Planning and Zoning Commission - Regular Meeting

[Music] Hey, hey, hey. [Music] [Music] Hey, [Music] hey, hey. [Music]

[Music] Oh, really?

Staff, are we good? It we good? Okay, we good. You guys good? Okay, I call the Tuesday, September 2nd, 2025 City of Claremont Planning and Zoning Commission meeting to order. Will the clerk please call the role? Commissioner Tidona here. Commissioner May present. Commissioner Neim present. Ma'am, Commissioner Bane here. Commissioner Kramer here,

Commissioner Hoisington here, and David Colby did call out. Okay, so that we have uh 6 with Commissioner Colby uh absent this evening. With that, please stand as you are able for the pledge of allegiance. I pledge algiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands. One nation under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Thank you. Um, I will remind everyone to please make sure your microphone is turned on before speaking and to make sure you speak clearly into it so the people present here and those watching online can hear. And as a reminder, this meeting is being recorded and broadcasted on the city's YouTube channel and that can be found at city of Claremont on YouTube. Commissioners, you should have received the minutes of the August 5th, 2025 planning and zoning meeting. I understand that there is one item to uh add or correct. Is that correct, Commissioner May?

Yeah, just a spelling of um page one, last paragraph, last sentence. Just the bamboo should be bamboo. M B A M B U. So the spelling of the establishment spelling. Yeah. With that uh correction, I'll entertain a motion. with that correction and a second. I'll set a motion for approval of the minutes. Second. Okay. Moved by Commissioner Neim, seconded by Commissioner Hoisington. All in favor say I. I. I.

Any oppose? Chair votes I as well. Motion carries 6. We will now move into reports and uh we'll have our planning and zoning uh planning and development director uh give us an update as to the order of the agenda here and and just why it was at the end and why we're moving it back up.

It's a simple excuse me good evening council board members Kurt Hansel development services director. If you look at the agenda, we as staff picked the the wrong format. The council format has the reports at the end. Just pointing out that your agenda does show it at the end of the meeting. That was unintentional. Of course, this board can have the choice of putting it early on or at the end. So, uh, do as you will.

Thank you. Thank you. So, we'll go ahead and stick with our, uh, tradition of having reports before new business. And we'll start with Commissioner Kramer. Thank you, Chairman Bane. At our last meeting on August 5th, we advanced a couple of important projects. The Bloxom offices reszoning, which will turn into a long neglected site and some productive office space. Um, and then we also worked on the expansion of the Church of South Lake, which strengthened a nice cornerstone of our community. So, looking ahead, I want to emphasize my full support for the city council's upcoming consideration of formbbased zoning for our downtown. In my opinion, this is the right step for Claremont's future. A form-based approach prioritizes how development looks and functions, ensuring that growth aligns with our community's vision for a walkable, mixeduse, and vibrant city center. It protects our character, improves predictability, and fosters sustainable economic growth. I strongly this is a transformative tool to guide us forward. Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner Hoisington. Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um I I don't have a report, but I I this morning um I heard on the news that they actually announced our meeting today this morning that um we were having a planning and zoning and that just kind of caught me by surprise like, oh wow, we made the news. Um so just to let everybody know that, you know, everyone in the viewing area of the local news now know that we're having planning and zoning. Um, and I did attend the council meeting and I just want to go on record um, again that it is my hope and desire that at one point our council members will compromise with the time of the meetings to have one at 3 and one at 6:30. Um, I think it's a fair compromise, but that's just in Paul's perfect world. But I just wanted to go on record that I'm still hopeful that we can eventually get back to that so that everyone will have the opportunity to attend council.

Thank you, Commissioner Teddona. Welcome.

Good evening everyone. Thank you. Uh it was an awesome vacation, but I am glad to be back. Um still settling in um from vacation. Um my own little milestone for myself. I did pass that Ohio State University planning and zoning basics class. So, I'm really proud of that. Uh jumping into some of this stuff to get to be better at it. That class certainly does not make me a subject matter expert by any measure. Uh but there were some really good takeaways like strong town mindset, walkability, town centers, centralized uh living opportunities, open spaces, and less sprawl. So, it's just something that I'm going to try to incorporate as I'm learning more uh to be better on this committee. Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner May.

Thank you. Um I'm going to uh piggyback on uh Commissioner Kramer's uh response in regards to the form-based code. And yes, I was at the city council and I was there in support of the vote that um moved forward the the firm DB DPZ code design. I want to make sure I got that right. Um as the new planning firm that's going to be working on the downtown I guess that it's it's a big section of downtown on a form-based code. So it's very exciting. Uh it's an incredible firm. Um, as I stated at the city council, we have won the lottery with them. Uh, they're gonna I I believe they're going to be doing some amazing stuff for this city and I'm excited um to look at what's what we're going to be looking at in the future with their planning. Um, and I think that's all I have to report. So, thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner Neim. No report, Commissioner.

Thank you. um for my report. Uh I just want to uh remind everyone in the public that the first budget hearing is Thursday at this Thursday in two days at 5:30 here in these chambers. Uh this is where the council will um take uh the first uh public hearing of the budget and proposed millage rate for fiscal year 2026. And then there will be a final hearing and final action taken in two weeks from Thursday also at 5:30 here in this room. And for uh my other item on the report is more of a question for our city attorney and then um letting the commissioners and public know. I believe the uh upcoming city council agenda next week has on it the proposed rules for disclosure. uh not only for us but for for council members as well. Uh that is a resolution not an ordinance. So it just takes the one meeting for them if they should choose to decide to act on. Is that correct?

That is correct. Okay. Thank you. And that is my report. Any staff reports or announcements? I I guess chairman, I would say that um in addition to the resolution that uh the city council will consider as to whether or not both the city council and the planning and zoning commission will be able to do site visits, expert reports, have communications uh outside the hearing as long as they're disclosed. Um there is another resolution that may be of interest to you that will be on the agenda next week regarding support for uh substantively amending or repealing SB 180. Great.

Um the resolution as drafted um is you know pretty strong in and what it asks for. Um so that will also be on the agenda. Okay. Thank you very much.

With that we will then uh are there any additions or corrections to the agenda? If not we will move into the agenda and what we will do is handle each item individually. um we'll announce them and city staff will present followed by any applicant presentation and then we'll open it up to the public. So we'll start with item number one resolution 2025-023R Plaza Kina Pod I conditional use permit. Good evening, planning and zoning commissions, commissioners and guests. Nick Gonzalez, Development Services. The applicant is requesting to amend the Plaza Kina planned unit development resolution 2015-08 to allow for internal shared drive aisles and reduce landscape buffers for parcel identified as pod I within the parent parcel. The property is located on the north side of State Road 50 and east of Magnolia Point Boulevard and west of Lake Boulevard. Uh, as you can see, this is the Plaza Kina PUD. Uh, this is the parent parcel and highlighted in yellow is the pod eye. This is a farther view of the parent and an updated aerial. This is pot eye. North of it is the multifamily. And this is the development of Dicks boarding goods in Golf Galaxy floor and decor and Costco. The proposed site is a vacant portion of within the PLA Plaza Kina mixeduse project that consists of C2 general commercial uses. The land development

code requires an amendment to the plan unit development for any uses or site changes not identified in the master development plan or permitted by the land development regulations for the C2 general commercial zoning district. The site is proposing a quick service restaurant, retail, and other commercial uses under the C2 general commercial uses. The parcel to the west was granted the same conditions, ensuring that the shared driveway driveways provide maximum feas feasible interconnectivity while reducing the number of driveway cuts along the north frontage road. When evaluating a request for a conditional use permit, the land development code section 101-212 requires specific development standards that are required to be met. Staff has reviewed the application as submitted in the accordance with the development standards criteria and finds the proposed use can meet the general criteria for granting a conditional use permit. The proposed use will not be detrimental to health, safety, and welfare of the surrounding community. Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit with the conditions contained in resolution number 2025-023R. That concludes staff's presentation.

Thank you, Mr. Gonzalez, congratulations on on graduating up to your first presentation to the P&Z commission. Thank you. Don't be too hard on me. Is the applicant present? If so, please come forward and uh state your name and address for the record.

Good evening. For the record, Jessica Gawa Cobb Cole Law Firm that is at 1 Daytona Boulevard, Daytona Beach, Florida. Thank you for having me here tonight. Um, I'm here on behalf of WMG Development, the retail developer here for this space. Um, first I want to thank staff. They've been fantastic to work with. This one is also my first presentation to you guys, so we match in that. Um, but this amendment type is not new. So, in January of 2024, this same amendment was brought forward for pods F and H in this cleanest development. Um, some of you may recall that at the time we did not have the detail layout for this pod and so we're bringing it through to have that same treatment as it was noted just allow for that interconnectivity between the lots um and to reduce the number of curb cuts there. While we don't have any confirmed end users for you guys yet um that general mix of uses that was noted by staff is accurate and we're hoping to find um some exciting users here for this site. And with that we're here for any questions.

Thank you very much. just please stick around and we'll open it up to the public and then bring it back to the commission. Thank you. This is the time in the agenda where anyone in the public can come forward and speak to this item. Item number one, resolution 2025-023R Plaza Kina Pod I conditional use permit. If so, please come forward and state your name and address. Again, if there's anyone who'd like to speak on item number one, please come forward. Seeing no one, we'll bring it back to the commission and we will start tonight with Commissioner Kramer, please.

Thank you, Chairman Bane. Uh, I've reviewed all this and it looks like this is the applicants asking for flexibility with driveways and landscaping on the pod one. So, um, it looks like to to me a technical adjustment to the Plaza Kina master plan. And in my opinion, shared driveways reduce traffic congestion and improve safety by limiting the number of cutins onto the main road. So staffs reviewed this and request and and they seem to be supportive of it. So at this point in time, I'm leaning very supportive of this resolution. Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner Hoisington.

Um, thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, I guess my question was I don't know if to staff or to the applicant. When we look at shared driveway, how does that impact the flow of the traffic going off of 50 into that area? Have we considered or is there or is it not a problem?

So, it's not creating any additional driveways. And so if this was no connectivity, these each each of these parcels will then have additional driveways. So it just creates less uh driveways to go onto this frontage road here. And then also uh with West Colonial. Okay. Why are they reduced in the landscape buffer? So, in between the parcels, uh, to have this driveway, if these weren't shared driveway aisles, they would have a a 10-ft buffer of landscape in between. So, that's the reduction in the landscape buffers is the you see this dotted line between these are the the three different parcels

with when adding a shared drive aisle, that's when you're reducing those buffers. So, it's essentially taking away those landscape buffers. Okay. That's all the chair. Okay. Thank you, Commissioner Teddona.

Thank you, Commissioner. Um I I mean, I've got a couple of concerns about this. Um it looks like, in my opinion, maximum feasibility, interconnectivity is uh going to be synonymous with one lane in and one lane out. Um, when we talk about not being detrimental to health, safety, and welfare, the pictures don't show the apartments that are behind it. Um, and evacuations certainly are, uh, something that could impact folks's health and safety. Basically, what you have here is just this big U, one lane in and one lane out. Um, and that just bothers me. There's nothing that connects at 250, which I would assume that would have to comply with DOT rules. And when we talk about shared driveways and interconnectability, I don't know if any of you saw the line of cars that wrapped around twice White Castle and then went into Costco's parking lot. So, how's that for a shared driveway aisle? That would be really interesting. Um, you know, I'm sure you all know the codes 123-43 about an appropriate buffer between uses. Um, minimum width 10 ft. Length uh buffer shall extend uh shall extend along the entire length of the property boundary. And then here's where here's the big thing. We we come to plantings. So a landscape buffer shall be planted with TR three trees, canopy trees per 100 linear feet. So all of that goes away if we approve this. And shrubs, three feet shrubs. Hopefully within a couple of years they grow to six foot. So again, to me that's a concern because

now here we are just not putting back trees. We're not putting back shrubs. And I remember, you know, when the sporting goods was going in, they made this big play about how they couldn't be seen from 50 and they needed extra signage because they were concerned about that. Um, so I don't know if that represents part of this or maybe they'll be upset that there's a tree in the way. But when you go to page 19 of the diagram, Okay. So, one of those driveways connects to Dicks and the other driveway further down to the right connects to a nine building apartment complex. And they're all just sharing one lane and one lane in and one lane out interconnecting all of this commercial property. And then that one lane in and one lane out dumps onto Lake Boulevard where again the diagram doesn't show it, but it's one lane either going up towards Lake Boulevard or coming down Lake Boulevard onto 50. So with all due respect, if somebody's going to sit here and try to convince me that that is not going to be an absolute traffic nightmare, I just don't believe you. So, I I have a huge problem. We're taking away trees and plants. Uh I don't think we do enough to try to save them. So, that's kind of where I am. And thank you, Commissioner Hoisington, for bringing up traffic because anytime you go past there, it's just wallto-wall traffic in there. You've also got people that are now cutting out of Costco to go over to Toyota and cut through their parking lots to get to the light. So again, anyone who's going to tell me that this is not going to create any more of a

burden, uh, I don't believe you. Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner May. I saw the attorney coming up. I wasn't sure if you were going to rebuttal or do I didn't quite hear a question, but I do have some comments that may help. Okay, we'll we'll we'll just save that for the once we get through and and and go from there. Perfect. Thank you.

Thank you. I was wasn't sure. Um, so piggybacking on um, Mr. Hydon and um, and Teddona, I believe you guys were correct in regards to the traffic. I have some concerns on the traffic as well. Um, especially since I don't believe we have an entrance from 50th. It looks like everything is coming from from the back. Correct. is that where the all the flow is is going in and out. So, um yeah, with with with the amount of I've I've I've go to Dicks, I go to Golf Galaxy to buy my son, you know, golf equipment and and and yeah, it does get crazy at certain times. So my question is, you know, has there been an updated traffic study on this um on this since there's more added uh retail and also QSRs uh being added? So that's my first question is has there been an updated traffic study? Number two, um I get that you guys had received the variance or this condition was approved in the past, but that was a different planning and zoning council and we are a new planning and zoning council. I don't agree. Um, and I understand what you're trying to do is, you know, you're trying to create these internal landscape buffers or to create these U shape in and out, one way in, one way out. However, if we're take if you're not going to supply us the 10-ft um landscape buffers, I do request that we add the trees. Uh, there is no trees. Um, and I think especially for the apartments across the way, there should be also a crosswalk um, for them to go across the street to be able to go to these QSRs without having to get in a car because I hear from the city council

every time I go to the city council, it's live, work, play, less less usage of of, you know, of a car. So, you know, to remove this traffic um, you know, I don't see any crosswalks. I don't see any sidewalks um on these properties. I mean, it would be nice if you guys don't want these 10-ft uh landscape buffers. Um why not create an outdoor green space uh where people can sit and eat? So, if this is going to be say, I don't know, a Canes or another, you know, fast food place like Chipotles and Taco Bell and everything else that's going there, it would be nice to have have people to be able to maybe park their cars or walk from across the street. You said there's what, nine buildings? There's what, 500 500 apartments there. It would be nice that they were able to walk from their apartments, walk across the street at a crosswalk and be able to go to this QSR or retail and sit down and have a nice sandwich or a hamburger or something outside with trees and and shading and seating area. So for me, if you want you guys want this landscape or just to be removed because of the drives, give me more trees. Give me some green space, open space. And trust me, the city council will probably, specifically one council woman will probably want open space and green space. So, I'm a different council person as the previous uh I mean, I'm I'm a different commissioner as the previous commissioners that approved this. So, for me, if this for me to support this, I would like to have some open space, some sidewalks. Um, and that for me is the most important right now. So,

and did you want to address your question to someone specifically um in regards to you asked about traffic? Yeah. Was was there ever a was there an updated traffic report or is that a requirement because now that there's more um I guess foot traffic and and car traffic coming to the site.

Good evening, John Cruz, Development Services. Um this original development uh went through a traffic study. It was a DRRI. They did a traffic study for 1.2 million square ft of commercial. Um they widened the roads from 27 all the way to the Orange County line as part of this development. And if you look at the total square footage out there, they're nowhere close to the 1.2 million square footage of retail when they did the original traffic study. So to answer your question, no, one was not updated because they're well below the the original threshold. And that 1.2 million square feet also includes the residential.

In addition, they also had 200 uh apartments included as well. So it's really 1.2 million square feet of retail plus 200 apartments in the original DRRI. Yep. And the other question is if I'm seeing this wrong, is there any sidewalks on any of this I mean because I don't see any sidewalks here and I don't I don't believe there's any sidewalks on any of the other

So this is a conceptual that was given to us. It it would have to go through the site review process which was then when we would add uh making sure that there is sidewalks and the appropriate landscape landscape buffers uh of the uh external parcels but my question is are there sidewalks at the other ones? Yes. Yes, it is. It will be consistent with the uh the other pods that we have been um adding sidewalks making that would just be easier to see how the other ones are. We don't have the full package. I don't have that 2015 dash or whether you know

I don't have the other ones. Didn't have time to pull it up on the computer. But it would be nice to see the flow of sidewalk the flow and how the sidewalk moves because here I don't see a sidewalk. Yeah, it's just to this specific parcel. Um but we'll make we'll ensure that the sidewalks are added in site review. And is there crosswalks as well in any of these sections? Um other crosswalks. Yeah, that can be a a condition to to put in with regards to the apartment. Correct. Yeah. Yeah. Because I mean, you want it you want it to make it livable, you know, walkable and, you know, that you're putting some great stuff. I mean, it's the Costco and Dicks and, you know, and some people might not want to use their cars and

they might just want to, especially, you know, coming November and December, we got great weather coming. have a nice walk down the sidewalk, go to Costco, get your groceries, go back and walk. So, I just wanted to see if there's any because in regards to what you're saying, wealth uh wealth, safety, and health, safety for me is is the key there. Um, and so sidewalks and crosswalks, I mean, I would like to see that as part of the site plan process. Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner Neim. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, yes. I have just a few questions. Uh, where would the signage be for this location?

So, at this time, we're still going through the detailed site plan review that would include um the final renderings. A lot of that's going to be user specific. And so, we have kind of a general program of what the facade of the building will look like that staff is reviewing, but we don't have final signage design yet because that will depend on the final tenants. So, you don't know if they're going to have like the sign on the building and also a monument sign as well. You don't know that these signage would be kind of consistent with what you see in the other pockets, the other pods within the site, but we don't have a final sign program.

Okay. Uh I I'm I'm a big fan of the buffering, decreasing your buffering. I'm sorry. I see a lot of greenage on this uh diagram that's on the screen that everybody's looking at. uh the greenage on the on the west side and on the east side. Are you plan to build more development there?

So, those are separate parals that could be developed. That's why we're building in the interconnectivity. Um what is slightly labeled on this plan, but does not have the detailed landscape plan that staff will review. Um is along West Colonial and along the interior frontage road, there is a landscape buffer built in. Those will be planted. I think the front one is 15 feet um and matching on the rear. Um the parking lot islands that you see that are green will have planting in there along with building perimeter landscaping. Um and the kind of cross-hatch area in line with the larger retail space on the left side of the building. Um does have that kind of patio pa activation that was discussed that if that user wanted outside tables or something like that, it would be built in as well.

And sorry, the front is 20 feet, not 15. I'm sorry. The front buff landscape buffer that's not being modified is 20 ft wide along West Colonial. Okay. So, basically, you have the front covered. You're not too sure about the east or the west yet. Those don't have development plans at this time. We're just building in the interconnectivity aspect. All right. Well, I'm getting a little tired of hearing I don't have the plans and yet you want a decision from me. I'm not taking that on you. I'm just lane. This is not the first time this comes across my desk and I have to make a decision on something I cannot see. No other questions for now, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you. Um, thank you for answering the landscaping question. That was going to be a question I asked um with regard to um the um internal uh landscaping to make up or kind of compensate for the reduced buffer. Um I in terms of um ability to do that with design and and with parking, how would that look from a a developer perspective? uh with regard to adding some additional landscaping to compensate for the the the uh removal of the landscape buffer from the the two other sides of the pod.

I think that we can work with staff through that detailed site plan review to you know I think the standards noted the small trees and the shrubs. Um you'll definitely see those along the building perimeter and then landscape islands. Um we can work on kind of small tree placement versus the large shade trees. um and where we cluster those to one protect visibility of users that are already there um and to fill in some of those spaces that because of the interconnectivity you don't have that 10 feet there in the middle

and if if we didn't do and and this may be a question for for staff instead so I uh thank you for that um for staff if we did not have this interconnectivity um how would this what's on the screen now look different how would this be different in terms of of access from the frontage road a andor access down off of colonial 50. Each parcel would have to have their own entrance. Yeah. Mhm.

Um so I I I I understand some hesitancy or concern with regard to the landscape buffer on the on the sides. But I think that from a from a user perspective, if we can get the developer to uh understand and and realize that um by by the city working with them to uh to allow for some interconnectivity and not requiring the landscape buffer in in inner lot, if you will, internal of the lot um to then allow for the interconnectivity because from a user perspective, if I'm a patron and I want to visit more than one of these. The the the frustration of having to go back out to a road and then back into uh another spot on here. Uh I'm trying to think of of an example of like think about it from the standpoint of of uh where Portillos and Mission Barbecue and and those restaurants are in that area. If we had four driveway, well, three right now, three driveways and three separate parking lots and you if you decided, oh, I want to go to to uh to Mission, but Mission's wait is too long, and now I want to go to Portillos, I have to go back out or go back around to get to that place without this interconnectivity. And I think from a user perspective and smart uh uh uh planning within a a parcel, this makes sense because it eliminates someone having to go back out onto a frontage road andor a main arterial, in this case 50, uh to to get to another parcel that's literally right next to it that they wouldn't necessarily be able to walk to because we're going to have a 10-ft landscape buffer on that side of the parcel and then the other side of the parcel. So, it's really 20 ft of landscape buffer that they have to walk through to actually even be able to get to the the next uh spot. So, I I I hear the concern and and uh worry about that, but I think that if the if the developer

is willing to work with the city and staff at the at the site planning process to add in some additional landscaping uh where they can to compensate for the flexibility of interconnectivity, um I think that that more than uh makes up for um for not having uh three separate parcels and people then getting frustrated if they turn into the wrong one and going h way to go Claremont. Now I got to go back out on 50 to go back to next door. Uh so I think that that's um something that we definitely want to um consider as we deal with this. So with that um any other questions or comments by commissioners commissioner Kramer?

Yes. Um I want to clarify. I'm going to stand up for a second. So there is a sidewalk along the north side of this road and there is a crosswalk right there. that goes east and west. So, Commissioner May brings up a great point. You've got a large community living right across the street on the north side. But if a logical place then would be to add a crosswalk right here where there's already one going east and west, add a north south crosswalk right here and that would solve a tremendous amount of problems. I don't have the problem um that some of the other commissioners have quite frankly uh because I see it in a different light. It's reducing driveway cuts which actually increases efficiency and traffic flow there. I do agree that the um landscape along 50 critical landscape on the the north side of it less less critical because you're literally buffering between retail establishments and and other commercial properties. So, um, I would support this with the amendment adding an amend amending it to add a crosswalk north and south at the Kina Terrace and I don't know what this road would be called, but clean terrace and that road. Thank you. Uh, Chairman Bane.

Okay. Anyone else? Yeah. Mr. Teddona, can I copy my fellow commissioner get up? Yeah. Yeah. Act. You know what? If if we're using this, why don't you just go down to the podium so that you can be microphones so that people uh on watching online can can hear you as well. I I thought of that after about you were threequarters of the way. All right. So, pardon the pun looking down the road ahead. Just confirm a question for me. Just you have to point to the uh item on the table there. You're telling me that this and this is developable, correct?

Okay. So the precedent that we're going to set by having reduced buffers means we're going to have reduced buffers here and we're going to have reduced buffers here. If we're not putting in an exit and entrance to 50 here, that means there's going to be no entrance or exit to 50 here or here. Which means we're going to wind up with this being the shared driveway for this and this little piece being the shared driveway for this. Unless, of course, you come back down here and put in another driveway, which means whatever you put in here and put in here is going to wind up on those two these two pieces of road back to that U. Unless you're going to cut into here or cut into here, which you probably can't cuz that's Lake Boulevard. In terms of privacy, if I'm in one of those nine buildings paying 14, 15, $2,200 a month, I think it's only fair that it says within a single family or multifamily residential development, a buffer shall be provided along the external roadways. And I realize that's this, but we could certainly make it this to reduce noise generated by traffic and create a visual barrier because once all this stuff starts backing up, when this is developed, according to this variance or what we decide on this traffic and people beeping their horns and the noxious fumes out of cars, the folks back here that live here that are not on your diagram shouldn't have to put up with that crap. Mr. Gonzalez, could you show um for the the um audience and for uh commissioners, when we're talking about the uh internal shared drive aisles and reduce landscaping buffer, the only place we're talking Can you point out where the only place we're talking about um reduced landscape buffer?

Yes, it'll be these two locations right here. So, it has nothing to do with the north, south, and external east and west of this parcel. the perimeter of the parcel will have to be decode. Okay. I just want to make sure because it sounded like you were indicating that there would be nothing that we were reducing items on the uh outermost north and south east and west and we're not. It's just so we don't know that until we actually get that plan of what's being developed and we are we are dealing with this CUP with this item in front of us. Well, like I said, I'm actually just thinking down the road just a little bit. Well, I mean, yeah, absolutely. Absolutely. But we have to deal with what's in front of us and and what is presented to us and not whatifs or may

absolutely microphone. Anybody else? Otherwise, I'll entertain a motion.

No. So again, I just wanted to let you know that uh you know, I understand the whole shared uh driveways and thank you again, Brian, for for bringing that up. But for me, if we're going to go ahead and approve this, I would like to see more landscaping on the buffers on the on the outsides and and and he brought up a good point. Um was also for noise, you know, reduction or just to just just for beauty. Um, again, somebody wants to sit down, have a nice hamburger, chicken sandwich, or whatever salad, it would just be nice instead of sitting right next to a roadway, they they're sitting sitting next to something that's has shrubbery and trees. So, again, the landscaping is important for me.

Yeah. Thank you. And it sounds like then uh if you're willing to do that, you have some flexibility from the commissioners with regard to it doesn't have to be specific to the parking areas. can also be added to the ex the north and south and kind of what I'm referring to is the east the external east and west uh not that internal.

Yes. And I do just want to clarify before kind of the motion phase. A few things we are happy to work with staff on kind of the additional landscaping and review. Um I would say if a condition is made regarding the crosswalk I would just say subject to you know engineering and detailed review there. Um because at the core of this request and I understand wanting to reallocate that landscaping and that is important. Um you said safety is the key and I think when you look at site design and planning the reason for these shared drive aisles is a safety consideration.

And so when you talk about why we don't have access to West Colonial Drive, it is one because DOT would not allow us to have driveway cuts on West Colonial Drive because of traffic. They want it all coming into a central access point and distributing along that frontage road. The intention is absolutely that if this parcel comes in and develops, it will utilize this dry vial and if this parcel comes in to develop, it will utilize this one. Because if you look at this site, the only other area is on a curve where you have restricted sight distance and issues there. If you look at the spacing between this cut and this cut, when you're looking at locations, what you're creating in all of these driveway cuts are conflicts with cars that could be circulating here and waiting in an orderly motion other than having four cuts where everyone's turning left at the same time and interfering with that apartment traffic. And so we we've noted the concerns here. I think we can work through most of those with staff on reallocating that landscaping, getting some more intense pedestrian connectivity. You do see the sidewalk along West Colonial here. meanders down. Um the other pods that have been developed within the site do have that sidewalk um to the north and this will continue that pattern. So I just wanted to clarify that.

Thank you. I think uh Commissioner Neimi, do you have Yes. Thank you. Uh Mr. Chairman. Yeah. Uh a question for staff. How many monument signs are they allowed to have since there's nine stores going here? One per one per lot. One per lot. So they still don't know if it's going on the north side or is it going on the 50 side. Correct. Because they're still drawing up the plans. Be along 50. It It would be along 50.

It would be along 50. So it won't be on the facing Dicks or floor decor. Okay. Uh, I got to ask this question. I just I've been mean to ask it. Uh, I'm looking at four dumpsters if I'm not mistaken. Is that correct? And there's no landscaping going behind those dumpsters. There will be landscaping around the dumpsters. So that that's part of the code. I'm sorry. Go ahead. That's a part of the code that we have landscaping around the So that greenery that little from exit to exit, you know, from the right from the east side to the west side, there's going to be a buffer of shrubbery along that whole thing. Can you point each side of the

No, no, no, no. I'm talking about the lot itself, son. See, Mr. Gonzalez, see right in the I am not coming down there. Right there. Yeah, that Oh, yes. Yeah, it's going to go from here. Is there? Yes, that'll be a buffer right there. Yes, sir. The buffer of Shubbery. Okay. Thank you. You answered my question. All right. With that, I will entertain a motion. I'll make a motion.

Mhm. I propose that we approve resolution 2025-023R Plaza Kina Pod One conditional use permit with the provision of a crosswalk being installed going north south adjac along north south through Kina crossing Kina Terrace. So the provision would be a crosswalk install going north south crossing Kina Terrace with with a with the engineering approval with engineering approval. Okay. Okay. Is there a second for that? Are we adding are we adding the condition of the landscaping?

That that's up to the person who makes the motion. Commissioner May. How can I How can I add this to to to make make us all happy? What do I need to add? I'll let Commissioner M. Yeah, just finish my What is the percentage now? Do we know what the percentage now of green? We You guys haven't there's been really not just a on greenery. I mean, it's unless right now. I mean, there hasn't been a plan or something like that.

So, it's based on the the the length of the front or the length Um and that's what the buffer is calculated with the amount of trees, the canopy trees. Okay. Um per linear feet. So we're asking for the landscape the landscaping that I'm asking on the buffers is already going to be included in the site plan review or is this an additional two? So the buffer going on that outer and then the that's already included in this condition. Yes. Okay. So, I'll leave my But there's I'll leave my um motion stand. Is there a I want to make sure I understand. I understand.

Yeah, because right now there's no for me. I don't know where all these trees and shrubs are going. So, you're So, basically, we're just looking at this, you know, we're looking at the the So, I just need to know that this is going to site plan review. she's, you know, they've agreed to add more landscaping on the on the on the, you know, outer boundaries or the buffers. Um, but there's nothing here in writing that says that.

So, per our code, every 100 linear feet, there has to be three trees. Two of them have to be canopy along the buffer. So, they would have to they would abide by the our land development code. Perfect. So basically they're they're abiding by section 123-43D minus the internal the internal. Mhm. Okay. So um and it's just the the buffer not all internal. It's just those two buffers. It's just the buffer. So is there a way I mean well we have we have a motion and the person who's making the motion is not has indicated that they're not wanting to add anything else to that at this time. Right. So,

so I think if if you would like that in there, we either need to um uh have it fail for a second and then we would try a different motion, I guess, is But thank you for answering the questions. So, I just wanted to make sure that section 123-43 still is is still part of this minus the the the internal landscape buffer. So, Okay.

Okay. Is there a second for Mr. Kramer's motion? Seeing none, motion uh dies. So is there another motion for this item? Okay, I'll have to use the same language that Mr. Commissioner Kramer had used um but adding in section 123-43D to abide by the um You got that Nikki?

So do you understand what I'm saying? So, I make a motion to approve resolution number 2025-023R with the condition of having the crosswalk going I guess north south along what was the name? Kina Terrace crossing Kina Terrace and making sure that has the engineering report approval right as well as abiding by section 123-43D minus the um they already have to do that. That's what's that's what this ordinance resolution is. They already have to do that. Yeah. I just wanted to make sure. So,

but it's a it's I mean it's a it's a it's a moot point. It really is. It's not it's not required because they anything that they don't have in a resolution or an ordinance they have to follow unless we exempt it. Well, you have it on record. So, yeah, that's fine. I have an applicant wants to ask a question. Can we chairman clarify for you? Yes, go ahead. My reading of your intent, and this is what I want to clarify, is to take the landscaping that would have been within that 10-ft buffer that we are removing and put that elsewhere within the site. So, now

I thought that's what we you agreed to already. We did, but it wasn't in the motion. And so if we just say compliance with the land development code as modified, then we're not replanting those that would have been in that strip. I want to make sure we say replanting the landscaping that would have been in the internal buffer elsewhere on the site. So essentially, we need a motion that incorporates Commissioner Kramer's language with the addition of adding what would have been in the landscape buffers elsewhere on the parcel. Correct. So, you're saying that the the pl the the landscaping that you were going to take out of the buffer is now going in a different area. Correct. We just can't put it in that strip because there's a road there. So, we'll put it in other

I think I can get to a point where we can all agree or at least get a motion here. So, we are your your motion. You're withdrawing your motion. Okay. Let me try again. I'm withdrawing the motion. Yes. Okay. Thank you. All right. Chairman, let me try again. I make a motion for approval of resolution 2025-023R Plaza Cleina Pod conditional use permit with the provision of adding a crosswalk going north south across Kina Terrace with engineering approval and that we are compliant with landscaping code as modified. That's my motion.

I'll second it. and staff understands the intent there behind that, right? I I do. Okay. Thank you. As long as legal does, they can advise on how to how to word it for the council. I think he did a great job. So, yeah. I just want to make sure. Okay. Okay. There is a motion and a second. Any final discussion? Seeing none, all those in favor say I. I. I. I. All opposed? Chair votes I as well. Motion carries 6. Thank you very much.

Thank you. This will go forward to the city council as a recommendation for approval and please work with staff on scheduling. We will now move to item number two, resolution 2025-024R one uh 1227 Bloxom Avenue conditional use permit. Mr. Cruz,

good evening again. John Cruz Development Services. This is agenda item number two. The applicant, Lake County, is requesting to use the existing building located at 1227 Bloxom Avenue for public safety use as an EMS ambulance station. Lake County desires to establish an EMS ambulance location in Claremont and has been looking for a suitable location for many years. Outlined on the display in yellow is the property in question. Here's Bloxom Avenue. It's behind the Wind Dixie. Here's State Road 50. And here is a more current aerial showing the location. And this is the new Volkswagen dealership center under construction. Now, the site provides an optimal location according to Lake County. The property consists of a single family home that will have to undergo a change of use life safety inspection if approved. Lake County plans to use the site as is and no improvements to the site or plant. And on the display, this is a top down view of what's existing. Uh Bloxom Avenue, existing concrete driveway, some gravel parking, existing building which is 8, 1183 square feet, existing carport, and then this is a view from Bloxom looking towards the the structure. The site will function as it appears with existing gravel parking and no additional landscaping as planned. A condition has been placed within the conditional use permit that any damages resulting from the operation of this use on Bloxom Avenue or the city's rideway as a result of the ASIS condition will be required to be repaired by the applicant owner. The total number of ambulances on site will be limited to

two with a maximum of four on-site personnel. The property is currently zoned R3 residential professional. The proposed EMS ambulance station is not listed under section 125250 as a conditional use. This is due to the unique nature of the use with the property being occupied 24 hours a day, 7 days a week with the personnel in conjunction with the station. Section 125250B states, "In case of uncertainty of the classification of any use, uses may be permitted which after consideration by the planning and zoning commission and approval by city council are not more obnoxious to the district than uses provided in this section. Staff has reviewed the CUP application in accordance with section 1012 of the land development code. The project does not appear to conflict with the comprehensive plan. The future land use is commercial and the proposed use municipal facilities is identified in objective 1.9. The location of the site is in an area that is transitioning from residential to commercial. The site appears to have access to major arterial roadways to serve the community. The service provided by the EMS ambulance station is needed within the city of Claremont and the proposed use may be desirable in this location. Conditions such as potential off-site improvements of warning lights, adequate parking, and potential Bloxom avenue improvements have been added to the resolution to ensure safe operations at the site. Staff recommends approval of resolution 2025-024R. That concludes staff's presentation.

Thank you, Mr. Cruz. Is the applicant present? Please make sure you state your name and address for the record, please.

Good evening. My name is Michelle Wilkinson. I am the property manager for Lake County. I am um the applicant. I also have the assistant county manager. Um Tommy Carpenter, David Kilbury, the public safety director, and Aaron Blake, who is the owner of property um the owner property manager overseeing the property. They have worked really well with us trying to find a prime location. Um this as um the closest locations currently are Miniola and um also Lake Shore and Groveland. So this location came available and the property owner was willing to work with the county to go through the approval process. It's already zoned um commercial and we wanted to add the extra element to be able to use it for an ambulance station. They currently the plan would be to just have one ambulance and would have two vehicles parked here. It would be used for them to come use the restroom, take a break, you know, um those kind of needs. So, we do would have to go through the life safety inspection, which will probably require us to do some modifications, which would be uh I think fire suppression or something since we would be using it overnight. So, for us to be able to use this location, there will be some funds that we're going to have to put in to modify it. Um, obviously, this is all contingent upon the city council and your approval as well. Um, if you have any questions, we have staff here to help and we appreciate your time. So, thank you.

Thank you. Um, this is, uh, now we'll move over to the public hearing for this item. If there's anyone here in the audience that would like to speak to resolution number 2025-024R, 1227 Bloxom Avenue conditional use permit, please come to the podium. State your name and address for the record and limit your comments to this item. Thank you.

Good evening, ladies and gentlemen. My name is Pamela Deambury. I'm at 1211 Bloxom Avenue. I'm right next door. You can see my garage right to the north of it. Now, that property used to be R2 and it was changed to R3 several years ago or maybe 10 years ago. and you all guaranteed the neighborhood myself told me that any business that would come there would have to fit in with the residential area that is the majority there. Um, there's a big difference between the accounting firm that was there. I believe it was an accounting firm. They were there between maybe 9 and 5:00 p.m. and then they closed. This new business is very different. 24 hours. It's going to be open seven days a week up to four ambulances. Between two to four ambulances. I want to know why that would even be considered. I just retired. I sleep right there near the uh garage. So, I'm going to be hearing staff going back and forth. The ambulances will be coming back and forth and parking over there, so it'll be difficult for me to see to make my turns onto the busy Bloxom Road. I already have to deal with Wind Dixie.

I'm glad they're there, but it I do get noise from there. So that's going to be additional noise and there's other I'm also speaking for the other my other neighbors. So that I want you to consider. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Is there anyone else here in the audience who would like to speak to this item? Item number two, resolution 2025-024R 1227 Bloxom Avenue conditional use permit. Anyone else? Okay, seeing no one else, we will bring it back to the commission and we will go back to Commissioner Kramer.

Thank you, Chairman Bane. So, this this one is challenging for me because Claremont has a need for emergency service ambulance desperately and I I I attend enough city council meetings to know how desperate um our need for this is. Um, we hear from the audience that that there could be as many as four ambulances there. I only saw where would be two. So, so, so ma'am, I'm going to correct you. I believe it's two, not four. So, would be the maximum number. So

so um

this this appears to me though practical and a and a cost-effective use of the building. Um so there you know operating the site as is raised some concerns about the gravel parking. I understand that and the aesthetics of the neighborhood compatibility. However, and and ma'am, I do feel for you because I I have been in a situation some of this in the past where the rights of many were somewhat trampling on mine, I felt. However, um this is this is a a a very necessary enhancement to Claremont in my belief. So, at this point in time, I'm going to be leaning favorably for this. Thank you.

Thank you, Commissioner Hoisington.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, I I agree with my fellow commissioner that this is something that is very needed. Um, having experienced the need for EMS services most recently to where paramedics get there and they're apologizing on the delay in getting an ambulance to transport my mother to the hospital because they were all out. having the ambulance arrive and have them apologize that they were 35 minutes away where the condition was not life-threatening at the time. It could have easily turned into that. So, I I I understand the need for a site. I guess my concern is a maximum of two ambulances there, a maximum of four on-site personnel 24/7, where is that personnel going to park? If we are to have two ambulances there, when you look at this space, where is the staff going to park? Do we also need to be concerned with and I don't I don't know what the rules are as having some type of notice to where to let you know that this is an emergency facility and the blinking lights and all of that. Where is that going to go to alert the public that there's a station there and how is that noise going to impact the neighbors? I understand the need for us to have this. I understand the proximity this property has come into availability.

But is is this the best use of this property for the neighbors that is going to impact? We do have the Wendixie Plaza there with trucks coming in. I know we have the limitations of when they can come in, when they come out. But Bloxom is a very busy, very busy street coming off of 50. How is this going to impact the traffic that's already there for just the folks that live in the Lincoln Park area? Has that has that been considered versus the availability of this property? Not taking away the need particular, as I said, someone who went through it and needed an ambulance. In my opinion, I needed it there in 5 minutes, but because of answering a call somewhere else in the neighborhood and not just having the availability of an ambulance, we had to wait that seems like forever. So, I just have concerns for the folks that are living in the area. How is this going to impact them 247? If we were to put two ambulances there and there's four staff, where's everybody going to park? Where's the ambulance going to go? How is that going to work?

Hello, council. My name is David Kilbury. I'm the public safety director for Lake County Fire Rescue. Great questions. So, we had uh some ambulances in the city at the fire stations, but as you know, your city is massively growing in those areas in those fire stations were needed for the suppression personnel. So, being good stewards of tax dollars and also the need of those patients that have emergency crisises that need transport to the hospital. This is a unique and very good location because of the clover leaf of the 2750 interchange and then also right in the heart of the commercial district there sandwiched between the new Volkswagen dealership and the Wind Dixie that's been there. I will assure you we are great neighbors and we are very cognizant of the fact that sirens won't be going on when the the traffic does not dictate the air horns and the sirens. Those will not be a disturbance to our our neighbor and I certainly can assure you that throughout the county we have facilities co-located very similar to this and we are very good neighbors. the parking would be under the carport or even in the back of it there. There's a law firm to the side and so that facility owns this parcel and uh again we'll be great neighbors. We want to be there for those emergencies that you speak of and this is using tax dollars to the wisest most efficient method possible and the highly skilled paramedics and EMTs that'll be staffing that ambulance to provide that critical care. Thank you. Did

you're good. Okay. Uh, Commissioner Teddona, good evening, sir. Uh, first and foremost, thank you for your service. God bless you and your team, what they do every day. Uh, Claremont certainly is growing and there's a need for this. Um, sorry to say it's almost a shame that with all the empty home, storefronts, and buildings that a developer hasn't approached you and said, "Hey, I got a place for you." But, you know, welcome to Claremont.

Uh, how cool would it be to have a substation in Wellness Way? But, you know, okay, couple of questions. So, and just bear with me. All right. Two ambulances four people max. Are the ambulances parked in front of the house? Yes.

So, they'll be ready to deploy facing towards Bloxom in the front of the house. In the application, we were asked what would be the maximum. Our intent is to have one ambulance there. We just answered the application. What would the max be? So, uh we are looking for other locations in the Claremont South Lake area, but just to be complete on the application, there would be no more than two, but our intention is one.

Okay? So, let's just go with worst case scenario because whatever it is, the need is there and there's two ambulances on site. Just play with me for a little bit. If you're going to dispatch the bus, you're probably going to be facing Bloxom. Your EM EMS folks come out of the door in the truck and here we go. We're on our way. So, more than likely, they are going to be placed between the mailbox and the house facing out. Fair enough. Yes.

Okay. the four cars because there's going to be two people per bus that goes on the other gravel side. Either under the overhang you're going to be jockeying cars on my shift is on, your shift is off. We're going to be passing each other and just moving cars around. Fair enough. Yeah, there will be two there other than at shift change would be four cars. Okay. The gravel itself, has anybody tested the gravel? Has anybody looked at water distribution of the gravel to make sure a bus doesn't sink into the gravel? No. Our intent would be on the concrete surface that you see backed into there.

Uh, one point to note, this is an ambulance, so it doesn't have the weight of wire water as a suppression fire truck would. This would be equivalent to maybe a cable utility truck or something, a dual axle on the rear. Okay. And what are we using the driveway for again? The ambulance. Okay. So it so it's not parked in front of the house. Their ambulances are going to be staged on the driveway. Correct. The ambulance is too tall to fit under the canopy. Right. I would imagine knowing the employees that's where they'll put their two vehicles is in the sh. Right. Yeah. That would be smart. Right.

So what's going on the gravel? I believe there's parking in the rear that the law firm uses for overflow and that's the reason for the gravel that goes behind that location. Gotcha. But it is not our intent to use the rear of the structure for the ambulance. We're going to be on the concrete.

Um the young lady had mentioned that there may be improvements to the site. So because of the life safety code with humans sleeping in the building at night, there will be a requirement for fire sprinklers. Those are the improvements for the Florida Fire Prevention Code that would be required to come into compliance with the Florida Fire Prevention Code. So we we anticipate a sprinkler system needing to be installed to be com code compliant. Right.

Okay. So now to ask a dopey question, is there anything that can go between this house and the neighbor's house that might act as maybe not like a sound barrier, but it's not like she's looking out her window and seeing ambulances coming and going? Yeah. So I am a fire chief. I that is not my expertise. I really am not sure what could be added there. Any chance of any type of expansion in this facility where we're putting in some sort of a tower to dispatch from or actually make it an operations operation?

No, not at all. This is a place for personnel to come back and take a shower, decontaminate, rest, have some food. It It's very suitable in its size to meet the need. The office has a light bar and a siren and a stretcher in the back. That's where they truly do their work. They will uh use this as a d-stress quiet watching TV, the news, or get on the internet. Perfect. And we you also mentioned being the perfect neighbor that you're probably not going to run lights and sirens out of here. You'll wait till you're somewhere near the call or wherever it is.

That is correct. In fact, we do that countywide on the priority of the call that comes in through the 911 center. There's two terms that we use in route and that is not lights and siren and then responding and that is the urgency of the medical situation dictates lights and siren to the scene but even then it would as they approach traffic. If we had a cardiac arrest come in at 2 in the morning and the crews had no traffic. They still probably would not be using their siren. They'd have their lights activated. But there are times where we just go with the normal flow, not to create more of a dangerous situation for motorists because they all act differently when there's a lightning siren vehicle behind them. Okay. Thank you, sir. Absolutely.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Commissioner May.

Thank you for the great questions and uh and also thank you for your service. Um, so my question goes back to the lights because I know this is not a fire I guess building but it's an EMS. So, are you required to have the blinking lights on the outside just so that when there is traffic because there is a lot of traffic on Bloxom because I go to Wind Dixie um and trying to get on to Bloxom um maybe there's you know a reason for you all to have that so that it's easier for them to get out. Is that

again being a fire chief uh traffic signage is not my expertise but I am not aware of any requirement. We have several facilities very similar to this throughout the county and they do not have blinking lights or notification of an EMS station, things like that.

Okay. And if I if I could uh just to add in there, we there is an item in the or in the resolution that does state that at the direction of our fire chief uh off-site improvements may be warranted to ensure safe ingress and egress which would include but not limited to warning signs and lights and additional signage. Um and that those uh conditions would need to be added added could be added at any time to ensure safe operations of the site. So that that that language is in the resolution right now. No, I see that. And um but that might be a concern of the neighbor.

Yes. Yeah. Right. Because we want I think what we're approving right potentially approving right now doesn't dictate anything. But if our fire chief in six months says, "Hey, we need some sort of signaled sound, whatever, uh to allow for uh safe egress ingress." um then that's going to be potentially added and that would not come back before us. This is a question. Let me see if I have any other questions for you. Um you already answered the maximum number of ambulances. Your intention is one but you you had to put the uh the maximum number for two. Um I think the next question for me is for staff. So,

okay. Yeah, for city staff, we we recently um looked at a property that was also an R3 um residential office and it was a medical uh office and Right. So, they were required to have parking. So, why is this different? Is it because of the facility that's being put in there and they're um it was actually at the request of the applicant to leave it as is to use. It would meet their needs.

So, does the staff does the city require the parking requirements even if they ask for it to be asis?

Again, it's it would be whatever you decide in the conditional use permit. So, if you want to require them to pave the parking and require the parking spots, you're more than welcome to add that. But the request was to use the site as is. Um, knowing that the operation doesn't have visitors going to it, it's only response. Uh, staff felt that it could be a possibility to support the request as is. Um there is conditions in there that says if in terms of mainly it's for um Bloxom Avenue and the rideway we were more concerned about uh coming on and off to the site but in terms of actually having dedicated parking spaces we honored their request using the site as is. So going back to the fire chief, um does that mean that there will you will not have any visitors coming to the site? So it's only for the just the employees or the EMS.

That's correct. Our EMS facilities are are have no purpose for the public to visit those unless somebody arrived with chest pain and knew we were there. But it's not for us conducting business. The business is the transport unit itself and it we come to you. Okay. That's the reason why I brought that up because I wasn't sure if maybe somebody was having a chest pain. And a lot of people know we exist, but a lot of times they don't know the fine details. So, yeah. So, okay, great question.

But thank you. Um, let me see. I know there's no requirements for a buffer. Uh, but I do like that there are, you know, the I mean based on 1252, there are setback requirements. Um, and just to satisfy the neighbor. Um, is there a way where we can add a condition to have a buffer, a landscape buffer, just so that it gives her more privacy, especially um, having her window. I think she said that she sleeps or she has her master bedroom, I believe, facing. Um, I don't believe there's any conditions in here for a landscape buffer. Uh but it I would like if it's possible um if there would be a landscape buffer for her. I think this side I guess side yard is 25 yards is a setback but I believe based on the buffer that we just did. Um

yeah, it would just be nice to have a buffer for her. So I don't know if that could be added in there. And again it's it's under um section two item number three. Number three. Okay. as requested by the applicant and with city council's approval. The site will be used as is with no requirement for additional landscaping buffers. Again, that was a request coming to us. Um, and that was something we felt we could support in terms of trying to get this service at this location. Um, but if you desire to add that,

but it's just because of the concern of the neighbor. I mean, we did have someone who literally lives right next door. We don't have anybody that has come that lives behind, but she did come and she did have her concern about the the EMS. Um, so thought maybe that could be a good requirement uh added just to satisfy some privacy. Um, and that's all I have. Thank you, Commissioner Neim.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Uh, yes, I have a several questions. Okay. Uh well, first of all, it does say on page 41 there should be two ambulance with no more than four. So technically the homeowner was homeowner was right cuz it's in writing. It says right here. I'm reading it. No, it says it says two ambulances. A maximum of two ambulances with four personnel.

Oh, okay. I'm sorry. I was in your zone. Sorry. Okay. So, that's a no no. Okay. When it comes to lighting, this is important. All right. Uh to the fire chief, uh once again, thank you for what you do. Being a retired officer from New York City, I understand. Uh can you point on the map? Uh staff, could you give them a map of that on that page? I think it's 44. There you go. Can you show me exactly by pointing on that map when you'll be turning your sirens and lights on, especially the lights?

So, that would be a decision of the crew based on the conditions that they have in traffic. So, if they pull out that driveway, they could turn the lights on in the sirens, you're telling me. It's depending on the conditions. They could certainly there's no restrictions on not putting the lights on. I me personally, I think this is a really bad location for this. Okay, that's my opinion and I'm entitled to it. Uh, as we're looking at this diagram, which was only shown halfway on I don't know what page it's on, but if you could I asked staff to go to this diagram, the one on the top where they're taking all that grass away and then putting gravel. Is that is that what I'm reading?

See that? Yeah, that was it. That was it. where it says 1301 square feet of gravel parking. That's all grass right now. So, we're going to replace all that greenery grass with gravel. If I'm not if I please tell me I'm wrong. Well, if you look in the picture, you can see the gravel with the grass coming through it. It's just a matter of maintaining the grass. I don't believe anybody's been in that building in quite some time, but there is gravel there. You can also see it on the side of the building as well.

Yeah. No, I saw I saw the side. I understand that. I just This is right literally next door to residential. Uh going to the Lake County manager if I ask you a question. All right. You said how many other locations you were looking at? One there and where was the third one? It's locations that the county currently has for EMS is Oh, location. Oh, the current location.

Yeah, she was uh just communicating where the ambulances come from currently. So, the city of Minnola, there's one in Mont Verde. There's one that's under rehab, but it's relocated, but uh our station 109 on Lake Shore down near Lake Susan in that area. Okay. And then the city of Groveland, you currently do not have a an ambulance in the city and we are trying to desperately get one here. I think it's a great location because of the clover leaf in the areas that it serves with fast access. As you know, we have a term called time is tissue and the faster we can get to those emergencies, the better.

I understand that and I see your point of view to a certain point. All right. Uh have you been down this Mr. Fire Chief? Have you been down this road during the daytime? Yeah, I I live in Claremont. I used to be the assistant chief here in the city of Claremont. Okay. I actually have been inside this location. I can tell you this is perfect for the feasibility of what we need it for because every time I go down that area, there's always a line to get to that light. So, I'm assuming you would go be going down Pit Street or

the other street. I will tell you every light in Lake County that you go to has got traffic. It's That's what I'm saying. I mean, it's like uh Commissioner Zona says, instead of all this development, wish somebody would just give you land.

To Commissioner Hoisington's point, though, is because of that traffic and the distance traveled, it takes time. You know, a lot in the fire service, what we truly battle is time. It's not flames. It's it's time that we battle. And the quicker we can be located to those emergencies, the better. I I respect that. But how does this help the South Lake part of Claremont? What was the question? How does this is all by the city of Claremont? How does this help all these other stations help let's say the south part of Claremont like Hartwood Marsh, Heritage Hills. Yes. So Kings Ridge.

Yes. So we are still looking for properties. Uh we like I mentioned, we had an ambulance at every fire station in the city. Today we don't. We're trying to get back into the city to provide those critical services. Are we planning to make any modifications to this house, Chief? Yes. To be in complant with the Florida State uh fire prevention code, there's going to be some life safety requirements. There's a sprinkler system that I mentioned, alarms, but other than that, it is movein ready. Okay. Are we adding any antennas? No. So, there'll be no staff inside the house. It's going to be vacant until usually

No, there will be the ambulance crew will be in there unless they're on a call. Okay. See, I'm I'm sorry. My New York's coming out of me. Usually, our EMS in New York, they didn't stay in one location, right?

Pick down a designated location. If I may continue, sir, but let's say for example, since you came from Claremont, I would say location, two ambulances, one by racetrack and let's say one in the parking lot by Kentucky Fried Chicken, so it's easy access in and out instead of staying in that location. Wouldn't that make more sense? So, Lake County doesn't uh work through a system status that you're talking about. We work 24 hours on duty and so when they're not specifically at a call, there's a location that they can get into air conditioning, uh, get food in their belly and and rest. Look, I I I I'm in agreeance we need this. I just think this is a bad location. I'm sorry. I'm going against what you believe is right. Uh, let's see. I covered the lighting. The noises to me is is a big thing. 24/7 opening and closing doors. All right. These are diesel vehicles. Correct.

We have both gasoline and diesel engines in the fleet. And there is a difference of noise level between gasoline engines and diesel engines. Correct. Sure. Would you like to live next door to this with a diesel engine? My neighbor does have a diesel pickup truck, so it it sounds the same when he fires it up. Yeah. Okay. I'm I'm not feeling this location. No other questions for now, Mr. Chairman.

Thank you. Um I just want to make sure I'm going through my list. Uh uh one of the disadvantages of going last is a lot of the questions get asked prior to so I think we talked about the uh clarification maximum two ambulances for staff. talked about uh uh currently not a need for stabilization of of parking. Um ambulances will not fit under the carport. Um so I guess uh I think those are taken care of. So let me start back over here. What outreach has been done to the neighborhood as you planned and developed this site?

Question. So this is the first step just to see if the commission is, you know, willing to allow us there. Okay. So there hasn't been any kind of notice or or uh anything that Lake County has sent out to the neighbors, uh similar to like what a developer might do for within a radius or No, sir. Okay. Okay. The city may have, but I'm not aware of that. Okay. Um and is can staff Mr. Cruz, can you just clarify? Did anything go out from city hall regarding it? In terms of we uh posted the site which is probably on the staff report it shows you the yellow posting

our um usual um notifi postcard notifications would send out um and then also legal ad but other than that we didn't go above and beyond that because it's we're working

yeah but you guys did your city code of the 150 uh that is correct uh um radius. Okay. and you guys go out to 200 I think is what it is. Yeah. Um, I I did have some same same questions as as uh or concerns regarding um the safe ingress and egress that Commissioner May was bringing up uh specific to um how we delineate our fire stations even in this city because we we have a difference in how we do that even within our own fire stations. So, if you look at like uh State Road 50 and you look at Hartwood Marsh, there are flashing lights and and signs and kind of some sidewalk or not sidewalk, a street marking, do not block this area. Uh, and then we have over on Legends uh, way, we we really have nothing except for the picture of the firet truck sign, but uh, if you're someone who's driving, and we all know this happens, with your AirPods in and looking forward, you may not see that truck coming out until they're in front of you versus nothing's flashing in front of you or directing your attention in front of you. Um, and I think that anyone who's driven in this location uh at any peak time specifically knows that uh the traffic um from uh the other businesses in this area uh cutthroughs from other areas come out on Bloxom to to go east or west on 50 and uh the uh the the I guess what would be the right hand lane to go through 50 or to turn right and and go west on 50 uh is pretty backed up at times. And then you've got the left turn lane that if you have people who uh can't make it in there now, they're

blocking kind of both lanes as that kind of diagonal to jut over to turn. And then you got the people coming out of Wind Dixie in that little side lot of Wind Dixie who either have to swing it wide to go uh south on the Bloxom or reverse swing it wide to go north on Bloxom. Um and I think that that this creates like a pain point in this general vicinity and area relative to potential traffic. And I know that that can be the case on all of our roads. But given that um we have a precedent in Claremont where we have said, "Hey, we're going to put some additional flashing lights and signage and and uh verbiage and markings to indicate this is an area that a truck or emergency vehicle may be coming in and out of frequently uh because of traffic that this would warrant it here." And I think it it concerns me that we're not proposing that upfront and giving it I'm not concerned that we're giving our fire chief the ability to decide that. What concerns me potentially is that that could be decided later down the road and not have a public forum or hearing like this where folks in the neighborhood could say, "Wait a second. Now I've got this flashing lights that I have to deal with in addition to the ambulances." So that does concern me a little bit with that. Um, with the with the ambulances, um, I understand that, uh, did you say or or if not, can you clarify, are there other locations in Lake County where ambulances are housed outside and not in a garage

or covered area? Right. So, Eustace, for instance, uh, is outside. Typically, all ambulances that are enclosed are co-habitation at a municipal fire station or a county fire station.

Okay. And in in Eustace, um I I know that oftent times these vehicles um have to be plugged in to when they're parked, uh when they're not being used. Um so that things run and it's not a cold start, if you will. Uh is that something that would happen in this location with these ambulances as well? And and what kinds of things would we see running to the ambulances to keep those powered, if you will? I'm not sure there's there's probably a term, but that's the term I'm using.

We call it a shoreline, and it just keeps all of the computers for the navigation. So, when the 911 call comes in, there's several ways over radio, through the computer, and on a phone app that the crews are notified. There are some pharmaceuticals that are carried in the ambulance that are temperature regulated. And so, it's just a shore power. When the ignition's turned to the start position, it spits that electrical cord out automatically. Okay. So, is the vehicle running and making noise at that time or is it just charging if you will? It's just on a shoreline for standby. So, none of the batteries deplete.

Okay. So, the engine would not be running. You wouldn't hear an idling vehicle for that. Okay. Um, with these vehicles, similar to some squad cars and fire trucks, um, I'm assuming that there is some audible radio transmissions that you can hear outside of the vehicle depending upon how loud it is, would that be something that if a call were to come in, would that when the staff are are alerted to that, are they alerted to that simply interior to the house or would there also be some audible uh whether it's even just voice or tones from that amitting from that ambulance.

Sure, I know the question. So, technology is starting to improve how crews are alerted. Through research, we've identified that some of the reactions of fight or flight for those really wrenching tones are starting to go away. Okay. So, in fact, later this month, we're going to institute a new dispatch system called G2 Phoenix, and it's what's known as a heart friendly. And so, uh, those personnel that have the reactions to the current tones will have a more smoother notification. It's just a beep. It's just beep beep beep. But it can buzz the phone. You'll probably hear a portable radio. Beep beep beep. And then it'll be a computerized voice. So, making those changes and that's countywide, including the city of Claremont. So, we're really excited about that. And but they would but that tone whatever tones they are would would those still be audible from the ambulance themselves or would it be all internal to the house?

I'm not saying you couldn't hear it but it will not be a projected PA. You'll probably hear the Volkswagen dealership asking for the service manager before you would hear anything at our location. Okay. And as somebody who lived through the era of um alarm clocks that used to make that jarring and now they you know with our iPhones we can make such uh sweet sounding tones to wake up to. I think I I hear what you're saying on on the tony tone sounds that are being used. Um do the ambulances make um make uh uh beeping noises when they back up? Probably. Okay. It's been a while since I've been on the ambulance, but I I'm but we before they back up, they have a human spotter get out.

Sure. Sure. So, uh, but some of them, I'm sure, are equipped with a beat. Uh, but I'm not sure on the ambulance that be here. Okay. Cuz I know that in some of our stations, we now have ability to enter the the stations from uh the back and then pull in rather than having to stop traffic to back in. Legends Way is one where they do have to do that because of the setup. But I think that that I'm assuming because of how this is designed and how there won't be access to come through and fit through the carport that that this ambulance would have to back up. So that is something to consider again for traffic and for sound. Yeah, I'm sorry. I didn't mean to interrupt. Yeah, that's okay. We actually did look at that. So that graveled area would allow a U-turn of the ambulance onto the concrete path.

The gravel area in front of the house or to the south on the side. So opposite the mailbox between the the hedge and the concrete there is room for an ambulance to get off the roadway for personnel safety and other cars and then relocate onto the concrete path. So they can leave Bloxom, do a U-turn, and never go back onto Bloxom to get in position. Okay. And that would just for clarification closest to the law office, correct? Not between the mailbox and the house. That's correct.

Okay. Okay. Um, let's see here. A question for staff. Um, what parking is allowed at this site now per our code? Well, um, right now it's could be used as residential. So, whatever they wherever they want to park for residential. So, so a a home a person who live so if this was a residential they could park in the driveway under the carport on the gravel on the gravel in front of the house on the gravel on the side. There's no HOA that I'm aware of. So, yeah.

Or the backyard. Okay. That's what I want to clarify is that essentially I get the concerns of potentially having longerterm parking or or ambulance parking uh in that area, but that is something that someone could do now based off code. Correct. As a single family. As a single family. Okay. If it was a business, would that also be the same?

No. Actually, this did go through the conditional use permit process several years ago for professional office. It was approved by council. They submitted for site plan approval. As part of the site plan approval, um they were going to improve the site with pavers, parking that had to meet our standard 10x20 storm water um landscaping and they never followed through with that conversion. which I can't speak for them, but I know that they went down that road and we had a site plan on file that was approved by the city for them to move forward, but they never moved forward.

Okay. And within R3, residential, professional, professional, do we make a distinction between where parking is allowed if it's residential versus professional?

Um, in terms of the the professional, then it does come into play, where it could be located. Um they have to be again they have to meet the parking code 10 by 20s. Uh have to have lane widths. Um you have to have fire access. Sure. Because you're bringing customers into your site. But when it's single family residential like this, we we had the you know they meet the the requirements by having the paved apron and driveway. As long as that's in place, it looks like they meet the requirements.

Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Um I think that um you know the reality of this location I think the the fire personnel the fire staff I think um uh mentioned that um the clover of 27 and 50 and this proximity of that being integral to site selection. I think also you could probably make the same argument that being uh essentially equal distance to both of our hospitals within uh uh Claremont also um makes it a prime location. Um I I share some of the same concerns um and and worries though that um just the type of let's call it professional non-residential that's allowed in R3. I know that am housing and ambulance is is a little bit different. So, we have to that's why we're here through the conditional use permit and and so forth, but something other than residential um you know does require some additional scrutiny and and looking at it to make sure it's congruent with the with the neighborhood and so forth. And I because this is I believe uh and correct me if I'm wrong, Mr. Cruz, this is like the last R3 and then it goes R2 I believe after that or there may be one more and then R2. I'm I'm checking the staff analysis chart, but I believe you are correct. Yes, to the north is R2.

Um, and to the east is R2 as well. Okay. And I think there may have been a confusion at some point. Somebody may have sens said something about this being commercial and it is R. It is residential professional. It's not commercial. Well, the future land use is commercial.

Correct. But it's currently they're not asking for a reszone. They're they're asking for use permit. So, the zoning stays the R3. Um I you know I I want I think everybody in this community has spoken up against or spoken out for additional ambulance services in the city. Uh and the fact that we have a city of 50,000 plus and and not an ambulance uh within city proper within the city limits is is very concerning. Um, I do have some concerns about potentially with the type of of business, if you will, that will be here that, you know, we could we could be having ambulances park in these gravelish areas, especially that area between the mailbox and the and the front door. It looks more lawn like. I I agree with my fellow commissioner. I thought it was lawn, too. And they were adding gravel to that. You can't really tell it's gravel. You can tell the other side is gravel more so. Um, and I think that, you know, I have some concerns about what that's going to do to that area in terms of how it's going to look uh after rainy season and that ambulance is is potentially driving over it and around it. I know that we as a city have in here that they have to do some things for us if they mess up the rideway, but uh what if it's not in the rightway? It still is a potential eyesore in that area. Um, and I I I hear I think I hear Lake County saying correctly that the intent is to put one ambulance and and two staff members. I think if if you know I would be I would feel better at a compromise of saying all right let's let's see if this location will work because I think we can all agree we need ambulance service within the city but only allowing at this point right now the one ambulance and the two staff to see what this does to this area and to see how this affects things because if it's if it's dramatically negatively affecting the area um then we have some mechanisms in place here through this

resolution that we can deal with that um and uh if if if it's coming back for a second ambulance uh or beyond that and we can have data to support whether or not that that's something that should be done um in this area. I just I want to try to do as much as we can to provide for the service to the community, but also uh realize that this this is the transition lot. And man, we really uh rad over the coals another applicant here um for an u an an aiology doctor that was going to be open a couple days a week during the day and and this is going to be something that's 247 365 um and and certainly is going to change the dynamic of that direct area and not to mention the traffic concerns. So I I guess that's kind of where I stand right now. I want to support it. I just have some some reservations and concerns with regard to to uh congruency with the neighborhood and and sounds and and traffic. Any other commissioners thoughts or

Yes. Yep. Yep. Commissioner Nim. Yeah. Please.

Uh Chief, I know you keep saying, "Well, you know, you'll hear the PA system through the Volkswagen Place." I'm in total agreeance with you on that one, but the Volkswagen Place has working hours. Okay, we're talking about coming back from a run 2, three in the morning. Okay, you're talking about cars parking in the back. So, you would have to utilize the gravel to make a U-turn. A vehicle on gravel makes noise as well. I'm looking at the convenience of being inconvenient if I live in that neighborhood for a very long time. That's the only reason why I'm saying I we need it. We need a location, but I I really I don't think this is the best location for it. I'm sorry. It's uh the noise level, the light level. Who knows? Maybe 3 months from now, we'll have to put lights over there and that'll be even more. It's it's I'm I'm I'm really surprised nobody's stepping up to give you a location and I'm very disheartened by that. All right, no other further questions. I just want to bring that point up to my fellow commissioners about this is 24/7. This ain't during 9 to5 hours.

Thank you, Commissioner Kramer.

Chief, I' I've got a couple questions. So, what is your average response time now with the EMS? So, the way the county works is we have a countywide EMSTU and we share those dollars with the municipalities. So, our true service is paramedics on non-transport firet trucks countywide. That is where the majority of the first arriving paramedics get to the scenes. So the ambulance arriving isn't designed in the first unit on the scene. Now certainly it happens, but it's the the life safety network is the first responders on the non-transport fire trucks. And so we share those EMS funds to do that. But I will tell you, it's difficult right now to get new young people to enter the field as first responders. And so we've done something that no one else in the state has done. And we pulled 16 EMTs off the streets and put them through a six-month paramedic program. And so we've been getting a lot of calls about how you do that. So we are training our own. We are absolutely steadfast to provide the best service in the state. And our average response time right now in the 90th percentile is in the neighborhood of 15 to 18 minutes. And so 90%

you said 15 to 18 minutes. I just want to be clear on that. Yes. Countywide. County wide. Umatillaa to the four corners or aster and all in between. So where is the next closest station to this? If if if I'm if I'm the next door neighbor right there and she needs an ambulance, where's the closest station? Now, depending on where you're at in the city, I would say Division Street at Minnola. Okay. So, there's a where the Octagon skate shop is there on on 27. It's back toward Lake Minhaha from there or Minnola, rather. Okay.

Now, if you were on the west end, it would be the city of Groveland. If you were down toward uh the Hartwood Marsh area, it would be station 109. Okay. So, your intent is really to put someone in the comm or put a station in the community to help. I I as my fellow commissioner said, if you've ever needed an ambulance and you're sitting there waiting on it, this becomes a real big deal. So, I know that the the city right now struggles with response times because, you know, we're working hard as as our our city council is trying to change this so that we could have, you know, uh emergency services within the city because 15 for me 15 minutes is 15 to 18 minutes is an extremely long time when when when you said it's not about the response, it's about the time. So, I have far less concern about the integrity of this neighborhood than some of my fellow commissioners because of the response time. The the for me, this is one a situation where the the good of the many outweigh the good of the few and and and I I'm highly supportive of this.

Well, I appreciate that. And just like you sitting there, I'm a public servant as well and what's the best thing for the community that we serve and so I respect everything you do for the zoning and planning and that's one of the reasons that Claremont is such a beautiful location of the hard work and dedication that you do. I look at it from a life safety standpoint and it's something that is needed. Thank you. Any other? Yeah, Commissioner Hoisington

where I understand the need to have additional locations and you said that you're good neighbors. A good neighbor would have reached out to the community and had a face-to-face conversation with them because this is going to change the trajectory of this community. And at no time, unless I'm mistaken, was there any attempt to meet with the neighbors to explain it to them so that they feel comfortable how their lives are going to change as far as their quality of life living there next to the possibility of ambulances coming and going 24/7. There was no attempt to do that. And and I don't understand the importance of this, how there was not an extra step to talk with the neighbors to get the buy in or at least let them be a part of the process so that they understand the need and why this is happening. I would not want to live next door as bad as the situation that I went through with my mother. I would not want to live next door to a house that had turned into an EMS station to where every day when I walked out, I saw ambulances parked on the front lawn. You said that there's new technology that's eventually going to happen to where the noise isn't coming when it's time for them to take off, but that hasn't happened. So we were to approve this tonight and you were to take ownership in the next three weeks that system would not be in place. Also

the fact that knowing that we needed it's just going to change the community. No, not not not not I understand what you're saying, Commissioner. The need of the greater versus the few, but do you want to be one of the few? I mean, really, the greater need versus the few. Would you want to be one of the few that's now having to live with this every day? I think you could find another location to put this. That's just my belief. I I I I cannot support turning this neighborhood into what this would be.

Thank you. Um I realize I'm sorry I had one more question on here for for uh um Lake County staff. How how will if uh Claremont proceeds with their own ambulance service, how does this facility and this site um play into that and is affected by that? So, I don't know how that'll play out because it's a countywide EMS MSTU. That's for the elected officials to determine. Uh but there's a need for transport ambulances in this city.

Okay. And then if if this is a if if approved and then this goes to council and is approved uh by council as well, what what est rough estimate even if you've thought about it when you would start operating out of this facility? Depending on how the walkthrough goes with the fire marshall here in Claremont, I would say somewhere mid October possibly. So with before the end of the year for sure. Okay. Yeah. As soon as possible. Okay. All right. We've been looking for years for a location to get into. Okay. Because we were in the fire stations. Yes. Yes. Thank you. I appreciate that. Um, any other questions? Um, yeah. Oh, yeah. Mr. Tonos. Chief.

Sir,

I come from Staten Island. Uh, crowded little place. Uh, very crowded. uh fireh houses next to apartment buildings and residential areas. EMT is always out there. Uh I ran a cert team on Staten Island for 12 years. So pardon with FD, PD, EMS on Staten Island, just based on our risk assessments, there was a lot of community outreach and you'd go past an EMS station or fire station, police station, and usually there'd be somebody, you know, out there more than one with a smile on their face greeting. You know, it's a lot of hand shaking. It's a lot of meet and greet. So, I can only imagine that maybe maybe one benefit to the community would be, you know, it's, hey, good morning, how are you? How you doing? Getting to know the folks, you know, the kids come over, hey, can I sit in the bus? Hey, can I, you know, so there's some of that. It's not like four people are going to be hermited in that building. So, on the flip side of everything, there's always that relationship or that handshake with your community. Am I right?

That is correct. So again, it's not like four people to hold up in there. And God forbid if somebody does know that you're there. Um I'm assuming they can approach the house and say, "Hey, you know, this lady just fell or this guy is like, you know, there's been an accident. I don't know if you got the call yet." I mean, it's not like you're not answering the door.

That's correct. Yeah. Okay. If the crew is there, they will certainly answer the door and be great neighbors. You know, we're always being thanked. The the last thing is on Staten Island, one of our biggest events was National Night Out where we would go down to the boardwalk and again just hanging out with, you know, the heroes of Staten Island. So if there isn't a call, if for some reason you're not racing all over Claremont, I mean, is it possible to do some outreach from here? So this way the neighbors can come up and say, "Hey, you know, my name is this, my name is that."

Yeah, we do that. Currently we have open houses for our locations but one of the things out of professional respect for the city is we don't you know because we are Lake County Fire Rescue is we want to you know I understand what Chief Azelle has here. I was a member of the city of Claremont and we respect that. Uh we work with businesses of showing ambulances and we have just down the street our paramedic graduation that we participate in that showing ambulances and things like that. But we do have a heavy uh volume of call load and so we don't have as many opportunities for the public display to space but we are certainly doing that as we stand up additionally

because this could actually be almost like a recruiting site. I come in with my kid or whatever he wants to just some more information on what it is to be one of you. Yeah, we call it a career in a year. Okay. You can be a first responder in one year's training. Awesome. Have a career. Thank you, Chief. Yeah. Okay, Commissioner May. It's just one simple question to the property manager. Property manager. You're the property manager kind of. Yeah. Okay. I represent the property owner. My name's Aaron Blake. I'm at 290 Citrus Tower Boulevard. I grew up in Claremont since I was probably six years old. Um I'm a commercial real estate broker. Deal with a lot of things. And um

you know, I was listening to the neighbor and and to you making your comments about why didn't we reach out Honestly, when you stand on that property and you look, it's not in any of these pictures, but when you stand on that driveway and look to the west, you're staring at the back of Windixie with dumpsters and semi-truckss and all of that type of look. And because of our knowledge of how the operation would be run and with the chief's experience, we really thought that it was a quieter and more conducive use. But I heard the neighbor loud and clear, and I've got a suggestion for that. Perhaps you put in a motion that from the front corner of the building, which would be the north west corner, we put a hedge row all the way out, similar to what is currently on the south side between the law firm.

So you're saying in between the neighbor,

correct? So from the northwest corner of the house, straight west, mimicking the existing bush row, you know, six feet tall, three, four feet wide. that would block that out effectively completely and provide her the privacy but yet still serve the community and have the fast response time and if anybody in that neighborhood ever needed it, they sure would be glad they had it. I know that. But our thought was we really felt the way that we know this operates is pretty quiet compared to the businesses that were around there. And so we were not attempting to be a bad neighbor. We thought we were a very good neighbor. And you know, just a a matter of not knowing what you don't know. And I heard her loud and clear. And I think that's a very reasonable thing to do to get along with the neighbors.

So that's that's my only comment. And I know you represent the owner who has the office next door. Um is there a lease that the the Lake County is is signing with you all? And that's and and it's contingent on of course the approval of this.

Well, to give you a little background, you know, we could have rented that to a, you know, a family of three or four or whatever and been done with it and had money. We've been working on this for six whole months. So, the owner of the property has given up rental income for six months to try to get the ambulance service that Claremont needs. That's a pretty big sacrifice that most of my clients would not do. So, it's it's not really I mean, it's a rental, but they it's more about the fact that they know it's needed and so they made that decision early on. They knew this was a long process and you got to go through all these steps and they made that decision up front and I think we started in end of January, beginning of February and now we are in September. So, and it'll be at least another 30 to 60 days before that comes online, maybe longer based on how long it takes to get the the fire suppression and whatnot put into the building. So, call it a year by the time it's all said and done. The owner gave up rental income for a whole year to try to do this for the community.

So, I'm also in commercial real estate. So, that's why I'm asking about the sign if there was a lease signed. And so, the owner is not doing any tenant improvements just to kind of make it nicer. Um, no, they're they're going to be based upon what the city requires, but nothing on the outside. Just, you know, no, because we didn't want to disturb the neighborhood or change the look or paint it bright green or anything. We wanted it to be just there and not noticed is was the intention anyway. Right. So, the gravel will there be new gravel put in by

Yes, we let the grass grow over it. If you went back and looked at photos from two years ago, that whole thing was just a gravel yard, the entire thing. And so we chose rather than spraying it with Roundup and making it look bad, we just let it start growing in there to fill in so at least it looked a little better. But that was all done by the previous owner of the property who sold it to the building owner next door. Then the my last question and I appreciate you coming up saying about the landscape buffer because that was one of the ones I think I brought it up and I really would like to have that. I think it would be a nice gesture especially for a good idea. Why not

for the neighbor? Yeah. And um the access to the back sensor is like will they be able to use your driveway in the back if if there is they have their own asphalt drive that goes on the other side of that bushes and that's what they're going to do in the future. And then there's a fence behind the property and there's another business behind it. So there's nothing that's all blocked off. So there's a business behind this one. It's not residential. uh caddy corner there's a business and I believe directly behind it is R2 or R3 but we have no intention of going that direction at all.

Okay. So they're not parking their car. So I I you know I'm landscaping is great. Thank you very much for offering that and I think that's should be definitely a condition that we had. Um but I was just wondering it looks like there's a buffer. There's landscaping in the back that doesn't bother the like a giant boenilia tree back there along the power line easement pretty much filling in and making a wall at this point. Perfect. That's you answer all my questions. I appreciate your time. Thank you. So, it sounds like we have um the prop the person representing the property owner. Is that am I safe to say that? Yes.

Okay. So, sounds like we have the property owner representative indicating that they would agree to providing a hedge line on the north side of the property um on the line there that would mimic what's on the south side between the house and the um law office. So, it would also be between the two residents or two houses. Correct. But I would start it right on the corner because if you put it down the whole property line, they might not like that. But it would block the entire view. Corner of the house back, not all the way to the front. Correct. Yeah. Yeah. So corner corner of the h the starting point of the house back.

Correct. Okay. Because there's a lot more distance between the law firm and that carport than there is between the house and the neighbor house. Okay. So I wouldn't want to infringe on that. Thank you. Um and then I guess if um so the commission really has before us uh any motions relative to that adding that hedgine potentially um uh whether or not we want to uh limit the ambulances to one versus two or two staff versus four staff based off of what Lake County is indicating and then any address any concerns with the parking if anyone wants to do that. Um, so I would bring it back to the commission for any motions. I'll make a motion.

Sure. Item number two, resol resolution 2025-024R1227 Bloxom Avenue conditional use permit with the addition of a hedge row commencing at the front of the home ending at the rear property line mimicking what's on the south side. mimicking what's on the south side. Okay. So, we have a motion to approve with an addition of adding a hedge line mimicking the south side, but it would be on the north side from the start of the home to the back. Mr. Chairman, I have a question.

Yeah. Well, can we have a let's first we have a motion on the floor. Do do we do we have a second? I second the motion. So, we have a second now. Any final discussion? Mr. Nei, Commissioner. Yeah. When you say mimicking, I'm sorry. When you say mimicking, that hedge line goes all the way to the street. The gentleman that just came up says he's going to the corner of the house. Yes. So Mr. Kramer's motion is from the corner of the house, but I'm referring to mimicking as in height and width. I just wanted clarification on. Yeah. Coming forward towards Bloxom, not backwards. So from the house forward to Bloxom.

Okay. So I had asked earlier if if we said to the back of the house and I thought you agreed to that. from the northwest corner of the house, which is the one we're looking at in the picture there on the left side. That front northwest corner straight west out towards Bloxom so that it blocks anything from the driveway from bothering her windows or where she stays. So that's different than what you're proposing. Could you put a map up there and show us exactly what you're trace it out for us? I'll just draw it on there first.

I'm just going to draw straight kind of like this. This is not exact, but you get the idea. Like that. So towards the front when you're over here in her house, your line of sight is blocked so that nothing sitting in the driveway can be seen. So from the front of the building to block something. Correct. You don't she doesn't want to see from these windows anything going on over here. So, we want to create privacy from here forward. Okay. So, let me rephrase this. I I I'll I'll make the motion again if that's acceptable, chairman. Yeah. As long as your second's okay with it.

Okay. Are you okay, Vince, if I change if I I'm sorry, thank you. All right. So resolution 2025-024R1227 Bloxom Avenue conditional use permit with the addition of a hedro commencing at the front of the house ending at Bloxom Avenue towards the front. Okay. As diagrammed as diagrammed and Mr. Teddona, you're okay with that? I'm okay with that. Okay. Any final discussion?

Yes. Let me just on the record of saying that you guys promised me when you changed it from R2 to R3 that it would be a business that fits in with residential. Thank you. Thank you. And I want to state that you went back on your word. Ma'am, I would I that's it.

So, um ma'am, so what will happen here is this is a recommendation to the city council. This is not a final decision. The city council will actually make the final decision on whether or not this gets approved. We will make a recommendation to either approve it or deny it based off of the motion that was put before us. So basically what's in the packet with the addition of this hedge that you see in the blue uh circles from the front of the house towards Bloxom. Um, and then, uh, the council will actually have a public hearing just like this, and you'll be able to voice your opposition at that point for any final approval or denial by the city council. Okay. Thank you, sir. You're welcome. Okay.

So, we have a move and a second. Any final discussion? Seeing none, all those in favor say I. I. I. All those opposed say nay. Ning. Nay. Okay. So, hold on a second. Here we have uh we have three. So we have Mr. Kramer. I know Mr. Teddona and Ms. May as eyes and Mr. Neimik and Mrs. Ms. Hoington as nays. Chair votes I wish this was only two or one ambulance and not two. Um I will vote I as well. Motion carries 42. Thank you. You're welcome.

So, this will then go to the city council for um uh an actual um approval or denial based off of this recommendation. Okay. All right. We are now to item three, resolution 2025-026R, Lake Haven on grand conditional use permit. And Mr. Gonzalez, Mr. Chair, I would like to ask is it would it be possible for a fivem minute break or do we want to keep going until the last item or We can take a five minute break. All right. So, it's 8:36. We'll reconvene. What is that? Uh at 8:41.

Thank you. Somebody else. [Music] [Music] Yeah. [Music] Hey. Hey. [Music] Hey, [Music] hey, hey. [Music]

[Music] Hey, hey, hey. [Music] Heat. Hey, Heat. Hey [Music] hey [Music] hey. [Music] Hey, hey, hey. [Music] Heat. Hey. Hey. Hey.

[Music] Hey. [Music] Heat. Heat. [Music] I don't heard you

I can't buy anything. It's like a Gatorade. We will call the uh PNZ meeting back to order and we will start now with item number three resolution 2025-026R Lake Haven on grand conditional use permit and Mr. Gonzalez. Good evening, commissioners and guests. Nick Gonzalez, Development Services. The applicant is requesting a conditional use permit to allow for a multifamily complex in the R2 medium density residential zoning district. The vacant parcels are located east of South Grand Highway and north of East Highway 50. And on the location map, the parcel is outlined in yellow. This is Grand Highway and it's north of the Atome shopping plaza. The subject property is designed for medium density residential use under the city's future land use and is zone R2 which permits uh multifamily development subject to conditional use permit approval. Zoom this out. The proposed project includes a 20 unit multifamily development that is consistent with both the density allowances and the intent of the R2 zoning district. The cup process provides an opportunity to ensure that multifamily developments are compatible with the surrounding neighborhoods and that appropriate design, buffering, and

access are addressed. Staff has reviewed the proposed request and find it to be in compliance with the city's land development code requirements. No waiverss or variances have been requested by the applicant at this time. The site is located adjacent to residential and commercial uses with frontage and access from SA South Grand Highway. The proposed development will serve as compatible transition between existing single family neighborhoods and commercial corridors. The site is located directly behind the athome store and down from and down from an existing storm water pond. The development could be considered infill development since majority of the surrounding area has been developed. When evaluating a request for a conditional use permit, the land development code section 101-212 requires specific development standards that are required to be met. Staff has reviewed the application as submitted in accordance with the development standards criteria and finds a proposed use can meet the general criteria for granting a conditional use permit. The proposed use will not be detrimental to health, safety, and welfare of surrounding community. Staff recommends approval of the conditional use permit resolution number 2025-26 26R. That concludes staff's presentation.

Thank you very much. Is the applicant present? And if would you like to present? If so, please come forward to the podium and state your name and address for the record, please. Good evening. Um, my name is Joe Zagami Jr. Address is 230 Mohawk Road in Claremont. Um, I think Nick covered it pretty well. I'll just say that, um, we've put a lot of thought into this. I have had a pre-application meeting with the city. All the city departments have had an opportunity to review this and comment, including fire. And what you see is a a revised preliminary conceptual site plan with their input having been considered and factored into the design.

Okay. Thank you very much. This is now the portion of the meeting where a public hearing for item number three, resolution 2025-026R, Lake Haven on Grand conditional use permit. If you'd like to speak on this item, please come forward. State your name and address for the record and please limit your comments to this item. Anyone here to speak on item number three. Seeing no one, we will bring it back to the commission and we will start with Commissioner Kramer. Thank you, Chairman Bane. So this request is consistent with the site zoning and future use land designations. And while it's seems to be a somewhat modest project, uh the cut process allows us to ensure it's designed with uh proper access buffering and compatibility with adjacent properties. So, um, have we done any traffic impacts that that and how's that going to, um, handle be handled on South Grand Highway? That's a fairly small street and I I use that street quite a bit. So, um, have we done any traffic studies on this?

Can you hear me well? Well, the, uh, the applicant did, uh, provide a traffic summary. uh stating that they will generate a 14 peak hour trips uh to be considered dimminimous uh and then if uh if they need to they would um they will request for exemption for a tier one traffic study. Okay. And then um looking at aerial view of that, you're right next to a lake there um Jack's Lake. How will storm water be managed given its proximity to that lake? that

uh that will be going through the the uh site site review process and environmental will look through that through the storm water. And how about anything to do with schools and and capacity? Is this going to impact our It's dimminimous. Deminimus. Okay. It's only 20 units. All right. I have no further questions at this time. Thank you, Commissioner Hoisington.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. Um, I too this looks like it's compatible, but that is a busy street. I mean, when you look at what's going on on Grand Highway right now, you have Mason Ridge that is almost finished. That multi- it's going to be huge. The development that's right to the other side of it, those town homes, and then this one is just the traffic that's going to be on this Grand Highway with 20 additional homes coming in. Um, that concerns me because that is a busy street. That is a street that has school buses in the morning and in the afternoon. Um, from the apartment complex to the other housing developments there. Is there one way in and one way out here? Is that what I'm saying? Yes, ma'am.

And we we don't see a problem with that as far as emergency vehicles being able to get in, um waste management being able to get in, turn around, where the trash bins, all of that's been addressed. So, fire did look at this plan uh as Mr. Sagami uh did state through our pre-application uh they did act add a um they added this turnaround access for EMS and the dumpster enclosure is right here. Okay. Okay.

So it has enough room with the that's our our fire truck um turn r turn ratio. So it does make that turn ratio. Um, and then the fire trucks, I mean the dumpster trucks would be doing the the same route. And you said the storm water issue has been addressed with Jack's Lake. That will through site rep site review process. Uh, environmental services will have comments on that and make sure that it's uh it's addressed.

Okay. My real concern is just the additional traffic that's going to be on this road because it's just a two-lane major fairway to get from to 50. So, I have real concerns about the additional traffic. But that's all, Mr. Chair. Thank you, Commissioner Teddona.

Thank you, Mr. Chair. If this is a conceptual plan, I mean, just some things that come off the top of my head. I Believe it or not, when I saw this after after getting that certificate from Ohio State University, I was like, God sent me a gift. Um, so when we talk about the trash and the dumpster, so again, um, the new guy still we're walking the trash to the dumpster. We're not talking about any kind of curbside pickup, right?

So all these folks are walking to the tra to the dumpster. Okay. Um, there's a lot of trees that are going bye-bye on on this site. Is anything outside of the yellow box as far as trees staying? You're saying outside of the yellow box? Outside of the yellow box. Outside of the yellow box. Are those trees staying this area? Well, come around. There you go. Where your pen is now. So, that's not a part of their property. so that those trees wouldn't be going anywhere.

Okay. All right. So, we're taking down a lot of trees as usual here in Claremont. Um, so what is that at the top? What is that? So, I got the trees. Can you point at on your plants so I can see? So, here's Sure. I love it. I project houses here. What is that? This is the access road. No, no, no. And then that's the access road to come in. This is a sidewalk. A sidewalk, sir. So, it's a sidewalk. Walking trail.

Are there a walking trail? Thank you so much. Which we the potential of an open space or maybe some sort of relaxation with benches. Are we putting any of the trees that we're taking down there? create one of our little buffers or go back to your Can you go back to your seat, please? Yeah. I I'm just I I I I'm fine with that, but I mean, we have to realize there are people watching on TV and here that cannot hear when we're not amplified. So, I mean, we can ask staff or we can go to the podium, but please don't go to the screen behind us.

Sorry about that. So, look, in a nutshell, I'm concerned about trees. There should be something in between that walking space to Lakefront Village. There's a lot of walking here. So, even if I wanted to take a walk on South Grand, it's a long walk to get to South Grand. I just think there should be something in there that is pleasant to the residents. I agree with my commissioner Hoisington that you're right off of 50. So, you've got that whole traffic off of 50 on the other side of Lakefront Village. You've got a tremendous development that's going on there because I actually walked it. Um, part of my other concern is you've got four parking spots for guests. Maybe the math works out wonderful, but you've got 20 houses, multiple bedrooms. So, the first four guests that show up, anybody else that shows up has got no place to park. Um, the other thing in terms of walkability, okay, and I've not been out to the place, but here's a perfect perfect opportunity for somebody talk to the the owners of At Home and that strip mall and maybe get something going so I can actually since I'm doing all this walking just to get to South Grand or get to the garbage station, I might actually be able to take a walk or get in a cart and go to at home or the buffet or the uh the gym or there's a restaurant there. So, I mean, if if that if that was taken into consideration into a conceptual plan, I probably have less of a problem with this. I like the idea that you're secluded, you're off the road. I mean, I lived down a dead end street on Staten Island and it was awesome. But at the same token, I'm on a

deadend street where I'm doing a lot of walking and I'm going to need that car that's going to wind up on South Grand. And like I said, I just I'm of the opinion if you could make it more walkable, more centralized, and tie into that at home, you might be able to alleviate some traffic because now at least I could go shopping without having to get my car just to go down a quarter mile to enter into a parking spot. So, I've just got some serious concerns. Plus, we don't even I don't are the part are the guest parking ADA. That's a long way for somebody to actually get out of a parking spot to go to that corner house um if they're in a wheelchair. So, um just some of my concerns, Mr. Chair, and I'm I'll stay seated from now on.

Thank you. I I understand the the need to want to point out, but it it just helps with it's not just us. There are other people watching and listening that it does help for uh for that information flow as well. So, um, Commissioner May, so is this a for sale or a for rent property? Question. For sale. For sale. Okay. So, this be simple. V simple. Got it.

Now, the staff, there are different requirements for St. Louis for for sale and for rent when it comes to parking. I'm putting on it. It's based on the number of bedrooms. Um, it's based on bedrooms. Yeah. And I believe the calculations there one and a half spaces per onebedroom unit and two spaces per twobedroom unit. And I believe these are onecar garages and then one in the driveway. So, right. So, that So, what's the total? So it includes the driveway and the four. So that would be 40 spaces and then plus those four guest parking spaces.

Yeah, cuz it's not in here. So that's what I wanted to get. So 40 spaces plus the four. And are you required to have 80 um the handicap? The four parking spaces were an addition from the applicant. It wasn't staff required. So that's just it's an added bonus. Okay. Uh you guys talked about traffic study and it h it's it's stated here that I guess the 14 peak hour trips which is considered to be dimminimous but I guess it's considered dimminimous by whoever the traffic consultant. Um unfortunately we didn't have that summary. It would be great to have that summary for the next package. Okay.

For us especially um this is a two-lane road. Um but it's already it's I I see it in this little traffic summary here. I'm a tree person. I I I've love trees. Um I agree with with with my commissioner here in regards to um I there's a lot of trees on the site. So my and I know he said he had a pre-application meeting with the staff. So did the staff bring up that a requirement of the tree survey or even a wildlife uh you know study? Uh I don't believe it was mentioned but they would have to comply with all the landscape buffers

and is that in here but it pertains to our land development. I understand the landscape buffer but what I'm talking about is a tree study because there Yeah, there's a difference. I can understand that that but there's a lot of trees on this. Yeah, we need a tree study because there's big trees. And I will um let everybody know that I did drive by this property because I know we're supposed to say that. I did drive by that property um and it's a very small

and it's a lot of trees and they're nice big trees. So, I would like as a condition again like we did for the uh other property um with the hotels to ask for a tree study. I have some concerns um there um because I don't again this is just a conceptual um I don't see if you know if the tree study is saying that there's certain trees there they have to be protected they're not depicted in here uh and also if there's trees coming down are they going to be providing into the tree fund or are they going to be planting trees within this little trail I think the trail is great I think that's a nice added touch as an amenity, but I don't see any trees or benches, um, things like that. So, I would like to see that um, and I see that there's a sidewalk added to the to it's a sidewalk, but it just basically ends to the to the end of that driveway. So, I'm assuming whoever the property owner on this other site, it's a different owner, I'm assuming. Right. It's totally different. Unfortunately, you weren't able to buy it to expand. It would have been nice, right? Um, so he's not required to have an additional sidewalk, but I do see a sidewalk, which is great. Um it's unfortunate that you know it's not going straight where we can see people walking to at home and all that nice uh new food that we see at the shopping center now. But um again my biggest concern on this um is the tree survey should be required based on uh

if you'd like me just to clarify for that part of the code for development is a site like this has trees is required to provide a tree inventory which is your tree study. So what we do is we look at that tree study. It's going to come up with a certain number of inches that has to go back onto the site. If it doesn't fit on the site, then they pay into a tree in tree fund. They cut a check. That is part of the standard code. Okay. That's nothing extra that we If you'd like, you could put it on there on the conditional use permit, but it's part of the code anyway. They have to go through that process.

Yeah. I just it's it just I understand that. It just makes me more comfortable because because um you know I'm living now in city of Claremont for three years and I'm driving by all these properties and a lot of our trees are gone. Oh yeah, there's and every time the financial numbers come up and I look at that tree fund and it's not

budgeted. Yeah, it's man there should be a lot of millions in there and there isn't. So I just you know that's my concern. I'm just trying to save our trees and just make Claremont healthier in a sense that shade, you know, less heat. Um, but you know, I just want to make sure that uh our developers are complying to that. So, that's all I have. Thank you. Thank you, Commissioner Neim. Yes. Uh, I have a few questions. Uh, can I ask the developer to please come back to the microphone? Hello, sir. Hello. Uh, is this there will there be an HOA?

Yes. Okay. Would there be any future amenities? Um, yes. Actually, we want to do something nice along the shoreline and and and I should say that um could you point where your future amenities might go on the map? We'd like to do something on the map, sir. So, I could see so the public can see it as well. No, we I'm sorry. He's not used to it. So that's let's be a little ginger with it. Okay. Well, our our thinking is we'd like to do there is a lake beyond

the storm water pond. So we were thinking maybe some kind of a um a dock or a bridge over the storm water pond to the lake. Um and maybe some kind of um walking path here along the bottom of the of the uh project because it is very beautiful and it's very secluded and and I should say that um all of this area here the elevation difference between the at home and us is huge. This is a big um

Yeah, it's about Yes. Um, and this is part of the athome lot. And and the athome um storm water pond is right over here. So, this isn't going to be developed. This is a buffer. It's a natural buffer. Um, which which makes the property very nice. It's very quiet when you're back in there. Um, obviously some of the trees have to come down. We didn't we have done a tree census. I know. I just asked on amenities, sir. So, if you're answering her question, I'll let you I'll allow that. Okay. Honestly, we haven't we haven't really contemplated the amenities package. Um, there's not going to be a clubhouse or a pool.

That's what I was asking. Clubhouse, any pickle ball courts, nothing like that. Just a walking path. Then, um, the idea is to keep it very natural. Okay. I like that idea. Uh my other concern is what is on the north side? Is that a retention pond? One long retention pond right here. Nope. That's the north right there. Thank you. No, that's a sidewalk. Not the sidewalk between the sidewalk and the road. Oh, there is kind of a swale. A swale. That's that. You'll be using that as a tention. Well, the the runoff from the drive will go into the swale. So, we have to account for the runoff, right,

from that drive. Okay. So, it's going to be it's not shown in blue, but there's a swale that runs between the sidewalk and the road that will capture the runoff from that. Okay, I understand that. Will you be owning the roads or will Claremont own the roads? Who? No, these are private roads that will be owned. So, this is private owned and maintained by the HOA. By the HOA, right? Okay. Uh since it's owned by the HOA, what is your rental policy minimum months?

I haven't, you know, like I said, we're we're we're interested in uh a fee simple product uh project. Um have we haven't written the HOA documents? We have I I don't know. Okay. So will you So obviously there's no B&B there. No, there's no intention for a bed and breakfast. No, these are these are um you know family residences. Okay. Sorry.

Answered that one. You answered that one. Major question. Where is the egress exit for commercial? I mean for emergency vehicles. Ingress and egress is at Grand Highway. That's one entrance. Where is the second? You're supposed to staff. Is it because of the amount of more than 25? He doesn't have 20. Oh, it's that's why I kept it under 20. Yep. It's under the density. And the reason would you be able to disclose that to me why it's such a long long entrance. Yes. It's a very simple answer. That's how the lot is configured.

Okay. The only way back to that beautiful property on the lake is through the flag pole. And by the way, I'll add um Lake County reviewed this too and there is a we are putting our section of sidewalk on grand and it's going to connect with at homes sidewalk. So you can theoretically walk from this project up the sidewalk to at home.

Yeah. Our apologies because I was the one that brought that up. It's just that on our picture we don't have that. We don't we don't see the sidewalk. We only see just your sidewalk. It's it it's offsite and and but Lake County is requiring us to connect their sidewalk to the north and their sidewalk to the south. So, we're going to put in our section of sidewalk and it will link the north and the south um parcels to ours. Perfect. Yeah, because if you look at that, Matt, it you can't see a sidewalk and that's the reason. No, you can't. And honestly, the at home sidewalk right now is all overgrown. It's completely overgrown. people aren't using it right now.

Well, I appreciate that you're adding that. So, so I see you have the sidewalk basically located on the east the northeast side. So, you have four parking spots there. So, you're telling me there is no sidewalks for those guest parking spots. There's no sidewalk. Yeah, honestly, it's all integrated. It's relatively low density. the traffic is going to be so slow and low that that I I envision people walking, you know, everywhere. Simple simple yes or no would justify what you're saying. So there is no sidewalk there.

No, there's no internal sidewalks. I would like to put a nature trail around the exterior perimeter though if you have enough room. All right, no further questions for now, Mr. Chairperson, unless you bring something up. Thank you. Um, just to piggyback on the sidewalk piece, um, across the street from the guest parking, um, doesn't this is this depicting that the sidewalk continues in front of those units and then goes back to the lift station? That's right. Okay. Okay. That's right.

So, so if they if if someone wanted to go visit someone on that side, they would be able to walk on a sidewalk, but it's to the other two buildings. correct to what Mr. Neim was I think questioning on on the other side. Okay. Um also clarification because I was under the impression that this was not fe simple that this was a a multi- uh multif family um uh unit because there's a trash enclosure. Uh, and if this is fee simple, then these folks are going to have um trash recepticles and they're going to be serviced because they're going to pay that

possibly. I suppose um a partner and I are going to own this and and what we're going to do is half the units will belong to him and half will belong to me. And our my intention was to make them each fee simple and I'd like to put each of my sons in a in a town home and uh help launch them. they're just getting out of college and helped launch them into the world and I thought this would be it's also a great way for them to get to know my business. So, we're working on this as a family and um so I want each unit to be owned individually. Now, I may own a building of five units but each unit will be feeding.

Okay. So, so there are 20 units. These are going to be considered 20 single family residences with 20 sing 20 individual alternate key IDs, 20 different tax bills, 20 different uh garbage and recycling bin collections, 20 different everything. Correct. if they're if they're fee simple. I don't know if that's for staff or for the developer, but if because I I think I was under the impression that this was more of a rental community than a single family residence community. Um where these were going to be fee simple individual units. Um and each one being a different tax ID and parcel ID or alternate key ID.

Yes. The footprint will be its own tax ID. And so if you buy a town home in this community, you will own the footprint and then everything else will be held in common by the HOA. Okay. Is that for staff? Is that what we have before us? The conceptual that you have is for multifamily. So it's not for fe simple. Correct.

Okay. So that's what Yeah. because I'm so I I want to make sure we're we're actually approving what the developer is indicating they want to present or um or propose which is a fee simple 20 individual parcels which may then require some looking at okay how does city uh city services like trash and recycling get through that area and collect in that area rather than just collect from a trash enclosure. exposure. Um, so I guess my question to the developer would be um or to the applicant would be, do we need to uh postpone this and and bring it back at a different time so that you can work with staff to make sure we actually have what you're wanting to present to us in front of us?

I'm not sure I I appreciate or understand the conflict uh here. I mean, if if if staff directs me to use the bins, then we'll we'll I mean, the garbage trucks can navigate the street systems, right? But what we haven't this this conceptual in front of us is a multif family unit like an apartment complex. This is not for 20 lots of 20 individual parcel IDs and alternate key IDs and taxable lots. This is one parcel that happens to have 20 units on it.

Okay? And what you're I think is what you're saying to us is that you're going to have 20 lots and then a essentially a 21st lot that is the community's lot that has all the amenities and road and everything else.

Well, really honestly the way I was thinking it I mean is we would condoize these as we needed to. I mean if I'm going to own a whole building um then maybe I don't need to condoise it. I I I don't know. we hadn't we hadn't gotten to the point where that decision had been made. I wasn't aware that we needed to make that decision now. So, I guess again I'll go back to staff. Where are we? This is this is kind of a new uh this is not common for us. We typically have either a multif family or a single family, but not a it's going to be either or. So, how do we proceed with this? Well, if it is a multifamily, I guess I would ask you, okay? Um, what what are your thoughts? What's what's the issue with it being a multif family?

There's I don't I I I'm not saying that there's an issue. Okay. What I'm hearing what I'm seeing in writing and hearing in words don't match. Well, we're still trying to figure that out.

Okay. But but we need to I think we need to as a planning and zoning commission know are we approving a con conditional use permit for 20 houses single family residences and 20 parcels or are we approving basically apartment style living multif family living and I think our code handle those things differently and so we would handle our review and decision of those differently so I want to make sure we're we're fair and equitable to you, but also to our code and to make sure that we have the I guess the correct information in front of us. Does that make sense? I

Yeah. So, it's it's it's Christian. It's like the new concepts that we see now, which is the bill to rent, which are fee simple, but they all own them and rent them out. Well, that's fine, but but these are this this is not a fee simple 20 fee simple unit. This is well he's saying it's fe simple but that's not what's in front of me. Has it been has it been platted yet? I don't agree with what he's saying. That's why I made sure I had to ask if it was for rent or for sale and he brought up the fee simple he was going to he just said quoted saying he's going to buy five units. So if he's going to buy five units out of 20 that's one quarter he's going to own as a developer.

And he most likely he's not going to live in five units. He's going to rent those five units out. That's on his 10. What What is his partner going to do? Exactly. And I I think I'm I'm potentially I'm I understand there's there's that concern, but I think conceptually from a conditional use permit, are we approving a a multi-family [Music] nonfee simple or are we approving a 20 fee simple parcels? unit uh project. Okay. Well, I need the ability to sell the units oneoff. Okay.

Okay. I I want that I want that privilege that right. So, if that means it's fee simple, then it's fee simple. That's that is what it means. Yeah, that's what it means. So, it have to be a fee simple project. Ultimately, you're going to have to plat this. Yeah. Yes. Right. And so, so you're looking for approval through the cup before you get into the plat process. That's correct. Yeah. And the point of the plat would be to create those those lots, right? So to city staff, um is this our process by the vehicle to get to that or would this come to us in a different fashion if if if we're looking at fee simple in the endgame here,

you know, in terms of that when we review this, I know the dumpster question came up. Um if you look at our code, dumpsters are for multif family, not fe simple. If it was fee simple, then they would have their own cans. Um, in terms of reviewing this, uh, we would need to know the size of the lot or the plaid underneath like we've done at Claremont Yacht Club. Yeah. And in several of the other locations and that was not presented to us. We were looking at it as uh multifamily. Um and again that's something that just was brought to our attention just um so in terms that it would have to be looked at a little differently

um in terms of that and it's just again we reviewed it as a multif family project uh in terms of the dumpsters in terms of uh you know the the private road stuff like that so um okay so I think then uh perhaps unless The uh the applicant wants us to consider this and and approve this as a multif family rather than giving him the ability to consider this to be single family and sell off parcels and and and and lots that we need to table this uh to our next meeting so that we can bring this back with that that cup. Is that right?

Correct. Correct. Yes. Okay. table it to the next meeting. Okay. Um and that is October 7th. 7th. Okay. So, um I guess I would entertain a motion to table to October 7th. I'll set a motion. I'm sorry. I will set a motion to have this tabled uh resolution 2025-026R tabled to the next PNZ meeting which should be October Somebody help me out with it. 7th I thought it was the 6th October 7th. Is there a second? I second. Seconded by Commissioner May.

Any final discussion? All those in favor of table till October 7th say I. I. Any opposed? Chair votes eye as well. Motion carries 6. I hope he understand

and then I think uh I'm assuming Mr. Henchel and and staff, Mr. Gonzalez, you guys will work with with applicant and that way we we know what we're actually looking at and addressing here so that we can um make sure that we're all operating from the same standpoint. Okay. Okay. Item number four, ordinance number 2025-032, land development code amendment. Um, and before we get too far, I I know um this was a late ad to the agenda and so I wanted to uh ask the city attorney to just talk a little bit about timing and notices and and legalities and so forth so that uh because I know it's come up in questions and conversations.

I I appreciate the opportunity, Mr. Chair. So the the issue is um as probably most if not all of you know it arose uh as a almost like a public thing you know and and frankly uh there's a flag out there that's hard to miss. Um so it it became an issue that we had to look at as on the staff. Uh the city did have a code enforcement case pending not about the flag but about the pole. All right. And that that case has subsequently been withdrawn. I believe I don't believe that case is pending. Is that case pending? We pulled it back for now.

It's pulled back. It's not on the agenda. It's not on the next agenda. Um so what's happened is u someone on the city council has requested an amendment to the city code um that he believes will address this issue. And that uh got to staff. We've taken a look at it. has gone through multiple people. This was at the very end of last week. This is a not just politically sensitive, it's constitutionally sensitive issue. Um so what you have in front of you is not what I would call a finished product. It would benefit from your review and your consideration. Um and the reason why it's on your agenda now instead of later after it's been given more thought by staff is the fact that it is pressing. A lot of people want to do something about this and um we've been asked to take care of it. So the planning and zoning commission in order for you to make recommendation on ordinance, you don't have the same advertising requirements that the city council has. So city council has a statute and it has to run in the paper at least once. You don't have that requirement. Now, traditionally, your staff has done that for you, which is a great it's above and beyond what's required under the law, and it helps get us public input. It helps get all the feedback that you need. Um, so, uh, that step has been skipped. It we've done the legally the minimum required in terms of notice, um, in the interest of possibly getting it to the city council agenda as soon as possible. Um, now as I've indicated to you before, you'll see, for example, the Councilman Howard had an idea about how he wanted to address it that's in your packet. Uh, it's in the agenda packet. And the version that's in front of you is slightly different. And the reason again is that it's gone through multiple stages of review very quickly. And I'd be happy to answer any questions as they

come about, but really we're looking for your recommendation. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. I appreciate the clarification. I'm sure the my fellow commissioners do as well. Um, and so then we have before us the item ordinance number 2025-032. Um, is there a presenter for this item? I I think you've got it.

I just want to make sure. I didn't know if there was a process here if if uh if the council member was going to be here or um Okay. So then we will then move directly into um public portion of the meeting. So is there anyone here in the audience that would like to speak to ordinance number 2025-032 land development code amendment? If so, please come to the podium and state your name and address for the record. Anyone here to speak on this item? Item number four, ordinance number 2025-032. Seeing no one, we'll bring it back to the commission and we will start then with uh Commissioner Kramer. Thank you, Commissioner Bane. All right, Chairman. I I understand and respect the intent of ordinance 2022-0 through2 and I I believe we should proceed with caution. allowing unlimited flag pole heights without permits would create unintended issues. And I do realize that we now have the freedom to display the American Flag Act of 2005 provides federal protection to flag displays, but we have existing code and ordinances already in place. Um I I I don't want to get political. This feels to me a little bit like pandering right now. Um, you know, we've got a we got a big flag out there and what are we going to do about it? And and even more so, are more of these big flags going to crop up? I I probably display the American flag in front of my house. I have it with lights on it at night. So, I'm, you know, I make sure that I have have the lights on it. I'm proud to display that flag. Um, but to me, this I I I don't know that this ordinance is is is ne is is necessary. We have existing code which

already allows flag displays within reasonable limits. Um, and I know that the bigger the flag, the prouder American you are, but um, you know, are we going to make the same accommodation for other flags? I the American flag is very clearly protected, but can we have a big, you know, flag out there uh, representing other people's interests? So, um, and I also feel that that this weakens our, um, oversight by, you know, removing the permit requirements. Um, I'm going to wait and see what the rest of the commission says on this, but to me, it feels a lot like pandering right now.

Thank you, Commissioner Hoisington. I know I'm not understanding this um with my fellow commissioner um I don't understand the need to change to go and at what point what's the exemption that if someone should say they want to go beyond 30 like where do we Stop. I'm going to wait and hear what everyone else has to say because I'm just not understand.

All right. Thank you, Commissioner Teddona. And I got to do this from my seat, right? I can't stand or anything. All right. So, this one is a tough one. All right.

Um I I'll just read off my notes as I read through this. Um, and I'm sorry to start it like this, but in light of some of the gray area that was written into SB 180, I would agree with my fellow commissioners that we really need to try to whittle down the gray area here so that no one can exploit this. Okay. So, let's make sure the wording is right. My question would be, was a permit filed for that pole? Do we know how high that pole is?

Do we know how high the pole is? We do not have a confirmation of the height of the pole. I believe it was verbally conveyed to us 130 ft. Okay. So, and a permit was not applied. So, it's not So, that thing was just put in the ground. That's correct. Okay. It hasn't been approved. It hasn't been denied. Just put in the ground. That's exactly where we're at. Yes.

All right. So, let me come back to that. There is an equally very nice flag that flies over Toyota on 50. Do we know anything about the size of that pole? Yes, we do. Well, how high is that pole? 100 ft. 100 ft. Was that granted a variance? Was Is there a permit or is that just put in the ground? That was done when it was in the county. Yes, sir. Um, we have indication that it did get a permit for that one. So, it has an approved permit.

I haven't put my eyes on it. Everything we've read about it, it does. Yes. Okay. So would it be safe to say that that acts as a precedence and so the highest flag pole in our area is about 100 ft. Want to defer to Mr. Wah over there if it's as far as presidents? No, technically it's not a precedent, but it's been approved. I don't know who approved it. It wasn't It was definitely Lake County. Yeah, it was not the city. It was not the city.

All right. So then that that Thank you for that because it was it and just bear with me. I'm not the legal ease. So it may have been approved by Lake County, but it wasn't approved by the city of Clermont, which is going to be very interesting because as we know, sometimes the city and the county property kind of like overlap in here. So that begs the question and I'm sorry. Is the Toyota property on Lake County property or the city of Clermont property? After it was completely developed, the flag pulls up. It was a dealership. It was annexed into the city. So we took it all in. Okay. So that flag pole was basically grandfathered into the city.

That's correct.

Okay. All right. Okay. I'm sure we've all read some regulations or proper handling of a of of of the flag. We all know it cannot touch the ground. Um, depending on the height of the flag pole, there may or may need to be lights. Um, I don't know if we've actually reached out to any kind of color guard or honor guard to find out how the flag should be treated. Um, again, I'm just reading my notes, so just please bear with me. I think one of the concerns is because I I on the way here I passed by Camping World and that is one bit that that flag is bigger than my house. Okay. and I enlisted the day after 9/11. I served that flag honorably for 15 years. So, I am not up here to talk badly about it. I guess part of my concern is when a flag pole goes 100 ft or 130 ft and I understand that there's going to be engineering behind it. Um, how far deep is it in the ground? Can it withstand a cat 5 hurricane? What happens if that flag becomes a sale? Um, what happens if a flag and and if this is exploited? If somebody does something silly and stupid with this, do we get involved if your flag and I'm just throwing this out there is flying over my property? Okay. Is there a an airway right? I mean, I even found FAA documents that say if it's 200 feet, you got to get FAA approval and it's got

to be and not that we are. It's got to be outside of a 20,000 foot radius in case you're near a nearby airport. So, you're not in a flight line. And we're not. Leburg International Airport's about 25 miles away. So again, FAA cat five. What happens if you Listen, I I love my neighbors in Fox Chase and I trim their trees that crawl over my my fence. I don't care. It's okay. I don't break anybody's chops. Um, like I said, I might be the anomaly. If you've got this 40x60 ft flag waving over your house, you might, you know, or whatever, you might worry about what it's going to whip into. Is it going to pull something? Is it going to create damage? All right. In my opinion, also, the American flag shouldn't be used for political gain or as a tourist attraction. So, I'm sorry. Don't come down to my place of uh business so you could see this 40 by60 and then I'm going to grab you in with a free donut and buy your an RV. Okay, that that just doesn't fly with me. Um going back to the first question and I'm sorry to be so elongated but you asked for it. um the fact that we have something on our 130 ft pole that hasn't been approved that I will defer back to my fellow commissioner. We've already got codes here and the code says 55 ft. So if you want to fly something as grand as an American flag, instead of like testing our limits, put up four 50 foot poles and fly your flags. I work at John

Young on 50. On the way home, I pass plenty of or buildings and and commercial establishments that have more than one flag pole on their property flying the American flag. Nobody is out there putting up this 200 foot or 130 foot flag pole and flying one flag. So, I understand about the Constitution. I understand about his first amendment right to express himself, but I think this is overdoing it. I think the two states that he's in or the two cities that he's in are they're already complaining about it. Um I have two flags in my house. I fly one flag. I don't have a light so I bring it in at night and I have a flag in my garage. Um I have a flag as my screen saver. I mean, honestly, chair, that's all I really got. I I I don't know. I don't want to say Oh, boy. It's a tough spot, but and you know, the American flag should be the size of the moon, and we should all respect that flag for all the folks that came before us uh and sacrifice for that flag. But I just think in this particular case where there is a code, if I was coming in to build a a building and I wanted to put up a flag pole, I would be looking to see how far I could go. I'm just not going to say 55 ft is not high enough. I'm going up 130 ft and you guys deal with it. So maybe the approach should have been different to the city of Claremont. Um because then maybe another conversation could have

been said, "Listen, dude, we've got a 100footer outside of Toyota and we'll deal with, you know, we could give you a hundred, but there doesn't seem to have been any negotiation." And I think all of that is being hidden behind the greatest emblem that this country knows. That's me. Thank you, Commissioner May.

So, I looked at this as a different approach and um and I do agree with all the commissioners here that, you know, we do have a code. They did not uh come to you all for a permit. If they would have applied for a permit, I bet you 100% that permit maybe we would have said no, but the city of council would have probably said yes indeed. Like a variance.

A variance. Yeah. So, I mean, that could have been just a simple, hey, but he didn't do that, unfortunately. And he not only did he not do it here, but he also did not do it in Greenville, North Carolina or Sanwaqing County, California. Those two places, I think you had mentioned two. I think there's another one. Um, he did the uh Camping World did the same where they put up a 130 foot pool. And in Greenville they have a 3,200 foot American flag flying. That's the size of my house. Like if that thing flew that would cover my house that would cover like 300 car I mean two cars. I mean it can cause an accident. But anyways the point here is he didn't do the permit. We have the situation. The city is looking at us for a recommendation which is funny because sometimes we do recommendations and they're not heard. they're actually changed. So for me it's like okay well what I can do is provide what I think and hopefully somebody will listen on the council hopefully. So this is what I found out. Greenville, North Carolina decided to amend their code and we're not Greenville, we're city of Claremont. They decided to say, "Okay, we're going to amend to the 130 ft and allow for the 3200 square feet." What I see here is that for them, they actually had a definition, a maximum of a flag size and a maximum of a pole size. But in regards to this recommendation, there is no maximum. So that's why I think John when you were bringing up the permit of Toyota being

kind of like a good segue of a maximum or maybe it is the 130 ft as our maximum. I ju, you know, I I just can't I just can't recommend something without a a ceiling because for me, and I think I've said it over a couple emails that I've sent to staff in regards to what I think um you know, there's a difference also in regards to non-residential and residential districts. So I can see in a non-residential zoning district and we don't have that separation in here. I can see 130 foot pole especially on a main corridor. But I if we don't have that exemption on a residential zoning district and I know HOAs are protected because of uh Florida statute 720 I believe right 304 um where it limits it to 20 ft in an HOA but 25 but in a non-HOA I can just picture maybe one two can you imagine 10 flag poles at 200 feet or 130 feet wherever the council decides to or sorry it's unlimited a 400 foot flag pole in a residential property. So I just you know I would like to see a separation between non-residential and residential. I think that is the key there. Um not having a permit and I understand I guess the councilman's he's he's I can understand why he put that in there. But my problem with that is that we have to have a way to know who is putting up a flag pole. So even if it's not, we don't consider a permit

maybe in an application, but it can be a simple just like the tree permit. It's so simple. It's a one-pager and it basically says this is who I am. This is where I live. This is what I plan to do. Then it tells the city, "Oh, we're we got a 130 foot pole going at Bob Evans." That then requires the city to ask for the structural integrity through the licensed structural engineer. Because my problem is, how are you asking this person? You're not going to know who's putting up a flagpole if there's no permit, no application. So, how does someone know to provide a licensed structured engineer? And the only way they know that is maybe by reading the code. But some people don't read these codes. You know, maybe they'll call and say,

"You do not read the codes." Huh? Many people do not read the codes.

Thank you. So, so, so many people who won't read the code will say, "Okay, well, I'm going to put a flag pole. Hey, I don't need to do it because I'm putting an American flag on it. I'm exempt. I don't have to do a permit." So, you know, that's it. But they're not going to know because there's no piece of paper, you know. So, that's the only thing. And maybe don't call it a permit. Maybe a permit is a bad word, but an application of some sort. Um, let me see. And that also and that holds also true in regards to enforcement because we are exempting poles only if they have an American flag. So what if somebody decides to put a 200 foot flag pole and they put a P or a non-American flag? How does that get enforced?

As as it's written, it violates the code and the poll would be in violation. They could start a code case. Okay. If they had, the way it's written, if they have an American flag and one of those flags, it's not a violation. But are they allowed to have both flags on one pool? It is under under this section. Yes. But is that the right way? I mean, I it would be nice to have for you to determine.

No. And it's it's nice to have maybe the color guard to be consulted with. they they understand, you know, uh everything that deals with the waving. It can't be dirty. It can't be touching the, you know, I think having a color guard consultant would be helpful to you all. Just for clarification, the the code does allow three flags flown on one parcel, but the American flag has to be there for Yes, it's supposed to be flown, but you have to have the American flag to be exempt to this. Yes,

that's what I'm trying to Yes. As written. as written. It has to so Bob Evans can build a 200 that he can tell you, hey, I'm putting an American flag, but then he doesn't. He puts a Bob Evans flag. So then then he'd be in violation. He's in violation. But the only way to figure that out is by having a application, right?

Let's not call it a permit because maybe that's a bad word. An application. City says, "Oh, Bob Evans is putting a 200 foot. That's great. Let's ask for the structured engineer." Boom. Do it's in the file. they complied, you know, and then code enforcement will be out there and say, "Oh, they still have the American flag." Perfect. They're complying. Um, so that's I think the recommend Oh, no. I think I have some more. Uh, maximum height, size of flag. There's no mention of a size of flag. I know there was mention of size of flags in other codes that I've seen in other cities, but there's no mention of any size of flag. So, I don't know if that was considered in the for the flag poles that are 55 and lower. There is in the code,

right? But what about the ones that are 56 and over? Did a lot of research myself and there's they're all just recommendations. Okay. The largest I saw was 30 by 60 on a like aund I think it's 150 foot tall pole. Right. So, who makes that recommendation regards to size? I mean that makes a difference when it comes to structural because those that those hookers the bigger they are the heavier they get. Oh sure when load increases all that. Oh yeah. So I mean I would consider adding also a flag size as well as the maximum height um so that you could fly it at half mast as well.

Or yeah

as long as it doesn't touch the floor. So, um, application, no permit word, but application or checklist. I know you love checklists. Uh, I think I don't think I have anything else besides what I sent you all via email. I think that's it in regards to recommendations. I think they're good recommendations. I'm a proud American. My uncles fought in the war. I love that flag. So, what you guys decide, please put a ceiling on it, a max. That's all I ask. And separate the non-residential to the residential.

And that's it. Thank you, Mr. Yes. May I just add a couple things

quickly? So, good point. If the flag is going to be at half mast, if it's too large, it still can't touch the ground. Uh I think the other thing to consider too is and I'm not an engineer by any stretch of the imagination but at 100 ft 130 ft 200 ft the width of that pole has to get larger towards the ground. Now back in the day for every two feet you went up you had to go a foot in the ground. So that 130 foot pole and again I'm not an engineer. Is it 65 feet in the ground? Is it encased in concrete? Is there rebar? Because to commission uh commissioner's point, if we start willy-nillying this and somebody wants to put a 100 foot pole on a piece of property that might not be anchored properly, if that thing comes down, she's now 100 ft somewhere else that it's fallen upon. So, the application is a great idea. Somebody might has to do a site survey. We already know 55 ft is acceptable. And again, at the risk of being repetitive, if I'm up at 130 ft, I I don't know. Nobody knows anything about this flag that's flying at 130 ft, about the pole, about,

you know, how it's stuck in the ground that it might not move. So, and I I thank you for that. I appreciate you, sir. Thank you. Sorry about that. Um, Commissioner Neim. Yes. Uh, council, I have a question. Are we Because I read this packet so many times. Are we talking about Camping World or we talking about the size of the pole? Because I heard one two commissioners on to my left talk about Camping World. I haven't seen Camping World written on this. This is strictly.

You can't assume. Okay. This is an ordinance. We're going with the height of the pole. Correct. Am I right by saying that? I'm not sure what your question is. My question is, are we talking about Camping World? Are we talking about what the audience says is the height of the pole?

I I mean, I think we're talking about both. Okay, now I'm really Now you really confused me because all right, let me go for it. Florida chapter 720 HOA ordinances, not ordinances, but the rule says like Commissioner May stated, you cannot go, you can overwrite what your governing documents state because it's a flag pole and you're allowed to hang a flag pole as long as the United States flag is on top. also states that you could have an armed services and a P. That is it. Now, that's the Florida state that set those rules. We're not experts up here. We're a plan and zoning commission. That's number one. They have a height requirement. I don't see a height requirement, but I know for a fact there's a 55 height requirement of buildings in Claremont. That's well being said. Wellness way decided to come along in our backyard and build 80 eightstory buildings. So that's where we ran into the problem with the car dealership. We annexed it. We annexed the problem. We're not here to complain about what's over here and what's over there. We have something in front of us. We have that Claremont's asking us for our opinion and advice to pass this. Okay. So that explains exact. I'm trying to comprehend how. All right, I get it. Camping World, there's a big beautiful flag there. I love the flag. We all in this room love the flag. Okay, but number one, what I'm hearing, and I have to ask staff, they put this in

without even permission or did they put it in and get denied and put it in again? They didn't come to us at all. Okay, thank you. So there was no engineer report done to see if this is safe or not. Correct. We don't have any paperwork on it.

Thank you. Thank you. So that's a violation right there. Okay. Now I believe that we have antennas that are the same height as this. Two of them. one by Racetrack or Taco Bell and the other one by the Catholic Church by the ball field. They both have American flags on it. That's because it's camouflaged like that. Some do use trees, some use flag poles. Are you referring to the cell towers out there? That Yeah, the cell towers. I'm sorry, I didn't see considered uh some of them are considered camouflage towers in the form of a flag pole.

Correct. So there is no limit size if that's what I'm asking. Is there a ordinance for a limit size on a cell tower of a flag? They all have a some form of a conditional use permit that limits the height of them. Yes. What about the size of the flag? I'm not aware the size of the flag. In other words, what I'm asking does that fall under federal exemption under the recommendation of the size of the flag? It should. Yes, that's what we would we would defer to. Yes. Okay. I understand that. So, if I'm not mistaken, didn't we have a problem with the one on 12th Avenue that was told to remove

the flag from the cell tower? I'm not I believe there was one that was tattered and asked to be replaced, if that's what you're referring to. Not tattered. It was asked to be removed because it didn't belong there on the cell phone tower back in the days. I mean, you've been in Claremont for a long time. Yeah. You should know that. It's right down the block. I don't recall the specific scenario. I'm sorry. That's a fair answer, K. I'm not going to test you on that.

All right. I'm looking at this and the only loopholes that I see, general flag poles should be in 30 foot height. Okay. It says the height there, but it's exempt if it's an American flag. So, I would recommend to the council since our buildings are only 55 ft in height, make the height of a pole 55 ft unless it's a cell tower. It's plain and cut dry simple. And commissioner, I would offer to you I I think that's a mistake in the draft in front of you that it says 30 as it is because we have another code section does say 55. Exactly.

We can't have both. So really what's in front of you, no matter what happens, if well I should say if you decide to recommend it in any form um it should say well in this form it should be 55. It'll have to be amended. That is true. That's why I thought I read that's why I brought that up.

Okay, that's number one. Number two, he's they're just asking because this happened. All right. Now, we're gonna go after this guy because I mean, we're not now since you say we're talking about Camping World. His past is really bad. He was told not to do it in the other counties and he did it. He snobbed us. All right. One thing I don't stand is somebody who hides behind the American flag. Okay. Landed a freeing home of the brave. That is not being brave. Okay. So, I praise Mr. Kurt Henels who's in charge of code enforcement. Go after him. go after him big time. Okay. And I'm said and I I'll say that in front of the camera. This you're putting the safety at the Claremont residents at risk. That's all I have to say for now. Commission. I mean, uh, Mr. Chairman, I just I don't understand. I don't see anything in here saying something about Camping World. And we're talking about Camping World. But since you said we could talk about it, I thought we had to ask permission.

Yeah. I well and uh to your to your question, Commissioner Neimik, um and to your point, I I this is not specific to Camping World. It is stemming from the Camping World flag.

Um and I I I mean, we don't have Council Member Howard here tonight to to say that, but if if I'm reading social media posts correctly, that is why this is before us. um that that this is before us because of the Camping World flag. Um and that that the I believe the intent and again I'm basing it off of what has been written in social media is that this would then allow that specific flag pole and flag display to proceed without any code enforcement action. because this would change the code. So that it didn't ma it would it would essentially say it does not matter that they did not apply for a permit or it does not matter that they did not meet our code because we've changed it. We would allow them to have that because we have no as this is currently written. If there is a an American flag on a pole, there is no height restriction so long as so long as it complies with FAA rules and regs, there's a structural integrity of the flagpole that's certified by a licensed structural engineer, that it meets all setback requirements unless waved by a variance, And it displays the flag consistent with the flag code, which would include lighting, half masked, no tattered, proper proper uh uh care and and concern for the flag, etc. All of those requirements. If it meets those four things, that pole is exempt from our height

restrictions as written in this ordinance. Okay. In addition to that, this ordinance also says poles and structures erected solely for the display of the flag of the United States of America are exempt from permit requirements. So I read that as if I'm going to put up a let's say I want to do a 100 foot pole and I want one of the flags to be the the flag of the United States of America. Okay. Um then if that's the case uh my height restriction is exempt if this is in if this is the law of Claremont. But because it's not solely the American flag, I have to apply for a permit. So if you're mischievous or devious in nature, you might say, "Hey, this pole is just for the flag of the United States of America and then fly whatever else you want on it so that you don't have to pay for a permit." Now, would we would would we catch them? potentially, but our code enforcement typically does not go out and drive around and look at every parcel for every violation. Um, it's typically something that comes to the attention of and then potentially to to kind of where Mr. Wall was stating, then we now run into a situation where someone can say under this ordinance, well, how can you make this just for the American flag? And I think we all feel very strongly about displaying the flag, but how can you make this just about that flag constitutionally? How is that legal? I should be able to

do my Bob Evans flag with my American flag at 150 ft and not need a permit and not have a height restriction because hey, under constitutionality, a flag is a flag. you have to apply it from a viewpoint neutral standpoint. I think that's the the potential issues. Now, we would need someone to challenge us to that and and take us to court for that. Um, obviously that's, you know, that's up to someone to do if this were to be approved. Um, but I think that's what potentially this sets us up for by kind of creating two two categories of of polls and two categories of permits depending upon if the United States flag of the United States of America is included or not. And I think that's the the concern I'm hearing potentially from some of you. Um, you know, I I I moved to uh to Claremont from Shboen, Wisconsin, where the the largest flag in the the I think it's the nation, right? It's a because it's it's a it's a US flag.

400 foot pole. 400 foot pole. The flag is 70 by 40. It's 9,800 square 9,800 square feet 70 by 140 and and it weighs 250 lbs. Thank you.

Okay. So, let's just say that if it's if it's a 9800 ft flag at 250 lb and the flag here that is currently not in compliance, we think based off of the fact that we think a county permit was it was indicated that county permit was given for the Toyota and was grandfathered in. So, this was the only one that would potentially be out of compliance if it's 130 foot tall at 3200 square feet, which is what the Greenville, North Carolina situation is for Camping World, which by the way, that's 3/4 the size of a high school basketball court.

Um that we're probably looking at a flag that weighs what 100 or more pounds? 148,

right? um that in Wisconsin, I will tell you, I've seen a lot of weird weather in Wisconsin, but I've never seen a hurricane. Um and so, uh not to mention what that flag will then do potentially in, as Mr. Teddona mentioned, hurricane winds. And I will tell you that that that flag, if anyone's interested, it's on uh US 43 um in Shbboen at Acuity uh insurance. Um, and it's open to the public. It there's memorial, there's everything. Um, but they take that flag down in high wind situations

in proper compliance with the code. They they make a very big deal about this. Um, and and it is able to be flown at half mass. So the other thing to your point is which we haven't really covered and I don't know if it's we even want to sorry I get into my tangents but how do you maintain or have to maintenance that flag? Oh so just the cherry picker alone that's going to get you up to 130 ft. we all know you've got to drop your legs down and you know do we have a potential OSHA problem a safety

problem and I agree with that and part of part of me says it's not my concern if a private bit you know if we pass this it's up to the private business they've got to figure it out if they want to put one up right um but my concern to to Commissioner May's point is how do how does someone know that they even need to provide a structural engineer uh um report and comply with that if there's no process. So, we're just now we're putting even more on our city staff and our code enforcement staff and our planning and development staff to try to figure out, okay, there here's a flag. Here's a poll. It has an American flag, doesn't have an American flag. Which section of the code does it apply? Can it be flown? Is it in compliance with the flag code? Now, our city staff is deciding whether or not something's in compliance with the flag code because that's what we put in here as one of the four things that need to be met in order for it to be exempt from the height restriction. I just I feel like I understand that there is a desire to want to have proud display of the flag of the United States of America. Absolutely. 100% without a doubt. Is there a way to do that that does not jeopardize potential safety and security of people driving on a United States highway that if this thing did come off will most likely end up on or near. Um not to mention a structure where there is a a school where where children are housed during the day during the week. Um I I just and to to to Commissioner May's point about like I there are HOAs that are going to govern some things, but there's a a large section of our city that's not an HOA that would apply by this. So essentially down Minihaha Avenue, you could have a 100footer, 150

footer, a 300 footer, as long as a structural engineer says it's okay and it has

and it has an American flag. Um, so I I I just I think I I get maybe where the the desire to protect display of the flag is appropriate. Um, I I do have some concerns about the the con constitutionality and legalities of of the venture and also the safety security pieces of it and also the the the additional requirements we're now putting on city staff to say you now have to verify it complies with these things rather than um just maybe creating a situation where it's a a reasonable height that is allowable. um and uh especially in commercial or industrial areas that maybe delineates between residential and commercial and industrial. Um and also I'm ticked off because this is not Camping World's this this they didn't just appear in Claremont and do this out out of the whim out of out of proud display regardless of what their CEO says. um this is a now a pattern and we are falling into that pattern and my concern is that um that now you know we're essentially saying to a a big business um that hey don't worry about complying with whatever the rules are uh and we're cloaking it in patriotism because this one happens to involve the US flag um and saying it's okay um we you know if it if it invokes our spirit and our fighting uh uh country uh spirit and nature, we're going to allow it uh or we're just going to rewrite the rules for you.

Well, I'm sure if we shut off his water and electricity, he'd come to the bargaining table.

Yeah. Well, I and I'm not suggesting that, but I I I do have I just I I have some constitutionality. I have some of those concerns. I share those some of the same things. Um I I worry that that you know we potentially are creating we've we've gone from a scenario to now a potential situation over here of of code um when this you know if we take a breath we realize yes there's a strong need to address certain things and I understand urgency and timing but in in in rushing to that are we potentially creating more problems for our staff and for our community from a safety security standpoint and a legality constitutionality standpoint. Um, and not maybe sitting down with staff, sitting down with with experts and figuring out, okay, maybe this 55 thing doesn't quite work everywhere in our community. Where can we allow some polls that that increase that height that allow for a prouder, larger display of the United States flag? and um a and deal with Camping World through our variance and application and permit process and have them prove that these that it is okay structurally um to to to display so that we can be all proud of it and it can be a focal point for everyone. um they could have done that uh just like anyone else who wanted to go about uh doing something that didn't meet our code regardless of whether it was flag pole or not.

Yes. I have a couple quick questions for council me. So we a lot of this seems to be around the 2005 um freedom to display the American flag act but does that cover businesses? I believe that that act is specifically there to cover HOAs and prohibit them from putting anything there. But um my understanding is um the act does not apply to business like Camping World or any other commercial entities. Um so while you do a little research

No, I I have some notes. Um you're talking about the freedom display which we reference which is referenced in the ordinance. No, I mean it's it's not it does not cover commercial properties.

Exactly. So we're trying to So So if I go out and do something wrong, I'll just petition, you know, maybe I'll just go build me a tennis court next to my house. And then once somebody realizes I'm out of code, well, I'll just come in front of planning and zoning and ask for a variance to allow my my tennis court to be put in. It'll be okay after I've see I have a real problem with going back and changing the law to fix a problem that somebody else and again

again as as chairman BA has stated this camping world group has a a pattern of trying to make small towns like us look like we're anti-American because we try to try to enforce our existing code. So now we've got to come back in and as as Commissioner Dona said, we have no idea whether this thing was put in properly. That thing could fall down at any time because we did not have the oversight ahead of time and now we're going to try to go back in and pay all of us as unamerican because we don't, you know, we want to hold the rules when this person when this developer or or owner went in just did whatever they wanted to. They have a I mean it's not just it's multiple small towns across the country that they have done this and they're making a political statement grandstanding and now you know Commissioner Howard I'm shame on him but coming back and saying let's let's change the law to make these people okay that's pandering and I have a real problem with with this whole thing. The law was set up to protect homeowners and HOAs not businesses. So to reference this act is a desperate grasp a desperate grasp at straws to try to you know retrofit what they did in the past. So that specifically does not cover businesses and yet we're going to reference this act in here. I think we've just put a whole lot of work on our our team. We have ordinances we have we have everything in place that we need right now. Next question. If somebody want to put in and so this is my naivee if I wanted to build a fight currently and I wanted to do that the process would be I would come before planning and zoning correct and ask for a conditional use permit or what would be I'm not sure what would be appropriate variance if I wanted to put this in

now based on our laws if I want to put that flag pole I'm at the yach club if I want to put a 100 200 foot flag pole at the yach club we would recommend you come in for a variance request. Yes. Exactly. Exactly. So, there's already a process in place to handle this and if Camping World had followed that, we wouldn't be having this discussion. We wouldn't have Commissioner H or Mr. Howard trying to retrof put something in front of us to retrofit something that somebody's already done. I have a real problem with this. I'm I am not in favor. Yes, please,

staff. All right. I understand uh Toyota was annexed in the Jeep dealership. Was that annexed in as well? Do you rec? Okay, that's I'm testing you. I'm sorry. I I actually researched the Toyota today. I did not rearch the other one. The reason why I ask is because it looks like their poles are under 50 feet. Okay. Okay. And there's like 10 of them. along. So that's making a a nice statement instead of having one gigantic one that Yeah, that's the only reason I'm asking if it was annexed in because I don't think it was. But

I wasn't around when it was built. I believe it was in the city when that limits. Okay. Yeah. But see, that's what I'm trying to explain. That's a business, right? All right. They stayed within the 55 ft. Right. Right. Not not this other person. So, I just wanted to ask that question. I don't mean to delay this.

No, that's okay. So, I think I I'm hearing a lot of comments or questions or or um I'm not hearing unlike a lot of other items before us. I'm not hearing yeses and nos. I'm hearing I have some concerns. I have questions. Um a and we want to do what's right and legal. So, correct me if I'm wrong on that. So, I think, you know, realistically, we have a we have we have three options. We can we can move this and and recommend approval. We can move this and recommend denial or we can essentially uh table it and and say look um this needs to be worked on more because there are concerns with with with the language and the application and the constitutionality uh and the safety security of these things that maybe I in the in in the desire to get it on the agenda today weren't put forward in into the uh ordinance and into the conversation. I'm just summarizing where we stand um so that we can try to figure out because we have to take some sort of action on it tonight.

Well, I'll go ahead and put a motion forward to deny this. I'd like to make a motion that we deny ordinance. Okay. Can I stop you there? Robert's rules would allow us to make a motion and second it and then if you want to deny it, vote no. Okay. But make the motion in the affirmative to approve. Okay. So, if you just because you make the motion doesn't mean you support it. It just means you're putting it on the table to vote on it. I'll pass. Okay. All right. Mr. Chair, I just wonder if I could offer just a few comments. I'm sorry. I'll make Yes. No. No. No. Yes. I I don't want to get in front of a train, although that's part of my job. Um, just a couple points that have been raised that I I may be able to offer some perspective on.

Thank you.

Um, I don't take a position on it. I mean, personally, I think there's no such thing as too big of a flag. Uh, personally, someone mentioned draping the moon. Why not Jupiter? you know, um, but looking at the law here, um, there was an interesting point raised, and I don't know who raised it, about what happens if on a quarter acre residential lot, someone puts up a 300 foot pole, however big the flag is. And what I I think from a legal perspective, what this code amendment would do, all it would do is it would exempt them from city regulation. It doesn't mean that common law principles don't apply. Meaning in the old days, what if someone did this before cities had regulations like this? Well, there was the idea of nuisance. Okay? And and trespass and air even air rights have existed for a long time. So, I'm not saying one way or the other what would happen in that scenario, but I we do have legal mechanisms to address that kind of thing in the absence of regulation, for better or for worse. Um, another thing is, uh, you know, sometimes there we have a lot of examples even in Florida of rules and laws that they went away because they were unduly restrictive. So, for example, in South Florida, there was a case brought by the Institute of Justice, which is a third party, you know, not not for-profit litigation group. And there was a city that regulated, basically said you couldn't have front yard gardens. Couldn't have one. And so, someone said, "I'm going to make a case, a test case of this." They planted a front yard garden. They won the lawsuit. They said, you know, cities can get away with a lot, but they can't get away with saying you can't have a front yard garden. Um, it's not exactly on point

with your situation here, right? Because you you've raised the point that actually, yeah, we're we would be going back and and changing the law and they would not have a code case that would be be able to enforce based on the poll if you recommend and the city council approved. U but there's a lot of examples like that and even Justice Scalia once said that um you know if he was the king he wouldn't allow flag burning

you know he he used more colorful language I think he said something about bearded scruffy sandalwearing you know whatever that he wouldn't allow it but he had to vote to allow it because of the first amendment we have different first amendment issues here and I think it's um I think it's interesting I can't say for sure where it goes. It's your call and I think as the chair mentioned, you know, it's up to someone to challenge. Also, your your code enforcement, you'd be amazed at how much they do have to enforce in terms of the the the width. You know, the Florida building code, man, that thing is like and there's no I there's no way for me to know that whole thing. Um, you have NFPAs, NEC's. Um, so anyways, I just wanted for better force just to share that kind of stuff and I leave it to y'all.

Thank you very much. Okay, so I bring it back to the commission. Is there a motion? Yes. I'd like to send a motion for approval of the height of 55 ft, same as the building height of a pole. Okay. So, you want to amend what's in front of us? Well, it's technically what I'm reading was designed or written in a hurry and they what I'm reading it says 30 ft. Am I right, counselor, when you're telling me it should have been written certainly can't be 30. It would need to be 55. It would have to be 55, but the code already says 55. So, yeah.

All right. So, I'm recommended for approval on the appropriate height of 55. So, you're moving for approval of this ordinance as written. Okay. With the with the change of 30 to 55. Exactly. Okay. Of course, it's incorrect on a Gotcha. Thank you. Is there a second? I'm confused. Okay. The motion is approval of this ordinance as written with the exception of changing 30 to 55 to match what the actual code is. This is an a print error if I'm hearing correctly. That 30. But does that mean if we approve it, that means anything

anybody could put up a 200 foot flag without a permit as long as it has the American flag on it? So we still have even though we're saying that we want to change the wording to 55 ft, we still have the gray area that's already built into it.

So for general flag poles, the maximum height would be 55, not 30. for flag poles that also have the American flag would be no no height exemption and if it's solely the American flag would not be required to have a permit. That's what this is basically written as and that's what Mr. Neim is pushing forward so that we can vote on it. So, we just need a second on that if we want to uh proceed to a vote. I'll second it. Okay. See, it also states here, if I might, Mr. Chairman, that it also needs an engineer report.

Correct. All right. So, it's not just you could put anything up. It needs an engineer report saying it's safe to build and you can't go past 200 ft. So, that's why I'm saying just keep it at No. No. There's no requirement there. This as written, there is no maximum height requirement. I thought I read in here it said something about the federal. There is the FAA. The FAA, but that's what I'm talking about. But if but if the FAA,

our our ordinance does not restrict the height. What it says is that it has to comply with FAA rules and reg. So, whatever those rules and rigs are, if it's 200, if it's 50, if it's 5,000, I'm obviously being exaggerating, but whatever those rules are, we're saying it just has to match those rules and rigs. We're not going to say it's something equal to or less than,

but it states right here, sir. It says the inst it's on p. It's on it's on the second second page on the back. Okay. Okay. It states right here, installation complies with all acceptable federal Federal Aviation Administration FAA regulations and height restrictions. Correct? So, if we're approving it, it has to meet that requirement. Correct. That's what I'm saying. Correct. So, you need to be under 200 ft or else you're out of compliance with the FAA. You could go higher if it was lit possibly with the FAA. Correct. FAA could allow you to go 300 as long as it has three red lights on it.

It It does not actually restrict the height. It just says you have to comply with FAA. I must misread into it, but I don't anybody wants to put a 200 pole, right? But let's let's be realistic. Who's going to put up a 400t pole? Uh, Commissioner, this is the city of the the champions or choice of champions. There might be a race.

Okay, so clarification. It has been moved and seconded to approve the ordinance as written with the one change of where it mentions in 117-12 [Music] B6 and B6A 30 to 55. Okay. Does that make sense to everybody? Yes. Okay. Any final discussion? Seeing none. All those in favor say I. I. Mr. Neimik. All those opposed say nay. Nay. Nay. Nay. Nay.

And the chair votes nay as well. So the motion does not carry six with commissioner Neimik as I and the rest of the commission as nay. Or I'm sorry 15. Mhm. Can't do five. 15. Okay. So, that will go then to the city council and um I believe is it on first reading or slated to be first reading? First reading in the next at the next council meeting next week. Okay.

Um and uh that will go on there for their agenda. All right. Are there any other items before we adjourn? I thank everyone including staff, citizens, my fellow commissioners uh for working through tonight. We had a lot of uh uh really I think um fruitful and important conversations. So thank you very much. With that meeting ajourned

have a good rest of the night. Hry hungry. I I got 36 minutes to get to Time to go to bed.

You bet your book. Thanks for being easy on me. I said thanks for being easy on me.