2026-10-20 - Land Use & Zoning

00:00All right.

00:02Everyone get in your seats. Let's go.

00:04>> It was It was some paternal discussions.

00:06>> I'm sure it was all procedural.

00:09Okay, no problem. All right, good

00:12evening everybody. It's 5:00 on October

00:1520th. We are going to go ahead and call

00:17the Land Use and Zoning Meeting to

00:18order.

00:20Welcome, welcome. And we'll start with

00:21introductions to the left.

00:23Mr. Amaro, way down there. They They

00:25really shoved you all the way down

00:27there.

00:27>> Thank you Thank you, Mr. Chair. I

00:30I'm humbled to be in your company

00:31tonight. I do not miss LUZ at all. But

00:34anyway,

00:35>> I appreciate you.

00:35>> Amaro, City Council, District 1.

00:38>> And we'll get you back on here next

00:39year, sir. No problem.

00:40>> it.

00:40>> No problem.

00:42>> Reginald Gaffney Jr., District 8.

00:45Good afternoon, Mr. Chair. Rahman

00:47Johnson, District 14. I thought I

00:48recognized the gentleman at the end.

00:50Yeah. But if we have to give up our

00:52Tuesdays, so does he. So, I look forward

00:54to him joining. Thank you for being

00:55here, Mr. Amaro.

00:57>> We'll make sure we take that up very

00:58last.

00:59>> [laughter]

01:02>> Second.

01:02>> Yeah.

01:04>> Cuz we care.

01:06Uh Rory Diamond and George, District 13,

01:08the Beaches.

01:09>> Joe Carlucci, District 5.

01:11>> Kevin Carrico, District 4, the

01:13Southside.

01:14>> Rory Ellis, District 11, the other

01:16Southside.

01:18>> Randy White, District 12.

01:20>> Terrance Harvey, Office of General

01:21Counsel.

01:23>> Munsellam, Transportation Planning.

01:27>> Susan Kelly, Planning Department.

01:29>> Aaron Arnett, Planning Department.

01:32>> Casey Cox, Planning Department.

01:33>> All right, thank you all for the

01:36introductions.

01:37With that, we will go through a few

01:41items that are deferred and also open

01:45continued. And then I am going to

01:49item number 2026-747

01:52first. Ms. Trimmer, that is your item.

01:55We're taking your item up first, 747.

01:59Yeah. We'll uh

02:03Uh she probably will anyways. All right.

02:06Item number one, 2026 124 is deferred

02:09with a public hearing next cycle on

02:1111/17/26.

02:15Item number two, 2026 125 is deferred

02:20with public hearing next cycle on

02:2111/17/26. Item number three, 2026 126,

02:25we have two speaker cards. Jamie Travis

02:28Leonard is in opposition, does not wish

02:29to speak, and Samantha Series is in

02:32opposition, does not wish to speak.

02:35And we'll put these right here. Next we

02:39have 2026 127, open the public hearing.

02:42No, wait. We have two speaker cards.

02:45Jamie Travis Leonard, opposition, does

02:47wish to speak.

02:49And Samantha Series after her, does not

02:51wish to speak.

02:59>> It was not on.

02:59>> Now you There you are.

03:01>> Good evening City Council.

03:04There we go. Good evening City Council.

03:05My name is Jamie Travis Leonard. My

03:06address is on file. I'll be quick. Um I

03:08continue to oppose this basically since

03:11it was introduced in February, and was

03:12wondering at what time

03:14do we

03:16like move this along? Um I understand

03:18the developer uh took our feedback and

03:21was uh reworking on a new proposal, but

03:24it's been

03:258 months now, and I would just

03:28like us to make some movement on this as

03:31well as the companion bill, which is

03:32126.

03:34That's really all I came up to say. So,

03:35I appreciate your time. Thank you.

03:38>> All right. Thank you.

03:40So, was that 125 or 126? That was 126,

03:43right?

03:44>> 127.

03:45>> All right. I am way behind. So, we got

03:48number five,

03:502026 436 is

03:53uh we're going to open the public

03:54hearing. We have no speaker cards, so

03:56we'll con-

03:59Just keeping you on your toes out there.

04:01We're on our toes over here. We're good.

04:04We have two speaker cards. Jamie Travis

04:06Leonard is in opposition, and Samantha

04:09Sears is in opposition does not wish

04:11to speak. Ms. Travis Leonard, you are

04:13recognized.

04:14>> Thank you. Uh Jamie Travis Leonard, my

04:16address is on file. So, I come up in

04:17opposition of this. Um I did uh go to

04:20Legislative Services and get the North

04:22Sea Pack report, and they uh concur with

04:24my findings, which is that the in-

04:27increase in industrial activities is not

04:29really uh

04:31concurrent with that environment. I'm

04:33also kind of tired of us going from a

04:35PUD to a PUD, when really this should be

04:37a PUD to an industrial light situation.

04:39It even says industrial light uses. And

04:42I fear that we are using PUDs as a way

04:45to not have full transparency

04:47in our zoning.

04:49So,

04:51uh if they want to go from a PUD to an

04:53industrial light, I probably would still

04:54oppose, but at least then I feel like it

04:55would be more transparent.

04:57Uh but as this is currently written, I

05:00stand in opposition for those reasons.

05:01Thank you.

05:03>> All right, thank you. And this public

05:06hearing is going to be continued until

05:0711 17 26.

05:09Item number six, 2026 523.

05:16One speaker card, Samantha Sears is in

05:18opposition does not wish to speak.

05:20And we will close this public hearing,

05:22and there will be an additional public

05:23hearing on 11 17 26. Item number seven,

05:262026 524. Open the public hearing. One

05:30speaker card, Samantha Sears is in

05:32opposition does not wish to speak. We'll

05:34close the public hearing with an

05:35additional public hearing on 11 17 26.

05:39And now, we are going to go to item 2026

05:44747,

05:45which I believe is on page 13, item 28,

05:492026-747.

05:51Council members, please declare your ex

05:53parte communication at this time.

06:01All right, seeing none, let's open the

06:02public hearing and get a staff report.

06:05>> Thank you. 2026-747

06:07seeks to reduce the required setback for

06:09a new monument sign for St. Peter's

06:11Catholic Church from 20 ft to 12 ft

06:13within the RLD 80 zoning district. The

06:16church, which is considered assembly use

06:18under section 656-1303,

06:20proposes to replace its existing 24 sq

06:23ft monument sign with a new sign of

06:25similar of similar size and placement

06:27along Girvin Road.

06:29Staff finds the request consistent with

06:30the standards for a sign waiver. The

06:32proposed sign will be compatible with

06:34other signage along Girvin Road, meeting

06:35all size, height, and illumination

06:37requirements while maintaining adequate

06:39distance from nearby residential

06:40structures.

06:42The reduced setback does not promote

06:43non-conforming signage and will not

06:44alter the aesthetic character of the

06:46area or negatively affect surrounding

06:47property owners.

06:49The waiver does not create traffic

06:50hazards, glare, or other adverse impacts

06:52as the sign remains modest in scale and

06:54non-illuminated.

06:56Unique site conditions, including

06:57existing mature trees that provide

06:59buffering and limit alternative sign

07:01locations, make strict application of

07:03the 20 ft setback unduly burdensome.

07:06Placing the sign at 12 ft preserves the

07:08tree canopy and ensures reasonable

07:10visibility from the roadway without

07:12diminishing neighborhood character. For

07:14these reasons and those in the staff

07:15report, we forward a recommendation of

07:17approval.

07:18>> All right, thank you so much. We have

07:19one speaker card, Cindy Trimmer.

07:21>> Cindy Trimmer, 1 Independent Drive,

07:23Suite 1200 on behalf of the applicant.

07:24I'm not sure what good behavior I did to

07:26get pulled up forward, but thank you.

07:28Um at the risk of overkill, I did a

07:30quick and dirty handout cuz a picture's

07:31worth a thousand words. The church

07:33recently expanded to include Our Lady of

07:35Hope Cemetery, and they want to update

07:37their signage to include the reference

07:39to the cemetery. If you look at page

07:41two, you can see the location of the

07:42existing sign on the right side of the

07:44entrance. The And then page three really

07:45shows why they're asking for the change

07:47to be able to move it to the other side

07:49of the entrance. When you're coming to

07:50the church from Gervin, you just really

07:52can't see the signage. There's not

07:54visibility and it causes people to turn

07:56kind of last minute. So, to improve

07:58visibility and safety, they're asking

08:00for the opportunity to move the sign to

08:01the south side of that entrance. And

08:03with that, I will stand by for

08:04questions.

08:06>> All right. Thank you. We don't have

08:08anyone in the queue, so we'll close the

08:09public hearing and bring back to

08:11committee.

08:12Motion and a second on the bill. No one

08:14in the queue. I'm opening the ballot.

08:15Record your vote.

08:22>> Six yay, zero nays.

08:24>> By direction of approved 2026-747.

08:26>> Thank you.

08:26>> All right.

08:28Now, we're going to go back to

08:32number eight. Is that where we left off?

08:34Yep. Okay. 2026-556.

08:36Council members, please declare your ex

08:38parte communication at this time.

08:41Yep. And this is going to be uh

08:43continued until 11:17. So, we're not

08:45going to be taking a vote on this

08:46tonight, just so everyone knows.

08:49All right. We have no ex parte. Let's

08:50open the public hearing. Do we need to

08:52get staff report if we're continuing

08:53this?

08:54Nope. Okay, great. We have one speaker

08:56card. Anthony Ikay

08:59and is in support and marked questions

09:02only.

09:03Yep. Questions only. Got it. All right.

09:06We'll continue That's the applicant.

09:08Yeah.

09:10Mr. Gaffney, do you need to say

09:11anything?

09:13Oh, okay. Mr. Ikay,

09:14Mr. Councilman Gaffney would like to

09:16speak with you in the green room.

09:18If someone from the Yeah.

09:24All right. So, this public hearing is

09:25going to be continued until 11:17:26.

09:29Are we good on Okay, we're good on

09:30quorum. All right. Item number nine,

09:332026-558.

09:34Open the public hearing?

09:36No.

09:41Way we don't have any speaker cards.

09:44All right, we have a few speaker cards

09:46here and

09:49it is yeah, not up for action until

09:5111:17. So, with that we have

09:55uh

09:56speaker Christopher Robin is in

09:59opposition and does not wish to speak.

10:02And then I'm sorry, we have

10:05I think this is the applicant. Fur, no.

10:08Okay. Next we have Jeff Rude. Come on

10:10down.

10:13Oh, weird. Okay, yeah, I'm

10:17Uh-oh, hold on. Okay.

10:21Okay, next Jamie Travis Leonard is in

10:24opposition. Yeah, we should have a

10:26council member doing this, not the one

10:28who's doing eight other things. Jamie

10:29Travis Leonard opposition does not wish

10:31to speak. Samantha Series opposition

10:33does not wish to speak. And again, we

10:35are on 2026 558.

10:38So, with that we will continue this

10:40public hearing till 11:17:26.

10:44Now, we are on 2026

10:47653.

10:49Open the public hearing.

10:52And Mr. Rebecca, do we have cards for

10:53this one cuz I have We have no cards for

10:55this one. Okay, we have no speaker

10:57cards.

10:58Do we

10:59We can just Okay, let's close the public

11:01hearing and bring back the committee.

11:03We need a motion to withdraw.

11:06Do we have a second? We have a motion

11:08and a second for the withdrawal. No one

11:10in the queue, open the ballot, record

11:11your vote.

11:17>> Five yes, zero nays.

11:20>> By your action you have withdrawn 2026

11:23653.

11:25Item number 11, 2026 654. Council

11:28members, please declare your ex parte

11:29communication at this time.

11:35Anybody?

11:37Oh,

11:39okay. Okay.

11:41Okay.

11:42Mr. Carrico, you're recognized.

11:44>> Uh thank you, Mr. Chair. I do have ex

11:46parte on this issue. I got an email from

11:48Mr. Roode uh sent about the project

11:50conditions, specifically uh condition

11:51number three.

11:52And he also called to see if I had any

11:54questions. So, that's my ex parte. We'll

11:56get it filed.

11:57>> All right, Councilman Johnson, you're

11:58recognized.

12:00>> Thank you, Mr. Chair. Out of an

12:01abundance of caution, I'm going to go

12:03ahead and declare ex parte. I saw Mr.

12:05Roode here and he just informed me that

12:08he um

12:09uh during our last meeting that this was

12:11coming up, but we didn't have any

12:13discussion, but I will declare it with

12:14the

12:15legislative services. Thank you.

12:17>> All right, we have no one else. We do

12:19want to welcome Councilwoman Clark

12:20Murray. Thank you for joining us.

12:22With that, let's open the public hearing

12:25and get a staff report.

12:27>> Thank you. This is PUD rezoning

12:29ordinance 2026-0654,

12:32which is requesting to rezone

12:34approximately 2.31 acres for a property

12:37located at 1905 Walnut Street. They are

12:40seeking to rezone the property from

12:41industrial light to a PUD in order to

12:44redevelop the former Duval Laundry

12:46facility into a mixed-use commercial and

12:49light industrial development. The PUD

12:51will allow for a broad mix of uses

12:53including office, retail, restaurants,

12:56uh food hall, event space. It will allow

12:58for live music. Um it'll also um

13:01maintain some light manufacturing and

13:03warehousing uses and all of this will be

13:05within the restored historic structure

13:07um in the Springfield historic district.

13:09As mentioned, the project is within the

13:11historic Springfield district and

13:13overlay, um meaning that all exterior

13:16changes will be uh needed to be reviewed

13:18through the COA process.

13:20The proposed PUD continues to allow uses

13:23consistent with the underlying light

13:25industrial land use category, but add

13:27site-specific development standards,

13:29including enhanced landscaping buffers,

13:32coordinated signage, tailored parking

13:34arrangements, and a shared courtyard um

13:36for outdoor events. The PUD creates

13:39flexible multi-tenant space within the

13:41historic main building and adjacent

13:42outbuildings.

13:44Staff finds the request is consistent

13:45with the comp plan. The site lies within

13:47the urban priority area where infill

13:49redevelopment, adaptive reuse of

13:52historic buildings, and mixed-use

13:54uh reinvestments are strongly supported.

13:56The PUD advances goals and objectives by

13:58promoting compact urban development, um

14:01viability of emerging mixed-use and

14:03industrial commercial corridors.

14:05The revised written description that's

14:07listed in the agenda ensures consistency

14:10with the existing light industrial land

14:12use category

14:13um

14:14after withdrawing the applicant's prior

14:16CGC land use amendment.

14:18The PUD meets the internal external

14:20compatibility criteria. Internally, the

14:22project's revised landscape plan

14:25addresses um address staff's concern by

14:27adding enhanced landscaping buffers,

14:29screening, and improved circulation. And

14:32externally, the site bridges industrial

14:34uses to the east and the established

14:36single-family neighborhood to the west.

14:38The added visual buffering and limits on

14:40hours of operate operation for outdoor

14:42amplified sound,

14:44including and in coordinated site

14:46design, strengthens the compatibility

14:47and mitigates impacts associated with

14:49the event space activity that would

14:51occur on site. Um multiple adjacent

14:53properties included re-threaded operate

14:56under similar PUD frameworks, creating a

14:58cohesive mixed-use area.

15:01Uh traffic impacts were reviewed by

15:02traffic engineering. Um we are

15:05forwarding a condition for uh

15:06requirement of a traffic study at PUD

15:08verification. Um and event parking will

15:11also be managed through off-street

15:13arrangements um with through a shared

15:16parking agreement with re-threaded that

15:18will provide an additional 70 spaces for

15:20a um special events.

15:22So, for reasons and those outlined in

15:24the staff report, we are forwarding a

15:26recommendation of approval with three

15:28conditions in your agenda and a revised

15:30written description that stated

15:31September 15th. The application was

15:33heard by Planning Commission on October

15:358th where there were no speakers in

15:37opposition and discussion focused on

15:39condition three within the agenda that

15:42focused on the time limits to amplify

15:44music and sound. The commission agreed

15:47with the condition given the close

15:48proximity to resident uses so they voted

15:51unanimously for approval with the same

15:53three conditions. Thank you.

15:55>> All right, thank you. We'll go to our

15:56speakers now. First speaker, Jeff Roode.

16:06>> Good afternoon. Jeff Roode, address on

16:08file. R O O D.

16:12Everything Ms. Abney said sounded

16:14exactly correct to me.

16:16On the

16:18concept of the

16:19condition three regarding hours

16:22at the Planning Commission, we did not

16:25request any change to that. So, they of

16:28course

16:29agreed to the 10:00 p.m. cut off.

16:32But,

16:33we here and through the email that

16:35Council member Carrico mentions are

16:37asking for an 11:00 p.m.

16:40cut off for outdoor

16:43sound.

16:45It's There's similar PUDs. I saw one in

16:50from 2023 that had until midnight for

16:53outdoor

16:54amplified sound.

16:56We're only asking for 11:00 p.m.

16:58Um

16:59Possible uses could include like

17:02outdoor movie screenings.

17:04Um

17:06or when we're having events for

17:08Rethreaded

17:0910:00 p.m. is just a little bit

17:11early of a cut off. So, that's why we're

17:13asking for 11:00 p.m.

17:15The applicant owner is here and can take

17:18questions as well. So, with that I'll

17:21answer any questions.

17:22>> Okay. All righty. And okay, we have one

17:25sec uh

17:27Let's wait till we're done. We've got

17:28one more. Uh Mr. Charles Price.

17:32Just Do you wish to speak?

17:35>> Charles is the applicant.

17:37>> Okay.

17:37>> Yep.

17:39Charles Price,

17:40uh

17:412532 University Boulevard West. I'm the

17:44applicant that I think my thoughts are

17:46consistent with what was expressed by

17:48Jeff.

17:49So,

17:50if you have any questions,

17:53be happy to field them.

17:56>> All right, thank you, sir. That is all

17:58the speaker cards that we have. We have

18:01Council member Diamond in the queue.

18:05>> Uh thank you, Mr. Chair. I just have a

18:06question for Mr. Roode. So, I think I

18:07understand your PUD. I understand what

18:09you're asking for. What I don't see in

18:12my packet is the kind of certification

18:14form that all this complies with the

18:16Salem amendments. Does it?

18:21>> Can you say those amendments again?

18:22>> Yeah, the uh I mean, did you not like do

18:25the research and see the form for

18:27confirmation with that it complies with

18:29the Salem amendments?

18:31Yeah, the 2021s, yeah.

18:34>> In all honesty, I've this is the first

18:36I've heard of a Salem amendments.

18:38>> Roode, you win a prize. They don't

18:40exist. But, this is your first time at

18:41that podium and we gave you a hard time.

18:43You passed. Congratulations.

18:47>> Thank you.

18:49>> You did better than the last guy that

18:50was up there and just who just said it

18:53did.

18:54But, we also have another council member

18:56in the queue. So, we'll go to Council

18:57member Arias. You're recognized.

19:00>> I actually have some serious questions

19:02for you. All right.

19:03Um

19:04through the chair, I I've seen this

19:06concept worked in other parts of the

19:07country, other um

19:09other countries as well, too. Uh it's a

19:10new trend that's happening now. and I'm

19:12glad to see it come to Jacksonville. Are

19:14you guys going to be operating and I

19:16don't really know much about this

19:17business, which is why I want to talk to

19:18you guys offline after this, but are you

19:20guys going to be doing some sort of a

19:21coffee shop in the in the daytime to

19:24have traffic or is it only going to be

19:25for events and in the evenings?

19:28>> It will be daytime included. It we A

19:32similar example would be Union Terminal

19:34just to give your

19:35>> Okay.

19:36>> mindset, but yes, primarily daytime and

19:39uh well, not primarily, but the point is

19:42this is not

19:43the project is not for an event venue.

19:45That's one aspect of the project, but it

19:48will be open daytime.

19:49>> Okay.

19:50>> Yes.

19:50>> And then my my next question regarding

19:53obviously we were we're looking at

19:54pending a traffic count or traffic study

19:56is what I heard, but

19:58um do you guys have adequate parking for

20:00an event cuz I'm assuming a a space of

20:02this size you're going to have easily at

20:04any given point maybe couple hundred,

20:06300 people there. I don't see parking on

20:08this site anywhere that will meet that.

20:10So, what are you going to be doing about

20:12off load um

20:13parking especially surrounding all these

20:15houses right next door to you?

20:18>> Yes, so we have some on-site parking

20:20then we have the shared use agreement

20:22with Rethreaded.

20:24Then of course, there's

20:26off-street or on-street parking and we

20:29are in discussions to buy certain

20:32off-site lands as well. As you can

20:34imagine, this question came up with the

20:37um

20:38Planning and Development Department and

20:40they were satisfied.

20:42>> Okay.

20:43Yeah, cuz I I'm looking around like I

20:44said, I'm just looking at a Google Map

20:45and there's obviously residences here.

20:47There's um

20:49a lot of good um businesses nearby. So,

20:51I just want to make sure that they're

20:52not impacted by

20:53by what you guys are going to propose. I

20:55I look at um the Glass Factory. They

20:57have several hundred people go there to

20:59those events and they have the parking

21:00under control because they have valet

21:02parking. They have the on-site parking

21:03next door that they bought similar to

21:05what you guys are going to do. So, I

21:06want to make sure that you guys protect

21:07the neighborhoods as well, too, in that

21:08area. So, but we'll talk more offline if

21:10anything.

21:11>> Good question. Thank you. And And one

21:13more caveat is we do have the support of

21:15SPAR,

21:16uh, as, you know, in in general. So,

21:18including for this parking issue, and

21:20they represent the neighborhood, who's,

21:22of course, thinks about parking.

21:23>> All right. Thank you, sir. Thank you.

21:26Councilmember Johnson, you're

21:26recognized.

21:29>> Uh, this is for the planning department.

21:31Um, is there any I looked at the the

21:35their request to do something different

21:37as it related to the, um, timing, that

21:40hour is it it the go from 10:00 to

21:4211:00? Is that something that you I know

21:45you the planning department would seem

21:46to be okay with it, but what do what are

21:47your thoughts on that?

21:50>> Um, through the chair to Councilman

21:51Johnson. So, the the limitation of the

21:54hours between 10:00 p.m. and 9:00 p.m.,

21:56um, is generally when we looked at other

21:59PUDs that we've done, that's a time

22:00limit that we've usually put on it, and

22:02it and it kind of lines up with the

22:04city's, uh, noise ordinance, um, with

22:06certain decimal levels, um, in near

22:08residential areas between the times of

22:1010:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. This This does

22:12go a little bit further to the 9:00 9:00

22:14a.m. Um, area, and then also with

22:17discussions with SPAR, they also wanted

22:20a time restriction on amplified sound

22:23within the area, just given the, uh,

22:25uh, surrounding residential area. So,

22:28that's how we came up with the the 10:00

22:30p.m. to 9:00 a.m.,

22:32um, time limitation.

22:35>> Got you.

22:36Okay. I'll see what everyone else says,

22:38but I'm I

22:39if they're going to have an event

22:40facility, I'm just I'm curious as to how

22:43they're going to lock in on that time.

22:44That was something that was like a big

22:46one for me. I like the idea, as as was

22:48said earlier by Councilman Areas, um,

22:50about this kind of use, but I'm just a

22:52little concerned that that kind of

22:54prohibits them to do the business that

22:55they want to do.

22:56Thank you.

22:58>> All right. Next, we have Councilmember

23:00Areas, you're recognized.

23:02>> Thank you, Chair. I think Councilman

23:03Carico it's going to be first time that

23:05he's on the queue. I'll let him speak

23:06first of anything.

23:06>> Yeah, let's let's do that. Councilman

23:08Carico, you're recognized.

23:09>> Uh thank you, Mr. Chair. No problem with

23:10trying to have an events venue and and

23:12extend the hours a little bit. My only

23:13concern is you're catty-corner to the

23:15Boys & Girls Club Teen Center on 10th

23:17and Liberty. And uh that's a a facility

23:20that hosts young people after school and

23:22sometimes on the weekends. It uh closes

23:25at I believe 6:30 or 7:00. Have you had

23:27any conversations with them? Do you have

23:29any concerns or with having, you know,

23:32loud music and alcohol served right by

23:34youth-serving

23:35um organization? Are you aware that

23:37that's your neighbor? I mean, have you

23:38done any research on that?

23:41>> Yes, I'm well aware that that's one of

23:43the neighbors that's two blocks away. Um

23:45that being said, we've

23:48gone to lengths as Jeff alluded to in

23:50regards to parking that we think we've

23:53secured two other sites for an

23:54additional 100 cars for parking. And so

23:57far as that the accommodations,

24:01we're not looking to allow alcohol or

24:04anything off premise. For that matter,

24:06we aren't It's just if somebody leases

24:09the space,

24:10then they would have to get all permits

24:12necessary, hire licensed people, hire

24:14licensed valet parkers, and everything

24:17is in a coordinated structure. So, it's

24:19not something that's just on the fly.

24:22>> And and what's the maximum amount of uh

24:24people that you can hold in the venue?

24:26>> The venue should be able to hold 5 600

24:29people

24:30approximately, but it's a lot of it's

24:33driven like

24:34uh what's the name of that

24:38venue at First and Liberty roughly

24:43where they currently have events. So, we

24:45probably have the hardest highest degree

24:48of parking and accommodations for any

24:51kind of event space.

24:52>> Yeah, parking will be tough over there.

24:54The The Boys & Girls Clubs has a um

24:56an event venue, too. Holds about 300

24:58people. They've had some parties there

24:59and parking

25:01in Springfield is is is tough. And if

25:03you're going to have 500 people, that's

25:05300 cars.

25:06>> That was the

25:07I mean, the the answer of the 500 is

25:09just because it's a huge building. I

25:11don't know that

25:13I don't know how many people will

25:15have it events.

25:16>> You'd be surprised. There's a there's a

25:18void in the market. The Glass Factory

25:19just went over to to a church, so

25:21they're not holding events anymore.

25:22People want to have big events. They

25:24want to have things and I don't want to

25:26discourage you or anything or or or say

25:28that we don't want these kind of venues.

25:29Our city needs them. But when you plop

25:31that down in a neighborhood and you do

25:33have interest and people want to come

25:34and there's

25:35five or 400 people,

25:37it's a burden on the neighborhood when

25:39you have all those cars. So I really

25:40want to explore that kind of parking

25:43uh plan that you're putting together and

25:44I don't know if the planning department

25:46has any comments on that or you reviewed

25:48it or or what parking might look like

25:49with a venue that has a maximum capacity

25:51of 500 people. I'd love to hear your

25:52thoughts and I'll I'll take it off the

25:54uh record and let the rest of the

25:55committee ask questions if you have any.

25:58>> So you don't want to hear you don't want

25:59to hear you don't want to hear the

26:00>> I want to hear yeah, I want to hear from

26:01both.

26:02>> Okay, planning department, do you want

26:03to answer Mr.

26:04>> Um so through the chair to Councilman

26:05Carrico, so initially um the the

26:09applicant did not have a parking plan um

26:11and the only parking that was going to

26:12be provided was on site and so our

26:14initial review was to recommend denial.

26:17Um following that, the applicant did

26:19work to obtain parking

26:22um plans and uh on off site. So between

26:26the rethreaded and the parking that

26:27they'll be able to provide on site and

26:30working with the traffic engineer with

26:33the city to provide some on-street

26:34parking there between all of that, um we

26:37found that

26:39it would satisfy the need for the

26:41parking. Again, the property is within

26:43the Springfield overlay, which does not

26:46have parking requirements for any of the

26:48uses within there except for churches.

26:50Um so they are providing far and above

26:54than what the code even in Springfield

26:56requires of property owners.

26:59>> And no one is here from Springfield in

27:01opposition. If if they were, I'd

27:02probably have more more questions about

27:04the parking just because of the effect

27:05on the neighbors. I mean, it it's in a

27:07residential area. I know there's mixed

27:08uses and um

27:10things like that, but that's a lot of

27:12cars. Uh, so if you would just answer

27:14for me what what your parking plan is if

27:16you were to book an event that had, you

27:18know, 4 or 500 people, what do you plan

27:19to do with all the cars? Valet,

27:21shuttles?

27:22Just

27:22>> It's everything's going to be valet

27:24parking and shuttles. And I've done

27:27events before when I held a event for my

27:29dad in Fernandina Beach, we had core

27:32parking areas and we just had shuttle

27:34set up to bring people in for events

27:37because the city in Fernandina was very

27:40limited on parking.

27:41To that extent as I alluded to earlier,

27:43we do have arrangements that are falling

27:46into place to acquire more land and

27:49additional access parking like a

27:51relationship with rethreaded.

27:54>> Yeah, I just want you to be real

27:55cognizant of that because that is one

27:56thing that adversely affects neighbors

27:58when you have people from, you know,

28:005:00 till 10:00 on a Friday evening all

28:03through the neighborhood walking down.

28:05Um, it makes it tough on the neighbors.

28:06So, just plan for it if it passes. I

28:09mean, you're you're going to be the

28:10owners. You're going to you're going to

28:11know that that's something you got to

28:11deal with, but uh, from a community

28:13standpoint, I really like you to really

28:15hone in on that and make a a good plan

28:16that works for the community.

28:17>> We we did give a presentation to SPAR

28:20and they had um

28:23I'd say

28:2550, 60 people from the community there

28:28that we gave a presentation to and they

28:29were very much in favor of it. That's

28:31how come we got That's how we were able

28:33to get SPAR support on behind the

28:35project.

28:37So, it wasn't and they SPAR even came

28:40to a planning meeting at the city

28:43and represented that they were

28:44comfortable with what we're doing in

28:46parking arrangements. So, it wasn't

28:48without

28:50their support that we just

28:53uh took a shot in the dark. We got their

28:56support for the parking.

28:57>> Yeah, I got it. And had you not done

28:58that, there would probably be like 30

29:00Spire people here yelling at you. So, I

29:01I think you did a good job at least of

29:03communicating your intent. So, uh we'll

29:06we'll see how the rest of the committee

29:06goes.

29:07>> And we appreciate We appreciate the

29:08comments because you guys

29:10>> Well, well, let's stop there. Let's stop

29:11there cuz this is this is not the forum

29:14for that. Um so, you can reply to

29:16questions, but then we're going to keep

29:17it up here and we're going to get more

29:18back into a a a flow here. So, uh we

29:21have three other members in the queue.

29:22So, Council member Area should

29:23recognize. And make sure we just go

29:25through the chair so we get this, you

29:26know, buttoned back up. Mr. All right.

29:29>> [clears throat]

29:29>> Um

29:31Guys, so so this is where I'm at right

29:33now. And um my biggest issue is I've

29:35seen what venues of this size What kind

29:37of impact they have? And most of the

29:39venues that I go to of this size,

29:40they're they're contained The parking is

29:41contained within the venue itself. I'm

29:43looking at exhibit three um from the PUD

29:46from August 6, 2026. And I'm looking at

29:49um section E.

29:51And and if through the chair if somebody

29:53from planning can actually just guide me

29:54in this part, um

29:56Terrence, um but it would be off-street

29:59vehicular parking and loading and

30:00bicycle parking.

30:02It's it's talking about a

30:04um subsection A, a conceptual site plan

30:06uh contemplates approximately 46 total

30:08parking spots within the space, also two

30:11ADA, um and based on the square footage,

30:14blah blah blah, uh saying that if they

30:17can't find the parking that they're

30:18going to be able to do right off right

30:20away off-street parking, meaning like

30:22going into the neighborhoods.

30:24That's my issue here.

30:25So, what I don't understand, and I've

30:27been doing this for a while, but I've

30:28always thought this is kind of

30:29backwards, but we're going to approve

30:31something and and I have I don't know

30:34them, but I have confident that they're

30:36going to do what they say they're going

30:37to do. But at the end of the day, once

30:38we approve this, if they don't get that

30:40agreement with Rethreaded and with else,

30:42that neighborhood is pretty much

30:44screwed.

30:45Like they're going to have parking all

30:46over the place. So, how do we know how

30:49do we put measures in place to make sure

30:50that we protect the neighborhoods in

30:52case they don't get the agreements done

30:53with rethreaded or with anybody else?

30:56>> Um through the chair to Councilman

30:57Arias. So,

30:59uh I believe the written description

31:00that you're looking at is the old one.

31:02There is a revised written description

31:03dated September 15th, which does um lay

31:07out the changes um to include

31:10uh the rethreaded parking agreement, and

31:13we have documentation of that agreement

31:15and the 70 spaces that will be provided

31:17um offsite through through that

31:19property.

31:20>> All right, thank you. So, through the

31:22chair, um so just to make me feel

31:24better, how many total parking spots do

31:26they have now counting the rethreaded

31:28agreement if it goes through?

31:31And and we just heard right now that

31:33they could have a maximum of 500 to 600

31:35people. So, what's the parking um like

31:37how many parking spots are they required

31:39based off of that head count?

31:42>> Um okay, so through the chair, uh to

31:45Councilman Arias, in the written

31:46description, they have 46 total parking

31:49spaces on site, um two ADA, and then

31:51eight motorcycle um parking, um and then

31:55we'll include the 70 parking spaces with

31:58rethreaded and the potential of

32:00additional uh parking agreements on

32:03other parcels, um including on-street

32:06parking um that will be done

32:09uh with works of traffic engineering to

32:12create some more on-street parking

32:13spaces. Um again, this is a this is a

32:16unique situation in that the parking uh

32:19or the property is within the

32:21Springfield overlay, which specifically

32:24deviates from the parking requirements

32:27of code to where uh there is no parking

32:30requirement for a number of uses within

32:32that area. So, they do fall within um

32:35the zoning category and alleviation from

32:39the parking requirements through the

32:41overlay. So, what they are providing is

32:43above what what even today they would be

32:46required by code.

32:47>> Thank you for that, Ms. Havnen. That

32:48actually makes me feel a lot better

32:49knowing that they're looking at 116 now

32:52plus on-street if it gets to that point.

32:54So, I feel better about that. And then

32:56my second point, Chair, would be

32:58I don't know where we're at with the the

32:59time frame of 10:00 shutoff, but

33:03for any kind of event venue we hall like

33:0710:00 is way it doesn't make sense. For

33:09that, don't even open up.

33:11So, I would like to see conversation

33:13here here be held about to see if we

33:14could actually make this a regular time

33:17frame with whether it's 12:00 what

33:19through the chair Mr. Rude, what what

33:21time frame are you guys asking for right

33:23now? What's the time cut off time that

33:25you guys want?

33:26>> What I

33:27What I submitted by email was 11:00 p.m.

33:30We think and would love it to be later,

33:34but we were concerned and wanted to come

33:37out with a an immediate compromise, but

33:39we would we would like it to be later.

33:41>> All right. I would propose, you know,

33:44if they came up with 11:00, that's fine.

33:46I will propose 12:00.

33:48However, if you look at midnight,

33:50honestly, I would propose 3:00 in the

33:52morning if it was up to me, but but I

33:54think it I mean it's it's critical

33:56because you you know, you're going to be

33:57holding hopefully

33:58things that benefit our community.

34:00Breast Cancer Awareness, you know,

34:01fundraisers, whatever the case is and we

34:03don't want to cut that off at 10:00 when

34:05they're in the middle of doing things.

34:06However, I will say that there's a lot

34:09of

34:10bars and and clubs here in downtown that

34:12have these sound doors. They have double

34:14doors. So, if we get to the point where

34:16noise is an issue,

34:18we may have to see some sort of a noise

34:20reduction to make sure noise isn't going

34:21to the neighborhood because really the

34:23only issue that you have is really any

34:25the houses to your to the west, I guess

34:27it is. Aside from that, the ones in the

34:29east, I think those are all industrial

34:30anyway, so I'm not worried about those,

34:31but that's my proposal. I will say leave

34:33it to

34:34whatever the cutoff time is for that

34:35area and move forward. You guys have

34:37parking situated taking care of, so I'm

34:39good with that. So, that's my proposal.

34:41Thank you, Chair.

34:42>> And just for a clarification, Mr. Arias,

34:44is the proposal for the event to

34:47be allowed to go to midnight, or are you

34:49talking about the one number three, the

34:52live music or amplified sound between

34:54the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 9:00 a.m.?

34:56>> I want

34:57everything to go to to midnight at the

35:00very least. Amplified sound, everything,

35:02right? I want them to operate as a

35:03regular business would operate. That's

35:05it. So, what I don't know what

35:07technicality, Mr. Harvey, that would be,

35:08but I just want them to operate.

35:10>> Uh through the Chair to Council Member

35:12Arias. So, the condition is for live

35:15music or amplified sound. That's all

35:17that the department regulates. Um so, if

35:20they're having an event inside that last

35:23to 2:00 a.m., as long as it's not

35:25amplified music, or they're going to get

35:26called on, um they're they're they're

35:28okay with the terms of this condition.

35:30But, if it is your um

35:33proposed amendment to um present

35:38there shall be no live music or

35:40amplified sound between hours of 12:00

35:42a.m. to 9:00 a.m., then that would be

35:44the language of the amendment in

35:45addition to the other two um conditions

35:48that were offered as well.

35:50>> I think through the Chair, I'm actually

35:51on board with that. So, based off of the

35:53what the committee wants, but I'm good

35:54with that.

35:55>> Okay, so we have a motion and a second.

35:59Uh yeah, we actually haven't even closed

36:00public hearing. So, so let's let's do

36:03this. We're going to go ahead and close

36:04the public hearing, and then we'll bring

36:06it back to committee. Council Member

36:07Arias, go ahead and make your motion

36:08again.

36:09>> All right, thank you, Chair. Mr. Harvey,

36:10please

36:11state my my motion.

36:13>> [laughter]

36:15>> Correct. So, before you right now, there

36:17are three conditions. Um the first one

36:19is an unless waived by the Chief of

36:22Traffic Engineering or their designated

36:23traffic study shall be undertaken by the

36:25developer upon PUD verification and

36:28provided during the 10

36:30review. Uh the second condition is that

36:32the design and location of all

36:34vehicular access points are subject to

36:36review and approval of the traffic

36:38engineering and development services.

36:40And the uh third condition would be that

36:43there shall be no live music or

36:45amplified sound between the hours of

36:4712:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m.

36:50>> Yes, sir. That's my motion.

36:52>> All right, we have a motion and a second

36:54on the Ares amendment. Councilmember

36:56Wyatt, are you on the Ares amendment?

36:59No?

37:00Okay. So, we'll go to Councilmember

37:02Keelco.

37:03>> You know, they got a saying, you don't

37:04uh surprise your friends. I'm going to

37:05vote no on the amendment just because I

37:07know the neighborhood, uh set up that

37:08Boys & Girls Club, you know, many years

37:11ago, and I know a lot of the neighbors

37:12in there. They're not part of SPARC.

37:14They don't show up to those meetings,

37:15but they're they're good folks that are

37:17uh in the community, and I don't think

37:18they want um

37:19noise till midnight or whatever he said.

37:21So, I'm just going to be a no on the

37:22amendment. That's fine.

37:23No hard feelings.

37:24>> All right. Councilmember Diamond, on the

37:26amendment.

37:26>> Uh thanks. I'm just going to speak on

37:27the amendment and the bill super fast.

37:29So, I support the bill. I I love the

37:31spirit of this amendment. There's if you

37:33look on a map,

37:34there's barely a house within like 50 ft

37:36of this. Like, so to me, I'm fully on

37:37board with this, uh and will support the

37:39bill as a whole.

37:41We're spending $500 million on downtown

37:44incentives to get businesses going

37:47around downtown. To me, this guy has not

37:50asked for a dime, and he's putting his

37:51own money into this thing. I hope it's

37:53amazing.

37:56>> Councilmember Wyatt, are you on the

37:57amendment?

37:58No? Okay. You you can stay in the queue.

37:59I'm just So, for me, I think we can

38:01accomplish

38:03sort of the amendment, uh but

38:06for there to be music outside at

38:08midnight, there are houses that would

38:09absolutely just get decimated by that.

38:12So, I I'm okay with amplified sound and

38:15music or whatever inside the building.

38:17So, I would just say, you know, I'm

38:20going to vote no on the Ares amendment,

38:21but I would just change amendment three

38:23to say there shall be no live music or

38:24amplified sound between the hours of

38:2610:00 p.m. to 9:00 a.m. outside.

38:29So, therefore, inside it doesn't apply.

38:32Is that correct, Mr. Harvey?

38:36Whoever.

38:37>> Through the chair, uh and I would defer

38:40to the planning department as to the

38:42intent of that condition.

38:44>> Um to the chair, that was the intent.

38:45The The concern that we had was that the

38:47PUD allows for outside live

38:50entertainment, and so it it we wanted

38:52restrictions on the outside amplified

38:54sound and live music.

38:56>> Okay. Um

38:57then that's what I was trying to

38:58clarify, but if if you're saying that

39:00number three is already specifically for

39:02outside, then

39:04because it's it's it doesn't really say

39:06that.

39:07And then Mr. Ares said he wants to the

39:09inside to be

39:10you know, having amplified music from

39:12whatever times.

39:13>> That is fair. So, um to clarify,

39:17um

39:18you would probably want to add that

39:19specific language to to specify that it

39:22is for outside during those during that

39:24time frame from the 12:00 a.m. to 9:00

39:26a.m.

39:27>> Okay. And one second, Mr. Ares, cuz I do

39:28want to get your thoughts on this. Um to

39:30the applicant, you know, what are are

39:32y'all's plans to have a lot of outdoor

39:35amplified music, or is it mainly going

39:36to be contained inside?

39:38>> It's primarily inside, but let's say we

39:41have a movie night in the community,

39:44you know, and it's summer, and it

39:45doesn't get dark

39:47until 8:00 8:30 or whatever. It kind of

39:51pushes everything around with the time

39:53changes. So, we're not

39:55setting up a concert venue. This is not

39:59something to compete with, say, in

40:00Augustine. It's not something to compete

40:02with

40:03any of these outdoor events. It's merely

40:06a community-oriented,

40:08primarily, or a wedding venue, or

40:11something of that order magnitude.

40:14>> Okay.

40:14>> So, it's not We don't have a list of

40:17Grateful Dead concerts lined up for

40:19outside. That's not what I do. I lease

40:22boxes.

40:24>> Yeah, yeah, no, I I get it and and look,

40:25you know, you know, you know, the the

40:27harmless thing uh

40:29>> my reputation.

40:30I've been doing this 40-something years.

40:32We've been associated

40:34since the 1920s in developing projects

40:37in Jacksonville.

40:38>> Yeah, so with that, I'll just clarify,

40:40you know, this is going to outlive the

40:43zoning is going to be past your tenure

40:45here, you know, you could sell this next

40:46year and then someone come in with not a

40:48good reputation. So, we don't look at it

40:49through the lens of anyone's reputation

40:51or not reputation. But, we we look at it

40:53through the lens of

40:55we get noise complaints up here as

40:57elected officials from people who don't

40:58want to listen to weddings go until

40:5912:00 a.m. And I'm very sensitive to

41:01that because we hear it all the time in

41:04in my district. So, I won't be

41:06supportive of anything past 10:00 p.m. I

41:08mean, I mean, just, you know,

41:10reminiscing, uh you know, what if a

41:12young family's got a a kid that they're

41:14trying to put down? I'm just telling

41:15you, like that's that's the type of

41:16stuff that, you know, is is not good for

41:19the community. So, we want to work with

41:21you, but for me, I'm a hard stop at

41:2310:00 p.m. outside amplified music,

41:25outside live music.

41:27Um that's just where I'm at. So,

41:29um

41:30you know, for me

41:32I want to hear from Council member Areas

41:33while I still have the floor and then we

41:35can talk about changing number three to

41:37just be for outside.

41:38Council member Areas, do you have

41:39anything?

41:41>> All right, thank you, Chair. Uh so, I I

41:43totally get where you're coming from.

41:44Everybody has different perspective.

41:45Obviously, you're coming from a family

41:46background um

41:48from me, I'm coming from a hospitality

41:50background.

41:50>> Yeah.

41:51>> Um you obviously also own a small

41:52business, so you understand the the the

41:54struggle that we as a small business go

41:56through on a daily basis to have

41:58government get in the way constantly.

42:00That's one of the things that that kind

42:01of upset me about Jacksonville because

42:03we we

42:04tout the word, we're pro-business, you

42:06know, come here and open up your

42:08business, but here we are at the very

42:10forefront putting limitations on these

42:12small businesses. That's where I'm kind

42:13of drawing the line. I do get the part

42:15about the residences, but at the end of

42:17the

42:18this is literally a budding

42:20residential and it looks like

42:22industrial, but this is so isolated from

42:25the residence that it's it's in its own

42:27land. I'm looking at the glass factory.

42:29I've done a lot of events at different

42:30venues, especially like this, and

42:32um there's never been any kind of

42:34negative impact to to communities. On

42:36the contrary, they bring value to

42:38communities because now they could even

42:39hold community events if they if we

42:40needed to there um to have town halls,

42:42whatever the case is. Um I'm encouraging

42:45you all to to support this because at

42:46the end of the day, aside from

42:47everything, small businesses are

42:49struggling on a on a given day. And if

42:51we have the opportunity to the little

42:52bit of opportunity to give them an extra

42:542 hours, like that's where I'm like, you

42:56know what? It's not costing us anything.

42:57And as Mr. Diamond said, you know,

42:59alluded to, they're not asking for a

43:00single diamond status. They just want to

43:02open up for business and and try to

43:04generate some some some money and be

43:06able to spread the the the wealth and

43:07the love here in our community. So, I

43:09don't know them. I just met them. I have

43:11no connection to them, but I do

43:12understand where they're coming from.

43:14So, I just encourage you guys to support

43:15it. However, I it is your your you have

43:18the mic, but um

43:19you did ask them if it was going to be

43:21outdoors and indoors. And yes, the whole

43:22time I was also focusing on the indoor

43:24component of it. Um if if they could

43:26somehow limit maybe the outdoor uh

43:29decibels cuz we've been talking about

43:30the decibels in Jackson for a while. I

43:33know it's very minute, like detailed

43:35oriented, but I I think we should still

43:37give them an opportunity. And at the end

43:38of the day, Mr. Harvey, if we could come

43:40back and and tell them they need to shut

43:42shut it down and change it to back to

43:4510:00 a.m. 10:00 p.m. Can we always do

43:47that? Through the chair? Can we like

43:50reverse it or no?

43:51>> So, no. That This is a a rezoning

43:53application. So, in order for it to come

43:55back before this body, they there would

43:57need to be some type of application or a

43:59bill to come before you all.

44:01>> Yeah. Uh so, it's one of those things

44:02where we have to take a chance on them

44:04if and

44:05it's up to you guys to decide. But I

44:06know where I'm going to vote based on

44:07the amendment that I proposed and I

44:08encourage you all to do this. Thank you.

44:10>> Okay.

44:11>> Yep. No, I appreciate that and always

44:13good to have as many kind of wide

44:15perspectives as possible.

44:17Councilor White, I'm assuming you're

44:18still not on the amendment.

44:21Okay, good.

44:22Anyone else on the amendment? So, for

44:23this we'll go ahead and take a hand

44:25vote. All in favor of the Arias

44:26amendment signify by raising your hand.

44:29Any opposed?

44:33The

44:34So, passes. The The Arias amendment

44:36passes. Okay.

44:37So, with that we need a motion and a

44:39second on the bill as

44:41the first Well, we have other

44:43amendments, too, right?

44:47>> There's an additional amendment as well

44:48and that's to attach the revised exhibit

44:50three dated September 15th.

44:53Um, we'll need a motion on that and then

44:54pass and vote and we'll

44:58>> All right, we have motion and second on

45:00the revised exhibit three amendment. All

45:02in favor of that amendment signify by

45:03saying I. I. Any opposed? That amendment

45:06carries. Now, we'll roll those up into

45:09one amendment and we will get a motion

45:11and a second on the bill as amended.

45:13Motion and second on the bill as

45:15amended. Now, Councilor White, you're

45:18recognized.

45:19>> Yes, sir. Through the chair, thank you.

45:21This is just to put on your radar.

45:24Totally different from what they've been

45:25talking about, but is that building

45:26sprinkled by chance?

45:29>> Actually, yes.

45:30>> That's good cuz when you said 500

45:32people, if it

45:32>> No, no, we fully upgraded the whole

45:35>> Well, I was going to tell you yes.

45:36>> Yeah, I'm upgrading everything.

45:38>> over 250 people, you just don't have to

45:40be sprinkled. So, that's good. Thank

45:42you.

45:44>> All right, and we have no one else in

45:46the queue. So, let's open the ballot.

45:48Record your vote.

45:55>> Seven yes, zero nays.

45:57>> By your action you've approved 2026 654

46:00as amended.

46:02All right, our next item

46:12>> Uh Mr. Chair, can you ask these

46:14gentlemen to go to the green room? I

46:15just want to chat real quick.

46:16>> Oh, yeah. Mr. Rude and Mr. Price, I

46:19think it was. Mr. Carrico would like to

46:22see you in the green room.

46:24All right, next item up 2026 657. We

46:27will open the public hearing and we will

46:30not get a

46:31uh

46:33planning department report, but we will

46:34go to our speaker cards as this was

46:37recently extended until

46:40uh 11:04. So, with that, let's see.

46:44I don't think the applicant Is the

46:45applicant here?

46:48Okay, got it. So, first up we have Ted

46:51Emerson is in opposition, does not wish

46:53to speak.

46:55We have Brenda McLaughlin in opposition,

46:58does not wish to speak. And then, we

47:01have Samantha Series is in opposition,

47:03does not wish to speak.

47:05And now, we will go to Edward Redloff.

47:14>> Just say

47:16Ed Redloff, 3739 Buckskin Trail West.

47:20I would first like to

47:22state it was refreshing to hear some of

47:25the council members up here speaking

47:27about concerns about parking, about the

47:30whole venue.

47:32Um

47:33this venue

47:34is particularly alarming

47:37and that is a um

47:40a 1-acre lot that has exactly eight

47:43parking spaces on there. But yet, they

47:46want to

47:48I've seating for 173 people on the

47:51outside of the building.

47:53And it's a batting cage

47:56with also a miniature golf course and

47:58they want to hold corporate parties and

48:01other

48:03events. The problem is the building they

48:06say is a restaurant, they have six seats

48:08inside that building.

48:10There's 167

48:12seats around the building.

48:15This is nothing more than looking to be

48:17an outside beer garden in a residential

48:20area that's within 1,500 ft of a school

48:24that is right in a roundabout area which

48:26is notoriously having issues with people

48:30running straight through it at the

48:32middle of the night and knocking down

48:33palm trees.

48:35Um

48:36the here council members concerned about

48:38on-site parking,

48:40um loud music. This is in a residential

48:43area. You'll hear other speakers here

48:46today talking about the initial PUD

48:48which was done in 1996

48:51and there were covenants in place.

48:54The person that came into this property

48:56now wants to convert it over into a

49:00outdoor party space in a residential

49:02area which makes no sense.

49:04Um

49:05I'm happy to see my council member here

49:08to hear the citizens come up tonight and

49:11to voice their concerns.

49:13But as members of the council, I'm also

49:17intrigued and encouraged to hear some of

49:19the feedback that you're giving.

49:21Uh the previous speaker up here

49:23uh concerning about what's it going to

49:25do to the neighborhood and impact the

49:27neighbors and also

49:29you know, about parking. There is no

49:31parking for 173 people. You got eight

49:34spots and this is a one lane two lane

49:37road one each direction with a

49:38roundabout. You'll be parking on the

49:40side of the road. It makes really no

49:43sense. I'm all for improvement.

49:46Um

49:47you know, it just has to make sense.

49:51And I appreciate you hearing me tonight.

49:53I will state that we went to the

49:55planning commission meeting planning

49:57committee meeting. They didn't show up.

49:59It got deferred after 4 hours. We came

50:01back tonight. We show up and they're not

50:04here again. It just gets frustrating to

50:07come down take hours out of our days to

50:10come down and fight for our community.

50:12Thank you.

50:16>> All right. Thank you, sir. Next we have

50:18Jamie Travis Leonard.

50:24>> Good evening, city council. My name is

50:26Jamie Travis Leonard. My address is on

50:27file.

50:29Plot twist, I'm in support of this.

50:32I know, I'm shocked y'all. I do value

50:35the community's input. Now, I want to be

50:37transparent. I live in District 8. This

50:38is not my district. I think that my

50:40opinion should be weighed less than the

50:42community members

50:43when it comes to this.

50:45But we

50:46when I read the PUD, it seems like it's

50:48a batting cage and they want to serve

50:49beer and wine. We have Topgolf and they

50:52serve beer, wine, and liquor.

50:54So, to me it just seems like a fun venue

50:57where you can go and maybe have some

50:58drinks if you want or otherwise just,

51:00you know,

51:01build up some arm muscles.

51:03I do understand the community's concern

51:05about parking. I hope that the developer

51:07addresses that. I also understand that

51:09they seem to be concerned about noise.

51:12We've talked now at length about that in

51:14this meeting and so hopefully the

51:16developer can work with the community to

51:18address those concerns and find a

51:20reasonable compromise, but as far as

51:23allowing the consumption

51:26of beer and wine on property, I I don't

51:28see where that

51:30is out of touch with other

51:33event or entertainment venues we have in

51:36town already.

51:37So, thank you.

51:39>> All right. Thank you. Next we have Steve

51:41Matchett.

51:51>> Steve Matchit, address is on file.

51:55I was almost not going to speak until I

51:57heard that. That was the first person in

52:00six hearings that has come up here to

52:03say they support this item.

52:05Um

52:06I find it interesting that well, I know

52:09that the person doesn't live in the

52:10neighborhood

52:12because

52:13they would be more of an anomaly.

52:16Um

52:18Committee members, Mr. Radloff just

52:20talked about this a minute ago. This is

52:22the

52:23Well, we've had six hearings on this

52:25item. Two in front Planning Commission,

52:27we had one at Great Arlington Beaches

52:29CPAC. We had one in front of the full

52:31council. We had one here 2 weeks ago,

52:34and we have one here tonight.

52:36The applicant has shown up one time at

52:38all six of these hearings.

52:40Okay? The reason for the deferral is I

52:42guess they finally figured out that it

52:44needs some representation

52:46after having been so opposed in so many

52:49of these.

52:51We got a unanimous denial from the

52:53Planning Commission.

52:55This was against a planning staff report

52:57of approval.

52:58I don't think you've seen that situation

53:00happen too many times in this body.

53:04Another situation this body has never

53:06seen is the

53:08introduction and the sponsorship of a

53:11recreation open space land use category

53:14dropped into a middle of a

53:17of a residential neighborhood. If you

53:19look at your zoning land use map that's

53:21given to you in your packet here,

53:25you'd have to zoom out to Merrill Road.

53:28That's almost a mile away to pick up the

53:30first non-residential piece.

53:33This property is not just surrounded, it

53:36goes on for a radius of almost a mile

53:41of it being all residential or school or

53:45a church.

53:47This um

53:49this land use was intentional.

53:52It was intentional in '96 when I did it

53:55with Mr. McLaughlin.

53:57And the idea was that it would covenant

53:59the property to never be expanded on a

54:02commercial basis.

54:04And it would never have alcoholic

54:06beverages.

54:08Those were two of the conditions that

54:09were part of that original PUD that was

54:12between the city, the councilman at the

54:14time, the neighborhood, and Mr.

54:17McLaughlin.

54:18And it allowed his batting cage to exist

54:20there for the last 30 years

54:23without this new proposal threatening to

54:26wreck all of that.

54:29We sent a lot of people home when we

54:30heard it was deferred.

54:32Actually, that was um

54:33uh I was a little disappointed in that.

54:35I was hoping that a few of these men

54:38may be able to get to testify. It's a

54:40couple of them have health issues.

54:42But they've made it to planning

54:43commission and they were on their way

54:45here before the cancellation or the

54:47deferral tonight. You'll see them in 2

54:49weeks.

54:50We're going to be looking for your

54:51denial at that time again.

54:53Thank you.

54:55>> All right, thank you, sir. We have Bert

54:57McLaughlin next.

55:00I guess he's not here and he is in

55:03opposition. Lisa Ransom.

55:08Followed by Ramsey

55:10Salem.

55:17>> Good afternoon. Uh my name is Lisa

55:19Ransom. I live in Ashley Green. I'm

55:21representing 119 homes. My address is

55:247755 Lynchburg Court East. Um I do have

55:28a letter that I sent out to the members

55:29of the committee. I won't read the

55:31entire letter. Um I'll wait until the

55:33public hearing, but I did want to

55:35register my opposition to the

55:37intensification of this commercial use

55:40that is surrounded by single-family

55:41homes and medium-density homes.

55:44Um

55:45I was the planner that wrote the

55:47original land use amendment report 30

55:50years ago. I was five. And um it was a

55:54denial by the Planning and Development

55:56Department because as if you look at

55:59your land use map, it is a spot land use

56:01and spot zoning. And as you know, um

56:04PUDs cannot be inherited, that they

56:07cannot be put in your last will and

56:08testament. So, um once you have

56:11something that's um written in stone, it

56:13will pass on in perpetuity and that's

56:15the problem. This is a commercial use.

56:17It is adjacent. There are single-family

56:20homes adjacent to it. And this is not

56:22the location for intensification.

56:25The land The site plan shows that

56:28there's limited if if if any onsite

56:31parking, which is really dangerous

56:33because there's a really small uh

56:35ingress and egress onto Hartsfield Road.

56:37And as um others have stated, it it is

56:40adjacent to the roundabout. And so, it's

56:44a busy

56:46uh thoroughfare. It's a busy collector

56:47road. It it it ends into a collector

56:49road. And so, there's a lot of traffic

56:51um on and I've lived in this area for 31

56:54years. And it's always been a very quiet

56:57residential neighborhood. In addition,

57:00my 27 years as an urban planner

57:03um totally, 21 with the city of

57:05Jacksonville, this is the first time

57:06I've seen an approval uh to intensify a

57:10commercial use that is surrounded by

57:12single-family homes. Um there's no

57:17way that this can make any sense in

57:19anyone's mind. I don't understand this

57:21approval.

57:22The site plan is hideous. It's um And in

57:26addition to the chain-link fence, the

57:29outdoor parties, the amplified music,

57:31and entertainment on site. This would

57:33create an atmosphere similar to general

57:36commercial uses

57:38um found in the downtown and surrounded

57:40areas in the urban core, definitely not

57:43in the greater Arlington area. If

57:45approved, this development would also

57:47set a precedence for added intensive and

57:49intrusive commercial uses in this quiet

57:52residential neighborhood that would

57:53destroy the quality of life for myself

57:55and my neighbors. Respectfully, I urge a

57:57denial of this application. Thank you.

58:00>> All right, thank you, ma'am. Next, we

58:01have Ramsey Salem.

58:07>> My name is Ramsey Salem. My address is

58:10on file. Um I'm coming to you because um

58:13I was president of uh Colony Cove Civic

58:16Association. I was a president of the

58:19greater Arlington uh

58:21Civic Council. I was uh chairman of the

58:25CPAC for Arlington Beaches. And um I've

58:28seen this spot zoning um in all these

58:31years and said that this is the worst

58:35case that I've ever seen of spot zoning

58:37in the middle of a residential area.

58:40Um this batting cage, it's been there

58:43and I've seen it for the last

58:46um 30 years and it's not never busy.

58:50Um

58:52it's always very little

58:54activity.

58:56And I know for a fact that there's been

58:58code enforcement people coming out there

59:00where they did things they weren't

59:01supposed to do. And both at CPAC and at

59:05GACC,

59:06we we discussed it and had um code

59:09enforcement go back out there and

59:11they've not always gone as planned.

59:14Um

59:15everything that everybody else said is

59:17you know, but the main thing is there's

59:20no parking.

59:22There's a school right across the street

59:24and you can't not supposed to put liquor

59:27right across the street from a school.

59:29And the reason being is obvious. And

59:32last thing is that the the noise from

59:36that there's all residential around

59:38there. Raimore Villa, the neighborhood

59:40is right there like

59:4250 ft from the property line.

59:45And there's homes right there against

59:46the fence there of it.

59:48So I don't understand how this could

59:50ever happen. Thank you.

59:54>> All right. Thank you, sir. Next we have

59:56I think the first name is Nolan Brenner.

1:00:10>> Hello, ladies and gentlemen.

1:00:12Thank you for letting me speak.

1:00:13>> Name and address.

1:00:16>> Nolan Brenner.

1:00:18I live on 5308 Matanzas Way.

1:00:22Which is on right off of University

1:00:24Boulevard.

1:00:26And I'm opposed to this because

1:00:29for one, I moved to the Arlington area

1:00:33uh to try to get out of some of the

1:00:36really bad areas off of Main Street that

1:00:38were loaded with

1:00:40uh liquor

1:00:42and vape stores and all this kind of

1:00:45stuff.

1:00:46I moved to get away from that.

1:00:49Now

1:00:50I come back over to Arlington and now

1:00:53it's getting loaded with

1:00:55places to buy liquor, beer

1:00:58so forth and so on. You know, vape and

1:01:01this and that and the other.

1:01:03You know,

1:01:04you put enough hot housing over there to

1:01:07to kill somebody.

1:01:09I mean, I there's some some of it I I

1:01:12know low-income housing is needed.

1:01:15But when you have established residents

1:01:17that have been there and all of a sudden

1:01:19their neighborhoods are just going down

1:01:23Because it Now, the people that are in

1:01:25this area that we're talking about,

1:01:28uh

1:01:29they've been there a long time,

1:01:32and

1:01:33they need peace and quiet, too.

1:01:37They don't need their streets littered

1:01:40with trash, dumpsters everywhere.

1:01:43It's it's it creates a mess.

1:01:47So, I'm opposed to this.

1:01:53So, please, if you would, don't put any

1:01:56more places to buy beer and liquor and

1:01:59so forth on University Boulevard. I can

1:02:02count six of them

1:02:04in a short distance.

1:02:06And it just creates a lot of crime

1:02:10and unwanted litter.

1:02:12I appreciate your time.

1:02:15>> All right. Thank you, sir. We have no

1:02:17other speakers. We will go to

1:02:19Councilmember Amaro, but I do want to

1:02:21let everyone know this public hearing is

1:02:23continued to 11 4 26. Councilmember

1:02:26Amaro, you're recognized.

1:02:30>> Thank you, Mr. Chair, and thank you for

1:02:32in the sense of fairness, having this

1:02:34continued until 11 4,

1:02:37which I presume at that time more

1:02:40members of our community will be here.

1:02:43I urge you tonight to listen to the

1:02:46community

1:02:48intentionally.

1:02:50Um

1:02:51in your deliberation as to what to do,

1:02:54um

1:02:56look at the history of the existing pud

1:02:58as pointed out tonight.

1:03:01And as you deliberate looking for that

1:03:03competent substantial evidence to reach

1:03:06to your decision,

1:03:08please do not minimize the voice of the

1:03:11community as to

1:03:13uh

1:03:14being uh of that threshold.

1:03:17Um

1:03:18I know it's a challenge at times trying

1:03:20to um

1:03:22make a decision between the the rights

1:03:24of a property owner versus

1:03:26the voices of a community, but the

1:03:28reason that we have existing codes and

1:03:31uh these are rails, these are guidelines

1:03:33to make sure that community standards

1:03:35are maintained

1:03:37and and that whatever is put into a

1:03:39community fits that community.

1:03:42Uh I think you can tell from the voice

1:03:44of of the residents of District 1

1:03:47uh it doesn't quite reach that

1:03:49threshold. So, I encourage you to pay

1:03:50attention to what

1:03:52uh my community is saying and and and

1:03:54also look at the history as stated with

1:03:57the original putt uh in reference to

1:03:59that. Um

1:04:00someone mentioned earlier about other

1:04:02venues. Well,

1:04:05uh other venues don't have a school

1:04:06within 1,500 ft. Other venues don't have

1:04:09a church. Other venues are not

1:04:11surrounded. So, just uh my appeal to you

1:04:14to pay attention. Thank you.

1:04:16>> All right, thank you, Councilmember

1:04:17Amaro.

1:04:18Uh we have no other speakers in the

1:04:19queue, so now we're going on to item

1:04:21number 13, 2026-660.

1:04:24Councilmembers, please declare your ex

1:04:25parte communication at this time.

1:04:30Seeing none, let's open the public

1:04:31hearing and get a staff report.

1:04:33>> Thank you. This is conventional rezoning

1:04:35ordinance 2026-660

1:04:37seeking to rezone 1.24

1:04:40acres of a property that's located at

1:04:4111713 Alt Drive. They are seeking to

1:04:45rezone from RR Acre to RLD 100A um in

1:04:48order to subdivide the property into two

1:04:51single-family residential lots um each

1:04:54meeting the required frontage with and

1:04:56lot area with access from Alta Circle

1:04:58North. The request is consistent with

1:05:01the underlying land use category of LDR

1:05:04which supports single-family detached

1:05:06housing as a predominant development

1:05:07type

1:05:09and allows up to seven units per acre

1:05:11when connected to both city water and

1:05:12city sewer. However, the RLD 100A will

1:05:15require the lots to be a half acre in

1:05:17size. Staff finds the rezoning

1:05:19consistent with the comp plan, which

1:05:21does encourage adequate land for

1:05:24residential growth accommodating

1:05:26compatibility with single family

1:05:28neighborhoods and provisions for a

1:05:30variety of housing opportunities. Um,

1:05:33the surrounding land use and zoning

1:05:35supports the request. The area is

1:05:36predominantly residential with parcels

1:05:38that are zoned RR acre

1:05:40and nearby zoned PUD subdivisions

1:05:44that allow four lots to go down to 70 ft

1:05:46in width. So, it's demonstrated

1:05:48compatibility with the established

1:05:50pattern of development. So, for these

1:05:51reasons and those outlined in the staff

1:05:53report, the planning department forwards

1:05:55a recommendation of approval.

1:05:57Application was heard by planning

1:05:58commission on October 8th. There were no

1:06:00speakers in opposition opposition and

1:06:02little discussion and they voted

1:06:03unanimously for approval. Thank you.

1:06:07>> All right, thank you so much. We have

1:06:09one speaker card, Steven Smith.

1:06:16Okay, questions only.

1:06:19And we have no one in the queue, so

1:06:21let's close the public hearing and bring

1:06:22it back to committee.

1:06:24We have a motion and a second on the

1:06:26bill. No one in the queue, open the

1:06:28ballot, record your vote.

1:06:38>> Six yay, zero nay.

1:06:40>> By your action you have approved 2026

1:06:41660. Item number 14, 2026 689.

1:06:45We'll open the public hearing and we

1:06:47have two speaker cards.

1:06:52Samantha Series is in opposition, does

1:06:54not wish to speak. And Jamie Travis

1:06:57Leonard

1:06:59in support.

1:07:00>> I am.

1:07:03Good evening, city council. My name is

1:07:04Jamie Travis Leonard. My address is on

1:07:06file. So, I

1:07:08um got some more information on this.

1:07:09So, for 26689, I am in I'm going to say

1:07:12tentative support. My understanding is

1:07:14they're trying to put a gas station in

1:07:15this space. This looking at the map,

1:07:17there's no other gas stations in that

1:07:18area. Funnily enough, my youngest goes

1:07:21to has piano lessons up by the

1:07:22neighborhoods up there.

1:07:24Um and as far as like a corner store

1:07:25situation, the closest one that I can

1:07:28remember is the one that's at Pecan Park

1:07:30and Main Street. So, I think this could

1:07:31be a good opportunity to provide some

1:07:33relief. I'm not a huge fan of gas

1:07:36stations just because if it will then

1:07:38once it transition to something else,

1:07:40there's remediation that has to be

1:07:41involved. This is happening where I live

1:07:42over on Dunn Avenue right now.

1:07:44I would prefer like a grocery store or

1:07:46something else for the community, but

1:07:47I'll take what we can get. Um my hope is

1:07:49that the applicant, I know this is being

1:07:51continued, so to the applicant, if

1:07:53you're listening,

1:07:55I would like to see this gas station be

1:07:56something the community could also use,

1:07:58more similar to like a Wawa than like a

1:08:00basic BP. Does have to be a Wawa,

1:08:02although I wouldn't be opposed cuz that

1:08:04could be getting dinner on the way home.

1:08:06Uh but that's really my request is that

1:08:09when this is being uh planned out for my

1:08:12understanding is again the gas station

1:08:13is what the end goal is that um

1:08:17it be something the community can

1:08:19uh use uh more than just for gas. So,

1:08:22thank you.

1:08:24>> All right, thank you. We have no other

1:08:25speaker cards and this public hearing is

1:08:27continued until 11/4/26. Item number 15,

1:08:312026-690.

1:08:33Open the public hearing. No speaker

1:08:35cards. We'll continue this public

1:08:36hearing till 11/4/26.

1:08:38Item [snorts] number 16, 2026-691.

1:08:42We will open the public hearing. No

1:08:43speaker cards. We'll continue this

1:08:44public hearing till 11/4/26.

1:08:47Item number 17, 2026-692.

1:08:49Let's open the public hearing and get a

1:08:51staff report.

1:08:53>> Thank you. Ordinance 2026-692

1:08:56is for a small-scale land use amendment

1:08:58located at 3747 and 3757 Hendricks

1:09:02Avenue and 3710 Grandy Avenue near the

1:09:06intersection of Hendricks Avenue and

1:09:07Emerson Street. The request is to change

1:09:10approximately 0.32 of an acre of land

1:09:13from community general commercial CGC

1:09:17and low-density residential LDR to

1:09:20residential professional institutional

1:09:23to allow for office and residential

1:09:25uses. The subject site was recently

1:09:27cleared and is currently vacant. Um

1:09:29according to the city's functional

1:09:31highway classification map, Emerson

1:09:33Street and Hendricks Avenue are minor

1:09:35arterial roadways, while Grandy Avenue

1:09:38and Greenridge Road are local roadways.

1:09:41These subject parcels are not

1:09:42contiguous. However, the parcels that

1:09:45are in between are under common

1:09:47ownership um

1:09:49at with the subject parcels and they are

1:09:52already designated as RPI.

1:09:54As such, the proposed amendment would

1:09:56allow all parcels under common ownership

1:09:59to be unified under the same land use

1:10:01designation.

1:10:03The intersection of Hendricks and

1:10:04Emerson uh serves as a low-intensity

1:10:07office and commercial node. The area

1:10:09north of the site, along each side of

1:10:11Emerson Street, is designated RPI and

1:10:14consists of a variety of office

1:10:15buildings and a few single-family homes.

1:10:19This RPI designation continues north

1:10:21along the eastern side of Hendricks

1:10:23Avenue and consists of office uses.

1:10:26The proposed amendment to RPI allows

1:10:28residential, office, and or limited

1:10:30commercial uses on an underutilized

1:10:33parcel supplied with full urban services

1:10:36within an urbanized area at the

1:10:38intersection of two minor arterial

1:10:40roadways.

1:10:42For these reasons and those in the staff

1:10:43report, the planning department

1:10:44recommends approval. This item was heard

1:10:47at planning commission on October 8th

1:10:49and was unanimously approved with

1:10:51minimal discussion.

1:10:53>> All right. Thank you so much. We have

1:10:55one speaker card, Shannon Acevedo.

1:10:59Come on down.

1:11:00I know you marked questions only, but

1:11:02I've got questions, so.

1:11:08Just state your name and address for me.

1:11:10>> Hello, um Shannon Acevedo and I'm with

1:11:13um 912 Saltwater Circle.

1:11:16>> Okay, great. Um and I know you reached

1:11:19out to me last week. We just didn't have

1:11:21a chance to connect, so is and there's

1:11:23no one else in the queue, so it's just

1:11:25going to be kind of me asking questions.

1:11:26Um it does this property owner been the

1:11:29same property owner for the whole time?

1:11:31When they first bought the property and

1:11:32it got rezoned the first time?

1:11:34>> Oh, I'm not sure.

1:11:37>> How long has Raj Properties owned it?

1:11:40>> Yeah, I'm not I'm not sure how long

1:11:41they've owned the property.

1:11:44Um I do I should have a copy of the deed

1:11:46here.

1:11:56Was there a concern about the timing?

1:11:58>> I just want to know like what happened

1:12:01because I think it was supposed to be

1:12:02something and now that didn't happen, so

1:12:04what is it supposed to be now? Is this

1:12:06like a start-stop type of thing or is

1:12:08this a real

1:12:10like deal

1:12:12project?

1:12:13>> Um

1:12:14yeah, I don't know if I have the deed

1:12:15with me here.

1:12:17>> To the chair.

1:12:18>> Yep.

1:12:18>> If I may. Um the property appraiser's

1:12:21card looks like it changed hands around

1:12:232023.

1:12:26>> Okay, and did it ever get rezoned from

1:12:30that time until now?

1:12:32>> No, sir.

1:12:33>> No?

1:12:34Okay.

1:12:36Got it.

1:12:37So, Raj Properties bought it in 2023.

1:12:41Right?

1:12:42>> That looks to be the case.

1:12:44>> Okay. Awesome.

1:12:46Um so what is the plan for the site?

1:12:50>> Uh the plan is for medical office.

1:12:53Um,

1:12:54>> What kind of medical office? How big?

1:12:56>> have a

1:12:58It's just conceptual, but I do have a

1:12:59site plan if you're interested to see.

1:13:02But, essentially it's

1:13:05looking like to optimize the site a

1:13:08two-story medical office

1:13:10up to 9,000 square feet.

1:13:13And then parking kind of moving

1:13:17around that perimeter.

1:13:19Uh, they own the contiguous parcels are

1:13:22five. Three of them are to be rezoned

1:13:25with a small-scale land use amendment so

1:13:27that all five of them could be RPI and

1:13:30CO zoning to allow for medical office.

1:13:33Um, but there's a a parcel that's kind

1:13:36of in the middle towards the south

1:13:37that's not part of the property.

1:13:40>> Okay, I understood. So, that's all the

1:13:42question I have for the land use. So,

1:13:45I appreciate that. And no one else is in

1:13:47the queue, so we'll close the public

1:13:48hearing and bring it back to committee.

1:13:50>> Move the bill.

1:13:51>> All right, we have a motion and a second

1:13:52on the bill.

1:13:54We have no one in the queue. Open the

1:13:55ballot. Record your vote.

1:14:02>> 60 Ayes, 0 Nays.

1:14:04>> By direction you've approved 2026-692.

1:14:07Item number 18, 2026-693.

1:14:10Council members, please declare your ex

1:14:12parte communication at this time.

1:14:15I don't see anyone else in the queue,

1:14:18but I did receive an email from Ms.

1:14:20Shannon Acevedo on October 14th at 9:32

1:14:24a.m. and we will get that filed with

1:14:26Legislative Services.

1:14:28We'll make sure George does it. So, with

1:14:29that, we have no one else in the queue.

1:14:32Let's open the public hearing and get a

1:14:33staff report.

1:14:34>> Thank you. This is the companion

1:14:35conventional rezoning ordinance

1:14:362026-0693

1:14:39requesting to rezone approximately 0.32

1:14:42acres of property located along

1:14:44Hendricks Avenue and Grady Avenue.

1:14:46They're taking it from CCG1 and RLD 60

1:14:49to commercial office in order to unify

1:14:52the zoning across all the parcels to

1:14:55support redevelopment for professional

1:14:57office uses.

1:14:58Uh staff finds the rezoning consistent

1:15:00with the comp plan with the approved

1:15:02land use change to RPI. Uh this category

1:15:05supports compact infill development

1:15:08along Emerson Street and Hendricks

1:15:09Avenue, both of which are identified as

1:15:12minor arterial roadways. Uh the rezoning

1:15:15furthers goals and objectives by

1:15:16promoting efficient land use patterns

1:15:19and reinforcing the viability of this

1:15:21established commercial corridor. Uh CO

1:15:23zoning is a logical transition district

1:15:25between the commercial uses to the south

1:15:27and west and single-family residential

1:15:29to the east. Surrounding zoning and land

1:15:32use patterns support the requested

1:15:33rezoning. Uh properties to the north are

1:15:36zoned CRO and used as offices. Uh

1:15:39properties to the south are zoned CCG1

1:15:41and support uh retail and auto service

1:15:44uses. And then you have residential to

1:15:46the east. So, the CO district will

1:15:48create a consistent commercial edge

1:15:49along Hendricks Avenue while maintaining

1:15:52appropriate transitions to the interior

1:15:54residential neighborhood. So, for these

1:15:56So, for these reasons and those in the

1:15:58staff report, we forward a

1:15:59recommendation of approval. Um

1:16:01application was heard by Planning

1:16:02Commission on October 8th. There were no

1:16:04speakers in opposition and little

1:16:05discussion and they voted unanimously

1:16:07for approval.

1:16:10>> All right. Thank you so much. With that,

1:16:13we have one speaker card.

1:16:15>> Shannon Acevedo.

1:16:16>> Questions only.

1:16:18>> Right.

1:16:19>> Uh yes, it's it's the same three

1:16:20parcels. So, um in this case, we just

1:16:23figured that CO is probably the most

1:16:25logical

1:16:27for a medical office use and

1:16:30um

1:16:30there were three different zonings,

1:16:32three different land use categories for

1:16:34the property in totality. So, this

1:16:37seemed like the

1:16:39um the most direct one to carry the

1:16:41project forward.

1:16:43>> Is the property for sale right now?

1:16:46>> I don't believe so.

1:16:47>> Okay, I just want to make sure. I drive

1:16:49by this every day, so

1:16:50>> don't think so, but I I'm not for sure

1:16:53on that.

1:16:54>> Okay.

1:16:55Um we'll go to one other council member

1:16:57in the queue and then we'll

1:17:00go to the rest. So, Council member

1:17:01Arias, you're recognized.

1:17:02>> All right, thank you, Chair. Ma'am, I'm

1:17:05curious because I I was just doing some

1:17:06research, but the the I guess owner of

1:17:09the property, they're going to put a

1:17:10medical use there.

1:17:12Doing my research, is it Florida Eye?

1:17:15Is that the the the business that

1:17:17they're going to put in there or what

1:17:18kind of business?

1:17:19>> think they've settled on an exact

1:17:21business. I know that they have that

1:17:22history of that type of medical use.

1:17:26Um they are looking at a few different

1:17:27options, but probably something of

1:17:29similar intensity to that.

1:17:31>> to say if it is a Florida Eye, I mean,

1:17:33they do top-notch work in the community.

1:17:35They're a well-respected business, so

1:17:37it's not my district, but to alleviate

1:17:39some concern, Mr. Carlucci, I you would

1:17:42have a great neighbor if that's the case

1:17:43if it is them indeed. So, just doing

1:17:45some research here, but thank you so

1:17:46much.

1:17:47>> Sure.

1:17:50>> Yeah, Council member Gaffney, you're

1:17:51recognized.

1:17:53>> Thank you to the chair. I guess this

1:17:54question is to the planning department.

1:17:55Under what I guess under the CO district

1:17:58they change it into

1:17:59what are the

1:18:01I guess

1:18:02um

1:18:03businesses could be I guess zoned under

1:18:05the CO?

1:18:06>> Um through the chair to Councilman

1:18:08Gaffney, this is probably one of our

1:18:09most restrictive commercial categories.

1:18:11So, the only uses that are allowed

1:18:13within this category are medical and

1:18:15dental offices, professional offices,

1:18:18and cosmetology type uses.

1:18:21Um and then you can do day cares that

1:18:24are in connection with a professional

1:18:26office and that's and that's it. It's

1:18:28very very limited.

1:18:29>> Okay. All right, thank you.

1:18:33>> All right, let's see who else. Anybody?

1:18:36We have no one else in the queue.

1:18:38Um

1:18:40So, with that, I'll go ahead and support

1:18:42it tonight. Uh well, we'll close public

1:18:44hearing and bring back to committee.

1:18:47All right, we have a motion and second

1:18:48on the bill. I'll go ahead and support

1:18:50it uh tonight under the you know

1:18:53kind of the concern or the point that

1:18:55Councilman Gaffney brought up that it's

1:18:56very limited in what it can be. Um

1:19:00it's it's just you know, I want to know

1:19:02who my neighbors are

1:19:04um

1:19:05because I have my office three blocks

1:19:07from here and I don't like to find out

1:19:10about zonings via a you know, planning

1:19:13department mailer.

1:19:14So, that's just a piece of advice for I

1:19:17guess yourself and Raj Properties. You

1:19:21know, I think um we all want to be good

1:19:23neighbors, but that's been sitting

1:19:24vacant for a long long long time.

1:19:28Um and so, you know, I would just

1:19:31encourage them to reach out to me and

1:19:33you know, kind of

1:19:34talk to me a little bit more between now

1:19:36and next Tuesday if that's possible. Um

1:19:39and I promise we'll get back to you.

1:19:40We'll make sure something actually gets

1:19:41set up. But um with that, that's that's

1:19:44kind of my only recommendation.

1:19:46Um

1:19:47and and I do want to kind of go over

1:19:48there now that I've seen the site plan

1:19:51um and just sort of get a feel for what

1:19:54exactly it would it would kind of

1:19:56entail. So, with that, there's no other

1:19:58speakers in the queue. We have a motion

1:19:59and second, so let's open the ballot and

1:20:01record the vote.

1:20:05>> Thank you.

1:20:08Five A's, zero nays.

1:20:10>> By your action, you've approved

1:20:112026-693.

1:20:13Item number 19, 2026-694.

1:20:17Open the public hearing. No speaker

1:20:19cards. We'll continue this public

1:20:20hearing till 11:42 6. Wait, do we?

1:20:28All right, public hearing is still open.

1:20:29Erica Allen.

1:20:31Are you here?

1:20:32Come on down.

1:20:40Okay.

1:20:48>> Um hello. Good evening.

1:20:51I'm Erica Allen.

1:20:53And um I live in St. James Place where

1:20:55they're going to

1:20:57actually be building, I think, some

1:20:58homes or townhomes. I'm not opposed to

1:21:01them building in my backyard, but I do

1:21:04want to know about what type of um

1:21:07buffering would be there to separate the

1:21:10existing homes from the homes that

1:21:12they're going to currently build.

1:21:14And um cuz there's a railroad track

1:21:16in my backyard as well. So, I already

1:21:18have the noise from that that surrounds

1:21:20us.

1:21:21And um so, I just kind of want to know

1:21:23what they're going to have in place for

1:21:25that. So, it's not that I'm against them

1:21:27building. It's fine.

1:21:29Just what we're protecting the current

1:21:30homeowners.

1:21:31>> Okay.

1:21:32All right. Thank you so much. Uh

1:21:34Councilmember Gaffney would like to

1:21:36speak with you in the green room.

1:21:38Um

1:21:39So, and you're right here,

1:21:41[clears throat] over here. Um

1:21:43Oh, okay. Sure. Sure.

1:21:45Um

1:21:46All right. With that, we'll go to the

1:21:48uh next item, but that public hearing is

1:21:50continued until 11:26.

1:21:52Item number 20, 2026-695.

1:21:55Councilmembers, please declare your ex

1:21:56parte communication at this time.

1:22:02Councilmember Johnson, do you have

1:22:03anything for this one? No? Okay. We will

1:22:05open the public hearing and get a staff

1:22:06report.

1:22:08>> Thank you. This is conventional rezoning

1:22:09ordinance 2026-0695

1:22:12requesting to rezone 1.2 acres of

1:22:15property located at 9520

1:22:18uh Sandler Road. They are rezoning from

1:22:21RR acre to RLD 70. Uh the applicant

1:22:24intends is the property into two equal

1:22:27residential lots for development of a

1:22:28single family home on each parcel. So,

1:22:30this would be two single family two new

1:22:32single family homes. Uh staff finds the

1:22:34rezoning consistent with the comp plan.

1:22:37The property is designated LDR within

1:22:39the suburban development area where

1:22:41single family residential is encouraged.

1:22:43RLD 70 is a primary zoning district

1:22:46within this category and it supports

1:22:48infill residential development.

1:22:50Surrounding development pattern strongly

1:22:52supports the rezoning. The area consists

1:22:54primarily of single family homes within

1:22:57the zoning categories of RLD 60, 70, and

1:23:00RR Acre. Properties to the north and

1:23:02south are zoned RLD 70 and you have RLD

1:23:0560 is located to the east demonstrating

1:23:08that the proposed zoning is consistent

1:23:10and compatible and appropriate for the

1:23:12site's established residential area.

1:23:14Based on these findings and those within

1:23:16the staff report, the planning

1:23:18department forwards a recommendation of

1:23:20approval. Application was heard by the

1:23:22planning commission on October 8th where

1:23:23there were no speakers in opposition and

1:23:25little and they voted unanimously for

1:23:27approval. Thank you.

1:23:29>> All right, thank you. We have one

1:23:30speaker card, Stephen Smith.

1:23:33All right.

1:23:34Okay. Uh here for questions only. No one

1:23:37is in the queue on this, so let's close

1:23:39the public hearing and bring it back to

1:23:40committee.

1:23:41All right, we have a motion. Do we get a

1:23:43second? Second on the bill. No one in

1:23:46the queue. Open the ballot. Record your

1:23:47vote.

1:23:53>> 60 yes, 6 no, 0 nays.

1:23:55>> By your direction you've approved

1:23:562026-695. Item number 21, 2026-696.

1:24:00Council members, please declare your ex

1:24:02parte communication at this time.

1:24:04Seeing none, let's open the public

1:24:05hearing and get a staff report.

1:24:07>> Thank you. 2026-696

1:24:09seeks to rezone approximately 0.23 acres

1:24:12located at 0100 3rd Street from

1:24:14commercial office to commercial

1:24:16community general 2. The applicant seeks

1:24:18this rezoning to expand the potential

1:24:20commercial use options for the property

1:24:22and the parcel is currently undeveloped.

1:24:24The property is designated CGC in the

1:24:262045 comprehensive plan. CGC is intended

1:24:29to support a variety of retail and

1:24:31service uses that serve broad areas of

1:24:33the city, often located at major roadway

1:24:35intersections.

1:24:37The site fronts 103rd Street, which is

1:24:39classified as a minor arterial roadway,

1:24:42and lies within an established

1:24:43commercial corridor where CCG-1 and

1:24:45CCG-2 zoning already exists to the east

1:24:47and south. CCG-2 is the primary zoning

1:24:50district within the CGC land use

1:24:52category, making the rezoning consistent

1:24:54with the comprehensive plan.

1:24:56The rezoning encourages commercial

1:24:57activity in uh nodes and corridors, and

1:24:59promotes redevelopment and infill over

1:25:01expansion into new areas.

1:25:04Approval will effectively extend the

1:25:05existing CCG-2 commercial corridor

1:25:08westward along 103rd Street.

1:25:10For these reasons and those outlined in

1:25:12the staff report, we forward

1:25:13recommendation of approval. This item

1:25:15was heard at the October 8th Planning

1:25:16Commission hearing. There were no

1:25:17speakers in opposition, and the

1:25:18commission voted unanimously for

1:25:20approval.

1:25:23>> All right, thank you. We have one

1:25:24speaker card, Ricky Rand, and is in

1:25:28support with questions only.

1:25:30We have no We have one speaker. Do you

1:25:32want to speak on the public hearing or

1:25:33after?

1:25:35Okay, go ahead, Ms. Clark-Murray. You're

1:25:36recognized.

1:25:38>> All right, thank you, chair. So, I did

1:25:40have an opportunity to speak with Mr.

1:25:41Rand earlier today, and of course, I

1:25:43will

1:25:45file my um

1:25:47ex parte and announce in council next

1:25:51week. Just um

1:25:53as the staff report said, it's a CC

1:25:56CCG-2,

1:25:58and the um

1:26:00the subject property has CCG-2 to the

1:26:03south, east, and to the west of it.

1:26:05When I spoke with the applicant, he was

1:26:08didn't really have a particular use or

1:26:11improvement that he wanted to make in

1:26:13mind at this time, but he was

1:26:14considering a garage, I think it was

1:26:15automotive that he mentioned.

1:26:17And

1:26:19one of the concerns, of course, with the

1:26:20community is always whether or not a

1:26:22liquor store is going in. And so, with

1:26:24the CCG2, he would still the applicant

1:26:27would need to file for an exception if

1:26:29he was going to do alcohol sales and a

1:26:32myriad other uses that are not that are

1:26:35allowed that won't be allowed except by

1:26:39And the other thing is that the

1:26:40applicant is aware that the subject

1:26:41property's proximity to wetlands, so it

1:26:44may impact his ability to make

1:26:45improvements on the land. And with that,

1:26:47I don't I would not be opposed to this

1:26:50particular legislation. Thank you. Thank

1:26:52you, Chair.

1:26:53>> All right. Thank you.

1:26:55And with that, we'll close the public

1:26:57hearing and bring back to committee.

1:26:59All right, we have a motion and a second

1:27:01on the bill.

1:27:04No one in the queue. Let's open the

1:27:05ballot. Record your vote.

1:27:12>> Seven yes, zero nays.

1:27:14>> By your action, you've approved

1:27:152026-696.

1:27:17Items number 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, and 27

1:27:23uh are

1:27:25uh I'll read the bills numbers as well.

1:27:262026-741, 742, 743, 744, 745, 746 are

1:27:31all uh deferred with a public hearing

1:27:33next cycle on 11/4/26.

1:27:35Item 28 we already took up. Item number

1:27:3929, 2026-779 is deferred because

1:27:41planning commission hasn't taken it up

1:27:43yet. And the following bills are on

1:27:45second reading. 2026-781, 782, 783, 784,

1:27:49785, 786, 787, 788, 789, 790, 791, 792,

1:27:55793, 794, 795, 796, 797, 798, and 807.

1:28:02With that, we have no other business.

1:28:05The meet This meeting is adjourned.