Gadsden County Board of County Commissioners

Planning Commission Regular Meeting

AGENDA & NOTES

Thursday, August 15, 2013

6:00p.m.

Board of County Commissioners Meeting Room

7 East Jefferson Street

Quincy, Florida

Present: Commissioner Regina Davis, At - Large Member, Chair

Commissioner Edward Allen, Vice – Chair

Commissioner Dr. Gail Bridges – Bright (arrived late)

Commissioner Diane Sheffield (arrived late)

Commissioner Larry Ganus

Commissioner Mari VanLandingham (absent)

Commissioner David Tranchand

Commissioner Frank Rowan

Commissioner William Chukes

Commissioner Ed Dixon (arrived late)

Commissioner Catherine Robinson (absent)

Commissioner Isaac Simmons, School Board Representative

Jill Jeglie, Interim Planning & Community Development Director

Willie Brown, Principal Planner

Beryl H. Wood, Deputy Clerk

1. PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

Chair Davis called the meeting to order at 6:10 p.m. with a quorum and led in the Pledge of Allegiance to the U.S. flag.

2. INTRODUCTION OF MEMBERS/ROLL CALL

Each member present stated his or her name and district for the record.

3. Approval of Minutes:

§ June 27, 2013 – Tranchand/Rowan 7-0 w/necessary corrections

§ July 18, 2013 – Rowan/Ganus 8-0 w/necessary corrections

Commissioner Dr. Gail Bridges – Bright arrived at this juncture.

4. DISCLOSURES AND DECLARATIONS OF CONFLICT – None

Commissioner Sheffield arrived at this juncture.

GENERAL BUSINESS

5. PUBLIC HEARING (Quasi-Judicial) – Spray Quimica C.A. (SP -2013-06) – Change of Use and Site Plan for PID#3-17-2N-3W-0000-00440-0000. A Public Hearing to consider allowing the change of use to the manufacturing of aerosol and liquid products at the former Printing House site located at 1066 Strong Road, Quincy. This site is designated Industrial (IND) on the Future Land Use Map. NO expansion is proposed for the existing 103,000± sq. ft. structures. Reallocation and expansion into the outside storage and parking areas is proposed. (BOCC 09/03/2013)

Mrs. Jill Jeglie, Interim Planning & Community Director introduced herself and was sworn by the deputy clerk. She disclosed that at their August 6, 2013 meeting, the Board of county Commissioners (BOCC) remanded the Sicamui, Inc. Site Plan for Change of use request back to the Planning Commission (PC) for consideration. The application was remanded to require the posting of a sign on the property in accordance with the Land development Code (LDC). In addition, notice has been delivered to residents of nearby properties.

She reminded the Board Sicamu (Spray Quimica) is a family owned corporation and the largest Venezuelan contract aerosol filler in that country, is seeking approval of their site and change of use plans to open a new manufacturing facility at 1066 Strong Road, the former site of the “Printing House”. The proposed use is located in the Industrial Future Land use Category.

She said after careful consideration they are recommending Option 1: Recommend approval of the Sicamu Inc. Class II Site Plan for Change of Use (SP-2013-06) with the following conditions based on the findings provided in this agenda request, materials provided by the applicant and reviewers, and testimony given at the public hearing. Specifically, the conditions recommended by the County Fire Marshall:

a) All NFPA requirements must be met at this facility to operate in this jurisdiction. NFPA Life Safety Code 101 Chapter 40 applies in general. Chapter 42 could apply to some storage areas. NFPA 30B applies. NFPA 58 applies to outside storage tanks. In addition to these code requirements any codes referenced within these codes will apply as well.

b) To maintain safety, a minimum of two (2) fire safety inspections at the facility are required to be conducted annually the local Fire Marshall. No more than six (6) months will be allowed to pass without an inspection.

c) As required by the Fire Marshall, chemical storage and mixing (solvents) tanks and station s will be located outside of the main building within the existing fenced outdoor storage area.

Commissioner Isaac Simmons asked for highlights of option 1.

Commissioner Dixon arrived at this juncture.

Chief Scott Haire, disclosed his recommendation was based on safety. He said he met with Mr. Pons and they met about codes and standards. He said they were willing to work with us on safety concerns. He discussed the gas house where the storage tanks are located, maintain safety, a minimum of two fire safety inspections at the facility are required to be conducted annually by the local Fire Marshall. Chemical storage and mixing (solvents) tanks and stations will be located outside of the main building within the existing fenced outdoor storage area. He said

Commissioner Isaac Simmons asked how they would notify communities on safety hazards as and if they arise.

Chief Haire stated they have mass notification communication system.

Commissioner Ganus asked what kind of chemicals would be stored on site.

Chief Haire said different solvent and propane he knows.

Commissioner Chukes asked how often they would do inspections.

Chief Haire said two. One announced and one unannounced.

Commissioner Allen asked how many NFPA requirements are there.

Chief Haire said there are several hundred and the NFPA you are looking at 4 or 5, what

Commissioner Ganus said he had concerns such as the color coded map that was adjacent to the property. He said the map was not included last month. He noted the City of Quincy had indexed a lot of the adjacent land. He noted his concern is they may be mixing some things that aren’t compatible. He said he thought it was a bad idea to mix next to single family properties. He mentioned several explosions that have happened in the past.

Commissioner Sheffield said has the property all around been zoned industrial. She felt it was the residential and that was not compatible.

Chair Davis asked that the City of Quincy City Manager or the City of Quincy Planning Director to come forward and answer questions.

§ Jack McLean, City of Quincy Manager, he said they annexed the property in. He said this is an issue they can manage. He said he felt it was a compatibility issue.

Commissioner Chukes asked how far the nearest residence is.

Commissioner Ganus asked why the City chose to allow residential.

Mr. McLean just looking at the uses that are out there. He said they will con

Chair Davis asked did they City have objections and called for public comment.

§ Kirby Palm, adjacent property owner, said his property would not have residence on it. No plans on building anytime soon.

§ Michael Dorian, Frank Smith Road, spoke at County Commission about notification. He said there was barely non for the last P&Z meeting. He said notification and signs went out this time. How much combustible material will be on site? He stated that he had spoken with Clyde Collins on what would be on site.

Commissioner Ganus asked what the density of single family residential category is.

Mr. McLean commented theirs is set up different from the County. He reiterated they have no objection of this project moving forward.

§ Jose Pons, 1066 Strong Road, spoke in favor of the project. He said they don’t know how much combustible material will be on the property. He said they chose the property because of the large buffer. He discussed other concerns, but said you have to apply with the codes. He stated accidents happen, but you design things to avoid accidents.

Chair Davis asked would they adhere to the rules and regulations that are being asked of by the City Fire Chief and the Planning Commission.

Motion: Commissioners Tranchand/Rowan – reapprove Option 1: 9-1(Ganus opposed the motion)

Commissioner Dixon asked if they could give 2 inspections, at least two.

Mr. Pons said he has no problem with additional inspections.

It was later determined the wording read at least two inspections, so there was no need for amendment to the motion and it was approved as stated above.

6. PUBLIC HEARING (Quasi-Judicial) – Florida Telecom Services, L.L.C. (SP-2013-05) – Preliminary Site Plan Approval for PID#2-11-3N-2W-0000-00340-0000. A Public Hearing to consider approval of a preliminary site plan with deviations from supporting lattice telecommunication tower at 39 Schwall Road at the Peavy and Son Construction within the Industrial Land Use District. (BOCC 09/17/2013)

Mr. Brown, Principal Planner for the County was sworn by deputy clerk and gave overview of case. John L. Ruth, Managing Member of Florida Telecom Services as agent, is requesting Preliminary Site Plan approval with four deviations to allow a 220-foot Self Supporting Lattice Tower within a 70-foot by 50-foot leased area enclosed by a 6-foot fence and evergreen landscaping on Peavy and Son Construction site at 39 Schwall Road (Parcel Tax ID#2-11-3N-2W-0000-00340-0000). Deviations from Subsections 5805 (A).1, 5805 (A).2, 5805 (B).2, and 5806 (A).3 are required for approval of the is application. The overall site consists of twenty (20) acres and is designated “Industrial” on the County’s Future Land Use map.

He said this was a Class II, Type II review of a site plan (Subsection 7202.A). The action is considered a quasi-judicial action in conjunction with the advertised public hearing as a Type II action per Subsection 7202 of the Gadsden County Land Development Code (LDC). Per Subsection 7501, a public hearing notice has been mailed to all property owner within 1000-feet of the property. The public notice requirement s of Subsection 7501 of the LDC have been met. A Citizen’s Bill of Rights meeting has been held.

He then disclosed the requested deviations from the Gadsden County Land Development Code (LDC). The applicant is requesting a total of four (4) deviations from Subsections 5805 (Location) and Subsection 5806 (Proximity to Parcels of Land with Residences) of the LDC as follows:

1. Subsection 5805 (A).1 requires that publicly owned lands be considered for tower development before privately owned lands are developed upon. The nearest county owned parcel is 1.69 miles away and is located on McNair Road on parcel# 2-13-3N-2W-1533-00000-0001. In a letter dated July 12, 2013 from the agent’s RF Engineer to the Gadsden County Planning Director, the applicant states that the nearest county owned parcel is not located within a radius identified to satisfy needed coverage gaps for the northeast area of the county.

2. Subsection 5805 (A).2 requires that existing towers be considered before tower development on new sites are developed upon. The applicant also states in the letter referred to above that the nearest existing privately owned tower is more than two (2) miles away and will not satisfy needed coverage gaps in the area.

3. Subsection 5805(b).1 states that proposed tower sites with 0.5 miles of a Rural Residential District is not permitted. The applicant is requesting a deviation from this requirement because the prosed site satisfies its RF Engineer’s coverage gap criteria for the area. The nearest Rural Residential District is 585 feet from the subject leased property, and the nearest resident within a Rural Residential District is 1,950 feet away.

4. Subsection 5806(A).3 requires that towers that are lit at night with red lights shall be at least 7x’s the height of the tower form property lines of parcels of land which a residence is located. Florida Telecom is proposing a north property line setback of 2.5x’s the height of the tower or 550 feet. The nearest residential structure is 1.950 feet away, and the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and Federal Communication Commission (FCC) require towers that are over 200 feet be lit at night with red lights.

Commissioner Tranchand asked what a rollback was. He asked would it deteriorate.

Commissioner Dixon asked would the light strode.

Commissioner Allen asked about the setback.

Chair Davis called for public comment. All were sworn by the deputy clerk before proceeding with discussions.

§ Marion Lasley, 5 Dante Court – discussed concerns about deviations. She said what the density of the rural residential was. According to my figures of 585ft and the code requires 2040 that’s a significant difference. Height of tower from property line. Red lights flashing would be annoying. She said there was a capability problem. No sign on Hwy 27.

§ Annie McBride, 17 Schwall Road, discussed concerns on health concerning the towers.

She asked why they are giving deviations. She also discussed the precautionary issues. She said the burden of truth should be on applicant not citizens. She also had problems with notification. She asked for some type of study.

§ Michael Dorian, mentioned the FCC was very hard to work with. He said when they wrote codes they weren’t allowed to talk about safety. He asked Willie if towers fell could they land near residence.

§ Roberta Moore, Planning Consultant, will be blinking light. Notification was provided in the Havana Herald, she said the requirement was only once, but they did it twice and sent notification for a ½ mile for citizens. About 93 mail outs. She said the health concerns of telecommunication towers they are directed to FCC to go to their website.

Mr. Brown stated with the height no they could not, even if it collapsed at full length.

Commissioner Sheffield said they would have white lights during the day.

Commissioner Chukes asked how many showed up to the Citizens Bill of Rights.

Mrs. McBride said there was only 4.

Commissioner Ganus said only a 1000ft would be notified.

Mr. Brown said mailings were mailed ten days prior to meeting,

Jill Jeglie, said the Citizen’s Bill of Rights, does not require posting, but mail-outs and 3 papers, Regular Meeting all was posted.

Commissioner Allen said if they turned down enough request regarding towers they would come out and ask questions FCC.

§ John Ruth, I would love to answer questions concerning health. He said the FCC website is full of information. He said they aren’t experts concerning these issues, so FCC won’t allow us to answer questions.

Commissioner Sheffield asked was this is new development design.

Mr. Ruth said it was not.

Commissioner Dixon asked would the light strode or not.

Mr. Ruth commented it appears to be blinking.

Commissioner Ganus what process did you use, to pick location.

Mr. Ruth said the carriers chose this spot. Areas that are already impacted.

Commissioner Chukes said his problem is with health concerns.

Mr. Brown said there are 46 other towers in Gadsden County. He said legally we can only discuss the 4 legal deviations.

Commissioner Allen/Simmons asked that they delay until they could visit website concerning health.

Commissioner Chukes and Dixon voiced concerns.

Chair Davis said the motion does not deal with the legality.

Commissioner Allen withdraw the motion.

Motion: Dixon/ Sheffield approve option1: 6/4 Commissioner Ganus, Tranchand, Allen and Chukes – opposed (Motion is approved)

Commissioner Tranchand voiced concerned with all the variances and said it may be precedent setting.

Commissioner Rowan said staff has researched and he agrees with them.

Commissioner Dixon called the question.

Chair Davis mentioned that this would be forwarded to the Board of County Commission and they could address their concerns there.

7. PUBLIC HEARING (Quasi-Judicial) – V-Stop Variance Request (Douglas City L.L.C.) (V-2013-01) – Variance approval is requested for PID#3-09-2N-4W-0000-00212-0100 located at 16854 Blue Star Highway, Quincy, to consider three variance to allow the expansion and replacement of an existing 912⁺⁄- square foot canopy with a 2,050 square foot canopy and two gasoline dispensers. Variances are requested to the roadway and corridor road setbacks. (BOCC 09/17/2013)

Jill Jeglie was sworn by deputy clerk concerning this issue and discussed the V-Stop Variance Request. Douglas City LLC, The applicant, with Ed Hinson as the representative, request three (3) variances from the Gadsden County Land Development Code (LDC). These variances are necessary to allow the applicant to expand and replace the existing canopy over two (2) new gasoline dispensers at their convenience store and gasoline station located at 16854 Blue Star Highway, Quincy, Florida 32351, Tax Parcel ID #3-0-2N-4W-0000-00212-0100. The following variances are requested:

§ Major Collector Setback – A variance request is proposed to reduce the required 110’ foot setback from the centerline of S.R. 12 (Greensboro Highway) right-of-way (r-o-w), a major collector roadway, to 64’± (Subsection 5203.3 of the LDC).

§ Arterial Setback – A variance request is proposed to reduce the required 120’ foot setback from the centerline of U.S. 90 (Blue Star Highway) r-o-w, a principal arterial roadway to 84’± (Subsection 5203.3 of the LDC).

§ Corridor Road Setback – A variance to allow construction with a reduction in the ‘Corridor Road Setback’ from 50’ to 32’± (Subsection 5405 of the LDC).

Commissioner Ganus pointed out some concerns. (Whereas)

Commissioner Bright said she was trying visualize where the other 2 pumps would go.

Ed Hinson, owner, currently there is 2 under canopy. He said the additional 2 would go underneath the canopy.

Motion: Sheffield/Bright 10-0 approve Option 1

8. PUBLIC HEARING (Legislative) – Churches, Class I & Access (LDR-2013-03) – An Ordinance amending Subsections 4202.K and Subsection 5611.G. of the Land Development Code to clarify Churches as Class I uses and to allow Churches to access through residential areas as follows:

AN ORDINACE AMENDING SUBSECTION 1202.K INSTITUTIONAL USES, AMENDING CHAPTER 5, DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS: SUBSECTION 5611. STREETS, DRIVEWAYS AND ACCESS MANAGEMENT; AMENDING SUBSECTION 5611.G. ACCESS, SUBSECTION 5611.G.5 OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE FOR THE PURPOSE OF ALLOWING CHURCHES THAT QUALIFY AS CLASS I INSTITUTIONAL USES TO ACCESS THROUGH AREAS DESIGNED, APPROVED OR DEVELOPED FOR RESIDDENTIAL USES; AND, PROVIDING AND EFFECTIVE DATE AND PROVIDING FOR SEVERABILITY. (BOCC 09/17/2013)

Jill Jeglie, discussed the Planning and Community Development Department (P&CD) is requesting review and approval of an Ordinance amending Subsection 4202.K ‘Institutional Uses’ and Subsection 5611.G. % ‘Access to Residential lots’ of the Land Development Code (LDC) to clarify that churches are Class 1 uses and to consider allowing churches to access through non- residential areas (Attachments #1 & 2).

Non-residential uses, including churches, shall not access through and area designed, approved or developed for residential use. Many existing churches access through residentially designed or developed areas. As churches are a ‘use by right’ in the Agricultural and Rural Residential Future Land Use Categories, churches have required variances and will continue to require variances through residentially developed areas unless the LDC is amended.

Commissioner Simmons voiced his concerns with access to property.

Commissioner Dixon talked about churches being in neighborhood. What is the big problem with a church allowing a daycare?

Commissioner Sheffield said when they are limited it poses a problem.

Mrs. Jeglie said they see both ends of the spectrum.

Commissioner Ganus asked what kind of rights neighborhood would have on Class II Site Plan.

§ Marion Lasley, 5 Dante Court, I have been traveling around County. People are turning residential homes into church. Parking is a problem. Metropolitan Church was told in the beginning they couldn’t have school and they sued the County. That’s know why to plan the County. She said there must be restrictions. She this is a huge concern. It does not sit well to have a church in the middle of subdivision. I support leaving Code as is or fix it. She said a variance is the only way to do that.

Commissioner Dixon voiced there is very limited ability dealing with churches. He asked for clarity.

Commissioner Sheffield said she felt it should be left alone, come in for variance.

Commissioner Ganus voiced it could remain 1, he referenced a scribblers error in the Code.