Jul 12, 2021 Ponte Vedra Zoning and Adjustment Board

[Call meeting to order]

[1. PVZVAR2021-01 730 Ponte Vedra Blvd - Retaining Wall. Request for a Zoning Variance to Section VIII.N.2 of the Ponte Vedra Zoning District Regulations in order to construct a retaining wall of no more than twelve (12) feet in height and located twenty (20) feet from an existing retaining wall in lieu of the four (4) foot maximum height and forty (40) foot separation requirements. Presenter - Jack Ossi]

[00:05:09]

ITEM NUMBER ONE ON THE AGENDA. PVZVAR2021-01. LIKE THE MEMBERS TO ADDRESS THE

[00:05:20]

>> TURN YOUR MIC ON. >> HELLO. , I VISITED THE SITE.

BOTH CERTAINLY OVERLOOK AND PONTEVEDRA BOULEVARD. I WAS AMAZED AT THE ELEVATION DIFFERENCES BETWEEN THE 2 HOMES. I DID NOT ANYONE ON PROPERTY.

HOWEVER I DID RECEIVE A LETTER FROM I BELIEVE MR. INGRAM AND I HAD NO FURTHER DISCUSSION AFTER

RECEIVING THAT LETTER. >> OKAY, I HAD SEVERAL DIFFERENT CONTEXT.

ONE MR. INGRAM DELIVERED A LIVER TO BE AT MY HOUSE INVITING ME TO VIEW THE PROPERTY. I THEN DID THIS AT THE PROPERTY WITH MY HUSBAND.

MS. WINTERS AND MR. INGRAM TOWARD US THROUGH THE PROPERTY. WE LOOK TO THE VIEWS AND SPOKE TO US ABOUT THEIR OBJECTION. ALSO HAVE A TELEPHONE CALL FROM JOHN CELLUCCI WHO IS A NEIGHBOR WHERE HE VOICED HIS OBJECTION TO THE VARIANCE. AND HE INDICATED THAT HE AND OTHER NEIGHBORS HAD SCENTED WRITTEN CORRESPONDENCE OBJECTING TO THE VARIANCE REQUEST.I INDICATED THAT THEY WERE NOT INCLUDED IN OUR PACKET AND CONTACTED THE COUNTY AND THE COUNTY DID FIND THE CORRESPONDENCE AND SUBSEQUENTLY SENT US THE MISSING STATEMENTS.

THEN I ALSO CALLED MR. CELLUCCI BACK AND CONFIRMED WITH HIM THAT WE HAD RECEIVED THEM.

>> I VISITED THE SITE AND I TALKED TO MR. AND MRS. INGRAM AND THEY SHARED WITH ME CONVERSATIONS THAT THEY HAD WITH BRAD WESTER WHO HAD MADE A PRESENTATION FOR THE APPLICANT

LAST MONTH. AND THAT COVERS IT. >> OKAY I HAVE LONG INVOLVEMENT ON BOTH SIDES. I'VE KNOWN ABOUT ONE OF 2 RATES A LOOK AND CHERYL ZOELLICK LIVED THERE PRIOR. I WAS FRIENDS WITH THEM AT THE TIME.

THE NEW OWNERS MOVED IN 2004. UP INTO THE SITE I'VE KNOWN BELK FOR A LONG TIME.

RECENTLY GOT TO KNOW VICKI. AND ON 7 30 THE HOUSE BELONGED TO TROTT AND KATHY LEE HAND.

THEY WERE FRIENDS, MY CHILDREN PLAYED SOCCER WITH THEM BECAUSE OF THEIR HISTORY 3 TIMES.

I HAVE VISITED BOTH SITES IN APRIL 2000 OR APRIL THIS YEAR. IT'S PROBABLY 20 TO 30 MINUTES COMING FROM THE BACKYARD IN 730 AND SPENDING TIME IN 12. IN CONVERSATIONS ON JULY 1 HAD A VISIT FROM BELK AND VICKI CHECKING ON HOW WENDY WAS DOING FROM THEIR C3.

AT THAT TIME CHATTED BRIEFLY ABOUT THE VARIANCE OCCLUDING THE FACT THAT THEY HAD THOUGHT THEY WERE MAKING PROGRESS EARLY ON BUT PROGRESS SEEM TO HAVE SLOWED AS FAR AS COMING UP WITH A MUTUAL AGREEMENT SITUATION. ALSO HAD A CALL FROM BELK IN THE AFTERNOON OF JANUARY 3 OR JULY 3 DISCUSSING THE FACT WE WERE COMING UP WITH A COUNTER PROPOSAL TO RESOLVE THE MATTER.

AND THEN THIS MORNING I HAD A CONVERSATION WITH BRAD WESTER CLARIFYING HE WAS NO LONGER INVOLVED WITH THE PROJECT. I'VE ALSO RECEIVED A REQUEST, I RECUSE MYSELF FOR THIS PROJECT SINCE I HAVE NO FINANCIAL INVOLVEMENT OR BUSINESS INVOLVEMENT WITH EITHER OF THE OWNERS OF 730 OR 102 OVERLOOK DRIVE NOW RECLUSIVE MYSELF. THANK YOU.

>> I'VE NOT VISITED THE PROPERTY HAVE NO CONTACT. >> I VISITED THE PROPERTY IN THE ADJACENT PROPERTY AND I HAVE NO CONTACT EXCEPT FOR THE LETTER THAT WAS SENT TO MY

HOUSE. >> I VISITED THE SITE AND IS BOOK WITH INGRAM'S PRIOR TO OUR

LAST TIME THIS WAS UP. >> WAS A PRESENTATION FROM THE HOMEOWNERS AT 730?

>> MR. PATTON FIRST IF I MAY I CAN SWEAR IN THE WITNESSES. IF YOU LIKE?

[00:10:04]

AND RAISE YOUR RIGHT HAND. AND YOU SOLEMNLY SWEAR THAT YOUR TESTIMONY WILL BE THE TRUTH, AND NOTHING BUT THE TRUTH TODAY BEFORE THE PONTEVEDRA ZONING BOARD.HANK

YOU. >> MY NAME IS CAROLINE GRUENBAUM ON ONE OF THE OWNERS.

>> MINIMUS BEDROOM GRUENBAUM AMONG THE OWNERS. >> WE APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO PRESENT A REVISED PLAN FOR OUR PROPERTY AND HOPE YOU WILL GIVE IT FULL CONSIDERATION. BUT WORKING WITH MANY CONSULTANTS ON THIS PROJECT INCLUDING BRIAN SPAHR WHO MAY BE HERE AT SOME POINT AND HE IS AN ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST.

HE WILL ALSO SOON SEE AN ENGINEERING REPORT FROM FORTRESS ENGINEERING.

WE ARE REQUESTING RELIEF FROM TO CONSTRUCT A RETAINING WALL MORE THAN 4 FEET IN HEIGHT.

WERE ASKING FOR THIS VARIANCE BECAUSE WE HAVE SIGNIFICANT HARDSHIPS ON OUR PROPERTY.

WE HAVE EXCEPTIONAL TOPOGRAPHIC CONDITIONS. UNIQUE TOPOGRAPHICAL CONDITION OF OUR HOUSE AND THE SLOPE CONSTITUTES A HARDSHIP. WE CANNOT BUILD ANY RETAINING WALL THAT IS SHORTER THAN 4 FEET BECAUSE THE FOUNDATION OF OUR HOUSE SITS ON TOP OF THE SLOPE THAT IS 12 FEET DEEP AT ITS LOWEST POINT. OUR SAFETY IS AT RISK DUE TO A FILLING BULKHEAD THAT IS THERE NOW. WE HAVE A NEED TO PROTECT THE FOUNDATION AND STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY OF OUR HOME. YOU CAN SEE FROM THE PICTURE THERE HOUSE WAS RESTING ENTIRELY ON THAT FEELING WALL. REPLACEMENT BUBBLE HELPERS PREVENT SOIL EROSION AND DAMAGE FROM SLOPE RUNOFF WITH NO IMPACT TO WETLANDS.

I THINK WE ALL UNDERSTAND EROSION AND THAT IT RAINS A LOT IN FLORIDA.

YOU CAN SEE WITH THE NAKED EYE THE HOUSE IS ON THE VERGE OF FALLING INTO THE JUANA AND NEEDS TO BE BETTER SUPPORTED. AT THE CONCLUSION OF THE HEARING ON APRIL 5 WHEN FIRST PRESENTED THIS TO THE BOARD ACKNOWLEDGE THIS HARDSHIP. THEY SAID I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY QUESTION THAT THIS IS A LEGITIMATE HARDSHIP AND SOMETHING THAT NEEDS TO BE DONE. HE SAID THIS AT THE VERY END OF OUR HEARING AS A CONCLUSION SUMMARY OF WHAT WE HAD TALKED ABOUT. HERE YOU CAN SEE THE SLOPE AND DROP OFF THE FOUNDATION OF OUR HOME IN THE EXISTING FAILING BULKHEAD.

WILL YOU NEED A VARIANCE BECAUSE OF THIS DROP OFF. AND IT IS ABOUT 12 FEET DEEP ONLY AND ITS LOWEST POINT THERE. WALT WILL NOT BE HIGHER THAN THE FOUNDATION OF OUR HOUSE. THERE IS SIGNIFICANT PRECEDENT FOR THIS PROJECT.

FOR THIS REQUEST. THIS IS THE SAME HARDSHIP THAT ALLOWED SIMILAR HOUSES ON PONTEVEDRA BOULEVARD TO GET ZONING VARIANCES TO EXTEND THEIR BULKHEADS OUT INCLUDING AT 654, 692, 724 AT 7 2600 VITA BOULEVARD. YOU CAN SEE 2 OF THESE EXAMPLES IN THIS PICTURE. OUR HOUSE WAS A SECOND FROM THE BOTTOM AND 2 WITH 3 HOUSES AWAY FROM US SO THE ONES OF THE TOP 2 ON THAT PICTURE SIMILAR TOPOGRAPHIC CONDITIONS.

AT THE END OF THE HEARING ON APRIL 5 THE BOARD RECOMMENDED WE EXPLORE AN ALTERNATIVE TO THE PLANT THAT WE ORIGINALLY PROPOSED. SUCH AS A WEDGE DIAGONAL LINE AND GET AWAY FROM OUR NEIGHBORS PROPERTY AND ADVISED TO CONSULT AN ENGINEERING FIRM FOR FULL REPORT. THEY PURSUE COMPROMISE WITH OUR IMMEDIATE NEIGHBORS TO THE SOUTH AT 102 OVERLOOK OPPOSED THE ORIGINAL PROPOSAL. YOU COULD SEE THE PICTURE THIS IS THE SCREENSHOT OF WHAT WAS RECOMMENDED AT THAT MEETING, WEDGE ON THE SOUTHERN PART OF THE PROPERTY NEXT TO THE NEIGHBORS. IN THIS PROPOSAL THEY RECOMMEND THAT THE WAGE BE AT A LOWER LEVEL THAN THE REST OF THE RETAINING WALL.

BASED ON THESE RECOMMENDATIONS WE CONSULTED WITH AN ENGINEERING FIRM FOR FULL STRUCTURAL REPORT OF THE BULKHEAD. WE DEVELOP A PLAN THAT ADDRESSED THE STRUCTURAL CONCERNS OF ENGINEERING TEAM AND THE CONCERNS OF THE NEIGHBOR ON THE BOARD. WE APPROACHED OUR NEIGHBORS AT 102 OVERLOOK DRIVE WITH A

COMPROMISE PLAN THE SERIES OF PMEETINGS AND CORRESPONDENCE. >> WE CONSULTED FORTRESS ENGINEERING GIVE US A FULL REPORT OF THE CONDITION OF THE EXISTING BULKHEAD AND GIVE US RECOMMENDATIONS FOR BUILDING A NEW ONE. THEY SAID THE BULKHEAD IS EXCEEDED ITS EXPECTED LIFESPAN OF 25 YEARS AND IS FEELING AND REQUIRES IMMEDIATE ATTENTION.

IT SHOULD BE STABILIZE IN A NEW BULKHEAD SHOULD BE BUILT SO THAT IS LEVEL TO THE FOUNDATION OF THE HOUSE. BECAUSE OF THE TOPOGRAPHY OR PROPERTY OF THE BULKHEAD WILL HAVE TO BE HIGHER THAN 4 FEET AND WILL REQUIRE A VARIANCE. THEY WROTE, IN OUR RECOMMENDATION IS TO CONSTRUCT A NEW 12 FOOT BULKHEAD ALONG THE WETLANDS BORDER AND

[00:15:01]

BELOW THE SHAREPOINT OF THE BACKFILL. >> ACCORDING TO THE ENGINEERING FROM THE ORIGINAL PLAN THAT WE PROPOSED AT THE HEARING ON APRIL 5 WAS THE SAFEST OPTION FOR STABILIZING THE FOUNDATION OF OUR HOME. TAKING THE NEIGHBOR'S CONCERN INTO CONSIDERATION HOWEVER WE WERE WILLING TO CONSIDER OTHER OPTIONS UNTIL WE CONSULTED THE ENGINEERS OF ALTERNATIVE LIKE THE ONES THE BOARD HAD MENTIONED.

THE ENGINEER STRONGLY ADVISED AGAINST STEP DOWN TIERED APPROACH BECAUSE IT WOULD NOT ALLOW ENOUGH BACKFILL TO PSUPPORT THE EXISTING BULKHEAD. DUE AGAIN TO THE UNIQUE ENGINEERING CONSTRAINTS WERE PROPERTY. CLEANS THE TOPOGRAPHY OF A LAMP THE POSITION OF OUR HOUSES FOUNDATION AND FEELING CONDITION OF THE CURRENT BULKHEAD. AS NOTED BY THE ENGINEERING REPORT SEVERAL TIERED AND TAPERED BULKHEAD ORIENTATION WERE CONSIDERED AS ALTERNATIVES.

THESE OPTIONS WERE NOT PERMITTED ADEQUATE QUITE AN RETAINING STRUCTURE TO ALLOW FOR THE PROPOSED BACKFILLING AGAINST EXISTING FAILING BULKHEAD.

IN ADDITION TIERED APPROACH WOULD NOT BE SAFE FOR OUR DAUGHTER WHO HAS A GENETIC NEUROLOGICAL CONDITION AND SPECIAL NEEDS. ANY OTHER ENGINEERING REPORTS OR CONTRACTOR QUOTES YOU MAY SEE FROM OPPOSITION TODAY DO NOT COME FROM AN ENGINEER WHO HAD BEEN TO OUR PROPERTY. WE CONSULTED 3 MARINE CONTRACTORS WHO ALL SAID THEY WOULD NEED TO BUILD THE NEW WALL AT THE SAME HEIGHT AS THE CURRENT BULKHEAD AT THE HEIGHT OF OUR FOUNDATION AT WOULD NEED TO FILL IT WITH SIGNIFICANT AMOUNTS OF DIRT TO STABILIZE EXISTING FAILING BULKHEAD. THEY WERE NOT COMFORTABLE WITH REBUILDING THE WALL AT ITS CURRENT LOCATION. WE RECEIVED A 2:55 TODAY REPORT FROM OPPOSITION FROM A DIFFERENT CONTRACTOR WITH THE PROPOSED PLAN. PTHAT PLAN THOSE CONTRACTORS DO NOT COME TO OUR PROPERTY AND THE INFORMATION THAT THEY HAD IS NOT ACCURATE PRESENTATION OF WHAT HER BULKHEAD LOOKS LIKE NOW WHAT ONE IN THE FUTURE WOULD BE ON THE DIMENSIONS NOT RIGHT AND THE MEASUREMENTS ARE NOT RIGHT THAT MAY COME UP LATER.

SO THE COMPROMISE THAT THE BOARD SUGGESTED THAT THE HEARING ON APRIL 5 INVOLVED A DIAGONAL WALL OR WEDGE. IT IS IMPORTANT TO NOTE THAT THE BOARD, YOU MIGHT REMEMBER THIS BOARD RECOMMENDED A STEP DOWN FOR THAT WAGE AREA. BUT IN THE REVISED PROPOSAL WE REMOVED THAT SPACE COMPLETELY FOR THE PLAN TO ALLOW MORE SPACE FOR SHRUBBERY AND FOR THAT MITIGATE ANY CHANGES IN OUR NEIGHBORS FEEL. THIS CHANGE WAS MADE AFTER EXTENSIVE CONSULTATION WITH HER ENGINEERS. I WANT TO REITERATE THIS GAME FOR TOTAL CLARITY. A NEW PLAN DOES NOT INVOLVE A TIERED APPROACH BUT MOVES THE SOUTHERN LINE OF THE BULKHEAD SIGNIFICANTLY AWAY FROM THE NEIGHBOR'S PROPERTY.

IT WILL BE 25 FEET AWAY FROM THEIR PROPERTY LINE ETHICS WHILE THIS POINT.

WILL NOT ABOUT THE PROPERTY LINE AND ALLOW FOR MAINTAINING THE VIEW OUTSIDE LINES OF CONSERVATION OF THE TREES AND ARMY DY THERE. THIS APPROACH WILL AGAIN ALLOW FOR CONSERVATION OF TREES, BUSHES AND SIGHTLINES. YOU CAN SEE FOR THE PICTURES A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF VEGETATION THE TARDY THERE. THIS PLAN SHALL ALLOW TO KEEP 3 EXISTING PALM TREES BETWEEN OUR NEIGHBOR'S FENCE LINE PRESERVING THE BEAUTY OF THEIR BACKYARD. YOU COULD SEE FROM THESE PICTURES OF OUR SOUTHERN NEIGHBORS PROPERTY 102 OVERLOOK DRIVE DOUBLE WALL WILL NOT DISTURB THE USE OF OUR NEIGHBOR SPACE. NEW WALL WILL NOT EVER GO ABOVE THE FOUNDATION OF HER HOME WHICH YOU COULD SEE AT THE HEIGHT OF THAT RED ARROW WITH THE PICTURE ON THE LEFT.

THE NON-OPAQUE FENCE WILL NOT BE INSTALLED REQUESTING A BALL THAT IS LEVEL AND IS NO HIGHER THAN OUR CURRENT BULKHEAD. WHICH YOU CAN SEE HERE IS BARELY HIGHER THAN THEIR FENCE OR THEIR SHRUBBERY. IN THIS REVISED PLAN FOR ANGLING THE WALL OUT 25 FEET FROM THEIR PROPERTY. THE ABUNDANCE OF SHRUBS AND TREES ARE REPLANTED IN THAT WAGE AREA I GET WILL PRESERVE THEIR VIEW. THE PICTURE ON THE RIGHT YOU WILL NOTICE THAT THEIR BACKYARD WAS BUILT LOWER THAN THEIR HOUSE.

SOME OF YOU ON THE BOARD COMMENTED ON THE VAST DIFFERENCE ON ELEVATION BETWEEN THESE 2 HOMES AND THERE'S A STEP DOWN TO THEIR POOL AREA. IT'S UNREASONABLE TO COMPARE THESE 2 ELEVATIONS OF THESE PROPERTIES. AS YOU CAN SEE FOR THE BOTTOM PICTURE ON THE RIGHT, THE WALL WILL TAKE UP ONLY A SMALL PORTION OF THEIR SIDELINE.

THE VAST MAJORITY OF THEIR POOL AND HOT TUB AREA AT THEIR VIEW WILL BE COMPLETELY UNAFFECTED.

AS YOU CAN SEE HERE AT THE WOODEN STICK THAT OUR NEIGHBOR WAS MEANT TO REPRESENT THE HEIGHT OF OUR BALL IS EXAGGERATED AND X SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER THAN TH HEIGHT OF HER WALL BECAUSE OF OUR TOPOGRAPHY. YOU CAN SEE THE ACCURATE HEIGHT AT THAT RED ARROW.

I WANT TO EMPHASIZE THE OPPOSITION BELIEVES THAT THIS MINIMAL IF ANY CHANGE IN THEIR VIEW OF OUR PROPERTY WHICH THEY HAVE NO LEGAL RIGHT TO SUPERSEDES THE SAFETY OF HER HOME AND FAMILY. WE WANT TO EMPHASIZE ALSO THIS IS NOT A WALL THAT IS 12 FEET HIGH AS IF YOU WERE MEASURING STARTING FROM THE BOTTOM OF THEIR PROPERTY LEVEL.

IT IS 12 FEET TALL ONLY AT THE LOWEST POINT OF THE SLOPE ON OUR PROPERTY.

YOU CAN SEE THAT BETTER IN THE PICTURE ON THE RIGHT. THE PALM TREES ON THE BOTTOM THAT IS MAYBE THE LOWEST POINT OF THE PROPERTY. THE LOWEST ELEVATION OF HER SLOPE IS BELOW THEIR OWN, THE NEIGHBOR'S OWN PROPERTY ELEVATION WHICH IS WHY THE WALL WILL NEVER APPEAR TO BE 12 FEET TALL FROM THEIR PERSPECTIVE. THE WALL WILL HAVE NO IMPACT ON

[00:20:02]

WE'VE NOT SEEN ANY OBJECTIVE EVIDENCE INVOLVING PRECISE NUMBERS OR PERCENTAGES THAT SHOW THERE WILL BE ANY EFFECT ON OUR NEIGHBORS HOMES. WE CONSULTED A LICENSED REALTOR WHO LOOKED AT COMPARABLE HOMES AND PONDER FEATURED BEACH FROM OUR HOME THAT HAD ADJACENT WALLS OR PRIVACY HEDGES AND FOUND THESE FEATURES PLAYED NO ROLE IN THE VALUE OF THE HOMES.

SHE PROVIDED A DETAILED REPORT WITH HER FINDINGS. ALSO IF OUR HOUSE FALLS INTO THE IGONNA I DON'T THINK THAT WILL IMPROVE PROPERTY VALUE IF ANY.

>> I'M NOT SURE, THERE'S BEEN A NUMBER OF PEOPLE OF CITED 3 DIFFERENT BULKHEAD COMPANIES, ENGINEER, IF THEY'RE TESTIFYING TODAY THAN THEY SHOULD BE THE ONES DELIVERING THE TESTIMONY.

BUT, UNLESS THEY ARE HERE AND ABLE TO ASK QUESTIONS I DON'T REALLY HAVE ANY WAY TO EVALUATE

THE SERIOUSNESS TESTIMONY. >> I'D LIKE TO LET THEM FINISH THE PRESENTATION.OU CAN BRING THAT UP DURING THE REBUTTAL. THANK YOU.

>> OKAY, THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. WE DISCUSSED THIS PROPOSED PLAN WITH OUR NEIGHBOR'S LAWYER AND OUR NEIGHBORS AND EXPLAINED TAT THIS COMPROMISE IS THE MOST ACCOMMODATING PLAN THEN HER ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS FEEL STILL MAINTAIN THE SAFETY OF HER HOME. THAT IS IN THE ENGINEERING REPORT.

WE SPOKE TO OUR NEIGHBORS AND OUR LAWYER WITH A DOZEN TIMES OVER THE PHONE, OVER THE EMAIL AND IN-PERSON MEETINGS PART OF WHICH WE FOUND OUR NEIGHBORS TO NOT ACKNOWLEDGE THE NEED FOR SAFETY OF OUR HOME. THE TIERED APPROACH SEEM TO BE STICKING POINT FOR THEM AND THEY WERE NOT ABLE TO COMPROMISE ON ANY PLANT THAT DID NOT INCLUDE THAT.

IT SEEMED THE ONLY ALTERNATE PLANS HE SUGGESTED WERE OPTIONS THAT THEY KNEW DID NOT MEET A VARIANCE.HE PROPOSED PLANS WERE EXTENSIVELY REVIEWED BY ENGINEERING TEAM.

WERE REJECTED BECAUSE THEY DID NOT ADDRESS A HOMES LONG-TERM STABILITY.

WE SHIP WITH OUR NEIGHBORS A FULL ENGINEERING REPORT, NOT A SUMMARY ON MAY 17.

WE WANTED TO HAVE PLENTY OF TIME TO DISCUSS THESE FINDINGS BEFORE HE MET WITH ALL OF YOU HERE TODAY. HOPING TO TALK TO THAN WE FOUND WE WERE UNABLE TO COME UP WITH ANY ALTERNATIVE THAT STILL MAINTAIN THE SAFETY OF HER HOME AND FAMILY.

THIS IS NOT DUE TO A LACK OF EFFORT ON OUR PART WE'VE SPENT SIGNIFICANT TIME AND MONEY TRYING TO ADDRESS THEIR CONCERNS. THIS IS LESS CORRESPONDENCE WE HAVE FROM OUR NEIGHBORS FEAR THEIR ATTORNEY ON JULY 6. EVEN AFTER ALL THESE CONVERSATIONS WE'VE HAD THE MOST THAT THEY ARE WILLING TO COMPROMISE IS WHAT THEY SUGGEST IN THIS LETTER. THE VARIANCE SHOULD BE NO HIGHER THAN 2 FEET ABOVE THE LEVEL OF THE PROPERTY AT 102 OVERLOOK. IF YOU LOOK AT THE SLOPE OF OUR PROPERTY IN THE PICTURE WE READ THE ENGINEERING REPORT AS WE SENT TO THEM AND THEY ACKNOWLEDGE THEY RECEIVED IT IS CLEAR THAT THIS IS NOT A REAL ATTEMPT AT A SOLUTION FOR US.

WE CANNOT GO THIS ROUTE BECAUSE WE WOULD'VE HAVE TO REMOVE DIRT FROM HER PROPERTY BELOW ITS CURRENT ELEVATION AND THIS WOULD DESTABILIZE THE RETAINING WALL.

THAT IS LITERALLY THE OPPOSITE OF WHAT WE NEED TO DO. FURTHERMORE THERE WAS A LIST OF DEMANDS IN THIS LETTER THAT WERE IRRELEVANT TO THE VARIANCE.

WHICH IS OUR NEIGHBORS WERE NOT MAKING A REASONABLE ATTEMPT AT A COMPROMISE.E RESPOND TO THE EMAIL THE FOLLOWING DATE REITERATING OUR SAFETY CONCERNS.

WE HAVE STRONG LETTERS OF SUPPORT FROM NEARLY ALL OF OUR SURROUNDING NEIGHBORS.

I WANT TO READ A SECTION FROM ONE OF OUR NEIGHBORS 729 PONTEVEDRA BOULEVARD.

AND THEN I'LL GET TO THE SUMMARY. THIS IS IT.

>> THIS IS FROM OUR NEIGHBORS. AS WE PULLED OUR PROPERTY SINCE 2001 WE'VE OBSERVED CHANGES IN POINTE VEDRA AND CHANGES ON OUR STREET. OUR PREVIOUS NEIGHBOR DELETE HANDS WHO RESIDED AT 730 PONDER RITA BOULEVARD HAD A YOUNG FAMILY WHICH INCLUDED 3 CHILDREN. BECAUSE OF THE LACK OF THE BACKYARD DUE TO THE BULKHEAD PROXIMITY TO THE HOUSE THE CHILDREN WOULD BY NECESSITY CLAIM THE FRONT YARD.

EYEWITNESSES THIS WITH ANXIETY UNCERTAIN EVEN MORE LIKE THE PARENTS OF THOSE 3 CHILDREN.

WE FREQUENTLY EXPRESS OUT LOUD THE FEAR THAT ONE OF THEM MIGHT BE HIT BY A CAR.

TERRIBLE EVENT DID OCCUR AS LAWN MAINTENANCE TRAILERS STRUCK THEIR SON MAX WHO WAS FLOWN VIA HELICOPTER TO SHANDS HOP HOSPITAL FOR EMERGENCY CARE.

HE SURVIVED WITH THE HAND FAMILY MOVED AWAY. THAT FOR MANY YEARS THE HOUSE WAS NOT OCCUPIED BY SINGLE FAMILY BUT INSTEAD BECAME A WEEKLY RENTAL UNIT WHICH DID NOT ADD TO THE COMMUNITY LIKE A FAMILY CAN. FINALLY WE ARE SO PLEASED AND FELT LESS WHEN THE GROUND BOUND FAMILY MOVED INTO THE HOME. THERE DELIGHTFUL PEOPLE, TALENTED AND EDUCATED THEY DEDICATE THEMSELVES TO. [INDISCERNABLE].

RIFFLE'S BUCKET IN THE BACKYARD WHAT OTHER BELIEVE AND IMPROVE THE SAFETY OF THE YARD STABILITY OF THEIR HOME AND ITS LOT AND HELP TO ENSURE THAT THE OCCUPANTS OF THE HOME FOR YEARS TO COME HAVE A SAFE PLACE TO LIVED HERE AND POINTE VEDRA. WE ARE REQUESTING TO CONSTRUCT A RETAINING WALL MORE THAN 4 FEET IN HEIGHT GIVEN EXTRAORDINARY TOPOGRAPHIC CONDITIONS TO SECURE THE SAFETY AND STRUCTURAL INTEGRITY OF THE FOUNDATION OF HER HOUSE.

THIS HAS NO CONFLICT, NOOSES OF NEGATIVE IMPACT TO THE HEALTH, SAFETY OR WELL FOR THE COMMUNITY. WILL PROVIDE THE CONTEXT OF IMPROVEMENTS IN HISTORICAL CHARACTER AND ORIENTATION OF THE ADJACENT HOMES. REVISE PLAN IS THE ONLY

[00:25:25]

PTHIS WAS THE OPTION PROPOSED B THE BOARD AT THE CONCLUSION OF HER HEARING ON APRIL 5 WITH THE ASSUMPTION THAT THIS WOULD BE THE OPTION WE WOULD CONSIDER TOGETHER BEFORE THE NEXT HEARING.OPE TO A MUTUAL AGREEMENT WOULD'VE BEEN REACHED UP TO PRODUCE SOME GUYS WITH HER NEIGHBORS AND WE UNDERSTAND THE CONCERNS.E'VE MADE GREAT EFFORT TO RESPECT THEIR WISHES AND WE WOULD AGREE TO A REASONABLE COMPROMISE THAT WAS PROPOSED BY THE BOARD.

WE'VE MADE SIGNIFICANT CONCESSIONS IN THIS PLAN INCLUDING LITERALLY CUTTING CORNERS. BUT WE CANNOT COMPROMISE OUR FAMILY SAFETY AND ANY FURTHER.

OUR COMPROMISE OF A DIAGONAL LINE IS A PLAN THAT WAS STILL SAFELY SECURE OUR HOME.

THE SMALL WOULD BE FAR ENOUGH AWAY FROM OUR NEIGHBORS YARDS WILL NOT BE AN ISSUE FOR THEIR VIEW. THIS IS A SIMPLE ISSUE THAT HAS PRESIDENT SIMPLE SOLUTION.

HERE'S ONLY BE COMPLICATED BY THE SUBJECTIVE PREFERENCE OF ONE NEIGHBOR.

GIVEN THE RECENT TRAGIC COLLAPSE OF A BEACH AREA BUILDING IN SURFSIDE MIAMI WE DO NOT FEEL LIKE WE COULD TAKE ANY CHANCES WITH HER OWN SAFETY.

WE DON'T THINK ANYONE ON THE BOARD HERE WANTS TO CAUSE HARM TO US OR FAMILY WE HOPE THAT YOU WILL VOTE WITHOUT MORAL CONSIDERATION IN MIND THANK YOU.

>> IS IT APPROPRIATE FOR US TO ASK QUESTIONS NOW OR SHOULD WE HOLD?

>> I THANK YOU SHOULD WAIT UNTIL AFTER THE PRESENTATIONS AND PUBLIC COMMENT.

>> OKAY. GOT IT. THANK YOU.

>> WHEN ASKING MR. CHAIR AND I'LL TRY TO KEEP IT SHORT. SO I WANT TO KNOW IF MISS GRUENBAUM HAD ANY HAND IN THE WRITINGOF THE REPORT FROM THE STRUCTURAL ENGINEER FOR

EXPECTANT REVIEW NEW DRAFT BEFORE IT WAS FINALIZED? >> REPEAT THE QUESTION.

>> DID MISS GRUENBAUM AND ITS REVIEW OR SUGGEST TO THE ENGINEER ANY CONCLUSIONS THAT

HE SHOULD POSSIBLY REACH IN THIS REPORT? >> THE QUESTION IS DID YOU HAVE A CHANCE TO REVIEW THE REPORT AND HAVE ANY INPUT INTO THE ENGINEER'S REPORT PRIOR TO

BEING PUBLISHED FOR THIS VARIANCE? >> WE HAD THE CHANCE TO REVIEW BUT WE CANNOT TELL THEM WHAT TO SAY. YOUR LICENSE ENGINEER COMPANY

AND THEY DO WHAT THEY RECOMMEND. >> WE TURN THEM ABOUT THE ALTERNATIVES ADDRESSED BY THE BOARD AND BUYER NEIGHBORS IN THE FIRST REVIEW THEY SAID THAT DOESN'T ACTUALLY ADDRESS THE ALTERNATIVES THAT WERE SUGGESTED AT THE MEETING WE WANT TO MAKE SURE THIS IS CLEAR THAT YOU TALK ABOUT THE TIERED ALTERNATIVES AND SEE IF THAT WOULD BE AN OPTION. WE TALKED ABOUT FREEZING, THEY PHRASE IT THAT WAY THEY THOUGHT WAS APPROPRIATE AND THE WEIGHT WAS SECURE. I'M SORRY BUT COULD BE HERE TODAY. WE ASKED HIM TO BE THERE AND THEY HAVE OTHER INSPECTIONS TO

DO.> SO YOUR ENGINEERS NOT TO BE HERE TODAY? >> UNFORTUNATELY NO.

>> THAT PUTS A HARDSHIP ON US BEING ABLE TO ASK TECHNICAL QUESTIONS TO THE ENGINEER.

>> TRUE. THE BOARD ASKED US TO GET AN ENGINEER REPORT.

AND THAT'S WHY WE ASKED FOR THE REVIEW. IT SEEMS A RELATIVELY CLEAR

WHAT THEIR FINDINGS ARE . >> YOU HAVE THE REPORTS. THAT WAS GIVEN THE STAFF REPORT

HOPEFULLY. >> OKAY. I HAD A LOT OF VERY TECHNICAL QUESTIONS TO ASK ENGINEER. WE WILL GET TO THAT LATER. LOOKS I WOULD'VE ASKED THE ENGINEER, DID THEY EVALUATE THE FEASIBILITY OF REPLACING THE EXISTING RETENTION WALL AND WHETHER THEY FOUND ANY EXPERIENCE REPLACING TENSION WALLS WHETHER HE WAS AWARE THAT RETENTION WALLS AND BULKHEADS ARE REPLACED IN SUBSTANTIALLY THE SAME LOCATION REPEATEDLY.

SO FOR EXAMPLE THE SOUTH EDGE OF THE GRUENBAUM PROPERTY TO THE EAST OF WHERE WERE TALKING ABOUT IS A BULKHEAD WALL. IT ABUTS MY CLIENT, MY AUNT AND UNCLES PROPERTY.

ASSUMING AT SOME POINT THAT WILL NEED SOME MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR OR REPLACEMENT IS AT THAT ENGINEERS CONCLUSION THE ONLY LOGICAL WAY TO REPLACE IT IS TO FILL IN THE INGRAM'S PULL AND EXTENDED OUT 20 FEET . BASED ON THE CONCLUSION THAT WAS REACHED IN THIS REPORT.

I'M ALSO CURIOUS HOW DID THEY GET TO 12 FEET WIDE? HOW DID THEY OR 12 FEET HIGH THE BULKHEAD. HOW DID THEY GET TO THE EDGE OF THE WETLAND AS HIS CONCLUSION IS THE MINIMUM NEEDED THAT IT WAS IMPOSSIBLE TO DO ANYTHING ELSE? HAS HE REVIEWED THE LATEST PLAN THAT CALLS FOR AN ANGLED WALL THAT IS NEAR THE INGRAM'S PROPERTY? IF NOT CONSISTENT? OR THERE'S VIRTUALLY NO FILL BEHIND THE EXISTING BULKHEAD UNDER THAT PROPOSED DESIGN. IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH HIS RECOMMENDATIONS? AND, ISN'T HE THEN RELYING ON PSOME OTHER ENGINEERING SOLUTIO

[00:30:02]

SO, I'M NOT A TECHNICAL EXPERT. I DO HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THAT AND I CAN'T ASK THEM TODAY.

THEN WITH REGARDS TO THE VALUE. MOST OF YOU WERE HERE LAST TIME.

MATT RAY IS AN APPRAISER WITH CAN TROLL ORGAN. HE TESTIFIED BEFORE THIS BOARD TO SAY THAT THE INGRAM'S HOME WILL BE DEVALUED. YOU SAW POP UP ON THE SIDE FROM SOMEONE ELSE WHOSE NAME I CAN'T REMEMBER AT THE MOMENT. HOW DID THEY REACH THE CONCLUSION THAT A 12 FOOT HIGH WALL CLOSING THE INGRAM'S BACKYARD WILL NOT HAVE A NEGATIVE EFFECT ON THE VALUES? SAYING THAT YOU TALK TO 3 ENGINEERS, OR 3 CONTRACTORS ABOUT REPLACING A BULKHEAD. I DON'T KNOW. THE ENGINEERING REPORT SAYS CONTACT STRUCTURAL ENGINEER FOR FURTHER WORK. DID THEY LOOK AT THAT? IT'S HIS CONTRACT CERTIFIED GENERAL CONTRACTOR FOR THE WORK.AVING SPOKEN WITH ANY CERTIFIED GENERAL CONTRACTORS AND DEAL WITH FOUNDATION ISSUES? THAT'S A WHOLE SPECIALTY ONTO ITSELF. IS DEALING WITH FOUNDATIONS THAT ARE UNSTEADY THERE'S OTHER ENGINEERING SOLUTIONS. I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THE ONLY TESTIMONY THAT IS LIVE BEING FROM THE GRUENBAUM. AND IT WAS EXPENSIVE TO DO THIS. IT'S EXPENSIVE FOR ME, IT'S EXPENSIVE FOR MY AUNT AND UNCLE TO BE HERE AND YOU'RE GOING TO HEAR FROM ROBBIE JOHNSON WHO IS HERE AND IT'S EXPENSIVE FOR HIM. HE IS AN ENGINEER OF ORGAN TO PROVIDE YOU SOME TESTIMONY.

I HOPE AT THE VERY LEAST THAT GOES TO THE WEIGHT OF THE TESTIMONY THAT'S PROVIDED HERE

TODAY. IN SUPPORT OF THE APPLICATION. >> WE CAN ANSWER SOME OF THOSE

QUESTIONS. >> I THINK THAT'S UP TO THE CHAIRMAN.

>> JUST A POINT OF CLARIFICATION, AT THIS POINT ON THE AGENDA HERE THE OPPOSITION WAS SUPPOSED TO HAVE 15 MINUTES TO PRESENT. AND SO I STARTED THE TIMER 15 MINUTES. AS IS THE PRESENTATION OR WE CAN HAVE AN ADDITIONAL 15

MINUTES? OR ARE WE CAN HAVE QUESTIONS? >> I HAVEN'T REALLY BEGUN MY CASE I DID HAVE QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT AND ANY OTHER WITNESSES THAT WERE GOING TO TESTIFY TODAY. THE ONLY WAY I KNEW TO GET THOSE QUESTIONS OUT WAS TO REGISTER THEM NOW SINCE THE APPLICANT HAS NOT PRESENTED ANY EXPERT WITNESSES TO REVIEW.

THEY PRESENTED A BUNCH OF, IN THE LEGAL WORLD THEY CALL IT HEARSAY AND BUT TO HAVE VARIOUS REPORTS SUBMITTED AND THEN TO READ THEM ALOUD IS NOT THE WAY YOU NORMALLY HAVE IT.

AT THE VERY LEAST I HOPE THAT GOES TO THE WAY. YOU KNOW, I DON'T CONTROL THIS MEETING, YOU DO MR. CHAIR. WE WOULD LIKE ADEQUATE TIME TO PRESENT.

WE DO HAVE ROBBIE JOHNSON HERE WHO WAS AN ENGINEER THAT WILL TESTIFY ON THE INGRAM'S BEHALF.

>> OKAY, SO YOU'RE FINISHED WITH YOUR PORTION OF THE PRESENTATION AS I UNDERSTAND

IT? >> NO SIR. IF I MAY HAVE A FEW MINUTES THAT I WILL MOVE ON. BUT, JUST TO SAY SIMPLY APPLICANT HAS NOT BORNE THERE BURDEN OF PROOF. THE BURDEN OF PROOF IS ON THEM TO ESTABLISH THEIR NEED FOR THE VARIANCE. AS YOU MAY RECALL FROM THE STAFF REPORT THAT IS BY VIRTUE OF EXCEPTIONAL NARROWNESS, SHOWERED AND IS OUR UNUSUAL SHAPE WITH A SPECIFIC PIECE OF PROPERTY OR REASONABLE WHITE TOPOGRAPHIC CONDITION OR OTHER EXTRAORDINARY SITUATIONS OR CONDITION SUCH A PIECE OF PROPERTY OR BY REASON OF THE PUSE OR DEVELOPMENT OF PROPERTY IMMEDIATELY ADJOINING THE PIECE OF PROPERTY IN QUESTION, THE LITERAL ENFORCEMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ZONING ORDINANCE WOULD CAUSE UNDUE HARDSHIP FOR THE APPLICANT.

PERSONAL FAMILY OR FINANCIAL DIFFICULTIES, LOSS OF PROSPECTIVE PROFITS, AND SIMILAR NEIGHBORING VIOLATIONS ARE STRIPS CREATED BY ARE NOT CONSIDERED HARDSHIPS JUSTIFIED BY VARIANCE. IN THIS CASE THIS HOME IS BUILT ON THE WEST EDGE OF THE DEVELOPABLE AREA OF THE PROPERTY. THE GRUENBAUM WERE AWARE OF THAT. AND THEY PURCHASED IT OR DOCTOR GRUENBAUM HAD PURCHASED IT THIS PAST FALL. THAT IS SIMPLY THE CIRCUMSTANCE THAT EXIST TODAY.

IT IS A SELF-IMPOSED HARDSHIP TO NOW SAY THAT YOU NEED MORE LAND TO CREATE A BACKYARD OR TO REPLACE A BULKHEAD. THE EVIDENCE TO SUPPORT THE IDEA THAT THE ONLY WAY, THE ONLY WAY TO REPLACE THIS BULKHEAD IS TO CREATE MANY FEET OF FILL TO THE WEST.

IT'S INCONSISTENT WITH BULKHEAD REPLACEMENT, RETAINING WALL REPLACEMENT IN GENERAL THROUGH HUMAN HISTORY. THAT PEOPLE OFTEN FEELS WALL ON THE EDGES OF PROPERTY AND IN

[00:35:02]

VICKI INGRAM. >> SHOULD WE SIT DOWN FOR MINUTE?

>> TO ANSWER THEM OR SIT DOWN? >> WILL WAIT FOR QUESTIONS LATER.

R. >> THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME THIS AFTERNOON.

I THINK TO RECAP WHAT HAPPENED BACK AT THE INITIAL MEETING IN APRIL, IT IS A HEIGHT DIFFERENTIAL THAT IS SO CRITICALLY IMPORTANT TO US. WE FEEL THAT THERE WILL BE A WALL. IT WILL DEFINITELY CUT OFF OUR VIEW AND OUR QUALITY OF LIFE WILL BE IMPACTED IN THIS PARTICULAR AREA THAT WE HAVE ENJOYED FOR THE PAST 18 YEARS.

WE BOUGHT THAT PROPERTY BECAUSE OF ITS LOCATION. BECAUSE OF THE VEHICLE.

WE ALSO BOUGHT IT CONTINGENT UPON THE FACT THAT THE COUNTY WOULD ALLOW US TO PUT IN A POOL AND ENJOY THAT BACKYARD TO ITS FULLEST DEGREE. SO WE WANT TO CONTINUE TO DO

THAT AND, YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE MEETING? >> SURE.

MY NAME IS BELK INGRAM. >> CLARIFIER ARE DISPLAYED. >> 102 OVERLOOK DRIVE POINTE VEDRA BEACH FLORIDA. THE BOARD ASKED US TO TRY TO WORK OUT A COMPROMISE WITH THE THE APPLICANT. ON APRIL 15 THE REPRESENTATIVE BRENT ENT WESTER THAT WITH US IN MY OFFICE POND AND FUTURE CLUB ABILITY. WE HAD A CONFERENCE ROOM NOTHING TO DO WITH THE REAL ESTATE. HE PRESENTED THE WEDGE.

WE KEPT SAYING THAT OUR CONCERN IS HEIGHT. THE BIG HEIGHT DIFFERENTIAL WITH THEIR PROPERTY ARE PROPERTY. THERE APPEAR WERE DOWN RE.

YOU WILL NOTICE THE LISTED 4 TO 5 TO 6 OTHER HOUSES THAT WERE GIVEN A VARIANCE TO BUILD OUT.

THOSE HOUSES ON THE SAME LEVEL. OF COURSE THEIR NEIGHBORS ARE HAPPY FOR THEM TO BUILD OUT AND THEY WILL TUNE. THERE ON THE SAME LEVEL. YOU GET DOWN TO US SOMEWHERE DOWN BELOW. SHE SAID WHEN TO WALK DOWN OUT OF OUR BACK OF OUR HOUSE TO OUR POOL AREA. WELL, OR ONE OF THE FEW HOUSES AND ALL OF THEM PONTEVEDRA THAT HAS A CRAWLSPACE UNDER OUR HOUSE. OUR HOUSE IS NOT BUILT DOWN ON THE GROUND. THAT'S WHY WE WALKED DOWN. ANYWAY WE TOOK MR. WESTER, HE WENT TO OUR HOUSE AFTER WE MET FOR ABOUT AN HOUR AT MY OFFICE. WE WENT OVER DIFFERENT THINGS.

TRYING TO EXPRESS OUR CONCERN OF THE HEIGHT OF THIS WALL OR IF YOU LIVED SOME PLACES IN POINTE VEDRA AND LOOK LIKE A FENCE GOING ACROSS YOUR BACKYARD.

BUT, WE DON'T KNOW IF WE EVER GOT THAT ACROSS TO HIM. ACTUALLY ONE OF THEIR SLIDES SHOWED THE RED ARROW AT THE HEIGHT. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU NOTICE THAT LITTLE GUY STANDING DOWN BELOW BUT HE WAS HOLDING A 12 FOOT 2 BY 4 UP IN THE AIR.

IT WAS EVEN WITH HER PROPERTY. THAT LITTLE PERSON THAT WAS DOWN BELOW IT WAS ME.

SO IT'S NOT LIKE IT'S JUST ABOVE OUR HEAD. IT'S THERE.

WE TOOK THE WEDGE IDEA AND UNDER CONSIDERATION I WENT BACK AND REVIEWED THE HEARING THAT WE HAD BEFORE. PART OF THAT WAS A SUGGESTION THAT THEY BRING THEIR YARD UP TO 2 FEET ABOVE OUR BACKYARD AND THEN WITH A 4 FOOT FENCE WOULD BE OF THE TOP OF HER HERITAGE AND WE WOULD HAVE, IT WOULD. [INDISCERNABLE].WERE SUGGESTING THAT BECAUSE WE KNOW THAT THERE ARE OTHER WAYS TO REPAIR RETAINING WALL.

RIGHT ON THE STREET AT 696 THERE WAS A HOUSE FOR SALE. HAD A BAD RETAINING WALL.

SO I PROVIDED Y'ALL WITH A PROPOSAL TO FIX THAT WALL AND I BENT DOWN AND VISITED THE WALL.

THEY PUT 12 FOOT FOOT PILINGS, 12 INCH PILINGS DOWN IN THE GROUND RIGHT NEXT TO THAT WALL TO SUPPORT THE WALL. THAT'S 12 FEET STRAIGHT DOWN. THEY DON'T HAVE DIRT THEY JUST HAVE THE PILINGS HOLDING AND REINFORCING THE WALL. AND SUBSEQUENTLY THEY KNOCKED THE OLD HOUSE DOWN AND BUILDING ANOTHER ONE. THE CONFIDENT ENOUGH IN THAT

[00:40:01]

THAT'S PRETTY MUCH IT. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. ARE THERE ANY PUBLIC? >> I JUST WANTED TO SAY.

JUST FOR THE RECORD I HAVE HAD GOOD COMMUNICATIONS WITH MS. GRUENBAUM.

SHE'S BEEN VERY ACCESSIBLE AND I HOPE I HAVE BEEN AS WELL AND TO BRAD.

WE KEPT THIS AS PROFESSIONAL AS WE CAN. WE KNOW THIS IS HIGH-STAKES FOR

BOTH FAMILIES. I JUST WANTED YOU ALL TO KNOW. >> OKAY.

>> THANK YOU MATTERS PLEASE. >> MY NAME IS ROBERT JOHNSON I LIVED AT 828:CIRCLE AND NEPTUNE BEACH 32266. I'VE KNOWN BELK VICKI FOR AT LEAST 30 YEARS.

MAYBE YBE 35. OUR SONS PLAYED BASKETBALL TOGETHER FROM A VERY YOUNG AGE AT ST. PAUL'S AND FRATERNITY BROTHERS LATER IN COLLEGE. NONE OF HER LONG TIME.

I SPENT A LOT OF TIME AT THEIR HOME VISITING AND ENJOYING THEIR POOL AND ENJOYING THE VIEW THERE. IT'S A BEAUTIFUL HOME. AS WAS DEPICTED IN THE PICTURES. ABOUT MYSELF, HAVE A DEGREE IN CIVIL ENGINEERING.

I DO NOT HAVE A LICENSE AND ENGINEERING. I NEVER BECAME LICENSED.

HOWEVER I HAVE MANAGED ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS MOST OF MY LIFE.

I AM A CERTIFIED GENERAL CONTRACTOR IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA SINCE 1974.

I HAVE A VERY LOW CONTRACTORS LICENSE NUMBER. I HELD SIMILAR STATUS IN CALIFORNIA FOR MANY OF THOSE SAME YEARS WITH THE GENERAL ENGINEERING A LICENSE.

UNLAWFUL LOT ABOUT CONSTRUCTION. I KNOW OFF A LOT ABOUT PILING.

I'VE MANAGED DEVELOPMENTS, DESIGN, ENGINEERING AND CONSTRUCTION OF INDUSTRIAL FACILITIES THROUGHOUT NORTH AMERICA AND NORTHERN EUROPE. PRIMARILY LARGE TANK FARMS ON DEEPWATER PORTS AND THE MAJORITY OF OUR FACILITIES WERE BUILT ON PILINGS.

THOUSANDS OF BALANCE OF PILINGS. I HAVE A GOOD UNDERSTANDING OF HOW PILINGS WORK. I MANY OCCASIONS SO WE HAD TO GO AND REPAIR RETAINING WALL AND WE HAD A LOT OF RETAINING WALLS AND BULKHEADS. WE WOULD BUILD A NEW BULKHEAD IN FRONT OF THE EXISTING BULKHEAD. IF THEY'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO BRING EQUIPMENT INTO PUT THE PILING AND THAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT PUTTING IN TO BUILD THE BULKHEAD 24 FEET OUT IN FRONT OF THEIR HOME THEY CERTAINLY WOULD BE ABLE TO HANDLE BRINGING THE EQUIPMENT INTO PUT PILINGS IN RIGHT BEHIND THE EXISTING BULKHEAD THAT THEY HAVE THERE. IF THOSE FILES BY THEMSELVES ARE GOING STRAIGHT DOWN AREN'T STRONG ENOUGH THEY CAN PUT SOME BETTER PILINGS IN OR THERE ARE QUITE A FEW OTHER WAYS THEY COULD BUILD THAT SAME THING WITH NO OBSTRUCTION AT ALL TO VICKI AND BELK'S VIEW.

NOTHING WOULD BE STICKING OUT. NO WALL WOULD GO ABOUT BEYOND 4 FEET FROM THEIR EXISTING

BULKHEAD. THAT'S ALL. >> ONE FINAL THING THAT THEY WERE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. THERE'S BEEN SOME ASSERTION THAT THERE IS NO RIGHT TO THE VIEW AND WHAT HAVE YOU. ACTUALLY, THE POINTE VEDRA OVERLAY WAS INTENDED TO ALLOW FOR A BALANCING OF PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS AS WELL AS RIGHTS OF THE COMMUNITY. PROBABLY MOST SIGNIFICANTLY IS A LIMIT ON BUILDING HEIGHT AT 35 FEET. THERE'S A LIMIT ON HOMES BE NO MORE THAN 2 STORIES.

SIMILARLY THERE IS A MAXIMUM BULKHEAD HEIGHT OF 4 FEET AND A MAXIMUM FENCE OF 4 FEET.

IT'S WITHIN THOSE THINGS THAT THE COMMUNITY HAS BEEN ABLE TO AVOID BATTLES WHERE ONE OWNER BUILD HIGHER THAN THE OTHER AND THEN EVERYBODY GOES ONE MORE STORY AND 10 MORE FEET AND 4 MORE FEET. WERE FACING A SITUATION WHERE THE BACKYARD WILL BE FEELING LIKE A DOWNHOLE. IT'S NOT WHAT WAS ALLOWED AND WE WOULD URGE THE GRUENBAUM TO

[00:45:03]

THANK YOU. FIX THANK YOU. >> ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS?

>> ON BRIAN'S BAR, 424 ÃCOURT. I HELP THE GRUENBAUM DURING THE PROJECT IN THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS FOR THE WALL. ONE A CLEAR COUPLE THINGS OUT. IS THERE ANY WAY TO PUT THAT PICTURE. FIRST OFF THIS IS A PICTURE, THIS IS A VIEW FROM THEIR CURRENT POOL. YOU SEE THE CORNER OF THE FENCE UP IN THE RIGHT SIDE? FROM THERE THE BULKHEAD WILL GO OUT THAT WAY. IT WILL NOT BE IN THEIR VIEW FROM THE POOL AREA.ECOND, COULD HE PUT THE PICTURE WITH THE MEASURING STICK UP PLEASE.

I KEEP HEARING 12 FOOT WALL FROM BEHIND THE HOUSE. TO BE HONEST WITH YOU I FIND THE JURISDICTION WETLAND LINE. THERE ELEVATION IN THEIR BACKYARD THAT'S OVER MY HEAD WHEN I'M STANDING AT THE JURISDICTIONAL LEVEL. THEY SAY THE WALL ITSELF WILL BE 12 FEET. IT SUCKS TO BE 12 FEET BEHIND THE HOUSE.

THE ARROW INDICATES WHERE THE WALL WILL BE. AND YOU WON'T EVEN SEE IT FROM THIS ANGLE. WILL NOT SEE IT BECAUSE WE BROUGHT IN AN ANGLE.

I DID UNDERSTAND HER CONCERNS WITH THE INITIAL PROPOSAL. I TOOK WHAT YOU WANT SUGGESTED AND REDESIGNED IT TO GO AT AN ANGLE. IT WILL NOT BE IN THEIR VIEW AT ALL. I WANT TO CLARIFY THOSE 3 THINGS AND IF ANYONE HAS ANY

QUESTIONS I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER. >> I HAVE QUESTION.

>> DID HE DESIGNED THE NEW DESIGN THAT'S BEFORE THE BOARD NOW?

>> THE ANGLE? WHAT IS YOUR FUNCTION? BOOKS ON AN ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANT. I SAY DESIGN. I BASICALLY LAMP AND THE

LOCATION. >> YOU'RE NOT A STRUCTURAL ENGINEER?

>> OKAY, THANK YOU. >> WILL GET BACK TO WITH STIONS.

ANYONE ELSE FOR PUBLIC COMMENT? >> A QUESTION FOR TUFF ON PAGE 12 OF THE HE REPORT AND IT'S COME UP IN THE RESENTATION THAT WE'VE GIVEN PREVIOUS VARIANCES 26224, 692, 724 AND 726.

ALSO THOUGHT 696 GIVEN PREVIOUS VARIANCES TO RAISE THE HEIGHT OF THE WALLS.

MY RECOLLECTION AND IT'S INVOLVED IN ALL IN THE LAST 6 AND HALF YEARS IS ALL THOSE AVERY TIED IN WITH EXISTING BULKHEADS OR WERE LOCATED AT THE SAME LOCATION AS THE PREVIOUS BULKHEAD. IN FACT, ON 654 WE GRANTED THEM TO ALLOW TO REBUILD THEIR BULKHEAD DIRECTLY IN FRONT OF THEIR BULKHEAD SO IT WOULD ENCROACH ON THE OTHER LAND.

AM I CORRECT IN THIS? >> YES SIR MR. CHAIRMAN. JACOB SMITH WITH GROWTH MANAGEMENT. THAT IS GENERALLY A CORRECT ASSESSMENT.

YES SIR. WE'VE NEVER ALLOWED PEOPLE AT THIS POINT TO ENCROACH UPON OTHER PEOPLE AS FAR AS VIEW GOES OR AS FAR AS ANYTHING ELSE?

>> I WOULD SAY IN THE STAFF REPORT WHEN I'M REFERENCING THESE DIFFERENT PROPERTIES IT IS IN RELATION TO THE TYPE OF VARIANCE AND NOT THE SPECIFIC UNIQUENESS OF THE INDIVIDUAL PROPERTY BUT A VARIANCE FOR THE HEIGHT AND OR THE 40 FOOT SETBACK REQUIREMENT.

THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT. THAT'S REMEMBER. OKAY THANK YOU.

>> YES SIR. >> I DID BRING FROM MY FILES AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS OF SOME OF THE OTHER PROPERTIES WHERE THESE WALLS WEREN'T EXTENDED. I DON'T KNOW IF ANYONE WANTS TO

LOOK AT THOSE AS A REMINDER? >> IF THAT'S INFORMATION YOU'RE CONSIDERING I THANK YOU SHOULD

SHOW THAT TO THE APPLICANT. >> YOU NEED TO ROTATE IT. YEP.

AND THEN PUT THE OTHER ONE ON, SIDE-BY-SIDE. I WOULD FLIP IT AROUND SO NORTH

[00:50:03]

THE NORTH OR TO THE SOUTH. >> IF THE APPLICANTS CAN READ THAT IF YOU WANT TO VIEW THOSE

CLOSER YOU COULD COME UP AND GET THEM. >> I THINK FOR STUFF FOR MR. CHAIRMAN. THIS PATIENT WAS TAKEN BEFORE 728 WAS BUILT.

THEY DID NOT NEED A VARIANCE FOR THE HOUSE BECAUSE OF THE BULKHEAD WAS BUILT AT THE SAME

TIME THE HOUSE WAS BUILT. AS I WRITE? >> CORRECT.

ONE THING WE NEED TO KEEP IN MIND THE ROPERTY IS BETWEEN C WALK AND OVERLOOK DRIVE.

AT ONE POINT WERE VERY VERY LOW. POINTE VEDRA BOULEVARD WAS AT BUILT AT THE TOP OF THE DEAL. IN A DEVELOPER AND IT WAS AN 83 OR ANY 4 CAME ALONG ABOUT THE PROPERTIES AND ESTABLISHED BULKHEADS ENDED BUILT ON THOSE PROPERTIES.

SOME THE PROPERTIES HAVE ANYWHERE FROM 12 TO 14 FEET OF FILM.

I THINK ALL THAT WORK WAS COMPLETED BY 1985. JUST A POINT OF REFERENCE IS WHY WE ARE BULKHEADS THERE AND PRIOR TO THE ZONING ORDINANCE AS ESTABLISHED WITH THE FOREFOOT REQUIREMENT. SO THAT'S A LITTLE BIT A HISTORY OF POINTE VEDRA.

OKAY? MY QUESTION IS, I CAN'T ASK FOR MY QUESTIONS.

I'VE GOT A SERIES OF QUESTIONS TO THE ENGINEERING. A SERIES OF QUESTIONS TO THE CONTRACTOR. AND I'M NOT SURE WHERE TO GO FROM HERE.

UNTIL SUCH TIME I CAN GET THE ANSWERS. BRING UP THE FACT THAT I'VE BEEN IN CONSTRUCTION FOR 40 YEARS. DURING THAT TIME A CONSTRUCTION I CAN IDENTIFY PROBABLY 8 TO 10 BULKHEAD PROJECTS WHERE I REPLACED THE BULKHEAD AND ITS EXISTING LOCATION. INCLUDING 1500 FEET AT THE PORT OF MIAMI, ON ONE SIDE AND 800 SOME FEET ON THE OTHER SIDE WERE NOT ALLOWED TO ENCROACH IN ANY WAY SHAPE OR FORM TO THE WATERWAY. SO, I WOULD QUESTION TO YOUR ENGINEER, A QUESTION TO YOUR CONTRACTOR, WHY YOUR BULKHEAD CANNOT BE REBUILT OR REINFORCED WHERE IT'S AT.

I WOULD ALSO ASKED THE QUESTION TO YOUR ENGINEER THAT THE EXISTING BULKHEAD AND THE EXISTING FILL HAS HELD UP THAT HOUSE FOR 31 YEARS. YOU DO HAVE SOME CRACKING IN PYOUR FOUNDATION WHICH A LOT OF HOUSES HAVE CRACKING IN THE FOUNDATION.

I UNDERSTAND YOU PROBABLY NEED TO HAVE YOUR BULKHEAD REPAIRED. BUT, THE STRUCTURAL ANALYSIS OF THE LOADBEARING OF THE FOOTING WENT OUT 30 SOME FEET FROM THE EDGE OF THE FOOTING ISN'T

RIGHT. >> I CAN ANSWER THOSE 2 COMMENTS.

>> THE FIRST THING YOU SAID ABOUT IT LASTING 30 YEARS. THE AVERAGE LIFE'S SPAN WILL BULKHEAD IS 25 YEARS. IT IS FAILING. THEY GET REPLACEMENTS REASON WHY THEY GET REPLACED OVER TIME. AND OURS IS REQUIRED AND IT'S A SAFETY CONCERN AND IT NEEDS TO BE REPLACED. THE ARGUMENT IS THAT THEY GOT IT LAST THIS LONG. THE SECOND THING IT'S A LITTLE IRRELEVANT ABOUT HOW BULKHEADS REPLACED ANOTHER PROPERTIES. THIS IS A VERY UNIQUE CHARACTERISTIC OR ENGINEER, YOU GUYS REQUESTED US TO HAVE OVER REPORT FROM ENGINEER WHICH WE DID.

THERE WERE CLEAR THE RECOMMENDATIONS IN THE CLEAR REASONING OF WHY THE OTHER APPROACHES DO NOT WORK AND WHY SPECIFICALLY THEY RECOMMENDED THEIR RECOMMENDATION.

YOU KNOW, I'LL ANSWER THOSE 2. >> OKAY. THE REPORT STIPULATES THAT BULKHEADS HAVE A 25 YEAR LIFE EXPECTANCY, RIGHT? GIVE OR TAKE.

YOUR BULKHEAD IS PROBABLY 32 TO 33 YEARS OLD. VERY WORRIED ABOUT THE WEST BULKHEAD WHICH IS ONLY 4 OF 46 FEET HIGH. AND THE REPORT HAD ONE SENTENCE ABOUT THE SOUTH BULKHEAD WHICH IS PROBABLY 8 TO 10 FEET TALL SAYING IT'S IN FINE CONDITION.

IT'S THE SAME AGE AS THE OTHER BULKHEAD. AND, I THINK WAS BROUGHT UP

[00:55:04]

>> THEY GIVE FREE QUESTION. THAT'S A CONCERN. UNDERSTAND THAT CONCERN.

OUR INTENTION IS TO MAKE SURE THAT OUR HOUSE WAS STABLE AND SAFE.

WERE GOING TO CONTINUE TO MONITOR ALL ASPECTS OF OUR HOUSE.

THE WESTERN WALL YOU TALK ABOUT IS VERY FAR FROM THE HOUSE. THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT WERE TRYING TO MAKE IN ORDER TO KEEP SUPPORT AND BRING IT AWAY FROM THE FOUNDATION OF OUR HOME.

BUT THE MORE PERTINENT ISSUE HERE IS WHAT'S IN FRONT OF US. JUNIORS HAVE CLEARLY IDENTIFIED THIS AS A SOURCE OF SAFETY CONCERN. THIS IS WHY WERE BRINGING THIS

UP AT THIS POINT. >> OKAY, I LIKE TO OPEN UP THE BOARD TO ASK THE QUESTIONS.

I LIKE TO GET BACK TO MINE. >> FOR MY OWN CLARIFICATION CAN I HAVE THE AGE OF THE HOUSE ON 102 OVERLOOK DRIVE. 1990? WERE TALKING ABOUT THE SAME TIMEFRAME? AND WHICH HOUSE WAS JUST FINISHED THEIR FIRST? OKAY. ALL RIGHT. IN THE POOL, WHEN WAS THE PULPIT IN THE BACKYARD? 2004? OKAY.

>> I THINK THE HOUSE AT 730 WAS COMPLETED JUST BEFORE THE HOUSE AT 102.> OKAY.

I THINK WHAT WE HAVE TO BE CAREFUL OF IS WE DON'T END UP WITH A LOOSE /LOOSE IN BOTH PIECES OF PROPERTY BECOME CONDONED BECAUSE OF SOME KIND OF MUDSLIDE OR YOU KNOW SO OBVIOUSLY WE WANT TO WORK TOGETHER. ANOTHER QUESTION I HAD FOR THE BOARD. WHEN WE APPROVE LET'S SAY WE IMPROVED THIS NEW WALL DESIGN.

WE THEN LIABLE FOR ANY CONSEQUENCES THAT COME AS A RESULT OF THIS WALL?

>> I'M NOT SURE I UNDERSTAND THE QUESTION?OULD YOU REPEAT IT PLEASE?

>> OR BASIE? PROVING THE STRUCTURAL PLAN. >> NO.

WERE PROVING A VARIANCE OF THE WALL HEIGHT ULTIMATELY, SINCE IT'S A RETAINING WALL IT WOULD REQUIRE ABILITY PREPARE IT IT WOULD REQUIRE STRUCTURAL ENGINEERING, IT WOULD REQUIRE INSPECTIONS ALONG THE TIME OF CONSTRUCTION. ALL WE ARE DOING AT THIS POINT IS APPROVING THE CONCEPT THAT THE WALL COULD BE HIGHER THAN 4 FEET.

AND THE FILL CAN BE MORE THAN 2 FEET. >> AND WE ARE APPROVING NOT

BASED ON AN ENGINEER PLAN? >> WERE BASING IT ON THE APPLICANT'S REQUEST.

AND THE ENGINEERS PLAN. YES I CONCUR WITH THAT. >> OKAY.

AND SO YOU DON'T HAVE ENOUGH INFORMATION AND WE CAN ANSWER QUESTIONS ABOUT THE ENGINEER

PLAN. IS THAT CORRECT? >> YES.

>> OKAY. >> WE DO AGREE, WE WENT, WE TRIED TO BE AS ACCOMMODATING AS POSSIBLE THAT'S WHY WE DID THAT BECAUSE WERE NOT GOING TO USE A BIG FENCE.

WE WILL KEEP THE SHRUBBERY THERE AND SO THEY DON'T SEE IT. TRY TO ACCOMMODATE AS BEST WE CAN. WE WANT TO BE AS ACCOMMODATING AS WELL.

>> THIS IS ONE OF THE SITUATIONS WHERE BECAUSE MY BACKGROUND ALSO IN CIVIL ENGINEERING. I AM UNLICENSED, I WAS A LICENSED SET ENGINEER IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA THAT I WOULD HAVE PREFERRED TALKING TO THE EXPERT THAT YOU HAVE BECAUSE I HAD SOME QUESTIONS PROBABLY IN THE SAME LINE AS JOHN'S ABOUT THE POSSIBLE OPTIONS I'M FAMILIAR WITH FROM MY BACKGROUND THAT WERE NOT DISCUSSED IN HIS REPORT.> I

[01:00:10]

>> IT'S BASICALLY BECAUSE YOU'RE STATING THAT HE SAID THAT THIS IS THE ONLY SOLUTION

IT. >> HE DIDN'T SAY THIS ONLY SOLUTION.

IF YOU LOOK AT AGAIN. WE'VE BEEN SAYING ALL ALONG THIS IS THE SAFEST ALTERNATIVE THAT HELPS PROTECT OUR HOME AND ALSO ADDRESSES OUR NEIGHBOR'S CONCERNS.E BROUGHT ALTERNATIVES. THE ALTERNATIVES THAT WERE SUGGESTED BY THE BOARD AND MAYBE YOU ARE THINKING OF OTHER ALTERNATIVES THAT WEREN'T BROUGHT UP ON A BUFFET.

WE BROUGHT UP ALTERNATIVES WERE BROUGHT UP ON APRIL 5 AND ALTERNATIVES THAT CAME UP IN THE MEETING BETWEEN MR. WESTERN AND THE INGRAM'S AND TOM INGRAM AND THOSE OF THE ALTERNATIVES WE CONSIDERED. THOSE WERE THE ALTERNATIVES THAT WE FOUND WERE NOT GOOD ENOUGH. THEY WERE NOT SAFE ENOUGH. THERE WERE NOT RECOMMENDED.

>> I GUESS BEEN AT THE APRIL MEETING ALSO AND 2 OF THE BOARD MEMBERS WHO ARE NO LONGER ON THE BOARD HAD TALKED ABOUT HOPING THAT THERE COULD BE A MEETING OF THE MINDS BETWEEN THE 2 NEIGHBORS TO COME UP WITH A MUTUALLY AGREEABLE SOLUTION AND I REALIZE THERE'S A STRONG FEELINGS BY BOTH PARTIES AND I WAS STILL HOPE THAT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT YOU COULD

REVISIT AND ACCOMMODATE. YOUR NEEDS AND THEIR NEEDS. >> WHILE THE TIERED APPROACH IS THE ONLY OPTION ON THE TABLE FOR OUR NEIGHBORS. IT'S GOING TO BE HARD TO COME

TO THAT CONCLUSION. >> WE SPENT A LOT OF TIME AND MONEY AND EFFORT TRYING TO MAKE A COMPROMISE. AND AS THE ATTORNEY MENTIONED. WE HAD GOOD CONDEMNATION PATIENT BETWEEN US. WE WERE THERE AT A STICKY POINT BUT THEY DIDN'T WANT US TO GO TO FEET ABOVE THE PROPERTY LINE. THAT WOULD COMPLETELY DESTABILIZE POWERBALL. THERE WASN'T A LOT OF WIGGLE ROOM.

WE DON'T WANT TO DO SOMETHING THAT IS UNSAFE AND SOMETHING THAT WILL PUT OUR FAMILY IN THE HOME THAT WILL JEOPARDIZE THE SAFETY OF HER HOME AND HER FAMILY.> WHY WOULD WE TAKE

THAT RISK? >> WE FELT VERY FORTHCOMING. WE DID BUT THE BOARD RECOMMENDED EITHER FURTHER. THE RECOMMENDED ESTATE TIERED APPROACH AT THAT WEDGE FAMILY SAID WILL MOVE THE WAGE COMPLETELY SO THEY WON'T SEE IT.

HE'LL BE OUT OF THE WRECK COMPLETELY. AS YOU SAW FROM THE PICTURES IT

WOULD BE MINIMAL IF ANY. >> I THINK WITH THE BOARD WAS TRYING TO DO WAS JUST OFFER SOME IDEAS NOT MAKE PARTICULAR RECOMMENDATIONS OR YOU CAN DO THIS OR DO THAT.

>> AND THAT'S NOT THE ONLY IDEA PRESENTED AT THAT TIME. IT WAS NOT THE BOARD'S

PRESENTATION THAT THIS WAS THE SOLUTION. >> IT WAS THE LAST ONE THAT THEY DID AND IT HE. [INDISCERNABLE]. INITIALLY WAS BROUGHT TO US DURING THE MEETING TO SEE IF THAT SOMETHING WE WOULD AGREE UPON THEN.

WE SORT OF APPLIED THAT THIS WAS A COMPROMISE AND IT TAKES EVERYONE'S CONSIDERATIONS INTO PLAY. FOR THE SAFEST OPTION WE APPLIED FOR LOST TIME WHICH IS TO GO OUT COMPLETELY AND BACKFILL THE WHOLE THING. THIS IS A SIGNIFICANT COMPROMISE ON OUR STAND AND IT REALLY IS SOMETHING THAT STILL PROTECTS THE SAFETY OF HER HOME AND HER FAMILY AND ALSO TEXT THE VIEW OVER NEIGHBORS. THE ARGUMENT THAT THERE IS NO OTHER ALTERNATIVE. MRS. GRUENBAUM JUST SAID. THERE COULD BE OTHER SOLUTIONS.

I DON'T KNOW WHY THIS IS GOING ON AND ON. >> THIS IS THE SAFEST RECORDATION. NO, GO AGAINST THE RECOMMENDATION.

>> DOCTOR TRAN 6 ARE YOU AN ENGINEER? >> ARE NOT GOING AGAINST MY

ENGINEER. >> I PREFER TO BE REFERRED TO AS DOCTOR GRUENBAUM AS WELL.

THANK YOU. HUGS JANE, YOU HAVE A QUESTION? >> I DON'T HAVE A QUESTION OR JUST A TAPED STATEMENT. PEOPLE STARTED TO MAKE STATEMENTS NOW.

I WAS NOT ON THE BOARD IN APRIL WHEN THIS ORIGINALLY CAME HERE. SO LOOKING AT THIS I CAN PAPPRECIATE THE CHALLENGE THAT THIS PRESENTS. THERE'S A GOAL OF SAFELY REPLACING THE BULKHEAD BUT THERE'S ALSO A GOAL OF NOT IMPACTING CURRENT NEIGHBORS THAT WOULD REDUCE PROPERTY VALUE OR ALTER THE CHARACTER OF THE PROPERTY THEY HAVE.

I AM CONVINCED THAT BUILDING THIS WALL WHAT ALTER THE CHARACTER OF THE PROPERTY AND AM ALSO CONVINCED IT WOULD REDUCE THEIR PROPERTY VALUE. I STILL HAVE TO BE CONVINCED ABOUT HOW TO SAFELY REPLACE THE WALL AND I THINK THAT'S WHAT WERE TALKING HERE IS THE ENGINEER IS NOT HERE FOR US TO QUESTION. THAT'S THE PART OF IT WERE TRYING TO BE CONVINCED OF. THAT'S THE PART I'M NOT YET CONVINCED THAT THERE'S BEEN A

[01:05:02]

SO THAT'S ALL I WANTED TO SAY. >> OKAY. >> I HAD A COMMENT.

>> OKAY JOHN? >> I THOUGHT THE LAST PRESENTATION YOU WILL REALLY WANTED TO EXPAND THE BACKYARD AS WELL FOR YOUR DAUGHTER'S SAKE.

IS THAT CORRECT? >> IT'S ON HER PRIMARY CONCERN. >> THE DAUGHTERS THING WAS ONE OF THE OPTIONS AND ONE OF THE ISSUES WITH THE STEP DOWN. THE SAFETY OF THE HOME AND THE

BULKHEAD IS OUR CONCERN. >> OKAY. >> HARRY DO YOU HAVE ANY

QUESTIONS? >> NO. >> SAM?

>> I HAVE A COUPLE. YOU GUYS HAVE SAID THAT YOU HAD SPENT SOME TIME TRYING TO COMPROMISE BUT, FROM THE INGRAM'S EARLIER IT SOUNDED LIKE THERE WAS ONLY ONE

MEETING. I'M JUST TRYING TO UNDERSTAND? >> IF YOU GO BACK TO THE SLIDE THERE WERE A MULTITUDE OF EMAILS AND CALLS AND IN PERSON AND FACE-TO-FACE TALKS WHEN HE TALKS ABOUT PUTTING UP THE SCREEN AND TALK TO MR. INGRAM IN PERSON IN FRONT OF HER HOUSE AND I HAVE ON A WEBCAM. I SAID YOU WANT ME TO TO PUT ON THE SCREEN HE SAID DON'T

BOTHER. >> OKAY. >> I'M CERTAINLY ONE OF THE ONES THAT SUGGESTED THE WEDGE AS AN ALTERNATIVE. TRYING TO RECOGNIZE SOME OF THE INGRAM'S VIEW AND SOME OF THEIR ISSUES. FOR THIS BOARD IS CURRENTLY THE STATE AND HALF IS FORMER. WE ALL UNDERSTAND THAT ENGINEERS ARE GOING TO ENGINEER THE BEST POSSIBLE SOLUTION. MAY NOT BE NECESSARILY THE ONLY POSSIBLE SOLUTION AND SO, UNDERSTAND THIS REPORT AND I READ IT. AND THAT'S THE WAY I TOOK IT.

AND ABSOLUTELY, CERTAINLY WHAT THEY ARE RECOMMENDING WOULD BE THE BEST POSSIBLE SOLUTION.

I MEAN TO KEEP CRIME, MY HOUSE, A TALL FOOTBALL ON THE WAY AROUND WITH THE GLASS ON TOP WOULD BE THE BEST POSSIBLE SOLUTION. NOT SOMETHING WE COULD DO IN POINTE VEDRA. I WANT YOU GUYS TO RECOGNIZE THAT THERE MAY BE ALTERNATIVES THAT MAY NOT BE AS GOOD. MAY NOT BE THE BEST POSSIBLE SOLUTION.

>> WE DON'T FEEL WE CAN COMPROMISE ON HER SAFETY. THAT SAFETY COMES FIRST.

>> ESPECIALLY WITH WHAT HAPPENED IN SURFSIDE. >> WHY WOULD WE TAKE THIRD

SAFEST OPTION? >> WE ALREADY ARE COMPROMISING SAFETY.>> WHY'D YOU HAVE TO

GO UP 24 FEET? IN-DEPTH? >> THE ENGINEER WROTE THE DETAILS IF YOU WANT TO READ ABOUT THE BACKFILL IN THE ANCHORING AND EVERYTHING LIKE

THAT. >> ALL THE RETAINING WALL IS DOING, 30 SOME FEET FROM THE FOUNDATION MAYBE 31 FEET FROM EDGE OF THE FOUNDATION ALL THE RETAINING WALL IS HOLDING UP THE DIRT BEHIND IT. THE LOADBEARING, THE FOOTING GOES DOWN DIRECTLY TOWN.

IT GOES ON AN ANGLE OF ABOUT 45 DEGREES FOR COMMON EARTH. IT DOESN'T GO OUT 30 SOME FEET LEVEL. LOOKS IT'S ALSO 22 FEET OUT FROM THE FOUNDATION OF HER HOUSE SO WERE CLEAR. APPROXIMATELY 20 FEET FROM THE CORNER.

IT'S FOR THE BACKFILL, THE BEST OF MY UNDERSTANDING I'M NOT ENGINEER IS THE WALL IS FAILING AND BOWING OUT THAT EXTRA MONITOR THAT'S NEEDED AND IT'S NOT JUST THE ENGINEER BUT ALSO THE CONTRACTOR MADE THAT CLEAR IN THE DOCUMENT DID IS THE BACKFILL MAINTAINS AND PROTECTS THE WALL THAT IS THERE NOW PUT THE PRESSURE ON THAT WALL FROM FURTHER DETERIORATING.

>> OKAY.MY ENGINEERING BACKGROUND DOESN'T SUPPORT THAT.

124 FEET QUICK ONE AT 12 FEET? >> AGAIN THEY BROKE THE RECORDATION.

WE CAN GO ON THAT AND SO WERE CLEAR AND WERE NOT MAKING THINGS APPEAR.

I THINK THIS MORNING SAYS. A RECOMMENDATION IS CONSTRUCTED TO PULL FOOT BULKHEAD ON THE LAND SIDE AND BACKFILL AGAINST THE FILLING BULKHEAD TO LITIGATE EXCESSIVE SOIL

PRESSURE, TO GREAT THE STRUCTURAL FAILURES OF HOME. >> AND THAT 20 FEET YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT IT WOULD ONLY BE 25 FEET AWAY FROM THE INGRAM'S PROPERTY LINE.

AT THAT POINT YOU MEAN THAT'S 20 FEET OUT IT'LL BE 25 FEET AWAY FROM THE PROPERTY LINE.

NOT THE HOME OR THE POLE. FROM THE PROPERTY LINE. IT'S A SIGNIFICANT AMOUNT OF SPACE WAY. YOU COULD SAY THE SAME THING FROM THE HOUSE THAT'S 2 FEET AWAY. IT'S COULD BE 25 FEET AWAY FOR THE PROPERTY LINE.

[01:10:02]

BEHIND SHRUBS AND TREES THAT THEY WILL NOT SEE. >> WE ALSO WANTED TO MENTION THAT SEVERAL OF YOU HAVE VISITED WHAT YOU CALLED THE SITE.

WHEN YOU MEAN YOU VISITED THE SITE YOU REALLY MEAN YOU VISITED 102 OVERLOOK DRIVE.

I WORKED A LITTLE BIT SURPRISED AND DISAPPOINTED THAT THAT'S THE WAY YOU'RE REFERRING TO THIS PLAN. IT'S ON A PLAN FOR 102 OVERLOOK DRIVE IT'S A PLAN FOR 730 POINTE VEDRA BOULEVARD. I WOULD LIKE TO SEE MORE OF YOU APPROAC THIS FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE AS WELL, COME TO THE HOUSE WHEN YOU SAY YOU VISIT THE SITE ACTUALLY VISIT THE SITE UNDER QUESTION FOR THE VARIANCE WHICH IS 730 POINTE VEDRA DRIVE.

>> I SPENT 30 MINUTES CLIMBING IN YOUR BACKYARD AND LOOKING AT THE DIRT AND EXAMINING THE

PLANS. >> YES WE APPRECIATE THAT. >> TOUCHING THE BULKHEAD.

POKING IT WITH A PEN. >> WE APPRECIATE THAT BECAUSE YOU DID TAKE THE TIME TO LOOK

AT BOTH SIDES. >> ACCORDING TO OUR VIDEO AND PEOPLE SAYING YOU CAME TO OUR

PROPERTY. >> US PERMISSION TO CAME THAT WE APPRECIATE THAT.

WE ASK THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN MORE CLEAR AT THE BEGINNING. >> JOHN IS A CLARIFICATION I DIDN'T COME ON THE PROPERTY BUT I WENT TO THE OTHER SIDE AND LOOKED AT IT FROM THE OTHER

SIDE. >> WHICH IS DIFFERENT BECAUSE THERE ARE HIGHER LEVEL.

>> OKAY. I'M NOT SURE WHERE WE GO FROM HERE.

ONE, AS A CONTRACTOR HERE THAT WILL BUILD THIS. TO HAVE A CONTRACTOR YET?

>> YES.ELL, YEAH.", WAS SPOKEN TO ABOUT 3 OR 4 MARINE CONTRACTORS AND WERE GOING FORWARD WITH ONE. WE HAVE A LETTER FROM THEM HERE.

>> HAS A CONTRACTOR ADDRESSED HOW HE'S GOING TO PUT ABOUT 55 TRUCKLOADS OF FILL BEHIND YOUR

HOUSE? >> YES. >> BECAUSE HE GONNA DO IT?

>> NOT FROM OUTSIDE BUT THE OTHER SIDE OF THE HOUSE. >> IS WIDER.> SOLD BETWEEN YOUR HOUSE AT 728. AND, IT'S 55 BASED ON THEIR ESTIMATE.

WITH PROBABLY 55 TO 60 TRUCKLOADS OF DIRT. >> ARE THE EXACT NUMBERS YOU

WANT TO KNOW THAT INFORMATION? >> SELECTS HUNDRED 85 CUBIC YARDS.

THE AVERAGE TRUCK IS 10 TO 12 CUBIC YARD SO CALLING SO YOUNG. IT'S A NUMBER.

WHICH IS A LOT OF DIRT. SO. OKAY.

>> ALL WORK WILL BE DONE BETWEEN 728 730? >> WERE NOT SURE ABOUT THAT.

>> THE DIRT THEY SAID WOULD BE EASIER FOR THEM TO COME TO THE OUTSIDE.

WE DON'T KNOW ANYTHING ELSE ABOUT THEIR EQUIPMENT. >> BETWEEN YOUR HOUSE AND 102 YOU'VE GOT A 30 SOME-YEAR-OLD RETAINING WALL AND ALL YOUR AIR-CONDITIONING EQUIPMENT.

>> WE DID WON'T DO ANYTHING UNSAFE IF THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE ASKING.

>> THAT'S GOOD CLARIFICATION. ATTORNEY? >> SO, YOU ASKED WHERE TO GO FROM HERE. THERE COULD BE 2 OPTIONS. THE APPLICANT CAN REQUEST A CONTINUANCE IN ORDER TO BRING IN THE EXPERT WITNESSES THAT THEY HAVE SUBMITTED REPORTS FROM. SO THE QUESTIONS CAN BE ANSWERED OR THE BOARD CAN TAKE A VOTE AND YOU'VE HEARD FROM MORE THAN ONE OF THE BOARD MEMBERS THAT THEY HAVE UNANSWERED QUESTIONS THAT THEY FEEL THEY NEED TO ASK THE EXPERT WITNESS.

SO, YOU MAY WANT TO CONSIDER A CONTINUANCE. >> I THINK THEY WERE VERY CLEAR

IN THE RECOMMENDATIONS AND THE REASONING. >> WE WOULD PREFER TO HAVE A

VOTE TODAY. >> IT'S ALSO COSTING US A LOT OF MONEY.

AND WERE GETTING THE IMPRESSION TO JUST TRYING TO DELAY US. SO WE GIVE UP.

>> WE UNDERSTAND THERE'S A LOT OF FRIENDSHIP HERE IS A LOT OF FRIENDSHIPS ON THE BOARD.

BETWEEN OUR POSITION AND WE ARE SENSITIVE TO THAT AND WE KNOW THAT A VOTE MAY BE DIFFICULT

BUT THAT IS WHAT WE LIKE TO SEE. >> IF YOU LIVED AT 102 AND HE BEEN THERE FOR 17 YEARS AND HE HAD A GREAT FEEL TO THE NORTH OF THE MARSHLAND.

AND SOMEBODY CAME ALONG AND BLOCKED HER VIEW. WOULD YOU OBJECT TO IT?

>> THE OBJECT HERE WERE SOME BLOCK. >> IF YOU LIVED IN OUR HOUSE AND HER HOUSE WAS IN A SAFETY ALERT FALLING INTO GONNA WOULD YOU PROTECT IT?

>> OKAY. I WOULD PROTECT IT AND I WOULD RESPECT MY NEIGHBORS VIEW.

FOLKS WE ARE. THAT'S WHY WE ACCOMMODATED IT. >> I PERSONALLY DON'T SEE

YOU'VE DONE MUCH TO RESPECT. >> I'M SORRY YOU DON'T SEE THAT WAY.

>> WERE NOT GOING HIGHER THAN THE LUNGFUL OF HER CURRENT BULKHEAD.

ANGLE 25 FEET AWAY FROM THE PROPERTY. THERE ARE SHRUBS THAT ARE

ALREADY THERE. >> WOULD YOU ANGLE MORE AND REDUCE THE DEPTH?

>> WE DON'T THINK IT WILL BE SAFE OPTION BECAUSE AS YOU MENTIONED ALREADY CUTTING AT AN ANGLE IS NOT THE BEST IDEA BECAUSE THEM WERE NOT PUTTING THE BACKFILL IN THAT WE SEND IS NECESSARY. WERE NOT ENTIRELY COMFORTABLE DOING THEM.

>> WE HAVE LESS THAN A 45 ANGLE DEGREE THAT WERE GOING. WE'VE BEEN VERY ACCOMMODATING

[01:15:09]

>> MR. CHAIR OF A QUESTION. >> YES? >> WHEN WERE REVIEWING THIS PICTURE AND PEOPLE KEEP REFERRING TO THAT ARROW THAT'S WHERE THE BALL WOULD COME.

WOULD THERE BE A 4 FOOT FENCE ON TOP OF THEIR? >> THEY'VE STATED THE 4 FOOT FENCE WOULD BE SEE-THROUGH. IN THE CURRENT FENCE WOULD BE REMOVED AND REPLACED WITH A

SEE-THROUGH FENCE. >> WE DIDN'T ACTUALLY SAY THAT. >> SAID THE NEW FENCE WOULD BE B& BOOKS I HEARD THE NEW FENCE WOULD BE OLD BETTER THAN THE OLD FENCE AND IT WOULD BE EASIER TO SEE-THROUGH. I DON'T THINK WERE MAKING SURE THAT HAPPENS.

IT COULD BE IMPEDED. >> WE CAN SEE ON THE RECORD WE WILL BUILD A NON-OPAQUE FENCE

OVER THE BULKHEAD FROM B. >> LIKE A PICKET RAIL? >> WE COULD SAY 50 PERCENT

CAPACITY. >> THIS POINT OF INFORMATION YOU'RE NOT REALLY SUPPOSED TO

HAVE A FENCE ON TOP OF A RETAINING WALL. >> OKAY WILL FOLLOW HER CURRENT

RECOMMENDATION. >> THE FENCE, JACOB, ISN'T THAT CORRECT? YOU'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO HAVE A FENCE ON TOP OF THE RETAINING WALL IN HER ZONING?

>> I DON'T HAVE THAT ANSWER RIGHT OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD. DOES GET A LITTLE CONFOUNDING WHEN WERE MAKING ESSENTIALLY WHAT AMOUNTS TO BE A WHILE ALREADY AND THEN GOING ON TOP HAVE TO CLARIFY THAT WITH THE FACT THAT IT'S AT GRADE. DON'T HAVE THAT ANSWER OFF

THE TOP OF MY HEAD. >> WILL FOLLOW ENGINEERS AND CONTRACTORS RECOMMENDATIONS.

I JUST WANT TO REITERATE THE RED ARROW THAT GOES BEHIND THE PALM TREE SORT OF RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE THERE THEN THERE'S A PALM TREE FARTHER AWAY THE BALL WOULD STOP RIGHT BETWEEN THOSE 2 PALM TREES. THIS ISN'T DRASTIC. THIS ISN'T BLOCKING THE VIEW.

THIS IS IT IMPEDED THEIR WAY OF LIFE AND THE BEAUTY OF THEIR LARGE WHICH WERE VERY JEALOUS OF. IT REALLY WOULD NOT GO SIGNIFICANTLY FAR.

>> WERE BEING VERY ACCOMMODATING TO THEIR VIEW. >> WE CAN PUT IN THE RECORD ABOUT TRYING TO MAINTAIN THE PALM TREES THAT ARE THERE. TRYING TO MAINTAIN THE SHRUBS.

IF THERE IS A SPECIFIC NEGLIGENCE THAT IS NECESSARY WE WILL ACCOMMODATE THAT.

>> IF YOU WANT US TO PLAN ANOTHER TREE. FOR THEM TO BE HAPPY WITH HER VIEW. WE WANT TO MAKE SURE OUR HOUSE IS SAFE AND OUR CHILDREN SAFE.

>> OKAY. >> MISS VALERIE IF THERE WAS A VOTE HELD TODAY AND IT WAS A NEGATIVE HOW LONG BETWEEN THE APPLICATION COULD COME BACK ON AN ITEM THAT WOULD BE LIKE THIS

PROPERTY? >> IT WOULD BE ONE YEAR UNLESS THAT WERE SIGNIFICANTLY DIFFERENT CIRCUMSTANCES WITH ANOTHER REQUEST. THE APPLICANTS WILL ALSO HAVE THE RIGHT TO APPEAL THE DECISION TO THE BOARD COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WHO WOULD HEREIN

ALL OVER AGAIN. >> WOULD THEY BE ABLE TO DEFERRED THIS VOTE UNTIL THEY

COULD BRING IN THE CONTRACTOR AND THE ENGINEER? >> I THINK THEY'RE LUCKY NOT TO

DO IT. >> THAT'S CORRECT. ANY QUESTIONS AMONG THE BOARD

MEMBERS PLEASE? DO WE HEAR A OTION? >> I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO DENY POINTE VEDRA VARIANCE OF 21 Ã173 ONE EVITA BOULEVARD FOR RETAINING WALL.

>> TO HAVE A SECOND? >> I WILL SECOND. LET'S REMEMBER A VOTE YES IS A VOTE TO DENY. OKAY? PLEASE VOTE.

[2. PVZVAR2021-05 306 Ponte Vedra Blvd - Setback. Request for a Zoning Variance to Section VIII.L.1 of the Ponte Vedra Zoning District Regulations to allow a rear yard setback of five (5) feet in lieu of the twenty-five (25) foot requirement to accommodate construction of a detached accessory structure. Presenter - Doug Burnett - St. Johns Law Group]

THE MOTION IS NOT APPROVED. OKAY NEXT ON THE AGENDA IS POINTE VEDRA ADJUSTMENT BOARD

[01:20:09]

ANYONE? >> I DID NOT ANYONE. I DID BICYCLE BEHIND THE BACK OF THE HOUSE, IN THE GOLF CART PATH. I ALSO DROVE BY THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE AND I GUESS OUR DIMENSION DID NOT TALK TO TALK TO ANYONE.

I PARKED IN THE POINTE VEDRA SPA PARKING LOT THEN WALKED AROUND THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY. I DID NOT SET FOOT ON THE PROPERTY.

I DID VISIT THE SITE. >> I VISITED THE SITE LIKE BOARD MEMBERS DID ABOUT GOING

AROUND THE BACK AND THEY DID NOT TALK TO ANYONE. >> DROVE BY THE SITE AND TO NOT

GO AROUND BACK AND I HAVE NOT SPOKEN TO ANYONE. >> AFFILIATE WITH A PROPERTY

BUT I HAVE NOT SPOKEN WITH ANYONE. >> A FILET WITH THE PROPERTY BUT DID NOT ANYONE. LOOKS AWFULLY WITH THE PROPERTY AND DID NOT ANYONE.

>> OKAY. A PRESENTATION PLEASE? >> HELLO MY NAME IS JACK OSSI I AM THE BUILDER FOR THIS PROPERTY. I BROUGHT THE GLOBAL VIEW IN

THE SITE PLAN THAT WILL BE DEVELOPED IN THE OVERHEAD. >> ADDRESS?

>> MY HOME ADDRESS? >> YES. >> 322 ÃROAD POINTE VEDRA

BEACH. >> OKAY. >> AS YOU SEE THE HIGHLIGHTED IS THERE LOT. THE IDEA IS, THE WAY TO GET TO THEIR BACKYARD IS THE DRIVEWAY IS ON THE LEFT. TO GO TO GO BEHIND THE HOUSE AND THERE'S A GARAGE IN THE BACK. RIGHT NOW THIS IS WHAT'S EXISTING IF YOU COULD SEE THAT.

MAYBE THIS MORNING IS A LITTLE BETTER. , THAT'S A LITTLE BETTER, RIGHT? AND SO THE PLAN IS TRYING TO DO IN ADDITION ON THE PROPERTY.

AND USE THE SAME DRIVEWAY. THEY DON'T WANT TO KNOCK DOWN THE HOUSE.

SO THE NEW SITE PLAN WILL LOOK LIKE THIS. I'M SORRY.

>> YOU'VE GOT A MIC RIGHT THERE. >> ALL WE DO HAVE A MIC.

THANK YOU SO UCH. SORRY. SO THIS IS THE IDEA OF THE SITE PLAN. THE HOUSE IS EXISTING HERE. THIS IS THE OLD DRIVEWAY THAT'S ALREADY THERE THAT COMES BACK AND THERE WAS A GARAGE, NO GARAGE RIGHT HERE WITH HER TRYING TO DO IN ADDITION HERE. AND THAT HAVE THE GARAGE OVER HERE.

THE REASON WHY THEY'RE PUTTING THE GARAGE THERE IS BECAUSE A COUPLE OF REASONS.

THERE'S A NEIGHBOR ABOUT WE TALK TO THE NEIGHBORS TO THE SOUTH OF THE VIEWING LET ME SEE IF I CAN GET THE, SORRY. THESE ARE THE NEIGHBORS TO THE SOUTH.

THEY'VE GOT A POOL THERE ALSO. WE CAN PUT THE GARAGE THERE BUT IT WILL HURT THEIR VIEW.

I COULD DO IT ALL LEGAL AND A WAY OF NO VARIANCE. SO, THEY COULD DRIVE UP AND GO IN THERE. THAT'S ONE REASON. ANOTHER REASON IS . SORRY.

ANOTHER REASON IS IF WE DID PUT THE GARAGE HERE AS YOU SEE IN THE PLAN THEN THEY'RE GOING TO MOVE THE POOL HERE. AND THEN DRIVING DOWN BEHIND THE HOUSE IS A BLIND SPOT.

THE HOUSE IS RIGHT HERE. THERE'S A BLIND SPOT COMING DOWN AND IF YOU HAVE CHILDREN OUT HERE BY THE POOL YOU'RE MORE LIKELY TO NOT TO SEE THE CAR COMING ROUND BECAUSE PEOPLE CLOSER TO THE HOUSE. THAT'S THE SECOND REASON WHY IF I COULD GET THE GARAGE CLOSER TO THE PARKING LOT BY THE SPA IT WOULD HELP MOVE MY POOL FURTHER DOWN SO PEOPLE CAN SEE

[01:25:01]

FOR THE VIEWING OF THE PARKING LOT SIDE I DON'T BELIEVE IT WOULD HURT VIEWING ON THE PPARKING LOT SIDE BECAUSE IT'S JUST REALLY PARKING LOT. THERE IS TREES BLOCKING EVERYTHING TO THE SPOT. I FEEL LIKE THIS LOT, THE SITUATION IS UNIQUE BECAUSE IT HAS A PARKING LOT NEXT TO IT. IT'S NOT NORMAL FOR ALL THESE POINTE VEDRA HOUSES TO HAVE A PARKING LOT NEXT TO IT. I THINK IT'S IDEAL TO HAVE AWAY FROM THE HOUSE TO THE SOUTH.

IT GIVES THE SOUTH HOUSE A BETTER VIEW. I HAVE THEIR APPROVAL.

I HAVE THEIR APPROVAL ON IT AND SIGNED AND NOTARIZED. TO PUT THE GARAGE TO THE SIDE OF THE NORTH I GUESS YOU WOULD SAY INTO THE SETBACK. MASKING FOR THE GARAGE DETACHED GARAGE TOOK ON THE SETBACK. NOT ANY PART OF THE HOUSE. I THINK THAT'S ALL I HAVE.

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS WE CAN GO BACK TO THE LOT SURE THE PARKING LOT.

AND SHOW YOU HOW BIG THE LOT IS COMPARED TO THE PARKING LOT. I BELIEVE THAT'S EVERYTHING I

HAVE TO SAY. >> WHAT IS THE HARDSHIP HERE? P>> OF THE HARDSHIP IS 2 THINGS.

THE HARDSHIP IS IF I PUT THE GARAGE ON THE SIDE WHERE I CAN AND THEN DRIVE IN THIS WAY AND HAVING PEOPLE HERE, THERE'S A BLIND SPOT. THE ONLY WAY TO GET TO THIS HOUSE TO THE GARAGE AND BACK IS PASSING THE HOUSE. I THOUGHT IT BE NICE TO NOT HAVE THE BLIND SPOT COMING PAST HOUSE AND HAVING A POOL WITH CHILDREN AROUND THE POOL GOING AROUND. THERE'S 2 THINGS. BETTER FOR THE HOUSE TO THE SOUTH BECAUSE THEY HAVE THEIR OWN POOL RIGHT HERE IN A STRUCTURE NEXT TO THE PERSON HIMSELF. AND ALSO, IT'S IDEAL. LUCKILY THERE'S A PARKING LOT TO THE NORTH SO IT'S A UNIQUE SITUATION WITH THIS LAW. THAT'S MY MAIN REASON FOR THAT.

>> SO I'VE A QUESTION. KIND OF ALONG THE SAME LINES OF THE HARDSHIP.

THE LOT IS 100.219 AND IT'S A RECTANGLE. IT'S A PRETTY GOOD SIZE LOT FOR POINTE VEDRA. THE EXISTING HOUSE DOESN'T TAKE UP MUCH OF IT.

WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS BASED UPON THE DESIGN OF WHAT THEY LIKE TO BUILD THIS IS A

SELF-IMPOSED HARDSHIP BY THE OWNER. >> YES.

OF COURSE. >> HAVE A COUPLE OTHER QUESTIONS TOO.

ON PAGE 8 AND SAID AND MAYBE THIS IS A STAFF QUESTION. PAGE 8 THERE WERE 2 PHONE CALLS RECEIVED ABOUT THIS INQUIRY. WHAT WERE THE SUBSTANCE OF THOSE PHONE CALLS?

>> YES MA'AM JACOB SMITH GROWTH MANAGEMENT. I BELIEVE SOME ADJACENT NUMBERS RIGHT IN THE VICINITY THEY WERE SIMPLY CALLING TO ACQUIRE WHAT THE VARIANCE REQUEST PARKS

BECAUSE THERE WAS A SIGN ON THE PPROPERTY? >> WE WERE JUST CALLING ASKING SOME GENERAL QUESTIONS ABOUT IT. THEY DIDN'T LEAVE ANY COMMENT

TO ME ONE WAY OR THE OTHER. >> ALSO NOTICED IN THAT CORNER WE ARE PROPOSING PUTTING THE GARAGE IS A PRETTY SIZABLE OAK TREE.HAT WOULD HAPPEN TO THAT OAK TREE?

>> I'VE GOT TO DO, IF I COULD KEEP THE OAK TREE ABOVE TO KEEP IT.

>> AND SABA HOMEOWNERS PROPERTY BUT IT SPANS OVER WHERE I THINK THE GARAGE WOULD BE.

>> SORRY, I'LL KEEP IT FOR SURE. YES.

I THOUGHT YOU WERE SAYING IT WAS ON THE PROPERTY. >> I THINK THOSE ARE THE ONLY

QUESTIONS I HAD. THANK YOU. >> YEAH.

>> OTHER QUESTIONS? >> THE QUESTION I HAVE IS IF YOU HAVE THE GARAGE IN THE ORIGINAL PROPOSED POSITION, WHY COULDN'T YOU HAVE THE POOL AS YOU HAVE PREDICTED? THEN HE WOULD HAVE A BLIND SPOT?> YES IT WOULD BE THE DISTANCE, TRYING TO THINK THE DISTANCE BETWEEN THE 2. IT GIVES YOU MORE ROOM TO TAKE IT AWAY FROM THE GARAGE.

SO YOU CAN HAVE THE ROOM OVER HERE. AND I HAVE TO TAKE THE SIDEWALK OUT. I MEAN I'M SURE YOU CAN PUT SOME TYPE OF POOL TO THE

[01:30:01]

WE STILL HAVE SIGN OFFS WITH HIM THAT HE WOULD LIKE NOT TO HAVE IT RIGHT NEXT TO HIS POOL

ALSO. IT'S JUST A COUPLE OPTIONS. >> COULD YOU PULL THE GARAGE

FORWARD FROM THERE? >> IF I PULL THE GARAGE APPEAR KEEPS GETTING CLOSER TO HIS HOUSE. REALLY NICE THING ABOUT THIS LOT IS IT'S NEXT TO THE PARKING LOT. AND IT'S A ONE STORY GARAGE. I'M NOT TRYING TO DO 2-STORY GARAGE ON THIS. IT'S ONLY THE 9 FOOT CEILING PLATE ON THE GARAGE.

AND I COULD DO A FENCE AT 6-FOOT AND REALLY I THINK THE CODE YOU COULD DO IT TO FRONT STOMACH TO FOOT LOTS THEN IT WAS UP TO 8 FOOT. I THINK.

YOU CAN'T DO THAT ON THIS? >> IT'S A 4 FOOT FENCE. >> OKAY.

>> FOREFOOT WITH NO LETTUCE. >> I'LL DO WHATEVER THE CODE TELLS ME TO DO.

I'M SORRY ABOUT THAT. YEAH, NEITHER WHERE I'M NOT DOING 2-STORY GARAGE IT WOULD BE JUST ONE STORY AND I'LL BE HAPPY TO PUT THAT INTO THE APPROVAL FOR ONE STORY.

IF THAT HELPS THE SITUATION. ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS? S?

ANY MORE QUESTIONS? DO WE HEAR A OTION? >> WHILE I APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT EVERYONE WANTS TO USE EVERY BIT OF THEIR PROPERTY IN POINTE VEDRA NO WE DON'T ALLOW THE SETBACKS OF 5 FEET. I BELIEVE THE LOT IS A GOOD SIZE TO HAVE A GOOD DESIGN FOR A POOL AND A GARAGE AND EVERYTHING ELSE. I'M GOING TO ACTUALLY MAKE A

MOTION TO DENY PVC VA ARE 21 Ã 5. >> SECOND.

>> AGAIN ABOUT YES IS ABOUT TO DENY THE VARIANCE. PLEASE TE.

[3. PUD2020-08 Ponte Vedra Self Storage. PUD 2020-08 Ponte Vedra Self Storage, Request to rezone approximately 2.1 acres of land from Single Family Residential (R-1-C) to Planned Unit Development (PUD) to allow construction of a Self Storage facility, located at the Southwest Corner of SR A1A N and Marsh Landing Parkway.]

OKAY, I'M SORRY TO SAY PITCHER VARIANCE HAS NOT BEEN APPROVED. >> OKAY.

>> FOR THE RECORD I DON'T KNOW IF YOU NOTICED BUT WE WERE ABLE TO SEE THE VOTE ON THE SCREEN

IF IT'S NOT WORKING. >> THE VOTE WAS 7 ÃZERO 0. >> I THOUGHT IT POPPED UP.

>> OKAY.THERE IT IS. I'M SORRY. >> THANK YOU.

LET'S MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER 3 ON THE AGENDA. POINTE VEDRA ADJUSTMENT BOARD REQUEST FOR MODIFICATION TO THE PUD OF 2020 ÃBUT WAIT POINTE VEDRA'S SELF STORAGE UNIT.

PLEASE ADDRESS THE BUSINESS SIDE AND IF YOU'D CHATTED WITH ANYONE?

>> I DRIVEN BY THE PROPERTY MANY TIMES AND I HAD A VOICEMAIL FROM ALEX CONLEY.

IS THAT CORRECT? AND I DID RETURN HIS CALL TO SAY THAT I HAD TO REFRAME FROM ANY FURTHER CONVERSATION. I WOULD SEE THEM HERE TODAY AT THE MEETING.

> SINCE LAST MEETING I ACTUALLY HAD A TELEPHONE MEETING WITH CHARLIE, SCOTT AND JAKE PEAKE ON JULY 8 AND THEY WALKED ME THROUGH THE CHANGES TO THEIR FILING.

>> ARE DRIVEN BY THE SITE AGAIN AND I DID NOT RECEIVE ANY PHONE CALLS OR TALK WITH ANYONE.

>> I ACTUALLY DID HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH LEX AND I CAN'T REMEMBER THE OTHER GENTLEMAN'S NAME LAST FRIDAY AFTERNOON. WHEN THEY WENT THROUGH THE CHANGES TO THEIR PROPOSAL AND WHICH I GUESS THE REPRESENTING TODAY.

>> I AM FAMILIAR WITH THE PROPERTY AND SINCE OUR LAST MEETING I HAVE HAD NO CONTACT

CONCERNING THE PROPOSAL. >> UNFAMILIAR WITH THE PROPERTY IN THE DIDN'T HAVE A PHONE CALL FROM ALEX WHICH I SAID I WAS NOT WILLING TO GO-AHEAD AND MEET WITH HIM PRIVATELY.

>> UNFAMILIAR WITH THE PROPERTY I SPOKE WITH THE APPLICANT AND PRESENTER REGARDING THE CHANGES

TO THE PROPOSAL TODAY. >> OKAY WERE READY FOR YOUR PRESENTATION.

ION. >> THANK YOU I APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO COME BACK BEFORE U I'M NOT SURE HOW TO CHARACTERIZE MY LAST ST MEETING.

IT WASN'T MY FINEST HOUR. ACCEPT ESPONSIBILITY FOR MY UNDERSTANDING OF WHAT SPIRIT OF

[01:35:05]

IT'S OUR INTENTION TO CONTINUE TO DEVELOP FIRST-CLASS PROPERTIES AS WE BEEN DOING IN THIS COMMUNITY FOR THE LAST 30 YEARS RANGING FROM THE Ã HEADQUARTERS TO THE REDEVELOPMENT IN BROOKLYN. WE'VE DONE A VERY NICE JOB OF BUILDING A PORTFOLIO OF FINE PROPERTIES AND WE WANT TO DO THAT HERE. UNFORTUNATELY THE EFFORT WE MADE LAST TIME WAS SHORT OF THAT. THIS BOARD TOOK US TO THE WOODSHED ON THAT. WE LIST RESTORING A BUSINESS. WE MISUNDERSTOOD SOME OF THE ISSUES WITH THE EXCEPTIONS AND WE'VE TAKEN ALL OF YOUR COMMENTS TO HEART.

WE SAT BACK DOWN WITH OUR TEAM AND REDESIGN THE PROJECT AND IT'S A VERY DIFFERENT PROJECT THEN WE BROUGHT THE FIRST TIME. WE HAVE HUGH MATTHEWS WHICH IS PRESIDENT, AND JASON FAULKNER IS THE PRESIDENT STUDIO-ARCHITECTURE AND DOUG BURNETT YOU WILL NOW.

WE WANT TO PRESENT YOU WITH VERY DIFFERENT PROJECT THAT WE THINK ADDRESSES THE ISSUES THAT WERE RAISED IN OUR LAST MEETING. AND IT'S A PROJECT WE CAN ALL BE PROUD OF. WITH THAT I LIKE TO GET DOUG TO COME UP AND INTRODUCED THE OTHER MEMBERS OF THE TEAM TO PRESENT OUR REDESIGN PROJECT FOR YOUR APPROVAL.

>> THANK YOU. DOUG BURNETT, ST. JOHN'S LAW GROUP.

I CAN HONESTLY TELL YOU AS I STAND HERE TODAY THAT IN 20 YEARS OF DOING THIS IN THIS COUNTY I HAVE NEVER HAD A MORE SINCERE CLIENT THEN WILL WE LEFT OUR LAST MEETING AND WHAT THE INSTRUCTIONS WERE FOR US TO ACHIEVE BEFORE COMING BACK HERE.

IT WASN'T A LET'S MAKE IT LOOK PRETTY AND STILL PROCEED. IT WASN'T A WE WILL TAKE OUR CHANCES. IT WAS A LET'S DO WHAT THEY SAID AND TRY AND ACCOMPLISH AS MUCH AS WE POSSIBLY CAN TO GET WHERE THE PLANNING AND ZONING, THE POINTE VEDRA PLANNING AND ZONING ADJUSTMENT BOARD WANTS US TO BE. SO WITH THAT LET ME ASK JASON FAULKNER TO PICK UP AND GO THROUGH SOME OF THE ARCHITECTURAL RENDERINGS TO TELL YOU WHAT WAS DONE ARCHITECTURALLY AND WILL COME BACK AND HIT SOME OF THE PDETAILS OF WHAT WE DID TO ADDRESS YOUR CONCERNS. JASON, IF YOU WHAT.

>> THANK YOU, JASON FAULKNER STUDIO-ARCHITECTURE 315 E. BAY STREET, JACKSONVILLE FLORIDA, 32202. SO LAST TIME WE WERE HERE WE PRESENTED A PROJECT WHICH I THINK WE DID A VERY BAD JOB OF DISPLAYING AND DEPICTING THE TRUE IMAGE OF THE BUILDING AND HOW IT'S PLACED IN THE CONTEXT. PWE SPENT MOST OF THE TIME SHOWING YOU WHAT THIS LOOKS LIKE FROM A BIRDS EYE VIEW. YEAH, I GET WHERE SOME OF THE HESITATION WAS AND WHERE SOME OF THE INKS WAS WITH THE PROJECT. SINCE THAT TIME, WHAT WE'VE DONE, WHAT WERE GOING TO SHOW YOU IS NOT AN ARTISTIC RENDERING.

WE ACTUALLY GOT 3 DIMENSIONAL MAPS AND WE RECORDED AND REPLICATED THE EXACT VISITATION THAT'S ON THE STREET IN FRONT OF THE SITE AND TRY TO GIVE YOU A TRUE REPRESENTATION OF THE SCALE OF THE BUILDING AND HOW IT WOULD BE VIEWED DOWN UNDER VITA BOULEVARD OR A 1A.

THIS IMAGE YOU SEE HERE I THINK EVERYONE IS FAMILIAR WITH THE ACE HARDWARE IN THE TARGET SHOPPING PLAZA. THE VIEW YOU HAVE UP ON THE SCREEN IS HEADING SOUTHBOUND ON A 1A. I'M RIGHT THERE AT THE LIGHT IS WHERE YOU WOULD TURN INTO GET TO THE TARGET AND YOU CAN SEE JUST THROUGH THE TREES IS A PEAK OF OUR STORAGE BUILDING ON THE RIGHT-HAND SIDE. THIS IMAGE HERE IS DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET LOOKING TOWARDS THE ENTRANCE INTO THE TARGET SHOPPING PLAZA. THERE IS A MCDONALD'S ON THE RIGHT. YOU SEE THE PROJECT ARROW INDICATING THAT IS WHERE OUR BUILDING WOULD BE. NOW WE'VE TURNED INTO A SHOPPING PLAZA SO ON THE DRIVE HEADING IN, IN THE FAR BACKGROUND ON THE RIGHT-HAND SIDE IS THE TARGET THAT YOU SEE THERE. ON THE LEFT IS OUR BUILDING FOR THE STORAGE BUILDING RIGHT THERE. AND AGAIN, THIS VEGETATION IS ACCURATE.

NOW WHAT WE'VE DONE IS WE'VE GONE UP TO THE TARGET, TURNED AROUND AND ARE COMING OUT BACK FROM THE TARGET TOWARDS A 1A ON THE RIGHT-HAND SIDE IS OUR STORAGE FACILITY.

[01:40:02]

YOU COULD SEE THE WAY THE VEGETATION IS THERE NOW ALONG THE 50 FOOT SWATH OF LAND, PRETTY WELL OBSERVED THE BUILDING AND ALMOST TOTALITY. WE'VE AT THIS POINT IN THIS VIEW WE ARE DRIVING DOWN THE ROAD HEADING SOUTH AND YOU SEE THE DRIVEWAY ON THE RIGHT-HAND SIDE WHICH WOULD BE THE DRIVEWAY TO THE STORAGE FACILITY.

AGAIN, THE WHOLE FRONT OF THE BUILDING IS TOTALLY OBSCURED BY THIS VEGETATION.

AT THE DRIVEWAY THIS IS THE VIEW YOU WOULD HAVE UP TOWARDS THE STORAGE BUILDING.

AND THE VEGETATION ON THE RIGHT IS EXISTING VEGETATION THAT IS THERE TODAY.

THIS VIEW IS FROM ACROSS A 1A. IF YOU ARE HEADING NORTH ON A 1A YOU SEE THE TARGET SIGN TURNING INTO THE TARGET RETAIL AREA. YOU DO GET A GLIMPSE OF THE STORAGE BUILDING BETWEEN THE TREES. NOW THIS VIEW WERE BACK AGAIN ACROSS THE STREET AT A 1A ACROSS FROM THE TARGET. AS YOU CAN SEE IT COULD JUST BARELY SEE THE ROOF OF THE STORAGE BUILDING. NOW ON THE FAR LEFT THERE WAS A BUILDING THAT LOOKS LIKE RIGHT WITH SOME GLASS ON IT. THAT IS A FUTURE POSSIBLE BUILDING. THE REASON WE PUT THAT IN IS TO SHOW THAT THERE HAS ALREADY BEEN A COUPLE OF OPPORTUNITIES, OTHER DEVELOPERS LOOKING TO DEVELOP A BUILDING ON THAT SITE. IF THEY DO THE CURRENT ZONING ALLOWS FOR A 35 FOOT HEIGHT BUILDINGS. AND, WHAT WE DID WAS WE REPLICATED THE CLOSEST THAT BUILDING COULD BE BUILT UP AGAINST A 1A TO TRY TO GIVE YOU SOME REFERENCE OF SCALE BETWEEN

OUR BUILDING AND ANY FUTURE POSSIBLE CONSTRUCTION. >> WHERE THAT ALSO STEMS FROM, LET ME JUST SAY THE PUD APPLICATION THAT THEY FILED FOR THAT SITE THAT'S WHERE THEY'RE

LOCATED THE BUILDING. >> RIGHT. AND ONE MORE VIEW AGAIN LOOKING BACK TOWARDS THE RETAIL CENTER. YOU COULD SEE THE BUILDING IS ALMOST COMPLETELY OBSCURED BY THE EXISTING VEGETATION. THIS IS JUST A FEW OF THE DRIVEWAY AND WHAT POTENTIALLY COULD BE A FUTURE BUILDING TOWARDS THE LEFT. SAME THING.

SO, LAST TIME THERE WAS ALSO SOME COMMENTS ABOUT THE ARCHITECTURE THAT SOME OF HER INSPIRATION WASN'T REFLECTING POINTE VEDRA OFF. WE HAPPEN TO CONCUR WITH YOU ON THAT. ANOTHER ASPECT WAS THE FACT THAT THE BUILDING APPEARED TO BE A 3-STORY BUILDING. WHAT WE'VE DONE IS WE'VE GONE BACK AND LOOKED AT THE ARCHITECTURE TRIED TO GET SOME OTHER INFLUENCES OF POINTE VEDRA AND DESIGN A BUILDING THAT CHARACTERISTICALLY ON THE OUTSIDE LOOKS LIKE A 2-STORY BUILDING.

SO, NEXT SLIDE PLEASE WAIT LEAVE CHANGE THIS IS WE'VE INTRODUCED THIS TEMPERATURE THAT YOU SEE THAT GOES ACROSS THE TOP OF THE BUILDING. , VERY CHARACTERISTIC OF THE ARCHITECTURAL BETS AND THE SAWGRASS VILLAGE. IT'S ALSO CHARACTERISTIC OF SOME OF THE ARCHITECTURE AND OTHER AREAS OF FLORIDA THAT ARE SEASIDE COMMUNITIES.

IT STILL HAS TRADITIONAL ELEMENTS WITH SOME MORE MODERN UNDERTONES.

I THINK WHAT WE MADE HERE WORKS LESS LIKE A STORAGE BUILDING AND IS CONTEXTUAL FOR OFFICE BUILDING IN POINTE VEDRA. HERE IS SOME OF THE SURROUNDING INSPIRATIONAL IMAGES OF ARCHITECTURE. WE KIND OF FELT LIKE THE SAWGRASS VILLAGE DID A GOOD JOB OF THAT LEAVE US INNOVATION AND THAT'S WITH THESE IMAGES HERE FROM THE RIGHT.

AND YOU CAN SEE INSPIRATION OF WHAT WERE DOING IN THE BUILDING NOW.

I THINK WHAT WERE GIVING YOU IS MUCH BETTER BUILDING OF WHAT WE CAME WITH ORIGINALLY.

ON THE LEFT IS A VERY TRADITIONAL MEDICAL OFFICE BUILDING AND THEN SOME LOCAL BRANCH BANKS. YOU CAN SEE THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF ECLECTIC MIX OF ARCHITECTURAL STYLES IN THE POINTE VEDRA AREA. HERE ARE SOME OF THE ADJACENT

[01:45:03]

OUTSIDE OF THE ACTUAL POINTE VEDRA ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD.

OTHER ONES ARE ACTUALLY WITHIN THE ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD OF POINTE VEDRA.

HERE'S THE IMAGE OF WHAT WE CAME TO LAST TIME. AS YOU CAN TELL IT DOES LOOK LIKE A CORPORATE STORAGE FACILITY. 3 STORIES.

IT'S A LITTLE FLUTTER ON THE DETAIL. THE IMAGE ON THE RIGHT IS WHAT WE ARE COMING BACK TO NOW. WE FEEL LIKE IT'S VERY CHARACTER WITH POINTE VEDRA.

IN OUR OPINION DOESN'T LOOK LIKE A STORAGE BUILDING. WE THINK IT WOULD BE A GOOD

ASSET TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD. >> AN IMPORTANT PUNCHLINE THE BUILDING ON THE LEFT IS 45 FEET TALL. THE BUILDING ON THE RIGHT IS 35 FEET TALL.

EXCEPT FOR THE ELEVATOR SHAFTS WHICH WOULD BE ALLOWED ADDITIONAL 2 FEET Ã10 INCHES.

GOING BACK TO MR. ALEX, HERE'S YOUR MARCHING ORDERS. LET'S GET TO THE BUILDING TO WHERE ITS ABSOLUTE MINIMUM. LET'S GET IT TO THE APPEARANCE OF A 2-STORY STRUCTURE AND IT CAME UP WITH THE CHANGE DESIGN THAT NOW NOT ONLY TO HAVE SIGNIFICANTLY ENHANCED ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN IN THE EXTERIOR STRUCTURE THAT LOOKS 2-STORY FROM THE EXTERIOR NOW YOU GOT THE HEIGHT DOWN TO 35 FEET. AGAIN, EXCEPT FOR THE ELEVATOR CHALICE WHICH WOULD BE AN ADDITIONAL 10 FEET 2 INCHES AS THE WAIVER REQUEST TO GO TO 35 FEET WITH ADDITIONAL 2 FEET 10 INCHES ELEVATOR SHAFTS. DOWN SIGNIFICANT LINK FROM THE ORIGINAL 45 FOOT PATHS THAT WE BEEN HERE WITH PREVIOUSLY. THANK YOU JASON.

JUST WALK THROUGH SOME OF THE MVP MAP CHANGES. SECRECY WITH GOING ON BETWEEN THE 2 DIFFERENT TYPE PLANS. OTHER TALKED ABOUT LAST TIME WE WANT TO MOVE THE BUILDING DOWN THIS TIME ACTUALLY DID ACHIEVE THAT. I MOVE THE BUILDING WE HIT AND MEET THE 20 FOOT SETBACK TO THE NORTH. WE ACTUALLY ARE ABLE TO ELIMINATE A LOT OF WAIVERS. IF YOU LOOK AT OUR PUD TEXT. WE'VE INCREASED THE WAIVERS TO THE NORTH. NO WAIVER. TO THE EAST, NO WAIVER.

TO THE WEST, NO WAIVER. TO THE SOUTH, STILL A WAIVER. IT'S ACTUALLY NOT REQUIRED IF THE PARCEL TO THE SOUTH OF US WAS COMMERCIAL. IN OUR PRESENTATION HERE GOING IT SHOW YOU THE PUD TEXT. THE RELETTING OF THE TEXT DOESN'T SHOW UP IN YOUR STAFF REPORT. I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO SEE. YOU CAN SEE UP THERE ON THE LISTED WAIVERS. WE'VE ELIMINATED 2 OF THEM WHERE WE DID HAVE WAIVERS PREVIOUSLY. AND ON THE SOUTH AGAIN, WE REALLY NEED THAT WAIVER RIGHT NOW BECAUSE THE PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH OF US IS ASSUMED TO BE RESIDENTIAL.

IT'S ZONING IS CURRENTLY RESIDENTIAL. I DON'T THINK ANYONE WOULD THINK THAT THE PARCEL TO THE SOUTH OF THE 4 ACRES THAT'S BEEN IT WAS SEVERAL DIFFERENT DESIGNS PROPOSING COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT IS GOING TO BE COMMERCIAL.

IS IT COULD BE ANYTHING OTHER THAN COMMERCIAL? IT'S GONNA COME WITH COMMERCIAL. WHEN IT COMES IN ZONES FOR COMMERCIAL WE WILL BE 100 PERCENT CONSISTENT. IT'S NOT A WAIVER THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED.

LET'S LOOK AT THE SITE AS WELL. AGAIN YOU CAN SEE THE ENHANCED SITE.

YOU LOOK AT ETM PUTTING THAT TO SOME AERIAL OVERLAY. AND WHAT YOU SEE IS A BIG DIFFERENCE FROM BEFORE IS YOU ACTUALLY GET ALL OF THIS ADDITIONAL BUFFERING ON THE NORTH SIDE. WE HAVE CALLED UP HAVING ENHANCED LANDSCAPING.

LET ME GET THIS AREA ALL WE COULD DO LAST TIME WAS TALK ABOUT IT.

NOW WE CAN ACTUALLY SHOW YOU. THE BUILDING IS FURTHER AWAY. THE PARKING HAS BEEN BROUGHT DOWN WE'VE GOT THIS AREA HERE WERE SIGNIFICANT FOLIAGE WILL BE LEFT OR LANDSCAPING WILL BE PLANTED. AND AGAIN, WERE MEETING OUR SETBACK.

ON THE NORTH. WERE MEETING OUR SETBACK ON THE EAST.

WERE MEETING OUR SETBACK ON THE WEST. ASKING FOR SOME RELIEF ON THE SOUTH OBVIOUSLY IS A TECHNICALITY BECAUSE OF WHAT WILL ULTIMATELY COME TO THE SOUTH. ASIDE FROM THAT WE'VE LOWERED THE BUILDING HEIGHT IS ABOUT WHO TO ABOUT THAT'S DEPICTED ON THIS PAGE HERE AT THE PUD TEXT. WE'VE REDUCED OUR SIGNAGE

[01:50:14]

WE STUMBLED WAIVER RELATED TO SIGNAGE OVERALL. NOT RELATED TO AN ADDITIONAL SIGN. WE DELETED THE MONUMENT SIGNAGE WAIVER.

DELETED WAIVERS, AGAIN LIKE I SAID THE SETBACK WAIVER SPACE BETWEEN PARKING AND THE BUILDING PARKING STANDARDS IS OF ALL BEEN DELETED FROM THE PROJECT.

WAIVER FOR BUFFERS AND SETBACKS, A WAIVER FOR THE MONUMENT SIGN WAIVER FOR ADDITIONAL WALL SIGN, A WAIVER FOR FILL DIRT. ALL OF THOSE RAN THE APPLICATION YOU SAW LAST TIME. THOSE SPECIFIC ONES HAVE NOW BEEN DELETED.

AGAIN LOOKING AT THE PUD TEXT YOU CAN SEE THE EXTENT OF THE REVISIONS.

YOU CAN SEE WHO SELL DELETIONS OF SECTIONS FROM THE WAIVERS. TO GET RID OF THOSE WAIVERS.

AND SUBSETS OF OTHER WAIVERS THAT HAVE BEN DELETED. SO AGAIN YOU COULD SEE AN OVERLAY OF THE AERIAL AND CONTEXT OF THE OVERALL AREA. AND WITH THAT I THINK IT TASTED UP FOR MR. HUGH MATTHEWS TO JOIN ME AND MAKE SOME COMMON SENSE AS WELL THE TRAFFIC

ISSUE. >> EVERY GIRL. GOOD, GOOD AFTERNOON I'M HUGH MATTHEWS WITH ENGLAND THAMES AND MILLER. 14775 OLD SAINT AUGUSTINE WROTE TO JACKSONVILLE. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME TODAY. A COUPLE THINGS ON TRAFFIC.

SO, WE LOOKED AT THE TRAFFIC DRIVEN BY THIS DEVELOPMENT VERSUS TRAFFIC DRIVEN BY OTHER TYPICAL COMMERCIAL USES THAT WOULD FIT ON THIS 2.1 ACRE TRACT.

THEN WE DID PRESENT THIS BRIEFLY TO THE COUNTY TO MAKE SURE COUNTY TRAFFIC KIND OF AGREED WITH A TRIP GENERATION NUMBERS AND THEY DID. SO, YOU WILL SEE THE TOP LINE HERE, SELF STORAGE 108,000 SQUARE FOOT. TOTAL SELF STORAGE GENERATES 163 TRIPS PER DAY. IN 18 IN THE PEAK HOUR. I WILL POINT OUT THAT I'M SURE ALL OF YOU REALIZE WE TALK ABOUT 18 AND THE PEAK HOUR TALKING ABOUT ANY OF THESE PEAK HOUR TRIP GENERATIONS THAT'S IN AND OUT. THAT WOULD BE 9 VEHICLES COMING IN.NTERING AND-EXITING. AND SO FOR EXAMPLE IF IT'S SPLIT 50-50.

SO 18 IS TOTAL IN'S AND OUT'S TRAFFIC. IF YOU COMPARE TO SOME OTHER USES THAT COULD OCCUR ON THE SITE A LOT OF COMMERCIAL USES HERE.

HAPPY TO TALK ABOUT ANY OF THEM. THE ONE IT LOOKED AT IS IF WE GRAB THESE BOTTOM 2 WHICH ARE USES THAT WE TYPICALLY SEE ON SITES AT A PRIME LOCATION SUCH AS THIS. I DON'T NOT, COFFEE SHOP, COULD BE STARBUCKS, COULD BE DUNCAN, COULD BE VARIOUS VENDORS THERE. COMBINED WITH FAST FOOD. THAT WOULD REPRESENT 5000 TRIPS. THOSE 2 NUMBERS COMBINED RIGHT THERE, 5 CHARLESTON TRIPS DAILY AND ONCE AT 300 TRIPS THE PEAK HOUR. HUNDRED 50 AND 150 OUT VERSUS THE-IN-OUT. THAT WERE TALKED ABOUT THE SELF STORAGE BUILDIN.

IF WE MIX MEDICAL AND DENTAL, IT'LL SAY SELF STORAGE ACROSS THE TOP, MEDICAL AND DENTAL BUILDING AND A FAST CASUAL RESTAURANT. WITHOUT LOOKED LIKE NOT AS MUCH AS A COFFEE SHOP. WITH SO CONSIDERABLY MORE TRAFFIC IS THE POINT HERE.

HAPPY TO GET INTO ANY OTHER LEVEL OF DETAIL OF THIS THAT YOU MAY WANT TO DURING Q&A.

SO, REALLY TO SUM IT UP. I THINK I REALLY RATHER GO TO THIS MORNING IF YOU DON'T MIND.

THERE WE GO. BE ABLE TO POINT WITH MY PEN THEN IT IS WITHOUT POINTER.

SO IF WE LOOK AT THE NORTHBOUND, SOME OF THINGS BURNETT WAS TALKING ABOUT.

LOOK AT HER NORTH BOUNDARY RIGHT HERE. AND THAT REPRESENTS 20 FEET.

SO THAT'S BUILDING SETBACK. WILLIE REQUIRED TO HAVE A 10 FOOT BUFFER THERE.

BUT, BECAUSE WE'VE PULLED THE BUILDING 20 FEET OFF THE PROPERTY LINE AND HAVE NO OTHER PROPOSED USES ON THAT SITE DEFAULT GET A 20 FOOT LANDSCAPE BUFFER.

[01:55:06]

ANY NOTICE ALL THE TREES THAT WERE PLANTED BACK WHEN THE TARGET CENTER WAS BUILT.

THE TREES THAT WERE PLANTED IN THIS AREA, VERY CLOSE TO THE PROPERTY LINE, THOSE AREN'T LARGE FOLKS THERE. BY VIRTUE OF PULLING THE BUILDING 20 FEET OFF AND THOSE TREES BEING ON THEIR PROPERTY BUT VERY CLOSE TO THE LINE AND ALLOWS THE CANOPY TO BE PRESERVED OF THOSE TREES. ALSO, DRIVEN BY THE FACT THAT THE FRONT 50 FEET LONG A 18 HERE WE DO NOT OWN AND IS NOT PART OF THIS PROJECT. OUR BUILDING PULLED BACK AN ADDITIONAL 50 FEET GIVES US HUNDRED FEET FROM A 1A. SO THE VIEW AS JASON WAS SHOWING. THE VIEW COMING IN THIS Q. WEEK HAS BEEN PUSHED SUBSTANTIALLY BACK FROM A 1A. THE LAST THING TO POINT OUT HERE IS THIS GREEN SPACE RIGHT HERE AND PULLING THIS PARKING TALENT WAS A CHANGE FROM THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION.

WE REDUCE THE PARKING ACROSS THE FRONT. HOLD THIS DOWN, INTRODUCE THIS GREEN SPACE HERE. AGAIN, COMING UP OR EXITING ON MARSH LANDING PARKWAY THIS BUILDING IS REALLY PULLED WAY BACK FROM A CORNER TO MAKE IT MUCH MORE AESTHETICALLY PLEASING. LET'S GO BACK TO THE SLIDE IF YOU DON'T MIND.

SAID THEN UP AT THE ENTRY DRIVE I JASON SPOKE TO IT. THE ONE THING I WOULD POINT OUT HERE BECAUSE WE'VE PULLED THIS LANDSCAPE ISLAND RIGHT HERE UP ON THE PIN CORNER OF THE BUILDING AND THEN WE'VE GOT THE LANDSCAPING IN THE ISLANDS DOWN THE SIDE OF THE BUILDING.

WE'VE GOT THIS SITE AND THE ENTRY COMING IN VERY WELL BUFFER.

NOT ONLY IS A VERY ATTRACTIVE SCOPE STRUCTURE WITHIN THE LANDSCAPING THERE COMBINED WITH THE LANDSCAPING AND EXISTING TREES ACROSS THE FRONT PARCEL REALLY BUFFERS THAT CORNER COMING UP THE SIDE. AND SO WITHOUT CONSIDERING THE VIEW, CONSIDERING THE ARCHITECTURAL CHANGES, CONSIDERING THE REDUCTION IN WAIVERS, CONSIDERING THE TRAFFIC, THE LOW TRAFFIC GENERATION TALKING ABOUT HERE. I WOULD RESPECTFULLY REQUEST

YOUR SUPPORT OF THIS PUD. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> THE ONLY THING I WOULD TELL YOU THAT THIS IS A HARD ACT TO FOLLOW. IF YOU LOOK AT PRECEDENTS ON THOSE COMPANIES BEFORE. THIS IS NOT A PROJECT. EVERY PUD IS UNIQUE.

THIS IS NOT OF PUD THAT SINCE PRESIDENT AND IT WILL BE CHALLENGING FOR ANY PROJECT COME ALONG THAT HAS THIS TYPE OF A UNIQUE DESIGN THAT'S CAPABLE . BECAUSE IT STORAGE.

CAPABLE OF BEING A 3-STORY STRUCTURE INSIDE BUT EXTERNALLY PRESENTING AS A 2-STORY STRUCTURE. IT'S VERY UNIQUE AND I WOULD HOPE THAT THROUGH THIS PRESENTATION I DELIVERED ON HOW I STARTED HOW MR. COLEY STARTED THIS.

BY SAYING THAT HEY, WE TOOK THE HEART OF WHAT YOU SAID LAST TIME AND THE TEAM MADE A REAL EFFORT TO GET THIS TOWN EXACTLY THE WAY WE WERE GETTING INDICATION FROM YOU AT THE LAST MEETING WHICH WAS TO SCALE IT BACK, ELIMINATE WAIVERS AND COME BACK TO US UNTIL WITHOUT WHEAT HOPE YOU WOULD THINK WE ACCOMPLISHED THE MISSION AND ARE IN A DIFFERENT POSITION NOW

AND WE WERE A MONTH AGO. >> THANK YOU. ANY PUBLIC COMMENT?

>> YOU WANT TO DO PUBLIC COMMENT FIRST?>> KATIE SWICK KISS.

> KATIE SWICK HAS 111 OCEAN COURSE DRIVE. I DIDN'T HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO LOOK AT THE PACKET AND THE CHANGES. I MEANT PRESS WITH THE DIFFERENT CHANGES THEY PRESENTED TODAY AS FAR AS THE SETBACKS.

IN THE RING AT 235 FEET. I STILL BELIEVE THIS BUILDING IS WAY TO BIG FOR 2 ACRES.

IT'S HUNDRED AND 5 SQUARE FEET. HUNDRED 5000 SQUARE FEET. WHEN YOU'RE ONLY ALLOWED TO HAVE 20. THAT'S QUITE CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT.

I JUST THINK IT'S TO BIG FOR THE LOT.O BE FOR THE PROPERTY.HANK YOU.

>> RENC)E FARRELL? >> GOOD AFTERNOON. HER NAME IS RENC)E FARRELL.

OTHER BIT 5020 GRASP CIRCLE IN PONTE VEDRA. , RESIDENT OF PONTEVEDRA.

I'VE BEEN A RESIDENT OF POINTE VEDRA SINCE 1991. I LIVED IN MUCH LANDING AS I

[02:00:07]

ASIDE FROM BEING A BIRD 30 YEAR RESIDENT I'M ALSO A STARTUP INVESTOR AND COMPANY.

A REAL ESTATE AGENT. I'VE BEEN ACTIVELY INVOLVED IN THE SCHOOL SYSTEMS IN OUR COMMUNITY FOR MANY YEARS. A BACHELOR OF SCIENCE FROM FLORIDA STATE AND COMPUTER SCIENCE. I HAVE AN MBA FROM UNF AND I'M CURRENTLY COMPLETING MY THIRD DEGREE IN CONSTRUCTION MANAGEMENT AT UNF. I'VE WATCHED POINTE VEDRA GROW OVER THE LAST 30 YEARS. I'VE RAISED MY CHILDREN IN THIS COMMUNITY.

I KNOW AND I CARE DEEPLY ABOUT OUR COMMUNITY. I HAVE A VERY PASSIONATE INTEREST IN THE FORWARD PROGRESS AND DEVELOPMENT OF POINTE VEDRA.

WHEN I FIRST MOVED INTO THE COMMUNITY WE WERE A SMALL BEACH TOWN WITH LIMITED OPTIONS FOR SHOPPING, EATING, MEDICAL AND MORE. TODAY IT'S DIFFERENT.

AND THIS IS WHY YOUR DECISION IS VERY IMPORTANT TODAY. AND TO OUR ESIDENTS.

THE COMMUNITY HAS WILL CONTINUE TO GROW IN THE LIMITED SPACE WE HAVE LEFT.

SO HOW DO WE DO THAT AND HOW WE DO IT IS EXTREMELY MPORTANT AND WHO WE CHOOSE TO LEAD THOSE PEFFORTS IS CRITICAL. THE PARCEL THAT'S BEING PRESENTED TODAY WILL BE DEVELOPED. WE KNOW THAT. SO THAT'S MAKE SURE IT'S DONE PROPERLY. THE STRUCTURE, I'VE SEEN THE RENDERINGS OF THEIR WELL DESIGNED WITH THE INTENT OF HAVING THE ENVELOPE PLANT INTO THE CURRENT PONTE VEDRA ARCHITECTURAL STYLE. IT'S ONE STRUCTURE. THAT IS BOTH AMPLY SET BACK FROM THE STREET VIEW AND ABUNDANTLY LANDSCAPED WITH NATIVE SELECTIONS.

BECAUSE OF ITS USE THE INCREASE IN ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC PATTERNS WOULD BE COMPLETELY MINIMAL.

WHICH IS A REAL CONCERN FOR OUR COMMUNITY. THE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY HAS THE BEST INTEREST OF CANTRA VDOT AND THEIR SITES. FOR THE 20 LONGTIME PUNTER EVITA PRECEDENTS. THEY ARE KNOWN FOR QUALITY CONSTRUCTION AND THE DETAIL TO BUILD FIRST-CLASS STRUCTURES. OUR RESIDENTS DO NOT NEED THAT LAND TO BE DEVELOPED WITHOUT MENAGERIE OF CHAIN STORES ADDING NOTHING TO THE BENEFIT OF OUR ESIDENTS.

THE LAND WILL BE DEVELOPED. THAT'S FOR SURE. LET'S DO IT'S RIGHT FOR PONTE VEDRA AND AT LEAST SUPPORT A LOCAL COMPANY WITH ROOTS IN THE COMMUNITY THAT HAS COME WITH THE DESIGN OF ONE SINGLE STRUCTURE. BUILT WITH QUALITY AND ARCHITECTURAL SYNERGY. THEIR PROPOSAL WILL ALSO MINIMIZE THE IMPACT ON TRAFFIC AND STOP THE MISHMASH OF OTHER OPTIONS. PLEASE VOTE YES TO GRANT THE

REZONING EXCEPTION. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU.

THAT'S IT? >> YEAH. >> OKAY QUESTIONS FROM THE

BOARD? >> READING THROUGH THE PROPOSED PUD.

YOU HAVE 5 YEARS TO GET THIS PROJECT UNDERWAY. IF DURING THIS PERIOD OF TIME YOU DECIDE THIS PROJECT IS NOT FEASIBLE WE HAVE A LIST OF SERVICE RETAIL, OFFICE, PHARMACY, BOUTIQUES, FURNITURE, OTHER CATEGORIES THAT COULD BE PLACED ON THIS PROPERTY SHOULD THE MEETING STORAGE NOT BE CONSIDERED FEASIBLE IS NOT PRACTICAL FOR WHAT WERE

APPROVING VING TODAY? >> THAT ISSUE HAD BEEN RAISED BEFORE.

MR. GRAHAM I THINK YOUR DAD ON THE BOSS JUST SAID CUT IT. SO WE CAN CUT ALL OF THAT AND OTHER USES OUT OF THEIR. THE USE THAT'S BEFORE YOU IS THE ONE THAT THIS PUD IS SEEKING. IF THOSE OTHER USES YOU HAVE CONCERN ABOUT MR. GRAHAM AND THAT IMPACTS YOUR VOTE THAT I CAN TELL YOU THAT ALEX IS PREPARED TO DELETE THOSE OTHER USES FROM THE PUD. THE ONLY ONE THAT IS KEY TO HIM AND THAT MATTERS IS GETTING

THIS MANY STORAGE, SELF STORAGE USE. >> MY CONCERN IS WE'VE SEEN

THIS BEFORE. SO I'M CURIOUS AS TO DIRECTION. >> YES SIR.

IF THAT'S THE BOARD'S WILL WE ARE WILLING ON THE PERMITTED USES DELETE EVERYTHING BUT THE

SELF STORAGE. >> THANK YOU. >> JOHN?

>> I JUST HAD A QUESTION ABOUT THAT AND GRANTS TO THE EGRESS FROM THE PROPERTY.

TRAFFIC COMING OUT FROM THE PROPERTY WANTING TO GO NORTHBOUND.

[02:05:07]

HOW DOES THAT WORK? >> AND ALSO COMBINED WITH T YOU INDICATED THAT THERE WERE TRIPS ON THE PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH THAT WOULD BE LARGER OR MORE TRIPS THAN THIS PROPERTY IF IT WAS A RESTAURANT OR DONUT SHOP OR SOMETHING ELSE. MARCH THOSE FACILITIES, AREN'T THEY SUBJECT TO HAVING A MEDIAN CUT IN ORDER TO GET INGRESS AND EGRESS COUNT? TO THE PROPERTIES? > THIS TE IF WE CAN PROJECT MAYBE THIS IMAGE AGAIN.

THIS BROWN LINE REPRESENTS THE PROPERTY LINE THAT OUR CLIENT CONTROLS.

AND IS THE SUBJECT OF THIS PUD. >> YOU WERE MAKING THE COMPARISON ON TRIPS TO THAT

PROPERTY. TO THE SOUTH, CORRECT? >> I WAS COMPARING 2 TRIPS TO WHAT OTHER USES, WHAT OTHER COMMERCIAL USES WOULD FIT ON THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY.

I WASN'T COMPARING ABOUT. >> WHAT I WAS SAYING IS THEY NEED IN INGRESS AND EGRESS CUT IN ORDER TO GO SOUTHBOUND AND NORTHBOUND. AND THIS IS ONLY GIVING YOU A

SOUTHBOUND CUT. FROM THE PROPERTY. >> YES, YOUR ABSOLUTE RIGHT.

WE HAVE A RIGHT IN AND RUN OUT DRIVEWAY LOCATED RIGHT HERE. AND THIS EXISTING STRIP OF

COUNTY RIGHT-OF-WAY, RIGHT HERE. >> SO THE TRAFFIC COMING OUT OF THE SITE WANTING TO GO NORTHBOUND, HOW DOES IT GET TO BE NORTHBOUND?

>> IT WILL BE UNDER DOT'S DIRECTION THEY WOULD HAVE TO GO SOUTHBOUND AND YOU TURN TO GO

NORTHBOUND. >> RIGHT. >> IS A VERY COMMON MOVEMENT

NOW IN DEALING WITH DOT. >> SO IF I UNDERSTAND JOHN'S QUESTION CORRECTLY.

IF I COULD TYPE ALL THIS TOGETHER I THINK, WELL GREAT THIS IS A COMMERCIAL SITE AS A RESIDENTIAL CLIENT THIS IS A COMMERCIAL SITE. TO GO NORTH ON A ONE ACRE DOING A U-TURN AND I DO IT RIGHT DOWN HERE WHEN I'M FRUSTRATED AND TURNING AROUND.

AND SO THIS PROJECT WOULD HAVE THE LEAST COMMERCIAL TRIPS, POLICE CARS COMING OUT OF IT OF ANY COMMERCIAL USE THAT IS ALLOWED HERE. SO, THAT'S THE PART OF THIS PROJECT I LIKE A LOT YOU GUYS HAVE DONE A PHENOMENAL JOB OF HAMMERING OUT.

MY QUESTION IS ON THE INTERIOR SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE BUILDING. THE 3 STORIES INTERIOR DOESN'T, I UNDERSTAND YOU WANT AS MUCH ROOM FOR INTERIOR STORAGE AS POSSIBLE.

DOES IT REALLY MATTER TO THE BOARD THAT THE FOOTPRINT OF THE BUILDING VERSUS THE USABLE AREA USABLE FLOORS OF THE BUILDING INSIDE? THERE WAS A COMMENT LAST TIME THIS CAME UP ABOUT WELCOME TO PONTE VEDRA HERE'S A BIG BUILDING AND THIS REDESIGN DID A FANTASTIC JOB OF THAT. AND I GO BACK TO THE TRAFFIC. IF WE DON'T LIKE THIS THEN THEY'RE GONNA COME BACK WITH A RESTAURANT OR SOMETHING THAT GENERATES SIGNIFICANTLY MORE TRAFFIC IS WELCOME TO PONTE VEDRA, HERE THE CARS. THIS IS A VERY DENSE

INTERSECTION AND I LIKE THIS FOR THAT REASON. >> JUST A FOLLOW-UP.

WHAT I WAS TRYING TO DRIVE OUT IS RETELLING AND THAT SITE IF IT WAS A COFFEE SHOP OR RESTAURANT OR DRIVE-THROUGH ETC. THEY WOULD WANT IN INGRESS, EGRESS PATTERN AND BE ABLE TO CROSS THIRD STREET GOING NORTH OR SOUTH. AND THAT'S NOT WHAT THIS HOUSE.

SO THIS FACILITY WHICH ARE TALKING ABOUT BUT HAVE TO MAKE THAT U-TURN AND THE USE OF ANOTHER TYPE OF FACILITY IN THAT SECTION OR IN THE PROPERTY IN MY ESTIMATION THAT THEY

WOULD DO IT. THAT'S ALL. >> JOHN, I DON'T THINK THEY BE

ALLOWED TO HAVE A LEFT TURN OUT. >> KNOW THEY'RE KNOCKING TO BE ALLOWED. THAT'S WHY I'M SAYING. RETAIL ESTABLISHMENT IS NOT, GO

FOR IT. >> OKAY, WELL GREAT. GOOD.

[02:10:01]

MEGAN? >> I JUST LIKE TO GO BACK TO THE BEGINNING A LITTLE BIT HERE ABOUT COMMERCIAL USES IN PONTE VEDRA. AND, IN HER ZONING MANUAL ACTUALLY HAVE A SECTION FOR OUR 3 COMMERCIAL DISTRICT. AND YOU'RE NOT ASKING TO BE REZONED TO A COMMERCIAL DISTRICT. YOU'RE ASKING FOR MORE EXPANSIVE PUD WITH LESS REGULATIONS. IN A COMMERCIAL DISTRICT IN OUR ZONING REGULATIONS AS IT CURRENTLY STANDS. ONE OF THE USES THAT'S NOT ALLOWED IS THE STORAGE USE THAT YOU ARE PROPOSING. SO THAT PHILOSOPHICALLY IS AN ISSUE FOR ME. ADDITIONALLY THE OVERALL MASS OF THE BUILDING REMAINS AT 108 THOUSAND SQUARE FEET. AS OPPOSED TO JUST UNDER 21,000 SQUARE FEET THAT IT SHOULD BE FOR THIS AREA. SO, HAVING SOMETHING THAT'S 5 TIMES WHAT WE NORMALLY ALLOW TO ME IS A PROBLEM. ADDITIONALLY THE BUILDING IS 3 STORIES.

THE REASON WHY WE HAVE 35 FEET AND 2 STORIES AS A REQUIREMENT IS WE HOPE THAT PEOPLE ARE ABLE TO USE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGNS TO SOFTEN THE BUILDING SO IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE A BIG SQUARE CUBE. SO YOU'RE ALLOWED TO PUT IN SLANTED ROOFS AND SO YOUR BUILDING LOOKS AND MORE IN KEEPING WITH THE OTHER BUILDINGS FOR THE RON SOUTH OF THIS PROPERTY WHICH YOU SHOWED FOR EXAMPLE, THE MORGAN STANLEY BUILDING.

IT'S A SOFTER, SMALLER SQUARE FOOT. THIS BUILDING IS ACTUALLY GOING TO BE BIGGER THAN, TOLERANT OF THE TARGET BUILDING THAT IT IS JUST SOUTH OF.

THE TARGET BUILDING IS AROUND P20 FEET HIGH. SO THIS IS REALLY SOMETHING THAT IS GOING TO HAVE A LARGE VISUAL IMPACT THAT YOU REALLY CAN'T DETECT FROM THE VERY LOVELY DRAWINGS THAT YOU PRESENTED. WHILE YOU DID CUT BACK ON SOME OF THE VARIANCE REQUEST, THE VARIANCE REQUEST THAT WERE FOR THE LARGEST THINGS HAVE NOT BEEN ALTERED. THIS BUILDING IS STILL NEXT TO RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY.

AND FOR ZONING DISTRICT REGULATIONS IF YOU'RE WITHIN 150 FEET OF RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY YOU'RE ONLY SUPPOSED TO BE A 2-STORY BUILDING. AND YOU'RE ONLY SUPPOSED TO BE, SORRY, THE HEIGHT ALLOWANCE IS 25 FEET. SO THIS BUILDING IS STILL TO MASSIVE FOR THE SITE. I THINK IT'S INAPPROPRIATE TO SUGGEST WHICH MIGHT HAPPEN TO THE SOUTH WITH THAT DEVELOPMENT MAY OR MAY NOT DO. THEY WILL PROBABLY TAKE YOU TO WHAT THIS HAPPENS TO BE ON THIS PROPERTY SO UOFU HAD A GIANT 5000 SQUARE-FOOT BUILDING THAT'S 37 FEET HIGH IT WOULD SET SOMEWHAT OF A PRECEDENCE OF WHAT COULD HAPPEN TO THE SOUTH OF THE BUILDING. I STILL FEEL THIS USAGE FOR THE SITE IS NOT IN KEEPING WITH THE PONTE VEDRA ZONING DISTRICT REGULATIONS AS ARE CURRENTLY EMBODIED IN OUR ZONING

REGULATIONS. >> OF A QUESTION FIRST BEFORE I SAY ANYTHING ELSE.

THE PARCEL THAT'S IN FRONT THAT HAS ALL THE VEGETATION, THAT'S NOT YOUR PARCEL BUT THAT COULD BE DEVELOPED AS WELL? YEAH, THAT VEGETATION RIGHT IN THE PICTURE THERE?

>> YES. THE CHALLENGE WITHOUT PARCEL IS, NOT SURE BUT YOU DEVELOP IT

FOR. >> YOU COULD THEY'LL? SOMEONE COULD BIND PUT

SOMETHING ON IT? >> THE 50 BY 50 LOTS. EVEN PUTTING THEM TOGETHER BECOMES IN A 50 BY HUNDRED. IF YOU APPLY THE 20 FOOT SETBACKS TO IT YOU WIND UP WITH

A B&. >> WITH A CANE? >> YES 10 FOOT WIDE BUILDING

WITHOUT ANY KIND OF VARIANCE. >> OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

THAT WAS MY QUESTION. I WANT TO THANK YOU AND BECAUSE I REALLY APPRECIATE EVERYTHING YOU'VE DONE SINCE OUR LAST MEETING. I'M GOING FROM 15 TO 5 VARIANCES. BEING VERY OPEN AND CALLING ME GOING TO THE VARIANCES AND CALLING THE VARIOUS BOARD MEMBERS. THE BUILDING IS BEAUTIFULLY DRAWN. I'M SURE IT WILL BE WELL CONSTRUCTED AS IT IS VERY

[02:15:01]

WHEN HE SHOWED THE PHOTO OF THE BUILDING SOUTH OF IT THAT'S LIKELY TO GO IN THAT ACTUALLY WAS THE BIG EYE-OPENER FOR ME. I THINK THE FOOTPRINT STILL APPEARS TO BE HUGE AND I THINK IT DOES OPEN US UP IN PONTE VEDRA TO LOOK LIKE VARIOUS OFFICE SITES AROUND JACKSON FELT LIKE OFF OF JT BATEMAN OFF OF SOUTHSIDE. IT'S A VERY BIG BUILDING.

I THINK IT OPENS US UP TO THE PROPERTY OF THE SOUTH'S 5 TIMES OVER THE ALLOWABLE HEIGHT.

I THINK IT IS TO BAIT. THAT'S WHERE I'M AT RIGHT NOW. IT PAINS ME TO SAY THAT BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T DO A LOT. IT IS A BEAUTIFUL BUILDING. YOU'VE DONE EVERYTHING YOU CAN.

TO ME THIS ISN'T WHAT PONTE VEDRA WANTS IN PONTE VEDRA ARE BIG BOXES AND BUILDINGS.

JUST WANT TO LET YOU KNOW WHERE I WAS AS WELL. >> IF I MIGHT COMMENT MR. CHAIRMAN? THE ONE THING I WOULD SAY TO YOU IF YOU'RE THINKING IN TERMS OF PRESIDENT. AGAIN HAVING BEEN HERE AND HEARD YOUR COUNTY ATTORNEY HAS BEEN THE COUNTY ATTORNEY FOR A LONG TIME SAY THAT HE IS NOT RETIRING AND THERE'S NOT ANYONE COMING IN EVENTUALLY. BUT THE THING I'VE HEARD IS EVERY PUD STAND ON ITS OWN.

THERE ALSO UNIQUE.Y'ALL HAVE SO MANY DIFFERENT VARIABLES. OBVIOUSLY WERE IN PONTE VEDRA WE HAVE TO REZONED BY PUD. WE CAN'T JUST COME IN WITH A COMMERCIAL ZONING DESIGNATION.

THE BENEFIT YOU GET IS YOU KNOW WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO GET. YOU KNOW THE SITE PLAN.

YOU GET A GOOD IDEA WHAT THE DESIGN IS THAT'S COMING FOR YOU INSTEAD OF APPROVING SOME GENERAL COMMERCIAL.WHO KNOWS WHAT IT'S GOING BE. I'LL TELL YOU THIS. THANK YOU DO HAVE AN ARGUMENT WHEN A PROJECT COMES IN NEXT TO YOU. IF YOU APPROVE THIS MORNING THAT HAS A SETBACK AS LARGE AS THIS MORNING IS, 50 FEET ON THE FRONT.

YOU DO HAVE AN ARGUMENT TO SAY WELL, BUT LOOKING FOR A BIGGER SETBACK ON THE FRONT.

THE PROJECT COMES INTO THE SOUTH. AND, IT GIVES YOU SOME LEVERAGE TO BE ABLE TO SAY THAT. WE ALSO HAVE THIS HUGE ISSUE OF THE TRAFFIC.

THIS IS A LOW TRAFFIC GENERATOR. WHAT HAPPENS WHEN SOMETHING ELSE COMES THROUGH IS NOT A THREAT. WE KNOW THAT ULTIMATELY SOMETHING IS GOING TO GO ON THE SITE THAT IS COMMERCIAL. UNDER ANY ONE OF THOSE SCENARIOS IT'S GOING TO BE MORE THAN LIKELY BE SOMETHING THAT GENERATES A LOT MORE TRAFFIC.

THE STATISTICS THAT HE WAS PUTTING UP RELATED TO TRAFFIC GENERATION ARE ONES THAT ENGLAND THAMES AND MILLER CONFIRM WITH YOUR TRANSFORMATION STOP WITH THOSE NUMBERS ARE THE REAL NUMBERS. IT WITH WHAT WAS PRESENTED TO YOU TODAY WE KNOW WE CAN CHECK IN. WERE ANTICIPATING WE WOULD GO ONE FROM TODAY HOPEFULLY WITH THE RECOMMENDATION AND APPROVAL AND BE IN THE FRONT OF 40 BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND KNOWING OUR HOMEWORK IS GOING TO BE FACT CHECK BETWEEN NOW AND THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING. WE WOULD BE AS ACCURATE AS POSSIBLE.

THE THING I WOULD TELL YOU IS THOSE USES ALSO WOULD BE ONES THAT WOULD FIT ON THE SITE WITHOUT ANY WAIVERS. SO, THOSE ARE REAL WORLD VERY LIKELY SCENARIOS OF WHAT WILL COME ON THIS PROPERTY IF IT'S NOT THIS. SO WE THINK WE'VE GOT YOU SOMETHING THAT DRIVING THE HEIGHT DOWN PUSHING IT BACK AND GET A SETBACK ON THE NORTH AGREED TO ENHANCE LANDSCAPING AROUND IT CHECKS ALL THOSE BOXES OF WHAT YOUR CONCERNS ARE. I HEAR WHAT YOU'RE SAYING AS FAR AS, YES IT IS A LARGE BUILDING. IT ALSO IS THE NORTHERN PART OF ST. JOHN'S COUNTY YOU CAN PUT

IT IN AND IT'S AS FAR BACK AS WE CAN PUT IT. >> THE ARGUMENTS ARE VERY COMPELLING. I DO APPRECIATE THEM. I ACTUALLY SIT ON THE CITIZEN TRAFFIC TASK FORCE ON A BET ON IT FOR MANY YEARS SO I'M AWARE OF TRAFFIC COUNTS AND WHAT'S GOING ON WITH A 1A. AND, LIKE I SAID, BEAUTIFULLY DRAWN.

THIS COMPELLING ARGUMENT. AS A MEMBER OF THE PONTE VEDRA ZONING BOARD HAVE TO ASK MYSELF, WERE DOES THE LINE STOP? WHERE DO WE START THE INSTALL.

AND I WISH THIS WERE TO WALL. I WISH HE WOULD HAVE TO FACE US HERE WITH US PARCEL.

IT IS IN ST. JOHN'S COUNTY AND IN THE PIT OF AVENUE ZONING DISTRICT.

IT IS SO FAR ABOVE WHAT OUR STANDARDS ARE. THAT'S MY ISSUE.

THANK YOU. I APPRECIATE ALL YOUR PARGUMENTS.

>> RICHARD, DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION? >> LAST TIME WE MET I HAD A QUESTION ABOUT THE VEHICLE COUNT. I WAS WONDERING, CAN YOU TELL ME THE FORMULA FOR THAT FOR STORAGE? DO THEY DO IT BY SQUARE FOOT OR 100 SQUARE-FOOT UNIT INSIDE EQUALS ONE VEHICLE? HOW IS THAT DERIVED?

>> SO INSTITUTE OF TRAFFIC ENGINEERS ABBREVIATED ITE HAS STUDIED ALMOST ANY IMAGINABLE

[02:20:06]

IN THIS CASE THERE'S ONLY ONE. SO IT'S EASY. IT'S OUR SQUARE FOOTAGE TIMES THAT TRIP GENERATION RATE. IT LOOKS AT IT FROM AN DAILY, FROM THE PEAK HOUR IN THE MORNING AND PICK OVER THE AFTERNOON AND PEAK HOUR IN THE GENERATOR.

ALL TYPES OF ANALYSIS. THAT'S THE ACCEPTED NORM THAT WE ALL USE.

>> AND WITH THE REVISIONS, WHAT IS THE UNIT COUNT NOW IN THAT STORAGE?

>> ALEX? I DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT.

>> WE WON'T KNOW UNIT COUNT UNTIL WE GET VERY CLOSE. OUR MANAGING COMPANY WILL HELP US IN THE FINAL ANALYSIS TAKE THE SQUARE FOOTAGE AND DECIDE HOW MANY ARE THIS BIG AND HOW MANY ARE THAT BIG. WE DON'T EVER KNOW THAT UNTIL WE GET RIGHT UP TO BUILDING

PERMIT. >> OKAY. ALSO, WHEN YOU SAY THE SIZE OF THE UNIT WOULD PROBABLY BRING THE TYPE OF VEHICLE THAT WOULD BE MOVING ITEMS INTO THAT STORAGE? WHAT WOULD YOU EXPECT WOULD BE YOUR LARGEST VEHICLE TRYING TO

PARK IN THE PARKING LOT? >> I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE LARGEST VEHICLE IS.

AND HOW OFTEN. WHAT REALLY TYPICALLY HAPPENS IS A LOCAL HOMEOWNER COMES AND TAKES THEIR WINTER CLOTHES HOME AND BRINGS THEIR SUMMER CLOTHES OR THERE SOME KIND OF, THE PEOPLE THAT STORE THINGS THERE ARE OUR FRIENDS AND NEIGHBORS AND THEIR IN AND OUT OF THERE WITH THEIR SUVS JUST TAKING THINGS. THAT'S A TYPICAL NORM.

IT MIGHT BE A FAN OR SOMETHING WHEN THEY FIRST GET STARTED OR SOMEONE MOVING TO THE AREA.

FAR AND AWAY MOST OF WHAT IT IS, IS JUST FOLKS LIVING HERE ATTENDING TO OUR MISCELLANEOUS

ITEMS. >> SO THE UNITS THEN IT WON'T BE AS BIG AS STAGING A WHOLE

HOUSE, 3000 SQUARE-FOOT HOUSE? THEY WOULD BE ACCOMMODATING? >> I WOULD SAY THAT WOULD BE AN EXCEPTION. MOST OF OUR UNITS ARE SMALL UNITS.

>> THIS LAST TIME YOU WERE HERE I THANK YOU SAID THE BIGGEST UNIT WOULD BE 4000 SQUARE FEET.

>> NO. 4000 FEET IS WAY OUTSIDE OF EVERYTHING OF EVER HEARD OF AND

SELF STORAGE. 4000 FEET IS 40 BY. >> IT WAS IN THE PRESENTATION.

>> WE'VE NEVER DONE A 4000 FEET. I'VE NEVER EVEN HEARD OF A 4000

FEET UNIT. >> THE COUNTY ATLANTA FILAMENT CODE HAS LANGUAGE IN THERE FOR SELF STORAGE OF TALKING ABOUT MAX OF ANY INDIVIDUAL UNIT. AND THAT MAY BE.

MOST OF THE ONES THAT ARE APPROVED, MOST OF THE PUD'S FOR SELF STORAGE THAT ARE APPROVED

HAVE A FOR THE LARGEST ANY INDIVIDUAL UNIT CAN BE. >> AS SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

LIKE A FEW TVS OR GOLF CLUBS. IT'S NOT THAT KIND OF THING. >> TYPICALLY EXCEED 10 BY 15,

10 BY 20 UNITS AS EVEN LARGE. A LOT OF THESE. >> IF I MAY JOIN IN THIS DISCUSSION. ON PAGE 3 OF THE PROPOSED PUD. THERE IS SOME LANGUAGE USING A MAXIMUM OF 4000 SQUARE FEET OF CONTIGUOUS AREA SHALL BE OCCUPIED BY ONE TENANT THAT MAY BE WHERE THE NUMBER COMES FROM. IT DOES SAY ABOVE THAT, THAT STORAGE BUILDING SHOULD BE SUBDIVIDED BY PERMIT AND PARTITIONS FOR SPACES CONTAINING NOT MORE THAN 400

SQUARE FEET EACH. >> I BELIEVE THAT THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE LANGUAGE AND THAT'S THE LANGUAGE FROM I THINK EVERY PUD OF RECENT TIME OR MODERN TIMES THAT APPROVE SELF STORAGE. THAT'S A LANGUAGE THAT'S IN THERE.

>> HAVING DONE A NUMBER THE PUD IS MYSELF RELATED TO THIS ISSUE.

I COULD TELL YOU THE LANGUAGES IN THERE. >> I WILL NOT QUESTION.

ASSUMING THERE IS A PROFIT THAT YOU TRY TO MAKE ON THIS FACILITY.

WAS THERE A REASON YOU DIDN'T DECREASE THE SQUARE FOOTAGE? IN YOUR PROPOSAL?

>> THEY GIVE HER THAT QUESTION. THE POINT THAT JOHN WAS MAKING. IF YOU LOOK AT THE USERS FOR

[02:25:08]

THEY GENERATE THAT HUGE TRAFFIC VOLUME THAT GENERATES THAT THE GRANT.

RENTS ARE A FRACTION OF THAT. LIKE JUST BARELY IN THE DOUBLE-DIGIT RANGE.

WE HAVE MORE SQUARE FEET, A LOT FEWER TRIPS THAT WE HAVE TO HAVE THE MORE SQUARE FEET BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT LOWER RENT BECAUSE IT'S A WAREHOUSE TUCKED AWAY BACK OF THE ROAD THAT DOESN'T CREATE THAT KIND OF TRAFFIC. TO ME, HERE THE ARGUMENT ON THE SIZE OF THE BUILDING. IT'S TUCKED AWAY BACK IN THERE. AT THE LOWEST POSSIBLE TRIP GENERATOR AND WE'VE DESIGNED IT 2-STORY OFFICE BUILDING SORT OF LOOK AND TUCKED IT BACK.

ONESTLY WAS CLOSER TO IT THAT ANYONE. I TRULY BELIEVE IN MY HEART OF HEARTS THAT WITH YOUR HELP TO PLACE A DESIGN WE CAN BE PROUD OF.

IT'S TUCKED WAY BACK OFF THE ROAD. THE BUILDING THAT YOU SAW PUT UP ON THE ROAD TO DEMONSTRATE, IF YOU PUT A BUILDING 35 FEET FROM THE ROAD IT'S VERY DIFFERENT ENVIRONMENT THAN ONE THAT'S 100 FEET BACK OFF. SO FOR MORE THAN 3 TIMES FURTHER BACK FROM A 1A. WHEN YOU CONSIDER WHAT YOU SEE WHEN YOU PULL INTO PONTE VEDRA YOU WILL SEE THAT VEGETATION. AND YOU WILL SEE HOW TO START OFFICE BUILDING KIND OF LOOK THAT SAID HUNDRED FEET BACK OF THE ROOM GENERATING 18 TRIPS INSTEAD OF HUNDRED AND 60 TRIPS. IN MY MIND IT'S THE RIGHT PRODUCT.

AGAIN I SAID IT BEFORE. IF Y'ALL DON'T FEEL LIKE YOU CAN GO TO A FAMILY REUNION OR COCKTAIL PARTY WITH YOUR FRIENDS AND SUGGEST YOU ARE PART OF SOMETHING THAT MADE

PONTE VEDRA A BETTER PLACE TO LIVE, DON'T GO FOR IT. >> I BELIEVE IT IS THAT.

I BELIEVE IT'S THE RIGHT DESIGN. I BELIEVE IT'S THOUGHTFULLY E.

I HAVE HANDED IT TO BE COMPLETELY UNBIASED ABOUT IT. I THINK THE TEAM DID A GREAT JOB. LIKE DOUG SAID, I GET IT, IT'S ALL IN ON THIS.

THERE'S NOTHING RESERVED. LET'S GET A PRODUCT THAT WAY WE COULD REALLY, REALLY BE PROUD OF. LET'S GET UP OFF THE ROAD AND GET RID OF THOSE EXCEPTIONS.

HAT'S ADDRESS EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THE ISSUES AND THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THOSE ISSUES.

IT REALLY DID DEEP INTROSPECTION'S OF WHAT THOSE THINGS WERE AND HUGH CAME ALONG AND SOME OF THOSE THINGS YOU KNOW, JUST MAKING THE ENGINEERS MAKING THEMSELVES COMFORTABLE WITHOUT. I THINK WE GOT A MUCH BETTER PRODUCT.

I THINK IT'S ATTRACTIVE.I WILL BEEN SEEN AS MUCH OF IT AS ANYBODY.

I APPRECIATE YOUR EFFORT AND YOUR QUESTIONS AND I APPRECIATE YOU SINCERELY HEARING THIS OUT

TODAY. >> ANY MORE QUESTIONS FOR THE BOARD? OKAY. THANK YOU. DISCUSSION AMONGST THE BOARD.

I WILL START. I FIND IT VERY INTERESTING REALLY HAD TO PUBLIC COMMENTS ON THIS ISSUE. THE SIGNS BEEN UP NOW FERGUS 2 AND HALF MONTHS.

IN ONLY 2 PEOPLE BOTHERED COMING IN TALKING ABOUT THIS. I FIND IT VERY INTERESTING.

ONCE WE PREVENT EVERYONE BECAUSE OF THE COUNTY COMMISSION AND THEN THERE WILL BE ALL THE SIGNS UP SAYING STOP THE STORAGE BUILDING. THAT SAID I THINK IT'S A GOOD PROJECT. THAT'S MY PERSONAL OPINION. OTHER COMMENTS?

A MOTION. >> THIS IS A LOSS FROM A PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT IS OWNED BY PTHE FAMILY THAT OWNS EVERYTHIN AT THE END OF BUFFER. WE STARTED TALKING ABOUT REZONING THIS PROPERTY AT LEAST 15 YEARS AGO. AND WE'VE SEEN SEVERAL DIFFERENT LANDS. WHAT WE SEE TODAY AND I HAVE SOME ADJUSTMENTS.

I THINK IS MORE PRACTICAL THAN ANYTHING WE'VE SEEN PRIOR. I KNOW THE SHAPE OF THE BUILDING PERHAPS IS NOT WHAT WE LIKE. GOING BACK TO WHEN WE LOOKED AT THE ARCHITECTURAL DESIGN OF THE LIBRARY FOR ALL PURPOSES. WE'VE INSISTED ON SOME ADJUSTMENTS THERE TO MAKE IT MORE COMPATIBLE. THEY'VE DONE A GOOD JOB.

PERHAPS THERE'S A TWEAK HERE AND THERE. IF WE RESTRICTED PUD APPROVAL TO ONLY THE SELF STORAGE BUILDING AS PRESENTED WITH A REQUIREMENT THAT IF SOMETHING ELSE WERE TO BE USED ON THE PROPERTY AND THAT'S MY CONCERN LEAVE IN THE PAST APPROVED.

DAYS FOR A SPECIFIC PURPOSE AND THE PURPOSE THEN SHIFTED OVER TIME.

[02:30:01]

REQUEST FURTHER ADJUSTMENT I THINK THIS IS A GOOD PROJECT. >> OKAY, OTHER COMMENTS FROM

THE BOARD? >> I GUESS I WOULD LIKE TO REITERATE THAT IT IS VERY MASSIVE. AND AS JOHN MENTIONED THE GAS STATION WHICH WASN'T AS TALL BUT TALLER THAN WITH THE ZONING REQUIREMENTS HAS SUGGESTED IN TERMS OF SIGNAGE AND HEIGHT.

THE COMMUNITY TYPICALLY DOESN'T WAKE UP UNTIL AFTER THE BELT IS GONE.

AND, I THINK THAT THERE ARE OTHER USES PROFESSIONAL USES AND WE HAVE TITLE COMPANIES THAT ARE FURTHER SOUTH. REAL ESTATE PLACES, DOCTORS OFFICES.WHICH COULD BE A PROVIDER USE. DEBIT PURCHASE THIS PROPERTY. WOULD PROVIDER USE THAT WOULD BE MORE IN KEEPING WITH THE ZONING DISTRICT. ONE OF THE THINGS I KNOW WE ARE TEMPTED TO WANDER INTO THE SWAMP ABOUT TRAFFIC. OUR PURVIEW ISN'T REALLY TRAFFIC. WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING IN THE ZONING REGULATIONS ABOUT TRAFFIC COUNT. WERE BASTED WE FOCUSED OUR ATTENTION ON THE SIZE, MASS AND

ARCHITECTURAL LOOK OF THE BUILDINGS. >> OF OUR MEMBER CORRECTLY MOST OF THE OBJECTION WAS TRAFFIC. OKAY, OTHER COMMENTS? DO WE HEAR A MOTION?

>> I WOULD MOVE THAT WE PPROVE PUD 2020 Ã08 PONTE VEDRA SELF STORAGE WITH THE FOLLOWING ADJUSTMENTS. THE MASTER PLAN TEXT IS LABELED EXHIBIT A APPEARING TIME BACK TO THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE. IT SHOULD BE EXHIBIT B. THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN BOUND IS NOT TITLED BUT IT WOULD BE EXHIBIT C. ON PAGE 2 OF THE MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN TEXT WE WOULD ALLOW ONLY THE INDOOR STORAGE OF GOODS, MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT OR PERSONAL EFFECTS CONNECTION TO SELF STORAGE AND PERSONAL PROPERTY. EXCLUDE THE REST OF THAT.

ALL OTHER USES ARE PROHIBITED SO WE WENT NEED THAT LAUNDRY LIST AND PROHIBITED USES.

WE WOULD RETAIN THE 5-YEAR DEVELOPMENT PERIOD. >> DO I HEAR A SECOND?

>> SECOND. >> OKAY. ANY COMMENTS? READY TO VOTE? OKAY, HAS EVERYONE VOTED? OKAY, IT LOOKS LIKE 4 NOTES AND

3 ASSISTS. THE VARIANCE IS NOT PPROVED. >> MR. PAT FOR THE RECORD THIS IS A RECOMMENDATION FOR REZONING TO PUD. NOT A VARIANCE.

>> WHAT? >> JUST TO CLARIFY THE CORD. >> OKAY.

DENIED. MOTION TO RECOMMEND DENIAL OF PUD 2020 Ã8 FONDA VDOT SELF STORAGE SUBJECT TO THE FINDING OF FACTS IS LISTED IN THE STAFF TAFF REPORT.

IS THAT IT? YES A MOTION FOR R DENIAL. >> OKAY MOTION FOR

>> UNDER STAND THAT MOTION APPROVED FAILED. >> WE DID APPROVE THE ZONING

VARIANCE WITHIN HAVE TO MOVE TO THE CLIENT? >> TYPICALLY WE HAD INTENT ON

THE PAST. >> I DO RECOMMEND THAT YOU DO DO THAT FOR THE RECORD.

[02:35:02]

>> AND MAKE A MOTION TO RECOMMEND DENIAL OF PUD 2020 Ã 08 PONTE VEDRA SELF STORAGE

SUBJECT TO 10 FINDINGS OF FACT AS LISTED IN THE STAFF REPORT. >> HAS SECOND IT?

>> SECOND. >> MR. CHAIRMAN BEFORE YOU TAKE THE POEM CAN I COMMENT BRIEFLY.

>> I'M NOT SURE IF WE CAN CONTINUE ON WITH THE CONVERSATION AT THIS POINT.

CAN WE? >> IT'S UP TO THE THE BOARD. >> EARLY VOTING AGAIN?

WHAT ARE WE DOING? >> WE HAVE TO APPROVE THE MOTION TO DENY.

SO MY GUESS IS SAYING WE ARE DENYING THE MOTION. WERE SAYING WE STILL OBJECT TO

IT. >> OKAY. >> WHAT HAPPENS NOW?

>> DO UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU VOTED FOR? >> IT SEEMS LIKE WERE DOUBLE

VOTING. >> WE ARE. SO THE VARIANCE DID NOT GET APPROVED. AND THEN PROPER ETIQUETTE IS THAT WE THEN VOTE A MOTION TO

DENY. TO CONFIRM. >> CAN I VOTE, I DON'T KNOW THE LEGAL TERM WOULD BE THAT I THINK THEY SHOULD BE ALLOWED ONE MORE OPPORTUNITY POSSIBLY LET'S SAY THE SQUARE FOOTAGE WAS ISSUE. , GO ANY FURTHER WITH THIS?

>> WELL, THERE'S A MOTION ON THE FLOOR TO DENY IT. YOU DO NEED TO VOTE ON THAT MOTION. AND YOU COULD VOTE HOWEVER YOU CARE TO VOTE ON THAT MOTION.

THAT'S WHY B&. >> THERE'S NO CONSIDERATIONS B. >> THAT WAS A PART OF THE

MOTION, NO. >> I THINK WE SHOULD REVOKED. I THANK YOU VOTED FOR THE WRONG ONE. OKAY. TO BE AGREED TO REVOTE?

I GUESS IS TO DENY. >> CAN WE STATE WITH THE MOTION IS BEFORE THE VOTE.

>> THE MOTION WAS TO DENY PUD 2020 Ã08. SUBJECT TO 10 FINDINGS OF FACT AS LISTED IN THE STAFF REPORT. OKAY SO THE MOTION TO DENY HAS BEEN APPROVED.

CORRECT? >> YES. >> OKAY.

SORRY TO SAY BUT YOU VARIANCE HAS NOT BEEN APPROVED AND IT'S BEEN BEEN DENIED.

AND? >> THEY WERE SEEKING A REZONING NOT A VARIANCE. JUST WANT TO

CLEAR THE RECORD. >> OKAY THE REZONING. >> I SLEEP.

RRY. >> Y. ANY STAFF REPORTS? OKAY ANY OTHER BUSINESS BEFORE THE BOARD? WE HAVE A SCHEDULED NEXT

MEETING? >> THE NEXT MEETING SHOULD BE THE FIRST MONDAY OF AUGUST.

FORGIVE ME I DO NOT HAVE THE DATE OF OF HAND. WE DO HAVE A SCHEDULED ITEM ON

THERE. >> I JUST WANTED TO BRING UP SOMETHING.

I HAVE HEARD FROM DIFFERENT PEOPLE AND I DON'T KNOW WHETHER THIS IS THE RIGHT FORMAT TO BRING US ALL. WE HAVE REGULATIONS ON THE HEIGHT OF SENSES AND SO ON.

ON HEARING FROM DIFFERENT NEIGHBORS AND SO ON THAT THERE IS QUESTIONS ABOUT LIGHTING AND PARTY LIGHTS AND OTHER LIGHTS THAT ARE LEFT ON TO ALL HOURS OF THE NIGHT.

AND SHOULD WE GET INVOLVED WITH SOME TYPE OF REGULATION OR RESTRICTIONS ON THE TYPE OF

THING? OR THAT MSD OR WHAT WE DEAL? >> ACTUALLY THERE ARE

[02:40:03]

SO, IS THAT TRUE? NO? THAT'S FOR THE OVERLAY DISTRICT AND NOT ALL OF OUR PROPERTIES ARE IN THE OVERLAY DISTRICT. SO I KNOW THAT THE MSD HAD BEEN LOOKING AT IT. I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE STATUS IS OF IT CURRENTLY.

AND WE WERE TALKING ABOUT B&. >> I TALKED TO POLLY. BUT, THE OTHER PART OF THIS IS THAT THE LEGISLATURE HAS NOW SAID THAT YOU CANNOT OBJECT TO ANYTHING UNANIMOUSLY.

YOU HAVE TO PUT YOUR NAME ON THE DOCUMENT ON THE PRIDE REQUEST.

THAT'S GONNA RESTRICT ANYBODY FROM MAKING AN OBJECTION. I'M JUST SAYING, SHOULD THERE BE SOME TYPE OF PARAMETERS ON THE COVERS OF OPERATION ON THE ULTRALIGHTS.

PARTICULARLY PARTY LIGHTS. NOT NECESSARILY SECURITY LIGHTS WERE TO RELIANCE THAT KIND OF THING. IS THAT SOMETHING WE DELVE INTO WAS NOT SOMETHING MSD?

>> WERE LOOKING AT YOU. >> YOU'RE LOOKING AT ME? SO IF YOU WANT TO ASK STAFF TO LOOK INTO THAT I KNOW THAT MSD HAS SUGGESTED SOME CHANGES RECENTLY.

JACOB, I DON'T BELIEVE THOSE PERTAINING TO LIGHTING THOUGH. >> YES, LIGHTING HAS BEEN BROUGHT UP. AT THE PLEASURE OF THE BOARD WE COULD CERTAINLY ENTERTAIN ANYTHING THE BOARD WOULD DIRECT. RESIDENTIAL LIGHTING INTERNAL IS NOT SOMETHING THAT THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE OR THE PONTE VEDRA CODE SPEAKS EXPLICITLY

TO. CURRENTLY. >> SO WOULD THIS BE SOMETHING THAT WOULD YOU DO THIS OR WHAT MSD DO IT? THAT'S WHAT I DON'T UNDERSTAND.

>> IT WOULD BE SOMETHING THAT MYSELF AND THE REST OF STAFF WE WOULD PUT TOGETHER.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.