Good evening. At this time, we'll bring the planning and zoning commission meeting for May 21st, 2026 to order. Roll call. Board member brain >> here. >> Board member Robert Sheer
>> here. >> Board member Dan Dodge >> here. >> Board member Kim Hardy >> here. >> Assistant city manager CRA manager Bonnie Lee >> here. >> City planners Mark Caret and Rebecca
Codle with Zeb Cohen and Associates >> here. myself, Melanie Ames, the interim city clerk. And this evening, uh, ladies and gentlemen, I'd like to introduce our new city clerk, Miss Sharita Belchure. Um, she will take reigns June 11th, last
commission meeting, and, um, we have waited seven long months for her and she's going to do a great talk for you. So, wish her well. Take good care of her. Welcome. >> And uh Chairwoman Veronica Glover,
>> we have a quorum. You may proceed. >> All right. At this time, we'll have the approval of the minutes for March 20th, 2025, April 17, 2025, and July 17, 2025. We have a motion to approve the minutes.
>> I make a motion approved. Second move approved and second for the approval of the minutes for March 20th, 20125, April 17th, and July 17. Should that be 2025? Well, this is Yes.
2025. >> All approved say I. >> I. Any days? >> Sorry. >> New items of first 100 Grove Avenue site plan approval. This is a request from Vogue Engineering
on behalf of Crescent Fish Camp LLC for a 15 acre site plan to be developed as a 54 space recreational vehicle park. There are 4.8 acres of wetlands that will be preserved.
and this property is located on excuse me at 100 World Avenue. The site plan has been reviewed by the city's development review committee for compliance with the requirements of the LDC and the plan development agreement.
Staff finds that the proposed plan complies with the applicable use, intensity, and conventional standards. The applicant is preserving nine of the 12 specimen trees on site and is providing mitigation for the specimen trees.
Staff is recommending approval of the site application to authorize development of the crescent fish camp with the following conditions. One is that prior to issu issuance of construction plan approval, the applicant will coordinate with the city regarding the proposed connection to the
existing 8 in water beam located within US7 at the development entrance. The final connection method shall be subject to city approval and may include a cut in T size on size tap insert valves or another method deemed acceptable by the
city. The second condition is that prior to issuance of construction plan approval, the applicant shall demonstrate compliance with all applicable fireflow requirements for the proposed dead end fire hydrant. The design of the water distribution system, including the
length and size of the proposed 6-in water man, shall be subject to review and approval by the city and the fire department. Are there any questions regarding the site plan? Any questions from the something I'd like.
>> Yeah, the applicant is here as well too. >> Okay. I I just wanted to put this into perspective because you know >> a lot of the microphone I want to put this into perspective. Is it working? >> Yeah. so that we get an idea on um unit
density because nothing is ever mentioned on that when these come to us and I I worked on the numbers and given the 15.19 acres minus the wetlands minus
uh almost three acres for some kind of a commercial development. I'm sure it's kind of like restaurant or something. >> It's just reserved land that's zone commercial. Yeah. Can the mic if you state your name for the record?
>> Andrew Garcia fishing. >> How's that? >> Anyhow, the the density that you're you're looking at is a 7.45 units per acre. The number just just to put this in perspective that never comes across.
And I hate to see things suffer with what's called a sardine effect when you just pile on as many units as you can. I mean, that's great for the owner because it pencils out as you mentioned. >> Sure. >> But it but it's not necessarily great
for the community. But anyhow, just just low low density is considered four to five units for a year. >> Yeah. So so this is not really considered residential, right? This this is an RV park. So So these These are not >> this is not residential. >> Yeah. So so they're they're not dwelling
units. So I I mean I understand the comparison that you're making, but it's not an actual standard. And so you know the the issue I I mean that you're raising I I think
it's just you know it's a just kind of an open question in terms of how you feel about it. Do do we have a standard for density in the city? >> There's not a standard for density that applies to RV parks. This is not a residential development. So you do have
residential development standards for dwelling units. These are trending uses more like a hotel. You know, think of it a better analogy would be a hotel. And so you don't apply residential densities to hotel units. For example,
>> this is not residential. versus RV. >> The the plan development does have a a maximum allowance that was approved with their plan development agreement of 74 spaces. So that would >> 74 spaces was the maximum maximum allowed by their plan development
agreement. So they're coming in with 54 proposed on the site plan. >> Okay. And 74 is more consistent with what you see in high density transient parks, right? So high high density is anywhere from 8 to 12 units per acre and medium density is like 6 to 8 units.
>> And I think you're referring more to to residential oriented parks. So these are transient oriented parks. So more vacation oriented guests, folks coming in from other places for short short-term stays. So a high density park that's transient in nature, you'd see 10
to 12 pads an acre is what's typical. The very limited landscape. came out for a site visit today and actually spoke with you >> and uh I think what you have envisioned even though it's 7.45 units for density
>> it looks good I just want to so the audience can understand about density so that we don't get so that it doesn't start looking like a parking lot. >> Absolutely. and and you know I think coming and seeing the the the park that
exists now um that gives you a really good feel for what we look to achieve right you know we don't go in and build parking lots and pave everything over we like to embrace live oaks and natural landscaping natural amenities because if you're a camper and you spent time camping you know to me it's a glorified
landscaping effort right um you get there amongst the trees and shade and pleasant settings and that really facilitates quality camping experience And that's something we try and do across our parks. So it very much so is our goal to not facilitate that effect.
>> And I got that feeling as I was speaking with you today on the board. Go ahead. That's all I had to say. >> Thank you. Um on the So um are we are you taking us through this?
We we we can if you you'd like to. We >> Okay. All right. Uh what was your intention? >> Our intention of presenting to you is we didn't know what size you you document
you you were looking at your agenda. There are full size sets that have been uh that have been provided with each of their submitts, but you'd have to have come in and asked to see that. So, so thank thank you Mark. So,
one of the um one of the issues is that um I just got this like two days ago and um unfortunately um um I haven't had time to come in and look at the larger scales. I did scan
this, but I haven't had the time really to look at any of this uh documentation uh with quality. um on the um on the 100 Grove Avenue. Um I I have some questions
that that that may satisfy me, but uh but on on B, the central business district smallcale uh plan, um moving on to B. >> Well, I'm bringing up a point of not getting the documentation.
uh but just two days ago. Um that's that's a lot of um research and and it's also quite honestly it's sensitive because people have brought up concerns about it property owners and residents
and uh like me they haven't had the time to re really review it. Uh so I have concerns about proceeding with E today uh at this meeting because of that. Um I'm willing to go forward with A with
the Grow Grove Avenue. Um um but um anyways, those are my general thoughts. Um and I I think it's I think we all agree it's important that our residents be able to look at the documentation.
Uh obviously it's our responsibility to make a recommendation at the end of the day uh to to the county to the city commission. So, uh anyways, uh with that should um
um what are your thoughts? >> Well, we can talk about let's get through this item which is a site approval and then let's talk about item B. >> Yeah, that's fine. >> Afterwards. >> Yeah. I just wanted to start out with my Okay.
>> my concerns. >> Okay. >> Well, do you want to walk through this plan? >> Let me ask you a few questions first if I may. Okay, >> please do. >> Okay. Um, obviously Grove Avenue exists
and you have a a second entry and exit on 17th, >> correct? >> Uh, and and that's a that's a new cut, isn't it? >> Yes. >> Yeah. Uh
um Marggo, are there any turning lanes? uh they're you know that they're going through the DOT permit process right now in terms of the the the number of actual
uh trips that will go through this uh through the site it's very low so >> well >> so I don't think will require that.
>> Yeah. So, it's up to DOT to >> Yes, it is. It's their road. >> Do the Okay. Thank you. >> And if it's the the second entrance is largely reserved for emergency vehicles. It was a fire marshal request. >> Well, I know it's just why you would
want it. >> Yeah, that's that's the purp. It's not going to be open for public entry exit. It's going to be closed. So, >> Oh, so be it will be dated. >> Correct. >> I see. can only use for emergency. Okay, great. Thank you for that
explanation. Um, you have u a restroom area. >> Who who is that intended to serve? >> So, it's a bath house, right? Typically composed of a, you know, select number
of bathrooms. the specific plan we proposed as three um and then three showers and it's it's RVers, right? So, you come in an RV, you want a break from your RV, nicer shower, more space, larger cooling setup. Um very common at
RV resorts and and other, you know, transit orient I appreciate that. So, really what it is, it's a convenience. >> Correct. uh in in case they uh don't want to uh use the facilities within their own RV. >> That's correct.
>> Okay. Um and is there parking for it? >> Yes. Should be just if you're looking at the plan, the park is directly in front of it >> to the south. So if you're looking at Grove Avenue, that's north and you see
the facility location and then just to the south there designated handicap parking spots and other select spots. >> Okay. Thank you. Um in the summary, it's it talks about tin tiny houses. >> Yes. >> What are tiny houses defined at in this?
>> So I think it depends on the on the on the local uh in Florida that you're that you're discussing. So tiny tiny homes in our frame of reference and they've actually been pulled from that plan specifically. So there's no proposed tiny homes in the most recent iteration of this plan. Uh but they're stamped
RVIA park model units. So they're on wheels. Um but you typically skirt them and they're they're like a regular hotel room, right? But they're facilitated by an RV pad and an RV oriented plug-in and sewer hookup and water hookup, right? So
you literally can park them on an RV pad and I've got a mobile hotel room that's not mobile and except in the case of emergency situation you have advanced warning not there'll be a chance to pull out. >> So um >> we have two on that I'm which really
good you know excellent >> but am I correct you just stated on on in this future plan you have none. >> No. >> Okay. If we if we do move to add those, it'll be a separate permanent engagement effort. >> And they're I assume they're bedroom
bath kitchenet or >> and they're meant as hotel infrastructure, right? So it's >> right. But hotels have suites uh with >> these have bed, bath, sink, you know, small cooking area, porch. >> So they do have small kitchen if you
were to correct plan in the future. Correct. Um, and how many guest parking spaces do you have? >> So, each RV pad is a parking space in its own right. >> Each one has parking uh guest parking
sheet six. So you'll see that there's a facilitated parking spot as opposed to every um >> what's the letter 46 G1 >> G1 >> and then there's a diagram of the the
path layout in the bottom right. >> Those are the different types of pads. >> Okay, great. And you can see I mean from a from a scale perspective if you're talking kind of the sardine effect these really aren't very large pads you know we're um
you know depending on the specific pad we're talking about but 55 60 70 ft in length significant amount of width and then space between them as well. So, there's the RV pad, there's a picnic table, there's a parking space, and a I
believe a boat. >> Some of them have boat parking spaces as well. >> So, the first one I'm looking at, which is top left, has two park spaces, a picnic area,
a uh a boat stall. Is that covered, by the way? >> No, it's not. Okay. Are you wanting a specific count of how many spaces there are? >> Uh, no, I got that. >> Okay. >> Thank you for asking. >> Did you have any further questions about
it? >> I may. Thank you for your patience. So the uh the bottom right one uh I see one one car stall the drive-thru stall is that for the RV.
So when we say driveth through there's different types of RV pad orientations. There's back in there pull in there's pull through. So pull through what it's meant to facilitate is somebody >> My point is that's for the RV. >> Correct. >> Yeah. Whether it's back in or drive through. Yeah, it's meant to facilitate
you pulling in and pulling out having to back up or >> So, that one has one stall car stall, correct? >> They're meant those are more so meant for people shorter stays, wanting to come in and out if they're pulling in a tow vehicle, not having to unl unlatch
it. Um, you know, meant to just be hyperconvenient. >> Uh, this may be premature, but have you done an analysis on it to determine your average state? Um we have general numbers. I don't have
the figure compared with me here today though unfortunately. But we tend to be a short so seasonally you know the Florida snowbird season. We do get um longer term stage from folks coming in from from you know various loc but a lot
from the northeast at our specific park. Um we'll see them come for January and February in certain cases. Some will come for Jan Feb and March. Um, but typically throughout the rest of the season they're pretty short stays. You know, come three, four days or weekends.
And uh I I certainly the assumption is that uh the existing facility uh to the north uh this this facility will use that boat ramp that pool etc. >> Correct.
>> Do you plan any any of those items in future developments on this site? We don't plan to expand the existing site any more than it is now from an RV pad or accommodation perspective. Um future amenities certainly it's something we
consider you know once we get more pads in if you know it's clear there's a need to facilitate some other form form of amenity something we trying to be responsible. So um so that's an option you'll have. >> Absolutely. >> Yeah. Depending on your growth
>> and as you said your needs. >> Um any vision on what the commercial aspect might uh compose of in the future >> on the 17 retail parcels? >> Yes. Yes. >> You know we're we're open to it. Um you know we do see that there's growth or
demand for growth in Crescent City from a commercial perspective. Um, to us those feel like prime, you know, main street front retail. Um, and it felt like at least waiting and seeing how that developed would be, you know, best for us, best for the city.
>> So, I think you should think of these as out parcels that I'm sure >> I certainly appreciate. I just was exploring a little bit. Appreciate that. >> Yeah. >> Yeah. Okay. Um, I I have another general question. So,
uh, you you've done very well with your property with the existing facility to to advertise and to promote um gatherings there. Um uh when the u speedboat races were here
um you did very well but uh and and I I went there but I was a little confused because as I entered and of course it was indicated the general public was welcome. I uh I saw a signage that said, you know, private property, no
trespassing, um um tenants only. Um and I was a bit confused about it. >> Yeah, that's you know, that's something we've heard in the past. Um and look, it's it's a it's a sentiment that it's
mixed for us because one, we have guest safety to consider. Um, and I think if it's after hours certain times of night, it's good to have signage like that. It, you know, makes people who may be coming in for nefarious purposes or, you know, maybe shouldn't be there. Uh, it's good
to have them see, hey, this is private property. I I know I shouldn't be here. Um, but we also have tackle shop down there and we've heard from folks that come in, they say, hey, I didn't know I was allowed down there, so I don't come buy and tackle from you. Um, so I think there's a give and take there. we're
airing to the side of caution um you know posting that it is indeed private property or somebody's down there and they don't have a reason to be down there it's better that they know that they're trespassing is our our perspective >> and I appreciate that but when there's an invitation to for the community to
come meet the boat captain captains of the races and you approach and you see this this warning um it it sends a mixed signal and we're a small happy town and we intend to be
that way at least in spirit. Um it uh it gives the wrong impression. Um so I would I would just suggest that you cover it when you have a special
event or um you know improve on the messaging. >> Okay. >> Okay. >> Yep. That stuff is we'll think through. >> Thank you. I'm sorry I'm diverting a bit but >> um that's all I have for the moment.
>> Yes. >> A couple questions. This has been through the design review. Correct. >> Correct. >> Means cross the city code. Everything that is in the site plan meets the code. >> It meets the code or the the plan development agreement. So yeah, the
answer is yes. Been through three three >> rounds. floor. This is not the first time we've seen >> This is not the first time you guys have seen it. >> It's also It went through staff review three times. >> Okay. All right. >> Well, I'm ready to make a motion.
>> Did we get from the community? >> Excuse me. Did we hear from the community if they have any comments? >> Uh you you certainly can. Yeah, that's >> I mean I was just wondering if that was I mean this is
>> you guys are doing more of a ministerial approval. >> So this isn't like I notice a public hearing but but >> Oh we got to hear from the audience. >> It's up to you guys as a group. >> I'd like to hear from the audience at this time. Do you have any public
comments or questions or concerns? >> Hearing none, then we will go on to the vote. >> Uh I I'll make a motion. If you're good with that, I will I move that we uh in this project for Christmas camp we
u approve the site plan as presented. I second. >> Is the motion and second green? >> I can Hardy. >> Yes. >> Dod. >> Yes. >> Bob chair.
>> Yes. >> S. >> I just want to comment that uh um I was very impressed with the variety. It looks like it's going to be a quality product. >> Thank you. We're really excited. >> Is this Friday going to be free drinks
and happy? >> If so, just pay attention. >> All right. Thank you. Moving on. Uh, Central Business District Small Scale Comprehensive Plan Amendment.
So, so before Rebecca starts, I guess what I'm going to suggest is first of all, we've done this in a number of communities. Uh, we've done master zonings that, you know, much larger than this.
Um, and what I'm going to suggest is that you guys hear hear our presentation, you hear any input, we answer your questions. If you want to make a decision tonight, that would be fantastic. If you guys
wish to continue this to the next meeting, you you certainly, you know, do that as well. and we'll be happy to come back as I will ask that since this is a public hearing if you do decide
that you don't want to make a decision tonight that you actually not close the public hearing you continue it >> we have two items one is a small scale comprehensive plan and the other is potential business district resoning.
I'm going to give a presentation that mainly focuses on resoning. The smallcale comprehensive plan amendment is specifically for um three parcels that are the Miller School property.
It's just under 8 acres. Uh this property is currently designated as public buildings and grounds. the central business district is compatible with the commercial and mixed use future land use designation.
So since that property is in the proposed central business district at this time, the small I'm sorry, the smallcale comprehensive plan amendment would change that future land use so that it would be compatible with the new zoning. >> And what is the new zoning?
>> The new zoning would be the central business district. >> Thank you. in the central business district at this time consists of 87 parcels and it's just over 40 acres of
>> Can everyone hear me if I'm not at the microphone just say next slide Okay. >> So on the screen you will see an aerial map. All the parcels that are currently part of the central business district are highlighted in red.
The city adopted an updated land development code in 2024 under a previous city manager, Mr. Charles Redd. With that uh code update, we created the central business district and it's intended to better fit the historic
development pattern downtown. So, it will promote a more walkable downtown area and fit a lot of the existing structures that are there by reducing the setbacks that are required. it it changes some of the standards so
that it will it will actually match what we have now. No properties have been zoned central business district yet. This is um an effort to promote the resoning. If it's adopted, any owners
that are in the areas highlighted in red that do not opt out would be included and would have this new zoning. So this is on the left hand side a map of the current future land use designations and on the right is the
proposed. If you'll notice um I know it's a little hard to see on the screen but on the right hand side the Miller school property is circled in red. Um the light bluish gray area is the area
that would be changed to mixed use and then the remaining area that is still shown in dark blue would keep its public facilities and grounds future land use and that was at the recommendation of city staff.
These two maps um on the lefth hand side reflect the current zoning. You can see that the majority of the parcels in the central business district area are currently zoned general commercial or GC1. There are a few that have single
family residential zoning and then the Miller school property that has a public buildings and grounds zoning at this time. And then on the right, the the color of the map has changed since some of our earlier versions like the map that's over here um just to reflect that
the same color as the mixed use future land use. So that that light bluish gray area is the central business district. Um you can see that it's mostly along Summit and Central Avenue. This table is a general summary of the
permitted uses between the existing zoning classifications of the properties that are in the proposed central business district. So, um the single family and public facilities are primarily for um that's
fairly self-explanatory. The only residential uses that's currently allowed in the public facilities area are assisted living facilities or nursing or retirement homes. GC1 does not allow any residential uses and the central business district allows
second story residential units over commercial. That is a major change. Another change is that the central business district promotes small-cale retail or restaurant uses by offering incentives for certain uses like cafes,
bakeries, those sorts of things. It does not allow drive-thrus or the more suburban commercial development that the GC1 zoning allows. Okay, this is a general comparison of the existing commercial zoning and the
proposed central business district. Right now, there are 40 parcels that do not conform to the existing general commercial area requirement, which is 10,000 square ft. With the new central business district, which reduces the lot area requirement
to 6,250 square feet, we would only have 22 parcels that are non-conforming. There are parking reduction incentives for properties in the central business district. If you're in the GC1 district
and you want relief from the parking requirement, you have to go through the variance process and the public hearing. For the central business district, if you're on Central Avenue, you can have up to 100% of the parking requirements waved. If you're elsewhere in the
district, you could have up to 50% wave. There are requirements for where the parking is placed. In the GC1 district, it's primarily front-loaded off the street. In the central business district, it's required to be to the
side or rear of a building. And that's part of that um walkable community intent that when you walk see the building, you're going to be coming directly to the entrance and not crossing a large parking lot. Um residential uses, as I mentioned before,
are not allowed in the existing commercial zoning, but would be in the central business district. And any non-performing structure may remain as it is. Um, this has been one of our biggest concerns from residents is that if they have an existing home or an
existing business that wouldn't conform, would they have to make changes to their property? And the answer is no. This is a section directly from the code that show the dimensional requirements for the new central business district.
The incentives for the central business district include parking relief. Um the city manager can wave 100% of the parking on central 50 elsewhere for specific uses like cafes, coffee shops,
bakeries, and small boutique style retail. Um there are also setback reliefs. So right now, if you're in this general commercial zoning and you need to reduce your setbacks, you have to go through the variance process come to a public hearing. With the central
business district, the city manager can reduce the setbacks administratively um even up to zero feet. So the building could potentially go all the way to the property line. Okay, this is this is an AI generated
image. The intent is just to help visualize how these two codes would apply. So on the left hand side we have a central business zoning district site. Um the dimensions are based on the
minimum lot width and area for that zoning. You can see that it it would allow for um a much smaller parking lot. You don't need nearly um as many spaces there, a smaller setbacks, so you have
less area that would be landscaped and direct entry from the sidewalk compared to the general commercial zoning on the right. This is from the perspective of standing on the sidewalk. Again, these are not perfect images. Um, but just to help
visualize on the left, the walkable community, you're more oriented to someone on foot. You can walk directly up to the entrance of the building versus our current suburban commercial zoning where you will be crossing a larger parking lot area to get to the
structure. Okay, these are to illustrate how the code would apply to a property on Central Avenue. The dimensions for these lots are based on the average area of all the non the lots that would still be non-performing in the central business
district. Um, which would be just over 3,800 square ft. So, the waiverss would allow reduced parking. So, since we have on street parking available, um that helps
provide for parking even if there's no parking lot. On the left, 25% of the parking is waved. On the right, 100% of the parking is waved. And you can see that setbacks are waved in both of these images as the building goes to the property line. And then the image on the
far left is from the perspective if you were looking straight at the building. You can enter directly from the sidewalk and you can see it fits that downtown development where you have buildings directly adjacent to one another.
Okay. The central business district does allow mixed use projects. They would have additional things to consider when they're designing the site. They have to account for open space and that would involve at least 20% of the total site
area. Some of that could be satisfied through private patios or balconies. Okay. Nonconformity. This is probably the biggest concern that we've heard from residents so far.
A lot of the properties downtown um right now are non-conforming due to limited parking, small lot sizes, setbacks, or they might have a very narrow driveway. The central business district is supposed to provide relief to those properties if they were to add
improvements or redevelop. Existing structures would not have to make changes just because of the res. Are there any questions about either the future land use amendment or the reszoning? A >> bunch of questions. >> Okay.
>> And I've got some I have three big concerns. >> Okay. My first big concern is the setbacks. Under current current zoning, the setback is 25 ft. That's under GC1. >> Yes. >> Okay. Now, you want to change it to 10
ft or zero. So, deemed by our city planner. The setback of this building from the street is 12 ft. You want to shorten the distance two feet shorter than what
we have out here already. This is a dangerous place to walk up here. It's not conducive to foot traffic or pedestrians. Okay. So, I'm totally against this 10-ft setback. I'd rather keep the 25 foot setback. At
least that's more aesthetically pleasing and more inducive to pedestrian uh walking storefronts. The other thing with a 10-ft setback, when you look down, if you're sitting on standing on the sidewalk and looking
down, you're going to see a plethora of buildings, lights, little overhangs, signs, and all that. Essentially, it's going to look like a strip mall, and it's not going to look aesthetically pleasing. It's not going to have the charm that we keep talking about that we
want in this community. Not at all. And my other big concern is parking. Um the idea of having uh residents over the buildings, that's a great idea. I mean, that really helps the community. Okay. But the problem is that
the parking arrangements need to be different because the parking arrangements during the day are different than the parking arrangements during the night. And I believe that I I believe that on street parking doesn't add to the aesthetics of of
the community. Okay? It just it doesn't. Okay? And there's a lot of questions that need to be asked before we even attempt to approve those. Okay? Like um what are the proposed minimal setbacks for CV? We already said it's going to be
10 people to zero. So the the waiver for to zero feet would be on Central Avenue specifically. >> Zero feet that means that the house is right or the building is right on the road
>> right up to the rightway line. It's not there'll be sidewalk in front of building. >> Well, that begs the question, how big is the sidewalk? 2 feet, 3 feet, six feet, 8 >> six feet. >> Six feet require six feet. If you look at the uh the requirements in the
central business district, we're actually increasing the size of the the sidewalk just too narrow to promote. >> I mean, you don't want people walking up and down the sidewalks like like a trail of ants, one behind the other because
you can't walk side by side because it's too narrow. So, that's a big concern. The other one is um are there transition uh projections adjacent to residential neighborhoods?
>> I don't think that's been addressed. And then um again, what is the secondary parking requirements for the second story residential living? Will shortterm rentals be allowed in that secondary
second story living? Um what is the maximum u future building height for CB zoning and u does resoning increase allowable
density compared to current zoning? I think it does. It it has the same density as the medium residential land use, but it has the intensity or the the walk coverage of the commercial land use. So,
it's a a combination of those two existing land uses. >> It's a hybrid. And then has traffic and parking uh demand been modeled with future buildup? You know, St. Augustine ran into a huge
problem when they, you know, revamped their downtown area because all of a sudden they found out they didn't have any place to park cars. They had to, you know, truck people in on trolleys. They wanted to go downtown. I don't know if we get that.
Okay. And then storm water drainage, you know, that always seems to be a big issue around here given that we have a lot of rain and will u historical architectural compatibility
standards exist, you know? I mean, can people just build any kind of a little tin shack storefront facade that they want to build? that there are architectural standards for uh the central business district and
there are existing architectural standards that apply uh for commercial residential development and there's additional architectural requirements for uh the redevelopment area already. So
this adds a little bit to it and uh Rebecca can go through that now. And then one it's a you know once the resoning how much future development can be can occur administratively
without um returning to zoning board. Other words how much free will does the city have to move forward without coming back to the zoning board? Well, it depend if they need variances, they'll they'll come back
to you, right? Uh site plans over 2500 square ft. If it say somebody was to take down a a building on Central Avenue, there'd be they'll be going through most likely the historic preservation board. And if they're doing
something more than than than 2500 square feet, they they would come back to you for site approval. >> I I I think there's there's some good parts to this and there's some not so good parts to this. I think this whole
thing needs to be revamped um with some of the items that I've mentioned so that we don't run into future problems where gosh I wish we had done that or we don't run into future problems where everybody's applying for
variance so there is no standards anymore just whether or not they can get their variance so I I wouldn't go on this as it stands Danny Any questions?
>> Uh yeah, I I I agree. Um but I I have a question and that is um the it talks about uh the setback change on central from the street. Um does it address um
summit 17? Does it change the setback there? The street setback. It changes the setback from from what you have in the the GC1 to what we're proposing on uh for the central business district.
So it would bring the buildings closer to 27. So so so think of Central Avenue as having a build two line where you're forcing the buildings forward uh to essentially to the property line.
Uh but there are reduc reduced setbacks along Summit Avenue. And so this was all designed to sort of be consistent with the vision that's in in the master plan >> which includes the four laning of 17th
>> ultimately. >> Right. >> Yeah. So we wouldn't want to encourage building where it may need to be eliminated in the future with the expansion of 17. uh
you know a lot of the vision that that was created that that this was created to serve would came from Charles Rudd who as you know was was very interested in downtown redevelopment and that was
his area of expertise. I think he thought that the, you know, the expansion of seven, you know, an additional widings of 17 would be a mistake, >> but it's not something that ultimately
we have a lot of control over, right? >> Well, that's my point. And uh as you remember, we uh we discussed that it would be up basically up to the state to determine that. So that that's a
concern I have. Yeah, >> right. The the more buildings that they have to impact, the less likely they are to, you know, there there's some there was some strategy to that.
>> Um, just as far as 17 goes from from a bit of a historical perspective, uh, it used to be before the medians came in here, we had street parking and all that out here. uh DOT can't even put the medians in for safety reasons is is what is what they
said about it. Uh it's looking like as far as 17 goes with the expansion that we're talking here in in a simple business district that there won't be any expansion anymore. I don't see them going from four to six lanes in the middle of town that doesn't doesn't seem to follow what DOT would do to spend
money just to make six lanes across the city doesn't >> they have to impact a number of historic structures that would seems like it's as big as it's going to be out here right now. So, >> well, I would like to think that, but I I don't have faith that it would quite
frankly. And quite frankly, uh looking back, uh I thought it was fine with the trees with the trees on either side covering the arbridge covering in the street. I mean, it was it was really represented what Crescent City is all
about. And the first mistake they made was to eliminate most of the trees and widen it. Um, I would have been all for just slowing things down as they came through town and and uh giving the
people traveling through the opportunity to take a look and stop. But anyways, um um I I have concerns about 17 in the future. So, is that something that we can, you
know, look at as far as if the setbacks are something that they question as far as safety and things of that nature, is that something that we can go back and review or >> Yeah. So, so
this is a zoning category that is in your landing code. Hasn't been applied anywhere yet. It it could be amended. We've amended the setbacks already for the the PF district, the the public facilities district if you recall. That was also a
district that had uh zero setbacks if you if you if you remember. Uh but because of uh some of the although they're not expanding the the fire department in place, if you recall, there was at one point a plan to expand
the existing fire station in that there was some concerns raised by by neighbors. So a 10-ft setback was established >> for the PI. So yes, the the central business district could be amended.
>> Just just to clarify, when we talk about setbacks, we're not talking from the road. We're talking from the right away. Right. >> Yeah. Right. >> So it's not we're not measuring from the road. We're measuring from the rightway. >> So what's the right way?
>> So the rideway includes, you know, there's the travel lanes. That's the road, right? And then there's there's sidewalks, there's you you know there there's utilities on each side. So the rideway it is in almost all cases always wider than
the actual roadway and it does vary along 17. >> It still doesn't make sense to me right away. You know, you got your road, you got your curving, >> and you got you're saying six foot sidewalk. Then where does the where's
the road? Is it at the end of the six foot sidewalk? >> No, they would they'll overlap, right? Some of the existing sidewalk is in the right way. >> Okay. So, you're still going to have a
narrow setback. >> It's not going to be 25 ft like it is in the CG1. I I would tell you it's not much bigger than >> 25. No, the proposal is not 25 ft. >> So, it's still narrow like we have out
here. >> And and that was the that that's the intent of the recommendation is to create this >> more defined, more traditional looking downtown
and to extend it beyond Central Avenue. So that was that's the vision in your master plan. >> Yeah, I remember >> you know and and this zoning was created at the same time as the master plan if you recall a different consultant
developed your master plan that was at but we coordinated with them and this district was created in discussions between us Charles and Harris in order to implement that master plan. So,
>> right. I I remember when we did the um presentation, we talked about he kind of showed us what it could look like and things of that nature. I think the whole purpose was your >> to make the um drew it up. >> So, what they're saying was done by
errors, but most of the stuff in the master was done by errors. >> Yeah. It started turning my Yeah, it was I agree it was much better vision than what the state may have in mind.
Personally, I wanted to do it narrow, but um so back to uh the point um we can go through this a little more and tweak it
and and uh and discuss possible changes. >> Yeah. So, let's assume, let's say you guys wanted a 50- foot setback in the central business district. I I would recommend against that, but let's assume you did.
>> If we continue this to the next meeting, we will bring you you'll you'll have these items and we'll have changes also to the social they can move together shortly.
But it's not the major issue. I mean, I like, you know, the the mixed use and things of that. I like what was presented to us. So, it's the major issue that the board is having. The setbacks. >> Um, I have um I like the general
concept. Um, however, as I said in the beginning, I'd like time to study it more. >> Okay. >> And I'd like time for the residents to be able to to study study it more. Um,
and so I I I think we're all best served who just to postpone this for another month. >> Yeah, I I I would ask that you hear from the public that is here before you do that. >> Yeah, I I that sure.
>> Yeah, that's I agree with that. I think we need the the people that it's going to affect need to tell us what they think. >> Exactly. Yeah. All right. So, at this time, do we >> I have another comment. Yes. >> You know, a a lot of the information
that's presented is digital. You know, it doesn't take into account any of the sociological aspects of what we're trying to do. I I think that, you know, as a person with a degree in social science, I I believe
that we need to add the social value. You know, do people like narrow sidewalks that are six foot wide and right on the curb or do they like wider sidewalks? You know, which is which is more
pleasing to them as strollers because that's what we're trying to encourage is people to stroll and hopefully pop into one of the storefronts. So there's there's nothing that addresses that in in any case.
It's all purely, you know, numbers and facts and economy on land use and stuff like that, but what does a community want and what what is aesthetically pleasing for our community? Was there
>> I just want to say if I'm remembering correctly because when they came in to do the presentation, wasn't there an aspect where there the community I mean the community can kind of go in and and look at it and get some input at that time?
>> Yeah, there was a lot of public input associated with your mastermind. So I mean a few workshops. >> Yeah. So, so you know in theory that is your your your quote unquote official vision for that area.
Not not that it you know you might not two years old might might feel differently now >> and not that it can't be changed but that is you know in terms of policy that is the official vision document >> for the redevelopment area.
>> Okay. Any more questions? >> Yeah, could I volunteer to uh present a report on the sociological impact of this
and get it out before we have our next meeting, you know, get it out to Dan 10 days. >> It's really not up to me. >> Well, I'm just can I do the call >> or is that like he'll >> do you want to do it? >> Yeah. Great. I I want to see something that that is going to be developed
community pride. >> Sure. >> You know, I want people to come here and say, "Wow, that's a great city. I'd like to buy something there." As opposed to, "Yeah, I like that new strip mall they put in." >> So, there's nothing in
the central business is designed to avoid strip malls, right? When we talk about the GC1, >> GC1 it was created and it
the the result of that is when we talk about it being suburban development, we we talk about the GC1 as being encouraging and oriented to strict commercial. We're we're the the central business
district is intended to be the opposite of that. >> Yeah. Well, I think there's some good points in GC1 and there's some good points in the CV. I think we need to meld them together to come to something that's aesthetically pleasing and and
promote people to think of Crescent City as a place that hey, I'd like to live there. So, I I think there needs to be a little bit of a a psychological evaluation of, you know, what what is a
8ft sidewalk with a 10-ft setback thing as opposed to a 20ft sidewalk with a 25 foot set. What is what is the ideal? >> I think a lot of it's lot size. You start chopping into people's lot size,
they're not going to be able to build. That's part of the problem. >> Yeah. I mean I >> Yeah, but now you're sacrificing aesthetics for >> that has nothing to do with aesthetics. How close it is to the the roadway has nothing to do with aesthetics.
>> Oh, it does. >> I disagree with you on that. >> I disagree that it would look like a strip mall from the master plan that we saw as well. Yeah, I >> And for the record, I I like living here
the way it is. So, I will tell you that I I I'd like to see improvement, but I came here 20 years ago. I like this town. I want to live here. So, we don't need to necessarily have a whole bunch of aesthetics that people say, "Oh, I want to live here."
So >> just one just one >> I think um we do need improvement and we need to move forward in enhancing uh future development and filling the vacancy commercial space.
Um I mean that's one of the issues here. Um, and I'm not I'm all for anything too that would allow more trees to be planted, particularly on these hot days um for shade. But um I think it's I' I'd
like to hear from the uh the public and um and I think it will we be wise to uh uh continue this for another meeting. >> All right. At this time, we'll um take
public comments. >> How's everybody doing? Scott King, 306 Central Avenue. I'll use that address for this today. So, um part of what we talked about just a little bit ago implied that this that we citizens have input. You know, there was
a lot of public hearings and all this work. Um, pretty sure only two of us in in this room were at a lot of those meetings and a lot of that. And no, we we didn't have it. We didn't understand, you know, Mr.
Red came to town and uh, yes, he was he was Mr. Redevelopment. The the Main Street people just gawk over him. He's he's Mr. Main Street. He knows what he's talking about. So when he came, we were all uh you know on board with doing whatever we could do to
help our city and we all know we're failing terribly. Um and quite honestly he led us and we followed and I think that's the way it should have been. What I'm trying to say is is we didn't understand um now that I'm reading this none of this was
discussed that how how detrimental this this could be to our town. So So you know, let's let's yeah, if all that had happened and we were all on board, then this would be a cakewalk, but that's not what happened. So, we kind of I agree we need to back
way up on this. Um, so we don't understand nuances that that um that happened that that that this will cause. Okay. First, the first thing that that really bothered me about it, there's a list of prohibited businesses. Did y'all read that? We didn't talk
about that today. That's unacceptable. unacceptable. Now, you know, if you read them, you might say, "Oh, no strip clubs and and no internet cafes." Well, sure, but there's other things on there that we might want. And there's some things on there, too, that are vague enough. Says
no fast food. Well, there's fast food out there today that's, you know, pretty upscale. So, I I don't like that list of prohibited businesses at all. Then there's a list of standards, which sounds good. building height. Did you read in there that they want
that that we're asking you guys to tell us what colorful painting unacceptable unique facade every 50 ft, you know, basically what this is trying to do is put us together and make us this cute little Orlando Disney World downtown looking thing. Uh, appreciate your
comments. to, you know, uh, a lot of this is counter counterintuitive. Um, I'm sorry, I'm kind of jumping a little bit. Okay. All that city manager control. I think that's a mistake as well. Yeah, it would it would make
things faster. But, you know, I everything has to come through this this room anyway. We don't let nothing happen in this town without rubber stamping and hitting gamble three, four, five, six times. So, that's going to happen anyway. uh sign requirements are at the
discretion of the city manager. That takes our that that takes my say so over the sign ordinance away because my representative now the mayor the commission doesn't have a say so the city manager
an employee can do what he wants wave parking requirements same argument there that's that's not his should be his place and then he can change the setbacks so I'm not real sure why we bother putting any of that in there if we're going to give our employee the right to just change of good. Yeah.
Also, it says we can opt out. Well, you know, that makes no sense to me. If this is supposed to be this cookie cutter, straight, everything in line, walk down the road, um, you know, the guy opts out on either side of me, I can follow all
these rules, but it sure doesn't make for these goals that we that we're talking about on walking area and all these aesthetics. So, There you go. Why do this where I can opt out and put a gas station right in the middle of your little beautiful
walking town? So, there's something wrong there. You know, you got the old pig and save lot. So, we're not going to be able to put a grocery store in there. Let's just say that the wall Walmart neighborhood stores. I think that's what they're called. The little grocery stores that would fit there. Nope. Can't
do it. That's a chain. Couldn't put a Dollar General grocery store in there either. Please. There's no jokes about how many Dollar Generals we have. Okay, this is a rural town with about 1,500 people, it's not an HOA. And while I have really been for a lot
of the changes we've done lately, lately me the last six years or so, you know, some of it is just again it's too much like an HOA. You know, this is a little South Florida town. This a little southern town in Florida. It's not a little Florida town. It's a it's a
southern town. We need less restrictions. I see this as restricting us, not helping us. Okay. Um, so you got somebody comes to town and maybe his idea is a little different. We're talking about, oh, it needs to we want this to be a walking town like it
used to be. Um, and who said so? Who who says so? Charles Rudd, who is not even here anymore. Who who says that? We have yet to decide
and we have been talking about it since the '9s when I got involved. We've been talking about that forever. Oh, let's use the lake. Let's do this. Let's do that. We don't know what our little niche wants to be. So, why are we forcing ourselves to become a little
walking town? Yeah, that sounds great, but we haven't decided that. So, I don't know why we're pushing to go that way. I don't know. You know, to me, and and I I guess this this is easy to use, but I'll say it anyway. You know, we're
we're dying out here. I'm lucky. I'm I just turned 62. I've already done it. I'm done doing it. I've done what I needed to do. Okay. That's dying. Dying out there. None of the kids stay here. They got to move out. We We talked about that. So, um, this here to me says to
potential investors, go away. You can build a little tiny thing right here, little tiny store with six parking with six parking spots. Uh, and then and that's it. Maybe somebody that wants to come in town with real money. We're
basically telling they lost. I wrote some stuff about how it just doesn't feel American to have a list of businesses that are not allowed. I keep mentioning that that that one really bugs me. Okay. So, uh, hey, can I ask a question or two now? Would that be okay?
I know it's not normally what happens here. Um, why is the area behind the school left unusable? whatever that zoning was um public use or whatever that was. How you said it was at the at the staff suggestion. Why does that one
big huge lot is right on Lake Crescent that comes all the way up to Prospect? Why why is that out of the picture? >> The five acres. >> Yeah. They they thought that there was potential for a mixeduse project on a portion of the site. Um but that there
also may be interest in preserving some of the access to the lake. Um that might be better suited if it kept its >> so we kept the rest of us known >> but that piece of property. Yeah. So that that doesn't that doesn't add up.
Um you just said something reminded me. Um what is a drive-thru? We've mentioned it several times. It's in the paper. What is a drive-thru? like a a drive-th through fast food like McDonald's where you have the drive >> said fast food so it's just saying the
same thing again or is there another >> No fast food restaurants typically have driveth through windows but they don't all have >> the upscale one I was referring to earlier probably doesn't we're not going to let them in anywhere okay
>> um I think it was a little misleading thing on there was like if you do this this and this then you'll then you'll qualify to ask the city for a grant. Um, not not true. You can ask for that grant without doing all this stuff. Um, we're giving
them out right now. That's the grant you're talking about, right? The >> the CRA grant. So, yeah, let's not uh let's not say that since it's not true. Now, this this this will probably might be one of few that say this. So, uh uh people living upstairs downtown,
I know it sounds like a great idea. I own a building downtown. Please don't do that. The only trouble I've had with people on my property after hours are people that live above other build other
structures there in town in downtown. There's no reason for somebody to be walking around at 3:00 a.m. behind my building, you know. And so uh but again, that's and I got here in 85. I've had three times that I've had to uh
in all that time I've had to call law enforcement, get through a break through the window, kid messed up a a car, and that guy. So, um I I I don't like inviting people to live downtown.
Granted, you know, somebody could drive in and do the same thing, sure, but I I don't like that. Um, let's keep in mind and I'll sit down, please. Um, oh, so you talked about buildings being um,
grandfathered in, but what about uses? And this is happening right now. We have one of the one of the properties, one of the businesses in on the map is a uh, it's a speed shop. That's what it really is. in a speed shop will turn into just
like a like a mechanic shop and the city's already went to him and told him that he's probably not going to be in compliance here soon. So the uses get grandfathered in as well. >> Yes, but both struct those non-conforming structures and non-conforming uses are grandfathered.
They're many of them are grandfathered. >> Very good. I just want to make sure since again um we've already we've already upset a business owner with that. And um I do have more uh I knew when I got up here with my notes, I'd forget. So, uh, yes, let's slow this
thing down. It needs a lot of work. Um, I am very glad to hear that we're not just rubber stamped, guys. Thank you very much for for slowing it down. And, um, which I guess this is already fixed, but I'll finish with this. Uh, I was expected to opt out here before the next
meeting. Let's let's let's let's uh let's show the people that this affects. uh a little girthy and give him, you know, give him some time to think about this and do something. That that was uh that was pretty quick to to
throw it out there and then hopefully kind of make a decision on something right away. And thank you for making sure that the public because that didn't happen back when like we thought. We all came here and drank my water and smiled, ate cookies, and then we went home feeling
good about ourselves. We didn't we didn't understand what what this all entailed. Thank you. Thank you. >> Thank you, sir. >> Anyone else? >> Good evening. Um, Carol Pointer. I live at 202 Summit Street. I'm one of the
very few residentials still there on um on the 17 going through town. I am just very concerned about what is going to happen with me and as far as property values of
am I going to have to conform. I just painted my house and now I see their colors that are supposedly um going to be in effect and stuff. And uh let's say I'm just I came like a couple of years ago when
they first started this whole process and I was not really particularly happy with the the things that they were going to do. Um the first thing I know I've been here for 22 years so um the first big thing that they did did was when
they widened 17 and they took all the off street uh on street parking away. And I have been out there numerous times mowing or working and almost be hit by cars coming because the sidewalk and the road are so narrow there, the little
area before that. But u anyway, I just um I don't know. I think my big question is instead of trying to promote all this new stuff to come in and convert everything, we have so much emptiness in
our town. We have a big where bustler or the Chevrolet dealership that big property there. We have empty storefronts when you drive through. I think those kind of things need to be addressed. So instead of taking away so much um so
that people when they're driving through it because they're driving through a business with nothing but businesses, they're going to keep on driving and they're not going to have any, you know, know that the rest of the town is is gorgeous and everything. So just my comments. Thank you.
>> Thank you. Thank you. >> Thank you. Anyone else? >> All right. I guess time will close. >> Do you guys have any additional questions for us before you take action?
>> I don't this time. Thank you. So is it the um suggestion to continue the public hearing? >> Yes. Continue to your June meeting. So to a date date certainly.
>> Yes. >> Would you like a motion? >> Yes. We like a motion to >> Can can you tell us what the date of the June meeting will be? So that can be >> 18. >> Okay. So if you continue to the June
18th meeting >> I'd like to make a motion that we continue to the June 18th meeting. >> Okay. It has been second. >> Mr. Green. >> Oh. vote. >> Oh, yes.
>> I'm sorry. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Mr. Sh. >> Yes. >> All right. So, going on to central business district zoning map amendment reszoning at the time.
>> You got to continue both of them. >> Okay. will continue. Um, >> so I would make a motion that we would continue that. >> Okay, I'll second that motion >> to the June 18th >> to the June 18th meeting. >> Yes. >> All right. It has been motioned and
second to continue the central business district zoning map amendment reszoning to the June 18th. >> Okay. >> Mr. Green. >> Yes. >> M. Hardy. >> Yes. >> Mr. Dodge. >> Yes. >> Mr. Chair. Yes.
>> Moving on to other items. Are there any staff comments? >> I just want you know that we in addition to what you've seen on your tonight where we're working on amendments to the historic preservation.
So, a draft's been created. It's being circulated both internally between ourselves, the city manager, city attorney, but I also have been told that uh C manager intends
to take it to preservation organization and discuss that uh with you all. That may already be in process. I'm I'm not certain, but that's something that will be coming to you in the future as well in one form or another. Uh the idea
being uh to get the city a situation where it can become a certified local government. >> Okay. Thank you. >> And I think we have a couple variances that are working their way through the
process as well that uh may be on that next agenda. So >> good. Other than that, we I have nothing for Becket again. >> Are there specific changes that you want
to see to the central business district before we bring it back to the next meeting? >> We're going to I'm going to make a list of all that and justifiable answer. >> Okay. I'm going to review it and I'll have more input our next meeting. is I I
know we're not supposed to talk to one another, but that's very inconvenient sometimes. Is there any way that we could, you know, once once I get by? >> The only way you can talk to each other
is if you have a noticed public meeting. So, you could have a workshop meeting. >> Yes. you know, between this, but you'd have to you have to coordinate that with city staff and ask to actually be noticed in the paper
because while I don't disagree with you that it is inconvenient that you aren't able to just sort of chat about policy issues, it is the law, right? All decision must occur in the sunshine.
>> We can do whatever. >> Excuse me. Any public comments? >> I have one last comment. You want me to cook? I just have one. I I would really encourage the audience to encourage your
friends, your neighbors, those people that are really concerned with uh revitalizing this city to come to our next meeting. It's it's very important that we have your input. Very important.
If if there's a lot of apathy out there, then it's it's hard to get things done. >> It's a good thing to show the public. I mean, I'd like to hear what other people say. You know, I sit at home and grumble to myself, but I'd like to hear
what other people have to say. >> And they can call us individually, >> can they? >> Why not? >> I thought we like couldn't talk. >> You can't talk to each other. You can talk to members of the public. >> Oh, okay.
>> We want you to talk to us, right? >> All right. So I think you could hear board com member board member comments. Are there any other comments from the board? >> No, thank you. >> All right. If there's nothing else, then
the meeting is adjourned. The the May 21st, 2026 Planning and Zoning Commission meeting is adjourned. >> I can have a proper motion in a second. >> I'll make a a motion that we adjourn. >> I'll second that.
So approved. Thank you. >> Thank you.