public hearing and we are at the Putham County Planning Commission. We are designated local planning agency for the county as prescribed in chapter 163 of the Florida statutes and we function under the authority of article 11 and 12 of the Putham County Land Development Code. The primary responsibility of this commission is to serve as an advisory
board and hear and make recommendations to the board of county county commissioners as on matters related to provisions of and proposed amendments to the Putham County comprehensive plan and Putnham County Land Development Code. The members of this board will review each application and make
recommendations to the board of county commissioners at their next regularly scheduled meeting on July 28th, 2026. Procedurally, we will call each case by name and number. A member of the staff will then briefly explain to us the nature of each request. We will then take any comments from the applicant or
their representative followed by public comments concerning the request. Please direct all comments or statements to the board and not to other people in the audience. Before speaking, we will ask each person to be recognized, come forward to the lectern, and identify his
or herself by name and address. After a person after all persons wishing to speak have been heard, we will entertain a motion from the board. This motion will be voted on by the board members and become recommendation to the board of county commissioners. The board of county commissioners will make the final
determination regarding the application. All applicants have the right to withdraw their requests at the time during the application pro any time during the application process. The following cases were advertised and being considered today's meeting but have will not be heard
at the request of the applicant. Didn't we have one get pulled? We did. Okay, I don't have the number on there, but it it got pulled. So, if applicants choose to have their cases heard at a later date, the case will be readvertised in accordance with Putnham County Land Development Code and Florida statutes.
Uh, first of all, do we have any conflicts of interest with anything today? How about exparte communications? Anybody? Everybody good? All right. In that case, we will proceed with case number
260000006. >> Thank you, sir. For the record, Michael Graves, Planning and Development Services. Once again, this is case REZ26-0000006. >> Uh, the applicants, uh, Donna Rose and Stephanie Whmer are requesting a zoning map amendment from industrial light to
residential 1A on a 3.4, four, I'm sorry, 0.34 acre parcel located at 100 Pine Street in Palaca to allow the redevelopment of a single family residence. Surrounding zonings include residential 1A, residential 4, and
industrial light. Uh the subject site has a future land use designation of urban service. of the land has approximately 90 ft of frontage on Pine Street and according to the National Wetlands layer and the FEMA flood zone layer on the GIS reference map. The lands do not appear to contain wetlands
and is located in FEMA flood zone X which is not a special flood hazard area. Should the applicant's request be approved, the applicant will then be eligible for obtaining all building and site work permits compatible with the R1A zoning district. Here you can see an aerial overview of
the property. Uh note the light gray area is the city of Palaca jurisdiction. Here you can see the future land use. Here you can see the zoning where they are right on the edge between the uh residential 1A in yellow and the
industrial light in the pink. Uh staff recommends approval of the request to amend the zoning map from industrial light to residential 1A R1A. staff finds that the proposed resoning is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the adopted comprehensive plan and meets the
location requirements of the residential 1A zoning district provided in the land development code and comprehensive plan. Are there any questions? Well, I would say uh they've got plenty of concrete and Florida Power and Light, so
It is high ground. >> There's currently like a a residential structure on it, right? >> Correct. There is a home on the property already. They are seeking the ability to redevelop. >> Okay. >> It would be a non-conforming structure right now under the land development
code. Uh so they would need to have this reszone approved in order to redevelop or intensify beyond 50% of the current value of the home. >> Okay. >> Anything more questions? Okay. Would is the applicant here? Would you guys want
to speak about it? >> Donna Rose, my parents own the house. >> Let's get you to come up to the uh to the thing here. Thank you. Give us your name and address for the record, please. >> Uh Stephanie Whmer. The address is 300 North Pine Street, Palaka. Um, my
parents own the house since the late7s. They both passed in 2022. Uh, it's our home now. Uh, we just had a septic and whatever the other thing is put in because it collapsed two weeks ago. Um, so, you know, we are trying to update
it, but in order to get it insured or anything, it has to be 100% replaceable. So, it has to be reszoned to residential for that and that's what we're seeking. >> Okay. And you guys currently live there? No, we have it rented out now. >> Okay. >> Yeah, but we do live in Palaka here. >> All right.
>> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> All right. Anybody else from the public? Seeing none, we'll close it up and bring it back to the board. Any discussion or we'll entertain a motion? >> Yeah. Go right ahead.
>> Just a quick question. Has I'm all for this. um when when this happens and we reszone, it's not going to put an undue burden on the industrial like for incompatibility buffers or anything like that, right? Because it's kind of changing
>> in in this case, you know, if this would have been zoned the other way or developed the other way and industrial would have been next to residential, they would have to account for those buffers. But since we're reszoning it, there's no expectation that the other properties would have to meet that, is
there? >> So, strictly speaking, there isn't any uh change uh for the buffer requirement. If you look at the zoning map, which should be on your screen again, you'll see that already the industrial light zoning district is adjacent to the residential 1A zoning district for the
majority of the property. Uh the property directly to the north appears to uh also be in a similar situation under a different ownership of course. Uh so it is likely that they would at at some point seek a resoning of them their own. Uh the property to the north of
that which is industrial and I believe is an industrial use of some form uh would uh need to have you know more buffer along that southern portion. However, they would only need to apply that if they ever redeveloped, intensified or expanded. Yeah, I think that's a legit question.
Is is there I mean in the in the case that uh exactly what we're talking about here though, if that were an industrial use immediately to the north there, is there a way that that would add that could adversely affect needing a more
restrictive buffer between the two? Uh the only time that a more restrictive buffer would be required would be on the side of the industrial uh developers if they ever uh redeveloped, intensified or expanded. Uh so if they just leave the
industrial use, let's say it was a small concrete manufacturing plant, if they never added another building, if they never uh tore one down and put a new one up, never went through DRC essentially, they'd never have to expand their buffer to meet the uh zoning. uh okay
discrepancy. >> Uh however, if they uh did want to say add another 250 or more feet to their main office building or something at that point they would have to expand the wall that's already there between the uh current border between industrial and
residential to all the way across. I guess I guess the scenario we're talking about is let's say these ladies sold that piece of property and the new owner said I don't want the I need I need more buffer between me and the industrial piece to the north and it's not there. >> They have the right to put a a fence on
their own property. >> No, I mean there is there not there's nothing there that would could force the industrial uh use there to increase their buffer. Is there? >> Uh no sir, not until the industrial use decided that they wanted to intensify their development. >> I think that's where you were going with
that, right? Yeah. Okay. >> And Michael, just for clarification purposes, the property just to the north is an existing residence, correct? Even though it's zone light industrial, >> I believe so. Yes, sir. >> Anybody else? >> Mr. Mr. Chair, I'd like to make a motion
that we approve um rec26-0000006 as it is consistent with the goals, objectives, and policies of the Putham County Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Code. Second. >> All right, got a motion and a second. All in favor?
>> I pass unanimously. Congratulations. This will move to the county commissioners meeting. They'll have the final say. So, um, good luck with it. All right. All right. That's all we got on the agenda. Let's see. Old business. Do we
have any old business to attend to? No old business. Any new business? >> Mr. Chair, um, I got my disclosure form the other day. Everybody remember to put that in. Fill that out. Said they clipped me.
>> Good. Good point. All right. They clipped me for 500 bucks. >> Did it really >> to be on this board because I didn't feel mine out. >> It got lost. >> Girlfriend. >> That's a real thing >> kind of things. Yeah, that's a real thing. >> All right.
>> They didn't they didn't I told them that, but they they didn't believe it. They did not believe what I told them. >> So, I had to pay. >> Where where can we get one of those forms? All right. Anything else?
All right. How about approval of the minutes from May 13, 26? >> Uh, I vote for approval. >> Second. >> All right. All in favor? >> I. >> All right. There we go. I think that'll do it. Call it good at 412.
Getting good. >> Yeah. Yeah. We're getting streamlined.