Sep 13, 2021 Ponte Vedra Zoning and Adjustment Board

[Call meeting to order by Chair]

[00:00:34]

>> I WOULD LIKE TO CALL TO ORDER THE AUGUST 13TH, 2021, MEETING OF THE ST. JOHNS COUNTY PONTE VEDRA ZONING AND ADJUSTMENT BOARD MEETING SHOULD BE NOTED WE DO HAVE A QUORUM, WE'RE MISSING TWO MEMBERS, JON LINCH AND SAM. MAY WE HAVE THE

MEETING OF THE PUBLIC NOTICE. >> THIS IS A PROPERLY NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING HELD IN CONOCCURRENCE WITH FLORIDA LAW.

THE PUBLIC WILL BE GIVEN THE OPPORTUNITY TO COMMENT ON TOPICS RELEVANT TO THE BOARDS AREA OF JURISDICTION. ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC DESIRING TO SPEAK MUST INDICATE SO BY COMPLETING A SPEAKER CORD AVAILABLE IN THE FOR YAY!. ANY ADDITIONAL SPEAKERS MAY BE HEARD ONLY AT THE CHAIRMAN'S. FOR A LENGTH OF TIME AS DESIGNATED BY THE CHAIRMAN WHICH SHALL BE 3 MINUTES. SPEAKERS SHOULD IDENTIFY THEMSELVES, WHOTHY REPRESENT AND STATE THEIR ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.

SPEAKERS MAY OFFER SWORN IT TESTIMONY, IT IF THEY DO NOT, THE FACT THAT TESTIMONY IS NOT SWORN MAY BE CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD TO DETERMINE THE WEIGHT AND TRUTHFULNESS OF THE TESTIMONY. IF OR PERSON DECIDES TO APPEAL ANY DECISION MADE OF THE MATTER CONSIDERED AT THE HEARING SUCH PERSON MAY NEED A RECORD OFPROCEEDINGS. ANY PHYSICAL OR DOCUMENTARY EVIDENCE PRESENTED DURING THE HEARING SUCH AS DIAGRAMS, CHARTS, PHOTOGRAPHS OR WRITTEN STATEMENTS WILL BE RETAINED BY STAFF AS PART OF THE RECORD. THE RECORD WILL THEN BE AVAILABLE FOR OTHER BOARDS OF THE COUNTY IN ANY REVIEW OF APPEAL RELATING TO THE ITEM. BOARD MBS ARE REMINDED AT THE

[Public Comment ]

[1. PVZVAR21-10 Hooks-Thranhardt Rebuild. ]

>> THANK YOU, MEGHAN. WITH THAT, ARE THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS TODAY ON TOPICS OTHER THAN THE SCHEDULED AGENDA ITEMS?

>> OKAY. HEARING NONE. LET'S MOVE ONTO AGENDA ITEM 1. THAT IS PVVVRA 20-1-TEN, HOOKS THRA IN, HEART REBUILD. BOARD MEMBERS HAVE YOU VISITED THE SITES HAD ANY CONVERSATIONS?

>> RICHARD? >> I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE PROPERTY AND I HAVE NOT SPOKEN TO ANYONE THERE.

>> I DID VISIT THE SITE, I TOURED IT WITH ASHLEY HOOKS AND AMY THRANHEART. THEY WALKED WITH WITH ME AND SHOWED ME WHAT

THEIR PLANS WERE. >> I VISITED THE SITE AND I BRIEFLY TALKED TO THE HUSBAND OF ONE OF THE APPLICANTS.

>> I'M FAMILIAR WITH THE SITE AND ON AUGUST 31ST IN THE AFTERNOON I HAD A PHONE CONVERSATION WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD TO THE EAST, JACK PARKER, HE WAS MORE INTERESTED IN THE PROCESS FOR THE VARIANTS AND HE WASN'T SURE HOW HE STOOD AS FAR AS APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL OF THE VARIANTS.

>> I AM FAMILIAR WITH THE PROPERTY AND HAVE HAD NO CONTACT

CONCERNING THE PROPERTY. >> I FORGOT TO MENTION THAT MICHAEL OSTEIN, PROPERTY OWNER ON ASLANO DID CALL ME TO EXPRESS THAT HE WAS NOT IN FAVOR OF APPROVING THE VARIANTS.

>> THANK YOU. >> OKAY. DOES STAFF HAVE

COMMENTS IN RELATION TO THIS? >> READY FOR THE PRESENTATION

BY THE APPLICANT. >>

[00:05:01]

>> GOOD AFTERNOON, WE WANTED TO SAY THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND CONSIDERATION TODAY ON BEHALF OF MY SISTER AND MYSELF, ASHLEY HOOKS AND AMY TRAINHART. WE DID PUT TOGETHER A SMALL PRESENTATION. WE GREW UP IN THIS HOUSE AT THIS PORT, WE MOVED HERE IN '86. AND A LOT OF WHAT WE'RE DOING TODAY IS IN ORDER TO KEEP THE PROPERTY IN THE FAMILY. MY PARENTS CURRENTLY OWN IT BUT WE'RE IN THE PROCESS OF THEM PUTTING IT IN TRUST FOR US. SO, IF APPROVED WE WOULD NEED THAT VARIANCE TO CARRY OVER INTO THE NEW OWNERSHIP OF MY SISTER AND I. WE DID SEND A LETTER, MY FATHER IS NOT HERE TODAY, BUT HE GAVE US PERMISSION TO DO THIS. MY MOTHER IS IN MEMORY CARE SO SHE'S NOT ABLE TO BE HERE. AFTER MULTIPLE CONVERSATIONS WITH THE COUNTY, WE DISCUSSED REMODELING I'VE BEEN TRYING TO FIND THE BEST SCENARIO FOR EVERYONE INVOLVED. WE'RE PLANNING ON TAKING THE HOUSE DOWN THAT HAD BEEN THERE SINCE 1950 OR '51, IT HAS BECOME OLDER AND HAS A LOT OF WELL, WE HAVE ISSUES WHETHER IT'S PLUMBING, ELECTRICAL, MOLD AND IT'S ELEVATED SO WE HAVE PROBLEMS WITH PESTS UNDERNEATH THE HOUSE.

HOWEVER, IT'S BECOME A MORE THAN MY FATHER WOULD LIKE TO HANDLE AT THIS POINT IN HIS LIFE. SO, WITH MY SISTER MOVING HOME, WE WANTED TO BEGIN THIS PROCESS AND IT'S WITH THE WAY THINGS ARE GOING IN THE PONTE VEDRA WITH PROPERTY VALUES SKY-ROCKETING, IT BECOMES IMPORTANT FOR US TO TRANSFER OWNERSHIP AT THIS POINT IN ORDER FOR US TO ESTABLISH TO SAVE OUR HOMESTEAD AND IF WE WAIT ANY LONGER WE MAY NOT BE ABLE TO. SO WE'RE GOING TO TAKE WHAT WE HAVE CURRENTLY WHICH IS TWO PLATTED LOTS, SO, WE HAVE LOT 1 WHICH IS THE SMALLER LOT THAT IS APPROXIMATELY 13,000 SQUARE FEET AND WE'RE ASKING FOR FRONT YARD SETBACK OF 24 FEET, THAT WOULD THE ADDRESS OF 11 SALANO ROAD. LOT TWO IS A GOOD SIZE AND WITH A FRONT YARD 20 FEET. WE CURRENTLY HAVE AN EXISTING POOL THAT WAS BUILT AT THE TIME THAT THE SETBACK FOR THE POOL WAS 40 FEET. AND IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT'S NO LONGER REQUIRED LOOKING AT THE BERLIN'S HOUSE, THEY WERE ABLE TO FIT A SIMILAR SIZE OR SIMILAR TYPE OF HOUSE AND PUSH EVERYTHING A LITTLE FURTHER BACK. THE VARIANCE ON LOT 2, SORRY, LOT 1, IS AN IRREGULAR TRIANGLE SHAPE. WHEN PLATTED IT DOES NOT HAVE A REAR YARD SETBACK. AND ALSO WHEN PLATTED, THE STREET WAS GIVEN A 30 FOOT RIGHT-OF-WAY, SO, 30 FEET FROM THE CENTER LINE OF THE ROAD ON EITHER SIDE. AND SO, WITH THAT PLUS THE 40-FOOT SETBACK FROM THE CENTER LINE OF THE ROAD, WE'RE APPROXIMATELY 70 FEET. FROM THE EDGE OF THE ROAD IS VARIES BETWEEN, 50-60 FEET. SO, THIS IS THE SITE PLAN OF THE PROPOSED STRUCTURES. YOU COULD SEE THE RED DOTTED LINE, THAT IS THE CURRENT BUILDING SETBACK ON THE FRONT. THE POOL, AGAIN, IS EXISTING. SO, I'M ASKING TO PULL BOTH HOUSES FORWARD AND WITH THE LARGER HOUSE ON THE RIGHT AT LOT 2, WE WOULD MOVE, I GOT A DOTTED LINE INDICATING WHERE THE OLD CIRCUMSLEOR DRIVE WAY. WITH THIS LAYOUT, WE'RE ABLE TO SAVE THEOUS FROM, WELL, AS YOU SEE FOR THE MOST PART, THE STRUCTURE IS PRIMARILY BEYOND THAT 40-FOOT SETBACK IT'S THE PORTION OF THE GARAGE THAT

[00:10:03]

THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING FOR THE VARIANT BECAUSE OF THE ODD SHAPE AND SMALL. AND YOU'LL NOTICE NEITHER OF THE LETTERS ANYONE WROTE ABOUT HAVING THE ISSUE OF THE DESIGN EFFECT OF MOVING THOSE STRUCTURES FORWARD OR THAT THAT WOULD RUIN THE SET ON THE STREET. THEY DON'T WANT TO HAVE MORE HOUSES SEEMS TO BE THE TONE AND ALSO I THINK ONE SAID IT WOULDN'T BE FAIR SINCE THEY DIDN'T GET A VARIANCE SO IT WOULDN'T BE FAIR IF WE GOT ONE.

THIS IS THE VIEW FROM OUR NEIGHBOR'S LOT. WE HAVEN'T SPOKEN TO THEM ABOUT THIS, WE SAW THEM AS THEY WERE BUILDING THEIR NEW HOUSE NEXTDOOR, BUT WE JUST MET THEM, AND WE HAVE NOT SPOKEN TO THEM ABOUT OUR ACTUAL PLANS. WE TOLD THEM WE WERE PLANNING ON DIVIDING IT INTO TWO LOTS AND I DID SAY I WOULD DO WHAT WE CAN TO RETAIN THEIR VIEW. THAT'S WHERE THE SUNSETS, SO IT'S A BEAUTIFUL VIEW OF THE CHURCH AND THE OTHER HOUSES ON THE GOVERNMENT COURSE AND IF WE'RE UNABLE TO ACHIEVE THIS VARIANT, WE'LL HAVE TO MOVE THE HOUSE AND IT WOULD INHIBIT THEIR VIEW. FOR ME, THAT'S A PLUS FOR THAT PARTICULAR PIECE OF PROPERTY, IT'S GOT A STUNNING VIEW. FOR US TO IMPEDE ON OTHER PEOPLE'S VIEW, IT'S NOT A HARDSHIP FOR US, BUT IT IS SOMETHING THAT I'M TRYING TO AVOID. I KNOW THEY WANT US TO SAVE THE TREES. AND, I'D LIKE TO SAVE THE VIEW FOR EVERYBODY IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. SO, IN CONTEXT, WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR IS AT LEAST, WELL, I'VE ASKED FOR THE 20-FOOT SETBACK BUT IT

[00:15:08]

INFORMATION. THAT'S IT. >> WELL, THANK YOU. IF YOU

HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. >> DOES THE BOARD HAVE ANY

QUESTIONS? >> MEGHAN?

>> WELL, ONE OF THE THINGS I THINK WOULD BE HELPFUL IS JUST TO LOOK A LITTLE BIT AT THE HISTORY, AND AS YOU RIGHTFULLY POINTED OUT, THESE LOTS WERE PLATTED A LONG TIME AGO, BEFORE THE PONTE VEDRA ZONING REGULATIONS WERE EVEN ZONING DISTRICT WAS ESTABLISHED. BECAUSE THE ZONING DISTRICT WAS ESTABLISHED IN 1965. THE HOUSE THAT YOU CURRENTLY HAVE WAS BUILT IN 1952. AND, THE OTHER HOUSES, FOR EXAMPLE, 500 ROTILE WAS ALSO BUILT IN 1964 AND 501 WAS BUILT IN 1961. SO ALL OF THOSE HOMES AND THEIR WILL HE INDICATIONS ON THE LOTS ARE GRANDFATHERED IN. MOVING FORWARD WITH THE REGULATIONS THAT WERE ESTABLISHED IN 1965, HOMES REALLY SHOULD EITHER COULD KEEP THE OLD HOUSE AND THEY WOULDN'T HAVE TO MOVE IT BUT IF THEY WANT TO BUILD A NEW HOUSE THEY NEED TO CONFORM WITH THE NEW ZONING REGULATIONS. LOT TWO IS A WONDERFULLY SIZED LOT AND FROM MY PERSPECTIVE DOESN'T HAVE HARDSHIPS, HAVING A POOL THERE IS NOT A HARDSHIP. IT'S THERE. I WOULD LIKE US TO POINT OUT, THE WATER OF THE POOL NEEDS TO BE 10 FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE WITH THE OTHER HOUSE EVEN IF IT'S YOUR SISTER, IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE 10 FEET AND FROM MY MEASUREMENTS IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S CLOSER TO THE PROPERTY LINE THAN THE 10 FEET. SO THAT WOULD BE AN ADDITIONAL VARIANT THAT YOU WOULD NEED IF YOU WANTED TO KEEP THAT POOL. LOT ONE IS DEFINITELY A LOT THAT IS SMALLER THAN THE CURRENT PONTE VEDRA ZONING REGULATION WHICH SPECIFY THAT IN ORDER TO BE BUILDABLE, THE LOT REALLY SHOULD BE 17,000 SQUARE FEET. SO, A VARIANCE WOULD BE REQUIRED JUST TO BUILD ONTO THAT LOT. IT IS AN IRREGULAR LOT. AND AS SUCH IT HAS NO BACKYARD, SO YOU ONLY HAVE A 10-YARD SETBACK THE

ENTIRE LENGTH. >> 10 FEET.

>> SORRY, 10 FEET. COULD BE PUSHED BACK ON THAT PROPERTY AND BE BUILT. SO, MY MAIN ISSUE IS THAT I DON'T SEE A HARDSHIP FOR LOT ONE NOT CONFORMING AND I SEE THAT LOT TWO IT IS SMALL WE COULD GIVE A VARIANCE TO BUILD ON THAT BECAUSE IT'S LESS IN THE

[00:20:03]

SETBACK. >> I GUESS, I NOW HAVE A QUESTION. BECAUSE I WAS WONDERING WHEN THEY SAID ABOUT THE 13,000 VERSUS THE 17,000, WOULD THAT REQUIRE A VARIANCE? I GUESS, JACOB, WOULD THAT BE FOR YOU -- FOR THEM TO BUILD A HOUSE ON LOT ONE, WOULD IT REQUIRE A VARIANCE SINCE IT'S 13,000 VERSUS THE CURRENT REGULAR RATION OF 17,000 SQUARE

FOOT MINIMUM? >> THESE ARE PLOTTED LOTS OF RECORD SO AS THEY SIT THEY WILL [INDISCERNIBLE].

[INDISCERNIBLE] >>

[INDISCERNIBLE] >> OKAY. SO, THE VARIANCE THAT THEY'RE REQUESTING WHICH IS THE SETBACK ON LOT ONE IS THE ONLY VARIANCE THEY WOULD REQUIR BASED UPON THEIR CURRENT PLANS?

[INDISCERNIBLE] >> OKAY, THANK YOU.

>> RICHARD? >> YEAH, I HAVE A QUESTION AS FAR AS THE PERKABILITY OF THE LAND, IS THERE ANY CONCERN WITH -- WHAT'S THE AMOUNT OF SQUARE FEET YOU COULD PUT ON THE GROUND THAT WOULD STILL ALLOW THE PERKING REQUIREMENTS TO BE MET?

>> I THINK WE COULD... >>

[INDISCERNIBLE] >>

THE NUMBER WOULD BE? >> THE CURRENT PLANS ARE LESS THAN THAT OR I WOULD HAVE ASKED FOR A VARIANCE FOR THAT AS WELL.

>> SO THIS WOULD BE A TWO-STORY HOME?

>> A STORY AND A HALF. >> ALSO, YOU MENTIONED THE BERLIN HOUSE, WHAT NUMBER ARE THEY LOCATED?

>> THEY ARE, LET'S SEE. I BELIEVE THEY'RE 5 SALANO ROAD.

>> SO, THEY'RE TOWARDS THE BEACH?

>> YES. >> AND YOU'RE SAYING THEY'VE

ALREADY HAD A VARIANCE? >> NOT AT ALL, IT'S A SIMILAR SIZED LOT BUT SINCE THEY DON'T -- WELL, THEY DID PUSH IT BACK, SO THEY ARE IMPEDING THE VIEW OF THEIR NEIGHBOR'S BUT IT WAS A FRESH, THEY TORE DOWN THE HOUSE AND STARTED ALL OVER AGAIN SO THEY WERE ABLE TO FIT A POOL AND MULTIPLE GARAGES AND THINGS LIKE

THAT. >> SO THERE HAS BEEN NO PRECEDENT AS FAR AS PEOPLE PUSHING THINGS BACK?

>> A NUMBER OF HOUSES HAVE BEEN BUILT ALONG THAT STREET, THEY'VE TORN DOWN ALL THE OLD HOUSES AND BUILT AS WELL FROM SCRATCH RATHER THAN HAVING ANY SORT OF HISTORY, IT'S ALL A FRESH START FOR THEM, AND RATHER THAN GETTING IT WITH FAMILY AND HAVING HISTORY THERE AND THINGS THEY THEY WANTED TO SAVE.

>> OKAY. THE OTHER INTERESTING VIEW I TOOK WAS, I WENT OVER ON SAN JUAN AND LOOKED AT IT FROM ACROSS THE LAGOON. AND, BOY, ALL THE HOMES ARE COOKIE-CUTTER AS FAR AS HOW BIG A LOT THEY ARE ON. AND I TRIED TO PICTURE TWO HOMES SITTING IN THAT SPOT. AND TO ME, I COULD SEE THE CONCERN, YOUR TWO OTHER LETTERS HAD IN THAT IT WOULD START MAKING EVERYBODY WORRIES ABOUT PEOPLE SPLITTING THEIR LOTS INTO THESE SMALLER LOTS AND BUILDING BIGGER HOMES. AND, ANOTHER PART OF THIS MEETING WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT 35-FOOT RESTRICTIONS AND THREE-STORY, SO IT ALMOST SOUNDS LIKE IT'S ALL COMING TO A HEAD WHERE WE MIGHT BE LOOKING AT BIGGER HOMES ON SMALLER LOTS. AND, THAT'S NOT TYPICAL OF WHAT YOU SEE IN AT LEAST OLD PONTE VEDRA.

>> I AGREE. I LOVED THE OLD HOUSES THAT SEEM TO BE DISAPPEARING. AND WE'RE CERTAINLY GOING TO TRY AND DO THE BEST WE CAN WITH WHAT WE HAVE. BUT WE DO HAVE TWO LOTS.

AND WE ARE GOING TO BUILD TWO HOUSES. AND, I WENT THROUGH A LOT OF BACKGROUND TALKING TO THE PEOPLE HERE AT THE COUNTY BEFORE I MADE SURE THAT THAT'S ALL ALLOWED AND PERMISSIBLE. AND YES, WE WOULD LIKE VERY MUCH TO GET THESE VARIANCES IN ORDER TO

[00:25:03]

>> YEAH, I THINK IT'S A LITTLE UNFAIR THAT YOU HAVE TO -- IT'S NICE THAT YOU ARE CONSIDERING THE NEIGHBORS, BUT NOT IF IT'S HAVING TO PUSH YOU INTO A REQUEST FOR A VARIANCE THAT MAYBE THE REST OF THE COUNTY DOESN'T REALLY APPRECIATE. SO, I KNOW YOU HAVE IMMEDIATE NEIGHBORS, BUT, CAN YOU GET THE SAME RESULTS WITHOUT THE VARIANCE?

>> WELL, I CERTAINLY CAN'T GET A THREE-CAR GARAGE.

>> OKAY. > SO NOT EXACTLY THE SAME RESULTS. THE HOUSE WILL BE SMALLER AND IT WILL IMPEDE THE VIEW. THERE ARE SACRIFICE AS WELL ON LOT ONE, I CAN'T GET A FRONT PORCH AND I CAN'T GET A BACK PATIO. SO, YES, THERE ARE THINGS THAT I WILL NOT BE ABLE TO GET, BUT THAT IS, IF Y'ALL FEEL LIKE IT'S BEST FOR PONTE VEDRA TO SAY NO, THEN I CERTAINLY UNDERSTAND IT. BUT, IT WAS STILL WORTH IT TO ME TO TRY AND DO THE BEST I CAN FOR EVERYBODY INVOLVED.

>> WELL, AND IF I MAY ADD, ONE THING THAT I DON'T KNOW REALLY WILL HELP YOUR DECISION BUT ONE THING THAT'S VERY IMPORTANT TO US IS CURB APPEAL AND MAKING SURE THAT WE HOLD UP THE INTEGRITY OF A BEAUTIFUL HOUSE THAT'S, BECAUSE WE'RE PART OF THIS COMMUNITY AS WELL. SO, WE WERE GOING TO SOMEWHAT MAKE THESE HOUSES LOOK SIMILAR SO THAT IT LOOKS LIKE ALMOST ONE CONTINUOUS PROPERTY. THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BE DIFFERENT LOOKS, ONE SQUEEZED INTO THE SMALLER, IRREGULAR SHAPE, IT'S GOING TO LOOK LIKE ONE PROPERTY. I FEEL VERY GRATEFUL THAT I GET TO LIVE IN THIS COMMUNITY THAT'S ARGUABLY THE BEST SCHOOLS IN THE STATE, AND CERTAINLY THE MOST BEAUTIFUL AREA IN THE STATE IN MY OPINION, SO, I MEAN, OUR REPUTATION IS VERY IMPORTANT TO US. SO, SHE'S WORKED VERY HARD, YOU COULD TELL, SHE'S VERY KNOWLEDGEABLE. SHE STUDIED ARCHITECTURE, SHE'S WORKED HARD AND WE TALKED TO A LOT OF OUR NEIGHBORS, NEIGHBORS THAT WE DIDN'T GET FEEDBACK FROM WHO SEEMED TO BE SUPPORTIVE. I THINK, AGAIN, THE ARGUMENT IN THESE DESCENT LETTERS IS THAT THEY DON'T WANT TO HAVE ANOTHER HOUSE, BUT WE HAVE A BUILDABLE LOT. SO, WE'RE GOING TO DO THE BEST WE CAN WITH THE PROPERTY TO MAKE IT BEAUTIFUL AND NOT LOOK LIKE JUST ANOTHER COOKIE-CUTTER

HOME. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?

>> OKAY. >>

[INDISCERNIBLE] >> IT IS DEFINITELY TWO LOTS, RIGHT? SO THERE IS NO SUBDIVIDING OF A LARGER LOT INTO

TWO LOTS? >> THAT'S CORRECT.

>> SINCE IT WAS PLATTED? >> YES, SIR. I THINK IT WAS BEFORE I WAS BORN. I NEVER CAN TELL. 35. OKAY. CAN YOU TELL US A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE TWO HOUSES THAT YOU ARE INTENDING TO BUILD, THE SIZE OF THE HOUSES, ONE-STORY, TWO-STORY,

ARCHITECTURE LOOK? >> I WAS WAITING BEFORE TAKING THEM FOR THE CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS, BUT THEY'VE BEEN DESIGNED. SHE'S GOT THREE CHILDREN AND WE HAVE A STUNNING BACKYARD VIEW, I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY OF YOU HAVE SEEN IT. SO,

[00:30:03]

UNDER ROOF IT'S 4,000 SQUARE FEET. BUT I'M NOT PLANNING ON FINISHING THAT BECAUSE I CERTAINLY DO NOT NEED IT. BUT THE ACTUAL PLAN IS FOR THE HOUSE TO BE.

>> AND YOUR HOUSE IS THE SMALLER LOT?

>> IT'S THE SMALLER LOT. >> OKAY. GO AHEAD.

>> WE STARTED WITH THE IDEAS OF DOING AN IN--LAW HOUSE FOR MY FATHER. WE HAVE BEEN THROUGH ALL VARIATIONS OF THIS. SO, YES, UNFORTUNATELY ON THE SMALLER LOT, I JUST DON'T HAVE THE SPACE TO DO MUCH WITH THE DRIVEWAY, THAT WOULD BE A STRAIGHT IN DRIVEWAY I WANTED A LITTLE FRONT PORCH. MY MOTHER USES A WHEELCHAIR AND OUR HOUSE CURRENTLY THE PORCH IS TOO HIGH.

ALL THIS GOES INTO IT, MY FATHER IS CURRENTLY ON THE SECOND FLOOR, WHEN WE REBUILD, I'LL GET HIM ON THE FIRST-FLOOR. BUT, THE DESIGN OF THE HOUSE. I MEAN, BOTH OF THEM ARE SPACIOUS AND EVEN MY SMALLER HOUSE HAS THE ABILITY TO BE SPACIOUS AGAIN AT 4,000 SQUARE FEET UNDER ROOF BUT I'M ONLY GOING TO TRY AND FINISH AT THIS .2400 SQUARE FEET. BUT, I DON'T KNOW BEYOND THAT. DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT LIKE, MATERIALS, BECAUSE

WE'RE STILL WORKING ON THAT. >> NO. WHAT I WAS INTERESTED IN MORE WAS THE CONCEPT, OF ARE YOU PUTTING TWO LITTLE HOUSES ON LOTS OR PUTTING TOO PIG OF A HOUSE ON THE LOTS. THE CONCERN FROM THE NEIGHBORS THAT YOU'RE GOING TO DECREASE THEIR PROPERTY VALUES IF YOU'RE PUTTING UP 4,000 SQUARE FOOT HOMES ON THE LOTSES, YOU WOULD ACTUALLY BE INCREASING THEIR VALUES.

>> I'M CERTAINLY TRYING. >> AND, I THINK AS MEGHAN BROUGHT UP, MY BIGGEST CONCERN IS THE LOT NUMBER TWO IS THAT IT IS A GOOD SIZED LOT AND WHAT'S DICTATING THE LOCATION OF THE HOUSE IS THE SWIMMING POOL WHICH YOU ARE KEEPING, RIGHT?

>> YES, WE ARE PLANNING ON KEEPING THAT.

>> AND IT IS WITHIN 8 FEET OF THE PROPERTY LINE?

>> I DON'T KNOW. I HIRED A -- IT DOES LOOK LIKE IT TO ME ON THE COMPUTER. THE SURVEYORS DIDN'T COME OUT AND TELL ME EXACTLY WHAT THAT CORNER IS. BUT, YES, THERE IS PART OF THE PATIO THAT ENCROACHES ON LOT ONE AND THE POOL CORNER, VISUALLY IT LOOKS LIKE IT IS. BUT I WOULD HAVE TO -- AND I MEAN, IF I HAD KNOWN THIS WAS GOING TO BE A POINT TODAY, THEN I CERTAINLY WOULD HAVE GOTTEN IN TOUCH WITH HIM AND ASKED HIM TO COME OUT AND TELL ME EXACTLY WHERE IT WAS AND HAD IT MARKED. BUT IT LOOKS TO ME TO BE UNDER 10 FEET Z AND JACOB, WOULD THAT REQUIRE ANOTHER VARIANCE IF IT'S EXISTING?

>> YES, SIR. SO, THAT'S A LITTLE DIFFICULT. AGAIN, WITHOUT HAVING THE EXACT INFORMATION, I WAS OPERATING UNDER THE GUISE THAT IT'S VERY, VERY, CLOSE, RIGHT? IT MAY REQUIRE A VARIANCE, BUT THEY MAY ALSO BE ABLE TO REMEDY THAT POOL, AGAIN, IT'S MEASURED TO THE WATER'S EDGE, SO A

MODIFICATION OF THE POOL. >> JUST FILL IN THE CORNER.

>> AGAIN, IT'S HEART TO SAY, THIS PACTETTE WAS NOT ADDRESSED.

>> MEGHAN, DO YOU HAVE ADDITIONAL COMMENTS OR

QUESTIONS? >> YES, I GUESS THE POINT THAT I WASN'T VERY CLEAR ON IS THAT WITH RESPECT TO THE LARGER LOT, I DON'T SEE THAT THERE'S A HARDSHIP IN BUILDING A HOUSE THAT WOULD CONFORM WITH THE CURRENT PONTE VEDRA ZONING REGULATIONS ON THAT LOT. I DON'T SEE A HARDSHIP. I ALSO

[00:35:05]

OBJECT TO THAT. >> THE FOOTAGE THAT YOU ARE ASKING TO BE TAKE AWAY ON THE FRONT OF THE HOUSE, TO ME, HAS A BIGGER EFFECT ON MORE PEOPLE ON THE BLOCK THAN IF YOU WERE TO MOVE THE HOUSE -- YOU COULD JUST DESIGN IT DIFFERENTLY ALSO, CLOSER TO THE LOT ONE AND LOT TWO SO THAT YOU KNOW, WE'RE ALWAYS TRYING TO LOOK FOR A HARDSHIP, AND I'M SAYING, ONE OF OUR LOTS DOESN'T HAVE A HARDSHIP, IT HAS A POOL BUT YOU'RE ALREADY GOING TO TAKE DOWN THE HOUSE, SO YOU COULD PUT A DIFFERENT POOL IN. AND THE OTHER LOT BECAUSE IT IS UNDER SIZED, 13,000, BUT YOU COULD BUILD A SMALLER HOUSE ON IT.

YOU COULD MOVE IT AROUND ON THE LOT SO EVEN THIS CURRENT LOOK OF HOUSE COULD BE IT SLID FURTHER BACK.

>> AND AGAIN, IMPEDE THE VIEWS. I UNDERSTAND...

>> THE QUESTION IS THE HARDSHIP, IF YOU COULD ARTICULATE A HARDSHIP FOR LOT TWO?

>> WELL, I CAN'T QUITE FIT EVERYTHING THAT I WOULD LIKE ON THAT HOUSE. I MEAN, YES, YOU COULD BUILD A STRUCTURE ON THE

SMALLER LOT. >> I'M TALKING ABOUT THE LARGER

LOT. >> OH, ON LOT TWO.

>> WHAT IS YOUR HARDSHIP? >> WELL, FOR US IT WAS BUILDING AROUND THE POOL AS WELL AS IMPEDING THE NEIGHBOR'S VIEW OF

THE CHURCH AND THE GOLF COURSE. >> BUT THEY DIDN'T WAVE ANY OBJECTIONS? YOUR NEXT DOOR NEIGHBORS?

>> NO, WE HAVEN'T SPOKEN TO THEM. WE MENTIONED WE WERE PLANNING ON BUILDING AND I TOLD THEM IN THE VERY BEGINNING I WOULD DO EVERYTHING I CAN TO NOT PUT THE HOUSE IN THEIR WAY BUT THAT WAS EARLY ON AND I HAVE NOT SPOKEN TO THEM SINCE WE APPLIED

FOR THE VARIANCE. >> I SPOKE WITH MR. BARKER AND HE WASN'T SURE IF HE WAS OPPOSED TO IT OR NOT. AND SINCE HE HASN'T WRITTEN ANYTHING IN, I GUESS HE'S NOT OPPOSED TO IT.

OKAY. ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS? >> I'M SORRY, JANE.

>> THAT'S OKAY, I PRESSED MY B BUTT BUTTON. ONE OF THE REASONS I VISITED THE SITE WAS BECAUSE IT WAS HARD FOR ME TO LOOK AT THESE PICTURES AND VISUALIZE WHAT THEY WERE REQUESTING, WHAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD LOOKED LIKE, AND I LIVE I DON'T KNOW, I GUESS IT'S THE CROW FLY'S NOT VERY FAR FROM THERE, I LIVE ONE STREET AWAY. BUT I WANTED TO VISUALIZE THE NEW HOUSE BEING BUILT NEXT DOOR AND ALL THE OTHER HOUSES AND WHERE THEY WERE ON THE SETBACK. I DID NOTICE THIS LOT ONE IS AN UNUSUAL TRIANGLE SHAPE, VERY HARD TO PUT A STRUCTURE ON. AND THAT WE DO WANT LARGER HOME THAT IS ALSO CONFORM WITH THE BUILDABLE PERCENTAGE OF OUR LOTS BUT THEY HAVE A TRIANGLE LOT, TO GET THAT SIZE OF HOME ON A LOT, I THOUGHT THAT WAS A HARDSHIP. SO, I HAVE NO PROBLEM, REALLY WITH THAT HOUSE, BUS I VISUALIZED WHERE THEIR SETBACK WOULD BE, THERE'S NOBODY TO THE EAST OF THEM, THE LAGOON COMES IN, AND THERE'S WATER AND THAT KIND OF THING. SO IT KIND OF CUTS OFF THAT CORNER. SO, I DIDN'T THINK, TO THE WEST, I'M SORRY, TO THE WEST OF THEM THERE'S NO OTHER HOUSE THERE AND IT KIND OF CUTS IN, AND THERE'S SOME, AS THEY MENTIONED A COUPLE BEAUTIFUL TREES THERE, THAT IF THEY COULD BE PRESERVED WOULD BE A BENEFIT TO OUR COMMUNITY. AND I'M CONSIDERING THE EFFECT ON THE

[00:40:03]

RIGHT-OF-WAY? >> YES, MA'AM, I DON'T BELIEVE MY REPORT, IT DEFINITELY IS 60 FEET AS I HAVE LISTED IN MY REPORT. I DON'T BELIEVE I PROVIDED INFORMATION FOR OTHER SECTIONS OF THE ROADWAY. BUT IT IS THE RIGHT-OF-WAY.

>> IT'S CONSISTENTLY 60 FEET AT THAT RIGHT-OF-WAY?

>> IN THIS PORTION. >> I GUESS I PRESUMED SINCE YOU MENTIONED IT, THAT MAY BE IT WAS DIFFERENT THERE.

>> IT'S JUST A FAIRLY -- >> PRETTY WIDE RIGHT-OF-WAY. I KNOW THE ONE BY MY HOUSE ISN'T THAT LARGE.

>>> THEN I LOOKED AT LOT TWO AND WALKED AROUND THE BACK AND LOOKED AT THE VIEW IN THE BACK AND WHAT THE NEIGHBOR'S VIEW WOULD BE. NOW, FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND, THERE ARE GOING TO BE TWO HOUSES BUILT HERE, THERE'S GOING TO BE A HOUSE BUILT ON LOT TWO, IF THEY DON'T GET THE VARIANCE, THEY ARE GOING TO PUSH THE HOUSE BACK AND MAY BE LOSE THE POOL WHICH WOULD IMPACT THE NEIGHBOR'S VIEW. SO, I GUESS I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM SOME OF THE OTHER BOARD MEMBERS HERE ON HOW WE CONSIDER THE VIEW FROM THE BACKYARD OF A NEIGHBOR'S HOUSE IN THAT REGARD, BECAUSE THAT'S ACTUALLY WHERE THE VIEW IS, OUT TO THE LAGOON WHICH WOULD ENHANCE PROPERTY VALUES. SO, I'M ASKING MY OTHER BOARD MEMBERS, YOU KNOW, HOW DO YOU CONSIDER THAT?

>> MY QUESTION WOULD BE ARE THERE ANY REQUIREMENTS THAT YOU CAN NOT BLOCK A NEIGHBOR'S VIEW WHETHER IT'S A CHURCH OR LAKE OR

ANOTHER BIG HOUSE? >> NOT ON BUILDABLE. IF IT'S 35 FEET, TWO-STORIES, 45 SETBACK FROM THE BACK, YOU COULD BUILD WHATEVER YOU WANT, IT'S YOUR PROPERTY.

>> AND A FOUR-FOOT FENCE. >> AND A FOUR-FOOT FENCE. YES.

BUT, HOW DO YOU CONSIDER WHETHER YOU ALLOW LESS OF A SETBACK IN THE FRONT WHEN IT WON'T IMPEDE THEIR VIEW AND IT'S AT THE END OF THIS -- I MEAN, IF YOU LOOK AT THAT, YOU COULD SEE IT'S A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT SITUATION IN TERMS OF WHERE THE LOTS SIT AND THE OTHER HOUSES AND THE SETBACK WOULD BE PRETTY CONSISTENT WITH THE OTHER HOUSES.

>> I GUESS, ONE THOUGHT IS THAT, FOR LIKE, ROTILE, AND SALANO, AND CORONA, THE ROADS, FOR EXAMPLE, I I LIVE ON RUTILE, THE ROAD IS 22 FEET WITH THE CURB. SO, THE FIRST 18 IS RIGHT-OF-WAY AND I HAVE ANOTHER 40-FOOT SETBACK. SO WHEN DRIVING ALL DOWN THE STREET THAT'S WHAT EVERYBODY HAS. WHEN YOU DRIVE DOWN CORONA, THAT'S WHAT THAT HAS EXCEPT FOR THE HOUSES BUILT PRIOR TO '65. ADDITIONALLY, THOSE ARE MINOR COLLECTOR ROADS, CORONA, AND SALANO ARE CONSIDERED COLLECTOR ROADS. I WOULD BE LESS INCLINED TO HAVE HOUSES CLOSER TO THE ROADWAY THERE AN ON A DEAD-END OR A CUL DE SAC. AND THE OTHER PEOPLE NOT IN FAVOR OF THE HOUSE BEING PULLED CLOSER TO THE ROAD IS BECAUSE THEY HAVE THEIR HOUSES FURTHER SETBACK WHICH IS A DIFFERENT LOOK. AND THAT, YOU KNOW, IT'S AN AESTHETIC. SO, IT'S A QUESTION OF HOW MUCH YOU HAVE VALUE THAT AESTHETIC WHICH

IS IN THE CODE. >> DO YOU HAVE APP DIFFERENT OPINION ON LOTS ONE AND TWO GIVEN THE SHAPE OF LOT ONE?

>> FOR ME, AS I SAID, THE TRIANGLE LOT HAS A HARDSHIP BECAUSE IT IS A TRIANGLE. IT IS UNDER SIZED. THE LOT WITH THE POOL DOES NOT HAVE A HARDSHIP IN MY OPINION.

>> OKAY. >> IF YOU WERE TAKING THE HOUSE DOWN, YOU COULD ALSO MOVE THE POOL. AND, I DO THINK YOU COULD SLIDE THE HOUSE BACK FURTHER SO YOU DON'T NEED TO HAVE IT AS CLOSE TO THE FRONT. BUT I'M WILLING TO LISTEN TO OTHER THOUGHTS. I MEAN, YOU COULD MOVE IT, THE ARGUMENT IS THAT THE ONE TREE AND YOU COULD PUT MORE SQUARE FOOTAGE AT THE FRONT

IF FOR THAT ONE TREE. >> OKAY. AND YOU WERE ASKING US TO VOTE ON THESE TOGETHER? LOTS ONE AND TWO? NOT

SEPARATELY? >> I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT WAS

AN OPTION TO TELL YOU THE TRUTH. >> WE COULD TALK ABOUT THAT.

[00:45:05]

>> WE COULD ACTUALLY APPROVE ONE WITHOUT APPROVING TWO. I MEAN, WE COULD MODIFY THE VARIANCE TO REFLECT. AND JANE, YOU ASKED A QUESTION ABOUT BLOCKING SOMEONE'S VIEW. I APPLAUD THE FACT THEY THOUGHT OF IT AND CONSIDERED THEIR NEIGHBORS, ARE THERE OTHER SOLUTIONS, MAY BE SO, BUT I THINK IT'S GREAT THAT THEY EVEN THOUGHT OF IT. THAT'S GOOD.

>> ONE OTHER QUESTION, ON COULDN'T QUITE READ THE DIAGRAMS, WHAT IS THE ORIGINAL SQUARE FOOTAGE?

>> THE CURRENT HOUSE? >> YES.

>> JUST UNDER 5,000 SQUARE FEET.

>> UNDER 5,000? >> YES.

>> SO, YOU ARE ADDING 600 FEET THAT PROBABLY FURTHER COMPLICATE

THE SITUATION, IS THAT RIGHT? >> WELL, WE'RE ADDING TWO

HOUSES TOTAL, SO... >> I MEAN IN REGARDS TO, LIKE

THE POOL. >> YES, WE ARE CHANGING THE CURRENT HOUSE ON TWO LOTS TWO HER HOUSE WHICH IS ABOUT 5600 IF WE WERE ABLE TO GET THE VARIANCE. SO, YES. IT WOULD BE

A LARGER STRUCTURE. >> I MEAN, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE COMPROMISE COME BACK AND I'M NOT SURE HOW.

>> WE NEED TO WAIT FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.

>> OKAY. >> I HAVE ONE MORE QUESTION.

ONE DOESN'T EXTEND FURTHER FORWARD THAN THE EXISTING HOUSE.

>> FURTHER TOWARDS THE ROAD? >> CORRECT.

>> IT DOES. OH, THE OLD HOUSE? >> YES. THE CORNERS LINE UP.

IT APPEARS TO BE ALMOST EXACTLY. >> IT'S PRETTY CLOSE, YES.

IT'S VERY -- SO OUR CURRENT HOUSE IS FACING WESTERLY. SO IT'S HARD TO DRAW A LINE WITH THE VEGETATION AND THE ROAD THERE AND SEE EXACTLY. THE FRONT CORNER, GO BACK TO THE AERIAL VIEW, THE FRONT CORNER OF OUR EXISTING HOUSE ON THE ROOF LINE IS FORWARD OF THE 40-FOOT SETBACK. THE STRUCTURE OF ACTUAL HOUSE IS 5 FEET BEYOND THAT FRONT CORNER OF THE ROOF OVER HANG. SO, YES, IT IS ABOUT THE SAME AS WHERE YOU SEE THAT FRONT CORNER, BUT I COULDN'T SAY EXACTLY BUT IT'S CLOSE.

>> OKAY. THANK YOU. >> OKAY. ANY PUBLIC COMMENT?

>> WE DO HAVE THE OVER LAY MAP. >> IS IT LATER ON? THE SITE PLAN? THERE WE GO. SO, I DOTTED IN THAT EXISTING FRONT CORNER, IT DOES SORT OF MATCH UP THE ROOF OVER HANG. THE ROOF OVER HANG STANDS, I DON'T KNOW HOW THEY DID IT, THAT'S NOT A VARIANCE ON RECORD BUT THAT DOES EXTEND TO BEYOND TO WHERE THAT LOT TWO CORNER OF THE STRUCTURE IS. BUT YOU SEE I ALSO HAVE THE FRONT PORCH AREA WHICH EXTENDS A LITTLE FURTHER AS WELL.

>> YEAH, I WISH I HAD A POINTER.

[INDISCERNIBLE] >>

>> SO YOU COULD SEE THE DOTTED LINE WHERE THE EXISTING STRUCTURE AND FRONT PORCH IS AND THAT GOES TO THE CORNER OF THE GARAGE ON THE HOUSE ON LOT ONE. BUT, I DO HAVE ANOTHER TWO OR THREE FEET FORWARD WHERE THE FRONT PORCH WOULD BE IF I WERE TO BE GRANTED THE VARIANCE ON THE HOUSE ON LOT ONE.

>> SO, VISUALLY FROM THE ROAD, THE HOUSE ON LOT ONE WILL NOT BE ANY CLOSER THAN THE EXISTING HOUSE.

>> I DON'T BELIEVE SO. BUT, AGAIN, THAT'S SUBJECTIVE.

>> GIVE OR TAKE. >> OKAY. GREAT.

>> AND I KNOW SHE'S BROUGHT UP THIS POINT, BUT WE'RE GOING TO RELOCATE THE DRIVEWAY FURTHER DOWN SALANO, THAT SHOULD

ALLEVIATE TRAFFIC ISSUES. >> AND, I UNDERSTAND THE BULK OF THE HOUSE WILL BE SIMILAR IN STYLE AND PLACEMENT AS THE OTHER HOUSES ON THE STREET IT'S JUST FOR THE GARAGE ON THE HOUSE ON LOT TWO THAT WE'RE ASKING FOR THAT IN ORDER TO PLACE THE THREE-CAR GARAGE THERE. AND WE'LL HAVE SOME VEGETATION, AND

[00:50:04]

>> OKAY. >> ARE THERE ANY PUBLIC

COMMENTS? >> KITTY?

>> DO I SIT DOWN? >> YES. TAKE A BREAK. GOOD

JOB. >> KITTY, 111 OCEAN COURSE DRIVE. I'M NOT A RESIDENT OF SALONO BUT I'VE BEEN A RESIDENT OF PONTE VEDRA FOR YEARS. MY CONCERN IS THE CLOSENESS TO THE ROAD BECAUSE ALL THE OTHER HOMES ON THAT SIDE ARE 40-100 FEET BACK. IF YOU LOOK AT THE HOMESITES, IT'S USUALLY THE GARAGE THAT MEETS THE 40, BUT THE HOMES ARE ANYWHERE FROM 50-100 FEET BACK OFF THE ROAD, SO THIS IS IS SIGNIFICANT DIFFERENCE IF IT'S 20-24 FEET. AND MEGHAN IS RIGHT, THAT'S A COLLECTOR ROAD, A STANDARD RIGHT-OF-WAY. PONTE VEDRA BOULEVARD IS A MUCH WIDER RIGHT-OF-WAY. EVEN SAN JUAN DRIVE IS A BIGGER RIGHT-OF-WAY. THERE'S NO DIFFERENCE OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY THAN ANY OTHER NEIGHBORHOOD. EVEN IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD ON OCEAN DRIVE, WE HAVE A 50 FOOT RIGHT-OF-WAY AND THAT'S A SMALL, NO-OUT LET NEIGHBORHOOD, SO THAT'S STANDARD. BUT, I WILL SHOW AN EXAMPLE AS THE SMALLER LOT IS WHAT YOU WOULD CALL A NON-CONFORMING LOT AT 13,000 SQUARE FEET. IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD, WE'RE ZONE R-2, WE'RE THE ONLY SINGLE FAMILY LOTS R-2 IN THE ZONING DISTRICT.

OUR LOTS WERE PLATTED A LONG TIME AGO. THEY'RE 60 BY 140 WHICH IS A TYPICAL R-1 C OR R-1 D PLAT THE LOT. IN THE CASE OF MY NEIGHBOR, SHE WAS ABLE TO ADD ONTO HER HOME AND BECAUSE HER LOT WAS NON-CONFORMING, SHE WAS NOT ALLOWED TO CHANGE THE FRONT SETBACK BUT SHE WAS ALLOWED TO HAVE EXTRA BACK SETBACK INSTEAD OF 40, I THINK IT WENT TO 25. AND THAT DIDN'T REQUIRE A VARIANCE. THAT WAS JUST SOMETHING IN THE CODE. SO, THAT'S AN EXAMPLE OF HOW A NON-CONFORMING LOT WHERE SHE WAS ALLOWED TO BUILD A 4,000 SQUARE FOOT HOUSE ON AN 8400 SQUARE FOOT LOFT. WHICH IS LESS THAN THIS 13,000 SQUARE FOOT LOT. MY ONLY CONCERN IS THE CLOSENESS, I THINK BOTH STRUCTURES CAN GO BACK ENOUGH WHERE THEY WOULD NOT BE JUTTING OUT THAT CLOSE TO THE

ROAD. THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU.

>> ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENT? >> OKAY. DISCUSSION AMONGST

THE BOARD MEMBERS. >> I GUESS, A TECHNICAL QUESTION TO OUR ATTORNEY, IS ARE WE ALLOWED TO APPROVE A PORTION

OF THIS VARIANCE? >> YES, YOU ARE, YOU COULD CONSIDER THE INFORMATION PRESENTED AND MAKE A DECISION

ACCORDINGLY. >> OKAY.

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

ABOUT THAT BEFORE WE VOTE. >> MY THOUGHT IS LOT ONE WE MIGHT CONSIDER APPROVING THE VARIANCE ON THAT, LOT TWO, I

PROBABLY WOULD NOT. >> YEAH, I'M LOOKING IN ALL THE DISCUSSION BOILS DOWN TO, IS IF WE COMPLETELY CLEARED THESE LOTS WE WOULD HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH NUMBER TWO, NUMBER ONE WOULD NEAT THE VARIANT TO BUILD. THAT'S THE BOTTOM LINE. AS MEGHAN SAID THERE'S NO HARDSHIP IN NUMBER TWO, THE SIGNIFICANT

[00:55:01]

ADDRESS. >> OKAY. OTHER COMMENTS?

>> RICHARD? >> WELL, MY LAST COMMENT ON THAT IS IF WE'RE LOOKING AT THE SMALLER LOT ARE WE SAYING THAT HOUSE IS ABLE TO BE BUILT IF IT WERE TO BE PUSHED BACK WITHIN THE REQUIREMENTS? IF SO, THEN, WHY ARE WE VOTING TO ALLOW IT TO COME FORWARD WITH OF THE VARIANCE IF IT INDEED CAN BE BUILT AS IT'S OWN PAPER THERE. IT JUST NEEDS TO BE MOVED BACK?

>> IF IT GETS PUSHED BACK TOO FAR, IT'S TOO CLOSE TO THE WATER, EVEN THOUGH IT'S WITHIN THE SETBACKS.

>> YOU MEN, TOO FAR IT GOES INTO ANOTHER VARIANCE?

>> YES. >> OKAY.

>> WELL, THE OTHER THING IS YOU COULD CHANGE THE DESIGN OF THE

HOUSE. >> YES.

>> YOU DON'T HAVE TO HAVE IT THIS PRECISE SHAPE.

>> RIGHT. >> YOU BUILD A HOUSE THAT FITS THE LOT, WHICH WOULD BE A TRIANGLE-SHAPED HOUSE.

>> OKAY. >> ANY OTHER DISCUSSION?

>> DO I HEAR A MOTION? >> I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE IT PVZBAR 21-10 HOOKS TRAIN THERE WILL HONLY TO ACCOMMODATE LOT ONE. AND I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S STILL BASED ON THE FOUR FINDINGS OF SUBJECT AND CONDITION AS LISTED IN THE

STAFF REPORT. >> IT WOULD BE.

>> SO I'M SEPARATING THEM AND MAKING A MOTION TO APPROVE THE

SECTION OF LOT ONE. >> AND NOT APPROVE IT FOR LOT

TWO. >> AND NOT INCLUDING LOT 2 IN

THIS MOTION. >> DO I HEAR A SECOND?

>> SECOND. >> OKAY. READY TO VOTE?

>> OKAY. WE HAVE THREE YESES, AND TWO NOS. IT TAKES FOUR YESES TO HAVE YOUR VARIANCE APPROVED. I'M SORRY TO SAY YOUR VARIANCE DID NOT GET APPROVED. WHAT ARE THE OPTIONS AFTER THIS?

>> DO WE MAKE A MOTION NOW FOR THE OTHER VARIANCE REQUEST?

>> OKAY. I WOULD MAKE A MOTION TO DENY PVCVAR 2021 REQUEST VARIANCE FOR THE SETBACK FOR LOT TWO. SO, THIS IS A MOTION TO

DENY THAT REQUEST FOR LOT TWO. >> LOT TWO.

>> FOR LOT TWO. >> OKAY. I THINK YOU NEED A

SECOND? RIGHT? >> YES.

>> YES. >> OKAY. DO WE HAVE A SECOND?

>> SECOND. >> YES IS TO DENY IT.

>> OKAY. >> VOTING.

>> OKAY. WE HAVE ALL HAVE DENIED THE VARIANCE. SO, THE

VARIANCE IS NOT APPROVED. >> AND, WHAT ARE THEIR OPTIONS

FROM HERE? >> IF THEY WOULD LIKE TO APPEAL, THERE'S ANY OTHER MOTION THAT YOU WOULD LIKE TO MAKE ON

LOT ONE HOWEVER. >> DOES SOMEBODY WANT TO MAKE A

MOTION ON LOT ONE? >> I THINK WE ALREADY

DISAPPROVED THAT. >> WELL, A MOTION FAILED.

>> >>

(INAUDIBLE) >>

>> IT I WAS WONDERING IF I COULD MAKE A MOTION TO ALLOW THE FAMILY TO SUBMIT MODIFIED PLANS THAT ARE MORE OF I GUESS A COMPROMISE THAN JUST A YES OR NO. I THINK THERE'S A LOT OF ROOM HERE TO STILL GET WHAT YOU WANT TO GET, WE ALL WANT TO GET EVERYTHING WE CAN, THE VIEW, THE POOL, THE THREE-CAR GARAGE. I THINK IT'S WORTH GIVING THEM AN OPPORTUNITY TO MAY BE COME BACK

[01:00:03]

>> MR. PATTON, I THINK THAT THERE ARE PROVISIONS THAT HAVE A YEAR-LONG WAITING PERIOD AFTER THE DENIAL, UNLESS THAT IS

WAIVED. >> UNLESS THERE ARE SIGNIFICANT CHANGES TO THE VARIANCE. O, A MINE MORE MODIFICATION OF THE DESIGN ON THE LOT WOULD NOT FIT IN THAT STIPULATION.

>> OKAY. WE DID IT FOR THE PUD FOR THE STORAGE, WAS THAT

BECAUSE IT WAS A PUD? >> WE DIDN'T VOTE ON IT. AND THAT WAS CONTINUED TO THE SECOND HEARING.

>> THIS IS A CASE WHERE WE HAVE NOT APPROVED THE VARIANCE. SO, IT'S BEEN DISAPPROVED AND IT HAS TO WAIT A YEAR UNLESS THERE ARE SIGNIFICANT CHANGES. IN THE OTHER CASE, WE HAD A CONTINUANCE AND IT ALSO IN THE CASE OF GO BACK TO NEVER MIND.

>> A CONTINUANCE, OKAY, SO WE COULDN'T DO THAT SAME STRATEGY?

>> SO, I DO HAVE A QUESTION, SO, THE LOT ONE WAS NOT APPROVED BECAUSE THERE WEREN'T ENOUGH VOTES BUT NOT BECAUSE THE MAJORITY DID NOT APPROVE IT, THEY STILL CAN'T COME BACK FOR A YEAR, RIGHT? IT'S STILL A YEAR REGARDLESS?

>> NO, YOU HAVE TO FOUR VOTES WHICH IS AN INTERESTING QUIRK OF OUR BOARD, IT'S NOT A MINORITY, BUT A MAJORITY. ANY OTHER MOTIONS THAT WOULD HELP THIS SITUATION OUT?

[2. PUD21-6 The Approach at Ponte Vedra.]

>> I DON'T KNOW. >> DOES THAT RULE STILL APPLY WHEN YOU HAVE TWO MEMBERS MISSING?

>> YES. >> AND IF YOU ONLY HAD FOUR MEMBERS IT WOULD HAVE TO BE UNANIMOUS WHICH IS NOT GOOD WHEN YOU ONLY HAVE FOUR MEMBERS. SO, OKAY. OKAY. I'M SORRY TO SAY, BUT YOUR VARIANCE IS NOT APPROVED. THANK YOU SO MUCH FOR

YOUR PRESENTATION. >> OKAY. WITH THAT WE CAN MOVE ONTO AGENDA ITEM 2. PUD 20-6 THE APPROACH THE PONTE VEDRA. I WANT TO BE SURE THAT EVERYBODY'S GOTTEN THE ADDITIONAL E-MAIL RECEIVED FROM THE WITH THAT SAID, I WOULD LIKE EVERYBODY TO ADDRESS WHETHER THEY HAVE TALKED TO ANYBODY AND OR VISITED THE

SITE? >> I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE PROPERTY AND MIKE HERSBERG CONTACTED ME BY PHONE THREE DAYS AGO, SAID I WAS GOING TO HOLD MY COMMENTS UNTIL THE MEETING TODAY. AND THAT WAS IT. AND I READ AN E-MAIL LATE THAT JANE PASSED ON THROUGH SHERRY. OR THE. I DID VISIT THE SITE, AND MICHAEL HERTZBURG ALSO CALLED ME AND SENT ME AN ATTACHMENT OF THE MODIFIED PRESENTATION, BUT WE DIDN'T DISCUSS ANYTHING OF SUBSTANCE. AND I SPOKE WITH KITTY WHO LIVES IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD ACROSS THE STREET AND I WANTED TO KNOW ABOUT THE NEIGHBOR'S OPINIONS ABOUT THE VARIANCES AND HOW IT WOULD IMPACT THAT NEIGHBORHOOD AND SHE TOLD ME THAT THE NEIGHBOR'S MAIN CONCERNS WERE NOISE FROM HAVING OUTDOOR DINING AND TRAFFIC WERE THE MAIN CONCERNS. ESPECIALLY WITH THE ROOFTOP CROW'S NEST BEING REQUESTED AND ALSO HAVING THE TRAFFIC OF A HOTEL. AND

THAT WAS IT. >> I ATTENDED THE ARK MEETING SO, I HEARD THE PRESENTATION THERE. SO I'M FAMILIAR WITH THE PROJECT AND I DRIVE BY THE LOT FREQUENTLY AND I WOULD SAY IT HAS VEGETATION ON IT. THAT'S ABOUT IT. AND I RECEIVED A PHONE CALL BUT I DECLINED TO PURSUE ANY ADDITIONAL COMMENTS

AND QUESTIONS. SO THAT'S IT. >> I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE SITE, SEPTEMBER 8TH, MID AFTERNOON, I HAD A CONVERSATION WITH MICHAEL HERTZBERG WHO GAVE ME A BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT AND ASK IF I HAD ANY QUESTIONS AND I SAID ALL THE

[01:05:01]

>> I RECEIVE ADD PHONE CALL, I DECLINED TO DISCUSS ON THE PROJECT AND I'VE HAD NO FURTHER CONTACT.

>> STAFF, ANY COMMENTS? >> NO, SIR.

>> I'M THE CHIEF OPERATING OFFICER OF PLAYMEN ENTER PRICES AND RESIDENT OF PONTE VEDRA BEACH. THIS IS A MARKET THAT I LIVE IN, PASS BY, I'VE BEEN WITH SLAYMEN INTERPRICES OVER TWO YEARS AND THIS IS ONE OF THE LAND HOLDINGS THAT WE'VE OWNED FOR ROUGHLY 15 YEARS. THE SITE WAS ACQUIRED IN CONCERT WITH ABADJACENT SITE MANY YEARS AGO IN A NOW DESOLVE PARTNERSHIP.

THE REMAINDER OF THE SITE WAS APPROVED BY THE COUNT COMMISSION FOR A STORAGE FACILITY SOME WEEKS AGO. THIS ADJACENT SITE IS REALLY THE ENTRANCE TO ST. JOHNS COUNTY. THE SITE WAS REQUIRED TO BE A RETAIL SITE, I.E., BIG BOX OR SOME OTHER FORM, WE TALKED TO A VARIETY OF RETAILERS, GROCERY STORES AND HOME IMPROVEMENT AND SO FORTH, ALL OF WHICH, OBVIOUSLY HAD NOT BEEN ACTED UPON. CONTEXT UALLY. CONTEXTUALLY. AND IN PONTE VEDRA BEACH. THE SITE, LENDS ITSELF TO A HOTEL USE WHICH IS WAS DETERMINED PARTICULARLY BY ME, AS A USE THAT OFFERED A DESTINATION GIVEN THE FACT THAT IT TUCKS AROUND BEHIND THE PONTE VEDRA TITLE MORGAN STANLEY BUILDING. SO, IT DOES SUFFER SOMEWHAT FROM VISIBILITY FROM THE MAIN ROAD WITH A NARROW FRONTAGE AND A I GUESS, I CAN CONTROL THIS HERE? YES. OKAY.

THANK YOU. SO, LET ME JUST FIRST GO TO THE SITE. SO, YOU COULD SEE HERE ALONG THE THIS AREA HERE, THIS IS A-1 A SO IT HAS A RESTRICTIVE LIMITED FRONT END SITE SO THE ABILITY FOR COMMERCIAL APPLICATIONS IS SOMEWHAT LIMITED BY ACCESS OF THE MAIN ROAD IN WHAT WOULD TYPICALLY BE A RETAIL SITE. SO WE CAME UP WITH A PLAN FOR A RETAIL THAT SITS PERPETRATOR PEN D CONSTRUCTION JOBS UNDER 100.

AND LONG-TERM, BETWEEN THE ENTIRE PROPOSAL, 250 PERMANENT JOBS TO THE SITE. THE PURPOSE OF OUR APPROACH HERE IS FROM A HOSPI HOSPITAL ELITE PERSPECTIVE, THE ROOM TAX WOULD BE A BENEFIT. THE HOTEL MARKET IN PONTE VEDRA BEACH IS SPLIT BETWEEN THE INN AND SPA AND THE MARRIOTT CONCERT CENTER WHICH WHAT WE WOULD CONSIDER TO BE THE HIGHEST END HOTELS IN THE MARKET. MORE CONFERENCE LARGE FUNCTIONS ET CETERA. FROM THERE ALL YOU HAVE IS THE HILTON GARDEN INN, WHICH IS A SIX-STORY BUILDING, FIVE ARE ROOMS, THE BASE OF WHICH IS THE LOBBY. THAT HOTEL IS WHAT I WOULD CALL A LOWER PRICED OR MODERATELY PRICED HOTEL. IN ADDITION TO THE NORTH ON JACK'S BEACH YOU HAVE THE HAMPTON INN WHICH IS A LOWER MODERATELY PRICED HOTEL. WITHIN THIS MARKET WE BELIEVE THERE'S AN

[01:10:02]

YOU WOULD COME IN AND PARKING WOULD CONTINUE TO THE REAR OR THESE RETAIL AND RESTAURANTS HERE WOULD BE PARKING TOWARDS THE FRONT OF THE PROJECT. THIS IS JUST A PROTOTYPICAL FLOOR PLAN OF POTENTIAL WAYS WITH THAT IT WOULD BE DESIGNED WITH OTHER UPSCALE BOUTIQUE TOSS OUT DOOR SPACES RIGHT NOW THE ONLY REAL OUTDOOR SPACE IS LOCATED AT THE VERANDA. YOU HAVE THE OUTDOOR

[01:15:02]

>> THESE ARE SOME PROJECTS THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED ELSEWHERE IN THE UNITED STATES THAT I PERSONALLY WORKED ON WITH OUTDOOR ACTIVATION, THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT IS CALLED THE STREET IN CHESTNUT HILL MASSACHUSETTS LOCATED ON ROUTE 9 WHICH IS AKIN TO A-1-A. AND THIS SITS PARALLEL TO THE STREET. HERE YOU SEE CHILDREN'S ACTIVATION, GREEN SPACE, OTHER TYPES OF EXCITING DWELL TIME ELEMENTS AND REALLY KIND OF FULFILLING THE IDEA OF HOW THAT CAN BE PROGRAMMED OFFERING A REAL DESTINATION TO THE MARKET. THIS IS ANOTHER PROJECT IN LYNNFIELD, MASSACHUSETTS CALLED MARKET STREET WITH ADDITIONAL OPEN SPACE. HERE YOU COULD SEE A LARGE PUBLIC GREEN WHICH WOULD BE SIMILAR TO WHAT WE WOULD BE DELIVERING HERE WITH OTHER TYPES OF ENGAGING ELEMENTS AND A WALKABLE VILLAGE LIFESTYLE WHICH IS WHAT WE ASPIRE HERE AS YOU COULD SEE IN OUR PLANS. LASTLY, HERE, YOU SEE AT THE TURN WHERE THE HOTEL AND THE COMMERCIAL BUILDING COME TOGETHER, WE WOULD BE PROGRAMMING THAT JUNCTION POINT BETWEEN THE BUILDINGS SO THAT THE PROJECT IS NOT MERELY A SINGLE-FACED PROJECT BUT ACCESSIBLE AND ENGAGING THROUGHOUT. FROM A BALCONY PERSPECTIVE, YOU SEE INSPIRATIONS FOR OUTDOOR EMNATIONS COMING OFF OF THE FLOOR, NOT A ROOF TOP BUT A BALCONY COMING OUT OF THE RETAIL WHICH IS CERTAINLY THE WANT IN TODAY'S DAY AND AGE AND IF YOU'VE LEARNED ANYTHING IN THE PAST 18 MONTHS IS OUTDOOR SPACE ASK A PREMIUM. WE WANTED A PROJECT THAT WOULD OFFER THIS TYPE OF ACTIVITY AND ABILITY TO KIND OF CONGREGATE. FROM AN ARCHITECT ARCHITECTUAL PERSPECTIVE. HERE YOU COULD SEE PROJECTS THAT ARE LOCAL TO THE MARKET AND OTHERS THAT ARE INSPIRING IN TERMS OF HOW THE PROJECT MIGHT, WOULD.

HERE IS A RENDERING OF THE PROJECT. THIS WAS THE STORAGE FACILITY RECENTLY APPROVED. HERE WE'LL BE COMING IN OFF A 1 A DIRECTLY, YOU'LL HAVE YOUR OPEN GREEN HERE, THE PROJECT IS CALLED THE APPROACH AT PONTE VEDRA BEACH, NOT ONLY BECAUSE YOU'RE APPROACHING AND ENTERING ST. JOHNS COUNTY, RIGHT HERE, THE CURRENT WELCOME TO THE COUNTY SIGN SITS HERE TODAY, AND ALSO PLAYING ON THE GOVERNMENT TERMINOLOGY OF THE MARKET BOTH IN THE APPROACH, THE T, THE FAIRWAY, THE GREEN, AND THEN HERE AT THE TURN. SO, WITH THIS, COMES SOMETHING THAT HAS LOCAL RELEVANCE AND IS ENGAGING NOT ONLY TO THOSE WHO LIVE IN PONTE VEDRA BEACH, BUT THOSE JOINING THE PROJECT OFF OF JTB.

WE DO ALSO BENEFIT FROM BEING RIGHT AT THE HEAD OF THIS STATE HIGHWAY INTERCHANGE. SO AS NOT TO EMBED TRAFFIC DEEPER DOWN THE ROAD AND TO ALLOW THAT TYPE OF ACTIVITY TO OCCUR AT A DESIGNED INTERCHANGE WHICH IS WHAT IT'S INTENDED TO DO. THAT SAID, YOU'VE GOT YOUR LARGER RETAIL BASE, THIS IS A 20-THOUSAND SQUARE FOOT, TWO-STORY RETAIL BUILDING, GROUND FLOOR RETAIL, RESTAURANTS ABOVE WITH THEIR OUTER PATIOS, RIMMING THE EDGE BOTH TO THE SOUTH AND TO THE EAST. HERE WE HAVE THE HOTEL.

THE HOTEL WE'RE PROPOSING IS THREE LEVEL WHICH IS THE MINIMUM NEEDED TO PROVIDE A HOTEL OF THE TYPE OF SCALE AND STANDARD THAT THE MARKET WOULD NEED. YOUR ARRIVAL POINT FOR THE HOTEL AND A SELF-PARKED ENVIRONMENT HERE. ONE ELEMENT WE DID ADD, WHICH IS THIS EAGLE'S NEST OR CROW'S NEST AS WAS REFERRED TO, WHICH IS A NON-PERMANENT ROOF ACCESSED AREA FOR THIS FLAGSHIP RESTAURANT HERE YET TO BE DETERMINED. WE ARE IN DISCUSSIONS WITH ROUGHLY HALF A DOZEN WELL-KNOWN LOCAL AND NATIONAL RESTAURANTS ON THAT

[01:20:16]

AGAIN, THE HOTEL WILL HAVE VERY RESTRICTED VISIBILITY, FROM THE MAIN ROAD AND EVERYTHING YOU SEE HERE WILL BE DRAMATICALLY SHIELDED AND LIMITED IN IT'S VIEW CORRIDORS FROM A1A. WE HAVE RENDERINGS OF WHAT WOULD HAPPEN, THIS PARTICULAR THING WOULD BE OPAQUE AND TEMPORARY, BUT YOU WOULD HAVE YOUR RETAILERS SPILL OUT AND SECOND FLOOR RESTAURANTS HERE, OBVIOUSLY WE'RE LOOKING WEST AND THE HOSPITALITY COMPONENT TO THE REAR. THIS NOW IS LOOKING EAST, LOOKING BACK TOWARD A-1A. TO SHOW SCALE AND A REPRESENTATIVE OF THE ARCHITECTURE THAT WE SELECTED HERE. THIS IS AT THE TURN WHERE THE HOTEL WOULD HAVE A LARGE BALCONY LOOKING OVER THE PUBLIC SPACE WITH THE ABILITY FOR THESE TWO BUILDINGS TO WORK TOGETHER. THE BEE TEAK HOTEL WOULD NOT OFFER A SIT-DOWN RESTAURANT WITHIN IT. BUT BECAUSE OF THE HOTEL BECAUSE OF SIZE WOULD RELY ON THE ADJACENT BUILDING TO SATISFY IT'S ACCOMMODATIONS AS A HOTEL FOR FOOD BEVERAGE AND OTHER TYPES OF THINGS, A HOTEL OCCUPANT TO RELY ON. THEREFORE IN THEORY AND IN PRACTICE, REDUCING TRAFFIC ON THE ROAD BY COCOONING THAT RESERVATION DENT AND ALLOWING THAT ECONOMIC ACTIVITY TO OCCUR HERE AS OPPOSED TO LEAVING THE COUNTY OR GOING ELSEWHERE. THIS WOULD BE INSIDE THE LOBBY OF THE HOTEL LOOKING IN AN EASTBOUND FASHION. AND HERE IS A VIEW INTEREST THE STREET. THIS IS A VIEW IF YOU WERE ON THE NORTHBOUND SIDE OF A-1A LOOKING WEST TOWARD THE PROJECT. SO, HERE YOU HAVE A LIMITED WINDOW OF THE HOTEL BECAUSE IT WRAPS BEHIND OTHER COMMERCIAL PROJECTS HERE. AND YOU HAVE THE SHORT END CAP OPPORTUNITY HERE. THESE BUILDINGS ARE ALL CAPPED AT 35 FEET, WHICH IS THE REQUIREMENT AND AS YOU COULD SEE, CONTEXTUALLY GIVEN WHERE THE MARKET IS HEADED, THE ROOFTOPS ARE SMALLER AND MORE MANAGEABLE AND THE BUILDINGS ARE MORE DISCONNECTED AND VILLAGE LIKE THAN ANYONE LARGER MONOLITHIC EXPRESSION. PONTE VEDRA TITLE AND MORGAN STANLEY HERE, THIS WOULD BE AS YOU'RE HEADED NORTH, YOU COULD SEE THE STRUCTURES COMING INTO PLAY. HERE WE DID A DRONE STUDY OF THE SITE, THIS IS THE SITE LINES AT 20 FEET, 25 FEET, 30 FEET, 35 FEET. SO, NO COASTAL VIEWS, THIS IS NOT A PROJECT THAT WILL LOOM OVER THE NEIGHBORHOOD. IT FITS WITHIN THAT 35 FOOT REQUIREMENT. HERE YOU GO, 40, STILL NO REAL ABILITY TO LOOK DOWN ON OR SEE NEIGHBORS THAT WAY. WITH THIS, I'LL HAND IT TO MEMBERS OF THE TEAM TO DISCUSS THE WAIVERS REQUESTED TODAY SPECIFICALLY.

AND I'LL STAY FOR MORE QUESTIONS AND FOLLOW UP.

>> GOOD AFTERNOON, MARK SHELTON WITH KENLY HORN AND ASSOCIATES WE'RE THE PLANNERS AND ENGINEERS FOR THIS PROJECT AND I'M AT 12740 GRAND BAY PARKWAY WEST ZITI 2350, JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA, I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF SLAYMEN ENTERPRISES, IT'S MY PRIVILEGE TO GO THROUGH THE WAIVERS QUICKLY AND I'LL TRY TO BE QUICK ABOUT IT. TO ACCOMMODATE THIS PROJECT ON THIS UNIQUELY SHAPED PARCEL WE NEED TO REQUEST EIGHT WAIVERS FROM THE CODE. I'LL GO THROUGH THEM ONE AT A TIME. THE FIRST ONE IS

[01:25:01]

HELP BREAK UP THE BUILDING. >> THE THIRD REQUEST IS FOR THE SETBACK. THE OVERLAY STATE THAT IS WHEN YOU HAVE COMMERCIAL BUILDING, A THREE-STORY BUILDING NEXT TO A RERESIDENTIALLY ZONED PROPERTY, YOU HAVE TO BE 300 FEET BACK. IN THIS CASE WE'RE NEXT TO A MULTIFAMILY PUD, AND WE'RE A HOTEL, TWO USES THAT ARE SOMEWHAT SIMILAR ONLY BY THE AVERAGE NIGHT STAY. ALSO I WANT TO MENTION THAT WE DO HAVE 100% CAPACITY LANDSCAPING AND A FOUR FOOT WALL AND THE CONFIGUREMENT OF THIS PARCEL LENDS TO THIS ISSUE AS IT'S MORE OF AN L-SHAPE AS OPPOSED TO A RECTANGLE OR SQUARE. HERE YOU COULD SEE AS WE SPEAK TO THAT DISTANCE, THE ACTUAL BUILDING TO BUILDING SEPARATION WILL BE MORE THAN 100 FEET ON TOP OF THE BUFFERS ALREADY THERE. THE FOURTH WAIVER IS THE SCENIC EDGE ALONG A 1 A, THE LDC STATE THAT IS WE NEED TO HAVE 30 FEET BUT WE'RE PROPOSING 20 FEET, THIS IS BECAUSE WHEN WE DEDICATE A RIGHT-OF-WAY TO DOT IT TOOK AWAY A GOOD AMOUNT OF AREA THAT WE COULD HAVE DEVELOPED TO HELP WITH THIS TO MAKE OUR PROPERTY MORE DEVELOPABLE. THE 20 FEET IS ALSO CONSISTENT WITH THE SOUTH PROPERTY AS YOU COULD SEE, THEY ALSO HAVE 20 FEET OF BUFFER. WITHIN THIS 20 FEET, WE WILL KEEP ALL THE REQUIRED FENCING, ALL THE REQUIRED SHRUBS, LANDSCAPING, GRASS AREA AND FROM RIGHT-OF-WAY TO BUILDING, WE'LL STILL BE OVER 100 FEET. THE 5TH WAIVER IS ABOUT PHIL. THE OVERLAY STATES THAT YOU HAVE ANY FILL TO THE PROPERTY IN THE PONTE VEDRA AREA YOU HAVE TO ASK FFOR A WAIVER.

IN THIS CASE WE'VE GIVEN A COLORIZED DIAGRAM OF HOW THIS IS A HOLE THAT WE HAVE TO FILL TO BRING IT UP TO LEVEL AND WE HAD TO BRING IT OVER THE FLOOD ZONE AND ONE OF THE THINGS HERE, WE HAD TO BRING FILL TO THE SITE SO THAT IT MATCHED THE NEIGHBORING SITES. THE INTENT OF THE OVERLAY IN THIS REGARDS IS SO THAT YOU DON'T ADD SO MUCH FILL TO CONTRADICT THE HEIGHT REQUIREMENT. THEY DIDN'T WANT YOU TO BUILD UP FIVE OR 10 FEET OF DIRT AND PUT UP YOUR 35 FOOT BUILDING. WE'RE NOT TRY DOG THAT, WE'RE JUST TRYING TO MAKE THIS BUILDABLE. THE REQUEST FOR REDUCE THE LAND BUFFER TO THE NORTH, NOW THAT THAT'S A WAREHOUSE, THAT GOES AWAY. HERE'S THE NEW ONE. THE NEW 6TH WAIVER IS FOR THE SIGNAGE. AND IN THIS CASE, THE OVERLAY STATES THAT YOU NEED FIVE ACRES TO GET 80-SQUARE FEET OF MONUMENT SIGN IN FRONT. WE HAVE APPROXIMATELY, ALMOST 4.3, SO WE'RE BARELY OFF. ONCE AGAIN, IF WE DIDN'T DEDICATE THE RIGHT OF WAY TO THE DOT, WE WOULD HAVE THAT FIVE ACRES, SO WE'RE ASKING THAT WE STILL GET THE 80 SQUARE FEET OF SIGNAGE INSTEAD OF THE 35, BECAUSE WE'LL HAVE MULTIPLE TENANTS IN THIS MIXED USE PROJECT WHICH ADDS TO TRAFFIC. FURTHER MORE, THE SETTLEMENT THAT SPLIT THIS PROPERTY ORIGINALLY, GAVE US FIVE ACRES,

[01:30:02]

MICHAEL ORSBURG. >>

>> MY ADDRESS IS 1 SLAYMAN PARKWAY. I WAS A PRACTICING PLANNER AND I'VE BEEN IN PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT FOR ABOUT 15 YEARS.

MR. SHELTON'S DONE AN EXCELLENT JOB WITH REGARD TO THE WAIVERS AND I WANTED TO GIVE HISTORY ON THE PARTITION OF THIS PROPERTY.

THIS PARCEL WAS NOT CHOOSEN BY THE DEVELOPER IT WAS ASSIGNED TO THE DEVELOPER BY THE JUDGE. COMING WITH THAT IS THE JUDGE SAYING THESE TWO PEOPLE CANNOT GET ALONG JUST LIKE A MARRIED COUPLE BEING DIVORCED, THEREFORE NO CONNECTIONS AND NO INNER CONNECTIONS BETWEEN THE PROPERTIES AND THAT SET AS DIFFERENT DEVELOPMENT MATERIAL FOR AN INDIVIDUAL LOOKING TO DEVELOP THE PROPERTY, I THINK WHAT WE'VE DONE IS CREATE SOMETHING THAT DOES AFFORD PONTE VEDRA A SENSE OF PLACE. IT GIVES A NAME PLATE FOR PONTE VEDRA BEACH. IT CREATES THE OUTDOOR AREA THAT PEOPLE ARE DESPERATE FOR. AND I THINK IT CONTAINS A LOT OF THE TRIPS AS WELL AS THE DOLLARS BEING SPENT OUTSIDE OF THE COUNTY. YOU NOW HAVE THE ABILITY BY COMBINING USES TO HAVE PEOPLE NOT ONLY STAY AT THE HOTEL BUT USE THE RETAIL. SIMILARLY, PEOPLE AT THE RETAIL WILL GO TO THE RESTAURANTS, YOU'LL HAVE THAT COMBINATION WHICH YOU OTHERWISE WOULDN'T HAVE IN A SINGLE-USE DEVELOPMENT. I WOULD TELL YOU THE WAIVERS ARE JUSTIFIABLE AND DO MAINTAIN THE SPIRIT AND INTENT OF THE OVERLAY. THE REZONING CRITERIA WITHIN THE YARE LAY SPEAK TO SEPARATION AND BUFFERING. THERE'S GOOD SEPARATION AND GOOD BUFFERING AND GOOD SAFE USE OF THE OVERLAY ROADWAYS IS ANOTHER CRITERIA, THE LEFT-HAND TURN IS PARAMOUNT, THE FDOT HAS REVIEWED AND APPROVED THAT. AND THAT'S EVALUATED BY THE TRAFFIC PROFESSIONALS AND IT INCLUDES THE VISUAL AND AESTHETIC ENHANCEMENT, I THINK THE PROJECT REALLY E VOKES A SENSE OF PRIDE. I WOULD DIRECT YOUR ATTENTION TO THE SURROUNDING USES WAS BE ADJOINED. IN THIS CASE THE BE THE NEW SALE STORAGE. REALLY WHAT YOU HAVE IS A TRANSITION FROM A REGIONAL SHOPPING PLAZA WITH A ARE TARGET CENTER AS SHOWN IN THE UPPER RIGHT-HAND CORNER A LARGE COMMERCIALIZED BUILDING OF 38,000 SQUARE FEET AND 30 FETAL AND TRANSITION TO A HOTEL AND LIMITED COMMERCIAL USE. I THINK YOU'RE CREATING THE NECESSARY TRANSITION OF INTENSITIES THAT OCCUR DOWN TO A MORE RESIDENTIAL AND BUSINESS PARK SCALE TO THE SOUTH AND SOUTHWEST. WITH THAT, I'LL STAND BY FOR QUESTIONING. THANK

YOU SO MUCH. >> QUESTIONS?

>> I THINK MEGHAN HAS A QUESTION.

>> IN YOUR DOCUMENT THAT WAS GIVEN TO US, WHICH IS CALLED THE APPROACH AT PONTE VEDRA BEACH, AND ON PAGE 12, IT TALKS ABOUT

[01:35:14]

THAT SEEMS LIKE IT'S VERY HIGH. >> THROUGH THE CHAIR, MADAM, I UNDERSTAND THE CONCERN AND I ASSURE YOU THERE'S NO INTENT TO RAISE THE ELEVATION OF THE SITE ANYMORE THAN NECESSARY. WE'RE AWARE OF THE CRITERIA SPEAKING TO THE LIMITATION OF THE FILL.

AND WE'RE NOT USING A SURFACE POND. AND THERE ARE SEVERAL REASONS FOR NOT USING THE SURFACE POND. SADLY, THAT HIPPED THE STORE IS LOCATED AT THE AREA OF THE LOADING DOCKS.

AS VEHICLES ARE BACKING UP AND BEEPING, THAT NOISE WILL BOUNCE OFF THAT WATER AND GO INTO THOSE NEIGHBORHOODS. WE TRIED TO ELIMINATE THE SURFACE WATER OF ELIMINATING THE NOISE. BY REDUCING THAT, WE'RE REDUCING THE NOISE THAT WOULD BOUNCE OFF THAT WATER. HOWEVER, AS MR. SHELTON SPOKE TO EARLIER, THE REAL ISSUE IS GETTING TO THE NECESSARY ELEVATION FOR THE STATE, LOCAL, AND FEDERAL CODES THAT WE NEED FOR THE BUILDING TO SIT ON. I BELIEVE A STUDY WAS DONE AND SHARED WITH THE COUNTY PREVIOUSLY ABOUT HEY, REGARDLESS OF THE OVERLAY, YOU HAVE TOLL MEET THE MINIMUM STANDARDS FOR ELEVATIONS.

>> I WOULD LIKE TO ASK ANOTHER QUESTION. WHAT'S THE ELEVATION

OF THE FIRST FLOOR? >> THE BOTTOM LINE WAS, I WAS TRYING TO FIGURE OUT, HOW HIGH WILL THIS BE? BECAUSE, AN UNDER GROUND, I COULD SEE LITTLE PIPES AND BIG PIPES. I'M TRYING TO SEE HOW FAR ABOVE THE ADJACENT APARTMENT BUILDING?

>> UNTIL WE GET INTO THE IT ACTUAL ENGINEERING OF THAT, I CAN'T TELL WHAT THOSE WILL BE, I CAN ONLY ASSURE YOU THAT WE DON'T WANT TO BRING IN FILL THAT'S EXTREMELY EXPENSIVE IT WOULD BE THE MINIMUM NECESSARY TO MEET THE COUNTY'S STANDARD FOR ELEVATION AS WELL AS NECESSARY TO COVER THAT DEVICE.

>> AND I'M JUST GOING TO SKIP TO TRAFFIC. I DID WEIGH THROUGH THE EXCITING PROJECTED TRAFFIC VOLUMES AND I GOT TO A POINT WHERE I WAS TAKING A NUMBER OF. IT WAS TALKING ABOUT 227 NET NEW TRIPS. AND, IT TALKED ABOUT THE METHOD FOR MITIGATING THE PROJECT TRAFFIC IMPACTS WHICH WERE GOING TO BE BASICALLY FROM M MARLIN TO THE COUNTY LINE. AND I DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW THAT WOULD WORK. SO, THE PEOPLE WHO ARE BASICALLY IN THE RESIDENTIAL AREA ACROSS THE STREET FROM THIS, WHICH IS AVENUE C IS THEIR EXIT, THERE'S GOING TO BE LIKE, 67 ADDITIONAL U-TURNS, IT SOUNDS LIKE IT'S REALLY GOING TO ADD A LOT OF TRAFFIC AND THE MITIGATION, I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT -- DO THESE NEIGHBORS BENEFIT FROM THE MITIGATION OR

HOW DOES THAT WORK. >> THANK YOU FOR THAT QUESTION.

AND THROUGH THE CHAIR, ACTUALLY YES, THESE NEIGHBORS BENEFIT FROM THE MITIGATION. THE DIRECTIONAL LEFT ON THIS SITE.

CURRENTLY ANYBODY TRAVELING NORTHBOUND THAT WANTS TO GO BACK TO ANY OF THE BUSINESSES INCLUDING THE SELF STORAGE WILL

[01:40:02]

>> AVENUE C >> CORRECT, THE DRIVEWAY TO THE SOUTH WILL LENGTHEN THE LEFT-HAND TURN AS PART OF OUR DIRECTIONALIZED LEFT WOULD WE LENGTHEN THEIR'S.

>> DO YOU HAVE A DRAWING TO SHOW THIS?

>> I ACTUALLY DO. I APOLOGIZE, I'VE GOT ONE BACK THERE I COULD

BRING FORWARD IF I MAY APPROACH. >> THERE'S ACTUALLY, THE MIDDLE TABLE THERE, YOU COULD ACTUALLY LAY IT DOWN AND IT COULD BE PROJECTED ONTO THE SCREENS. IN YOU COULD ENLARGE IT A LITTLE BIT FOR THOSE OF US WITH VISION CHALLENGES.

>> WHAT YOU'RE SEEING IS THE LEFT THAT WE WOULD INSTALL THERE AT A 1 A. WHAT WILL BE IMPROVED AS WE SAID AT AVENUE C. THIS LEFT-HAND TURN BAY BEING EXTENDED THAT WOULD BE LONGER ALLOWING MORE STORAGE FOR THOSE PEOPLE MAKING THAT LEFT INTO AVENUE C. THOSE RESIDENTS. THAT AVOIDS THE NEED FOR ANY OF THESE TRIPS THAT OTHERWISE WANTED TO GO TO EITHER OF THESE TWO LOCATIONS FROM HAVING TO MAKE THE U-TURN AT THE INTERSECTION HERE. IT'S A DIFFICULT U-TURN HERE.

>> BUT, THE QUESTION I HAD, IF I'M EXITING AND I'M A HOTEL GUEST THAT WANTS TO GO TO JACK'S BEACH I WOULD MAKE A RIGHT-HAND TURN AND GO OVER TO MAKE A U-TURN BY AVENUE C TO GO NORTH?

>> CORRECT, THERE IS THE POTENTIAL TO ALLOW FOR THAT U-TURN OR GO TO THE NEXT LIGHT OR USE PROFESSIONAL DRIVE. BUT WHY WOULD WANT TO GO TO JACKSON BEACH WHEN YOU'RE AT PONTE VEDRA BEACH? [LAUGHTER]

. >> SO THAT WOULD BE THE SAME AS

IT IS TODAY? >> NO, THAT'S JUST.

>> THAT WOULD ALSO BE THE SAME TRAFFIC?

>> DO YOU WANT ME TO ASK SOME QUESTIONS?

>> CAN I OFFER THAT WOULD BE THE SAME TRUCK TRAFFIC REQUIRED FOR THE RETURN OF ANYTHING GOING TO THE SELF-STORAGE, THAT WOULD HAVE TO MAKE A SIMILAR MOVE TO RETURN THAT VEHICLE WHICH IS MORE PROBLEMATIC THAN A STANDARD SIZED VEHICLE MAKING THAT MOVE.

>> I HAVE QUESTIONS, JOHN, IF I MAY.

>> SO, I'M ON THE CITIZEN'S TRAFFIC TASK FORCE AND I HAD TROUBLE FOLLOWING THIS. DID I MISS SOMETHING? THIS SAYS THAT THIS IS OFFICE AND RETAIL. WHAT ABOUT THE HOTEL TRAFFIC? WAS THAT ALSO TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION?

>> YES, MA'AM, IT IS, AS A MATTER OF FACT THE FDOT

>> AND THE 245 EMPLOYEES WOULDN'T BE THERE ALL AT THE

SAME TIME? >> NEW YORK CITY AND I THINK 245 IS THE BULK OF ALL THE EMPLOYEES FOR ALL THE DIFFERENT THINGS PERMANENT POSITIONS. THE NEW TRIPS CREATED DURING THE PEAK HOUR, OBVIOUSLY THAT'S THE TIME THAT CONGESTION IS THE HIGHEST AND WHAT YOU'RE SEEING IS A 50/50 SPLIT, 76 IN, AND 70 OUT. YOU'RE LOOKING AT A CAR EVERY MINUTE THAT WOULD BE ADDED TO THIS THAT'S OTHERWISE NOT THERE, THAT WOULD BE THE BE LEFT-HAND TURN IN AND OR A RIGHT-HAND TURN OUT OR IN.

THAT'S NOT A LOT OF TRAFFIC CONSIDERING THAT PEAK HOUR.

>> OKAY. SO THIS IS YOUR TOTAL HOTEL OFFICE?

>> I'M NOT SURE THAT YOU ARE LOOKING AT, BUT THERE WAS A TRAFFIC STUDY DONE AND EVEN WITH THE HOTEL THERE, YOU'RE LOOKING

AT 146 TRIPS IN PEAK HOUR. >> AND THIS WAS USING 2017 ST.

JOHNS COUNTY'S TRAFFIC STUDY DATA?

>> MY RECOLLECTION IS YES. >> YOU KNOW WE'RE A LOT WORSE

NOW THAN 2017? >> ACTUALLY, TRAFFIC VOLUMES HAVE DROPPED UNFORTUNATELY BECAUSE OF COVID. BUT I KNOW

WERE YOUR GOING. >> MY OTHER QUESTION IS, THE RESIDENTS THAT ABUT THIS PROPERTY BEHIND, HOW WERE THEY CONTACTED? HOW WERE THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE THERE CONTACTED TO LET

[01:45:05]

>> THROUGH THE CHAIR, THEY WERE SENT NOTICES THROUGH THE COUNTY?

>> INDIVIDUALLY? >> THAT I CAN'T SPEAK TO.

>> CHRISTINE, DO YOU KNOW WHETHER THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE IN THE APARTMENTS WERE SENT A NOTICE OR WAS THE MANAGER OF THE

COMPLEX SENT A NOTICE? >> I DO NOT KNOW THE ANSWER TO THAT QUESTION. I CAN LOOK IN THE APPLICATION.

>> I KNOW THE PROPERTY NEXT TO IT, WHICH, BY THE WAY, WE RECOMMENDED TO DENY THE SELF-STORAGE FACILITY. BUT I KNOW WHEN I TALKED TO THE PEOPLE AT THOSE APARTMENT BUILDINGS, THEY DID NOT GET NOTICE, IT WAS THE MANAGER THAT GOT A NOTICE

THAT THAT WAS BEING PROPOSED. >> IT WOULD HAVE BEEN THE

PROPERTY OWNER. >> SO, IT WOULD BE THE PROPERTY OWNER, BUT NOT THE PEOPLE WHO ACTUALLY LIVE IN THE APARTMENT

BUILDINGS? >> RIGHT. UNLESS THE APPLICANT CAN VERIFY WHERE THE SIGNS WERE POSTED.

>> IF I COULD OFFER, THE PROJECT HAS BEEN SOMEWHAT IN THE BAKING PROCESS FOR A FEW YEARS. WE HAVE BEEN IN FRONT OF THE ARC SEVERAL TIMES, AS A MATTER OF FACT, GOING BACK INTO 2020, 2019 IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, I DO KNOW THAT THE MANAGER OF THE APARTMENT COMPLEX DID SHOW UP TO THE MEETINGS EARLIER ON AND SO SHE WAS AWARE AND INDICATED THAT SHE WAS AWARE THAT IT WAS GOING ON AND WE'VE HAD NO COMMENTS FROM THE COMMUNITY.

>> MY QUESTION IS HOW DO THE RESIDENTS, I MEAN, THE MANAGER'S

ONE THING, BUT YOU DON'T KNOW. >> I'LL TELL YOU WE HAVE TWO RESIDENTS OF THAT COMMUNITY THAT ACTUALLY WORK FOR US. AS A MATTER OF FACT THEY USED THE ABILITY TO HOP TO THE TARGET CENTER AND THEY'RE EXCITED TO BE ABLE TO WALK OVER HERE.

>> AND THE SITE HAS BEEN TAGGED FOR QUITE SOME TIME.

>> AND I'M HAPPY THAT MEGHAN ASKED THE QUESTION ABOUT THE FILL BECAUSE I WAS TRYING TO ADD EVERYTHING UP AND WHEN I ADDED IT ALL UP, IT LOOKED LIKE THIS IS ZONED RESIDENTIAL AND IT'S BETWEEN TWO OTHER RESIDENTIAL AREAS AND ABUTS THE APARTMENTS BUT DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET ARE SINGLE-FAMILY HOMES. I REALIZED THOSE APARTMENT BUILDINGS WILL HAVE A 270-FOOT BUILDING, I THINK IS THE SIZE OF THE HOTEL, VERSUS 120 FEET, AND IT COULD BE UP TO 43 FEET HIGH WITH THE FILL, AND IF IT'S ZONED COMMERCIAL, IT SHOULD BE 120 FEET AS OPPOSED TO 270. THAT'S WHY I WAS ASKED IF THE RESIDENTS KNOW OF THAT.

>> NOT KNOWING WHAT THEY'RE ELEVATIONS ARE. THOSE PROPERTIES ARE HIGHER THAN OUR PROPERTY AT THIS POINT.

>> I WALKED AND LOOKED AT THEM WHEN WE WERE CONSIDERING THE SELF-STORAGE BUILDINGS, AND THOSE DIDN'T SEEM TO BE TALLER THAN THE 35-FEET, DOES ANYBODY KNOW?

>> THEY ARE ABOUT 35 FEET. >> CORRECT.

>> SO, THIS WILL BE EIGHT FEET. >> AS YOU COULD SEE LOOKING TO THE WEST FROM THE SITE, EVEN AT 40 FEET, YOU CAN'T SEE THE ROOF

LINES. WE'RE PROPOSING THE 35. >> YOU STILL WOULDN'T SEE IT AT 45 FEET. AND THERE'LL BE A 100% BUFFER ALONG THE PROPERTY

BOUNDARY. >> THE $5.7 MILLION IN ANNUAL WAGES CAUGHT MY ATTENTION. THAT'S IMPRESSIVE FOR ANYONE.

BUT WHEN I DID THE MATH IT'S AN $11 PER HOUR AVERAGE WAGE, WHAT KINDS OF JOBS YOU ANTICIPATE WILL BE PAID $11 AN HOUR, WHY DO YOU BELIEVE THAT WOULD BE GOOD FOR PONTE VEDRA BEACH?

>> NO, I DID 245 DIVIDED INTO THE $5.7 MILLION AND 2,080 HOURS PER YEAR, ASSUMING THEY WERE FULL TIME JOBS. I GUESS

RESTAURANTS DON'T PAY BENEFITS. >> TYPICALLY, RESTAURANTS PAY A

SERVER'S WAGE WITH TIPS. >> OKAY.

>> SO, THERE'S A BIT OF A DISCOUNT THERE.

>> OKAY. SO THEY'RE NOT REAL HIGH-PAYING JOBS, LIKE SOME OF THE OTHER BUILDS THAT WE HAVE IN PONTE VEDRA THAT ARE OFFICE BUILDINGS, DOCTOR'S OFFICES, ATTORNEYS, TITLE COMPANIES, THAT

KIND OF THING. >> ALL OF WHOM NEED PLACE TOSS

STAY, EAT, AND SHOP. >> AND EVEN THERE WAS A TITLE COMPANY, THE ATTORNEYS DO VERY, VERY, WELL, BUT THE OFFICE STAFF ISN'T MAKING THE SAME SALARIES THE ATTORNEYS ARE.

>> THEY DON'T, THAT'S ABSOLUTELY CORRECT. ABSOLUTELY

[01:50:03]

HAD, JOHN, THANK YOU. >> RICHARD? IT INTERESTING THAT THE I FIND- CONTRACTORS ARE IN CONVERSATION WITH FDOT AND GRADING NEW TURN LANES AND THAT SUCH AND TO ME IT SEEMED LIKE THERE'S BEEN A REAL BATTLE WITH THE FDOT ON NEW TRAFFIC LIGHTS AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE. IF YOU ARE OUT DURING BOTH RUSH HOURS, MOST OF THE INTERSECTIONS THAT HAVE BUSINESS THERE AND NO LIGHT IT'S IMPOSSIBLE TO MAKE ANY SORT OF SAFE MOVE, PEOPLE MOVING SOUTH ON A 1 A, YOU GET 5 PEOPLE COMING FROM THE WEST SIDE, OVER THE MEDIAN. AND NOW, YOU HAD FIVE CARS SITTING IN THE U-TURN IN THE MIDDLE OF THE MEDIAN. I FIND IT INTERESTING THAT DOT IS WORKING OUT THE TURN LANES WITH YOU, BECAUSE THE BIGGER PICTURE SEEMS TO BE IF WE'RE GOING TO KEEP ALLOWING THESE BIG VARIANCES AND CHANGES, I THINK FDOT NEEDS TO COME UP WITH A MORE STRATEGIC PLAN FOR THAT PART OF A 1 A AND HOPEFULLY THAT ANSWER WOULDN'T BE SIX LANES OF TRAFFIC BECAUSE I THINK THAT WOULD COMPLICATE MATTERS FOR PEOPLE TO CROSS THREE LANES ACROSS THE MEDIAN AND TRY TO HEAD NORTH. SO, I HAVE A REAL HARDSHIP WITH THE TRAFFIC AND I KNOW AVENUE C IS ALREADY SUPER DANGEROUS TRYING TO GO SOUTH OR COMING ACROSS TO GO NORTH. AND, I JUST THINK THERE NEEDS TO BE A BETTER PLAN BEFORE WE START LETTING MORE BUSINESSES COME IN THERE AND THAT WAS MY MAIN ARGUMENT WITH THIS STORAGE.

AGAIN, I DIDN'T THINK A1A. YOU SAID YOU OWN PROPERTY IN THE AREA, WOULD YOU HAPPEN TO OWN ANY OF THE PROPERTY OVER THERE NEAR WORLD MARKET? WHERE WE HAVE NEW MINI STRIP MALLS THAT HAVE NOT GONE TO 100% CAPACITY SINCE THEY WERE BUILT.

>> SO, THE WORLD MARKET CENTER IN JACK'S BEACH?

>> THAT'S 100% LEASED FOR MANY YEARS.

>> WHERE WHISKY JACK'S IS. >> CORRECT.

>> PIER ONE JUST MOVED OUT AS A RESULT OF THEIR BANKRUPTCY AND WE'VE LEASED THEIR SPACE. THE CENTER'S 100% LEASED.

>> I THOUGHT THERE WAS A PLACE NEXT TO THE MEN'S STORE.

>> THERE WAS A BALL ROOM DANCING, WHICH REPRESENTS 2 AND-A-HALF OF THE TOTAL. THAT WENT OUT TWO MONTHS AGO. AND

THAT'S IN JACK'S BEACH. >> AND THEN NORTH TO WHERE HOME DEPOT IS AND ANOTHER LARGE STRIP MALL THAT ALSO SEEMS TO BE FLOUNDERING WITH GETTING PEOPLE IN THERE.

>> I CAN'T SPEAK FOR THE COMPETENCY OFE REGENCY CENTERS.

>> WOULD THIS BE THE STARBUCKS, OR.

>> NO, SIR, THOSE ARE DRIVE-THRU, AND WE WILL NOT HAVE

TOSE. >> AND WILL WE TRY AND USE

HOMEGROWN? >> 100%.

>> YES. >> OKAY. SO THERE WILL NOT BE

LIKE ANOTHER OUTBACK IN THERE? >> I WOULD ASPIRE SOMETHING OF MUCH HIGHER QUALITY. BUT NO, NOTHING LIKE THAT.

>> IS THAT ACTUALLY IN A DOCUMENT THAT SAYS WE WILL NOT

BE DOING THIS. >> SO, YOU WANT TO LIMIT

SPECIFIC NAMES? >> WELL, I DON'T WANT TO HAVE

THE COOKIE-CUTTERS COMING IN. >> BECAUSE OF THE CONSTRUCTION

[01:55:02]

>> THE OTHER THINK THING I WORRY ABOUT IS PEOPLE ABANDONING OLD STRIP CENTERS AND GO TO THE LATEST AND THE NEWEST, WHAT THAT DOES, OBVIOUSLY IS CREATE A VOID, POSSIBLE A MILE AWAY. AND YOU PULL THE CREAM OF THE CROP IN, AND THEN THESE CENTERS STRUGGLE BECAUSE THESE SHOPS ARE BRINGING IN 80% OF THE BUSINESS

FOR THAT STRIP MALL. >> FROM A COMMERCIAL LEASING PERSPECTIVE. WE HAVE NOT TARGETED ANY TENANTS NOR HAVE I SPOKEN TO ANY TENANTS CURRENTLY IN THE PONTE VEDRA BEACH MARKET.

>> WHAT'S INTERESTING HERE AS A LAND PLANNER TO LOOK ATTHE VERAA TO THE SOUTH AND IT IS OVERCROWDED AND IT SERVES THE SOUTHERN END OF THE PONTE VEDRA COMMUNITY. THIS IS NOW, AT THE NORTHERN END, SO YOU'RE ABLE TO TAKE THAT TRAFFIC AND SPLIT IT.

LET'S GO OH OUR LITTLE OUTDOOR VENUE HERE. I THINK AGAIN, YOU'RE SPLITTING THE TRAFFIC, THE PEOPLE OF PONTE VEDRA CAN SPLIT THE TRAFFIC AND GO TO TWO DIFFERENT DESTINATIONS. BUT SIMILARLY, YOU'RE ANCHORING THE CORRIDOR AT TWO ENDS. IF SOMETHING GOES BAD, IT'S A WELL STATED PATE YOU MADE, THOUGH.

>> IN ADDITION TO THAT IF YOU GO UP TO ATLANTIC BEACH, WHERE ONE OCEAN HOTEL IS, DOWN TO MICHAELER'S BEACH THAT'S A 12 AND-A-HALF STREAK OF WHAT'S COMMONLY KNOWN AS THE JACKSONVILLE BEACHES THIS SITE SITS AT THE CENTER OF THAT CORRIDOR WITH THIS BEING AT THE STATE HIGHWAY INTERCHANGE. SO ALL OF THOSE PARTICIPANTS THAT MAY BE COMING TO ST. JOHNS COUNTY FOR THIS TYPE OF PROJECT OR ACTIVITY WOULD NOT BE EMBEDDED OR CONTINUING IN A SOUTHERLY DIRECTION CONGESTING THE ROADWAYS, THEY WOULD BE AT THE FRONT DOOR AND LEAVING IMMEDIATELY THERE AFTER, AND NOT EXAGGERATING THEIR TRIPS INTO

THIS CORRIDOR. >> OKAY. AS FAR AS OUR BOUTIQUE HOTEL, DO YOU HAVE A CERTAIN CHAIN THAT YOU ARE LOOKING AT OR WILL IT BE TOTALLY CUSTOMED BOUTIQUE?

>> SO, WE DO HAVE COMMITMENTS FROM MOST MAJOR CHAINS. ALL OF WHICH, AND IF YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH HOW THE HOTEL IS EVOLVED, DEFUSION BRANDS, THIS WOULD NOT BE YOUR CLASSIC FLAGGED HOTEL, THIS WOULD BE LIKELY WHAT'S CALLED A SOFT BRAND WHICH IS SOMETHING THAT HAS IT'S OWN UNIQUE PROJECT IDENTIFIER BUT WORK WITHIN THE RESERVATION SYSTEM FOR THAT TYPE OF APPEAL WITHIN THE LARGER BRANDS TO ENGENDER THAT TYPE OF TRAFFIC

AND LOYALTY. >> ALL RIGHT. I HAD THE

>> I HEARD THE HOTEL RESTAURANT. BUT I THINK I HEARD YOU SAY THERE'S NOT A HOTEL RESTAURANT.

>> THERE'S NOT A TRUE RESTAURANT IN THE HOTEL.

>> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU.

>> QUESTIONS? >> OBSERVATION, A QUESTION.

ASSUMING ALEX COALLY HAS BEEN ABLE TO CLOSE ON THAT NORTH PARCEL. THIS SORT OF PROJECT FITS WITH WHAT THEY DO I WONDER IF THERE'S A HAUT THAT THAT COULD BE CONSOLIDATED AND USE THE ACCESS TO THE SHOPPING CERTAINTY.

>> THE PARCEL TO THE NORTH OF US BY ORDER OF THE COURT'S PARTITION DOES NOT ALLOW CONNECTION. IT'S NOT US SAYING

WE'RE UNWILL DOG THAT? >> EVEN AFTER IT'S BEEN SOLD

FROM THE BADGER FAMILY? >> EVEN AFTER IT WAS SOLD,

CORRECT. >> IT WAS A ARDUOUS AND LONG PROCESS AND THE JUDGE REALIZED, NEITHER PARENTS COULD GET ALONG AND AS SUCH THEY WERE NEVER TO SPEAK AGAIN, I GUESS.

>> OKAY. I WOULD LIKE TO COMPLIMENT MY BOARD MEMBERS THEY ASKED ALL OF MY PROPERTY IS CURRENTLY ZONED R-1

[02:00:01]

>> WE'RE ALREADY OVER THE PEAK HOUR THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT GENERATING FOR THE HOTEL ITSELF. YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT 10 TRIPS A DAY BUT WHEN YOU TAKE THE PEAK HOUR FOR THOSE, THAT'S ONLY THE 20, BUT REMEMBER IT'S UNDERLYING RESIDENTIAL D CATEGORY. THE FUTURE LAND USE HAS ALREADY IDENTIFIED YOUR HIGHEST DENSITY

IN THE COUNTY. >> SO SE RESIDENTIAL LOTS?

>> YES. AND FURTHERMOR, THE RESIDENTIAL LOTS WOULD NOT.

PEOPLE TRYING TO GET BACK TO THEIR HOMES, THEY WOULD NOW HAVE

TO U TURN AT THE PARKWAY. >> WOULD THEY NEED A WAIVER FOR

FLAT ROOFS? >> YES, SIR. WITH THE FLAT ROOFS, IT GETS A LITTLE OPEN TO INTERPRETATION, I SUPPOSE AS FAR AS HOW THAT FACADE THE FRONT OF THAT. WE CAN LEAVE IT TO THIS BOARD'S DISCRETION IF THEY THINK THAT'S NECESSARY.

>> IT LOOKS LIKE FLAT ROOFS. >> AND THROUGH THE CHAIR, IF I

MIGHT. >> YES.

>> WE DID LOOK AT THE PARCEL TO THE NORTH WHICH WAS APPROVED THERE IS A FLAT ROOF AND THERE WAS NO WAIVER FOR A FLAT ROOF, SO WE WERE ONLY FOLLOWING PAST PROTOCOL, IF THERE'S ONE REQUIRED WE ARE NOT OBJECTING TO ADD IT TO OUR WAIVER.

>> BUT ONE OTHER CONDITIONWISE THAT THEY WERE TO MAKE THE FRONT AWARE TO BE TWO STORIES. I REALIZE YOU'RE COMING IN A DIFFERENT DIRECTION, BUT NOT THE HOTEL. SO, THE HOTEL, IT LOOKS LIKE IT WOULD BE THREE STRAIGHT FLOORS.

>> MAY I ASK, THE RENDERING REVIEWED BY THIS BOARD CLEARLY SHOW IT'S THREE STORIES IN THE FRONT AND THREE IN THE BACK.

THERE WERE NO ELEVATION CHANGES ACROSS THE STRUCTURE, 37,000 SQUARE FEET FOR A TOTAL OF A LITTLE MORE THAN ONE HUNDRED THOUSAND. THE FAR. BUT I'M GOING TO LET THAT ONE LIE.

>> ACTUALLY, AS JANE POINTED OUT, WE DID NOT RECOMMEND THE

APPROVAL. >> I UNDERSTAND, BUT I'M SAYING THE REVIEWS WERE DONE, I'M JUST TRYING TO GET THE CONSISTENCY IN THE MANNER IN WHICH THEY WERE DONE.

>> WE BELIEVE THERE'S AMPLE OPPORTUNITY FOR FINISH AND OPPORTUNITIES TO GIVE THE BUILDINGS UNIQUE LOOKS FROM THE

GROUND PLAIN. >> I DO FEEL LIKE WE NEED TO SAY ANY APPROVAL BY US OR THE COUNTY OR ANY BUILDING HAS NO BEARING ON ANY FUTURE REQUEST FOR VARIANCES.

>> OKAY. WE WOULD LIKE TO GO TO PUBLIC COMMENT NOW PLEASE.

>> THANK YOU. OKAY. PUBLIC COMMENT?

>> GOOD AFTERNOON, KITTY, 111 OCEAN COURT DRIVE. AT THIS TIME I WOULD LIKE TO LET THE CHAIRMAN KNOW I'M HERE REPRESENTING MY NEIGHBORHOOD, AVALON, PONTE VEDRA, AVENUE C, THERE'S ABOUT 60 HOMESITES THERE AND 50 ARE DEVELOPED RIGHT NOW. AND, I'M HERE TO REPRESENT THEM. SO I'M ASKING FOR A LITTLE MORE THAN

THREE MINUTES. >> OKAY, YOU COULD HAVE MORE

THAN THREE MINUTES. >> THANK YOU. I WOULD LIKE THE RECORD KNOW THAT EVER SINCE THIS WAS PRESENTED TO THE ARCHITECT COMMUNITY BACK IN JULY, I WENT TO THAT MEETING AND I SPECIFICALLY ASKED THE COUNTY TO HAVE THE RENDERING TO SHARE WITH MY NEIGHBORS AND I WAS TOLD BY JACOB SMITH THAT SLAYMEN WOULD NOT RELEASE THOSE EVEN THOUGH IT WAS A P NOTICE THE PUBLIC HEARING THEY HELD IT BACK UNTIL YESTERDAY. I DIDN'T GET IT IN

[02:05:03]

MEETING. >> OKAY.

>> AS FAR AS THE APARTMENTS TO THE REAR, THAT NOTICE WENT TO THE OWNER IN NORTH CAROLINA. AND WHEN THIS FIRST CAME ABOUT, THE FIRST TIME, THAT NOTICE AGAIN, WENT TO NORTH CAROLINA FOR THAT ARCHITECT REVIEW COMMITTEE MEETING BEFORE COVID, AND THE MANAGER AT THAT TIME WAS A GENTLEMAN BY THE NAME RYAN, AND I CALLED TODAY, HE SAID THEY WERE NEVER NOTICED ON ANYTHING GOING ON AT THAT PROPERTY. SO, I'M NOT SURE WHAT MANAGER WAS AT THE FIRST ARK MEETING, I WAS THERE, THEY DIDN'T SPEAK, THEY MAY HAVE SPOKEN TO THE APPLICANT ON THE SIDE BUT AT THAT TIME IT WAS DEFINITELY A GENTLEMAN THAT WAS THE MANAGER FOR THOSE APARTMENTS TO THE REAR. BUT, AS I CONTINUE THERE ARE SO MANY VARIANCES. THERE ARE SO MANY OPPORTUNITIES FOR DISCUSSION THE FIRST THING I WOULD LIKE TO TALK ABOUT IS THE TRAFFIC. THE TRAFFIC STUDY INCLUDED IN YOUR PACTETTE THIS TIME AROUND IS THE SAME AS TWO YEARS AGO. THESE TRIP NUMBERS SHOW THAT HALF THE PEOPLE LEAVING WILL BE MAKING A U TURN AT AVENUE C. THEY'RE GOING TO WANT TO GO NORTH THAT MEANS THEY HAVE TO COME OUT, CROSS THREE LANES OF TRAFFIC, MAKE A U TURN SOMEWHERE. SOME MAKE IT CROSS TO THE TURN LANE, SOME MAKE IT IN THE MIDDLE, SOME GO ALL THE WAY AROUND. SO, YOU COULD HAVE FOUR CARS STACKED TRYING TO MAKE A U TURN AND WHAT DOES THAT DO TO THE PEOPLE TRYING TO GET OUT OF AVENUE C AND GO SOUTH? WE'RE DEADLOCKED IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. SO, THAT'S THE ISSUE WITH THE MEDIAN, THE INTERSECTION AVENUE C. THE INCREASE OF U TURNS. THERE'S NO U TURN LANE. THERE'S NO LANE WHERE THEY STAY IN THE MEDIAN TO MAKE A U TURN. THEY CAN GO ANYWHERE THEY WANT IN THAT MEDIAN TO MAKE THIS U TURN, AND THAT'S GOING TO CAUSE DIFFICULTY FOR PEOPLE COMING FROM THE SOUTH TRYING TO TURN LEFT INTO THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH OF PROFESSIONAL PARK. AND IT'S GOING TO MAKE IT IMPOSSIBLE FOR US TO COME OUT OF AVENUE C AND GO SOUTH. BUT IT IS GOING TO BE TRICKY FOR ANYONE COMING OUT, CROSSING THOSE THREE LANES OF TRAFFIC, MAKING A U TURN AND IF THEY HAD TO GET ON JTB THEY WOULD HAVE TO BE MAKING LANE SWITCHES. THEY MIGHT BE BETTER OFF GOING TO PONTE VEDRA LAKES.

MY CONCERN IS THESE NUMBERS ARE FROM TWO YEARS AGO AND I DON'T BELIEVE THEY'RE CURRENT NOT WITH ALL THE TRAFFIC THAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE. THE ISSUES THAT MY NEIGHBORS ASKED ME TO TALK ABOUT IS THE TRAFFIC BUT ALSO THE NOISE. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU REMEMBER, WHERE WHERE TRADER JOE'S IS RIGHT NOW, THERE WAS AN APPLEBEES. THEY HAD OUTDOOR DINING AND MUSIC. ALL WE HEARD WAS THE THUMP THUMP THUMP THROUGH ALL THE WOODS AND EVERYTHING, THAT MUSIC RESONATED INTO OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. SO, NOW, WE'VE LOST ALL THE TREES. WE HAVE ALL THESE HOMES, AND WE'RE GOING TO HAVE OUTDOOR DINING AND AN EAGLE'S NEST ABOVE OUR HOMES AND IT WILL BE ABOVE OUR HOMES AND IT'S WITHIN 300 FEET BECAUSE SOME OF THOSE PEOPLE GOT NOTICED THAT LIVE RIGHT THERE ON A1A, AND YOU DON'T GET A NOTICE UNLESS YOU LIVE WITHIN 300 FEET OF THE PROJECT. SO, THEY ARE GOING TO BE THE MOST CHALLENGED WITH NOISE COMING FROM THE OUTDOOR DINING AND THIS SO-CALLED EAGLE'S NEST THAT I BELIEVE IS OVER 35 FEET. I DON'T THINK IT SHOULD BE ALLOWED. I THINK THAT AMPLIFIES THE NOISE THAT WILL BE ENTERING OUR NEIGHBORHOOD ESPECIALLY WHEN THERE'S A WEST WIND. SO, AS A PERSON THAT'S LIVED IN PONTE VEDRA FOR SINCE THE MID-80S, I'M CONCERNED WITH THE AMOUNT OF WAIVERS BEING ASKED FOR. I JUST, THE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM IS, OKAY, I KNOW THEY WANT 120 ROOMS, WHAT IS THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THAT BUILDING? I'M JUST CURIOUS, WHAT DOES 120 ROOMS, I'VE KIND OF CONALCULATE BETWEEN 60-80, THEY'VE NEVER SAID IT BUT I THINK IT SHOULD BE PRESENTED TO THE BOARD THE

SQUARE FOOTAGE? >> 63,800.

[02:10:04]

>> BUT THE WAIVER SHOWS THIS PROJECT AS BEAUTIFUL AS IT IS, AND ALL THE TIME THEY CONSIDERED, THIS PROJECT IS TOO BIG AND TOO UNACCOMMODATING FOR THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES, IT NEEDS TO BE SCALED DOWN OR POSSIBLY PUT AT ANOTHER LOCATION. I LIKE THE IDEA, THEY'RE TRYING TO CAPTURE SOMETHING NOT IN THE AREA, BUT THERE'S JUST TOO MANY WAIVER AND TOO MANY VARIANCES THAT THEY'RE ASKING FOR AND I COULD GO ON AND ON. I'M WORRIED ABOUT THE LENGTH OF THE BUILDING AND THE SETBACK ON A1A, I DON'T AGREE WITH THE SETBACK. I KNOW THEY SAID THE PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH ONLY HAS THE 20, BUT THAT BUILDING'S ONLY ONE STORY, AND THEIR BUILDINGS WILL BE MUCH HIGHER. SO ANY BUFFER TO A1A WOULD BE BENEFICIAL TO MY NEIGHBORHOOD ANYWAY. THAT'S ALL I HAVE. THANK YOU.

>> OTHER SPEAKERS? >> NOBODY ELSE?

>> OKAY. DISCUSSION AMONGST THE BOARD MEMBERS.

>> JANE? >> I'M OKAY WITH MORE SHOPPING AND RESTAURANTS, WE NEED AS MUCH AS WE COULD BEAR IN PONTE VEDRA, IT'S A BRIGHT SHINY OBJECT TO PUT ON THE CHRISTMAS TREE HANGING ON A1A AND THE BEAUTIFUL GREEN SPACES. MY ISSUE IS THE ELEPHANT IN THE ROOM, THE THREE STORIES, THE HUGE BUILDING, UP AGAINST RESIDENTIAL AREAS, ACROSS FROM RESIDENTIAL, IN THE OVERLAY DISTRICT OUR PURPOSE AND INTENT OF THIS BOARD IS THE PROTECTION OF ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL USE TOSS PROPERTY.

SO, I GUESS THAT'S WHAT I'M THINKING OF, I'M NOT AGAINST STROBILATES, RETAIL OR DEVELOPMENT, BUT I THINK WE HAVE TO PROTECT OUR RESIDENTS AND I'M HEARING CONTROVERSY AROUND NOISE AND SIZE OF BUILDING AND UP AGAINST THE RESIDENTIAL AREA.

SO, I GUESS I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR FROM MY FELL BOARD MEMBERS.

>> I SHOULD HAVE ALLOWED THE APPLICANT TO MAKE REBUTTALLE

COMMENTS. >> CAN I ANSWER THAT QUESTION.

IT'S INTERESTING, THE PONTE VEDRA OVERLAY IS VERY CLEAR ABOUT THE COMPATIBILITY AND CONSISTENCY. AS A MATTER OF FACT IS HAS TO BE ON THE SAME SIDE OF THE ROADWAY TO BE CONSIDERED. OBJECT SITE SIDE OF A 6 HUB 2 FOOT RIGHT-OF-WAY. SO IT'S NOT A COMPARABLE YOU ARE PROHIBITED FROM COMPARING.

>> IT'S FOR NOTICE PURPOSES. BUT YOUR OVERLAY IS CLEAR THAT YOU ARE TO CONSIDER ONLY THOSE PROPERTIES ON THE SAME SIDE OF

THE STREET. >> SO, YOU HAVE RESIDENTS BUT YOU WANT TO REDUCE OUR SETBACK INSTEAD OF 50, YOU WANT 20 FEET, GET CLOSER, BUILD UP YOUR BUILDING.

>> THOSE BUILDINGS ARE 35 FEET ADJACENT TO US, AND THERE'S SIGNIFICANT BUFFER ON THEIR SIDE OF THE PROPERTY. UNLESS THEY TAKE DOWN THE TREES THAT THEY HAVE ON THEIR SIDE WHICH I DON'T THINK THEY WANT TO DO, THERE'S BUFFER BEYOND OUR SITE AND THE BUFFER INHERENT IN THAT PROPERTY THERE.

>> BUT IT'S NOT ACCORDING TO CODE. YOU ARE REQUESTING

SOMETHING LESS THAN CODE. >> THAT IS CORRECT.

>> 50 >> IF IT'S MORE THAN 2 STORIES,

IT WOULD BE 50. >> THE REAR BUILDING IN THIS CASE IS 92 AWAY FROM THE PROPERTY LINE.

>> AND IF THE CODE DOESN'T EVEN CONTEMPLATE A THREE-STORY BUILDING NEXT TO THIS RESIDENTIAL AREA. SO, IF YOU WERE GOING TO BE VERY ACCURATE, YOU WOULD HAVE TO EXTRAPOLATE IF A 2 STORY BUILDING IS 50, A THREE-STORY BUILDING WOULD BE

MORE THAN 50. >> I WOULD DISAGREE WITH THE EXTRAPOLATING, BUT I WOULD POINT TO WHAT HAS BEEN APPROVED AND REGARDLESS OF WHAT THAT BOARD DID FOR THE PROJECT, WHAT HAS BEEN APPROVED IS THE CONTEXT OF DEVELOPMENT IN THE AREA. AS A PLANNER, I'M CALLED TO EVALUATE THAT. YOU HAVE A THREE STORY BUILDING, 35 FEET IN HEIGHT. WHETHER IT LOOKS LIKE TWO OR LOOKS LIKE TORX IT DOESN'T MATTER, IN THIS CASE IT'S THREE, IT HAS THE LOOMING EFFECT. AND THERE'S NO BUFFER.

>> AND THE CODE IS VERY SPECIFIC THAT CONNECT NOT TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION ANY OTHER BUILDINGS IN THE AREA THAT HAVE BEEN APPROVED, ANY OTHER VARIANCES WHEN WE LOOK AT CURRENT VARIANCES BEING PRESENTED.

>> AGAIN, THEY'RE WAIVERS, MORE IMPORTANTLY, IN THIS INSTANCE YOU HAVE TO LOOK AT COMPATIBILITY, THAT'S WHAT'S

[02:15:03]

>> YOU WOULD LOOK AT ALL THREE SIDES, YOU WOULD LOOK AT THE APARTMENT BUILDING TO THE WEST, WHICH ARE TWO-STORY BUILDINGS, AND YOU'RE IMPLYING THAT WITH THE PROOF STRUCTURE, THEY'RE 35, NONE OF US KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THE HEIGHT IS, AND THE BUILDING TO THE SOUTH WHICH IS A ONE-STORY WHICH IS NOT 35 FEET. SO THAT THE MAJORITY OF THE BUILDINGS ADJACENT TO OUR PROPERTY ARE NOT

35 FEET. >> I WOULD DISAGREE WITH THAT

BUT GO AHEAD. THANK YOU. >> FROM A TRAFFIC PERSPECTIVE, THE PURPOSES OF A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT IS TO CREATE AN EXCHANGE OF USES. DRIVE BY ANY HOTEL AND HOW MANY CARS ARE DRIVING THROUGH THAT HOTEL DURING THE NORMAL DAY, THEY'RE MOSTLY NIGHTTIME TRIPS. MOST HOTELS ARE VACANT AND INTIVE DURING THE DAYTIME PARTS. SO YOU'RE LOOKING AT A 20,000 SQUARE RETAIL THAT IS PREDOMINANTLY CONTRIBUTING TO TRAFFIC THE MAJORITY OF THE DAY. WHEREAS THE HOTEL HAS A THIRD OF

A DAY PART USE. >> OKAY. ANY ADDITIONAL

REBUTLE? >> NOW IT'S TIME FOR DISCUSSION

AMONGST THE BOARD MEMBERS. >> JUST RESURRECTING MY QUESTION ABOUT PUTTING SUCH A HUGE BUILDING UP AGAINST A RESIDENTIAL AREA. THREE STORIES PLUS BUILD UP, POTENTIALLY ANOTHER EIGHT FEET SO IT'S 43 FEET, 3 STORIES, 270 FEET LONG AGAINST A RESIDENTIAL AREA AND WHAT THE OTHER BOARD MEMBERS THINK ABOUT OUR RESPONSIBILITY IN PROTECTING THE RESIDENTS THERE AND 20-FOOT BUFFER, THAT KIND OF THING. SO MANY WAIVERS BEING REQUESTED TO ALLOW THAT HOTEL. AND A HOTEL ALLOWING STRANGERS ACCESS EPIDEMIC AGAINST A RESIDENTIAL AREA.

>> MEGHAN? >> I HAVE THE CONCERNS THAT YOU HAVE IN PARTICULAR THE COUNTY HASN'T BEEN ABLE TO DO A GOOD JOB OF NOTIFYING THOSE INDIVIDUAL AFFECTED. THE SINGLE ORANGE SIGN ON THE FAR SIDE AND THEN THE LETTER TO THE OWNER.

IF THE OWNER DOESN'T COMMUNICATE TO THE TENANTS THEY NEVER FIND OUT ABOUT IT. WE HAVE TO IMAGINE OURSELVES AS A TENANT LIVING IN THAT BUILDING AND SUDDENLY THEY SEE THIS VERY LARGE STRUCTURE BEHIND THEM WHEN THEY USED TO HAVE A LOT OF GREENERY. AND THIS DEVELOPMENT DOESN'T HAVE MUCH GREENERY. IF YOU LOOK AT IT TOPOGRAPHICALLY, YOU SEE THERE'S ONLY A LITTLE GREENERY IN THE BUFFER AND AROUND THE EDGES, BUT IT'S A LOT OF PARKING SPACE AND HARD SURFACES. I BELIEVE THAT IN ORDER JUST TO HAVE THE IMPERVIOUS RATIO. THE GREENERY IS REALLY JUST NEXT TO THE RETAIL SPACE SO IT WILL BE A BIG

CHANGE. >> RICHARD, ANY COMMENTS?

>> NO? OKAY. MY COMMENT IS THAT THIS PARCEL WILL EVENTUALLY BE DEVELOPED. IT'S NOT GOING TO BE DEVELOPED AS RESIDENTIAL.

IT'S NOT GOING TO BE A LOW-DENSITY PROPERTY. IT'S A VERY EXPENSIVE PIECE OF PROPERTY AND SOMEBODY'S EVENTUALLY BUILD SOMETHING ON IT PERIOD. A LITTLE BIT OF OUR RECOMMENDATION IS WHAT DO WE RECOMMEND TO THE COUNTY COMMISSION TO APPROVE OR NOT APPROVE? AND REMEMBER, WE'RE NOT APPROVING OR NOT APPROVING, WE'RE JUST MAKING A RECOMMENDATION TO THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AS TO WHAT WE THINK THEY SHOULD DO. THAT'S WHAT WE GOT TO THINK ABOUT IS LOOKING AT THIS PROJECT, IS THIS PROJECT A GOOD USAGE FOR THIS PROPERTY? IS THIS PROJECT SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE GOOD FOR OUR NEIGHBORHOOD? YOU KNOW, WHATEVER GETS DEVELOPED WILL ADD TO TRAFFIC, IS TRAFFIC UNDER CONTROL IN PONTE VEDRA? PROBABLY NOT. IS THERE A CURRENT PLAN TO IMPROVE TRAFFIC IN PONTE VEDRA? YOU CAN ANSWER

THAT, CURRENTLY NO. >> IT'S AN IMPOSSIBLE TASK

[02:20:01]

REALLY. >> WITH THAT SAID, WE GOT TO FIGURE OUT WHAT TO RECOMMEND TO THE COUNT COMMISSIONERS AS FAR AS WHAT THEY DO WITH THE ZONING AND COHE DO WE WANT THIS AS A PUD AS OPPOSED TO JUST A PIECE OF PROPERTY BEING DEVELOPED.

WITH THAT, ANY OTHER COMMENTS? >> I GUESS, ONE OF THE QUESTIONS I HAVE IS THAT, OR REFLECTIONS, WE KNOW THAT FOR EXAMPLE, ON OTHER PIECES OF PROPERTY, WHICH ARE BEING DEVELOPED, THE CURRENT ONE IS THE GATE GAS STATION. THE GAS STATION CAME BEFORE US AND THEY PDIDN'T ASK FOR A PUD. THEY JUT STAYED WITHIN THE OUR BOARDS PURVIEW AND ASKED FOR VARIANCES AND THEIR PROJECT WAS APPROVED. WHEN PEOPLE COME AND ASK FOR A PUD, EVEN THOUGH THEY KNOW WHAT THE VARIANCES ARE WITH RESPECT TO OUR CODE, THERE IS SORT OF A DISREGARD FOR THE VALUE OF THE PONTE VEDRA ZONING DISTRICT REGULATIONS BECAUSE THEY WANT TO GO OUTSIDE OF THE, AND CREATE AN AREA THAT DOESN'T REALLY HAVE TO COMPLY WITH THE ZONING DISTRICT. SO, IN ANY KIND OF COMMUNICATION WITH THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, I WOULD SAY, WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE IS PEOPLE THAT ARE WILLING TO GO THROUGH A PROCESS WITH THE ZONING BOARD AND POSSIBLY WORK TOWARDS A SOLUTION WHICH COULD HAVE VARIANCES BUT COULD CREATE A COMMERCIAL SITE DEVELOPMENT THAT WAS CONSIDERATE OF THE ZONING REGULATIONS AND TRAFFIC AND THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE ACROSS THE STREET WHO'LL BE LARGELY AFFECTED. IT WILL BE A MORE COMMUNITY-ORIENTED APPROACH.

SO, MEGHAN, WITH THAT SAID, AND JOHN, WITH WHAT YOU SAID, I GUESS WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE IS THE BUFFER RETAINED BETWEEN ANY BUILDINGS AND THE RESIDENTS AND IN THE APARTMENTS TO ENSURE THAT IF TREES COME DOWN THAT THEY'RE NOT TAKEN DOWN BUT THAT THEY'RE PUT THERE BY THE DEVELOPER SO THERE'S A BUFFER THERE. SO, WHEN YOU TALK ABOUT WORKING WITH THE PLANNING ZONING AND PLANNING, IS TO TALK ABOUT THOSE THINGS. I KNOW WHEN WE CONSIDERED THE BUILDING NEXT DOOR, THEY DID COME BACK WITH A LOT OF CHANGES TO THEIR BUILDING TO TRY AND GET US TO APPROVE IT.

WITH WHAT OUR CONCERNS WERE AND ONE OF MY REAL CONCERNS HERE IS THE NOISE LEVEL AND THE PROTECTION OF THE RESIDENTS THAT

ABUT THIS DEVELOPMENT. >> OKAY. DO I HEAR A MOTION?

>> I'LL MAKE A MOTION. >> I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO RECOMMEND DENIAL OF PUD 2021-06, THE APPROACH OF PONTE VEDRA BEACH SUBJECT TO FINDINGS OF FACT AS LISTED IN

THE STAFF REPORT. >> A SECOND?

>> >> I'LL SECOND.

>> REMEMBER, VOTING YES SO TO VOTE FOR DENIAL.

[3. Ponte Vedra Zoning District Regulations - Diebenow Proposed Amendments.]

>> OKAY. EVERYBODY'S VOTED. IT'S 4-1 FOR DENIAL. WHICH MEANS THE DENIAL HAS BEEN APPROVED. WHICH MEANS A RECOMMENDATION IS TO NOT APPROVE IT TO THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS.

>> WITH THAT LET'S MOVE TO AGENDA ITEM THREE. WHICH IS THE PONTE VEDRA ZONING REGULATION, THE PROPOSAL OF AMENDMENTS.

[02:25:01]

>> DID I PRONOUNCE THAT CORRECTLY?

>> IF I COULD, I WOULD OBJECT TO US GOING THROUGH THIS AT THIS TIME BECAUSE IT'S COMPLETELY CIRCUMVENTS OUR USUAL WORKSHOPS TO DISCUSS THESE TOPICS AND I DON'T THINK IT'S THE APPROPRIATE VENUE TO VOTE ON SOMETHING AS ABSOLUTELY ACCOMPLISHED FACT WITHOUT A WORKSHOP TO PROPERLY LOOK AT ALL OF THESE CHANGES.

IN FACT, I WOULD MOVE THAT WE DENY THIS REQUEST.

>> I SECOND. >> SHOULDN'T WE HAVE DISCUSSION

BEFORE WE VOTE. >> NOW, YOU CAN HAVE DISCUSSION, SINCE A MOTION'S BEEN MADE AND SECONDED.

>> OKAY. >> I SAY WE HAVE DISCUSSION

BEFORE THAT. >> OKAY. WOULDN'T IT BE FAIR TO AT LEAST DISCUSS IT AT THIS MEETING? THE DIFFERENT...

>> THIS IS PRESENTED IN A FORM TO BE DELIVERED TO THE COUNTY COMMISSION FOR FINAL APPROVAL IN CREATING LAW. AND I DON'T THINK WE'VE TAKEN ENOUGH TIME TO WORK THROUGH ALL OF THESE ISSUES BASED ON THE HISTORY OF HOW WE GOT HERE AND I JUST FEEL LIKE WE NEED A WORKSHOP TO REALLY TALK THROUGH IT AND NOT LOOK AT A DOCUMENT THAT IS PRESENTED TO US FOR APPROVAL AS IT STANDS.

>> I WOULD LIKE TO AGREE WITH HARRY BECAUSE I WAS GOING TO SAY, ESSENTIALLY, THE SAME KIND OF THING THAT OUR PROCESS IN HISTORICALLY IS TO VET IDEAS WITH THE COMMUNITY USING WORKSHOPS. HISTORICALLY, WE HAVE DISCUSSED FENCES, WHICH ARE ONE PIECE OF THIS, AT MULTIPLE WORKSHOPS OVER THE YEARS AND HAVE SENT OUT SEVERAL SURVEYS AND WHILE THERE ARE INDIVIDUALS WHO WANT SOME OF THESE ITEMS, THEY ARE HISTORICALLY HAVE BEEN IN A MINORITY. AND, I THINK THAT IT IS IMPORTANT WHEN WE HAVE REGULATIONS THAT EFFECT AN ENTIRE COMMUNITY THAT WE RESPECT THAT PROCESS, AND WE ALLOW THE COMMUNITY TO WEIGH IN AND THIS SEEMS TO BE AN ATTEMPT TO CIRCUMVENT GATHERING INFORMATION

FROM THE ENTIRE COMMUNITY. >> RICHARD?

>> I'M SHAKING MY HEAD IN AGREEMENT. I MEAN, I READ UP ON THIS AS MUCH AS I COULD, BUT, IT JUST SEEMS LIKE IT NEEDS TO BE IN FRONT OF A BIGGER GROUP THAN JUST US FOR A RECOMMENDATION.

>> MR. CHAIRMAN, DO YOU MIND IF I SAY SOMETHING?

>> I'M STEVE AND I'M A RESIDENT AT 335 PABLO ROAD. JUST TO GIVE YOU BACKGROUND, I'VE ACTUALLY BEEN TO THE MSD, AND I'VE BEEN TO THE PV ARCHITECT REVIEW COMMITTEE, I WAS IN FRONT OF THIS BOARD IN APRIL. AND I'VE SPOKEN WITH THE COUNTY COMMISSIONER, AND I'VE WORKED WITH THE STAFF, AND IF YOU WANT TO HAVE A WORKSHOP, I HAVE NO OBJECTIONS TO THAT. I HAVEN'T BEEN HIDING FROM ANYBODY, THESE ARE MY IDEAS AND REVISIONS APPROPRIATE TO BE CONSIDERED. IF THIS BODY WOULD LIKE TO TAKE MORE TIME TO THINK ABOUT IT, TALK ABOUT IT, I'M HAPPY TO APPEAR, ANYTIME, ANYWHERE, ANY PLACE, TO TALK ABOUT IT. BUT THE NOTION THAT THIS SNUCK UP ON SOMEBODY OR THAT PEOPLE HAVEN'T HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO TALK ABOUT THESE ITEMS, I JUST HAD TO GET UP AND SAY NOTHING CAN BE FURTHER FROM THE TRUTH.

>> IN YOUR DEFENSE WE TALKED ABOUT IT IN APRIL. AND SAID WE NEED TO COME BACK AND NOW WE CAME BACK. SO, I'M A LITTLE SURPRISED THAT WE'RE AT THIS POINT.

>> I APPRECIATE THE THE OPPORTUNITY TODAY, IF YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT IT TODAY, I'M PREPARED AND IF YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT IT ANOTHER DAY, THAT'S OKAY TOO.

>> I'M HERE, ONE OF THE ITEMS THAT'S LUMPED INTO ONE OF THESE CHANGES FOR CONVENIENCE AND OVERALL DISCUSSION. BUT THIS ONE SPECIFICALLY REGARDING MULTIPLE ACCESS ON PONTE VEDRA

[02:30:02]

ORDINANCES. >> WHAT THIS ALLOWS IS SOLVE A

U-SHAPED DRIVEWAY. >> YEAH. A THIRD OF THOSE EXIST ALONG THE BOULEVARD AS IT SITS RIGHT NOW WITH NO ISSUES.

>> AND IT WAS DISCUSSED IN THE OCTOBER MEETING AND IT WAS DISCUSSED AGAIN IN THE MARCH OR APRIL MEETING.

>> THAT'S CORRECT. >> AND SO, YEAH, IT JUST WASN'T WRAPPED INTO THE PARKING ORDINANCE ITSELF AND ADOPTED AS

SUCH. >> SO MY SURPRISE. AND SO WE CAME BACK TO ADD THIS AND IT'S BEEN TO THE GENERAL COUNSEL'S OFFICE AND GROWTH MANAGEMENT REVIEWED THAT AS WELL.

>> AT THAT TIME, WHEN YOU MADE YOUR PRESENTATIONS, I WAS ZOOMING IN, I KNOW THAT BRAD AND YOU WERE HAVING A CONVERSATION ABOUT IT. THERE WAS NO VOTE TAKEN BY THIS BOARD TO APPROVE IT. I DO WANT TO POINT OUT I TOOK THE TIME TO LOOK AT THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TO GET UP TO SPEED. THE CODE SAYS FOR SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL UNITS SHALL GENERALLY BE LIMITED TO ONE DRIVEWAY, CIRCULAR DRIVEWAYS MAY BE PERMITTED WITH A MINIMUM 50 FOOT FRONTAGE WITH THE APPROVAL OF THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR. AND THEN IT GOES ON ABOUT CONSTRUCTION. I KNOW THAT IT'S RELATIVELY EASY TO GET APPROVAL OF THAT CIRCULAR DRIVEWAY. I DON'T KNOW OF ANYBODY WHO HAS APPLIED FOR A CIRCULAR DRIVEWAY AN THERE'S JUST, YOU DON'T HAVE TO CONTACT THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR, LIKE ROADS AND BRIDGES AND THEY GIVE

[02:35:01]

>> OH, BOY. YOU WANT TO GO THERE?

>> AND SOME OF THE COMMENTS SAID, I DON'T HAVE ANY PROBLEM BACKING OUT. AND SOMEBODY ELSE SAID, WELL, THE CIRCULAR DRIVEWAY DEPENDS ON HOW THEY BUILD IT, WHAT'S THE RAIDIOUS, BECAUSE THE TRAILER WILL DRIVE OVER SOMETHING.

>> THE FACT OF THAT RULE THAT YOU JUST READ IS REALLY OPEN TO INTERPRETATION. SO, I THINK THROUGH ADMINISTRATION CHANGES, DIFFERENT ENGINEERS THAT MIGHT REVIEW THIS, CLEARANCE ISSUES BEING HELD UP. IT WOULD BE A LOT CLEARER TO HAVE THAT CODIFIED. THAT A SECONDARY DRIVEWAY IS ALLOWED.

>> MEGHAN, MY CONCERN IS YES, IT'S BEEN APPROVED OVER THE YEARS, AS BRAD SAID ALL IT TAKES IS ONE CHANGE OF A BUILDING PERMIT ISSUE AND STARTS ENFORCING YOU CAN'T HAVE A CIRCULAR DRIVEWAY. I DON'T SEE HARM IN AGREEING AND DISCUSS AND VOTE ON IT TO CHANGE THE 150 TO 100 FOOT.

>> WE DON'T HAVE ANYTHING IN OUR CODE. AND TYPICALLY OUR CODE IS MORE RESTRICTIVE THAN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE SO WE WOULD BE PUTTING SOMETHING IN MORE EXPANSIVE. I DON'T KNOW, ADVICE FROM ATTORNEYS OR OTHER PEOPLE.

>> SHOULD WE JUST MAKE A MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL TO AHMED THE PONTE VEDRA ZONING REGULATION ON DRIVING.

>> WE ALREADY HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND WE'RE DISCUSSING. WE WOULD EITHER HAVE TO RETRACT THAT TO GO TO THAT MOTION. IF WE GO FORWARD WITH THE MOTION AS CURRENTLY PRESENTED WE CANNOT

CONTINUE ON WITH THAT MOTION. >> THAT'S A GOOD POINT.

>> WE APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO DISCUSS THIS.

BUT, I DID WANT YOU TO UNDERSTAND THAT WE HAVE CODE CHANGES. A LOT OF THE TIMES THE PONTE VEDRA PARKING ORDINANCE IT SAYS OUT OF CONVENIENCE IT WILL BE PUT IN THE DEVELOPING

REGULATIONS, ALL BE IT, PARKING >> THE REASON WHY WE CHANGED THAT ORDINANCE BECAUSE OF ABUSE OF THAT ORDINANCE AS WRITTEN PREVIOUSLY. WE WANTED TO MAKE IT VERY CLEAR, THAT I HAVE SO MANY PICTURES THAT I DOCUMENTED IN MY HEARINGS AND PRESENTATION, THAT YOU HAVE CONTRACTORS PARKED IN FRONT OF A CIRCULAR DRIVEWAY, EXISTING. THEY HAVE JUST BECOME TO ABUSE THE ORDINANCE. IT'S BEEN A SLOW ROLLOUT BUT IT'S WELL RECEIVED. WE'RE CHANGING THE SIGNAGE RIGHT NOW, I GOT APPROVAL FROM THE COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND ROAD AND THE LIKE, WE'RE GETTING NEW SIGNS, THIS WAS A CLEANUP ORDINANCE OFFERED AS A MITIGATED ELEMENT TO THAT PARKING ORDINANCES AND SAYING, LET'S CHANGE THAT DRIVEWAY RULE BECAUSE 150 SHOULDN'T APPLY ON THE BOULEVARD WHERE THERE ARE A LOT OF CIRCULAR DRIVEWAYS AND TWO ACCESS POINTS. AND WE DON'T THINK THERE'LL BE ANYMORE CONFLICTS. THERE'S NOT A LOT OF CURBING, ALONG THE BOULEVARD.

THAT'S THE CATCH AS WELL. WE WANT TO BE DEFINED AND CLEAR

[02:40:05]

>> RICHARD, DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION?

>> COULD YOU TELL ME AGAIN WHAT YOUR INTEREST IS IN THE DUEL

DRIVEWAY? >> TO SERVE THE RESIDENTS THAT I'M ELECTED BY. I'M AN ELECTED OFFICIAL AT PONTE VEDRA BEACH.

WE HAD A PARKING ORDINANCE CHANGE ALONG THE 6.7 MILES OF PONTE VEDRA BOULEVARD, THERE WERE EXCEPTIONS MADE TO ALLOW TEMPORARY PARKING ON THE BOULEVARD, OVER THE NUMBER OF DECADES IT BECAME ABUSED AND HARD TO ENFORCE FROM THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE. WE HAVE A CONTRACT WITH THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE AND THE MSD FOR OFFICERS TO PATROL MSD. WE HAVE MUNICIPAL SERVICES WE RUN AND CAN DO ON OUR OWN BUT WE TYPICALLY LEAN ON AND PROVIDE WITH COUNTY SERVICES AS WELL.

THIS WAS ONE OF THEM. BEING A COUNTY ROADWAY. SO WE CHANGED THE RULE ON PONTE VEDRA BOULEVARD TO MAKE IT CONCRETE OF WHAT'S ALLOWED AND NOT ALLOWED. ALLOWING A SECONDARY DRIVEWAY THAT'S CURRENTLY NOT ALLOW THE UNLIKE THE PONTE VEDRA PARKING RLE, IT WAS OVERINTERPRETED AND ABUSED. I THINK THERE ARE EXAMPLES OF FOLKS GOING AND ASKING FOR ONE AND IT MEETS ALL THE SEPARATION, NO SAFETY ISSUES, OR SITE LINE ISSUES, IT'S JUST YOUR NOT 150 FEET WIDE AND YOU DIDN'T HAVE A CURB, SO YOU CAPTAIN HAVE ONE. WE WERE OFFERING IT AS A PART OF PRESENTATION AND IT'S REALLY ON ME THAT I DID NOT WORK WITH THE MANAGEMENT STAFF TO HAVE THAT CODIFIED LANGUAGE IN THERE, ADOPTED OFFICIALLY. I THOUGHT IT WAS. SO, THIS IS MORE OF A CLEANUP FOR A DISCUSSION THAT'S BEEN HAD OVER THE LAST 9-10

MONTHS. >> HOW WAS THE 35 FOOT ITEM

INCLUDED WITH THIS DRIVEWAY? >> THERE ARE ALWAYS CODE CHANGES OVER THE YEARS WITHIN THE CODE ITSELF. IN THE PONTE VEDRA DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS AND THIS WAS ONE THAT WAS PUT IN THERE. YOU KNOW, THE FENCE THING, I MEAN, THERE ARE PLANNERS WHO ARE NO LONGER WITH ST. JOHNS COUNTY WHO HAVE VETTED THIS THROUGH WORKSHOPS OVER THE LAST FIVE YEARS, EXTENSIVELY. I USED TO BE THE CHAIRMAN OF THE PONTE VEDRA OVERLAY ARCHITECTURE COMMITTEE. WE SAW THAT THE ST. JOHNS COUNTY'S STAFF COME BEFORE US TOR OR THREE TIMES WITH DO WE WANT TO ALLOW SIX FOOT FENCE, JUST ALONG THE ENVELOPE OF A BUILDING BACK DOWN TO FOUR FEET, JUST FOR PRIVACY CONCERNS. SO, WE SAID DOES IT MAKE SENSE TO ADOPT A NEW RULE OR REGULATION. THE OTHER ONE, THE 35 FEET RULE IS, WE HAVE A 35 FOOT RULE AND WE'RE ONLY ALLOWED TWO STORIES.

I THINK THERE'S DISCUSSION IN HAND AND YOU JUST SAW ONE BEFORE US, YOU HAVE 35 FEET, IT'S TECHNICALLY THREE STORIES, BUT TWO STORIES IS ALL IT'S ALLOWED IN THE OVERLAY.

>> AND I THINK STAFF OUT OF CONVENIENT WANTED TO LUMP THAT IN WITH THOSE OTHER CO-DEPENDENT OPTIONS AND ITEMS.

>> IT SEEMS TO ME THAT THEY SHOULD ALL COME IN INDIVIDUALLY.

BECAUSE IT DISCUSS FENCES WITH DRIVEWAYS, FOR ME, I WOULDN'T KNOW WHAT TO DO TO VOTE ON IT BECAUSE IT'S SUCH A HODGEPODGE, IT'S LIKE SOMEBODY'S COMING IN WITH SIX OR SEVEN ISSUES.

>> I WAS GOING TO ASK THAT QUESTION, WHY ARE THEY NOT

SEPARATED? >> IT'S NOT PERFECT, BECAUSE IT EVEN SAYS THAT IN THE PONTE VEDRA PARKING ORDINANCE NOT TO GET LONG WINDED, IT SAYS OUT OF CONVENIENCE IT'S ADDED TO THE PONTE VEDRA ZONING REGULATIONS WHEN A PARKING ORDINANCE REALLY ISN'T THAT, IT'S NOT A ZONING REGULATION, PER SE, IT'S IN PUBLIC RIGHT-OF-WAY. I THINK OUT OF CONVENIENCE IT'S PUT INTO PONTE VEDRA'S OWN LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE IF YOU WILL.

AND I THINK, RIGHTLY SO, STAFF WAS BUNDLING IT TOGETHER. SO, I

APPRECIATE YOUR TIME. >> WE HAVE TWO 5THS OF THE MSD;

RIGHT? >> YEAH.

[02:45:01]

>> WE BOTH HAVE, I HAVE GIVEN HER A TARDY SLIP FOR TONIGHT'S

MEETING. >> 40 MINUTE DRIVE.

>> I RECOMMEND THAT OUR BOARD PERIODICALLY ATTEND THESE MEETINGS. WITH THAT SAID, HARRY, WOULD YOU LIKE TO MODIFY YOUR THING TO EXCLUDE THE DRIVEWAY? WOULD YOU LIKE TO MODIFY YOUR MOTION TO INCLUDE THE DRIVEWAY?

>> WHAT ARE WE VOTING ON SPECIFICALLY?

>> WE WOULD BE VOTING TO DENY ANY RECOMMENDED APPROVAL OF THE ZONING DISTRICT REGULATIONS FOR BUILDING STORY FENCE HEIGHTS ATTACHED STRUCTURES AND ROOF DESIGN BUT THAT WE MAY CONSIDER THE DRIVEWAY SEPARATION, SEPARATELY.

>> THE RAH BRAD HAD ASKED FOR WAS TO AMEND SECTION 3-B OF THE ORDINANCE. WHICH I DON'T HAVE A COPY IN MY ZONING.

>> DOES ANYONE HAVE A COPY OF THAT?

>> IT'S STILL A STAND ALONE ORDINANCE. SO, THE NEXT TIME WE END UP UPDATING THE PONTE VEDRA CODE IT WILL BE.

>> BRAD, COULD WE PUT THIS OFF TO OUR NEXT MEETING BECAUSE RIGHT NOW, WE DON'T SEEM TO BE PROPERLY ORGANIZED. I MEAN, I DON'T KNOW WHERE THIS IS IN OUR CODE.

>> SO, THE I THINK, JACOB YOU HAD A PRESENTATION PREPARED FOR A STAFF REPORT, RIGHT? AND IT WOULD LIST WHERE THAT WOULD GO?

>> I THINK WHAT WE'RE AFTER IS FOR THIS BOARD TO APPROVE THE CONCEPT OF CHANGING THE 150 TO 100 FEET?

>> EXACTLY. >> BUT THERE'S NO 150 FEET IN OUR THING, IT'S ONLY IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.

>> WE COULD MAKE THE RECOMMENDATION TO THE LAND

DEVELOPMENT CODE CHANGE THAT. >> WE CAN DO THAT.

>> YES. >> SO, THIS BOARD WOULD BE UNITED THAT HOPEFULLY WE COULD THEN MAKE THAT RECOMMENDATION THAT THAT COULD CHANGE WHICH THEN AFFORDING IT TO MOVE

FORWARD. >> MAY I SUGGEST WE VOTE ON THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR WHICH HAS BEEN SECONDED AFTER THAT, THEN, COME BACK WITH A SECOND MOTION TO SPECIFICALLY ADDRESS THE

DRIVEWAYS? >> AS AMENDED TO EXCLUDE THE DRIVEWAY SEPARATION REQUIREMENTS FROM THE MOTION.

>> BECAUSE ONCE WE VOTE ON IT WE CAN'T BRING IT BACK.

>> MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE MOTION ON THE FLOOR IS TO NOT

CONSIDER ANY OF THE PROPOSALS? >> RIGHT.

>> AND IF THAT PASSES THERE'S NO FURTHER DISCUSSION NEEDED.

>> SO, CAN WE MODIFY THAT MOTION?

>> ABSOLUTELY. >> AND THAT WOULD BE HARRY.

> SO, THE MODIFICATION WOULD BE THAT.

>> I THINK THE ORIGINAL MOTION WAS TO DEFER THE MATTER TO A WORKSHOP AND SO, AND I SAID THAT I WAS WILL TO GO DO THAT. IT SOUNDS LIKE THE AMENDED MOTION CHANGED THAT AGAIN. SO, I'M REALLY CONFUSED AS TO WHAT ACTION IS ACTUALLY PENDING

BEFORE THE BOARD AT THE MOMENT. >> I'M GOING TO RECOMMEND TO THE BOARD THAT WE WITHDRAW THE MOTION AS CURRENTLY PROPOSED.

WE THEN HAVE A SEPARATE MOTION TO TAKE THE FIRST THREE ITEMS, SAY, AND DEFER THOSE TO A WORKSHOP AND NOT DISCUSS THOSE TODAY AND WE HAVE AND THEN ANOTHER MOTION THAT WE APPROVE THE CONCEPT OF MAKING A RECOMMENDATION TO REDUCE THE 150 FOOT TO 100 FOOT ALONG PONTE VEDRA BOULEVARD FOR PARKING.

>> TO MAKE IT EASY. I WILL WITHDRAW MY MOTION.

>> THE ONLY THING I WOULD LIKE TO POINT OUT IS THIS IS SECTIONS THREE, FOUR, AND EIGHT, AND BRAD'S IS SECTION.

(INAUDIBLE) >>

>> OKAY. BUT WE COULD STILL MAKE A RECOMMENDATION.

>> SINCE IT'S IN OUR AREA? >> OKAY.

>> TIME TO HEAR A MOTION TO DEFER THE FIRST THREE ITEMS

[02:50:01]

EFFECTIVELY TO >> I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE A MOTION TO DEFER THE ITEMS TO AMEND SECTIONS 3, 4, AND 8 OF THE PONTE VEDRA ZONING DISTRICT REGULATIONS RELATING TO BUILDING STORY, FENCE HEIGHT, ATTACHED STRUCTURES AND ROOF DESIGN TO A

WORKSHOP. >> CAN I HEAR A SECOND IN

>> I ACTUALLY WOULD LIKE TO PUT MY $0.02 IN.

>> FIRST WE NEED A SECOND BEFORE WE CAN DISCUSS IT.

>> SO, I LEFT THE DRIVEWAY SEPARATION REQUIREMENTS OFF OF

THE LIST. >> SECOND?

>> DID WE DEFER EVERYTHING OTHER THAN PONTE VEDRA?

>> I'LL SECOND. >> NOW CAN WE HAVE DISCUSSION

ON THE MOTION? >> DO YOU HAVE A DISCUSSION

ITEM? >> YES. I WOULD LIKE TO GET MORE INVOLVED WITH THE DRIVEWAYS BASED ON THE SITUATION WE HAVE RIGHT NOW ON THE BOULEVARD, I COULD ONLY THINK ADDITIONAL DRIVEWAY MATERIAL IS NOT THE RIGHT MATERIAL THAT WOULD PLAY INTO THE FLOODING ON THE BOULEVARD. SO, THAT'S SOMETHING I NEED TO GET SMARTER ON. I'LL BE PUTTING IN TOTALLY

IMPERVIOUS. >> SO WE'RE DEFERRING THE WHOLE DRIVEWAY CONVERSATION. RIGHT NOW WE'RE FOCUSSING ON THE BUILDING STORY, FENCE HEIGHT, ATTACHED STRUCTURES AND ROOF DESIGN AND WE'LL DEFER THAT AND THEN WE'LL TALK ABOUT DRIVEWAYS.

>> SO, MY COMMENT IS IF WE DEFER THIS TO A WORKSHOP, I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE IT AT A TIME WHEN PEOPLE FEEL COMFORTABLE ATTENDING A WORKSHOP WHICH IS NOW A TIME RIGHT NOW. I'LL TELL YOU WHY, BUT I KNOW SOME PEOPLE DON'T LIKE SURVEYS IN THIS ROOM BUT WHEN I WAS PRESIDENT OF THE PONTE VEDRA COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION WE DID A LOT OF SURVEYS AND IN 2020 WE ACTUALLY DID A SURVEY ON THREE-STORY BUILDINGS AND FENCE HEIGHTS AND IT INCLUDED OTHER THINGS BUT THOSE WERE TWO THINGS, 40% OF OUR MEMBERSHIP RESPONDED. AND IT'S NOT ALL THE MEMBERSHIP BUT IT'S THE MAJORITY OF HOMES IN THE MSD BELONG TO THE PONTE VEDRA COMMUNITY ORGANIZATION. 93% OPPOSED 3-STORY BUILDINGS AND 77% OPPOSED FENCE HEIGHTS HIGHER THAN 6 FEET. I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE SURE THAT IF WE DEFER THIS TO THE WORKSHOP WE DON'T SCHEDULE A WORKSHOP AND ONLY THREE PEOPLE FEEL LIKE THEY CAN SHOW UP. SO, WHAT DO I DO ABOUT THAT, JOHN?

>> I HAVE NEVER ORGANIZED A WORKSHOP, SO, STAFF, HOW DOES A

WORKSHOP GET ORGANIZED? >> DO WE AMEND THE MOTION?

>> KITTY IS STRETCHING OR HAS A THOUGHT?

>> I AGREE WITH YOU, ONE OF THE POSITIVITIES ABOUT THE WORKSHOPS IN GENERAL IS ON FENCES IN FAMILIAR, WE'VE TALKED ABOUT THEM IN JUNE AT AN MSV MEETING IN JUNE OF 2017, ODE MSD MEETING IN MARCH OF 2019. WE HAD THE PONTE VEDRA COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION SURVEY IN MARCH OF 2019. I ATTENDED AN ARK MEETING IN MARCH OF 2019. AND WE DISCUSSED IT AT THIS BOARD IN NOVEMBER OF 2019. MARCH OF 2020 MAY OF 2021. SO, FENCES HAVE BEEN DISCUSSED AND I HAVE A WHOLE FOLDER PULL OF MATERIAL DEVELOPED BY THE COUNTY ON FENCES, THE PROBLEM WITH FENCES AND THE PROBLEM WITH MANAGING FENCES. SO, IT'S AN AREA WE'VE HAD A LOT OF CONVERSATIONS ON AND THAT MATERIAL SHOULD BE SHARED AGAIN IF, YOU KNOW, BEFORE WE DO SOMETHING.

>> AND IF WE NEED A WORKSHOP, THAT'S FINE, I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE IT'S HELD AT A TIME WHERE PEOPLE WHO WANT TO ATTEND FEEL COMFORTABLE ATTENDING WITHOUT THE COVID RESTRICTIONS.

>> I DON'T THINK WE HAVE TO MODIFY THE MOTION.

>> I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT WHERE YOU HOLD THE MEETING TOO, WE CAN'T HOLD PONTE VEDRA IN THIS AREA AND EXPECT PEOPLE TO COME

DOWN AND PARTICIPATE. >> THAT IS OUR LADY AT THE STAR BY THE SEA, WE HAD GO ATTENDANCE.

>> OKAY. >> ANYMORE DISCUSSION?

>> BRAD? >> ONE THING IN RESPONSE. THIS DRIVEWAY THING IS NOT ASKING FOR ANY LUMPED IN VARIANCES OR ANY KIND OF WAIVERS, YOU STILL HAVE TO MEET THE IMPERVIOUS SURFACE

[02:55:04]

PLANTINGS. >> SO, IT WOULD ALL BE.

>> LET'S VOTE ON THE MOTION AND CONTINUE ON WITH ANOTHER MOTION TO CHANGE THE DRIVEWAY REQUIREMENTS. OKAY. SO, PLEASE

VOTE. >> WHAT ARE WE VOTING FOR?

>> WE'RE VOTING TO MOVE THE FIRST THREE ITEMS ONTO A

WORKSHOP. >> OKAY.

>> AND THEN WE'LL HOPEFULLY HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CHANGE OF THE PARKING LOT DRIVEWAY REQUIREMENTS. OKAY.

>> UNANIMOUS. DO I HEAR A MOTION TO CHANGE THE 150 DIMENSION TO 100 FOOT DIMENSION TO ALLOW CIRCULAR DRIVEWAYS.

>> I MAKE A MOTION TO RECOMMEND DOING THAT.

>> WAIT, WE'RE RECOMMENDING TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE?

>> YES. >> THAT THE COMMISSIONERS MADE.

>> MR. CHAIRMAN, AND BOARD MEMBERS, FOR CLARIFICATION, THE DRIVEWAY PROVISION THAT WE'RE DISCUSSING IS TO BE ADDED INTO THE PONTE VEDRA ZONING DISTRICT REGULATIONS. EARLIER, SOMEBODY HAD READ OFF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTION SPEAKING TO THE 150 FEET AND 100 FOOT, ONE OF THE KEY WORDS IN THERE, WHICH GOES BACK TO THE INTERPRETATION WAS GENERALLY.

AND SO, BY ADDING THIS SECTION TO SECTION 3-B OF THE PONTE VEDRA CODE IT'S GOING TO GIVE AN EXCEPTION TO THAT GENERALALITY ALLOWING ALONG PONTE VEDRA BOULEVARD MORE THAN ONE DRIVEWAY CONNECTION. EVERYTHING ELSE STAYS THE SAME.

>> OKAY. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO THAT EFFECT.

>> OKAY. DO I HEAR A SECOND? >> I'LL MAKE A SECOND.

>> CURRENTLY SKS THREE HAS TO DO WITH R 1 SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICTS SO IT'S BEING ADDED TO THIS SECTION OF

OUR CODE? >> IT IS, AND IF YOU HAVE THAT IN FRONT OF YOU, YOU'LL SEE BASICALLY UNDER THE TABLE OF ZONING STANDARDS, THERE'S A NICE LITTLE LIST OF SORT OF SPECIAL CIRCUMSTANCES, BROADLY SPEAKING THEY ADDRESS MOSTLY THE BOULEVARD AND IT'S GOING TO FALL UNDER THAT SECTION. IT WOULD BE A NEW NUMBER, NUMBER 12, I BELIEVE. READY TO VOTE?

>> WE'RE VOTING TO ALLOW THE TWO DRIVEWAYS ON PONTE VEDRA IT BOULEVARD CHANGE. FROM 150 FOOT TO 100 FOOT.

>> OKAY. APPROVED UNANIMOUSLY. CONGRATULATIONS. THANK YOU.

>> EXCUSE ME. EVERYTHING WE JUST DID, HOW DOES THAT CHANGE WHAT YOU'RE PRESENTING TO THE MSD RIGHT NOW?

>> IS THERE NEW INFORMATION THAT YOU ARE NOW TAKING TO THE

MSD MEETING? >> NO. THIS IS A REGULARLY SCHEDULED MSD BOARD MEETING TONIGHT. I WILL REPORT ON THE PROGRESS, BUT THE NEXT STEP IS IT GOES TO THE FULL COUNTY COMMISSION WHICH IS THE TYPICAL PROCESS.

>> MR. CHAIRMAN, WHO SHOULD I WORK WITH TO GET THE WORKSHOP

SCHEDULED? >> GOOD QUESTION.

>> THE STAFF. >> THE STAFF?

>> THE STAFF. >> OKAY.

>> THANK YOU, SO MUCH. >> KEEP US ABREAST AS TO WHEN

THE WORKSHOP IS. >> TALK TO US, RIGHT NOW WE HAVE THE GENERAL FEELING THAT NOW IS NOT THE TIME AND I DON'T KNOW IF THE TIME WILL BE NINE MONTHS FROM NOW OR...

>> LISTEN, MR. CHAIRMAN, UPON THAT, I WOULD REQUEST THAT YOU JUST GO AHEAD AND VOTE TO DENY IT TONIGHT. IF YOU'RE GOING TO PLAY A GAME OF DEFERRING INDEFINITELY FOR NO REASON.

[03:00:04]

>> WE'RE TRYING TO SCHEDULE A WORKSHOP WHEN PEOPLE FEEL SAFE

TO COME. >> WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, YOU JUST READ YOU HAVE DATES AND TIMES OF SPECIFIC MEETINGS AND TOPICS ABOUT FENCES. YOU'RE CLEARLY PREPARED TO TALK ABOUT THE ISSUE TODAY, YOU JUST DON'T WANT TO. AND THAT'S OKAY. YOU DON'T HAVE TO TALK ABOUT IT TODAY, I'M GIVING YOU THE OPPORTUNITY NOT TO TALK ABOUT IT. IF YOU DON'T WANT TO HAVE A SUBSTANTIVE TALK ABOUT IT. I HAVE 25 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE DEALING WITH LAND USE AND ZONING ISSUES. I'VE BEEN EXPRIMTREMEL DEFERENTIAL. IF YOU JUST DON'T WANT TO TALK ABOUT IT, THAT'S FINE. OTHERWISE I WILL WORK WITH THE STAFF TO FIND A DATE

FOR A WORKSHOP. >> I THINK, THE CONCERN OF THE BOARD WITH THE CURRENT COVID SITUATION HAVING A PUBLIC MEETING AT THIS TIME MAY NOT BE THE BEST IDEA. SHOULD WE WAIT A MONTH, OR TWO MONTHS, I DON'T KNOW.

>> WE'RE HAVING A PUBLIC MEETING RIGHT NOW. THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS IS MEETING EVERY MONTH.

>> AND TURN AROUND AND LOOK AT THE ROOM, NO ONE COMES. BECAUSE

THEY'RE AFRAID TO COME. >> MAY BE, OR MAY BE NOT. LIKE I SAID I'M WILLING TO HAVE A MEETING ANYTIME ANY PLACE ABOUT THE TOPIC BUT WHAT I JUST HEARD IN THE LAST COMMENT WAS WE MAY NOT KNOW WHEN THE RIGHT TIME IS. YOU JUST AMENDED THE CODE ON THE ISSUE, THAT MR. ENSON SAID HAD NO IDEA ABOUT. YOU JUST AMENDED THE CODE THAT PRESUMABLY YOU HEARD ABOUT TODAY FOR THE FIRST TIME. I'VE BEEN HERE BEFORE, I'VE BEEN THROUGH THE PROCESS AND I'M NOT ASKING FOR SPECIAL TREATMENT, I'M MAKING MYSELF AVAILABLE AND YET I'M HERE AND I HEAR A COMMENT THAT WE MAY NOT NO WHEN THE RIGHT TIME IS, IT MAY BE NINE MONTHS FROM NOW.

AND IF YOU DON'T WANT TO HEAR IT, MR. GRAHAM, IT'S OKAY. MOVE

US ON AND DENY US. >> WE HAVE HAD THESE RULES IN EFFECT FOR 20 YEARS. WE DON'T NEED TO TAKE 30 MINUTES TODAY TO CHANGE THE RULES WITHOUT PUBLIC COMMENT AND PUBLIC WORKSHOP TO

CONSIDER THE CHANGES. >> I COULDN'T AGREE MORE. MY

ONLY REQUEST IS. >> WE CAN SCHEDULE WITH STAFF

[Staff Report ]

HELP US GET IT SCHEDULED. >> I APPRECIATE THAT

[Board Report]

NOT. >> OKAY. WE'RE NOT GOING TO CONTINUE ON AND. WE WILL SCHEDULE THE WORKSHOP AS SOON AS

POSSIBLE WITH SAFETY IN MIND. >> THAT WOULD BE GREAT.

>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN, I SURE APPRECIATE IT.

>> OKAY. THANK YOU. >> OKAY. WITH THAT, ARE THERE

ANY STAFF REPORTS? >> NO, SIR.

>> OKAY, WITH THAT, I HAD PROPOSED THREE ITEMS TO TALK ABOUT TODAY. AND HOPEFULLY WEEK KEEP IT FAIRLY SHORT BUT WEAVE RECEIVED TWO APPEAL TOSS DENIALS OF VARIANCES FROM OUR JULY MEETING. AND MY QUESTION IS HOW DOES THE APPEAL PROCESS WORK? WHO GETS TO TALK IN THE APPEAL PROCESS, WHAT HAPPENS?

>> SURE, CHRISTINE VALIER OFFICE OF THE COUNTY ATTORNEY.

IT'S A SIMILAR PROCESS TO THE INITIAL HEARING. IT'S BEFORE THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, IT'S MEANS THE APPLICANT CAN STATE THEIR CASE AND PRESENT ADDITIONAL INFORMATION THAT WAS PERHAPS NOT AVAILABLE OR NOT PRESENTED TO THIS BOARD AND THEY CAN ALTER THEIR REQUEST TO MITIGATE ANY CONCERNS. BOARD POLICY 2.205M STATED THAT WHEN THE APPEAL IS FROM AN ADVISORY BOARD THAT A MEMBER FROM THE ADVISORY BOARD BE PRESENT AT THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONER MEETING.

THERE'S NO FURTHER GUIDANCE ON WHAT ELSE IT INVOLVED FOR THAT ADVISORY BOARD NUMBER. I DON'T BELIEVE FROM TALKING WITH STAFF AND ALSO FOLKS IN MY OFFICE THAT THERE'S ANY EXPECTATION THAT THE

[03:05:02]

REGARDING THE ORIGINAL DECISION. >> OKAY.

>> SO, WE'RE NOT ANTICIPATING A PRESENTATION BY THE BOARD?

>> NO. >> MY OTHER QUESTION IS, ON SAY 7-30, THAT WAS APPROVED OR DENIED 4-3, THREE OF THE BOARD MEMBERS RECOMMENDED THAT THE VARIANCE BE APPROVED. SHOULD SOMEBODY FROM EACH SIDE, THE APPROVAL AND DENIAL SIDE BE

READY TO ANSWER QUESTIONS? >> THAT IS UP TO YOU ALL.

>> DID WE TALK AT THE LAST MEETING ABOUT DESIGNATING THE

PERSON TO ATTEND? >> NO, AND THAT'S ON THE AGENDA

FOR TONIGHT. >> AND THE OTHER QUESTION IS I FEEL PERSONALLY ATTACKED IN THEIR APPEAL ON THE RECLUSAL, AND I NEED YOUR GUIDANCE AND THE BOARD'S GUIDANCE AS TO WHAT DO I DO ABOUT THAT? DO I ADDRESS THAT BY E-MAIL OR LETTER TO THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS? OR DO I TURN THE MEETING INTO A PRESENTATION ABOUT THE HONESTY AND FACTS OF THE SITUATION?

>> , SO YOU READ THE APPEAL, JOHN?

>> YES. >> OKAY. I HAVEN'T READ IT.

>> THE APPEAL BASICALLY SAYS THAT I WAS REQUESTED TO RECUSE MYSELF, WHICH I NEVER WAS. THAT I HAD BEEN GOOD FRIENDS WITH BELK AND VICKY FOR 37 YEARS AND THAT I HELPED THEM DO THEIR PRESENTATION. AND BRAD SCOTT WAS THE CHAIR IN THE APRIL MEETING. AND THERE WAS AN E-MAIL THAT SUGGESTED I MIGHT RECUSE MYSELF BUT IT WAS NEVER PRESENTED FORMERLY TO THE BOARD AND BRAD DID NOT REQUEST THAT I RECUSE MYSELF. WHEN WE HAD THE JULY MEETING, I HAD IMMEDIATE IT CLEAR THAT I HAD NOT BEEN ASKED TO RECUSE MYSELF AND THERE WAS NO REASON FOR ME TO RECUSE MYSELF I HAD NO BUSINESS OR DEALINGS WITH ANY MEMBER. WE HAD WORKED VERY CLOSELY TOGETHER IN GETTING A SIDEWALK INSTALLED IN PONTE VEDRA, WE NEVER HAD DINNER OR LUNCH TOGETHER. AND AT THAT TIME, THEY NEVER RAISED THEIR HAND AND SAID WE THINK YOU SHOULD NOT VOTE ON THIS. TREVES NEVER A FORMAL REQUEST TO RECUSE MYSELF AND THEY PUT IT IN THE APPLICATION THAT I SHOULD HAVE AND THAT'S A GOOD REASON FOR THEM TO GET THE VARIANCE

APPROVED. SO WHAT SHOULD I DO? >> YOU COULD DO ONE OF TWO THINGS, YOU COULD WRITE A LETTER THAT WOULD BECOME PART OF THE APPEAL RECORD EXPLAINING WHAT YOU STATED AND I CAN ASSIST YOU IN WRITING THAT LETTER, BUT BASICALLY AS YOU KNOW, FLORIDA LAW REQUIRES YOU TO VOTE ON EACH ITEM UNLESS YOU HAVE A DEFINED FINANCIAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST. AND CLEARLY, YOU DID NOT. IN

THIS CASE. >> WE HELPED RAISE MONEY FOR THE SIDEWALK ON PONTE VEDRA BOULEVARD, IT WAS NOT A BUSINESS DEALING AND A FINANCIAL DEALING AND IT WAS FOR THE BETTERMENT OF THE COMMUNITY AND IT WAS FIVE OR SIX YEARS AGO.

>> OKAY. >> I THINK A LETTER SHOULD BE WRITTEN BUT THE ONE QUESTION I HAVE, IN GENERAL, IF WE'RE GOING TO ATTEND A MEETING, IN CASE THE COMMISSIONERS HAVE A QUESTION, DO WE NOTIFY THEM THAT A MEMBER OF OUR BOARD WILL BE ATTENDING THE MEETING AND WE PICK THAT ARE MEMER NOW, LET'S SAY. AND THEN WE PASS THAT INFORMATION TO YOU OR, LIKE, WHAT'S THE NORMAL PROCESS SO THAT THEY KNOW WE'RE IN THE AUDIENCE AND AVAILABLE TO PROVIDE ANY ADDITIONAL INFORMATION THAT THEY MIGHT

WANT? >> I THINK THAT COULD BE STATED AT THE BEGINNING OF THE APPEAL. AT THE APPEAL HEARING BEFORE THE BOARD. I COULD MAKE NOTE OR PATRICK MCCORMICK CAN MAKE NOTE THAT WHOEVER YOU CHOOSE TO ATTEND IS AVAILABLE IN THE AUDIENCE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT WE HAVE.

>> AND, PART OF MY ISSUE WAS ALSO IN THEIR APPEAL THERE ARE A LOT OF THINGS MISS REPRESENTED AS FAR AS WHAT ONE OF THEIR

[03:10:04]

>> THEY TOOK AN INTERESTING APPROACH TO ATTACK THE BOARD AND

TO ATTACK ME. >> IT WAS AN E-MAIL. BUT IT

WAS SENT TO EVERYBODY. >> WE CAN SEND IT AGAIN, BUT IT WAS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT IT WAS SENT TO ALL THE MEMBERS.

>> I THOUGHT THAT WAS SENT TO EVERYONE?

>> SHERRY? >> I'LL LOOK IT UP.

>> I'M PRETTY SURE I GOT IT. >> IT WAS AN E-MAIL. BECAUSE THERE WAS AN APPEAL FOR BOTH 730 AND 306. AND SO, IN WHICH WE TURNED DOWN 7-0. SO, YOU GOT TO TWO APPEALS. AND READING THEIR APPEAL, I STILL COULD NOT FIGURE OUT WHAT THE 306 ARGUMENT WAS, OTHER THAN THAT THE THEY WANTED IT. THE 730S APPEAL IS FRAUGHT WITH ERRORS AND THEIR ENGINEERING REPORT HAS NO ENGINEERING INVOLVED IN IT AND AS AN ENGINEER, I WOULD HAVE LOOKED FOR THINGS LIKE A LOAD ANALYSIS, AN ANGLE OF RECUSAL OF FOUNDATIONS, A REALLY INSPECTION. SOIL, NONE OF THAT WAS THERE. THE RECOMMENDATION ON THE SITUATION FOR THE PILES IS THAT THEY HIRE A CONTRACTORS TO DETERMINE HOW BAD IT WAS.

THE ENGINEER DIDN'T INSPEC IT. SO, WITH THAT SAID, WHO SHOULD

ATTEND? >> CAN I INTERRUPT BECAUSE WE DO HAVE PEOPLE IN THE AUDIENCE THAT GO THROUGH THE PROCESS OF BEING DENIED THE VARIANCE AND I WAS WONDERING IS THIS PUBLIC INFORMATION OR IS THIS INFORMATION THAT SHOULD BE?

>> . (INAUDIBLE)

>> SO, YOU'RE GOING TO GET A REALLY GOOD TUTORIAL HERE. TAKE NOTES. ALSO, I HAD A PROBLEM WITH THE APPEAL PROCESS. THEY CAN COME IN WITH NEW EVIDENCE SO TO SPEAK?

>> THEY CAN. >> THAT THROWS THE WHOLE VALIDITY OUT ON WHAT WE VOTED. SO, THEY CAN SIMPLY COME IN AND SAY, OKAY, WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR 25 FEET DOWN TO 20 FEET.

>> WELL, RICHARD, I THINK IN THEIR WRITTEN APPEAL THEY PRETTY MUCH STIPULATED WHAT THEY'RE ASKING FOR. I DON'T THINK THEY CAN COME IN WITH AN ORAL PRESENTATION WITH A SMOKING GUN.

>> NO. THEY CAN'T ASK FOR MORE, THEY MAY THEORETICALLY ASK FOR LESS IF THEY FLIES WITH THE BOARD.

>> THEY MAY ACTUALLY HAVE AN ENGINEERING REPORT THAT HAS ENGINEERING ON IT. BUT THEY WOULD HAVE TO GET IT TO US AHEAD

OF TIME, CORRECT? >> FOR?

>> IF THEY HAD A NEW REPORT FROM ON ENGINEER?

>> WOULDN'T THEY HAVE TO GET US A COPY OF THAT AHEAD OF TIME OR TO THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS AHEAD OF TIME?

>> THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OR PRESENT IT AT A MEETING, IT'S UP TO HOW THEY WANT TO HANDLE IT.

>> FOR THIS ITEM, YOU ASKED WHO SHOULD GO TO THAT MEETING. FOR THAT ITEM, I KIND OF RELIED ON THE IT WOULD HAVE YOU BASED ON YOUR BACKGROUNDS AS TO WHAT THE REPORT DIDN'T INCLUDE AND WHAT IT DID INCLUDE AND THAT KIND OF THING, SO THAT WOULD BE MY PREFERENCE ON WHO WOULD BE AT THE COMMISSIONER'S MEET TO GO TALK ABOUT THAT DENIAL OF THE VARIANCE EVEN THOUGH, YOU VOTED TO DENY BUT AM COUPLE PEOPLE VOTED TO APPROVE. YOU SEEM TO HAVE THAT BACKGROUND THAT'S REQUIRED FOR THE PAYTON RESIDENCE, I DON'T THINK IT MATTERS WHO'LL BE THERE. BUT IF SOMEONE'S GOING TO BE THERE, THEY MAY AS WELL REPRESENT THE

BOARD ON THAT APPEAL AS WELL. >> THAT'S THE NAME OF THE

PERSON WHO REQUESTED IT, RIGHT? >> YES.

>> ANOTHER COMMENT I HAVE IS WE SEE ALL THE GREAT WORK AND DETAILED WORK THAT THE STAFF PUTS TOGETHER FOR US TO EITHER DENY OR APPROVE, IT'S ALREADY THERE, EVERYTHING'S THERE THAT WE CAN PULL FROM TO PUT TOGETHER A RECAP IF WE WERE TO HAVE TO DO A RECAP. WE'RE TALKING, LIKE WHAT WAS YOUR PROBLEM, MINE WAS

[03:15:04]

>> RICHARD, I THINK, THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AREN'T GOING TO GO BACK AND LISTEN TO THE PRESENTATIONS THAT WE HEAR.

TYPICALLY, THE MEETINGS LAST SIX-EIGHT HOURS, I'VE NEVER BEEN

TO ONE. >> THEY CAN LAST THAT LONG

YEH. >> AND THE COUNT COMMISSIONERS, IT'S ONE ITEM OF 15 ON THEIR AGENDA. WE ONLY HAVE TWO OR THREE ON OUR AGENDA, TYPICALLY. AND SO, THEY LISTEN TO THE PRESENTATION, BY 7:30 ABOUT HOW BAD THEIR FOUNDATION IS AND HOW BAD THE HOUSE IS FALLING AND REALTIME SKY WILL FALL LATER THAT DAY. AND THEY WILL SAY, I'VE HAD THIS VIEW ALL MY LIFE AND NOW IT'S TAKEN AWAY FROM ME BECAUSE THEY WANT A PLAY YARD.

AND THAT'S WHAT THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WILL HEAR. WE HEARD IT, WE DID AN ANALYSIS, WE HAD A CHANCE TO READ THE REPORTS. AND I DON'T THINK THE COUNTY WILL READ ALL THE

REPORTS. >> I THINK THERE SHOULD BE SOME TYPE OF RECAP THAT'S LESS THAN HALF A PAGE.

>> YOUR TALKING ABOUT TWO DIFFERENT THINGS. YOU'RE

TALKING ABOUT BELKINGRAM. >> I'M TALKING ABOUT ALL CASES.

WE SHOULD HAVE A MECHANICISM THAT RECAPS WHY WE VOTED THE WAY WE VOTED. I HAVE NO REASON WHY TODAY JOHN VOTED NO AND THE FOUR OF US VOTED YES. I WOULD BE CURIOUS TO KNOW. BUT I GO OUT OF HERE, JUST THINKING, WELL, HE MUST HAVE SOMETHING WE ALL MISS.

>> THAT'S WHY WE HAVE THE DISCUSSION. AND THAT'S THE

THIRD ITEM ON MY AGENDA TODAY. >> BUT, I DON'T THINK IT SHOULD BE A SECRET BECAUSE YOU VOTED FOR BOTH OF THESE.

>> YES, I DID. >> FOR THE SHOPPING CENTER AND

WHATEVER YOU DID. >> I KNOW WHY, YOU SAID WHY IN THE COMMENTS. SOMETHING'S GOING TO BE THERE. AND I THOUGHT THAT WAS A GOOD OPTION. AND, I MIGHT BE WRONG, BUT YEAH. THERE MAY BE A BETTER OPTION LATER ON BUT OBVIOUSLY, YOU GUYS DISAGREED WITH ME, SO THEY WILL GO TO THE COUNTY COMMISSION AND WE'LL SEE

WHAT HAPPENS THERE. >> WELL, MR. PATTON, YOU ALSO ASKED IF THESE BOARD MEMBERS CAN SPEAK WITH OR COMMUNICATE WITH COMMISSIONERS AND ABSOLUTELY, YOU CAN HAVE A FINE CALL, YOU COULD E-MAIL THEM OR HAVE A MEETING IF YOU SO DESIRED

INDIVIDUALLY. >> WHAT I MAY DO, IS PERSONALLY IS TO GET DRAFT UP SOMETHING, GET IT TO YOU, AND THEN HAVE IT BE ABLE TO BE PRESENTED AND ALSO E-MAILED TO THE COUNT COMMISSIONERS. I WOULD LIKE THEM TO SEE IT BEFORE THE

MEETING. I TOOK IT PERSONALLY. >> I UNDERSTAND.

>> OKAY. OCTOBER 6TH. >> 5TH.

>> OCTOBER 5TH. >> AND WE HAVE A MEETING ON THE

4TH, I THINK. >> YEAH, WE'RE ON FOR THE 4TH.

>> YEAH, OKAY. >> OKAY. YOU MUST HAVE BEEN AGENDA THAT PUTS IN SOME TYPE OF TIME FRAME SO THEY WOULD HAVE TO BE THERE AT 8:00 A.M. IF IT'S A 3:00 ITEM?

>> NO. >> UNFORTUNATELY, THE AGENDA WON'T BE PUBLISHED UNTIL RELATIVELY CLOSE TO THAT DATE.

>> ABOUT A WEEK BEFORE. >> WELL, THEY ONLY NEED TIME TO GET DRESSED AND GET INTO THE CAR. I MEAN, IF IT'S IN THE AFTERNOON, THEY KNOW THEY CAN GO IN THE AFTERNOON.

>> SOMETIMES THEY MOVE IT AROUND.

>> THERE'S NO TELLING. AND HAVING BEEN TO SEVERAL DIFFERENT COUNTIES AND COUNTY COMMISSIONER MEETING, YOU COULD NEVER TELL WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN. WHAT'S GOING TO BE MOVED OR TALKED ABOUT FOREVER. SO, WE WILL HAVE DISCUSSION.

>> AND SO, IS IT ALL RIGHT IF MEGHAN AND I FIGURE OUT BETWEEN

THE TWO OF US IF WE BOTH ATTEND? >> WE CAN BOTH ATTEND.

[03:20:04]

>> ARE YOU GOING TO DECIDE TODAY?

>> YES. >> YOU COULD BOTH ATTEND.

>> I'LL ATTEND. IF YOU DON'T WANT ME TO ATTEND, LET ME KNOW.

>> AND WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO DISCUSS THE APPEAL?

>> I DON'T BELIEVE. NO. >> OKAY.

>> OKAY. >> ITEM 2: THERE'S A PROCESS TO GET NEW BOARD MEMBERS. AND WHAT'S HAPPENED IN THE PAST, IT SEEMS HAP HAZARD, I THOUGHT AN APPLICANT HAD TO MAKE AN AMOUNT INDICATION BEFORE THE END OF THIS YEAR, IT ENDS UP IT HAS TO

BE 12 MONTHS OF THE OPENING. >> CORRECT.

>> BUT WHAT I WOULD LIKE TO ENCOURAGE THE BOARD MEMBERS TO DO, IS IF YOU THINK OF SOMEBODY THAT WOULD BE A GOOD FIT FOR THIS BOARD TO ENCOURAGE THEM TO FILL OUT AN APPLICATION.

>> HARRY MAY NOT RENEW AND HE'S GOING IN MAY. BETWEEN NOW AND MAY, HOPEFULLY, WE CAN HAVE MULTIPLE APPLICANTS TO CHOOSE

WHO SHOULD BE ON THE BOARD. >> MAY OF 2022?

>> THAT'S NOT ENOUGH TIME, BECAUSE YOU SAID.

>> IT HAS TO BE WITHIN 12 MONTHS.

>> THE APPLICATION IS GOOD FOR 12 MONTHS. SO, YOU DON'T HAVE

TO WAIT. >> OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

>> RIGHT. SO RIGHT NOW, ANYBODY CAN MAKE AN APPLICATION FOR HARRY'S POSITION. BUT WHAT WE CAN'T DO IT WAIT UNTIL THE LAST MINUTE AND HAVE THE BOARD NOT HAVE A FULL SEVEN PEOPLE BECAUSE AS WE NOW KNOW, YOU HAVE TO HAVE FOUR VOTE TOSS APPROVE THINGS. SO, WHEN IT'S DOWN TO US. THE LAST ITEM ON THE AGENDA, WE MAY NOT GET INTO IT TODAY, DO WE NEED TO HAVE A MEETING AND DISCUSS HOW THE BOARD WORKS TOGETHER, WHAT WE DO, PROCESS, QUESTIONS? JUST A GENERAL DISCUSSION ABOUT HOW WE

WORK TOGETHER? >> JANE?

>> I'M THE ONE THAT BROUGHT THIS UP. AND I ACTUALLY THINK TODAY'S MEETING WAS A REALLY GOOD ONE WHERE WE DO TALK A LOT AND ASKED FOR EACH OTHER'S OPINIONS AND WHAT WE WERE THINKING AND QUESTIONS. THAT'S WHAT I WANTED TO SEE MORE OF ACROSS THE BOARD BECAUSE MY FIRST MEETING OR SO, IT SEEMS LIKE WE HELD OUR REASONS CLOSE TO THE VEST AND THEN VOTED YES OR NO. BUT I WOULD LIKE TO HEAR WHAT MY FELLOW BOARD MEMBER ARE THINKING BECAUSE THEY COULD PERSUADE ME EITHER WAY IF THEY HAD DIFFERENT THOUGHTS THAT I DIDN'T THINK OF. I DON'T KNOW ABOUT PERSUADING BUT I WANT TO BE SURE ALL THE INFORMATION'S ON THE TABLE BY THE TIME WE VOTE FOR SOMETHING. SO, I WANTED MORE DISCUSSION AMONGST BOARD MEMBERS AND MAKE SURE EVERYBODY

WAS COMFORTABLE WITH THAT. >> AND I KNOW, THE FIRST COUPLE OF YEARS I WAS ON THE BOARD, THERE WOULD NEVER REALLY BE DISCUSSION. WHAT I ENCOURAGE US TO DO IS ACTUALLY HAVE REAL DISCUSSION AND HAVE PEOPLE BRING UP POINTS THAT MAY BE WE DIDN'T THINK ABOUT. HINDSIGHT, THE INADEQUACY OF THE ENGINEERING REPORT, BECAUSE I COULD HAVE GONE ON FOR A FEW HOURS AN AN 8-PAGE REPORT. TODAY WAS A GOOD EXAMPLE, WE HAD GOOD DISCUSSION AND HONEST, OPEN OPINIONS ABOUT THINGS. AND SO, BUT, I WOULD ALSO THINK IT'S INTERESTING THAT TYPICALLY WE'RE NOT ALLOWED TO TALK TO EACH OTHER. WE CAN AT LEAST SAY HELLO TO EACH OTHER WHEN WE SEE EACH OTHER IN THE STREET. SO, THAT'S KIND OF WHAT I HAD. AND I DON'T KNOW IF WE NEED TO, YOU KNOW, HAVE A MORE DISCUSSION ABOUT HOW WE WORK TOGETHER?

>> >> WELL MY OTHER QUESTION WAS ABOUT TRAINING FOR PROPER PROCEDURE, YOU KNOW, HOW WE WE HAVE VOTES AND DECISIONS, THAT KIND OF THING SO WE IT DON'T TAKE UP MEETING TIME. AT LEAST ONCE A YEAR, SHOULD WE HAVE SOMETHING BEFORE OR AFTER ONE OF OUR MEETINGS SO MAY BE THE STAFF TALKS ABOUT THE DEVELOPMENT CODE, OUR ROLES, OUR SPOBLSS, HOWL WE RELATE TO OTHER PEOPLE AND PLACES WITHIN THE COUNTY.

>> WE HAVE NEW PEOPLE COMING ON ALL THE TIME AND SOME OF US AREN'T TRAINED FOR THAT AND SO THAT WOULD BE HELPFUL AS WELL.

SPHERE YOU KIND OF GET THROWN INTO THE DEEP END QUICKLY.

RICHARD BROUGHT IT UP WHEN HE FIRST GOT ON THE BOARD AS FAR AS WHAT DO YOU DO. AND HE ASKED SEVERAL QUESTIONS AND I RESPONDED TO THINKS QUESTIONS. I THINK THE IDEA IN A WE NEED TO DO A BETTER JOB OF BRINGING BOARD MEMBERS ON AND HAVING

[03:25:03]

>> SO, YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT ON-BOARDING NEW MEMBERS?

>> YES. >> AND ACCLIMATING THEM TO THE

BOARD. >> YEAH, LIKE, HOW YOU VOTE, THROWS CONFUSION ON THAT, OCCASIONALLY. OKAY, IF YOU'RE DENYING SOMETHING, YOU VOTE YES FOR IT.

>> I THINK A HALF HOUR FOR A MEETING FOR A NEW PERSON. DO IT THE SAME DAY AS THE MEETING AND START, A HALF HOUR EARLIER AND

TALK THROUGH IT. >> AND I CAN DO THAT, AND JUST A LITTLE BIT ABOUT PROPER DECORUM. HOW YOU REPRESENT YOUR IDEAS AND HOW TO ASK QUESTIONS AND THE ORDER THAT WE DO THINGS IN. I LEARN IT HAD BY JUST BEING HERE.

>> SO. WE CAN DO THAT, WE WOULD JUST OF COURSE NEED TO ADVERTISE IT AS A MEETING. BUT IT COULD BE A MEETING JUST FOR THAT PURPOSE, BUT IT WOULD NEED TO BE PART OF THE ADVERTISEMENT

FOR THE PUBLIC MEETING. >> OKAY. IT WOULD BE OUT IN THE OPEN, IT WOULD BE HERE, JUST A LITTLE BIT OF HOW TO OPERATE THE MICROPHONE. WE USED TO HAVE POINTERS, WE USED TO HAVE

POINTERS. >> CAN I MAKE ONE COMMENT ABOUT COMMUNICATION. THERE IS A N NUANCE TO THE REQUIREMENT. ONE OF THE MEMBERS WAS INTERESTED IN TALKING ABOUT XYZ, THAT MEMBER COULD E-MAIL ALL THE OTHER BOARD MEMBERS WITH THE PROPOSAL FOR A WORKSHOP, DETAILS FOR A WORKSHOP, AND THAT WOULD BE OKAY. WITH YOU THAT WOULD BE THE END OF IT. WHERE YOU GET IN TROUBLE IS THE BACK AND FORTH COMMUNICATION. ONCE ONE E-MAIL FROM ONE MEMBER GOES TO THE REST OF THE MEMBERS OR ANOTHER MEMBER, THERE CANNOT BE A RESPONSE BACK. SO, I JUST OFFER THAT TO YOU, THAT MAY HELP SINCE Y'ALL MEET ONCE A MONTH. THAT MAY HELP IN SOME COMMUNICATION ABOUT UPCOMING MEETINGS.

>> THE ONLY COMMENT I HAVE IS SOMEBODY WAS PROPOSING AN IDEA, THEY WOULD SEND IT OUT BUT THEY COULDN'T HEAR THE VOICES BACK.

SO, COULD WE SEND IT TO SOMEONE HERE ON

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.