Hit the gravel first, right? Yeah. >> Good evening. We will call our Monday meeting January 12th, Carver Heights Montlair CRMA meeting to order. Would you please stand for the invocation and
the pledge? Heavenly Father, we come before you to do the business of this city. May every voice be expressed and heard with dignity and respect. Guide our discussions and decisions that will continue to lead economic growth,
opportunities, and prosperity for our community now and for future generations. Amen. >> Amen. >> Amen. >> I aliance to the flag of the United States of America and to theublic for
which it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> We'll now go with our meeting minutes from September 22nd, 2025. May we have a motion to approve the minutes?
>> I'll make a motion to approve the minutes. >> Is there any discussion? >> Second. >> Second. >> Second. Is there any discussion? >> Roll call, please. >> Commissioner Peterson, >> yes. >> Commissioner Reeseman, >> yes. >> Commissioner Connor, >> yes.
>> Commissioner Burray, >> yes. >> Chairperson Barry, >> yes. >> I'm going on to our discussion item tonight. Um, for our future goals for the CRA, since our last meeting in September, um, the CRA Commissioner
Alderman and along with members of the Greater Leburg Community Development CRA commissioners attended the Florida Redevelopment, um, redevelopment association annual conference in West Palm. It was October 14th through 17th of 2025.
The conference provided an abundance of valuable information and we would like to thank the city for the opportunity to attend. The knowledge gained from this conference will allow us to better align ourselves with the goals for our future for our goals for the future of the CRA.
Um I would like to go ahead and open the discussion if um Commission Connor would like to start since Commissioner Rob Alderman is not here. >> Oh, excuse me. Go ahead. >> I did not attend that meeting, but um I
did have some discussion as just a few things that I just kind of wanted us to look at. um as the carbon height CRA uh my concerns uh which would be like the park security cameras being that we've had um a couple of incidents that so far
I don't believe have been solved over there and just to see whether or not we can get someone to monitor those and I'm asking um maybe the city manager and the commission to see whether or not we can hire someone and how that would you know
be effective. >> Commissioner Connor, I know um on Friday you sent me kind of a list of stuff you wanted to discuss, but let's if we can before you go on your list, I know let let me tackle that one. >> Um Mayor Barry asked about this um as
well I think a couple a month or so ago. Um so in that regard um Chief Iozi as well as it h has looked into this. Um, so let me just bring this to your attention because I think we can knock this one off the list. Um, actually
under my spending authority, but before I did that, I want to make sure that you guys are all nod your heads. Yes. Um, Chief Io's identified as with with IT director um, Mike Andrews identified some other locations where they think that additional cameras would help. Um,
and as you guys know, there's kind always two pieces to the puzzle. There's our capital costs and then there's, you know, the the recurring costs. So, the capital cost to put in additional cameras in areas where the chief thinks are uh sufficient. I didn't ask him how
many cameras does that number count for chief. >> Two that I was looking. >> So, it was two. So, the number is 40 grand to bring in the additional cameras where chief feels comfortable that that will provide us more coverage of that area. Then it's about a $2,000 annual
cost uh for fiber. So the cameras are hooked to fiber. We pay the f so it's about 2,000 a year. So um the 40 grand is within my spending authority. So if if everybody's okay with that, it's six cameras. I was going to say that seems
pretty expensive for two cameras. Um so six cameras, 40 grand. And then the the IT monthly cost is 2,000 a year. So divide that by 12. Um, so as if everybody wants those put in, we can we can get that done. There is the money in
the budget to do it. It's within my spending authority. >> Where what are you talking about putting them in >> in and around Berry Park? >> Yeah, that's coming out of the CRA. >> Yes. >> CRA. I'm fine with it. We How many cameras do we have right now?
>> The three. >> Okay. I mean, if you feel we need that many, I'm not going to, you know, >> we have three in Berry Park right now. >> In and around Berry Park. Yes. >> Wow. >> Okay. >> I didn't realize. >> We need that many. >> So, this would make it nine.
>> I'm okay with it. >> Okay. I will get that done. >> Commissioner Alderman would Commissioner Connor, were you? Did you have anything else you'd like to add? Okay. Commissioner Alva, would you like to provide some information of your
feedback and your future goals for CRA? >> Uh, yes, I I would. Um, actually, um, I typed up a list that I probably should hand to everyone u of items that are of
concern for me. Um, so I think I have enough copies here to go around. And I guess I should give one to the clerk as well. Go ahead. >> Okay. So, um um I have some concerns or
some items I feel like uh would address uh Carver Heights and and I think also will benefit uh the city as a whole because you know that'll be an improvement. And so I had some things here that I think I've I've brought up
before. Uh and my number one was um getting information disseminated out to the residents at Montlair Woodland Park and Carver Heights. And um you know it's a monumental challenge
to get everyone um well just to get information out to that area. Um so with today's technology I thought what we can do is set up the electronic message boards at the gateways and those
gateways as I have listed here would be uh both ends of Montlair uh county road 468 uh Woodland Park Carver Heights and Carver Heights has multiple gateways. So I listed uh from Thomas Road uh there
would be Evette, Misspar and Harlem. I may have missed a couple but I think a couple of those I don't think I think they are dead ends. uh from um Montlair Road uh
um Montlair Road/Center Street uh that would be u a gateway an a message board there and then from Griffin Road there would be uh Tuskegee Street and Beacher Street and I think this would cover where people are going in and out of
those areas where if we need to get any type of information out information out to that they would see it. Uh trying to do walk around and do flyers is is a monumental challenge and it's timeconuming for people with busy
schedules. So, and that's something that I think I may have hinted at before. Um, but I think that would greatly benefit uh those areas as a whole, you know, and then maybe that can be something that can be modeled to benefit other areas of
Leburg, you know, maybe, you know, and and I kind of bring that from being that you have given me the opportunity to attend the uh FRA is is if we do something to do it in a manner that, you know, take it up a level so we can you
know be a model for others and you know and and and and it will have benefits for the entire community and on that message board not just you know let it be bilingual and just as you discussed just a moment ago with the uh security
cameras having a fiber then that can be controlled from central location through you know a fiber communication. So uh that was item number one. Um item two was uh and I think this is already
being addressed from my understanding is uh sidewalks. Uh that would be now I'm just referencing Carver Heights. There may I'm sure there's a need in other areas like maybe Montlair. Um, but just from my
observation, uh, Tuskkegee Street in Harlem and, uh, Weightman and I know some areas of Tuskegee and Weightman already have sidewalks. So, it may be some maintenance be required to, uh, you know, bring them into a better state. And this was also a request from a
resident. So, um item number three, um is something I think will greatly benefit and add value is a multi-purpose center. Um
that is uh tangible for the residents of Wooden Park and Carver Heights. Um I know there's been maybe some discussion that where we have the uh resource center, but in a way that's really kind of separated from Carver Heights. um um
you know it's still possible but I think it's it's it would be better if it was something right there in Carver Heights. So I figured the center would be um able to host uh meetings, banquetss u and a good model is a place that I've been to
uh in recent months is uh Winter Park Community Center. Uh, having been there and walked through and was added, attended an event there, uh, I was impressed by how that was set up, not just, uh, you know, and it and it was
being utilized. Um, they had a basketball court, they had a gym, they had three events going on, I think a wedding reception, a birthday party, and something else all all at the same time. And um, and and people playing
basketball and in the gym. So that's just something as a model and I'm not saying it has to be exactly like that but if something like that was placed out in the car heights I think it would be a benefit and not just the car right heights I mean it will be I'm sure
accessible to the entire city. Um, and so with that, some proposed locations I, you know, looked at was one, there's a an area off of Carver Drive, which is accessible through, uh, Thomas Road and,
uh, and also could be accessible from the, uh, Leburg Wildwood Trail, you know. Um uh then the second option I would be the uh three lots at Bradford Avenue and McCorm Street. I think that's right by
there by Barry Park. I think there's a corner there. I mean I I don't know if that can be utilized or not. I'm just giving you my observation. And the other one was where the uh former Dabney swimming pool was was located. Um item four
um was a basketball court at Barry Park. Um and then this is something I think that was brought up by Miss Connor. Um, so that was one of the things I would I think would uh benefit that area even
though I know they have the Boys and Girls Club, but I think, you know, for me having traveled various places and I and I'm I'm going to use West Palm Beach cuz I have relatives down there. So, and I've traveled through there and I noticed how they have these little local
areas that's right near each community where people have access to stuff like that. Um um so that's that's one of the things uh I think would be a benefit. Uh item five and I an item that was brought to my
attention by resident um was uh and I'm not sure if this comes out of CRA or capital fund or not, but it was um a speed hump or table on uh at the Simmons Avenue prior to the curve
where the street turns into a Nebraska. Um they complain that people like to go around that curve at uh a high rate of speed and there are kids in that area. Um item six um this stems from
having attended the FRA and is that a some type of dedicated CRA staff be added to help all the CRAAS with their with their agendas or goals. And I know this will probably require
some uh consultants and for best guidance. So those are some of the things that uh are of my concern. And um um far as items, that's
that's it. And I I have something I would like to say. Um, so I I wrote this out because I wanted to try to hit all my talking points. Um, and this where I'm coming from here is um,
you know, I I'll just read it out to you. So, having been given the opportunity to attend uh, two FRA conferences, I come away with a glaring observation. I have seen cities from as far as the
panhandle to the Keys. And one of the major differences from Leburg and them is the representation. They don't just have members such as Teresa, Samantha, John, and myself. They have starting at the top, mayors, city
managers, finance engineers, analysts. I can't gauge at what level you the elected have have put into how the CRA aspect can enhance the value of the city as a whole. I can say from observing you
seem to value some of its purpose. I want to inform you that it can be a great deal more. I want to encourage you and the elected encourage you the elected officials and the city manager and representatives and other
departments to attend the next CRA I mean excuse me FRA. It is my hope that you can see for yourselves the enormous possibilities that can be uh enormous possibilities can be achieved with your with your
knowledge and support. On that note, I say reach out to reach out and research West Palm, Daytona, and other municipalities or talk with Mr. Jeff Burton of Bradington cuz um what I seen
down there is u it it it was eye opening as to the possibilities of the elected officials teaming with the CRAAS or what actually can be possibly done here where where people with the creative eye can see
things I can't see. But I think um maybe just attending a day down there and interacting with others on the next one would uh would probably help you see how maybe we as a CRA can me be be better at
what we do with the elected officials. >> I thank you for my time. >> Thank you Commissioner Alderman for the um information. I have just one question that I'd like to ask and I um what when you reference the information to be
provided at to be disseminated what type of information would you want to see presented just for understanding >> um for for instance uh we have coming up this weekend uh Martin Luther King parade I mean in general I mean any information
um your voting precinct um hey we are having a meeting for uh cleanup in the community. That would be a big one because you know what I observed when I've attended uh community cleanup is yeah we get participants in the
neighborhood but we get a lot of outside participants is more outside participants than sometimes I mean the the ratio of outside to inside should be it should be more people from the neighborhood themselves caring about cleaning up you know I mean I I don't
mind putting in that work to clean up and pick up But I think that's where we will get some enhancement just just in just local things that are happening in the community. You'll get more participation cuz when I hear, hey, there's a market
thing going on downtown. I'm hearing it in passing. I'm like, so I'm not on maybe certain social media sites to be aware of it or I may miss the newspaper because like I said, I know we all have busy lives and u with this information
age, things just are always passing me by. So I think that would be a way that in passing just in passively people when they ride by that and they see that message board, it'll subliminally uh register with them.
>> Okay. Thank you. Thank you. Are there any other questions or city manager? Do you have any comments or anything? >> Okay. Well, are there any further questions or concerns? and we can definitely um pull this
information into um present it when we start our planning for our next budget around um we will start prep prepping around March and then we'll go from there as far as
our next items to include for discussions for where the CRA will be going in which direction. >> I can email this to uh Mr. admire if you want me to. >> Yes, please do. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Okay. Are there any
other concerns or questions that someone has to say? >> I just have a question of Al and I know I should know this, but uh refresh my memory on how much money we have in CRA right now. Al, I mean the the Okay, I know that's not fair. You can answer that later. I'm curious about the
current balance and what we're I forget what we're bringing in annually. You may remember. >> I did not look. And my concern is we spent quite a bit on Susan Street. So it's been it's been we spent that money down some. >> No, Susan we took Susan Street was 44127
CRA. There is >> and Carver Heights >> some amount of Carver Heights as well, >> right? >> Susan Street is primarily 44127 CRA. There was a little snippet of Susan Street which is in the Carver Heights
CRA and I think Commissioner Connor is correct. I think we took like about 200 grand to do a portion of Susan Street from the Carver CRA but the primarily most of the expensive items are on the
east side of the line which is 44127. >> And I'm fine with that. I was just trying to get my hands around how much capital we had, you know, in comparison to this list, but we can talk about that. >> We'll get you a better I will email an answer out. I want to say it's in the ballpark of half a million, a million
dollars, but >> Okay. Okay. >> I have a lot of numbers left and I didn't look at that one. >> Any further questions or discussions? If not, may we get a motion to adjourn our meeting?
Roll call. >> Oh. >> Oh, but excuse me. Roll call, please. >> Mr. Peterson. >> I don't want to get bogged down on this subject, but we have not spoken about it for a while. Uh, the lots that are owned by the not just the city of Leburg, but there's a fair number of lots in Carver
Heights, and they've been sitting idle for a while, and we've talked about that over and over, and I just I don't want to get bogged down, but I just want to know I'd like to get that resurrected in some form of fashion. Get those lots off our books that are, you know, not on the tax roll, costing us money, they're dumping, all that good stuff. We talked about maintenance.
>> I agree um Commissioner Peterson and we have had approval as far as a process and we can possibly get that going as soon as possible for whoever's interested in the lots. >> Commissioner Reeseman, >> nothing this evening.
>> Commissioner Connor, >> nothing this evening. >> Commissioner Alderman, >> nothing else. Thank you. >> Commissioner Connell, >> no ma'am. >> Commissioner Burray, >> nothing tonight. Chairperson Barry and nothing else tonight. >> May I have a motion for
>> motion to adjurnn? Second. We're ready. You ready? >> Wait. >> No. You got to wait. We'd like to call to order our Monday, January 12th commission meeting. We've already done the invocation and
the pledge of allegiance. We have no proclamations. We have no presentations. And at this time, the public may bring matters to the attention of the city commission.
>> Okay. I'm sorry. >> To the city commissioner. Please note that issues raised at this time will not be discussed, but your comments will be referred to the appropriate staff or scheduled for consideration at a future city commission meeting. If you are
speaking about an item that will be considered later in this meeting, your comments will be heard during public hearings. Each speaker is allocated three minutes. Kindly adhere to this time to ensure equal opportunity for all participants. Thank you. Are there any
public comments? >> I was going to see if anybody else wanted to go before me because I'm gonna take a while. You got three minutes. >> I don't know. I can go over the agenda before she walks up here. >> Is there is this something that's
already on the agenda? No. Okay. Thank you. Well, hello everybody. It's nice to see you, Mayor Barry and all the commissioners and city manager. And it's nice to be here. We are here to give a
special presentation to the mayor, to Mayor Barry. So I would like for all the PEOs that are in the crowd to come up front and just stand up here somewhere. >> That's my mother right there. >> So I kind of
This is an organization. >> This is a small representation of our PEO chapter in le in Leburg. So, we're just so proud of uh of Mayor
Barry and we had a special presentation for her today and we'd like to go ahead and give it to her right now. You want to come up? Mor, >> we should take a picture. >> Oh, we will. Pam is probably around to
take pictures. We feel so proud of you. >> Did you get a picture? >> You want come here? >> Yeah. Can you all move over? >> We can all move. >> Can you go over here? >> No, I'll stay here. >> Okay. Go ahead.
>> No, I'm all right. I first knew uh Mayor Barry as a seventh grader when she was a good student and also a cheerleader and then uh then she left then she left Leburg for a good
while and uh came down to stay and take and be with her mother and her mother's here. her mother right here at Agnes will be a hundred years old in March. But we are just very very proud of uh of
Mayor Barry and we wanted to give her a special welcome today and we know that in this year that you're going to be the mayor that you will represent the city very well and we are so proud of you. Thank you so much. >> So that's all I have. Thank you.
>> Are there any other public comments? >> Good evening. I'm calling I'm up here tonight to discuss the uh the second reading ordinances reg. >> Excuse me, sir. May would you state your name and your address, please? >> Sure. My name is Gerald Amarall and I
live on 3337 Kuru Avenue. I'm over in the Lake Denim Estates neighborhood and I'm I'm here tonight because I have concerns about the proposal of the uh Dominion project. Dominion Apartments project.
>> Excuse me, sir. What was your name again? >> Gerald Amarall. >> Yes. >> Will be on the agenda tonight. >> That's correct. >> Okay. >> Perfect. >> Thank you. It's a public hearing, so you will be able to share your comments at
that time. >> Thank you. >> Are there any other public comments that are not related to any of the agenda items? So, we can go on with our consent agenda items. Routine items here are placed on the consent agenda to expedite the
meeting. If the commission staff wish to discuss any item, the procedure is follows. Pull the item from the consent agenda. Vote on remaining items with one roll call vote. Discuss each pulled item and vote by roll call.
Are there any items to be pulled? If can we go ahead and have a motion then, please? Yeah. I'd make a motion to approve all all remaining items on consent agenda. >> Second. >> Roll call, please. >> Commissioner Conell, >> yes. >> Commissioner Bur, >> yes.
>> Commissioner Peterson, >> yes. >> Commissioner Reeseman, >> yes. >> Mayor Barry, >> yes. Now we're into public hearing. During public hearings and non-rine items, the commission requests that those in attendance respect the process and
maintain order. As such, in accordance with Robert's rules of order, please refrain from speaking out, cheering, or applauding during these procedures. Askum attorney Watson, will you please swear in any participants?
>> Yes, ma'am. I'm happy to do that. If anybody here uh is here tonight who wishes to speak on item 62, Dominion PUB reszoning or item 63, the Leburg Flex resoning, if you would please stand and raise your right hand so we can get you
sworn in. >> All right. Do you swear or affirm that all testimony you'll give tonight will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? >> All right. Thank you. They're they're all set. M madame mayor, >> will someone please introduce 6A1? >> Introduce as be read by title only.
An ordinance amending the future land use map of the comprehensive plan of the city of Leburg changing the future land use map designation of certain property containing 18.71 plus minus acres from city of Leburg low density residential and general
commercial to city of Leburg general commercial for property generally located west of US highway 27 and north of Palm drive lying in section two township 20 south range 24 east Bay County, Florida and providing an effective date.
>> Move for approval. >> Second. >> Mr. Miller, >> do you have presentation? >> Thank you, Madam Mayor. >> This is for the Dominium Apartments. Uh, excuse me, Dan Miller planning and zoning. This is for the Dominium
Apartments zoning cases. Uh, the project consists of a small scale comp plan and reszoning only. There's no annexation involved with this request. The property is already within the city limits. Site consists of 18.71 plus or minus acres. It's generally
located on the west side of US Highway 27 and north of Palm Avenue. The request is for approval of a future development which consists of 276 multif family dwelling units. Under this request, the future land use application is requesting a change from general
commercial and low density to general commercial. and the zoning application for the project is requesting a change from PUD to PUD with revised conditions. The property is currently zoned under two expired PUDs. The first being
ordinance 1339, a 306 bed assisted living facility and the second being ordinance 11-95 which is a commercial office park. Under the project was sent around all the city departments. There were no substantiative departments from the comments from the city departments.
The school board has issued a public facilities determination letter and the applicant will still need to obtain a school concurrency reservation or a mitigation agreement prior to development. Lake County Public Works did not have any comments on the
project. The applicant and Lake County have met and are working together on roadway improvements. FDOT is requiring full access on the southern portion of the property. So, there will be two full access points. I'd like to note, let's
see, under public responses, a summary of those responses includes concerns about significant alteration of the character of the neighborhood, increased traffic noise and light pollution, increased crime, concerns about storm water runoff, additional noise, loose
pets, and children walking around the area. I understand obviously that there are neighbors here who wish to comment and under the terms of the SPUD agreement, the proposal consists of a total of 276 multif family units. No other uses are permitted. The maximum
building height shown is three floors. There will be two, three, and four bedroomedroom units provided with 800, 900, and 1,000 square foot unit sizes for each of those respectively. the site plan, the current site plan meets the
requirements for the parking code. Um, the applicant did show at the last at the first reading a different site plan with much larger buffers on it, which uh they wanted to do, which would reduce the parking sum somewhat. There are 25
ft undisturbed buffers around the project, a 4- foot tall earthen burm along US Highway 25 uh supplemented with plantings along top of the burm to to provide visual and noise buffer. And then there is a requirement for opaque fencing where the property is adjacent
to residential areas. A minimum of 35% of the property must be an open space. Dark sky lighting is required. There is a code compliant landscaping plan required. Uh Baja and Bermuda grass are permitted, but not St. Augustine as due to the water consumption. Uh under site
access there is the primary access point and a secondary which is down on the southern part of the property. Um the PUD will require the developer to provide any and all expansions or upgrades to these access points and roadways as needed and required by FDOT
and Lake County. Under recreation, 1.3 acres of the property has to be in parkland and that would include one primary recreation area with three amenities. That would be a swimming pool, a children's playground, and a dog park. The project will be on City of
Leburg utilities for water and wastewater there. So, there will be no wells or septics on the property. And finally, there is a phasing or expiration clause which requires that the development would move forward within 48 months of any approval with
substantial commencement. Um that would have to occur within the four years or there would be an automatic reversion to the RE1 zoning code which is one acre per unit and this is designated as an attainable workforce housing project to
meet the needs of affordable housing which is a market need in within the city. Uh the planning commission did recommend denial by a vote of two to four citing left turn traffic and parking concerns. Mr. Logan Opsel with the law firm Lounge Drossstick Caner and
Reed in Orlando is here to answer any additional questions you may have. Thank you, Madam Mayor. >> Dan, I have a couple questions for you. >> Yes, sir. >> When did the PUD expire? >> The older PUDs expired, let's see, one was, I believe, in 20
15 and one in uh I'm not sure about the exact year. I know that they're both expired. >> Okay. >> So, they're both expired, but you're I'm going to guess you're going to say that that was before you put or the city put the stipulation in. It goes back to the
one one on an expired P. >> That is correct. >> So, if this would have been a newer PUD, it back to the one one >> and it expired. If it was a newer PU and expired, that is correct. Yes, sir. Do you remember when that went into effect? >> Uh, not quite a year ago.
>> Okay. >> Thank you, >> Dan. I did have a question for you, too. Yes, sir. >> Uh, the property itself has two different zonings on it right now. >> That is correct. >> Okay. That's >> the property on the west, I believe, was the 306 unit
>> closer to >> assisted living and then the office park out toward the east toward 2725. So, it's a low density residential and then a general commercial. That's what we're >> actually a 306 bed apartment, excuse me, um, assisted living would be more like
an apartment complex. >> Yeah. >> I have a question. Wasn't parking a concern when we discussed >> Yes, ma'am. Um, the current site plan that they're proposing uh meets the parking code. the one that they would
like to see, the one that they would like to allow to be changed to would reduce the parking. However, it it greatly increases the buffers. And I'll, you know, to be um frank with you, staff prefers the one that gives the greater
buffers to the neighbors, the the newer one that they would like to um put into the PUD. >> What's the difference in the buffering, Dan? I mean just 25 or so. >> It goes from I think >> it was like 100 feet, wasn't it?
>> It's it's like it's over 100 feet, right? 100 feet for It's pretty large buffers on the newer the newer one. And I think there may be an example of that in your packet. >> So the developer is flexible with either plan. >> They prefer the second plan, the the one that they would like to change out and
put into the new the PUB. >> Okay. I I guess I'm going to go on the record and say with in front of my fellow commissioners, the parking is more important to me than the buffer. The buffer would still be adequate and I would want it adequate, but I believe it would be closer to 25 ft, which is what we typically do. I think you said
there's a burm also, but where I'm going with this is I the parking is important to me. I think it goes to two. >> It rates right at 2.0, which is the requirement. >> And that that I have no problem with that. The 1.6 does tug at me some. >> Okay. Um >> I believe the um applicant does have a
presentation you might like to >> Okay. I just want to get out in front of it and throw that out there. >> Are there any more questions? >> They have other properties that have the 1.6. Correct. >> They do down in Orlando and in different locations in Central Florida. >> Okay. Thank you.
>> Would the petitioner Mr. Oswall like to present? Good evening, Logan Ops, 215 North Yola Drive. Good to be with the commission this evening. Um, we haven't updated our our PowerPoint, so you've seen some of
this. Um, so I do have a a couple things I want to hand to the commission to assist in this presentation. This is all part of the application package um that's with staff. Uh but for some pictures uh following first reading,
there were some questions about other similar projects we had and so I thought it'd be beneficial to provide you actual pictures of other projects, too. And so I'll I'll hand these to you and then um thanks Dan. We'll hand these to you and then uh I can outline uh for the record
what what's being presented as well. Okay. And and just for the record, you have pictures of other projects. um the site plan which is going to be up on the presentation, our preferred site plan, just a little easier for you to to see um and hold. This is just statistical uh
data that I provided in first reading relating to some of the top employers here in Leburg um here in Lake County and and some examples of what those salaries are. Those include city of Leburg governmental jobs, uh firefighters, police officers, Lake
County schools. Um as well we have and these these are part of the application package a a parking analysis done by our engineers Kimley Horn which uh illustrate what we've utilized in other jurisdictions. Uh certainly under the the two we've we've utilized the 1.6 and
even less than that in certain jurisdictions. This uses data to show you what this particular use yields in terms of parking usage which allows us those increased setbacks uh less impervious areas. um and things along those lines. And finally, a
transportation analysis. Uh before we dive into the presentation, you know, Dan had mentioned and and you'd you'll see uh on on the on the slides that there is two future land use designations on the property and under those uh permitted uses uh within the
city. And so we wanted to just spell out again with with our engineer what those differences and trips look like um and and what would exist under existing entitlements. So with that, I'll I'll dive in um and again some of this is is review, but I want to make sure we touch
on these and then answer any specific questions you have. Um before I get into the the land use side of things, I just want to briefly call up a member of our project team to remind you a little bit bit about Dominium uh and and what we
do. >> Thanks. Good evening, commissioners. Glenn Daniels, 375 Northridge Road, Sandy Springs, Georgia 30350. I'm with the developer Dominium. Dominium is one of the largest uh
attainable housing developers in the nation. We've been in the state of Florida for over a decade. We own and manage over 33 apartment communities with over 7,500 residents in our apartment communities in the state of Florida. Um before we get into the land
use discussion tonight, I just want to call out that Dominium is not one of those developers that builds and leaves. We are looking for a partnership with the city of Leburg, hence our uh our work to to get this PUD uh signed with
you guys. Um so that being said, we will own and manage the property for at least 15 years. The property will be attainable housing for at least 30 years. and we are gracious for the opportunity to to partner with the city
of Leburg and look forward to your consideration. Thanks. >> Thank you, Glenn. And and we'll talk a little bit about the property and and the project. Um turn this back on. So, of course, we have an assemblage and
this is from the property appraiser site. There's a few parcels out there and as we move into the next slides, you'll see how the future land use designation as it exists today overlays uh these parcels. Dan outlined the request. It is to make
a consistent future land use across the totality of the assemblage to general commercial and then the PUB to allow for uh our our use. and and throughout this project and and of course, excuse me, throughout this presentation, of course, what's been handed to you are are
pictures of of what uh has been implemented elsewhere and and gives you a good sense of this fully amenitized uh really class A uh multifamily space um for the residents. So, here's some conceptual renderings as well. And this is part of your first reading, so you've
seen this. Um, this is also what yielded the conversation to to make sure we get you real world images to see what's been out there uh built out. We touched on historically the property has been approved for commercial and office park uh as well as assisted
living facility for 305 residents. Um those are taken from PUDS which Dan mentioned are are now expired. Uh and so that's why you have the request from PUD to PUD which includes these additional restrictions as part of the PUD ordinance in your packet.
The city of Leburg zoning map again we're we're already within the city um and have it still shows the the PUD which we just outlined. And here's the slide which shows the existing future land use map and and that split. So much of the property, the majority of the
property is the general commercial and we are looking to to bring in the remainder of it so that there's a consistent future land use designation across the property under that uh general commercial highway commercial. I know it's changed uh C3 uh
consistent zoning. Uh here are some of the allowable uses which I know you're well aware of which include multif family group living uh you have some more institutional uses like your elementary middle high schools um churches animal hospitals hotels and
motel uh and vehicular sales across the the screen there are requests for PUB uh and this is taken from your code there's the purpose of of the planned unit development uh request and that's um innovative site plan design allow for things like the setbacks and items that
we're uh putting forward in this preferred site plan that's before you allowing for uh proper development in these infill areas which of course the property is and then creating some flexible approaches to achieve that which again is part of the conditions
and part of the considerations in the PUD ordinance and this presentation. Here's what's out there today. Uh a different kind of attainable housing. This is not uh ideal conditions, but there's a number of dilapidated
structures and some areas I think are just unlivable um and and other abandoned structures uh and barns. Um so this is the proposed site plan and the printout uh is in your handouts as well. Uh this is what allows for a lot of that
buffering and additional setbacks. Uh we had a community meeting which was well attended and there was a variety of specifics that were brought up. So I'm always appreciative of that. Uh a lot of which was maintaining the existing trees
particularly along the tree line. Uh allowing for as much setback as possible. So that's what's being accommodated here. This is the allows for the 1.6 uh parking stalls per unit. And again, there's there's studies and real life examples and and part of those pictures
that were handed to you of of this working um and working well so that we can avoid additional imper imperous surface areas and allow for for additional ponds and landscaping. Uh one of the specific requests that came out of the community meeting too was uh the
idea of fencing or not. Um, we have worked into the PUB ordinance the ability to again maintain that natural vegetation, those trees, that was a specific ask we heard. And so rather than ripping those out to put up a fence, uh, it allows us the flexibility
to work with staff to identify the appropriate areas to preserve those those that natural vegetation um, and then perhaps other other areas going ahead moving forward with installing a fence. So, I wanted to call those specifics out to you and I'm sure we'll
hear additional comments as well. Um, and and again, this is what shows the 1.6 ratio. It's 442 spaces. Um, and this is fairly well baked. It's it's really worked from our expert reports to what's been built out and and worked very well
um in in practicality. And as Glenn noted, Dominium goes on to own and operate these projects. uh they want them to succeed. You see the the level of quality that the end product has and so
parking of course is a is a major consideration in these projects. And so uh we have the a vested interest in making sure that this property this project is properly parked and these are the setbacks that they provide. Uh to answer Commissioner
Peterson's question, on the east side over 140 ft, south over 129 ft, north side 141 ft to the building envelope. So pretty significant setbacks and and uh particularly behind maintaining a lot of that vegetation which again you see on
27 which will also have a burm uh and and additional plantings. So we also had our engineer go ahead and put together a a concept plan which which meets code and and organize it in such a way that uh we can maintain as
much as the green areas but also uh have have the buildings placed in an appropriate way that meets the PUB minimum required setbacks and and this is this is what we have um and this is typical of what you see in a lot of uh overparked projects quite frankly and
it's what we call kind of the shopping mall effect, if you will. It's really only parked around Christmas and the other times you're looking at a whole lot of concrete. And so taking uh particular care and attention to having our experts, our engineers map out and
plan a a a project that can be better organized, allow for more open space, allow for less impervious areas and additional setbacks. not only is more attractive, not only is better for things like runoff and maintaining drainage and storm water, but also has
the ability to meet specific comments we heard at the um community meeting. This the bottom left just illustrates, you know, where those setbacks on the preferred site plan uh reverts back to uh following getting a fully fully uh up
to the two rather than the 1.6. six parking stalls per unit. Um, with that, I'm happy to answer any questions. We have our whole uh project team here. Um but uh before I before I do conclude, you know, not only do we
put great care into how these projects are designed, uh but of course uh the residents that ultimately utilize them across jurisdictions, we see a lot of school teachers and uh government staff. um a lot of the folks quite frankly that
you that you would see in the sectors that are some of the more uh major employers in the area. These are the folks that uh utilize this great highly amenized project. Now uh a lot goes into uh the choice of those residents as
well. There's there's yes uh income caps uh to make it attainable. There's also income minimums. So how do we verify that? uh pretty extensive verification of employment, right? Because we got to verify that that payment, that income structure, uh background checks, uh
criminal history, and and again, proof of employment. So, uh these are a lot of young families, um again, folks who are just getting started and and and really a thoughtful uh beautiful project that can be brought in to to allow uh housing
and amenities uh for these folks and for these families. So like to always end in a in a practical touch as we as we end our discussion in in land use world. But um I'll reserve some of my time to respond to I'm sure what will be some some good questions, specific comments, and then I'm happy to answer any for you
right now as well. I know I'm the I'm the difficult one on parking, but uh I'm just I don't want to overly complicate it, but I just throw out an idea because I I do respect the the neighbors uh who wanted more buffering. Um and so let me talk about
the parking. I understand if it's affordable housing and I respect, you know, this company owns multiple what 30 something plus projects. My my concern is 20 years from now, you know, when the bonds expired and there's no restrictions on the property, it it
really could not go to market rent, I don't think. Um I mean, maybe somebody can correct me, but I I thought the parking probably need to be closer like a 1.8 or two for market, you know, rent apartments. Um, where I'm going with this, you know, I want to keep the neighbors happy, but I'd be willing to,
I guess, ask if there's a way to compromise on the buffering and improve the parking. I'll just say, for example, like 1.8, and I'm not trying to dictate what the parking is. I'm just throwing that out there. But I'm trying to make a point that the parking is important to me. I do have concerns. I know I've been fairly consistent on a lot of projects
on parking. I feel a little out of line because I do respect the developer has all these projects. I see the list here and the average is like 1.5 and here we are at6 and I'm pushing back a little bit but I just throw that out for discussion to my fellow commissioners and your thoughts or the developers thoughts. Um I would be I would love to
see the buffer say cut in half and parking improved like somewhere in the middle as well. That's that's just my thoughts. I'll stop right there. Okay. >> Yeah. Thank you, Commissioner. And you certainly have been consistent. That's that's for certain. And so we wanted to make sure that we had the information, you know, real world studies, real world buildouts that do show some of those
those parking ratios. Again, you said you usually lands around 1.5, but requesting 1.6. And so what that means in terms of total spaces from the 500, I think it was 550 on the total buildout to the 4, you know, 42 is we're not
talking a whole lot of spaces, but we are talking a whole lot of benefit by removing th those impervious areas. And I like your comment. Uh what' you say? Shopping center parking. I mean, yeah, I don't want a a big, you know, asphalt parking lot out there empty. But I do have concerns. This question is for
you or Dan Miller, whoever, whoever can answer it. But do we have a different parking? I'm looking at Al Men or Dan. Different parking requirement on market rent apartments or is it still the same number? Looking for Dan Miller. >> Still the same. Okay. Thank you, Dan.
Okay, >> I'll save my comments till after public comments. >> Yep. And commissioner, you indicated you want to hear some of the comments from the public as well. So, I'll continue to discuss with my team. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> Is there anyone from the public that
would like to make comments? >> Good evening. It's Gerald Emerald again. Sorry for uh jumping ahead of the game there. Um 337 Kuru Avenue over here in Lake Denim Estates. Um
I'm not against affordable housing. I have concerns as a resident locally here, as someone who drives these roads every day about the increased traffic. I can speak personally about the challenges of getting in and out of the
development that I'm in. Of course, everybody wants to be the last person to move into a place. And you know, so I kind of get it, but um I am concerned about the additional traffic that as low as 400 additional cars and as many as
555 cars will bring during rush hour. traffic in the morning and in the evening will uh will bring to this area of the town. Um we don't have a traffic light to get in and out of our development. It's
challenging and dangerous and I can only imagine that the uh the same will be said for what's proposed here if it's allowed to pass. Um, I don't see it improving the uh the access to the development I'm
in or the folks that live in the development that were there directly next to us before. Um, I can also speak to the fact that our neighborhood is largely three and fourbedroom homes and we don't have enough parking
and I can't see how it would make sense to have and I mean we're talking about single family homes with average people. Most people have two cars. I can tell you the people at the corner of my my street have six. They can't fit them in
their driveway. It's difficult for emergency services to get in and out of our development when it's time and it does happen. So, just speak in real world. I don't manage 30 apartment complexes throughout the US, but I can speak to what's going on locally here
for me and it's challenging enough. I can't see how this is going to improve it. that doesn't bring into the conversation with my concerns about what additional utilities, what the additional demand will do to
additional costs for the folks that are already here and and paying taxes for that sort of stuff. Um, that's a whole separate consideration on my part because I know I paid you utilities here and as we continue to annex more property and do more expansion and more
developments and more and more and more, it's it's just something that's on my mind. That's all I have. Thank you. >> Thank you. Are there any more public comments? Please state your name and your address,
please. Cammy Johnson, 180 Duchess Drive in Corley Island, Mobile Manor. Good evening, mayor and commissioners. I am here tonight to formally oppose the proposed Dominion 276 apartment rental
development plan for 1716 Connell Road. I respect respectfully ask that you deny the approval of this project. I am a resident of Corley Island Mobile Manor, a 55 and older senior community that directly borders the western boundary of
the proposed development. Because of this immediate proximity, our community would experience the most significant and lasting impacts of this project's moved forward. The proposed development is incompatible with our neighborhood on in both scale
and intensity. 10 three-story apartment buildings on this site create a level of height and density that ex excessive for available acreage and inconsistent with the existing residential character of the area. At approximately 15 units per
acre, this project overcrowds the site and would permanently alter the neighborhood with the greatest impact falling on the senior residents who live immediately next door. Traffic and safety concerns are equally troubling. US Highway 27 is already heavily
congested and county road 25 is narrow and lacks the cap capacity to safely handle the additional traffic. This development would significantly increase vehicle volume in the area that already experiences unsafe conditions. Limit
ingress and egress combined with sufficient insufficient on-site parking creates a real risk of overflow parking along county road 25A of further endangering drivers and pedestrians and nearby residents. These concerned are
not theoretical. It's someone who lives in the area. I experience these conditions daily. Approval of this project in its current form creates a foreseeable risk of serious accidents and places public safety at unnecessary
risk. This is not a responsible outcome for our community. You have both the authority and the responsibility to prevent this. I respectfully urge you not to approve this project out of concern over potential litigation from the developer. I instead I ask that you
stand firm in representing the residents of Leburg, particularly the senior residents of Corley Island Mobile Manor by voting to deny this proposal. This evening I am also formally submitting the original letter signed letter previously sent to you along with the
new attachment an attachment A which contains a 100 resident signatures from Corley Island Mobile Manor. These residents stand united in agreement with the concerns expressed and respectfully request that their collective voices be acknowledged
and considered. If despite these concerns, the project is approved, I respectfully request that conditions be imposed, that a wall be built. >> Ma'am, your time is up. >> Thank you.
Good evening. Bill Pulk, 600 Cascade Avenue, Leburg, Florida. Lifetime resident, senior citizen, all that good stuff. Um, at the previous first reading, the attorney had speak or spoken about um discussions with the
DOT. Have y'all gotten any discussions from the DOT? Have you gotten any plan from the DOT on how this is going to work? >> Um, not today. >> I don't think so. >> Right now, not today.
>> Pardon? >> Not today, Mr. No. >> The answer is no. >> You have gotten no answers from the DOT. >> No, they are working with DOT at this time. So, >> we don't have a specific >> We don't have any specifics on the DOT
how they're going to approach Highway 27 from this new project. >> Uh the DOT is requiring as I stated in my opening remarks that that there will be a full access point on the southern part of this property and on the northern part. >> So, two two ingress two two entries on
27. >> So, how is that going to um approach? How are you going to approach Highway 27 from this project on the south or the north? >> You would have to talk to DOT. >> That's what I'm saying. Nobody knows how we're going to get on Highway 27 from this project yet. Project's nice
project. Um the PUD that uh expired was only what for 18 homes, which would have been a nice little residential community, but you got basically 300 people or 300 units on this 276, whatever it is.
uh units on this pro project and you know approximately 400 cars coming out on Highway 27 which is totally impossible right now. We you know the DOT or Leburg or nobody has had anything
to do with the um traffic problems we have on Highway 27 right now. I went to the post office this morning uh and I I ran that little route on C25A or I called it radio and you cannot get out on 27 on the north end at all
because it's not even wide enough for a car to sit there and wait for the traffic to come along. And then on the south side it has a wide middle that you could sit there and wait for the traffic. But I waited 15 minutes to get
to be able to go north. So without any answers from the DOT, I don't know how you could approve this project at this point in time. Thank you. >> Hi, good evening. My name is Valerie Gutinskis. I live on 3739 Caspian Street in Leburg in the Lake Denim Estates
community. A lot of my concerns are the same as Mr. Geralds here that he mentioned earlier. Um I'm just concerned about the already overstressed infrastructure and the additional strain that this complex would put on it. We are one of the largest under 55 communities in Leburg and we currently only have one point of
entry which is a stop sign that we share with Ravenswood. So that's about 500 plus single family homes. Um and we are slightly south of the proposed complex which means you know when there's an opening they would get to turn before we do. I regularly wait to exit our
community and with this complex I would wait even longer. Um my husband actually works here and I think it was two weeks ago we live maybe 10 minutes away. It took him 47 minutes to get home from um
from this place just because of all the traffic and there are no or at least very minimal back roads. So 27 is really our only point of entry or exit for Leburg as well as the neighboring cities. So I also have concerns for
people who live um in the villages or Claremonts. This is really their only way in or out as well. So it puts uh strain on them as well. I do also have concerns about the 1.6 vehicles. Like Mr. Gerald said, we already have a vehicle overflow problem in Lake Dunma
states. So I am worried about if there is a vehicle overflow where they are going to end up if it's going to be on 25 27 in the neighboring communities. Um so that's I think those are essentially all of my concerns and then also the impact on
response times for emergency services if it is or if we do have increased congestion. What is that going to do to emergency response times? And that is all I have. Thank you so much for your time. Hi, good evening. My name is Carol Crop. I live in Winter Park 1621, Chase
Landing Way, Winter Park. I represent the owners of Corley Island, the mobile home park directly to the west. Um, we are a 55 and older park, all retired. Most of these people, you know, this is where they're going to spend the rest of
their life. And now we've got this big development with lots of traffic concerns that you know y'all have heard all this. I don't need to repeat it. But one thing I did want to ask is even on these setbacks, where's the one on the west? Do we know what that is? Um I
we're on the west and that's our biggest concern and is there going to be a fence? And the developers just said they're not real sure about that because they may use the trees as buffers and that's a problem. So, I don't know. Is there a reason the West isn't listed
as a setback? I mean, I don't know if this is a time for questions or not, but um so, you know, I would just like to reiterate what our residents said that the traffic is a huge concern. Um you know, we don't want three-story buildings looking down into our mobile
home park. We already have a problem with cut through from the east through our park to Lake Denov estates. And you know, if now you've got, you know, younger people, teenagers living there trying to get to see their buddies in Lake Denim, they're going to be going right through us if there's not at least
a fence at the bare minimum. But, you know, this was zoned for assisted living. That doesn't bring in 500 cars assisted living. Most of those people aren't even driving. So, this changes things dramatically for our residents. They own their own homes. We only own
the property. They own their own homes. I don't know what this is going to do to the value of their homes. And for some of these people, that's the only thing they really own. And you know, we're very concerned about our residents. So, you know, I hope y'all will take that into consideration. Thank you.
>> Are there any more public comments? >> Hello. Good evening. My name is Roland Nunes. I live on 1928 County Road 25A. Um, so I live right on the road. Um, I travel it every single day, seven days a week, all the time for everything that I
do. Um, I do recall during the um the uh construction that's been going on, how it's increased the traffic a lot in this area particularly. And one of the things that I've noticed just from the traffic diversion during the construction, a lot of cars go through 25A and with how
narrow those roads are and the speeds that those cars are driving you I mean it's it's just going out to your mailbox is dangerous. Um, so just looking at that during those moments of construction when cars are being rerouted, just trying to see what that
would look like as we get the increased um level of traffic from all the building. Uh, that that is what concerns me particularly because um this isn't the only project on that road. County Road 25A is a onem stretch of road and we already have Lakeside Retreat that's
already on the north end of that. We already have Manuela apartments that have been um approved for be for being built just one mile north on that same road with this one as well. It does concern me the level of traffic that we can see on there. Um and for the reasons
that have already been stated, I'm not going to rehash everything that you've already heard. My a lot of my points were a lot to that. Um personally, I h I don't have a problem with the affordable apartments in this location. I know we need them. Trust me, I know we need them. and I do support him. It's just
the density. The density is really what concerns me the most. Um I don't know if there is any possibility of lowering the density of that, but that's really the biggest problem is it just it all comes down to traffic for me. Um I see it every day. I see it on that road. 25A is just not built for it and without some
kind of a widening of some sort. Um, and and I understand that there's the north and the south entrance, but like I said, if we look at it beyond just this one development and then the other ones that are already in existence and already been approved for development, that's really where my big concern lies, looking at where we're concentrating all
of the apartments in just one mile area. And um, I just don't know what that's going to do, especially with the additional traffic going north on Leburg that I'm sure a lot of people here are very familiar with. So, those are just the comments I wanted to share. Thank you. No further public comments
now that we've Go ahead, Chuck, please. >> Hello. My name is Brian Matthew. I live at 410 Perkins Street downtown area. Um I've noticed in the projects uh that have been already approved um it has caused the high traffic but my biggest
concern is the existing uh infrastructure we have. We have water lines going down most of our roads that are still steel blowing out twice in a year spraying in the middle of the night. I'm having to make calls on it. Um I work for a lot of these big
construction companies in the first place. They don't really seem to care about how everything falls when it gets getting the infrastructure caught up. One proposal, if it does get passed through, is in their 15-year term that
or 20-year term that they're signed on. Anything from the 27 is maintained and repaired by them and not by our city people. You understand? because we're already pretty tight on our, you know, uh, employees in this
area on keeping up on just the repairs in this area. So, it's uh I've seen, you know, all electric is still behind. It's blowing out. We're blowing out capacitors or uh overhead setups every month. I hear them constantly blowing
out. So I I know our infrastructure can't handle much more of what we're getting adding on here and we need to do something about that before we go and add on even more. And I know it's going to pull a lot more power than most people because it is a four or five
story buildings going in. So it's something really to be concerned about in the first place before we even go forward with it. I appreciate you listening to me and thank you Further comments from the commissioner. >> Oh, for the public. We've heard from
everyone. I'm sorry. Can we move it to then? >> Oh, do you want to respond? >> Yes, ma'am. I I think I can respond to a lot of these questions, comments. Um, thank you. Uh, and thank you again, everybody, for taking the time and and some of the specifics. I want to speak
to them. Um, one, we've we've talked about a lot what's what's out there today in terms of existing future land use. So, I know sometimes we're here I'm here uh talking about vacant land, talking about agricultural land, those sorts of things. But, um this is something with existing entitlements and
with those existing entitlements come certain permitted uses. Um what you have before you is is studies and and these are traffic counts taken from what could go in there uh particularly on the commercial space and and others. And those those are significantly more
traffic trips compared to what we are proposing. Um yeah, 27 it's a it's a state road and and I think I think all of I think all the folks make really good points. You know, it's state road. We're working really closely with FDOT. Uh we've already met with them twice. Uh
they want us to have two access points. uh we're already looking at at things they're going to require a traffic warrant study, traffic signalization there on this on the southern portion. Um and so so that will be something that we have to look into and would ultimately have to pay for. You know, it
is interesting a lot on the these projects when when you have traffic issues, um the in the natural course of things, you got to go through you got to work with who's responsible for the roads and oftent times the the the last to come in isn't always the great thing because you're you're the one that's
paying for these these road improvements. And so we are having those trips. But again, these are as if as you look to our traffic study and and the yield of peak hour trips versus what could be permitted in these future land use areas, um it is a net reduction and and that's something to keep in mind
particularly on an infill development uh property like this. Um vehicles, understand there's some there's some folks at Lake Denim with excessive vehicles and and and I get that. Uh but we we are owned and operate ourselves
and we have a management company. Uh as part of the requirements uh on top of everything else we look into of future tenants, we also require vehicle registration. So we we know on the front end which vehicles are coming in and certainly wouldn't require uh and allow
uh six. And so those are that's another way in which we're we're looking at things on the on the parking ratio. Um what's not what's what's helpful on this devel conceptual plan is is an illustration of the trees. But what what you miss on the on the on an aerial is
that on the western side there it is wet in there. I think there's a creek that runs through there. So there's some natural separation and topography uh to keep the the properties and the projects separate uh and allow additional setbacks too. There's a reason why we put the the pond where we did to also
make sure we're accounting for for overflow in the event of storm events and things like that. Um, and while I'm talking about the west side, I do want to answer that question. I wrote I typed in east that 140 ft should have said west. So that's that's the illustration.
The reason why the east now wouldn't be uh wouldn't be included when I correct that to the west is because we've we've talked about that's along 27. And we already have some uh exceeding setbacks there from the PUD minimums. We also have a landscape burm, 4 foot burm
already above grade with additional plantings with natural vegetation. So so that's why appreciate that and thank you for that clarity. I should have caught that earlier. Um and the the the previous you know the zoning yes was for assisted living which which maybe would
have less parking, right? Uh but that was a a previously approved part of the PUD uh as it relates to a permissive use in the zoning. Uh what I outlined before is under those future land use designations, a whole lot more uses that could come in which yield a whole lot
more trips uh compared to what's being requested. And so appreciate those distinctions as well. Uh a final point on the setbacks and and what we're able to achieve here and and appreciate Commissioner Peterson's comments as well. It is important we can cover this. Um, yes, it's for the residents, but
it's also for our future residents and creating the best product in the area and maintaining those additional setbacks. These are three stories, so they're not looking down um into and the additional setbacks assist with that and the the natural vegetation and setbacks
I was talking about as it relates to the wet area and existing tree line. So, I wanted to make sure I covered those particulars. Um, and lastly, I I was taking notes for everyone that talked and I believe we were able to to address everything. Um, but I was also working
with the project team and um, PUDs are negotiated zoning districts, right? We've worked really hard with staff to go through this PUB process, provide conditions that that work well, not just for the cities, but then go back in, report what we heard at at the community
meetings, and create more conditions to to help address uh some of the specifics we heard both then and tonight. Um, but in the spirit of that cooperation in good faith, uh, we we would uh be amendable to increasing the 1.6 to the
to 1.8 8 um while maintaining uh the setbacks. So with that, I'm happy to answer any questions you have. >> Can you clarify the fencing and the BMS? >> Yeah, thank you. So the BMS are along 27, that's the 4ft earthn BM. Um there
would be a preservation of the natural vegetation. And there's also minimum landscaping requirements which will go in um the the as it relates to fencing and and I I think I heard wall you know that particularly on a wall you got to
put in footers you got to you know you got to put it up on the property line. So you're going to lose a lot of trees and a lot of that vegetation and some of which particularly on the south side and southwest side are are pretty big mature uh trees and some you know certainly have the potential to be. And so while
the PUD that's presented before you now gives us the flexibility to work with staff particularly on site plan approval to identify those appropriate locations, uh we've we are in agreement with with the majority of what we heard that that maintaining and preserving those trees
and landscapings would be uh a benefit, but the PUD still certainly calls into uh utilization of fencing as well. >> Yeah. all the if this does pass the residents I talked to of Corey Island, Lake Denim, and Ravenswood, they want to see a fence on along the entire
residential border while saving as many mature oaks as possible. >> Sure. >> Um and and again, I'm we're happy to work with staff on that. It's already in the PUD ordinance. So, to the extent that they require fencing, we would we would we would need to comply. So to answer that question head on, the other
is and I I just want to say it because I I told the gentleman I would that uh there there's some residents on the southside that have some really nice trees and they and they don't want to want they don't want to have a fence there, but I'm confident we can work with staff to come up with the appropriate fencing requirements.
>> Excuse me. I've said it before on residential developments and that's because it becomes an HOA issue. But you know, I really don't care about the fence and if the neighbors want it, I'm fine. with this big buffer. >> Yeah, I guess I just worry the fences I see look good for 5 years and after that they don't look that good. I just point
that out. That's probably a bigger issue when there's an HOA. In this case, it's on the apartment owner. I just throw that out for discussion. I do appreciate the uh the improved parking that that was important. >> Thank you. Just curious because I've heard it in talking. Would you guys have
any opposition to putting verbiage in your PUB that you would never go live local? Yeah, it's a good question and it's part of why we're here today. Um, we we as as Dominium as a company want to work with municipalities and
jurisdictions we're working in to avoid, you know, uh, putting forth a live local act as opposed to all the great things and conditions we were able to put into this PUD ordinance and and we can address today. But yes, we're we're happy to
agree to no, you know, live local Um, I will note that it's a it's pretty big act and it's it's it's new. Some of which has um favorable uh like tax rebates for the purchase of construction equipment, you know. So, there's there's slivers in there, but I think what
you're what you're asking, Commissioner, is is agreeing to not uh assert live local as it relates to, you know, densities and and permissible uses and and we would be agreeable to that. And then you said you the intersection
warranted a a traffic light or you're >> Yeah, it's called a traffic signalization warrant study. So it's okay. It's a study >> and and all indications just to be candid with you are that uh traffic you know traffic signalization will likely be required but of course we got to go through that study with FDOT which we
are. >> Okay. Um, >> and last question, can you just define affordable housing or that as well? Because I've heard section 8. I've heard all that. Just clarify that a little bit for me. >> Yeah, that old section 8 I think is a
creature of of decades ago. It's it really doesn't exist in its current format. We're we're dealing with federal tax incentive programs. Um and so uh what they do is they these tax incentives allow uh these class A
buildouts um and with with certain tax incentives uh that allow uh basically a more efficient buildout and allow the the uh afford affording us the ability to have
lower rents. Um, we do have folks here on the project team that can really get in the nitty-gritty of how that works. But that old, you know, section 8 moniker and run by government, you know, things like that. That's not what this is, that we're utilizing uh tax incentives.
>> I want to be sure the audience is clear on that because I have heard concerns on, you know, I call this affordable housing. Uh, but you know, people I think one of the newspapers called it a lowinccome project. Um, and those terms are used loosely, but maybe you can quickly explain the difference. Um >> yeah. Yeah. Go ahead.
>> So yes, lowincome housing tax credits. It's it's a tax ex incentive. Um large banks and investors are required to meet some community. They're supposed to pay back to the community. In exchange, they get tax credits. So we
end up taking those tax credits and selling them to the investor. Now, the way this is different than section 8 is section 8 as it's like been known in the past doesn't exist anymore. That's been abolished since the 80s. I think mid 80s. Now, what people know as section 8
are vouchers that the residents carry to any property. We are different. We we attain to a different income band, a higher income band. And so what we're talking about are librarians, uh, starting salary with nurses,
teachers. Yeah. And such. So, >> no, thank you. You answered the question. I want to be sure the audience knew that, you know, it's not a voucher subsidized housing. It's just the developer has tax has tax credits, i.e. lower rents. Okay. Thank you. >> Yeah. And to put a cherry on top of that, you
know, it allows, you know, private uh development of these types of uses rather than ongoing subsidies or or governments engaging in them themselves. And I think the result speaks for itself. So, thank you, Commissioner. >> You also expressed my concerns over traffic, but I'm not going to go there
right now. I just want to point out that there is a need for this type housing. And help me out here. The county approved the bond. Well, I believe it was a 50 vote. So, they I just want to point out that they >> Yes, we have their support. >> Yeah, unanimous support there on that front from the county as well. Thank you
for noting that. >> Are there any further questions? >> Any commissioner? Commissioners, >> thank you for your time. Yes, I um I have several things I want to bring up. The city's got real traffic issues. Um I
think at this point everybody has to acknowledge we have some real traffic problems in town and bringing in more residential development is not going to help the problem. It's going to make it worse. this, you know, the last count, plus or
minus, the city's got over 40,000 lots, residential lots have already been approved to be built on. I would say out of that 40,000, at least 30,000 are south Leburg.
If you take the stretch of 27, 27 from the intersection of 27 and 48 down to say Dixie, you can't bypass that. There is no way to bypass that stretch of 27. Absolutely not. Unless you pull into
Singleary Park and take a boat. So to add more and more traffic onto this stretch of road that you cannot bypass makes absolutely no sense to me. the the property is presently zone
commercial. Now, I've heard here tonight that commercial brings in more trips than residential. Well, you know, I think if you look at it this way, to me, a commercial development, it's bringing it's bringing maybe more
trips into the site, but it's already local traffic. This complex is bringing new traffic into the area. The a commercial development in this area is just all it's doing is funneling what the traffic we already have already on the roads.
It's not adding more traffic to the road. I know they're working with with FDOT, but presently I don't see how in the world you're going to get out of this complex, go across 27 and go north. It's impossible.
As far as the reduced parking, am I to believe that a three or four bedroomedroom apartment only needs 1.6 or even 1.8 parking spaces per dwelling unit for a three or fourbedroom unit? Do these people never
have guest over? I mean, it that makes absolutely no sense. 15 units an acre. I mean that density is is absurd. Absolutely absurd.
I think it's in the best interest of the city. This property presently has commercial zoning. We need commercial development. We don't need any more residential development, especially at this density. And in this location where everything's
already bottlenecked right there, I I urge this commission to deeply consider this to turn this project down. The density is just way too high. The the traffic issues on that stretch. You can't get out of there's no way you
can bypass that. I I strongly urge the commission to consider turning this project down. Thank you. Okay. >> So, yeah, my comment on the uh on the project, uh we've got two different land
uses on the property. Uh a uh we just spent uh two years ago going through our comp plan in depth, trying to figure out where things should go, make sure the zoning is correct on everything. And I'm not in favor of changing the zoning on
this to all commercial. I think we need uh to leave the zoning as it is. So, uh I'm not in favor of the project. >> Any other any other comments? >> I'm going to call for a motion, please.
Can we have a motion? We we had a reading on the first one. So I think we need need to we need clarification on what what site plan >> I was just thought we to know which plan one 6A1 6A1 only >> that's all we introduced >> which site plan is proposed today in the
packet Dan the one with the limited >> the site the both site plans are in the packet right now the one that is the 2.0 is the one that came in with the packet the one with the 1.6 six parking which gives the larger buffers is the one they would like to switch to. Does that make
sense? >> But the but the developer just clarified he can keep the buffering at one and 1.8. Go ahead. >> So then why didn't you why didn't you clarify the motion on which project commissioner you would like the commission to vote on one with more parking or less because they're both in
your packet. >> Okay, >> that's right. That's where I was going to go. I'd also note that the one point, you know, the PUD requires a conceptual plan. No, you're right. >> No, we're not on that. Those will be on reason for future land use right now. >> This is a future land. >> All you need to do is vote on the motion
on the floor which changes the zoning. You're not at the PU. >> We only are doing 61. >> You're correct. >> So the future land use the comp plan right now. >> I'm happy to clarify on the next item. >> So the motion on the floor is a good one and this considers changing the motion
to the to the request of the multif family. So mayor >> roll call. Roll call, please. >> Commissioner Bur, >> no. >> Commissioner Peterson, >> yes. >> Commissioner Reeseman, >> yes. >> Commissioner Conell, >> no.
>> Mayor Barry, >> yes. >> Now, I'd like to call for >> I'd like to call for the second reading. I mean, excuse me, for the reading for 682. >> I'll introduce 682 to be read by title only. An ordinance of the city of Leburg,
Florida, changing the zoning on approximately 18.71 plus minus acres from City of Leburg PUD to City of Leburg PUD planned unit development to allow for 276 multifamily units for a property generally located west of US
Highway 27 and north of Palm Drive lying in section 2, Township 20 South, Range 24 East, Lake County, Florida, and providing an effective Hey, >> move for approval. >> Second. >> Dan, will you give a >> uh Madame Mayor, we do need a
clarification on this which site plan to go to. The applicant did indicate earlier in the meeting that they were willing to go to 1.8 on the parking and that's the one they would like to have move forward please >> with the existing buffers.
>> And I don't care if they compromise. >> And you just Dan 1.8 just that needs clarification. the max parking or the min which 1.8 reference >> the minimum. >> Okay. So you what you commissioner
you're which which parking did you want? >> The 1.8 is fine. I heard if I heard them correctly they said they were going to maintain the the current buffering even at 1.8. I want to be sure the commission's clear on that. >> Yeah. So the the PUB has your minimum buffering and and we PUD requires a conceptual plan. So, we'll continue to
utilize the conceptual plan and we'll work with staff on the 1.8 so that they can approve the site plan. >> Yeah. Thank you. >> Great. Is there anything the commission needs to do to clarify what they're voting on? So, so what you all are voting on is a PUD as we've discussed this evening and the PUD that you're
voting on is the one with the minimal parking maximum buffering. That's what's before you now. >> Right. And if anybody wants if anybody wants to amend that and add any changes like the
agreement to not do any live local projects as was discussed. Um and again the 1.8 parking uh I I think that that would be appropriate here too. >> One final >> 1.8 in the >> well 1.8 8 was already announced. So I
think that um we would probably just need to clarify an addition of the live local prohibition in the agreement. Was there anything else? >> You said you need an amendment on the local prohibition in the PUD.
>> Yeah. Amend the motion to limit live local >> or the she used the word prohibit. >> Prohibit live local. Yeah, I did say. >> Were there any other >> questions before a motion?
>> You seconded that. >> On the amendment approval. >> I didn't hear you. >> Oh, >> can we please clarify the motion again because I'm >> I make an amended motion to prohibit live local on the property.
>> Okay. And is there a second? >> Second. Okay. Now, can we vote on the amendment? Roll call, please. >> Commissioner Peterson. >> Yes. >> Commissioner Reese. >> What? What? What are we voting on?
>> Okay. So, you're voting on the you're voting on amendment to overall there's a motion on the floor to approve the >> PUD. Mhm. >> Before you vote on the PUD, Commissioner Reeseman, seconded by Committee Peterson
made an amendment to the motion so that the parking plan of the PUD would be the minimal parking plan. So minimum parking maximum maximum landscape. So if you make that amendment, then you'll move back to the vote on the PUB.
>> So you're voting on reducing the parking. >> Correct. Increasing it. increasing. >> Well, it's not. It's not. No. See, that's that's a misconception. It's actually supposed to be two. The 1.8 is a decrease from what our LDRs call for.
So, let's not mislead anybody here. We're not increasing the parking. We're actually still decreasing it. >> That's how I understand it. >> You're voting for minimum parking, maximum land, >> but it does it's not but the the 1.8 doesn't even meet our LDRs. And
>> yes. >> So it is a decrease from our LDRs. It's not an increase. >> Yes, that is correct. You So the motion that you made had two parts. It's the smaller parking, not the not the code
parking. So it's less parking than code requirement, but more landscape and the prohibition on >> live local. That's what the amendment that you're voting on. So just like >> Commissioner Peterson, it's less parking, >> not the code parking.
>> It's realized heights everything in the PUD >> but more than the one >> unique to the project. >> Okay, >> call the roll, please. >> Okay, so we were at Commissioner Conell. >> No. >> Commissioner Bur, >> no. >> Mayor Barry,
>> yes. >> Well, we had We have >> you want another since we stopped. >> I didn't I didn't think you pulled everybody. >> I did those two and then you stopped and finished. >> Okay. So, what's the vote count?
>> Three yes, two no. >> So, now you move into the motion to approve the PD >> consideration of the PED vote now. >> Okay. Now we will go into voting for the PUD >> as amended. >> As amended.
>> Commissioner Re, you got something? >> Commissioner Reeseman? >> Yes. >> Commissioner? >> No. >> Commissioner Bur? >> No. >> Commissioner Peterson? >> Yes. >> Mayor Barry? Yes. Now, can we someone introduce 683, please?
>> I'll introduce 6 A3 to be read by title only. >> Hey, we got a meeting going on. >> Can we please hold down the noise? Would you like to take a five minute recess so that we can come back and continue the clean the meeting? Yes, sis. We'll give
you five minutes. Thank you. like to call the meeting back to order, please. Would someone please introduce 683? >> I'll introduce NA as be read by title only. >> An ordinance of the city of Leburg, Florida, changing the zoning on
approximately 7.80 80 plus minus acres from city of Leburg PUD planned unit development to SPUD small planned unit development to allow for commercial and light industrial uses for property generally located north of Commander
Road and east of US Highway 27 lying in section 11 township 20 south range 24 East Lake County Florida and providing an effective date. >> Move for approval. >> Second. Thank you, Madam Mayor.
This project uh is called the Leburg Flex. It consists of a reasonzoning only. There is no annexation or comp plan involved in this. The site consists of 7.8 plus or minus acres is generally located on the east side of Highway 27 and north of Commander Road. The request
is for approval for a future development which will consist of flex space warehouses. is now to familiarize you with flex space. If you'll think of what's down here on right across from bowling alley on West Main Street, we have an office in the front and a
warehouse in the back. Um it is currently changing from PUD to small PUD with revised conditions because we did not have a small PUD when this one was originally zoned. Um the old PUD allowed for an assisted living facility. the city department responses. We
received no substantiative comments from the city. Uh this is does not impact the school board since there's no residential here. Lake County Public Works did not have any comments. We did not receive written responses, but we did meet with uh one of the neighbors who is here tonight and would like to
speak uh to discuss buffer, setbacks, noise concerns, air filtration, a few items like that. Um, under the terms of the agreement, the proposal consists of industrial flex space, multi-tenant uses. Now, this is small bay flex
spaces. That would include warehouse distribution, logistics, light manufacturing, um, fabrication and assembly of non-hazardous type items, contractor trades, offices with indoor storage, wholesale trade, technology and
printing, indoor storage. No. Um the intent of this PUD is to utilize only light industrial type uses not heavy industrial. I want to make that um very clear because um sewing clothes and and
digging a a a mine those are both industrial uses. So we're talking about the light industrial side. Uh there six buildings proposed on the site with a maximum building height of two floors. There is opaque fencing or a wall required where the property is adjacent
to residential which is right here on the east side. Uh 35% in open space dark sky lighting is required and a code compliant landscaping plan. Uh there's a conceptual site plan in your packet.
There is access that is shown on the site plan. It is one primary access point because that's all that is needed. The PUD would require the developer to provide any and all expansions or upgrades to the access points and driveways as needed by FDOT on Commander
Road or Lake County, excuse me, FDOT on US 27 or uh Lake County on Commander Road. There, this project will be on city water and wastewater. So there's no wells or septics there. Uh there is the
standard phasing clause in this project uh with the automatic reversion after four months to the RE1 zoning standards. Planning commission did recommend approval on this one by a 70 vote. We do have one gentleman here that would like to speak about it and um Mr. Mr. Rick
Blunt of Blunt Development along with Miss Danielle Parker who's also with Blunt Development and several other people are here to answer any questions you might have on this one. Are there any questions for um Dan? Commissioner,
may we call for the petition petitioner, please? Mr. Blunt. >> Rick Blunt, 5429 County Road 125, Wildwood, Florida. I also want to congratulate um Mayor Barry. So, another
Leburg High School graduate uh to be the mayor there. I got to speak to Mrs. Henderson a little bit in the lobby and she said she didn't want to stay for my presentation. So that's okay. But uh we appreciate that. Um this this project
Dan pretty well covered it. It's it's not real controversial. Thank goodness it uh it does something that Jay Commissioner Connell mentioned earlier. Keeps jobs local. Um hopefully cut down some of the traffic in that area. This is also in that same area of Leburg, uh,
South 27. For those of you that aren't familiar or um, haven't looked at it, it's down there in front of the entrance to Hawthorne to the just to the right of it if you're facing Hawthorne. So, we're real proud of this project. Um, our consultants have told us it'll bring
between 68 and 95 jobs as a minimum. Um, I'm in one of these types of units myself right now just off Highway 44 in the uh, Wildwood area behind Spar and we have five staff working out of our unit and it's only uh, ours is around 1,250
square feet. These are going to be minimum of 1500 square feet units about 34 of them. So, um, we are excited about keeping the jobs in the area. as Commissioner Connell mentioned, it's nice if people don't have to drive all the way through the town to go to their,
you know, work. And so hopefully we'll bring some of those jobs and be able to keep some of the people from having to drive so far out of town and may help you with some of those traffic issues that we that we all do know about. And uh I think that's about all I have really and I'm here for questions, but
it's it's called Flex Space. I I went over it at the first reading pretty well, I think, and had a lot of good good questions. some some things from all of you commissioners and um I think that's all I have to cover unless you have some more questions for me. >> Commissioners, do you have any questions
for Mr. Blunt? >> If not, are there any public comments, please? My name is Larry Boyce. I live at 4755 Commander Road. It's at the very end of the road on the east side of this proposed development.
Um, I just got a few concerns uh as far as being able to futurally get along with the development, which I know Ricky well, so I I'm not real concerned, but I'd like to get on record. Um, the uh
some of the homeowners in area, I'm kind of speaking for them, too. I've got one of my neighbors here with me, Ricky How. And uh the uh let's see, um let me catch up here.
Just to address the concerns that could potentially impact our residences really. Um uh we think uh addressing these issues could help reduce some of that impact with minimal effect on the development. Number one would be the
light industrial zoning. I'm not up to all the zoning codes and everything. I talked to Dan this morning and he kind of explained it to me, but I know when I was in Leburg with my business, I have a I work with solid surface acrylics and
I'm in Wildwood now, but the the uh uh I had I was out here by the bowling alley on Richie Road and I had to come and apply for light industrial zoning because I had an outdoor dust collector. And that's one thing I I kind of would like to see is no outdoor equipment
that's non-essential to, you know, I could understand ACs or something like that. Um the uh uh you know, and I don't I can't think of anything else that would be outdoor. I know Hawthorne every now and then on Monday mornings they have to run their
little circulate pump on their uh on their uh water treatment plant across from me, but that's an hour long. So, um the uh second under that would be to limit the hours of operation. Um I'd
rather not have somebody out there banging on a car or something or in a metal at a welding shop or something like that at 11 o'clock at night or 6 o'clock in the morning. Um that's something I would like to consider. Um I
talked to Ricky a little bit before the meeting about the setbacks. I know it sounded like it's kind of crucial on the building thing. I I have a a big site plan of that because I was looking at doing a class A RV park there and I decided not to do it about a year ago.
So I measured it out today. There's 230 ft from the wetlands pond on the west side to my property line according to scale. Um the if you know if I add up a 25 every other
setback on there is 25 or 30 feet. Uh except for the extreme far west property which is on the other side of the wetlands pond. Um so I I would like to you know address that that setback a little bit. Um the uh
>> sir your your time >> up. Yes. >> Already. Okay. >> Thank you. Ricky Howell 4760 Commander wrote, "Uh, I've just uh want to back up what Larry was talking about. We'd like to have
a little bit of a buffer more than what what we're getting, 10 feet of a buffer. We'd like to get at least 25 ft. I don't think that's asking a lot. Uh we'd like to have a
to ask for a a a masonary wall to come from the uh norththeast corner all the way around to the east of the entry.
That would kind of give us a buffer. We wouldn't see it. Maybe 8 foot tall. we wouldn't be able to see as much or hear as much. So, uh and then of course Larry covered all the uh uh zonings and stuff.
It's it's a it's a nice project and uh I don't I don't think I don't think we could ask for something better there, but it's still an impact on us and we're just asking for a few things and we wish you would consider it and we thank you.
>> Thank you, Mr. How. Are there any other comments from or questions from the >> No. >> Oh, no. From the commission. >> Okay. >> From the public. There's no more to be. There's no more comments from the public. No one's up. So, I'm asking now
for the commission. >> Uh Dan. >> Yes sir. >> With regard to we've done one other of these flex I think Montlair or something, didn't we? Flex base there. Did we have what was the uh setbacks?
>> I remember on the um residential side it was closer to 25. I don't remember the exact number. >> What what what is the setback from commercial to res? >> On commercial to residential it's really not a defined setback in C in in the commercial. You can go down to zero if
you put in a firewall. That's and so what yeah firewall on the building side? No, I'm talking about from the >> Oh, on this particular one >> from zoning. I mean from commercial piece of property to residential piece of property. >> That's correct. You can go down.
>> What is there's not a there's not a standard number. You can >> we don't we don't have a setback for >> generally it goes both sides add up to one. And on this one um you could you could put in the number that you want because it's an SPUD. So there's
generally not a specific number. It usually has to add up to 15 to answer the question specifically, but in a PUD you can make it whatever you want it to to make it. >> You say 15 add up to >> seven and a half, seven and a half, five and 10, something like that. >> Really that tight?
>> It's quite tight. Now it in a in a commercial zoning you can go down to a zero setback if you build a firewall. Sure. And I mean you're aware of that. I know. >> Yeah. So I I get the building fire side from separation.
>> In this particular property, there's a 10-ft buffer and a 15t uh setback, but a buffer lays on top of the setback. They lay on top of each other. They start at the same point. So it's essentially 15 ft from the property line. >> So in this particular case, what what
are the proposed setbacks? front side and rear. >> On the um >> I mean I I it's not the site plan, so I I don't know what he's proposing here. But >> on on the rear side, it's the 15 on the on the sides there. I have to go pull my
book out and look at it if I can get Candy to come in and bring me that book. And then on the front, I believe it's uh 20, but I'll have to look at it real quick. Mr. Connell, if you give me just a minute while she's going to grab that book and we'll get it open. Where where is it that y'all live at on the here? Where is it y'all live on this map?
>> White house. >> Which one? >> I mean, you you got some you got lots in front, the back, and the side. >> Well, at at the end of commander, which dead ends uh there's three three people. That's myself, Larry, and uh a lady
>> at on the river. >> So, there's only three properties. >> The three on the river. >> On Yes. On the east. The east end of that is where Larry takes the blunt of this and uh Miss Lillian in the middle
takes a lot of it. I'm across the road there. Uh so I'm not as impacted as they are, but we'd still like to have a buffer uh you know and a and a wall >> and and that's that's the area that then
work we're looking at is only the 10 foot. >> Yes. On the east there. >> Yes. Yeah. Thank you. >> Okay. To answer the question specifically, Mr. Commissioner Connell, um the building setbacks as measured from the property lines on the north is
25, on the south is 30, and then on the east and west they're both 15. Um and the that's the building setback. The first 10 feet of that is a buffer. So it's essentially 15 feet. >> 15, I'm sorry. >> Yes, sir. >> 15t total.
>> Yes, sir. That's correct. M Mr. I don't mean to keep I don't I'm not trying to run thing. Mr. Blunt, I mean, would it affect your >> I'd like to address some of these if you'd allow me. >> Um well, first of all, Mr. Ricky Fowler,
he's at the end of Commander Road and then to the south. >> So, he actually doesn't border our property. So, um he just I think was wondering I talked to him and Mr. Boyce in the lobby earlier and Mr. Boyce is directly he's the larger home site that
you see there with the white building and then the uh he's on the he's got a dock down there. Um and he addressed some of his concerns with me before the meeting and I think we worked them out. Um one of the things in the PUD and we
can hopefully add that read it into it tonight if we do make this change to make the uh homeowner happy behind. uh we have we have uh in the PUD that required six to eight foot fence or wall and we would be willing to amend that on
all the residential borders to be a minimum of 8 feet rather than just six. We would say uh 8 foot fence and um there is the buffer also in there the 10 feet uh that he would have and then Mr.
Boyce and I were talking in the lobby about if we, you know, it's we're willing to do a few things like um one of his concerns that he got cut off in his time limit that he mentioned to me in the lobby, which is a genuine concern. So, I'm going to help him out and bring it up uh right here. And that
is that he was concerned with these dust collectors that ventilate from manufacturers, especially like furniture manufacturers, things like that outside of a building. And I said, "Well, you know, I wouldn't want that ventilator toward my home either,
ventilating out that there's also an environmental concern with it. Sometimes it could be combustible occasionally. Um, but the dust that would be created." So, I told Larry, I said, "Well, you know what? We'll we'll read it into the record that any bordering the residential in the southeast corner we
will make sure that u all uh dust collectors or you know if needed there's probably I'm not even going to be one there but in in the future if there is because I may not own this forever I could sell it in 10 years and then the next owner so this would protect Mr. boys living behind here that we would uh
read uh add that to the PUD that they would all be vented away from the residential in the southeast corner because that other property there that you can see um Commissioner Connell that's actually Hawthorne's parking for their u boats and RVs for their residents so it's really like outdoor
industrial parking so Mr. Boyce already borders that, you know, it doesn't seem to cause a concern for him. I don't suppose um too much, but um so those are two things that we would agree on. Um the buffer we worked very hard on u very difficult process to get all the
different setbacks rather um on the property because we're protecting the wetland too. Uh we're not going to impact that with our building at all. And and so this is very well thought out and with our civil engineer um foreigner uh climber fareer barley this isn't
something that we just sketched out you know this is something that was took a lot of thought a lot of time and a lot of effort and money and so um the 15 foot setback is is important to us uh on that area there in that little southeast corner that we have that on that entire
east corner actually our east end um but we would be willing as I said to be a good neighbor to put those other provisions in there uh in the PUD. Does that make sense, Dan? Sort of. >> Okay. >> One, one other question that he did raise and I I I would have the same
question if I've lived in that area, is >> are you willing to limit the hours of operation outside of the building? >> That's the first that I've heard that. And I don't think that's something that I could do. Um, as I said, I'm in a um
complex right now that that has um my gosh, it's got 60s something units, and there'll be an occasion where I'll go in at 8:00 at night and work in my office. Um because that's where all my projectors are and a lot of my equipment inside. I don't disturb people, but um I
can't imagine that I would be able to that that would work in practical terms. I mean, it sounds good, you I'm talking about outside of the unit, not not inside the unit, outside the unit in the the parking lot. >> I mean, I'm just I'm just talking about it from a noise standpoint. We are we
are fairly close to some residential here. And I I I could understand where he's coming from. I wouldn't want to hear somebody banging around out here at 9 10:00 at night. >> I don't What do you think, Danielle? I have my entire staff here, by the way, to help me. I knew some questions may come up. There were um uses that were
not included um for that reason. Things like auto mechanics were not included because we don't want big piles of cars and they will work at night all over the place or working at night. So a lot of those list of uses were already taken out of that list so that that's not a
problem. >> Yeah. So I think we we actually tried to address a lot of things. That's a good point Danielle. You helped jog my memory. We've been working on this for a very long time and we've gone through the list list together with Dan and Candy and tried to make it where it is something appealing and but yet can
bring some jobs here uh and not be so restrictive that nobody can utilize their uh because you'll have people coming in um catering kitchens that are going to come in and maybe they load their truck uh Commissioner Connell at 8:00 at night maybe or unload it. So I wouldn't want to restrict them say when
your restaurant closes down you can't come in here and unload your truck into your unit. No, no, no. And I I that that's >> I mean, you see how that could be. >> Oh, I do. And but I and Yeah. And I understand that's not what what I you know, I would I would want either. I mean, but >> somebody outside I mean, you know,
>> banging around on something, >> right, >> is different than unloading your truck. I mean, >> it's just so vague, you know. >> Well, and I I get that. I get that. But I do I do understand the neighbor's concern on that, too. >> I do. And we're going to try to, like I said, we're going to be a good neighbor for Mr. Boyce. And um you know, uh
And um go ahead >> with with uh commissioner within the restrictions of the PUD all the work has to take place inside. There's no outside. >> Okay. >> There you go. >> That was that was >> this is you got to state your name and
address. >> How you doing? Michael Mil 5688 uh C. Thomas Roadwood. Um I just want to make one clarification as far as you know like like Mr. Blonde had mentioned we would do an 8ft uh fence along it's roughly about 300ish
feet for those two parcels on the screen there. Um as opposed to you know wrapping around the whole the whole development that section where to go >> that was it. >> Yeah. >> You referenced a 10-ft buffer. Is that landscaped in any way? I'm thinking of
sound of Okay. Buff. Yeah. Reducing sound. >> That's exactly right. utilizing, you know, typical. >> Are there any other public comments, please? >> Can we go to a commission deliberation?
>> Yeah, I I just wanted to check with Grant. Do we need to amend the SPUD to that 8 foot section? >> Would we a motion to do that? >> Yeah, we would need to. If if the desire is to include any of the changes that were discussed, there would need to be
an amendment done. Um, >> yeah, I thought the said 6 to8. >> In the PUD, it's in the PUD, it's written six to eight. So, you may want to make an amendment to to make it eight. >> Yes.
>> So, I'll make a motion to amend the SPUD to 8 foot fencing >> on the uh Is that for the entire property, Dan? before I >> they were they were looking at >> just for the 300 >> Mr. Boyce's property down here
>> residential >> for >> southeast I think is what he had said >> it already specifies residential properties that the the 68 >> right so they just need to make it >> we want 8 foot >> for residential >> on the residential side
>> when it abuts >> so the amendment is 8 feet where it abuts residential >> we need to include the language about the dust collectors at all >> you can add language about the dust collectors as far as staff is concerned.
They could be restricted to point toward the front or something like that. The only time dust collectors are going to come into play is if there's someone like a furniture builder. Okay. >> It's pretty uncommon. >> So, there's a motion on the floor. >> I know you need to make a motion. You need to make a motion. Amen. >> Motion looking for a second.
>> Okay. I'll second. >> Discussion. >> Any further discussion? Roll call, please. >> Commissioner Connell, >> yes. >> Commissioner Bur, >> yes. >> Commissioner Peterson, >> yes. >> Commissioner Reeseman, >> yes.
>> Mayor Barry, >> yes. No. >> Yes. I think so. >> May we have a roll call on the amended motion, please? >> We We We did the amendment. Now we're
looking back on on the six on approving the 683, excuse me. Okay. The amended 6acre. >> The amended 6acre. Thank you. >> Commissioner Burray. >> Yes. >> Commissioner Peterson. >> Yes. >> Commissioner Reeseman. >> Yes. >> Commissioner Conell. >> Yes. >> Mayor Barry.
>> Yes. >> Now we're in 61. >> We have no business. No routine items in 61. Somebody >> would someone please introduce
I'll introduce 666 C1 to be read by title only. >> Resolution of the city commission of the city of Leburg, Florida appointing one member to the Leburg firefighters retirement plan board of trustees and providing an effective date. >> Move for approval.
>> Second. >> Mr. >> Did did we write that with the one? So, this is a resolution uh to replace one member on the firefighter pension fund. This is the city's appointment. If you recall, the the pension boards are made up of two representatives from the union, two representatives from the
city, and then one representative that jointly appointed. Mr. Middle uh Middlemiss is uh his term expired in December. So, this is an appointment for his term for two years. It would end December 31,27. So, it's a two-year
appointment. He is the only person who has uh filled out an application to serve on the pension board representing the city and I believe the resolution is written that way. >> Yes, sir. >> I'll make a motion to approve Mr. Middle. >> Second.
>> Madam Clerk, can we have a roll call, please? >> Commissioner Peterson? >> Yes. >> Commissioner Reeseman? >> Yes. >> Commissioner Cono? >> Yes. >> Commissioner Bur? >> Yes. >> Mayor Barry? >> Yes. Um, next we have our information reports. We have none. City attorney
items. >> Nothing tonight. Thank you, Madame Mayor. >> City Manager, >> I I don't have any tonight other than to jump on the bandwagon and recognize Mayor Barry. Um I think it's a pretty significant uh deal to have our first
female African-American mayor in Leburg's history. So, Mayor, congratulations. Look forward to working with you. >> Thank you. >> Roll call. Commissioner Peterson. nothing tonight. Commissioner Reeseman, >> couple things. At our TDC uh board meeting this this afternoon that I sit
on on behalf of the city, this TDC allocated $150,000 towards the spring games. So, that'll be taking part here in Leburg and Claremont from February 13th through March 28th. So, that will bring a lot of hotel stays and residents and out oftowners enjoying our city. Um,
look forward to seeing you all this Saturday at the MLK parade and MLK breakfast. And then lastly, a congratulations to Mayor Barry on her first meeting as mayor, and I look forward to a great 2026. >> Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner Pell. >> Nothing. >> Commissioner Bur, >> nothing tonight.
>> Mayor Barry. >> Um, yes. I'd like to congratulate all of the students who were awarded a $4,000 scholarship at the Villages MLK Junior Scholarship Awards Breakfast this past Saturday. And a special congrats to
Leburg High School's Ella Prader and Janice Wagner for their achievements. We're proud to announce and wish them all for all of their accolades to come. And I'd also like to say thank you to all for my first meeting and how many
more >> 23 plus the budget. >> Best budget. So you got a lot. >> I counted a lot. So I thank you all and if there's no further >> we can >> motion to adjurnn. >> Yes.
>> Thank you.