Here. Alternate Nair. Here. Alternate Warnicke. Present. Thank you, staff. First item on the agenda is the approval of the minutes from the July 16, 2025 meeting. We did have one minor change. The minutes that were emailed to you showed that alternate French was here. He actually was excused. So the agenda that's in your binder and the one we're voting on this evening is the corrected copy. Do I have a motion? So moved. Second. Can I make a comment about changes? It would just be helpful if what was highlighted or identified what the change was and what the new information is. That's all. Well, I'm sure that staff will make a note for future reference. All those in favor of passing the minutes? Say aye. Aye. Those opposed? Hearing none. Motion passes. Got to talk quick. It only gives you a certain amount of time. Right? I know. It's like timing me out. Presentations, awards, and reports. I don't see any. Public forum. Staff, do we have anybody from the public who'd like to speak this evening? No, only on the items that are being presented. Very good. Thank you so much. Nothing on old business. Moving on to new business. Public hearing for ordinance number 34-2025. Does council want to read this into the record now or would you prefer to wait? I can read it in now. Thank you, Mr. Chair. So this is ordinance number 34-2025, an ordinance of the City of Deltona, Florida, amending section 110-319, PUD, planned unit development of article three, establishment of classifications and official zoning map of chapter 110 zoning to reduce the minimum parcel size required to establish plan unit developments. And table one, permitted use table of article three, establishment of classifications and official zoning map of chapter 110 zoning to update uses in planned unit developments, providing for conflicts, codification, severability, and an effective date. Thank you, council. Turning it over to staff. Go right ahead, Mr. Smith. Good evening, Madam Chair, fellow planning and zoning board members. Tonight, I will present proposed amendments to section 110-319 of the Land Development Code, which governs planned unit developments or PUDs. These updates are designed to improve flexibility, clarity, and alignment with the City's long-term planning goals. As background, in March of this year, the Commission adopted ordinance number 5-2025, which updated our PUD regulations. The item before you tonight represents a continuation of that work, refining standards to further strengthen our code and improve its usability. There are two primary changes we are proposing. First, reducing the minimum lot size for PUDs to one acre, and second, updating the table, the permitted use table, to clarify which uses are allowable within the PUD zoning districts. This intent is to promote more flexible site design, encourage redevelopment in infill, and provide greater clarity about permitted uses. This ensures that our zoning regulations remain consistent with the comprehensive plan and support high-quality, context-sensitive development. Reducing the minimum lot size to one acre makes the PUD process more accessible, especially for infill and redevelopment projects, and it encourages creative planning while still requiring projects to meet high-quality design and development standards. Updating the permitted use table will eliminate ambiguities in the current code, making the process clear for applicants, staff, and decision-makers. This will also help streamline reviews and ensure consistency with the City's broader land use and economic development policies. Staff has reviewed the amendments and finds them consistent with the comprehensive plan. Accordingly, we recommend approval of ordinance number 34-2025 to amend section 110-319 and update the permitted use table. In terms of process, the Planning and Zoning Board is considering this tonight. City Commission will consider this on first reading on September 3rd, and second reading and adoption on September 15th. Thank you, Mr. Smith. We'll start with board comments or questions. We'll start with Member Gonzales. Member Stewart. Member Northey. No comment. Vice Chair de Oricle. Nothing at this time. Thank you. Alternate Warnecke. I'm good. Thank you. Alternate French. Yes, what's the present allowed size? The present allowed size is five acres. Any other comments or questions from the board? May I have a motion? Madam Chair, if you can open up to the public. I'm sorry. I always forget that. Thank you for reminding me. Is there anyone here from the public who would like to speak on this matter? No, ma'am. All righty. May I have a motion? I move to recommend the City Commission adopt ordinance number 32-2025. Second. Staff, can you call the roll? Member Gonzales. Member Northey. Yes. Member Stewart. Yes. Alternate French. Yes. Alternate Warnecke. Yes. Vice Chair de Oricle. Yes. Chair Cardo. Yes. Motion passes unanimously. Wonderful. Thank you. Moving on to item B on the agenda. Council, would you like to read it into the record? Yes, Madam Chair. This is ordinance number 32-2025, an ordinance of the City of Deltona, Florida, amending the official zoning map to rezone approximately 7.93 acres of land located at 930 Howland Boulevard from retail commercial C1 to mixed use planned development and PUD, providing for recording, conflicts, severability, and an effective date. Thank you, Council. Mr. Smith. Good evening. I forgot to introduce myself earlier, so I'll do that now. I'm Jordan Smith, Planning Director. Good evening, Madam Chair and Planning and Zoning Board. Tonight, I will be presenting ordinance number 32-25, a rezoning request for approximately 7.93 acres located at 930 Howland Boulevard. The request is to change zoning from retail commercial C1 to mixed use planned unit development and PUD. The subject, this is a vacant wooded parcel on the east side of Howland Boulevard, just north of Pine Ridge High School. It is currently a zoned retail commercial and has a future land use designation of commercial. The rezoning request would bring this property into the MPUD category to allow for a coordinated mixed use commercial development. To the north side of the subject property is a vet clinic right there, and then to this, then you have Pine Ridge High School to the east and south. And there's the current zoning map, C1, and then the future land use is commercial. So the proposed project is called Blackfin Storage. Phase one would include approximately 800 self-storage units, 57 covered RV and boat parking spaces, and 1,280 square feet of office. Phase two would result in the reserve at 2.82 out parcel along Howland Boulevard for future commercial development. The site design also includes open space and a walking trail around the stormwater pond. And there's a picture of the master plan. And in the back, yeah, there's the storage and then the proposed out parcel. So the MPUD zoning provides flexibility and ensures higher quality development. It allows a mix of compatible commercial uses while prohibiting those that are inconsistent with the city's long-term vision for the corridor, such as discount stores, standalone automotive uses, and large box retail. The MPUD also requires stronger design standards, buffering, and pedestrian features. The community meeting was held on May 22nd at the Daltona Regional Library. No residents attended in person, but the applicant did receive one inquiry email from an adjacent property owner who resides out of state. And that inquiry was just general in nature and did not express opposition. The request is consistent with the comprehensive plan. It advances future land use goals by promoting compact mixed-use developments, supports economic development objectives by diversifying our commercial base, and aligns with transportation policies through coordination with Volusia County on traffic mitigation. The development agreement establishes clear standards for the project. The development will occur in two phases. Parking is reduced in line with national data for storage facilities. Open space shall exceed the open space exceeds the 25 percent minimum requirement. A 35 front setback and 25 and 20 foot side buffers are required with enhanced landscaping and masonry wall for screening. The project must comply with 360 degree architectural design standards. The traffic analysis shows 1,828 daily trips with mitigation coordinated with Volusia County. And finally, the project is expected to create approximately 100 construction jobs, four operational jobs, and 15 indirect jobs. And then on page 11 of the development agreement, um, letter G shall state, shall state that, um, it's the northern, northern versus, northern instead of southern for the, um, masonry wall. And just for an outstanding policy note, um, staff recommended prohibiting car washes and full service drive-through restaurants to further align with the city's vision for higher value development along Helen Boulevard. The applicant declined to include those restrictions in the agreement. The board may consider whether to add them as part of their recommendation to the commission and staff recommends the planning and zoning board conduct a public hearing and provide a recommendation of ordinance number 32-2025 to the city commission. Thank you. Thank you. We'll start with comments from the board starting with alternate French. Uh, yes, Jordan. Um, does this plan take into account any historic tree status on the foliage that's on that property? I believe there are some folks there. Do, are those going to be planned in so that those will be included or preserved in the design plan? I will let the applicant answer that question, but that would be dealt with at the site plan stage. This is just the result. Any other questions from alternate French? I have a couple of questions. I have a couple of questions on the back. So you are not remec the, um, you're not recommending the restaurant? We're not recommending a drive-through restaurant. What was that? Drive-through. Okay. Cause on here it says fast casual. So I guess what's the definition of fast casual? So, uh, we had previous discussions with the applicant and they can certainly speak more to this about, um, creating a condition where it would allow for restaurants that have drive-up service that it does not, um, it's not the primary form of business. So a fast casual, like say a Panera bread, which has both dine-in and carry-out service, but the bulk of their business is not through drive-through, drive-through versus, uh, like a, a checkers that is 100% drive-through. Um, that's somewhat of the condition that we had spoken about. Um, and you know, the applicant can speak more to what their intended uses are for the, the property. Um, I do want to note that without the condition, it may, the board can still consider this as compatible with the comprehensive plan and recommend approval. This is more towards, um, economic development goals. Right. So you're talking a McDonald's versus a chili, something like that? Yes. That's a great example. Okay. And then the other question is on lot one, it says warehouse storage parcels. Is that where the RV storage is going up in the top corner? Yes. And is it going to be covered? I will let the applicant answer that question. Okay. So that would be an applicant's question? Yes. Okay. Any other questions? I'm good with that. Vice chair. Thank you. Jordan, can you go back to the slide where we show what the city asked to and to exclude? All right. Thank you. Okay. So, so I just want to confirm. So listed here is full service drive-through restaurants right now. And the, and the applicant declined to add those restrictions. So right now, any full service drive-through restaurant could go in that area that's, that's tagged as fast casual? Yes, ma'am. Okay. So, so it could be anything. Okay. Um, my next question is, did, did we just, I might be having deja vu, but did we not have something very similar to this has, that has already been approved also on Holland Boulevard not too long ago? Recently, um, another storage facility was approved, um, on Holland. With, with RV storage parking in the back and, and an office? Medical office in the front. Correct. Okay. But, but this is completely separate. Yes. Okay. I just wanted to. Other side of town. All right. Thank you. That's all I have for now. Thank you, Madam Chair. You're welcome. Member Northey? Yeah, I have a couple questions and some of them are probably generic. Um, what does enhanced landscaping mean to the city, to you? Up and beyond, up and beyond, um, what our landscape code, um, requires. I, I understand that, but, but can you give me an example of what you would say, what, what would meet the standard of the city when it says enhanced landscaping? Do we have a standard that says what that is? So the, I get the, I'm going to give the typical attorney answer. It depends. Um, and the idea is to make this flexible as you move forward towards the, the site plan phase. So enhanced landscaping could be more trees. It could be more mature trees. It could be, um, you know, additional plantings beyond the code minimum. So, well, Larry is right. There are at least one or two oaks on that property that had been there since I came to town and I've been here a long time and it's beautiful piece of property. And it leads me to this question. Originally, some years back, maybe 20, 30 years back, that property I thought was owned by the vets by Dr. Fancher who owns the vet office is right there. So do we know I, I didn't look it up what the past ownership was, but I am concerned when I hear that we're talking about doing something that is almost identical to what we've already done on, on Hallam Boulevard. And, and I guess my question would be to staff, why are we, I mean, you have a vet's office there that's, and you have the school there. Why would we be doing some kind of, um, um, uh, recreation vehicle there? I mean, do we have a need in this, in this city? Have we done, done a needed analysis that says these uses are needed for this particular property? We have not done a need analysis, no ma'am. Okay. Okay. And then, um, that's my vet. So let me just, just say that's my vet. So I'm down there a lot. And I was down there just the other day and I did not see, but does this require a zoning sign notifying the public when those orange signs up? Cause I don't remember seeing that. We did provide the applicant with, um, the public notice sign. So did, did we, do we check those to be sure that they're up? Cause I don't remember seeing it. I mean, it was there when I missed it, but I'm not blind. That's going to be a question for the applicant. They are, um, asked to send us a picture of, um, posting the site. Okay. I think that's all. Thank you. Oh, I have one other question. And this is, um, um, I guess more generic than anything. Uh, the community meetings are held. I'm is, uh, is, was that a requirement for that zoning change? The community meetings is a new requirement that, um, the P and Z recommended to the, um, city commission to implement for all right. Okay. Correct. So before any public hearing, you're required to do a community meeting with residents with right now, the code says within 300 feet. Um, and they're supposed to hold it in a public space such as a library church, um, something accessible to all. Okay. That area does not have a lot of residential to begin with. So, uh, my question then would be, is there a reason that, uh, we could not go as a P and Z member or could we go as a P and Z member? Could we get, could we get, um, notification? Are you asking about the community meeting? Yeah. So staff can definitely, um, let you know when the community meetings are being held. However, side note, if there's more than one P and Z member, um, you cannot speak to each other. Right. So I'm going to lean to legal on this, but I would probably advise against it. Well, I, I think you, from my re remembrance, it would have to be noticed. And I would think when the applicant noticed that the meeting was public anyway. So the city would be required to post a public notice because it's a, because you are a board of the city. Do they have to put, I, I, it's been a while since we, since I've known about how they do that because I know there was going to be some, they were looking at some changes, whether it was going to be in the paper or whether it could be noticed on site. So the notice can be through various forms. It can be online or, um, and frankly, that's more of a question for the city clerk on what the current practice is. Um, but yes, the city would need to post a notice if there were going to be multiple planning board members attending, um, in order to comply with sunshine. Is that, is that a difficult thing to do? I don't know how we do noticing now on this city, whether we, I, I don't believe it's difficult. It would seem to me that we noticed we would put information out anyway that said this was happening. We could just add a line that says potentially you would have P and Z members in attendance. Or you can speak to the city clerk's department about that. All right. Thank you. This may be a really bad time to ask this question, but counsel, since this is a quasi judicial hearing, are we supposed to be doing ex parte? Yes, ma'am. I was after comments, I was going to ask that we, uh, please disclose. Okay. So it's okay if we continue with the last two board members' comments and current questions, and then we can go back to that. Yes. That's, that's permissible. Wonderful. Please remind me. Uh, member Stewart. Uh, I don't have any questions, Jordan, for you. I do have some for the applicant. So thank you. Sounds good. Member Gonzalez. None for Jordan. Thank you. Wonderful. Uh, you certainly can. Alternate Wernicke, would you like to ask one more question of Mr. Smith? One more question, Jordan. Um, the applicant stated that is the commercial front restaurant that we're speaking of come at a later date? Yes. That would come in in phase two. Is there a deadline on a date or is it could be now for 10 more years, 15 years that that place would just stay vacant? There's no timeline, but we do, we have asked that that particular parts that our parcel be, um, properly, um, maintained. Okay. But it hasn't the city in the past talked about doing the commercial first. I know it's residential, but so they're getting their bang for their buck for the storage, but we're really not getting anything in value for the city. Understood. Um, that was my question. That's going to be a question for the applicant to ask them about the phasing. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. And now Madam Chair, at this time we could, can I, I'd like to ask staff a question and then we'll, if you don't mind, then we'll go to that part. Jordan, can you, uh, turn to pages 10 and 11 in the development agreement, please. At the bottom of page 10, it talks about minimum building setbacks. And at the bottom of page 11 or close to the bottom, it talks about landscape buffer yards. And I just want to make sure we're all on the same page here because, um, I might be misreading this, but to start with, um, 10 B north yard, north side yard of lot one is a 10 foot building setback, but the buffer yard has noted in H two, lot one buffer shall be a minimum of 20 feet. That means that your building can encroach into the buffer by 10 feet. Is that really what we want? That's not the intent. Okay. Let's look at the next one that might need to be tweaked. So, uh, looking at 10 E south side yard of lots one and two building setback, 10 feet south side, excuse me, H five south side, lots one and two 20 feet. So again, I have a 20 foot buffer and a 10 foot building setback, which means my building can encroach into the landscape buffer 10 feet. I'm thinking that we got that flipped or that might need to be corrected. What do you think? Staff will take a look at that. Last one, 10 F east rear yard, 10 feet for a building setback and H four rear buffer 20 feet. That means my building can encroach into my buffer by 10 feet. So in those three instances, we might want to recheck our calculations or buffer yards and setbacks. So noted. Wonderful. Thank you so much. Uh, I think you said that the applicant was here and was ready to make a presentation. I'd like to call the applicant to the poll. Oh yeah. Oh, sorry. Counsel. Can you help us out with quasi judicial hearing protocols? Yes, ma'am. Uh, because this proceeding is quasi judicial in nature, all members of the planning and zoning board must disclose ex parte communications and ex parte communication is any communication written verbal or otherwise between you and any individual regarding this application, which includes residents, family, friends, staff, and applicants. So if you have can, can discuss this application with anyone who's not yourself, um, you must have closed disclose that at this time. So we'll start with member Gonzalez, anything to disclose? Nothing at the time. Thank you. Member Stewart. Uh, I'd like to disclose conversation with commissioner, uh, Davis and Harriet, um, a conversation with my wife and, uh, a conversation with, uh, resident John Stewart and Derek Sukuna. Member Northy? No. Vice chair. I had a resident or a resident. I had a conversation with several residents just to get their perspective on this. Do you need their names? I can submit those. Uh, yes. If we could have their names or if you don't remember. I'll get, I don't have, yeah, I'll get, I'll send a list to the. The city. Alternate Warnecke. I had no contact with anybody. Alternate French. None. And I also have none. All right. And now I believe the applicant is here and would like to make a presentation. I'll call them to the podium. Please state your name and address for the record. Can you turn on your microphone, please? Just push the little speaker button. There you go. Can you hear me now? Yes, ma'am. Thank you so much. Kim Booker, Booker and Associates, 1019. Uh, Townsend Drive, Orange City, Florida. I'm here on behalf of Blackfin Acquisitions. Um, to immediately, uh, address some of the questions that you had, um, the RV boat storage will be covered. Um, and the text that we were just discussing, I think the site plan shows a 10-foot building setback and a 20-foot landscape buffer. The intent is that the building would obviously be set back further than the landscape buffer. So we have no problem with cleaning that text up. Um, the, uh, the only concern that we had in the objections to the car wash and to the, um, the drive-through and, and the drive-through being significant because you can't have a Culver's, you can't have a Starbucks, you can't have a Zaxby's, you can't have anything with a drive-through the way, um, the way, um, it is written. And I understand that Deltona has a desire to create, um, more, or have more sit-down restaurants. Um, this area that we're talking about, though, is to the east of Deltona. Um, it is surrounded by the Pine Ridge High School. Across the street is a Christian school. Um, there is a new subdivision, uh, at the north, uh, east, or yeah, northeast corner. Um, it is prime. To me, this is a perfect location for what we're trying to do here with a, um, it's going to be a $15 million construction project. It's going to generate over a hundred thousand dollars annually in, uh, tax revenue. It's going to be a beautiful, um, building. Um, but it is going to be set back and, um, you will not see the building because you will have, I mean, you will see some of the building, obviously, but you will have the retail commercial parcel in the front. Uh, it is set out for two phases. However, it, the two phasing is because we have the ability to start construction right away on the self storage. We are looking for tenants for the retail commercial. This is an area that, um, as it being surrounded by the high school, um, you know, as far as a sit down restaurant, you can't have alcohol because you're so close to the schools. Um, so that is another reason that we would like the options to have a drive through a business with a drive through use. One in that the primary use is not a drive through is not really defined. Um, so we didn't know how that was going to be governed. How is that going to be enforced? What are we going to be looking at when we submit a site plan, if it has a drive through? So that was some of the concerns and why we wanted to have the drive through, uh, included in the language so that we aren't limited. Obviously, when you have a high school, uh, there, there, you know, the Starbucks and the, and the, the Culver's and the, uh, even Panera's, you know, options are, and then given the location at the east end of Deltona, where there's not a lot of commercial development, it, um, the, the type of use, um, that may be, um, the, the desired use that people are going to be looking at, the developers going to be looking at will most likely have drive throughs. So by reducing and removing the drive through ability, it reduces the ability to develop that lot. It's really just not an area that you're going to be looking at a sit down restaurant, uh, from an economic standpoint, from a developer standpoint, from a real estate standpoint. You know, you can wish that you can have these things, but there are certain criteria that these type of restaurants look for. And that area is just not really, you know, ideal for that type of development. Um, a car wash, there are no car washes. We talked with the commissioner for that district and they were, uh, in support of a car wash because they need that type of service on that end of town. Um, it is, uh, it, it, it, it will have enhanced landscaping. And, um, Mr. Worthy, the, the point that you've brought up about the enhanced landscaping is a question that we had. Um, we have no problem with providing enhanced landscaping. We just needed some and wanted some type of criteria that established what that would entail. Um, and the masonry wall obviously is going to address most of the concerns I think are about the buffer area. We are requesting though that that masonry, that the building, the portion of the structure that is, uh, located on the Southern boundary. Um, as you can see that the site, obviously we're bounded, um, to the South by the high school and to the East by the high school. Um, the residential development, which you can see there has, I think progressed slightly since that, this photograph, but, uh, is a, uh, approved, uh, residential subdivision, the masonry, um, wall, which I don't have actually, um, the city's presentation included the, the, uh, site plan. And you can see that the, that the Southern boundary and the East boundary will be, uh, primarily enclosed by a wall from the building. So we are asking that the masonry wall be, uh, connected to that building wall, uh, and run around the perimeter of the East and the Northern side of the, of the site plan. Um, but as stated by Jordan, the, obviously the request is consistent with the comp plan. It's consistent with the future, uh, uh, land use plan. It is, uh, I think consistent with, um, the city's, uh, economic development. It is, uh, also in a location, the traffic impact is, is nominal from a self-storage facility. Um, there will be a site, uh, there will be traffic studies done. There've already been traffic studies completed, but there'll be additional traffic studies, uh, completed, uh, once the exact use is determined on the retail commercial portion of it, the tree survey would be done at the time of the site plan as well, which would allow us to then to accommodate the existing, uh, trees that would be maintained, uh, on the site. At this point, we don't have a real plan because we don't have a user. So we can't determine that until we get to that stage of development, but obviously those, those factors would be taken into consideration. Um, and we have, uh, met all the criteria, obviously, for the zoning change, the, um, this, the full service, um, restaurant, obviously we're asking that the planning and zoning board consider leaving the drive-through in. So that gives us some additional options for development. It would be much better to have a development in that area versus leaving it undeveloped for a period of time. The longer, the more restrictions we have, the, the less likely that we can develop it in an expedited fashion. However, the agreement, I wanted to point out a clarification. Also, the development agreement does have a three-year period in which there has to be a building permit pulled. Um, so it doesn't, it's not unending. Um, the, the self-storage will be built and it would be our goal to develop the commercial portion of it right away as soon as we can find a user. Um, you know, obviously they're in the business of selling real estate. So there's no desire to leave this, um, 2.83 acres undeveloped. Uh, we did agree to provide enhanced landscaping during the period of time that it's vacant and until such time as it's developed. Um, and they are providing additional, um, uh, landscaping and a pedestrian walking trail as well as seats, um, for someone to sit around the stormwater pond. Uh, so it's going to create a, uh, recreational amenity. Uh, so they are providing additional open space over the 25%. That's 26% of the project will be, um, preserved and considered open space. Um, so I think that the, the project, um, meets the criteria for the rezoning. Uh, I'm unfamiliar with the recently approved project, but this, um, I would like to, uh, talk about one, the need for RV and boat storage. And these are some photos that I took, um, this morning around Deltona. We have a number and you can drive down the road to this today coming here. I counted another 10. Um, there's a dramatic, you know, dramatic need for RV and boat storage, um, in the area. It's code enforcement is constantly citing people who are having boats and, and RVs illegally parked in their front yard or in their side yard. They're prohibited from parking them if, if you can see them from the road. Um, and so there's a huge demand to provide that service for Deltona. Um, this is the facility that we're talking about. It's a $15 million, like I said, construction, climate controlled. It's a beautiful building. Uh, we're not talking a typical, uh, plain self storage facility. This is something that's going to look like an office building. Um, it, it's going to be, uh, create a hundred, at least a hundred construction jobs for operational jobs, 15 indirect jobs for the self storage facility. Um, it meets the demand. Like we said, there's, uh, provides currently only two square foot per capita as to the national average is 6.3. So there is a deficiency in the provision of, of self storage in Deltona. We're providing enhanced landscaping and public space. And, um, you're going to generate a substantial amount of tax base from this facility, uh, which Deltona obviously I think needs. Uh, we need more, more projects like this that will generate those spaces. Also the retail, um, the retail commercial space would generate employment. And you're looking at, you know, you talk about, um, minimal investments, drive through, uh, facilities like Starbucks and Culver's, and you're still looking at two and a half to four million dollar typical investments in buildings with, you know, businesses with drive throughs. Uh, these aren't small investments. Um, they also provide jobs. Um, and if you look at the average income for Starbucks or Culver's, uh, I was actually amazed that you're, that some of these, uh, positions are in the $50,000 to $100,000 range, depending on the business. Uh, Chick-fil-A, Chick-fil-A employs 170,000 people. Um, and that's something that would be prohibited if that, if the language, uh, regarding the drive through is included in this provision and the DA. So as far as the uses. So that's what we're looking at. Those are jobs. They may not be the, the highest paying jobs, but neither are sit down restaurants. You have servers that are making two or $3 an hour, uh, plus tips. Whereas in, uh, Starbucks as a corporation, they have benefits. McDonald's, they have benefits. Um, they're making $25 an hour. Um, so I think it should, there should be some consideration, um, to those types of businesses as well. Um, which is something that Delta, you know, greatly needs the sit down restaurants. They want to be near the interstate. They want to be in the activity center. They want to be near a destination. So that's something that has to be looked at also in making these zoning changes as to where it is probable that those types of uses should go. Uh, and in this case, I think next to the high school, uh, and across the street from the Christian school and down the street from the elementary school, um, I think you, you, you would see more like the Panera or the Starbucks or the Culver's or, or those types of things were that would actually be you utilized as well as a car wash. We have the residential neighborhood, um, and commissioner, one of the commissioners that indicated that, you know, it would provide a service to them. They lived in that area. Um, it, it, it would be a, um, benefit to the community because in that area there, there are no car washes in the near vicinity. Um, so we're requesting that, um, as the application clearly meets the criteria under the law is consistent with the comp plan. It's consistent with the future land use plan, um, and will provide, uh, substantial benefits to the community, um, that you approve this with the, the car wash and the drive through as, uh, permitted uses, um, and allow us to utilize the building as part of the masonry wall. Um, that was on page 11. Um, and if you have any other questions, we'll be happy to answer them. Thank you so much. We'll start with the board member Gonzalez. Do you have any questions for the applicant? Not a question, but a statement to correct. There is a car wash going in right around the corner on four 15, just down the road. They've already broke ground for that one. So on four 15. Yeah. Okay. So that's just a comment to make a correction on what you were stating. Okay. But other than that, I have no questions. Thank you. Member Stewart, do you have any questions for the applicant? Uh, just another statement to, um, recognizing that car wash being built, but also less than two miles away on Fort Smith, the new Starbucks that broke ground and will be done very soon. Um, it's, it's my preference to include this language, the recommendation to the commission, uh, simply because, uh, I'm looking out for our highest and best use and what our residents are asking for and what they're saying on Facebook and, uh, all the other social media and places and conversations that we have, um, that they are looking for some anchors, uh, something, uh, I do agree. $4 million is a pretty solid investment to build out of Starbucks or Chick-fil-A. Um, I think we're, it's my preference that we would have, uh, that put back in and make that recommendation to the commission. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Member Northey. Do you have any questions for the applicant? Yeah, I do. Um, so you are wanting to put back in drive-throughs. No, no, no. Currently, currently drive-throughs are allowed. I thought that I heard that they were not. So correct me if I'm wrong. The applicant denied or declined to leave those provisions out. So drive-throughs would be allowed. Correct. The city staff had requested in addition to the conditions that are listed within the DA that are agreed upon by the applicant had requested to exclude restaurants that are primarily a drive-through use and to exclude car washes. The applicant declined for the reasons that Ms. Booker, uh, so eloquently stated during her presentation and, um, certainly is up to you as the board whether you find that acceptable or not. I will note for you that in order to include those conditions, the applicant does have to agree and stipulate at this hearing. Um, so just as a note procedurally. This is speculative, speculative development, correct? Correct. Okay. And, uh, as to the retail, excuse me, as to the retail, the self-storage is already planned. Okay. And under contract. So I don't feel like I get an answer on the trees that are already in place. You said that would be design, a design standard. The retail will be done at the site plan stage. There's also, um, I'm trying to find the page. It's not where the page is. But it said architectural enhancements. What does that mean to me? That's in your code. And that's. Well, I, uh, when I asked about the, uh, landscaping enhancements, they said to ask you. So I'll ask you about landscaping enhancements as well. That's the wording in your code. Enhanced landscaping requirements under the 310-319. We don't know what it means either, but we have to agree to it. Is that the same thing with architectural enhancements? Yes. We don't know what that means either. I mean, other than they'll have the discretion to decide that. There are certain architectural standards that are depicted in your code as to what they are. Um, but they'll have to submit it and they'll have the discretion to approve it. Member Northey, um, they would have to meet chapter 111 of our architectural design standards. So that's what we're referring to in terms of architecture. Talking about utilities, because if there's no, as, uh, if I read this correctly, there is no central, uh, sewer system on Howland in that area. I think it says she'll connect when available. Chris Warshaw with England, Tim's and Miller, um, 1411 Edgewater Drive, Orlando, Florida. Um, we are the engineer of record on the, on the job. Um, at this point, the utilities are planned to be brought, um, from Howland. Uh, and if they're further away from the property, we'll extend them down. Um, all those final details on how that will happen will happen during, during site plan, but there's not going to be a septic field out here. It's not going to be a well. It's going to be connected to public service utilities and it'll be the cost of the developer. At the time of development. Correct. So you've already got the development set for the, um, storage. Is that correct? We will plan the utilities to account for the uses, probably the, the worst case scenario use for what would be in the retail. So by over design, what will be needed, but we'd make sure that it'd be properly accounted for. Okay. Thank you. Vice chair questions for the applicant. I, I, I don't necessarily have questions for the applicant. I think I do have a question coming back to you, Jordan. So I'll wait because others may, and we could just get you up there at one time. But I do, I will just say, um, I, I do tend to agree with my, my co-member Dave and that I, I do believe, and from what I hear from for residents, there is little benefit to, to leaving the drive-through option in, you know, Deltena residents already have plenty of drive-through options. And, um, frankly, they're looking for him and, and they deserve more than another drive-through option. So while I would be amenable to leaving the car wash option at your discretion, I, I would prefer that we put the drive-through excursion back in. Thank you. Alternate Warnicke. Yes. I have a few questions. Um, first and foremost, looking at the oversight plan and looking at the development plan, I doubt there'll be any trees that are saved the way it's set up. Second of all, will they, they'll be living on, will there be a person living on site for the storage? Not that they'll be living on site. No. Okay. It's closed down. This is not an open 24-hour storage facility. This will have certain hours and they'll be fixed. They will have to enter during those hours. Okay. And have you thought since there is covered storage in the RV park, have you thought about putting solar panels on the top of the roof? I'm sure that could be something that they would consider in their design. He's saying yes. Okay. And I think that's all the questions I have. And again, there is a car wash down the street. And again, I think we, even though it is close to the school, I really want better restaurants in our area. And I go to every DRC meeting just about and almost every council meeting and 75% of applicants are storage. So we have too much residential or we can end up with too much storage. Thank you. I wanted to address one issue too, that goes to the drive through. We cannot have alcohol sales in these restaurants because the location of the schools, which is again, also going to make it difficult. And if I may, I do just want to clarify that that is applies to alcohol sales that are for establishments that do not have more than 51% of their sales for non-alcoholic beverages. You're just limiting further what can go there. I mean, I understand your argument. I just want to clarify that the statutory prohibition on sale of alcohol and distance from schools applies to establishments that sell 51% or more of their sales. Which a typical family style restaurant usually is not more than half their sales in alcohol. I would imagine. I really don't know. Thank you, Zach. That helped. No, you're fine. Alternate French. Do you have any questions for the applicant? Yes. Mine is related to traffic. If you're going to be having this storage facility for rigs, trailers, et cetera, are you considering the possibility of the need for a traffic light here for that type of left-hand turn situation or the pattern for traffic going in and out of this area, especially with the proximity of the school? A traffic light is not proposed at this. No, no traffic light is proposed, nor does that. I don't think that the trips are going to become close. Correct. Okay. Thank you. Yeah. If I can just clarify that, you have to go through a, you can't just put signals up everywhere because they're one, a maintenance issue, and two, they'll stop traffic. So you got to have, you actually have to have traffic in order to justify a signal and the traffic from here wouldn't have that. I have a rig and I know it's difficult making a left-hand turn into moving traffic in this particular area here is one of the reasons why I'm asking that because I see that as a potential problem you're going to have. Vice Chair had one more question for the applicant. I did. I'm not sure who it would be for, so I'm open to whoever can answer it. I think there was a slide that showed the current traffic study, and I think it was maybe a little more than 1,800. It was the trips anticipated, 1,828. Okay. So do we have, and I'm glad you brought that up, Member French, because I did have a question about are we, do we have any concern about the safety of that number of trips being so close to the high school and elementary school with, with a lot of the kids walking along there and crossing? Oh, and the private school too. That's right. Yeah. So there's four schools in close proximity. Sorry. Right. Obviously we would be installing sidewalks and pedestrian walks in conjunction with the trail. Every precaution would be taken, but it's, it's really not a lot of trips. Self-storage doesn't really generate a lot of trips. So it's, depending on the retail, what the retail is. Well, that's the unknown. Yeah, right. Yeah. But it's, it's not a substantial amount of trips. For the self-storage, but the unknown, the unknown is the, the retail and the potential restaurant exposure. But assuming the worst case scenario, I think at this point. And additional traffic engineering takes place at site plan. Right now we're just at the rezone, so we don't have all of those details yet. We have our traffic engineer here. Do you mind coming up here and just giving a brief explanation? The 1800 trips are, are based upon the full anticipated build out or potential build out of the development. So that in, and what, and you can explain this more eloquently than I can, that there's a breakdown within those trip counts that is more based upon the self-storage. And then what we've actually done is based the, the, the balance of it off of, um, a fast food restaurant with a drive-through, which is actually an extremely high trip generator. So at this stage, we're looking kind of worst case scenario, just to make sure that we've, we've identified that. And we've, the traffic analysis is looking at that. Um, if, if it is a less of an intense use, those trips go down. The initial storage unit, though, is a very, very small, but I'll let you kind of explain how that breakdown happened. Yes. So, um, I'm Kirsten Fawcett. I'm with LTG at 1450 West Granada Boulevard, Ormond Beach 32174. So you mentioned that the daily trip count is around 1800 trips, which is accurate. However, for just the storage facility, when we do the analysis, we look at the highest AM peak, PM peak hour, and the highest, um, PM peak hour as well, which the school times relatively fall within that bracket. Um, for the storage facility itself, we're looking at a combined total of 11 AM peak hour trips, and 19 PM peak hour trips. And as he mentioned, the balance of that would go into the fast food. And, uh, we're also, like they've all mentioned, still in rezoning, but the safety factors for that driveway, the turn lanes, the pedestrian features are more analyzed in the concurrency site plan phase. Um, but everything would be recommended for, uh, within your code and Volusia County's code as well for the pedestrian. And, uh, we do look at the proximity to the schools, what that means for walkability and everything as well. Thank you. So one question for the traffic engineer before you leave the podium, have you submitted to Volusia County yet? Yes, we have. Yep. We have submitted to city of Deltona staff and the Volusia County staff. We have received comments and we're in the process of getting ready to, um, address their concerns as well. Okay. Yes. So you're in the process of pulling your right-of-way permit? Um, I believe. Is that a right-of-way use permit that you're submitting for? Yes. Okay. Great. Thank you. And I had one other question. I think it might be for staff real quick. The beginning of your, uh, discussion points, you mentioned that allowable use is within C1. So are you saying that storage facility is or is not an allowable use in C1? So with the first item that you approved tonight, storage facilities would be allowed, um, within the input. So that's not going to get codified until its second reading before council on the 15th of September. So as a point of clarification, the, this is an MPUD, which allows the applicant to utilize various zoning classifications. Industrial has self-storage currently as an, as of right use. So as an MPUD, which is why they're seeking the rezoning instead of going with straight zoning in a commercial would allow them to utilize the, the self-storage as an, as of right use. So storage is not an allowable use within the C1 classification. No, it is not. Thereby triggering the need to rezone to an MPUD. Yes. Correct. Okay. That's what I needed to know. Thank you so much. I don't believe we have any other questions for the applicant. And Madam Chair, just for clarification, um, staff as planning has been coordinating with economic development staff. And, um, we are willing to change our recommendation, um, for the drive-through as long as there's, um, the car wash is prohibited. Okay. Fair enough. So if that's the recommendation you want to provide to the commission, that's up to you. Wonderful. Thank you so much for that clarification. I don't think we have any other, we have more questions for the applicant. No. And I, I do just want to clarify again, the applicant does have to agree to that stipulation at this hearing. And just, so you repeat that stipulation one more time, Jordan. It, it was to, to remove the car wash, but allow the drive-through. So kind of the opposite of what I suggested. Correct. Okay. Just, we'll just thank you. Okay. Uh, are we, are we going to wait for the applicant? Yeah. I don't, if you need a few more moments, we could open public hearing while you discuss or, you know, I'm sorry. Can I, can I jump in with another question? I'm sorry. I'm just, would you be willing to share why staff is willing to make that concession? To risk, to reduce on the automotive type uses. We think a car wash would be a more intense automotive type use. And, um, Deltona is in the need for more restaurants. So, um, hopefully we can get a quick service restaurant, such as a Panera's and they do have drive-throughs. So it would be amenable to staff. Very good. I hear what you're saying. And I appreciate that, but it's just, it opens the door for anything is, is where my- That is, that is correct. Is where mine and the other residents' concerns come from. Okay. Well, quite, quite frankly, would it be reasonable to set a minimum size square footage for said restaurant? Because a McDonald's is not going to be more than 3,000 square feet where a Panera could potentially be more than 3,000 square feet. So that way we would identify what QSR restaurants would fit within that criteria or not. So while we ponder that, I'd like to open it up for the, for public forum. If there's anybody here from the, um, from the public that would like to speak on this matter. Mr. Douglas Falkowitz. And if you could please state your name and address for the record. And I believe you have two, two minutes. Hi, Doug Falkowitz. I live at 3375 Golden Hill Street, Deltona, Florida. My concern really is only going to be the traffic. The rest of it is fine, but I would like to see them. The problem coming out to Holland is going to be a problem because we already have a problem with the intersection of Golden Hills and, and Fernando or Fernandes or whatever it is, is already a problem. I don't know if there's a possible way that they could connect, come through the back of, on the side, on the, I'm trying to got to explain it, come through the side so that they had, they would bring their traffic out on Fernando. So that way we could put a traffic light then on that intersection to control the traffic. Especially if they would put a fast food restaurant in, then they definitely wouldn't have to do something with the traffic and you can't put a, a traffic light every, every, every intersection. That's really my main concern. I just wanted to voice it. Thank you very much for your input. All right. Staff, do we have anyone else who would like to speak? Yes ma'am. Robert Adams. Mr. Adams, if you could state your name and address for the record, please. Certainly Robert Adams, 1031 Wanderer, Deltona, Florida, 32738. Thank you for your time and your service. Um, I question, um, the vision for Deltona. Is it going to be industrial? Is it going to be all fast food car washes? I really have, I agree strongly that we would be much better served with a sit down restaurant. Certainly don't need another car wash. The one we have that we use regularly is seven minutes away. Now we're going to have another one two minutes away. Um, and I, I also have real concerns about traffic there. You're in an area with the, uh, you've got the high school there, a light there. You've got kids, a lot of activity early in the morning or throughout nine, 10 o'clock. You've got all the people at the same thing when they're coming back and you've got a lot of traffic there and a, uh, RV. You're bringing in traffic that is not only more traffic, but it's slow moving traffic. You're, uh, in putting in, um, a lot of differences in speed, which is very dangerous. You've got guys zooming down Highland, Howland, and then you've got guys pulling out with their trailer and boat. A lot of traffic with that and a lot of danger that goes with it. We've already lost kids in and around that area. And I think at very least we need to do something to address that traffic flow somehow. I think a light is a good idea. I think a light at Howland and I believe it's golden rod or is, uh, an even better idea. If nothing else that slows down your traffic going through there and it just makes it safer for the cars, for the kids, for the community in general. Thank you for your time. Thank you for your input staff. Do we have anyone else who would like to speak on this matter? No, ma'am. Very good. Okay. Uh, open it up for comments or questions from the board. Anyone have anything else they'd like to discuss further? I have one thing. Um, obviously this is on a sand hill and I haven't had, they're going to be required to do tortoise mitigation. They will need to do those particular studies. Yes. They will need to do the appropriate studies. Yes. Okay. So do we we want to talk about the, um, square footage threshold idea? Does anybody have any comments with regards to that? I like where you're going with it. I just don't, I guess I would turn to legal to see how, I don't know that I know enough about the specific requirements to get to where we would like this to get to. Yeah. I, frankly, I'm not sure what the minimum size would be that differentiates between a fast food versus fast casual restaurant. Um, it would be a condition that the applicant would have to stipulate to tonight. Uh, and frankly, I'm looking at their master development plan that shows already a building in excess of 4,000 square feet. So I'm not right. So I'm not sure that 3,000 is the right threshold or not. Um, right. That may very well be the threshold. Um, I would turn to the applicant, the applicant's representative, if they have any desire to stipulate to a minimum building size. Um, and if they've had a chance to think about the, the other, um, the other stipulations. I'm, uh, Nathan Landers with Blackwood Partners, the applicant at 4440 PGA Boulevard, uh, suite 600 Palm Beach Gardens, Florida. Um, as far as the stipulation on the square footage of the drive through facility, um, I think we'd be open to it, but it, you know, again, one for it to do it, we'd probably need to be closer to maybe 2000, um, to, to put that in there that it would have to be at least 2000 square feet dedicated to, to that facility with the attached tractor. Again, the main thing with, with this is that, um, we all have, you know, desires and things like that, but the, what the retail is being driven is why it's also, um, phase two, which is, you know, just a simple way of saying that we're able to move forward with the self storage. And the reason behind that is self storage is generally completely speculative in the sense, but we've done a lot of research or actually would be proposing a $15 million project in your community. And, and the reason for that is also, you mentioned you have a lot of residents here. Yeah. And that's the full reason why a self storage facility is looking to go in here is to support that. That's how they operate. And again, people with other garages and all that stuff. And same as we showed with the boat and RV storage. So again, there's a need here and we've analyzed that with using all kinds of specific data, things like that. So again, with the resident, uh, with the commercial, um, we are going to have to go out and seek, uh, use for that. And that's what we do for a living. So we're not necessarily worried about it. But again, this is a whole complete development and we're dealing with over seven acres. And because of the configuration of that property, the back of the property is very hidden, um, because it's surrounded by the, uh, residential and the school. And so there's not much visibility to it. So it doesn't conform to a retail, um, commercial type, uh, project. So it's really a fitting opportunity for us to be able to do this mixed use type component to where, you know, we're able to put in there a use that is, is a need. It may not be jumping at you and you're not going to go there and eat and sit down and hang out with your friends or something like that. But again, it is a need for the community and the residents here. Uh, and then the retail component is again, we're going to seek out, um, a good, uh, you know, fit for this. However, it's going to be based on their desires. We, you know, again, with the self storage, we build it and everybody goes there and does it, but I'm not going to open a restaurant there that, uh, you know, or build a building and, you know, open a restaurant and things like that. Those are more driven by someone that wants to operate within that facility. And so that's why it's kind of phase two. Um, so again, what we want to do is just keep the options open to make sure and to ensure that we move as quickly as possible to bring you another service, uh, for that area. So again, with the fast food, I know, you know, you're going back and forth, you want more sit downs. Uh, and I get that. And, uh, again, we'd love to do that too. We're not opposed to it whatsoever. We're just trying to keep our options open, but, um, with school kids there, they also need jobs and that's a tremendous opportunity for them. I know McDonald's for one does a phenomenal job with a local residents. Same with Chick-fil-A. I mean, they are, they go into the schools and, you know, really bring them in for management and training programs and all this other thing. So again, we're just trying to find the right fit. We're not saying we're going to put either of those two uses there. We're just saying we want as much options as we could possibly do. Thank you so much. Do I have a motion? Oh, go ahead. Did you have a question? You turn on your mic. So if we're doing the motion, it's without the car wash. So basically the car wash or restaurant, that's our two. Yeah. So I, I guess I do need some clarification from the applicant. Are you willing to stipulate to the removal of the car wash use and the include, or I was unable to tell from your comments. I apologize. Again, we're not looking to remove, uh, we want it the way it is. Again, we want as many options as we can possibly get here. We're not looking to, again, we're just trying to see this thing through and if it's the right fit. Again, any, any type of, uh, retailer that comes in there, they're going to put a lot of money into that thing and there's a reasoning for them to do it. They're not just going to build something. They're looking to make money. Um, so they see it as an opportunity. So again, we're just trying to find the right, right fit and, uh, bring you additional services. We will, you know, again, concede to the 2000, minimum square foot for the, uh, restaurant with a drive through. Um, and again, that, that basically gives you, uh, an interior seating area. So again, like, um, you mentioned checkers before checkers, you know, at least the older ones, I haven't seen one in a long time, but they were just the two drive throughs and there was no seating areas basically. So with 2000 square feet, that gives you inside seating and all that stuff. Yes. Yes. Thank you. So the form of your motion tonight would be either to recommend approval or recommend denial to the city commission of this request with the additional stipulation of the 2000 minimum square footage for a quick service restaurant. Um, it would be proper to recommend either. This is consistent with the comprehensive plan as determined by the planning and zoning staff. Um, and based, however, if based on the evidence you've heard tonight, um, you do not feel that the exclusion of those additional conditions is appropriate, then, um, then you could also recommend denial. So you can recommend either. Madam chair. Madam chair. Oh, I'm so sorry. That's okay. Go ahead. I was going to make a motion. Oh, before you do, I want to ask one more quick question. Uh, when, if, if at what time will this board re-see any of this development in the form of an application? This board will not, this goes to the city commission and, um, site plan done at staff level, final engineering. Okay. So this will not, this will not come back before this board in any way, shape or form. No, ma'am. Not unless there's a major amendment to the PD. That's what I wanted to hear. Thank you so much. Thank you. Um, Madam chair. I move to recommend the city commission deny ordinance number 32 dash 2025. Second. Uh, staff, will you call the roll please? Member Gonzalez. Opposed. Member Northey. Okay. So, so walk me through this one. I vote yes, which means it's a denial, correct? Yes. Yes. Member Stewart. Yes. Alternate French. Yes. Alternate Warnecke. No. Vice chair D'Erico. Yes. And chair Cardo. Opposed. Motion passes four to three. Okay. Staff comments is next on our agenda. Do we have any comments from staff? The only comment from staff is, um, staff is currently working on, uh, the continuing education, the education log for the planning and zoning board to keep track of their hours that they're, um, spending. So, um, we will get that out to you shortly. And then, uh, at back in July, the city commission did pass, uh, chapter 111, which is the new architecture design standards. So, we are currently, um, using those. So, um, that's the update. Thank you. Very good. Thank you. Uh, board members comments. Do we have any, uh, member Northey? Thank you. And thank you for the explanation on the board education. Cause that was one of my comments. My other one would be, uh, last meeting, we talked about handicap accessibility and the idea. I think, did you take that to the council, the idea of updating that staff has not, we have a bunch of items that we're going to be bringing to the commission at the same time, um, for the recommendation to give us direction. Okay. So, we haven't done that yet with the, with the commission, but we're going to correct. Yes, ma'am. We have a date on that idea. When then the next, um, two meetings. Okay. Thank you. One other thing. I, I'm, I really am concerned that I don't understand. But, and I heard it from the applicant, the enhanced landscaping definition, enhanced architectural definitions. I, I, I felt like we were not being clear on what that meant. So in terms of enhanced art, I'm not sure where the term enhanced architectural, it was, it's in here. Yeah. So, um, the reason that we use somewhat vague language, like enhanced, right. Is to allow flexibility for the staff, for staff and for the applicant in proposing what that is at site plan with the knowledge that that will have to exceed the minimum code requirements. And the reason for that is, is frankly, as you get your tree surveys done, and as you actually go through the engineering required at a site plan, your layout and existing landscape may change somewhat. So to stipulate to a certain, um, you know, a certain number of trees or- In other words, it means nothing to me. It's, it's done at the end. So when they, they could say enhanced landscaping or enhanced architectural standards. I, as a PNZ member, have no idea what- There could be one extra tree. Yeah. I mean, it's just, uh, I get PUDs. I know why they do them. Turn on your mic. Thank you. I'm sorry. Uh, but we did have, uh, uh, meetings about this, where all of this was presented as far as the, the general of what is required for the landscaping. And then as, um, they've been saying is it answers above and beyond that. Yeah. Well, that's why they do PUDs. So they get away with that. Not, I, I just think that the beautification of the city is incredibly important. And that's, and that's one of the things we discussed very intently, uh, when we went over this, uh, the revised, uh, landscaping and architectural designs for the city is we all were in agreement that we wanted to see something that popped. It was nice. It's beautiful. You may, you can, if you'll turn on your mic, go ahead. Actually for Jordan or staff or anybody. Um, I realized that they stated that Deltona is in the need for boat and RV storage. It's one thing to need the RV storage, but the city can't force it. And everybody that parks it on the side or in their driveway won't pay for storage because you have no way to force it, right? No, ma'am. Okay. Unless it's in a HOA and they're not allowed to park there. Um, I, I do also want to flag the, at the commission level, there's an update to chapter 66, which is the parking vehicle regulations, which will address some of those issues. Um, so there, that's a little bit outside the scope of this board, but just wanted to flag that for you all. Do I have a motion for adjournment? Oh, I had a question. Oh, sorry. Right ahead. Is this going to also go before the commission? Yeah. This will go before the commission on September 15th. I have a couple of comments. Um, I have seen before where boards make recommendations based on things. So I want to say if several things in relation to this proposed project, which is one of the reasons why I voted it down. Um, yes, we need more commercial development, but looking at this, it looked like it was the wrong fit for what it was that they were looking for. Traffic, I think was something that really needed to be considered on this because we're going to be handling a really difficult situation just north of this location at North Howland with all the development that's now been approved up by where graves intersects Howland. And up there we have massive development that's coming in and we're already experiencing a lot of traffic challenges there. And this kind of a placement here, especially for the kind of traffic it was going to produce, in the proximity of schools, I think was ignoring the difficulties we're going to have to deal with, with what we've now approved at North Howland. And we don't need to repeat those kinds of errors again. And we have multiple storage areas in various areas of Deltona and there's even some on Doyle Road. Um, the proximity of possibly having another fast food place or even a sit-down restaurant to the schools I think would be problematic as well because it's not a restaurant but the library across the street here is constantly having difficulties with students after school after hours. It becomes a babysitting service for them and putting a restaurant there is going to create some untold kind of challenges that we don't even foresee yet. Because of the behavior of students and with the traffic, uh, there was just no way that I could see this being something that we would want to have. But my biggest concern is after it leaves us, is our commission going to listen to all the points that we made and validate our concerns and move forward with following through on our recommendations? Because I've seen them approve other things in the interest of trying to get us more commercial, but we don't want to do it the wrong way. So member French, I did take down your comments that you just stated and they will receive the same staff report that you all received and staff will also put in those comments as well. Thank you. And you can also reach out to your commissioners. Oh yeah. Yeah. I'd just like to add one, one thing real quick. I know that we're very concerned about traffic as well. We should be, but Howland Boulevard is owned and maintained by Volusia County, which is the reason why I asked if the traffic engineer slash applicant had submitted for a right of way use permit through Volusia County, because those traffic engineers at the county will do an overly thorough job of ensuring that if there is any reason why they could justify putting a signal at that, at that intersection, they will not think twice about mandating it and making sure that it happens before they get their permit. So while that is outside of our purview and that's happening, um, ancillary to whatever's going on at the city, I just wanted to just put that out there that I know that we're concerned about traffic as well. We should be, but Volusia County is also concerned about traffic. And again, they are the ones that will mandate a signal based on the traffic analysis slash traffic studies. And, um, I, if this does move forward, I would not be surprised if there's a signal there. So anyway, with that being said, yeah. Oh boy. Here we go. Okay. Okay. That's fine. Decided by the commission, but I know there was some discussion about the property that was north of the vet's office where that road is. It turns into the development. What's the name of that development? Fernando. Fernando. Yeah. That, that is in the county. And there was some consideration about annexing that into the city. Did that happen? There was a decision regarding the acceptance of that road. Um, the commission did decide to accept the road, um, pending some additional discussions with Volusia County about potential annexation of those other properties that has not come to its conclusion. So they are still in the county that has additional properties. That's correct. Yeah. For me, I was intimately involved in the incorporation process when I was a council member and I'm like dumbstruck when I heard that. I said, why did we draw the map that excluded these properties from Deltona? I don't know what the answer is to that. And I don't either. Not that you do either, but. Um, so no decision has been made as to annexation, but there was a decision on the road. Okay. Thank you, member friend, uh, member Stewart. Excuse me. I have one question. Uh, in my role as PNZ board member, um, when an applicant or anyone brings up a topic or brings up information, are there, is there an opportunity or is it inappropriate to research that, to look online, to figure out details while the session is happening, or is that something that we just need to take it at face value and, and kind of move on? So you all are welcome to consult outside resources. Um, you, as far as using electronic media, I'm assuming you're searching on your phone, that's fine. You cannot consult with a human. Correct. Yep. Okay. Right. And certainly not your fellow board members. Right. No, my, so my question was, is, is it, how do I say this nicely? I'll say it. So the big concern about alcohol consumption, and that's going to push everybody out, according to the internet, that never lies. It's all true because it's online. Uh, the national restaurant association and the New York times report that fine dining and upscale establishments, the percentage of alcohol sold is close to 30%. On average, limited service restaurants or sit down type restaurants, it's closer to 21%, uh, of alcohol sales. So thank you for bringing that up. Yeah. Because typically when it hits the 51%, from my experience, that's when you start to go to a sports bar. Right. I could tell you in the industry that I'm in, that's how we classify a sports bar. Yeah. Yeah. So thank you for bringing that up because that was kind of my question too. I'm like, okay, like, so can people sit down and still have a drink and still do what they want to do because it's in close proximity. The answer to that would be yes. Correct. If we followed the nationwide standard. Great. Anybody else? Motion to adjourn. Motion to adjourn. So moved. Seconded. All those in favor, say aye. Aye. Adjourned.