Nov 18, 2021 Planning and Zoning Agency

[Call meeting to order.]

[00:00:31]

>> MR. MATOVINA: ALL RIGHT. I'D LIKE TO CALL THIS MEETING T ORDER. WE'LL START WITH THE PLEDGE OF A PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE. PLEASE STAND.

>> I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.

ALL RIGHT. MADAME VICE CHAIR, COULD YOU READ THE PUBLIC NOTICE STATEMENT, PLEASE.

>> MS. PERKINS: THIS IS A PROPERLY NOTICED HEARING HELD IN CONCURRENCE WITH REQUIREMENTS OF FLORIDA LAW. THE PUBLIC WILL BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO COMMENT ON TOPICS RELEVANT TO THE AGENCY'S AREA OF JURISDICTION AND THE PUBLIC WILL BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO OFFER COMMENT AT A DESIGNATED TIME DURING THE HEARING.

ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC DESIRING TO SPEAK MUST DO SO BY INDICATE SO BY COMPLETING A SPEAKER CARD WHICH IS AVAILABLE IN THE FOYER. ANY ADDITIONAL SPEAKERS MAY BE HEARD AT THE DISCRETION OF THE CHAIRMAN.

SPEAKER CARDS MAY BE TURNED IN TO STAFF.

THE PUBLIC SHALL SPEAK AT A TIME DURING THE MEETING AND IT'S A LENGTH OF TIME AS DESIGNATED BY CHAIRMAN WHICH SHALL BE THREE MINUTES. SPEAKERS SHOULD IDENTIFY THEMSELVES, WHO THEY REPRESENT, AND STATE THEIR ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. SPEAKERS MAY OFFER SWORN TESTIMONY. IF THEY DO NOT, THE FACT THAT TESTIMONY IS NOT SWORN MAY BE CONSIDERED BY THE AGENCY IN DETERMINING THE WEIGHT OR TRUTHFULNESS OF THE TESTIMONY.

IF A PERSON DECIDES TO APPEAL ANY DECISION MADE WITH RESPECT TO ANY MATTER CONSIDERED AT THE HEARING, SUCH PERSON WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS AND MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT A VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE, WHICH RECORD INCLUDES THE TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE APPEAL IS TO BE BASED. ANY PHYSICAL OR DOCUMENTARY 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 THE AGENCY OR IF COUNTY IN ANY REVIEW OR APPEAL RELATING TO ITEM BOARD MEMBERS ARE REMINDED THAT AT THE BEGINNING OF EACH ITEM THEY SHOULD STATE WHETHER OR NOT THEY HAVE HAD ANY COMMUNICATION WITH THE APPLICANT OR ANY OTHER PERSON REGARDING THE SUBSTANCE OF THE ITEM OUTSIDE THE FORMAL

[10. PUD 2020-04 Porter Property. Request to rezone approximately 165 acres of land from Open Rural (OR) to Planned Unit Development (PUD) to allow for a maximum 223 single-family dwelling units. This item was heard by the Board of County Commissioners at their regularly scheduled public hearing on September 21, 2021. The request was remanded back to the Planning and Zoning Agency for their consideration of several revisions made by the applicant in response to concerns by the surrounding community and the Board of County Commissioners.]

WE WILL BE RESPECTFUL OF ONE ANOTHER EVEN WHEN WE DISAGREE.

WE WILL DIRECT ALL COMMENTS TO THE ISSUES.

WE WILL AVOID PERSONAL ATTACKS. >> MR. MATOVINA: THANK YOU, MADAME VICE CHAIR. OKAY.

BEFORE WE GET INTO THE NEXT ITEM, ON THE AGENDA, ITEM NUMBER 10, WE HAVE BEEN ASKED FOR A CONTINUANCE TO DECEMBER THE 2ND ON, AND IF WE DO MOVE FORWARD WITH A CONTINUANCE, THERE WILL NOT BE ANY -- WE WILL NOT OPEN UP THE PUBLIC HEARING TODAY. SO WHAT'S THE PLEASURE OF THE BOARD? DR. HILSENBECK.

>> DR. HILSENBECK: WELL, THIS WAS A VERY LATE REQUEST THAT WE GOT YESTERDAY AFTERNOON LATE. I ACTUALLY DIDN'T SIGHT UNTIL LAST NIGHT WHEN I GOT HOME ABOUT 9:00.

I UNDERSTAND THAT MOST OF IT HAS TO DO WITH THE TRAFFIC CIRCLE IDEA WITH CONCEPT OF A TRAFFIC CIRCLE ON LEWIS SPEEDWAY AND I THINK WHILE THAT'S PROBABLY A GREAT IDEA, I HAD HEARD THE COUNTY HAD TURNED THAT DOWN SEVERAL TIMES, THAT THAT WAS JUST OFF THE TABLE BUT NOW IT'S BACK ON THE TABLE IN A LARGE WAY, APPARENTLY. BUT WHAT MY REAL REQUEST HERE IS THAT I HAVE SOME PERSONAL AND FAMILY MATTERS THAT I HAVE TO DEAL WITH AND I WILL NOT BE ABLE TO BE AT THE DECEMBER 2ND MEETING, AND IT'S POSSIBLE I WONT BE ABLE TO BE AT THE DECEMBER 16TH MEETING, SO -- AND I ASK YOU, PLEASE, BECAUSE THIS IS A MATTER OF GREAT INTEREST TO ME AND I'D LIKE TO BE HERE AND PARTICIPATE IN THIS, SO IF I WERE ON THE BOARD AND ONE OF ASKED THIS OF ME, I WOULD CERTAINLY VOTE TO CONTINUE THIS AFTER THE HOLIDAYS TO OUR FIRST MEETING IN JANUARY.

I KNOW THE 6TH OF JANUARY IS OFF THE TABLE BECAUSE WE VOTED NOT TO HOLD THAT MEETING, BUT I'M HOPE.

THAT I COULD BE HERE FOR THAT -- HOPEFUL THAT I COULD BE HERE FOR THAT, AND SINCE WE ORIGINALLY VOTED ON THIS MATTER, THIS ITEMS ABOUT THREE AND A HALF MONTHS AGO, I'M HOPING THAT THIS BOARD WILL AGREE TO WAIT UNTIL THE JANUARY PZA MEETING FOR ME TO PARTICIPATE. WE ARE ASKED TO CONSIDER THIS

[00:05:04]

>> MR. MATOVINA: MR. MILLER. >> MR. MILLER: OBVIOUSLY IT'S GOING TO BE PUT TO A VOTE, BUT MY ONLY CONCERN ON THIS IS THIS WAS REQUESTED JUST LAST NIGHT. I BELIEVE DURING OUR FIRST HEARING I ASKED THE APPLICANT IF THEY WANTED A DFERL BECAUSE WE HAD AN INTERVENE DATE BEFORE THE BCC.

THEY SAID NO, THEY WERE READY TO GO.

WE WENT FORWARD WITH THE VET AND IT WENT TO BCC.

IT'S BACK HERE. I DON'T KNOW HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE HERE JUST ON THIS ITEM BUT A LOT OF PEOPLE ARE HERE TO SPEAK ON THIS AND THEY DIDN'T KNOW ABOUT THE LAST NIGHT.

I'M FINE HEARING IT TODAY. I'M FINE MOVING IT FORWARD.

OBVIOUSLY I'D LIKE TO ACCOMMODATED DR. HILSENBECK.

IF HE CAN BE HERE ON THE 2ND, I THINK HE SHOULD BE HERE FOR THE VOTE. BUT THIS ISN'T THE FIRST TIME THIS HAS COME UP AND IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING, AND I'VE TALKED TO MR. CLYBURN, I'VE TALKED TO MR. SANDERS ABOUT IT.

THIS CONCERNS ONE ITEM FOR ONE NEIGHBOR.

IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY HAVE TO DO WITH THE DERNS OF CONCERNSF EVERYONE ELSE SO I JUST WANT TO PUT THAT OUT THERE, MY THOUGHTS

FOR CONTINUANCE. >> MANCHT NIG ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY THOUGHTS ON CONTINUANCE? MS. PERKINS PENCHES I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM TO CONTINUING TO THE 2ND OR IF YOU WANT TO PASS ON ANOTHER DATE BUT I THINK WE SHOULD ASK THE APPLICANT FIRST BEFORE WE MAKE A DIGS ON THE DATES. THEY'RE THE ONE REQUESTING THE CONTINUANCE, AND I KNOW IT WAS LAST MINUTE BUT WE SHOULD AFFORD

THEM THAT OPPORTUNITY. >> MR. MATOVINA: AND I AGREE WITH THAT. DOES ANYBODY ELSE UP HERE HAVE ANY COMMENTS BEFORE WE CALL THE APPLICANT UP?

MR. PETERSON. >> MS. PERKINS: MR. CHAIRMAN, I WOULD ECHO MR. MILLER, DR. HILSENBECK'S COMMENTS THAT WE HAVE HEARD THIS BEFORE AND IF WE ARE GOING TO DELAY IT, I WOULD RESPECT DR. HILSENBECK'S WISHES TO WHEN HE'S HERE LATER

IN JANUARY. >> MR. MATOVINA:

DR. MCCORMICK. >> DR. MCCORMICK: AGAIN, I

SUPPORT CONTINUING THIS. >> MR. MATOVINA: ALL RIGHT.

WILL THE APPLICANT COME UP AND LET US KNOW IF THEY ARE AMENABLE TO CONTINUING -- WE'RE NO HAVING A MEETING ON JANUARY THE 6TH SO THAT WOULD MOVE IT ALL THE WAY OUT TO JANUARY 20TH.

ALL THE WAY OUT TO JANUARY THE 20TH.

>> FOR THE RECORD LINDS' HAGA MILLER THIMS & MILLER.

IT OUR PRERCHT TO MOVE IT TO JANUARY.

THE TYPE OF CHANGE THAT'S BIEBER K-12 BOO PROPOSED IS A ROUND ABOUT ON LEWIS SPEEDWAY. THAT JAINT PROPERTY OWNER IS MAKING THAT CONTINUANCE REQUEST. SO IF WE COULD FOR THE BOARD, DECEMBER 2ND WOULD BE THE PREFERRED CONTINUANCE DATE.

>> OKAY. CHRISTINE, WHAT IS OUR OPTIONS HERE? DOES THE BOARD MAKE THIS DECISION ULTIMATELY OR ARE WE -- WHAT'S -- WOULD YOU TELL US WHAT

WE NEED TO DO HERE, PLEASE. >> YES.

IT IS WITHIN THE BOARD'S SOLE DISDREGS TO GRANT, DENY OR MODIFY A REQUEST FOR A CONTINUANCE, SO IT'S WITHIN YOUR AUTHORITY TO CONTINUE IT UNTIL JANUARY, IF THAT'S THE CONSENSUS. JANUARY 20TH IS THE SECOND

MEETING DATE. >> MR. MATOVINA: MR. MILLER.

>> MR. MILLER: JUST TO CLARIFY, I THINK THIS CONTINUANCE WAS REQUESTED BY MRR FROM MR. SANDERS ON THIS.

>> MR. MATOVINA: MR. SANDERS. >> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS. JUST TO CLARIFY HERE, YES, I REPRESENT, AS YOU MAY RECALL, CARL SANDERS, A1A.

I REPRESENT. [INAUDIBLE] ADJACENT TO THIS PROPERTY. AND WHEN WE RECEIVED THE REVISION YESTERDAY AFTERNOON ABOUT THE PROPOSED ROUND ABOUT, MY RESPONSE WAS, WELL, IT'S THE 11TH HOUR.

IF YOU WANT MY CLIENTS TO CONSIDER THIS AND TALK ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT IT CHANGES THEIR OPPOSITION TO THE PROJECT, YOU'LL NEED TO CONTINUE THIS BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE TIME, AND THAT BEING SAID, THEIR POSITION MAY BE EXACTLY THE SAME.

I DON'T KNOW. WE HAVEN'T HAD A CHANCE TO LOOK AT IT TO DETERMINE IF IT ADDRESSES THEIR CONCERNS, BUT THEY'RE JUST ONE PROPERTY OWNER. NOT THE WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD.

IF THE APPLICANT WANT TO GO FORWARD TODAY, WE'RE FINE WITH THAT. OUR POSITION TODAY IS IF WE DO GO FORWARD WITH THIS, THE ROUND ABOUT, PROPOSED ROUND ABOUT ADDITION DOES NOT, AS OF TODAY, JUST TO DOES NOT CHANGE THEIR OPPOSITION TO THIS PROJECT AT ALL.

[00:10:02]

IF YOU WANT TO DEFER IT UNTIL JANUARY, WE'RE FINE WITH THAT TOO. SO IF THAT LIVE DOPPLER RADAR

FICE IF THAT CL. >> MR. MATOVINA: MS. HAGA, DO YOU NEED A MINUTE? OKAY.

>> MR. MATOVINA, WHILE WE'RE WAITING IF I COULD TAKE CARE OF A HOUSEKEEPING ISSUE. THE FIRST THREE ITEMS THE ON AGENDA ARE RELATED, ROWE MOBILE HOME.

THEY ARE A BIT OUT OF ORDER. ITEM 3, THE ZONING VARIANCE SHOULD BE HEARD BEFORE THE TWO SPECIAL USE REQUESTS, SO WE COULD HEAR NUMBER 3 FIRST AND THEN PROCEED WITH 1 AND 2

SEPARATELY. >> MR. MATOVINA: WELL, THAT COULD BE FIVE, TEN MINUTES FROM NOW.

I'LL DO MY BEST TO REMEMBER. I DID MAKE A NOTE.

>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN FOR THAT BRIEF MINUTE AND CALLING MR. SANDER UP. I THINK THAT GAVE A LITTLE CLARITY OF THE NEED TO COLLABORATE SO AT THE DISCRETION BOARD CONTINUING THAT OUT TO THE DATE THAT FEELS RIGHT FOR THE BOARD, I THINK WE WOULD APPRECIATE.

SO IF THAT'S THE JANUARY 20TH DATE, WE CAN ACCOMMODATED THAT

SCHEDULE. >> MR. MATOVINA: ALL RIGHT.

SO WE'RE BACK TO THE BOARD FOR A MOKES.

MS. PERKINS. >> MS. PERKINS: I MOVE TO CONTINUE ACTION ITEM NUMBER 10 TO 1/20/22.

>> THANK YOU. >> MR. MATOVINA: IS THERE A

SECOND? >> SECOND.

>> MR. MATOVINA: ANY DISCUSSION? SECOND BY MR. PETER. ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, LET'S REGISTER THE VOTE SO THAT PASSES 5-1.

WE CONTINUE UNTIL JANUARY 20TH.

IF ANYONE IS HERE TO SPEAK ON THAT ITEM, WE WILL NOTE OPEN IT LATER IN THE MEETING. OKAY.

>> MR. MATTA VENA, I THINK I MISUNDERSTOOD THE DIRECTION.

2 AND 3 ARE RELATED. THAT --

>> YES, MA'AM. 2 AND 3 ARE RELATED AND 3 NEEDS TO BE HEARD BEFORE 2, BUT THEY'RE BEING HEARD TOGETHER BUT THE MOTION NEEDS TO BE MADE BEFORE NUMBER 2, AND THEN NUMBER

1 IS A SEPARATE ITEM. >> THANK YOU.

>> OKAY. WE ARE NOW INTO THE PUBLIC COMMENT SECTION OF OUR MEETING. WHAT THAT MEANS IS THAT YOU MAY COME UP AND SPEAK ON ANY ITEM THAT IS EITHER ON OR NOT ON-THE-AGENDA FOR UP TO THREE MINUTES.

IS THERE ANYONE WHO WANTS TO COME UP AT THIS POINT IN TIME AND MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT? WE WILL HAVE TIME FOR PUBLIC COMMENT ON EACH OF THE ITEMS TO BE HEARD AFTER THIS, SO YOU WILL BE ABLE TO SPEAK TO THE OTHER ITEMS BESIDES ITEM NUMBER 10 ON THE AGENDA. OKAY.

SEEING NOBODY AT THIS POINT -- I WILL ALSO TELL YOU THAT I'D

[1. SUPMIN 2021-08 Elkton Family Farm. Request for a Special Use Permit to allow the placement of More Than One Main Use Structure on a Residential Lot in Open Rural (OR) zoning, pursuant to Land Development Code (LDC), Sections 2.03.28 and 2.04.07, subject to the Family Farm and Lot provisions of LDC, Section 6.08.17 and Comprehensive Plan policy A.1.6.4.]

DOES THAT SOUND ABOUT RIGHT, MS? >> MS. PERKINS: YES.

>> MR. MATOVINA: AT THREE MINUTES APIECE, THEY START TO ADD UP. SO WHEN YOU COME UP, PLEASE MAKE YOUR COMMENTS BRIEF AND TO THE POINT, IF YOU CAN, BUT WE'RE NOT HERE TO ASK YOU TO NOT COME UP AND EXPRESS YOUR OPINION.

LET'S MOVE ON TO THE REGULAR AGENDA.

ITEM NUMBER 1 IS THE ELKTON FAMILY FARM.

AND MR. GARCIA I THINK IS HERE, AND I'LL FIRST ASK OF THE MEMBERS IF THERE WAS ANY EX PARTE COMMUNICATION.

>> NONE. >> MR. MATOVINA: AND THE CHAIRMAN HAS NONE. ALL RIGHT.

MR. GARCIA. >> SPEAKER: THANK YOU, AGENCY MEMBERS. I'M HAPPY TO BE HERE AND HAPPY TO SPEAK IN FRONT OF YOU TODAY. SO THIS IS A ITEM FOR A MINOR SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO ADD MORE THAN ONE MAIN USE STRUCTURE ONTO A RESIDENTIAL LOT. THIS IS IN REFERENCE TO ALSO A FAMILY FARM AFFIDAVIT THAT HAS BEEN APPLIED FOR AND REVIEWED BY STAFF. SORRY.

FOR THE RECORD MAX GARCIA MATTHEWS DESIGN GROUP 7 WALDO STREET. JUST TO GIVE AN IDEA OF WHERE WE ARE LOCATED, THIS LOT IS LOCATED ON WOODWARD ROAD WHICH IS THIS ROAD THROUGH. AND THEN IT'S ABOUT A MILE AND A HALF SOUTH OF COUNTY ROAD 214, AND THE MAIN ACCESS COLLECTOR IS ORANGE AVENUE RIGHT NOW RI. THE FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION FOR THIS PROPERTY IS AGRICULTURE.

THE ZONING DESIGNATION FOR THIS LOCATION IS OPEN RURAL.

IT IS DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO THE WEST BY PLANNED RURAL DEVELOPMENT. SO TO GIVE A QUICK SUMMARY OF

[00:15:02]

IT WAS PLATTED IN 1909. THE LDC ACTUALLY PROHIBITS MORE THAN ONE STRUCTURE FOR AGRICULTURAL OR SILVICULTURE OH A FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION UNLESS IT'S IN COMPLIANCE WITH OUR FAMILY FARMS AFFIDAVIT PROVISIONS.

WE HAVE COMPLETED THE REVIEW FOR THE FAMILY FARM ACH AFFIDAVIT EARLIER THIS YEAR. IT IS COMPLIANT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN POLICIES IN A1 THAT PROVIDE DETAILS FOR THE FAMILY FARM PROVISIONS. THERE ARE NO PENDING COMMENTS ON THAT FAMILY FARM ASIDE FROM THAT A MINOR USE PERMIT APPROVAL IS REQUIRED FOR THE APPROVAL OF THE AFFIDAVIT.

TYPICALLY YOU REQUIRE A YOU MINIMUM 20 ACRES TO DO A FAMILY FARM. HOWEVER, BECAUSE THIS IS A LOT RECORD PRIOR TO 1990, WE ARE EXEMPTED FROM THAT REQUIREMENT.

THE PROPERTY ITSELF IS 10 ACRES. SO JUST TO DISPLAY SOME COMPATIBILITY FOR THE USE OF ONE MAIN USE STRUCTURE ADD TO THIS PROPERTY, THE APPLICANTS ARE THREE FAMILY MEMBERS.

AS PART OF THE FAMILY FARM AFFIDAVIT, THEY ARE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE AN AFFIDAVIT EXPLAINING A THAT THEY WILL KEEP PERMANENT RESIDENTS ON THIS PROPERTY SO ONLY THREE THREE FAMILY MEMBERS ARE ALLOWED TO BE ON THAT FAMILY FARM.

IT WOULD REQUIRE ADDITIONAL AFFIDAVITS IF THEY WANTED TO ADD ANY OTHER FAMILY MEMBERS TO THIS PROPERTY.

HOWEVER, AT THIS TIME IT IS ON THE THREE FAMILY MEMBERS IN THE FORESEEABLE FUTURE. SO GOING ON TO FURTHER COMPATIBILITY FOR THIS PROPERTY, IT IS LOCATED IN EXISTING RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD. THERE ARE SEVERAL RESIDENTIAL HOMES LOCATED ALONG WOODWARD ROAD.

OUR PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT THE VERY END OF WOODWARD ROAD.

THE ONLY EXISTING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE ADJACENT TO THIS PROPERTY IS NORTH OF THE PROPERTY ACROSS WOODWARD ROAD.

THAT HOME IS SET BACK QUITE A DISTANCE TO PROVIDE SOME VISUAL BUFFER BETWEEN THE APPLICANT'S PROPERTY AND THEM.

OTHER THAN THAT THE PROPERTY ON THE EAST SIDE IS VACANT.

THE PROPERTY ON THE EAST IS ACTUALLY A APPROXIMATELY 95-FOOT FPL EASEMENT. WE COULDN'T FIND A RECORD OF THE ORDINANCE MAKING THE EASEMENT BUT IT IS THERE AND THE EAST OF THAT FURTHER IS THE PUD I SPOKE ABOUT EARLIER.

ON THE SWAYS VACANT PIECE OF LAND AND ON THE SOUTH IS WETLAND AND MORE VACANT PARCELS. WE HAVE NO INTENTION OF IMPACT THE WETLAND WHATSOEVER THAT EXIST ON THIS PROPERTY.

AS YOU'LL SEE ABOUT THE SITE PLAN, WE ARE COMPLIANT WITH LDC REQUIREMENTS. THIS SITE PLAN HAS GONE THROUGH STAFF REVIEW. THIS SITE PLAN PROVIDES THAT WE ARE MEETING THE REQUIRED SETBACKS, SEPARATION.

WE ARE ALSO REQUESTING ACCESSORY STRUCTURE IN ADDITION TO THESE TWO RESIDENCES. WE HAVE PROVIDED THAT THERE'S A 25-FOOT BUILDING SETBACK THE TO AVERAGE 15-FOOT WETLAND BUFFER.

MISSING AS I MENTIONED, THERE WILL BE NO IMPACT TO THOSE WETLANDS WHATSOEVER. AS YOU SEE THAT IS THE EASEMENTS, THAT DISTANCE THERE, AND THIS IS THE PROPERTY WHICH WE INTEND TO PUT TWO RESIDENCES ON.

SO IN SUMMARY, WE ARE REQUESTING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT BE APPROVED FOR ONE MAIN USE A T. ADDITION TO THE PRIMARY RESIDENTIAL USE.

IT IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH LDC AS WELL AS THE FAMILY FARM PROVISIONS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

WE ARE REQUESTING APPROVAL OF THE MINOR SPECIAL USE.

I AM HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU YOU MAY HAVE.

ADDITIONAL, TWO OF THE THE APPLICANTS FOR THE PROJECT ARE HERE TO SPEAK TO ANY QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE.

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

ANY OF THE AGENCY MEMBERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? SEEING NONE, DO WE HAVE IN PUBLIC SPEAKER CARDS?

>> MS. PERKINS: WE DO. WE HAVE THREE.

>> MR. MATOVINA: I'M SORRY, DR. HILSENBECK.

I DIDN'T SEE YOU. >> DR. HILSENBECK: I HAVE IA COMMENT. I'LL HOLD IT.

>> MS. PERKINS: WE HAVE WAND A COLEMAN.

CAN YOU STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.

>> SPEAKER: SNAIMEDZ WANDA COLEMAN.

>> MS. PERKINS: GO AHEAD. >> MR. MATOVINA: YOUR ADDRESS.

>> SPEAKER: I LIVE DIRECTLY >> MS. PERKINS: CAN YOU STATE

YOUR ADDRESS. >> SPEAKER: 6950 TWOOD WARD ROAD DIRECTLY ACROSS FROM THE PROPOSED EXEMPTION, WHATEVER.

[00:20:02]

THAT'S GOING TO BE RIGHT NEXT TO THE ROAD WHICH IS LIKE RIGHT IN MY FACE ON MY PROPERTY. I REALLY DON'T THINK THAT THERE IS ROOM TO PUT TWO, TWO STRUCTURES, TWO WELLS, TWO SCEPTICS. I DON'T THINK IT'S LEGAL TO COORDINATING TO YOUR OWN RECORDS.

SO THAT IS MY CONCERN. >> MR. MATOVINA: THANK YOU.

>> MS. PERKINS: NEXT WE HAVE KATHIE HUGHES.

>> AND HELLO. MY NAME IS DEATH HUGHES AND WE HAVE PROPERTY AT 7100 WOODWARD ROAD.

I'LL REITERATE WHAT WANDA HAD SAID.

YOUR UNDERSTANDING WHEN WE FURRED THE PROPERTY OUT THERE THAT OPEN RURAL WAS ONE HOUSE PER ACRE OR ONE STRUCTURE PER ACRE AND AS SHE SAID IT'S 1.33 ACCORDING TO YOUR RECORDS.

WE ALSO ARE CONCERNED. THEY SAY STRUCTURE, AND I SAW THE DIAGRAM, BUT THE FACT THAT THEY COULD CHANGE THEIR MIND AND PUT MOBILE HOMES BECAUSE IT'S NOT -- IT SAYS STRUCTURE.

WE FIND SIGNED COVENANTS WHEE BOUGHT PROPERTY OUT THERE THAT SAID THERE WERE NO MOBILE HOMES ALLOWED ON WOODWARD ROAD AND I UNDER FROM THE COUNTY THAT YOU DON'T REGULATE THOSE COULD HAVE NANSZ, BUT WE -- COVENANTS BUT WE DO HAVE A LOT OF -- AND I'M CONCERNED THEY COULD CHANGE THEIR MIND AND PUT A MOBILE HOME. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT COULD BE IN THE RECORD THAT THAT COULD BE A RESTRICTION ADDED THAT IF YOU DO APPROVE THIS, THAT THERE WOULD BE NO MOBILE HOMES ALLOWED.

THANK YOU. >> MR. MATOVINA: THANK YOU.

>> MS. PERKINS: NEXT WE HAVE AMY NELSON.

>> SPEAKER: HI. I'M AMY NELSON.

I LIVE AT 7015 WOODWARD ROAD AND I ECHO THE SAME FEELINGS.

MY CONCERN IS PUTTING TWO STRUCTURES ON 1.3 BUILDABLE ACRES. IT DOES NOT APPEAR TO BE ENOUGH ROOM. IT JEOPARDIZES OUR PROPERTY VALUE AS WELL AS THE OUR STREET AND HOW IT LOOKS, AND WE'VE ALL SPENT A LOT OF MONEY BUILDING OR HOMES AND HAVE THEM SET BACK.

I'M ALSO CONCERNED ABOUT WHAT THE STRUCTURE IS, AND I ASK IF YOU DO APPROVE THAT THAT YOU ARE ABLE TO PUT IN THERE THAT THE STRUCTURE WILL BE -- DOES NOT ALLOW A MOBILE HOME AND THAT IT WILL BE AT LEAST A MODULAR OR A PERMANENT STRUCTURE HOME ON THE

PROPERTY. >> MR. MATOVINA: THANK YOU.

ANY OTHER? BACK INTO THE AGENCY, I GUESS I'LL ASK MS. BISHOP IS THE 1 ACRE.

GROSS ACRE OR PER NET ACRE? >> SPEAKER:

>> THE OR ZONING WOULD ALLOW IT'S JUST ONE UNIT PER ACRE.

>> MR. MATOVINA: THANK YOU. WOULD THE APPLICANT LIKE TO COME

UP AND PROVIDE ANY REBUTTAL? >> HELLO.

I WOULD LIKE TO ADDRESS THE COMMENTS FROM THE SPEAKER CARDS.

THE PROPOSED STRUCTURES, WE ARE UNDERSTAND THE UNDERSTANDING THAT AS LONG AS WE MEET THE LDC REQUIREMENTS OF ONE UNIT PER 10N COMPLIANCE WITH THE LDC COMPLIANCE FOR HOME IN OPEN RURAL ZONING. IT'S MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THAT ACREAGE WOULD ONLY APPLY TO THE MIXED USE, FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION. IN ADDITION, WE ARE INTENDING ON HAVING AT LEAST ONE OF THOSE HOMES BE MODULAR.

THE OTHER ONE IS OPEN TO CONSIDERATION FOR THE APPLICANTS. THEY HAVEN'T COMPLETELY SETTLED ON A HOME JUST YET BUT WE DO KNOW AT LEAST ONE OF THIS WILL BE A MODULAR CONSTRUCTED HOME. THERE WILL BE NO IMPACTS ON WETLANDS. BOTH OF THESE STRUCTURES WOULD BE COMPLOON WITH LDC REQUIREMENTS OF FRONTAGE, SIDE SETBACKS AND IT IS LOCATED AT THE VERY END OF THE STREET AND ONLY IS ADJACENT TO THE NEIGHBOR NORTH, AS SAID BY THE FIRST PRESENTER. WE CAN ADDRESS THE CONDITION OF THE HOME STRUCTURE WITH MY CLIENT IF THAT IS A CONDITION YOU REQUIRE. HOWEVER, WE OTHERWISE ARE UNDER

[00:25:02]

>> MR. MATOVINA: ALL RIGHT. WE'RE BACK INTO THE AGENCY.

DOES ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT OR STAFF? DR. HILSENBECK.

>> DR. HILSENBECK: I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW IF WE PUT IN A PRESERVING THAT THERE HAS TO BE PERMANENT STRUCTURES.

YOU SAID ONE MODULAR HOME AND THEN THE OTHER HOME IS UNDER DISCUSSION. YOUR NEIGHBORS OUT THERE SEEM TO BE PRETTY ADAMANT THAT THEY WANT PERMANENT HOMES ON THE PROPERTY, SO I'D LIKE TO KNOW IF INDEED YOU COULD ACCEPT THAT TYPE OF RESTRICTION TO HAVE PERMANENT HOMES ON THERE.

>> YES. OUR COMPLIANT IS COMFORTABLE WITH HAVING ONE MORE PERMANENT STRUCTURE MODULAR HOME AS THE OTHER HOME. YES, SIR.

>> DR. HILSENBECK: I'M NOT CERTAIN ON THE DISTINCTION TECHNICALLY LEGALLY ON MODULAR HOME VERSUS MOBILE HOME.

DO YOU KNOW, TERESA, OFFHAND? I'LL BET YOU DO.

>> WELL, IT'S NOT MY EXPERTISE BY ANY MEANS, BUT FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND FROM MY EXPERIENCE WITH WORKING WITH THESE TYPE OF UNITS, IS A MODULAR HOME, THEY ARE GOVERNED DIFFERENTLY THAN A MOBILE HOME WITH RESPECT TO HOW THEY'RE LICENSED, AND MOBILE HOMES ARE LICENSED THROUGH A DIFFERENT AGENCY.

I THINK THE EO OR SOMEBODY HAS SOME APPROVAL OVER THOSE FOR MOBILE HOMES. AND MODULAR HOMES ARE NOT

REGULATED THAT WAY. >> DR. HILSENBECK: OKAY.

I'D LIKE TO ASK THE APPLICANT ONE MORE QUESTION THAT JUST CAME TO MIND. I WAS IN FAVOR OF THIS UNTIL I HEARD YOUR NEIGHBORS SPEAK. AND I THOUGHT YOU HAD AIR NICE SITE PLAN AND YOU WERE STAYING OUT OF MCCULLOUGH CREEK AND YOU WERE NESTING THOSE UP THERE IN THE NORTHWEST PART OF THE PROPERTY, BUT -- SO EACH HOUSE IS GOING TO HAVE A WELL AND A SEPTIC OR IS THERE A WAY TO SHARE ONE WELL AND ONE SEPTIC?

>> OUR INTOONGS TO SHARE ONE DRAINFIELD AND HAVE TWO SEPARATE SEPTIC TANKS. OUR ENGINEERING BELIEVES THAT

WOULD BE A FEASIBLE SOLUTION. >> DR. HILSENBECK: SO ONE DRAINFIELD, TWO SCEPTICS. WHAT ABOUT THE WELL?

>> THE WELL IS LOCATED TOWARDS THE FRONT, ACTUALLY.

SO RIGHT UP HERE YOU'LL SEE THE WELL.

PER WHY ARED COULD RETIREMENTS WE HAVE TOBY 75 FEET AWAY FROM A ADRIANAFIELD. DRAINFIELD.

BASED HOW THE SITE PLAN DESIGNED IT HAD THE SEPTIC DRAINFIELD CAN GO IN IEWFORTSDZ THOSE LOCATIONS.

WE PLAN -- EITHER OF THOSE LOCATIONS.

WE PLAN TO HEAD FOR THAT. WE'RE COMFORTABLE WITH THIS SITE PLAN IN TERMS OF SEPTIC AND WELL USE AS WELL.

>> DR. HILSENBECK: SO THE DRAINFIELD WILL BE WELL AWAY

FROM MCCULLOUGH CREEK? >> WE'RE NOT SURE 100% WHERE THE DRAINFIELD WILL GO. IT WILL LIKELY GO BACK HERE BEHIND UNIT ONE OR BACK BEHIND UNIT 2.

IT MIGHT LOCATED SOMEWHAT WITHIN THE SETBACK BUT THAT IS NOT FOR SURE. IT WILL NOT BE LOCATED IN THE

WETLANDS BUFFER. >> DR. HILSENBECK: THANK YOU.

>> MR. MATOVINA: OKAY. ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS

OR COMMENTS? >> MR. CHAIR, IF I MAY ADDRESS, I JUST WANT TO ELABORATE A LITTLE BIT BEFORE ON IT'S MANUFACTURED MODULAR BUILDING. WE DO HAVE THAT DEFINED IN OUR CODE AND IT MEANS A CLOSED BUILDINGS STRUCTURE OR SYSTEM OF SUB ASSEMBLIES WHICH MAY INCLUDE STRUCTURE, ELECTRICAL, PLUMBING WITH HEATING, VENTILATING OR OTHER SERVICE SYSTEMS AND MANUFACTURING FACILITIES FOR INSTALLATION OR ERECTION WITH OR WITHOUT SPECIFIED COMPONENTS AS DEFINED AS THE FINISHED BUILDING OR AS PART OF A FINISHED BUILDING.

AND THEN IT GOES ON TO SAY THAT THIS DEFINITION DOES NOT APPLY TO MANUFACTURED/MOBILE HOMES OR MANUFACTURED MODULE BUILDING SHALL ALSO MEAN AS THE OPTION OF THE MANUFACTURER THAT THE BUILDING OF OPEN CONSTRUCTION MADE OR ASSEMBLED IN MANUFACTURING FACILITIES FROM THE BUILDING SITE FOR INSULATION OR INSTALLATION ON THE BUILDING SITE.

WHAT IT'S GETTING AT IS IT IS NOT A MOBILE HOME, AND I THINK YOU CAN COME IN AND YOU CAN -- LIKE THEY PUT UP THE WALLS AND THE WALLS MAY HAVE BEEN CREATED SOMEWHERE ELSE BUT NOW THEY'RE BRINGING THE WALLS INTO THE SITE AND THEY'RE PUTTING THE WALLS

UP. >> MR. MATOVINA: THANK YOU.

OKAY. SO WE'RE BACK INTO THE AGENCY FOR A MOTION. MS. PERKINS.

>> MS. PERKINS: I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE SPECIAL USE PERMIT, SPECIAL USE PERMIT SUPMIN 2021-08 SUBJECT TO NINE CONDITIONS. AND EIGHT FINDS NS FACT AS

PROVIDED IN THE STAFF REPORT. >> MR. MATOVINA: WE HAVE

MOTION BY MS. PERKINS. >> DR. HILSENBECK: I'LL SECOND THAT BUT ARE WE GOING TO MOD IF I THAT TO ENSURE THAT THERE'S

[00:30:03]

>> MS. PERKINS: THAT IS NOT MY MOTION.

>> DR. HILSENBECK: OKAY. THEN I'M NOT GOING TO SECOND IT.

>> MR. MATOVINA: SO WE HAVE A MOTION BY MS. PERKINS -- BEFORE WE PLOA ON THIS -- WELL, WE'VE GOT A MOTION BY MS. PERKINS.

IS THERE A SECOND IN MR. MILLER. ALL RIGHT.

DISCUSSION. I WOULD LIKE TO MENTION SOMETHING. A MODULAR HOME HAS TO COMPLY, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, A FLORIDA BUILDING CODE WHICH MEANS TYPICALLY IT'S GOING TO COME IN IN PANELS ON A TRUCK.

THEY WILL BE NUMBER CODE SO THEY KNOW WHAT ORDER TO PUT THEM IN.

THEY ATTACH IT TO A SLAB TYPICALLY.

IT'S GOT TO HAVE AULD WIND SHEAR REQUIREMENTS AND EVERYTHING ELSE. A MOBILE HOME COMES IN IN ONE PIECE OR TWO PIECES TYPICALLY. IT'S NOT TYPICALLY A ATTACHED TO A SLAB AND IT IS REGULATED ENTIRELY THROUGH A TOTALLY DIFFERENT PROCESS. A MOBILE HOME HAS TO ACTUALLY APPLY FOR A ANNUAL RENEWAL OF THEIR TAG REGISTRATION JUST LIKE A CAR, YOU DO FOR YOUR CAR. THAT I KNOW YOU HAVE TO DO FOR SURE BECAUSE I HAVE ONE. AND IT DOES GET TIED DOWN BUT IT GETS TIED DOWN WAY DIFFERENTLY THAN A STANDARD STRUCTURE THAT GOES THROUGH THE BUILDING PERMIT PROCESS.

DR. HILSENBECK. >> DR. HILSENBECK: OKAY.

WHAT I WANT TO ENSURE HERE, TO GIVE THE NEIGHBORS SOME MORE COMFORT, IS THAT THE SECOND HOME PUT OUT ON THE PROPERTY IS NOT A

MOBILE HOME. >> MR. MATOVINA: ALL RIGHT.

ANYBODY ELSE? DISCUSSION.

ALL RIGHT. WE'VE GOT A MOTION AND A SECOND.

LET'S GO AHEAD AND RECORD THE VOTE.

[Items 2 & 3 ]

IT'S NOT WORKING. ALL RIGHT.

THERE WE GO. THAT MOTION PASSES 5-1.

OKAY. ON TO ITEM NUMBER 3 ON THE AGENDA. WE'RE TAKING UP ITEM NUMBER 3 FIRST. IT'S COUPLED WITH ITEM NUMBER 2 BUT WE HAVE TO VOTE ON ITEM NUMBER 3 FIRST, SO MR. ROWE, ARE YOU HERE? MS. ROWE.

I'M SORRY. >> .

>> MEHM I'M DOMINIQUE. RUDOLPH ROWE WAS MY DAD.

>> MR. MATOVINA: BEFORE YOU PROCEED, MS. ROWE, HOLD ON.

ANY EX PARTE COMMUNICATION? GO AHEAD, MS. ROWE.

YOUR ADDRESS EMPLOYEES. >> 28 NORTH WHITNEY STREET APARTMENT 9 SPHRAWGHT SPHAWGHT FLORIDA 320 GO 4.

>> MR. MATOVINA: THANK YOU. ST. AUGUSTINE, FLORIDA.

>> MR. MATOVINA: THIS IS A REQUEST FOR A SPEBL USE FOR A MOBILE HOME ON MY PARENTS' PROPERTY.

THEY HAD A HOUSE FIRE TWO YEARS AGO, SO WE NEED A ZONING VARIANCE FIRST BEFORE WE CAN DO ANYTHING TO PUT A MOBILE HOME OR ANYTHING UP THERE. THIS IS THE ADDRESS OF THE PROPERTY. IT'S 545 NORTH NASSAU STREET.

IT'S HERE IN ST. AUGUSTINE. THIS IS THE MAP.

THE RESIDENTIAL DEED. THE ZONING MAP.

THE RS-3. THAT'S THE PROPERTY RIGHT HERE.

THAT WAS THEIR HOUSE BEFORE THEY HAD THE HOUSE FIRE.

WE HAVE A EASEMENT AS WELL FOR THEM TO CROSS OVER RIGHT HERE TO GET TO THEIR LAND. I'M ASKING YOU, CAN YOU PLEASE APPROVE THE ZONING VARIANCE. THIS HAS BEEN REALLY HARD FOR THEM. THEY'VE BEEN STAYING WITH MY AUNT FOR TWO YEARS, AND THIS IS THE LAST THING THAT WE'RE WAITING FOR TO BE APPROVED. I ALREADY HAVE THE MOBILE HOME ALREADY APPROVED. ALL THEY HAVE TO DO IS JUST SIGN THE PAPERS. AND IF THIS IS APPROVED, WE CAN MOVE FORWARD. AND THAT'S THE SURVEY THAT WE

[00:35:04]

AND THE PROPERTY, LIKE I SAID, IT WAS A HOUSE THERE BEFORE AND IT BURNT DOWN. AND WE HAD THE EASEMENT ALREADY FOR THE YARD AND FOR US TO GET ACCESS OVER TO OUR PROPERTY.

SO THERE WAS NO CODE ON THE APPLICATION OR ANYTHING.

SO THERE ARE 11 CONDITIONS TOGETHER AND EIGHT FINDINGS.

AND SIX DENIALS. AND THAT'S IT.

THAT'S IT FOR THE ZONING VARIANCE.

AND THEN WE'LL JUST MOVE TO THE --

>> >> MR. MATOVINA: HOLD ON.

WE'LL GO THROUGH THIS ONE FIRST, MA'AM.

>> OKAY MANCHT SO DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? SEEING NONE, DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC SPEAKER CARDS?

>> MS. PERKINS: WE DO NOT. >> MR. MATOVINA: SO WE'RE BACK INTO THE AGENCY FOR A ACTION ON THE VARIANCE REQUEST.

MS. PERKINS PERCENTAGE OF MOTION TO APPROVE ZONING VARIANCE 2021-28 SUB TO SEVEN CONDITIONS AND FIVE FINDINGS OF FACT AS

PROVIDED IN THE STAFF REPORT. >> DR. HILSENBECK: SECOND.

>> MR. MATOVINA: MOTION BY MS. Y DR. HILSENBECK.

THE. ANY DISCUSSION.

>> MR. MATOVINA, I'M SORRY TO INTERRUPT, HOWEVER, THE STAFF REPORT FINDING ARE WRITTEN IN A WAY THAT THE BOARD NEEDS TO DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT THE VARIANCE WILL BE TRANSFERABLE, SO IF WE COULD GET CLARIFICATION ON THAT ISSUE.

>> MR. MATOVINA: SO BACK TO THE ORIGINAL MOTION, MS. PERKINS MENCHES MY MOTION WOULD BE FOR TRANSFER ABILITY MANCHT MOTION BY MS. PERKINS FOR -- TO MOVE IT WITH TRANSFERABILITY IS THE

SECOND. >> DR. HILSENBECK: I'LL STILL

SECOND THAT. >> MR. MATOVINA: DR. HYMNS SECONDS IT. NOW IS HILSENBECK SECONDS. I THANK YOU, COUNTRIES CHR.

SEEING NONE, LET'S REGISTER THE VOTE.

ALL RIGHT. THE VARIANCE IS APPROVED

>> THANK YOU. >> MR. MATOVINA: NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD AGAIN. MS. ROWE.

>> IF I MAY THROUGH THE CHAIR, THE POWERPOINT PUT TOGETHER WAS FOR BOTH APPLICATIONS, SO THIS WOULD JUST BE REDUNDANT TO GO THROUGH FOR THE SPECIAL USE BECAUSE SHE HAS ALREADY EXPLAINED THE NEED FOR THAT, SO IF IT PLEASES THE BOARD, YOU COULD JUST GO AHEAD AND RENDER YOUR DECISION ON SPECIAL USE.

>> MR. MATOVINA: WE WOULD BE GLAD TO DO THAT.

THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.

DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS RELATED TO THE SPECIAL USE? ANY SPEAKER CARDS RELATED TO SPECIAL USE?

>> MS. PERKINS: NONE. >> MR. MATOVINA: WE'RE BACK INTO THE AGENCY FOR A MOTION. MS. PERKINS.

>> MS. PERKINS: MOTION TO A MOVE ESSENTIAL.

USE MER IT. SUPMIN 2021-02 SUBJECT TO EIGHT FINDINGS AND AND EIGHT FINDINGS FACT.

>> MR. MATOVINA: WE DON'T DEAL WITH TRANSFERABILITY ON THIS I

[4. MINMOD 2021-13 Baptist Primary Care at Parkway Village. A request for a Minor Modification to the World Commerce Center PUD, Ord. 2003-108, as amended, to reduce the required setback along the east property boundary from twenty (20) feet to ten (10) feet and to increase the Baptist Primary Care building square footage from 13,000 to 15,000 square feet, specifically located in Outparcel 8 within the Parkway Village project at World Commerce Center PUD.]

>> MS. PERKINS: PENCH WITH TRANSFERABILITY.

>> MR. MATOVINA: MOTION BY MS. Y DR. HILSENBECK.

ANY DISCUSSION? SEEING NONE, LET'S REGISTER THE VOTE CONGRATULATIONS, MS. ROWE.

>> THANK YOU SO MUCH. >> MR. MATOVINA: YOUR WELCOME.

GOOD LUCK. LET'S MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER 4, AND WE HAVE MS. DENDOR WITH ETM. GOOD TO SEE YOU AGAIN.

>> YOU TOO. >> MR. MATOVINA: ANY SPART COMMUNICATION WITH REGARD TO ITEM NUMBER 4?

>> DR. HILSENBECK: NONE. [INAUDIBLE]

>> I FILED A NOTICE OF RECUSAL ON THIS.

>> MR. MATOVINA: MS. DENDOR. >> IS FOR THE FOR THE RECORD CASEY DENY ADORE ENGLAND THIMS & MILLER.

OLD SANTIAGO ROAD. THIS IS A REQUEST FOR BAPTIST PRIMARY CARE LOCATED IN PARKWAY VILLAGE WHICH IS IN THE WORLD COMMERCE CENTER PUD. THE REQUEST IS TO REDUCE 20-FOOT

[00:40:01]

PARKWAY VILLAGE IS A DEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA WITHIN WORLD COMMERCE CENTER. THE SITE HAS A FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF MIXED USE WHICH ALLOWS FOR THE PROPOSED USE OF A BAPTIST PRIMARY CARE FACILITY AND THE SITE AGAIN IS ZONED WORLD COMMERCE CENTER PUD WHICH ALSO ALLOWS FOR THOSE USES.

THE DEVELOPER OF THE PARKWAY VILLAGE DEVELOPMENT AREA HAS BEEN ALLOCATED OVER 111,000 SQUARE FEET OF NON-RESIDENTIAL USES AND 210 DWELLING UNITS FOR MULTI-FAMILY USES.

THE PROPOSED BAPTIST PRIMARY CARE BUILDING WOULD BE DEVELOPED IN TWO PHASES TO TOTAL -- TO HAVE A TOTAL OF 15,000 SQUARE FEET. THE CODE REQUIREMENT AGAIN IS A 20-FOOT SETBACK TO NON-RESIDENTIAL USES THAT ARE ADJACENT TO ROAD RIGHT-OF-WAY AND RESIDENTIAL USES.

THAT SETBACK APPLIES TO BUILDINGS, STORAGE AND PARKING.

AS YOU CAN SEE, ON THE SITE PLAN SHOWN ABOVE, THE PROPOSAL FOR THE FUTURE BUILDING WOULD BE WITHIN THAT 20-FOOT SETBACK APPROXIMATELY 10 FEET WOULD BE PROVIDED, NO LESS THAN 10 NEAT, AND THE FUTURE DEVELOPMENT JEANGTS IS CURRENTLY UNKNOWN WHETHER THAT'S GOING TO BE RESIDENTIAL OR NON-RESIDENTIAL SWEER GOING AHEAD AND REQUESTING THAT THAT 10 FEET ALSO APPLY TO THE PARKING AREA WHICH DOES MEASURE 10 FEET FROM THAT ADJACENT PROPERTY LINE. THIS RELIEF WOULD ONLY BE SPECIFIC TO OUT-PARCEL 8 WHICH IS THE BAPTIST PRIMARY CARE PARCEL WITHIN PARKWAY VILLAGE. THERE IS APPROXIMATELY 40 FEET PROVIDED BETWEEN THE BAPTIST PRIMARY CARE BUILDING AND THE ADJACENT APARTMENT BUILDING. THIS SITE PLAN SHOWS 45 FEET.

THIS IS THE PLACEMENT OF THE PHASE 1 BUILDING AND THE PHASE 2 WOULD BUMP OUT APPROXIMATELY 5 FORE MORE FEET GIVING ABOUT 40 FEET THERE THE PLPPED THE BUILDING EXPANSION AND PARKING ARE 20-FOOT SETBACK BOUNDARY.

THE APPLICANT PROPOSES ENHANCED LANDSCAPING WITHIN THAT 10-FOOT COMPATIBILITY TBUFER. CURRENTLY THERE'S AN "A" SCREENING REQUIREMENT WHICH IS SHRUBBERY AND A FENCE, FENCD THEY'RE PROPOSING TO PROVIDE SOME ADDITIONAL TREES, SHADE TREES AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE WHICH WOULD BE SUBJECT TO APPROVAL AT THE TIME THAT CONSTRUCTION PLANS ARE SUBMITTED. THE APARTMENT DEVELOPER HAS BEEN IN TOUCH WITH THE APPLICANT WITH THE PROPOSAL FOR THE REDUCED SETBACK AND THEY HAVE NO OBJECTION TO THAT.

THE REQUEST IS NOT CONTRARY TO THE PUBLIC INTEREST, AND I'LL BE

AVAILABLE FOR ANY QUESTIONS. >> MR. MATOVINA: OKAY.

DO ANY AGENCY MEMBERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS?

DR. HILSENBECK. >> DR. HILSENBECK: I HAVE ONE.

IN THE APPLICATION THAT I RECEIVED ELECTRONICALLY ON PAGE 6 OF THAT APPLICATION IT SHOWS A DIFFERENT BOUNDARY AND LOCATION OF THIS PROPERTY THAN WHAT YOU JUST SHOWED.

SO I'M JUST GOING TO HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF YOUR PROPERTY AND PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT APPEARS TO BE DIRECTLY INTO A CYPRESS DOME FORESTED WETLAND AREA, BUT WHEN YOU SHOWED YOUR SLIDE, YOUR PROPERTY APPEARS TO BE SHIFTED TO THE SOUTHWEST OF THERE. ON MENU THE PROPERTY IS SHIFTED TO THE NORTH END OF THAT CYPRESS DOME.

SO I JUST WONDER WHICH IS CORRECT.

I DON'T KNOW IF OTHER PEOPLE'S PRINTED MATERIALS -- I GET THEM ELECTRONICALLY -- SHOW THIS SAME THING, BUT I HAVE IT RIGHT HERE ON MY PHONE. SO I'M WONDERING WHICH IS THE CORRECT PLACEMENT. I'M GOING TO VOTE FOR THIS BUT I'M JUST CONCERNED ABOUT THAT CYPRESS DOME WETLAND, FORESTED WETLAND AND IF IT INDEED WAS YOUR PROPERTY -- YOUR PROPERTY DOES ENCROACH THAT MUCH INTO IT, ABOUT TWO-THIRDS OF IT OR HALF, THAT COULDN'T YOU ALL JUST STAY OUT OF THAT, BUT MAYBE YOU CAN

ANSWER THE QUESTION. >> THAT AERIAL MAP THAT ST. JOHNS COUNTY PROVIDED IN YOU ARE WHY STAFF REPORT IS A LITTLE OUTDATED. I DON'T HAVE A CLOSE P.

THE BEST I CAN DO IS SHOW YOU THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP THAT HAS THE CURRENT AERIAL UNDERNEATH IT.

THIS ONE IS DATED EARLY 2021. WHERE YOU CAN SEE THAT THERE HAVE ALREADY BEEN IMPACTS ON THAT WHEN THEY DID THE MASTER INFRASTRUCTURE FOR THE PARKWAY VILLAGE DEVELOPMENT, SO THE BAPTIST PRIMARY CARE WOULD NOT BE IMPACTING THAT WETLAND AT ALL. THOSE IMPACTS HAVE ALREADY TAKEN

PLACE. >> DR. HILSENBECK: OKAY.

SO WE DIDN'T HAVE THE MOST UP-TO-DATE AERIAL THEN.

>> CORRECT. >> DR. HILSENBECK: SO HALF

[00:45:02]

>> IT HAS BEEN IMPACTED, YES. >> DR. HILSENBECK: SAD.

TBHUT. >> MR. MATOVINA: ANY THOROUGH BOARD QUESTIONS? MS. DIDN'T DOR, WHAT WOULD YOU SAY THE HARDSHIP IS IN THIS CASE?

>> I WOULD SAY THAT THE HARDSHIP IS THAT THERE'S -- IT'S AN EXISTING MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT AND THEY'RE PROVIDING THE 40 FEET SETBACK OR THEY'RE PROVIDING MORE THAN 20 FEET FOR THE SETBACK. THE BUILDING, THEY'RE ALLOCATED OVER -- THEY'RE ALLOCATED UP TO 15,000 SQUARE FEET.

THEY ALSO HAVE -- THEY'RE ACCOMMODATING THE PARKING AND THE DRAINAGE AND EVERYTHING BUT PRIMARILY THE FACT THAT I IT'S A MIXED USE DEVELOPMENT AND YOU'RO INCOMPATIBILITY BUFFERS IN MOST MIXED USE COMMUNITIES IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY AND SO BY THE A LYING THE SETBACK ON TOP OF THAT, YOU'RE REDUCING THE

DEVELOPABLE AREA FOR THE CLIENT. >> MR. MATOVINA: THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT. DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC SPEAKER CARDS? PERCHLTS WE DO NOT.

>> MR. MATOVINA: THEN WE'RE BACK INTO THE AGENCY FOR A MOTION. MS. PERKINS.

>> MS. PERKINS: MOTION TO APPROVE MINOR MOD 2021-13 BAPTIST PRIMARY CARE AT PARKWAY VILLAGE REQUEST FOR A MINOR MODIFICATION TO WORLD COMMERCE CENTER PUD ORDINANCE 2003-108 AS AMEND TO REDUCE THE REQUIRED SETBACK ALONG THE EAST PROPERTY BOUNDARY FROM 20 FEET TO 10 FEET AND TO INCREASE THE BAPTIST PRIMARY CARE BILL SQUARE FOOTAGE FROM 13,000 TO 15,000 SQUARE FEET SPUSKLY LOCATED IN OUT-PARCEL 8 WITHIN THE PARKWAY VILLAGE PROJECT AT WORLD WORLD COMMERCE CENTER PUDS BASED UPON SIX FINDINGS OF FACT AND SIX FINDINGS MAFNTLE WE HAVE A FIRST BY MS. PERKINS. A SECOND BY MR. PETER.

[5. MAJMOD 2021-15 Worthington Estates (Lot 180). Request for a Major Modification to the Worthington Estates PUD (Ord. 2016-42) to convert a single parcel from Fill Mitigation uses to a Residential use in order to add one (1) single family unit, increasing the total number of units from 179 to 180. The request adds an Optional Density Bonus pursuant to LDC Sec. 5.10.04 and revises the MDP Map and MDP Text. The subject property is located on an unaddressed lot located on Scott Road. This item was continued from the October 21, 2021 PZA Agenda to a date certain (November 18, 2021) at the request of the applicant.]

MR. MILLER CAN'T VOTE. CAN YOU OVERRIDE THAT? THERE WE GO. ALL RIGHT.

THAT MOTION PASSES. CONGRATULATIONS.

3. ALL RIGHT.

LET'S MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER 5, AND MR. BURNETT.

BEFORE WE GET INTO ITEM NUMBER 5, I'M GOING TO ASK CHRISTINE TO EXPLAIN FOWS AND TO TO UE AUDIENCE WHAT OUR CHARGE IS HERE WITH REGARD TO THIS PARTICULAR ITEM.

>> YES, MR. MAT VOONA. CHRISTINE, SENIOR ASSISTANT INCRO ATTORNEY. THE ITEM HERE BEFORE YOU IS A REQUEST FOR A MAJOR MOD IF I CAIGHTS TO WORTHINGTON ESTATES PUD. THIS LORD MUST CONSIDER THE AP BOARD MUST EXR THE APPLICABLE COMP PLANT AND LAND DEVELOPMENT PROIFGHTSZ RAFERREDDING COMPATIBILITY FOR THE PARTICULAR REQUEST. I UNDER THERE MAY BE SOME OTHER ISSUES SPECIFICALLY COMPLAINTS, CODE FORM COMPLAINTS.

THIS BOARD CANNOT RESOLVE THOSE COMPLAINTS, AND TO THE INTENT THAT THOSE COMPLAINTS DO NOT RELATE TO THE COMPATIBILITY OF THE PROPOSED REQUEST, YOU MAY NOT CONSIDER THEM.

>> MR. MATOVINA: THANK YOU. SO JUST SO THAT THE AUDIENCE UNDERSTANDS, YOU'RE MORE THAN WELCOME TO COME UP HERE AND SAY WHATEVER YOU WOULD LIKE, BUT IF THERE'S DRAINAGE ISSUES THAT YOU FEEL ARE ASSOCIATED WITH THE WORTHINGTON STATES' PUD, IF THERE'S A FENCE ISSUE -- ESTATES PUD, IF THERE'S A FENCE ISSUE WHICH I BELIEVE SOME OF THE EMAILS WE GOT MENTIONED BOTH OF THOSE ITEMS, THIS BOARD IS NOT GOING TO RESOLVE THOSE ISSUES.

THOSE ARE RESOLVED BY FILING A PRIDE COMPLAINT THROUGH CODE ENFORCEMENT AND STAFF CAN HELP YOU THROUGH THAT PROCESS.

SO I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT THE AUDIENCE IS AWARE OF AN ACT, THAT THAT'S NOT THE CRITERIA THAT WE'RE SUPPOSED TO BE MAKING OUR DECISION UPON HERE TODAY. THAT BEING SAID, I'D LIKE TO ASK THE GROUP FOR EX PARTE COMMUNICATION.

>> I DROVE DOWN THE VERY BUMPY NON-COUNTY ROAD TO FIND SAID

LOT. >> MR. MATOVINA: AND I ALSO MADE A SITE VISIT AND ALSO HAD A CONVERSATION WITH BILL CLYBURN, THE DEVELOPER, LAST EVENING ABOUT THE ISSUES RELATED TO THIS. MS. PERKINS.

>> MS. PERKINS: I SPOKE WITH MR. BURNETT YESTERDAY BRIEFLY

ABOUT THIS PROJECT. >>>

>> MR. MATOVINA: DR. HILSENBECK.

>> DR. HILSENBECK: DOUG BITTERN AND I TRADE PHONE CIEWLS

AND EMAIL BUT WE NEVER SPOKE. >> MR. MILLER: I HAD A BRIEF CONVERSATION WITH MR. CLYBURN ABOUT IT.

>> MR. MATOVINA: SOW NOW WE'RE READY FOR YOUR PRESENTATION.

>> FOR THE RECORD DOUG BURN NET ST. JOHNS LAW GROUP HERE IN ST. AUGUSTINE, FLORIDA. AS YOU MENTIONED IN THE EX PARTE DISCLOSURE MR. CLYBURN IS HERE WITH ME TODAY AS WELL AS A COUPLE OF HIS ASSOCIATES FROM THE GROUP.

A COUPLE OF YOU HAVE BEEN OUT THERE ARE THERE FOR SITE VISIT.

[00:50:01]

YOU CAN SEE OUR LOT IS ALL WITH A UP INTO THE VERY NORTHEAST PORTION OF THE PROJECT. YOU DO ACCESS THIS SUBDIVISION VIA GREENBRIER ROAD. TAKING A LITTLE MORE RECENT AERIAL, ZOOMING IN ON IT, YOU CAN SEE THROTT SEE THE LOS SEPARATED FROM THE REST OF THE MAIN SUBDIVISION.

THE APPROVED PROJECT, THIS IS THE PROJECT OF WORTHINGTON ESTATES THAT'S THERE AND APPROVED AND LARGELY BUILT AT THIS STAGE. THE INFRASTRUCTURE IS FULLY IN.

THE MOST OF THE HOUSES ARE BUILT.

AND THIS IS THE PARCEL WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.

IT WAS A PARCEL OF RECORD, A PLAT DEEDED OF RECORD FOR MANY, MANY, MANY YEARS. IT ALIGNS JUST LIKE THE OTHER LOTS NEXT TO IT. OUTSIDE OF OUR PROJECT IT WAS A QUIEWRD FOR THE PURPOSES MINE -- A INQUIRED FOR THE PURPOSES OF MINING DIRT, NOT FOR THE PURPOSES OF WATER RETENTION.

THE ST. JOHNS COUNTY WATER PERMIT FOR THAT SITE ACTUALLY LAST THAT PARCEL FOR MINING DIRT, NOT FOR STORM WATER RETENTION, SO THIS DOES NOT INVOLVE A MODIFICATION OF THAT PRMIT FROM THE WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT.

I'LL JUMP THROUGH SOME OF THIS. YOU CAN SEE THIS IS OUR REVISED MDP MAP. IT'S 2.73 ACRES.

THIS IS THE PARCEL. IN FACT IT SAYS TRACT 65 ON HERE BECAUSE THAT'S THE NUMBER IT IS IN THAT SEQUENCE OF LOTS OUTSIDE OF THE SUBDIVISION OF WHAT ITS ORIGINAL NUMBER WAS.

EXCUSE ME. 36.

SUPER IMPOSED MY NUMBERS. SO IT'S TRACT 36.

OUTSIDE. THE INTERESTING THIN WHEN WE ORIGINALLY STARTED TO DO THIS, OUR MAJOR MODIFICATION WAS TO TAKE THIS WAR SELL OUT. STAFF DIDN'T WANTS YOU TO DO THAT. THEY WANTED US TO LEAVE IT IN THE PROJECT BUT TURN IT BACK INTO A SINGLE LOT RATHER THAN TAKING IT OUT AND RESTORING IT TO TRACT 36 LIKE IT WAS BEFORE.

THE TBHEAFNT NEIGHBORS GET NEXT TO THIS IS IT WON'T BE OR SO THE USE OF THIS LOT WON'T BE AS INTENSE AS LOT 35, LOT 37, 38 OR 39 NEXT TO IT. IT WILL ACTUALLY WIND UP THAT THIS LOT WILL HAVE THE SAME 35-FOOT DEVELOPMENT EDGE AROUND IT. SO YOU HAVE 35 FEET ON EACH SIDE THAT CAN'T BE USED. AND THEN ADDITIONALLY YOU HAVE UPLAND PRESS PAITION VAWTION FOR THE BACK HALF OF THE LOT THAT CAN'T BE USED AND S. THE LOTS NEXT TO IT DON'T HAVE THESE RESTRICTIONS US THAT WE'RE OR LOTS, AND THEN YOU WIND UP A LIMITED FOOT PRINCIPLED N BUILD ON THIS LOT AFTER APPROVAL. I'LL JUMP REAL QUICK TO SHOW YOU WHERE WE WERE AT LAST TIME AGAIN WITH AN AERIAL ZOOMED IN.

THIS IS 2 EMERGENCY ACCESS. IT'S IN THE A REAL ACCESS FOR VEHICULAR TRAFFIC BUT IT'S THE EMERGENCY ACCESS IN CASE THERE WAS AN EMERGENCY EITHER IN WORTHINGTON ESTATES OR OR SCOTT ROAD, EMERGENCY VEHICLES ARE COULD TRAVERSE THIS EITHER DIRECTION. WHEN WE WERE HERE LAST HEARING, THE FENCE TO PREVENT VEHICULAR TRAFFIC WAS THERE BUT NO FENCING ON EITHER SIDE OF IT. SUBSEQUENT TO THAT, ONE OF THE REASONS WE WANTED A CONTINUANCE, WE CANTED TO TAKE CARE OF SOME OF THESE ITEMS. SOMETIMES IT'S, YEAH, WE'RE GOING TO DO IT AND WE'RE REQUIRED 20EU TO DO IT BUT TO ACTUALLY DO IT AND BE HERE TODAY WHERE NOW IT LOOKS LIKE THIS.

YOU CAN SEE THE FENCE IS IN PLACE.

SOMEONE DOESN'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THE FENCING IS GOING TO BE DONE BECAUSE TODAY IT'S ACTUALLY BEEN ACCOMPLISHED. YOU CAN SEE THIS IS WHAT IT LOOKED LIKE AT THE HEARING BEFORE IN THIS AREA, NO FENCING, AND NOW IT'S FENCED. SO IT DOES PREVENT, FOR EXAMPLE, A VEHICLE FROM GOING AROUND THAT EMERGENCY ACCESS.

IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE LIMITED SIMPLY FOR EMERGENCY VEHICLES.

A VEHICLE COULD HAVE HERE ETCLY GONE AROUND IT.

THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN DRIVING IN SOMEONE'S BACKYARD, MONTH THERE IS THE FENCE IS NOW IN PLACE BOTH TO THE RIGHT AND LEFT OF THAT EMERGENCY ACCESS SO IT PREVENTS THAT CONNECTION.

EXPURT WAS IN THE PUD. WE -- AND IT WAS IN PUD.

WE DID ACCOMPLISH THAT NOW. AND AGAIN JUST A LAST LOOK AT THE MDP MATCH WHAT'S THERE, WHAT WILL BE BUILDABLE AFTER THIS APPROVAL. SO WITH THAT, I'LL CONCLUDE MY COMMENTS AT THIS STAGE. YOU CAN SEE AN OVERLAY OF THAT SITE PLAN ON THE SITE JUST SORT OF ROUGHLY WHAT IT WOULD LOOK LIKE AT THE END OF THE DAY. AND I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S PUBLIC COMMENT OR NOT BUT I'LL END MY PRESENTATION AT THIS

TIME. >> MR. MATOVINA: THANK YOU.

DR. HILSENBECK, DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION?

>> DR. HILSENBECK: YEAH, I'M JUST CURIOUS.

, DOUG, AS TO WHY Y'ALL ARE PUTTING SO MUCH EFFORT INTO THIS SINGLE LOT TO GET IT TO BE A SINGLE FAMILY LOT.

>> SURE, GOOD QUESTION. YOU KNOW, WHEN THE PROJECT STARTED ITS CONSTRUCTION THERE WAS A NUMBER OF COMPLAINTS THAT CAME UP, AND ONE OF THE COMPLAINTS, FOR EXAMPLE, WAS YOU

[00:55:01]

YOU WEREN'T SUPPOSED TO DO THAT. WELL, ONE OF THE THINGS WE FOUND OUT DURING THAT TIME AND ONE OF THE COMPLAINTS IS OUR SURVEYOR ON THE PROJECT ACTUALLY LIVED OFF SCOTT ROAD AND HE DROVE SCOTT ROAD TO THE PROJECT TO ENTER THE PROPERTY.

THAT'S NOT. THE DAAL CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC THAT WE'RE RUNNING CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC ON SCOTT ROAD BUT ONE OF THE FOLKS GOING TO AND FROM THE SITE ALL THE TIME WAS SOMEONE WHO LIVES OFF SCOOT ROAD. THERE WERE SOME OTHER COMPLAINTS. I CAN TELL YOU THE COUNTY COMMISSIONER AT THAT TIME ASKED TO MEET WITH MY CLIENTS OUT THERE WHO THEY DID MEET WITH THEM.

THE ISSUE WAS DISCUSSED OF, HEY, YOU GUYS ARE GOING TO MINE THE DIRT. IS THERE ANYTHING YOU CAN DO TO REDUCE THE CROSSING OR TRAFFIC ON THIS SECTION OF SCOTT ROAD.

MY CLIENT SAID, WELL, I CAN TURN IT BACK INTO A LOT.

SO HERE WE ARE. YOU KNOW, THE ULTIMATE RESULT OF THIS IS THIS GETS APPROVED, IT'S A LOT.

IT HAS VALUE. OBVIOUSLY IT ALSO BENEFITS FROM WHAT'S WHAT'S GONE ON IN THE LAST 18 MONTHS OF OUR WORLD THAT IT IS A VALUABLE LOT, AND SO MINING THE DIRT COULD BE DONE. OBVIOUSLY THAT DERIVES A VALUE AND A PROFIT POTENTIALLY. AND SO THIS IS AN OPTION THAT MY CLIENTS CLIENT IS WILLING TO PURSUE AND SO HERE WE ARE.

>> DR. HILSENBECK: PERSONALLY, I WOULD RATHER SEE IT AS A LOT RA THERON DUG UP AND MINED AND ALL THAT HAPP HAB HA AT THAT TIME DESTROYED. YOUR DWRUPLAND PRESERVATION THAKS BACK TOWARD THAT CREEK, WETLAND IN THE BACK.

>> AND THERE ARE A COUPLE SPECIMEN TREES BACK THERE AS WELL, SIR HISTORIAN INTERESTING. BUT I'M DRVE HINCHT INTERESTING.

I'M JUST CONCERNED. YOU ASKED FOR A CONTINUANCE THE LAST TIME WE HEARD THIS, SO THAT WAS GRANTED THERE ON THE SPOT, BUT, YOU KNOW, WE'VE HAD ALL THESE EMAILS.

I GUESS WE'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO CONSIDER THE 30 MUST OR 40 EMAILS WE RECEIVED ABOUT THIS, BUT WE CANNOT CONSIDER THE PAST TRACK RECORD OF THIS PARTICULAR DEVELOPER IN MEETING THEY ARE OBLIGATIONS TO THE COMMUNITY IN OUR DECISION?

>> NOT UNLESS THEY AS SOMEHOW RELATE TO THE COMPATIBILITY OF THE LAND USE CHANGE AND 2 ZONING CHANGE THEY'RE REQUESTING.

>> DR. HILSENBECK: ONE LETTER THAT WE RECEIVED, IT WAS STATED THAT IN 2014 ON APPROVAL OF WORTHINGTON ESTATES, THAT IT STATED ONE OF THE PROVISIONS WAS THAT NO CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC ON SCOTT ROAD, AND THEN APPARENTLY THAT WAS CODIFIED IN AN ORDINANCE IN 2016 THAT THERE WOULD BE NO CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC ON SCOTT ROAD, BUT YOU ARE SAYING THERE'S NO CONSTRUCTION

TRAFFIC ON SCOTT ROAD? >> AT THIS STAGE THERE'S

ABSOLUTELY NONE. >> DR. HILSENBECK: NONE NOW.

>> OTHER THAN OBVIOUSLY YOU'D HAVE THE CONSTRUCTION FOR THIS ONE HOUSE VERSUS THE MINING OF THE DIRT.

GOING BACK TO THAT ISSUE, I GUESS I WANT TO BE MINDFUL OF THE CHAIR'S DIRECTION RELATED TO THIS THAT IT'S NOT IN -- AND YOUR COUNTY ATTORNEY'S DIRECTION THAT THIS ISN'T PART OF THE ISSUE FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION BUT I'LL TOUCH ON IT NONETHELESS.

THERE WERE A LOT OF THINGS THAT WERE PERCEIVED AS BEING VIOLATING THE PUD ORDINANCE OR COUNTY CODE AND THE LIKE, AND MY CLIENT OFTENTIMES IS PHYSICALLY ON-SITE.

YOU KNOW, YOU HAVE A LOT OF SITUATIONS I THINK WHERE DEVELOPERS OR HOMEBUILDERS HAVE A SUB THAT GOES OUT THERE.

MY CLIENT TYPICALLY SITS OUT THERE A GOOD POURING OF THE DAY WATCHING WHAT'S GOING -- GOOD PORTION OF THE DAY WATCHING WHAT'S GOING ON, AND SO HE IS PHYSICALLY THERE.

WHAT WE FOUND OUT WAS THERE WERE A NUMBER OF THINGS THAT WERE COMPLAINTS THAT WEREN'T ACTUALLY THE DEVELOPER'S FAULT, THE DEVELOPER AREAS -- ANYTHING H THE DEVELOPER.

SOME OF THE ISSUES RELATED TO ONE OF THE PONDS.

WANTS ANYONE RELATED TO PROJECT. WASN'T ANYONE RELATED TO PROJECT AND IT WAS YOUNG KIDS ACTUALLY WHO LIVED IN A DIFFERENT AR ANOTHER THING THAT WE LEARNED, AND I'LL BE SENSITIVE TO TIMING, WE DON'T WANT TO HARM ANY NEIGHBOR IN COMING THROUGH WITH THE APPROVAL. WE DID LEARN, FOR EXAMPLE, THAT ONE OF THE NEIGHBORS DID FILL ON THEIR OWN UNRELATED TO US, WHICH DID CAUSE A DRAINAGE ISSUE. WE MADE THEM AWARE OF WHAT THEY'RE ALLOWED TO DO VERSUS WHAT HAD BEEN DONE, SO WE'VE HAD SOME OF THOSE THINGS GO ON THAT HAD NOTHING TO DO WITH THE

DEVELOPER. >> DR. HILSENBECK: THIS IS A PERSON WHO WAS PLACING FILL IN THEIR BACKYARD?

>> THERE'S MORE THAN ONE. >> DR. HILSENBECK: FROM THIS

PARTICULAR PROPERTY? >> ONE IS LOCATED WITHIN THE

PROJECT, YES, SIR. >> DR. HILSENBECK: OKAY.

[01:00:01]

>> IT'S STABILIZED, YES, SIR. >> DR. HILSENBECK: IT'S STABILIZED AND IT LEADS DOWN TO THAT GATE INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

IS THAT GATE LODGED? >> YES.

AND IT WOULD BE WHROKD A KNOX BOX ON IT? THE STANDARD BOX THAT A FIRE TRUCK WEEK FOR EXAMPLE REMEMBER, HAS KEYS TO THAT THEY CAN OPEN IT AND UP RETRIEVE THE KEY FOR

THAT SPECIFIC LOCK. >> DR. HILSENBECK: THAT WAS MY NEXT QUESTION. WHO HAS THE KEYS.

ALL RIGHT. OKAY.

THANK YOU. >> MR. MATOVINA: IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? OKAY. SEEING NONE, BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO PUBLIC SPEAKERS, WE HAVE A REQUEST FROM MS. FARR TO SPEAK FOR A LONG LIST OF PEOPLE, BUT I WANT TO BE SURE THAT THOSE PEOPLE ARE ALSO NOT GOING TO COME UP AND SPEAK, SO COULD YOU READ OFF THE NAMES, PLEASE, MS. VICE CHAIR.

>> >> MS. PERKINS: I EVER MARY FARR, CHARLES FARR, ROBIN GAINEY, JOEL HASTINGS.

>> MR. MATOVINA: HOLD ON. GO SLOWER.

YOU GOT CHARLES FARR. >> MS. PERKINS: CHARLES FARR, ROBIN GAINEY, JOEL HAS HASTIND NEIL WHITE.

>> MR. MATOVINA: MS. FARR, WOULD YOU COME UP HERE FIRST,

PLEASE. >> MR. MATOVINA, I JUST WANT TO CONFIRM WITH MS. FARR THAT THAT IS THE LIST THAT SHE IS REPRESENTING BECAUSE YOU HAVE A DIFFERENT LIST THAT HAS 41

NAMES. >> MR. MATOVINA: NO, OTHERS ARE THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE COMPLETED SPEAKER CARDS.

I WANTED TO MAKE SURE THEY WERE NOT ON THE LIST.

I WANT TO MAKE SURE WE'RE NOT DOUBLE-DIPPING.

MS. FARR, WHAT AMOUNT OF TIME ARE YOU ASKING FOR AS THE DESIGNATED SPEAKER FOR THIS GROUP? I'M CERTAINLY NOT GOING TO ALLOW THREE MINUTES FOR EVERY ONE OF

THESE PEOPLE. >> NO, I DON'T EXPECT THAT 37 I CAN'T TALK THAT MUCH. A TALK A LOT BUT THAT THE THAT MUCH. MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT I CAN

HAVE AS MUCH AS TEN MINUTES? >> MR. MATOVINA: YES, I WOULD GRANT YOU TEN MINUTES. I THINK IT'S UP TO ME AND I

THINK TEN MINUTES IS REASONABLE. >> I PROBABLY WILL NOT TAKE THE WHOLE TEN MINUTES BUT I APPRECIATE THE TIME.

>> MR. MATOVINA: ALL RIGHT. WOULD YOU PREFER TO GO FIRST OR

WOULD YOU PRESERVE TO GO LAST? >> I GO LAST.

>> MR. MATOVINA: THAT WOULD BE FINE.

THEN WE GO TO THE OTHER THREE SPEAKERS.

>> MS. PERKINS: CHARLES FARR. [INAUDIBLE]

IS THERE AN OVERHEAD PROJECTOR? >> MR. MATOVINA: RIGHT IN FRONT PUFF P NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.

>> CHARLES FARR 1835 SCOTT ROAD. GOOD AFTERNOON, MR. CHAIRMAN, MEMBERS OF THE MZA AND STAFF. MY NAME IS CHARLES FARR AND I LIVE AT 1835 SCOTT ROAD WITH THE COMMUNITY NEIGHBORHOOD WHICH IS AICP COLLECTION OF ECLECTIC HOMES IN THE NORTHWEST PART OF THE COUNTY. WE ARE LOCATED DIRECTLY NORTH AND WEST OF WORTHINGTON STATES' PUD.

AND I WILL FOCUS ON UNFULFILLED OBLIGATIONS BY ALTERRA, THE DEVELOPER OF THIS PUD. I UNDERSTAND THE ATTORNEY HAS SAID THAT THIS IS NOT RELEVANT, BUT STILL WE WANT TO HAVE OUR SAY. THE FIRST THING I WOULD LIKE TO PRESENT IS THIS IS THE INFORMATION THAT COMES FROM THE APPROVAL BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS STATING WHAT THEY WOULD DO AS FAR AS FENCING. THIS AGREEMENT WAS REACHED WITH THE ATTORNEY AND THE DEVELOPER AND THEY AGREED TO DO THIS.

HOWEVER, AND THIS IS ALSO IN YOUR BLUE PACKETS, HERE'S WHERE WE HAVE THE FENCING AND THE RED LINE.

THERE'S A WETLAND BUFFER HERE AND THEN THESE ARE OUR NEIGHBORS OVER HERE. THE EMERGENCY EXIT'S RIGHT HERE.

THE FENCING THAT HAS BEEN COMPLETED IS ON THESE TWO LINES.

THE REST OF THE FENCING HAS EITHER BEEN DONE BY THE NEIGHBORS THEMSELVES, THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE ON THESE, OR IT HAS NOT BEEN DONE. THERE ARE EIGHT LOTS WHERE THERE HAS BEEN NO FENCING DONE AS OF YESTERDAY.

I ALSO WANT TO PRESENT A NOTE. THIS WAS A TELEPHONE CONVERSATION I HAD WITH MR. CLYBURN IN JANUARY OF THIS YEAR. AT THE TIME THE VERTICAL CONSTRUCTION WAS STARTING. I REMINDED HIM OF THIS AGREEMENT THAT WE HAD AND THAT IT WAS ACTUALLY CODIFIED IN THE BCC

[01:05:05]

THANK YOU. MARCHLTS THANK YOU, MR. FARR.

MR. MILLER, DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION?

>> MR. MILLER: MR. FARR, HAVE YOU FILED ANY COMPLAINTS ON THIS WITH THE PUD CONDITIONS WITH THE COUNTY?

>> AND WE HAVE TALKED TO COUNTY STAFF BUT WE HAVE NOTE FILED A

COMPLAINT. >> MR. MILLER: AND YOU UNDERSTAND AND ANYONE ELSE WHO IS SPEAKING ON THIS THAT THIS HAS TO DO WITH ONE LOT THAT, WHETHER THAT WILL BE AMENDED TO

ALLOW FOR A SINGLE FAMILY HOME? >> RIGHT.

>> MR. MILLER: AND IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE FENCING OR ANY OF THE ISSUES YOU BROUGHT UP.

>> WE'RE TRYING TO POINT OUT THAT THIS DEVELOPER HAS NOT BEEN COMPLIANT WITH THE ORDERS THAT Y'ALL APPROVED.

>> MR. MILLER: BUT YOU UNDERSTAND THAT AS IT RELATES TO OUR DECISION TODAY THAT THAT ISN'T REALLY PART OF OUR NEXUS.

>> I UNDERSTAND. >> MR. MILLER:

>> MR. MILLER: THANK YOU, SIR. >> MS. PERKINS: ROBIN GAINEY.

>> MY NAME IS ROBIN GAME I LIVE AT A 2333 MARLEY ROAD SOUTH.

I LIVE DIRECTLY BEHIND WHERE THEY BUILT THESE HOUSES, THIS DEVELOPMENT WAS DONE. I HAVE BEEN IMPACTED IN MULTIPLE WAYS AND, I RECOGNIZE THAT THEORETICALLY Y'ALL HAVE NO AUTHORITY TO ADDRESS THOSE IMPACTS.

I THINK YOU VOTE THE WAY YOUR HEART FEELS.

MY PROPERTY IS BORDERED ON THE SOUTH SIDE BY THREE OF THE LOTS THAT WAS ON THAT MAP THAT CHARLIE SHOWED YOU.

I MOVED THERE IN 1998. WHEN I MOVED THERE, THE LOT WAS UNDEVELOPED. I MOVED OUT THERE FOR THAT REASON. IT WAS WIDE OPEN, NICE WOODED AREA. I CHOSE TO NOT CLEAR MY LOT, CLEAR CUT IT. I CUT JUST ENOUGH TREES TO PUT MY HOUSE ON IT. I LIKE TREES.

THERE WERE OVER 100 REMAINING TREES, WATER OAKS, LIVE OAKS, LOBLOLLY BAYS. IT WAS, IT IS, HAS BEEN.

ONE OF THE SELLING POINT TO OUR FAMILY IS THE THICKNESS OF THAT FORESTED AREA. VERY NICE.

I GREW UP IN NORTH FLORIDA. I LIKE VERY MUCH AN UNDEVELOPED WOODLAND. WE HAD LARGE -- WHEN YOU TALKED ABOUT A -- WHAT WAS IT? -- A SPECIMEN OAK, I'VE GOT SPECIMEN OAKS ON MY PROPERTY. I'VE GOT A LIVE OAK THAT HAS A DIAMETER, THE DIAMETER OF THE TREE IS A LITTLE OVER 5 FEET.

IT'S WELL OVER 100 YEARS OLD. 70 FEET BEHIND THAT ONE THERE WERE THREE OTHERS RIGHT DIRECTLY BEHIND MY PROPERTY.

THEY HAVE BEEN DESTROYED BY WHAT'S GONE ON.

WE HAD 20 YEARS AUTO THERE BEFORE THEY STARTED DOING THIS.

AS I HAD TOLD MANY PEOPLE I CAN'T BHIEN TOO BAMED I HAD 20ERS YOOF BLISS. NOW IVER GOT HOUSES BEHIND ME.

WHEN THEY PROPOSED THIS WE JOINED THE INDIVIDUALS IN HOW TO DEVELOP THAT PROPERTY WITHOUT IMPACTING EVERYTHING ELSE.

THERE WERE PROPOSALS MADE AND CON CETIONZ MADE DIDN'T COP SESSIONS ABOUT LOT LEVELS, DRAINAGE ISSUES, ALL OF THESE THINGS THAT YOU APPARENTLY CAN'T ADDRESS UNDER THIS SINGLE FAMILY CHANGE. THAT DEVELOPER ACCOMMODATED US BY AGREEING TO CERTAIN THINGS THAT HAVE NOT BEEN FOLLOWED THROUGH WITH. OUR PROPOSAL HERE, OUR WISH HERE IS THE ONLY -- ATTORNEY GENERAL CHANCE WE HAVE TO PROTEST -- THE ONLY CHANCE WE HAVE TO PROTEST IS TO COME HERE AND SAY THEY HAVE NOT FOLLOWED THROUGH WHAT THEY SAID.

THEY HAVE MADE SLIGHT CONCESSIONS IN THE LAST 90 DAYS ABOUT HURRYING UP SO THEY CAN SHOW YOU A PICTURE OF WHAT THEY DID IN THE LAST TWO WEEKS BUT THAT'S ALL THEY HAVE DONE.

THEY HAVE NOT ADDRESSED THE ISSUE THEY SHOULD HAVE ADDRESSED ORIGINALLY. DRAINAGE ISSUES THAT ARE HORRIBLE AND KILLING TREES ON MY PROPERTY NOW.

ALL MY WATER OAKS ARE DYING BECAUSE OF THE DRAINAGE, THE INCREASED FILL THAT THEY BROUGHT IN, PUSHED WATER, EVERYBODY ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THAT WHOLE DEVELOPMENT IS UNDERWATER NOW BECAUSE OF THIS AND IT HAS KILLED ALL MY WATER OAKS.

FORTUNATELY BY LIVE OAKS ARE STILL ALIVE.

I WOULD BE REALLY UNHAPPY IF THAT WERE NOT THE CASE.

I KNOW I'M OUT OF TIME MANCHES THANK YOU, SIR.

>> . >> MS. PERKINS: CHARLES

HASTINGS. >> SPEAKER: HI, MY NAME IS

[01:10:06]

SO THE INFORMATION I HAVE TODAY REALLY IS A DIRECT IMPACT ON THIS DEVELOPMENT AS I TRAVERSE THE ROAD THAT THEY ARE GOING TO BUILD THIS LOT ON AND THEY'RE GOING TO NEED INTRODUCTION CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT TO DO SO. SO MY PROPERTY AND HOME IS LOCATED AT THE VEND CHED PRIVATE SECTION OF SCOTT ROAD BEYOND THE PORTION OWNED A COUNTY MAINTAINS IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY.

A OWNED THIS PROPERTY SINCE 1995.

BUT ALTERRA GROUP WERE AVID FOR A THE DEVELOPMENT THEY WERE TO MAINTAIN SCOTT ROAD FOR EXISTING RESIDENTS.

WHEN CONSTRUCTION BEGAN MASTERED PART OF THE ROAD WAS COVERED BY ASPHALT AND LIME GRAVEL TO PROTECT THE SURFACE OF THE ROAD.

THE THEY SENT A ROAD GRATER TO SCRAPE THE TOP 4 TO 5 INCHES OF THAT ROAD OFF TO SMOOTH THE ROAD AND IT DID TO THAT ABOUT IT EXPOSED THE LAW RAY GURTY UNDERNEATH THAT WITH TIME AND RAIN IT BECAME A MUD PIT. THE MATERIAL THEY SCRAPED OFF THE TOP OF THE ROAD CREATED DAMS ON EITHER SIDE OF THE ROAD THAT RETAIN THE WATER. SOME OF THE PHOTOS, IF YOU COULD SCROLL THE PHOTOS WHILE I'M SPEAKING.

SOME OF THE PHOTOS YOU SEE ARE SCOTS ROAD.

SO LATER A BACKHOE WAS SENT OUT TO ELIMINATE THE BERMS AFTER MY FAMILY HAD COMPLAINED TO THE DEVELOPER TO ELIMINATE THE RAISED PORTIONS TO ALLOW THE ROAD TO DRAIN BUT UNFORTUNATELY SO MUCH TIME HAD PASSED THAT THE ROAD HAD BECOME VERY RUTTED AND DEEP POTHOLES UP TO 12 INCHES DEEP IN PLACES FORMED.

WHEN THIS FILLS WITH WATER, IT MAKES THE ROAD IMPASSABLE BY SMALL CARS. BECAUSE THIS IS MY PERSONAL VEHICLE IT'S BEEN TUCK IS IN THE MUD ON SCOOT ROAD BEFORE.

WE HAVE HAD VEHICLES THAT HAD TO BE TOWED, EVEN A DELIVERY VEHICLE HAS BEEN STUCK ON SCOTT ROAD.

THERE ARE TWO CURCHTS THAT DRAIN THE SOUTH CULVERTS THAT RUNS INTO MILL CREEK. THOSE HAVE BECOME CLOGGED OR COLLAPSED SO IT NO LONGER DRAINS FROM THE SYTHE THAT WORTHINGTON STATES' IS ON ALTHOUGH IT HAD BUILDS UP AND CROSSES THE ROAD DURING HEAVY RAINS. I ALSO SUGGEST THAT, YOU KNOW, IN CONJUNCTION WITH THE APPROVAL TO MAKE CHANGES TO LOT 80 -- EXCUSE ME -- 180 I WOULD SUGGEST THAT ST. JOHNS COUNTY AND ALTERRA GROUP COME TO AN AGREEMENT TO HAVE THE COUNTY BE ABLE TO MAINTAIN THAT ROAD. WHEN MY NEIGHBORS AND MY FAMILY AND I HAVE REACHED OUT TO THE COUNTY, THEY SAY THEY CAN'T DO ANYTHING BECAUSE THAT LAND IS OWNED BY THE DEVELOPER AND IT'S PRIVATE LAND SO THEY HAVE NOT BEEN HELPING US AND THE ROAD IS UNFORTUNATELY IMPASSABLE. THE PICTURE YOU'RE SEEING RIGHT NOW IS ACTUALLY RIGHT IN FRONT OF MY PROTD AT THE VERY END.

THAT'S WHERE MULTIPLE, VERY HAVE BEEN STUCK.

WATER -- THIS PICTURE WAS TAKEN TWO WEEKS AGO WHEN WE HADEAU NOR'EASTER. THIS IS HALF TO TWO-THIRDS AS IT IS ON A TYPICAL SUMMER RAIN AND RIGHT NOW WE'RE LOOKING AT 10 INCHES WATER WHERE I'M STANDING.

ANY QUESTIONS FOR ME? >> MR. MATOVINA: THANK YOU.

>> SPEAKER: THANK YOU. >> MR. MATOVINA: MS. FARR.

YOUR TURN. >> MS. PERKINS: WE HAVE NEIL

WHITE. >> MR. MATOVINA: WHO?

>> MS. PERKINS: NEIL WHITE. >> MR. MATOVINA: SORRY ABOUT THAT. MR. WHITE.

>> SPEAKER: GOOD AFTERNOON, FOLKS.

NEIL WHITE LIVE A 1620 RAIN CROW DRIVE.

I'M SPEAKING ON BEHALF OF MY NEIGHBORS OUT THERE WHO .

I HAVE PLIFD IN THIS AREA MY WHOLE LIFE AND I'VE SEEN FIRSTHAND BY DRIVING DOWN THERE THE CONDITIONS OF THIS DEVELOPER, AND WE KNOW WE CAN'T STOP DEVELOPMENT.

THAT'S HAPPENING THROUGHOUT THE COIN COUNTY, THE WHOLE STATE.

THEY'RE CLEAR CUTTING THE WHOLE COUNTY.

THE ISSUE IS THEY'RE NOT KEEPING UP TO THEIR END OF THE BARGAIN OF WHAT WAS AGREED TON BOTH THE FENCING, AND THE ROAD, DRAINAGE WHAT HAVE YOU. I KNOW FOR A FACT -- I LIVE ON SCOTT ROAD AND WHEN THE CONSTRUCTION WAS HOT AND HEAVY THERE WERE DUMP TRUCKS FLIEPG AND COUN SCOD ROAD.

I KNOW THEY'VE GOT TO MAKE A LIVING BUT IT'S A LOT SHORTER FOR THEM TO GO THAT WAY. I LIVE IN LAKE THRIEWCH HATCH E WHICH A DRAINAGE OF MILL CREEK. FILED A COMPLAINT WITH THE STATE OF FLORIDA. THEY KEPT MUTT MUDDYING UP MILL CREEK OR AS THEY CALL TURBIDITY OF THE WATER.

THEY SAID WE'LL LOOK INTO ABOUT IT ONCE AGAIN THE DEVELOPER, THE MONEY BEHIND THEM OUTWEIGHS THE INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS SO I'M STANDING UP HERE TRYING TO ASK Y'ALL THAT DELAY THIS THING, GIVES A CHANCE TO TRY TO REGROUP, HOLD THE PEOPLE TO THEIR AGREEMENT, YOU KNOW, I'M RAY PERSON, IF I GIVE MY WORD AND SHAKE A HAND ON IT, YOU CAN COUNT ON IT.

WALL WE WANT IS OTHER PEOPLE TO HAVE THE SAME KIND OF ATTITUDE AND JUST DO THE RIGHT THING. YOU CAN'T STOP DEVELOPMENT.

WE WELCOME OUR NEW NEIGHBORS, WHAT HAVE YOU BUT WE ALL NEED TO GET ALONG TOGETHER, AND THE DEVELOPER VERY OFTEN HAS TOM TO THIS STATE, IN AND OUT IN A FEW YEARS, MADE THEIR MONEY AND

[01:15:01]

SO I WOULD APPRECIATE YOUR CONSIDERATION, JUST TRY TO GIVE US SOME MORE TIME ON THIS THING. YOU MAY NOT BE ABLE TO RULE ON IT BUT GIVE US MORE TIME TO GET OUR THOUGHTS.

WE HIEWRD AN ATTORNEY BEFORE. IF NEED BE WE'LL DO IT AGAIN.

THAT ARE WILLING TO DO WHATEVER IS NECESSARY TO BE SURE WE ARE TBEEG TREETDZ FAIRLY. THANK YOU.

>> MR. MATOVINA: THANK YOU. >> MS. PERKINS: NEXT WE HAVE

MARY FARR. >> SPEAKER: I'M HERE TO TALK TO MAJOR MODIFICATION 2021-15 LOT 180.

>> MS. PERKINS: NAME AND ADDRESS FORTH RECORD SPHNCHTS YES. MY NAME IS FAIR FARR I LIVE AT 1385 SCOTT ROAD. AND I RESIDE IN THE FOSSIO GRANT COMMUNITY. MARY FARR.

THE FINAL AGREEMENT THAT WAS COME TO IN THE.

>> ON APPLICATION, I SAT, AS MY COMMUNITY'S REPRESENTATIVE WITH MR. BURNETT, MR. CLYBURN, THE COUNTY ATTORNEY, OUR ATTORNEY JANE WEST, AND COMMISSIONER JAY MORRIS.

WE WENT THROUGH THESE THINGS IN DETAIL.

ALL OF THE AGREEMENTS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT RIGHT NOW HAVE NOT BEEN COMPLIED WITH. WE'RE NO ASKING YOU TO ADDRESS FIXING THESE PROBLEMS. WHAT WE'RE ASKING YOU TO DO IS TO DELAY UNTIL THEY COME THROUGH, AS MR. WHITE SAID, AND STAND UP TO THEIR WORD. THERE ARE SEVERAL -- WITH THAT SAID, I WANT TO GIVE YOU A SUMMARY OF WHAT'LL HAS BEEN SAID. FIRST OFF, THE FLOODING, THE RESIDENTS ALONG SCOTT, THE END OF SCOTT AND MARLEY ARE EXPERIENCING STANDING WATER, FLOODING CURING DURING THE RAINY SEASON. THE THE LONG TIME ESTABLISHMENT OAKS ARE DEAD AND DISIEG. THE THE TREE LOSS NEGATIVELY AFFECTS THE WATER FLOW IN THIS AREA WHICH JUST ADDS TO THE FLOODING SITUATION. COUNTY PEOPLE HAVE COME OUT.

WE HAVE TALKED WITH COUNTY PEOPLE ABOUT THIS SITUATION.

NO ONE INDICATED THAT WE NEEDED TO FILE A COMPLAINT.

SO OUR IGNORANCE IS THE REASON THAT A COMPLAINT HAS NOT BEEN FILED AND WHETHER THAT MEANS ANYTHING, I DON'T KNOW.

BUT I THINK THE POINT SHOULD BE MADE.

AND WE ASK NOW IN THE DELAY THAT SHOULD WE FILE A COMPLAINT NOW SO THAT THE COUNTY STAFF WILL BE INVOLVED? BECAUSE WE WOULD BE MORE THAN WILLING TO DO THAT.

THE SECOND IS THE CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC.

SCOTT IS, YES, THERE WAS A LOT OF CONSTRUCTION TRAFFIC WITH MORE THAN JUST THE SUPERVISOR AND HIS TRUCK GOING THROUGH.

THERE WERE NUMEROUS DUMP TRUCKS. PEOPLE HAVE COUNTED DOZENS OF THEM A DAY GOING UP AND DOWN SCOTT.

THAT IS A COST ALSO TO THE COUNTY.

SCOTT ROAD IS A VERY SPM OLD ROAD WITH ASPHALT OVER SHALE.

AND THESE OVERLOAD -- THESE HUGE LOADED DUMP TRUCKS GOING BACK AND FORTH DAILY, NUMEROUS OF THEM, HAVE AFFECTED SOME OF SCOTT ROAD THE WHOLE LENGTH, ESPECIALLY AT THE END WHERE MR. HASTING WAS TALKING ABOUT. AND AGAIN, THIS WAS ORIGINALLY AGREED TO IN A MEETING WITH COMMISSIONER JAY MORRIS AND THE OTHER PEOPLE I JUST SPOKE ABOUT. AND WHAT WE WOULD ASK IN A COMPLAINT WE FILE IS JUST THAT SCOTT ROAD BE PUT BACK TO ITS ORIGINAL CONDITION. THIRD IS THE PERMANENT FENCING TO DESIGNATE THE MITIGATION AREA.

OUR CONCERN AT THE TIME, AND WHICH I SPOKE OF, WAS THAT THE MITIGATION AREA, THE PEOPLE THAT ARE MOVING IN WORTHINGTON ESTATES ARE NOT FAMILIAR WITH MITIGATION AREAS FOR THE MOST PART, MY OPINION, AND THEY WOULD NOT UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS NOT THEIR PROPERTY. THIS IS PROPERTY SET ASIDE FOR WATER FLOW, AND JUST A SIMPLE FENCE TO RUN ACROSS IT TO

[01:20:01]

NOT EVEN A LOT OF MONEY TO DO. AND THAT AGREEMENT HAS BEEN COMPLETELY IGNORED UP UNTIL WE STARTED DISCUSSING IT.

MR. CLYBURN DELEGATED HIS RESPONSIBILITY TO THE HOMEBUILDERS. SOME OF THEM HAVE ACKNOWLEDGED THAT AND DONE IT. SOME OF THE HOMEOWNER HAVE PUT IN THEIR OWN FENCES. BUT THERE ARE EIGHT LOTS THAT ARE STILL OPEN AND NO FENCE TO INDICATE THAT THIS IS MITIGATION AREA. NOT SOMETHING THAT THESE PEOPLE HAVE BOUGHT. SO THESE ARE THE THREE MAJOR THINGS THAT WE FEEL NEED TO BE ADDRESSED.

WE ARE MORE THAN WILLING TO PROPERLY ADDRESS IT BY FILING THE APPROPRIATE COMPLAINTS. BUT UNTIL THESE ARE RESOLVED AND THAT THE ORIGINAL AGREEMENT AND PUD APPROVAL IS MET, THAT THE NEW -- EXCUSE ME. I'M NERVOUS.

THE ORIGINAL -- THAT THE ORIGINAL PROJECT HAS NOT BEEN COMPLETED PROPERLY. THIS NEW PROJECT CAN'T BE STARTED UNTIL THAT'S DONE BECAUSE IF THEY DIDN'T KEEP THEIR WORD THERE, HOW ARE WE GOING TO KNOW THAT THEY'RE GOING TO KEEP THEIR WORD OR ACT IN THE SAME FASHION AGAIN? AND WHAT WE ARE ASKING VERY RESPECTFULLY IS MERELY DELAY THIS UNTIL IT CAN BE PROPERLY TAKEN CARE OF AND COMPLETELY, AS AGREED -- COMPLETED AS AGREED TO PLANNING AND ZONING AND ESPECIALLY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS.

I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME, AND I APPRECIATE THE EXTENSION, SO

THANK YOU VERY MCH. >> MR. MATOVINA: THANK YOU, MS. FARR. OKAY.

WOULD THE APPLICANT LIKE TO COME UP AND PROVIDE ANY REBUTTAL.

>> JUST A FEW THINGS TO HIT ON. ONE, I CAN TELL YOU THAT I'VE REPRESENTED THIS CLIENT FOR A LONG TIME.

I CAN TELL YOU THAT THEY'VE DONE HUNDREDS OF LOTS IN OUR COUNTY.

THEY ARE NOT THE DEVELOPER, IF YOU WILL, THAT HAS PROBLEMS WITH THE COUNTY. THEY'RE VERY RESPONSIVE, LIKE I SAID EARLIER. MR. CLYBURN IS GENERALLY ON THE SITE. IF SOMEONE CALLS THE COUNTY AND THE COUNTY CALLS THE DEVELOPER, BILL'S THERE.

WHERE ARE YOU AT? OUT HERE MAKING AN INSPECTION.

IT IS ONE OF THOSE TYPES OF SITUATIONS AS FOR THE FENCING, THE FENCING AND THE PUD WAS WORDED IN A VERY SPECIFIC MANNER, AND I THINK MANY OF YOU WILL APPRECIATE THIS.

YOU WOULDN'T PUT THE FENCING UP FOR THE INDIVIDUAL HOMES AS PART OF THE INFRASTRUCTURE BECAUSE WHEN THE INITIAL INFRASTRUCTURE GETS PUT IN IN THAT PERIOD OF TIME TO WHEN THE HOME IS BUILT THERE'S GOING TO BE A NUMBER OF THINGS THAT OCCUR, CONSTRUCTION ON THE SITE, THERE'S THE FINAL LOT GRADING.

YOU WOULDN'T PUT THE FENCE IN THERE.

SO THE REQUIREMENT OF THE PUD IS THE FENCE IS NOT RELATED TO THE HORIZONTAL INFRASTRUCTURE. IT'S RELATED TO THE VERTICAL CONSTRUCTION. SO YOU HAVE YOUR FINAL LOT GRADING, AS YOU GET THE LANDSCAPING DOWN, THEN YOU PUT THE FENCE IN. I CAN TELL YOU THE FENCE THAT WAS DONE THAT I SHOWED YOU IN THE PHOTOGRAPH WAS SOMETHING THAT THEY WANTED TO GET CONTINUANCE FROM LAST MONTH TO THIS NONTHE GET IT IN THE GROUND AND SHOW YOU THEY WERE GOING TO MAKE PROGRESS. THE REST OF THE FENCING IS ORDERED. YES, PART OF WHAT MS. FARR SAID IS TRUE. IT WAS SOMETHING THAT THE HOMEOWNER -- THE HOMEBUILDER ARE OBLIGATED TO.

I CAN TELL YOU THAT ONE OF THOSE HOMEBUILDERS IS ALSO MY CLIENT AND HAS COMMUNICATED IN THAT HOMEBUILDER'S KB HOME, THEY HAVE COMPLIEWN CATED THAT THEY'RE G-8 THE FENCE DONE AND IT'S ORDERED SO WE KNOW IT'S GOING TO GO IN. IT'S NOT AT THE STAGE WHERE THE COUNTY HAS ACTION TO TAKE BECAUSE WE HAVEN'T COMPLIED WITH THE REQUIREMENTS. THE.

FINAL HOMES ARE BEING PUT IN, THE FINAL HOMES OF ENTIRE PROJECT, PHASE 4, IF YOU WILL, IS THIS BACK SECTION, SO THE FENCING IS GOING TO GET DONE. IT'S GOING TO GET DONE TIMELY.

IT'S A VERY SHORT HORIZON I THINK FROM WHERE WE ARE TODAYN==. AS FOR THE ROAD, THERE IS A SECTION OF SCOTT ROAD IN THE MIDDLE.

THERE'S THE VERY END TURN THAT GOES AROUND WHERE MER HASTINGS LIVES. THERE'S THE MILLED SECTION THAT

[01:25:02]

WE'LL MAKE THAT COMMITMENT, DEDICATE IT TO THE COUNTY WHENEVER. NOT A PROBLEM.

THERE'S THAT ONE SECTION NOS. THAT THE PUBLICALLY OWNED.

ONE THING THAT'S INTERESTING WHERE THOSE HOLES ARE IS ONE OF THE PROBLEMS THAT OCCURS FROM TIME TO TIME ON SCOTT ROAD WHICH IS THE FOUR-WHEELERS AND ATV TYPE VEHICLES THAT ARE OUT THERE DRIVING AROUND. IF YOU ACTUALLY LOOK AT THAT PHOTO WHERE THAT HOLE IS OF THE WATER STANDING, YOU'LL SEE A LOVE TRACKS COMING OUT OF IT IN ALL DIFFERENT DIRECTIONS.

WE BELIEVE THAT THAT'S FROM A FOUR-WHEELER GOING AROUND IN A CIRCLE THAT CREATED THAT HOLE IN THAT AREA.

THAT'S WHAT IT WOULD APPEAR TO BE.

AS FOR THE OTHER ISSUES RELATED TO THE SUBDIVISION, IT'S GOING TO GET COMPLETED. IT'S GOING TO GET COMPLIED WITH.

COUNTY STAFF OBVIOUSLY HAS THE INSPECTIONS THAT THEY DO ON THE SUBDIVISION AND ON THE INDIVIDUAL LOTS IN THE HOMES.

THEY CAN TAKE ACTION RELATED TO THAT.

WHAT YOU'RE REALLY HERE FOR TODAY IS DO WE WANT A BORROW PIT ON THIS SITE OR DO WE WANT A SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE, AND THAT'S THE ISSUE FOR YOU RELATED TO THIS.

ALL THE OTHER CODE ENFORCEMENT MATTERS, I CAN TELL YOU THAT ISSUE OF CONSTRUCTION TRUCKS AND DUMP TRUCKS GOING UP AND DOWN THE ROAD, I HAVE A PRETTY BIG JEEP THAT I DRIVE AROUND, AND I DON'T THINK I WOULD HAVE GONE THROUGH THAT AREA OF SCOTT ROAD WHEN THIS WAS UNDER CONSTRUCTION BACK IN THAT TIME PERIOD.

I CAN TELL YOU THAT THERE WAS A DIRT COMPANY THAT HAD TWO DIFFERENT LOCATIONS THAT THEY WERE WORKING ON COMPLETELY UNRELATED TO OUR PROJECT COMING ON SCOTT ROAD TO MARLEY, ONE SITE HAD A LOT OF DIRT BROUGHT IN.

I'M NOT SURE HOW MANY LOADS BUT A LOT OF DIRT BROUGHT IN.

THAT'S COMPLETED NOT RELATED TO US.

WE KNOW WHO THE CONTRACTOR WAS RELATED TO THAT, BUT THE DIRT, SITE WORK CONTRACTOR, NOT SOMETHING RELATED THE OUR PROJECT AT ALL. AND IT WAS A LOT OF LOADS.

THERE IS ALSO, AND IT MAY HAVE BEEN COMING FROM THE BORROW PIT ROAD THAT ACCESSES SCOTT. I'M NOT SURE.

BUT WE DO KNOW THAT TWHRAIS LOT OF DIRTIED, SIGNIFICANT.

MAYBE MORE THAN 100 LOADS BROUGHT BACK TO THAT AREA, NOT COMING FROM OUR SITE BUT ACTUALLY COMING ON SCOTT ROAD.

WITH THAT AGAIN I JUST GUESS I'LL WRAP UP BY SAYING THIS IS ONE OF THOSE ONES WHERE EVERYTHINGLY LATE TO THE PUD, MY CLIENT IS GLOWING TO COMPLY WITH WHAT THEY HAVE TO COMPLY WITH UNDER THE PUD. IT'S INTERESTING, ONE OF THE AREAS WE'RE FENCIN ISN'T CURRENTLY -- THIS IS WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE. THIS IS A GOOD 40 TO 50 FEET WITHIN THE PROJECT. BEFORE YOU GET TO THE PROJECT BOUNDARY. WHERE YOU SEE THIS TREE STAND RIGHT HER HERE IS 40 TO 50 FEET INSIDE OF OUR PROJECT.

BUT FENCING'S GOING TO GO IN THAT AREA ANYWAY BECAUSE IT'S A REQUIREMENT OF THE PUD. THIS ISN'T SOMETHING THAT THERE THEY'RE BEING A BADS DEVELOPER. THERE AREN'T PROBLEMS RELATED TO THIS DEVELOPMENT. IT'S A SOLID PROJECT WE'RE JUST TRYING TO SOLVE A SIMPLE ISSUE THAT WAY BACK AT THE COUNTY STAFF AND THE THEN COMMISSIONER ASKED US TO NOT MINE THE DIRT OUT OF THIS LOT, AND SO WE'RE AT A POSITION TO SAY WEEKS HEY, LET US HAVE ONE SINGLE FAMILY HOUSE ON THIS LOT AND WE WON'T MINE THE DIRT. IT WILL SAVE MORE THAN 1,000 TRIPS PROBABLY ON SCOTT ROAD OF DIRT BEING HAULED OFF.

WITH THAT BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

OF COURSE MY CLIENT IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE, TOO, AND HE KNOWS ALL OF THE SPECIFICS RELATED TO THIS

SUBDIVISION. >> MR. MATOVINA:

DR. HILSENBECK. >> DR. HILSENBECK: DOUG, I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. I GUESS I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION WHEN YOU ASKED FOR A CONTINUANCE -- WHAT WAS IT, TWO WEEKS, A MONTH AGO, I'M NOT SURE EXACTLY THE DATE -- I THOUGHT -- I WAS UNDER CAN THE IMPRESSION SO I'M PROBABLY WRONG, THAT YOU WERE GOING TO WCOMMUNITY TO RESE ISSUES BEFORE YOU CAME BACK, SO I'M NOT SURE WHY YOU ASKED FOR THE CONTINUANCE OTHER THAN TO DO THAT. DID THAT HAPPEN?

DID YOU MEET WITH THE COMMUNITY? >> BILL CLYBURN PHYSICALLY WENT OUT THERE. I KNOW HE MADE PHONE CALLS.

HE PHYSICALLY WENT ON IT AND MET WA WITH A NUMBER OF RESIDENTS, SPECIFICALLY FOLKS WHO HAD BEEN HERE AT THE PLAS PZA MEETING AND VOICED CONCERNS AND PHYSICALLY MET WITH THEM.

I BELIEVE HE TALKED TO THE PHONE TO THE FARRS.

I KNOW HE TALKED TO MR. HASTINGS DOWN ON THE END TO SEE WHAT COULD BE DONE LONG-TERM ABOUT SOME OF THOSE ISSUES.

SO, YES. >> DR. HILSENBECK: OKAY.

YOU SAID THAT MOST OF THIS IS ALREADY BUILT OUT, WORTHINGTON

ESTATES IS ALREADY BUILT OUT? >> YES, SIR, IN FACT YOU CAN SEE

[01:30:02]

END. >> DR. HILSENBECK: SO SINCE VIRTUALLY ALL OR MOST OF THIS VERTICAL CONSTRUCTION HAS TAKEN PLACE, WHY HAS IT TAKEN SO LONG TO GET A FENCE PUT UP?

>> I GUESS THE SHORT PART OF THE STORY IS MY CLIENT OBLIGATED THE HOMEBUILDERS TO DO IT. THEY FELL BEHIND, AND HE'S PUSHING THEM TO GET IT DONE NOW AND ACTUALLY UNDERTAKING PART OF IT TO GET IT DONE. SO I MEAN, IT'S GOING TO GET DONE. IT'S GOING TO GET ACCOMPLISHED.

I THINK WE ALL RECOGNIZED MOST OF THE NATIONAL HOMEOWNERS IS WHITE PVC PLASTIC STYLE VINYL FENCE IS SOMETHING MOST OF THE NATIONAL HOMEBUILDERS PUT UP AROUND THEIR SUBDIVISIONS ANYWAYS, IT'S BEING ACCOMPLISHED.

>> DR. HILSENBECK: THAT'S TRUE.

SO I DIDN'T KNOW THAT WE WERE GOING TO HAVE SUCH A NARROW CHARGE IN WHAT WE COULD CONSIDER HERE TODAY, SO I'M JUST WONDERING WHAT THE BEST COURSE OF ACTION IS.

SHOULD THE RESIDENTS FILE A COMPLAINT? WE APPROVED THE LOT BECAUSE THEY PROBABLY DON'T WANT DIRT HAULED OUT ON SCOTT ROAD. I PERSONALLY DON'T WANT TO SEE THAT LOT MINED. BUT BUILDING A SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE THERE MIGHT BE THE LESSER OF TWO EVILS TO HUNDREDS OF DUMP TRUCKS COMING UP AND DOWN SCOTT ROAD.

SO IF WE APPROVE THIS, MAYBE THEY SHOULD FILE A COMPLAINT WITH THE COUNTY, DO A PRIDE COMPLAINT, BUT I DON'T KNOW.

I'M AT A LOSS ON THIS. SO I JUST WAS WONDERING IF THE RESIDENTS HAD HAD -- HAD THEIR COUNTY COMMISSIONER OUT THERE.

I GUESS ONE WAS OUT THERE YEARS AGO, BUT I GUESS THIS IS WHITEHURST DISTRICT, COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST'S DISTRICT. I WONDER IF HE'S BEEN OUT THERE TO LOOBLG AT THE LOOK AT THE SITUATION.

>> I DO NOT KNOW. I KNOW THE ONE COMMUNITY MEETING HE DID PARTICIPATE. I THINK YOU WERE A PART OF AS WELL FROM WHAT I RECALL. I'M NOT SURE.

>> DR. HILSENBECK: ME? NO.

I DON'T RECALL. IT'S POSSIBLE.

I'M KIDDING. I WASN'T THERE.

>> AND DR. HILSENBECK, KNOWING HOW SENSITIVE YOU ARE TO ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES, WE AGREE. WE DON'T WANT TO MINE DIRT FROM IT. IT WILL CAUSE TRAFFIC ON SCOTT ROAD. THE GREAT THING IS -- STAFF WAS ANTOINE THAT POINTED THIS OUT. INSTEAD OF PUTTING THIS BACK TO OR WHERE YOU WE HAVE MINIMUM SETBACKS, BECAUSE THERE IS IN THE PUD YOU DO END ONE A 35-FOOT DEVELOPMENT EDGE ON BOTH SIDE, YOU DO HAVE THE UPLAND PRESERVATION SO YOU REALLY HAVE THIS FOOTPRINT HERE IN THE MIDDLE.

INTERESTINGLY ENOUGH YOU CAN SEE IT ROUGHLY ALIGNS WITH WHAT'S BEEN PUT IN THESE OTHER LOTS IN THESE AREAS, SO IT WORK OUT WELL. THEY WIND UP NOT HAVING OR USES.

IT'S JUST SINGLE FAMILY SO IT'S EVEN MORE RESTRICTIVE THAN THE

LOTS THAT ARE AROUND IT. >> DR. HILSENBECK: OKAY.

THANK YOU. >> YES, SIR.

>> MR. MATOVINA: MR. PETER. >> PETER: DOUG, YOU SAID THE DEVELOPER MIGHT BE AMENABLE TO TURN THAT PART OF THE ROAD OVER TO THE COUNTY, AND I KNOW THAT DOESN'T DIRECTLY RELATE TO OUR CHARGE TODAY BUT AFTER BEING OUT THERE, THAT WOULD BE A GOOD THING SO I'M JUST CURIOUS TO KNOW HOW THAT WOULD WORK OR IF THAT'S A REAL -- IF THAT'S A REAL OFFER.

>> MR. PETER, I'M LOOKING BACK THERE.

THE BOSS SAYS IT'S A REAL OFFER. HERE'S THE WAY I'LL TEE THAT UP FOR YOU. I THINK POTENTIALLY YOU MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE AND AS PART OF THE MOTION TO APPROVE THIS, YOU MAKE THE RECOMMENDATION THAT THE APPLICANT ALSO DEDICATE THAT SECTION TO THE COUNTY. OF COURSE, IT'S UP TO THE COUNTY COMMISSION ULTIMATELY TO DO IT BUT YOU COULD MAKE THAT AS PART OF YOUR MOTION AS A RECOMMENDATION.

YOU KNOW, YOU'RE MAKING A RECOMMENDATION ANYWAY.

YOU COULD MAKE THAT RECOMMENDATION THAT THE APPLICANT WILL DEDICATE IT IF THE COUNTY WILL TAKE IT.

>> IF I COULD JUST INTERJECT, WE DON'T KNOW WHAT COUNTY STAFF WOULD BE INVOLVED IN REVIEWING I KNOW THAT NEEDS TO GO THROUGH A SPECIFIC PROCESS, SO THAT SHOULD FOLLOW WHATEVER TYPICAL PROCESS THE COUNTY USES TO CONSIDER THAT OPTION.

I DON'T KNOW IF THE COUNTY IS INTERESTED IN HAVING A ROAD IF IT'S DAMAGED AND THEN NOW HAS TO PAY TO REPAIR IT SO THAT MIGHT BE PART OF THE TYPICAL REVIEW PROCESS SO I WOULD CAUTION YOU ON CONDITIONING APPROVAL ON THE DEDICATION.

>> MR. MATOVINA: DR. HILSENBECK.

>> DR. HILSENBECK: IT'S A FOLLOW-UP ON MR. PETER'S

[01:35:01]

BUT THE COUNTY WOULD NOT HAVE TO TAKE THE ROAD IF IT WAS OFFERED, ESPECIALLY THE CONDITION IT'S IN AND ALL THAT.

I UNDERSTAND THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WOULD HAVE TO VOTE TO ACCEPT THAT ROAD, BUT I DON'E CHANCES OF THEM DOING THAT WOULD

BE, BUT IT IS -- >> AND WE DON'T HAVE TO RUSH THAT ASPECT OF IT. I'M PRETTY SURE I CAN TALK THE MY CLIENT ABOUT IT. WE CAN HAVE IT TO WHERE IT GOES FORWARD, THE COUNTY COMMISSION IF THEY DETERMINE TO APPROVE THIS. WE COULD HAVE A WINDOW AFTER THE APPROVAL THAT WE DEDICATED IF THE COUNTY WANTS.

THAT GIVES THE COUNTY TIME TO FIGURE OUT WHETHER THEY WANT IT

OR NOT. >> DR. HILSENBECK: THEY WOULD

MEET IT, I'M SURE. >> MR. MATOVINA: I HAVE A QUESTION. MAYBE MORE OF STAFF.

IT MAY NOT BE. THE OWNERSHIP PRESUMABLY ENDS WHERE THE PAVEMENT ENDS WHICH SEEMS TO BE THE RAPHER THOSE LOTS OF COUNTY OWNERSHIP. REAR ARE OF THOSE LOTS.

DOUG, YOUR CLIENT OWNS THAT EASEMENT, THAT STRIP?

>> I THINK THE FEE SPM TOTE DIRT IS OWNED BY PLY CLIENT.

I THINK ALL OF THESE OTHER HOMES BACK HERE, I ASSUME ALL THESE OTHER HOMES BACK HERE HAVE EASEMENTS RIGHTS TO CROSS IT, BUT IT GOES FROM WHERE THIS LINE IS HERE TO JUST BEYOND IS OWNED BY THE APPLICANT. AND THEN IT PICKS UP AGAIN AND

IS OWNED BY THE COUNTY. >> MR. MATOVINA: SO WOULD IT BE YOUR CLIENT'S INTENTION TO DEED THAT PORTION OF THE ROAD TO THIS PARTICULAR LOT OWNER OR WHAT ARE THEY GOING TO DO WITH

IT? >> NO.

I MEAN, RIGHT NOW THIS LOT HAS ACCESS JUST LOOK THE OTHER LOTS.

>> MR. MATOVINA: I UNDER THE LOT HAS ACCESS.

WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN TO THE FEE SIMPLE OWNERSHIP TO THE ROAD

EASEMENTS? >> IF THE ROAD WAS DEDICATED TO THE COUNTY, THEN IT WOULD BE COUNTY YOU RIGHT-OF-WAY.

>> MR. MATOVINA: ASSUME IT WAS NOT DEDICATED TO COUNTY.

WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN TO THE FEE SIMPLE OWNERSHIP?

>> IF NOT, IT WOULD STAY IT WAS THE CURRENTLY.

>> MR. MATOVINA: AND THIS LOT IS OVER 200 FEET WIDE?

>> I THINK IT SHOWS 180 IS THE DETAIL.

180 FEET. >> MR. MATOVINA: OKAY.

THANK YOU. ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? ALL RIGHT. THEN WE'RE BACK INTO THE AGENCY FOR A MOTION. MS. PERKINS.

>> MS. PERKINS: MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF MAJOR MOD 2021-15 WORTHINGTON ESTATES LOT 180 BASED ON SIX FINDINGS OF

FACT. >> MR. MATOVINA: WE HAVE GOT A MOTION FOR APPROVAL BY MS. PERKINS.

IS THERE A SECOND? IS THERE A SECOND? GOING ONCE, GOING TWICE. THAT MOTION DIES FOR LACK OF A SECOND. COULD WE HAVE ANOTHER MOTION?

DR. HILSENBECK. >> DR. HILSENBECK: I'LL MOVE THAT WE CONTINUE THE ITEM AS REQUESTED BY THE RESIDENTS UNTIL THESE ISSUES CAN BE RESOLVED. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT IS A VALID MOTION TO MAKE GIVEN OUR NARROW CHARGE HERE, BUT MANY OF THE RESIDENTS ASKED FOR A CONTINUANCE OF THIS UNTIL THESE ISSUES COULD BE RESOLVED, SO I THINK A TIME CERTAIN INTO EARLY SPRING OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT WOULD BE --

>> I WOULD ENCOURAGE YOU TO INCLUDE A TIME FRAME.

>> DR. HILSENBECK: HOW ABOUT MARCH, SOME ME GO IN MARCH,

FIRST MEETING IN MARCH. >> MR. MATOVINA: SO WE HAVE A MOTION BY DR. HILSENBECK TO CONTINUE THIS ITEM TO THE FIRST MEETING IN MARCH. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND BY MR. PETER. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION?

MR. BURNETT. >> I JUST WANTED TO INTERJECT.

I DON'T KNOW IF THIS CHANGES. I'M NOT SURE THE ISSUES YOU WANT US TO ADDRESS, MR. HILSENBECK. I CAN TELL YOU WE CAN COMMIT TO GETTING THE FENCE DONE WITHIN 60 DAYS OF TODAY.

IT'S GOING TO GET DONE BFOREHAND BUT THERE'S OBVIOUSLY TWO MAJOR HOLIDAYS. THE HOLIDAY SEASON IN THE MILLED. WE MIDDLE.

WE CAN COMMIT TO GETTING A FENCE DONE IN THE NEXT 6TH DAYS AS PART OF YOUR RECOMMENDING IF YOU WANTED TO GO AHEAD AND MOVE FORWARD WITH THE CONDITION THAT WE GET THE FENCE DONE WITHIN

60S R.60 DAYS. >> MR. MATOVINA: SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND. IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION AMONGST THE MEMBERS? IF NOT, LET'S REGISTER THE VOTE.

OKAY. SO WE HAVE A 3-3 TIE.

SO NOW WE'RE BACK INTO THE AGENCY FOR A MOTION.

[01:40:01]

MS. PERKINS. >> MS. PERKINS: MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL AND WE MOVE FORWARD BASED UPON SIX FINDING OF FACT WITH ONE ADD CONDITION THAT YOU ARE REQUIRED TO PUT THE FENCE IN BEFORE YOUR HEARING BEFORE THE BCC.

>> I THINK THE BCC MAYBE ONLY A COUPLE OF WEEKS OFF IS THE ONLY CONCERN. THE BCC'S DECEMBER 7.

>> MS. PERKINS: WELL, THEN, -- >> BUT I ASSUME WE CAN GET OUT AND PUT A FENCE UP BUT IT'S NOT GOING TO BE THE FENCE ANYONE WANTS. OBVIOUSLY.

WE WANT TO GET THE FENCE DONE CORRECTLY.

>> MR. MATOVINA: WHAT IS YOUR MOTION, MS. PERKINS?

>> MS. PERKINS: I WITHDRAW THE MOTION.

>> WE WANT A FAVORABLE MOTION. I GUESS I WOULD JUST SAY ANYTHING, BY THE END OF DECEMBER? I KNOW THAT'S OUTSIDE OF THE BCC BUT THE BCC MAKESIT A CONDITIONAL OF THE APPROVAL WE HAVE TO ABIDE BY IT.

>> MR. MATOVINA: MR. BURNETT, THIS IS NOT A NO, YAIGHTD SESSION. PLEASE STEP BACK FOR A SECOND.

>> YES, SIR. >> MR. MATOVINA: LETS LET'S GET A MOTION AND I'LL WILL IT KNOW IF WE WANT YOU TO COME UP HERE. ALL RIGHT.

IS YOUR MOTION STILL WITHDRAWN? >> MS. PERKINS: IT IS.

>> MR. MATOVINA: DR. HILSENBECK.

>> DR. HILSENBECK: I'M NOT GOING TO MOVE ANY MOTION FORWARD, BUT AS PART OF THE MOTION THAT MS. PERKINS HAD MADE AND NOW WITHDRAWN I WAS GOING TO SUGGEST THAT WE INCLUDE THAT THE OFFERED TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS TO TAKE THAT OVER, OWNERSHIP AND MAINTENANCE, BUT THAT'S MOOT AT THIS POINT.

>> MR. MATOVINA: WILL SOMEONE PLEASE MAKE A MOTION.

WHAT DO YOU SAY? >> I WOULD ENCOURAGE SOMEONE TO

MAKE A MOTION. >> MR. MATOVINA:

DR. HILSENBECK. >> DR. HILSENBECK: I WILL MOVE THAT WE CONTINUE THIS ITEM UNTIL THE FIRST MEETING IN JANUARY OF

THE PZA. >> MR. MATOVINA: WE'VE GOT A MOTION BY DR. HILSENBECK TO CONTINUE THIS ITEM TO THE FIRST

MEETING IN, JA. >> DR. HILSENBECK: AND THAT WOULD INCLUDE THE FACT THAT THE FENCING IS COMPLETED BY THAT DATE. THAT WOULD BE JANUARY 16TH, I BELIEVE. FENCING COMPLETED BY THAT DATE

AND THAT -- >> MR. MATOVINA: DR. HILSENBECK, YOU'RE MAKING AIN' MOTION TO CON CONTINUE IT,

NOT CONDITION IT. >> DR. HILSENBECK: FINE.

>> MR. MATOVINA: ARE YOU SECONDING THAT, DR. MCCORMICK?

>> DR. MCCORMICK: YES, I'LL SECOND THAT.

>> MR. MATOVINA: SO WE ARE MOVING THIS TO THE THIRD THURSDAY IN JANUARY 1 JANUARY 20TH IS WHAT THIS MOTION WOULD DO IF IT'S A APPROVED 37 WE HAVE RAY MOTION BY DR. HILSENBECK. WE'VE GOT A SECOND BY DR. MCCORMICK. IS THERE ANY FURTHER DISCUSSION?

>> MS. PERKINS: YES. MY ONLY COMMENT IS I DON'T THINK THIS ACCOMPLISHES ANYTHING. I THINK YOU'RE GOING TO GIVE THE DEVELOPER A COUPLE OF WEEKS TO GET SOMETHING DONE THAT HE MAY NOT BE ABLE TO GET DONE DUE TO SUPPLY OR OTHER FACTORS THAT AREN'T DIRECTLY RELATED TO HIM, SO THAT'S MY ONLY OPINION.

>> MR. MATOVINA: ANYONE ELSE HAVE ANY COMMENTS?

>> COULD WE AMEND THE MOTION TO THE FIRST MEETING IN MARCH TO PROVIDE MORE TIME, AS MS. PERKINS POINTED OUT?

>> MS. PERKINS: I WASN'T SUGGESTING MORE TIME.

>> NO, NO, BUT YOU'RE RIGHT. IT'S A TIGHT TIME FRAME IN EARLY

JANUARY. >> MR. MATOVINA: DR. HILSENBECK, IT'S YOUR MOTION.

>> DR. HILSENBECK: BEL MR. BURNETT OFFERED UP STANDING AT THE PODE DWHRUM THAT THEY WOULD HAVE THAT FENCE COMPLETED IN 60 DAYS BUT I DO REALIZED THERE ARE CERTAINLY SUPPLY CHAIN ISSUES AND IT MAY BE OUT OF THE DEVELOPER'S CONTROL TO BUILD THAT FENCE IN 60 DAYS, BUT IF MR. BURNETT -- I COULD SEE HIM OUT THERE PUTTING THE FENCE UP, ACTUALLY.

>> MR. MATOVINA: MR. MILLER. >> MR. MILLER: SCHEDULED TO GO BEFORE THE BCC? I APOLOGIZE.

I'M NOT SURE IF WE'RE ON ANY MOTION, WE'RE SO FAR AWAY FROM THE PROCESS AT THIS POINT. WHAT IS THE BCC DATE SCHEDULED

FOR? >> DECEMBER 7TH.

IF MS. PERKINS WANT TO MAKE HER MOTION AGAIN, WE WILL GET IT DONE. THE THREE OF US, MAYBE THE FOUR OF US HAVE DONE SOME PHYSICAL LABOR SO IF WE HAVE TO, WE WILL

GET IT TURN. >> MR. MATOVINA: MR. MILLER

MINCHT I HAVE A MOTION. >> MR. MATOVINA: WE HAVE A

MOTION ON THE FLOOR. >> DR. HILSENBECK: WE HAVE MY MOTION OF JANUARY 16TH FOR CONTINUATION UNTIL 16TH.

>> MR. MILLER: MY APOLOGIES. I THOUGHT I HEARD SOMEONE SAY

THEY YOU WROO IT. >> MR. MATOVINA: THAT MOTION IS ON THE FLOOR RIGHT NOW. SO IS THERE ANYONE ELSE TO

[01:45:02]

LET'S REGISTER 2 THE VOTE. ANOTHER TIE VOTE.

MR. MILLER. OKAY.

>> MR. MILLER: A MAKE A MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL MAJOR MAD MODIFICATIONS 2021-15 WORTHINGTON STATES' LOT 180 WAIDZ ON SIX FINDINGS STAFF AS S PROVIDE POFD WITH THE CONDITIONS THAT THE FENCES BE INSTALLED WITHIN 60 CASE BY THE VOTE OF BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSION. THAT WOULD PUT IT IN FEBRUARY.

IT WILL WOULD STILL BE HEARD BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSION

ON DECEMBER 7TH. >> MR. MATOVINA: GOT A MOTION BY MR. MILLER. IS THERE A SECOND? SECOND BY MS. PERKINS. DR. HILSENBECK.

>> DR. HILSENBECK: MR. MILLER, WOULD YOU BE AMENABLE TO AMENDING YOUR MOWING TO INCLUDE THAT THE -- THAT SCOTT ROAD BE OFFERED TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AT THEIR MEETING

TO CONSIDER THIS? >> MR. MILLER: I'M ALWAYS AMENABLE BUTTED MY CONCERN IS HAVING DONE A LOT OF ROAD DEAD EXPAIRKSZ THERE'S A LOT THAT GOES INTO AND IT ENGINEERING STUDIES, THAT WE'RE SETTING OURSELVES UP AND THE DEVELOPER FOR FAILURE ON THAT. WHILE I KNOW EVERY THEY HAVE EVERY INTENTION 20 DO THAT, IT'S ACTUALLY IN THEIR BEST INTERESTS TO DO IT, I'M TEST HESITANT TO MAKE IT A CONDITION.

>> DR. HILSENBECK: I DIDN'T MEAN THAT THEY COMPLETED THE PROCESS BUT AT THE BCC MEETING THEY WOULD OFFER THAT ROAD TO

THE COUNTY. >> MR. MILLER: MY CONCERN IS THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSION ME GO IS IN TWO TO THREE WEEKS AND THE FULL ENGINEERING THAT WOULD HAVE TO GO IN AND THE DRAINAGE FOR MAKING THAT PUBLIC ROADWAY WOULD NOT BE COMPLETED AT THAT POINT IN TIME.

>> DR. HILSENBECK: AND THE ENGINEERING WOULD HAVE TO BE COMPLETE PRIOR TO THE BOARD CONSIDERING IT?

>> DR. HILSENBECK: MINCH FOR THEM TO TAKE IT UP AND TAKE

CONSIDERATION, YES. >> DR. HILSENBECK: I DIDN'T MEAN THEY WOULD COMPLETE THE ACCEPTANCE OF DEDICATION, JUST TO EVEN CONSIDER TAKING THAT ROAD OVER.

YOU HAVE EXPERIENCE IN THAT, SO --

>> MR. MATOVINA: OKAY. SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO MOVE THIS FORWARD AND A CONDITION AGAIN WAS?

>> MR. MILLER: THAT THE FENCES AS REQUIRED IN THE PUD BE INSTALLED WITHIN 60 DAYS AFTER A POSITIVE VOTE BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSION, ASSUMING IT IS APPROVED BY THE BOARD OF

COUNTY COMMISSION. >> MR. MATOVINA: SO WE HAVE A MO

[6. MAJMOD 2021-01 Lightsey Road Storage. Request for a Major Modification to Ordinance 2019-59, revising the Master Development Plan to combine four buildings into two buildings, increasing the square footage from 65,500 to 75,282 square feet, and expanding the Stormwater management system.]

>> MR. MATOVINA: FOLKS, PLEASE CONTINUE YOUR CONVERSATIONS OUTSIDE AND WE'RE GOING TO ETD GET STARTED ON ITEM NUMBER 6. MR. WHITEHOUSE.

DO WE HAVE ANY EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS FOR MR. WHITEHOUSE'S ITEM HERE? SEEING NONE.

>> GOOD AFTERNOON, MR. CHAIRMAN AND BOARD MEMBERS.

AGENCY MEMBERS. FOR THE RECORD JAMES WHITEDHOUSE STT LAW YIEWP IN ST. AUGUSTINE ST. JOHNS COUNTY, FLORIDA.

I'M HERE ON BEHALF LIGHTSEY ROAD PROPERTY, THE LIGHTSEY ROAD SELF STORAGE PUD WHICH IS OUT ON LIGHTSEY ROAD JUST AFTER YOU COME OFF 207. SOME OF YOU MAY HAVE BEEN OUT THERE. IT'S CURRENTLY BUILT AND IN OPERATION. DURING THE BUILDING OF THE PROJECT, THEY CAME TO THE CONCLUSION THAT THEY WERE GOING TO NEED AN EXTRA BUILDING AND SO THIS MAJOR MOD MODIFICATION WAS FILED PRIOR TO THE COMPLETION OF THE PROJECT GETTING THEY EVER CO AND OPENING 1 BUT NOW IT OPEN AND IT IS IN OPERATION ON LIGHTSEY ROAD AND THIS MODIFICATION IS JUST TO ASK FOR THE ADDITION OF THAT ONE DOOLING BUILDING, THE PART AT THE BEGINNING WHERE YOU SAID TO COMBINE THE 24 BUILDINGS INTO TWO, THAT'S A CONSTRUCTION PLAN ISSUE THAT COULD BE DONE DURING CONSTRUCTION. THAT'S ALREADY BEEN APPROVED BY THE COUNTY SO THOSE BUILDINGS ARE ONE BUT JUST TO CLEAR UP THE PUD, THAT'S INCLUDED IN THIS MAJOR MODIFICATION TWELS THE FACT THAT THEY NEED TO COMPLIET EX EXPAND THE TO RETAIN STORM WATER FOR THIS NEW BUILDING.

THIS IS A PICTURE OF THE AREA OFF LIGHTSEY ROAD.

[01:50:03]

THIS IS THE PROPERTY WITH THE STORAGE BUILDING LIKE I SAID ALREADY BUILT. HERE IS THE ORIGINAL PUD APPROVED PLAN. IT WAS APPROVED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY -- OR RECOMMENDED BY THIS AGENCY AND THEN APPROVED BY THE BOARD BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AT ORDINANCE 2019-59. THIS IS AS I SAID, THIS IS HOW IT WAS ORIGINALLY APPROVED WITH THESE BUILDINGS BROKEN INTO TWO.

THAT WAS MODIFIED. THESE ARE IN ONE NOW.

HERE I'LL SHOW YOU THIS IS THE PROPOSED PLAN WHERE YOU HAVE THESE TWO BUILDINGS IN ONE AND THE ONLY THING REALLY HAPPENING IS THE ADDITION OF THIS BUILDING HERE TO THE -- I GUESS IT'S SORT OF THE EAST-NORTHEAST AND JUST SOME MINOR ADDITIONS TO THE STORM WATER RETENTION POND TO ACCOUNT FOR THE LAND COVERAGE OF THIS BUILDING. THIS IS THE ZONING AS YOU CAN SEE ALL AROUND IT. THIS IS A MIXED USE CORRIDOR OF 207. A LOT OF PUDS AROUND OF THEM.

THIS IS THAT SORT OF MULTI-FAMILY NEWER PROJECT THAT YOU SEE RIGHT ON 207 AND THIS IS THE PROJECT, THE SELF STORAGE.

AS YOU SAID, HERE'S A CLOSE-UP OF WHAT'S CURRENTLY OUT THERE.

THIS IS A LIGHT AT LIGHTSEY ROAD.

THIS IS WHERE YOU COME ON ON LIGHTS ROAD.

THESE RTD BUILDING. IT'S OPEN IN OPERATING NOW.

THIS IS WHERE THE NEW BUILDING WOULD GO AND THIS IS THE AREA WHERE YOU HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF INCREASE IN THIS RETENTION POND TO ACCOUNT FOR THE COVERAGE. AND HERE'S THE PROPOSED PLAN.

ALL OF THAT IS LAID OUT IN YOUR PACKETS WHICH SHOW THE ADDITIONS TO THE TEXT BUT ALL OF THEM, AS I SAID, ARE SUM RIDE AS I STATED. I'M -- SUMMARIZED.

AS I STATED, I'M HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S ANY PUBLIC COMMENT SO I CAN WAIT UNTIL AFTER THAT AS WELL. THANK YOU 1 MR. CHAIRMAN.

>> MR. MATOVINA: ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OF MR. WHITEHOUSE? DR. HILSENBECK LINCHTS WHEN I FIRST READ THIS I WAS FINE WITH IT. IT'S A REAL REASONABLE REQUEST, NO DOUBT ABOUT IT BUT IT A HERE PIERCE THAT SECOND BUILDING THAT YOU'RE PUTTING OUT TO THE EAST IS GOING TO ENCROACH INTO THAT WETLAND HABITAT AND SO IS THE EXPANSION OF YOUR RETENTION POND. I PERSONALLY THINK WE HAVE WAY TOO MANY RETENTION PONDS. WHERE YOU HAVE WETLAND, THAT THEY SHOULD BE UTILIZED TO RETAIN STORM WATER RAUNCH, RUN OFF, ET CETERA PLUS THIS IS RIGHT THERE IN THE HEADQUARTERS OF MOWL TREE CREEK. MOLE TREE CREEK.

I DON'T LIKE THAT. IT'S GOING TO VOTE FOR IT ANYWAY BECAUSE IT'S A REASONABLE REQUEST AND I DON'T SEE ANYWAY FOR YOU TO FIT THAT IN. I GUESS THE STORAGE BUSINESS IS BOOMING, HUH? REALLY GOOD.

>> YES, SIR. I APPRECIATE THOSE COMMENTS OF THE CHAIR. PART OF IT IS WE HAVE THE MEET THE STATE AND CROWN WATER REQUIREMENTS.

THAT'S WHY WE WOULD DO IT. I THINK WE WOULD AGREE WITH YOU AS TO GOING THAT DIRECTION IF WE COULD, BUT WE HAVE TO INCREASE THE RETENTION TO COVER THE USE. AGAIN, THEY'RE STILL PROTECTING OR KEEPING ALL OF THIS AREA BACK IN HERE AS WETLAND.

AS YOU SEE IN THE TEXT, I THINK IT'S A 2 POINT SOMETHING ACRES.

THIS IS MAYBE A HALF ACRE OR A LITTLE LESS OF INFRINGEMENT AND THEY'RE CONTINUING TO PROTECT, AS PART OF THE PUD LANGUAGE, THIS WHOLE WETLAND AREA IN HERE. APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS.

THANK YOU, SIR. >> MR. MATOVINA: DOES NUB ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT?

ANY PUBLIC SPEAKER CARDS? >> MS. PERKINS: WE HAVE ONE.

JONATHAN FOSTER. >> MR. MATOVINA: NAME AND

ADDRESS FOR RECORD MR. FOSTER. >>>

>> AND NAME IS JONATHAN FOSTER 1524 SOUTH WOOD PLACE.

LIVE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD OFF LIGHTSEY ROAD AND I DRIVE PAST THIS DEVELOPMENT EVERY DAY. THE ISSUE I HAVE TO DO WITH THIS HAS TO DO WITH THE SIDEWALK. AS YOU KNOW THE COUNTY REQUIRES DEVELOPERS TO PUT IN SIDEWALK IN FRONT OF THEIR PROPERTIES AND THIS ONE HAS PUT ONE IN ACROSS PROPERTY OWNER TO PROPERTY CORN ACROSS LIGHTSEY ROAD. THE PROBLEM IS THAT THE SIDEWALK DOES NO CARRY THROUGH TO THE INTERSECTION.

IT DOESN'T CONNECT WITH THE ROAD.

IT'S BLOCKED BY A DITCH AND IT'S COMPLETELY FUNCTIONLESS.

IT'S COMPLETELY USELESS. AND SO YOU HAVE THIS SIDEWALK FRONTING THE PROPERTY THAT NOBODY CAN USE.

AND I'VE LOOKED INTO THE COUNTY'S LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, AND ASHLEY 6 COVERS DESIGN STANDARDS AND IMPROVEMENT REQUIREMENTS, AND SECTION 6.02.06 RELATES TO SIDEWALKS.

AND IT SAYS HERE SIDEWALKS SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED FROM BOUNDARY TO BOUNDARY, CHECK, AND SHALL EXTEND TO THE EDGE OF THE ADJACENT ROADWAYS. SO THIS IS NOT, IN MY VIEW,

[01:55:02]

AND THERE'S A LOW INCOME APARTMENT COMPLEX RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET FROM THIS DEVELOPMENT, AND IT'S A COMMON SIGHT TO SEE PEOPLE WALKING UP LIGHTSEY ROAD TO GET TO 207.

THIS ROAD IS A VERY PRECARIOUS ARRANGEMENT FOR PEDESTRIANS ALREADY AND THIS STREET HAS BEEN CRYING OUT FOR A SIDEWALK FOR QUITE A LONG TIME. SO IT'S, YOU KNOW, ON ONE OCCASION I EVEN SAW A YOUNG MOTHER WITH A STROLLER WALKING IN THE ONCOMING LANE OF TRAFFIC ON LIGHTSEY ROAD, AND THIS IS UNACCEPTABLE. IT'S SOMETHING THAT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN ALLOWED TO HAPPEN IN THE FIRST PLACE, BUT NOW WE HAVE AN OPPORTUNITY TO MAKE THIS RIGHT.

THIS SHOULD BE A CONDITION OF APPROVAL FOR THIS PUD, THAT THEY NEED TO MAKE THIS COMPLIANT WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.

AND I THINK THIS IS A GOLDEN OPPORTUNITY.

IT'S NOT TOO LATE. IT'S NOT GOING TO BE AN OVERWHELMING EXPENSE. IT WOULD PROBABLY INVOLVE A CULVERT AND SOME RAILING BUT IT SHOULD BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THIS DEVELOPER TO FOLLOW THROUGH WITH THEIR OBLIGATIONS, AND, YOU

KNOW, THAT'S MY STATEMENT. >> MR. MATOVINA: WELL, SIR, THANK YOU FOR DOING SUCH GOOD RESEARCH.

IT WAS EXCELLENT RESEARCH. UNFORTUNATELY, I THINK WE'RE IN SOMEWHAT THE SAME POSITION WE WERE IN WITH THE THE LAST TIME WITH REGARD TO THAT BUT I'M GOING TO LEAVE IT UP TO THE GROUP HERE TO MAKE THAT DECISION.

BUT THANK YOU. THOSE ARE GOOD COMMENTS.

ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENT?

>> MS. PERKINS: NONE. >> MR. MATOVINA: OKAY.

MR. WHITEHOUSE. >> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN.

JUST -- I WAS JUST -- CAN YOU PUT THAT PICTURE BACK UP? I WAS TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT DIRECTION THAT WAS ON THE PROPERTY. AGAIN WE WANT TO BE GOOD RESIDENTS AND GOOD NEIGHBORS TO THE PEOPLE IN THE AREA.

I THINK, AND MAYBE I'M GUESSING, IT LOOKS LIKE MAYBE THAT'S TO CENTURY BOULEVARD SO THAT -- WE MIGHT HAVE WENT ALL THE WAY IT TO EDGE OF RIGHT-OF-WAY ON CENTURY BOULEVARD.

>> MR. MATOVINA: SIR, CAN YOU COME UP HERE AND CAN YOU EXPLAIN TO MR. WHITEHOUSE EXACTLY WHERE THAT IS SNUCK GO DIRECTLY TO HIM

AND SHOW HIM IF YOU'D LIKE. >> SPEAKER: YES, YOU'RE CORRECT. IT'S OH CENTURY BOULEVARD.

THAT'S THE WESTERN SIDE OF THE DEVELOPMENT.

AND YEAH, IT DOES NOT -- THAT'S ONE OF THE --

>> MR. MATOVINA: SO IT'S ON THE SIDE ROAD.

IT'S NOT ON LIGHTS ROAD. >> OBVIOUSLY, LIKE I SAID, WE WANT TO TRY TO BE GOOD NEIGHBORS BECAUSE I REMEMBER WE HAD, IN BUILDING THE SIDE OUT BECAUSE IT WAS JUST RECENTLY IN THE LAST FEW MONTHS THAT THEY FINISHED OUT AND GOT THEIR CO.

MY UNDER OF COURSE WAS, AND I THINK IF WE GO BACK TO THE -- YOU'RE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO SEE IT REALLY WELL, BUT THIS IS -- OOPS -- THIS IS CENTURY, I THINK, AND -- YES IT IS -- AND THIS IS LIGHTSEY OUT HERE. THE SIDEWALK ITSELF, MY UNDERSTANDING IS IT GOES TO THE RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE AND SO WE DON'T HAVE ABILITY TO GO INTO THE RIGHT-OF-WAY.

I DON'T KNOW. WE CAN LOOK INTO THAT.

I THINK AS THE CHAIRMAN SAID, I DON'T NECESSARILY KNOW -- AGAIN, WOULDN'T WA TO BE GOOD NEIGHBORS AND WE WANT TO DO THE RIGHT THING SO WE'LL LOOK INTO THAT AND FIGURE OUT WHAT WAS GOING ON OUT THERE. I WAS LOOKING FOR MR. DESOUZA BUT IT LOOKS LIKE HE LEFT ALREADY.

WE CAN FIGURE OUT WHAT'S GOING ON OUT THERE AND TRY TO SEE.

AGAIN AS THE AGENCY KNOWS, WE CAN'T GO INTO THE RIGHT-OF-WAY IF THAT'S COUNTY-OWNED PROPERTY BUT WE CAN TRY TO FIGURE ON THE A BETTER WAY TO -- AND I DON'T KNOW IF IT CAN CONNECT TO THE ROAD THERE EITHER. I THINK THAT'S ONE OF THE THINGS IN THE COUNTY CODE, AS THE AGENCY MEMBERS KNOW, A LOT OF TIMES WE'LL BUILD SIDEWALKS OR WE TAKE PUT IT IN A SIDEWALK FUND, AND IF THERE'S NOTHING ON EITHER SIDE THAT'S BUILT YET, THERE'S NO SIDEWALK, I THINK ONE OF THOSE THINGS YOU SEE QUITE FREQUENTLY IS ON 210, AND IT'S HAPPENED OVER THE YEARS WEEKS,, THAT THERE'S PLACES WHERE THE SIDEWALK ENDS AND THERE'S NOTHING ON EITHER SIDE. LET ME PUT THE PICTURE UP AGAIN.

SO I'M LOOKING AT THE PICTURE, AND I THINK, YOU KNOW, I JUST -- I DON'T KNOW -- HERE'S MR. D'SOUZA.

I DON'T KNOW HOW WE CONNECT INTO A ROAD, AND YOUR ENGINEER MIGHT

BE ABLE TO TELL YOU. >> DICK, GROWTH M'M.

IT TOGETHER EXTENT FEASIBLE OF WHAT COUNTY CODE WOULD ENFORCE A PROJECT TO DO. THAT'S WHERE IT STOPS NATURALLY BASED OFF THE PROPERTY LINE AND WHAT WE IN CODE CAN REQUIRE OF

AN APPLICANT. >> MR. MATOVINA: THANK YOU.

>> DO YOU KNOW IF THIS IS RIGHT-OF-WAY HERE? I MEAN, AGAIN I'M NOT AN ENGINEER SO I DON'T KNOW.

>> I DO BELIEVE THAT THAT'S WHERE THE RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE

[02:00:01]

THAT'S WHY THE LOT DOES EXIST THERE.

WHEREAS HIT THE RIGHT-OF-WAY LINE, THAT'S WHERE THE RIMPLE TO CONSTRUCT SIDEWALK ENDS AND THEY ALSO HAVE NO OBLIGATION TO CONSTRUCT SIDEWALK ON A LOCAL ROAD.

>> MR. MATOVINA: THANK YOU. DR. MCCORMICK.

DR. MCCORMICK. >> DR. MCCORMICK: YEAH.

I WAS GOING TO MAKE A MOTION. >> MR. MATOVINA: MR. MILLER IS ON THE QUEUE SO HOLD ONE SECOND WITH YOUR MOTION, PLEASE.

>> MR. MILLER: THIS IS ON PAGE 70 EXISTING PUD UNDER SIDEWALKS.

THE REQUIREMENT IS A 5-FOOT SWAWBLG WILL BE PROVIDE ALONG LIGHTS ROAD TO THE EXTENT THERE AREN'T ANY EXISTING.

THE I UNDERSTAND THIS LOOKS PRETTY ABSURD, AND IT'S INTERESTING THAT THEY HAVE THE SIGN UP THAT SAYS THAT THE YOU CAN SWA ENDS BECAUSE IT'S PRETTY OBVIOUS THE YOU CAN SWA ENDS, BUT -- SIDEWALK EBDZ BUT IT LOOKS LIKE THEY COMPLIED WITH

THE CONDITION. >> MR. MATOVINA: ALL RIGHT.

ANY OTHER COMMENT FROM THE AGENCY MEMBERS? IF NOT, DR. MCCORMICK UP. DR. HILSENBECK.

>> DR. HILSENBECK: I JUST WANT TO COMMEND MR. FOSTER FOR BRINGING THAT FORWARD TO US AND DOCUMENTING IT VERY WELL.

THANK YOU. BUT IT DOES APPEAR THAT IT END AT A RIGHT-OF-WAY, BUT I WISH WE COULD DETERMINE THAT FOR CERTAIN PRIOR TO THE SPROAT. VOTE MANCHTS I DON'T WANT TO

>> MR. MATOVINA: I DON'T WANT TO COMPLICATE MATTERS BUT WE BUILD SIDEWALKS IN RIGHT-OF-WAY ALL THE TIME.

IT'S JUST SUBJECTED TO APPROVAL. SENATE OF, MOST SWHAWRKS IN SUB DIVISIONS ARE IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY, NOT ON A LOT.

SO I'M NOT QUITE SURE ABOUT STAFF'S TESTIMONY THERE, BUT WE BUILD THEM ALL THE TIME IN THE RIGHT-OF-WAY.

DR. MCCORMICK. >> DR. MCCORMICK: NOW I'LL

PROPOSE A MOTION. >> MR. MATOVINA: YOU WERE

GOING TO MAKE A MOTION. >> DR. MCCORMICK: MY MOTION IS

[7. MAJMOD 2021-11 Greenbriar Downs PUD. Request for a Major Modification to the Greenbriar Downs PUD (Ordinance 2019-15) to increase the allowed height of structures on the North Parcel from 35 feet to 55 feet to accommodate construction of a church.]

THE STAFF REPORT. >> MR. MATOVINA: WE'VE GOT A MOTION BY DR. MCCORMICK. IS THERE A SECOND.

SECOND BY MS. PERKINS. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? VEEG SEEING NONE, LET'S REGISTER THE VOTE.

ALL RIGHT. THAT MOTION PASSES.

AND WE WILL MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER 7, AND MR. SHELTON.

THIS DOESN'T LOOK LIKE MR. SHELTON AT ALL.

HE'S GOT RED HAIR AND HE'S TALL. >>Y I'M BLAIR UNITING WITH KIMLEY-HORN. OUR ADDRESS 12740 GRAN BAY

PARKWAY WEST, SUITE 235 RO. >> MR. MATOVINA: LET MEABOUT EX PARTE COMMUNICATION. I FORLGT ANY EX PARTE COMMUNICATION? THANK YOU.

SORRY. >> THANK YOU GUYS FOR THE TIME.

I APPRECIATE IT AND I'LL BE QUICK.

WE ARE HERE FOR MAJOR MOWED FOR GREENBRIER DOWNS PUD, AND THE LOCATION OF THE PUD IS ON LONGLEAF PINE PARKWAY AND VETERANS PARKWAY ALONG THE, THAT'S THE PROPOSED VETERANS EXTENSION. AND THIS IS FOR THE NORTH PARCEL UP HERE ALONG LONGLEAF PINE, AND THEN THE SOUTH PARCEL THE RESIDENTIAL PORTION OF THE PUD. WE ARE JUST HERE TO TALK ABOUT THE REQUEST IS TO INCREASE THE HEIGHT FROM 35 FEET IN THE COMMERCIAL PARCEL TO 55 FEET TO ALLOW FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A CHURCH. CHURCH OF 1122 IS CONSTRUCTING A CHURCH ON THE NORTH PARCEL, AND THE REQUEST IS ONLY ONLY PERTAINING TO THE NORTH PARCEL. WE'RE NOT TOUCHING THE SOUTHERN PORTION WHERE THE RESIDENTIALS ARE.

AS YOU CAN SEE, THIS IS A RED LINE OF THE TEXT WHERE IT SAYS NORTH PARCEL. WE'VE GOT 55 FEET DOWN THERE AT THE BOTTOM. AND THE HEIGHT OF STRUCTURES.

WE'RE ONLY TOUCHING THAT. SO THE REASON WE'RE REQUESTING THIS IS WE THINK IT'S COMPAT YOU WILL BE FOR THE AREA.

THIS IS A COMMERCIAL NODE AS YOU CAN SEE IN THE LAND USE MAP.

IT'S THE COMMERCIAL CORRIDOR ESSENTIALLY ON THIS CORNER.

AND WE ARE DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO CREEK SIDE HIGH SCHOOL, AND CREEK SIDE HIGH SCHOOL IS ALREADY BUILT, CONSTRUCTED AND IT'S ALMOST 55 FEET OR TALLER. AND WE ARE RIGHT HERE.

HERE'S OUR PARCEL. SO WE ARE JUST HERE TO REQUEST THAT YOU ALLOW TO US INCREASE THE HEIGHT ON THE NORTH PARCEL TO 55 FEET. AND I'M HERE FOR ANY QUESTIONS

YOU MAY HAVE. >> MR. MATOVINA:

DR. HILSENBECK. >> DR. HILSENBECK: DID I READ COLLECT IN THE APPLICATION THAT THE NORTH PARCEL IS 55 ACRES?

>> YES, SIR. IT IS 55 ACRES.

>> DR. HILSENBECK: SO ARE THERE ANY OTHER BUILDING OR CHURCHES PLANNED FOR THAT PARCEL?

>> WE DO HAVE A PLAN FOR A COMMERCIAL PORTION, AN ANCHOR BUILDING WITH SO MANY RETAIL ADJACENT TO THE CHIECH CHURCH.

[02:05:04]

>> DR. HILSENBECK: SO IF WE APPROVE THIS FORE THE CHURCH, AND I DON'T OBJECT TO THE CHURCH BUILDING A SEEM 55 FEET HIGH -- THAT DOESN'T BOTHER NEE ONE BIT -- BUT I ASSUME WE GRANT THIS FOR THE ENTIRE PARCEL, THAT ANY BUILDING PUT ON THAT PARCEL

COULD BE 55 FEET HIGH. >> YES.

TECHNICALLY, AND THEY DIDN'T BREAK ON IT AND WE DIDN'T WANT TO MAKE A TON OF RED LINE CHANGE.

WE JUST WANTED TO MAKE THE POINT THAT WE'RE DOING 55 FEET.

WE WOULD TOTAL BE WILLING TO ADD I CONDITION THAT THE 55 FEET HEIGHT WOULD BE ONLY FOR THE CHURCH BECAUSE WE DO NOT PLAN TO BUILDING ANY OTHER BUILDING TALLER.

>> DR. HILSENBECK: THAT'S WHAT I'M LOOKING FOR RIGHT THERE.

JUST RESTRICT THIS TO THE CHURCH.

>> YEP. >> DR. HILSENBECK: OR ANOTHER

CHURCH THAT MAY BE BUILT THERE. >> THANK YOU.

LARGE ASSEMBLY CHURCHES. >> DR. HILSENBECK: THANK YOU.

>> MR. MATOVINA: MR. MILLER. >> MR. MILLER: JUST REAL QUICK, IS THERE GOING TO BE A PARTICLE GARAGE?

>> NO. DIDN'T A PARKING GARAGE?

>> NO. >> MR. MATOVINA: DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT?

DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKER CARDS? >> MS. PERKINS: WE DO NOT.

>> MR. MATOVINA: DO WE HAVE A MOTION? BACK IN THE AGENCY. MS. PERKINS.

>> MS. PERKINS: MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF MAJOR MOD

[8. MAJMOD 2020-21 Hydro PUD. Request for a Major Modification to the Hydro Aluminum PUD (Ord. 2008-60) to modify PUD name, change the project phasing, increase building square footage in Sub-Phase IA by 182,001 square feet for facility buildout. The subject property is located 200 Riviera Road.]

TO THAT. >> MR. MATOVINA: MOTION BY MS. .

SECOND BY DR. HILSENBECK. ANY SUGGESTION? LET'S REGISTER THE VOTE. THAT MOTION PASSES.

>> THANK YOU. >> MR. MATOVINA: YOU'RE WELCOME. LET'S MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER 8.

MS. KULICK. IS THERE ANY EX PARTE COMMUNICATION TO DECLARE FOR A ITEM NUMBER 8?

? >> GOOD AFTERNOON.

THIS IS QUITE LOUD. MY NAME IS KATIE KULICK WITH LAND ASSOCIATE 200 MAL GUST TREAT SUITE 3 ST. AUGUSTINE, FLORIDA. GOOD AFTERNOON, MEMBERS OF THE AGENCY. IT'S MY FIRST TIME BEFORE YOU SO IT'S A PLEASURE TO MEET YOU AND WE ARE HERE TO PREFNLT A MOSKSD TO THE HYDRO ALUMINUM PUD ON THE OTHER HAND 2008-60 SO THANK YOU ALL FOR BEING HERE. SORRY.

THAT WAS QUICK. THIS IS A REQUEST TO MODIFY THE HYDRO ALUMINUM PUD TO AMEND THE PUD NAME TO HYDRO TO BETTER REFLECT THE NAME OF THE OWNERSHIP, TO CHANGE THE PROJECT PHASING SCHEDULE TO A SINGLE 20-YEAR PHASE AND TO INCREASE BUILDING SQUARE FOOTAGE IN SUB PHASE 1A WHICH IS THE EXISTING INDUSTRIAL PORTION OF THE PUD. AND I LOST IT.

OKAY. THIS IS OUR -- I'D LIKE TO DROSS OUR PROJECT TEAM TODAY -- INTRODUCE OUR PROJECT TEAM.

TODAY WE HAVE REPRESENTS FROM HYDRO EXTRUSION USA.

WE HAVE PLENTY OF ENGINEER MANAGER NICK -- THERE HE IS RIGHT THERE. AND PLANT MANAGER MATT NICKEL WHO THE IN THE BACK. AND SENIOR DIRECTOR OF MANUFACTURING RALPH WESTFALL. AND RALPH IS IN THE BACK AS WELL. HYDRO'S ATTORNEY UPCHURCH BAILEY IS HERE AND SID WAS INSTRUMENTAL IN DEVELOPING THE ORIGINAL PUD WHICH WAS APPROVED IN 2008 AND HAS EXTENSIVE KNOWLEDGE AND HISTORY OF THE PROJECT, SO THE TEAM IS HERE TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE. AND I'M GOING TO PRESENTED PRESENT A FEW SLIDES TO GET OUR BEARINGS, GIVE A LITTLE HISTORY, AND THEN I'M GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO NICK LEKAS TO INTRODUCE HYDRO ST. AUGUSTINE AND WHAT THEIR PLANS ARE FOR EXPANSION.

THAT WAS MY MODIFICATION. SO THIS IS THE SITE LOCATION.

WHICH ONE IS THE -- I'M TRYING TO LOOK AT THE -- SORRY, TERESA.

I JUST WANT TO USE THE POINTER HERE.

[02:10:01]

THAT'S THE SITE LOCATION. THE SITE IS ACCESSED OFF OF US-1 SOUTH TO RESOURCE RADIOED AND THEN DOWN TO RIVIERA AND YOU'RE LOOKING AT THE INDUSTRIAL PORTION OF THE SITE.

THE SITE IS APPROXIMATELY SIX MILES SOUTH OF STATE ROAD 312 AND TWO MILES NORTH OF STATE ROAD 206.

SO THIS IS THE FOOTPRINT OF THE EXISTING PUD.

IT IS 1,008.4 ACRES. NOTHING IS CHANGING IN ACREAGE AS A RESULT OF THIS MODIFICATION.

I JUST WANT TO GIVE A LITTLE BIT OF THE BACKGROUND.

THE INDUSTRIAL USE OF THE CURRENT HYDRO SITE ABOUT BEGE EARLY 1970S BY DELTONA CORPORATION.

DELTONA MANUFACTURED HOMES FOR THE ST. AUGUSTINE SHORES DEVELOPMENT. AND SINCE THAT TIME THE SITE HAS BEEN IN CONTINUOUS USE AS AN INDUSTRIAL OPERATION.

IN FACT, MY COMPANY LAND ASSOCIATES HAS BEEN ON AND OFF INVOLVED WITH THE SITE SINCE 1979 SO IT'S BEEN A LONGSTANDING INDUSTRIAL SITE. OVER THE YEARS THE PLANT HAS CONTINUED TO OPERATE AS INDUSTRIAL AND RESIDENTIAL, DWELLING UNITS AS WELL AS NON-RESIDENTIAL SUPPLEMENT ARE YOU DWEVMENT HA CONTINUE TO GROW SURROUNDING THE PROPERTY.

AND SO THE EXISTING INDUSTRIAL FACILITY -- WE'LL TRY THIS AGAIN, WHICH IS RIGHT HERE -- THAT'S LOCATED ON 36.4 ACRES AND THE REMAINING AREA, THIS AREA HERE, IS PROVOCATIVE 67 ACRES, AND -- THERE ARE CURRENTLY HAVE A ANT CAN'T WITH INADVERTISEMENTS FOR MINIMAL MUTT FUTURE DEVELOPMENT SUCH AS THIS AREA UP HERE IS RESERVED AS A OPEN SPACE.

THIS IS A 225-FOOT -- IT WAS CARVED YOU AT FROM THE PUD TO PROVIDE A BUFFER TO THE INDUSTRIAL.

I'M SORRY. SO THIS IS THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP. HYDRO HAS A MIX OF DIFFERENT LAND USE TYPES. IT'S GOT INDUSTRIAL WHERE IT'S MAIN PLANT IS RIGHT NOW. IT'S ALSO GOT SOME REST RES-C AS WELL AS MIXED USE DOWN HERE. SO IN 1990 THE ST. JOHNS COUNTY ADOPTED THE 57 PLAN FUTURE LAND USE MAP PER THE REQUIREMENT OF THE 1985 GROWTH MANAGEMENT OR LAND USE MAP IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT AC. THE PROPERTY HAD BEEN -- WHICH IS THE INDUSTRIAL PORTION HERE, HAD BEEN DESIGNATED AS RES-C, WHICH THEN RENDERED THE SITE AS AN EXISTING NON-CONFORMING USE.

SO THIS CAME TO LIGHT IN A 2005 APPLICATION FOR REZONING BY AN ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER. AND WHAT HAPPENED WAS THAT THE COUNTY INITIATED AN INTERNAL FUTURE LAND USE MAP AMENDMENT TO CORRECT THAT PROPERTY TO BE INDUSTRIAL ON THE FLUM.

SO SURROUNDING USES IN THE AREA ARE ALSO MIXED USE AND RES-C AS WELL AS SOME CONSERVATION AREA. SO THE PUD IS BOUND BY A LARGE TRACT OF CONSERVATION AREA HERE TO THE NORTH AND TO THE EAST OF THE INDUSTRIAL PORTION. THERE'S THIS AREA HERE IS ABOUT AT LEAST 500 FEET TO THE CLOSEST RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT THERE.

AND AS WELL I HAD ALREADY MENTIONED THAT THIS -- YOU CAN'T SEE THE PHASING BOUNDARY BUT THIS PARCEL UP HERE IS SET ASIDE AS OPEN SPACE IN THE PUD, AND THEN THIS TRACT HERE PROVIDES A 25-FOOT SETBACK. AND WE'RE ONTO ZONING.

SO THE PUD IS INDICATED HERE. IT IS A PUD OF MIXED TYPES OF DEVELOPMENT SURROUNDED BY MULTIPLE RESIDENTIAL PUDS AS WELL AS PSD AND MOBILE HOME PARK DOWN TO THE SOUTHWEST HERE.

SO OVER TIME THERE'S BEEN A MIX OF VAIR WHY ZONING USES

[02:15:09]

OUR MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN IS PRETTY BUSY.

I THINK YOU'VE GOT IT IN YOUR STAFF REPORT AND I CAN IT.

UP ON THE OVERHEAD IF WE WANT TO DO THAT TO SEE ALL THE MINUTIA DETAIL. BUT THIS IS SHOWING YOU THE APPROVALS FROM THE PUD FROM 2008.

-- WE'VE GOT YOUR INDUSTRIAL PORTION HERE.

THIS AGAIN, THAT'S THE OPEN SPACE PARCEL I WAS SPEAKING OF THERE. THIS IS THAT CARVED OUT 225-FOOT AREA THAT ACTS AS A BUFFER. THIS AREA, 2A IS DESIGNATED FOR OUR OFFICE AND COMMERCIAL, BUT THE USES ARE LIMITED TO THIS PORTION OF THE SITE HERE. AND THEN ON THIS PARCEL HERE, ANYTHING THAT HAPPENS ON THIS PARCEL IS LIMITED TO THE SOUTH SIDE AND THERE CURRENTLY ARE NO PLANS FOR THAT YET.

JUST TO REITERATE THAT AGAIN HERE YOUR LOOKING SITE PLAN, BUT THIS AREA UP HERE IS ALL CONSERVATION AREA.

I THINK THAT'S KIND OF THE BARE BONES OF IT.

I'D LIKE TO BE ABLE TO INVITE NIK LEKAS UP HERE TO TALK ABOUT ABOUT WHO HYDRO IS HERE IN SANTIAGO ST. AUGUSTINE AND TO TALK ABOUT WHAT THEIR PLANS ARE EXPANSION ARE AND WHEN HE'S DONE I WILL COME BACK AND DO CLOSING

COMMENTS. >> MR. MATOVINA: THANK YOU.

>> GOOD AFTERNOON. I'M NICK LEKAS.

THANK YOU FOR HEARING THIS. MY HOME ADDRESS IS 691 MEDINA A COURT IN ST. AUGUSTINE SHORES, A SHORT EIGHT-MINUTE DRIVE TO WORK EVERY DAY. MY OFFICE IS OBVIOUSLY 200 RIVIERA BOULEVARD. SO I JUST WANT TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT HYDRO AND WHO WE ARE, WHERE WE CAME FROM.

SO AS KATIE SAID, IN 79 IT SAYS, VAW OF AMERICA, A GERMAN COMPANY, CAME INTO TOWN. THEY HAD A FACILITY IN NEW YORK STET AND THEY CAME INTO TOWN AND THEY WANTED TO BUY -- THEY WANTED TO EXPAND IN THE SOUTHEAST FOR MARKET REASONS.

AND THE EXISTING DELTONA SITE WAS AVAILABLE AT THE TIME, AND LAND ASSOCIATES ACTUALLY CAME GOWN CAME DOWN THEY WERE A NEW JERSEY FIRM AT THE TIME, LAND ASSOCIATES CAME DOWN AND LOOKED AT THE SITE AND DID A LOT OF STUDIES AND DECIDED THAT IT WOULD BE A GOOD SITE FOR VAW TO COME INTO MOVE INTO THE COUNTY.

SO IT HAPPENED. AND THIS 1979, VAW MOVED IN.

WE HAD -- I WASN'T THERE YET BUT AT THE TIME WE HAD A COUPLE OF EXTRUSION PRESENTATIONS, A COUPLE OF DRAW BENCHES TO PREFER, DRAW TUBING, ALUMINUM TUBING.

IN 1980 AND '81 WE EXPANDED WITH A SMALL PAINT LINE AND A THIRD PRESS, AND I ACTUALLY BEGAN MY EXREER IN CAREER IN 1981 WITH VERY MANY OFAW AT THE TIME. SO -- VAW AT THE TIME.

THREE OR FOUR YEARS LATER I GUESS WE ADDED A CASTING FACILITY, A REMILL FACILITY FORE REMELTING OUR SELF-GENERATED SCRAP, AND THAT HELPED TO MAKE US SELF-SUFFICIENT SO WE

[02:20:03]

JUST A LITTLE WHILE AFTER THAT WE EXPAND AGAIN WITH FABRICATION. THEY THE ALUMINUM EXTRUDERS WEREN'T REALLY WELL-KNOWN FOR FABRICATION FACILITIES.

THE AMOUNT OF CAPITAL THAT IT TAKES TO STWES IN THOSE KIND OF THE C&C MACHINING PROCESSES AND THINGS LIKE THAT TO ADD VALUE TO THE EX TRUSIONS WAS COST PROHIBITIVE.

SO WE WERE SORT OF PIONEERS AT THE TIME IN THAT AREA.

SO WE ADDED SOME FABRICATION CAPABILITY.

AND OVER THE NEXT 20 YEARS OR SO WE CONTINUED TO GROW THE BUSINESS. WE CONTINUED TO UPGRADE OUR EXTRUSION PRESSES. WE UPGRADED OUR DRAW BENCHES.

WE UPGRADED OUR REMIL MELT FACILITY FROM A VERY SMALL REMELT FACILITY TO THE ONE THAT WE CURRENTLY HAVE TODAY.

WE'VE EMPLOYED COUNTLESS HUNDREDS OF PEOPLE THROUGHOUT OUR 40-YEAR TENURE, 42-YEAR TENURE ACTUALLY ON THIS SITE.

WE'RE ACTIVE RIGHT NOW IN ELECTRICAL BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION, DISTRIBUTION, AUTOMOTIVE SEGMENTS.

AGAIN, TALKING A LITTLE BIT OF OUR PIE NEARING SPHIRT, WE'VE MADE -- PIONEERING SPIRIT, WE'VE MADE SOME INNOVATIONS IN PAST AND WE CONTINUE TO DO THAT, DOING THINGS FOR PARTICULAR INDUSTRIES THAT NOBODY ELSE IN THE COUNTRY, AND FOR ONE PRODUCT LINE, EVEN IN THE WORLD, WE'RE THE ONLY ONES THAT CAN DO THAT HERE IN ST. AUGUSTINE. WE'RE A NATIONAL LEADER IN ALUMINUM RIGID CONDUIT. WE JUST RECEIVED A PATENT AND UL APPROVAL FOR ALUMINUM ELECTRICAL METALLIC TUBING.

AND THAT'S TAKING OFF. THE CONTRACTORS THAT HAVE TESTED IT FOR US ABSOLUELY LOVE THE PRODUCT.

IT'S THREE TIME LIGHTER THAN STEEL, EASIER TO PUT UP, DOES NS CROAD. THERE'S JUST A LOT OF -- DOESN'T CORRODE. THERE'S A LOT OF GOOD THINGS THAT ALUMINUM PRIS TO . WE'RE MAKING FORAYS INTO THE COMMERCIAL BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY.

IF YOU LOOK AT STOREFRONTS AND CURTAIN WALLS OF LARGE BUILDING AND LARGE CITY SKY RISES AND THAT SORT OF THING, THE PRETTY FASCIA, IF YOU WILL, ON ALL THESE BUILDINGS, THAT'S ALUMINUM, AND WE MAKE THOSE, THOSE PARTS IN OUR FACILITIES.

WE CURRENTLY EMPLOY APPROXIMATELY 367 EMPLOYEES AT OUR FACILITY TODAY. OUR 2020 EXTRUSION SALES, 50 MILLION POUNDS, WE HOPE TO GROW THAT TO 70 MILLION POUNDS BY THE TIME OF OUR BUILD-OUT. CURRENTLY WE HAVE THREE EXTRUSION PRESSES. 18-2-9.

A COUPLE OF DRAW PERCHES FROM 3/4 INCHES TO 2-INCH CAPABILITY.

IF YOU DON'T KNOW WHAT DRAWN TUBING IS, THINK ABOUT LAWN FURNITURE. THAT REALLY, REALLY TOUGH ALUMINUM TUBING THAT DOESN'T BEND BUT IT WILL BREAK IF STRESSED ENOUGH. THAT'S DRAWN TUBING.

WE HAVE A 40-FOOT POWDER COATING LINE.

RIGHT NOW IN OPERATION. AND AGAIN EXTENSIVE FABRICATION CAPABILITIES WITH C&C, WELDING, PUNCHING, SAWING, EVERYTHING THAT'S NEEDED TO DO ON VALUE ADDED.

AND, OF COURSE, WE HAVE A REMELT.

SO WHAT ARE WE DOING AND WHY? IF YOU SEE THERE, THE EXPANSION OF THE CONDUIT OPERATIONS, THAT HAS TO HAPPEN FIRST, SO WE HAVE A BUILDING THERE ALREADY, AND WHEN WE BUILT THAT BUILDING BACK IN 1992, WE BUILT SORT OF A HALF OF A BUILDING, IF YOU WILL, AND WE WISH NOW TO ADD THE OTHER HALF OF THE BUILDING.

RHINITIS JUST PRARNG AREA. IT'S AN ASPHALT PARKING AREA.

SO WE PETITION TO PUT WISH TOT THE OTHER HALF OF THAT BUILDING THERE SO WE CAN FURTHER SERVICE OUR CONDUIT DEMAND.

AFTER THAT HAPPENS, THE CREATION OF A NEW FABRICATION BUILDING.

SO LET ME JUMP FORWARD TO C A MINUTE.

EVERYTHING WE DO, EVERYTHING THAT WE NEED TO DO GOING FORWARD

[02:25:02]

ULTIMATELY WE WANT TO PUT A NEW 12-INCH EXTRUSION PRESS LINE WHERE YOU SEE THE BLOCK NAME C, BUT TO DO THAT, THAT'S OUR EXISTING FABRICATION BUILDING, SO WE HAVE TO BUILD A FABRICATION AND PAINT LINE BUILDING, WHICH IS B.

ONCE THAT'S DONE, WE'LL MOVE EVERYTHING FROM OUR EXISTING FABRICATION BUILDING INTO THE NEW FAB AND PAINT BUILDING.

ONCE THAT'S UP AND RUNNING THEN WE'LL JUST ADD TO THE EXISTING FAB WEST INTO A LARGER, LONGER BUILDING.

WE NEED THE LENGTH FOR OUR NEW EXTRUSION PRESS LINE.

AGAIN, I JUST WANT TO REITERATE, WE'VE BEEN HERE FOR 42 YEARS NOW. WE'VE BEEN GOOD NEIGHBORS.

WE'VE BEEN -- WE'VE BEEN GOOD STEWARDS OF EVERYTHING AROUND US. WE'VE PURCHASED -- WE'VE PURCHASED LAND AROUND THE SITE, AROUND THIS SITE PROPER.

WE'VE PURCHASED LAND AROUND THE ACT OF SITE FOR THE SOLE PURPOSE OF CONSERVATION AND BUFFER SO THAT NOTHING GOES THERE.

GOING FORWARD, WE'RE TRYING TO CONTINUE TO BE A GOOD NEIGHBOR TO THE COMMUNITY. WE'RE TRYING TO CONTINUE TO BE A VIABLE INDUSTRY FOR ST. JOHNS COUNTY.

AND WE REALLY WOULD LIKE YOU TO VOTE TO APPROVE THIS SO THAT WE CAN KEEP -- REMAIN VIABLE AND WE CAN KEEP OUR BUSINESS GOING FOR THE FAMILIES, THE 367 FAMILIES THAT LIVE AND WORK IN THIS INDUSTRY. THANK YOU FOR YOUR

CONSIDERATION. >> MR. MATOVINA: THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU, NICK. SO I WANTED TO PROVIDE THE ANALYSIS, AND I'M NOTE GOING TO READ ALL OF THIS -- NOT GOING TO READ ALL OF THIS BECAUSE A LOT OF IT MIRRORS WHAT IS ALREADY PROVIDED IN THE FINDINGS OF FACT FROM STAFF FOR APPROVAL, RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL, SO THE TWO OUT OF HERE THAT I REALLY WANTED TO POINT OUT WERE ITEMS 2 AND 3 WHICH I LOVE -- THESE ARE NEW PORTIONS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, SO 2, THE PU IS CONSISTENT WITH OBJECTIVE A121 OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, THE COUNTY SHALL ENHANCE THE ECONOMIC DIVERSITY AND PROSPERITY OF ITS CITIZENS THROUGH ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT OPPORTUNITIES, EXPANSION AND DIVERSIFICATION OF THE COUNTY'S TAX BASE. AND 3, THE PUD IS CONSISTENT WITH POLICY A1212 OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT ST. JOHNS COUNTY RECOGNIZES EXISTING LARGE AND SMALL BUSINESSES AND INDUSTRIES ARE VITAL TO THE ECONOMY, RETENTION AND EXPANSION OF EXISTING BUSINESSES AND INDUSTRIES IS AN IMPORTANT COMPONENT OF THE OVERALL DIVERSIFICATION OF THE ECONOMIC BASE. RETENTION AND EXPANSION OF EXISTING BUSINESSES AND INDUSTRIES SHALL BE AN INTEGRAL PART OF THE COUNTY'S ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM.

AND AGAIN, THERE ARE SEVERAL OF OUR FINDINGS OR CITATIONS FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, PARTICULARLY THE PUD PORTIONS OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. AND WITH THAT WE'D LIKE TO THANK YOU, AND WE ARE HERE AND AVAILABLE TO ANSWER ANY

QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE. >> MR. MATOVINA: OKAY.

DR. HILSENBECK. >> DR. HILSENBECK: COULD YOU GO BACK TO YOUR THIRD SLIDE. YOU GLOSSED OVER THAT.

I I'M JUST CURIOUS WHAT WAS ON THAT SLIDE?

>> I'M SORRY. THE THIRD SLIDE?

>> DR. HILSENBECK: I THINK SO. >> THERE WAS THE PUD.

THIS WAS THE REQUEST FOR WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR.

AND THEN THE THIRD SLIDE WAS THE PROJECT TEAM.

THIS WAS RELATING TO CHANGING THE PUD NAME AND JUST THE REQUEST FOR MORE REFLECTIVE OF THE NATURE OF THE COMPANY.

>> DR. HILSENBECK: ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

A COUPLE OTHER THING. SOME HAVE BEEN ANSWERED.

HOW MUCH MORE NOISE DO YOU THINK THAT 182,000 SQUARE FOOT

[02:30:06]

>> I'M GOING TO HAVE TO DEFER TO THE CLIENT ON THAT.

I DON'T KNOW. >> DR. HILSENBECK: I'LL JUST SAY I HAD A FRIEND, WE HAD A FRIEND THAT LIVED ON FINANCE SECOND A, AND -- FONSECA AND WE WERE AT SEVERAL PARTIES AT THEIR HOUSE AND THE NOISE FROM THAT THING 24/7 IS UNBELIEVABLE.

I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S FEASIBLE TO ADD SOUND PROOFING.

YURCH ENGINEERS MAY ADDRESS THAT, BUT IS IT FEASIBLE TO AND SOUND PROOFING TO THOSE BUILDINGS?

BECAUSE IT IS LOUD. >> SO WE HAVE ADDRESSED NOISE IN THE PAST. SOME OF THE NOISE THAT YOU MAY OR MAY NOT HEAR IS THE NOISE OF ALUMINUM SCRAP BEING PUSHED AROUND. WE, BACK IN 2007, WE INSTALLED A WALL AROUND THAT WITH NOISE BAFFLING MATERIAL 6 FEET TBOOF THE WALL ALONG THAT AREA. WE HAD NOISE STUDIES DONE DURING THAT TIME AND WE SATISFIED THE RESULTS OF THAT NOISE STUDY, SO

WE HAVE DONE THAT. >> DR. HILSENBECK: WHO CONDUCTED THAT NOISE STUDY? WHO CONDUCTED THE NOISE STUDY

AND YOU SAID THAT SATISFIED -- >> I DON'T HAVE HAVE THAT INFORMATION. IT WAS A THIRD PARTY ENGINEERING FIRM. WE CAN GET THAT.

>> DR. HILSENBECK: BUT IT WASN'T A COUNTY STUDY.

>> NO, NO, THAT WAS A THIRD PARTY ENGINEERING FIRM THAT HAD

DONE THAT. >> DR. HILSENBECK: OKAY.

WELL, YOU KNOW, THAT AREA HAS REALLY GROWN UP.

A LOT OF RESIDENTIAL AROUND THERE SINCE Y'ALL WERE ESTABLISHED IN '79. I'M REALLY ON THE FENCE ON THIS BUT I'D LIKE TO HEAR PUBLIC COMMENT.

I GUESS THERE ARE A LOT OF PEOPLE HERE TO SPEAK ABOUT IT.

AND I LIKE THE JOBS. I UNDERSTAND ALL THE GREAT JOBS YOU PROVIDE AND I'M SURE THEY'RE PRETTY HIGH PAYING, AND WE ALL USE ALUMINUM. I'VE PROBABLY GOT ON ON MY SCREEN PORCH AROUND THE BACK OF MY HOUSE THERE.

SO I UNDERSTAND THAT IT'S NECESSARY TO PRODUCE, AND IT'S A, YOU KNOW, A GOOD THING FOR ST. JOHNS COUNTY, BUT THE MOIST AND THE THE FLIGHTS ARE RESIDENTS IS -- TO EXPAND -- THE NOISE AND DID THE LIGHT FOR RESIDENTS, TO EXPAND THAT I HAVE QUESTIONS ABOUT THAT, DEEP CONCERNS ACTUALLY.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

>> MR. MATOVINA: DO ANY OTHER AGENCY MEMBERS HAVE MI QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT? MR. PETER.

>> MR. PETER: COULD YOU GO BACK TO THE SLIDE WHERE YOU STHOAD THE DIFFERENT SUB B PHASES.

I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR THAT THS EXPANSION IS TAKING PLACE WITHIN

SUB PHASE 1A. >> CORRECT, WITHIN THE INDUSTRIAL FUTURE LAND USE, THE INDUSTRIAL PORTION OF THE

EXISTING FACILITY, YES. >> MR. PETER:

>> THANKS. >>>

>> MR. MATOVINA: DO ANY OTHER AGENCY MEMBERS HAVE ANY

QUESTIONS? >> DR. HILSENBECK: I JUST HAVE ONE MORE. I GUESS IT WAS 2B HE'S THE OPEN

SPACE AND NOT TWVMENT A AND B. >> CORRECT.

>> DR. HILSENBECK: IT SHOWS LARGE ORE YOUR MAP BUT I ANSWERED MY OWN QUESTION. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. >> MR. MATOVINA: OKAY.

SO WE'RE GOING TO MOVE INTO PUBLIC SPEAKERS.

HOW MANY CARDS DO WE HAVE? >> MS. PERKINS: I ONLY HAVE THREE SPEAKER WARDS CARDS. ALLEN RACKEN DIDDIC.

I'M SORRY. I TOTALLY MESSED THAT UP

>> FIRST I WANT TO THANK THE COMMISSIONERS FOR TAKING TIME OUT TO HEAR OUR CONCERNS. I'M -- MY NAME IS ALLEN RACKENTON I LIVE AT 115 EAST PINE HOLLOW TRAIL AND BUTS RIGHT UP TO THEIR PROPERTY WHERE THEY WANT TO START WITH I GUESS IT WILL BE 2B AND 2B. -- AND 2A.

SOME OF THE CONCERNS THAT WE HAVE IS THE WILDLIFE THAT LIVE IN THAT PRESERVE AREA THAT COME -- I HAVE A PICTURE WE HAVE, THE NEIGHBORS ARE WEARING IT, THE DEER THAT COME ON OUR PROPERTY. THEY WALK IN THE STREET AND WE'RE GOING TO LOSE ALL THAT, AND TODAY ON THE WAY HERE HAPPENED TO SEE ONE ON THE SIDE OF THE ROAD THAT GOT HIT, SO WE'RE WORRIED ABOUT THAT. TRAFFIC ON REPORTER'S ROAD WHICH IS A SMALL TWO LANE ROAD, FEEDS AN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL, FEEDS GRAND REVIEW WHICH IS ACROSS THE STREET, TUSCANY WHICH YOU KNOW AND OUR COMMUNITY. IT CAN'T HANDLE ANY MORE TRAFFIC THAN WHAT THEY GOT WITH THESE TRACTOR-TRAILERS COMING THROUGH THERE. THE DOES HYDRO PLANT HAVE

[02:35:01]

THE SMELL. IT SMEMS WHEN THEY START CLEANING THAT FACILITY. WE GET IT ALL NIGHT LONG.

THE NOISE IS 24/7, AS YOU JUST MENTIONED.

EVERY TIME A TRUCK GOES ON THE SCALE, THEY'RE BEEPING THE HORN, BLOWING THE HORN. THE NOISE OF DROPPING THE ALUMINUM INTO THE TRUCKS, WE'RE HEARING THAT.

WE BUT UP TO IT. SO I DON'T KNOW WHAT KIND OF BUFFER THEY INTEND TO MAKE FROM THE PROPERTY LINE INTO THAT PRESERVE AREA THAT'S ALREADY THERE, WHICH WE'RE GOING TO LOSE. I MEAN, AND THE WATER RETENTION, AFTER THE HURRICANES, THAT DIP HELD BAWRT WATER PROBABLY FOT MONTHS UNTIL IT FINALLY DISSIPATED WHICH NOW WE'RE GOING TO LOSE THAT. WE'RE GOING TO GET FLOODED OUT EVERY TIME WE GET A HURRICANE? HOW ARE THEY GOING TO ADDRESS THAT AREA? WE REALIZE THAT THE COUNTY HAS GROWTH AND THEY'RE GOING TO EXPAND.

THEY HAVE TO EXPAND. BUT I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH ROOM THEY HAVE BEHIND THEM WHICH IS MORE TO THE SOUTH AND HOW MUCH THEY HAVE GOING TO THE EAST. WE'RE ON THE WEST SIDE OF THEM.

WE'RE GOING TO GET THE BRUNT OF IT.

SO WE'RE WORRIED ABOUT WHERE THE FURTHER EXPANSION IS GOING TO BE. AND WHAT HAPPENED TO ALL THE TREES? THE PINES THEY'RE GOING TO BE CUTTING DOWN, THE PINE TREES. SO WE THINK IT SHOULD GO OUT FURTHERMORE PLANNING WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN TO THIS -- THEIR BUILD-OUT BEFORE THE COMMISSION MAKES ANY DECISIONS.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. >> MR. MATOVINA: THANK YOU.

>> MS. PERKINS: VERNON HUNT. >> HI, MY NAME IS VERNON HUNT I LIVE AT 125 MAGNOLIA CROSSING POINT.

I'M NEW HIRE. I'VE LIVED HERE FOUR MONTHS.

I MOVED IN. I SURVEYED THE PLACE, THE AREA WITH GOOGLE MAPS, SAW THE SPOT IN THE DISTANCE BETWEEN -- WHAT IS IT? -- LOIRD, IS THAT HOIRDZ HS 200 FEET. A LOT OF TREES.

YOU CAN'T SEE MUCH THROUGH IT BUT IT WAS A LOT OF WETLANDS.

THERE'S 3 FEET OF CREEKS THAT GO DOWN INTO MOSS CREEK, GOES INTO MOULTRIE CREEK, AND MY UNDERSTANDING IS EPA DOES NOT ALLOW FILLING IN WETLAND AREAS. PRESIDENT OBAMA YEARS AGO PUSHED THROUGH A LAW THROUGH THE EPA TO KEEP PEOPLE FROM FILLING IN DITCHES AND WETLAND AREAS, AND THERE'S ALL WETLANDS AREA.

THEY MENTIONED THE TREES. THEY HAVE 200 FEET, 200, 300-FOOT PINE TREES BETWEEN US AND HYDRO.

MY OTHER CONCERN IS THE -- THEY MENTIONED THE TRAFFIC ON REPORTER'S ROAD. THE HOPEFULLY I'M PLOWNSING THIS PROPERLY. THERE IS PRONOUNCING THIS PROPERLY. THERE IS AN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL 200 FEET FROM RORERS RADIOED. THE PEOPLE TAKE THEIR KIDS AND TO THATNEAUX THE SCHOOL. MY CONCERN OF IS THEY'RE GOING TO CLOSE OFF THE ROAD THE AND MAKE IT A COMPANY-ONLY ROADWAY, AND PEOPLE WILL HAVE TO TAKE THEIR KIDS OUT TO US-1 DOWN AND THEN INTO SHORES TO GO TO THE SCHOOL.

AND I TRIED TO GET ANSWERS THROUGH HYDRO.

I WENT THROUGH THEIR COMMUNICATION DEPARTMENT FOR THREE OR FOUR WEEKS. I HAD THREE COMMUNICATIONS.

TWO OF THEM WERE SET UP TO BE MEETINGS.

THEY CANCELED THEM. I'VE BEEN TRYING TO GET THIS MAP BECAUSE MY PROPERTY GOES RIGHT WHERE THAT -- MY PROPERTY IS ON THE LEFT SIDE OF THAT 4. SO IF THEY DEVELOP 4, WHICH IS THE FEEDER AREA FOR THE CREEKS INTO MOSS, AND THAT'S ALL WETLAND BETWEEN THEM AND US, AND I'M NOT SURE WHERE RORERS ROAD IS. IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S GETTING COVERED UP BY B1 AND 11B AND 11B OR 112 112 CH.

SO THAT'S CUTTING OFF ACCESS TO THE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD. 20 MORE SECONDS.

THERE'S NO SETBACK NUMBERS. I'VE BEEN TRYING TO FIND OUT THROUGH THE STATE AND THE COUNTY WHAT THE SETBACK DISTANCE IS.

RIGHT NOW WE'RE AT 225 FEET. YOU GUYS ARE GOING TO -- THEY'RE GOING TO EAT IT UP. THERE'S NO SETBACK BETWEEN HEAVY

INDUSTRIAL AND RESIDENTIAL? >> MR. MATOVINA: THANK YOU,

SIR. >> THANK YOU.

[02:40:03]

>> MS. PERKINS: ANNA ROBERTERA.

I'M SORRY. >> HELLO, EVERYONE.

MY NAME IS AN A. I LIVE ON 217 VOLUSIA AVENUE, ST. AUGUSTINE BY TUSCANY AREA. IT'S LITTLE LITERALLY ACROSS THERE STREET FROM 2A AND 2B, AND THE HOUSES START RIGHT NEXT TO THIS ROAD. SO WE MOVED TO THIS AREA FROM THE SHORES ABOUT SIX MONTHS AGO. WE LIVED IN A AREA DEEPER IN THE SHORES AND WE COULDN'T HEAR ANY NOISE OR SMELL, BUT THE FIRST DAY WE MOVED, WE COULD HEAR THIS NOISE ALL THE TIME, LIKE 24/7.

THAT WAS FROM THE PLANT. AND THE SMELL IS AWFUL.

I COULD NOT OPEN THE WINDOWS. I AM WORRIED WHAT KIND OF SMELL I'M SMELLING ALL THE TIME. I HAVE TWO LITTLE KIDS WHO HAVE SCHOOL RIGHT NEXT TO US, AND I'M REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT THOSE EMISSIONS THAT COULD BE BECAUSE I DEFINITELY FEEL SOMETHING, SMELL SOMETHING, AND FIRST OF ALL, THE NAME FOR THE PLANT IS MISLEADING BECAUSE HYDRO IS, FIRST OF ALL, ASSOCIATES WITH SOMETHING WITH WATER, NOT ALUMINUM.

AND IF THERE ARE PLANS TO CHANGE THE NAME TO HYDRO WITHOUT EXTRUDE ANTS, IT WILL BE IAN MORE MISLEADING FOR PEOPLE.

ESPECIALLY NEW TO THE AREA. SO MY CONCERN IS WILDLIFE PROTECTION BECAUSE RIGHT NOW THERE IS FOREST LINE BETWEEN OUR RESIDENTIAL AREA FROM BOTH SIDES AND THE PLANT.

ONCE IT WILL BE CUT DOWN, THERE WILL BE NO BUFFER, LIKE NO WOODS THAT WILL CAUSE EVEN MORE NOISE AND EVEN WORSE SMELL, I ASSUME.

AND AS FAR AS I TWO SAY WE ALL KNOW THAT ALUMINUM CAUSES ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE, SO I DON'T KNOW IN THE LONG-TERM PERSPECTIVE THIS SMELL, HOW IT CAN AFFECT EVERYBODY'S HEALTH.

LIKE THIS IS A SERIOUS DISEASE THAT WE'RE ALL FACING IN OLDER AGE, SO I'M REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT THIS, THOSE EMISSIONS.

WILDLIFE PROTECTION, ANOTHER IMPORTANT THING IS THE COST OF PROPERTIES NEXT TO THIS PLANT. AS SOON AS THIS AREA WILL BE DEVELOPED EVEN MORE, ALL THOSE HOUSES, LIKE MY HOUSE AND ALL MY NEIGHBORS THAT LIVE ON MY STREET AND EVEN LIKE FURTHER DOWN, THEY WILL ALL PROBABLY FACE SIGNIFICANT DROP IN THE HOUSE VALUE BECAUSE NOBODY WANTS TO LIVE RIGHT NEXT TO THE PLANT.

SO I'M REALLY CONCERNED ABOUT THIS, THE WHOLE PROJECT.

AND THERE ARE LOTS OF QUESTIONS THAT NEED TO BE ANSWERED, NEED TO BE MORE RESEARCH DOWN. I ASSUME THIS NOISE, AIR QUALITY AND POTENTIAL DISEASES THAT COULD HAPPEN.

>> MR. MATOVINA: THANK YOU. >> MS. PERKINS: THERE ARE NO

MORE SPEAKER CARDS. >> MR. MATOVINA: AYALA ARE GOING TO HAVE TO GO OUTSIDE IF YOU'RE GOING TO KEEP APPLAUDING.

PLEASE HOLD YOUR APPLAUSE DOWN, YOUR COMMENTS DOWN FOR SPEAKERS.

SIR. >> REBUTTAL IN THE EVENT THERE

ARE NO MORE PUBLIC SPEAKERS. >> MR. MATOVINA: YES, SIR.

COULD YOU PLEASE POINT OUT CLEARLY WHERE THIS EXPANSION IS

GOING TO BE. >> YES.

>> MR. MATOVINA: SO WE'RE ALL CLEAR WHERE IT IS.

>> YES, MR. DHEAR. SID, 7 YOOCT 80 NORTH PONDS DE LEON BOULEVARD. I REPRESENT HYDRO.

THE ONLY PLACE WHERE THE EXPANSION IS TANK PLACE IS THE CORE PLANT. IT'S 1A.

AND IF I MAY BE ALLOWED JUST A LITTLE CLARIFICATION WITHIN THE REBUTTAL BECAUSE SOME OF THE QUESTIONS THAT WERE ASKED, I THINK KATIE ACTUALLY SAID, BUT I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE IT'S CLEAR REGARDING THE PERIMETER OF THE PROPERTY.

SO FIRST OF ALL, LAST THING FIRST, NORTH HYDRO IS THE PARENT COMPANY. NORSE HYDRO IS ACTUALLY 50% AND WAS ORIGINALLY THE NATION OF NORWAY.

I'VE REPRESENTED HYDRO HERE LOCALLY FOR A NUMBER OF YEARS.

SOMETHING THAT KATIE MENTIONED WAS THAT IN '73 DELTONA BUILT THIS PLANT ORIGINALLY, ITS ORIGINAL FORM AND LOCATION TO BUILD THE PREFAB HOUSES THAT WERE THE ORIGINAL HOUSES FOR THE

[02:45:03]

THAT WAS WHEN EVERYBODY FOUND OUT AND TERESA AND ROSEMARY WERE INVOLVED, THAT WE WERE A NON-CONFORMING GRAWR.

WE WITH WERE IW UNDER THE ZONING CODE WHICH WAS AT THE TIME THAT THE CODE WAS ESTABLISHED THE MOST INTENSIVE USE WE COULD HAV.

THE PLAN AMENDMENT WAS MADE IN ORDER FOR US TO HAVE PROTECTABLE RIGHTS. WE WEIGHED HOW TO DEAL WITH BUFFERING TO THE WEST, AND TO THE EXTENT THAT PEOPLE ARE CONCERNED, TO THE WEST AND THE NORTHWEST, I JUST WANT IT CLEARLY UNDERSTOOD THE BENEFIT OF BEING THERE.

WE BOUGHT JUST UNDER 38 ACRES THAT HAD BEEN DENIED A REZONING BECAUSE OF THE NEXT-DOOR STATUS OF THIS PLANT BY THE BCC.

GEORGE MCCLURE, GOD REST HIS SOUL, WAS ABOUT TO APPEAL.

THE DECISION WAS MADE TO GET DISINS DISTANCE AND TO GET WOODS AND TO NOT TOUCH THE WOODS, PARTICULARLY IN 2B AND IN THAT CARVE-OUT THERE TO THE WEST OF . THE REASON WAS -- YOU WERE ASKING, DOCTOR, ABOUT WHAT THE STUDIES THAT WERE DONE.

I CAN TELL YOU THE ORIGINAL NOISE STUDIES THAT WERE DONE WERE DONE ACTUALLY BY VERBAL ACCUSE VANDERBILT ACOUSTIC ENGINEER BEFORE IT WENT TO A COUPLE OF OTHER ACOUSTIC ENGINEERS BUT THE PRIMARY ISSUE TO BE RAISED, BECAUSE THE QUESTION WAS RAISED DO WE PUT A WALL ALONG THE WESTERN PERIMETER WAS THAT THE KENDALE HOMES WOULD BE HARD UP AGAINST THE PROPERTY LINE, AND WHAT HE SAID WAS THAT CERTAIN SOUNDS WERE GOING TO GO STRAIGHT THROUGH THE WALL AND BE HEARD NEXT DOOR AND OTHERS WERE GOING TO BOUNCE, AND ACTUALLY PROBABLY BE HEARD AT THE SUBDIVISION NEXT DOOR. AND WHAT WE DECIDED TO DO WAS WE BOUGHT, REMEMBER IT WAS 2005, 2006, BASED ON THE HIGHEST AND BEST USE OF MULTI--- OR SINGLE FAMILY EVEN THOUGH, AGAIN, THEY HADN'T BEEN ENTITLED FOR IT, AATELY $.3 MILLION FOR 29.6 ACRES. SO AGAIN, THAT'S A REALLY NICE NUMBER NOW IT WASN'T THEN.

WE PAID A PREMIUM IN ORDER TO GET THAT BUFFER.

WE'RE NO DPOING ANYTHING TO ANY OF THOSE -- DOING ANYTHING TO ANY OF THOSE PERIMETER LOTS. BECAUSE IT WAS A LOODED TO SO IT'S UNDERSTOOD, THE PARCELS NAH SEE LIGHTLY OUTLINED TO THE NORTH AND EAST OF 1A, THOSE ARE OWNED BY HYDRO BUT THEY ARE NOT PART OF THE PUD, AND THOSE ARE BETWEEN 200 AND 500 FEET OF DEPTH TO THE NEAREST PROPERTY LINE.

SO THAT'S JUST AT LEAST, AS FAR AS WHAT THE BUFFERS ARE, THAT'S WHERE WE PUT OUR MONEY WHERE OUR MOUTH WAS, QUITE LITERALLY.

TRAFFIC. BETWEEN THE TIME OF THE PUD'S ORIGINAL APPROVAL AND THE CURRENT APPROVAL, AND AS NOTED BY JAN TRAN THAT MANY'S COMMENTS OF ON THE ORIGINAL REPORT, THE TRAN THAT MANY'S COMMENT, THE COUNTY NO LONGER REQUIRES, OF COURSE, TRANSPORTING CONCURRENCY FOR NON-RES-, BUT WE ACTUALLY WORKED CLOSELY WITH JAN BACK WHEN WE DID THE PUD 12 YEARS AGO, AND WE HAVE VERY STRICT REQUIREMENT IN THE PUD WHICH WE HAVEN'T TOUCHED, WHICH BASICALLY ARE WHEN WE HAVE, BASED ON

[02:50:02]

SO WE WON DOING THAT AND WE WOULD BE DOING TURN LANES INTO RIVIERA. 3.

IN ADDITION, PLEASE UNDERSTAND THAT JAN WAS TALKING ABOUT IN HER COMMENTS THAT, AS A CONDITION TO CONSTRUCTION PLAN APPROVAL, THAT WE WOULD HAVE NON-RES-DEVELOPMENT APPROVAL AT THE CONSTRUCTION PLAN LEVEL IF WE GENERATE MORE THAN 300 313P THAT ESSENTIALLY FROM US-1 OVER, WHETHER IT'S WARRANTING SIGNALIZATION OR ANYTHING ELSE THAT IS NEEDED OF AN IMPROVEMENT, THOSE MUST BE CONSIDERED.

WELL, THE FACT IS THAT'S IN ADDITION TO WHAT WE ALREADY AGREED TO AND CONTINUE TO AGREE TO.

SO AS FAR AS -- LET'S SEE. WE HAD THE TREES.

AS FAR AS WE KNOW, WE'RE PRINCIPALLY DOING WORK IN THE PARKING LOT. I MEAN, THERE MAY BE FOUR, THERE MAY BE 20 TREES BUT THEY'RE ALL IN THE INTERIOR PLANT AREA.

WE AGREED TO HAVE SPECIFIC DECIBEL LEVEL NOISE THAT WAS I THINK 55 DB BASED ON A 60 MINUTE AVERAGE.

THAT IS GOING TO BE 11 TO 7 AND 7 TO 11, A.M. TO P.M. WOULD BE 65. IT'S THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN AN ELECTRIC TOOTHBRUSH AT THE PROPERTY LINE AND BASICALLY MY CONVERSATION WITHOUT THE MICROPHONE.

WE HAVE EXTENDED BETWEEN BUYING THE BUFFER, BETWEEN GETTING THE WALL, BETWEEN IF ENGINEERS BY MY COUNT IT'S A CONSERVATIVE $5 MILLION FOR NOISE ABATEMENT. WE ARE NOT AVERSE TO LOOKING A FURTHER NOISE ABATEMENT. ICE SOMETHING WE HAVE ANALYZED IN AN ONGOING MANNER. ALL I CAN TELL YOU IS SINCE 2005 THEY HAVE CONSISTENTLY BEEN PROACTIVE IN THAT REGARD.

SO BEYOND THAT, HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT I CAN.

MARCHLTS DOES ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT?

DR. HILSENBECK. >> DR. HILSENBECK: I HAVE ONE FOR MR. HANSBALKER. I JUST LOOKED UP.

YOU SAID 55 AND 65 DECIBELS. THAT WOULD BE LIKING A ELECTRIC TOOTHBRUSH OR YOU SPEAKING WITHOUT THE MICROPHONE? IT SAYS HERE IT'S A FREEWAY AT 50 FEET FROM THE PAVEMENT EDGE, FOR EXAMPLE. OR A PASSENGER CAR AT 65 MILES AN HOUR, 25 FEET FROM THE PERSON.

SO THAT SEEMS A BIT HIGHER THAN AN ELECTRIC TOOTHBRUSH TO ME.

>> WELL, I CAN TELL YOU IT'S ONE OF THE ALTERNATIVES, AND I'VE DONE WORK FOR INDUSTRIAL CLIENTS, GOLLY -- WHAT AM I? VERY OLD, 36, 37 YEARS. I CAN TELL YOU ALSO THAT 55 TO 65 IS DEEMED TO BE AN ORDINARY CONVERSATION IN A RESTAURANT.

I CAN ALSO TELL YOU THAT 75 IS A TYPICAL DB FOR INDUSTRIAL ORDINANCE DURING THE DAY. I CAN TELL YOU THAT WE ARE SPECIFIC WITHIN THE PUD INVESTED FOR THOSE NUMBERS BUT I CAN ALSO TELL YOU IF THE NOISE ORDINANCE APPLIED, WE WOULD BE HELD TO A RAUCOUS AND DISTURBING SOUND BETWEEN 7:00 A.M. AND 7:00 P.M.

UNDER THE COUNTY ORDINANCE, NOISE ORDINANCE, AS MOST

[02:55:03]

THAT'S, IF YOU LOOK A WHAT IT ACTUALLY HAS IT HAS RENEWABLE ENERGY AS ONE OF THE THINGS. 2B NOTHING.

2A, WE WERE TALKING ABOUT MAYBE HAVING AN OFFICE.

3, AT THIS POINT ROADWAY TRAFFIC MAYBE, CIRCULATION.

WHAT WE REALLY BELIEVE WE ARE DOING IS SHUFFLING THINGS AROUND AND TRYING TO EMPHASIZE A LITTLE BIT MORE ON CONDUIT.

AGAIN, IF YOU WANT TO START ASKING WHAT IS 65 AND WHAT'S 70, THERE ARE ALL SORTS OF USES THAT GO THERE.

>> DR. HILSENBECK: I DON'T WANT TO ASK THAT.

I DIDN'T. YOU HAD BROUGHT THOSE FIGURES UP. THAT'S WHY I FOLLOWED UP ON IT.

SO IN MY OPINION, NOISE ISSUES, ODORS AND A LOT OF LIGHTING, SO IS THERE ANYTHING THAT CAN BE DONE TO ABATE THAT? FOR EXAMPLE, INSIDE THE BUILDING CAN THERE BE SOUND PROOFING, NOT JUST A WALL OR A FENCE WITH SOME BAFFLES ON IT BUT PERHAPS INSIDE

THE BUILDINGS? >> WE CAN CERTAINLY -- IT'S A LARGE PLANT, AND I KNOW WE HAVE LOOKED AT IT, AND I KNOW WE CAN MAKE GOOD FAITH EFFORT BETWEEN NOW AND THE 21ST TO ANALYZE WHAT OUR OPTIONS ARE, DOCTOR. I ALSO KNOW THAT THE PUD CALLS FOR LIGHTING THAT IS SAFE BUT LIGHT THAT ALSO -- AND I THINK TERESA IS FAMILIAR MORE THAN I WITH THE COUNTY CODE, IT'S NOT DARK SKY BUT IT'S BASICALLY TRYING TO MINIMIZE LIGHTING, OVERFLOW LIGHT POLLUTION TO NEARBY RESIDENTS.

WE CAN LOOK TO WHAT WE MIGHT BE ABLE TO DO THERE.

NOW, BEAR IN MIND WHERE WE ARE AND WHERE WE'RE MAKING THE MODIFICATIONS REALLY IS INTERNAL, BUT THOSE ARE THINGS THAT I THINK WE CAN REASONABLY ANALYZE JUST AGAIN, AS WE BOUGHT THE KEN DALE, JUST AS WE AGREED NOT TO TOUCH THE AREAS TO THE

NORTHEAST. >> DR. HILSENBECK: THANK YOU.

MANCHES ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? I HAVE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. I HAVE TO SAY THAT THIS HAS BEEN AN EXTREMELY BAFFLING PRESENTATION FOR ME.

I'VE HAD DIFFICULTY FOLLOWING THE AUDIENCE AS WELL AS THE APPLICANT. HOW MANY EMPLOYEES WILL THIS EXPANSION ADD TO THE PLANT? THIS IS A 24-HOUR A DAY PLANT,

RIGHT? >> WE DO NOT KNOW YET.

WHAT WE DO KNOW IS THE CONDUIT WORK IS A LEVEL OF SOPHISTICATION THAT IS GREATER, SO WE WOULD BE EXPECTING TO HAVE MORE HIGHLY SKILLED LABOR OPPORTUNITIES.

>> MR. MATOVINA: I WOULD LIKE TO KNOW HOW MANY PEOPLE ARE GOING TO BE COMING AND GOING FROM THIS PLANT.

>> OKAY. >> SO IN TERMS OF ADDITIONAL EMPLOYEES, AS WE DO THE BUILD-OUT, FOR INSTANCE, RIGHT NOW WE'RE LOOKING AT A PROJECT INTERNAL TO OUR CONDUIT BUILDING. E. WHERE WE'RE GOING TO PUT AUTOMATIC IN WITH PROCEED BIOTICS AND THE PURPOSE OF THAT IS ACTUALLY TO EK THAT SOME EMPLOYEES OUT OF THE PROCESS, SO DURING THAT PROCESS WE'LL BE REMOVING ABOUT EIGHT FULL-TIME EQUIVALENTS, EMPLOYEES FROM THE 24/7.

AS WE GO FORWARD WITH OUR PLANS TO ADD FABRICATION AND PAINT LINE, WE'RE NOT REALM ADDING EMPLOYEES AT THAT POINT.

WE'RE JUST MOVING EMPLOYEES FROM ONE BUILDING INTO ANOTHER BUILDING. AS WE START UP OUR NEW PRESS, BECAUSE OF THE TYPE OF PRESS LINE THAT WE'RE GOING TO BE PUTTING IN AND THE AUTOMATION INVOLVED IN IT, WE'RE GOING TO BE MOVING FROM A PRESS LINE THAT CURRENTLY USES FIVE, SIX PEOPLE

[03:00:01]

>> MR. MATOVINA: OKAY. LET ME TRY AGAIN.

HOW MANY EMPLOYEES DO YOU HAVE RIGHT NOW?

>> 367, APPROXIMATELY. >> MR. MATOVINA: AT BUILD-OUT HOW MANY EMPLOYEES DO YOU THINK YOU WILL HAVE?

>> MAYBE AT TOP MAYBE 380 TO 400.

>> MR. MATOVINA: THANK YOU. THAT WAS THE ANSWER I WANTED.

ALL RIGHT. AND CAN ONE OF YOU ALL EXPLAIN TO ME WHAT THESE NEIGHBORHOODS ARE AND WHICH OF THEM SOLELY ACCESS OFF OF -- OR WHICH OF THESE USES, INCLUDING THE SCHOOL, ACCESS OFF OF THIS ROEHRS RADIOED BECAUSE I DON'T D BECAUSE I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT THE PARCEL TO THE WEST DOES, WHAT THE PARCEL TO THE EAST DOES.

I DON'T REALLY UNDERSTAND WHO USES THAT ROAD.

THAT'S YOUR ONLY WAY IN AND OUT OF THIS PLACE.

STHARTD? >> IT IS THAT RIGHT?

>> IT IS. >> THAT WAS A YES OR NO QUESTION, SIR. THANK YOU.

>>Y WHY BE, IT >> YES, IT IS.

>> CAN YOU EXPLAIN TO ME WHO USES THAT ROAD, PLEASE.

I DON'T KNOW WHO THESE DEVELOPMENTS ARE AND -- SO PULL THE AERIAL UP MAYBE AND SHOW US WHO USES THAT ROAD.

>> OKAY. THE PUD THAT IS TO OUR IMMEDIATE WEST ACCESSES OFF ROEHRS ROAD AND THAT IS AT IT COLLECTOR STATUS. THE PUD THAT IS TO OUR NORTHWEST I BELIEVE ACCESSES BOTH OFF OF ROEHRS AND HAS ACCESS ON US-1.

THE SHORES IS THE INTERNAL, AND THE SHORES BASICALLY HAS ACCESS POINTS OFF OF ROEHRS AND, OF COURSE, SEVERAL OTHER ONES.

AND FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH, ROEHRS WAS ACTUALLY CONSTRUCTED BY THE PLANT SO IT WAS ORIGINALLY FOR THE PLANT, BUT THE SUBDIVISIONS MOVED TO THE LOCATION, AND THAT IS WHERE THE SOURCE IS.

THAT'S WHY AGAIN YOU HAVE AN OBLIGATION UNDER THE PUD FOR US TO BE TAKING THE MINOR COLLECTOR AND IMPROVING IT AS A MINOR COLLECTOR OF THE WHOLE LENGTH OF THE ROAD.

>> MR. MATOVINA: AND THE WHOLE LENGTH IS TO THE THE EASTERN SIDE OF THE PLANT, TO THE EASTERN SIDE OF THE PLANT'S PUD, RIGHT? THAT'S WHERE ROEHRS ENDS?

>> IT'S BALANCE ABOUT AC. IT'S CLOSER TO THE EAST, THOUGH,

YES. >> MR. MATOVINA: IT DOESN'T

EXTEND FURTHER TO THE EAST. >> NO.

IT GOES NORTH-SOUTH THERE AND RIVIERA GOES SOUTH AND WE ARE THE SOLE USER OF RIVIERA SOUTH OF ROEHRS.

RIVIERA GOES NORTH AND UP INTO THE SHORES TO JOIN THE SHORES

NETWORK. >> MR. MATOVINA: THANK YOU.

THAT'S WHAT I NEEDED TO KNOW. OKAY.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? IF NOT, WE'RE BACK IN THE AGENCY. MS. PINKIES PERKINS.

>> MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF MAJOR MOD 2021-21 HYDRO PUD

[9. PUD 2021-10 Albury Lore. Request to rezone approximately 12.98 acres of land from Open Rural (OR) to Planned Unit Development (PUD) to allow for a maximum 160,000 square feet of non-residential uses and a maximum 250 hotel rooms.]

BASED UPON SIX FINDINGS OF FACT. >> MR. MATOVINA: GOD A MOTION BY MS. PERKINS. IS THERE A SECOND.

SECOND BY MR. PETER. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? OKAY. IF NOT, LET'S REGISTER THE VOTE.

ALL RIGHT. THAT MOTION PASSES.

OKAY. WE ARE ON TO ITEM NUMBER 9.

DO WE HAVE ANY EX PARTE COMMUNICATION FROM THE AGENCY MEMBERS? ALL RIGHT.

MR. INGRAM, IS THIS YOU? >> GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSIONERS OR AGENCY MEMBERS. I'M TOM INGRAM.

I'M AT 233 EAST BAY STREET SWEETD 1113, JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA. THIS IS A PROPOSED -- IT'S A RETAIL COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT AT 210 AND 95.

[03:05:01]

I'LL GO THROUGH MY SLIDES HERE. BUT IN DISWRENL, 95 AND 210, THIS IS A SITE THAT'S NEAR WHERE CE WILSON ROAD HIEWDZ TO BE.

IT'S NOW CALLED MOON BAY PARTICLE WAY BUT ICE UNDER CONSTRUCTION BY D.R. HORTON IT'S A FOUR LANE MINOR COLLECTOR THAT GOES A SLOW SPEED ROAD THAT WILL RUN ALONG THE FRONT OF THIS PROPERTY. HEETION A ZOOMIN OF THE SITE.

IT'S ABOUT 13 ACRES. I WILL GO TO THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP FIRST. THE SITE IS IN THE MIXED USE REALLY AS WITH ALL OF THE SCHAINGS IN JDGES LONG AGO WITH THE -- ST. JOHNS COUNTY WITH THE COMPENSATION OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THE COUNTY WANTED TO DIRECT THE MOST GEFN INTENSIVE GROWTH TO INTERCHANGES AND PUT MIXED USED IN EACH OF THEM. THIS IS REALLY IN THE PAFORTD THAT. THE CURRENT ZONING IN THE SITE IS OR WHICH IS OPEN RURAL, AND REALLY TO HELP UNDERSTAND WHY IS IT THAT YOU HAVE AN OPEN RURAL SITE IN THE MIDDLE OF A MIXED USE LAND DRICTD, IT GOES BACK TO THE COUNTY'S LONGSTANDING PRACTICE OF ALLOWING LANDOWNERS TO REALLY BE THE ONES TO INITIATE ZONING CHANGES. THE COUNTY DOES NO TYPICALLY TRY TO IMPOSE ZONING UPON LANDOWNERS AND THEY WAIT FOR THE APPLICANTS TO COME FORWARD. SO MY CLIENT, IT'S ICONIC REAL ESTATE DEVELOPMENT OUT JACKSONVILLE, AND THEY'RE A DEVELOPER IN THE AREA AND THEY'VE DONE SOME THINGS.

PROBABLY THE MOST NOTABLE IS THE INTUITION WORKS IN DOWNTOWN JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA IS THEIR PROPERTY.

IT WAS A REDEVELOPMENT OF AN OLDER SITE, OLDER PROJECT.

BUT WITH ME TODAY THE TONY GALORIA, FARLEY GRANGER, AND PAUL GRANGER OF ICONIC IF Y'ALL HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OF THEM.

THE SITE, IT'S ROUGHLY ON THE MORE END IS ABOUT 400 FEET DEEP AND IT'S ROUGHLY 1500 FEET OF FUTURE FRONTAGE ALONG MOON BAY PARKWAY. THERE'S A LARGE PART OF THE PROPERTY THAT ABUTS LAND OWNED BY D.R. HORTON THAT'S BETWEEN MOON BAY AND THE PROPERTY FRODGES, YOU'LL SEE IN THE FORTHCOMING SLIDES BUT FOR ALL INTENTS AND PURPOSES AND FUNCTIONALLY IT WILL ACT AS FRONTAGE.

JUST IN TERMS OF BIG PICTURE, I THINK YOU GUYS ARE FAMILIAR WITH 210 AND 95, BUT THERE'S BEEN A LOT OF HAPPENING OVER THE YEARS.

THE DARKER COLORS EVIDENCE SITES WHICH HAVE BEEN MORE DEVELOPED WHERE DEVELOPMENT IS MOSTLY COMPLETE.

THE LIGHTER COLORS REFLECT SITES THAT ARE LESS COMPLETE.

THE DID I THE BIG DEVELOPMET OF US IS THE BRIDGEWATER PUD WHICH IS ABOUT 800 TOWNHOMES THAT ARE -- THAT WAS REASONABLE APPROVED AND IT'S UNDER DEVELOPMENT.

ALSO TO THE NORTH OF THAT IS THE FOUNTAIN PROJECT WHICH IS NOT LISTED ON THIS MAP BUT AT THE NORTH END OF THE INTERCHANGE.

IT'S GOT 1 MILLION SQUARE FEET OF OFFICE AND COMMERCIAL AS WELL AS MEDICAL USES WITH ASCENSION HOSPITAL BASICALLY BEING ACROSS MOON BAY PARKWAY GOING NORTH INTO THAT DEVELOPMENT.

SO THE PROPOSAL IS FOR 100,000 -- EXCUSE ME -- 160,000 ENCLOSED SQUARE FEET OF NON-RESIDENTIAL USES AS WELL AS THE MAXIMUM OF 250 HOTEL ROOMS. HOTELS TYPICALLY INCLUDE ANCILLARY SPACE WHETHER IT BE A RESTAURANT OR GIFT SHOP OR WHAT HAVE YOU, AND SO IT ALSO CALLS FOR ANCILLARY USES NOT TO EXCEED 12,000 SCARE WITH FEET WITH THE HOTEL.

BEFORE I GET TO THAT STUFF, THE VISION FOR THIS SITE IS THAT WE BELIEVE THERE IS A DEMAND FOR A HOTEL AND WE WOULD ANTICIPATE THAT IT WOULD GO ALONG KIND OF THE NORTHWESTERLY PORTION OF THE DEVELOPMENT, AND THAT THE REMAINDER OF THE PROJECT WILL BE WOULD BE A MIX OF OFFICE AND RETAIL, AND, YOU KNOW, WITH THE SITE NOT BEING DIRECTLY ON 210, WE BELIEVE IT WILL BE MORE ORIENTED TOWARDS THE NOOSHED. AS YOU KNOW NEIGHBOR.

COUNTY ROAD 2 THING HAS GROWN SUBSTANTIALLY OVER THE PAST TEN YEARS AND CONTINUES TO HAPPEN TO THE EAST AS WELL AS TO THE WEST.

SO JUST A LITTLE BACKGROUND ON THE SITE.

HERE'S THE FLOOD ZONE MAP. IT'S NOT IN A FLOODPLAIN.

THERE'S ABOUT 2018 ACRES OF MIXED WET HANDLED/FOREST AS PART OF THIS DEVELOPMENT. AND THE WETLANDS SHOWN IN THAT THIN BLUE LINE THERE. THIS IS OUR SITE PLAN WHICH ALLOWS FOR HOTEL, COMMERCIAL AND OFFICE MORE TOWARDS THE NORTHWEST AND COMMERCIAL AND OFFICE MORE TO THE SOUTHWEST.

IN RESPONSE TO SOME COMMENTS FROM STAFF, WE DID AMENDMENT THE SITE PLAN ON NOVEMBER 10 WHICH IS WHAT YOU SEE HERE TO ALLOW FOR POTENTIAL ACCESS TO THE SOUTH, SO THERE AT THE VERY

[03:10:05]

IT'S UP TO REALLY SEMINIK S AS WELL AS THE COUNTY AS TO WHETHER THEY WOULD BE REQUIRED TO RECIPROCATE THAT AND THERE MAY BE PRACTICAL LIMITATIONS. FUNCTIONALLY MOON BAY PARK WAY, THE ROAD SHOWN TO THE NORTH WILL PROVIDE A CONNECTION BETWEEN ALL OF THESE DEVELOPMENTS. AND THIS IS JUST ZOOMED IN ON THE NORTHWEST CORNER. IN TERMS OF NEIGHBORS, WE HAVE THE PILOT TRAVEL CENTER IS UP TR YOU CAN SEE ON THE SITE, RPM AUTOMOTIVE ARE ON THE NORTHWEST. FUTURE DEVELOPMENT IS ANTICIPATED WHERE YOU SEE THE RETENTION POND AND THE BLANK SPACE THAT IS SEMINIK PROPERTY. THIS IS AN OLDER AERIAL BUT AS YOU YOU GO TO THE EAST ON THAT PHOTO YOU COULD HAVE TO TOWNHOMES THAT DR HORTON ARE CONSTRUCTING.

SO WITH THAT I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE.

>> MR. MATOVINA: ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR THE APPLICANT?

DR. HILSENBECK. >> DR. HILSENBECK: I HAVE ONE QUESTION BOUGHT IT'S NOT NORS THE APPLICANT.

IT MAY BE MORE FOR COUNTY STAFF. WITH ALL THE DEVELOPMENT THERE AT THE I-FIVE-COUNTY ROAD 210 INTERSECTION AND THAT BORDER AND ALL THE DEVELOPMENTS AROUND THERE, THE TRAFFIC THERE IS HORRENDOUS NOW. I-95.

WHAT IS BEING DONE? DO WE HAVE SOMEBODY FROM THE COUNTY STAFF? JUST WONDER WHAT PLANS THERE ARE REALLY TO UPGRADE, ALLEVIATE, AMELIORATE, WHATEVER, THE TRAFFIC IN THAT AREA BECAUSE IT'S BRUTAL.

>> GOOD AFTERNOON, AGENCY THIS. TRAN TRANTHAR SENIOR TRANSPORTATION PLANNER. THERE'S ONE ENGINEER WHO IS WORKING ON ALL THE PROJECTS IN THIS AREA DESIGNING THE INTERSECTION AT WHAT USED TO BE CALLED C.E. WILSON WHICH IS NOW MOON BAY PARKWAY ACROSS THE STREET FROM THE FOUNTAINS DEVELOPMENT WHERE THE ST. VINCENTS HOSPITAL IS GOING AND EVERYTHING. THE.

THEY ARE DOING A SITE ACCESS DETERMINATION AND ANALYSIS ALL THE WAY THROUGH WITH THE I-95 INTERCHANGE.

WE ARE ACTIVELY WORKING WITH DOT WHO HAS FUNDED ADDING LANES TO I'M 95. AND IN CONJUNCTION WITH THAT THEY WILL. LOOKING AT ALL OF THE INTERCHANGES FOR IMPROVEMENT AND CHANGES TO THE DESIGNS OR CHANGES TO THE SIGNAL OPERATIONS, THAT TYPE OF THING,

FOR THE ENTIRE AREA. >> DR. HILSENBECK: OKAY.

SO LET'S LEAVE I-95 OUT OF IT FOR NOW.

WHO IS GOING TO PAY FOR ALL THIS ROAD UPGRADES ON COUNTY ROAD

210? >> IF IT'S A RESIDENTIAL PROJECT, THEY WILL BE ASSESSED A PROPORTIONATE SHARE, WHICH THERE HAVE BEEN SEVERAL. THE BRIDGEWATER PUD HAS APPROXIMATELY $4 MILLION THEY'LL BE PAYING.

THERE ARE SOME OTHERS. THE NON-RESIDENTIAL WILL BE MAKING SITE ACCESS IMPROVEMENTS ONLY.

HOWEVER, THAT DOES AND POSSIBLY COULD INCLUDE I'M 95 DEPENDING ON HOW WE WORK WITH DOT ON THE FUTURE IMPROVEMENT IN THAT AREA.

>> MR. MILLER: SO DO YOU . >> DR. HILSENBECK: NOW DOUGH APPROXIMATELILY MOUCH MONEY IS IN THE BANK RIGHT NOW TO WHY E

COUNTY ROAD 210? >> I DO NOT HAVE THAT NUMBER.

WE HAVE ACTIVELY BEEN ACQUIRING RIGHT-OF-WAY IN THIS AREA.

THE PLAN IS TO SIX LANE FROM WHERE TWIN CREEKS STOPS ALL THE

WAY TO I'M 95. >> IT'S GOING TO BE EXPENSIVE.

>> YES. >> DR. HILSENBECK: THANK YOU.

>> MR. MATOVINA: ALL RIGHT. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE AGENCY MEMBERS? IF NOT, DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC

SPEAKER CARDS? >> MS. PERKINS: WE HAVE ONE,

FARLEY GRANGER. >> HE'S HERE FOR ANY QUESTIONS

YOU MAY HAVE. >> MR. MATOVINA: THANK YOU.

SO WE'RE BACK INTO THE AGENCY. IN PERKINS.

[11. PUD 2021-05 Deerfield Forest. Request to rezone approximately 37 acres of land from Open Rural (OR) to Planned Unit Development (PUD) to allow for the development of a maximum of 63 single family homes, located on the south side of Watson Road and west of Deerfield Meadows Circle.]

>> MR. PIERRE: PENCHES I'LL OFFER A MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PUD 2021-10 ALBURY LORE BASED UPON NINE FINDINGS OF FACT & AS PROVIDED IN THE STAFF REPORT.

>> MR. MATOVINA: WE HAVE TO GET A MOTION BY MS. PERKINS.

DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND BY MR. PETER.

ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE, LET'S REGISTER THE VOTE. ALL RIGHT.

[03:15:02]

>> I DROVE DOWN THERE AND TOOK A LOOK AROUND.

>> DR. HILSENBECK: I'VE BEEN THERE BEFORE BUT NOT

SPECIFICALLY FOR THIS. >> MR. MATOVINA: AND I HAD A CONVERSATION WITH THE APPLICANT ABOUT THE NATURE OF THE REQUEST AND SOME OF THE PROVISIONS THEY MADE TO ALLEVIATE SOME OF THE

CONCERNS OF THE NEIGHBORS. >> GOOD AFTERNOON.

MY NAME IS GARY DAVENPORT. MY TBREAS IS 212 SOUTH SHADOWWOOD IN ST. AUGUSTINE, AND I REPRESENT THE APPLICANT FOR THE PROPOSED DEERFIELD FOREST PUD.

THIS IS THE LOCATION MAP. WE TO ORIENT YOU WE ARE AT THE T END OF WEST WATSON ROAD, AND JUST SOUTH OF THE TERMINUS, WILL ACCESS THROUGH DEERFIELD FOREST PUD WHICH IS TO OUR EAST.

HERE IS AN AERIAL OF THE PROPERTY.

APPROXIMATELY 37 ACRES. AND THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP, AS INDICATED HERE, IT IS RESIDENTIAL B SURROUNDED BY RESIDENTIAL B. JUST TO THE EAST THERE'S AN EXISTING MIXED USE BECAUSE THAT IS AN EXISTING INDUSTRIAL PARK.

AND, OF COURSE, AS TOM JUST POINTED OUT TO YOU, THE STANDARD ZONING IS OR, EVEN UNTIL YOUANDE SPECIFIC APPROVALS DONE, SO WE ARE OR AND SURROUNDED BY OR. JUST -- THIS IS OUR SITE PLAN, AND I TOOK THE LIBERTY OF ACTUALLY COLORING THIS IN FORE A PURPOSE I'LL GET TO IN A MINUTE BUT WHAT I WANT TO POINT OUT IS TOTE EAST OF US AND I KNOW WE HAVE SOME NEIGHBORS HERE TO TALK BECAUSE WE ACTUALLY MET WITH THE NEIGHBORS A AT THEIR HOA MEETING TO LISTEN TO THEIR CONCERNS, AND THERE'S ALSO HISTORY WITH THIS PROPERTY. THIS PROPERTY WAS PROPOSED FOR PUD IN 2017 AND WAS TURNED DOWN, SO WHAT WE DID IS WE WENT THROUGH THE DENIAL AND LOOK AT EACH ITEM THAT WAS LISTED FOR THE DENIAL AT THAT TIME AND ADDRESS EVERY ONE OF THOSE ISSUES. WE MET WITH THE ADJACENT HOA, HEARD THEIR CONCERNS, AND WE HAVE DONE OUR BEST TO ADDRESS -- THE ISSUES AS POSSIBLE TO BE ADDRESSED AND WE PUT A LOT OF TIME AND THOUGHT INTO THIS PUD TO GET TO THIS POINT.

LET ME GO TO THE OVERHEAD REAL QUICK.

THIS IS ONE THING I WANT TO POINT OUT.

THIS IS YOUR STAFF-GENERATED COMPATIBILITY ANALYSIS SO THE DARK -- PERFECT -- THE DARK CATEGORY HERE IS THE PROPOSED PUD. THE PUD TO THE EAST OF US, DEERFIELD MEADOWS, IS THE ONE, THE THIRD COLUMN.

I WANT YOU TO TAKE NOTE THAT THAT IS ALMOST IDENTICAL IN EVERY WAY. THE UNITS PER ACRE THE SAME.

THE SETBACKS THE SAME EXCEPT FOR TWO AND A HALF FEET ON THE SIDE.

LOT SIZE IS WITHIN THE PROPOSED PUD ARE LARGER THAN ADJACENT PUD. MAXIMUM BUILDING COVERAGE THE SAME. MAXIMUM IMPERVIOUS SPHURGS RATIO THE SAME. THE POINT OF THAT IS WE'RE BASICALLY DOING WHAT WAS EXACTLY DONE NEXT DOOR.

SO WHAT DO WE DO TO ADDRESS THE ISSUES BROUGHT UP BY A PREVIOUS APPLICATION? LARGER LOTS.

THE LOTS HERE ARE LARGER THAN WERE PROPOSED BEFORE AND ARE LARGER THAN THE ADJACENT. SIGNIFICANT INCREASED OPEN SPACE. THE GREEN YOU SEE THERE IS ALL OPEN SPACE. THE BLUE YOU SEE THERE ARE RETENTION PONDS. THERE'S A PUD TO THE NORTH OF US

[03:20:02]

WE HAVE AN ADDITIONAL 50 FEET OF OPEN SPACE.

THEY'VE ALSO ORIENTED THE PONDS AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE TO THE NORTH AND TO THE SOUTH TO PROVIDE ADDITIONAL SEPARATION.

AND YOU CAN SEE THIS RATHER UNIQUE STUDENT TO SQUARE UP THE LOTS TO MAKE THE MOST OF USABLE SPACE WITHOUT IMPACTING NEIGHBORS. ONE OF THE BIG ISSUES WITH THE NEIGHBOR AND VERY UNDERSTAND I WILL BE IS WE WILL BE ACCESSING THROUGH THEIR PUD, HOWEVER, THEIR PUD WAS SPECIFICALLY DESIGNED TO SERVE THIS EXACT PUD.

THE ROAD THAT WE'LL BE ACCESSING GOES TO THE PROPERTY LINE WITH A CUL-DE-SAC. IT'S NOT SOMETHING YOU NORMALLY DO IF IT'S GOING TO BE A DEAD END ROAD.

THERE IS A SEWER MAIN STUBBED OUT TO THE PROPERTY.

THERE'S A WATER MAIN STUBBED OUT TO THE PROPERTY.

THEY WERE DESIGNED TOGETHER TO ACCOMMODATED EACH OTHER, AND I KNOW HOMEOWNER DON'T KNOW THAT BUT ESSENTIALLY THAT WAS HAPPENED. THIS IS THE MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE JEAJTS PUD. CIRCLED IN RED THERE, FUTURE ACCESS. IT WAS AGAIN DESIGNED FOR ACCESS TO THIS PROPERTY. I HAVE A FEW THINGS HERE.

I KNOW THESE ARE HARD TO SEE SO I'LL KIND EXPLAIN WHAT THEY ARE BUT THIS IS THE UTILITY SYSTEM AND HOW IT WAS DESIGNED TO SERVE AS PUD, AGAIN, THE STUB-OUT. THIS IS THE ANALYSIS OF THE LIFT STATION. WICH WAS DESIGNED TO SERVE THIS PROJECT. CAPACITY IS WITHIN THE EXISTING LIFT STATION. AND AGAIN, THEIR PUD LAY OTT NEXT TO OUR PUD WHICH THIS IS A UTILITY DESIGN.

THIS IS THE MASTER PLAN FOR THE DOCUMENT DESIGN.

THEY'RE DESIGNED TOGETHER. ONE OF THE BIG THINGS WE DID SINCE MEETING THEM, AND I REALLY UNDERSTAND THIS CONCERN OF THE NEIGHBORS IS THEY'RE LIKE, WELL, CONSTRUCTION IS MESSY, ESPECIALLY HORIZONTAL CONSTRUCTION, AND YOU'RE GOING TO DRIVE THAT THROUGH OUR NEIGHBORHOOD? SO WE WENT OUT OF OUR WAY, MET WITH THE ADJACENT LANDOWNER WHICH IS A VERY LARGE HOLDING COMPANY, AND WE PURCHASED THE RIGHT TO HAVE CONSTRUCTION ACCESS THROUGH TRAIL ROADS, THROUGH TIMBER ROADS SO THAT NO CONSTRUCTION ACCESS WILL GO THROUGH THEIR PROJECT. IT WILL BE ALL OFF-SITE, SO IT WILL NOT AFFECT THEM. THIS IS NOT WRITTEN IN THE TEXT BECAUSE I GOT IT APPROVED YESTERDAY, AND I DON'T MAKE PROMISES THAT I CAN'T KEEP, SO THIS WILL BE -- WE PROPOSED THIS TODAY AS AN AMENDMENT TO OUR REQUEST AND WE'LL ADD I HAD TO THE TEXT FOR THE COUNTY COMMISSION.

BUT THIS IS SOMETHING WE ARE MAY GO FOR OFF-SIGHT TO MINIMIZE THE IMPACT TO THE ADJACENT PUDS. ONE OF THE ISSUES IN THE ORIGINAL PROJECT WAS, WELL, IF THE RAILROAD'S BLOCKED HOW WILL ALL THESE PEOPLE GET OUT? WE WENT AND PURCHASED AN EMERGENCY ACCESS EASEMENT ONLY TO BE USED IN EMERGENCIES, BUT IF THESE PEOPLE NEED TO EVICT IF FIRE OR SOMETHINGES AND THE RAILROAD IS BLOCKING THE THING, THEY CAN GO THIS ACCESS TO CARTER ROAD. IT'S NOT GOING TO BE AN OPEN ACCESS. IT'S FOR EMERGENCIES.

IF THE COUNTY NEEDS TO ACCESS THIS AREA WITH EMERGENCY EQUIPMENT, WHATEVER THAT MIGHT BE, THEY HAVE THIS POSSIBILITY.

AND THAT WAS PURCHASED BY THE APPLICANT FOR THIS PROJECT.

AND PROBABLY THE BIGGEST, THE APPLICANT, IF THIS IS APPROVED, IS GOING TO EXPAND THE INTERSECTION OF WATSON ROAD AND US-1 BECAUSE IT'S A SINGLE LANE, AND IF SOMEBODY'S TRYING TO TURN LEFT, NOBODY'S GOING THROUGH SO WE'RE GOING TO HAVE A LEFT TURN LANE AND A RIGHT THROUGH/RIGHT TURN LANE, NOT AS MUCH TRAFFIC GOES ACROSS THE ROAD OR TURNS RIGHT BUT BY PUTTING THOSE PEOPLE OVER TO THE RIGHT EVERYBODY GOING NORTH TO ST. AUGUSTINE WHICH IS WHERE 90% OF THE PEOPLE GO WILL HAVE UNFETTERED ACCESS. SO THE DEVELOPER WILL COME OUT OF POCKET TO DO THIS. SO JUST TO WRAP UP, WE DID MEET WITH THE NEIGHBOR'S. I THINK WE HAVE ADDRESSED ALL OF THE ISSUES. WE I HAVE HAD PROKED THE BUFFERS, EMERGENCY TAKES, INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENTS.

THE ACCESS IS DESIGNED TO BE THERE THROUGH DEERFIELD.

AND ONE OTHER THING I WANT TO POINT OUT, IN GETTING THAT CONSTRUCTION ACCESS, WE HAD TO MEET, OF COURSE, WITH THAT LANDOWNER. THAT LANDOWNER OWNS ABOUT 10,00.

EVERYTHING SOUTH OF THIS PROJECT TO WHERE 95 AND US-1 COME TEG SOUTH OF 206 IS OWNED BY THAT ONE COMPANY THROUGH A LAND HOLDING COMPANY. THEY HAVE NO INTENT OF DEVELOPING, THEY TOLD ME THEY'RR THE LONG GAME.

[03:25:03]

NONE OF US DO IN OUR NEIGHBORHOODS, BUT THIS IS THE LAST PIECE LEFT. THERE'S NOTHING ELSE COMING ON WATSON ROAD. THE NEXT THING THAT COMES IS GOING TO BE MASSIVE. IT'S GOING TO HAVE ITS OWN ACCESS. IT'S NOTE GOING TO BE WATSON ROAD. SO WE'RE KIND OF AT THE END 5 IT'S THE LAST PIECE LEFT EVEN THOUGH THERE'S ENTITLEMENTS DOWN THERE, THERE'S NOTHING ELSE THAT'S REALLY GOING TO COME.

AND I DO HAVE, IF THERE'S ANY ISSUES WITH DESIGN, I HAVE A PROJECT ENGINEER DAVID TAYLOR HERE WITH ME.

AND WITH THAT I'M AVAILABLE FOR WHATEVER QUESTIONS YOU HAVE.

>> MR. MATOVINA: ANY QUESTIONS? MS. PERKINS PERCENTAGE OF YES. CAN YOU EXPLAIN THE EVACUEES EASEMENT LOCATION? BECAUSE I'M NOT UNDERSTANDING IT BASED OFF THE PICTURE, IT DOESN'T SEEM, AT LEAST ON YOUR SITE PLAN THAT I'M LOOKING AT, DOES THAT EASEMENT TOUCH THE PROPERTY? BECAUSE ON YOUR SITE PLAN IT

DOESN'T. >> IT'S NOT OUR -- THE EVACUATION EASEMENT OR THE CONSTRUCTION?

>> EVACUATION. >> ON THE END VIDEO UP HERE IS HOPEFULLY A LITTLE BIT BETTER. IT'S OFF-SITE.

THERE'S A SUBDIVISION NORTH OF WATSON ROAD WHERE THAT DEVELOPER HAD A STUB-OUT AND HE RETAINED A RIGHT-OF-WAY.

I DON'T KNOW IF THAT HELPS ANY MORE OR NOT.

SO CARTER ROAD COMES OFF OF WILDWOOD AND KIND OF DEAD ENDS AT MR. ESTES PROPERTY AND THEN MR. ESTES OWNS THE SUB-OUT FROM THAT SUBDIVISION AND HE HAS GIVEN TO US, SOLD SOLD TO US AN EASEMENT CONNECTING CARTER ROAD TO THAT SUBDIVISION WHICH IS WEST OF THE RECORD RECORD. SO WATSON THROUGH THE SUBDIVISION UP TO CARTER ROAD. IT'S NOT AN OPEN ACCESS.

IT'S EMERGENCY ONLY BECAUSE I'M SURE THE PEOPLE ON CARTER ROAD DON'T WANT TRAFFIC UNLESS IT'S AN EMERGENCY.

>> MR. MATOVINA: DR. HILSENBECK.

>> DR. HILSENBECK: BEFORE I ASK A QUESTION OR A FEW, I DID HAVE AN EX PARTE COMMUNICATION. I THINK WAL ALL GOT THE WE ALT THE EMAIL FROM ALLEN LAURO TO YOUR PZA MAILBOXES.

I QUOTE HIM BACK AND THAIFNTIOND HIM FOR HIS DETAILED EMAIL.

BUT HE BROUGHT P A LOT OF GOOD POINTS IN THAT PARTICULAR EMAIL.

HAVE NOT MET THE GENTLEMAN OR SPOKEN TO HIM.

BUT, MR. DAVENPORT, YOU SAID YOU HAD ATTENDED THE COMMUNITY MEETING, HOA MEETING. YOU AREN'T REQUIRED TO.

I UNDERSTAND THAT. AND THAT THE RESIDENTS DO NOT WANT DEERFIELD FOREST DRIVE TO BE UPGRADED, SO IN YOUR ORIGINAL APPLICATION OR WHATEVER YOU HAD PROPOSED UPGRADING THE FIRST 20.

DEERFIELD FOREST DRIVE, BUT YOU SAY THAT THE RESIDENTS AT THEIR HOMEOWNERS MEETING SAID THEY DID NOT WANT THAT, IT WOULD BE AN INCONVENIENCE. I DIDN'T SEE ANY NOTES OR

DOCUMENTATION OF THAT. >> THAT WAS FROM THE 2017

APPLICATION. >> DR. HILSENBECK: IT WAS.

>> YES, SIR. >> DR. HILSENBECK: I SKIPPED RIGHT OVER THAT PART. SO THERE HASN'T BEEN ANOTHER

CONSULTATION IS HOMER? >> HOMEOWNER?

>> THERE BEATENS A SPECIFIC DISCUSSION ABOUT DEERFIELD FOREST. EVEN THOUGH IT QUALIFIES AS COUNTY MINOR COLLECTOR, I THINK, IT'S A DEAD END.

THERE'S NO MORE DEVELOPMENT COMING IN.

SO YOU BASICALLY PUT A SHORT SIDEWALK THAT GOES TO A RAILROAD TRACK ON IT IF YOU WERE GOING TO BUILD SOMETHING ON THE OTHER SIDE. THERE'S NO BENEFIT TO IT.

AND IT GOES ALONG THAT INDUSTRIAL -- ALONG THAT INDUSTRIAL PARK, SO WIDENING THE STREET, ADDING CAPACITY THAT WILL NEVER BE USED SEEMS KIND OF POINTLESS.

>> DR. HILSENBECK: SO YOU ARE PROPOSING NOT TO UPGRADE EITHER DEERFIELD FOREST DRIVE ORWAT SON ROAD TO A COLLECTOR STATUS?

>> CORRECT. ESSENTIALLY YOU'RE CORRECT.

WE'RE GOING TO MAKE MINOR IMPROVEMENT ON DAMAGE DONE WEST OF THE COUNTY ENGINEERING BROUGHT OUT THAT'S WEST OF THE RAILROAD THAT NEEDS TO BE I HAD WOOENED BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF DAMAGE TO IT AND WE ARE GOING TO DO THAT.

YOU CAN'T FIX EVERYTHING. WE'RE FOCUSING THE RESOURCES ON THE INTERSECTION WHICH IS THE CONSTRAINT.

IF YOU'VE BEEN DOWN WATSON ROAD, IT GOES TO A SWAMP.

>> >> DR. HILSENBECK: I'VE

DEFINITELY BEEN ON IT. >> IT WOULD BE PROHIBITIVELY EXEFN FOR ANYONE TO UPGRADE THAT TO A COLLECTIVE.

>> DR. HILSENBECK: SO I WENT THROUGH THE PROPOSED CHALLENGES

[03:30:07]

YOU'RE SAYING THERE WILL BE NO UPGRADE TO WATSON ROAD THAT IS APPARENTLY WATSON ROAD, 11,000 TRIPS PER DAY RIGHT NOW.

IT LACKS ADEQUATE PAVEMENT WIDTH, SIDEWALK, SUFFICIENT DRAINAGE FACILITIES. IT'S NOTE UP TO COUNTY STANDARDS BUT YOU'RE GOING TO CONFINE YOUA DANGEROUS INTERSECTION THERE AT WATSON ROAD AND US-1, BOTH SIDES AND THERE HAVE BEEN FATAL ACCIDENTS THERE, BUT -- SO CAN YOU GUARANTEE THAT THE MONEY YOU'RE GOING TO PUT IN IS GOING DIRECTLY TO THAT INTERSECTION?

>> YES, SIR. >> DR. HILSENBECK: UPGRADE? BECAUSE I HAD READ SOMETHING ABOUT THE MONEY WILL GO INTO A ZONE 3 FUND AND IT WILL BE SPENT AT THE DISCRETION OF THE BOARD

OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS. >> THAT WAS A PREVIOUS VERSION

OF THIS PUD. >> DR. HILSENBECK: I DON'T KNOW NOW WHAT WAS PREVIOUS AND NEW.

>> THE TEXT WE HAVE THAT I WORVEGD WITH STAFF ON SAYS THAT THE MONEY IS GOING TO THAT INTERSECTION.

>> DR. HILSENBECK: OKAY. SO THE CONSTRUCTION ACCESS, THAT'S NEW. IT WON'T BE ACROSS DEERFIELD MEADOWS ANY MORE SO THAT'S NEW. DO YOU HAVE DOCUMENTATION?

IS THAT RAINIER TIMBER COMPANY? >> NO, IT'S FIRST COAST LAND AND

TIMBER. >> DR. HILSENBECK: FIRST COAST

LAND AND TIMBER. >> THAT'S THE COMPANY THAT'S BUYING UP ALL THAT LAND. THEY BOUGHT RAINIER'S PROPERTY, ALL THE SOUTH PART OF THE PROPERTY.

AGAIN, I DIDN'T GET IT APPROVEDDAL UNTIL YESTERDAY SO I COULDN'T HAVE IT IN THERE BUT WE MADE THE COMMITMENT TOTE HOA TO TRY TO GET IT SO I DON'T HAVE IT IN THE TEXT BECAUSE I DIDN'T HAVE IT YET. I WILL ADD THAT TO THE TEXT AND MAKEIT A CONDITION OF THIS DECISION TODAY.

>> DR. HILSENBECK: SO THERE'S NO DOCUMENT FOR US TO LOOK AT

TODAY. >> WHAT KIND OF DOCUMENT? I HAVE IT IN THE TEXT THAT I WILL PROVIDE IT IN CONSTRUCTION

EASEMENT. >> DR. HILSENBECK: ACCESS

EASEMENT FOR CONSTRUCTION. >> WE HAVE A LICENSE WHICH IS ANOTHER FORM OF OWNERSHIP. WE HAVE A LICENSE FOR THAT.

I WILL COMMIT TO THE TEXT THAT WE WILL USE THAT.

>> DR. HILSENBECK: I'M SURE WHEN YOU GO TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS THAT YOU'LL HAVE THAT.

>> YES. HISTORIANS YOU KNOW, I LOOKED AT YOUR WATER AND SEWER LETTER. ABOUT THE LIFT STATION.

I HAD LOOKED AT PROBABLY 40 OR 50 OF THOSE WATER AND SEWER LETTERS FROM ALLEN FLOOD SINCE I'VE BEEN ON THE PZA AND I'VE NEVER SEEN ONE THAT HAD SO MANY CAVEATS, CONDITIONS CITED WITHIN THAT LETTER, INCLUDING SOMETHING ABOUT -- WELL, NONE HAD PROVISIONS, AND IT SAID THAT THERE MIGHT BE UPGRADES TO THE LIFT STATION NECESSARY, BUT IN YOUR PROPOSAL, YOUR FIRST PROPOSAL BACK IN 2018, IF I'M READING THIS CORRECTLY, WERE AGREEING OR SAYING YOU WOULD DO UPGRADE TO THE LIFT STATION BUT NOW YOU'RE SAYING YOU WON'T DO UPGRADE TO THE LIFT STATION.

>> LET ME CLARIFY THAT, SIR. WE'RE NOT SAYING THAT.

IF UPGRADES WERE REQUIRED WE WOULD DO THEM BECAUSE THE COUNTY UTILITY DEPARTMENT WOULD MAKE US DO IT.

WE HAD THAT LANGUAGE IN AS A SAFETY, AND WE WERE TOLD TO TAKE IT OUT BECAUSE THE IMPROVEMENT HAVE BEEN DONE, HAVE SINCE BEEN DONE. SO THE COUNTY SAID TAKE THAT LANGUAGE OUT BECAUSE IMPROVEMENTS ARE ALREADY THERE.

THEY HAVE BEEN DONE. ITES BEEN UPGRADED SINCE '17.

>> DR. HILSENBECK: THE LIFT STATION HAS.

>> YES. >> DR. HILSENBECK: I GUESS I'M CONFUSED READING THROUGH THE WHOLE PACKAGE OF MATERIAL.

I GUESS I WAS IN A TIME WARP. >> IT WASN'T MY APPLICATION BACK THEN. NESS THIS IS NEW TO ME.

THE ONLY RAIN PUT THAT UTILITY ANALYSIS LETTER IN WAS NOT FOR THE PURPOSE OF UTILITY ANALYSIS BECAUSE THAT'S THE DATE OF THE LETTER. I YOU THE PUT THAT LETTER IN TO SHOW THESE TWO PROJECTS WERE DESIGNED TO BE ONE.

THAT WAS THE ONLY POINT OF PUTTING THAT LETTER IN IS THAT BOTH PROJECTS WERE DESIGNED TO BE ONE.

>> I DIDN'T GET THAT OUT OF REAING IT.

I'VE GOT SOME MORE THINGS HERE BUT I GIS THERE'S PEOPLE HERE FROM PUBLIC THAT WANT TO SPEAK. I WILL MENTION THE SOIL TYPES ON THE PROPERTY, AND MAYBE YOUR ENGINEERING AND YOUR DEVELOPMENT PLAN COVERS THIS, BUT THERE ARE THREE SOIL TYPES ON THAT PROPERTY, AND THEY ARE IN ORDER POMONA, FLORIDANA AND RIVIA AND THEY ARE POORLY TO VERY POORLY TRAINED SOIL, VERY POORLY DRAINED SOIL AND POORLY DRAINED TO VERY POORLY DRAINED, INCLUDING VERY SLOW HAD TO PERMEATE, SO THE SOIL TYPES OUT

[03:35:02]

AND I BRING THOSE UP ON A LOT OF PROJECTS.

A LOT OF THESE >> YOU HAVE YOUR HOLDING PONDS AND YOUR GREEN SPACE AND I'M WORRIED ABOUT FLOODING NEIGHBORS. AND WE HEAR ALL OF THE TIME, OH, YOU CAN'T DO DEVELOPMENT AND FLOOD NEIGHBORS. WE HAD ONE TODAY THAT WERE CONSIDERED NEIGHBORS NEXT TO A DEVELOPMENT THAT WAS GETTING FLOODED.

IT HAPPENS. I KNOW FOR A FACT. I KNOW PEOPLE GET FLOODED BY NEARBY DEVELOPMENTS. I'M SCEPTICAL BY SOME OF THOSE THINGS.

>> AND THEN THERE'S THE LOCKED GATE, IT IS UNPAVED, UNLIT, DIRT ROAD.

I COULDN'T TELL FROM THE AERIAL IF IT WAS WETLAND. IT DIDN'T REALLY LOOK LIKE.

LET'S SAY THERE WAS AN EMERGENCY AND IT WAS RAINING, IT COULD BE A SLOPPY MESS. I DON'T KNOW. IT MAY BE SANDY AND PACKED DOWN WELL. I DON'T KNOW. HAVING A LOCKED EMERGENCY GATE IF PEOPLE ARE PANICKING AND TRYING TO GET OUT. IT IS A CONCERN.

>> IT IS STABILIZED. IT IS NOT JUST A DIRT ROAD, IT WILL BE STABILIZED.

IT IS NOT USED AND IT IS NOT PAVED. >> I DIDN'T READ THAT IN

THERE. >> OKAY. I WILL LOOK AT THAT --

>> OKAY. >> -- AND CLARIFY THAT, SIR. >> YOUR CLIENTS PAID 35 THOUSAND DOLLARS FOR THE EASEMENT. IT IS APART OF THE PLAN.

>> YES, SIR. >> DEAR FIELD MEADOWS IS A BRAND NEW SUBDIVISION.

A YEAR AGO, THERE WERE HALF BUILT, NOT HALF BUILT, BUT THEY WERE BUILDING AND THEY ARE AT CURRENT STANDARDS AND NOT LIKE THEY ARE GOING TO BUILD ABOVE THEM.

WE WILL BUILD TO THE SAME STANDARDS THAT THEY BUILT TOO.

>> I WASN'T ON THIS BOARD WHEN THAT WAS APPROVED. >> THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. >> I'M A LITTLE CONFUSED -- MAYBE A LOT -- IS THIS WHAT I'M LOOKING HERE, THE ACCESS ROUTE FOR CONSTRUCTION, IT IS THE EMERGENCY EGRESS

POINT? >> NO, THAT'S THE CONCUSSION.

THAT'S THE EMERGENCY EGTRESS -- >> THERE'S A SUBDIVISION NEAR THE RAILROAD TRACKS AND GO TO THE NORTH END OF IT AND GET ON THE TEMPORARY ROAD AND HIT CARTER ROAD FURTHER TO THE NORTHWEST. SO THE PEOPLE WOULD HAVE TO COME OUT OF THE DEAR FIELD SUB SUBDIVISION AND GET ON WATSON ROAD AND TAKE A LEFT

TO GET ON THIS ROAD TO GO UP AND FIND THE DIRT ROAD. >> OH, I GOT IT.

>> NOT OVER THE RAILROAD TRACKS. >> THROUGH THE WOODS.

>> TO GRANDMOTHER'S HOUSE. >> IT WAS THE OTHER ROAD. >> I DROVE OUT THERE AND

WATSON SORT OF ENDS. IT IS TRICKY. >>> ALL RIGHT, ANY OTHER

QUESTIONS? IF NOT, WE WILL MOVE -- >> MR. CHAIR, BEFORE YOU MOVE ON TO PUBLIC COMMENT, CAN I ASK -- TO COME UP SHE HAS A COMMENT AND A

STATEMENT SHE HEARD. >> I WANTED TO CLARIFICATION THE TRAFFIC VOLUME ON WATSON IS 3400 VEHICLES NOT 11 THOUSAND. THAT'S A 2021 COUNT THAT WAS TAKEN A MONTH AGO. I THINK THE REFERENCE TO 11 THOUSAND VEHICLES IS ALLOWED BEFORE IT IS TO BE UPGRADED TO A MAJOR COLLECTOR. WHEN THE CODE ROADS WHEN THE DEVELOPMENT ADDS TRAFFIC TO AN EXISTING FACILITY, IF THEY TRIP IT TO THE NEXT ROADWAY CLASSIFICATION, THEY ARE TO UPGRADE. THE VOLUMES ARE WELL BELOW THE MAJOR COLLECTOR VOLUME, THEREFORE, IT IS NOT REQUIRED TO BE UPGRADED BY THE DEVELOPER. THE ENTIRE STRETCH OF THE ROAD.

THEY HAVE AGREED TO UPGRADE THE PERFORMANCE OF THAT IS DESIGNATED WEST OF THE

[03:40:06]

ON WHAT DESIGN THAT WILL END UP BEING. >> THAT'S A GREAT CLARIFICATION. YOU HAVE TO BE CAREFUL OF EVERYTHING YOU READ.

>> DERRICK? NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD, PLEASE.

>> GOOD AFTERNOON. DIRECT HESI'M 379 DEAR FIELD MEADOWS CIRCLE.

DERRICK HESSY. >> I WOULD LIKE TO STATE SIGNIFICANT CONCERNS REGARDING THIS DEAR FIELD DEVELOPMENT. THE DEVELOPER HAS NOT ACTUALLY ADDRESSED ALL OF THE CONCERNS OF THE RESIDENTS OF THE DEAR FIELD MEADOWS HE WORKED WITH DEAR OUR MAJOR CONCERN THAT THIS DEVELOPMENT WILL CAUSE A HUGE INCREASE IN TRAFFIC DEVELOPMENT BECAUSE THE DEVELOPER WANTS TO USE OUR COMMUNITY STREETS FOR THE IN AND OUT FOR THE 63 HOMES. THE TRAFFIC ASSESSMENT PERFORMED IN 2018 WHICH I REVIEWED. THAT'S 686, 343 ENTERING AND 343 EXITING. THAT'S ONE VEHICLE FOR MINUTE, AND 69 TRIPS PER HOUR, ONE VEHICLE EVERY 52 SECONDS. THESE ARE ALL NEW TRIPS ABOVE AND BEYOND WHAT THE CURRENT LEVEL OF TRAFFIC IS IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.

THIS WILL CAUSE A SUBSTANTIAL NEGATIVE IMPACT ON OUR NEIGHBORHOOD QUALITY OF LIFE AND SAFETY FOR THE FOLLOWING REASONS; FIRST, THERE ARE MULTIPLE FAMILIES WITH CHILDREN THAT PLAY OUTSIDE AND RIDE BIKES ON THE ROUTES TO THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT. THAT IS SHOWN ON THIS MAP. ALL ALONG THE EGRESS AND INGRESS. WITH VEHICLES PASSING BY ALMOST EVERY MINUTE, THE CHANCES OF AN ACCIDENT INVOLVING A CHILD IS INCREASED.

THEY DIDN'T THINK THEY WOULD HAVE TO KEEP THEIR CHILDREN INSIDE WHEN THEY BOUGHT.

>> THERE ARE 10 HOMES WITH RV GARAGES. EIGHT OF TEN HOUSES.

>> HE'S ARE VERY LARGE VEHICLES THAT TAKE UP A LOT OF ROOM IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND WILL IMPACT TRAFFIC IN AND OUT SIGNIFICANTLY. I WON'T GO INTO DETAILS BUT THESE PICTURES TAKE UP SIGNIFICANTLY AMOUNT OF TIME.

THESE WILL IMPACT THE QUALIFY OF LIFE AND SAFETY RISK FOR THE FAMILIES WITH

CHILDREN. >> THE ONLY WAY SHOULD SHOULD BE ALLOWED TO PROCEED IF THEY PROVIDE A SECOND ENTRANCE THAN DIRECTLY THROUGH OUR COMMUNITY.

THAT DOES NOT MAKE SENSE. >> THANK YOU FOR HEARING THE CONCERNS OF OUR COMMUNITY.

>> KEENAN BABSALBABALON. >> HE TOOK IT. GOOD AFTERNOON.

I LIVE AT 323 DEAR FIELD MEADOWS CIRCLE IN THE DEAR IF HE WOULD MEADOWS

COMMUNITY. >> I AM HERE TO TALK ABOUT DRAINAGE.

SPECIFICALLY HERE'S AN EAGLE-EYE VIEW OF WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE TODAY.

THIS IS MY CARTOON. I COLOR OUTSIDE OF THE LINE SOMETIMES.

THIS IS BLUE IS HOW OUR DRAINAGE LEAVES IN YELLOW AND GOES TO THE RIVER.

CLOSE UP CARTOON, WE HAVE FOUR DRAINAGE PONDS THEY ARE ALL CONNECTED AND THE

[03:45:02]

TO THE RIVER. >> THERE'S A PICTURE OF IT. HERE'S WHERE YOU CAN SEE THE DRAINAGE DITCH. THERE'S A PICTURE OF A DRAINAGE DITCH AS IT LIVES

DEAR FIELD MEADOWS. >> IT IS UPSIDEDOWN. >> THERE'S A PICTURE OF IT AS IT ENTERED INTO THE CREEK. OUR CONCERNS WITH THIS ARE AS THEY PROPOSED THAT DRAINAGE DITCH WILL NOW NOT GO ALL THE WAY TO THE CREEK, IT WILL COME INTO THIS GREEN BUFFER ZONE. TAKE A HARD RIGHT, COME UP HERE, TAKE A HARD LEFT AND WORK ITS WAY INTO THE CREEK AND EVENTUALLY OUT TO ITS ULTIMATE DESTINATION INTO THE RIVER. I'M NOT A FLOW EXPERT OR CAPACITY EXPERT, BUT MY CONCERN IS WITH THE INCREASED NUMBER OF SEVERITY AND NUMBER OF STORMS THAT SEEING, THAT THERE BETTER BE PLENTY OF MARGIN BASE IN THE CAPACITY AND THE FLOW RATES THAT THIS CAN HANDLE TO SUPPORT WITH WHAT IS GOING TO COME OUT OF THE FOUR DRAINAGE PONDS OUT OF OUR DEVELOPMENT.

>> MY EXPERIENCE WITH IT DITCHES FILL UP, THINGS GET BACKED UP AND WHEN YOU START PUTTING 90-DEGREE ANGLES, YOU ARE ASKING FOR TROUBLE WHEN IT BACKS UP INTO OURS, WE ARE HIGHER THAN DEAR FIELD TRACE, THAT'S WHERE THE PROBLEM LIES.

DEAR FIELD TRACE IS -- IT IS LOWER THAN EVERYONE ELSE. THAT'S WHERE IT IS GOING TO

END UP. >> THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU.

>>> MICHAEL CLARK. >> HELLO, MY NAME IS MICHAEL CLARK, 4640 CARTER ROAD.

I'M HERE SPEAKING FOR MYSELF AND MY NEIGHBORS WHO LIVE ON CARTER ROAD.

>> SOME THINGS YOU SHOULD KNOW ABOUT CARTER ROAD, IT IS SINGLE LANE ROAD.

AS FAR AS AN EVACUATION ROAD, PEOPLE NEED TO PULL OUT OF THE WAY FOR CONDARS.

IT IS NOT A GOOD EVACUATION ROUTE. THE BACK HALF OF CARTER ROAD IS A PRIVATE ROAD. THE HOMEOWNERS OWN THE ROAD IN FRONT OF THEIR HOUSE.

THIS EVACUATION I GUESS EASEMENT THAT IS REQUESTED WOULD BE ASKING FOR ACCESS

TO OUR PRIVATE ROAD. >> THE EASEMENT IS SO FAR AWAY FROM THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT FOR A LOT OF US WE ARE CONCERNED THAT IT IS GOING TO BE JUST OPENING IT UP FOR FUTURE DEVELOPMENT ALONG WATSON ROAD. SOMEONE IS GOING TO GET THIS GREAT IDEA TO REMOVE THE LOCKED GATE AND OPEN ACCESS SO FOLKS CAN DRIVE FROM WATSON ROAD TO WILD WOOD ROAD. AS SOMEONE ELSE HAD MENTIONED FAMILIES LIKE MYSELF, WE HAVE BOUGHT OUR HOUSES ON PLACES LIKE CARTER ROAD SO WE CAN HAVE A QUIET ROAD FOR OUR KIDS TO PLAY. WE ARE AFRAID MAYBE NOT RIGHT AWAY, MAYBE 5-10 YEARS DOWN THE ROAD WE WILL LOSE THAT GREAT FEATURE OF CARTER ROAD BECAUSE OF DEVELOPMENTS LIKE THIS. THANK YOU.

>>> ELIZABETH ROY. >> ELIZABETH ROY, 324 DEAR FIELD MEADOWS CIRCLE.

>> I WILL BE TWO HOUSES AWAY FROM THE NEW ENTRANCE TO DEAR FIELD FOREST IF IT IS INDEED BUILT. MY MAIN CONCERNS, THERE'S THREE OF THEM, I'M JUST WONDERING THE BUILDER IS SO SURE OF BUILDING 63 HOUSES IN THERE.

HE HAS PURCHASED ALL OF THE RIGHT OF WAYS WHICH IS OKAY, I MEAN HE IS WELCOME TO DO

[03:50:01]

THE DRAINAGE ISSUE IS ONE OF MY MAIN CONCERNS. THE PONDS GO UP, THEY ARE RELATED THE WATER GOES TO THE LOWEST SPOT. AND RIGHT NOW WE ARE OKAY.

BUT I HEARD OTHER ISSUES TODAY AND IN THE PAST THAT WHEN NEW DEVELOPMENTS GO INTO AN OLD DEVELOPMENTS, YOU HAVE A LOT OF DRAINAGE ISSUES.

AND THE TRAFFIC ON THE ROAD I'M CONCERNED ABOUT IT BECAUSE I'M GOING TO BE RIGHT THERE. I DIDN'T REALIZE IT WOULD BE ONE CAR A MINUTE.

WOW. BUT THERE ARE A LOT OF LITTLE KIDS THAT COME DOWN TO MY HOUSE. I DON'T HAVE YOUNG CHILDREN. THEY ARE RUNNING OUT TO GET A BALL, THEY RIDE THEIR BIKES, THEY TAKE THEIR RA RAZORS OUT ON THE ROAD.

I WAS AN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL TEACHER AND YOU CAN TELL THEM NOT TO GO OUT INTO THE STREET. OUR FRONT YARDS ARE CLOSE TO THE STREET AND OUR FRONT YARDS ARE SMALL AND OUR BACKYARDS ARE NOT BIG EITHER.

>> IT IS NOT TIME TO PUT IN THIS ADDITION, IT IS A NEW COMMUNITY, IT WILL HAVE ITS OWN HOA, AND BE ON ITS OWN. IT HAS NO EXIT TO WATSON ROAD.

IT DOESN'T MAKE COMMON SENSE TO ME. >> I THINK THAT'S PRETTY MUCH IT. AND I JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY THE BUILDER REALLY WANTS TO ADD THIS IN A SUCH WETLAND AREA. WE HAVE THE EAGLES THAT FLY AROUND. IT IS BEAUTIFUL THERE. I HATE TO SEE THAT HAPPEN.

THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU. >> ALLEN BISHOP.

GOOD AFTERNOON, GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS ALLEN BISHOP, I

LIVE AT 121 -- DRIVE IN DEAR FIELD MEADOWS. >> FIRST, THE COUNTY ROADS WE HAVE THROUGH OUR SUBDIVISION, IT IS 27 FEET CURB TO CURB.

IT IS NOT AS WIDE IS OTHER ROADS. WE ADDRESSED ABOUT THE -- IN THE COMMUNITY, SOME OF THE COACHES ARE 36 FEET LONG AND THE ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC IS GOING TO CREATE A BIGGER PROBLEM FOR EXIT AND ENTRY GETTING INTO AND OUT OF THE RV HOMES. GOING ALONG WITH THAT, ADDING 686 ADDITIONAL TRIPS THAT WILL IS PROBABLY LOW, THAT IS GOING TO PUT SIGNIFICANT ADDITIONAL BURDEN ON THE ROADWAYS. I WOULD SAY THE ACTUAL NUMBERS SHOULD BE AROUND SIGNIFICANTLY HIGHER. SPEAKING OF TRAFFIC, PER THE P

PUD>> 2018, CHANGES WERE TO MADE -- AND PER DOT REVIEW. IT WAS STATED THAT THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE SUBDIVISION WOULD NOT START UNTIL ST. JOHN'S COUNTY AND FLORIDA DOT HAD APPROVED INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT. HAS THIS YET BEEN DONE?

>> AND THIS HADN'T BEEN BROUGHT UP, THE CONSTRUCTION STARTED AT THE INTERSECTION NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE CORNER OF WATSON. THERE'S A STRIP CENTER THAT IS GOING IN THERE. THEY ARE DOING THE CONSTRUCTION.

IT IS GOING TO GREAT AN ADDITIONAL HAZARD BECAUSE OF THE ENTRANCE TO THE STRIP AREA WHERE THEY ARE DOING CONSTRUCTION IS LESS THAN ONE HUNDRED FEET ROUTE 1 WEST OF WATSON ROAD. YOU CAN SEE WHAT KIND OF PROBLEMS, THE ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC THAT IS GOING IN AND OUT OF THERE AND IT IS GOING TO THE INTERSECTION EVEN

WORSE. >> SPEAKING FOR POTENTIAL TO ACCIDENTS, ACCORDING TO THE SHERIFF'S OFFICE FROM 2018-TO PRESENT THERE HAVE BEEN 45 ACCIDENTS TWO FATALITIES AND 31 INJURIES. AND POST COVID-19 TRAFFIC THE ADDITIONAL BUILDING THAT IS CONSTRUCTED ON TECHNICAL COURT LET ALONE THE 686 TRIPS FROM AN ADDITIONAL SUBDIVISION, YOU CAN SEE THE S YOU TRY TO GET IN AND OUTE DEAR FIELD SUBDIVISION.

PRIOR TO APPROVAL OF THIS SUBDIVISION, IT SHOULD BE A REQUIREMENT THAT THEY SHOULD EXTENT WATSON ROAD PASSED THE DEERFIELD TRACE SUBDIVISION WHERE THEY HAVE A SINGLE POINT OF ACCESS DEERFIELD TRACE AND ENTER AND ACCESS AND NOT THROUGH

[03:55:09]

DEERFIELD MEADOWS. >> GREAT TIMING. >>> MARK ODONOGH.

2952 DEERFIELD CIRCLE. >> AT THE MEETING ON THIS PROPOSED SUBDIVISION, ONE OF THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS SAY WE ARE DELAYING A DEAD HORSE BECAUSE THEY WERE HEARING FEEDBACK FROM EMERGENCY SERVICES THAT WERE TRYING TO GET THE NEW DEVELOPS BY AN ACCESS BLOCKED BY RAILROAD TRACKS AND DELAYED BY THE EMERGENCY AS A MOTIONLESS TRAIN AT THE RAILROAD TRACKS. THE TRACKS WERE THERE BEFORE THE SUBDIVISION WAS BUILT. ADDING ADDITIONAL 63 HOMES BEYOND THE SIMPLE ACCESS BY THE RAILROAD WOULD PUT RESIDENTS AT RISK FOR FIRE AND MEDICAL EMERGENCIES BEING ACCESS BEING FREQUENTLY BLOCKED BY RAILROAD CARS UNLOADING AND UNLOADING BECAUSE THERE'S A RAIL YARD NEXT TO IT. WE HAVE WITNESSED THE TRACKS BEING BLOCKED FROM 15-20 MINUTES AS THEY WERE UNLOADING AND LOADING AND MAINTENANCE CREWS. THIS CAN TRIPLE THE RESPONSE TIME FOR EMERGENCY SERVICES WHICH WOULD HAVE SERIOUS IMPLICATIONS FOR FIRE OR MULTITUDES FOR LIFE

THREATENING EMERGENCIES. >> AND I HAVE A PHOTOGRAPH HERE OF THIS IS WATSON ROAD HERE AND THIS IS THE RAIL YARD AND THEY PULL RAIL CARS AND UNLOAD AND LOAD AND ADD THEM BACK ON TO THE TRAIN. I HAVE HEARD IT HAS BEEN BLOCKED FOR UP TO AN HOUR AT

A TIME. >> EVEN IF THERE'S A PROPOSED EMERGENCY EVACUATION ROUTE. I WALKED IT AND THERE'S NO WAY A CAR WOULD MAKE OR AN AMBULANCE OR FIRE TRUCK IN ITS CURRENT CONDITIONS. EMERGENCY VEHICLES WILL EXPERIENCE DELAYS AND REROUTE TO CARTER ROAD WHICH WOULD ESSENTIALLY TRIPLE THE TIME THAT IT WOULD TAKE FOR THEM TO RESPOND. AND THEN I WOULD LIKE TO

REFER TO EAGLE'S NEST THE DEERFIELD FOREST. >> WITH CONFIDENCE AT THE RECENT DEERFIELD MEETING MENTIONED THAT THERE WAS NO EAGLE NEST IN THE PROPOSED SUBDIVISION AREA. I AM CONCERNED ABOUT THEIR CONFIDENCE, THIS IS A LOCATION ON THEIR APPROPRIATE BY THE EAGLE WATCH PROGRAM.

>> THANK YOU, SIR. >> DID YOU GIVE THOSE MATERIALS?

>> OKAY. >> MELISSA -- >>> GOOD AFTERNOON.

4628 CARTER ROAD. >> I HAVE SOME ITEMS I WOULD LIKE TO DISPLAY AND I HOPE YOU GOT THE PACKAGES I PROVIDED TO STAFF EARLIER. I WANTED TO TALK ABOUT THE EMERGENCY EASEMENT TO CARTER ROAD WHICH WE THE PROPERTY OWNERS OWN THAT PART OF CARTER ROAD. THIS IS THE ACTUAL EASEMENT IN PLACE RIGHT NOW AND IF YOU HAD A CHANCE TO LOOK AT IT, YOU WILL SEE IT IS A 20800 FOOT EASEMENT ON CARTER ROAD THAT IS MY NEIGHBORHOOD, MR. CLARK, SAID IT IS PRIVATELY OWNED.

THIS IS THE PORTION OF CARTER ROAD. I WANTED TO SHOW YOU THE CONDITION. IT PREVIOUSLY IT WAS PAVED DIRT ROADS.

THE OWNERS BECAUSE THEY OWN THAT PERFORMANCE OF THE ROAD, AFTER IT ENDED WE TOOK IT UPON OURSELVES TO PAVE IT AND GET TO OUR HOMES. THIS IS THE PICTURE OF CART R ROAD FROM MY DRIVEWAY GOING BACK TO HIS PROPERTY, WHERE THEY ARE TALKING THEY

[04:00:05]

THIS IS GOING NORTH TOWARDS WILD WOOD DRIVE. AS YOU CAN SEE THE SURFACE AREA AS MR. CLARK SAID WHERE ONE CAR CAN PASS AT A TIME. THESE PORTIONS.

THIS IS A DRIVEWAY TO THIS SIDE. BEHIND THE TREES, WE HAVE WE HAVE TO PULL OVER TO ALLOW CARS TO PASS. YOU CAN SEE OUR NEIGHBOR HAS PUT UP STRIPS TO MARK THE TREES. IT IS EXACTLY 11 FEET FROM TREE TO TREE. THIS IS THE PORTION OF CARTER ROAD.

THIS IS ME PULLING OUT AND I HAVE TO PULL OFF OF THE DRIVING PAVED SURFACE AND IT IS SUB STANDARD. THEY HAVE A 30-FOOT EASEMENT THERE.

I HAVE ASKED TIME AFTER TIME TO HAVING STRIPING PUT IN THE MIDDLE OF THE ROAD -- THIS WAS IN YOUR PACKAGE. THIS IS WHERE IT STARTS, I FIND IT REMISS BY THE APPLICANTS AND HIS TEAM THAT HE WOULDN'T KNOW THAT THIS PART IS PRIVATE.

MY NEIGHBORHOOD COULDN'T BE HERE OUT OF DOWN, HE WAS PAINTING HIS FENCE WHEN A SURVEYING COMPANY CAME WHEN HE COMPANIED WHAT HE WAS DOING, HE WAS SURVEYING IT AND WOULD SOON HAVE TO MOVE HIS FENCE BECAUSE IT IS GOING TO BE AN EMERGENCY ACCESS EASEMENT. THAT IS NOT THE CASE. WE ARE NOT HATEFUL PEOPLE.

BUT, NO, IT IS A LEGAL MATTER THAT I THINK WELL, I'M GOING TO STOP RIGHT

THERE. THANK YOU. >> WOULD YOU GIVE THOSE

MATERIALS TO SHERRY. >>> MICHAEL CLOCOLLUM. >> OKAY.

>> THAT IS ALL WITH THE PUBLIC SPOO SPEAKERS? >> WOULD THE APPLICANT LIKE

TO COME UP AND GIVE A REBUTTAL? >> YES, AGAIN.

GARY DAVEENPORT. >> TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE CONCERNS, THE ONE THAT IS UP ON YOUR SCREEN, THE EMERGENCY ACCESS. IT IS NOT A ROAD.

IT IS NOT GOING TO BE -- IT IS BASICALLY ONLY IF THE WORSE CASE SITUATION AND YOU NEED TO GET OUT. IT IS NOT FOR YOUR CONVENIENCE.

IT IS THROUGH AN OWNER WHO OWNS ON CARTER ROAD TO BE ABLE TO GO OUT.

IT IS NOT A PUBLIC USE. IT IS AVAILABLE ANYONE TO EMERGENCY TO ANYONE WHO NEEDS. IT IS NOT FOR -- I KNOW THERE ARE A LOT OF ISSUES.

I'M ACTUALLY FRIENDS WITH MELISSA'S HUSBAND. HOPEFULLY, STILL, IF NOT -- BUT, THAT WAS THE INTENT TO SOLVE A PROBLEM THAT THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAS AND THE COMMISSION HAD AND THE ONLY WAY POSSIBLE TO DO IT AND AGAIN, I DON'T EXPECT IT TO

BE USED. >> AS FAR AS THE RAILROAD THAT SITE IS NO LONGER USED FOR OFF-LOADING. THERE'S A FOR SALE SIGN AND IT IS EMPTY.

>> THE COUNTY KEEPS THE COUNT OF EAGLE NESTS, IF THEY HAVE ONE, THEY WOULDN'T LET US DO IT. THERE WAS NO EAGLE NEST. THERE'S NO EAGLE NEST ON

THAT PROPERTY. >> AND AGAIN, I WANT TO SAY AGAIN THE DEERFIELD MEADOWS WAS DESIGNED TO HAVE ACCESS TO THIS PROPERTY. IF YOU THINK ABOUT IT, YOU COMBINE 74 LOTS WITH 63 AND THAT'S NOT A LARGE SUBDIVISION, IT WOULD NOT HAVE A COLLECTOR ROAD. IT WOULD BE BUILT THE SAME WAY IT IS BUILT NOW.

>> IF YOU WANT TO ADDRESS DRAINAGE ISSUES. I HAVE A DRAINING ENGINEER WITH ME. WE KNOW HOW DRAINAGE WORKS, YOU HAVE TO GET A PERMIT, YOU CANNOT DO ANYTHING THAT IS NOT GOING TO WORK. AGAIN, IF THERE'S SPECIFIC QUESTIONS, I HAVE THE DRAINAGE ENGINEER HERE WITH ME TODAY.

[04:05:03]

>> ALL RIGHT. MR. MILLER. >> YES, SIR.

>> THE 2017 -- HOW MANY UNITS? >> 63.

EXACTLY THE SAME NUMBER. >> SO THE LOTS HAVE GOTTEN LARGER, BUT IT IS STILL THE

SAME AMOUNT OF LOTS. >> CREATE IFL ENGINEER. IT IS A GRID PATTERN.

IT DOESN'T WASTE AS MUCH LAND. >> I AM LOOKING AT IT, THEY DENIED IT AND THE B.C. C DENIED IT AND WENT IT TO THE CIRCUIT COURT AND DENIED IT.

>> IT WAS A DIFFERENT APPLICANT AND ATTORNEY. >> THE PRIMARY REASON THIS IS A THIS STAFF REPORT PLANNING AND ZONING AGENCIES SAY TRAFFIC FLOW AND SAFETY CONCERNS THE PRIMARY CHANGE IS THE EMERGENCY ACCESS OFF OF CARTER.

>> EMERGENCY ACCESS OFF OF CARTER AND THE INTERSECTION IMPROVEMENT AT US 1.

WHEN THE ROAD DOESN'T HAVE A TURN LOAD, YOU INCREASE THE CAPACITY, NOT DOUBLING IT.

BUT INCREASE THE CAPACITY. >> DOCTOR? >> I WILL SUMMARIZE SEVERAL ISSUES THAT ARE BIG FOR VOTING FOR THIS. THE TRAFFIC THROUGH THE

AADJUST -- >> YOU ARE GOING TO ASK QUESTIONS?

>> THERE ARE NO QUESTIONS. I WAS GOING TO SUMMARIZE. >> I'M NOT TRYING TO CUT YOU

OFF. >> I WOULD LIKE YOU TO DO YOUR QUESTIONS.

>> YOU ARE CORRECT. I DO JUMP AHEAD. >> THANK YOU.

I APPRECIATE THAT. >> I ASSUME THAT -- I KNOW YOU WERE NOT THE ATTORNEY IN 2017, '18. WAS THERE AN ENVIRONMENTAL REPORT SUBMITTED AT THAT

TIME? >> YES. >> WE DIDN'T GET TO SEE IT.

THAT IS ALWAYS A BARRIER FOR ME TO VOTING FOR SOMETHING I DON'T SEE AN ENVIRONMENT REPORT. THAT MAY HAVE SETTLED THE EAGLES NEST.

IT IS UNDETERMINED IF THERE IS AN EAGLE'S NEST. OR CLOSE TO IT, SAY 650 FEET. MAYBE THE FISH AND WILDLIFE DATABASE.

RIGHT NOW WE DON'T HAVE THE ANSWER TO THAT TO ANSWER THAT QUESTION.

THAT'S MY ONLY QUESTION AT THIS POINT. THANK YOU.

>> YOUR STAFF CAN VIEW THIS. >> MR. CHAIR? >> YES.

>> YOUR QUESTION IS WHETHER OR NOT THERE'S AN EAGLE'S NEST THERE.

I WAS CHECKING THE ENVIRONMENTAL STAFF DID REVIEW AND THEY HAVE A LAYER IN THE SYSTEM WHICH LOOKING AT AS WELL WE DON'T HAVE AN EAGLE'S NEST ON THERE.

I DON'T HAVE MY ENVIRONMENTAL STAFF HERE. IF THERE WAS AN ACTIVE EAGLE'S NEST THERE, THEY WOULD REQUIRE THE APPLICANT TO HAVE THE BUILD ZONES THE SAFETY NET AROUND IT, IT WOULD SHOW UP. DOES THAT ANSWER YOUR

QUESTIONS? >> PARTIALLY. SINCE YOU ARE LOOKING AT ME, I WOULD SAY PERHAPS IT IS LITTLE FURTHER WEST AND OFF OF THE PROPERTY.

I THINK -- IF THERE'S AN EAGLE'S NEST, CIRCLE IS 650 FEET THAT WOULD PRECLUDE, I CAN'T ESTIMATE THAT DISTANCE BY LOOKING AT THIS AERIAL PHOTO.

I WISH THERE WAS SOME GOOD ANSWER ON THAT. IF AND WHEN, WHERE, THERE IS

AN EAGLE'S NEST. >> I CAN SAY THAT OUR STAFF WOULD HAVE REVIEWED FOR THAT AND IT WOULD BE ON THERE. YOU WOULD SEE THE 600 FEET, 300 FEET AND PLAN THERE TO

SAY WHEN THEY COULD DO CONSTRUCTION. >> OKAY.

WE WILL SAY THERE'S NO EAGLE'S NEST. >> WE ARE BACK INTO THE AGENCY FOR A MOTION. IF THERE ARE NO MORE QUESTIONS.

>> MR. MILLER? >> I WOULD LIKE TO DENIAL. P UD AS A REQUEST FOR ZONE 37 ACRES FROM OPEN TO RURAL TO ALLOW FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF 63 SINGLE FAMILY BASED ON

[04:10:04]

10 FINDINGS OF FACTS. >> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND A

SECOND FOR DENIAL. >> IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION AT THIS POINT?

>> NO. >> I FORGO MY SUMMARY. >> MR. MILLER?

>> FOR THE APPLICANTS AND STAFF, LOOKING AT THIS, I HAVE DEALT WITH REZONING WHERE YOU HAD TO GO THROUGH AN EXITING NEIGHBORHOOD. YOU TRY TO EXHAUST EVERY SINGLE OPTION. IN THIS CASE, YOU HAVE A PUD FOR THE EXACT NUMBER OF HOMES, WENT THROUGH, DENIED, AND IT WAS DENIED AND CHALLENGED IN CIRCUIT COURT AND DENIED AND WE ARE PROPOSED WITH ALMOST THE EXACT SAME SITUATION WITH SLIGHTLY LARGER LOTS. I THINK THERE'S A SOLUTION FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THIS

PROPERTY BUT I DON'T THINK THIS IS IT. >> ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM

-- >> DID WE HEAR A MOTION? >> YES.

>> YES. >> MR. MILLER MADE ONE. >> DID YOU GET A SECOND?

[Staff Reports]

>> YES. >> IF NOT, I SECOND. >> YES, THERE'S A MOTION AND

A SECOND. WE ARE IN DISCUSSION. >> JUST TO CLARIFY, THIS IS A MOTION TO DENY. YES WOULD BE TO VOTE TO DENY IT AND NO IS NOT TO DENY IT

-- YES, SURE. >> ARE WE READY TO VOTE? >> OKAY.

LET'S REGISTER THE VOTE. THAT MOTION PASSES. >> OKAY.

THAT CONCLUDES OUR AGENDA OTHER THAN STAFF REPORTS.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.