[1. Northeast Florida Regional Council Resiliency Program. As requested by Commissioner Blocker, the Northeast Florida Regional Council will be providing a brief presentation on their Resiliency Program. The Resiliency Program has a nexus to several existing NEFRC programs of Emergency Preparedness and Economic Development. The presentation will include a discussion of ongoing programs in the Region, a few county specific projects and upcoming work that will include St. Johns County. Beth Payne, CEO and Eric Anderson, Emergency Preparedness Manager will be presenting.]

SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST.

ALL IN FAVOR. FIFR AGENDA ITEM.

NORTHEAST FLORIDA REGIONAL COUNCIL RESILIENCY PROGRAM.

>> GOOD MORNING. THANK YOU FOR HAVING ME HERE, I AM BETH PAYNE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF REGIONAL COUNCIL.

I HAVE EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS COUNCIL ERIC ANDERSON.

I'LL CARRY ON. THIS IS A TIMELY PRESENTATION WITH THE CLOSE OF THE LEGISLATIVE SESSION HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS ALLOCATED FOR RESILIENCY EFFORTS.

HAPPY TO TALK AND SHARE ABOUT THE WORK WE DO.

REMINDER OF OUR MISSION AND BOARD AND GOVERNANCE.

MADE UP OF 35 MEMBERS AND CERTAINLY WANT TO RECOGNIZE LONG-TIME MEMBER COMMISSIONER WALDRON.

WE HAVE A NUMBER OF PROGRAMS YOU CAN SEE IN YOUR PACKET.

[00:30:01]

WE ARE HERE TO TALK ABOUT RESILIENCY.

LIKE ALL GOOD THINGS THAT GROW AND CHANGE POISED TO BE FLEXIBLE AND PURSUE THOSE CHANGES. WE HAVE FORMS AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT TASK FORCE. FUNDING IN DELIVERABLES, YOU HAVE A GREAT PRESENCE FROM ST. JOHNS COUNTY.

YOUR CHAMBER, WE HAVE HAD A VERY SUCCESSFUL SET OF MEETINGS AND BEING APPROVED BY OUR BOARD OF DIRECTORS.

THAT INCLUDES COVID-19 RECOVERY PLAN.

WE HAVE DISCOVERED ABOUT RESILIENCY ISSUE OF COMMUNITY RESILIENCY. LOTS OF ISSUES WE HAVE RECOGNIZED REGIONAL COUNCIL TAKING EFFORT TO PURSUE FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES TO BENEFIT LOCAL GOVERNMENTS.

ERIC IS HERE TO TALK ABOUT RECENT SUCCESS WHICH IS A GRANT DEDICATED TO HEALTH CARE RESILIENCY.

>> GOOD MORNING. I AM ERIC ANDERSON.

I AM HERE TO DISCUSS PART OF THE MITIGATION DOLLARS FOR PLANNING HERE IN THIS LAST YEAR. WE LOOK TO START THIS FALL IN A THREE-YEAR IMPLEMENTATION AND HIGHLIGHT HOW ST. JOHN BENEFITS.

WHAT WE'LL HIGHLIGHT HERE IS WELL, ALL RIGHT.

NORTH FLORIDA RESILIENCY PLAN BROUGHT ON BY DEVELOPMENT FROM DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES.

REASON WHY NORTHEAST FLORIDA COUNCIL SUITED TO CARRY OUT THIS MISSION, WE MANAGE NORTHEAST COALITION AND CHAMP COALITION, YOU CAN SEE ON THE PROCEEDING MAP.

18-COUNT COALITION TO HELP MANAGE AND PREPARE THE HEALTH CARE SECTOR ACROSS THE AREA. PERFECT.

NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE. LARGE MYRIAD OF PLAYERS THAT HELP WITH DISASTERS. NEXT SLIDE PLEASE.

AND ONE MORE, PLEASE. THIS IS WHERE WE TALK ABOUT THE FRAME WORK OF A PLAN. WE QUICKLY RECOGNIZE.

ALSO NEEDING ACCESS TO HEALTH CARE DURING THOSE TIMES.

AIMS TO HELP PARTICULARLY LOOKS AT CYCLONES AND OVERLAND FLOODING AND SEVERE STORMS. AGAIN WE ARE LOOKING AT TWO DIFFERENT SECTORS, INFRASTRUCTURE AND CLINICAL CARE SERVICE DELIVERY AND THREE DIFFERENT TYPES OF THREATS.

LOW FREQUENCY HIGH IMPACT EVENTS, TROPICAL CYCLONES.

WE WANT TO LOOK AT A SET OF VULNERABILITIES ACROSS THE SECTOR IN NORTHEAST FLORIDA. THIS GOES TO TWO BROAD AREAS.

RESILIENCY PLAN PROVIDING HECK OF A LOT OF THE OF DATA.

[00:35:08]

STARTS TO LOOK AT THREATS THAT AREN'T ANALYZED FOR THE HEALTH CARE SECTOR. WE HAVE THAT DATA SET OVERLAND FLOODING. VARIOUS DIFFERENT TYPES OF SCENARIOS RELATED TO THAT. WE ARE LOOKING AT THE VARIOUS TYPES OF THREATS AND MAPPING THAT AGAINST THE AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATIONS. WE'LL LOOK AT 100-YEAR AND 500 YEAR SERIES IS BECOMING MORE RELEVANT.

500 YEAR FLOOD EVENT IS NOT OUTSIDE THE NORM.

WE SHOULD BE PLANNING FOR AND NOT IMMUNE.

IF WE ASK THE RESIDENTS OF HOUSTON, TEXAS AFTER TWO EVENTS, THEY ARE ABSOLUTELY SUSCEPTIBLE. IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT.

AGAIN WE'LL LOOK AT STORM SURGE MAPPING SERIES.

PERFECT EXAMPLE I WOULD LIKE TO HIGHLIGHT.

THIS IS A SHOT OF ST. AUGUSTINE. THE BLUE IS 100 YEAR AND BROWN IS 500 YEAR FLOOD EVENT. WE HAVE HEALTH CARE FACILITIES VULNERABLE. AS WELL AS OTHER AREAS SUSCEPTIBLE TO THE EVENT. THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF HOW WE CAN UTILIZE AGAINST HEALTH CARE FACILITIES TO TERM.

OVERLY -- YEAR TWO COMES TO WORKING WITH HEALTH CARE SECTOR.

THOSE 470 FACILITIES. START ADDRESSING THESE TWO SPECIFIC AREAS. INFRASTRUCTURE AND CLINICAL CARE SERVICE DELIVERY. YOU CAN SEE THE VARIOUS DELIVERIES. THEY START TO DEVELOP MITIGATION STRATEGIES. NEXT SLIDE, PLEASE.

ALL OF THAT CULMINATES TO START DEVELOPING MITIGATION STRATEGIES. WHAT DOES AL LA CART MENU LOOK LIKE? I THINK THE POINT IS TO WORK WITH HEALTH CARE FACILITIES DEVELOP THAT AL CARTE LIST AND CHECK THOSE OFF THE LIST. COVER MY LAST TWO SLIDES THERE.

WHAT IS THE INTENT? FACILITIES THEY CAN USE THESE RECOMMENDATIONS AS WE JUST DISCUSSED HARDENING FACILITIES.

OTHER SIDE OF THIS IS AGAIN WE CAN START TO IDENTIFY AREAS AND COMMUNITIES OPTIMAL FOR DEVELOPMENT.

WE KNOW IF THERE IS PROPENSITY OF FLOODING, SURGE IN CERTAIN AREAS PROBABLY NOT A BEST THING THAT LOCATE A HOSPITAL.

WHAT WE CAN DO IS DO PARTNERSHIPS AND FUNDING TO START ADDRESSING MITIGATION STRATEGIES.

CURRENTLY IMPLEMENT $170,000 A YEAR TO ADDRESS PREPAREDNESS ACTIVITIES. START TARGETING THAT $170,000 TO MITIGATION STRATEGIES AND IDENTIFY.

DEDICATED ANNUAL FUNDING. I PUT IN HIGHLIGHTS, FHA ENTERED INTO AN AGREEMENT INFECTIOUS DISEASE PLANNING.

WE ALSO HAVE THE ABILITY AS AN AGENCY TO GO AFTER FEDERAL AND

[00:40:04]

PRIVATE FUNDING RELATED TO GOVERNMENTAL AGENCY AND HEALTH CARE COALITION. HEALTH CARE COALITIONS PAID AND FUNDED PROGRAM THROUGH THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH BEGIN BRIDGING THIS GAP OF PREPAREDNESS.

WITH THAT, THAT IS THE OVERVIEW OF WHAT WE ARE GOING TO ACCOMPLISH NEXT THREE YEARS AND WE'LL LIKELY BE WORKING WITH YOUR COUNTY HAND IN HAND AS WELL AS OBVIOUSLY INVITING YOU TO THE

TABLE. >> THANK YOU, SIR.

ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD? PUBLIC COMMENT ITEM 1 ANYONE

WISHES TO SPEAK. >> COMMISSIONER WALDRON?

>> I WANT TO THANK ERIC AND MISS PAYNE FOR ALL THE HARD WORK THEY DO. REALLY A GREAT UNIT.

I LOOK FORWARD TO OUR MEETING THURSDAY.

[2. License Agreement for Escambia Public Beach Access Project. St. Johns County has been contacted by Escambia Right of Way Public Beach Access Project, Inc., a non-profit formed by residents primarily along Broward Street near the Crescent Beach area of the County, as they look to construct and install a pedestrian beach access and dune crossing that will be open to the public and requires access to an unopened section of the County-owned right-of-way of Escambia Street. The group will finance and construct the improvements and seek all approvals, permits and licenses needed for the project. The group also proposes a process for it to request the County to accept ownership of the improvements upon completion of construction, but will warranty the improvements for one year and provide a one-time financial contribution of $7,500.00 to the County for future maintenance, operation costs, and expenses for the improvements. County staff has prepared, for the Board's consideration, a proposed license and hold harmless agreement providing for the installation, construction, and operation of the improvements with the Right-of-Way, subject to certain terms, conditions, provisions and requirements. Annual costs for maintenance and operating expenses are estimated at $600-$1,000.]

>> CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT. ALL RIGHT.

>> WE ARE GOING TO MOVE ON TO AGENDA ITEM NO. 2.

LICENSE AGREEMENT FOR ESCAMBIA PUBLIC BEACH ACCESS PROJECT.

MR. MATTEL? >> MR. CHAIRMAN, COMMISSIONERS.

THIS IS ONE OF THE REGULAR AGENDA ITEMS THAT WAS NOT NOTICED FOR THE REMOTE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION.

BECAUSE THERE WAS A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF PUBLIC INTEREST IN IT I REACHED OUT TO PRINCIPLE ON EITHER SIDE OF THE EQUATION TO LET THEM KNOW IF THEY HAD COMMENTS.

WHEN PUBLIC COMMENT STARTS I CAN READ THAT IN FOR YOU.

>> QUICK BACKGROUND ON DECEMBER 15TH, BOARD DISCUSSED PROPOSED ESCAMBIA RIGHT-OF-WAY PROJECT AND DIRECTED STAFF TO PLACE IT ON A FUTURE AGENDA. THAT IS WHERE WE ARE HERE TODAY.

THERE IS KIND OF A DIRECTIONAL IN TERMS OF ADJACENT BEACH ACCESS POINTS 1.3 MILES BETWEEN OTHER ACCESS POINTS.

BUTLER TO THE NORTH ONE MILE. IN SUMMARY, ESCAMBIA

[00:45:08]

RIGHT-OF-WAY PUBLIC BEACH ACCESS PROJECT.

ONE-TIME FINANCIAL CONTRIBUTION $7,500 TO THE COUNTY FOR FUTURE MAINTENANCE EXPENSES. REVIEW, WALK OVER RESIDENTS BROWARD STREET, WEST OF A 1A. CROSSWALKS NOT PLANNED.

ANALYSIS CONCERNS OVER LACK OF PUBLIC PARKING AND LACK OF ACROSSWALK A 1A PROVIDING BETTER PEDESTRIAN ACCESS AND DRIVE TO OTHER CROWDED PUBLIC PARKING LOTS.

PUBLIC INPUT GOLF STREAM DESIGN GROUP.

MEETING HELD TUESDAY FEBRUARY 16TH.

2021. 5:00 P.M. BEACH LODGE MEETING GROUP. INCLUDING GOLF STREAM STAFF.

11 SETS OF COMMENTS RECEIVED EIGHT BEING WITH THE ESCAMBIA PROJECT. RECOMMENDED ACTION, BEACH ACCESS INCORPORATED REQUEST APPROVAL OF LICENSE AGREEMENT FOR ESCAMBIA.

REPRESENTATIVES FROM THE GROUP OPPOSING THIS AS WELL AS I AM SURE OTHER COMMENTS I AM GLAD TO ANSWER ANY COMMENTS.

>> ANY QUESTIONS FROM MR. MATTEL?

>> >> DID YOU SAY WE HAVE

REPRESENTATIVES. >> GOOD MORNING, GOLF STREAM DESIGN GROUP. AS MR. MA TEAL SUGGESTED WE HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH STAFF APPRECIATE STAFF'S HELP WORKING THROUGH THIS. BROWARD STREET IS A LIMITED RIGHT-OF-WAY ESCAMBIA STREET. IF YOU WALK TO THE NORTH ALONG THE DOT SIDEWALK. I CALL IT DELAP AT A TIMED.

NOT ADA COMPLIANT. MEMBERS OF THE ESCAMBIA BEACH RIGHT-OF-WAY GROUP BRING UP A POINT CREATES A SAFER RIGHT-OF-WAY POINT. ADDRESSING THE CRASH WALKS.

ABOUT 4.8 MILES TO THE NORTH. WE HAVE A 200-FOOT PATH PROPOSED 140 FEET OF ELEVATED BOARD WALK ONCE YOU GET TO COASTAL CONSTRUCTION CONTROL. SO WITH THAT, I THINK ANY QUESTIONS TO BE HAD, I CAN BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO ANSWER.

WE CAN GO TO PUBLIC COMMENT AND RESPOND TO QUESTIONS AS THEY

COME UP. >> QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD? SEEING NONE. OPEN UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.

[00:50:04]

>> WE HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEM 2, ES CAP -- ESCAMBIA RIGHT-OF-WAY. LIMIT OF THREE MINUTES PER

SPEAKER. >> WE HAVE TWO PODIUMS, YOU CAN

LINE UP AND GO ONE AT A TIME. >> NAME AND ADDRESS, TOO,

PLEASE. >> MY NAME IS ALLEN PARLLPAN.

OWN A BEACH HOUSE 6400 BROWARD. I HAVE OWNED IT FOR 36 YEARS.

I HAVE HAD THE PRIVILEGE OF APPEARING BEFORE YOU PREVIOUSLY IN MY CAPACITY AS AN ATTORNEY FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD ON ANOTHER ISSUE IN WHICH WE WORKED VERY WELL.

I HAD NOT BOUGHT THE PLACE I HADN'T HAD IT MORE THAN SIX MONTHS BEFORE HE CONTACTED ME ABOUT THE RIGHT-OF-WAY.

SHORTLY THEREAFTER NO. COUNTY CAN'T SELL THIS SORT OF THING. BESIDE UTILITY, WATER AND POWER INTEREST. IN INTEREST OF FULL DISCLOSURE.

FROM AN ECONOMIC STANDPOINT. I BENEFIT NO MATTER WHAT HAPPENS HERE. I OWN TWO LOTS ON THE WEST SIDE BEHIND THE BEACH HOUSE WHICH WILL BE PROVIDED WALKOVER ACCESS. IT IS A BAD IDEA.

CURRENT PLAN SIMPLY UNSAFE. IT IS GOING TO BENEFIT FOUR OR FIVE HOUSES THERE ON BROWARD. BY INVITING PEOPLE TO COME OVER FROM TREASURE BEACH IN VOLUME AND CROSS OVER THERE.

INVITING AN ACCIDENT ON A 1A. HEAVILY GREEN AREA.

BLIND TURN ON BROWARD. EVERY TIME WE GO IN THERE, THAT ENTRY AND TURN ON BROWARD YOU HAVE TO STOP AND BE CAREFUL COMING AROUND THE TURN. EVERYBODY HAS HAD CLOSE SHAVES GOING IN AND OUT OF THAT ENTRANCE.

THERE IS NO PARKING, THAT IS A HUGE PROBLEM.

WE HAVE AN ENORMOUS PROBLEM GOING IN AND OUT OF BROWARD HOLIDAY WEEKENDS AND ALL PEOPLE PARK ON BROWARD STREET.

WE KNOW THERE IS SOME OF THAT. >> SIR, THAT IS THREE MINUTES.

>> ALREADY? >> YEAH.

>> CAN I ROUND UP IN 30 SECONDS. >> THANK YOU FOR YOUR TESTIMONY.

>> IT IS A BAD PLAN. IT IS DANGEROUS, SOMEONE IS GOING TO GET HURT. COST BENEFIT IS NOT THERE.

GOT TO BE A BETTER WAY TO GO. >> THANK YOU, SIR.

NAME AND ADDRESS, PLEASE. >> GOOD MORNING, MR. CHAIRMAN, COMMISSIONERS. LAST WEEK I SHARED WITH YOU SOME THOUGHTS ABOUT THIS PROJECT. ABOUT THE RISKS AND UNKNOWNS.

I APPRECIATE YOUR CONSIDERATION AND RESPONSES I RECEIVED.

TODAY I WANT TO GO THROUGH A FEW DIFFERENT POINTS.

I COME WITH A DIFFERENT PERSPECTIVE AS DOES MY NEIGHBOR.

IF YOU LOOK AT THAT YELLOW RECTANGLE.

THIS IS A PROJECT THAT IS GOING TO CONSTRUCT A WALKWAY.

IT IS GOING RIGHT DOWN MY PROPERTY AND MY NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY. FACT IS ALMOST ANYONE ELSE IN THIS ROOM WHO WAS IN THAT SITUATION WOULD BE STANDING HERE TALKING TO YOU ABOUT IT TODAY. THEY CAN USE THE WALKWAY AND GO HOME. US, WE GOT IT 24/7.

[00:55:03]

OUR CONCERNS ABOUT MAINTENANCE, SECURITY, THEY ARE REAL.

WE NEED TO BE ASSURED THOSE WILL BE TAKEN CARE OF.

LET'S FACE IT. IT IS HARD.

WHEN YOU APPROVE THIS, COUNTY IS TAKING ON AT LONG-TERM OPERATION. WE HAVE THE QUESTION, IS THIS THE BEST ALTERNATIVE YOU HAVE. VERSES ADDRESSING CROSSWALKS AND ALL OF THE BEACH ACCESS BESIDE THE COUNTY PIECES.

WE HAVE TO CONSIDER THE BEST ALTERNATIVE.

WHEN I BUILT THE HOUSE, COUNTY REQUIRED ME TO BUILD EXTENSIVE RETAINING WALL. COST OF WHICH WAS THE SAME PRICE OF THE FIRST HOUSE. LAND THERE AND TOPOGRAPHY IS SO COM COMPLEX.

AFTER THAT BECAUSE WE CLEARED THE LAND TO PUT THE WALL IN PLACE, I WAS REQUIRED TO RESTORE THAT LAND.

I WAS REQUIRED TO PUT DOWN INDIGENOUS PLANTS AND IRRIGATION. I HOPE THIS PROJECT IS SUBJECT TO THAT SAME SCRUTINY. TO ME THAT IS A STUDY THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE BEFORE YOU CAN APPROVE THIS.

WE NEED TO UNDERSTAND THE IMPACTS OF THAT IF I AM REQUIRED TO MAKE THOSE CHANGES FOR THAT LAND AND LAND GETS CHANGED.

WE HAVE TO UNDERSTAND THAT. LAST THING I'LL SAY IS: I HAVE A HOUSE IN TREASURE BEACH. I HAVE OWNED IT 11 YEARS.

THEY SHOULD COME TO THIS MEETING TODAY.

IT IS A PRIVATE BEACH ACCESS, IT IS THERE.

SAFE INTERSECTION. I HAVE USED IT FOR YEARS.

WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT THE ALTERNATIVES YOU HAVE TO ADDRESS BEACH ACCESS IS THIS THE BEST ALTERNATIVE? THANK YOU COMMISSIONERS. APPRECIATE THE TIME TO SPEAK SO

YOU AND LEADERSHIP. >> THANK YOU, SIR.

NAME AND ADDRESS, PLEASE? >> GOOD MORNING.

THANK YOU FOR CONSIDERING OUR REQUEST DR

>> MY NAME IS BOB RINKLY. WE ARE PART OF THE NO-PROFIT THAT IS BRINGING THIS ITEM TO YOU.

I THINK WE CAN ALL AGREE, ST. JOHNS COUNTY HAS GREAT SCHOOLS AND GREAT BEACHES. FOR PROPERTY OWNERS WHO LIVE ON THE WEST SIDE WE CAN SEE ONE OF THE GREAT BEACHES, GETTING TO IT -- OUR OPERATIONS ARE TAKE OUR VEHICLES AND ADD TO THE TRAFFIC.

THIS PASSED SATURDAY, I TRIED TO FIND A PARKING SPOT AT CRESCENT BEACH. TRAFFIC SPILLED OUT TO PARK ON THE SHOULDER. PEOPLE ARE WAITING FOR A SPACE TO OPEN UP. WE WOULD MUCH PREFER.

FOR US, MAT DETAILED TO FOLLOW A SIDEWALK TO CRESCENT BEACH.

WE HAVE TO CROSS A 1A TWICE. THERE IS A THIRD CROSSING OF A 1 A. WE BELIEVE THERE IS A BETTER ALTERNATIVE. WEST SIDE OF BROWARD 15 LOTS, SEVEN HOMES. ONE LOT CLEARED FOR NEW CONSTRUCTION AND A LOT FOR SALE. MY WIFE AND I OWN ONE OF THOSE HOMES. WE CAN WALK OUT OUR FRONT DOOR.

IN 100 PACES WE CAN BE AT A COUNTY EASEMENT GOES FROM OUR STREET TO THE BEACH. WE ARE ASKING FOR YOUR PERMISSION TO CROSS THAT EASEMENT IN A MANNER APPROVED BY COUNTY ENGINEERING AND STATE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION. WE WILL PAY FOR THOSE IMPROVEMENTS, A PATH, A BOARD WALK THEY DEEM NECESSARY.

YOU ALSO NEED TO UNDERSTAND WHAT WE ARE NOT ASKING FOR.

WE ARE NOT ASKING TO CHANGE RESIDENTIAL NATURE OF BROWARD STREET. I HAVE LIVED ON THE STREET TWO AND A HALF YEARS AND NEVER SEEN A CAR PARKED WHERE PEOPLE CAME IN, PARKED AND THE BEACH.

WE ARE NOT ASKING FOR PARKING ON BROWARD STREET.

WE BELIEVE THE COUNTY PARKING ORDNANCE ADDRESSES THAT ISSUE IN

[01:00:05]

A PERFECTLY SATISFACTORY WAY. THIS APPEARS TO BE A GOOD ACCESS POINT. IT COULD PROVIDE SAFE WALKING OR BIKING ACCESS TO THE BEACH FOR APPROXIMATELY 300 HOMES.

BEACH ACCESS AT THIS POINT IS PARTICULARLY GOOD LOCATION, WELL JUSTIFIED AND ALLEVIATE PRESSURE ON NEIGHBORING ACCESS POINTS.

WE ARE HERE ASKING FOR YOUR APPROVAL OF LICENSE AGREEMENT THAT WILL ALLOW US TO MOVE FORWARD IMPROVING OUR QUALITY OF LIFE AND IMPROVE QUALITY OF LIFE IN CRESCENT BEACH.

>> THANK YOU, SIR. NEXT SPEAKER, PLEASE.

>> BILL -- 288 GROVE ROAD. TRAVELS TO THE WEST FOR 19 YEARS. THIS RIGHT-OF-WAY HAS ALWAYS BEEN THERE. I HAVE WORKED WITH STAFF AND COUNTY TO BRING IT TO THE COMMISSION.

I APPRECIATE YOU LISTENING TO OUR VOICE AND LETTING IT BE HEARD. IT HAS BEEN THERE BECAUSE AT SOME POINT THE COUNTY IS GOING TO HAVE TO OPEN IT UP FOR BEACH ACCESS. WHAT A BETTER OPPORTUNITY THAN TO USE IT AS A GIFT FROM THE RESIDENTS FULLY PAID FOR BY THE RESIDENTS WITH RESERVES FOR FUTURE MAINTENANCE THAT OVER 300 HOMES CAN ACCESS. ONCE AGAIN, IT IS A GIFT.

THERE IS A LITTER FROM THE FOUNDATION MENTIONED READ IN.

I THINK IT WOULD BE GREAT TO HEAR IT.

BEACH ACCESS, IT IS IRONIC. FIRST GUY UP THAT SPOKE WAS PART OF THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT AND TALKED ABOUT BEACH SAFETY AND CARS. IT WOULD BE LESS CARS ON THE BEACH. NO. 2, RISE OF SEA LEVEL.

THIS TAKES CARE OF THAT AS WELL. APPRECIATE YOUR OPPORTUNITY TO TALK ABOUT IT. I UNDERSTAND I WOULDN'T WANT IT.

IT IS NOT SOMETHING WE ARE BUYING THIS LAND TODAY TURNING IT OVER TO THE PUBLIC TO ACCESS. WE AS RESIDENTS OF ST. JOHNS COUNTY OWN A PIECE OF THAT RIGHT-OF-WAY.

WE AS RESIDENTS OF OCEAN GROVE ARE WILLING TO DIG INTO OUR OWN POCKETS, PAY FOR THIS ACCESS TO BE OPENED SO THAT OUR ENJOYMENT OF THAT ACCESS IS AVAILABLE. BEEN WORKING ON THIS 11 YEARS TO GET TO STAND HERE AND TALK TO YOU GUYS.

I APPRECIATE THE TIME, CONSIDERATION AND IF YOU HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS, WE WOULD BE HAPPY TO ANSWER.

>> THANK YOU, SIR. YES, MA'AM.

>> GOOD MORNING, COMMISSIONERS. MY NAME IS MARE YELL BRINKLY.

WE LIVE THERE WITH MY 96-YEAR-OLD MOTHER WHO HAD A BIRTHDAY YESTERDAY. WE HAVE FOUR ADULT CHILDREN AND HAVE FOUR GRAND KIDS THAT VISIT A LOT.

I HAVE TAKEN CARE OF MY DAUGHTER'S TWO CHILDREN SINCE INFANCY THREE AND FIVE. WE HAVE STRUGGLED GETTING GRAND KIDS AND MOM TO THE BEACH SINCE BUILDING OUR HOME.

CURRENTLY THE WALK FROM OUR HOUSE TO CRESCENT BEACH ACCESS IS APPROXIMATELY ONE HALF OF A MILE.

MY MOTHER IS NOT ABLE TO WALK THAT FAR.

SHE USES A WALKER. WHEN TAKING MY GRANDCHILDREN TO THE BEACH. I LOAD THEM AND ALL THE BEACH SUPPLYS IN A MACK WAGON AND CARRY THE CHAIRS ON MY BACK.

THE JOURNEY DOWN A 1 AN IS SCARY.

VEHICLES PARKED ON SHOULDER AND SIDEWALK PRESENTING WALKERS AND BIKE RIDERS FROM GETTING BI. BY.

ONE DAY A TRUCK PARKED ON THE SIDEWALK AND WOULD NOT MOVE.

WE WERE NOT HAPPY OR SINGING ANY LONGER.

[01:05:06]

WHEN WE DO GET DOWN TO THE BEACH AND STORM POPS UP UNEXPECTEDLY, WE HAVE TO RETRACE OUR STEPS AND GO THROUGH ALL OF THIS TO GET HOME. THE RIGHT-OF-WAY WE ARE ASKING YOUR PERMISSION TO DEVELOP IS PRACTICALLY ACROSS THE STREET FROM OUR HOUSE. IT WOULD BE A SAFETY ACCESS TO THE BEACH FOR US AND OUR NEIGHBORS.

IT WOULD IMPROVE QUALITY OF LIFE.

THANK YOU FOR LISTENING. >> THANK YOU.

FURTHER PUBLIC COMMENT ITEM 2? >> I LIVE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF A1A TO THE WEST. I HAVE BEEN THERE FOUR YEARS NOW. I LIKE TO REITERATE PEOPLE ON THE EAST SIDE OF A1A OCEAN FRONT PROPERTIES THEY KNEW THERE WAS A RIGHT-OF-WAY THERE WHEN THEY WERE PURCHASING THE PROPERTIES.

KNOWING THERE IS ALWAYS AN OPTION FOR RIGHT-OF-WAY TO BE OPEN FOR PUBLIC ACCESS THAT SHOULD HAVE BEEN PART OF THE DECISION MAKING AT THAT TIME. SINCE I HAVE MOVED INTO THE WEST SIDE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, I HAVE SEEN A LOT MORE YOUNG FAMILIES MOV IN. ADDING THIS WALK OVER IS NOT GOING TO MAKE US WANT TO GO TO THE BEACH MORE.

WE ARE ALWAYS GOING TO WANT TO GO TO THE BEACH.

WE LIVE BY THE BEACH. IT IS GOING TO CREATE A SAFER ENVIRONMENT TO GET TO THE BEACH. I HAVE A THREE AND A HALF YEAR OLD. IN A COUPLE OF YEARS HE IS GOING TO WANT TO GO TO THE BEACH HIMSELF.

WALKING DOWN A1A NORTH AND SOUTH.

I DO IT WALKING BACKWARDS SINCE PEOPLE ARE TEXTING, CALLING, RIDING ON THE SHOULDERS. SAFETY IS NOT THERE ANYMORE.

IT IS A PANIC MOMENT GETTING ACROSS.

SHORTER WE COULD MAKE THAT FOR THE RESIDENTS, SAFER IT WILL BE FOR EVERYBODY. THANK YOU.

>> GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS FRANK HIEZ LMAN.

WE ARE ADJACENT SOUTH SIDE. WE 100% SUPPORT BEACH ACCESS AND MUST APPEAR IN A MANNER. THIS PROPOSAL ACHIEVES NEITHER.

FIRST SAFETY CONCERNS HAVE BEEN A FACTOR IN THIS DEVELOPMENT REJECTED THREE THAT'S ALL THE TIME WE HAVE FOR THIS PROGRAM. S IN THE LAST FOUR YEARS.

EVEN THE DIRECTORS OF THIS NO-PROFIT STATED HOW DANGEROUS THE A1A INTERSECTION IS AND NOW ASK OTHER HOUSE HOLDS TO CROSS THERE. FOOD TRAFFIC IS GOING TO INCREASE OR ISN'T ON THE A1A FROM THIS DEVELOPMENT.

G F IT NO-PROFIT SHOULD SEEK STATE FUNDING BEFORE THE COUNTY APPROVES THIS. OR THEY MUST PROVIDE FUNDS AS PART OF THE PROPOSAL. THERE IS NO REASON WE FOLLOW THE TRENDS OF THE PAST AND HOPE THE STATE APPROVES A CROSSWALK BEFORE SOMETHING BAD HAPPENS. ONLY THREE OF WHICH ARE FULL TIME COUNTY RESIDENTS. MAKES NO SENSE FOR THE COUNTY TO OCCUR THE COST OF MAINTAINING FREE WALK OVER FOR YEARS AND STORMS TO COME FOR SUCH A SMALL GROUP.

PICK YOUR POSITION. EITHER WAY THERE IS A PROBLEM.

THIS IS NOT THE RIGHT-OF-WAY, THIS IS THE ESCAMBIA RIGHT-OF-WAY. IN THIS PROPOSAL PEDESTRIANS REQUIRED TO WALK DOWN BROWARD STREET.

THIS PLAN MUST BE CHANGED TO A DIRECT PATH ALL THE WAY THROUGH TO THE A1A SIDEWALK. THIS IS A STANDARD.

SIGNS SHOULD BE INSTALLED. COST OF THIS CHANGE COULD BE SIGNIFICANT. IT IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE NON PROFIT IS A FREE BILL TO THE COUNTY.

IN CLOSING WE WONDER HOW IT IS MADE IT TO THE BOARD.

NEVER A FOLLOW UP MEETING TO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD MEETING HOSTED BY GOLF STREAM BACK IN FEBRUARY. PROVIDED NO DETAILS OR ANSWERS.

WE ALL ACCEPTED MORE DISCUSSION DOWN THE ROAD.

AT THIS POINT NEVER AN OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS

[01:10:02]

ALTERNATIVES. WHAT IS THE RUSH? TURTLE SEASON. NO ONE CAN BUILD ON THE DUNES UNTIL NOVEMBER 1ST. APPROVE THE PROPOSAL OR EVALUATE BETTER ALTERNATIVES. APPRECIATE YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION, WE ASK YOU TO OPPOSE THIS IN ITS CURRENT FORM.

THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU.

YES, MA'AM? >> MORNING, SANDRA MARVIN.

5024 MADORIS AVENUE. I WANTED TO OFFER MY OPINION AS A LIFE-LONG RESIDENT IN THIS AREA.

I HAVE OWNED MULTIPLE PROPERTIES AND LIVED ON ATLANTIC VIEW LONG BEFORE THEY HAD THE DECKED WALK OVERS THAT THE COUNTY AS GREATLY PROVIDED WE APPRECIATE THAT. I WILL BE COMPLETELY IN FAVOR OF THIS. I USED TO OWN PROPERTY ON DESOTO ROAD TREASURE BEACH AND THERE WAS NO ACCESS.

THIS IS COUNTY OWNED. THIS SEEMS TO BE A GOOD SOLUTION AND I WOULD HOPE YOU SUPPORT IT. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. NAME AND ADDRESS, PLEASE, SIR.

>> HELLO, GARY MOORE. 6524 BROWARD STREET.

ONLY A COUPLE OF HOUSES DOWN FROM WHERE THERE IS GOING IN.

I AGREE BEACH ACCESS SHOULD BE ALLOWED BUT, I AM CONCERNED WITH THE SAFETY OF PEOPLE WALKING ACROSS A1A AND ALSO HAS ANOTHER RESIDENT POINTED OUT, MAYBE IT SHOULD GO COMPLETELY FROM ESCAMBIA ALL THE WAY TO A1A. SO IT DOESN'T GO DOWN BROWARD STREET. I AM CONCERNED FOOT TRAFFIC AND PEOPLE COMING ACROSS THROUGH HERE IT IS NOT THAT NEIGHBORHOOD ANYMORE. IT IS GOING TO BE A LITTLE SOMETHING. I AGREE THE OTHER RESIDENTS PROBABLY NEED TO GET ACROSS. PERHAPS THERE IS A DIFFERENT WAY OF MAKING IT PRIVATE OR COUNTY VACATING PERHAPS THAT AND MAKING IT A PRIVATE WALK OVER LIKE TREASURE BEACH HAS AND COUNTY WOULDN'T BE RESPONSIBLE AND NEIGHBORHOOD COULD PERHAPS CONTROL IT INSTEAD OF HAVING EVERYBODY ACROSS.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. >> NEXT SPEAKER PLEASE.

>> GOOD MORNING, MY NAME IS ANTHONY KAYZOY.

54 BROWARD STREET AND RESIDENT IN THAT HOUSE 24 YEARS.

I AM OPPOSED TO EACH ACCESS OF A BROWARD STREET.

THEY WERE TALKING TO THE COMMISSIONERS.

THERE WAS AGREEMENT PROPERTY SUBDIVIDED AND GIVEN TO ADJACENT LANDOWNERS. IT COULD GET RID OF THIS ESCAMBIA RIGHT-OF-WAY AND NO. 2 IT WILL INCREASE THE INCOME TO THE COUNTY I PROPOSE AS AN ALTERNATIVE TO A BEACH RIGHT-OF-WAY WE CONSIDER SUBDIVIDING THAT PROPERTY AND GIVING IT TO THE ADJACENT HOMEOWNERS, THANK YOU.

[01:15:01]

>> THANK YOU, SIR. FURTHER PUBLIC COMMENT? IF YOU WISH TO SPEAK PLEASE FORM A LINE SO WE CAN PROCEED A LITTLE MORE SPEEDILY, YES, MA'AM, NAME AND ADDRESS?

>> MY NAME IS JACKIE KATHY. 345 AMELIA COURT.

I HAVE BEEN THERE FOR 20 YEARS. I WALK MY DOG TO THE BEACH NEARLY EVERYDAY WHICH MEANS I HAVE TO CROSS A1A JEALOUSON ROAD. IT TAKES 15 MINUTES TO GET THERE. THE I WANT TO TAKE MY BEACH SUPPLIES, I HAVE TO DRIVE TO BUTLER OR CRESCENT BEACH, PARK.

IF I COULD WALK I WOULD NOT BE ON THE ROAD DRIVING TO THE BEACH. I WOULD APPRECIATE YOU CONSIDERING ALLOWING THIS WALK WAY TO BE GRANTED, I DON'T KNOW WHAT ELSE TO SAY. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU, MA'AM. NEXT PLEASE, AGAIN IF Y'ALL WILL

FORM A LINE. >> GOOD MORNING.

SCOTT TRUSTER. 6698 PUTNAM STREET.

I HAVE BEEN A RESIDENT FOR 35 YEARS.

RETIRED MERCHANT SEAMAN. I LIVE HERE FULL TIME.

I AM HERE IN SUPPORT OF THE WALK OVER.

THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE UP THERE KNEW THE PROPERTY I AM HERE TO SHOW MY SUPPORT. I THINK IT HAS BEEN A LONG TIME COMING. SOMETHING WE HAVE BEEN LOOKING FORWARD TO IN THE FUTURE. FUTURE IS HERE NOW.

I THINK IT IS TIME. THANK YOU.

>> COMMISSIONERS, ROBBIE WILES. I HAVE BEEN A RESIDENT 12 YEARS OCEAN GROVE NOT TREASURE BEACH. IMPROVEMENT ON THIS WILL HELP THE WHOLE COUNTY AND TAX PAYORS. PROPERTY VALUES WILL INCREASE.

NOT ONLY WILL OUR PROPERTY VALUES INCREASE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF A1A BUT IN THAT BROWARD COMMUNITY.

I REALLY RECOMMEND YOU PASS THIS.

IT IS GOING TO BE FUTURE TAX PAYING MONEY WE HAVE BEEN PAYING. IT IS NOT A SECRET ST. AUGUSTINE FULL OF PEOPLE. WE NEED ACCESS TO THE BEACH.

WE NEED YOU TO FOCUS ON WALK OVERS, WE NEED MORE BOAT RAMPS, EVERYTHING. WE HAVE GROWTH.

PLEASE APPROVE THIS. >> THANK YOU.

>> GOOD MORNING. 'CADIAN MILLER, 288 DESOTO ROAD.

I HAVE BEEN ON BREVARD STREET. I WOULD LOVE TO HAVE THIS BEACH WALK OVER TO BE ABLE TO RIDE MY BIKE OVER THERE AND SURF.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. >> THANK YOU.

NEXT PLEASE, SIR. >> GOOD MORNING, I OWN A PROPERTY 6465 BROWARD. ALSO ONE OF THE MEMBERS OF THE ESCAMBIA PROJECT. TO THE COMMISSIONERS, I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME. THERE HAS BEEN A LOT OF TIME AND WORK DONE ON THIS PROJECT. WE HAD SEVERAL TIMES APPROACHED THE COUNTY ABOUT DOING THIS AS A PROJECT FUNDED BY THE COUNTY.

THIS IS THE LONGEST STRETCH BETWEEN PUBLIC ACCESSES NORTH OF 206. OBSTACLES WE RAN AGAINST WERE THE FUNDING. WE RECOGNIZE THIS ACCESS ALTHOUGH EXTREMELY IMPORTANT TO US WE FEEL HAS A SIGNIFICANT IMPACT TO THOSE AROUND WAS NEVER GOING TO REACH THE POINT OF GETTING PUBLIC FUNDING. WE HAVE TO TAKE THIS BURDEN

[01:20:22]

FINANCIALLY TO OPEN UP ANOTHER BEACH ACCESS.

I ENCOURAGE YOU TO SUPPORT THIS I THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND

CONSIDERATION. >> THANK YOU, SIR.

ANY OTHER SPEAKERS WHO WISH TO SPEAK ON ITEM 2, ESCAMBIA BEACH WALK OVER? ANY OTHER SPEAKERS.

>> WE ARE GOING TO GO TO YOU. I BELIEVE THERE ARE COMMUNATION

KAGSS. >> THANK YOU MR. CHAIR, THERE WAS A LETTER SENT INTO THE BOARD.

IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE TO READ IT INTO THE RECORD, AT LEAST MOST APPLICABLE PORTION. FROM SURF RIDER FOUNDATION YESTERDAY REGARDING THIS ITEM. HONORABLE COMMISSIONERS ON BEHALF OF THE SURF RIDER FIRST COAST CHAPTER AND INCLUSION IN THE OFFICIAL RECORD RESPECTFULLY ENCOURAGE YOU TO APPROVE LICENSING AGREEMENT BEACH ACCESS AT THE LOCATION IN SOUTH ST.

JOHNS COUNTY. NEXT THE LETTER GOES IN WHO SURF RIDER IS. I THINK THE BOARD IS AWARE OF THAT. ESTABLISHMENT OF NEW PUBLIC ACCESS IS A LINE IMPORTANT PUBLIC POLICIES CITES PORTIONS OF THE CODE SECTION 2.01 AND 02. MANDATE THE COUNTY PROTECTS PUBLICS CUSTOMARY USE RIGHT OF BEACH ACCESS AND USE.

FURTHER IN LINE WITH THE FLORIDA STATUTES IMPORTANCE OF THE PRESERVATION OF BEACH ACCESS CITES TO SECTION 161.053.

AND THEN I'LL GO TO THE CONCLUSION FINALLY WE WOULD ENCOURAGE THE LICENSING AGREEMENT BE AMENDED SO AS TO REQUIRE THE COUNTY TO ACCEPT THE CONSTRUCTED IMPROVEMENTS AND REMOVE COUNTY'S OPTION TO NOT ACCEPT IMPROVEMENTS OR REQUIRE REMOVAL. RESPECTFULLY ENCOURAGE COUNTY TO INSURE ACCESS IS CREATED AND MAINTAINED.

SO IT IS OPEN AND AVAILABLE TO MAINTAINED.

>> I AM IN FAVOR OF BUILDING A WALKWAY WITH CONCESSIONS OR CHANGES FOR US. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE NO PARKING SIGNS. I THINK WE SHOULD CLEAR A TRAIL FROM ESCAMBIA TO A WALKWAY. LOOKING AT THAT, IT WAS FLAT.

POSSIBLY PUTTING ON THE ENTRANCE THEY DON'T PUT CROSSWALKS, THERE IS A NEED. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE US WORK ON GETTING A CROSSWALK. YOU KNOW, OR GETTING SPEED LIMIT CHANGED TO 35 A1A UNTIL YOU GET TO 206 WHICH THAT IS A DOT CALL.

[01:25:18]

>> JUST TO THE CONCERNS, MR. MATTEL, THIS CONCERNS THE FACT HE HAD TO DO EXTRA ENGINEERING TO MEET REQUIREMENTS FROM THE COUNTY. WOULD THIS BE HELD TO THE SAME

STANDARDS. >> ENGINEER WITH GOLF STREAM.

SO IN TERMS OF REPLACING THE VEGETATION DEALING WITH THE GRADE AND ENGINEERING. THEY WOULD BE HELD TO THE ST.

STANDARDS. >> THAT WOULD DICTATE WHAT WE

HAD TO DO ON THE SITE. >> WOULD ANYBODY'S PRIVATE PROPERTY BE INFRINGED UPON BY THIS PATH OR IS THIS ALL IN THE

COUNTY RIGHT-OF-WAY? >> YES, SIR.

ALL WITHIN COUNTY RIGHT-OF-WAY. >> NOBODY'S PRIVATE PROPERTY.

NO BLEED OVER? >> IN TERMS OF WHAT THIS PROJECT

WOULD DO, NO, SIR. >> I THINK THOSE ARE MY OWN

QUESTIONS, THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU COMMISSIONER.

>> AS IS PAUL I AM FAIRLY ACQUAINTED WITH THIS STRETCH OF A1A. HAVING LIVED ON RIVER VIEW DRIVER 26 YEARS. I TOTALLY SUPPORT SUPPORT COMMISSIONER'S COMMENTS I WOULD SUPPORT A MOTION THAT WOULD INCORPORATE ALL YOUR SUGGESTIONS REGARDING SAFETY ISSUES.

AND MY POSSESSION. >> THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER.

>> WE ARE HAVE TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES.

I DON'T THINK IT WOULD TAKE A WHOLE LOT A1A FOR THE FOOT TRAFFIC. AND KEEP IT IS THAT WAY.

NOT A VERY LONG STRETCH THERE. I DON'T KNOW IF THEY WERE WILLING TO HELP WITH THE LIGHT. PROBABLY NEED YOU TO COME UP AND SAY IT ON RECORD. DRIVE AND MAKE SURE AND SEE WHAT ONES ARE LIGHTING. I DIDN'T NOTICE ANY STREET LIGHTS. I DROVE DOWN TO GREEN STREET.

THAT WAS AS DARK AS NIGHT. IT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE OTHER WALKWAYS IN FOR THE COUNTY. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE COST WOULD BE. WE ARE WILLING TO FOOT THE BILL TO SEE THIS THROUGH FOR THE RESIDENTS.

>> MR. CHAIRMAN, I AM IN SUPPORT OF WHAT WE HAD.

BEFORE I VOTE ON THESE FOUR EDITIONS.

I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH NO PARKING SIGNS.

I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE COSTS ASSOCIATED.

COST PERMITTING AND NOT FAMILIAR WITH THE AREA TO KNOW EXACTLY WHAT IT IS GOING TO TALK. LIGHT AND CROSSWALK -- A1A, DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM. CLEARING AND ACCESS AND THE LIGHT. I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE ANNUAL UPKEEP. COST 1600-1000 A YEAR.

I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW WHO IS PAYING THE COSTS? ANY OTHER COSTS TO ANTICIPATE. OFTEN TIMES ADDITIONAL COSTS INCUR. WANT TO MAKE SURE WE ARE FULLY

INFORMED. >> THIS BOARD WALK IS

[01:30:02]

CONSTRUCTED TO THE NEWER STANDARDS WE ARE TRYING TO ACHIEVE IN HAVING COMPOSITE DECKING.

IT HAS A LONG LIFE OF 50 YEARS. ONLY REPAIRS WE WOULD SEE WOULD BE THE SUBSTRUCTURE PROBABLY 10-20 YEARS.

WE PROJECTED 600. THAT IS WHY THE GROUP CAME UP WITH $7,500 FIGURE. IF WE HAVE A BIG NOR'EASTER OR STORM, STEPS GOING DOWN TO THE BEACH CAN BE WASHED OUT AND FEMA REPLACEMENT. SOMETIMES IT WOULDN'T BE.

>> JUST GO BACK TO THE POINT IF THERE WAS SIGNIFICANT DAMAGE TO A STORM LIKE YOU MENTIONED ULTIMATELY WHO IS RESPONSIBLE

FOR MAKING THOSE REPAIRS. >> ULTIMATELY THE COUNTY WOULD BE RESPONSIBLE. SO FIVE YEARS DOWN THE ROAD THAT

IS SOMETHING WE WOULD BE? >> YES, SIR.

IF WE COULD, MR. CONRAD, ARE WE ABLE TO GET AN ESTIMATE.

NO PARKING SIGNS, CLEARING TRAIL TO THE WALKWAY, STREET LIGHT.

CROSSWALK BY ACCESS A1A. COMMISSIONER WALDRON BROUGHT UP I THINK WOULD BE GREAT. DO WE HAVE A STAFF THAT COULD

GIVE A GENERAL RANGE. >> MR. CHAIR, I CAN WEIGH IN.

MR. CALDWELL HERE FROM PUBLIC WORKS, 350-$400,000 LIGHT INSTALLATION HAS TO BE F DOT APPROVED.

HE CAN ADDRESS BETTER THE COSTS AS WELL AS THE FOOT PATH AND THE SIGNS. 350 AND -- $350,000-$400,000 FOR

LIGHT INSTALLATION. >> DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS.

IT IS IN THE RANGE 350,000-400,000350,000-$400,000D CONSTRUCTION THIS IS SOMETHING WE WOULD GET THEM TO INSTALL ON THEIR OWN BEHALF. TAKEN THIS OPENING UP THE ROADWAY. BROWARD TO A1A, ESCAMBIA RIGHT-OF-WAY. MINIMAL, COUPLE HUNDRED FEET OF RIGHT-OF-WAY. I WOULD RECOMMEND CONCRETE SIDEWALK JUST FOR ADA COMPLIANT AND NO ISSUES IN THE FUTURE AND REDUCING FUTURE MAINTENANCE ALONG WITH THAT.

$25,000-$35,000 PERMITTING EXPECT TO BE MINIMAL.

WE WILL WORK WITH THE DEPARTMENTS.

>> THANK YOU. >> YET.

>> JUST TO CLARIFY THE LIGHT AS A TERMINOLOGY HERE.

STREET LIGHT THOSE ARE TYPICALLY INSTALLED.

BECOMES METERING. IT IS FOR THE LIGHTED CROSSING.

AS WE DISCUSSED THE WARRANT. INTERSECTION COUNTY SECTION TO STATE ROAD 206. THE BEACH ACCESS POINT IS NOT ADA. BEACH WALKS ARE NOT ADA COMPLIANT. THIS CLOSE TO THE BEACH AS PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED TYPICALLY HAVE TO CUT THEM OFF FOUR MONTHS OUT OF THE YEAR FOR TURTLE SEASON.

[01:35:19]

I WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE CROSSWALK AND HAWK, STATE ROAD 207, THAT IS A HAWK SYSTEM. DUE TO THE SPEED LIMIT ALONG A1A. THAT IS WHAT YOU WOULD SEE.

IT WOULDN'T BE FLASHING BEACONS. IT IS A LITTLE MORE STOUT THAN

FLASHING BEACONS. >> HAVE WE LOOKED AT IT? I WANT TO GET BACK TO THE POTENTIAL MR. MATTEL TALKING ABOUT PASS WARRANTEE PERIOD. DO WE LOOK AT A BOND IN THIS

SITUATION OR IS THAT AN OPTION? >> I BELIEVE THEY WERE LOOKING AT THE $7,500 ONE-TIME PAYMENT AS ESCROW FOR LONGER TERM MAINTENANCE. WE ARE PROPOSING COMPOSITE TOP RAILS AND PRESSURE TREATED SIDE RAILS.

ALL THE DECKING AND TOP RAILS COMPOSITE.

THAT IS BASICALLY RECYCLED PLASTIC 2X4.

IT IS MORE LIKE CONCRETE THAN TEMPORARY FROM -- DECKING. MORE LIKELY TO BEND THAN BREAK.

BUT NOR'EASTERS, WHAT YOU ARE LOOKING AT IS MORE DAMAGE FROM THE SUN AND SUN DAMAGE ON 2X4 AND NAILS.

USING STAINLESS STEEL FIXTURES. MUCH LARGER.

>> THANK YOU. PATRICK?

>> MR. CHAIRMAN, I THINK MR. MATTEL INDICATED CONCEPT, ONE TIME, $7,500 PAYMENT. IN TERMS OF BONDING OR ADDRESSING FUTURE MAINTENANCE COST WE CAN REVIEW INCORPORATING

THAT INTO THE REVIEW. >> TWO THINGS I'LL TURN BACK TO THE BOARD. TWO THINGS, COMMISSIONER WALDRON BROUGHT UP. SAFETY MITIGATION MEASURES IN PLACE. SOMETHING WE WOULD HAVE TO EVALUATE. REASONABLE TO HAVE NO PARKING SIGNS. UNDERSTAND IT IS NOT NECESSARILY IN PLACE EVERYWHERE. MY OTHER CONCERN FIVE YEARS DOWN THE ROAD DEALING WITH CATASTROPHIC EVENT THAT WOULD DAMAGE THAT. WHAT THE COST SHOULD BE?

>> SURE. I THINK -- AS WE JUST EXPERIENCED USING THE WORD CATASTROPHIC, TALKING ABOUT HURRICANE DAMAGE. FEMA ENDS UP PAYING.

TYPICALLY NOT A BURDEN ON THE COUNTY.

I WOULDN'T SEE A TYPICAL NOR'EASTER HAVING WEAR AND TEAR EFFECT ON THIS AS A BRAND NEW BOARDWALK.

CATASTROPHIC EVENTS DEFINITELY KICKS BACK TO FEMA.

[01:40:01]

>> NORMALLY REIMBURSEMENT PROCESS.

>> LOOK AT A REIMBURSEMENT. I'LL TURN IT BACK TO THE BOARD.

MY BUTTON IS NOT WORKING. >> MR. CHAIR, IF I COULD JUMP R.

MR. MATTEL AM I RIGHT? >> YES, SIR.

IT IS REASONABLY RARE. WE HAD ONE SET OF STEPS WASHED OUT. WE LOST ONE OUT OF 47.

IT IS NOT A HIGH NUMBER. IT DOES HAPPEN.

>> HOPEFULLY THIS MATERIAL WILL BE A STRONGER COMPOSITE.

>> TECHNICAL DIFFICULTIES HERE. I AM GOING TO TURN AND LOOK.

>> NO. I DON'T KNOW HOW WE ARE GOING TO WORD ALL THIS INTO A MOTION. WHAT I AM HEARING.

I WOULD PROBLEM WAX THAT. DIDN' EXTRAORDINARY.

CROSSING IS SOMETHING WE COULD GET WITH DOT ABOUT.

OF COURSE CHEAPER IF WE GET SPEED LIMIT REDUCED.

I THINK AS A GROUP IT IS DANGEROUS ON A1A PERIOD.

THAT SPEED PROBABLY SHOULD BE REDUCED LIKE IT IS IN OTHER CITIES. AREAS VERY POPULATED.

THAT IS MY SUGGESTION MOVE FORWARD WITH NO PARKING SIGNS.

CLEARED TRAIL NO RIGHT-OF-WAY. THEN WE'LL LOBBY DOT FOR THE CROSSWALKS AND SEE WHAT COMES OF THAT.

>> SOUNDS GOOD, MOTION. >> MR. CHAIRMAN, IF I COULD GET A PIECE OF CLARIFICATION BEFORE WE HAVE A MOTION.

COMMISSIONER WALDRON YOU WERE INDICATING CLEARING OF THE PATH A1A TO BROWARD. IN TERMS OF COSTS WERE YOU THINKING IT WOULD BE SOMETHING BORN BY THE COUNTY OR APPLICANT?

>> MORE FOR THE COUNTY. IT IS A COUNTY BENEFIT.

WE OPEN UP THINGS ALL THE TIME. IT IS AN OPTION FOR PEOPLE WHO ARE TAX PAYORS, COUNTY RIGHT-OF-WAY.

I DON'T WANT TO SEE IN THE FUTURE WE DON'T HAVE -- I CAN TELL YOU THAT PAVED STRIP WAY CHEAPER THAN EXPENDING THE PARKING LOT. THIS IS MORE PEACEFUL.

>> IF I UNDERSTOOD YOU CORRECTLY MR. COMMISSIONER, YOU WERE GOING TO REMOVE YOUR SUGGEST ABOUT A STREET LIGHT?

>> I DIDN'T THINK OF TURTLE SEASON.

THAT IS THE MAIN FOUR MONTHS OF BEACH GOING.

>> WITH THAT, I WOULD HAVE HAVE SUGGESTED MOTION IF COMMISSION WALDRON WOULD BE INTERESTED. IN ADDITION TO THE MOTION IN YOUR PACKET. DIRECTING COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR PLACING NO PARKING SIGNS CLEARING A PATH A1A TO BROWARD AND COORDINATING WITH DOT ON A CROSSWALK AT A1A.

DOES THAT CAPTURE? >> YES.

SOUNDS LIKE A GOOD MOTION. SO MOVED.

>> SECRETARY. >> ONE MOMENT.

I AM SORRY. >> DO YOU NEED ME TO READ THE

OTHER MOTION? >> YOU CAN SAY AS REFERENCED IN THE AGENDA. DID IT CAPTURE THE APPLICANT WAS GOING TO PAY FOR ANY NEEDED SIGNAGE.

>> COMMISSIONER WALDRON WAS IT YOUR INDICATION PARKING WOULD BE

INCLUDED BY THE APPLICANT? >> APPLICANT WILL PAY FOR THE

SIGNS. >> OKAY.

YES. >> THEN FOR THE RECORD I'LL CLARIFY THE MOTION. DIRECTING AGENDA ALSO.

[01:45:26]

>> ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, PLEASE VOTE.

>> IN REGARD TO THIS CLEARING IN PAVING OR SIDEWALK, WILL THAT

COME ON FUTURE CONSENT AGENDA. >> AS THE MOTION DRAFTED AND THINK COMMISSIONER WALDRON INDICATED.

THIS WOULD BE DIRECT TO REVIEW THAT.

>> THAT IS WHY I ASKED. WHAT DOES IT MEAN TO REVIEW IT.

>> I WOULD ECHO AND BRING IT ON CONSENT AGENDA.

MY EXPECTATION COME OUT OF RESERVE ACCOUNT.

WE'LL MR. DUN REVIEW. WE WOULD REVIEW, BRING BACK ON

FUTURE CONSENT AGENDA. >> THANK YOU.

[3. Public Hearing * LDC Amendments - Article II and XII - Short Term Vacation Rentals. At its March 2, 2021 meeting, the Board of County Commissioners heard a second reading of proposed Land Development Code amendments relating to Short Term Vacation Rentals. The Board continued the item until after the current session of the Florida Legislature due to pending litigation on the topic and directed staff to present further revisions in the meantime. This agenda item presents proposed amendments to Articles II and XII of the St. Johns County Land Development Code to address Short Term Vacation Rentals reflecting the Board's direction. Staff will also provide an update on the pending legislation at the public hearing. (Part 1 of 2)]

>> PLEASE VOTE. >> PASSES 5-0.

NOW WE ARE GOING TO MOVE INTO AGENDA ITEM 3.

LUNCH BREAK LITTLE BEFORE NOON AND SEE HOW FAR WE GET AND

READJOURN. >> GOOD MORNING, COMMISSIONERS.

>> FOR THE RECORD JOE C. CEARLEY.

SPECIAL PROJECTS MANAGER. SORRY ABOUT THAT.

AS YOU CAN SEE, THIS PROCESS HAS BEEN VETTED THROUGH THE PUBLIC RATHER VIGOROUSLY. WE HAVE HELD SEVERAL WORKSHOPS DISCUSSION ITEM TWICE. ALSO CAME BEFORE US ORDNANCE FORMAT DECEMBER 1ST BY THIS BOARD.

JANUARY 21ST IN FRONT OF PZA AND MARCH 2ND FROM THIS BOARD BY ADOPTION. AT THAT MARCH 2ND MEETING COMMISSIONERS RAISED SEVERAL CONCERNS REGARDING MAXIMUM OCCUPANCY AND ADDITIONAL STAFF REQUIRED TO ENFORCE REGULATIONS.

SINCE THAT MEETING. BUILDING OFFICIAL HAS LOWER 16 OCCUPANTS, ON SITE POSTING.

ADDITIONALLY, INCLUDED PHASING OF THE MAXIMUM OCCUPANCY FOR PROPERTIES INCOME-BACKED EXPECTATIONS THAT COULD PHYSICALLY HOUSE MORE THAN OCCUPANCY OF 10 PHASED OUT AND REDUCED BY TWO OCCUPANTS DOWN TO 10 TO THE MAXIMUM OF 10.

WHAT THE ORDNANCE INCLUDES EXCLUSIONS FOR PROPERTIES LESS INNER COASTAL. MULTIFAMILY EARNED ASSOCIATION.

PROPERTY MANAGEMENT. OWNER OCCUPIED DUPLEXES.

EFFECTIVE DAY OF ORDNANCE. NOVEMBER 5TH.

[01:50:01]

2021. APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS REQUIRE BUSINESS TAX RECEIPT DBPR LICENSES.

DRAFT COPIES OF LEASE AGREEMENTS BY THE COUNTY AND NEW APPLICATION REQUIRED. NUMBER OF ROOMS FOR OCCUPANCY.

INFORMATION POSTED MINIMALIZED. POSTED IN THE HOME.

INCLUDE OWNER'S CONTACT INFO. MAXIMUM NUMBER OF VEHICLES AND MAPS -- EVACUATION ROUTES. OCCUPANCY STANDARDS TWO PER ROOM. REDUCE OCCUPANCY FROM 16 TO 10 OCCUPANTS. 24 HOUR TIME FRAME GARBAGE CANS ABLE TO BE BROUGHT OUT AND RETURNED BACK TO THE HOME.

NOISE ORDNANCE IN EFFECT. VIOLATIONS SET BY RESOLUTION ISSUED FOR NON-COMPLIANCE. EXISTING PRIOR TO EFFECTIVE DATE OF THIS ORDNANCE. OCCUPANCY THAT CAN HOUSE MORE - THAN 20 OCCUPANTS AND BE REDUCED AND PHASED OUT TWO OCCUPANTS PER YEAR TO THE MAX OF 10 OCCUPANTS CAN BE MET.

SOME THINGS TO CONSIDER, WE HAVE BEEN WORKING WITH GRANICUS WITH REGISTRATION PROCESS. THAT IS ONE THING FOR THIS BOARD TO CONSIDER. FEE AMOUNT SET BY RESOLUTION AT A LATER DATE. THAT CONCLUDES OUR PRESENTATION.

IN THE ORDNANCE ITSELF, I WANT TO BRING TO LIGHT, THERE WERE A FEW ERRORS IN THE WAREHOUSE CLAUSES.

REFERENCES, 16 REDUCED TO 10. I HAVE A CLEAN DOCUMENT WITH THAT THAT IS RECORDED. ADDITIONALLY ARTICLE 2, COMPILED ERROR. LEFT OLDER LANGUAGE IN.

IT IS INDICATED IN ARTICLE 2. LINES 3.10-3.17.

THAT WAS AN ERROR. I KNOW THERE ARE PEOPLE HERE TO SPEAK AND THAT CONCLUDES OUR PRESENTATION.

>> QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD? >> MR. CHAIRMAN, IF I MIGHT JUMP IN. TO CLARIFY E THE LAST PART.

PACKET WITH AGENDA MATERIALS PROVIDED TO THE BOARD AND PUBLISHED ON THE WEBSITE WERE IN ERROR COVER ORDNANCE OLD VERSION THAT NEEDED TO BE UPDATED. MINOR CHANGE REFLECTING THE BOARD'S DIRECTION THEN THERE WAS A HOLD OVER OF ONE PAGE OF THE ARTICLE 2 CHANGES. THEN ALSO TO ADDRESS THIS BOARD CLERK. THIS ITEM CONTINUE TO TODAY IN ORDER TORE SEE WHAT THE LEGISLATURE DID WITH PENDING BILLS. SPECIFICALLY BILL WAS TO PRE-EMPT LOCAL GOVERNMENTS ABILITY TO REGULATE VACATION RENTALS DID NOT GO THROUGH. LEAVING THIS BOARD'S AUTHORITY IN TACT AS IT WAS WHEN WE LAST CONSIDERED IT.

MY VIEW AND VIEW OF OUR OFFICE THIS ORDNANCE PROPOSED WOULD BE WITHIN THE COUNTY'S AUTHORITY STATUTORILY AND CONSTITUTIONALLY. ANYTHING FROM THE BOARD WHEN ARE WE OPENING UP TO PUBLIC COMMENT. PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, YES, MA'AM.

GOOD MORNING AGAIN. IT IS IN THE AMENDMENT.

[01:55:04]

ESSENTIALLY YOU ARE GIVING BUSINESSES THE RIGHT TO OPERATE IN SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AREAS.

I REALIZE THE COUNTY CANNOT CONTROL THE LENGTH OF STAY.

YOU CAN LIMIT NUMBER OF GUESTS ALLOWED YOU CAN INSPECT THESE PROPERTIES WHICH WAS ALSO TAKEN AWAY FOR SLEEPING ROOMS ETC. AND CHARGED COST EVENT SECTION TO THE BUSINESS OWNER OF THE VACATION RENTAL. OWN AMENDMENT STATES MANY REASONS WHY THE SHORT-TERM RENTALS DO NOT BELONG IN RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS. INFRASTRUCTURE BASED ON TWO TO THREE PERSONS PER HOUSE HOLD. U.S. CENSUS DATA, 2.73 PERSONS.

YOU FEEL IT IS OKAY TO HAVE 16-20 PEOPLE IN PRIVATE HOUSES.

YOU STATE OPERATION OF SHORT-TERM VACATION RENTALS MAKING HIGHER OCCUPANCY OF RENTAL HOMES INCOMPATIBLE WITH ESTABLISHED NEIGHBORHOODS. INCREASE TRANSIT OCCUPANCY COULD WANT. YOU SINGLE AND TWO-FAMILY DWELLING BUSINESSES. HOME BUSINESS HAS THE OWNER PHYSICALLY THERE. HOUSING IS COMPARABLE TO A HOTEL NOT A HOME FAMILY BUSINESS. THERE IS A SECTION THAT INSURES THE PROPERTY RIGHTS. AND TO PRESERVE GENERAL WELFARE.

YOU DID NOT DISCUSS PROTECTION OF THIS COUNTY WHO PURCHASE HOMES IN SINGLE RESIDENTIAL AREAS.

SHORT-TERM VACATION OWNERS INDIVIDUALS OR CORPORATIONS KNEW THEY WERE PURCHASING, RENOVATING OR BUILDING A SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL AREA. HOW ARE THE LOCAL PEOPLE BEING PROTECTED TO A BEACH AREA NOT SINGLE RESIDENTIAL HOMES.

TO QUOTE YOUR DOCUMENT. SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING HOME LARGEST INVEST A FAMILY WILL MAKE IN THEIR SHORT TIME.

SHORT-TERM VACATION RENTALS CAN DISTURB AND BURDEN THE DESIGN OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. I AM LIMITING TRANSIENT OCCUPANTS AND REQUIRED PHYSICAL INSPECTS OF THIS PROPERTY SOONER

THAN LATER. >> YES, MA'AM.

THANK YOU. NEXT SPEAKER, PLEASE.

THOSE THAT WISH TO SPEAK COME UP AND STAND BY SO WE CAN MOVE

AHEAD, YES, MA'AM. >> SANDRA MARVIN, 524 MADORIS AVENUE. I HAVE OWNED THIS PROPERTY FOR 25 YEARS I HAVE OWNED MULTIPLE PROPERTIES.

I TURNED THIS INTO A SHORT-TERM RENTAL.

DOING MUCH MORE DAMAGE I -- SEPARATE RENTAL AGREEMENT DON'T REQUIRE WHICH IS CRITICALLY IMPORTANT TO PUT TEETH IN THAT LEGALLY WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO TAKE AN ID FROM THOSE GUESTS. THAT IS GOING TO BE THE THING THAT MAKES -- THAT IS WHAT THE HOTELS DO.

IF YOU INCLUDE THAT, I THINK YOU WILL SOLVE MOST OF YOUR PROBLEMS OF THE PARTY ANIMALS AND NOISE AND OTHER ISSUES.

THE REQUIREMENT TO LIST MY HOME ADDRESS ON THE POSTING ON THE BACK PROPERTY TO ME IS A THREAT BECAUSE I HAVE A HAD TO THROW OUT PEOPLE.

IF MY HOME ADDRESS IS ON THAT PIECE OF PAPER THEY ARE GOING TO

[02:00:03]

COME FIND ME. I HAVE HAD TWO INCIDENCES LAST TWO MONTHS. I VET MY GUESTS CAREFULLY.

I HAVE CAMERAS, NEIGHBORS HAVE ALL MY NEIGHBORS.

THAT TO ME IS A PROBLEM. OTHER THING I HAVE A PROBLEM WITH ARE THE VIOLATIONS WE CAN CONTROL THE INCREASING BAD BEHAVIOR. THAT CITATION SHOULD BE GIVEN TO THE GUESTS. GIVE US THE CHANCE TO REMEDY A SITUATION. I LIVE TWO MINUTES AWAY.

IT TOOK HOURS AND HOURS AND HOURS TO GET THEM OUT.

POLICE DEPARTMENT TOLD ME IT WAS A CIVIL MATTER.

I CALLED A FRIENDLY COMMISSIONER AND GOT THEM OUT THE NEXT MORNING. TO EFFECT THE TENANTS.

OTHER BIG ISSUE, GARBAGE COLLECTIONS.

THIS NEIGHBORHOOD COMES BEFORE DAYLIGHT.

PLEASE CHANGE THE PART THAT SAYS WE HAVE TO PUT IT OUT ON THE SAME DAY. DON'T SET US UP TO YOU PROBABLY THREADED THE NEEDLE AND THINK YOU HAVE PROBABLY HAVE. IF YOU ALLOW ME TO GRUMBLE A LITTLE BIT. COUPLE MORE ISSUES.

YOU ADDRESSED NOISE ISSUE. AND INCLUDE NOISE ORDNANCE WITH THE PACKAGE THAT GOES TO THE OWNERS.

CONTINUING PROBLEM WITH ILLEGAL SIGNAGE, OVERSIZED AND ON PUBLIC PROPERTY SOMETIMES OBSTRUCTING PEOPLE GETTING OUT OF THE DRIVEWAYS SEEING ON COMING TRAFFIC.

WE WANT THE SIGNING ORDNANCE INCLUDED IN THE PACKAGE.

WE THINK WE ARE NOT EXPERTS. WE ARE HANDLING THE REGISTRATION ISSUES. DURING THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT CENSUS SURVEYS. LARGE NUMBER OF RENTALS OUT THERE NOBODY KNEW ABOUT. WE WENT TO COUNT HEADS AND HAVING TO DELETE HEADS. THESE HEADS WERE FROM OHIO AND MICHIGAN. ISSUES ABOUT SEVEN DAY AND GARBAGE TAKEN CARE OF. HURTS TO SAY WE ARE DELIGHTED WITH MAXIMUM OF 16 NOW. I KNOW NONE OF US WANTS TO LIVE NEXT TO 16 DRUNKS FOR A PERIOD OF TIME, IT WILL SOON BE DOWN TO 10. GENTLEMAN YOU HAVE DONE A MARVELOUS JOB. WE HAVE HAD A LOT OF HICK UPS.

[02:05:02]

WE ARE HERE AND WE ARE GRATEFUL. THANKS AGAIN.

>> THANK YOU. SIR.

>> YES, SIR. >> MY NAME IS DENNIS SHIPMAN.

5400 ATLANTIC VIEW. I CAN'T SAY IT HAS BEEN GOD SPEED. WE ARE GRATEFUL AND URGE YOU TO

PASS THIS RESOLUTION. >> DAVID GOLDBURG.

I APPEARED IN MARCH ON BEHALF OF THE HOMEOWNERS WHO WISH TO ENJOY PROPERTIES IN PEACE. I INDICATED RIGHTS OF ALL HOMEOWNERS TO BE RESPECTED. BUT CERTAINLY THOSE INDIVIDUALS WHO RESEARCHED AND PURCHASED HOMES IN RESIDENTIAL AND NOT COMMERCIALLY-ZONED NEIGHBORHOODS.

THEY SHOULD NOT HAVE RIGHTS TREAD UPON.

IN MARCH, I REVIEWED NOISE ORDNANCE IN TOTALITY.

STATES A VIOLATION OCCURRED IF AT ANY TIME NOISE IS LOUDER THAN NECESSARY FOR PERSONS IN THE DWELLING UNIT.

NOISE MUST BE CONFINED TO FOUR CORNERS OF THE PROPERTY AND NOT JUST ON WEEKENDS BUT BETWEEN 10:00 P.M. RENTAL PEOPLE GET THE SAME FEES PER NIGHT WHETHER THEY RENT TO ONE PERSON OR 14 OR 16 OR 20 PERSONS. TO GRANDFATHER IN THOSE EXISTING RENTALS WILL LEAVE EVERYONE WHO APPEARED WITH ABSOLUTELY NO SOLUTION. ALSO TO WAIT SIX YEARS TO CURTAIL THE NUMBER OF INHABITANTS 14-20 DOWN TO 10 WOULD BE TEDIOUS TO ALL OF US WHO WISH AN EXPE -- EXPEDITIOUS SOLUTION. WE BELIEVE OUR RIGHT TO PEACE AND TRANQUILLY AS WELL AS EXPENDITURES WE HAVE MADE ON RESIDENTIAL SHOULD EQUALLY BE CONSIDERED.

SMALL BUSINESS OWNERS SPOKE OVER THE TELEPHONE IN MARCH AND IDENTIFIED THEMSELVES AS SUCH WANT FREEDOM -- THEY WANT LITTLE OR NO REGULATIONS. WHY ARE WE HERE TODAY? TO BE CONSIDERED A SUBCLASS OF A RESIDENTIAL AREA.

IT WAS IN THE HANDOUT. THESE INDIVIDUALS ARE FULLY AWARE THEY PURCHASE PROPERTIES IN OUR RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS. WHY SHOULD I SELL MY HOME AND LEAVE THE AREA, ONLY THE BUSINESSES THAT MOVED TO OUR BEACH RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS. AT LEAST THREE ON THE PLANNING AND ZONING WENT ON RECORD AS SAYING THEY THEMSELVES WOULD NOT WANT TO LIVE NEXT TO THESE RENTAL PROPERTIES.

DID NOT ACT. WE ASK FOR YOUR HELP NOW, THANK

YOU. >> THANKS, CHAIR.

>> ANY OTHER SPEAKERS FROM THIS AUDIENCE? YES, MA'AM. NAME AND ADDRESS.

>> GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS CHRISTINA.

140 PINTEREST DRIVE. I KNOW IT IS A LOT TO LISTEN TO BOTH SIDES. COUPLE OF THINGS, THIRD PARTY OPTION FOR APPLICATION INTAKE. KEEP IN MIND THEY ARE EXPENSIVE.

THEY LIKE TO SELL IT ONCE ALL THE PEOPLE ARE REGISTERED AND SPREAD OUT OVER LIST OF REGISTRATION, IT CAN BE AS LOW AS NEVER QUITE WORKS OUT. IN FORT LAUDERDALE, THEY HAVE 4400 UNITS, ONLY 600 ARE REGISTERED.

ST. AUGUSTINE ARE HAVING THAT AS WELL.

WHAT YOU HAVE PUT TOGETHER IS PRETTY FAIR.

I MOST PROBABLY WON'T HAVE AS BAD AS AN ADOPTION.

DOESN'T USUALLY WORK OUT TO THE NUMBERS THEY ARE TELLING YOU IT WILL. UM, 10 MAX, I THINK THAT MIGHT BE BASED ON PALM COAST. THEY DID FACE LAWSUITS AND END

[02:10:07]

UP DOING OUT OF COURT SETTLEMENT.

DID COST THE COUNTY MILLIONS. I DO THING TWO PLUS TWO IS A GOOD OPTION. WANTED TO MAKE SURE IF WE ARE GOING TO HAVE LANGUAGE THAT ADDRESSES CHILDREN, OVER 20 OR 21. WHAT THAT LANGUAGE IS.

A LOT OF TIMES YOU HAVE SIBLINGS TRAVELING TOGETHER AND BRINGING THEIR FAMILIES SO YOU MAY HAVE THREE COUPLES AND CHILDREN THAT WANT TO GET TOGETHER AND SHARE A HOME AND DO A FAMILY VACATION.

SOMETHING TO CONSIDER AS WELL. I DO ALSO AGREE WITH THE LADY THAT SPOKE EARLIER. HAVING HOME ADDRESSES OF OTHERS WHERE YOU DO END UP EVICT SOMEBODY.

PUBLIC INFORMATION LOOK IT UP ON THE TAX ROLLS.

ALSO IF WE CAN AGAIN TO THAT POINT HAVING TRAINING FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT. WE DON'T WANT TO HAVE PARTIES IN OUR HOMES. WE DO WANT TO EVICT PEOPLE IF THEY ARE HAVING LOUD PARTIES AND DESTROYING THE PROPERTY.

TRAINING FOR LAW ENFORCEMENT KNOWING IT IS NOT LIKE A RESIDENTIAL SITUATION THAT REQUIRES YOU TO GO TO COURT TO EVICT. IF SOMEBODY IS IN THE HOME UNDER FLORIDA LAW YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO EVICT THEM.

HAVING LAW ENFORCEMENT TRAIN DEFINITELY HOMEOWNERS ON -- --

IS THERE A CALLER ON THE LINE? >> I WANT TO THANK YOU AND YOUR STAFF. SOME OF THEM ARE CORPORATIONS AND NEED TO HAVE FULL DISCLOSURE OF ALL THE BENEFICIAL OWNERS OF THE CORPORATIONS. I WOULD LIKE AN EXPLANATION WHY IT WAS IT WAS THE TEXT WASN'T POSTED.

I HAVE AN APPLE MAC LAPTOP. THE THING COULDN'T BE READ LINK WAS NOT WORKING. PROBLEM IS, THESE SHORT-TERM RENTALS IT. AND THOSE CORPORATIONS DONE IT WITH UBER. THEIR COMPUTER TECHNIQUES THEY HAVE TRANSFERRED A GREAT DEAL OF WEALTH AND THEY HAVE NOT DONE A GOOD SERVICE ON THE PEOPLE OF ST. JOHNS COUNTY AND OTHER RESORT AREAS. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE STAFF DO BETTER DRAFTING. COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE NOT WANTING TO BE MUSCULAR AND REG REGULAR. HOW THE STAFF MANAGED NOT TO HAVE THIS ACTUAL ITEM. THIS IS THE FIRST OR SECOND READING? DO WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO COMMENT? CAN YOU HAVE THE STAFF GO BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD. RESEARCH AND STAFF HAVE DONE IS SHALLOW. THEY FIND AN EXAMPLE OF SOMEBODY ELSE THAT HAS WRITTEN AN ORDNANCE.

THEY ARE DOING THE MINIMUM THEY CAN GET AWAY WITH.

THANK YOU, GENTLEMAN FOR PUTTING THIS ON THE AGENDA.

I WANT TO COMMENT ON ITEM 2. I SUPPORT THE APPROACH Y'ALL HAVE TAKEN ON THE BEACH ACCESS AND TALKING ABOUT ST. AUGUSTINE

[02:15:10]

SEASHORE. THEY SPEND TWICE AS MUCH AND TWICE AS LONG AND WE NEED THEM. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. ANY OTHER SPEAKERS IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WISH TO SPEAK ON ITEM 3?

>> THANK YOU MR. VICE CHAIR. PUBLIC COMMENT CLOSED NOW BACK

TO THE BOARD. >> MR. WHITEHURST.

>> THANK YOU MR. CHAIRMAN. I SUPPORT MAKING A CHANGE TO THE ORDNANCE, OBVIOUSLY, WE HAVE A LOT OF CONCERN COMING OUT OF THAT COMMUNITY. I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE ACTUALLY ADDRESS THE PROBLEM. PROBLEM IS NOISE, TRASH, PARKING. I THINK THE NUMBER OF RESIDENTS.

I HAVE MET GROUP OF FOUR THAT ARE PERFECTLY CAPABLE OF BREAKING THE NOISE ORDNANCE. IT IS ABOUT ENFORCING THE ORDNANCE. I WOULD BE IN FAVOR -- IF WE NEED TO DOUBLE THE FINES FOR THOSE THAT VIOLATE, IF NOT, TRIPLE. WHATEVER STOPS THE BAD BEHAVIOR OF HAPPENING I WOULD BE IN FAVOR.

JUST WANTED TO VOICE THAT CONCERN.

PERHAPS MAKING MORE PUNITIVE ACTIONS AGAINST THOSE THAT VIOLATE NOT SO MUCH PEOPLE IN ANY DWELLING ITSELF.

>> LET ME RESPOND TO THAT BRIEFLY.

ONE OF THE CHALLENGES WE HEARD ONE LADY SPEAK EARLIER.

YOU HAVE HOMEOWNERS, THEY ARE RENTING, WE HAVE TO BE CAREFUL WE DON'T PENALIZE THE HOMEOWNER. I WANT TO FULLY EQUIP THEM IF THEY ARE ABLE TO ADDRESS THIS PROBLEM.

I RECOGNIZE, ARE WE PENALIZING A HOMEOWNER TRYING TO DO THE RIGHT THING. THAT IS SOMETHING I AM UNSETTLED. COMMISSIONER DEAN NEXT.

>> COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST I HAVE AN OPINION ON OCCUPANCY.

I REALLY BELIEVE THAT WHEN YOU HAVE THE LARGE NUMBER OF OCCUPANTS OCCUPYING THREE OR FOUR BEDROOM HOME IN THE MIDDLE OF A RESIDENTIAL AREA, YOU HAVE 15-20-25 PEOPLE THAT BY DEAF NATION IS GOING TO GENERATE ADDITIONAL PROBLEMS BE IT NOISE, PARKING, GARBAGE. TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION FOR INVESTMENTS MADE. GIVES IT THE RIGHT TO USE THE PROPERTY BUT BALANCE THAT WITH RESIDENTIAL HOMEOWNERS WHO LIVED HERE, 5, 10, 15, 20 YEARS. THEY HAVE A RIGHT IN A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD. IT IS REASONABLE AND PHASE IN PERIODS. THERE WAS I THINK NOT THE LATEST VERSION OF THE PROPOSED ORDNANCE.

[02:20:08]

SO THE BOARD NOT JUST HEARD BUT SEEN THE PARTICULAR LANGUAGE, THANK YOU. I WANT TO MAKE SURE I AM LOOKING AT THE SAME CHANGES. SHORT TITLE AND ALL THAT CHANGES ARE MADE IN THE WHEREAS CLAUSES. AGENDA MATERIALS IT WAS PUBLISHED ON LINE. PARAGRAPH THAT TALKS ABOUT THE JUSTIFICATION FOR OCCUPY SAN LIMIT OF 10.

RATHER THE FINAL DOCUMENT WILL SAY 10 BUT YOU HAVE REFERENCED 16 PREVIOUS VERSION REVISED THAT HAS BEEN APPROVED TO 10.

FOLLOWING PAGE WITH YOU MADE REFERENCE TO.

THESE PROVISIONS WOULD BE NOT REFERENCED IN THE COPY YOU HAVE.

THOSE ARE THE CHANGES NOT SUPER SUBSTANTIVE.

WANTED TO MAKE SURE YOU HAD A CHANCE.

THIS IS PRETTY IMPORTANT. I WANT TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTAND WHAT IS GOING ON. I STUDIED THE STAFF REPORT.

LOOK AT BOTTOM OF PAGE 2. IF I MOVE AND DON'T KNOW IF IT WILL PASS IF I MOVE. IF I MOVE THE SECOND ONE WITH CHANGES. WERE THOSE FIVE CHANGES I WOULD

BE REFERRING TO. >> CHANGES INCORPORATED INTO THE

ORDNANCE. >> I HAVE TWO OPTIONS.

MAKE FIRST MOTION OR SECOND? >> THIS WAS A -- BODY OF THE ORDNANCE THAT YOU WOULD BE APPROVING HAS SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES IN TERMS OF OCCUPANCY. IF YOU WOULD BE INCLINED TO MAKE

A MOTION. >> WHAT I HEAR BODY OF ORDNANCE, SUBSTANCE IN YOUR PACKAGE IS THE MOST CURRENT AND REFLECTS CHANGES THAT MR. CEARLY REFLECTED.

JUST CERTAIN OF THE WHEREAS CLAUSES THAT NEEDED TO BE REVISED. IF THERE IS A MOTION I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE ARE CLEAR ON THAT. THERE IS CONFUSION.

WHAT WE HAVE BEEN REVIEWING FOR AND PREPARING FOR DIFFERENT THAN

[02:25:06]

WHAT WE ARE PRESENTING. THAT HAS BEEN IGNORED.

>> THE SUBSTANCE OF THE STRUCTURE OF WHAT YOU ARE APPROVE LEGISLATIVE FINDINGS OF FACT AND WOULD ADOPT AN EXHIBIT CHANGES TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.

THEY REFLECT THE CHANGES COMMISSIONER DEAN AND THIS BOARD WERE LOOKING FOR. THEY REFLECT CHANGES.

THERE WAS ONE THING SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN.

LINE NUMBERS 309-317. YOU CAN TELL IT SORT OF REPEATS LANGUAGE FROM A PREVIOUS VERSION THAT WOULD NOT BE INCLUDED IN WHAT THIS BOARD WOULD BE APPROVING.

UNFORTUNATELY GOT KEPT IN. >> DO WE HAVE COPIES OF THE

DIRECT UPDATED VERSION? >> I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE ACTUAL

COPY. >> ONE THING I WOULD LIKE TO SEE OF THAT 36 HOURS. MINE IS PICKED UP 6:00.

I DON'T PICK THEM UP UNTIL I GET HOME FROM WORK.

I PUT CHILDREN UNDER 12. PASSING ORDNANCE.

I WOULD BE IN VIOLATION. I AM AT 11.

THE SIX MONTH OLD MAY CAUSE MORE NOISE.

I THINK WE NEED SOMETHING WE KNOW THE IDENTIFIED RENTER.

AIRBNB DO NOT GIVE IT TO THE RENTERS.

OTHER THING I WOULD LIKE TO SEE WHEN WE HAVE FINES, RENTERS SHOULD RECEIVE THEM FIRST QUICKLY MAYBE ONE VERBAL WARNING. I DO AGREE NOT HAVING A HOME ADDRESS ON PIECE OF PAPER. DOESN'T MATTER.

SEVEN DAYS OF REMEDY. >> THERE IS ONE THING I WANT TO STATE. THESE PEOPLE RENTING IT WANT THEIR RIGHTS TO RENT PROPERTY AND ALL THAT.

AS SOON AS THEY HAVE AN ISSUE, THEY WANT TO BE A HOTEL.

PEOPLE LIVING THERE DESERVE TO HAVE PEACE AND QUIET.

[02:30:47]

>> THEY WOULD BE TICKETED THE SAME WAY WHICH DOES HAVE A QUICKER TURNAROUND TIME, COMPLIANCE TIME THAN SEVEN DAYS.

IF SOMEONE CONTINUES AND PULL UP NOISE ORDNANCES AS WE SPEAK.

THE SEVEN-DAY WARNING REQUIREMENT JUST FOR THE VIOLATIONS OF THIS ORDNANCE. THINGS LIKE THE TRASH, PARKING, OCCUPANCY, THEY WOULD NEED TO REMEDY THAT WITHIN SEVEN DAYS.

IN TERMS OF ID, I THINK THE IDEA OF HAVING THE CONTACT PERSON FOR THE RENTER WAS WE WOULD HAVE THE ID OF THE PROPERTY OWNER AND OPERATOR OF THAT. SO THE COUNTY WOULD BE ABLE TO

CITE THEM VERY EASILY. >> IF YOU GO ON AIRBNB AND RENT HOUSE. OWNER OF THE HOUSE DOESN'T HAVE YOUR IDENTIFICATION AND KNOW WHO YOU ARE.

THEY MAY HAVE A NAME AND RENTING DATES.

WHEN THEY COME TO EVICT WHO DO THEY EVICT EVERYBODY.

ARE YOU GOING TO PICK OUT ONE RANDOM OR EVERYBODY? I WOULD THINK YOU WOULD HAVE TO FLOW THE RENTER'S IDENTIFICATION. PIECE OF PAPER, OWNERS COULD GET AND KEEP. WHEN WE SAY COST ANALYSIS, WE HAVE ESTIMATE TWO TO FIVE HOURS OF PROPERTY RESEARCH.

WHAT WOULD THAT INCLUDE? >> ESSENTIALLY LOOKING FOR VACATION RENTAL HOMES, WHERE WOULD STAFF BEGIN? RESEARCHING 60 DIFFERENT SOFTWARE PLATFORMS THAT IS GOING TO TAKE A LOT OF TIME. WHEREAS, WORKING WITH THE THIRD PARTY SOFTWARE VENDOR, THEY HAVE THE SOFTWARE TO DO THAT, STAFF

DOES NOT. >> BASICALLY TAKE US TWO TO FIVE

HOURS. >> THAT WAS PROXIMATION AT THAT POINT. IT COULD TAKE A LONG TIME.

>> I HATE THAT WE ONLY ACCOMPLISH TWO A DAY.

>> COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST. >> THANK YOU MR. CHAIRMAN, I WANTED TO ADDRESS THE POINT THAT IS YOU MADE AND COMMISSIONER MADE. NONE OF US WANT TO HURT BUSINESS OWNERS. MY INTENT WE SHOULD HAVE MORE PUNITIVE FUNDS SHOULD EFFECT THE PARTY.

IF WE INCUR FINES AS A RESULT OF THIS PROPERTY.

YOU CAN PASS EVEN IF WE FINE THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY AS A BUSINESS THEY CAN PASS THOSE FINES ALONG TO A RENTER.

THAT WAS MY INTENT. TO YOUR POINT THERE ARE A LOT OF PEOPLE DOING BUSINESS THE RIGHT WAY.

TRYING TO KEEP THOSE PEOPLE OUT OF THEIR PROPERTIES.

TO COMMISSIONER DEAN, I KNOW YOU HAVE BEEN WORKING ON THIS MANY, MANY YEARS. I AM SORT OF LATE TO THE PARTY.

>> LASTLY I SUPPORT COMMISSIONER WALDRON'S POINT.

FOLKS IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD ALLOWED TO PUT TRASH CANS OUT THE NIGHT BEFORE IT IS COMMON SENSE TO ALLOW SHORT-TERM

VACATION RENTALS. >> THANK YOU COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST DOES EVERYBODY HAVE A COPY OF THE CORRECTED VERSION.

[02:35:05]

>> I APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST UNDERSTANDING NOT FAVORABLE OF PUTTING UNNECESSARY OR HIGH TETEN ED HEIGHTENNED REGULATION.

THEY ARE NOT BEING ENFORCED. HOWEVER, I THINK THIS IS UNIQUE IN THAT IT IS BEING DEALT WITH AT THIS PARTICULAR POINT ADDITIONAL REGULATION. I WANT TO BE CLEAR BECAUSE I THOUGHT THERE WERE VERY GOOD AND I KNOW CHRISTINE MENTIONED SOME OF THESE EARLIER AS WELL TO MAKE THEM PALATABLE ALSO HELPFUL ENFORCEMENT. ALSO CLARIFICATION REGARD TO THIS ORDNANCE. CAN YOU GO THROUGH THIS ONE MORE

TIME? >> SURE.

NOT COUNTING KIDS, 12 OR UNDER PART OF THE 10.

36 HOURS FOR TRASH CANS TO BE PICKED UP.

WE NEED SOME HOW IDENTIFICATION AND RESPONSIBLE PARTY OF THE RENTING GROUP. FINES TO RENTER FIRST PROPERTY HAD THREE OR MORE COMPLAINTS LANDOWNER WOULD BE FINED.

AND SIX-YEAR DOWN SIZING COULD GO THE OTHER WAY.

TIME TO REMEDY THE SPAGS DEPENDING ON THE NOISE ORDNANCE EXPLAINED QUICKLY. REST GET SEVEN DAYS.

I HAVE A LOT MORE NOTES. >> THANK YOU, VERY HELPFUL.

MR. CHAIRMAN, I WOULD BE FAVORABLE TO THOSE.

WE WANT IT TO BE EFFECTIVE. WE DON'T WANT TO COME BACK AND REVISIT. COMMISSIONER DEAN WE WANT THIS TO REACH THE OBJECTIVE. I THINK THAT IS IMPORTANT NOT TO PUT REGULATION ON TOP OF REGULATION THAT IS NOT GETTING THE JOB ACCOMPLISHED. WE HAVE A PROBLEM ADDRESS THE PROBLEM TO ALLOW FOLKS TO HAVE A TRANQUIL ENVIRONMENT THEY HAVE PURCHASED INTO AND BEING INVADED.

IF THIS WORKS, THIS WORKS. I WILL SUPPORT IT.

IF IT DOESN'T, WE NEED TO REVISIT IT AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.

I THINK WE HAVE MORE NOISE OUTSIDE THERE.

NONETHELESS. >> THANK YOU COMMISSIONER SMITH.

WE WANT TO MAKE THE RIGHT DECISION AND IMPORTANT TO HEAR FROM THE BOARD. I THINK THIS IS A GOOD START.

WE HAVE PEOPLE THAT WANT TO ENJOY THEIR HOME.

PROPERTY RIGHTS AND SHOULD BE ABLE TO DO THAT.

I LIKE MR. WALDRON SUGGESTION FINE THE PARTY.

ALSO ID OF PERSON RENTING. THAT IS IMPORTANT.

GRANDFATHERED, I WOULD BE IN FAVOR OF REDUCING TO THREE YEARS. SIX YEARS SEEMS A LITTLE LONGER

COMMISSIONER DEAN? >> I AGREE WITH ALL THE RECOMMENDATIONS. I ALSO AGREE MR. CHAIRMAN YOUR RECOMMENDATION OF THREE YEARS. THAT IS TRYING TO HIT THE SWEET SPOT. BEFORE I MAKE A MOTION NO OTHER COMMENTS. ONE MORE CALL IN, I DON'T WANT TO OVERLOOK. IF THERE IS A CALLER, WE WANT TO

[02:40:04]

HEAR FROM YOU IF THERE IS A CALLER GO AHEAD ON ITEM THREE.

>> TOM RENOLDS. -- COURT ST. AUGUSTINE BEACH, FLORIDA. COMMISSIONERS, YOU KNOW, AIRBNB'S, WELL, THEY BRING A LOT OF PEOPLE THAT SPEND A LOT OF MONEY. THIS IS A TOUGH DECISION SAYING CRACKING DOWN. WE ARE FLORIDA.

WE REPRESENTED BEACHES AND FUN AND WE REPRESENT ACTIVITY.

TO ME. ONLY THING I SEE GOING ON RIGHT HERE RIGHT NOW IS CREATION OF MORE LAWS, COUNTY ORDNANCES, ETC. ETC. I DON'T AGREE WITH ANYTHING SAID.

REASON WHY IS, I MIGHT NOT BE A LAWYER, BUT I CAN UNDERSTAND THE LAW. THE LAW, THEY HAVE A LAW CALLED DISORDERLY CONDUCT. BREECH OF PEACE.

FOR SOME REASON YOU FOLKS AND OTHER PEOPLE, YOU WANT TO KEEP CREATING MORE I WANT TO TELL YOU SOMETHING,

>> PORT BEACH, CALIFORNIA HOUSES ARE CLOSE LIKE THE BEACH HERE.

THEY KNOCK ON YOUR DOOR, KNOCK, KNOCK, KNOCK.

THEY SAY YOU ARE ARRESTED FOR DISORDERLY CONDUCT.

CAN'T PLAY MUSIC AFTER 10 P.M. CAN'T DISTURB NEIGHBORS.

I AM TELLING YOU WHEN THEY COME BACK, SOMEBODY WENT AWAY IN HANDCUFFS. I READ THE LAW.

WE HAVE THE SAME LAWS. YOU CAN'T BOTHER YOUR NEIGHBORS.

I HAVE TO TELL YOU THIS ONE LAST THING, THEY ARE EFFECTING THE COUNTY AND BEACH. I LOVE THE PEOPLE.

PICKED UP LARGE GROUPS OF PEOPLE.

PART THAT IS GETTING ME IS HOW MUCH THEY ARE DEPRIVING THE RENT UP. I GIVE YOU A QUICK EXAMPLE.

TWO BATH TWO BEDROOM HOUSE. PITCH PEOPLE.

DON'T WORRY ABOUT THE PAYMENT AND PRICE.

WE'LL GET YOU $1,500 A WEEK OVER HERE, AIRBNB.

I WANT TO FINISH I WOULDN'T VOTE FOR ANY OF THIS.

THERE IS ALREADY A LAW. ALL I SEE ARE MORE LAWS BY REPUBLICANS. I SHOULD MOVE BACK TO CALIFORNIA. THAT IS ALL THEY EVER DID DEMOCRATS KEEP CREATING LAWS HOPE YOU VOTE IT DOWN.

ARREST PEOPLE THAT DISTURB PEACE.

>> THANK YOU. >> OKAY I THINK THAT COMPLETES PUBLIC COMMENT. I AM PREPARED TO MAKE A MOTION.

>> COMMISSIONER SMITH, >> SIX YEARS AND HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT BURT HARRIS AND THOSE THINGS.

I THINK RESEARCH IN REGARD TO THE PERIOD.

AM I MISSING WHY SIX YEARS WAS CHOSEN?

>> COMMISSIONER SMITH, WE DID TAS THAT ON RESEARCH WE DID WITH FLAGLER COUNTY, PARTICULAR EMPLOYED A SIMILAR DROP DOWN AND HAD SUCCESS IN THEIR LITIGATION. FROM A LEGAL STANDPOINT, COMFORTABLE WITH 7 WE WILL NEED MAYBE TO TAKE A LITTLE TIME TO FIGURE OUT HOW TO DROP THAT DOWN, 20 DOWN THREE AND THREE MORE. THEN FOUR.

I GUESS TO GET US DOWN ANOTHER 10 OK WANTS OVER THREE YEARS.

BUT I THINK FROM A LEGAL STANDPOINT.

COMFORTABLE WITH THE PHASING IN PACKET YOU ALL HAVE.

AGAIN WE UNDERSTAND THE BOARD'S DIRECTION WILL BE WHAT IT WILL BE. I HAVE A QUESTION OF COMMISSIONER WALDRON. I THINK OF THE BOARD REGARDING ID. WERE YOU SUGGESTING THAT THE COUNTY ACCEPT THE ID'S OR THE LANDLORDS?

>> I WOULD SAY LANDLORDS. IF YOU HAVE A PROBLEM AT A HOTEL, THEY GO TO THE FRONT DESK AND GET YOUR ID.

>> I DON'T KNOW IF THERE IS SOMETHING THAT PROHIBITS THAT OF

[02:45:01]

MAKING THE POSTING. WE COULD INCLUDE SOMETHING.

>> CERTAINLY THAT COULD BE INCLUDED.

>> MR. CHAIR, IF I MAY, BACK TO THE SIX YEAR OR THREE YEAR I THINK MR. BALLTI SAID WE FEEL MORE COMFORTABLE WITH THE THREE YEAR. ALWAYS SOME RISK.

I WILL SAY WITH COMMISSIONER WALDRON'S RECOMMENDATION OF NOT COUNTING THE 12 AND UNDER AS PART OF THE AGGREGATE.

THAT DOES LESSEN THE EXPOSURE SOME.

I WANT TO MENTION THAT. IN OTHER WORDS I THINK THAT WOULD HAVE TO GO TOGETHER IF YOU ARE GOING TO REDUCE FROM SIX TO THREE YEARS. VERY PRUDENT TO INCLUDE 12 AND UNDER NOT COUNTING IN THAT NMBER.

OTHER THING, IF I MAY AS YOUR COUNTY ATTORNEY MAKE THIS RECOMMENDATION: I THINK THERE SHOULD BE A MOTION INCORPORATING ASPECTS. AND A SECOND.

AND ONCE THAT IS DONE, I WOULD RECOMMEND THAT THIS ITEM AT THAT POINT BE PAUSED AND GIVE MR. BALLTIS AND CEARLY TIME TO WRITE OUT LANGUAGE. THIS IS AN IMPORTANT DOCUMENT.

BOARD COULD PUT A PAUSE ON THAT, GO THROUGH ONE OR MORE OTHER AGENDA ITEMS OR BREAK FOR LUNCH AND HAVE THEM COME BACK.

YOU HAVE DONE YOUR PUBLIC COMMENT.

I THINK FOR THOSE CHANGES, I THINK IT WOULD BE PRUDENT TO HAVE A CHANCE TO WRITE THOSE OUT BEFORE MOTION SECOND VOTE OVER.

>> OKAY. THANK YOU.

I THINK WE NEED TO GO THROUGH A MOTION.

>> IF I MAY, I'LL MAKE THE MOTION AND SEE IF THERE IS A SECOND. I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE TO ENACT

ORDNANCE 2021. >> 22.

>> DEVELOPMENT CODE WITH CHANGES BASED ON BEING CONSISTENT WITH FLORIDA LAW AND ST. JOHNS COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ALL OF THOSE CHANGES RECOMMENDED BY COMMISSIONER WALDRON ALONG WITH CHAIRMAN RECOMMENDATION TO REDUCE SIX-YEAR PHASE OUT TO THREE YEAR. IN THE FINAL VERSION.

DIRECT STAFF TO PREPARE CHANGES. >> SECOND.

>> WE HAVE A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER DEAN.

SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST.

I INTENDED TO LET US TAKE A LUNCH BREAK AT NOON.

HOW MUCH TIME DO WE NEED? >> I THINK THE LUNCH BREAK SHOULD BE SUFFICIENT. HALF HOUR.

>> MR. BURNETT, DO YOU -- IS WORKING AND WE WILL MOVE FORWARD TO RECONVENE.

>> YES, MR. CHAIR, FOR ITEM NUMBER THREE, MR. BOLTICE IS PRINTING OUT THE REVERSION FOR THE BOARD.

FOR THE BOARD'S OPTION SHOULD IT PROCEEDS TO NUMBER FOUR OR JUST WAIT A FEW MINUTES AND HE WILL BE DOWN WITH THAT.

>> JEREMIAH BLOCKER: WHILE WE ARE WAITING, A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER DEAN AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST.

THAT'S WHERE WE STAND AS WE WAIT.

[4. Public Hearing * PUD 2020-01 Fatemi Commercial PUD. A request to rezone approximately 1.85 acres of land from Open Rural (OR) to Planned Unit Development (PUD) to allow for the development of 12,000 square feet of commercial/retail or professional office uses. The property is located at 2590 and 2960 SR 16 and designated Mixed Use on the Future Land Use Map. The Planning and Zoning Agency recommended approval with a 5-0 vote at its March 18, 2021 regular scheduled public hearing. The Agency discussed growth in the area and the proposed PUD consistency with the Mixed Use designation of the surrounding area. Please see Growth Management Report for project details.]

[02:50:04]

MR. RYAN DO WE NEED TO MOVE TO ANOTHER AGAIN ITEM? OKAY, ALL RIGHT. SO WE ARE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND TEMPORARILY TABLE THIS. WE WILL COME TO YOUR MOTION, COMMISSIONER DEAN. MOVE CONTINUE TO AGENDA ITEM

NUMBER 4. >> I DON'T KNOW IF THE OVERHEAD WILL WORK. NO? OKAY. I CAN JUST TELL YOU QUICKLY THIS IS FOR THE FATEMI PUD. DOUG BURNETT.

REZONING TO PUD FOR THE FATEMI PROPERTY.

WHEN I START THIS APPLICATION, DR. FATEMI WAS STILL WITH US.

AT THIS STAGE HE HAS PASSED AWAY.

HIS WIFE, MR. FATEMI IS CARRYING ON THIS APPLICATION.

IT IS TO REZONE A SMALL PARCEL OF PROPERTY LOCATED BETWEEN A DAY CARE PARCEL AND THE CHURCH PARCEL THAT IS OUTSIDE OF FR FRONTING STATE ROAD 16 ON THE WEST OUTLET MALL, THE OLD-STYLE OUTLET MALL, IF YOU WILL. THE GOAL IS TO HAVE IT REZONED FOR A COMMERCIAL USE VERY CONSISTENT WITH WHAT IS IN THAT AREA AND THAT IS PRETTY MUCH MY PRESENTATION.

IT WENT 5-0, RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL TO YOU FROM THE

PLANNING AND ZONING AGENCY. >> JEREMIAH BLOCKER: BEFORE WE GO FORWARD, THE QUASI JUDICIAL AND START WITH THE DISCLOSURES.

>> JEB SMITH: I HAVE NONE. >> HENRY DEAN: NONE.

>> JEREMIAH BLOCKER: I HAVE NONE AS WELL.

>> PAUL WALDRON: NONE, MR. CHAIRMAN.

>> JEREMIAH BLOCKER: THANK Y YOU.

ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD? OKAY.

SO THIS IS ONE OF THE AGENDA ITEMS THAT HAS BEEN NOTICED FOR REMOTE PARTICIPATION. LET'S GO AHEAD AND OPEN UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENT. I DO SEE -- WE DID HAVE A CALL.

THANK YOU. >> HENRY DEAN: OKAY.

WE WILL OPEN ITEM 4 UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.

IS THERE A CALLER ON THE LINE? IF SO, NAME AND ADDRESS.

A CALLER ON THE LINE FOR ITEM 4? I DON'T THINK SO AT THIS TIME. MY SCREEN SAYS WENT FROM ONE TO ZERO SO I DON'T THINK THERE IS. ANYBODY FROM THE -- IN THE AUDIENCE HERE TO SPEAK ON PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEM 4? ITEM 4? FATEMI PUD.

SEEING NONE, CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT.

>> JEREMIAH BLOCKER: SO PUBLIC COMMENT --

>> I DON'T RECALL ANY PUBLIC COMMENT AT PZA LEVEL FOR WHAT

IT IS WORTH. >> JEREMIAH BLOCKER: PUBLIC COMMENT CLOSED. BACK TO THE BOARD.

>> HENRY DEAN: I WILL MAKE A MOTION.

>> JEREMIAH BLOCKER: PLEASE, SIR.

>> HENRY DEAN: MOTION TO ENACT ORDINANCE 2021 --

>> I JUST HAVE A QUESTION. ARE YOU SIGNING -- DID YOU

ASSIGN ONE FOR ITEM 3 YET, 22? >> JEREMIAH BLOCKER: WE HAVE

NOT. >> CLERK: OKAY, 22.

>> HENRY DEAN: FATEMI COMMERCIAL PUD BASED ON NINE

FINDINGS OF FACT. >> SECOND.

>> JEREMIAH BLOCKER: A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER DEAN AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST.

ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION? >> YES, I HAVE A QUESTION.

MR. BURNETT, I SEE OFF WAIVER. CAN YOU CARE TO EXPLAIN THE

WAIVER. >> GIVE ME ONE MOMENT, SIR.

I APOLOGIZE. I THINK I CAN -- KNOW IF THIS IS UP AND RUNNING. GET TO THE SITE PLAN.

WHAT THE SITE LOOKS LIKE WITH THE DAY CARE NEXT DOOR, OUR SITE AND THE CHURCH AND THE BIG ATLANTIC SELF-STORAGE.

YOU CAN SEE THE ROW BUILDINGS FOR SELF-STORAGE AND LOOK AT THE PROJECT HERE. FOR THE 35-FOOT DEVELOPMENT EDGE THAT YOU WOULD PROPOSE BETWEEN THIS SITE AND THE ADJACENT SITE IN BETWEEN THE SITE AND THE ADJACENT SITE.

>> MY QUESTION IS THIS AND I APPRECIATE YOU BRINGING UP THE MAP BECAUSE I REVIEWED THAT AS WELL.

MY CONCERN -- AND THIS IS JUST A MILD CONCERN BUT IT IS A CONCERN, WHEN ASK YOU FOR THE WAIVER AND THEN WE GO TO THE TEXT, THE PUD TEXT, AND SOME OF THE USES THAT ARE PERMISSIBLE ON THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY, PAGE 5 OF 19 ESPECIALLY, THERE ARE KENNELS THERE. AND I JUST -- I HAVE A CONCERN ABOUT SOME OF THE COMPATIBILITY WITH ESPECIALLY THE CHURCH OR

THE DAY CARE WITH THAT. >> WE WILL AGREE TO ELIMINATE

KENNELS. >> THAT'S ALL I HAVE RIGHT

[02:55:02]

THERE, MR. BURNETT. >> MR. MCCORMACK LINE THROUGH KENNELS IN THE PUD. THE APPLICANT STIPULATES TO IT.

>> THANK YOU, MR. BURNETT. THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.

THAT'S ALL I HAVE. >> JEREMIAH BLOCKER: THANK Y

YOU, COMMISSIONER SMITH. ANY FURTHER COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD? SEEING NONE, LET'S GO AHEAD AND VOTE. THAT PASSES 5-0.

MR. BURNETT, ANOTHER AGENDA ITEM.

ARE WE READY TO GO BACK TO -- OKAY.

>> I'LL COME BACK. >> JEREMIAH BLOCKER: BACK TO ITEM NUMBER 3, MOTION BY COMMISSIONER DEAN AND A SECOND

BY COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST. >> I THINK YOU MADE A MOTION AND A SECOND. BRAD AND JOE VERY KINDLY HAVE MADE REVISIONS TO PRESENT TO YOU.

I WILL SAY THE MOTION IS GOOD EXCEPT IT WOULD HAVE NOW AN

ORDINANCE NUMBER WHAT -- >> 23.

>> 23, THAT WOULD BE IT. >> MR. CHAIRMAN, THANK YOU AGAIN FOR THE TIME. AS PATRICK INDICATES, WE HAVE MADE THE CHANGES THAT THE BOARD HAD REQUESTED.

AND I BELIEVE YOU ALL HAVE COPIES NOW, AND I WILL JUST RUN THROUGH THEM THOUGH FOR THE PUBLIC ON THE OVERHEAD.

AND WE HAVE DONE THIS AS A READ LINE.

PURSUANT TO THE BOARD'S MOTION IN SECTION -- SUBSECTIONS B-2 AND SUBSECTION C, WE HAVE REMOVED THE REQUIREMENT IN THAT THE RENTAL AGREEMENT INCLUDE THE ADDRESS OF THE OWNER AND PROPERTY MANAGER, OF COURSE, IN SECOND CONTACT PERSON PROVIDES FOR THE NAME AND THE 24-HOUR TELEPHONE NUMBER.

WE REMOVED THAT. MOVING DOWN FURTHER, STILL IN THE APPLICATION PROCEDURES. THE APPLICANT WOULD BE REQUIRED TO EXECUTE AN AFFIDAVIT WHICH CERTIFIES, AMONG OTHER THINGS, THAT THEY ACKNOWLEDGE AND AGREE THEY SHALL OBTAIN A COPY OF A GOVERNMENT ISSUED PHOTO IDENTIFICATION FOR EACH TENANT, LESSEE OR GUEST. AND BEFORE I PROCEED USE FURTHER CLARIFICATION FOR THE BOARD WHETHER THEY WANTED THAT TO BE EVERY TENANT AND GUEST AND THE OCCUPANT OR JUST THE CONTRACTING OR THE PRIMARY GUEST, FOR INSTANCE --

>> THAT WAS INTENDED TO CONTRACT SIGN.

>> JEREMIAH BLOCKER: WE WILL BE LOOKING AT A RESPONSIBLE PARTY. WHATEVER PARTY IS RESPONSIBLE FOR ENTERING INTO THE AGREEMENT OF THE CONTRACT.

COMMISSIONER DEAN? >> HENRY DEAN: OH, NO, I WILL

CONCLUDE WHEN HE IS DONE -- >> JEREMIAH BLOCKER:

UNDERSTOOD. >> HENRY DEAN: NOT ON THAT O

ONE. >> I APPRECIATE THAT.

THEN WITH THAT, I WILL MAKE A FURTHER REVISION JUST TO CLARIFY IT WILL BE A PHOTO IDENTIFICATION FOR THE CONTRACTING TENANT, LESSEE OR GUEST.

MOVING FURTHER, NOW WE HAVE MOVED INTO THE USE AND OCCUPANCY STANDARDS IN THE SUBSECTIONS OCCUPANCY ADDED THE PHRASE EXCLUDING CHILDREN 12 YEARS OF AGE AND UNDER. INCLUDING CHILDREN 12 YEARS OF AGE AND UNDER. THEY WILL NOT BE COUNTED TOWARD THE MAXIMUM OF TEN TRANSIENT OCCUPANTS.

MOVING TO THE NEXT PAGE, SUBSECTIONS FOUR ON SOLID WA WASTE. WE HAVE INDICATED HERE THAT THE CONTAINERS SHALL BE PLACED AT THE CURBSIDE NO EARLIER THAN SUNSET THE DAY BEFORE PICKUP AND PICKED UP NO LATER THAN SUNRISE THE FOLLOWING DAY. I THINK THAT REFLECTS WHAT THE BOARD HAD IN MIND. THEN MOVING FURTHER UNDER THIS SUBSECTION ON REQUIRED P POSTINGS.

WE REMOVED THE REQUIREMENT THAT THE POSTING INCLUDE THE ADDRESS OF THE OWNER, PROPERTY MANAGER. SO JUST NAME AND PHONE NUMBER.

THE NEXT PAGE ON SUBSECTIONS G ON ENFORCEMENT.

ADDED LANGUAGE THAT REFLECTS THAT IN THE EVENT OF A VIOLATION OF THIS TENANT OR LESSEE.

GUEST OR OCCUPANT THE COUNTY SHALL FIRST PURSUE ENFORCEMENT AGAINST LESSEE, TENANT OR POCK PANT OF THREE VIOLATIONS OF TENANTS, LESSEE, OBJECTING PANTS OR GUEST OFFICE SH SHORT-TERM RENTAL. COUNTY WILL PURSUE ENFORCEMENT

[03:00:04]

AGAINST THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL THAT THE COUNTY AT ANY TIME WILL PURSUE ENFORCEMENT OF OWNER OR OPERATOR IF A VIOLATION BY THE OWNER OR VIOLATOR.

>> QUESTION. BRAD, WHY ARE WE PUTTING " "MAY,"MAY PURSUE. LEAVING IT UP TO JUDGMENT.

IF IT IS ON ORDINANCE I WANT IT ENFORCED AND THAT'S WHY WE GET ISSUES DOWN THE ROAD WITH SOME OF THE OTHER ENFORCEMENT.

>> THE IDEA OF USING THE WORD "MAY" IS NOT TO INDICATE THAT THE COUNTY WOULD NOT PURSUE, BUT NOW IS ALLOWED TO PURSUE.

AS I UNDERSTOOD IT BEFORE RESTRICT THE COUNTY'S ABILITY TO GO AFTER THE PROPERTY OWNER INITIALLY IF THE TENANT IS VIOLATING AND ONLY AFTER REP REPEATED VIOLATIONS AND THEN AT THAT POINT WE MAY GO AFTER THE PROPERTY OWNER AS WELL AS STILL THE TENANTS. SO I THINK THAT WAS THE IDEA TO

STILL ALLOW THOSE OPTIONS. >> I AM NOT AN ATTORNEY SO I SO I WANTED TO MAKE SURE I UNDERSTOOD THAT.

>> I APPRECIATE YOUR INDULGENCE THAT WE ARE DOING IT A LITTLE ON THE FLY AND ENCAPSULATES A LITTLE BIT WHAT YOU ARE LOOKING FOR. HEAD TO THE FINAL PAGE AND ADDRESS THE PHASING IN -- THE SHORTENED PHASING IN SO MAY REQUIRE SHORTENED SCRUTINY. SHORT-TERM VACATION RENTALS IN EXISTENCE PRIOR TO MAY 4, 2021 WILL TEMPORARILY BE ALLOWED TO MAINTAIN AN OCCUPANCY OF 20 TRANSIENT OCCUPANTS OF ALL OTHER SECTIONS 2.0.2.4. AND 20 TRANSIENT OCCUPANTS SHALL BE RETAINED FROM MAY 4, 2022.

AT WHICH TIME THE MAXIMUM TRANSIT OCCUPANCY TO 17 TRANSIENT OCCUPANTS. MAY 4, 2023, THE MAXIMUM TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TO 14 TRANSIENT OCCUPANTS.

MAY 4, 2024. THE MAXIMUM OCCUPANCY SHALL BE REDUCED TO AND REMAIN TEN TRANSIENT OCCUPANTS IN SUBSECTIONS E 2 ABOVE. NO SPECIAL VESTING PROCESS OR FEE TO OBTAIN THIS VESTING AND ELIGIBILITY TOWARD THE NORMAL SHORT-TERM VACATION -- SH SHORT-TERM RENTAL REGISTRATION

PROCESS. >> AS A REMINDER THAT SECTION E 2 ABOVE EXCLUDED CHILDREN AGES 12 YEARS AND UNDER.

>> JUST IN SUMMARY, THAT WOULD MEAN FROM ONE YEAR FROM TODAY THE MAXIMUM OCCUPANCY WOULD BE 20 AND REDUCED BY THREE TO 17 FOR ONE YEAR AND THREE TO 14 BY ANOTHER YEAR UNTIL IT DROPS DOWN ALL THE WAY TO 10 AND THOSE ARE THE ONLY CHANGES THAT WE MADE. WE STAND BY FOR ANY ADDITIONAL

CHANGES. >> JEREMIAH BLOCKER: BRAD, THANK YOU FOR YOUR HARD WORK ON THIS.

A LOT OF MOVING PIECES AND DOING THIS A LONG TIME AND THANKS FOR THE GREAT WORK. AND THE WHOLE TEAM.

COMMISSIONER DEAN, I THINK YOU WANT TO SPEAK AT THE END AFTER HE GOES THROUGH THESE CHANGES. AT THE END NOW --

>> HENRY DEAN: QUICKLY, QUICKLY.

I REALLY WANTED TO DO EXACTLY WHAT YOU DID TAMPA COMMEND BRAD AND JOE FOR SUCH GOOD AND EXCELLENT WORK, QUICK WORK OVER THE NOON HOUR. THAT CAPTURED ALL OF THE RECOMMENDATIONS WE MADE IN OUR MOTION AND SECOND AND THEN FINALLY I WANT TO THANK PAUL AND YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN, FOR EXCELLENT RECOMMENDATIONS TO GET THIS NEAR PERFECT ORDER FOR

A DIFFICULT ISSUE. >> JEREMIAH BLOCKER: WELL, IT HAS BEEN A TEAM EFFORT. THANK YOU TO EVERYBODY.

ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM THE BOARD?

>> MR. CHAIR, JUST AS A FORMALITY, DOES THE MAKER OF THE MOTION ADOPT AND ACCEPT THE MAKER AND THE SECOND ADOPT AND ACCEPT THE PROPOSED LANGUAGE DESCRIBED BY MR. BOLTICE I THURSDAY, YOULY REVIEWED THE CHANGES OFFERED BY BRAD AND JOE THAT CAPTURES WHAT OUR DISCUSSIONS AND THOUGHTS WERE

IN MY OPINION. >> JEREMIAH BLOCKER: RIGHT NOW

GO TO COMMISSIONER SMITH. >> JEB SMITH: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. I HAVE A QUESTION OF MR. BALTICE WITH REGARD TO IT BECAUSE I HAD WRITTEN DOWN A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT ON -- ABOUT THE THREE COMPLAINTS VIOLATION AND I HAD IN MY NOTES SIX MONTHS NOT 60 DAYS TO ACCUMULATE THAT. THAT ONE SAID 60 DAYS.

TAMPA WILL YOU PUT THAT BACK UP.

I AM NOT SURE IF I SAW THAT DIFFERENT.

SIX MONTHS. >> JEREMIAH BLOCKER: I MISSED

[03:05:06]

THAT WELL. >> 0 DAYS.

I THOUGHT IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE SIX MONTHS.

180 DAY.S. >> KOPZ SMITH, THANK YOU FOR CATCHING THAT. I THOUGHT I HEARD BOTH AND I

WENT WITH THE ONE I HEARD LAST. >> THAT IS FINE.

A 6 IN THERE ANYWAY. THAT IS THE ONLY THING I HAD

DIFFERENT IN NOTES. >> FOR RECORD PURPOSES FOR COMMISSIONER DEAN AND COMMISSIONER WALDRON, YOU MEANT IT FOR A SIX-MONTH PERIOD? THANK YOU.

>> JEREMIAH BLOCKER: THANK Y YOU, COMMISSIONER SMITH, THAT WAS GOOD CATCH. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION FROM THE BOARD? A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER DEAN AND A SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST.

[5. Public Hearing * COMPAMD 2020-08 Stonecrest (Transmittal). Transmittal hearing for COMPAMD 2020-08, known as Stonecrest, 6164 Race Track Road, a Comprehensive Plan Amendment to amend the Future Land Use Map designation from Rural/Silviculture (R/S) to Residential-C (RES-C) for approximately 46.53 acres for a residential community consisting of a maximum 147 dwelling units. The Planning and Zoning Agency recommended approval for Transmittal to State and Regional Agencies with a 7-0 vote at its April 1, 2021 regularly scheduled meeting. The Agency discussed the impacts of future growth and the impacts on schools.]

I THINK WE ARE READY TO VOTE AND THAT PASSES 5-0.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU TO STAFF.

AND THE PUBLIC FOR THEIR INPUT. NOW WE WILL GO TO AGENDA NUMBER

5. >> I HAD A LITTLE HIATUS AND NOW TIME BACK. DOG BURNETT ST. JOHNS LAW GROUP. I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF KB HOME.

I WILL TALK MORE KB. OUR ENGINEER ON RECORD IS VINCE DUNN AND ASSOCIATES AND DAVID TAYLOR.

VINCE DUNN HAS BEEN DOING A LOT OF WORK FOR US.

THE PROJECT AREA IN SPOTS WHERE A LOT OF DEVELOPMENT OVER THE YEARS. PRESSURE AND STEADY GROWTH.

RACETRACK ROAD IN BETWEEN I-95 AND U.S. 1.

LITTLE BIT OF ZOOMED IN AERIAL WORK FROM GOOGLE.

YOU CAN SEE TWIN CREEK'S LAKE FEATURE DOWN ON THE BOTTOM OF THE SCREEN SHOWS UP VERY VI VIVIDLY FROM THE AIR.

THE SITE THERE IN PURPLE LOOKING AT THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP, YOU CAN SEE IT IS SUR SURROUNDED BY INTENSIVE COMMERCIAL USE AND FURTHER TO THE EAST IS RESIDENTIAL C SOUTH OF THE DOG TRACK. LOOKING AT THIS VIEW PROCEEDER VIEW OF DURBIN NATIONAL. WHERE IT SITS BETWEEN DURBIN AND THE DEVELOPMENT OF GREYHOUND TRACK.

THE URBAN SERVICE AREA FOR DURBIN NATIONAL.

A LITTLE LOOK FOR THEIR SITE PLAN AND OUR SITE LINES UP WITH THE PHASE 3 AND 4 PARK AREA IS LOCATED ONE PAGE FOR DURBIN NATIONAL TO SHOW THE INTENSITY OF THE PROJECT.

PRESIDENT PUD. IF WE COME THROUGH TRANSMITTER COME TO YOU WITH THE PUD ZONING APPLICATION AND I DOPTION OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. PUD LAYS OUT WITH LOTS.

ROUGHLY 46 ACRES. 16 ACRES OPEN SPACE AND 11 W WETLAND ACRES CONTEMPLATED OF BEING PRESERVED.

A FOOTNOTE ON KB. I THINK THIS IS WORTH NOTING IF YOU WERE OUT AND ABOUT AND IN THE COMMUNITY REASON RUSSELL SAMPSON ROAD. LOOK AT HERITAGE OAKS THAT KB DID AND YOU CAN SEE WHAT THEY CAN DO WITH THE PROJECT ON THIS SCALE. IT IS AMAZING THE SPECIAL MINISTRIES IN THIS SITE AND HOW IT PLACE OUT.

ANYWAYS, POINT THAT AS A FOOT NOTE AND ONE OF THE ONES THEY ARE VERY PROUD OF AND HAVING BEEN THE REPRESENTATIVE OF THAT APPLICATION. I AM ALSO PROUD OF -- A GREAT PROJECT IN THIS COMMUNITY. TAKE A LITTLE CLOSER LOOK AT THE AERIAL AND OVERLAYING IN OUR SITE PLAN TO IT.

YOU CAN SEE HOW WE BUTT UP AGAINST THE NORTH PROPERTY BOUNDARY, THE SOUTH SIDE, WITH THE DURBIN NATIONAL OFFICE AND HOW THE OLD PROCESS LINE UP. AND NOT ONLY SINGLE FAMILY THERE. YOU HAVE TOWN HOME PROJECT AND MULTIFAMILY PROJECT IN THE AREA AND YOU CAN SEE THE DOG TRACK AS WELL. AS FAR AS COMP PLAN.

WE CHECKED THE BOXES ON THE COMP PLAN IN EVERY CATEGORY AND DONE THE MARKET STUDY. ECONOMIC IMPACT ANALYSIS AND IT IS IN YOUR REPORT IN FRONT OF YOU.

THE QUICK PART OF IT IS THAT IT IS SIGNIFICANT IN ITS JOB

[03:10:01]

CREATION. 237 JOBS DURING THIS PROJECT.

BIG NUMBERS FOR REVENUE FOR THE COUNTY REVENUE FOR THE WORKERS AND THE COST OF THE PROJECT IN GENERAL.

FISCAL IMPACT ANALYSIS DOES RESULT IN ANTICIPATED HOME SALES THAT IT DOES RESULT IN A POSITIVE AD VALOREM AND ROUGHLY $2.2 MILLION IN IMPACT FEES IN CONNECTION WITH THIS PROJECT.

MARKET DEMAND. I DON'T KNOW IF WE NEED TO GO INTO THIS MUCH DETAIL. WE RECOGNIZE THIS AREA RACETRACK ROAD AND DEMAND. KB IS EXCITED ABOUT THIS LOCATION AND VERY GOOD DEVELOPED QUICKLY SOLD QUICKLY.

AND TECHNICAL ASPECT OF COMP PLANS.

WHEN OFF COMP PLAN AMENDMENT AND ECONOMICS DEVELOPMENT, ANY ONE OF THESE JOB CREATION, PRESERVATION OF THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT AND OTHER PUBLIC BENEFIT.

WE RUN THROUGH THIS THE COMP PLAN AMENDMENT.

UTILITIES. JEA AVAILABILITY IN THAT AREA.

A LETTER FOR THEM MARCH OF THIS YEAR AND CURRENT TRAFFIC.

SO ONE OF THOSE UNIQUE SITUATION WHERE DIRECTLY ACCESS LINK HAVE CAPACITY. WE MORE THAN LIKELY WILL HAVE A PORTION OF SHARE AGREEMENT FOR CONCURRENCY AND ONE OF THOSE SECTIONS WITH A DIRECT ACCESS LINK HAS CAPACITY.

PUBLIC BENEFIT WE ANTICIPATE THAT AFTER WE FILE.

IF WE ARE TRANSMITTED AFTER WE FILE THE TRANSPORTATION CNCURRENCY. AND SCHOOL CONCURRENCY.

AND I THINK I WILL STOP FOR A MOMENT AND SAY WE GOT A 7-0 RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL AT PZA.

DR. MCCORMICK VOTED FOR IT AS PZA'S POINT ABOUT THE SCHOOL BOARD AND THIS IS A BIG PART OF IT.

IT IS ANTICIPATED AT LEAST RIGHT NOW THERE IS CAPACITY IN THIS AREA FOR SCHOOLS. SO NOW WHETHER THAT HOLDS OUT ALL THE WAY THROUGHOUT PROCESS FROM KB SFPT THEY HAVE DONE THE PROCESS NUMEROUS TIMES WITH THE SCHOOL DISTRICT.

PRESIDENT COVERAGE CALCULATES YOUR NUMBERS.

AND KB IS PREPARED TO DO THAT IF THEY NEED TO.

AT THIS PARTICULAR MOMENT THERE IS CAPACITY.

ENVIRONMENTAL NO SPECIES OR WILDLIFE THAT ARE ENSTAGE ERRED OR THREATENED. WE CONFIRM THAT.

HERITAGE SERVICES, NO ARCHAEOLOGICAL SIGNIFICANCE ON THE SITE. IN NO EAGLE'S NEST ON THE SITE.

FIRE HYDRANTS AND PUBLIC UTILITIES WITHIN FIVE MILES OF A FIRE STATION. AND, AGAIN, WE THINK WE CHECK EVERY ONE OF THE BOXES ANY ONE OF THESE SHOULD BE SUFFICIENT FOR A CAMP PLAN AMENDMENT. AND LASTLY JUST LOOKING AT THE MAP FOR WHERE THIS IS LOCATED AND HOW IT FILLS IN AND WHAT IS AROUND IT. URBAN SERVICE AREA AROUND THE END. ALL THE RED LINE THE SERVICE AREA AND AROUND THE PROJECT RATHER THAN BEING IN THAT AREA.

IF THIS IS A COMP PLAN AMENDMENT THAT REALLY WARRANTS TRANSMITTAL AND WE APPRECIATE YOUR CONSIDERATION.

THANK YOU. >> JEREMIAH BLOCKER: THANK YOU, MR. BURNETT. ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD? SEEING NONE. WE WILL GO TO PUBLIC COMMENT.

ONE OF THE AGENDA ITEMS THAT WE WILL BE HAVING REMOTE PARTICIPATION. SORRY.

>> HENRY DEAN: WE WILL TAKE UP PUBLIC COMMENT FOR ITEM 5.

ITEM 5. RIGHT NOW I DON'T SEE ANY CALL-INS. ANYONE IN THE PUBLIC IN THE AUDIENCE? PUBLIC COMMENT, NUMBER 5.

SEEING NONE. >> JEREMIAH BLOCKER: PUBLIC COMMENT CLOSED. BACK TO THE BOARD.

>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. IF I MAY THROUGHOUT CHAIR ADDRESS MR. BURNETT. YOU DESCRIBE THE PUBLIC BENEFITS PERTAINING TO THIS PROJECT, RIGHT, AND THE FISCAL IMPACT AND PAYMENT OF IMPACT FEES.

IS THAT -- >> YES, SIR AND GUESS THE ONLY THING WE WILL ADD KNOW BETTER WITH ADOPTION BECAUSE IN TRANSPORTATION WE CAN'T FILE THAT UNTIL AFTER TRANSMITTAL.

AT THE ADOPTION HEARING, WE WOULD BE A PLACE TO PRESENT

THOSE ITEM. >> RIGHT, AND MR. CHAIR, I JUST WANTED TO SAY AT THE LAND USE DECISION PHASE, YOU NOTE BOARD HAS MAXIMUM FLEXIBILITY AS TO APPROVE AND DENY.

[03:15:04]

ONE THING I AM CONCERNED ABOUT AS YOUR COUNTY ATTORNEY IS THAT FOR THE -- THE IMPACT FEES, WHETHER, THE APPLICANT IS REPRESENTING THAT THEY WILL PAY THE IMPACT FEES OR, YOU KNOW, THE -- IN THE LEGISLATION THAT WAS PASSED THIS YEAR, THERE WAS A CLARIFICATION TO THE IMPACT FEE CREDIT, TRANSFERABILITY ISSUE. AND THE LANGUAGE INCLUDED IN YEAR ESSENTIALLY PROVIDES FOR CREDITS THAT WERE CREATED BEFORE OR AFTER THE EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE LEGISLATION.

THE COUNTY'S POSITION HAS BEEN FOR EXISTING IMPACT FEE CREDIT AGREEMENTS, THOSE ARE BY AGREEMENT, BY CONTRACT.

THERE ARE SOME LIMITATIONS IN THE USE OF THOSE CREDITS AND THE BOARD NEEDED AN APPRECIATION IF THIS APPLICATION AND FUTURE ONES T TOO, BUT, YOU KNOW, THE APPLICANT'S POSITION ON THAT -- WOULD THE APP BE PAYING IMPACT FEES OR BUYING CREDITS POTENTIALLY, YOU KNOW, WITH THE ISSUE OF WHETHER THOSE IMPACT FEE CREDITS ARE ACTUALLY TRANSFERABLE GIVEN THAT THEY ARE MOST IF NOT ALL OF THEM ARE TIED UP IN AGREEMENTS. MR. BURNETT, ARE YOU MAKING ANY

SENSE OF KIND OF MY QUESTION? >> SURE, MR. MCCORMACK ONE THING IS I DON'T KNOW THAT WAS COMING TOWARD ME AND WARRANTS DISCUSSION AND THAT YOU RAISE IT HAS MERIT AND WE WILL HA HAPPILY REVIEW THAT AND DOCTOR AND LET THE FOLKS AT KB HOME BETTER UNDERSTAND SO YOU AND I CAN HASH OUT TO UNDERSTAND THE ISSUE FOR THEM AND WE WILL BE READY BEFORE THE OPPOSITION HEARING AND HAVE THE BILL -- I AM NOT SURE THE DYNAMICS ON THAT YET. OBVIOUSLY -- IT IS NOT UNTIL TRANSMITTAL THAT WE CAN FILE OUR TRANSPORTATION CONCURRENCY APPLICATION. SO HOPEFULLY WE GET THROUGH TRANSMITTAL TODAY AND WE ARE ABLE TO DO THAT AND HIGH PRESSURE THAT OUT AFTER THAT BEFORE AN ADOPTION HEARING.

>> PATRICK MCCORMICK: MR. CHAIR, FAIR ENOUGH.

I THINK THIS WAS PASSED BY THE LEGISLATURE FRIDAY HAS NOT BEEN SIGNED YET BUT MAY BE SIGNED. I WANT TO AIR THAT ISSUE FOR

EVERYBODY'S FUTURE EXPECTATION. >> JEREMIAH BLOCKER: THANK Y YOU, MR. MCCORMACK. COMMISSIONER WALDRON NEXT.

>> PAUL WALDRON: INTERIOR ROADS PUBLIC OR PRIVATE.

>> THEY WILL BE PRIVATE UNLESS YOU WANT TO ACCEPT THEM.

>> PAUL WALDRON: I DON'T SEE IT IN WRITING.

I DIDN'T SEE IT IN THE PUD TEXT, THAT'S WHY I WAS ASKING.

>> I WILL MAKE SURE IT IS IN THE PUD TEXT.

I WILL MAKE SURE WHEN BY BACK TO THE OFFICE.

>> JEREMIAH BLOCKER: THANK Y YOU.

THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER WAL WALDRON.

COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST. >> CHRISTIAN WHITEHURST: THANK YOU. THROUGHOUT CHAIR, WE WILL HAVE THE INFORMATION WHETHER THEY WILL BE PAYING IMPACT FEES OR SEEKING CREDIT BEFORE WE MAKE THE SECOND VOTE?

>> PATRICK MCCORMICK: YES, MR. BURNETT IS REPRESENTING THAT HE WILL REVIEW THAT WITH HIS CLIENT KIND OF WHAT THE ISSUE IS AND I WILL BE HAPPY TO DISCUSS THIS FURTHER WITH MR. BURNETT TO KINDS OF FULLY INFORM HIS CLIENT ON THAT, AT THIS POINT, NEW LEGISLATION. AND I WOULD BELIEVE THAT SHOULD THE BOARD VOTE TO TRANSMIT THAT INFORMATION WILL BE BACK BEFORE THE BOARD AT LEAST PART OF THE SECOND -- THE ADOPTION HEARING.

>> CHRISTIAN WHITEHURST: THANK YOU MR. MCCORMACK, KNOWING WHERE IT WAS I LOOKED AT IT WITH A VERY CRITICAL EYE, BUT THAT IT 78.2 HAS ADEQUATE CAPACITY WAS SURPRISE TO SOMEBODY LIKE ME WHO DRIVES THAT STRETCH OF ROADWAY.

NORTHWEST IS GETTING BUSIER AND BUSIER, CAPACITY WITH WATER, SEWER, ROADWAYS AND SCHOOLS ARE TOP OF MIND FOR MY DISTRICT.

78.1, HOWEVER, IS DEFICIENT -- BY THE WAY STAFF DID A GREAT JOB. GROWTH MANAGEMENT, TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT OF PUTTING ALL THIS INFORMATION INTO THIS REPORT AND A LOT OF QUESTIONS I HAD GOING INTO THIS WERE ANSWERED AND I WANT TO THANK YOU FOR DOING A FANTASTIC JOB WITH THIS AGENDA ITEM BUT 78.1 ON RACETRACK ROAD HAS A PLAN IN PLACE THAT IS FUNDED TO BE FOUR LANES.

THAT WILL BE REMEDIED AND YOU WILL PAY SOME PROPORTIONATE FAIR SHARE INTO THAT TO SORT OF MITIGATE THE TRAFFIC FOR THE

[03:20:01]

1608 TRIPS. >> THAT IS WHAT WE ANTICIPATE,

YES, SIR. >> CHRISTIAN WHITEHURST: PER THE STAFF REPORT THAT IS WHAT I WAS ALLUDING TO.

GIVEN THE ADEQUATE ROAD CAPACITY AND THE LETTER THAT NIECE HIGH SCHOOL HAS CAPACITY AT THE SCHOOL, I AM IN FAVOR OF THE PROJECT. SO I WILL BE VOTING YES.

I AM READY TO MAKE A MOTION. >> JEREMIAH BLOCKER: OKAY, THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST.

PLEASE GO AHEAD. >> CHRISTIAN WHITEHURST: I WILL MOVE TO TRANSMIT COMP AMENDMENT 2020-08 STONECREST

BASED UPON FINDINGS OF ACT. >> HENRY DEAN: A SECOND.

[6. Public Hearing * REZ 2021-03 Stokes Landing Townhomes. Request to rezone approximately 33.46 acres of land from Open Rural (OR) to Workforce Housing (WH) to allow up to 320 Townhome units with at least 40% designated as Workforce Housing as required per the Land Development Code. The Planning and Zoning Agency recommended approval with a 7-0 vote at its April 1, 2021 regularly scheduled meeting. The Agency discussed ingress and egress to the property, increased traffic on U.S. 1 and potential impacts to Stoke Landing Road. (Part 1 of 3)]

>> JEREMIAH BLOCKER: A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST.

SECOND BY COMMISSIONER DEAN. ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION BY THE BOARD? SEEING NONE.

PLEASE VOTE. IT PASSES 5-0.

>> GENTLEMEN, THANK YOU. >> JEREMIAH BLOCKER: MOVE ON TO AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 6 A QUASI-JUDICIAL MATTER.

START WITH DISCLOSURES, COMMISSIONER.

>> CHRISTIAN WHITEHURST: WHITEHURST THURSDAY APRIL 29 AT APPROXIMATELY 10:30 A.M. I HAD A MEETING WITH.

BETH BREEDING, BOB PORTER IN THE PROJECT TO DISCUSS THE PROJECT -- BEAR WITH ME WITH MY NOTES HERE.

WE TALKED ABOUT OBVIOUSLY ITS LOCATION.

IS THIS THE RIGHT PLACE GEOGRAPHICALLY AND THEY ARE NOT REQUESTING ANY ADDITIONAL DENSITY ALTHOUGH WORKFORCE HOUSING ALLOWS FOR THAT. A 20-FOOT BUFFER REQUIRED AND THEY ARE GIVING A 35-FOOT BUFFER.

WE DESCRIBED THE CONCERN OF THE 50-YEAR RESIDENT WHOSE PROPERTY BORDERED THIS PROPERTY. THAT'S ALL I HAVE.

>> JEREMIAH BLOCKER: COMMISSIONER WALDRON?

>> PAUL WALDRON: THURSDAY APRIL 29,2021 A MEETING WITH BETH BREEDING, BOB PORTER AND STAFF.

MOSTLY WE DISCUSSED BOB'S FISHING TRIP TO COSTA RICA, MOW PWEELT FEES AND AFFORDABLE HOUSING ZONING.

WE DID HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF DISCUSSION ON THE LOCATION OF THE PROJECT BEING AWAY FROM REGIONAL FACILITIES AND WE DISCUSSED THE NEED FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

BUT MOST OF THE CONVERSATION WAS ABOUT FISHING.

>> JEREMIAH BLOCKER: OKAY, THANK YOU.

COMMISSIONER SMITH. >> JEB SMITH: THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. APRIL 29, 2021, I MET AT 11A WITH MISS BETH BREEDING, MR. BOB PORTER, CHRISTINE AND TERESA BISHOP. WE WENT THROUGH MANY THINGS AND KEPT A HANDOUT THAT BETH BREEDING AND MR. PORTER PRESENTED AND I WILL SUBMIT THIS TO THE CLERK OF THE COURT BUT WE WENT DOWN THROUGH THIS. ACCESS INGRESS, EGRESS, HIS F FORAL ARCHAEOLOGICAL SOCIETY THROUGHOUT COUNTY, WE WENT THROUGHOUT WETLANDS AND IMPACT AND LEAVING 1.49 ACRES OF WETLANDS. OPEN SPACE DENSITY, WILDLIFE MAPS, SOIL BORINGS. INTERNAL ROADS IS WILL BE QUIET AND FDOT AND DEALING WITH THEM AND WE WENT THROUGHOUT BUFFERS THAT HAVE BEEN PREVIOUSLY MENTIONED.

IN ADDITION TO THIS WE TALKED ABOUT THE NEIGHBOR MR. LEROY KENSLAW AND HIS SUPPORT FOR THE PROJECT AND ALSO SOME OF HIS COMMENTS ABOUT IT. AND THAT IS ALL I HAVE TO

DISCLOSE ALREADY MR. CHAIRMAN. >> JEREMIAH BLOCKER: THANK Y YOU, COMMISSIONER SMITH. COMMISSIONER DEAN?

>> HENRY DEAN: YES ON THURSDAY APRIL 29 ABOUT 1:00, I MET WITH BETH BREEDING AND BOB PORTER AND REALLY DISCUSSED IN GENERAL ALL THE COMMENTS, PARTICULARLY MADE BY COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST ARE THE ONES I REMEMBER THE MOST.

>> JEREMIAH BLOCKER: THANK Y YOU.

ALSO A MEETING THURSDAY APRIL 22,2021 AT APPROXIMATELY 1:30 WITH BETH BREEDING HERE AT THE COUNTY OFFICE.

WE DISCUSSED DENSITY, WORKFORCE HOUSING, ITS IMPACT ON THE COUNTY AND HOW THIS PROJECT WOULD SPECIFICALLY IMPACT THE NEED OF ST. JOHNS COUNTY BOARD FOR HOUSING AND DISCUSSED THE INPUT FROM RESIDENTS IMPACTED BY THIS.

DISCUSSED THE SCOPE OF THE PROJECT, THE SCHEMATICS AND W

WETLAND I7 PACTS. >>.

>> BETH BREEDING: BETH BREEDING.

IT SOUNDS LIKE YOU HAVE DONE MOST OF MY PRESENTATION FOR ME.

I VERY MUCH APPRECIATE THAT AND SO I WILL MAKE QUICK.

I AM EXCITED. AS YOU KNOW I WORKED VERY HARD ALONG WITH TO YOU GET THIS W WORKS FOR HOUSING ZONING DESIGNATION. I AM VERY EXCITED TO BRING BUFFER 286 UNITS. THE ACTUAL DENSITY THAT IS

[03:25:05]

ALLOWED BECAUSE IT IS MULTIFAMILY -- EXCUSE ME, MIXED USE IS 414. DUE TO SITE CONSTRAINTS WE WERE NOT ABLE TO MEET THAT MAXIMUM. HERE IS AN AERIAL THAT YOU CAN SEE THERE WAS A PRIOR PIT OF THE DCHLT D.O.T. BACK IN THE 60S AND IT WAS T HAS SINCE BECOME A WETLAND SINCE IT WAS A BORROW PIT AND WE ARE USING THAT FOR STORM WATER FOR THE PROJECT. AS YOU SEE WE ARE IN THE MIXED USE DISTRICT. THE ZONING IS O. R.

THE SITE PLAN CHANGED FROM PLANNING AND ZONING AGENCY.

I SAY ALL THE TIME WE DEVE DEVELOPERS DON'T LIKE TO GIVE YOU A SET IN STONE SITE PLAN BECAUSE AS YOU GO IN ENGINEERING THINGS COME UP. WHAT CAME UP WITH MR. KENSLAW.

KIND ENOUGH TO EXPRESS THEIR CONCERNS A 20-FOOT COMPATIBILITY BUFFER IS REQUIRED BY CODE.

AFTER MEETING WITH HIM AND SEEING THE -- THE VERY MATURE GROWTH THAT IS THERE AND HIS NEED FOR PRIVACY, WE BESIDEED TO GIVE HIM 25 FEET SO IF A T TWO-STORY BUILDING COMES IN HE WILL MAINTAIN HIS PRIVACY AND PUT UP A FENCE TO KEEP PEOPLE FROM TRESPASSING ON TO HIS PROPERTY.

WE HAVE MET WITH D.O.T. WE HAD OUR -- AND THE MINUTES OF THAT MEETING ARE WITH STAFF. THEY ARE ALLOWING A LEFT END AND GETTING A LEFT END ON U.S. ONE.

WE STOPPED THE ACCESS THAT WE WERE TRYING -- THAT WE WERE LOOKING TO DO CONTINUE TO STOKES LANDING ROAD AND THIS WOULD BE LESS TRAFFIC ISSUES ON THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE BEHIND THIS PROJECT AND WE WILL JUST HAVE THE ONE ACCESS POINT.

THE INTERNAL ROADWAY ALSO HAVE PARK BEING ON THEM.

PRIVATE FOR THAT PURPOSE AND NO ADDITIONAL DRAIN ON COUNTY RESOURCES FOR THAT. WE ARE VERY EXCITED THAT WE ALREADY DID THE ARCHAEOLOGICAL REPORT AND NOTHING WAS FOUND.

WE DID OUR PHASE ONE AND OUR ENVIRONMENTAL REPORTS AND NO ENDANGERED SPECIES FOUND AND I HEARD OF AGGRESSIVE COTTONMOUTH ON THE PROPERTY BUT THEY ARE NOT PROTECTED.

THAT BEING SAID, WHAT DO WE HAVE HERE -- CONCURRENCY.

WE HAVE A LETTER FROM THE SCHOOL BOARD THAT CONCURRENCY IS AVAILABLE. AND WE HAVE FILLED OUT PROPORTIONATE FAIR SHARE AGREEMENT AND GOT BACK FIRST COMMENTS AND ASKED FOR THAT TO BE SET FOR HEARING.

25% OPEN SPACE THE FLOOD WAY AND THE FLOOD ZONE AND WE MEET WITH ALL THE REQUIREMENTS AND THIS WILL BE SUBMITTED SHORTLY.

WE SUBMIT THE ENGINEERING PLANS TO ALL THE UTILITIES IN THE COUNTY AND THAT IS BEFORE WE HAD TO MODIFY THE SITE PLAN AND NOW THAT WE MODIFY THAT WE ARE BACK WITHIN TWO WEEKS FOR THE ENGINEERING PLANS FOR EVERYONE. I THINK WE EVEN THOUGH USING THE WORKFORCE HOUSING DESIGNATION WE ARE NOT GETTING ANY ADDITIONAL DENSITY WITH THAT.

AND WE MEET THE REQUIREMENTS IF WE WENT TO THE PUD AND CHARGE HIGHER PRICES. BUT IT IS A PASSION OF MINE FOR WORK FORCE AND NOT ALWAYS ABOUT MAKING THE MOST AMOUNT OF MONEY THAT WE CAN BUT DOING WHAT IS RIGHT FOR THE COMMUNITY AND WE THINK WE ARE WELL-PLACED AND VERY EXCITE TO BE TRYING TO BRING THIS MANY UNITS TO ACTUALLY SERVE THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE OUTSIDE OF THE COUNTY HOPEFULLY AND SERVE THIS COUNTY AND CAN'T AFFORD TO LIVE HERE. WE ARE TRYING -- THE NICHE THAT WE ARE TRYING TO FILL HERE. THAT'S ALL.

>> JEREMIAH BLOCKER: GO AHEAD AND OPEN THE PUBLIC COMMENT.

MR. MCCORMACK? >> PATRICK MCCORMICK: YES, MISS -- IF I MAY THROUGH THE CHAIR, MISS BREEDING, YOU MAY HAVE A LITTLE HINT ABOUT WHAT I MAY BE ASKING ABOUT.

YOU WILL PROBABLY HEAR DURING MR. BURNETT'S PRESENTATION OF THE IMPACT FEE CREDITS. THAT ISSUE COULD POTENTIALLY PERTAIN TO THIS PROJECT AS W WELL.

DO YOU HAVE ANY -- ANY THOUGHTS OR STATEMENT WOULD YOU LIKE TO MAKE ON THAT ISSUE TO THE BOARD ON THIS PARTICULAR APPLICATION?

>> THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT WILL HAVE ITS OWN IMPACT FEE CRE CREDITS. IT IS ABOUT 120,000 THAT WE ARE HAVING TO PAY FOR PROPORTIONATE FAIR SHARE.

THEY WILL MOST CERTAINLY BE USING THEIR OWN IMPACT FEE CREDITS AND ALL I AM AWARE OF AT THIS TIME.

>> PATRICK MCCORMICK: IF YOU MAY THROUGHOUT CHAIR AGAIN.

THANK YOU, MISS BREEDING. >> HENRY DEAN: WE WILL NOW

[03:30:03]

TAKE PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEM 6, THE STOKES LANDING TOWNES TOWNHOMES. I SEE NO CALL-IN YET.

ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC? YES, SIR.

>> YES, MY NAME IS LEROY K KENLAW.

AND I LIVE ON STOKES ROAD. I OWN 161 STOKES LANDING ROAD 620 FEET ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY THAT IS IN QUESTION.

I HAVE MET WITH MISS BREEDING AND BOB PORTER.

JUST TO LET YOU KNOW IT WAS A VERY NICE MEETING WITH THEM.

THE ONLY THING THAT I AM REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT BECAUSE WE ORIGINALLY STARTED OFF WITH 320 UNITS.

I AM DOWN HERE -- HEARING MISS PROCEEDING SAY 186 AND 194 --

>> 286. >> 286, I AM SORRY.

I AM NOT SURE EXACTLY WHICH ONE BECAUSE OF THE SITE PLAN THE WAY IT IS UP. IS THE ONLY CONCERN I HAVE IS DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF MY HOME AS PROTECTING MY PRIVACY AND I DON'T SEE REALLY WHERE THAT WILL BE OMITTED RIGHT IN FRONT OF ME IF SHE CAN KIND OF COME UP AND HELP ME WITH THAT AND I HAVEN'T SEEN A SITE PLAN AND I AM NOT REALLY UNDERSTANDING EXACTLY AND ACTUALLY THE ONLY CONCERN THAT I HAVE THAT AND THEN THE DRAINAGE, YOU KNOW, FROM THE CLEAR.

AND I KNOW THEY GOT TO RAISE IT.

HOW MUCH THAT WILL IMPACT ME WHICH I SPOKE WITH BOB PORTER.

HE ASSURED ME THAT HE WILL DO THE BEST THAT THEY CAN TO DO MAKE SURE MY PROPERTY IS PROTECTED.

>> YES. AND JUST EXPAND ON THAT.

I WAS IN THE MEETING WITH MR. PORTER WITH THE ENGINEER'S OFFICE. PREVIOUSLY WE HAD THE LOT DRAINING FROM THE MIDDLE TO THE BACK AND MIDDLE TO THE FRONT AND WE CHANGED THAT SO IT CHANGED ALL TO THE FRONT SO IT WOULDN'T IMPACT THE 35 FEET AND MAINTAIN AND WE SAID TO THE ENGINEER THAT WE PROBABLY NEEDED TO ADD A CULVERT BECAUSE MR. KENSLAW TOLD US AT TIMES THE WATER LEVEL RISES OVER THE ROADWAY AND WE ASKED THE ENGINEER TO MAKE SURE WITH THE ENGINEERING PLANS TO ADD A CULVERT UNDER THE ROAD TO STOP WHAT IS CURRENTLY HAPPENING WITH HIM EVEN WITHOUT THE DEVELOPMENT. SO WE ARE TRYING TO TAKE ALL OF THOSE THINGS INTO CONSID CONSIDERATION.

I EVEN BOUGHT A POINTER ON AMAZON AND CAME CRUSHED.

IF YOU LOOK AND SEE WHERE YOUR HOUSE IS AND WHERE THE PROPERTY BOUNDARY IS. RIGHT HERE.

>> RIGHT. >> SO IF WE GO TO THE SITE PLAN YOU CAN TELL, -- THIS IS THE LINE HERE.

HOMES HERE AND 35 FEET AND AS THICK AS THIS THANK IS WITH THE TREES. WE HAD THE SURVEYOR COME OUT AND SET STAKES TO SEE HOW MUCH OF A BUFFER THAT WILL PROVIDE AND NONE OF THIS WILL COME OUT. THE ENTIRE 35 FEET IS PRESERVED

IN ENTIRETY. >> I AM UNDERSTANDING WHAT WE AGREED UPON AND TALKED ABOUT WAS THE 26 UNITS THAT IS BEING OMITTED IN FRONT OF MY HOME IS NOW GOING TO BE ADDED BACK IN

FRONT OF MY HOME? >> NO, WE NEVER SAID THEY WOULD BE OMITTED IN FRONT OF YOUR HOME.

WE SAID IN ORDER TO GIVE THE 35-FOOT BUFFER, WE LOST 26 UNITS. WE NEVER SAID THERE WOULD BE NO UNITS WITH YOU. WE AGREED TO DO INSTEAD OF 20

[7. Public Hearing * VACROA 2019-01 - a Public Hearing to vacate portions of Renoir Blvd. The applicant requests a vacation of a portion of unopened/unimproved Renoir Blvd (7th Street, a 40 foot right-of-way by Plat) within the Hilden Subdivision. Based on staff's review thus far, traffic patterns will not be negatively impacted, and no party will be unreasonably affected by the requested vacation.]

FEET, 35 FEET SO -- AND ADD A FENCE SO THERE WOULD BE --

>> JEREMIAH BLOCKER: MISS -- WE WILL PAUSE THIS AGENDA ITEM TO GIVE YOU A MOMENT TO TALK AND MOVE TONIGHT NEXT AGENDA ITEM AND GIVE YOU AN OPPORTUNITY.

PAUSE ON AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 6 AND MOVE ON TO AGENDA ITEM

NUMBER 7. >> GOOD AFTERNOON, ZACK CRABTREE. I, TOO, WISH I WAS TALKING ABOUT FISHING AS WELL, BUT I AM ACTUALLY LEAVING TOMORROW TO GO TO CLEARWATER TO FISH. BUT HERE ON THE VACATION OF A RIGHT-OF-WAY. A VERY INTERESTING LITTLE SPOT.

IT IS KIND OF JUST SOUTH OF NIECE HIGH SCHOOL IN AN EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD. MR. GARRISON IS HERE.

HE WAS THE ORIGINAL DEVELOPER OF THIS LAND AND YOU CAN SEE OUR REQUEST IS TO VACATE A SMALL PORTION OF THE ROAD THIS IS THE ACTUAL SITE MAP. HERE WE SEE THE AERIAL WITH THE

[03:35:07]

ODD SHAPE. WE WILL GET INTO THAT A LITTLE BIT. AND THE RED SECTION IS IN THE LONGATED VERSION WHERE WE ARE TALKING ABOUT IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD. A JAE EASEMENT ON THE OUTSIDE OF IT ON THE APPROVED. WE ARE TALKING OF THE UNAPPROVED. THE EASEMENT THAT IS CURRENTLY BEING USED, I WOULD ASSUME, BY NEIGHBORHOOD CARS.

AND AGAIN THIS SHOWS THE JAE EASEMENT AND MR. GARRISON'S PROPERTY EXTENDS BEYOND ALL OF THAT AND YOU CAN SEE THE COUNTY RIGHT-OF-WAY THAT IS UNAPPROVED RIGHT NOW.

THIS IS THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY THAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT. AGAIN, THE ODD SHAPE.

I WILL GET INTO THAT IN JUST A BIT.

AND THERE IS CURRENT CONCERNS THERE.

THIS IS GOING ON FOR THREE YEARS, BELIEVE IT OR NOT AN WE ARE FINAL LEER HERE. TIMELINE.

2003 IS WHEN THIS ALL START. MY UNCLE'S OFFICE DRAFTED WITH THE CURRENT DEVELOPMENT. WE STARTED BUILDING THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND WE REALIZED WE WILL NEED SOME CONSERVATION EASEMENTS. IN 2003, THE -- 2007 IS WHEN WE VACATED THE ORIGINAL PLAT AND TOOK A LOT OF THE LOTS ADJACENT OWNED BY MR. GARRISON OUT OF THE PLAT.

UNFORTUNATELY THIS WHOLE ENTIRE THING IS DUE TO A SCRIVENER'S ERROR THAT HAPPENED IN 2007. IN LITTLE SECTION OR THAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT AND ATTEMPTING TO VACATE BECAUSE WE HAD A SCRIVENER'S ERROR IN THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION WHERE THIS WAS INTENDED TO BE VACATED AS PART OF THE ORIGINAL PLAT VACATION BACK THEN. IT IS NOW.

WE ARE KIND OF STUCK TO WHERE WE ARE AT TODAY.

THREE YEARS AGO ATTEMPT TO GET A DRIVEWAY PERMIT TO ACCESS OUR PROPERTY. DUE TO THE LENGTH, THE COUNTY WASN'T WILLING TO WANT TO EXTEND THE DRIVEWAY PERMIT THAT FAR AND LEFT WITH A VACATION OF A RIGHT-OF-WAY.

AGAIN, THE DEVELOPMENT CONTINUED AFTER THE PLAT VACATION AND CAME BACK TO NO MORE LAND.

EXCEPT FOR THE PROPERTY BEHIND. THERE IS NO MORE DEVELOPMENT THAT CAN BE KIND OF OCCURRED ON THE PROPERTY AT ALL AND IF IT DID, IT WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH A REZONING IF MORE THAN LIKELY HAS TO DO WITH THE PUD WHICH IS BACK IN HEARINGS.

AND, HOWEVER, THIS IS NOT REALISTIC WITH THE UPLANDS.

MOST OF IT IS CONSERVATION EASEMENT AND MR. GARRISON AKA THE DEVELOPER IS WORKING WITH EPA WITH OTHER WATER MANAGEMENT EFFORTS IN RECORDS TO THIS CONSERVATION EASEMENT AND JUST A VERY SMALL PORTION OF UPLANDS WE WOULD LIKE TO HAVE ACCESS.

RIGHT NOW WE DON'T HAVE LEGAL ACCESS BECAUSE WE NEED TO GET THROUGH AN UNAPPROVED RIGHT-OF-WAY.

THE ODD SHAPE, I THINK IT WILL BE A CAUSE OF CONCERN BECAUSE WE ATTEMPTED THREE YEARS TO NEGOTIATES WITH THE ASSOCIATION. WHEN THIS DEVELOPMENT WAS INITIALLY FORMED IN THE PLAT, IF YOU LOOK BACK AT THE MAP -- IT WILL BE EASIER TO DO THIS WAY, YOU CAN SEE THAT POND WAS A PART OF THE RETENTION SYSTEM AND DEEDED OVER TO THE HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION AT FLORENTINE.

THE HOMEOWNER ASSOCIATION CONTROLS THAT PIECE OF PROPERTY AND SERVICES THE WATER MANAGEMENT OF THE WHOLE ENTIRE NEIGHBORHOOD. AS YOU CAN SEE, THE AREA NEXT TO WHERE THE -- WHERE OUR REQUEST IS ACTUALLY ONLY BY THE ASSOCIATION. THAT START AUGUST OF 201, OUR COVERINGS WITH THE ASSOCIATION TO ATTEMPT TO HAVE THEM CONTENT TO THIS ITEM. WE INITIALLY FILED A VACATION OF RIGHT-OF-WAY OF THE ENTIRE SECTION.

THROUGH COUNTY DISCUSSIONS WAS REALLY WITHOUT THE CONSENT OF THE ASSOCIATION WE COULD NOT LEGALLY REQUEST FULL PORTION OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY TO BE VACATED. THE REASON BEING IF YOU VACATE A RIGHT AWAY YOU PROVIDE TIGHTTH TO THE PROPERTY, 50% TO THE LANDOWNERS WHICH IS WHY WE ARE REQUESTING THAT OUR 50% BE VACATED BECAUSE WE CAN'T WORK ON DEAF EARS UNFORTUNATELY.

WE ASKED MEETINGS AND OFFERED TO PURCHASE THE PROPERTY AND OFFERED ANYTHING UNDER THE SON AND GOING ON FOR THREE YEARS TO WORK WITH THE ASSOCIATION IN THAT MATTER.

WE ARE ONLY REQUESTING OUR PORTION THAT IS LEGALLY TO REQUEST TO VACATE. LETTERS IN JEA THAT IS IN OUR FILE. NO UTILITIES IN THIS.

COULD NOT BE AN EXTENSION OF THE ROADWAY AND TO HAVE A SMALL PORTION OWNED BY THE COUNTY IS 20-FOOT WIDE.

[03:40:02]

UNREALISTIC TO BE DEVELOPED INTO ANYTHING IN THE FUTURE AND SR. S OTHER THAN A CONSERVATION BUT A SMALL BIT OF OPTIONS THAT WE ARE TRYING TO ACCESS.

WHAT DO WHAT DO WE DO WITH THE LAND? SIMPLY PUT, HAVE LEGAL ACCESS. WE HAVE NO LEGAL ACCESS.

PART OF A PLAT BACK IN THE DAY. WE ARE TRYING TO GET PROPER ACCESS TO THE PIECE OF PROPERTY AGAIN GOES BACK TO THE NEW DEVELOPMENTS. THE PROPERTY IS UNDEVELOPER.

WE WERE TRYING TO GET ONE PIECE OF PROPERTY TO BUILD THE RETIREMENT HOME ON THE UPLANDS AND NO REALLY COULD DO A PUD REZONING SIMPLY BECAUSE THE ECONOMICS TONIGHT WORK AT ALL.

CONSERVATION EASEMENTS. IN SUMMARY, THE LIMITS OF THE VACATION REQUEST AS A RESULT OF THE HOA REALLY NOT WANTING TO CONSENT TO OUR VACATION AND RIGHT-OF-WAY.

AND THIS WAS ASSOCIATED FOR THREE YEARS NOW.

PRESIDENT PROPERTY THE PROPOSED VACATION DOES NOT AFFECT LEGAL ACCESS AND THIS ROADWAY ALMOST SERVICES A DEAD END.

ANY TIME OF PUD A ROUNDABOUT FOR EMERGENCY VEHICLES TO GET ACCESS TO. I BELIEVE THE JEA LIFT STATIONS HAVE A ACCESS TO HAVE PROPER TURN AROUND FOR THE BIG TRUCKS.

DOES NOT HOUSE ANY PUBLIC UTILITIES OR ANY TRAILS.

AND IF APPROVED, THE COUNTY WILL BE VACATING ANY INTEREST IN THE SUBJECT PROPERTY WHICH TAKES THE BURDEN OFF OF THE COUNTY AS WELL FOR THAT LITTLE PORTION.

FOR THAT TURN IT OVER TO THE BOARD FOR QUESTIONS AND PUBLIC

COMMENTS. >> JEREMIAH BLOCKER: GREAT.

ANY FEEDBACK FROM THE BOARD? GO AHEAD AND OPEN IT UP TO PUBLIC COMMENT. ONE OF THE AGENDA ITEMS NOTICE $FOR REMOTE PARTICIPATING, SO WE WILL OPEN IT UP TO CALLS AS

WELL. >> HENRY DEAN: WE HAVE NOW TAKE UP PUBLIC COMMENT ON ITEM 7.

I SEE NO CALL-INS. ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC WISH TO SPEAK? YES, SIR, PLEASE COME FORWARD.

NAME AND ADDRESS, PLEASE, SIR.

>> -- >> IF ANYONE ELSE MR. PLEASE APPROACH THE PODIUM IF ANYONE WISHES TO SPEAK.

>> DAVID SMITH,00

MR. CHAIR. >> OUR CONCERN -- I REPRESENT SEVERAL OF THE HOMEOWNERS, PROPERTY OWNERS FROM THE COMMUNITY GOING ON ALMOST TWO DECADES SINCE I PURCHASED MY HOME 17 YEARS AGO, WE HAVE ENJOYED OUR PRIVACY BACK THERE AND WE PURCHASED PREMIUM PRESERVE LOTS BY THAT BUFFER AND THE PROPERTY IF QUESTION, AND THIS SITE IS LITERALLY 50 FEET BEHIND OUR HOME. AND THIS DEAD-END STREET HAS AFFORDED US THE PRIVACY AND PURCHASE OF THE LOT FROM JB HOMES ALL THOSE YEARS. OUR CONCERN THAT WILL PROHIBIT TRAFFIC, HUMAN TRAFFIC OR CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT AT THIS SENSITIVE ENVIRONMENTAL ERA. AND MOST RECENTLY THE USE OF FIREARMS BEHIND OUR RESIDENTIAL HOPES ON THAT PROPERTY ON ANY GIVEN OPPORTUNITY WITH THE PUBLIC HIGH SCHOOL NEARBY.

AND OUR CONCERN THERE LOW PRESSURE MORE ACTIVITY IN LINE WITH THAT TYPE OF -- TYPE OF ACTION.

PRESIDENT USE OF PERFORMS ON THE PRIVATE PROPERTY.

WE DO NOT WANT TO MAKE RENOIR A THROUGH STREET AT ANY TIME OR A ACCESS POINT. PERHAPS ANOTHER PLACE THAT CAN COME THROUGH BUT I HAVE A PETITION, KIND OF A GRASS ROOT PETITION, PROPERTY OWNERS, PRIMARY PROMPT OWNERS WHO SIGNED THIS AND OPPOSED TO THE MOTION TO VACATE RENOIR

BOULEVARD. >> JEREMIAH BLOCKER: THANKY YOU, SIR. PATRICK, DOES HE NEED TO GIVE

THAT PETITION TO -- >> PATRICK

>> PATRICK MCCORMICK: THE PETITION SHOULD BE PLACED IN

. >> HENRY DEAN: IF YOU HAND IT

TO THE CLERK'S OF. >> ANY NAME IS GARY GARRISON.

2315 PONTE VEDRA BEACH. I AM THE OWNER OF THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION HERE. AND IT IS PROPERTY THAT WAS LEFT OVER FROM -- I DEVELOPED THE WHOLE SUBDIVISION OF FLORENTINE 270-SOME LOTS AND MR. SMITH WHO JUST MOVED ONE OF THE PEOPLE WHO BOUGHT THE PROPERTY.

[03:45:01]

AND WHAT'S LEFT THERE IS PRIMARILY WOODED WETLANDS.

I DID FIND A WHOLE AREA BACK THERE THAT IS ABOUT HALF AN ACHE THEIR I WOULD LIKE TO GAIN ACCESS TO JUST FOR RECREATIONAL PERIOD USE AND BUILDING A SMALL HOME OR CABIN FOR RETIREMENT YEARS. I HAVE TO DISAGREE WITH MR. SMITH WHO JUST SPOKE. MR. SMITH USES THAT END OF THE STREET MAP. HE USES THAT STREET FOR HIS OWN PERSONAL USE. FIVE OR SIX CARS.

AND PARKS IN PARKING SPACES THAT ARE DESIGNATED FOR SERVICE VEHICLES THAT I PROVIDED FOR ST. JOHNS UTILITIES FOR THE LIFT STATION, USES A PORTION OF THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION RETENTION POND I CAN'T AS HIS OWN BACK-DOOR PATIO.

THAT'S FINE. YOU KNOW I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH HIM DOING THAT BUT I HAVE A PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY THAT IS AVAILABLE TO ME AND AS A OWNER OF THE PROPERTY I SHOULD HAVE RIGHTS TO ACCESS MY PROPERTY AND THAT IS THE REASON WHY WE ARE HERE TODAY. THERE WAS 40-FOOT PIECE THAT WAS LEFT OUT AND ALL THE REMAINING LOTS THAT WERE BACK IN THERE, THE COUNTY WAS UNABLE TO CORRECT THAT CLERICAL ERROR AND WHAT WE INTENDED TO DO BACK IN 2005 I BELIEVE THAT WAS.

BUT, YEAH, I JUST ASK THAT YOU GIVE ME PROPER CONSIDERATION AS ANY OTHER HOMEOWNER OR LANDOWN WEAR HAVE AND PROVIDE ME WITH ACCESS TO IT. THAT'S ALL I HAVE.

>> JEREMIAH BLOCKER: THANK Y YOU, SIR.

>> HENRY DEAN: ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENT? ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENT? ON ITEM 7.

APPARENTLY THAT'S IT. >> JEREMIAH BLOCKER: WITH PUBLIC COMMENT CLOSED BACK TO LEGAL.

>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. ONE POINT OF CLARIFICATION ON TOPIC OF LEGAL ACCESS TO THE PROPERTY.

OF COURSE THIS IS CURRENTLY A LEGAL RIGHT-OF-WAY AND THERE IS LEGAL ACCESS. THERE IS LEAGUE ACCESS TO THE PROPERTY FOR TO GET ACCESS TO THIS SQUARE OF RIGHT-OF-WAY. THE DIFFERENCE WOULD BE IF VACATED IN THE PRIVATE PROPERTY WOULD BE A DRIVEWAY AS OPPOSED TO COUNTY ROAD STANDARDS. I BELIEVE THERE IS A DIFFERENT ACCESS POTENTIALLY FROM A DIFFERENT PART OF HIS PROPERTY THAT WOULD REQUIRE TRAVERSING MORE OF THOSE WETLANDS IN ORDER TO REACH THE UPLANDS. I WANTED TO ADDRESS THAT THE TOPIC OF LEGAL ACCESS. THANK YOU.

>> JEREMIAH BLOCKER: THANK YOU OKAY, BACK TO THE BOARD.

DEAN DMREENZ CHAIRMAN. THIS IS IN DIS--

>> HENRY DEAN: MR. CHAIRMAN, THIS IS IN DISTRICT FOUR.

IF YOU ARE SUPPORTING THIS, I WILL BE HAPPY TO MAKE A MOTION.

I WOULD LIKE TO MOVE TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2021.

>> 195. >> HENRY DEAN: AINVOLVING VACROA 2019-01, RENOIR BOULEVARD, PETITION TO VACATE A

PORTION OF RENOIR BOULEVARD. >> CHRISTIAN WHITEHURST:

SECOND. >> JEREMIAH BLOCKER: A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER DEAN AND SECOND BY COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST.

ANY DISCUSSION FROM THE BOARD? SEEING NONE, PLEASE VOTE.

IT PASSES 5-0. OKAY, ARE WE READY TO GO BACK TO AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 6? MISS BREEDING?

>> YES, SIR. >> JEREMIAH BLOCKER: WHILE YOU ARE DOING THAT GO TO COMMISSIONER WALDRON.

>> I WANT TO AMEND MY QUASI-JUDICIAL.

I DID HAVE A COUPLE OF PHONE CONVERSATIONS OF LEROY KENLAW.

A COUPLE OF MONTHS WITH YOU I -- I HAD TWO OR THREE PHONE

CALLS WITH MR. LEROY. >> JEREMIAH BLOCKER: YE.

THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER WAL WALDRON.

[03:50:05]

>> WE AGREED WHERE HIS HOUSE IS WE WILL PUT A SIX-FOOT FENCE FOR AT LEAST 150 FEET, WE MAKE SURE IT IS AN EIGHT-FOOT FENCE

TO ENSURE ADDITIONAL PRIVACY. >> JEREMIAH BLOCKER: SIR, IS THAT YOUR UNDERSTANDING? WILL YOU COME UP SO WE CAN MAKE SURE FOR THE RECORD EVERYONE AGREES.

>> YES, THAT IS CORRECT. AND LIKE I SAID BEFORE, IT WAS AN HONOR WORKING WITH THEM. THEY WORKED WITH ME VERY WELL TRYING TO PROTECT MY PRIVACY IS THE ONLY THING I AM CONCERNED ABOUT. LEAVE THE NATURAL VEGETATION THAT IS THERE WHICH THEY AGREED TO, WE ARE GOOD.

>> JEREMIAH BLOCKER: THANK Y YOU.

RECOGNIZE LEGAL. >> I WANT TO SAY MISS BREEDING FOR THAT WORKING WITH THE CONSTITUENT AND COMPROMISE.

DOES THE STAFF FEEL THAT IS DESCRIPTIVE OR HAVE A LITTLE MARKER ON A SITE PLAN TO PUT INTO THE RECORD I MEAN, WHEN YOU ALL TALKED ABOUT THAT IS THAT MAYBE SOMETHING YOU CAN TO DO PUT A LITTLE MARKER WHERE THE FENCE WOULD BE?

>> YES, AND WE CAN ALSO PUT IT ON THE ENGINEERING PLANS EVEN THAT YOU DON'T PUTS FENCING ON ENGINEERING PLANS TO SHOW THAT

WE ARE COMPLYNG. >> TYPICALLY WITH A REZONING WE DON'T REQUIRE A SITE PLAN IF IT IS CONCEPTUAL.

IT IS NOT A RECORDED LEGAL DOCUMENT OR REQUIRED EXHIBIT.

SHE DOES HAVE THIS PROJECT CONSTRUCTION SUBDIVISION PLANS AND I WILL BE THE ONE REVIEWING THAT AS WELL.

>> JEREMIAH BLOCKER: MR. CEARLEY, CAN YOU WAIT HERE,

PLEASE. >> MR. CHAIR, I FEEL THAT IS

SUFFICIENT. >> I AM PROBABLE GOOD.

I WAS GOING TO ASK. THE CODE IS SIX FEET, CORRECT? SO DOES THERE HAVE TO BE A WAIVER IN THE PUD TO HAVE AN

EIGHT-FOOT SECTION. >> I UNDERSTAND THEY ARE AGREEING TO IT AND NOT COME BACK LATER ON AND HE DOESN'T GET A EIGHT-FOOT FENCE DUE TO CODE.

>> JEREMIAH BLOCKER: SOMETHING TO BUILD INTO THE LANGUAGE.

>> I SEE THAT AS THE EIGHT-FOOT FENCE IS ON THE APPLICANT'S PROPERTY, RIGHT, THAT'S COR CORRECT?

>> CORRECT. >> JEREMIAH BLOCKER: I THINK THE ISSUE WOULD BE -- COMMISSIONER WALDRON, APPRECIATE YOU BRINGING THAT UP.

COULD THAT RUN INTO A CODE ISSUE BECAUSE THIS IS EXCEEDING THE CODE. WHAT DO WE NEED TO DO IF THIS IS APPROVED TO THE BOARD, WHAT DO WE NEED TO DO TO BUILD IN --

OR ARE WE MISSTATING IT. >> MAYBE I AM MISSING IT.

>> WE ARE LOOKING UP THE CODE RIGHT NOW.

INDIVIDUAL SITES YOU CAN GO TO EIGHT FEET IN CERTAIN

CIRCUMSTANCES. >> JEREMIAH BLOCKER: DO YOU

NEED FEW MINUTES TO LOOK IT UP. >> WE ARE LOOKING IT UP.

[8. Consider appointments to the Ponte Vedra Zoning and Adjustment Board. Currently there are two vacancies on the Ponte Vedra Zoning and Adjustment Board both due to an expired term. Please find attached for your review and consideration two applications Richard Ensslen - District 4, and Jane Rollinson - District 4, along with a recommendation from the Ponte Vedra Zoning & Adjustment Board. Ponte Vedra Zoning District Regulations, Ordinance 2018-16, Section XII.B.2 states, "Appointments of board members shall be for four (4) year terms with total service limited to two (2) such terms." The suggested motions reflect such a term.]

>> JEREMIAH BLOCKER: DO YOU NEED A FEW MINUTES.

>> IF YOU DON'T MIND. >> JEREMIAH BLOCKER: COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST. NO? ALL RIGHT. ARE WE HANDLE AGENDA ITEM NUMBER. DAWES AND GO TO AGENDA ITEM NUMBER AND COME BACK TO THIS. MAKE SURE WE GET ALL THIS CORRECT. YES, MA'AM.

>> MELISSA LUNDQUIST: GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSIONERS.

MELISSA LUNDQUIST, ASSISTANT TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONER. SIMPLE TWO APPOINTMENTS TO TO THE PONTE VEDRA ZONING AND YOU JUSTMENT BOARD.

TWO VACANCIES DUE TO EXPIRED TURNS.

TWO APPLICATIONS THAT WE RECEIVED DURING THE ADVERTISING PERIOD. WE DID RECEIVE A RECOMMENDATION THE PONTE VEDRA ZONING -- SORRY THE PONTE VEDRA ZONING AND ADJUSTMENT BOARD RECOMMENDING BOTH OF THE TWO APPLICANTS THAT IS ALSO IN YOUR PACKET. THESE TERMS ARE FOR FOUR-YEAR TERMS. PACEICS OF THIS ITEM IF THERE

[03:55:02]

ARE ANY QUESTIONS FOR ME I WILL BE HOPE THAT ANSWER THIS FOR YOU. ANY QUESTIONS FOR MISS LUNDQVISR. LET'S OPEN UP TO PUBLIC COM

COMMENT, AGENDA ITEM 8. >> HENRY DEAN: PUBLIC COMMENTS TO ITEM 8, THE PONTE VEDRA ZONING ADJUSTMENT BOARD.

I SEE NO CALL-INS. ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC WISH TO SPEAK. SEEING NONE, I THINK THAT

CLOSES PUBLIC COMMENT. >> JEREMIAH BLOCKER: THANK Y YOU, MR. VICE-CHAIR. PUBLIC COMMENT IS NOW CLOSED.

BACK TO THE BOARD. IS THERE A MOTION?