Dec 17, 2020 Planning and Zoning Agency

[Call meeting to order.]

[00:00:07]

>> MR. KOPPENHAFER: GOOD AFTERNOON, EVERYBODY. ALL FOUR OF YOU OUT THERE IN THE AUDIENCE. WELCOME AND WELCOME TO THE FOLKS ONLINE AS WELL.

THIS THE PLANNING & ZONING AGENCY MESQUITE FOR DECEMBER 17, 2020.

I HAVE A SCRIPT HERE TO READ AND THAT'S WHAT I'LL DO. CONFIRMING MEMBER ACCESS.

GOOD AFTERNOON AND WELCOME TO THE MEETING OF THE REGULAR PRACTICING AND ON EDGE I AM MIKE KOPPENHAFER CHAIR OF THE PLANNING PEAFNLINGS BEFORE WE BEGIN LET ME FIRST CONFIRM THAT THE AGENCY MECHANICS BY PHONE CAN HEAR ME AS WELL AS CALL ROLL FOR THOSE WHO ARE HERE IN PERSON. FELLOW AGENCY MEMBERS WHEN I CALL WHY NAME, PLEASE RESPOND IN THE AFFIRMATIVE. I'LL GO THROUGH OUR ROLL CALL. DR. MCCORMICK.

>> DR. MCCORMICK: AYE. I'M HERE. >> DR. HILSENBECK.

>> DR. HILSENBECK: PRESENT. >> MR. WAINRIGHT. >> MR. WAINRIGHT: YES, HER GHOO MR. KOPPENHAFER CERTAINLY IS HERE. MS. PERKINS.

>> HERE. >> MR. ALAIMO. >> HERE.

>> AND MR. MATOVINA. >> HERE. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. INTRODUCTION TO MEETING INCLUDING REMOTE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION. IN ORDER TO MITIGATE THE TRANSMISSION OF THE CORONAVIRUS AND REDUCE RISK OF COVID-19 ILLNESS, THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS HAS ADOD PROCEDURES TO CONDUCT MEETINGS G 20-10 TO PROVIDE FOR MEETINGS USING REMOTE MARPTION AND ALLOW THE PUBLIC A MEANS TO COMMENT WITHOUT PHYSICALLY ATTENDING. ALONG WITH PRIOR COMMUNICATIONS INCLUDING EMAIL THE PUBLIC WILL BE ABLE TO COMMENT BY TELEPHONE WHILE WATCHING THE MEETING VIA GT OR STREAMING POSTED ON COUNTY'S WE. AT WWW.FLJC.US.

THETELEPHONENUMBERASK9042091265S ITE.EVENIFMEMBERSOFTHEPUBLICDONO VIDECOMMENT,PARTICIPANTSAREADVIS EDTHATPEOPLEMAYBELISTENINGTOWHOD ONOTPROVIDEPUBLICCOMMENTANDTHOSE P E R SONSARENOTREQUIREDTOIDENTIFYT H E M SELVES PLEASE NOTE THAT THIS MEETING IG RECORDED.

FOR THOSE OF YOU CALLING IN TO C ONNECTED,PLEASECALLBACK.PUBLICCE EMINUTESPERSPEAKER.WHILEATHREEML LBEDISPLAYEDONGTANDTHEWEBSITE,DU ETOADELAYTHEINAUDIOANDVIDEOIWOUL DASK THE THREE MINUTE TIME LIMIT WHEN THEY ARE COMMENTING. P MESA MUTE YOUR PHONE WHILE YOU MUTE THE MEETING ON YOUR TELEVISION OR COMPUTER WHEN YOU ARE SPEAKING TO AVOID AUDIO FEEDBACK.

AGAIN, THERE IS APPROXIMATELY 30 SECOND DELAY IN AUDIO AND VISUAL PRELINGSZ ON GTV AND THE WEBSITE. IF WE EXPERIENCE ANY TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES, WE WILL RECESS WHILE THEY ARE RESOLVED AND THEN RESUME THE MEETING. MEETING MATERIALS.

MATERIALS FOR THIS MEETING ARE VIABILITY COUNTY'S WEBSITE. UNDER "AGENDA AND MINUTES." THERE THERE YOU CAN CLICK ON "GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT" AND PLANNING & ZONING AGENCY MEETING, AND YOU WILL SEE THE LINKS TO THE AGENDA AND THE INDIVIDUAL AGENDA ITEMS. ROLL CALL VOTE. FINALLY, IF ANY MEMBER OF THE BOARD IS PARTICIPATING REMOTELY THEN EACH VOTE TAKEN IN THIS MEETING WILL BE CONDUCTED BY ROLL CALL VOTE.

CHECK THAT BOX OFF. UP NEXT IS A PUBLIC NOTICES STATEMENT.

AND MY VICE CHAIR MR. WAINRIGHT WILL BE READING THAT. >> MR. WAINRIGHT: MIKE ALWAYS ALLOWS ME TO REED THIS. 1 THIS IS A PROPER NOTICED PUBLIC HELD IN CONCURRENCE WITH REQUIREMENTS OF FLORIDA LAW THE PUBLIC WILL BE GIVEN AN OPPY TO COMMENT ON TOPICS RELEVANT TE AGENCY'S AREA OF JURISDICTION AE PUBLIC WILL BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUO OFFER COMMENTS AT A DESIGNATED E DURING THE HEARING. ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC DESIRI SPEAK MUST INDICATE DOUGH BY COMMITTING A SPEAKER CARD WHICH IS AVAILABLE IN THE FOYER ADDITIONAL SPEAKERS MAY BE HEART THE DISCRETION OF THE CHAIRMAN. SPEAKER CARDS MAY BE TURNED IN .

THE PUBLIC SHALL SPEAK AT A TIM THE MEETING ON EACH ITEM AND FOR A REFNGHTDZ TIME AS DESIGNATED BY THE CHAIRMAN WHICH SHALL BE THREE MINUTES. SPEAKER'S SHALL IDENTIFY THEMSELVES, THEY REPRESENT AND STATE THEIR ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD SPEAKERS MAY OFFER SWORN TESTIM. IF THEY DO NOT, THE FACT THAT TY IS NOT SWORN MAY BE CONSIDERED E AGENCY IN DETERMINING THE WEIGHR TRUTHFULNESS OF THE TESTIMONY. II.

IF A PERSON DECIDES TO APPEAL AY DECISION MADE WITH RESPECT TO AY MATTER CONSIDERED AT THE HEARIN PERSONS WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS AND MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VER ABILITY RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED ANY PHYSICAL OR DOCUMENTARY EVIE PRESENTED DURING A HEARING, SUCS

[00:05:08]

THE RECORD WILL THEN BE AVAILAB OTHER AGENCY OR OTHER COUNTY OR IN ANY REVIEW OF APPEAL RELATED TO THE ITEM III. BOARD MEMBERS ARE REMINDED THATE BEGINNING OF EACH ITEM THEY SHOE WHETHER THEY HAD ANY COMMUNICATH THE APPLICANT OR ANY OTHER PERSN REGARDING THE SUBSTANCE OF THE M OUTSIDE THE FORMAL HEARING OF TE AGENCY.

IF SUCH COMMUNICATION HAS OCCUR AGENCY MEMBER SHALL THEN IDENTIFY THE PERSON INVOLVED IN THE MATERIALT OF THE COMMUNICATION. CIVILITY CLAUSE.

IV. WE WILL BE RESPECTFUL OF ONE ANR EVEN WHEN WE DISAGREE.

WE SHALL DIRECT ALL COMMENTS TOE ISSUES. WE WILL AVOID PERSONAL ATTACKS.

>> MR. KOPENHAFER: THANK YOU, MR. WAINRIGHT. UP NEXT IS PUBLIC COMMENTS.

THIS IS WHERE THE PUBLIC CAN SPEAK ON ANYTHING THAT IS NOT ON TODAY'S AGENDA.

ANYONE IN THE AUDIENCE HERE SPEAKING ON PUBLIC COMMENTS? SEEING NONE, IS THERE ANYONE

ONLINE, TOM? >> MOW PUBLIC COMMENT. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. WE WILL CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENTS, THEN, AND WHEN WE OPEN FOR EACH OF THESE AGENDA ITEMS, WE'RE GOING TO GO THROUGH AN EX PARTE LIST.

I THINK THAT'S MORE APPROPRIATE. SO FOR AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 1, DOES ANYONE -- I'M GOING TO GO THROUGH THE LIST, RATHER. DECLARING EX PARTE, DR. MCCORMICK.

>> DR. . I TAKE THAT AS NONE. DR. HILSENBECK.

>> DR. HILSENBECK: I'M SORRY. I WAS MUTED. I DIDN'T HAVE ANY, THOUGH.

>> MR. KOPPENHAFER: DR. HILSENBECK. >> DR. HILSENBECK: NO.

>> MR. WAINRIGHT. >> MR. WAINRIGHT: NO. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER SAYS NO.

MS. PERKINS. >> MS. PERKINS: NO. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER:

MR. ALAIMO. >> MR. ALAIMO: NO. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: AND

[1. TUP 2020-04 Arbor Mill @ Mill Creek HOA Food Trucks.]

MR. MATOVINA. MANCH NO. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. ITEM NUMBER 1. LET'S TALK ABOUT SOME FOOD

TRUCKS. >> HELLO, GOOD AFTERNOON, EVERYONE.

>> MR. KOPPENHAFER: GOOD AFTERNOON. >> MY NAME IS THE DEE DRA PHILLIPS AND I AM A COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION MANAGER REPRESENTING ARE BOOSH MILL@MILL CREEK AND WE HAVE A REQUEST FOR A TEMPORARY USE PERMIT TO ALLOW FOR FOOD TRUCKS IN THE COMMUNITY.

WE HAVE SUBMITTED THE REQUIRED POWERPOINT PRESENTATION TO GO THROUGH FOR YOU GUYS TO SEE.

THE ARBOR MILL COMMUNITY ASK LOCATED OFF COUNTY ROAD 16. AS YOU CAN SEE IN THE FIRST PICTURE THERE. AT THE TOP OF THAT PAGE IS WHERE THE AMENITY CENTER IS LOCATED.

THE COMMUNITY IS REQUESTING UP TO THE ALLOTTED 12 FOOD TRUCKS PER YEAR.

THE FOOD TRUCKS WILL COME IN ABOUT TWO VENDORS, AND IT WILL ONLY BE OPEN TO JUST THE RESIDENTS AND NOT THE PUBLIC. HERE ARE SOME ADDITIONAL MAPS THERE FOR YOU SHOWING YOU WHERE THE INFORMATION IS. AS STATED, AGAIN, THIS IS A REQUEST TO SEEK APPROVAL FOR TEMPORARY USE PERMIT TO ALLOW FOOD TRUCKS AT THE AEROBE AT MILL CREEK AMENITY CENTER WITHIN THE ARBOR MILLS PUD. THE A REQUESTED A MAXIMUM OF TWO FOOD TRUCKS FOR A TOTAL OF 12 EVENTS, ONE EVENT IN MARCH, SEPTEMBER, APRIL AND OCTOBER AND TWO EVENTS PER MONTH IN MAY, JUNE, JULY AND AUGUST. THE EVENTS WILL TAKE PLACE ON SATURDAY EVENING BETWEEN 5:00 AND 8:00 P.M. THE FOOD TRUNKS RANGE IN SIZE FROM 5 BY 8 FEET TO 8 BY 32 FEET. THERE IS APPROXIMATELY A 35-FOOT BUFFER PROVIDE BEAN THE AMENITY CENTER PARKING PARKING LOT E ADJACENT HOMES TO THE SOUTH. AGAIN, THIS WILL DESCRIBLG BE AN HOA EVENT THAT IS COMMUNICATED THROUGH PRIVATE ARBOR MILL@MILL CREEK NOTIFICATION CHANNELS BIKE LIKE TOWN SQUARE WHICH IS PROVIDED AS A PLATFORM FROM THE MOOGMENT COMPANY AND THROUGH FACEBOOK THAT IS MANAGED BY RESIDENTS ONLY. THESE EVENTS AGAIN, NOT PUBLICALLY ADVERTISED AND WILL NOT BE OPEN FOR PUBLIC. THE HOA ITSELF DOES NOT MAKE ANY MONEY FROM THESE EVENTS, AND ALL PROCEEDS WILL GO DIRECTLY TO THE VENDORS.

THESE EVENTS WILL BE HELD AS A WAY OF SOCIALIZING FOR THE COMMUNITY RESIDENTS.

SHOULD THE PERMIT BE GRANTED, THE ASSOCIATION WILL ASK THAT YOU WILL PARTICIPATING FOOD TRUCK VENDORS AND RESIDENTS PRACTICE SOCIAL DISTANCING AND WEAR A MASK.

[00:10:01]

THE AREA THAT'S OUTLINED IN BLUE IS THE PARKING LOT WHERE THE FOOD TRUCKS WILL GO.

THERE'S ALSO ADDITIONAL SEATING AND BENCHES FOR RESIDENTS TO SIT AND ENJOY OR YOU CAN BUY YOUR FOOD AND TAKE IT HOME IF YOU'D LIKE. THIS IS ANOTHER MAP.

AGAIN OUTLINING WHERE THE FOOD TRUCKS WILL GO AS WELL AS THE AMENITY CENTER.

THERE'S ADDITIONAL SEATING AT THE POOL WITH BENCHES, TABLES AND CHAIRS.

THE PROPOSED TEMPORARY USE SHALL BE REQUIRED TO OBTAIN THE APPROVAL OF THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR OF AT LEAST TWO WEEKS PRIOR TO THE ANNOUNCEMENT OF THE EVENT.

THERE SHALL BE ADEQUATE PARKING PROVIDED FOR TEMPORARY USE. NO MORE THAN 12 TEMPORARY USE PERMITS SHALL BE ISSUED FOR THE SAME SITE WITHIN ONE YEAR PERIOD EXCEPT WITH THE LIMITATION OF 1B AND C SHALL APPLY AS STATED HERE WITHIN. ALL SITES OF THE LOCATION -- ALL SIDES OF THE LOCATION OF THE TEMPORARY USE SHALL PROVIDE RESTROOM FACILITIES WITHIN REASONABLE INCIDENCE, AND THEREE ARE RESTROOMS LOCATED AT THE A MEN ENTRY CENTER.

ALL MERCHANDISE, DISPLAY TENTS THE WILL BE PLACED IN SUCH A MANNER AS TO NOT IMPEDE PEDESTRIAN OR VEHICULAR TRACK OF AND SHALL NOT IMPEDE A FIRE LANE.

WE DID RECEIVE ONE LETTER OF SUPPORT FROM A RESIDENT, WHICH IS INCLUDED IN THE POWERPOINT

PRESENTATION. THANK YOU. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: THANK YOU.

WE HAVE A FULL AGENDA TONIGHT, SO WE'RE GOING TO GO STRAIGHT TO PUBLIC COMMENTS.

COULD DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS? >> NO PUBLIC COMMENT CARTS.

>> MR. KOPPENHAFER: TOM, DO WE HAVE IN YOU PUBLIC COMMENTS ONLINE?

>> MOW PUBLIC COMMENT. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: TOM, DO YOU MIND TURNING UP THE THE MICROPHONE A LITTLE BIT MORE, 20% OR SO. IT'S HARD TO HEAR AND YOU IT'S HARD TO HEAR THE APPLICANT. THE P. YOURS AS WELL, PLEASE. YOU'RE WELCOME.

HEARING NO PUBLIC COMMENTS, THEN WE ARE BACK INTO THE AGENCY. ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT?

WE'VE SEEN THESE FROM TIME TO TIME HERE, AND -- >> DR. MCCORMICK: I DON'T HAVE ANY -- I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. I WAS JUST GOING TO SAY I THOUGHT THE APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION WAS WELL -- VERY WELL DONE.

THAT'S IT. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: THANK YOU, BILL.

THAT WAS IMPORTANT. >> DR. MCCORMICK: RIGHT. COINCHTS WAS GOING TO SAY WE'VE SEEN THESE FROM TIME TO TIME. THEY LOOK LIKE A LOT OF FUN, LIKE ALL HAVE TO DO IS WALK DOWN THE STREET AND YOU HAVE ALL THESE FOOD TRUCKS AROUND YOU. WITH ALL THAT SAID, DOES ANYONE

CARE TO MAKE A MOTION? >> DR. MCCORMICK: I'LL MAKE ONE.

>> MR. KOPPENHAFER: PLEASE. >> DR. MCCORMICK: I'VE GOT TO COME BACK TO THE MOTION.

SORRY. ALL RIGHT. MY MOTION IS REQUEST FOR A TEMPORARY USE PERMIT TO ALLOW FOR FOOD TRUCKS AT AMENITY CENTER WITHIN THE ARBOR MILLS PUD ORD 2014-11 AS AMENDED, PURSUANT TO SECTION 2.02.05.B .3 OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.

MY MOTION WAS TO APPROVE TUP 2020-04 ARBOR MILL@MILL CREEK HOA FOOD TRUCKS.

I GOT IT A LITTLE BIT BACK WRARDZ L. WARDS BUT I THINK YOU WE GOT IT ALL OUT.

>> MR. CHAIRMAN, IF I COULD JUST CONFIRM WITH DR. MCCORMICK, WOULD THAT BE INCLUDING THE FOUR

FINDINGS OF FACT AND THE EIGHT CONDITIONS? >> DR. MCCORMICK: YES, SIR.

>> THANK YOU. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A MOTION AND WE HAVE A

SECOND FROM MR. WAINRIGHT. >> MR. WAINRIGHT: YES. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, WE'LL DO THE ROLL CALL VOTE.

DR. MCCORMICK. >> DR. MCCORMICK: YES. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER:

DR. HYMNALS. >> DR. HILSENBECK: YES. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER:

MR. WAINRIGHT QUAINCHTS YES. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: FOR KOPPENHAFER SAYS YES.

MS. PERKINS. >> MS. PERKINS: YES. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER:

MR. ALAIMO. >> MR. ALAIMO: YES. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: AND

MR. MATOVINA. >> MR. MATOVINA: YES. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: GOOD LUCK WITH THE FOOD TRUCKS. ALWAYS AVAILABLE FOR SAMPLING UP HERE TOO.

[2. NZVAR 2020-02 Planet Fitness Signs.]

[00:15:01]

ITEM NUMBER 2, ROSS MCARTHUR. >> PRESENT. >> COVERAGE VIRTUALLY.

>> VIRTUALLY, YES. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: FIRST LET'S GO THROUGH EX PARTE FOR

THE MEMBERS. DR. MCCORMICK. >> MODERATOR:

>> DR. MCCORMICK:ION. >> DR. HILSENBECK: NO EXPARP WAINCHTS NO.

>> MR. KOPPENHAFER: MR. KOPPENHAFER SAYS NO. MS. MERNTION.

>> MS. PERKINS: NO SH. >> NO. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: ROSS,

WOULD YOU LIKE TO TAKE OVER NOW. >> YES. GOOD AFTERNOON, COUNCIL.

I AM WITH PLANET FITNESS. WE ARE HERE TODAY ASKING RELIEF PRESIDENT CURRENT ORDINANCE FOR OUR LOCATION AT 80 EPIC BOULEVARD IN REGARDS TO OVERALL SIGN SQUARE FOOTAGE AND INDIVIDUAL LAW SIGN ALLOWANCE. CURRENT ORDINANCE ALLOWS FOR 200 SQUARE FEET PER BUSINESS WITH NO SIGN BEING MORE THAN 150 SQUARE FEET IN SIGN FACE AREA. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU FOLKS RECALL, BUT WE WERE HERE THEY 1ST OF OCTOBER REQUESTING A SIMILAR MATTER IN THAT WE WERE ASKING FOR 474 SQUARE FEET IN TOTAL SIGN AREA FOR THREE SIGNS, EACH AT 1 HADN'T 58 SQUARE FEET, WHICH WAS OVER THE OVERALL ALLOWED SQUARE FOOTAGE FOR A SID THE INDIVIDUAL SIGN FACE AREA OF ALMOST 8 SQUARE FEET PER SIGN. THE RECOMMENDATION AT THE TIME WAS TO TRY AND GET A LITTLE MORE COMPLIANT. WE WENT BACK AND DID OUR HOMEWORK.

WE ARE ASKING NOW FOR TWO SIGNS WITH THE BEST VISIBILITY WE FEEL FOR THIS LOCATION, ONE OVER THE FRONT DOORS AND ONE FACING EAST, AND WE HAVE REDUCED THE SIZE OF EACH INDIVIDUAL SIGN TO BE COMPLIANT AT 148 SQUARE FEET PER SIGN, WHICH IS 2 FEET LESS, BUT THE OVERALL SQUARE FOOTAGE IS 96 SQUARE FEET HIGHER THAN THE ALLOWABLE. AND WE FEEL THAT WITH THE HIGH SPEED OF TRAFFIC ON THE HIGHWAY, THE SETBACK FROM THE MAIN ROAD AND NEW DEVELOPMENT THAT WILL BE IN THE AREA IN TIME, THAT WE WILL BE LOST TO OUR CUSTOMERS, NEW CUSTOMERS AS THEY TRAVEL BACK AND FORTH ON NUMBER 7 AND CAUSING, IF THEY DO MISS THE TURN TO THE FACILITY, THAT THEY WILL HAVE TO DRIVE AROUND THE BLOCK TO EVENTUALLY FIND THE ENTRANCE AND GET INTO OUR SITE.

WE FEEL THAT OTHER SIGNS IN THE AREA WITH MCDONALD'S, THAT BY OUR CALCULATION IS GREATER THAN WHAT WE'RE ASKING, AND WE'RE ASKING FOR A FAVORABLE CONSIDERATION ON THE COUNCIL'S

PART. THANK YOU. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: THANK YOU.

AGAIN, DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC SPEAKER CARDS? >> MR. WAINRIGHT: NO.

>> MR. KOPPENHAFER: DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC SPEAKERS ONLINE, SIR? >> NO PUBLIC COMMENTS.

CHONCHTS THANK YOU VERY . >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

WE ARE BACK IN THE AGENCY FOR QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT, THOUGHTS OR A MOTION.

>> MR. WAINRIGHT: I HAVE A QUESTION. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: PLEASE,

ARCHIE. >> MR. WAINRIGHT: COULD YOU PLEASE SUMMARIZE THE CURRENT REGULATION VERSUS THE VARIANCE THAT YOU WISH IN TERMS OF NUMBERS OF SQUARE FEET IN EXCESS

OF THE STANDARD. >> YES. THE CURRENT STANDARD ALLOWS FOR 200 SQUARE FEET PER BUSINESS. WE'RE ASKING FOR 296, WHICH IS 96 FEET, SQUARE FEET OVER THE A ALLOWABLE. THE CURRENT SIGN ALLOWANCE, INDIVIDUAL SIGN ALLOWANCE IS 150 SQUARE FEET, AND WE ARE AT 148 SQUARE FEET. SO ONE SIGN IS COMPLIANT BY

2 FEET AND THE OTHER SIGN IS IN EXCESS OF 96 SQUARE FEET. >> MR. WAINRIGHT: THANK YOU.

[00:20:04]

>> MR. KOPPENHAFER: LET'S GO THROUGH THE LIST, SEE WHO'S GOT QUESTION.

DR. MCCORMICK, DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? >> DR. I

ASSUME NONE. DR. HILSENBECK. >> DR. HILSENBECK: I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. I DO HAVE A COMMENT. I DO THINK THEY WERE RESPONSIVE TO OUR DISCUSSION THAT WE HAD, AND THEY HAVE REDUCED THE REQUEST SO I AM FAVORABLY

INCLINED TO VOTE FOR THIS AT THIS POINT. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER:

MR. WAINRIGHT. >> MR. WAINRIGHT: I ASKED MY QUESTION.

MY ONLY COMMENT IS STILL THAT FIRST CRITERIA, THEY'RE 30% OVER OR ACTUALLY CLOSER TO 50% OVER

THE STANDARD. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: I DO NOT KNOW ANY QUESTIONS.

MS. PERKINS. >> MS. PERKINS: NO QUESTIONS. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER:

MR. ALAIMO. >> MR. ALAIMO: NO QUESTIONS. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: AND

MR. MATOVINA. >> MR. MATOVINA: NO QUESTIONS. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: ALL RIGHT.

THEN WE ARE BACK IN THE AGENCY FOR THOUGHTS OR A MOTION, PLEASE.

GO AHEAD. >> MS. PERKINS: I'LL HAVE A MOTION.

MOTION TO APPROVE NON-ZONING VAIR KANSAS 2020-02 SIGN FOR A NON-ZONING VARIANCE FOR SECTION AND 7.02 .0 IF HADN'T D LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TO ALLOW 296 SQUARE FEET OF ADVERTISING DISPLAY AREA FOR BUILDING SIGNAGE IN LIEU OF THE MAXIMUM 200 SQUARE FOOT OF SIGNAGE PER BUSINESS, BASED ON EIGHT FINDINGS OF FACT AND SUBJECT TO THE FIVE QUANS PROVIDED IN THE

STAFF REPORT. >> I'LL SECOND THAT. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: GREG BEAT YOU TO THE PUNCH. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION, PLEASE SPEAK UP. HEARING NONE, WE'LL DO OUR ROLL CALL VOTE.

DR. MCCORMICK. >> YES. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER:

DR. HILINGS. >> DR. HILSENBECK: YES. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER:

MR. WAINRIGHT. >> MR. WAINRIGHT: NO. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: MR. KOPF

SAYS YES. MS. PERKINS. >> MS. PERKINS: YES.

>> MR. KOPPENHAFER: MR. ALAIMO. >> MR. ALAIMO: YES.

>> MR. KOPPENHAFER: AND MR. MATOVINA. >> MR. MATOVINA: YES.

>> MR. KOPPENHAFER: MOTION CARRIES IN THE AFFIRMATIVE. >> THANK YOU.

COVERAGE YOU'RE WELCOME. >> SEASONS GREETINGS. BYE NOW.

>> MR. KOPPENHAFER: SEASONS GREETINGS. THANK YOU.

[3. NZVAR 2020-08 Buc-ee's at St. Johns. ]

PLEASE. DR. MCCORMICK. >> NO EXPARTD.

>> MR. KOPPENHAFER: DR. HILSENBECK. >> DR. HILSENBECK: NO

EX PARTE. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: MR. WAIRNL.

>> MR. WAINRIGHT: NO. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: MR. KOPPENHAFER, I DROVE AROUND THE SITE BEFORE THEY KICKED ME OUT OF IT. MS. PERKINS.

>> MS. PERKINS: NO. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: MR. ALAIMO.

>> MR. ALAIMO: NO. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: AND MR. MATOVINA.

>> MR. MATOVINA: NO. >> MR. CHAIRMAN, I APOLOGIZE. BEFORE MS. HAGUEA GOES, THE BOARD MEMBER SHOULD RECEIVED IN THEIR PACKET TODAY AN AMENDED MOTION PACKET THAT INCLUDES THE CORRECT LANGUAGE AND ACCURATELY REFLECTS THE REQUEST OF THE APPLICANT HERE.

IT IS A LITTLE LONG, SO I'D -- MY SUGGESTION WOULD BE THAT WHEN THE BOARD DECIDES TO MAKE A MOTION, THEY COULD MAKE IT IN THE FORM OF I A MOTION TO A MOVE OR MOTION TO DENY AS SET FORTH IN THE AMEND PACKET OR AMENDED STAFF REPORT TO SHOARCHT IT. I WANTED TO MAKE SURE FOR THE RECORD EVERYONE I HAD IT, AND I CAN ALSO PULL THE ON IT OVERHEAD FOR ANY OF THE VIEWING PUBLIC TO

SEE THE AMENDED MOTION AS WELL. THANK YOU. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: BECAUSE WE GET THESE THINGS AT SORT OF THE LAST MINUTE, IF SOMEONE COULD TAKE A YELLOW HIGHLIGHTER OR SOMEHOW BRING TO THE AGENCY'S ATTENTION WHAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN CHANGED.

>> AND I'LL -- I GUESS I'LL SAY IT IS IT'S ALMOST INTHIERL NEW. I'LL GIVE YOU A LITTLE BACKGROUND. I NEED TODAY SPEAK WITH MS. HAGA TO GET A BETTER SENSE OF WHAT THE REQUEST WAS VERSUS WHAT STAFF'S UNDERSTANDING WAS, AND WE HAVE NOW ACCURATELY REFLECTED WHAT SHE IS SEEKING, FOR INSTANCE, THERE'S A POINT A AND B, AND SHE'LL DESCRIBE IN MORE DETAIL THAT RELATES TO THE NUMBER OF SIGNS, THE NUMBER OF FACADES THAT CAN HAVE SIGNS, AND WE GOT A LITTLE MORE CLARITY ABOUT THE RESTRICTIONS RELATING TO THE TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGE THAT IS REQUESTED HERE. AND I BELIEVE MS. HAGA WILL GO INTO A LITTLE BIT MORE DETAIL ABOUT THAT TOO. BUT IT'S -- IT'S ESSENTIALLY A BRAND NEW MOTION, MR. CHAIRMAN.

>> MR. KOPPENHAFER: DOES THIS MATERIALLY EFFECT THE ADVERTISEMENT?

>> NO, IT DOES NOT. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: MS. HAGA, MAYBE YOU CAN ENLIGHTEN US ON

THE DETAILS. >> I AM HEACH TO. THANK YOU AND GOOD AFTERNOON.

FOR THE ORD LINDSAY HAGAR EVERA PLANNER 1775 OLD ST. AUGUSTINE ROAD IN JACKSONVILLE.

[00:25:08]

I'VE INTRODUCED OUR TEAM, AND OUR REQUEST BEFORE YOU TODAY IS A NON-ZONING VARIANCE THAT'LL ACHIEVE VERY SPECIFIC WALL SIGN PACKAGE FOR THE BUCK BUC-EE'N YOU YOU CAN SEE IT'S UNDERVERTICAL AND HORIZONTAL CONSTRUCTION, NEARING DPLEERGTS SPRING 2021.

WHAT OUR WALL SIGN PACKAGE WILL A SIEVE CHIEF EXECUTIVE IS FOUR GOALS.

WE WILL REDUCE WALL SIGN CLUTTER BY RESTRICT TECH NUMBER OF WALL SIGNS BERE BUILDING FACADE FOR A PRIMARY AND SECONDARY SIGN WHICH IS AN APPROACH WE SEE ALONG THE CORRIDOR HERE IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY. WE'RE GOING TO ESTABLISH PROPORTIONALITY BETWEEN THE

PRIMARY. >> SECONDARY SIGN WHICH WILL BE REPRESENTED AS A PERCENTAGE.

WE'RE SCALING OUR SIGNAGE ANKLE TO COMPLEMENT THE BUILDING MASS OF THE BUCKEES SIGHT AND WEAR GOING TO EQUALIZE BEEN SINGLE TENANT RETAILS LOCATED ALONG THE CELEBRATE AND ARTERIAL ROAD.

THIS IS A KEY POINT WHEN WE LOOK AT WHAT A SINGLE TENANT AND MULTI-TENANT AND THE ALLOWABLE SIGNAGE UNDER THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. BEFORE LEADING INTO OUR MEETING HERE FOR THE PLANNING AND ZONING AGENCY WE HOSTED A VIRTUAL MEETING, WHICH WAS VERY HELPFUL BECAUSE IT'S A HEAVILY GRAPHIC-BASED PRESENTATION AND A REQUEST, ONE, FOR WHAT OUR SIGN MACKAGE IS SO IT LENT FOR US EXPLAINING TO THE COMMUNITY WHAT WE'RE REQUESTING AND PRESENTING HERE NO THE NON-ZONING VARIANCE. THAT PRESENTATION WAS THE BASIS FOR TODAY'S INFORMATION BEFORE UP. WE ADDED IN A COUPLE OF BITS OF ENHANCEMENTS TO ADDRESS QUESTIONS THAT AROSE FROM THAT MEETING AS WELL AS JUST DIFFERENT QUESTIONS THAT WE'VE HAD WITH STAFF AS WE GEARED UP FOR OUR PRESENTATION TO YOU TODAY.

THE SUMMARY WILL ADDRESS THE FIVE CRITERIA FOR NON-ZONING VARIANCES AS WELL AS THE FIVE ADDITIONAL CRITERIA WHEN WE WERE ASKING FOR SIGN DEVIATION. WHAT WE HAVE PRESENTED DURING OUR PRESENTATION WAS AGAIN EQUALIZING WALL SIGNAGE ALONG THE COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR.

WE DESCRIBED THE TO COMMUNITY OUR UNIQUE SITE CONDITIONS, THE DISTANCE OF THE BUILDINGS TO THE ROAD RIGHTS-OF-WAY 1-800-THAT EDGE OF PAVEMENT, THE ADJACENT ROADWAY TYPES AND ARE COLLECTOR AND ARTERIAL TIEPTS DISPIERNTION THEN WE TOOK OUR ATTENDANCE ON A TOUR OF THE GRAPHIC SITE USING GRAPHIC RENDERINGS AND I HOPE TO DO THAT HERE NOPPED A COUPLE OF THE QUESTIONS THAT CAME DURING OUR WEBINAR PRESENTATION WAS SHOWING WHAT THE CODE ALLOWS SIDE BY SIDE WITH WHAT WE'RE REPRESENTING, AND THAT REALLY HITS HOME WITH THE DIFFERENCES AND WHY THIS ISING A APPROVABLE NON-ZONING SARAH VARIANCE. THE OTHER QUESTIONS IS WHAT'S GOING ON AT THE SITE, WHAT'S THE LANDSCAPING AND WHEN WILL YOU PLANT THOSE TREES, SO WE ANSWERED THOSE QUESTIONS FOR THE PUBLIC IN. SO LET'S DISCUSS WHEER IN DESCRIBING THIS PORTION OF ST. JOHNS COUNTY. ON THE MAP THAT YOU SEE IN FRONT OF YOU, I I HAVE HIGHLIGHTED I-95. THAT'S CRITICAL TO KNOW WHERE WE ARE.

WE'RE LOCATED IN JUST FOR ORIENTATION, THE TOP OF THE MAP IS NORTH, AND THEN AS WE MOVE DOWN, WE SEE THAT WE HAVE THAT& ASSEMBLER CHANGE AT DURBIN CREEK NATIONAL PAVILION.

THAT'S UNDERWAY. WE'RE ALL FAMILIAR WITH THAT, HOW 90 AND 95 INTERSECT AS BEING DOWN. WE HAVE 220 HERE AND WE WILL TFT FIRST COAST OUTERBELTWAY END INTERCHANGE AGAIN WITH 95. THEN WE'RE LOCATED AT THE FOURTH INTERCHANGE A INTERNATIONAL GOLF PARKWAY AND 995. THE RED LIGHTLY THE PROPERTY. IT'S THEN A WHAT THE BUCKEESITES 33,000 SQUARE FEET. THAT'S THAT BUILDING MAP WE'LL TALK ABOUT AS WE SHOW YOU THE SIGNS RELATIVE TO THAT INTEGRATING INTO THE ARCHITECTURE.

SO WHAT'S OUR APPROVED PLAN? YOU KNOW WE'RE UNDER CONSTRUCTION, WE'RE APPROVED AND UNDERWAY. THIS PLAN IS OUR PROVED MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN HIGHLIGHTED WITH A CHUSM ELEMENTS TO REALLY RELAY OVER UNIQUE SITE CONDITIONS SO THAT WE HAVE THE 13-ACRE PARCEL THAT YOU SEE HIGHLIGHTED HERE IN GREEN. THAT GREEN REPRESENTS A SERIES OF SEENIC EDGES AS WELL AS EXISTING CANOPY TREES THAT ARE IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY ALONG INTERNATIONAL GOLF PARKWAY. AND THEN THE ON-RAMP AS YOU GET ONTO CELEBRATE 95.

INTERIOR TO OUR SITE ABOUT 40% IS PRESERVE OR 4 ACRES IS OPEN SPACE WELL REVEALING AS THE SCENIC EDGE POCKETS, OUR LANDSCAPING HAS PUSHED TO THESE OUTER EDGES REALLY HAVING A LANDSCAPING EDGE TO THE BUILDINGS, AND AS WE SEE OUR OPEN SPACE WITH OUR LANDSCAPE ISLAND. THE BUILDINGS THERE IS CENTERED WHERE YOU SEE, AND THEN I'M SMOAG SHOWING YOU DISTANCES IN TWO PARTS. IN THE RED LINE WE'RE RELATING THE BUILDING DISAINS THE TO PROPERTY LINE, AND THEN THE OUTER YELLOW TO THE AGE OF PAVEMENTS WHERE OUR PASSERSBY WOULD HAVE THAT MOMENT TO SEE THROUGH THE LANDSCAPING VIEW SHED THAT PEEK OF WHERE THEY CAN SEE THE WALL SIGNS. THOSE THOSE DISTANCES RANGE FROM 250 FEET TO ALMOST 200, 290 NEAT AT THE SHORTEST DISTANCE AT 150 FEET FROM THE BUILDING TO EITHER THE EDGE OF THE PROPERTY LINE FOR EDGE OF PAVEMENT. SO WHAT IS THIS NON-ZONING

[00:30:05]

WE PROPOSED TO LIMIT THE NUMBER OF PERMITTED SIGNS WHICH WOULD BE UNLIMITED TO NO MORE THAN TWO SIGNS, AND WE'RE DESCRIBING THOSE TO BE A PRIMARY SIGN WAS THE WORD BUC-EE'S AND OUR SECONDARY SIGN OUR LOGO BUTTON. WE'RE ALSO PROPOSING TO LIMIT THE NUMBER OF FACADES THAT WOULD BE ABLE TO HAVE WALL SIGNS FROM UNLIMITED WHICH IS PROVIDED IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TO NO MORE THAN THREE FOR OUR FOUR-SIDED BUILDINGS THEY REQUESTED TO INCREASE ONE OF THE WALL SIGNS. THAT WOULD BE OUR PRIMARY SIGN BUICK EAST FROM THE CODE LIMIT OF 150 SQUARE TETE FEET TO 175 SQUARE FEET, AND THEN ALLOWING FOR OUR BUTTON TO BE 40 PERCENT OF THAT SIZE SO THAT WE HAVE A TOTAL PER FACADE OF NO MORE THAN 240 SQUARE FEET.

YOU'LL SEE THROUGH A SERIES OF GRAFIX THAT I'LL WALK US THROUGH THAT HOW THIS FITS INTO THE BUILDING. SO THIS BEGINS FIRST STARTING WITH A PLAN SCREW AND THEN THE SO ON THE LEFT-HAND SIDE OF THE SCREEN YOU SEE WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING AS WALL SIGNS, THOSE THREE FACADES MADE UP OF PRIMARY AND SECOND VIEJ. WE'VE ALSO RELAYED THE FROFNLG WHERE IT FACES IN WEST, NORTH AND SOUTH ELEVATIONS ALONG THOSE ROADWAY TYPES.

THE KEY MALM SEE WILL BE OUR GUIDE AS WE GO THROUGH THE TOUR. SO THIS FIRST ELEVATION IS THE WEST ELEVATION. IN THE MAP KEY NORTH IS TO THE TOP THAT OF CIRCLE THAT YOU SEE AND THE WESTERN ELEVATION WOULD FACE TO INTERNATIONAL GOLF PARKWAY.

THAT'S THE SHORTEST IDENTIFIED OUR BUILDING FRONTAGE JUST OVER, UNDER 154 FEET.

OUR SOUTHERN EL VACANCY SPACES WORLD COMMERCE CENTER PARKWAY. INTERIOR TO THE WORLD COMMERCE CENTER DRI. AND THE THE NORTHERN ELEVATION IS OPPOSITE OF THAT AND IT FACES THE ON-RAMP'S INTERNATIONAL GOLF PARKWAY AS WELL AS INTERSTATE 95.

THOSE WOULD BE THE THREE FACADES WHERE OUR TRAVELING PUBLIC AND POTENTIAL CUSTOMERS LOOKING TO WHERE THEY WOULD SEE THIS WALL SIGNAGE. THE NEXT TOUR I WILL SHOW TO YOU FOUR VISH CHIEWSTLES RERNTIOND WE HAVE CREATED THAT SHOW THE REQUEST OF THE SIGNAGE ON THE BUILDING ELEVATION FROM THESE VAN THAT KNOWLEDGE POINTS SO STARTING WITH NEW NUMBER 1, THIS WOULD BE IF YOU'RE AT THE INTERSECTION OF GOLF PARKWAY AND WORLD COMMERCE CENTER AND YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE SITE AND YOU CAN SEE WITHIN THIS AREA THE APPEARANCE FROM THE WEST VIEW.

THIS IS THE CORNER WHICH WOULD BE THE SHORTEST IDENTITY OF OUR BUILDING PROJECT, AND YOU START TO SEE A COUPLE OF THE ITEMS OF THE SITE CONDITIONS. HERE WE'RE RELYING THE EXISTINGG MATURE CANOPY OAKS THAT ARE WITHIN THAT RIGHT-OF-WAY, AND SOME OF OUR LANDSCAPING THAT'S BEING PLANNED IN OUR COMMERCIAL CONSTRUCTION PLAN THAT REPRESENTS OUR SCENIC EDGE.

THIS IS THE SECOND VANTAGE POINT THAT OF SAME VIEW FROM THE WEST, AND WE HAVE ADVANCED A LITTLE CLOSER AS IF YOU WERE THE PEDESTRIAN. THE ROADWAY THAT WE SEE THESE CARS TURNING AT THE BOTTOM OUR PICTURE IS WORLD COMMERCE PARKWAY AS PEOPLE ARE AND ITING.

THIS GIVE US A CLOSER VIEW IN THE LANDSCAPING PLAN OF WHAT IS PLANTED AND WHAT IS REPRESENTED BY THE ACTUAL PLANTING PROGRAM THAT'S APPROVED FOR OUR SITE, AND YOU CAN START TO SEE PICTURES OF WHERE THE WALL SIGN WOULD BE ON THAT WEST ELEVATION& AND THAT SNAPSHOT THAT'S LIMITED IN THAT DONESSED WFNTD AMOUNT OF LANDSCAPING. -- WINDOW OF THE AMOUNT OF LANDSCAPING. I WILL PRESENT TO YOU TWO VIEWS. NOW WE HAVE ENTERED INTO WORLD COMMERCE CENTER AS IF WE WERE GOING TO GO TO RING POWER. WE'RE LOOKING AT THE STORE.

THIS IS WHERE YOU SEE AN OPEN EXPANSE OF THE CORNER OF THE BUILDING BECAUSE WE'RE AT THE FIRST ENTRANCE INTO THE PROPERTY WHERE YOU SEE THE CANOPY IN THE CORNER OF THE BUILDING ENTRANCE AND HOW IS SIZE OF SIGN FITS IN WITH THE MARQUEE HEADER THERE INTO THE BUILDING.

WE'VE CONTINUED NOW AGAIN ALONG WORLD COMMERCE CENTER AS WE'RE PASSING BY THE SECOND ENTRANCE, AND WE'RE STARTING TO SEE HOW THE LANDSCAPING IS BUILDING UP AND YOU'RE LOSING THAT VIEW AS YOU SEE, AS YOU COME IN AS A PASSERBY BUT YOU CAN SEE HOW THEN FITS INTO THE SCALE OF THE BUILDINGS AND ITS DISTANCE FROM THE RIGHT-OF-WAY WHERE WE HAVE BETWEEN LANDSCAPING, BUILDING AND THE OTHER ACCESSORY STRUCTURES ON-SITE. THE NEXT TWO VIEWS 3 AND 4 ARE JUST SINGLE IMAGES, AND THIS IS GHIFG US AN OPPORTUNITY. WE'VE NOW TURNED AROUND AND WE'RE EXITING AND WE'RE ON WORLD COMMERCE CENTER PARKWAY ALONG THE BOTTOM HERE AND WE'RE HEADED BACK OUT TO WORLD COMMERCE PARKWAY. YOU CAN SEE OPEN AGAIN, BECAUSE OF THE DRIVEWAY STRANS, AND THEN REARING IN HOW IT'S BEEN INTERRUPTED BY THE CANOPY TO THE FRONT AND THE LANDSCAPING WAS WE'RE REBUILDING THAT IN ON OUR SCENIC EDGES.

THE LAST VIEW IS FROM THE STANDPOINT OF LOOKING AT INTERNATIONAL GOLF PARKWAY IF WE'RE ON THE RAMP. HERE WE HAVE MADE THIS OUR DESTINATION.

WE'VE TRAVELED SOUTH ON I-95, EXITED ON INTERNATIONAL GOLF PARKWAY AND WE'RE AT THAT ROAD INTERSECTION AND WE'RE LOOKING ACROSS A FOUR-LANE DIVIDED HIGHWAY INTO THE CORNER OF OF

[00:35:02]

THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHICH YOU ADDRESS SINGLE BUSINESS TENANTS, ALMOST PUNITIVE IN THE SENSE THAT IT LIMITS TOTAL BUILDING SIGNAGE TO 200 SQUARE FEET PER BUILDING.

IF THIS BUILDING WAS DIVIDE INTO THREE DIFFERENT TENANTS, SAY THREE MULTI-TENANTS, YOU WOULD BE ABLE IN TOTAL, IN AGGREGATE TO GO OVER 370 SQUARE FEET INDIGENOUS TRIBES EVER DIVIDE BETWEEN THREE SIDES FOR THOSE TENANTS THERE'S A DISPARATE THAT'S PRESENTED BETWEEN APPLYING 200 SQUARE FEET PER BUSINESS RATHER THAN PER FOOT WHICH IS WHAT OUR REQUEST TO BE TO APPLY, AND IT LIMITS THAT SINGLE SIDE OF 150 SQUARE FEET NFNED WHAT YOUR BUILDING MASS WOULD BE RELATIVE TO THE HEIGHT OR VERT CAFLGHT YOUR BUILDING.

THE SECOND POINT IS THIS IS RELATED TO THE DESIRE TO REDUCE COSTS, IF THAT'S CORRECT.

IT IS NOT. THIS DOES NO CHANGE OUR REDPUKS COSTS IN ANY DEVELOPMENT REQUIREMENTS OR CONSTRUCTION COSTS. WILL THIS INCREASE CONGESTION.

NO, IT IS WILL NOOP. THIS TOUCHE NON-REZONING VARIANCE DOES TO THE NO RELATE TO FACTOR THAT WOULD OFF-SHOOT OR INCREASE CONGESTION. WILL IT NOT DIMINISH PROPERTY VALUES ARE CHANGE THE ESSENTIAL CHARACTER? WE'RE ESTABLISHING THAT WE ARE ON THE CELEBRATE INTERSTATE CORRIDOR CHARACTER AND THAT HAS THIS AMOUNT OF SIGNAGE.

YOU AND THE BOARDS OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS HAVE APPROVED UNIFORM SIGNAGE PLANS FOR SIMILAR PROJECTS ON THE INTERSTATE 95 CORRIDOR, AND I'LL WALK YOU THROUGH A COUPLE OF THOUGH POINTS. IS THIS EFFECTIVE IN HARMONY? OUR LAND CODE SEEKS TO PROVIDE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELL FAR FOR PROPERTY OWNERS AND SPECIFICALLY IN ARTICLE 7 THAT DEALS WITH SIGNS, WE PROMOTE TO PUBLIC SAFETY, EL SAFETY ANDIT WELFARE AND HAVE NON-DISCRIMINATORY SIGNS. I'LL WALK THREW THE -- FOR ADJACENT SIGNS AND PROJECTS.

TO BREAK DOWN, WE HAVE PUT TOGETHER A SERIES OF WHERE WE ARE.

I'M TAKING YOU ON A TOUR OF THE SITE SHOWING HOUR SIGN CONCEPTUALLY IN THE BUILDING TO GIVE YOU THOSE VIEW SHEDS, DOCUMENTING THOSE POINTS WE NEED TO SEE FOR SIGN VARIANCE.

HERE'S WHAT THE SIGN WILL LOOK LIKE IN OUR PRIMARY ON THE LEFT-HAND SIDE WHEN IS THE WORD BUC-EE'S AND OUR SECONDARY WHICH IS OUR BUTTON THAT YOU SEE FOR OUR LOGO.

WHEN YOU ADD THESE TOTAL SQUARE FOOTAGES UP THEY WILL COME BELIEVE 240 SQUARE FEET BUT WE'D LIKE TO HAVE THAT IN A PERMIT. AS WE CALL ALL KNOW PERMITTING IS TO MAKE SURE EVERYTHING IS FINE SO WE WILL COME BEFORE YOU AGAIN WITH THE DEVIATION IN PINCHES LET'S REMIND US WHERE WE ARE IN THE CORE DOOR. WE'RE LOCATED ON INTERSTATE 95 EXPWOWR SITE THERE AT THE BOTTOM, AND THE ADDITIONAL CRITERIA THAT I HAVE WALKED US THROUGH, AND THAT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE WHERE WE ARE, TAKING US ON A SITE TOUR. WOULD IT BE EFFECTIVELY VIEWABLE FROM THE NEAREST ROAD OR STREET SNROIFT YOU CAN SEE SNIPPETS HAVE VIEW SHEDS THAT WE HAVE BETWEEN THE AMOUNT OF LANDSCAPING WITH THE 30-FOOT SCENIC EDGE AND ITS EXISTING CANOPY TREES AND THE ROADS RIGHTS-OF-WAY, OUR RENDER, SHOW AND DEMONSTRATE THAT.

THE DISTANCE OF THE SIGNS, TOILE SIGNS FROM THE ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY.

HERE I'M MEASURING TO EDGE OF PAVEMENT. I BELIEVE IN YOUR STAFF REPORT THE STAFF MEASURED TO THE CENTER LINE OR WHERE A CAR OR PASSERBY WOULD BE CRIEFG.

AT THAT POINT IT'S REAFN HAVE EVEN A GREATER DISTANCE OF WHERE YOU HAVE THAT MOMENT TO SEE THE SIGNAGE. AND THEN THE SPEED LIMITS ON THE ADJACENT ROADS.

WE HAVE DESCRIBED WHERE THAT WOULD BE. WE'RE SURROUND BY MINOR, MAJOR AND SPHWEERL ARTERIAL ROADWAYS UPARE THE WARDS OF 65 MILES AN HOUR.

THEN THE IMPACT ON VIZ BIMENT YOU CAN SEE BETWEEN A COMBINATION OF THE SCREENING AND THE LANDSCAPING AND THE APPROPRIATENESS OF THE SIZE OF THE SIGN, HOW THAT MAKES FOR AN APPROPRIATE IMPACT AND CON THESKS BUILDING WHERE IT'S RELATED TO THIS SITE.

AGAIN ON THE BUILDING ELEVATIONS HOW IT'S BE INTEGRATED INTO THE SIZE OF OUR BUILDINGS THAT WE HAVE AS 53,000 SQUARE FEET AND WHERE IT'S LOCATED AT THE MARQUEE AREA.

SO WHAT DOES THIS MEAN FOR SIGN EQUITY, WHERE WE ARE HERE ON THE INTERSTATE? WE'RE GOING TO PULL IN AGAIN WHAT OUR PLAN WILL ACHIEVE FOR FOUNDATIONS FOR OUR QUAL SIGN PLAN TO REDUCE WALL SIGN CLUTTER PROPORTIONALITY BETWEEN THE PRIMARY AND SECONDARY SIGNAGE, SCALE TOWER BUILDING MAP, AND THEN EQUITY BETWEEN SINGLE TENANTS USERS.

WHAT THIS CHART RELIES IS AN ANCHOR TENANT PROVISIONS PULLED US OF THE DURBIN PARK PAVILION PUD. THAT FIRST TOP WOULD BE A SINGLE ANCHOR TENANT, AND WHAT THEY'RE SIGNAGE PROVISIONS OF THE WOULD ALLOW FOR A TOTAL PER BUILDINGS OF OVER 1,000 SQUARE FEET OF SIGNAGE. WHAT OUR REQUEST WOULD BE IF YOU AVERAGED OUR SIGNAGE OVER AND

[00:40:03]

THAT TO HAPPEN, WOULD BE AN. >> ANCHOR: OF 780 SQUARE FEET BUT WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR IS BELOW THAT. AGAIN IT'S A REQUEST FOR SIGNAGE FOR THREE FACADES AS THE 240 SQUARE FEET EACH OF THE EACH FOR A TOTAL OF 720. THE JUNIOR -- THAT WAS THE JUNIOR ANCHOR THEN IN DURBIN PARK PAVILION COMES JUST UNDER THAT.

SO WE'RE NOT AS LARGE AS THE MAIN ANCHOR TENANT THAT IS DEFINED WITHIN THAT COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR BUT ERNL WE'RE CERTAINLY LARGER THAT JUNIOR ANCHOR TENANT THAT HAS THE SAME PROVISION AND WE KNOW WE CAN REST ON THE DECISIONS WE HAVE MADE TO DEVIATE FROM THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE IN THAT PROVISION. WE WILL A LIKELY VISITED THE SITE. WE KNOW IT. WE HAVE APPROVED THE PLANS AND LOOKED AT IT. BUT HERE'S WHAT IT MEANS THOSE PROISK ON WHAT IS THE ANCHOR TALENT, THE LOLLIPOP OR BALLOON INDICATES WHAT THAT ANCHOR SIGN WOULD BE.

THAT'S 300 SQUARE FEET ON THE FRONT, SIDE AND REAR. AND THEN THE DEPARTMENT SIGNAGE YOU'RE AFFORD ONE SIGN AT 75 SQUARE FEET FOR EACH SERVICE LINE THAT YOU CAN.

YOU SOW YOU CAN SEE YOU'RE BUILDINGS UP ON THAT ANCHOR TENANT THAT EXISTS.

AND IT'S SIM LEARL SITUATED AT THE EXCHANGE OF THE INTERSTATE AND STATE ROAD 9B AND RACE TRACK ROAD. THIS FISHING HINSDZ WHAT MULTI-TENANT SIGNAGE LOOKS LIKE AND WHAT IT COULD ACHIEVE. IF OUR PROJECT WAS DIVIDE INTO MUPT TENANT IT WOULD EXCEED THE REQUESTS THAT WE HAVE FOR EACH FACADE. HERE'S ANOTHER ANCHOR TENANT THAT'S LOCATED, AND WHAT THIS ONE IS WORLDS WHILE IS YOU'RE SIEGE SOWING ON THE FRONTAGE SPACING THE INTERIOR IS IN THE BACK SIDE ALONG RACE TRACK ROAD, THIS IS IF SCENIC EDGE WEEK IT WILL HIT IT IS FULL MA CHOWRT CHIEWRT AS WE SHOWED IN OUR RENDERINGS BUT YOU ALSO HAVE A ANCHOR TENANT ON THE REAR ON THIS FA SUED AND WHERE YOU'RE SEEING DEPARTMENTY SIGNAGE.

SO IN CONCLUSION I HAVE TWO POINTS. I JUST WANT TO REMIND ALLS OF WHAT THE SIZE OF THINGS ARE. AS WE ARE PREPAYING FOR OUR PROJECT IN DIFFERENT QUESTIONS THAT I HAD, I CAME TO THE REALIZATION DO WE REALLY UNDERSTAND WHAT THE SIZE OF THINGS THAT WE TAKE FOR GRANTED OR THAT COMMONPLACE COMMON ELEMENTS.

WHEN WE JUXTAPOSE A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT ARE VERY FARM TO US ALL WE SEE THAT A STANDARD TRAFFIC SIGNAL IS A LITTLE OVER 3-1/2 FEET. THE LENS ITSELF IS 12 INCHES OR A FOOT WIDE COMPARED TIE 6-FOOT TALL MAN IT WILL SEEMS LARGE. JUX TAU POSED WHEN YOU US.

PUTS IT IS ONTH MAST ARM IT'S SEEMS APPROPRIATE IN ITS PLACE THE NEXT IS THE INTERSTATE SPEED LIMIT SIGN AT 5 FEET TALL. AGAIN TAKEN OUT OF CONTEXT NEXT TIE HUMAN FORM AT 6 FEET IT SEEMS INCREDIBLE LARGE JUXTAPOSE TAU POSED NEXT TO THAT MAN. THEN OUR SIGN LIMIT THAT WE HAVE FOR INTERNATIONAL GOLF PARKWAY BEING 7 FEET TALL BY I HAVE TWOO FEET LONG.

THAT IS THE SIZE OF SIGN THAT COMES OUT DOT MANUAL. ALL OF THESE SIGNS FOR BY SEEMS, IT SEEMS OUT OF PLACE NEXT ON THE FELLOW BRUTOVER THE INTERSTATE IN ITS APPROPRIATE CONTEXT IT MAKES SENSE. SO WITH THAT IN MIND WHEN WE LOOK IEWRT SIGNS, ON THE LEFT YOU SEE THE BUILDING ELEVATION WOULD BE WHAT THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE WOULD PERMIT ON EACH OF THE FACADES THAT WE'RE PRESENTING WEST, SOUTH AND NORTH.

ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THE SCREEN YOU SEE WHAT WE WOULD PROPOSE IS A 240 SQUARE FEET ON EACH OF THE SAME FACADES WATCHING FOR ONE. AND YOU CAN SEE THEY'RE PLACED IN ITS CONTEXT THE SIGN DOES -- IS APPROPRIATE AND IT DOES MEET THE INTENT OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE WHICH IS THE CRITICAL ELEMENTS OF ONE OF THE NON-ZONING VARIANCE CRITERIA. SO IN SUMMARY I'LL CONCLUDE AGAIN REMINDING US WHAT OUR REQUEST IS. THIS MATCHES INTO YOUR MOTION OF WHAT WE'RE LIMITING OUR WALL SIGNS. WE WANT TO BE VERY CLEAR ABOUT WHERE THEY WOULD BE PLACED ON THE BUILDINGS. WE'RE FOLLOWING THE SAME PROGRAM THAT'S USED WITHIN THE INTERSTATE CORRIDOR LIMITING IT TO THE FACADE AND WHICH SIGNS ARE BEING INCREASED FROM THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE PROVISIONS.

WITH THAT I WILL PAUSE FOR ANY QUESTIONS. I THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND ATTENTION, AND I'M HAPPY TO RETURN TO ANY GRAPHICS THAT WE HAVE OR TAKE SOME QUESTIONS.

>> MR. KOPPENHAFER: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> THANK YOU.

>> MR. KOPPENHAFER: DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC SPEAKER CARDS? WAINCHES NO.

>> MR. KOPPENHAFER: TOM, DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKERS ONLINE, SIR? >> NO PUBLIC COMMENT.

>> MR. KOPPENHAFER: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. THEN WE ARE BACK IN AGENCY FOR QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT OR COMMENTS. LET'S GO THROUGH THE LIST.

DR. MCCORMICK. YES OR COMMENT? HEARING NONE, DR. HYMNALS

HILSENBECK. >> DR. HILSENBECK: YOU MENTIONED IN PASSING YOUR POLE SIGN OUT THERE ON STATE I-95. THAT IS 100 FEET TALL, NEARLY 300 EXPWAIR FEET IN THAT SIGN.

ADD THAT TO 72 OF THE FEET THAT YOU'RE -- 720 FEET YOU'RE ASKING FOR YOU'RE OVER 1,000 SQUARE FEET OF ADVERTISING SIGNAGE, SO THAT IS A CONCERN TO ME. I MEAN, YOUR POLE SIGN HAS BEEN APPROVED. YOU ALSO MENTIONED A LOT VERSUS A SINGLE.

[00:45:01]

DO YOU KNOW HOW MANY SQUARE FEET? >> ONE SECOND.

I DON'T KNOW THE TOTAL, BUT A JUNIOR ANCHOR TENANT IS DEFINED TO BE UP TO 89,000 SQUARE FEET,

SO AN ANCHOR TENANT IS GREATER THAN THAT RANGE. >> DR. HILSENBECK: I WOULD THINK THEY WOULD BE IN THE RANGE OF 1,000 SQUARE FEET, SOMETHING LIKE THAT WALMART.

YOU KNOW, THE ORIGINAL REQUEST, AND I KNOW IT WAS REVISED AND WE GOT THAT INFORMATION TODAY, WAS 720 SQUARE FEET SIGNAGE. THAT'S STILL EXCLUDED THE 300-FOOT POLE SIGN.

AND YOU -- FACADE. IN MY OPINION I JUST THINK IT'S STILL TOO MUCH.

I DON'T KNOW IF ANYBODY IS GOING TO MISS SEEING THAT THERE. AND EXCEPT FOR THE DECIPHERABLE VILLAGE AND THE WESTMINSTER VILLAGE UP THERE AND THE RESIDENTIAL AREAS AND THE FACILITIES IN WORLD GOLF VILLAGE AND THE EPIC THEATER AND ALL THAT, IMAX THEATER, TO ME THIS IS JUST STILL TOO OVER THE TOP, IN MY OPINION, OF SIGNAGE. AND I DO LIKE YOUR LANDSCAPING, AND I THINK THAT'S VERY NICE. OF THE THINGS YOU SHOWED, I THINK THERE'S REALLY SOME NICE LANDSCAPING. BUT SIGNAGE, THE SQUARE FOOTAGE THAT YOU'RE ASKING FOR IS TOO MUCH. I DON'T THINK ANYONE IS GOING TO MISS THIS MASSIVE STRUCTURE THERE WITH ALL YOUR OTHER SIGNS OUT ON THE INTERSTATE, AND I'D LIKE TO SEE IT REDUCED FRANKLY BEFORE I COULD VOTE. THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> MR. KOPPENHAFER: THANK YOU. MR. WAINRIGHT. >> MR. WAINRIGHT: YES.

YOU ALWAYS PRESENT SO THOROUGHLY. IT'S AWESOME.

>> THANK YOU. >> MR. WAINRIGHT: FRANKLY, IT'S A LITTLE INTIMIDATING TO ME TO TRY TO KEEP TRACK OF IT ALL. LET'S SEE. I HAVE A PROBLEM IN SPITE OF THAT WITH THE EXCESSIVE AMOUNT OF SIGNAGE. IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THE I-95 SOUTH RAMP, THAT DOESN'T SEEM TO MATTER TO ME VERY MUCH TO ME. I DON'T KNOW ANYBODY GETTING ON THE SOUTH RAMP TO GET ON 95, WHETHER THEY'RE GOING TO BE LOOKING OR NOT.

THE FOLKS TO THE SOUTH AND TOLT TO THE NORTHEAST, THEY SEE AN AWFUL LOT OF SIGNAGE.

WHY IS THIS -- AND I HAVE THREE QUESTIONSARE THERE OTHERS IN THA THAT ARE CONFORMING WITH THE SIGN REQUIREMENTS OF THE COUNTY? AND THAT WILL BE AFFECTED BY THIS CONSECUTIVE AMOUNT OF

SIGNAGE HERE, OTHER FAST FOOD PLACES OR -- >> THIS SITE IS LOCATED IN THE WORLD COMMERCE CENTER DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT RIGHT IN THAT FIRST CORNER PIECE IN THE MIXED USE PORTION OF THAT PROJECT. THE WORLD COMMERCE CENTER PUD SIGNAGE PLAN SIMPLY REFERS YOU BACK TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.

WE KNOW THAT WE'RE THE FIRST COMMERCIAL PARCEL BEYOND RAIN POWER TO BE DEVELOPED WITHIN IN AREA. MOST THAT YOU SEE IS THE SINGLE FAMILY AND MULTI-FAMILY TO THE SOUTH OF THAT PROJECT, NOT ALONG THE ST. JOHNS WHICH IS ON THE NORTHERN SIDE THAT OF INTERSECTION. SO WE'VE SEEN PLANS FOR COSTCO ACROSS FROM OUR PROJECT.

SO THIS COULDN'T BE AFFECTED OR IMPACTED, THIS SIGN NOT IMPACT OTHER BUSINESSES.

IMMEDIATELY JEAJTS THEY'RE VACANT COMMERCIAL PARCELS. >> MR. WAINRIGHT: MY SECOND OF THE THREE QUESTIONS. IT SAYS HERE THAT THE VARIANCE IS IN HARMONY WITH THE GENERAL

INTENT OF THIS CODE, YET THERE'S NOBODY ELSE THERE. >> SO WE'RE ESTABLISHING -- THE GENERAL INTENT OF YOUR CODE, I PULLED OUT TWO PORTIONS OF IT, ONE FROM ARTICLE 1 OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE THAT SPEAKS TO PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY AND WELFARE.

THAT'S WHAT WE WERE DO'S AS PLANNERS. ALSO LOOKING AT THE RIGHTS OF PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNERS OF WHAT THEY CAN ENJOY AND USE FOR THEIR PROPERTY.

RARNGDZ SIGNS THERE ARE A SPECIFIC ELEMENT ON THE INTENT OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE WHICH WOULD PROVIDE FOR EQUITY AND NON-DISCRIMINATORY BETWEEN SIGNS.

SO WHAT WE'RE SHOWING HAS THE CHARACTER AND THE INTENT HERE ON INTERSTATE 95 LOCATED WITHIN A LARGE COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR AT AN INTERCHANGE. WE SEE THAT THE COUNTY, THIS

[00:50:04]

IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AS WRITTEN, THAT WE HAVE ONE SIGN THAT'S 150 SQUARE FEET, NOT TO EXCEED 200 SQUARE FEET PER BUSINESS, PER BUILDING, BUT UNLIMITED IN NUMBER OF SIGNS IS A FLAW WITHIN THAT LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AND DOESN'T PROVIDE FOR THAT POINT OF ADDRESSING MASS AND BUILDING SCALE.

SO THAT'S WHAT THE INTENT WOULD BE OBJECT, WHAT HARM OR OFF-SHOOT FROM APPLYING FOR THIS SIZE THAT FITS INTO THE ARCHITECTURE OF THE BUILDINGS WOULD BE A NEGATIVE IMPACT RESULTING FROM THIS. OTHER THAN THE OPTICS OF THE NUMBER CHANGE.

>> MR. WAINRIGHT: THANK YOU. AND MY THIRD QUESTION, THE MESSAGE IS NOT EFFECTIVELY VIEWABLE FROM THE NEAREST ROAD OR STREET. WHAT ABOUT THAT?

IT LOOK VISIBLE TO ME. >> IT IS IN THOSE RENDERINGS AS I SHOWED YOU.

THOSE RENDER. >>> REPRESENT THE SIZE THAT WE'RE, AND IF YOU THINK ABOUT THE SIZE OF THINGS AND RAS YOU'RE DRIVING, WE HAVE, AND THE COMPARISON TO OTHER COMMERCIAL PROJECTS IN ITS NORTHWEST SECTOR, A 30-FOOT SCENIC EDGE INSIDE OUR PROJECT AREA WITH AN ADDITIONAL CANOPY ROW THAT'S WITHIN THAT RIGHT-OF-WAY RIGHT-OF-WAY.

WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? THERE ARE LIMITED CHANCES AND CONDENSED VIEW SHEDS TO SEE WHAT WOULD BE THAT SIGN. SO IF IT CAME IN REGULATED AT THE 150 SQUARE FEET, YOU WOULD NOT HAVE THAT MOMENT SEE THAT SIGN WITHIN THAT AREA, AND THAT'S WHAT THE RENDERINGS WEREY SHOWING US, THAT ABILITY SEE AS WELL AS THE DISTANCE FROM THE EDGE OF PAVEMENT WHERE WE WOULD

BE AS EITHER DRIVERS OR PEDESTRIANS. >> M. WAINRIGHT: THANK YOU.

FOR MYSELF, I REMAIN -- I'M OKAY WITH THE SIDE OF THAT LOOKS OUT ON 95 AND THE SOUTH RAMP.

THE OTHERS I THINK ARE, ALTHOUGH YOUR ARGUMENTS OR YOUR POSITION IS VERY PERSUASIVE, IT SEEMS EXCESSIVE TO ME. JUST A LOT OF SIGNAGE. THANK YOU.

>> FROM THE OPTICIAN OF THE NUMBER OR WITHIN THE CONTEXT? THE CONTEXT OF THE BUILDING ITSELF SCALING IT UP TO WHERE IT IS IN THE BUILDING, ITS OVERHEAD MARQUEE.

WHAT I'M SHOWING ON THE SCREEN NOW, MR. WAINRIGHT, IS WHAT THE CODE SIZE WOULD ALLOW ON THE SAMIZE BUILDING AND THEN WHAT WE'RE REQUESTING ON OUR MAIN ENTRYWAY THAT WE SEE IN EACH OF THOSE ELEVATIONS. SO WHAT'S ABSENT FROM THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE IS RECOGNIZING THAT PORTION. IT WILL ALLOW FOR A BUILDING OF THIS SIZE BUT WOULD NOT ALLOW FOR INTEGRATED SIGNAGE TO MATCH THAT, AND THAT'S THE POINTS. THAT'S THE TENT OF INTENT OF WHAT WE'RE DOING FOR THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. SO THAT BOTTOM MID ROW THAT YOU SEE IS OUR PRIMARY CUSTOMER ENTRANCE FACING INTO WORLD COMMERCE CENTER IN THAT AREA.

AGAIN WE'RE INTERIOR TO THAT SITE, AND THEN THE SOUTHERN -- THE BOTTOM THAT YOU SEE IS FOR I-95. SO AGAIN, IN THE CONTEXT OF THE BUILDING, NOT THE OPTICS OF THE NUMBER, WE WE HAVE ESTABLISHET IT FITS WITHIN THIS SITE FOR THIS SPECIFIC CONDITION.

>> MR. WAINRIGHT: THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: MS. HAGA, YOU'VE GOT A LOT OF BACKGROUND IN SIGNS FOR SOME REASON IN MY LIFE.

SO THE REALITY IS THERE WILL BE BILLBOARDS UP ON 95 AND THIS WILL BE AN EVENT FOR THE WHOLE FAMILY TO ENJOY AND WATCH THE SOUTH OF THE BORDER TYPE SIGNS AND ALL THAT KITSCHY STUFF.

AND NOBODY'S GOING TO MISS THIS THING. FROM THE REALITY SIDE.

GETTING AWAY FROM THAT AND LOOKING AT THIS THING IN THE CONTEXT OF THE P SEAVMENT WHEARG THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE FOR WHAT IT'S EXPWOSHTH MATE FLAWED BE AND I DON'T SPHWREE WITH THAT, IN MY HONOLULU OPINION IT NIGHT BE 200 SQUARE FEET BUT IT'S NOT LIKE FOUR TIMES THAT.

IT'S SOMETHING 50% MORE, WHATEVER. I DON'T KNOW.

IT'S NOT UP TO ME TO DECIDE. BUT IT'S NOT THAT SIGNIFICANT OF A JUMP.

I THINK WHEN YOU ASK FOR A VARIANCE AND TO GO TO THIS EXTREME, I THINK YOU'VE GOT TO LOOK AT THE CHARACTER OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD THERE. AND WHILE THERE IS NOT A LOT AROUND YOU AT THE MOMENT, YOU KNOW, ROYAL GOLF VILLAGE AT SOME POINT IS OR WAS A HIGHER END -- AND I'M NOT TRYING TO DISPARAGE THE TRUCK STOP OR GAS STATION -- BUT IT HAD A LOT MORE PANACHE THAN A VERY NICE CONVENIENCE STORE EXIT THERE. AND SO I THINK THAT THE CHARACTER, THE CHARACTER THAT THE GORLD WORLD GOLF VILLAGE DEVELOPER PUT IN WAS A LOT OF BEAUTIFUL LANDSCAPING AND A LOT OF BEAUTIFUL ELEMENTS THERE, AND I DON'T PERSONALLY AGREE THAT THIS FITS WITHIN THAT MYSELF IN TERMS OF THE SANITIZE ES OF THESE SIGNS.

[00:55:02]

THE BUTTON -- IT MAY BE A BUTTON BUT IT'S STILL A SIGN IN EVERYBODY'S DEFINITION OF IT, RIGHT? SO I THINK TO CELEBRATE THEM IS NICE BUT I THINK YOU HAVE TO ALSO -- SEPARATE THEM IS NICE BUT I THINK YOU ALSO HAVE TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT YOU HAVE THIS GIANT ORE MUST POLE SIGN. THE THING IS 100 FEET TALL. I GET UP FAMILIES ARE GOING TO WANT TO SIGHT. YOU'RE GOING TOY WHEN E. KNORR WHERE IT'S ON THE HIGHWAY.

THE SITE ITSELF, WHILE IT MAY BE A PERCEIVED DIFFICULT, THAT'S SORT OF A SELF-IMPOSED THING.

IT'S GOT TO HAVE LANDSCAPING AROUND IT. THEY ALWAYS DO.

AND FRANKLY IT NEEDS LANDSCAPING AROUND IT BECAUSE THOSE 13 ACRES, ABOUT -- WHATEVER THE PERCENTAGE IS -- 80% OF IT IS PAVED. RIGHT IN THE MIL.

YOU'VE GOT A COUPLE OF ISLANDS ON THE SIDE, BUT IT'S A FAIRLY HARD SURFACE THERE.

I WAS DRIVING BY IT THE OTHER DAY AND DROVE THROUGH IT. SO I PERSONALLY THINK IT'S TOO MUCH A GRAB HERE. AND WHILE I DO THINK THERE'S SOME WIGGLE ROOM IN TERMS OF YOUR 200 OR 150 SQUARE FOOT SIGN REQUIREMENT, I THINK 720 IS JUST TOO FAR FOR ME PERSONALLY.

>> SO WITH REGARD TO THE POLE SIGN, YES, THAT IS A SIGN THAT'S ALLOWED BY RIGHT WITHIN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AND DOES PROVIDE FOR THE TRAVELING PUBLIC AS YOU'RE NEARING THE EXIT WHERE TO GO. AND THEN SO AS WE DRAW DOWN INTO THE SITE, THEN WHAT IS THE SIGNAGE CONTEXT HERE FOR THE BUILDING FOR WALL SIGNS? IT'S NOT AS IF YOU'RE HEADED NORTH ON I-95 AND YOU'RE GOING TO LOOK AT THE BUILDING WALL SIGNS ON THAT PORTION.

IT'S REALLY TO BRING INTO THE SITE, AND THIS GRAPHIC TO ME HITS HOME WHAT THE CODE WOULD PERMIT, WHICH ACTUALLY WOULD ONLY BE ONE OF THOSE SIGNS ON A FACADE BECAUSE A A NEWER INTERPRETATION OF LIMITING THE BUILDING FOR A SINGLE TENANT TO 200 SQUARE FEET PER BUSINESS VERSUS WHAT YOU SEE HOW FITS INTO THE SCWAIL SCALE OF THE BHILGD SO WHERE WE DO ALLOW FOR THE SIZE OF THIS BUILDING, THE SCALE, THE MASSING, IT'S MISSING MI ARCHITECTURAL REGULATIONS THAT WAS ADOPTED WITHIN THE WORLD COMMERCE CENTER PUD OR& WITHIN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, YOU WOULD HAVE THE SIZE OF BUILDINGS THAT WOULD HAVE SIGNAGE ON IT THAT'S OUT OF CONTEXT TO THE BUILDING THAT IS PERMITTED. THE POINT OF THE LANDSCAPING RENDERINGS TO SHOW YOU IS TO GIVE THAT DISTANCE AND THOSE SCREEN SHOTS BUT TO SEE HOW THAT BUILDING FITS IN WITH THAT AMOUNT OF LANDSCAPING. 30% OF THE SITE IS IN LANDSCAPINGY AND WE HAVE A 30-FOOT SCENIC EDGE THAT'S ALONG THAT INTERNATIONAL GOLF PARKWAY.

SO WE CAN LOOK TOWARDS WHERE, AND WE CAN DISCUSS WITH MR. STAMP HERE IF YOU'D LIKE TO COME UP OR WE CAN TALK ABOUT OUR SIGNAGE, OR ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT.

POLE SIGN IS ENTIRELY OF DIFFERENT ON WHAT'S HAPPENING ON THE SIDE AND OUR BUILDINGS

FACADES ARE INTERNATIONAL INTO THE SITE OF WHAT THAT WOULD BE. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: SOY SEE IT AND I THINK OTHER PEOPLE COULD SEE. IT WHILE YOU FEEL YOU MAY BE PENALIZED BY THE BUILDING SIZE SIGNS, YOU'VE GOT THE POLE SIGN AND THAT'S BALANCING OUT E IMAITION. I'M JUST PLAYING THE DEVIL'S ADVOCATE HERE.

AGAIN, I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. I DON'T DISAGREE THAT THE BUILDING SIGNAGE COULD GET A LITTLE BIT BIGGER BUT I THINK IT'S BY FAR TOO BIG IN MY

OPINION. >> IN THE AGGREGATE AND THAT'S THE POINT TO BRAD WHEN HE OPENED UP OUR HEARING TODAY IN CLARIFYING. THE ORIGINAL MOTION IS THAT TOTALING UP 720 SQUARE FEET IN AGGREGATE FOR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.

WHAT WE'RE REQUESTING IS TO SHOW 240 SQUARE FEET PER FACADE. SO WHEN YOU REALLY LOOK AT WHAT THAT REQUEST IS FOR THE BUILDING AND THE SCWAIL SCAILG AND THE LINEAR FOOTAGE WE'RE USING THE SAME CODE FOOTAGE FOR THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. THAT OPEN TAISK GOING FROM 2000 SQUARE FEET TO 7201 INYEEKS THIS, THAT'S NOT REALLY WHAT OUR REQUEST IS.

WE'RE LOOKING AT EACH OF THE FACADES AND DOES THAT FIT IN IN THAT CONTEXT AND WHERE THEY FACE TO THE ROADWAY TYPE, THE DISTANCE AND THE STALE SCALE OF THE BUILDING BEING 13 ACRES.

>> ON THE HIGHWAYS, TOO, I DON'T KNOW WHAT THESE ARE EXACTLY CALLED BUT UPCOMING EXIT, HERE'S THE FOOD BUSINESSES OR THE SERVICE STATION, WHATEVER IT IS. YOU KNOW ALL THAT GETS, THAT'S PART OF YOUR ALLOWABLE SIGNAGE,, TOO. SO TO ME AGAIN I'M JUST REPEATING MYSELF SO I WON'T KEEP YOU DOING THIS, BUT NO ONE'S GOING TO MISS THIS THING, THE REALITY IS, AND I UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU'RE SAYING. I DON'T DISAGREE A GREAT DEAL

WITH THE BUILDING SIGNAGE BUT IT'S JUST TOO MUCH FOR ME. >> IN TOTAL.

OKAY. NOTED. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER:

MS. PERKINS. >> MS. PERKINS: I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.

I'M PROBABLY THE ONLY ONE THAT PROBABLY WILL AGREE I THINK IT LOOKS FINE.

I THINK IT'S IN CONTEXT WITH THE BUILDING SIZE AND THE VIEWPOINT, SO I WOULD SUPPORT IT.

>> THANK YOU. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: MR. ALAIMO.

>> MR. ALAIMO: YES, THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. HOW MANY LOCATIONS DOES BUC-EE'S

[01:00:01]

YOU HAVE? SOME. >> THANK YOU, MR. ALAIMO.

I'LL HAVE MR. STAN BEARD COME UP AND ANSWER THAT QUESTION AND GIVE US SOME MORE INFORMATION.

>> GOOD AFTERNOON. I'M SAM BADER, DIRECTOR OF RELATIONS FOR BUC-EE'S.

THANKS FOR HAVING US. WE HAVE 20 OTHER TRAVEL CENTERS THROUGHOUT TEXAS, ALABAMA, FLORIDA, GEORGIA. EACH ONE OF THESE TRAVEL CENTERT WE ARE REQUESTING.

NO OTHER LOCALITY. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: CAN WE MUTE A MEMBER BACK THERE, TOM 1

WHO'S GOT THE BARKING DOG. >> MR. WAINRIGHT: DID YOU BRING THE DOG WITH YOU?

>> I HAVE NO DOG. [LAUGHTER] >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: ROY, ANY

OTHER QUHES? >> MR. ALAIMO: I WANTED TO FOLLOW UP ON THAT BECAUSE IT WAS A LITTLE HARD TO HEAR. DID HE SAY THAT ALL THE OTHER LOCATIONS HAVE THE -- HAVE A SIMILAR SIGNAGE REQUEST THAT THEY'RE ASKING FOR HERE? IS THAT KIND OF WHAT I HEARD?

>> ALL OF OUR OTHER LOCATIONS HAVE THE -- THE REQUEST THAT WE HAVE PROPOSED ARE ON THE

BUILDINGS AS WE SPEAK. >> MR. ALAIMO: OKAY. I LIVE IN THE WORLD GOLF VILLAGE. I'M ACTUALLY PRETTY CLOSE TO WHERE THE BUC-EE'S IS.

I'VE BEEN TIE FEW OF THE BUC-EE'S. THEY'RE A BEAUTIFUL STORE.

THEY HAVE SOME OF THE BEST BEEF JACKER YOU'LL EVER HAVE. AND IT'S A BEAUTIFUL STORE.

BUT DRIVING PAST IT EVERY DAY, YOU'RE DEFINITELY NOT GOING TO MISS IT, AND I JUST HAVE TO ECHO SOME OF MY COLLEAGUES HERE TO THE BOARD THAT IT'S A LITTLE BIT MUCH OF A REQUEST HERE.

BUT THAT'S ALL I HAVE. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: THANK YOU. MR. MATOVINA.

>> MR. MATOVINA: YEAH, LINDSAY, I SEE THERE ARE TWO ACCESS POINTS, AND THEN ON WORLD COMMERCE. THOSE ARE THE ONLY TWO WAYS TO GET IN AND OUT OF THE BUC-EE'S,

IS THAT CORRECT? >> YES. >> MR. MATOVINA: AND THEN I SEE IN I DESCRIBE IT AS THE NORTHWEST CORNER, I SEE SOMETHING THAT'S LABELED.

I CAN'T READ THE LABEL BECAUSE IT'S -- ON MY COPY IT'S TOO SMALL, BUT IT LOOKS LIKE MAYBE

THAT MIGHT BE SOME SIGNAGE OR A WALL OR SOMETHING. >> DOES IT LOOK LIKE A SEMI CIRCLE WALL? THAT'S THE WORLD COMMERCE CENTER SIGNAGE PLACE MAKING AS YOU

ENTER WORLD COMMERCE CENTER, A PORTION OF THE PROPERTY. >> MR. MATOVINA: WILL THERE BE ANY SIGNAGE, FREE TANNED STANDING SIGNS AROUND THE PROPERTY SAYING THIS IS

BUC-EE'S, YOU'VE ARRIVED? >> YOUR DIRECTIONAL SIGNS. >> NO, THERE'S NO -- THE ONLY DIRECTIONAL SIGNS WE HAVE WOULD BE NO TRACTOR-TRAILERS, THE ONE FOOT BY ONE FOOT, VERY SMALL.

THE POLE SIGN AND THEN OUR BUILDING SIGNS ARE WHAT WE ARE ALLOWING FOR.

GETTING NOTICED. >> MR. MATOVINA: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: YOU'RE WELCOME.

ALL RIGHT. THAT'S IT FOR QUESTIONS. CARE TO OFFER ANYTHING ELSE?

>> SO, YEAH, THANK YOU. WHILE I'M UP HERE. THE POINT OF OUR REQUEST IS MAINLY, IT'S A SCALE ISSUE FOR US, AND I MEAN, IT'S FUNNY, WE GET SINGLED OUT BECAUSE WE'RE BIG IN, SO IN COMPARISON TO, SAY, A HOME DEPOT WHICH SHE SHOWS A VERY HOME DEPOT SIGNAGE DOWN THE ROAD, COMPARED TO THAT BUILDING AND THEIR SIGNAGE, WHAT WE ARE SAYING IS THAT OUR SIGNAGE IS RELATIVE TO OUR BUILDING SIZE. AND I MEAN, WE DESIGNED THE BUILDING, THOSE FACADES, WE DESIGNED THEM TO INCORPORATE OUR SIGNAGE.

AND STOW WHILE I SO WHIL, THE ARGUMENT COULD BE MADE THAT NO ONE'S GOING TO MISS US AND WE HAVE BILLBOARDS DOWN THE STREET AND WE HAVE. BLUE SIGNS ON THE HIGHWAY, I MEAN, THOSE AREN'T CODE RELATED, AND I CAN'T ALWAYS COUNT ON THOSE HAD TO HAPPEN, SO OUR SIGNAGE IS PRETTY BUILDING-SPECIFIC. IF YOU -- THE GENTLEMAN WHO LIVES IN WORLD COMMERCE CENTER, IF YOU GO TO THE GATE DOWN THE STREET, IT'S A SMALLER BUILDING, BUT THEY HAVE THREE SIGNS ON IT, AND IT'S BECAUSE THEY'RE ABLE TO SAY THEY'RE A GATE AND THEY'RE A

[01:05:07]

AND SO AGAIN, BACK TO THE HOME DEPOT OR THE WALMART, IF YOU'RE CALLED A MAJOR ANCHOR, WHICH WE ARE, BUT NOT IN SIZE BUT IN VISITORS AND REVENUES AND ALL THAT KIND OF STUFF, BUT IN WE WERE A MAJOR ANCHOR, WE WOULD BE GIVEN THAT LEVEL OF, YOU KNOW, MAIN SIGNAGE VERSUS DEPARTMENT SIGNAGE. AND IF DISPARATE BETWEEN WHAT IS ALLOWED FOR A HOME DEPOT OR A WALMART DOWN TO THE 200 SQUARE FEET OF SIGNAGE PER BUSINESS IS ENORMOUS.

AND WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO DO IS FIGURE A WAY IN BETWEEN AND MORE TOWARDS THE BIG FELLOWS BECAUSE

WE KIND OF ARE. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: ALL RIGHT. >> THANK YOU.

>> MR. KOPPENHAFER: THANK YOU. APPRECIATE IT. WE ARE BACK IN THE AGENCY THEN.

THOUGHTS? COMMENTS? >> DR. MCCORMICK: MR. CHAIRMAN. IRST OF ALL, I GOT TO CONFESS THE GREAT BARKING DOGS ARE MINE.

SO WHEN I MUTED, THAT'S WHY. SO RIGHT NOW I'M NOT MUTED. AND I THINK THAT THE ARGUMENTS THAT ARE BEING MADE BY LINDSAY AND THE OWNER OF BUC-EE'S ARE GOOD ARGUMENTS, BUT I THINK THAT THE ARGUMENTS THAT HAVE BEEN MADE AGAINST THESE SIGNS, THE AMOUNT OF SIGNAGE BY THE MEMBERS OF THE AGENCY, I'M PERSUADED MORE BY THAT SO I'M NOT GOING TO MAKE A MOTION BUT I'M GOING TO -- I'M INCLINED TO VOTE TO DENY THIS PROJECT. THANK YOU.

>> MR. KOPPENHAFER: YOU'RE WELCOME. ANYONE ELSE HAVE THOUGHTS OR

COMMENTS? >> I DO. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER:

MR. MATOVINA. >> MR. MATOVINA: BUC-EE'S IS AN UNUSUAL ANIMAL.

NAME ANOTHER BUC-EE'S, SOMETHING LIKE BUC-EE'S. YOU CABOT FIND CAN'T FIND ON.

SO IT DOESN'T FIT INTO OUR CODE. IT'S I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY SQUARE FEET THAT BUILDING IS BUT IT'S A PRETTY DARN BIG BUILDING LIKE A GROCERY STORE. AND SO WHEN I READ THROUGH THE FIVE REQUIREMENTS TO MEET A NON-ZONING VARIANCE WEEK I CAN FIND REASONS WHY THEY MEET ALL FIVE OF THOSE REQUIREMENTS, WHICH I BELIEVE IS THE CHARGE OF THIS, THIS GROUP.

I ALSO BELIEVE THAT NOT EVERYBODY'S GOING TO KNOW THAT'S A BUC-EE'S, AND I DON'T HAVE VERY GOOD SIGHT, EYE SIGHT E GETTING OFF THE HIGHWAY AND SAW THE LETTERS BECAUSE THEY DIEFNT FREESTANDING SIGN OUT FRONT, I WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO READ IT. I WOULDN'T KNOW NECESSARILY THAT WAS THE BUC-EE'S. AND I MIGHT GO THE OTHER WAY OR I MIGHT DRIVE PATS IT.

I DON'T KNOW. IF ANY EVENT, I'M PREPARED TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THIS REQUEST BECAUSE I BELIEVE IT MEETS THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE LDC, SO I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE NZVA 2020-08 IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE STAFF REPORT PAINCHTS.

>> MS. PERKINS: SECOND. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: WE HAVE A MOTION AND WE HAVE A SECOND TO APPROVE. ANY FURTHER COMMENTS? SEEING NONE, WE'LL VOTE THROUGH

THE ROLL CALL. DR. MCCORMICK. >> DR. MCCORMICK: NO.

>> MR. KOPPENHAFER: DR. HILSENBECK. >> DR. HILSENBECK: NO.

>> MR. KOPPENHAFER: MR. WAINRIGHT. >> MR. WAINRIGHT: I THOUGHT

THE PRESENTATION WAS EXCELLENT BUT NO. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: MR. KOPPENHAFER IS GOING TO SAY NO. MS. PERKINS.

>> MS. PERKINS: YES. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: MR. ALAIMO.

>> MR. ALAIMO: NO. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: AND MR. MATOVINA.

>> MR. MATOVINA: YES. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: ALL RIGHT. MOTION DOES NOT CARRY.

>> MR. CHAIRMAN, PROCEDURALLY I'D REQUEST OF THIS BOARD IF THERE IS ANOTHER MOTION TO BE MADE, IT WOULD BE HELPFUL FOR STAFF AND I THINK FOR THE APPLICANT IF THERE IS A MOTION MADE THAT COULD HELP US PROVIDE FINDINGS OF FACT TO SUPPORT THE BOARD'S DECISION, BUT THAT'S UP

TO THIS BOARD IF THEY WANT TO MAKE AN ADDITIONAL MOTION. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: SO DURING

[01:10:02]

MS. APPLICANT. >> THANK YOU. SO WE APPRECIATE THAT MOTION TO APPROVE AND SEE WHERE WE ARE HERE, THAT THAT MOTION DID NOT PASS, AND APPROACHING, WE'VE HEARD SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT IN TOTALITY THERE'S TOO MUCH SIGNAGE THERE, AND SO WHAT WOULD WE PROFFER HERE TO THE BOARD IN REDUCING ANY OF THAT SIGN OR THE THREE FACADES.

AGAIN, WE'RE LOOKING AT A LIMITING SIGNAGE TO THREE FACADE AT 240 SQUARE FEET FOR EACH

FACADE. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: SO IF I CAN INTERRUPT, RATHER THAN SORT OF DO THIS UNDER THE GUN, AND I'M NOT TRYING TO KICK THIS CAN DOWN THE ROAD BECAUSE I'VE GOT TO COME BACK TO THE NEXT MEETING, TOO, I WOULD SUGGEST YOU ALL FIGURE OUT WHAT YOU ALL THINK YOU WANT HERE AND THEN COME BACK TO US OR MAYBE TALK TO STAFF OR HOWEVER WANT YOU TO DO THAT, BUT I DON'T WANT YOU TO FEEL PRESSURED LIKE YOU'VE GOT TO -- YOU'VE GOT TO PERFORM SOME ACT FOR US. I'D RATHER YOU ALL FIGURE IT OUT, AND THEN APPROACH US AGAIN.

>> AND I APPRECIATE THAT. I ALSO WANT TO POINT OUT THAT WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT WHAT WE COME BACK WITH IS WITHIN THE SCOPE OF REASONABLENESS TO YOU FOLKS, AND SO WITH THAT SAID, I'M A LITTLE -- I'M A LITTLE CLOUDY ON WHAT I'M TRYING TO SOLVE FOR, AND WE'RE ALL ABOUT -- WE WE CAN FIX THIS. THERE'S BEEN -- YOU MENTIONED THE SIZE OF THE POLE SIGN.

THERE'S BEEN MENTION OF ANCHORS VERSUS JUNIOR ANCHORS VERSUS MULTIPLE TENANT BUILDINGS AND THINGS LIKE THAT. AND SO THE THING THAT I DID, LINDSAY, WHERE I COMPARED TO US

A MAJOR AND A JUNIOR AND WHERE WE FELL IN BETWEEN -- >> YEP.

>> -- SO THOSE -- AND STOP ME IF YOU'RE TIRED OF HEARING THIS AND YOU JUST WANT ME TO GO BACK AND COME UP WITH SOMETHING, BUT WHAT I'M TRYING TO GET TO IS THAT THAT SIGNAGE SCENARIO, IT DIDN'T INCLUDE ANY POLE SIGNS OR GROUND-MOUNTED SIGNS OR ANY OTHER SIGNS OTHER THAN BUILDING SIGNS, AND I THOUGHT THAT IT WAS ABOUT AS DESCRIPTIVE AS I COULD GET IN TERMS OF EQUITY, IN TERMS OF, OKAY, LIKE HOW BIG ARE THESE TENANTS, HOW BIG ARE THESE BUILDINGS, AND HOW MUCH SIGNAGE DO THEY GET, AND DO THEY GET THIS SERVICE 1, 2 AND 3 THING. AND I GUESS THAT'S WHERE I'M KIND OF WHERE I CAN MAYBE COME TO AN AGREEMENT, IS THAT AGAIN, I DON'T -- IF YOU ADD UP THOSE SERVICE, THOSE SUB SERVICE SIGNS, THEY ADD UP TO A NUMBER, A TOTALITY OF SIGNAGE THAT I THINK IS GETTING IN THE WAY HERE ON MY REQUEST, THAT MY TOTALITY SOUNDS LARGER THAN IT SHOULD.

I UNDER UNDERSTAND THAT. I GUESS WHAT I WOULD COME BACK WITH IS SOME SORT OF, SOME SORT OF BETWEEN JUNIOR ANCHOR AND BUC-EE'S PROPOSED BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW, AND I CAN SHRINK THOSE FACADE SIGNS OR I CAN, BY NOT A LOT, BUT ENOUGH TO GET ME IN THAT POSITION TO WHERE, A, IT'S SCALED CORRECTLY FOR THE BUILDING YOU. CAN'T GET AROUND THAT.

I MEAN, THE CODE AS IT STANDS, PUTTING THAT SIGN ON THAT BUILDING IS, QUITE FRANKLY, IT'S EMBARRASSING. AND I DON'T THINK THERE IS AN INTENT TO DO THAT.

THERE IS A DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A HUGE BUILDING WITH 200 SQUARE FEET OF SIGNAGE FOR THAT BUILDING AND A 10,000 SQUARE FOOT BUILDING WITH 200 SQUARE FEET OF ALLOWABLE SIGNAGE.

AND SO I WOULD LOVE TO GET TO A POINT WHERE I CAN GET IN BETWEEN, YOU KNOW, I'M BETTER THAN A JUNIOR ANCHOR BUT NOT AS MUCH AS I'M ASKING FOR TODAY KIND OF A THING.

AND I'M KIND THROWING THAT BACK AT YOU TO SEE IF I'M BARKING UP THE WRONG TREE.

>> MR. KOPPENHAFER: WELL, WHAT I CAN OFFER IS WE CAN GO THROUGH THE ROLL CALL LIST AND EACH

[01:15:01]

THAT'S A RETAIL HUB AND AN UNUSUAL ZONING, THE ONLY ONE IN THE COUNTRY FOR ITS LITTLE SIZE

THERE, AND SO I'M NOT -- YOU'RE NOT A TENANT. >> SO IF THEY'RE RETAIL AND PEOPLE KNOW THAT THEY'RE GOING TO THAT RETAIL CENTER, IS THAT NOT THE SAME ARGUMENT THAT YOU'RE MAKING THAT, WELL, PEOPLE ALREADY KNOW THEY'RE GOING TO BUC-EE'S, THEY DON'T NEED A BIG

SIGN? >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: I'M SAYING I DON'T THINK THEY'RE THE SAME

THING. >> OKAY. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: SO LET ME GO THROUGH THE LIST HERE AND PEOPLE CAN PONTIFICATE ON THEIR REASONINGS HERE.

DR. MCCORMICK, WOULD YOU LOOK TO ADD ANYTHING TO YOUR COMMENTS BEFORE?

>> DR. MCCORMICK: WELL, I AM ON THE LINE AND I'M NOT MUTED, BUT I ALSO AM NOT AN ARCHITECT,

SO I'M NOT GOING TO PONTIFICATE ON THIS ISSUE. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: ALL RIGHT.

DR. HILSENBECK. >> DR. HILSENBECK: WELL, WITH THE STATEMENT THAT WAS JUST MADE THAT THE BUC-EE'S IS IN BETWEEN A JUNIOR TENANT AND AN ANCHOR TENANT, MS. HAGA SAID A JUNIOR TENANT, THE DURBIN PARK IS ABOUT 89,000 SQUARE FEET. I ESTIMATED A WALMART, THE ANCHOR TENANT MIGHT BE AROUND 200,000 SQUARE FEET. I LOOKED UP, WHILE WE'VE BEEN TALKING, WHAT THE AVERAGE SIZE OF A WALMART IS. THE AVERAGE SIZE IS 1 1IEN 187U HOW TO SQUARE FEET. AT 53,000 SQUARE FEET, BUC-EE'S IS NOT TWENL AN ANCHOR TENANT AND A JUNIOR TENANT. IT'S BELL BELOW BOTH OF THOSE. SO ASKING FOR WHAT AMOUNTS TO NEARLY THREE AND A HALF TIMES THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF SIGNAGE ALLOWED CURRENTLY LDC IS JUST WAY TOO MUCH IN MY OPINION. AND THEN YOU CAN THROW IN THE POLE SIGN AT 100 FEET TALL AND 300 SQUARE FEET NEARLY OF SIGNAGE. SO I THINK THEY'RE ASKING FOR JUST WAY TOO MUCH THE, AND I WOULD REMIND, IT WAS STATED THAT THERE ARE BUC-EE'S IN TEXAS AND ALABAMA AND GEORGIA AND FLORIDA AND ON IT OF THE 20 THEY ALL HAVE THESE SIGNS.

I WOULD JUST SAY THAT THIS IS ST. JOHNS COUNTY, FLORIDA. IT'S THE HOME OF THE NATION'S OLDEST. AND WE ARE TRYING TO, THROUGH OUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AND THE REGULATIONS HERE, MAINTAIN SOME DECORUM AND STANDARDS FOR WHAT WE SEE AS A VERY LIVEABLE AND IMPORTANT COMMUNITY. AND THE ASKING OF THREE AND A HALF TIMES THE AMOUNT OF SIGNAGE IS JUST TOO MUCH OF A STRETCH. SO THOSE ARE MY COMMENTS. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. SO THAT POINT ON THE TENANT SIGNAGE, HERE YOU CAN SEE ON THIS CHART, JUNIOR TENANT, IT REASONINGS STARTING BASELINE 10,000 UP TO 89,000.

SO I WAS REFERENCING THE 89,000 AS THE BREAK POINT OF WHAT THE HIGHEST CAP WOULD BE FOR A JUNIOR. SO TO THAT POINT WHEN DR. HILSENBECK WASIN GIVING HIS INFORMATION, A JUNIOR STARTS AT 10,000 TO, SO BUC-EE'S WOULD FALL IN THAT SLIGHT OF UP TO 89,000 JUST FOR THAT CLARIFICATION THERE. BUT I NOTED IT'S IN BETWEEN WHAT HE'S SAYING IS A POINT OF ORDER OF SIGNAGE IN BETWEEN OUR REQUEST AND JUNIOR ANCHOR.

IN TOTAL NUMBER. AS WE'VE HEARD, IT'S A GOOD TIME TO CHECK IN HERE AS A GRABBED THE MICROPHONE, THAT WE HAVE HEARD THE AMOUNT OF SIGNAGE AND THE OPE TICKS AND THE TOTAL.

BUT -- OPTICS AND THE TOTAL BUT THOSE ARE AN AGGREGATE ON THE LEFT QULUM INSPECTORS WE WERE HAVEN'T HEARD SO MUCH AS TO THE MARQUEE, THE FACADE ITSELF 240 SQUARE FEET.

SO IS THAT ALSO MASTER THE AMOUNT OF SIGNAGE, IS THAT IT'S IT'S THE TOTE OR AS IT RELATES TO THE FACADE? IF ANY OF THE BOARD MEMBERS WANT TO WEIGH IN, I THINK THAT'S A DISTINCTION POINT AS WE'RE LOOKING TO EITHER DROP A FACADE OR, AS MR. BEARD EXPLAINED,

SHRINK SIGNAGE. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: SINCE EVERYBODY IS NOT HERE, I'VE GOT TO GO THROUGH THE ROLL CALL LIST. SO I'LL KEEP DOING THAT.

MR. WAINRIGHT. >> MR. WAINRIGHT: YES. I'M VERY COMFORTABLE WITH ASKING YOU ALL OR SUGGESTING THAT YOU WORK WITH PLANNING. I THINK IT'S SOMEWHERE -- I DON'T THINK WE HERE ON THIS BOARD, SPEAKING FOR MYSELF, THAT WE NEED TO GET THIS FAR DOWN IN

[01:20:02]

I'M FINE WITH YOU ALL GOING AND WORKING IT OUT, AND WE'LL LISTEN TO WHAT YOU AND PLANNING WORK OUT AND DO OUR BEST WITH THAT, AND PERSONALLY I WOULD NOT GO ANY FURTHER THAN THAT.

>> MR. KOPPENHAFER: ALL RIGHT. I'M UP NEXT. SO I AM AN ARCHITECT AND SO THERE'S A PROPORTION, THAT'S A NATURAL THING, AND PEOPLE -- SOME PEOPLE JUST SEE IT.

THIS WORKS WELL OR THIS DOESN'T. AND I CSH AGAIN, I SAID THIS BEFORE, I DON'T DISAGREE THAT YOUR 150 SQUARE FOOT SIGN ON THAT BIG MARQUEE LOOKS SMALL AND OUT OF PROPORTION.

A COUPLE WAYS TO HANDLE THAT. ONE, SHRINK THE MARQUEE. DROP IN THE QULUM, WHATEVER, YOU KNOW, MAKE THAT SMALLER. TWO, THIS IS HAD A TRICK THAT I LEARNED HAD A LONG TIME AGO.

PAINT A BORDER AROUND IT. THE BORDER IS PART OF THAT SIGNAGE ELEMENT TOO.

THREE IS, YOU KNOW, MAYBE THERE'S A BUTTON LOST ON ONE OF THESE FACADES.

AGAIN, I WOULD COUNTER TO WHAT OR ASK YOU ALL TO LISTEN TO WHAT ARCHIE SAID AS WELL.

I DON'T WANT TO DESIGN THIS THING FOR YOU. I GET PAID TO DO THIS STUFF.

NOT HERE THOUGH. SO I WOULD SAY GO BACK AND FIGURE THAT OUT.

THE OTHER PART I WOULD SAY IS GOD BLESS BUC-EE'S. YOU GUYS ARE 20 DIFFERENT PLACES. EACH PLACE IS A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT.

AND AS RICHARD ALLUDED TO, WE THINK JUST ST. JOHNS COUNTY IS JUST THE BEST PLACE IN THE WORLD. THAT'S WHY WE ALL LIVE HERE. AND SO YOU'VE GOT TO THINK ABOUT THE CHARACTER OF THE AREA. YOU COULDN'T DO OI A BUC-EE'S IN QUESTION OF THE P. KEY WEST.& FORGET THE AREA. THEY LIKE THIS QUAINT LITTLE TOWN THING.

SO FOR WHATEVER IT'S WORTH WE'VE GOT THIS LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE THAT SHOVES NOW THE 200 SQUARE FOOT CATEGORY. I THINK THERE'S SOME ROOM THERE. I DON'T KNOW WHAT IT IS.

ALL RIGHT. MS. PERKINS. >> MS. PERKINS: I DON'T HAVE

ANYTHIN ELSE TO ADD. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: MR. ALAIMO.

>> MR. ALAIMO: YES, MR. CHAIRMAN. I KIND OF ECHO REGARD WHICH I'S COMMENTS THAT THEY CAN GET WITH THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT AND COME UP WITH SOMETHING.

I'M NOT AN ARCHITECT, BUT WE'RE CERTAINLY WILLING TO LISTEN, AND LIKE I SAID, I HAVE NOTHING BUT GREAT THINGS TO SAY ABOUT BUC-EE'S AND THE EXPERIENCE THAT I HAVE HAD AT THEIR OTHER LOCATIONS, BUT I'M JUST NOT AN ARCHITECT, SO THAT WOULD BE MY COMMENT.

>> MR. KOPPENHAFER: MR. MATOVINA. >> MR. MATOVINA: I GUESS MY ONLY COMMENT WOULD BE, YOU KNOW, MAYBE YOU SHOULD CONSIDER AS AN OPTION SOME ADDITIONAL SIGNAGE, FREESTANDING SIGNAGE. IF YOU WANT PEOPLE TO FIND IT, I DON'T THINK THEY'RE GOING TO -- MOST THEY KNOW IT'S THERE. I DON'T THINK THEY'RE GOING TO SEE THE SMALLER LETTERS.

SO YOU MAY CONSIDER THAT. I DON'T KNOW WHAT OUR CODE ALLOWS, BUT --

>> MR. KOPPENHAFER: OKAY. SO FROM A LEGAL PERSPECTIVE, WE HAD A NON-MOVEMENT OF A --

>> RIGHT. MR. CHAIRMAN, BECAUSE THE MOTION FAILED TO ACHIEVE A MAJORITY VOTE IN FAVOR, ORDINARILY IF THERE WERE NO OTHER MOTIONS TO BE MADE, THAT WOULD SERVE AS A DENIAL. IF I'M UNDERSTANDING THIS BOARD CORRECTLY, THERE MIGHT BE ROOM FOR A MOTION TO CONTINUE THE ITEM TO PERHAPS A DATE CERTAIN TO PRESERVE THE NOTICE AND ALLOW THE APPLICANTS TO GET WITH STAFF AND TO DISCUSS ALTERNATIVE DESIGN PLANS.

I THINK THAT MOTION WOULD STILL BE IN ORDER BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE A SUCCESSFUL MOTION RIGHT NOW. ALTERNATIVELY, IT COULD JUST STAND AS IT IS, BUT THAT'S THE

BOARD'S DISCRETION. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: I LEARNED THAT THE OTHER DAY.

NO MOTION IS A MOTION. SO YOU GUYS AMENABLE TO A DATE CERTAIN OR CAN WE JUST DO A DATE

CERTAIN? >> THANK YOU FOR THAT. CONTINUING US TO A DATE CERTAIN WOULD BE ACCEPTABLE, WHICHEVER HEARING YOUR FIRST MEETING IN JANUARY IS UP.

>> THE FIRST MEETING IN JANUARY HAS BREYNN CANCELED. >> SO WE COULD BE ON FOR JANUAR?

>> MR. KOPPENHAFER: DPOANTDZ NUMBER OF ITEMS TOO. DO WE HAVE THAT, TERESA?

>> WE DO, YES, SIR. I BELIEVE THERE'S NINE ITEMS ON THAT AGENDA.

>> MR. KOPPENHAFER: NINE ITEMS ALREADY. >> WOULD THAT BE THE 21ST,

TERESA? THURSDAY THE 21ST? >> YES, SIR.

COVERAGE WROW GUYS BE AMENABLE TO THE FIRST ONE IN FEBRUARY? I KNOW YOU'VE GOT TIME FRAMES

[01:25:02]

YOURSELF. >> I'VE GOT TO OPEN THIS THING. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: I UNDERSTAND. YOU CAN SAY NO. I CAN SQUEEZE IT INTO JANUARY.

>> WHAT IS THE DATE OF THE FEBRUARY? >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: FIRST

THURSDAY. >> IT'S FEBRUARY 4TH IS THE FIRST THURSDAY IN FEBRUARY.

>> I'LL JUST DELAY THE OPENING. >> WE WOULD DELAY THE OPENING DO --

>> FEBRUARY 4TH IS FINE. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: AGAIN, I'M NOT TRYING TO BE THE BAD GUY HERE. I'M TRYING TO WORK IT THROUGH. THAT'S WHY I'M TRYING TO GET A

DATE. AM I HEARING THE 4TH WORKS? >> MM-HM.

>> MR. KOPPENHAFER: ALL RIGHT. MR. WRAIRN, WOULD YOU LIKE TO MAKE THIS MOTION?

YOU'VE BEEN PAYING ATTENTION. >> MR. WAINRIGHT: THAT'S TWO QUESTIONS.

I'D OFFER A MOTION TO POSTPONE AND COME BACK ON FEBRUARY THE 4TH AFTER REVIEWING WITH

PLANNING STAFF AND ANYONE ELSE YOU WISH TO. >> THANK YOU.

>> >> MS. PERKINS: SECOND. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: WE HAVE A

MOTION AND A SECOND. GOING THROUGH THE ROLL CALL. >> DR. MCCORMICK: YES.

>> DR. HILSENBECK: I'D LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT. AS WITH THE PLANET FITNESS A WHILE BACK, THEY WITHDREW THEIR APPLICATION BEFORE WE ACTUALLY VOTED AND CAME BACK.

THIS ONE, WE'VE ALREADY VOTED TO DENY IT, SO I'M GOING TO SAY NO ON THIS MOTION.

>> MR. KOPPENHAFER: ALL RIGHT. MR. WAINRIGHT. >> MR. WAINRIGHT: YES TO THE

MOTION. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: MR. KOPPENHAFER SAYS YES TO THE

MOTION. MS. PERKS PRENCHTS YES. >> MR. ALAIMO: YES.

>> MR. MATOVINA: YES. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: WE'LL SEE YOU GUYS FEBRUARY 4TH.

>> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU FOR YOUR COMMENTS. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: TWO DAYS AFTER GROUNDHOG DAY DAY. THAT'S NOT A BEAVER, THOUGH. MOVING RIGHT ALONG.

[Items 4 & 5]

GOOD AFTERNOON. >> GOOD AFTERNOON AND BE SEASONS GREETING, MR. CHAIRMAN.

MR. WYCOFF, COULD I HAVE MY SLIDE SHOW. BEHALF OF THE OWNER OF 4TH AVENUE ARTNERS LLC. I'M HERE TO PRESENT AGENDAS ITEMS 4 AND 5 WHICH DEAL WI SMALL SCALE MAP. TO INCREASE THIS IS MORE THAN 2 THOWB ACRES OF MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT ORIGINALLY APPROVED IN 2005 AND SUBSTANTIALLY MODIFIED IN 2014 AND IT HAS HAD SINCE THAT TIME A GREAT TIME AT PRODUCING NEW NEIGHBORHOODS, A DYNAMIC AMENITY CENTER, THE BEACH WALK CLUB, CRYSTAL LAGOON, AND THE COMMERCIAL ELEMENTS ARE NOW FOLLOWING SUIT IN SHORT ORDER. THE MASTER PLAN ON THE SCREEN CALLS FOR THE CENTRAL AREA THAT I'VE LIELTD HIGHLIGHTED IN RED AS WHERE THE LAGOON, A MAJORITY OF THE COMMERCIAL AND IT'S A NEIGHBORHOOD SUPPORTING COMMERCIAL FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD THAT SURROUNDS ON IT BOTH SIDES OF COUNTY ROAD 210. TODAY WE'RE LOOKING SPECIFICALLY IN THE MIDDLE OF THE PROJECT AT PARCEL SPNGS THIS AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH ON THE SCREEN FOR PARCEL 6A-1 WHICH IS THE TAN COLOR AS OF A FEW HOURS AGO, THE PUBLIX SUPERMARKET IS UNDER CONSTRUCTION.

THE OWNER OF THE ENTIRE PARCEL 6 IS TALKING WITH SEVERAL TENANTS FOR SOME NEIGHBORLY SCALE COMMERCIAL ON THE OTHER SIDES. THE SITE IS DEVOID OF ANY SORT OF WEDLAND.

IT'S BOUNDED BY CONSERVATION AREA ON THE SOUTH, ON THE EAST, ON THE WEST, AND THEN COUNTY ROAD 210 TO THE NORTH. IT'S EFFECTIVELY AN EFFICIENT INFILL SITE THAT THE GENERAL SITE PLAN WAS INCLUDED IN YOUR STAFF REPORT. THE APPLICANT RESPECTFULLY REQUESTS TO AMEND THOSE TWO PARCELS THAT I HAD COLORED IN RED, 6A-2 AND 6 FROM THEIR EXISTING RESIDENTIAL B CATEGORY TO RESIDENTIAL C TO ALLOW FOR THE ABILITY TO PUT ONE OR TWO RESTAURANTS WITH DRIVE-THROUGHS. THAT'S THE STRAIGHTFORWARD REQUEST.

IT IS NOT AN ALLUSION TO DO ANYTHING MORE INTENSE THERE. IT IS SIMPLY TO REFLECT WHAT THE DEVELOPER OF THE OVERALL COMMERCIAL NODE IN THAT AREA WOULD LIKE TO SEE AS A POSSIBILITY. THERE IS NO INCREASE IN THE AMOUNT OF ENTITLEMENTS THAT ARE ASSOCIATED WITH THE PROJECT RELATED TO THIS AMENDMENT. AND THERE'S NO POSSIBILITY OF FURTHER EXTENSION OF THIS OUTSIDE OF THAT AREA THAT I SHOWED YOU ON THE EARLIER MAP THERE THAT IS OUTLINED AT THE COMMERCIAL, NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL AREA.

WE'RE GOING TO REINFORCE WHEN THE MINOR MODIFICATION THAT SAYS ONLY THESE TWO PARCELS 6A-2 AND

[01:30:02]

THERE WILL BE NO FURTHER EXTENSION. CONSISTENCY WITH POLICY A125 YEAR LOCATED WHINTSDZ THE NEIGHBOR -- EXCUSE ME -- DEVELOPMENT AREA BOUNDARY.

THE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT IS ALLOWED IN RESIDENTIAL B ALREADY.

IT'S SIMPLY THE FACT THAT THE DRIVE-THROUGHS ARE NOTE ALLOWED FOR RESTAURANTS.

WE'LL NOTE THAT THE PUBLIX UNDER CONSTRUCTION DOES HAVE A DRIVE-THROUGH PHARMACY, YOU BUT THAT'S THE CODE. THAT'S THE CODE WE LIVE WITH. NOSE WITH VALID -- COME BEFORE THE BOARDS OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TO ASK FOR SOME RELIEF.

THED ADEQUATELY INFRASTRUCTURE THAT EXISTS TODAY IN LARGE PART DUE THIS MASTER DEVELOPER AND WINDING OF COUNTY ROAD 210. THERE WILL BE NO NEED FOR PUBLIC EXPENDITURES TO SUPPORT THEY PROJECT.& IT DOES NOT PROMULGATE OUR URBAN SPRAWL.

THE SITE RESTRICTS THE INTENSITY AND LIMITS THE INGRESS AND EGRESS POINTS.

AND THERE'S THE POSSIBILITY OF FISCAL IMPACT OF DISOOLINGS DISOOLINGS SALES TAX FROM COMMERCIAL. ALL IN ALL TO SAY THAT THE CRITERIA THAT WE USED TO EVALUATE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN OOSSMENTSDZS HAVE BEEN MET AND -- AMENDMENTS HAVE BEEN MET AND WHEN IT COMES TOO MANY WE COULD RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THIS BOARD AGREEING WITH THE FOUR FINDINGS OF FACT FOR APPROVING THIS ON PAGE TFN YOUR STAFF REPORT.

A LEWDED TO THE ZONING AS WELL WITH THE COMPANION MINOR MOD DPAITION WHICH IS AGENDA ITEM 5.

THE RESTAURANTS WITH DRIVE-THROUGHS IS SIMPLY BEING ADDED TO THE AREA KNOWN AS NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL IN THE TABLE. SIMPLY IT'S ALLOWED IN OTHER PLACES IN THE PUD THAT WOULD ALLOW I BY ADDING THAT DENOTATION TO THE TABLE THERE AS WELL. WITH GREAT SPHROACT COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, THEY SUGGESTED ADDING A NOTE THAT LIMITS IT TO JUST THOSE TWO PARCELS AS I MENTIONED A MOMENT AGO AND INCORPORATE THAT INTO THE MINOR MODIFICATION. THE PUD HAS ADDITIONAL DESIGN STANDARDS AND LANDSCAPING AND BUFFERING FOR THOSE PROPERTIES THAT ARE UP AND DOWN AND AND WE BELIEVE THAT THE PROPOSED USES SHOULD THE DEVELOPER WISH TO GO WITH SOME ETCH FORM OF DRIVE-THROUGH RESTAURANTS ON THOSE PARCELS, THAT IT BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA. IT IS SHIELDED BY DENSELIED WOOD CONSERVATION LAND.

AS I MENTIONED, I DROVE BY THERE THIS MORNING JUST TO DOUBLE-CHECK AND MAKE SURE THERE'S NO REASON WHATSOEVER THESE TREES WERE TAKEN DOWN OR THAT WAS A BAD PHOTO.

NO, IT IS VERY HEAVILY WOODED IN THE SURROUNDING AREAS. IT IS SEVERAL HUNDRED FEET FROM THE NEAREST RESIDENTIAL LOT. PIENLT OUT THAT SECTION 608 .16A OF YOUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE ASSURES THAT NO WHAT'S CALLED AN CALL BOXED OR AN ORDER BOX WHICH YOU SCREAM INTO TO GET YOUR WHOP SEATER LEAST 200 FEET AWAY FROM THE NEAREST RESIDENTIAL AREA, AND AS I SAID WE CAN SHOW YOU SOME MEASUREMENTS IF YOU WOULD LIKE BUT IT'S SEVERAL HUNDRED FEET FROM THAT LOCATION.

THIS WOULD BE THE ONLY LOCATION SOUTH OF 210 WHERE THIS WOULD BE ALLOWED, AND WE FEEL THE M STRVMENT REALLY JUST KIND OF COVERS ALL THE REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE FOR. THIS AREA COLORED BLUE WOULD BE THE ONLYPLACE THAT IT'S ALLOWED BECAUSE THERE ARE NO OTHER PARTS IN THAT BUBBLE MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN THAT ARE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL. SO THE VERY STRAIGHTFORWARD REQUEST THIS AFTERNOON, AGENCY MEMBERS, WE'RE NOT LOOKING FOR ANY REINTRODUCTION IN PARKING, NO REDUCTIONS IN OPEN SPACE, NO ADDITIONAL HEIGHT, NO ADDITIONAL SIGNAGE. SLY SIMPLY THIS A ABILITY TO HE THE POSSIBILITY OF ONE OR BOTH OF THOSE PARCELS CONTAINING A FAST FOOD RESTAURANT TO COMPLEMENT THE OVERALL COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT OF THAT PARCEL.

AGAIN, RESPECTFULLY REQUEST A POSITIVE SUPPORT OF THE SEVEN FINDINGS OF FACT ON PAGE 10 OF YOUR STAFF REPORT FOR THIS APPLICATION. MR. CHAIRMAN, I APPRECIATE YOUR

TIME THIS AFTERNOON AND WELCOME ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: THANK YOU.

TO GO PUBLIC COMMENT. DO WE HAVE ANY IN THE THEATER HERE?

>> MR. WAINRIGHT: NO. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT ONLINE, COME?

>> NO PUBLIC COMMENT. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: THEN WE ARE BACK IN THE AGENCY.

I FORGOT TO ASK FOR EX PARTE ON THIS ONE. THAT'S NOT REQUIRED, BUT LET'S GO THROUGH THE ROLL CALL LIST DECLARING EX PARTE AND LET ME KNOW IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS

FOR THE APPLICANT OR ANY GENERAL COMMENTS. >> MR. CHAIRMAN, JUST TO BE

CLEAR D. >> DR. MCCORMICK: NO EXPARPT, NO QUESTIONS.

GOING BACK TO MUTE. >> BOTH ASSIGNMENTS 4 AND 5 WERE HEARD TOGETHER.

EX PARTE WOULD BE REQUIRED ON 5, NOT 4, BUT THANK YOU. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: YOU'RE WELCOME. ALL RIGHT. AND AGAIN WE ARE OBVIOUSLY HEARING THEM BOTH TOGETHER AND WE'LL HAVE TWO SEPARATE MOTIONS 4 FOR AND 5.

DR. HILSENBECK. >> DR. HILSENBECK: I HAVE NOE EXPARPT ON NO EXPARP ON EITHER ITEM 4 OR 5 BUT I WOULD LIKE TO SAY, NUMBER ONE BE I APPRECIATE THE APPLICANT BRINGING UP THE

[01:35:01]

I DO APPRECIATE. THAT WAS GOING TO BE MY FIRST QUESTION THAT'S BEEN COVERED, AND I APPRECIATE THAT. SECONDLY, I THINK THIS IS AN ENTIRELY REASONABLE REQUEST TO DRIVE-IN LANES FOR THESE RESTAURANTS WITH ESPECIALLY COVID-19 AND HOPEFULLY, THOUGH, WE ARE GOING TO BEAT THAT IN THE MONTHS TO COME WITH THE VACCINE AND SO FORTH.

SO I INTEND TO SUPPORT IT. THANK YOU. THAT'S IT.

>> MR. KOPPENHAFER: THANK YOU. MR. WAINRIGHT. >> MR. WAINRIGHT: YES, A

COUPLE OF COMMENTS. FIRST -- >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: NO

EXPARPT? >> MR. WAINRIGHT: NO ON EITHER.

NO. COMMENTS. MR. ROBBINS, I REMEMBER WHEN I FIRST CAME ON THIS BOARD YOU WERE GOOD ENOUGH TO ESSENTIALLY TOUR THE THE NEWCOMERS IN A SEM DISMARKS I APPRECIATE THAT. I BENEFITED FROM IT. I THINK I BENEFITED FROM IT.

>> MR. KOPPENHAFER: THIS QUALITY DOESN'T JUST GROW ON TREES.

>> R. WAINRIGHT: DO YOU MIND? ALL RIGHT. HERE'S THE QUESTION.

THIS IS ALL ABOUT A DRIVE-THROUGH ISSUE. IS THIS CORRECT?

>> YES, SIR. TO THE CHAIR, ANARCHY. >> MR. WAINRIGHT: ARE THERE OTHER CHANGES FROM RES B TO C THAT MIGHT BE DELETERIOUS TO PEOPLE WHO ALREADY LIVE THERE?

>> THROUGH THE CHAIR TO THE AGENCY MEMBER WAINRIGHT, I WOULD SAY NO, THINK IT'S ALREADY RESIDENTIAL B WHICH AGAIN DOES ALLOW FOR COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT, DOES A LOT OF THOSE TYPES USES, BUT IN PARTICULAR THERE ARE SOME MORE INTENSE THAT ANT LITTLE HOW HAD.

SO RATHER THAN -- AREN'T ALLOWED SO RATHER THAN MAKE MIKE HUCKABEE USE OR WOULD ALLOW FAR MORE ELEMENTS OR ALLOW EVERYTHING THAT MAY BE ALLOWED BY RES-C, WE HAVE SPECIFICALLY LIMITED THIS CASE, AND THERE'S NO OTHER PROPERTY THAT APPLIES TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL CATEGORY AND THE DRI OR THE PUD. SO AGAIN WE'VE TRIED TO GO OUT OF OUR WAY TO ASSURE FOLKS THANK THIS IS SPECIFIC TO THESE TWO SITES AND THAT WILL BE THE ONLY LOCATION THAT IT WOULD BE

POSSIBLE. >> MR. WAINRIGHT: THANK YOU. MS. BISHOP, I'M NOT TRYING TO PUT YOU IN A POSITION OF CONFLICT. WOULD YOU AGREE WITH THAT?

>> YES, SIR. THE MINOR MODIFICATION THAT'S ASSOCIATED WITH THIS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT, YES. AND WERE RESPECT TO THE RESIDENTIAL C BEING ON THAT -- BEING ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF 210, THERE IS A PUBLIX AND THERE ARE COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES THAT ARE ALREADY OCCURRING IN THAT GENERAL AREA, AND THIS WILL SIMPLY JUST ALLOW FOR DRIVE-THROUGHS TO BE AT THOSE TWO LOCATIONS.

>> MR. WAINRIGHT: THANK YOU. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: I'M UP NEXT.

NO EXPARPT TO DECLARE AND NO QUESTIONS P IN MS. PERKINS BENCHTS SPHOA EX PARTE.

NO SUCCESS. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: ARE IN ALAIMO.

>> MR. ALAIMO: NO RP EXPARPT ON SCWHREAND ITEMS AND NO QUESTIONS.

>> MR. KOPPENHAFER: THANK YOU. MR. MATOVINA. >> MR. MATOVINA: NO EX PARTE

AND NO QUESTIONS. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

ANYTHING ELSE TO ADD, MR. ROBBINS? >> NO.

THANK YOU, SIR. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

WE'RE BACK IN THE AGENCY, THEN, FOR A MOTION. >> MR. WAINRIGHT: I'D OFFER A

MOTION UNLESS SOMEONE ELSE WISHES DO TO. >> MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF CPA SS 2020-05 TWIN CREEKS PUD PARCELS SA-2 AND SB BASED ON FOUR FINDINGS OF FACT.

>> MS. PERKINS: SECOND. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: WE HAVE A MOTION AND WE HAVE A SECOND NOW.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? AND THIS IS FOR ITEM NUMBER 4 FIRST.

GO INTO THE ROLL CALL. DR. MCCORMICK. >> DR. MCCORMICK: I APPROVE.

>> DR. HILSENBECK: YES. >> MR. WAINRIGHT: YES. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER:

MR. KOPPENHAFER SAYS YES. MS. PERKINS. >> MS. PERKINS: YES.

>> MR. ALAIMO: YES. >> MR. MATOVINA: YES. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: MOTION CARRIES UNANIMOUS 7-0. ARCHIE, HOW WOULD YOU LOOK TO TAKE THE FLOOR NOWRM 5.

>> I'D OVER A MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF MINMOD 20-14 TWIN CREEKS PUD PARCELS 6A-2 AND 6B BASED ON SEVEN FINDINGS OF FACT AND SUBJECT TO SIX CONDITIONS

SENCHTS EVER MENCHTS SECOND COANCHTS. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: WE HAVE A MOTION AND WE HAVE A SECOND. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE WE'LL DO THE ROLL

CALL VOTE. DR. MCCORMICK, HOW SAY YOU? >> DR. MCCORMICK: YES.

>> DR. HILSENBECK: YES. >> MR. WAINRIGHT: YES. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER:

MR. KOPPENHAFER SAYS YES. MS. PERKINS. >> MS. PERKINS: YES LAINCHTS

YES. >> MR. MATOVINA: YES. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: MOTION

CARRIES UNANIMOUS 7-0. WEAR GOING TO TAKE A >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: GOOD AFTERNOON ONCE AGAIN. WE'LL RESUME OUR MEETING HERE. UP NEXT IS ITEM NUMBER 6.

[6. REZ 2020-08 Island Docs Moultrie Road.]

ISLAND DOCKS MOWLT RI ROAD. MATT LAHTI. >> STLAWG, FLORIDA.

[01:40:09]

I GUESS AS YOU CAN SEE ON THE PARCEL BOUNDARIES ARE OUTLINED IN YELLOW.

WE'RE NOT NORTH OF LEWIS POINT AND TO THE EAST OF OLD MOHL MOULTRIE ROADY HERE.

THERE'S A EXISTING MEDICAL FACILITY HERE THAT HOUSES MOSTLY DOCTORS' OFFICES.

THE PARCEL NEXT DOOR WAS ACQUIRED BY THE SAME OWNER AND THEY'RE SEEK BECOMING A 4,000 SQUARE FOOT EXPANSION TO THAT FACILITY WITH SOME ADDITIONAL PARKING.

SO BOTH PARCELS ARE OWNED BY THE SAME ENTITY BUT DUE TO THE OLD PSD, WE NEEDED TO DO A REZONING HERE. WE JUST FELT THAT WAS THE CLEANEST WAY TO GET EVERYTHING CONSISTENT AMONGST THE PARCELS. SO WE'RE DEALING WITH TWO FROM 60 OLD MOULTRIE ROAD RIGHT HERE.

SO AS I MENTIONED THE EXISTING SITE IS ZONED PSD. ANOTHER SITE ZONED COMMERCIAL NEIGHBORHOOD HERE TO THE SOUTH. AND THEN THE OLD MOULTRIE RIGHT-OF-WAY HERE.

AND THEN THE PUD AND ADJACENT COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS ARE FURTHER TO THE WEST THERE. MIXED USE LAND USE ALL ON THE WEST SIDECH US-1 SO EVERYTHING IS PRETTY CONSISTENT WITH THAT. HERE'S A QUICK SITE PLAN SHOWING THAT PROPOSED EXPANSION TO THE SOUTH WITH THE BUILDING EXPANSION AND STORM WATER POND AND A PARKING OFF-SHOOT HERE.

SO IT'S REALLY NOT A BIG PROJECT BUT IT DOES ALLOW FOR SOME OFFICE SPACE AND FOR SOME EXPANSION FOR ISLAND DOCTORS THERE TO ALLOW A FEW MORE DOCTORS TO COME IN.

SO REQUESTING APPROVAL HERE TO REZONE THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY AND ALLOW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF THIS 4,000 SQUARE FOOT EXPANSION. WE'RE HERE TO ANSWER ANY

QUESTIONS IF YOU HAVE THEM. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: FIRST WE'LL TO GO PUBLIC COMMENT.

>> NO. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT ONLINE?

>> NO PUBLIC COMMENT. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: ALL RIGHT. NO PUBLIC COMMENT ONLINE.

WE CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT, AND WE WILL GO THROUGH OUR ROLL CALL. FOR QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT ANDAL ALSO TO DECLARE ANY EX PARTE. DR. MCCORMICK.

>> DR. MCCORMICK: NO EX PARTE. NO QUESTIONS. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER:

DR. HYMNALS. >> DR. HILSENBECK: NO EX PARTE.

I DID THINK THIS WAS A GOOD APPLICATION, WELL PREPARED, AND IT'S A REASONABLE REQUEST.

I INTEND TO SUPPORT IT. THANK YOU. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER:

MR. WAINRIGHT. >> MR. WAINRIGHT: NO COMMENT, NO EX PARTE.

>> MR. KOPPENHAFER: MR. KOPPENHAFER HAS NO COMMENT, NO EX PARTE.

>>> MS. PERKS. >> MS. PERKINS: NO EX PARTE,

NO QUESTIONS. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: ARE IN ALAIMO.

>> MR. ALAIMO: YES, MR. CHAIRMAN. I WOULD LIKE TO RECUSE MYSELF FROM VOTING ON THIS ITEM. I HAVE DONE BUSINESS WITH ISLAND DOCTORS, AND I KNOW I'M NOT THERE PRESENT TO FILL OUT A FORM OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT, BUT OUT OF AN ABUNDANCE OF CAUTION I'D

LIKE TO RECUSE MYSELF FROM THIS ITEM. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: ALL RIGHT.

AND MR. MATOVINA. >> MR. MATOVINA: NO EXISTING RESTAURANT PAR TO A, NO

QUESTIONS. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

ALL RIGHT. ANYTHING ELSE TO ADD? >> THE OTHER NO, SIR.

THANK YOU. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: YOU'RE WELCOME.

HAVE A SEAT. WE'RE BACK IN THE AGENCY THEN FOR A MOTION.

>> MS. PERKINS: I'LL OFFER A MOTION. MOTION TO RECOMMEND A PROOFLG HAVEY ROANG 2020-8 ISLAND DOCS OLD OLD MOULTRIE BASED ON FOUR FINDINGS OF FACT.

>> MR. KOPPENHAFER: MR. MATOVINA SECONDS THE APPROVAL.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE AGENCY MEMBERS? HEARING NONE, DO THE ROLL CALL

VOTE ONCE AGAINST. DR. MCCORMICK. >> DR. MCCORMICK: YES.

>> DR. HILSENBECK: YES. >> MR. WAINRIGHT: YES. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER:

MR. KOPPENHAFER SAYS YES. MS. PERKS. >> MS. PERKINS: YES.

MR. ALAIMO IS NOT VOTING. AND MR. MATOVINA MATT. >> MR. MATOVINA: YES.

>> MR. KOPPENHAFER: MOTION CARRIES NAN MUST 6-0. UP NEXT IS ITEM NUMBER 7.

[7. PUD 2020-10 Grand Cypress. ]

EX PARTE TO DECLARE. >> DR. MCCORMICK: I TALKED THE WITH ELLEN AVERY-SMITH ABOUT IN

PROJECT, AND SHE JUST EXPLAINED IT TO ME ACTUALLY. >> DR. HILSENBECK: YES, I DID

[01:45:03]

ABOUT THE PROJECT AND EXCHANGED QUESTIONS AND COMMENTS. >> MR. WAINRIGHT: NO.

AND I WANT TO KNOW WHY I DON'T. >> I LEFT A VOICE MAIL ON YOUR ANSWERING MACHINE.

[LAUGHTER] >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: EX PARTE, I DID HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH ELLEN AVERY-SMITH ABOUT THIS PROJECT AND THE DETAILS OF IT. MS. PERNG PNCHTS ELLEN AND I

PLAYED PHONE TAG DUTY DIDN'T ACTUALLY TALK ABOUT THE PROJECT. >> MR. ALAIMO: YES, MR. CHAIRMAN. I HAD A CONVERSATION WITH ELLEN AVERY-SMITH EARLIER TODAY

REGARDING THE PROJECT. >> MR. MATOVINA: AND I DID THE SAME YESTERDAY OR THE DAY BEFORE. AND I DISCUSSED THE MERITS OF THIS LOCATION.

>> MR. KOPPENHAFER: THANK YOU. YOU HAVE THE FLOOR, ELLEN. >> THANK YOU VERY MUCH, MR. CHAIRMAN. FOR THE RECORD, ELLEN AVERY-SMITH, ROGER TOWERS 100 WETSTONE PLACE HERE IN ST. AUGUSTINE. AND I AM HERE TODAY WITH A TBRIEWCH GENTLEMEN WHO ARE SITTING IN THE AUDIENCE FROM GAT LAN DEVELOPMENT WOULD BE FRANK GAT LAN, JOE PASQUAL A AND MARK MCMILAN. SORRY I CAN'T SPEAK FOD RAJ SINGULAR FROM SINGULAR TRAFFIC SOLUTIONS IS HERE AS OUR PROJECT TRAFFIC ENGINEER, AND THEN DOUG SKILES IS HERE AS THE PROJECT CIVIL ENGINEER IN CASE WE NEED THEIR EXPERTISE.

GATLIN IS UNDER CONTRACT TO PURCHASE THIS PROPERTY FROM ABOUT A YAR RACEWAYS AND ABOUT A YAR TIMBERLAND. THIS IS THE SITE OF THE EXISTING DOG TRACK ON RACE TRACK ROAD THAT IS OWNED BY BEST VET. AND SO JUST TO GIVE A LITTLE ORIENTATION, THE SITE, HERE'S US-1, RACE TRACK ROAD HERE. THIS IS THE PROPERTY THAT IS SUBJECT TO THIS APPLICATION HERE. IT'S ABOUT 103 ACRES. YOU WILL NOTICE THAT RACE TRACK ROAD COMES BY. YOU'VE GOT PORTIONS OF BARTRAM PARK HERE.

YOU HAVE RACE TRACK ROAD GOING OVER I-95. AND THEN THIS WHOLE AREA IS DURBIN PARK. AND SO YOU MAY RECALL A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO WHEN WE WERE HERE AT THIS BOARD TALKING ABOUT ALL OF DURBIN PARK AS THE URBAN SERVICE AREA FOR THIS, AND IT'S ABOUT 1900 ACRES IN TOTAL. GATLIN DEVELOPMENT IS THE DEVELOPER OF THIS FIRST 700,000 SQUARE FEET CALLED DURBIN PAVILION AND DURBIN PARK. SO GATLIN IS THE SAME AND THE CONTRACT PURCHASER OF THIS PROPERTY IS THE SAME ENTITY THAT IS THE DEVELOPER OF DURBIN PAVILION. JUST FOR A LITTLE CONTEXT. AGAIN, LIKE DURBIN, WHICH HAS AN INTENSIVE COMMERCIAL FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION, THIS ENTIRE SITE HAS AN INTENSIVE COMMERCIAL FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION. SO THAT DESIGNATION ALLOWS UP TO 13 RESIDENTIAL UNITS PER ACRE AND ALLOWS A MAXIMUM IMPERVIOUS US SURFACE OF 75% AND A MAXIMUM FLOOR'S CROATIA RATIO OF 70%.

SO THIS WHOLE AREA OF RACE TRACK ROAD WAS ENVISIONED TO BE THE NON-RESIDENTIAL LANDING PAD, IF YOU WILL, OR THE MIXED USE AREA OF ST. JOHNS COUNTY. A LOT OF DENSITY, A LOT OF INTESTINETY INTENSITY TO BLEND IN WITH THE URBAN AREA AND BARTRAM PARK AND EVERYTHING TO THE NORTH IN DUVAL COUNTY. AND YOU'LL SEE ALSO POINT OUT THAT NOCATEE IS RIGHT ACROSS US-1 AND OF COURSE NOCATEE IS A FAIRLY DENSE DEVELOPMENT WITH ITS OWN TOWN CENTER AND THAT KIND OF A NOTION. GOING FORWARD WE'RE GOING TO YOU'VE GOT TO DURBIN PUD SURROUNDED BY VARIOUS PUDS. THE MAJORITY OF THE PROPERTY, PARTICULARLY WHERE THE RACETRACK SITS, HAS COMERNL INTENSIVE ZONING ZONING RIGHT NOW. A LITTLE PORTION OF IT HAS OPEN RURAL BECAUSE THAT WAS NEVERIY DEVELOPED BY THE CURRENT PROPERTY OWNER.

THE APPLICANT BASICALLY IN THIS APPLICATION WE'RE SEEKING A MAJOR MODIFICATION OR ACTUALLY IT'S NOT A MAJOR MODIFICATION. THAT'S A TYPO GRAPHICAL ERROR ON THE PART OF MY OFFICE.

IT IS AN APPLICATION TO REZONE TO PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT THIS PROPERTY, WHICH AGAIN IS 103 ACRES, TO A MAXIMUM OF 250,000 SQUARE FEET OF NON-RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL AND OFFICE PRIMARILY, AND THEN A MAXIMUM OF 915 MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL UNITS.

SO WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE AND WHERE IT MIGHT BE LOCATED.

JUST THE CONTEXT OF THE SITE, YOU'VE GOT THESE CONTIGUOUS WETLAND THAT RUN THROUGH THIS PORTION OF THE SITE AND THEN THIS PORTION OF THE SITE, AND SO THOSE WETLAND AREAS ARE GOING TO BE PRESERVED IN THEIR MAL STATE, AND YOU WILL SEE IN THE PUD TEXT THERE'S A REQUEST FOR A RESIDENTIAL DENSITY BONUS WHICH IS ALLOWED BY THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE LAND DEVELOPMENT

[01:50:03]

YOU'LL SEE ON THE MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN THAT THERE WILL BE A SIGNAL INSTALLED BY THIS PROJECT WHEN THAT IS WEARNTD RAZORBACK WARRANTED AND, OF COURSE, THE COUNTY GETS TO DETERMINE WHEN THE SIGNAL IS WARRANTED, AND SO WE'LL WORK WITH THE COUNTY STAFF ON THAT.

THE INTENT IS TO HAVE THE COMMERCIAL FRONTING ON RACE TRACK ROAD, AND YOU SEE THAT IDEA HERE WITH THE PONDS RELATED TO IT. SOME POTENTIAL TENANTS WOULD BE GROCERY STORES, RESTAURANTS, THAT KIND OF A THING ALONG RACE TRACK ROAD, AND THEN WITH THE MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL IN THE UPLANDS ON THIS SIDE OF THE PROJECT -- I'M SORRY -- UPLANDS THERE THAT WILL -- YOU'LL SEE RIGHT HERE THIS IS THE IDEA OF A PEDESTRIAN BRIDGE OVER THIS CONTIGUOUS WETLAND. IT WILL BE OVER, NOT IMPACTING, TO PROVIDE THIS UPLAND AS A NICE PARK FOR THE PROJECT. AND SO THAT'S THE GENERAL IDEA OF THE MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN.

TO LOOK AT THIS IN A LITTLE MORE COLORIZED WAY, AGAIN YOU'RE PROTECTING THE CENTRAL WETLANDS STRANDS AND THIS CONTIGUOUS WET HANDLED THE EVENTUALLY NEED GOWN TO DURBIN CREEK.

IT'S ENVISIONED THAT THIS WILL BE ONE PRODUCT TYPE AND THIS WILL BE THE OTHER.

THAT'S THE REASON FOR THE TWO DIFFERENT COLORS. THEN YOU'VE GOT KIND OF THE COMMERCIAL AND OFFICE ALONG RACE TRACK ROAD WITH THE PONDS, AND THEN SOME UP LNLD AREA HERE AND THEN THE WETLANDS AND THAT'S THE GENERAL INTENT OF THE PLAN RIGHT NOW.

AND THEN JUST KIND OF THE DIVISION, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE AS YOU HAVE SEEN WITH DURBIN PAVILION, THEY LIKE TO DO VERY NICE DEVELOPMENTS, AND SO GATLIN PUT TOGETHER THESE BEAUTIFUL SLIDES THAT WE CAN ALL GET KIND OF A CONCEPTUAL LOOK HAT WHAT THEY'RE ENVISIONING.

SO HERE'S WHAT THE MULTI--- I'M SORRY. THE OFFICE AND NON-RESIDENTIAL, OFFICE AND COMMERCIAL WILL LOOK LIKE ON THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY, AND YOU SEE THE NICE INTERWEEKS CONNECTION WITH THE SIDEWALKS THAT WILL GO OUT TO RACE TRACK ROAD SO THERE WILL BE INTERCONNECTIVITY WITH CYPRESS TRACE AND WITH THE RESIDENTIAL ACROSS THE ROAD IN DUVAL COUNTY, NICE LANDSCAPING AND NICE-LOOKING PROJECT, IF YOU WILL, AND THIS IS THE ARCHITECTURAL THEME THAT THEY'RE ENVISIONING GOING INTO KIND OF THE MISSION STYLE BLENDING IN MORE INTO THE GAIT INTO ST. JOHNS COUNTY AND ST. AUGUSTINE.

AND AGAIN, HERE'S A DIFFERENT VIEW. AGAIN, RACETRACK ROW, THE IDEA OF INTERCONNECTIVITY INTO THE PROJECT. YOU'VE GOT ALL THAT COMMERCIAL, HOPEFULLY A GROCERY STORE, SOME OTHER NON-RESIDENTIAL USES ALONG RACE TRACK ROAD, AND THEN THE RESIDENTIAL SET BACK OFF THE ROAD. AGAIN, THIS IS AN IDEA OF WHAT SOME OF THE MULTI-FAMILY MIGHT LOOKING, HIGHLY A MEN TIES ADVERTISED, FIRST CLASS APARTMENTS OR TOWNHOMES, AND THEN, OF COURSE, CENTRALIZED AMENITIES FOR EACH COMPONENT OF THE RESIDENTIAL, IF YOU WILL. I TALKED ABOUT BEFORE TWO COMPONENTS OF THE MULTI-FAMILY.

EACH WOULD HAVE THEIR OWN AMENITIES. I HAVE HAD SOME DISCUSSIONS WITH THE HOA ATTORNEY FROM CYPRESS TRACE, AND SHE TOLD ME THAT THAT HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION IS NOT OPPOSED TO THE PROJECT. THEY JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THIS PROJECT HAS ITS OWN AMENITIES, AND IT DOES, SO WE'RE WORKING TOGETHER TO COMMUNICATE THAT WITH THEM.

THERE WILL BE NO SHARING OF AMENITIES WITH CYPRESS TRACE. AND THEN GOING INTO AGAIN, HERE'S ANOTHER IDEA OF POOL AMENITY, CABANA, WORKOUT FACILITY, THAT KIND OF THING, VERY NICELY A MEN ADVERTISED AND LANDSCAPED. THIS IS A RENDERING OF WHAT ANY

[01:55:05]

THIS IS THE WHAT THE OTHER KNOW COMPONENT COULD LOOK LIKE WEEK JUST A DIFFERENT ARCHITECTURAL STYLE. AND AGAIN GOING TO THE A MEN FEF THE COMMUNITY.

OBVIOUSLY THE PROJECT WILL PROVIDE TRANSPORTATION PROPORTION OF THE SHARE.

WE'RE WORKING WITH YOUR TRANSPORTATION PLANNING DEPARTMENT ON THAT AND WILL PAY THE PROPORTIONATE SHARE THAT IS NEGOTIATED IM FINALIZED WITH THEM FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO RACE TRACK ROAD, ITS INTERSECTION WITH US-1 AND OTHER LONELY ROADS.

WE HAVE ALSO GOT AN APPLICATION IN TO THE ST. JOHNS COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT AND ARE AWAITING THEIR SCHOOL CON SURRENCY DETERMINATION. I'M SURE IT WILL COME OUT THAT THERE IS A PROPORTIONATE SHARE DUE, AND THEN THAT PROPORTIONATE SHARE AGREEMENT WILL BE SIGNED, WHICH IS REQUIRED BY THE LAW. SO THAT THE CAPITAL CONTRIBUTION FROM THIS PROJECT WILL BE PAID TO THE SCHOOL DISTRICT TO BUILD STUDENT STATIONS FOR THE STUDENTS GENERATED BY THESE CHILDREN. AND I KNOW DR. MCCORMICK, THAT'S VERY NEAR AND DEAR TO YOUR HEART. IF YOU'RE LISTENING WITH YOUR DOG.

SO WITH THAT BEING SAID, I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE, AND WE'LL COME UP AFTER ANY PUBLIC COMMENT TO OFFER ANY OTHER INPUT THAT YOU MIGHT NEED.

>> MR. KOPPENHAFER: WE'RE GOING TO GO RIGHT TO PUBLIC COMMENT FIRST THOUGH.

ARCHIE, ANY PUBLIC SPEAKER CARDS? >> MR. WAINRIGHT: NO.

>> MR. KOPPENHAFER: DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC SPEAKERS ONLINE, SIR? >> NO PUBLIC COMMENT.

>> MR. KOPPENHAFER: ALL RIGHT. NOW WE ARE BACK WITHIN THE AGENCY TO ASK THE APPLICANT ANY QUESTIONS. REQUESTS OR COMMENTS. GOING INTO THE LIST,

DR. MCCORMICK, QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FOR THE APPLICANT? >> DR. MCCORMICK: NO.

I JUST HAVE A COMMENT THAT WE DID TALK ABOUT THE MITIGATION IN TERMS OF -- WE DID TALK ABOUT THE MITIGATION FOR THE SCHOOLS SO WE COVERED THAT. I'M HAPPY WITH THAT.

>> DR. HILSENBECK: I MENTIONED THE EX PARTE. WHEN I SPOKE WITH ELLEN AVERY-SMITH YESTERDAY AND SHE SAID MOST OF THIS BUT I DO HAVE SEVERAL COMMENTS BUT NO REAL QUESTIONS. I TOLD HER THERE WERE TWO GOOD THINGS ABOUT THIS FROM MY POINT OF VIEW, THIS PROPOSAL. THERE ARE THREE. NUMBER ONE, IT WAS A WELL DONE APPLICATION. NUMBER TWO, THEY ARE GETTING RID OF WHAT IS NOW AN EYE SORE IN THE COUNTY. PLANNING DID DEMOLISH THE OLD BEST VET FACILITY SO THAT THAT'S SAD WHAT'S HAPPENED TO THAT. AND THEIR PRESERVATION OF 30 PLUS ACRES OF WETLANDS THAT ARE DIRECTLY CONNECTED INTO URBAN CROOK THROUGH THE WATERSHED. SO THOSE ARE GOOD THINGS ABOUT IT. YOU TALKED ABOUT THE FACT THAT THIS IS A CURRENTLY ZONED COMMERCIAL INTENSIVE, AND I CAN CERTAINLY LIVE WITH THAT. I UNDERSTAND VERY WELL THAT THE COUNTY COMMISSION WANTS TO ENCOURAGE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT IN THE COUNTY.

AND IF THIS WERE JUST A COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT THERE, I COULD SUPPORT IT, BUT BUT GIVEN THE FACT THAT WE ALREADY HAVE OVER 60,000 APPROVED BUT UNBUILT UNITS ON THE BOOKS, RESIDENTIAL UNITS ON THE BOOKS IN THE ST. JOHNS COUNTY, AND THIS IS A PRIMARILY, IN MY VIEW, 915 RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT UNITS, THAT I CANNOT SUPPORT. IT CONCERNING SCHOOL CONCURRENCY, I ALWAYS LIKE TO SEE IN THE APPLICATION THE NUMBER OF STUDENTS THAT ARE GOING TO BE GENERATED. I HAVE STATED IN THERE THAT IT'S GOING TO BE WAITING FOR THE CONCURRENCY REVIEW. I'M GLAD DR. MCCORMICK IS HAPPY WITH THAT AND THE MONEY THEY'LL PAY TOWARD THE SCHOOL, BUT RIGHT NOW I DIDN'T LOOK UP THE ELEMENTARY OR MIDDLE SCHOOL ALSO THAT THIS WOULD SERVICE, BUT THIS WOULD BE NOT NES SCHOOL DISTRICT AND THAT SCHOOL IS OVER CAPACITY ANDY OVERCROWDED, AND ADDING MANY MORE STUDENTS TO THAT SYSTEM ULTIMATELY, IN MY MIND, IT'S NOT A GOOD THING. RIGHT NOW ST. JOHNS COUNTY HAS THE NUMBER 1 RANKED SCHOOL SYSTEM IN THE STATE. I'VE BEEN VERY CONCERNED FOR QUITE WHILE THAT IT'S GOING TO BE OVERWHELMED SINCE SOME OF OU& CAPACITY NOW. THAT'S REALLY BEEN, ALONG WITH ENVIRONMENT AND CULTURAL ASPECTS OF THIS COUNTY, THE GOOSE THAT LAID THE GOALGD EGG, AND I'M AFRAID THAT WE'RE GOING TO WOUND THAT. SO AS I TOLD MS. AVERY-SMITH YESTERDAY, I FEEL THAT I REPRESENT A BROAD CONSTITUENTS==.

[02:00:01]

SO IF -- IN THIS COUNTY. SO I WILL CONTINUE TO SPEAK UP FOR THEM AND INTEND TO BE, ALTHOUGH POSSIBLY AS A LONE VOICE, I'M GOING TO CONTINUE TO HELP FIGHT A CURB, WHAT I SEE AS RAMPANT GROWTH IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY IN TERMS OF RESIDENTIAL GROWTH, ESPECIALLY WITH 60,000 PLUS MINUTES ALREADY ON THE BOOKS THAT AREN'T BUILT YET. AND I WILL SAY THAT WHILE I FEEL WE ARE VERY LUCKY TO LIVE CLOSE TO DUVAL COUNTY AND JACKSONVILLE WITH ALL THE AMENITIES THEY PROVIDE, MAYO CLINIC, PROFESSIONAL SPORTS SUCH AS THE JAGUARS, CULTURAL ASPECTS AND OTHER A AMENITIES OF A BIG CITI DO NOT CHOOSE TO LIVE IN DUVAL COUNTY OR I WOULD HAVE BOUGHT A HOUSE THERE, SO I DON'T WANT TO SEE OUR COUNTY ELECTRIC MORE LIKE BECOME EVEN MORE LIKE DUVAL, EVEN AN ENTRANCE WAY FOR IT. I PREFERRED DRIVING DOWN:US-1 WHEN IT WAS THE OLD RANCH ON THAT SIDE OF THE ROAD BEFORE NOCATEE WAS DEVELOPED AND ALL THAT. SO THAT'S ALL I REALLY HAVE TO SAY.

I INTEND TO VOTE AGAINST IT, BUT IT WAS A WELL PREPARED APPLICATION AND I'M SURE IT WILL PASS. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR LISTENING TO ME RATTLE ON.

THANK YOU. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: THANK YOU. MR. WAINRIGHT, SOMETHING MORE

SUCCINCT. >> MR. WAINRIGHT: YES. MY CONCERNS ARE ABOUT THE WAIVERS, AND THERE SEEM TO BE SO OPEN ENDED. I CAN'T TELL FROM THIS BRIEF, THEIR IMPACT, AND I'VE TRIED TO VISUALIZE THE IMPACT FROM THE PEOPLE WITHIN THIS DEVELOPMENT AND THE PEOPLE OUTSIDE IT, FOR EXAMPLE, ON ITS BORDERS, AND I DON'T WANT TO SIT HERE AND REQUIRE YOU TO GO THROUGH THOSE NINE ISSUES AND JUSTIFY THEM, BUT IT DOES SAY THAT THE APPLICANT MUST ALSO PROVIDE JUSTIFICATION FOR WHY THE WAIVER IS NEEDED, AND I'LL LEAVE IT THERE. THE ONES THAT PARTICULARLY TROUBLE ME ARE THE FIRST ONE.

I CAN'T GET MY ARMS AROUND THE SIZE, THE IMPACT. NUMBER 3, NUMBER 4, I'M OKAY ON THE SIXTH SETBACK FOR THE COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS. THE PERIMETER BUFFER I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH REDUCING IT. AND SO FORTH. AND I WILL FOR THE TIME BEING AT

LEAST LEAVE IT THERE. >> WELL, MR. WAINRIGHT, IF THIS IS THE TIME WHERE I CAN ANSWER THOSE QUESTIONS FOR YOU, I CAN RUN THROUGH THESE QUICKLY BECAUSE A LOT OF THEM ARE RELATED TO THE FACT THAT THIS IS A PROJECT THAT FRONTS ON RACE TRACK ROAD AND HAS MULTIPLE USES WITHIN IT, MEANING THE INTENT WAS TO PUT THE COMMERCIAL AS CLOSE TO RACE TRACK ROAD AS POSSIBLE WITH THE RESIDENTIAL CLOSE TO THE BACK. SO, FOR EXAMPLE, NUMBER 1, WE WANTED TO PUSH THE BUILDINGS FORWARD TO RACE TRACK ROAD AND HAVE THE PARKING BEHIND.

AND THAT APPARENTLY, IN THE VIEW OF SOME, SOME PEOPLE WOULD LIKE TO SEE RACE TRACK ROAD CORRIDOR PRESERVED AS A MORE GREEN-LOOKING FOR AND LESS URBAN, SO WHAT WE DID WAS ASK INSTEAD OF HAVING THE BUILDING UP ON THE ROAD, WE FLIPPED IT TO THE TRADITIONAL LOOK OF ST. JOHNS COUNTY WHERE THE PARKING LOTS ARE IN FRONT OF THE COMMERCIAL BUT THE INTENT IS TO KIND OF PUSH THE DEVELOPER DEVELOPMENT, THE NON-RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT OF IT TOWARD RACE TRACK ROAD, WHICH IS A MAJOR FOUR-LANE COLLECTOR ROAD THAT IS, AGAIN 1 INTENSIVE COMMERCIAL IN ITS NATURE NOW. THIS IS SIMILAR TO WHAT'S HAPPENED IN DURBIN ALONG RACE TRACK ROAD WHERE YOU'VE GOT THE -- YOU WANT THE COMMERCIAL LOOK UP FRONT.

SO THAT'S THE INTENT OF HAVING THE WAIVER FOR SETBACK, FOR THE SETBACK FROM ONLY PARKING LOTS FROM TRACE RACK RACETRACK RO. BUILDING WILL STILL BE SET BACK A MILNE OF 20 FEET FROM THE ROAD. THE ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES. AGAIN, IF YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE A MIXTURE OF RESIDENTIAL IN THE BACK, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE RESTAURANTS UNTIL THE FRONT OF IT THAT MAY SERVE BEER OR WINE OR ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES. THEN THAT'S THE REASON, AGAIN,

[02:05:04]

WAIVER NUMBER 4, AGAIN, SINCE WE'RE TALKING, THERE MAY BE FOR THE RESIDENTIAL, IF THEY ARE TOWNHOMES 1 THEY WANT THE ABILITY TO HAVE THE GARAGES SET BACK BUT THE SAWED SET FORWARD.

THAT'S A DESIGN LOOK FOR WAIVER NUMBER 4. AND THEN WAIVER NUMBER 6, AGAIN, YOU'VE GOT NON-RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS ALONG RACE TRACK ROAD, SO THE IDEA IS TO HAVE THEM LOOK LIKE THIS, INTERESTED EVER INTEGRATED, SO YOU SEE THE BUILDINGS, THE PARKING AREAS AND ALL OF THAT. THE IDEA IS TO NOT HAVE TO HAVE THESE INDEPENDENT RESIDENTIAL OL AND OFFICE BUILDINGS SEPARATED ACCORDING TO THE CODE BECAUSE THEY'RE WITHIN ONE MASTER PLAN DEVELOPMENT. SO THAT'S THE IDEA FOR WAIVER NUMBER 6.

THE SAME KIND OF THING FOR WAIVER NUMBER 7 IS AGAIN, THE BUFFERING BETWEEN THE COMMERCIAL OUT PARCELS TO PROVIDE KIND OF THIS UNIFIED LOOK. SO YOU SEE THE PARKING FIELD, THAT IT WILL BE SHARED. YOU'VE GOT THE INTEGRATION OF THE USES.

AND THE SAME THING FOR WAIVER NUMBER 8 WITH RESPECT TO THE LANDSCAPE ISLANDS, HAVING THIS KIND OF A LOOK THAT ALLOWS THE WAIVERS TO HAVE THE PARKING LOT LOOK LIKE THIS INSTEAD OF LIKE A TRADITIONAL PARKING LOT YOU WOULD SEE. THAT'S MY SIMPLE EXPLANATION

QUICKLY OF THESE DIFFERENT WAIVERS. BAINCHTS >> MR. WAINRIGHT: M,

HOW IS THAT GOING FOR PLANNING? YA'LL HAVE LOOKED OVER THESE. >> I'M SORRY, SIR.

>> MR. WAINRIGHT: THESE WAIVERS, YA'LL HAVE LOOKED AT THESE, AND I'M NOT ASKING YOU IF

YOU APPROVED THEM, BUT DOES IT SEEM REASONABLE TO YOU? >> YES, SIR.

WE HAVE LOOKED AT THEM THROUGH THE STAFF REVIEW AND, YES, THEY DO APPEAR REASONABLE BASED UPON

THE TYPE OF PROJECT THAT THEY ARE TRYING TO DEVELOP. >> MR. WAINRIGHT: THANK YOU.

REINFORCED MY QUESTION ABOUT MY CONCERN ABOUT THE OPEN-ENDEDNESS.

NUMBER 3 IS A PERFECT EXAMPLE OF THAT. ARE YOU GOING TO PUT A BAR NEXT TO A CHURCH? IF YOU'RE GOING TO REMOVE THE DISTANCE REQUIREMENT, ALL OF IT?

>> MR. WAINRIGHT, THERE'S NOT A CHURCH THAT'S PROPOSED WITHIN THE FOUR CORNERS OF THIS PROJECT. THERE IS A DAYCARE CENTER ACROSS RACE TRACK ROAD.

AND SO WE ARE JUST LOOKING AT THE FUTURE. IF I COME IN AND I WANT TO DEVELOP A RESTAURANT AND I WANT TO HAVE THE ABILITY TO HAVE SERVE ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES, AND IT'S A SMALL RESTAURANT, NOT A RESTAURANT THAT MEETS THE EXEMPTION FROM THE CODE, BUT I HAVE A SMALL RESTAURANT THAT WANTS TO SERVE BEER OR WINE OR WANTS AN ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGE LICENSE. WE NEED THIS WAIVER FOR THAT RESTAURANT TO BE ABLE TO BE LOCATED THIS PROPERTY BECAUSE THERE'S A DAYCARE CENTER THAT IS WITHIN 1,000 FEET ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE RACE TRACK ROAD IN DUVAL COUNTY. THAT'S THE KIND OF THING THAT THIS WAIVER IS DESIGNED FOR. WE ARE NOT PROPOSING ANY CHURCHES, ANY SCHOOLS WITHIN THIS PROJECT ITSELF. IT'S THE 103 ACRES. WE ARE GUARDING AGAINST THE COMING OF CHURCHES AND DAYCARE CENTERS AND SCHOOLS TO THIS PROJECT.

SAME THING WE DID WITH DURBIN PARK. THE SAME THING WE'VE DONE WITH A MYRIAD OF OTHER PROJECTS IN THIS COUNTY. THIS IS TO A PROTECTION WAIVER

FROM KIND OF COMING TO THE NUISANCE IDEA. >> MR. WAINRIGHT: THANK YOU.

AND THE PROJECT LOOKS GOOD TO ME. IT'S JUST I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THE OPEN-ENDNESS OF SOME OF THESE WAIVERS. THANK YOU.

>> MR. KOPPENHAFER: ELLEN, AGAIN I'M NOT GOING TO VOTE ON THIS.

I REQUESTED THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE. BUT I THINK IT'S A GOOD DEVELOPMENT. I THINK CI, COMMERCIAL INTENSIVE, IT DOESN'T GET MORE INTENSE THAN THAT ON THE MAP, AND THERE COULD BE SO MANY OTHER THINGS THAT WOULD NOT BE AS COMPATIBLE BY RIGHT AGAINST THE RESIDENTIAL AREA THERE. SO THIS ESSENTIALLY LOOKS LIKE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL TO ME WHICH MAKES THE MOST SENSE, ESPECIALLY WITH THE RESIDENTIAL THAT'S ALREADY BACK DOWN THAT COMMERCIAL ROAD OR THAT PUBLIC ROAD THERE, SO IF I HAD TO SAY SO, I THINK IT'S RIGHT. IN TERMS OF THE WHOLE RIGMAROLE ABOUT RAMPANT GROWTH, THAT'S

[02:10:01]

THERE ARE SOME FOLKS THAT HAVE BEEN HERE 29 YEARS LIKE ME, AND YOU CAN'T BE THE LAST GUY TO SAY I'M GOING TO SHUT THE DOOR BEHIND ME. THAT'S JUST NOT POSSIBLE.

SO AT ANY RATE, THAT'S MY TWO CENTS. MS. PERKINS.

>> MS. PERKINS: I JUST HAVE A FEW POINTS OF CLARIFICATION. IS THERE 915 OR 975?

BECAUSE THERE'S TWRO DIFFERENT NUMBERS FOR MULTI-FAMILY. >> YES.

IN THE PUD TEXT IT IS 915. 9 NINE ONE FIVE IS THE CALCULATION WITH THE WETLAND

DENSITY BONUS TENCHTS. >> MS. PERKINS: CAPPED AT 915. HOW MANY MULTI-FAMILY ARE IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD THAT CONNECT TO YOUR PROPERTY, THAT CYPRESS TRAILS OR WHATEVER IT'S CALLED?

DO YOU KNOW HOW MANY UNITS ARE >> I DO NOT. I DO KNOW THEY ARE TOWNHOME

UNITS SO THEY ARE MULTI-FAMILY UNITS AS WELL. >> MS. PERKINS: YOU'RE ADDING AN ADDITIONAL THEN 15 TO THIS TER PER. BASED OFF THE PMPT THERE ARE GOING TO BE FIVE POINTS OF ENTRANCE AND EXIT, IS THAT RIGHT, MITT BEGINNING AT INTO THE AMOUNT OF DENSITY THEY ARE PUTTING? N.?

>> YES. WHAT THEY WILL BE -- LET ME GO BACK TO THE MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLANI WENT THE WRONG BHAIP I'M G TO GO TO THIS MORE FORMAL PLAN. AND MIGHT BE -- I MIGHT HAVE TO HAVE DOUG COME AND TALK ABOUT DISTANCE SEPARATION IN A MINUTE. BUT THIS ROAD IS ALREADY EXISTING TO GO BACK TO CYPRESS TRACE. THE IDEA THIS PROPERTY OWNER ACTUALLY USED TO OWN THIS PROPERTY AND SOLD IT FOR CYPRESS TRACE AND CARVED OUT THE ABILITY, AGAIN, TO HAVE ACCESS POINTS HERE AND THEN ACCESS POINTS THERE.

THOSE ROADS, AND IF WE NEED TO GET FRANCK TO BLISS MAGIC COMPUTER UP, WE CAN LOOK AT IT ANOTHER AERIAL, BUT THOSE CURB CUTS ARE ALREADY THERE AND THEY ARE CUTS THAT ARE ALREADY LIKE DRIVEWAY APRONS THAT ARE ALREADY IN BOTH OF THOSE LOCATIONS FOR THIS BUILDINGS-OUT OF THIS PROJECT. AND THEN THERE WILL BE ACCESS POINT HERE TO GET INTO THIS RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT, AND THEN WE DID -- THIS AREA, AND IT'S EASIER TO SEE ON THIS COLORIZED MAP -- THIS AREA IS NOT INTENDED FOR DEVELOPMENT BUT WE DID ADD AN ACCESS ARROW JUST IN CASE WE EVER NEED TO GET BACK IN HERE FOR MAINTENANCE PURPOSES AND THAT KIND OF THING.

IT'S NOT THE INTENT TO DEVELOP THAT. WE'RE ACTUALLY TAKING SOME OF THE DENSITY FROM HERE AND HERE AND APPLYING IT HERE. SO THAT ONE PROBABLY WILL NEVER BE USED, BUT WE JUST WANTED -- BECAUSE YOU KNOW IT'S A MAJOR MODIFICATION TO THE PUD.

IF WE EVER NEED TO ACCESS THERE. SO WE JUST THOUGHT IT WOULD BE SAFER TO PROVIDE THAT ACCESS

ARROW IN THAT LOCATION. >> MS. PERKINS: OKAY. AND A SIGNAL IS GUARANTEED AT

SOME POINT, CORRECT? >> YES. >> MS. PERKINS: WHENEVER THE

COUNTY DECIDES? >> YES. WHENEVER IT'S WARRANTED, THEY KNOW THAT THAT IS AT THEIR COST, AND IF WE NEED TO TALK ABOUT WHEN THAT MIGHT BE WARRANTED, RAJA SINGULAR IS HERE. HE'S OUR PROJECT TRACK OF ENGINEER IF WE NEED TO TALK

ABOUT THAT SENCHTS. >> MS. PERKINS: THAT'S ALL I NEED TO KNOW.

>> MR. KOPPENHAFER: MORE LAISM. >> MR. ALAIMO: NO QUESTIONS OR

COMMENTS, MR. CHAIRMAN MAINCHTS NO QUESTIONS OR COMMENT. >> MR. CHAIRMAN, IF I MIGHT.

MS. AVERY-SMITH, I THINK COULD YOU GO BACK POSSIBLY TO THE FORMAL MVP MAP.

I THINK YOU ARE WERE INDICATING BEFORE AND I JUST WANTED TO CONFIRM THE AREA IN THE NORTHWEST PART, YOU INDICATED IS NOT -- NOT DESIGNATED OR NOT INTENDED FOR DEVELOPMENT?

IS THAT WHAT I HAIRED SAY? THE NORTHWEST CORNER? >> CORRECT.

THE IDEA IS THOSE ARE UPLAND AREAS THAT COULD BE USED MORE FOR RECREATIONAL OR SOME OTHER OPEN SPACE FOR THE PROJECT, AND THE IDEA IS TO CLUSTER THE DEVELOPMENT HERE AND THERE FOR

THE RESIDENTIAL. >> WILL YOU BE INTENDING TO SUBMIT A REVISED MDP MAP THAT SHOWS THAT BETWEEN NOW AND THE BC CLVMENT? RIGHT NOW IT'S DESIGNATED

MULTI-FAMILY ON BOTH OF THEM. >> THAT'S CORRECT, AND THAT'S BECAUSE AGAIN FOR MEASUREMENT OF DENSITY PURPOSES FOR NUMBER OF UPLAND ACRES WE WANTED TO MAKE SURE WE WENT BACK AND FORTH, AND MS. BISHOP CAN BACK ME UP ON THAT ONE, WE ORIGINALLY WERE GOING TO APPLY THE DENSITY THROUGHOUT THE PROJECT BECAUSE WE DID NOT KNOW EXACTLY WHERE THE COMMERCIAL AND OFFICE VERSUS MULTI-FAMILY WAS, AND IN GETTING INTO DISCUSSION WITH SPHAF ABOUT, OKAY, YOU NEED TOOL KATE YOUR RESIDENTIAL AND YOUR NON-RESIDENTIAL ACREAGE WITHIN THE PROJECT SO WE CAN DETERMINE HOW MANY UNITS OF DENSITY AND NUMBER OF SQUARE FEET YOU'RE ENTITLED TO UNDER THE LAND USE OF INTENSIVE COMMERCIAL, THAT'S THERE, THESE ARE DESIGNATEDT- MULTI-FAMILY BECAUSE THOSE ARE

[02:15:08]

THAT ACREAGE WAS USED TO CALCULATE THIS MAXIMUM NUMBER OF DEVELOPABLE UNITS.

>> IS THERE LANGUAGE IN THE TEXT THAT REFLECTS THAT THEY AREN'T INTENDED FOR ACTUAL DEVELOPMENT

OR THAT THEY ARE INTENDED TO BE RECREATION? >> WELL, THAT'S AT THE INTENT, BUT I MEAN I SUPPOSE UNDER THE WAY THE MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN IS, THOSE ARE UPLAND ACRES AND THEY COULD BE DEVELOPED. THAT'S WHY I DON'T WANT TO SAY THEY WILL NEVER BE DEVELOPED, BUT THE BENT RIGHT NOW, THAT'S WHY WE HAVE A BUBBLE MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN, BUT I'M TELLING YOU THE RATIONALE FOR PUTTING THIS AND THIS AS MULTI-FAMILY IS SIMPLY FOR THE

DENSITY CALCULATION. >> OKAY. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.

>> MR. KOPPENHAFER: YOUR WELCOME. ANYTHING OALS ADD, SNENL.

>> NO, SIR, UNLESS ANYBODY HAS ANY QUESTIONS. AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE MR. WAINRIGHT IS COMFORTABLE WITH THESE WAIVERS. OTHERWISE, WE CAN TALK ABOUT

THEM SOME MORE. >> MR. AINRIGHT: I THOUGHT YOU WOULD BRING THAT UP.

THANK YOU. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: THANK YOU. WE'RE BACK IN THE AGENCY THEN.

COMMENTS OR A MOTION. >> MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PUD 2020-10 GRAND CYPRESS

BASED ON NINE FINDINGS OF FACT. >> MS. PERKINS: SECOND. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION SOMEBODY HEARING NONE, PLEASE VOTE.

DR. MCCORMICK. >> DR. MCCORMICK: I APPROVE. >> DR. HILSENBECK: NO.

>> MR. WAINRIGHT: YES KOPF MR. . MS. PERKINS. >> MS. PERKINS: YES.

>> MR. ALAIMO: YES. >> MR. MATOVINA: YES. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: MOTION CARRIES 5-1. THANK YOU ALL. LAST NUMBER, ITEM NUMBER 8.

[8. COMPAMD 2020-05 Winding Oaks - Transmittal.]

SHANNON ACEVEDO, NO STRANGER TO THIS ROOM. >> THAT'S RIGHT.

COVERAGE HOW IS EVERYTHING IN THE PRIVATE SECTOR? >> I'M HOLDING MY HEAD ABOVE WATER. GOOD AFTERNOON, SHANNON ACEVEDO WITH MATTHEWS DESIGN GROUP FOR THE RECORD 7 WALDO STREET, ST. AUGUSTINE, FLORIDA. I'M HERE FOR THE WINDING OAKS PROJECT, AND JUST TO GIVE A QUICK INTRODUCTION TO MY TEAM THAT IS HERE WITH US EL AS WELL ARE CLIENT CEFERL JUSTIN WITH PULL OUTY HOME, MYSELF WITH PLANNING, CHRIS BUT AREMORE ALSO WITH MATTHEWS DESIGN GROUP ON ENGINEERING, JODI 6:00 OUR ENVIRONMENT HALL CONSULTANT AND RAJ ASH SINNED LOR WITH OUR TRANSPORTATION. SO THIS PROPERTY IS ABOUT 229 ACRES IN TOTAL, AND AS YOU CAN SEE, IT'S TWO DIFFERENT TRACTS.

THE LARGER BEING THE RESIDENTIAL TRACT, AND THEN ALSO TRIANGULAR PIECE A LITTLE FURTHER SOUTH ALONG STATE ROAD STWFNT WHICH WE'LL CALL THE NON-RESIDENTIAL TRACT AND THAT PIECE IS JUST UNDER 12 ACRES. AND WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT HERE IS A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT. THIS IS THE A LARGE SCALE LAND USE AMENDMENT REQUEST, SO THIS IS FOR TRANSMITTAL ONLY AT THIS POINT. LOOKING AT THE EXISTING FUTURE LAND USE MAP, YOU CAN SEE THAT THE RESIDENTIAL PORTION IS ALREADY WITHIN THE ST. JOHNS COUNTY DEVELOPMENT AREA AS DESIGNATED AS RESIDENTIAL B. AND THE NON-RESIDENTIAL TRACT IS IN RURAL/SILVICULTURE. WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING IS TO MODIFY AND AMEND THIS LAND USE DESIGNATION TO RESIDENTIAL C WITH ONE IMPORTANT CAVEAT THAT THERE WILL BE A TEXT OOVMENTD FOR AMENDMENT THAT WOULD LIMIT TO IT 360 UNITS IN THE RESIDENTIAL PIECE DMEARKS ABOUT 3.08 PER ACS THE 2. THE MAIN JUSKS JUSTIFICATION FOR THIS LAND USE AMENDMENT TO BETTER ALIGN AND CREATE A TRANSITION FROM AS YOU CAN SEE A MORE INTENSE DISTRICT ALONG THE I-95/207 INTERCHANGE MODE OF MIXED USE.

YOU DO HAVE SOME RESIDENTIAL B AND OTHER USES SUCH AS INDUSTRIAL FURTHER NORTH.

THIS WOULD LIMIT URBAN STRAHL SPHRAWL BY CONS TRAINGT NEW DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THIS DEVELOPMENT AREA, AND YOU CAN KIND OF SEE THE RAILS TO TRAILS SORT OF FORMS A NATURAL BOUNDARY FOR THOSE DEVELOPMENT AREAS. IN ADDITION, I'LL TALK ABOUT THIS IN A MINUTE, BUT THE NON-RESIDENTIAL TRACT IS STRATEGICALLY LOCATED TO OVER A UNIQUE PUBLIC BENEFIT TO ST. JOHNS COUNTY. SO JUST TO KIND OF GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF WHAT THIS WILL LOOK LIKE, THE DESCRECIALG SIDE, WE HAVE TWO MAIN AREAS -- RESIDENTIAL SIDE WE HAVE TWO MAIN AREAS OF DEVELOPMENT. THESE WOULD ALL BE SINGLE FAMILY.

THERE'S A LARGE SEVERY AM CAIC PRESERVATION IN THE AREA KIND OF THE WITH ITS PONDS AROUND AND IT

[02:20:05]

AND AS YOU CAN SEE, THERE'S THIS CONTINUOUS WETLAND RUNNING THROUGH THAT WE'RE LOOKING TO PRESERVE WITH THIS PROJECT. AS FAR AS THE NON-RESIDENTIAL TRACT IS CONCERNED, WE ARE PROPOSING TO DEDICATE A PARCEL OF LAND TO ST. JOHNS COUNTY WITH THE INTENT THAT THIS WOULD BE AN OPTIMUM LOCATION FOR NOT ONLY A FIRE STATION SITE BUT POSSIBLY A COMBINATION FIRE/SERF SHERIFF SITE MUCH LIKE THE ONE THAT'S BEEN RECENTLY CONSTRUCTED ON US-1.

AND SO JUST TO KIND OF PAINT YOU A PICTURE OF WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT HERE IN TERMS OF A REGIONAL SCALE, WE'VE GOT TO STREET NETWORK OF STATE ROAD 207, I-95, EVENTUALLY COUNTY ROAD 229 WILL BE COMING DOWN TO STATE ROAD 7 AS YOU CAN SEE, AND THEN VERMONT BOULEVARD IS ONE OF THE LOCAL STREETS THAT'S THE ADJACENT TO THE SITE. AND YOU CAN SEE WHERE THIS WOULD BE LOCATED IN RELATION TO THE COUNTY AS A WHOLE. AND WHEN YOU BRING THE LAND USE IN THERE, YOU REALLY SEE HOW THIS SORT OF FITS INTO DEVELOPMENT AREA EXTENDING THAT IN SUCH A WAY THAT MAKES SENSE FROM A COMPATIBILITY PERSPECTIVE, HAVING A SLIGHTLY MORE DENSE OR INTENSE LAND USE THAN RES B BUT A NICE TRANSITION FROM THAT MIXED USE AREA THAT'S ALREADY DESIGNATED. AND WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT NO PARRISH FARMS IS SORT OF IN FLUX AND WE DON'T KNOW WHAT'S HAPPENING WITH FUTURE DEVELOPMENT AT THIS THE POINT BUT THERE IS SOME INTEREST AROUND THIS AREA. IT'S CLEARLY MOVING TOWARDSER MOFF A SUBURBAN DEVELOPMENT PATTERN VERSUS RURAL, AND SO THINKING ABOUT LONG-TRM WHAT THIS AREA LOOKS LIKE, WE FEEL WINDING OAKS WOULD MAKE A GREAT CONTRIBUTION TO THAT AS FAR AS COMPATIBILITY TO THE AREA. AND I WANTED TO THROW THIS IN THERE JUST TO THINK ABOUT THIS MORE AT A REGIONAL SCWAIL. YOU DO HAVE A SINGLE LANDOWNER THAT OWNS THIS PROPERTY THAT'S ALL IN RED YOU SEE, SO THAT'S A BIG QUESTION MARK. WE DON'T KNOW WHAT THE FUTURE BRINGS WITH THAT PIECE OF PROPERTY, BUT IT DOES AGAIN KIND OF IN A WAY FORM THIS ENCLAVE IN THE CENTER, AND YOU CAN SEE WHERE THE RAILS TO TRAILS IS HERE.

I-95 AND STATE ROAD 207. AND YOU CAN SEE IN THE FUTURE HOW THIS LOOKS LIKE IT WOULD DEVELOP QUITE COMPATIBLY AND CONSISTENTLY AS A SUBURBAN TYPE OF PATTERN WITH YOUR MORE INTENSE USES TOWARDS THIS INTERSECTION AND THEN MOVING OUTWARD BOTH EAST AND WEST.

SO TALKING ABOUT PROJECT BENEFITS. AS I MENTIONED, WE'RE LOOKING AT THE PUBLIC DEDICATION OF THIS FIRE/SHERIFF STATION SITE. WE'RE ALSO LOOKING AT PROVIDING A HOUSING PRODUCT THAT'S GOING TO BE VERY AFFORDABLE TO ST. JOHNS COUNTY RESIDENTS.

WE'RE LOOKING AT PARTICIPATION IN PRE-FUNDING A REGIONAL DOCUMENT INFRASTRUCTURE THAT'S ALREADY BEING PLANNED BY THE ST. JOHNS COUNTY DOCUMENTS DIVISION FOR SEWER NEEDS IN THE AREA. AND ALSO THIS CONNECTIONS TO RAILS TO TRAILS WITNESS AS I HAD MENTIONED EARLIER. ALSO PRESERVATION OF OVER 100 ACRES OF WETLANDS ON SITE.

GHEGHT A LITTLE BIT MORE IN THE DETAILS OF WHY WE HAVE THIS REQUEST, WHY YOU'RE LOOKING AT THIS TODAY, SO AS I MENTIONED, IT'S THE TEXTEDAO WOULD LIMIT TO 360 UNITS.

AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THE REASON WE NEED THIS TEXT SOOVMENTD BECAUSE OF THE WETLAND. IF YOU DIDN'T HAVE WETLAND TO CONTEND WITH OR WERE YOU 52 WERE DOING HUGE AMOUNTS OF IMPACTS AT THE DURNLT CURNLGT DESIGNATION OF RESIDENTIAL B TWO DWELLING UNITS PER NET ACRE YOU WOULD HAVE UP TO A THEY'RE ELK MAXIMUM OF 434 DWELLING UNITS WITH THE PUD REZONING. HOWEVER, WITH JUST OVER 100 ACRES IN THE MAJORITY BEING PRESERVED, THAT'S REALLY WHAT'S NECESSITATING THIS LAND USE AMENDMENT REQUEST FOR YOU AS FAR AS THE RESIDENTIAL PLAN IS CONCERNED. I ALSO DID WANT TO MENTION BECAUSE I KNOW THE AGENCY, AT LEAST SOME OF YOU HAVE SEEN THIS PROJECT A FEW YEARS AGO, AND IT WASN'T A LAND USE AMENDMENT REQUEST AT THE TIME. TWRAS IT WAS A PUD BY ITSELF.

AND THEY THE THEY WERE LOOKING AT THE BASE DENSITY OF RES B OF TWRO DWELLIN UNITS PER ACRE DUST PLUS DENSITY BONUSES THAT THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE ALLOWS FOR BOTH PRESERVATION OF WETLAND ACRES AND ALSO PUBLIC DEDICATION LANDS. AND I WANTED TO DO THE MATH JUST SO YOU KIND UNDERSTOOD WHAT THE AND RES-C THAT WE'RE ASKING. IT WOULD BE THE DIFFERENCE OF ABOUT .8 DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE OR IN TBOALT 94 UNITS. -- TOTAL 94 UNITS.

[02:25:07]

AND SO WHAT WE'VE PROVIDED HERE IS A GENERAL MONTHLY MORTGAGE PAYMENT, AND THIS INCLUDES BOTH HOA, CDD AND A TYPICAL MORTGAGE FOR DIFFERENT HOMES WITHIN DIFFERENT SUBDIVISIONS THROUGHOUT ST. JOHNS COUNTY. IT'S IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT WINDING OAKS WILL NOT HAVE DMIEFNED CDD FEE AND THE HOA THAT WE'RE LOOKING AT IS RELATIVELY SLIM EXPUKS SEE WHERE IT FALLS YUNSD $1,500 AS AN EXPECTED MONTHLY PAYMENT. IT'S QUITE COMPETITIVE THROUGHOUT THE MARKET. SO GETTING TO THE NON-RESIDENTIAL TRACT, WE DO HAVE A ONE OUT PARCEL THAT WE'RE PLANNING FOR COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT, AND THAT WOULD BE TO ADD SOME DIVERSITY IN LAND USES, WHICH IS WHY YOU SEE THAT RES-C DESIGNATION, BUT THE MAJORITY OF SITE, EVERYTHING YOU SEE THERE IN PURPLE, THAT IS WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING TO DEDICATE TO ST. JOHNS COUNTY, AND THE INTENT WOULD BE FOR A FIRE/SHERIFF STATION SITE.

WE'VE SORT OF OUTLINED HERE, THIS IS JUST AN EXAMPLE OF WHAT COULD BE, BUT THIS IS A VERY SIMILAR FOOTPRINT TO THE ONE THAT'S ON US-1, AND IT'S THERE FOR YOU AS REFERENCE JUST TO NOTE THAT THERE WOULD BE PLENTY OF SPACE TO ACCOMMODATED A USE SUCH AS THIS.

MORE IMPORTANTLY, THE LOCATION IS SO VALUABLE HERE. YOU HAVE JUST OVER 1200 LINEAR FEET RIGHT ALONG STATE ROAD 207, PERFECT FOR SOMETHING LIKE A FIRE STATION, AND IT'S ALSO REALLY KIND OF IN THE PERFECT BALANCE AS FAR AS ITS PROXIMITY TO I-95 BUT FAR WEST ENOUGH THAT IT CLOSES THIS FIVE MILE ROAD MILE GAP THAT CURRENTLY EXISTS. THE PINK AREAS YOU SEE ARE THE AREAS WHERE THE FIRE SERVICES ARE WITHIN THE 5-MILE RADIUS. THIS WOULD CLOSE THAT GAP BY BEING ABLE TO BUILD A NEW FACILITY THERE. I ALSO WANTED TO MENTION THAT THIS COULD ALSO HAVE SOME BENEFITS FOR THE SHERIFF DEPARTMENT AS WELL.

OH, SORRY. I MEANT TO MENTION THE EXISTING SUBDIVISIONS HERE.

YOU CAN KIND OF GET AN IDEA OF EVEN ASIDE FROM WINDING OAKS, WHO WOULD BENEFIT FROM HAVING THIS NEW PUBLIC SERVICE LOCATED WHERE IT IS. GETTING TO THE SHERIFF BENEFIT TO THIS WHOLE THING, RIGHT NOW THE OPERATION CENTERS AT US-1, AS YOU CAN SEE, AND THAT REALLY KIND OF FUNCTIONS FOR THE SOUTH, SOUTHEAST AND THE SOUTHWEST. THERE IS A SMALL UNMANNED AREA

[02:30:04]

AND YOU CAN SEE WHERE THAT WOULD BE IN RELATIONSHIP TO THE EXISTING OFFICES.

IN TERMS OF TRAFFIC ANALYSIS WE LOOKED AT A FOUR MILE STUDY AREA, AND WHAT WE FOUND IS WHAT YOU SEE IN ORANGE. THOSE ARE IMPACTED ROADWAYS WHERE YOU'VE GOT 1% OR MORE CHANGE IN TRAFFIC WITH THE PROJECT. IN THE RED IS THE EXTENT OF ADVERSELY IMPACTED. THAT ENDS UP BEING ONLY ABOUT 4.2 MICHELS OUT OF THE 66 ROAD MILES THAT WE STUDIED. AND WITH THAT WOULD COME ANTICIPATED MITIGATION OF ABOUT $5 MILLION. IT'S IMPORTNT TO NOTE THAT THINKING ABOUT THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THIS RES-C REQUEST AND THE EXISTING RESIDENTIAL B DESIGNATION, THOSE SAME EXACT 4.2 MILES ARE WHAT ARE ADVERSELY IMPACTED AND P. IN OTHER WORDS, BY REQUESTING THIS RESIDENTIAL C, IT REALLY HAS NO CHANGE AND IT DOESN'T ADD ANY ADDITIONAL ROAD MILES TO BE ADVERSELY IMPACTED. WHAT IT DOES DO IS INCREASE THE ANTICIPATED MITIGATION, AND I WANT TO SAY IT'S -- WE DID SOME ROUGH MAP BUT IT WOULD BE ABOUT $1.5 MILLION MORE.

IN TERMS OF UTILITIES, WASTEWATER IMPROVEMENTS, THERE'S AN EXISTING INFRASTRUCTURE PRETTY CLOSE BY ALONG CYPRESS, AND THE ST. JOHNS COUNTY DOCUMENTS DEMENT IS CURRENTLY WORKING ON A PLAN FOR AN EXPANSION. WHAT THEY WANT TO UPGRADE TO EVENTUALLY, THE LONG-TERM PLAN IS A 2. 5 MILLION-GALLON PLANT, AND BY PRIG BRINGING THE WINDING OAKS DEVELOPMENT ONBOARD, WE COULD EXPECT TO CONTRIBUTE ABOUT $1.6 MILLION TOWARDS THOSE IMPROVEMENTS WHICH HELPS BRING THAT SOLUTION ALONG.

WE'RE CURRENTLY WORKING WITH THE UTILITIES DIVISION ON BOTH THE LONG-TERM AND INTERIM SOLUTIONS AS WE THINK ABOUT HOW THIS PROJECT WOULD DEVELOP MOVING FORWARD.

IN TERMS OF SCHOOLS, WE CAN'T FORMALLY APPLY FOR SCHOOL MITIGATION CONCURRENCY UNTIL AFTER THE LAND USE AMENDMENT IS ADOPTED, HOWEVER, WE DID DO SOME RESEARCH ON WHAT THE GENERATION WOULD BE AND FOUND THAT IT WOULD BE ABOUT 90 STUDENTS FORE WHAT WE'RE PLANNING ON 360 UNITS, AND YOU CAN SEE HOW THAT BREAKS OUT FOR THE DIFFERENT SCHOOLS AS FAR AS ELEMENTARY, MIDDLE AND SCHOOLS. ALSO GOING BACK TO THAT COMPARISON BETWEEN RES-B AND RES-C, THIS WOULD BE THE DIFFERENCE OF ABOUT 24 STUDENTS. IN TERMS OF ENVIRONMENTAL, AS I MENTIONED, OUT OF THE 102.7 WE'RE LOOKING TO PRESERVE APPROXIMATELY 100 ACRES, SO PRETTY MUCH ALL OF IT. THE ONLY THING THAT WE WOULD BE IMPACTING ARE WHERE WE CAN -- WE JUST HAVE NO OTHER CHOICE SUCH AS THE AREA THAT YOU CAN KIND OF SEE COMING UP THAT EASTERN FINGER. WE WOULD HAVE TO DO SOME IMPACTS THERE.

BUT GENERALLY WE'RE LEAVING THE WETLAND AS IS. 8.8 ACRES OF RECREATIONAL AREAS.

AND ALSO WANTED TO MENTION THAT MORE THAN 4 ACRES OF THE SEVERE CAMMIC AREA IS TO BE PRESERVED WHICH IS WELL OVER THE CODE MINIMUM OF 10%. AND YOU CAN SEE WHY.

THERE'S SOME BEAUTIFUL TREES ON-SITE THAT WE ARE LOOKING TO PRESERVE THROUGHOUT THE EXTERIOR OCCAMMIC AREA WHICH WOULD BE A GREAT AMENITY TO BOTH THE PUBLIC AND THE PEOPLE LIVING WITHIN THIS SUBDIVISION. SO WITH THAT WE BELIEVE THIS REQUEST IS JUSTIFIED AND COMPATIBLE WITH BOTH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT EXPWOATD IMREFN PLAN, AND WE REQUEST TRANSMITTAL. I'LL BE EXPANDING BY FOR QUESTIONS AND MY PROJECT TEAM IS

HERE AS WELL IF YOU HAVE SPECIFIC QUESTIONS FOR THEM. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. DO WE HAVE ANY MUMBLE SPEAKER CARDS?

>> MODERATOR: OF WAINCH NO. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC SPEAKER'S ONLINE?

HELLO? >> HEY, THIS IS MARK TURNER. CONCHT GO AHEAD, MARK.

PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AND WE'LL GIVE YOU THREE MINUTES.

>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN, BOARD MEMBERS. FOR THE RECORD MY NAME IS COLONEL TOMS MARK BURNER MY RESIDENTS LOCATED AT 4024 VERMONT BOULEVARD IN ELKTON.

IN RELATION TO VERMONT HEIGHTS, MY RESIDENCE IS A TWO-STORY WHITE HOUSE IN THE MOST FOREIGN NORTHERN POURS OF VERMONT HEIGHTS OFF VERMONT BOULEVARD BEFORE IT TRANSITIONS TO ALLEN NIECE ROAD. MY PROPERTY IS GENERALLY ADJACENT TO THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AREA. EARLIER I PROVIDED A LETTER TO MS. MEAGAN CUNY.

I BELIEVE SHE PRINTED A COPY FOR YOUR REVIEW. IN THAT LETTER I HAVE EXPRESSED

[02:35:03]

SO THE CONCERN IS THAT EGRESS TOWARD ST. AUGUSTINE WOULD BE TURNING EAST AND MAKING U-TURN WEISE WEST ON TBRNT 7. THIS MULTIPLIED BY NO TRAFFIC SIGNALS IS AND OVER 300 NEW RESIDENCES SIGNIFICANTLY INCREASES TRAFFIC CONGESTION AND VEHICULAR SAFETY CONCERNS.

NOW, AS I MENTIONED, VERMONT BOULEVARD IS A TWO-LANE ROAD OFF HIGHWAY 207.

THAT CEKDZ THE HIGHWAY WITH ALLEN NIECE ROAD. CURRENTLY OUR BOULEVARD PROVIDE ACCESS TO THE COUNTY LITTLE OF WITH SIGNIFICANT TRUG AND THROUGH TRAFFIC DURING THE DAY.

UNFORTUNATELY, THE TRUCKS AND THE MAJORITY OF THOSE VEHICLES DO NOT OBEY THE POSTED TRAFFIC SIGNS AND HAS BECOME INCREASINGLY DANGEROUS FOR VEHICLE RAFFIC AND PEDESTRIANS, ESPECIALLY CHILDREN. IT DOES HAVE DIRECT EAST AND WEST ACCESS TO 207 BUT IT DOES NOT HAVE ANY TRAFFIC SIGNALS. IN MY OPINION, ANY INCREAE TO THE CURRENT TRAFFIC, ESPECIALLY TRYING TO ENTER OR EXIT 207 AS WELL AS NEAR THE ENTRANCE, THE PROPOSED ENTRANCE ACCESS CLOSE TO THE STATE TRAIL AND ROAD CURVE WOULD HAVE A CRITICAL IMPACT ON VEHICULAR SAFETY AND NOISE POLLUTION WITHIN OUR LONGSTANDING COMMUNITY. IT'S LSHED DIFFICULT TO ENTER AT ANY TIME 27 TOWARD ST. AUGUSTINE AND VERY DANGEROUS TO CROSS THE STATE BIKE TRAIL DUTY BLIND SPOT CREATED BY THE CURVE IN THE ROAD TRAVELING SOUTH JUST BEFORE THE TRAIL.

HOWEVER, IF THE BOARD APPROVES THE RESTOANG FOR THE DEVELOPMENT, IT IS MY WISH THAT ANY ENTRANCE OR EGRESS TO THE PLANNED DEVELOPMENT BE BEFORE OR AFTER VERMONT HEIGHTS AND THAT THERE BE NO ACCESS FROM VERMONT BOULEVARD NOR ALLEN NEECE ROAD THE ZONING ORE GRANT AN EXCEPTION AFTER GATED EMERGENCY ENTRANCE OR EXIT THAT WOULD TRADITIONALLY OR NORMALLY EXIST OAT BACK SIDE OF PLANNED COMMUNITY. THE GOAL IS TO MAINTAIN A SAFE THROUGH WAY AND NOT INCREASE TRAFFIC REQUIREMENTS, CONGESTION AND NOISE.

THOUGH I'M NOT OARCHLT OPPOSED TO THE DEVELOPMENT, AS A CAPITA& INVESTMENT STRATEGIST FOR THE NIETDZ ARMY AND A MASTER PLANNER FOR OUR COMBAT BASES OVERSEAS, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE DEVELOPER ADDRESS THESE TRAFFIC AND NOISE CONCERNS AS WELL AS ENSURE PUBLC VEHICULAR SAFETY PRIOR TO THE START OF ANY CONSTRUCTION. LASTLY, AS I'VE GROWN TO BE SOMEWHAT OF A CONSERVATIVE IN MY MILITARY PRACTICE, I WE ASK THAT THERE BE NO CONSIDERING OF WIDENING VERMONT BOULEVARD TO PROTECT AND LEAVE UNDISTURBED THE BURROWS THAT EXIST ON MY PROPERTY AS WELL AS ACROSS THE STREET. ANY INCREASE IN TRAFFIC IN THE ASSOCIATED --

>> MR. WAINRIGHT: YOUR TIME IS ABOUT UP. >> OKAY.

VIBRATION WOULD BE DETRIMENTAL TO THAT HABITAT. THAT CONCLUDES MY STATEMENT AND

THANK YOU AGAIN FOR YOUR TIME. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER PUBLIC

COMMENTS VIA THE INTERNET? >> NO MORE PUBLIC COMMENT. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: ALL RIGHT.

CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENTS. THE APPLICANT CAN STEP FORWARD AND MAYBE ADDRESS THOSE

QUESTIONS. >> THANK YOU. YES, I DIDN'T WANT TO ADDRESS, AND -- I DIDN'T WANT TO ADDRESS, AND I DID RECEIVE THAT LETTER THIS AFTERNOON ABOUT THE CONCERNS ALONG VERMONT BOULEVARD AND THE CONCERN ABOUT NOT WANTING THAT ROADWAY WIDENED AND TRAFFIC CONCERNS. DID I WANT TO CLARIFY AND I PROBABLY SHOULD HAVE SPENT A LITTLE BIT OF TIME IN THE PRESENTATION ON THIS, BUT WE DID WORK WITH FDOT AND WE HAVE BEEN GIVEN PER NEGOTIATION DO A LEFT OUT AT THE MAIN INTERSECTION, SO LOOKING AT STATE ROAD 207, THE MAIN ENTRANCE WILL HAVE BOTH A LEFT OUT AND A RIGHT IN AND A RIGHT OUT.

SO THE IDEA IS THIS REALLY IS GOING TO BE THE PRINCIPLE ACCESS.

THE SECONDARY ACCESS ALONG VERMONT BOULEVARD IS VERY, VERY SECONDARY IN TERMS OF I'LL HAVE RAJESH KIND OF GO THROUGH THE NUMBERS BUT WE'RE LOOKING AT PROBABLY LESS THAN 20 TRIPS DURING PEAK P.M. HOURS, WHICH WOULD BE ESSENTIALLY ABOUT ONE TRIP EVERY THREE MINUTES.

SO WE'RE REALLY LOOKING AT THIS AS BEING A VERY ANCILLARY, VERY UNLIKELY USE, AT LEAST BY MOST

[02:40:07]

>> TO THE CHIEF, THANK YOU. MY NAME IS RAJESH WITH SINGULAR TRAFFIC SOLUTIONS, PARK BOULEVARD JACKEDVILLE FLORIDA 33216. I'M THE TRAFFIC ENGINEER.

WE WORK WITH FDOT. I HAVE HEARD THE CONCERN ABOUT TRAFFIC ON VERMONT.

T DOT HAS AGREED TO ALLOW FOR A LEFT OUT ON THE PROJECT AT STWFNT THAT WOO REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF TRACK OF GOING ONTO VERMONT SO THIS WOULD -- STILL MAKE A LEFT OUT OF OF THE

PROJECT DRIVEWAY ONTO STWFNT TOWARDS THE 95. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: SORRY TO INTERRUPT SO THAT'S THE LEFT OUT FROM WINDING OAKS DRIVE. THERE'S NOT HAD A RIGHT LANE

TURN OUT. >> WHEN YOU CEJA RIGHT TURN LANE, THIS IS A WESTBOUND RIGHT

TURN LANE IN THE PROJECT. THERE'S A RIGHTS DECEL. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: BUT TO

TURN RIGHT THERE IS NO SEPARATE& LANE. >> YES.

THIS IS ALSO THE LEFT OUT ONTO STWFNT. THIS IS 207.

>> MR. KOPPENHAFER: RIGHT. >> THERE WILL BE A MEDIAN CUT. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: IS IT A REQUIREMENT TO CONNECT TO VERMONT BOULEVARD FROM THE COUNTY?

>> I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION. TYPICALLY IN PROJECTS OF THIS SIZE WOULD NEED AT LEAST TWO CONNECTIONS FOR EMERGENCY PURPOSES.

>> MR. KOPPENHAFER: I SEE JAHN COMING FORWARD. MAYBE SHE CAN ENLIGHTEN US.

>> GOOD AFTERNOON, JAN TRAN THRAM WITH GROWTH MANAGEMENT. THERE IS NOT A SPECIFIC REQUIREMENT FOR A SECOND ACCESS. WE DO ENCOURAGE THE SECOND ACCESS FOR ANY DEVELOPMENTS OVER 200 UNITS. IF THERE'S AN ISSUE WITH VERMONT BOULEVARD, THEY COULD TURN IT INTO AN EMERGENCY ONLY ACCESS. THE REAL ISSUE IS FOR EMERGENCY ACCESS AND JUST HAVING ANOTHER

WAY OUT, AS YOU HEARD THAT MANY TIMES BEFORE. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: RIGHT.

OKAY. >> I THINK THE ONLY ISSUE THAT WOULD COME ABOUT, AND RAJ CAN ADDRESS THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC THAT IS ACTUALLY COMING FROM THE WEST IS MINIMAL.

THE MAJORITY OF THE TRAFFIC BASED ON THE MODEL IS HEADING EAST TOWARD I-95 AND ST. AUGUSTINE. BUT THERE WOULD BE SOME TRAFFIC THAT WOULD NEED TO GET INTO OR -- INTO THE DEVELOPMENT FROM THE WEST POTENTIALLY, SO THEY WOULD NEED TO GO DOWN AND MAKE A U-TURN AND COME BACK. DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? SO THEY WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO

ENTER FROM VERMONT BOULEVARD IF IT WAS JUST AN EMERGENCY ACCESS. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: SO IT'S JUST NOT WARRANTED TO HAVE A TWO-WAY MEDIAN CUT THERE AT WINDING OAKS DRIVE?

>> IT WOULD NOT ALLOW FOR A FULL MEDIAN OMG. FDOT WOULD NOT ALLOW FOR A FULL

NEED YANG OPENING AT THAT LOCATION. >> IT DOESN'T MEET THEIR ACCESS

MANAGEMENT OF SEPARATION. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: AND VERMONT IS A MEDIAN CUT THROUGH,

RIGHT? >> YES. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: DIDN'T MEAN TO HOG THE QUESTIONS HERE. JUST WANTED TO GET CLARIFIED. ALL RIGHT.

APPLICANT, WOULD YOU LIKE TO STEP FORWARD, ADD TO THAT? >> THANK YOU.

JUSTIN DUDLEY 204 DELRAY PARK WITH A POINT VEDRA FLORIDA WITH MULTIPLE HOMES AND I DO SNREECT APPRECIATE THE COLONEL TURNERS LETTER. HE WE HAD SAW SIMILAR CONCERNS N THIS FIRST CAME UP TO THE COUNTY IN 2016 WHEN A PRIOR APPLICANT WAS INTENDING A FIRE STATION AT THE BACK OF THIS RESIDENTIAL TRACT THAT WOULD ACTUALLY HAVE TRUCKS ADDING TO VERMONT BOULEVARD, WHICH I KNOW HAS CAUSED A CONCERN FOR TRAFFIC ON THAT ROADWAY.

IT WAS US WORKING WITH THE LANDOWNER THAT PROMOTED THE IDEA OF PUSHING THAT FIRE STATION OUT TO 207. THAT SEEMED TO BE MORE APPEALING TO, AT THE TIME I BELIEVE INTERIM TREE OF PRAFAT OR NOW CHIEF EXECUTIVE PRAF ANT FOR THIS NEW LOCATION TO GET THAT TRAFFIC OFF THE ROADWAY. WE LEFT THE ACCESS THERE ONTO VERMONT TO THIS PIECE FOR EMERGENCY SERVICES TO HAVE THAT SECONDARY ACCESS TO MEET THE COUNTY'S DESIRE FOR EMERGENCY SERVICES AND WHATNOT. BUT JUST TO BE CLEAR, WE ARE YOU SEE THAT TAIL CONNECTING ONTO 207, THAT IS EVERYTHING BUT A LEFT-HAND IN COMING OF FROM THE WEST OR COMING FROM THE HASTING

[02:45:07]

WHAT WE HAVE FURTHER DONE IN A PRELIMINARY DESIGN IS TO HAVE LEFT AND RIGHT OUT STAGING LANES AT THE COMMUNITY SO THAT IT IS A MORE DESIROUS LOCATION TO HAVE MOST OF THE TRAFFIC FLOW OUT THE FRONT ENTRY THERE AT VERMONT AND 207, IT IS NOT A LIGHTED SIGNAL AT THAT LOCATION.

IT'S A FOUR-WAY INTERSECTION, AND VERMONT CONNECTS TO 207 WITH A SINGULAR LANE FOR TRAFFIC STAGING, WHETHER YOU'RE GOING STRAIGHT ACROSS 207, TURNING LEFT OR TURNING RIGHT, AND SO WE DON'T BELIEVE THAT THAT WILL BE A HEAVILY USED LOCATION FOR ACCESS INTO THE SITE WHEREAS THE CONNECTION THERE AT TWFNT 207 IS GOING TO BE THE PRIMARY CONNECTION.

SO. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: THE VERMONT PAVED ALL THE WAY UP TO

THIS ALLEN D. NEECE? >> IT IS, YES. AND ALLEN D. NEECE CONTINUES TO BE PAVED. WHERE YOU SEE THE DARK PURPLE IN THE TOP LEFT, THAT'S THE WASTE DUMP LOCATION THERE SO THERE'S ALREADY, I KNOW FOR FOLKS THAT LIVE ALONG VERMONT ALREADY DEAL WITH TRUCK TRAFFIC IN THAT LOCATION, AND SO WE LOOKED AT THIS PIECE TO SAY THAT BECAUSE IT HAD THIS IDEAL OPPORTUNITY TO CONNECT TO STWFNT ON THE EAST SIDE OF VERMONT, OUR TRAFFIC NOT HAVE TO BE IMPOSING THOSE RESIDENTS LIKE AT THE MAY ALREADY BE INCURRING WITH

CURRENT USES >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: FOR MR. NEECE, HE GETS A SCHOOL AND THEN A DUMP ROAD NAMED RIGHT AFTER HIM. OKAY.

>> MAYBE HE'S A RENAISSANCE MAN THAT DOES IT ALL. MAY I SPEAK TO ONE OTHER TOPIC?

>> MR. KOPPENHAFER: SURE. >> APPRECIATE IT. I'M NOT SURE IF IT WAS DR. MCCORMICK OR DR. HILSENBECK THAT MADE THE COMMENT ABOUT ALL THE UNITS ALREADY EXISTING IN THE COUNTY THAT ARE APPROVED, BUT PERHAPS UNBUILT. WE DID A MARKET ANALYSIS BACK IN MAY WHEN WE STARTED THIS PROJECT, AND WE HAD A NUMBER OF 57,701 ENTITLED UNITS IN THE COUNTY THAT WERE NOT YET BUILT, BUT WE NOTE THAT 51% OF THEM ARE SPECIFIC ONLY TO SIX PUDS IN THE COUNTY. SILVER LEIF, U. SAWGRASS, NOCATEE, RIVER TOWN, PLAYER'S CLUN AT SAWGRASS AND ST. AUGUSTINE SHORES. AND 34% OF THOSE LOTS ARE ROUGHLY 19,500 OF THEM ARE IN THOSE PUDS THAT ARE MORE THAN 15 YEARS OLD, SO NOT SURE THAT ALL OF THE EXISTING ENTITLEMENTS ARE NECESSARILY ENTITLEMENTS THAT WE WOULD EXPECT TO HAVE GO HAVE DEVELOPMENT. WITH AS SOME OF THESE ARE GROABLES ENTITLEMENTS. MAYBE THERE'S MORE ENTITLEMENTS THAN THERE'S ACTUALLY LAND PLANNING FOR. SO WE'VE BEEN VERY DILIGENT TO SEEK A SITE WHERE WE THOUGHT WE WOULD HAVE THE LEAST AMOUNT OF IMPACT AGAIN FROM THIS REQUEST FROM A RES B TO RES-C, NOT ACTUALLY CHANGING THE ADVERSE ROADS, HAVING CLOSE PROXIMITY TO HIGH TRAVEL CORRIDORS SUCH AS 207 AND 95, AND IT HAS LESS THAN THREE ACRES OF TOTAL WETLAND IMPACTS A PIECE THIS SIZE WITH OVER 100 ACRES PRESERVE. WE'RE AROUND 102 ACRES PRESERVED YOU LOOK AT AB ENDTRADA ON THE OTHER SIDE THE WAY THEY ARE MORE THAN THREE TIMES THE NUMBER OF UNITS, AND THEY HAVE ABOUT 109 ACRES OF PRESERVE WETLAND SO WE'RE PRESERVING NEAR 45 OR 46 PERCENT OF SITE SO WE FEEL IT HAS A LOT OF ATTRIBUTES TO THIS PROJECT AND ARE VERY ENCOURAGED BY THEM.

>> MR. KOPPENHAFER: THANK YOU. I'M GOING TO OPEN IT UP TO EX PARTE AND QUESTIONS OR

COMMENTS FROM THE AGENCY MEMBER MEMBERS. >> I HAVE A CLARIFICATION ON THE RIGHT TURN LANE. THAT GRAPHIC DID NOT SO I. SHOW A RIGHT TURN LANE OUT OF THE PROJECT. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT THEY ARE PROVIDING ONE LEFT OUT AND ONE RIGHT OUT OF THE PROJECT. YOU WILL HAVE TWRO LANES EXITING.

>> MR. KOPPENHAFER: TWO LANES EXITING GOING SOUTH. >> GOING SOUTH, YES.

THANK YOU. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: THANK YOU. DR. MCCORMICK, QUESTIONS,

COMMENTS, AND EX PARTE. >> DR. MCCORMICK: I HAVE NO EX PARTE.

THE COMMENTS BY THE LAST SPEAKER I FOUND IMPORTANT AND INTERESTING, TO ME AT LEAST.

THANK YOU. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: THANK YOU. DR. HILSENBECK.

>> DR. HILSENBECK: I HAVE A FEW QUESTIONS, AND IT WAS ME WHR 60,000 CURRENTLY OF YET UNBUILT PARCELS IN ITS EXPROIRNG GOT THAT INFORMATION DIRECTLY FROM THE ST. JOHNS COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF GROWTH IN NOVEMBER, LATE NOVEMBER. SO I TRUSTED THEM TO COME UP

[02:50:02]

AND TRYING TO BE SUCCINCT, I STILL -- THE COMMENTS THAT WERE MADE IN TERMS OF RESIDENTIAL UNITS IN THE COUNTY, I BELIEVE, MY OPINION, THAT ARE OVERWHELMING OUR COUNTY AND ITS INFRASTRUCTURE THAT I MADE ITEM 7 PRESENTED BY ELLEN AVERY-SMITH, THEY WOULD GO FOR THIS ONE AS WELL WHERE QUALITY OF LIFE IS AT STAKE HERE. CONCERNING -- I'M NOT GOING TO TALK ABOUT THE WETLANDS. I THANK YOU FOR PRESERVING NEARLY HALF THE SITE OF THE FIVE WETLAND. YOU THE ABOUT I WANT TO TALK ABOUT WATER.

YOU HAVE A LETTER FROM ST. JOHNS COUNTY UTILITIES THAT THEY CAN MEET WATER AND SEWER.

I'M GLAD THIS WILL BE ON WATER AND SEWER. BUT THE COUNTY WATER -- COUNTY ROAD 214 IS NOW DRAWING BRACKISH WATER FROM THE FLORIDA AQUIFER FOR RESIDENTIAL USE.

I HAVE READ SEVERAL ARTICLES P. AND THAT WATER FOR RESIDENTIAL USE HAS TO BE SPHIRLTD THROUGH REVERSE OSMOSIS WHICH IS REALLY EXPENSIVE. FILTERED.

JUST 13 YEARS AGO QUART FOR RESS WAS FOUND FROM THE SURFICIAL AQUIFER.

NOW, DUE TO A LOT OF GROWTH -- I WANT WON'T SAY RAMPANT GROWTH BUT A LOT OF GROWTH -- THE COUNTY NOW HAS TO DRILL DEEPER INTO THE GROUND WATER, INTO THE FLORIDAN AQUIFER, AND THAT IS A DRAIN ON OUR SYSTEM IN TERMS OF INFRASTRUCTURE.

LET ME LOOK AT MY LAST PLANS HERE. I BROUGHT UP SOILS BEFORE.

YOU HAVE TEN SOIL TYPES ON THIS ONE, ON THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY. EIGHT OUT OF THE TEN, THE MAJORITY ARE -- AND MOST OF THEM OUTSIDE THE WETLAND, THE BONE A SIDE WETLAND, VERY WET, POORLY DRAINED TO VERY -- [INDECIPHERABLE] DRAINED SOILS.

I AM CONCERNED ABOUT WHAT THAT DOES TO A WETLAND. DECIPHERABLE IN ISOLATION.

THEY NEED BUFFERS. IT'S ALWAYS DETRIMENTAL TO THOSE.

AND I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THAT BUT IF YOU WANT TO ADDRESS QUESTIONS, THAT'S FINE.

THOSE ARE COMMENTS. I APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK MY OPINION.

>> MR. KOPPENHAFER: THANK YOU. MR. WAINRIGHT. >> MR. WAINRIGHT: A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. MS. ACEVEDO, HELP ME OUT HERE. LET'S SEE.

WE'VE GOT -- WE DON'T HAVE AN OVERWHELMING AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC. THE EXISTING ROADWAYS ARE ADEQUATE FOR THE TRAFFIC FROM THIS DIVISION? IS THAT CORRECT?

>> THE MAJORITY OF THE FOUR MILE RADIUS, THAT'S TRUE. THERE ARE ABOUT FOUR MILES THAT

WERE ADVERSELY IMPACTED. >> MR. WAINRIGHT: SO LIKE 500, 700 CARS A DAY ADDITIONAL ARE

[02:55:06]

GOING TO COME OUT OF THIS PLACE. >> WELL, THAT'S WHAT THE MITIGATION WOULD BE FOR.

SO WE DID SPEAK WITH ST. JOHNS COUNTY'S TRANSPORTATION PLANNING DEPARTMENT TO TALK ABOUT WHAT SOME OF THOSE IMPROVEMENTS COULD BE, THINKING ABOUT -- SO THE AREA IN RED THERE IS THE AREA THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WHERE YOU'VE GOT THOSE ADVERSE IMPACTS, ALL OF WHICH HAPPEN TO BE ON THE EAST SIDE OF I-95. SO WHERE WE CAN BRING A BENEFIT IS BY HAVING A LARGE SUM OF MITIGATION DOLLARS SUCH AS THIS. THERE COULD BE THE POTENTIAL FOR A COST SHARE WITH FDOT TO DO SOME IMPROVEMENTS TO STATE ROAD 207. BUT IT'S TOO EARLY TO TELL AT THIS THE POINT WHERE EXACTLY IN THE TRANSPORTATION NETWORK THOSE DOLLARS WOULD BE SPENT.

>> MR. WAINRIGHT: OKAY. IN ORDER TO LEAVE THERE OR ENTER THIS AREA, THERE ARE -- WHAT? - TWO WAYS IN AND TWO WAYS OUT TON 207? TWO OF THOSE WAYS.

AND THE OTHER WAY IS THE ROAD THAT RUNS TO THE NORTHEAST. >> SO THERE'S STATE ROAD 207 IS THE MAJOR ACCESS POINT, AND THERE WILL BE A RIGHT IN, A RIGHT OUT, AND ALSO A LEFT OUT

FOR PEOPLE COMING OUT OF THE SUBDIVISION GOING TOWARDS I-95. >> MR. WAINRIGHT: I HEAR YOU TALKING. I'VE HEARD WHAT YOU SAID. PEOPLE TURNING LEFT OUT ONTO 207, THAT IS -- IT'S GOING TO BE VERY DANGEROUS, AND MOST OF THOSE PEOPLE THAT COME OUT OF THERE ARE GOING TO BE TURNING LEFT TO COME INTO THE CITY OR INTO THE COUNTY.

IS THAT NOT CORRECT? >> I'M GOING TO LET RAJ SPEAK TO THAT.

>> MR. WAINRIGHT: I DON'T MEAN TO PUT YOU OAT SPOT. IT SEEMS WE JUST GLOSSED OVER

THAT. >> JUST TO GREASE THE CONCERN, WE ARE PROVIDING 500 OR 600 TRIPS THROUGH THE ROADWAY SYSTEM. THE TOTAL TRIPS IS GOING TO BE ABOUT 347P P.M. TRIPS. THAT INCLUDES TRAFFIC COMING IN AND GOING OUT COMBINED.

SO TIP QULI IN THE PEAK HOUR WE EXPECT 219 TRIPS ENTERING IN THE P.M. PEAK INTO THE PROJECT.

128 LEAVING THE PROJECT. AND THEN AS FOR PARTNERSHIPS COMING OUT OF THE PROJECT TOWARDS 95, WE BELIEVE THAT 95% OF THE TRAFFIC IS GOING TO GO TOWARDS 95.

AND WE HAVE DUB IMAFT ANALYSIS OF THAT INTERSECTION AND WORKED WITH DOT ON THAT ISSUE, SO WE FEEL LIKE IT'S -- IT HAS ENOUGH CAPACITY TO ALLOW FOR THE TRIPS TO GO TOWARDS 95 AT THE

INTERSECTION. >> MR. WAINRIGHT: THANK YOU. WASTEWATER.

WASTEWATER HERE WILL BE TREATED BACK IN ST. AUGUSTINE? FROM YOUR MAP, THAT'S WHAT IS

SUGGESTED. >> YES. SO AS I HAD MENTIONED, THE ST. JOHNS COUNTY DOCUMENTS DEPARTMENT RECOGNIZES THAT THERE IS A SEWER CAPACITY CONFLICT RIGHT NOW IN THIS GENERAL AREA OF THE COUNTY WITH OUR WITHOUT WINDING OAKS.

SO WHAT WE'RE WORKING ON IS UPGRADING THEIR SYSTEM, THINKING ABOUT FUTURE DEVELOPMENT, AND, OF COURSE, THAT TAKES TIME AND MONEY, AND SO WHAT THEY'RE LOOKING AT IS AN EXPECTED CONTRIBUTION FROM DIFFERENT DEVELOPMENTS MOVING FORWARD TO HELP FUND THIS INFRASTRUCTURE.

AND SO WE'RE LOOKING AT $1.6 MILLION IS WHAT WE WOULD BE EXPECTING TO CONTRIBUTE THROUGH

WINDING OAKS. >> MR. WAINRIGHT: & IN THE MEANTIME, THE PEOPLE THERE

WILL -- >> THAT'S A VERY GOOD YES. THAT'S WHAT WE'RE WORKING WITH THE UTILITIES DIVISION ON NOW, SO WE'RE LOOKING AT BOTH THAT LONG-TERM STRATEGY PLUS WHAT IS THE INTERIM SOLUTION LOOK LIKE, ARE THERE SOME INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS WEEKS DO WITH THE

EXISTING FACILITY AS WE PHASE OUT DEVELOPMENT. >> MR. WAINRIGHT: THANK YOU.

I THINK THIS IS A GOOD PROJECT. I'M JUST WORRIED ABOUT THE INFRASTRUCTURE IMPACTS.

ONE OTHER AREA. STRAIGHT OUT, IS THERE FIRE PROTECTION IN THAT AREA WITHOUT

THAT FIRE STATION OR IS IT REQUIRED? >> SO THE ST. JOHNS COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT WILL SERVICE ALL AREAS WITHIN ST. JOHNS COUNTY. WHEN WE LOOK AT THE FIVE MILE ROAD MAP, WE'RE LOOKING AT A VERY QUICK ANALYSIS OF OBVIOUSLY THE CLOSER YOU ARE TO THE FIRE STATION, THE FASTER THE RESPONSE TIME, THE BETTER SITUATION YOU'RE IN.

[03:00:05]

RESIDENCE AS WELL. >> MR. WAINRIGHT: THANK YOU. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: ALL RIGHT.

MY TURN. I'M UP. >> AND IF IT WOULD BE ALL RIGHT, MY CLIENT WOULD LIKE TO TAKE A STAB AT ONE OF THE COMMENTS EARLIER CONCERNING THE ORIGINAL WINDING OAKS REQUEST WHEN IT CAME THROUGH YEARS RAG AND HOW THAT HAS RANGED TO THIS CURRENT

REQUEST. >> TO THE CHAIR, I'M OKAY TO HOLD RESPONSES IF YOU'D PREFER.

>> MR. KOPPENHAFER: NO, GO AHEAD. I DID NOT SEE YOU THERE.

I WAS LOOKING DOWN AT MY PAPER WORK. >> FAIR ENOUGH.

TO THE BOARD MEMBER, WAINRIGHT, THE FIRST WESTERN YOU HAD REGARDING THAT LEFT ONTO 207, AS WE GO THROUGH THE PUD AND THE SITE PLAN THERE, WE FULLY EXPECT TO FURTHER THE CONCEPTS WITH THE FDOT. WE HAVE DISCUSSED ABOUT A LEFT OUT ACCELERATION LANE WHERE IT WOULD ALLOW FOR A MEDIAN THERE TO BE AN ACCELERATION WHERE FOLKS COULD GET UP TO SPEED BEFORE THEY ARE MERGING INTO TRAFFIC. THERE ARE EXAMPLES WHERE THE FDOT HAS DONE THOSE ON OTHER ROADWAYS SO THAT YOU'RE NOT JUST MERGING INTO THAT PROBABLY HIGH RATE OF SPEED TRAFFIC COMING FROM WEST TO EAST ON STWFNT SO& THAT IS ALSO IN OUR -- 207 SO THAT IS ALSO IN OUR CONSIDERATIONS. IN RATHER TO THE UTILITY, IT IS THERE AT JUST WEST OF 95. THE DOCTOR ON THE PHONE AS WELL HAD BLOT UP ABOUT THE BRACKISH WATER. THE COUNTY CURRENT DOES PULL BRACKISH WATER AND THEY HAVE A FORCE MAIN THAT DOES PUMP IT ALL THE WAY BACK OUT TO ANASTASIA ISLAND.

THAT'S CURRENTLY HAPPENING NOW. BUT OUR UTILITY USE OUR PROJECT IS ESTIMATED AT 108,000 GALLONS PER DAY IS THE NEED, AND THEY ARE LOOKING AT A CAPACITY NEED FOR THAT TOTAL AREA OF 2.5 MILLION GALLONS, SO WITH OR WITHOUT US, WE'RE SOMEWHERE AROUND 4% OF THE PROJECT, BUT OUR TIMING OF THE PROJECT ALLOWS US TO BE A FINANCIAL CONTRIBUTION TO THEIR THEIR NEED, AGAIN, WHETHER WE EXIST OR NOT. AND THEN SHANNON IS CORRECT THAT, OF COURSE, THE FIRE SERVICES WOULD SERVICE THIS AREA, BUT YOU'RE RIGHT THAT IT IS OUTSIDE OF A FIRE SERVICE AREA, SO A CUSTOMER THAT BUYS A HOME IN THIS AREA DOES PAY HIGHER INSURANCE RATE. THE ISO RATING IS HIGHER FOR THEM, AND THAT'S TRUE FOR ALL THE FOLKS LIVING TO THE SOUTH THERE AS WELL CURRENTLY ON 207, AND IT WORKS OUT TO ABOUT, ON A PRICE POINT THAT WE'RE AT IN TH& MID TO HIGH 200S, LIKE A TWR $80,000 VALUED HOME, IT'S ABOUT A $44 A MONTH COST TO HAVE THAT HIGHER INSURANCE RATING. $280.000 VALUED HOME.

>> >> MR. WAINRIGHT: ONE QUESTION.

I'M NOT FRYING TO PIN YOU DOWN. THIS IS NOT THE PLACE FOR THAT. BUT THAT JAITION LANE ACCELEN

LANE, WOULD THAT BE PART OF YOUR PROJECT IF IT COMES FORTH? >> IT WOULD BE A PART OF OUR IMPROVEMENTS, CORRECT IN WE WOULD HAVE TO DO THE RNDERS TURN IN.

WE WOULD HAVE TO DO THE MEDIAN OPENING THAT CURRENTLY TURNER MENTIONED DOES NOT AS CURRENTLY EXIST, AND AS PART OF THE PERMITTING FOR THE MEDIAN OPENING WE DO HAVE TO DESIGN GOR THAT MEDIAN AS NEED. HERE AS A TRAN MILT FOR LAND USE WE HAVEN'T PHIL DISIENTD BUT WE HAVE BEEN INVOLVED IN CONVERSATIONS WITH ITS FDOT TO ENSURE THAT WAS AN OPTION TO HAVE THE LEFT OUT SO THAT WE COULD ANALYZE THOSE TRAFFIC COUNTS AND REALLY MORE SO TO FURTHER ANALYZE WHAT THE TRAFFIC IMPACT TO VERMONT WAS, BEING THAT IT WAS A CONCERN WHEN THIS DID COME BEFORE THE BOARD LAST TIME. AND MUCH OF THE CONCERNS ON WHEN IT WAS LAST BROUGHT TO THE BOARD REGARDING THE FAILURE WAS THE LAST APPLICANT WAS PROPOSING ABOUT A 2-ACRE FIRE STATION SITE AND IT WAS LOCATED INSIDE THAT RESIDENTIAL TRACT AND IT WAS UP

[03:05:04]

I THINK THEY PREFERRED SOMETHING CLOSER TO OUT ONTO 207 WHICH IS WHAT WE WERE TRYING TO SOLVE FOR BY MOVING THAT STATION OUT TO 207. SHANNON IS CORRECTS IT IS CLOSER TO THE EAST BUT YOU HAVE THE HIGHER DENSITY UNITS. I UNDERSTAND STATION 24 TOTE NORTH IS ALREADY QUITE BUSY AND SOMETIMES HAS MULTIPLE CALLS THAT THEY'RE TRYING TO SERVICE, AND SO TO HAVE SOME OVERLAP IN THAT HEAR WOULD BE ADVANTAGEOUS TO THEM.

PLUS WITH ITS TWUT 202009 IT GIVES GOOD APPROXIMATE IT TO HAVE A FUTURE POINT WHEN THAT DOES COME ALONG. ALSO REGARDING THE TRAFFIC CONCERNS WHERE THEY'RE ADVERSELY IMPACTED, IF YOU A HAVE SAW THEY WERE MOSTLY ON 207. THE COUNTY DOES HAVE IN 2022 I BELIEVE ON THEIR CIP THE 313 WHICH WILL PROBABLY LEAVE YATE SOME OF THAT TRAFFIC THERE THERE IS THAT IS ON 207. JUST WANTED TO MAKE MENTION OF THOSE THINGS.

>> MR. WAINRIGHT: THANK YOU. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: ALL RIGHT. MY TURN.

I THINK IT'S A NATURAL PROGRESSION OF DEVELOPMENT FLIPPING AND CROSSING ITEMS OF 95 HERE. IT'S OBVIOUSLY BEEN FILLED UP DOWN THE 207 CORRIDOR FOR QUITE A WHILE, SO I WOULD SUPPORT THIS. MS. PERKINS.

>> MS. PERKINS: I DON'T HAVE ANY COMMENTS, BUT I DID HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH JUSTIN BACK IN

OCTOBER AND WE DISCUSSED THE PROJECT. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER:

MR. ALAIMO, EX PARTE AND ANY COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS. >> MR. ALAIMO: NO EX PARTE OR

COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: THANK YOU. MR. MATT.

>> MR. MATOVINA: DO WE HAVE AN EX PARTE COMMENTS IN LAND USE AMENDMENTS?

>> EX PARTE NOT REQUIRED BUT THERE WILL EVENTUALLY BE A COMPANION PUD SO PLEASE RECORD

YOUR EX PARTES FOR FUTURE DISCLOSURE AS WELL. >> MR. ALAIMO: I DID HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH JUSTIN SOME TIME AGO. I'M NOT QUITE SURE HOW LONG AGO BUT IT WAS A WHILE BACK. AND I THINK WE'VE GONE THEREON AN AWFUL LOTT PUD ITEMS TO TRY TO FIGURE OUT WHETHER RES-C IS CONSISTENT WITH THE AREA, SO I'M PREPARED TO VOTE FOR THIS.

>> MR. KOPPENHAFER: ALL RIGHT. IT IS TRUE, AND I FORGOT TO MENTION THIS, THIS IS A TROONS MILT HEARING SO WE'VE GOTTEN INTO THE WEEDS REAL EARLY REAL FAST, AND THIS WILL BE COMING BACK AROUND AGAIN AS WELL AS GOING TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS.

AT ANY RATE, ANYTHING ELSE TO ADD? >> NO, SIR.

>> MR. KOPPENHAFER: THANK YOU VERY MUCH. BACK IN THE AGENCY.

>> RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF TRANSMITTAL OF COMP COMPAMD 2020-05 WIND LOCATION BASED OH

FOUR FIND NGTSZ OF FACT. >> MS. PERKINS: SECOND. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: WE HAVE A MOTION IS AND A SECOND FOR APPROVAL. ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? I MATTER NONE. ROLL CALL CROAT. DR. MCCORMICK.

>> DR. MCCORMICK: I'VE GONE BACK AND FORTH THIS SEVERAL TIMES BASED ON COMMENTS FROM DIFFERENT PEOPLE. BUT AT THIS TIME I'M GOING TO VOTE NO.

>> MR. KOPPENHAFER: THANK YOU. DR. HYMNALS. >> DR. HILSENBECK: NO.

>> MR. KOPPENHAFER: ARCHIE. >> MR. WAINRIGHT: YES. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER:

MR. KOPPENHAFER SAYS YES. MS. PERKINS. >> MS. PERKINS: YES CAINCHTS

COVERAGE MAR ALAIMO. >> MR. ALAIMO: YES. >> MR. MATOVINA: YES.

>> MR. KOPPENHAFER: MOTION CARRIES 5-2. ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU ALL. MOVING ON TO OUR LIST, STAFF REPORTS.

[Staff Reports - Next PZA meeting is on January 21, 2021 with 9 items.]

>> YES, SIR. JUST A REMINDER YOUR JANUARY 7TH MEETING HAS BEEN

CANCELED. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: WOOHOO. >> YOUR JANUARY 21ST MEETING WILL BE YOUR NEXT MEETING THAT YOU WILL HAVE, AND IT DOES HAVE DEFICIENT HAS TEN ITEMS ON IT.

I WAS TOLD AT THE BREAK THAT THERE'S TEN ITEMS. AND THEN THE LAST THING, I JUST WANT TO WISH YOU ALL A CUSTOMER ERR MERRY CHRISTMAS. THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH FOR YOUR

SERVICE. WE APPRECIATE IT. >> MR. KOPPENHAFER: YOU'RE WELCOME. AGENCY REPORTS? I HAD A COUPLE THINGS HERE.

[Agency Reports]

BECAUSE I TERM OFF NEXT YEAR AND I'M NOT GOING TO BE THE CHAIR FOR A PARTIAL TERM.

DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE. ALSO, I DID TALK WITH STAFF. WHEN THE STAFF COMES UP HERE AND GIVES THEIR, WE'LL CALL IT OPINION OR EXPERT OPINION, IT'S BASED ON THE FACT THAT THEY'RE COLLEGE FOR THIS STUFF AND ARE CREDITED IN DOING SO. THERE WAS SOME QUESTION FROM ONE

[03:10:07]

AND I'LL TAKE A MOTION TO ADJOURN. >> SO MOVED.

>> HAPPY HOLIDAYS.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.