like to call the planning and zoning commission meeting of Leburg to order. It is Thursday, November 20th, 2025. I remember that time. I said 26 last time. Um, please stand for the pledge of the flag and the uh invocation.
>> Your invocation. >> Dear Lord, we ask you to be with us today as we undertake the business of the city of Leburg. We pray that the decisions we make will be pleasing in your sight. Pray this in thy most holy name. Amen. >> Amen.
I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. >> Thank you. >> I had to lean against this thing because
because of my legs real weak. I was I was All right. Um, everybody's had an opportunity to uh review the minutes. Are there any uh additions, corrections, or deletions? If not, I'll accept a
motion to approve. >> I make a motion to approve the minutes of the November 20th, 2025. I >> uh all in favor say I. >> I. >> I. All opposed. Thank you very much.
Um, let me see. Anybody that would like to speak will need to be sworn in. Uh, please stand to be sworn in. If you plan on speaking, if you don't get sworn in, you can't speak. >> That's easy. >> Do you swear affirm the testimony you're about to give is the truth, the whole
truth, and nothing but the truth? >> I do. >> I do. >> You can only speak a little while. >> I still got it. >> All right. Um, Dano. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I'd like to welcome everyone to the December 18,
2025 city of Leburg Planning Commission meeting. My name is Dan Miller, director of planning for the city of Leburg. Staff present today includes executive assistant Sabrina Mitchell, senior planners Diane Yuckle and Max Van Allen, planners Melissa Meadows, de los Santos
and Mr. Mill Ortiz, and city attorney Jennifer Cotch. Today's agenda and speaker's registry is available on the table by the exit door. If you wish to speak on a case, we ask that you would please sign in the speaker's registry which is on the table and turn it into Sabrina seated here to my left. Under
the rules of participation, the meeting will be conducted under the following processes. Number one, the chairman will announce each case. The staff will then present a list of exhibits for the record. This will include maps, photos, text as shown on the screens.
The staff will then provide the case background and some descriptive information and read a recommendation into the record. The applicant will then have the opportunity to speak on the case. Members of the public will then have time for comments. The applicant will have an opportunity to respond. The chairman will then close the case to the
public. Commission will have a discussion about the case and the commission will then take a vote on the case and call for the next item on the agenda. The planning commission consists of citizens appointed by the city commissioners of the city of Leburg and they are charged with two primary functions. The first is making final
decisions on cases such as variances and conditional uses and the second is making recommendations for issues to be heard by the city commission. The city staff provides recommendations to the planning commission based on the city's comprehensive plan, city's land
development regulations, and state of Florida statutes. There are three cases on today's agenda. All of three of these cases will receive recommendations by the planning commission and those recommendations will be forwarded to the city commission for final decisions.
There are tenative dates for the city commission hearings which are listed in bold on the agenda. These dates are subject to be changed. So, please contact the planning and zoning office or the city clerk's office in regard to those final hearing dates to ensure that you come to the correct meeting. And
finally, on behalf of the city of Leburg Planning and Zoning staff and the city of Leburg Planning Commission, we thank you for your participation in today's public hearing process. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you.
I will like to introduce the uh first case. It's public hearing case number SP25748, Lake Margaretta, phase 2, smallcale comprehensive plan amendment. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. In the background of this case, the project
consists of an annexation, small-cale comp plan, and reszoning. The site consists of 25.07 plus or minus 8. >> Can I interrupt just a second? Yes, sir. I'm going to inter I'm going to introduce the second one, too. >> Yes, sir. Thank you. >> What we do is since these two are basically same information, we introduce
them both at the same time. We vote on them separately, but we go ahead and just run it through at the same time instead of doing the same thing twice. Uh case number two, public hearing case number PUD25749 Lake Margaretta phase 2 plan unit development. >> Sorry. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. This is
an annexation smallcale comp plan and reszoning. The site consists of approximately 25.07 plus or minus acres. It's generally located on the south side of County Road 48 and east of number two road. The project is contained within the currently approved Lake Margareta
project. The request is for approval for a future development consisting of 75 plus or minus single family dwelling units. Under this request, a future land use application for the project is requesting a change from Lake County Rural Transition to City of Leburg
estate. The zoning application for this project is requesting a change from Lake County R1, which is rural residential to planned unit development. Senior planner Diane Yekl will present the maps and photo exhibits including aerial zoning,
future land use, surrounding land use, wetlands, flood zone maps, commission and CRA maps. >> Thank you, sir. >> Thank you, Mr. Miller. So, starting with the extended aerial, we see that the subject property is south of 48 east of
number two road and west of Triumpy Road. And also the aerial shows that it is south of 48, east of number two road and west of Triumpy Road. For the zoning, we have to the north,
south,outheast, and west city PUD planned unit development. In Lake County zoning, the subject property is currently zoned Lake County Agriculture, which is also to the east. The proposed zoning is PUD planned unit
development. For future land use, we have estate residential to the north, south, east, and west. In Lake County, future land use, the subject property has a future land use of rural transition, which is also to
the east. The proposed future land use is estate residential. And for surrounding land use, we have to the north pasture improved hay average, to the south orange groves, to the east, single family and orange groves, and to
the west timber. And it does show that the subject property is in the Leburg ISBA. for developments. We have that the subject property is in an enclave surrounded by Lake Margaretta phase one.
Um and there's also Eagle Tale number two road close by and number two agricultural PDIO. Uh flood zones. There are no flood zones in the subject property or wetlands.
The subject property is right next to commission district number four. And for pictures, the top photo is a closeup looking south on Gospel Hill HLS. Uh the bottom picture is looking north
on Gospel Hill HLGs and the top picture is looking east on Gospel Hill HLGs. And the bottom picture is looking south on Gospel Hill HLGs. And the final picture is looking west on
Gospel Hill HLGs. And that's all I have, Mr. Miller. Thank you. >> Thank you, Mr. Yuckle. With that, we move on to the departmental review summary. Project was sent out to all city departments plus Lake County government and Lake County School Board for comment. We only received one
substantive comment from the city departments and that is the public works department requesting that the developer reach out to them for computer modeling of water and wastewater um needs to ensure that there's capacity in the nearby lines. That's a standard comment. Uh nothing substantiative other
than that. under the school board. The applicant has been in contact with the school board and they're working on the adequate public facilities letter and it is the school board's practice that the applicant will be required to obtain a school concurrency reservation
which reserves capacity in the schools for development and if at the time of development because it changes every year if there is adequate school capacity not available then the project will be subject to a mitigation agreement. Uh Lake County Public Works
did not have any comments on this project. Under public responses per Florida statute and city of Leburg code requirements, the project was legally advertised, posted, and letters were sent out to the surrounding property
owners within 200 ft. We did not receive any written responses to the ads or letters. Under the terms of the SPU agreement, this proposal will consist of a total of 75
multifamily residential units on 25 plus or minus acres. There's no other uses permitted. The project proposal includes design standards for the architecture which are included and were shown in your exhibits package. There'll be 35%
of the property in open space. Dark sky lighting is required. code compliant landscaping plan required and of course the usual bare or bermuda grass is required in place of St. Augustine. Again, since it's single family, you'll have the maximum building height of two
floors, gutters for sideyards of less than five feet, and then there are again facade samples in your packet. And what I wanted to note here is that this project will be integrated into the larger Lake Margaretta project that
surrounds it. Now, uh, this project did not come the the applicant did not have control or ownership of the property at the time the original Lake Margaretta project came in. They have since achieved that uh, ownership and
that's why they're coming in and basically just finishing off what they propose as the Lake Margaretta project. So, it'll be phased in with that. Um, under site access, there is access shown on the plan and an emergency access as well. The PUB does require the developer
to provide any and all expansions and or upgrades to any access points and roadways as needed uh by FDOT or Lake County. And in this case, because it integrates into the larger project, that actually won't uh FDOT or Lake County
review will not be necessary on that. Um there are 2.7 acres of recreational and parkland required. Um which will again and I keep saying this but it's going to be integrated into the larger project. Um under utilities of course everything will be on city water and wastewater.
Um and then we have the phasing or expiration clause which requires that development move forward with substantial commencement within four years or less or the property will automatically revert to the standards of the RE1 zoning district which is one
acre per unit. I'd like to go ahead and read those recommendations for the record at this time. For the amendment to the comp plan case SP25-748, planning and zoning department is
recommending approval of the request for the following reasons. One, the project meets the requirements of chapter 163.3187 Florida statutes for smallcale comprehensive plan amendments. Two, the proposed request is compatible with the adjacent future land use designations of
Lake County Rural Transition and City of Leburg Estate Residential. Three, the proposed request is compatible with the proposed zoning of City of Leburg PUD as conditioned. And four, the proposed future land use designation for the site is consistent with the city's growth
management plan, future land use element goal one, objective 1.6 and 1.8. The action requested is to vote to approve the small-scale comprehensive plan amendment from Lake County Rural Transition to City of
Leburg estate residential and forward this recommendation to the city commission for their consideration. The recommendation for the PUD is under case number PUD2-749. Planning and zoning department recommends approval of this request for
the following reasons. One, the proposed zoning classification of planned unit development is compatible as conditioned with the current surrounding zoning districts of Lake County R1 and city of Leburg PUD. Two, proposed small-cale comprehensive plan amendment is compatible with the adjacent future land
use designations of Lake County rural transition and city of Leburg estate residential. And three, the proposed request does not appear to create a detriment to surrounding properties as conditioned in the PUD document. The action requested is to vote to approve the
staff's recommendation to reszone the subject property from Lake County R1 Rural Residential to City of Leburg PUD and forward to the city commission for their consideration. Therefore, Mr. Chairman, based on a review of this proposal and the fact that it is consistent with the city's comprehensive
plan and land development regulations, staff's recommending approval for cases SCS SCP25-748 and PUD25-749, Lake Margaretta phase 2. Mr. Bill Maki and Mr. Tom Daly of Daily Design Group are here to represent the case and
answer any questions you may have. Uh the applicant may like to request some changes to the PUD document and they do have a presentation for the commission. Thank you sir. >> Okay. >> Um before they come up um I had a just a
quick question. Did you say something about multif family at the beginning? >> If I did that was a mistake because it's single family. >> Okay. Because you said I'm sorry. >> That's what threw me. I'm like I put an apartment in the middle of that. >> No question. >> Thank you. That was in my mind the whole
time. >> And then you said single family. >> Yeah, you said single later. But yeah, >> so much to say that I probably have the wrong word in my >> That's okay. >> But thank you for that clarification. >> We'll forgive you this time. >> A sore finger will make that happen. >> It will. >> Uh, any other questions from staff?
>> It is a single family home. >> Yeah, completely. Yes, sir. >> Come on up. >> All right. >> Come on down. >> State your name and address for the record. My name is Tom Daly with Daily Design Group, 913 North Pennsylvania Avenue, Winter Park, Florida. Um, and
I'm here on behalf of the uh the applicant. Uh, if we can go to the next slide, please. Back in uh this is the original, this is the approved plan for the surrounding properties and this approved by the city council in uh August of this year. Uh while we were
going through that process, probably you know getting towards July or so, the folks in the we they kept calling it the donnut hole reached out to my clients and said, "Hey, what about me, you know, to and wanted to engage in talking about
selling their land to the developer." And so it was a little too far down the process. So we sought approval for that. And then as you know once once we got beyond that and contracts got uh formalized for the purchase that came
what you're reviewing today. And so the lake Margaretta has uh you know 195 acres this is 25 so it's about 13% expansion of the uh of that community. If you can go to the next slide please. And that's how it fits in. I mean it's
just basically filling the donut hole. um and uh with the same standards that Lake Megaretta has with the lot sizes and all the architectural standards and all of those things are all the same. And so this really was just trying this this request is really just trying to go
ahead and fill that donut hole in. It's at the top of the hill. So the storm water for this is going to be within the Lake Margaretta estates because we got to have the water going downhill. Um, and the open space and the recreation.
We're going to expand the recreation that was approved for Lake Margaretta to add another 3 acres of land to accommodate this. It'll all be under the same master HOA. Um, you know, and all designed with the similar similar
requirements. So, if you can go to the next one, please. And really, this is, you know, it's like I said, it's simple. It's no, there's no wetlands like uh Diane said. There's no environmentally sensitive lands. Um, you know, we're we're looking at uh changing from county to city annexing in it's all within the
ISBA. So, we're we're allowed to do that and it's a mixture of 50 foot wide lots, 60 foot wide lots and 70 foot lots, which is the exact same development program that the parent tract has. >> Jump in just one second. I hate to interrupt you, but before you go to the
next slide, it says 100 single family lots. >> That's right. And it'll be >> 75. >> It'll be 75. Okay. the our proposal when we submitted was that we have a maximum of four homes per acre but blended with
the whole thing it would not exceed three. So that's we had a you're exactly right. And so >> what what Dan said, you know, um >> this time. >> Yeah. But um and we we'll work on the language on that and this presentation
when we get to the uh to the city council. >> Um so I guess our our next uh you know uh step would be to get to the city council which I believe is uh >> was it Jan >> January 12th? >> January 12th. February 23rd.
>> Right. Right. So, that's where we're at. If you could go to the next slide, please. This is just the homes. These are the same homes that we showed with the Lake Margaretto, the larger project. >> They're all nice. If you can just scroll through those, please. These are all on
these are the little bit wider lots, you know, the onetory and the twostory. Kind of a farmhouse country um design aesthetic. And this is a 70 foot lot. And a lot of these, you know, have threec car garages. You know, it's a >> um it this is just an addition to and
again squaring off the donut hole, so to speak. >> Right. >> And so we'd appreciate your uh support with us and I'm here to answer any questions. >> Thank you. >> And we're not doing multif family. >> Any questions of the applicant? >> And you said that uh >> your agent
>> uh three three houses. It would be more than three houses on one acre. that one. >> Well, because there's no storm water on this site because it's at the top of the hill, right? The storm water usually takes about 15 or 20% of the land.
>> So, when you integrate this whole thing in as a standalone, it might exceed that three units an acre, but as a blended for the whole community, we're not going to exceed. >> So, that's that's why, >> Mr. Chairman. Yes. within the PUD. When
we were writing this, we built it off the previous Lake Margaretta project. in discussions with the applicants. There are a number of areas in here that staff and I think we saved the document at the
wrong point, but there is a number of items in here such as the boulevard roadway decorative entry feature that are not going to apply to this PUD because it integrates within. And what I'd like to respectfully request of the commission is to allow me to make those
changes and I can list them whatever you would like. But there's uh some wording about the homeowners association that's going to actually be called a master homeowners association and lake Margaret. Let's see. And and that the storm water system can be located within
the boundary of the entire project because this is high and dry ground which they can use to build the houses and all of the water is going to run off anyway. And I would like to be able to um make a couple of changes in that as
far as like we have the 15 foot wide buffer tract which isn't necessary. I don't know why we missed it but we did. My fault and um so I would like to be able to just make those corrections if it's pleases the commission. Um, again,
the entry feature and those kind of items, um, is really what I need to do. And it's just language cleanup. It's not, um, it doesn't change densities, lot sizes, anything like that. If I may have permission to fix that or >> Okay.
>> Um, with the applicant before it goes to city commission, it would be helpful. I didn't realize we had these errors until earlier today and rather than try to change the document at the last minute, we thought it's better to just bring it to you as it is as it was submitted. And
as >> not being pasted. >> Yeah. And I didn't want to I didn't want to fix it without you knowing what I was doing. >> I get I get real estate contracts like that every once in a while. >> Dan, uh could you address Gospel Hill Road?
>> It's definitely a one Lane Road. >> Yes. >> What is your plan there? >> Our plan is to remove it. Okay. It it it does have uh and I can't recall if it's a a public easement or uh right ofway,
but we're still going to incorporate it the entrance to uh number two road as an emergency as a the location for our emergency access. >> But it'll be gone. It'll it'll just >> it will be the one once the property is
annexed, the city will then be legally able to vacate and put in the the emergency access. If we try to do it now, then the county commission has to agree, the city commission has to agree, and there's a whole bunch of steps that staff feels if we just annex it and we
handle it administratively would be more efficient u and less bureaucracy to deal with. >> Cool. Any other questions? >> Thank you. >> Merry Christmas. I forgot to say that. >> You, too. You too.
>> Dang it, man. Merry Christmas. >> Yeah. >> Is there anybody uh in the audience that wants to speak for or against any of the public? >> Okay, we'll close to the public. Um I've got a couple questions for you, Dan. >> Yes, sir. Um,
I'm sure it won't take this long, but are these two separate basically two separate deals? So, their 40 their 48 months starts after this is approved. >> So, that section >> the other ones have to finish before this one.
>> The the other ones would have to start >> before this one in order to have that 48month period expire. Right. So if they do substantial commencement, if if phase one substantially commences prior to
2029, they're safe. This one will be 20 by the time it's approved, it'll be 2030. So it'll be a few months difference. >> I was just curious. I sir, I'm sure that won't happen, but >> I'm always thinking
a lot of people won't agree to that, but um any other questions? >> No, sir. >> All right. Well, I'll uh open it up for any other discussion amongst us and open for a uh motion.
>> Oh, before we do that, I was going to ask you a technical question. Since he's got those changes, can we just say uh if they want to approve it with as as presented >> as presented with the recommended changes is fine. If you want to just add
that to the end of your motion. Yes, >> that's how I used to do it, but I just want to make sure. >> Sounds good. >> Cool. If they decide to do it, right? >> Yes. >> Okay. It's in your all's hands now. >> Well, Mr. Chair, I'd like to make a
motion to approve case number SP25748 with the recommendations of Mr. Miller. >> Great. >> Okay, it's been motion made and seconded. Is there any discussion? Roll call. >> Commissioner Simeon.
>> Yes. >> Commissioner Baroft. >> Yes. >> Commissioner Robertson, >> yes. >> Commissioner Sen, >> yes. >> Commissioner Sanders, >> yes. >> Commissioner Marshall, >> yes. >> Thank you. And public hearing case number PUD2749.
Is there a uh motion on that? >> So move. I'd like to make a motion to >> That's okay. to approve PD25749 >> with the chang >> with the changes with the recommendation of Mr. >> Yes.
>> All right. Any discussion? Roll call. >> Commissioner Fire. >> Yes. >> Commissioner Robertson. >> Yes. >> Commissioner. >> Yes. >> Commissioner Sanders. >> Yes. >> Commissioner Marshall. >> Yes. >> Commissioner. >> Yes.
>> Thank you very much. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. Have a great holiday. >> You too. Happy continuation. >> Say hi to Susan Watson or I guess she's a Davis now. I still go by her main name. Okay.
Public hearing case number Spud 25751 Petrolanda Castine Road Small Plan Unit Development. >> Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Under the background, this project consists of a reszoning only on a site consisting of 2.98 plus or minus undeveloped acres.
Does have a single family house on it, so it's almost undeveloped. Generally located on the north side of Castine Road and west of South Street. Under the overall proposal, the zoning application for the project is requesting a change from small planned unit development to small plan unit development with revised
conditions. The request is for approval of a zoning for a future development consisting of warehousing and storage plus other uses. Senior planner Max Van Allen will present the maps and photo exhibits including the aerial zoning future land use surrounding land use
wetlands flood zone maps commission and CRA maps. >> Thank you, Mr. Miller. The extended aerial shows the subject property west of South Street and north of Castine Road. The aerial shows the subject property
directly north of Castine Road and west of Catoy Road. The existing zoning is SPUD small planned unit development and is surrounded by R3 highdensity residential to the north, M1 industrial to the east,
and R2 medium density residential to the southeast. The surrounding Lake County zoning includes A agriculture to the west and south, R six urban residential to the east and west. The proposed zoning is SPUD small
planned unit development with revised conditions. The existing future land use is low density residential and is surrounded by lowdensity residential to the north and east and highdensity residential to the southeast.
Surrounding Lake County future land use includes urban low density to the west, urban medium density to the east, and rural to the south. Surrounding land uses include house of worship to the north, residential to the east, west, and southeast, and
agriculture to the south. Developments include the Southwinds town homes to the north. The property is in commission district two. There is minimal flood zone around the property boundaries as shown on the
map and there are no wetlands present on this property. Signs were posted. The top image is a closeup of the sign looking north on Castine Road. And then the bottom image is looking north into the subject
property on Castine Road. The top image is looking east along Castine Road from the subject property. The bottom image is looking south across Castine Road from the subject property. And finally, looking west along Castine
Road from the subject property. That's all I have. Mr. Miller, >> that's got to be the only pieces in the flood zone or wetlands. >> Yeah, that area >> because wet over there. >> Thank you, Miss Van Allen. Moving to the departmental review sum summary. The project was sent out to all city
departments plus Lake County government and school board for comment. There were no substantiative comments from the city department as a is it as it is a non-residential project. School board had no comment. Lake County Public Works responded with the the necessity or
requirement I should say for a commercial driveway permit, additional rideway on Castine Road and a traffic impact analysis along with looking at storm water drainage and flood design for the project. Those are standard requirements that the city of Leburg
has. And we uh as in all of these comments that are part of the city of Leburg review, we also share those reviews with Lake County Public Works on any project that impacts um Lake County public facilities such as roadways.
Under public responses per Florida statute and city of Leburg code requirements, project was legally advertised, posted, and letters were sent out to the surrounding property owners within 200 ft. The city received no responses from the ads and letters. Under the terms of the SPUD agreement,
this proposal consists of 2.98 plus or minus acres with permitted uses that include a single family residential use, which is the current use down in the corner of this property that
house has the potential to be split off from the rest of this. So, we're leaving the single family use in the PUD. It also allows for office uses, warehouse distribution, logistics, light manufacturing, contractor trades and
offices, shops, indoor storage, indoor light manufacturing, technology services such as computer and data processing. Um project proposal includes some minor design standards such as screening of any mechanical equipment on top of any
buildings. 35% of the property has to be an open space. Dark sky lighting. Code compliant landscaping is required and maximum building height I think is still two floors 35 ft which is consistent with what's in the area. Landscape buffers are required and bea or bermuda
grass as normal in all our PUDs. Um site access is shown on the site plan is coming from from Castine Road. There's only one uh access point that is required. That's all that's needed. The developer will be required to provide any and all expansions or upgrades to
the access points as required by Lake County. Um utilities will be on city water and wastewater. And then finally, we have the phasing or expiration clause, which does require a four-year turnaround on substantial commencement
or it reverts to the RE1 zoning district requirements, which is 1 acre per unit. Um, under the recommendation for PUD2-749, planning and zoning department is recommending approval of this request for the following reasons. One, the
proposed zoning classification of plan unit development is compatible as conditioned with the current surrounding zoning districts of Lake County R1 which is rural residential and city of Leburg PUD plan unit development and the proposed smallcale comp plan amendment is
compatible with the adjacent future land use designations of Lake County rural transition and city of Leburg estate residential. The proposed request does not appear to create a detriment to the surrounding properties as conditioned in the PUD document and the action
requested is to vote to approve the staff's recommendation to reszone the subject property from Lake County R1 Rural Residential to City of Leburg small plan unit development and forward to the city commission for consideration. And I'd like to note in this recommendation that
we need to change the wording from plan unit development to small planned unit development as it's under 10 acres and that's where we use the small plan unit development designation. Um therefore, Mr. Chairman, based on a review of this proposal and the fact that it's consistent with the city's comprehensive
plan and land development regulation, staff is recommending approval for case number 25-7 51. Thank you. Petrolanda attorney Brett Jones from the Jones Law Firm in Claremont is here to represent the case and answer any questions you
may have. Thank you, sir. >> I've got a quick question. What about is there anything in there about outdoor storage? Uh outdoor storage would be allowed under this PUD as the purchaser is a um
development company and because they'd be adjacent to some residential, they would be putting up fencing um to buffer that. >> Okay. >> So that's their plan as far as you know. >> As far as I know. Yes, sir. >> Any other questions of staff?
>> Yeah. Um, this is going to be residential and small business. >> The the property is I don't know if you can see it on this. >> There we go. Right there is a small is is a about 1,200 square feet house.
Something like that. We would anticipate this part being cut out as a single family home and then fencing going up around here and the rest could be used. This is an industrial site. I believe that's pest control. >> Yeah. Yeah. >> And um then Catoy Road, South Street.
So, it's an ideal location for what they want to do. It's it's real easy to get to South Street and get to uh jobs and they could just cut out that one. So, you'd end up with some single family running here and you're industrial or light industrial
working back towards South Street. >> So, it's one one house or one home or office, whatever it might be. >> Yes, sir. And it could that house could easily be converted into an office which at one time we did have conversations about that. So I just wanted to leave open the possibility of
>> of cutting it out if they chose to. >> It sounded like it was going to be mixed businesses together. >> Cool. >> Any other questions? Mr. Jones, please state your name and your address, please.
>> Good evening. My name is Brett Jones. 700 Alman Street, Claremont, Florida. Um, happy to answer any questions that you have. Thanks to staff uh for for working with us on this one. I don't have anything to present. >> Any questions of the applicants? Representative. >> All right. Thanks. Thank you.
>> Oh, darn. Huh? >> Anybody from the public? >> This This is an easy day today. >> I'm not getting paid by the letter on this one. >> I say we're not going to get paid either. Social >> drink. Go home. >> Um, okay. We'll close to the public. A
render decision. I'll accept a motion. >> Yes, Mr. Chairman. I'll make a motion on public hearing case SPUD25751 Petrolanda Castine Road Small Plan Unit Development. >> Any discussion?
>> Didn't mean to jump on you. >> Roll call. >> Commissioner Robertson. >> Yes. >> Commissioner Sen. >> Yes. >> Commissioner Sant. >> Yes. >> Commissioner Marshall. >> Yes. Commissioner Sime. >> Yes. >> Commissioner. >> Yes. >> Thank you very much.
>> Thank you. >> Good luck, Mr. Jones. >> Mayor Critics. >> Yes. >> Anything else to be brought up before? >> Is this the property that the Cadilla Hope sold to them? >> I believe it is. Yes, sir. >> Um, Mr. Chairman, I did have a couple of
announcements. Um, staff is working on the new planning commission binders, which we promised to have you at this meeting. I apologize for that. It's been a rough couple of months here. Uh but we'll have them for you early in 2026. Uh it's just the standard binder that you get when you come on the planning
commission, but we wanted to update them and present new ones to everyone. Um and then at the at a November city commission meeting, PNZ staff was asked to make a presentation on the pros and cons of having a planning commission or
a magistrate. The job was to present the options magistrate or planning commission in an unbiased manner and I was unfortunately had to go out of town. So that responsibility fell to our very
own deputy director Candy Harper and um in the end and she made a a good presentation on that and in the end the city commission did vote to keep the planning commission. So, just as an official announcement, if you hadn't heard anything,
>> did they give you give us a raise? >> We'll take one step at a time. >> Yeah, I meant to ask you about that. I unfortunately here I was pushing it like crazy before and I I wasn't feeling well, so I didn't I wouldn't didn't make it. >> But that's good news as far as I'm concerned.
>> Well, that you know, that gives me confidence in the city commission making a good decision. >> I I've got more confidence. >> Thank you, Candy. >> Sorry, where the camera is. Anyway, anything else to be brought up? >> Just merry Christmas to everybody. You
know, I mean, hope you all have a blessed Christmas and a safe Christmas and uh >> you as well. >> Get what you want. >> Amen. Pray for me >> always. Thank you very much. See you next year.
Oh, >> wow. >> It's too late now. We never uh