Good evening. Now six o'clock. I would like to call the order. The plan is on board a meeting for September 12, 2024. We're going to get to the show. Yeah. You would not have an implication and you for letting everybody that came out tonight. Make it made it here safely and everybody that wanted to come and could not come. Still keep them in remembrance and that the meeting go well tonight and everyone just stay safe and let's get the meeting going and have a good time. We'll have a pleasure, but pleasure, collegiate. of the United States of America and to the Republic for which it stands for Nation, our God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all. Okay, we have roll call. Chair Arnold here, Vice Chair Gehrhart here board member Nigg board member Rothberg board member fountain board member Piston alternate alternate member law we have a quorum president We will now have Ms. Nunder Bordys to talk about some issues and some emails. This is in reference to City Issued emails. The Florida Department of Ethics, the Ethics Commission has now required everyone to file their form ones electronically. And with that being said, the city has issued each and every one of you a city issued email. So the new email address for yourself would be your first initial last name at mylakealford.com. I have letters here that have your passwords. So, and instructions on how to obtain the information and have a log on and get your two factor authentication numbers. If you have issues, please contact me. I'm going to go ahead and pass these out so you can go ahead and start the meeting. Thank you. Thank you, Miss Linda. Now we will have meeting minutes from August 8th, I have approval for the meeting minutes. Second. minutes of roll. I'll let me I'll let favor. All right. minutes of roll. Okay, we're going to have our first business item on the agenda. Proceed of Lake Opera. Chair, would you like me to read in the meeting procedures? Sure. Thank you. Meeting procedures, general procedures. Anyone in the audience who wishes to speak and present testimony on a case will be sworn in. The Chair shall announce the case. Staff will introduce the case and disclose any responses to the notification, which were not already provided to the Clinton and Zoning Board. Staff will present the staff report and recommendations. The applicant or a designated speaker representing a group in opposition will have 30 minutes total to speak. Members of the general public will have five minutes each to speak. However of the general public will have five minutes each to speak. However, the 30 minute threshold shall not be exceeded. Applicant will be given the opportunity to respond to any opposing testimony. The board will discuss the case and vote on the matter. Next page. If you are going to address the planning and zoning board, on any case today, please stand up, raise your right hand, and answer out loud to the following question. Do you swear or affirm that the testimony you provided the Planning and Zoning Board today is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Is there any one of the audience that will require the services of an interpreter? I may. I know. I don't even know how to respond to that. Thank you. It does not appear that we will need an interpreter this evening. I turn the meeting back over to you, Chair. Thank you. We'll have our first business item on the agenda, the City of Lake Africa Water Plant Conditional Youth Slash Site Development Plan. Thank you, Madam Chair. As a ministerial note, as a part of an announcement, there was a public hearing that was advertised for tonight, related to the South 40. When that agenda was put out, it was listed as tentative. There wasn't sufficiency on the development agreement that was tied to us, so that item was pulled. We did put a notice out on social media advertising of that, cancelations, so that is why you do not see that on the agenda tonight. Also to the board has been copied to some updated materials, the latest and greatest site plan for the water plant, and then also there was an additional attachment that was also given a report that the staff report was based on, so that was also included in the updated packet materials. Related to this action item, the City of Lake Alfred Waterpoint. The City's Watermaster Plan has identified the need for the construction of an additional waterpoint. A new water plan is necessary to service additional growth in the area. The City currently has a single water plan, and the additional plant will also add redundancy and resilience to water service. Currently, there is ever a significant issue with the main plant, which is of course right outside the door here. We would solely be dependent upon interconnects with other cities to provide service. So many cities that are our size or even smaller have multiple water plants already. We've gotten by for years without the need for additional plants because we've got interconnects with Auburndale in the city of Winter Haven. So if there ever was a fire or an issue with the plant, we kind of had that built in. But going forward, especially as the city is continuing to grow, we're in the position now to where we need those additional plants to not only service the growth but also for resilience and redundancy to the existing system. For the past several years, the city has been in the process of requiring suitable property for the construction of the new plant. The city purchased a parcel off the old Lake Albert Road in County Road 557 in June of 2003 for the construction of the plant. While the parcel consists of 20 acres, only 3.36 acres of upland with the balance being wetland, and you can see there kind of on the area. Those are actually two parcels. So the one to the north, the smaller rectangle. That's the parcel that we're looking to have the water plant on. We also purchased the property to the south, which that'll be the location of the future park. So they're both owned by the city, and the plant will kind of tuck up there into the Northwest Quirror. Integration of the water plant into a park facility will provide economies of scale and site development, and will also provide buffering from other residential development by being adjacent to a park property and other wetlands. The city is requesting the board to approve the conditional use and site development plan to approve the use for a major utility and the green swamp overlay district. Percent of the sections 2.33 and 3.7.5 B of the city of Lake Alfred, Uddefied land development code on approximately 19.9 acres of land located at 4020 Old Lake Alfred Road, east of Old Lake Alfred Road, west of County Road 557, and further described as with off-site improvements on parcel 262-720-000000-03010. I feel like the city attorney. Yeah. Staff recommendation on this item is to approve the city of Lake Outwards proposed use and site development plan request. As you can see, this is the plans for the water plant. Effectively, it's a ground storage tank and then the wells, which of course are underground. There's a small facility there for offices and storage and you can see the area outlined and red. That would be space for an additional expansion for an additional ground storage tank. Water plants are not too interesting. Most of the action is happening beneath ground. You'll see out to the, even when we think about the water plant here in town, what we think of the water plant, we see, oh, the water tower. The tower is basically just an elevated ground storage tank that stores water. That tower now is a vestigial element. It's not even online in the sense that water flows through there. That's kind of an outdated technology. So you're never really going to see new water towers built. Back in the day, the elevation of the water put pressure on the pipes, which kind of kept pressure in the system. Nowadays, it's all run through variable frequency drives and pumps and computers that maintains pressure in the system rather than relying upon gravity and physics of an elevated tank. So really all we're talking about is the ground storage tank. You can see the one right outside here and then really other than a small building for offices and some storage, you know, all the other, all the magic is happening beneath ground with the wells. All this has been designed by the engineers. We've been, you know, permitting through the water management district. So, this site is a go. It just needs, it needs approval from the planning board for our land development code. The use and site plan approval go to the board for approval. That is all I have. Staff will be happy to answer any questions. Disproc notification, this is a conditional approval for use and cycling. Yes, this would be a conditional use for the conditional use as well as the site plan. So as part of the conditional approval process, I just want to supplement the record if I can. The cyclan that's presented to you, you do have a letter of sufficiency from geo-planning solutions and for geo-planning solutions. That is Ms. Amy Bailey, an experienced plan over the 25 years of experience in the public sector with a master's of arts and geography emphasis in GIS, geographic information systems, graduate certificate certificate from USF in 2002, environmental science and policy graduate, and a bachelor's of science and environmental science from St. Leo College. Miss Bailey is an expert in her field and has provided an opinion that is part of your record that the site plan is as presented sufficient. You also have an email from I believe this is testing Schoeman who has provided CPH, or as a CPH, I do apologize. CPH, identifying as part of their review, comments that had previously been provided, had been addressed. CPH is an engineering firm, a Florida licensed engineer active in the state of Florida and would constitute a qualified expert in their field to provide set opinion. As part of the conditional approval, it would also be any approval would be subject obviously before a construction would occur to technical review committee review, as well as legal review, to make sure that if there are any minor adjustments, and I don't see that being the case, but that's why we have a conditional approval when you have a project of this magnitude. Any substantive changes to the site plan, the conditional approval will allow those minor amendments to be made, reviewed, and approved pursuant to the applicable provisions of our land development regulations, as well as applicable for the law and before final approval is deemed to have been given, those reviews will have been provided. So a conditional approval is what is being requested. And if you have any questions in regards to a conditional approval, please feel free to ask. You can have me more than happy to answer them. But like I said, given the complexity of this type of project, a conditional approval seen most appropriate, it's not like building a residence on a single, on a finite lot. There's a lot of different moving parts that are involved in this type of endeavor. Sadly, I have any answer any questions? Is it not working? There we go. Can you explain to me what the circles are? Because the square that's off to the right is where the water plant is going to be. Is that correct? So the circles are the ground storage tanks. And so the one on the right is planned on being built now. And then the one highlighted in red, that's going to pencil out for a future tank to be built as like an expansion. So when you have a water plant, you know, you have different limony factors. How fast the water can come up from the ground, and then your next limony factor is how fast they can drain from the tanks. So there's different, and they've all kind of designed that in order to account for, you know, future needs. So the water plant itself, I really consider it to be like the ground storage tank. But if you look at like a water plant, it's basically just, there's a small shed where they put in like a little bit of like chlorine and treatment. The treatment on a water plant is very minimal in this area. So it's basically just like a small operations room where you'll have like the computers, you'll have the high service pumps that take the water kind of like out of the ground and then you'll have the ground storage tank and then you'll have another pump room that distributes it through the system. So the the buildings to the north you can kind of see a cluster of buildings that kind of where all this high service pumps are and they'll probably do like an office and a small facility there. And then you've got the wells that would, there's not gonna be anything really, you're not gonna really see too much on the plan. That would just be kind of an area denoted and then you've got the ground storage tank. And then there is an offsite component where they're gonna drill another well further away, but it's related to the same plant. So those circles are the water storage tanks and what you would traditionally call the water plant. Where was the park going to go? Park is going to go immediately to the south of it so you can see the upper parcel there, that like that hashed area, that's where we're kind of putting the water plant. You can kind of see the bend in the road so it's kind of tucked up into the corner there. And then the park will go all the way south. You can see kind of the grove area. So north of late camp and then south of kind of that line where the water plant is, that'll be the park. That's about 20 acres of upland. We're going through a park master plan process now. We're gonna design that, what we can fit there, what we can, you know, there'll be some workshops and public workshops on that later this year and going into next the kind of envision what we can do with that property. But yeah, that's where the park's gonna go. Thank you. I have a question. I'm gonna go ahead. No, no. Through the animal clinic. Thank you I have a question The animal clinic we've got a lot of wetland on this site Yeah, do you guarantee that this is gonna stay wetland? Yeah, so when you permit through the water management district a plant like this If we've already been going through the process on they model absolutely everything in the area and they make the city pay for all the modeling. So we've got probably $100,000 plus in wetland and underneath the ground like modeling on what the draw downs are going to be associated with the plant. This plant we're going through a water use permit modification process now. And so they look at not only this one, but they look at everything her. They even the plant this plant we're going through a water use permit modification process now and so they look at not only this one but they look at everything her they even look at our wastewater plant they look at enviromentranspiration we recharge from effluent discharge I mean it's exhaustive and we've been going through this modification now for close to 18 months and so they look at everything under the sun before they give us a spring fit. Gumblakes. Gumblakes. Gumblakes. Spring fit. Is it? I don't know. I don't know that. They will get sourced. I would guess it's not, but Gumblakes maybe it is. Yeah. it is I would guess it's not but. Gumballink is maybe it is. Yeah Gumballink isn't one of the NFLs or one of the regulated bodies that I think the district looks at but when we're talking about a water plant though, you know this is not like a regular well. I mean it's fairly deep. I mean so they're going deep into the ground but they model all of the area when you do your drawdowns. I'd like to know if Gunn Lancashrink fit, because we already have, you ever heard of Kissigan Springs? Probably not, because Kissigan Springs got dried up by the phosphate industry. But if you look at pictures of Kissigan Springs back in the 30s, there were people swimming there, canoes, guys swinging out over the water with ropes. So you put a water plant pretty close to a lake and if that sucker spring fed, your love will dry that lake up. That would really be a deal. And that's why I asked the question. It just seemed like we got a water plant, we've got a dropping water table every single year in Florida because of our water usage and just a question. And the reason for the first question is that our second request on this agenda has us while approving something for residential that used to be conservation and it cut filled in by somebody and they took out the plants and so forth so it got redefined as not conservation apparently anymore by somebody and so you want the planning board to approve it and I'm just thinking to myself wait a second here we've got a lot of wet one. We've got a lake that's close. And I'm just asking the question. Thank you. Yeah. OK. Any other planning board members discussion? No. No. OK. OK. Now we have our public here and front of the public to come up. They were like someone would like to come up And come up to the podium, please Thank your name and address, okay? My name is Richard James Schedlerick. I've been born for over 30 years. I own six acres that are joining that. I have never been able to help develop. I have been told that if any of the property gets blown away, I could only keep one dwelling per 10 acres. There's five dwellings on that property that I got grandfathered in before the state came up and said you had to have ten acres for one tank. I have not been able to develop, I have not been able to ensure some of my property because of the state considering I am surrounded by filtration for the floor to aquifer. If you look on this map, we pointed out that lake on Lake Stau. Got to valve the head of the piece forever. Okay, you look at that swamp that comes around and has to, that's filtration area. It has to come around and go into Lake Dome, come down Lake Dome and you know the rest of the more. Okay, so I won't get anymore. And I did, I have an HVAC business. I started it in the mid 80s right here in Lake Alfred. And I got chased out of town because back then it was a two-line road and you could only operate a business in the business history, which still doesn't offer much. We don't have a business district after all I won't do there. But the thing is, I got ran out of town because I was trying to start a business here in town. There was no offerings of any place for a young man to get started. Okay, so now we're expanding and so we're going to get, you know, bear it, or you're just like you've spoken about. I've been restricted for over 30 years. There wasn't enough money coming from me to ever make a change. And now you're going to pump water out of a filtration system and the heartland floor and it's all because of what water we're looking for. All these beauty floor inscrows were turning them into rooftops. Why are you going to get a lot more taxes out of a home for the next 200 years and you're going to get out of the last 200 years of warrantries. And so you're not even considering the people that's lived here all their lives. And so that's what I have to say. And there's nothing that I can do about it besides tell you the facts that I've been restricted for over 30 years and now I can do a lot of plan there. In my house, right there behind me. I don't care what the point is, I've been restricted for years. And now all of a sudden somebody can come in with enough money and they think that's happening. And so I'm just letting you know, I you know the die right here in this town I am absolutely heartbroken for what I see going on Thank you all. Thank you Hello my name is James Allen. I live in Polk County, Florida. I just wanted to give you all heads up about a water treatment plant. The city of Lake Alps, the city of Alpindale has problems at certain times of the day for water pressure, so apparently they're using pumps, but I'm not going a stay on that but I wasn't know I would wear this conservation land gonna be used for something else Conservation land supposed to be conserved It's supposed to be if it's got a conservation Tidal to it is supposed to be transferred to each individual owner of the land It never goes away and And if it was conservation the startway, it should still stay conservation. And I don't know why you don't have a lake camp pictured in a lake. I fished out lake before. You can either get in that bar pit from that lake because there's a hole cut. And all of that marksland back toward that's a Toward 557 is marshland. And it connects and goes under the road to the hum Lake, because they used to be a canal that you could pull through and fish the hum Lake off the highway. That was 30 years ago now, but it's grown up. But I see that a clearing, I don't know, a swift mudgum permission, but they're clearing around, going late with preserve. And I assume swift mudgym, that permission to do that, but if any individual tried to get permission to do something like that, they'd be denied. But conservation man, are y'all planning on doing something with the conservation land? Right. Can I excuse you for one minute, if you have a question. Right, I see it manages to take a note. So you can address it after the meeting with you. Oh, okay. All right, I'm sure. But I'm under impression of it. It's putting conservation, it's supposed to stay in conservation from now on. It's just like the 250 acres on the east side of Gumballake. You all took 50 acres to build on and put 200 acres in conservation without 200 acres should stay in conservation. Especially if it's been an easement so to the state. It's supposed to stay there and you're not supposed to pile dirt up on the land or anything else. That's a no-no. It's supposed to be left alone in natural state. And that's all I got to say but you need to check into the water plant because I don't know if you I'm sure you're going to have a backup pump, but the city of Lake Alvers having problems with water pressure certain times of the day, the residents are. And I see where they have to stop construction because the sewer plants are big enough and they got to update their sewer plants. But that would be a good model to keep on so y'all won't get in the same trouble. You know, and that's just some free advice that I think she should look at. Thanks. Thank you, Mr. Ella. Anybody else? Good evening. Nelly Kromley, Pook City, Florida. On the public hearing notice in regard to this plant, it lists the parcel and it says, which offsite improvements on parcel 26, 27, 26, 6, 6, 6, 6, or 0, 0, 0, 0, 0, zero, three, zero, one, zero, which is a south parcel. So what does it mean by offsite improvements on that parcel? I heard that there was future development for a part there, but what offsite improvements does this notice talk about? It doesn't give any specifics. That's what that means. We can answer your questions after the meeting. Hold your questions throughout the public hearing. We will be able to answer your questions. Okay. So if you answered my question, it needs to be answered perfectly because this was on the public notice, but it didn't say what specifically those offsite improvements are. If you answer my question, it needs to be answered perfectly because this was on the public notice but it didn't say what specifically those off-site improvements are. So that should be for the public to know what those are. Because if I'm as a resident, just like this gentleman here, he's been ever years, a few kids services before, he should know what offside improvements are going to be right next door to help. Anyone else from the public? Okay. And I will close the floor for the public comments. If there's no more but board discussions. Madam Chair, if I may. Okay. Just to respond to some of the public comments there. So the Auburndale, you know, they, we've probably seen some of the articles in the paper recently, Auburndale's running into concurrency issues with wastewater. We don't have that yet in Lake Alfred because we expanded our plant back in like 2005, 2006 and anticipation of the housing boom that was happening then, we built it and then they didn't come. And so we've been paying for excess capacity capacity or I should say the residents of Lake Alfred have been paying for that excess capacity for the last 20 years. So we had room to grow in the wastewater side. We do have plant, we are currently planning the next expansion of the wastewater facility. So our current facility we're planning a 1 million gallon a day expansion and so that will kind of catch the next wave so we should be ready when that comes on let's see here on the water pressure issue absolutely we are starting to experience water pressure in the morning the city recently put out like a public service announcement asking for folks to kind of change their irrigation timers and basically it's like a traffic jam. You know if everyone goes on the road at 8 a.m. that's when you hit rush hour. It's the same thing with the water plant. That water plant can pump 2.3 million gallons or 2.5 million gallons of water a day. It just can't pump at all in a four hour or three hour period. And so we're trying to stretch that out, some of that usage to buy us time until this new plant is constructed. It's being constructed into the vicinity of the growth in order to service the growth. So that's why that location was selected. You couldn't have a water plant all the way on the east side of town to service the north side of town to service the north side of town with pressure. You got to locate the plants where the demand is. That will help address that issue. Another note, and just a kind of jog my memory with talking about the groves, those groves use a tremendous amount of water. And back in the day, when those grows, most of those grows had permitted capacities to run their growth pumps and to run in full bore, especially if there was going to be a freeze or something like that. So a well and a grove might have a 300,500,000 gallon permit. And so as those wells turn over into houses, those houses actually use less water than the grotes do. So I don't want you to think that it's a net impact above and beyond what was already occurring. Those grotes tended to use a lot of water in addition to that. On the question regarding the late clearing and conservation, all of that stuff is permitted through SWITMUD. The city doesn't regulate state water bodies or anything like that. And oftentimes SWITMUD will give permits for things that even the city doesn't allow. The question on conservation from Mr. Allen, I think that may apply to the other action item. The water plant is being built wholly on conservation from Mr. Allen, I think that may apply to the other action item. The water plant is being built wholly on upland. It's adjacent to wetlands, but it itself is being built on the upland. In regards to the off-parcel improvements, if you'll notice the water plant, because they kind of jutted over, they couldn't fit everything exactly on that parcel. So some of it kind of crept down a little bit onto the park property. I authorized that rather than try to create some percolinean engineering effort to fit everything in. Some of the water plant comes a little bit south of the parcel. Additionally, I had referenced the well. There's going to be another well that's going to be closer to the southeast side of the property and the engineers they like wells that have separation. They don't want two wells right on top of each other. They like to have some separation between them. And so that's also one of the other off sites. But you're not going to see anything above the ground on the off site and so that's also one of the other off sites but you're not going to see anything above the ground on the off site and from that component really the only thing that really you're seeing here is the the water plant kind of encroaches a little bit into that southern parcel and you've got the well separation so that's why we've listed both parcels just to be entirely accurate but you know 99% of the the vertical components associated with the water plant are represented on that plan and are in the northwest corner and that's all I have Come on. Another thing you're not thinking about, my name is James Allen, I live in Polk County, Florida. Another thing you're not thinking about too is also all this water you're going to use, you're going to have to do something with it. Now the city of Albanyl got the D.E.P. to let them pump so many thousands of gallons a day into the lake area in the lake leaner run of treated sewage water. That's the lake side grew up in and fished in and eat fish out of them. Now they say the treated water is good. Well I'm not going to drink a glass of it and I don't think anybody in here would want to drink a glass of treated sewage water. But they're dumping it in our lakes and our lakes once they're gone or gone, they're not enough, bring them back. And that's another thing you need to look at. Thank you. Thank you. Just one follow up to that. So the water plant pumps the water up when everyone fluses their toilets and it goes down the drain, It all goes through the pipes, through the sewer pipes, makes its way to the Ramona sewer plant and then that's treated. Then the effluent discharge which is kind of the water that's left over, that then gets put on to a spray field. And that's how all wastewater utility operations work. We're not asking to put it discharge into any lake or anything like that. It goes on to the spray field. We're not asking to put it discharge into any lake or anything like that. It goes on to the spray field. We're actually trying to work with the water management district to permit what's called like a rib. It's a rapid infiltration basin. Basically looks like a storm water retention pond and you jump it in there and then that filters back through the sand and the soil and gets filtered by nature and then actually recharges the aquifer and goes back into the water table. Because if you think about water, the water that's been on the planet for millions of years is the same water. All water gets recycled. So at some point, everyone flushes this as the soil, if that water goes into nature, it goes through the ground, it evaporates, it goes up into a rain cloud, it rains that down. So it's all about the water cycle. So when we talk about water scarcity, we don't mean that, hey, water is disappearing from the planet. You know, we mean that water is going into different formats. And so the wastewater component, we're not dumping anything into the lake and we're actually putting it back into the ground. Most of it's a lot of it's evaporating off of the spray field but some of it's actually soaking back into the ground being filtered by nature and recharging the very aquifer that we're pulling water out of. So, the spray field is like something totally adjacent to the... It's close to the water plant. I mean, you can have it a distance. Auburndale actually has spray fields on I-4 by 559. If you've ever seen big water cannons, and it looks like they're just watering a field for the sake of watering a field, that's a spray field. So that's actually effluent discharge that's spraying out of these water cannons and it grows up into hay. And so the hay actually soaks up because the effluent discharge, even though we call it poop water, it's basically just water that has a lot of nitrogen content in it and nutrients. And so the hay soaks up the nutrients and grows and then they come and they bail the hay and then they ship it off and of course the cow's eat it and everything else. It's a low-tech process but it's actually pretty fascinating how water and wastewater services work. I've seen that happen in Water Haven that's how they do this. Once you water haven that's how they do this What you just explain that's how they once it go through the cycles it go through They can use it for plants and just take it for the cows and stuff You got my attention when you're talking about spray fills. Does anybody live here long enough to remember when Lake Apricyce did discharge their Anybody here? Well, I don't know where you headed at. Okay All right, there used to be a rubber plant down here. We used to be sun-dying candy plant. Okay, well it's like Alfred swapped property out here to get a spray fill that they've already established. I used to hunt it. I used to hunt, I used to fish, but like out for you can't as I don't remember their names actually times gone by, but we have a spray filled and I just can't understand why I know you're saying you want to put this in the centrally located area. That area, there's just so much that's being given up because of money. Okay, so we already have a spray field. Auburndale used to have one at the corner of the cast road and Adam Sparn road. Well, then some reason, though, it got pushed after where you're describing words located at this time Okay, well, I'm not a dummy when they talk about green algae down in the abglades And that what why because look at all the toilets like you're describing gets flushed in Orlando And it has to go right down to St. Louis River and they wonder why they have a blue green algae problem Let's go over to Tampa Bay don want to go to fishing now more because they got their red algae. But why? Because of all the mid-jury and water. And people ask me that don't even live here. They got enough muds, live up in the North half of house down here and they still complain. But still they go, Richard, what do you think about the impact of people moving to Central Floor. My grandfather told me this area is going to go down, not going to mention the exact word he said he does, but Disney's coming to town so you can make it how many years ago and it's been going on. And so I see the change, there's nothing that we can do. Okay, so I know what you're up to and I know why you're picking that area, but people like me that's lived here all my life have had to suffer because of swift mud. So I don't even know how in the world, how in the world you even talk is with mud to allow you to drill into space and out in that environmental area that I've been taught all my life. And so it's just a pick, I don't know, it's all about money. So he's talking about a spray field, like I've already had a lovely spray field and he's talking about, I know that land. There used to be a home on there, a putty central area, it back in the very early 80s. It's gone. There's not much land that he's describing. There is a groove right beside us. I play a land, but I don't picture him squeezing all this in that little corner. Okay, so I hear a lot of talk and I'm not buying it. I've been here too long. EPA may lack output dumping their border in the lake hangs. We've got to spray through it already. It don't need a spray cell. You can pump it over there. You can put a plant somewhere close. It doesn't have to be right in the middle of the aquifer. But if Lake hours weren't allowed, I don't have any. So I just hate to see it because I don't have the money to fire. Thank you. You don't have the floor for public comments. Is there no more board members? discussions No more of the attorney All right, so no more discussions call for vote Motion okay, remember the motion would be a conditional approval of the use and site plan okay So do we have no other conversions for the conditional use and site plan for like off the word of plan. I'll second it. Okay. I don't have a favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Motion carries. And Madam Clerk just for the record to reflect the conditional approval of the use as I plan so. Okay. Our next two items on the agenda tonight would be the Heritage Act, Future Land Use, and the Heritage Act, Vony. Thank you, Madam Chair. This is an applicant initiated request to amend the City of Lake Alfred Future Land Youth's map, an official zoning map, specifically amending a portion of one parcel of land comprising of plus or minus 3.5 acres, generally located between Highway 557 and Camp Lake for their identified by parcel identification number 26-27-20-000000-0310 from the future land use of conservation to residential and the zoning from conservation to rural residential. The staff report contains a more detailed analysis and summary of the applicant is seeking to take an up one portion of their currently zone conservation property and move it into a residential land use and rural residential zoning, which it would allow for some use of the property. Rural residential is the least intensive of the city's residential zoning categories, allowing for only one unit per acre, which generally allows for homesteads on one acre lots, or more commonly a homestead in support of an agricultural use. In comparison, other properties in the area within the city limits is generally assigned a vintage residential zoning classification, which allows for four units per acre and is typically developed into single-family residential neighborhoods. The properties proximity to more intensive uses, the VRN, and it being adjacent to County Road 557 in proximity to major roads would generally indicate a more intensive usage. However, on balance the applicants request for the less intensive rural residential zoning assignment is appropriate based upon its size and disposition relative to the lake and other conservation areas. And just for all the yields of the CFRPC staff here for additional presentation, certain things are required to be in conservation. If it's a wetland or floodplain or different things, those are required to be in conservation. The area that's being requested to take out of conservation is upland area that doesn't, isn't required to have that designation, but that's why they're going through the land use and the zoning request process. At this time, let me yield to Brendan, with the CFRPC for an additional or detailed presentation. And I've got the clicker here if you want us to. OK. with the CFRPC for an additional or detailed presentation. And I've got the clicker here if you want us. Okay. Brenda, if you don't mind just briefly before you commence with your presentation, can you please state the entity that you work for and the duration of your employment as well as your qualifications and certifications as a planner. For the record, I'm Brenda Torres with the Central Florida Regional Planning Council and I serve as a planner. I've been a planner for five years with the CFRPC. Did you receive a degree or any sort of certification to access the planner? No, my background is in communications, but my training has been with the CFRPC for five years. Okay, thank you. So just to reiterate what Ryan said, we are here for a request done by Ed and Saxons representing Heritage Ag. For the subject property located between Highway 557 and Camp Lake, so the total parcel area is 24.68 acres, div or take, with the subject area for the request being 3.5 acres. And the request is to go from a future land use amendment of conservation to residential and your rezoning from conservation to rural residential. You can see here this aerial photo map of the subject property. And then the dotted line is the upland that is actually part of the request, which is for the future land use of MEP and MISO. Just to write some more background information regarding the subject property again is located within the green swamp area of critical concern and is comprised of 24.68 acres. In March of 24, the city did initiate a investigation of the subject property due to the suspicion of impacts to the conservation area and environmentally sensitive areas. And their focus was on a plus or minus six acre portion of the southern section of the subject area, of the subject parcel, sorry, and these were the results. Due to the classification of having conservation on the property, the presence of clearing within the potential wetland and floodplain areas were identified and shown that it was unauthorized activities. Of the six acres, 3.5 acres of the area is considered to be uplands, which may be developable if the future land use and zoning are assigned. Existing future land use, again the subject property does have a feature land use of conservation. Again this is a designation to protect natural resources, lake water and residential or commercial or industrial uses are not allowed in conservation. Existing zoning. Existing zoning is conservation. Again, this allows for the protection of natural resources, such as well as blood, soy, lakes, and habitat. Again, residential commercial industrial end uses are not permitted within the zoning. The proposed feature land use for the 3.5 acres identified and shown here in yellow is for residential which allows for densities of six units per acre is the classification shall offer agricultural uses on the property without a dwelling unit and all our agricultural uses, accessory to residential uses or properties transitioning from county to urban areas the density for any use in this district shall not exceed one unit per ten acres where paved roads and water or so are not available. The proposed zoning is rule residential, which this would allow for a maximum density of three units on the subject property. Again, the subject property is 3.5. So the density would be one unit per acre. And that here we have a tool showing the difference of between existing future land use and zoning, showing that the density change would be up to only three units for this property. The city did work with the applicant to determine what was the best future land use in zoning for the subject area and of you with the city comprehensive plan. So the proposed residential future land use and zoning are complimentary assignments and are proposed on property located in proximity to other properties with similar residential assignments. The proposed assignments are consistent with requirements for residential development on the property located within the Green Swap area of critical concerns. And it needs to be noted and part of the record is to approve that area of the site determined to contain wetlands and flood plain shawl, maintain their conservation assignments and shall be maintained and restored as applicable for conservation purposes and consistency with the green swamp area of critical state concern requirements. Oh, sorry. So again, I just want to reiterate that while the subject area is 3.5 acres, if there's any area that within that is a well and it will still need to remain with its conservation assignment. And regarding public infrastructure available to serve future development, all that will need to be reviewed during the time of development. But we did do a public facility service analysis as well. And just for clarification, I believe you're talking about a concurrency evaluation. Yes, which I was going to do. So we did complete a concurrency evaluation analysis and the city has available capacity within the system to share a future development with a doctor levels of service standards. And this is just a summary of that analysis. So regarding potable water, the city has a 12-inch water main located on the east side of Highway 557, which has the available capacity to serve three dwelling units for this project, it's an intensively-tovigamin that's impact on the city's portable water system. Regarding wastewater, the city has again a 12-inch horseman located on the west side of Highway 577 and does have compatible service future development with anticipated, um, diminishing impact on the city's wastewater system. Regarding solid waste, they outfread, um, transit solid waste collected to the city, to the Co-Fowny landfill, and there is an anticipated low impact on solid waste collection. Regarding traffic and transportation, again, a diminutive is impact on neighboring roadway network. The property is served by Highway 557 and based on calculations of traffic, again very low impact to the nearby roadways. Regarding airports, the subject site is not located within an airport buffer zone and Lake Alfred Fire Department and Lake Alfred Police Department and Po County Fire Rescue Facilities are located approximately two miles from this subject site. The city does have full capacity to serve the area. Regarding recreation, the proposal amendments which support the maximum density of three units present a very low impact to cities, recreation facilities. And the proposed amendments will have a diminimum impact on folk county public schools as well. So regarding environmental conditions and impacts, regarding wetlands and flood plains, in the memo issued by the deal planning solutions LLC, a recommendation was provided that the restoration of the site will be necessary to achieve compliance with city codes. Additionally prior to any development on the subject sites at owner slash applicant will be required to coordinate with appropriate agencies on any additional studies and or permits necessary to ensure compliance on the site. No surveys or studies have been provided for review regarding protective species. However, the owner and applicant will be required to coordinate with the perforated disease on required studies or permits necessary to to ensure compliance if they're protected. Any species that may be on this site prior to any development? Could you leave that up for me please? Yes. And just for the record, the exhibit that's referenced in the staff analysis or in the analysis, but that was provided by geo planning solutions and as previously mentioned Miss Bailey who is the CEO for geo planning solutions has 25 years of experience in the public sector as a master's of arts and geography GIS and spatial analysis for USF. Geographic information systems for USF in 2002 environmental science and policy graduate certificate from USF in 2001 and a Bachelor of Science and Environmental Science from St. Leo College and is a qualified expert in her field to provide such an opinion that may be relied upon as competence of stanchile evidence. And while we cannot condition the future land use application itself, but I would recommend that as part of the recommendation to be forwarded at those conditions, be provided to the city commission. And I believe we have Jeff with CFRPC, also would like to make a statement for the record. Thank you, good evening everyone. Again, just for record, also Judge Mucker, planning director, Senator Fortorejo, Plenty Council, just to record, also, Judge Mucker, Planning Director of the Central Florida Regional Plenty Council, just to get my certification out there in my background. 27 years in public and private sector planning, 13 years with the Central Florida Regional Plenty Council, American Institute of Certified Planner Certified, got my bachelor's degree in Natural Resource Conservation and Master's in Urban Plating. All of that being said, the report that's in front of you tonight is based on findings of a field study that was done on the site. As you will see in your package, the area that's proposed is plus or minus three and a half acres. I just want to kind of clarify that. That is based on the findings on the site today. What that means is essentially it's an upland area that was found to be as a result of the neighboring areas per GIS. Everyone has GIS is just data that says that they're nearby wetlands, nearby floodplain area. This was the remnant of that six acre piece that was studied on the south side that was found to have approximately about 3.5 acres of upland area. That property has conservation assigned on it today with lynch use and zoning. As the city manager alluded to before, anything in the city that has wetlands or flood plains on it is required to have a conservation future land use anxiety. It happens to be that this portion of the property, this 3.5 acres roughly does not have wetlands, does not have flood plains on it. So we have moved this report forward for the request based on the findings, the investigation that was done on the site. But again to the city attorney's point, moving forward right now, as we know, we know what the data is that we have. That is not a justification for the conservation, or sorry, for the wetlands or the floodplain areas on the site. That would require a jurisdictional determination of the Southwest Florida Water Management District to find out exactly where that area is. So what's being proposed for you all tonight is a future land use and zoning change on a geography that dotted area that we're showing. The maps that the city uses in its future land use and zoning those are not surveys. So the area that's being proposed is that three and a half acres. It is found at this point to not have conservation on it. We do know that, that it does not have wetlands or flood plains on it. But before any development would be able to occur on that property, it would have to get all the necessary permits coordination through the water management district, DEP to find out exactly where those areas are. So I just wanted to clarify a couple of those points. You can just summarize that. Yes, it has conservation on it today, but it is not physically located in an area that has wetlands and floodplains. The portion that is the subject of this amendment. But moving forward, we do understand that while the math will show the residential of that moose forward, it would still be identified and it would be a not necessarily a condition on the zoning, but just for the record that the city knows that the applicant would be required to make sure that they do the studies, getting additional information, make sure that they coordinate and get any permits that are necessary to recognize where that wetland flood plans. So with that staff will answer any questions that you all have, and I guess we'll open for public hearing. Can you please pull up the map where you're putting it out again? We can go back to... Can you point to where the area that they're talking about how many properties are going to be there when they build if they build if it goes forward? Does it? So per the request, well, and let me just clarify this too. While the future land use allows six units per acre, the zoning only allows one unit per acre. So the area that is the subject portion is just this piece that's right here that's in this dashed area. That is consistent with the report and the investigation that was provided based on the findings where wetlands and flood plains are on the site. Which generally run in the green areas area area of the flood plate around the lake, and then where the bar of head is, that is essentially part of the lake area at this point. So that yellow area, again, is not a survey, but it's the area that would be reflected as the area for potential residential development in the future. Does not mean that that would be the complete area where they would be able to develop anything on the property. But because the zoning only allows one unit per acre, the maximum that they can build on this site would be three acres. At this point, I think the intention is to build a single family home out there with some agricultural support of use, maybe a accessory structure or something. But that's what's really neither here nor there. At this point, the request is, could they get up to three units on this property? In theory, they could. Would they be able to develop three properties on this site? That's a whole nother story. They would have to come back through. You'd have to sacrifice this property. There would be a number of things. That would clearly follow any additional studies and anything else that would need to be had. Looking at where the exact locations of the wetlands are, where the flood plains are, that would all be done by surveyed through gerizidictional determination with the water management districts. But definitely, welcome to our site specific when we're talking about future land use, which is the first action item before you for recommendation. That would be based on consistency, but the comprehensive plan, compatibility with the land development regulations and compatibility consistency with land use trends or future land use trends within that general vicinity. Correct. Correct. I have to lay a put slide. I'd like to ask a question here before I do. Maybe more of a statement than a question. I've read through all these reports. This land has been filled in. They got improperly installed stuff to prevent contamination of the lake. I've maintained that you have no idea what was conservation and upland before that fill. Let's share this thing in and then if come in here for a request to go and build something on it. We've been down this road before in Lake Elford. If you go out here on 1792 on the right hand side of Haynes, look at Haynes, there's an area there with a lot of Cypress trees that look like they're growing on regular land. You guys feel that in and got caught. I don't know what the difference here. I mean, that's it. I've got to leave. I'm sorry. I've got to previous commitment. If I could. That's my comment. I don't think I don't think you know what's upland and what's wetland because they've done a lot of filling. So if I could respond to that. So again, the basis of the report is on where are wetlands on the property today and where is floodplain based on data that we have from FEMA and from the National Wetlands inventory. That is all supported by the report that was provided back in May of this year, April this year. It's assumed that these are upland areas based on the fact that they are not present with wetlands, flood plains, or other natural habitat that would assume that there's a conservation or wetland area in that general area of the yellow. I think the point there to be made again is yes, the site has been disturbed, but a lot of it has been disturbed in addition to this potential upland area. And again, in the report as well, the applicant will have to restore any areas that are required to be restored if they do fall within the wetland or floodplain areas. Based on the data alone, I understand that the point that the site has been deserved at this point, but there's not data that shows this point that there's wetlands or floodplains in the portion that's being requested to be amended. Jeff, if I may, we based our report, your report, off of the other report. And that determined that looked at historic GIS data. So we could compare it. So it's not like, OK, after all, a couple truckloads of dirt. And oh, there's the new upland. Let me throw in a request there. We have historical data. So, and this only because her board member, her, or Nick brought it up, you know, this property is under a token force in an action for exactly that. So the property owner will have to clean up or remediate some of the areas that were impacted. The zoning request, so it's separate from that. And the sense that's really they're just trying to get you know approval on the the portion that is historically upwind but I think it's accurate to say that whatever the impacts are to the wetland and the floodplain areas the action that the board is taking tonight you're not you're not going to be putting in area that previously was floodplain or wetland into the residential. So it's not like the property that is not able to kind of pull like a bait and switch or anything like that. We've got the historic data there, so to speak. So this is the request on the area that's historically. You always bend the upland. And then really any environmental impacts or remediation or restoration. That's a separate action that really that the board shouldn't be considered or weigh in. I only bring that up because a board member nigg brought that. So that's a separate action that the owner will have to deal with in their own due course separate from this action item. Is that pretty accurate? Yeah, that's, again, the data, right? So it's not as though I think the city manager said if that's the thought as that land was moved and now created the upland, it was historically an area based on the data that we have not shown as wetlander flip plate area. How long is it dating go back? Well, it's current data. So the data that's in the report is what's current and what's... No, I'm talking about Ryan. And he said we had previous data on it. How long is this owner been the owner of this problem? Not very long. So we've got recent data from before it was disturbed to where we can compare it. I mean, we've got any otherography back to the time. That's the point. So it's not as though it's based on something has happened on the site. It was prior to. Right. Right. OK. So no floor for public. Good evening. My name is Saxon Evans. I am the owner of this property. And the way I got this property is I sold the park property that just came up before you guys and the water plant property to the city for no markup what I had it for. And my thing was I was going to keep the southern part that was dry high and dry and I was going to build a home and move to Lake Alfred. So what happened is stepped in and went to Swiffman first before anything was put on the property and I got two ERPs with environmental resource permits that are filed with the state submitted the city. Now after I realized I should have gotten permits of the city as well. But I got it with the state with the water authority and they said they actually went out there, they did a site visit, they tested the ground where I was going to do anything that I was doing which is just moving dirt around because what I was trying to do was build a berm to protect me from highway 557 because it's so loud, it's about 75 decibels and this was an agriculture property, this is a cow pasture, has been the shins on it beforehand, I bought it from them, sold the remainder to the city, and then as you know it was a growth as well. So this has been a cultivated site for a long time, and so when I came in I went to the state which I thought was the right authority, I got the approvals from them to do the work that I did. And the aerials that we have go back to 1972 when this was a mine. So this used to be a burrow pit and they dug it all out and they packed it all down. I sent all that photography to the city as well and everyone's aware of that. But I just wanted to let you know that I didn't come in here and try to fill a wetland or something like that. This has been historically a high and dry piece of land. But the reason why that this was put in that kind of oddly rounded out green area. It is because in the original code, I wasn't going to get too deep into it, but I can tell there are some people in the crowd that we probably like to know this. Before the satellite imagery was good, they had a piece in the code, and I'll read it to you real quick. That said, down, based on a high probability of wetlands floodplain and dangered species in habitat and historic archaeological sites below an elevation of 135 feet, the cities as established that that is a no-developed line and that property will automatically get put into conservation. The city then in 2018, and the ULDC put this code in, policy 2.23, which I've sent you, says the city shall review the development limitation map, which is this map. This is where they get the future land use for that, and update as necessary annually. Property owners wishing to refute the information contained in the adopted limitation map may submit official information provided by a professional environmental scientist or engineer for the city's review. And that's what I did. I went out and got a professional environmentalist to go out there and look at this property and say there are no wetlands. There haven't been wetlands, there are no flood plants, there haven't been flood plants, none of that's been altered and I even had swift met out there and did a field test which they also submitted over to the city which is widely the city is moving for approval on this because they said this is a wetland, it's shunner than conservation because it was under 135 feet but they didn't have the data to show that this was dry, because it was done off its out of life. And so I just wanted to get that out there and explain that, and just so you know I wasn't coming in here trying to fill a wetland, because it's been a mine, and before that. And so I'd be happy to answer any questions that anyone has while I'm up here and listen to the rest of the people and come back to you. I definitely appreciate all the information. I just hide to it. Thank you. Of course. All right. Thank you. Thank you. Just for the record, I don't know. I'm not just giving or in any way engaging in any discussion as to whether or not in 2018, what might have been an applicable policy or a complaint or why changes have been made, but I can tell you that was being presented to you tonight is based on applicable law, policies, goals, and regulations or objectives in our comprehensive plan and land development code. And that has been found by qualified experts to as consistent with our complaint, compatible with our LDRs and the recommendation of staff is for approval. I am in no way trying to discount or diminish Saxon's opinions, however the city's recommendation is based on data and analysis that is applicable to the property. Thank you. My name is James Allen, I live in Polk County, Florida. Number one, why was this land put in conservation to start with? Number two, the buyer should have been aware of it being in conservation when he bought it. And number three, they put about 20 to 25 dump cut loads of dirt on it, the back store is probably used just to put dirt on where they could use it somewhere else in their construction. But he says build a bar and keep the noise down from 557 where the noise is going to get worse before it gets any better. But the reason is, why did they put in a conservation that start with? And the conservation isn't going to work when you can pull it out of conservation when you get ready to build on it, what's it used to have in conservation? You know, that's what beats me. We've been through this road a year ago about conservation. And conservation don't work, apparently. You know conservation is supposed to be set aside forever and If you read the state law that transfers the East buyer and if you sell it the easement goes with the next buyer The stays with the land conservation easement stays with the land And that's the way it should be. Conservation means conservation, and don't mean put it over there, and we'll use it when we want to. And that's all I really got to say. But it's not a fair system if you're going to take land out of conservation and destroy it or build on it or develop it. It's just, it's just, it's wrong to start with. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Nelly Coneley-Pook City, Florida. This partial blame was annexed into the city in 2005 and under Orwness 1102-05, it was assigned a future rand use of conservation, and in 2007, a zoning of conservation under-ordinets 1192-07. And according to the City of Lake Alphas, unified land development code, they are to protect natural resources, lakes, wetlands, flood plains, as well as a vegetation, anything that's classified under conservation, it says you're permissible to build parks and recreational areas, public utilities, but you cannot have it residential according to the unified land code of like Alfred. This property was designated conservation for its future land use and for zoning over 20 years ago, nearly. It's located in the Grease drop area of natural critical state concern, concerns in the city, unified land code section 2.3.3 states. The city shall preserve the integrity of the Grease drop as an intact ecosystem, a statewide significance by protecting the natural resources, etc. The study done in March of 24 reported in April 24 tells you there was significant damage done to this sensitive area. In additional findings reported noted that restoration must take place on the site and it has to achieve compliance with the city codes. The city's policy 1-1.4 was violated on the city's watch. Why was it caught then? I saw the loads of dirt going in. Certainly someone in the city could have. During the August 8 planning zoning meeting, the city's inter- and community development director, City Manager Ryan Levin goods spoke the following words regarding the conservation zoning designation by large portion of the Burton Ranch property. I quote, because of wetland water flows and because the land is in the grease swamp, the lake outfort is not seeing development such as what is occurring in Davenport or in the poor corners area. That's what he said. This is the philosophy applied to the Burton Ranch property, what makes a heritage ag parcel an exception. Why would the city's community development staff recommend to approve the proposed land use and zoning designate change from conservation to residential? With the drive, when you drive north on 557, you see the same development Mr. Levin Good preferred. Just as on Highway 27, the ones that agriculturalgro-culture lands are now density-packed housing develops and in the no-fusio development information sheet from the city there is also apartment complexes that are planned such as on the corner of Creek Road in 5-dc-7 that will have 100 units. The latest U.S. Census population Blake Outlet released in May of 24 estimated its population to be 7,626 residents. On the table, two-one known feature development, there are 14 developments on or off of Highway 557. According to this figure, it's provided that totals 3,596 room dwellings. The average number of people in the household in post-counting Florida is 2.6 people for house. That would be a total of 9,349.6 individuals, over 2,000 people of the present town population. If you look at other future developments, the number of additional houses is 234. Another 6,016.4 persons with no prior infrastructure improvement to speak of, you're having more than double the city's population. The future land use code goal once again, orderly growth and development. In objective 1.1 states, ensure that growth will be directed to appropriate areas. This is a land parcel and a greetswark critical area of state concern. It is historically conservation. it should stay that way. For an easily three dwellings, you're going to change land that you want to build a port next to. You want to squish three houses in there. It's shameful. Okay. This property was just bought in three by this individual. Really? Still have a comment? Mm-hmm. Good. Hi. I can see why the people are upset about this because it sounds like I'm taking conservation and just bulldozing to make a big development. I want to put a house and a spot to put my future mother along. I'm not trying to go for maximum zoning. I'm doing it on a piece that's upland. I got approval from the States Swift Lord. They've been out there. I had professional environmental scientists sign off that I wasn't messing with wetlands and floodplain and all this stuff I just wanted to I know I shouldn't really get into it But I just wanted just so you know more about it Conservation was set up there originally not because it was an area that was Protected or wetland or a floodplain it was there because it was under that unit Enanomised or 135 foot rule even though it wasn't a wetland, it wasn't a floodplain. It wasn't a wetland or floodplain because it used to mine sand out of it to build the highway. It's not muck. The other thing was all work was approved by Swithman. Everything. It was submitted. It was approved by ERPs. My mistake, which I'm going through code enforcement, is that I didn't go to the city to get a permit as well. Because I thought I had covered that with a SWIT mud. And that's my fault. And then it was automatically put into that because the 135 feet. And then there is code in place in the ULDC from 2018 that allows us, or there's a vehicle that allows people who have a piece that isn't in wetland or floodplain that was thrown in that with this wavy thing based on the elevation to say hey I would like to use my property because it's not a floodplain, it's not wetland I want to put a house on it, I don't want to put a development on it and this historically had been an agriculture for 75, 80 years up in Telecut, Anxen and the city's automatic thing is to throw it into future land use, which was governed by this 135 feet. So I can't speak for the people who made the choice on that 135 feet, but I don't believe that they did that for this particular property because they felt like this was to be protected for wetlands floodplain or arche archaeological site. It was a mine. It was an upland, it's an upland piece around by up and cut ditches and you know I wish I could have done it better and gone through the city but I thought I was doing what I was supposed to do with this hate and I just asked that you you see that where I'm coming from. That would be great. Thank you. Thank you Mr. Edden just one one thing I want to be really sure about The purpose of you really just want to build a house Requested instruction fee of fear in less is that not married yet But with the culture yeah, the request I submitted in site plan was one house on the lake and then either connected that house or over where the barn would be would be a spot to you know stick extensively so they're not living with me when they come to visit. But I'm not asking for six units. I'm not asking for nine. I'm asking for I asked originally for agriculture because I wanted to put cows out there and a previous owner, Mr. Shen was telling me that the cows would get out on 557, which is another reason I was building those burns. And you can see it if you drive by. You'll see where I stack the dirt up along the road because I'm trying to make a quiet spot. It's a beautiful spot on the lake. And if I can answer any more questions, please let me know. I appreciate it. Thank you. Jeff, if you'll wait till the public hearing is closed, then we'll be part of staff. Can you, excuse me, excuse me. I didn't have the money to do that. Sir, can you wait to after the public? Okay. Okay, we're gonna close the public hearing in more discussions on the board. Madam Chair, if staff could have additional response of the Assembly, you'll back to Jeff. I think he wanted to make additional comments. Thank you. Don't forget, a public comment is closed and now you're opening it back for staff. We'll be back up for staff. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair. I just wanted to address the first comment. There were three questions. I just wanted to address the first comment. There were three questions. You know, why conservation? Again, I think that was been ex-noted. I just want to clarify that. So there was a state requirement within the green swamp that anything below 135 feet elevation was to be put into conservation. That policy, that legislation, that changed, thus the change in the city's requirements. That was part of the reason why the property was assigned conservation. Florida is also a private property rights state, so we have a property owner who's requesting a future landing and zoning change. Everything that we review for the city as planning staff, as folks who look at regulations, policies, permits, we have to base that off of substantial, you know, competent evidence, right? And so there's three things that we have to review that against when we bring things in front of you. One is a consistent with the city's comprehensive plan. Two is a compatible with the area. And then finally, what are the impacts on public facilities and services. Those are the three things that we have to bring before you that serve as finite evidence for any request. If it is not consistent with any number or one of those, the recommendations to you all would generally be for denial. Generally, we don't bring those things before you because we review them. There are certain circumstances where we don't bring those things before you because we review them. There are certain circumstances where we have to bring those things before you because it is due process and you all have to evaluate that to make sure that we're being honest that we're doing our jobs, bringing the requests before you and the approval or the denial before you for your consideration. In this case, because the data shows that there is no evidence of this area being within a wetland, with any floodplain, that the portion of the property being assigned conservation due to a previous policy at the state level that required it to be conservation, it does not preclude the owner to come forward at this point to request that to be changed. And again, so based on the substantial confidence evidence that we have in front of us and the things that we have to review this against, it would share that there's an opportunity here to assign this a land use of residential to move forward. So I just wanted to clarify a few of those things for you all. Very good. And then Madam Chair, if I may, just to kind of piggyback off of that. The 135 existed previously. And I think part of the reason is because the technology wasn't as good, you know, the satellite imaging and the GIS technology wasn't where it is today as it was 20 or 30 years ago when that standard existed. So it's kind of like a boilerplate. Hey, if you're below 135, it's automatically zone. It's automatically considered a wetland, whether it is or not. Now that we've got better data, we do allow applicants to kind of come back. But you still got to go back through the process. And even they request Oak and the city could do it administratively. And the answer is no, even though you can provide evidence, you still got to go through a land use process and something that was established by law, the ordinance that was done back in 2007, even though you've got supporting data, it still has to be changed to be a law. Other comment that was made, the city did witness the dirt being put out on it. That's why we put it in the code enforcement. The notice of violation, I don't have the exact date when it was given, but it was given soon after the violation was witnessed to have a curve. We gave the owner some time before we eventually took it before the magistrate and the magistrate found it in violation and gave time for that to be cleaned up. Again, it happened on the city's watch. We threw the flag on the play. No different than if you were speeding through town and the police officer issued you a ticket. We issued a ticket because it was in violation of our standards. Swift mud oftentimes will kind of give exemptions and permits for things that the city wouldn't give Which kind of kind of blows your mind a little bit you would think that the water management district would be more Restrictive sometimes in the city, but a lot of times the district is such a big entity They'll give exemptions for very small parcels and things like that. So I'm not surprised that that happened, that's happened in other cases, but ultimately you're in the city of Lake Alfred. So again, we don't regulate the water bodies, look, the wetland is part of the land and the floodplain is part of the land and we don't allow impacts in the green swamp area in our wetlands. So the city is actually more restrictive than even the state is because if you were in a different jurisdiction or a different part of the city, you might actually be able to impact a wetland. Now you might have to do mitigation and whether it's on site or off site or the like, but we don't even allow you to do that in the city. So the fact that he impacted those areas, that's why there was that, you know, a token for some violation. You know, the other comment about, you know, conservation being perpetual, sometimes that's the case, especially if you were to sell your development rights to the state, that's kind of when you get into that being perpetual. Or if it truly is just an easement and there is no underlying ownership then you might run into that but this is a parcel. This is a piece of land no different than you own your home on a piece of land on a parcel that has zoning. This zoning just happens to be conservation and it just happened to be annexed into the city when that 135 elevation requirement existed so it automatically fell into conservation. Now that we're under a new code and it allows more detailed knowledge of it, you know, now we've identified and you've heard from the expertise from the CFRPC and the attached report that approximately 3.5 of these acres are technically in upland and so are eligible for a different classification. But the comments still stands on the overall green swamp, 80% of the area really is in wetland and in flood plains and they will remain in that in perpetuity because our code requires that wetlands and floodplains remain in conservation. This is just a small piece that happened to be in upland and so that's why you're receiving this request and that's also why staff recommendation is approval because it met the criteria. And staff will be happy to answer any questions and I do appreciate the CFRPC in doing a detailed analysis and providing that information. Okay. So what's the remedy for the violation? What's the remedy that the city is imposed on the violation? Again, that's kind of a separate action from the land use, but effectively because there's a notice of violation that the property owner has to kind of remedy it to the satisfaction of, you know, they'll have to do some type of report. You know, he said he's already had kind of environmental folks out there. We've got the data on kind of where some of the boundaries were. So they're going to have to restore that to the satisfaction of the magistrate. And so that's where the magistrate comes in. The magistrate's like a judge. So we've already found that there's been a violation. The magistrate's already determined that there's a violation. There's so much time that's been given before fines start to run on the property. So when the applicant thinks that they're back in the compliance, they're going to have to present evidence like two of judge to say, hey, I'm back in the compliance. And when they present that evidence, we will have our own experts that will review their submittal and will either agree with it or we won't agree with it. And then no different than the judge, if the city disagrees with what the applicant or what the owner is presenting, we present both cases to the magistrate like a judge and then the judge ultimately decides. So that's kind of what that process is looking at. And again, totally separate from land use and zoning. The only reason I've even discussed it is because it's been brought up by a board member and the applicant himself but that really should not weigh into at all you know your decision making here and as the CFRPC already stated this land use is kind of like it's not a survey it's not to the exact inch it's almost like a concept yeah conceptually yeah you've got some upwind here. But when you come into full apartment, you're going to have to have these jurisdictional determinations that bind the exact boundaries. And they may even have to have that as a part of the code enforcement process. I don't, I can't find on that. I'm not, that's not my expertise. But they're going to, they're, the burden of proof is on them effectively to demonstrate that they've satisfied, you know, the, the code enforcement violation and then also when they come to develop. Did you say something has to come back through us again? Should we approve what's? No, this would be, this would probably be the final stop unless there was a subsequent request or, you know, something else that went in there. I knew, I heard a comment earlier about the mugger and law and the barn all that. That's a great narrative. Again, not really material to land use or zoning. You're looking at residential and you're looking at three units per acre. So again, a sackson could get hit by a bus tomorrow, sell the property goes into his estate, it gets sold, and then someone else owns the property, six months from now and they build three houses on it. So again, you can't really use site-specific things to kind of balance out what could potentially happen there. Because again, once you have land use in zoning, it runs with the land until it gets changed. But rural residential is the lightest land use that we have in the city. I got one more pay. I got one extra pay. It's closed for the public. It's closed for the public. Okay. All right, entertainment motion for the approval of the ginseng 2 and 3. I mean, just two. Okay. You have a future land use is first. That is more of a legislative or quasi legislative analysis. That's why you have been talking about comp plans and goals, policies and objectives of the comp plan, conservation those types of issues. Next, after you vote on the future land use, you'll have a zoning hearing, which is a new hearing for these zoning specifically. Okay. I make a motion to approve the future land use. I'll second it. All in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. No, just for the record and just for your own education. Now you'll move on to the zoning hearing. That is a quasi-judicial proceeding. And as I don't want to necessarily go into quasi-judicial unless you have any questions about it, but remember that is a strict scrutiny analysis with the comp plan as well as a check the box type analysis as far as the LDR requirements for the requested zoning designation. So it is not a legislative function. It is a quasi-judicial function. Okay. So, again, and the staff's already presented the analysis, is concurrently the rural residential is the least intensive. So you've already approved the land use, future land use category of residential within the menu of options that's even available in the green swamp. The green swamp limits, you can only have four units per acre maximum. So there's only two residential zoning categories that even qualify in the green swamp area. And that would be vintage residential, which would be the four units per acre. That's typically what you see the neighborhoods swamp area. And that would be vintage residential, which would be the four units per acre. That's typically what you see the neighborhoods go on. And then rural residential. Rural residential is our least intensive zoning category that we have in the city. It's one unit per acre, I'm assuming that you've got water and sewer available. If you don't have water and sewer available, it's one unit for 10 acre regardless of the zoning. But rural residential is our least intensive use, land use, I'm sorry, zoning category. And as I've mentioned in the staff report, that's usually an ag-related or ag-supported residential use. So this would actually allow ag on the property. We've all heard conversations before, oh, I want chickens in town or the lake. And we're like, we don't allow chickens. Well, technically we do allow chickens. It's just got to be in a rural, it's got to be in a rural zoning category, which is what this is. So it's the closest thing you're going to get to the county while also being in the city. So this is the least intensive option that's available within this category and that is what the applicant has requested and staff has given recommendation of that request as denoted in the analysis in the previous report. Okay, anyelly, currently putt city for it. So I need clarification because on your documents I see that it's requested rural residents, which is one dwelling per acre. We're talking about 3.5 acres here. But then the individual says that, oh, I was going to build a future home for myself. But, you know, I just thought all the noise and stuff like that. No, I'll go with the three houses on the three acres, you know, one for acre. So I need clarification. So what is it that we're looking at? Are we looking at one house on these 3.5 acres? Or is it what the document says? Three dwellings on a 3.5 acre strip that's in between a lake and 557. And that is basically sandwiched between two AE floods. So what are we looking at? Is it the three dwellings? Which I believe that's what we're looking at to be sold, I'm sure. So I need clarification on that. And I think the board needs to be clear on that too. Is it one residence or three to be sold? I'll answer at the end of the public hearing if I may not answer. Sure. Well, why at the end so we know what we're looking at, what you're voting on? I think it was brought up before the way I understand it will be for the three. And then he's going to build a house and another house for his animals. And he said he was going to build a house that he had changed as my. So I don't know. No, he didn't say that. He said he was going to go to the house and he was going to do some of the first animals. But what's passing today is what's rehouses? The way the zoning is, the way I understand it, correct me if I'm wrong, but that's the way I understand it. Yes, I have the only reason I bring that up is because it's land use and zoning is very tough. It's very tough for the board. It's very tough for the public. And that we typically, the city looks at the maximum and minimum standards. You know, what they do with the property after they have the land use and zoning, it's a combination of minimum and maximum. So I don't want the board to make decisions based upon a narrative which may or may not come to pass. I kind of gave the extreme example. Your zoning role was a potential for one up to up to one unit per acre. That would be the maximum. So anytime we do something, I tend to look at it. Not in terms of what is going to happen or could happen or possibilities. What's the worst case scenario or what's the maximum. And so here you just have a zoning category. You've got three and a half acres. You're assigning the least intensive zoning category that we have available. And we've got to give it something. So the maximum that you could see on that property is three units per acre because again, the owner of the property could sell the property before it was developed. Oh hey, I'm going to build my dream home here in five years. Oh you know what? I got married and the wife's got family over in California. And so now I'm moving to California. I sell the property whoever buys the property now gets the land use. They're not committed to building one house with a mother and law suite. They could potentially build three houses. So I just say that, so that not to say that what was stated won't happen, but when you look at land use and zoning, you're really caught a half to zoom out and say this is what could happen on this property. So that's the only, that's why I say that. And that's the correct legal standard is the maximum development envelope should be what is considered for purposes of your decision. So what is the maximum, what is the maximum density that could be constructed pursuant to the code and that's what should be considered? So right now I thought it was, they were asking for rural residential, correct? So that is one unit per one acre. Okay. I'm just curious. My name is James Allen. I live in Polk County, Florida. Number two and number three is says Heritage AG. Who is Heritage AG? Is that a construction company? the He does develop them. I think they had hands in the Gumballite Reserve, which is not no reserve no more. It's a hell in the government. So he can say if he's going to build for the mother-in-law, whatever it is, he's like Ryan said. And once the deal is made is done. He can do it. He can then build it three houses and then go back to the other piece of property behind there and build four houses greater and make money. It's not what it appears to be. That's all I got to say. Thank you. I'm Sachs and Evans just wanted to talk about that. I named it Heritage Ag because it's been an agriculture property for a long time. My core business is real estate brokerage and I've developed a lot of properties in Lake Alphard. I have nothing to do with the gun like property but that's why I found this site. I like the town. You guys are great to work with and I want to put my home here So that's in the site plan I submitted to the city for my site plan aspect has to you and it's on I don't know if that comes in a play here, but that's what I'm asking for so thank you I'll make a general statement which may or may not get people mad But you're the owner of the property. Yes, I understand. And at this time, if we approve this, that's your property of the right to do with it what you will. Yes. And if you develop two or three, that's your choice. If you turn around and sell it and someone else develops two or three, that's their choice. The same if it's your property and you choose that, that's the exact same way we would handle it. It's only fair. We're just trying to look at what the law is, follow the law, and the history of it and go from there. No personal attack on anybody. I make every one of us make zero dollars for being here with voluntary. I live in Lake Alfred. I live in a duplex. I bought two duplexes side by side. I live in one unit, rent three out. I live here. So I want nothing but good too. I've disapproved things that don't make sense. I've asked a lot of questions. I'm not here to hurt anybody, but I think that really needs to get said. I've heard many comments saying people are pretty pockets, money full of mock pockets. Every one of these people now have to fill out forms that identify where their money go. I included all of us have to include forms because the state has mandated this stuff. So I used to be one of those people that said this stuff, but I really challenge anybody. They say it to go research it, find it, and prove it because I get nothing to be up here. I do it because I love my city and I love my constituents and everybody around me. I'm doing this a volunteer service. Anyway, I'll shut up. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. So we're close. Public hearing and no more board members discretion no more. Just as the final comment, I mean, would the land use approved the board? It has to have it has to have a zoning assignment and you have two options. It's either vintage residential, which is four units per acre, or you have the least intensive option that we have on the menu, which is rural residential. That's what the applicant is requesting, and that is what staff recommends. So you've got two options you're going with the least intensive option that you have available to you. So, I'm going to come right into approval. I like to make a motion to approve for a rural residential. I second the motion. All in favor say aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carried. Okay, we'll have the other. What? Okay, we'll have the fourth. Thank you. Business item on the agenda, which is resolution 011-24 by Laws. You got a resolution, so I do have the resolution. I will read that title into the record. Just for the record as well, this item has already been considered, the revisions. This has been an item that came up to the board for consideration, probably close to a year ago, right about a year ago. And so the revisions have been vetted, discussed, and have been made pursuant to your recommendations and what is provided for and our code for consistency. It's coming to you in the form of a resolution which is a little bit different than what has come before us because the city manager or interim community development director and I wanted to make a more formal adoption process for the planning and zoning board. So I just wanted you to be aware of that, that you have thoroughly reviewed these particular changes. I will read the resolution title into the record. Resolution number 01-24. A resolution of the planning and zoning board of the city of Lake Alfred Florida and Mending the Bylaws, Section 2 definitions, Section 3 membership, Section 4 meetings and schedule, Section 5 public hearing and procedural rules and Section 6 staff role. Providing for conflicts, providing for severability, providing for the administrative correction of the scripted errors and providing for an effective date. Madam Chair, if I may read the analysis? Yes, go ahead. The froze resolution amends the bylaws of the planning and zoning board. The amendments are consistent with the unified land development code changes and the PNZ boards previous discussions. These include consistency with the ULDC for board composition, defines regular and altered board members and their associated duties. Also includes the language cleanup throughout the document, order of business, and then modified to be consistent with the City Commission agenda. Motions that defines who may make one and when an alternate member may make one in three business days for agenda packet distribution. Also removes resolution language in places, the bylaws as an exhibit to the resolution. I was not a part of the earlier board meetings that made these recommendations. So I'm going off of the attorney and staff here. But staff recommendation is to approve Resolution 01-24 and we'd be happy to answer any questions. Any other questions from the public? No? Okay. Seeing none, then we'll open it up for the boy. I think this is the one we've already went through. Yeah, yeah, we'll open it up for the boy. I think this is the one we've already went through. Yeah, yeah, we already done all of it. All right, okay. So, entertain a motion to approve. I noticed on here where they talk about the membership and they're talking about the board. And they're talking about seven members, but when you go further into it and they talk about the City Council, it's down to five members. So, should that not be consistent? Oh, you have to say a journey on that. Where do you refer to here? Pace, please. I'm just trying to make a call. Pace, or is that too for you and me? I'm trying to make a call. Yeah, three of eight, where it says members, but then the City Council wants to find it, said five. Because the board will step down to five, I don't know. Yeah, there's a phase in process that was devoted, that was devoted on and approved by the commission. Right. So the actual board membership would not be something that the plan is only board would be able to vote on and change at this point because that was something that was voted on by the commission and caught five virtue of the ULDC. So that unfortunately is outside the jurisdiction of the board, but it is a phase in process. I'm trying to find exactly, I'm going to come up here and you just show me what you're talking about. Because that might be easy. I think this is where it says five, right? Yeah. It's on page three, what it talks about. If you look at the strike-through-underline version, it shows the changes. Yeah. And it shows the changes. That's the strike through version is what you have behind that. This is the pre-strike through version here. And then once you get through that, you'll have the strike through version. Here, this is B. Yeah, it doesn't be. But pay the debt. That actually is the actual first resolution that was the existing one. And so the strike through underlying version is the one exhibit B and that's what you'll be voting on. So you'll see the changes in exhibit B. If it makes you feel any better, I was confused when I saw it and I was like, when is it? I've never seen a resolution as a part of an exhibit to a resolution. You can see it. Yes. So before that how it was presented, essentially all the provisions were presented with or inside the resolution. And so now what we have is a resolution adoption process where you're going to actually have a resolution and the text changes will be attached as an exhibit there too. So we took the previous resolution, we attached it as an exhibit for purposes of providing you with the previously adopted rules and bylaws and now the exhibit be would be the strike through version which will what is what will be codified or memorialized for purposes of your reference in the future. Okay, thank you. Any more comments? Okay, so I'll let the make a motion to approve. Wait to make a motion to approve. We're gonna say resolution number 01-24 exhibit. Is that anything up there? Proof of resolution 01-24. Rule 01-24. I'll second. Okay, all in favor, say aye. Aye. Aye. Any opposed? Motion carries. That complete. That complete. That complete. As presentation. Okay. And our next meeting, like it will be October 10th, 2024 at 6pm. Nenies or Giants? Man, listen, that was the right thing. That is as good of Nibbioff position as you are ever going to see.