>> Good morning, everyone, thank you so much for being
here. I'm going to call to order. Today is a Seminole
County Board of County commissioners meeting it is
Tuesday September 12th.
That today we have with us to listen indication, pastor,
Jeff Johnson from cross life church and if you would please
rise and Mister Johnson, if you would after leading us in the
invocation then latest in the pledge of allegiance. Thank
you.
Let's talk to God together.
>> Father God we thank you for today
just driving in this morning and seeing the sun over the
lake we're reminded of
your goodness, the evidence of your love for senior creation.
Thank you for waking each person, his warning for the
giving them life and bres
and as we think of today, I just pray for these
commissioners and all the staff and support people who are here
pray that you would give them the wisdom that they need to
make decisions with wisdom with compassion with kindness they
even give them the guidance they need the supernatural
insight to make our County and an even better place to live
and play as we just give this meeting you we pray, you'd be
all in and threw it for your glory and we pray these things
in Jesus name. And then.
>> I pledge allegiance to the United States of America and to
stands one nation under God indivisible with liberty and
justice for all.
>> Thank you so much we really appreciate you being here.
I don't believe we have any awards presentations are
proclamation on our agenda.
So moving on to the consent agenda. Pursuant to Florida law
the public has a right to be heard on all propositions
except when the Board of County commissioners is acting on
ministerial or emergency matters or conducting a meeting
exempt from section 2 86.0 1, 1, Florida statutes,
public comment time on proposition Shelby 3 minutes
for individuals and 6 minutes for group representatives.
The right to be heard during quasi judicial hearings is
governed by Florida law and the public will be provided the
opportunity to be heard on non agenda matters at the end of
the meeting proper decorum will be observed and that is that
the end of I one 30 meeting this afternoon
in accordance with the operating policies and
procedures of the Seminole County Board of County
commissioners section 2.1 7, 5, public participation before the
board comments shall be limited to the subject being considered
by the board. All public comments shall avoid personal
attacks, abusive language and redundancy disrespectful rude
irrelevant or slanderous remarks or disruptive behavior
may subject to the individual to removal from the board
chambers and the chairman may curtail repetitious comments do
we have anyone who is fill out a form to submit public
comment. No ma'am okay, if there's any member of the
public here there's the green and the yellow form that you
would have been given an opportunity to fill out out in
the lobby.
I don't see anyone running toward the podium.
Mister manager do we have any changes to the consent agenda.
No man no changes. Any commissioners have any items,
they'd like to discuss.
I I'd like to pull item number one for discussion.
Madam chair, yes.
>> Make a motion to approve items to through 13.
And items, 1415 the constitutional officers and
gender safe.
>> There's a motion by commissioner zembower second
Biden Larry all those in favor say aye aye any opposed.
Passes unanimously and I'm I'm pulling number one for
discussion just to highlight and out of Christie look at
Christie has already seen. I'm I'm I'm very comfortable
with what is being presented today, what I'd like to do if
we could just look at what our options may be
next year or later on I'm not sure what the process would be
I'll be completely candid with
everyone and employees who may be feeling your pain I don't
know maybe I'm not but I have not at the best customer
service experience with charge Snyder has our FSA it's been an
ongoing situation and I'm thinking if I'm just one,
I don't know how many others there may be and I would love
to look at other opportunities that may be more.
Helpful for employees perhaps looking at Cigna at you doing
that is this thing so that's where my brain is thinking
forward.
Christina you have anything you can share with us about that.
>> Certainly we typically come to you in March when I work
session just to give you an idea of where we are with with
all of the benefit plans and I'm sorry good morning that's a
great Lady. Resources director he started talking to these.
Commissioners I so really when we come in March. You know I
make a motion now for us to about to to our PR que. I don't
know all over him and ins and outs but says we are with Cigna
there would be easy transition for people who have an FSA we
have some other information unless it was not unless it was
a decision or dental or something out there would be a
little bit of a tease there. So, you know certainly we can
do an rfp I have heard from a few other folks that they're
having the same password entry issue and certainly if anybody
has any concerns or issues with any of the plans they can
certainly contact us that we can try to help rectify those
but so they can absolutely go out to our heated to see what
the options are we've been assured Center at least since
I've been here for just 8 years.
Commissioner her and then commissioner zembower.
>> So I would say that we we have been with Sharks Snyder
for a very long time I've not had the FSA issues that it
sounds like you're having
maybe for brees and I mean it live in the space so it gets a
little bit of a different experience I would say though
that
you are you are about to launch the team into a significant
amount of work because an rfp for an FSA is not an easy lift.
And if the thought process is which I think would be
legitimate and the thought process is that it would be
connected to say no because we have talked about connecting
it. In the form with former vendor we couldn't do that.
When you connect and FSA to the medical carrier. You can have
the claims Ottawa due to Kate it is a much easier experience
and I think the one you are used to at the school district.
And in that instance, I would just throw out there to the
team that that would be a single source because they're
the only ones that can to adjudicate no one else can
Ottawa due to Kate Cassidy wants and claim so so that I
would say if that's the past we want to go down we should
probably give that direction as opposed to a market search for
those that would be concerned about not doing a market
search, the average cost for an FSA is roughly $5 per employee
in the grand scheme of the savings if you're saving
anything let's call it 20% which won't happen. It's a
dollar per employee per month.
The savings to that versus the convenience of of putting it in
and we
our consultant knows all the going price is for FSA so you
can get Cigna to the reasonable price. I think there's other
areas of the plan that would be would have time more wisely
spent that we need to be paying attention to and that rfp would
be a heavy lift.
Commissioner, zembower.
>> I agree with the sharp Snyder, I like what you see
them after my first year here. A drop that far as I'm
concerned the useless with that I'm happy to make a motion to
move towards Cigna have a discussion with Cigna about
picking that up.
The only clue if you don't make it the question and maybe this
is a question for Christine and I know open enrollment starts
next month houses. If we do move forward how would this
impact open enrollment.
>> And it would have to be for the 2025 years so so much.
So when you have for 2020 for one more year.
>> So commissioners and there is that that's a motion to
emotion to them,
direct staff to work with Cigna and bring something back to us
for consideration. For January, one of 2024 wrecked second.
There's a motion by zembower the 2025.
>> 5, 5, Pass and we're going to one of.
>> Motion by commissioner zembower second by commissioner
her any further discussion.
All those in favor say aye aye any opposed motion passes
unanimously, thank you we'll bring it to March and and then
we have all the other items commissioner her that are.
>> I I would make a motion to move forward with item number
one.
>> Second there's a motion by commissioner her second by
commissioner zembower any discussion all those in favor
say aye aye any opposed motion passes unanimously, thank you
thank you so much appreciation.
When you flip through 20 items that quickly. Getting out to
County manager and staff briefings item number 16 is
regarding the charter review Commission appointments.
>> Thanks madam chairman, and commissioners you all know
we've been working on this for quite some time. We just have a
few few tweaks to make to our appointments
as you know the the charter review we have to review our
charter and it's a you know for for next year. So any potential
items that
could change needs to be on the ballot, you know November of
2024. And so the committee needs to start meeting and so
what I just passed out or Kate, thank you Kate passed out to
the commission. Staff has briefed you all you all have
given us your appointments, I just want to go through and
just to explain the what the charter says and the charters
specifically says 15 members sit on the charter review
committee. One has a right has to be a representative from
each of the cities of the 7 cities. And each of you for
your district, it's a district appointment and then we have 3
at-large appointments that the board can make.
I know is that has met with you all and there's been a couple
different guidelines that they have set on how we reach that
15 member board. So as you can see we are here at 16 that you
all had submitted to us and and really 15 but the 16th is there
was no representative from the city of Casselberry that we had
to fill and so I know the chairman you had actually
reached out and got a willing participant to fill that role
even though it's not your appointment.
So what I would like to do if an up to the chairman if you if
you agree if we go block by block. But you know the charges
we have to fill this the cities that you to representative from
the city. So what we have listed on here is your on that
hole on the right hand COLUMN is the district that had
submitted the name for each of the blocks
and then you'll notice if you go down to the 3rd blocking the
at large.
Where it says location on the left-hand side that is the
district in which that that individual lives in
and to the right is the district again is the
commission district that submitted the name of that
person so just so it and we do have the addresses for everyone
on here so there might have to be a little
tweaking on here so Jim, if you what we can just go through to
the rocks but we're looking at is they were looking to start
that the first meeting this month in September but we're
still on track if we have it in October. So I think once we get
this committee appointed we're looking at the first week of
October to hold the first first meeting.
>> And I think that's a great suggestion. Commissioners the
names that have been submitted to folks filled requirement of
a member from each of the city's 7 cities.
You see the names that are before you is there anyone who
would like to make a motion to
approve those names being appointed to the charter review
Commission.
I'd be happy to make that motion motion by commissioner
her second second by commissioner zembower any
discussion
can you define what that motion is again.
>> The motion is to approve Angela Fleming Colleen Hufford
Emily town and Bruce cubic.
Tom o'hanlon Michelle Smith and John her and.
>> The motion a second any further discussion
commissioners Constantine.
>> And just just a matter of of
we have happened going through this process
and just a question
is somebody asked me, I'm just when I was coming to step up
our of a meme of resident of Casselberry no okay.
So if we approve the 7
and then we approved the 5 basically what we're saying is.
You know at the at large we're going to have to eliminate one
is that basically what we're going to do that's correct.
Okay.
So can I question that
just just to tag on to what you're saying if we're going
block by block.
>> If you approved the 7 which gets the 7 cities covered which
it's my understanding and I could have misunderstood you
but people on the bottom in the bottom 2 blocks don't live in a
city.
They can live in a city.
>> The last ones can the last ones.
>> Yeah they can live in a city, but none of them live in
the city that doesn't have coverage which is correct
Casselberry so.
>> We have to be on the corporate 1, 1, segment has to
be from the unincorporated for Seminole County that's the Mets
lock
and I think that it create can correct me if I'm wrong but I
believe the district come a point that can be anywhere in
your district all read it to you so.
>> Of the 15 members at least one member must reside with an
age where the municipality, at least one member must reside in
the unincorporated area of each County Commission this stretch.
Thank you.
And so.
>> From what I gathered if
this this the top block is the most obvious block to cover the
city's Deborah doesn't live in a city Nicole does not live in
a city I do not know about Maryland crowding but I do not
believe she was
doctor Robin Dellinger does not live in a city and I know Rusty
Roberts does not live in the city so and then I go back to
the
bottom block.
I don't know about James D*** whether he lives in the city or
not I do not believe so she did verify that.
>> So yeah this Kent's already has I believe Don that due
diligence and.
>> So if you'll notice on the last block sorry in the last
block. It says location.
That's the district that they're in
but are they in a city know okay so that
and they don't need to be a city or don't need to be but to
on trying to get to the answer to your question commissioner,
I have been but that's okay, but the question was if we're
if we say yes to the first block.
Does that automatically mean that somebody falls out from
the 3rd block and I think it means that somebody can fall
out from either block to or block 3 us.
That's correct.
Right so the commissioners,
>> I'll try to make this easy their 7 cities are spot
commissioners to commissioners are going to have to pick.
2 from the city to make it work. I don't want any other
way you can not do it.
I think that your only option now if you want a Casselberry
and stand alone, which is the open
that is
my district.
Commissioner Lockhart district commissioner dallari district.
Yeah, you've got to a very small piece of Casper, every
small piece.
We want to get out.
It works.
>> I think with an uneven number of cities and the fact
that some districts have to far more than one city within their
district it made it impossible for staff to come up with a
recommendation that would make it equitable in terms of city
representation so
I think the county managers thought processes.
Let's make sure we take care of the thing that we are required
by our charter to do which is to have the 7 cities
represented we have to do that regardless of who appoints
which person regardless of which one of us points which
member of the cities we have to have 7 cities. So it was I
think less important to say this is my appointment, this is
your appointment and more that we're fulfilling the
requirement of the charter but I understood that.
>> We also have a requirement and that
one from each district must be in the unincorporated area so
we have the requirement of the city of the charter whether
requirement of the unincorporated them charter
which then leaves the at-large.
>> If you will well it in my mind it doesn't because the the
2 bottom boxes, overlap so because none of them live in
the city, the top boxes, the rocks that stands alone to and
from the bottom 2 boxes.
We have one too many
and from my from my perspective and please correct me if I'm
wrong County attorney.
I don't necessarily know that the point at which it gets to
the board that we still have to be a line to I have my 3 we
have to be a line to needing the charter requirement
correct.
They were have nots for the record from the county manager
the Internet.
>> So if you are comfortable with at least let because we
have a motion and a second on the city's if moving forward
with that. If we can get that done and then we can tackle the
bottom 2 boxes.
>> There's again I it gives I was talking I I think they're
all related to yes, it's in your yes, we have to buy the
charter have the 7 cities. And yes, we have to buy the
charter we have one from each unincorporated district the
next the next thing though is that.
I think it's important that each of us as commissioners
have 3 appointments. I am I don't think that it's you know
in any case. You know where one and nothing against the fact
that I think that the commissioners that chairman
went ahead and tried to find somebody from Casselberry
because nobody did that so I'm not assuming that that was some
sort of
anything else. I'm just saying at this point I think that it's
important that we try to find make sure that within the
context of what we have with the charter that we have 3
members. If we approve the first one in the second one.
Somebody is going to have have only 2 points.
And I you know that to me is also I think I'm comfortable on
I'm not comfortable with that.
>> So that's what we can talk about so.
The fact that it was brought to my attention that we were
coming very close last month to coming to this process without
a representative from the city of Casselberry was concerning
to me and as the chairman I felt like it was my
responsibility to try and fix the situation that
commissioners among themselves were not able to to come to a
solution on. So I reached out to MS. KENS and said I found
somebody from Casselberry who is willing to serve
and because that that was not my it was not my appointment,
I was not but it could have been that was present in all of
the county attorney addressed this if she'd like to what was
presented to us in 2 different phases for suggestions for how
the board could proceed with finding. Members of this
commission were just that they were suggestions and so when
when we got to wear.
You know commissioner zembower had already found his
appointees before that second advise advisory opinion
suggestion came out. It we hit we hit a little bit of a road
block.
So
far less concerned with everybody having 3 and far more
concerned with having
the charter requirements be fulfilled. So the issue of
everybody having 3 is something that I guess we're going to
have to you know start
you know Roland ice or rock paper scissors ing but
that we have to have a member from each one who lives in each
of the 7 cities and and the concern over who has you know I
got more bubble gum and my jar than you did I just can't I
have time for that we just need to get these appointments done
and make sure that we fulfill the requirements of the charter
and I assure you Colleen Hufford he was the person who
graciously offered to serve she has served in the past. She's a
former elected official she is very well liked by members of
this community and has no ax to grind with anyone on this
board. So I thought it was actually a rather good get.
>> I'm sure we are so so make this easier on everybody.
Although I was the first commissioner to get all mine
and didn't I'd like to move this along because
quite honestly you that's miss characterization. That we've
been able to work this out ourselves I think we all
followed direction from staff I followed it from almost a year
ago. So with that said I will draw back home arts and Colleen
Hufford can go in
that that's a problem for legally we can figure it out
from there that's all I'm done talking about
so who so it was that of motion but when I'm and I'm just
saying I'm going to drop from my lisnek home arts
when the slide calling in
she lives in the city on the stand. So somebody has got a
point to from a city there's a district to Dick's would go off
his district, 2 people are Nicole market that's what the
motion is fine if that was that's what happens. The
district to or he's in district 5 you're right. I'm sorry I
thought it was district to your right. So we need now a
candidate from district 2 if we do that.
>> Well I just I think maybe you have a candidate from
district 2 because in the 3rd box. No they're not from
distance to the I'm sorry he's from district by the district
commissioners who put an end to end. I can. I agree.
Commissioner that did and I want to make sure that
everybody that this was nothing personality and I you know I
understand why you presented that person what I was trying
to say is I do feel however at the same time that it's
important that you have
somebody from each particularly 3 from each district now
to go along with what commissioner zembower just did
if you keep miss mom March. And you take out again this is
no personalities this is just trying to get to the to the
point you keep her from district 2 and you eliminate
Mister D*** I'm from district to then you have the same
thing.
So Mister Dixon lives in district 5 he was appointed
right recommended by district we need somebody from district
2 if you eliminated the smarts did you keep MS. March, then
you have everybody in the second box together. The 3rd
box then becomes the 3 people from different from you just
pointed by district 1, 5, 3, in there from 1, 5, 1, But missed,
but we have
what the charter requires completed.
So I'm suggesting to Mister commissioner zembower instead
of eliminating this marks you eliminate Mister D*** in your
motion and then then the charters
complete the charter what the crime and to the charter is
complete
would that be acceptable. Mister commissioners in them.
I just like I'm moving on
then I'll make that motion.
>> So there's already a motion a second on the table for the
first for the city representatives.
Call call the vote. Okay, so I was just trying to move a lot
and we've got the whole thing
potentially with death.
There's a motion and a second too.
A point.
Angela Fleming Colleen Hufford Emily Tom and Bruce coup that
Tom o'hanlon Michelle Smith and John her and
as the respective city representatives for the charter
is there any further discussion on that motion.
All those in favor say aye aye any opposed motion passes
unanimously.
>> I will make a motion then to approve the second box 5
individuals.
And the 3rd box eliminating. Mister D***.
There's a motion by commissioner Constantine
commissioner her.
>> So second. Well I didn't know if you're a second by
commissioner zembower and then I saw your hand pop up.
>> I I just want to get this on the record because I have asked
the question behind the scenes and I'm going to own it.
Nicole serves as the executive director at the airport so she
serves at the will of the board of the airport and we have a
board member that serves on the board of the airport. And so
does that pose any
appearance of or conflict of interest because there is the
possibility of undue influence.
This is supposed to be a completely independent board.
The rest of the names on this, I can't draw, I'll use your
term a direct nexus to any of those individuals that we have
no relationship with them whatsoever gathered there.
If that's the case where a woman several on this list.
And I if I can manage a service in time so I serve on the on
the affordable housing board with Mister Scott called.
So it's I think it's 2 different things he's not be
paid executive director of the affordable housing board is e
that's the difference for me is that she's in Floyd by the
airport that you served on the governing board of.
Madam chair.
>> He is not in our pick our position is not a voting member
for lays out where leah's non-voting member non-voting
member that's helpful thing.
>> I will say I I did ask also the county attorney in the
county manager to just look at the relationship between the
city and the airport because the charter says specifically
that no
elected official or department director of any city and I was
I would because the city Commission points, they're
bored and approved their budget I wasn't sure if miss marks
would be considered a department director, because
there again with different type of the perceived potential
conflict, but I just I did run that up the food chain just to
see what that might look like and there is no there is no
legal conflict is not considered an apartment of the
city, but
but I had the same
similar potential concern.
Any comments, I'm not even going on.
All right. So there's a motion and a second too. Appoints
Deborah Bauer for unincorporated district one
Nicole marks for unincorporated district to Marilyn Crotty for
unincorporated district 3 doctor Robin de linger for
unincorporated district 4 and Rusty Roberts for
unincorporated district 5
any further discussion all those in favor say aye aye any
opposed motion passes unanimously.
I do believe that motion included the 3 great end to buy
Yahoo did and just restated but the motion stated my apology
elimination of Mister Dunne Mister Davis okay so thank you
very much for catching that.
Well I think we're done with that I think I think receded
and the scans to have anything you'd like to share with us
about the process moving forward. So make sure that
welcome letter gets out to them from you this week and we will
we have to as just a great.
>> Stated we had planned on the first tee to make September
21st the 21st to sit so close to today we suggested the
probably Oktoberfest was better and it could give them a little
more time notice to be here will but that the letter as
well as we're pulling together an electronic packet for them
sounds great start and you.
>> And we may want to make a recommendation that the charter
review board during their process talk about this
process. Maybe we need to have a spell out more clearly in the
charter. All right maybe provide for some alternate sort
or something like that I don't know
all right, thank you all very much for for helping us.
Get that done. The next item item 17 is a review of our
valuation or appraisal and appraisal reports
it's actually
agenda really as a as a as a workshop, this type items
>> and I will have brought back to him it can't reduce this
item.
>> Good morning. Chairman and commissioners are backing him
around and services director
myself and Eliza Harris Giuliano will be presenting the
second work session on the air based amendments.
As soon as we can get our power point, I'll go for a slide just
where we are in the process and then allies that will conclude
with the rest of the presentation.
So again, this is the second work session on the year based
amendments and these are the amendments to the comprehensive
plan that follow the evaluation and appraisal report.
So based on the first work session that we had on August
8th, I did add a slide of the overall problem in the
management keys, key strategic priorities.
So the first item that has been completed. It of these action
steps was the envision Seminole 2045 plan and this incorporated
the listening for an education or that came out of the ksp is
even before that process started we had begun the
process of amending the land development code at the time
we're calling those are haha but an amendment to land
development code that did evolve over time and included
additional changes that still is in process, but we are being
that to you for first reading of the ordinance ordinances
because we have the ordinance to million known covid and
ordinance and they need the conference of plan that is
needed in order to implement those changes to land
development code that we before you on September 26 so
we envision Seminole 2045 plan is completed.
We're in process for the first round of land development code
changes. We are now we did our I wish an appraisal report
which was due last year so that has been completed so based on
the evaluation and appraisal report we are now doing the
year based amendments which are the moments, a conference of
plan based on that evaluation and appraisal report.
And then once we have completed the 0 based amendments that
will be discussing today, then we anticipate additional
changes to land development code to implement the current a
comprehensive plan changes that we're proposing 7 will be
bringing more land development code changes team next year.
So that's where we are in the process. I hope that clarifies
and it's a multi step process. But we just wanted to kind of
give an overview of where we are so with that I will turn it
over to allies are.
So that she can you to go forward and if you think
sorry.
I will turn it over to allies and she can discuss the
additional slides.
Good morning chair and commissioners.
>> So I'll up.
>> So just to reiterate where I'm Rebecca said we are the
board accepted the envision Seminole 2045 vision report as
well as the evaluation and appraisal of the comprehensive
plan back in November and we're coming forward with it changes
to the comprehensive plan based on the vision and the year.
So this is where we are in the the comprehensive plan update
process of course based on that vision in the year we had one
work session back in August. There was a community meeting
also in August to get feedback from the public and that work
session to the next time we're in front of you will be asking
for a vote on trans middle to the state of the comprehensive
plan updates and in the meantime there will be a PNC
recommendation in November.
So as you recall the the result of the vision was 5 vision
goals protect wildlife maintain rural places grow walkable get
active and be green, and each of those came with a set of
strategies recommendations, some of which were directly
with directly related to the comprehensive plan and some of
which are outside the comprehensive plan or related
to other elements that are currently being updated.
And then in addition to the vision based optics the
comprehensive plan we also were coming specifically to the
future land use element with a view of
federer organization and clarity this will this may
sound familiar. We talk the same way about the zoning
update. The update to the zoning chapter of land
development code.
So if you see on the hunt comprehensive plan, the future
land use element in particular of comprehensive plan is
organized around the house, we crown of 2007 central Florida
growth vision. That was I think you had a lot of community
support was done at a regional level and what we're for posing
today is very much in line with that but we have had the
opportunity since then those reflect on some of the outcomes
of that as well as 2, do a Seminole County based vision
and so we think it's proper that the comprehensive plan now
be based on the Seminole County specific vision rather than the
regional vision. We also notice that in trying to huge to that
the central Florida, regional vision. There were some weird
organizational things that happened in the current plan so
we're trying to fix those and also not make the same
mistakes. We'll see the organization includes the
vision plan goals but he's not married to those goals in terms
of its organization it's organized in a way that's going
to be usable for the public and for other development community
members that be using the plan is all staff.
So these are the vision goals that we shared with you the
city, the comprehensive plan goals that we share with you.
Last time which are really the substantive ones wildlife
natural resources and sustainability Crowe walkable
inactive that that that first one combines be green and
protect wildlife the second one combines the vision goals of
growing walkable and getting active and the 3rd 33rd enhance
existing place actually wasn't a vision goal. But the course
is something important. We recognize that there are parts
of the comprehensive plan either procedural or geographic
that need to be addressed whether or not they were part
of the vision.
Finally maintain world places that covers the last visual the
property rights is a significant element of the
existing plan that of course is important to the county and
city maintained.
Since we we talked with you last we also identified some
other goals that were necessary just to organize the plan the
first of those is manage growth in conservation that school one
angle 6 pitches coordination of investments, those those House
important policies that are necessary for the function of
the plan. But didn't necessarily relate to one of
the vision goals.
Through this process we are also going to be looking at the
Organization of the overall comprehensive plan while most
of our discussion focuses on the future land use element,
the overall comprehensive plan we also want to I'm not making
tons of changes within each of those elements, although there
are some recommended by apartments we want to make sure
that it's understandable to the public and accessible so we're
we're taking some steps to communicate the organization
the planned introduction to to help make it more accessible
and we're not really focused on that today, but you will see
that as part of what comes back to you in November.
So that those first 2 vision goals, the green and protect
wildlife as I mentioned leading to that comprehensive plan goal
of wildlife natural resources in sustainability went through
the verge of the goal last time so I won't repeat it, but we
think it really provides more of a vision for what the end of
this session is rather than have the functional definition
that was there before.
What we did not talk about last time was the the end PDS
recommendations this is a report that talks about how we
deal with water and it's something that the staff has
been incorporating throughout the land development code
updates and also has important updates with in the within the
comprehensive plan. So those were incorporated as well
affecting how we deal with impaired water bodies as well
as stormwater pollutants
another thing that and so just had to back up a second we
talked about certain updates to that fall under this this goal
last times, I'm not repeating those just talk about the ones
we didn't get to cover last time.
So also within this natural resources gold we we looked at
the Buckeye to River protection area. We didn't make major
substantive changes here this is really one of those Clary
issues, one of one of the things we did is move from the
countryside to natural resources because it really is
protecting the river is the core of that that set of
objectives.
And we we also made some revisions for clarity because
we got feedback that it was just there are parts of it that
were confusing. So it's been redone in order to clarify
those complaints without changing the substantive things
that people who are trying to develop that are asked to do.
We also added a policy on vegetative resource and tree
canopy we know trees are very important to the public here in
Seminole County we also wanted to make it clear that native
plants in general and the Florida friendly plants that we
have already made we already proposing updates plan
development code to expand the use of those the clarified how
their most appropriately implemented a new development
we want to make sure that we're supporting policies in the
comprehensive plan talking about those issues again
there's already a fertilizer ordinance but there was no
corresponding policy in the comprehensive plan. So that's
now rated.
>> I have a question on that. So the pesticide portion I
understand what's there but
pretty sure that's mandated by federal and state I don't know
that we can get into the weeds on the pesticide control.
>> Sure so we thought was important to include we can
take a take a look at whether there's any conflict there,
but we don't see an issue with having a statement a policy
level statement from the county that it's something that's
important should there ever be a change. At another level it
could still be dealt with at the county level.
>> And I understand what you're saying, but I at the same time,
I'm not a big fan of putting things in a May confuse the
public can also confuse our staff just just my thoughts.
I think we need to be looking at that a little closer.
>> I'm following up on commissioners and there is
question can you tell us which policy flu that language is in.
>> And I hate to do that state I don't expect you to have this
memorized but maybe you can point that out to us later on
sure we can go back and read that and see sadly
times yes and upended your package as you know there was
the full the full text of the future land use amendment that
we're proposing. It is a draft. So it is a work in progress now
mentioned some places that we're still I'm still expecting
changes including based on your feedback. Commissioner
Constantine thank you
I am not.
>> I agree with the fact that we don't want to confuse the
public.
But one of the things.
But my understanding was that and something that I think is
is a positive
is that many times when people come in to look at a comp plan
of building code whatever, they're looking at
and something is not referenced then they'll come back and say.
Well you didn't put that in the comp plan you didn't put that
in the building code even if it's mandated or required by a
nother level of government so to reference it and I thought
that's what we're intending here so to reference it and you
know to as of ice part of our code
kind of could
potentially reduce the amount of confusion and that's that's
you know I think that that's one thing that we need to make
sure that we're not
adding to the confusion if one were looking at that and saying
what we don't need it because it's required by somebody else.
>> And I if I could just add on there. There's you know in
terms of the intent here. I think is not around
regulating which pesticides are permissible. It is about
planting the right plants in the right places to reduce the
need for pesticide use and yet education awareness around I'm
not over applying pesticides rather then maybe what you're
talking about which is the federal regulation of of
pesticides chemicals that kind of issue.
>> And I I did find it on port page 468 of our gender flew 2.5
points 3 letter B.
And it says the county shall encourage the use of native
land for Florida, friendly species to promote local
biodiversity and increase resilience, responsible
management of pests shall be encouraged to reduce pesticides
and chemicals, according to the Florida friendly practices.
That's the only thing I see related to chemicals but if
there's something else maybe a pointed out to us later and I
were not
we're not chemists over McCain.
>> That's the only one that comes up when you do a word
search on the document test site.
Winter yes commissioner white.
>> Real briefly on the deck of the waters resources. This
should be something in there. That additionally adds the fact
that we're trying to move to one water policy.
Just so that the people realize that there's another piece of
the water resources in the future.
And then.
We rate. Madam chair as well as commissioner zembower that they
were trying to make it very clear about the fertilizer
ordinance fertilizer, a pesticide management.
We quiet we do refer to as ordinance with sometime in the
future we should revisit that to make sure that what we're
trying to accomplish with that ordinance actually is taking
place.
Every mile.
>> Good feedback and and I don't want to keep you from
going to get to getting to the rest of your presentation.
So commissioner Constantine and then we'll let you get back
here for Sunday and I think that our staff
I think that very good suggestion. Commissioner glory.
I think our staff when they were putting in that
fertilizer.
I'm trying to remember what it was the the the bill this year
that it mandated that you could not change or fertilizer,
we're donantes that our staff did look at it prior to that to
make sure that you know we're still doing what we're supposed
to but I think we should continue to do that is just to
make sure that the intent of what we did is being
accomplished and I also believe that there's going to be
potentially in the water.
Resources and protection in this area probably a number of
changes once we get the holistic water policy and I see
the camera shaking her head, so I so there's going to be a
number of different potential changes on that.
>> Yeah, I'll use this opportunity mentioned there are
at least 3 ongoing plans that will likely result in future
additional updates the comprehensive plan after this
one water the transportation master plan, a master mobility
plan and the leisure services master plans, all of those are
ongoing, there's a lot of planning going on which is
great and we're trying to you know we have a deadline for
this so we can't wait for those plans to be done so we will be
making these updates with the expectation of future plans
will be made and but we'd be happy to incorporate some
language about the ongoing one water policy assuming that's
the that's the consensus.
So last thing in this section the the walled Lake and state
ability section. So currently there is an FDR bonus for
projects in the comprehensive plan, there's an F AR minus for
projects that we meet minimum green certification levels for
lead or F G BC right now that only applies to the urban
centers and quarters over life or get the the showing of that
we're proposing as part of this of take to make that clickable
County wide the current increase is a point to and say
are increased that would not necessarily be appropriate
County wide so our proposal was to change it from us of flat
point to increase to 20% increase which is more scalable
to different base level as they are. So that is a that's a
substantive change that we're recommending as part of this
update and we would exclude from that bonus the the world
protection area, the rural area and they need the river
protection area so its not applicable everywhere, but it
would be a couple more widely within the county.
Commissioner dallari thank you madam chair.
>> I think that's the appropriate thing to do.
But we come to lead or other.
A green building practices there's different levels of
lead are building practices so we need to define what those
levels are.
So that it's clear
what's happening.
>> And then finally you know we talked as prevalent on Cup day
update about electric vehicle readiness. This is another
example where we are recommending policy and the
plan to support that already ongoing effort and when
government code.
And there's Thursday said that was the last thing that is not
the last. I believe this is the last thing in the section
cluster development and this is an area where we are looking
for direction from the board. More on the next slide on this
slide.
So what we've done so far with respect to clustering and this
is one of those elements that is a little bit of a moving
target as we go through this draft. Those because we need
additional direction and is because there's a lot of moving
parts. So what we've done so far is we clarify the intent of
clustering around natural resource protection. We've also
removed some language that really kind of conflated what's
appropriate in urban condition, and what's appropriate in a
more natural resource intensive, a position not to
eliminate those urban plan developments that might we
organize their density in order to to innovate are pretty open
space but to recognize that that is not that's not
clustering that's something different that that may be a
worthy goal, but it's doesn't really accomplish what you
would expect a clustering which is expansive areas of open
space or in some cases world farmland we are. We are also
recognizing the value of agricultural and working lands
that's consistent with what's happening a statewide level
with the Florida wildlife corridor standard so we're
looking to that as an example
we are looking potentially clarify this would not be in
the draft are seeing now that certain types of agriculture
like indoor agriculture would not necessarily meet the goals
of we're creating that wildland contributed to that wildlife
corridor so that we can regulate bona fide agriculture
that could potentially be
that could be dealt with through any sort of easement if
there's a cluster development project.
So we're looking and of course happy get guidance on any any
portion of this. We're specifically looking for
guidance is on a couple of pointed elements within the
plan.
Right now there are 2 different standards there's a standard
that calls for a minimum of one acre within these right within
say rural fostering and there's a standard that calls for half
an acre.
And it's that they're not in direct conflict with a really
send mixed messages to the public and to the development
community on what they're being asked to do so we would like
guidance on whether the appropriate clustering in these
were all natural context is a minimum of one acre farm in.
I halfacre the benefit of course and a half acres you
potentially get more contiguous land but the minimum of the
acres, it's more likely to be the prep that most would be
consistent with a broke actor or the general voter law
character of the areas where these are likely to happen.
And the second one is related to the current 10 R 10 role
robust or bonus right now.
This is the only only category in the rural area where you
actually get extra density for for clustering where's the
other categories clustering is an option, but it's not
necessarily incentivized with extra units.
So those are 2 areas where we are looking for feedback.
Commissioner, thank you.
>> The eye could see the pros and cons of the minimum lot
size acre versus half acre, we although probably in the rural
area, I would prefer because I think that that the the the
citizens that live there today went to see more of a world
atmosphere.
But when it comes to the clustering bonus and we've seen
this in some developments that have come before us
and because we don't do it anywhere else. I don't see the
the bonus in clustering for the development community is the
fact that you you are able to consolidate the resources and
therefore the cost of development is less because
you're doing it all in a certain area.
I don't think that we should be giving
density bonuses for clustering in the rural area.
And a hots commissioner zembower.
>> I prefer to leave it as it is.
I think the reality is we want to encourage I encourage as
much open space as possible and if it's if any developments
going to happen by example on that 10 zoning category we want
to concentrate that
in such a finite space so it does allow for more open space
more green space more impervious area and to actually
enjoy what we're finding is even in the rural areas.
There are a lot of people don't want large lots.
They don't want to maintain that. So I'm I'm a fan of
pretty much leave it as is.
Commissioner her.
>> I actually think that the benefit of clustering is to
create that open green space not to create larger yards that
become fertilized
and watered.
So I I offer you that in district 5 we have in the what
used to be the rural area.
A lot of subdivisions -1 where we have acre lots but it is a
lush lawn, and it it is probably not environmentally
sensitive so. I I agree with commissioner zembower where I
think
the elephant in the room is the clustering that we've allowed
to happen on small infill spaces that maybe aren't infill
spaces
where
it's really not clustering it's we've jammed 14 houses into 5
acres on a street that historically has not had that
and that's certainly what's happened in the lake Sylvan
area and that's the piece of it that I think has created uproar
around the concept of clustering if clustering looks
like this like this diagram.
I think we'd all support clustering but clustering at
least in my district and I voted for the one that was the
one between the 2 surf 2 visions that happened on either
side of it because you you can't single out the one in the
middle and say oh no you can't do it. But they've done it all
around you on your 5 acre lot is now sandwiched in between 30
houses and you can't put 12 on your property.
That's the piece of it where I think we need further guidance
is in the small Miller land.
Configurations, what does clustering really need
because there's do green space and any of that.
Commissioner thank you.
>> The commissioners a spot so comments
because what's happened in small lots in the 5 to 10 acres
that you're not surprised are you.
I think you're right commissioner, where there's a
finding could track.
People are more density
so just like you're saying that using different words that to
the good of clustering and there is no space.
You can if there is you really can't find it.
They may meet the definition of the rule, but
if you look at it, holistically you really don't see it.
I think that's the issue that's at hand. In the real area,
I like the large lots, but in the 2 areas that are not in a
rural area, you know what's happening to these 5.10 year
contract to the smaller where people using question just to
get more density and that's what we should be looking at.
So tell us what you're saying.
>> Yeah, all away in on that as well and I I think I agree with
it's a different conversation
from Earl vs
all use the phrase urban just because it's the opposite of
her off.
How do we fix the inconsistency them.
There's an inconsistency that needs to be made consistent.
Then is keep just keeping it the same result, the
inconsistency.
>> So we can
maybe put more descriptive language around how you would
accomplish friends and I think that this is the only way to
accomplish the half acre right now would be through plan
development we can make that explicit that it's required to
be a plan development which would of course put it in front
of this board. We can also potentially make changes
through the land development code that would address more
clear clustering standards from our perspective the the very
urban that now there are some specific area plans like like
Sullivan is a specific area plan that we have not don't
deeply deeply into as part of this process. There's the
Myrtle Street that's a specific area plan. The the broader
issue around planned developments being a way of
organizing density a different way I mean from my perspective
I somebody working both sides line I wouldn't call that
clustering also wouldn't
say it's a bad thing it just needs to be clear. What is
trying to accomplish so you can determine if it's accomplishing
that goal. And we did make an effort and the plan in the plan
development code to put clearer expectations around what should
come out of plan development.
>> Commissioner Constantine and then commissioner zembower
commissioner Constantine was going to lose the blood coming
out of his fingertips so I needed to call on him.
Well, I I'm just trying to raise my hand so the people can
see it in.
They're asking for direction and I think that what I've
heard from my fellow commissioners is talking about
the acre versus the one half acre.
The rural area.
In my coffin in my first comments I said that is not you
know I could see the benefits of either or.
I really I'm more interested in making sure that we're
consistent when it comes to the clustering
in the rural area as we are with the rest of it. I do not
see
the benefit
of giving density bonus.
In the world area
for clustering I see the benefit for any developer is
the big being able to maximize their opportunities to develop
within a smaller area and that's going to save money
that's the that's the positive as well as what commissioner.
Jim Bauer has said there's a lot of people they're looking
to have smaller lots but I do not think.
In fact I believe that it is inconsistent with the rural
boundary that we would give
stir density benefits in the rural area and that's what I
think they are asking for direction on and I'm saying we
should not give cluster bonuses in the rural area
which is in fact
it actually isn't the rule.
>> Segment, I think staff will speak about that that was
supported the bonus for the 08:00AM that's been there for a
for effort to encourage open space but getting to the
the urban area.
I want to make sure that we're not talking past staff and our
consultant
clustering on a 5 acre tract where has that happened.
>> So for the record of economic development services
director any ordinary correct so we have clustering
provisions in the comprehensive plan and land development code
based on geographic areas. Allies image, a 96 or in
transitional area. And that's what it was discussed
previously about some of the subdivisions that
are requesting so they have suburban estates future land
use torture allows withdraw unit where acre, but if you
develop the custard subdivision then you can developed 2 and a
half to units per acre so historically some of that
subdivisions in order to utilize the density bonus in
the 6, 7, transitional area they propose PD is with
clustering subdivision
but they may not truly need the definition of fostering so
based on that we have strengthened our definition of
clustering development code and as part of these comprehensive
plan amendments we are also tightening up the language and
the 6 over in transitional area area to demonstrate that
because part of the language in there says that in order to get
the 2 and a half to units per acre you have to demonstrate
that you have no more impacts one dwelling unit per acre so
where better defining that language and how to demonstrate
that. But this specific topic we're trying it's 2 different
questions. The
if you do it unless you're subdivision in the rural area.
Do we want to allow halfacre minimum lot size which could
potentially be in conflict with our well and septic you can
probably get well and septic on a half acre probably more
difficult to do.
And then that the second question is specifically
related to the are 10 a future land use designation in the
corresponding 10 zoning designation which allows the
density bonus for every acres that you put into conservation
preservation me and you get the additional unit. So is that the
withdrawal unit per 5 acres and 71 per tent right.
>> Well, I think we have to have whatever we decide has to
have certainty.
Both for the developers as well as the public little to no
interpretation in my opinion that the staff level exactly
what everybody is treated equally and we don't see these
differences are going on or have gone around the county.
>> Exactly and that it did it does cause confusion because we
have had
interested developers in property that has taken
advantage of the density bonus in the rural area and they see
the provision in the conference of plan that allows an unknown
half acre and then we have to explain that doesn't apply to
that because if you take advantage of the density
bonuses, a minimum of one acre so there's some confusing
language them said that does need to be clarified like Eliza
said if the board still wants to maintain the middle half
acre we'll clarify that that's if you are developing in the PD
and not taking advantage of the density bonus provision
for the board wants to allow the minimum halfacre with the
density bonus provision that's also an option.
Thank you.
Commissioner.
>> I'm just going to own it. I didn't think I was confused
until I got here for this discussion. And so it could
we've identified the problem and it could be us haha
I just want to play this through.
On your second.
Big green bullet point direction on LDC in
consistencies minimum minimum lot sizes for clustering one or
one acre versus a half acre.
A couple in the wrong area or not applicable in the rural
area. It's
yeah, all of the 1st half of this.
>> So there's a comprehensive plan policy that if you cluster
in the rural area you can develop a minimum of a
half-acre lot size.
>> So so County just play that through on the news that sure
is the example
if I change that to a minimum of an acre.
Then all that luscious green space around their is cut by
half.
>> For the its youth double another way to say it is that
you will double the space that those dwellings take up.
>> And you will create the opportunity because on the one
acre lot I can now build another dwelling I can put in a
pool. I can put in a separate garage trip. I can cover that
land with all sorts of stuff.
>> And you've got to put more sidewalks curbs and roadways to
get between the houses.
>> And the infrastructure so so that's the piece where I
I got okay with the half acre cause I want to see the open
green.
And so the advantage that we're giving to the developer to get
that additional unit in there gives me open green in the
rural area. That's the piece that I'm not I'm definitely not
understanding.
The idea that that doesn't help
maintain consistency out there that.
>> I think what I'm hearing from staff maybe staff.
They're trying to go consistency between the world
and the urban interpretation because people have looked at
it and don't understand how they get one here one there.
>> And I know that what we're trying to clarify is that there
is an overall policy in the rural area that you can have a
minimum of half acre for clustering then you also have
this density bonus provision in our 10 future land use
designation that allows you to build more density if you could
a certain amount of land within conservation that specific
density bonus provision requires a minimum of one acre
lot right. And so we're asking if you do want to make those 2
things consistent that one acre or half acre and I think it's a
question of yes, with happy you're going to have less
infrastructure and potentially less impact to natural lands.
It's I think it's a question of character versus an open space.
>> Commissioner commissioner dallari has to be recognized
for a good decision was fun. Okay commissioner Constantine
and I you know I I I were having this open dialogue.
So I'm just sick.
If we do which I don't have a problem with what you're
suggesting commissioner
to have more open space.
By giving the density bonus for taking away that
you know I think that we're not being consistent where you know
either if we're going to do the one hake acre.
We're the one acre in either case. I still think
giving the density bonus is in the rural area is taking away
from the from the opportunity to have more open space.
I don't think in the end of the urban area we have no density
I then city a bonus. I think that in the role area. We do we
do have a density bonus for clustering yes, he's like so
run transitional area.
Okay my mistake for now, I'm a little bit confused, but I
still feel the 4 p V opd yes, that's it and I just but I
still feel that in the rural area what we're doing is we're
doing the total opposite of what we're trying to do which
is to maintain the role of flavor of it give more open
space by doing the questioning. If we're then giving them
bonuses in the in the in the rural areas. So I'm I'm opposed
to giving density bonuses enroll area and I think that if
we're going to be consistent here. We should all be.
Thank you madam chair, I mean I think we're all trying to get
to the same point we're just trying to get there. What I
like to see if
>> with the career staff can do this give us some examples so
we can actually see it instead of just looking at that one
side to say.
We're is going to double show it to the shows how the air is
going to double, you know give us an example, so we can
actually see it in the same thing goes with the with a
density bonus and I think commissioner Constantine makes
about point you know give us an example of
space actually happens in that density bonus element
and I think by looking at those 3 different scenarios we'll be
able to figure out or articulate.
What we like what we don't like.
>> Commissioners embarassed we recognize just just just
just a final and I think.
>> I agree I think we're all headed in the right direction.
I think the real question that I think what I'm hearing areas.
We want more green space right what we're trying to do we want
more green space so what gives us more green space.
Sporting the homes
and roadways and sidewalks and all that over
a certain geographic area or bringing them into a smaller
geographic area
and leaving more open and green spaces.
I think if we're really trying to drive for more open spaces
and green spaces.
You stay with where you're at.
>> And when I think that's a fabulous idea because a
picture's worth a 1000 words in this instance.
When you bring that back I do want to be super clear about
where we're trying to eliminate in consistencies I don't think
we're trying to eliminate in consistencies between how we
treat the rural area and how we treat the urban area. We're
trying to eliminate in consistencies
within the rural area in the LDC and and the other documents
that are driving this. So I I don't think they all have to be
a lake in we've mixed that I'm here to site seeing head nods
in that area as well for clarity
so I have a couple of questions and one of the things that we
talked about.
>> And our briefing is that the half acre verse acre from from
my perspective of someone who has a septic tank and
when these newer developments come in and the community
opposes package plants for water.
And you're on one acre lots and we're talking about drilling
you know, multiple rounds versus that the compassion of
these
neighborhoods and the desire of certain of the developers to
develop on one acre lots versus half acre lot.
The need from an infrastructure perspective, not just pavement
and sidewalk. But truly the issue that people may be having
with Wells and septic on the same lot if we're not going to
be giving them the ability to Bill package plants.
I love to hear from the development community what
their flavor is and what the fades perceive the market to be
on one acre 1st half acre out out in the rural area.
And what
how are they going to manage septic and well
on a half acre lot.
That those are a couple of questions that we talked about
the other thing that I think
well I'll go out and about that on a slide or not but I have I
have a question we get to page 482 of the agenda.
For the 3.3.
I don't know if this is related to that or not if I if that
makes sense to to go they're not
and will we and we also didn't talk about electric vehicles,
but I don't know if we want to talk about either kind of
skipped over that.
That's all about on this I agree completely with the
picture's worth a 1000 words and and I think we're we're
conflating where the inconsistency is lie and I
think
I agree with commissioner zembower all trying to get to
more green space but how do we practically do it in a way that
people will
watch out.
>> So one more thing that has some relationship to the
previous discussion and police to the resources piece so we
discussed it briefly last time, but we didn't really which
NASCAR explicit direction and we also didn't have the benefit
of our environmental services team here. Last time so we
didn't want to get too deep into this.
As we discussed last time the Florida legislature has passed
a bill that requires the use of enhanced or advance septic
systems on lots that are less than or equal to one acre.
When they're located in these the map areas which are where
the water is viewed as impaired and if you look at the map on
the screen that is the
that is the overlap of a number of different the maps for those
are the areas of the county that would be covered by this
rule we do actually have
with an exhibit here that shows a little more detail, sorry.
It's the same page.
Well the months of.
So what Rebecca is going to hand around is basically the
same math but with the utilities that County utility
shown. What we don't have at this time is all of the private
private utility services it also shows the city boundary so
essentially we anticipated that we have not a 100% proven at
this this juncture that the small white area on the left
would be largely on on sewer, so it really wouldn't be an
issue. But we do know that of course these rural area on the
right has much more very that is not on sewer. And by
intention. So the question that we're asking today is should
the county at its option expand this requirement for the advent
use of advanced septic which could be active or passive
to the whole County as opposed to just the areas of the county
boards required by state law.
This also as we understood our proposal this point is that it
would be implemented in the same way the state requirements
are implemented. If you're getting those it may be the
second page if you got that that clip together
so would not affect somebody who has an aging septic tank.
Who's trying to replace it, they wouldn't necessarily have
to follow the new rules which is consistent with what the
state is doing.
Also jump here too that we looked at the area that's
excluded from the state requirements here on the right
obviously in the white the areas that are not in the rural
area and then the colors those areas that are in the rural
area. You can see that includes much of that area is under.
Our 5, 4,
Our 10 where they would have larger lots, so if they have
those larger loss, they are not impacted by this or firemen
force should they choose to cluster to one acre they would
be impacted by this requirement have we are also suggesting
that the board consider that any closer development would
have to comply with the advanced septic requirements
that way if they're at 1.1 acres loss that they would
still have to comply. So we wouldn't end up with people
just kind of increasing lot size a little bit to avoid that
choir meant.
We also did get some input on the cost it looks like there's
there's minimal differences in the upfront cost that
potentially a significant increase in the annual
maintenance costs. These these are based on the research that
the departments have done, but they are potential to change
over time, particularly as to which the maintenance
requirements and we've had gotten some feedback that the
advance maybe make make this may sound a little high
relative to people's experience or that the conventional maybe
a little while
passive is the the best combination of low upfront cost
a little bit and its cost but not all lots can do that based
on their size and configuration because those facilities take
up more space.
So with all that I will go back to
the initial question which is should the state requirements
be implemented County wide and should they be implemented
between only affects one acre or less size lots of course the
late certainly a conversation where people to closer to half
an acre of course it would apply and then also the county
could at its discretion applied to officer developments.
Commissioners anybody be able to give up a quick up down
thumbs up thumbs down answer to allies on this one.
>> I I say go with state requirements called a county
wide.
County was OK. Yeah patients that's how I interpreted that
no all right so anyone else have an opinion I would go.
Yes, yes, yes,
if you wanted a quick and I did yeah what I'm saying yes.
Yes, yes, okay. Yes, yes, yes, one of the 3 questions okay
during a county wide. Advanced if we it and I'm just going put
this caveat.
Eventually it's we're going to have to do it and I mean sooner
than later it's going to cost a lot of money if we have to
retrofit it's you know this if there's minimal difference.
It makes no sense to allow people to put in obsolete
septic tanks.
Commissioner, they are commissioner her and then
commissioner zembower
so.
>> I just want to make sure that I see commissioner
Constantine's face when I say this but I agree with what
with what I just said yeah. Here so if you take us back
Eliza to the cost differential.
And we've I've gone back and forth with the team here on
this the cost differential here first of all annual maintenance
on a regular septic tank is not $75. Nowhere near so probably
what you're doing it right if you're
yeah, if you're doing it,
you know if you're dancing around it, I guess you can you
can even get somebody to come out for $75 with a truck that
can do anything
and so when I look at the difference here when you're
developing new development, the difference between 11,012 1100
so we're calling that let's call that 1200 bucks. Plus the
annual maintenance difference that may be an additional 2 or
$300 by the time we think the advanced is too high.
I don't know why you would subject somebody to at the
point of replacement to at that time in the universe having to
replace it.
For a much different level I actually think doing it now is
that best way to do this we have to start phasing this in
at some point because it's the reality so allowing people to
can you know the definition of insanity is what's coming to my
mind is that allowing folks to continue to implement something
that we know is not the future is probably a bad idea what I
don't think that means is that when somebody who has a
conventional system now goes to replace it.
That were forcing the issue there correct me if I'm wrong
correct.
>> And forgive me someone had their hand up commissioner
zembower.
>> To not force you so so I agree that we want to be good
stewards we want to do the best we can to and the subject
thanks but here's the reality of the unintended consequences.
If you all were going up to go out look at some of these
advanced units throw on a half acre one acre lot now you no
longer have to swim for capability you no longer have a
place to put a shed because the drain field in the way it's set
up so that is going to impact the reality of what happens
with development and then we're going to go back and say.
Well our one double a really can't go here because you can
put that many units on this piece of land with advanced
septic what an effort.
So I think we really better be paying attention to that very
closely
and I will tell you.
They're there
are good ones. They're bad ones, the technology is he's
come a long way I'm not convinced it's all the way
there yet.
>> So if I can just play and what I see on here is that
we're talking about that for a lot larger than an acre because
I agree with your concerns commissioner zembower I'm on
the smaller lots of at least that's what's on the outside
teen. The other way should be less than or equal to an acre
so tired on smaller lots Aish yes, thank you.
>> The origins of people don't want storage units all their
stuff the kind of a shed on the property.
>> All right so that's very funny. So we have this
discussion also yesterday. You know the enhanced septic
systems at one time and I have not kept up with this.
>> But there was a problem for folks who might be on certain
types of medical treatment whether you are on chemotherapy
that the the systems at the time we're not processing
waste.
It from humans who are different types of medications
and that's something that I definitely want to get the
answer to before I make a decision because yes costs is a
is a factor is a huge factor. But if you have someone who
I was required to put one of these in and they are for some
reason diagnosed with a condition where they have to be
on a medication that the system does not process that's a huge
problem so and that was again that was something at one time
I have not looked into this and years of staff could just look
into that and give me the latest greatest that be super
helpful. I I fundamentally agree with the thought process
of making it consistent across the entire County. Just for for
ease of moving forward and all that good stuff. As long as
it's not.
We're going to be cumbersome for those who are having to
replace systems commissioner Constantine and then shot her.
>> Commissioner, I you know I I agree with all your concerns as
I do with commissioner zembower as far as concerns and making
sure that they don't happen.
Here's the difference.
The standard septic tank isn't changing. And it wasn't
processing from everything that I've ever read you the concerns
that you had
the advanced is continually improving.
What we're talking about now is the future.
For the past.
And the fact is that there are many different types of
potentials for the advanced septic tank which would
alleviate the concerns the commissioner zembower has
indicated
and all of the new advanced from everything that I've read
takes care of the concerns that you've had.
>> That you're talking and that's phenomenal so that staff
can just get that to us that would be great so. So again
what I'm saying is.
Yes, yes, yes, I think that we should.
>> Move to the future and not talk about you know allowing.
Do these new developments to go in and put it.
Obsolete septic tanks.
>> Commissioner dallari and commissioner her.
>> First of all the first, I want you to put up sleet septic
systems and because the state won't allow correct.
In the area has the areas that in the B map there they won't
be allowed to do the in the areas that
if they did put convince systems and how much of the
property would be not be able to be developed what other
requirements what happened with that area.
>> So the I think it depends on the systems of the passive
systems to take up more space and those those the ones with a
lower maintenance over time I don't know
that are vital services team hasn't dad on the size of the.
>> The septic stands for says conventional septic systems at
this time in the same region, I'm asking that is because you
know we need to be very definitive. We talk passes we
talk in advance what level of this so we talking about.
>> So I would be compliant. It's just that they're I my
understanding is that the advance to take up less space
and that's why people would we use that.
>> When you say that both being complained you're talking about
the passive and Andy and the active but the advanced state
rep, I just want to make sure you know the better he
understands because we've been getting confusion MS. Or for
before before you answer that question commissioner, her
something she'd like to tax you can do a double down. I
actually went to pick up where you left off and the additional
information getting the pictures done yet, but keep I'm
with you but I I actually think that on 5.76.
It is a 5 on page 5.76 where you have the graph on the cost
we need to expand that to include the acreage that's
required what what land mass does each of the 3 systems
occupy to address this issue.
I have a philosophical belief on where I should be but it
needs to be fact based in right now simply calling you up here
to talk about this is freaking me out a little bit much
probably freaking you out a little bit too. So I I think
this is a follow up item to get super specific about what the
impact to it is because I think it is a legitimate concern
agree and then maybe a secondary chart of.
What are the things that are not addressed through the
processing of these systems conventional advanced and
passive so we can make an intelligent decision on this.
Commissioner, dallari would you like to finish your questions
like if staff first.
Morning Kim ordered the environmental services director
and.
>> As far as the passive systems, my understanding of
that and what I've seen is it was actually during the
construction of the installation of those those
passive systems because they have to have just the way it's
constructed that you would need a larger space to open. No hole
in the ground that was that was my understanding was that bin
the difference in in the system, not the actual
footprint so we would need to I want to follow up on that and
and ensure that that what I'm saying is accurate.
>> So it sounds like the consensus is that we'd like to
have some more information pulling it out.
>> And I would think with that same information that I would
like says we're talking about less than one acre
is they require most of these are many of these
septic systems that same property will be on a dedicated
well.
And there is a
statutory requirement of the distance between the septic and
well that could wonder property unusable if we make the wrong
decision so I think that needs to be part of
consideration when we get all this information we certainly
don't want to take a property that is
has right now and got those rights because of
again an intended consequence.
The be very helpful to us.
>> Okay, so I think the county manager and staff have the
clear as mud direction on where we're going next on that topic
and then Eliza before we move on to what I'm assuming would
be the policies and the fours.
With your presentation I do have a couple things I'd like
to address just in in the threes.
And I'm and I'm and I'm know I'm sounding obtuse but I don't
I don't have a correlation between the slide deck and what
it reflects back to in the loop flow. So I so I went oh well,
I went and it's not a big deal. But I I went through the the
language when we're looking at page 476 of the agenda flew 3.2
points to. This is not new language. This is old language
and its protect wetland and flood-prone areas in the East
rural area consistent with the provisions of the future land
use and conservation elements of this plan and through the
potential purchase the properties with funds driving
from the natural lands program authorized by voter referendum
in 1990 in 2000.
I'm just wondering if we would want to update that language to
reflect Seminole forever for because at my understanding is
those funds are are spent from 1990 in 2000 so that it's no
longer relevant. So I would just ask if there's consensus
from the board that staff look at updating that language.
>> For me and when we approve an ordinance that should always
be updated on those automatically, but yes.
>> And absolutely has on. And then the other
item in the threes.
Page for 82 objective flew 3.3
to protect the existing rural character and established
existing large lot residential neighborhoods with the
specified world within the specified role boundary and
we're all neighborhoods within the urban service area of the
county.
I would like a definition of rural neighborhoods within the
urban service area of Seminole County
because
I believe that rural would mean
no Street lights, no sidewalks no
fire hydrants know like what is because one man's rural rural
is not another man's world, all right and
I just think that could help us moving forward. There are
letters and eggs and less there's already a death
definition for rural neighborhoods within the urban
service area.
>> We can definitely clarify that and we also are you have
established the role on a policy which is going provide
more definition for those rural enclaves will validate whether
or not there's anything outside of that that needs to be
addressed. Okay, I appreciate that I wasn't sure if rural
neighborhoods was another way of saying rural enclaves where
that was an additional type a designation that we were giving
to certain neighborhoods.
For the record of economic development services director.
>> So currently in the comprehensive plan, the 2
designated rural areas of the county are that will cover
River protection area which is in the urban area, so it's
likely referencing neighborhoods within the McKay
River protection area and then of course we have the rural
area in the East area but we'll make sure we clean that
language app and then as allies is stated, we are creating the
policies for the role enclaves which will be areas return
world in character with an urban area. Okay.
So just because.
>> My brain isn't so we're saying that you're going to
clean up the language to find that the rural neighborhood in
this circumstance is pertaining to Raul enclaves or those under
cover over protection area.
>> Yes, so what will look at that and make stand in kind of
analyze that and see what it's referencing and then make sure
we create consistency for so for anything within the urban
area. Well a line that with the policies that we're creating
for Ron Klain okay because I think we have
neighborhoods.
>> In the wekiva River protection area that have
all of the urban services and would not be Raul
in terms of
the neighborhood that we have lots of neighborhoods that do
not have urban services that would be considered world that
are not in the wekiva River protection air and does that
make sense. Yes, exactly and I agree that all right great.
Thank you very much appreciate that any anything else before
our allies and moves on to her. Yes commissioner.
>> Yeah, I had a note under.
>> 2.1 point to see missus relative to the enforcement of
the urban bear management ordinance it's on page 14 of
the document.
I don't know what page it is in the board vote.
And that the way it stated it says enforcement of the urban
bear management. Ordinance I think it needs to be
enforcement and education of the urban bear.
Management ordinance and we are doing some of that now but
certainly more needs to happen with regard to making sure that
all of the folks that move into these areas understand how to
live with theirs.
>> So it's page for 46 here following along in a paper
bound book
and I think it's that letter C the a C
read what you re see again.
>> Right now it says enforcement of the urban bear
management ordinance and I propose that its enforcement
and education.
>> Any feedback on that was commissioner her to give
direction to staff to change that patient is good okay.
Thank you.
Anything else.
All right miss Harris. I think on the next.
>> Moving on to these days. Our policies resulting from
division goals of relatable communities and support active
lifestyles and again as of last time we did address some of
these previously, although they have in this section we are we
there are number of things addressing a very high level
that we're digging into more details.
So as we talked about previously the the intent here
is to encourage efficient use of land housing choice and
economically vibrant active places that use use and unable
to use of multi-modal transportation.
Our goals here were to streamline there was a lot of
language that was consistent with the idea of creating a
walkable multi-modal places based on the House we grow
regional vision in the in the existing comp plan. But they
there was a lot of repetition they were also some standards
that were. It there were incentive programs that were
fairly complicated and based on the review of what had been
done to date essentially know what had happened to these
programs because it'll be because of the cup I either
they were too complex and or the incentive was not great
enough for them to want to tap into these one of those was the
mixed the program and the mixed use development we land use
category which is directly applied to a couple of
properties that not very many properties and the second one
is the urban centers in quarters
overlay program and that is the the second exhibit that was
passed out is the urban centers and quarters overlay
at some point we can put this up on screen at some point but
that will interfere with a slight ex.
Just briefly here.
We also did want to recognize the important relationship
between land use transportation within the future land use
element of course there is a transportation element, the
part of the way that our transportation system is built
is through development through the roads that that are built
as part of new projects.
Joining us.
So all you have there been Center's Encores overlay in
front of you we did we have talked about this previously
and there's an overlay on this map that you haven't seen
previously unknown talk about that a little bit a little bit
later in order to take advantage of this program you
would be required to opt in destrehan or into design
standards in large part that is the mixed use development
standards that we are currently reviewing as part of the land
development code update process, the mixed use corridor
development and the missing middle standards.
They're the 2 categories that are currently created in the
draft, one is for non-residential future land use
districts that fall within this boundary and the other is for
residential future land use districts that fall within the
boundary subject to site review by the board in compliance with
the bonus criteria there be access to densities up to 75
units an acre we'll talk a little bit about the economics
behind that. But in addition to looking at the economic piece,
he also comparable surround the region as well as the the types
of goals that we have around creating these mixed use
walkable places to get to support of transit to get to
places that you can comfortably walk from somewhere you are to
somewhere you want to be we have to have things closer
together and then and a practical level that means
increased density and intensity.
There are some overlapping for lace which we which we
addressed in terms of the overlap with the hit areas as
well as the Oxford overlay hit areas in particular have limits
on how much residential that you can put in and this would
not change that particularly airport and we understand
there's a compelling reason not to have significant amount of
residential they're so this would not allow that to happen
where it wasn't intended.
Nats for the non residential. So these are the commercial
properties are essentially right on the quarter for the
residential future land use districts. We're also looking
at some of these missing middle and small typology ease in
looking across. So here, here's the math and then to have to
show me how to change it back for too long too.
So what you see in the pink is the areas within the overlay
the urban centers and quarters overlay that is in the plan
today that are in the unincorporated area.
The overlay go ahead and talk about the overlay now so the
overlay is the mobility areas associated with the updated
mobility fee and for the board members that this is our in
front of you so you can look at it there as well so the one of
the the things that was discussed during the last board
meeting was whether these higher density should be
limited to the urban mobility area which is
broadly the area between 1792, including the properties
funding 1792, to I 4 as well as 36 I will note there is one
update that needs to be made to this map which is the border of
the 4.36 overlay in that mobility, the blue line and the
pink area are not contiguous they should be can take us the
blue line will be moved back to be continuous with the to
encompass all of the the the pink properties.
But the way the policies are written it also includes
whether or not the for larger land owners that are only
partially within the overlay effects that too. Now we don't
have to write the policy exactly the same way as the
mobility area, but the city wants to move forward with this
will flush this out in more detail, essentially the intent
being that those higher densities would be available
only within that quarter mobility area. It's not a lot
of this site in question now that I'm looking at this and
much more closely and it seems a little bit.
>> Parcels that appear to be single family residential hot
Texas. Ting homes that are in the urban corridor we offer.
How are these individual what was the.
What was the
tipping point that rash the rash now how are how are some
of these parcel selected and what I'm just.
>> Carry a space on the current policies in the adopted
comprehensive plan, the urban centers and quarters are
defined as quarter mile from the the certain roadways in the
county. So you can see what some of those roadways are 4
3617 92 East make these Lake Mary Boulevard
and half a mile from the sunrail stations so that is how
these are defined and it doesn't have the specificity of
what's the underlying land-use et cetera et cetera. Now it's
now can I switch back or
madam chair.
So so you'll know that when the bill comes back up. That's why
we have the distinction in the new proposal between what has
an underlying future land use district of
non-residential in what has an underlying future land use
district of residential and the same things are not allowed in
the places so we can make that distinction, okay and I'm
assuming that because of the patchwork.
>> Quilted mess of city versus County going through some of
these corners that's why it looks.
Spotty, yes that right, yes, so I think there is an
unincorporated and the various excluded are the city areas got
it okay, thank you for that clarification commissioner
Constantine
okay, so.
>> To use your phrase disc watching areas a lot she's
watching here are the peak. I I hate to tell you or ask you
to do this could go back to them at least that's what my
question. But
so the higher density corridor if you're talking about right
now are the ones that are in the pink, yes.
And you're saying all of those are not in cities, correct
correct.
And we see the core.
But then we're going into the suburb areas in the couple of
places and
the reason for that.
>> So these these courts will find in the previous
comprehensive plan back in 2012 what we are suggesting as part
of this plan what we were our original plan was just to use
those predefined quarters. The additional potential
direction we can get at this time would be to limit the to
tear it so the higher densities would only be available within
the.
>> Core area. Within.
>> Ashley you're here.
District 4 have sex so between 7 to 92, including the
properties within the 1792 quarter to i-four and down
4.36.
The spine of the county, the core areas story with the Corps
as defined under the gun.
Over the years.
Yes commissioner zembower.
>> And I think this can be somewhat confusing. I think
too.
Boston probably public us watching because there's no
designation with the cities and the reality is many of these
splotch year he is if you continue those through the
city, they're every bit as watching if not more.
And some of these areas. Yes so the whole corridor of
what it truly is resembling
on the landscape.
It's much different than this. And I think we should be
we should be following some kind of transitioning
in and around those cities
where we already have density
to be consistent are somewhat consistent with what the cities
are doing along those corridors as well.
>> You mean like a lake some joint planning agreement I've
been pushing for the years. And I do think to your point
commissioner zembower there are some cities all in Casselberry
has one who is completely embraced density and their core
and then they they seek it. So I think that those are good
conversations for for us for sure.
Jean, what is the specific direction that you need from
the board today with all of that in mind that that's all
good we have to do that what do you need from us today. So we
have there's more explication of this if you're in a few with
entertain that. Before we asked for specific recommendation or
I can tell I think it would be helpful for us to know what it
is you're going to be asking shores of the as as you're
giving a presentation we can be thinking about it. It's lines
so the basic question is
are are we comfortable with the recommendations in general
around essentially that you have to
to put it plainly. The issue is the county has a policy that it
wants to see urban development in these quarters, it's not
happening, we're making changes to try to make it happen,
is they as the commission come through with those changes that
we're proposing and then within that does the commission favor
of limiting the more intense. Allowances to this urban this
core mobility area.
I think that's that's very helpful for me to know where
we're headed if you don't and then you say whatever else you
like to say before we.
But on
so I didn't quite get to the residential future land it sits
on the side of belief, but let me let me say broadly that as
you get to smaller parcels it actually makes sense the
density should go up because essentially this is the same
that the same types of buildings on a smaller parcel
you actually get higher density because you're not building new
roads are not building we want people to build on the existing
infrastructure and take advantage of that rather than
building new infrastructure and yet densities tend to penalize
that because they've had I smaller properties so we're
trying to reverse that here in the in the bottom where we're
allowing for higher density on the smaller properties.
This is that we can get through that because that has what
we've been looking at.
So let's talk a little bit about the small properties for
a minute so in some analysis we identified over for almost 500
properties under 3 acres that fall within this overlay many
of those big parcels have been vacant for a long time of the
examples that are about to show you I understand have been they
can since the mid 90's.
So and very little is happening. So how do we
encourage something to happen this small parcels are also
interesting because
the big national groups tend to avoid them. They don't they
don't meet the requirements for what the and a big multifamily
developer wants to deal with because they want you 200 plus
units and project. So this potentially creates an
opportunity for local investment for the kind of
development we used to see where your doctors and lawyers
are investing in properties as opposed to Wall Street. So we
see this is a huge opportunity for small builders to be
engaged in some exciting work within the county.
And these are just examples that that we've designed that
would fit some of these smaller lots is actually designed to
fit on an existing 50 foot lot.
These also tend to create more attainable situations for
potential renters and homeowners. They they create a
potential obtainable ownership opportunities because there
just aren't a lot of new ownership opportunities being
created
that are affordable where it's a single-family House on a
single family lot in these more expensive areas of the
communities to get that affordability you really have
to be sharing a lot with other homeowners.
And on the renter side. These large the smaller properties
tend to have a higher motivation to retain their
renters they don't have the ability that a 200 unit
property has just commenting a certain amount of talk or
turnover, if you've only got 4 tenants and you like those
tenants it's there's much less incentive for you to
significantly raise the rent
to get somebody new and because the turnover costs are much
higher.
And you're more likely to have that human human relationship,
so looking at just these the small properties we estimated
you could have potentially 4500 new residential units, he's
also could incorporate live work. Tech businesses. We
estimated 900 businesses not will say that was for all
listeners and quarters that number goes down with limited
to that just the core. But that also goes to that hearing
question.
So this is why those properties that I mentioned my my team
looked I believe it was this property, they said had been
vacant since 1994 1995. I'm Sofia is their desire to see
something happen there we model what might look like to have
one of the smaller scale developments incorporated into
that neighborhood.
And this is a double lot situation you can see it's just
off one of these major corridors
looking into the back of the commercial actually but that's
good because successive what's walkable to some of these
destinations
that may be one reason that single-family houses haven't
wanted to go there and see what it looks like the same project
from the other side 2 of the smaller smaller structures.
These particular ones are 6 units per lot that's our 6
units per building. I think that's with a little bit larger
units you can actually get more units and if you were going to
a smaller unit size.
And then this is what that might look like on a little bit
closer to a single lot double lot of elements this is a 2
acre parcel so a little bit bigger, maybe even right up on
one of the quarters we estimated depending on that
unit size could go anywhere from 35 to 50 units an acre
including potentially some of the small business live work
spaces.
So we did do some financial analysis of this. Of course
property location location location property is very
unique looking at very broad level. We found that currently
yes the densities that we have the comp plan 10 you snake or
even up to 20 units in acre are very difficult to make work in
the economic environment based on the land prices so we're
starting to see a viable on the smaller lots around 30 units an
acre and then a really a prep track to project for something
to invest in around 50 units in acre so that's some of the
numbers behind the densities that we're proposing on the
small loss
and then the shift gears just quickly the MX D as I mentioned
some of those properties actually exist within the in
the quarter, but technically the the commission could
approve the nxt future land use anywhere within the urban area
shopping center. Redevelopment it's not apply there now that
could potentially be applied. Similar range of densities
right now the it's actually a minimum of 10 units an acre and
a maximum of 30 units in acre that has not been sufficient to
generate much activity. So what we're proposing is that for if
you use a parking structure which starts to consolidate its
that parking and not create these large impervious areas
that you would be able to go up to 60 units an acre.
We also provide that same incentive to those smaller lots
under 3 a snake or without the need for structured parking
position created things you can do on the smaller lots to do
with the parking their existing bonus programs for we also
increase the FDR 0.6 to one point oh there's a bonus
programs for workforce, housing and affordable housing but
point to FDR bonus and a 20 units per acre.
Bonus so those would be applicable here so you
potentially could get to a units an acre and a 1.2 F a r
if you take advantage of all those funds programs. Another
subject to change that we've recommended here rather than
having a specific number of units traded off in the
comprehensive plan will be recommended is that we dealt
within land development code to be based on market analysis
because it is something that can change rather quickly
because the market changes.
And then this is the economic analysis behind that the blue
is the surface parking analysis, the green is the
structured parking analysis again, we're looking at we are
seeing some financial volatility of projects in the
3rd units make arrangements surface parking if you want to
structure parking which supports that walkability by
putting destinations closer together you really have to be
6 units an acre to even be viable we did the analysis of
200 units in acre, although we're not we're not proposing
that anywhere in the plan, although that would be a very
attractive project according to our analysis. So we fell
somewhere in between so shifting gears a little bit
last couple things within this topic support the multi-modal
transportation network, these are existing policies that we
just reorganized to make them to to make them a little more
clear and I gather together but we think that's all very
relevant to what we're talking about in terms of mixed use a
multi modal development
also existing policies around pedestrian and bicycle
infrastructure and expanding the trail network, which of
course the county's done a great job of we have added a
policy defining transit serve development, what we're
proposing to define it as is development within a quarter
mile of the route service essentially buses with 15
minutes or better head ways. There are within a mile of fix
guide. Way transit station now I will note you will not find a
lot of places
potentially anywhere within the county right now that has 15
minute had ways we understand that it. But that is the kind
of service that would really be able to allow somebody to to
shed a car by choice so. And that's why we're told was
that
you know we could consider that we could support a
recommendation maybe up to 30 minutes if the county wanted to
be more flexible. But 15 minutes really is that is the
goal
aspiration.
I would also note, you know we did a mile from six-way fix
guide way transit the current senators are half a mile you
could at you could. We do lots of recommendations words tiered
for half a mile is one standard in miles a different standard
but we do see people commuting in for up to a mile to these
major transit stations.
>> Larry has a question just real quickly, I know you talked
about court meeting with different organizations since
we're talking a transit transportation.
One thing you need to put in there that will be continuing
coordinating with us.
The station master plan and a transit master plan
to make sure that we're putting in the right infrastructure to
meet these needs
because things will happen.
If they're not if the structure is not there.
Commissioner Constantine thank you very much
this lot to take in.
You know what ran through this and that, but I just want to
make sure that as we're moving forward that I understand the
goals.
The goal is to make these
these
parcels that have not been we used to have been saying
sitting vacant for a long time.
In some cases infill parcels more attractive.
It seems to me that the more density that we put on them.
The value was going to go higher because that's what
usually happens in in real estate
and therefore they're going to be coming less attractive and
we may just be in and you know just this is big picture now
will be coming back and saying we have to get more density
because of the fact they've increased value.
The other thing is we have been there's been so many piece that
had increased density in other areas. Those have become let's
get the people that go into those and made those more
attractive before they go into these infill projects
and if you know we were tougher on this zoning in the density
and other areas that potentially that these will
become more attractive just throwing out some ideas here
that that we need to consider because the fact of the matter
is I see the need I understand where you're coming from and I
see the attractiveness. But I also as commissioner zembower
used the word out intended the phrase unintended consequences.
In many cases, especially in real estate when you add the
density then people start saying okay X y Z per unit and
therefore the the the price that goes up and then it
becomes through your own chart, less attractive financially so
I I'm you know I just want to make sure that we're looking at
all the ramifications here when we're doing that and I I would
not expand to the aspiration of those I think are important in
this because we do want to make sure that these are transit.
We ended and I are able for these are the residents that we
put in there that are able to use multi modal systems.
>> And I would add you know, we showed some vacant properties
on the smaller side the other condition would be
redevelopment which is you know, somebody has a steady
income from a of a small communities are something
what's the motivation to have them do something more robust
that would would be capture some of those affordable
housing units and as I've said it is as excuse me but as I've
said before that is in my opinion.
>> Where the real opportunity lies is in the redevelopment
and doing it right the next time
and giving them advantages to redevelop.
>> This again Rebecca Jimenez outman services director in
just to clarify we're this density bonuses and the
intensity bonuses that we're proposing it's only within the
centers in corridors overlay and when we're looking for
feedback to further restrict that possibly only to the
mobility coming to the city area. So this was in applying
County. Why it's only applying to the centers in corridors
overlay and it is an opt-in overlay you don't have to
develop thunder. That it's just if you choose to develop and
take advantage of those density and intensity bonuses, then
you're required to meet certain criteria like being that the
transit oriented and that type of thing so wouldn't it so you
don't have to develop under it that if you choose to do about
that under it that you have to meet certain conditions and
then you're eligible for those density increases and so the
more intensity and density we think is appropriate for those
that like the 7 to 92 corridor.
>> And Mister chair Mister chair as I indicated, I you
know I said that I agree you know, I see the benefit of this
and the opportunities and those corridors I just want to make
sure that we're also you know we want we want to emphasize
the redevelopment we want to emphasize that bility aspect of
this we do not want to you know
unintended consequences and those things become out press
overpriced and I can see the people that own those lots
right now they may not have been actively selling it.
But oh my gosh I can gets 50 units in acre all the sudden
the price will go. Sky high.
Commissioner zembower that commissioner dallari.
>> Thank you several things.
The attainable workforce, housing is something that you
know we have to address me we've talked about quite a bit
for 5 years.
It just seems that every time a project gets into development
services.
If for whatever reason can't get to where it needs to go
whether it's the applicant whether it's our regulations,
whatever it might be.
We can all sit up here and talk about how great this is but
here's the reality.
The 474 small lots but then a 5 give or take in this geographic
area
that all sounds good first and foremost there's nothing in
this corridor that even support the density of 30 Dewey Finn
it's break or anytime soon.
Mixed use.
Look at Maitland by example and 1792.
What about them by the there are some real area.
They can't keep commercial entities on the lower floor for
nothing
that they change like you and I change our socks every day.
So that's a problem.
But the reality is
the small properties
and the reason this becomes difficult until this board is
capable of making tough decisions which we have to do
for the future generations, which is.
Many of these properties remained a vacant because it's
not before double financially for somebody to go in and build
a single family home on it compared to what's currently
surrounding it.
So now you identified as possibly a workforce,
attainable area or high density
and now the surrounding neighbors are going to come in
and say none of them out.
Well here we don't want that you know we are single-family
homes there I can you know by more than 4. Seminole forever.
So we can also be there and talk about he's a great idea is
this is what should happen and the reality is we have to make
tough decisions as this is exactly what needs to happen as
far as density in the urban core which is where the impact
fees or mobility fees are incentivizing
development infrastructure is already there.
And we have to understand there's going to be were 2
worlds. Collide it's going to be the world that
have been in those neighborhoods for 2030 40 years
and preparing for the next generation as well as keeping.
Workers
our teachers, our firefighters, our police officers right here
community so not have to drive in from Volusia Lake and
wherever else they might drive from
the mixed use, I have said I have some concerns with that.
I don't think it's sustainable in this corridor anytime in the
near future.
Washington D C
great works good Arlington, Virginia works good downtown,
Miami works good downtown Orlando. Fantastic. We just
don't have the density of population and to do it.
As my thoughts. Life
thank you madam chair.
The commission. It's about points.
Staff talked a little bit about to the Treasury development,
correct.
Those for real stops the basis for the development standpoint
from which already was controlled by the 4 cities
out to Marc Longwood Lake Mary in Sanford.
>> Can we actually seeing that right now, but the areas around
Israel stops its clued from this County that's controlled
by the city's this is going to be reducing even what we're
talking about.
If you look in city.
Those 4 cities that control those
growth and development around those rail stations, it's going
to be the ones that will be talking about 2 d.
>> So that there is shown in blue are unincorporated now
subject to any Jay pa's which I don't think
we would yeah, we don't have the jpa with Altamonte Springs,
which is where I think a lot of the core area.
And you know if you look at that plan.
>> We're going to be caught they're going to be an axe in a
lot of that property. The same thing with all the other 3
other cities and so I like to see some patients on that as
well.
Great on paper.
But when it comes to reality in concert unless we have a GPA
with those 4 cities.
That one's going to be in control of it.
Commissioner.
>> I just would like you to put up, I believe it's page 5.86
the before and after small lot examples within the urban
centers and corridors over leg.
We have to tell me which one you want to see stopped there.
Before and the the page numbering is always a challenge
here so
we just want to take a breath and I think this picks up on I
think commissioners in Bowers position around we get we're
going to have to make hard decisions
which is what we got put here to do but this hard decision in
that before and after is that we're literally going to
overshadow that one single family home on what looks to be
a half of a city block.
To the tune of what I think is 4 or 5 stories
should be 3 just.
1, 2, 3, 6, to 3.
3 all right. 40 feet, 45 foot.
So that is a really really tough
spot to be in because you render that single family home
behind it.
Relatively worthless
most people aren't going to buy that
and so the question that I have because it took this step this
up drives me crazy when that happens and we've had this
discussion and briefing.
All you have to do is drive down Park Avenue in Sanford in
question what were they thinking.
Massive you do that Victorian home next to a cement block.
Duplex like what were they thinking.
And clearly winter Park didn't think that way and that changes
the whole dynamic of the town and even though these are in
the urban corridors I still don't think we should put
ourselves in that position. So the question that I ask as
an briefing we talked about about for which is going help
here.
I would be willing to incentivize by increasing in
density if they acquire that home while they're doing it.
They at least need to make an offer to the to the person that
lives there.
I don't know if I've just cause shivers to run up.
>> I'm not saying we have to force the purchase, I'm not
saying you know condemnation what I'm saying that the person
that lives there needs to have the option of is this what I
want or do I want to sell out.
Just ask the best questions, MR.
>> Understood good point but here's the reality as kuz back
to the heart of decision-making process
as every community insurers in ages. There obviously is a
change in the landscape as time moves on.
And and one argument would be the counter argument, I'm not
saying this is what I what I agree with.
But the home that would be overshadowed
would obviously cell and do the same thing who knows 2 years 5
years 10 years later.
It's a tough that's a tough decision to make to
commissioner Constantine's argument in every hearing.
Well the people who live here have rights to that already
live there as well as the people that are building there.
So we're ready to strike that balance of you have a need you
must accommodate for the next generation.
And that's the hard conversation. This board's guy
got to make.
And it's obviously not the rule where it's not obviously not
know why the area. It
has to happen and where the infrastructure transportation
and all that already exists and will continue to develop.
It's tough it's a hard hard decision we all have to make.
I understand what commissioner saying.
>> And I'm simply asking whether or not we can ask it
the point that we're granting those densities in this area
for the opportunity for that developer to see we make a fair
market value offer to the homeowner that if this
situation is prime because it's one home that's left there and
I don't know that one home on that lot size can actually do
the same thing
it would be really hard sure I think we can ask whether we can
mandate I get that. But then that's a different argument
than you're doing this to me right.
>> Miss hammock might want to weigh in and then we'll get a
commissioner Constantine.
>> Sure and I just wanted to point out 2 things that this
you do see dead. These of course are in urban centers in
corridors adjacent to commercial development so this
would actually be a transition between as more intense uses to
the single-family use is one of the things we could do through
the land development code amendments that would follow
this is we could have increased setbacks and then decrease
building Heights depending on what the Jason to it so if you
have a one story single family home. Then we could do as
stepback setback apply that in that case to create more of a
transition between the types of uses.
>> Mister Constantine thank you, here's the reality that I
think that has been going around it. I think if the
commission and or even mentioned it.
You know the intensity in the density is going to be
established by the cities that have the infrastructure
and that that you know, I mean I I don't know if we want to
even consider the competition for compete with them.
You know I think that you know we get because we get the same
amount of tax you know from them, you know they're in this
County, I mean whether they're in the city are not in the
city.
And the fact of the matter is that density is going to happen
so I think those realities need to be taken into consideration
when we're doing this and and not for us to compete. As much
as to complement and and because I you know when you're
talking about these areas we all know, we've heard
commissioner, you mentioned gas very we you know Altamonte
Springs is got that and those density areas and your might my
old office was demolished so that they could build more
condominiums, I mean it and and and mixed use office is right
there in the cranes roost area it's it's happening but it's
happening
in the cities where the infrastructure is and where the
water and sewer is and I don't know not to say that we don't
have water sewer in these most of these locations, but I just
want to make sure that we are complementing that circumstance
and not trying to compete with because competing with that we
lose.
>> So perhaps it and the board.
>> Legree with this or not but maybe what we ought to do is
ask the county manager and your team to reach out to each of
the cities that would be represented in this quarter and
find out what they are doing. And if we are in alignment with
their densities and intensities than that than that that whole
conversation and we it makes complete sense for us to be
collaborative in nature anyway, even separate and apart from
having I'm not having the jpa is in place so is that
something that we is that does that make sense to at least
figure out like how far apart are we from one another in this
conversation.
>> I think it absolutely makes sense not withstanding have a
jpa but commissioner hers point and this is already happened in
my district in this school.
Have single-family residence.
We live in a home
that the city has done huge developments smack up against
them.
We have no say so
it sits
and obviously the cities are going continue to grow
especially with 2 or 3 of them at least are going to continue
to spread out annex property throughout the county. Okay
commissioner Specht I am if I may madam chair and I think
things as Kings and the city's what they're planning on it to
get the right idea.
We should also be putting that into a transportation master
plan
because what I fix guidelines. A transit.
It will drastically affect what we have to put into
infrastructure.
Because to a certain road crossings that will have
the significant ramifications.
Around the Longwood area in particular
what needs to happen.
>> So I just want to point out the inverse
and that is regardless of what the cities are doing.
I do think we need to figure it out I do think we need to try
to align with it to create a smooth tennis too.
The edge is that the edges of the jurisdiction share.
We can't force the city to annex so this situation doesn't
go away we have to plan for it appropriately
because while we would think that they would they often
don't and we are experiencing that daily
and that can change with elections apps well in it can
you can change with staff changes that can change with
elections but in the meantime the person in that House still
has a has has an impairment that can potentially happen
right.
>> And I do see miss hammocks point that right now there is
no buffer between the commercial and the simple
family and in planning world.
Usually you would have some type of transition but for and
so I get from their perspective about that
that S
is the definition of a transitional.
Use on that parcel but I also understand living in a shot of
and then of course of someone who may have sat in one of the
seats at one point in time would say well.
They don't have to put on that property that by that someone
may have someone may have said that at one point in time and
if you time any time. So there are all sorts of different
perspectives on on this challenge and I think who
worked for we are identifying the same types of challenges we
just haven't quite figure out
the best way to do it but but we all know densities have to
increase
in this area.
Back to your
original request at the end of that portion of your
presentation you are looking for direction from the board
that would give you what type of
information what are you what do you need from us so that we
can put a check box next to this or say you're coming back
and we'll give it to you later to ensure that we sent them to
do more work.
>> The dead, so I think my takeaways at this point well so
I'm not sure we've got a clear answer on that the core area
but I would suspect based on the tenor of the conversation
that that would be desirable to limit this to the core area to
deal more specifically with compatibility in transitions to
existing neighborhoods, I would point out that one of the
things that we were one of the things that we're looking at as
part of this process is how much is unable to kind of
automatically to the comprehensive plan versus how
much does unable to enable somebody to rezone to something
that might make this possible. You're looking at the missing
middle standards that we're looking at the parallel
process. There are limitations based on the underlying zoning
for instance, I'm an underlying zoning of our one would limit
somebody to to a 2 story building, maybe let them to a
quad flex rather than a 6 or 7 plaques and those kinds of
limitations could be applied to this this condition. If I would
be OK if I address a couple of actual things that came up
during the conversation, yes please we did have the efforts
that just didn't have the opportunity to talk to some of
the staff at Maitland and we found out that within that may
once the center. All those properties are we stop even
though the tenants are still working on it out so that's
that's good news for mixed use perspective. I would also note
that we're not requiring everything to crack for mixed
use everywhere as part of the standards that could be viewed
as a negative or a positive but well we're really relying on
the market to decide what what's appropriate in that
respect
the, you know one thing that we actually do a lot of work in
Winter Park. And there's there's actually a great
selection of condos and duplexes and missing middle
that you hardly notice because that really well designed so
design guidelines are are not part of our scope, although we
love design guidelines and to the to the only thing that
would might help address some of these issues. The comp plan
might not be the perfect place for that all that we can
certainly think about policies that the talk to that and and
just you know just to point out that we've got and this is very
difficult time with our clients and the public got some people
concerned that prices are going off and some people concerned
price are going go down in response to the same activity
so am I I think based on what we typically see what we
typically see with these missing metal type development
as prices land prices do go up but affordability also goes up
because people are able to share the land so that is that
is the goal and and I think that you know to to address
more directly. The chairs question I think we have
direction too. Again just a little more fine-grained with
how we deal with some of these compatibility issues and
address how the land development code might further.
Further address this need to.
>> You guys were tied like. My dear friend commissioner
Constantine and some of the stuff first
all I wanted to say is I don't want us to.
We designed our projects
we since we're talking about 1792
like the projects in Maitland I'm going up and down 1792,
I constantly fears that I'm going to run into those
buildings that are breaking up the kids, 1792, and I just
that's what we're talking about I don't want to that's that's
all over the same.
>> I would also if I am so we as part of the NEC guidelines.
We specifically looked at Maitland and tried to do pros
and cons and we hadn't came away from the same design
standpoint that that probably need to be a little more space
between the buildings and the and the roadway for everyone's
benefit so I do think that we've addressed that in the end
you see the guidelines are in and the standards and the code
so that we can revisit that needs to be addressed further,
but that's where we've attempted to address that
concern. Thank you commissioner zembower.
>> I will try to wrap it up in the support.
Pretty little bow make us really down to what
the 5 of us can be after the county.
What do you want this to be what we need to do to him.
We do and have
that's all I'm looking for from you all if we want this to be
the density corridor which it should be what we need to do to
get there. So we can have it
and that depends on all of us have an enormous risk a shin
with our with our constituents and ourselves.
Well, those tough decisions that lie ahead on in this
matter.
Where we're at 1125.
>> And this is all done really good conversation. How how much
more do you predict. Time lives, we're very close to the
end and I recognize asking that question really realize it was
5 of us, but I just wanted to let everyone just
so.
>> This is our new goal for maintaining are all places
which is straight out of the vision plan. It addresses both
agriculture and resource base businesses by which we mean
certain age are based businesses in fact are change
language to reflect that in some places
we've introduced objectives that organizes information
previously I will say that countryside referred primarily
if not solely to the east rural area but we are recognizing
that there are rural areas throughout the county and we're
trying to address that appropriately will not
decreasing any of the expectations with in the East
rural area.
And we also are connecting the natural resources to the world
while still addressing them as separate issues.
So the objectives, the major objectives that we're talking
about here are preserving world character in Seminole County as
a whole and then more specifically happened objective
for preserving well character in the Seminole County which we
know is very important.
There's some cleanup. They're related to language making sure
we're referring to it the same way every time. And we also
wanted we added Jackson's talk specifically about the economic
viability of agricultural and nature based businesses as
economic generators and ways of preserving open lands in the
long term.
The land development code rva comma dates many rural uses
were reiterating that to some extent within the within the
policies and also incorporating for instance that the solar
issue, we know can be somewhat controversial but it's been
mandated by the state so it's something that we're responding
to an able to put in policies and code provisions that make
it more compatible
our culture so we we've incorporated many of the
recommendations from the vision plan such as
establishing a row business Council doing some economic
studies to support rural businesses the long term we
know you've previously partnered with the regional
planning Council on such studies and continuing to
support existing programs.
I'm Richards just some some spree surface level changes
here same policy same title new policy so that matters of
policy previously established and we're all business Council
we now create a separate policy that establishes the world
business Council but flushed out the Agra tourism policy
consistent with state law to be more more explanatory of what
Agra tourism is and how it and how it's allowed within the
county consistent with state law.
And that is that.
So there's no specific questions we had there unless
there is a reaction or negative reaction. Well, I don't know if
it's negative until I hear
>> we talk about the variety of uses being accommodated farming
and ranching native plant nurseries equestrian
are we requiring that the plant nurseries be only for native
plants know okay.
A lot of find that somewhere and and language to make sure
that trust but verify right and then there is AIDS.
There is an additional.
I'm page 5.46, this is flew 2006.1 under joint planning
agreement kind of going back to our other discussion, there's
an additional a new sentence that says the county Shao host
interjurisdictional planning summit as necessary.
So that means we're taking the onus to to initiate those and I
don't know what the as necessary us, but I feel like
we're there.
Especially considering we still don't have an in our local
agreement with the school district that is I mean we have
one but we haven't updated it and there's like there's staff
paying out there so I just wanted to make sure that
everybody knew that that sentence is being added and
that we're putting it on us. I'm not saying it's a bad thing
just drawing attention to it.
That's all I have anything else. Commissioner commissioner
zembower.
>> Just a question Agra tourism so this has been an issue where
somebody buys several acres and then they build a venue on the
several acres and then they throw some goats into the mix
and what could come kids come visit the goats but they can
House a 100 people in a venue.
>> So our understanding is that the the
this has changed significantly since we started this process
and essentially is then dealt with by only allowing that to
happen on a pig's existing bona fide agricultural operation
rather then kind of the after after effect of adding the
goats afterwards so if there's additional questions certainly
Rebecca can chime in yeah so the.
>> Is it just to clear the roads for first know you know,
I'm I'm trying to shorten the conversation but but I mean it
was put in the woods.
Across the street from us elementary school middle school
and you can accommodate 100 cars pop in and out of there
and so the neighbors went crazy in. I ran for election and
heard about it.
And so did Rebecca for the record. Him for panic for the
record I thank you.
>> So in order to legally have average tours and you have to
be a bona fide agricultural use which means you have to have
the agricultural classification from the property appraiser so
you have to apply for that designation through the
property appraiser and if you do have the G one
classification or property, then you are entitled to have
an Agro tourism
use on your property in compliance with state law which
does not permit you to build new structures just use your
existing agricultural structures. Type of Agra
tourism years so
we could have could force many issues where people are not
legally operating at orders of business and may not have the G
one classification but in or what we're doing through the
conference of plan is just making sure that it complies
with state law requirements for average person.
Thank you.
>> On that note, you know, I've always advocated and we never
got anywhere when I asked the question are legal department
in these and there's always been this interpretation of
bonafide
existing
agricultural operations reality is if they don't file a form F.
Yes, they're really not a farming operation.
And I don't know why that cannot and should not be
something that rips the classification of talk to the
property about that. He's he's aware of that different
counties apparently do it differently. They require
formats be given to the property appraiser in order to
get you know those types of exemptions and so forth.
But we also been very lax and and some of those entities who
gone just build additional buildings without permits under
the guise of its agricultural when we're doing when times are
doing to the state statute.
I thought I think that the reality is on this rule.
The issue is.
I think we're pretty good shape. But I will tell you
what's rule and one person's mind. I think the city here a
couple times a day is not world somebody else's mind. You know,
you come out to the rule area. And you can see worst bonds
with country style homes.
And the next property would be a 7,000 square-foot home that
looked like it came out of Heathrow. That arguably is not
by design or nature. So commissioner or might be
helpful
because we get everybody hears that comes in there that's not
in a row area saying there live in a rural area.
Until they sold their house to somebody and now it's 6 outs.
So these enclaves I think
we need to be looking at very closely
as we get down that pathway is the true trying to that area
because I am not a fan of let's call this an enclave because
there are 5 remaining. Folks that have forces there.
That now one is going to sell next year another was going to
sell 3 years from now on the other was going to sell 5
years, we've got 2 left.
So I think we need to really look at the trend
of what's going on before we declare certain areas on the
players misses happened over off Thomas table in my district
and are still a few over there that still have you know
they're older homes and living that
a question lifestyle. But now they're surrounded by
development, you know 2 ounces per acre 3 outs for a dark side
are senator. So a good definition of what war means.
And I've advocated for this.
It was name as well, what is AG and what's not as we have folks
going to go. Well you don't know why you're doing that
because it's zone day one. It's only for agriculture.
They don't understand how the whole process works.
So some good definition surrounding I think would be
very helpful.
And that's all I have
anybody else
to be continued.
Thank you.
>> I work for trying to find page numbers.
The next item that we have on our agenda. This morning is an
update from the county attorney and then we will break for
lunch.
>> I've said a real quick update for you hopefully you
also you know that was circulated on Friday by Lynn
Porter Carlton of the county Attorney's office that if it's
to District Court of appeal and heard in order and the river
cross land company and Chris go with a pill that's what I want
to talk about the work session. I'm so sorry.
We're going to the county attorney finish the update and
then we'll go to public comment.
My apologies. That's why the 5th district entered an order
denying the appellant's motion for eyewitness opinion
rehearing on buck which is. Good news item just in case you
didn't know just wanted to mention that.
I think the meeting.
>> The King I appreciate the the translation from lawyer to
English because I read I did read the email I really don't
know what this means about the lengths. Some of these words so
thank you any questions for the attorney.
Miss can cover comment. Yes, we have Nancy Harman like to make
a comment on the session okay.
>> Good morning, it's current 7, 5, 2, pioneer way Geneva
Florida. One of the weather and I'm not. Good I really enjoyed
this conversation again.
The openness of your all's dialogue. It was really good.
I'm here mostly on the cluster in the rural area.
The half acre and try the real quick because I I did listen to
what you guys said thank God for the recording cause you can
back it up on your life just case anybody wants to know
and I know you're going to reduce this again revisit my
concerns again with staff but
when we talk about half an acre.
I want
first of all there's no land that I found
and the rule boundary area just a 2nd half acre.
But I'll go look and Jay you may check me on that the other
is that there is should college even downtown. That up in the
downtown areas and there some write out their awful Geneva
road. So small it is something that yes, some of those though
are grandfathered in the majority when you're talking
about doing these cluster development morally what people
are looking at is larger in crunch because it's my sense so
in that case, the land is sold 5 acres not half acre.
So when you think about a half acre and you think about
fertilizer,
when you do a cluster development if you see we've
seen in the areas of the urban came we recognize it's not
really cluster. But nonetheless when you make a common space
com and they fertilize it.
In our rule area obviously we would prefer people keep it at
her cultural to more natural, you know, just let the grass
grow, but that isn't happening and what happened and there
will be fertilizer.
So no matter if it's a half acre one acre 13 for last.
That's because people from the city are coming in to the to
the rural area.
And examples though to people not necessarily winning half
acre and it is right now with a ski lift across that area is
being developed and they have lots that are like 80 acres 5
to 8 and I think there's one
9 and a half acre so they've actually taken that land and
3rd.
The large homes.
Cross the street from that all and has just taken the 50 acres
than they are. So the first 5 acres so there's still a demand
in the rural area for these large acreage and so we get
back to the clustering thought it goes back to what do you
question for for clustering to save and preserve natural areas
like wetlands and floodplain so in order to do that we do want
to cluster the properties into an area that's
buildable but in that building the area as you're going to
face.
The open space is not the wetlands and the flood Plains
that's not open space could you could be 3 minutes to move the
citizens Association.
So just and I'll go further on that but I just and then they
wanted to talk about the subject just real quick on
that.
When you talk about in the rural area. If you're going to
have acres and you are going to mandate advance sewer, we're
septic on them for a not mandating it on the urban
areas. Well because people are going to have the same
unintended consequences
of not being able to build a pool or with their warehouse or
whatever they want in there. And then on ever tourism.
How we do have a situation, I'm going to check into an owner
Jay if you're even aware of this
near not another one the one byte of the late late to
neighborhood or they could they be high then they've got
beehives and now they are going to build that from what I do
know that the facebook I haven't gone verified, but
the facebook thing is are talking about now holding a
building to have weddings and Iran for tourism.
And there's there's there's no farm they're nothing so I
really would appreciate the board really looking at that
meeting with Johnson saying look show me your 3 years of a
business as an agriculture.
You know bonafide show me that and then the other thing is is
not you don't build.
If you know pup tents, no nothing no parking nothing.
>> We don't have a nice lunch, officiated.
>> These are good by the way we will
>> can't imagine a wedding among the vi was quick yeah
haha
be in love.
Event planning and his future yeah.
>> So we are we are going to break for lunch and come back
at one 30 but is there anything any direction we need to give
the county manager the county attorney will we go into break
before we come back.
>> We just have a good launch to be ready for some more
brutal afternoon so no don't which it's going to be a great
afternoon.
All right. We will recess and reconvene at one 30.