Good evening. I'm going to go ahead and call this meeting of March 3rd, uh, 2026 to order. If you'll join me in standing, the mayor will lead us in a prayer and the pledge. >> Please bow with me. Lord, thank you once again for the wonderful city that we live in. Thank you for the staff that keeps it running
dressing. We ask that you watch over everyone tonight. Watch over the council to make sound help the system and make sound and right decisions. We ask that you watch over our first responders who protect us on a daily basis and cover your hands over their
actions. We are are coming into one of our biggest seasons the next couple weeks and we ask that uh everything runs smoothly and everybody is taken care of. We ask it all we do in your name Jesus Christ. Amen.
Pledge allegiance 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. All right, Kathy, can you call the role,
please? >> Here >> all right. If anyone in the audience has something they'd like to speak about that is not an item on the agenda, if you could fill out one of these forms up here and please give it to Clerk Haley. Uh we'll get to public comment later in
the evening. Mayor's report. Uh not a whole lot tonight. Just to let everybody know that we're in the election season right now. It's early voting is open. You can go over to the county center and vote. And March 10th is election day. So u if you live in the city of Sebring,
you can vote in this election. If you don't live in the city of Sebring, you can't vote in this election. So but best of luck to everybody up here. Uh like I mentioned earlier that the race is in coming into town in two weeks. Uh we'll have a transporter parade that'll kick
off the week. So it's going to be a big uh deal again like it is every year. So uh hopefully you all enjoy it. It's kind of compounded this year. I shouldn't say compounded, but even bigger this year thanks to uh Kadz and Dave Don Davies
for putting on a St. Patty's Day party on the same night. So um it should be a much bigger event this year and it'll be a lot of fun. So hopefully see you all there. But that's really all I have right now. Okay. Thank you. Uh, council members
reports and concerns. Mr. Carlile, >> I just agree with the mayor. Everybody needs to get out and vote. Let's break a record this year because people don't vote in city elections. They just don't get out. So, get out and vote. And, uh,
pick the people that you feel like needs to be up here. Uh, I can tell you three, but I'll keep that to myself. chance. >> You got nothing to report. >> Well, I missed Roland not here, but um I
want to say last week we had a round table. So, thank you uh uh Carl for for organizing that. So, parking is one of the big topics of discussion right now. So, the a lot of us got together to figure out how many parking lots are
available within the city and really really close to the circle. So Hannah, our PIO is went through and found, I think, 14 different parking lots that are open to the public, like 524 spots and like 34 of ADA spots, an additional
200, uh, on street parking on the circle. So, uh, we're working on an active campaign to bring awareness to where are these parking lots and then where can you go to find parking. So, we want to bring this to all the businesses. Um, and hopefully that's going to alleviate a
lot of the stress and frustrations that small businesses are feeling. So, thank you the chief, Hannah, the whole team. It's been a really good week when it comes to parking and bringing that to everybody's attention. >> Other than that, good to go. >> On that note, I think after consent
agenda tonight, the uh at least half of the parking lot located behind the building should be open for the public at least until construction is done. So, that should take some short tax as well. >> Thank you for doing that. That's it's all the mayor. He's the one
who gets stuff done. Um, so we're going to move on to uh item eight, our consent agenda. There's a few things we need to note. Some changes on there on item number B, the announcement of upcoming meetings. Our meeting on the 17th, the time has been officially changed to 3:30
instead of 5:30. It's going to be earlier just to accommodate for the uh FanFest and Transporter Parade. Item number 8F um is being pulled until we can get some legal clarification and then item number eight I has been pulled
um per the event organizer to come back at a later date. Are there any questions or comments from council on the consent agenda? Anything from the public on the consent agenda? Okay. Seeing none, I will entertain a
motion. I make a motion that we accept the consent agenda by changing uh in the minutes at the meeting will start at 3:30 uh pulling uh 8 F and 8 I
second. All right, we have a motion and a second. Matthew, can you call for roll, please? >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Sto, >> yes. All right, we have no old business. We're going to move on to new business. Starting with item number 10 A.
Uh Mr. >> 10 A is a public hearing an ordinance 1571. That ordinance is titled an ordinance of the city of Sebring Florida changing the future land use classification for approximately 38 acres located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Sunset Road Rideway
and Semicway south of Summit Road north of Sebring Parkway from county medium density residential to city commercial. providing for severability, providing for conflict, and providing for an effective date. >> Thank you. Uh, this is public hearing that I need to open. Yes. >> All right. So, I'm going to go ahead and
open this public hearing. >> Yes, sir. Take it away. >> Okay. Good evening, council. Jeff Schmucker with the Central Florida Region Planning Council, but we're going to go through presentation go over the future ladies. There's also
we're going to cover that together. do want to recognize the Peterson tonight as well as the engineer record of JSK engineering. Um we're going to give the brief overview on technical side of things and then I turn
it over to them to provide all a little bit more detail on what the project entails. Um and then from there uh we'll entertain questions from the council and anyone from the public. Um so with that uh this is a request. This is on behalf of Gapway Groves uh property um
requesting future land use map amendment resoning. Uh the property that you see in the map here uh the blue area that represents about 38 acres that's at the southeast corner of the intersection of Sunset Road and Scenic Highway. This is just to the north of the Sebring Parkway. Next slide. Uh the existing
future land use on the property today is a um uh county residential medium allows up to eight dwelling units per acre. Next slide. uh with an existing zoning today of county AU or agricultural which allows for one dwelling unit to five acres.
Next slide please. Um the proposed future land use uh request is for a commercial um land use category. This would support number of office commercial activities, residential, recreation um as well as opportunities for manufacturing, light manufacturing, wholesale, warehouse types of uses. Um
the two bottom uh bullet points here, the non-residential development intensity uh would allow up to.7 um impervious surface ratio, meaning that 70% of the site could be uh developable uh with 30% of the site to remain as open space. Um and then as far as
residential development, um this category would allow up to 20 dwelling units per acre or up to 40 with the plan unit development. Uh next slide. All of that said, the proposed zoning on the property is a plan unit development for business park. Um, so this would be
primarily for non-residential use, uh, not for residential at this point. Um, next slide, please. And when we look at this area from a compatibility standpoint, um, staff finds that it's generally consistent with the area with what is, uh,
happening in the area. Um, what you see to the east of the property on the east or sorry to the west side of Scenic Highway. Um you've currently got agricultural there, agricultural to the west as well as to the east. Uh but with the opportunities for future residential as some other amendments have uh recently come through and then of course
to the south um you've got the the Bernie Little property with the warehouse use there. Um staff sees this as a potential transitional type of uh land use opportunity between the nearby residential uh being just to the north of the Sebring Parkway uh but also
providing uh for all intent and purposes um almost like a a neighborhood uh retail or neighborhood business type of area for the amount of uh potential residential that's coming in this area. When we think about that from an impact standpoint of folks that would maybe be
traveling down the Parkway out to uh US 27, uh this might provide some opportunity for the folks uh in this area to provide for some of those services. Next slide. Uh just a couple photos. This first one, this is a view of the property. This is
looking um uh north um up Scenic Highway uh into the property. Next slide. And again, uh another view from Scenic Highway. This is looking south. And what you see there is the warehouse use on the south side. Next slide. Uh quickly
in terms of uh impacts, uh there is capacity for the city to provide water and sewer. Uh that is available. Um owner developer at time of development would be required to connect. Uh in terms of traffic and transportation, um there was a developers agreement um that was uh executed back in 2023. Uh we'll
hear a little bit more about that in a moment. Um as part of that and of course as part of any development um there would be uh additional requirements at time of development to look at what improvements operationally would need to be made uh to serve any of that future development on the site. But um as as
the uh review has had or been had at this point um it doesn't indicate that there would be any negative impact on the surrounding roadway network today. uh briefly on uh recreation and open space. As I mentioned before, the developable area would be se 70% uh
remaining uh 30% of the site for open space. Um that meets the requirements in terms of the city's uh recreation and open space uh concurrency requirements for um for recreation, public recreation and open space in the city. So no impacts from that standpoint. Next slide.
Um staff has also coordinated with emergency services. Um all located within five mile radius of this area. So no negative impacts have been anticipated. Staff has not heard any negative impacts from from those uh from those uh folks at this point. Uh in terms of school impacts because the site
will be non-residential. No impacts on Highlands County Public School System. Um and then with this being a uh former um agricultural grove site, uh there's very little environmental sensitivity on the site today. Um however, that being
said, again, this would be reviewed in more detail at time of development. So there may be additional permits or studies that would be required in coordination with the water management district or D um to pull any permits that may be needed at that time. So that would be looked at in more detail at time of development. Uh but as it stands
right now, uh staff does not see that there's any uh issues from an environmental standpoint with this this property. Next slide, please. Um so what you see here, this is um the master development plan. This is a binding plan that runs with the planned
unit development and zoning. Um again, we'll get into some more conversation about this. There was a uh former plan that had come before the city uh which had been reviewed, had comments. Um this is now a updated or revised master development plan that uh more clearly
outlines uh what the uh proposal on the property would be. Uh which is essentially um on the the west side of the site uh more retail service uses um uh consistent with this area, a uh open space or green corridor up through the
middle um and then some form of a flex space over to the east side. Uh this has been reviewed. It's been vetted through staff, the city, uh, meets all of the requirements at this point for PUB approval. Um, and as I mentioned, we've got the applicant here tonight, and, uh,
we can get into some more details of the plan itself, um, at that point. Next slide. Um, also with a PUD, uh, plan unit development uh, zoning, you have the opportunity to put development conditions on this property. And just to
run through uh these in summary, uh the conditions that are before you all tonight, um number one would essentially be that the uh development on the site, the uses on the site would be consistent with the uses that are outlined on page two of the master development plan. Uh
condition number two outlines the development standards. So again, these are the maximum impervious surface area, the floor area ratios, uh the open space requirements, as well as the setbacks and the height requirements for development when it comes in. Um a new
condition um or in addition to number two, a new condition uh that wasn't presented at the previous meetings. Um more clarity on the F again, floor area ratio, that impervious surface area. The requirement is to have 30% open space on
the site. Uh this uh as we understand would allow as this develops that if a site comes in and it's only the u the southeast corner of the site first that's the first to develop. If it does not meet the full 30% as long as the
site as it develops over time meets the third the full 30% requirement for the site as a whole um they would be consistent with the PUD approval. Next slide please. Uh condition number three here um
essentially is again just reiterating the 30% open space requirement um and that it shall include um areas for public access illustrated on the master development plan. Uh number four, again this is a an updated condition, new condition here, uh again related to open
space. Um identifying on the master development plan um that the area and we'll we can go back to that in a moment. that area up the middle, that green space area would have to be developed and all that open space in that portion of the property would have to be developed prior to the first uh
certificate of occupancy for the first use on the site to ensure that that that u improvement happens. Um new condition number five, which is actually um a previous condition. This is just relating to landscape buffers around the uh periphery of the property, noting
that there are potential residential uses that will come in over time surrounding the site. Um, condition number six, uh, through the development process with the new residential that is potentially coming in, being cognizant of that, trying to provide connectivity
for those folks, uh, particularly to the, uh, west side of Scenic as that development comes in to provide opportunities for connectivity for pedestrians to either walk um, obviously to drive, but uh, to provide that uh, connectivity uh, between the residential
uh, communities and this this property. Um and then finally number seven uh is in regards to the uh developers agreement uh and the traffic impacts and traffic analysis that'll be required at time of development. Um and so with that, let me um go ahead and turn it
over to uh Shelton Rice with Peterson Myers and then we'll stand to answer any questions you all might have. >> Thank you, Mr. Schmucker. For the record, Shelton Rice. I'm an attorney with the law firm of Peterson Admires. Address 225 East Lemon Street, Lakeland,
Florida. Today, I'm here on behalf of Gapway Gross. This may be a property owner you're familiar with. Zach Strings in attendance with us today as well. He's our client rep. Additionally, we have Justin Hinton, our engineer of record on this case from JSK Consulting and Engineering Outfit to answer any
questions that specifically you may have related to engineering on this site. Um, with that said, this project's got a lot of history. There's a lot to it. We've been here a lot of times. The first time we talked about this project, at least in front of this city council, was in 2023. We have a developers agreement
that goes way back to that time. I'm sorry. I apologize for jumping around. This just generally shows you you got a lot of development in the area, right? There there's a lot of development. As you look at it from an aerial, you know, there's there's progress and that progress and growth is occurring and
moving northnortheast. Uh as you move further away from Lake Sea Ring, uh further north from here, you see that that growth is expanding that direction. We have Bernie Little to our south. It looks like there's nothing else happening around us, but as was mentioned by Mr. Schmucker, the residential PUD that's on the western
side of this site really is everything adjacent to it along Lake Sebrank. And so that's planned going through the development process for residential now. And so from a from a growth standpoint, this seems like a an appropriate place for that to expand to next. Next slide,
please. So just a little bit about that history. As I mentioned, we had a development agreement back in 2023 that came before this body concurrent with the annexation of the properties. And as part of that language in the agreement, we
specifically included uh the quotation that says the business park is intended by developer to be developed with commercial uses subject to and through a PUD. And so we didn't know what that would be at the time. We knew all of these properties, the gray, the red, the purple, the blue were part of what was
proposed for annexation. We weren't certain about what everything would be, what exactly would be proposed where, but we're ready to move forward with bringing this in given changes in the citrus industry, our clients needs. U this kind of prompted us to move forward with this process.
The red property is the residential PUD as I mentioned. So that's 100 plus units, I think closer to 200 units of residential development that's contemplated there that's been approved by the city council. It's going through the engineering process. Now, the gray area was approved for I'll call it a
medium density residential future land use and zoning consistent with the development agreement that was contemplated back in 2023. That allows by ride up to 5.8 units per acre. Uh so that allows a pretty intensive amount of development that's starting to get
beyond just single family detached when you start getting above four or five units per acre from a practicality standpoint. So, um, relatively intensive residential to the north. To our south, of course, that's not a part of this project is the Bernie Little facility that I'm sure you all are aware of. Um,
distribution type use there. And then to our east there, there there's really nothing. So, what that leaves is this per purple property kind of stuck between some residential, a lower intensity type use, and then to Bernie Little, a slightly more intensive type use. And so, to Mr. Schmucker's comment
about this is a transitional type property where we're trying to transition from pretty intensive with Bernie Little lower intensity with single family residential. So good planning principles is let's put something a little more intermediate intensity in the middle that would fit well both with Bernie Little on one side
and the residential on the other. Uh the blue section just for for transparency because I know this was a hot button item previously when it was talked about. Uh there is nothing pending for the blue south of Sebring Parkway right now. There's no applications pending that has been annexed in, but there is no future land
use and zoning from the city that's been assigned to that property. This is this is remarkable. We I think picked just about the same angle, Mr. Schmucker, for the picture of the site. I actually drove by the site on my way in and a lot of those groves have been pushed. So this just kind of failing
citrus grove um that our client's dealing with. You look up. This is Sunset Road. And so that's not really a road, but it's a road that's contemplated in the future. It runs along the northern boundary of this purple site. And the intention here is for this to connect and create a roadway
long-term to provide better interconnectivity to some of the residential the residential PUD uh and then out to the east further as other properties developed. Next slide, please. Thank you. So 38 acres. I'll blow through this quickly. Mr. Schmucker did a great job, but city
commercial future land use designation, a PUD, which really has all the nuts and bolts of what we're proposing to do. So, I'm going to focus my intention on on the PUD request. Next slide, please. So, this is what we started with and and the intention going back to that time. I
know this is not not a great site plan. Doesn't have a lot of detail, but that was on purpose, right? The idea was we don't know what the future will hold. We don't know what the market demands are going to be. We don't know what the desire is going to be in this area long term. We were proposing to do something
more commercial C1 commercial type uses. And at that time we contemplated, you know, do we do C1 zoning? Do we want to do uh a PUD approval with some of these commercial uses? And ultimately we landed on the PUD because there were some conditions and we really wanted
some detail about Sunset Road and the extension of Sunset Road and then some additional conditions of approval and there were some uses in C1 that were intentionally trying to be precluded from this site. So that led us down the PUD path but without the certainty we tried to maintain flexibility consistent
with your PUD ordinances and what they're intended to do uh with this with this site plan. So that's where we were that went through the planning and zoning board. They recommended unanimous, excuse me, unanimous approval. I believe it was definitely a recommendation of approval for this
request with that site plan. We came to the city council and as you guys may recall, now we're getting a little more recent history seven, eight months ago. The direction was we understand what you want to do. We've worked, we've seen Gapway, they've been good neighbors. They were good developers on the residential project with numbers a
number of concessions regarding landscaping and roadways and other issues. we've seen what you've done on some of the other sites. We know you're a good developer, but we need to know a little bit more about what you're proposing. We we don't want to give away the farm, so to speak. We want to kind of know what's coming in or at least
have a site plan to understand what what's going to go there. So, fast forward, it took us quite a bit of time to try to figure that out and know exactly what that is. We've done the best we can to try to maintain a little bit of flexibility while also giving you guys enough certainty to know this is
what's going there and maybe more importantly what's not going there. Next slide, please. So, this is the site plan. This is obviously drastically different from the site plan that we were here with last time. Uh there's a lot of intentionality with it. So, I'm going to just walk through a little bit
of the idea and the concepts from our standpoint that that we looked at. Scenic Highway and the preservation of the views along Scenic Highway was critical. That was something that was important to us. It's important to Gapway. We know it's important to the city. Proposing that this western side with
kind of the retail labels, the proposed out parcel labels, that's really kind of the commercial focus of this use, the retail focus, the service focus of the project. We've got it such that we have parallel parking along scenic. So you don't look at this site and you see a
huge sea of parking from the road. It's just a big parking lot with buildings way in the back. We've tried to pull those buildings up closer to the road, create some parallel parking adjacent to scenic highway so that you've got a nice landscape buffer, a little bit of parking, and then you see people walking by the shops and enjoying that. On the
flip side, no pun intended, on the the east side of that, when you get behind the retail buildings, you see we've tried to be very intentional about including open space, creating open space and open pockets even within the retail section so that there's places for people to gather, places for people
to spend time, recognizing that's an important component of really the the new age of commercial development today, these retail shops. It's not just a place to go pick up dry cleaning or go do something like that. It's a place you can go spend some time, get an ice
cream, hang out, uh have your kids play. And so that's kind of the intentionality behind some of the thoughts here. As we move further east, we've got the open space section. And I'll talk a little bit more about that in a minute. But really now we're talking about separating this retail section from kind
of the trade type uses or the little bit maybe more flexible uses we're proposing on the eastern side. Um the open space is intended to have our storm water retention but do it in such a way that it's functional and so that you get some benches, you get some kind of a park
feel there and you have walkable spaces so that people can once again do more than just shop. They can spend a little time on site. Then as you get further east, you'll see the flex space buildings. Really don't have certainty there as to what that'll be. That it's unknown at this time. However, we're
trying to keep that as open-ended as we can on that eastern side, recognizing we're away from scenic. We've got open space. We've got retail between us and Scenic. We've got separation between uh those uses on the east and all the way
to the west of Scenic and the residential projects. Uh and of course that's closer to Bernie Little kind of as you look at some of the development the way that's oriented on the southeastern side. So that's the layout. It's been very intentional about the way it's done. It took a lot of time to get
back to you, but we wanted to put a lot of thought and time into it. I think we've gone through four or five iterations, if not more, of this concept plan just with my client. And then a couple after we talked with city staff and their consultants to try to come up with something that we thought would be uh productive and something the city
could be proud of. Next slide, please. And that's just kind of a zoomed in version of it. I'll I'll mention while we're here, just briefly the maximum impervious surface ratio of 70%, right? We can't have more impervious than that. We we won't likely be anywhere close to
that on an overall project scale. When you have this much open space, it would be hard to reach that anyway. Um the maximum F, so the floor area ratio really deals with intensity of footprints. How big a footprint of buildings can we ultimately have? And
that's capped at 0.38. Um so so below the cap that's allowed in the commercial future land use in in most commercial districts. Uh maximum building height is 50 feet and that was just carried over from the C1 zoning district kind of back from where we started. We thought that was
appropriate. We're not expecting 50 foot tall buildings here, but want to provide, you know, flexibility where we can. So, this is the second sheet, and this really gets into what uses are allowed, where, what can we do, what can't we do. Um, and if you'll go to the next slide,
please. I've got I've got a couple zoomins that I think will show it a little bit better. I think if you click one more time, one more time, please. Thank you. So, uh, looking at the site, right, we've got the purple pink color on the left. My daughter would be
disappointed that I didn't know a better name for that color, but, uh, anyway, we've got the color on the left that's allows limited commercial retail uses. Mr. Scott, if you don't mind clicking again, open space in the middle and then other
uses on the east. table one and the uses we identified in table one. These are really similar to the uses. There's been a couple of tweaks, but very similar to the uses that was originally presented for what would be allowed on the entire site. What we've done is we paired those down slightly and we've really tried to
focus on those retail commercial uses on this western site. So, you won't see anything more intensive. So that's really what we're trying to put as the storefronts kind of the shops on the west open space in the middle and then other uses that are allowed non-residential uses allowed in your PUD
ordinance. So on that far eastern side we're just saying other non-residential uses allowed under your PUD regulations which are detailed out in your code is allowed on that eastern section. So that's kind of keeping the flexibility there, but really narrowing down what people are going to see and the focus
along Scenic Highway. One more click, please. Thank you. And then table two is also on there, and that just prohibits certain uses. I think the most critical one, uh, frankly, these are a lot of things that we weren't intending to do, but um, identifying that the retail and that we
have a 55,000 square foot maximum retail square footage for any single tenant. So the concern, some of the concern we heard at prior city council meetings and from the public was we don't want great big tenants. We don't want a big Lowe's. We don't want a Home Depot. We don't
want these things there. That would really cap that. So this 50,000 square foot number that's that would really keep out Publixes, Windixies, all of those things. This is kind of focusing more on those smaller type uses. So that's how we're getting to those concerns that were originally raised
back in those prior uh public hearings. Next slide, please. So, just looking at compatibility for a second, and I know we've touched on it already, but the yellow is the existing PUD that's under uh going through the design and engineering process. Now, we have the approved more intensive
residential to the north and Bernie Little to our south, currently to the east. It appears there's some development. I I venture to say residential, maybe one parcel over to the east that's not adjacent to this along Sebring Parkway. Um but there is more kind of development kind of coming
around this. So the thought was let's create a neighborhood activity center and that's frankly what I think is the most accurate term for this where people can go to the store they could get a some milk. They could get some services that they may need. They don't have to go on 27. They don't have to get on a
major thoroughare. They don't have to go as far. And so it keeps some of those trips that would otherwise be traveling farther on the roads closer to their home. They don't have to travel as much. So while these projects generate traffic, right, some of that might be they may save trips elsewhere in the
traffic system. Next slide, please. This is Bernie Little to our south, right? So this is what's adjacent to us. Says we're contemplating what uses are appropriate on this site. It's a beautiful building. It it's a it's really a nice facility that they have there, but we also don't think low
inensity residential or large lot residential immediately adjacent makes the most sense. We think this kind of transition of commercial uh while also meeting the needs of the neighborhoods would be appropriate. Next slide please. So just a couple of conditions to note and I know Mr. Schmucker already went
through this so I won't belabor it but we've already done a traffic study. The preliminary traffic study was for all of the gapway projects all four parcels that I initially mentioned from 2023. That traffic study was approved in 2025. So it really no impacts, little to no
impacts. There's a lot of capacity on the roadways here. Um, it was slightly different uses because we really don't know exactly the uses here, but really didn't indicate there would be any problems. However, when this project comes in, when we go to the next stage, the development stage, there'll have to
be additional traffic studies done once we have the definitive, hey, this is the commercial use that's going to be put in there. So, they can run trip analysis and evaluate impacts at that time. um have to provide a pedestrian connection to the extent we can to the PUB to our
west that's under the same ownership as Gapway, right? So, we certainly want to make these projects so that they're cohesive and compatible with one another. And then the last uh the last condition that I've got there I think is a very important one that we we've added here just in the last couple of days
really says when it deals with the issue of well when does that open space we love the open space in the middle but when are you going to build it? when is that going to come in? When can we expect to have that? Are you just going to build everything on the west and build everything on the east and then that may never happen? So, we basically committed to say we'll deal with that
open space and that open space will be built when we come in for our first certificate of occupancy. So, we could get building permits. We could kind of go vertical, but we can't occupy any building until that's completed. And so we thought that was a pretty significant concession given the amount of open
space its overall percentage of the site um and our clients intention just to show we're going to continue to be good developers uh and our clients committed to making sure this is an attractive good project from day one all the way to the end. Next slide please.
So requested commercial future land use designation. It's consistent with your land development code and your comprehensive plan. Uh it's it's appropriate. It's compatible with the surrounding areas as is the PUD request particularly in light of some of the conditions, some of the limitations we
we've imposed on the project. We have, as I mentioned before, the planning and zoning board recommendation of approval. This is something you guys have seen before. We believe we've done what was asked of us at the prior city council meeting. So, we're here to hopefully see this to fruition uh and
respectfully request a favorable vote. I would ask if there are public comments that maybe we'd be given a minute or two to respond afterward just so we can answer questions and we're happy to answer questions from the council, whatever you have. Thank you. >> All right. Thank you. So, because this is a public hearing, we're going to start with public comment. Before we get
to public comment, I do want to to remind everyone um we're this is coming to us a little bit backwards as as what is normal. This is our first reading. After this next week, it will go to planning and zoning for their comments again on this. and then um if it gets
approved along the way then it would come back to us in two weeks for our final reading. So this is our first ride at the apple. It's going to come go to planning and zoning next week. Uh so now like to invite anyone from the public who has comments, input or questions. And as a reminder, please state your
your name for the record when you get up here. >> Good evening. Tom Griffin. You need my address? >> Nope. No. Okay. Just a quick clarification because it's going to depend on maybe how I speak tonight. Is this a hearing or a reading? >> This is a public hearing.
>> Okay. Because the notification that we got as living in the area said tonight was a reading and if it's a hearing, we're supposed to have 15 days notice and today is 13 days. So, I need to know which one it is
and if it and if there's going to be a vote tonight depending on that answer. Could anybody answer that for me? Oh, that's that's what was advertised. The two public hearings are Tuesday, March 10th and Tuesday, March 17th. >> Okay. So, this is a reading.
>> This is just a allowing the public to comment on >> So, will there be a vote tonight? >> Yes. >> From the council members. >> Well, it doesn't have to be, but yes, I anticipate the council will vote on it. >> So, you're going to vote on it before it goes to planning and zoning? >> Yes. >> So, why is it even going to go to planning and zoning? >> The requirement thing comes in the 15
days. Correct me if I'm wrong explain for the second and final reading. That's why it's advertised like it is because it has to be first read planning and zoning for their notice and then you do have the 15 days prior to the second and final notice. So this is this does
conform because even if they vote on it tonight, it's not the final, >> right? The ordinance doesn't take effect until it's been approved at two separate meetings, >> right? >> It has to be approved. >> I understand that. But I I was trying to find if there's a vote tonight or not and if there's a difference between a reading and a hearing as far as voting
goes. >> Passing it on first reading would allow it to move forward. It would not make any make anything final as of this evening. It would only become final after if and after it was approved uh on March 17.
>> Thank you. Jeff Carlson. For the record, I apologize for only having six pages of notes. I've only had about an hour to read through the comp plan, the requested amendment, uh the requested motion tonight, and your zoning ordinances. I will not bore you with all
the minor language inconsistencies which are rampant um through the two documents, but I would read page two, goal number one from your comprehensive plan to ensure a highquality living environment through new and redevelop compatible land uses.
And I don't feel like this particular plan fits in that. And one thing for the record uh to correct is that the first time this piece of property came up before the city and the county was in the early 2000s. I think back then it was my friend Jack Brandon and Norman
White were the lawyers that worked with us on my favorite plan which you will hear about significantly more from me called the North Sea Ring Sector Plan. Um, and I think it's really disingenuous of us to use poor planning and poor site
zoning to justify future poor planning and poor sight spot zoning. Um, the burning little distribution center should have never been there. It's an industrial use in what was originally put in the plan as R3 as a buffer from like commercial use, which is this
development. This development should be on the corner of Scenic Highway and US uh Scenic Highway and the Sebring Parkway. North Sean sector plan was developed prior to Panther Parkway being completed and at the same time as we were putting together the final touches on the
current Fairmont extension of the Sebring Parkway. So it was a very important long-term long range planning tool to help us try and determine what should go where and what the compatible uses are. Um,
and Mr. Griffin already talked about the inconsistencies, so I guess I'll save that for next Tuesday night. But, um, I just I I hope that as you move forward and looking at especially this north and east of Sebring that we really need to
look long term. I think the the tra to say that there will be no traffic impacts, you have no opportunity to widen Scenic Highway at Panther Parkway. There are houses right up against the road. Um, one inconsistency that I did want to bring up tonight related to the plan was the ordinance that you're
voting on says that planning and zoning board approved this tonight. So that's not accurate. So that needs to change that it may be it will be heard on that date next Tuesday night. Um, I'm curious in section two of the pres proposed PD
development requirements and by the way that's one of them consistencies. Your zoning code references zoning district PD, not PUD, but PUD is used consistently as a zoning classification, and that does not exist in your current zoning code. Um, under under section
two, it says minimum setbacks, front setback zero, side setback zero. But then in paragraph four, just below that, it says there's going to be landscape buffers. So, I'm not really sure how you get zero lot line and landscape buffers. That doesn't really make sense to me. Um, there's a lot of others. I guess
I'll save them for Tuesday night, but I think this, my opinion, this should have gone planning and zoning first, then your proposed ordinance would be accurate, and then you do your first reading, and then you do your second reading. But I'll leave that up to you respectfully. Thank you very much for your time. >> Any other public comment or questions?
for the most part. My name is Mike Healey. I'm here representing my mother-in-law who lives some close to adjacent to this property. Uh pretty much what he just said. Um one of the first issues that I have is
this this is going totally out of order. This should be on planning and zoning first. You don't even know if they're going to approve unless this is all a foregone conclusion. Um, and aside from that, just as previously stated in previous meetings I've been at in regards to this, this is
not the place for commercial. As the last gentleman said, I agree. The commercial aspect, the retail aspect belongs on the Parkway side of Bernie Little, which as he said as well, should have never been there. That was a county decision. And at that meeting that that
zoning change was made at the county, a statement was made when it was asked about more commercial heading farther north. We're not going to allow that. That was what the the county board said.
Well, in the meantime, you all have annexed in that property. So, that statement pretty much meaningless, I guess, because you're all going to do what you want. But this is not the area for the commercial or retail. It belongs on the other end. Uh I appreciate what these
gentlemen, these firms have done. It does look far better than what was originally presented as far as the the strip mall concept or something like that. U I think this is an improvement, but I I still think it's not the place for the commercial development. Thank
you. Any other input or comments from the public, Tom Griffin, thanks again. Uh, just a couple other things I'd like to add. I mentioned it last time around. Um, but I just kind of want to bring it back up
again because I'm kind of a visual guy. And this is a really big deal what you're being asked to do here. Um, it's a great looking location. It's a great looking plan. Um, but what you're being asked to do is approve a change and
allow a commercial space development that is larger than anything else in Highlands County. The next closest thing that's not government or medical,
Lakeshore Mall, 38 acres, about similar size. Okay, I'll go down a little list here. Sebring Square Parkway all the way to Bay View. So that's the whole section all the way down to Chick-fil-A,
36 acres. Okay. Now, I pulled this off the property appraisers. So, I'm relying on what's on that public website for these numbers. Highlands Regional Medical Center, 11 acres. Windixie South, 14 acres. Walmart
23 acres, Home Depot 15 acres. I can go on. Point I'm making is this is a huge ask for an area that by their own goals is going to be residential. Okay. So, you're you're being asked to
almost double the size of any commercial space on a two-lane road, which now we hear is going to have parallel parking. I don't know how that's going to work. It's just too much. It's too big. It's too important. It doesn't fit the space.
I hear that Bernie Little Industrial and I was against Bernie Little because I thought it was a terrible location for that. I can happily say there's minimal impact on Scenic Road from Bernie Little. So you can't really use that as a
justification as a bumper or a barrier or a segue because the traffic in and out of Ernie Little is minimal. There's some trucks leaving in the morning. There's some trucks coming at night. Other than that, nobody's going in and out of there.
This, on the other hand, 38 acres of retail up to 50 feet high. Looks like to me some pretty densely dense goals in the back. It's a big ask, guys. So, I would ask that you really
consider that. I would ask also there's no vote tonight because I feel like if you vote, it sways planning and zoning. And I would also ask that the next meeting of the week of the 17th be postponed. There's a couple reasons for that. That meeting is scheduled for 3:30
in the afternoon. that limits when the public can come. It's race week. There's two events downtown that night. It's spring break, okay? So, you're going to really limit public involvement of
anybody who wants to come to that meeting and speak for or against. Either way, I'm sure these gentlemen wouldn't oppose having all the public have plenty of time to make their feelings known. So I would ask those things tonight from
this board moving forward just this is serious stuff for this area. Thank you. >> Any other public comment or input? Uh Marcus Hrove sparkling drive. Um fairly new to the area but couple of
things was a nice presentation. Um, obviously 50 foot worries me. Uh, we talked about he kind of paused where he got to it. 50 foot will give you an unobstructed view of the lake. We're not allowed to build that high. I live on Lake Sebrink actually next to Tom. So I find that's like a fairly large change
that you'd be allowing when current people already have lived there. Some generationally for decades have never been allowed to increase the size of their footprint. The zero foot setback I've honestly never heard of it. Everywhere I've been you've always had a monument front setback. So I find that kind of strange. and the impact on the
road. Obviously, the pictures were taken before they cleared the land. Um, so at the moment, it's already been assumed that it's cleared, ready for development, which may be a little bit presumptuous. Um, and the traffic and the amount just the actual impact. I mean, it seems very different to what when the signs went up last year. We
were talking about residential and this is great. Obviously, we convert the grows over for more development for homes. But as Tom mentioned, Lakes Shore mile when you actually put that 38 acre view and you tell people to think of the size of Lake Shore Mall and that's what you're going to build on the side of currently an unlit road that until the
end of last year was covering Groves. I don't mind with houses, but I think you maybe have to look why is it not further. If you look at the aerial view that they also showed, it looks like in Sebring now will be the closest of the new development to commercial. everywhere else where you showed the pictures of town commercial is further
away from certainly the lakes or the residential area. So the only thing uh finally Sebring I'll obviously be working at the racetrack. So I think a lot of people were busy that week also businesses. There's a lot of people coming to town. It was record numbers for Daytona. They've sold everything out
for Sebring. So that's all I got to say. Thank you very much. Anyone else? Did you want a chance to respond to some? >> If I might, thank you. I'll I'll be brief and I appreciate a little patience here. Um, for the record, Shelton Rice
again, I just talking with my client back there about the citrus and he said, Shelton, if we could do citrus, we'd be doing citrus. We we'd be doing citrus right now, but we we can't do citrus. It's not viable. It's not working. and we we've been looking at alternative uses and we've been looking at this one
for three years. Um getting kind of to the timing issue. We we've been looking at it for three years. We've been around we've been through the ringer. We've presented projects in front of these folks in front of the city council many times. Um on this site a couple of times
before planning and zoning board a couple of times. Um we still have a planning and zoning hearing on the 10th. We have another hearing on the 17th. we think there's adequate opportunity for, you know, additional public comment between now and then. And as always, we're happy to hear if there's
constructive feedback or things we can do differently. We're always open to to hear what those are and to address them. A couple of kind of things that maybe I didn't say right or or didn't really explain exactly what they were very well. Uh, when it comes to setbacks and what setbacks are, that's really a lot
setback and how far the building has to be away from the property line. When you look at that site, we don't have any buildings close to property lines. That's really dealing more internally with what a lot could be. As as they plat it and go through that process, we don't see that as being any effect. If
if the concern is about a building's distance from the exterior property boundary, we're happy to clarify it. And I think, frankly, some of those numbers may be directly from the C1 zoning district. We're just trying to use those standards, but include them in to make it look more like a concept plan, more
like a site plan. Um, at this stage, the max building height, as I mentioned, is from your C1 zoning district. We're just using that because that was kind of our starting point from where we came from. It's not our intention to go 50 ft on anything, but it provides flexibility if there is something that that is
appropriate there moving forward. As far as the traffic study, I don't want there to be any misunderstanding here. We of course there's going to be traffic. Of course, there's going to be trips, right? We're not saying there's not going to be trips. I think what I was trying to communicate is there are
things in the traffic world that if you don't have to travel as far from your house to a store, you're not on the road as long. And so overall, it's generally a good planning concept to have commercial or those service type uses in
close proximity to your residential. Doesn't necessarily mean next door. I would know and if we could just briefly go to um that one that one works the one but just back if you could. Thank you. So if we look at it what are we adjacent
to? We're talking about compatibility. We're adjacent to our clients own property to the west across scenic highway and the residential PUD. They they own that. They still own that. The property to the north they still own they own that property. The property to their south is Bernie Little. the
property to their east is an active citrus orange grove. Right? So, um, from a compatibility perspective, from an impact on folks, it we don't think that's a negative. We think that's a positive. Uh, we think this would be helpful. We think the residents that live in the area would probably use the
commercial. We've seen that story unfold in the past. Um, the parallel parking is not intended along Scenic Highway. What I really meant to say was that's internal to the the project. So, kind of adjacent to those retail buildings to make more of a walkable feel, separate
your sidewalks from kind of the travel lanes a little bit so that you feel more secure, more safe on those sidewalk areas. That's internal to the site. That's not adding sidewalks on scenic or excuse me, not adding parallel parking along Scenic Highway. Jack Brandon is a partner of mine. So, I
appreciated the reference to Jack. I I I wasn't aware of some of the the prior things that were mentioned, but I'll look into those. Um, you know, when we look at the site, we look at it in comparison to what's around it. We do think it's appropriate. We don't think this is commercial in the sea of
residential. We think this is commercial, a neighborhood activity commercial, a relatively limited commercial on what can go there surrounded by our clients other other properties that he's going to have a residential development adjacent to that he's going to develop and sell to
somebody else. He wouldn't do something that negatively affects his other property. So, uh, if anybody's affected, it's probably our client as much as anybody else. And it certainly he thinks it makes sense from that standpoint and won't harm the other projects. There's examples all over and I'm happy to
provide them of commercial working in conjunction with residential and close proximity. That's mixeduse projects. You hear the term mixed use. That's a a common thing that happens everywhere. And one of the big benefits is you can get those services in close proximity to
where you live. It's more walkable. It's closer. It's it's you don't have to be so vehicle oriented to to live and to do what you need to do. So, um I appreciate your comments. We're happy to talk with anybody if they have, you know, additional comments for us or feedback.
We're happy to answer any questions you may have, but we appreciate your time. Thank you. >> All right. Now, going to go ahead and adjourn the public hearing portion um and do council's questions and comments. I'll I'll start. I've got a few comments.
So, one of the things that has been mentioned a lot and I've talked with some of you is, you know, you can't um can't undo Bernie Little, right? It exists and I do agree with the developers concept that that this light commercial is a good transition from a light industrial. Um if we didn't have
light commercial, I find it hard to believe that um a developer would put residential housing directly adjacent to Bernie Will. So that that would be my concern if we say no to a some sort of a light commercial or retail development that we're
uh dooming this land to just be dead because I don't I don't see a developer coming in to build housing right next to Bow or maybe there being an appetite for people to buy housing right next to it. Um addressing kind of the mention was the size this would be the largest
development. Um, not quite accurate there. If you go like the mall is 67 acres. It's split into three parcels. If you click one, it might look like it, but together it's 67 acres. The um the one with when Dixie
and Chick-fil-A is a bunch of little parcels. You add them all up, it's larger than this one. Um, and there's also I, you know, I don't know the percentages. You you might know this, but the green space in this proposed plan is pretty high. like 50ish% is is
my, you know, uh, napkin kind of math on it. So, it's it is less dense than those areas. It's not a a sea of parking like some of the the commercial developments that we already have existing. It it looks pretty great to me, honestly, from that standpoint. And the idea of being
able to walk from from a neighborhood and have places to to be um is unlike a lot of the commercial development that I've seen so far. Um, so from the first reading. Obviously, we still have planning and zoning to go
through this in detail and we would have a second reading after this. I'm in favor of it as I it's as I see it now. I think that um the developer has been very diligent in addressing the issues that we had the first time around. Um
and I'm I'm pretty uh pretty favorable to to what is being presented right now. And I think the last thing, you know, there's a a a question about postponing this. What is the date the new council
would be seated? It's the first meeting in April. Correct. So if we postpone even a single meeting, it means that we're splitting this and putting it onto a new council when this seated council has this development from the start. Um
I I really think that's probably bad idea. Um I think that there is a lot of opportunity for the public to have input on this. Right. At tonight's meeting, we have a planning and zoning meeting next week. We have one farther. It is at 3:30, but this is also not the first first time, you know, we've had uh two
meetings from with public input before this which has led to this moment. Um so I don't think that there's anyone really being denied the opportunity to to comment on this if we made an initial vote tonight. Again, nothing is binding tonight. Still has to go to planning and
zoning and then back to us. Think that's all the comments I have at this point. >> Anyone else? >> And um I think Mr. Carlson, you'll start on planning and zoning this week. So, you'll be a part of that discussion. So, again, um yes, planning and zoning. I've
I sit in on those meetings. They are not really swayed by city council. So they are their own thinking minds and they have a lot of um good people that really dive dive into this and really love this stuff. So I think planning and zoning will be able to stand on their own merit
when they review it on Tuesday. Um as a young fa having a not I'm not not a young family. I'm looking at young families moving in. I think this is what families are looking for is how can you get from your home in a walking distance to the coffee shop. Um I know my younger sister has chosen a spot in St. compete
because the coffee shop was walkable. Um so you know I mean really that's what she was looking for. So I think having this near residential is ideal um because we don't have things like this in Sebring except downtown. So I think it is a good option. So again I'm favorable for what is being proposed
because it does provide that buffer. Um Bernie Little isn't pretty. I think their little section is, but it will at least allow that transition to um something more favorable in at least appearance. I hope um with the planning. >> I'll go less than or
less. >> I I agree with both of you completely. Um you brought up a lot of the questions and things I was going to bring up too. Uh I think one of the hardest things is just change. change is hard knowing that they there was citrus there forever and now it's not going to be citrus and it's just we have to adapt and make the best
decisions we can with the best information. Um I agree I think that would be dead space if we were just expecting there to be quarteracre lots and single family housing. Um I think there's a there there's a huge housing need and having these units available
it's just going to increase the uh the supply. I think that's just going to be really beneficial all around. Um, not everybody wants to to have the a lot of the landscaping responsibilities, too. They just want to have to to go have a place to stay and a
place that's walkable and really meaningable for for a family. Um, I I agree with you on on PNZ, too. I think there are any concerns that they'll they'll let us know. I don't think that they're going to be knowing that Jeff is on uh P&Z now, I don't think that
they're going to be swayed by it, but we're voting on. And I also agree too that um we've been invested in this project for a long time. And I would I would like to be on council to to make these next decisions. I can't thank Gway enough for listening
to the public for years and working with us and hearing the public. So, there's opportunities and I I'd be in favor of of going forward. And I agree, it's probably not the the best thing, but with the with not having
it to P and Z, but with where we're at too and with the information that we've had over the years, I think that'd be the best decision. >> I think we're kind of between a rock and a hard place. I kind of agree with the public about uh the next meeting being
at 3:30, but we've heard everybody's uh thoughts. Uh we've been accused of not being businessfriendly and uh I I like the concept. I think it uh
gentleman referred to the mall. Uh the mall is more it's just a big probably 38 acres with the parking lot, you know, and this is not going to be that way. There's going to be green area and stuff. Um,
and things are changing, you know, and we can't stop it. So, I would have to say, um, I know we had a lot of complaints about Bernie Lel, Bernie L, but um, I don't
think it's that big I saw I don't think it impacted uh people like they thought it was going to impact them. I'm not sure this will either because it's not going to happen overnight and the roads will have to be
changed eventually. They have to be bigger. Uh so I'm the only thing that I don't like is the 3:30 meeting, but you know I'm like person I'd like to be on board because
could be my last meeting. So I'm good with it. It's good. I agree with everybody on the council. So I think it's a great project. I think they're scaling it down to where they scale it down. They listen to what the public said early on. It's
not as big as a beast as when you first started or at least looked like it. And then the green concept I think is when you get I mean just the middle itself is 30% 33% then you have the little ponds on the side. So and I think as far as that as far as landscaping if you all
live up to what you say I think it's a better project than another Bernie Little sitting there or a mall. >> Yeah. >> But you know I have to agree with the comments of the council. >> Thank you Gary. >> Yeah. I appreciate everybody's input you
know and uh gentleman and Gatwe had definitely worked with us doing a great job >> and to clarify one thing. This is a binding site plan. Okay. Correct. So it is a binding site plan. So we're not
seeing a uh so so the public understands this is not a pretty picture that you know can be changed once we approve it. This is part of the deal this site plan. Um I think if we had designed this oursel we couldn't have asked for something that is better to fit within a
community like that. Uh and again to I know it is it is large but you know go to any of those other larger commercial places in our city and there's no green space. There's you know the minimum amount of you know ditch between 27 and
parking as as allowable and that's it. you know, maybe some islands between parking with a tree here or there, but this is actually a beautiful site plan. And conceptually, I'm I'm on both. >> That's the only thing to add to and I I
don't disagree with I I think when we look forward to with new development too, we need to to be aware of how they have these buffers too. So, as people want to develop too, being very aware of what do we want as as a city and and not doing just the the
oneoffs and reszoning. So I mean we're three many years into this progress that now we're into this project. So moving forward with future development. I think we just need to be going back and using that comp plan. >> And and I agree. So if if Bernie Little
did not exist, I would say this is not an appropriate site. It needs to be closer to, you know, on the Parkway like the future land use map and and ignore the sector seing plan said. But Bernie Little does exist and I don't I don't foresee
I feel like there needs to be a transitional use between Bernie Little and residential and I don't think we're going to get a better option. That's my thought. >> I don't either. >> Any other comments? >> Okay, I'll entertain a motion. I make a motion that we approve ordinance number
1571 on first reading and scheduled second read second and final reading March the 17th. >> Second. >> All right, we have a motion and a second. Kathy, can you call the role, please? >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Yes.
>> Yes. All right, we're going to move on to item number 10B, companion ordinance. Mr. Uh this is ordinance 1572 which is entitled an ordinance of the city of Sebring, Florida, changing the zoning
classification for approximately 38 acres located at the southeast corner of the intersection of Sunset Road rightway and scenic highway south of Summit Road and north of Sebring Parkway from county agricultural to city planned unit development providing for separability providing for conflict and providing for
effective date. All right, I'll go ahead and open the public hearing. Great. >> Again, Jeff Schmucker, Central Florida Regional Planning Council. This would be the reasoning portion of the presentation that we gave. So, this would be the uh transition of the uh 38
acres from the current county agricultural use to the plan development and we can correct that for uh second reading in the short title. Um but this would be the reasoning portion of the future land use amendment that you all just passed on first reading.
Um, any questions or comments from the public? >> Jeff Carlson, for the record, just a point of clarification, Mr. Swain, did you correct the ordinances prior to their approval to no longer they they said they're
approving them as a as presented, but they were presented with incorrect information related to planning and zoning's approval? >> Yes, sir. they will be corrected when they come back before council on the 17th. >> Okay, >> those will changes to be noted. >> The second thing is that as I talk about
this adnauseium nor sering sector plan, I know you think you've worked on this a long time, but I literally started working on this piece of property 25 years ago and at that time the Sebring Parkway was a 25year-old plan. And we had people
lined up in this building fighting us on the Sebring Parkway saying it's old. It doesn't matter. But what we understood is that the people 25 years prior to us had taken the time to put together a long range plan and try to stick to that plan and try to look
forward to what's going to happen 25 years from now. No different than leases that are 100 years old. You want to try and look forward. I implore you to think of the comprehensive plan not as a burden but as a tool similar to your
budget. It's not something to be changed every time someone wants it changed. It's something for you to look at respect the work that people did 25 years ago and what their plans included and the amount of time and effort that they spent. We literally spent hours
with all of the property owners in North Sebring along 17 Arbuckle Creek, the Crutchfields, Davis's, everybody. And so I the final question I have is you're you keep talking about a buffer because we put Bernie Little there. The
east side of this property, my understanding is light manufacturing going to be allowed. That means metal fabrication. So now on the east side of the property that is now bordered by vacant land, you're going to put manufacturing facilities where you could have metal
fabrication or auto body shops or um it it said again I haven't read the whole thing but it said light manufacturing was allowed. Am I wrong? >> I believe a couple of those were excluded from that so I can correct >> light manufacturing. I think that the
the east side if I understand it correctly is permitted. is under the PD section which does not >> the PD which is not a technical clarification. The zoning ordinance actually says PD not PUD. It's not >> understand but that look at
>> commercial amusements theaters grocery stores sidewalk cafes. This is the east section or the whole section. That is the if I understand it that is the west section. And again, one thing I asked, these maps are horrible to read in the copy that I
got, which is official copy for next week's meeting. I think it's it's almost illegible to be able to read that stuff. You want to pass that back? >> We have a better copy. >> But what I'm thinking about right now is that okay, Bernie Little was allowed to go there. Obviously, we can't do anything about that as much as all of
us, at least I would love to. But you've got to think about what's going to go to the east next time. What's going to go to the north next time? If you don't put the entire package together, then the next council 5, 10 years from now is going to be making the exact same decision you're making based on a poor
decision tonight or on the 17th at 3:30 when no one can be here. That's it. Thank you. >> Any other public comment? >> Tom Griffin. Um, so I'm just going to respond a few comments. Uh, I did add up all those little parcels on that one
where uh tickling and everything is. So, I think my number's pretty close. Um, so we're talking about a buffer. We're talking about 38 acres. U, you know, they own all that land. They own
120 or 130 acres on the east side of Scenic. You know, it wouldn't be a bad thing to go back and say, "Let's spread the commercial out a little bit." So, instead of having one giant commercial space, you spread it out a little bit, kind of
redesign things and have, you know, three 10 acre spots instead of one 40 acre spot. You know, I don't think that's an unreasonable way to look at this. And finally, you know, I don't come to a lot of meetings and I know y'all work hard and I appreciate what you do here, but I think it's real
selfish to say you want to be in on the vote because you may not be reelected be at the next meeting. To me, it's it's not your legacy. It's what's best for the public. And what's best for the public is to be able to come to a
meeting and voice opposition or in favor, not well, I may not be at the next meeting, so we're going to ram this through. so I can have my name on it. That's all I got. Thank you. >> Any other public uh comment?
>> Yes, sir. >> I think Mr. Carile's comments, Christopher Toughley, um Mr. Carile's were comments were more as a joke and lighthearted as than they were um I want to get this through because I may not be
able to do anything with it in the future. Anyone else? Did you want the opportunity to speak? Yeah, just briefly for the record, Shelton Rice, I appreciate the opportunity to speak briefly and the comments from the public. We're welcome to, you know, hear feedback and have
have comments. If folks do submit letters, I'm not sure if there's a process at the city, but they could provide maybe letters or emails or something to the city. They they could send them to us if they want to. Uh, but a lot of times those are provided to the city or the city clerk and then we get an opportunity to review them and of
course you guys would as well. So, if that would be helpful for folks to, you know, make sure they have an opportunity to not only articulate their thoughts, but in as long a format or short a format as they're comfortable, maybe may be something folks could utilize. Um, and hopefully early enough that we can,
you know, try to incorporate some constructive things into our project. I think we've shown we're willing to do that as to the uses and we'll I'll make sure that's more clear and what we're exactly talking about when we come back. Um, but the plan development or PUD
specifically has in the section and it's referenced on the MDP plan that the uses are allowed as are permitted for non-residential in the section for plan developments or PUDs. And so that details it out, but I'll make sure we
have better, more thorough answers. U, but it's not our intention to have, you know, auto repair and those things. We have table two on there specifically to limit some of those things. And if there are other hot button items or things that we really think shouldn't be allowed that may be allowed in that section, we're certainly open to to
dealing with those as they come up. We want to be good neighbors. We want to be good developers and we want to do the right thing. So, we appreciate your time and comments. Uh and always we're we're we're welcome welcome feedback and and input from the public and anybody else. So, thank you for your time.
>> Okay. Any other public comment? I'm going to go ahead and close the hearing. Um, some things there. I don't think anyone is wanting to rush this through. So, at at this point, the
way it stands, if we do our second and final reading on the 17th, the public will have had the opportunity to come to a 5:30 p.m. meeting four times u before we do that vote. Two on the last time where it was essentially tabled to make these changes and two before that 3:30
meeting. That's the opposite of rushing something through. And as far as having this voted on before a new council is seated, what I am trying to avoid is having council have to catch up on something that has been that we've spent hours, you know, going through and they
will have to address on their very first meeting with having zero background. Um, I think that's prudent to make an informed decision rather than asking a new council, you know, here's your first meeting. Figure it out. Um >> potential new council.
>> Potential new council, right? >> Uh the talking about permitted uses probably part of the concern of that is that the copy that's in the agenda is not very readable. It really isn't. Um it's not your fault. Um it's just
scanning failures. I guess I I got a more readable copy from Scott earlier today to be able to read those tables. Um, so maybe we could provide that to the public and it clarify some of these questions because the uses are very to me very clear and laid out. Okay. Um,
I'm not going to belabor kind of the points we already made. This is a companion piece. You know, everything I said in the first one still applies in my thoughts. Are there any other comments or more thoughts from council? >> I agree with you. What I think Harris and I were saying is
we we've had years working on this and asking them to change some stuff and they've graciously done it. Uh it's not a selfish thing. I think we just agree with you.
uh throwing it if there is new people up here throwing it on them and them have to go back and read everything that we've previously read and know about seen through is the reason I I I would
like to be part of that it's not a selfish thing just uh we're uh we're well verssed on it want to clear that uh if I don't get to vote on it, I just don't
it's not there's not a selfish just want to echo what you both said. Um and I think it sounds like um Mr. Rice is open to suggestions. So, if anybody in the public wants to make it known that they do not want certain aspects of this property being developed or for a
certain use, I think you'd be more than willing to to listen to everybody's uh emails or correspondence and to work through that. Um, again, you guys have been really meaningful and helpful and working with us. I don't want to beat a dead horse, but I think it's just a good
project and the the being on regional planning council and HRTPO with with looking at these long-term projects. We're looking at some of these roadways that are going to that are 30 or 40 years out. So, Jeeoff, I agree with you too of there's a lot of history too that
we need to be aware of too as we move forward. So, it's it's two years is is a long time for us, but in the grand scheme of things too, we gota look look in the future, but also be aware of where we're at right now and practically how do we make the best next
step too. Even if that wasn't the original intent, that's not where we're at right now. And I think this is the next best thing with all the green space and the um that use that's that's planned and especially you being the neighbors too. You don't want to hurt yourself in in the next phases of of
development. >> Any other comments? There's no other comments. I will entertain a motion. >> Make a motion we approve ordinance number 1572 on first reading. Schedule second final reading March the 17th,
2026. >> Second. >> All right, we have a motion and a second. Kathy, can you call the roll, please? >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Stewart, >> yes. Right. There is no business from the audience. We're going to move on to item number 13A, uh, city administrators
project report. >> Good evening. Most of the project report hasn't materially changed. Uh, I did add some context to the foreclosure on leans process.
We have 10 cases that have been working through the system. Five cases are headed to judicial hearing. Two cases pending settlement. One property is moving toward voluntary compliance as a result of turning communication. Staff is still working on our people's
club, but expect that to be published in the very glad to see that the enforcement yielding positive results was the whole point, right? Any questions for Scott?
Thank you. We'll move on to item number 13B, petition for voluntary annexation. >> So Dick Miller was unable to be here tonight, but Dick Miller owns Sebring Diner associated property has two parcels
located behind the diner. Looking to have those parcels annexed in the city this point in time. Um this would be just an approval concept of annexation request. They got to bring back an ordinance
to approve in reference to his annexation question on that. Is he already serviced by our water? Are there any questions or comments from the public on this item?
>> I don't know why he all so it says approve annexation request as presented but this is just to approve it for attorney swings to come back the annexation. It's not approve the annexation. It's approving for you to draft the annexation like nor
a conceptual request, I guess. Okay. This way, just >> Okay. Uh any any comments or questions from council? >> Okay. I'll entertain a motion. Not sure exactly how to do it, but
I move to uh approve the uh access request, get paperwork started. >> That works fine. Okay. All right. Second. Okay, we have a a motion by Mr. Carile, a second by Mr. Dvery. Kathy, can you
call the role, please? >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Yes. >> Yes. All right. Last but not least, item number 14A. >> Saley. >> Um, one thing first, I just want to reiterate what uh Mayor said earlier.
This is early voting week. It started on Sunday. Friday 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. You can only early vote at the supervisor elections office for this week only or March 10th will be your next opportunity to vote. 7:00 a.m.
to 7:00 p.m. You can only vote at your precinct. So not the supervisor office to vote because you will not be able to vote at there. If you do not know your precinct, I can answer all election questions except for your voting precinct, but you will need to call the supervised elections office to get to
voting precinct case have changed for the city election. So it may not be at your normal city voting precinct for this election. So going certain place at your city election um did send out those notices, but so you need to be aware of that because your voting precinct may
have changed for this election. Just making everybody aware and you do have to have your photo ID. So if you walk in to vote not having a photo ID such as your driver's license or something whether they know you like they know me and call me Miss Haley. Hello Kathy. I
still had to produce a photo ID. So just make sure you come prepared to vote or you will be unfortunately turned away and not be able to vote. Some people don't know that and it's a thing. So anyway now approve of bills. So rude.
>> A second. All right, we have a motion to second. >> Well, I want to say that because some people don't do that and they walk in thinking they can vote because they know everybody and they can't vote and they go to the wrong precinct and >> Thank you for saying it. >> People don't know. So, >> I want everybody to be able to vote, please. >> Carile,
>> yes. >> Yes.