[0:04] test test.

[0:07] >> chair: good evening, it's

[0:08] 5:00 and we are going to go

[0:10] ahead and open up for public

[0:10] hearing.

[0:12] I think mary and chuck will be

[0:13] joining us shortsly.

[0:15] MADAM Clerk, first item or only

[0:16] item.

[0:21] >> first and only item, z26-0000

[0:24] z26-00005, transmittal hearing

[0:26] for everlee farmstead community

[0:27] large scale comprehensive plan

[0:27] amendment.

[0:28] >> chair: okay, thank you.

[0:30] And the recommended action is to

[0:35] transmit the application z26-05

[0:36] with policies for the state for

[0:37] review and comment.

[0:39] And MR. Dawson, you are

[0:39] recognized.

[0:40] >> good evening, MR. Chair.

[0:43] Chris dawson, principal planner

[0:46] for development services of

[0:47] alachua county growth management

[0:48] department.

[0:50] You have my resume.

[0:52] Tonight as the clerk mentioned,

[0:55] this is the transmittal hearing

[0:56] for the everlee farmstead

[0:58] community which is a large scale

[1:00] comprehensive plan amendment.

[1:01] >> chair: and I presume we will

[1:02] do your presentation and then we

[1:05] will break for public comment at

[1:06] 5:30.

[1:07] >> I'm going to try to not talk

[1:08] for half an hour, MR. Chair.

[1:09] >> chair: then we will turn it

[1:10] over to the applicant.

[1:11] >> we'll see where you are and

[1:13] you tell me when to sit down and

[1:15] let other people speak.

[1:15] >> chair: right on.

[1:16] Thank you, sir.

[1:18] >> MR. Chair, this is a future

[1:22] land use map amendment for about

[1:25] 996 acres, 820 of which are

[1:28] inside the hickory sink special

[1:30] area plan and 176 are outside.

[1:31] it would change the future land

[1:33] use designation from rural

[1:35] agriculture to everlee farmstead

[1:35] community.

[1:37] And it would also create

[1:43] policies implementing the

[1:46] everlee farmstead community

[1:47] future land use designation.

[1:49] This application is really

[1:53] considered a part of the hickory

[1:54] sink special area plan.

[1:56] Even though there is some land

[1:57] outside the limits of the

[1:58] special area study that's

[1:59] included, the majority of the

[2:01] property is inside.

[2:03] That special area study was

[2:07] accepted by the board in

[2:07] NOVEMBER 2023.

[2:10] It included a number of

[2:14] conditions which had been

[2:14] addressed in the application

[2:15] before us today.

[2:18] It allowed for a phase 1 U.F.

[2:19] Golf development and you saw

[2:20] that comprehensive plan

[2:21] amendment and pd before you

[2:24] earlier this year.

[2:26] It identified conservation areas

[2:29] within the limits of the special

[2:31] area study and it also

[2:34] identified areas for potential

[2:35] future development.

[2:38] And there was specific direction

[2:40] included on the protection of

[2:41] natural resources within the

[2:43] limits of the special area

[2:48] study.

[2:51] So the sas now has really three

[2:58] sort of distinct.

[2:59] There's 580 acres you saw

[3:01] earlier owned by the U.F.

[3:01] Foundation.

[3:02] That's where the U.F. Golf

[3:03] course is.

[3:05] There are all the lands west of

[3:07] parker road that are owned by

[3:11] U.F. Ifas and managed by U.F.

[3:11] Ifas.

[3:13] And then there are the lands

[3:15] sort of south of the golf course

[3:17] on the east side of parker road

[3:19] that are subject to this

[3:20] application.

[3:22] The ones within the sas are

[3:25] still under the ownership of the

[3:27] lee family or associated

[3:28] entities.

[3:29] There's some additional

[3:30] properties outside of the sas

[3:33] that are in private ownership.

[3:34] And generally, it's located

[3:38] south of oakmont and west of

[3:39] haile plantation.

[3:40] That's sort of a location map

[3:41] there.

[3:43] Oakmont is up here.

[3:45] Haile plantation is here.

[3:48] The legonna development is here

[3:49] sort of in the center of the

[3:50] screen to the east.

[3:52] Parker road on the west side and

[3:54] archer road there running to the

[3:55] south.

[3:57] Again, an aerial of the --

[3:59] recent aerial of the project

[3:59] site.

[4:02] Most of this property has been

[4:03] historically used for

[4:05] agriculture of different kinds.

[4:07] It's been ranchland at times.

[4:09] It's been active farming.

[4:11] And it's been in silviculture

[4:12] again at different times.

[4:14] And even the properties that are

[4:16] outside of the special area

[4:20] study have had sort of similar

[4:21] historic agricultural uses.

[4:23] And again, the proposal is to

[4:25] change the future land use

[4:28] designation for these properties

[4:31] from rural agriculture to the

[4:31] everlee farmstead community

[4:33] future land use designation.

[4:35] And on this map, you can see

[4:40] that's the sort of I'm going to

[4:41] call it brown for sake of

[4:44] discussion color on the map.

[4:45] And then the blue line shows the

[4:48] properties that were part of the

[4:49] special area study.

[4:51] You can see the U.F. Golf

[5:00] institutional to the north.

[5:02] Again, this is a request for

[5:04] properties both within and

[5:05] outside the hickory sink special

[5:06] area study.

[5:08] And we have proposed policies

[5:09] that are included in the staff

[5:09] report.

[5:10] We're going to go through some

[5:12] of them, not necessarily in

[5:14] detail, but we certainly can

[5:17] that create the everlee

[5:18] farmstead community future land

[5:19] use designation.

[5:24] And that's applied to about

[5:24] 996a.

[5:25] Again, just say we sort of in

[5:27] the special area planning

[5:27] process, that we have identified

[5:29] in our comprehensive plan, there

[5:31] was a special area study scope

[5:34] of work that y'all approved.

[5:37] The study itself which included

[5:39] significant stakeholder public

[5:41] participation and your

[5:43] acceptance of a resolution for

[5:44] the special area study, that was

[5:45] in NOVEMBER 2023.

[5:47] And now we're really at that

[5:49] sort of implementing special

[5:52] area plan.

[5:53] So that's kind of zoomed out a

[5:54] little bit more.

[6:00] Just so you can see the extent

[6:01] of the hickory sink on the west

[6:02] side of parker road.

[6:03] You can see all these -- this

[6:05] actually goes all the way up to

[6:08] tioga south, up here on the

[6:08] northern end.

[6:11] And then again, you can see the

[6:15] limits of the everlee farmstead

[6:16] community future land use

[6:19] designation down here in the

[6:19] south.

[6:21] So again, proposed changes.

[6:24] The first one is a map change to

[6:27] change that future land use

[6:28] designation from rural

[6:32] agriculture to everlee farmstead

[6:32] community.

[6:36] And that also will include an

[6:38] update of the map f-17 that we

[6:43] adopted as part of the U.F. Golf

[6:45] application to reflect the new

[6:46] future land use designation on

[6:50] these properties.

[6:51] So it will look something like

[6:53] that, the map at 17.

[6:55] And again, you can see there

[6:56] that's the everlee farmstead%

[7:00] community that we have sort of

[7:01] designated on that special area

[7:03] plan map.

[7:07] So the second part is a lot of

[7:07] text amendments.

[7:09] And as I mentioned, we're going

[7:10] to go through them.

[7:12] These are adopted in or proposed

[7:19] in policies 8.6.1 through 8.6.4.

[7:20] Those have already been adopted.

[7:22] Those would still, to some

[7:26] extent, apply within the everlee

[7:26] farmstead community.

[7:27] That includes the designation of

[7:28] the conservation management

[7:30] areas, those kinds of policies.

[7:32] There is also a whole new set of

[7:35] policies in 8.6.6 that we'll go

[7:35] through.

[7:37] Those apply to all of the

[7:38] everlee farmstead community.

[7:39] So not just the area within the

[7:41] special area plan, those apply

[7:43] to all of the properties for

[7:48] this future land use

[7:48] designation.

[7:50] So I'm going to talk about some

[7:53] of the policies that we're

[7:54] adopting and the sort of

[7:58] framework in the sort of view of

[8:01] the conditions that you all

[8:03] adopted as part of the

[8:05] acceptance of the special area

[8:05] study.

[8:06] So, for example, on this first

[8:09] one, condition 8 related to

[8:11] prioritizing protection of

[8:12] conservation management areas

[8:14] and clustering development close

[8:17] to the urban cluster, it

[8:19] required any application to

[8:22] address requirements of policy

[8:26] 7.1. 3 which is related to the

[8:28] companion of the urban cluster.

[8:31] It had a requirement that it be

[8:34] served by urban infrastructure

[8:36] and do an analysis that

[8:37] demonstrates that's possible.

[8:38] Required an analysis of the

[8:40] potable water and sanitary sewer

[8:43] facilities element, policy 3.1.5

[8:45] which deals with the extension

[8:48] of potable water and sanitary

[8:51] sewer outside the urban cluster.

[8:53] It required transportation

[8:55] connections consistent with our

[8:56] urban mobility districts,

[8:58] including connectivity to

[8:59] surrounding development.

[9:02] Required urban design concepts

[9:04] that support non-automotive

[9:05] modes of transportation.

[9:07] And it included a requirement

[9:08] for affordable housing

[9:09] consistent with policies adopted

[9:12] in our comprehensive plan.

[9:14] So I say that there's a lot of

[9:16] things there in condition 8.

[9:17] Each of those is addressed sort

[9:19] of somewhere in the policies

[9:22] that we're proposing for

[9:24] adoption.

[9:25] Condition 9 dealt again more

[9:28] with the extension of central

[9:31] water and sanitary sewer and the

[9:36] analysis of 3.1.5 and 3.1.6 from

[9:38] the potable water and sanitary

[9:40] sewer element.

[9:42] And condition 10 dealt

[9:42] specifically with conservation

[9:45] and low water use landscaping

[9:47] and it included some such ases

[9:49] up here on the screen but

[9:51] certainly didn't limit it to

[9:55] those sort of individual topics.

[9:58] And then condition 13 dealt with

[10:02] stormwater treatment, the use of

[10:05] low-impact design ideas and

[10:11] engineered soils for

[10:11] de-nitrofication.

[10:13] And some of those are addressed

[10:16] specifically in policies we are

[10:17] proposing for adoption.

[10:19] Some MAY have more specific

[10:20] elimination later on in the

[10:22] process if the board decides to

[10:26] move forward with this comp plan

[10:26] amendment.

[10:28] So at this point, I'm going to

[10:30] sort of dive into the proposed

[10:32] policies that we have written.

[10:34] And sort of talk about what the

[10:38] policies do in terms of the

[10:38] everlee farmstead community

[10:39] future land use designation.

[10:43] And the first is proposed policy

[10:43] 8.6.6.

[10:46] And this is the additional%

[10:48] development entitlements that

[10:50] the project that we are

[10:54] proposing be granted to the

[10:55] project.

[10:57] So under the current future land

[10:59] use designation for the

[11:02] property, staff estimated

[11:03] loosely, it's sometimes hard to

[11:06] do it more specifically, but

[11:09] about 275 units would be a

[11:11] reasonable number of units that

[11:12] could be developed in a

[11:13] clustered subdivision on the

[11:14] property.

[11:16] So that's based on the acreage

[11:18] of the property that allows one

[11:20] dwelling unit per 5 acres as

[11:21] well as bonus units that would

[11:22] be available through the

[11:25] clustering provisions of our

[11:27] plan.

[11:30] Policy 8.6.6 proposes 2,500

[11:33] residential units, market rate

[11:36] residential units, plus an

[11:38] additional 250 affordable units

[11:39] and 200,000 square feet of

[11:40] non-residential development.

[11:42] So that's the sort of total of

[11:44] what would be allowed on the

[11:45] property.

[11:46] And the proposed policies

[11:51] require that 5,000 acres be the

[11:52] basis for transfer of

[11:54] development rights either

[11:56] through acquisition or fee

[11:56] in lieu.

[11:57] That's where those residential

[11:58] units really come from.

[12:00] So I'm going to go through that

[12:02] here in just a second, about how

[12:03] we arrived at those numbers a

[12:04] little bit more.

[12:05] >> chair: okay.

[12:06] >> I did want to just point out

[12:07] that's really -- it's not that

[12:09] the units are just being created

[12:10] out of nowhere.

[12:12] We are really looking for them

[12:15] to be moved from one place to

[12:19] here.

[12:21] Policy 7.1.3 of the future land

[12:24] use element is a policy that

[12:26] requires the analysis of need

[12:28] for expansion of the urban

[12:29] cluster.

[12:31] So two parts to that.

[12:32] The applicant is not proposing

[12:35] to expand the urban cluster.

[12:36] And the staff policies that

[12:38] we're proposing also would not

[12:40] change the location of the urban

[12:41] cluster line.

[12:43] So the everlee farmstead

[12:45] community would continue to be

[12:46] located outside of the urban

[12:48] cluster, even though it would be

[12:51] served by central sanitary sewer

[12:55] and potable water.

[12:57] The applicant did not find that

[12:59] analysis that is part of the

[13:00] evaluation and proposal which we

[13:02] are considering right now was

[13:04] wrong or invalid.

[13:06] And really didn't identify sort

[13:09] of in the way that our

[13:10] comprehensive plan requires the

[13:12] identification of need.

[13:14] There isn't really a methodology

[13:18] to get there.

[13:19] i think what I would say about

[13:21] that is sort of as staff, we

[13:24] focused on the policy outcomes

[13:30] for this particular piece of

[13:31] property.

[13:32] That is the build-out through

[13:33] the future land use designation

[13:35] as compared to the build-out

[13:37] under the proposed policies.

[13:39] And given those two, we think

[13:42] that the option as we propose

[13:45] today is a better outcome for

[13:46] several reasons than what might

[13:49] be allowed with 275 units on the

[13:56] site today.

[13:57] Policy 7.1.3e of the

[13:58] comprehensive plan deals with

[14:00] what you have to do if you are

[14:01] expanding the cluster.

[14:03] And there's a bunch of stuff in

[14:04] there, like that's the analysis

[14:05] of need part.

[14:08] But there's also okay, if you

[14:09] are going to expand it, you have

[14:11] to do one of these two things.

[14:14] And one of those is that 25% of

[14:16] any new units have to be

[14:19] affordable at 80% of area median

[14:19] income.

[14:22] And the other sort of option is

[14:24] that you have to have a transfer

[14:26] of development rights for any

[14:28] new units authorized by the

[14:28] amendment.

[14:30] So those are sort of the two

[14:33] ends of the spectrum.

[14:36] And what we have sort of done is

[14:37] mashed those together.

[14:42] And so what we have said is that

[14:44] there has to be a purchase or

[14:48] pay a fee in lieu of for

[14:49] 5,000 acres of other land where

[14:52] those units could come from.

[14:55] That's 55% of the full tdr

[14:56] requirement.

[14:58] And that the development has to

[15:00] provide 250 affordable housing

[15:04] units, that's at the 80% ami, at

[15:05] or below 80% ami.

[15:07] And that's about 45% of that

[15:14] full requirement.

[15:15] We have kind of mixed that and

[15:16] said you get some of this and

[15:18] some of that but together they

[15:20] add up to that full 100%.

[15:22] Just graphically because some

[15:24] people MAY think better, you can

[15:26] kind of think of the top arrow

[15:30] going zero to 8,900.

[15:31] 8,900 would be the total number

[15:33] of acres required to offset the

[15:34] additional entitlements.

[15:35] On the bottom you could look at

[15:38] that 25% and say it would be 557

[15:40] units if it were all affordable

[15:41] housing.

[15:42] So you might say, well, like if

[15:45] you were right in the middle,

[15:49] it's 4,450 of tdr, 279 of

[15:51] affordable units.

[15:52] You could slide that bar over to

[15:56] one side and do less tdr and

[15:56] more affordable units.

[15:58] You could slide the bar the

[16:01] other direction and do more tdr,

[16:03] fewer affordable units.

[16:05] And in discussion with the

[16:06] applicant, this is sort of the

[16:11] place that we arrive, which is

[16:11] 5,000 acres, 250 affordable

[16:12] units.

[16:14] So that's kind of how we got

[16:14] there.

[16:16] There isn't a policy specific to

[16:18] that in the comprehensive plan

[16:18] today.

[16:20] And those policies that are in

[16:22] there about tdr and affordable

[16:24] housing are related specifically

[16:27] to the expansion of the cluster.

[16:28] Again, we're not expanding the

[16:30] cluster, so this is sort of an

[16:31] in-between where we are taking

[16:34] those policies that we have in

[16:34] the comprehensive plan and

[16:37] adapting them to how this site

[16:40] might function.

[16:43] >> chair: any questions on that,

[16:45] commissioners?

[16:46] Okay.

[16:48] i'd love to go through it.

[16:49] >> yeah, let's go through it

[16:49] first.

[16:51] >> chair: okay.

[16:55] >> MR. Chair, the policies 3.1.5

[16:56] and 3.1.6 provide some options

[17:03] to the board about expanding or

[17:04] expending potable water and

[17:05] sanitary sewer lines into

[17:06] outside the cluster.

[17:09] There's an a, b, c and d.

[17:11] And one of those is sort of the

[17:13] health, safety, welfare, you

[17:14] know, if we don't do that,

[17:15] people are going to -- wells are

[17:17] going to go bad or, you know,

[17:19] there's too many septic tanks,

[17:19] something like that.

[17:22] So those are sort of a and b,

[17:23] those two.

[17:25] C is that the board finds --

[17:26] makes a finding and that's what

[17:28] we're doing here tonight -- that

[17:32] the extension of those

[17:34] facilities would meet the goals

[17:35] of the comprehensive plan in

[17:36] some other way.

[17:38] And so we have really said --

[17:40] and in here, it talks about the

[17:42] retention and expansion of

[17:44] business and industry or the

[17:45] attraction of new business.

[17:47] What we have said instead is

[17:49] that really that protection of

[17:52] land through the tdr and the

[17:54] provision of affordable housing

[17:55] units are goals that the

[17:57] commission has identified in its

[17:59] comprehensive plan.

[18:01] And so that this plan really

[18:03] does support those other goals

[18:05] that are identified in the

[18:06] comprehensive plan.

[18:08] That's why we think it's okay

[18:11] for the extension of potable

[18:12] water and sanitary sewer.

[18:13] In addition to having that many

[18:20] units would really require it

[18:20] anyway.

[18:26] So again, it is supportive of

[18:28] the 250 affordable units, the

[18:29] 5,000 acres of conservation or

[18:32] ag preservation and the urban

[18:36] form of development that will be

[18:38] underan as part of this.

[18:42] And then really, at that point,

[18:44] policy 3.1.6 doesn't apply

[18:47] because that specifically

[18:48] applies to the expansion of the

[18:49] urban cluster.

[18:51] So that's sort of how we went

[18:52] through that analysis of those

[18:57] two policies that were required

[19:02] in the conditions of the sas

[19:03] resolution.

[19:03] For transportation mobility,

[19:06] there's really a couple of

[19:07] policies that support that, that

[19:10] deal with the transportation

[19:12] mobility aspect.

[19:18] Proposed policy 8.6.6.3 require

[19:21] the development consistent with

[19:21] tnd standards.

[19:22] So the development itself sets

[19:24] up the idea of character areas

[19:26] which are different parts of the

[19:27] development and would have

[19:28] different kinds of

[19:29] characteristics.

[19:31] So there's both the village core

[19:32] and village edge that would

[19:34] function much like our village

[19:36] center and transit supportive

[19:38] area for TNDs function.

[19:40] And then the hamlet portion of

[19:41] the development, which would

[19:43] function like our outside the

[19:45] transit supportive area.

[19:47] And although the standards

[19:49] aren't necessarily specifically

[19:50] implemented in the comp plan

[19:53] here, we make reference to those

[19:55] sections of our comp plan being

[19:58] the guiding factor for how those

[20:00] areas will develop.

[20:03] The fourth character area is the

[20:05] farmstead character area.

[20:08] That's more rural and isn't

[20:10] appropriate to have those same

[20:11] urban design standards.

[20:12] we'll talk about that here in

[20:13] just a second as well.

[20:16] And then proposed policy 8.6

[20:17] 8.6.6.13 writers the

[20:19] implementation of a mobility

[20:20] district which is what we have

[20:22] for our other mobility fee.

[20:23] We have three mobility districts

[20:25] in the county and it would

[20:28] require the implementation for a

[20:30] mobility district specific to

[20:31] this development with a fee that

[20:33] is intended to support projects

[20:37] that are related directly to

[20:39] this everlee farmstead

[20:39] community.

[20:41] And that includes a requirement

[20:43] to construct internal

[20:44] infrastructure that enhances

[20:46] mobility within the development

[20:49] and also a limitation on

[20:50] development, the amount of

[20:52] development prior to the

[20:54] programming of four-laning of

[21:00] state road 24 to parker road.

[21:03] I mentioned the character areas.

[21:05] So the farmstead generally

[21:07] allows density up to one

[21:09] dwelling unit per 3 acres which

[21:11] is a little higher than our

[21:12] current rural ag designation.

[21:13] There are some areas that

[21:16] require clustering and that are

[21:18] calculated at the one dwelling

[21:21] unit per 5 acres so it's not

[21:23] directly 1-to-3 over the whole

[21:24] thing, but generally that's

[21:25] where we started.

[21:27] The hamlet is I'll just say more

[21:29] suburban in nature and allows

[21:30] densities up to five dwelling

[21:31] units per acre but again would

[21:34] be very similar in design

[21:35] outside the transit supportive

[21:37] area and design standards,

[21:40] sidewalks, pedestrian, bike,

[21:41] transportation infrastructure.

[21:44] The village edge, which would be

[21:46] mixed use with up to 10 dwelling

[21:48] units per acre and a minimum of

[21:48] 300 units.

[21:50] And then the village core which

[21:52] is mixed use with up to 16

[21:54] dwelling units per acre and

[21:55] minimum of 600 units.

[21:58] So those are both a little bit

[22:01] the maximum density of those two

[22:02] are a little bit higher than

[22:04] what is allowed in our tnd.

[22:08] So our tnd maxes out on I think

[22:09] 10 dwelling units per acre in

[22:11] the village center and goes down

[22:12] in the transit supportive area.

[22:14] So these would be a little bit

[22:16] higher, on the high end.

[22:18] And rather than having a minimum

[22:19] density on the low end, it's a

[22:20] minimum number of units.

[22:22] It's a little bit different, but

[22:23] accomplishes a similar kind of

[22:24] goal.

[22:26] And then the five dwelling units

[22:29] per acre is one dwelling unit

[22:31] per acre more intense than our

[22:32] low density future land use

[22:34] designation, but really sits in

[22:35] the same sort of area in terms

[22:41] of intensity.

[22:43] The farmstead character area

[22:45] under the proposed policies is

[22:48] required to be a minimum of

[22:51] 400 acres, so 400 acres out of

[22:51] the 996 acres.

[22:54] And a minimum of 50% of that is

[22:58] set aside for uses consistent

[22:59] with policy 6.2.12c which is the

[23:02] policies in our rural clustered

[23:03] subdivisions related to open

[23:04] space.

[23:06] And this would include all of

[23:08] the CMAs that are designated

[23:10] as part of the special area

[23:11] study.

[23:13] Those are CMAs and they only

[23:15] get to be CMAs.

[23:17] You don't do development or

[23:18] stormwater in there.

[23:19] It would also include areas

[23:21] where the strategic ecosystem

[23:24] standards apply, either as a

[23:27] clustered subdivision or as

[23:29] complete set aside as, you know,

[23:30] potentially ag lands or

[23:33] something like that.

[23:35] There would be more property in

[23:39] the farmstead, so the sort of

[23:40] remaining homestead area from

[23:43] the lee family, which is sort of

[23:44] centrally east located in the

[23:46] project would be included in

[23:46] this.

[23:48] And then there would be

[23:49] additional open space areas that

[23:57] would be included as well.

[23:58] Policy 8.6.611 would require a

[24:01] working farm as part of the

[24:02] development, which would be a

[24:03] minimum of 20 acres in size.

[24:06] It has to be located outside of

[24:08] any cma or any of the other

[24:10] areas that are identified with

[24:11] the additional development

[24:12] standards as part of the special

[24:13] area study.

[24:16] And this would generally support

[24:18] agricultural and community-based

[24:20] agriculture related activities.

[24:22] So you can think of this as

[24:23] farm-to-table type of things,

[24:27] farmers' markets, actual farm,

[24:27] producing farm.

[24:28] There's a range of activities

[24:30] that could be considered as part

[24:37] of that.

[24:39] Policy 8.6.6.15 requires a pd.

[24:41] It requires the implementing pd.

[24:43] So all of this will be

[24:44] implemented by a planned

[24:45] development zoning district.

[24:48] We don't have any current zoning

[24:49] districts that would be

[24:51] appropriate for it.

[24:52] And it requires the planned

[24:53] development to include

[24:55] disturbance limitations so that

[24:58] means the actual areas of land

[24:59] where you are disturbing the

[25:01] property as you're developing.

[25:04] So it would require a

[25:05] minimization of that and

[25:07] provides for some selective

[25:09] clearly in the CMAs where that

[25:11] is consistent with the

[25:14] restoration of the cma itself.

[25:15] Policy 8.6.16 requires

[25:17] geophysical testing prior to

[25:19] stormwater management facility

[25:19] design.

[25:21] The specifics of that are still

[25:22] being sort of worked out as part

[25:24] of the planned development.

[25:26] But I'll just note that as part

[25:28] of the U.F. Golf pd, there was

[25:31] some pretty stringent

[25:33] requirements about testing,

[25:34] subsurface testing prior to

[25:36] implementation of stormwater

[25:36] management system.

[25:38] We would anticipate similar

[25:41] kinds of requirements on the pd.

[25:43] And then it also requires a

[25:45] stormwater best management

[25:46] practices document as part of

[25:47] the planned development.

[25:48] And you will see all of that in

[25:53] the future if you decide to

[25:54] transmit.

[25:58] Water conservation policy

[26:01] 8.6.6.17 establishes a maximum

[26:02] landscape irrigation limit,

[26:05] requires florida native or

[26:06] florida-friendly landscaping,

[26:08] sets limits on fertilizer and

[26:10] provides for soil limits and

[26:11] lots and common areas.

[26:13] I'm going through this very

[26:15] broadly right now.

[26:17] Establishes irrigation water

[26:18] sources and rules and introduces

[26:22] the idea of an irrigation

[26:23] utility within the development.

[26:26] So all of these are things that

[26:28] there are some pretty solid

[26:30] language already in the plan on

[26:30] these.

[26:32] But there will be more

[26:34] implementing language at the

[26:34] planned development.

[26:36] Suffice it to say nearly all of

[26:37] these are things that we don't

[26:39] get in our normal developments

[26:40] here in alachua county.

[26:42] So even with the policy language

[26:45] that we have in the plan, we are

[26:47] sort of already a leap ahead of

[26:49] where our existing development

[26:53] patterns are today.

[26:57] And as part of the analysis, we

[27:00] did review public facilities

[27:01] availability.

[27:02] Gru has sufficient capacity in

[27:07] both its water and wastewater

[27:09] systems to serve the

[27:09] development.

[27:10] There are likely to be

[27:11] improvements both on the site

[27:13] and potentially off-site and

[27:15] further up the distribution

[27:19] system in order to support the

[27:20] development with the capacity

[27:22] available in the plants.

[27:24] Fire rescue reviewed the

[27:25] application and has indicated

[27:26] there would be no issues

[27:28] providing services to the site

[27:32] at our urban level of service

[27:32] guidelines.

[27:33] So similar to how we provide

[27:36] service within the cluster.

[27:37] And alachua county public

[27:38] schools reviewed the proposal

[27:41] and found capacity exists either

[27:44] within the current school

[27:45] concurrency service area for the

[27:47] project or an adjacent school

[27:48] concurrency service area.

[27:50] I will say that analysis was

[27:52] done prior to the rezoning, that

[27:54] the district has not adopted new

[27:56] school concurrency service areas

[27:56] yet.

[27:58] They are working on that.

[28:01] But in terms of what's available

[28:04] today in the system, it's

[28:04] available.

[28:06] It has to be available to serve

[28:11] the development.

[28:12] The planning commission heard

[28:14] this item on JULY 15th and

[28:16] they recommended the board of

[28:17] county commissioners transmit

[28:18] the item.

[28:20] I will say that they provided a

[28:22] comment and this is in the staff

[28:23] report.

[28:24] That there were concerns and

[28:26] discussion about the potential

[28:27] for transportation impacts in

[28:29] the southwest portion of the

[28:32] county related to this

[28:32] development.

[28:34] There were not any specific

[28:35] recommendations from the

[28:36] planning commission about that.

[28:38] Just a request to let you know

[28:40] that they had concerns and there

[28:41] was discussion among the

[28:44] planning commission members on

[28:45] that.

[28:46] The board, you guys are holding

[28:48] a public hearing tonight to

[28:49] decide whether to transmit this

[28:50] item.

[28:51] This is a large scale

[28:52] comprehensive plan amendment.

[28:55] It would be transmitted to the

[28:58] state for state review, both at

[28:59] the florida commerce which is

[29:02] the state planning agency as

[29:04] well as other state agencies

[29:05] that would have an interest in

[29:06] the application.

[29:07] If you transmit it, once

[29:08] received, florida commerce and

[29:10] those other organizations would

[29:12] have 30 days to respond and

[29:14] provide comments to us.

[29:16] And then if there are comments,

[29:19] county staff would work with the

[29:21] applicant to solve any of those

[29:23] and schedule a final adoption

[29:23] hearing.

[29:26] So that's a tbd date.

[29:29] So, MR. Chair, that is the end

[29:30] of my presentation.

[29:31] I'll just say staff recommends

[29:32] that the board of county

[29:34] commissioners find the

[29:39] application z26-000005 with

[29:41] staff's proposed policies

[29:41] consistent with the

[29:42] comprehensive plan and transmit

[29:43] the proposed comprehensive plan

[29:44] amendment to florida commerce

[29:46] and other agencies for their

[29:47] review and comments.

[29:48] >> chair: okay.

[29:49] Right on time.

[29:50] Right on time.

[29:51] I think what we're going to do

[29:53] is pause the public hearing.%

[29:55] we will open it up for public

[29:56] comment, not related to this

[29:56] item.

[29:58] And then we'll bring you back

[29:59] up, chris, we'll ask questions

[30:01] and then we'll hear from the

[30:01] applicant.

[30:02] Sound good?

[30:05] Sound good, commissioners?

[30:07] MR. Konish, welcome.

[30:08] >> jim konish.

[30:09] I'd like to thank commissioner

[30:10] chestnut and wheeler for

[30:12] speaking with me on JULY 12th

[30:15] and sending county environmental

[30:18] protection out to poe springs to

[30:21] protect the public from a toxic

[30:25] dead spring.

[30:32] As you know, sunday I walked

[30:33] down.

[30:37] Our spring is closed for human

[30:37] occupation.

[30:42] Your lavish six-stall pump-out

[30:46] toilets are not being used.

[30:49] Poe springs flow is zero.

[30:53] It's a putrid pond.

[30:54] This incredible runout to the

[30:56] river where I have spent

[30:59] hundreds of hours, the spring

[31:00] does not even return to the

[31:05] river, sir.

[31:09] I'd like to change the subject.

[31:11] Under the trim notices that went

[31:15] out, taxpayers need to be aware

[31:17] that stormwater and solid waste

[31:18] assessments in the city of

[31:21] gainesville have moved from gru

[31:22] bills to tax bills.

[31:25] And the notices aren't crystal

[31:25] clear.

[31:28] You have 20 days to object to

[31:30] your non-ad valorem assessments

[31:33] or to apply for a hardship

[31:33] exemption.

[31:36] The city of gainesville has a

[31:37] hardship exemption forms on

[31:38] their website.

[31:39] The county does not.

[31:41] The county is refusing to give

[31:43] me a copy.

[31:45] They say they will only give it

[31:46] to a homestead owner.

[31:48] I have done the public records

[31:48] law.

[31:49] I have had a lot of problems

[31:50] with public records.

[31:52] And I will sue the county to get

[31:55] whatever I need under the law.

[31:56] And there will be other things

[31:58] that I'll be suing them for,

[32:01] other violations.

[32:10] To its credit, gru looked at

[32:12] anomalous water bills and has

[32:13] discovered a lot of serious

[32:13] leaks.

[32:20] And I had one in front of my

[32:20] residence.

[32:21] In the duckpond across from

[32:24] thomas center they put the water

[32:25] meter off my property.

[32:27] Someone most have drove over it,

[32:28] ups or amazon.

[32:31] They broke the connection.

[32:33] And I leaked for a year and a

[32:36] half massive amounts of water,

[32:39] billed to my house with

[32:40] wastewater fees.

[32:42] And there was no visible

[32:44] evidence because a live oak tree

[32:47] drank the water as fast as it

[32:48] leaked and got really big.

[32:53] Now, this is just old

[32:54] infrastructure.

[32:55] But alachua general hospital had

[32:57] a water leak in the basement for

[32:58] the entire life of the hospital.

[33:00] It was a broken line in front of

[33:01] the water meter.

[33:03] They thought it was a spring.

[33:03] [Tone]

[33:06] Citizens need to know every leak

[33:07] is different.

[33:09] And there's large amounts of

[33:11] money owed to customers.

[33:12] >> chair: thank you, jim.

[33:12] >> such as myself.

[33:13] >> chair: thank you, MR. Konish.

[33:14] >> thank you.

[33:16] >> chair: thank you.

[33:18] Next speaker, please, public

[33:18] comment.

[33:19] Anyone?

[33:23] Going once, going twice.

[33:24] Okay.

[33:25] Come on in.

[33:26] Oh, hey, sam.

[33:28] That's my nephew.

[33:30] >> and that's my uncle.

[33:30] [Laughter]

[33:31] It's the first time I have

[33:32] spoken in a forum like this.

[33:34] I understand it's three minutes,

[33:35] right?

[33:35] >> chair: yeah.

[33:36] You've got a green light and the

[33:38] green light means go.

[33:39] Red light means stop.

[33:40] >> thank you all.

[33:42] Good evening, commissioners, and

[33:43] thank you for the work you do

[33:44] for this county.

[33:46] My name is sam cornell.

[33:47] For years I reviewed the license

[33:48] plate camera program.

[33:49] Of course, this is something a

[33:50] lot of counties have been

[33:52] talking about nat news.

[33:54] I'm not here to criticize the

[33:55] county or compliment the county.

[33:56] What I did do three the freedom

[33:59] of information requests, I

[34:00] published my findings and I have

[34:02] a document here if you are

[34:02] interested in that.

[34:04] I have a one page printout if

[34:06] you are interested in brevity

[34:07] that I can get to you at the

[34:07] end.

[34:09] What I found is why I'm here.

[34:12] and pardon me, I just walked in

[34:14] the door and I was getting my

[34:14] paperwork together.

[34:17] As we speak, alachua county's

[34:18] unique and expensive with flock

[34:22] and exxon companies extend to

[34:22] 1540 organizations.

[34:26] That's not 1540 neighboring

[34:27] police departments.

[34:29] Their roster includes some

[34:30] faraway agencies I'm just going

[34:31] to name a few.

[34:33] We share or police information

[34:35] captured by flock and axon

[34:37] cameras with the tupelo regional

[34:40] airport police, wallace state

[34:41] community college police, the

[34:42] missouri department of

[34:44] conservation, national park

[34:45] services natchez trace parkway

[34:47] and, of course, the university

[34:50] of north texas at denton police.

[34:51] Ask yourself why the nebraska

[34:53] state patrol needs a photo of

[34:55] your car, or actually 12 photos

[34:57] of your car on newberry road

[34:57] taken today.

[34:58] Don't get me wrong.

[35:00] I broadly trust the government.

[35:02] But the data in alachua's

[35:03] agreement can also be shared

[35:05] with lowe's corporate, private

[35:07] HOAs and dozens of landlords

[35:09] from what I found inside.

[35:10] What are we doing, you know?

[35:12] Think about that for a minute.

[35:13] There are many such examples

[35:14] showing misuse and abuse of

[35:16] these cameras in florida and

[35:17] nationwide.

[35:19] That is not me alleging anything

[35:21] against aso or its brave men and

[35:21] women.

[35:24] But it does underscore what

[35:25] becomes possible when local

[35:26] governments connect themselves

[35:28] to a national data-sharing

[35:29] infrastructure.

[35:30] I'm asking that this commission

[35:33] act locally against national

[35:33] spillover.

[35:34] What bothers me in this county,

[35:36] if you want a left turning lane

[35:38] or if you want a fire station or

[35:40] you want street party, you have

[35:42] to have public speech about

[35:42] that.

[35:43] You have to have debate about

[35:44] that and open forum and the

[35:45] public speaks first.

[35:46] That's how it works here.

[35:48] A system that photographs all of

[35:49] us every day and ships that data

[35:52] across the country, that arrived

[35:54] with no hearing, no comment, no

[35:55] vote.

[35:56] At least not one that I could

[35:56] find.

[35:57] And that's okay, I don't expect

[35:59] you to know every dollar the

[36:00] sheriff is spending money on.

[36:02] I also don't expect anything to

[36:03] necessarily be done about this

[36:04] right away.

[36:05] But I want to call it into

[36:06] attention.

[36:06] This isn't free.

[36:08] The newest contract we just

[36:10] signed with axon for 10 years

[36:12] from now is $935,000.

[36:14] Tha's real money, that's a

[36:15] deputy or two.

[36:16] That's filling overtime gaps.

[36:19] That's retention bonuses.

[36:20] I'd rather fund officers than

[36:21] this camera technology.

[36:23] Here's my ask and I'll wrap it

[36:24] up here.

[36:25] I'm asking alachua county

[36:27] considers changing the 30-day

[36:29] data retention that these

[36:31] cameras collect to 7 days.

[36:32] Often it's cited if a person

[36:34] goes missing or a car gets

[36:35] stolen we can use these cameras

[36:36] to find them.

[36:36] [Tone]

[36:38] That's a great thing.

[36:39] I don't call in my car being

[36:40] stolen 30 days after it

[36:41] happened.

[36:42] I have other asks but I'm happy

[36:43] to share with you at another

[36:44] time.

[36:45] The paper that I published or

[36:47] the one-page printout.

[36:48] >> you can leave it.

[36:51] >> chair: sam, if clerk, we'll get

[36:51] copies of those.

[36:52] Isn't he great?

[36:54] >> he is great.

[36:55] >> well, look, you know, I was

[36:56] trying to warm up here but I

[36:58] just walked in the door.

[37:04] >> chair: that's my new port newark.K.K.K.K.K.K.K.K.K.K.K.K.K.K.K.K.K.K.K.K.K.K.K. Time.

[37:05] He didn't tell me he was coming

[37:07] either which is even greater.

[37:08] That's what I love about it.

[37:10] >> he looks good in a coat and

[37:11] tie, too.

[37:12] >> chair: I know.

[37:13] He wears a tie and I don't.

[37:14] Look at this guy.

[37:15] We're going to go ahead and

[37:16] close public comment.

[37:17] Did you have a comment to public

[37:17] comment?

[37:18] >> I did.

[37:19] >> chair: commissioner prizzia.

[37:19] >> I guess I have a question

[37:20] regarding this.

[37:22] I'm not sure if he's speaking

[37:25] specifically about security

[37:25] cameras hat the sheriff's

[37:28] office is deploying that are

[37:29] separate from the cameras that

[37:32] we did vote on regarding school

[37:34] zone enforcement.

[37:35] But during that conversation

[37:38] that we did deliberate about, we

[37:39] were very clear -- or I was very

[37:40] clear and it was part of the

[37:42] motion that we retain that data

[37:44] and control over that data and

[37:46] that we not share it or sell it

[37:48] to anybody outside of the

[37:49] county.

[37:50] So if those cameras are included

[37:53] in what he's reporting to us, I

[37:55] would like information back.

[37:58] and I would like to know, you

[38:01] know, what is the extent of

[38:02] those contracts.

[38:04] >> chair: you want to ask him?

[38:04] >> do you know?

[38:06] I'm looking at our staff because

[38:07] they helped draft that contract.

[38:08] >> no worries.

[38:09] Those are different cameras.

[38:11] And they are doing speed zone

[38:11] enforcement only.

[38:13] They are not retaining license

[38:14] plate data.

[38:15] And they have a different scope

[38:15] of agreement.

[38:17] The companies that I'm referring

[38:20] to are flock and axon.

[38:20] >> yeah.

[38:22] And I didn't know what -- I have

[38:24] the same concerns that you have

[38:26] about rights to privacy, access

[38:30] to our data and had expressed

[38:31] that during those meetings and

[38:33] sort of like tried to rein in

[38:36] what was possible so we could

[38:37] still enforce school zones

[38:39] efficiently but also protect

[38:43] people's rights and safety and

[38:43] privacy.

[38:45] But now you've got me concerned.

[38:46] So thank you for bringing this

[38:47] to my attention.

[38:48] I will certainly read your

[38:49] report and I would be interested

[38:52] to understand if any of those

[38:53] contracts are county contracts

[38:56] or if they are only sheriff's

[38:57] office contracts.

[38:57] >> chair: sam, do you know the

[38:58] answer to that?

[38:59] >> the last thing I'll say to

[39:03] that because I do -- that is

[39:08] part of a project with lawton

[39:09] chiles on 24th.

[39:11] It would be a subsidiary

[39:13] agreement because they are their

[39:14] own thing.

[39:16] >> chair: and flock and axon get

[39:19] access to the right-of-way how?

[39:22] >> alachua county has 250 50

[39:24] installed right now and 40 are

[39:24] coming.

[39:29] I'm not asking that we remove

[39:29] but oversight.

[39:32] There are 50 scattered about

[39:35] alachua county primarily on

[39:36] state and county roads and the

[39:38] data is interchangeably shared.

[39:40] >> chair: I had someone contact

[39:43] me, one right outside of haile

[39:48] plantation outside of lawton

[39:48] chiles.

[39:49] >> that actually is a school

[39:50] zone camera.

[39:51] There's not a flock camera on

[39:53] that road oddly enough.

[39:54] >> chair: we'll read the report.

[39:56] >> no worries.

[39:58] >> I would ask our staff let us

[40:00] give that report also to the

[40:00] sheriff's office and ask if they

[40:02] could give us a report back

[40:04] about what the data sharing is

[40:06] in their contracts and

[40:06] agreements.

[40:08] And, you know, that there is a

[40:09] concern at least for me, if you

[40:10] guys are okay with that, there's

[40:12] a concern from this board about

[40:13] how our data in alachua county

[40:15] is being shared outside the

[40:16] confines of public safety within

[40:17] our county.

[40:18] And if that is the case, we'd

[40:20] like to have a conversation.

[40:21] >> well, there is from the

[40:21] community, too.

[40:23] We're getting emails from folks.

[40:24] >> chair: does anybody object to

[40:24] that request?

[40:25] >> no.

[40:26] >> no.

[40:26] >> chair: thank you.

[40:28] So missy, did you have anything

[40:29] to comment on that or you'll get

[40:30] back to us?

[40:33] >> no, I can send out a request

[40:33] tonight.

[40:34] >> chair: all right.

[40:35] >> thank you.

[40:35] >> I feel very heard.

[40:38] >> chair: thank you, sam.

[40:39] Isn't he great?

[40:40] Behalf laugh I think I've

[40:42] already said that a couple of

[40:43] times.

[40:45] That's my brother's son.

[40:46] That's my new port

[40:49] nephew.

[40:51] >> who is that, ken?

[40:51] >> chair: that's sam.

[40:53] My mom had two sons.

[40:53] [Laughter]

[40:54] I had two sons.

[40:56] My brother had two sons, that's

[40:57] one of them.

[40:59] And then both my sons had sons.

[41:00] >> all right.

[41:01] >> chair: that's kind of a

[41:01] thing.

[41:02] Yeah, okay.

[41:02] We're going to close public

[41:04] comment and stop talking about

[41:04] ken and his family.

[41:08] And we're going to go back to

[41:12] MR. Dawson, your presentation

[41:13] before we hear from the

[41:16] applicant, any commissioners

[41:19] that have questions for

[41:19] MR. Dawson.

[41:21] We have commissioner prizzia.

[41:22] >> I would point out we have

[41:24] lots of staff here from our

[41:25] other review departments and

[41:26] they can also answer some of

[41:26] those questions.

[41:27] >> chair: so you are ready to

[41:29] pass that microphone.

[41:30] >> I MAY pass that buck if

[41:31] needed, MR. Chair.

[41:32] >> chair: they are over there

[41:34] laughing thinking you can

[41:34] handle.

[41:35] Go ahead.

[41:36] Commissioner prizzia, start us

[41:36] off.

[41:38] >> I have a whole like, you

[41:40] know, marked up document here,

[41:41] lots of questions.

[41:43] I tried to summarize them in a

[41:45] sheet for myself.

[41:46] Would you mind pulling up the

[41:47] presentation?

[41:49] And maybe I'll try to go in the

[41:51] order that you brought them up.

[41:52] >> sure.

[41:54] >> and then, you know, I guess I

[41:55] don't know if you want me to

[41:57] just do a couple and then

[41:57] pass --

[41:59] >> chair: no, no.

[42:00] Go ahead.

[42:02] He might answer a lot of ours.

[42:03] >> here we go.

[42:05] I guess first and foremost, I

[42:08] want to understand, are all

[42:10] strategic ecosystem areas within

[42:14] the strategic area study being

[42:16] protected with the current

[42:17] strategic area plan?

[42:19] >> MR. Chair, I'm going to ask

[42:23] one of our epd folks, steve

[42:24] hofstetter.

[42:25] >> chair: you're already kicking

[42:26] it off.

[42:26] Hey, steve.

[42:26] Welcome.

[42:33] >> good evening, steve

[42:33] hofstetter, environmental

[42:34] protection department.

[42:36] All the areas identified through

[42:37] the special area study isn't

[42:38] being protected through this

[42:39] application.

[42:41] Is that accurate?

[42:44] To kind of split it up into two

[42:45] parts, every part that was

[42:47] identified within their project

[42:49] area for protection is being

[42:49] protected.

[42:51] So the areas within the lands

[42:54] that they own in the 996 acres

[42:56] is being protected as identified

[43:00] in the plan.

[43:02] The plan study recognized lands

[43:04] on the east side of the road

[43:05] that are currently, you know,

[43:08] owned by the state that also

[43:09] required protection.

[43:12] That aspect is separated from

[43:16] this project area and this

[43:17] applicant is not involved in the

[43:19] protection of that area.

[43:22] That's maybe the first step of

[43:24] answering your question.

[43:24] >> okay.

[43:26] Well, I guess I'll speak to my

[43:27] colleagues and the applicant in

[43:29] that regard.

[43:30] So, you know, when we started

[43:35] down this pathway -- and this is

[43:36] a long time ago.

[43:37] This is before the applicant was

[43:40] even the applicant, right.

[43:41] The conversation about this area

[43:43] was about the entire

[43:44] 4,000 acres.

[43:45] At that time, it was about 4,000 acres.

[43:47] It was under single ownership by

[43:49] the lee family and their subsidy

[43:52] companies that they had

[43:52] developed.

[43:53] And the plan was that they were

[43:56] going to do the strategic area

[43:57] study because it was their

[43:57] property.

[43:59] Sometimes the county will

[43:59] undertake a strategic area study

[44:02] and talk to all the landowners

[44:03] and get consensus around what

[44:05] we're going to do with that

[44:05] property.

[44:07] It was a single landowner so it

[44:08] made sense for them to undertake

[44:10] the strategic area study because

[44:11] they wanted to do it now because

[44:13] they wanted to get moving with

[44:14] some projects, right.

[44:16] So they did that.

[44:18] And when that work and that

[44:20] world, they said, okay, we

[44:22] recognize that we would like to

[44:24] donate this piece of property to

[44:25] U.F. For their golf course.

[44:27] We would like to retain our

[44:27] homestead.

[44:29] And we would like to develop the

[44:29] rest.

[44:32] And we were like, whoa, what?

[44:34] Like that's a huge amount of

[44:35] development outside of the urban

[44:36] cluster.

[44:39] That would be disastrous for the

[44:40] water quality.

[44:41] Can we have a conversation about

[44:42] that?

[44:43] The conversation went, long

[44:44] story short, at the end of the

[44:46] day, the conversation landed on

[44:48] the fact that if they protected

[44:50] the 2,000 acres on the west side

[44:56] of parker road, that we would be -- and in particular the

[44:56] conservation management areas

[44:59] across that entire 4,000 acres,

[45:00] that we would be interested and

[45:02] willing to entertain the

[45:04] development of the remaining

[45:04] acreage.

[45:06] And that was the deal.

[45:09] And we also agreed that phase 1

[45:10] would be the golf course because

[45:11] they wanted to get that golf

[45:12] course moving quickly because

[45:15] U.F. Had some urgency around

[45:16] that property.

[45:18] And so we did our part and we

[45:19] said okay.

[45:21] And we gave U.F. The right to

[45:22] move forward with our golf

[45:24] course quickly, like they

[45:24] wanted.

[45:27] And now we're here with part 2.

[45:29] And from my perspective, part 2

[45:33] is protecting all of the CMAs

[45:36] in that area and, therefore,

[45:37] getting the development rights

[45:39] and entitlements to be able to

[45:41] develop in a huge way beyond

[45:43] what the original entitlements

[45:44] are.

[45:46] So I understand that property

[45:48] isn't under the ownership of the

[45:49] current owners any more, right?

[45:51] They sold it to the university

[45:52] of florida.

[45:55] And I understand that they can't

[45:56] necessarily control the

[46:00] decisions of the university of

[46:01] florida.

[46:02] However, they clearly have a

[46:04] tied relationship to the

[46:05] university of florida.

[46:06] They are donating them the golf

[46:06] course.

[46:08] They are in conversations about

[46:09] how trails might connect in

[46:10] their development.

[46:12] And so, you know, for me to be

[46:14] able to feel comfortable moving

[46:20] forward with this, I really need

[46:21] to see some sort of

[46:22] documentation what the

[46:23] protections are for that cma

[46:24] area on the west side of the

[46:24] property.

[46:27] I know that ifas is working on

[46:28] management plans for that area.

[46:29] >> chair: I don't think they are

[46:29] here tonight.

[46:30] >> well, I know they are not

[46:31] here tonight.

[46:32] I'm telling them before final

[46:34] development plan, before this

[46:35] thing gets any kind of stamp of

[46:37] approval to move forward on it

[46:39] in a serious way with digging

[46:40] that first shovel of dirt, I

[46:44] need to see written evidence

[46:47] that there is protections and a

[46:49] restoration and management plan

[46:50] for that western side cma.

[46:56] Because this is -- that was the

[46:56] deal.

[47:00] That was the deal that we all

[47:00] struck.

[47:02] We've got a lot of sensitive

[47:03] areas that need protection and

[47:05] those need to be protected in

[47:10] order for them to develop.

[47:11] And now it's-like at the last

[47:13] minute because the state saw

[47:15] what they wanted the golf course

[47:16] path, they struck a deal and

[47:18] sold that property to U.F.

[47:20] Instead of doing the longer,

[47:22] harder process of a conservation

[47:24] easement with like rural and

[47:24] family lands which was the

[47:25] original plan.

[47:27] And I don't fault them for that

[47:28] and I don't blame them for that.

[47:30] But I also --

[47:32] >> chair: that's part of this

[47:34] application.

[47:35] >> well, then I'm not really

[47:36] interested in this application.

[47:37] I mean did we

[47:39] we have to protect those

[47:40] areas.

[47:41] That was the deal.

[47:42] And I think that they can.

[47:43] There are management plans.

[47:44] There's a contract that they

[47:45] have with the owners for the

[47:48] sale of that property and what

[47:49] they are and aren't allowed to

[47:51] do on that property that they

[47:52] could provide to us.

[47:53] U.F. Is planning a restoration

[47:54] plan for that property.

[47:55] They are planning a management

[47:56] plan for that property.

[48:01] They are talking about it being

[48:03] like austin cary or broadway

[48:03] swisher.

[48:05] I want to see them written and

[48:06] documented and I think our

[48:07] community deserve that.

[48:08] They deserve the right to have

[48:10] that information in writing what

[48:14] U.F. Is going to do with that

[48:15] conservation land on the western

[48:16] side of the property.

[48:17] I understand it's not a subject

[48:18] of this specific application but

[48:20] it's part of the strategic area

[48:20] study.

[48:22] In order for the strategic area

[48:24] study to implement a strategic

[48:25] area plan, I don't think we can

[48:27] move forward until we have that

[48:29] with an actual development,

[48:30] until we have that information.

[48:30] That's my 2 cents.

[48:32] I don't know how my other

[48:33] colleagues feel about it.

[48:34] >> chair: I feel differently but

[48:35] we'll get to it.

[48:37] >> I do too.

[48:39] >> I will -- my questions then

[48:41] are if that's not being

[48:42] protected, like what can the

[48:44] applicant provide us around that

[48:45] with regards to what ifas is

[48:48] doing with their protections or

[48:48] conservation?

[48:50] I have reached out to ifas and

[48:52] asked them to do a walking tour

[48:54] of the property and talk to them

[48:56] about the management plans so I

[48:57] could get some comfort myself

[48:58] with it.

[48:59] I think for the public, they

[49:00] should also have that

[49:01] information.

[49:02] It shouldn't just be something I

[49:06] know because I walked the

[49:06] property.

[49:08] Question, the 260 acres that's

[49:13] referenced in policy 3.1.5 for

[49:16] the farmstead area, it says --

[49:19] it's on page 10 of the staff

[49:19] report.

[49:24] And it says the extension of

[49:26] potable water and wastewater are

[49:31] great than densities and will

[49:32] participate in the stormwater

[49:35] and the set aside of 260 acres

[49:36] of the development site.

[49:38] Can you talk to me about those

[49:39] 260 acres of set aside?

[49:41] >> thank you, MR. Chair, yes.

[49:42] So, as I mentioned in the

[49:43] farmstead area, we have required

[49:49] that to be a minimum of

[49:49] 400 acres.

[49:53] And then 200 of that has to be

[49:55] in uses that are consistent with

[49:58] the clustered subdivision

[49:59] policies.

[50:01] So those are generally ag uses,

[50:03] conservation uses.

[50:05] Just depending on those

[50:06] properties.

[50:08] And then we have an additional

[50:11] policy that requires another

[50:12] 60 acres specifically of open

[50:15] space set aside.

[50:15] >> gotcha.

[50:16] Thank you for that.

[50:16] thank you.

[50:19] That answers that question.

[50:20] You had the study about the

[50:22] impacts to archer road and

[50:23] parker road.

[50:24] And in the report, it talks

[50:26] about the potential of failure

[50:29] of service provision at 39% of

[50:30] the development.

[50:32] But currently, as it stands, I

[50:33] believe we have the development

[50:35] allowing to go forward with 50%

[50:39] before it has to have met the

[50:39] provisions.

[50:41] Is there a reason why we didn't

[50:44] stick with the 40%, 39 -- I'll

[50:45] round it up to 40%.

[50:48] That is the --

[50:49] >> MR. Chair, I'm going to call

[50:51] up another colleague.

[50:53] >> chair: okay.

[50:54] MR. Hays, transportation guy.

[50:57] >> well, no.

[50:58] In terms of that specific

[51:00] number, I wanted to step up

[51:00] because that was a decision that

[51:02] I made.

[51:04] Generally speaking, so we don't

[51:06] do concurrency really anywhere

[51:07] in the county, but that policy

[51:11] is a concurrency-like policy.

[51:15] And to be quite frank, the 39% I

[51:17] thought 50% was a reasonable

[51:18] number in terms of the

[51:19] entitlements for getting the

[51:22] project off of the ground.

[51:24] And also allowing the county the

[51:25] surety that we were not going to

[51:27] let something get out of hand on

[51:28] archer road.

[51:30] Ultimately, you know, that is

[51:31] modeling.

[51:33] That is a transportation impact

[51:33] analysis.

[51:34] It could be that, it could be

[51:35] something more.

[51:36] It could be something less.

[51:38] But in terms of the regulatory

[51:40] approach, I thought 50% was a

[51:41] good rule of thumb number for

[51:42] that policy.

[51:42] >> okay.

[51:43] And do we have a similar thing

[51:46] for when the bike trail

[51:48] connections to archer braid need

[51:50] to be done or any of the

[51:51] internal trail networks that

[51:53] would serve that community?

[51:54] >> MR. Chair, so what we are

[51:57] working on, we do not have a

[52:00] policy in the grandparent

[52:01] amendment.

[52:03] I know because we are

[52:04] concurrently working on the

[52:07] planned development and allison,

[52:08] MS. Moss and myself are working

[52:09] `on it today, looking at the

[52:10] conditions that will accompany

[52:11] the planned development.

[52:12] And there will be a condition to

[52:14] that effect with the number of

[52:14] units.

[52:15] >> that will be great.

[52:16] >> chair: you are workin on a

[52:17] condition for that.

[52:17] >> yes.

[52:18] In the planned development.

[52:20] >> chair: in the pd.

[52:21] >> in a couple of months.

[52:22] >> that's great.

[52:23] I think that's really important.

[52:25] I think we have had a lot of

[52:26] challenges with some of the

[52:28] other developments that we're

[52:29] committed to doing trail network

[52:30] connections.

[52:31] And, you know, then it's like,

[52:33] oh, well, that's too expensive,

[52:34] all of a sudden, and, you know,

[52:35] then we're kind of struggling to

[52:36] kind of make it work.

[52:38] So just knowing that it's

[52:39] committed and that it's an

[52:40] expectation it's going to get

[52:41] done --

[52:41] >> chair: that's in the pd.

[52:43] >> it's really important.

[52:43] Okay.

[52:47] Let's see.

[52:49] Also in the pd, we're going to

[52:53] be having more specificity how

[52:55] we will limit the phases and

[52:58] work on that limiting of lot

[53:00] clearing and/or like -- you

[53:05] talked about limiting -- you go

[53:06] down your slides and you talk

[53:12] about the limiting of --

[53:13] >> keep going.

[53:26] >> what is the word he used?

[53:29] There, to limit -- there go

[53:29] back.

[53:32] Include disturbance limitations.

[53:35] >> so, MR. Chair, I have people

[53:37] who can talk a little bit more

[53:42] specifically about the types of

[53:43] implementation tools we're

[53:47] talking about at the pd, just

[53:49] generally without biasing you

[53:50] towards the overcome of this.

[53:52] I would say generally those are

[53:54] sort of specific standards that

[53:56] we're identifying at the pd

[53:56] stage.

[53:58] They MAY not necessarily be

[54:00] phasing related in the

[54:01] traditional sense where we talk

[54:02] about a number of units or

[54:03] something like that.

[54:05] I'm guessing that they will take

[54:06] a different form, like on the

[54:09] golf course we talked about how

[54:11] far outside of the greenways you

[54:13] could go with heavy machinery

[54:15] and those kind of things.

[54:16] I would anticipate they are more

[54:17] in that range.

[54:19] I think stacy or mary could talk

[54:20] a little more in detail about

[54:22] those if you have specific

[54:22] questions about how they are

[54:24] approaching that.

[54:27] >> I guess I would like to hear

[54:28] how they are approaching them.

[54:29] I think it was one of the key

[54:31] things in some of our conditions

[54:33] for the --

[54:34] >> chair: mary, stacy, you want

[54:35] to take it?

[54:37] She said no, you take it.

[54:38] Again, this is a pd thing.

[54:39] >> but it was part of the

[54:40] conditions in our strategic area

[54:45] study that we limit that we have

[54:46] L.I.D. And have a disturbance.

[54:47] >> chair: it's going to be

[54:48] handled in the comp plan.

[54:49] Mary, welcome.

[54:54] >> mary szoka, stormwater

[54:55] quality with epd.

[54:56] Do you have a specific question

[54:58] or overarching what you think?

[55:00] >> my question is how are we

[55:02] ensuring that they are going to

[55:05] limit disturbance of the natural

[55:06] areas to the greatest extent

[55:07] possible as they are doing their

[55:09] development practices.

[55:11] >> so as mentioned, that will be

[55:15] further like defined in the pd.

[55:16] Preliminarily, we provided

[55:17] feedback on setting limits of

[55:20] disturbance setbacks.

[55:21] Similar language was recommended

[55:24] and implemented for the golf

[55:27] course portion of the project.

[55:28] >> thank you.

[55:29] >> chair: thanks, mary.

[55:31] That wasn't so bad.

[55:32] Stacy is like ha ha.

[55:33] `

[55:34] >> chris, you mentioned this was

[55:37] supposed to follow or tnd and

[55:39] tod policy as best as it can,

[55:41] given that it has some

[55:43] differences in its densities.

[55:44] And that includes sort of them

[55:46] following our -- it looked like

[55:47] there might have been different

[55:49] policies regarding setbacks and

[55:50] street escapes and blocks.

[55:52] To my mind, it looked like their

[55:55] goal was to make those even more

[55:56] refined, which in our mind -- to

[55:58] my mind would be a good thing if

[55:59] we're trying to do more dense

[56:00] and more compact development.

[56:02] I want to check in that is the

[56:02] case.

[56:04] >> MR. Chair, you know, when we

[56:05] adopted our tnd design

[56:06] standards, both in the comp plan

[56:09] and then the sort of

[56:11] implementing language in our

[56:13] land development regulations, it

[56:14] was pretty early days.

[56:15] And we weren't necessarily

[56:17] trying to be as aggressive as

[56:20] one could possibly be about

[56:21] getting those forms.

[56:22] I think we really -- our goal

[56:27] was to sort of manage that level

[56:32] of urbanness within the context

[56:35] of our pretty suburban cluster.

[56:36] I don't think that anybody would

[56:39] look at our tnd standards and be

[56:41] like that gets you the most

[56:43] urban form ever.

[56:44] Like I don't think any of us

[56:45] would say that.

[56:49] So I think there is room for the

[56:53] applicant to propose some

[56:54] additional tighter standards,

[56:57] one, the pd.

[56:58] Meaning smaller setbacks,

[57:01] smaller lots, like tighter.

[57:02] >> tighter, yeah.

[57:05] >> as well as sort of those

[57:07] additional pieces of policy

[57:08] language that are in the comp

[57:12] plan as proposed that are

[57:14] supportive of additional

[57:15] standards at the pd level, that

[57:18] we MAY not necessarily implement

[57:22] in all of our other TNDs or

[57:23] TODs but MAY meet what the

[57:25] applicant's goal is for the form

[57:26] of that development.

[57:28] Does that answer your question?

[57:29] I don't think there is -- this

[57:31] is me being honest and this is

[57:33] how I intended the policies to

[57:36] be, which is that at the

[57:38] minimum, they would have to meet

[57:39] those design standards that we

[57:40] have in a tnd.

[57:41] >> chair: in the tnd.

[57:43] >> when you get to the pd.

[57:45] But at pd, when you look at

[57:46] that, we MAY be pointing out to

[57:47] you, hey, here's something

[57:49] that's different than what we

[57:52] strictly do in our TNDs.

[57:52] >> right.

[57:54] Maybe there will be things we

[57:55] can adopt.

[58:01] Okay.

[58:01] Excellent.

[58:03] Under the stuff about low impact

[58:04] development and all of that --

[58:06] again, I MAY be getting to the

[58:06] pd.

[58:07] I'm probably more interested in

[58:08] the details.

[58:10] >> chair: you are nailing the pd

[58:11] for sure.

[58:11] We'll stop there.

[58:13] >> all the things I need to talk

[58:14] about, they are already in

[58:14] process.

[58:15] Let's get it out there.

[58:17] The public hears about these

[58:18] things, emails that we have

[58:19] gotten regarding concerns and

[58:21] the conversations that I have

[58:22] had with concerns about this,

[58:23] these are the things that people

[58:24] are concerned about.

[58:25] >> chair: sure.

[58:31] >> and that is the water and

[58:32] amount of water for irrigation,

[58:34] I think staff have done an

[58:36] amazing job of having the water

[58:37] budget and working generally

[58:38] speaking on this idea that it's

[58:40] mainly reclaimed water, but that

[58:42] it is also going to be, you

[58:43] know -- there's going to be a

[58:44] water budget and there has to be%

[58:45] a maximum amount of water they

[58:48] can use and try to limit

[58:50] irrigation on their individual

[58:51] propertie and things like that.

[58:54] But I guess I'm interested to

[58:55] understand how we are monitoring

[58:56] that.

[58:58] Like is that right of inspection

[58:59] by the county?

[59:01] Is that with -- how is that

[59:02] going to work?

[59:05] >> I'm going to ask I think

[59:07] stacie greco to come and talk

[59:08] about that.

[59:09] >> chair: mary says I'm not

[59:10] taking it.

[59:12] Hey, stacie.

[59:15] >> stacie greco, epd water

[59:15] resources.

[59:17] So the question is how will we

[59:19] monitor that.

[59:20] So as lots are developed, so way

[59:22] down the road if they are

[59:23] developed, you know, we have

[59:25] written in it does have to

[59:26] follow chapter 77.

[59:28] So any irrigation would have to

[59:29] go through our approval process.

[59:33] So that's already set up for

[59:34] anywhere irrigation is going on

[59:34] in the county.

[59:36] So then we would look at this

[59:38] differently because it has

[59:39] stricter requirements than our

[59:40] chapter 77.

[59:44] So we would look, okay, you can

[59:45] only irrigate 40% of the lot

[59:47] instead of 50%.

[59:48] And there are additional things

[59:50] that we would have to keep track

[59:51] of, so I think we have written

[59:52] it in.

[59:54] There's a certain percentage of

[59:55] the lots that would have no

[59:56] permanent irrigation.

[59:57] So we would definitely have to

[59:59] keep track of, you know, those

[1:00:00] types of things.

[1:00:02] And, you know, that would be in

[1:00:04] the pd, potentially some of the

[1:00:06] stuff would go in the covenants

[1:00:08] and restrictions for the

[1:00:09] neighborhood depending on, you

[1:00:12] know, what exactly we're talking

[1:00:13] about.

[1:00:14] >> will there be like

[1:00:14] requirements?

[1:00:16] Or are we talking about the idea

[1:00:18] of having soil moisture sensors

[1:00:20] and ensuring they shut off rain

[1:00:22] gauges and using technologies

[1:00:24] like that to ensure water isn't

[1:00:25] being wasted in the development?

[1:00:26] >> yes.

[1:00:29] So already our code requires

[1:00:33] soil moisture sensors or smart

[1:00:33] E.T. Controllers.

[1:00:36] So those would have to be used.

[1:00:38] I imagine when we get to the pd,

[1:00:42] we will also have in larger

[1:00:44] scale water conservation

[1:00:45] technologies

[1:00:47] technologies built in to that,

[1:00:47] also.

[1:00:48] >> we had a farmer come today

[1:00:50] who is downstream of the

[1:00:51] development that's very

[1:00:53] concerned about the impacts of

[1:00:55] runoff to their wells and the

[1:00:59] amount of nitrogen that's going

[1:01:00] to come from using reclaimed

[1:01:02] water that has additional

[1:01:04] nitrogen load plus the farm on

[1:01:05] site, things like that.

[1:01:06] Is there any plan to have a

[1:01:08] monitoring well for water

[1:01:12] quality on site?

[1:01:13] >> that's a great question.

[1:01:14] We did build in a monitoring

[1:01:15] plan for the golf course

[1:01:16] neighborhood which is nearby or

[1:01:20] the golf course property.

[1:01:21] We have not discussed doing

[1:01:22] groundwater monitoring.

[1:01:24] We could definitely talk to the

[1:01:31] applicant as we move through

[1:01:33] these and it could be integrated

[1:01:34] in other properties in that

[1:01:35] area.

[1:01:37] There's the wetland going in and

[1:01:38] a lot happening in that area

[1:01:41] that perhaps taking a broader

[1:01:42] approach makes sense.

[1:01:46] >> okay, thank you.

[1:01:48] You might want -- well, steve

[1:01:50] might want -- I guess is steve,

[1:01:52] not really stacie because it's a

[1:01:53] question about the tdr.

[1:01:55] I'm really excited -- I'm

[1:01:57] actually really excited about

[1:01:59] this part of this application.

[1:02:04] I think it's a great way to use

[1:02:05] TDRs to the advantage of

[1:02:06] protection of actual natural

[1:02:07] resources rather than just

[1:02:08] buying some development rights

[1:02:10] here and some development rights

[1:02:12] there and actually moving this

[1:02:13] money to buy conservation land

[1:02:14] that's meaningful and going to

[1:02:16] make an impact.

[1:02:19] And so for me, this seems like a

[1:02:19] win-win for us.

[1:02:21] And I know that, you know, some

[1:02:22] of the folks in our community

[1:02:24] are less than excited about

[1:02:26] seeing this kind of urban

[1:02:27] density outside of the urban

[1:02:28] cluster.

[1:02:30] But given it's surrounded by

[1:02:32] development and given the

[1:02:33] proposals that they have put

[1:02:34] together and all the work that

[1:02:36] staff have done to get the kind

[1:02:37] of provisions that we have, I

[1:02:39] actually think this is the best

[1:02:41] potential outcome for this piece

[1:02:42] of property with the protection

[1:02:45] of the cma on the west side and

[1:02:45] this tdr program.

[1:02:47] Because I think that we

[1:02:49] MR. Ultimately protect a lot

[1:02:51] more important resources,

[1:02:53] natural resources and lands to

[1:02:56] this county than a lot of the

[1:02:57] farmland that's there,

[1:02:59] especially with the amount of

[1:03:00] sustainable decision making that

[1:03:01] the developer is already

[1:03:02] committed to.

[1:03:04] It sounds like they are going to

[1:03:05] continue to be pushed towards

[1:03:06] with the prd.

[1:03:08] My question is, how are we

[1:03:10] establishing the fee in lee for

[1:03:12] this and are we going to be sure

[1:03:14] we have a number we all agree on

[1:03:16] prior to preliminary development

[1:03:18] plan being approved.

[1:03:19] >> MR. Chair, steve hofstetter

[1:03:20] again, environmental protection.

[1:03:21] The way it's going to work, we

[1:03:23] are going to come up with a

[1:03:25] development or developer's

[1:03:27] agreement that will outline the

[1:03:28] agreements of how that program

[1:03:29] `is going to function.

[1:03:31] We're in the early talks now

[1:03:35] about what that value might be

[1:03:36] per tdr as well as, you know,

[1:03:38] where, how, you know, all those

[1:03:40] details are going to be in an

[1:03:41] agreement that will come back to

[1:03:42] the board.

[1:03:44] I understand it's before

[1:03:47] preliminary, is that correct?

[1:03:47] Somewhere --

[1:03:48] >> chair: part of the pd or

[1:03:50] after the pd prior to

[1:03:51] preliminary?

[1:03:53] >> yes, probably after pd, but

[1:03:53] before preliminary.

[1:03:56] Maybe during the pd there's a

[1:03:57] little more information that's

[1:03:58] coming out about strategies of

[1:04:00] how we're moving toward that

[1:04:02] final agreement.

[1:04:02] >> okay.

[1:04:05] I guess my one request is that

[1:04:09] as we work towards that, that

[1:04:10] there is definitely an interest

[1:04:12] in the county being able to

[1:04:14] enforce any of the easements

[1:04:16] that are purchased and like that

[1:04:17] we have enforcement authority on

[1:04:18] those easements.

[1:04:20] Because I think, you know, they

[1:04:21] are going to -- you don't know

[1:04:22] who they are going to buy them

[1:04:23] from.

[1:04:24] If they decide to buy them

[1:04:26] themselves, if it's fee in lieu,

[1:04:28] it's no big deal.

[1:04:29] >> chair: we'll make that

[1:04:30] decision.

[1:04:32] >> if they are negotiating

[1:04:33] TDRs for individuals with

[1:04:35] easements, we are on there with

[1:04:36] having right of enforcement on

[1:04:38] those easements is my only

[1:04:38] request in addition to a good

[1:04:41] approach for the TDRs that is

[1:04:43] fair and equitable and uses

[1:04:45] appraisal processes that make

[1:04:47] sense, so that it's transparent

[1:04:50] how we're getting to that

[1:04:51] number.

[1:04:52] Okay.

[1:04:55] The farm, for me, I think it's

[1:04:57] really important -- there's some

[1:04:59] talk in there about the farm.

[1:05:01] And it talks about it as if it's

[1:05:02] bona fide ag.

[1:05:05] I have to say it.

[1:05:06] >> it's the last --

[1:05:06] >> yeah.

[1:05:08] From my perspective -- and I

[1:05:10] have had this conversation

[1:05:11] before with staff and with the

[1:05:11] applicant.

[1:05:14] I think this farm really should

[1:05:16] be considered institutional use

[1:05:19] or some other land use.

[1:05:22] While it might be ag, it is an

[1:05:23] amenity for the development.

[1:05:28] It is much like -- I consider it

[1:05:29] much like a pool or tennis court

[1:05:30] or something like that.

[1:05:31] It's going to be agriculture.

[1:05:33] And in that way, it's going to

[1:05:35] be sharing important values

[1:05:38] around our local food system and

[1:05:41] around what it should look like

[1:05:42] I think.

[1:05:44] And what I have seen of their

[1:05:46] plans, it's going to be really

[1:05:47] amazing for people to learn

[1:05:48] about what local food systems

[1:05:50] are, how they work, how local

[1:05:51] farms work and being able to

[1:05:53] connect people to their food,

[1:05:55] which I am really excited about.

[1:05:56] I do think because this is part

[1:05:57] of a development system and a

[1:05:59] system that we're really

[1:06:00] concerned about in regards to

[1:06:02] water quality and water quantity

[1:06:04] and those sorts of things I

[1:06:05] really would like to see that

[1:06:06] this farm have some of the same

[1:06:08] requirements to develop a

[1:06:11] nutrient -- like to do soil

[1:06:13] testing and develop a nutrient

[1:06:14] management plan and a crop plan

[1:06:14] -

[1:06:17] and to develop irrigation and

[1:06:19] water budget plan for the farm

[1:06:22] and to submit those to us, you

[1:06:23] know, the same way they are

[1:06:24] doing with some of the

[1:06:25] irrigation structures.

[1:06:27] And so that it's not just okay,

[1:06:30] this little piece is set aside,

[1:06:32] so it can do whatever it wants.

[1:06:34] I think that it should be part

[1:06:38] of the overall development plan

[1:06:39] structure in compliance and

[1:06:42] enforcement that we are doing

[1:06:46] with our other water quality and

[1:06:48] quantity concerns about the

[1:06:48] development.

[1:06:50] >> MR. Chair, I will just point

[1:06:51] out, if the board is deciding to

[1:06:54] make that change, obviously, the

[1:06:55] applicant will want to maybe

[1:06:57] address that.

[1:06:59] That's condition m talks about

[1:07:00] that bona fide ag has that

[1:07:02] ability to follow best

[1:07:03] management practices.

[1:07:04] If we are going down that way,

[1:07:05] that would probably be the

[1:07:07] policy you want to adjust.

[1:07:08] >> okay, thank you.

[1:07:08] >> moving forward.

[1:07:12] >> and then my last question is

[1:07:14] do by know if the farm -- I

[1:07:16] guess this is a question for the

[1:07:16] applicant.

[1:07:18] I'll wait until the applicant

[1:07:18] comes up.

[1:07:20] I think I have had all of my

[1:07:21] questions addressed, so I will

[1:07:23] pass the mic to mary.

[1:07:24] >> chair: okay.

[1:07:25] Commissioner alford and then

[1:07:27] commissioner wheeler.

[1:07:27] >> okay.

[1:07:30] Of course, that's right in my

[1:07:31] tablet here decides to go to

[1:07:32] sleep.

[1:07:33] >> sorry about that.

[1:07:34] [Laughter]

[1:07:35] >> oh, he wants to be charged.

[1:07:37] That's where all my questions

[1:07:39] are, so excuse me for like 2

[1:07:41] seconds until I plug this guy

[1:07:41] in.

[1:07:43] >> I can come up with more.

[1:07:43] [Laughter]

[1:07:44] Just kidding.

[1:07:46] >> while that's restarting, just

[1:07:51] one thing.

[1:07:55] Originally, MR. Lee had 4,000

[1:07:56] something acres.

[1:07:58] And if he had decided to just

[1:08:01] develop that all into 5-acre

[1:08:02] lots he could have done that by

[1:08:07] right and had quite a few lots,

[1:08:09] 800 I think.

[1:08:13] Is that about right?

[1:08:14] >> MR. Chair, we could probably

[1:08:16] have discussions all day long

[1:08:18] about that very particular

[1:08:19] question.

[1:08:22] I'll give you sort of --

[1:08:22] >> yeah.

[1:08:24] >> the basics of that which is

[1:08:25] that the future land use

[1:08:28] designation for this property is

[1:08:29] one dwelling unit per 5 acres.

[1:08:31] So I think you can kind of start

[1:08:31] there.

[1:08:34] But we do have additional

[1:08:36] limitations in our comprehensive

[1:08:36] plan.

[1:08:38] One about the number of plots

[1:08:40] that are not part of a clustered

[1:08:44] subdivision that can be created

[1:08:46] outside of the urban cluster in

[1:08:46] any given year.

[1:08:48] And that number is 100.

[1:08:50] So I think it's important to

[1:08:53] sort of keep that perspective.

[1:08:54] And we have lots being created

[1:08:58] in the unincorporated area that

[1:08:59] sort of qualify for that.

[1:09:02] They are not part of a clustered

[1:09:03] subdivision that take up some

[1:09:04] part of that.

[1:09:06] So I think you could say -- I

[1:09:08] don't think there would ever be

[1:09:10] 5-acre lots as far as the eye

[1:09:11] can see.

[1:09:12] Yes, there are parts of the

[1:09:13] county that are like that before

[1:09:15] we had our subdivision

[1:09:16] regulations today.

[1:09:18] It would be nearly impossible to

[1:09:20] do that going forward.

[1:09:22] So I don't think we would say

[1:09:23] there would be 5-acre lots as

[1:09:24] far as the eye can see.

[1:09:26] I think you could say there

[1:09:31] would be 3-acre lots and a less

[1:09:32] than sustainable development

[1:09:33] form.

[1:09:33] >> right.

[1:09:35] And that's all.

[1:09:37] I don't need too much detail.

[1:09:39] It was just the point was there

[1:09:41] could have been something a lot

[1:09:41] worse here.

[1:09:43] And I think that by protecting

[1:09:46] the land on the west side and

[1:09:49] by, you know, creating this, you

[1:09:51] know, and the deal that you

[1:09:53] talked about, I feel good about

[1:09:53] this.

[1:09:55] Even though some of my most

[1:09:56] favorite people in the county

[1:09:59] have sent me emails talking and

[1:10:02] asking us not to transmit this.

[1:10:04] We have been talking about this

[1:10:05] a long time and I feel really

[1:10:06] good about it.

[1:10:09] I wanted to start by saying

[1:10:09] that.

[1:10:11] My computer came up and here it

[1:10:11] is.

[1:10:15] Now I will ask my questions.

[1:10:17] So we had the discussion -- it's

[1:10:19] always great to follow anna.

[1:10:21] >> chair: she gets a lot of it

[1:10:22] out of the way.

[1:10:23] >> she gets a lot out of the

[1:10:23] way.

[1:10:25] When we get to that 50%

[1:10:27] development part, is there any

[1:10:28] provision that there has to be

[1:10:33] any sort of public transit -- or

[1:10:35] not public transit, but any sort

[1:10:37] of transit relief part of the

[1:10:37] neighborhood?

[1:10:40] I know they have talked about

[1:10:41] doing a park and ride lot and

[1:10:42] things like that.

[1:10:43] Anything that could relieve some

[1:10:46] of the impact to archer road and

[1:10:48] other roads in the area.

[1:10:49] >> yeah.

[1:10:51] So I think the way that I would

[1:10:53] answer that is that there's

[1:10:56] detail to follow.

[1:10:58] But that, you know, one of the

[1:11:00] things that we say about our

[1:11:03] mobility plan is that it

[1:11:04] considers development within the

[1:11:06] cluster and not development

[1:11:07] outside the cluster.

[1:11:09] That's one of the sort of

[1:11:11] hallmarks of a mobility plan.

[1:11:12] And because this is a

[1:11:13] development that we wouldn't

[1:11:16] have anticipated as part of our

[1:11:18] mobility plan, we would think

[1:11:19] there would be additional

[1:11:21] projects that are necessary to

[1:11:22] support it.

[1:11:23] Because this is a pretty big

[1:11:24] piece of property.

[1:11:26] We're not talking about 20 units

[1:11:27] on a little piece of property.

[1:11:29] It is pretty significant.

[1:11:30] So we do have a policy that, as

[1:11:34] I mentioned, establishes or will

[1:11:35] establish a mobility district

[1:11:37] specifically for this property.

[1:11:39] And we would anticipate that

[1:11:42] there is at the very least a

[1:11:44] transit project that is tied to

[1:11:45] that.

[1:11:46] We propose that in our policies

[1:11:48] today, a table that's related

[1:11:49] specifically to that.

[1:11:50] Exactly what that transit

[1:11:53] service looks like, we don't

[1:11:54] have that spelled out.

[1:11:56] Is it going to run through the

[1:11:56] project?

[1:11:57] Is it going to run around the

[1:11:58] project?

[1:12:00] what are the headways going to

[1:12:00] be?

[1:12:01] Does it run all week?

[1:12:02] I don't have the answer to all

[1:12:04] of those.

[1:12:08] And all of those will sort of

[1:12:09] contribute to the cost.

[1:12:12] But I think yes, we have

[1:12:14] considered that just like with

[1:12:16] the cluster, transit is an

[1:12:17] important component of mobility.

[1:12:18] We would anticipate that to be

[1:12:20] the case here as well.

[1:12:21] >> okay.

[1:12:22] And I do appreciate the fact

[1:12:24] that the developer has talked

[1:12:26] about putting in a park and ride

[1:12:27] lot.

[1:12:29] Because given the number of

[1:12:31] people that commute, that would

[1:12:33] make sense whether we get

[1:12:35] transit like we want it there or

[1:12:36] not, we could at least have car

[1:12:39] pooling that could work better.

[1:12:41] Let's see.

[1:12:42] Just a comment.

[1:12:46] I would love to see no

[1:12:48] irrigation to any residential

[1:12:49] lots and a soil amendment as

[1:12:50] well.

[1:12:51] I know soil amendments are part

[1:12:53] of what you guys are discussing

[1:12:56] in terms of minimizing the need

[1:12:59] for irrigation.

[1:13:01] I also wanted to talk about --

[1:13:07] you mentioned a well for water

[1:13:08] quality monitoring.

[1:13:10] I always hate that because by

[1:13:11] the time you see it in the well,

[1:13:13] we already have an issue.

[1:13:16] So I'm curious if we might think

[1:13:18] about as we're going forward

[1:13:21] something like a nitrogen budget

[1:13:25] instead because we know how much

[1:13:27] nitrogen is in the reuse water.

[1:13:30] We know what's necessary for a

[1:13:30] farm.

[1:13:33] I know that's asking a lot.

[1:13:33] >> chair: MS. Greco.

[1:13:33] >> yeah.

[1:13:37] so for the non-agriculture

[1:13:39] portion, we have written into

[1:13:41] this no fertilizers.

[1:13:43] So they will be doing soil

[1:13:46] amendments prior to installing

[1:13:47] landscaping.

[1:13:49] And then, you know, they can do

[1:13:50] soil amendments, compost and

[1:13:52] stuff after that.

[1:13:55] But no, you know, traditional

[1:13:59] fertilizers with nitrogen and

[1:13:59] phosphorus in it.

[1:14:00] That is most of the property.

[1:14:06] So we think that will have a big

[1:14:07] impact.

[1:14:08] >> we just talked about a

[1:14:09] monitoring well.

[1:14:10] In lieu of a monitoring well for

[1:14:14] the rest of it, a nitrogen

[1:14:15] budget -- I worked on one like

[1:14:23] that on another project.

[1:14:24] >> it's something we can discuss

[1:14:24] with the applicant.

[1:14:25] You're talking about for the

[1:14:26] agricultural area?

[1:14:28] >> for the agricultural areas,

[1:14:29] yeah.

[1:14:31] And for any place using the

[1:14:33] reuse water.

[1:14:35] You know how much nitrogen

[1:14:37] you're putting on the water with

[1:14:37] the calculation.

[1:14:38] I just thought it was something

[1:14:39] to look at.

[1:14:41] I don't know if it's something

[1:14:42] doable but I thought I would

[1:14:44] suggest it for discussion.

[1:14:49] >> thank you.

[1:14:51] >> let's see.

[1:14:56] When we get to the -- what do

[1:14:57] you call it?

[1:14:59] The 5,000 acres that we're

[1:15:03] looking at for the conservation,

[1:15:05] we are looking at doing multiple

[1:15:07] tracts and multiple areas

[1:15:09] probably because we're probably

[1:15:11] not going to get a 5,000-acre

[1:15:13] tract we do buy or they could

[1:15:14] buy.

[1:15:15] >> MR. Chair, that's a good

[1:15:15] question.

[1:15:17] I asked our lands people, are

[1:15:18] there 5,000-acre tracts and

[1:15:20] but there's not very many of

[1:15:20] them.

[1:15:22] >> and we have a lot of small

[1:15:24] tracts that are on our, you

[1:15:25] know, want list.

[1:15:26] >> so the way that our policy is

[1:15:29] written today, it references the

[1:15:31] transfer of development rights

[1:15:32] policies that we already have in

[1:15:35] our plan for expansion of the

[1:15:35] cluster.

[1:15:37] And there are already some

[1:15:40] requirements in those policies.

[1:15:42] So for conservation properties,

[1:15:44] they have to be on our -- is it

[1:15:46] the active acquisition list?

[1:15:46] >> yes.

[1:15:46] >> that's right.

[1:15:48] They have to be on the active

[1:15:50] acquisition list.

[1:15:52] Generally, the default is not

[1:15:54] smaller than 160 acres, but

[1:15:55] there's some exceptions to that.

[1:15:57] And there are similar

[1:15:59] requirements for the purchase of

[1:16:00] agricultural lands.

[1:16:04] So I think that the short answer

[1:16:06] is we're not likely going to go

[1:16:08] find a 5,000-acre tract, either

[1:16:10] the applicant or us unless they

[1:16:11] know something that we don't

[1:16:12] about acquiring land.

[1:16:14] So I would anticipate the county

[1:16:16] would be using this along with

[1:16:19] its other funds for acquisition

[1:16:22] to acquire lands as they become

[1:16:23] available to us.

[1:16:24] >> just like we would normally

[1:16:27] try to find the best quality

[1:16:27] lands.

[1:16:30] >> if the applicant is paying a

[1:16:31] fee in lieu, yes.

[1:16:33] >> that answers that question.

[1:16:36] And one more comment.

[1:16:40] Is there a -- well, maybe a

[1:16:41] comment.

[1:16:43] Is there a provision at all for

[1:16:46] livestock or poultry in the area

[1:16:49] as part of the agricultural

[1:16:52] nature of the development?

[1:16:52] And, you know, I feel like

[1:16:54] people are going to live in an

[1:16:56] agricultural hamlet, they should

[1:16:59] get the full experience.

[1:17:00] [Laughter]

[1:17:02] >> so, MR. Chair, for those

[1:17:04] areas that are within the

[1:17:05] farmstead, where agricultural

[1:17:08] uses are allowed, I would

[1:17:09] anticipate there might be some

[1:17:13] of that.

[1:17:15] And potentially, within some of

[1:17:17] the subdivisions that are in

[1:17:18] that portion of the property --

[1:17:21] I don't know exactly how that

[1:17:23] would play out.

[1:17:26] We don't currently have anything

[1:17:28] addressing that in the planned

[1:17:30] development specifically.

[1:17:32] I don't know on the working farm

[1:17:33] if they intend to have any

[1:17:34] animals.

[1:17:35] I think they have the allowance

[1:17:36] for that, but I don't know if

[1:17:38] that's something that they would

[1:17:39] normally do.

[1:17:40] >> chair: you can ask them to

[1:17:42] address that during their

[1:17:42] presentation.

[1:17:44] >> I was going to ask them to

[1:17:46] address that with the comment

[1:17:51] that I really like the

[1:17:52] regenerative agricultural model

[1:17:54] and animals are part of that in

[1:17:58] terms of creating, you know, a

[1:18:00] healthy, you know, healthy

[1:18:02] environment for regenerative

[1:18:02] agriculture.

[1:18:05] So anyway, that's all I've got

[1:18:05] right now.

[1:18:06] >> chair: thank you,

[1:18:06] commissioner alford.

[1:18:07] Commissioner wheeler.

[1:18:09] >> just a couple of things.

[1:18:11] Was this property ever on the

[1:18:12] acquisition list for us?

[1:18:15] Was it offered to the county for

[1:18:16] purchase?

[1:18:17] >> yes.

[1:18:19] >> I just remember serving with

[1:18:21] a commissioner here who one time

[1:18:23] said, you know, if you are going

[1:18:25] to restrict the use of this

[1:18:26] property, are you willing to buy

[1:18:27] it?

[1:18:28] You know, so that kind of sticks

[1:18:29] in my head.

[1:18:29] [Laughter]

[1:18:30] >> chair: that's good.

[1:18:32] >> I'm trying to understand, was

[1:18:34] it offered?

[1:18:37] >> MR. Chair, steve hofstetter,

[1:18:39] I don't want to get this wrong.

[1:18:41] My memory was that there was

[1:18:43] discussion of putting it on the

[1:18:46] list and it did come in front of

[1:18:50] the commission to be put on the

[1:18:50] list.

[1:18:51] I don't know -- I don't believe

[1:18:52] it got put on the list.

[1:18:53] >> is that right?

[1:18:54] >> yeah.

[1:18:56] But it was nominated.

[1:18:57] >> it didn't rank high enough.

[1:18:58] >> it was nominated.

[1:19:00] >> because when I first came on

[1:19:04] this board, I walked that

[1:19:06] property with thal lee.

[1:19:08] And I remember him sitting in

[1:19:09] the audience where that pretty

[1:19:11] young lady is when he came here

[1:19:12] with th people from the

[1:19:12] university of florida.

[1:19:14] And he took it on the chin big

[1:19:15] time from the community about

[1:19:17] even thinking about working with

[1:19:18] the university.

[1:19:21] And to talk about, you know,

[1:19:22] them making deals with the

[1:19:25] university, that was so badly

[1:19:27] entangled legally that there was

[1:19:29] a lot of strong arming that was

[1:19:29] going on there, too.

[1:19:31] I think the lee family deserves

[1:19:36] the respect from this community

[1:19:37] that they have worked really

[1:19:39] hard over the eight years I have

[1:19:40] been on this board, you know, to

[1:19:42] make sure it got into the right

[1:19:45] hands or it got, you know, to

[1:19:47] the best use of the property and

[1:19:48] the best way that they could

[1:19:50] actually do the dealing for

[1:19:51] their family.

[1:19:53] So, you know, when the time

[1:19:54] comes, MR. Chair, I would have

[1:19:56] the honor of recommending that

[1:19:57] this be transmitted.

[1:19:59] >> chair: okay, thank you.

[1:20:03] >> thank you, steve.

[1:20:07] >> chair: let me go through the

[1:20:07] slides.

[1:20:08] That's the easiest way for me to

[1:20:09] do it.

[1:20:17] Why don't we start with the

[1:20:21] transportation mobility slide?

[1:20:23] This kind of deals with what

[1:20:26] mary was asking earlier.

[1:20:28] >> no one likes my slides.

[1:20:30] >> I liked that slide.

[1:20:32] >> that was clever.

[1:20:36] >> chair: I thought that was

[1:20:38] very creative, not something in

[1:20:39] the comp plan.

[1:20:40] >> I haven't been called

[1:20:41] creative in a long time,

[1:20:41] MR. Chair.

[1:20:42] >> chair: that was creative.

[1:20:44] What we're talking about here is

[1:20:45] actually creating a mobility

[1:20:47] district specific with a fee

[1:20:49] included for transit, ultimately

[1:20:51] when and if we get to that

[1:20:51] point.

[1:20:53] And it would require an internal

[1:20:55] infrastructure that enhances

[1:20:56] mobility, limitation on

[1:20:58] development prior to programming

[1:21:00] of state road 24.

[1:21:02] So are we saying they don't turn

[1:21:06] any dirt until archer road is

[1:21:06] four-laned?

[1:21:08] >> no, MR. Chair, the way that

[1:21:11] policy is written is that the

[1:21:13] limitation is 50% of the

[1:21:15] entitlements.

[1:21:16] >> chair: right.

[1:21:17] so halfway.

[1:21:19] Before they go anywhere past

[1:21:21] hooj, we have to four-lane

[1:21:21] archer road.

[1:21:22] >> yeah.

[1:21:23] It has to be in the five-year

[1:21:24] work program.

[1:21:26] And that's typical because the

[1:21:27] state sometimes moves things

[1:21:28] around so the goal is to get it

[1:21:31] into the work program.

[1:21:32] >> chair: yeah, which I know

[1:21:34] this board has supported and I

[1:21:34] think we can work with the

[1:21:36] applicant on that.

[1:21:38] I know the applicant has worked

[1:21:38] on that.

[1:21:39] Next slide.

[1:21:43] So farmstead property, okay.

[1:21:46] 400 of the acres of the 997 will

[1:21:47] be farmstead?

[1:21:48] >> yes.

[1:21:50] So you could think of the

[1:21:51] character areas.

[1:21:53] You'll see them on the planned

[1:21:53] development.

[1:21:55] And they are almost like

[1:21:56] separate zoning districts within

[1:21:59] the sort of pd itself.

[1:22:00] So each of them will have its

[1:22:02] own sort of development

[1:22:02] standards.

[1:22:04] So you will see graphically that

[1:22:06] there will be 400 acres of

[1:22:09] farmstead on the planned

[1:22:10] development.

[1:22:10] >> chair: yes.

[1:22:12] 40% of the entire development

[1:22:14] will be one unit per 3 acres.

[1:22:16] >> a little more than 40%.

[1:22:17] 40%, right, right.

[1:22:19] Then on the hamlet side, there

[1:22:22] will be 5 units per acre up to 5

[1:22:24] units village and 10 units in

[1:22:26] the village core up to 16 unit.

[1:22:27] >> that's correct.

[1:22:28] >> chair: with those minimums of

[1:22:31] 900 of the 2700 units would

[1:22:34] basically be very dense.

[1:22:35] And those densities.

[1:22:38] and what I had heard in the

[1:22:40] planning commission, there was a

[1:22:41] commissioner who objected

[1:22:43] because he actually wanted more

[1:22:43] density than that.

[1:22:44] Is that right?

[1:22:46] >> yeah, MR. Chair, first of

[1:22:48] all, the 300 and 600 wouldn't

[1:22:50] get you to 10 and 16 dwelling

[1:22:50] units per acre.

[1:22:53] So they would be less than that.

[1:22:56] But even using that, you still

[1:22:57] end up, you know, if you used up

[1:22:59] all of your density in the

[1:23:01] farmstead and used up your 300

[1:23:04] and your 900, with the acreage

[1:23:05] limitations that we have set,

[1:23:07] you get pretty close to four

[1:23:09] units an acre in the hamlet

[1:23:10] area.

[1:23:13] So I just want to keep in

[1:23:15] perspective that becomes really

[1:23:17] consistent with our low density

[1:23:18] residential and the development

[1:23:20] that we have seen in it over the

[1:23:21] last several years.

[1:23:24] It's not as -- it would likely

[1:23:26] be more dense than oakmont, for

[1:23:27] example.

[1:23:27] >> chair: right.

[1:23:28] All four of those would be

[1:23:29] connected to sewer and

[1:23:30] wastewater?

[1:23:31] >> all of the development, any

[1:23:32] new development would be

[1:23:33] connected to sewer and water,

[1:23:34] yes, MR. Chair.

[1:23:34] >> chair: next slide.

[1:23:37] The working farm slide.

[1:23:40] Yeah, right there.

[1:23:43] So must be at least 20 acres

[1:23:45] outside of the 200 cma acres.

[1:23:48] >> so it wouldn't be 200 acres

[1:23:49] that are in a conservation

[1:23:50] management area.

[1:23:52] So that's worth some sort of

[1:23:53] discussion, I suppose.

[1:23:56] What we said is that half of

[1:23:58] that farmstead -- so 200 acres

[1:24:01] if it's 400, have to be in uses

[1:24:04] that are consistent with the

[1:24:06] rural cluster open space

[1:24:07] policies.

[1:24:09] So that includes the

[1:24:10] conservation management area,

[1:24:14] but it also could include other

[1:24:15] uses that might not be

[1:24:17] conservation management.

[1:24:20] So it could potentially be some

[1:24:20] stormwater.

[1:24:23] It could be -- there's a set of

[1:24:25] recreational uses, for example.

[1:24:27] So no, I wouldn't say that there

[1:24:28] would be 200 acres of

[1:24:30] conservation management area.

[1:24:32] There would be 200 acres of what

[1:24:35] I would broadly call undeveloped -- it's not going to

[1:24:38] have houses sitting on it area.

[1:24:40] >> can I ask a question on that?

[1:24:41] >> chair: sure.

[1:24:44] >> would that then -- could it

[1:24:47] in a theoretical framework -- I

[1:24:47] don't imagine it could because

[1:24:49] of the scale of the development.

[1:24:51] But theoretically speaking,

[1:24:52] could all the stormwater be in

[1:24:53] that 200 A.I.

[1:24:54] 200 acres and then call

[1:24:56] that part of their open space

[1:24:57] requirement and check the box

[1:24:58] with stormwater ponds?

[1:25:00] >> so, MR. Chair, the

[1:25:01] commissioner said theoretically

[1:25:03] so I'll say theoretically, I

[1:25:04] suppose.

[1:25:06] I think that is incredibly

[1:25:09] unlikely from an infrastructure

[1:25:09] standpoint.

[1:25:10] >> okay.

[1:25:12] >> chair: next slide on the land

[1:25:13] disturbance.

[1:25:16] So policy 8.6.6.16 writing

[1:25:18] geophysical testing prior to

[1:25:19] stormwater management, have we

[1:25:20] ever required that?

[1:25:21] >> yes, we have one other time

[1:25:23] and that was on the U.F. Golf

[1:25:23] property.

[1:25:25] We have in limited instances

[1:25:27] also required it on specific

[1:25:29] developments where we are either

[1:25:32] aware of particular geologic

[1:25:34] features that might impair that

[1:25:36] or we have also used it at times

[1:25:37] where we know there's a property

[1:25:39] that maybe had a former landfill

[1:25:40] or something on it.

[1:25:41] >> chair: no, I think it's

[1:25:41] great.

[1:25:43] And I appreciate that the

[1:25:44] developer wanted to do it.

[1:25:46] This is what we were asking save

[1:25:48] alachua to require for the terra

[1:25:49] property.

[1:25:50] So the fact that they are

[1:25:51] agreeing to do that I think is

[1:25:52] really, really super.

[1:25:55] Next slide, water conservation.

[1:25:58] So have we ever required these?

[1:26:00] `it seems like we are setting a

[1:26:02] whole new bar.

[1:26:03] >> I would love to espouse I

[1:26:05] could say which of these we

[1:26:06] require currently or have

[1:26:08] required in the past, but

[1:26:09] probably stacie would be better

[1:26:16] at answering that question.

[1:26:20] >> stacie greco.

[1:26:22] Looking at these, we have some

[1:26:24] florida-friendly language in our

[1:26:24] code.

[1:26:24] >> chair: sure.

[1:26:29] >> but most of these I would say

[1:26:31] are new and above current code.

[1:26:32] Especially on the fertilizer,

[1:26:32] that is big.

[1:26:35] And then it is further

[1:26:37] implementing the irrigated area.

[1:26:38] You know, our design code

[1:26:39] already does that, but it's

[1:26:42] taking it further.

[1:26:45] And limiting irrigation to

[1:26:54] reclaimed water.

[1:26:55] Ther not going to have

[1:26:55] irrigation wells.

[1:26:58] >> most of this was also the

[1:27:00] result of the sas requiring it.

[1:27:01] Those were some of the

[1:27:02] conditions we set so forth.

[1:27:03] >> chair: this is a great new

[1:27:08] standard that we are setting

[1:27:09] here and the developer is

[1:27:11] setting here unless I'm missing

[1:27:11] something.

[1:27:12] >> chair: those are the majority

[1:27:15] of my questions I have one

[1:27:16] question for staff.

[1:27:19] And that's the anna issue she

[1:27:20] first brought up.

[1:27:22] How would staff require the

[1:27:26] applicant to enforce U.F. To do

[1:27:29] their conservation management

[1:27:30] plan?

[1:27:32] >> that isn't what I asked.

[1:27:33] >> chair: it isn't?

[1:27:35] >> I asked for proof that U.F.

[1:27:37] Has a plan.

[1:27:38] >> chair: how would the

[1:27:39] applicant -- how would staff

[1:27:40] require that the applicant

[1:27:53] require that U.F. Have a plan?

[1:27:54] >> MR. Chair, I can think of

[1:27:55] ways that the board can enforce

[1:27:58] that kind of request.

[1:28:00] So you could choose to not

[1:28:02] approve this application with

[1:28:05] that as a reasoning.

[1:28:07] I'm not suggesting that as

[1:28:09] staff, but you're asking me a

[1:28:09] hypothetical.

[1:28:11] So I'm going to try and provide

[1:28:11] that.

[1:28:14] What we typically say is that

[1:28:17] where you have an application

[1:28:20] for a particular piece of

[1:28:20] property, you can't use the

[1:28:23] setting of another property as a

[1:28:25] reasoning for denying it.

[1:28:27] Where you have like a cell tower

[1:28:29] maybe and someone says why don't

[1:28:30] you put it on that piece of

[1:28:31] property, that's not the subject

[1:28:32] of the application.

[1:28:34] So if you have a reason to deny

[1:28:36] an application, that's in front

[1:28:38] of you, you could do that and

[1:28:40] you can state your reasoning for

[1:28:40] it.

[1:28:42] So I think I would say that.

[1:28:45] Ultimately, I think in this

[1:28:46] case, that's the way you could

[1:28:47] do it.

[1:28:48] The application that was

[1:28:50] submitted to us is for a

[1:28:54] particular piece of property.

[1:28:55] And enforcing conditions on

[1:28:59] properties that are outside of

[1:29:00] that would be questionable or

[1:29:01] probably at best although the

[1:29:04] board can adopt its own policies

[1:29:05] in the comprehensive plan.

[1:29:06] >> chair: right.

[1:29:08] So we would essentially be

[1:29:10] saying ifas, do your plan.

[1:29:11] Submit it to us or we're not

[1:29:13] going to submit next-door.

[1:29:13] >> no.

[1:29:14] What I was saying is that we

[1:29:16] have a strategic area study.

[1:29:18] And in all the other instances

[1:29:19] where we have strategic area

[1:29:20] studies, we have conservation

[1:29:22] management areas within those

[1:29:22] strategic areas.

[1:29:25] And those are sensitive

[1:29:27] ecological areas that require

[1:29:27] protection.

[1:29:29] It's why we created the

[1:29:30] strategic ecosystems to begin

[1:29:31] with, right.

[1:29:33] So in this instance, it just

[1:29:35] happened that it was the lees

[1:29:37] who have stewarded that land for

[1:29:37] generations.

[1:29:39] They have own it.

[1:29:41] And they owned the entire thing.

[1:29:42] >> chair: I understand your

[1:29:42] point.

[1:29:44] My point, because it is --

[1:29:45] >> let me finish, please.

[1:29:46] >> chair: well, but it's my --

[1:29:48] it's actually my point is that

[1:29:49] if we were to do that, the time

[1:29:52] to do that was when U.F. Was

[1:29:54] standing there asking us

[1:29:54] something.

[1:29:55] That was the time to do that.

[1:29:58] If this was your issue, U.F. Is

[1:29:58] standing right there.

[1:30:00] They are asking for a golf

[1:30:00] course.

[1:30:02] They are asking for an approval.

[1:30:04] And if that was your issue, that

[1:30:06] was the time to bring it up.

[1:30:08] That was never -- this is the

[1:30:10] first time I'm hearing this is

[1:30:11] your position.

[1:30:12] And U.F. Isn't here.

[1:30:14] Like they are literally not

[1:30:14] here.

[1:30:15] And to ask this applicant to

[1:30:18] bring U.F. Here or to require

[1:30:21] U.F. To do that seems a month

[1:30:21] late.

[1:30:22] Two months late.

[1:30:23] >> well, okay, fine.

[1:30:26] But it's still my position.

[1:30:26] >> chair: okay, that's fine.

[1:30:27] >> the applicant who is

[1:30:29] ultimately the landowner who is

[1:30:32] the lees, like they agreed to

[1:30:33] the strategic area study.

[1:30:36] And that included the protection

[1:30:38] of the entire cma within that

[1:30:40] strategic area.

[1:30:42] And they have a responsibility

[1:30:43] to uphold that protection.

[1:30:44] >> chair: understood.

[1:30:44] I hear your point.

[1:30:45] >> that's what I'm saying.

[1:30:46] >> chair: and I think for the

[1:30:49] land that they own, they are

[1:30:50] certainly upholding that.

[1:30:51] But what you're talking about is

[1:30:54] land that they no longer own.

[1:30:55] And I hear your point.

[1:30:57] And I understand your point.

[1:30:58] >> they keep telling us -- they

[1:31:00] told us in that meeting with

[1:31:02] u.F -- they told us that it was

[1:31:02] being protected.

[1:31:05] When they came, they told us it

[1:31:06] was being protected.

[1:31:07] When the same came, they told us

[1:31:09] it was being protected.

[1:31:10] And they keep promising up that

[1:31:11] ifas is protecting it.

[1:31:13] If all those things are true,

[1:31:14] then it should be no problem for

[1:31:16] them to provide us the contract,

[1:31:18] the sale agreement that includes

[1:31:21] what they are doing to protect

[1:31:22] it.

[1:31:23] The management plans or

[1:31:24] restoration plans that ifas is

[1:31:26] developing to protect that land.

[1:31:28] Like if what they keep telling

[1:31:29] us, ifas and U.F. Did stand up

[1:31:30] there.

[1:31:31] I did ask that question and they

[1:31:33] told us that they had plans to

[1:31:34] restore and protect it.

[1:31:35] >> chair: and I believe them.

[1:31:36] I believe ifas.

[1:31:38] >> where are those?

[1:31:39] Show us.

[1:31:40] >> chair: I love that question.

[1:31:42] I just think that question is

[1:31:43] being asked of the wrong people.

[1:31:44] I love the question.

[1:31:45] >> it's the landowner.

[1:31:47] It's the landowner, they chose

[1:31:48] to sell that property.

[1:31:50] Show me they protected that

[1:31:51] conservation management area.

[1:31:52] >> chair: we'll see if we can

[1:31:54] address that issue I think right

[1:31:54] now.

[1:31:56] I think now it's time for the

[1:31:57] applicant to present.

[1:31:58] After the applicant presents,

[1:32:01] then we'll ask their questions

[1:32:02] the board.

[1:32:04] We'll ask the board for a motion

[1:32:05] or not.

[1:32:06] And then we'll have a discussion

[1:32:08] and then we'll open it up to the

[1:32:09] public who is here that wants to

[1:32:11] speak to the motion.

[1:32:11] Okay.

[1:32:11] Welcome.

[1:32:12] >> great, thank you.

[1:32:14] Good evening, commissioners, for

[1:32:16] the record lindsey hagua.

[1:32:19] I'm a community planner with

[1:32:23] england, timms and miller, old

[1:32:24] st. Augustine road.

[1:32:25] This has been healthy debate

[1:32:26] just to get to our presentation.

[1:32:28] With our team, we will try to

[1:32:29] hit on some of the questions

[1:32:30] that you have raised and that

[1:32:31] staff has addressed as well just

[1:32:34] to help move through our

[1:32:34] presentation.

[1:32:35] Here is your full team.

[1:32:36] Most of us you know.

[1:32:38] We have been in front of your

[1:32:39] commission before.

[1:32:40] You have worked with us

[1:32:40] individually.

[1:32:42] We have worked with your staff

[1:32:46] over these last year and years

[1:32:47] we are all here.

[1:32:49] Some of us will present to you

[1:32:50] at different slides in the

[1:32:50] presentation, but we are all

[1:32:53] here to answer and pull up

[1:32:54] anybody during some questions or

[1:33:07] after public comment.

[1:33:08] We have gone through this

[1:33:10] process and different changes in

[1:33:11] land ownership, the mixture of

[1:33:12] where we've been.

[1:33:13] Different actions.

[1:33:14] And then with us when we got

[1:33:16] involved for everlee farms in

[1:33:18] 2026, a ton of engagement as a

[1:33:20] community planner, let's invite

[1:33:20] people over.

[1:33:22] And I wanted to give thanks to

[1:33:28] principal bell over at

[1:33:29] terwilliger and made it a

[1:33:30] convenient location for us to

[1:33:32] meet to kind of have that school

[1:33:34] engagement and go and learn from

[1:33:35] our neighbors what are some of

[1:33:36] their concerns, what are the

[1:33:38] things that they appreciate

[1:33:40] about their areas, how do we

[1:33:41] reflect those character areas

[1:33:43] and how we can give them more

[1:33:43] information.

[1:33:45] So some of that resulted in

[1:33:47] policy changes that's before you

[1:33:48] for transmittal tonight.

[1:33:50] And some of that found a home in

[1:33:52] our planned development rezoning

[1:33:53] and these commitments that our

[1:33:55] team has offered.

[1:33:56] the highlighted box here today

[1:33:58] is where we are at for

[1:33:58] transmittal.

[1:34:00] Do we have enough information to

[1:34:01] give this out for state and

[1:34:02] regional review?

[1:34:03] Continue to work with the

[1:34:04] community and staff on your pd

[1:34:06] and then come back before you

[1:34:08] with that whole bundle of

[1:34:09] entitlements that gives us this

[1:34:12] plan that we want to see here

[1:34:13] for everlee farms.

[1:34:15] This map helped frame out some

[1:34:16] of the discussion and just

[1:34:18] remind us of all the things that

[1:34:19] MAY get lost in the details or

[1:34:21] the policies.

[1:34:22] So on the left hand of the

[1:34:23] screen, trying to just frame out

[1:34:25] for us the 4,000 acres that we

[1:34:26] know.

[1:34:28] During your special area study

[1:34:30] process, we had different

[1:34:30] scenarios.

[1:34:31] Your regulations tell us, give

[1:34:34] us a built scenario,

[1:34:35] conservation scenario.

[1:34:36] Here the scenario we have in

[1:34:37] front of us is a third iteration

[1:34:39] of it and how we achieve.

[1:34:40] And really when we think through

[1:34:42] it of how we are clustered or

[1:34:44] honed in development to what's

[1:34:47] represented as this 997 acres

[1:34:49] that has gotten through the

[1:34:50] transfer development rights over

[1:34:51] into that.

[1:34:52] So additional conservation lands

[1:34:53] will be had beyond what you see

[1:34:57] here in your special area study.

[1:34:59] I'd like to invite up austin

[1:35:01] because he's one of our members

[1:35:03] to discuss what is the project

[1:35:03] vision.

[1:35:05] He'll then walk it over to

[1:35:06] victor dover.

[1:35:07] I'll come back again and give

[1:35:09] you a little bit of preview and

[1:35:10] then we'll clean up withdrew

[1:35:13] holly and our engineers to

[1:35:14] answer those public

[1:35:15] infrastructure issues and go

[1:35:16] into rebuttal.

[1:35:16] Thank you.

[1:35:17] >> chair: austin, welcome.

[1:35:19] >> good evening.

[1:35:20] I'm humbled to be here,

[1:35:22] appreciate you guys bearing with

[1:35:24] us through this.

[1:35:26] I am austin roberts, PRESIDENT

[1:35:28] Of the roberts companies,

[1:35:30] landowner and applicant.

[1:35:33] I'm a 7th generation north

[1:35:33] floridian.

[1:35:34] My

[1:35:35] my family live here in alachua

[1:35:38] county and my kids go to school

[1:35:40] right around the corner of this

[1:35:40] property.

[1:35:43] It has become near and dear to

[1:35:43] our hearts.

[1:35:45] >> we're probably distantly

[1:35:45] related.

[1:35:45] >> yes.

[1:35:47] Well, you wouldn't be the only

[1:35:50] one, I sure you.

[1:35:51] [Laughter]

[1:35:53] Everlee farms represents the

[1:35:55] remaining 996 acres ever a once

[1:35:57] larger over 4,000-acre farm

[1:35:59] owned by the lee family.

[1:36:01] As has been stated here tonight,

[1:36:02] over 26 acres, almost 27 acres

[1:36:04] have already been conveyed and

[1:36:07] under the stewardship of ifas.

[1:36:08] 580 acres were donated to the

[1:36:09] university of florida for their

[1:36:11] new golf course which you all

[1:36:14] voted on a couple of months ago.

[1:36:16] This is the evolution of this

[1:36:17] process.

[1:36:19] We are here at the finish line

[1:36:23] of what we set forward to do and

[1:36:24] a great plan.

[1:36:25] I think you'll see tonight

[1:36:27] through the experts that I have

[1:36:28] here that we will answer a lot

[1:36:30] of your questions and concerns.

[1:36:31] From the beginning, our goal has

[1:36:32] been to create something

[1:36:33] special, something that

[1:36:34] preserves meaningful agriculture

[1:36:36] and open space, creates a

[1:36:38] walkable connected community.

[1:36:40] My family has a long history of

[1:36:42] being passionately involved in

[1:36:43] agriculture.

[1:36:44] I had the privilege of growing

[1:36:45] up here in north florida.

[1:36:47] I have fond memories as a kid

[1:36:48] walking through the woods many

[1:36:50] times and picking blackberries

[1:36:52] and enjoying the outdoors.

[1:36:53] My intention with this project

[1:36:54] is to bring some of that to the

[1:36:56] people of this community and the

[1:36:58] people that will be able to live

[1:36:58] here.

[1:36:59] To build a special place where

[1:37:02] you can leave your front porch,

[1:37:03] walk miles of trails, experience

[1:37:05] nature and wildlife all along

[1:37:07] the way and to have our kids

[1:37:08] grow up and know where their

[1:37:10] food comes from.

[1:37:11] And to have the opportunity to

[1:37:13] get their hands dirty and have

[1:37:14] the opportunity to do that in

[1:37:16] the community in which they live

[1:37:16] in.

[1:37:18] So I've been blessed to have

[1:37:20] that exposure and that

[1:37:21] opportunity, but bringing it to

[1:37:24] the place where people live is a

[1:37:26] new alternative and really I

[1:37:27] think the path forward for that

[1:37:29] sort of exposure and education,

[1:37:31] that part we're excited about

[1:37:32] and is a primary pillar of what

[1:37:35] set us on this path.

[1:37:37] And, you know, I think that the

[1:37:39] vision for this place is built

[1:37:41] around blending a walkable

[1:37:42] traditional neighborhood with a

[1:37:44] large working farm set within

[1:37:46] over 200 acres of agriculture.

[1:37:47] You'll hear us talk about the

[1:37:48] working farm tonight and we can

[1:37:52] give you a lot more detail on

[1:37:54] the BMPs of the neighborhood

[1:37:55] itself.

[1:37:56] That working farm component, the

[1:37:59] nuance of that being a minimum

[1:38:01] of 20 acres, don't let that take

[1:38:02] away from the fact that we also

[1:38:03] have agreed and set aside

[1:38:04] 200 acres of agriculture and

[1:38:05] open space.

[1:38:07] It could be a variety of uses.

[1:38:08] I know you had some questions on

[1:38:09] that earlier.

[1:38:11] We'll walk you through that.

[1:38:13] I think looking at it from a

[1:38:14] master plan perspective, with

[1:38:17] the long view, was important on

[1:38:19] how we actually introduced these

[1:38:22] ideas and put them into practice

[1:38:24] versus, you know, the

[1:38:28] alternative of dirt dobbing 100

[1:38:32] lot or 200 lot that bring no

[1:38:32] community value.

[1:38:33] You have heard me say this

[1:38:34] before.

[1:38:35] But the opportunity and the

[1:38:36] reason I got passionate is

[1:38:38] because it gave us a chance to

[1:38:41] have a master plan approach to a

[1:38:42] 15, 20-year vision and a

[1:38:42] solution.

[1:38:43] And how that through that

[1:38:44] opportunity, you can bring value

[1:38:46] to the greater community.

[1:38:47] Not only the people that live

[1:38:48] here, but the people who are in

[1:38:51] this community.

[1:38:52] I live here and value the people

[1:38:54] of this community.

[1:38:55] We spent a tremendous amount of

[1:38:57] time engaging with nearby

[1:38:58] residents and the broader

[1:38:58] community.

[1:38:59] Those conversations have helped

[1:39:01] inform this vision.

[1:39:02] We have been able to take some

[1:39:07] of that feedback and, you know,

[1:39:08] effectively make it something

[1:39:10] that we can build and be proud

[1:39:10] of.

[1:39:14] I'll tell you, you know, the

[1:39:15] county requires one public

[1:39:16] workshop.

[1:39:18] We have done five.

[1:39:20] The requirement for notices, we

[1:39:21] doubled.

[1:39:22] If it split a street, we sent it

[1:39:24] to the other side of the street

[1:39:25] just to be careful.

[1:39:25] There is nothing about this

[1:39:27] project that's been a shortcut.

[1:39:29] We have been here for months and

[1:39:31] months and years to get here.

[1:39:32] So you all know that and have

[1:39:33] felt that.

[1:39:35] So bear with us through this

[1:39:36] long presentation.

[1:39:36] Again nothing about this has

[1:39:39] been short.

[1:39:40] You know, we are grateful for

[1:39:42] the opportunity to work closely

[1:39:43] with the county staff.

[1:39:45] I will say I know you guys are

[1:39:47] probably pretty proud of them.

[1:39:48] This is a very sophisticated

[1:39:49] staff.

[1:39:50] Give them their due.

[1:39:52] It has been a joy working with

[1:39:52] them.

[1:39:53] It has not been easy which is a

[1:39:55] good thing for the county, but

[1:39:57] it has been a joy and very

[1:39:57] professional.

[1:39:58] I can tell you, we have been

[1:40:00] very impressed.

[1:40:02] We have worked tirelessly with

[1:40:05] them throughout this project.

[1:40:07] And to build a project that we

[1:40:08] can all be proud of.

[1:40:11] We and you and them and the

[1:40:13] community at large.

[1:40:14] Their questions, requirements,

[1:40:16] guidance and careful review have

[1:40:17] helped us strengthen the

[1:40:19] proposal and bring this vision

[1:40:20] together and what's in front of

[1:40:21] you now and really what will be

[1:40:23] in front of you at the pd.

[1:40:25] So keep in mind obviously we are

[1:40:27] able to walk through that detail

[1:40:27] tonight.

[1:40:28] a lot of that will live in the

[1:40:31] pd and we will be back to you in

[1:40:33] a month or so, two months.

[1:40:35] That's where a lot of that will

[1:40:35] live.

[1:40:36] We are actively working with

[1:40:38] staff now on how we implement

[1:40:40] those practices and procedures

[1:40:43] and BMPs, best management

[1:40:44] practices.

[1:40:45] We have invested significant

[1:40:46] time and resources in studying

[1:40:48] the property and working with

[1:40:51] this experienced planning team

[1:40:52] to balance future housing needs

[1:40:55] with agriculture, environmental

[1:40:56] stewardship and infrastructure

[1:40:57] and quality of life.

[1:40:59] As a community, with the

[1:41:00] approval of this project, we can

[1:41:02] really set the bar and become a

[1:41:04] leader in the region with this

[1:41:05] resilient community that

[1:41:06] integrates both agriculture,

[1:41:09] nature, along with

[1:41:10] with the growing

[1:41:11] need for housing opportunities.

[1:41:14] So that our kids, my kids, your

[1:41:15] kids and families can continue

[1:41:17] to afford to live here and work

[1:41:18] here and build businesses here.

[1:41:19] And that is our goal.

[1:41:21] I have three kids and I sure

[1:41:22] hope that we continue to keep up

[1:41:23] with the availability for them

[1:41:26] to afford to be able to stay

[1:41:27] here, you know, live here and

[1:41:30] work here.

[1:41:33] We will address some of the

[1:41:33] outstanding questions you guys

[1:41:36] have, bear with us and a lot of

[1:41:37] our presentation MAY get through

[1:41:38] some of that for you.

[1:41:40] We are obviously happy to answer

[1:41:41] any questions you guys have at

[1:41:42] the end if we have not touched

[1:41:43] on it.

[1:41:45] At this time, I would pass the

[1:41:46] microphone off to victor dover

[1:41:49] with dover cole and partners to

[1:41:50] take the next step.

[1:41:52] >> chair: thank you, austin.

[1:41:53] MR. Dover, welcome.

[1:41:53] >> good evening.

[1:41:55] I actually have the fun part.

[1:41:56] [Laughter]

[1:41:58] I'm victor dover, town planner

[1:41:59] and neighborhood designer.

[1:42:00] Y'all all know design is not

[1:42:02] something to be added on at the

[1:42:03] end after all the big decisions

[1:42:04] are already made.

[1:42:06] It's something that has to be

[1:42:06] there from the beginning.

[1:42:09] It's been a pleasure to work on

[1:42:09] this.

[1:42:12] There are four fundamentals that

[1:42:14] the lees and austin roberts and

[1:42:17] ryan frankel set out for us.

[1:42:17] It's historic.

[1:42:19] And our job has been to test all

[1:42:21] the policies that you are

[1:42:23] considering transmitting tonight

[1:42:26] against real-world streets and

[1:42:29] blocks and building footprints

[1:42:33] and the way the farm would work.

[1:42:33] Like.

[1:42:35] Although we will get in much

[1:42:36] more of that detail when we come

[1:42:37] back with a pd.

[1:42:44] I'll give you a preview of that

[1:42:44] tonight.

[1:42:46] Just quickly, nature, that's

[1:42:47] reminding us of the idea that

[1:42:48] you have heard a lot about

[1:42:50] tonight about how thousands of

[1:42:52] acres have already been placed

[1:42:55] under conservation stewardship.

[1:42:56] And we like the idea that green

[1:42:58] florida will be at your

[1:42:59] doorstep, this place.

[1:43:03] So in the neighborhood design

[1:43:04] job, it is part of our

[1:43:06] application to design the

[1:43:06] doorstep.

[1:43:07] To design that connection.

[1:43:10] And not to just have the big

[1:43:11] protected green florida nature

[1:43:13] be something across a road, but

[1:43:15] have it be something that can

[1:43:19] come into the community and come

[1:43:20] and weave and integrate with the

[1:43:22] design of the neighborhoods.

[1:43:24] And so I will show you some maps

[1:43:29] to get across that idea.

[1:43:30] Legacy is about taking the long

[1:43:32] view in both senses of the word.

[1:43:34] Designing since we have a big

[1:43:36] canvas and phenomenal for

[1:43:38] preserving long views across

[1:43:39] open space, that's the obvious

[1:43:40] one.

[1:43:42] Obviously, the long view across

[1:43:44] the horizon in terms of

[1:43:45] stewardship and the business

[1:43:55] plan, the very definition of

[1:43:55] sustainable.

[1:43:58] You will hear from justin myers

[1:44:01] and just the idea that you go

[1:44:02] with your neighbors and get

[1:44:04] ahold of what's in season and

[1:44:11] your children would have that

[1:44:17] awareness that austin indicated.

[1:44:19] On one hand, it means freedom

[1:44:22] and connection because the

[1:44:23] walkable community will be set

[1:44:25] up so that you have lots of

[1:44:26] choices about how to move about

[1:44:28] and go from here to there,

[1:44:29] including walking, biking,

[1:44:31] transit, making short trips even

[1:44:32] if you drive.

[1:44:34] It's also about something else

[1:44:36] which is lining those paths,

[1:44:39] those sidewalks and those trails

[1:44:40] with front porch culture, so you

[1:44:41] can get to know your neighbors

[1:44:44] and you can have healthier,

[1:44:46] happier families.

[1:44:48] Now, I won't read all this to

[1:44:49] you, but we were making notes to

[1:44:51] ourselves about all the things

[1:44:53] that have been accumulating over

[1:44:57] the last 30 years in county

[1:44:57] policies.

[1:45:00] You have been eding us to this

[1:45:00] point.

[1:45:02] Basically saying bring alachua

[1:45:04] county what it really deserves

[1:45:06] in terms of the neighborhood

[1:45:06] form.

[1:45:08] I think we have an example in

[1:45:09] the making sure.

[1:45:10] I will try to describe to you a

[1:45:12] little bit why we believe that's

[1:45:13] the case.

[1:45:17] First, this word farmstead

[1:45:17] deserves a little bit of

[1:45:18] explanation.

[1:45:20] In some ways the inspiration

[1:45:24] truck austin when he visited new

[1:45:26] field which is a community we

[1:45:27] designed in martin county, also

[1:45:29] known as the first time martin

[1:45:30] county approved anything nearly

[1:45:40] that big in 45 years.

[1:45:42] It's part of the plan into and

[1:45:45] connect with the human habitat,

[1:45:47] the settlement and to put the

[1:45:48] farm at the center of community

[1:45:48] life.

[1:45:51] We didn't have the opportunity

[1:45:53] in new field to design it with

[1:45:54] the farmer in the room.

[1:45:56] But here, we have.

[1:45:59] Justin myers who runs the farm

[1:46:03] at newfield inherited shapes and

[1:46:05] geometries we put on the land

[1:46:07] before he was on the job.

[1:46:09] But here for everlee, we have

[1:46:11] had justin working right beside

[1:46:12] us actually thinking about how

[1:46:15] the farm would operate.

[1:46:16] Just to give you a little bit of

[1:46:18] a window on what the design

[1:46:19] process of this has been like,

[1:46:20] it's been about starting with

[1:46:21] the green parts which I have

[1:46:22] said several times.

[1:46:25] And then thinking about how the

[1:46:26] networks, the green network, the

[1:46:30] network of streets and the

[1:46:34] network of trails and greenways

[1:46:37] and the neighborhoods would go

[1:46:37] together.

[1:46:38] And so that's been kind of going

[1:46:41] through a process of getting

[1:46:42] more and more defined.

[1:46:43] Our job at this point has been

[1:46:45] to test the policies that are in

[1:46:46] front of you to see whether we

[1:46:48] have them right to be able to

[1:46:50] design the ultimate thing that

[1:46:51] austin has described.

[1:46:53] This is the latest plan.

[1:46:55] Of course, this MARCH draft

[1:46:57] because it is subject to lots of

[1:46:58] change.

[1:47:00] But this is illustrating, for

[1:47:03] example, the large lee family

[1:47:06] farmstead at the center of the

[1:47:08] property and then how the

[1:47:10] neighborhoods and hamlets are

[1:47:12] arranged around it.

[1:47:13] And it's quite large and so

[1:47:15] there's a lot of details.

[1:47:16] We are happy to bring these back

[1:47:18] up and talk to any of the

[1:47:20] crucial ones you have questions

[1:47:21] about.

[1:47:22] The fun part is thinking about

[1:47:26] the what if, the vision of this.

[1:47:27] And our favorite part of this is

[1:47:31] the idea that nature at your

[1:47:33] doorstep, you could take that

[1:47:34] walk in the woods that austin

[1:47:35] described and keep going on that

[1:47:37] trail and arrive at your

[1:47:38] friend's house or at the heart

[1:47:41] of the community or back to your

[1:47:42] home.

[1:47:44] And that reweaving of things, so

[1:47:46] that you don't have to have the

[1:47:48] situation found in so many of

[1:47:48] our florida metropolitan areas

[1:47:49] where nature is a thing you

[1:47:52] drive your kids to see instead

[1:47:53] of a thing that they can walk

[1:47:55] out their door and see.

[1:47:56] So that was the first kind of

[1:47:57] big picture what if.

[1:48:00] And just for fun, that

[1:48:01] illustration that I've got on

[1:48:03] the screen is actually a real

[1:48:03] place in the plan.

[1:48:06] It's imagining our extension,

[1:48:07] voluntary extension of the

[1:48:09] conservation management area

[1:48:13] deep into the land and how long

[1:48:15] views will be created as you

[1:48:17] exit one and enter the other

[1:48:18] parts of it.

[1:48:21] The other one of ideas shown in

[1:48:24] one of the images that austin

[1:48:24] showed is housing variety.

[1:48:26] Of course, we will have houses,

[1:48:28] detached houses of various

[1:48:30] sizes, large and small on their

[1:48:33] own lots but attached houses.

[1:48:34] We will have multi-family

[1:48:36] housing and a whole range, the

[1:48:38] whole range of prices and sizes

[1:48:41] to own and to rent, including

[1:48:43] not putting them off into their

[1:48:45] own areas by housing type, but

[1:48:47] mixing them together so the

[1:48:49] attached houses will be on the

[1:48:51] same street facing the front

[1:48:53] porches of the same green

[1:48:54] tree-lined street that their

[1:48:55] neighbors have.

[1:48:57] The farm is similar.

[1:48:59] We see this is not something

[1:49:01] that is walled off or fenced off

[1:49:03] from the community but rather

[1:49:04] something that's across the

[1:49:06] street from people's front

[1:49:07] porches.

[1:49:09] It's really, of course, meant to

[1:49:10] be more than just food.

[1:49:12] It's also a social condenser,

[1:49:14] meant to bring people together.

[1:49:16] We will have a couple of areas

[1:49:19] where we get full-blown next use

[1:49:20] main streets.

[1:49:22] Here's one of those village core

[1:49:23] ideas.

[1:49:25] And this particular case, we're

[1:49:27] looking at a place in the main

[1:49:28] street we already saw and you

[1:49:30] can see in the image, the

[1:49:31] opportunity to bring it north

[1:49:32] from archer road for a few

[1:49:34] blocks and then bend it so that

[1:49:37] your view is focused on

[1:49:37] something important at the end

[1:49:40] of the street in that little

[1:49:42] white arrow you see on the map

[1:49:44] shows the sort of directional

[1:49:45] view of the sketch.

[1:49:46] so you get the idea we do these

[1:49:51] pictures as design because we

[1:49:53] are age to hold them up to

[1:49:54] austin and his team and say is

[1:49:55] this what you meant, is this

[1:49:56] what you intend and compare it

[1:49:57] to other places.

[1:49:59] You'll pick up in this image,

[1:50:00] for example, showing one of the

[1:50:02] neighborhood centers a very

[1:50:06] deliberate attempt to achieve

[1:50:08] something as charming and

[1:50:10] similar in scale to haile

[1:50:12] village center.

[1:50:13] The edges are the most important

[1:50:14] parts.

[1:50:16] And so here's a spot where one

[1:50:19] of the two large farm parcels

[1:50:22] and the orchard and teaching

[1:50:23] forest are adjacent to a

[1:50:25] large-scale area that will be

[1:50:26] preserved.

[1:50:27] Adjacent to some of our

[1:50:28] sensitive neighbors.

[1:50:32] So to put that on a map, from

[1:50:33] the green and protected areas

[1:50:34] that are between their homes and

[1:50:36] the new ones that we build, this

[1:50:38] is the kind of thing you'll be

[1:50:39] able to look across open space

[1:50:42] and see.

[1:50:43] So I've given you an idea of

[1:50:45] kind of what the human habitat

[1:50:46] parts of it are meant to be like

[1:50:48] and what the edges are like.

[1:50:49] I'd like to ask justin myers to

[1:50:51] talk to you about the farm

[1:50:51] itself.

[1:50:53] >> chair: okay.

[1:50:55] MR. Myers, welcome.

[1:50:55] >> good evening.

[1:50:58] My name is justin myers and I

[1:50:59] work with agomennity.

[1:51:01] We design and manage community

[1:51:03] farms and farm amenities.

[1:51:04] One of the questions that often

[1:51:06] arises is what is a community

[1:51:06] farm.

[1:51:08] I think a farm can be a lot of

[1:51:09] different things to different

[1:51:09] people.

[1:51:12] For us, when we think about a

[1:51:14] farmstead community each as

[1:51:16] everlee, it is taking authentic

[1:51:17] agriculture and integrating into

[1:51:18] the holistic design of the

[1:51:19] neighborhood and community.

[1:51:22] That's a lot of what victor just

[1:51:22] shared with you.

[1:51:24] How do you use the farm as this

[1:51:26] dynamic resource that both for

[1:51:27] the residents who live there,

[1:51:30] but also the broader public can

[1:51:31] participate and engage and

[1:51:34] really get this resource that

[1:51:35] can really approve their

[1:51:37] day-to-day quality of life.

[1:51:38] So on a simple level, that's

[1:51:41] kind of like how we view this

[1:51:42] farm can kind of benefit and

[1:51:44] kind of be woven in.

[1:51:46] And so during this talk, I'll

[1:51:47] just kind of really state at

[1:51:48] pretty high level.

[1:51:51] Some of y'all's questions I'll

[1:51:52] slightly address and then happy

[1:51:54] to chat more in-depth as well

[1:51:55] afterwards.

[1:51:56] Because there is -- I think the

[1:51:57] farm is probably not like the

[1:52:00] mystery box, but it can go in a

[1:52:01] lot of different directions so

[1:52:02] we want to kind of paint what

[1:52:04] that picture is, as genuine and

[1:52:05] authentically as possible.

[1:52:08] So for everlee, 20-acre working

[1:52:08] farm.

[1:52:11] Really with the goal of growing

[1:52:12] year-round diversified

[1:52:13] vegetables, fruits and flowers,

[1:52:15] potentially some like pasture

[1:52:17] poultry or other livestock.

[1:52:19] I think how you like choose to

[1:52:21] integrate that into the land,

[1:52:22] there's a lot of possibilities

[1:52:24] around that.

[1:52:25] All utilizing sustainable and

[1:52:27] organic practices, as well as

[1:52:28] like that best management

[1:52:30] practices for like ecosystem and

[1:52:31] community health.

[1:52:33] I think oftentimes when you are

[1:52:35] growing right in front of your

[1:52:36] neighbors and we have farms in

[1:52:38] both texas and florida and

[1:52:40] there's literally -- one of our

[1:52:42] projects in texas is a front

[1:52:44] forge like 30 feet from where

[1:52:46] the farm starts.

[1:52:49] At newfield that victor shared,

[1:52:50] they are right across the way

[1:52:52] and watching what is happening.

[1:52:53] It's literally like their front

[1:52:54] yard.

[1:52:55] What we are utilizing in terms

[1:52:57] of growing practices or from

[1:52:58] soil amendments or potentially

[1:53:00] pest control, it's not only to

[1:53:02] grow really healthy food, but

[1:53:03] it's also like part of that

[1:53:04] person's daily life.

[1:53:05] So there's a lot of intention

[1:53:08] and care that goes into that.

[1:53:12] And then from the kind of

[1:53:13] like -- I think when you get

[1:53:14] into the farm, like the growing

[1:53:15] of the food and like the

[1:53:16] agricultural side is really like

[1:53:18] the heart and the driver and

[1:53:19] that's kind of like speaks to

[1:53:20] that authenticity and then

[1:53:22] layered on top of that is the

[1:53:23] community programming and

[1:53:24] community engagement piece.

[1:53:26] But the food is a core part.

[1:53:28] So that food access of how

[1:53:29] people get connected to food,

[1:53:31] whether that's through a csa

[1:53:33] which is essentially like a

[1:53:34] weekly membership program, like

[1:53:37] a veggie share, farm box, like a

[1:53:38] farm stand, farm store, that

[1:53:41] would be not only for the

[1:53:42] everlee farm products but also

[1:53:43] from potentially other local

[1:53:46] farms and local food purveyors,

[1:53:48] like being able to sell their

[1:53:50] goods that we're not producing

[1:53:50] on site.

[1:53:52] Which then expands the offerings

[1:53:54] for both residents as well as

[1:53:55] the general public around there,

[1:53:57] being able to find local food

[1:53:59] that's supporting alachua

[1:54:00] county, supporting gainesville

[1:54:02] and also supporting the small

[1:54:05] businesses of farmers and food

[1:54:05] purveyors.

[1:54:08] And then from that, the reality

[1:54:10] with farms there are many people

[1:54:12] excited about local food and

[1:54:13] literally people come up to us

[1:54:14] and say I bought a house here

[1:54:15] because of the farm and they

[1:54:18] sign up for the csa, they join

[1:54:19] the farm club.

[1:54:21] But there's also folks who, you

[1:54:21] know --

[1:54:22] >> chair: what's a csa?

[1:54:24] >> it stands for community

[1:54:25] supported agriculture.

[1:54:29] And it's basically -- oftentimes

[1:54:30] you'll hear it now described as

[1:54:32] like a farm share or veggie box

[1:54:34] or harvest box and it can be a

[1:54:38] weekly or biweekly.

[1:54:40] Where you are essentially

[1:54:41] getting four to eight items from

[1:54:42] the farm each week.

[1:54:44] Sometimes it can include other

[1:54:44] products as well.

[1:54:46] >> chair: yeah.

[1:54:46] >> yeah.

[1:54:47] But there's other people who are

[1:54:49] less interested in like the

[1:54:50] vegetable side.

[1:54:51] But that farm can really still

[1:54:53] be a resource for their life.

[1:54:55] And that's everything from a

[1:54:56] beautiful green space that they

[1:54:58] are walking by in the morning or

[1:55:01] they are taking and going on a

[1:55:02] run, as well as kind of like

[1:55:04] that connection to nature that

[1:55:06] victor had mentioned.

[1:55:07] Through education, doing like

[1:55:09] targeted classes and workshops,

[1:55:12] as well as like farm tours and

[1:55:14] volunteer programs, spring break

[1:55:16] day camp for kids, there's like

[1:55:17] a full range of education that

[1:55:18] can be woven in.

[1:55:20] And then just that social hub,

[1:55:21] that social connection.

[1:55:24] I mean I think when we think

[1:55:25] historically, food is part of

[1:55:26] culture and brings people

[1:55:27] together.

[1:55:28] When you have a beautiful green

[1:55:30] space at the farm, having

[1:55:33] whether a pizza night or

[1:55:35] farm-to-table dinner or a movie

[1:55:37] night, some of our farms, really

[1:55:39] the farm is used as the space

[1:55:41] and not necessary about a

[1:55:43] farm-specific program but a farm

[1:55:45] as a beautiful space to exist

[1:55:45] in.

[1:55:47] I think when you layer on like

[1:55:49] the true like agricultural

[1:55:50] prduction and the food

[1:55:51] production that's happening,

[1:55:53] intoxication in addition

[1:55:55] -- in addition to

[1:55:56] this beautiful community

[1:55:57] oriented space to bring people

[1:55:59] together, a dynamic opportunity

[1:56:00] to bring people together.

[1:56:02] For everlee, it's both as a

[1:56:03] benefit to the residents who

[1:56:05] live there and the broader

[1:56:06] public is invited into that.

[1:56:09] Lastly as we go more broad, you

[1:56:10] know, gainesville and alachua

[1:56:13] county has a really great

[1:56:13] agricultural network already.

[1:56:15] So I think we really see everlee

[1:56:17] as being like a node in the

[1:56:18] local food system.

[1:56:19] And how can we support and be

[1:56:20] part of that?

[1:56:21] Whether through working with

[1:56:24] local nonprofits, other local

[1:56:26] farms, U.F. Ifas.

[1:56:28] I think there's a lot of

[1:56:30] opportunities of how everlee can

[1:56:31] help strengthen that resiliency

[1:56:33] and expand the surface area of

[1:56:35] what the local food is here.

[1:56:37] That's just kind of like a

[1:56:39] high-level snapshot.

[1:56:40] Happy to answer more questions

[1:56:40] as well.

[1:56:42] Lindsay is going to chat a

[1:56:43] little bit more and then we can

[1:56:44] chat again.

[1:56:45] >> chair: okay, thank you,

[1:56:45] justin.

[1:56:49] >> thanks, justin.

[1:56:49] Okay.

[1:56:51] I'm going to walk you through a

[1:56:53] couple of slides that really

[1:56:55] fall into the pd preview element

[1:56:57] and begin with kind of summary

[1:56:59] of all of our community

[1:56:59] meetings.

[1:57:02] This follows that consumer

[1:57:04] reports style of capturing what

[1:57:05] did the community share with us

[1:57:07] as their important aspects.

[1:57:09] And then what did we do about

[1:57:09] that.

[1:57:11] And so some of them are, hey, we

[1:57:13] want land use and character to

[1:57:16] be reduced densities along the

[1:57:16] edges.

[1:57:17] You'll see that both in the

[1:57:20] density assignment for our

[1:57:21] farmstead character area as well

[1:57:23] as when the pd rezoning is

[1:57:25] presented to you, lot sizes

[1:57:26] around and perimeter buffering

[1:57:28] so they can maintain the

[1:57:29] character and familiarity that

[1:57:31] they are used to seeing on our

[1:57:32] adjacent neighbors.

[1:57:34] Some of it was more trails,

[1:57:35] making sure that they have

[1:57:37] connections both to outside

[1:57:41] along parker, out to archer, but

[1:57:45] also to lagonno and up to the

[1:57:46] golf property.

[1:57:48] Right now tracking on 16 miles

[1:57:49] of trail with internal and

[1:57:51] external connections.

[1:57:52] We'll see that again in our pd.

[1:57:54] Some of this is about preserving

[1:57:57] the east-west connections on how

[1:57:59] they see and utilize southwest

[1:58:00] 73rd and want to have that

[1:58:01] connection and then how they do

[1:58:03] not want connection through

[1:58:04] vehicular traffic into haile.

[1:58:06] We heard that loud and clear

[1:58:08] coming out of our resolution at

[1:58:09] the special area study.

[1:58:10] And then following on justin's

[1:58:11] line, inviting the neighbors to

[1:58:13] be part of the working farm.

[1:58:17] Part of that was this wasn't an

[1:58:20] exclusive amenity or farm only

[1:58:22] to the residents of everlee but

[1:58:23] really community engagement.

[1:58:24] Folks are welcome to come and

[1:58:26] visit and see and be a part of

[1:58:26] that.

[1:58:30] Some elements, this plan is a

[1:58:31] glamorized version if you will

[1:58:32] of what will be the zoning

[1:58:33] master plan that will come

[1:58:34] before you and really want to

[1:58:37] hit home what our character

[1:58:38] areas are as far as clustering

[1:58:39] development within the project

[1:58:41] area and following some of the

[1:58:42] guidelines that you have within

[1:58:45] your policies already as far as

[1:58:46] transitioning from the area to

[1:58:49] the east, over moving to the

[1:58:50] west to parker.

[1:58:51] Some of the areas you see

[1:58:52] highlighted are very specific

[1:58:54] elements that the community

[1:58:56] provided for us as areas they

[1:58:58] want to see and commitments that

[1:58:58] we have agreed to.

[1:59:00] We have met with the carrollton

[1:59:02] folks there and they want to see

[1:59:04] this expanded buffer that's more

[1:59:05] manicured that they can see as

[1:59:07] they exit out of their

[1:59:08] neighborhood and enter.

[1:59:10] And expanding and not averaging,

[1:59:13] but having a 100-foot buffer

[1:59:13] undisturbed in that area around

[1:59:15] that nook into the southern

[1:59:15] area.

[1:59:16] Again, this is like character

[1:59:21] maintenance, mitigation of

[1:59:25] things that would be new and

[1:59:26] seeing areas for clearing that

[1:59:28] you would see within our pd

[1:59:31] rezoning application.

[1:59:32] These are best practices that

[1:59:33] either are a policy that's

[1:59:34] before you tonight to transmit

[1:59:37] out or will be part of our best

[1:59:38] management plans that are

[1:59:39] attached to our pd.

[1:59:40] And they generally hit on things

[1:59:43] that are already given to us,

[1:59:44] that recipe out of the special

[1:59:46] area study resolution.

[1:59:47] We have talked about open space,

[1:59:49] how that's provided on site and

[1:59:52] then off-site to gain our

[1:59:54] density, our water resources.

[1:59:56] You walk through with staff what

[1:59:57] we will see covering all those

[1:59:58] elements.

[2:00:01] And then affordability as far as

[2:00:02] meeting in some of that policy

[2:00:04] through transfer of development

[2:00:05] rights and provision of

[2:00:06] affordability and a mixture of

[2:00:07] units that we see on our

[2:00:08] project.

[2:00:10] Again, we're here for policies,

[2:00:12] transmit out for state and

[2:00:13] regional review.

[2:00:14] A lot of our questions are of

[2:00:16] interest and our pd and just a

[2:00:18] sneak peek and preview into that

[2:00:19] I think helps round out the

[2:00:21] policies that are

[2:00:22] I would like to invite up

[2:00:23] drew.

[2:00:23] Heel complete our presentation

[2:00:25] for you and then we can go into

[2:00:26] public comment or any comments

[2:00:28] you MAY have, and we thank you

[2:00:29] for your time.

[2:00:29] >> thank you.

[2:00:30] Thank you, lindsey.

[2:00:32] All right, drew.

[2:00:34] >> thank you, lindsey.

[2:00:37] Commissioners, drew holly,

[2:00:38] england, tims, and miller.

[2:00:39] Just want to say staff did such

[2:00:40] a wonderful job this evening.

[2:00:42] they stole a lot of my thunder,

[2:00:46] so I will make it as brief as I

[2:00:48] possibly can.

[2:00:51] Thank you all for having us here

[2:00:51] this evening.

[2:00:53] I wanted to hit on some of the

[2:00:54] key tenants on the comp plan

[2:00:56] before you this evening.

[2:00:57] And really given you some

[2:00:58] numbers associated with some of

[2:01:05] the benefits that we see.

[2:01:06] So looking at the transportation

[2:01:08] and mobility fees we're looking

[2:01:09] and estimating $20 million in

[2:01:10] mobility fees to be paid over

[2:01:12] time base on current rates and

[2:01:12] based on the development

[2:01:13] program.

[2:01:14] And those mobility fees of

[2:01:17] course as you know are used for

[2:01:19] a number of things but moat leas

[2:01:20] within the -- mostly within the

[2:01:22] mobility district to improve

[2:01:23] roadway segments and level of

[2:01:23] service.

[2:01:25] Chris hit earlier on utilities.

[2:01:29] We do have capacity as evidenced

[2:01:30] by gru's letter to us.

[2:01:33] We've talked a lot about our

[2:01:34] irrigation policies and water

[2:01:35] use.

[2:01:41] We see that as a core tenant of

[2:01:42] this proposal in front ofia

[2:01:43] of

[2:01:44] you this evening.

[2:01:48] We have had conversations with

[2:01:49] the fire chief about doimation

[2:01:51] of a proposed fire site.

[2:01:54] We have looked and as evidenced

[2:01:54] bide

[2:01:57] by chris' presentation

[2:01:58] earlier there is currently

[2:02:01] school capacity and we estimate

[2:02:03] $7 million average in ad valorem

[2:02:03] school taxes.

[2:02:05] Lindsey mentioned earlier the

[2:02:06] miles and miles of improved and

[2:02:08] unimproved trails to serve both

[2:02:09] residents and neighbors alike.

[2:02:11] And really the innovative tdr

[2:02:13] and affordability matrix that we

[2:02:15] worked very hard and diligently

[2:02:19] with staff to address two key

[2:02:20] components of the county's

[2:02:24] goals.

[2:02:26] So lindsey kind of gave the

[2:02:27] precursor to this timeline which

[2:02:28] was the lead up to where we are

[2:02:30] this evening, and I wanted to

[2:02:31] kind of finish the timeline at

[2:02:36] least to the next couple of

[2:02:37] years.

[2:02:38] So we stand here before you

[2:02:40] tonight asking for transmitting

[2:02:42] to the state and ultimately look

[2:02:43] to be before you in OCTOBER for

[2:02:44] an adoption hearing.

[2:02:45] But during the next several

[2:02:46] years, there is still a long

[2:02:47] road to hoe as we move forward

[2:02:54] with this project to finalize

[2:02:55] preliminary development plans,

[2:02:57] engineering and permitting,

[2:02:58] geophysical testing we talked

[2:02:59] about, all to make sure we get

[2:03:00] the plan right, and that

[2:03:03] ultimately culminates in final

[2:03:04] development plan, permit

[2:03:07] approvals, and construction.

[2:03:09] We see, you know, homes going up

[2:03:10] and families moving in, really

[2:03:16] in the next three years or so.

[2:03:18] As a part of that obviously

[2:03:19] there is a component there that

[2:03:21] I talked ability about earlier

[2:03:21] with the impact and mobility

[2:03:23] fees paid at certificate of

[2:03:24] occupancy to make sure that the

[2:03:26] infrastructure that's needed to

[2:03:29] support these homes and families

[2:03:30] is paid for and in place to be

[2:03:34] able to support the proposed

[2:03:36] development.

[2:03:38] So one of the things we heard at

[2:03:39] plan commission and we wanted to

[2:03:40] address head on waw this

[2:03:43] transportation component.

[2:03:44] So I have many of my colleagues

[2:03:45] here tonight who are much more

[2:03:50] well versed in transportation

[2:03:51] than I am but I will take the

[2:03:51] first crack at it.

[2:03:53] So our current analysis looked

[2:03:57] at an internal capture rate of

[2:03:59] only about 10%.

[2:03:59] When compared to the region and

[2:04:02] areas like the town of tioga and

[2:04:03] haile plantation we believe that

[2:04:04] MAY be a bit understated.

[2:04:06] We see internal capture of

[2:04:08] greater than 30% in those

[2:04:12] areas.

[2:04:13] Based on the development plan

[2:04:14] that we have, the mix of uses

[2:04:15] and the attractiveness of the

[2:04:16] nonresidential elements we feel

[2:04:20] certain that we are going to

[2:04:22] create that internal capture

[2:04:23] which keeps traffic volumes off

[2:04:25] of local adjacent roadways and

[2:04:26] inside of the development as

[2:04:28] much as possible.

[2:04:30] We talked earlier this evening

[2:04:34] about a phasing threshold.

[2:04:36] Limiting development to 50%

[2:04:40] until the state road widening is

[2:04:41] in the work plan.

[2:04:41] We also talked about the

[2:04:45] creation of an everlee specific

[2:04:46] mobility district, and that

[2:04:46] mobility district would be to

[2:04:48] use to fund transit element

[2:04:56] within the district including

[2:04:58] circulator, a potential park and

[2:04:59] ride side, bus stops, all of

[2:05:01] those elements to be really

[2:05:02] figured out in the future as we

[2:05:08] work with staff.

[2:05:09] I wanted to hit on something we

[2:05:10] heard from you all this evening

[2:05:11] and

[2:05:18] evening and also from staff,

[2:05:19] the slides that up are next is a

[2:05:21] preview of what's to come with

[2:05:23] the pd but wanted to address

[2:05:24] them here as well.

[2:05:25] We are certainly focused on

[2:05:28] nutrient management, and water

[2:05:28] quality.

[2:05:30] Our water resources in florida

[2:05:32] are of significant importance to

[2:05:41] all of us that that starts on

[2:05:42] the improvement side when we

[2:05:44] talk about water quality that's

[2:05:44] limiting nutrients.

[2:05:45] Well we have had discussion

[2:05:46] tonight with mary and other

[2:05:46] -

[2:05:48] members of staff who have talked

[2:05:50] about our commitment to no

[2:05:52] fertilizer on any of the

[2:05:53] residential lots.

[2:05:56] We've committed to a water

[2:05:57] policy round an irrigation

[2:05:57] budget.

[2:05:59] We've committed to using the

[2:06:00] lowest quality source of water

[2:06:06] available to us and reuse

[2:06:06] water.

[2:06:07] We've committed to lot of

[2:06:09] different things that are above

[2:06:09] and beyond.

[2:06:11] We've committed to the areas we

[2:06:11] can actually irrigate within the

[2:06:12] project.

[2:06:14] So that's where it starts.

[2:06:15] We talked a lot about limiting

[2:06:18] the level of disturbance on the

[2:06:18] site.

[2:06:21] This is just an -- graphical

[2:06:22] example of some lots potentially

[2:06:25] backing up to the cma, and our

[2:06:28] desire obviously to maintain

[2:06:31] existing vegetation to not clear

[2:06:32] trees where it's not necessary.

[2:06:34] And to make sure that we

[2:06:35] preserve the character and the

[2:06:37] community that makes this place

[2:06:41] special as it is today.

[2:06:42] I want to talk a little bit

[2:06:45] about our landscape best

[2:06:46] management plan, again you heard

[2:06:49] from staff this evening that

[2:06:51] this plan really goes above and

[2:06:52] beyond and you will see this

[2:06:54] again in the pd, but really

[2:06:56] using florida friendly, florida

[2:06:59] native plants, setting an

[2:07:00] irrigation budget, making sure

[2:07:02] that we limit the amount of turf

[2:07:04] grass which we know is a

[2:07:06] constant driver of water use,

[2:07:08] creating an irrigation utility

[2:07:10] that will limit the amount of

[2:07:11] irrigation that individual

[2:07:13] residents are able to apply on

[2:07:14] the landscape.

[2:07:16] And so on and so forth.

[2:07:17] This is something that we

[2:07:19] believe strongly in, are really

[2:07:21] committed to seeing this through

[2:07:22] throughout in the enforcement of

[2:07:31] this through the b mp process.

[2:07:35] You know, I've had the pleasure

[2:07:36] of working with austin and the

[2:07:38] team behind me this evening, and

[2:07:40] it is not lost on me that this

[2:07:43] is a generational land.

[2:07:45] And with generational land comes

[2:07:47] very unique responsibilities.

[2:07:49] This team behind you has one

[2:07:51] opportunity to get it right, and

[2:07:53] through working with staff, I

[2:07:56] believe we have gotten it to a

[2:07:57] point where we are getting it

[2:07:57] right.

[2:08:00] So with that in mind, I would

[2:08:02] kindly ask you all to consider

[2:08:03] transmitting this to the state,

[2:08:05] and would be happy to take any

[2:08:07] further questions.

[2:08:07] >> okay.

[2:08:08] Commissioners, any questions for

[2:08:12] the applicant?

[2:08:13] Commissioner prizzia, then

[2:08:15] commissioner alford.

[2:08:16] >> yeah, I guess a

[2:08:18] quickly, how

[2:08:19] do you anticipate the phasing of

[2:08:21] the affordable housing going?

[2:08:22] We currently don't have the

[2:08:24] requirement, you know, for in

[2:08:27] this anywhere of policy around

[2:08:27] the affordable housing being at

[2:08:28] the front end of the

[2:08:30] development, but I do think, you

[2:08:31] know, it's one of those things

[2:08:32] that if it gets left to the end

[2:08:35] it MAY never happen, if certain

[2:08:36] phases don't go through or we

[2:08:38] see it's 30 years or 40 years

[2:08:40] before they happen so can you

[2:08:42] just talk more for the community

[2:08:42] to understand what you think of

[2:08:44] in terms of how that affordable

[2:08:44] -

[2:08:45] housing will --

[2:08:46] >> sure, yeah, we're working

[2:08:47] with staff currently and I think

[2:08:48] a lot of that will be in the pd

[2:08:48] and the development agreement

[2:08:49] that we're working in now.

[2:08:51] So I think you'll see, you know,

[2:08:53] sorry to continue --

[2:08:54] >> no, that's fine.

[2:08:55] >> but you know that is a part

[2:08:56] of the process that we are in

[2:08:59] now, and so our intent with that

[2:09:01] is that that is not a, an after

[2:09:02] thought or to come at the end

[2:09:04] hat it's integrating

[2:09:04] throughout.

[2:09:06] I will tell you I don't think

[2:09:06] it's economical to say that

[2:09:08] there is some sort of one for

[2:09:10] one or some sort of specific you

[2:09:12] know ratio but I do think

[2:09:13] that'll be integrated and there

[2:09:14] is some language we can come up

[2:09:16] with with staff to be integrated

[2:09:18] into development agreement that

[2:09:20] can, you know, say, you know, at

[2:09:22] certain stages right that there

[2:09:24] has to be those some sort of

[2:09:25] criteria.

[2:09:26] So we're committed to that.

[2:09:27] >> slept, thank

[2:09:28] -- slept, thank

[2:09:30] -- excellent, thank you.

[2:09:31] I did want to say

[2:09:32] congratulations, I will tell you

[2:09:33] you know we have had a few other

[2:09:35] really big development type

[2:09:36] projects happen in alachua

[2:09:37] county and we've never had one

[2:09:39] where there's an empty room or

[2:09:41] very few people here that have

[2:09:42] comments on the development.

[2:09:44] And so I will say as a testament

[2:09:45] to that five meetings that you

[2:09:46] had in the community and

[2:09:47] listening to your neighbors and

[2:09:49] hearing what they have to say,

[2:09:50] and listening to us and what we

[2:09:52] have to say through the sas

[2:09:53] process and being willing to

[2:09:55] work with our staff, so thank

[2:09:57] you for at least coming, you

[2:09:58] know, for coming to the table

[2:09:59] with all of that work alread

[2:10:01] being done.

[2:10:03] And making sure that the

[2:10:04] neighbors are excited about

[2:10:06] having you as a neighbor.

[2:10:08] I emean I've never had so many

[2:10:09] letters of support from

[2:10:10] neighborhoods who actually live

[2:10:11] directly next to a development

[2:10:12] that they are excited about a

[2:10:12] development coming.

[2:10:14] Usually it's the opposite.

[2:10:15] It's all the reason why they

[2:10:17] think it's an awful idea.

[2:10:18] >> I appreciate that.

[2:10:19] That's important for us.

[2:10:21] As you know I'm a community

[2:10:21] member.

[2:10:23] >> something to be proud of for

[2:10:25] sure and it's evident the work

[2:10:26] has been done and I really

[2:10:27] appreciate our staff.

[2:10:28] I know that they worked really,

[2:10:30] really hard to, you know, get to

[2:10:32] yes on this and to find those

[2:10:33] balances with protecting our

[2:10:34] natural resources.

[2:10:37] And allowing for the developer

[2:10:37] to build something that's going

[2:10:39] to be -- and the family to build

[2:10:40] something that's going to be a

[2:10:41] legacy that's going to be more

[2:10:43] dense, more urban in nature and

[2:10:44] make more sense if we're going

[2:10:46] to develop a piece of property,

[2:10:47] let's do it the right way and

[2:10:48] let's put that kind of density

[2:10:49] so that we're building

[2:10:50] affordable housing so that we're

[2:10:52] allowing for mobility and people

[2:10:53] to live, work, and play in the

[2:10:54] same area.

[2:10:55] And you know, of course I'm

[2:10:56] excited about the farm.

[2:10:57] That's what I do but I do think

[2:10:59] you know one of the things I

[2:11:00] mentioned was the idea that you

[2:11:01] know from my perspective, that

[2:11:04] farm is an amenity to the

[2:11:06] development, and I think leaving

[2:11:08] it to bona fide agriculture is a

[2:11:11] mistake, I think that it needs

[2:11:13] the kind of controls through the

[2:11:14] hoa, through the agreement with

[2:11:18] the county, to protect the

[2:11:19] residents of that neighborhood

[2:11:20] and the future of that land to

[2:11:22] make sure that it has the same

[2:11:24] types of regulations and

[2:11:25] requirements for the management

[2:11:27] of that property as the rest of

[2:11:27] the development.

[2:11:30] >> I agree, I think you'll find

[2:11:33] that as a part of the b mp

[2:11:34] conditions that we plan on

[2:11:35] implementing into the pd so that

[2:11:37] we do, we do plan to implement

[2:11:39] and so while there MAY not be a

[2:11:44] ton of detail if the comp plan

[2:11:44] application, I think you will

[2:11:46] see that come along into some of

[2:11:48] the bmp criteria that you'll see

[2:11:52] in the pd just like some of our

[2:11:56] landscape -- you know landscape

[2:11:57] irrigation will be addressed so

[2:11:59] we are happy to address that

[2:12:00] specific point even within the

[2:12:01] confines of the comp plan

[2:12:03] amendment and the pd proposal

[2:12:05] that we are, we are we have in

[2:12:09] front you've also presenting

[2:12:12] criteria and bmp practices that

[2:12:14] have to be abide by.

[2:12:15] >> well I would -- I guess I

[2:12:17] would like for staff to let me

[2:12:19] know what they think the

[2:12:21] appropriate edits are to m in

[2:12:23] the comprehensive plan

[2:12:24] transmittals as we have it to

[2:12:26] address that at this stage as

[2:12:27] well as at the stages moving

[2:12:29] forward just so that.

[2:12:31] >> yeah, I'm happy to pass the

[2:12:32] microphone off.

[2:12:34] I think we're, where we have

[2:12:35] come to it from this perspective

[2:12:36] is we

[2:12:37] we were asking for

[2:12:38] transmittal and then you will

[2:12:40] get back the pd with those

[2:12:41] conditions on which you would

[2:12:42] vote on its own merits within

[2:12:43] that pd document.

[2:12:46] You know with that criteria but

[2:12:49] happy to pass the microphone off

[2:12:56] if you want --

[2:12:58] >> MR. Chair, I don't know.

[2:12:59] So I would say from staff we

[2:13:00] find ourselves in a little bit

[2:13:03] of a quandary because the state

[2:13:05] really takes control of defining

[2:13:08] what ag is, and it preempts us

[2:13:10] from regulating that.

[2:13:12] >> this isn't -- this isn't ag.

[2:13:14] Into the traditional sense I

[2:13:15] mean yes they are going to be

[2:13:17] growing food but it's first and

[2:13:19] foremost it's going to be an

[2:13:20] open space, a park for the

[2:13:22] neighbors who live right next

[2:13:23] door, you know and so while it

[2:13:26] is a farm, I guess my, my sense

[2:13:28] of the story that they're

[2:13:29] telling and my experience of

[2:13:30] these developments in the past

[2:13:33] is that it's, it's not a

[2:13:34] traditional farm in the sense

[2:13:37] that it's operating on its own

[2:13:41] in a rural area outside of the

[2:13:42] impacts that it would have on

[2:13:45] residences rights next door or

[2:13:46] stormwater ponds that are right

[2:13:49] next door to it.

[2:13:51] And therefore, it's actually a

[2:13:53] different type of land use than

[2:13:55] bona fide ag.

[2:13:58] It's going to be subsidized by

[2:14:02] the development.

[2:14:03] >> corbin?

[2:14:04] >>> I don't know if there is

[2:14:05] something you wanted to add to

[2:14:06] that before I jump in.

[2:14:07] >> it's true, I was just going

[2:14:08] to say that as a part of the pd

[2:14:09] there is a mix of -- or as a

[2:14:11] part of the comp plan there is a

[2:14:12] mix of uses obviously and to be

[2:14:15] categorized in each one and that

[2:14:16] was why we addressed it via

[2:14:18] character areas, and addressing

[2:14:20] that farm and that location and

[2:14:21] the criteria and the guidelines

[2:14:24] of which it has to abide, we're

[2:14:26] offering above and beyond maybe

[2:14:28] just bona fide ag, we're happy

[2:14:29] to offer in the form of that pd

[2:14:31] in which obviously you would

[2:14:32] have all of the detail in front

[2:14:34] of you to support or obviously

[2:14:37] not support but that would just

[2:14:38] be my only comment is that I

[2:14:40] think as we see it, we see

[2:14:42] character areas and individual

[2:14:43] categorization of what is where,

[2:14:45] and what that has to abide by so

[2:14:46] we plan on having that for you

[2:14:47] in the future.

[2:14:49] >> correct and I appreciate that

[2:14:49] and I believe you I mean the

[2:14:51] conversations that I've had with

[2:14:51] you about what you all plan to

[2:14:54] do and listening to justin talk

[2:14:55] about and see you know these

[2:14:57] types of developments, I

[2:14:58] absolutely 100% believe you and

[2:15:00] agree with you, but I think if

[2:15:02] we call it bona fide ag then our

[2:15:04] ability to actually do those

[2:15:06] enforcements of that pd are

[2:15:06] actually pritted

[2:15:08] pretty limited

[2:15:12] to his point because we cannot

[2:15:13] regulate agriculture in

[2:15:14] somestances so I want to be

[2:15:16] mindful of that and make sure we

[2:15:19] you to come up with those --

[2:15:21] >> wouldn't we have that has

[2:15:22] as

[2:15:25] part of the pd, we can put the

[2:15:27] conditions in the pd?

[2:15:27] Corbin?

[2:15:28] >> so ultimately as far as the

[2:15:29] land use perspective goes, eyes,

[2:15:30] I get the point that this is

[2:15:33] different than your traditional

[2:15:34] ag but if there is a commercial

[2:15:36] component to this agriculture,

[2:15:39] there is nothing we could do

[2:15:40] that would potentially stop

[2:15:43] getting an ag cloiks and --

[2:15:44] classification and coming in an

[2:15:46] at a later time, we're doing

[2:15:48] bona fide ag selling vegetables

[2:15:50] and then preempted.

[2:15:52] >> for tax classification.

[2:15:52] >>> yeah they could come in and

[2:15:54] say on this particular portion,

[2:15:57] this is ag classified.

[2:16:00] Therefore, you know because we

[2:16:02] are, we are using this for bona

[2:16:04] fide ag we have a commercial

[2:16:05] output the county is then

[2:16:06] preempted from coming and in

[2:16:08] regulating it no matter what we

[2:16:11] call it on this end.

[2:16:13] >> so how would the pd

[2:16:14] requirements be upheld in a

[2:16:15] situation where there was bona

[2:16:20] fide ag?

[2:16:21] >> chris?

[2:16:24] >> yeah, so I mean, it's a walks

[2:16:26] like a duck quacks like a duck

[2:16:30] kind of thing, MR. Chair.

[2:16:31] >> on a farm.

[2:16:32] >> on a farm.

[2:16:32] [Laughter]

[2:16:33] Yeah, I guess there will be

[2:16:34] animals there.

[2:16:36] I think that the problem is we

[2:16:37] can -- we can call it something

[2:16:40] else in our comp plan, but if

[2:16:41] it's on a piece of property and

[2:16:43] the property appraiser says it's

[2:16:48] bona fide ag, we're, we're

[2:16:49] preempted from it.

[2:16:50] >> I guess I just --

[2:16:52] >> so if the, if the applicants,

[2:16:54] I would just say you know from

[2:16:57] my perspective, so one thing we

[2:17:00] could do is, I'll wait on that.

[2:17:02] I think from, from my

[2:17:04] perspective, trying to say that

[2:17:07] the working farm that might

[2:17:08] potentially, this is, this sort

[2:17:09] of what happens in the future,

[2:17:14] it's a what if, but if it is ag,

[2:17:17] and it gets an ag

[2:17:18] classification, regardless of

[2:17:21] what we adopt, the state says we

[2:17:24] can't enforce it.

[2:17:25] Because it's ag.

[2:17:27] >> I mean reading --

[2:17:30] >> so, so the only, I don't -- I

[2:17:32] don't know if the applicant is

[2:17:33] willing to stand up here and

[2:17:36] commit and say I agree that it's

[2:17:38] never going to get an ag

[2:17:40] classification, yes, it's an

[2:17:44] institutional use, and I agree

[2:17:46] to these regulations.

[2:17:47] But the applicant would sort of

[2:17:50] have to make that explicitly

[2:17:51] clear.

[2:17:52] >> they're saying that they're

[2:17:54] going to have these BMPs to

[2:17:55] further defined in the kinds of

[2:17:56] things they're binding

[2:17:57] themselves to in terms of

[2:17:59] operating that farm with

[2:18:02] sustainable practice, organic

[2:18:03] practices, water management

[2:18:04] practice and I'm saying you're

[2:18:06] telling me today that we

[2:18:07] couldn't actually enforce that.

[2:18:09] >> yeah, I mean, they MAY do

[2:18:12] some of those things, and we can

[2:18:14] have them in the pd, but if it

[2:18:17] comes to that point where the

[2:18:19] state says or the property

[2:18:20] appraiser says no, they, they

[2:18:23] apply for an ag classification,

[2:18:25] they have a commercial purpose,

[2:18:27] they do one of the activities

[2:18:30] that is generally considered

[2:18:32] agricultural, we, we can't

[2:18:35] regulate it anymore.

[2:18:35] So I think that's sort of the

[2:18:37] challenge that we've found

[2:18:39] because we talked about I know

[2:18:40] stacy sat in a conference room

[2:18:42] with me and we talked about that

[2:18:42] possibility.

[2:18:45] Can we apply these irrigation

[2:18:48] policies or fertilizer policies

[2:18:50] or whatever to the working farm

[2:18:51] portion and I think where we

[2:18:55] always sort of ran into the wall

[2:18:57] was what happens when it become

[2:19:00] bona fide ag.

[2:19:01] >> I mean, I think if I could

[2:19:07] step in here, 8.6.6.10 and

[2:19:09] 8.6.6.11 hammers home and is

[2:19:10] exact point and it's in the

[2:19:11] policy.

[2:19:13] I mean it basically says working

[2:19:16] farm is a community anchor that

[2:19:18] required planned development

[2:19:20] zoning shall include a

[2:19:21] professionally managed year

[2:19:22] round working farm as a

[2:19:23] centrally organized element of

[2:19:23] the community.

[2:19:25] That's like the first sentence.

[2:19:29] And then whu r when you get into

[2:19:32] policy 8.6.6.11 it says context,

[2:19:33] agriculture compatibility and

[2:19:35] best management practice context

[2:19:37] sensitivity buffers, best

[2:19:39] management practices, including

[2:19:40] the landscape best management

[2:19:41] plan, and right to farm

[2:19:43] disclosures shall be required to

[2:19:45] ensure long-term compatibility

[2:19:47] between ag operations and the

[2:19:47] residential or mixed use.

[2:19:50] I mean you guys have addressed

[2:19:53] this I think I don't understand

[2:19:56] like we're going to hear all of

[2:19:58] your concerns be put into the pd

[2:19:59] and it's actually part of the

[2:20:02] comp plan policy.

[2:20:03] Like it's got to be consistent.

[2:20:05] The pd can't be inconsistent

[2:20:06] with the comp plan policy, it

[2:20:07] must be consistent with the comp

[2:20:08] plan policy.

[2:20:10] >> what they're saying is it

[2:20:12] doesn't matter if the comp plan

[2:20:13] policies or pd policies are

[2:20:15] applied too bona fide ag because

[2:20:17] at the end of the day we can't

[2:20:19] regulate the bona fide ag.

[2:20:22] >> it's literally going to be

[2:20:22] regulated.

[2:20:23] >> my concern isn't now.

[2:20:25] My concern is 12, 30 years --

[2:20:26] 20, 30 years from now when the

[2:20:28] developer isn't there and the

[2:20:29] hoa has taken --

[2:20:31] >> well 40 years -- yes, they

[2:20:31] will, believe me.

[2:20:32] >> I don't disagree with your

[2:20:33] concern.

[2:20:35] My point is let's address that

[2:20:36] concern at the pd.

[2:20:38] Because the policy it has to be

[2:20:40] consistent with what staff has

[2:20:43] put into the comp plan policy.

[2:20:44] >> but what I'm being told by

[2:20:46] our attorney is that it doesn't

[2:20:47] matter what we put in the pd.

[2:20:49] If it's land use is ag then its,

[2:20:51] and its bona fide agriculture

[2:20:52] then we have no ability to

[2:20:53] regulate it.

[2:20:56] >> so we don't want an ag

[2:20:57] component to this neighborhood?

[2:20:58] >> no I'm not say that.

[2:20:59] >> you are.

[2:20:59] You are saying that.

[2:21:01] >> no I was saying that I was

[2:21:03] hoping that the land use would

[2:21:06] not be ag, that it would be

[2:21:07] something else and it's actually

[2:21:09] part of the development rather

[2:21:10] than an agricultural farm

[2:21:11] because it's even thoughit is a

[2:21:13] technically a farm, it's an

[2:21:15] amenity to the neighborhood and

[2:21:18] my only concern is long-term the

[2:21:19] residents and with this gets

[2:21:21] turned over to somebody other

[2:21:22] thanking amenity for management

[2:21:24] that they understand they need

[2:21:25] to hup

[2:21:27] uphold the values the

[2:21:28] amenities is bringing to the

[2:21:29] farm.

[2:21:30] It's down the road.

[2:21:31] We're the ones -- not me but

[2:21:32] some other commissioner up here

[2:21:34] is going to be the one who gets

[2:21:35] the whiny neighbor who's like

[2:21:37] this farm is stinky and it looks

[2:21:39] bad and they're not doing their

[2:21:40] job the right way.

[2:21:44] And you know, they're not using

[2:21:46] organic materials and.

[2:21:47] >> put their for sale sign in

[2:21:48] the yard and someone else is

[2:21:50] going to buy that house.

[2:21:51] Because that's the central to

[2:21:53] the neighborhood.

[2:21:54] Like if you don't want a farm in

[2:21:55] your neighborhood, probably

[2:21:57] don't go to everlee.

[2:21:58] >> correct, this is not the

[2:21:59] place for you.

[2:22:03] But to that point, as a part of

[2:22:04] the later staidgesz, we

[2:22:05] --

[2:22:07] stages we will have a cdd

[2:22:08] creation and there willby an

[2:22:10] hoa, and so just to be clear,

[2:22:14] the working farm is not a land

[2:22:15] holding that there would be any

[2:22:17] incentive to be held privately.

[2:22:21] So there will be confines of

[2:22:22] obligation right in that whether

[2:22:25] the hoa owns it or kdd what have

[2:22:25] you.

[2:22:27] I mean, there would be no

[2:22:29] benefit of privately holding

[2:22:30] that liability if that makes

[2:22:31] sense.

[2:22:33] So I think that in reality,

[2:22:35] probably addresses a lot of the

[2:22:37] ongoing concerns that you have,

[2:22:38] and the way we get there is

[2:22:39] through that scale that we're

[2:22:42] asking for.

[2:22:43] >> you conclude?

[2:22:43] >> yeah.

[2:22:44] >> commissioner alford and then

[2:22:47] commissioner wheeler.

[2:22:48] >> okay.

[2:22:51] I have a few things.

[2:22:53] First, I want to say thank you

[2:22:55] for the extensive community

[2:22:56] outreach.

[2:23:00] This is in my district basically

[2:23:01] and I've had calls from many of

[2:23:04] my former neighbos and friends

[2:23:06] that live in the hale rr area

[2:23:08] and they've all said, you know,

[2:23:10] we thought we weren't going to

[2:23:12] like this but we really love

[2:23:12] it.

[2:23:15] And it's, it's they, they've

[2:23:17] said that you guys are just

[2:23:20] great to talk to, to negotiate

[2:23:23] with, to share information,

[2:23:23] that's the first thing I wanted

[2:23:24] to say.

[2:23:25] Second thing, I need to disclose

[2:23:27] that I've known victor dover for

[2:23:29] a very long time.

[2:23:31] He's my favorite new urbanest

[2:23:32] and I haven't seen a project of

[2:23:37] victor's that I haven't liked.

[2:23:41] So he's really, well, I mien, I

[2:23:43] can't not say that.

[2:23:46] So I, I'm very excited to have

[2:23:47] you do, you know potentially do

[2:23:49] work in our town, and provide

[2:23:50] something that, you know, I

[2:23:53] just, like your approach to

[2:23:54] things and I like how you

[2:23:56] integrate the new urbanist

[2:23:59] principles in a, in a practical

[2:24:00] and approachable way you don't

[2:24:01] talk about transects and all

[2:24:02] this other stuff.

[2:24:04] You just tell people how it

[2:24:09] works and so I like that.

[2:24:11] And then and I really like this

[2:24:13] whole idea of growing healthy

[2:24:15] food and growing healthy people

[2:24:17] and growing healthy community

[2:24:20] because it all fits together,

[2:24:24] and, and I just, you know, I

[2:24:26] really tried hard to not like

[2:24:30] this project because it isn't

[2:24:31] what we should be doing we

[2:24:32] should be developing, outside of

[2:24:34] our urban cluster but I just

[2:24:35] love it.

[2:24:36] I can't help it.

[2:24:39] I really do like it and I, and I

[2:24:41] have to admit that.

[2:24:46] So a few concerns that I do have

[2:24:47] are so I live for a number of

[2:24:50] years in the hale village

[2:24:52] center, and I got very familiar

[2:24:54] with a lot of people that did a

[2:24:57] lot of work in the haile village

[2:24:57] center because they're my

[2:24:59] business partner and one of the

[2:25:00] things that I learned is that

[2:25:02] gru has stated on multiple

[2:25:04] occasions that they would never

[2:25:05] allow another village center to

[2:25:10] get built in their district.

[2:25:11] Because it everything's too

[2:25:12] close together, it was too hard

[2:25:14] to provide the utilities, too

[2:25:15] hard to go in and fix.

[2:25:17] Just too hard.

[2:25:20] So I hope that we are working

[2:25:23] hard to make a good relationship

[2:25:25] with at early on in this project

[2:25:27] while we're in the planning

[2:25:29] phase so can you talk a little

[2:25:31] bit about what -- how you've

[2:25:32] worked with gru and low you

[2:25:33] how

[2:25:34] you're planning on managing

[2:25:35] that.

[2:25:35] >> MR. Holly.

[2:25:38] >> yes, of course, specifically

[2:25:40] commissioner alford we have been

[2:25:42] working with gru for the better

[2:25:43] course of the rast nine months.

[2:25:46] So we engaged them prior to

[2:25:48] actually filing any applications

[2:25:50] with the county.

[2:25:52] We have concerns obviously

[2:25:53] around their ability to serve

[2:25:55] and how that would work with the

[2:25:57] urban cluster.

[2:25:59] We work with them and actually

[2:26:00] have been having biweekly

[2:26:01] meetings really over the course

[2:26:04] of the last six months or so.

[2:26:05] To discuss their ability to

[2:26:07] serve the utilities that would

[2:26:08] be necessary, the extensions

[2:26:11] that are required to get to the

[2:26:12] property, and we have gone so

[2:26:14] far as to really start looking

[2:26:17] at sizing of lines and how do we

[2:26:19] provide infrastructure, for this

[2:26:21] specific property at specific

[2:26:21] locations.

[2:26:23] And so that's something that we

[2:26:25] have been intentionally working

[2:26:29] with gru towards really

[2:26:32] alignment for the last six to

[2:26:32] nine months.

[2:26:34] >> so are they going to allow

[2:26:35] their urban setback standards

[2:26:37] and your more urban areas and

[2:26:40] not try to impose their all you

[2:26:43] have to do is drive through

[2:26:46] butler and see what they like to

[2:26:47] have so.

[2:26:49] >> yeah, and certainly I mean we

[2:26:51] want to be a accommodating as we

[2:26:52] can be as we look --

[2:26:58] >>no, you don't.

[2:26:58] [Laughter]

[2:26:59] >> as we think through street

[2:27:01] sections and streetscapes and

[2:27:03] building frontage and how we

[2:27:04] accommodate trees, how we

[2:27:05] accommodate sidewalks,

[2:27:07] pedestrian facilities,

[2:27:08] utilities, you know we're

[2:27:11] providing, we've submitted very

[2:27:13] narrow streetscape sections

[2:27:16] purposefully to really slow

[2:27:18] design speeds, narrow

[2:27:19] right-of-ways, that creates a

[2:27:20] challenges for utilities and

[2:27:21] it's something that's not lost

[2:27:22] on us as engineers and planners

[2:27:25] and designers.

[2:27:27] So we look forward to having

[2:27:28] these conversations with gru

[2:27:28] specifically on how we can

[2:27:31] address that as we move towards

[2:27:32] construction documents.

[2:27:33] >> okay I just -- you know that

[2:27:35] just really wordy me because I

[2:27:36] have heard that quote so many

[2:27:39] times and I just, but I also

[2:27:41] know that you know there was

[2:27:44] probably not the same level of

[2:27:45] planning at the beginning of

[2:27:49] that, and so you know there were

[2:27:50] utilities run under buildings

[2:27:53] and things that were a challenge

[2:27:54] so hopefully we're at a little

[2:27:57] better place than that so thank

[2:28:01] you for that on the, I would

[2:28:04] love to they

[2:28:09] think that the

[2:28:15] whole agriculture thing would be

[2:28:21] self-regulating, but again,

[2:28:29] living in the hale village

[2:28:38] center I've watched that

[2:28:47] slippery slope of a natural

[2:28:57] landscape that everybody

[2:29:07] embraced and loved being slowly

[2:29:17] chopped down and replaced with

[2:29:27] more formal landscaping along

[2:29:37] some of the streets in areas

[2:29:46] even though residents didn't

[2:29:54] want it it's what the homeowners

[2:30:04] association did because I don't

[2:30:14] know somebody knew somebody.

[2:30:23] But I really do feel like we

[2:30:31] need something there.

[2:30:38] I don't know what it would look

[2:30:46] like, but I think expecting it

[2:30:54] to be self-regulating is, is

[2:31:03] going to be a challenge because

[2:31:11] things, things do change, and

[2:31:19] managers do change, and

[2:31:28] sometimes it just all boils down

[2:31:37] to money and I hate to say

[2:31:46] that.

[2:31:55] And while I'm on the subject of

[2:32:03] landscaping, I was curious now

[2:32:12] when you did your first

[2:32:22] presentation to us, you kind of

[2:32:32] had this little vision that you

[2:32:43] shard of walking down a natural

[2:32:53] path in the woods and I remember

[2:33:04] talking about edible landscaping

[2:33:14] at this point so can you talk

[2:33:22] about had you that would fit

[2:33:29] into the.

[2:33:37] >> of course.

[2:33:44] Yeah.

[2:33:52] Back up one step try to give you

[2:33:59] an answer on the farm on the

[2:34:07] agriculture self-regulation.

[2:34:15] I think important piece there is

[2:34:22] having the ownership and

[2:34:31] obligation live in the cdd or

[2:34:39] hoa.

[2:34:46] Just answer the question much%

[2:34:54] like an amenity center in

[2:35:02] another neighborhood, that's --

[2:35:09] >> it's got to be really --

[2:35:16] >> obligation --

[2:35:23] >> yeah and it's got to be

[2:35:30] really clear.

[2:35:38] >> -- hold that amenity.

[2:35:45] >> it's got to be really clear

[2:35:52] because inale it wasn't

[2:35:59] necessarily clear.

[2:36:06] >> yeah, I think that's

[2:36:13] important for us too.

[2:36:20] I think the clarity for

[2:36:27] potential homeowners that's

[2:36:33] going to be necessary.

[2:36:38] So that, to answer that part,

[2:36:43] the second part of that though

[2:36:47] for the edible landscaping I

[2:36:50] think that goes back what I was

[2:36:53] telling you my original vision

[2:36:55] for this and one of the primary

[2:36:58] millers is not only street

[2:37:00] design and walkable

[2:37:02] neighborhoods but sidewalks,

[2:37:04] those are all very important

[2:37:07] pieces of this presentation no

[2:37:09] doubt but also some of the

[2:37:11] natural landscape and having

[2:37:13] trail ways through them and then

[2:37:15] incorporating and we're working

[2:37:17] with epd through some of the

[2:37:19] criteria on what can be

[2:37:21] implemented and potentially

[2:37:23] added in some of those c ma

[2:37:25] where we could implement either

[2:37:27] restoration implementation or

[2:37:28] potentially some edible

[2:37:30] landscaping so the vision with

[2:37:32] that was that we try to keep a

[2:37:34] lot of the especially perimeter

[2:37:36] or integrated conservation trail

[2:37:38] ways in a way that you get to

[2:37:39] experience edible landscaping

[2:37:42] and wildlife and under tree

[2:37:43] canopies so some of that will be

[2:37:45] working in hand in hand with

[2:37:47] staff and working through and

[2:37:49] weaving through some policy mike

[2:37:51] sure we can make all that happen

[2:37:52] in a way that is meaningful.

[2:37:54] >> yeah, I mean, I think about

[2:37:56] my kids getting to experience,

[2:37:58] you know, mullberries or pawpaws

[2:37:59] or things like that that you

[2:38:01] don't necessarily see anymore

[2:38:03] because you know nobody's

[2:38:05] growing them commercially really

[2:38:06] but you know they're great.

[2:38:08] >> yeah, this is an opportunity

[2:38:10] to do that.

[2:38:11] I mean, it just, especially

[2:38:13] considering in the trailway

[2:38:15] system it's really not

[2:38:16] commercial, it's scale.

[2:38:18] It's more of an experience and

[2:38:19] so that's something that we

[2:38:20] value that I think we're excited

[2:38:21] to have the opportunity to work

[2:38:22] with ifas on potentially you

[2:38:23] know using, would love to pair

[2:38:25] up in some way to have some

[2:38:26] lurch component but then also be

[2:38:27] used you know improve genetic or

[2:38:28] fruit stock and would love to

[2:38:29] see how that can evolve.

[2:38:30] We plan on incorporating a lot

[2:38:31] of that into the trail system.

[2:38:32] >> awesome.

[2:38:32] Thank you.

[2:38:33] All right.

[2:38:34] Let me see, if I got all of my

[2:38:35] little stars.

[2:38:36] And I think this goes without

[2:38:37] saying but we are measuring 50%

[2:38:38] development by the number of

[2:38:39] residential units?

[2:38:40] Or.

[2:38:41] >> one-half of 2700.

[2:38:42] >> 2500?

[2:38:43] >>> 50% of what?

[2:38:44] >> of residential units or

[2:38:45] residents or area developed,

[2:38:46] what is 50% mean?

[2:38:47] >> for the archer road.

[2:38:48] >> oh, yaw

[2:38:49] yeah, it would be the

[2:38:50] eunice, intensity of

[2:38:52] development.

[2:38:53] >> intensity of development,

[2:38:54] just wanted to, I figured

[2:38:55] somebody's going to ask me that,

[2:38:55] so I figured I should ask.

[2:38:56] Okay.

[2:38:57] That's all I have right now.

[2:38:58] >> thank you, commissioner.

[2:38:59] Commissioner wheeler.

[2:39:01] >> yes, I just want to thank the

[2:39:02] group.

[2:39:03] I've been asking for eight years

[2:39:04] now every development to give me

[2:39:05] something I've never seen

[2:39:06] before.

[2:39:07] Now I know it's time I can

[2:39:07] finally retire I

[2:39:08] I was on a jake

[2:39:09] fuller cartoon I always got the

[2:39:10] last word on a water video

[2:39:11] today, and now getting to see

[2:39:12] something that I've never seen

[2:39:13] before, and to watch all of you

[2:39:13] who were a part of the team that

[2:39:14] I was there that visiting that

[2:39:15] day was remarkable to see the

[2:39:16] energy and the enthusiasm and

[2:39:16] the commitment to this project

[2:39:17] being able to make a community

[2:39:18] that is charming and, and is

[2:39:18] inviting.

[2:39:19] And inviting community so I do

[2:39:19] hope you all will put some of

[2:39:20] those cracker houses that I saw

[2:39:20] the designs for out there.

[2:39:21] You know, that are, are

[2:39:22] reminiscent of a calmer, easier

[2:39:22] time.

[2:39:23] You know people try, travel to

[2:39:23] disney all the time to see these

[2:39:24] kinds of communities, you know,

[2:39:25] that you all are talking about

[2:39:25] trying to do, and that's what it

[2:39:26] felt like when I was there.

[2:39:26] You all were creating this place

[2:39:27] that people would want to be.

[2:39:28] And it was really exciting to

[2:39:28] see that.

[2:39:28] In motion and I would really

[2:39:29] like to make this motion now.

[2:39:30] I know we're going to have

[2:39:30] community speaking up.

[2:39:31] >> good I mean we need to have a

[2:39:31] motion.

[2:39:32] >> I move that we transmit the

[2:39:33] application z26-000005 with the

[2:39:33] staff recommended policies to

[2:39:34] the state for review and

[2:39:34] comment.

[2:39:35] >> second.

[2:39:36] >> second.

[2:39:36] >> chair: motion and two

[2:39:37] seconds.

[2:39:37] All right.

[2:39:38] >> thank you now I can retire.

[2:39:38] >> chair: do you conclude?

[2:39:39] Do you conclude?

[2:39:39] Commissioner chestnut.

[2:39:40] >> thank you, MR. Chair.

[2:39:40] I guess I have a couple of

[2:39:41] questions first of all, how many

[2:39:41] farmstead communities are

[2:39:42] there?

[2:39:42] Is this the first or?

[2:39:43] Or is it more in florida?

[2:39:43] I'm just asking.

[2:39:44] >> you mean in the county or are

[2:39:44] you just mean in general.

[2:39:45] >> in general because to me this

[2:39:45] is the first time I ever seen

[2:39:46] anything like it so that's while

[2:39:46] yiep

[2:39:47] I'm asking.

[2:39:47] >> I would not dare to think

[2:39:48] there is something different to

[2:39:49] this.

[2:39:49] There are definitely different

[2:39:50] versionses of this but I think

[2:39:50] what we have built under the

[2:39:51] guidelines of what your staff

[2:39:51] has recommended is very unique.

[2:39:52] I would not shy away from that.

[2:39:52] There MAY be farm components to

[2:39:53] communities that MAY exist

[2:39:53] elsewhere but with all of the

[2:39:54] processes and policy that

[2:39:54] they've recommended I would

[2:39:55] imagine we're very unique.

[2:39:55] >> there are a lot of

[2:39:56] farmsteads.

[2:39:56] >> MR. Mayors, did you want

[2:39:57] to -- I saw you jump up.

[2:39:57] >> [Off mic]

[2:39:58] 72 austin, do you want justice

[2:39:58] to.

[2:39:59] >> yeah.

[2:39:59] >> yeah, please.

[2:39:59] >> I was just curious.

[2:40:00] >> I think austin's answer was

[2:40:00] great in terms of I think there

[2:40:01] is like a spectrum of like kind

[2:40:01] of these farm-based

[2:40:02] communities.

[2:40:02] And this is I think on that like

[2:40:02] deeper end of like really having

[2:40:03] it be like a core part of the

[2:40:04] neighborhood and a very like

[2:40:05] real and authentic way where

[2:40:05] it's not just kind of like

[2:40:06] checking a box ear kind of like

[2:40:06] a farm in name only.

[2:40:07] And so I think and that end it

[2:40:08] is one of the more unique

[2:40:08] projects and there is not like

[2:40:08] necessarily like a formal like

[2:40:09] governing body or definition of

[2:40:09] like what is a farmstead or

[2:40:10] agri -- like this but I think

[2:40:11] this is on that end of the

[2:40:11] spectrum that really kind of

[2:40:12] captures like the vision of how

[2:40:12] a farm can be integrated into a

[2:40:13] neighborhood and really have it

[2:40:13] be like a deeply valuable

[2:40:14] thing.

[2:40:14] >> okay.

[2:40:15] My next question, I think during

[2:40:15] the presentation, they stated

[2:40:16] there would be fruits and

[2:40:16] vegetables but I never heard

[2:40:16] anything about any animals.

[2:40:17] Are there going to be animals?

[2:40:17] >> so I think --

[2:40:18] >> and what kind.

[2:40:18] >> yeah, so some of or other

[2:40:19] projects we have like pasture

[2:40:19] pull tree

[2:40:20] powelltry.

[2:40:20] For

[2:40:21] poultry.

[2:40:21] For some places an educational

[2:40:21] chicken coop, 20, 25 birds and

[2:40:22] others you have egg production

[2:40:22] with 2

[2:40:23] 200, 300 birds same with

[2:40:23] an apiary we will have 10 hives

[2:40:24] there is a showcase piece but we

[2:40:24] could have 80 to 100 and have

[2:40:25] honey production so I think

[2:40:25] where we are now in the planning

[2:40:25] we'll be especially the

[2:40:26] educational pieces that are

[2:40:26] woven in and then there is

[2:40:26] opportunity to have like larger

[2:40:27] scale animal ag as well that

[2:40:27] kind of how it evolves down the

[2:40:27] road.

[2:40:28] But I think like vegetables,

[2:40:28] fruits and flowers are really

[2:40:29] like the main driver like

[2:40:29] diversified year round basis and

[2:40:29] then you can kind of slide in

[2:40:29] animals around the way if

[2:40:30] needed.

[2:40:30] >> the only reason I ask that

[2:40:30] question because was I remember

[2:40:31] MR. Lee saying that their farm

[2:40:31] been there for many years then a

[2:40:31] development started building

[2:40:32] around them and people from

[2:40:32] haile plantation don't mean to

[2:40:32] pick on haile plantation but

[2:40:33] were complaining about the

[2:40:33] cows.

[2:40:34] At night mooing and tough like

[2:40:34] that.

[2:40:34] So that's why I asked that

[2:40:34] question because what I want to

[2:40:35] make sure happens is that when

[2:40:35] folks buy property there, that

[2:40:35] they know that they're buying

[2:40:36] into a farm.

[2:40:36] >> sure, yeah.

[2:40:36] >> keep in mind that 20-acre

[2:40:37] working farm MAY be more

[2:40:37] primarily directed at fruits and

[2:40:37] veggies but there is another --

[2:40:37] you know at the part of a

[2:40:38] 200-acre you know agriculture

[2:40:38] conservation open space

[2:40:38] requirement so we might have

[2:40:39] other areas and again we're

[2:40:39] still in planning stages but we

[2:40:39] might have other areas that have

[2:40:40] livestock you know horses or

[2:40:40] cattle or goats and maybe a

[2:40:40] little bit farther awaifrom

[2:40:41] community have but still allow

[2:40:41] those uses.

[2:40:42] >> cute little pig maybe.

[2:40:42] >> yeah.

[2:40:42] [Laughter]

[2:40:43] >> my daughter had any say in

[2:40:43] it, probably.

[2:40:43] >> and I guess my last question

[2:40:44] is what phase will the farm go

[2:40:44] in to an active farm.

[2:40:44] >> heeds the first phase.

[2:40:45] >> that's important.

[2:40:45] Thanks for mentioning that.

[2:40:45] Our commitment is that

[2:40:46] implementation is up front.

[2:40:46] So keep in mind the property is

[2:40:47] being farmed today and we wanted

[2:40:47] not only some of the areas that

[2:40:47] are later development that they

[2:40:48] continue to be farmed but the

[2:40:48] actual working farm be

[2:40:49] implemented up front ask

[2:40:49] obviously there is phasing

[2:40:49] involved in that.

[2:40:50] I mean we couldn't move in day 1

[2:40:50] and have the sort of intensies

[2:40:51] over the entire 20 acres that

[2:40:51] you will have as homes come in.

[2:40:52] But the implementation of that

[2:40:52] farm at some scale day 1 is a

[2:40:52] commitment of ours.

[2:40:53] >> okay.

[2:40:53] And I guess my last comment,

[2:40:53] thank you for the presentation.

[2:40:54] It was very informative.

[2:40:54] My first time seeing something

[2:40:54] like this I think that it

[2:40:55] probably would be a great

[2:40:55] success is and that's why I

[2:40:56] second the motion.

[2:40:56] >> thank you.

[2:40:56] >> so thank you.

[2:40:57] >> chair: thank you,

[2:40:57] commissioner.

[2:40:57] commissioner prizzia.

[2:40:58] >> yeah, to both commissioner

[2:40:58] alford and I have both expressed

[2:40:58] our concerns.

[2:40:59] I think and you'll have to

[2:40:59] forgive me.

[2:40:59] I'm not trying to be a stick in

[2:40:59] the mud about this.

[2:41:00] As you know I should be the most

[2:41:00] excited about here being the

[2:41:00] local food maven we're doing a

[2:41:01] development that has ag at its

[2:41:01] core.

[2:41:01] But yun we just had to deal with

[2:41:02] a pd that had a golf course as

[2:41:02] an amenity and you know 50 years

[2:41:02] ago everybody thought golf

[2:41:03] courses in the middle of

[2:41:03] developments were going to be

[2:41:04] the most amazing thing and

[2:41:04] everyone was going to want to

[2:41:04] live on a golf course and it

[2:41:05] gave them free open space and

[2:41:05] now that pd is trying to split

[2:41:06] off the golf course and wanted

[2:41:06] to sell it and we ended up

[2:41:06] buying it as a park because we

[2:41:07] had this situation.

[2:41:07] I want to make sure that we're

[2:41:08] not doing the same thing with

[2:41:08] this development that in 50

[2:41:08] years we're not going to have

[2:41:09] people standing up trying to

[2:41:09] sell that part of their pd and

[2:41:10] rezone it and turn it into

[2:41:10] something else so they can.

[2:41:10] >> or meadow brook.

[2:41:11] >> I've seen those happen and

[2:41:11] where they create these amenity

[2:41:12] based developments and then it's

[2:41:12] not cool anymore and then they

[2:41:12] want to change it.

[2:41:13] >> so MR. Chair, I think both

[2:41:13] the applicant and staff have

[2:41:13] heard at least that comment

[2:41:13] pretty clearly I think we have

[2:41:14] some thoughts about how we might

[2:41:14] deal with that, I don't think

[2:41:14] they're ready for production at

[2:41:15] transmittal and sort of

[2:41:15] wordsmithing that right now MAY

[2:41:15] not be great.

[2:41:16] I think the thought that we have

[2:41:16] is that we transmit it if the

[2:41:16] board wants to transmit it, that

[2:41:16] we transmit it as is.

[2:41:17] But with the some language in

[2:41:17] the motion that gets at when we

[2:41:17] come back for adoption having

[2:41:18] some better handle on that

[2:41:18] working farm component like

[2:41:18] maybe it has to be under common

[2:41:18] ownership or you know whatever

[2:41:19] that language is, but something

[2:41:19] that addresses the comments

[2:41:19] that --

[2:41:19] >> do you mind adding that to

[2:41:20] the motion, marihelen?

[2:41:20] >> certainly.

[2:41:20] Certainly.

[2:41:20] >> the applicant and the, and

[2:41:21] staff are okay?

[2:41:21] So essentially that by adoption,

[2:41:21] which would also be the same

[2:41:21] time as the pd, that the

[2:41:22] applicant and staff will work on

[2:41:22] something to provide protection

[2:41:22] of the long-term management of

[2:41:23] the farm.

[2:41:23] Okay.

[2:41:24] You good with that?

[2:41:25] >> that's agreeable.

[2:41:26] >> MAY I make a comment about

[2:41:27] that though because you're

[2:41:30] talking 30 to 50 years from now

[2:41:31] where farmer MAY not be possible

[2:41:32] here.

[2:41:33] -- farming MAY not be possible

[2:41:34] here because of the climate.

[2:41:36] >> I think -- I got faith in

[2:41:36] austin roberts.

[2:41:37] I think he will be able to do

[2:41:37] it.

[2:41:39] And he looks young enough that

[2:41:40] he will still be alive.

[2:41:42] >> that's not my point.

[2:41:44] My point is that if we need to

[2:41:45] change in 30 years, the people

[2:41:47] who are here now have to change

[2:41:51] the way it is, you know, it is

[2:41:54] implemented, then it MAY not

[2:41:56] even be to have it as farming.

[2:41:58] You know, anymore.

[2:41:58] >> yes, ma'am, at that time we

[2:42:00] could come back to the board at

[2:42:01] that time obviously to ask.

[2:42:03] >> of course 30 years from now.

[2:42:05] >> and I think, I think the key

[2:42:07] piece in those examples you had

[2:42:09] was private ownership of a

[2:42:11] common amenity and I think

[2:42:14] that's pretty easy for us to

[2:42:16] mitigate through cdd and

[2:42:16] ownership.

[2:42:18] I think that's the piece of --

[2:42:19] on those practices.

[2:42:20] >> thank you, austin.

[2:42:23] Okay, so we've got motion and a

[2:42:23] second.

[2:42:25] We've heard from staff, we've

[2:42:27] heard from the applicant, it is

[2:42:29] time for our amazing citizens

[2:42:31] that are here to come forward.

[2:42:32] We'd like to hear from you all,

[2:42:33] then we will come back to the

[2:42:35] board we'll have further

[2:42:36] deliberations, and then we'll

[2:42:38] see where this goes.

[2:42:40] If you will introduce yourself,

[2:42:41] we've got a light system.

[2:42:45] Green means go, yellow means 30

[2:42:45] seconds,.

[2:42:47] >> chair, commissioners I'm

[2:42:48] grinning because I don't think I

[2:42:50] have ever been in the position

[2:42:52] that I am in now, the position

[2:42:57] I'm in now is I'm going to say a

[2:42:59] little tiny no in a whole course

[2:43:02] of yeses and that's kind of fun

[2:43:05] and I'm glad to be here.

[2:43:09] Jay rosen beck, chair of epac.

[2:43:10] Epac recommends the

[2:43:12] comprehensive plan amendment not

[2:43:15] be approved as currently

[2:43:15] written.

[2:43:18] Concerns include the increase in

[2:43:19] allowable units, location

[2:43:21] outside the urban cluster, water

[2:43:22] quality impact on groundwater

[2:43:26] and springs, location and

[2:43:29] insensitive karst, lack of exact

[2:43:32] metrics for tdr, and something

[2:43:34] we haven't heard before,

[2:43:37] potential impact on gopher

[2:43:37] tortoises.

[2:43:40] That was a vote of 5-3 with two

[2:43:42] members absent.

[2:43:42] Thank you.

[2:43:43] >> thank you.

[2:43:44] >> chair: we appreciate you and

[2:43:45] all the work you do for this

[2:43:45] county.

[2:43:47] Thank you for your comments.

[2:43:59] Next speaker, please.

[2:44:03] >> I'm back, sam.

[2:44:04] >> chair: you're recognized.

[2:44:04] >> thank you.

[2:44:05] I don't know why we keep calling

[2:44:06] this a farm.

[2:44:08] I genuinely have no idea.

[2:44:10] If you talk to a farmer, from

[2:44:12] this area or from the peripheral

[2:44:14] counties they will tell you the

[2:44:15] numbers need to be inversed.

[2:44:17] We are losing the forest for the

[2:44:19] trees no pun intended.

[2:44:23] Why aren't we talking about the

[2:44:23] homes.

[2:44:25] All of the roads are single

[2:44:27] lane, parker, 24th, archer,

[2:44:28] whatever you want it's all

[2:44:28] single lane.

[2:44:29] What are we doing about that?

[2:44:31] A farm?

[2:44:32] This is a trojan horse and I'm

[2:44:34] sorry, I feel very emotional

[2:44:35] about this I don't want to take

[2:44:37] away from my credibility to talk

[2:44:40] about it I am a breekeeper I do

[2:44:42] have a degree of zoology from

[2:44:43] university of florida and I grew

[2:44:45] up across the street from this

[2:44:46] proposed development.

[2:44:47] I cannot tell you I knew about

[2:44:49] this issue before today.

[2:44:50] You know, vice chair pris you

[2:44:51] you mentioned there's not a

[2:44:54] whole lot of audience here as a

[2:44:54] potential indicator that there

[2:44:56] is not a lot of disagreement.

[2:44:58] it's a luxury to be here.

[2:44:59] There are not a lot of people

[2:45:01] who can take this time no matter

[2:45:02] what to come here and voice

[2:45:04] their opinion, particularly from

[2:45:06] the 45 minutes away that this

[2:45:07] site is proposed.

[2:45:08] Commissioner alford you

[2:45:09] mentioned your kids talk about

[2:45:10] the berries I love that.

[2:45:11] I worked at a summer camp owned

[2:45:13] by the school board here for

[2:45:14] seven summers and there actually

[2:45:16] are a few mulberry bushes

[2:45:17] growing out there.

[2:45:19] It's amazing.

[2:45:22] The antithesis of a neighborhood

[2:45:24] that has berries in it is

[2:45:26] putting another 1% of the entire

[2:45:28] amount of homes in this county

[2:45:30] in an area that comprises less

[2:45:32] than 1,000th of the land in it.

[2:45:34] You take away so many more

[2:45:35] berries than you will have no

[2:45:38] matter how dense you try to say

[2:45:38] it.

[2:45:39] 20 acres, 40 acres, it all chops

[2:45:41] up to about 300 square feet per

[2:45:42] household of farmland.

[2:45:44] That is a bedroom.

[2:45:45] That is not a farm.

[2:45:47] This is a trojan horse, and

[2:45:48] there are not very many people

[2:45:49] behind me who are going to be

[2:45:51] here to pay attention to this in

[2:45:52] 40 years.

[2:45:53] I am sorry there are only three

[2:45:55] of us in this room in our

[2:45:55] 20s.

[2:45:56] So I have to think about

[2:45:57] tomorrow.

[2:45:58] This is an unpopular opinion,

[2:46:00] and I can see -- I concede

[2:46:00] that.

[2:46:02] But at the same time, park and

[2:46:03] ride, this is not the population

[2:46:06] that's going to be utilizing

[2:46:06] those services.

[2:46:10] In college I rode the 150rts

[2:46:10] route from the hale village

[2:46:11] center to the university of

[2:46:11] florida.

[2:46:13] Nobody's on the that bus.

[2:46:14] They discontinued the service.

[2:46:16] This isn't a viable transport

[2:46:17] idea, we don't have the

[2:46:18] infrastructure yet.

[2:46:20] I like that this company

[2:46:22] continues to mention the good

[2:46:24] that it will do to the

[2:46:24] community.

[2:46:25] Y like the public service

[2:46:27] offsets that they're sucking.

[2:46:29] And that's -- suggesting, and

[2:46:29] that's all good.

[2:46:30] The bones aren't there yet.

[2:46:31] We just got the golf course.

[2:46:34] We just got the ifas land.

[2:46:35] Ifas will have trails and they

[2:46:36] will do extension and they will

[2:46:40] do teaching in that 500-acre

[2:46:40] forest.

[2:46:41] I taught for ifas for three

[2:46:43] years I promise you that will

[2:46:43] happen what they will not do is

[2:46:45] go to a neglected 20-acre

[2:46:47] forest, I'm sorry, 20-acre farm

[2:46:48] and say this is how farming is.

[2:46:49] Because it's not.

[2:46:52] You'll get one zucchini per

[2:46:56] household if a -- if you have a

[2:46:58] bumper crop on a 20-acre farm

[2:46:59] with 27 houses on it.

[2:47:00] I have pages of notes that I

[2:47:01] took during the 97 minutes that

[2:47:03] the other people got to talk

[2:47:04] about it.

[2:47:06] But the reality is I just, I

[2:47:07] don't see how this is

[2:47:08] sustainable for this county

[2:47:09] right now.

[2:47:10] We don't have the infrastructure

[2:47:11] in place for it, and I really

[2:47:12] don't want to put the cart

[2:47:13] before the horse bt I had to say

[2:47:14] something.

[2:47:15] >> chair: thank you, sam.

[2:47:22] All right next speaker.

[2:47:26] Anybody else?

[2:47:26] Okay.

[2:47:27] we'll go ahead and close public

[2:47:27] comment.

[2:47:29] Bring it back to the board.

[2:47:30] Commissioner wheeler, and then

[2:47:31] commissioner prizzia.

[2:47:33] >> very quickly.

[2:47:36] I understand the concerns a lot

[2:47:39] of us feel had those concerns.

[2:47:41] I've been working recently with

[2:47:42] three families who have large

[2:47:43] pieces of land.

[2:47:45] They're elderly people trying to

[2:47:46] decide what to diewbt

[2:47:48] -- what to

[2:47:48] do about that land to be

[2:47:51] responsible to their families.

[2:47:52] And to make sure that it gets

[2:47:55] into the right easement or the

[2:48:00] right conservation or the right

[2:48:01] use for that plan.

[2:48:02] 4,000 acres is a lot of land to

[2:48:03] try to decide what to do with.

[2:48:05] And so I feel like then working

[2:48:07] with the lee brothers and

[2:48:08] watching them struggle over

[2:48:09] laith years of trying to figure

[2:48:10] out had you -- eight years of

[2:48:11] trying to figure out what to do

[2:48:14] with take, how to take

[2:48:15] responsibility for this land not

[2:48:17] only for the community but for

[2:48:19] their own families as well, you

[2:48:20] know, a large piece of property

[2:48:22] like this could easily be sold

[2:48:24] to someone who would put an ai

[2:48:25] center there.

[2:48:26] This is exactly the kind of land

[2:48:28] those places are looking for,

[2:48:29] and some of these families are

[2:48:32] so desperate to get that

[2:48:34] property moved along that they

[2:48:37] would take the first best offer

[2:48:39] without doing the investigation,

[2:48:40] without doing the work that the

[2:48:43] lee brothers have done, so I

[2:48:46] just feel like that though I am

[2:48:49] also a water conservationist, I

[2:48:52] feel like that it's inevitable

[2:48:53] that these big properties are

[2:48:56] going to be sold to somebody,

[2:48:59] and so to be able to watch it be

[2:49:00] sold to who we've got now, this

[2:49:04] team of people who are trying to

[2:49:07] coordinate to the best possible

[2:49:08] creative resolution, this is why

[2:49:09] I'm supporting it.

[2:49:10] At this point.

[2:49:11] Thank you.

[2:49:12] >> chair: thank you,

[2:49:12] commissioner.

[2:49:14] Commissioner prizzia and then

[2:49:14] commissioner alford.

[2:49:17] And then I'll make the

[2:49:18] comments.

[2:49:19] >> first I think you might want

[2:49:22] to run for office some day,

[2:49:22] sir.

[2:49:25] But I follow in your uncle's

[2:49:26] foot steps but I guess what I

[2:49:29] want to say is I hear you loud

[2:49:31] you a little bit because I run a

[2:49:33] small farm on campus and we're

[2:49:35] only a quarter acre and we grow

[2:49:37] 15,000 pounds of food a year.

[2:49:38] We grow lots of food in a very

[2:49:40] small space and we feed a lot of

[2:49:41] people.

[2:49:42] And so you know it's possible

[2:49:44] with sustainable integrated

[2:49:45] agriculture to grow a lot of

[2:49:48] food in a small space.

[2:49:49] And so I don't know that it's

[2:49:52] just going to be one zucchini a

[2:49:53] household but I do hear you that

[2:49:55] at this is a farm that the's a

[2:49:56] very small -- this is a farm

[2:49:58] that is a very small piece of a

[2:49:59] residential and commercial

[2:49:59] development.

[2:50:01] And that that's being kind of

[2:50:03] focused on a lot when really

[2:50:04] this is about the bigger picture

[2:50:06] of developing a neighborhood and

[2:50:08] a community and a space that

[2:50:09] traditionally never had one and

[2:50:10] waserary rural but you know

[2:50:13] we're in a private property

[2:50:14] state in a private property

[2:50:17] country and people can develop

[2:50:18] their property, and as

[2:50:20] commissioners, we get the

[2:50:22] unenviable job of making the

[2:50:25] call about how that gets done

[2:50:27] and trying our very best to

[2:50:30] protect the natural resources,

[2:50:32] the public tax dollars, with

[2:50:35] efficient delivery of services

[2:50:37] to all of those residents that

[2:50:40] private entities decide to

[2:50:40] develop.

[2:50:42] And from my perspective I think

[2:50:43] we've done the very best that we

[2:50:45] can do to protect the natural

[2:50:47] resources that are out there, to

[2:50:48] get funding to be able to buy

[2:50:50] more of those beautiful wild

[2:50:54] spaces that aren't being used

[2:50:56] for agriculture, to actually

[2:51:00] protect more land in our county

[2:51:01] from development and at the same

[2:51:03] time allowing for a much more

[2:51:04] compact, much more efficient

[2:51:06] development of space for the

[2:51:08] delivery of services to what

[2:51:10] will ultimately be a more

[2:51:12] urbanized area and while it is

[2:51:14] technically outside our urban

[2:51:16] cluster, it is right on the edge

[2:51:18] and I know that this you know we

[2:51:19] are very cognizant of the fact

[2:51:20] that we don't want this to be a

[2:51:22] leap frog situation.

[2:51:24] We've done the analysis to look

[2:51:26] at all the other parcels around

[2:51:27] it to make sure thus

[2:51:28] this can't

[2:51:30] be a hop hop hop with the

[2:51:31] agriculture enclaves built with

[2:51:32] a lot ofort or -- bill, with a

[2:51:35] lot of other pieces, I can staff

[2:51:36] have worked hard to make sure

[2:51:37] this is a unique circumstance in

[2:51:40] a unique area, and you know I

[2:51:43] didn't want to like it either.

[2:51:44] To be totally honest with you.

[2:51:47] You know, I really didn't.

[2:51:49] And I still feel like it's one

[2:51:51] of the hardest votes that I've

[2:51:53] ever had to make to vote for

[2:51:55] 2700 homes on what used to be

[2:51:57] conservation land and farmland.

[2:51:59] But I do think that it, if it's

[2:52:00] going to be developed, this is

[2:52:02] the best way it can possibly be

[2:52:03] developed.

[2:52:03] And I just wanted to share that

[2:52:05] with you since you took the time

[2:52:07] to come up here and speak to

[2:52:07] us.

[2:52:08] Thank you.

[2:52:10] And to epac we appreciate your

[2:52:11] comments and my comments are

[2:52:14] also to epac, we appreciate your

[2:52:16] input and we agree with you in a

[2:52:18] lot of ways but I think the

[2:52:19] things that staff have put in

[2:52:21] place around irrigation

[2:52:22] protections, around fertilizer

[2:52:23] protections, around ground

[2:52:24] penetrating radar, that will

[2:52:26] help us in looking to see if

[2:52:28] there are any geological

[2:52:30] resources that we need to

[2:52:31] protect.

[2:52:32] I think most of the developer --

[2:52:35] both the developer and the staff

[2:52:37] have done a really good job to

[2:52:37] build something that we can all

[2:52:38] be proud of.

[2:52:39] >> chair: thank you,

[2:52:39] commissioner.

[2:52:41] Commissioner alford.

[2:52:42] >> yeah, you know, I started

[2:52:43] getting involved with the county

[2:52:46] by being the chair of epac, and

[2:52:50] so I, I I understand where epac

[2:52:50] comes from.

[2:52:51] I would like to invite the

[2:52:53] developer to meet with epac.

[2:52:54] Epac is our environmental

[2:52:59] protection advisory board, and

[2:53:01] they, they are some of the most,

[2:53:04] some of the most talented

[2:53:05] environmental folks in our

[2:53:06] county, and I think that it

[2:53:08] would be great to meet with them

[2:53:11] and address their concerns

[2:53:11] directly.

[2:53:13] Because I think that would be, I

[2:53:19] would love to be magnificence

[2:53:20] even be there for the -- maybe

[2:53:23] even be there for the meeting

[2:53:28] and then the trojan horse idea.

[2:53:29] I added it up.

[2:53:32] In my backyard I have 300 square

[2:53:34] feet of garden, and I have more

[2:53:37] than I can eat and share and

[2:53:38] whatever put away in jars.

[2:53:40] But I also have a lot of fruit

[2:53:42] trees all over my property.

[2:53:44] And other things that have --

[2:53:46] you know, integrated that are

[2:53:49] outside of what I consider, you

[2:53:50] know, the part that I farm, so

[2:53:54] to speak, and that's what I'm

[2:53:54] hoping that this development

[2:54:01] will also have is that you know

[2:54:02] integrated agricultural thought

[2:54:04] process throughout the whole

[2:54:05] development so I wanted to say

[2:54:06] that.

[2:54:08] And then there is one more

[2:54:08] thing.

[2:54:09] Nope.

[2:54:11] I think that's all I need to say

[2:54:13] right now but again, appreciate

[2:54:15] your comments.

[2:54:16] Understand exactly where you're

[2:54:17] coming from because that's where

[2:54:20] I started.

[2:54:20] So.

[2:54:21] >> chair: thank you,

[2:54:22] commissioner.

[2:54:23] So like mary alford said about

[2:54:25] victor dover she's known you her

[2:54:27] whole life.

[2:54:28] >> not mi whole life.

[2:54:29] >> you didn't say that.

[2:54:30] >> no, no, no, for a long time.

[2:54:32] >> okay, for a long, long time.

[2:54:32] >> yeah.

[2:54:34] >> chair: well I --

[2:54:35] >> for my whole professional

[2:54:35] life.

[2:54:37] >> well I have known sam

[2:54:38] literally his whole life.

[2:54:41] Not my whole life and so he is

[2:54:43] in the cornell family we teach

[2:54:44] people to speak their mind, and

[2:54:47] let's have the debate and so sam

[2:54:48] thanks for being here.

[2:54:49] Appreciate your comments.

[2:54:53] Let me tell you when I got

[2:54:55] comments from many folks that

[2:54:58] were not in favor of this, I

[2:54:59] really respected those

[2:54:59] comments.

[2:55:01] You know, and some of those

[2:55:03] folks are some of my largest

[2:55:06] supporters like mary said, and

[2:55:09] then this weekend I heard from

[2:55:11] well over 50 to 75 other folks

[2:55:13] many of those folks I know and

[2:55:16] they are in largely in support

[2:55:17] of this project one of them is

[2:55:20] sam your neighbor roger and --

[2:55:22] christian so they -- they sent

[2:55:25] in an email and so it was really

[2:55:25] interesting because there were

[2:55:27] so many folks that are so close

[2:55:29] to this project that are in

[2:55:31] favor of it which really to your

[2:55:35] point, commissioner, is a

[2:55:37] testament to how austin and his

[2:55:39] team have brought this forward

[2:55:39] to us.

[2:55:41] You know, I didn't know austin

[2:55:43] before this but what I have

[2:55:45] learned about him is that he is

[2:55:47] a land owner, he is a farmer.

[2:55:48] More importantly though he is a

[2:55:51] person in our community that

[2:55:53] wants to have and build

[2:55:55] something that he's proud of,

[2:55:57] and we don't get a lot of

[2:55:57] developers that stand up here

[2:55:59] and spend that amount of time

[2:56:01] and energy and resources to

[2:56:04] really engage a community with.

[2:56:06] Here is my idea wut

[2:56:08] but are

[2:56:08] there other ones out there.

[2:56:10] And he has worked with what I

[2:56:11] think is the best staff in the

[2:56:12] state and they are tough.

[2:56:13] They say if you want to do

[2:56:15] something new, it's going to

[2:56:17] have to kind of well it's going

[2:56:18] to have to be consistent with

[2:56:20] our plan.

[2:56:21] and so let me tell you what I

[2:56:24] like about it.

[2:56:26] Policy 8.6.6.9 integration with

[2:56:27] conservation lands and research

[2:56:29] assets we have an opportunity

[2:56:30] with the premiere research

[2:56:32] institution of the state and we

[2:56:34] will be pushing them to put the

[2:56:37] strategic ecosystems into some

[2:56:38] conservation but we have an

[2:56:40] opportunity to work with a

[2:56:42] flagship university, the best in

[2:56:43] the tontry in my opinion and

[2:56:45] that's -- country in my opinion

[2:56:46] and that's part of our policy

[2:56:47] that we will be transmitting.

[2:56:49] Working farm as a community

[2:56:51] anchor I had never seen that did

[2:56:56] have a chance to go down and see

[2:56:56] new field.

[2:56:59] I love the concept.

[2:57:01] Hopefully we can get some of the

[2:57:02] things that you are concerned

[2:57:04] about as our farmer on the

[2:57:06] commission and I know the land

[2:57:07] owner is interested in doing

[2:57:08] that as well.

[2:57:10] I love that that policy is a

[2:57:11] community anchor.

[2:57:12] Moabilityd.

[2:57:14] We are literally -- mobility.

[2:57:14] We are literally creating a

[2:57:17] mobility district, completely

[2:57:18] comprehensive plan and the

[2:57:21] growth is going to fund itself.

[2:57:22] We're not asking our existing

[2:57:25] taxpayers to fund the mobility

[2:57:26] plan, the developer and the

[2:57:30] neighborhood is going to fund

[2:57:30] it.

[2:57:31] 8.6.6.13, transfer of

[2:57:32] development rights and

[2:57:36] affordability.

[2:57:37] Favor of and asking developers

[2:57:39] to bring affordable housing they

[2:57:41] are voluntarily doing it.

[2:57:43] I heard tonight that it's going

[2:57:45] to be consistent with the

[2:57:46] phasing of the development.

[2:57:48] I can't wait to read that policy

[2:57:49] in the pd.

[2:57:50] I think that's going to be

[2:57:51] great.

[2:57:53] But we are confining --

[2:57:56] combining the density, getting

[2:57:58] 4,000 acres well 3,000 acres

[2:58:00] into conservation or management

[2:58:02] through ifas, we're going to

[2:58:05] have conservation in the

[2:58:08] 997 acres, and through the tdr

[2:58:09] that the developer and staff

[2:58:10] came up with, we're going to be

[2:58:13] able to acquire an additional

[2:58:16] 5,000 acres and put that into

[2:58:16] conservation.

[2:58:17] Heability happened since I have

[2:58:18] been -- hasn't happened since I

[2:58:19] have been on the board and I

[2:58:20] don't know if it's happened

[2:58:23] previous to me, very often.

[2:58:24] I see one of our folks that

[2:58:29] helped us write the plan three

[2:58:30] decades ago so I guess I'll ask

[2:58:31] him after this hearing soei

[2:58:33] really love that.

[2:58:34] To me that's staff and the

[2:58:35] developer working on hey you

[2:58:37] want to do something outside the

[2:58:37] urban cluster?

[2:58:39] It's got to be pretty special

[2:58:41] and I really appreciate staff's

[2:58:41] work and the developer for

[2:58:44] working with our staff.

[2:58:47] The land disturbance piece, that

[2:58:48] policy, 8.6.6.14 we have talked

[2:58:49] to developers about don't just

[2:58:50] clear cut everything it's

[2:58:55] actually in the policy.

[2:58:58] The 8.6.6.16 policy water

[2:58:59] conservation and lawn water use

[2:59:00] landscaping again you heard

[2:59:05] stacy say this is really a

[2:59:05] model -- haven't had a developer

[2:59:07] want to work with us on that

[2:59:10] level, and I think you know they

[2:59:16] worked with us in adopting the

[2:59:17] study so that's something

[2:59:18] they're following through on.

[2:59:18] Is it perfect?

[2:59:19] No.

[2:59:19] i think we have a real

[2:59:21] opportunity to make it perfect

[2:59:22] at the pd.

[2:59:26] And I know that with MR. Dover,

[2:59:28] with the army of experts that

[2:59:32] have been involved in this

[2:59:32] process for the last year with

[2:59:34] the community's input and with

[2:59:35] what I think is the best staff

[2:59:37] in the state, I think we're

[2:59:38] going to have a really special

[2:59:41] thing to look at in a couple of

[2:59:42] months with the pd.

[2:59:44] So I am in favor of the motion.

[2:59:45] Really appreciate all the work

[2:59:47] that our staff has put into it

[2:59:48] and all the work that the

[2:59:50] community has put into it.

[2:59:51] And with that, is there any

[2:59:52] further discussion before we

[2:59:54] take a vote?

[2:59:54] Okay.

[2:59:56] All those in favor of the motion

[2:59:59] on the floor, say aye.

[3:00:00] Anyone opposed?

[3:00:01] All right that motion is

[3:00:03] unanimous.

[3:00:03] So congratulations.

[3:00:06] We'll see you for the next four

[3:00:07] years and certainly in the next

[3:00:09] couple of months.

[3:00:10] [Laughter]

[3:00:10] Okay?

[3:00:11] All right.

[3:00:12] >> we'll see him for longer than

[3:00:12] that.

[3:00:14] >> yeah, yeah, well I mean, not

[3:00:16] building a house until 2029 is

[3:00:17] what I saw so there is going to

[3:00:21] be lot more of these meetings

[3:00:22] and I think yeah.

[3:00:23] >> that concludes our meeting

[3:00:24] because we've already had our

[3:00:25] commission comment.

[3:00:25] Chuck, did you have something

[3:00:28] you want to add?

[3:00:28] >> yeah.

[3:00:31] Something different though.

[3:00:32] Totally.

[3:00:34] Over the weekend, I was yeah, i

[3:00:35] was going through my e-mails, I

[3:00:37] was playing catch-up I'll be

[3:00:40] honest with you, and I ran

[3:00:44] across a whistleblower in

[3:00:46] reference to it says

[3:00:48] administrative mismanagement and

[3:00:50] a resume fraud.

[3:00:52] Confidential whistleblower

[3:00:53] disclosure and it gives the

[3:00:55] state statute, and it says the

[3:00:58] office of county clerk of the

[3:01:00] court comptroller and he is

[3:01:02] asking for an audit of the

[3:01:05] alachua county board of county

[3:01:07] commissioners county managers

[3:01:10] office, the formal report of

[3:01:12] administrative mismanagement

[3:01:14] recruitment policy violation,

[3:01:17] and a material resume fraud

[3:01:20] within alachua county human

[3:01:20] resources.

[3:01:21] So I don't know if this is

[3:01:22] true.

[3:01:23] I want to know what's going on

[3:01:24] here.

[3:01:27] I thought with whistleblower, I

[3:01:27] want to give it to staff but I

[3:01:28] want to know what's going on if

[3:01:31] we have whistleblower stuff, I

[3:01:32] mean, if I hadn't caught this,

[3:01:34] this would've been dead.

[3:01:35] I don't think anybody else --

[3:01:37] >> did come on email?

[3:01:38] >> it was in email.

[3:01:40] It was in our e-mails, yes,

[3:01:40] ma'am.

[3:01:43] >> I saw it.

[3:01:45] >> I forwarded it to.

[3:01:46] >> forwarded it to the

[3:01:47] attorney.

[3:01:47] >> yeah.

[3:01:48] >> but I haven't heard anything

[3:01:49] though.

[3:01:50] I mean so that's why I'm

[3:01:52] bringing it and I will give it

[3:01:52] to the clerk.

[3:01:56] >> hand it to him.

[3:01:57] >> yeah, because I just want to

[3:02:00] know I mean if we're having

[3:02:03] whistleblowers tell us something

[3:02:04] policies, I think it's important

[3:02:07] that we know not that I have to

[3:02:08] keep constantly looking,

[3:02:09] looking, looking for stuff.

[3:02:10] That is not what I got elected

[3:02:12] to do, but I am going to look at

[3:02:15] my e-mails that when folks send

[3:02:18] them, so that's why that was

[3:02:19] important to me and I just want

[3:02:20] to bring that to the attention

[3:02:21] of you all.

[3:02:21] >> thank you, commissioner.

[3:02:22] Anything else?

[3:02:22] 92 that's it.

[3:02:23] >> that's it.

[3:02:23] >> all right.

[3:02:25] You all, we are adjourned.

Regular Meeting @ 5 p.m.

Agenda

Transcript