh an infill project within the greater Dand area um I'll go through the staff report uh pretty much explains the conditions of what we are asking for with the 50 units this is coming in as a PUD um and it is coming with a product that I think is very necessary and needed in the area uh that is being a town home uh product yes it's single family yes it's fee simple ownership but it's different than the 50ft Lots or the smaller lots that you end up having uh and trying to it's not affordable housing by any stretch of the means nothing really is at this point but trying to fill in that missing gap of of housing uh and and being able to make sure that we locate it in the right place um again the summary and the scope there it is going to a PUD for 50 units I do want to emphasize one of the reasons why you know I'm I'm I'm here and on board with this project and and pitching it as as strongly as I will be today is the existing underline Urban medium intensity and I'll kind of show you how that fits in this is this is not kind of a select Airborne drop into it this is part of the overall structure out here uh and it's and that is a challenge to kind of deal with as you guys are familiar with the city of deland's let's say irregular boundaries as we've kind of grown back out to 1792 into into Woodland so this still is within the County's jurisdiction but service by the city limits and ultimately I think fits in with with both situations there and if you're familiar with the roadway uh Garfield folks travel up there North and South South to of us is uh is George Marx and I'll kind of show you the frame of reference to what we're dealing with another big benefit is we are as an infill project existing capacity is already there in place and then the other uh commitment and this will come into play uh I'll Circle back up when we talk about the boundary along our eastern boundary but we are dedicating a substantial amount of ride of way the roads are out there already it's fine but they're all deficient from a size perspective so the county will be getting the additional rideway uh to be able to make the roads fully conforming um by dedication for our property again the frame of reference there was 92 to the north and 17 to the West just so you kind of have a frame of reference for what we're dealing with here um I took a measurement uh the purple and the I guess orange or red colors are the ones I want you to pay attention to most going from the intersection of Kentucky and Garfield North to 92 you're about 3/10 of a mile for frame of reference that's the Athens theater to the new courthouse so that's the length of the distance that you're dealing with there and then just to give a a gap uh although we do not connect to clear view to the north that's 210 of a mile and then if you go to the West along Garfield that to if for your frame of reference of where Garfield spits out on 92 that's the IHOP and the family bookstore is that's Garfield there and then you've got those apartments the uh the land Oaks Condos are where that green line kind of goes to then obviously we have single family surrounding uh our our property um so from our land use standpoint like I said this is a bit of a mish mash of jurisdictional um fun you can see all the Inc is the Incorporated area you do have a larger subdivision to the east you have Urban low intensity uh to the south of us so that's definitely single family homes I think up to four units an acre there uh obviously to the north then along Woodland you've got the commercial Corridor um dropping the parcel numbers to kind of give you the shapes of what we're dealing with this is the configuration right this is kind of um Sim City I always go back to that computer game of how you kind of plan through this you've got your you've got commercial along your Corridor you've got your Urban medium intensity as the transition between the commercial to the traditional single family and then you've got the single family and so we are a smack dab on that Urban medium intensity uh transition between the commercial to our north and west and then the single family even uh to our South um as as part of the Pud and kind of what you get in addition to just the overall development because of the Pud you've got the 20% requirement for open space we may need to talk a little bit about that based I got the the letters from the neighbors this morning uh with respect to the amenities that we provide so we may be able to be a little bit more sensitive on that but we do have an obligation provide that 20% because of the Pud you do get the tree protection area that's required and then the a unique element of this project is we are keeping the internal roadway uh privately owned privately maintained and gated um and as you can kind of see from our configuration uh of our project that keeps all of our stuff internal now I'm a big believer of interconnectivity a lot but then we also have those conversations about well the spillover from I mean it's still still residential it's still single families living in these units but there is this perception of single family detached homes next to to uh townhouse and will be a self-contained project this way and this helps to kind of configure with that you also so because of our access and our design you don't have more driveways accessing other than the one on um Kentucky multiple driveways accessing onto the roadway um and I provided here just to kind of give the frame of reference of what would otherwise be required for your front yards by surrounding zoning categories that are there 30 feet 20 feet your side yards we provide a landscape buffer minimum of 20 ft along the entire project and it gets bigger in certain places I'll kind of show you through that on the concept plan and then we have a 45t building setback for all portions of the property um other than on Smith Road on a portion of that and I'll explain that to you um and all those measurements are are measured after the dedication of the ride of way so uh before i' had gotten those letters I thought it would be a good exercise just kind of show you what it would be like standing from our perimeter looking in for how we designed this to again be self-contained here so we're going to go kind of uh Around the Horn uh starting in the bottom right corner cor with what that experience is going to be from the from the street level um this is the southeast corner of our property on the right side that you can't see that'll be Smith Road and we'll Circle back around that at the end um but you're looking North from the rideway we have a dedication to now include a sidewalk there is no sidewalk along that portion of Garfield or Kentucky and you will have a a sidewalk for um I don't know that the county will actually want to end up building the sidewalk on Smith but it will be constructed constucted for Garfield and Kentucky um and so as a result with this portion after you get through the dedication and that dedication measures out that 35 ft for rideway dedication measures to the center line of the asphalt so you'll have you'll have the Improvement for the roadway there an additional 35 ft of landscape buffer TPA and that most likely keep the natural vegetation that's already there and then from the edge of property through that 30t of landscape buffer there you don't get to a building or structure for uh 48 feet um on the next uh location this is now in our southwest corner um again right at the corner of Garfield and Kentucky we've put a storm water pond on our western edge of the property there um but here I want you to be able to see so if you're across the street from here again to dedication of the rideway uh we have a 25- foot landscape buffer it's not counted as TPA because it's too narrow for TPA but that's to accommodate the the sizing for the pond but if you look to the east East where the buildings are that is still the 30 ft and a te tree preservation area there um and again sidewalk will be included this now going along uh the north south roadway uh Garfield uh looking from Garfield to the east uh obviously you've got the retention Pond uh dry but you do have a landscape buffer on the external area and then I think the building the closest to the edge of the building from that roadway because of the pond being there is about 145 ft um moving to the north there um this is looking for the South looking south from that property line again you've got the 30 ft of landscape buffer and TPA and then the closest building is 45 ft from the edge of the property um similar like if you were still on that same parcel and again I hadn't read the letter uh from the neighbor until this morning but I did this up earlier this week uh here where you can kind of see the reference and and um orientation you do have a 30-ft landscape buffer um between the edge of our property uh that's still there um it tapers down to 25 ft right at the corner and that's mainly because of the curvature of the roadway not necessarily that anything else is going to be removed there uh and when I come when we come back and circle around from the comments probably the pickle ball court we can talk through that some people love them some people hate them we're not committed one way or the other as to what amenity goes there and we can relocate or swap it onto the other side but again um edge of building looking to the East is about 83 feet away um and then from the northern side of the project looking down you still got that same 30 ft landscape buffer and you're 45 ft from the edge of the property to a building face now this is um going down Smith we're looking at the Northeast quadrant and you can kind of for your frame of reference you've got the drive roadway the light gray rectangle on the top right uh as planed as botch ball that's definitely much more passive unless you have really wild and crazy botch ball players so sorry that may be a swap with the um with the um pickle ball or we do two bot ball quarts but here again you've got about 90 ft from the edge of the property to easternmost building uh you do have a 30t of landscape buffering for this for the majority of this property um this is the roadway that is the most efficient and we'll kind of show you the air the the aerial photo and the the street level photo and you're getting the county is getting a 20 foot RightWay dedication here that comes into play for the Southeast corner here um because I don't think that the full scope of the dedication was was realized when this was being laid out so what you have here with this unit and this is again back to the southeast corner there's 25 ft of building setback from the property line after the dedication of the rideway now I don't think that the county intends to develop that rideway or the roadway they just have in reservation because ask for it now because you can get it but we're still treating it from the permitting standpoint that there's 25 ft it will be landscaped but that's a distinction that's the narrowest part of our property from where a building is from The Edge and that is being driven because of the additional rideway dedication and then just to kind of give you uh here this is looking North on Smith uh for the adjacent property there um and I was curious from like the measurement from the center line how far back everything went but effectively if you can see that red dot and blue dot on the aerial photo using Google Maps that's basically 83 feet give or take from the center line North that's to kind of reference the southern face of our property here and then to show you the northern extension of this building cluster that's this picture here so it lines up just north of that driveway from that home again still buffered but giving kind of a proximity and spacing in in conjunction with what's already there um again again from that standpoint the entire building is south of that neighboring home to the east uh and at closest point the building faces 65 ft from the neighboring property line because of the asphalt the dedication and the setback so again uh I know I flew through that kind of quickly but we're here with uh Umi density already there we're coming in with 50 town home units I think Mr Shams told you what the allowable density is with the eight we think it's a good infill it's I I know that there are still plans moving forward with the county to try to address overall sidewalks on that Corridor particularly on Garfield um and we are able to contribute that as being new development they just didn't require it back in the day and I think we kind of come to regret that but we're doing our best to improve that so that you'll be able to easily access and again the you know Garfield North spits out at lows and like the Auto Zone on the south side of 1792 um I'm happy to answer any oh well let me actually get into the letters um so again there was one question dealing with you know the traffic flow and and your question I completely understand the calculations of how do you you're adding constructions how you go down even more than that you know the average trip generation for for like town houses get treated slightly differently than single family if you can kind of believe that it's it's traffic ation kind of at its best but um the rideway will be expanded the mitigation is necessary at site plan for traffic improvements will be necessary but we we are in that Umi and that kind of contemplates the traffic being you know we're not we're not bumping up and asking to break the underlying comp plan and push that further um and we will be providing sidewalks along our portion of the property there the other question I think was coming from one of the adjacent Property Owners say to I think on I think that might be our one to the Northwest but either way there's a question about how will these be marketed these will be private fee fee simple ownership Lots um there so with respect to that pickle ball and The Botch ball court we've not provided for any fencing or screening we're happy to do that or we're happy to switch again I don't play pickle ball I know a lot of people do um I'm happy to have feedback on that it was just more to have a passive activity uh o opportunity for our residents um but we do have to provide something for them there so if that's horseshoes or something else like we can we can work through that with you uh it there will be no lights and that facility like the common area facil facility be closed at dusk we can provide that as a as a condition um like I said we could screen around the play area to deal with the noise um there's a reference to the minimum lot SI or minimum unit size in here is at 575 that's your default language these units are more likely to be between 1,600 and 2,000 Square fet um and the height would be the standard height of any two-story home that's where we're capped at 35 ft that's what's utilized for all your single family subdivision uh requirements um we do have the buffering like I said we went through that and happy to go through any other questions on that from how are we trying to buffer and within that buffer we maintain and preserve as many of those trees in there as possible um and that's it in nutshell we think it's a good infill project to give different housing product uh in close proximity to existing stores and we think we've tried to be as considerate as we can for our surrounding property neighbors happy to answer any questions you may have thank you Mr Woods any questions for the after you wouldn't have to have any pictures of sketches uh right now you know it's it's anytime we're coming forward with any town home projects you want to make sure you get the entitlement kind of in place before you go full on right now all we have is the sketch that uh Kim Buck engineering had designed uh for that all right any other questions um I'm curious about the the statement here and the one of the letters in opposition it says the Builder plainly states their purpose is to provide housing stock for ston University I've lived in a university area and um it got unpleasant at times of the year it was University of Texas and football weekends were a nightmare um I can Envision that being a real issue for anybody who's been living in this nice quiet neighborhood for all these years can you sure and and I had to ask uh the the developer who's here about that question um I think the focus point there is is more of a price point of below the3 $320,000 average price now for like a single family home um I'm not and he may be able to speak a little bit more directly as to the conversation about Stetson University specifically I would say um that there you know the idea is not for it to be rentals it is for fee simple ownership um and there would be a Property Owners Association to maintain like for instance the no operation of The Botch ball not that a lot of kids are going to do botche ball and pickle ball but to not operate Beyond 8:00 that can be controlled there too um but it's it's the same situation as you'd have and I would I think kind of point out you know along Garfield right we had the tornadoes kind of come through a couple of years ago and a lot of that those homes the older homes there was a good number of kind of student housing folks living in there as kind of roommates and stuff like that so you know I I we you can't you can't preclude someone just because they're a college kid but this isn't being designed in for the purpose of being student housing um you know D land I don't think the county ran a fou this D land for the longest time had no more than two unrelated people in your home uh which was basically an anti-party requirement from the down it blatantly violates uh federal law you know and it really conflicts with how you would Define a family unit these days or you know you know non-traditional but all that is to say this isn't the goal here isn't for a ston housing project here whatsoever it's it's Town Homes to fit through the folks that you know at $450,000 $400,000 for single family homes um there's a whole lot of folks that aren't getting ownership and this is hopefully to bridge the gap between being able to rent and be able to own without going to single f okay Mr wood we do have some public participation for can I ask him one more question okay quick uh Michael I did hear you say that's going to be gated right yes okay good yeah and and the way that would work obviously during the day it would be open for Amazon and all the the good stuff with that but then it would be a gated controlled at night with a Callin for pizza delivery and stuff like that and you will see on the design there's a t-shape at the bottom there that's for the turnaround so that the vehicles get there after hours you know for delivery and stuff that they don't block or anything so yeah okay we do have some public participation form so after they have spoken I'll give you a chance for reot okay thank you all right okay U we Mr wine morning sir if I could get your name and address for the record I'm John wi I live at 295 Spring Garden Avenue the Leon Springs okay sir and I am an owner in this uh part owner of the property uh I want to just I know I've got limited three three minutes I want to so I want to take you three things uh to make it clear first of all I myself and the and the Builder Atlas Holmes Randy stalard uh has been in this area a long time and I don't have time to get through all the technicalities because the the pros have covered that I just want to say that our reputation says that we're good neighbors and Florida is a growing State and there's a cry for affordable homes and frankly all the projects that we're working on they're they're crying out for for affordable homes now as a developer and Builder if it's not a sin to make money then the only way you can produce that is through the town home concept you don't have to be a smart person to figure that out so my my real desire at my age is to be able to to say that we have fulfilled a need in America because there's a cry for particularly starter home buyers that can't afford homes so I want to just stay that the that it's not just the land I mean b County but other areas are are screaming out for Town Home developments to meet that need now the other thing I want to say quickly is two things the tree issue is always an issue and we Prof we we paid a professional tree expert to come out there which he did and we've still got tree mitigation but the first thing he told me was Mr wine these are all lur Oaks and there's no specimen trees on that property they're all lur Oak so our tree impact is going to be more minimal we've got a development in the Leon Springs and you don't want to hear about that one because it's got some real tree issues we have no tree issues on this property in fairness um and the other thing is that from the beginning the county encouraged us uh they didn't they suggest Ed maybe is a better word that would we consider a a a private development instead of public so we have felt that going to a private would would do a lot of things so we have decided to go to private development we've got a full buffer around it and and I would live there personally in that in that subdivision thank you for your time thank you sir okay then we have a and I hope I don't mess this up Kim pausic I'm sure you'll straighten me out once you get up here can I get your name and address for the record yes my name is Kim pothus and I live at 1402 North Garfield so um what I uh some of my concerns about this project are uh with the wildlife that's there right now what what are the plans for because what's going to happen is they're all going to scatter so um we'll have an increase and raccoons and there's a cat colony there and all kinds of stuff like that that concerns me I'm also concerned about what kind of fencing they're going to use since it's going to be gated um I don't really want to look at white PVC fence when I leave my house um I'm also concerned about how it's going to impact uh taxes for the houses that are there now because um I would assume that something like this would probably cause a raise in taxes down the line and I am concerned about traffic because traffic is really bad at that intersection of Kentucky and Garfield already there's pretty much a wreck there uh at least twice a year and it's constant traffic so I don't see that this is going to help that but um basically those are my concerns and thank you for your time thank you ma'am okay and I have a Susan and Michael Boyd good morning good morning sir could I get your name and address for the record my name is Michael Boyd I live at 1411 North Garfield my property backed right up to the project we're talking about you want to say can we do this together so we might I might get mad and say something I should and she'll ate me with perectly all right I might give you a little extra minute okay thank you okay uh I have a I have a few questions that I feel like I just got run all over by a big truck right there with the fast talking there in the beginning um the I do duplex in my knowledge is a uh multif family building am I correct Mr Sor you want to answer that question we have it defined as single family attached um mainly it's due to a building code type thing so so town homes are duplexes are their own thing they're considered odd in that you you know a person owns the building and they own the underlying Fe symbol they own the land they share a common wall with their adjac per uh neighbor Town Homes town houses are are similar in that a person owns the building they own the underlying land they share you know one or more than one wall with their adjacent neighbor um in our code Town Homes like kind of straddle the line between multif family and single family but they are defined as single family attached dwelling units same thing then right duplex is a multif family right two people live welded together four people live welded together uh that th there are no then they say that they match the two-story houses in the area there are no two-story houses in the area they're all one-story houses in the area when we moved here we looked for a place a nice comfortable place that had zoning around us where they were not going to tear down all the trees and build an apartment complex and now here they are now all of a sudden we've decided that all of our trees that are 40t tall in this big around are worthless because they're Laurel Oaks instead of whatever kind of Oak is worth more than that um I'm going to be looking out of my back backyard I have a beautiful pristine backyard and I can look out and I'm going to be looking into the windows of the second story apartments and you cannot uh or somebody's going to be out there playing bot ball I'm not even sure really what bot ball is or or uh pickle ball and uh they're their feet away from my backyard my privacy um I really am a I really don't believe his story about being housing stock he would not have entered it in his story to convince you if he hadn't meant that he intended some of that to be housing stock for Stetson there's a lot of more beautiful things in town or Stetson is beautiful but there's a lot of more things in town that that draw people to to delay land the land is a beautiful city um we live literally three blocks our this development is literally three blocks from 92 it's not right on the highway it's a it's six blocks or five blocks from uh 17 so we're not right up next to the highway we're not in a building glut area um so um okay then uh they talk about they're going to put in sidewalks you guys have tore up the my whole Road and run both sides of the street putting in sidewalk no a bike path a bike path you call it is that different than a sidewalk it's 10 feet wide instead of four feet wide or five feet wide and all the trees came down okay if you speak in the mic if I could get you to speak in the mic oh sure so with that 10 foot bike path they took down all the trees on one side of the road nobody's replaced that so this gentleman from the attorney was talking about putting in sidewalk on Garfield so is he going to put an additional sidewalk along the front of our side of the road okay you know I'll get him to address some of the concerns that you've got okay uh he's going to come back up for rebuttal and hopefully you your some of the concerns you have can be addressed or maybe explain Fuller okay okay that's all okay thank you all right well thank you so much all right do we have anyone else M Tucker okay Mr Woods if you'd like to come back okay Michael Woods for the applicant um so with respect to the sidewalk um and I don't know how they they how the county is treating the sidewalk location in relationship to the multimodal with the bike right now we are required to comply with the requirements of the county and that is to provide improved sidewalk on Kentucky and Garfield as I understand it and then rway dedication on Smith yes now if um if anything has changed from that because the as I understand it the Garfield Trail was running along the west side of Garfield is that correct okay um if that is changed obviously we can work through that but as we are here now and required we would be putting in the sidewalk uh as part of that dedication of additional ride away for Garfield right because the way that Garfield is paved right now it's not quite as narrowly constrained as say Smith that one's is basically compacted roadway and what have you but the asphalt doesn't reflect what the actual rideway is right we often times have that situation where people think they're front yard goes to the asphalt and the reality is the right away is basically where the power line poles are um and I think you saw that with and I I guess that's probably the city's Greenway plan that's been going through that you could see a pretty huge Trail going through there um but our requirements are coming from from your staff and from your code and at this point in time for the for the Western perimeter and the southern perimeter of our property will be providing uh sidewalk um with respect to the the statement about the two story homes in the immediate area didn't mean necessarily to say that other than to say I know two-story homes come up as an issue but that's why you had the 35 ft like twostory homes are not themselves a bad thing or a nuisance there are a couple two-story homes farther down on Garfield I know of um or split level that are there but with respect to how it impacts on this project here again even with with their adjacent property that's 45 ft with 30 ft of of landscape buffer to their South and then even farther over to the East um and and part of that too and why I kind of emphasized earlier on in my presentation about like the table of what is required for the setbacks for straight zoning versus what have you is um you would still be able to have and correct me if I'm wrong if this was like a single family lot division like the pool could be 8et off the the property line right so we are sitting back farther than from single family um it's a difficult balance and you know again we are trying to keep everything tightened in as best that we can for this but uh hopefully I answered those questions and then from the tree mitigation that goes through what your Forester whether that's through Keith or with ginger for for mitigation and impacts on that but I think the goal is for the perimeter side to remain natural because why would you want to cut out and then replant Keith doesn't like that uh what about the type of fence have you had proposed type of fence I don't think so I think the fence requirement comes from a buffering is that part of our landscape buffer do you guys recall off the top top of our head um I mean I'm just asking one of the questions that there was asked yeah no I appreciate you bringing that up cuz I forgot that um and even like from the from the fencing perspective like even along Garfield I don't know if they would require us to put it on the edge of pavement for Garfield or on the other side of it well probably probably so because of storm water um that is a requirement from the code provision uh we're happy to not do white PVC as well um the gated community aspect when we kind of refer to it as that that's mainly because of how we control the vehicular access that that's that gate but it's not like we are looking to like lock in and cage in to the extent that there's a fence requirement that's coming out of your landscape beautification buffer requirements we we're complying with that we not we're not getting any relief from that with our request okay all right any questions for the appli yeah how much again did you say these were going to run a unit uh I was talking to Randy he was saying about three and a quarter okay which scares the hell out of me but you know it's no no no and I wanted to come back in and say that that's not that's not coming in and this is not an affordable housing project that's what I was thinking affordable housing is but but what you're really kind of seeing the squeeze is you know it's a whole another kind of conversation to try to get true affordable housing projects in I'm sure you guys have seen your fair share of them and there's particular developers that do that because of the compliance requirements for the Fed and everything else like that but as that has kind of gotten the focus and the attention that gap of you know the interest rates kind of being where they are no one's kind of really selling out there's this sense of this inventory kind of shortage because if you're in a home with a 2% interest rate you don't want to leave you don't want to leave because you're going to be paying more for Less house downsizing it doesn't make sense um so all that is to say go scare yourself and pretend that you're looking for like a 22y old or or young family and see what the inventory is not on Zillow or on realtor or something mhm those numbers just keep and I keep waiting for something to slow down and it just hasn't uh so this and this is a product that we just really haven't had in the greater Dand area there's more coming online now but we had been so focused coming out of the crash on the single family residential um and no one wanted to be the first developer here to do tow houses right there's that proof of concept you had a few smaller here there like I think Ken Goldberg did one or two but now that there's been one or two that have been built and people see how quickly I mean I I don't think I don't think there would be I think there' be a line waiting to get these if they're coming on so this is more of this is more in tune um the the term affordable housing throws people into a different tizzy this is more I would call this affordable market rate housing it's what really what you have or attainable is the this is a this is these are starter starter homes this is something that my son might be able to afford right now because other than that there's nothing in that price point yeah um so but I think it's a in general it's a it's a good project you're required to leave x amount of undisturbed vegetation around the perimeter correct is that we're required to to maintain 15% tree preservation 15% and you can only get the tree preservation credit if you're 30 ft wider and so that's why those buffers have been bumped out okay where we couldn't do it on Smith there's still that landscape buffer that'll be there but we don't get credit for it there so that buffer would alleviates some of the concerns about the two-story units that's the thought process yeah okay okay and you mentioned something about swapping the pickle ball for the b ball no lights anyway so yeah we we for sure it's not going to be lit for for those purposes I just trying to get ahead of the issue you know we we we try to come up with something that's passive you are dealing with with site constraints obviously we're not going to put in like basketball or tennis courts from a size perspective pickleball typically is innocuous but I've never lived next door to one um and I don't know so so that's really kind of a discretion we can figure it out now we can figure it out for County Council but we we will be providing an amenity facility there and to the extent that we need to screen anything from a noise perspective um we can do that but you will have irregardless you will have that 30t of tree preservation area there in between and so we'll be farther off than any single family swimming pool that would be there otherwise if developed you know okay any other questions not for him though thank you Mr Woods thank you do we do have any more public particip okay we're going to close the for for public participation open up for commission discussion or motion well I have one comment to make uh and actually this is directed to staff um as I'm I read through this and I'm arguing some of these questions on here I noticed that there is no individual's name or address on one of these opposition letters it's the very detailed one first one on here it doesn't specify who this came from so I I would suggest I would ask I should say that in the future that if we don't have identification on the on the letters that they not be included with the package okay outside of that I'd like to make a comment here also that um a lot of the concerns being brought forward today this is an R4 zoning originally it's an urban single family residential so as far as the wildlife and things like that you're going to have that if even if you were deny the PD the R4 zoning in itself uh would be allow it to be uh built up uh twostory houses are allowed in any neighborhood any residential neighborhood up to 35 ft so I mean I mean I believe me I sympathize with the adjacent Property Owners of with all the development that it's occurring and is it seems to be a little bit overwhelming but under the current zoning um I don't see what really holds this back um that it sounds to me like they've taken the adjacent Property Owners into consideration with their buffers and um hopefully they'll be able to coexist that's my comment and I'll accept the motion or I need a motion wake up guys you want me to do it all right I'll make a motion case p-2400 Z2 that uh we move this forward uh this resoning application to the County council with a final action a recommendation of of approval subject to the staff recommended conditions okay I got a motion on the floor from Mr CA to forward the resoning application case number PUD 24002 to count count to County Council for final action with recommendation of approval subject to the staff recommended conditions and a second for Mr sixma any discussion on the motion all those in favor signify by saying I I I any opposed motion carries unanimously Mr Costa could I get the next case please all right the next case should we we read both of them together uh CPA and the Pud yeah let's let's take we can take both of those on y yeah okay uh excuse me we are still in a public hearing if you don't mind taking conversation outside Chambers thank you all right P -24 d002 app sorry wrong one see cpa-2 4-4 application of Land Development Resource Group LLC agent for the owners requesting a smallscale comprehensive plan Amendment from the urban medium intensity Umi future land use flu designation to the commercial coom flu designation property is located at 3728 West International Speedway Boulevard in Daytona Beach and the accompanying is the Pud -24 d006 application of Land Development Resource Group LLC agent for owners requesting a rezoning from the urban single family residential R2 zoning class classification to a planned unit development PUD zoning classification with a business subclassification property located at 3728 West International Speedway Boulevard Daytona Beach thank you Mr Costa and this is Miss Ray good morning um so I will talk about the um comprehensive plan Amendment first and then I will talk about the Pud okay so the proposed future land use change is from the urban medium intensity to commercial on a 1.7 6 Acre Site uh the applicant is proposing to utilize the site for a contractor's storage yard under the Umi neighbor under the Umi future land use designation uh neighborhood businesses are allowed as commercial uses however any more intensive commercial use would need the amendment to the commercial uh the property is surrounded by other commercial properties um it is currently developed with a single family residents and carport that is proposed to be removed the commercial has a commercial designation has a floor area ratio of 55% the applicant is proposing to construct a 9,000 squ foot office and Warehouse facility uh the F would be approximately 12% staff's recommendation um for the future land use amendment is to find it consistent with the comp plan and forward to um County council with recommendation of approval for the Pud the applicant is proposing to rezone from R2 to PUD with a business subclassification for the contractor's storage yard there is currently a code violation on the property for having the heavy equipment on site and this proposed rezoning would resolve that issue uh the property is located within the High Ridge Neighborhood local plan and that that plan requires any new development on a lot exceeding 1 acre in sized shall be processed through the Pud procedures uh the Pud is proposed to be developed in three phases phase one for all infrastructure improvements phase two for the construction of the of the 9,000 ft office and Warehouse facility phase three the extension of the parking area uh the proper is also subject to the thoroughfare overlay standards and non-residential design standards uh this PUD is contingent upon the proposed future land use Amendment change to commercial uh staff recommends forwarding the resoning to County Council for final action with recommendation of approval and I'm available for questions thank you Mr Ray any question for staff not yet hearing none is applican President yes sir you're here well we got to you be up there before noon well that's true it's still morning I forgot my jacket in the car I can get your name and address for the record ma'am Colleen miles Land Development Resource Group 140 South Beach Street Daytona Beach Florida um I'm here to answer any questions staff has been fantastic with this I was contracted by the property owners to first get them out of Code Enforcement action which code has been delightful as well went to them yesterday to say I was going to be here today um this should bring them into compliance and that's kind of our goal okay my goal sorry I can answer any questions you may have okay any questions for the applicant I okay I think they did a pretty good job putting it together seem like we have any do we have any public participation fors I don't think Mr our reporter here wants to anyway okay we're going to close the floor for public participation and open up for commission discussion uh if you'd like to wait for Mr Costa to get back get back just a few minutes or we can go ahead and start a commission discussion move right along com no well no so commission discussion or motion um commission discussion I know this area I mean I drive it pretty often um it definitely um it's one of the things that we're lacking and this is County but it's in Daytona it's one of the things that was lacking is is um any kind of industrial with outside storage um it's I get those calls as a as a realtor the broker I get those calls daily I looking for a small building but I need more storage yard you know they're contractors they're plumbing supply companies and we just don't have that this fits a niche and it's it's really away from residential I don't think it's going to impact anything it's in an area of mostly industrial it's a mixture of industrial and some residential but mostly it's not heavy industrial uh I personally don't have any issues with this whatsoever um and unless somebody has something else I'd be ready to make a motion no I agree CPA first yep Ready go ahead all right on case cpa-2 4-4 uh we find that the future land use Amendment consistent with the comprehensive plan and vote and move to forward the application case number CPA 24004 to the County council with a recommendation of approval to transmit to the Department of Commerce DOC for expedited State review and to Valia count to the Valia growth management commission for certification y second okay which one you guys second um I don't know who was first uh Patterson was first doesn't matter okay I got a motion on the floor to as stated from Mr C forward for uh the application with recommendation of approval uh for CPA 24004 and a second for Mr Patterson any discussion on the motion NOP all those in favor signify by saying I any opposed okay let's take the Pud now case number p-2400 6 I recommend that we forward the resoning application case number PUD 24-6 to the County Council for a final action with a recommendation of approval second okay I got a motion on the floor for Mr Casa for PUD 24006 to forward the resoning application case to the County Council for final action with recommendation of approval and a second from Mr Mr Patterson any discussion on the motion all those in favor signify by saying I I I motion carries unanimously okay that was worth your weit was it okay okay do we have any other public items Miss Smith do we have any other public items no sir do we have any staff items no sir staff comments no sir commission comments no did a good job though what are we looking at for July are we loaded up or is it a light it's lighter than this month okay this was a little heavier uh my other comment on the commission comments is that uh I want to wish Mr Bender well uh is his Endeavors I'm sorry that see that he had to go um but uh he was always a um uh he was very reliable and he was very uh um easygoing and understanding of the Public's concerns when things came in front of us so he will be missed for sure and he always had a good good background on things too since he was born and raised here also I just want to make that comment though yeah and he left me as the old man on the board mhm he did have a little bit well I don't know he left for two and then come back so he probably still had more time than M we're going to miss him okay the uh other question I had was on the uh council meeting for the public Workshop when when is that going to be uh it's uh July 27th it's my birthday want to make sure is July 27th okay that might I thought it was in June sometime and I didn't have it written down anywhere so uh 20 hold on 20 on 23rd is it is July 20 Tuesday July 23rd starting at 300 p.m. 23rd 3 p.m. okay okay the other comment I would like to make was to Mr Shams the the one case that we had the day where he decided only ask for one variance and move it over instead of with the existing that would was are we informing the applicants that there may need to request the second variance in the event that um it was the fail on the on the or his initial variance was the fail for that case um the conversation I had with him was um that he was it was it was kind of like a benefit to him that he was only requesting one variance I mean I I can start informing them that for cases like that it may be easier to maintain what you have rather than moving it as certain direction but he wanted to minimize the amount of variances he was asking for but okay the existing structure though was three and A2 ft off the property line yes and he would asked for an variance of six Ines yes and to me that would be an encroachment upon the northern property owner more so than what was already there and so from my my perspective I don't know how the other board members feel I'd prefer not to have any more encroachment that need be on adjacent Property Owners understood and rather than take it in consideration for him just to have one variance I'd rather seen the three foot VAR 12 foot on one side and three and a half with was the original sight plan I mean the original impact um therefore he wouldn't impact his Northern property owner as much okay that was otherwise if he didn't have to go for for um come back on it then I would have probably recommended that but rather than make the guy go through any more turmoil there I decid to let it go okay any other commission comments okay press and citizen comments we don't have any this meeting is adjourned e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e e