[1. SUPMIN 2020-06 Swim Well Babies, LLC Lessons. Request for a Special Use Permit to allow a Home Occupation to provide private swimming lessons in Residential, Single Family (RS-3) zoning, pursuant to LDC Section 2.03.07, specifically located at 319 North Roscoe Blvd.]

BECOMING BURDENSOME, AND I JUST WANTED TO POINT THAT OUT AND NOTE THAT.

THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, DR. HILSENBECK. IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE TO SPEAK AT THIS POINT IN THE MEETING? SEEING NONE, WE'LL MOVE ON TO THE FIRST ITEM ON THE AGENDA, AND THE PRESENTERS IS MS. TRAVERIA. MS. TRAVERIA, WOULD YOU COME UP

ON AND MAKE YOUR PRESENTATION. >> HELLO. MY NAME IS KERRY TRAVERIA I RECITED 319 NORTH ROSCOE BOULEVARD. I AM IN THE PROCESS OF BECOMING A CERTIFIED INFANT SWIMMING RESOURCE INSTRUCTOR. INFANT SWIMMING RESOURCE ALSO KNOWN AS ISR TEACHES CHILDREN BETWEEN THE AGES OF SIX MONTHS AND SIX YEARS SELF-RESCUE SKILLS IN THE HOPES OF DROWNING PREVENTION. THE LESSONS ARE FORMATTED TO MEET WITH THE CHILD IN A ONE-ON-ONE SETTING. IT'S ONE INSTRUCTOR, ONE CHILD, MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY FOR TEN MINUTES EACH DAY, AND THEN LESSONS TYPICALLY TAKE BETWEEN FOUR AND SIX WEEKS TO COMPLETE. DURING THIS TIME CHILDREN UNDER THE AGE OF ONE ARE TAUGHT HOW TO RISE TO THE SURFACE OF THE WATER AND ROLL ONTO THEIR BACK IN ORDER TO BUY THEM TIME FOR AN ADULT TO RESCUE THEM, AND THEY IN THE EVENT THEY CALL INTO RAY POOL OR A BODY OF WATER UNINTEND. CHILDREN BETWEEN THE AGES OF ONE AND SIX-YEAR-OLD OLD ARE SAW THE TAUT A SEQUENCE OF SWIMMING, FLOATING AND SWIMMING AGAIN SO THAT IF THEY FALL INTO WATER WITH THEY CAN SWIM TO GET TO THE SIDE AND ROLL TO THEIR BACK IN THE EVENT THAT'S NEED TO REST AND GET AIR. DROWNING IS THE NUMBER ONE CAUSE OF DEATH IN CHILDREN UNDER THE AGES OF FOUR YEARS OLD IN THE COUNTRY, AND FLORIDA LEADS THE NATION IN UK DROWNING DEATHS ANNUALLY. THERE IS RAY NEED FOR THIS SKILL TO BE CAUGHT IN OUR AREA AND THERE'S A SHORTAGE OF TEACHERS, SO I'M LOOKING TO HAVE MY HOUSE ZONED SO THAT I CAN TEACH

THESE LESSONS FROM HOME TO MEET THE NEED. >> SO COMING BACK TO THE AGENCY, I'M GOING TO FIRST ASK DOES DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS? AND DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? I HAVE A QUESTION OF THE

APPLICANT. >> YES. >> AND THERE ACTUALLY WAS AN EMAIL THAT CAME IF IN WITH THIS SAME EXPERNG I THINK IT MAY JUST NEED TO BE A CLARIFICATION.

>> SURE. >> HOW MANY STUDENTS WILL BE AT YOUR HOUSE AT A PARTICULAR GIVEN

POINT IN TIME? >> SO THERE WILL ONLY BE ONE STUDENT IN THE POOL AT A TIME, AND EACH SESSION IS TEN MINUTES, SO IN THE COURSE OF AN HOUR I CAN'T TEACH MORE THAN SIX STUDENTS, BUT I WOULD AIM TO TEACH BETWEEN FOUR AND SIX STUDENTS, AND I'D HAVE IT FORE MADE IT AS SUCH TO WHERE -- FORMATTED AS SUCH TO WHERE THERE SHOULDN'T BE MORE THAN TWO FAMILIES AT A TIME, ONE IN THE POOL AND THEN POTENTIALLY THE NEXT STUDENT ARRIVING, WAITING

TO GET INTO THE POOLTE AS THE OTHER ONE EXITS THE POOL. >> AND SO LITERALLY IT'S TEN

MINUTES. >> YES. >> YOU HAVE THEM FOR TEN MINUTES. THEY GET OUT OF THE POOL. THEY LEAVE.

>> YES, THAT IS IT. >> SO -- >> IT'S MONDAY THROUGH FRIDAY, SO IT'S A BIG COMMITMENT IN TIME ON THE PARENTS' BEHALF BECAUSE THEY HAVE TO DRIVE, THE CHILD'S IN THE POOL FOR TEN MINUTES AND THEN THEY'RE OUT, BUT THE TECHNIQUE HAS BEEN DEVELOPED OVER 50 YEARS AND IT'S PROVEN TO BE THE MOST FECK WAIVE-FOR-CHILDREN OF THIS AGE BE THE EFFECTIVE WAY FOR CHILDREN OF THIS AGE TO LEARN AND RETAIN THE SKILLS.

>> SO I'M GOING TO ASK STAFF RIGHT NOW TO ADDRESS THE QUESTION OF IS THERE A NUMBER

[00:10:03]

THAT -- DOES THERE NEED TO BE A LIMIT, BECAUSE I WAS THINKING YOU MIGHT BE SAYING THERE THERE'S ONLY GOING TO BE ONE, STUDENT THERE AT A TIME BUT THAT MAY NOT BE.

>> SO ONE DISMIEWNT POOL, BUT IT MIGHT, BECAUSE IT IS SUCH A SHORT TIME, IT COULD VERY WELL BE SOMEBODY PULLS IN FOR THEIR NEXT LESSON, SO THEY WOULD ARRIVE TS OTHER PERSON IS

LEAVING THE HOUSE. >> SO I'M GOING TO ASK STAFF TO ADDRESS THE QUESTION OF WHETHER OR NOT THERE SHOULD BE A LIMIT ON HOW MANY ARE THERE AT THE SAME TIME.

>> GOOD AFTERNOON. FOR THE WORDS MARIE COLEE, GROWTH MANAGEMENT.

YES, OUR CODE LIMITS THE NUMBER OF LESSONS, AND LET ME GET THIS IN FRONT OF ME SO I CAN BE SPECIFIC. THE GIVING OF ART, MUSIC OR OTHER INSTRUCTIONS OR LESSONS SHALL BE LIMITED TO NOT MORE THAN FOUR PERSONS AT ANY ONE TIME.

SHE COULD POTENTIALLY HAVE FOUR CHILDREN IN THE POOL IF SHE WAS ABLE TO DO THAT.

THERE'S NO LIMIT TO THE NUMBER LIKE THROUGHOUT THE DAY OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT.

IT'S JUST THE GIVING OF THE LESSONS WOULD BE LIMITED TO FOUR AT ONE TIME.

I HOPE THAT ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION. >> AND AS WRITTEN, I ASSUME THAT THAT'S NOT NECESSARILY COVERED IN THE FINDINGS, SO DO WE NEED TO PERHAPS MENTION THAT OR IS

THAT -- >> THAT SHOULD BE LISTED AND THERE'S AN AFFIDAVIT THAT SHE'LL SIGN THAT IS PROVIDED IN YOUR PACKET THAT CONFIRMS THAT SHE WILL COMPLY.

>> RIGHT. >> VERY GOOD. SO I HAVE DR. MCCORMICK ON THE

QUEUE. >> YES. MY QUESTION WAS, AND THIS IS IN REGARD TO A PUBLIC COMMENT THAT WE RECEIVED, THEY TALK ABOUT THE FACT THAT THERE IS NO FENCING BETWEEN THE POOL AND THE WATERFRONT, AND SO THEN THE ISSUE WAS IF YOU HAVE MORE THAN ONE CHILD THERE, DO YOU HAVE MORE THAN ONE OWNER OR INSTRUCTOR THAT IS THERE WATCHING OR IS IT JUST YOU'RE DEPENDING ON THE FAMILY TO MAKE SURE THAT THAT OTHER -- WHATEVER CHILD IS THERE, THAT THEY'RE NOT GOING TO GET INTO THE WATERFRONT?

>> RIGHT. SO THERE IS ONLY EVER ONE CHILD BEING INSTRUCTED AT A TIME, AND PER ISR'S REQUIREMENTS, IF ANOTHER FAMILY ARRIVES, THE PARENTS ARE NOT ALLOWED TO LEAVE THEIR CHILDREN UNINTENDED, SO IT IS -- UNINTEND, SO IT IS THE PARENT'S SNONT TO CATCH REO WATCH THEIR CHILD WHEN THEIR LESS SNONT IN RACE. SO THE CHILD BEING TAUGHT WILL BE IN MY ARMS IN THE POOL. NO OTHER CHILDREN ARE ALLOWED IN THE POOL.

IF THE CHILD ARRIVES EARLY, TOAF TO WAIT WITH THE PARENT THEY CANNOT BE IN THE POOL OR NEAR THE POOL UNTIL IT'S THEIR TERM. PER CODE IN FLORIDA, WE DO NOT NEED TO HAVE A FENCE ON THE BACK SIDE OF OUR PROPERTY BECAUSE THERE'S THE NATURAL BARRIER, SO THERE IS FENCING ALONG THE REST OF OUR PROPERTY TO MAKE SURE THAT IT COMPLIES WITH CODE, BUT BECAUSE THE WATER SERVES AS A NATURAL BARRIER, WE'RE NOT REQUIRED TO HAVE ONE THERE AS THE HOMEOWNERS.

DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR QUESTION? >> THANK YOU. >> OKAY.

>> MR. ALAIMO, YOU -- >> AND IF I COULD JUST CLARIFY. SIR IS VERY STRICT IN THEIR REGULATIONS. THERE IS NEVER TO BE MORE THAN ONE CHILD IN THE POOL AT A TIME WITH THE INSTRUCTORS, ONLY THE INSTRUCTOR AND THE ONE CHILD BEING TAUGHT ARE ALLOWED IN THE POOL AT ALL TIMES, AND SO THERE WOULD NEVER BE MORE THAN ME AND THE CHILD IN MY ARMS IN THE

SWIMMING POOL. >> OKAY. SO DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC

COMMENT? >> WE DO NOT. >> ALL RIGHT.

WHAT I WOULD ASK YOU TO DO, THEN, MR. VICE CLARE, -- IS NOT ABLE TO ATTEND.

LET'S READ HER LETTER INTO THE RECORD AND GIVE THEY ARE ESSENTIAL CONSIDERATION.

DO YOU HAVE IT? >> I DO. THIS IS A LETTER FROM MARY CONFIRMINGY, WRITTEN ON WEDNESDAY MARCH 10TH, AND SHE ASKS US TO SHARE THIS WITH THE BOARD REGARDING SUPMIN 2020-06 SWIM WELL BABIES LLC SWIM LESSONS.

I SPEAK SPOKE WITH A NUMERICAL OF PHENOMENA PALM VALLEY RESIDENTS WHO LIVE ON THE INTRACOLT WATERWAY. THE THE LOTS LOOK LARGE, THEY ARE 400 FEET DEEPTH BUT IN WIDTH THEY'RE ON WNL HUNDRED FEET WIDE. FOR THE MOST PART ALL MOHL HOMES ARE PLARNLG THEY FILL THE LOT. THE. HOMES ARE BUILT ON WATERFRONT.

NUMBER 1, IN THE CASE PRESENTED TO YOU, THE POOLS ON THE THAN THE WATERFRONT SIDE AND DOES NOT SEEM TO BE FENCED IN FROM THE WATERFRONT SAFETY MUST BE ADDRESSED ESPECIALLY IF OTHER PEOPLE'S CHILDREN ARE USING THE POOL FOR LESSONS. IF SHE HAS ONE AT A TIME IN THE

[00:15:02]

POOL BEING TAUGHT, WHO IS WATCHING THESE OTHERS? SAFETY US IN MUST BE ADDRESSED.

NUMBER 2, THE HOMES HERE ARE ON TOP OF ONE ANOTHER ON THE WATERFRONT SIDE.

FOUR CHILDREN, MAKE A LOT OF NOISE. NOISE MUST BE CONSIDERED.

HOW WILL IT BE CONTROLLED N. NUMBER 3, THE LOT IS OVER 400 FEET FROM THE ROAD.

IF FOUR CARS GOING TO DROP OFF KIDS IN AN HOUR THERE ARE FOUR MORE COMING TO PICK THEM UP, WHERE COULD BE EIGHT CARS PARKED OR TRYING FIND ROOM? THIS IS ASSUMING THE REST OF THE YARD IS NOT LANDSCAPED. I THINK THIS APPLICATION NEEDS MUCH DISCUSSION CONCERNING THE ISSUES I HAVE ADDED. THIS IS A RESIDENTIAL AREA. I'M NOT AGAINST SOMEONE WANTING TO TEACH KIDS TO SWIM, BUT UNDER THE -- UNDER WHAT ENVIRONMENTAL AND SAFETY CONDITIONS? THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION. MARY KON CERKSE, TWIEB SOUTH

ROSCOE BOULEVARDS. >> A THE APPLICANT YOU'RE ALLOWED TO ADDRESS THOSE ITEMS. I BELIEVE YOU HAVE ADDRESSED THE FIRST ITEM IN PARTICULAR. I THINK YOU HAVE ADDRESSED THE OTHERS BUT YOU ARE ALLOWED TO SPEAK IF YOU WOULD LIKE? SO NO CHILD IS LEFT UNATTENDED.

ONLY THE CHILD BEING TAUGHT IS IN THE POOL UNDER MY DIRECT SUPERVISION AND NO OTHER CHILDREN ARE THERE UNLESS THEY ARE WITH THEIR PARENT BEING ATTENDED, SO I THINK SAFETY HAS BEEN ADDRESSED, JUST LIKE IF A CHILD. SAT PALM VALLEY FISH CAMP DOWN THE ROAD, THE PARENT WITH WITH THE CHILD SUPERVISING THEM TO MAKE SURE THEY DON'T GO OUT ON THE DOCK AND FALL IN THE WATER. FOR NOISE, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT GOING TO BE FOUR CHILDREN IN THE SWIMMING POOL AT A TIME. IT WILL BE ONE CHILD WITH ME, AND WE'RE NOT GOING TO BE -- I'M NOT GOING TO BE HOLDING LESSONS AT A TIME OF DAY THAT SHOULD BE DISRUPTIVE OR GO AGAINST THE COUNTY'S NOISE ORDINANCE. THERE SHOULDN'T BE ANY MORE THAN TWO CARS COMING AND GOING IN, AND MY DRIVEWAY CAN EASILY ACCOMMODATE FOUR TO FIVE CARS. EV WOULDN'T AREA WHERE YOU CAN PULL IN TO TURN AROUND TO GET OUT OF THE DRIVEWAY SAFELY. AND THEN THE OTHER -- I DON'T REMEMBER HER OTHER ISSUES. ACCESS. AND THEN AS FAR AS TRAFFIC ON ROSCOE, WHERE I'M LOCATED ON ROSCOE, I'M RIGHT IN THE BEND OF ROSCOE AND SOLANOA AND THE ADDITIONAL FEW CARS AN OUR I DON'T THINK WILL ADD TO THE TRAFFIC FLOW OR CERNT AREA.

>> VERY GOOD. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU.

>> ALL RIGHT. WE'RE BACK INTO THE AGENCY AND WE'RE LOOKING FOR A MOTION.

>> I HAVE A COMMENT. IS IT NOT WORKING? >> LET'S GO AHEAD AND GET A MOTION AND A SECOND, AND THEN I'LL OPEN IT UP FOR IF THAT'S OKAY, DR. HILSENBECKY.

>> , MR. CHAIRMAN. I FEEL LIKE THIS IS COMPATIBLE. I FEELIT LIKE THE APPLICANT ADDRESSED THE SAFETY EXPIRNTION FEEL COMFORTABLE MAKING MOTION TO APPROVE SUPMIN 2020-06 SUBJECT TO 12 CONDITIONS AND SEVEN FINDINGS OF FACT, I BELIEVE, AS PROVIDED IN THE STAFF REPORT IT. SAYS EIGHT BUT IT'S SEVEN, RIGHT?

>> IT'S SEVEN FINDINGS OF FACT FOR THE APPROVAL. >> IS IT EIGHT?

>> EIGHT FINDINGS OF FACT. I'M BEING CORRECTED. IT EIGHT FINDINGS OF FACT.

>> SUBJECT TO 12 CONDITIONS. AND EIGHT FINDINGS OF FACT AS PROVIDED IN THE STAFF REPORT.

>> SECOND. >> I'VE TO GET A MOTION AND A SECOND AND I'VE GOT

DR. HILSENBECK ON THE QUEUE. >> THE ONLY THING I WANT TO ADD IS I ACTUALLY WANT TO COMMEND YOU FOR COMING FORWARD AND APPLYING FOR THIS. IT'S POSSIBLE YOU COULD HAVE DONE THIS ON YOUR OWN AND GIVEN THESE SWIMMING LESSONS WITHOUT EVER COMING TO THE COUNTY FOR APPROVAL. SO I THANK YOU FOR APPLYING FOR THIS.

>> THANK YOU. >> VARIANCE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

[2. ZVAR 2020-33 Thompson Residence (144100-0000). Request for a Zoning Variance to Land Development Code Table 6.01 to allow a Front Yard setback of fifteen (15) feet in lieu of the twenty (20) foot Building Restriction Line requirement to accommodate a single family residence, specifically located at 2797 South Ponte Vedra Boulevard.]

>> OKAY. ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM THE AGENCY? HEARING NONE, LET'S VOTE. THAT PASSES 5-0. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR COMING

IN. >> THANK YOU. >> ALL RIGHT.

ITEM NUMBER 2 IS BEING PRESENTED BY MR. PARTEL. YOU'RE READY TO START WHENEVER.

>> KEVIN PARTEL, COASTAL CONSULTING RESTORATION PA 4230 MILITARY STREET SANTIAGO FLORIDA 32834 I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF MS. AND MR. THOMAS FOR A VAIR VABSIANS FOR FRONT YARD SETBACK OF 15 TO 20 FEET. AS YOU MAY KNOW, I -- OR YOU MAY NOT KNOW -- I'VE BEEN IN TOWN FOR PROBABLY ABOUT 37, 38 YEARS, USED TO BE EMPLOYED BY THE DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES

[00:20:02]

IN 1990, WENT OUT ON MY OWN. COASTLES COASTAL CONSTRUCTION CONTROL LINE DELINEATES THE LAND SEAWARD, ALONG THE OCEANFRONT THAT IDENTIFIES THE GREATEST AREA OF IMPACT DURING A POSSIBLE STORM EVENT. THE IN 1988 THE CONTROL LINE FLEW, WAS RELOCATED TO ITS CURRENT LOCATION, AND EVERYTHING, EVERY PROPERTY FROM THE KATE STATION SOUTH OVER THE LAST 30--SOME-ODD-YEARS HAS BEEN REQUIRED TO GET A VARIANCE. THE REASON FOR IT IS THE DEPARTMENT REQUIRES THAT THE HOME BE SET AS FAR LAND WARD A POSSIBLE IN AN ATTEMPT TO MIN YOU MIZE IMPACTS TO THE BEACH SYSTEM AND/OR CONTAIN A REASONABLE SETBACK FROM THE RECENTLY INSTALLED BOAT LINKS. THE PROPERTY IS PROBABLY 2-1/2 MILES SOUTH OF THE GATE STATION.

THE AREA WAS EVERLY SEVERELY HIT DURING MATTHEW AND IRMA, WHICH REQUIRED THE INSTALLATION OF BULK HEADS THAT NOW LINE THAT PORTION OF THE SHORELINE FUTURE LAND USE MAP IS RESIDENTIAL C. ZONING MAP IS RS-3. 75-FOOT WIDE LOT.

8-FOOT SETBACKS. AND AGAIN, REQUEST FOR A 15-FOOT SET BACK ON THE FRONT YARD.

THE BIG THING THAT I'VE LEARNED OVER THE YEARS IN DEALING WITH THE BOARD IS THEY'RE ALWAYS CONCERNED ABOUT BEING ABLE TO TURN AROUND ON SITE AND NOT BACK INTO THE RIGHT-OF-WAY, SO IF YOU LOOK, YOU'LL SEE THAT ALONG THE ENTIRE EAST SIDE. I DON'T HAVE A POINTER.

BUT YOOL SEE YOU'LL SEE ALT SIDE WE HAVE A CONCRETE DRIVEWAY THAT WILL LOUSE TO US TURN IN AND OUT, TURN AROUND AND EGRESS BACK ONTO THE STREET FORWARD. THIS IS A PICTURE OF LOOKING EAST AT THE BULKHEAD. THERE'S A PUSHING OF THE BULKHEAD.

WHAT I DID WAS THIS IS ANOTHER SHOT YA'LL TOOK STANDING ON THE SOUTHEAST LIEFNT PROPERTY.

WHAT I DID HERE WAS STOOD IN LINE WITH THE ADJACENT STRUCTURES ON THE EAST SIDE, AND YOU CAN SEE THERE'S A CONSISTENT LIENLT 30 TO 32-FOOT OF HOUSE, 8 TO 10-FOOT OF DECK, DEPENDING ON THE OWNER'S REQUEST. THIS IS NOW LOOKING SOUTH AT THE LAND WARD SIDE SO THAT'S THE ROADSIDE. YOU CAN SEE HOW THE ALIGNMENT OF THE HOMES LINE UP, AND I WAS SUCCESSFUL IN OBTAINING A VARIANCE FOR THIS PROPERTY THAT'S CLEARED RIGHT NOW.

THAT'S A TORRES PROPERTY, 2795, I BELIEVE LAST YEAR, AND SEVERAL OF THESE HOMES ALONG THIS PORTION OF THE SHORELINE I'VE SECURED VARIANCES ALONG THE YEARS.

THIS IS ONE LOOKING NORTH NOW ON THE WEST SIDE, AGAIN SHOWING THE ALIGNMENT OF THE HOMES BEING AT 15-FOOT SETBACK OR SO. AND THEN THIS IS LOOKING SOUTH AGAIN ON THE EAST SIDE OF THE HOMES TO THE SOUTH, AGAIN TRYING TO GIVE YOU THAT ALIGNMENT. THAT'S LOOKING FROM THE ROAD STRAIGHT OUT. SO THE ISSUE THAT WE HAVE IS DUE TO THE CURRENT ROAD SITUATION, THE PLACEMENT OF THE BULKHEAD, THE LOTS HAVE BEEN COMPROMISED, COMPROMISED TO THE POINT THAT NOW WE HAVE A HARDSHIP WITH RESPECT TO BEING ABLE TO BUILD A REASONABLE USE STRUCTURE.

IF WE WERE TO GET A 20 VOOT VARIANCE INSTEAD OF 27 WE WOULD WOIND UP WITH A 27-FOOT WIDE HOME WHEN DOESN'T GIVE YOU TWO ROOMS MUCH LESS A HALLWAY TO WALK THROUGH THEM, SO THE 15-FOOT REQUEST IS VERY SERIOUS WITH REGARDS TO REASONABLE USE. SO ANYHOW, YOU KNOW, THIS ISN'T OUT OF THE NORM FOR THIS PORTION OF THE SHORELINE. THIS IS KIND OF SOP FOR NUB TO OBTAIN REASONABLE -- ANYBODY TO OBTAIN REASONABLE USE. I CAN DOCUMENT OVER THE LAST 30-SOME-ODD-YEARS, 32, 33, 34 YEARS THAT I'VE BEEN SUCCESSFUL IN OBTAINING 5200 OF THESE VARIANCES, SO BASED ON THAT, OUR REQUEST IS THE SAME CONSIDERATION AS WE'VE GOTTEN BEFORE, THAT IS, TO GRANT US THE 15-FOOT, ALLOW TO US ENJOY THE REASONABLE USE OF PROPERTY, AND HELP PUT TAX DOLLARS BACK IN THE COUNTY'S COFFER GIVEN THE SITUATION THAT OCCURRED OVER THE LAST FOUR YEARS, AND I KNOW THE COUNTY'S BEEN HARD HIT. THIS IS ONE WAY TO HELP THE COUNTY AS WELL AS ALLOW THE NEW PURCHASERS TO HAVE REASONABLE USE.

THANK YOU. >> MR. PARTEL. >> YES, SIR.

>> AT THE LAST MEETING, THE FIRST PERSON WHO USED A CLICKER BROKE IT AND THERE WAS A 30 SECOND DELAY TWEEFN SLIDE SO WE'RE BETWEEN EACH SLIDE SO WE'RE GLAD YOU DIDN'T BREAK IT.

[00:25:02]

IS THERE ANY EX PARTE COMMUNICATION ON THE PART OF THE AGENCY MEMBERS?

>> NONE. >> IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT?

>> I HAVE TWO AND A COMMENT. >> OH, I'M SORRY, DR. HILSENBECK.

I SEE YOU. >> SO IT IS WORKING. OKAY.

>> YES, SIR. >> NUMBER ONE, DO YOU HAVE A SLIDE THAT SHOWS THE COASTAL CONSTRUCTION LINE WITH REGARD TO THE PROPERTY AND THE PLACEMENT OF THE HOUSE?

I KNOW YOU HAVE A SLIDE -- >> YES, I DO. >> THAT I SAW BECAUSE OF THE

CONSTRUCTION LINE. PERHAPS IT DID. >> SO THE SITE PLAN -- I CAN'T SEE FROM HERE, BUT IF YOU LOOK AT, THERE'S A DASHED LINE RIGHT THERE, THAT'S THE CONTROL LINE,

SO IT'S ON THE LAND WARD MOST SIDE OF THE PROPERTY. >> ALL RIGHT.

NUMBER TWO, WHO PAID FOR THE BULKHEAD ALL ALONG THERE? >> WELL, THE PREVIOUS OWNERS PAID FOR IT. THIS IS -- THIS IS BASED ON DEPARTMENT'S RULES.

EVERYONE AND ANYONE WHO IS INTERESTED IN PUTTING A BULKHEAD IN, IT WAS PAID BY THE OWNER, AND THE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS, WHOEVER DECIDED TO PUT IT IN TOGETHER.

>> SO TAXPAYER MONEY DID NOT GO TOWARD THE CONSTRUCTION. >> NO, SIR.

THAT TAXPAYER MONEY GOES STROIBLGHT RENOURISHMENT. >> THANK YOU HIGH.

COMMENT IS THAT GIVEN THE FACT THAT IT WAS STATED IN THE APPLICATION 13 OTHER HOMES IN THE VICINITY HAVE HAD BEEN GRANTED A WAIVER, I THINK IT'S GOING TO BE VERY DIFFICULT TO DENY YOUR REQUEST, SO I'M IN FAVOR OF IT. THANK YOU.

>> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS FROM THE AGENCY? DO WE HAVE IN SPEAKER CARDS?

NUB ON ANYBODY ON GTV? >> NO PUBLIC COMMENT. >> SO WE'RE BACK INTO THE AGENC

AGENCY. OR A MOTION. >> I'LL OFFER A MOTION.

MOTION TO APPROVE ZONING VARIANCE 20-33 THOMPSON RESIDENCE 144100-0000, A ASK Q.

FOR A ZONING VARIANCE TO LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TABLE 6.01 TO ALLOW A FRORNLT YARD SETBACK OF 15 FEET IN LIEU OF THE 20-FOOT BUILDING RESTRICTION LINE REQUIREMENT TO COOMENTD A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE SPECIFICALLY LOOK AT THE 27 NEEFN SOUTH PONTE VEDRA BOULEVARD SUBJECT TO FIVE

FIND NGTSZ OF FACT AND SEVEN CONDITIONS. >> DO WE HAVE A SECOND?

[3. ZVAR 2021-01 32 Preserve Island Circle Renovation. Request for a Zoning Variance to Land Development Code Table 6.01 to allow for a 40% Building Coverage in lieu of the 35% Maximum Lot Coverage by All Buildings requirement in Residential, Single Family (RS-3) zoning to accommodate an addition and bring the existing single family home into compliance, specifically located at 32 Preserve Island Circle.]

WE HAVE A FIRST AND SECOND. IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? I SEE NOBODY ON THE QUEUE.

LET'S VOTE. THANK YOU, MR. PARTEL. >> THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH.

GOD BLESS YOU ALL. THANK YOU. >> NEXT UP, WE HAVE MR. GAVE MR.

DID I DO ALL RIGHT WITH THAT? >> YES, PERFECT. MY NAME IS TRENT GAVAZZI.

I AM THE HOARNL AT 32 PRESERVE ISLAND CIRCLE, PONTE VEDRA BEACH.

AND I'M HERE TO APPLY FOR A VARIANCE BASED ON A DISCREPANCY BETWEEN THE HOME, THE ORIGINAL PLANS AND WHAT WAS PERMITTED BY THE PREVIOUS OWNER. THIS IS A CHRONOLOGY OF EVENTS AS TO HOW I GOT HERE. I PURCHASED THE HOME IN 2018. I'M THE SECONDLY OWNER.

IN NOVEMBER OF 2020 I WAS SEEKING APPROVAL FROM ST. JOHNS COUNTY FOR A RENOVATION PROJECT, A PROJECT THAT DOES NOT IMPACT THE EXISTING FOOTPRINT OF THE HOME OR LOT USES OF THE HOME AS A PURCHASED IT. IN JANUARY OF 2021 I RECEIVED NOTICE FROM PLANNER, ST. JOHNS COUNTY, THAT I NEED TO SEEK A VARIANCE, WHICH AT THE TIME WAS CONFUSING TO ME, NOT BEING FAMILIAR WITH THE PROCESS OR WHAT THE REASONING WAS. AND IT WAS DETERMINED THAT THE HOME EXCEEDS THE 35% LOT COVERAGE BASED ON WHAT WAS PERMITTED PRIOR TO ME PURCHASING THE HOME, AND I HAVE A SERIES OF SLIDES HERE THAT KIND OF LAYS OUT THE -- A VISUALIZATION AS TO WHAT I'M PLANNING TO DO, HOW THE HOW IT STAYS WITHIN THE FOOTPRINT OF THE EXISTING PROPERTY. THESE ARE THE BUILDER PLANS SUBMITTED IN SEPTEMBER OF 2013.

THEY SHOW A MAIFERRED PATIO DIDN'T A PAVERRED PATIO. THE BACK OF THE THE BUILDING PERMIT, WHICH WAS ISSUED IN 2013 AS WELL, ABOUT THE SAME TIME, SHOWS A COVERED PALLET I DON'T WHICH YOU CAN SEE HIGHLIGHTED -- PALLET I DON'T WHICH YOU CAN PATIO WHICH YOU CAN SEE HIGHLIGHTED IN ORANGE THERE. THE RENOVATION PLANS STAY WITHIN THIS FOOTPRINT WHICH IS MEANT TO SHOW THE AREA IN SCREANS AND DISCREPANCY AND THE OVERALL AREA

[00:30:02]

OF THE HOME. THESE ARE THE TWO AREAS WHERE RENOVATION IS PLANNED.

IT'S TO EXTEND, WHICH IS ALREADY FRAMED, THE DINING ROOM INTO THE EXISTING ROOFLINE, WHICH WILL TAKE UP PART OF THE COVERED PATIO. THE OTHER PART IS A RENOVATION OVER THE EXISTING GARAGE. THIS SLIDE HERE IS TO SHOW FROM 2016 BEFORE I PURCHASE THE HOME.

THE GARAGE AS IT STANDS TODAY, AND THE COVERED PATIO, THE BACK OF THE HOME THIS ACTUALLY SHOWS THE FRAMED-IN AREA FROM 2016 AS WELL.

I'VE GOT HIGHLIGHTED WHERE I WANT TO EXTEND THE DINING ROOM WHERE THAT FRAMED COVERED PART OF THE PATIO IS IN THE BASKET OF HOME WITH THE ORANGE ARROWS. THIS JUST GIVES THE ELEVATION ON THE OUTSIDE OF THE HOME AS TO HOW THAT AREA WILL LOOK OR HOW IT LOOKS TODAY WITHIN THE EXISTING FOOT PRECIPITATE OF THE HOUSE. WE'VE ALSO GOT THE FLOOR PLAN ON THE TOP THERE THAT WAS SUBMITTED. THIS IS THE GARAGE, THE FRONT OF THE HOME, A LITTLE CLIP I PULLED OUT OF THE SUBMITTED PLANS THAT SHOWS WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO DO OVER THE GARAGE AS IT EXISTS TODAY THAT'S THE ELEVATION.

THE SIDE OF THE HOME. AND THERE'S SOME ADDITIONAL -- I TOOK IT ALL THE WAY BACK TO 2014 TO SHOWY SHOW IT WAS ONE OF THE ORIGINAL HOMES IN THE AREA AND THAT THE ROOFLINE WAS PART OF THE ORIGINAL BUILD. HERE'S ANOTHER FROM 2015 AS THE AREA STARTED TO BUILD OUT.

I'VE ALSO ADDED, WHICH I GOT IN OCTOBER LAST YEAR, THE APPROVAL OF THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION IN FAIRFIELD WHERE I LIVE. THIS IS I WHAT THEY ISSUE FOR AN APPROVAL IT.

SHOWS THE BOARD MEMBERS AND SOME NOTES. THIS IS THE APPLICATION CALLED ART TRACKER. THESE ARE SIGNATURES FROM MY NEIGHBORS IN THE AREA.

MY NEXT DOOR NEIGHBOR WHO IS ACTUALLY ON THE ARC COULD NOT VOTE, BUT SHE'S APPROVED AS WEL

WELL. THAT'S IT. >> MR. I THINK YOU MIGHT HAVE A YEAR IN LOBBYING. I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU CURRENTLY DO BUT THAT I WAS GOOD

PRESENTATION. DR. HILSENBECK. >> I JUST HAVE ONE QUESTION.

TWO ACTUALLY. I BELIEVE YOUR CURRENT LOT COVERAGE IS 38.5%, AND THAT'S BY NONE OF YOUR DOING. THE HOME WAS BUILT. YOU PURCHASED IT.

SO WHAT YOU'RE PLANNING TO DO IS NOT GOING TO CHANGE THAT LOT COVERAGE REALLY AT ALL, IS IT?

>> NO, IT IS NOT. >> OKAY. AND THEN NUMBER TWO, DO YOU ENJOY BACKING UP TO ALL THAT GREEN SPACE BEHIND YOUR PROPERTY?

>> I DO. YES. >> THANK YOU.

>> VERY MUCH, YEAH. >> THANKS. >> IS THERE ANY EX PARTE COMMUNICATION THAT ANY MEMBER NEEDS TO DECLARE? ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? OKAY. HEARING NONE, HOW ABOUT SOME

SPEAKER CARDS. >> WE DO NOT. >> ANYBODY ON THE TV?

>> NO PUBLIC COMMENT. >> OKAY. SO WE ARE BACK INTO THE AGENCY

FOR A MOTION. >> I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE ZVAR 202021-01 32 PRESERVE OINLD CIRCLE RENOVATION, ASK FOR A ZONING VARIANCE TO RAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TABLE 6.01 TO ALLOW FOR A 40 FIRST BUILDING COVERAGE IN LIEU OF THE 35% MAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE BY AULD BUILDING REQUIREMENT IN RESIDENTIAL, SINGLE FAMILY RS-3 ZONING TO COOMENTD THE DIGESTION AND BRING THE EXISTING SAYING SING FAMILY HOME INTO COMPLIANCE BASED FIVE FINDINGS OF FAWCT AND

SUBJECT TO THE SEVEN FROISKTSZ AS PROVIDE IN OUR STAFF REPORT. >> SECOND.

>> WE'VE GOT A FIRST AND A SECOND. I SEE NOBODY IN THE QUEUE.

ANYBODY HAVE ANYTHING TO SAY? HEARING NONE, LET'S VOTE. CONGRATULATIONS, MR. GAVAZZI,

[Items 4 & 5]

AND GOOD LUCK TAKING CHAIR OF ALL THOSE CHILDREN AND YOUR GRANDPARENTS.

GOD BLESS. >> YOU THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> ALL RIGHT.

LET'S MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER 4, AND MR., INC. INGRAM. AND I THINK WE'RE GOING TO DO ITEMS 4 AND 5 AT THIS POINT IN TIME. IS THAT RIGHT, CHRISTINE?

>> YES, I THINK THEY'RE GOING TO BE PRESENTED TOGETHER AND VOTED ON SEPARATELY.

>> ALL RIGHT. GOOD AFTERNOON, MEMBERS OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING AGENCY.

[00:35:04]

I'M TOM INGRAM WITH THE LAW FIRM OF SOTO AND INGRAM IN JACKSONVILLE FLORIDA 233 EAST A BIT STREET, SUITE 1113, AND I AM HERE REPRESENTING HIGHLAND POINT LLC, THE MASTER DEVELOPER OF THE ST. AUGUSTINE CENTER DRI WHICH IS A DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT THAT WAS FIRST APPROVED IN 1997. I HAVE SOME GRAFIX GRAPHICS TO SHOW YOU.

SO THE ST. AUGUSTINE CENTRE IS THERE AT THE NORTHEAST QUADRANT OF I-95 AND STATE ROAD 16 IT.

COMPLUS INCLUDES THIN DOOR OUTLET MALL. THOSE ARE THE NEW FORD'S GARAGE, STANDARD IN THE, A COUPLE OF HOTELS, AS WELL AS TOWNHOME COMMUNITIES THERE TO THE EAST, AND THEN IF YOU ARE FAMILIAR WITH THE AREA, YOU'LL SEE INMAN ROAD WHICH IS THAT NORTH-SOUTH ROAD THERE THAT RUNS TO THE GUN RAWNG AT THE VERY NORTH END BE THE RANGE AT THE VERY NORTH END HERE'S ANOTHER OUTLIEFNT ENTIRE DEVELOPMENT OF REASONABLE IMPACT.

AND THIS IS -- REGIONAL IMPACT P. I APOLOGIZE FOR MY ARTISTIC ABILITIES, BUT THE HIGHLIGHTING SHOWS ROUGHLY THE LANDS THAT ARE CONTINUED TO BE OWNED BY THE MASTER DEVELOPER HIGHLAND POINT LLC THAT ARE NOT YET DEVELOPED. WHAT WE'RE GOING TO PRIMARILY TALK ABOUT THIS AFTERNOON IS AT THE VERY NORTHEAST CORNER, WHICH IS KNOWN AS AREA H.

THE CURRENT FUTURE LAND USE IS MIXED USE DISTRICT, AS IS ALL AROUND THE AREA OF THE CHANGE EXCHANGE AND PUD IS THE ZONING. SO THE DRI CHANGE, WHICH IS REALLY THE PRIMARY CHANGE FOR DISCUSSION TODAY, IS TO ADD 300,000 SQUARE FEET OF LIGHT INDUSTRIAL USE TO PHASE 3A OF THE PROJECT, SO THE PROJECT HAS THREE PHASES BUT 3A IS BROKEN INTOE THRVMENTA AND 3B.

THE 3A AND 3B. CURRENTLY THE PROJECT HAS APPROVED 300,000 SQUARE FEET OF LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AS PART OF PHASE 3B. PHASE 3B HAS A TRAFFIC MITIGATION THRAIRMT WAS REQUIRES DEVELOPED BACK IN THE EARLY 2000S WHEN THE CROWN AND THE STATE DEVELOPED REGIONAL IMPACT IN A DIFFERENT METHODOLOGY, IN A DIFFERENT MANNER, AND IN THOSE DAYS THERE WOULD BE A CUSTOM TRAFFIC ANALYSIS DONE, AND LOOK AT THE OVERALL IMPACTS OF THE PROJECT, AND COME UP WITH THE DEVELOPER'S PROPORTIONATE SHARE OF TRAFFIC IMPACTS AND APPLY THAT TO CERTAIN ROADS OR OTHER IMPROVEMENTS OR CASH. THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT ST. AUGUSTINE CENTRE HAS PROVIDE IMPROVEMENTS TO THE INTERSTATE 95, STATE ROAD 16 IS ABOUT CHANGE AS WELL AS MORE RECENTLY CONTRIBUTING $410,000 TOWARDS THE SIGNALIZATION OF INMAN ROAD.

HOWEVER, IN MORE RECENT YEARS, THE STATE HAS DIALED WAY BACK ON THE WAY THAT TRAFFIC IMPACTS OF DRIS ARE ASSESSD AND TO NOW THEY DEFAULT BACK TO THE COUNTY'S NORMAL PROCESS, SO IF YOU HAVE A SITE, WHETHER IT IS A DRI SITE OR NOT A DRI SITE, YOU WOULD APPLY THE COUNTY'S CURRENT LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS AND CONCURRENCY PROCEDURES TO DETERMINE THE IMPACT.

IN 2008 THE COUNTY COMMISSION RECOGNIZED THAT THEY WERE PERHAPS NOT SEEING THEIR SHARE OF NON-RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IN TERMS OF JOB CREATION AS WELL AS TAX BASE, AND IN 2008 THEY DETERMINED THAT TRAFFIC IMPACTS FROM NON-RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WOULD BE ADDRESSED THROUGH THE IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE. AND SO TO UNPACK THAT, AND I KNOW SOME OF YOU HAVE BEEN HERE LONGER THAN OTHERS, BUT THE IMPACT FEE ORDINACE IS BASED ON AN IMPACT FEE STUDY THAT WAS DONE TO LOOK HOLISTICALLY AT ALL OF THE TRAFFIC IMPACTS OF NEW DEVELOPMENT BY USE, SO INDUSTRIAL VERSUS WHRAIRS VERSUS SINGLE FAMILY AND SO WAREHOUSE VERSUS SINGLE FAMILY AND SO FORTH, LOOK AT THE OVERALL NEEDS FOR THE COUNTY, AND BASICALLY RUN THOSE NUMBERS, AND SO THAT THERE IS NOW A SET IMPACT FEE FOR WHETHER IT'S RETAIL OR INDUSTRIAL, BUT EVERYONE PAYS IN. IF SOMEONE DOES MAKE A ROAD IMPROVEMENT, THEY RECEIVE IMPACT FEE CREDIT TO OFFSET THE IMPACT FEES. SO WHAT WE ARE SEEKING IS TO BE ON EQUAL FOOTING WITH OTHER PROJECTS THAT ARE UNDER THE NEW SYSTEM.

SO THE ONE THAT'S BEEN IN PLACE SINCE 2008. OTHERS HAVE ALSO SAW THIS, FOR EXAMPLE, LAST AUGUST YOU ALL SAW THE SILVER LEAF PROJECT, WHICH CAME IN AND ASKED FOR I BELIEVE IT WAS OVER 800,000 SQUARE FEET OF NON-RESIDENTIAL USES TO BE ADDED INTO ITS PHASING TABLE

[00:40:04]

WITHOUT ADDING MITIGATION IN LIGHT OF THE COUNTY'S DESIRE FOR YOBS AND NON-RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT AND TAX BASE, AND BECAUSE THE IMPACT FEE DOES ADDRESS TRAFFIC MITIGATION.

AND THAT WAS APPROVED. ALSO MORE RECENTLY WITH WHARDZ TO ST. AUGUSTINE CENTRE, YOU ALSO REVIEWED THE PROPOSED BAPTIST HOSPITAL FACILITY THAT WOULD BE -- THEY WOULD BE DOING SOME FACILITIES IN ST. AUGUSTINE CENTRE ON A PROJECT THAT'S ON LAND THAT'S OWNED BY A DIFFERENT LANDOWNER AND THAT WAS APPROVED AND THEY WOULD PAY IMPACT FEES. THIS HAVE BEEN OTHERS AS WELL.

THE ANDERSON PARK PUD WHICH IS ALSO KNOWN AS ELEVATION POINT, WHICH ADDED APPROXIMATELY 860,000 SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL IN 2018, AND I BELIEVE THAT WAS CONFIRMED AGAIN LAST YEAR, THAT'S OFF STATE ROAD 16 TO THE SOUTH NEAR THE 208. THERE'S PRECEDENT FOR THIS.

I THINK THE MARKET HAS RESPOND. WE HAVE SEEN FAR MORE RETAIL IN NON-RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT IN THE SPOIN, AND WE WOULD LIKE TO BE PART OF THAT TO PROVIDE OPPORTUNITIES FOR JOBS AND GROWTH. THIS SITE HAS BEEN UP AT THE NORTH END, AND IT HAS BEEN DORMANT. THE EXISTING TRAFFIC MITIGATION REQUIRED OF PHASE 3B WHICH WOULD BE FOR 300,000 SQUARE FEET OF LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AND I BELIEVE 280 HOTEL ROOMS, WOULD REQUIRE WIDENING AFTER SECTION OF STATE ROAD 16 NEXT TO THE OTHER OUTLET MALL ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE ROAD OF 95. I SAW AN ESTIMATE FROM ONE OF THE STATE REPORTS, THE LONG RANGE TRANSPORTATION PLAN THAT ESTIMATED THAT IMPROVEMENT AT OVER $10 MILLION.

IT'S SIMPLY SO LARGE THAT THIS PROJECT CANNOT POSSIBLY BEAR THAT COST.

WE HAVE COMMUNICATED WITH THE COUNTY FOR WELL OVER TEN YEARS NOW THAT PHASE 3B IS NOT COST FEASIBLE FOR US. HOWEVER, IN MORE RECENT YEARS, THE COUNTY HAS ESSENTIALLY AGREED WITH THAT ON A LARGER LEVEL AND HAS DECIDED TO EVALUATE THE TRAFFIC IMPACTS OF NON-RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT BASED ON THEIR IMPACT FEE AND GO FORWARD, AND THE MARKET'S RESPONDING. SO THE LAST MILE DISTRIBUTION FACILITY, WHICH IS PROPOSED AND IS APPROVED RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET FROM OUR AREA H WAS ALSO EVALUATED ON THAT BASIS.

SO THEIR OFF-SITE TRAFFIC IMPACTS, I KNOW THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION WITH ABOUT INMAN ROAD, BUT BEYOND THAT THAT IE BIGGER PICTURE THAT'S ADDRESSED THE IMPACT FEES.

THAT'S THE KEY CHANGE WITH THE DRI. IN ADDITION THERE'S AN AREA ON THE SITE PLAN THAT'S SHOWN AS ISOLATED UPLAND. IT'S JANET ADJACENT TO AREA H WHICH IS APPROXIMATELY 5-1/2 ACRES. WE WOULD LIKE TO ADD THAT INTO THE SITE WITHOUT ADDING TO THE SQUARE FEET. IT WOULD STILL BE AT 300,000.

YOU THE ABOUT IT WOULD GIVE US APPROXIMATELY 18 ACRES DEVELOPABLE TO DO LIGHT INDUSTRIAL USES OR INDUSTRIAL USES. AND FINALLY, TO EXTEND AT THE EXPIRATION AND BUILD-OUT DATES FROM AUGUST OF '26 TO OFFING 2031.

SO HERE IS THE -- TO AUGUST OF 2031. SO HERE IS THE SITE PLENTY OF PROJECT. FOR REASONS THAT LOST TO ANTIQUITY THEY HAVE DRI MAPS, AND THEY WOULD CALL THIS H. SO UP AT THE FAR NORTHEAST CORNER, IT SHOWS THE ISOLATED UPLANDS AREA AS WELL AS AREA H, AND SO THIS IS THE CURRENT PLAN. IT SHOWS THE OUTLET MALL AREAS, RETAIL SALES, AND THEN THE PROPOSED PLAN IS TO ALLOW FOR INDUSTRIAL ON AREA H ALL THE WAY UP TO THE NORTH END. I WILL NOTE THAT WE ARE CURRENTLY ALLOWED TO DEVELOP RESIDENTIAL RESIDENTIAL UP THERE AS WELL, INCLUDING AN AREA WHERE WE COULD DO UP TO 70 SINGLE FAMILY HOMES. AT THIS POINT WE DID NOT ANTICIPATE THAT OCCURRING IN LIGHT OF THE LAST MILE DISTRIBUTION FACILITY COMING NEXT DOOR.

WE BELIEVE THE BEST USE IS LIGHT INDUSTRIAL, AND WE BELIEVE THERE'S RAY DEMAND FOR IT NEAR THE EXCHANGE. SO THIS IS A ZOOM IN VIEW THE SLIDE TO SHOW, COMPARE THE EXPURNT PROPOSED MAP H. CURRENT AND PROPOSED MAP H. FOR REFERENCE THIS IS ALAS MILE DISTRIBUTION FACILITY SO IT'S FLIPPED ON ITS SPIEPTD SHOWS FROM IT NORTH TO SOUTH.

THE AREA ON THE WEST SIDE, THE LINE THERE IN THE MIDDLE 1 THAT'S INMAN ROAD.

THIS PARTICULAR SITE PLAN DOES SHOW SOME PARKING ON MY CLIENT'S PROPERTY, WHICH IS PART OF THEIR EARLIER APPROVAL. WE DO ANTICIPATE BEING PART OF THEIR PROJECT, SO THAT WOULD PROBABLY BE IN ALL LIKELIHOOD PART OF THEIR FACILITY. SO ADDITIONAL CHANGES IN THE PUD, THE ORIGINAL PUD HAD CALLED FOR SOME LARGER BUFFERS ALONG AREA H, WHICH IS AGAIN AT THE

[00:45:07]

VERY NORTH END. NOT KNOWING WHAT WAS GOING TO GO ON THE SIDE OF INMAN ROAD, HOW TO NOW WE NO IT'S GOING TO BE DISTRIBUTION SITES, AND WE WANT TO BASICALLY REMOVE THAT AND REMOVE SCREENING BETWEEN US AND THE LIGHT -- THE LAST MILE DISTRIBUTION FACILITY.

THE TWO USERS COMPATIBLE. AND THEN FINALLY FOR CONTINUITY'S SAKE, WE DID INCORPORATE ALL THE CHANGES THAT WERE RECENTLY APPROVED BY THE COUNTY FOR THE BAPTIST AND LIGHT STEM MAJOR MODIFICATION TO THE MAJOR PUD. SO WITH THAT I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER

ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. >> LET ME FIRST ASK IF THERE ARE ANY EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS FROM

ANY OF THE MEMBERS. >> YES, I SPOKE WITH MR. INGRAM THIS MORNING BRIEFLY TO DISCUSS

THE PROJECT AND HE CLARIFIED A COUPLE QUESTIONS I HAD. >> AND I SPOKE TO MR. INGRAM ON MONDAY AND HAD A COUPLE QUESTIONS, AND HE CLARIFIED THOSE, ALSO.

ANYBODY ELSE? DR. HILSENBECK. >> OKAY.

COULD YOU -- I WANT TO SAY, FIRST OF ALL, BEFORE I ASK A FEW QUESTIONS, I DID VOTE FOR THE LAST MILE DISTRIBUTION FACILITY AND FOR THE 100,000 SQUARE FOOT MEDICAL FACILITY, SO I KNOW THIS AREA WELL UP THERE. MY WIFE KNOWS IT EVEN BETTER. BUT NONETHELESS, YOU WROTE A LETTER DATED JANUARY 11, 2021, TO THEN AT THE TIME TO ACTING GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIRECTOR MICROBARSON, AND YOU STATED THIS. I JUST WANT YOU TO HELP ME UNDERSTAND IN CONCURRENCY AND THE PAYMENTS AND SO FORTH. SO IT WAS QUOTED, "TO OFFSET THE TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS OF THE ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT IN PHASE 3A, THE COUNTY WOULD REQUIRE THAT THE ROAD IMPACT FEES BE PAID IN CASH OR USING IMPACT FEE CREDITS IN CEERD ANSWER WITH ORDINANCE 2005-27 AND 2018-16, THE ST. JOHNS COUNTY IMPACT FEE ORDINANCE."& SO MY QUESTION IS IF YOU MOVE ALL OF THIS DEVELOPMENT UP TO PARCEL H AND THE ISOLATED UPLAND, ARE YOU GOING TO AVOID THE IMPACT FEES CONCURRENCY FOR PAYING THOSE?

WIEWFNT TO ABOUT A THEM MOVING OFF TO 3A OR 3B UP TO AREA H? >> SO WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING TO DO IS TO COMPLY WITH AND MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE IMPACT FEE ON THE OTHER HAND BY PAYING THE IMPACT FEES EITHER THROUGH CASH OR THROUGH IMPACT FEE CREDIT FOR PRIOR TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS THAT WE'VE DONE. SO, FOR EXAMPLE, WE HAD PAID $410,000 TO HELP SIGNALIZE INMAN ROAD, AND SO TO THE EXTENT WE HAVE CREDITS LEFT, WE COULD PAY IN CREDITS.

BUT, YES, WE WILL MITIGATE FOR OUR ITEM NUMBER PACTS FOR THIS PROPOSAL BY -- IMPACTS BY PAYING

THE IMPACT FEE WHEN IT'S IN CASH OR IN CREDIT. >> SO THERE WILL STILL BE SOME

IMPACT FEE PAYMENT MADE NEEDED? >> AGAIN, EITHER IN CASH OR THROUGH USE OF CREDITS BECAUSE

WE ALREADY PAID. WE ESSENTIALLY PRE-PAID. >> HAVE YOU WORKED AT ALL WITH AND CONSULTED WITH ALL THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN THOSE APARTMENTS IN AND TOWNHOUSES

THAT ARE RIGHT TO YOUR SOUTH/SOUTHWEST? >> NO.

IN THAT THIS IS A MASTER PLAN PROJECT THAT'S BEATEN IN WORKS SINCE 1997 -- BEEN IN THE WORKS SINCE 1997, AREA H HAS BEEN DESIGNATED AS INDUSTRIAL FOR LITERALLY DECADES NOW, SO I DID HEAR FROM ONE RESIDENT WHO WASN'T REAL THRILLED ABOUT IT, BUT THAT'S THE EXTENT OF MY

COMMUNICATIONS. >> SO WHEN THE LAST MILE DISTRIBUTION FACILITY FOLKS WERE HERE BEFORE US, THEY HAD WORKED WITH THE PEOPLE IN THAT RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT PORTION TO MITIGATE -- TO WORK WITH THEM TO MITIGATE THEIR TRAFFIC PATTERNS AND NOISE AND LIGHTING AND ALL THAT, SO YOU'RE ASKING TO MOVE THAT 300,000 SQUARE FEET OF LIGHT INDUSTRIAL UP THERE.

DO YOU HAVE ANY MORE SPECIFIC PLAN FOR WHAT WOULD BE IN THERE IN LIGHT INDUSTRIAL?

>>EL WITH JUST TO CLARIFY, THERE ARE 300,000 SQUARE FEET OF LIGHT INDUSTRIAL APPROVED AT THIS LOCATION ALREADY. IT'S JUST THE ISSUE IS THAT THE OFF-SITE TRAFFIC MITIGATION IS SO DISPROPORTIONATE TO WHAT THE COUNTY REQUIRES OF EVERYBODY ELSE NOW.

SO TO BE COMPETITIVE IN THE MARKETPLACE, WE'RE SEEKING TO BE ON EQUAL FOOTING.

[00:50:04]

AS TO PLANS, WE DID NOT HAVE EXACT PLANS BEYOND WHAT WE HAVE SHOWN TODAY.

>> SO THE 300,000 SQUARE FEET OF INDUSTRIAL WASN'T ON 3A AND 3B. IT WAS ALREADY, YOU SAID, UP THERE IN AREA H IN THE ISOLATE UPLAND? IS THAT CORRECT?

I'M JUST -- ITEMS 4 AND 5 BOTH, WHICH ARE INTERRELATED. >> I UNDERSTAND.

SO ON THE LEFT THERE IS THE CURRENT MAP H, WHICH SHOWS THE INDUSTRIAL ON AREA H AND APPROXIMATELY 24 ACRES THERE. THERE'S ABOUT A 5-1/2 ACRE ISOLATED UPND SITE ON THE CURRENT MAP. THAT'S WHAT THERE IS TODAY. UNDER THE EXISTING DRI AND PUD WE ARE PERMITTED TO BUILD UP TO 300,000 SQUARE FEET OF INDUSTRIAL USES.

UNDER THE PROPOSED MAP WE WOULD BE ABLE TO SPREAD 300,000 SQUARE FEET OF INDUSTRIAL USES ACROSS

BOTH THE ISOLATED UPLNLDZER A AND THE OLD AREA H. >> SO THERE ARE NEW ENTITLEMENTS

BY UTILIZE THANKS ISOLATED UPLANDS AREA FOR THIS AS WELL. >> WE WOULD BE ABLE TO SPREAD IT OVER A LARGER AMOUNT OF LAND ESSENTIALLY TO GET GREATER FLEXIBILITY ON THAT.

>> MY NEXT QUESTION, THIS REALLY HAS TO DO WITH 5, ITEM 5, BUT SINCE WE'RE DOING THEM TOGETHER, THEY ARE COMPANION ITEMS, SO TO SPEAK, I'D LIKE TO KNOW IS THIS PARTICULAR REQUEST THAT YOU'RE MAKING NOW FOR ITEM 4, IS THAT TRIGGERING THE WAIVER THAT YOU'RE SEEKING FROM LDC SECTION 9.04.05C TO ALLOW MORE THAN ONE MODIFICATION TO A PUD WITHIN A ONE-YEAR TIME FRAME OR WAS THAT TRIGGERED BY THE APPROVAL FOR THE 100,000 SQUARE FEET OF NEW MEDICAL FACILITIES OUT ON THE WEST SIDE OF THIS PARTICULAR PUD? SO WHAT IS TRIGGERING THAT

REQUEST FOR THIS WAIVER?& >> SURE. I'LL ATTEMPT TO UNPACK THAT FOR THE REST OF THE PEOPLE LISTENING. SO THERE IS IN THE CODE A LIMIT ON THE NUMBER OF TIMES ONE CAN AMEND A PUD IN A YEAR. IT'S ONCE PER YEAR.

STAFF FELT THAT WE SHOULD SEEK A WAIVER FROM THAT IN LIGHT OF ANOTHER LANDOWNER IN THE PUD HAVING SOUGHT A REZONING EARLIER THIS YEAR. RATHER THAN DEBATE THE ISSUE WITH STAFF ABOUT WHETHER A LANDOWNER, A DHIRCHT LANDOWNER CAN AMEND THEIR ZONING, WE SIMPLY REQUESTED THE WAIVER. BUT IT'S HIGHLIGHT DEBATABLE WHETHER A A WAIVER IS EVEN NEEDED BECAUSE THEY PERTAIN TO DIFFERENT PROPERTIES. I'M HERE REPRESENTING HIGHLAND POINT LLC. ELLEN AVERY-SMITH WAS HERE SEVERAL MONTHS AGO REPRESENTING LIGHTSTONE, WHICH WE BOTH -- BOTH ENTITIES REGION A RELATIVELY LARGEAO THIS PROJECT BUT WE -- AMOUNT OF THIS PROJECT BUT WE DO OPERATE INDEPENDENTLILY

>> I CAN'T DEBATE THE LEGAL MERITS BECAUSE I'M NOT HERE AN ATTORNEY, NOR AM I HERE TO DEBATE, BUT MIGHT I ASK STAFF, IT STATES THAT THE MODIFICATION IS TO A PUD, NOT PARTICULAR OWNERS WITHIN A PUD, SO I SEE THIS AS A WAIVER, AND I SEE SOMEONE COMING FORWARD.

MAYBE HE HAS AN ANSWER. AS A MODIFICATION OR A WAIVER FOR THE ENTIRE PUD, WHICH IF IT IS INDEED THAT, I JUST SEE THAT AS A BAD PRECEDENT TO ALLOW MORE THAN ONE MODIFICATION TO A PARTICULAR PUD WITHIN LESS THAN A ONE-YEAR TIME FRAME. SO COULD I ASK STAFF AS WELL HOW MANY OTHER PUD MODIFICATIONS HAVE BEEN GRANTED WAIVERS FOR THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE WITHIN LESS THAN A ONE-YEAR TIME FRAME? HOW MANY HAVE HAPPENED IN, SAY, THE PAST FIVE OR TEN YEARS OR LAST THREE YEARS, WHATEVER DATA YOU HAVE?

>> GOOD AFTERNOON BE, JUSTIN KELLY WITH GROWTH MANAGEMENT. THERE HAVE BEEN OTHER PUDS THANK COME IN AND ASKED FOR THAT PARTICULAR WAIVER. I DON'T KNOW OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD THE NUMBER OF PUDS THAT HAVE COME IN AND ASKED FOR THAT PARTICULAR WAIVER.

I KNOW THERE WAS ONE LAST YEAR. THIS IS THE FIRST ONE THIS YEAR. IN YOUR STAFF REPORT ON PAGE 10 AT THE BOTTOM THERE IS A PARAGRAPH THERE THAT EXPLAINS THE SPECIFIC CODE SECTION THAT YOU ARE REFERENCING, AND I'LL READ THAT PLAF. THE PREDICT HAS REQUESTED A RAIFER TO THE PROVISIONSL DC SECTION 94AO WHICH PROIF MORE THAN ONE MODIFICATION TO PUDS

[00:55:04]

WITHIN ONE YEAR. ANOTHER PROPERTY LOWER THAN LOCATED WITHIN THE PUD FILED AN APPLICATION FOR A MAJOR MODIFICATION TO AREA A OF ST. AUGUSTINE CENTRE PUD TO ADD 100,000 SQUARE FEET OF MEDICAL CENTER USES. PER SECTION 90405C THIS PROVISION MAY BE WAIVED BY THE BOARD WHICH SUCH ACTION IS DEEMED NECESSARY TO PREVENT INJUSTICE FOR FACILITATE PROPER DEVELOPMENT OF THE COUNTY. THE PLANNING STAFF DID NOT HAVE

ANY OBJECTIONS TO THIS WAIVER." AND. >> AND THANK YOU FOR READING THAT. I DID READ THAT SEVERAL TIMES. I PARTICULARLY NOTED THE SECTION RELATING TO ALLEVIATE INJUSTICE, SO I THOUGHT THAT WAS INTERESTING, BUT OKAY.

SO DOES ANYONE IN THE STAFF KNOW IF SUCH WAIVERS WITHIN ANY PUDS IN THE COUNTY HAVE BEEN

GRANTED ANY TIME RECENTLY? >> YES, SIR, IF I MAY. THERE HAS BEEN -- THIS WHAIFERSS BEEN REQUESTED AND THE PUDS THAT HAVE COME FORWARD TO YOU, SOME OF OUR OLDER PUD DEVELOPMENT THAT YOU'RE SEEING, MANY OF THOSE PROPERTIES ARE OWNED BY DIFFERENT INDIVIDUALS NOW, AND THEY OWN LARGE TRACTS OF THESE PUDS. SOME OF THE OLDER ONES.

AND THOSE ARE COMING BACK BEFORE YOU NOW FOR MOD HAVE MODIFICATIONS AND THEY ARE COME BACK BEFORE YOU WITH THOSE DIFFERENT OWNERSHIPS THAT ARE COMING, AND SO, YES, WE ARE SEEING THIS WAIVER BEING REQUESTED. ACTUALLY, A LITTLE BIT MORE THAN WE THOUGHT WE MIGHT SIGHT, BUT WE ARE SEEING IT QUITE A BIT NOW.

YES, I FEEL LIKE IT IS A PROPER WAIVER FOR THEM TO ASK AT THIS POINT IN TIME.

WHEN THAT SITUATION DOES OCCUR. BUT THAT IS COMPLETELY UP TO THE BOARD.

AS YOU HEARD MR. KELLY SAY, THE CODE DOES ALLOW FOR YOU ALL TO MAKE THAT DECISION.

>> RIGHT. SO I DO UNDERSTAND THAT THERE'S SOME OF THESE COMING TO US.

I KNOW ELLEN AVERY-SMITH PRESENTED THAT ITEM. AND THEN WAS GOING TO ASK FOR AS PARTICULAR PUD WITH THE MEDICAL FACILITIES, BUT ACTUALLY DUE TIE CONVERSATION, SHE ATTRIBUTED TO A CONVERSATION SHE HAD WITH ME ON THE TELEPHONE THAT SHE DECIDED TO REMOVE THAT AND NOT GO FORWARD WITH THAT PARTICULAR WAIVER REQUEST. BUT YOU'RE SAGA THEY ARE COMING FORWARD, AND I DO UNDERSTAND THAT, BUT HOW MANY HAVE BEEN GRANTED IN THE LAST FEW YEARS?

HOW MANY ACTUALLY HAVE GRANTED? >> I DON'T HAVE THE ACTUAL NUMBER.

I KNOW THEY HAVE COME FORWARD TO YOU, AND I CAN'T THINK OF PUDS THAT'S ACTUALLY AGAIN DENIED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, SO I WOULD SAY THEY HAPPENED.

I DON'T KNOW THE EXACT NUMBER BY ANY MEANS. >> OKAY.

WELL, THE ORDINANCE IS IN THERE, IN MY OPINION, FOR A REASON, TO PREVENT EXCESSIVE REQUESTS, MORE THAN ONE PER YEAR, AND I KNOW THIS PUD HAS BEEN AROUND SINCE 1997.

I APPROVE HAVE ITS USES UP THERE. I JUST THINK IT'S A BAD PRECEDENT TO ALLOW THIS. IN THE FUTURE I'M GOING TO VOTE AGAINST SOMETHING REQUESTING A WAIVER LIKE THIS, LETTERS, SO I'M GOING TO BE CONSISTENT IN APPLY VIEWPOINT HERE AND MY PRINCIPLES. BUT THIS PARTICULAR PUD, AS POINTED OUT, THIS THING LAST BEEN AMEND ALMOST AS MANY TIMES AS THE U.S. CONSTITUTION, AND I JUST DON'T SEE -- I JUST THINK IT SETS A TERRIBLE PRECEDENT FOR THE COUNTY GOING FORWARD IF ONE IS NOT SUFFICIENT PER YEAR FOR A PUD REQUEST, EVEN THOUGH I UNDERSTAND THERE ARE DIFFERENT OWNERS IN IT, SO I THINK YOU MADE A GREAT PRESENTATION, AND I ASSUME IT'S GOING TO GET APPROVED, BUT I CAN'T SUPPORT IT BASED ON THAT WAIVER REQUEST, AND SO THAT'S -- I KNOW PART OF 5 BUT WE'RE DOING THEM TOGETHER, SO I'M GOING TO HAVE TO TOTE VOTE UNFORTUNATELY AGAINST BOTH EVEN THOUGH I UNDERSTAND YOUR NEED AND I WOULD AGREE WITH YOUR NEED TO MOVE THAT 300,000 SQUARE FEET, BUT I CAN'T SUPPORT IT.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR YOUR ANSWERS, EVERYONE'S ANSWERS AND PRESENTATION.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> IS THERE ANY OTHER AGENCY QUESTIONS? I DON'T HAVE ANYBODY IN THE QUEUE WE'RE GOING TO MOVE ON TO --

>> MR. CHAIRMAN. >> YES. >> I WOULD ASK THAT WE READ THE PUBLIC COMMENT. WE DID THAT FOR ITEM 1. I WOULD ASK THAT WE DO THAT, THE

PUBLIC COMMENT THAT CAME IN FROM JOE -INCOME 19Y. >> WE READ IT ON ITEM 1 BECAUSE THERE WAS A SPECIFIC REQUEST TO READ IT, DR. MCCORMICK. SO THAT'S WHY WE READ IT ON ITE.

DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKER CARDS? >> WE DO. WHEN I CALL YOUR NAME, PLEASE COME FORWARD, STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. YOU WILL YOOB GIVEN THREE

[01:00:01]

MINUTES. IF YOU HAVE ANYTHING THAT YOU'LL BE PRESENTING, PLEASE SHARE THAT WITH STAFF AFTERWARDS. FIRST SPEAKER WILL BE MICHAEL FOSSILMAN.

>> HI, HOW YOU DOING. I'M ACTUALLY MICHAEL, I'LL HERE FOR MY FATHER-IN-LAW MICHAEL FOSSILMAN WHO LIVES AT 312 VOLTAIREY ROAD WHICH IS RIGHT AT THE BASE OF THEIR PROPERTY ON THE SOUTH SIDE. FIRST, I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR THE PUBLIC COMMENT THAT WAS SENT IN, SO IF YOU COULD READ, IT I WOULD LIKE THAT VERY MUCH, AND IF YOU NEED TO TAKE MY TIME, THAT'S FINE. MY ONLY OTHER QUESTION WOULD BE WHAT'S THE PLANS FOR THE AREA RIGHT ABOVE OUR PROPERTY. THERE'S RIGHT NOW TREES AND NICE PEACEFUL LAKE AND IT'S BEAUTIFUL. AND I JUST DON'T WANT THEM TO TAKE THAT AWAY AND WE LOSE OUR VIEW FOR MY IN-LAWS. SO THAT'S MY VIEW, AND I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR THE PUBLIC COMMENT

WITH THE REST OF MY TIME. >> THANK YOU. >> NEXT SPEAKER WILL BE SUZANNE

CAMERON. >> DO I GET TO HEAR THE PUBLIC COMMENT?

>> NO, SIR. >> HI. MY NAME IS SUZANNE CAMERON.

I LIVE AT 104 GORE GONZALEZ A COURT. LIVE IN TUSK ANY VILLAGE WHICH IS THE AREA OF IMPACT THAT YOU WERE SPEAKING OF. I WORKED A LOT WITH THE LAST DEVELOPMENT, CHINDZ NOW THAT D NOW HAS BEEN STOPPED DUTY GUN RANGE THERE, THAT THEY ARE NOT GOING TO DEVELOP THERE. THE LAST I TALKED TO THEM WAS TREE THREE DAYS AGO, TWO DAYS AGO, SO THAT'S A PROBLEM. I DO HAVE A BIG PROBLEM THAT THESE PEOPLE, THIS GROUP WAS NOT CONSIDERED ENOUGH OF THE CONSIDER THE ENOUGH OF THE RESIDENTS IN THIS COMMUNITY TO COME TO AT LEAST TRY TO TALK TO US TO TELL US WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO DO, PARTICULARLY SINCE THEY'RE LOOKING TO DEVELOP RIGHT BEHIND US.

SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT I HAVE WITH THIS ARE THE SAME ISSUES THAT I HAD WITH LAST MILE, THAT LAST MILE REALLY WORKED WITH US TO GET IT FIGURED OUT AND TO MAKE IT WORKABLE FOR US.

TRAFFIC ON INMAN ROAD IS GOING TO BE AFFECTED CONSIDRABLY. WE HAVE A LOT OF UNITS.

THERE IS A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT USE INMAN ROAD FOR BICYCLING, FOR WALKING.

WOO WE NEED . AND WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND THAT THEY ARE GOING TO RESPECT OUR RIGHTS TO DO THAT, TOO, AS PART GETTING FROM ANYBODY. I UNDERSTAND THE NEED FOR JOBS IN THE COMMUNITY, AND I'M ALL FOR THAT. DON'T GET ME WRONG.

BUT WE LIVE THERE. WE INVESTED IN THIS COMMUNITY. WE INVESTED IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY.

AND WE HAVE A RIGHT TO HAVE SOME CONSIDERATION, ALSO. I'M VERY CONCERNED.

THEY APPARENTLY DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING IN THERE OR HAVEN'T FIGURED THAT PIECE OF IT OUT.

THERE WILL BE SEMI TRUCKS COMING IN AND OUT. WE NEED TO HAVE SOME ASSURANCE THAT NOISE ORDINANCES AND THAT TRAFFIC ORDINANCES ARE GOING TO BE RESPECTED AND TAKEN CARE OF, THAT WE'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE SEMIS WITH J BRAKES OR LOUD ENGINES OR HORNS GOING UP AND DOWN INMAN ROAD AT 2:00 A.M. MY PROPERTY BACKS RIGHT UP TO INMAN ROAD.

MY BEDROOM LOOKS OUT OVER INMAN ROAD. THAT WOULD BE VERY DISTURBING TO ME. WE NEED TO HAVE CONSIDERATION FOR EVERYBODY, FOR BOTH SIDES, NOT JUST FOR SOMETHING THAT'S GOING TO BRING IN MONEY BECAUSE WE BRING IN MONEY, TOO, WE PAY

TAXES. THANK YOU FOR GIVING ME TIME. >> THANK YOU.

>> OUR NEXT SPEAKER IS MARY KATHERINE BESTEL. I'M SORRY.

BALZAC. >> MY NAME IS MARY KATHERINE BALANCESEL.

I LIVE THE 257 EAST PIZZA. MY UNIT IS DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET FROM WHERE SUZANNE LIVES.

I'M THE THIRD UNIT AWAY FROM INMAN ROAD. SO I HAVE THE TRAFFIC FROM BOTH OUTLET CENTRE AND INMAN. THE TRAFFIC IS A HUGE CONCERN IN THIS EAR.

THERE ARE A LOT OF PEOPLE IN OUR COMMUITY WHO WALK WITH SMALL CHILDREN, WHO WALK WITH THEIR ANIMALS, AND WE HAVE A LOT OF DEVELOPMENT ON INMAN ALREADY. ARC IS BUILDING A NEW BUILDING,

[01:05:06]

AND AT THE CORNER WE'RE SUPPOSED TO BE HAVING THE NEW GAS STATION THAT'S COMING IN, THE FLEW CHICK-FIL-A. THAT IS GOING TO BE A LOT OF TRAFFIC FOR THE LIGHT THAT IS AT THE INTERSECTION OF INMAN AND HIGHWAY 16. THE TRAFFIC PATTERN AS IT IS NOW CREATES A BACKUP, AND IT'S VERY DANGEROUS. THE LEFT TURN LANE IS ALSO THE STRAIGHT THROUGH LANE IF YOU WANT TO GO ACROSS THE STREET TO ZACK BUY'S, SO YOU HAVE TO PUT TRUST IN THE PERSON COMING AT YOU THAT THEY'RE GOING TO USE THE LIGHT TO TELL YOU THEY'RE TURNING OR THE PERSON COMING AT YOU HAS TO TRUST THAT YOU'RE GOING PUT YOUR SIGNAL ON.

THAT NEEDS TO BE COMPLETELY REVIEWED AND CHANGED AS SOON AS IT CAN BE.

IF THEY ARE GOING TO BE BUILDING AND USING THIS ROAD, WE ALREADY HAVE THE NOISE FROM THE LOG TRUCKS THAT ARE COMING OUT OF THERE, AND COMING FROM AN ENVIRONMENTAL SIDE OF THIS, WE HAVE BALD EAGLES THAT ARE NORTHWESTING THERE. NORTHWEST NESTING THERE.

THE WOOD STORK HAS JUST COME OFF OF THE ENDANGERED SPECIES LIST. THEY NEST THERE BECAUSE ALL OF THE LAKES THAT IS BEHIND WHERE OUR SUBDIVISION IS. THEY NEST WHERE THEIR FOOD SOURCE IS, AND WE'RE SEEING A LOT OF NEW BABIES IN THIS LAKE AREA AND ALSO, NOT KNOWING WHAT THEY PLAN TO BUILD AND THEY'RE REQUESTING TO TAKE THESE SCREENS DOWN WITH JUST A CHAIN LINK FENCE OR WAS THERE SOMETHING THAT WAS GOING TO HELP WITH NOISE OR WITH LIGHT FOR WHATEVER THEY'RE BRINGING IN? BECAUSE WE HAVE THE GUN RANGE. THAT IS NOISE THAT WE HEAR 24 HOURS A DAY. BUT THEY'RE ALSO GOING TO BE BRINGING IN LIKE SUZANNE MENTIONED, ALL OF THE HEAVY EQUIPMENT. THERE IS A LOT OF NOISE ON THAT SIDE OF THE ROAD WITH JUST THE SMALL AMOUNT THAT THEY'RE DOING TO CHANGE THAT LANDSCAPE.

AND THEN MY NEXT ISSUE IS WHAT WILL THEY DO TO HELP RECOVER THE GREEN SPACE THAT THEY'RE GOING TO BE TAKING AWAY? BECAUSE THEY HAVE LOGGED THIS ENTIRE AREA AND THE WILDLIFE THAT IS THERE. SO ARE THEY GOING TO DO SOMETHING TO HELP BECAUSE ALL OF THIS PAVEMENT IS GOING TO BE GOING IN, IT'S GOING GET HOTTER AND HOTTER.

ARE THEY GOING TO DO SOMETHING TO HELP WITH THE GREEN SPACE IN OUR AREA?

THOSE ARE THINGS THAT I HAVE OF CONCERN. >> YOUR MINUTES ARE UP, MA'AM.

THANK YOU. >> THE NEXT SPEAKER WILL BE HEATHER BOATNER.

>> MI. I'M HEATHER. I LIVE ANOTHER 320 VOLTAIRE PLACE IN TUSCANY VILLAGE. OUR UNIT, MY UNIT THAT I LIVE IN BACKS UP TO THE RETENTION POND THAT BACKS UP TO THE PROPERTY THAT'S IN SECTION AREA H THAT THEY'RE PEAK SPEAKING ABOUT.

THIS IS NOT A VERY GOOD PICTURE OF IT. I THINK ONE OF HIS FIRST SLIDES KIND OF SHOWED YOU A LITTLE BIT MORE EXACTLY HOW OUR DEVELOPMENT BAWNGS TO THAT.

SO THE ONE INSUED THEY'RE TALKING IN QUESTION WE HAVE INMAN THE WHICH THE WHICH THE LADIES AND GENTLEMAN WERE SPEAKING ABOUT, AND THEN YOU COME BACK AND YOU'VE GOT A WHOLE SECTION OF UNIT THAT HAS THE POND BEHIND US. BEHIND THAT, AS WE HAD SAID, IS THE AREA THAT DEEMED TO BE DEVELOPED. I HAD QUESTIONS THAT I -- WE HAD NOT EVEN HEARD ABOUT ANY OF THIS UNTIL IT WAS -- EXCUSE ME. I DON'T HAVE IT EXACTLY PREPARED COME UP AND WE HAVEN'T BEEN COMMUNICATED WITH IN ANY WHICH WAY AS FAR AS HOW FAR BACK, I THINK IT'S A 25-FOOT BEFORE OR WHATEVER HE WANTS TO DO BEHIND THAT POND.

I'M STARING AT TREES, AND BEHIND THOSE TREES IS A BEAUTIFUL DEVELOPMENT, AND WE HAVE, AS WE SAID, HER ONS, EGRETS. I WANTED TO GET SOME TYPE OF SURVEY THAT CAME IN THAT STATED ALL OF THE DIFFERENT WILDLIFE THAT IS NOW GOING TO BE DISTURBED BY ALL OF THIS.

I SAW THE BALD EAGLES YESTERDAY MORNING. I HAVE PICTURES OF IT.

THEY'RE NOT VERY CLEAR. MY NEIGHBOR WILL TELL YOU SHE SPOKE OF A FLORIDA PANTHER.

THERE'S ALL DIFFERENT WILDLIFE THAT WILL BE DISTURBED. BEYOND THAT WE HAVE THE SOUND.

WE HAVE THE TRAFFIC. I KNOW SUSIE HAD WORKED WITH THE FIRST MILE AS FAR AS THE TRUCKS THAT WERE GOING TO BE GOING DOWN THAT ROAD. IF WE DON'T HAVE AN IDEA OF WHAT'S GOING TO BE CESTLED THERE, HOW DO WE KNOW THATY -- YOU SHOULD AB PROOFING IT IF THEY DON'T EVEN HAVE A PLAN, WHICH MEANS IF YOU ALLOW THAT THEY WILL HAVE FREE REIN TO PUT ANYTHING IN AND INDICTMENT LIGHT INDUSTRIAL. I KNOW IT'S LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AND RESIDENTIAL BECAUSE I'M ONE OF THE RESIDENTS THAT LIVE THERE, AND I DO PAY TAXES, AND I DO WANT TO CONTINUE TO LIVE THERE AND NOT HAVE TO MOVE ELSEWHERE. I DON'T MIND THE GUN RANGE.

IT'S A BACKGROUND SOUND. IT'S BLUE NOISE OR WHATEVER THEY CALL IT, WHITE NOISE TO ME, BUT TO HAVE OUR SKY RUINED, OUR NATURE RUINED, OUR WHOLE AREA, IF IT WAS -- IF IT WERE TO BE A

[01:10:03]

PARKING LOT, I THINK I'D BE EVEN BETTER THAN THAT THAN WE DON'T KNOW WHAT IT'S GOING TO BE, SO I JUST HAVE CONCERNS AND I HAVE QUESTIONS AND NO ONE'S EVEN TRIED TO REACH OUT TO US TO ANSWER ANY OF THOSE, SO I JUST WANTED TO VOICE THAT, THAT I DO NOT BELIEVE THE RESIDENTS IN THE AREA -- WE CAN'T GET BEHIND SOMETHING IF WE DON'T HAVE KNOWLEDGE OF IT.

THAT'S REALLY IT. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU.

>> NEXT SPEAKER WILL BE MARY UNVVER. >> HI THERE.

THANK YOU. YOU WERE COMPLIEPTS. I LIVE AT 324 VOLTAIRE PLACE IN ST. AUGUSTINE. I LIVE RIGHT NEXT DOOR TO HEATHER.

AND I AM ALSO BACKING UP TO THE POND AND TO THE BEAUTIFUL FOREST PRESERVE THAT'S BEHIND ME.

AND I'M NEW TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD, SO I WAS NOT AWARE OF ALL OF THIS OF THE CHANGES WITH -- WHAT ARE WE CALLING IT? -- THE AMAZON IF WE WANT TO CALL IT THAT, DEVELOPMENT THAT WAS GOING TO COME IN. I MOVED IN IN OCTOBER, AND I HAVE SINCE ENJOYED SUCH A BEAUTIFUL SCENERY AND MONKEY COFFEE MORNING COFFEE WITH BIRDIES AND ALLIGATORS AND DEER, AND I HAVE SEEN BALD EAGLES AND I HAVE SEEN A PANTHER, AND I AM STRUCK BY THE -- I'VE READ BOTH OF THESE PROPOSALS, PROPOSAL 4 AND 5.

I'VE READ THE ENTIRE -- THE WHOLE THING. I'M STRUCK BY THE LACK OF ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF THE TUSCANY VILLAGE COMMUNITY, RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY IN THAT -- IN BOTH OF THOSE DOCUMENTS. IT'S HARDLY MENTIONED, EVEN ON THE AERIAL THING, THE AERIAL DISPLAY OF IT. IT TALKS ABOUT THE BEER DISTRIBUTION PLACE, THE ALUMINUM FRAME FACTORY, THE GUN RANGE, AND DOES NOT EVEN IN THAT AERIAL DESCRIPTION TALK ABOUT US THE THE KANE VILLAGE. TUSCANY VILLAGE HAS BEEN THERE SINCE 2013.

IT'S CLEARLY A WELL-ESTABLISHED COMMUNITY. THERE ARE ALL AGE GROUPS THERE.

AND WE ARE ALL, I BELIEVE, WONDERING, WE WONDER IN FRONT OE PLANNING.

WHAT IS IS IT THAT I PARKING LOT IS GOING TO BRING TO US? AND I RECOGNIZE JOBS IN THE COMMUNITY IS A VERY IMPORTANT THING. CERTAINLY WELCOME IT.

I ALSO UNDERSTAND THAT YOU AS THE BOARD WOULD ALSO WELCOME THAT ALL RESIDENTS ARE -- OUR WISHES RESPECTED AND HONORED AND THAT WE ARE ABLE TO KNOW WHAT'S GOING TO BE PUT IN THERE.

I GUESS ANOTHER QUESTION I HAVE FOR YOU IS HAVE ANY OF YOU BEEN OVER THERE.

I WONDER IF YOU HAVE BEEN TO THE ACTUAL AREA WHERE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.

IF YOU HAVEN'T, I WELCOME YOU TO MY HOME. I WELCOME YOU TO SIT ON MY BACK PORCH AND TO OBSERVE WHAT IS POTENTIALLY GOING TO BE CHANGED INTO WHAT, WE DON'T KNOW, AND I'M SORRY THAT WE HAVE NOT BEEN COMMUNICATED WITH IN A MORE TRANSPARENT FASHION AS TO WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN THERE, AND SO I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME AND I HOPE THAT YOU WILL RECONSIDER MOVING FORWARD WITH THIS WITHOUT RE-LOOKING AT SOME OF THE ISSUES THAT WE ARE RAISING FOR YOU.

THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. ANY OTHER SPEAKER CARDS?

>> NONE. >> IS THERE NUB ON ANYBODY ? >> IS THERE ANYBODY ON THE PHON?

>> YES, I AM HERE. I'M SORRY. I'M TRYING TO UN-- I AM TRYING TO MUTE -- I AM TRYING TO MUTE MY DEVICE HERE. I AM SO SORRY.

YES, DO YOU WANT ME TO GO AHEAD? >> NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, YES.

>> MY NAME IS JOE MCNARNY 1005 BLACKBERRY LANE, ST. JOHNS. I REPRESENT THE NORTHWEST UNITED FOR PROPOSITION FIRST OF ALL, I WANT TO APOLOGIZE TO SOME DEGREE WITH THE LETTER THAT I DID SEND THAT YOU HAVE IN YOUR PACKET. I DID BELIEVE THAT THE PARKING AREA -- I REALIZED NOW THAT PARKING ON THE WEST SIDE OF INMAN HAD BEEN PART OF THE AMENDS PROJECT APPROVAL, THE LAST MILE APPROVAL, AND SO THE AMENDS PROJECT APPROVAL. AND SO -- AMAZON.

MY LETTER IS RECOMMENDING CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF THESE PIECES, AND I'M GOING TO CHANGE THAT, BUT FIRST OF ALL I WOULD ELIMINATE CONDITION NUMBER 1 RELATED TO THE TIMING OF TREE

[01:15:05]

CLEARING. I WOULD ELIMINATE THE 75-FOOT NATURAL BUFFER WHICH I BELIEVED WAS GOING TO BE ALONG THAT PARKING AREA. BUT I WOULD RETAIN THE CONDITION THAT PHASE 3B REMAIN, THAT THE TRANSPORTATION CONCURRENCY REQUIREMENT REMAIN, AND I WOULD ALSO RETAIN THE CONDITION THAT THE APPLICANT PERFORM A WILDLIFE STUDY.

YOU'VE HEARD FROM SO MANY RESIDENTS ABOUT THE WILDLIFE, EAGLES AND PANTHERS THAT THEY HAVE SEEN. I WILL SAY THAT MR. INGRAM EXAGGERATED ON ONE POINT, AND THAT WAS THAT THE TRANSPORTATION CONCURRENCY IS NOT A $10 MILLION VALUE, BUT I RECEIVED THIS MORNING FROM OUR TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT THAT IT'S $2,587,449. I DON'T HAPPEN TO HAVE THAT AMOUNT IN MY CHECKBOOK. I KNOW THAT IT'S A BIG NUMBER. BUT HERE'S WHAT THAT NUMBER APPLIES TO. THE AMAZON WAS APPROVED AT 1 THUN HUNDRED THOUSAND SQUARE FEET WITH AM WILL 400 CARS PARKING, AND HUNDREDS OF TRUCKS. THIS APPLICANT IS SEEKING 300,000 SQUARE FEET OF TRILL, THREE TIMES THAT -- INDUSTRIAL, 3 TIMES THAT, 1200 CARS AND HUNDREDS AND HUNDREDS OF TRUCKS. AND SO THE TRAFFIC ON INMAN WITH THIS APPROVAL WILL BE ENORMOUS.

ENORMOUS. AND THAT 2.5 MILLION CERTAINLY CAN APPLY TO ALL THE MITIGATION STEPS NEEDED. BUT I WANT TO ACTUALLY SAY I WOULD LIKE FOR YOU TO DENY THIS APPLICATION ON THE BASIS OF THE TESTIMONY FROM THE CITIZENS WHO LIVE IN TUSCANY VILLAGE AND OTHER. THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ATTORNEY HAS GIVEN YOU ABSOLUTELY ALL OF THE REASONS UPON WHICH YOU CAN BASE YOUR DENIAL.

THIS IS AN ESTABLISHED ORDERLY DEVELOPMENT, AND THIS PROPOSAL PRODUCES AN INCOMPATIBILITY OR DEVIATION FROM THAT ESTABLISHED ORDERLY DEVELOPMENT IT. DETRACTS FROM THE CHARACTER AND QUALITY OF LIFE. AND IT HAS OTHER DETRIMENTAL EFFECTS AND NUISANCES.

AND ON THAT BASIS, THIS APPLICATION CAN BE DENIED IN ITS ENTIRETY.

AND SO THAT IS WHAT I AM ADVOCATING TO YOU TODAY, AND I THANK YOU SO MUCH.

>> THANK YOU, MR. MCNEARNY. IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE ON THE PHONE?

>> NO MORE PUBLIC COMMENT. >> THANK YOU. AT THIS TIME WE'RE GOING TO TURN

IT BACK OVER TO MR. INGRAM FOR REBUTTAL. >> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR.

I'LL BE BRIEF. JUST TO GO BACK TO THE AERIAL MAP WEEK JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT, INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT IS NOT DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO THE HOMEOWNERS. THERE IS A POND AREA BETWEEN THOSE TWO SO WE WILL NOT BE DIRECTLY ABUTTING THE RESIDENTS. THIS WAS AND IS A MIXED USE COMMUNITY.

IT'S BEEN THAT WAY SINCE 1997 WHEN IT WAS FIRST APPROVED. IT HAS DEVELOPED AS SUCH, AND IT'S ALWAYS BEEN THE PLAN SO THIS IS BUT A PART OF OF THE ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT THAT WILL CONTINUE TO TAKE PLACE AS WELL AS REDEVELOPMENT. WE HAVE SEEN QUITE A BIT OF REDEVELOPMENT IN THE CENTER. IT IS COMMON AND EXPECTED AT INTERSTATE INTERCHANGES FROM AN ECONOMIC STANDPOINT, THEY ARE THE POWER PLANTS OF OUR ECONOMY THAT ST. JOHNS COUNTY HAS AS MANY INTERCHANGES ON I-95. SO IT IS AN APPROPRIATE AREA FOR GROWTH, FOR INDUSTRIAL USE, JUST AS IT WAS WHEN IT WAS FIRST APPROVED IN 1997. SO WITH THAT, I UNDERSTAND HEARING FROM THE RESIDENTS IT IS A MIXED USE PROJECT AND IT IS SEPARATED.

AS TO THE BUFFERING, REALLY WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS TO TAKE A REQUIRED 30-FOOT PERIMETER BUFFER UP AT THE NORTH END ACROSS FROM THE GUN RANGE AND THE LAST MILE DISTRIBUTION FILT AND TAKE IT TO 10 FEET BECAUSE WE DO NOT BELIEVE THAT INDUSTRIAL AND GUN RANGE NEED TO BE BUFFERED BY 30 FEET FROM A LIGHT INDUSTRIAL USE. IT DOESN'T IMPACT THE RESIDENTIAL USES TO THE SOUTH. AND I KNOW I WOULD GET A LOT OF GRIEF IF I HAD PROPOSED TO DO THAT. SO WITH RESPECT TO THE IMPACTS OF THIS PROPOSAL ON THE SURROUNDING AREA, THE IMPACTS ARE THE SAME. THE IMPACTS ARE THE SAME AS WHAT ARE APPROVED TODAY. THE QUESTION IS WHAT SORT OF APPROPRIATE.

[01:20:03]

THE COUNTY HAS DECIDED THAT IMPACT FEES ARE THE APPROPRIATE METHOD FOR MITIGATING NON-RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT. WE AGREE, AND THAT'S WHAT WE WANT TO DO.

WE THINK THAT AN ADDITIONAL OFF-SITE TRAFFIC MITIGATION WOULD BE VASTLY DISPROPORTIONATE TO WHAT EVERYONE ELSE IS BEING REQUIRED TO DO AT THIS POINT. SO THE SYSTEM HAS CHANGED.

THE COUNTY HAS RECOGNIZED THAT TO COMPLETE IN THE MARKETPLACE FOR JOBS, THEY HAVE TO HAVE A FAIR SYSTEM FOR ASSESSING MITIGATION, AND WE WANT TO BE PART OF THAT SYSTEM NOW.

SO THANK YOU VERY MUCH. APPRECIATE YOUR HELP. >> DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? TOM, I HAVE ONE QUESTION. IF THIS IS NOT APPROVED, AND 300,000 SQUARE FEET OF INDUSTRIAL BE DEVELOPED ON PARCEL H?

>> YES. >> THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.

WE'RE BACK INTO THE ACCESSIBLE FOR A MOTION. >> MR. CHAIR, MAY I COMMENT IN.

>> YES. >> THIS IS WITH RESPECT TO DR. HILSENBECK'S QUESTION AREA, I WAS ABLE TO GO THROUGH OUR SYSTEM AND FIND SOME OF THE ONES WE DID APPROVE.

I DID COME UP WITH TWO THAT WE HAVE PROVED OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS THAT DO HAVE THAT WAIVER IN THEM, THOSE PUDS WERE APPROVED, AND THEN, OF COURSE, WE HAVE THIS ONE THAT IS

IN REVIEW NOW. >> WE'RE BACK IN THE AGENCY FOR A MOTION.

DR. MCCORMICK, ARE YOU MAKING A MOTION? >> INITIALLY WHEN I WAS GOING TO SPEAK BEFORE, I WAS GOING TO PROVIDE SOME CONDITIONAL REASONS WHY WE MIGHT POSSIBLY APPROVE THESE TWO PROPOSALS, BUT NOW AT THIS POINT I'M NOT GOING THAT WAY.

I'M GOING TO USE THE ARGUMENTS FROM THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ATTORNEY, THE REVIEW COMMENTS WHICH SAYS, "THE BOARD MAY DENY THIS APPLICATION IF THERE'S COMPETENT SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE THAT THIS THE APPLICATION PROVIDES AN INCOMPATIBILITY FOR DEVIATION FROM ESTABLISHED DEVELOPMENT THAT THE DETRACTS FROM THE CHARACTER AND QUALITY OF LIFE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD BY CREATING CONSECUTIVE NOISE, LIGHTS, VIE BRAKES FUMES, ODORS, DUST, PHYSICAL ACTIVITIES AND OTHER DETRIMENTAL EFFECTS." OBVIOUSLY, I'M GOING TO VOTE TO DENY THIS PROPOSAL -- THESE

PROPOSALS. >> THANK YOU. SO MS. PERKINS.

>> I'D LIKE TO OFFER A MOTION. >> YES, PLEASE. >> MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF DRI MOD 2020-04 ST. AUGUSTINE CENTRE BASED ON FIVE FINDINGS OF FACT AS PROVIDED IN THE STAFF

REPORT. >> IS THERE A SECOND? >> SECOND.

>> IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? >> I'D LOOK TO MAKE ONE COMMENT, AND I'M NOT AN EXPERT IN THIS AREA, BUT IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT RULES SUCH AS THIS ONE ABOUT ONLY BRINGING A PUD OR A ZONING ONCE A YEAR BEFORE THE GOVERNMENT BODY WAS TO KEEP APPLICANTS FROM WEARING OUT THE GOVERNMENT BODY WHEN THEY LOST BY BRINGING IT BACK OVER AND OVER AGAIN, AND SO THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING. I DON'T KNOW ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR RULE THAT WAS MADE, BUT THAT'S HOW IT'S BEEN EXPLAINED TO ME IN THE PAST.

IT HAD MORE TO DO WITH THE SAME PIECE OF PROPERTY AND THE SAME APPLICANT OR SUBSTITUTE A NEW APPLICANT JUST KEEPS COMING BACK BECAUSE THEY LOST. ANYWAY, THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SAY. LET'S MOVE ON AND SPROAT. VOTE.

ALL RIGHT. THAT MOTION PASSES 2. SO NOW WE'RE MOVING ON TO ITEM

NUMBER 5, AND I'LL ENTERTAIN A MOTION ON ITEM NUMBER 5. >> MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF MAJOR MOD 2020-17 SARATOGA SPHR AREA H BASED ON SIX FINDINGS OF FACT AS PROVIDED IN

THE STAFF REPORT. >> SECOND. >> MOTION FROM MS. PENSIONER, SECOND FROM MR. ALAIMO. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, LET'S REGISTER THE

[6. CPA (SS) 2020-01 Danforth Property. A request for a Small Scale Comprehensive Plan Amendment to change the Future Land Use Map classification of approximately 7 acres of land from Rural/Silviculture (R/S) to Community Commercial (CC), specifically located at 5720 County Road 210 West.]

VOTE. DR. MCCORMICK, WE NEED TO YOU VOTE, PLEASE.

>> I'M SORRY. >> ALL RIGHT. THAT PASSES 3-2.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. MOVING WOULD BE WE HAVE MR. BURNETT UP NEXT, AND I HAVE TO TELL YOU, MR. BURNETT, I'VE BEEN WONDERING WHERE YOU'VE BEEN.

I WORRIED BUT A LITTLE BIT, QUITE FRANKLY. ARE YOU ALL RIGHT?

[01:25:03]

>> THANK YOU. I'VE BEEN IN THE WORLD OF MEDICAL OFFICE LEASING WG A LITTLE SEGUE ON THAT THANK YOU FOR LETTING ME BE HERE TODAY.

I'M HERE TODAY ON BEHALF OF KATE AND BUBBA DANFORTH. THIS IS ONE OF THOSE HOPEFULLY YOU'LL SHARE WITH ME THE FEEL-GOOD PROJECT. THESE ARE YOUR AVERAGE FOLKS THAT ARE TRYING TO GET LAND USE IN PLACE ON THEIR PROPERTY. THEIR PROPERTY IS APPROXIMATELY 7 ACRES. IT'S ON -- LET ME GET MYSELF ORIENTED HERE.

IT'S ON COUNTY ROAD 210 WEST, VERY CLOSE TO LONG LEAF PINE. YOU CAN SEE AN AERIAL OF THE PROPERTY HERE. WE DID HAVE A COMMUNITY MEETING. ONE OF THE FOLS THAT CALLED IN FOR THE COMMUNITY MEETING AT THE TIME IS THE LANDOWNER WHO IS MELDZ JEANLTS IMMEDIATELY TO THE NORTHEAST -- IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT NORTHEAST IF YOU WILL. HE STATED HE DIDN'T HAVE A OBJECTION TO IT. AN INTERESTING THING TO PUT THIS IN THE CONTEXT OF WHERE THIS PROPERTY VEIL LOCATED IS YOU CAN SEE NOW THE NEXT STECH AN THE PROPERTY IS IN RELATION TO GRAND CREEK. AND IF I GO ONE STEP FURTHER, YOU CAN SEE THIS IS ACTUALLY FROM GRAND CREEK'S PUD. YOU CAN SEE THE COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL IN THE THE ORANGE-ISH COLOR HERE IMMEDIATELY NEXT TO THEIRS, AND THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE HERE TO SEEK TODAY, IS TO GET COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL ON THEIR PROPERTY. THEY I THINK IT'S THE MOST APPROPRIATE USE AND APPROPRIATE FOR THE AREA GIVEN THE LOCATION. AND.

THAT PRETTY MUCH ENDS MY PRESENTATION. THERE'S A SITE PLAN.

THIS IS VERY ROUGH. FOR COMP PLAN AMENDMENT YOU HAVE TO HAVE A PLAN.

THIS IS A ROUGH BUBBLE PLAN, AND I ASK YOU TO APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT THIS BUBBLE PLAN IS ONE THAT'S CREATED BY OR FOR AVERAGE FOLKS. THIS IS NOT A SOPHISTICATED DEVELOPER COMING IN FOR YOU IN AN APPLICATION. AND I GUESS I WOULD TELL YOU IN WINDING UP ON THIS IS THIS IS ONE OF THOSE CASES WHERE WIFE CS THE FOLKS TO LIST THEIR PROPERTY WHERE THEY HAVE A CONTINGENCY THAT THE DEVELOPER IS GOING TO HAVE TO GET LAND USE BEFORE THEY CAN SILT, AND SO THE FOLKS WIND UP IN A SWAIKS SITUATION WHERE THEY HAVE TO NEGOTIATE FOR A REDUCED PRICE TO BE ABLE TO SELL THE PROPERTY TO A DEVELOPER VERS LETTING THEM GET THE LAND USE IN PLACE. NOW IT INCREASES IN VALUE AND THEY GET TO REAP THE REWARD BEFORE SELLING THE PROPERTY. SO I'D ASK FOR YOU TO LOOK AT IN IT THIS CONTEXT AS WELL.

THIS IS A VERY SMALL COMP PLAN POOVMENTD IT'S 7 OR 8 ACRES AND IT MATCHES UP NICELY WITH GRAND CREEK. WITH THAT I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU HAVE.

>> DR. HILSENBECK. >> I AGREE, IT'S GOOD TO SEE YO YOU.

I AM CONCERNED, NUMBER ONE, I'VE CONSISTENTLY VOTED AGAINST CHANGING DESIGNATION FROM RURAL SILVER CULTURAL LANDS TO ANYTHING ELSE, RESIDENTIAL, COMMERCIAL, BECAUSE IF BELIEVE STRONGLY IN AGRICULTURE AND THAT INCLUDES SILVICULTURE, BUT YOUR LAST POINT WAS VERY WELL TAKEN THAT YOU MADE ABOUT THEM POSSIBLY HAVING TO SELL AT A REDUCED PRICE AND THEN SOMEBODY ELSE REZONES IT SO THAT'S A VERY GOOD POINT. BUT NO GOING THROUGH THE APPLICATION, AND I DON'T KNOW I DON'T KNOW IF YOU FUTURE PUT IN IT THERE OR STAFF PUT IN IT THERE IT STATED THAT THE GRAND CREEK PUD IMMEDIATELY WEST WILL HAVE UP TO 400 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES, THEY WILL HAVE 45,840 SQUIRE FEET OF NON--- SQUARE FEET OF NON-RESIDENTIAL USES WHEN BUILT, SO THAT IS NOT BUILT YET. I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S UNDERWAY.

AND THEN SOME OF THE LAND IT STATES, WHILE SOME OF THE LANDS TO THE EAST AND SOUTH ARE IMPROVED WITH -- AND IT SAYS -- A RESIDENTIAL UNIT, AND THAT MAY BE THE OWNER THAT CALLED IN, I DON'T KNOW, THAT YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT, IT SAYS THE MAJORITY OF NEIGHBORHOOD LANDS ARE VACANT AND UNIMPROVED. SO TO ME, DOING THIS AT THIS TIME, CHANGING THE ZONING OF THIS IS, FOR ME PERSONALLY, IT'S TOO MUCH TOO SOON WITH IN MY OPINION, AND AND I WILL TELL YOU I HAVE BEEN A VERY PROUD DEFERRED AND PROMOTER OF FLORIDA AGRICULTURE FOR MANY YEARS IN MY PREVIOUS LIFE AND JOB, AND A LOT OF PEOPLE DON'T REALIZE THAT FLORIDA AGRICULTURE IS THE SECOND LEADING LEADING ECONR OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA, AND THAT'S NOT BEHIND DEVELOPMENT.

THAT'S BEHIND TOURISM. DEVELOPMENT ISN'T EVEN THIRD OR FOURTH, BUT AGRICULTURE, THAT

[01:30:02]

INCLUDES ROW CROP AGRICULTURE, SILVICULTURE AND RANCHING AS THE MAIN CORNERSTONE OF AGRICULTURE IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA, AND THERE'S THINGS LIKE AQUACULTURE NOW AND SO FORTH, BUT THOSE ARE REALLY IMPORTANT, AND I'M A STRONG DEFENDER AND PROMOTER OF FLORIDA AG AND STRONGLY BELIEVE IN IT. I HAVE A REALLY GOOD FRIEND HERE WHO IS A POTATO FARMER, MAJOR POTATO FARMER. I HAVE MANY FRIENDS THAT ARE RANCHERS THROUGHOUT THE STATE, AND TO ME THOSE, THOSE KINDS OF USES OF LAND, INCLUDING SILVICULTURE LIKE THIS LAN HAS BEEN IN SILVICULTURE, THERE'S MORE INTENSIVE SILVICULTURE TO THE EAST-SOUTHEAST, MORE TREES IN ROWS, BUT EVEN EVEN WRITTEN BOOK CHAPTERS FROM THE CONTRIBUTIONS OF AGRICULTURE TO FLORIDA CONSERVATION , AND UNFORTUNATELY, AND I AGREE THIS IS A FAIRLY SIMPLE REQUEST AND I UNDERSTAND YOUR REASONING, I JUST PERSONALLY CAN'T VOTE AGAINST IT ON PRINCIPLE.

I MADE A PRINCIPLED STANDNESS PAST ON IN THE PAST ON AGAINST CHANGING RURAL AND SILVICULTURAL LANDS ON OTHER USES AND I'M GOING TO MAINTAIN THAT POSITION, SO I PERSONALLY CAN'T VOTE FOR IT BUT I DO APPRECIATE YOUR PRESENTATION AND YOUR REASONING AND THE OWNERS' DESIRES. I CERTAINLY APPRECIATE ALL THAT.

SO THANK YOU. THERE'S REALLY NO QUESTION THERE FOR YOU, BUT IF YOU WANT TO ADDRESS IT, THAT'S FINE, TBHUT FOR LISTENING, AND SORRY YOU HAD TO STAND THERE AND HEAR THAT,

BUT I NEEDED TO STATE THAT. THANK YOU. >> UNDERSTAND.

MR. HILSENBECK, THE ONLY THING I WOULD OFFER TO YOU ON THAT, AND I THINK YOU CAN MAINTAIN A ASSIST CAN H. CONSISTENT POSITION EVEN IF YOU VOTED IN FAVOR OF THIS, THIS IS 7 ACRES.

THE ABILITY TO DO MEANINGFUL AGRICULTURE ON THIS IS REALLY LIMITED, AND SO THAT'S THE ONLY THING I WOULD OFFER TO YOU. IF IT WAS 70 ACRES, OBVIOUSLY IF IT WAS 700, BUT IF IT WAS 70 ACRES, WITH IT WOULD BE A DIFFERENT STORY. SEVEN SEARVETION PLIMENTD THAT'S

THE ONLY THING I COULD SUBMIT OUT TO YOU IN RESPONSE. >> I UNDERSTAND UNDERSTAND THAT, AND THIS HAS COME BUFFS MANY TIMES AND I'VE ONLY BEATEN ON BOARD A LITTLE OVER A YEAR SO I PROBABLY DIDN'T VOTE FOR THOSE OTHER WAIVERS THAT WERE DISCUSSED BUT I HAVE VOTED AGAINST CHANGING RURAL AND SILVICULTURE LAND ZONING, BUT THERE'S A NIBBLING AWAY EACH TIME, LET'S SAY THIS LAND GETS TO BE COMMERCIAL, AND THEN YOU GO, OH, WELL, RIGHT ACROSS THE ROAD THERE ON 210 WEST, THAT'S JUST SILVICULTURE. THIS IS NOW IN COMMERCIAL.

SO NOW WE WANT TO PUT THIS OTHER IN A DIFFERENT KIND OF LAND USE. IT'S A CHOPPING AWAY, NIBBLING AWAY. I'VE STATED THIS BEFORE. AND EVEN AT 7 ACRES, AND I FEEL CERTAIN YOUR ITEM WILL PASS, BUT I NEED TO MAINTAIN MY PRINCIPLED STAND ON THIS, AND I DO APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS, AND THANK YOU VERY MUCH, DOUG. GOOD TO SEE YOU.

>> ARE THERE ANY OTHER AGENCY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS? ALL RIGHT.

SO WE ARE THEN BACK INTO THE AGENCY, AND DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKER CARDS?

>> WE DO NOT. >> ARE THERE ANY SPEAKERS ON GTV?

>> NO PUBLIC COMMENT. >> THANK YOU. SO WE'RE BACK INTO THE AGENCY

FOR A MOTION. >> MR. CHAIRMAN, I'D EVER OFFER A MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF CPA SS2020-01 DANFORTH PROPERTY BASED ON FOUR FINDINGS OF FACT.

>> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

[7. CPA (SS) 2020-06 5960/5956 Don Manuel Road. Request for a Small Scale Comprehensive Plan Amendment to change the Future Land Use designation of approximately 5.0 acres of land from Agriculture (A/I) to Residential- A (Res-A), specifically located at 5960 and 5956 Don Manuel Road.]

ANY DISCUSSION? NOBODY IS ON THE QUEUE. I HEAR NO DISCUSSION.

LET'S GO AHEAD AND REGISTER THE VOTE. THAT PASSES 4-1.

GOOD TO SEE YOU, DOUG. ALL RIGHT. MOVING TO TO MS. BURY BURY .

I'M LOIS MASTERS BREW BAKER AND I RESIDE AT 5960 DON MANUAL ROAD IN ALTON.

I DON'T KNOW HOW I USE THIS. THIS IS A REQUEST FOR PROPERTY AT 59 6:00, 5960, WHICH THEY'RE RIGHT NEXT TO EACH OTHER ON DON MANUAL TO REQUEST CHANGE FROM IA AGRICULTURE TO A RESIDENTIAL ON THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP. SOME BACKGROUND, THIS IS A MOTHER-DAUGHTER RELATIONSHIP.

THE 5 ACRES, WHICH IS THE 59 FUTION AND 5960 IN ALTON WAS WILLED TO ME BY MY FATHER.

A FAMILY FARM EXEMPTION WAS OBTAINED AT THAT TIME. I DEEDED TO MY DAUGHTER A LITTLE

[01:35:01]

OVER 2 ACRES OF THE 5 IN JUNE OF 2000. THE PROPERTY AT 5960 IS CURRENTLY HOMESTEADED BY ME AND MY HUSBAND AND IT'S OUR PRIMARY RESIDENCE SINCE 2004.

THE PROPOSAL FOR THE PROPERTY AT 5956 IS TO BE USED BY MY DAUGHTER, LIANE, AS HER PRIMARY RESIDENCE. THIS IS IMPORTANT TO US. IT'S BASICALLY BEING TOGETHER AS A FAMILY. AND FOR THE ABILITY FOR LIANE TO BE ABLE TO BUILD A HOME ON THEY ARE PROPERTY. SUPPORTING, OF COURSE, IS THE PROPERTIES ALONG THE NORTHERN SIDE OF DON MANUAL ROAD AND THIS WOULD BE WEST OF STATE ROAD 13. IT'S A LITTLE SMALL SECTION OF DON MANUEL. CURRENTLY HAS SEVERAL RESIDENCES ALONG THAT ROAD.

AND OUR REQUEST TO BE IN LINE OR CONSISTENT WITH THE CURRENT PROPERTIES.

AND I'LL BE ABLE TO SHOW YOU THAT THE AERIAL VIEW. WE'VE ALSO TALKED WITH OUR NEIGHBORS ALL UP AND DOWN THE ROAD, AND THERE'S NO CONCERNS THAT HAVE BEEN BROUGHT TO US.

AND TWO OF OUR NEIGHBORS THAT WE'VE KNOWN THE LONGEST, AND THEY HAVE ALSO PROVIDED LETTERS OF SUPPORT WHICH WAS INCLUDED IN OUR ORIGINAL APPLICATION. THIS IS THE LOCATION MAP.

YOU CAN SEE THE ARROW POINTING. WE'RE RIGHT TOWARDS THE VERY END.

DON MANUEL ACTUALLY STOPS RIGHT AT MY DRIVEWAY OR JUST THEREBY. THIS IS THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP.

AND THE, OF COURSE, IT'S EXARLG THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LISTED THERE, WHICH IS WHAT WE'RE REQUESTING. THIS IS THE AERIAL MAP, AND YOU'RE GOING TO SEE ALONG THE NORTH SIDE OF DON MANUEL THERE'S AT LEAST SIX RESIDENCES, AND WHERE DON MANUEL DEAD ENDS THERE'S FOUR ADDITIONAL RESIDENCES. THE PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH OF DON MANUEL ROAD IS AGRICULTURAL, AND IT'S ALL BEING FARMED CURRENTLY. SO OUR REQUEST IN THE LITTLE BLOCK, MY HOME IS ALREADY THERE, IT WOULD BE RIGHT NEXT DOOR TO ME WHERE MY DAUGHTER WOULD BE WANTING TO PUT A HOME THERE. THIS IS THE FLOOD ZONE MAP. IT'S X EAFD ALL AROUND US EXCEPT OVER TOWARDS AE WHICH IS RIVERSIDE, OR GETTING CLOSER TO THE RIVER, I SHOULD AI.

THIS IS SAY. THIS IS THE ZONING MAP. THAT'S THE END OF MY

PRESENTATION. ANY QUESTIONS FOR ME IN. >> DO ANY OF THE.

AGENCY MEMBERS HAVE EX PARTE COMMUNICATION. >>

>> YES, I DROVE OUT THE LOOK AT THIS BECAUSE IT WAS OF PARTICULAR INTEREST TO ME, AND I WANTED TO SEE -- THE AERIAL WAS VERY GOOD ON SHOWING THE SURROUNDING LAND USE, BUT I JUST

WANTED TO SEE IT, BUT I DO HAVE A COMMENT, ALSO. >> GO RIGHT AHEAD,

DR. HILSENBECK. >> THIS MAY SEEM INCONSISTENT WITH WHAT I STATED PREVIOUSLY ABOUT RURAL/SILVICULTURE, BUT THE KEY TO THIS ONE IS EVEN THOUGH IT'S 5 ACRES, THE LAST ITEM WAS 7, THE FACT THAT THE SURROUNDING LAND USE IS ALREADY IN LOW INTENSITY RESIDENTIAL ALONG WITH ACTIVE FARMING IN THE AREA, I COULDN'T TELL THAT THIS WAS AN ACTIVE FARM.

I DON'T BELIEVE IT IS. SO I INTEND TO VOTE FOR THIS ITEM.

ACTUALLY ONE HOUSE OUT THERE, AND I UNDERSTAND YOUR REASONING. I DID HAVE A QUESTION.

THERE WAS A MAP, HAND-DRAWN MAP IN THE APPLICATION, AND IT SHOWED AN EXISTING SEPTIC TANK, AND THEN I BELIEVE FOR THE NEW OR THE NEWER HOUSE OR THE OLDER HOUSE, ONE WAS GOING TO BE LAIS RAISED AND THE OTHER ONE NOT RAISED. IS THAT NOT -- DID I REMEMBER

THAT INCORRECTLY? >> NO, ON THE 59 SPHIKS WHICH IS A LITTLE OVER 2 ACRES THAT IS MY DAUGHTER'S, THERE'S NOTHING ON THAT PROPERTY. THERE'S NO SEPTIC.

>> FUTURE SEPTIC. >> IT WOULD BE A FUTURE BUT IT WOULD HAVE TOBY RAISED.

THAT'S ACCORDING TO THE EXISTING REQUIREMENTS. >> IT ON THAT MAP.

I'M NOT NUTS COMPLETELY. >> I DON'T KNOW WITH THE SEPTIC TANK.

EVERYBODY ALONG THAT ROAD HAS BEEN RAISED UNLESS THEY'RE GRANDFATHERED IN FROM MANY, MANY

YEARS AGO. >> I'M SURPRISED SINCE YOU ARE SO FAR AWAY FROM THE FLOODPLAIN.

I COULDN'T GET BACK THERE, BUT IT'S OBVIOUSLY WET BACK BEHIND YOU, CYPRESS AND MAPLES AND SO

FORTH. >> THE WOODS ALL BEHIND US, IT GETS A LITTLE WETTER BACK THERE,

BUT WE'RE DRY WHERE WE'RE AT. >> OKAY. THANK YOU.

>> DR. MCCORMICK, DID YOU HAVE SOMETHING YOU WANTED TO ASK? >> NO, I THOUGHT YOU WERE ASKING

FOR EX PARTE. I THOUGHT I HEARD YOU SAY THAT. >> I DID.

DID YOU HAVE ANY? >> AND I SAID NO SPART. >> MR. MATOVINA, SORRY, I JUST WANTED TO INTERREJECT THAT IS THIS IS A SMALL STALE COMP PLAN AMENDMENT.

>> I MISSED THAT. THANK YOU, CHRISTINE. I THUD PAY ATTENTION.

[01:40:03]

I COULD HAVE JUST A CURIOSITY QUESTION, REALLY NO BEARING. WHAT IS THE CLEARED AREA TO THE WHES? ALMOST LOOKS LIKE A SAND TRAP IN THE MIDDLE OF IT.

>> THOUGHT WEST OF WHERE I LIVE, MY HOUSE? >> WELL, IF YOU LOOK AT THE --

YES, THAT AREA. >> IT'S JUST THE OPEN -- THAT IS MY BROTHER'S HOUSE BECAUSE MOST OF THIS PROPERTY, MY FATHER OWNED MANY YEARS AGO, AND THEN HE DEEDED, WILL I HAD TO ME AND MY FOUR BROTHERS BUT, YEAH, THAT'S JUST A BIG FIELD BETWEEN ME AND MY BROTHER'S PROPERTIES

THAT WE OWN. >> GOT YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

-- THAT WE MOW. >> SO WE ARE BACK INTO THE AGENCY.

DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKER CARDS? >> WE DID NOT. >> AND DO WE HAVE ANYBODY ON

GTV? >> NO PUBLIC COMMENT. >> ALL RIGHT.

THEN WE'RE READY FOR A MOTION. >> MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF THE CPA SS 2020-06590/5956

[8. PUD 2020-01 Fatemi Rezoning. Request to rezone approximately two acres of land from Open Rural (OR) to Planned Unit Development (PUD) to allow for 12,000 square feet of commercial/retail and/or professional uses, located at 2590 and 2560 SR 16.]

DON MANUEL ROAD BASED ON FOUR FINDINGS OF FACT. >> SECOND.

>> WE'VE GOT A MOTION AND A SECOND. ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, LET'S REGISTER THE VOTE. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR BEING

HERE. >> THANK YOU. >> ALL RIGHT.

DOUG, IT LOOKS LIKE YOU'RE UP AGAIN. >> I WILL LAUGH AND SAY THAT NOW YOU'VE SEEN TOO MUCH OF ME. FOR THE ORD DOUG BITTERN, ST. JOHNS LAW GROUP 1 THROW SEA GROVE MAIN STREET. I'VE GOT THE UNIQUE PLEASURE TODAY OF BEING HERE ON A SECOND PROJECT, KIND OF SIMILAR TO THE FIRST PROJECT. THINGS SO OFTEN IN LIFE COME IN TWOS AND THREES, AND SO AS I REPRESENTED KATE AND BUBBA DANFORTH ON THE PRIOR APPLICATION, NUMBER 6, I REPRESENT STARTING WITH THIS ONE DR. FATEMI IS HIS WIFE MRS. FATEMI. 14 MONTHS AGO WHEN THIS APPLICATION WAS FILED, DR. FATEMI WAS WITH US. TODAY HE IS SUBSEQUENTLY PASSED, AND SO I'M HERE TODAY ON BEHALF MRS. FATALITY FATEMI. THIS IS A PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT THEY OWN THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO GET ZONING IN PLACE FOR. IT IS ONE OF THOSE APPLICATIONS VERY SIMILAR TO THE DANFORTH.

INSTEAD OF SEEKING A COMP PLAN AMENDMENT HERE, THOUGH, WE'RE SEEKING A REZONING.

AND BECAUSE THIS IS IN THE NORTHWEST SECTOR, IT HAS TO BE DONE BY A PUD.

TAKING A LOOK AT IT, YOU'LL RECOGNIZE I-95 AND STATE ROAD 16, YOU KNOW, THIS IS THE OLD WEST SIDE OUTLET MALL AREA, AND JUST PAST THE OUTLET MALL ON STATE ROAD 16, THAT T. OUTLET MAUT IS LITERALLY JUST OFF THE SCREEN TO THE RIGHT. THE BUILDINGS, THAT'S THE ATLANTIC SELF STORAGE THAT WAS BITTEL IN MAYBE 'TWAS THE LAST FIVE TO TEN YEARS, AND THEN YOU'VE GOT I WANT TO SAY IT'S A JEHOVAH WITNESS CHURCH HERE AND THEN YOU'VE GOT A SCHOOL, DAYCARE KIND OF SCHOOL IN THIS LOCATION, AND THEIR PROPERTY IS ON THESE TWO LOTS IN THE MIDDLE.

TAKING A LOOK AT WHAT THEY'D LIKE TO DO, INTERESTING ANY LUF WE'RE USING THE SAME ENGINEER THAT DID THE PROJECT IMMEDIATELY NEXT DOOR, SO THAT'S WHY YOU GET GOOD OVERLAIF THEIR PROJECT NEXT DOOR TO OUR PROJECT HERE. YOU, SEE JUST A GENERAL LAYOUT OF A COMMERCIAL BUILDING WITH A POND AND SOME PARNLG ACCESS TO -- PERJURY ACCESS TO SCENT. WE DID THE PRE-MEETING WITH DOT.

WE DON'T ANTICIPATE THERE BEING ANY PROBLEM WITH THE CONNECTION POINT TO STATE ROAD 16.

AND AGAIN AN AERIAL. AND I THINK THAT'S PRETTY MUCH THE MAJORITY OF MY PRESENTATION.

WE THINK THAT A COMMERCIAL PROJECT IN THIS LOCATION FITS IN NICELY OBVIOUSLY WITH WHAT'S IN THE AREA. I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS FOR YOU IF YOU'D LIKE.

>> OKAY. DO WE HAVE ANY EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS?