[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.