[0:23] Good morning and welcome to the

[0:24] SEPTEMBER meeting of the local

[0:25] planning agency for Pinellas

[0:27] County, Florida. Today's public

[0:28] hearing by the local planning

[0:31] agency, or lpa, is being held

[0:33] to review proposed amendment. A

[0:35] proposed amendment to the

[0:36] Pinellas County Future Land Use

[0:38] Map and a proposed development

[0:39] agreement. The local planning

[0:41] agency is an independent

[0:42] advisory board charged with

[0:44] reviewing and making

[0:45] recommendation to the Pinellas

[0:46] County Board of County

[0:47] Commissioners on cases to be

[0:49] heard today. The Board of

[0:53] County Commissioners. Will make

[0:55] the final decision on each item

[0:56] at a separate public hearing

[0:58] currently scheduled to be held

[1:01] on OCTOBER the 27th, 2026 at 6

[1:02] P.M. The Board of County

[1:04] Commissioners will be. Meeting

[1:06] will be held at 333 Chestnut

[1:08] Street in the Palm Room. The

[1:10] procedure for today will be as

[1:11] follows. First, staff will make

[1:13] a brief presentation not to

[1:15] exceed 20 minutes. We'll then

[1:16] hear from the applicant who

[1:17] will present their case again,

[1:20] not to exceed 20 minutes. We'll

[1:21] then hear from proponents who

[1:22] will be given three minutes

[1:24] each, unless representing a

[1:25] group of five or more, in which

[1:27] case they will be given ten

[1:29] minutes. Non-speakers must be

[1:31] present and waive their time to

[1:33] get the ten minutes. We'll then

[1:34] hear from opponents who

[1:36] likewise will be given three

[1:38] minutes each, unless

[1:39] representing a group of five or

[1:41] more, in which case they will

[1:43] also be given ten minutes.

[1:45] Again, Non-speakers must be

[1:46] present and waive their time to

[1:49] get the ten minutes. We'll then

[1:51] hear from the applicant, who

[1:53] will be given the opportunity

[1:55] to close, answer questions or

[1:56] respond to any concerns raised

[1:58] by the opponents or proponents

[1:59] for a period of time, not to

[2:02] exceed five minutes before your

[2:03] presentation, please give your

[2:05] name and address for the record.

[2:07] All testimony needs to be under

[2:09] oath, so if you have not been

[2:10] sworn in already and you plan

[2:12] to testify, please rise now and

[2:14] be sworn.

[2:15] >> Do you swear or affirm that

[2:18] the testimony is the truth, the

[2:19] whole truth, and nothing but

[2:21] the truth? Yes. Thank you very

[2:22] much.

[2:23] >> Also, please fill out the

[2:25] slip on the table and present

[2:26] it to the clerk before you

[2:28] speak. There will not be

[2:29] continuing rebuttal, so please

[2:31] try to present all information

[2:32] while you are here at the

[2:35] podium. If you plan to provide

[2:36] letters, written comments,

[2:38] studies or other documents in

[2:40] response to the Lpa's findings

[2:41] and recommendations, those must

[2:43] be received by the zoning

[2:44] section. Seven days prior to

[2:45] the Board of County

[2:46] Commissioners meeting, in order

[2:48] to be included in the record

[2:49] that will be transmitted to the

[2:51] Board of County Commissioners.

[2:52] So with that, we'll move into

[3:00] the agenda. And at this time

[3:01] we'll hear the quasi judicial

[3:02] statement.

[3:03] >> Thank you. Good morning,

[3:05] Assistant County Attorney Kirby

[3:06] Crider. The matters heard by

[3:08] the local planning agency are

[3:09] quasi judicial in nature.

[3:11] Please note that only competent,

[3:12] substantial, fact based

[3:14] testimony or evidence MAY be

[3:15] considered by the local

[3:16] planning agency deciding the

[3:18] matters before it. Pure

[3:19] speculation or opinion not

[3:22] based on competent. Excuse me.

[3:24] Pure speculation or opinion not

[3:25] based on competent facts.

[3:26] Supported evidence cannot be

[3:28] considered by the board. Lay

[3:29] testimony with fact based

[3:31] support, including but not

[3:33] limited to meeting minutes,

[3:34] surveys, engineering reports,

[3:36] etc. MAY be considered

[3:37] competent. Substantial evidence.

[3:38] Thank you.

[3:39] >> Thank you, Counsel Crider.

[3:40] Thank you. We'll now move to

[3:42] item three. Approval of the

[3:44] minutes for the AUGUST 12th,

[3:46] 2026 lpa hearing. Do I have any

[3:48] comments on the minutes before

[3:49] I entertain a motion? All right.

[3:50] Seeing none, I'll entertain a

[3:52] motion on the minutes. So moved.

[3:54] Motion by Everett. Second.

[3:55] Second by Cataldo. All in favor,

[3:58] say aye. Aye. Opposed like sign.

[4:00] The motion passes unanimously.

[4:05] That brings us to item four. A

[4:09] 1flu26-02. Staff. This is a

[4:12] companion case with dva 26-02.

[4:14] >> Yes, they're companion cases

[4:15] so they will be presented

[4:17] together. Heard together but

[4:18] separate votes.

[4:19] >> Okay. And will you need time

[4:21] for both cases or just time for

[4:22] one presentation.

[4:23] >> Just one presentation.

[4:24] >> All right. And is the

[4:25] applicant acceptable with that

[4:27] arrangement. And I'm getting a

[4:29] yes. Please proceed when you're

[4:29] ready.

[4:31] >> Thank you, MADAM Chair.

[4:32] Ladies and gentlemen, a local

[4:33] planning agency. I'm Scott

[4:34] Swearingen, I'm the county's

[4:35] long range planning manager.

[4:37] It's a pleasure to be here

[4:38] before you again this morning,

[4:39] and I appreciate your time. So

[4:41] I'll try to make this brief

[4:42] before you. The presentation.

[4:43] Two cases. It's a future land

[4:47] use map amendment. That's fl

[4:49] 2602 followed by a development

[4:53] agreement dva 2602. And I would

[4:54] note and Michael, please

[4:55] correct me if I'm wrong, the

[4:57] development agreement. These

[4:59] are separate, separate voting

[5:00] items. But the development

[5:02] agreement would not be able to

[5:03] take effect unless the future

[5:06] Land Use Map amendment were

[5:06] approved.

[5:07] >> That's correct. Yes.

[5:11] >> Thank you. The subject

[5:13] property is approximately 4.82

[5:14] acres. It's located on the west

[5:18] side of us highway 19 North and

[5:20] unincorporated Clearwater. The

[5:22] current future land use

[5:24] designation is residential

[5:27] office retail for 4.16 acres

[5:28] for the majority of the

[5:30] property, and there's

[5:31] preservation land use on the

[5:34] property as well on 0.66 acres.

[5:35] And requested amendment is to

[5:37] change that land use from

[5:39] commercial to commercial

[5:41] general, which would cover 4.12

[5:43] acres, and then the remainder

[5:44] would remain as preservation,

[5:47] with a slight increase to 0.7

[5:49] acres. The zoning of the

[5:50] property is Commercial Parkway.

[5:52] However, there is no zoning

[5:54] change being proposed. Along

[5:55] with this. No zoning change,

[5:57] just the future Land Use map

[5:58] amendment and the development

[6:01] agreement. And that agreement

[6:03] includes certain building

[6:04] limitations and conservation

[6:05] easement. I'm going to get into

[6:07] that in just a second. The

[6:10] applicant is their expressed

[6:11] intent for the property is for

[6:17] a self-storage facility. The

[6:19] development agreement portion

[6:21] of this, you know, this package.

[6:24] So we have a you could sum it

[6:25] up with the following three

[6:26] restrictions. So the property

[6:29] shall not or shall be developed

[6:30] substantially in conformance

[6:33] with the non billable area,

[6:34] exhibit d to the development

[6:35] agreement. And I'll show you

[6:38] that in just a moment. So non

[6:40] buildable area this is the the

[6:42] non billable. It represents the

[6:44] non culverted section of Curlew

[6:45] Creek. Curlew Creek runs across

[6:47] the property kind of from the

[6:50] northwest to the southeast. So

[6:52] it's that non culverted portion

[6:54] which will remain preservation

[6:55] on a future land use map. And

[6:58] it generally includes a 25 foot

[7:01] wide setback or buffer if you

[7:02] will on either side from the

[7:05] top of the bank on both sides

[7:06] it's approximately 30% of the

[7:07] subject property. So that's

[7:09] what the Non-billable area that

[7:12] is referred to in exhibit d and

[7:14] those areas again depicted in

[7:15] exhibit d, and any additional

[7:17] areas mutually agreed upon by

[7:18] the developer and the county

[7:20] during site plan process will

[7:22] be placed under a conservation

[7:23] easement. So that would become,

[7:25] in effect, a conservation

[7:26] easement that would ride with

[7:29] the property. And then finally,

[7:32] the maximum impervious surface

[7:33] ratio is being capped by the

[7:39] development agreement at 0.7.

[7:41] This is an exhibit d to the

[7:42] development agreement. This is

[7:43] a binding exhibit to that

[7:45] agreement. This shows the non

[7:48] buildable area. I also want to

[7:49] include and this is a part of

[7:51] your packet as well. The

[7:52] applicant has prepared a

[7:53] concept plan. And again this is

[7:55] a conceptual level plan. It is

[7:57] non-binding. It's not a part of

[7:58] the development agreement. But

[8:00] they've they've submitted this

[8:02] to show kind of their intent

[8:04] for redevelopment of the

[8:05] property. So it gives you this

[8:08] kind of very kind of glossy

[8:09] overview of how you how they

[8:11] would envision that they could

[8:12] be able to, to develop that

[8:15] property from a site plan level

[8:17] showing the creek that goes

[8:19] through storage area to the

[8:21] west, more to the west of the

[8:22] property, near the residential,

[8:24] just on on the west side of the

[8:25] property and the development

[8:33] being pushed more toward us. 19

[8:35] and again, this is non binding

[8:37] with the application. It's on

[8:39] the west side of us 19 which

[8:41] you can make out there. And

[8:44] then Curlew Avenue which is

[8:46] fairly minor roadway. The

[8:49] surrounding character us 19 is

[8:51] mostly, you know, office strip

[8:55] commercial. You can see that

[8:56] mobile home parks right around

[8:59] there as well. And to note the

[9:00] mobile home park that is

[9:03] adjacent to the west side of

[9:07] the subject property. So the

[9:09] map on your left shows the

[9:10] current future land use map

[9:11] with the subject property

[9:12] designated as residential

[9:14] office, retail. And then the

[9:16] change would move on the right

[9:18] side of your map to commercial

[9:21] general, we do have a growing

[9:22] precedent, if you will, for

[9:23] Commercial General along the

[9:25] corridor. They are pretty

[9:27] similar in in in land use types.

[9:28] I'll go into that in just a

[9:30] moment. But you can see most of

[9:32] the corridor is residential,

[9:34] office, retail and then a

[9:36] residential categories. You can

[9:38] start to to come about as you

[9:40] move on either side of the

[9:45] corridor. And no zoning

[9:46] component to this case, but the

[9:48] property is zoned Commercial

[9:49] Parkway, as are the majority of

[9:51] properties along us 19 in this

[9:53] area. And then similar to the

[9:55] land use map, you can see in

[9:56] the zoning map some of the the

[9:59] more residential zone districts

[10:00] start to come about on either

[10:02] side of the corridor,

[10:03] residential medium, residential

[10:04] plan development, r-2, single

[10:09] family, those kinds of things.

[10:11] Give you some orientation of

[10:13] the property a little bit. So

[10:14] this is the subject property.

[10:15] It's looking north from Boy

[10:17] Scout Road. Boy Scout Road is

[10:19] at the south end of the

[10:20] property. So looking northward

[10:21] you can see you might be able

[10:23] to make out us 19 a little bit,

[10:26] kind of on the middle right

[10:29] side of the photo and then

[10:30] looking in the opposite

[10:32] direction. This is looking

[10:34] south along on the subject

[10:36] property. Us 19 is to the left,

[10:38] and this is the old, the former

[10:40] Hamburger Mary's property or

[10:45] building. This is looking

[10:46] northwest at the subject

[10:48] property. This is a vacant

[10:49] office building and is

[10:51] currently on site that is

[10:53] scheduled to be. The applicant

[10:55] has expressed that they would

[10:58] like to remove this building.

[11:01] And then finally this is on the

[11:04] subject property near the west

[11:05] boundary or border of the

[11:06] subject property looking

[11:07] obviously looking westward. And

[11:09] you can see you have the, you

[11:11] know, the fencing that's that's

[11:12] between the mobile home park

[11:15] and the subject property there

[11:19] at the far west side. The

[11:21] current land use designation.

[11:24] The designation allows a wide

[11:26] range of uses from residential

[11:28] office, personal service,

[11:29] office support, commercial

[11:32] service, retail. It also allows

[11:34] some light manufacturing and

[11:35] some research and development

[11:37] like research and development

[11:38] and verbatim, per our

[11:40] comprehensive plan, this

[11:42] category is generally

[11:43] appropriate in locations where

[11:44] it would serve as a transition

[11:46] from more intensive

[11:47] nonresidential uses or major

[11:49] roadways to residential, office

[11:51] or public semipublic uses.

[11:53] These areas are typically in

[11:54] close proximity to and served

[11:57] by the arterial roadway network.

[11:59] The density residential density

[12:00] that's permitted by this

[12:01] category is 24 dwelling units

[12:06] per acre, with a 0.5 far and a

[12:08] 0.85 impervious surface ratio

[12:10] for nonresidential uses. That

[12:12] impervious surface impervious

[12:14] surface ratio is important as

[12:16] we get into understanding the

[12:17] limitations of the development

[12:19] agreement. So that is what is

[12:21] currently on the property today.

[12:22] And then that change to

[12:25] commercial general, mostly the

[12:27] same set of uses are permitted.

[12:28] However, Commercial general

[12:30] does permit storage warehouse,

[12:31] which is the reason why the

[12:32] applicant is seeking the change

[12:34] because they would like to

[12:35] redevelop the property with the

[12:36] self-storage facility that is

[12:38] not permitted under the ror. It

[12:39] is permitted under the

[12:43] commercial general and per our

[12:44] comp plan. This category is

[12:46] generally appropriate in areas

[12:47] of the County that are now

[12:49] developed or appropriate to be

[12:50] developed in a manner designed

[12:51] to provide the community or

[12:52] region with commercial goods

[12:54] and services, and in areas in

[12:56] proximity to and with good

[12:57] access to major transportation

[13:00] facilities. Similar to the r o

[13:02] category, 24 dwelling units per

[13:06] acre are permitted a 0.5 5far,

[13:08] which is the same far. However,

[13:09] the impervious surface ratio

[13:12] gets bumped up to a 0.9 for

[13:15] nonresidential uses. Note that

[13:17] the development agreement that

[13:19] that is being included with

[13:23] this would cap that isr at 0.7,

[13:25] so it wouldn't be at the 0.85

[13:26] that it is currently today, nor

[13:28] would it go up to 0.9. It would

[13:30] be capped at 0.7. So we would

[13:32] have a lower impervious surface

[13:38] ratio on this property. And the

[13:39] preservation category that's

[13:42] really kind of along the Curlew

[13:44] Creek per our comp plan. These

[13:45] are areas determined to have

[13:47] environmental significance and

[13:47] recognized in the Pinellas

[13:48] County Comprehensive Plan, as

[13:50] you might as you might have

[13:52] garnered, including wetlands,

[13:53] 25 year floodplains, natural

[13:56] drainage ways, habitat,

[13:57] endangered species, areas

[13:59] generally appropriate to areas

[14:01] of major ecological functions

[14:04] as 0.1 far and a 0.2 isr for

[14:05] nonresidential uses. So you can

[14:06] imagine those are kind of like

[14:09] support facilities that MAY be

[14:10] necessary in those preservation

[14:14] areas. And then finally the

[14:15] current land use, which will be

[14:17] continue to be land use as

[14:18] proposed, is probably not the

[14:19] most accurate word there.

[14:21] Commercial Parkway. It provides

[14:22] for a wide range of commercial

[14:23] and office uses, including

[14:25] self-storage facilities. And it

[14:26] also to note, allows

[14:26] residential in certain

[14:28] circumstances should be

[14:30] conveniently located with

[14:32] access to arterial highways and

[14:33] transportation facilities,

[14:35] either directly or by service

[14:37] roads. The maximum building

[14:39] height is 75ft, but note that

[14:42] it is limited to 45ft when 50ft

[14:45] of residentially zoned property.

[14:47] And again, no zoning change is

[14:53] being proposed. Traffic impacts

[14:54] from a land use. And I always

[14:56] like to just this disclaimer

[14:59] this is like a 200 zero foot

[15:01] analysis of traffic, traffic,

[15:04] and a more granular level would

[15:06] be looked at during site plan

[15:07] review. But at least from this

[15:10] level, the actual traffic

[15:11] volume could be slightly

[15:15] reduced simply because the

[15:17] amount of the commercial

[15:18] category with the change would

[15:19] be slightly reduced, but it's

[15:21] pretty much null as far as

[15:23] traffic impacts. I will note,

[15:25] however, that us 19, as many of

[15:26] you are probably very aware in

[15:28] this segment, as a level of

[15:30] service f with a vehicle to

[15:33] capacity ratio of 1.817. And

[15:34] for those of you who MAY travel

[15:36] this road, I'm sure you're very

[15:37] aware that it's currently under

[15:39] construction and that future

[15:40] cross section of this roadway

[15:42] and that future function, this

[15:43] roadway, if you think of what

[15:45] you have south of Clearwater.

[15:47] So it's going to more of a a

[15:49] limited access highway as

[15:50] opposed to kind of a strip

[15:52] commercial highway as it is

[15:54] today. So that's going to be

[15:56] the ultimate that will be how

[15:57] us 19 will be ultimately and

[15:59] how that level of service

[16:01] changes. I am not sure. But of

[16:03] course we will see. With regard

[16:05] to flood risk, this property is

[16:06] neither within the coastal high

[16:07] hazard area, the coastal storm

[16:09] area. However, it does lie

[16:11] within the 100 year floodplain

[16:13] and partially within the 25

[16:18] year floodplain. In conclusion,

[16:20] staff supports the proposed

[16:21] amendments to the Future Land

[16:23] Use Map and the Associated

[16:25] Development Agreement. The Land

[16:26] Use Amendment does not

[16:28] significantly alter the uses

[16:29] permitted or change the

[16:30] potential impact from

[16:32] development. The use categories

[16:35] themselves are, are are pretty

[16:37] similar, with the exception

[16:38] that the commercial general

[16:40] would allow for the intended

[16:42] use of the property by the

[16:43] applicant, which is a self

[16:46] storage facility included with

[16:47] the development agreement

[16:49] that's included what what it

[16:50] essentially does it better

[16:52] protects Curlew Creek and

[16:53] reduces impacts in the

[16:54] floodplain per the development

[16:56] agreement, reduces the maximum

[16:58] potential impervious surface

[16:59] allowed on site. We talked

[17:00] about that. It would be

[17:03] actually lowered to 0.7, and it

[17:04] effectively pushes development

[17:06] away from the residential

[17:07] dwellings on the west of the

[17:11] property closer to us 19. And

[17:14] that happens in part by d,

[17:16] which puts that kind of setback

[17:18] buffer area creates that

[17:20] conservation area that's more

[17:21] toward the west side of the

[17:23] property and effectively ends

[17:24] up making, you know, pushing

[17:26] that development to the east.

[17:27] So further away from the

[17:31] residential as it exists today.

[17:33] One thing is that the amendment

[17:34] will it will allow cleanup of

[17:36] the property and redevelopment

[17:37] in line with the county's

[17:38] development regulations in a

[17:39] more appropriate manner. You

[17:40] also saw the site photos that

[17:42] we took of the subject property.

[17:44] We found a proposal compatible

[17:45] with the area's mixed use

[17:47] character and consistent with

[17:48] our comprehensive plan, staff

[17:50] recommends approval. The Board

[17:51] of County Commissioners is

[17:54] scheduled to hear this item on

[17:55] OCTOBER 27th in their evening,

[17:58] 6 P.M. Agenda. That is all I

[17:59] have in my presentation. I

[18:00] appreciate your time. I thank

[18:02] you, and if you have any

[18:03] questions, I'd be happy to try

[18:04] and answer.

[18:05] >> All right. Board members,

[18:06] any questions for MR.

[18:06] Swearingen?

[18:08] >> Yes, I have a question.

[18:08] >> Yes, ma'am.

[18:09] >> Vice Chair.

[18:11] >> Good morning. Good morning.

[18:13] I was just wondering how that

[18:15] impervious surface area ratio

[18:17] did I get all that right, is

[18:19] going to be achieved? And where

[18:21] will the parking area be and

[18:23] what is the access from the

[18:24] highway.

[18:27] >> So access from us 19 would

[18:28] come, I believe, directly off

[18:30] us. 19 however, there is also a

[18:31] Boy Scout road that's adjacent

[18:33] to the south that could be used

[18:37] for access. We don't we don't

[18:39] delve into that level of detail

[18:41] at the Land Use amendment phase.

[18:42] The development agreement

[18:44] speaks to that as a previous

[18:45] surface ratio. Now, however,

[18:46] they. However, they have to

[18:48] figure out their parking and

[18:49] loading and those kinds of

[18:50] things. And where that building

[18:52] goes, that's on them, but they

[18:54] are not allowed to have

[18:55] impervious surface greater than

[18:58] 70% of the subject property.

[18:59] Okay. Does that answer? I think

[19:00] you had a third question. Did

[19:01] you?

[19:02] >> No, you covered it. I think

[19:04] the parking, the access and the

[19:04] impervious ratio.

[19:06] >> Okay.

[19:08] >> That was pretty quick.

[19:09] >> Thank you. And I'll just add

[19:12] for the access that us 19 is

[19:15] fdot roadway. So any access

[19:16] will have to get permitted

[19:19] through the dot. The road on

[19:21] the south boy Scout is is a

[19:23] county road, so it would be

[19:25] lesser designated roadway. We

[19:28] would allow access there, but

[19:30] then the permitting for any

[19:31] driveway access on us 19 would

[19:34] come from dot.

[19:36] >> And down the road when the

[19:39] when the us 19 construction is

[19:41] finished and it's probably

[19:42] going to become an overhead

[19:46] road with side roads.

[19:47] >> Yeah, yeah.

[19:48] >> Service road. That wouldn't

[19:50] be an issue any any longer for.

[19:51] >> The no. Usually when it's

[19:53] it's a service roads, it's

[19:55] easier to get a driveway access

[19:56] on those because you have lower

[19:58] speeds. Sure.

[19:59] >> Thank you.

[20:00] >> Board members. Any other

[20:03] questions for staff? No. All

[20:05] right. Thank you, MADAM Chair.

[20:12] Thank you. Please state your

[20:14] name and address for the record.

[20:16] >> Good morning. Kevin Reilly,

[20:17] 401 East Jackson Street in

[20:20] Tampa. And I have been sworn. I

[20:21] appreciate all of your time

[20:22] this morning. I'll. I'll suck

[20:24] up for just a moment. I just

[20:26] finished a term on a board in

[20:27] Saint Petersburg and you know

[20:28] you're here for only item. So

[20:30] thank you for reviewing and

[20:31] being here because I know this

[20:33] is a volunteer position. Now,

[20:34] jumping into the actual

[20:35] application, I don't have a

[20:36] presentation because I just

[20:37] would have shown the same

[20:39] pictures that that staff showed.

[20:40] So I'm going to talk a little

[20:42] bit about some of the items

[20:43] that staff talked about and

[20:44] then answer any questions that

[20:46] you all we have our planner,

[20:47] the applicant and an engineer

[20:48] here, if you have specific

[20:50] questions, but I'll try and

[20:51] cover most of those as I

[20:53] discuss with you all. So again,

[20:55] we're coming to the we're

[20:58] coming to the, the board today

[20:59] with with a use in mind, but

[21:00] this application doesn't

[21:02] request a specific use. It's

[21:03] just that that's the, the

[21:05] impetus of the application. So

[21:06] it wouldn't technically limit

[21:08] to the self storage use, but

[21:10] that that is what is desired

[21:12] under the current development

[21:14] scheme. But what really brings

[21:17] us here is the isr and

[21:19] stormwater and floodplain

[21:20] limitations. So this site is

[21:22] the site was developed of

[21:23] course with the office building

[21:25] you all saw. And then there's a

[21:27] restaurant and parking. And so

[21:30] the that was all built before

[21:31] the stormwater regulations. And

[21:32] the floodplain was as stringent

[21:34] as it is today. And so

[21:35] redeveloping the site is going

[21:37] to be more challenging because

[21:38] they'll need to be more

[21:40] floodplain compensation and

[21:41] they'll need to be less

[21:42] pavement, essentially. And so

[21:44] it makes that's why you're

[21:45] essentially having three

[21:46] developments become one,

[21:48] because repeating the same

[21:50] development is impossible. And

[21:52] so the future land use change

[21:54] is sought to to add the use

[21:55] that we're interested in. But,

[21:58] but honestly, the from a bigger

[22:00] picture, our considers office

[22:01] uses. Well, there's office uses

[22:03] there and they're, they're not

[22:05] viable anymore. And as us 19

[22:07] becomes a limited access

[22:08] highway, those retail uses a

[22:10] strip retail is not going to be

[22:11] viable in the same way anymore.

[22:14] And so a warehouse or more

[22:15] commercial use, including self

[22:17] storage, we think is more

[22:18] appropriate for, for the site.

[22:20] And so that's the impetus of,

[22:22] of what's behind the

[22:24] application. Now how we achieve

[22:26] that. To the vice chair's

[22:28] question, there is essentially

[22:29] it's less development, right?

[22:31] There's, there's three areas of

[22:31] development that exist today,

[22:33] and it's going to ultimately

[22:35] become the, the one development

[22:39] because most of the it's I

[22:40] don't want to say exactly. So

[22:42] let's talk broadly. So almost

[22:44] the west half of the property

[22:46] is going to end up being either

[22:48] preservation as it exists today

[22:50] or floodplain compensation. So

[22:52] it will be much less pervious

[22:53] area. And the way that you

[22:54] achieve development is, is to

[22:57] go to go vertical. The proposal

[22:59] is for four stories, which is

[23:01] within the limitations of the

[23:02] code and the comprehensive plan.

[23:04] And they'll also be a

[23:04] significant buffer because the

[23:06] west half of the of the

[23:08] property is not going to be

[23:09] developed, because it'll have

[23:11] to meet those stormwater

[23:14] requirements. And so and the

[23:15] other thing too, for

[23:17] transportation and for parking

[23:19] and those things, the use we're

[23:21] proposing is, is forgiving on

[23:23] those. It's not a big traffic

[23:24] generator and it doesn't

[23:25] require as much parking so

[23:26] uniquely would be okay. But if

[23:28] that was to change again,

[23:29] because this application

[23:30] doesn't tie us to a use, if

[23:32] that was to change, we'd still

[23:33] be limited on where we can

[23:35] develop. And so if a different

[23:36] use went in there, the

[23:37] development would be limited by

[23:39] where we can where we can put

[23:42] pervious development and what

[23:44] we could fit. And if it

[23:45] required more parking, you'd

[23:46] have less development so that

[23:49] that would all come later. As

[23:50] staff also noted, there's no

[23:51] change in zoning. So, you know,

[23:54] the zoning map has the same

[23:55] consistency and compatibility

[23:58] that it has today. And the, the

[24:00] staff talk about compatibility.

[24:01] And we have a letter in the

[24:02] record talking about the

[24:03] compatibility of this future

[24:06] land use category with the

[24:06] adjacent. There's some

[24:07] precedent across the street,

[24:09] but more importantly, the uses

[24:10] are largely the same otherwise.

[24:13] And so the compatibility is

[24:15] maintained. And as far as

[24:17] access goes, access isn't

[24:18] proposed to be changed. So

[24:19] there are access points there.

[24:21] And so there'll be an access

[24:23] off of 19 and then off of Boy

[24:25] Scout with that. We do have our

[24:27] team here. If there are more

[24:27] specific questions that I

[24:29] didn't cover from the questions

[24:30] you all asked before, we're

[24:31] happy to answer them, but

[24:33] otherwise we'll we request your

[24:34] consideration and approval.

[24:36] Thank you.

[24:37] >> Board members. Any questions

[24:41] for the applicant? All right.

[24:43] Seeing none, we will now hear

[24:45] from the public. Is there

[24:46] anybody in the room who wishes

[24:49] to speak in support of

[24:54] applications flu26-02 or dva

[24:56] 26-02. Seeing none in the room,

[25:03] do we have any online. I'm

[25:04] going to take silence as a no.

[25:06] >> The last time we checked

[25:07] there was no one online.

[25:11] >> Okay. We'll now hear from

[25:12] opponents. Is there anyone in

[25:14] the room who wishes to speak in

[25:19] opposition to flu 26-02 or dva

[25:24] 26-02? All right. Seeing none.

[25:26] And I'm going to assume there's

[25:28] nobody online either comes back

[25:29] to the applicant. Do you have

[25:34] any closing remarks?

[25:35] >> No. I would just point out

[25:37] that the I didn't mention the

[25:38] development agreement in my

[25:40] short discussion. But the

[25:40] development agreement does

[25:42] limit development more. It's

[25:44] more limiting than what is

[25:46] there today. But frankly, with

[25:47] floodplain compensation

[25:48] requirements, that's acceptable

[25:50] because I think a 0.7 F.A.R

[25:52] would be hard to achieve even

[25:54] as it is, let alone the 0.5 or

[25:55] 0.9. So we're comfortable with

[25:56] that limitation and we've

[25:57] agreed to that.

[25:59] >> Thank you all. Thank you.

[26:03] All right. Any final questions

[26:05] from the board for staff or the

[26:08] applicant? I have one question

[26:10] for staff. With the non

[26:12] buildable area on exhibit d, I

[26:15] see that there is the I'm just

[26:16] going to say it's a smoke shop.

[26:20] But the commercial retail

[26:23] overlaps that is that a

[26:25] situation where if they're

[26:27] going to redevelop the property,

[26:29] they didn't really address that

[26:30] in that corner and their high

[26:33] level overview. But yeah, and

[26:34] that just continues like a

[26:35] nonconforming use. Or will

[26:36] redeveloping the property

[26:39] require that to be demolished?

[26:41] >> The proposal is to demolish

[26:44] the buildings they identified

[26:45] during our discussions with the

[26:46] applicant that the buildings

[26:48] are all, you know, obsolete.

[26:51] They've been vacant there.

[26:55] There is no plan to to use them.

[26:56] I can let the applicant speak

[26:59] further on that. But yeah, that

[27:00] would.

[27:01] >> Just from.

[27:03] >> How it's redeveloped. Yeah.

[27:05] That would end up either being

[27:07] a non-conforming if it was to

[27:10] stay the same use, okay, would

[27:13] be able to expand. Otherwise it

[27:15] would, it would have to be

[27:15] demolished.

[27:16] >> So they could take this

[27:18] through site plan and maintain

[27:20] that building as non-conforming.

[27:22] >> Yeah. As you can see the in

[27:24] the building in the back too,

[27:27] as well. The it covers that a

[27:28] portion of that as well.

[27:29] >> Okay. Understood. Thank you

[27:33] for clarifying. All right. Any

[27:35] other questions for staff or

[27:37] the applicant. Seeing none it

[27:41] comes back to the board. Do we

[27:44] have any is it I'm willing to

[27:46] entertain a motion on

[27:49] application f Lu 26-02.

[27:50] >> I'll move to approve case

[27:53] number f-2602.

[27:54] >> Motion by Oliver.

[27:55] >> Second.

[27:56] >> Second by Hamilton. All in

[27:59] favor, say I I. I opposed like

[28:02] sign. The motion passes. We'll

[28:04] now I will now entertain a

[28:09] motion on diva 26-02.

[28:12] >> I move approval of diva dash

[28:13] 26-02.

[28:14] >> Motion by Hamilton.

[28:14] >> Second.

[28:16] >> Second by Larry Johnson. All

[28:18] in favor, say aye. Aye. Opposed

[28:22] like sign. The motion passes.

[28:27] So. All right. That brings us

[28:29] to the end of our cases. Staff,

[28:31] do you have any remarks for us

[28:32] before we adjourn.

[28:35] >> a couple of couple items to

[28:36] update on. I brought you before

[28:38] that. We're we're looking to

[28:41] switch over to a paper packets

[28:43] and going to tablets. We got

[28:45] approval. So we're in the

[28:48] process now of of acquiring the

[28:50] tablets. And hopefully we'll

[28:52] have those at your next meeting.

[28:53] And speaking of your next

[28:55] meeting, we don't have any

[28:57] items right now. So there

[28:58] probably will not be a meeting

[29:00] next month. So we would see you

[29:02] in NOVEMBER.

[29:07] >> Understood. So all right.

[29:09] Well I hope you all have a good

[29:13] OCTOBER if we don't see you.

[29:14] Definitely happy to serve as

[29:17] the citizens need us. With that,

[29:18] I'll entertain a motion to

[29:20] adjourn. So moved. Motion by

[29:21] Larry Johnson.

[29:21] >> Second.

[29:23] >> Second by Hamilton. All in

[29:24] favor, say aye. Aye aye.

[29:27] Opposed like sign. The motion

[29:35] passes unanimously.

[29:37] >> You to Halloween? I can't

[29:39] even think about that yet.

Local Planning Agency meeting on 9/9/2026 - Sep 9th, 2026

Agenda

Transcript