Land Use & Zoning Committee, Kennethcity (Pinellas County): August 4, 2026

Transcript and record text

Search the transcript and record text

Closed captionsWhat was said at the meeting, transcribed Aug 5, 2026. Speech is not a decision.

The published text is longer than the displayed excerpt.
No speaker turns were supplied with this transcript.
This transcript has no source timestamps.
No speaker identities were supplied with this transcript.

Alright, sorry for my tardiness. We're gonna go ahead and get the meeting. Started easy land use and zoning. >> It is AUGUST 4th at 5 o'clock. And we're gonna go ahead and get started with introductions to left. >> Will land in district 3 visiting. >> Good afternoon. Total time or Tyrone o'clock. Mary District 9. And I'm here for Bill number 14 in the agenda. Thank you. >> About the no Reginald f and enjoy your district. 8. Testing where we go. Good afternoon. Rockland Johnson District 14, the West Side. >> Good evening. Rory Diamond District 13. The beaches, Joe Carlucci District 5. Good afternoon dollars District 11, Randy White District 12. Terrence Harvey Office of General Counsel. As well as playing department. Suzann Kelly planning department. Casey Cox planning department. Canaccord and Planning Department. >> All right. Welcome everybody. Thank you so much. We're going to go head and we're not going order on the agenda. So. First action item is going to be on Page 9. If everyone wants to turn there. And these are items that got tabled last week and now should be fully ready to go for action. So item number 16 is going to be our first action item committee members. So with that, we are going to go ahead and ask for ex parte communication at this time. Does anyone have ex parte communication on this bill? Council Johnson, you're recognized. >> Thanks, MISTER Chair. I rise to declare ex parte. I reached out to the applicant had some questions about it since they were less issues. I have not had a chance to file it, but this will be filed with logistics services. We just talk specifically about this particular project. What the next steps were. Thank you. >> Right on seconds. I've got a lot of experts fight to 4.37 Okay. Here we go. In the queue. Yeah. I want to declare ex parte on. 26 for 37. I net. In my office on JULY. 21st with Andre Blues Joseph, Michael Milton, Steve Match it. And we discussed all of the items that need to be addressed. Removing certainly zoning categories and traffic in this paperwork is being filed with legislative services and there's another one also too day, AUGUST. 4th ahead, a phone call with Michael Milton regarding one last item on the written description and going to be fine with legislative services. So with that, >> we will go ahead. We need to go to get the staff report for this are going to get a new one. Where did it? Okay. So we're going open the to get staff work for the second time. >> Thank you. This is pd rezoning 2026 for 37 which seeks to rezone approximately 7.1 4 acres from pd to pd. Another question is to amend the existing pt to add a commercial uses, including a hotel, an el parcels for retail and restaurant uses and related site improvements. The proposal retains the previously approved entitlement for up to 270 multifamily residential units. Staff evaluated the request for consistency with the 2045 comprehensive plan and found the proposal to be consistent with the community. General commercial land use designation and the site's existing future land use element cite specific policy. 4004.3, 6, the mixed use development promotes infill readout redevelopment within the urban Development area by utilizing existing infrastructure while providing a complimentary mix of residential and commercial uses, we find that beauty meets the internal and external criteria and find the proposal to be compatible with the surrounding development, which includes multi-family residential communities, commercial shopping centers, officers, churches and single-family homes. This is also commercial infill development appropriate for the commercial corridor along Atlantic Boulevard. So for these reasons and those in the staff report, we forward a recommendation of approval with 2 conditions listed in your agenda which are related to traffic. And this application was heard by the Planning Commission on JUNE 18th where there are no speakers in opposition and little discussion among the commissioners and they voted unanimously for a prove ul with the same 2 conditions. >> All right. Thank you so much for that. Do we get really good needed? You'll feel speaker cards and you know. No, okay. I just want to make sure I didn't see any cards or that was like a could a swan. So with that, what MR. Green are you here? A good. You felt a cart. Okay. Well, if you don't mind, just come on up in light. Give a summary of what we talked about. Please. With the community. Yes, you get your card later. Name and address. Get Andre Green. 1000 Riverside Avenue Suite 1600. I represent corner lot development. Saint Nicholas, Multifamily partners thank you to staff for the work they've done. Thank you to Vice PRESIDENT Current Lucci. Percent of the meeting with the residents for us too kind of discuss what was in pd and what uses we could agree to remove. That was a couple Mondays ago. We put conditions to to remove that. And I want to say Monday. Updated to written description to delete was a trucker until. 100 Kappa limited to 100. And 25 I rooms for hotel and amongst other things in the written description and then also outside, I had spoken with the residents and agreed to remove major automotive. And truck until truck stop is what I'm move truck rental. Just one. It would be good. Neighbors in the area mean all the developments that we you know, top notch. So we just want to work with the residents and and MAY a good project. Okay. Great. Thank you. Thank you for that summary with that, we have no speaker cards on. And so we will close the public hearing. All right. Motion is second on the amendment and planning department. Explain the amendment or just give us a brief overview. Was the written description in the conditions? >> Thank you. So on the planning department had 2 conditions and that we forwarded alleyways shall only be allowed pursuant to the review and approval of the planning Department and the Development Services Division meeting the requirements of the applicable city ordinances. And the second condition was unless waived by the chief of traffic engineering or their designee. A traffic study shall be undertaken by the developer upon pd verification and provided during the tense that review the methodology of the study shall be determined by the developers traffic engineer, the chief of the transportation planning where the designee and the chief of traffic engineering or their designee. And then we have 2 amendments. One is to touch her revised exhibit 3 that will actually be dated AUGUST 4th. And then this Second Amendment is to update a scrivener's error for the site plan date. >> And those incorporate all the changes that were just stated at the podium, correct. >> Correct. Yes. I know that the applicant had forwarded some conditions of approval of things that there were going to remove on. But we did have those included. Those were added after the fact. So I don't know if that's something that you all wanted to include, but I don't think that they would be necessary given that none of those items uses are listed in the right description that was received. >> Okay. So those conditions got corrected in the new written description. AUGUST 4th, correct. Okay. Okay. All right. We are good. And if there's any questions, go ahead and get in the queue. But we are seeing none. So all in favor of the amendment signify by saying Aye. We got. I have to remove the residents are likely to remove major automotive repair. That was literally just discussed a couple minutes ago, which is not in the written description. It is in the written decision. It is in the written description. They asked for me to remove it. Understood. And I can agree so have to got it. Stand. Stand by then. Okay. So we just passed that amendment. And this Cox, they can not be a condition now since they can't be in the written description. Yes, we can have that added as a condition. Okay. So we have a motion to second on the removal of major automotive repair truck into truck rental. Okay. Okay. We're good. We gotta we gotta taking a not out there from the community. So we have a motion to second any discussion, c 9, all in favor of the amendment signify by saying any opposed the many carries All right. Let's go ahead and roll up those amendments want to use the amendment. And we just had a motion to second on. The bill has twice amended. Known in the queue. So it's going up in about a culture that. >> 6 yeas, 0 nays by You've approved. 26 for 37. As amended. Thank you guys. Appreciate you, MR. Green and all the community members. Thank you so much for working with me. Our office coming out. >> Got a much better product there number 2. For action is going to be on Page 11 committee members turn to Page 11 item 1920, 26 for 77. We will open the public hearing and a staff report. >> Ordinance 2026 for 77 is for a small scale land use amendment to change 12.0 41 acres at 7, 4, 0, 1, Old Kings road from public building and facilities pbf to medium density residential mdr to allow for residential development. This is the site of the former Kings Trail Elementary school. Abutting the site to the southeast and northeast are apartment complexes which are designated as an Dr to the northwest is a former ymca swim facility. This parcel is also designated as mdr and it was rezoned in 2024. To develop residential uses. Residential uses. Are the predominant use in the area. Wilson High School which in the pbf Land use category is approximately 560 feet to the north of the subject site. And Baker Skinner Park, which is designated recreation and open space are less is approximately 1000 feet to the south southeast of the site. The subjects site is located on the collector Road, which is Old Kings Road with access to full urban services. The proposed amendment to mdr ensures that the residential character of the area will be maintained and provides a logical expansion of the existing mdr land use category surrounding the site. And Dr provides adequate land to accommodate population growth and offers the opportunity for development of a wide variety of housing types. For these reasons. And those in the staff report, the Planning Department recommends approval planning commission heard this item JULY 23rd there were some neighbors in opposition. Listed Several concerns that are really likely to discussed during the rezoning and the Planning Commission ultimately recommended approval unanimously with a vote 8 to 0. And I'm happy take any questions. All right. Thank you with that. We're going go to the speaker cards. >> First up, we have fought hard. Thank you, MR. CHAIRMAN pardoned 14. 31 Riverplace billboard. This site is currently a public buildings and facilities pbf one. >> One of order, commercial or in to show uses in the zoning code. The proposed lane use on the site is Tmb are. This is by far a down-zoning from what you have on the site to site currently allows, for instance, 70 feet of high. They could be go. They can you can raise one foot 3 feet for every one foot that you that you come in off of your side >> The Germans, it's has access to a collector road as was in the head by planning Department. The road has 86% of a capacity that that was that it was built for left is 14%. The being used at this point, the proposed to zoning will go through many of the issues that raise as part of the land use. But other that all will have questions on the ladies. Next we have Christie, >> Good evening, Chris. To Kenny address on file. By opposing 0, 4, 7, 7, It likely seems we're just an angry neighborhood trying to block progress or ruin a developer's. Bottom line and waste. This committee is valuable time. It looks like we're completely inflexible. The truth is we've spent months offering reasonable compromise conditions to protect public safety and neighborhood compatibility. The applicant's agent has flatly refused every single effort to collaborate because the rules state, the companion pd cannot be condition without the applicant's consent. And because the applicant refuses to grant it, there's no room left for negotiation or further discussion on the land. Use and how this application fails to legitimate public purpose requirement per their request. They've simply not showing how the pd will govern that requirement for this property. Everything needed for a sound to Niles already formally substantiated in the public record. We've chosen not to delay your hearing with repetitive speeches. We stand entirely on the recorded evidence because the applicant refuses to comply fully with the comprehensive plan and leaves our neighborhood vulnerable to many public purpose failures. As a result of poorly planned and redeveloped public land. We respectfully ask this committee to protect the rule of law. And tonight, this land use change from pbf one to mdr. Thank you. >> Okay. The following speakers checks that they do not wish to speak and are in opposition. Aimee Calfee, Gray Depot. Cherry Pope. Aj. Of a car. Are okay. Maybe he wished he doesn't want speak on this one the next one. And then we have some the series and opposition does not wish to speak in. >> At least Roche is in a position does not wish to speak. So with that, we will go ahead and close the public bring back Ben. Okay. So we have motion to second on the bill yeah, I'll just go and say for the land I don't have any issues there. I think a lot of the conditions are going to come in on the next bill. The pd. So with that, we've got no one in the queue and we have a motion a second. So it's open about that. >> 0 nays. >> I actually approved. 26 for 77 item number. 26 or sorry. Item number 2026. For 78 council members. Please declare any ex parte communication you have at this time. I think there should be some kind diamond recognized. >> Thank MARCH air rises clear ex parte communication. Yesterday I spoke with the applicants attorney Paul Martin. Very briefly, really just told me that this was coming I Took a look at it. Thank you. Alright, counselor White. You're recognized. >> The clerics or today I had the same conversation. Mission hard yesterday had a few questions answered that will be filed. >> Kuzma Johnson, you're recognized. MR. Chair. I rise to declare its I MR. Harden had some questions about what I saw on Friday. The 31st. >> That's being probably of city services. Thank you. >> Alright, Kuzma Gaffney. You're recognized. Thank you. Also let it Cook declares. Party also spoke in the starring Aslyum iPhone handsome. Didn't have any questions. >> And thing. Go foul. Legislative services. >> All right. >> Notice cues. So I'll go ahead and clear mind. >> I had a meeting on JULY 28th with the community and Paul Harden and that people could be legislative services. And then for just today at 04:00pm. I had another meeting with these pro. Should Christie Kenny in the Green Room and we discussed further condition. The site plan and then another one that I do the paperwork for, because I just had that as well on a 4 at. 4.45 With Paul hard in the Green Room to discuss the conditions on the remaining items of the site plan and the parking and other items and that paperwork will be filed with legislative services. Councilmember Johnson, you're recognized. >> MR. Cherry, I missed It's being filed with legislative services. Also had email and phone message from skinny as well. Again, publication of Services. Thank you. >> All right. Thank you, sir. Let's go ahead. And open the public or the public his staff court. >> Thank you. This is the companion p t 2026. For 78 which seeks to rezone approximately 12.4 1 acres at 7, 4, 0, one Old Kings road south from public buildings and facilities, one to apd to allow redevelopment of the former Kings Trail Elementary School site into 110 unit residential community consisting of townhomes. The cottages Stephens proposed rezoning to be consistent. The 2045 comprehensive plan with the proposed land use change and DR. The proposed mdr designation allows medium density residential development and support infill housing and established neighborhoods. The project meets 2045 comprehensive plan policies encouraging compact growth, diverse housing options and redevelopment. A former public facilities sites. The proposal meets requirements for internal and external compatibility. King's Road South as a collector road way currently operating at 14% capacity. The proposed development is estimated to generate 1000 daily trips in the corridor can accommodate this volume, stop exporting a condition, though traffic study will be required at civil plans. Civil site plan review. Surrounding uses include multifamily zone arm. Dd single family has owned 70 and a recently approved residential development to the West underarm da. The proposed housing tight matches establish development pattern along Old Kings Road south for these reasons. And those in the staff report before recommendation of approval with the 2 conditions in your agenda. His application was heard at the JULY 23rd Planning Commission hearing. There are several speakers in opposition who cited concerns about traffic, environmental impacts, 2 existing wetlands and the lack of need for additional density in the area. Overall, the commissioners agreed that the proposed development was consistent with the surrounding existing developments and voted unanimously for approval with the same 2 conditions. All right. Thank you so much. >> We will go head to speak cart. MR. Geffen, you're recognized. Experts say. >> Yes, thank you. I love the final edition. I as party also is office that they like 2 weeks ago as I get a date, we just discussed the project itself. Ingress, egress issues that she makes everything a final legislative services. >> I thank you so much. All right. First, the first big card, Paul hard pardoned 14 31 replace Boulevard take great umbrage of Ms Kenney's description of of our activity in this. >> In zoning within a week of for asking for a meeting. I met with her, went through all the issues that they had. And really we've addressed every one of them the site is pbf one. Now, as I said, one of the most intense is too short, not one of the most the most. As is traditional sowing in the zoning code. And, you know, we had a meeting after during the council meeting the other night with the neighborhood. They already have a cab had a cap on the number of units based on It had with with the the owners of joining property. That less than 2 years ago. Request cap number units and 110 units. And since that time, we have found a new written description putting on the camp they requested. They wanted us to build a road of it at a cost clubs close to 2 million dollars through somebody else's land that we don't own that we can take that. We can't force them to sell to us. We have immediate access onto a road that has 86% capacity over what was what was built built to do. There were 5 items on on their list. They want is to address the second one was a capacity of Jackson Electric Authority. We we have filed with the planning department the time of falling on the land use Map request the 2 who are. She's me a letter from from the j a saying that there was available capacity. So we comply with that one. There was a request that if we build holes housing for older adults that comply with the federal law. I told them that love is owning code doesn't require that and actually doesn't allow for doesn't a language in it. If we built those, we would, in fact comply with with those everything they asked for. We comply with except the road we can't build a 2 million dollar road across somebody else's land. When we have capacity on the road in the leaf running the site with regard to the conditions, the first condition, if the planning, if the public works department wants to has to have a traffic study will will do the traffic study. Transportation study using the methodology that we agree with them with regard to the second condition. However, that language is exactly what the plane Department playing commission came up with. But we are opposed to that second condition. We've plenty of parking on the site for the use that we're going provide. We don't need parking for guests. In fact, they those are yeah, well, we'll have questions. I'm sure. Thank you. Put words were opposed to the second condition. Okay. We have more expert to unique you me. >> know, do you want to declare okay? Councilmember areas going to clear ex parte? Chaired it making I had a expert and met with that. I actually spoke on the phone with the applicants, a pardon couple days ago. Going to be filed with to say services. Thank you. Have questions. But once we get we're going go through the rest speaker cards and then we'll keep the pope can open for questions. Alright, next, speaker Chrissy Kenny. >> Followed by a j. Laura Bacchus and at least brush. >> Good evening, Chris. To Kenny address on file and I oppose ordinance 4, 7, 8 as written myself along with the San Jose Neighborhood Association are not asking you to change Jacksonville laws. Neither asking you to impose new requirements or unreasonable burdens on this applicant. We're asking for one thing. Apply the law exactly as it already exists. Florida law does not require an application to be morally acceptable. It requires that this council changed the law governing this property. The applicant demonstrate through competent, substantial evidence that this beauty is fully consistent with our comprehensive plan. That burden belongs to the applicant. It does not belong to this neighborhood over the last several months. We've carefully reviewed this application. We've identified numerous areas where the application fails to demonstrate consistency with the comp plan. We documented those deficiencies cited the applicable policies and submitted everything into the public record. We're not asking you to resolve every disagreement but rather enforce 5 things, deficiencies that should have been addressed before this application was ever recommended for approval information that would transform assumptions into evidence and enforceable commitments. These items presented in the binders on record address the very issues the comp plan exists to protect transportation impacts, environmental stewardship, neighborhood compatibility, infrastructure planning, Unforcible development standards. 9 optional 9 in first with good intentions. The Planning Department's responsibility is to determine whether the applicant has demonstrated consistency with every applicable comp plan policy before recommending approval. The recommendation of approval on fine. Fine is not the legal standard for apd. Fine is not a finding of consistency. Fine is not competent. Substantial evidence and find does not create enforceable protections for neighborhoods. When we identify these deficiencies were told, have the applicant included the information we suggested to rim at remedy these deficiencies. Their application would have been excellent superior, if you will, yet not being the applicant Commission simply did not matter. The response should concern every citizen because the comp plan is not designed to reward minimal administrative review. It exist to ensure that legislative decisions are made only after necessary. Facts are fully known. The question before this committee is not whether this development might become prized into compliance. It's much simpler. How can this committee make the required finding a full consistency when the applicant is not supply the information necessary to demonstrate it. That is the very question Florida's Growth Management framework expects elected officials to ask before changing the law governing the piece of property. This neighborhood is not asking for protection. Perfection, not additional conditions. That additional promises, evidence, transparency, accountability. We're asking for compliance by reasonable remedies that the applicant should have satisfied from the very beginning because once this ordinance is adopted, it becomes law and the law requires more than fine. It requires proof. Thank u next. We have aj goes car. >> Hi, Good evening. My name is a j I stay within 250 feet. Do this Robert is going develop. I I respectfully request you defer to the question to the planning group. I stand under guard at on the evidence barred and our nation. Do or do what I'm going say. Yes, no. I mean, guns on is the blocking of all of variant is natural beauties. Leaks all around the that a lot properties to being do So that an off under their own really go to the leak. I think in morning commute going to be done before. So which probably cause sinkholes duck starting used to recruit a we maybe goes. I've noticed and the last 16 of them stay on this property. The last couple of years, how to buy a lot of room my back yard. You know, because I can see they're going sinking, I think, is in Cadiz flow because of collection legs. And, you know, the national, even as beat us to get all of the all of the surrounding area, they do. So that's my only concern. Apart from their records sealed Arrow. Y Les front alleges the rest of you to do boards and alerts or want to get into that. My concern is the board member. Oprah didn't hold a single with effect. That's a lot to say. Thank you. All right. Thank you, sir. When you go ahead and welcome council. Member Kevin Carrico. Thank you for joining us tonight. >> And next, we have Laura Baucus. >> I I'm Laura Baucus, my addresses on file and I oppose 4, 7, 8 as written. The section of Old Kings Road South between Saint Augustine Road and Powers Avenue where the Kings Trail School property is located. Does not meet current design standards for a suburban collector road weight. It has to 10 foot lanes. No shoulder, no parking or turn lanes. No bike lane. No jta bus route or stops. Was planned without regard for robotics. Spansion. Drainage ditches line about half of this section on both sides. King's Road South has 57 single-family homes that face the property in this section. The application states that access to the property will be by way of Old Kings Road South. According to an independent assessment by traffic engineer, Alston Chapman. The road currently has actual about 3600 daily trips and 2025. But the counts stations north of 2 leader road, not in this, not close to this property. The development of 110 single-family homes is expected to generate between 111200 daily trips, including peak hour trips. This would increase traffic in this section by over 30%. The connection at Old Kings Road MAY need left and right. Turn lanes. As a result. Consideration should be given to upgrading old Kings Road to collector standards, including 11 foot lanes and 4 foot paved shoulders. King's Road is a constrained right of way, which make it challenging to widen. Required roadway improvements to meet current design and safety standards would have significant impact neighboring homeowners and the cost to a developer to make these changes would be just substantial. According to the city Land development procedure, Spaniel pd code requires a local residential street to have a minimum pavement with of 24 feet. This suggests the internal roadway in this development will be wider. The panel, King's Road south, the collector. The planning Department has made a request to add a guest parking spot for every 3 units within the development. The representative for the school board and developers has stated that this is not needed or desirable if the planning department has asked for a fix to the design because it makes it safer and more functional. And the idea of a self-sustaining not Herndon. Some design for this pd has already failed. City standard to ensure that roadways are safe, durable and consistent with the city of Jacksonville's requirements. Please listen. >> All right. Thank you. Next, we have a lease Roche. >> Good evening, Elise. Brush address on record. Our goal was never to oppose this project as a whole. Our goal is to minimize the impact. The significant infill project has on our community. Our conditions are just nuisances or hurdles. We want the developer to jump through. They're well thought out inconsistent with the comprehensive plan. We've worked tirelessly to ensure our request to conditions are supported by competent, substantial evidence which we presented to you at last week's council meeting. We simply ask that those conditions be consider tonight. I had the pleasure of speaking with MR. Harden a couple of times this week. And I just like to give a summary our conversation and his position on our request to conditions. The applicant isn't interested in entertaining in gress egress from Powers Avenue va shared access easement along the rear of the ymca property. MR. Harden took the time to explain the right away buffer in 20 foot landscape buffer to me, which I greatly appreciate. But his client is not willing to provide single story. Structures along Old Kings Road South. Up until Thursday of last week, MR. Hurt and was under the impression that the cottage. Product his client wishes to build would be one story. But he found out that they are, in fact, 2 story structures and provided elevations for those. Products. He did say that he could lower the height limits to 30 feet, but that's not reflected on the revised written description. The applicant is not interested in preserving wetlands where the tree canopy nor are they willing to develop a project that is strictly provided providing housing for the elderly. That's where everything stands this evening. So I appreciate all of your time and consideration. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Next. >> The following speakers are in opposition but do not wish to speak any county in a position as an opposition. Cherry Pope is in a position in Smith. The series is opposition. >> And with that, get back to make you here. All right. We'll go ahead and we can close the public bringing back to committee for questions start looking through some of these conditions. So first, first off, all coming up, kind of kick it off to the I guess playing department can can someone explain what conditions we have in this amendment that we're about to move in. That would be good. >> Through the chair. So we have 2 conditions. We have the first one, which is unless waived by the chief of traffic engineering or their designee. A traffic study shall be undertaken by the developer upon pd verification and provided during the tense. That review the methodology of the study shall be determined by the developers. Traffic engineer, the chief of the transportation Planning division or their designee and the chief of traffic engineering or their designee and the second condition is parking shall be provided in accordance with part 6 of the zoning code for all uses if developed with cottages or townhomes, guess parking shall be provided at a minimum ratio of one parking space for every 3 residential units. >> All right. And we're going to go to councilmember Carrico for ex parte communication briefly, but it? Thank chair. Sorry for being tardy. But I do have a claim. Expect town as I did, have a phone call with pardoning called me. >> Monday and we discussed on his side of the story on the rezoning and we will put more details into our correspondents to Leslie of services and get that file. Thank you. Okay. Great. >> With that. The public areas close an hour and kind of open to date. So with that, accounts Johnson? >> Thank you, MR. Chair. I have questions. About the second condition. About parking. And and I pretty well. I do appreciate appreciate it being read to me, I want to understand it and I can see what's on the paper. So I don't need to read. But through the chair, I need some understanding. Part 6 of zoning code for all uses that sticks out to me. Does that mean the party needs to be put in a certain place or location? And assuming that we're going MISS Cox so through the chair, does that mean help me understand that? >> Through the chair to COUNCILMAN Johnson. So basically the way that part 6 zoning code is written is that there are different standards, depending on the use. So like a commercial restaurant is going to require say like one space for every 3 to 6,000 square feet of of gross floor area. And so in the zoning code, we have different parking standards for like single-family homes. The only require 2 spots. And then for town homes and cottages. We treat that as a multifamily type product. And require one space for every 3 units. And the reason that explicitly call this out here is because the applicant. Sot to waive that parking standard in the pd written description and we have just gotten concerns during later in the development process where a lot of these town home products. They come back because they don't have any guest parking and, you neighbors are complaining that people are parking on the street and at streets in those neighborhoods are not. They're belted out the 24 feet. So they have to come back in later trying to find a space to put the guest parking with the guest parking be in a certain location. Were. >> Through the chair. Yes. So it would be off of the street. So it's considered off-street parking so they would have designated spaces off of that are not on the actual individual. Lots and not on the street so arc would be away from the unit itself. That's what was a little confusing to me be like up because of the fun of the development. And you have to walk to the units that correct. Yes, or if it's a private road, they can kind of do like parallel parking off to the side of the street. But it just it's not on the physical lot in the driveway and it's not on the actual street. MR. Chair through the chair to MR. Harden, does that work for a little confusing for me? Because when I looked at the site, it looked like the guest parking would be more efficient if it were. In between. I mean. To have another space somewhere else away. Can you help me understand? Is this something that able to you and your client? >> No, that was the issue raised that the planning Commission meeting and in front of the council the other night no one wants to go visit. Some want to impart 5 houses down. Read that. And and if you listen to what she said, she said we we consider this a multi-family use. It's not a single-family use. This is this is personal on their own lot. The rule will known house. >> We won't we. We've offered to have one parking space in front of the show. The houses which we have room for the 31 foot wide. Lots at that location. So each of the houses are on the street, as you can see on the site plan, which is part of the written scripts will have space in front of it for a parking space. And that's where prefer that guests partying to occur. When you build these guest parking lots, it different places along the road. They ended up being storage locations, people part Are they part rv's? Is it ends up being a storage lot. And does it serve the purpose of guest parking in because these are not, in fact, multifamily use Prague, homes. They each have a space. If you look at the site plan, you'll see that they really do have room for 2 spaces on the driveway and and from the house we've included. Those is as part of the of the written description think parents has a copy of that. We have be Putin evidence and be used. Thank you before you take your seat, MR. Harden to starting to do I mean to a ox through the chair. >> Is do you does gets parking? Because I think there's a little bit of confusion while you MAY consider these multi-family based on what I saw in this side are seeing the site plan as well as what has been explained. It seems as though these are single family residences. Can the guest parking be contained within the parking that is there? So it's continuous or I think that and with all due respect, I do think there is a MISS Calculation on qualifying. This is multi-family. While they MAY be. Not the usual, but I do think they're single family. So I don't know that we can qualify that as such. But in looking at this specifically. My question is if they have a number of parking spaces that are above and beyond the number that it would take to satisfy parking in that unit. Would that satisfy the need for guest parking without having a separate guest parking area? Through the chair to COUNCILMAN Johnson? >> I mean, if the council sees fit for so the way that the code is written and when cottages were past, it was treated as a basic like a stand-alone townhome was the product. And so again, we treat Townhomes has a multifamily product, which is why we have the requirement for a guest parking spaces in addition to the parking on site for the PRESIDENT. Let me clarify, gets parking, not spaces area. Its guest parking spaces, but that's area away from the actual. You I mean, again, so it can be. >> It can be in front of the house itself. It just has to be a designated off-street parking spot whether or not they decide to cluster as like a parking lot like it does in area at the front of the residents or they want to have them kind of throughout. >> You say the unit, the spaces and I apologize. I understand because it's not kind of Joe here unit the spaces throughout the facility or the development must be labeled guess space. You can do it that way ever. We do our parking calculations. Yes, they have to be able to show that they're providing the one space for every 3 units. >> It does that work for you through the chair? Does that work for you? MR. Harden. >> No, it doesn't. I understand what Casey saying, but that's not the situation of these are not multi-family sites there. Described in the use as a single family site and it was described in the joining us, for instance, and that they don't have to have separate parking other locations. We're going to have parking on the on the side wall of being on the driveway for for one spaces, parking inside the garage for another space. And then there's room because the streets are wide for another space in front of each And there's room as you go around. If you look at the site plan, you'll you'll see that's the case. I understand the the issue, a We have a communication issue. But the the fact that there's there's single-family units and there's a parking space in front of them. I think solve that problem. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, MR. Chair. >> Alright Kuz Medina. You're recognized. Thank you. MISTER Chair actually actually wrote this bill in the cottages bill and I'm glad to see that developers are doing it. First of all, I understand where the neighbors are at. This is a classic case of transition where all on one side of the street, you've got median density residential, all of the other side of the street, single-family homes and really nice ones totally got where the neighbors are track if this were on the other side of the street on West side, I would be comfortable with given that it's on the side with and through residential. That's all that's around it. Plus the why for that on a parking bay. I would remove the condition. And here's why. This is literally why I think it's just a mistake and how he wrote the bill. So our what we envisioned with the cottages is that it's horizontal application of medium density and higher density residential. So you're going to get fewer units but much nicer, almost single-family homes. That was the goal. So you get essentially what our small houses and townhomes that are detached. And then when we wrote the bill, when we set up here and debated at the idea was that you would have a garage with one car in small driveway with one current and and there was never the only thing people ask is that we not do side by side between the units which they're not doing here. So personally, I'm comfortable with binding language to alleviate the need for just another parking lot because that's not how we envisioned this application of essentially what's smaller single-family homes that were carved out of our code. So that's where I'm at. I don't know what that language would be. Probably have to ask parents, but that look like because that condition doesn't make sense to me given what we were trying to do with these with this bill. Have to doubt that we can just remove that condition. I make the motion to accept these conditions and MR. Harden wants it and I'm not going to stop on the chair because this is district. But just without that, that condition. Let's let's let it play out if we can. Think I have a solution for the parking perfect on. >> Okay. >> And >> the council areas you want to speak. If you have speak on the parking, I can go ahead and address some of that. But if you have other, okay, good. Mean, we're all speaking in the parking in some when another, through the chair, essentially, I want to kind of go over what what we heard today. And the fact of the matter is that these are single family homes. >> Identity and not on homes or not, multifamily homes. When you look at historically a cottage, they are single-family homes. You have cottages in resorts, Margarita Ville or historic areas of town where they could be considered multi-family is. But that's not what's happening here. And like my colleague just mentioned, you know, one side of the road, you have multifamily. The side is single family. We had a similar cases in on to maybe about a year ago and the same exact scenario happened and we had to go with the composite central evidence and exactly what is in this case like that of single-family. So I feel comfortable voting the way got a vote tonight just because of the 5 of what we're looking at right now. But they said we're going to continue the conversation on that part. Thank you that. All right. So yeah. And kind take the. >> The rest, the lead here, MR. And you can stay up there because this is gonna be a couple of questions to you. So and that with the community multiple times, we in the green room and it with you in the green room regarding the parking. We all see the dilemma here, which is obviously were larger multi-family developments. Guest parking is a separate parking lot basically where you can go in park and then like watch your. Friend's house or whatever. This just kind of got wrapped into that. So What in these or 35 foot wide? Lots the right one feet. 31. Yes, sir. Okay. And is it a single-car garage? >> It. >> Some of them are single car, but most of them are larger than single-car garage. I don't want to say their double garages, but I have intentionally put the design in the rear in the written description that we would like to use for the committee. And it shows that there's room for 2 cars in driveway side by side or behind each other. Yes, on both sides, ok? So for for intents and purposes in clarification, the driveway is double wide for cars yet. Not quite double wide, but the 2 cars can park in the driveway side-by-side. Yeah, not just behind each other. Right? Okay. And then there's also room in front of the house which is really where people end up park. It And that was that was my point of what I asked why we're in the green Room, which is >> it? And is there a way to line guest parking along the street. >> Because getting the guest parking, you know, removing units. You said you were, you know, able to accommodate that. And but you were able to accommodate marking an lining guest spots along the street itself. To make sure that there is adequate space along the road >> like in front of people's houses are on the other side or whatever. So can we get that commitment? I've got if you if you look at the site plan I have, I think it does that. It shows there's room for >> parking spaces, but I want marked. You said you would paint them in line them. Not personally going to pay Nevada. No, but y'all will have it marked on the street. Is how of figure out what we could do market? Maybe every other one, something like that. Doesn't have to be every single house were not actually what you're saying. Yeah, but there will be what's the parking requirement case? Musk ox like 30 through the chair. It one space for every 3 residential units. >> effects 36. I think it's what I counted. Okay. That's where multi-family this is not multifamily. Okay. Single-family. Lots of people on. I understand that she just run the account that that's what trying we need. I will give you that count. >> Before Tuesday night. Okay. Do you want to? >> I can. I can. I can with all my parking on that. If you want to go ahead speak on this good. All right. Thank you, chair. I just want to. For the record. I live in the town and I have a neighbor. One of the neighbors called is called Kettering outside Grand Bill and they have a similar situation where they have guest parking labeled on the streets. Number 2, a time out every other on the road. It's terrible. Looks hideous. The on it. All right. But it's already there. So before you go in on this route, just know about aesthetics is going to make the neighborhood terrible. I personally believe the neighbor. I wouldn't want that. I wouldn't mind having some some assigned gets parking, maybe a little mark or something, but to actually haven't read on the road. It's a good look. Okay. Okay. Look at gun bill any time. You see one Just trying to just trying to make something work for the neighborhood's folks over there. So. >> MISS Alice, are you here? Come on down. Let's do. Let's do the fun work. What we can get this done here. Only if I get to enterprise. All right. You'll get a. Golden started. The end of the assignment. So when we met in the Green Room, y'all wanted to remove 6 units and accommodate the 3 additional parking spaces that can kind of fit inside each unit. Hardin said that that's not feasible. They're not willing to do that. We just asked if they would mark in line the streets too, identified parking that is sort of already there. That would that would be sort of like asking across the street down Hernando, whatever we're going to put on public parking, you know, where you can already park on the street. If you're going to come to your house, so were you stand or what is your group stand on? I guess the parking. Requirement issue that you'll have that raised at this point? >> I think that we would agree with COUNCILMAN Areas that it would be unbecoming to paint the street with guest parking. My concern really is in the staff report that city staff has already received complaints that. Parking is inadequate and high density neighborhoods. And I do understand that you are saying this is a single family. Neighborhood, but its dense, 110 units on 30 foot. Lots is dense. If there can be some accommodation. And I frankly don't know what that could be for some guest parking somewhere. I'm not an engineer. I don't know where that could be placed. I think it's appropriate. >> Cox, what is if if this was not cottages, if these were just rld 50, what would the parking guest parking requirement be? >> Through the chair, there is no guest parking requirement for single-family dwelling. So this is 2 parking spaces per dwelling. >> So as you >> kind of see the the dilemma here. It's in this weird in-between. We can't necessarily. Stipulate or require that cottages, which are single-family have the same parking requirement, has a actual multifamily, which is high density. This is medium density so I personally I don't think park is going to be issue at all. I think they're going park on the street. You're going your friends. And if there's a large party who's to say they want that they're going to fill up the entire neighborhood or their their entire neighborhood. They're not going to park across old kings into you, all's neighborhood, so to speak and walk into I just don't see that personally as an issue. Question, yes, sure. Good. Is there a parking requirement for our mda? >> Through the chair? I'm so it depends on whether it's a single family dwelling or a multi-family dwelling or a townhome, a cottage. So they all have different criteria. So multifamily for apartments is based on the amount of bedroom spaces. Town homes and cottages have the one guest space per a 3 units, single-family dwellings, just 2 spaces for the home. Got it. So defense. >> As it's written right now, that's the way it's written right now. However. The bill sponsor has kind of said maybe those mishap, but but let's let's parked this conversation for a second. And then we'll hear from a few other committee members before we move on to the next item that I have good husband. I just wanted to clarify because I was talking MR. Harvey and I just want to make sure everybody here understands is people understand. >> the applicants are not traveling under the cottageville and taking medium density residential and saying I'm gonna do that application. That's not what's happening here. They're running under 31 foot lot. Single family homes. Just so it's clear. So then they have that to you that your requirement what staff was doing is simply taking median density residential or multi family and saying, hey, this is kind of like that. And some of that's in the description. And therefore, they they loved it on. So there's no reason to change the college because as it stands today, as I understand it, okay, just want to make that clarification because you're going to see this again. And then if you want me to make a motion, I'm happy >> No, no, I hear And I think we're kind mixing words or Dyson was because the product that they're building is called cottages. But now we also have an actual policy program for colleges, whatever, but you're good for right now. Lease and MISTER Hardin, One kind of final question to you regarding the buffer along old Kings. We talked about this what I would what I would like to see read along love for long >> Kings. Okay. Yeah. The there's like 15, 15 or so on on >> For France trip, there's you have a a site plan. The part of the written description that >> that >> parents has it needs to be incorporate. We can use it, but it has 10 feet it in the backyard. There's a 20 foot road offer. Then there's additional 10 feet. And then there's the the area between the road and and that 10 Yes, and adds up at different places. >> And so in talk to me about the fence. Is there any fence line or anything along those the back of those homes right now Okay. There is not one shown in there but will be happy to put one in there. It was our intention to do one. Yes, okay. So we're going to make that a condition of that. The to make sure there is a fence along all of the backs of those facing case like that outside south facing uta. Yeah. All on how put that on that I mean, that's slightly in the Okay. Okay. We'll do that. And as far as planting live oak trees to give a little bit of a cleaner tonight, clear low, just more of a continuous look along. Okay. So it's not just clear cut white vinyl fence or would vinyl fence or whatever can we agree on plan team some live oak trees like every 15, 20 or whatever. Yet, I don't know what countries that be, but will before Tuesday night, we'll have a plan of planning schedule for that area. >> You'll have okay. And I'll have to get with you on that before I guess Tuesday and with the community because we don't just want 3 trees but wanted to obviously look. Like it's you. >> Yeah. You want that are gonna live, >> Yeah, we wanted to be you know what the arborists and everyone says is good. But All right. So we've got fans, the trees and is that MR. Harvey's I can get updated tonight or is that going to have to get updated kind of on the back in and we? >> Bring it out of the Florida it yet. So if you want to add bills as conditions tonight, you can it'll be in the posture for you all to vote on it on next Tuesday. If you wait, you'll have to either. Workshop and actually knows it's a land use map Amendment. There's a public hearing. There is a public hearing. Correct? But whether or not you guys want to wait to add that condition on the rezoning, which is what we're having anyway. You can add that condition tonight and not have to do that on Tuesday. Yeah, we want to tonight. Okay. Yeah. I don't have any objection that. So that would be they have just put him in for the state of for the record. Yeah. Go ahead and state. So there will be 3 conditions. One will be the first one that you have in there that based on the methodology between the city and the developer. Look on the traffic study. To that. There will be a fence. Place. >> Along the southern line of the the 20 foot road buffer. Yes, which is shown on that site plan. The parents has. >> And then 3, that that that's just inside or outside the fence which the neighbors want, they'll be your landscaping. I'll come up with a landscaping, land that. >> Okay. Yeah. We want we want like lands. Given that again, someone signs off on that says, you know, this is actually don't work. There and will pull utility lines everything. But yeah, those are the 3 conditions, MR. Harvey, I guess you got those. >> You need to use that site plan make it. That's likely is not part of the record right now. >> Okay. So that's condition that we have listed on here. >> Another amendment. Yep. And go rule them all up the amendment before you would be to attach revised exhibit 3 dated AUGUST 3rd, 2026. In the revised exhibit 4, which is the revised site plan dated AUGUST 3rd, 2026. As well. Okay. >> had to revise written description. Yes, that was the exhibit 3. Okay. Thank you. >> And was there a 30 foot height restriction in the new Because we want. Can you go to might? Can you get to the mic? >> There is a 35 foot hi to limit which is what which is what our nba is. When I proposed the 30 foot, I got a letter back from them saying they didn't want 30 feet. They wanted the 35 foot, but I'm happy to to change that. The 30 feet okay. >> As Elise, can you come down to confirm if you want 30 feet or not? And then we can hopefully wrap this up. >> For clarification, I said that. >> Give her some space ball having He likes me. I think there's a little cross there not that we didn't want the 30 foot height restriction. It just didn't solve our request for the single-story structures along Old Kings Road south. That was my comment. Not that we don't want the 30 foot height restriction understood. >> So would you like us to include that in there or is it? Yes, please. All right. Going at it in there, MR. Martin did agree to that act when he was already on. Yeah, we agreed to a 15 30, 30 foot height restriction as well. Change to 30. All right. So with that, do take those of individually, MISTER Harvey? Can we just vote on all those as one Big Amendment? >> Yes, we can roll them all up. I will repeat them to you to let you know what I have. Go ahead, Right. So we have the amendment which will attach a revised exhibit 3, which is the pd written description, dated AUGUST 3rd, there's a detach revised exhibit for which we've I, which is a revised site plan dated AUGUST 3rd, 2026, you guys will also be voting on the conditions which will be unless we buy the trafficker chief of traffic engineer. It does it need traffic steady, shall be undertaken by the developer upon pd verification that the fence along the southern line of the 20 foot road bit. Skis me that they will be a fence along the southern line of the 20 foot part of the Road of Old Kings Road skews an landscaping along the fence line as well. >> Can you come to the might sorry? We can't. We can't let you do it. You get. All in any questions on the amendment. All right. All in favor the amendment that was just read to you saying Aye, aye, any oppose the amendment areas. All right. We have a motion second on the bill to be amended with the conditions. And with that, we will open about requirements. >> 7 yeas, 0 nays. >> I actually approved. 26 for 78 with the conditions. All right. I will get with MR. Harden to recap the rest of any loose ends that come up. Neighborhood. We will get with you as well to make sure we go into next Tuesday, fully on the same page. All right. Could Thank you all. All right. That brings us now to Page 15 council members. Please turn to Page 15. >> We're gonna go to item number. 29 2026. For 87 Council is pleased to clear your ex parte communication at this time. Council related. You're recognized. Thank chair at a clear ex parte on JULY 29th that one 30 at met with MISTER Milton, MR. Kaplan, the property in 5 years and are on site to discuss. >> This bill, including the grade for experienced site plans and future plans. And this has been part legislative services. >> All right. Thank you so much for that. We're going to open the public hearing. His staff court. Thank you. Ordinance 2026. 47, which is also known as waiver road France 26 Dash 10. >> There's a waiver of road frontage that seeks to reduce the required minimum road frontage from 240 feet. 2. Should say 94 feet to allow for the redevelopment of the 3rd single family dwelling in the are acre zoning district. The subject property is a 3.0 4, 2 acre lot located along Girvin Road. Currently developed with to legally nonconforming single-family dwellings, as well as several accessory structures. The 780 square-foot home, which is the for this west on the property was built in 1970. And the 2,280 square foot home on the eastern portion was a replacement of an existing mobile home 2013, the applicant seeks to add a 3rd home to the property. Bring existing nonconforming structures into compliance through companion, administrative deviation, which 2026 for 88, which will hear next. Staff finds there are no practical difficulties in meeting the strict letter of the code as the property already exceeds allowed density with the 2 nonconforming homes. Approval would expanding nonconforming use and alter the character of the surrounding area. So Stephen, request inconsistent with the zoning code standards and Ford's a recommendation of denial. >> All right. Thank you so much for that. First speaker car just a moment. Followed by Michele sorrow and then we have John Caplan. So if show and John will come on down to the front so we can have you come speak next, MR. Milne floor is Justin my address on file. I just wanted to take a moment to thank you that were here. The last year for differing and allowing us the opportunity to be here and and speak the idea here is so that me and my wife, which is MR. Kaplan, granddaughter. With our 6 year-old son would be able to build a house on this property and it would allow us to live on this property with the rest of our family. And we would like to move his school's very close. It's a great school. I was a park elementary. We love the area. We want to stay in the area. And that's really all I've got a address to pin them. Thank you. All right. Thank you as Next, we have a show sorrow. >> The show so 15, 20 girvin road 3 to 2 to 5. I'm here to support this. I'm second generation of like you said 6 year old is the 4th generation. So we're just trying to keep all of us together and close in. You know, keep that going. It's a great place to be able to stay with with the family in and have us all together. It's, you know, and then my whole life. So it's great. Thank you. >> All right. Thank you. Nice have John Caplan. Yeah, my name is John Caplan. Greatly appreciate being able to have my family stay together. This means so much to me. Thank you for your time. All right. Thank you, sir. We have no speaker cards. And we have no in queues. Let's close public hearing and bring that committee. >> All right. We motion a second on the amendment. All in favor the minute signify by saying aye, any oppose the Medicare's. All right. We have motion second on the bill as amended counts related

Agenda textLand Use & Zoning Committee

Tuesday, August 4, 2026 5:00 PM City of Jacksonville 117 W. Duval Street Jacksonville, FL 32202 Agenda - Marked Council Chamber, 1st Floor, City Hall Land Use & Zoning Committee Joe Carlucci, Chair Rory Diamond, Vice Chair Raul Arias Kevin Carrico Reggie Gaffney, Jr. Rahman Johnson Randy White Legislative Assistant: Rebecca Bolton Council Research: Brandon Russell Office of General Counsel: Terrence Harvey Planning Dept.: Susan Kelly Planning Dept.: Helena Parola Planning Dept.: Erin Abney Planning Dept.: Kaysie Cox

Land Use & Zoning Committee Agenda - Marked August 4, 2026 COUNCIL RULE 4.505 DISRUPTION OF MEETING Any person who disrupts a regular meeting of the City Council, standing committees, special or select committees, sub-committees or any other public meeting presided over by a City Council Member may be forthwith barred, removed, or otherwise ejected, in the discretion of the presiding officer, from further attendance at that meeting. If necessary, due to the nature of the disruption, the audience may be cleared from the Council Chambers or meeting location in the discretion of the presiding officer. Any person who refuses to leave the City Council Chamber may be subject to arrest. Disruption of a meeting includes the following types of behaviors: 1) Any form of political campaigning or electioneering regarding a specific candidate or group of candidates in City elections; 2) Impeding the orderly progress of the meeting by shouting, yelling, whistling, chanting, singing, dancing, clapping, foot stomping, snapping fingers, cheering, jeering, using artificial noise makers or musical instruments, waving signs of any size, or engaging in any other display of excessive noise, sounds, or movement; 3) Displaying or waving signs of any sort, except where used to support the speaker’s presentation at the podium, and only where the sign is 21 inches by 21 inches or smaller in size and cannot be displayed in a manner which unreasonably obstructs the view of the dais for any member of the audience, regardless of message; 4) Audible noise from cellphones or other electronic devices; 5) Consumption of alcohol or controlled substances; 6) Making vulgar or offensive remarks or gestures, or using threatening language or gestures, including but not limited to pantomiming discharging a firearm, choking, or throat-cutting; 7) Refusing to stop speaking when his or her time has expired or is otherwise directed by the presiding officer to do so due to disruptive behavior as described herein; 8) Returning to the meeting after having been removed or ejected, or attempting to do so. Page 1 of 24

Land Use & Zoning Committee Agenda - Marked August 4, 2026 Meeting Convened: Meeting Adjourned: Attendance: All public hearings that were scheduled for 8/18/2026 are rescheduled 8/19/2026 pursuant to Ordinance 2026-568-E. Item/File No. Title History 2026-01221. OPEN PH CLOSE PH MOVE Applicant: Hunter Faulkner ORD Adopting a Small-Scale Amendmnt to the FLUM Series of the 2045 Comp Plan at 0 Old Kings Rd, btwn Acree Rd & Plummer Rd - (5.7± Acres) - AGR to LDR- Sandcastle Capital Holdings, LLC (R.E. # 002547-0002) (Appl # L-6091-25C) (Dist. 8-Gaffney Jr.) (Read) (LUZ) (PD & PC Apv) (Rezoning 2026-123) 2/24/26 CO Introduced: LUZ 3/3/26 LUZ Read 2nd & Rerefer 3/10/26 CO Read 2nd & Rerefer 3/24/26 CO PH Add'l 4/14/26 4/14/26 CO PH Cont'd 4/28/26 4/28/26 CO PH Cont'd 5/12/26 5/12/26 CO PH Cont'd 6/9/26 6/9/26 CO PH Cont'd 6/23/26 6/23/26 CO PH Cont'd 7/28/26 7/28/26 CO PH Cont'd 8/11/26 LUZ PH: 4/7/26, 4/21/26, 5/5/26, 6/2/26, 6/16/26, 7/21/26, 8/4/26 Public Hearing Pursuant to Sec 163.3187, F.S. & Ch 650, Pt 4, Ord Code - 3/24/26 & 4/14/26, 4/28/26, 5/12/26, 6/9/26, 6/23/26,7/28/26, 8/11/26 Page 2 of 24

Land Use & Zoning Committee Agenda - Marked August 4, 2026 2026-01232. EX-PARTE OPEN PH CLOSE PH AMEND MOVE Applicant: Hunter Faulkner ORD-Q Rezoning at 0 Old Kings Rd, btwn Acree Rd & Plummer Rd - (5.7± Acres) - AGR to PUD, to Permit Single-family Dwellings, as Described in the Old Kings Rd Manufactured Home PUD - Sandcastle Capital Holdings, LLC (R.E. # 002547-0002) (Appl # L-6091-25C) (Dist. 8-Gaffney Jr.) (Cox) (LUZ) (N CPAC Deny) (PD & PC Amd/Apv) (Small-Scale 2026-122) 2/24/26 CO Introduced: LUZ 3/3/26 LUZ Read 2nd & Rerefer 3/10/26 CO Read 2nd & Rerefer 3/24/26 CO PH Add'l 4/14/26 4/14/26 CO PH Cont'd 4/28/26 4/28/26 CO PH Cont'd 5/12/26 5/12/26 CO PH Cont'd 6/9/26 6/9/26 CO PH Cont'd 6/23/26 6/23/26 CO PH Cont'd 7/28/26 7/28/26 CO PH Cont'd 8/11/26 LUZ PH: 4/7/26, 4/21/26, 5/5/26, 6/2/26, 6/16/26, 7/21/26, 8/4/26 Public Hearing Pursuant to Ch 166, F.S. & C.R. 3.601 - 3/24/26 & 4/14/26, 4/28/26, 5/12/26, 6/9/26, 6/23/26, 7/28/26, 8/11/26 AMENDMENT: 1.Attaches Revised Exhibit 3 (revised Written Description dated July 11, 2026). 2. Attaches Revised Exhibit 4 (revised Site Plan dated May 6, 2026). 2026-01243. DEFER (PH Next Cycle 11/17/26) ORD Adopting a Small-Scale Amendmnt to the FLUM Series of the 2045 Comp Plan at 0 Rampart Rd, btwn Collins Rd & Park City Dr - (25.55± Acres) - MDR to BP - Collins Rd Properties I, LLC (R.E. # 015912-2800 (Portion)) (Appl # L-6079-25C) (Dist. 14-Johnson) (Read) (LUZ) (PD & PC Apv) (Rezoning 2026-125) 2/24/26 CO Introduced: LUZ 3/3/26 LUZ Read 2nd & Rerefer 3/10/26 CO Read 2nd & Rerefer 3/24/26 CO PH Add'l 4/14/26 4/14/26 CO PH Cont'd 5/26/26 5/26/26 CO PH Cont'd 7/28/26 7/28/26 CO PH Cont'd 11/24/26 LUZ PH: 4/7/26, 4/21/26, 5/19/26, 7/21/26, 11/17/26 Public Hearing Pursuant to Sec 163.3187, F.S. & Ch 650, Pt 4, Ord Code - 3/24/26 & 4/14/26, 5/26/26, 7/28/26, 11/24/26 Page 3 of 24

Land Use & Zoning Committee Agenda - Marked August 4, 2026 2026-01254. DEFER (PH Next Cycle 11/17/26) ORD-Q Rezoning at 0 Rampart Rd, btwn Collins Rd & Park City Dr - (25.55± Acres) - PUD (2021-736-E) to PUD, to Permit Industrial Business Park & Office Uses, as Described in the Rampart & Collins PUD - Collins Rd Properties I, LLC (R.E. # 015912-2800 (Portion)) (Appl # L-6079-25C) (Dist. 14-Johnson) (Corrigan) (LUZ) (SW CPAC Deny) (PD & PC Amd/Apv) (Small-Scale 2026-124) 2/24/26 CO Introduced: LUZ 3/3/26 LUZ Read 2nd & Rerefer 3/10/26 CO Read 2nd & Rerefer 3/24/26 CO PH Add'l 4/14/26 4/14/26 CO PH Cont'd 5/26/26 5/26/26 CO PH Cont'd 7/28/26 7/28/26 CO PH Cont'd 11/24/26 LUZ PH: 4/7/26, 4/21/26, 5/19/26, 7/21/26, 11/17/26 Public Hearing Pursuant to Ch 166, F.S. & C.R. 3.601 - 3/24/26 & 4/14/26, 5/26/26, 7/28/26, 11/24/26 2026-01265. OPEN PH CONT PH 8/19/26 NO PD/PC REPORTS Applicant: Michael Herzberg ORD Adopting a Small-Scale Amendmnt to the FLUM Series of the 2045 Comp Plan at 6919 Pitts Rd, btwn New Kings Rd & Moncrief-Dinsmore Rd - (1.88± Acres) - LDR to CCG- Fluffy Buttons, LLC (R.E. # 003916-0020) (Appl # L-5928-24C) (Dist. 8-Gaffney Jr.) (Read) (LUZ) (Rezoning 2026-127) 2/24/26 CO Introduced: LUZ 3/3/26 LUZ Read 2nd & Rerefer 3/10/26 CO Read 2nd & Rerefer 3/24/26 CO PH Add'l 4/14/26 4/14/26 CO PH Cont'd 4/28/26 4/28/26 CO PH Cont'd 5/12/26 5/12/26 CO PH Cont'd 6/9/26 6/9/26 CO PH Cont'd 6/23/26 6/23/26 CO PH Cont'd 7/28/26 7/28/26 CO PH Cont'd 8/11/26 LUZ PH: 4/7/26, 4/21/26, 5/5/26, 6/2/26, 6/16/26, 7/21/26, 8/4/26 Public Hearing Pursuant to Sec 163.3187, F.S. & Ch 650, Pt 4, Ord Code - 3/24/26 & 4/14/26, 4/28/26, 5/12/26, 6/9/26, 6/23/26, 7/28/26, 8/11/26 Page 4 of 24

Land Use & Zoning Committee Agenda - Marked August 4, 2026 2026-01276. OPEN PH CONT PH 8/19/26 NO PD/PC REPORTS Applicant: Michael Herzberg ORD-Q Rezoning at 6919 Pitts Rd, 10650 New Kings Rd, & 0 New Kings Rd, btwn New Kings Rd & Moncrief Rd - (5.55± Acres) - RR-Acre & CCG-2 & PUD, to Permit the Operation of an Auto Sales Company, Primarily Operating as an Online Sales Company on the Property, as Described in the Pitts Road Auto PUD- Fluffy Buttons, LLC (R.E. # 003905-0000, 003906-0000 & 003916-0020) (Appl # L-5928-24C) (Dist. 8-Gaffney Jr.) (Corrigan) (LUZ) (N CPAC Deny) (Small-Scale 2026-126) 2/24/26 CO Introduced: LUZ 3/3/26 LUZ Read 2nd & Rerefer 3/10/26 CO Read 2nd & Rerefer 3/24/26 CO PH Add'l 4/14/26 4/14/26 CO PH Cont'd 4/28/26 4/28/26 CO PH Cont'd 5/12/26 5/12/26 CO PH Cont'd 6/9/26 6/9/26 CO PH Cont'd 6/23/26 6/23/26 CO PH Cont'd 7/28/26 7/28/26 CO PH Cont'd 8/11/26 LUZ PH: 4/7/26, 4/21/26, 5/5/26, 6/2/26, 6/16/26, 7/21/26, 8/4/26 Public Hearing Pursuant to Ch 166, F.S. & C.R. 3.601 - 3/24/26 & 4/14/26, 4/28/26, 5/12/26, 6/9/26, 6/23/26, 7/28/26, 8/11/26 2026-03727. EX-PARTE OPEN PH CLOSE PH MOVE Applicant: Michael Herzberg ORD-Q Rezoning at 12020 Dunn Creek Rd, btwn Dunn Creek Cemetery Rd & Bardin Rd - (1.92± Acres) - RR-Acre to RLD-50 - Eigger Enterprise, LLC (R.E. # 106490-0050) (Appl # Z-6763) (Dist. Dist. 8-Gaffney, Jr.) (Abney) (LUZ) (N CPAC Deny) (PD & PC Apv) 5/12/26 CO Introduced: LUZ 5/19/26 LUZ Read 2nd & Rerefer 5/26/26 CO Read 2nd & Rerefer 6/9/26 CO PH Only LUZ PH: 6/16/26, 7/21/26 , 8/4/26 Public Hearing Pursuant to Ch 166, F.S. & C.R. 3.601 - 6/9/26 Page 5 of 24

Land Use & Zoning Committee Agenda - Marked August 4, 2026 2026-03768. OPEN PH CONT PH 9/1/26 (At the request of CM Peluso) ORD-MC re Home Occupations; Amend Secs 656.304 (Rural Residential Category), 656.305 (Low Density Residential Category), 656.306 (Medium Density Residential Category) & 656.307 (High Density Category), Subpt B (Residential Use Categories & Zoning Districts), Pt 3 (Schedule of District Regulations), Ch 656 (Zoning Code), Ord Code; Amend Sec 656.311 (Residential-Professional-Institutional Category), Subpt C (Commercial Use Categories & Zoning Districts), Pt 3 (Schedule of District Regulations), Ch 656 (Zoning Code), Ord Code; Amend Sec 656.331 (Agriculture), Subpart E (Miscellaneous Use Categories & Zoning Districts), Pt 3 (Schedule of District Regulations), Ch 656 (Zoning Code), Ord Code; Amend Secs 656.368 (Springfield Historic Zoning Districts) & 656.369 (Springfield Performance Standards & Development Criteria), Subpt I (Springfield Zoning Overlay & Historic District Regulations), Pt 3 (Schedule of District Regulations), Ch 656 (Zoning Code), Ord Code; Amend Sec 656.401 (Performance Standards & Development Criteria), Subpt a (Performance Standards & Development Criteria), Pt 4 (Supplementary Regulations), Ch 656 (Zoning Code), Ord Code, to Modify Home Occupation Requirements Consistent with State Statute (Reingold) (Introduced by CMs Peluso & Miller) (PD & PC Apv) 5/12/26 CO Introduced: R, LUZ 5/18/26 R Read 2nd & Rerefer 5/19/26 LUZ Read 2nd & Rerefer 5/26/26 CO Read 2nd & Rerefer 6/9/26 CO PH Add'l 6/23/26 6/23/26 CO PH Cont'd 7/28/26 7/28/26 CO PH Cont'd 8/11/26 LUZ PH: 6/16/26, 7/21/26, 8/4/26 Public Hearing Pursuant to Ch 166, F.S. & C.R. 3.601 - 6/9/26 & 6/23/26, 7/28/26, 8/11/26 Page 6 of 24

Land Use & Zoning Committee Agenda - Marked August 4, 2026 2026-04209. EX-PARTE OPEN PH CLOSE PH MOVE Applicant: Cyndy Trimmer ORD-Q Amend Reso 74-690-243, as Amended, which Appvd a Dev Order for Belfort Station (a/k/a Cypress Plaza), a Dev of Regional Impact (DRI), Pursuant to an Appl for Change to a Previously Appvd Dev of Regional Impact (the AFC) Filed by CCP Baymeadows, LLC, & Dated 8/14/24, to Remove 7.64± Acres from the DRI; Finding That These Changes Are Consistent with the 2045 Comp Plan & the City Land Dev Regulations; Directing the LSD to Forward Certified Copies of this Ord to Authorized Agents (R.E. # 152578-2100) (Kelly) (LUZ) (PD Apv) (Companion 2026-421) 5/26/26 CO Introduced: LUZ 6/2/26 LUZ Read 2nd & Rerefer 6/9/26 CO Read 2nd & Rerefer 6/23/26 CO PH Add'l 7/28/26 7/28/26 CO PH Cont'd 8/11/26 LUZ PH: 7/21/26, 8/4/26 Public Hearing Pursuant to Ch 166, F.S. & C.R. 3.601 - 6/23/26 & 7/28/26, 8/11/26 2026-042110. EX-PARTE OPEN PH CLOSE PH AMEND MOVE (w/Condition) Applicant: Cyndy Trimmer ORD-Q Rezoning at 0 Baymeadows Wy W, btwn Baymeadows Wy & I-95 - (7.64± Acres) - PUD (1974-577-E) to PUD, to Permit Multi-Family Residential Dev, as Described in the Baymeadows Wy W PUD - CCP Baymeadows, LLC (R.E. # 152578-2100) (Appl # Z-5819) (Dist. 11-Arias) (Corrigan) (LUZ) (PD & PC Amd/Apv) (Companion 2026-420) 5/26/26 CO Introduced: LUZ 6/2/26 LUZ Read 2nd & Rerefer 6/9/26 CO Read 2nd & Rerefer 6/23/26 CO PH Add'l 7/28/26 7/28/26 CO PH Cont'd 8/11/26 LUZ PH: 7/21/26, 8/4/26 Public Hearing Pursuant to Ch 166, F.S. & C.R. 3.601 - 6/23/26 & 7/28/26, 8/11/26 PLANNING COMMISSION & PLANNING DEPARTMENT CONDITION: 1. Unless waived by the Chief of Traffic Engineering (or their designee), a traffic study shall be undertaken by the developer upon PUD verification and prior to the submission of civil plans. The methodology of the study shall be determined by the developer’s Traffic Engineer, the Chief of Transportation Planning (or their designee), and the Chief of Traffic Engineering (or their designee). Page 7 of 24

Land Use & Zoning Committee Agenda - Marked August 4, 2026 2026-043011. OPEN PH CLOSE PH MOVE Applicant: Brian Small ORD Adopting a Small-Scale Amendmnt to the FLUM Series of the 2045 Comp Plan by Changing the Future Land Use Designation at 505 Starratt Rd, btwn Starratt Rd & Perdue Rd - (1.82± Acres) - LDR to RPI - Nan L. Brown Trust (R.E. # 106643-0000) (Appl # L-6115-26C) (Dist. 8-Gaffney, Jr.) (Sheppard) (LUZ) (PD & PC Apv) (Rezoning 2026-431) 5/26/26 CO Introduced: LUZ 6/2/26 LUZ Read 2nd & Rerefer 6/9/26 CO Read 2nd & Rerefer 6/23/26 CO PH Add'l 7/28/26 7/28/26 CO PH Cont'd 8/11/26 LUZ PH: 7/21/26, 8/4/26 Public Hearing Pursuant to Sec 163.3187, F.S. & Ch 650, Pt 4, Ord Code - 6/23/26 & 7/28/26, 8/11/26 2026-043112. EX-PARTE OPEN PH CLOSE PH MOVE Applicant: Brian Small ORD-Q Rezoning at 505 Starratt Rd, btwn Starratt Rd & Perdue Rd - (1.82± Acres) - RLD-60 to CN - Nan L. Brown Trust (R.E. # 106643-0000) (Appl # L-6115-26C) (Dist. 8-Gaffney, Jr.) (Mehta) (LUZ) (PD & PC Apv) (Small-Scale 2026-430) 5/26/26 CO Introduced: LUZ 6/2/26 LUZ Read 2nd & Rerefer 6/9/26 CO Read 2nd & Rerefer 6/23/26 CO PH Add'l 7/28/26 7/28/26 CO PH Cont'd 8/11/26 LUZ PH: 7/21/26, 8/4/26 Public Hearing Pursuant to Ch 166, F.S. & C.R. 3.601 - 6/23/26 & 7/28/26, 8/11/26 2026-043413. EX-PARTE OPEN PH CLOSE PH AMEND MOVE Applicant: Lara Hipps ORD-Q Rezoning at 101 1st St W & 0 Laura St, btwn Pearl St N & Laura St N - (0.46± Acre) - CRO-S to PUD, to Permit a Banquet Hall & Event Space, as Described in the Karpeles Grand PUD - Jacksonville Museum Space, LLC (R.E. # 070825-0000 & 070824-0000) (Appl # Z-6814) (Dist. 7-Peluso) (Corrigan) (LUZ) (PD & PC Amd/Apv) 5/26/26 CO Introduced: LUZ 6/2/26 LUZ Read 2nd & Rerefer 6/9/26 CO Read 2nd & Rerefer 6/23/26 CO PH Only LUZ PH: 7/21/26, 8/4/26 Public Hearing Pursuant to Ch 166, F.S. & C.R. 3.601 - 6/23/26 AMENDMENT: 1. Attaches Revised Exhibit 3 (revised Written Description dated June 23, 2026). Page 8 of 24

Land Use & Zoning Committee Agenda - Marked August 4, 2026 2026-043514. EX-PARTE OPEN PH CLOSE PH AMEND MOVE Applicant: Peter King ORD-Q Rezoning at 0 Village Ln, E of I-295 btwn Herlong Rd & Normandy Blvd - (19.38± Acres) - RMD-A to PUD, to Permit a Multi-Family Housing Dev with Multiple Bldgs, as Described in the Ragland Landings PUD - North Florida Land Trust, Inc. (R.E. # 010399-0000 (Portion)) (Appl # Z-6983) (Dist. 9-Clark-Murray) (Mehta) (LUZ) (PD & PC Amd/Apv) 5/26/26 CO Introduced: LUZ 6/2/26 LUZ Read 2nd & Rerefer 6/9/26 CO Read 2nd & Rerefer 6/23/26 CO PH Only LUZ PH: 7/21/26, 8/4/26 Public Hearing Pursuant to Ch 166, F.S. & C.R. 3.601 - 6/23/26 AMENDMENT: 1. Attaches a Revised Exhibit 4 (revised Site Plan dated June 4, 2026). 2026-043615. DEFER (PH Next Cycle 8/19/26) Applicant: Justin Holmes ORD-Q Rezoning at 0 Old Kings Rd & 0 Acree Rd, btwn Acree Rd & New Kings Rd - (161.46± Acres) - PUD (2022-0851-E) to PUD, to Permit the Inclusion of Add’l Uses Including Industrial Light Uses, as Described in the Acree PUD - Acree JV, LLC (R.E. # 002507-0005, 002558-0300, & 002569-0020) (Appl # Z-7006) (Dist. 8-Gaffney, Jr.) (Corrigan) (LUZ) (N CPAC Deny) 5/26/26 CO Introduced: LUZ 6/2/26 LUZ Read 2nd & Rerefer 6/9/26 CO Read 2nd & Rerefer 6/23/26 CO PH Only LUZ PH: 7/21/26, 8/19/26 Public Hearing Pursuant to Ch 166, F.S. & C.R. 3.601 - 6/23/26 2026-043716. EX-PARTE OPEN PH CLOSE PH AMEND MOVE (w/Conditions) Applicant: Andre Green ORD-Q Rezoning at 0, 4066, 4132 Atlantic Blvd & 1635, 1649, 1657, 1667 Arletha Rd, btwn Art Museum Drive Rd & Beach Blvd - (7.14± Acres) - PUD (2022-0534-E) to PUD, to Permit the Inclusion of Add’l Uses Including Residential & Commercial Uses, as Described in the St. Nicholas PUD - St. Nicholas MF Partners, LLC (R.E. # 129485-0000, 129562-0010, 129480-0000, 129564-0000, 129479-0000, 129474-0000, 129482-0000, 129562-0020, & 129481-0000) (Appl # Z-7107) (Dist. 5-J. Carlucci) (Corrigan) (LUZ) (PD & PC Amd/Apv) 5/26/26 CO Introduced: LUZ 6/2/26 LUZ Read 2nd & Rerefer 6/9/26 CO Read 2nd & Rerefer 6/23/26 CO PH Only LUZ PH: 7/21/26, 8/4/26 Public Hearing Pursuant to Ch 166, F.S. & C.R. 3.601 - 6/23/26 Page 9 of 24

Land Use & Zoning Committee Agenda - Marked August 4, 2026 PLANNING DEPARTMENT & PLANNING COMMISSION CONDITIONS: 1. Alleyways shall only be allowed pursuant to the review and approval of the Planning Department and the Development Services Division meeting the requirements of the applicable City Ordinances. 2. Unless waived by the Chief of Traffic Engineering or their designee, a traffic study shall be undertaken by the developer upon PUD verification and provided during the 10-set review. The methodology of the study shall be determined by the developer’s Traffic Engineer, the Chief of the Transportation Planning (or their designee), and the Chief of Traffic Engineering (or their designee). AMENDMENT: 1. Attaches a Revised Exhibit 3 (revised PUD Written Description dated June 11, 2026). 2. Page3, Line 4: Scrivener’s error to change Site Plan from April 13, 2025 to August 13, 2025. 2026-047517. OPEN PH CLOSE PH MOVE Applicant: Brian Small ORD Adopting a Small-Scale Amendmnt to the FLUM Series of the 2045 Comp Plan at 0 Granite Pl, Btwn New Berlin Rd & I-295 - (1.91± Acres) - WD-WR to LI - Bird Dog Land Holdings, LLC (R.E. # 108820-0050) (Appl # L-6120-26C) (Dist. 2-Gay) (Tremante) (LUZ) (JWC Deny) (PD & PC Apv) (Rezoning 2026-476) 6/9/26 CO Introduced: LUZ, JWC 6/16/26 LUZ Read 2nd & Rerefer 6/23/26 CO Read 2nd & Rerefer 7/28/26 CO PH Add'l 8/11/26 LUZ PH: 8/4/26 Public Hearing Pursuant to Sec 163.3187, F.S. & Ch 650, Pt 4, Ord Code - 7/28/26 & 8/11/26 2026-047618. EX-PARTE OPEN PH CLOSE PH MOVE Applicant: Brian Small ORD-Q Rezoning at 0 Granite Pl, Btwn New Berlin Rd & I-295 - (1.91± Acres) - IW to IL- Bird Dog Land Holdings, LLC (R.E. # 108820-0050) (Appl # L-6120-26C) (Dist. 2-Gay) (Mehta) (LUZ) (PD & PC Apv) (Small-Scale 2026-475) 6/9/26 CO Introduced: LUZ 6/16/26 LUZ Read 2nd & Rerefer 6/23/26 CO Read 2nd & Rerefer 7/28/26 CO PH Add'l 8/11/26 LUZ PH: 8/4/26 Public Hearing Pursuant to Ch 166, F.S. & C.R. 3.601 - 7/28/26 & 8/11/26 Page 10 of 24

Land Use & Zoning Committee Agenda - Marked August 4, 2026 2026-047719. OPEN PH CLOSE PH MOVE Applicant: Paul Harden ORD Adopting a Small-Scale Amendmnt to the FLUM Series of the 2045 Comp Plan at 7401 Old Kings Rd S, Btwn Old Kings Rd S & Powers Ave - (12.41± Acres) - PBF to MDR - Duval County School Board (R.E. # 148000-0000) (Appl # L-6123-26C) (Dist. 5-J.Carlucci ) (Tremante) (LUZ) (PD & PC Apv) (Rezoning 2026-478) 6/9/26 CO Introduced: LUZ 6/16/26 LUZ Read 2nd & Rerefer 6/23/26 CO Read 2nd & Rerefer 7/28/26 CO PH Add'l 8/11/26 LUZ PH: 8/4/26 Public Hearing Pursuant to Sec 163.3187, F.S. & Ch 650, Pt 4, Ord Code - 7/28/26 & 8/11/26 2026-047820. EX-PARTE OPEN PH CLOSE PH AMEND MOVE (w/Conditions) Applicant: Paul Harden ORD-Q Rezoning at 7401 Old Kings Rd S, Btwn Old Kings Rd S & Powers Ave - (12.41± Acres) - PBF-1 to PUD to Permit Multifamily Residential Dwellings Including Townhomes & Cottage Homes, as Described in the Kings Trail PUD - Duval County School Board (R.E. # 148000-0000) (Appl # L-6123-26C) (Dist. 5-J. Carlucci) (Abney) (LUZ) (PD & PC Amd/Apv) (Small-Scale 2026-477) 6/9/26 CO Introduced: LUZ 6/16/26 LUZ Read 2nd & Rerefer 6/23/26 CO Read 2nd & Rerefer 7/28/26 CO PH Add'l 8/11/26 LUZ PH: 8/4/26 Public Hearing Pursuant to Ch 166, F.S. & C.R. 3.601 - 7/28/26 & 8/11/26 PLANNING DEPARTMENT & PLANNING COMMISSION CONDITIONS: 1. Unless waived by the Chief of Traffic Engineering or their designee, a traffic study shall be undertaken by the developer upon PUD verification and provided during the 10-set review. The methodology of the study shall be determined by the developer’s Traffic Engineer, the Chief of the Transportation Planning (or their designee), and the Chief of Traffic Engineering (or their designee). 2. Parking shall be provided in accordance with Part 6 of the Zoning Code for all uses. If developed with cottages or townhomes, guest parking shall be provided at a minimum ratio of one parking space for every three residential units. Page 11 of 24

Land Use & Zoning Committee Agenda - Marked August 4, 2026 2026-047921. OPEN PH CLOSE PH MOVE Applicant: Salomon Raas ORD Adopting a Small-Scale Amendmnt to the FLUM Series of the 2045 Comp Plan at 888 Franklin St, Btwn Franklin St & Van Burren St - (1.69± Acres) - MDR to HDR - JHA Franklin Arms, LLC (R.E. # 122486-0000) (Appl # L-6122-26C) (Dist. 7-Peluso) (Sheppard) (LUZ) (PD & PC Apv) (Rezoning 2026-480) 6/9/26 CO Introduced: LUZ 6/16/26 LUZ Read 2nd & Rerefer 6/23/26 CO Read 2nd & Rerefer 7/28/26 CO PH Add'l 8/11/26 LUZ PH: 8/4/26 Public Hearing Pursuant to Sec 163.3187, F.S. & Ch 650, Pt 4, Ord Code - 7/28/26 & 8/11/26 2026-048022. EX-PARTE OPEN PH CLOSE PH AMEND MOVE (w/Conditions) Applicant: Salomon Raas ORD-Q Rezoning at 888 Franklin St, Btwn Franklin St & Van Buren St - (1.69± Acres) - RMD-D to PUD to Generally Permit Affordable Senior Housing Units, as Described in the Franklin Arms PUD - JHA Franklin Arms, LLC (R.E. # 122486-0000) (Appl # L-6122-26C) (Dist. 7-Peluso) (Corrigan) (LUZ) (PD & PC Amd/Apv) (Small-Scale 2026-479) 6/9/26 CO Introduced: LUZ 6/16/26 LUZ Read 2nd & Rerefer 6/23/26 CO Read 2nd & Rerefer 7/28/26 CO PH Add'l 8/11/26 LUZ PH: 8/4/26 Public Hearing Pursuant to Ch 166, F.S. & C.R. 3.601 - 7/28/26 & 8/11/26 PLANNING DEPARTMENT & PLANNING COMMISSION CONDITIONS": 1. Unless waived by the Chief of Traffic Engineering (or their designee), a traffic study shall be undertaken by the developer upon PUD verification and prior to the submission of civil plans. The methodology of the study shall be determined by the developer’s Traffic Engineer, the Chief of Transportation Planning (or their designee), and the Chief of Traffic Engineering (or their designee). 2. A Designated Loading Zone shall be provided in accordance with Part 6 of the zoning Code. Page 12 of 24

Land Use & Zoning Committee Agenda - Marked August 4, 2026 2026-048123. OPEN PH CLOSE PH AMEND MOVE Applicant: Mark Prideaux ORD Adopting a Small-Scale Amendmnt to the FLUM Series of the 2045 Comp Plan at 1442 Bivins Rd, Btwn Hogan Settlement Rd & Normandy Blvd - (0.78± Acres) - CGC to LDR - Commercial Strategies Group, LLC (R.E. # 007630-0000) (Appl # L-6102-26C) (Dist. 12-White) (Fogg) (LUZ) (PD & PC Apv) (Rezoning 2026-482) 6/9/26 CO Introduced: LUZ 6/16/26 LUZ Read 2nd & Rerefer 6/23/26 CO Read 2nd & Rerefer 7/28/26 CO PH Add'l 8/11/26 LUZ PH: 8/4/26 Public Hearing Pursuant to Sec 163.3187, F.S. & Ch 650, Pt 4, Ord Code - 7/28/26 & 8/11/26 AMENDMENT: 1. Attaches a Revised Exhibit 2 . 2026-048224. EX-PARTE OPEN PH CLOSE PH MOVE Applicant: Mark Prideaux ORD-Q Rezoning at 1442 Bivens Rd, Btwn Hogans Settlement Rd & Normandy Blvd - (0.78± Acres) - CCG-1 to RLD-60 - Commercial Strategies Group, LLC (R.E. # 007630-0000) (Appl # L-6102-26C) (Dist. 12-Gay) (Cox) (LUZ) (PD & PC Apv) (Small-Scale 2026-481) 6/9/26 CO Introduced: LUZ 6/16/26 LUZ Read 2nd & Rerefer 6/23/26 CO Read 2nd & Rerefer 7/28/26 CO PH Add'l 8/11/26 LUZ PH: 8/4/26 Public Hearing Pursuant to Ch 166, F.S. & C.R. 3.601 - 7/28/26 & 8/11/26 2026-048325. EX-PARTE OPEN PH CLOSE PH AMEND MOVE Applicant: John McGuire ORD-Q Rezoning at 6411 Arlington Rd, Btwn Sprinkle Dr & Westdale Dr - (0.71± Acres) - PUD (2026-773-E) to PUD to Permit the Operation of a Thrift Store & Community Retail Center, as Described in the Foster Closet PUD - Pam, LLC (R.E. # 141488-0000) (Appl # Z-7238) (Dist. 1-Amaro) (Abney) (LUZ) (PD & PC Amd/Apv) 6/9/26 CO Introduced: LUZ 6/16/26 LUZ Read 2nd & Rerefer 6/23/26 CO Read 2nd & Rerefer 7/28/26 CO PH Only LUZ PH: 8/4/26 Public Hearing Pursuant to Ch 166, F.S. & C.R. 3.601 - 7/28/26 Page 13 of 24

Land Use & Zoning Committee Agenda - Marked August 4, 2026 AMENDMENT: 1. Attaches a Revised Exhibit 3 (revised Written Description dated July 16, 2026.) 2026-048426. EX-PARTE OPEN PH CLOSE PH MOVE Applicant: Curtis Hart ORD-Q Rezoning at 0 Old Gainesville Rd & 10571 Normandy Blvd, Btwn Norton Rd & Blair Rd - (1.41± Acres) - CO to CCG-1- 10565 Normandy Boulevard, LLC (R.E. # 012774-0010 & 012774-0020) (Appl # Z-7045) (Dist. 12-White) (Corrigan) (LUZ) (PD & PC Apv) 6/9/26 CO Introduced: LUZ 6/16/26 LUZ Read 2nd & Rerefer 6/23/26 CO Read 2nd & Rerefer 7/28/26 CO PH Only LUZ PH: 8/4/26 Public Hearing Pursuant to Ch 166, F.S. & C.R. 3.601 - 7/28/26 2026-048527. EX-PARTE OPEN PH CLOSE PH MOVE Applicant: Kristen Reed ORD-Q Rezoning at 1265 Kings Rd, Btwn Kings Rd & W 3rd St - (0.45± Acres) - CCG-2 to PUD to Permit the Property to Provide Compatible Commercial Development With the Area, as Described in the Community & Veteran Empowerment Center PUD - Jacksonville Urban League Economic & Community Development Foundation, Inc. (R.E. # 053955-0000) (Appl # Z-7009) (Dist. 7-Peluso) (Abney) (LUZ) (PD & PC Apv) 6/9/26 CO Introduced: LUZ 6/16/26 LUZ Read 2nd & Rerefer 6/23/26 CO Read 2nd & Rerefer 7/28/26 CO PH Only LUZ PH: 8/4/26 Public Hearing Pursuant to Ch 166, F.S. & C.R. 3.601 - 7/28/26 2026-048628. EX-PARTE OPEN PH CLOSE PH MOVE Applicant: Stephen Richardson ORD-Q Apv Zoning Exception (Appl E-26-26) at 3546 St. Johns Bluff Rd S, Btwn Beach Blvd & Town Center Parkway Which Includes the Retail Sale & Service of All Alcoholic Beverages Including Liquor, Beer/Wine for on-premises Consumption, for Baran Cafe, in CCG-1 (R.E. # 165411-9025 & 165411-9030) (Dist. 4- Carrico) (Cox) (LUZ) (PD Apv) 6/9/26 CO Introduced: LUZ 6/16/26 LUZ Read 2nd & Rerefer 6/23/26 CO PH Read 2nd & Rerefer LUZ PH: 7/21/26, 8/4/26 Public Hearing Pursuant to Ch 166, F.S. & C.R. 3.601 - 6/23/26 Page 14 of 24

Land Use & Zoning Committee Agenda - Marked August 4, 2026 2026-048729. EX-PARTE OPEN PH CLOSE PH AMEND MOVE Applicant: John Kaplan ORD-Q Apv the Waiver of Min Required Road Frontage (Appl WRF-26-10) at 1522 Girvin Rd, Btwn Girvin Rd & Ebbtide Ct - John Kaplan & Diane Kaplan - Req to Reduce the Min Road Frontage Requirements from 240 ft to 0 ft in RR-Acre (R.E. # 162188-0000) (Dist. 3-Lahnen) (Corrigan) (LUZ) (PD Deny) (Companion 2026-488) 6/9/26 CO Introduced: LUZ 6/16/26 LUZ Read 2nd & Rerefer 6/23/26 CO PH Read 2nd & Rerefer LUZ PH: 7/21/26, 8/4/26 Public Hearing Pursuant to Ch 166, F.S. & C.R. 3.601 - 6/23/26 AMENDMENT: 1. Page 1, lines 12 and 26: remove “240 feet to 0 feet” and replace with “240 feet to 94 feet”. 2026-048830. EX-PARTE OPEN PH CLOSE PH MOVE Applicant: John Kaplan ORD-Q Granting Administrative Deviation (Appl AD-26-29) 1522 Girvin Rd, Btwn Wonderwood Dre & Ebbtide Ct - John Kaplan & Diane Kaplan - Req to 1) Reduce the Required Side Yard Setback From 5 ft Min to 0 Feet & 2) Reduce Min Lot Width From 300 ft to 94 ft for 3 Homes in RR-Acre (R.E. # 162188-0000) (Dist. 3-Lahnen) (Corrigan) (LUZ) (PD Deny) (Companion 2026-487) 6/9/26 CO Introduced: LUZ 6/16/26 LUZ Read 2nd & Rerefer 6/23/26 CO PH Read 2nd & Rerefer LUZ PH: 7/21/26, 8/4/26 Public Hearing Pursuant to Ch 166, F.S. & C.R. 3.601 - 6/23/26 2026-052331. DEFER (PH Next Cycle 8/19/26) ORD Adopting a Small-Scale Amendmnt to the FLUM Series of the 2045 Comp Plan at 0 Yellow Water Rd, Btwn Normandy Blvd & Wells Rd - (49.87± Acres) - RR to AGR - Yellow Water Land Holdings, LLC (R.E. # 002275-0005 (Portion)) (Appl # L-6036-25C) (Dist. 12-White) (Sheppard) (LUZ)(Rezoning 2026-524) 6/23/26 CO Introduced: LUZ 7/21/26 LUZ Read 2nd & Rerefer 7/28/26 CO Read 2nd & Rerefer LUZ PH: 8/19/26 Public Hearing Pursuant to Sec 163.3187, F.S. & Ch 650, Pt 4, Ord Code - 8/11/26 & 8/25/26 Page 15 of 24

Land Use & Zoning Committee Agenda - Marked August 4, 2026 2026-052432. DEFER (PH Next Cycle 8/19/26) ORD-Q Rezoning at 0 Yellow Water Rd, Btwn Normandy Blvd & Wells Rd - (49.87± Acres) - PUD (2022-786-E) to PUD District, as Defined & Classified Under the Zoning Code, to Permit a Travel Trailer Park, as Described in Bridle Creek RV PUD - Yellow Water Land Holdings, LLC (R.E. # 002275-0005 (Portion)) (Appl # L-6036-25C) (Dist. 12-White) (Cox) (LUZ) (Small-Scale 2026-523) 6/9/26 CO Introduced: LUZ 7/21/26 LUZ Read 2nd & Rerefer 7/28/26 CO Read 2nd & Rerefer LUZ PH: 8/19/26 Public Hearing Pursuant to Ch 166, F.S. & C.R. 3.601 - 8/11/26 & 8/25/26 2026-052533. DEFER (PH Next Cycle 8/19/26) ORD Adopting a Small-Scale Amendmnt to the FLUM Series of the 2045 Comp Plan at 4427 Emerson St, Btwn Emerson St & Bills Rd - (0.37± Acres) - RPI to CGC - 4427 Emerson, LLC (R.E. # 135938-0000 (Portion)) (Appl # L-6117-26C) (Dist. 5-J. Carlucci) (Fogg) (LUZ) (Rezoning 2026-526) 6/23/26 CO Introduced: LUZ 7/21/26 LUZ Read 2nd & Rerefer 7/28/26 CO Read 2nd & Rerefer LUZ PH: 8/19/26 Public Hearing Pursuant to Sec 163.3187, F.S. & Ch 650, Pt 4, Ord Code - 8/11/26 & 8/25/26 2026-052634. DEFER (PH Next Cycle 8/19/26) ORD-Q Rezoning at 4427 Emerson St, Btwn Emerson St & Bills Rd - (0.37± Acres) - CRO to CCG-1 - 4427 Emerson, LLC (R.E. # 135938-0000 (Portion)) (Appl # L-6117-26C) (Dist. 5-J. Carlucci) (Martin) (LUZ) (Small-Scale 2026-525) 6/9/26 CO Introduced: LUZ 7/21/26 LUZ Read 2nd & Rerefer 7/28/26 CO Read 2nd & Rerefer LUZ PH: 8/19/26 Public Hearing Pursuant to Ch 166, F.S. & C.R. 3.601 - 8/11/26 & 8/25/26 Page 16 of 24

Land Use & Zoning Committee Agenda - Marked August 4, 2026 2026-052735. DEFER (PH Next Cycle 8/19/26) ORD Adopting a Small-Scale Amendmnt to the FLUM Series of the 2045 Comp Plan at 4730 Spring Glen Rd, Btwn I-95 & Englewood Ave - (0.35± Acres) - LDR to RPI - Rick Warming & Stacey Warming (R.E. # 127932-0005 (Portion)) (Appl # L-6125-26C) (Dist. 5-J. Carlucci) (Fogg) (LUZ) (Rezoning 2026-528) 6/23/26 CO Introduced: LUZ 7/21/26 LUZ Read 2nd & Rerefer 7/28/26 CO Read 2nd & Rerefer LUZ PH: 8/19/26 Public Hearing Pursuant to Sec 163.3187, F.S. & Ch 650, Pt 4, Ord Code - 8/11/26 & 8/25/26 2026-052836. DEFER (PH Next Cycle 8/19/26) ORD-Q Rezoning at 4730 Spring Glen Rd, Btwn I-95 & Englewood Ave - (0.35± Acres) - RLD-60 to CRO - Rick Warming & Stacey Warming (R.E. # 127932-0005 (Portion)) (Appl # L-6124-26C) (Dist. 5-J. Carlucci) (Mehta) (LUZ) (Small-Scale 2026-527) 6/9/26 CO Introduced: LUZ 7/21/26 LUZ Read 2nd & Rerefer 7/28/26 CO Read 2nd & Rerefer LUZ PH: 8/19/26 Public Hearing Pursuant to Ch 166, F.S. & C.R. 3.601 - 8/11/26 & 8/25/26 2026-052937. DEFER (PH Next Cycle 8/19/26) ORD Adopting a Small-Scale Amendmnt to the FLUM Series of the 2045 Comp Plan at 0 Gate Pkwy, Btwn Burnt Mill Rd & Point Meadows Dr - (10.64± Acres) - RBI to CGC - Gate Ventures, LLC (R.E. # 167741-4000 (Portion)) (Appl # L-6128-26C) (Dist. 11-Arias) (Loe) (LUZ) (Rezoning 2026-530) 6/23/26 CO Introduced: LUZ 7/21/26 LUZ Read 2nd & Rerefer 7/28/26 CO Read 2nd & Rerefer LUZ PH: 8/19/26 Public Hearing Pursuant to Sec 163.3187, F.S. & Ch 650, Pt 4, Ord Code - 8/11/26 & 8/25/26 Page 17 of 24

Land Use & Zoning Committee Agenda - Marked August 4, 2026 2026-053038. DEFER (PH Next Cycle 8/19/26) ORD-Q Rezoning at 0 Gate Pkwy, Btwn Burnt Mill Road & Point Meadows Dr - (15.46± Acres) - PUD (2015-240-E) to PUD to Permit Commercial Uses & a Plant Nursery on the Property, as Described in Gate Ventures PUD - Gate Ventures, LLC (R.E. # 166741-4000 (Portion)) (Appl # L-6128-26C) (Dist. 11-Arias) (Corrigan) (LUZ) (Small-Scale 2026-529) 6/9/26 CO Introduced: LUZ 7/21/26 LUZ Read 2nd & Rerefer 7/28/26 CO Read 2nd & Rerefer LUZ PH: 8/19/26 Public Hearing Pursuant to Ch 166, F.S. & C.R. 3.601 - 8/11/26 & 8/25/26 2026-053139. DEFER (PH Next Cycle 8/19/26) ORD-Q Rezoning at 7080 Wheat Rd, Btwn Demaggio Rd & George Wood Ln W - (0.73± Acres) - RR-Acre to RLD-50 - Hoose Homes and Investments, LLC (R.E. # 014464-0010) (Appl # Z-7219) (Dist. 14-Johnson) (Batteh) (LUZ) 6/9/26 CO Introduced: LUZ 7/21/26 LUZ Read 2nd & Rerefer 7/28/26 CO Read 2nd & Rerefer LUZ PH: 8/19/26 Public Hearing Pursuant to Ch 166, F.S. & C.R. 3.601 - 8/11/26 2026-053240. DEFER (PH Next Cycle 8/19/26) ORD-Q Rezoning at 0 Union Heights Rd, 0 Bob-o-link Rd E, & 7167 Old Kings Rd, Btwn Soutel Dr & Mockingbird Rd - (16.73± Acres) - IL to PUD to Permit the Development of a Concrete Batch Plant and Material Storage, as Described in the Soutel Industrial PUD - Preferred Materials, Inc. (R.E. # 003587-0000, 003589-0000, 003590-0000, 003588-0000, 003587-0050, 029973-0000, & 030092-0000) (Appl # Z-7232) (Dist. 10-Pittman) (Abney) (LUZ) 6/9/26 CO Introduced: LUZ 7/21/26 LUZ Read 2nd & Rerefer 7/28/26 CO Read 2nd & Rerefer LUZ PH: 8/19/26 Public Hearing Pursuant to Ch 166, F.S. & C.R. 3.601 - 8/11/26 Page 18 of 24

Land Use & Zoning Committee Agenda - Marked August 4, 2026 2026-053341. EX-PARTE OPEN PH CLOSE PH MOVE Applicant: Felicia Luke ORD-Q Apv Zoning Exception (Appl E-26-28) at 2030 Walnut St, Btwn 10th St E & Carmen St Requesting an Establishment or Facility Which Includes the Retail Sale & Service of All Alcoholic Beverages Including Liquor, Beer or Wine for on-premises Consumption, for the Hidden District, LLC (R.E. # 072113-0000) (Dist. 7-Peluso) (Martin) (LUZ) (PD Apv) (Companion: 2026-534) 6/23/26 CO Introduced: LUZ 7/21/26 LUZ Read 2nd & Rerefer 7/28/26 CO PH Read 2nd & Rerefer LUZ PH: 8/4/26 Public Hearing Pursuant to Ch 166, F.S. & C.R. 3.601 - 7/28/26 2026-053442. EX-PARTE OPEN PH CLOSE PH MOVE Applicant: Felicia Luke ORD-Q Granting Administrative Deviation (Appl AD-26-34) at 2030 Walnut St, Btwn 10th St E & Carmen St - 4 Loco Investors, LLC - Req to (1) Reduce Min No. of Off-Street Parking Spaces From 63 to 0 Spaces, (2) Reduce the N Uncomplimentary Land Use Buffer Width From 10 Ft to 0 Ft, (3) Reduce the N Buffer Trees From 10 to 0 Required Trees, & (4) Reduce the N Visual Screen From 6 Ft Tall & 85% Opaque to 4 Ft Tall & 0% Opacity, IL (R.E. # 072112-0000) (Dist. 7-Peluso) (Martin) (LUZ) (PD Apv) (Companion: 2026-533) 6/9/26 CO Introduced: LUZ 7/21/26 LUZ Read 2nd & Rerefer 7/28/26 CO PH Read 2nd & Rerefer LUZ PH: 8/4/26 Public Hearing Pursuant to Ch 166, F.S. & C.R. 3.601 - 7/28/26 2026-054443. EX-PARTE OPEN PH CLOSE PH AMEND MOVE Applicant: Richard Mullaney RESO-Q Concerning the Appeal of a Final Order of the Jax Historic Preservation Commission Denying Appl for COA, as Requested by Gina Teresi, Seeking to Replace the Remaining 20 Historic Windows in the Riverside/Avondale Historic Dist at 3855 Saint Johns Ave, Pursuant to Ch 307 (Historic Preservation & Protection), Pt 2 (Appellate Procedure), Ord Code; Adopting Recommended Findings & Conclusions of the LUZ Committee (COA-26-33533) (R.E. # 092818-0000) (Harvey) (LUZ) (PD Deny) 6/23/26 CO Introduced: LUZ 7/21/26 LUZ Read 2nd & Rerefer 7/28/26 CO Read 2nd & Rerefer LUZ PH: 8/4/26 AMENDMENT: 1. Grant or Deny Appeal Page 19 of 24

Land Use & Zoning Committee Agenda - Marked August 4, 2026 2026-055344. 2ND READING ORD Adopting a Small-Scale Amendmnt to the FLUM Series of the 2045 Comp Plan at 1414 Causey Ln, Btwn Monument Rd & Causey Ln - (2.53± Acres) - LDR to CN - Caraballo Living Trust (R.E. # 161286-0110) (Appl # L-6134-26C) (Dist. 2-Gay) (Loe) (LUZ) (Rezoning 2026-554) 7/78/26 CO Introduced: LUZ LUZ PH: 9/1/26 Public Hearing Pursuant to Sec 163.3187, F.S. & Ch 650, Pt 4, Ord Code - 8/25/26 & 9/8/26 2026-055445. 2ND READING ORD-Q Rezoning at 1414 Causey Ln, Btwn Monument Rd & Causey Ln - (2.53± Acres) - RLD-60 to CN - Caraballo Living Trust (R.E. # 161286-0110) (Appl # L-6134-26C) (Dist. 2-Gay) (Nagbe) (LUZ) (Small-Scale 2026-553) 7/28/26 CO Introduced: LUZ LUZ PH: 9/1/26 Public Hearing Pursuant to Ch 166, F.S. & C.R. 3.601 - 8/25/26 & 9/8/26 2026-055546. 2ND READING ORD-Q Rezoning at 0 Cahoon Rd, Baymar St & Vernell St - (0.25± Acres) - CCG-1 to CCG-2 - Vickers Storage, LLC. (R.E.# 005572-0000) (Appl # Z-7221) (Dist. 12-White) (Martin) (LUZ) 7/28/26 CO Introduced: LUZ LUZ PH: 9/1/26 Public Hearing Pursuant to Ch 166, F.S. & C.R. 3.601 - 8/25/26 2026-055647. 2ND READING ORD-Q Rezoning at 6302 Vine St, Btwn Vine St & Grove St - (7.29± Acres) - RR-ACRE to RLD-100A - Euell L. Udy Trust (R.E.# 021183-0300) (Appl # Z-7244) (Dist. 8-Gaffney Jr.) (Martin) (LUZ) 7/28/26 CO Introduced: LUZ LUZ PH: 9/1/26 Public Hearing Pursuant to Ch 166, F.S. & C.R. 3.601 - 8/25/26 Page 20 of 24

Land Use & Zoning Committee Agenda - Marked August 4, 2026 2026-055748. 2ND READING ORD-Q Rezoning at 7020 A C Skinner Pkwy, Btwn A C Skinner Pkwy & Belfort Rd - (15.41± Acres) - IBP to PUD to Permit Mixed Use Project Within the Existing Business Park, as Described in Plymouth Liberty Business Park PUD - Plymouth Liberty Business Park, LLC (R.E. # 152575-0825) (Appl # Z-7275) (Dist. 11-Arias) (Abney) (LUZ) (Small-Scale 2026-475) 7/28/26 CO Introduced: LUZ LUZ PH: 9/1/26 Public Hearing Pursuant to Ch 166, F.S. & C.R. 3.601 - 8/25/26 2026-055849. 2ND READING ORD-Q Rezoning at 0 Richardson Rd, Btwn New Kings Rd & Kinlock Dr - (9.05± Acres) - RLD-60 to RLD-40 - Trevor Moody (R.E. #130455-0100) (Appl # Z-7312) (Dist. 10-Pittman) (Cox) (LUZ) 7/28/26 CO Introduced: LUZ LUZ PH: 9/1/26 Public Hearing Pursuant to Ch 166, F.S. & C.R. 3.601 - 8/25/26 2026-055950. 2ND READING ORD-Q Rezoning at 0 Philips Hwy, Btwn St. Augustine Rd E & Emerson St - (5.14± Acres) - PUD (2025-861-E) to CCG-2 - LNS Philips, LLC (R.E. # 130455-0100) (Appl # Z-7354) (Dist. 5-J. Carlucci) (Cox) (LUZ) 7/28/26 CO Introduced: LUZ LUZ PH: 9/1/26 Public Hearing Pursuant to Ch 166, F.S. & C.R. 3.601 - 8/25/26 2026-056051. 2ND READING ORD-Q Apv Zoning Exception (Appl E-26-29) at 1043 & 1045 Park St, Btwn Oak St & Margaret St - 1043 Park, LLC & 1045 Park, LLC - Requesting: 1) an Estab or Facility Which Includes the Retail Sale & Svc of All Alcoholic Beverages Including Liquor, Beer/Wine for On-Premises Consumption, 2) Permanent Outside Sale & Svc, Meeting the Performance Standards & Dev Criteria Set Forth in Pt 4, & 3) a Nightclub, for FT JV Jacksonville, LLC, in CCG-1 (R.E. # 090342-0010 & 090342-0000) (Dist. 7-Peluso) (Batteh) (LUZ) 7/28/26 CO Introduced: LUZ LUZ PH: 9/1/26 Public Hearing Pursuant to Ch 166, F.S. & C.R. 3.601 - 8/25/26 Page 21 of 24

Land Use & Zoning Committee Agenda - Marked August 4, 2026 2026-056152. 2ND READING ORD-Q Apv Zoning Exception (Appl E-26-31) at 11192, 11150, 11140 & 11112 Normandy Blvd, Btwn Chaffee Rd S & Stratton Rd - Chaffee Sq Land Trust - Req an Estab or Facility Which Includes the Retail Sale & Svc of Beer & Wine for Off-Premises Consumption, in the PUD District, as Defined & Classified Under the Zoning Code (R.E. # 012853-0010, 012848-0000, 012848-0020 & 012848-0010) (Dist. 12-White) (Mehta) (LUZ) 7/28/26 CO Introduced: LUZ LUZ PH: 9/1/26 Public Hearing Pursuant to Ch 166, F.S. & C.R. 3.601 - 8/25/26 2026-056253. 2ND READING ORD-Q Apv Zoning Variance (Appl V-26-16) at 11192, 11150, 11140 & 11112 Normandy Blvd, Btwn Chaffee Rd S & Stratton Rd - Chaffee Square Land Trust - (1) Reduce Landscaping Rqmts of Sec 656.607(L), Ord. Code, Parking Lot Landscaping Matrix, & (2) Increase the Max Permitted Driveway Width to Adjoining Lots from 24 ft to 40 ft, in the PUD. (R.E. # 012853- 0010, 012848-0000, 012848-0020 & 012848-0010) (Dist. 12-White) (Mehta) (LUZ) 7/28/26 CO Introduced: LUZ LUZ PH: 9/1/26 Public Hearing Pursuant to Ch 166, F.S. & C.R. 3.601 - 8/25/26 2026-056354. 2ND READING ORD-Q Apv Zoning Exception (Appl E-26-33) at 5340 Normandy Blvd, Btwn Lenox Ave & Vincent St - Tobacco Galore, Inc. - Req an Estab or Facility Which Includes the Retail Sale & Svcs of All Alcoholic Beverages Including Liquor, Beer/Wine for On-Premises Consumption, in CCG-2 (R.E. #059701-000) (Dist. 9-Clark-Murray) (Nagbe) (LUZ) 7/28/26 CO Introduced: LUZ LUZ PH: 9/1/26 Public Hearing Pursuant to Ch 166, F.S. & C.R. 3.601 - 8/25/26 2026-056455. 2ND READING ORD-Q Apv Sign Waiver (Appl SW-26-08) at 4932 Sunbeam Rd, Btwn Wexfordchase Rd & Neal Dr - NE FL Builders Association, Inc. - Req to Reduce the Min Setback from 250 ft to 88 ft in CRO (R.E. # 149101-0000) (Dist. 5-J. Carlucci) (Mehta) (LUZ) 7/28/26 CO Introduced: LUZ LUZ PH: 9/1/26 Public Hearing Pursuant to Ch 166, F.S. & C.R. 3.601 - 8/25/26 Page 22 of 24

Land Use & Zoning Committee Agenda - Marked August 4, 2026 2026-056556. 2ND READING ORD-Q Apv Sign Waiver (Appl SW-26-09) at 9715 Atlantic Blvd, Btwn Monument Rd & Library Rd - Car Spa Atlantic Blvd. - Req to Reduce the Min Setback from 10 ft to 3 ft in CCG-2 (R.E. # 123027-0040) (Dist. 1-Amaro) (Mehta) (LUZ) 7/28/26 CO Introduced: LUZ LUZ PH: 9/1/26 Public Hearing Pursuant to Ch 166, F.S. & C.R. 3.601 - 8/25/26 2026-056657. 2ND READING ORD-Q Apv the Waiver of Min Required Road Frontage (Appl WRF-26-11) at 9140 Maxville-Middleburg Rd, Btwn Maxville-Middleburg Rd & Tobias Rd E - Jerod Lee - Req to Reduce the Min Road Frontage Requirements from 35 ft to 0 ft in AGR (R.E. # 001000-0030) (Dist. 12-White) (Mehta) (LUZ) 7/28/26 CO Introduced: LUZ LUZ PH: 9/1/26 Public Hearing Pursuant to Ch 166, F.S. & C.R. 3.601 - 8/25/26 2026-056758. 2ND READING ORD-Q Apv the Waiver of Min Required Road Frontage (Appl WRF-26-12) at 0 Alvin Ct, Btwn Alvin Rd & Connie Jean Rd - Jason Mixson & Teresa Mixson - Req to Reduce the Min Road Frontage Requirements from 80 ft to 0 ft in RLD-100A (R.E. # 015526-0154) (Dist. 14-Johnson) (Nagbe) (LUZ) 7/28/26 CO Introduced: LUZ LUZ PH: 9/1/26 Public Hearing Pursuant to Ch 166, F.S. & C.R. 3.601 - 8/25/26 2026-056959. 2ND READING ORD Rescheduling the Finance Committee, TEU Committee, & LUZ Committee Meetings of Tuesday, 5/18/27, to Wednesday, 5/19/27; Acknowledging the 1st Regular Meeting of the City Council in March 2027 Will Occur on Wednesday, 3/10/27, in Accordance with Council Rule 4.102 (Regular Council Meetings); Directing Approp Notification by the Chief of the LSD; Waiving Council Rule 2.201 (Meetings) to Auth the Rescheduling of the Standing Committee Meetings as Described Herein (Staffopoulos) (Introduced by CM Howland) 7/28/26 CO Introduced: R, TEU, F, LUZ Public Hearing Pursuant to Ch 166, F.S. & C.R. 3.601 - 8/11/26 Page 23 of 24

Land Use & Zoning Committee Agenda - Marked August 4, 2026 2026-059060. 2ND READING ORD-MC Repealing Sec 106.444 (Sale of Firearms; City Funding), Subpt E (Miscellaneous Provisions), Pt 4 (Fiscal Management), Ch 106 (Budget & Accounting Code), Sec 122.108 (Restrictions on Leases of City Property), Pt 1 (Municipal Buildings & Offices) & Sec 122.817 (Weapons & Firearms in Custody of Sheriff), Pt 8 (Tangible Personal Property), Ch 122 (Public Property), Ord Code, to Comply with the State of FL Preemption on Regulations Pertaining to Firearms; Amend Sec 122.502 (Weapons, Explosives & Flammable Materials), Subpt A (Airport Security), Pt 5 (Airport Property), Ch 122 (Public Property), Sec 420.213 (Explosives, Blasting Agents & Ammunition; Permits & Bonds Required), Pt 2 (Operational Provisions), Ch 420 (General Provisions), Sec 656.369 (Springfield Performance Standards & Development Criteria), Subpt I (Springfield Zoning Overlay & Historic District Regulations), Pt 3 (Schedule of District Regulations), Ch 656 (Zoning Code), & Sec 674.207 (Emergency Powers of Mayor), Pt 2 (Security, Disaster & Emergency Preparedness), Ch 674 (Disaster Preparedness & Civil Emergency), Ord Code, to Comply with the State of FL Preemption on Regulations Pertaining to Firearms; Prov for Codification Instructions (Staffopoulos) (Introduced by CM Howland) 7/28/26 CO Introduced: R, NCSPHS, LUZ LUZ PH: 9/1/26 Public Hearing Pursuant to Ch 166, F.S. & C.R. 3.601 - 8/25/26 & 9/8/26 NOTE: The next regular meeting will be held Wednesday, August 19, 2026. *****Note: Items may be added at the discretion of the Chair.***** Pursuant to the American with Disabilities Act, accommodations for persons with disabilities are available upon request. Please allow 1-2 business days notification to process; last minute requests will be accepted; but may not be possible to fulfill. Please contact Disabled Services Division at: V 904-255-5466, TTY-904-255-5476, or email your request to KaraT@coj.net. Page 24 of 24

Meeting record textLand Use & Zoning Committee — Closed Captions

Showing the first 24,000 of 188,109 characters. The full document is at the source.

Alright, sorry for my tardiness. We're gonna go ahead and get the meeting. Started easy land use and zoning. >> It is AUGUST 4th at 5 o'clock. And we're gonna go ahead and get started with introductions to left. >> Will land in district 3 visiting. >> Good afternoon. Total time or Tyrone o'clock. Mary District 9. And I'm here for Bill number 14 in the agenda. Thank you. >> About the no Reginald f and enjoy your district. 8. Testing where we go. Good afternoon. Rockland Johnson District 14, the West Side. >> Good evening. Rory Diamond District 13. The beaches, Joe Carlucci District 5. Good afternoon dollars District 11, Randy White District 12. Terrence Harvey Office of General Counsel. As well as playing department. Suzann Kelly planning department. Casey Cox planning department. Canaccord and Planning Department. >> All right. Welcome everybody. Thank you so much. We're going to go head and we're not going order on the agenda. So. First action item is going to be on Page 9. If everyone wants to turn there. And these are items that got tabled last week and now should be fully ready to go for action. So item number 16 is going to be our first action item committee members. So with that, we are going to go ahead and ask for ex parte communication at this time. Does anyone have ex parte communication on this bill? Council Johnson, you're recognized. >> Thanks, MISTER Chair. I rise to declare ex parte. I reached out to the applicant had some questions about it since they were less issues. I have not had a chance to file it, but this will be filed with logistics services. We just talk specifically about this particular project. What the next steps were. Thank you. >> Right on seconds. I've got a lot of experts fight to 4.37 Okay. Here we go. In the queue. Yeah. I want to declare ex parte on. 26 for 37. I net. In my office on JULY. 21st with Andre Blues Joseph, Michael Milton, Steve Match it. And we discussed all of the items that need to be addressed. Removing certainly zoning categories and traffic in this paperwork is being filed with legislative services and there's another one also too day, AUGUST. 4th ahead, a phone call with Michael Milton regarding one last item on the written description and going to be fine with legislative services. So with that, >> we will go ahead. We need to go to get the staff report for this are going to get a new one. Where did it? Okay. So we're going open the to get staff work for the second time. >> Thank you. This is pd rezoning 2026 for 37 which seeks to rezone approximately 7.1 4 acres from pd to pd. Another question is to amend the existing pt to add a commercial uses, including a hotel, an el parcels for retail and restaurant uses and related site improvements. The proposal retains the previously approved entitlement for up to 270 multifamily residential units. Staff evaluated the request for consistency with the 2045 comprehensive plan and found the proposal to be consistent with the community. General commercial land use designation and the site's existing future land use element cite specific policy. 4004.3, 6, the mixed use development promotes infill readout redevelopment within the urban Development area by utilizing existing infrastructure while providing a complimentary mix of residential and commercial uses, we find that beauty meets the internal and external criteria and find the proposal to be compatible with the surrounding development, which includes multi-family residential communities, commercial shopping centers, officers, churches and single-family homes. This is also commercial infill development appropriate for the commercial corridor along Atlantic Boulevard. So for these reasons and those in the staff report, we forward a recommendation of approval with 2 conditions listed in your agenda which are related to traffic. And this application was heard by the Planning Commission on JUNE 18th where there are no speakers in opposition and little discussion among the commissioners and they voted unanimously for a prove ul with the same 2 conditions. >> All right. Thank you so much for that. Do we get really good needed? You'll feel speaker cards and you know. No, okay. I just want to make sure I didn't see any cards or that was like a could a swan. So with that, what MR. Green are you here? A good. You felt a cart. Okay. Well, if you don't mind, just come on up in light. Give a summary of what we talked about. Please. With the community. Yes, you get your card later. Name and address. Get Andre Green. 1000 Riverside Avenue Suite 1600. I represent corner lot development. Saint Nicholas, Multifamily partners thank you to staff for the work they've done. Thank you to Vice PRESIDENT Current Lucci. Percent of the meeting with the residents for us too kind of discuss what was in pd and what uses we could agree to remove. That was a couple Mondays ago. We put conditions to to remove that. And I want to say Monday. Updated to written description to delete was a trucker until. 100 Kappa limited to 100. And 25 I rooms for hotel and amongst other things in the written description and then also outside, I had spoken with the residents and agreed to remove major automotive. And truck until truck stop is what I'm move truck rental. Just one. It would be good. Neighbors in the area mean all the developments that we you know, top notch. So we just want to work with the residents and and MAY a good project. Okay. Great. Thank you. Thank you for that summary with that, we have no speaker cards on. And so we will close the public hearing. All right. Motion is second on the amendment and planning department. Explain the amendment or just give us a brief overview. Was the written description in the conditions? >> Thank you. So on the planning department had 2 conditions and that we forwarded alleyways shall only be allowed pursuant to the review and approval of the planning Department and the Development Services Division meeting the requirements of the applicable city ordinances. And the second condition was unless waived by the chief of traffic engineering or their designee. A traffic study shall be undertaken by the developer upon pd verification and provided during the tense that review the methodology of the study shall be determined by the developers traffic engineer, the chief of the transportation planning where the designee and the chief of traffic engineering or their designee. And then we have 2 amendments. One is to touch her revised exhibit 3 that will actually be dated AUGUST 4th. And then this Second Amendment is to update a scrivener's error for the site plan date. >> And those incorporate all the changes that were just stated at the podium, correct. >> Correct. Yes. I know that the applicant had forwarded some conditions of approval of things that there were going to remove on. But we did have those included. Those were added after the fact. So I don't know if that's something that you all wanted to include, but I don't think that they would be necessary given that none of those items uses are listed in the right description that was received. >> Okay. So those conditions got corrected in the new written description. AUGUST 4th, correct. Okay. Okay. All right. We are good. And if there's any questions, go ahead and get in the queue. But we are seeing none. So all in favor of the amendment signify by saying Aye. We got. I have to remove the residents are likely to remove major automotive repair. That was literally just discussed a couple minutes ago, which is not in the written description. It is in the written decision. It is in the written description. They asked for me to remove it. Understood. And I can agree so have to got it. Stand. Stand by then. Okay. So we just passed that amendment. And this Cox, they can not be a condition now since they can't be in the written description. Yes, we can have that added as a condition. Okay. So we have a motion to second on the removal of major automotive repair truck into truck rental. Okay. Okay. We're good. We gotta we gotta taking a not out there from the community. So we have a motion to second any discussion, c 9, all in favor of the amendment signify by saying any opposed the many carries All right. Let's go ahead and roll up those amendments want to use the amendment. And we just had a motion to second on. The bill has twice amended. Known in the queue. So it's going up in about a culture that. >> 6 yeas, 0 nays by You've approved. 26 for 37. As amended. Thank you guys. Appreciate you, MR. Green and all the community members. Thank you so much for working with me. Our office coming out. >> Got a much better product there number 2. For action is going to be on Page 11 committee members turn to Page 11 item 1920, 26 for 77. We will open the public hearing and a staff report. >> Ordinance 2026 for 77 is for a small scale land use amendment to change 12.0 41 acres at 7, 4, 0, 1, Old Kings road from public building and facilities pbf to medium density residential mdr to allow for residential development. This is the site of the former Kings Trail Elementary school. Abutting the site to the southeast and northeast are apartment complexes which are designated as an Dr to the northwest is a former ymca swim facility. This parcel is also designated as mdr and it was rezoned in 2024. To develop residential uses. Residential uses. Are the predominant use in the area. Wilson High School which in the pbf Land use category is approximately 560 feet to the north of the subject site. And Baker Skinner Park, which is designated recreation and open space are less is approximately 1000 feet to the south southeast of the site. The subjects site is located on the collector Road, which is Old Kings Road with access to full urban services. The proposed amendment to mdr ensures that the residential character of the area will be maintained and provides a logical expansion of the existing mdr land use category surrounding the site. And Dr provides adequate land to accommodate population growth and offers the opportunity for development of a wide variety of housing types. For these reasons. And those in the staff report, the Planning Department recommends approval planning commission heard this item JULY 23rd there were some neighbors in opposition. Listed Several concerns that are really likely to discussed during the rezoning and the Planning Commission ultimately recommended approval unanimously with a vote 8 to 0. And I'm happy take any questions. All right. Thank you with that. We're going go to the speaker cards. >> First up, we have fought hard. Thank you, MR. CHAIRMAN pardoned 14. 31 Riverplace billboard. This site is currently a public buildings and facilities pbf one. >> One of order, commercial or in to show uses in the zoning code. The proposed lane use on the site is Tmb are. This is by far a down-zoning from what you have on the site to site currently allows, for instance, 70 feet of high. They could be go. They can you can raise one foot 3 feet for every one foot that you that you come in off of your side >> The Germans, it's has access to a collector road as was in the head by planning Department. The road has 86% of a capacity that that was that it was built for left is 14%. The being used at this point, the proposed to zoning will go through many of the issues that raise as part of the land use. But other that all will have questions on the ladies. Next we have Christie, >> Good evening, Chris. To Kenny address on file. By opposing 0, 4, 7, 7, It likely seems we're just an angry neighborhood trying to block progress or ruin a developer's. Bottom line and waste. This committee is valuable time. It looks like we're completely inflexible. The truth is we've spent months offering reasonable compromise conditions to protect public safety and neighborhood compatibility. The applicant's agent has flatly refused every single effort to collaborate because the rules state, the companion pd cannot be condition without the applicant's consent. And because the applicant refuses to grant it, there's no room left for negotiation or further discussion on the land. Use and how this application fails to legitimate public purpose requirement per their request. They've simply not showing how the pd will govern that requirement for this property. Everything needed for a sound to Niles already formally substantiated in the public record. We've chosen not to delay your hearing with repetitive speeches. We stand entirely on the recorded evidence because the applicant refuses to comply fully with the comprehensive plan and leaves our neighborhood vulnerable to many public purpose failures. As a result of poorly planned and redeveloped public land. We respectfully ask this committee to protect the rule of law. And tonight, this land use change from pbf one to mdr. Thank you. >> Okay. The following speakers checks that they do not wish to speak and are in opposition. Aimee Calfee, Gray Depot. Cherry Pope. Aj. Of a car. Are okay. Maybe he wished he doesn't want speak on this one the next one. And then we have some the series and opposition does not wish to speak in. >> At least Roche is in a position does not wish to speak. So with that, we will go ahead and close the public bring back Ben. Okay. So we have motion to second on the bill yeah, I'll just go and say for the land I don't have any issues there. I think a lot of the conditions are going to come in on the next bill. The pd. So with that, we've got no one in the queue and we have a motion a second. So it's open about that. >> 0 nays. >> I actually approved. 26 for 77 item number. 26 or sorry. Item number 2026. For 78 council members. Please declare any ex parte communication you have at this time. I think there should be some kind diamond recognized. >> Thank MARCH air rises clear ex parte communication. Yesterday I spoke with the applicants attorney Paul Martin. Very briefly, really just told me that this was coming I Took a look at it. Thank you. Alright, counselor White. You're recognized. >> The clerics or today I had the same conversation. Mission hard yesterday had a few questions answered that will be filed. >> Kuzma Johnson, you're recognized. MR. Chair. I rise to declare its I MR. Harden had some questions about what I saw on Friday. The 31st. >> That's being probably of city services. Thank you. >> Alright, Kuzma Gaffney. You're recognized. Thank you. Also let it Cook declares. Party also spoke in the starring Aslyum iPhone handsome. Didn't have any questions. >> And thing. Go foul. Legislative services. >> All right. >> Notice cues. So I'll go ahead and clear mind. >> I had a meeting on JULY 28th with the community and Paul Harden and that people could be legislative services. And then for just today at 04:00pm. I had another meeting with these pro. Should Christie Kenny in the Green Room and we discussed further condition. The site plan and then another one that I do the paperwork for, because I just had that as well on a 4 at. 4.45 With Paul hard in the Green Room to discuss the conditions on the remaining items of the site plan and the parking and other items and that paperwork will be filed with legislative services. Councilmember Johnson, you're recognized. >> MR. Cherry, I missed It's being filed with legislative services. Also had email and phone message from skinny as well. Again, publication of Services. Thank you. >> All right. Thank you, sir. Let's go ahead. And open the public or the public his staff court. >> Thank you. This is the companion p t 2026. For 78 which seeks to rezone approximately 12.4 1 acres at 7, 4, 0, one Old Kings road south from public buildings and facilities, one to apd to allow redevelopment of the former Kings Trail Elementary School site into 110 unit residential community consisting of townhomes. The cottages Stephens proposed rezoning to be consistent. The 2045 comprehensive plan with the proposed land use change and DR. The proposed mdr designation allows medium density residential development and support infill housing and established neighborhoods. The project meets 2045 comprehensive plan policies encouraging compact growth, diverse housing options and redevelopment. A former public facilities sites. The proposal meets requirements for internal and external compatibility. King's Road South as a collector road way currently operating at 14% capacity. The proposed development is estimated to generate 1000 daily trips in the corridor can accommodate this volume, stop exporting a condition, though traffic study will be required at civil plans. Civil site plan review. Surrounding uses include multifamily zone arm. Dd single family has owned 70 and a recently approved residential development to the West underarm da. The proposed housing tight matches establish development pattern along Old Kings Road south for these reasons. And those in the staff report before recommendation of approval with the 2 conditions in your agenda. His application was heard at the JULY 23rd Planning Commission hearing. There are several speakers in opposition who cited concerns about traffic, environmental impacts, 2 existing wetlands and the lack of need for additional density in the area. Overall, the commissioners agreed that the proposed development was consistent with the surrounding existing developments and voted unanimously for approval with the same 2 conditions. All right. Thank you so much. >> We will go head to speak cart. MR. Geffen, you're recognized. Experts say. >> Yes, thank you. I love the final edition. I as party also is office that they like 2 weeks ago as I get a date, we just discussed the project itself. Ingress, egress issues that she makes everything a final legislative services. >> I thank you so much. All right. First, the first big card, Paul hard pardoned 14 31 replace Boulevard take great umbrage of Ms Kenney's description of of our activity in this. >> In zoning within a week of for asking for a meeting. I met with her, went through all the issues that they had. And really we've addressed every one of them the site is pbf one. Now, as I said, one of the most intense is too short, not one of the most the most. As is traditional sowing in the zoning code. And, you know, we had a meeting after during the council meeting the other night with the neighborhood. They already have a cab had a cap on the number of units based on It had with with the the owners of joining property. That less than 2 years ago. Request cap number units and 110 units. And since that time, we have found a new written description putting on the camp they requested. They wanted us to build a road of it at a cost clubs close to 2 million dollars through somebody else's land that we don't own that we can take that. We can't force them to sell to us. We have immediate access onto a road that has 86% capacity over what was what was built built to do. There were 5 items on on their list. They want is to address the second one was a capacity of Jackson Electric Authority. We we have filed with the planning department the time of falling on the land use Map request the 2 who are. She's me a letter from from the j a saying that there was available capacity. So we comply with that one. There was a request that if we build holes housing for older adults that comply with the federal law. I told them that love is owning code doesn't require that and actually doesn't allow for doesn't a language in it. If we built those, we would, in fact comply with with those everything they asked for. We comply with except the road we can't build a 2 million dollar road across somebody else's land. When we have capacity on the road in the leaf running the site with regard to the conditions, the first condition, if the planning, if the public works department wants to has to have a traffic study will will do the traffic study. Transportation study using the methodology that we agree with them with regard to the second condition. However, that language is exactly what the plane Department playing commission came up with. But we are opposed to that second condition. We've plenty of parking on the site for the use that we're going provide. We don't need parking for guests. In fact, they those are yeah, well, we'll have questions. I'm sure. Thank you. Put words were opposed to the second condition. Okay. We have more expert to unique you me. >> know, do you want to declare okay? Councilmember areas going to clear ex parte? Chaired it making I had a expert and met with that. I actually spoke on the phone with the applicants, a pardon couple days ago. Going to be filed with to say services. Thank you. Have questions. But once we get we're going go through the rest speaker cards and then we'll keep the pope can open for questions. Alright, next, speaker Chrissy Kenny. >> Followed by a j. Laura Bacchus and at least brush. >> Good evening, Chris. To Kenny address on file and I oppose ordinance 4, 7, 8 as written myself along with the San Jose Neighborhood Association are not asking you to change Jacksonville laws. Neither asking you to impose new requirements or unreasonable burdens on this applicant. We're asking for one thing. Apply the law exactly as it already exists. Florida law does not require an application to be morally acceptable. It requires that this council changed the law governing this property. The applicant demonstrate through competent, substantial evidence that this beauty is fully consistent with our comprehensive plan. That burden belongs to the applicant. It does not belong to this neighborhood over the last several months. We've carefully reviewed this application. We've identified numerous areas where the application fails to demonstrate consistency with the comp plan. We documented those deficiencies cited the applicable policies and submitted everything into the public record. We're not asking you to resolve every disagreement but rather enforce 5 things, deficiencies that should have been addressed before this application was ever recommended for approval information that would transform assumptions into evidence and enforceable commitments. These items presented in the binders on record address the very issues the comp plan exists to protect transportation impacts, environmental stewardship, neighborhood compatibility, infrastructure planning, Unforcible development standards. 9 optional 9 in first with good intentions. The Planning Department's responsibility is to determine whether the applicant has demonstrated consistency with every applicable comp plan policy before recommending approval. The recommendation of approval on fine. Fine is not the legal standard for apd. Fine is not a finding of consistency. Fine is not competent. Substantial evidence and find does not create enforceable protections for neighborhoods. When we identify these deficiencies were told, have the applicant included the information we suggested to rim at remedy these deficiencies. Their application would have been excellent superior, if you will, yet not being the applicant Commission simply did not matter. The response should concern every citizen because the comp plan is not designed to reward minimal administrative review. It exist to ensure that legislative decisions are made only after necessary. Facts are fully known. The question before this committee is not whether this development might become prized into compliance. It's much simpler. How can this committee make the required finding a full consistency when the applicant is not supply the information necessary to demonstrate it. That is the very question Florida's Growth Management framework expects elected officials to ask before changing the law governing the piece of property. This neighborhood is not asking for protection. Perfection, not additional conditions. That additional promises, evidence, transparency, accountability. We're asking for compliance by reasonable

All meeting actions

Source coverage incomplete

5 meeting items captured. The published sources do not prove this is the complete docket.

Showing 5 of 5

Browse by category5 actions

Search this meetingShow

Agenda item 1Ordinances
Committee will consider revised site plan for Old Kings Road industrial project
Topics: coastal resilience, land use
- Land Use & Zoning Committee
Agenda item 2Ordinances
The committee will consider a revised site plan for a proposed industrial business park at 0 Rampart Road.
Committee will consider site plan revision for Rampart Road industrial park
Topics: roads, land use, local-government
Open item
- Land Use & Zoning Committee
Agenda item 4Other meeting items
Audible noise from cellphones or other electronic devices;
- Land Use & Zoning Committee - Agenda Meeting
Agenda item 7Other meeting items
Refusing to stop speaking when his or her time has expired or is otherwise directed
- Land Use & Zoning Committee
Agenda item 8Other meeting items
Returning to the meeting after having been removed or ejected, or attempting to do so.
Topics: land use
- Land Use & Zoning Committee

Official record

ArtifactSourceState

AgendaLand Use & Zoning Committeeread text

Agenda packetNot published in the sources we holdunavailable

Budget documentNot published in the sources we holdunavailable

Action agendaNot published in the sources we holdunavailable

MinutesNot published in the sources we holdunavailable

Transcript or captionsSource recordingread transcript

AttachmentNot published in the sources we holdunavailable

Recording and media

Official pages

Coverage and corrections

Records considered

Land Use & Zoning Committee
Land Use & Zoning Committee — Closed Captions

Not claimed by this page

A source-grounded next meeting date

Official outcomes have not been published.
The available transcript has no reliable timestamps.
Transcript coverage is partial.
Speakers have not been reliably matched to public profiles.
Named people and places have not been reliably resolved.
An individual roll-call roster is not available.
Low-grade, ungraded, procedural, or superseded items remain in the complete agenda inventory rather than the meeting digest.

No source correction or revision history is recorded for this meeting. A corrected artifact will appear here as a new version rather than replacing what is shown above.

Transcript and record text

All meeting actions

Official record

Coverage and corrections

Share or embed this record