Good. Um, I think we can start. Okay. Like to call the meeting to order. Stand for the pledgece to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it
stands. One nation under God. indivisible with liberty and justice for all. Thank you. We have uh two meeting minutes, two months for the minutes to approve. Have we all reviewed the minutes from
Tuesday, May 20th, 2025? Don't forget to do roll call. Roll call. First first roll call again. Yeah. All right. Philip Lantry, excused absence. Russell Alexander here. Nanette Douglas excused absence. Dawn Grisby present.
Ruby Bridgefor here. Dy Snyder excused absence. Megan Marshall present. Mr. Chairman, we we do have a quorum. All right. We've got the minutes in front of us from Tuesday, May 20th, 2025. Have we
all reviewed the minutes? Do you have them? No. Yes. Just without Chairman, both of my copies are for tonight. Well, can we move we'll move this item to the back? The minutes review. You can move forward with it. If they've
had a chance to review the minutes, they can take a motion on it. They were in the packet that was circulated prior to the meeting. Yeah, you've reviewed the I'll take a motion to I'd like to make a motion to approve the minutes from the last meeting. Well, this is would be from May of this year. From the May meeting, correct? That was not our last one.
No. No. Oh, from the May meeting. From the May meeting. May 20th. I second a motion. We have a first and a second. I call for a vote. All in favor? All in favor? I
I I I That passes 4 Z. Mr. Do we have a motion for the meeting minutes from Tuesday, July 15, 2025? I'd like to make a motion to approve the minutes from July. Second. All in favor?
I I I passes 40. Mr. Chairman, if I could just in speaking with our uh capable AV director. Um folks, appreciate you being here this evening. We do and the fire department was here as I'm sure you all
saw. we have some capacity um potential issues with the the amount of people that are very interested in here. So, as I understand it, our uh our director will be uh making the television in the bridge available because we don't want
to overcrowd the the chamber. That does not preclude you all from coming in and and participating and giving comment at the appropriate time at all by being in the bridge watching, but we do have to be mindful of the amount of people that are here at any one time from safety standpoint. So, appreciate your
cooperation in that regard. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Can we get the volume turned up on that, please? The volume on the television. Yes, please. Okay. We'll we'll do our best to get that accommodated. Yes. Uhhuh. Hey D. Okay. I don't see an agenda. Do you know which
one you're going to be hitting first and second? Because some of us that are waiting for the second one to go out. I think the Yeah, I think staff's going to come up with when they call the case and make a present announcement as to which item will start. Okay. So staff has requested that we move item K to the beginning. So we're going to be
reading item K first. Item K is the first one to be heard, Mr. Chairman. Is that right? Yes. Okay. Item K is ordinance number 2024-50. It's future land use
uh CPA 24 0000007 for the city of St. Cloud. Good evening. Melissa Duncan, director of community development. Um we have our consultant Jared Jones here from BHB. He's going to present our future land
use element here for us tonight. As you all know, this has been a project that has been a multi-year project that we have been working diligently to complete and we are um proud to present this to planning commission tonight. He will um
go through his presentation and then I will wrap it up for him. Okay. And with that, I'll um go ahead and let Jared take over. Thank you. Thank you. Uh so I'm Jared Jones, uh consultant with BHB as mentioned and for the past
couple years I've been helping the city with its future land use update. Uh so starting off uh this is a growth chart for Oyola County. Uh everyone here knows that the city, the county, and the region has been growing very quickly and
it's expected to continue growing very quickly. And and so the best the best thing that the city can do and has decided to do uh to mitigate mitigate uh downsides to this and maximize the benefits to the
city is to proactively plan for the growth um and really building up the building blocks uh that the city identified in the envision St. cloud plan uh which are shown here related to character uh employment parks and open
space connectivity and downtown right so this is a overview of the timeline uh that we've been on right now of course we're in summer 2025 at the planning commission uh our uh previous uh step uh was the uh additional
engagement uh late last year early this year uh where we made some changes uh to the original maps that were proposed. Uh so what what were those changes? Uh uh so six highlevel changes uh Lakeshore
Boulevard, Vermont and Michigan, Florida Avenue, Orange Avenue, and some miscellaneous changes as well. Uh so generally we've uh walked back uh some of the uh commercial. Well, let's start with the overall map.
Uh it's hard to see at the scale. There will be some inset maps on the uh couple slides in a couple slides. And so these are all the areas that have had changes proposed to them.
And then uh so there was a uh this was the map that was in the last submitt. So with these additional changes we've made since the last round of engagement, uh this is now uh the the proposed changes and we'll zoom in here a bit.
Uh uh so importantly uh Lakeshore Boulevard um you know there was talk about restricting that uh commercial from the entirety of Lake Shore down to a more select segment and um that was the direction we got from from council
and from the community was no walk walk it back a little bit and uh when we did that we changed it back to residential um but you know I do have to say uh we changed it back not to LDR but to MDR and that was a mistake and I
do apologize for that and um for the appearance that that had you know we weren't uh that was not the intention. Um we we really you know picked the darker yellow and not the lighter yellow like we meant to. So now we are not proposing that
change. uh we are keeping it to the limited uh neighborhood commercial flu and not the general commercial flu and applying that just between Mass and Michigan Avenue. And yes, as it's noted there, we we corrected and removed the MDR
designation, right? Uh similar uh similar for Vermont and Michigan. uh we uh reverted the change from MDR to LDR and then we uh removed changing uh the fifth street
nodes to neighborhood commercial. So now those are remaining uh what they are now which is LDR. similar uh at 10th and orange is uh we are no longer proposing that as a
commercial note. Right. So kind of looking back uh to the current adopted comprehensive plan um adopted way back in in 2020 and and speaking to the the growth the region and city has seen and that plan actually
underestimated the city's population by 20,000 residents. um which is uh you know speaks to how how difficult it can be to to estimate how how this city and region will grow. Uh so so that has uh helped to inform some of these decisions
as well. Uh but looking to the future and the recent pop more recent population projections uh uh are projecting a demand of more than
17,000 housing units uh by 2045 which is the planning horizon for the comp plan update. And so more of the analysis uh findings that we conducted as part of this update. Of course, as mentioned, it's grown quickly. It will continue to go uh
grow quickly. A lot of that growth will be captured within the joint planning area or JPA as uh Greenfield development new neighborhoods um out on the peripheral land that will be annexed into the city.
However, even uh with that uh that JPA land and vacant land currently within the uh city is not enough to capture or to provide those projected housing units uh that are projected to be in demand in
the city. Additionally, uh not looking just at housing but at employment as well. Um the the city has a goal of balancing the the jobs to housing ratio and getting more to a even balance. And so that means uh more
uh sorry uh more jobs would be needed as well. Uh and that results uh that led to a lot of the commercial changes uh throughout the city and not just the the neighborhood commercial um but also
the employment centers out uh further from the core. So all that to say um you know that the current framework uh is not going to meet the the future needs for housing or jobs uh for the future of the city and that's the reason for uh some of these
changes. So uh again these uh non-residentidential needs uh 232 acres of commercial and uh 580 of industrial then institutional needs that that was
also projected but it's found the the city has enough institutional land uh and those uh lands can be designated as the need arises in the future. So, uh, this is an overview of of kind of when that housing is expected to be
in demand. Uh, you know, as as we've seen it with the last comp plan, it's not always easy to tell. It's not certainty. These are projections. Uh, but the the trends are are clearly showing continued growth in the region.
Uh, so I I know a lot of people say, um, you know, I we've grown enough or we we uh need to stop the growth now. um we're we're losing our character and we we certainly uh understand why people feel that way. Um but it's important to note
there are consequences of not managing growth and and not planning for it proactively like we're proposing here. Uh first and foremost is it drives up the cost of housing and rent for existing residents and new residents who will be either moving into the community
or or born in the community as well. And and that means uh families, young families, they may delay home ownership. They may even delay having starting their family uh because they're not able to purchase a home or have a place to live. Uh it will uh mean more of that
green field development out in the countryside uh where uh that presents additional strain on the overall transportation network. Uh the uh strained housing market also means uh economic development lags
behind as businesses uh struggle to retrain talented workers and to uh pay them the wages they need to to pay for very expensive housing. And overall that that stresses the overall financial situation for the city and its services
it provides. So again uh so here's again the future line use map that's being proposed and then again these are the areas that are proposed for change. Uh the overall reduction in the
residential area is uh less than 8% of the city overall. So it's relatively a small percentage and the vast majority of the residential areas uh remain purely residential. Uh some of the other uh future land use
districts have been proposed to become more mixed use districts. Uh so commercial and employment districts uh both allow for some of the other uh types. So housing in commercial and
and um and employment and then uh institutional as well uh for you know that community- based housing situation like for churches and things like that. The the annexation of the mixeduse areas
is the largest change. Uh we can go back to that. the the large pink on this map here over towards the west significant change and that's really matching what's in the JPA. And so these are the uh the five main
goals of the policies getting out of the map changes and into the policies themselves um that uh contain five goals in the draft and I'll go over each of those. Uh so this first one is uh really setting the the framework of the
comprehensive uh planning uh system for the city of St. Cloud and it establishes those future land use designations sets their densities and intensities a as well as their allowable uses and uh pre presents how natural
resources are to be considered in these decisions as well. Uh so overall the uh JPA future land uses uh those were uh essentially brought in to match the county's future land uses already designated for those
areas. That's in accordance with the actual language of the joint planning agreement uh that the city has signed. Uh the employment future land use designation is a consolidation of private institutional and industrial
future land uses just reflecting that uh you know there's there's not as much of a of a difference between these different types of commercial uses as there used to be. Uh similar with institutional uh public civic and communities uh services were
all consolidated into that institutional flu. And then uh we've already t talked about the new neighborhood commercial flu allowing for limited commercial in the lakefront and Florida Avenue areas. I I touched on this briefly earlier. Uh
so we allowed for the uh commercial flu to have some housing and for the highdensity residential to have some limited commercial uses as well and then the institutional future land use uh to allow under certain conditions some
housing as well. All right getting into the the fund density numbers. Uh so there are four col five columns here. uh the future land use on the very left and then that uh next first white column on the right is the existing under the current
comprehensive plan maximum residential density and then the next column to the right is what's being proposed and then the two to the farthest left are similar but for commercial so maximum commercial density allowed and then what's being
proposed uh so so skipping down to the JPA centers uh under the county uh there's actually no maximums established for these uh uh for these designations and uh the the city's version has
established uh a range of densities. The uh excuse me uh the commercial CBD uh it previously as you can see uh did not allow for any residential density outside of the commercial outside of
downtown. So now it's going to allow up to uh 30 dwelling units per acre uh and then up to 40 within downtown. Then uh no no increases proposed for the low density residential um uh for medium
density residential increasing from 10 to 18. then high density residential in increasing from 18 to the uh up to 40. So I I hear the reactions behind me. I
know there's uh concerns with density on uh the the character of the city and completely understandable. Um, you know, one thing to keep in mind is that future land use is the maximum that the city as it implements this plan uh will adopt
zoning districts to implement these future land uses. And those maximums on those zoning districts can be lower than the maximum under the future land use. and the uh the the plan goes through um a lot of different steps to try to
promote diverse housing options that allow for more density in a way that is not disruptive to the community character. So allowing different forms of housing. Uh here we we have uh some duplexes that essentially look like single family
homes or or large single family homes. uh town homes uh similar. Uh there's there's a few slides like this. It's uh showing how uh density can be uh provided in in creative ways that are
reflective of St. Cloud's historic character and the the vision that uh that the city wants to see established in the future. And then getting up into the higher density of course um you know those
don't look like single family homes obviously but there's still uh designs uh design standards the city can set to uh make sure that they are more more aligned with the character of St. Cloud
and I I really like this one on the right with the the mixeduse live work unit. Um it it's very pedestrian scale oriented. It's uh you know the the one on the left has the Florida palm trees and uh you know not exactly what you you
think of when you think of high density housing, right? You typically think of a a tall or a big blocky apartment complex. Um but that is not the intent or the goal of this update. All right. Now getting into goal two um and and uh coming to the end of this
presentation uh if if the goal one was setting the framework goal two is really utilizing that framework to to advance the goals to encourage smart growth economic development and sustainable growth.
Uh so I I'll call uh the protect vested property rights. One aspect of this was to uh simplify the the city's development framework um to kind of consolidate the the many different uh growth management schemes that have
guided growth over the decades of St. Cloud. uh you know have been a few significant changes in how Florida has managed growth over the years and essentially all of those have been built on top of each other and and results in
a pretty complex entitlement situation as I'm uh sure this body is aware. Uh so looking to for ways to simplify that uh but also to protect their existing property rights that they've uh established with these agreements and
also their uh commitments to the city through provisions of of green space and infrastructure uh that were also established in those. Okay. And then uh getting on on goal
three. Um if uh goal two was uh the the carrots, these are the sticks. It's how how do you set standards for this where you know the the housing isn't uh offputting or isn't uh clashing with
neighbors or residents and how how can it be um incorporated incrementally and to the benefit of existing residents and existing property owners. And then uh also in this one is school sighting as
well is h how can schools um with coordination with with the county school board uh be worked back into the community to have real community schools where they're integrated in the neighborhood and not one big uh one big
building on the outskirts of town with lines and lines of cars. Uh that everyone loves those drop off lines I know. Then goal four uh is talking about the city's approach to managing growth
within the JPA. Uh so identifying the need for continued coordination with the county uh with Oyola County staff and their planners and to proactively pursue the annexations in a in a way that
encourages in responsible infrastructure in annexation decisions. Right. And then uh finally goal five is uh actually the implementation to of the element. So it includes a table of 26
specific actions for the city to take to implement the goals, objectives and policies uh of the previous four. And a big component of that table is the LA upcoming land development code update that will take place after uh the comp
plan is approved. And um so the the comp plan it it really sets the vision and says what's what's possible here uh but ho how to do it and and the actual rules that will guide the growth and development that that will be within the
land development code update and it also talks about other uh the the relationship from to this plan to other comp to other citywide plans. Um so utility plans, parks plans, uh things like that and and how identifies ways to
uh both uh build on on those plans and how those plans can support the vision of this future land use element. Okay, I believe that is my slide and I'll pass it off. Thank you Jared.
So, I just want to cover next steps. Um, after tonight's meeting, once you guys make a recommendation, we will bring that recommendation forward to our city council at the final public hearing on September 11th.
This Thursday, August 21st, there is a workshop on this item here in council chambers to um go over our update with our city council. and that is at 9:00 a.m. on Thursday morning, August 21st.
Um I we don't typically take public comment at workshops. Um however, I do believe that is up to the to the mayor's discretion. So I I don't want to say that we're we're not taking public comment at that meeting. Um but uh just
want to make sure that everyone here um is aware that we have a workshop on Thursday morning and then our final public hearing on September 11th. Uh because we want to make sure that um both our planning commission and our members of the audience understand that
there is still time to give public input and and there is still time to make any final map changes um if necessary. And with that, we are requesting that planning commission recommend approval of this item. Um, of course, staff
recommends approval and we are requesting that you recommend approval of ordinance number 2024-50. And at this time, both um myself, staff, and the consultant are available for any questions.
Melissa, I have a question. Can you break it down a little bit more in layman's terms for me and hopefully some of the other people out there? Let me let me just go back a bit and I don't want to rehash the whole presentation because I know it was pretty long, but let me just make some
general comments if that's okay. Okay. So, if you hold on, let me get back a little bit so I'm not multitasking here and I can focus. There you go. Okay. So, um as everyone here is
aware, um Florida, not just the city of St. Cloud and Oyola County, but Florida has had explosive growth. Um obviously Florida and Central Florida and the city of St. Cloud OciOla County are places that people want to be. And because it
is such an attractive um place for people to live, it draws more people here. And and because of that um underestimated growth that was put out by the state back in um 2020, we
typically, excuse me, we typically update our our plans based on the forecasting that is provided by the state. It was underestimated by over 20,000 uh residents. So
that has led to some of the challenges that we have right now. We are projecting the next 20 years of growth and we used a private consultant metro forecasting to help us do our own
forecasting so that we're not dependent on the state's formulas. However, um his methodology has been approved by the state. So um based on those population projections, we have an idea
of how many residents will be wanting to come, future residents will want to come to the city. And we are also currently annexing lands that's in the joint planning area with OciOla County. And I'll I'll talk I'll talk about what that
joint planning area is in a second. And tell me tell me if I if I'm over explaining because I can I can not um explain certain things. Really just specifics of what's happening at our lakefront. Okay. Okay. So um to wrap up my former
thought then based on those population projections we have to prepare for that growth. Right. And what the number one goal of this comprehensive plan update, the future
land use map update, is to ensure that we reserve enough land to have um places where we can create employment hubs so that we have jobs located here in the city. And so that's where you'll see on
the map a lot of the gray areas. And um I won't talk too much about that. If you skip over to let me also go to my my notes here to make sure I don't forget anything. Okay, if we go to Florida
Avenue. There we go. Initially when we um presented changes to Florida Avenue, we were looking at making that a commercial corridor. Our council directed us to scale it back and do a neighborhoodbased
commercial category that is limited and restricted to um specifically for Florida Avenue. It would be restricted to professional offices and um also they
can have commercial accessory units. Um those will require a conditional use. So, there is a process that they would have to go through to change their home to a non-residential use that would be
classified as a professional office. Um, and that conditional use process requires it going to city council. So, it's not um it it's not I want to change my house to my, you know, local attorney
office or accounting office and then okay, it's done. It's not as simple as that. There there is a process where it has to go to city council for review and approval and city council can add any conditions um to ensure that the change
does not impact the neighbors or minimize the impacts on the neighbors such as requiring um any landscape buffering in between uses any um walls. uh they can look at required parking and if they if they believe that the site
would need more parking for the use that's proposed and the site cannot accommodate that parking then they can deny that conditional use. So there is a process for Florida Avenue. Um I can speak a little bit about Lakeshore as
well. So, um, as Jared said, initially the, uh, proposed commercial along Lake Shore was a much wider, um, um, blocks, additional blocks, um, almost the whole
lakefront. And, um, our council directed us to reduce that to only between Michigan Avenue and Massachusetts Avenue. So, we have done that. Um what would be allowed there are limited uses
such as restaurants, cafes, bed and breakfast uses and these will not require a conditional use only for those blocks specified between Michigan Avenue and Massachusetts. Um does that does that answer your question?
I think so. Um that can you touch a little bit more on the high density? Sure. So highdensity residential is essentially a category that would allow for more compact development
sorry um for more compact development of housing. So whenever you have homes that are spread far apart, it does cause more of a strain on public facilities such as our roadways um and
our um our city infrastructure. So when you have compact development, it does two things actually three things I would say. It makes it more pedestrian friendly. It um puts less strain on our
public facilities and it can typically reduce um traffic because if you have a certain number of rooftops in a in an area that can support the commercial businesses that are will want to locate
there. So we need the housing for the workers to work at these businesses. Obviously there you can't locate a business with jobs if you don't have anyone there to fill the jobs. And so having having those highdensity
developments situated where we want them to support the jobs is what we're um seeking to accomplish here. I can appreciate that. It's just I'm having a hard time wrapping my head
around 40 units per an acre with a whole lot more people in that unit on the streets driving to wherever. Not sure how that is less, but so yeah. So I am so
how does that benefit the res? We we'd like to we'd like to allow the city to do the presentation and ask questions and then we'll take statements after that time. So So that high density is still between uh possibly between Massachusetts and
Michigan. No, no, no. We don't h we don't have high density there. So I I know the map is kind of hard to see at at this scale, but the darker brown color, that's where we are proposing highdensity residential. So it's south of 192 um
between the blocks of um 14th and I'm sorry, I believe it's 14th and 19th Street uh or maybe se 17th, sorry, I can't see. 14th and 17th Street. Um and then there are some um proposed north of
192, north of 13th Street along 10th Street. Can I piggy back off of your question since we're on high density? What design standards is the city going to implement for these structures? Because all of the high density that I'm
looking at on the map is in the middle of single family homes. So what you showed in your slides is not going to fit in with the character of St. Cloud, right? So keep in mind that those areas
that are shown on the map right now, those are smaller block sizes. So there will be limitations based on the block sizes themselves. And so typically on those smaller block sizes, you'll see things such as these courtyard units
is that would be medium dens. Oh, there I see that one. Those are high density. The ones before being called, right? Because density typically or not typically density is the number of dwelling units per acre, right? And so
the smaller the unit, the more units you can fit. And typically these smaller courtyard units are not, you know, your three, four bedroomedroom homes. They're they're smaller units. So you can fit more on a city block than you could um
your more suburban uh type developments. I appreciate the answer, but to back to my question, is this what we're looking at? Is that going to be the city adopted design standard for that high density? Okay. So, block size
will be a limitation. Also, we have architectural standards that will require uh materials that um are high quality. We also have open space requirements. So, 20% of the development has to be open space and that has to
include um amenities. when right now we have architectural standards in our code. When we amend our land development code following this update, we can place more stringent
zoning and architectural standards based on our council direction and of course staff will make a um professional recommendation, but we'll bring it to council for their approval. But as it stands right now, staff has no recommendations for the design standards
for those highdensity blocks. Oh, we are we already have design standards in place. It's already in our code for multif family. But going back to the presentation fitting in with the character of St. Cloud, you're putting this on the state streets. And if you go to the next slide and you
show the massive apartment complex, that's not going to fit in with this the characteristic of the state streets. They they don't fit on a city block. this type of development couldn't fit on a city block un now as it stands today. But it's not to say what what could happen in the future should some property
well because of the because of the grid network because there are roadways that separate these lots. It would be very very difficult because the city would have to vacate the right of way. Not possible. No, nothing is impossible.
But this these pictures here are what you're proposing for elsewhere outside of our city grid. It's really one because remember this is not just the city grid. This is citywide. This includes annex land that we just annexed over in the Edgewater area
and and like Live Oak if people wanted to have a picture in their mind right on um Nova Road and and 192 Live Oak. That would be an example of this. Correct. And if anyone's familiar with the Marlo apartments that are at Nova and 192, uh we just annexed that.
Yeah. I don't I don't disagree with this for the new fresh raw annexed area. I'm concerned about I'm sure a lot of people are concerned about what are you doing with the state streets? You're changing single family and it's not impossible. So that's
that's kind of my fear. I would hope that we're a little bit prepared for essentially the worst because I don't know if you guys are going, you know, if the city is going to vacate any of those rightways, close roads. It's we it's not impossible. It's not impossible. That would take a city
council action and I and that would come before us again. Yeah, I can't imagine city council would would approve that that for for us to vacate right away. I don't understand the need in that particular area to change the high the highdensity residential the density from
18 to 40 units per acre because you can't fit that many there right now. So why the change? Well, there remember it can be incremental as well. So, it doesn't have to be 40 units. It could be up to 40 units if
you have the right site for it. If the site won't allow it, you can't do it there because of the design standards. Because of the design standards, you have to have parking, you have to have landscaping, you have to have open space, you have to have storm water retention.
But if wasn't I'm sorry. So, wasn't there another on there was another area for area? There was another slot on that page for areas within the JPA, which would be what we were talking about for those larger units. They would
be within the JPA. I'm sorry. Can you repeat that? On the Can you go back to the other the page with the um the map columns? No. Oh, the columns. Okay. Oh, sorry. There we go. So, within the JPA areas, you can have 18 to 40 there.
Mhm. But within so this highdensity residential is just for the areas that are currently not part of the JPA and already within the city. Correct. Correct. And there's no place within the city now where we would have that kind of a unit
except for where you're changing it on the state streets. So why the change from 18 to 40 there? So the idea is to support our downtown businesses. So what studies show is that the more people you have situated close
to businesses and especially in a downtown area, it it provides the patrons to support those businesses and also it helps activate your downtown so that you have um more more um a more
vibrant downtown because what you're suggesting if I'm correct is that again this is all in the future. that those commercial pieces that they've just indicated are going to need the workers who can easily
get from that part of town here without being on all the major roadways, which we know that's why there's so much traffic because we don't have a Home Depot on that end of town that we need and everybody has to get on the road to go all the way down there. So, I I think that's it's the future bit, not the
today bit. Exactly. Yeah. So we are required by state law to plan for the next 20 year horizon. So every 20 years we have to plan for the next 20 years. And this this may never
come to fruition. If if people stop moving here then it'll never happen. But as long as people want to move here. Yeah. As long Yeah. So I guess Melissa, what I my my thing is is that it's it's so much stuff that I just don't do what you do every day
and understand. I I guess what my my biggest question is that there's always so much um that was out there and and you did address the fact that there's not highdensity residential down at our lakefront. There's going to be somewhat of a commercial allowability because I mean
right are we doing uh Airbnbs and stuff in St. Cloud now or what? But but people do want to come and enjoy our quaintness of our lakefront. And that's what we really I think everybody wants to preserve. And I think that staff recommends this because this will allow
us to have some some growth for business because we need that. We def definitely need more little restaurants and things like that. But uh but the support of the density of the residents is very very tricky. And I know u again it's it's
hard. This is what I guess I just want to say. Not a lot of growth and overage on our lakefront. It's been adjusted now where it's pulled back and it's in better areas. That's what this is saying in essence in in essence in in our humble
professional opinion. And over on um the S kind of the S-curve on Lake Shore going into Rummel, it is that proposed at any part of this as residential, I mean as commercial. Let me go back to the map. The S-curve
on Rumble. I don't see anything on the map. Let me go. Oh, yes. There was one lot that um came to the city and they requested us to change them to the neighborhood
commercial use. And so we did take that request into consideration and we are recommending that it is changed to the same neighborhood uh commercial use along Lake Shore. So it would have the same
restrictions as as the um Lakeshore Boulevard uses such as so not Massachusetts to Michigan, it's Massachusett. But that that was not a cityinitiated change. That was an applicant initiated change, meaning the property owner
requested it. Uh on your on the park and open space on that chart, it went from zero dwellings per acre to now one dwelling per acre. Why? That was with the restriction that it it
is supportive housing for the park or um like the caretaker. Yeah, I remember now. There's um you've removed policy F214, fiscally neutral development.
It's just gone. That said, to ensure fiscal responsibility to the residents, the city of St. Cloud shall require proposed development to be fiscally neutral when the development meets a c certain threshold or requires an expansion of city services as specified in land
development code. This means government spending to improve services shall have no net negative effect on the city's financial resources and budget. An example of physic fiscally neutral development includes but is not limited to an analysis showing the increased tax
revenue as a result of the improved lands will equal or exceed the cost. Mr. Chairman, to what are you referring? This is the policy that was removed out of the document that we were given for this as part of this case. Can you go up a level and tell me which
um objective? No, it's okay. Which objective is that under? Because I'm I'm It's part of the thousand pages we got. I know. But Oh, it's page 50 of 86. I don't the header. What What is the header of that section?
Oh, I'd have to go back to the thousand pages. Okay. I I'm not sure if the consultant can speak on that, but um when when I hear you read that, it sounds to me that might be a requirement that we can't actually impose because we uh the state
of Florida is a private property rights state. And if you already have entitlements to develop your property, even if it is um not fiscally uh neutral, we the city cannot stop you
from developing your property if you already have entitlements. And so that that sounds to me like why we would have removed that. So if there's entitlements, it can be built on at a cost and it
could cost the city money potentially, but it would still have to happen with no benefit. Yes. And I don't know what the exact number is right now, but if you have a single family home that doesn't bring in a certain amount of
taxable value, you're already char you're already costing the city u money for for maintenance. Like the the taxes we bring in does not cover the cost that it takes to maintain. Yes. So give an example of that. Are you
saying that a a small house that doesn't have any improvements would be a burden on the city as opposed to or I I'm not sure what what what I'm not sure why the removal of that what that apply how it affects anything. So meaning if if
property doesn't doesn't cover itself like if if the taxable value of the property does not cover the costs to the city for um whatever services that that may need be needed for that property. We cannot say you can't be there because you're not
covering your own costs. Okay? You can't kick somebody out of their little house if they house. It would be like a a new construction type deal, but it would probably be like if you were to find a lot in the city and build a, you know, a regular size house on the city.
Okay. It's a good removal. Okay. I think that was uh I have a question about the institutional. It's said in the slides that the institutional needs have been met. Um, I'm assuming we've spoken with
the school board to get their involvement on whether or not that's factual or not because there's a lot of mixed use being shoved down our throat, which I don't know how the school board's able to balance what they actually need versus what the
city's approving mixed use wise if you've got a bunch of commercial and residential mixed together. Do you know if that conversation's been had with them? So, um I believe what you're asking is if we have enough
institutional land use to provide land for all the schools that are necessary. Well, no, it says that we did. I just want to confirm that. Well, that that institutional use is not just for schools. It's for any public
use, civic space, um etc. So, it's not only for schools. So the city doesn't have control over the school district. So they can locate pretty much wherever they need to locate and they determine when schools are necessary, not the
city. Yeah. But if we're increasing the density within the city, that's going to increase the need for schools. So that's that's kind of where I'm going with the Oh, yeah. We we coordinate with the school district. Do they now
every day? Yes. Yes, they're aware of this. They're supportive of this plan. We send them every project that we that comes through the city. So, they're supportive of of this code. They did not object to it.
Well, but the but the reality is the school board is you give them the information about who's moving here. They're not going to say, "Oh, sorry. We don't need any more people here because we don't want to teach any more kids." It's that this is what's happening. This is the growth. So, we're going to need another school. And the schoolboard says, "Okay, we're going to have to get
some teachers and get a principal and and then that happens." So, it's not that they can say, "Oh, yeah, it's okay to do it." No. Or don't do it. They just have to know the numbers and be part of the plan. Right. And they provide us a school capacity report for each development
that comes through the city. Mr. Chairman, if I just make a comment just it's it's redundant, but remember that this is a requirement the city has to adhere to with a plan uh pursuant to Florida statute by Florida law. So, this
is not something that has been unilaterally uh worked up, if you will. this is something to comport with uh Florida statutes which those have to be complied with from a legal perspective and also juggling the the growth that
based on information that's been cold over uh significant period of time. So these are these are broad issue uh topics that I know and I know there's a temptation to drill down to the specifics. There's no question about
that. It's very natural. But we have to be cognizant of what's on the agenda tonight is it's a it's a future land use modification. Questions are all relevant and good, but these are very big picture issues that are being met.
I think the the bigger picture too would be why are we pushing this through if the state just signed and approved Senate Bill 180, which basically vacates any comp plans that are different than what we've already adopted. So, I believe Manatee and Orange County
have already been denied by the state when they tried to push through their comp plans, which was similar regular conventional zoning to transact zones, which is what we were given the class on last time we were here. So, is that something that the city's already
flushed? We're confident that the the state's going to approve this. I I think I think that council is very confident that the city's moving forward as it needs to with regard to those statutes. Yeah. Yeah. Hasn't met resistance with that as yet that I know of at all. I think it's doing its due diligence and trying to
comport with Florida statutes. Big picture. Again, are there any other questions for the applicant? Is there any Mr. Chairman? Did did you or the commissioners have any questions of Mr. Jones as well uh from the presentation?
Any questions? Mr. If if there weren't, I just wanted to make mention I apologize. I'm Jack Morgansson, the attorney for the commission this evening. I again uh respectfully we are over capacity in here. So I I do ask those of you that would be so kind that as I understand
that the television in the bridge room is also on as well for our overflow folks. We did have the fire trucks here earlier. So I just am a little um anxious on that issue. Um you'll certainly have the opportunity if you wish to speak to come at the appropriate time and be heard by the commission. Um
just a reminder as uh Miss Duncan mentioned this is going to go before council on the 11th of September and there is a workshop I guess later this week. The planning commission is here to take your feedback your comments. They're not here to answer questions
this evening and at the end of this presentation and this matter after they receive all of the feedback from you all and from staff and so forth they will make a recommendation. There's no final action that's being taken tonight. So I don't want anyone to have any question about that. Uh this is an advisory
commission and they're going to make a recommendation at the conclusion of these matters to the council. Council will then consider and take the action uh in September. Okay. Thank you Mr. We have a request for we're going to take public comment now. We've got a
request from Kathleen Silva. Kathleen Silva, can you please state your name and address? Hi, my name's Kathleen Silva. I didn't touch it. Nobody touched it. You didn't get your three minutes. There it goes.
There it goes. Ma'am, I'm sorry. If you could just adjust the microphone a little bit so we can make sure to hear you. Thank you very much. My name is Kathleen Silva. I live at 700 Florida Avenue here in St. Cloud. I own the historic Dr. Woods House. I
purchased that home in 2013. It was foreclosed. At that time, most people that I knew told me I was crazy to give the bank money for that house. I've spent the past 13 years fixing it up, restoring
it, and I believe making it one of the nicest homes here in the neighborhood. I would have never taken on that project had I known that the city was planning on making my street a commercial block. That is not why I moved to the lakefront
area. Um, I live here in this community. I work here in this community. It's a community. My children are safe here. People know who they are. We are not like the other neighborhoods in Florida.
We are not like CM where nobody knows their neighbors. My kids know at any time they can run out of their house and run down the road. You know, if if they needed something, you know, when somebody says I work at the hospital and they say, "Hey, grandma's here." They
mean their grandmother's here. you know that we treat our own families in the hospital that I work for. I just I don't understand why and it feels maybe I'm wrong, but I just feel
that this commercializing lakefront is being pushed at us. It came up before elections and it was kibashed and now it's back again and saying that oh we're going to vote on it in September. I don't think that's a long
enough time to think about it and to truly get the information from the people that it's going to affect. Yes, I know everybody wants to move to Florida and I know that Oyola County is the fastest growing county in the United States,
but with that, we need to stop and really take a look at what do we want for our neighborhoods and and turning my house into a commercial business is what's not best for our neighborhood. Thank you.
Thank you. [Applause] Do we have any other public comment on this issue? I'd like to make If anybody that wishes to come up and speak that um please come up and speak at the podium, state your name and your
address. And once you've made your presentation, if you haven't already, please fill out a form so that we can have the information in our file. Thank you, sir. Very pleased to do that. My name is Mark Kentley. I live at 207 Memphis Place off of Rumble Road. And I want to just echo some of the
comments I just heard. You know, I've I've lived in St. Cloud for 30 years myself and I love it. I love the people. I feel safe. Like the lady just said, our police force is awesome. And our lakefront is extremely special.
Extremely. I've often told my friends that the head the brain of St. Cloud is right here downtown. But the lakefront is the heart of our community. That's where the love is. And I think
you ask anybody that lives here, they would agree with me on that one. And the professional on Florida Avenue makes no sense. Up here around the courthouse makes sense.
And I particularly want to call out this lot on Rumble Road. I mean, that one little lot. But I happen to notice it on the map. That absolutely makes zero sense. There's one lot in a residential area
with no associated commercial anywhere around it. And why that would even be offered, it just doesn't make sense to me. If we're going to grow the the the commercial in the area where you have existing commercial in the area of
Krabby Bills and in that proximity would make sense, but outside of there makes no sense. I mean, that's a lakefront lot. And I think that that's really really needs some consideration as you look at
all of these things going forward. You know, I know we have to plan for growth. I know we have to grow. Nothing's going to stay the same. We get it. But certain things like the heart of our community, I believe should be protected as we're doing it.
That's the answer. Thank you. [Applause] Good evening. Joe Thacker, 17 South Orlando Avenue, CMI. I just want there are two properties that I want to make sure get changed on the map. Um, we have already submitted it to staff, but I
want it on the record. That's at 192 in Puffin to keep it commercial instead of changing it to highway business. And then also um keeping the First United Methodist Church in downtown as institutional instead of neighborhood commercial.
Okay. Hello, Terry Roberts. I've lived here all my life. Um, I'm a little different than some of the other people in here. I'm not here about my personal home. I'm here about my business, which is your just your address, please. I'm sorry. 1491 Orange Avenue.
Thank you, sir. Yeah. Um, which it's its designation I believe is IR2, which is industrial, and there's quite a few things that I can actually do with the property. The issue that I have with
changing the name, which I was told, I made a couple phone calls to ask about it, and I was told that no problem, your zoning's not changing. Well, it's not the zoning that I'm worried about. It's the rules and regulations that comes with the future land use that I'm worried about. Uh you can call it a pink pig or whatever you want to call it, but
it's whatever you're, for instance, you're living in a subdivision, you have an HOA. The HOA then is going to tell you, they're not going to tell you you can't build a house there. They're going to tell you what color of the house is going to be and so on. So in my uh issue that I'm having is in some of the
wording which I don't know exactly from what I believe it's uh employment. What does that mean? What's the rules and regulations for future land use of employment? There is none. It says it right here on the piece of paper. It says it's kind of like the Nancy Pelosi
thing. Whether you like or not, you got to pass the bill before you know what's in it. Yeah. Um, it's very Yeah. So, it can literally cost me because I purchased the property so that I can do pretty much everything
that's on there and I bought it for an investment at some point. Say if I decide to retire and I want to sell it, I would be selling the property based on what it is, which you can do everything that I purchased the property for. But now if the it says in here that the land
development uh future land use it's going to have rules and regulations if you go to change it. They're not going to change anything that I'm doing now, but it will if I sell the property to somebody else now. It could literally cost me hundreds of thousands of dollars. So, um
yeah, I think I pretty much did it. So, thank you. Thank you. [Applause] Hi, good evening everyone. Thereso Derti to make way in Savannah Park. My property backs up to Rumbl Road.
The lot that has been designated or the homeowner is asking for it to be commercial is the rear of my property. My pool area, our pond, everything. That property would be right across at the
back of my property. So, I hope that that will be removed. You know, I've lived in the home for 37 years. That change would be incredibly horrible for our neighborhood
and Savannah Park is a quiet 74 home neighborhood and that there will destroy what we have created. So I hope you take that into consideration. Thank you. Thank you.
[Applause] I am Pat Palmer, 3005 Canoe Creek Road. I don't know if this is the forum, the place time, but I have a question because I live in one of the areas that are designated as park open area. My
house isn't a park or an open area right now. So, I would like some explanation of what that means. You know, it's the it's not for the commission this evening. You might want to speak with staff at the conclusion of the meeting, but commission's here to take your feedback certainly, but they're not here
to respond to or give you guidance or answers. That's what I Thank you. I needed to know. Hi, I'm Danny Martinez from 2420 Breeze Road, St. Cloud, Florida. I I own the property at 1501 Orange Avenue, which I
want to change the zoning on, which is right beside Terry, which would be industrial, but I guess the new zoning wording is uh for employment, but I want to make sure mine goes through. I believe your case is later this evening.
Later. Okay. Good evening. Uh, the name is Joan Zang and I'm at 2464 Prominade Drive and um, I think you might want to also hear from a relative newbie to St. Cloud. I have not been here as long as many of the
people in this room, but I do support some of the comments, especially the ones about Florida Avenue. I can see the um the reasoning along Lakeshore Drive for some really nice cafes, small
restaurants, and things like that. But um and I and I understand growth. I I totally understand growth, but to really impact the character of this city would be so be doing such a disservice to St.
Cloud. I think we you may want to reconsider some of the things here and make some adjustments that could work for the citizens here. The charm of this city is uh undeniable and indescribable.
Don't ruin it. I I just totally say don't ruin it. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. My name is Thomas Richards. I live at 1517 Pennsylvania Avenue here in St. Cloud. I've been here for 30 years.
I've raised my three children here. It's a small town. We raised them. It was It was great. My area is going to become high density residential. The only way I can see them creating highdensity residential in those state streets is we're building up. We're building we're
going to be taking down all the trees. We're going to totally change the character of the center of our city. It's going to be nothing but high-rise apartments. And it's not going to be a place where I'm going to want to stay. [Applause]
Thank you. Hi, I'm Don Luna, 3068 Sandstone Circle. I own a business on 1000 Lakeshore Boulevard, this rusty anchor. Um, as of right now on weekends, it is impossible to park on Lakeshore Boulevard. So, I'm very concerned with all the businesses
coming in where people are parking. Um, downtown, the businesses are not thriving as well as they should be. So instead of focusing businesses down there, I don't know why we're not fixing the ones here and finding parking here, maybe getting transportation down to our beautiful nature of lakefront from the
businesses here in downtown, which we've worked fairly hard on with bricks on the floor and all that. Thank you. [Applause] Little traffic jam here. Betty Damky,
Hidden Heights Trail, St. Cloud. I have four generations of family living here. We've been here for 40 years. Three of those generations are ready to leave because of this type of situation that has been and is going on. You need to listen to the residents. We
live here. We know what's going on. planners, developers, engineers, consultants, many of them have never even seen the area that they're talking about other than on a piece of paper and a line. So, listen to
the residents. We know our area. The changes that are proposed on Lakeshore, they're going to open the gates for future medium density all the way to Chisum Park. The medium density
allows 18 units per acre. With that, a developer could starting at Lakeshore right now, could go in and purchase two, three, four or more homes, tear them down, and then suddenly you've
got a condominium three or four or more stories high. And don't say it won't happen. Changes are made right here at these dasis with you and the city council. every meeting just like you're planning to do right now.
The commercial zoning on the commercial on the corner of RML in Cyprus, all that will do is open up more commercial down RML Road. This cannot happen. You're destroying our neighborhoods. You're destroying what's
existing, what this city was built on. It's the most beautiful drive in the city. Why we're in it? Think of the additional traffic commercial will bring in when they say medium density. Remember that is eight can be up to 18
units per acre. Take three acres and multiply what's going to go in there. As for I'm conincing three of the different things on the agenda. As for the uh business uh commercial on the corner of Lily and Lee, which is I think
a little further in the agenda, right now from Buggy Creek to 192, 7 miles, there are seven designated commercial spots with the town center at Jones Road being a massive area. Add to
those, the eighth one is pretty much in progress right now. Center Lake, which will have a huge commercial center. We don't need another one a couple of blocks down the road at Lillian Lee. Plus, Lillian Lee
is a stones throw from 10th Street, which is a major horrific area to try to get out and maneuver around. Lillian Lee. This one at Lillian Lee is maybe a half a mile to
the 192 intersection that is all already massive commercial. Anyway, I'm just begging you. Growth is good. We're not opposed to it, but there's a time and a place for everything. And this is not the time or the place for what has been proposed
tonight. And I strongly suggest that you do some a lot more homework before you approve it and think about what has not been told to you as much as what was presented to you. Thank you. I'm Gerald Nielson and I live at 3025
Canoe Creek Road. And all I I didn't completely understand from the maps cuz they're quite small and I I didn't understand when we were saying like JC or this or that.
But I was I received a degree in landscape architecture and environmental planning. And what I would just like to suggest is that what we are working towards is what I
consider urban sprawl. And I also think that when these developments go in, I didn't hear anything about protecting uh nature's ways and the animals lives.
What happens is they sell a piece of property and it gets developed and then they sell another piece next to it and it gets developed. If they would work it so that there is a
corridor where animals can move, we would not lose what we have and that we enjoy in nature. And that's what I would just like to see considered a little bit. and to see all these
buildings going up which we see today and they talk about traffic and that's going to hold it down and that's not going to do that. It might be downtown here and that's the place to do it but
let's see if we can do some master planning instead of just here and there. I would really like you guys to think about it. Thank you. Thank you.
[Applause] All right. Oh, my name's Jeff Rler. I live at 4339 Rumble Road. I'm on lot five. And apparently you want to turn lot three into a commercial property. Talking to my neighbor. Apparently, you
bought the first lot and you're interested in getting the other three. I've lived there for 30 years. Uh I own lot A and lot B. And you annex my lot across the street into the city. And now
you're proposing putting a a sidewalk and you're going to be cutting the trees on the other side. And we have owls and eagles that have been nesting in those trees that I've seen. They come every
year and I don't understand why you want to put a commercial property in a residential area and I want to know what it's going to be used for. That mean you want to put in a jet ski resort or or what?
And so basically I'm just trying to find out what's going on because I'm not getting any kind of information from anybody. Yes, sir. As I as I mentioned, sir, the commission's not here to answer any questions, but to take your feedback. Thank you. Okay. Thank you.
I'd like to can we say that we we are an advisory committee. We are not the city. We're a volunteer committee for the city. Mr. Chairman, as I as I mentioned, I know people are anticipating speaking and and getting their thoughts together, but as I mentioned, the planning commission is an advisory commission.
They're going to take all the feedback from staff from Mr. Jones and from all of you and then make a recommendation to the city council. There's no final action being taken here tonight. So, uh, take that that's exactly what's going on. So, thank you, ma'am.
Hi there. I'm Darlene Moresco. I live at 4:30 Oregon Avenue in St. Cloud. I've been here since 1971. And, um, I understand growth is going to happen, but I also know that we have a building downtown St. cloud that's been growing and we've been waiting for a
long time for it to be finished. And so you're talking I think commercial downstairs which we need and apartments upstairs which obviously we need. So I'm going to
ask the advisory committee to advise them to get it done. We have a uh a Leroy Price that has filled out a comment card. You can go ahead, sir. I'm Andy Strano and I live at 1700
Eastern Avenue. It's a corner eastern and 17th. It's a 3acre lot. Lived there for the last 13 years. I've owned a house down here in St. cloud since 94, but it's being reszoned as employment. I
came up to the city offices three times a week ago trying to find out what employment was. I'm like the guy on Orange Avenue. There's no definition of what that land is going to be used for other than once this land use gets
proposed. I'm R2 now on three acres. Once this gets proposed, any structure or change to my property will be under new zoning, which nobody can seem to say what it's going to be. I
want to leave it the same as it is now. If there's going to be future use on that street, let them do it individually. Everybody on Eastern Avenue has three, five acres, big acres. It's only residential.
The woman talking before said, "Well, maybe your taxes don't pay for don't pay for the use of the city services." Well, the last 13 years, I haven't got any city services at my house. The ditch overflows all the time. If
there's a hurricane, two of my acres are underwater. Nothing could be done about it. Nobody does anything. So if that was made into industrial or whatever, it's going to flood out the whole street. There's no sewer on that
street on Eastern from where they want to do it. So all that structure will have to be put in. The street's just a tiny little two-lane road. It's going to cost the city more to develop that street. But I know you can't answer any
questions and you can't get any answers when you come up to city hall about what this land use is going to be or how it's going to affect me in the future. So, who do you go to? I uh just want to talk uh about situation. and I live on Clay Whley
Road. Sir, I'm sorry. Could you just state your name and address again for the My name is Leroy Price. I live on Clay Whley Road. When I uh came here in 1986, I went to the county and I asked them about the land use and they uh showed me
this green area and they said, "This is all agriculture and com and conservation." And I said, "Is there any plans on changing that?" And they said, "No." And uh the we have a community back there and we were uh forced if you
will to build on 5 acres, one single family home. We couldn't split up. We couldn't divide anything like that. And uh that was kind of a appeal. Now uh they want to put uh all these hundreds of houses across from me. And I
understand that you can't uh stop progress. And I I fully agree that um developers have a right to do that but within limits. And now they want to put this uh section right across from my house called MISK's use. And that seems
like giving somebody a blank check to do whatever they want. They could put apartment building. They could put a gas station. I think it changes the whole character of the community. And uh I would appreciate that uh something like that doesn't happen.
Thank you. Okay, my name is Maddie Neil. I live at 580 East 13th Street, St. Cloud, Florida. I was debating about whether to even make a statement, but when the guy talked about the owls resting in the trees, I thought, okay, that's my cue to say, we
live at 580 East 13th Street. When we moved there, of course, there was nothing there basically, but now we got businesses all around and I'm glad to see the businesses. However, I think, and I know this is an advisory committee, I think it need to be advised
that try to keep some beauty in St. Cloud. We only have a little bit. 580 East 13th Street from um Crawford to Orange Avenue is one little section. And of course, Lakefront is another, but in
those little sections where the animals live, where the butterflies, where even I think we have some historical buildings. I don't think we I mean, I know we want to expand St. Cloud, but I think we need to keep those little bit of beauty areas. Thank you.
Thank you. Uh Daniel Kirk, 361 Michigan Avenue. Um this November will be 30 years in St. Cloud. And um I don't know about anybody else, but I the traffic is just what I want to bring up here. Um I hear see all these pretty slides and all these pretty
pictures and we're going to change this and that. Where's the pretty roads we're gonna have to get around town? You know, let's address that. That's the elephant in the room here. They're coming up here and telling us we want to do this and that for people coming here
20 years from now. We're here now. And uh I turned off a 192 the other day to try and get down to Walmart on Ny Road and it was like a 20 light weight. I had to turn around. I said, "There's no way I'm not doing this." So, um, we need to
get the roads addressed. If we're going to do a planning, let's tell us what the roads are going to be before you approve all this stuff. And to echo some of these other people, um, the blank check that that they're trying to cash here with the uh, um, it's an employment district. What is that? You want to
change my neighborhood from residential to employment district, but you can't tell me what it is? I say you you don't approve anything until they they iron it out and and give you a firm definition of what employment district actually is. Um also let's stop building schools on
main roads. You're crippling the town with the school. You can't get in and out of any area on Nova Road. Now we've crippled that road. What What is the plan here? I don't see a plan. We only have about 15 traffic lights in town. None of them are synchronized. You're stopping here. Stopping here. Stop.
Stop. Stop. Stop. Stop. can't get through town. Let's get the roads. We got all this technology. Let's address these issues. Get the traffic flowing. It's just um these are these are issues that can be solved. And uh as far as this is you can't take um questions, but
uh I would hope that you can address these issues for us. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Good evening. My name is Lynn Keane and I reside at 4411 Brave Lane, which is Tika Village at the Turnpike, which I'm
sure everybody that has lived here for any amount of time knows my little community. I don't know if you're familiar with it, but if you're not, you should drive out there in the afternoon and wait in the lines of traffic that we have to wait in every morning from anywhere between 6:00 a.m. and about
7:30 when hopefully everybody gets on the turnpike and gets out of the way so that we can get in and out of our community. I don't know if you all understand, everybody's talking about the high density projects downtown. I don't live downtown, but I also know it's a beautiful area and that's what brought me here 21 years ago from Miami.
I don't want to give it up. But I also know that you have slated or the commissioner has or somebody has slated the area next to Noly Road. When you come out there, anybody knows familiar with Noli Road and Canoe Creek? The green space there, the last green space
where the overpass for the turnpike is going to go. They have slated it high density. They want to build apartments or whatever in there. You can only put so many spaces on a piece of property up next to the
turnpike. We already have issues with buses every morning with the school children across the street. We now as a retirement community have children that have to come and live with their grandparents at times. We have issues with buses there. If anybody wants to
know where the entrance and exit to that community is going to be, they should ask the planning commission because it's supposed to be right there on Canoe Creek Road coming right out at that turn signal. So, you're going to have two turn signals coming off a NI road onto
Canoe Creek continuously. This is not going to change after the flyover has been built. How are those people going to get in and out of the property? We are already in trouble getting in and out of the property. I myself go up to play whe and have to make a U-turn in
the mornings if I can get out if somebody is gracious enough to let me out and or to let me into the other in intersection the other lane to get over. You want to add a multifunctional piece of property there next to us with more
homes, more young people driving. It's just a cluster and it's really sad and that's what St. cloud has become a cluster. You can't get on 192. You can't go here. You can't do this. Sit in the traffic on new Noli
in the morning. Sit on Clay Whley Road trying to get out. Anywhere up and down there is just ridiculous. And they want to add high density homes right there. I'd like to see the owls we used to have
and the turkeys that used to come through and the deer that used to come through. But I lost all that to the turnpike and to the hundreds of thousands of homes that are going to go over there where we have no infrastructures yet. No school for the children that will come, no Walmarts, no
Publixes, no no any kind of infrastructure. We just talk about the homes. Thank you. Maybe we have no more. You can hand it. She needs to sign. She Good evening. My name is Kathy Neil and
I'm also live in the Tika Village uh community and I was very upset that they are planning on putting 66 town homes in between that tiny space which will wipe out the rest of our green area that we
had. Uh our founders 30 years ago came down from Orlando, found a beautiful enclave with within an I should say an enclave and we were surrounded by green. We donated land to the city of St. Cloud so that you could build a fire
department beside of us which now a new fire department is going in and is supposed to be bigger and better. We're thrilled about that and we were generous enough or I should say the founders were generous enough to take that valuable property and donate it back to the city.
We have no green left except one area of what backs up to me. I was at the council meeting. Um they had no idea that it had been allowed. I don't know. I' I' I've been trying to find out how
this works as far as development, permitting, okaying it, building. It's very confusing to me. Um, but I do want to say I did a traffic I did my own traffic
study as far as accidents. Okay. And from the St. Cloud Police Department to the what is now Clay Whe just that small area.
In 2022, I believe there was like 94. In 2023, there was 111 accidents. Uh in 2024 was 95, which surprised me. And in 2025,
we are not even into the middle of August and we are up close to 100 already. So, and those are says traffic. It doesn't say it says traffic with
injuries, traffic with no injuries. Well, I've been in a traffic accident and I thought I wasn't injured except for my hurt ankle. Two days later, I'm in the hospital with with a morphine drip because my entire body hurt from that crash. So, when they say no
injuries, I question that number about and what's really interesting is the number of accidents that happened right at the fire station. I know right at the entrance of Tika Village, there have been at least three fatalities in the
last couple of years. And I see my time is running out, but please take into consideration the green space and most importantly the traffic and the safety. As an educator, I thought educating our students was the first and foremost, but
as a leader, I learned that safety is first and foremost before education. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, ma'am. My name is uh Matt Walter. I live at
1909 Eastern Avenue. Um unfortunately a lot of my other neighbors, some are here tonight, some couldn't be here tonight. Um so they asked me to come and speak on their behalf. So what I actually want to tell the board to begin with, I don't envy where you all are sit. I've sat on boards before and y'all have a tough job
between mandates of the state and what the city wants. So, and the I I don't envy you one bit. What I will tell you though is for those of us that that are been annexed into the city in the last several years and we're a green space
now and we've actually sat on committees, worked with the city, worked on creating some of this zoning so that there could be a job corridor in downtown. Now, I agree with a lot of what most of these other people say about traffic and where are the right
places to put all that stuff. Again, fortunately, that's not my job to decide that. That's yours. But we're actually in support of having some of these job centers because again, as everybody knows, traffic is horrible. If we can have some jobs here so people don't have to travel so far to those jobs, it may
help alleviate some of that traffic. So while all these other issues are out there, that is one of the things that we support is try to have some of these job centers and that there are some strategic places that those can be put so that we don't have schools on every
corridor from 192 to Noli Road. I don't know if for you those y'all that drive, if you go in the mornings, you cannot get from 192 to Noly Road without going through a school zone. Okay? So, we've got to be more strategic when we put some of those places. Improving those
roads, having roadways and job centers are going to be the key of St. Cloud in its future. Thank you very much. Thank you. Hi, my name is CD Hoffman. I live at 718 Florida Avenue. We've just got the new walkway that was put down. I think it's
beautiful. I think it ought to be that all the people that live on Florida Avenue should have beautify their houses more than try to turn them into a business. That's all I have to say. Thank you. Perfect. She's all Thank you.
Hello there. My name is Bernardet Lorent and I live on 1403 Pennsylvania Avenue and I've been there for 30 years and in OciOla County also CMI for 50 50 years total. And when she was talking about
the small two-bedroom homes that kind of offended me because I've been in my small little f house for 30 years and I remodeled the whole thing all by myself. I worked hard for it and I can't see turning my small little house into no business
at all. So, I just wish that they would really think about the smaller homes. Thank you. [Applause] I'm Oliver Trap. I have a business on 3475 Progress Lane. Um and uh seconding
a little bit the issue with the schools. Uh St. Cloud has been a success story from the demographic growth and for that reason a lot of investors are rushing into St. Cloud to build additional schools. But if you look around what happens in Texas and other places when
you are not judicious and granting additional and conditional uses of places and you create like over capacity that's neither god good for cost for the parents nor it's good for quality it just lowers everything. So the
demographic trends are also that parents have less kids to some extent. So I would be very judicious not to create too many schools and allow schools in residential areas because uh it's not good for the quality either if you overbuild. Sir, I don't think he mentioned his
name. Your name and address 3475 progress. There's a I didn't hear your first name. I thought address. Sorry. Thank you, sir. All right. If we're if everyone has spoken, we'll close the p public comment
session. Um, I have some follow-up questions for the for the city for the applicant. Mr. Chairman, are you so are you closing the public comment? Yes, we've closed the public comment. Make one last call out to see if someone because this is the final call for public comment this evening before
uh the commission. Does anyone else wish to make public comment? We're going to close the public comment. Thank you, sir. Okay. And we have some follow-up questions. Yes, sir. Yes, sir. Sorry. Thank you.
So, with the um with this future land use element, there was there's places that have changed that already have an existing use. Were these people notified? Everyone was notified if if their property was changing or if they were
within 500 feet of a property that was changing. If I could, Mr. Chairman, just for clarification, I maybe I interjecting I apologize, but just to clear what I'm hearing is but the this endeavor for the
land, excuse me, I'm sorry. This endeavor for the change to the future land use map is intended to not impose additional restrictions or burdens on existing property owners, but to potentially
uh expand those. Correct. So, in other words, I'm just I'm just hearing concerns that any kind of adoption of this will instantly change someone's uh property into something that it's not. And that's not what's going on
here. Is that correct? I think that needs to be expounded on specifically for the commission. That was Yeah, that was my next. Sure. Yes. So, for the future land use and um forgive me um I will try to say it in in layman's terms and not use planning
jargon. The future land use is the vision of where the city is headed and we are required by the state to plan for the next 20 years. So it is essentially a
master plan and a guide for growth for the next 20 years. It does not change the zoning of the individual properties. The zoning is what sets the more um more
customized uses and development standards for the individual parcels. And each land use that we have either proposed to create tonight or is already in existing in existence that we are
proposing to expand into other areas. have correlating zoning districts. And so once the land use changes, it is up to the individual property owner to request
the zoning to change. Later on on the agenda, you will see that there is a table of classified lands. That is the table that we are presenting tonight um in support of this land use change that
will identify which zoning districts are compatible with which future land use designations. So your zoning is what says you know how many stories your your um building can be. It says how far back
from your um property lines does your building have to be. What type of landscaping is required? What type of buffering between you and your neighbor? All of those specific design standards and design elements are tied to zoning,
not land use. What land use does is it reserves the land. Because one thing I believe everyone needs to take note of is right now we have this huge sea of yellow.
Everywhere that you see a yellow color on that map, that means it's already entitled for single family homes, whether they are attached or detached. And they can build right now up to four
dwelling units per acre. If we don't set aside land for other uses, all of our land will be eaten up by subdivisions. And so this exercise is to change the land use now so that these large tracked
homebuilders cannot eat up all our land so that when the market is ripe for multif family or it's ripe for employment, we have no land left for those uses. So specifically to just help out um the
Orange Avenue concern of that is doesn't mean that that person's going to have hundreds of thousands of dollars of cost in the future because that land use is being adjusted. That zoning is already set per se. I'm not sure I understand. Well, the the concern I think was on
like Orange Avenue. Oh, this is coming and changing. There were three in particular. the idea of what is employment, the idea of of a house, a place where there's a house and now it's going to be open space. And then the Orange Avenue concern where there was there was changing uh I thought it was
the land use there. Those folks again are not shouldn't be concerned that their house has to go away because it's now open space or correct and um we will check on that. No one's home should be changed to open space. that may be a map
error or it could be, you know, when you zoom into the map, it just appears that it's covering that land. Um, we did take down her contact information to correct that. So, that that should be a non-issue. um regarding the employment
land use. What that means is for now until we come back later on and we will present it to planning commission and our city council. Right now we are proposing that
industrial land uses and office land uses are I'm sorry industrial zonings and industrial um and office zoning design zoning designations sorry. um are part of the employment land use.
So if if we are proposing to change the land to employment, we are preserving that land for jobs. That is the goal. So when when a property owner of a parcel
that has an employment land use wants to either develop it themselves or if they decide to sell it, then it will have to be an a use that is allowed in industrial or an office zoning because
we are wanting to ensure that those lands do not become homes. We need places for jobs. Again, I know I've already said this, but if we don't preserve land now for businesses to locate here in the future or even, you
know, as soon as the market allows for it, it will be eaten up by homes because right now it's already entitled to allow single family homes up to four dwelling units per acre. And I think we've um
things like out at um off Clay Whe etc. There are places and I know folks don't come to all these meetings so people don't hear all the things that you all have established and they're coming but you can't just say we want it and it happens. Uh but those are being set aside. So there is commercial in areas
that just haven't come yet. Right. So that might be things folks don't know. Right. And I and I know mixed use is um not very clear if you don't understand what the plan for mixed use is. Whenever you have a designation for a mixeduse
land use, you have to have an adopted concept plan. And in that concept plan, you have to demonstrate that you are um balancing your homes with the jobs. That's the benefit of a mixeduse district because the city can um be
ahead of that by requiring a jobs to housing balance. There any more questions for that? Um I I guess it's a recommendation uh first that I I it was kind of disturbing to hear a lot of folks say, "Oh, I came
down here trying to get I I think that we just need like a a question area that the city and I'd like to really push the council to come up with that so that when people can come in, they can have they might not you'd be there to answer it right then, but there can be something they fill out and within 24 or
four or 48 hours they get that answer because I think that's the unknown is what really frustrates people And um and and I again I just kind of want to say commission that as you know six years ago before I I learned and sat out there and was my first commission I had lots
of opinions and didn't know half of what I have learned over the last three years of how much that this staff does. And I I just want to kind of keep reminding folks that it they are master planners. That's what they're doing. So if people
think they're just picking stuff out and doing it, they're they're just not. Um, so I mean things like on certain houses in in on some of these state streets, they were businesses. There was doctors and lawyers and everything up and down Pennsylvania and New York. I mean, look
at the history. I have been here for over 50 plus years. So I I know that those houses and then they became residences and also I don't think that also and correct me if I'm wrong is that we are seeing that every single house on Florida Avenue is going to be turned
into something that's a choice that someone might be able to make. But the other thing is is that we've sat here before right and had people they have to jump through a lot of hoops before the staff says that that's not going to impact and it's not going to hurt. And you know, we we deny lots of things, but
um I I just think that there are a lot of things out there. I mean, Krabby Bills is one. Everybody's like, "Oh, Rust, we don't need stuff on the lakefront." Krabby Bills is a great addition. I mean, the Rumbl Road thing is a kind of a big concern, I think, a little bit there. But I hope folks know
that you all are going to vet that big time before something happens there that's going to disrupt where everybody else is living. that that's not just a gimme, but do help me understand that that was something the homeowner requested.
And did I did I hear or misunderstand? Did the city buy it or No, no, no. Not not that specific parcel. The the property owner requested to change their land use to the neighborhood commercial land use, which is the most limited land use. remember
that only allows the um small restaurants, cafes, bed and breakfast uses. So when the property owner found out that we were doing map updates to allow those uses, um I believe it was a she she she contacted the city and asked
to change her property. And because the city is improving the trail along the lake shore and along Rumbl, um I believe her thought was it would be a great spot to maybe have like a little ice cream
shop or I mean she she uh um thought of a couple different uses, but um plus you think about the amount of size like there there has to be extra parking. There has to be handicap. There has to be so many hoops that someone jumps through. I I don't want residents and us to like think that they're going
to put some great big giant thing there and now everybody's all and I can explain that just a little bit. It starts at land use. The next step is zoning. After that, depending on um the site itself, there may possibly
be a conditional use or not. Um but then there are the engineering plans. And so there are several levels of review that happen before the building permit can ever even be applied for and obtained.
Miss Duncan, I don't mean to be uh redundant. I forgive me, Mr. Chairman. Just want to make this point so that it's clear to the commission and to anyone that's interested. As I understand the presentation from some of the concerns were raised, this proposed
amendment to the future land use that is not going to impose um restrictions on existing uh the nature of one's existing property at this time. It's not that it's not going to disrupt that at all. Whether it's a two to home or whether
it's a a business operation or wherever. This is simply going forward prospectively for those property owners either existing or future that wish to take to to to do something maybe different or what have you that there may be some flexibility depending on what they're proposing.
Correct. Everything that's proposed in this plan ex allows a greater use. We have not but it doesn't take away from from an existing Okay. Correct. It does not restrict any existing use and we have to put something into place.
So I mean if it if and even if it isn't this something has to go into place because of the JPA right well because of the states the state law and the statute. Okay. Would you go back and uh reiterate the
Florida uh private property rights? Yes ma'am. So the state of Florida is a private property rights state. It required it meaning the state the state required every jurisdiction in the state of Florida all cities and counties to
adopt a private property rights element in their comprehensive plan which we have done and essentially what that means is and I'll just say for me if I owned a property downtown
and right now I'm entitled to have up to four dwelling units per acre. The city cannot stop me from building my up to four dwelling units per acre. The only thing that the city could do is say, "Okay, on your acre,
you must accommodate for parking. You must accommodate for any um landscaping requirements. You must accommodate for um any storm water runoff, things of that nature. like at the at the engineering level, we can impose those
um those requirements, but the city does not have the authority to say you cannot build on your property when you're already entitled to build on your property. And every property within the city already has entitlements of some
sort. So, how does that apply to um this employment zoning? A couple of people talked about uh they're living in these zones. How does that affect them?
If they live in an employment land use area that we are proposing to change, they don't have to do anything. If in the future or even you know as immediately after this is approved, if they decide as the property owner that
they want to develop their property into an employment use, they would then have to come to the city to city council and request to change their zoning to a zoning that is compatible with the land
use. And then depending on which zoning they request, there are uses tied to every zoning. And if we use industrial, for example, there's an I1, I2, and I3. And depending on the level of industrial
that they're requesting, there the uses become more intense as the number gets higher. But also we are um proposing to have the office land use compatible with the uh employment land use. The office
zoning compatible with the employment land use. And so if someone wanted to build an office, they could request that zoning and move forward with that type of development. But we have um sighting
standards meaning the building has to be set back so far. We have um architectural standards meaning that most buildings we are are um enforcing a pedestrian scale. We look at
the number of stories. We we take all of that into consideration. We look at the whole surrounding area before we bring our recommendation to planning commission. And then of course that recommendation to city council.
Does that answer your question? Yes. That's and just a that's strictly a volunt that's voluntary. Any existing property owner in that uh subject area what you were discussing they can remain as they are. There's no correct requirement that they change it. Yeah. That is correct.
I think that's important to confirm. And my other question too was um Joe mentioned something about 192 Puffin uh and a Methodist uh church. C can you elaborate on that? Is that something that is proposed a change in there?
Yes. So um and I'm going strictly based off memory. So Joe, please feel free to chime in if I get this wrong, but for the property at the corner of Puffin and 192 on the north side of 192, right now they have a commercial land use. We were
proposing to change it to employment. They have requested that we keep it commercial. So, um, after tonight's meeting, between now and city council, we are going to remove employment as a land use for that property and keep it commercial because from what I
understand, they already have someone interested in developing it as a commercial property. And then regarding the United Methodist Church, um there were several parcels
that um that the church uses, the building itself, and then the parking. We just wanted to make sure that all of the parcels had the same land use, and I believe it was institutional. Institutional. Yeah. Okay. There any further questions for the
applicant? I just have a quick question. with all of the property that the city's annexed over the years that that all of those all of that land we can put this comp plan into,
right? That's what that's what we intend to do. Realistically, you really wouldn't need anybody's buy in, per se, because it's it's vacant land. So that's that's going to be the the rooftops that you guys were talking about coming in because the area that we that you guys
showed us on the map, State Streets, that's all you already have your rooftops. Everything's already there. There's clearly no buy in from the residents on any of that. So is is there a a situation where we could push because I know we I understand we have,
you know, requirements from the state. Is there a way that we could push this comp plan through for all of our new development? Anything like that? And then I mean something's got to go back to the board because these residents are not not in a in a satisfied manner that
you know talking about carrots and sticks. There's there's nobody's eating it. Um so is is there is it is there a way to push this through so that you're in compliance? I understand that we have to do that but also maybe work on the back
end of what because we've already got this here. This is already established. Nobody want clearly nobody wants it changed or the majority of the people don't want it changed. Um there's small changes here and there and maybe that's something that could be worked on something that can go through the community a little bit more. It doesn't seem to be flushed out as well as I
think it should be. Um, so is there, and maybe this for the consultants or you, whoever wants to answer, is there is that a possibility to push this future land use for the annex lands, the new lands, the vacant lands, and still be in compliance with the state requirements?
Sure. So, um if that is your intent, what you can do is recommend make a motion to recommend approval um with the condition that the states streets remain as they currently are.
But if that is a recommendation, I I want to we have to work together. I want to make sure that this is something that you and the consultant kind of agree that we would still be in compliance with the comp plan should we submit it to well we're going have to submit it to the state
right so there are many factors involved whenever you change a land use we would have to do an analysis after if if that's the recommendation of the planning commission we will have to go analyze that and see what impacts that would have on uh meeting our housing
needs and our jobs needs and Then we would bring that data to our city council. I'm not sure I followed what that was. Was that that you don't want it to be high density on the state streets or
my idea behind it is that the I I get it. We we have to do this. We don't we don't have to do it. But um in theory it is it's it's great and it works I think for vacant lands when you're building.
But the the problem that I have and I think that a lot of the residents are um expressing to us is the fact that this is already developed. Now we're going to kind of you know move and shake it, do different things to it and then when you sell it or you want to do something else with it because and I'm also and I want
I don't want to get into the weeds of it but you mentioned employment means um office and industrial but then we just had a class on formbbased code which that's not going to exist anymore. Now you're going to have transact zones. So, it's going to change a lot more than
what we're what is here today. So, it's and I again I don't want to I didn't even honestly want to bring that up, but it is Well, just to clarify, transsects are form-based codes. Right now, we have uklitian zoning, but you you're not going to say that something's zoned industrial. It's going
to be whatever transct you you you change it into. Correct. So, it that's that's what I'm saying. It's It's going to be different than what is here. Um what what is going to be different? I I don't want to get some other I don't
want other topic pulled into like what this specifically is about because this is very specific area. So I don't I'm not following. Yeah. know we can stay focused on this but the code itself it the way that it was presented to us at the last class learning session that we had here was
that the code is going to be changing into the formbbased code. So that's what I'm trying to I and I and I don't disagree with a form-based code if it's new lands and I'm and so my struggle is with the state
streets. You have an established area now you're going to put a form-based code over it. How does that ch How does that change? I I think if you and I don't but how does that substantively change what's being proposed in this? I'm not sure I'm following that. Maybe I'm not down in the weeds.
I don't really know. Yeah, I'm not I think I'm following I believe what Megan is saying is in the mixeduse districts that is more of a hybrid of formbbased code with Uklitian zoning.
Um, I believe, and correct me if I'm wrong, what what Megan is asking is if we apply that only to those city expansion areas, meaning the mixed use districts and
those areas that we are annexing and not to our downtown area. Does that summarize it? the I think more or less the grid part of it. But if you if you was to not put the future land use into
the grid, you would have to move it. You would have to change the entire everything else because you wouldn't have the population that you're going for, right? And we would have to do another analysis because what our ultimate number one goal is is to balance the
jobs to housing ratio. Right now we have a little over half a job per every household. So that means people have to leave St. Cloud to go to work. And so if we can balance and work
towards balancing that jobs to housing ratio, the goal is at a minimum to have one job per every household. And what that would do is prevent people from having to drive
outside of the city and they can work inside of the city which essentially would reduce traffic on our major thorough affairs. Yeah, that's I remember the workshop a few years back that was again and it's
that I always use the same example the Home Depot thing. If you had more commercial in certain areas then there are there is less actually less traffic on the road and um yeah I mean I drive it every day constantly so I know the
times when I just stay off the road. I mean that's in every city the peak periods are the peak periods. Uh so uh I think that that we is just something that is we're going to have to keep dealing with too. So
yeah, I think that like one of my comments too is just to for every for everyone to always remember it's not it's very difficult for us to get out of our own egos of what we want where we want it and we want things to always be the same and they and it just can't be
and the planners try really really hard to follow everything but I but I think you say it the best it's something that has to happen. It has to happen within reason. And the city council, who were the ones that make the ultimate decisions, really took something that
everybody was up in arms about, brought it here, and it's even still, there's a whole lot more to happen before any of this would make people go crazy and think that there's going to be tons of commercial down on Lakefront or Florida Avenue or or anything. I mean it doesn't
go unnoticed though that it would be nice to have more keep things more in our town area but I know that's been a development what district or whatever um what is it that they find the different houses on that grid area and saying oh this could be good for for business like
even Indiana or whatever. So if I could I apologize if I just because I think this is also important um Miss Duncan if you could just quickly summarize and this is not to focus on a mistake but I heard in the presentation from Mr. Jones that there was some type scrier's air or what have you from
medium density. It was intended to be low uh density and I I but I I don't know if that came through clearly enough that on Lakes Shore on Lakeshore and and I just wanted to amplify that at least to get that point clear for the commission. Very good point.
Um because not to not to belabor a mistake I make them all the time. on this little ma'am. Ma'am, just allow Miss Duncan to address, please. Okay. If you look at the smaller map to
the bottom right, you can see that there's the red color along Florida Avenue and then the blocks of um Lakeshore Boulevard from Mass to Michigan, I believe it was. And you see the yellow extending out from that red.
That is a map error. So we've corrected the map and we've removed that yellow which was the medium density residential. It will remain low density residential. Okay. I just wanted to be Oh, thank you. Yes. Yes. I
that was a point that I thought was important to the commission. And the red commercial can be utilized for that. It doesn't have to be utilized for that. Correct. can be utilized. It's giving
the option, but also it's a very limited neighborhood commercial use because those um businesses have to be on a neighborhood scale. Your local restaurants, um cafes, bed
and breakfast, and there's already a bed and breakfast overlay in our downtown. So, people can already do that. The only thing that's really changing is adding the option for the cafes or small restaurants. Thank you, ma'am.
Thank you. Yeah, I think uh I think the biggest issue I had was just the change from the 18 to 40 on the high density residential based on where it was based on where it was drawn at on the state streets. Yeah,
that is also something that you can um make as part of your motion. Um if you want to um recommend a condition to reduce the density to a number that you would be more comfortable with. I would
just um reiterate that the 40 is maximum and if a site cannot handle that much density, they won't be
able to get it. Meaning parking, runoff, all of those things that we just But if you know that the site can't handle it now, then what's the point of even putting it on there? I I I because if
is it a numbers? It's a numbers thing. It's a numbers thing and you have to look at each parcel individually. So once it gets to the engineering level that's when we slice it and dice it and say sorry you have to have this, you have to have that, you have to have
this. And if there is a case where it makes sense and the site is um fit for a higher density then then we would recommend approval. But again staff only
is a recommending um group just like uh your recommending body. We only bring these forward um as requested by the applicant and then our city council has to approve it ultimately if they are um
changing their zoning from medium to high density residential or low to high or low to medium. Like every every um zoning that has to go along with that land use change has to go before our
city council. Commission members, I'm the prime offender, but please make sure your microphones are closed so you can be clearly heard for all comments for all here and viewing at home as well. Please, one last question.
Yes, ma'am. If the um Florida, what is that? Florida Avenue um area was um
restricted from this proposal. What kind of impact would that have on your plan if that part was taken out? Um we won't know until we do the evaluation. Um but if that is a recommendation of planning commission
and we will bring it to the workshop on Thursday morning if council directs us to do that evaluation and look at what that impact will be. Um potentially we may have to locate it somewhere else in the city in order to meet that jobs to
housing balance. Maybe the consultant can speak better to that but that high high level that's my understanding. Yeah sure. Um thank you and I I want to thank everyone uh who who came and and spoke today as
well. Uh the comprehensive plan is my opinion the the most important planning document uh in the city and so it's great that this many people are here to talk about it regarding Florida Avenue. Um, realistically, uh, for the jobs housing
balance, it it would not make a a huge dent if those, uh, if that future land use was changed and and we just kept those, uh, few blocks along Lake Shore. Uh however uh one of the um factors behind Florida Avenue that hasn't really
been spoken on tonight uh was to uh give uh to create a a corridor uh down to the lake shore to connect downtown uh with with the lakefront. And obviously Florida it's very hot a lot of times
walking that distance is not comfortable. So, if there's a small business, if there's a small cafe or ice cream shop, something like that, you can stop along the way and get something to um should one of those property owners decide like, hey, I have a a desire to
open a small business and and my lot would fit a small uh commercial unit towards the front or the side, whatever standards the city adopts for that, um then that would be an option for them and that would help kind of that pedestrian circ circulation uh connect
downtown and the lakefront. Well, that's a good question. So, that could always be something added in the future if there was like a need and all of a sudden we've realized that could make residents very comfortable right now not to have it, but then down the way, oh look, it has grown, we really do need that, that that can always be
added, right? Yeah. Yeah. Certainly, the city maintains the right to, you know, adopt things as they see fit in the future. Where are they in the park? Um, yeah. So, that brings up a great
point that I think I failed to mention. This is a living document. Um, this is not even if it's adopted by council. This can be changed at any time at council's approval. We can make requests to change it. If if
we find that anything's not working and or council finds that anything that is adopted is not quite what what they want it to be, they can direct staff to make changes. So this is a living breathing
document. It's not once it's adopted it has to stay this way for 20 years. If that were the case, we would never come before you guys because we're here all the time requesting land use changes. Okay. True. point.
We have any more questions for staff or the applicant? Do you have anything else to discuss amongst ourselves? Uh just a again a reminder it's not happening today or tomorrow and and it wouldn't nothing would be added without
following all those other guidelines about parking and runoff and and use and all of that stuff that we listen to you know every month when we come. So that's I I don't disagree with that and I think
this is very much needed. I think it needs to be for new development. Um because I I understand site development, you need a lot to to to do it. Um and it's there's not a lot down there. So it
to me I think this still needs I think the state streets need to be left out out of this and and maybe excuse me come up with a different solution, a different plan moving forward. Um, we obviously need more transparency and
meetings with the residents to get a little bit more because this it's it's not working for them. And I understand and I I almost wanted I wish that maybe we had a couple of different map options so that everybody could see it. But I would assume that that's already been done um and possibly presented at, you
know, city meetings that or town hall meetings with that that the planning departments had with the residents. Um to get their input and their buy in. Um I just don't see this working the way that it's presented to us. We we're
gonna have I think we have to make changes to it before Well, I I I'm have to disagree. I think that it really does have a lot of good a lot of good points that they've been working on it for years and and and again folks come in and come to one
meeting they come to you know once in a while and they don't know all that goes into it and it is it has to be done for the future. I I do I I really like the idea of maybe leaving Florida Avenue out from the commercial side right now. And
so I mean I I just I think that from what it was proposed before and what the council asked staff to do, I I think that it it makes a lot of sense the way that we're growing and it's and it is controlled growing. It's not it's not what people are thinking. And I I hope
everybody's really really hearing that it does not affect everybody this moment on their properties right now and today. that it is giving opportunities for people to make decisions like having an ice cream parlor, you know, having a small business, giving more people more
opportunity for employment. Um, and I think we forget about that because we have egos. Well, I think please if the public comments been closed, so please allow the commission to deliberate. I think too you got to you got to remember that throughout the state streets and a lot of areas, there's
already people that operate small businesses out of their homes. There's already construction workers that are operating. There's contractors. There's real estate agents. There's people already operating out of their homes. I don't think this is that much different than that. I think right next door to my house, there's an Airbnb and that's not
in a that's not in a neighborhood district. So, it's I don't think it's that much different to call it that. I think that's more to stay in line with with what we're legally obligated to do is just pick an area and say that that's the area or pick an area here and say
that that's the area to make the numbers fit. In my opinion, that's that's what I've gathered from this. But um there's any more discussion? Mm-m. I think based on the comments from the
community um uh I think we that we have an opportunity to move forward with the plan, but I think we should show some consideration to uh the State Street area and revisit and
do a little more um research on that as well as the Raml piece. so that um we can get some better understanding. [Applause]
So um as it was said before too, anyone can make a motion. You can add conditions to that motion if you'd so like. Well, I'd like to make a motion to recommend approval of ordinance number
2024-50 uh based on the 16 findings within the land development code, but also with the adjustment of 192 and Puffin to remain commercial, the Methodist uh church properties to remain institutional, um but with the advisement of the
removal of Florida Avenue as a um as commercial at this time. I second a motion. We have a first and a second. All in favor? I I opposed.
No. No. Okay, you're two to two. I'm sure the council would appreciate some form of a consensus reaching them by way of a direction or an advisement. Um, normally in a normal case, I would
simply recommend the staff will move on and council be so apprised that you couldn't agree. But I do think and I'm inferring that the disagreements amongst you are not that far apart based on the conditions that were included in the
motion being considered. Um, and maybe I'm wrong on that, but if you feel like you can move forward with another motion of some sort that would achieve a consensus in whatever direction you all choose, I'd encourage you to try to accomplish that. If you're not inclined
to do that, then the then the 2 to2 recommendation, which is no recommendation, will go on to council because it's going to council either way. Well, yeah, if you all could share with us what would Let's try it again without the what the high density residential excluded to.
the change to the numbers just so I understand I just want to understand what what is the issue a high density concern on the high change from 18 to 40 on the state streets if it goes from uh so with a limitation of the number recommendation or with
just it being medium density or something with the with the number change to what would be a number that feels good to you all and can we ask if that would make how would that impact overall so Is your concern only the state street
or is it just high density anywhere in the city? Because if it's only the state streets then you can recommend to leave the remove the state streets. That's where it's at. Okay. So no high density residential on any state street. Yes.
To do we need to recommend it to be any level like medium or No. Does it impact our the study at all from the Yeah, you'll have to come to the mic, but thank you, sir. Yes, that change would be a lot more
substantial than the Florida Avenue change. Um if if you don't mind me backing up a slide or two to the citywide map, um you can see the uh the residential the highdensity residential along the state streets. uh that's really at the heart of the city uh right
south of downtown and uh really at at the hub of uh th those different employment centers being proposed throughout the city. Uh so not having that residential density um there it would be more impactful and would
probably require taking another look at and it's Orange Avenue to Vermont. Um no, what is that? Orange Avenue to Oh, thanks. Yeah, that's you can see it a little bit better here. There's the start of it. I can't read Orange Avenue all the way to Columbia.
Yes, I believe that. So, I don't have to if that's the Browns. The Browns. Yeah, right. Yes, the Brown on this. No, this is this is to the to the north. We don't have a inset of that of the state streets. You're talking about the one between 192
and 17th Street. Easter, but it is if it's Eastern to Missouri, if that's the correct thing, it is that those are possible. It doesn't say that every single every single street from Eastern to
Missouri is going to have a high density. It's just that those are zoned as a possibility for a proper uh developer to do that. Correct. Yes. But not zoned designated the future land use. And I'm sorry
word future land use as a possibility. But they would have to then get a significant amount of land from however many uh um residents that have them to be able to have that. So again, I hope everybody
understands it that just because it's it's a land use designated. It it doesn't mean that that can happen. It's got to have you've got to have what 20 30 uh houses in a row that agree to give up their properties and and and yes, so there's so many other hoops to jump
through. Not to say that people won't and people haven't. So anything is possible, but is it is it is it logical? Is it logical? I think it's a recommendation that shows that we're not happy about it. Well, I don't necessarily know that I'm
unhappy about it because I think that people do need some that type of of of apartments and things like that for people to be able that's right near the school and the high school and everything. I mean, you can have walking ability. So, it's not outside the realm
of of logic, but it's it's really going to be a very very difficult thing to have happen. So, I I don't know. Could there be a number that still would works in there though? Like if is it to 25 or 30? Yeah, I I was wanting to make that point
anyway. Um, so the the density number of 40 units per acre and you know if I'd be curious if you went back in your records and looked at this, but uh that's supposedly a very hard number to actually achieve and densities
uh you know lower towards 20, it's more achievable or higher towards 60 more achievable. But that, you know, 35 to 45 range, it's um you're kind of at a height that doesn't really work pencil out. And especially on these small lots,
um it it would require some some really uh creative site design and um compliance with to comply with all of the city standards for these sites, right? Um you know, we have a lot of city standards. Yes, absolutely. Would that number be more agreeable to
you all like 25 district. I I would support your motion if we left out the state streets for this application. Which one? I'm sorry. Left out. I said I would support the motion if we
left out the state streets entirely. The the the the street we were just speaking about. the entire grid, all items on the state streets, the the entire grid of the state streets. Which includes help me gal, but that that includes pretty much everything that you're
looking at on the map. So what what changes everything all of the new development? So how so how would you propose that they figure out how to get those people to employment opportunities in say 20 and 40 years from now? Oh wow.
Ladies and gentlemen, please appreciate your comments, but the the commission needs to deliberate. If you have comments or want to talk, you can certainly go outside, but we need you to be be quiet while they're discussing the matter. Yeah, because it's not happening today, right? And it's not happening tomorrow, and it's not happening next year, and it's that just for that.
I I don't disagree, but I don't see a bustling downtown right now. And you won't probably for another 20 years, right? I mean, we don't have the number of employment that would who nobody's going to build those units. A builder's not going to come in and build
those units if there's not enough people to go in them. So, that's where again this has to be something that we have to be farreaching. This is just an opportunity to designate those. But is everybody listening that how many things
have to happen for that to have for those to occur? But we we have to figure out how to get more folks on the streets. I mean, we do see a lot of empty houses on the state streets too, right? That people are doing nothing
with. If I may, um I just wanted to point out on the map um because I I failed to do this earlier as well. If you look at the location of where we have designated the highdensity residential, you'll notice
it's right next to the gray. The gray is where we are where we are designating the employment land use. So the idea is to have people situated near employment so that they don't have to drive so far to work.
And also in order to have a thriving downtown, you need more residents because the businesses will not locate there if there are not residents there to patron the businesses. So why aren't we moving the high density residential
closer to to the gray area? It's it's it's spread out. Why is is there closer to the gray area? Yeah. Wouldn't you want the literally the head No. doesn't look right. I don't think this map is exactly what they're saying. It's it's eastern to
Missouri and it goes right it would go right through all of that. It's just not I can't I'm not counting blocks because the map is is a bit ridiculous, but it's you're walking 15 blocks to work. Why wouldn't you more more or less encompass it? Why isn't the high density
residential encompassed around the gray area? I think it is. It doesn't show it on the it's you I I would I would call maybe four or five of those blocks encompassing the gray, but then the rest of it going beyond Michigan and and
going towards Columbia. I mean, you're walking 15 blocks. It it just doesn't seem like that's what the intent what you want it to be. And then there's another gray area over here that there's no highdensity residential. But that's why I'm saying I think the map is not exactly right because if you go all the
way down here to right where they had said Colombia on the next map and it goes all the way down to Eastern which goes right through there. So it is like right next door there Orange Avenue right next door.
Does that help a bit? It kind of shows the transition from medium to high to employment. And then also notice that everything surrounding the highdensity residential that we've proposed is either commercial
to the north or employment to the east, medium density to the west that leads into employment a little further west near Buddinger where the hospitals. So I I I know it can seem that this was not done strategically, but this was
absolutely done strategically. There's a reason, lots of thought. The reason is so everyone doesn't have to go onto 192 to get to work. Um if you look at streets
um at 14th, 15th, 16th, 17th, those roadways um are east west corridors that you can go to the west for work. You can go to the east for work. You may have to go north for work as well, but you're not having to get on
192, go up Narusi into Orange County or Orlando for work or jump on the turnpike and and go up to anywhere outside of St. Cloud for work. I mean, it's still obviously an option. Um, but we don't want to restrict the
city so much to where that's your only option is to leave St. cloud to go to work because that is what makes traffic so bad. We need jobs here, we need entertainment here, we need services here, and we need retail services here.
And you can have commercial in the mixed use. Correct. So you can you could you could almost essentially thatch that pink area with the red too. Not necessarily because in a mixed use district there are a certain number of
rooftops that you can have before a commercial center is required. So like you were saying before because it it was like a canvas essentially vacant land. We were able to master plan it and require a jobs to housing balance in
that. Um actually it was done through OciOla County initially and then we adopted it but staff is here to take your recommendation to city council. Um if there are any other questions that we can answer for you, we are happy to
answer any questions. Um, I would just request that if your if your intent is to lower the density in the grid area, the effect of that may be you have less
residents there to support your employment and support your retail and services. And if there's not enough people there, businesses will not survive. or they won't locate here in the first place.
Right. You'll have a change. I I don't have a I don't have a big change. I don't think I I could not support taking the residential the high res density residential out of the the out of the city.
We're split. There's no more. You won't and you won't agree. There's not another motion. And there's not an option to just lower that number from 40 to 25 that you all would agree on. I don't think it helps. No,
it doesn't help. So, just let me poll each one. Miss Marshall, do you have any other motions that you wish to to move forward that or Miss Bridgefor Miss Griggsby or Mr. Chairman, Mr. Alexander?
If not, then then then uh just announce that that's the final vote and that'll be notified through council and they'll receive the information I'm sure at the workshop on Thursday uh as well as reflected in our minutes.
I I would I would recommend you make a motion to adopt this last action as the final for tonight. Then if so we have clarity that no further motions are coming forth on this matter. Chairman can't do that. Do I need to make sure? Any one of you can make a motion that if that's if that's the pleasure of the
commission. I will make a motion. Well, we'd be it'd be from one of the members, one of the commission members. I'd like to make a motion that the split decision of the commission is final. Is there a second to that?
Second. Okay, there's a second on that. So, it's ready for a vote. All in favor? I I I. Miss Britworth, was that an I? Yes. I'm sorry. It was an I for Miss Britworth. Miss Marshall. Correct. All right. So, that's a final decision
from the commission. It's a recommendation, which is no recommendation. It was two in favor with the conditions, two opposed to the conditions as proposed, and there's no future motions going forward this evening. You heard Miss Duncan uh that the workshop will go forward on
Thursday. Um, I don't know whether uh council will allow for comment at that workshop, but I do know that the matter will be heard on the 11th of September before council and those that meeting starts at uh the city council meeting starts at 6:30
6:30 6 and a half 6:30 p.m. All right. Thank you all for for coming and um if you'd just allow us to conduct. We have several more items to take. So, if you'll just conveniently find your way um out, be safe, and thank you for your time here this evening. Unless you're here for one of the other
Yeah, if you're here for one of the other matters, please stay cuz we're going to have to hear your matter. So, absolutely. Okay, Mr. Chairman, maybe we can take just a five minute break. Uh yeah, I'd like to get Can we adjourn for five minutes and rec five minute
down? like to call the meeting back to order. You said hammer. Ladies and gentlemen, ladies and gentlemen, we're going to move forward with the rest of the agenda. So, to those of you that are not here for an agenda item, if you please find your way out to the corridor.
Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. All right, we're going to call resolution number 2025111R. That's a CNU2500 01 for the Alter Community Church in Luke Anthony. This applicant's requesting approval of conditional use for a private school known as the Alter
Academy in the R1B single family dwelling zoning unit. Good evening. Ralph Keith, associate planner with with community development. Tonight I will be presenting CNU25-0000001 the conditional use for the Alter Academy.
Oh, I'm sorry. Prior to starting, I would also like to make you aware of a scrivener area scrivener area within the staff report. For some background, currently there's a feature land use of lowdensity residential.
It has a zoning of R1B single family dwelling. They are proposing a conditional use of a private school in R1B zoning. Their proposed operation times are Monday through Friday, 8:00 a.m. to 2:30 p.m. And their proposed student capacity
is 40 students, 20 per modular building for grades K to 12 with four staff members. Here is a graphic representation of the future land use showing lowdensity residential
as well as a graphic representation of the zoning showing the R1B single family. Here is a concept that was provided. As you can see down at the lower right corner are the two the two buildings that would house the school. Honor
honor before July 16th, 2025. Staff re recommends approval of resolution 2025-11R with the following conditions. The approval of the requested conditional use does not constitute the approval of the provide concept plan. Changes to the
site will require approval of a site development plan and any additional approvals required by the land development code. There will be no reduction in parking shall shall be prepared and this approval is for the alter academy private school only. Upon the school leaving the subject property,
the conditional use shall expire. I am I'm sorry. Plan Commission requested action approval of ordinance approval of resolution 2025-11R with conditions stated by staff. Uh the applicant is available for
questions as well as staff. Yes, the applicant I believe the applicant fill out a form. Luke Anthony. Uh he is one of the should Okay. Good evening. Good evening.
So, I thought I thought that we had looked at this some time in the past. Yes, sir. We had a previous school that had been in there that was applying for it and there were some questions about some character issues and some previous allegations. So we had
so completely canceled that out and we had started a new with our own uh school. Okay. So these aren't the same it's not it's not the same people that No. Okay. No sir. Just the same location. Same location. I have a question either for you or
staff whoever would like to answer. Is the modulars is that something permanent that you're looking or in the future would you like to put something more permanent aesthetically pleasing? Modulars aren't the uh yeah choice. Yeah. And they've been there I think
probably about 20 years. So I'm sure you know they're getting towards the end of life expectancy where I'd love to you know actually put a building there. Mhm. Is that the possibly moving forward? Possibly, but like you said, it's uh low density residential right now. So, I
don't not even sure what we could do there. But yeah, I mean that's always the goal is to build better and improve. We have put about $350,000 into the property in the last two years. Um making upgrades and correcting things and, you know, making it beautiful
again. Okay. Thank you. And the four staff members, are they they teachers administration? Yeah, teachers and aids. Okay. Any other questions? Traffic concerns. There used to be traffic concerns there. Those are gone
now. Yes, sir. We have a pantry. It's actually the largest food pantry in OciOla County. And it was previously during CO turned into a drive-through food pantry which created that backup. they'd be up all the way down 192. And we have since changed that to a walk-in pantry where they park and walk inside
and we actually get to talk with them and, you know, offer them other um resources, other charities come out and show share with them what they have. We've had haircuts out there and stuff. So, it's a completely different process now that doesn't interfere in any way. You know, it starts at 9:30 to 11:30.
It's not any way conflicting with any school traffic or anything. and it's uh really streamlined it and everything that no haven't had any issues. We did have a a medical event during the summer where one of our elderly clients had um heat stroke and the ambulance and fire
truck came in out no problems, you know, right in the middle of everything. So, it was really a good test and she was fine. She didn't have to go to the hospital or anything and everything worked smooth. Okay, any other questions?
That's all for now. I I would just like to say I know these guys have gotten a lot of flack today and a lot of trouble. Uh but my experience with the planning department has been amazing. You know, I came in here, I've been pastor there for one year now. I don't know anything about any of this. And so I go to the planning department, I go, "This is what I'm
trying to do, help." And they've helped every time. They've been so gracious. You know, answered emails, phone calls quickly, and you know, it's been a great experience for me. So, I really appreciate everything that they've done. And uh I think they're doing a great job. And Stephanie and and Ralph and
Melissa, you know, it's just been a pleasure for us. Great. Okay. Good. Nice. Thank you. So, we'll open it up for public comment. Is there any public comment on this item? Okay, we'll close the public comment.
Any discussion? Just a reminder from your council to make sure to any motion mentions you've considered the six factors of the land development code for a conditional use and the uh and the conditions and the conditions and the conditions in this case. Yes.
Correct. So would anyone like to make a motion? I'd like to make a motion to recommend approval of resolution number 2025111R based on the six factual matters of within the land development code and
along with the conditions stated by staff. Second. I have a first and a second. I have a vote. All in favor? I I I I passes 4 Z.
Right. The next item is resolution 2025112R Primrose School St. Cloud CNU 25003. Um Living Trust Stonefield Engineering. Yes.
Good evening. Ralph Keith, associate planner with community development. Tonight I will be presenting case CNU25-0000003, the conditional use for Primrose School St. Cloud under resolution number 2025-112R. For some background, currently there is
a feature land use of commercial and the current zoning of HB highway business. The proposed conditional use as a child care center in HP zoning. Proposed operation times are Monday through Friday 6:00 a.m. to 6 pm.
The proposed student capacity is 238 students ages 0 to 12 with 24 staff in after school programs for grades K through 5. Here is a graphic representation of the future land use.
as well as a graphic representation of the current zoning. Here is a graph graphic representation of their concept and what they propose on or before July 16th, 2025. Staff recommends approval of resolution
2025-112R with the following conditions. The approval of the requested conditional use does not constitute the approval of the provided concept plan. Changes to the site will require approval of a site development plan and any additional approvals required by the land
development code. At the time of site development plan, the applicant will need to provide a masonry wall on their lot to mitigate the sound between their playground and the residential homes to the north of the subject property. There will be no reduction in parking shall be permitted. And this approval is for the
childcare center Primrose School St. Cloud only. Upon this school leaving the subject property, the conditional use shall expire. Likewise, staff is recommending um requesting the plane commission recommend approval of resolution 2025-112R.
Staff and the agent are available for questions. Is the applicant here? Uh I the applicant is not here. The agent is though. I have a question for the agent. Can you go while he's
coming up? Can you go back to the site plan real quick for me, please? Thank you. So, you've got a you're going to have a masonry buffer, masonry wall to the north of the property. There's also residential property to the east. Is that masonry wall going to encompass that playground on the north and the
east or just the north? Oh. Well, that was that was the city's recommendation, I guess, right? Yes. Yes. Um, at your request, it can be looked at again. I'm sorry. Yeah. um planning commission can make a
recommendation to have the buffer and wall um on more of the property boundaries than the north if you see fit. Can you go one more slide to the other uh layout uh back one?
Yes, there. Okay. So to the left is what is that? So to the left is highway business. To the right is RPB. That is currently under the jurisdiction of Oyola County.
That one that said the one that says USM. Yes. Okay. What is that? That's Ocola County as a What's there? Do we know? There's a there's a house. There's a It showed on the satellite picture. There's a house there. There's a house there. Oh, so it's an Ocola County house. I
mean like it's just a residence. It's a It's a a resident. The city hasn't got them yet. Yeah, it has not. Come on now. You guys get on there. So, it's just a res. Okay. That's where the residence is. So, that's where the the wall initially and then you all are
saying No, they were saying the wall's to the north. Oh, to the north. And we want it to be to the east. Yes. Well, got it. Does the agent have anything to say to that suggestion? Yeah. Yeah. Um, and I'll fill out a card when I get done, but um, excuse me. My
name is uh, Kevin O' Conor and I'm with NI Real Vest and I represent the owners. So, the engineer applicants not here. Um, he really represented uh, Primrose and Primrose is just recently out of contract on this. They're still looking for a replacement uh, franchisee if you
would as far as we know. Um, so then that that location you're talking about is actually the owner of the property. So they own they own a house over there and then they own the slot. Oh, they own they own the uh um what we would like to ask and we
didn't get a chance to ask during the break but um we just found out that you know Primrose kept this on. So the owners would like it to go forward but they would like the reference to Primrose pulled out because we have other child carers that want to be there. U maybe not in the exact same
size or whatever but they have to come back for that. But um the ideal recommendation they like is to have it move forward but without the reference and you know on your conditions that it's primrose only um they would like it to be left just as you know childcare.
Yeah through their through their name for now acting through you as agent for the applicant. Um yeah probably just through their name I guess would be right be fine amend their name as it moves forward but yeah need to have an identification. Well, the um the city
had specifically said Primrose School St. Cloud, so that would be not our recommendation. What do you what do you want to do about it? Yeah. Is that a is that a problem? Uh because the other if you don't if we
don't it then it's a lot longer process, right? You have to start all over again. Right. Right. So, um we we were not aware that Primrose was not going to be located here. So, um maybe we can amend the language to just say the um
approved user or um so or or current as Marco's um current school or current or um approved because once once this goes to city council and they find a user, they will
have to go through the process of getting a business tax receipt and all that. So, and of course their their um plans for construction. So, once they have a user and they get their business tax receipt, we could probably tie the expiration to that. Once the business
tax receipt expires, the conditional use will expire. Okay. My other question is I don't necessarily know if a re can we make a recommendation about the wall to the east if the owner wants to do it because what if they don't want to do it? Maybe
that's why it wasn't put up. Yeah, I wouldn't recommend it because they own it. Um, but I mean to have a wall. Yeah. I mean, that would be their call. I mean, if it's not, that's why I
they own both properties. I don't think it's necessary. They can do it if they want to. So, Oh, okay. Right. And and keep in mind when they come in for their engineering plans because it's commercial next to a
residential, we will our code already requires buffering. Whether or not that buffering requires a wall is is in question, but a buffer will be required. Yeah, because we're just doing conditional use. So it does that part will come a little later. Yes, ma'am.
with those conditional uses are we and I don't want to restrict the applicant to find the 238 kids. Um and then there was there was a couple other conditions in there. Um,
and since it's kind of just brought to our attention, is is there a scenario where we could possibly um continue this to a date to be determined based off of what the applicant can find for a replacement school?
It's possible. It's it's I would re It's up to the applicant really. I mean, I just don't want to restrict if Primrose isn't going to go in there. Sorry to cut you off, Jack. Sure. Okay. Um I just don't want to restrict them to these conditions and then they find a a replacement school and they would like something different.
What were the conditions again? It's um one is the uh one's got the masonry wall, one's no reduction in parking. So they are so it's just a capacity of 238. I mean they can be lower. They're proposing that but I don't think
our condition of approval includes that. Does it? No. Your condition was only the wall. Yeah, it was the wall. That is primrose school. 238's fine. Just leave it. Were there were there not four conditions? I thought there were four. This is There were four conditions. Four. One's
one's for that. It's only primrose school. One's for no reduction on parking. There you go. Here it is. This is Yeah, this is what we wanted to Yeah. Okay. Uh so it's the fourth condition that you were
identify him as Marshall in terms of that coming into question because it says it's the conditions for approval uh for this primrose only in that name. So I guess the question would be at least my recommendation would be that the applicant be heard on whether they
want to go forward in their own name in which case you'd address that condition and allow them to go forward. I think can be done I think it can be done from the city's perspective can it not in terms of the conditional use it's just a matter of whether or not they
uh coordinate if for better lack of a better word um the appropriate found or you know institution so who the the um applicant is because there's a certain amount of time the applicant is uh Stonefield
well the applicant shows as uh living reverend is that reverend and living trust. The agent that's just abbreviated. It's really a living trustable. It's just they don't you don't have the full name on there, but Stonewood is the
agent. So, it can say this approval is for this for a child care center owned by Rev Living Trust. I mean, should does there need to be I think Megan's right. Does there need to be a a a name in there of some sort
or do we just say a child care center? I think it would depend on if they were planning to sell the property themselves or and develop it themselves or sell it. So I think if we said um this approval
for or yeah this approval is for a child care center um upon the expiration of the um initial business tax receipt. This conditional use shall expire. So once a business
moves in and gets their first business tax receipt, if the business ever changes, or do we really mind if it goes from a daycare to a daycare? Because we could we could um change that condition to basically say if there are and and
we'll have to word smith it, but like something that that to the effect of if there's any um nuisance or um impact um to the neighbor, then um the conditional use can be brought back before city
council. We've put that on other other conditional uses before. I feel like we're making it more difficult than it really is. It's just that we are approving a child care. We don't It's not It's It's irregardless of what the name of it is. Can't we just take four out?
We'll just take the entire Can we take condition for out? Well, what if we don't do the condition is for the child care center? It's just that you would just You would just redact the Primrose schools. Yeah. Unless the city has an issue with
it changing from Primrose to a different daycare center. We typically may um like them to expire because if there are any issues, it can be revisited by city council at
the time they switch ownership or um brands. So it's the um the a child care whatever goes in there has to have a uh what is it? You're saying a license a business tax receipt. Okay. So, we could just say approve for a child care that has a b approved
business tax receipt. Actually, I would I'm sorry, just thinking out loud now. I think we should tie it if we're going to it going to tie it to a process. It should probably be the certificate of use versus the business tax receipt. Since the business
tax receipt is essentially a tax, um the um yes, the con the con uh sorry, certificate of use is the zoning application that approves the use and it
also um requires the fire inspection. So approved certificate of use. Certificate of use instead of prun schools approval is for a child care approved with an approved certificate of use. I would say the initial fac child care
facility that obtains their certificate of use. I like that. Thank you. Did you get that? Okay. Or do you I mean you say if ownership were to change what the use maint I mean the the condition of use under that condition could continue
as long as it maintained as a childare center whether the ownership change or not would it not? It could if we don't put a condition. Well, I mean the condition I'm reading is proless for childcare center only. Upon uh of such use being um abdicated
or what have you the conditions expires? I mean that's very straightforward that way. You know really what we're talking about is administrative in terms of who's the applicant who has who's going to who's going to be responsible for the the commission. is the the applicant
right now, which is the property owner, right? Correct. It could it could go either way. The applicant owns both parcels, right? The the residential. So, it's because Primrose is no longer the applicant or in the name of Primrose. They're off the table. Correct. Well, they weren't even the applicant, were they? They
No, but it was in there. It was the the name of the application was through them. So, in my estimation, it would be through the the applicant in the in the name of the applicant for now. Well, I think this would the city's issue would that be because the applicant is not going to be the one
pulling the certificate of that that's a great question for the applicant um certificate of they need to let us know that. Yeah, they would not. They wouldn't be. It sounds like they plan on selling the parcel. It should be for blank childcare facility. I forgive me on this, Miss Duncan. What
is the the time for implementation for the conditional use? Doesn't the 12 months? It's 12 months. So, you lose that conditional use if you don't implement the the use within that 12-month period from from receiving it. To the best of my knowledge, I believe
it's you have to apply for a building permit within 12 months to to to put into effect the the use that's conditional, but you'll lose it if you don't. Correct. Okay. So, that becomes the issue with getting a franchisee to operate. Well,
okay. I'm just thinking out loud with the process of it, but I think it can I think it from the commission standpoint, I think it can go forward in the name of the applicant as the owner. Think again for the conditional use. They can receive the use as long as they operate
it as a child care center approval for this child for a childare center owned by Rev Living Trust. Is that what you mean? Well, I'm saying yeah, it's it won't be owned by them. No. Oh,
well, well, the pro Yeah, the the school won't be, you're saying. Or I'm I'm assuming the property itself will not be owned by Okay. Oh, so they have to go out and find a new buyer. So So what we're Okay. So I think that we go back to take number
four off completely and all it is is that we're a conditional use, right? Well, city didn't like that. So I I if you would like me to, I would attempt a motion. We haven't got we haven't called for public comment. No. Right. And also um it sounded as though
the um applicant would like to amend number two since they are selling off the property and the there is a a residential home to the east. They would like to add or expand that condition to include the east. Got it. I have it down here.
Oh, thank you. Is there any public comment on this? Then we'll close public comment. Let's go ahead and make any discussion. Any discussion? No, we've had enough.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to make a motion to recommend approval of resolution number 2025-112R based on the six factual matters within the land use development code and the
recommended conditions with an edit to condition two to include the eastern boundary property line with a sixoot masonary wall and the edited condition of number four. The
approval is for a child care center for the initial child care facility that obtains the certificate of use only. Upon this school leaving the subject property, the conditional use shall expire.
Second a motion. I have a first and a second. All in favor? I I I I thank you. So, we've got all these city park. Do they all have to be read separate? These are separate cases actually,
right? Yeah. I think they do, but I don't think they'll take long. So, they're separate cases, but they got they got to be heard each one at a time. That's uh this is ordinance number 2025-54 of city parks resoning ZMA2500
06 for city of St. Cloud. Good evening. Rob Keith, associate planner with community development. Tonight, I will re be presenting to you the zoning map amendment for the city parks resoning. Currently there is a future the current
future land use is park and open space. There's existing zoning of P professional and we are proposing a zoning of o open space and recreation. This development is compatible with the surrounding area and will have no
adverse impacts on city facilities. Here is a graphic representation of the parks that are being affected. These are showing their future land use. At the top you can see the lakefront as well as Goodwin Veterans and I cannot remember the name of the one right on the left.
Sorry. Um as well here's a graphic representation of the zoning for all of those parks showing us P professional honor honor before June. I couldn't do it. I couldn't do it. June 16th, 2025,
staff recommended approval of ordinance number 202554. Likewise, it is recommended that the planning commission recommend approval of ordinance number 202554. We go back to that picture again. What we're talking about just the one on
Dakota uh off uh by Dakota on Lakefront, right? Yes. Okay. Yes. So, there is the lakefront up top. Oh, it is. And so, Veterans Park, you said, and then the one over at um what's that? Second in Mississippi. That one, too. Oh, um I'm sorry. Additionally, I would
like to make you aware of a scrivener error that was identified in the staff report referencing the incorrect flu designation. The subject parcel already maintains a flu designation of parking open space under the current future land use map. The proposed zoning of open space and recreation aligns with this
and is compatible with this designation. Oh, okay. Uh so the four parks that will be included is the lakefront at 1104 Lakeshore Boulevard which has a current flow of park and open space as well as
Goodwin Park located at 317 Delaware A with the current flu future land use of park open space as well as OP Johnson Park located at 300 Georgia A and Veterans Park located at 120113th Great.
Why are we changing the zoning? So, currently they are zoned as P professional. Uh we are as part of the future land use update. They have received a updated updated future land use park in open
doing it wrong open space and recreation. No, no, no. Ju just to clarify um the reason why we're changing the zoning on these parks is because they are existing parks. So it's it's essentially a map cleanup. We are giving it the zoning to
match the use that's already there. Yeah. Because professionals are not the right thing, right? I have been on that playground though, right? There's some really good players on that play. Maybe not professional. The zipline. Oh, if it's if it's park in open spaces, you guys can put a cell
phone tower there, right? We've had that. We had that. They had to change the zoning to put the cell phone tower. Oh, yeah. Yeah. Yeah. Yeah. We did. You would. You're not going to put cell phone towers all over my park. No, this uses So, we can't
they're city owned parcels and we would like to have more park uses. Okay. All right. Any questions? Any public comment? Public comments closed. Any discussion? No. Do we have a motion?
Yep. I'd like to make a motion to recommend approval of ordinance number ZMA25006 based on the 16 findings within the land development code. I'll second. You were not allowed to second. I can't.
Somebody second, please. I I second. Let's All in favor? I I I miss Marshall. I said I I'm sorry. I'm just checking making sure. I want to make sure everybody voted. Loud and proud. Be loud and proud. I
Jack. Thank you. Thank you. Doing my job. We're going to read ordinance number 2025-55 for the Stephanie Lee Rothenson Memorial Park reszoning ZMA2500 [Applause]
08 from the city of St. Cloud. Good evening. Ralph Keith, Associate Planner with Community Development. Tonight I will be presenting to you the zoning map amendment for Stephanie Lee Rothstein Memorial Park ZMA25-00008
under ordinance 2025-55. Currently there's existing future land use of lowdensity residential. We are proposing a future land use of parking open space pending approval of the future the flu element and map update. The existing zoning is a agricultural.
The proposed zoning is O open space and recreation. The development is compatible with the surrounding area and will have no adverse impacts on city facilities. Here's a graphic representation showing the Stephanie Lee Roth Rothstein Park as
Logan City residential. Here's a graphic representation showing the agricultural zoning of of their said park. Honor before June 16th, 2025, staff recommends approval of ordinance number 2025-55.
Likewise is recommended that the planning commission recommend approval of ordinance number 2025-55. There any questions for staff for the applicant? Nope. No. No. Map cleanup. No cell phone towers. No cell phone towers.
All right. Any public comment? Applicant. Public comments closed. Can I have a motion? Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a motion to recommend approval of ordinance 2025-55
based on the Where am I? Six 16 16 findings within the land development code. Second a motion. There were a first and a second. All in favor? I I I I
Thank you. Next is ordinance 2025-56 Roma Road Ring Zoning Zma 25009 city of St. Cloud. It's a zoning map amendment. Good evening. Ralph Keith, associate
planner with community development. Tonight we'll be presenting the zoning map amendment for Raml Road resoning DRC case number ZMA25-0000009 under ordinance 2025-56. Currently the existing future land use is low density residential.
The proposed future land use will be park and open space pending approval of the proposed flu element and map update. The existing zoning is R1A single family dwelling with a proposed zoning of O open space and recreation.
Development is compatible with the surrounding area and will have no adverse impacts on city facilities. Here is a graphic representation showing the flu for the parcel as low density residential as well as a graphic representation of
the zoning showing R1A single family residential on or before June 16th 2025. Staff recommends approval of ordinance number 2025-56. Likewise, it is recommended that the planning commission recommend approval
of ordinance number 2025-56. Questions for the applicant? No. Any public comment? We close the public comment. Can I have a motion? Does anybody wish to make a motion? Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a motion
to recommend approval of ordinance 2025-56 based on the 16 findings within the land development code. Second. I have a first and a second. All in favor? I I I I
can I ask a question though? Look at back at the map. How does that relate to the one that we were talking about earlier? So the one we were talking about earlier is going to establish the future land use required for this to come come to f
fruition. So the future land use element will establish the parking open space and then this will establish the zoning of I think I know what you're asking. Let me find the map on the other side.
Oh, that one first. Let me talk about right. Is it the one at the top of it right on the other side of Rumble? Just want to find a zoomed zoom in of that section if I can because I want to give you accurate information. So, just
give me a moment because open space can be parking, right? No, I don't. No. Open space can't be parking. Just parking alone or do you mean like a a trail head for the trail?
Parking for a trail head. Parking for I believe if it's tied to a park, it could be a trail head. Okay, that's okay. I don't need to I don't mean to belabor this one. I just wanted to make sure that I saw that one up above if that's the one that is from before.
I am I'm about 90% sure, but I'm I'm 10% unsure and I just don't want to give you inaccurate information. I didn't hear anything. It was just a question we can follow up on another time. like to call ordinance number 2025-57
for the Canary Park Reszoning ZMA 250010 the city of St. Cloud zoning map amendment. Good evening. Ralph Keith, associate planner for community development. Tonight I will be presenting the zoning and map amendment for Canary Park reszoning ZMA25-000010
under ordinance 2025-57. Currently there's existing feature land use of public institutional. The proposed future land use is parking open space pending approval of the proposed flu element and map update. The existing zoning is R2 single family and
two family dwelling. The proposed zoning is O open space and recreation. The development is compatible with the surrounding areas and will have no adverse impacts on city facilities. Here's a graphic a graphic representation showing Canary Park with
its public institutional future land use as well as a graphic rep representation showing the R2 single and two family dwelling zoning. on or before June 16th, 2025, staff recommends approval of ordinance number
2025-57. Likewise, as recommended is likewise is recommended the plane commission also recommends approval of ordinance number 2025-57. And this is a another map cleanup because it's already a park. Yeah. Okay.
All right. Any questions for the applicant? Nope. No. No. Any public comment? A close public comment. Mr. Chairman, I'd like to make a motion to recommend approval of ordinance
2025-57 based on the 16 findings within the land development code. A second. Got a motion and a second. All in favor? I. I. We're going to call ordinance number 2025-59
to DMI business park phase 2 with ZMA25005 with Danny Martinez zoning map amendment. Good evening Ralph Keith associate planner with community development. Tonight I will be presenting the zoning map amendment for DMI business park
ZMA25-0000005 ordinance number 2025-59. Theus the existing future land use is low density residential. We're proposing a future land use of employment pending approval of the proposed flu element and map update. The existing zoning is R1A
single family dwelling with a proposed zoning of I1 industrial development is compatible compatible with the surrounding area and will have no adverse impacts on city facilities. Here is a graphic representation showing the
low density residential future land use as well as a graphic representation showing the R1A zoning designation. On the before June 16th, 2025, staff
recommends approval of ordinance number 2025-59. Likewise, it is recommended plane commission recommend approval of ordinance number 2025-59. can go back to the map. Yep. And the staff is applica and applicant
are available for questions. Do we know what kind of business is proposed? Can we have the we have the applicant light industrial Good evening. Sorry it took so long. Yeah, that's I've been here all night. It's all right. Um I'm Danny Martinez
and I'm the uh business owner. And to the north of that, I already started four buildings. Their small business is what they're going to end up being. Like uh uh you know, you'll come in, you'll have an office or whatever, and then you'll have um like sales or whatever
like that, too. It's just the whole thing is going to be all small businesses on the other side too. What are you thinking? Like warehouse type facility? Yeah, like uh it's hard to um like I got
uh like BNC mower, you know, you'll have your u sales and then you'll have your repair shop. Basically just the smaller kind of business. Understood. Thank you. Okay. What What's the What's the small parcel
between what's already there and what's proposed? The corner. Yeah. Right. Yeah. There's um a old house there. Um really nothing. It's just an old house. The guy does boat repairs. Yeah.
And stuff like that. You'd have buffers once this gets flushed out through a site plan to Yeah, I got the site plan up. But, you know, with him, he's going to Oh, I'm sorry. He's going to be um his will be industrial, too, or employment, whatever
they want to call it. But, um his will be changed in the future zoning, too. and the other guy on the other side of mine or whoever owns it, they're going to theirs will be changed too in a future zoning map.
Okay, that's all that's all I Okay. And then just for um for city, there'll be a site plan site review with with buffers as needed for the for the residential to the back of it on Bibbons. Yes. So um once we get to that point
there will be a site development plan re required. Okay. Any other? Nope. Nope. I'd like to make a motion. Public comment. Oh. Is there any public comment for this item?
And notices were sent to everybody around the property. Yes. Okay. We'll we'll close public comment. Now, I'd like to make a motion to recommend approval of ordinance number 2025-59
based on the 15 16 findings within the land development code. Second. Have a first and a second. All in favor? I I I I passes 5 4 Z. Now, ordinance number 2025-61
for Grace Community Church. This ANX250017 uh for an encumbrance annexation for 9 acres. Does the staff want to take all three of these in its presentation? Yes, please. So that's ordinance number 202561 202562
which is comprehensive plan amendment and 202563 which is a zoning map amendment all for Grace Community Church. Good evening. Melissa Duncan, director of community development. This case before you tonight is for Grace Community Church, the annexation, future
land use amendment and zoning map amendment. This request is um consistent with our statutory requirements. It is contiguous and reasonably compact. It is adjacent to city limits. The existing future land use is
community center in the county and the proposed future land use is community center in the city. The existing zoning is community center perimeter in the county and the proposed zoning would be
community center perimeter in the city. This development is compatible with the surrounding area and will have no adverse impacts on city facilities. Here's a graphic representation of the future land use map and the zoning map.
Staff is recommending approval. We are requesting that planning commission also recommend approval of the annexation future land use and zoning map amendment for the project known as Grace Community Church. Staff is available for questions
and also the applicant is present and available for questions. What's incumbrance incumbrance annexation? So an incumbrance annexation basically means when the property goes to um request
water and sewer services in the city, they sign a notice of encumbrance that essentially says when you are um contiguous to city limits, the city can annex you um at any point whenever the
city is see deems it um time. That's right. I I did not realize that this was a incumbrance annexation. I thought it was an applicant initiated annexation. It says encumbrance on the agenda. I didn't
when I read the report it's voluntary maybe a scrier there. We'll we'll correct that for the council meeting. But you were correct in the definition of Thank you. Well, I'm glad I asked you. I'm glad you did, too. Thank you so
much. Oh, did it? Yes, that is the applicant confirming that it's a voluntary annexation. Thank you. [Music] We have any questions for the applicant? No.
Do we have any public comment? The public has left. Public has left. Just a reminder for the commission to take each one of these agenda items one by one on your motion because there are three separate matters to be considered
for uh for action. So we'll close public comment. Anyone want to entertain a motion for the first 202561 annexation? Sure. I would like to make a motion to
recommend approval of ordinance number 2025-61 based on the 16 findings within the land development code. Second. Have a first and a second. All in favor? I I I conf I'd also like to make a motion to
Oh, I I there you go. All right. Just making sure. All right. Passes 4, Mr. Chairman. So, I entertain a Anyone want to entertain a motion for I'll go ahead and say I'd like to make a motion to recommend approval of
ordinance number CPA25007 based on the 16 findings within the land development code ordinance 2025-62. Yes. Oh, what did I say? You said the um
CPA number ordinance number 20256-62. Yeah. Sorry. Second the correction. Uh all good. All in favor? I I passes 40.
Okay. Carrying on. I'd like to make a motion to recommend approval of ordinance number Z ordinance number 2025-63 based on the 16 findings within the land development code. Second.
All in favor? I I I I Oh, we're on to ordinance number 2025-64, table of classified lands, CCA25004.
Good evening. Melissa Duncan again, director of community development. So this item is um one of the land development code amendments that correlate to the future
land use map element update. So, the purpose of this update to our land development code is to uh uh adopt and update the conversion table that assigns a zoning district to the future land
use. And in this update, the zoning has to be consistent with the future land use. and it will um update the compatibility matrix that shows the allowable zoning
districts within the future land use designation. And um I'll just go through it and I will explain it in layman's terms. So whenever we annex land from Oyola County, we have this table that
tells us if it's zoned something in the county when it comes to the city, that's what it'll be zoned in the city. So it it we it demonstrates what zoning districts are compatible between the county and the city. And so we use this
table as a guide to um assign zoning districts as we annex land. And so we updated that. And the the largest reason for the update is because we created new uh
future land use designations. that was heard earlier. And with the adoption of the future land use map, we are creating new future land use designations. The employment was talked
about a lot. There are also other future land use designations that we're not necessarily creating, but because they already exist within the joint planning area of Ocola County that we plan to
annex within the next 20 years, we are adopting those land uses as part of our future land use update. And so we are putting them on our table so that when we annex those lands, we know what
zoning to assign to those land uses. And of course, all of this is dependent on the future land use map and text amendments to that element being approved by city council. And this uh table shows which
zoning categories are compatible with which land uses citywide. So it includes both the updated land uses and the existing land uses. And so the question that kept coming up um was the
employment. If if you look on the left hand side of the column, you'll see the employment category. And then you'll see on the right hand side uh the zoning category where it lists I1, I2, I2A, which we don't assign new um categories
for that. Essentially, that's an old category that meant you're already um industrial in the county and we're annexing you. That's where the A pretty much stands for annex annexed land. Um so we don't assign that any longer. And
then I3, which is essentially an industrial PUD. And then we have P for professional or office. And so um this is part two um of the update that will that we will be taking to city
council on September 11th to explain and demonstrate which zoning categories are compatible with which future land use classifications. Okay. staff is recommending approval.
Likewise, we are requesting that planning commission also recommend approval. And sorry, the ordinance number dropped off there, so I can't tell you what the ordinance number is, but I think it's 2025-64. Correct.
Okay. Do we have any questions? Have a question why we went with employment for the industrial zones. So, um, because St. Cloud is not necessarily a place where we would want
like the heavy industrial, what some people would call like the dirty industrial. We are right now tying our industrial categories because they are very um clear in our code what uses are allowed
right now along with the professional office um categories because there's a trend where um in urban centers people I'm sorry in urbanized cities people are
moving away from calling it industrial because it can have a negative connot mentation because a lot of times when you say industrial people think the dirty industrial. Absolutely. So employment you know means jobs and isn't and that's what we're trying to
accomplish here is to bring more jobs. Thank you. You're welcome. Is there any public comment public comment? Any discussion?
Anybody care to make a motion? I'll go ahead and ask for approval. Oh, I would like to make a motion for approval of which one am I doing in my or ordinance, right? 202564. Yeah. Yeah. No, but I'm doing uh ordinance agenda item L.
No, I'm my land development code. What am I doing? a land development code or a you just you just uh you could really read any of them. It doesn't have to be any of them. It can be any one of them. I'd like to recommend approval of ordinance number 2025-64
based on the 16 findings of the land development code. Second. All in favor? I I move on to ordinance number 2025-65 for the urban infill centers LDC update. Should we take a break?
No. No. Just a joke. I believe I believe this is the last item. Let me have one. You have the longest drive. So, just kidding. Anyway, sorry. I know. I apologize.
Oh, that was funny. Upset with me now. So this is the second land development code update that we are proposing to bring along with the future land use map and text update.
So um let me uh also explain this one in layman's terms. So we are proposing to create the listed zoning categories there. the employment center core and perimeter, urban center core, perimeter, community
center core and perimeter, neighborhood center, commercial and mixed. Um, and the reason for this is because within the joint planning area of OciOla County, there are um centers already
designated. So, we want to adopt the policies so that when we annex them, they are already in place and we don't have to scramble to adopt um those uses. And um on our map change, I'm trying to
think if we had any areas designated yet. Nova and 192. So, Marlo Apartments is an is a community center core if that um rings a bell. Mhm. Okay. And so the intent of this is
to enable the creation of compact development areas that encourage walkability and transit use to create pedestrianfriendly urban design elements and to improve connectivity for cars, bikes, and pedestrians. I'll talk a little bit about each center type.
So if you give me a second, just want to make sure I don't miss any of my notes. if you um want to be really confused and not mix this up with the neighborhood commercial that we were proposing as a
new land use. This is an existing land use in the county already in the JPA. This is um a centrist approach. The neighborhood centers can be up to 10 acres and they have to be adjacent to
local um streets, avenues or boulevards. Um primary uses um can be smallcale neighborhood serving retail and office, recreational, public or civic uses or a supporting mix of residential types.
Um for the community centers they have to be greater than 10 acres up to 70 acres and they are um the perimeter are generally at the area extending a half mile outside of the center and the primary uses for this are large scale
retail office civic uses and medium to highdensity residential. Um urban center minimum of 70 acres. Uh the area um that's considered the perimeter is generally a mile outside
the core and the uses are u large scale retail office and intense residential development. And regarding the employment center, again a minimum of 70 um acres and it
generally the perimeter extends a mile outside of the core and the uses are primarily intended to provide intense workplace uh developments uh research for firms, national headquarters, medical and professional offices,
hospitals and light industrial development. Ancillary retail is um allowed. You can have secondary educational facilities uh including colleges and universities and then residential development that is intended to provide a variety of housing types
for the employees of the center. Uh this uh amendment will um also adopt building sighting standards uh build two lines in lie of setbacks. Uh they will
have enhanced civic areas and we um have architectural standards that include building orientation, form and massing, articulation and roof modulation. staff is recommending approval and we are requesting that you also recommend
approval and this is city initiated so I'm available if you have any questions so the employment uh this kind of ties a little bit into the employment centers right or it's confusing so employment versus
employment center they are two separate land uses the employment um like I was explaining explaining earlier is is um your industrial and office uses. Employment centers are essentially the same except now you're adding um form to
it and we're going more form based. Okay. U so curious then you bring up Marlo and it's funny because I was there today so it's really I mean very much fresh to me. Um, but that is there an employment area or center whatever we
call before planned near there south of 192 there's a large vacant um area that is also planned for uh that's part of the community center and it's planned for a mix of uses. It again it's
intended to have uh commercial uses there. So will some of the tiein from even just the plan that we went through before like that's there now built out I think what is the correlation between the timeline of when an employment area
would be up and running in order to continue to support that. So if you if you think of Marlo apartments specifically um there is a parcel between 192 and the apartments that has been set aside for
commercial use. And so we are having a pre-application meeting, I believe, this Thursday, which I won't be attending because I'll be at the workshop, but they have already proposed um or they are proposing commercial now. They're they're holding a pre-application
meeting now. So that's part of what the plan is too like that that that is not too far away from whenever the residences would be built or the employment and then the residences. That timing is part of that. Absolutely. So again, I know it's not
attractive, but the rooftops always come before the commercial. So now that the rooftops are there, we are um gaining interest or not we the city, but the applicant is gaining interest and they have requested a pre-application meeting
with the city so that we can go over our process for them developing that commercial piece. Great. Sorry, that was an aside from that one. It's okay. Anyone else have any questions on this? No.
Is there any public comment? Public comment is closed. Does anyone anyone wish to make a motion on this? I'd like to make a motion to recommend approval of ordinance 2025-65
based on the 16 findings within the land development code. I have a motion. Do I have a second? Second. All in favor? I I I I passes very good.
Next planning commission meeting is September 16th at 6:00 p.m. Anyone want to make a motion to adjourn? So moved. Say second. Meeting adjourned. All right.
All right.