PDE-24-0336
Published agenda2 appearances between Sep 3, 2024 and Sep 17, 2024.
No action required as this was the first Public Hearing. The adoption hearing was scheduled for the September 17, 2024 Board of County Commissioners meeting at 1:30 p.m. in New Port Richey.
Official title
An Ordinance By The Pasco County Board Of County Commissioners Amending The Pasco County Land Development Code; Amending Section 303.5, Common Procedures, Preapplication Consultation; Section 305.1, Neighborhood Meeting, Intent and Purpose; Section 402.3, Use Permits, Conditional Uses; Section 525.3, C-1 Neighborhood Commercial District, Conditional Uses; Section 525.4, C-1 Neighborhood Commercial District, Special Exeption Uses; Section 526.3, C-2 General Commercial District, Conditional Uses; Section 907.3, Stacking Spaces And Drive-Through Facilities; Creating Section 1106, Car Wash Facilities Standards; Appendix A, Definitions; And Other Sections, As Necessary, For Internal Consistency; Providing For Applicability; Repealer; Providing For Severability; Inclusion Into The Land Development Code, And An Effective Date.
On a calendar
Sep 3, 2024 → Sep 17, 2024 · click a mark to jump to that appearance
Every appearance2 of 2 are in a recording
TranscriptWhat was said at each appearance is below it. Machine transcription, with speaker names inferred from voice matching. 83% of 272 lines carry a name. It shows what was said, not what was decided, and both the words and the names can be wrong.
- 1
Approved minutes
No action required as this was the first Public Hearing. The adoption hearing was scheduled for the September 17, 2024 Board of County Commissioners meeting at 1:30 p.m. in New Port Richey.
56mRon OakleyChairyou. Thank you. Now we'll move um
Move back to P51.
Kathryn StarkeyVice ChairWe have pro publication of the hearing of this matter in the July twenty-fourth, twenty twenty-four edition of the Tampa Bay Times.
Ron OakleyChairAnd before you start, Terry, for the uh pilot country, if you will leave your address and email downstairs and the HOA also do the same thing with the girl that answers the phone. Her name's Cherry. If you'll leave that number before you before you leave so I can contact you in the future. Okay?
Ron OakleyChairRight there.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman Mariano Spito's Planning Development and Economic Growth. Item P fifty one is file number PDE twenty four zero three three six. This is an ordinance by the Pasco County Board of County Commissioners, amending the Pasco County Land Development Code, amending section three hundred three point five, common procedures, pre-application, consultation, section three oh five point one Neighborhood Meeting Intent and Purpose Section 402.3 Use Permits Conditional Us. Section 525.3
C1 Neighborhood Commercial District Conditional Uses. Section 525.4 C1 Neighborhood Commercial District Special Exception Uses. Section 526.3 C2 General Commercial District. Conditional uses. Section 907.3 stacking spaces and drive-thru facilities, creating section 1106, car wash facility standards, appendix A definitions, and other sections as necessary for internal consistency, providing for applicability, repealer, providing for severality, inclusion in the land development code. And
an effective day. This is the first public reading or discussion of the ordinance, so no action is required today. I will proceed into the presentation.
So what I would like to do today is to discuss the journey uh in developing the proposed ordinance uh by talking first about existing conditions and observations, then talk about consistency in terms of what the com plan supports, and lastly get into the actual proposed ordinance. The purpose of the ordinance is to establish new land development code standards for car wash facilities in Pasco County. This was pursuant to a board directive that was issued last fall. The frequency and location of low employment generating
car wash businesses on county arterials and collectors created a public concern such that the BCC directed the Planning Development and Economic Growth Department to develop new standards. regulate the frequency location and the design of these. And as I mentioned, we're going to talk about the existing conditions, the consistency with the comprehensive plan, and then the proposed ordinance. And then there have been extensive stakeholder outreach and input received with multiple meetings from different
interests.
So to go into the existing conditions. On the screen is a map of the West Market area. This is indicative of what's kind of happening across the county. This is just a sample size, if you will. There's 25 freestanding car wash facilities across the county, four freestanding car wash facilities in the various cities, 10 self-service car wash facilities, four hand wash service facilities. facilities and twenty nine gas stations
with car washes as ancillary spread across the county. That's the total inventory. Overall, that's approximately seventy-two different types of opportunities to wash one's car.
Kathryn StarkeyVice ChairOh yeah, I'm a member. I'm a member.
Ron OakleyChairOn this uh slide what you'll see here is the cross a small uh audit of the cross county thoroughfares that are crisscrossing the county north and south. Obviously we have a lot of roads in the county, but here I'm particularly talking about those roads which go from county line to county line from the east side all the way to the coast. So you have 11, approximately 11 north-south roads, which would include US 19, Rowan, Middle, Starkey Moon Lake Alignment, Sun Lake Shady Hills alignment, US-41
Land O' Lakes, Stable 54 Old Pasco alignment, Bruce B. Downs, Boyette, McKendry alignment, Curley Meadow Point alignment, Hankart, Morris Bridge, US 301 and Old Lakeland alignment. Those are basically the major north-north-south roadways. And then we have six major east or west to east roadways. That would be the State Road 54-56 alignment, the State Road 54 Zephyrh Zephyrhills Bypass, Island Boulevard
and County Road 54 Alignment, Rangeland Air and Cutoff. Alignment, ridge and overpass alignment, which those two actually don't connect, but they blend along the familiar parallel. Just to point it out, this is ridge and it ends currently on the vision roadmap anyway at US 41, and then there's a gap, and then there's a pickup again, right bought at I-75 and continuously. And then State Road 52, of course, and then County Line Road along Ornando County. And
this is simply to illustrate which roads are moving across the county. And this is kind of an important point to consider because these are limited frontages. There are not that many opportunities for employment-generating land uses to line up on these major cross-county roadways, and so one ought to. to be considerate of the types of uses that are putting themselves along these rules.
Back last fall, one of the ideas was that car washes were low employment generating land uses, but they were also creating a certain visual that we potentially wanted to avoid, including uh pictures like this where the various appurtenances are out front and visible to passer-by traffic and essentially to community as and also this which illustrates the wide expanses of land that they're picking up along these frontages
plus the appurtenances that are up out in front. And so one of the and
Jack Marianothe buildings
Ron OakleyChairare hidden behind the roads.
Jack MarianoYes. Quick question, how does that meet all that how how does it meet our landscaping code?
Kathryn StarkeyVice ChairThat's not us.
Jack MarianoThat was not us? Okay.
Kathryn StarkeyVice ChairNeither was the other one 'cause that had an illegal sign. I've already figured that out.
Ron OakleyChairThe building
is a good idea. This is sort of the direction that the c my board was looking at where you had the building near to the roadway from batching stations and various other apparent systems located behind in terms of a horizontal layout for freestanding car wash. So in terms of the consistency analysis.
Uh one of the things that uh we had to take a look at was what the comprehensive plan was uh noting.
And so policy flu 1810 is the preservation of capacity for employment generating uses, and policy ED 162 is also a policy for the preservation of capacity for employment generating uses. There are two different elements, but it's essentially the same policy. The Comprehensive Plan notes that the county shall, through the development review process, ensure adequate land and transportation capacity is available for present and future high-paying employment. And generating land uses. So the development review process noted in the Company and the Plan begins with a regulatory framework of the Land
Development Code, and the provisions of the Land Development Code establish the standards against which a review is conducted, which is the review process itself. Establishing the proposed standards for car washes in the land development code will ensure adequate land and transportation capacity. is available for employment generating land uses because the draft provisions will regulate and condition the design, proximity, and frequency of car washes on the transportation corridors. Uh the proposing regulation for design and frequency, as well as establishing car washes as
conditional uses, will enable the county to assess the impacts of such development and spread it out sufficiently to make space for implementing land uses along these corridors. The proposed amendments are consistent with this policy in this regard. Policy flu 143, transitional land uses, and policy flu 1.6. Also titled transitional land uses. Similar, same policy living in different parts of the comprehensive plan. The compound is typically, these policies are typically used to transition
specific land uses between one another. They're also used to ensure an appropriate mitigation of impact using land development code standards, such as landscape buffers, noise mitigation measures, hours of operation, etc. And the proposed amendments work to An appropriate design relationship between, in this case, car washes and surrounding land uses. In addition, the policy also works to manage the redevelopment of areas no longer appropriate as viable residential areas. Properties identified for commercial development or redevelopment are typically understood as
generally not viable or appropriate for residential development alone. In understanding that a property is more appropriately validated. Designated as non-residential or at least mixed use. Policy through 163 requires the management of said non-residential development or redevelopment. And the proposed amendment seeks to manage this: the development and redevelopment of sites for car washes and the application of the conditional use process and the new standards to ensure mitigation of impacts and reasonable transition between uses. So the proposed amendments are
consistent with this problem. And then finally, policy flu 144, which is residential compatibility, buffer standards between residential and non-residential land uses. This policy intends to protect neighborhoods from the sensory intrusions of adjacent non-residential uses that may affect the long-term viability of those neighborhoods. And the proposed amendments to the Land Development Code will condition and limit the sensory intrusions of car wash uses. will have on surrounding development, whether it is residential or non-residential in scope. This is often
the case that car wash uses locate near to residential areas and are also adjacent to other non-residential developments. So this uh proposed amendment is consistent with this policy as well. So uh moving forward then into the existing ordinance, one thing that we ought to consider first is the distinction in the types of uses that we're talking about. So the proposed ordinance um began with a or with a
design limitation and regulation associated with freestanding car wash. So car wash itself wasn't really defined in the land development code. We created uh and proposed a new car freestanding car wash definition, an automotive vehicle service that includes a fully automated exterior vehicle car washing, exterior vehicle washing that uses friction, which could include cloth, brushes, or other physical elements, or touchless equipment as vehicles move through a washing tunnel fitted with a series of synchronized
machines and from Providing a minimum of three vacuum stations. That minimum of three vacuum stations at the end allows for the distinction between freestanding and what's not freestanding. For example, a gas station with an accessory use car wash. They typically don't have vacuum stations, certainly they don't have the number of vacuum stations that a freestanding car wash use has. Uh there are a a series of supporting amendments uh before we get into the proposed section
eleven oh six. These amendments are sprinkled throughout the land development code, including in Chapter 300, where we have a prohibition on the waiver of pre-application or pre-consultation meetings, which is to say that if you're going to do a conditional use uh permit for these uses, you have to do a pre-app. Uh it'll require Car washes to have neighborhood meetings also. Chapter 400 has an alignment, uh, aligns conditional use requirements rather with the new zoning regulations, because there is
a portion of the code that we're going to adjust in Chapter 500, which is to make all car washes a conditional use in C1 zoning and all car washes a conditional use in in C two zone. And then Chapter 900, uh this one's kind of uh this one was a tack on to this as uh since this project was gonna move rather quickly but it didn't. Uh the tack on was to modify the stacking requirements for drive-through facilities
for restaurants. Um it has nothing to do with car washes obviously. Uh the the intent here was to uh provide a site Plan-friendly update the land development code in a quick way in order to enable the counting of car stacking from the pickup window of a drive-thru restaurant facility and not from the menu board, which would often cause the tails of drive-thru cars to go into neighboring properties or out onto
the front of you. And then finally, we created a definition, which I showed at the very beginning. So going into the actual ordinance, I'm not going to go through all of the text um that's on the screen and read everything, but if you recall the C1 and C2 will have car washes as conditional uses and what section 1106.2a is talking about is that in MPUDs that have C1 and C2 permitted uses, it'll they'll need so
you We have MPUDs that often say, we want the permitted uses that are outlined in the Euclidean zone C1 and or the Euclidean zone C2, for example.
By changing them and moving them in the C1 and C2 zonings from the permitted uses list to the conditional uses list, a lot of these MPUDs are no longer going to have access to a use that was previously in the permitted uses list. So they've been moved out of the way for them. They'll need those MPUDs will need a substantial modification to reinsert car wash back into the MPUD. This is in effect the same process uh as having a as requiring a conditional
use permit in the Euclidean zoning, which is basically to review, draft the conditions of approval hearings. So it's essentially the same process. Uh additionally, this section is also prohibiting car washes in EC Employment Center future land use, IL industrial light future land use, IH, industrial heavy future land use, TC town center future land use. These are all future land uses that are reserved for employment generating
uses. And again, car washes typically they tend to have two, maybe three jobs associated with them. And then from a design perspective, auto-centric car washes are not compatible with traditional neighborhood development or transit-oriented developments, or the compact development areas associated with mixed-use trip reduction measures, modern, or you hear about them from time to time, which are less than auto-centric in terms of the design that they're trying to propose.
Additionally, car washes will be prohibited in the connected city northern and southern innovation zones and community hub special planning areas. One car wash use would be allowed per type 1 villages of Pasadena Hills village, type 1 village. Previously specifically approved car washes in MPUDs are exempted to Section 1106. So all of that's being talked about in 11062 data. In
terms of the applicability, these are the four special, you might use the word exception, but the special considerations in terms of applicability. All proposed new car washes having approved site plant or approved building permit prior to September 17, which is the target approval date for this ordinance. that uh has not expired shall only be subject to 1106 uh 3d1. And then uh
and we'll see what 11063B1 is in just a second, uh, but just to cut to the chase so that you don't wonder too much, it's basically saying that drive lanes and parking spaces shall be clearly delineated. In other words, make sure your paint markings on the ground are uh available for people to navigate your site. All proposed new car washes with a pending site plan application deemed complete for content prior to September 17 shall only be subject to that D1 provision I just mentioned. All proposed car washes
with a pending building permit submitted prior to the adoption of this ordinance shall be subject to D1, the painting provision I noted, and any approved MPUD with specific design location. Your site orientation standards for car wash should only be subject to the same D1 provision and will not require substantial modification to the MPUD. This last portion of the sentence is a qualifier that uh compares against what's happening in 1106.2, which
is saying that your use was permitted previously but now is in the find it finds it Itself in the conditional uses section, you have to do a substantial modification because it it it it uh mimics the conditional use process for in an MPUD. This uh provision here notes that you don't have to do that if you have an MPUD that clearly talks about car washes and clearly talks about um the requirements that that car wash in
that MPUD will follow.
So they don't have to do anything section. Uh moving on in terms of um car the car car uh one of the big things that happened at the Planning Commission uh was that the or the local planning agency required that all car washes should find uh should be subject to the conditional use permit process. Uh this created a little bit of a um an internal problem to the uh proposed ordinance because uh
1106.3 were general design and use standards that were going to be applicable to all car washes at that point because there was no distinction being made by the planning or the local planning agency recommendation. Uh so in attempting to weave the Planning Development Economic Growth Department's proposal with the local planning agency's proposal. It was determined that 1106.3 should only be applicable to freestanding car wash facilities, which
would meet the original intent of the ordinance to regulate that the various appurtenances, the amount of land area used up by these freestanding car wash facilities on our major corridors and the unsightly appearance that they were presenting. And so these standards talk about the horizontal design requirements. for a freestanding car wash facility. These are not applicable to a use such as a gas station which might have accessory car wash with it.
Moving along in terms of the setbacks, again, when when the two versions met at the local planning agency, what came out was setback requirements that essentially imitate and are exactly the same as the C2 setback requirements for any other commercial use. So the other main thing that the proposed ordinance requires is that we'll screen. all mechanical equipment, so if it's on the roof, parapets. If it's on the ground somewhere, landscaping,
fencing, that sort of thing.
Importantly, there is an allowance for car wash openings to face a right-of-way after orienting properly. So there's a situation, there's always going to be these types of uh situations where if the freestanding car wash facility, for example, is a corner lot,
Which however which way you turn the building is always going to be facing the right-of-way. And so the code does take uh does make allowance for car wash openings to face the right of way. There's ways that you can screen it without having to impede access into the tunnel that that the cars will move through.
On this slide, and you can see here our D1 provision. This is the drive lanes and parking spaces shall be clearly delineated, making sure your paint the paint markings are appropriate. In this provision, we're talking about screening vacuums and pumps in C3 and C4 there, and screening from residential areas.
Finally here in 1106.4 we get to additional design standards that are now applicable importantly to all car wash facilities. So these are vertical requirements where we seek to avoid blank facades, make sure that the buildings and the various appurtenances match each other, keep a clean appearance. That's the language that's being presented in Uh 11064A and B. These uh design standards would be applicable
to a project like a gas station that has uh an accessory car wash, mainly because it doesn't deal with horizontal requirements, it only deals with uh vertical requirements. Make sure you're you you look right. Uh it does not impede these business. businesses from presenting their brand.
More of the vertical requirements for the roofs, for the various types of materials. There's a lot of variation opportunity given in terms of the materials that can be used to create that visual distinction to avoid light facades. Car wash tunnels. The interior mechanical equipment of the freestanding car wash tunnels shall not be visible from adjacent lightsaber. A different provision to the one that I mentioned just a few minutes ago that talked about how the openings of the
tunnels uh could face the right-of-way. This is talking about the vertical element, so making sure that you don't have those glass walls that fog up and create a lot of um visual.
Some people don't like that look where everything is just uh wet and and foggy in the building. So uh this is simply trying to avoid that that view into the mechanical systems of the car launching.
And then moving along in terms of the Chapter 300, which I mentioned at the beginning of the presentation, this is just a language that's requiring pre-application consultation. Neighborhood meetings are required for car washes. You can see that here at the bottom. Here's the uh conditional uses. List that'll be present in the C1 and C2 zoning requirements. So one of the things that happened at the local planning agency, the initial proposal came forward with a
proximity requirement. There was one and a half miles separation between various freestanding car wash facilities. The local planning agency changed it to say all car washes should now be conditional use permits. We could better control the proximity issue through a conditional use permit process. That's what they voted on and recommended. As part of that discussion, the County Attorney's Office helped to facilitate the establishment of these additional standards that would be built into the
conditional use criteria that the Planning Commission. The future on such a on a car wash proposal, for example, and what kind of conditioners could that assess and discuss how close a proposed car wash is to other types of car washes in the area and what can be done about it. So just to walk through those really quick because these are kind of new, um, it happened in the discussion at the local planning agency. So all car wash facilities will be subject to additional.
Additional review criteria and standards, which may include, but not limited, to the following: a demonstration by the applicant that there is public need for a car wash at a particular location proposed. This can likely be accomplished by a market demand analysis. An inventory of all car washes located within a five-mile radius of the proposed location. This to identify the saturation of what's happening, how many car washes are located within the In the vicinity, we saw the map earlier in the West Market area, kind of showed the different locations of the
various car washes across the county. Noise limits appropriate to the surrounding land uses. We have noise requirements and the code of ordinances, but if something wanted to be a little bit more stringent, we could build that into the conditional use permit. A decommissioning plan was something that was talked about at the local planning agency extensively. The plan for when these uses expire, when they go out of business, and we have a shell of a building that remains. So this is something that can be established as a conditional use permit has appropriate hours of operation, which
is a typical requirement of many conditional use permits. And then, of course, requirements for enhanced buffering, etc., for the use. All of this can be discussed on a case-by-case basis through. the conditional use process. These are the requirements, these are the conditional uses themselves in the C1 and in the C2 lists coming in as C under C1 and Q under C2 zone. This is the the
drive-thru add-on that that took place. So it's illustrating that the the stacking spaces are to be counted from the pickup windows, not the manu colours. And then the definition here at the end. And so with that presentation we would request the Board of County Commissioners accept uh public comment. No action is required today. There were a number of questions that were submitted by public uh interested parties. As it relates to the car wash ordinance that's being proposed here today, those
included questions that I tried to answer during the presentation. For example, if an if an existing MPUD allows C2 uses, but a developer wants a car wash, he has to do a substantial modification. answer to that is If there is an existing MPUD that has allowed C one or C two permitted uses, it's relying on the Euclidean zoning to identify the permitted uses. If the Euclidean zoning district changes and moves a previously permitted use to a conditional
use, the MPUDs which reference the permitted uses of these Euclidean zones no longer have that. As a result, to access that use, a substantial modification is required to reintroduce it, which essentially is the same thing as a conditional use permit anyway. You have to develop the conditions, whether that's in a conditions of approval list or as a conditional use permit list. And then you have to present it to the Planning Commission and also to the Board of County Commissioners. Same process.
Others uh were question other questions included uh the differentiation between 1106 2A, uh which required that substantial modification that I just talked about. Um but if you have a specific design, do you do you need to still go through that sp substantial modification? The answer is no. If your MPUD clearly identifies that it allows a car wash and that it says that car wash is going to be positioned in this manner and it's going to allow these types of appurances and and other uh pieces of equipment,
then they're free and clear of 1106. You don't have to follow that. There was a s a small typo at the end of the presentation which we can fix. And then lastly the the other question I answered. So um sorry any questions?
Ron OakleyChairMr. Weightman.
Seth WeightmanThank you, Chair. Terry and David and team, I'm very glad to see movement to our level on this this project. It's you know clear that we have car washers all over the county. You've seen my maps, we've seen yours. Now I want to make sure before The second reading of this, and we have all the kinks worked out. There's a lot in this ordinance where I just really my initiative was architectural design
standards and some level of distance requirement. Um and I think it's important that this board have the ability that we don't box ourselves in that. I guess we through conditional user however Ingle step in whenever you'd like. That this board has the ability to pr approve a car wash if it's if it's deemed necessary in the area. My thought process behind this was say the widening of 301 happens from 56 south and it's six lanes or even fifty-six,
for example. I don't want people doing U-turns and cutting across traffic to get to service station or or whatnot. So I know instead of boxing ourselves to just one of the But have 'em to where It's say forty one to forty one is widened from fifty two all the way to Hernando, for example. Um So uh and then thinking about further on a on a decommissioning plan. I I like the idea but Other businesses go out of business, a Wendy's goes
out of business or Checkers goes out of business and they don't have a decommissioning plan. It's kind of apples to apples there or they brand round up, weather, mowing the grass. i that's kind of a uh uh uh a tricky tricky deal there if all of a sudden we're doing decommissioning plans for one type of product over another. I I understand it back in O eight when you know, market fell out and we had car washes sitting around on fifty-four. Um just
falling apart, looking bad, but there are other businesses too. Um so I think we still have a little bit of work to do. before we we vote on this thing and I'm hoping that staff can get you know, you all working together and get with stakeholders, especially the County Attorney's Office, Mr. Steinschneider. M maybe working and coming in at a higher level, that way we can have some you know, the business kind of thought process going into this ordinance. That way it's a it's a good product and we don't have
to necessarily undo it later. Um and also like to see anything that the board has approved previously not be impacted. uh uh by this ordinance. I know there's there's ones that we approved at um uh fifty two or What's it called now? McKay Clinton and Prospect. And that's used as our example and that group was a fantastic working partner of what if we're going to have a car wash in this county. what we want it to l to look like
and be designed and and and be moving forward. And I don't want this ordinance to hem up, you know, their next steps. It's I wanna make sure that what we have going forward is for the future. So I'm very glad of all the work and hours y'all put into it and working with the stakeholders. I'm excited to see uh the finished product here and I know you know all the folks out and about throughout Basco County are as well. It's we've heard it loud and loud and clear that hey, what's up with all
these these car washes and looking like put pup golf course courses with sharks and all sorts of funny things so you know, glad that we're moving towards a direction to make up our car wash product uh look a little more professional. So thank you.
Ron OakleyChairUh, Terry, I believe with with stakeholders and all in mind, I think you've answered a lot of those questions prior to now, if I'm not mistaken. As far as competition. in the workplace. Mm-hmm. On car washes.
Ron OakleyChairOh you you mean as in terms of
Ron OakleyChairWell I d I didn't think you could have um A car was coming in a corner and they have monopoly on all four corners even though they don't own the land. I thought y'all addressed
Ron OakleyChairthat. Uh it ca yes, it can be that can be addressed because if we require all car washers to have a conditional use permit, one of the criteria that we discussed
Rick Warnerum
Ron OakleyChairnumber ten B here. In inventory of all car washes located within a five mile radius. If the board found that there was car washes on all four corners, for example or on on all three corners, now the fourth one was coming in for a car wash. there's an opportunity here for the board to really critically assess uh a fourth and say maybe there's too many right here.
Ron OakleyChairYeah. That's what I was thinking you'll address that. Any other questions?
Jack MarianoMr. Chairman Mr. Mariano. Uh I'm a little concerned about Commissioner Weightman challenging having putt-putt class co golf courses out there. So you want to
Seth Weightmanchallenge the putt-putt
Jack Marianogolf, is that what you're saying?
Uh I'm and I'm glad you brought up as far as having a six lane highway, having them across the way, 'cause that was one of my thoughts too. Yeah. Avenue two turns. I'm I'm glad we're covering that. I'm glad we're covering intersections 'cause three's probably enough. Um so the two's probably plenty, but I think it's good to look at that. The Someone who's put the application, I agree with that too. Don't affect that. What does concern me a little bit is far as staff getting involved in doing a market analysis, what do we need to know? their business model is pretty
much If you can look at what they do, they pretty much go by subscription rates anyway. So whether the ones right beside it or not, they don't care. I don't think it's gonna help the effect we want. The distance of a mile, mile and a half, whatever it may be, I think is probably the most important part of this whole thing going through next year design standards, which I like what you're doing there too. Um I'm I'm more concerned to that than in the market analysis. I think it's would slow down the whole process, uh not make it good. Um MPUDs, if someone's got C two zoning
and it fits, um I don't know what type of analysis you're gonna do, but I think we should take a close look at that as well. If they're already approved for it, that's kinda like being pre approved. If it meets our standards to what we're setting for design, I don't know how you keep someone from saying Yeah. you can't put it in after after May MP and B is approved. That's in the marketplace. Yeah.
Kathryn StarkeyVice ChairYeah. Okay, this is
the
right-of-way too, and I think of all the work we did, I see Mr. Altman's here on his on his plan. I don't think was that an MPUD?
Ron OakleyChairThat was. Yeah. And it was specific.
Kathryn StarkeyVice ChairOkay, and we we did a lot of specific rules on the layout of that one, but you're saying you'd have to come back through
Ron OakleyChairagain? No, no. He that project was free and clear. Okay. The MPUD has specific it has identified that it will do a car wash and it has identified specific site design uh criteria in the MPU D. I I wanna be clear though that there are many MPUDs That, I suppose you might say, for convenience sake, have simply said we will allow all C2 permitted uses. And it that's it. That's all it talks about in the MPUD.
Well, the MPUD is making a reference to the Euclidean zone and essentially piggybacking off what the Euclidean zone has in the land development code. So if that list changes there, uh that means that it's no longer accessible to the MPUD in terms of being a permitted use. So That may sound unfair, but it is it's like I said previously in the Euclidean zone, it's now conditional use. So anybody who had C2 before, they're going to have it
as a conditional use. So if they want to do that, they're going to come into the Planning Commissioner the Board of County Commissioners to make their case for a conditional use permit. If you're in an MPUD, you're going to do the same process, except it's going to be called a substantial modification, but they're going to come in, they're going to do the same exercise. Where they develop the conditions of approval. The same kind of conditions of approval. You'd build for a conditional use permit and then make that proposal to the Board of County Commissioners say we'd like to reinsert a car wash into this MPUD with these uh conditions
of approval. And that's basically the same process as a conditional use permit. Okay.
Kathryn StarkeyVice ChairOkay, and I have one more question. Um the did you say there has to be a neighborhood meeting?
Ron OakleyChairYes.
Kathryn StarkeyVice ChairIs that part of what we require now on conditional use?
Ron OakleyChairYes. For conditional use.
Specifically for the car wash use, as I pointed out here, it'll be required. I shouldn't say for all conditional use permits, but specifically for the neighborhood meeting. All conditional use permits must do a pre-application meeting, no matter what. But for a neighborhood meeting
Kathryn StarkeyVice ChairWhy?
Sounds just like discriminatory. I f I feel bad for the car wash people. Well
Seth Weightmanthat's neighborhood. Is that stemming from the one that's in Seven Oaks? Is that the kind of the reason why we're all sudden up the car wash popped up in Seven Oaks in Business Park in the Business Park?
Kathryn StarkeyVice ChairWhere? Inside
Seth WeightmanSeven Oaks? It's on uh I'm not sure. The west side of Bruceby Downs. In Seven Oaks, yeah.
Kathryn StarkeyVice ChairOkay, well Bruce Bowns is a big road.
Seth WeightmanYeah, you oughta go see it.
Kathryn StarkeyVice ChairI guess it won't show up on here yet.
Seth WeightmanSo so Terry, Mr. Chairman?
Ron OakleyChairYes.
Seth WeightmanSo Terry, so the project that's approved that the board approved however long ago at Prospect and Clinton.
Unidentified speakerVoice AYes.
Seth WeightmanThis these terms and they were the catalyst for how we got worked on all these architectural design standards and we're fortunate to have a partner with, you know, Circle Cable and work with us and go through renderings and all the examples. They're set to close and move forward and they would not be impacted on on what we have reading here today.
Ron OakleyChairYes, that's the intent of the language. Scroll back here.
Uh here at the end here. A new car wash? Yeah. A new car wash? I'm sorry? It's an X green. Well it works in combination. So a new car wash to be located within one of these pr prohibited uh areas receiving specific approval as a use in an MPV approved by the board prior to the adoption of this section shall not be prohibited. That car wash was in a V OPH village. That's why it's it's included there in the in the prohibited areas. And
then the next
Seth WeightmanWell we have two of those but this board already approved Yeah,
Ron OakleyChairwhat'll be okay there. And then this one here. Uh any approved MPUD so this one's the all encapsulating county wide provision. Any approved MPUD with specific design, location, and site orientation standards for car washes shall only be subject to section the painting on the ground and will not require substantial modification, otherwise they don't have to come in for for anything.
Seth WeightmanSo why am I why are we hearing concern from votes that have already been passed?
Ron OakleyChairI mean I would try to make it as clear as possible so that they wouldn't have to
Seth Weightmanbe a good idea. Looking to go forward here and you know, have a good product going forward, but You know, this board's made binding decisions, so it's going into getting better in the future. And I just hate to see It's my initiative, but I hate to see something we're working on. Have negative impact on something that we shouldn't have be even worried about today. That's right.
Ron OakleyChairSo again that that one at Prospect and Clinton is in the clear as it relates to this uh
Ron OakleyChairthank you Chairman Mariano So there's no action date, but this is a public hearing and I believe we have someone signed up to speak.
Kathryn StarkeyVice ChairWe don't have anyone signed up per se.
Ron OakleyChairBut
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chairwe have one online, but I
Unidentified speakerVoice Bbelieve Mr.
Ron OakleyChairHobby is here. Mr. Hobby wants to speak to this item.
Unidentified speakerVoice BUh Mr. Chairman Clark Hobby, Hobby and Hobby, PA 109 North Brest Street Tampa, Florida have been sworn. Uh I I do not have any philosophical objection to limiting car washes. I don't have any problem with uh you know requiring conditional use permit and C2 uh The board does need to be aware that there are a lot of people that adopted C2 standards in their MPUDs. They probably thought they were going to have car washes as a potential use, and those are going to go away now. But
my the reason why I'm speaking today is I'm hoping that we can sit down with your staff. David Engel and his staff have worked very hard on this, and the county attorneys have have worked on this whole But there hasn't been a lot of meeting together with the stakeholders, and there's some language issues with this draft that we received last week that are still really problematic. That's one example of it. If you look at B4, it says if you have an approved MPUD with a specific design, location, or
site orientation standards, you do not it will not require a substantial. Modification to the MPUD, not a modification to the MPUD. We haven't approved MPUD. I don't want to do any modification. It just she'll say not require a modification. And some of the language in the previous paragraph is also inconsistent with that. So I know uh Miss Wellhite and I would like to sit down and Cynthia Spidel with the County Attorney's Office. and with staff just to
work through the the finer points of the language but I'm representing the seller and the one site over in Prospect and McCabe and I worked on the other MPUD on the other side that both have site design requirements and I've got to be very clear that those are still allowed and that we're not having to change our MPUD. That's just very important. and and Cynthia and I both worked on the one that involves Mr. Altman and his partners and you know it would be a shame if we're at
this point if that language was construed to mean that we have to modify our MPD before we could proceed. So anyway, I appreciate your help. Thank you.
Jack MarianoMr. Chairman? Yes. So Clark? Yes. So even going through the conditional use would be part of a modification. For an M P U D.
Unidentified speakerVoice BWell, that that's a raising a different issue. In the previous paragraph, I I I would say to the board: instead of requiring when someone has C2 but they don't have specific design standards, you could simply require a conditional use permit be obtained from the board, which has to go through all the hearings. A conditional use permit is a lot easier to get done than a substantial monitor. Modification to the MPUD. The filing fees, the reports and all that stuff are exponentially more
difficult. So that's one of the things we discuss with staff. But like I said, that this is more getting into the legalese and the language not doing what I don't think the county even intends that it's doing.
Jack MarianoWell th those are my thoughts too, by going to this substantial modification or any modification. Would entitle probably cost a lot more money compared to just a condition.
Unidentified speakerVoice BOh for sure. Uh there's no question about that.
Jack MarianoSo I think that's we should we should be looking to go that way.
Barbara WilhiteBarbara Wilheite 60 Barbara D'Souza Wilheite. Oh, I don't know. Barbara Wilheite, [address removed]. This has been a long journey. We've been side by side with your staff, with Clark and I and Cynthia Spidel. We understand your intent. We just have to make sure the language is reasonable and works. And we'll continue. Staff has said they would sit down with us and we actually offer. I said, look, I'll sit down with you. Let's get in a room. Pull it up on the screen and let's fix some of these language issues. We've seen a bunch of them between Clark and myself. I would say that I
was surprised when I got back from my honeymoon that the Planning Commission had pulled in all car washes. Do we really want to do that? You all were really clear about standalones, freestanding, but now we have the 7-Elevens and their accessory car washes. So now we're talking about every convenience store that wants to have a gas station, uh excuse me, uh car wash, now we're pulling them into this as well. And do those people even know? that that, you know, we've talked about it's been in the press. I don't really feel sorry for the freestanding ones, because it's been in the press for a really long time
that this was something you were working on. But I imagine there's people that are been working on in like a seven eleven with a with a um car wash that no idea that this is going on. We're pulling them in. So I just kinda wanna point that out. I was really surprised by that 'cause that pulls in a whole nother group of folks. Um So the other thing and then that's amplified by the fact that you have some really strong prohibitions here in P Connected City and in V O P H He says you can have one well there's a whole bunch of places in connected city. I guess you'll have to just drive somewhere else. you know, drive somewhere else in the connected
city to wash your car. But if you look at in in villages of Pasadena Hills, you can have one per village. Okay, well so now is that one standalone or is that one just regular seven eleven with a car wa accessory car wash? So perhaps if you guys could kind of weigh in on that. And give some direction because those it seems like there's gonna be a lot of unintended consequences with those strict prohibitions when the c the what you're moving towards is a conditional use so you can hear these. But
some of those you won't be able to hear if you have this kind of language that's this strict in here. And how are you gonna decide who's the first one, who gets to be the first one? That's a whole nother can of worms. The neighborhood meeting, I've done a ton of neighborhood meetings in all my years and requiring that to be mandatory in every case just stirs people up. Um very difficult to do neighborhood meetings because People can't have their questions asked because you have people that feel strongly, people that just want to get questions asked. It's not a very good vehicle. So
Your staff already has discretion. If there's a use that people are caring about that want to participate. Neighbors want to participate when they get their notice staff says go to a neighborhood meeting, you go do one or you just meet with the people that have shown interest and have questions. So I think we're just going to make this a very, very, very difficult process. Clark and I do make our living off a process, so we're actually standing up here saying, Are you sure? Because we make our living off of process. So just kind of think about that. Um again we want to come up with something that's workable and reasonable.
And you know all this p is is time on your staff as well. We have a lot of different things.
Kathryn StarkeyVice ChairThat was all I wanted to
Barbara Wilhitekinda point
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chairout. Talk about how we the cell tower ordinance.
Barbara WilhiteSo yes, so there's I was was paying attention to Planning Commission when I got back. I did listen and I guess there's the thought The decommissioning plan, what I can hear what what Planning Commission is saying is in the cell tower ordinance there's a very sp there's very specific language that says if that cell tower is not used for six months, it has to come down or the county can bring it, you know, can uh bring it down and then lean the property. So I think that's what Planning Commission was saying. Um if I'm channeling
what Planning Commission was saying. Saying in their recommendation, I'm not sure the language is reflected here, but there is specific language if that's something they wanted to do. Um Or you if you're you're coming down going down a conditional use route, I guess I suppose you could condition them. We do need to work on the way the condition conditional use standards, you know, may include but not limited to. It's not really a standard, so but I talked to David, he said we'll work on that. Um but that's the thought. Uh it's not my thought. I'm just telling you what the Planning Commission was thinking
that perhaps that would self-regulate people to make sure that there wasn't a proliferation of where they shouldn't be, but I'm not sure that that's I mean I don't know that's a perception that people think people aren't going into these businesses um with these big investments and and making those decisions wisely. So That's my input. Happy to work with your staff. Get this over the the goal line.
Ron OakleyChairSo glad to see you. Uh the next time you come, learn your last name and we'll be okay.
Kathryn StarkeyVice ChairThat's we did not have any L one L signed up. Okay.
Ron OakleyChairDoes anyone speak to this item?
Anyone? See another one?
Kathryn StarkeyVice ChairOnline, um Miss Spidel, Cynthia Spidel.
Ms. Spider. There you go.
Unidentified speakerVoice COkay, thanks, yeah. Uh um for money checked to concerns weaver and I'm here representing um the circle cow prospect and putting out and do everybody's been kind of referencing though obviously I just wanted to make sure we got on record that we support the um use exemption in one one oh six point two A that allows the use to continue in the type two village because we Are a type 2 village, and that only um 6.3. Standard
for the driveway markings, but that would be the only additional standard that would apply. Um, and it would not require any modification to sort of um echo the court's point that it's insubstantial. Uh, it should describe any modification. So um that covers with any wanted just thing. That would be thankful working with us and allowing that exemption to be clear. There's just two clear items that I wanted to bring to your attention, and that was the fact that no alternative standards would be allowed. So I
just think that something like in our case, and just having gone through this experience, there were a lot of engineering standards that were required for me to replace municipal things in certain areas. So I think that it's a Date to model in any circumstance. I think there was a little play though that Terry mentioned, so that covers that. that in um a public meet it would be really hard to establish a public meeting and something above public meet I don't think it can should be in the business of picking. Competition is
good for place, it's good for the citizens of Patrick County. And with that, I'm happy to answer any questions and thanks very much for the opportunity to comment.
Kathryn StarkeyVice ChairThank you, ma'am. Um Madam Vice Chair, we uh the clerk's office wants to make note uh that there is a ex-party communication notification that has been filed in this matter on behalf of Commissioner Weightman.
Kathryn StarkeyVice ChairOkay. And um does staff wanna come back up or We You want to answer any questions or comments at any time?
Ron OakleyChairUm Victoria Spito's Planning Development and Economic Growth. Uh I don't have any further questions. We'll be happy to work with the stakeholders that just spoke. Uh and I think we're very close uh to a final version.
Kathryn StarkeyVice ChairOkay. Well uh Commissioner Mariano?
Jack MarianoYeah, just one one question, Terry. As far as gas stations go I think the type of gas station that has it built right beside their building, et cetera, is not a complete waste of space, this has efficiencies to it. I'm not looking to put those into this whole uh protection. I don't know if the rest of the board does the same way.
Kathryn StarkeyVice ChairI don't I don't have an opinion one way or another on those.
Jack MarianoAs far as location sighting a mile, a mile and a half. If they can fit, they can go to me, I don't have a problem with
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chairthat. Yeah, yeah, same.
Ron OakleyChairAre you saying I'm sorry, Commissioner, just to clarify, are you saying that the gas stations with ancillary or accessory car wash shouldn't have to meet a proximity requirement?
Kathryn StarkeyVice ChairWait, which kind? Because like Commission uh Mr. Altman's had is a gas station with a full car wash.
Jack MarianoLet's say there are gas station pumps on one side, then off to the side they have the building connected to the building, they have a sing single standalone one stall
Kathryn StarkeyVice Chairdrive through and be done. Is there a way to discriptive those are
Ron OakleyChairthe so called accessory car washes,
so they're not included. Well in the current draft we we have included them, but is it the board's desire not to consider them at all?
Jack MarianoUm I mean you can Make them look good if there's some standards you're gonna put in, but I'm not looking to like put them into the uh distance things, uh distance numbers we're talking about.
Ron OakleyChairOkay. Well we don't have a proximity requirement right now. It's just a con a straight up conditional use permit for for every for all the uses. Okay.
Lisa YeagerThe other thing also um about uh holding a public meeting, I don't know. I just think that like Commissioner Starkey said, other businesses don't have to do that, so I don't really think that's fair. I don't know what you guys think. But
Unidentified speakerVoice DYeah. Okay.
Seth WeightmanI think it depends on where you put 'em. When the one popped up at Seven Oaks, that cost that that surprised a lot of folks. Uh that one could go where it did. Um but again, the board will have discretion, right? So we'll we'll take 'em we'll take 'em as they come.
Kathryn StarkeyVice ChairYeah.
Ron OakleyChairMr.
Jack MarianoChairman Mariano.
Kathryn StarkeyVice ChairRemember it's one or two jobs per that's the
Seth WeightmanYeah, right. When you look at jobs per square foot.
Kathryn StarkeyVice ChairThat's that's what gets me.
Jack MarianoRight, but from what might be different, uh the conditional use it is a public hearing. So I wouldn't say it was a town hall meeting, but it will be a public public will get a chance to voice their opinion on it.
Ron OakleyChairYeah. Casper.
Jack MarianoAnd yes and a lot less cost than the quantification process.
Ron OakleyChairYou have something to Well I just to clarify Commissioner Yeager and Commissioner Starkey commented on the requirement for neighborhood meetings, right? Right. Okay. Just
Mike Carballayeah.
Unidentified speakerVoice ESo I think Terry, I think if I can summarize I th the comment is since you're gonna have a full blown public hearing On that atom. They don't they don't necessarily think a neighborhood meeting is necessary.
Kathryn StarkeyVice ChairYeah. Very good.
Unidentified speakerVoice EWhatever.
Kathryn StarkeyVice ChairThat's why he's an attorney.
Jack MarianoThat's why it's our journey.
Ron OakleyChairI guess.
- 211mRon OakleyChair
a second. All those in favor to continue. Say aye. Aye. Okay. Yes. Five zero. Next move to the next items. Uh P sixty five.
Unidentified speakerVoice FWe have proved publication of the hearing of this matter in the temp Bay Times of July twenty-fourth, twenty twenty four.
Ron OakleyChairThank you, Mr. Chairman. Item P65 is PDE 240336. This is an ordinance by the Pasco County Board of County Commissioners, amending the Pasco County Land Development Code, amending section 303.5, common procedures, the application, consultation, section 305.1, neighborhood meeting, intent and purpose, section 402.3, use permits, conditional uses, section 525.1. C One neighborhood commercial district conditional uses Section 525.4 C One Neighborhood
Near Neighborhood Commercial District Special Exception Uses Section 526.3 C2 General Commercial District General Commercial District Conditional Uses Section 907.3 Stacking Spaces and Drive Through Facilities. Creating section eleven oh six car wash facilities standards, appendix A, definitions, and other sections as necessary for internal consistency, providing for applicability, refueler, providing for severability, inclusion into land development code, and ineffective date. Um I
made a presentation on this at the last Board of County Commissioners meeting in Dade City on September third. The Board of County Commissioners provided Uh uh input on developing some uh changes to the proposed ordinance that was discussed. The version that has been passed out to everyone today um updates what has been included in civic clerk that version addresses freestanding car washes only so the accessory Uh
car washes that would be associated with gas stations is no longer being considered as part of this ordinance. Uh it requires conditional use approval for new car washes, freestanding car washes proposed to be included within an MPUD, a C1 or a C2 commercial district, notwithstanding any provisions that might be contrary in the land development code. Um we had previously proposed requiring any new car wash within an MPUD to be processes of substantial modification. So everything is now to be uh
conditional use. That's the intent. The standards proposed under uh 402 2.3 conditional uses have also been amended to reduce the inventory radius distance submitted by applicants. So previously we had a a provision under the conditional use requirements. Yeah.
All the car washes within a five mile radius that's been reduced to a one point five mile radius. To keep with the original intent of acknowledging what kind of car washes are within a certain proximity of a proposed car wash. And then finally, the board noted that neighborhood meetings were not necessary for car washes as they would come before the public hearing process as a conditional use anyway. So that has also been removed. We can go through a full presentation, but that's the Uh update
since the last meeting. And we have worked with the stakeholders to accomplish these amendments.
Ron OakleyChairAny discussion.
Kathryn StarkeyVice ChairYes, I have one question. Under the applicability um uh and in reference to V O P H I know we have a gas station that also has a f a car wash. It's not a drive it's not a building that you drive through but it's a freestanding car wash with a gas station. I wanna make sure that's still that's a one per village. I mean that can't that counts.
Ron OakleyChairYes, that's that's built into that into this code.
Kathryn StarkeyVice ChairOkay, because you define it says where one freestanding car wash is permitted per village, but are you gonna consider and I'm thinking of Alan Altman's corner Um That's a That's a car wash like the freestanding ones we're talking about plus a gas station. It is not a gas station with a little drive thru building. So it's it's a hybrid. And I think that should count, one per village. Otherwise.
We're gonna be messed up.
Because those are that's not what we wanted in in those villages, as you just saw in that presentation.
Ron OakleyChairSo Is the question is that car wash facility that's in village A of V O P H okay to be there? Is that what you're asking?
Kathryn StarkeyVice ChairI'm I'm saying that that we need to count
Unidentified speakerVoice EShe wants to make sure that a ty that that type of car wash counts in this ordinance.
Kathryn StarkeyVice ChairAs a freestanding
Unidentified speakerVoice Ecase, a particular one you've exempt it you've you've exempted. But if future are developed that are of that model She wants she's asking if those would be captured. Those would be the right-of-way. Correct
Kathryn StarkeyVice ChairCommissioner? Is that
the other one?
Because you said you're taking out the that it's only freestanding car washes, but that's a freestanding car wash with a gas station.
Unidentified speakerVoice GCommissioner Oakley Freestanding Car wash is defined, it's it's done by the number of vacuums That they have, it's not based on whether they're next to a gas station or not.
Kathryn StarkeyVice ChairOkay. Okay.
Unidentified speakerVoice GSo that would count as a few years ago. The answer is yes, it counts. It counts as a freestanding car wash because of the number of vacuums has at the car wash. Not it doesn't matter whether it has a gas station next to it.
Kathryn StarkeyVice ChairOkay. That's that's all I want to then I'm then I'm So we have to have public.
Ron OakleyChairOkay.
All right. Okay, and this is a public meeting and is anyone here to speak to this item?
Mr. Hobby?
Unidentified speakerVoice BMr. Chairman, Clark Hobby, uh 109 North Brussel Street, Tampa, Florida. Uh I apologize. I wasn't planning on speaking, but actually uh Commissioner Starkey is raising an issue that I should have caught the other day, and it's in the limited applicability section. A four. I believe what she's alluding to and the way this should read is that There should be a limited applicability for any approved MPUD that has specific design location or site orientation standards for car
washes, not freestanding, because until today we didn't call them freestanding car washes. So if you your MPUD, like Alan Altman's and one other that I have, have specific design. criteria that we came up with, you know, most of these are fairly recent, then those only have to meet a very limited part of the code. So I think that's the one change I would request. I don't see offhand that there would be a problem with any of the other sections.
Kathryn StarkeyVice ChairDavid, does that keep the intent of one per village?
Unidentified speakerVoice GI think so, but I kinda need to see the language that Clark was talking about.
Jack MarianoMr. Chairman Mariano. So if you strike the free standing or you just consider it as a regular car wash, I don't I don't see what the difference would be.
Unidentified speakerVoice GBut I think what Clark is trying to say is that this doesn't uh directly affect Commissioner Starkey's question. I It's still one per village. He's talking about the exemption for uh that already already approved MPDs. And he's saying that We should strike the word freestanding for num from A four. And just say car washers. necessarily have a problem with it because the theory of A four was that if you already had an approved M P D that
specifically had design standard for car washes, you should you wouldn't be subject You'd only be subject to very limited parts of this code. So I don't I don't think it's a problem. We we've we've intended to vest the MPUDs that had Specific design standard for car washes.
Unidentified speakerVoice ESo
Unidentified speakerVoice Gthen it matters whether it's freestanding or not.
Unidentified speakerVoice EBut the only one that would be stricken would be Sub four.
Unidentified speakerVoice GA yeah
Unidentified speakerVoice EA four, yes. The word freestanding from A four. There also appears to be a numbering error in that section where you've got two A's on this in the version that was passed out. So That would be B four that would have freestanding struck in the second line.
Unidentified speakerVoice HChairman? Yeah. Thank you, Chairman Ms. Dolson, so wouldn't a backstop do that be because it's conditional use the board would have to bless it anyway, up or down?
Unidentified speakerVoice GFor the new car buses, yes, they're all requiring conditional uses, but We specifically exempted any MUD were They sp they they went out of their way to list car wash as a use and staff developed design standards for that car washed use because
Unidentified speakerVoice FYeah.
Unidentified speakerVoice GThey had already been through a more a r a process similar to what we would do for a conditional use approval. So we were trying to vest the M P Ds that Where staff had already done a more detailed review of the car washed use. So but to answer your question on a going forward basis Yes, any new car wash, any new freestanding car wash Would require a conditional use approval whether it was in C one, C two, or in an MPUD that had not gone through that more detailed process.
Unidentified speakerVoice HSo for this change the motion would be Exceptional ordinance as it states with amended
Unidentified speakerVoice Gwhat? Removing the word freestanding from is it B four or A four? I'm not sure which is B four, not that.
It's removed he won Clark has asked us to remove one word which I'm okay with. It's the word freestanding from B four.
Unidentified speakerVoice HSo my motion would be
Unidentified speakerVoice GWait
Unidentified speakerVoice Ea minute. Public hearing. You spoke
Ron OakleyChairto public hearing.
I know Clark spoke, but is there anyone else in the audience who wish to speak to this item?
Unidentified speakerVoice FWe do not have anyone signed up or online.
Ron OakleyChairSo seeing no one come forward then ready for the pleasure
Jack Marianoof the board. Move approval with the noted changes of the second A going to be and And section four going taking out the word freestanding.
Unidentified speakerVoice ISecond.
Ron OakleyChairOkay, I got a motion and a second. All those in favor say aye. Aye. Aye. Aye. Motion passed five zero. Um Now it's time for public hearing.
Unidentified speakerVoice FIt
is
a rope over there. Roll call. District two, Commissioner Weightman. Aye. District three, Commissioner Starkey. Aye. District four, Commissioner Yeager. Aye. District five, Commissioner Mariano. Aye. District one, Chairman Oakley.