Hey, hey, hey. The March 19th, 2026 Planning and Land Development Regulation Commission public hearing is now called to order. If I could have you all to please um actually we could uh please rise for the pledge of allegiance.
I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America >> to the republic for all we catch up. >> If we could have roll call, please.
>> Good morning, members. Member Harrison, >> present. >> Member Craig. >> Member Shelley >> here. Member Bush >> here. >> Member Sigma >> here. >> Acting chair Sigma. Oh, sorry. >> Hey, get on my >> Costa. Gladly give it up.
>> I'm here. >> And uh Chair Mills is absent. >> All right. Before we get started. Yes, ma'am. Oh, yes. Oh, will you please silence your phones and any audible devices you might have during the meeting? Thank you. Uh before we get started, we need to
have a uh nomination and a vote on a vice chair. Anyone? >> I nominate uh member Bush. There >> we second. >> Yeah, I'll second that one. >> Have a second. All in favor? >> All opposed?
Eyes have it. You want to slide on over? >> Slide on over, girl. >> Um, do I need to? I'm all plugged in. >> Okay, then stay right where you're at. You're good. >> I'll pass I'll pass the g your direction. No worries. Uh we have uh any minutes to approve on this one? I don't
believe so. >> No, sir. >> No. So then let's go right into the um let's go right into legal comments by Mr. Story. >> Sure. Uh thank you uh Mr. Chair Prompor or acting chair. Um this is for uh uh
members of the public and for applicants that decisions by this body on cases which reszone real property from one classification to another pursuant to the zoning ordinance are recommendations only to the county council and do not constitute a final hearing. So new evidence may be introduced at the county
council public hearing. However, deci decisions on variances and special exceptions 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 add evidence a reasonable mind would accept to support a conclusion. Thank you, Mr. Chair. >> Yep. And uh before we get started, let me say that the public is invited to
speak on any matters that coming before us today. If you would please fill out a form at the back of the room and hand it in before you come up to speak and we'll call you up when it's your turn. Um, with that, let's go into any exparte communications and we'll start to my
immediate right. >> None. >> I have none. >> None. >> None. >> None. >> And I have none as well. Uh, before we get started with the uh old unfinished business, there is one item I want to uh put to a um
I guess I make a motion or a vote, I should say. uh CPA2506 and PUB250 have requested to be moved to the end of the agenda. So, we need a motion for that to rearrange it. >> I get a motion on that, please. >> I'll I'll move that we um move CPA25-006
and PUD25-005 to the end of the agenda. >> Second. >> Okay, we have a motion uh by by Miss Bush on that motion and and a second by Miss Shelley. Uh all those in favor say I. >> I. Any opposed? All right, then we'll move on right into old business. You
would please read uh V269. >> Yes, sir. >> V26009, variances to the minimum yard requirements, yard and accessory structure requirements on urban single family residential R3 zoned property.
>> All right. And this is uh Laura Costa. No relation by the way. >> Good morning board. >> Good morning. >> Uh we have a variance application for a vacant parcel located at 1177 John
Anderson Drive. Uh we have uh they're request the applicant is requesting three variances. One for a proposed two-story home and two for an ingground proposed swimming pool. Variance one would reduce the uh north front yard
from 30 feet to 25 ft for the proposed two-story helm. Uh variance two would uh allow the proposed swimming pool within the front yard setback and variance three would allow a reduction of the front yard to
from 30 ft to 29 ft for the proposed pool. The property is a vacant corner lot, single family urban residential zoning R3 and uh urban low inensity future land use. The parcel was created in its current configuration by a subdivision
exemption lot combination and lot line adjustment with 1175 John Anderson to the south in June of 2021. The approval was made um as the property as a standalone conforming corner parcel
R3 zoning classification which requires a minimum lot size of 10,000 ft and minimum width of 85 ft. The subject parcel has an area of 10,800 ft² and a lot width of 175 ft on Brooks Drive.
Uh, as a corner lot, it's subject to two front yards of 30 feet along the north and west lines. Then if a new R3 corner lot was created today, it would be required to be 15% larger than the
minimum requirement pursuant to 72612B1 in order to accommodate for that second fryard. FEMA flood insurance maps have the subject property mostly within flood zone X in the northwestern corner of the property is the 2% chance annual flood
hazard area. The proposed locations of the single family residence and in ground pool are outside of the flood zone area. During discussions with the applicant regarding the al alternative safety features for the pool, um we noted options such as a screen enclosure or a
6ft fence would also require variance and could be incorporated into this request. However, the applicant was firm in his preference. He's going to put a 4ft fence within the front yard as a safety feature which would not require variance. A 4ft fence is a code for a
swimming pool to meet the minimum height, safety height. Environmental permitting reviewed the application and had an objection to this project. Uh staff recommendation is to deny variances 1, two, and three, uh should PLDRC find the applicant have provided
uh competent substantial evidence for approval, um there are two conditions provided for them to consider. Um, any questions for staff? >> Troy Kent, can we change those names, please?
>> Um, do can you tell me what the jurisdiction is in the um property um map? Sorry, I'm trying to pull it up real quick. The property location map. >> The jurisdiction is >> Yeah, it's all pink right there. So, do
you know what jurisdiction that is representing in the map? >> Uh, that would be >> Yep. That's the city of >> Orman Beach. >> Orman Beach. Okay. >> That's all. >> Okay.
>> Any other questions for staff? >> No. All right. Thank you. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Is the applicant present? Come on up, please. If you would please state your name and address for the record. >> Current address. >> Uh our current address is 316 Bucknell
Drive, Daytona Beach, Florida. Uh we hope to live at the 1177 John Anderson Drive. >> And your names? I didn't catch the names. >> Adam Marcus, >> Sarah Gummy Marcus. >> Okay. You've heard staff's uh report. Would you like to add to that? >> Uh she did a great job uh explaining the
the the project and the request. Um, I wanted to thank Laura for all of her hard work and the hours that she's put into this along with myself and my wife. Uh, and thank you all for for taking the time to review this today. Um, we're asking for a very modest variance to the
existing setback requirements, only a few feet. Um, it will adhere to, you know, the the standard of the neighborhood. Um, and we think it's reasonable and and uh looks appropriate for for what will be there in the future. Do we have any questions for the
applicants? >> No questions at this time. All right. Thank you. >> Thank you. >> You may sit down. >> Do we have any public participation for this case? >> No, sir. >> All right. That being said, let's uh close the floor for uh public participation and open the floor for
either uh discussion and or a motion. >> I'll be glad to make a motion, >> please. >> I move that case number V-26-00009 be approved. subject to the staff conditions on page 24. >> I'll second.
>> Second, Harrison. All right. So, I have a motion by Miss Shelley to approve case V-26-009 with the two staff recommend conditions and a second by Mr. Erison. All those in favor say signal by saying I. I.
>> I. All those opposed. >> Motion passes unanimously. Next case, please. Yes, sir. Case number V-26-023. Variances to accessory structure
requirements on urban single family residential R4 zoned property >> and this is Mr. Tula. >> Yes, thank you. Um the the applicant was requesting four after the fact variances to address the front yard encroachment
of an existing 2.32 square foot and 8t high um accessory structure and a 540 ft detached garage and studio. Uh the variances are variance one is to allow the accessory
structure within the east front yard. Variance 2 is reduce the eastern front yard from 25 ft to 0 ft for the accessory structure. Variance three is allow accessory structure detached garage studio within the eastern front yard and then variance four is to reduce the eastern front yard from 25 ft to
24.83 ft for an accessory structure detached garage studio. The subject property is located approximately uh 900 ft from the intersection of Lake George Road and um Peach Lane in Seville. Um,
this variance request is for a 12,689 ft parcel developed with a single family residence and two accessory structures. As mentioned before, um, the parcel was purchased by the current owner in 2004 and building permit records indicate that the principal structure and detached garage with the studio were
permitted uh, in 2006 with construction around 2008. The approved plan did not clearly depict the building step back from the easement line that is also on the front yard um of the property resulting in the garage being located within the front yard creating a minor
or dimminimous encroachment. Uh the second um accessory structure consisting of a wall with footers and electrical service used for lighting was constructed between December se approximately between December 2017 and April 2018 without permits and is
associated with an active code compliance case which prompted the variance request. Um the property is zoned um single urban single family resident uh residential R4 and meets the lot size and the width requirements. However, both accessory structures are
located within the 25 ft front yards at back. Um uh the site is located within the flood zone AE. The original building permit included FEMA certification at the elevation of 8 ft one uh 1 ft above the
base flood elevation. Environmental permitting has reviewed the request and has no objection. However, uh provided that the project remains in compliance. Um uh in addition there were three um letters opposition that were submitted to you for your um review. Um and then
staff recommends denial for variance variance requests one and two um as they do not meet three of the five criteria for approval. And then staff recommends approval for variance requests three and four as it meets at least uh meets all five of the criteria. Should PL DRC find
the applicant has provided competent substantial evidence for approval. The conditions are provided to you below. >> Any questions for staff? >> I do have one. So, we are doing there's existing items that we're trying to get variance for and then future to be built items as well. Correct. We have a
combination of >> No, they're they're um the two structures have already been built >> are existing. Okay. >> Yeah. The garage/ studio was built with permits in the past, >> but at the wrong setback. >> Gotcha. All right. Thank you. Uh there's no other further questions for staff.
We'll call the applicant up. >> Thank you. >> Thank you. >> If the applicant's present, please come up, come forward, state your name and address for the record. >> Good morning, sir. >> Good morning. My name is James Hannis.
1668 Lake George Road is my uh residence. Okay. Uh what I'd like to respond to is that um my response is to acknowledge that I sent out seven certification um letters sent to the adjacent property
owners for their information and feedback. Uh the result provided a total of five out of the seven or 73% of the property 73% of the property owners that did not deny
uh the variances. >> Did you present those letters to us? Do we have copies of that? >> Yes, I do have a copy of it. So the one couple in the house >> Mhm. >> is part of that three. So, uh, each
house I sus I suspect is is one one um one individual board one vote. Otherwise, you'd have uh all the partners or all the owners of the each of the house doing two of the uh two of
these. >> Okay. We'll check with staff here in a minute. >> So, there's some that are married and some are not. Okay. >> Anything else you'd like to add? Do you have anything else to add? Miss Stucker will take this. >> There you go. That's >> just one letter.
>> Yeah, that's what it looks like. >> And I'll say the uh planning and and zoning has been extremely outrageous in terms of the working and the quality of work and and their findings is acceptable. >> Okay. Hang on, sir. Any questions for
the applicant? Sir, come right back up. Any questions for the applicant? No. You may sit down then. >> Do we have any uh any members of the public that want to speak on this? >> No, sir. >> No. Do you have those letters by chance?
>> Oh, you do? Did you fill out a form afterwards, sir? Please come on up. >> I did it ahead of time. >> You did? >> You have filled one out? >> You gave her a form? >> Filled out a form. >> I was one of the ones that sent an email in. >> No, I understand that. Uh when you're done talking, there's a form in the back
if you don't mind filling. Just for the record, fill it out. Fine. No problem. >> State your name and address, please. >> Robert Trimmer, 1693 Lake George Road. >> Okay. Go ahead, sir. >> And I'm completely opposed to I don't mind if he keeps his garage, but I think he needs to be able has to be able to
remove the wall because that's in complete violation of any codes for the county, a setback rule. Mhm. >> Uh he's blatantly been somebody that has thumbed his nose at county codes and done things on this property that repeatedly that he's gotten in trouble
for for putting in doors without permits and putting in windows without permits, doing roof projects without permits. Yet he goes around and tells everybody else in the community what they're allowed to do and what they're not allowed to do. He thinks he's code enforcement somehow.
Personally, it would be very erroneous in my opinion that the county would allow him to keep the wall simply for the fact that you'd just be thumbming your nose at everybody else that does everything by the book, by the code. I put windows and doors in my house there
and got the permits properly and everything to do all that because I worked in the industry and I know what is required. He has sliding glass doors on the second and third floor that they allowed him to keep that he put in without a permit and that was established that go to nowhere.
There's no balcony. There's no protection to stop them. They allowed him to screw them shut which should have never been allowed if he' have got the proper permit to do it to begin with. They have never allowed him to install those. Why he was allowed to get away with that after the fact is beyond me. I
don't understand that because I worked in that industry and that is a big no no. Anybody could pull those screws out if he was to sell that house later on. Small child fall out to his death. Second, third floor. Yet, he still has those doors. He should have had to
replace those in my opinion. And that's just one of the reasons that I feel he should not be allowed to keep the wall simply for the fact that he should be held accountable for the things that he does without the permit that he expects everybody else to do in that community
of Seville. So, >> okay. Any questions for the speaker? >> No. Thank you, sir. >> Any other public participation? Then we're going to close the floor for public comment and um
have uh discussions up here or and or a motion. >> Chair, if I may, sir, would you mind coming up to the DAS to fill out that form, please? >> The gentleman that just spoke. >> Yep. Yes, sir. Thank you. All right. So, any panel discussion and
or motion, please, on this case? >> Yes, please go ahead. >> Um, yeah, I'd like to uh move that we separate this uh to a vote with variance one and two and variance three and four. >> Separate the two. So, you want to make
two separate motions? >> Okay. >> All right. Go ahead. >> Do I need to make it? >> Yep. Make your motion. >> Make two motions. >> I'd like to move that we separate uh the variances into two different uh votes with variance one and two together and
variance three and four together. >> A second on that. >> Yeah, I'll second that one. >> All right. All right. So, we have a motion on the floor on case B260 023 uh to take separate votes on variance 1 and two as one and a a separate vote on variance three and four as another. All
in favor signal up by saying I >> I. All opposed. All right, moving on. So, >> let's take variance one and two discussion or a motion. >> Uh I'm ready to make a motion. I just have a question. in making a motion. Um,
do I have to make it in the affirmative here or no? >> Yes. So, in the affirmative. Yes. When I say in the affirmative >> that I recommend to deny. >> Yes. That would be an >> just confirming. >> Um, I'll make a motion
>> that uh case number V-26-023, I recommend denial of variance 1 and variance 2 subject to >> just variance one, variance two. So, denial on variance one and two. >> Yes, sir. >> Do I have a second? >> Second. >> We have a first and a second on the
motions. >> Um, so we have a motion by Miss Shelley and a second by uh Miss Craig to deny variances one and two. All those in favor signal by saying I. >> I. >> All those opposed. Motion passes
unanimously. And then moving on to variance three and four. >> I recommend on case number V-26. Can I not? Let me stop you for a second. So I just want to make sure that's a motion for denial on variance one and two. >> Correct. >> Okay. All right. Moving on.
>> Um I recommend uh case v-26-023 23 recommend that go through recommend variance three and variance four be approved subject to four staff conditions. >> Second. >> Mr. Chair, just to clarify, it would
just be three staff conditions. It would be condition two, three, and four. Yes. I'm sorry. 2, three, and four. >> Second. >> Second by Miss Bush. All right. So, we have a motion on the floor on case B-26-023
on variances one variance three and variance four to approve with staff recommended conditions number 2, three, and four. Uh, and a motion by Miss Shelley and a second by Miss Bush. Any discussion on the motion? All those
in favor signal by saying I. >> I. >> I'm an I as well. All is opposed. That one passes unanimously. 70. Okay, that concludes. Thank you. And we are moving on to
now we're at new business. First item is uh V-26-025 and it is Mrs. Tucker. Miss Tucker, I'm sorry. Read that into the record, please. Getting ahead of myself. >> I was waiting.
>> Uh, case number V-26-025. Variances to the accessory structure requirements on urban single family residential R4 zoned property. >> Miss Tucker. >> Good morning, members. Today before you, we have a case where the applicant is
requesting two variances to reduce the minimum waterfront yard setback for an ingground pool and screen enclosure in the urban single family residential R4 zoning. The subject property is located on the south side of Aelia Road and is non-conforming to the R4 zoning
classification as the property is only 6,961 square ft in area and has a lot width of 57.24 ft. The R4 zoning classification does require a minimum lot area of 75,000 square feet and a frontage of 75 ft. The
parcel does have a vested status and is eligible for building permits. And in May of 2015, the property did receive a variance to separate from the parcel to the west. The applicant purchased the property in June of 2025 and the property was previously developed with a
1541q ft single family residence that was developed in October of 24 by the previous property owner and up to the 25 ft waterfront setback line. In November of 25, the applicants applied for building permits for the pool and screen enclosure and were notified that they were encroaching in
the waterfront setback. The proposed pool will be 13 ft from the property line and the screen enclosure will be 10 ft. According to the applicant's written petition, the pool is to be used for physical therapy. Environmental permitting did review the the request and didn't have any objections. However, they did identify that the site is in
the Indian River Lagoon surface water improvements and management overlay. The applicant does already have a current wetland alteration permit in house that is associated with the building permit. Staff did receive one letter of support and one letter of opposition that was
presented to you today for your review. Staff recommends denial for the variance request as it fails to meet criteria 1 through four for granting a variance. Um if the PLLDRC does find the that the applicant has provided competent substantial evidence to support approval. Staff has provided three uh
conditions for consideration. I'm available for any questions. >> Any questions for staff? I have one. Um the letters of opposition. Are they in his packet? >> Uh yes, sir. It was um the highlighted form.
>> Uh we received it on March 9th. It would have been in the stack of papers you received. I do have one extra copy if you'd like it. >> The ones you handed out today or in our >> the ones from this morning. >> This morning. Okay. >> Yes, sir. >> Give me one second to look those up, please. >> I believe it should be either page two
or three in the packet. Yeah. 256 CPA. All right, everybody find those? >> Yes, just starting to read. >> So, any no questions for staff then? >> I have a I have a >> You do have one. >> I have a comment. >> Go ahead, please. Miss Bush. >> I just wanted to say thank you for
labeling the property location map. >> Yeah, that's all. >> Make it simple. Yeah. Thank you. Any other questions? >> I I did have one comment. >> Please go ahead. I don't know how relevant it is, but when um when Miss Tucker was reading, she said that the
lot was 75,000 square feet and it was 7,500 just for >> No, ma'am. The R4 requires a minimum of 7,500 square feet and this lot is just under 7,000. >> And all I said was all I meant to say was you misspoke and said 75,000 instead
of 7,500. >> Thank you. Those zeros do get a little tricky sometimes. Any other questions or comments? No. All right, moving on. Is the applicant present? Please come forward. State your name and
address for the record. >> My name is Daryl Corbett. My address is 160 Iselia Road, Edgewater, Florida, 32141. >> Okay. You've heard staff's uh presentation. Yes, sir. >> Would you like to add to that? Um, I do have there was four letters actually of approval and recommendation for this
being done by my immediate neighbors around me. I did get, as was pointed out by Kelly earlier to me that I wasn't aware of. There was one neighbor that, for lack of better terms, has been a problem since we moved in anyway. So, I'm not I wasn't expecting anything nice
from them. But, this pool is very small relatively. There are there are 118 houses located on those canals. Out of those 49 of those have pools out of and three are being built right now or actually two are being built. One just got completed this year. So getting a
pool on that property or on those canals is not unusual. And if you look at those all the ones that exist now are closer than the 10-ft setback most of them about 70% actually sit up on the water itself. They can overlook the the canal standing on their pool deck. I'm asking
for a very small pool, 9 by 12. It started out 9 by9 because of my my disability. The pool company recommended I go longer, so I had stairs going down into the spa and I wouldn't step in down a giant step into the spa. That's what this is for. It's not a large, if you
look at the size of the pool that's being built in comparison to the house to the property and other pools around mine, this is very small and looking for a health benefit. It's >> okay. Any questions for the applicant?
>> Miss Shelly, >> and I just I wanted to make a comment um just to um reiterate that the home that is there I was looking uh was it was by the previous owner. >> Uh no, no, ma'am. That >> built 25.
>> I purchased the property. Okay. >> And the end of I believe it's 2022 and we built the house. >> So you built the house. Okay. Thank you. Thank you for clarifying. >> And I do have Anybody else? I do have one question. You said you had multiple letters of support.
>> Yes, sir. >> Did you turn those in? >> Yes, sir. They were emailed over to Kelly. I've got copies of those if you need those. >> I I have the one that was in our packet. One one for one pro, one one con. >> And when I looked through my email, I had only had the one letter that I'd
received from Mr. Cor. >> If you have them and you want to turn those in, that would be part of the record today. Uh yes sir to Kelly. >> Yep. >> We'll pass those along. Do you have anything else you want to add? >> Uh no sir.
>> Okay. Thank you. You can have a seat. Do we have any uh speakers for this case? No sir. >> No. In that case, we'll close the the floor for public particip excuse me, participation and open it up for uh discussion and or a motion.
>> I'll make a motion on this. Go ahead. Case B26025. I'll make a motion for approval with the three staff conditions. >> Second. >> So, I have a motion on case V26-025 by Mr. Sixma and a second by Miss
Shelley. Any discussion on the motion. All those in favor signal by saying I. >> I. Any opposed? Passes. Uh V26025 passes unanimously. >> Okay.
Next case, Miss Shelley. >> Yes. >> Thank you. >> Case number V-26-028. Variances to the accessory structure requirements on urban single family residential R4 zoned property.
>> All right. And this is uh Laura Costa again. >> Still no relationship. >> Still. Gosh, I'm so sorry. >> She keeps saying no. >> Good morning. Uh
>> morning. The applicants are requesting two variances for a proposed 440 square ft carport. Variance one is to allow a proposed accessory structure located within the front yard and variance two is to reduce
the south front yard from 25 ft to 14 ft. subject parcel was developed in uh with a 2278 square foot single family residence which was constructed in 2024 by Dickerson Construction. Applicant
purchased the property in November 2024 and added a screen room uh constructed May of 2025 and then has submitted a building permit for the carport as well in uh December of 2025.
The carport is going to be facing Beasley Drive and is intended to provide shade and protection from inclement weather and to store his vehicles. Uh please note that the home was built with a twocar garage. Uh per FEMA flood maps, the subject
property is wholly located within flood zone X. Environmental permitting reviewed the variance request and stated they had no objection to the carport as long as they follow all the uh comply with the environmental regulations. Staff's recommendation is to deny
variances one and two should PLDRC find that the applicants have provided competent substantial evidence for approval. The two conditions have been provided for your uh consideration. Uh staff has received three letters of support from adjacent owners. >> Okay.
>> Any questions for staff? >> Bush. >> Thank you. Um, first, thank you again for labeling the property location map with the jurisdiction. You have no idea how helpful that is for me. Thank you. It is helpful. >> Um, I wanted to ask, are there any I I
did a quick Google maps aerial search. I didn't go drive around the community, but do you know if there are any other front yard carports in this community? >> There is one unpered one across the street. >> Okay, then. >> Thank you. >> And we'll see them next month. Yeah, I
haven't heard from them. So, >> okay. >> Yet. >> Thank you. >> You're welcome. >> Any other questions for staff? >> All right. Thank you. >> Uh if is the applicant present, would you please come up, state your name and
address for the record? >> My name is Dana Taylor. Uh I live at 1683 Beasley Drive. You heard staff's report. Do you have anything you like to add? >> Yeah. I I I wrote it out if I if I can read it.
>> Um criteria the criteria analysis analysis of fact. Uh number I is no special conditions are warranted for an accessory in the front yard. They reference the uh pickup truck that I have is too large, too long to fit in
the garage. Uh, and when we fit tried to fit two cars in there when we we moved in last year, >> it uh you couldn't open the doors to get out. The the garage is quite small for a twocar garage. >> Um, special and number two, special
conditions and circumstances for actions of applicant. is not planned to be a storage place but but to serve as a park to serve to park operational licensed vehicles. three of them. Um, two two vehicles for for for
sun rays. Sun suit two vehicles uh to protect vehicles from sunrays normally protected by adequate garage space and the covered covered workspaces also will serve as uh you know home improvement uh things like that. The you know you pack
the car out, you do something, you put the car back in. Um a literal interpretation derives the right right applicant and reasonable use. The carport anchor to the existing driveway is the is the only in the front is the
only location. Front yard is used to to for septic field. They it was suggested I put it in there. It was also suggested that I put it in the rear and the rear has a slope in it. And uh the slope and
ease landscape is is sloped and suggested they suggested that a permit for the garage I guess to put take stuff out of the garage and put in there. We went through a 10 10 uh or four month uh permit to put a a
tough shed in the backyard and and it's very small. It was just for lawn stuff. Uh the harmony in the neighborhood is very good. Um the before I started be when I first started this whole process, I was told by the
people in the carport, they said, "Get get your neighbors to to write a letter and tell them that you're you're uh what you want to do. Get them to help you approve." I I did I I started with the letters and there's three of them, three
or four that were attached with my my my uh packet and uh and I didn't know that it was when I started it. I did I suggest I went to about eight eight people down the street uh and I had that
form that I have in their paid letter and I asked them to uh I talked to them about about what I wanted to do and why and uh uh I didn't I did about 10 of them and I didn't realize that that I
could I had to have one for just the people that touch the property. Mhm. >> So, I did those and those are included except the one in the back and um and I didn't uh uh I didn't know that I could
could bring the other ones in cuz there was 28 people in the in the street in the street I live on the Beasley Drive and it's uh it was a I I could have brought them in but you know I I I
didn't. So, um, and the, uh, the last thing on this is that, uh, is I know that all of my neighbors don't have a problem with it. So, >> okay. And see if we have any questions.
Uh, Miss Shelley, >> um, I just have a couple of questions or one question really. Um, will the roof of your carport be taller than the roof of your garage? Will it be? No. No. Oh, I was looking at the vehicle. Okay.
>> It's actually 9 ft. It's 9 ft uh uh from >> So, it will come off from the garage at an even >> just at the eve above the garage door. >> Great. Thank you. And um this really has nothing to do with the applicant, but I was looking at the neighbor next door
with all the cars in the front yard. So, I think um anyway, just just a comment. >> Okay. Miss Bush, you have a question or comment? >> I do. Um, did you consider adding on to
the principal structure and doing some kind of attached carport instead of a um one that you would have to construct 6 ft away? >> Well, it's uh it I I like the idea that it's that it's away from the house. I I
don't know that that if that uh I could probably ha have the car carport people do it, but in in my the way I was trying to do it was was I have a 3T if you come out of the come out of the entrance of my house and you go you're coming out
and there's there's a 3 ft space. This was before we put the additional uh width of the of the uh a apron apron I call it on the on the driveway. And so uh right where that a right where that
apron starts is where it's a new new uh it's wider, >> right? And so that that corner would have a would have a a stansion going up in the corner that would hold the uh the corner of the
>> Yeah, I'm just trying to My point was is there a way that you could aesthetically design this to match more of the house and in harmony with the community rather than just installing something that's prefab that >> it is. It is. It is. It is black roof,
black trim and white and it's a white house with black roof and trim. >> Okay. Thank you. >> Uh Mr. Erson, my concern was you wrote on here that the
RV is going to be moved, but where >> Oh, I'm selling it. >> Oh, okay. >> Yeah. I I have I have a I bought I have the the the the plan I had a plan
to put the trailer next to the house on the on the other side by the by the front by the front and and there because there's a gate there and there's a there's a fence. The problem is is that's the that's when I found out
that the septic septic system was there. So, now I've lost I've either got to go put it in storage, which I did for a year, >> but I took it out of storage because I I'm I'm going to sell it when I when I if if and when I get the >> the the uh
carport. If I do, if I don't If I don't, I'll sell it. If I do, I'll think about it. But I can't It won't It won't fit under it. It'll only go The the inside of the the carpet is only 8 ft high. >> Mhm. Yeah. Okay.
>> Uh Miss Craig, >> uh thank you, sir. Um of the 28 people, the neighbors that that you sent letters to, were there any objections to this uh project? >> Oh, no, no, no. anything to help? >> No, it was
they were it was it was really an interesting way to meet your neighbors because because we were there a year and we we see people go by and you know and all that but and being on a dead end street, you know, we see the same people all the time. So, uh but
when I talked to them, they were very Oh, they were so many of them told me to do it without a permit. Maybe maybe they're not sure about you. >> That was that was a guy across the street with an illegal one. They weren't the suggested I'm sorry I shouldn't say
that they weren't suggesting that I that I break the law which I I did I had a permit for my for my tough shed a permit for my my um screen room in the back and and I was I
you know even the guy who who did my screen screen room uh one of his one of his guys said you don't have to do that you know you you don't need that you I went and got the permit they said well you I got the permit so I got the got
through the permit process for this and then and then uh suddenly I was stopped for something I didn't know anything about and it was a quite a surprise and and it's been a long journey to do this so
>> okay great thank you sir um any other further questions for the applicant you may sit down thank you uh do we have Any public participation? >> No, sir. >> All right. With that, we will close the floor for public participation and bring this back to us for uh discussion and or a motion.
>> I'll be glad to make a motion. >> Please do. >> That we approve case number V-26-028 subject to the two staff conditions on page five. >> Second. And Okay. So, I have a motion on case V26-028 from Miss Shelley and a second from Mr.
Ersen. Uh Miss Bush, did you have another question before you move on? Um, no, just a comment. Go ahead. Um, I just wanted to say that I'm I'm gonna be a no on this just because I would love to see the structure tied more into the house. Um, and I don't think it's in harmony with the neighborhood. Um, I think that
that is going to be an issue that we're going to see later on down the road. So, I just want to explain my vote and appreciate the opportunity. Thank you, chairman. >> Again, we have a motion by Miss Shel, second by Mr. Erien. Uh, any other comments? >> Okay. Uh, all those in favor signal by
saying I. I. I. All those opposed >> I. >> So we have one in opposition. Is that 6 to one? Is that right? >> Yes sir. >> 5 to one. >> 5 to one. Sorry. 5 to one. So this motion passes 5 to one. Thank you.
And the next case, Miss Shel, please. >> Yes, sir. Case number CPA-25-00006. Small small scale. Oops. Did I go to the wrong way? Back up. I'm trying to move on too fast. >> Yep. 2632. Oh, I flipped that one right over.
Case number 26-032, variances to the minimum yard requirements, maximum lot coverage and maximum fence height on urban single family residential R3 zoned property. >> Good morning, Miss Ray. >> Good morning. So, the applicant is
requesting 10 variances to the minimum yard requirements, the maximum lot coverage, and maximum fence height for the existing residence, an approximately 2,661 ft home addition, and a proposed 6 ft
CMU privacy wall. There are two subject properties, parcel one that is 1774 John Anderson Drive, and parcel 2 that is 1776 John Anderson Drive. Parcel one is currently developed with a one-story residence and a dock. This residence is
proposed to be demolished. Parcel 2 is currently developed with a twostory residence that was constructed in 1955, a swimming pool and a dock. This residence is proposed to stay with the home addition added onto this one.
Uh the applicant is currently going through a lot combination of the two parcels to create one unified building site. The Halifax River is located along the western property lines of parcels one and two and along the southern property line is the Roberto Road extension.
Because of this, the property will have two front yards, a waterfront yard, and one sideyard. The properties are zoned urban single family residential R3, which has a minimum lot area of 10,000 ft. Individually, the two properties do not meet the minimum lot area. However,
once they are combined to create one unified site, the lot will meet the minimum lot area requirement at approximately 11,090 square feet. The R3 zoning classification has a minimum front yard setback of 30 ft, sideyard setback of 20 ft combined with
a minimum of 8 ft on anyone side, and a waterfront setback of 25 ft. Variances one and two are for the existing single family residents. Variance one is to reduce a north sideyard from 8t to 3.8 8 ft. Variance 2 is to reduce the east
front yard from 30 ft to 5.2 ft. Variances 3 through 5 are for the proposed home addition. Variance 3 is to reduce the east front yard from 30 ft to 25.2 ft. Variance four is to reduce the south front yard from 30 ft to 10 ft.
And variance five is to reduce the west waterfront yard from 25 ft to 15.75 ft. Variant six is to increase the maximum lot coverage from 35% to 46% for the existing res residence and the proposed
home addition. The fence height requirements are within section 72 to82 of our zoning ordinance. For a fence placed within the waterfront yard, it shall not exceed 3 ft in height except those with the opacity of 25% or
less. Fences placed within the front yard shall not exceed 4 feet in height. Variances 7 through 10 are for the proposed 6ft CMU privacy wall. Variance 7 is to increase the maximum fence height from 3 ft to 6 ft for 10 linear
feet along the western boundary within the west waterfront yard which is the orange cloud on the left hand side. Variance eight is to increase the maximum fence height from 3 feet to 6 feet for 25 linear feet along the southern boundary within the west
waterfront yard which is the I think it's green schools right next to it variance 9 is to increase the maximum fence height from 4 ft to 6 ft for 59.5 linear feet along the southern boundary within the south front yard which is the
purple and then variance 10 is to increase the maximum fence height from 4 ft to six feet for 30 linear feet along the southern boundary within the east front yard. But uh staff recommends to approve variance requests one and two as the variances met all five criteria. Deny
variance requests three through six as the variances failed to meet criterias one through four. Deny variance requests seven as the variance failed to meet all five criteria. Approve variance requests eight and nine as a variance has met criteria one, two,
and five and deny variance request 10 as a variance failed to meet all five criteria. Should the PLDRC find that the applicant has provided competent substantial evidence to support the approval of the variances, seven conditions were provided for reconsideration. I do also want to add that two letters
of support were provided in the uh staff report package from the adjacent neighbors to the north. I'm available for questions. >> Any questions for staff, >> Miss Bush? >> Yes. Thank you. Um, do you know what the impervious surface ratio property is?
>> So, the impervious like as it stand as it currently stands, >> what the proposed ISR is? >> Um, I do not. Let me >> They're asking for a variance to the lot coverage. So, I would love to know what that impervious surface ratio is before.
>> Absolutely. Um, I do not have that calculation on hand at the moment. Um, I just know the law coverage, which is the what's under right. >> Right. >> Okay. >> Any other questions for staff? >> I do have one quick one. This is not
considered a corner lot by any means. >> It is. >> Yes, sir. That um the south the Roberto Road extension that goes to the public pier um that is considered a right of way still. >> Okay. So, you're even though the road doesn't punch through, it's considered a rightway. So that's two front yards.
Yes, sir. Okay. >> All right. Uh if no other questions, then thank you. Well, the applicants present. We'll call him up. >> Please state your name and address for the record. >> Sure. >> My name is Chris Whitney. I live at 297 Lesley Lane in Lake Mary, Florida. I'm
the architect for the project. >> Okay. >> Um first, I want to say thank you to to Kristen and her team. we've had multiple meetings and conversations that have crafted this solution and and provided an extensive amount of information. So,
she's been fantastic to work with. Um, you know, I'm I'm happy with her support on a few of them. I stand to speak to support the ones that are declined. Um, I also have an ex an an additional exhibit. Um, as I was writing my narrative, I thought it might be easier
to have one more picture. There's no new information. I don't know if I give it to you and Um you also received a an extensive packet of additional sort of narrative. Yes. And um the term that we're using is
hardship. Um as you look at this site, it's very oddly sat on the property. The the house is not square to the street and that's consistent for several lots and that shows up in the exhibit. So, we're using the term sort of hardship, something that we didn't create. Um,
what you're going to see in the exhibit that we give you is that our solution actually improves all those conditions of which we were denied for. Uh, when we remove the existing house, and you'll see that in the sketch. The red box is the old house that we're taking away.
The black box is the proposed addition. And the little uh sort of white area in the black line is exterior space. It's both a summer kitchen on the first floor and there's a balcony on the second floor. So depending, you know, it's not conditioned space u that's actually
crossing that. So I'm going to go one by one through um the ones I took exemption to. Uh number three, our front yard. Uh as you notice, only a tiny corner of our addition actually fails that red line and we are significantly behind on our
front yard um from from the John Young. Uh second, I'm sorry, number four. Um the setback is, you know, although it is called a corner lot, you can see that the add that the house that we're taking down did not address the fact that it
was a corner lot. Um, Robert Road extension really is a wooden pier. There's never going to be an extension of that road. So, uh, with all that being said, we are still improving that setback by 5 ft. So, we are 5 ft farther
away from the property line than it is today. So, we have improved again that condition. Um number five um in the exhibit of the proposed construction uh crossing setback of the exterior space on yeah you know the the the setback
from the river or the inter coastal as I call it um you know really doesn't hit the the the uh actual structure it only hits our exterior spaces. So, um we think that we are certainly within family of that. Um
number seven and number 10 relates to the um height of the fence because that is sort of public access and there's lots of people going up and down that walk. Our homeowners are just hoping to get a little more privacy. They're building a brand new seaw wall. The seaw wall was deteriorated. So, all that under separate permit is under
construction and we have the environmentals and all those things that support that. So, we're just looking for that extension of the wall to provide a little more privacy from that public access on that that dock. So, that's our response to the 10. I'm ready for any questions.
>> Any questions for the uh Yes. And Miss Bush, >> you did not speak to variant six, the increase in lock coverage 35% to 46%. Would you like to speak on that? >> Um I just jumped over it. um our
coverage is consistent and you'll see in the in the picker package with if you look at the photography of the neighborhood that's just sort of the way this neighborhood builds and so you know the variety of pool surfaces and driveways um we're just we think we're being
consistent with the neighborhood >> understood pools aren't cons a part of that lot coverage that I'm aware of >> uh and the way we calculated yes that's area stuff so >> can you inform me then is the red box smaller square footage than what you're proposing The red box is the house that we're
removing and we are larger than that but we are farther away from the what I think the critical setbacks are. >> I understand but my question was is it larger and yes okay >> yes you can see that by the size of the gray box versus the red box. >> I just wanted confirmation. Thank you. >> Yes ma'am. >> And oh but one more question. Do you
know what the imperous surface ratio is on this line? >> I believe when we calculated those numbers for the 46 that was our impervious area. So that's >> No, your impervious area is way more than that. It includes all your pavers. It's anything that water can't percolate through is considered. >> Miss Bush, I could answer that question.
From their original submitt, it's about 72%. >> Yeah, I thought we had this >> from the original submitt. >> Yes. When they provided their variance application, they calculated lot coverage to include the pavement, which we corrected them that it's only the roof structures.
>> Okay. >> But the ISR is about 72.2%. >> 72. Okay. Thank you. That's helpful. >> I knew we had the number somewhere. Any other questions for the applicant? >> Anyone? No. All right. Thank you.
>> Thank you so much for hearing us. >> Do we have any public participation on this? >> No, sir. >> All right. We have two letters of support in the packet and any supplemental emails or letters? >> Not from what you additionally received
yesterday or day before uh from Steve. And if you would please, what we received yesterday or the day before, was there any opposition letters in that packet? >> No, sir. >> There was one >> or two. Yeah, I I'm having trouble
finding it in my packet. That's why I'm asking. >> No, there's no letters of opposition. There was only those two letters of support. The supplemental um information that Steve sent. Yes, that was just additional information from the applicant. >> Okay. But not there's no letters from neighborh. Thank you.
Um, there's no other questions. We're going to or statements. We're going to close the floor for public participation and open it for discussion and or a motion. >> I'll be glad to make a motion. >> Please do. >> Can real quick. Oh, sorry. We have a
couple comments. Go ahead, Emily. >> Yeah. Sorry. Uh, I just wanted to see if we could break up the variances again like we did with the first case. >> What are you proposing? >> There's a lot of them. Um, so I'm ultimately I'm I'm proposing to pull out variant six. I do not feel comfortable
approving that where it stands. I don't like where the ISR is and so I want to the rest of them I'm fine with. >> You want to separate that as a separate vote. Variant six. >> Yes, please. >> All right. Uh, Miss Craig, >> thank you. Um, yeah, I I'm also having a
problem with variant six. Um, I think that the uh the the water runoff up in that area is a real is a real issue and um I don't think that this is going to help matters any um the fence
height um along the southern boundary. I think I'm okay with it up to a certain point, but it seems like to take it six feet all the way out to the uh to the
um street practically is uh could pose a a traffic problem. Um and um yeah, I think those are those are my my main objections to this.
Uh yeah, I think that's it. >> Any other comments? Um waiting for the motion. I'll be glad to make a motion that we approve case number V-26-0
through 32, variance 1, variance 2, variance 3, variance 4, variance 5, 7, 8, 9, and 10. >> And we have a second on that. >> Yes. You want to do that separately? >> Yep. You want to go ahead and make that motion as well and then we'll take them
separately. >> Sure. Um, for V26-032, I move that we deny variant 6, increasing the lot coverage from 35 to 46%. >> So, we have a motion to deny variant 6. Second one.
>> Okay. And motion deny variant 6 by Miss Bush and second by six. Let's go through this. So, case B-26-032. >> The first motion is for variances 1 2 3 4 5. I think legal was trying to hear.
>> No, it's it's fine. So So you're you're doing the first motion first and you're going to vote on that first and then you do the second motion by >> um I have six mot second and the first motion. >> Yeah, we have second. >> Yeah, >> we we did. >> We haven't done roll call yet. >> We haven't done roll call yet, but we just >> we haven't voted yet. We just got the
motion. I'm just reading rereading them back into the record. So let's start again. So case V-26-032, I have a motion on the floor by Miss Shel and a second by Mr. Sixma to approve variances 1 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 and
10. And then we have a second motion on the floor um from Miss Bush with a second also by Mr. Sixma to deny variance number six. >> Correct. >> If I can ask you something real quick. >> Yes.
>> If we don't include that in the first motion when we needed a second motion to deny the number six separately. Yeah. >> So, so you've have two motions. Um, you will need to act on them separately. So, the first motion you're going to vote on is a motion to approve. Correct.
>> 1 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 10. >> Right. >> Everything. Yep. Right. So, once that is done, either you approve or deny, then you move on to the second motion, which is just on uh whether or not you would want to deny uh variance number six. >> Yep. That's it. All right.
>> And I want to for the record, I'm guessing you were wanting to have the um recommendations in there as well for your motion, Miss Shel. >> Oh, so for the first one to approve all of those, it' be um 1, two, four, five, six, and seven. Those are the
conditions. >> Correct. >> Two, four, five, six. >> And I'll reread that before we vote. Cool. >> Mhm. >> We're good. >> All right. So, one more time. Case V26 032. Motion on the floor by Miss Shelley and a second by Mr.
to approve variances 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 7 8 9 and 10 with the staff recommended conditions 1 2 4 5 6 and 7. >> We're not doing six
>> in the vote in this first vote. >> Correct. That's why I skipped number three. >> Oh yeah. Okay. >> Okay. That's on the recommend that's on the recommendations. All those in favor signal by saying I. >> I. Any opposed? All right. So that one. So the first
motion passes. Now the second motion again case V26-032. Motion on the floor by Miss Bush and a second by Mr. Sixma. And the motion is to deny variance number six and the condition number three staff
recommend condition number three. So this is a motion for denial. >> There wouldn't be a condition if we're denied. >> There's just one condition, right? Well, we wouldn't be putting a condition on the denial for denial. >> Just one. Okay. Just the variance number six. All those in favor of the denial say I. >> I. >> All those opposed I.
>> I. >> So, let's do that a roll call, please. >> I was just going to ask >> on the denial. So, we're voting on the denial. Please go ahead. >> Member Harrison, >> deny. >> Member Craig, >> deny. >> Member Shelley, >> approve.
>> Member Bush, >> deny. Member Sixmo >> deny >> and chair Costa >> approve. So >> that is a 4 to2 >> 4 to2 vote. >> So it stands >> it.
>> Yes. Yes. So >> stands stands as a denial. >> Yes. It's a denial of that particular variance. >> They have an option to appeal. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> Um and they would have to redo the site plan because you know the obviously the proposed house is is too big. So within the constraints that you approved, they
would have to come back with a site plan for the the fence height and the setback provisions, but they have to keep within that 35% lot coverage. >> Okay. All right. Thank you. Uh got that applicant out there. You all good? Thank you. All right. Moving on to the next case then.
>> And uh Miss Shel, we are skipping the CPA and the PUB. So, we're going to Z. Got it. Um, case number Z-26-029, reszoning from the prime agriculture A1
zoning classification to the rural agriculture A2 zoning classification. >> All right. And this is Miss Ray again. So, the applicant is requesting to reszone a 5.44 acre parcel from Prime Agriculture A1 to Rural Agriculture A2.
The property is approximately 340 ft north of Incorporated City of Deltona and is currently undeveloped. The property was subdivided from a larger parcel in May of 1982. The property met the minimum lot area requirement of the A1 at the time of
creation, which was 5 acres with no minimum lot width. In 1984, the minimum lot area increased from 5 acres to the current 10 acres. The immediate surrounding parcels are all zoned A1. Lot sizes of these parcels vary from 1
acre to 10 acres in size. Southeast of the property are two parcels that are zoned RO residential RR that have 1 acre lot requirement. Development pattern in the area is transitioning from larger 10acre lots to more smaller lots of 5 acres or
less. The property has a rural future land use designation and A1 and A2 zoning classifications are assumed compatible. Advocates intent is to utilize the less intensive minimum yard requirements to construct single family residents. The
subject property is a corner lot and the two front yards have a 30-foot ingress egress easement that is located on the subject property. The minimum yard requirements would be measured from that ement line as you can see on the um picture in front of you. When the A1
minimum yard requirements are added at 100 ft for the front yard and 50 ft for the sideyard, it decreases the buildable area. The A2 has a front yard requirement of 50 ft and a sideyard requirement of 25 ft, giving them a greater buildable buildable area. Both
the A1 and A2 zoning classifications would allow just one dwelling unit on the property. Staff recommends forwarding the resoning application to county council for final action with a recommendation of approval. I'm available for questions. >> And I believe Miss Craig, you have a question.
No, >> Miss Bush, go right ahead. >> Thank you. Um, I'm just curious. We we get I you know, I understand I don't understand this gentleman is reszoning this property in order to build it because of how just erroneous and and um strict these A1 setbacks are. If the
chairman Mills were here, he would echo this as well. Um, I just out of curiosity, and you don't have to answer this now, maybe this is something that, um, Samantha and you all can do research on, how many A1 zone properties are non-conforming because we get a lot of requests to build on these properties.
So, I'm just curious, is it time to re-evaluate that? >> We we do not have that number. Um, that would definitely be a research project to evaluate and look at it. Yeah, just out of curiosity because we get a lot of the requests to develop these and
they're a lot of them are substand like they're not substandard but they're not the 10acre minimum. So I just maybe that would be worthwhile to maybe come up with some kind of policy that then would allow these individuals that are going through this process to do so quicker. Right. >> Thank you.
>> Absolutely. >> Any other questions for staff? >> Nope. Thank you. Is the applicant present? Would you please come up? State your name and address for the record. >> David Cole, 2870 Appaloosa Trail,
Deltona, Florida. >> All right. You've heard a staff report. Anything you would like to add? >> No, sir. I I really don't know what to say. I never done this before. >> Okay. All righty then. Uh, have a seat and if we need you, actually, hang on. Anybody have any questions for the applicant?
You may have a seat then. Thank you. Any public participation on this case? >> No, sir. >> None. All right. In that case, we close the floor and let's open it for uh discussion and or a motion. >> I'd be happy to make a motion. >> Please do. >> Z26029
forward reszoning application to county council for final action and recommendation of approval. >> Second. >> Got a second by Miss Shelley over here. And any discussion on the motion? Anyone? No. In that case, all in favor
signal by saying I. >> I. >> All opposed. Motion passes unanimously. And the next case, please. >> So, going back to >> uh we're going No, we're going to do the uh ordinance. Go ahead. Do the ordinance. We'll finish it up. >> Do the ordinance.
Case number 0-25-00008, Ordinance 2026-05, amending chapter 72 of the code of ordinances to amend zoning classification and backyard chicken regulations. >> Miss Ray, take it away.
>> All righty. So, in uh May of 2025, the county council meeting, council directed staff to review the regulations for backyard chickens and urban areas and consider reducing the minimum lot size requirement. In January of 2026, council discussed
sta staff's findings and directed staff to prepare an amendment to the backyard chicken regulations to eliminate the lot size requirement, eliminate the need for a conditional use permit, allow for chickens to be either fenced or within a coupe, and to raise the maximum number of chickens allowed per lot.
Currently, backyard chickens are permitted through a conditional use permit within the following zoning classifications. Urban single family residential R1 through R4, urban two family residential R six, and urban mobile home subdivision MH6. The minimum
lot size for backyard chickens is 1/4 acre or 10,890 ft. The R3, R4, R six, and MH6 zoning classifications have a minimum lot size requirement that is less than the one quarter an acre, resulting in the
conforming lots within these zonings cannot meet the minimum lot size for the backyard chickens and and are unable to keep chickens. Section 722935 establishes 11 standards for our backyard chickens within urban areas. A
couple of these standards are no more than five chickens or hens. Uh chickens must be kept in a fully enclosed predator proof coupe and are not permitted to be free range. C coups may not be taller than 8 ft, may not exceed a maximum of 150 square ft. Must be
sheltered or confined to prevent contact with wild ducks or geese, etc. uh staff research staff researched the urban backyard chicken regulations in 16 local municipalities and seven adjacent counties. Seven out seven out of the 16 municipalities regulate backyard
chickens. Only two have a minimum lot size requirement. All seven counties regulate backyard chickens and none have a minimum lot size requirement and the average maximum number of chickens permitted among the jurisdictions is five. Based on council
direction and comparative research, staff proposes to allow backyard chickens as a permitted use instead of a conditional use permit. Eliminate the need for a building permit for the chicken coops. Eliminate the requirement for a University of Florida agricultural
extensive extension service class completion. Eliminate minimum lot size requirement and establish a sliding scale for the maximum number of chickens based on lot size. Staff recommends finding ordinance 20265 consistent with the comprehensive
plan and forwarding it to county council for final action with recommendation of approval. I'm available for questions >> and I've got a few of them for you. >> Uh I'll let Miss Bush go ahead please. >> Okay. Um I had sent you all my questions
ahead of time, right? So um I will just ask them now for the public and for everyone to hear. Um my first question I and I first off I want to commend the research that you did. It was very thorough the way that you put that together. It was easy to read and
comprehend and understand the flow of information, right? And how the logic model, how you were able to decide what it is that you were going to remove and or keep within the modification of your ordinance. So, excellent job on that and walking me through that process. Right. It was like I was in your head. I I
could get it. I just had a few things where I was like, "Okay, I don't understand that." Right. the minimum number of chickens. Um, so less than 5,000 square feet. And I I posed this again. How many do we know how many lots we have that are that are in that category?
>> So I was unable to do the that type of research because it would take our mapping team. Yeah. >> Yeah. >> So unfortunately I was not able to get that number for you. Um, however, it was a maximum number of chickens, not a minimum. So I don't know if that's So it' be a maximum of three for those. I just was curious on the three number
because in the research everything was four and up and typically you try to think of like a chicken per person. So if you had a four per you know fourbedroom house on a 5,000 foot lot you'd want four chickens >> right? So, kind of how I worked it is um
so the average is five and so for the uh five chickens, you'll see that the Sorry, let me get to the table. Um that it's 75,000 square ft to the 9,999 ft². Um our um most common urban zoning
is R4 that has that minimum lot size of 7500 ft². So, with the average of five and then as I went down, I just kind of minus the chickens. >> Understood. Understood. That was just something that I would consider is not necessarily the sliding scale based on the square footage, but maybe by the
occupants that the chicken is trying to feed. >> Um because that is the purpose, right, of ch I mean, at least that's why I have chickens. I don't carry them just to have them as a backyard animal. They're providing eggs and substance for me, >> right? Um, my second question you struck
through no more than one coupe shall be allowed per permitted parcel, which I understand because we're not obviously permitting those, but I would keep the one coupe per parcel requirement so that if somebody has three chickens and they all have three coups, that might get a
little stinky, noisy, it might get excessive, and you would have no way for code enforcement to enforce that. They also might be moving coups because they don't want to clean the coupe, which is another one of your requirements. So something to consider, >> right? Um that one was struck because uh the 1 acre or more of the 20 we want to
be able to if they wanted 10 and 10, they would have the option to have those two coups. Got >> it. Maybe then there's a clause in there that could stipulate if it's um residential properties under a certain square footage, then they're only allowed one coupe. And if you have a greater square footage, then more than
one because that would be appropriate for the size of the lot. Um, my next one, and this one I was I was I'm not sure how you're enforcing this now, so please I would love to know. The fly tight bin must be kept at least 20 feet away. This is where you put the poo, the
manure. Uh, it must be kept 20 ft away from all property lines. I'm just curious if that's feasible for a property that's 5,000 square foot or less. So, that was a part of the original adoption. Um and of course it was the intent is to keep it away from
all property lines so it doesn't like of course this odor. Um that is subject to change if the commission wants to propose something if they want to do it for accessory like accessory structure setbacks for of course for the smaller lots that's up to the commission
discretion. Is how is that being m is it being >> enforcement and are have there been any issues with this on residential properties that are anchored >> main um code enforcement that we've seen is based on roosters >> not so much the fly type then
>> okay I just was curious on how enforceable this was >> it's our code enforcement so once they get a complaint about it then they go out and investigate >> I can just see this being one of those issues that neighbors fight each other about and argue over the specifics of it
and I just am not sure whether or not that's really pertinent to three chickens right at a minimum. So, >> um those are my questions. Thank you. >> Anybody else? Miss Craig. >> Yes, thank you. Um looking through the
uh attachments from the various other towns and uh I see that a number of them mentioned owner occupied dwelling as being a um uh
restriction and I was wondering if there was a reason for not including that in in what we're putting forth. I'm not sure. Um, a lot of Well, these are for backyard chickens, so for our urban areas. So, a lot of times it would be for their
residents for them to have backyard chicken. So, it would be owner owner occupied. My question is based on the fact or my understanding at least that an owner occupied property like this, the um the owner of the chickens is
going to be more likely to be careful about it and take it rather than a um a tenant. So, uh that would be my suggestion is to add that as one of the conditions.
>> If I might, Assistant County Attorney Chris Ryan, um any we just have to remember that we're still under the ambit of SB80. So, any restriction that's more burdensome is something that would not be allowed by the ordinance. >> And also, I believe this accommodates for rental properties. someone wants to
rent a house and have chickens. If you have owner occupied um restriction, you would not we would not be able to allow a a renter uh who rents a house to have backyard chickens. >> So, the towns that have currently have
owner occupied um restrictions to it, are those will they not be able to enforce that after SP 180? >> No, no, no. It's it's SP 180 is you can't do be more restricted. So you can keep what you have. You just can't make it more ownorous.
>> Anyone else? I've got a couple questions for you. So on the acre or larger, there is no maximum. >> It's no greater than 20. >> No greater than 20. >> Mhm. >> For >> one acre or more. >> More 1 acre or more. So if you got a
5acre parcel, you're limited to 20 birds. >> Yep. And this is just within urban areas. >> Within urban areas only. Okay. Again, if you got a 5 acre parcel inside of an urban area, >> it's it's rare, but it's there's some urban properties that are large.
>> Mhm. >> Okay. That's um that one here. I would I would class I have another class lot size classification on there. Um I would probably go at 2 and a half and above is probably um an unlimited source.
That's but that's an that's my opinion. So, >> absolutely. I'm just going with the intent of what with the council kicked it back to us that they're basically looking at less restriction on this. And then the other one that I had was regarding the coupe size. So 150 is
across the board. That's your maximum size coupe whether it's on a 5,000t lot or a 1acre lot. >> Yes, sir. >> Um one ce >> I was going to say you're going to be hardressed getting 20 birds into in 150 ft. >> Right. And that's why we struck the
>> Okay. Got it. limited to one. >> Aesthetically though, multiple 150 foot coups versus one 500 foot coupe. >> Mhm. >> From a maintenance standpoint, a cleanliness standpoint, one-stop shopping versus having to now spread it out is that's something I think we need
to might want to fine-tune it just a bit. >> Okay. >> Instead of the one shoe fits all size. Uh, and that's it. That's all I had. Anybody else? >> Go ahead. Oh, I just wanted to comment on that question. >> I'll come right back to you, M. Bush. Miss Craig. Sorry. >> Oh, >> go ahead.
>> Okay. Um, on you said it was for urban areas only. I was assuming that that was residential. So, >> urban residential. So, those uh those classifications I mentioned earlier, um, it would just stay within those zing classifications. >> Okay. So, anything a is not >> No, those are by right and we don't regulate any.
>> Yeah. Okay. That's how you define urban. I just want to confirm. >> Miss Craig, did you have something? No. Okay. Anyone else? Do we have any public participation on this? >> No, sir. >> We don't. >> If you'd like to come up and speak. Yes. Afterwards, please fill out a form in
the back of the room and turn it into uh >> this to discussions. >> Oh, chicken discussions. >> Yeah. Um >> about the ordinance, not about chicken raising, right? >> No, I'm just saying because you were having a um about talking about three to four and stuff like that per household and stuff like that. They usually um
working in the pet industry usually they sell um four to six usually because they want to make sure they survive and make sure they have the proper heings of that. Now with the stuff going on now with freeze they will want to keep the higher amount not three they're more
likely to pass away and die. And another thing about the the fly thing about their poop. There's also seen on online stuff a lot of people with smaller areas like this, they also um like to put them on wheels. So, they actually could move them and they're actually more cleansy. You saying about being clean?
>> So, actually if they move them keep moving the um the coupe, it could actually keep it uh the waste down. It'll keep the smell down. It will keep it more hygienic and it will be more appro. This may be a suggestion for you guys to do for people that have smaller locks and stuff like that. so they could
be more um or so they could be able to do it instead of being a problem. >> And can I get you to state your name and address for the record? >> My name is Antonio Himenez. I live at 2680 Palm Drive. >> And do you have chickens? >> I used to have chickens. Yes. And I'm planning to try to have some chickens again.
>> Okay, great. Congratulations. Thank you. Thank you for your input. Please fill out the form at the back of the room. Thanks. >> Any uh other public participation? Anybody else wants to discuss chickens before we move on? >> No. All right. >> I have a comment. >> Go ahead.
>> I grew up with backyard chickens and um I loved getting the fresh eggs in the morning, so I'm glad we're doing this. >> Uh Mr. Chair, if um we would I would recommend that if you would want to make changes to the ordinance, you do so in the form of a motion um to change
specifically the language so that we can uh bring it to council with those recommended changes. >> That would require me to go back here and rewrite this, huh? Are we ready to do that? >> We have a list. Yeah.
>> Well, let's go through that. Who Who else has what other issues do we have besides mine and uh let's go let's do it that way before we even start making a motion on here. >> Go ahead. >> Yeah. Give those to me one more time. >> Okay. So, um I had an issue with the maximum number of chickens being three
for lot size less than 5,000 square feet. I also had an issue with there being um removing the no more than um one coupe. I wanted to keep the one coupe requirement. >> Mhm. >> However, I recognize your comment,
chairman. So, I would be willing to suggest maybe what we need to do is have staff go back and evaluate the square footage of the coupe size and bring that back to >> I would agree I would agree with you that we should have a scale for that. Same same scale for uh property size
versus number of coups or coupe size >> and and the number of chickens because that is absolutely you can't have one without the other. Um, so and then the the whole fly tight bin, I just I don't know if that's really necessary. If I'm making a mountain out of a molehill, but if it's something that we are putting
into a policy that we have intent to enforce, it should be enforceable for all intents and purposes. So maybe there's another way we can look at writing that. Um, but those are my those are my issues with it. Okay. >> I do agree also with your comments um chairman and I do think that there needs
to be a a breakup of um the 1 acre and 1 acre more to the um halfacre. Yeah. >> So I ultimately I think this needs some more work and I would be willing to make a motion to table this. >> What I want to do >> in order for staff to bring back the
recommended changes we are suggesting. >> Is that a motion? >> It is. Yes. I'll second. >> I'll second that. Yeah. All right. Before we go any further, so Miss Bush, that was you. Mr. Erison, you have something else to comment. >> That was going to be my motion. >> So, let's go that again. So, we have a motion by on case 025008 by Miss Bush
and a second by >> Mr. Ersen. >> Er that and that motion is to table this uh for some additional research and corrections and bring back to us >> do 30 days, 60 days. How much time do you need?
>> Yes. >> Um >> 30 days. >> I'm Yeah, I'm looking I'm looking both directions. >> So, we think um the the May May meeting. >> Yeah, I think May PLDRC is the earliest we could do. >> We have a little more space there on May. Okay. All right. So, we'll table
this to the May uh >> Thank you. >> I will I'll amend the motion to read that way. >> Yes. >> Okay. >> I willhead I will amend that as well. You want me to amend it? >> Yes, please. Um I move that we table um ordinance 25-008
to the May 21st meeting. >> Yes. >> And member Ersen second. >> All right. So motion to to table case O-250008. Motion by Miss Bush, second by Mr. Ersen to table it to the May 21st meeting uh
for staff to revise and or incorporate our comments. All those in favor signify saying I. >> I. All opposed. All right. Eyes have it. See you in May. >> And that brings us back to the
>> CPA and PUB, please. >> Oh, we've got the stipen discussion. >> Uh, yeah, we'll do the stipen at the very end. He's here, correct? >> No, >> not back yet. >> Okay. Yep. Gotcha. Okay. Didn't turn a page. Okay. CPA. Okay.
>> Apologies. Um, just to clear up any confusion, I'm not Mark Watts, but my name is Kelsey Hansen and I'm filling in for Mark Watts for this one. >> Okay. So, is he coming back or you're going to take over? >> I'll take over. >> Okay. Got it. >> Ready? Okay. Case number CPA-25-00006
smallcale comprehensive plan amendment from the urban lowintensity future land use designation to the commercial future land use designation. and uh the accompanying one please. >> Yes. Case number PUD-25-
Z005 reszoning from the general commercial B4 and transitional agriculture A3 zoning classifications to a planned unit development and a business subclassification. >> Okay, this is uh Miss West. >> Okay, good morning.
>> Good morning. >> Um so we have two cases before you today. One is the land use change from urban low intensity to commercial and the other is the reszoning from B4 general commercial and A3 transitional agricultural to PUB with the business
subclassification. This is for a site located at 1971 Old New York Avenue in Dand on the northwest corner of South Ridgewood Avenue and Old New York Avenue. Um so this is really to uh have
the existing stockyard restaurant stockyard to bring that into compliance with the current code and then also and that's on the east side of the property and then the west side of the property is a proposed event center. Um the restaurant itself was built in the 1930s
and has continued as that use throughout time. Um, the house, which is in the center of the property, was constructed in the 1950s and the barn was constructed in the 1980s. The owner of the stockyard purchased those two additional properties to the west um
between 2021 and 2023 and anticipated this event center use on the property. Um the what we're doing today for the land use amendment is that through the PD we're going to be limiting the um future I'm
sorry be limiting the intensity through the PUB at 1,00 or 12,500 gross leasable area which is about a 12% F and that is going to make the commercial is going to be limiting that use right so you can't come in and put a brand new commercial
use into that property so we're going to be conditioning the land use change upon the approval of that PUD. Um, other things that are going on the site is that there are 70 spaces on site uh for parking and across the street they have an overflow parking area with an
agreement to the south um at the Magnolia Christian School. The site itself for additional landscaping and what have you. So, they're going to have used the existing landscaping on the north buffer adjacent
to the railroad. The existing landscaping on South Ridgewood Avenue that is surrounding the existing restaurant. The new landscaping that they're going to be putting in is in the low impact retention area. As you can see, it's an existing constraint site.
This is a redevelopment, right? They are utilizing the current um barn, the current the current barn as the event center itself, the single family dwelling as the bridal suite, and the restaurant will retain that use. So,
changes to the site is really going to be the additional parking on the eastern portion, the additional landscaping in the low impact retention area. They're going to be adding retention to the site, which didn't have it before because it was residential uses and an
historic site for the restaurant. Um, so bringing things into compliance. We are making it to where we have uses that have been going on in our community for a very long time. Making that into compliance as well. Um, and also putting safety improvements across Old New New
York Avenue. As you can see where it says Dand Junction, we'll have a an area there for the crossing to that overfilled parking which is definitely needed in that area. If you have any additional questions, I am here. Yeah, we have several. Um, let me I'm
going to start first if you don't mind here. Uh, this is what all triggered by what the addition of the event center. >> Is that right? >> Yes. >> That would started this whole ball rolling. Okay. All right. Mr. Ericson, >> I want to keep putting that from before. Sorry, we need to reset.
>> You're done. You don't need Okay, Miss Bush. >> Uh, thank you. Um, curious, what's the speed limit on Old New York Avenue? full 35 35 35 30 >> This is my neck of the woods. >> Okay. >> I think it's 35 40
>> 35. Okay. Okay. I was just curious. Um >> I just took it the the crossing. I was just curious at what the recommendation there for that whether or not that was going to be an activated crossing or passive crossing. >> I believe you mean by activated as in they're going to have the flashing. I I
believe they're going to have that there. Okay. >> Yes. >> Good. And there's one thing that I forgot to mention which is a large portion of this is in the center of the property about where you see I can't do this line. Um about right oh I'm sorry right here this
area. Forget that one. Um there is a hiatus between the two plats that are located there. So um the attorney for this property is looking into who the ownership of that hiatus is. It's about 30 feet if I'm not mistaken. It might be a little bit less. Um, so the
recommendation from staff is a recommendation of approval subject to um, delete that for you. Subject to resolution of the ownership of that hiatus. That makes sense.
All right. Any other questions for staff? Is the applicant present? Hi, good morning. Uh, once again, not Mark Watts, Kelsey Hansen, 231, uh, North Woodland Cobb call. Um, I first
just want to thank staff. This is my one of the first projects I got to work on with county staff and Mark. Um, and it's been very enjoyable. Uh, big learning curve. Um, second, we received the responses from a neighbor. Um, I believe
Miss Moon has sent a email to staff uh just before this commission. Um, as I understand it, we do have a 15 to 20 year colorful history with her. Um, and I believe the PD, the language in the PD does address her main concerns regarding
noise and traffic. Um, specifically, as you asked about the crosswalk, yes, we're going to install the crosswalk for safety purposes with the flashing lights. um as we have a separate agreement with the school for overflow parking. Um and then the noise um the
language in the PD um actually provides for stricter standards regarding noise as to the event center. Um so I believe any qualms that Miss Moon may have are addressed in the PD. Um, and as Miss West mentioned, you know,
we're here to just request that the appropriate land use and zoning um be put in place for this existing site and it's um been around for a very long time um as the restaurant and now the event center. Um so, you know, we worked with staff on
the PD agreement. Um specifics in the agreement include the noise ordinance, which um like I said are a stricter standard. the it won't go past 11 p.m. Um, and we're not requesting any deviations from the county's noise requirements within the PD. Um, you
know, the parking, as I mentioned, will will provide additional parking requirements and accommodations and safety features with the road improvements. Um, uh, and then restrictions as well as to events. Uh, we did have a conversation with staff regarding um, restrictions during
weekdays until a traffic memo is approved by the county. Um and then so the event center will not hold events on the weekdays and then have limited hours on the weekends. Um other than that, we're here for any questions you guys may have regarding
the project, but it was a um enjoyable one as it was my first time >> um transitioning from litigation to land use. So um here for any questions. >> All right, Miss Bush. >> Sorry. Uh, are you planning any lighting
improvements along um Old New York Avenue with this proposal? >> We are not besides the crosswalk um with the lighting structure to avoid any sort of serious hazards um with along the 35 mile per hour. Um nothing that we're
aware of. >> The intent, I'm assuming, to use the overflow parking is in the evening hours when the restaurant is busy. >> Uh yes, and and also for the event center on the weekends. Um >> Okay. Mhm. >> Um I would just be concerned about lighting um because of the fact that
most pa most fatalities and serious injuries pedestrians are at night or in dusk or dim lit hours. >> So having um a rapid flashing beacon at this location is fantastic. However, it only goes so far if that is not lit.
>> Um because this is an area that people are going to be traversing that facility, I would highly recommend that you add some sort of lighting. if it's not roadway lighting that you as the representative of this um business do lighting in order to ensure that there
is visibility for the safety of those patrons crossing that road. The event center I'm not as concerned with because that's a daytime activity. Um but I am always very concerned about people crossing any type of roadway at night that's not lit. >> Understood.
>> I do this for a living so Understood. And um >> and it might not be in your PED. It might not be in the DA, right? But I'm just for you all doing do the doing your due diligence and making sure that your your patrons are protected.
>> Yeah. I we um I believe the lighting uh language in the P refers to just night or night sky standards, but we can discuss any additional lighting along uh New York Avenue if it's required. I do I believe there's I'd have to bring it up on Google view
if there is any sort of posts or anything outside of the restaurant but as to the event center we >> yes there is um we're looking at aerials right now there is one right across the street for where that crossing is about to go right in that general area and yeah on the other side of the street where the Magnolia Christian School is
and the stockyard itself also has um >> oh not really pedestrian scale but close enough lighting along the front >> okay as well >> I would just just do your homework, due diligence, and review what that looks like at night for peaceful that are for patrons that are crossing. >> Makes sense.
>> Thank you for putting that in. >> Mhm. >> Any other questions? >> Thank you. >> Yeah. Thank you, guys. >> Do we have any uh public participation? >> No, sir. >> All right. Other than the letters of uh the two emails that we have, correct? From the same person.
>> Correct. Yes, sir. The two letters you were provided this morning. >> All right. In that case, we will close the floor for public participation and bring it up to us for either a motion or discussion or both. I'm happy to make the motion. >> Go, sir. It's my neck of the woods
there. Okay. uh CPA 25006 motion um uh to find a future land use amendment consistent with the comprehensive plan and forward the application to county council with recommendation of approval to transmit to the Florida Department of Commerce
for expedited state review and the Valuchia Growth Management Commission. >> Second. >> All right. I have a motion on the floor on uh made by Mr. Harrison and seconded by Miss Shelley and it's on KCPA-25-
Z006 to forward to the county council with a recommendation of approval to transmit to the Florida Department of Commerce >> for expedited review. >> Yes, with the two conditions. >> I'm sorry. >> With two conditions. >> And there's two conditions on >> two condition. Yes.
>> And that is amended with the two two staff recommended conditions. Uh all those in favor? I all those opposed. So CPA25006 passes unanimously and then the we'll also do the
accompanying case uh which is PUD-25-005. Can I get a motion on that? >> Okay. Make a motion for PUD25-00005 forward the resoning application to county council for final action with recommendation of approval subject to
the attached master plan consisting of pro proposed written development agreement and the preliminary plan the two conditions >> second. >> So I have a motion for Mr. Harrison, a second from Michel case PUD-25-00005
to forward to the county council for final action with a recommendation of approval uh with the two staff recommended conditions. All those in favor say by I. >> I. >> I. All those opposed. >> This motion passes as well unanimously.
All right. That brings us to uh the PLDRC stipen discussion and anybody presenting this or we're just on our own. >> I just have >> I'm here. >> I'd like to make a comment. >> Yes, go ahead, please.
>> Um I'm I'm going to have to leave at this point be because I have to be somewhere. So I just want I will not be here for the discussion. >> Okay. >> Thank you. >> We're going to miss you. >> I'm sure you will. >> Enjoy. >> Thank you.
>> Before you before you leave though, do you have any comments on on topic? >> Yes. The same ones that I've had before. I'm I've never had a stipen. Um so I'm fine with what we have or whatever the board decides. That's that's here. So
>> thank you. >> Okay. >> All right. So this is a discussion to increase the monthly stipen for the planning and land development regulation commission members. I provided a brief timeline of what we have spoken about today or previously. So back in November
of this past year, you asked staff to do some research which we provided um which was about Jason jurisdictions mileage reimbursement rates and package printing cost. back in December, we uh you provided general concurrence to table discussion till March, which is when we are in the middle of budget right now.
Um and then last meeting you voted to add the item to this agenda. So the current rate is $200 per meeting which was allocated via resolution in 1987, an expense allowance to be paid to each member. Um just a brief history about the other
boards we have. Um the code enforcement board is the only other advisory board whose members receive a stipend which is set at $100 per meeting attended which is a little bit different than ours. Um the majority of the cities do not provide uh a stipend for their planning
commissions. There is a travel pdeium in Putnham County um at $30 per site visited and the mileage reimbursement rates were updated from the last research that was done. Um and it is 72 cents per mile for the federal
government. The state is 44 cents per mile and the county is the same as the federal government. Our average printing per month is $159.93. And staff's recommendation for we just give you a couple options of what you would like to do. Um, one is no action
and the other is we add a discussion item for county council to increase the monthly stipen to whatever amount this commission desires. >> Any questions for staff? Any discussion amongst ourselves? >> Yes, go ahead, please.
>> Member Craig, your mic's not on. >> Sorry. >> Thank you. The printing and mailing cost is that for the whole uh board or is that per person? >> That is the cost per meeting. >> Per meeting. Okay. Thank you.
>> That's that's changing here soon. >> Post office. >> How how many people get a paper copy? I mean, I've always loved the paper copy so I can make my notes and stuff. I mean, I get one. Yeah. Okay. Six out of our seven members of our board uh have
now opted for paper copies. >> Yeah. Okay. Uh my thoughts are I know the cost of traveling is up and down especially with fuel costs but also goes back down. I
would say no action on my part. That's just my thoughts. >> This does put any motion or anything. It was just a informal discussion and count. >> I would recommend having a motion. >> I'm prepared to make one after. >> Go right ahead. All right. Anybody else have any other comments?
>> Miss Craig, this is an old one. >> It's an old one. Sorry. >> Okay. >> Uh, yeah. Go right ahead. Make a motion. >> I move forward with a a motion of no action. >> Second. >> Second. >> You got it. >> All right. So, we have a motion of no
action on the PLDRC stipen made by Mr. Er and seconded by uh Mr. Sixma. All in favor say I. >> I. >> I. >> All opposed. >> I. That would be four to one. >> So it dies right here. Correct. >> Correct.
>> All right. We're done with that one. And now that I lost my help, my assistant, I'm kind of lost. Here we go. Okay. Do we have any other public items? >> Uh, no, sir. >> Do we have any staff comments? >> No, sir. >> Any commission comments?
>> Yes. Yes, I commend you for your good job today. >> I appreciate it. Feel like I was stumbling over myself, but All right. Thank you. >> All right. You did a good job. >> Um, any other staff comments? >> Yes, I do have one. Um, I don't know if it's a form of emotion,
but uh, it is that time of year where we have to reset the absences. So, let the record reflect we're starting new. This is year two now. And with the new policy we passed >> that allowed three >> uh Mr. Urs that is still that is is not
in effect because I have to draft an ordinance um because it's it's in our ordinance. So we still need to go to county council for them to approve those changes. >> So we'll yeah but >> you are correct that and we have a new time period because the time period
started in January instead of March. So everyone reset in January. This is per calendar year. Oh, >> okay. We're doing per that disc. I thought it was April. >> We're changing it to April because it makes sense when for the reappoint. >> So, it would be appropriate for me to do
that once this is done, right? I get it. Yes. >> I got to wait. Okay. >> But but I mean, everyone's everyone has been reset since January. >> Um, >> what's the timeline on that ordinance? assuming that nothing gets weird and I
can find a >> be weirder. >> Find something on county council. Um maybe June because um I I'll try for May but hopefully for June. >> All right. All right. >> It may be like Juneish. >> All right, good enough. Any other
commission comments? >> Any press and citizen comments? All you folks with the blue shirt, that's twice in a row. Nobody wants to talk. I mean, I'd love to hear from you while you're here. No. Okay, >> it's scaring us. >> All right, hearing nothing further, then
we're going to call this meeting adjourned. >> Thank you. >> Great job. >> Yeah, >> okay. Yeah. >> Yeah. Yeah, these past couple days. >> Maybe this is the last one. I don't
know. >> I like the chip cooler, though. >> I like it cooler, too, outside. I wish they would do something about that. >> Okay. All right. >> Take care. >> Yeah. Hi. Yeah.
>> Oops. Didn't say he said he had other >> I appreciate that. >> And thank you for attending. Turn >> some other >> They're in the other one. Okay. I That was where I was headed next.
>> I think Oh, it's so good. >> Well, you know that's the the whole chicken or just came up during started actually popping up. I think it was before that, but that was the proliferation. >> Well, there's 40 wide, right?
I think >> Oh, I know. There's no space. >> So, yeah, we started fast enough. Yeah. >> I got Yeah. 20. So I might So you're going to have more than enough free acres they free
come back but I could imagine they were limited to birds on five flip side of that was a discussion you could multiple structures.
They're always rooster. >> Yeah. >> Here's the thing about that some people don't understand. When you sexing a chicken, it's not a science. Sexing to chicken is actually it's an art form. So when you go and you go say
you go to Tractor Supply and they say, "Hey, we got you whatever." They tell you what they're sex that one very likely you're going to end up with sexy birds. So sometimes you don't know until they are now tall. It's just going
to create a home. Cabbage patch is perfect place. That's where the roosters. You go to the couch patch and it's something. But there's roosters all over the place. How they get along. >> Yep. They just go and stuff that's out there and they just they just hang out there and they live out their life.
That's what people, you know, you're there's no You can go to truck supply and get a chicken tube. You can get the chicken, you get the feed, you can get everything you need right there and probably buy stuff you don't need >> except for you buy those online all day long.
>> All right. >> Well, you have a great day. We had Yeah, we had what two weeks of summer and all of a sudden this >> I just trimmed back all my mangoes and aocado trees yesterday for the first time right after the cold and I'll end
up losing probably trees. They were too big to cover. Oh yeah. >> Now you basically you just cut them. You cut them right close to the ground. The puff will come right up. I did that to mine as well. I have a whole cluster of bananas. I cut them close to the ground.
>> It is. It's a lot of work. We haven't seen ages. They say it's here. I haven't seen it yet. But for example, Maybe one day. >> Yeah, right.
>> We'll bring it back. Yeah, they're already back. I gave him the two for stockard and the one for your chickens. We were saying