is known for its 17 municipalities and whereas Polk County was and is still known for its agricultural industry, citrus industry, and phosphate mining. Therefore, February 8, 2025 is hereby proclaimed the 164th birthday of Polk County, Florida. That's what we're doing this year. And where's Denise? Oh, right there. Come on up. And then Denise is with the Historical Commission. And then next year, we have a bigger celebration because it'll be our country's 250th birthday. What's that called? That's it. And I don't know what the plan is, but there's some events planned, but this is what we got for this year. So let's get a picture. Thank you, Commissioner Braswell. All right. At this time, we have some requests from the general public, but first, Mr. Kevin Noble, please come up to the center if you're here and state your name and address. And you have three minutes. Thank you for having me. I live outside Bartow. I live through the 23rd block of Outdoor Slope Road. That's in Bartow, Florida. Yeah, well, the reason I'm here today is because Outdoor Slope Road and Outdoor Slope Road are in bad condition. There's potholes. And the patch up is not holding. In the Polk County Roads and Dreams Department and Board Me Unit 2, they have failed. They have failed to fix these roads in a bad shape. Yeah, well, so I reached them for over a year, and they didn't resolve anything. So I failed that three miles. I failed that Outdoor Slope Road from Citrus Avenue to Chest High Road should be repaved to, you know, to, to, um, to help, to help, to help make the drivers, to help make it safe for everybody. And from Outdoor Slope Road, from Shrek Road to Esteech Road, it needs, it should be repaved and smoothed out. Yeah. Yeah. So I tried to address it for years and that they're, and they're getting to run around and ignore my requests and I'm fed up with it. And I'm not the only ones. I know some residents along that road have headaches with it too. Yeah. Yeah. And, and the, and the semi trucks, they do not need to be going through, um, these two rural roads and, and they can be diverted off, of, of Outdoor, Outdoor Road, which is the main road. This, with, with all the orange trees disappearing, they don't need to be on that road. You know, they need to go somewhere around. There's, um, there's our road. It's not wide enough. Yeah. Yeah. And I'm just concerned, that, that, that, that somebody's going to get hurt, that somebody's going to get hurt or get killed because we don't need no, we don't need no more fatalities. Yeah. Yeah. So, so I appreciate, so I would have made, I can, I would appreciate it if you can, if you can reach out to the roads and dreams department and just, and just let them know that, that, that, that Kendall spoke to you on, on Ken Hill's behalf. And just please tell them to repave Outdoor Road, um, from, from, from Citrus Avenue to, to, to Cheshire Road and from Outdoor Road, um, from, from Shrek Road to Estee. So if you could please reach out to them and tell them to fix these roads, fix these roads before too late and, and maybe, um, and level out the, level out the dips and repave the road to make, to make it smoother. Yeah. And, and, um, and, um, that made me in the, in the residents of Barton very happy for that area. Yeah. And thanks for having me here. And, and, um, and, um, thank you, commissioners. Thank you. Uh, Lisa Marino. And I think we got something we want to pull up here, don't we? Hi. Um, we are here today representing. Ma'am, state your name and address. Sorry. Lisa Moreno and my address, 3439 Avenue F Northwest in Winter Haven, Florida. Sorry. We are here today representing the residents of Avenue F and Avenue G to request their support and urgent help in the face of a terrible situation that has been affecting our homes and families for almost a year. This situation is caused by a car speaker audio installation business named Chickie sound. The address is 3434 Avenue G Northwest. This business has, uh, not insulation facilities generating a very hard noise levels for the entire neighborhood, shaking doors and windows of our homes and disturbing the peace and rest of us and our children with competition cars that have 50 or more speakers, not respecting any regulation of hours or also the level of noise. Since it stays open until the early hours of the morning, like 5 a.m. or 4 a.m. in the morning, especially on weekends, and it's not only the noise, but the songs with offensive words, lyrics that our children are listening to. It is also to be concerned since there is schools right in front of them and also church nearby. Not least on Saturday nights, there are many people drinking alcoholic beverage and they leave the business speeding out with their vehicles, which could cause a road accident too. This whole situation has been notified on many occasions to both the police and the code enforcement providing videos evidence of the different situation and repeatedly trying to talk to the owners who in despotic and sometimes aggressive way indicate that they will continue to do because they have their right and permission to do it. Uh, otherwise, and also being rude even to the police officers who have come to talk to them. Our neighborhood before their arrive was a quiet and peaceful place. We have very old people and dedicated state of health there, as well as many children and special need children in our neighborhood affecting their quality of life. We beg them in the most attentive way to escalate this problem as far it has to go. So that's so this neighbor, nightmare, nightmare ends please. Thank you so much. I have a video so you can see how loud they are, if they can help me. Okay. It is loud. Mr. Chair. Yes. I will look into this. Yes. With code enforcement, find out what the issues is and if extra steps need to be taken. You have her contact. Did she fill out form? Yes. And we got all of them in the back. She's sitting there. I want to get on top of this and see what we can do. Okay. Thank you so much. This is across the street from the sheriff's substation, isn't it? That's right, sir. Yes. And Weswood Middle School. Yeah. Okay. We will get involved in this. Thank you for coming. Mr. Stevens. I think it's a Winston Stevens. Oh, don't see him. Okay. Is anyone else like to come forward? All right. Please state your name and address. And good morning, ladies and gentlemen. My name is Fawn Spakey. I live at 2013 Oliver Place in Winter Haven, which is technically in Polk County, not in Winter Haven city limits. I don't know if some of you remember me from before I had come about. I have been cited violation for code enforcement on rearing chickens on my property. And it's not because the chickens are in violation. It is because the coop placement on the property is within violation. According to section 222 E dash two, a chicken coop must be 50, five, zero feet from any property line from any one distance. So that means if I were to have a coop in my backyard, I would need at least 105 feet or so from any property line, because obviously that would include the actual coop itself in that delineation in those dimensions. Most people even if you have, and I'm sorry, this is for under half an acre. Most people who have backyards do not have 100 feet, 105 feet from any one property line from side to side, let alone 50 feet back. Again, since most of the houses are set back so far, excuse me. And even if you had over an acre, usually those are long and narrow. So you might not even get that 100 foot. Now, I have I was originally here in October, I have been in contact with land use development, I have been in contact with my code enforcement agent. As of now, there are no chickens on my property. And there's no coop on my property in order for me to be compliant. But I just want to let you know, I'm, again, I've been in contact with them, I'm hoping that these rules come through soon. And they change to something much more manageable. If I lived in Winter Haven, I would only need 15 feet. If I was in Bartow, I would only need five. If I lived in Lakeland, I would only need 10. So your municipalities within this jurisdiction have much more reasonable delineations lines for me to be able to house my coop and house my chickens. So I just want this is 164th birthday of a county that prides itself in agriculture. I know later on, you're also going to be a denoting this as agri week. Last week was the youth county youth, the Polk County Youth Fair. I just want to show you our chickens, one grand champion white eggs, and I had to get rid of them. Our rooster, I don't have that one, the rooster won second place. So my rooster was the second place rooster in all of Polk County. And then we proceeded to win first place, not grand champion, but first place with our white eggs. So even though we're in FFA, the exemption does not count because you still make us be compliant with the 50 feet. So I really implore you that as these, as these rules come through, please keep it much more manageable for people. We had to get rid of our chickens. So now we don't get to compete inside of FFA or anything like that anymore, which is really, it's very heartbreaking. So thank you very much. I know we've done stuff. I see Ben sitting back there hovering. So come on up, Ben, and give us a heads up. Tomorrow, I think it'll be heard by the planning commission. Yeah. Yeah. Changes to that. Let me, you know, we're working on it. We, we see where you're coming from. I just, I figured after that, it would be nice to come up and again. Okay. Thank you, Mr. Chairman for the record, Ben Zisco land development director, uh, commissioner Troutman is correct. The ordinance to change our regulations is scheduled to appear before the planning commission tomorrow morning. And then that would proceed to the board of county commissioners in March. And our proposal as written would reduce that setback from 50 feet to 10 feet. All right. Thank you. There you go. That would be so amazing. Please. Yes, ma'am chair, if you don't mind. Um, it may be beneficial to come speak tomorrow to the planning commission. Um, if you, if that's possible, it's at 9am as well. Okay. I knew there was one later on in the month, but that was at one 30, which is not conducive for picking up. So, okay. Thank you very much. Ladies and gentlemen, I got a question. What's a dozen grand champion eggs cost these? Uh, $7, $7, $7, soy free, corn free range, eat all the bugs and grass they would like. I'm telling you, they were delicious eggs. I'd like to have a grand champion. Thank you. Thank you very much everybody. Have a good day. All right. Anyone else? Cassandra Richards, 2357 Freeland Road, Lake Wells, Florida. First of all, I would like to say thank you. Thank you. County commissioners. You're doing a great job. Everything that you do. I'm still working on the light on Lewis Griffin Road and Highway 60. I'm still working on speed bumps for Freeland Road. They're still speeding. They're going to continue to speed until we slow them down. I have been in contact with city commissioners as well. I've spoken to them. I've gotten them involved. We are going to see how to get you all, all of us come together. The city commissioners are talking about reaching out to Grady Judd. We have somebody in Babson Park we're reaching out to. We are definitely fighting for this light at Lewis Griffin and Highway 60. It's very important because we had two wrecks in less than three days where it's congested at. And Lewis Griffin and Highway 60 will free up some of that congestion. We had a four car collision where two was transported, one was airlifted. Three days later, we had two cars where one car flipped over. We definitely need to get this under control. We have about 300 more houses being built right now in that same area. If it's congested now, it's going to get even worse. And no one is going to get crossed without a light. We have to free that up. I appreciate everything that you do. And have a great day. Mr. Richards, just to let you know, you know, on our end, we're working, we have instructed our staff to talk with DOT to try to get this quicker. And you know, there's a process with DOT. I know there's a process. But we're doing our side. So, you know, we understand and we're working on it. But thank you. And that speeding, someone almost ran into the church because they speed through there. They cannot cut that corner enough. I know you all can change the so-called collective roads because both of them crossing each other can't be collective roads somewhere. It has to give. We definitely need speed bumps before somebody child get hit. Okay. Sometimes I'm in the driveway and they speed through there and I'm yelling, slow that car. But that ought to get their attention. Yeah. Yes, sir. But they go anyway. Mr. Richards, just to know, so I've, I've been pushing this on the backside as well to see if we can get the road reclassified because we had gone down the road of speed bumps, but not allowed due to that classification. So we're actively working on that. So every time you come and speak, I certainly welcome it. I just know that, you know, we're listening to that trying to make a difference. And I appreciate everything that you do. Absolutely. All right. Thank you, ma'am. Anyone else? Good morning. My name is Anita Oster and I own a house at 433 Acorn Court in Salterra Resort in Davenport. I'm going to be speaking about a street in particular called Pine Tree Trail, which I hope it's okay. I can just refer to as PTT to save some time. Sure. I am here today to advocate for the owners of Salterra, for those living in the surrounding areas, as well as the citizens at large that use PTT on a daily basis. Our resort has been plagued with serious traffic issues for several years, and we now find ourselves in a precarious and dangerous roadway situation. I have been an owner in Salterra for 13 years, and I have observed the many growing pains that we as a community have faced and continued to on a daily basis. When the resort was in its early phase, there were never backups or issues as we see today. With areas such as the Posner Parkway area expansion, with medium density housing, stores, restaurants, Lake Wilson Road expansion, Estonia, a new community on Ernie Caldwell close to PTT with further development currently underway, which will bring a combined number of 1,600 more plus homes to the area. We are already feeling the daily surge of that traffic. PTT has become a high-speed thoroughfare, causing precarious implications, and Salterra simply cannot support this level of traffic under the current layout. Anyone coming in and out of Salterra is playing a game of Russian roulette on a daily basis. High-speed cars, the sheer volume of cars going both ways, as well as how the street itself is set up, with the lack of proper signage makes for significant safety issues for everyone. It is not just a matter of a busy time of the day anymore. It can be unpredictable and erratic even during peak periods. PTT at Salterra Boulevard saw three accidents alone in the span of less than 72 hours this past weekend, a very serious one occurring right at the gate on Pine Tree Trail on Salterra Boulevard on Friday night. From the information we have given, six people were rushed to hospital, including two small children. Many of these accidents are due to high speeds and people turning from incorrect lanes and getting T-boned. Currently, there are no road signs on PTT making drivers aware that it is a one-turn lane into Salterra. There is an error on the actual lane. However, it is barely visible at night, especially when the first lane is backed up. Ideas have been proposed and communicated that our community would need to pay $5 million to make Bowen Road function for a secondary entrance. It was also suggested to install lights at PTT to the cost of the Salterra owners. I am wondering how, with the increased traffic directly relating to more developments and expansion going up in the immediate vicinity, that the county keeps on approving that we as a community are being told that the cost would be to our homeowners. The county is putting our owners, guests, vendors and everyone that works in Salterra in harm's way each and every day by not addressing this chaos. The county bears responsibility to ensure the adequate measures are taken to accommodate the demands imposed by all these surrounding developments that are having such detrimental impact. We know of the serious issues that plague PTT. We know the accidents are increasing. We know that we require road signage. We know that PTT is a failing roadway. We know the majority of the issues that we face are not the fault of Salterra. We know that PTT has become a high-speed and dangerous thoroughfare, and we know that time is of the essence here in order to prevent more accidents and possible deaths. I implore the board to revisit these issues. I implore the board to take a look at the number of accidents within the last two years that are incrementally happening and to put the expansion of Pine Tree Trail as a priority in the upcoming budget. We cannot wait for years there for there to be any more headway. It is not a matter of if somebody dies. It's when somebody dies. It is that bad. Thank you ma'am. I got a question. Okay. This came up what maybe a year and a half two years ago and what I recall the issue was then was when you turn north on Pine Tree Trail to go to Ronald Reagan there's an inadequate turn lane. That's not what you're talking about here. You're talking about just speeders? No, no. I wasn't here a year or two years ago when there were other representatives of our CDD board that came. The problem is if you're turning right to go to Ronald Reagan or you're turning left to go to Ernie Caldwell onto PTT. It is a precarious situation even trying to get out because there are cars coming. There's a lane that turns into Salterra and there's supposed to be a lane that keeps going through to Ernie Caldwell to go north. What happens is you're trying to inch up, trying to inch up to go left. You've got cars blazing this way. You've got people stopped to cross into Salterra and then you have people that are blocked by that first lane that you don't see coming. It is speeders. It is proper signage. It is everything. It is a mess. I consider myself a very good driver but I actually get nervous now even just leaving the neighborhood because I'm like, am I going to be able to cross over and not have an accident? I was there last weekend. I was there Thursday, Friday, and Sunday and witnessed all three of these accidents. I saw the people on the ground. We have people from all over the world that come to our resort. We are a short-term rental resort. We have owners there. We have residential people. We have townhomes. The three accidents were right there at the entrance? They were from people being t-boned. It happened from somebody trying to turn in from the far lane, not the first lane that you're supposed to use. They got t-boned. We had one person that was trying to leave Salterra and at the last second maybe he misjudged it but he was leaving and he also got t-boned. The one on Friday evening that was very serious with I think three people were airlifted with the two children. That one I believe they were trying to also turn in and the speeders came and they got hit. I don't know exactly all the details but that was the gist of what the security people told us. I see Jay Jarvis coming up. Jay, you'd like to say something about this? Bring us up to speed. Good morning, Commissioners. For the record, Jay Jarvis, Roads and Drainage Director. As Commissioner Braswell mentioned, you know, it's about a year and a half, two years ago this issue was brought up. There was a lot of discussion about this issue. We looked at different alternatives as she has mentioned with relative to Bowen Road which is a substandard road on the back side that they have an emergency access through, bringing that up to standard and then of course the improvements at the entrance to Salterra as well. And so when that was brought before the board and we had discussions about it, the direction from the board was these appear to be related to the development themselves and their access and things that would be addressed by the development for those types of improvements. She did state and it is true that currently Pine Tree Trail is a failing road. It's a two-lane road. It meets the requirements via a four-lane based upon traffic volume currently utilizing the roadway. It is on our unfunded CIP list for as a project to move forward. But as you all are well aware, you know, there's other projects in the works. Allocations have been made as time goes on, you know, the theory being there will be other projects moving forward and prioritized. It's just once again, as we move into that process, how that will be decided by the board to move forward with what projects and which projects and which priorities. So, you know, that has been the discussion. I've had several communications with multiple people. She may have even emailed me. I'm not. I have an email. No, not yet. Okay. I know I have an outstanding email from someone from Solterra asking me about this situation again. And I was going to give basically the response that I just gave to you all as far as this was looked at. And, you know, there were improvements that were thought about, but those were determined to be more the responsibility of the development if they wanted to do those because it seems to be some of the issues are more of the access to the development rather than, you know, the roadway, which we understand the roadway needs to be widened. But can I just comment on that? Again, I wasn't here. I was just privy to some of the emails. And from what I've been told by the HOA board and CDD board, this Bowen Road wouldn't be in effect for the mass community. The way that Bowen Road is laid out, it is onto a property called Villatel, which has 71 homes facing the road. We were told something about $5 million. If that were even a possibility, that would maybe be something that Villatel would have access to and maybe the Solterra Springs, which is the residential area. There is no way that that could possibly be a roadway for 1,200 other homes and guests of the resort. To say you have to spend $5 million to do a road, I mean, that's not going to help what the problem is on Pine Tree Trail. I mean, I'm just saying there are accidents after accidents after accidents, and I wasn't able to get the report in time for today for the number of accidents even since just July. We had four in July, we had three in September, and so forth, and three in three days. I know there's traffic everywhere, and I know it's bad everywhere. This is a short-term rental community that was built 14 years ago, 15 years ago. I was one of the first people there. I have seen how this has grown. The amount of development that is happening, Posner Parkway, as I mentioned, on Ernie Caldwell, DR Horton is now putting in another. I mean, we can't have 5,000 homes there on a single-lane highway in a short-term rental community that is the butt of the intersection of this massive thoroughfare now. Ma'am, what we need to do, I mean, I appreciate you coming and bringing it back to our attention. We'll look at this in whatever way we can, and I'll get with Jay and talk to him about your interest. You know, it sounds like it's the developers, you know, could be his responsibility, but we'll look at what we can, and I know it's a problem. Just like you said, it's that way basically everywhere up there, and a lot of these, you know. I just felt compelled to come here today because of the light of three this weekend, and when I saw the two little babies, and I saw the person on the floor, and I saw the helicopter coming, I just, as a citizen, I have to say, like, we have to do something. I know this is everywhere, but I'm just trying to advocate. I understand. Thank you. Thank you very much. Anyone else? All right. Let's see. We need a motion to approve consent agenda. So moved. I have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Ms. Butterfield. Good morning. How are you today? I'm doing well. Thank you. So today we have for you to approve and ratify payroll checks number 03690 through 03730 in the amount of $59,964.04. We have 2,777 direct deposits in the amount of $4,100,584.57, and those are dated January 24, 2025. We have wire and electronic fund transfers of $84,254,040.71, dated January 1 through February 3, 2025. And then invoice checks numbered 476331 through 477141, totaling $10,195,884.55, dated January 21 through February 3, 2025, for you to approve and ratify, please. I have a motion. Motion. Second. I have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. We also request the approval of the minutes of your regular board meeting that was held on January 21 of 2025, please. Motion for approval? Second. I have a motion and a second. Any further discussion? All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Anything else? Yes, sir. Just one more reminder. Our sweetest day of the year is coming up quickly. Next Friday is Valentine's Day, and my office will be hosting our annual group wedding. It will be at Fort Blunt Park this year, and we are delighted to have the chairman join us to welcome everyone for the ceremony. We welcome the public. For those interested in actually getting married that day, we need you to sign up ahead of time. You have to have a license, so February the 11th would be the cutoff day for you to obtain a license for it to be valid to be married on January 14th. So come celebrate with the newlyweds for a very special occasion. Thank you. Thank you. Mr. Beasley. Good morning, Mr. Chair, members of the board, members of the viewing audience. The manager's office will have two items for board consideration this morning. Item number H1 is to request the board's approval of a consultant services agreement in connection with the North Central Landfill's transfer station site improvements project. These professional services will include design, engineering, permitting, and bid support services at a cost not to exceed $476,512.93. The North Central Landfill's citizens and small business scale house handles up to 500 transactions a day for waste disposal at the county's transfer station. In order to promote safety, efficiency, and a better customer experience, a community investment program project is approved within the adopted budget to construct a citizens and small business convenience center that will add a new scale, new scale house upgrades, and to improve the site stormwater management system. As such, specific local, state, and federal regulatory agencies will require permitting. The consultant will provide professional design and engineering services and permitting services necessary to perform these improvements. Services also include geotechnical evaluations, permit level design drawings, development of an environmental resource permit modification application package, as well as Polk County's land development services, and building the building division's permit application process. Funding for this initiative is included within the solid waste division's community investment program. So Mr. Chair, members of the board, I think consistent with the board's commitment to operational efficiencies and in addressing customer service expectations where feasible, I would request the board's approval of the proposed consultant services agreement number 2021-026-02 between Polk County and Stearns, Conrad, and Schmidt Consulting Engineers, in an amount not to exceed $476,512.93. Is there a time frame in there? Dale may, yes there is, in terms of the one preliminary design will be complete, as well as when you think you're ready to go construction. Dale Henderson, Director of Solid Waste. Design will take a number of months, probably about four months design, and then permitting construction. This is a project that we hope within the next 12 months will be well underway, if not towards completion. Anyone else? Do I have a motion? Second. Got a motion in a second. Any further discussion? All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Thank you, commissioners. Mr. Chair, members of the board, second item, final item from the manager's office this morning is item number H-2, is to request the board to approve a professional services agreement with CPH Consulting LLC for architectural and engineering services in connection with the Polk County Utilities Northeast Regional Warehouse Operations Building and Fleet Facility. These phase one professional services will be provided at a total expense not to exceed $210,909. Polk County has completed the public solicitation process seeking professional services from qualified firms for a new northeast region utilities operations facility to include administrative offices, a parts warehouse, and the fleet maintenance shop. Services will include design, permitting, surveying, bidding documents, and construction administration support services. Professional services for this project will be delivered in three phases. Phase one to include conceptual facility design and the site master plan. Phase two to prepare final facility plans and specifications. And phase three to provide construction administration support services. As part of the northeast wastewater treatment plant expansion, the existing operations building will be relocated to a five-acre site to provide the necessary space for the planned expanded wastewater treatment facilities. The proposed new facility will include a parts warehouse for utilities operations and work bays for the fleet division to expand their ability to serve vehicles especially within the northeast sector. These additional warehouse spaces planned for the facility will also help reduce the drive time for those Polk County utilities employees assigned to the northwest sector of the county. This project provides a more regionalized approach for serving the largest of the utilities six service areas. Regional field staff will also be assigned to this new facility during major weather events to provide more efficient emergency response operations. A request for proposal number 24273 was issued and five firms submitted qualification proposals. In July of this past year, the board approved the selection committee's recommendation to enter into contract negotiations with CPH Consulting. It is anticipated that the phase one services would be completed within four months. Amendments to the agreement to provide for phase two and phase three services will be brought back to the board for completion for approval upon completion of each previous phase. Total project costs will be shared between the county's general fund and utilities capital improvement fund. As such, these professional services costs will be apportioned by way of $56,945.43 to the county's general fund and $153,963.57 to the utility division capital fund. So, Mr. Chair, members of the board, I think given what I believe are significant operational benefits to multiple county divisions and I think in keeping with the board's efficiency focus, I would request that the board approve the proposed agreement with CPH Consulting for required architectural and engineering services in connection with the Polk County Utilities Northeast Regional Warehouse Operations Building and Fleet Facility Phase one services at a cost not to exceed $210,909. Moved for approval. Second. I had a motion and a second. Any further discussion? All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. That's it, Mr. Chair. Randy, do you have anything? No, sir. Okay. Commissioner Troutman. I just wanted to say, give a shout out to Polk County Parks and Rec over the weekend. They did host the Hunt for Sasquatch race at the ATV Park down at Bone Valley. That was my first visit to Bone Valley, so if you haven't gone, it is a great place and a little gym of our county. So Sasquatch was on the trail. He just seemed to disappear into the woods when you ran by him. Well, those hills are serious. You're running on the ATV course, so if you like flat running, this race is not for you. I'm more of a flat runner. I wondered why you weren't there. The problem we got, you know, you will never find him. We don't have them down here. We have a skunk ape. I was told when I found him to ask him that question, but I'm still waiting. Okay. Mr. Brassel. Yeah, I just want to talk back to the fire rescue department. We're 19 short today, right, Joe? So we need, obviously we're continuing to hire. Are we, was the plan yesterday or was it mentioned that at the retreat, board retreat next month, we would have a plan in place on how to start ramping this? Yes. Okay. I'm getting a thumbs up from Joe. Yes, sir. All right. All right. That's all I got. Nothing for right now. Thank you. Mr. Scott. Yes. I'd like for, to ask for the board support and staff to dive into the PDs that are approved. Currently back in 2018, we used to have a time limit on when they would expire on the PD approval. In 2018 or 19, that was modified to have an indefinite approval. And what I'm seeing is a PD that was approved 10 years ago, you know, may not meet the criteria we have today. And necessarily, hopefully our criteria today are a bit better for the community long-term. So I just like for staff to look into reconsidering how we can frame that up on our policy side of things. You got that. Because that could change, I guess, a lot with the change of the comp plan and all the regulations. Right. So it would just, it would give it, yeah, it would potentially make a PD that, you know, it still has value. I believe, like, we wouldn't go and reduce densities that were approved as far as the layout goes, though. It would give us the ability to help make this, you know, county to our current standards. Okay. I believe, though, that you're dealing with somebody who at that time had vested property rights. And I don't believe we can go, this is for Randy Meek. Right. Yeah. Right. This would be not for the ones that are currently approved. Oh, it's the future. Any ones going forward. So anything that's vested right now would still stand. Correct. I think what he's asking is a change going forward. Yeah, I think just looking at the forward viewing, you know, how can we make this county a little bit better and better planned and not get locked into maybe areas of the past or something that wasn't as great as we think it is now. So just, I think it's a good idea to at least have that looked at and see how we can bring that back to the board. Okay. Thank you. Anyone else? I don't have a thing. Just glad to be here. All right. Expedited hearings. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Before we go into the hearings, I'll go over the general procedures for public hearings. We ask that you please turn off your cell phones or other devices that may distract from the public hearings. Please adjust the microphone and state your full name and address for the record before you begin speaking on a topic. Individuals speaking during the public comment section of a matter will be strictly limited at three minutes. The board is experiencing these matters and is able to discern what is legally relevant to an issue and what is not. Information that is relevant and repetitive only serves to frustrate and necessarily prolong the day's business. The commission expects civility at all times during all public hearings. Speaking out of turn, shouting out from the audience, disrespectful sounds or utterances while another is speaking are unacceptable and you will be asked to leave the chambers for the remainder of the day. If any person decides to appeal any decision made by the board with respect to any matter considered today, you will need a record of the proceedings and that for such purposes, you may need to ensure that verbatim record of the proceedings is made, which record includes testimony evidence upon which the appeal is to be based, which you must gather at your own expense. Anyone in the audience who wishes to speak and present testimonies today must be sworn in. All testimony given during public hearings shall be deemed to be sworn. At this time, if you're going to address the commission or speak on any case today, please stand, raise your right hand, and answer out loud to the following question. Do you swear or affirm that the testimony or evidence you provide to the commission today is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth? Thank you. Mr. Chair, at this time we'll go to an expedited hearing. Expedited hearing procedures. Expedited hearings are held pursuant to resolution number 2022-089. Expedited hearings are used when no opposition was present at the Complaining Commission hearing. The applicant agrees to the expedited hearing, and the recommendation of the Development Review Committee is for approval. Expedited procedures are the following. After staff briefly introduces the case, the hearing will be open for public comment. If anyone speaks during public comment, the applicant will be given the opportunity to respond. At the public comment, the board will consider the land use case. At any time, a full presentation from staff can be requested from a commissioner, the applicant, or a member of the public. All documents attached to the agenda are deemed part of the record of the land use case. Unless removed from the list of experts by motion of the board, all individuals on the list of experts attached to the agenda are deemed experts for the purpose of the land use case. At this time, I'll turn it over to Mr. Ziskell. Thank you, Mr. Mink. Good morning. For the record, Ben Ziskell, Land Development Director. There are two items on today's expedited public hearing agenda. Item number 01 is an expedited public hearing for case LDCT 2024-18, Section 220, Warehouse Separation, to consider the adoption of a county-initiated request amending Section 220 of the Land Development Code. This amendment is intended to provide additional buffering for warehouse uses that are currently locating next to existing residential uses, in particular the ARR land use designation. A good example of this is the development we see on County Line Road where new warehouse development is occurring, but some existing neighborhoods have the ARR designation. So this amendment would require that additional buffering, which would include enhanced landscaping and opaque fencing. In addition, for any warehouse that has more than four loading docks, an additional buffer of 50 feet would be established where no parking and no activity could occur. So again, this is to recognize the changing environment in portions of our county while protecting existing residential uses. Your Planning Commission unanimously recommended approval, and following any public comments or questions from the board, staff is recommending approval. All right. Does anyone have any questions for them? All right. Ladies and gentlemen, this is a public hearing. If you wish to come forward and speak on this matter, please come forward at this time, state your name and address, and you'll be given three minutes. Seeing none, I'm going to bring it back to the board for any further discussion or a motion. Motion to approve. Second. Got a motion and second. All in favor? Opposed? Motion carries. Item number 02 is an expedited public hearing for case LDCT 2024-22, section 2.135, parcel-specific land use amendments. This amendment is first reading of a land development code text amendment to provide site-specific conditions for a project that you will see in two weeks. In two weeks, an applicant will present a request for a land use change to designate a portion of property off of LaRoche Road as residential medium. These site-specific conditions will be implemented in the land development code to provide additional buffering due to the need to relocate a road as a result of that project. So staff will present a more formal presentation to you on the land use change and this text amendment in two weeks. This item is at first reading, so no action is required by the board today. Ladies and gentlemen, this is a public hearing. If you wish to come and speak on this matter, please come forward now and state your name and address, and you'll be given three minutes. Seeing none, I'll bring it back to the board. No action required, right? Mr. Chairman, now that we move into the regular portion of the public hearing, staff would like to make a request to take item P3 out of order. The applicant and staff have agreed to request a continuance of item P3 to your next meeting at February 18th. Move to continue. Second. We have a motion and a second to move. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion approved. Thank you. Good morning, board members. Eric Peterson for the Land Development Division. I have before you a petition for a community development district in south of Lake Wales. It's called Winslow's Point. It is for 533 total units. It is located at around the intersection of 640 and U.S. 27. This is the general area currently in the project. There is only one phase that has been built. That's the Circle K. This is the residential component of the master development. The legal ad was published in Lakeland Ledger on every Friday in the month of January, as you can see, 7th, 14th, 21st, and 28th. This CDD request is located between two of our growing universities in the southeast portion of the county. It's surrounded by multiple businesses, fairly good employers to the area, Oakley, Robin Builders, and some others, eager beavers, trailers, and chemical containers. Also, Warner Southern University to the south. The property is currently agricultural residential rural. It was approved as a rural residential development in 2010, and this will help it get off the ground. This is the approximate layout of the project. As you can see, it fits in with the area and its density and intensity. The budget for the CDD as proposed has been reviewed by our county engineer, and it is one of the higher budgets. It has in it an allotment for off-site road improvements. There will probably be intersection improvements at 640 that will be needed based on preliminary traffic studies. The wet water and wastewater is going to be provided by the City of Lake Wales. There is a connection currently at the Circle K. This will expand into that. Staff finds that all the statements in the petition are correct. It is consistent with a comprehensive plan, sufficient size, compact, and contiguous. The CDD is compatible with the services and facilities of the area, and we have authorization from all the property owners. With that, I will stand for questions. Questions? Ladies and gentlemen, this is a public hearing. If you wish to come forward and speak on this matter, please come forward and state your name and address. I believe we have the applicant. Yes, my bad. Applicant, please come forward. Sorry about that. Thank you, Eric, and thank you, Commissioners, for having us here. I'm Jarrett Earlywine. I'm with QTAC Rock at 107 West College Avenue, 32301, our zip code. Appreciate the chance to be with you guys today. I've been in front of you all a couple times here on CDDs recently, so I won't go into a lengthy explanation about CDDs, but suffice it to say that I think we've met the statutory criteria, the staff report supports that, the testimony that we submitted supports that, and our petition supports that as well. So we're really just here and available to answer your questions. We think the project obviously will, you know, the CD will allow us to put in a better quality project, especially considering the cost of the off-site utilities and the off-site roads. It will fit really well with the community. So, again, just appreciate your consideration. Happy to answer your questions. Any questions for me? All right. Now, ladies and gentlemen, this is a public hearing. If you wish to come forward and speak on this matter, please come forward, state your name and address, and you will be given three minutes. Good morning. My name is Winslow Stevens. I reside at 608 Thornburg Road, Babson Park, which is on Crooked Lake. And no, Winslow's Point was not named after me, but a dog once was. My concern with the development is I understand that this is about a community development district and that these districts have a board that will be initially appointed by the property owner, eventually appointed by the residents. If you look at the map, the area down by Crooked Lake is all wetland, and they have set aside that as a green zone, which I think is great. But going forward, there's going to be great pressure by the residents to creep into this zone. I think it's just human nature. But that zone is vital for Crooked Lake, which is an outstanding Florida water. I don't know if all of you are familiar with that, but I have brought along fact sheets about it. Crooked Lake was designated that back in the 80s, and that sets it aside from other water bodies in the state of Florida. My main concern is going forward. And since this is in the county and would ultimately be the county's responsibility, I think it would be wise to have a member appointed by or at least approved by the county commission on this community development district board that is knowledgeable about wetland management because that is one of the listed items that these boards are responsible for. And I'm not talking five years from now. I'm not talking after it's built. I'm talking 20, 30, 50 years from now if the pressure to get down there increases. In the PUD, there's a plan for a boardwalk through the wetland and a dock at the lake, no motorboat storage, no motorboat access, no beach. That's already in the PUD. The outstanding Florida water is recognized in the PUD, and I would encourage that we follow this PUD very strictly. I'm also a member of the board of directors of the Defenders of Crooked Lake, which is a group that strives to maintain the quality of the water in the lake, and we will certainly be reaching out to the new residents, trying to get them involved in the lake. But if it's possible, if it's legal, I would certainly like to see the commission involved in long-term management of property this large. Thank you. We'll talk to the applicant, Matt, but thank you very much. Anyone else? All right. We'll bring it back to the board for any more discussion and a motion. Well, I think just speaking to Mr. Winslow's points, just to clarify, I think from Randy from legal side, there's a difference. They are not appointed. They are elected. You know, I don't know why I keep doing this. Excuse me. Does the applicant have anything to say? I have left you out twice today. I'm sorry. No, it's okay. So I think Mr. Winslow obviously brings up a good point. I'm sure we're all concerned about the ecosystem there. Today we're just deciding on whether to approve the CDD petition. The alternative would be you'd have a homeowners association to manage that. Most water management districts, in fact, have a letter to this effect, basically say that all things being equal, I've got this in a written letter, all things being equal, a CDD is a superior maintenance entity over an HOA, and it's because it can get FEMA funding, can collect on the tax roll, and get long-term loans if it needs to. It's got sovereign immunity protection, more transparent, on-site staff, staff engineer. So it's a more robust entity for taking care of an asset like this. The city of DeLand actually about a year ago approved a CDD for the exact reason we're doing one here, which is to help, I mean, there's other reasons too, but the main reason was they wanted to protect Lake Winmeset because there's a project sitting on the lake and they wanted to have a governmental entity overseeing that. I don't know that there's a mechanism in Florida statutes to appoint a person on our board, but that said, that particular area, I think any development in there would have to come back before the county to get any different approvals on the PAD and things like that. So I think it would be protected, and I think it's better protected by a CDD. My understanding was the appointment of the members of the board is controlled by the statute and lays out how members are chosen. So I don't think we could really go outside of that statute. I mean, I think it's basically set up their appointment at the beginning, then they're elected. I don't think we would have that ability. I agree with you. But at the same time, I also understand what he's saying, and I think there is a way that the county is involved in that through the permitting process and through the approval process. So that area will not be developed without it coming back to you guys. All right. Thank you. Move for approval. Second. Got a motion and a second. Any further discussion? All in favor? All opposed? Motion carries. All right. P4. P4 or P2? P2. P2. Okay. Morning. For the record, Mark Bennett, Land Development Division. I'll be presenting LDCT 2024-27, State Road 60, Boy Scout Road, Rural Cluster Center, Activity Center Plan Text Amendment. This is the first of two items that will be coming before the board, mainly at the next meeting. This is the first reading of the text amendment. No action is required. But what I do want to do for the next minute or two here is sort of explain what's up, what's going on, what an activity center plan is. So the specific action here is to amend the Land Development Code to allow for the establishment of the activity center plan. Activity center plan consists of maps and policies that address the following items you can see listed there. It is consistent with the comp plan, land development code. Staff is recommending approval. And there was a legal ad published in the Polk Sun on January 22nd with no response. What's an activity center plan? This excerpts out of our comp plan. It's to ensure activity centers develop in a manner consistent with sound planning principles. It's a special detailed land use plan and can be initiated by either an applicant or the county. Why are we doing one here? Our rules for expanding activity centers state that 80% of the site has to be developed unless there's just one owner that controls the remaining acreage. Last year we made some changes to the rural cluster center policies. One of those was that if a property owner wanted to expand an existing rural cluster center and it was less than 80% developed, then they had to create an activity center plan. The rationale behind that is to have a blueprint to regulate how the rest of the activity center develops. In this case, there's only one use out there, that being the existing dollar general. I won't go through these in detail, but the gist of the activity center plan is it addresses the area to be covered, permitted uses, transportation issues. That I'll get into further here shortly. Signage, landscaping, architectural building standards with the intent of ensuring that new buildings are in character with what's out there already. Yeah, signage, landscaping, lighting. In the activity center plan, we're proposing lighting that would implement dark sky requirements. Basically, those are provisions intended to reduce glare. The rationale here is that primarily this is a rural area. I'll say that Flaming Arrow is just up the road and, you know, kids from St. Pete and Tampa go out to Flaming Arrow to go see the stars. So having dark sky provisions will help in that regard. And also, if you recall from the last meeting when we had the workshop about the comp plan, that was the comments we got from citizens at the meetings about interest in dark sky requirements. And then lastly, a restatement of the rules for expanding rural cluster centers. The plan includes anticipated expansions, potential roadway modifications. One of the issues here was Rose Terrace, which is a road here. It's very close to the intersection. This plan would include a proposal that ultimately realigned Rose Terrace so that it's much further away from the intersection, therefore allowing more distance from safety and access points. To summarize, the purpose of an activity center plan is a more detailed, more specific plan for an intersection. I've explained the items it covers. We think it's a good thing because it implements sound planning principles as identified in our plan, consistent with the comp plan, development code, and we recommend approval. Planning Commission did approve this on a 5-2 vote. And with that, I'll stand for any questions. Any questions? I got one. Yeah. Oh, I'm sorry. There's what happened to it. Oh, I've got some additional slides if we want to discuss the interchange. I don't know what happened to them here. But, yeah. That's kind of my question. DIT is going to change this interchange whether this comes or not, right? Right. And bear with me here. I will. I just think, I mean, my comment is it seems like a pretty clever way to make that intersection a lot safer in a way that I never would have thought of. And I'm glad to see them doing that regardless of what comes there. Right. Without getting into specifics, details, or quite frankly, DOT's business, I'll show a couple slides that were presented at the public workshop a couple years ago. And Ben gave a very good explanation yesterday of the whole concept of the intersection. But these were the proposed improvements, alternate routes. The feedback I got from DOT staff is that the project is proposed to be let receive bids on February 26th of this year. Construction time for the contract will be 300 days. And the project will consist of repaving plus the intersection improvements. And they intend to have a public meeting at some point. So you all know as much as I do now about the intersection. So I'll say this, one of the things with the way that intersection is now on the crash data, you know, that came back for it, there's consistently six, on average, six crashes a year that are pretty significant based on the way that intersection currently is. And I know DOT has this proposed, but they also said, you know, they're going to do it in 2023 and it's 2025 and it hasn't started yet. So, I mean, I think as far as the Commissioner Braswell's point, it's good, you know, on improving that intersection, but maybe this RCC is a bit premature, you know, for that until that kind of comes into play. I wouldn't want to see us add more congestion to a bad intersection, you know, without DOT making their improvements. That's good. Anyone else? All right, ladies and gentlemen, wait a minute. I won't, boy, I keep messing up on these applicants. I'm just jumping around, y'all. Applicant would like to come forward, please. Good morning, members of the Commission, Chairman. Tom Woodridge, TDW Land Planning here, representing the property owner client for this corner. We appreciate the presentation that staff's made. It's been excellent working with them over the last three years to move forward at this intersection with some changes, both in the RCC land use policies and reviewing this intersection for a long-term vision of what could possibly occur on other corners besides the one corner that actually has something on it. And I think that's really the focus of today is to say this is an intersection. It's a key intersection out in this area. There's a lot of growth out in Indian Lake Estates. I'm sure you're all aware of that, the number of houses you all drive out there, I'm sure. But if you haven't, members of the public, I would say drive out there. You'll see there's quite a few more homes than people perceive. From that perspective, I'll say that we believe that this location and correctly and thoroughly evaluating this intersection is a key study in the future land use in this more rural area of the county because we are capturing that trips as they pass by to employment closer into Lake Wales, for example, and would stop in for some need that they may have at this intersection, which is a safe place to put commercial activity and where the commercial policies of RCC and the conference plan dictate that we would put these types of activities at an activity center. So we've gone through what's called an activity center plan over the last few years to thoroughly look at the long-term use and appropriateness of commercial at this intersection. As Mark showed, I provided, TDW Land Planning provided these exhibits that you saw earlier illustrating kind of some of the overall things that are going on beyond just a, we're not here today just to talk about RCC land use on the northeast corner. We're here to show you that the evaluation that's been done to enable that safely and appropriately consistent with the county policies is supported by the analysis that we've provided in these exhibits and the background data we've been running over the last few years. So these are meant to illustrate to the board, to you all, that we've done the analysis to show that not only on our corner, we can show safe access and appropriateness of the land use at our northeast corner, which is in the top right, showing those yellow arrows, which hints at the point that we turn this in to the DOT improvement that we anticipate will happen, was appropriate in this activity center exercise, excuse me, activity center plan exercise, because it shows that we've recognized that there are changes that are going to occur and that we are still comfortable and confident that it is suitable for what we need, number one, but number two, what we anticipate DOT to be requesting from us as development requests move forward. On that note, we don't have any plans at this time for development on the northeast corner because this is a land use long-term activity center planning request. We are setting up the entitlements. We are evaluating the infrastructure. We are requesting your approval for the long-term RCC use at this northeast corner, but we don't have a user knocking at the door asking for development approval. So we anticipate this will mesh very well with that DOT discussion and what sort of changes that would occur, and we would be required at the northeast corner to coordinate with DOT for any driveway access or any on-and-off movements from State Road 60, regardless of whether this was the discussion we were having on the intersection improvement or not. So just wanted the board to be comfortable that we've looked at this thoroughly. We are aware of the DOT changes that are occurring. We've anticipated them with these exhibits here that were turned in months ago in preparation for that discussion. So beyond that, we've shown that we've planned around the intersection, and I'll just stand here for any questions that you might have directly about our activities and planning process. Anybody, any questions? Ladies and gentlemen, this is a public hearing. If you wish to come forward and speak on this matter, please do that and state your name and address, and you'll be given three minutes. Thank you for putting that slide back up. Ronald Newingham, 2618 Cedarwood Drive, Lake Wells, Florida. In reference to this intersection, the terminology that you use here is rural cluster center. Basically, in my mind, that says urban sprawl, and in the process of this urban sprawl, down that road, you don't see it in the slide, but you have a pump station, the county does. Next to that, I heard rumors there's going to be a fire station. Okay? Now, in relative, legally, you can't have anything to do with the demands of the intersection, but that way that they're redesigning that, and just to add more information to you, on the western movement, they have changed their turnaround further east, and it's going to be at the end of the restaurant area. So they're shortening that up because of the hill that's up there. So you have two short lanes to jump, turn around in there after the Department of Roads changes that intersection and blocks it off. I'm advocating to them, with no avail, obviously, that if we put in a light up there with the proper secondary things, that it might make it a lot safer, and the amount of traffic that this development would start creating, not to speak of the fire trucks, an emergency that has to come off of that intersection, and if they want to come across and go south, they have to go west and do U-turns with big fire trucks. I think it's very detrimental to make any more growth in that area than it's already designed for, and I think the urban sprawl really needs to be considered here in it, and once you start approving that, then it's going to grow, not contiguously from Lake Wales, but it's going to have its own little pocket out there. He recommends that the people way down in Indian Lake Estates are going to utilize this because it's a convenient way to go to Lake Wales, and he feels that he's providing a service to the residents further east, but that does create a more traffic problem, and I know you're not planning for the traffic routing, but that should be something in the backslider that's considered. This growth, allowing this growth to happen, is going to create other problems, and I believe that it would be badly advised that you approve this plan until Lake Wales moves its way down to here, and until that happens, I think the development in that area should be held at bay. Thank you very much for your time. Thank you, sir. Anyone else? My name is Sandra Schindler. The address is 9520 Oakwood Drive, Lake Wales, Florida. I agree with what Ron had to say, and I think moving any more development into that area until the FDOT is done with whatever they're going to do with that intersection is very badly advised. We take our lives in our hands every time we come into town. For you guys, this is theoretical. For us, it's life and death. There is enough traffic at that intersection already, and if the petitioners are willing to put in a traffic light, that might be something different. So I talked to Sam Berkman at FDOT, and I asked him what is the criteria for a traffic light. More traffic? No. More deaths? No. More dollars? He said they are already in the red for this year. So I do not know when this proposed intersection that is shown up there will be available. But as mentioned, it's been two years since it was proposed, and nothing's been done. And if they don't have any money, I don't know when it will get on the schedule. So we agree that you can't call this a safe space, and you would call it urban sprawl. Thank you. Thank you, ma'am. Anyone else? All right. Being there's no one else, we'll bring it back to the applicant, and let him say anything he might want to say. I'd just like to address, I appreciate the concerns and comments of the residents in the nearby area, and that's not stated lightly. I think that we have shown that through our population support that we meet the criteria of the conference plan so that this is not sprawl. We have more than the suggested population support that's dictated by the RCC in this area. So while this corner looks rural in its immediate location, as you mentioned, with the fire station and an injection well, there's a lot of things happening in and around this area that's moving forward, and I'm not to say this is going to turn into subdivisions everywhere. That's not what I'm saying, but what I am saying is that within the radius that's required, we do have the minimum population support for the land use. And the second thing I'd mention is on the DOT, you know, we thought a lot this long and hard, and I'll give another example, and this is not to kick the shins of the DOT in any way, but I will say that if you look at I-4, for example, or any other major improvement, 27, you know, ultimate I-4, you know, we just got done with the barrels, right, about to remove those, and they're like, no, let's move it up to make more improvements that are necessary. And so my point in saying that is that the DOT is constantly responding to growth, and sometimes they're ahead of it in some ways, but I think most of what we see is there's so much going on here in Florida. They're reacting to what is changing constantly. They're fluid. They understand that something is needed, so they get started on it, and it's a longer timetable. And they do rely on landowners in multiple cases that you see every session you're here together, that the landowner has to be responsive to something that the DOT requests, and we will be doing that. We'll be working with the DOT because we understand that the improvements are, whatever improvements they have decided on, you know, are not moving forward immediately, but we will be coordinating with them to make sure things happen in concert with what they anticipate is needed at this intersection. Thank you, sir. I heard you correct that this thing goes to bid for DOT, the interchange. Mr. Bennett. Yeah. The feedback I got from DOT was that a resurfacing project, State Road 60 from west to Saddlebag Lake Road to east to Tiger Lake, is proposed to let receive bids on February 26, 2025, and that construction time for this contract was 300 days. All right. But for some time within the 300-day period, the intersection improvements will be completed. It's not going to go to bid unless it's funded, right? Right. Well, that was resurfacing or the intersection and the resurfacing? Both. It was both. Okay. Thank you. Anyone else? All right. Thanks. Time for a motion. I got, sorry, I got a, we're, there's a first reading. Oh, first reading. But I do have another, I got another comment, though. Okay. Just in looking at the overall aerial map here, outside of that Dollar General, I mean, everything around this is ARR. And, you know, I understand that the RCC is, I think, a creative way in which you can develop an intersection that's not used too often within the county. And, Ben, you can correct me if I'm wrong, I think five or six total was what we have historically in the county. So, again, for me, I think this is a creative way to try to put something commercial in a very rural area and looking on a map your miles until you get over to Lake Wales or other significant development. So, just, I think, case in point, there's the DOT traffic intersection issue with the hill and the 65-mile-an-hour speed zone and fatalities that occur and also accidents. But then there's also the fact that it's ARR for a reason. And right now, it still looks like the whole area around it is remaining ARR. Thank you. All right. Anyone else? All right. Now we're going to go to P4. Thank you. Good morning. My name is Shonda Bennett with the Land Development Division. I'll be presenting the last two cases together. Two cases are LDCPAL 2024-15 and LDCT 2024-24. They're county-initiated cases relating to Indian Lake Estates. Both cases were advertised in the Polk Sun on January 22, 2025. LDCPAL 2024 is a comprehensive plan text amendment to change two policies in the comprehensive plan in Section 2.130B, which allowed duplexes in the area highlighted in Office Center as the area of concern displayed on the map on the screen. So that little odd trapezoid. And it allows up to four dwelling units to the acre and some non-residential development to be on septic if sewer is not available, where currently development at two units to the acre has to be on sewer in Indian Lake Estates. The Land Development Code text amendment, which is obviously a sibling to this amendment, basically restates the same policies in the comp plan, as well as adds a use table in Chapter 4 for Indian Lake Estates that's similar to Chapter 2 with some unique allowances based on some prohibition of uses in the comprehensive plan. This is a location map. I'm sure you must know where Indian Lake Estates is out by Lake Walk on the Water. This is an aerial photograph of Indian Lake Estates, and it's divided between an area behind the gate and in front of the gate. That's what we call it. The yellow line shows the approximate area of that dividing line. So behind the gate, which is west, is a mix of uses. It's mostly residential, and to the east is a mix of uses. Canopy Oaks is to the south. You may remember we've had some hearings on that area of the county in the past. This amendment was started by, or it was catalyst by a pre-application from a property owner on a lot in the office center on DeLand Avenue, and property owners of the three areas starred to the east of that office center. You can see the land use maps that the lots behind the gate are residential suburban in the suburban development area, which is a section of the county where we don't expect sewer to be extended. Outside the gate, you can see a mixture of land uses like community activity center, neighborhood activity center, residential low four, office center, residential medium, and institutional. DeLand Avenue has a future land use designation of office center, and you can see some white areas on DeLand, and those are duplexes only. There are no office uses developed on DeLand Avenue currently, nor any other use developed on DeLand Avenue currently in the office center. The current policies in the comprehensive plan and the Land Development Code prohibit the construction of duplexes in office center, which is normally appropriate. However, the requested change is to allow the proposed duplex next to an existing one on DeLand. If not next to it, the proposed change in ILE will require a level three in that office center. It's really to accommodate the specific situation for this area of Indian Lake Estates. The property owner of the starred parcels in residential low four is currently required to proceed with a level four for duplex units. However, the sewer limitation is prohibitive. The lots in the RL four are half an acre currently and are eligible for one single family unit to be on subject. But since the lots you see in the residential four are half an acre, to get to densities up to four unit only units to the acre require the sewer, and to do a duplex currently does require a level three review. And there are two clusters of duplex units in the residential area, which is not too far from the starred area right here next to the institutional, and then there's a cluster down here. Certainly, it's not the majority or even half, but just so you know that there are areas of duplex units in Indian Lake Estates. A few facts. The duplexes on DeLand and in the RL four have existed since the 1990s. The office center designation along with the others were given or approved in 2009 with the comprehensive plan amendment initiated by the board of Indian Lake Estates at the time. And at that point, they had thought about providing sewer, but with my phone calls to their sewer company, and as you heard yesterday, that's just not the expectation of the Indian Lake Estates is to provide any sewer to anybody in the community. Indian Lake Estates is a platted subdivision of residential and non-residential lots consisting of about 8,000 plus or minus lots on about 5,000 acres. When the comprehensive plan was adopted, it was originally given a designation of development of regional impact, which doesn't really have to do with the legislative designation of DRI. It's just, it was large. The mention of Canopy Oaks was, I mentioned that because Indian Lake Estates is within the compatibility areas for the Avon Park Air Force Range, and this is a map that's part of our comprehensive plan map series which shows different levels of compatibility. So the so what of the, what we call the MIPAs, is the closer you get to the range, the more concerned with impact to the training performed at the range. For example, the military branches that train at the range must adjust their height upwards the denser an area becomes. However, the base understands that ILE will be denser as it develops out and have made the appropriate training adjustments. This is basically what the letter says that we have received from the Air Force. Of course, not meant for you to read it, but this slide just displays the changes proposed in the office center at the top and describe the area based on the plat so that it specifically is for DeLand Avenue only for duplexes and the reference to the sewer exemption at the bottom of the page. And this is for the Land Development Code changes. Again, restating the office center allowances at the top, and then the middle of the document is just the lead-in to the use table, and that gives you an idea of what it looks like if it's approved today or approved at the second reading for this case. And then the need for the use table is to provide some clarification for customer service and all of us who use the code in talking to customers. The policies in the comp plan actually prohibit several uses in Indian Lake Estates, so otherwise we use table 2.1 in the Land Development Code, so it's to provide for some clarification. And we've added a proposal to just reference the water and wastewater connections that's stated in the comprehensive plan. So staff does recommend approval for several reasons listed, and, of course, the Planning Commission did recommend denial, 6-1 of the case, but I'll stand for any questions. I have one. And if we do not approve this today, the way it currently is laid out, they could build a single-family home on septic, or that is not allowed in the office? They can build a single-family home on septic. On septic, okay. Yes, sir. Thank you. But the office center, so someone, the customer that I was dealing with owns a property right next to a duplex. So the way it's written today, she couldn't build a duplex next to a duplex. But she could build a single-family home, but not a duplex. Not an office center, no. Oh, no, okay. So an office center, which is that trapezoid here, that's what's odd about this. It's got office center, but the only use in it is duplex. We didn't feel it was appropriate to take that land use away and replace it with residential because of the vested rights with that. We thought just would be good to give them another additional use to deal with that odd situation that really doesn't exist really anywhere else. Right, so the duplex is allowed in the office, but the sewer is the hiccup on allowing it to be installed. That's true. That's true. You're right. The sewer, they'd still have to connect to sewer, so that sewer amendment is still needed for that as well. Did you have a question? Yeah. I got a call yesterday, and the caller told me the roads, the road in front of this is a dirt road, isn't paved. Is that correct? I find that hard to believe. Not here, no. The roads are private even though they're on the east side of the gate, but that's not dirt. All right, say that again. The road is private? Right, the roads in here are private, but right, yes. Okay. Anyone else? Shonda, just to clarify, because you gave a lot of information, those duplexes got there by means of what planning mechanism? Before a comp plan. Okay. Okay. All right. All right, thank you. Is the applicant here who wants to speak or anything? The staff initiated because we had multiple owners. Okay. I did go to the board for the Indian Lake Estates and told them about these changes, and they didn't have any concerns. All right, then. This is a public hearing. If anyone wishes to come up and speak on this matter. I just want to clarify. You said that you went to the board, and there were no concerns from the current board at Indian Lake Estates? Yes, ma'am. Okay. Okay. And this is a public hearing for P4 and P5. P4 and P5. Okay, this is a public hearing for P4 and P5. If you wish to come up and speak on this matter, please state your name and address, and you'll be given three minutes. Good morning. It's just a tangential thing. My name is Victoria Del Castillo, 3740 Crystal Beach Road, Winter Haven, Florida. You had stated that, and several people presenting today stated, or I heard it a couple times, that you had to advertise or publicize in the Sun. Is that the publication? Yes, ma'am. I just wanted to ask the commissioners. Have you looked at the readership of that paper and considered that maybe these public announcements should go on a really good Facebook marketing person's? I think our people have looked at all the options. We've talked about the news and our own, and we've got a thing in place now that what we're going to do, we've looked at all of it. I mean, do you want responses from the public? Always. That's what it's all about. Okay, because the Sun, and I mean it with great love and respect. I worked as a communications director under the Obama administration in a deep state agency that yesterday Trump wants to eliminate. Okay, and that's good. And so my point is that there are better ways if we want to get more people involved, and I noticed that Mike was interested in the rural, like keeping things rural. Because people's property values go down if they bought that land, like my family, thinking that it would be always five-acre minimum lots, and that's what they wanted to raise their family with and have sort of grandkids and great-grandkids. And then suddenly there's a new development that's been put in, and people haven't had the right to even speak on it because they didn't have the way to know of how to speak on it because they didn't read the Sun. Thank you. Thank you, ma'am. Anyone else? Just to clarify, we also publish online, so there is ability to get the notices online. Anyone else? All right. Seeing none, bring it back to the board. Move or approval for? I think we're just, they were both readings? No, P4 is a transmittal, yeah. Move to approve P4. I have a question, though, first. Go ahead. Yep. Since the duplexes you said that were there in the 90s, to Commissioner Troutman's point, and you had responded, those were planning-wise allowed by pre-comp plan approval, correct, before 1991? Right. It would have been under the zoning code. There's a pre-planned unit development that's part of this, but that's a vested document. No, fair enough. Just in looking at moving forward, if we were to approve this today, being post-comp plan, is there any way that this can be, this approval can be construed to go further in Indian Lake Estates or near areas and increase, you know, the density or allow duplexes to where single-family homes are in that area, but somebody's, you know, looking at doing even more with it and more intense use, I guess, does this allow us, I guess, would this put us in any circumstance where, like, sets a precedence to where that can be an issue in future development in the area? All we can do is look at this case. Well, it's not an approval. It's the transmittal of the comp plan only, and the scheduled adoption is April 1st, so you hear, if it gets transmitted today, you'll hear both cases again for final decision in April. I think the intention was to allow growth in Indian Lake Estates. That's why they were given the pretty intense land uses of Community Activity Center, Neighborhood Activity Center. It was already, in 2009, it was approved to allow duplexes as level three review, so, but with the sewer exemption, it will allow more intensification, but it's not a new development, it's a new lake estate, so it's allowing development sort of, if you will, on an infill basis. So the 09 approval, I'd assume that sewer was going to be available, presumably? Yes. Okay, got it. That was the intention, but that's not happened today. Understood, okay, that helps, thank you. All right. I second the motion for the P-4. We have a motion and a second. All in favor? Aye. Opposed? Motion carries. Thank you, and P-5 is a first reading, so I believe we're done. Yep, yep. All right, we are done. Thank you, everyone. Thank you.