Okay, we're on. All right. Good evening. Welcome to Ovidito City Council chambers. If everyone could please rise for the pledge of allegiance. And can I ask the Weeblow pack 39 if you guys want to come up and lead us? Come right up here. And we got our flag right back here.
Should you guys face the flag? >> All right, whenever you're ready to flag the United States of America to the republic for it stands, one nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and
justice for all. >> Thank you guys. >> Great job. in a moment of silence. I would like to call our meeting to order. It is December 1st at approximately 6:30 p.m. and we have all members of council present. I'll start
with our first order of business, which is the approval of the minutes. What is the pleasure of council? >> I move we approve the minutes. >> We have a motion. Do we have a second? >> Second. >> Second. All those in favor, please signify by saying I. I. >> I. >> The motion carries. We're going to move
on to the OS of office. So, we'll go on down and get right to it. Do >> you want to bring Paul and Carson? >> Hello. Hello, mayor. Congratulations on another term. And for folks don't know this, her father was a city council
person for for several years, Phil. And uh was always a pleasure to know him. and your mother been in the community for a long time. And one thing you say about Megan is she always listens and she always has an opinion and always
wants input and is always on the job. So I do appreciate that an elected official. So it's my honor here to swear you in. She has her family Paul the husband over here. We have Carson and Aaron. Good good job. Good to see you here. >> He's gonna be holding it. >> All right.
>> All right. Put your left hand. Yeah. >> I got to share I got to share this Bible has actually traveled down every single street in the city of Ovido. So, it's a special one. That's why it's kind of beat up. It was in a bike basket that was metal. >> Fantastic. Well, it's my pleasure to be
here, my honor. So, if you raise your right hand, repeat after me. I, Megan Slater. >> I'm Megan Slater. >> A citizen of the state of Florida. >> A citizen of the state of Florida >> and of the United States >> and of the United States. and being an officer of the city of Ovido >> and being an officer of the city of
Ovidito >> and a recipient of public funds as such officer >> and a recipient of public funds as such officer >> do hereby solemnly affirm >> do hereby solemnly affirm >> that I will support the Constitution of the United States >> that I will support the Constitution of
the United States >> and of the State of Florida >> and of the State of Florida. I further affirm >> I further affirm >> that I am duly qualified to hold office >> that I am duly qualified to hold office >> under the constitution of the state >> under the constitution of the state >> and that I will well and faithfully
perform >> and that I will well and faithfully perform >> the duties of mayor of the city of Ovito Florida >> the duties of mayor of the city of Ovito Florida >> on which I am now about to enter >> on which I'm now about to enter. >> So help me God. >> So help me God. >> Congratulations.
Good job, Parker. Good job, Paul. Good job, Aaron. Fantastic. >> Well, I I'd love to get a picture with anybody who's willing to be in one up here and the scouts. Yes. So, these guys
came on a very special day and just got a quick tour of upstairs to see what we do here at city hall, including all of the transparency efforts. And since we've got the clerk of the court here, uh he he's sort of the lead transparency officer for the for the county. So very excited that that you could be here.
Thank you for for helping swear me in. >> Thank you, Nancy. Squeeze. And next up we have Natalie Tuker. >> Oh, wait. Oh, do we do it in the middle? >> The pause at the very end. Can we do that? Okay.
>> Okay. >> I guess we're proceeding. >> I'm the wrong way. Which way am I? Let's see. Folks are be taking pictures that direction. So, I will this way >> and then right.
>> That's right. Making sure I'm close enough to be able to read the mic. I have the pleasure of administering the oath to our current deputy mayor and uh council member Natalie Tukurt. So, please repeat after me. I Natalie
Tukurt. >> I Natalie Tukurt. a citizen of the state of Florida. >> a a citizen of the state of Florida >> and of the United States of America >> and of the United States of America. >> And being an officer of the city of Ovido, Florida. >> and being an officer of the city of Ovito, Florida. >> And a recipient of public funds
>> and a recipient of public funds >> as such officer >> as such officer. do hereby solemnly swear or affirm >> Do hereby solemnly swear or affirm >> that I will support the Constitution of the United States >> that I will support the Constitution of the United States >> and of the state of Florida
>> and of the state of Florida. I further swear or affirm >> I further swear or affirm >> that I am duly qualified to hold office under the Constitution of the state >> that I am duly qualified to hold office under the constitution of the state >> and that I will well and faithfully perform >> and I will well and faithfully perform
>> the duties of council member of the city of Ovito Florida >> the duties of council member of the city of Ovito Florida >> on which I am now about to enter >> on which I am now about to enter. >> So help me God. >> So help me God. >> Congratulations. support. I would love to have you She's quite
All right. And now we have some housekeeping to take care of. I'd like to invite forward Amy Penock, supervisor of elections, and our city clerk, Elellon Rivera, who is a lot of people don't realize this, our city clerk is the supervisor of elections for purposes
of city elections. So part of it, the counting is outsourced to the uh county clerk of the or supervisor of elections. So let me pass this off for all the things. Well, it's our honor to present uh together the certificate of election
to you, Mayor Mayor Megan Slate and Natalie Turt. So, thank you for your service to our community. Thank you. I've never done that before. >> Well, a different supervisor. >> All good.
>> Okay, makes sense. All right, we will move on to item number three where the council elects the presiding officer and deputy mayor. Uh what is the pleasure of councel? >> I think we need to turn it over to the city attorney to start. >> Do we?
>> I don't have any notes on this one for season. >> I would ask you all about that. Is it your practice in the past that you uh turn it over to the city attorney to administer that? >> I don't that's in the Yes. I don't quite
remember, but sure, go for it. >> I'm glad to do it if you'd like. >> Yeah, that's fine. >> I will go ahead and do that then. Uh the next order of business is uh the
election of a presiding officer. I will open the floor for nominations. Well, Oto has a phenomenal charter that allows the presiding officer to change every year and not necessarily be the mayor. And I have had the the honor of nominating all but one of my colleagues
so far and would like to nominate the one that I haven't yet and that is Alan. >> Are there any other nominations? >> I nominate Natalie Tukurt. All right. Are there any further nominations? Hearing none, nominations
are closed. I know how I normally administer votes like this uh in a number of other jurisdictions, but I would ask because I wasn't anticipating administering this. Uh in the instances where you have two
candidates and you have five folks voting, uh the typical way uh that I see it administered is that voting is not yay or nay, but to uh have the role called and members uh state which one they're voting for. Is there any
objection to that procedure? Hearing none, I would ask the clerk to call the role. Council member Britain. >> Miss Tutert. >> Council member Bterford. >> Tot. >> I think we're done.
>> Let's make it unanimous. Tuker. >> Mayor Slick. >> Tuker. Well, I appreciate that. I think that's uh we're good on that end. >> Is there y >> Well, I am glad at least now that I can
say that I have nominated all of you to be the presiding officer. >> She takes the time. >> And I appreciate the unanimous vote. Uh so we will move on to item number four, which is a ceremonial item for art in the chambers. And I believe I tried to
jump the gun on this one last week, so I'm excited to get it going. But uh Mr. Cobb >> uh thank you deputy mayor. Uh tonight we if you noticed on the walls we have uh we have changed out the uh the art in the chambers. Uh and these are an
exhibition from a local artist Mr. Kathleen Safy. And did you want to come? >> Uh Miss Safy is here tonight and would like to introduce her. And I'll have Dr. PA come up and we can uh to be able to
open the uh open the exhibit. >> Okay. >> Good evening and congratulations deputy mayor, mayor um and council members. Good evening. Um so actually I'm going to turn to Kathleen Crane. She's our um um the public art board um chairperson
and she'll present the the artist. >> Hi Kathleen Crane. Good to be here. Um, I'm excited to uh present Kathleen Safy's exhibition here. Uh, this is the third installment of Arts in the
Chambers, which was a recommendation from the Public's Arts Board last year. So, Kathleen, would you like to say a few words? >> Awesome. Thank you. >> Good evening. Thank you so much for having me here and thank you especially to Dr. Korea and the whole Ovido Arts
Board for their leadership in providing this space to showcase local art. It means a great deal to have a place where local artists can share their work with the community. The pieces I'm showing tonight are inspired by the beauty of Ovido, its landscapes, its birds, and the sense of community that comes from
being surrounded by so much nature. Even as Ovito continues to grow, there's a strong connection to its roots. And that's something that makes this city feel so special. Ovito is a bird sanctuary. And while chickens used to roam freely and still do in a few corners, it's the sandill cranes that
captured the character of the town for me. On one of my family walks, as you saw them back there, we were walking along. At that time, it was the four of us. We were walking four by four. And then across the street from us was a family of sandill cranes, also four of them walking in perfect synchronization
with us. And we just got such a giggle out of it. They walked fast. And so then we walked fast. They started to stop and peck. We pretended to stop and peck. We were just having such a great time looking at them and reflecting and we realized by seeing them as a flock that we as well were a flock. We were a
community and I love how the birds in Ovido remind us of being a community. You see birds in central Florida actually act in a very unique way. In the wintertime instead of staying with their like kind, the birds here actually form a chosen flock. Birds of different species coming together for the sake of
protection and community. And I think that just reflects so beautifully how we as Ovito as a city are as we continue to grow. How people from all different places have a home here. A lot of the work here is using birds to show community. And one that I want to
reflect on is called there. It's called gnat catchers. And that one I made to reflect on a community of mothers that I found here in Ovido. You see, gnat catchers are small tiny little birds that spend their days grabbing insects out of the air. And it might seem inconsequential, but you know, it's a
lot like the community of mothers that I call my chosen flock. It's a lot how you guys as a city council probably work too. Sometimes it seems like small inconsequential tasks, but when it all comes together, it helps to keep the ecosystem alive and without you, the city would also fall apart. Also, you'll
see a lot of landscapes in the collections I'm presenting here. Um, something from the Florida Trail and one that I particularly love to see every day is the view from Mitchell Hammock. To me, it's kind of like my Monaet's hay stacks where every day I go past and I like to see how the colors change and
it's that little pause, a moment of beauty that Ovito still offers. I'm so grateful for the opportunity to share this work with you and I hope it does encourage people to pause, notice, and appreciate the natural beauty and the sense of community that makes Ovito such a meaningful place to live. Thank you.
>> Thank you. And >> thank you. I know we're not down there right now, but would you like to get a photo with your family up there with us? >> Yeah, sure. Okay. And thank I just want to say thank you again. Uh at our last meeting, I tried
to show it off because I walked in here and was so excited. It was so pretty in here. But uh thank you for sharing your art with us. We do appreciate it. >> Thank you for the opportunity. I'm so glad we had this space. Thank you. Uh, next up we have public comment. I do have two written requests to speak. So
when I call your name, just come up and state your name. Uh, the first one I have up here is uh, Donald Terry. >> Good evening. I live at 1911 Silverweed Way uh, across the street from the mall.
And I wanted to just bring something up. I don't know if it's your jurisdiction. I know decisions have been made already about the light at the corner of Doviera and Ovido Mall Boulevard. Um
I sat there today for 10 minutes in the mall parking lot watching what goes on and it really is staggering what goes on. One person uh leaving from Target heading to 429 went straight through the light at 30
miles per hour did not stop or heed the stop signs at all. I would say 80% of the people driving from 426 and turning right onto Doa off of Vita Mall Boulevard do not stop. They just coast
through some speed through. Um, but really no one came to complete stop. I know you've had police out there patrolling. I've seen the sheriff. I've seen the local police. I don't think it
really has any effect besides giving out some tickets. Um, our neighborhood is um zoned for high density. Um, there's all those units going up behind the jewel. I mean, I don't know if anybody's looked
to see how enormous that project is, but it goes all the way from 417 to 426. I mean, it has to be another 500 units at least. I mean, it's enormous. So, there is a fair amount of traffic. I know you had a counter out there and
then it was deemed not enough cars went by to have a stoplight, but you know, we live there. I see on a regular basis people go through the light quite often. There's going to be an accident. There'll be a t-bone or
something, but it's dangerous. And that's my only comment. Uh, I don't know whose jurisdiction it is or who made the decision not to replace the light, but it's really not a good situation. Thank you.
>> Thank you. Next up, I have Lawrence Dapo. Good evening. Thank you. Let me start by saying I completely agree with Mr. Terry. Um, but my comment is is about Sweetwater Park.
Um, I visit the park fairly regularly and uh, I love the place, especially the boardwalk. Um, but I notice something every time I enter and exit. The road on the way in and the road on
the way out is awful. And I would like the council and the town to consider uh paving the road. It's dirt. There's potholes, big holes, and it's uh I don't
know. I go about 2 miles an hour hoping not to damage my car on the way in. So, my request is that you take a look at it and see what uh see what can be done. Okay. Thank you. Appreciate it. >> Thank you. I do not have any other written requests to speak. Is there
anyone in the audience that would like to address council at this time? Hearing none, I will close public comment and we will move on. We do not have a consent agenda, which is wild. Um,
but we'll move on to our public hearing number seven, which is ordinance number 1761, amendment to chapter 28. Mr. Cobb. >> Uh, thank you, Deputy Mayor. I believe we need to have uh Mr. Bose read the by title only.
>> Thank you, Deputy Mayor. This is ordinance number 1761, an ordinance of the city of Ovito, Florida, amending chapter 28, articles 1 and two of the city of Ovido Code of Ordinances, updating impact fees for parks and recreation, fire and rescue, law enforcement, and administrative
facilities. Revising related definitions, processes, and methods of calculation. Adopting an impact fee, an impact fee technical report for parks and recreation, fire and rescue, law enforcement, and administrative facilities. Revising definitions concerning mobility fees, and providing
for conflicts, severability, cotification, correction of scrier's errors, and an effective date. >> Thank you, Minister Cobb. >> Uh, thank you, Deputy Mayor. If you remember back, you did first reading at your last meeting on November the 17th. And at that time, you asked the staff
and the consultant to uh incorporate an accessory dwelling units into the mobile residence land use code. And that has been done. We incorporated them in all of the uh different uh impact fee categories. Uh Jonathan Paul who is our
consultant is here tonight. uh he is prepared to make a presentation should you wish that he do so. Uh but everything has still remained the same from your discussion item back in October as well as first reading in November. Uh the basis basics of this
impact fee update is that we've changed the methodology for the impact fees in which we've gone from a consumptionbased methodology which was what we had before to a project drivenbased methodology. It is all based on local data. It does in our opinion meet the dual rational
nexus. Uh it did because we did change the uh calculation methodology. The um the fees are increasing uh greater than 50%. State law now requires that when you have a fee that is increasing greater than 50% it has to be allocated
you can't you can't increase it greater than 50% and that the increase has to be allocated over a period of four years equally over those four-year period. This ordinance does do that. It allocates the increase over equally over the four-year period. Um like I said Mr.
Paul is here. He can answer any questions you may have. Also, if you would like him to give the presentation, he can give the presentation as well. Uh, but it this is a public hearing, so we would recommend that you conduct the public hearing and adopt ordinance number 1761.
>> Okay. Thank you, Mr. Cobb. Um, as far as the presentation, we have heard it. Did anybody up here want to hear it for a third time? I will offer it. >> I think we're okay here. So, um, at this time, I'm gonna open. I'm gonna open up
the uh >> public hearing uh and I don't have any written requests. So, is there anyone in the audience that would like to address council on this topic >> hearing? None. I will close the public hearing and ask what the pleasure of council is. >> I move we adopt ordinance number 1761.
>> Second. >> We have a motion in a second. Any discussion? Just want to reiterate from last time that even though we are going to raise impact fees as high as we can, it is still not going to be high enough to actually cover the cost. So, we are doing our very best to stay on top of
this because this is one of the very few tools that remain to local governments to try to make sure that the new people coming to town are paying for the impacts they bring and not shoving it off on the people who are already here. So, we're doing our best. We're not going to quite get there, but we have a
plan to attempt to catch up. And it's going to probably be, and Mr. Paul can probably speak to this, more like a seven to eightyear horizon to be able to catch up under the limits put on us by the state legislature. So, talk to your
state legislators. They have really tied our hands on this one. Council >> But, I'm good. Good. Good. >> All right. Then I'll ask the clerk to call the role. Mayor Slick. >> Hi, >> Council Member Bford. >> I, >> Deputy Mayor Tugert,
>> I. >> Council member Britain, >> I. >> Council member, >> I. >> The motion carries. We do not have any first reading ordinances or resolutions. So, we'll move on to discussion item number 10, which is the annual appointment or reappointment to city boards. Mr. Cobb.
>> Uh, thank you, Deputy Mayor. Tonight, you have uh appointments for two of your two of the boards serving the city. One is the local planning agency. We have two positions that with terms expiring on December 31st. I have Mr. David Dever who is asking for reappointment and Miss
Lisa Ramsey who is who has submitted her resignation. So we will need to fill her seat. We also have uh on the recreation and parks advisory board we have two positions expiring on December the 31st. Uh Mr. Jay Getty and Mr. Ed Wiggins. Both of them have requested
reappointment. And so I'll turn it back over to you, Deputy Mayor, to uh to for the pleasure of council. >> Okay. And I know we always like to start and ask, is there anybody who came out tonight for appointment to these boards? >> Uh if you guys want to come up and just
kind of speak to, you know, why you want reappointment or or you're running? You want to start us off? Mr. D'Vor, >> did you prepare something? Um, I'm David Dever. I'm served two years on the LPA and I'm asking for
reappoint. Um, my purpose for it is I think it's an excellent volunteer um position to to take up and to get to know your local government and how it
works. And um I like the educational aspect with it. And um that's pretty much it. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Thanks. >> Did you want to come up? >> Good evening. My name is James Griby. I
live here in Ovito. I lived here for 20 years. My wife Jessica was born and raised here. Um we love the community. We love the city. Uh we've raised our family here. Our sons went to Parton and to Carolon and to Len Childs and to Hagerty. I've served as a poporn or
football coach in the community, uh, den leader for a scub uh, Cub Scout troop. I served as the president for the Hagerty High School Athletic Boosters Club, and I'm just looking for more ways to be involved in the community. You know, we're planning on staying here forever. Thank you.
>> Thank you. Uh, so we'll start with our LPA board. So, we have two positions. Um, uh, Mr. De is looking to stay in his position, so I guess we'll start off with that. Is anybody against that? >> I'm okay with >> I'm okay. I >> think he's doing a great job.
>> All right, you got it. Um, Miss Lisa Ramsey did resign, so we have that position to open. So, I guess >> I nominate Mr. Rebby. >> All right, do >> I am good with that. >> Any other nominations? All right. Congratulations, sir. >> Thank you.
>> Welcome to our LBA board. Um, we will move on to our parks and recck board, which looks like we have Mr. Jay Getty and Ed Wiggins looking for reappointment. Is anybody looking to nominate anybody else? >> I'm good with the reappoint with those two reappoints. >> You guys good?
>> Okay, then we'll stick with our our our current people. Thank you guys for volunteering and it's always it's always good to see multiple applications come in to serve our city. We appreciate it. So, let's move on to item number 11, which is the Central Florida pledge that
I believe the mayor brought up at the last meeting. So, Mr. Cobb or Mayor Slate, >> I think I'll lead off. Uh, this is a request for council to give us direction regarding joining the Central Florida pledge. Uh, Mayor Slate did ask at your
last meeting and receive consensus to have a discussion item. Uh, the Central Florida, what you're being asked to consider is the Central Florida Pledge Business Network. Uh, and through this network, members commit to treating everyone with dignity and respect, listening especially when you disagree,
creating spaces that are safe and welcoming for all, speaking up with courage when it matters, and talk taking small consistent steps toward a stronger community. I would like to introduce Mr. Joel Hunter. He is here with us tonight. He is the chairman of the Central Florida Pledge, and he said he is
available to address any questions. And I'll turn it back over to you, mayor. Uh, since you requested the consensus at the last meeting. >> Well, it's a pretty simple concept. Uh, it is just an outward statement that we're going to be nice to people and make sure that we listen to other
viewpoints, especially when we disagree with them. And I think that's something that this body does a particularly excellent job of already. And um I I can't think of any reason why we wouldn't take a step to just say, "Hey, this is this is how we operate." And if
that um adds a little credibility or oomph to the movement and encourages other people to think about how they might be able to actively try to uh you understand different viewpoints, it's a good thing for us to try.
>> I'm fine with it. >> Okay. >> And if if I I I would love if Dr. Hunter would hop up real quick if you could do like a twominute little explanation of where it came from, where where is it now? But like really two minutes if you can. >> Great. First of all, let me say I love
this. I'm so glad I came tonight because this so much. This is America. This is awesome. Um uh Central Florida Pledge has been in existence a little under two years u or a little over two years now. uh started
off uh uh with the alarm of the rise of anti-semitism after the October 7th attack. Um and um we thought we would just kind of rally the troops, so to speak. It is the only network with every
sector in Central Florida represented. We started out with just leaders signatures. Um, and we got signatures from the heads of governments, law enforcement. Of course, Sheriff Lima is one of the first to sign. Um, uh,
education, all of the universities, um, nonprofits, businesses, arts and entertainment, I mean, all of the sectors. Uh and basically uh it is the commitment of adults to do what we teach all of our
kindergarteners to do. Uh be kind, be honest, um um stand up for anybody who's getting picked on and treat people with respect. >> And the reason we think it's necessary and and more and more organizations are
signing on. I mean, all of the big ones. Um, I drive Chamber of Commerce, all of the 800 pound gorillas. Um, Rosen u um and and of course the city uh of Orlando. The thing that the the great thing about Ovito is that Ovito would be
the first city in Semino County to do so. Um but it's the very thing that we want to model for our kids. It builds a safer community. Um the uh culture is getting more and more um um
more and more um divisive and accusatory uh and attack oriented and this is just a counter to that saying no that's not who we are. That's not who we want to be. Um we want to model this for our kids and build a future uh for them. We can't fix the Middle East. Can't fix the
United States. Can't even fix Florida. but we can fix our own community. Um, and so it's just a positive non-political has nothing to do with polit politics. It's just a citizensbased solution to what is a an
increasing problem in our culture. Um, and I'd love uh if Ovito could lead the way here. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> And I'm Yeah, I'm completely on board as I was last week. So, uh, it sounds like we're all good. >> Sure. >> Well, we're we're happy to be the first
city in Seminal County to sign on to that. Thank you for coming out, sir. >> What we'll do, we'll do a resolution for you and have it so that all five of you can sign. >> Excellent. >> All right. So, that'll be December 17th's agenda. We'll sign that and it'll be official before we kick off 2026.
>> All right. So everybody can see your leadership. That'd be great. >> Yep. We can do that at the next meeting. All right. We'll move on to item number 12, which is our land development code update discussion. Mr. Cop.
>> Uh thank you, Deputy Mayor. Uh if you recall, we city adopted a brand new uh land development code. And I when I when I say brand new, I mean we basically carried very little of the of the old code into it. It was a completely
rewritten, reformatted everything. Um, and uh, Mr. A asked me a couple of weeks ago, tell me what tell me about a glitch. What is a glitch ordinance? Is that a term of art? And I said, well, yes, it is. It is a term term of art. Uh, anytime you rewrite your regulations
and you start to, you adopt them and then you start to implement them, you start to find things that maybe it was an unintended consequence or maybe it was something that you thought it you thought it was working at the time, but when you actually got into the implementation, there was something that needed to be
changed. Uh, you also you tend to find things that as code in the code enforcement world they say that's not enforceable. So you do what you call a glitch ordinance. And the glitch ordinance is to fix all those little things that you find within the first eight months to a year after you adopt
it. And so tonight, uh this is a discussion item the staff has been compiling all those little glitch items that they found. Uh some of which involve the zoning map, some of which involve the permissible uses table and throughout the other chapters of the land development code. And so they
wanted to uh bring that for you tonight as a discussion item. And then that'll this will kick off the public hearing process for this glitch ordinance. And so I'm going to turn it over to uh Miss Pierre and she'll walk you through the the various changes. >> Oh, I'm sorry, Dr. Korea.
>> So, good evening again. I'm a little bit jetlagged. So, I have this Pierre here to jump in if I start to, you know, to crash here, but as Mr. Cobb said, um this is the glitch ordinance. We'd like
to go over the changes that we are proposing and um the LDC is a living document so it's it's never really finalized but I'll try to go um quickly um the categories of change that we are
proposing some some are just the map amendments that we are trying to resolve the conflicting issues with the zoning and the future land use um also some changes based on Florida statutes some clarification and some corrections.
So I'll go quickly. The first one is really just um the statutes now require final plats to be approved administratively. So this is just to um to reflect that and it will be shown in two different sections of the code. Um
so now final plats will be approved by staff um if they comply with the PSP the pre municipal division plan. Um next slide. Um this one was um a change that we discussed some time ago with um council. We were trying to find a way
for small um redevelopment um um on side plans not to require the whole um a whole side plan. So um we decided to propose for detached um accessory structures or situation as an outdoor
seating um if you have the infrastructure on the site to accommodate these changes then it can go straight to a building permit um uh stage. So that is the change um that we are proposing over there. Um next slide
please. Um these are two um um um amendments that we did. One is just to move a language, relocate language on the inspections um that were in the final plat um um u site construction permit um um
section. And the second one was to um allow for um different types of um um guarantee um performance and maintenance guarantee um not only a bond um um um
guarantee uh guarantee bond. So these are just also two minor changes. Um next slide. Um this one again is just to um reflect the final uh plat um being approved now by staff.
Next slide please. Um this one we just added this language because in the past um the code um said for a lot split or a lot aggregation the new lot had to be conforming. So the structures and the lot had to be
conforming. And we just wanted to add language to say that is true. Um but it's also unless there is an existing n legally non-conforming structure on lot. So we are kind of recognizing that some structures are legally non-conforming
then they can stay uh even with a lot split or a lot aggregation. Next um slide this is the uh table that shows the list of future land use designations in the zoning the
respective zoning districts. So we corrected that R1 uh BB should be in the medium density residential and not in the low density residential. And we included PLI in all the zoning categories and PUDs in the ones that the
um comprehensive plan already um established and we we'll go back to this table when we talk about the zoning map amendments. Next slide please. This one was um also a correction um because we
uh when we did the code last year, we uh added one zoning district which is the R1C for the mutant square area. Um and these are very small narrow lots that we have over there. Um so we created this
particular zoning district not to have um the property owners have to come and request for deviations over and over again but we forgot to address the corner lots. So um in our code if you have a corner lot the you have front
setbacks into in two areas but of course if you have a 28 ft lot if you require um two areas to have 20 ft then you you you make the lot nonbuildable. So we correct to have in a street um
side um setback would be only minimum 10 ft. Next slide. Um these are um the changes that we did in the table of permissible use. Uh we included the community residential home which is
commercial. So it's a category um for um residential homes between seven and 14 um um bedrooms um um as a permissible use in the downtown neighborhood. Um we
have a situation of an applicant that is waiting for this change to be able to um make the transition that they want. Um and that is something that we did not um foresee in the u last year. We also clarified the different retail um square
footages. Now we have the mean the the small retail category in the mobility plan. um and that uh we have different categories of um of retail and depending on the size they are um allowed in more
uses. We also included the light industry and manufacturing as a special exception RPOC zoning districts also to comply with the comprehensive plan. And we included government as a use in all the zoning districts that we thought
that government office could be a good use. And we added the solar facilities, the floating solar facilities and the resiliency facility as we also discussed in the comprehensive plan that also comes from a statutes requirement.
Next slide. Um this one uh we had the um the requirement that um multif family with more than 50 units and um commercial with more than 30,000 square feet have to provide. So those developments have to provide two access
points. But this one clarifies that it's not only multif family, it's um if you have single family um developments with more than 50 units, they also would have to provide two um two uh access points.
Next slide. Um this one is just adding that um PUD can be um accompanied by um a conceptual development plan or a master land use plan also matching the language in the
comp plan. Next slide. Um this is just to clarify how we calculate the density bonus that um when you have you have different categories that are possible for density bonus but they apply if you you're going to have 100% of the bonus
it's it's only the the bonus density. So it's just if you have eight dwelling units per acre as a as the by right but you can reach up to 10 it's the percentage only um um is applicable on
the two um uh density bonus. So this is just to clarify how we calculate. Next slide. Um this again some clarifications on the detached accessory structures. Um
uh it's providing language for the street side and for the side um setback and the same for the next slide which is for um pool accessory pool um structures and patio and screen enclosures. So this
is just clarification how how um first of all how they are measured and um and um the the side uh the street side um um component. Next slide.
Um these are this is uh the first one is um the situation of through lots. We have that already um as an administrative rule, but now we codified in the code
and um and the design and maintenance on the bottom for fences. It's something that we had in the code, but it was removed and that's saying that fences have to be kept in the upright condition and that is an important feature for code enforcement.
So, we brought it back. Next slide. Um these are just clarifying that um u for arterial roads um we have now setbacks if the arterial is not a FD um road if
it's in the city. Um so that is just to add for those situations. Next slide. This again just clarifying um that walkways inside parking lots would be um
instead of five um feet for uh um foot width the walkway. Next slide. This is um this is language that uh for PUDS if you
don't have sign um standards for commercial um properties then it will u automatically be considered u to follow the C1 um standards.
So this was uh language that we had because some PUDS do not have language for signs. Next slide please. Um again a very particular situation for um signs
side um setbacks for lots that are minim less than 30 feet then you you share the difference and put it in equidistance from both sides. So very specific little changes that staff uh you know by
applying the code thought it was important to clarify. Next slide please. This is just in the table of um uh the schedule for the tree replacement. Um it before it they did not include the
preservation. So the tree replacement and preservation follow the same schedule. Next slide. This is just to correct that mini parks do not apply um uh for the downtown core
and the downtown transition zoning. This is was already stated in the other other sections of the code but this note uh was kept so we had to remove that. Next slide. Um this is to clarify that in mixeduse
development the residential component will have to to um to to provide mini parks as well. Next slide. Um these are definitions that we had to
include for resiliency facility solar solar facility floating solar facility and the um staff also included um water vessel that was not there. Next slide. So these are now we're going to talk
about the zoning maps. Um and the zoning maps we had to change to to to amend uh for two reasons. One is to make the zoning compliant compliant with the comprehensive plan. So as you see over
there the public so we have two situations that we're going to show some um zonings that we changed to PLI to match the public future land use and those that had to meet the medium density MDR medium density residential.
So uh in P in public um the only zoning allowed is PLI. So if you have a a public uh future land use the proper zoning that you have to um be assigned is the PLI and that's the change that we are doing for some of the projects and
in MDR R1 R1 is not um a proper zoning. So those situations that we found that we had MDR and R1 we changed to R1B. So these are the changes that we are going to change to show um right now. So
next slide please. So these are the two properties that one is the lodge and the other one is the American Legion that we discussed last time. Um they have a public future land use. This is the future land use. Next slide.
On the left you have the existing um zoning map which is RP and then on the right is the proposed PLI. So that's why we are changing. The next slide please. These are all the
um city work um um public works um um properties. They are we are changing from today they are u public future land use but they have um next slide please. they have an industrial zoning. So we
are changing to PLI. This this one um the issue was that um they have today downtown transition future land use but last year we did the R1C zoning district. Um next slide please. So we had to correct to bring
them to be compliant with the comprehensive plan and it's downtown neighborhood. That's the proper zoning for them. Next slide. Um these are two situations of two subdivisions that we had R1
zoning with MDR um future land use. So we are changing now for one R1B to match the the uh future land use. It's also in that those situations
we are also making the zoning reflect the sizes of the lots because those lots for instance Allenale over there the plat is actually 50 ft but they um use one and a half lots so it's 75
so they are nonconforming lots to the R1 zoning which requires a minimum of 8 ft 80 feet in width So the R1B is a better um zoning for that um uh for the configuration that
they have. So um that's what we are proposing for those two um lots and um for the two two um subdivisions. And if we go further,
um, you see the only difference between R1 and R1B is that R1B allows town homes. Um, but town homes would be um difficult to to be rearranged in those
subdivisions because then you have to meet the density and you have to meet the uh other requirements. We do not have R1B today in the zoning map. So if there is any question about allowing town home, we could remove um town homes
as a permissible use in R1B and there will be no difference in the uses allowed in R1 and R1B. So I'm just going to we are not proposing that. We did not think about proposing that because I don't think
there are many practical situations that you could have town homes in those subdivisions. But if there is any worry about that, we could remove um um town home is a permissible use in R1B. >> And you said R1B is nowhere else in the city.
>> We don't have we're just doing this to make this conform. >> Yeah. >> Okay. >> Next slide. Um so again this is what um they have today on the left R1 and then what we
are proposing R1B. Next slide we have these are the other subdivisions that we have um that again moving from R1B to um from R1 to R1B to meet the medium density residential.
Next slide. Um well that's showing the the the the change and this is the timeline. So this uh we had already a discussion uh with a work session with LPA. Um they
um identified one um actually word to change from May to Shaw and they were correct. We changed that. Um so the plan is to bring the bleach ordinance to LPA as a public in the public hearing December 16th and um January 5th the
first um hearing um and um at council and then the adoption hopefully January 20th and I'm available if you have any questions. My staff is also here so >> Okay. Thank you and I hope you had a good Thanksgiving traveling.
>> Yeah. Does anybody have any questions for Dr. Curry while she's up here? >> Can you bring up the presentation? Chart 11. I just caught something on chart 11 >> that looked like it had some items on there that wasn't on the presentation. I thought I saw some stuff about solar facilities.
>> Oh, yeah. The state statute that it has to be >> Yeah. Okay. >> It's It's here. Um if you go back to >> Oh. Oh, sorry. I thought you were running it. >> It wasn't the presentation. It was I think it was not in your
presentation. >> It wasn't in ours. >> No, but but it we caught that today and we corrected today. So, it's in the presentation that I gave here right now. But this is something that we changed in the comprehensive plan. Um it it's in the memo, but I think the the
presentation that you got all got previously did not have that listed. So, that would be >> chart 11. He goes after this. He keeps going through the keeps going.
>> I think you have to go back back. >> I saw it up there on your present. >> Not this one. If can go back. >> I saw floto volt. Oh, you have a different set of charts than what we
>> volach. >> Yeah. Solar facilities to our CE and zoning and thought I saw floating solar facilities. >> What is that? Is that a statute we got to comply with? >> Yes. >> It's what they have in Altimont. Okay. >> At at Cranes Roost.
>> Any change in the in the comp plan? >> Okay. And so we just changed we um we made those the same changes there. So we are now making consistent this is from um coming from the last three items is coming are coming from the statutes.
>> Okay. All right. I just I just saw there were more bullets on there than what was on my chart and just >> you're right. Sorry. >> Thank you. One of one of the places in there, I don't know if it was uh presentation or the staff report or one of that it's
float solar panels generally floating in like retention ponds. >> Yes, that's the idea. >> Storm water ponds. Yeah. >> Yes. >> Which is interesting. >> Um >> this is not coming I mean it's a good idea. It's not coming from us. It's coming from the state. >> We actually wanted to do that at the aquatic center way back before we did
the geothermal. >> Remember that? >> I do not. Sorry. >> Um, can we get a copy of the updated presentation? >> Absolutely. >> Could that could the packet be updated for that? Because there have been people online saying things about this and that
would be an interesting thing to be able to point >> Sure. to. >> Yeah, >> we can update that for sure. Yeah. >> Um, I'm also interested in, you know, the the R1B and town homes in it. Um, I
think I may have even seen somebody say something along those lines. So, if the if the thought is it was left in there because we don't think it's possible to make that and so it doesn't matter, does it matter then to just take that out?
>> So, today it would not because we don't have any land in the in the city that is zone R1B. So, we are not >> right. We're proposing to change some to R1B. >> We are proposing to create now this this
the zoning already existed but we did not have it mapped. >> So now we will be mapping. So if you would like to >> does the current zoning allow town homes >> R1B? No. R1. No. >> So right now you cannot build a town
home on these homes. >> That is the only difference. Yeah. >> Okay. So if it were a change to R1B, which is only being done to make it compliant with the comp plan and needs to be done to be consistent with the comp plan, then you can. So we have we
perhaps by accident created a scenario where we have changed the the future land use maps to allow greater density than anyone may have intended in this area. >> I I this is not a a recent change. So this >> but you're saying that town homes are
not allowed now and have never been allowed and they are and that that somehow is not consistent with the future land use. That's what I'm trying to understand better. >> Well, it sounds like we don't have to allow town homes because R1B does not exist in the city. So we can take it out
now to not zone by accident, >> right? Is that correct? >> Because I I believe that's what we're getting at here. >> But it was invented for a reason. And I'm trying to understand the reason why >> town well town homes um R1B because it's a MDR
zoning right is a zoning with less um um it is more inclined to have town homes you know so if you're going to create a new subdivision with R1B zoning you could have town homes if you
meet the density you have to meet the density right um but the density MDR as eight dwelling units per acre. So you could have but so now the situation that we have now is that we are changing the zoning for an existing group of people
right and we are bringing this use that is different from the previous use that they have. So, if it's not added, the only way to to flex on the increased density and intensity would be to demolish all the existing houses that
are on lots that are, you know, and I'll put it in air quotes, too large and then rebuild single family homes on smaller lots. Is that am I understanding that correctly? >> Yeah, you would have to so if it would be so the the the if it would be a a
massive aggregation, right? or or it would be a PSP, they would, you know, they would have to go through the process. Um, but if if you have a situation that you have one large lot that could have three units because a
town home definition is three attached units, then you kind of change the character in a neighborhood if you had that situation. So if you want to avoid that situation, we could remove the town home
as a permissible use in R1B. >> Would a duplex be allowed? If we were to remove >> duplex is not allowed. >> Still not allowed. So it would be either single family home or three or more attached. That doesn't make a lot of sense to me to skip the middle.
It's I just wanted to bring you know that this the only difference that we have in R1 um and R1B is the town home component >> is maybe I'm misunderstand but uh Mr. Chicago, you and I talked about this a
little earlier. Um, the R, and maybe this is a different neighborhood, but some of the neighborhoods the impetus from going from R1 to R1B was because the lot width was already too narrow. >> Correct. >> And
less that it didn't match the comp plan and more that what was on it is nonconforming. >> That is correct. One of the things I would I would like to also something touching back on what the mayor was talking about
>> when we did the comprehensive plan update in 2022. These neighborhoods, if I remember correctly, these neighborhoods were already medium density residential. They they weren't changed in 22. They they were already medium density residential >> and they had the R1 zoning.
>> Uh as Mr. and I discussed today. R1 zoning has a minimum lot width of 80 feet where take with the Allenale uh the actual platted lots I believe are 60 feet >> 50 >> 50 feet and then when you take one and a half you get a 75 foot lot you still even with the building lot you still
have a non-conforming lot because it's not 80t wide uh there's an 8500 square 8500 square foot minimum lot area as well and I don't think those lots meet the 8500 and so the idea One of the
ideas we were talking about today was changing the zoning one to meet the medium density residential future land use designation, but two to bring these lots into com into into conformity. >> In other words, when you have a uh with
an R1B, I believe it's uh 50 feet is the minimum. >> I think it's 60 minimum is 60 feet wide. Now, if you have a 75 foot building lot, >> you have a conforming lot >> and the building's conforming. So, it brings much more flexibility to the property owner. Let's say that they
wanted to bring in a um uh they wanted to make an addition onto the house. You know, they would have the ability have the flexibility to do that now without having to go through auous process of deviations and nonconformity reviews and and because one of the things we can't
do is increase the nonconformity. And so that's one of the reasons why that looking at these these neighborhoods that were already medium density residential which obviously may a town home a small town home complex probably would meet with the eight dwelling units
per acre. Um but it uh would the R1B allows those brings those lots gives it a zoning district in which those lots can comply. you don't there is no non-conformance anymore. And so that was
the whole thing. You got you got a zoning district that met met the future land use designation and the platted lots that were there now have a zoning district that they comply with rather than being in R1 and not being wide enough or have enough minimum area. So
those were the basic basic things. >> Yeah. But I would add one thing. So Allenale is is one subdivision that is very regular. So all the logs have the same size. But other subdivisions have a a variation.
>> So most of the lots do not meet, you know, the R1 um minimum requirements, but some do and exceed. So these are the ones that could be technically split into town homes. So we have situations
in those lots that they would they would have to have 14,000 and some change square footage to be able to have to meet the density for three units. >> So can we can we take that out? Can we
like not do that? You said you could take out the town home thing. >> The town home. I mean, I would be in favor of doing that without adding more uses than what currently sit there and we still can make them compliant without potentially putting their neighborhood at risk.
>> Well, but now so now I'm thinking does that help because >> Well, that doesn't change anything if you do that. >> Well, because you could still MDR. So since they're MDR, you could get three or four lots, bulldoze everything, and
then now MDR can turn into R2, >> right? >> Well, through a reszoning coming process. Yes. Well, >> um but but by right, they would be able to I mean it would be quasi judicial to turn it into R2 from MDR, future land
use, right? >> I think it's still Arizona. have to show that you meet the requirements and it's um you have different um um zonings, you know,
let's let's pull the the table that shows the future land use and the zoning. >> Yeah, >> but that's Yeah, I I can jump in a little bit on this. Let let me just create a hypothetical here because I I can't name particular neighborhoods for you and say this and that. Let's say you
had a neighborhood that say you took out the uh the town home piece here, but you reszoneed them all in a mass resoning to R1B and then an owner of four or five of those lots then came in and applied to
reszone it from R1B to R2. All right, that would be a quasi judicial zoning application that would go through the entire process. They do not have a legal entitlement. you know, wave a magic wand and automatically it goes to R2. All
right. A property owner is entitled to a zoning consistent with their future land use. What's proposed right now is a >> mass reszoning that would provide them a zoning that is consistent with their future land use with the the uh uh
medium density the MDR right now. R1B is consistent with that pursuant to the code. So they could come and apply to go to R2, but they do not have it as of right that you must give it to them to go up to something higher within that
range there. You would look at things like, for example, the character of the area and see that everything else within an existing subdivision is of a completely different character and that would be something you could take into account. >> I hope that helps. >> Can I just add I just want to add one
other thing and I completely agree with what you just everything you just said. So when we're looking at resonings, we look at the different zoning classifications. So for MDR, as Miss Vo said, you have R1B that's consistent, R1B
B that's consistent, R1C, that's consistent, R2 and R3. So what we look at when people come and request the resoning, and as Mr. Vos says, they're not automatically granted the zoning that they're requesting. We have to make
sure that that zoning is first consistent with the comprehensive plan and then compatible with the surrounding uses and surrounding zonings. So, they're not obligated, the city isn't obligated to to honor that request as long as we give them a zoning district
that is consistent with the comprehensive plan is what matters. So, they're not and R2 does allow duplexes, but this particular zoning district does not allow duplexes. And as Dr. Korea said we can tonight because we're at
it's basically um a discussion. So if you want to remove um town homes as a permissible use from the R1B, we can do that. We're not at a public hearing stage, so there's still time to do that. >> I'm inclined to when do we need to make
a decision by >> today? today. That's what I was thinking. Okay. Um, so my my inclination on this is if the density is allowed and people can still accumulate lots and they can do these
things somehow or another to not make it allowable by right when the density can be had. All that does is create additional fees to be collected, additional work for you to do, and we are back to a quasi judicial
hearing where somebody will still be able to check the boxes and say, "I have x square feet of a lot. I want to build town homes or duplexes or whatever the case may be." Because are not all of
these things consistent with the future land use of medium density residential? >> They are. Okay. So, >> the the other thing that I was going to say is that all these subdivisions have homeowner association, right? Can you break that? >> Yeah. Yeah.
>> There's an HOA there. >> Well, there's not on Allenale. There's not off of Reed Road. >> All day would not be Alando. They would have to do a massive >> It would it would be very all the >> Yeah. The large ones that I was talking about the lots the large lots they have
homeown association I'm assuming >> which ones >> it's would be uh no fossil grow does not have an HOA >> um >> so let's go to the next >> most of these do not have HOAs
>> they do not have the the >> these are not the large ones let's move to >> I don't think >> these ones don't I don't think so either. Yeah, >> I don't think they have. >> So if if we say it's okay, it is then
okay. >> Yeah. >> Can I just say one other thing? The future land use the comprehensive plan which is medium density residential does not list typologies. It just says residential up to eight dwelling units per acre. So single family is also
consistent with the future land use designation as well. So I just wanted to add that I'm I'm inclined to to not just leave it but add that duplexes are allowed by right as well because this avoids a
reasonzoning that is unlikely to ever be asked for or achieved ever. But what do you guys think? >> I'm not sure why we would go and add I'm not sure why we would add that because
it's it's not it's not currently. So it's MDR. They would have to go through as is right now. If somebody wanted R2, they could apply and
that would be quasi judicial, right? Staff would decide whether that is consistent, >> if there is transition, if there is if if it's compatible with the surrounding >> and if it's a big enough lot. Like that's the that's the kicker right
there. >> And we would not change the zoning from one lot, right? >> No. Well, you'd have to have a few of them, right? You'd have to buy a few people out, want to turn it into something. >> So, in the future, this will happen,
right? We know this will happen. >> Maybe redevelopment. Redevelopment will happen, right? I don't know when, but it will happen. >> It's it's plausible to assume that it will happen with with, you know, prices of land.
>> It might just be a long time. >> The issue is that Do we want to stimulate that or not? Right. But it's not an easy it's not easy to meet the density and it's not
easy to meet the um the lot the minimum lots for you know um to be able to have one lot subdivided into three. >> Well and then also you've got to add sewer. So there's the sewer component. I mean, there's just I'm I'm just thinking
the technical hurdles that a person would have to overcome is incredible. And if somebody wants to do that to then throw up an additional hurdle when they can get the yes through a quasi judicial hearing, the additional hurdle of and you also have to do a
resoning which is essentially a rubber stamp to get the yes if they're willing to do all these other things that are incredible hurdles. I don't know. Y'all know where I'm at. >> Well, that's the question. Is it is it a rubber stamp? Right? Because what said earlier was that if R1B is consistent
with the future land use, then they're not entitled to change it. But if staff then decides that um they can change it. Thinking about like competent substantial evidence, right? staff's recommendation becomes
competent substantial evidence that it's essentially up to staff then to say yes you can have this because you know I mean as we witness in here nobody else comes forward and brings competent substantial evidence otherwise right
typically >> so >> well staff would have to have a good basis to recommend approval right and um we would have if if it meets the the analysis of compatibility a good
transition then we would recommend approval if not we would not >> okay so I think the question we >> go I was just going to say >> I can give you two contrasting hypothetical fact patterns here it's we
pick one of these neighborhoods here imagine a hypothetical universe where a developer came in and bought every single lot in the entire thing and then said, "Hey, we'd like to do something completely different here or something substantially different consistent with the future land use and uh they can come
in and demonstrate that a new zoning is going to satisfy all the criteria and have uh compatibility with the surrounding uses and and so on. That's probably going to be a pretty straightforward one on a resoning coming before you all. Uh if in contrast you
had a development pattern that is single family detached residential that is an established neighborhood. Folks have been in there for decades. Then all of a sudden folks put together developer put together three or four of them right in view of all the rest of them and then
decided aha it's going to be town houses now when the neighborhood's been single family residential for decades. It could very well be on that fact pattern given all the facts you have there that there would not be competent substantial evidence that would uh
support staff giving a recommendation to approve on that depending on what zoning they're looking to go to and so on. It as with all quasi judicial matters it can be very fact dependent. It's not merely they have a future land use so
they're automatically allowed anyone on that list. They're entitled to one on that list. One that's you all decide to allow them to have that is supported by competent substantial evidence. >> Well, and that makes me feel better
because scenario two is what I'm worried about. Someone buying up three houses and then throwing a townhouse in the middle of your neighborhood. People are not going to be happy. Well, if that's the case, then we should just take town home homes off because it doesn't it doesn't prevent somebody from
doing what they could do in case one, right? I mean, they would need a reasonzoning, but you're going to buy a whole neighborhood and reszone it or build something on it. That's probably not a terrible hurdle. >> I would speculate that would be a more straightforward reason. >> Yeah.
>> Right. And in this case, it adds, you know, one more barrier to prevent people from doing what uh the residents in that area probably don't want done. >> I mean, that's where I'm sitting. >> A change of character in the neighborhood, right? >> Yeah. All right. So, deciding to take
them off or leave them? >> I would like to take the town home. >> Deputy Mayor, >> you agree. >> Deputy Mayor, if I could. >> Yes. >> Maline, could you go to the slide that has the permissible uses table on it? I think did Dr. Didn't you have a slide with that permissible uses table? >> We have.
>> But that's the gist of it, right? >> Yes. >> Take it off or leave it. >> Take it off or leave it. Town homes. >> I I'm I'm going to make a suggestion to you uh in in looking at this and and the thing that I'm looking at I'm looking at lot structure as well as far as minimum
lot sizes and zoning setbacks and everything. If we're going to do this, my my recommendation to you, you can see up there where it says single family attached town home. Uh we should uh take it out of R1B, R1BB, and R1C. You start at R2. Uh and then under duplex, take it
out of R1C. There's no way unless you're building two tiny homes next to each other of 900 square feet, you're not going to get that on an R1C. >> Does that affect any current zoning in the city? >> Should 1.3 and 1.4? Yeah, if you're if I if I'm you know in
looking at the discussions that you're having and looking at the table that was provided as well where we start looking at minimum lot sizes and setbacks and things and saying okay can this can be done in the scenario of blank slate
rebuild everything yes it works but if we're looking at taking two or three lots and everything we might as if you look at R1B R1BB and R1C those lot structures and setback requirements aren't conducive to the
single family attached town home or the duplex unit. If you look at, you know, as far as if you're thinking of building a duplex that, let's say, has two two units of 1200, >> you know. So, I would recommend that you remove it out of all three of the zoning
districts and then take the duplex out of R1C and start it at R2. My only concern is to be more restrictive to zoning. >> Well, you guys know that I don't like to lock and amber any any more single
family residential than absolutely has to be to to not allow any natural progression >> towards if we if you keep the look the same but you change the number of families that can live there. I think that is exactly what people
>> are hoping to do is stay in their neighborhoods and not have to you. If you have a single family home in Allenale, for example, I know a few people who who live there, they don't really want to move, but they would like to not have a yard someday. So, if
there's an opportunity to be in a duplex in that neighborhood, you know, what would the economics have to look like for somebody to build that? I I I don't think it's very likely, but to prohibit that or to put up roadblocks, I I don't know that that's
what people genuinely want. >> I think although it's MDR, I think just removing from R1B, it's still a transition. I would not affect R1 BB, R1C, R2, and
R3. If we are to remove, I think I would only remove the R1B. All right. So, can we to put this back? Um, we're going to say yay or nay on town homes and R1B. So, I'm going to say I don't want town homes
in R1B and see if there's three of us up here on board with that. >> From what I hear, I I'm okay with with taking it out. >> Taking it out. >> I was I was aligned with the mayor on leaving it in. >> Leaving it in. It is up to you.
I I would like to take it out because I I think the residents who live there already almost certainly don't want that in if you live next to >> until they go to sell when they go to sell to the highest bidder who will take
their 57y old house and put something new there because they can't figure out how to keep it another generation. I redevelopment has its place. The land has already been cleared. People live there and they want to continue living
there. This this is it's a >> Well, who wants to continue living there? >> The the people who are not punching out, right? >> Well, we have consensus. >> Okay. Yeah. Three people want to do it. So, yeah. >> I mean, I I I kind of see it. I do see
it both ways. I mean, there's >> But they can buy the whole block and reszone and do that. That's a possibility. >> They They could. >> Okay. Okay. That that possibility still remains that they could still reszone and do the thing >> because it's MDR. >> Yeah. >> We're not saying no forever. We're saying no peacemeal.
>> No peace meal. >> Yeah. >> Um Okay. So, we're taking out town homes. >> All right. >> And then I think Were there any other questions on this topic? >> No. >> Okay. I think we're good. >> Thank you.
>> All right. We have made it. We are up to the city manager's report. Uh, thank you, Deputy Mayor. Uh, welcome to December, what not most people call the most joyous time of the year. We call it the busiest time of the year. Uh, we have a number of things going on in the month of December. And I asked Mr. uh,
Mr. Beldin if he would come give you an update. We do have some things going on this week, this Thursday, and this Saturday, and as well as other things. And so, I wanted to let him uh, just get us started off with uh, with all the things happening in the month of December. >> All right. Thank you, Mr. Cobb.
Honorable mayor, deputy mayor, council members, um who's ready for parade? Um we've got, as Mr. Cob said, it is a busy time of the year. Uh staff is working very diligently hard um to put on three great events and programs upcoming. Uh this Thursday, December 4th is the
annual tree lighting event um at Center Lake Park. It's from 5:00 p.m. until 8:30 p.m. We actually flipped the switch at 6:30 to light up a veto. Um it is quite a spectacle. If you've sat up on the hill and you watch thousands of residents looking up and coming together and gather, it's truly a great moment
and uh looking forward to your participation on on Thursday. Uh that will actually lead into our winter parade on Saturday, December the 6th. Um that will begin approximately um lead out parade time is 7 p.m. uh from the gymnasium and aquatics facility. Um
we're asking um participants to show up, you know, starting at 400 p.m. gather their spot in line. they can get their costumes on, decorate their vehicles, um practice, whatever whatever their forte is for that parade. Um we will have a a float participating this year. Um some
council members participating. Uh I think we've kind of shared those guidelines, but we'll have more information um tomorrow passed out to you. Um I can answer any questions on the parade at this time or at the end of this. Um we also have one final event that we're planning. That's our Winterfest event, which is Saturday,
December 13th from 10:00 a.m. until 400 pm at the cultural center, Center Lake Park area. Kid-friendly event, um typical vendors, food trucks, um games, activities, performances. Um we'll be selling wristbands. Um
>> you can't there's nothing you can do other than walk around without paying. >> Um no, the the wristband is only to take part in the activities such as the bounce houses and >> but you can walk around for free. you can visit vendors for free. Typical event that we put on. Um and then also mixed in with there with our fellow fire
department, we also have Santa's run um mixed in. I believe that's the next week um every night of the week. And I know that that's a truly mark remarkable event as well where all council members are involved and um that's pretty much a full slate of programs. Are there any
questions I can entertain this evening? >> Any questions? >> No. Oh, you said with the Winterfest, um, there's performances. You can see the performances without a wristband. Correct. Correct. >> Yes. Yep. >> Yeah. It's all free. So, >> Okay. >> All right. >> Thank you, Mr. >> Thank you.
>> Hi, Deputy May. I'm glad you mentioned uh Santa Run the 8th through the 12th. We also the this Friday we have the police awards banquet. So, and that'll be at the cultural center as well. So, just wanted to get everybody caught up on all the different things going on in
December. It's a lot of stuff. So, That's all I have, Deputy Mayor. >> Okay, Mr. Votes. >> Thank you, Deputy Mayor. I have nothing to report. >> Council member Britain. >> Okay. I had a Christmas tree lighting, a holiday parade, a Winterfest. That's all
taken care of. Uh, but we do have one event on the 11th. Did you mention the 11th? >> 3 p.m. >> 3 p.m. Okay. The Jolie. >> The Jolie. >> Okay. And that kind of goes along with what the the artist said today. that
that's a linkage to our our past and our heritage to have Joe Lee recognized. So, uh I think that'll lead to more more of those types of plaques and statues coming up. So, >> and Joe Lee's nephew was here uh earlier in the meeting. So, he'll be there as
well. >> And it and that reminds me if you know anyone who's related to him, I've invited those that I know and uh to come out there and be part of the recognition. Um so, let's go to the the comments. I kind of chuckled because I was at
Ovido Mall Boulevard today in DVA and it was just the opposite. No one was moving. Everyone was afraid to move when I got there. Even the people turning right on the right on the Ovido Boulevard uh were sitting there and they were all being very cautious. Now I I
know that the gentleman's probably seen more more of what he was talking about. So Chief, I don't know. Can we start handing out tickets? I wouldn't I wouldn't sit out there and wave at them to make sure they stop. I would I would give them tickets and that'll that'll help stop it.
>> The email has already >> Okay, good deal. And then on the the Sweetwater Park, I don't know if we want to pave that or not, uh, Brian, but maybe we can get get it regraded or or get some gravel put down to help that out. >> We we recently uh put millings in.
>> Oh, Bobby. >> Um, and I I Yeah, M. Mr. Mr. Why? I can we we actually did get a request from a resident uh because there were considerable potholes in in the drive and staff went out. I'll I'll let Mr. >> Council, good evening. Uh I can update
actually on both of those items. Uh for the first one on the mall Boulevard, let me just speak to that one real fast. There's a design that's been it's almost done which will basically restripe that intersection. Basically, the turn lanes go away so it'll be more direct turning movements and it'll calm it down. That's
on Magnolia. >> I'm sorry. Doa and uh Boulevard. Wanted to circle back to the first one. >> And then uh for Sweetwater Park, believe it or not, so Magnolia Street, which has been closed now for about a year and a half. >> Yeah. >> The bids came in. So at the next council
meeting on the 15th, we're actually going to reward the bid for the repair. Included with that repair is resurfacing of the entrance of Sweet Water Creek. >> Okay. >> So that is there. >> Okay. But what about the rest of the road? And is it all dirt road through there or >> Well, what I think it's I don't know the
exact distance, but the where it's paved now gets completely redone. >> Okay. >> So, if you go further in, of course, that's all dirt that would have to be regraded or add millings or whatever to smooth it out. >> Yeah, just smooth it out or something. >> Yes, sir. >> Okay. All right. Uh, one one thing too,
Mayor, you had asked about the mast arms and something that Mr. Wyatt explained to me today. The the mast arm that was the danger. >> Yes, that one has been removed. That's not there anymore. >> Okay, >> there's still two up there, but part and I apologize. I don't remember the
specifics of the project. We're dealing with over 60 projects right now and so I can't remember details of everything, but there are modifications to those existing M. I believe they come out, the ones that are there that are still remaining. >> Well, it looks like there was some kind of like metal mesh around the bottoms of
them, the the ones I saw today. I was like, that's >> the ones there at the intersection. >> The ones there because there's two two master still up at that intersection. And I guess there's a third that's not >> right. They're no longer functional, but they're they're still in place. >> So, you know, it does kind of beg the question if they're there, they're not
going to actually fall on us. It would be helpful to get some PR going to explain why. >> No, but I've I've seen pricing for the intersection for the improvements estimates that include removal, but I don't want to say that yes, they're coming out for sure because sometimes estimates are for different scenarios.
>> So, they are not a danger to anybody the ones that remain. No, >> but they are not functional because you need the the third one for it to be safe to operate. >> So you'd have all three >> okay >> movements. Thank you. >> There's oversized stop signs at that intersection and and flags on top of it.
>> Yes. Well, I >> hence everyone was stop >> no matter what we do. I can't change human nature. I can't stop speeding. I can't stop red light running or stop sign running. And it occurs not only in Ovito, it's everywhere. So I see it in Winter Springs quite often myself. So
try as we might. >> Chief's going to get I already sent an email. Okay. Uh Mr. D'vor, Mr. Greby, congratulations. Mayor Slate, mayor teacher or deputy mayor teacher, congratulations. >> Thank you. >> Look forward to another two years. >> Thank you.
>> That's all we got. >> All right. Uh I'm up next. So I want to say I'm excited to go for term three here. So um it's always a pleasure serving up here. And I do agree with what the mayor said earlier. We all disagree quite often actually, but we do
it pretty well. Uh so I'm looking forward to another two years doing that. Um I think we hit almost everything. I asked for the I did want to ask if we're getting a good number of applicants for our charter review committee. I don't know if we know that yet. I >> think we have we have six. We have six
applicants. >> And when are we looking to have those done? I have been spreading the word quite a bit, but >> the deadline is December 6th. >> December 6th. So, we have six applicants and we said we were going to appoint like 15 people. So, um I guess this is my reminder to everybody in the city
that we are looking for volunteers for our charter review committee and to make sure those of us up here go out and uh remind people to apply. And that's all I have other than have some good holidays coming up. Mayor Slate, >> y'all covered everything. No report. All
right, Council Member. >> Um I don't have anything specific. I'm looking forward to the uh the events coming up and uh I think that's about it as far as um charter review goes. Um can that go like on on our PR social media? Something like that?
>> It has. It's everywhere. Yeah. >> Yeah. It's okay. So, it's been a lot. Some reason I don't see those come across my social media. So, um anyway, >> I feel like I've been reminded daily. >> Really? Yeah. Okay. >> Doing a good job.
>> All right. Well, that's all I've got. >> Okay. Council member Butterford. >> Yeah, I think we covered a lot of stuff. Uh, congratulations James and David. We appreciate your volunteerism and and stepping up. So, it's a a great community service and we appreciate you guys doing that. Congratulations Natalie
and Megan. So, you know, great job on uh on a very tough campaign, you know. >> Thank you. I worked hard on this one. But it goes to show you too that people I mean for the most part are you know don't think that there's anything wrong you know seriously wrong that they're
looking to change anything. So again congrat congratulations and we talked about the tree lighting the holiday parade. So and then you get the police awards banquet on Friday night. So that's it. >> Okay. Is there anything else for the
good of the order? >> It is 8:06 p.m. >> next meeting >> and I'm going to read the next meeting. Our next meeting is December 15th at 6:30 p.m. We have a regular session. Uh January 5th, 6:30 p.m. a regular session. Tuesday, January 20th on a
Tuesday, >> Martin Luther 13 Tuesday >> because of MLK day. Good reason. January 20th at 6:30 p.m. And then Monday, January 26 at 5:30 p.m. >> It's still tenative. >> We have a tenative work session. Is there anything else for the order?
>> It is now 8:07 p.m. And this meeting is journed.