The August 25th, 2025 hearing for the Planning and Land Development Regulation Commission is now called to order. And if I could have everyone please silence any audible devices that you may have. And if you could please join me for the pledge of allegiance.
>> I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for it stands one nation under God with liberty and justice for all. >> Good morning. I would like to thank everyone for joining us this morning.
And um Miss uh Tucker, could I please have a roll call? >> Member Craig >> here. >> Member Shelley >> here. >> Member Costa >> here. >> Member Bush >> here. >> Member Sigma >> here. >> Chair Mills >> here.
>> And member Eri is absent. >> Thank you, Miss Grin. Okay. Sorry about that, Miss Tucker. We do have minutes to discuss from July 17, 2025. have any discussion on those minutes?
>> I have none, but I I'll be glad to make the motion. Uh I'll make a motion to approve the July 17th minutes. >> Second. >> I've got a motion on the floor to approve the July 17, 2025 minutes for Mr. Sixman, a second for Miss Shelley.
Any discussion on the the motion? All those in favor signify by saying I. I. >> I. Any opposed? >> Motion carries unanimously. If anyone would like to speak for against any of the cases being heard today, if you could please fill out a form at the back of the dis here and
give it to Miss Tucker to my immediate left and we will be limiting you to a threeminut time limit. And after the comments have been heard, I will give the applicant an opportunity to address any concerns the speakers have and answer any questions the commission may
have. And at this time, I'd like to turn it over to Mr. Sorya for legal comments. >> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, this is for members of the public as well as for any applicants that decisions by this body on special exception cases and cases which reszone real property from one classification to another pertain to the
zoning ordinance are recommendations only to the county council and do not constitute a final hearing. New evidence may be introduced at the county council public hearing. Decisions on variances made by this body constitute final action subject to an appeal to the county council. And what this means is
that no new evidence may be presented at the time of the county council public hearing on the appeal. An agrieved party that appeals such a decision is confined to the record made before this body. Hearings by this body on reasonzonings, special exceptions and variances are quasi judicial in nature, meaning that
this body is acting more like a court and must take into account all oral, written or demonstrative evidence presented. Their decisions on these cases must be based on competent substantial evidence in the record and competent substantial evidence has been defined as that evidence a reasonable mind would accept to support a
conclusion. Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> Thank you, Mr. Soral. And now, while while we're on legal comments, I'd like to ask the commission to disclose for the record any exparte communications that have occurred before or during the public hearing at which a vote is to be taken on any quasudicial
uh matter. And I'll start with my immediate right with Miss Craig. I have none. >> None. >> I did have a conversation with the applicants for S25003. >> I have none. >> None. >> And I had a conversation with the
Adriana Sakuliff for S25003 and V2519. Also had a discussion with Mr. Glenn Storch on the same cases. Other than that, that is it. Okay. We do have some
items to be continued. Um, let me see who's those are. B25. Let me see. Mr. Harris, one of these is yours. The B25032.
You want to comment on that? >> Yes. The applicant email last night and said he wanted to continue his application because there was a survey issue. He needed to get a new survey. >> And when are we continuing that too? >> 60 days. 60
>> days. The October meeting. >> Yes. >> And what is our October meeting, Mer? >> The October 16th PLDRC meeting. >> Mr. Chair, I'm prepared to make a motion. >> Okay. Mr. six I mean Costa >> make a motion we continue case V-25-032
uh to the October 16th PLDRC meeting >> second >> got a motion for Mr. to uh continue v25032 to our next o not our next meeting but October 16th meeting and a second for Miss Shel. Any discussion on the motion?
>> All those in favor signify by saying I. I. Any opposed? >> Motion carries unanimously. The other case would be V25045. >> And Miss Tucker, this one's yours. >> Thank you, chair. Good morning, members. Um on Monday afternoon, uh Mr. Shawfield
emailed staff a new site plan. The variance requests are still the same, but the layout's different. So staff would like additional time to review the application and the variance request. And we're uh requesting that this case be continued to the September 18th, 2025 PLDRC meeting.
>> Okay. September 8. >> I'll make a motion. >> Okay. The case number V-25-045 be continued to the se September 17th >> 18 >> 18th PLLDRC meeting. >> Second. >> Okay. I got a motion on the floor to
continue V25045 to her September 18th, 2025 meeting uh for Miss Shel and a second for Mr. Costa. Any discussion on the motion? All those in favor signify by saying I. I. Any opposed?
>> Motion carries unanimously. Okay, we do not have any unfinished old business because that one got continued. So, we're going to move right into our new business. Miss Shelley, could I get the first case, please? >> Yes, sir. Case number V-25-044,
application of Robert Ays, owner, requesting a variance to the maximum fence height in the front yard and accessory structure requirements on R4 urban single family residential zoned property. >> Thank you, Miss Shel. Mr. Harris, this one's yours. >> Yes. Good morning. The applicant is
seeking variances to a maximum fence height and minimum yard requirements to construct a 6' tall white vinyl fence and to install an ingground swimming pool swimming pool, sorry. Variance one is to increase the maximum front yard fence height from 4T to 6 ft for
approximately 74.5 linear feet along the friendly circle frontage. Variance two is to reduce the front yard set back for a swimming pool from 25 ft to 9 ft along friendly circle. Variance three is to reduce the sideyard set back for a
swimming pool from 8 ft to 7.5 ft along the southern property line. The property is the property is a 9,448 ft corner lot zone urban single family residential R4 with an urban medium
intensity future land use designation. It fronts both Imperial Heights Drive and Friendly Circle, making it a corner lot by code. The house was constructed in 1966 and sits 3.1 ft from the southern property line and 10.7 ft from
the eastern property line. As a result, the rear yard is limited in size. Because of this, the applicant proposes to place both the fence and the pool in the western front yard behind the driveway along Friendly Circle. The proposed fence totals approximately 98.5
linear feet of which 74.5 ft is located in the required 25 ft front yard. The pool is proposed 9 ft from the friendly circle front property line and 7.5 ft from the south property line. The fence is intended to screen the pool and to
provide privacy and containment for pets. Traffic engineering has reviewed this proposal and confirmed that the fence will not obstruct visibility or the sight triangle. Environmental permit permitting has no objection provided all applicable land development code
regulations are met. A letter of support was submitted by the neighboring property at three friendly circle to the south who has no objections. Staff recommends approval of variance one for the fence height as it meets all five criteria. However, staff recommends
denial of variance two and three for the pool encroachments as the request exceeds the minimum necessary to make reasonable use of the lot. I'm available for any questions you may have. >> Thank you, Mr. Harris. Any questions for staff? >> Yes, sir. >> Miss Bush,
>> just a quick question and a reminder, I guess. Do pools are pools included in the lot coverage? >> No, they are not. Okay. Thank you, >> Mr. Costa. >> Yeah. What's the um I know he's got
you're looking at as a front yard. What is If that was a sideyard, what is the actual U dimension that should that would have been? >> That's a 20 foot setback. >> Side yard set 20 foot. >> Yes. >> And a front yard is what? >> 25. >> 25. Okay. Thank you.
>> The side is 20 foot with eight on either side. Minimum of eight. >> Minimum of eight. >> Yes. for sideyard setback. >> Yes. >> Not 20. Okay. >> All right. Any other questions for
staff? Is the applicant present? You want to come forward, sir? If you want to come to the mic and I could get your name and address for the record. >> Sure. My name is Robert Ays. I'm a resident of 114 Imperial Heights Drive, Orman Beach.
>> Okay. you've heard the uh staff report. Anything you would like to add to that? >> Uh I appreciate uh all the guidance that you all have given us today, but really what we're trying to do is because we're on a a corner lot, we by zoning, we have two front yards. So really, this is
technically a sideyard. Um it is an oversized lot. And lastly, we're just really trying to copy our neighbor who uh had a similar approval with you all for 110 Imperial um Imperial Heights Drive, sir. >> Okay. Any questions for the applicant?
>> All right. Do we have any public participation forms for this case? >> No, sir. >> All right. We're going to go ahead and close the for public participation and give your decision here, sir. >> I really appreciate it. Thank you. >> Okay. All right. Anybody would like to
grab a hold of this one? Make comment motion? >> Yeah, I'll make a motion. >> Drink some more coffee. >> Yeah. I make a motion that um case number V25- 0004 we approve variances 1 2 and three with
the staff recommended conditions. >> Second. >> Okay. I got a motion on the floor to approve variance 1 2 and three for V25044 with the one condition from staff from Mr. Costa and a second from Miss Shel.
Any discussion on the motion? >> All those in favor signify by saying I. I. Any opposed? Motion carries unanimously. Okay, Miss Shelley, can I get the next case, please? Case number V-25-047
variance variances amendment yard requirements on urban single family residential R3 zoned property. >> Thank you, Miss Shel. Miss Ray, this one's yours. >> Good morning. The applicant is requesting two variances for a proposed
720 square foot detached garage. Variance one is to reduce the north rear yard from 20 ft to 8 ft. Variance 2 is to reduce the west side yard from 8 ft to 5 ft. The property is currently developed with a 1500 ft residence that
was that is located towards the center of the property. The property is zoned R3 and has a minimum front yard requirement of 30 ft. rear yard of 20 feet and sideyard of 20 feet combined with a minimum of 8 feet on either side.
According to the zoning code, accessory structures that exceed 500 square ft in area shall meet the same yard requirements as the principal structure. Environmental permitting reviewed the request and had no objection. A staff's recommendation is to deny variances one and two, however, should the PLLDRC find
that the applicant has provided competent substantial evidence for approval. Two conditions were provided for consideration. I'm available for questions. >> Thank you, Miss Ray. Any questions for staff? Miss Bush. >> Yes. Thank you. Um I noticed that in the
staff report it references an accessory structure that's behind the applicant. Um and that accessory structure doesn't meet those um setbacks and it looks like it's larger. So my question is were the requirements to meet the principal setbacks established in 2002 when that
accessory structure was constructed. >> Yes ma'am. Okay. >> Okay. Any other questions for staff? Mr. Cross. >> Yeah. This is another case of uh two front yards on this particular lot. What is the side setback on that um on the
left side there? Where's the sideyard? Uh, this does not have two front yards. That is the sidey yard. >> They're asking from 8 to 5t >> on the side. >> Yep. Never mind. Looked at the wrong shot. Sorry. >> No worries. >> Yep. >> Yeah, they're reducing it from uh Yep.
>> 8 to five. >> Got it. Okay. All right. Any other questions for staff? >> Okay. Is the applicant present? Good morning, sir. Could I get your name and address for the record? >> Good morning. My name is Kurt Hoffman,
702 Albert Lane, Dan, Florida. >> All right. You've heard the staff report. Anything you'd like to add? >> Um, just said I appreciate the help so far through this process from the staff and um the house was built with no garage. So, I or when I purchased the
house, it didn't have a garage. So, I've um bought an enclosed trailer. So, I'm pretty much my garage is an enclosed trailer and my back porch. So, I'd like to get use of my trailer again and um my back porch and that's the reason why for this building.
>> Okay. All right. Miss Bush, you had a question. >> Yes. Um I just was curious as to why so big and why it couldn't meet the um why it couldn't be under 500 square feet. Um, as mentioned, the gentleman behind me has a building of the same structure
and he has the same vehicle that I have truck and he was able to or I'm able to walk around the vehicle and then plus I have a four-wheeler, I have my lawn mower. Um, I'd like a toolbox in there and you know that's I tried to go as small as I could that with the stuff
that I have the meat instead of >> you know I'd love to get a 40 by 60 but that I know that wouldn't happen. Okay. >> Me too. >> Thank you. Okay. All right. Any other questions for Miss Craig? >> Good morning. >> Good morning.
>> I'm curious about access to this. Are you going Are you planning I don't see on the drawing here a driveway? >> Um I have like it's ballast rock. I I used to work for the railroad so I was able to get some ballast rock and I have that in the sideyard right now. Uh so
the ground is so soft in the front of it um that I use and I' I'd be keeping that. So, you're not planning on concrete or anything? >> Um, not not at this time. I' I'd like to get the building built and then if I could, I' i'd like to do maybe a driveway in front of it, but not I know
I couldn't go out to the street because it's limited. >> The the rock wouldn't be sufficient. >> Um, I mean, I guess it could. Yeah, you always want more, right? >> Okay. Thank you. >> Any other questions for Miss Bush?
>> And I assume this is going to be on slab, correct? Yes, ma'am. Okay. >> All right. Any other questions for the applicant? Do we have any public participation forms, Miss Tucker? >> No, sir. >> Okay. We're going to close the floor for
public participation and open up for commission discussion and get you an answer. >> All right. Thank you, sir. >> Thank you. >> All right, guys. I'll make a motion case V2504 or V25047 uh that we approve variances 1 and two
with staff recommended conditions. >> I'll second. >> Okay. I got a motion on the floor to approve variances one and two for V25047. And there's two staff conditions uh for Mr. Costa and a second for Miss Shel. Any discussion on
>> Miss Bush? Miss Bush. >> Miss Bush. >> Sorry about that. rushing here along moving this meeting. >> Any discussion on the motion? >> All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. Any opposed? Motion carries
unanimously. >> Okay. Miss Shelley, could I get the next case, please? >> Yes, sir. Case V-25-0448, a variance to the minimum yard requirements on rural residential RR zoned property.
And Miss Ray, this one's yours. Also, >> uh, the applicants are requesting a variance to reduce the north side yard from 15 feet to 5 feet for a proposed 1,800 ft² detached garage. The property is an atypical lot, which is defined as a lot within a subdivision where because
of the design, it abuts a street at one end and on the opposite end, a water waterway or water body. Uh the applicants did receive a previous variance in November of 2023 uh for a detached garage. Uh at that
time the proposed garage was uh 1,200 square ft in area and located closer to the residence. Uh the approved variance request uh was to reduce the north sideyard from 15 ft to 3 ft.
Uh the variance was approved with one condition that the detached garage was limited to the um size and location um of the structure on the approved variant site plan. Uh since that approval, the applicant has revised their plan and is now requesting uh 5T instead of the
previous 3 ft and is located closer to uh the road than the residence. Uh staff's recommendation is to deny the variance request. However, should the PLDRC find that the applicants have provided competent substantial evidence for approval, two conditions were provided for consideration. I'm
available for questions. >> Thank you, Miss Ray. Any question, Mr. Costa? >> Just to clarify that one more time. So, they had a previous variance that we gave them for 3 ft. >> Yes, sir. >> And this one is now for 5T. >> Yes, sir. >> So, okay. And the size of the structure
increased by how much? >> Uh 600 square f feet. A a plus 600. >> Yes, sir. >> Okay. All right. Thank you. >> You're welcome. >> Any other questions for staff? >> Okay. Is the applicant present?
>> Good morning. Brett Fudge, 2141 Haunting Road. >> You've heard the staff report. Anything you'd like to add to it? >> Um, yeah. In 2024, I guess FIMO changed the requirements for auxiliary structures that they had to be one foot above the flood plane. That put us at
like 8 foot where that building was going to go. Our house is currently at 5'7 or 5.7. So it have been like almost a 2 and 1/2 ft transition 40T from the house. Physically we couldn't make it work. So we pushed it farther to the west. Um both property adjacent
properties have structures already up there. Um, we had a a signed letter from our neighbor for support uh to the north which is it's going to affect his property. So, he was good with it. And um once we moved it up, formed it up, of course, my wife realized how small it
was, so we made it a little bit bigger to help accommodate future toys and stuff. >> All right. Any question, Mr. Costa? >> Uh, you mentioned a letter of support. Did we have a copy of that? >> That was on the previous variance. I can get another, >> but not on this one. So, okay. All
right. Thank you. >> I could get one. Miss Bush, you had a question. >> Yes. Um, is So, I imagine that the reason for the elevation is why you couldn't put on the south side of the driveway and why it had to be located on the north. >> The south or north, it really didn't matter.
It made more sense to go to the north. Um, the adjacent property, their driveway lines up, and that way we can use it universal for we both have long trailers and stuff getting in and out of the properties. >> Okay. Um, and then are you going to have to remove trees in order to install it?
>> No. >> Okay. And is it are you already beginning construction of the pad currently? >> So, yes, the the pads already poured. Um, we had plans. We relocated the structure, kept it 30x40. The building
department approved it. Um, they didn't realize they needed a variance at the time, but they gave us the green light. We resubmitted on making the structure bigger. That's when >> it triggered this. >> Yes. >> Um, wind up making it bigger. >> Went ahead and went through with the
inspections knowing that we could get a slap on the wrist or something. Been dealing with the building official. Got him on my cell phone. We're calling. Went out there. He signed off on everything. Um, inspected the rebar. We poured it cuz unfortunately this happened back in like May or July or May, beginning of June. Here we are in
August. I got two little kids. I didn't want that site open. Spent a lot of money forming it up. rebar. It's It's a construction site. It's basically dangerous and with storms and stuff. So, I went ahead and made the decision to pour it um with the county still inspecting it as that condition. So,
they are aware of everything that's going on. Um been working hand in hand with them and then I put the brakes on it till we have this meeting. >> Okay. And and they're on hold right now. Obviously, you're not going vertical until you get this. >> Correct. Yeah. I haven't done anything further than just went this lab. Okay.
Thank you. >> My inspection. We did everything by the book. >> Okay. >> Okay. Mr. Costy, you had a question. >> Yeah. So, the but you moved this project west from the previous >> Yes. >> So, out of the AE and into the X zone. So, you're out of the flood flood zone. >> Yes. Okay. Thank you.
>> Y. Any other questions for the applicant? Okay. Do we have any public participation forms for this case? >> No, sir. >> Okay. We're going to get you get you an answer here, sir. We're going to close the floor for public participation. and open up commission discussion or a motion.
>> I'll be glad to make a motion. >> Go ahead, Mr. >> I move that case number V-25-048, variance to the minimum yard requirements on rural residential zoned property be approved subject to the staff conditions, two staff conditions. >> Second.
>> Okay, I got a motion on the floor from Miss Shel to approve B25048 with the two conditions from staff and a second from Mr. Sixman. Any discussion on the motion? All those in favor? Miss Bush, you wanted to >> Yeah, just real quick. Normally, I
probably wouldn't be um approving this just because you did work already on it, but um thank you for at least being honest. Um so that I just wanted to state that for the record. >> Okay. All right. Anyone else would comment?
All right. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> Any opposed? >> Motion carries unanimously. Miss Shel, could I get the next case, please? >> Yes, sir. Case number V-25-050. Variances to the minimum yard
requirements on rural residential RR zoned property. >> Okay, Miss Ray, this one's yours. >> Yes. So, the applicant is requesting two variances of a partially constructed uh 3,600 ft single family residence. Uh
variance one is to reduce the east front yard from 40 feet to 33 feet and variance two is to reduce the north side yard from 15t to 10 ft. Uh building permit was issued in February of 2024 with an approved zoning review uh with the site plan showing the residents
meeting the minimum yard requirements. Uh after construction began, the applicant submitted a form board survey to verify the residence was still in compliance with the minimum yards and it was discovered that the residence had shifted and now encroaches into the front and sideyard.
Uh there are wetlands on the western portion of the property and our and the property is located within our natural resource management area um which requires a 50ft upland buffer. Environmental permitting reviewed the application and had no objection as a single family residence is located
outside of the wetlands and their associated buffers. A staff's recommendation for variances one and two are for approval because they met at least three of the five criteria criteria for granting said variance um with two staff recommended conditions. Um I will note that one letter of
opposition was submitted from the adjacent um neighbor to the north. I'm available for questions. Thank you, Miss Ray. Miss Bush, you had a question. >> Does this happen often? >> No, ma'am.
>> Is that it? >> Okay. Any other question for staff? Okay. Is the applicant present? Good morning. If I could get your name and addresses for the records, please. >> Uh, James Latiri. >> And your address? >> Um,
>> 310 for 310 Mitnik. >> Okay. What is the name? >> 310 Mitnik. >> Okay. And your, sir? >> Uh, Eric Thrushman. 310 Mitnik. >> Okay. You've heard the staff report. Anything you'd like to add to it? >> No. The only reason it was moved over was when we originally uh set it up,
they made us put the garages on the side. So that made the houses move over to the to the right. And when we did the form survey, it was just missed. That's >> okay. >> Because we submitted that form or the form board survey right from the beginning.
>> Okay. All right. All right. Uh any questions for the applicant? Miss Bush, >> can you clarify who made you put the the garage on the side of the house? >> County. >> Valuchia County. >> Yeah, it was a it was a front entry garage. >> Because of an ordinance, we had to do a
side entry garage, so we had to push everything to make the driveway come in. >> That's >> okay. >> Which forced the house to move to the right >> 15 ft. >> Okay. Any other questions for the applicant? Okay. Hearing none.
>> Do we have any public participation forms? >> No, sir. >> Okay. We're going to close the floor for public participation of a commission discussion. >> Have a great day. >> Okay. >> I'll make a motion on this. >> Go ahead, Mr. >> I'll make a motion for approval on case
B250 with the two staff recommendations. >> Second. >> I got a motion on the floor for Mr. sixman to approve variances one and two for B250 with the two staff conditions and a second for Miss Shelley. Any discussion
on the motion? Miss Bush. >> I just wanted I just wanted to clarify with staff that that was a requirement as a side entry. No, that's not a requirement of staff, >> not from the zoning staff to require side entry garage. >> Okay. Because that's what the applicant
is saying is why they moved it over. It was a requirement of Valuchia County. So I was verify report. >> Okay. Yeah. That's one of the requirements of the enterprise overlay requirements. If you're going to have the garage in front of the home, it has to be a side entry. So, it is in the
enterprise overlay. >> Yes, ma'am. >> Oh, okay. Thank you for that clarification, >> Mr. Costa. >> Yeah, I just want to make note that we do have one letter of opposition uh that wasn't brought up in here and her concern or his Yeah, her concern was about um potential flooding on her part.
Looking at this, I see a a drainage ditch running along the side of the property line there. Is that a publicly maintained or uh private drainage? That's for anyone. >> That would be for staff, wouldn't it? >> Sorry, one moment.
>> Yep. >> And the reason why you're looking, the reason I asked that question is on my property on my 5 acres, I have a also a drainage ditch on the back side of the property that is publicly maintained. And while I maintain my section, that thing runs about a mile in each direction. Uh it go it is basically
clogged up with trees on both sides. So it's just a dam on either side. So I just have a pond at this point. And I want to make sure that this is a address so that the neighbor that has not built um has that ability to keep their property high and dry.
This is usually a question for public works. They keep um an inventory of all their drainage facilities. Um we don't have a public works person here, so bear with us while we try to find that out. >> Yeah, I'm going to I'm going to assume that it's a privately maintained and not
publicly uh because I think it would be flagged differently on the survey. Mhm. >> But I just a question I wanted to ask on that and and whose property line does it actually fall under the dish itself? Is it outside of this particular property line and belongs to the neighbor?
>> Yes, sir. It looks like it goes through the adjacent neighbor to the >> neighbor's side. Okay. >> Thank you. >> Otherwise, we could add a condition, but it's not on his property. >> Keep it clear. And since it's not on their site, they really can't touch it unless they've got some kind of a >> agreement
>> an agreement or an easement use on it. >> Okay. So, >> all right. Any dis any other discussion on the or I'd accept the var. Did we get a variance on that? A motion on that? >> Yes. Got a motion in a second. >> Two conditions. >> Mhm.
>> Okay. Any other discussion on the motion? All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> Any opposed? Motion carries unanimously. >> Okay, Miss Shilly, can I get the next case, please? >> Yes, sir. Case number S-25-00003
special exception for a non-exempt excavation on prime agriculture A1 zoned property. >> Okay, Miss Ray, this major. >> Lucky you today. Um, >> you want to read both of them in?
>> Uh, can we also read in the varian? >> Mr. Shams, you going to take this one? >> Yes, sir. >> Okay. >> Uh, can we also read in the variance application? >> Yeah. wrote that. There's two together. >> Oh, I see that now. >> Oh, okay. >> Go ahead, Mr. Shams. I didn't mean to interrupt you. >> No worries. Um, good morning, Steve
Shams of Planning Development Services. U, the applicant is requesting a special exception for a non-exempt excavation on 54 acres of a 154 acre site. The site is located at the intersection of Colony Road and State Road 415. It's
surrounded by single family residences along the western, southern and eastern boundaries and on the northern boundary is uh adjacent to deep creek preserve conservation area. Uh further along the eastern boundary
there is a 60oot utility ingress and egress easement for left or landing road. Pur zoning ordinance all setbacks and buffers will be measured from the western most point of the easement. The applicant the application received 12 letters of opposition and one letter
of support. Uh of these letters um about six of them are in the area the affected area. Six of the letters of opposition and the letter of support is the neighbor to the north. Um most of these letters were received
after the report was published and have been provided to you in your packet. The applicant is proposing to dig two pits to excavate approximately 2 887 million cubic yards of fill and over five phases. The entire excavation will
be over a period of 12 years. The site contains approximately 42.8 acres of wetland area. Typically, special exceptions require a 250 ft setback from the excavation top of bank to wetlands or water bodies. However, if the applicant can demonstrate no
permanent or temporary draw down of the wetlands through a third-party reviewer, then a reduction of 75 ft can be permitted. The 75 ft is comprised of a 25 ft setback and a 50ft upland buffer. They have met this requirement.
Based on the special exception plan, the applicant is proposing to remove the site's access onto state road 415 and will access the site from Colony Road in the southwest southeast corner. The excavation activities will generate 160 daily trips from the dump trucks
entering leaving the site and 12 additional daily trips of employees entering leaving the site. According to their documents, every each pit will be approximately 50 ft deep and will have a maximum slope of 3t to 1 ft.
Proposed hours of operation are from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Monday through Saturday. Um, non-exempt excavations are subject to specific code requirements in section 72-293 and must meet all requirements for
recommendation of approval. Um, of these requirements, there is a dimensional standard to maintain a 150 ft setback from the excavation top of bank to any property line or rideway line and a 50-ft perimeter landscape
buffer. The intent of these separation requirements is to mitigate noise, dust, and visual disruptions to adjacent property owners. The applicant has applied for an accompanying variance application to reduce or remove these requirements entirely. For example,
along the eastern boundary with the utility easement, the applicant is requesting a variance to reduce the setback from 150 ft to 10 ft and the landscape buffer from 50 ft to 10 ft. The variance requests to reduce the
necessary separation requirements indicate that the required special exception criteria are not being met. The traffic generated by the site will impact the level of service of state 415 based on prior review of the site through our technical staff committee.
The applicant was instructed to coordinate with FDOT about potential traffic impacts, but the applicant has not provided evidence of FDOT's review. Therefore, there is not sufficient data to conclusively state the proposed non-exempt excavation will not result in
undue traffic congestion on the surrounding network. The excavation activities will be conducted 12 hours per day, 6 days per week for 12 years. Though there is existing vegetation in some areas along the property perimeter,
it is sporadic and does not serve the buffer's purpose of mitigating um noise and dust impacts and visual disruption that result from the activities. Without proper screening and separation, this has the potential to adversely affect neighboring single family residences.
Therefore, the application is inconsistent with the intent of the special exception. It will adversely affect the public interest, does not meet the requirements of the special exception, may create a public nuisance, may alter the surrounding neighborhoods, and may
result in adverse traffic impacts. Uh therefore, staff recommends forwarding to county council with final action of denial. If approved, staff recommends 13 conditions included in the report. And for the variance application,
they're proposing nine variants. Okay, I'm going to Miss Shel didn't read that case into the record. So, let her read that in there right now. >> Of course, >> because this is a companion case, so we'll hear them both at the same time. >> I would suggest I would ask uh as
someone who represents the neighborhood that we have the the two quasi judicial hearings separately though, one uh for the special exception because there's a different standard and one for for the variances. >> We're going to hear both of them though. So we'll get so we'll get a gist on what
we're what we're dealing with as far as the variance, but we will have two different hearings on it. Thank you. >> Okay. >> Case number 25-19 special exception. >> I'm sorry, member Shelley, your microphone's not on. Thank you.
>> Thought my voice was loud enough. >> It was. Case number V-25-019, variances to special exception minimum yard requirements and landscape buffer requirements on prime agriculture A1 zoned property.
>> Okay, Mr. Sams, go ahead. >> Thank you. Uh so the applicants proposing nine variances to a special exception requirements for the non-ex excavation. Um uh variance one is to reduce the mimi yard from from the eastern ingress
egress easement from 150 ft to 10 feet. Variance two is to reduce the mimi yard from of the southern boundary from 150 ft to 50 ft. Variance three is to reduce the minimum yard from the northwest boundary from 150 to 35 ft. Variance
four is to reduce the minimum yard of the northeastern boundary from 150 ft to 50 ft. Variance five is to reduce the minimum yard from the western boundary from 150 ft to 50 ft. Uh variant six is to reduce the perimeter buffer along the
northwestern boundary from 50 ft to 0 feet. Uh variant 7 is to reduce the perimeter buffer from the western boundary from 50 ft to 0 feet. Variance 8 is to reduce the perimeter buffer on the southwest boundary from 50 ft to 0
feet. and variance 9 is to reduce the perimeter buffer on the eastern boundary from 50 ft to 10 ft. Um the applicant is not proposing to roost setbacks for the entire property perimeter. The specific areas being reduced are identified on the variance
site plan on the screen. Um it's a little busy, a little difficult to ascertain, but there are areas where they are maintaining the buffer, such as on the northeast section and also on the southeast section.
The reduced 10-ft landscape buffer along the eastern boundary is the only separator between the 60 ft access easement for Left for Landing Road and the excavations top of bank. Environmental permitting review the proposed variances did not support the application.
The variances do not meet any of the variance criteria as there's no special condition on site to warrant the proposed reductions. Uh literal interpretation would require the applicant to meet all special exception criteria including the setbacks of landscape buffers. Um the variances are not the minimum variances that would
allow the excavation. They are able to redesign the borrow pit to meet the separation requirements and the proposed excavation will adversely impact surrounding property owners and is inconsistent with the area in its current iteration. Based upon
review of the special exception, there is not sufficient evidence to justify the reduction of these standards. Overall, staff recommends denial for all nine variances. Um, if PLDRC does approve, staff recommends three conditions. I'm available for com question. >> Thank you, Mr. Sh. Any questions for the
staff? >> I do have a question. I I noted when I was looking at this site uh on Google Earth, it had a dedicated of a a Lake Ashby Canal on the eastern portion of the property. That's not on any of our
staff report there. Is there a reason for that? Hold on one second. >> Okay. >> And Mr. Chair, while they're reviewing that, just um the just the word on the way these applications work together. So you have a special exception, you have a
variance, two separate standards, correct? Um so the variance for each of those variances, you need to meet three three out of five. Um, I would recommend that you consider the variances first because if you deny the variances, you must recommend denial for the special
exception. Special exception is contingent upon the the variance criteria because they can't get the special exception site plan approval unless they also get these variances from you. So, um, if you approve the variances, then you can make an independent determination on the special
exception. you can approve it or recommend approval or you can recommend denial. But um my my advice is consider the variances first whether or not they meet that that criteria. Uh once again if they don't then if you deny all the
variances you know you should recommend denial for the special exception because you can't grant the special exception as presented if you also deny the variances. >> Okay. Thank you Mr. Stori. Okay, in line in lie of that we will consider the
variance first. Um going to put cart before the horse I guess >> the >> I say that because it's like all of this is in context. So the varian >> I understand I understand and that was the reason I wanted both of them to be read in the same case so we could be
able to consider look at both of them when we're deciding either the special exception or the variances. Right. >> Okay. because obviously if the special exception don't go through, we don't need the variances. >> Correct. >> Uh, no, no, it's the other way around. >> Do that by vice versa. I understand.
Okay, Miss Bush, you had a question. >> Yes, this is for staff. Um, I noted that the environmental impact study that VHB did states that um the property and the applicant believe that the property is not located in the eco overlay. However,
there according to your map, there is a small sliver of this property that is located. So is that part of the reason why they're requesting or stating that the 250 foot buffer is not necessary and that the only request is is the variance to 75 ft.
>> So the uh reduction from 250 ft in our code is it's allowed to 75 ft if they're not having temporary or permanent draw down the wetlands. We had a third party reviewer uh WGI view the report over four iterations and
they finally did determine that based on the plan there would not be wetland impacts. >> Okay. >> Yeah. It has nothing to do with uh whether or not it's an eco that's independent. So if this was located outside of that we would still say you need to be 250 ft from the wetland
unless you can demonstrate there's no short-term or or long-term draw down of the wetlands. >> Okay. So that is okay. Okay. Do you have an answer on the Lake Ashby Canal? >> Yes, sir. Um, it's within the utility easement on the survey. It's an oversight that it wasn't mentioned.
>> So, but it is there on the eastern portion of that property. >> Yes. >> Okay. I just want to I I caught that when I was looking at the site and uh I wanted I was curious why it wasn't mentioned in the report. Okay. All right. Uh Okay. So, do we have any other
questions for staff? Okay. Is the applicant present? >> Good morning. >> Good morning. Could I get your name and address for the record? >> Yes. My name is Anna Long. I'm an attorney with the law firm of Dean Me, 420 South Orange Avenue, Sweet 700,
Orlando, Florida, 32801. I represent the applicant. Here with me today is the applicants engineer Jim Golden from Grove Scientific as well as our environmental uh ecological um representative from VHB. And finally, we
have uh owner representative and operational representative here. So, if there's something I can't answer um but there's a question for which one of the others can, I just wanted to let you know that there was a full team here. Um, and I do have for uh the county attorney just a procedural question
because we had the same question of staff. Um, we felt that the special exception should be considered in and of itself and alone primarily because of your procedural outcomes. And and if we're taking the variances first and if
for whatever reason you deny one, two, three or all of them, then that's as I understood this morning something that is not appealable to the board to the port of county. >> Oh, no. They're all appealable. >> Okay. Each individually. >> Yes. Yes. >> And they'll be taken each individually.
>> Uh it depends upon the final um >> So you see there's nine variances. You can say yay or nay to one through nine or any combination thereof. And if we don't have a clear direction on that, then we don't know what we could go back to the drawing board if that would be
necessary and the pro project would still be viable. How procedurally to do that? So I would ask your indulgence and someone could assist with that. We want the discussion. Okay? We want full discussion. We want to hear what you have to say. We want to hear what these folks have to say. And if there's an
opportunity for something to be addressed in the interim, then in all honesty, we're going to look for some relief from a decision, we will pull them and and and go back to a drawing board and figure out what we can do. But before we do that, we want to hear so we
know. Um because I also understand from your um the code if we are denied for whatever reason and we make it through to the board of county commissioners and again um that's that ends up being not in our favor for whatever reason then we
have to wait an entire 12 months to to come back to you and it could be like one thing that if we had only done this or you had only known that and we don't want that. Okay. So I wanted to set that stage. >> Okay. All right. Um, >> so that
>> hold on just a moment. Miss Bush, you had a comment you like? >> Okay. U Mr. Sora, I I'll give you a scenario here. In the event, and I'm not saying it will, do we have the variances fail? Can we continue the special exception?
>> But what about the variances? Because we've already made a decision on that. If you have made a decision on the variances, then the options are um uh the applicant can appeal um to county council. Um you can also uh if you recom
if you deny those, you can uh leave room to uh essentially wave the one-year filing limitation. >> Okay. You've done that before. >> So, they can go back into the drawing board. Yes. And redo it and we would just continue the special exception. >> Yes. That's what I >> essentially. Yeah. You have that authority. Just leave that one. make
sure we don't deny the variances which throws everything out in the one-year period, >> right? Um and also, you know, this is it's that's why the it's a little bit complicated. Um I recommend you have a discussion. Um ask the ask the
applicant, you've heard what this commission is saying. Um would you like to request a continuence? Um so and refile whatever variances so you don't have a final decision. um leave the applicant the ability to basically come
with an alternate plan of you know uh appropriate v variances. That's also something this commission has done in the past. >> Okay. >> Thank you. I appreciate that. I appreciate you. >> All right. So, back on board. Um the property in and of itself is plus or
minus 154 acres. A third of the property is being proposed for the special exception variance for the operation of the borrow pit. there is a reason why the variances are being asked for. Um, and our
environmentalists can speak to that more clearly, but essentially the acreage of wetlands on site within the area are being avoided in their entirety. There's no impact to them. There will not be an impact to any of those on-site wetlands, period. We've met all the criteria.
We're not asking to go in there and mitigate a piece or a part of any of them. And in order to do that, then we have less operable area on the internal portion of the property because of the way it meanders.
Secondly, um over the last couple of days, as staff mentioned, there's been several emails that have come in in opposition, but the closest parties, those most affected, the one to the north, and we're going to go over uh individually each of the
variances and and what they are, and our engineer is going to explain those to you. But the property to the north, the one that in which the cell fell tower is located for which the easement of the utility is issued to Crown Castle, they are in favor of this uh operation and
support the variances. I've also reached out to Crown Castle which is the entity to uh that benefits from the easement um and they are discussing um how they can respond to us to give you what you need in writing so that you know they too
would have no opposition to the variance. Um one of the reasons they wouldn't have an opposition to the variance is the their access road is already in. So most utility easements are there so that you don't obstruct that or their ability to come and to go and this wouldn't do that. Um some of
the variances again one by one uh for instance the one to the north where it's where it's said by staff we're asking for zero setback. Well that's because there's nothing there that it's it's it's it's more forested area. So, we're we're not impacting anybody to the north
with respect to noise or traffic or any of the concerns that might be raised. Um, as far as the majority of the folks that have responded in opposition, some of them are over 3 miles away. Um, and I I do understand that when there's
something of interest and everybody comes and you want to talk about it, that's fine. But it also should be taken into account the extent of the concerns. Um and with respect to uh the one issue that was raised by staff in traffic,
we're required as I understand it during site plan phase to provide a traffic study. Uh and if we fail the traffic study then to appro um provide appropriate improvements along the roadway. Site plan phase isn't anywhere near um ready because we don't have any
of the approvals that would allow for us to move forward. Um so the answer to the question about traffic is correct. It's not known yet, but it will be known and it wouldn't need to be addressed. Period. We don't get a buy on that.
Um, I would respectfully ask that we have an opportunity to come back and provide any uh rebuttal to any of the comments made by public if we can appropriately address them and then as the discussion said, the opportunity to make a decision on process and procedure
moving forward. And with that, I'd ask that our engineers speak to the individual variances. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Okay, get your name and address for Mr. >> Chairman. Uh James Golden uh with Gross Scientific and Engineering, uh 6140
Edgewater Drive, Orlando, Florida. >> Okay. >> 32810. Okay. So, good morning everybody. Um I'm here to go over the uh variances and what we believe is a support for the variances that we have. We have a number
of them. But as Miss Long stated, um we really believe that these variances are the reduced setbacks uh are required to make this a feasible project. First um going to uh go over variance
one and nine. Um one of the variances to reduce the landscape buffering along that border along the eastern border. Well, there uh in the next slide I'm going to show you, but there are existing dense stand of
trees uh within our property line from the top of the bank of the Ashb Canal. Um so we have a photograph of that in the next slide, but um um you want to show that now? Okay. So you can see this is looking at uh the life for Landing
Road uh easement area and that this is looking east. So you can see there's a dense stand of trees along that that is within our property line before the top of the bank of the canal. So um we would uh offer so our setback
is really 70 ft from those just beyond those trees from the top of the bank of the Ashb Canal to uh our edge of construction. um heard the staff say that the uh setback goes right to the top of the
bank. Actually, the borrow pit design is there's a a burm uh to stop any offsite runoff or erosion. Then there is a road, the perimeter road that the uh the trucks would follow. Then uh there's a recharge trench from the dewatering
recharge. Then you go down into the pit. So it's about another 50 ft from where from the 70 foot set back from property line. So another about 50 ft during operations at least. Um Miss Long mentioned that there is a
letter no opposition from the Gothier uh for the access road setback uh and that impacts this variance. Um there is a cell tower driveway. That's the utility easement. That's really the same access as to the uh
homeowner to the northeast there. And um so that's our slide one. Thank you. Uh go to go to number three, please. This uh shows uh what we believe is support for variance number four that is
a setbacks and the landscape buffer from the Gothier's property to the northeast of uh the project. Um they have a letter of no objection to the reduced setbacks along their property boundary uh between
them and our project. Um, we are offering a 50-foot uh like per code a 50-ft landscape buffer along the uh northeastern property boundary between our project and their project. And then along the western portion of their
property, there is existing dense stand of trees. All these wetlands are mature wetlands. They have cypress trees and we uh that's in our application. and it shows the photographs of those dense stand of trees in these wetland areas.
And so they have a wetland along their western boundary that we are not impacting and those trees are really serve as an existing buffer. Your code allows an applicant to claim existing uh
trees uh as uh the landscape buffer and that's what we uh offered in our application. So, we believe that does uh fit uh what your code would require uh and more so than the 50- foot landscape buffer.
Um then uh so again, we have a letter of non-objection to these reduced setbacks along the northeast property boundary of uh the homeowners there. Next slide. I'd like to go over the support for
variances three and six. That's along the northern property boundary between the project and Deep Creek Preserve Conservation Area. Um since there are no residences or other uh uh development
that would uh be potentially be impacted by the project. It is just an an uninhabited natural area that we are recommending or proposing that we are not going to have landscape buffer along that boundary. Since we are not trying
to visually buffer uh that area uh from say if a residence were along that property boundary, there's an an abandoned rideway that we are requiring to have a setback from. It's really um not used. So we believe that that's not
really a valid uh setback reason along that boundary. Um we the lake the the lake once the pit is excavated there's going to be a very nice lake uh up against that uh that boundary and so we believe that will
enhance the conservation area. All wetlands are preserved along this boundary just like the entire project and there's no excava excavation in that northwestern or western side of the property uh up against this um these
boundaries in this area. Okay, this goes over variances uh five and seven along the western portion of the property. really there's no pit development within 600 feet of this setback. Um you see you can see that
there is a recharge pond between our western boundary and then a wetland and then our borrow pit. Uh that recharge pond was required by your third party reviewing engineer as when uh during the dry season we would have a storage area
for water that would help us uh recharge the wetlands and make sure they stay hydrated. So that is not an excavation. It's just an above ground pond that is going to be used uh to enhance our uh recharge of
the wetlands. Um there's again there's significant forested wetlands between the western boundary and our project and that was uh put forth in our application. In addition, we're offering this is not in our application yet but 50-ft
landscape buffers between the wetlands. So there are no uh visual corridors uh for the uh any residents down the western boundary there. So we're proposing to add a 50-foot landscape buffer and trees that meet your code. Uh
if we're allowed to uh go forward, we would revise our plan to uh give more details. But you can see that uh these landscape buffer areas are pointed out on the plan there. Um
okay, thank you. Next one, please. Now, we're down to the uh southern boundary of the property. Um, again, the excavation is far uh more than 150 foot from these property boundaries. You can
see that we're we're also offering the 50-foot landscape buffer between these wetlands that provide, you know, thick a forested wetland visual buffers, but we're again offering to meet your code in between the existing vegetation
buffers. So there are a a a totally opaque uh line of vegetation between our pit and uh these residents along to the southern boundary. Um so the the pit we believe uh in a
disagreement with your staff that we do meet the 150 ft setback along the southern boundary based on our design of our uh excavation. And again, the wetlands are not impacted along this southern boundary. Thank you.
Next one. Finally, uh we uh there was some letters of opposition that mentioned potential wildlife and other impacts, noise and dust, um from the pit. and I wanted to go over what we believe is going to be
mitigating conditions that will not impact our neighbors uh from the project. First, we're going to have to uh in the final site plan or immediately after this approval, if we get approval, we'll go forward with the St. John's River Water Management
District permit applications for storm water management and for water use permitting. um your own environmental permitting section uh reviewed the application and they did not have any objections to the application.
We're preserving 42 acres of wetlands on the property. Like Miss Long mentioned, that's about approximately a third of the project property acreage noise reduction will be uh mitigated uh by the depth of the
applica the depth of the excavation. Most of the excavation is going to be below grade uh 20 30 40 feet below the land surface. So uh that will greatly mitigate any potential noise from
leaving the excavation. Dust is dust is controlled by daily application of water on the roads that are around the pit and uh within the pit. So there'll be a water truck operating con constantly. Um,
and your your county traffic engineering did review the application and they did not ra they said it did not raise any issues with daily trips generated from the site. Water level monitoring wells will be installed around all these pits
during dewatering activities and those will be monitored weekly and reported to the water management district. And so if they see any impacts to wetlands, they would uh require us to do mitigating uh operations.
And then uh finally, we believe that the pick once they're converted to lakes will increase of flood water retention. The this site is actually uh the center portion of the site is at Upland area. It now flows off to the south and the
east towards the Ashb Canal and Ashb Lake. we would uh maintain that flow. We would be required to maintain that flow uh under our environmental resource permit through St. John's and um we would also
add additional storage for uh any flood flooding that would go on to the site by these lakes. Once you the lakes the lakes provide more storage than the uplands do at this point. Um, well, thank you this morning uh for this time and I'll be here for any
questions. >> Okay. Any questions, Miss Bush? >> I have a few. >> Mhm. >> Um, I like I said, I read through the environmental impact statement the VHB did. How many times were they on site to
identify species? >> Yeah. Go ahead. >> Shannon Ruby Julian, 225 East Robinson Street, Orlando, Florida, 32801. Um, we were on site three times. Uh, we did a preliminary environmental assessment
prior to the purchase. Um, we spent a few days, probably three days delineating the wetlands and doing protected species report. And then we did a subsequent site visit. uh after that when the PL site plan was uh preliminarily prepared.
>> Okay. Can you estimate the number of hours that you were on site? >> Uh probably 56. >> Okay. And do you acknowledge that this property is within the wildlife corridor? >> Do I? Yes. >> Okay. Thank you. Um there was a letter
that was provided. I I think I'm done with the HP. So, >> um there was a letter provided in your application uh to help explain the project and I have some questions related to that letter. Um first, you stated that the project is consistent
with the purpose of the article in code 72293, but you provided no reasoning. So, is your ex explanation of the variances today part of that reasoning? Uh yes, it we would add those to part of
that reasoning. Uh can you tell me the exact uh the title of that code? I I you've read the number to me. Can you is that just a consistency? >> This was your letter. So I'm asking you >> my in in the application my letter in
the application. I don't know if it was you specifically, but there was a letter in the application that said that you were consistent with this section of the code, but provided >> I have to have my application in front of me to be able to tell you exactly what what that was referring to. >> Okay. Well, I have additional questions
related to this letter. So, if you >> Okay, I can go ahead. >> Okay. um in the letter and um attorney if I am speaking more to the special exemption and not the variances, please let me know because I'm kind of not it's I'm
somewhat blurring the lines here, but I I think it's relevant to ask these questions related to the special exemption uh on whether or not we should grant these variance requests. >> You can do that. >> Okay, >> you can continue with your question. >> Thank you. Uh, in the same letter, you
state the non-exempt excavation is a permitted use with special exemption, but it is not a permitted use. That is why you're here before us today and why you have to go before the county council. Um, a permitted use would be one that would be allowed outright. Do you agree?
>> Um, yes, we know it it needed a special exception, but you can it's allowed to apply for a special exception within cultural zoning. >> Absolutely. >> That's what we I was referring to. >> Okay. But the letter indicated that it was a permitted use and it it was permitted with special exemption with
Okay. >> Um you state the project will not adversely affect public interest. Uh however, you are asking for reductions in landscape buffers um things of that nature, but did not provide really thorough explanations. You did hear with
what you've presented, but you did not necessarily provide that in the application um in in your letter, right? Requesting the variances. I'm I'm still a little fuzzy on how you're protecting specifically the west side because there are properties on the west side of this
boundary and because you're stating that there is no development and then there's wetland corridor to the north that you don't have to provide that that buffer. Um do you acknowledge that there are still public interests that would need to be met with these landscape buffers and with these setbacks because there
are adjacent property owners? Well, we'll look at that individually and for uh each of these boundary areas um along the western boundary that that's one of the biggest setback areas that we're offering. That's like 600 ft
from the property boundary to our borrow pit. So, that has a lot of buffering there and the with the thick uh vegetation of the wetlands. Also, >> you're talking about where the recovery pond is. >> Yes. But there's there's no landscaping between where the recovery pond is and
the property line, right? >> Um yes, but that's just a a 4ft high burn like a pool sitting there with water in it. >> Right. So noise and um dust and things, there's nothing to block that from the properties to the west is my point.
>> Uh not during construction of that, but that's just very temporary. say a 30-day construction time to build that pond. So that's just a a minimal inter interruption there. And then we would have the pond in for using during operation. So
>> So there still would be use of the pond during operation, right? >> Yes. But that's just raising and lowering the water levels. There's no truck activity, no heavy equipment there. It's just a pond sitting there and we drain water out of it into the wetlands to help us hydrate the
wetlands. >> Okay. Um, you state you're able to meet all the requirements imposed in your letter by the federal, state, and local government, uh, and by the county council, but you are seeking nine variances. So, how do you justify stating that you're meeting these
requirements if you're requesting variances? >> Well, we believe that we're uh these setbacks are adequate to u mitigate any potential u impacts from to offsite. We have borrow pits in Orange County, Lake
County, uh, Valuchia County, and excuse me, Acyola County with these reduced setbacks and we have no complaints from the residences surrounding these borrow pits. So, we have good uh evidence over time that we can mitigate any potential
impacts to our neighbors with these reduced setbacks. >> Okay. >> Uh, that's all my questions at this time, chairman. Thank you. >> Okay. Miss Shel, you had a question. >> 25. >> Miss Craig,
>> I also had a comment about the use of the term dense stand of trees for the buffer along the east and southern borders. Um, when I drove by it, it did not look like a dense stand of trees to me. It was um quite uh sporadic. You can
see through completely to the the rest of the um land. And uh I I sort of have an objection with that term dense stand of trees. >> Understand? Any other
questions for the applicant? Chair, if I may, um, member Shelley, your mic wasn't on, so we weren't able to capture your comments. >> My point was just that the letter because having to >> speaker on it's on. >> Oh, okay. >> Yeah.
Um, it's Speak up. Be careful. I'm from Texas. >> Y'all don't want to hear that. Okay. Um, it was only just a point if anyone was looking having it all online. I was going around trying to then I found the letter and I just wanted to make a point
that the letter is in the packet under S25- Z003. It's not necessarily germanine. It's just a point of knowing where it is if someone was looking for it. >> Thank you, >> Miss Bush. >> Um I this might be a question also for staff as well as the applicant. You
mentioned the recharge pond on the west side. Um but I believe staff stated that the third party WGI stated that there were no impacts to the wetland. So, why would a recharge pond be necessary to keep the wetlands moist or wet?
>> Um, per the third party review, um, I believe with the inclusion of the pond that would, um, prevent any impact to wetlands. >> So, there are impacts to wetlands. >> If they did not include >> if there but they have to do this pond
in order to mitigate what that impact is. Correct. >> Yes. >> Okay. Can I clarify something there? >> Yes, go ahead. >> Um there really uh we did a model of water balance overall for the whole
property during operation and um that pond it is just a backup. We we believe that without the pond, we still met the criteria of no impact to the wetlands and uh but the third party required that
pond uh to agree with us. But it's it was our uh expertise in uh the groundwater modeling and the water balance that we we think we prove there's no wetland impacts without the pond even. So, we added it to plate your
third party engineer. Any other questions for the applicant? Okay, we do have some public participation forms for this case. Uh, I will give you an opportunity to for rebuttal after they've been heard. Um,
and uh, so we're going to move forward. Also, um, I'm going to call Mr. Storch to come forward and I'm going to normally we would allow the three minute time limit but Mr. Storch you're
multiple you're representing multiple people. >> I am representing at least five people. Yes, >> at least five people. Okay. So, we're going to allow you to go ahead over that three minutes because it's I believe you someone said you had a presentation. >> I have two PowerPoints. One for the special exception and one for the variance.
>> Okay. Can we see the variance for we're addressing the variance at this point? It'll just be a minute. And >> by the way, while she's bringing that up, I did have a question. The um >> Go ahead and state your name and address for the record. >> Yes. Uh my name is Glenn Storch. Uh the
office address is 420 South uh Nova Road, uh Daytona Beach, but my home address is 4220 Boy Scout Camp Road. I'm in this area, too. And we'll be utilizing this intersection, and so I can see exactly what's going on here.
the um the staff report indicates that there is in fact this is why I'm concerned uh about the representations that there is supposed to be uh a proposed 21 acres of direct impacts to existing wetlands and so I don't understand why someone's saying there's
no impact to wetlands someone else is saying there may be impacts to wetlands someone's saying there should be a recharge area for wetlands so that does say that and my understanding is was that that impact of wetlands were in fact affecting the uh Ashb Canal which again again is a natural resource
although it was built 100 years ago that goes into Lake Ashby which is where I live. So just as a thought we ready? >> Yeah. >> All righty. Um so first of all let's start with the fact that I am an attorney. I've been an
attorney for 45 years. I have represented lots of folks who have asked for excavations exempt excavations in in this county. And I have done that I believe in a way of finding the appropriate location for those excavations away from residences in an
area where it will not impact people and then working with everyone the staff with the neighbors and everyone else to make certain because the one number one issue here is how does this affect the rest of the neighborhood? How does this affect the rest of the people that we're dealing with? Because if you don't,
you're dealing with an industrial type use. an industrial type use because you've got trucks coming in and out all the time with noise and backup noise and everything else um and dust. This is like an industrial use in a rural area. And so you've got to be very careful in
those cases. And so that's what I've always done to deal with this. This is probably the worst location I have ever seen for an excavation and probably the worst application I have ever seen because what this does is not only ask
for a reduction or a a use of this property like this, but ask for a reduction of the minimal standards that are provided in for uh these excavations to try and protect people. The minimum standards are what you're asking what he's asking for a variance from.
Typically, when I do excavations, I always go way beyond what the minimum standards are because you have to find a solution that makes certain that this does not impact the area. And when you look at this, and we'll walk through these uh this uh each one of these, as
you recall, this is a legal matter. You're asking that the law not be applied to you because of these circumstances, because of these special issues. And so in this case particular, you have to meet these standards. If you don't, if you don't say how you've met
these standards, then you're not entitled to avoid the law that you're not entitled to a variance. So I'm going to try and figure out how to work this. There we go. So yes. All right. So you have to meet the you have five criteria
to say I don't have to meet the law. And right now what this applicant is attempting to do is to expand the size of the excavation uh by requesting nine variances. And by the way, I'm going to deal with all nine variances because in this particular case, the applicant has
simply decided to give his reasons for every single variance as exactly the same. Nine variances, nine the exact same. So you can say, "Oh, I'm going to, you know, this variance is not a big problem. This variance is not a big problem." his application says the exact
same basis for every single variance. He didn't uh differentiate that. So I'm not going to differentiate that. So staff finds that he meets zero of the five criteria. Uh and the reason for that is because if you look walk through this,
he has to show that special conditions and circumstances exist that are peculiar to the land. this particular site because remember we're asking for them not to apply the law to your site and which are not applicable to other lands in the same zoning district. All right. So in this case he made the
assertion that the wetlands within the pastures do not make s I mean I mean I'm sorry the assertion he made does not make any sense. He made the assertion that the wetlands in the site uh uh with the combination of the pasture uh really blocks everything and therefore there's
no real problem here. What he's saying is there's no problem here. He didn't say he has a right to a uh the special circumstances. Every single pasture in Valuchia County has the exact same situation. Basically, it's a a square
parcel. It has wetlands in it, has uplands in it. There are no specific special circumstances in this particular case regarding this site. uh in in fact the only special circumstance that I can see is that this site has uh uh single
family homes around it uh whereas most of the agriculture like this that would be done do not have that. So let's start with the other thing. Um he had uh 154 acres to work with 154 acres to work
with to design a borrow pit that met the setbacks required. He could have done that. The applicant simply wants to maximize the size of the pit to maximize his profits regardless of the impact of the neighboring properties. The second one, the must show that the special
circumstances and uh or special conditions and circumstances do not result from the actions of the applicant. Well, obviously clearly in this case that's exactly what happened. The special uh conditions are solely the result of the applicant uh uh of the
actions of the applicant because the applicant designed the borrow pit to be larger than the permitted use with smaller or no setbacks. He didn't have to do that. He could have provided the setbacks. In thisaa case, he simply decided not to do it because he will
make more money if he doesn't do it that way. Now, this some of these things are really hysterical. So the applicant must show that the literal interpretation of the zoning ordinance would deprive the applicant of the rights commonly enjoyed by other properties in the same zoning
classification other areas that have a one. Okay. The applicant must show how this interpretation would be an unnecessary and undue hardship. All right. Again, in this case, the applicant's assertion in his application,
in his written petition for variance, which is what I'm talking about today, said that, oh, the setbacks in the land development code are too large and would result in financial loss or business loss to the applicant. That was his
reason why the law should not apply to him because he doesn't like our laws and therefore he would make less money. That is not a legal basis for a variance. If the applicant if the if you granted
these nine variances he's asking for but required all the other agricultural oper uh land owners to comply with the law, it would deprive all other land owners. That's what would happen. It's not a depriving him. It's depriving everybody else who's following the law. There's no
evidence of hardship whatsoever in this case that would justify the landowner not being able not being required to follow the law. Uh the applicant must show that the nine variances requested are the minimum variances that will make possible the
reasonable use of the land. Okay. So the applicant and I'm just trying to explain this to everybody is not entitled to construct a borrow pit from border to border. I mean when you go to zero setbacks for instance that's at the border of the property. That means the
other part of the person has to have buffers on their side. Is that fair? No. Because when we did our zoning ordinances we specifically said this is an industrial use. We need to make sure that we do anything in here that has plenty of buffer and plenty of
protection for the adjoining property owners. He wants no protection for the adjoining property owners. He bought the property a year ago with an A1 entitle that allow that will allow 10 acre parcels. That is a reasonable use of the land. He has a reasonable use of the
land. He's not being stopped from reasonable use of the land. The rest of the neighborhood has the exact same thing. A1 and what do they have? They have single family homes with horses and cows and agriculture. That does not require nine setbacks uh
setback variances. Applicant must show that variance is in harmony with the intent and purpose of the ordinance and the comprehensive plan and the such variance will not be injurious to the area involved. The intent of the ordinance and comp plan is to meet the setbacks to protect the
adjoining property. This plan does not meet that criteria. And in addition, as evidenced in the staff report for the special exception, the reduction or the lack of setbacks is clearly injurious to the area and potentially dangerous. When
we get to that special exception, you'll see some of the areas that you have to look at in order to grant the special exception. And one of them is, is this going to be injurious to the area? Is this going to be is this going to be dangerous to the folks? Is there a hazard here? Yes. and the setbacks that
you were looking at is one of the reasons why they're trying to prevent some of those things. In this particular case, this is a bad idea. It is not legal. It meets absolutely none of the five criteria and he is not entitled to a variance any variance uh whatsoever in
especially nine variances. I mean that's that's offensive. So uh if you have any questions I'm available. >> Okay. >> Any questions for the speaker? Mr. cost. >> Good morning, Mr. Storch. >> Good morning. >> And we go way back. >> We do.
>> One of the reasons that I'm on this board is because of a special exception on a borrow pit in my backyard which eventually got approved um with my input. So, my question to you is pointed blank, and I'm not going to go through these one by one. There's nine of them.
Do you see a path any kind of path for a um compromise between the people that you were representing and the >> you know uh the way I would like to work I always try to find solutions if I possibly can
>> in this particular case it's not just the setback variances it's not just everything else it's the way the neighborhood is in this particular case it's what's going to happen to that neighbor neighborhood in the event this is there. It's the traffic issue because if you look at the way this thing works,
I mean that's we'll get the special exception there, but the traffic issue is going to be very very difficult to have those 320 trips per day of dump trucks. So the the variances I mean there's always ways you can try to solve solve problems to work together to find
solutions. >> I just think that this is the wrong uh site for this this loca uh for this. So, let me re let me ask the question a different way because I got your I got the attorney answer there. >> Do you see a path for any kind of
compromise where this could potentially move forward? >> Uh, you know, I I have talked to my clients obviously >> uh and uh but again, I see that there's they haven't even the only time they made the effort to come out to talk to
people was they talked to a gentleman. I saw this in a letter from from uh Jesse Smith and she said her her father was concerned and and about the idea of all this noise and dust and everything else and uh the applicant just started
yelling at her. >> Mhm. >> And so at him and so when I look at that I'm not sure that the applicant in this case is able to compromise to the point where this is able to to be done. M you've got to see, you've got to have the right client in order to make that
happen. And in this particular case, like I say, he apparently is used to getting what he wants whenever he wants it. And to come in and ask for what he's asked for 12 years. He's asked for 12 years of this. I have never seen a
12-year uh uh request for a excavation. Well, that's regard that's regarding the actually exception itself, which I have a whole list of questions and suggestions. But on the variance itself, if we if it dies here, that's my question. Is there a possibility that that something can be worked out between your client and the applicant?
>> Yeah. If >> before we before I request I mean suggest to them a potential continuence because I can smell the way this is going. >> I again, you know, my reputation how I'd like to work with it. I just don't see it in this case. >> Okay. All right. Look, I just wanted
your honest answer on that one. >> That's my honest answer. >> Perfect. Thank you. >> Okay. Any other questions for the speaker? >> Okay. Thank you, Mrs. Storch. >> We do have other uh public participation here. Um, Miss Susan Lear.
So, we will have a threem minute clock on you, h. >> Good morning. My comments will be short and sweet. >> Okay. Um, I'm here to discuss the reszoning and variance request for Colony Road in 415. >> I'm sorry, ma'am. Will you mind stating your name and address for the record, please?
>> Susan Leer, 4610 Saddle Creek Run Road, New Simra Beach, Florida 32168. So, I'm here to talk about the reasonzoning uh requests and varants. This area is designated as part of the wildlife corridor. The ecosystem is
vital to sustainability of life and should be protected. We need trees to breathe. The residents and land owners have chosen county life to escape city life. These proposals will disrupt life as we
know it. This proposal will benefit someone while inducing deterioration to others. 415 is already congest congested. This will increase traffic, dump truck after dump
truck. And present more hazardous driving conditions. There are many families with young teen drivers. We are concerned for safety reasons. I ask this board to deny the reasonzoning requests and variances. Thank you.
>> Thank you. Okay, we have a Brian and Joan Hammer. >> Okay, she did. She fill out one of these forms. >> Okay, come on up. State your name and address. State your name and address and then
turn the form into Miss Tucker when you when you're done. >> Good morning. Uh Brian Hammer, wife Jones sitting there, 4700 Colony Road. Um as far as the uh the environmental stuff, it sounds like he all got it
covered. I mean, sounds like he's going to have an uphill battle with whatever he's doing. Our only concern is cuz our daughter and son and our family is the one that lives there on the south side right there in Colony Road with the little postage stamp house. Obviously,
we're concerned. Um, you know, and after listening to everybody's comments, you know, it sounds like you've got it uh with the water. Obviously, that's going to be an issue. But I guess our biggest concern is is because of our family. My whole family lives there on that road.
My friends live on that road. And it's it's the access from the dump trucks on the Colony Roads are probably our biggest issue to be honest. if he can figure out a way to get his trucks out on 415 without an impact and which there is a lot of traffic on 415, which I think we
all agree. Um, you know, I've talked to this guy. He seems like a straight shooter, but with all the other stuff that's out of my wheelhouse as far as environmental stuff goes and water placement, I can't speak to that. All I'm asking is is that let's let's not
have all these dump trucks on Colony Road. That's the biggest thing for us and that's about all I got to say. >> Thank Thank you, Mr. Dammer. Mr. Cross, you had a question for the applicant? >> I do, sir. >> I mean, speaker, >> can you come back for a second? >> Yep.
>> So, your heartburn So, your heartburn is with the access to Colony Road, not necessarily the borrow pit in itself. >> I don't understand all the, you know, the the water flow and that, Frank, to be quite honest with you. The one thing I would, you know, probably say, you know, if he's got this borrow pit or
this uh surge pond, you're going to have to get water out of it. You're going to have to put a pump in it. So, whoever the neighbors are there on the west, which I don't know, >> there they are. Hello. >> It's a great way to get together with the neighborhood. But, uh I'm sure they ain't going to like to
hear that pump running because they're going to they got to get that water out of that pump. But again, that's, you know, that's part of uh what these discussions are about. Yeah. My me biggest concern, Frank, honestly, is just >> that traffic on the colony. >> Yeah. The dump trucks. And we know how
that goes. So, >> all right. Perfect. Thank you. >> Anybody else? >> All right. >> Thank you, sir. >> Okay. Miss Tanya Danch, I guess it's hard for me to read. I know you wrote it pretty fast. Name and address for the record. Tavia Danch
11:45 Saddle Run News. >> Yeah. >> Closer to you. >> Can you hear me now? >> Yes. >> Okay. >> You want to state your name and address for the record again? >> Yeah. Tavia Danch 1145 Saddle Run, New Sperna. >> Okay.
>> And um I'm a you know, local land owner. We have a single family home. We just moved to the area probably about 2 years ago. Uh it took us a long time to find the property. Um, we have two horses that we just rescued. Um, wild mustangs
actually from out west and really concerned about the dust, um, flooding and of course the traffic. I ride my horses on Colony Road. Um, so obviously that will no longer be possible, you know, with all those dump trucks and and
yeah, just really in opposition of the the project. Any questions? >> Nope. >> Okay. Thanks. >> Thank you, >> Brian King. Uh Brian King, 4623 Colony Road. Um my biggest opposition is the the entry to
Colony Road. That, you know, keep them off a colony. I don't need the dump trucks on our Colony or 415 is hard enough to get onto off a colony from 7:30 in the morning to 9:00. It's a stream of people coming from Orlando
going to Daytona and you're going to go dump 300 dump trucks a day in and out of that. Good luck. Um, Colony Road doesn't need the access off of it. If they want to access their their project or whatever, have them dump it off 415, come in on the back side of where the
original access road goes into that property. And two, on the other thing on that thermo or the survey mark, the water I can tell you for testence, the the customer that lives in the back, um
I've repaired his road three times due to the wash out from the flooding that comes through that property and going into Lake Ashby Canal. It has washed his driveway and stranded him and his wife not to be able to access their house or the cell tower three separate times off
of 415, washing the entire canal, I mean road out from the amount of water leaving that site going to Lake Ashby Canal. So I mean they can fix that and use that way or whatever they want to do, but I just don't want them on our road cuz
we've got kids, we got people that ride horses on a daily basis, neighborhoods. So, dump trucks and horses don't get along. Um, other than that, that's it. >> All right, sir. Thank you, >> Michael Smith. >> Good morning. Could I get your name and
addresses for the record, please? >> Yeah. Hi, and thank you. My name is Michael Smith, land owner 4481 Colony Road, uh directly adjacent uh from an eastern and northern border with the project project. >> And I'm Jessica Smith, resident at 4481
Colony Road. We're directly affected by variant 7. >> And uh I'm sorry, may I I know we only got three minutes. I have submitted somewhat of a detailed document prior to this. So I don't know if you have access
to access to that. And uh biggest issue when we first pulled into Colony and we're new residents there. We've only been there 20 plus years. Um it was quiet, tranquil
nature. We came up from Miami was exactly what we were looking for. months looking. This will ruin that period. I would be forced to move because there is no buffer that is going
to block the noise and dirt and air from 320 dump trucks going right next to my property from 7:00 a.m. to 700 p.m. 6 days a week for a dozen years.
Just imagine that my house I'd have to leave, but it wouldn't be worth anything cuz who would want to buy something like that? It makes no sense. As I look through all this and you have
all the detail on the AR, the A1 to AR, what's in the best interest of the the county, the variances are trying to fit a square peg and a round hole. And if you look in some of
the detail of that matrix of the application, you can see that some of it is, well, I can't agree with not having this variance because I won't make enough money. Well, what about the residents that have lived there for decades or generations?
It's a nice, quiet community. We'd like to keep it that way. And so, in closing, like I said, I know I don't have much time and there is more detail available. the Colony Road access. They're trying to design or have
suggested design a new road entryway off of 415 that's 300 ft up 100 yards as an entry point. I know it's not DOT approved yet. I really doubt they're going to allow that stack up of trucks and they said, "Oh, that's okay. We're
going to have an area of staging for these trucks. So, if the trucks aren't blowing past my neighborhood, they're going to be sitting there idling. Anyway, you cut it between that and the excavation noise,
it's nonstop. It will ruin our home, ruin our family. We were concerned about turtles, deer, etc. I'm worried about humans, me, my family. This will ruin it. And I
strongly encourage you to look into who who the applicant is. Look up his ex site and see his opinion on the planning commissions, state and local governments by nature of his words on X.
Uh if you're faint of harsher language, bring your buffers. >> Okay? >> That's the kind of guy you're dealing with. >> Okay. All right. So, thank you for your comments. >> Questions? >> Okay. >> Thank you for your time. >> Thanks.
>> Okay. Travis Whitaker. Travis Whitaker, 4560 Colony Road. Moved there in 2005. Um, I think I agree with Brian King. I think that our my biggest concern for my
family, we we don't live miles away. We live.7 miles further west towards the dead end of Colony Road. That's not a a through street. It's a dead end road. So, we live down that way. So, we drive
by the beginning of Colony Road. Me and my wife and my two kids, my my youngest will be driving pretty soon. We drive by every day. And it's already difficult enough getting in out in and on 415 from
our road as it is right now. I can't imagine 160 trucks coming in and then going out. That's 320 more entrances and exits than what we
have right now for 6 days a week for 12 years. I'm all for being in business. I'm all for making money. That's makes the world go round. but not at the expense of
other people. Um, a couple of things that I did have a question about on the northern border that it was stated that it's not going to impact anybody and I could be wrong, but I believe that's borders to Deep
Creek Preserve that is accessible by the public, is it not? Wouldn't that be wouldn't zero setback affect the public use of view from that deep creek if I'm walking my trails out there? Just asking the question. I don't
know for sure if that's the case, but uh the noise while they might be digging below surface, the 320, you know, in in and outs of dump trucks, that noise is certainly above ground. And as Brian
said, or I think Mr. Hammer said, uh, if you're moving water from point A to point B, you're going to need pumps to do that. So, I don't think that's going to be below ground either. Um, if I lived on the western edge of that property, I think I would not be very
happy about that. Um, entrance and exit, let them use 415. They could work out whatever plan they need to with F DOT and make it happen. But Colony Road needs to be maintained. It was a dirt road when I moved in
there. It was not designed for industrial use. So why don't we keep it what it was designed to be? Entrance exit for a community because that's what we have there. >> Thank you, sir.
Michael Brown. Good morning, sir. Can I get your name and address for the record? >> Michael Brown, 4523 Colony Road, New Smyrna Beach. >> All right, sir. >> I am the property owner on the west edge of that uh area there. And I apologize.
I've just really kind of found out about this about a week ago, so I don't really have any comments prepared. Uh, but listening to what's kind of planned here, um, I'm really kind of amazed because I was under the impression when the property was bought, it was going to
be set aside as a residential kind of area. And everybody that you've heard from, for the most part, they're correct. We have a community there. I used to live in Orange County. Uh, it's a very quiet street. It's actually a pretty narrow street. You know, we have
I drive a pickup truck, an F350. If there's another F350 going the other direction, we pretty much have to rub the grass to get by each other. It's a narrow street. It's not wide enough for that um kind of traffic. There's routinely horses and family walking down
the street. It's an area for I would say elderly people uh to get out there and exercise cuz it's not a lot of traffic down there. Uh I have a couple 80 year olds that live with me. I'm very concerned about the dust and the noise.
They are both on breathing machines. Uh we have other members of our family that are on breathing machines that come visit. I'm very concerned about the impact it'll have on my home, my property value. Um, I can tell you this right now. If I had been buying this
property uh a year from now and this burrow pit was there, it would not appeal to me as much knowing that there's a burrow pit right next door that's going to be running for 12 years. Uh, which I can imagine is going to definitely affect my property value and
my ability to baby sell in 5 or 10 years. cuz I don't have any plans to sell, but you never know what life brings you. Um, I'm very concerned about I honestly I can't believe that there's even a consideration for running an
entrance onto Colony Road. I I just it blows my mind that anybody would think to put that kind of traffic on a residential street in a community like what we have. You know, there's a burrow pit in Ostein. That burrow pit doesn't
even run on Saturdays. How is this burrow pit going to be allowed to run on Saturdays? Why do we need a burrow pit 4 and a half miles north of the one in Ostein? I don't understand that and I'm just beginning to learn about this. So, I'm going to try to educate myself and
figure out some more things about what's going on here. But from what I can see when they bought the property apparently and I understand is it was supposed to been residential and now they're trying to change it to this industrial use which and it should not be done at all.
You know, it's it's one thing to have 10 acre homes next to us and and that coincides with what we are all living with out there. Uh but for what they're trying to do here, it seems pretty destructive for what we have. And there
are people that do. I see them on the back side of property. I back up to uh Deep Creek Preserve. I constantly see people riding horses back there, walking back there, enjoying that property. Uh so there is a lot of traffic that goes back there. They walk that property all
the time. >> All right. Thank you, sir. >> Thank you very much for your consideration. >> Thank you. >> Do we have any more public participation forms? >> No, sir. >> Is there anyone else here that would like to speak to this case? All right, we're going to close the floor. No, we're not. We're going to ask the applicant to come back forward for
rebuttal. >> And Mr. Chair, just a few statements. Um, this is about the project. >> Yes. >> Not about an individual person or an owner. Um, just, you know, just focus on the project. >> Got it.
>> You want to come forward? >> Thank you. Um, you know, I have to say that I agree with I think it was attorney Storch that I too prefer
a process where the conversations that took place today take place ahead of time. So, I'll start with that. And I think in hindsight, should some of those conversations had have had taken place,
perhaps this would have been a different um presentation. I am appreciative for the information gleaned today. I believe that my clients are as well.
Um, I do want to state for the record that part of my history, not that you care, but I used to be the environmental protection manager for Orange County for six years. So, I do have an understanding, very in-depth understanding of environmental rules and
regulations. And I really do understand how you need to work in conjunction with developed areas and the need to continue to develop but to do it in a responsible manner. Um I have to look back to the
point 21 the inconsistency that Miss Bush brought up. Um as I understand it having our environmental person sitting next to me when I was like what are we talking about? it's a surface water issue as opposed to what I was focusing on. That's my error because I was
focusing on the treat canopy areas. And so my comment about avoidance and and not requiring mitigation, staying away from those clumps of canopied areas, that is accurate. So as a point of clarification, um
I heard and I appreciate Mr. Costa for asking on more than one occasion, do you see a way forward? And while initially I may not have thought there to be one, I I think there might be. Um maybe I'm an optimist. Maybe maybe the way forward
won't make everyone uh ecstatic on either side. Um but um I learned a long time ago that when you can walk out of a room and everybody's equally as miserable, you've done a good job. So, um,
I respectfully request that these matters be continued. >> Thank you, Mr. Costa. You had a comment. >> I do. >> Question. >> I Well, both. Uh, and I'm glad that um I appreciate you coming forward and saying those things and I'm glad that you
decided to do a continuence. So, since we're not going to get to the case of your uh of the actual special exception itself, let me just throw these couple comments out for you for you guys to mull over. Um, suggestions would be that your operating
hours be trimmed down to say between 8:30 to 4:30 inside underneath the uh the window of the traffic on 4:15. I travel that, by the way, I travel that northwest north south corridor daily. So, I know exactly what we're talking about here with And you have people that are legally passing. you do have a lot
of young drivers. So, I think if you narrowed your timeline down to about 8 hours a day, the other thing is I would take the Saturdays off the table and only bring them back as a maintenance only because even in the country, I want peace and quiet and as far away as that
I am from from that site, I'm sure that I'm going to be hearing it as well. Um, not necessarily from your site, but from the neighbors surrounding it. So, I would limit that so that there is some peace and quiet on the weekends and then uh give a very serious concern about a dedicated turn lane on 415 onto your
property rather than using Colony Road as more than one uh of the folks that spoke today that is their biggest heartburn is the access on Colony. Um let's see what else I had. And the other thing is the 12 years. I think that's
excessive. I think this can be done in a much shorter time frame. I know we had one recently on Rasley and 4:15 and I don't think that one ran more than five years. I think it was a timeline. They finished earlier than they had ex than had expected, but I think the 12
years is definitely a big uh that's a long time for these folks to wait. Other than that, um unless there's other comments, I'd be ready to make a motion for the continuence. >> Do you want do they haven't requested a continuence? >> She did. >> She did. >> Oh, she did. Okay. >> All right. Um you can go ahead and make
the motion and we'll have a discussion on the motion. >> All right. We'll do two separate motions and we're continuing both cases. >> Correct. >> Correct. >> All right. So, first motion is a continuence. Uh how first off, how long? >> Uh I would not recommend a timeline. Um >> leave it open.
>> Leave it. We we'll have to readvertise, you know, uh do pro and renotice it, but this gives the opportunity to um for the applicant to work with the community. Um, and if it causes a redesign, I I don't want to put them under a harsh timeline and staff under a harsh
timeline. >> Well, my question to you then is so we have an open-ended continuence or should I should I go out say 6 months, 12 months or >> You can have an open-ended continuence. We just have to renotice it. >> All right, that's fine. Uh, case number V-25-019.
Uh, I make a motion that we continue this case um with no end date. Second. >> Okay. I've got a motion on the floor to continue V25019 for Mr. Costa and a second for Miss Shelley. Uh any discussion on the
motion, Miss Bush? >> Yes. um not so much on the motion to continue this, but I um uh I would have a hard time seeing this be approved even if without the variance request just because of the impact that this is
making to the environment, to the surrounding neighborhood. Um this is just not really fitting. I I agree with um the other attorney that spoke. This is just not the proper location. Um, and being somebody that, you know, works in,
um, traffic management, um, knowing and seeing the fatalities and serious injuries that occur on State Road 415 on a regular basis, I would just struggle that even if a dedicated turn lane would be appropriate to get the truck traffic off of 415. I don't think that FDOT has
plans to widen that facility anytime soon, especially in this vicinity. Um, and and this area is designated to be agriculture. It's supposed to be um large lots. It's supposed to have the peace and quiet that people bought into.
Um I myself live on a large lot in the country and I would be furious if this was going to be located next to me. So even if you were going to continue this, I I cannot support the variance requests nor would you know I'll get to the other section later. So thank you. Those are
my comments. And I was I was going to make a similar comment in that um first of all um coming to us without any other thing. It you did fail to meet any of the variances failed to meet five of five
criteria. That's that's almost uh unheard of here for something like that to even move forward. And um I concur with many of Miss Bush's comments. Thank you, >> Miss Craig. I also concur that I would have a hard
time um going along with this proposal. >> Okay. Anyone else? Mr. Sigma. >> Yeah, I would like to say I'm in concurrence with with them also. This is a tough project to try to put through. Also is Col Colony is still county
maintained. Correct. >> Yeah. So taxpayers are going to try to keep this road up with all those major dump trucks going down Colony Road. That's not going to be good either. So, that's my thoughts. >> Okay. >> All right. Um,
my thought is I don't like an open-end continuance. >> You You can limit it. >> They're going to have this laying over their head for many months. >> You can limit it to >> We need to get a conclusion to this >> sooner rather than a year.
>> So, I don't want to leave here and them not know when this is going to come back and and they'll have to be back. If 6 months is okay, you can do four months, you can do six months. >> I'll make that I'll make an u an adjustment to my motion to be uh 6 months continuence. >> I'll second that.
>> And what would that be? Six months. >> Yeah, that would be uh January February, I think. >> What is six months? Our next six month date? >> February. >> Would you like the January or February? >> Let's do the February, please. >> What you have a date?
>> Would be February 19th, 2026. >> Okay. So the motion amended motion to continuence to the February 19th PLDRC meeting. >> All right. And you second that, Miss Shel? >> Yes, sir. >> Okay. Uh the other discussion on this is when we look at special exceptions, one
of our things that I look at is to make sure all your setbacks and all that are met in order to get it because it is a special use of the the property. Um, I'm inclined uh to deny my personal opinion
on all nine variances. Um, I don't foresee the reasoning to have them other than for economical reasons. Um, so I don't want you leave here thinking that we can tweak that and it's going to
change my personal opinion because the variances aren't going to fly with me and I can't see how this would work and especially the ingress and egress on Colony Road. Definitely not for that.
And I'd be really hardressed to approve it on 415 to be honest with you. I'm not going to say I'd still want to hear the presentation on it without the variances um before I made that decision, but I'm definitely not leaning towards even
approving the special exception. So, that's my opinion on it. But as far as the continuence, uh we're going to go ahead and take a motion on that. And if you want to continue it until that date, you're more than welcome to do so. So all those in favor of a continuous to
our on the variance v25019 and the special exception 25 0003 until our uh continuence has to be brought back before us before February the 19th 2026.
>> Let me make let me amend that motion because I only called out the one case. So, let's uh let me amend the motion to include case S--25003 and V-25019 um continuous to February 19, 2026 PLDRC
meeting. >> And I'll second that. >> Okay. Any other discussion on the motion, Miss Bush? >> Um just I want to let the record reflect. I'm going to vote no on this just because I want to straight up deny it as is right now. I don't think six
months is going to make a difference and I think the residents are going to want to know what's going to locate next to them sooner rather than later. So, just wanted to put that out there for uh the members uh and for the public. >> Okay. Um
I would normally agree with you on something like that, but the fact of the matter is these folks have put a lot of money and time into trying to get this through. And so, um, I'm going to give them an opportunity to see if whatever they can come up with.
Okay. All those in favor signify by saying I. >> I. >> Any opposed? >> I. >> Motion carries five to one. >> Continues. >> But Miss Bush and descent for the continuing. >> Okay, that does it.
>> Thank you. All right, that covers the new business. Um, >> um, I do apologize. We're still in a public hearing. If you'll please take conversation outside of the chambers be greatly appreciated. >> I'm gonna I'm gonna uh give us a fivem
minute recess until the chambers clears out. Thank you, Glenn. Get the mouth. >> We're still in a meeting. >> We took a fivem minute recess. >> No, I know. >> Okay, gotcha. >> I'm not sure they understood that
either. Thank you. Hallelujah. I think We got that >> discussion on >> just for discussion >> I don't want to change right
Well, I just don't think it should be I love Okay, we're going to bring it back now. So, we're finished with the new business. Uh, do we have any other public items? >> That would be you, Mr. Shams.
>> Uh, no, sir. >> Okay. Do we have any staff items? >> Uh, yes. We actually, uh, welcomed the new planner 2 this week, uh, Mr. Joseph Jascula. He comes to us from the Army Corps of Engineers. So, we're very excited to have him on our team and he should be coming up on the DIS as as
soon as possible. >> All right. And we also have the the bylaws discussion, do we not? >> Yes, we did. Um, I apologize. I will get that next meeting. Um,
okay. Um well, if you would like to talk about the the bylaws, we can. Um that will give me some guidance on to you know what what you what would you like to change about it. Um I think the bylaws
are accessible from the PLDRC website. >> Correct. But if there's any like any discussions about that you would kind of like us to bring forward on terms of proposed changes we can do. >> Correct.
Well, and as far as the discussion matter, I think that one of the reasons I wanted to be brought back up is because we have uh since my tenure on this board had had a couple times where we've lost individuals that were very
well verssed on this type of situation that was automatically taken off the board >> because of having more and two absences within a yearly time frame. >> Yeah, it's three. Um, and that would
actually be a change in the PLDRC code. Um, it's an ordinance change. Um, it is reflected in the bylaws, but the the um the number of uh um uh meetings to miss
are written into the uh the uh ordinance that creates the PLDRC. So, it's uh I think if it's mi you miss three or more for any reason whatsoever um then it is an automatic vacation. Um so
>> I would just just my opinion I would like to have it at least where they could appeal to this board rather than an automatic vacation uh of the the appointment. Um
because like I said that we've had some really legitimate reasons and I was here when that got put in place by the way that got put in place in 2018. >> Yes sir. >> Our discussion then and I will tell you that um the reason behind it was we it's
like the pendulum. It went from one extreme to the other. We had individuals that would miss multiple times. We'd have and then we also had individuals that would show up and not even they were here but they weren't they were here but they weren't mentally here.
They were physically here in the back room doing whatever they were doing. And so to me that was just the detrimental to this board is not. Uh I realize that we need to have at least four members as a quorum. >> Yes sir. >> Uh that's why I'm not really keen on
virtual um participation. Uh we went through that back in and and you can't get a quorum off of virtual now. We were able to do that during COVID and and it was very difficult to do a virtual meeting with individuals.
They don't usually get their point across >> and from my point of view where I sit is very difficult trying to keep them involved and be making sure that they're being attended to and their questions are being uh answered. But I would like
to have at least an opportunity for whoever meets that threshold of three absences to be able to go back to this board and plead your case. You know, uh why or why not? We should keep you on
the board. Simple. And um rather than just an automatic vacation. Uh we I we had that with Mr. vendor and uh he'd been on the board for years. Never had a problem with attendance. He
had uh some issues come up. They were legit and he was he had to lead the board. Only way he could get back to it was for reappoint and he chose not to go that route. But
um so I just I know that people have come in not feeling well because they don't want to miss those absences and I'd rather not have a person put in that situation. That was my reason for the bylaws. Look
at >> Miss Bush. >> Well, that includes I'm sorry. >> I'm sorry. >> Um I just went through this process with my my nonprofit board redoing our bylaws. We just adopted them on Tuesday night. Um, and one of the things that we
did as far as absences goes because that, you know, our our board members are um various disciplines. They have reasons, work purpose, family life, illness, and we're meeting in person. Um, and so one of the things that we added to our bylaws was uh the
difference between unexcused and excused absence is notated that in the bylaws as to what an excused absence is, pregnancy, right? family matters, things of that nature. I, you know, I'm gonna try to be here. Um, but you know, we we
defined what that was. So that way if they let us know ahead of time, they're not feeling well, they did not want to get the rest of our board members sick, they had a family emergency, um, that we were allowed to excuse that absence and it didn't count towards the number of
absences in total of that year. So that's a suggestion. I I think the board chair is absolutely correct that there should be some leniency there. Um, and you know, not I've I've tried to always make it, but like I you know, I have a potential uh absence coming up. So, I
wanted to speak to what we were doing uh with our board in order to make that um appropriate especially because we're all busy, right, and life happens. >> Mr. Cost, you had a comment? >> No, not on that subject. >> Okay.
within the bylaws itself. >> Not at all. >> Okay. And and we'll uh that is an ordinance change. We'll bring it to county council for direction. Um we'll ask that this commission kind of
um uh vote to, you know, have staff present that to county council. Um specifically for PLDRC to um allow some flexibility in terms of the absences. um uh either changing the threshold or having that
system of excused and unexcused, you know, absences. I I will say that uh you guys can miss three, all the other boards can miss two and then they're automatically off, >> right? >> Maybe we shouldn't have brought it up. >> Okay. Now, the way I'm reading it is if
you miss three, >> yes, you're automatically off. Uh all the other boards are >> You said they could miss two >> and they're automatically off >> for other boards. They're automatic. If they miss two, they're automatically off. >> Yes. >> But on our board. >> And do they meet as often as we do?
>> Some of them meet once a month. Um, uh, not as often as this board. I I believe I think code force code enforcement usually meets once a month and they have two. Um, so let's >> Okay. Well, maybe my thought process is
not correct then. I just don't want to have to go in front of council. >> And uh um I think you were I was not around in 2018, but um you know, I've been told that it was response to exactly what you were you were saying
about um you know uh absences and the the harsh rule is a response to other boards you know not meeting quorum and things like that. Yeah. Um uh I understand and I have the same opinion about virtual meetings especi especially
for quasi judicial uh provisions where I need to protect due process very difficult to do >> very difficult I've been through it believe me >> through co I went through that and when me and maybe a few couple staff members
were in here and that was it you know so but uh Mr. Costa, you had a comment. Oh, Miss Craig, I'm sorry. Don't want to miss >> overress. >> No, go go go ahead. I'll go after you. I have something came up on this. >> I hesitate to bring this up because I'm
okay with the status quo, but I'd like some clarification on what's in the bylaws about reelection of positions on the board. And I'd like to see that the verbiage changed so that it's uh
it it currently says once a year uh physicians are are up for authorization again and I'd like to have it say but it's okay for somebody to be reelected and I believe that that verbiage is not included. >> You mean reappointed?
>> Reappointed. >> Are you talking about the officers such as the chair, vice chair, secretary? >> Chair and vice chair. There's no limitation currently on reelection. Um, >> well, I can give you some history on that, too.
>> There used to be a limitation. We took it off because nobody wanted the position. That was back when Frank Cerveno was on was the chair and he did such a good job. We never wanted him to leave, but then he left me anyway. So,
>> and then I had to take it. >> Now we got you. >> Now you got me. Yeah. And you we like you there, but the way I read it, it it's possible that you couldn't be reelected. >> No, I don't think so. I've been it wrong. >> Listen, I've been here. >> There may have been a restriction, but
there currently is not a restriction on re-election. >> I've been sitting in this seat for at least five years. You know, >> but uh and and if somebody wants it, well, just speak up. >> Arm wrestle.
>> Don't push that. We'll talk about it, >> Mr. >> Yeah. I just going to ask if uh to save us or save me some time. I'm going to speak for myself, not for the rest of us. Uh could you email us the bylaws and the chapter that pertains to PLDRC? >> Yes.
>> And that way if we have any specific questions, at least we you can have them and have them ready and have answers ready for us when we come back next month. >> Yes. Does that work? >> Yes. >> Great. >> Great idea. And I will make a statement that uh you know I'm not steadfast on this. It was just something that I know
we lost uh a couple individuals actually because one was concerned about absences and the other one actually had the absences and um and I just hate to see that happen. Not to say that I couldn't go back before council and ask for a reappoint if that were to happen to me
personally. So if if if it's okay if it if it's not a problem then we I just wanted to be out there you know some consideration. >> Uh can I get a motion from this entire commission you know for staff to uh go
to council bring up these points because it will require an ordinance change. >> Okay before we make a motion what I would like for but Mr. Cost has asked to review the bylaws in the stat in the code it's in. So, let's put that off until the next meeting.
>> Yeah, I think that by next meeting, we've all had a chance to go through both documents and we can discuss it and then kick it upstairs if we need to, >> Miss Bush. >> And I would just ask if I'm not here next meeting that you would consider the excused unexcused absence concept.
>> Thank you. >> I you know, life maybe. So that's why we that's one of the reasons we had the discussion today is get an idea of everybody's input and what they their what their feeling is at the moment. You know, then before we send a motion to
council, we'll have it pretty much ironed out. >> Okay. Anything else on that subject? Okay, Mr. Shams, any other staff items? >> No, sir.
>> Staff comments? No, sir. Commission comments. Miss Shelley. >> Yeah. I just have a couple of comments. Um I would like to say first of all, it'd be really helpful to have the pages numbered. >> This is the first time the pages haven't been numbered.
>> Yeah, we're um currently going through we're training Kimberly to be my replacement. So, that was a small oversight, but we'll make sure it's corrected next month. Great. I apologize. >> Just either Yeah, it was difficult. And then um
I I'm not able to come over and get um the packet and um Miss Craig has offered to pick up a packet for me and she's been dropping them off for me at my home. Um this last time um she was informed
um that it was a sunshine violation, which it is not. I said that we would need to check with legal to make sure >> it is not a sunshine violation. We don't see each other. I don't know she's been at my house. I have a gated house. She can't even approach my house. She just drops it.
>> I'll direct that to Paulo. >> As long as So, so I think you're fine in that in that instance. Um uh you know the the sunshine law um applies to >> that legally. Yes. So it does not apply to just dropping a package at my home
>> because there's no there's no communication between it. >> There's nothing. >> I wrote a note. >> And then you sign six name to it. >> Exactly. You're fine. >> Okay. Mr. Costa.
>> Yes. This I have two comments uh and questions and suggestions. Um, at some point, and correct me if I'm wrong, but I I recall that usually on page two of our reports when we'd have uh any case, it would show the the zoning, but it
would next to the zoning, it would actually then show you what the setbacks are. >> Yeah, >> we had that at one point. Now, it's gone away. So, I keep having to ask the same question. While I don't I know most of the zoning setbacks, I didn't memorize all of them. It would be very useful to have a table similar to what you have below where shows zoning land use for
the the neighbors left and right, but for the subject property is having the setbacks spelled out for both the zoning and the future land use if they're different. That would be very helpful to me, especially when we're looking at cases with front two front yards instead of having to ask the question. Um, what
was my second one? I had two. Oh, the second one goes back to Apollo, which is a question we had before. So, the council kicked around chapter 72 this past uh two days ago. I made all kinds of changes left and right. So, my question to you, and this is a
hypothetical moving forward. So, the case that we saw before us today, if those changes have been ratified, it would have not had any impact whatsoever on that case today. >> No, because that case is already in process. We do not change the rules from under an existing applicant. they would
operate under the rules at the time of the application. So, that application would travel all all the way to county council, even if they uh ratified it on Tuesday. >> So, regardless, even though they've got a six-month continuence, when they come back, they're still tied to the old law.
>> Yes. >> Rece unless they they could voluntarily choose to, you know, reapply. >> Withdraw and reapply. withdraw and reapply in which case they would come under the new rules and if that is uh ratified um what they have done is
basically they have made all of you the final decision maker for the special exceptions. So that means to approve minimum four >> um >> same what works same way as the variance. Yeah. >> So uh that's so that's
>> thank you >> miss Bush. >> I have a few things. one followup to u Mr. Costa's question. Are we going to be able to see that ordinance again or does that just go for third reading back? >> It would just go for a third reading. >> Okay. And I I have asked when that is
going to take place so that I could try to I >> um it's they continue to a date certain of the 4th Thursday. September 4th this September 4th Thursday at 9:00 a.m. >> Okay. Um,
my second thing is that the Florida Planning Conference is taking place in Daytona Beach in September. So hopefully staff is able to attend, but I wanted to make the um, planning commission aware because I know that they have some special workshops and um, if you are interested in attending, I will not be
there for obvious reasons, but I did help plan some of the sessions and there is a um, a few of the mobile tours that um, my organization helped put on. So definitely encourage you especially because it it comes around to Daytona not very often. Uh and the last time it was here it was interrupted by a
hurricane so we weren't able to have the full conference. Um so very excited that's so far so good. It's the Florida planning conference. Um so they have sessions on planning projects comprehensive zoning those type like everything that pretty much we
cover. Um and it talks about those types of projects across the state. um where they have various community development directors staff present on unique planning um projects uh comprehensive plan changes, zoning changes, things of that nature. So uh for those of us that
have an AICP designation, we have to get certified credit, we have to get continuing education credits and that's one place to do it. Um but they also have a planning commission um uh lecture usually on Tuesday. Um, I believe it's going to be the 16th of September if I'm
not mistaken. Um, so I just wanted to share that with all of you in case you were interested in attending because they talk about kind of the rules and the overview of what this board's supposed to really do, but it's across the entire state. So, you'll hear from other planning and zoning board members
about some of their trials and tribulations and some of the projects that they um review. So, it's very worthwhile. I've Yeah. when I was you. >> Yeah, it's a it's a put on by a great it's, you know, put on um uh every year across the state in various locations.
Um and so like I said, we're really lucky to have it in Vtona Beach this year. Um and Valuchia County and a lot of um individuals within the county have been helping put on some of the mobile tours and really highlight some of the great work that Valuchia County is doing um in in the planning realm. So, I just
wanted to make that note. Um, and then for obvious reasons, I might not be here at the next meeting, I will let you know. Um, obviously, uh, but my intent is if I'm not had the child yet, I will be here. So, um, hopefully I will see you. If not, I will see you in October.
>> Okay. Any other commission comments? >> Uh, yeah, I'd like to say something, uh, on the the the bar pit. Um, I just appreciate Glenn being here. I know he was he was representing other clients and stuff to to be here, but he's got
probably more expertise than anybody I know on bar pit. So glad you were here. Learned a lot. Yeah. Thanks. Okay. The other uh thing I would like to address is these this sunshine law. I don't know if we're not being a little
too strict on that. You've got it to where I can't even talk to Frank. I couldn't talk to him about other matters unrelated to the PLDRC and just exactly where where does where do you start getting into the gray area
because I have talked to people on the state level because I called one time uh I didn't call I emailed I wasn't going to be and I knew that the vice chair wasn't going to be there and I reached out to uh Miss Shelley and Mr. Costa to
let him know that I wasn't going to be here and I got my hand slapped for it. They that I was told that was almost a violation. It wasn't didn't come right out say but then so I asked at the state level if that was a violation and was
told no. So, where is my where am I at on >> So, so we're usually pretty conservative, but you know, you're not prohibited from just talking to any of your fellow uh commissioners. Um the
sunshine law kicks in if uh on certain topics. So, it is um a discussion uh two-way communication on anything that could reasonably be before your commission. So that's basically all land
use matters. Um attendance and things like that. Uh not really subject to it because it's not it's it's usually you know when you try to get a quorum you need to know how many people are going to show up. Um but there is that kind of
danger of something slipping in. So, you know, when coordinating schedules, our recommendation is, you know, go through our staff for for that type of activity. Um, just to keep things clean because if someone does a public records request,
all they'll see is just emails from one commissioner to another. Um, so a lot of it is us trying to be protective of you in terms of um, uh, you know, sunshine laws. Um, and kind of the best way to do
that, and the simplest way is, um, hey, don't talk about anything related to county business on emails. It's kind of a simple rule, um, without having to go through topics of discussion. So, coordination on, you
know, can you hold a meeting? Um, because you're the chair, you you call the meeting. um you know and just on that not subject to to a sunshine violation um because it's not something I would reasonably come before you. Um
but it's very easy to slip into discussion of matters that are kind of innocuous. Um say oh this controversial item is coming on this particular day. Are you going to show up? Right? So that's you know something as I can
understand as that. So that's kind of why our advice is >> try not to communicate with other members of the commission on county business. >> Okay. >> How about theoreticals? anything that could reasonably come
before counting. So that's that's things in the future. So theoretical subjects are subject to are you know in the purview of the sunshine law. >> May may I say that uh I too got my hands
slapped and outside of my normal fashion I did not fire back. So I'll fire back now. So the the the email was basically the question was posed by staff. Have you guys received your packages? And everybody
was copied. I replied back copied all. No, mine has not arrived. I think that is not a violation of the sunshine law when we were trying to between all of us. We're trying to figure out where the problem is. And you're telling us you cannot communicate with each other on this is not these are not items that are
agenda items. These are housekeeping items. And I don't see where the sunshine law comes in and applies there. >> I'll have to I'll have to take a look at that. But it's but it also applies to um like kind of ministerial things like
approving minutes, right? That's that's kind of an act. Um so >> no, I I agree and I agree with you that is but that's a function of the of the of the board itself. But attendance, I mean, hey, I'm going to be absent tomorrow. I don't think that is a sunshine law issue. Uh haven't gotten my
package yet. I don't think that's a sunshine issue. Uh hey, you guys didn't reserve our parking spots. That's not a sunshine issue. So, those are the items that if I fire that out, I copied all I guarantee you automatically I would get a I get a little hand smack from either
McFarland or in this case now Samantha West who's who's in charge of us. I'm sure that would be automatic. >> Sure. So, let's let's try something. Um >> Okay. Let's see if we can blind copy everyone. So that way if you reply all,
>> you don't, you know, you can't reply all to blind. Um, and usually we do this by saying, you know, commission members are blind copied to this email, but please do not try to reply all. >> I'm a real stickler about the sunshine law. I mean, I was on the planning commission for a long time in Daytona
Beach. I was an elected official and I would say to people because I don't like it to even have the appearance um from somebody in the public or or so I heir on the side of being so I would tell people you know we get invited to a lot of the same public events where
different things that I'm not being unfriendly but I don't sit in a corner and have a conversation it could we could be talking children or pregnancy or anything else but I tend I don't do that because of the perception so my friends and so I would tell them in advance And so I'm not being unfriendly.
I'm just aware of that perception. >> Miss Bush, you had a comment. >> Yeah, I was just going to say the be the blind copy is the best practice. We do that with my organization and we work with 40 jurisdictions and elect different elected officials and any communication we send out is always
blind copied to the elected officials. So that would be my suggestion going forward. >> Miss Shel, I thought you were just being rude to me. That's all. You weren't talking to me. when I slapped you. >> I I think Miss Tucker has something. >> I'm sorry. I don't have a request to
speak button on this side. Um generally our common practice is that we do blind copy all of the PLDRC members. Um there's been some accidentes with training. It's been corrected. So we do apologize for previous instances. Um we just want to make sure that we're trying to protect you guys as much as we can
when it comes to the sunshine laws. So it's tough love. We apologize. It's and it's also um >> organized this meeting >> because you never know if if it's like well even if we blind copy say a member
of the public copies all of you in an email and then you respond respond all as as you pretty much do. um as a natural reflex if you're receiving all these blind copies, you're comfortable to to respond all. If you respond all to
a constituent email or a public email and then another member of the commission also responds all, you know, then we have that kind of, you know, intersection of, oh, there's communication. Um and then you know the timeline gets
kind of okay did this member re look at what the other member uh replied all to and are they also responding to that? Um so there's a little bit of kind of you know uh be careful when you respond all
um to any email because uh uh a member of the public could have copied any any comm commissioner member. We'll try to blind copy um from now on and then you know definitely start our
emails with um you know fellow commissioners are are copied in this email. Please try not to respond all. >> Okay. Well, anyway, that's, you know, I know we're getting I don't want to prevent the fact that if I see Stony out
somewhere or Frank somewhere or anyone here on this board that I can't talk to them because of sunshine, you know, if it's pertaining to the planning board or something of that nature, if it's a public hearing um meeting and we all
attend, I can understand not standing side by side and discussing what's going on in the public meeting because it's going to come force but for personal things I >> personal things are completely >> I don't but delivering a packet is not
anything to I guarantee that's not violating sunshine >> yes there's all these like mechanical things that are not sunshine violations um that just it's kind of like how how
life operates um but there is a uh uh opportunity for like kind of innocuous comments to kind of slip in. Um so that's kind of what we're concerned about. But just you know meeting schedules uh you know trying to
get quorum um just delivering materials those are fine. Um, it's just, you know, the only advice I can give is is kind of try not to say more than um what you need to if uh you know that your
correspondence is going to another member of the commission. >> I didn't say that. [Laughter] >> No, but I'm I get what you're saying. I understand. Okay. Anything else? Do we have anybody else
commission comments? Do we have any present citizen comments? This meeting's adjourned. >> Okay, ladies, let's get on the same page so we get you good. a lot about it. >> That's what I hear.
>> I don't know what all these they took out with his by right or I know they were taking some things and making a buy right instead exceptions or whatever. So, you know, I mean, and sometimes it's redundant
anyway. They take our recommendations to have here their time. They've always they always have the opportunity to appeal it >> if they don't like the decision that the field puts out. >> They do have the opportunity, not
sometimes, >> regardless of what our decision is, they got the opportunity to appeal to county counsel. >> So in the event that it it needs to go further, they do have that opportunity to do that. So because most of the time it's sent as
a recommendation but on special exception but now it's going to be stop here. We do have that's under they can appeal that also no matter what our var what our decision is
>> right that we have had enough we've actually had them both ways >> that we would approve a variance and then someone would appeal that to the county council. >> So we've had it both ways. cuz I know a situation up at the Leon's room. We approved it and then the the residents
appealed it and it got it reversed. >> It got reversed. >> Yeah. But I think it's a it's it's a it's taken some of the steps out of the equation. Not to say that uh that they
should be, but it's it's it's definitely taking Thank you. See you next time. I don't know. Are you waiting? That's right. Yes. Um I have it right over
Oh, no. You're Yesterday. Uh Alan I don't You guys are the most I've ever seen. What you have to sit here half an hour? I just barely got here.
[Music] I don't give a I don't give a lot of time to think. >> We had to continue. No traffic, which apparently [Music] Oh yeah, run. We used to go fast.
>> Good. We'll see. >> All right. I didn't chapter one. Very similar. How about [Laughter]
[Music] >> my lucky day? Let's go. Did I I don't think I have Get rid of He was not very No, I did not. >> It's okay.
I couldn't believe I missed you already. Oh my gosh. >> Oh no. >> Yes. This is so initial. Anyway, have fun.
>> Take care. Bye-bye. Yeah. Sorry. Okay.