Feb 17, 2022 Planning and Zoning Agency

[Call meeting to order.]

[00:00:28]

>> I CALL THIS MEETING TO ORDER AND WE ARE GOING TO START WITH THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE SO IF YOU'D STAND AND RECITE THE PLEDGE WITH ME, I'D APPRECIATE IT.

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

MADAME MAYOR VICE CHAIR, DO YOU WANT TO READ THE PUBLIC NOTICE

STATEMENT, PLEASE >> MS. PERKINS: YES.

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 DATA SO BY COMPLETING A SPEAKER CARD WHICH IS AVAILABLE IN THE FOYER. ANY ADDITIONAL SPEAKERS MAY BE HEARD ONLY 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 FOR A LENGTH OF TIME AS DESIGNATED BY CHAIRMAN WHICH IS 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 OTHER BOARD AGENCIES IN THE COUNTY IN ANY REVIEW OR APPEAL RELATING TO THE 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 RELATING TO THE SUBSTANCE OF THE ITEM OUTSIDE THE FORMAL HEARING OF THE BOARD. -- EXCUSE ME, THE AGENCY IF SUCH COMMUNICATION HAS OCCURRED, THE AGENCY MEMBER SHOULD THEN IDENTIFY THE PERSONS INVOLVED AND THE MATERIAL CONTENT OF THE COMMUNICATION. CIVILITY CLAUSE.

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

WE WILL DIECT ALL COMMENTS TO THE ISSUES.

WE WILL AVOID PERSONAL ATTACKS. >> THANK YOU, MS. PERKINS.

SO AT THIS POINT WE ARE MOVING INTO A PUBLIC COMMENT PERIOD.

[1. ZVAR 2021-29 5480 Atlantic View (178180-0000). Request for a Zoning Variance to Land Development Code Table 6.01 and Section 6.01.03.E.3 to allow for a Second Front Yard setback of three (3) feet in lieu of the fifteen (15) foot requirement in Residential, Single Family (RS-3) zoning to bring the existing single-family home into compliance and accommodate an addition, specifically located at 5480 Atlantic View. This request was previously heard by the Planning and Zoning Agency on 2/03/2022. The request was continued to a date certain of 2/17/2022 with a vote of 6 to 0 in order to allow the applicant to provide a Structural Engineer to discuss the hardship.]

SO WE ARE MOVING ON TO THE FIRST ITEM ON THE AGENDA, MR. WHITEHOUSE, AND I'M GOING TO FIRST ASK FOR EX PARTE COMMUNICATION FROM THE AGENCY MEMBERS.

RICHAD, DR. HILSENBECK? >> I DID HAVE A CONVERSATION WITH JAMES WHITEHOUSE. WE TRADED PHONE CALLS BUT NEVER CONNECTED, BUT JUST UP HERE A FEW MINUTES AGO HE SPOKE TO ME BRIEFLY. I ALSO SPOKE WITH GAIL PHILLIPS WHO IS THE DIRECTOR OF THE LINCOLNVILLE MUSEUM AND CULTURAL CENTER, AND I WAS JUST ASKING HER OPINION -- THIS IS BY TELEPHONE -- IF, HEAVEN FORBID, THIS HOUSE WERE TO BE TORN DOWN, WOULD THE THE LINCOLNVILLE MUM WANT TO RECEIVE AND DISPLAY ITEMS OF HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE AT THE LINCOLNVILLE MUSEUM, AND SHE WAS SUPPOSED TO READ THE AGENDA ITEM AND GET BACK WITH ME. BUT SHE HAS NOT GOTTEN BACK WITH ME. BUT SHE INDICATED SOME WILLINGNESS. THEY'RE JUST MOVING THE WALGREENS COUNTERS IN THERE RIGHT NOW, AND SHE INDICATED SOME WILLINGNESS TO DO THAT IF IT WAS ABSOLUTELY AND ONLY IF IT WAS NECESSARY, BUT -- SO I JUST REACHED OUT TO HER.

THANK YOU. >> DR. MCCORMICK.

>> FIRST OF ALL, I'VE BEEN -- T 50 YEARS AGO I .A LOT OF TIME AT ATLANTIC VIEW. I RENTED A LOT OF HOMES THERE DURING THAT PERIOD OF TIME, AND I HAD THREE VERY YOUNG KIDS AT THE TIME WHO KIND OF GREW UP ON THOSE TBEACHES THERE, SO --

[00:05:04]

THAT'S MY CONDOMINIUM ON THE BEACH THERE.

AND IN 2004 I BOUGHT A HOUSE IN SUMMER ISLAND.

SO MY TIME ON THE BEACH HAS BEEN FARTHER SOUTH THAN WHERE ATLANTIC VIEW IS WHERE MY KIDS USED TO GROW UP.

ANYWAY, REACHING OUT TO GET MORE INFORMATION, I CONTACTED SEVERAL PARTIES. ONE WAS THE HARP, WHICH IS THE HISTORICAL ARCHITECTURAL REVIEW BOARD, AND TO GET THEIR INFORMATION IN TERMS OF THEIR FEELINGS ON WHY EDDIE KRAMER, FOR EXAMPLE, OUR APPRAISER, WAS NOT IN FAVOR OF THIS BEING ADDRESSED AS AN HISTORICAL STRUCTURE.

AND THE REASON BASICALLY -- I CALLED HIS OFFICE, TOO, BY THE WAY AND GOT BASICALLY THE SAME INFORMATION.

THE INFORMATION I GOT FROM EDDIE'S OFFICE WAS, WELL, BECAUSE IT'S NOT IN THE CITY AND HISTORICAL STRUCTURES IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY REFER TO THE HISTORICAL STRUCTURES WHICH ARE IN ST. AUGUSTINE, BECAUSE THIS STRUCTURE WAS ON THE ISLAND, IT'S NOT REALLY RELATED -- NOT REFERRED TO AS A HISTORICAL BUILDING FOR THAT PURPOSE, SO THAT WAS PROBABLY BASICALLY HIS REASON FOR BEING IN OPPOSITION TO THAT.

TALKED TO TERESA BISHOP TO GET INFORMATION ON -- I WANTED TO KNOW MORE ABOUT THE REZONING VARIANCES BECAUSE MY WIFE AND I HAD WALKED ON THE BEACH AND THEN ON OUR WAY BACK WE MET, WE SPOKE TO ONE OF THE NEIGHBORS, OUR NEIGHBORS FROM ST. AUGUSTINE BEACH CLOSE TO ATLANTIC VIEW, AND HIS ARGUMENT WAS, WELL, THERE HAVEN'T BEEN ANY VARIANCES THAT HAVE BEEN APPROVED.

AND I SAID, WELL, GEEZ, I NEVER WAS BACK HERE UNTIL I MOVED TO OCEAN PALMS, AND ONCE I MOVED TO OCEAN PALMS, I SPENT A LOT OF TIME GOING DOWN MAGNOLIA DOWN TO OCEAN VIEW AND WALKING MY DOG, AND MY WIFE AND MYSELF, AND WE WALKED OCEAN VIEW QUITE A BIT.

SO I SAW AN AWFUL LOT OF CHANGES.

SO I SAID, GEEZ, THERE HAVEN'T BEEN ANY -- THERE HAVEN'T BEEN ANY APPROVALS OF VARIANCES? SO I WENT TO TERESA AND I SAID, WELL, WHAT RECORDS DO YOU HAVE ON ZONING VARIANCES IN THAT AREA? AND I GOT SIX.

ONE IS THE URNT CURRENT ONE S BEFORE UP.

THE NEXT ONE WAS'LL 5591 THRAWNCHT VIEW.

THAT'S ALREADY BEEN DISCUSSED BUT WHAT HAPPENED THERE WAS IT WAS APPROVED BY A 4 TO 2 VOTE BY THE PZA BUT THEN IT WAS TURNED DOWN BY THE COUNTY SO THAT IN ESSENCE WAS NOT APPROVED AS A VARIANCE. THE NEXT ONE WAS ATLANTIC -- 5548 ATLANTIC VIEW. THE NEXT ONE WAS 97 SEA OATS LANE. THAT WAS BACK IN 2012.

THAT WAS APPROVED 7-0. AND I DIDN'T SEE ANYTHING THAT CHANGED ON THAT PARTICULAR -- APPARENTLY IT WAS NOT APPEALED TO THE COUNTY COMMISSION. THEN THE NEXT ONE GOING BACK TO 206 WAS ON 5360 ATLANTIC VIEW. THAT WAS DENIED.

EXACT COUNT NOT KNOWN, AT ANY RATE IT WAS DENIED.

AND THEN FINALLY WAS THE CAMERON JACOBS PROPERTY ON 5420 ATLANTIC VIEW BACK IN 2006. THAT GOES A LONG WAY BACK.

AND THAT ONE WAS APPROVED, ALTHOUGH THE EXACT COUNT IS NOT KNOWN. SO I FOUND A COUPLE THAT HAVE BEEN APPROVED AND A COUPLE THAT HAVE BEEN DENIED, AND THEN -- AND NOW WE STAND AT THIS POINT. THAT'S WHAT I FOUND OUT IN TERMS OF THAT, AND THAT'S BASICALLY MY EX PARTE.

>> THAT'S YOUR EX PARTE COMMUNICATION.

>> YES. >> THANK YOU, DOCTOR.

MS. PERKINS. >> YES, I SPOKE WITH MR. WHITEHOUSE RIGHT BEFORE THIS MEETING.

WE BRIEFLY DISCUSSED THE NEW INFORMATION.

>> ANYBODY ELSE? MR. PETER.

>> YEAH, I TRADED A COUPLE OF EMAILS WITH TERESA BISHOP AND

[00:10:05]

GOTTEN AN ANSWER TO THAT. >> ANYBODY ELSE? I DID DECLARE I DID GET A VOICE MAIL FROM MR. WHITEHOUSE LATE THIS MORNING, AND I APOLOGIZE FOR NOT GETTING BACK TO YOU, MR. I WAS ON A CONFERENCE CAL UNTIL I GROT HERE.

AND SO HE MENTIONED HE HAD SOME ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO SHARE WITH US FROM AN ENGINEER. SO AT THIS POINT I WILL --

DR. MCCORMICK. >> YEAH, I DIDN'T BRING UP ONE OTHER ITEM. BECAUSE I DID CONTACT AND TALK TO SALEENA RANDOLPH ABOUT THAT WALKWAY ON BOTH SIDES OF THAT HOUSE. THOSE ARE NOT EASEMENTS, SO YOU'VE REFERRED TO THEM, JAIME, AS EASEMENTS MANY TIMES.

MANY PEOPLE IN THE RAWDIENCE, AND I DID, TOO, AT THE END WHERE I ASKED YOU ABOUT THAT PROPERTY, AND I REFERRED TO THEM AS EASEMENTS. THEY'RE NOT EASEMENTS.

SO THE HAS NOT REALLY TAKEN RESPONSIBILITY FOR KEYING THEM UP FROM THAT STANDPOINT, I DON'T THINK.

THAT'S IT. >> DR. HILSENBECK?

>> I ALSO NEED TO DISCLOSE THAT I DID DRIVE BY THE PROPERTY AGAIN AND WITH MY WIFE THE OTHER DAY AND EXAMINED IT, SO DIDN'T GO ON THE PROPERTY, THOUGH, I DIDN'T WANT TO TRESPASS.

>> ALL RIGHT. MR. WHITEHOUSE.

>> GOOD AFTERNOON, MR. CHAIRMAN. VICE CHAIR, AGENCY MEMBERS.

FOR RECORD MY NAME IS JAMES WHITEHOUSE OF STNG LAW YIEWP 10 WO SEA GROVE. ST. JOHNS COUNTY, FLORIDA.

I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF THE OWNERS AS I KNOW FROM LAST MEETING.

I KIND OF JUST WANT TO GO BACK OVER IT BRIEFLY.

I KNOW, MR. MILLER, YOU WEREN'T HERE SO WAIPT TO GO BRIEFLY EXPOIFORT PRESENT THE NEW EVIDENCE AND THEN WE CAN MOVE FORWARD, MR. CHAIRMAN, IF THAT'S APPROPRIATE.

AS YOU ALL KNOW, WE'RE HERE TO REQUEST A VARIANCE ON THE PROPERTY AT 5480 ATLANTIC VIEW WHICH IS DESIGNATED AS A PART OF THE FREEDOM TRAIL. THERE'S A PLAQUE OUT FRONT.

AND THE LOCATION IS HERE. I HAVE IT CIRCUMSTANTIALED .

IT'S JUST TO THE SOUTH OF THE MATANZAS BEACH RAMP, AND AS I SAID THE FIRST TIME AND I'LL REPEAT AGAIN, THE MANUTEY BARRY FAMILY SEEKS TO MAKE THIS PROPERTY PRESERVING THE HISTORICALLY SIGNIFICANT STRUCTURE WHICH HAS BEEN MARKED PART OF THE FREEDOM TRAIL AND WHOSE SIGNIFICANCE HAS BEEN MARKED BY MANY HISTORIANS AND DOCUMENTED BY MANY PUBLICATIONS.

IN FACT, IN BETWEEN THE LAST MEETING AND THIS MEETING, MR. PAUL, MANY OF YOU MAY KNOW A LOCAL HISTORIAN, ALSOAL WROTE A LETTER AS TO HIS UNDERSTANDING OF THE HISTORIC SIGNIFIES THIS PROPERTY. HE DID A LOT OF WORK WITH HISTORIC PROPERTIES DOWNTOWN AND HE'S BEEN WORKING HERE SINCE 1976. HE SAYS ALL THAT WITHIN HIS LETTER. AND AGAIN, I DON'T THINK AS WE SORT OF DISCUSSED LAST TIME, I DON'T THINK THERE'S A LOT OF DISAGREEMENT THAT THIS IS A HISTORIC PROPERTY.

ESPECIALLY IN THE LOCAL HISTORIAN'S EYES AND IT'S BEEN MENTIONED THROUGHOUT MANY PUBLICATIONS.

IT'S A HUGE MENTION IN THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT, AND PART OF MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR.'S HISTORY, THE FIGHT WITHIN OUR COUNTRY FOR CIVIL RIGHTS. IN ANY I WAS CASE, I DID, AS DR. MCCORMICK SAID, I DID REFER TO ITS AN EASEMENT.

IT'S AN UNOPENED RIGHT-OF-WAY OWNED BY THE COUNTY AND IT'S JUST TO THE NORTH OF THIS PROPERTY.

IT'S 30-FOOT -- 30 FEET WIDE. THIS PARTICULAR STRUCTURE, WHICH YOU CAN SEE IN THE PICTURE, WAS BUILT PRIOR TO THE ZONING AND IT WAS -- AND IT'S BUILT AT 5.7 FEET, THE WALL IS BUILT AT 5.7 FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE. THE PROPERTY LINE THAT ABUTS THIS 30-FOOT WIDE EASEMENT. WE ALREADY LOOK AT THE PICTURES LAST TIME SO WE DON'T NEED TO LOOK AT THEM AGAIN, BUT I THINK THAT, AS YOU KNOW, THE REQUEST HERE WE NEED TO HAVE A VARIANCE BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE THE STRUCTURE'S BUILT.

THE LAST TIME WE WERE BEFORE YOU, WE TALKED ABOUT BUILDING

[00:15:06]

I THINK WE HAD SOME CONSTRUCTIVE CONVERSATION DURING QUESTION-AND-ANSWER PERIOD AFTER PUBLIC COMMENT, AND WE WANTED TO GO BACK AND LOOK AT IT. AGAIN, I DON'T THINK I NEED TO GO BACK THROUGH THE HISTORY OF IT.

I THINK EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS THAT THIS IS A HISTORIC BUILDING. I THINK WHAT WE REALLY NEED TO GET DOWN TO IS WHAT I WAS ABLE TO GLEAN FROM GOING AND MEETING WITH THE ENGINEER. IN FACT, I WILL TELL YOU THAT WE'VE BEEN WORKING ON THIS FOR THE LAST TWO WEEKS STRAIGHT THROUGH, IN FACT, ALL THE WAY UP TO THIS MORNING.

THE LETTERS I PROVIDED TO YOU, TWO OF THEM FROM THE ENGINEER HIMSELF. THE FIRST ONE, SO YOU CAN SEE IT, AND YOU ALL HAVE A COPY OF THIS ONE, THIS ONE IS DATED FEBRUARY 14TH. THIS IS THE ONE THAT AFTER THE MEETING WE HAD, WE WENT AND TALKED TO THE ENGINEER AND EXPLAINED TO HIM WHAT WE WERE TRYING TO DO, AND YOU'LL SEE FROM THE LETTER THAT HE TALKS ABOUT THE REQUEST, WHICH IS THE SAME REQUEST THAT WE TALKED ABOUT, SO I'M NOT GOING TO GO OVER THAT. IT'S IN YOUR LETTER.

YOU CAN SEE IT'S PART OF THE RECORD NOW.

BUT THE FINDING WAS THAT THE BEST WAY TO DO THIS, THE MOST APPROPRIATE WAY TO DO THIS AND PRESERVE THE BUILDING ITSELF WAS TO DO, AS I SAID, PUT THE COLUMNS AROUND THE BUILDING ITSELF, BUT THE SUPPORT BEAMS AROUND THE BUILDING ITSELF, AND THEN BUILD THE STRUCTURE AROUND IT, AND HE SAID FROM AN ENGINEERING STANDPOINT WITHIN THIS LETTER, THAT THAT WOULD BE THE BEST WAY TO ACHIEVE THE GOALS TO HAVE THE KYL COLUMNS AT THE FRONT, THE MIDDLE AND THE REAR OF THE CURRENT STRUCTURE AS DEPICTED IN THE ATTACHED CONCEPTUAL DIAGRAM, WHICH THIS IS A DIAGRAM HE ATTACHED WHICH, LIKE I SAID, SHOWS THE COLUMNS ALONG THE OUTSIDE OF IT WITH THE WEIGHT-BEARING BEAMS AROUND IT.

AND SO HE SAID THAT WAS THE BEST WAY TO DO IT.

AND THEN WE ASKED HIM ABOUT, WELL, WHAT ABUT THE PLAN THAT SAID, YOU KNOW, WE CAN MOVE IT IN 15 FEET SO -- THE SECOND STORY AT LEAST INTO THE 15 FEET AND TRY TO DO IT THAT DIRECTION, AND HE SAID, YOU , YOU KNOW -D THIS IS WHAT THAT WOULD LOOK LIKE. THIS IS THE DIAGRAM THAT HE PRESENTED WITH 15 FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE GOES SORT OF RIGHT DOWN THE MIDDLE OF WHERE THE DOOR IS, INTO THE MIDDLE AND TO THE BACK WHERE YOU'D STILL HAVE TO HAVE THE COLUMNS.

AND AGAIN, YOU SEE WITHIN HIS LETTER, HE SAID, WELL, MOST THING ARE POSSIBLE FROM AN ENGINEERING PERSPECTIVE.

THE HYPOTHETICAL PLAN IS NOT RECOMMENDED GIVEN THE VARIABLES AND THE LOAD AND THE UNKNOWNS AS TONIGHT CURRENT 1-STORY CINDER BLOCK HISTORIC HOME. FIRST OF ALL IT WOULD ENTAIL SPLIT TFNG FRONT ENTRYWAY OF THE OLD HOME WHERE AS IT HAD WOULD BE PERT FROM AN DISEERNG ENGINEERING DESIGN TO PUT -- FURTHER YOU WOULD MOST LIKELY NEED TO PLACE A LOAD BESHEAR COLUMN HALFWAY DOWN NIDAL OF THE HOME TO SUPPORT THE LOAD BEARING BEAM FOR TO NORTHERN WALL STRUCTURE.

THIS WOULD PERMANENTLY DAMAGE AND ALTER THE STRUCTURE ON THE SIDE INSIDE. PRESERVATION OF THE INTEGRITY OF THIS STRUCTURE IS THE PURPOSE OF THIS REQUEST.

AND AGAIN HE SAID SEE THE ATTACHED DOCUMENTS.

AND THAT WAS ON MONDAY. AND THEN AFTER THAT, YOU KNOW, AFTER READING, GOING BACK AND READING ALL OF THE CONCERNS AND GOING BACK AND REVIEWING MY NOTES ABOUT SOME OF THE AGENCY MEMBERS' CONCERNS, I WENT TO MY CLIENT AND SAID, "I THINK WE NEED TO GO BACK TOOT ENGINEER AND SEE WHAT WE CAN DO TO TRY TO FIGURE THIS OUT. IS THERE A WAY FROM AN ENGINEERING PERSPECTIVE TO EITHER GET TO THAT 15 FEET OR FIND SOME WAY WHERE WE BRING IT IN, THAT WHEN IT'S THE LEAST INTRUSIVE, YOU KNOW, TO MINIMIZE THE INJURIOUS EFFECT OF VARIANCE, WHICH IS THE EXACT LANGUAGE FROM YOUR CODE WHICH SAYS IF YOU'RE GOING TO GRANT A VARIANCE LET'S DO THE LEAST AMOUNT. Y SEW SO WYE WENT BACK TO HIM AND TALKED TO HIM FOR SEVERAL DAYS, AND OBVIOUSLY AS YOU CAN SEE IN FRONT OF YOU HE WENT BACK AND REEVALUATED HIS ENGINEERING IN AN ATTEMPT TO PROVIDE INCREASED SETD-BACK FOR THE SECOND AND THIRD STORIES. YOU SEE FROM THE LETTER IN FRONT OF YOU THAT ON HIS LETTERHEAD AND SIGNED BY HIM WITH HIS PE LICENSE NUMBER, THAT SUBSEQUENT AFTER REVIEW OF MY OPINION AND

[00:20:05]

A STATED PREVIOUSLY DUE TO THE HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE, THE OWNER WANTS TO BUILD ABOVE THE CURRENT INFRASTRUCTURE IN AN ATTEMPT TO SAVE THE EXISTING STRUCTURE AND INCORPORATE IT IN THE NEW HOME. AND HE GOES TO SAY ABOUT TWO-THIRDS DOWN THE PAGE, ALTHOUGH I STATED PREVIOUSLY THAT THE HYPOTHETICAL PLAN OF MOVING THE NORTHERN WALL OF THE NEW STRUCTURE IN AN ADDITIONAL 10 10 FEET WAS NO RECOMMENDED GINN IF VARIABLES AND END LOAD ANDING UNCOMOARCHES AS THE ONE STORY CINDERRER BLOCK HISTORIC HOME BECAUSE THAT WOULD ENTAIL SPLITTING THE INTRIFT OLD HOME AND FROM AN ENGINEERING DESIGN IT WOULD BE BETTER TO CLOSE THIS DESIGN WITH A NEW TRUCH, BELIEVE WE COULD MOVE THE NORTHERN WALL SETBACK WHICH WOULD IN FACTES ENCLOSE IT INTO THE STRUCTURE AND AT THE SAME TIME MINIMIZE THE INJURIOUS EFFECT TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS. HE GOES ON TO SAY, IN IN PLAN WE COULD ON US DOUBLE GIRDER TRUSSES TO PROVIDE TO SUPPORT.

THIS WOULD ALLOW TO US SUPPORT THE BEAM FOR THE NORTHERN WALL OF THE NEW INFRASTRUCTURE AND AVOID PERMANENTLY DAMAGING THE HISTORIC STRUCTURE. IT WOULD ALSO ALLOW US TO KEEP THE NORTHERN FACADE OF THE OLD STRUCTURE FOR HISTORIC REFERENCE AND PRESERVATION. I COULD WOULD CONTINUE TO CAUTION AGAINST MOVING THE NORTHERN WALL IN FURTHER THAN THAT 10-FOOT SETBACK GIVEN THE POSITIONING OF THE OLD HOME'S ENTRYWAY AND THE NEED TO ENCLOSE THAT PORTION FOR ENGINEERING OF THAT NORTHERN WALL. AND HE FINALLYIZES BY SAYING, IN CONCLUSION, I'M CONFIDENT THAT THE REVISED PLAN BASED UPON THEIR WILLINGNESS TO FIND THE BEST AND MOST FEASIBLE PLAN TO ACHIEVE BOTH THE PRESS HAVING A OF THE OLD STRUCTURE AND ALLOWING INNOVATIVE BIFLGHTD NEW STRUCTURE AROUND THE OLD WILL WHILE ALSO MAINTAINING STRUCTURE INTEGRITY AND SECURING THE SPHRUSM SOUNDNESS OF THE NEW STRUCTURE IS AN APPROPRIATE PLAN GIVING THE ENGINEERING NEED TODAY ACHIEVE BOTH PRESS PRESERN AND THE NEW HOME. AND HE ATTACHES DOCUMENTS AS HE REFERS IN TOE IN THERE. HE ATTACHES HIS OLD DOCUMENT WHICH TALKS ABOUT WHAT WE WERE -- WHAT FORMER ENGINEERS HAD SAID WAS THE BEST PLAN, AND HE GREED WAS PROBABLY THE PEST PLAN, AND WHEN HE WENT BACK AND LOOKED AT IT BASED ON OUR URGING, HE CAME TO THE CONCLUSION AS HE STATED IN THE LETTER THAT HE COULD FIND A WAY FROM AN ENGINEERING PERSPECTIVE TO MOVE US IN AND IT WOOB A 10-FOOT SETBACK ON THIS SIDE, WHICH ALL OF YOU KNOW WE TBRAWKD IT AT LENGTH, IN ALL LOTS THERE ARE 8-FOOT SETBACKS ON SANITIZED.

THIS ONE CALLS FOR A 15-FOOT SECOND FRONT YARD SETBACK BECAUSE IT'S ON THIS NOT EASEMENT BUT THIS UNOPENED RIGHT-OF-WAY THAT WE TALKED ABOUT BEFORE.

AND SO IN THIS PARTICULAR CASE NOW, IT APPEARS THAT IT'S AVAILABLE, THE THAT WE COULD HAVE THIS ENGINEERED TO COME IN 10 FEET, YOU LEAVE THE FACADE, WHICH NOW I WILL TELL YOU, AS WE TRIED TO TALK ABOUT LAST TIME, IS PROBABLY A GOOD WAY FOR THE PRESERVATION OF THIS BUILDING BECAUSE NOW YOU CAN SEE THAT FACADE. AND I HAVE PICTURES I'LL SHOW YOU AGAIN. I KNOW YOU HAVE SEEN THEM BEFORE BUT YOU CAN SEE THEM AGAIN. YOU'LL BE ABLE TO SEE THIS FACADE COMING OUT OF THE SIDE OF THE NEW HOME,AL WHICH BE OVER HERE, AND AND YOU WOULD STILL HAVE THE MEASURING.

MARKER. AND THEN YOU HAVE TO COUNTY UNOPENED RIGHT-OF-WAY WHERE YOU'RE NOT BETWEEN HOMES.

YOU'RE ACTUALLY IN A SPOT WHERE PEOPLE COULD COME AND SEE THIS.

AND SO IN ANY CASE, I THINK THAS APPROPRIATE.

I THINK YOU SEE THE DOCUMENTATION FROM THE ENGINEER.

AND I WANT TO KIND OF GO THROUGH JUST THIS -- THIS PROPOSED -- AND I DON'T WANT TO CALL AT A COMPROMISE ABOUT THE A PROPOSED WAY THAT WE CAN ACHIEVE THE GOALS OF THE MAJORITY OF PEOPLE THAT ARE TALKING ABOUT THIS. OBVIOUSLY WE'RE NEVER GROWING TO PLEASE ANYONE. SOME PEOPLE DON'T WANT ANY TYPE OF VARIANCE EVER IN THIS AREA. YOU HEARD DR. MCCORMICK SAY THE COUNTY HAS DONE THEIR RESEARCH AND THERE HAS BEEN SOME VARIANCES IN THIS AREA, AND PARTICULARLY A FEW OF THEM THAT WERE ON THESE, YOU KNOW, UNOPENED RIGHTS-OF-WAY THAT CALL FOR THIS EXTRA 7 FEET FOR SECOND FRONT SIDES, SO ANYWAY, I'M NOT GOING TO -- I'LL JUST GO THROUGH IT QUICKLY.

LIKE I SAID, THIS WAS WHAT WE HAD BROUGHT FOR YOU LAST TIME BASED ON ADVICE OF AN ENGINEER FROM JACKSONVILLE.

THIS IS THE ONE THAT MR. MORGAN HAS SAID IS AVAILABLE AND CAN BE DONE. AND AS YOU CAN SEE, IT'S OVERLAID ON WHAT WE WE HAD BEE YOU LAST TIME, AND IT COMES DOWN

[00:25:02]

AGAIN, THIS IS JUST -- THIS IS JUST MY RUDIMENTARY SHOWING OF, THE OF TRYING TO SHOW YOU HOW MUCH WE'RE GOING TO CUT OFF OF THE BUILDING. I THINK IT KIND OF SHOWS YOU THAT, YOU KNOW, THE PEOPLE WHO ARE WORRIED ABOUT US GOING THE WHOLE BUILDING ITSELF COMPLOAS TO THE 5.7 FROM THE LINE, THIS WILL NOW LOOK MORE, AGAIN, RUDIMENTARY BUT I WANT TO SHOW YOU FOR PICTORIAL REASONS, THIS WILL BE NOW YOU HAVE THIS WHOLE SECTION HERE WILL NOT BE HERE ON THE TOP.

IT WILL BE PUSHED BACK TO THE 1. AND THEN YOU HAVE THE REMAINING PART ON THE BOTTOM. AND AGAIN, RUDIMENTARY, BUT I DID IT IN A WAY THE HOUSE IS YELLOW WITH THE WHITE AND GRAY ROOF SO YOU CAN SEE FROM A RUDIMENTARY PERSPECTIVE HOW IT WOULD LOOK WITH THIS. AGAIN I'M NOT AN ARCHITECT.

I'M NOT A DESIGNER. I'M JUST TRYING TO SHOW YOU THIS BLUE AREA NOW WILL BE OPEN, AND I THINK THAT WAS A LOT OF THE COMPLAINT, THAT THEY DIDN'T WANT TO TAKE UP A WHOLE VIEW IN THIS AREA, AND YOU SAW SOME OF THE EMAILS WERE ABOUT THE EXTRA SQUARE FOOTAGE THEY'RE GETTING, PETS THAT WAS NOT THEIR INVENT INTENT. IN ANY CASE, I THINK THAT'S AVAILABLE TO MOVE FORWARD WP. HERE'S A PICTURE OF THE SIDE OF FACADE. THAT'S NOT THE BEST PICTURE, BUT CAN SEE THAT THIS IS KIND OF WHERE THE NEW BUILDING WOULD BE ANOTHER 5 OR 5 FEET IN OR SO GOING UP HERE AND WOULD LEAVE THE OPEN SPACE BIEFT, AND AGAIN YOU HAVE THE 30-FOOT, YOU KNOW, UNOPENED RIGHT-OF-WAY THAT YOU CAN SEE TOO.

MORE PICTURES. AND THIS IS THE -- THIS KIND OF SHOWS YOU, YOU KNOW, THIS IS WHERE THE DOORWAY IS.

IT IS HERE. AND THE ENGINEER SAYS THAT THE BEST WAY TO KEEP THIS, THE INTEGRITY OF THIS STRUCTURE IS TO GO RIGHT HERE, WHICH IS THAT ADDITIONAL 5 FEET TO MAKE IT A 10-FOOT SETBACK ON THAT SIDE. AGAIN, THIS IS LOOKING FROM THE BACK. THIS IS UNDER THE OPENED RIGHT-OF-WAY. THIS IS THE HOUSE ITSELF.

THIS IS THE FACADE THAT WOULD BE SECURED.

AND AGAIN, I THINK IT WOULD BE ABOUT RIGHT WHERE THAT WINDOW IS OR A LITTLE BEFORE THAT WINDOW. THIS IS THE FACADE.

I THINK YOU'VE SEEN IT BEFORE BUT JUST TO SHOW YOU.

THIS IS THE FACADE THAT YOU SEE IN A LOT OF THE PICTURES OF PUBLICATIONS, ET CETERA, THAT REFER TO THIS HOUSE HISTORICALLY, AND I THINK THIS IS A GOOD -- I THINK THIS PLAN IS A GOOD WAY TO PRESERVE THAT SO YOU HAVE THAT PICTURE OF THIS FACADE ON THE PLAQUE MARKER AS WELL AS IF PEOPLE COME TO SEE IT, THEY'LL SEE THIS. THEY'LL SEE THIS.

IT WILL JUT OUT, YOU KNOW, 5 FEET OR SO FROM WHERE THE NEW STRUCTURE IS BUILT SO THERE ACTUALLY BE PRESERVATION AND YOU SEE WHAT YOU'RE LOOKING AT, WHICH I THINK IS A BIG PART OF PRESERVATION. IN ANY CASE, I THINK - THE ONLY THEY'RE THING I WANTED TO TALK OTHER THING I WANT TO TALK ABOUT IS I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT TO REMEMBER THAT YOU DO HAVE THIS 30-FOOT UNOPENED RIGHT-OF-WAY HERE, AND I THINK IT REALLY PLAYS A PART IN YOUR CONSIDERATION OF THIS BECAUSE YOU HAVE THIS VISUAL THROUGH WAY WHICH WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT IN BETWEEN HOUSES AND WE'RE TRYING TO GET CLOSER TO ANOTHER HOUSE.

IT ACTUALLY IS AN OPEN AREA NEXT DOOR TO WHERE THEY ARE.

AND LASTLY, I'LL SHOW YOU, THIS IS THE OVERHEAD, AND AS YOU CAN SEE, AGAIN, YOU CAN SEE THIS LARGE AREA HERE AND THEN THE OTHER -- THE ADDITIONAL STRUCTURE THAN THE WOO BE ANY DIFFERENT THAN ANY OF THE OTHER HOUSES THAT ARE BUILT HERE, PARTICULARLY THE ONE NEXT DOOR TO IT, AND THEY COULDN'T GO OAT COASTAL CONSTRUCTION LINE, AND AS A REFERENCE THEY ARE TOKE TAKING OUT THIS NON-CONFORMING GARAGE IN THE FRONT AS PART OF THEIR PLAN. THIS IS THE FACADE AGAIN.

THIS IS OUR LOCAL HISTORIAN DAVID KNOLLAN WHO HAS DONE SEVERAL DIFFERENT INTERVIEWS AND REPORTS FROM THE FRONT OF THIS HOUSE, AND THAT'S -- THIS IS THE FACADE THAT WE'RE TRYING TO PLECT AND PRESERVE. I'D BE AMISS IF I DIDN'T MENTION THAT WE'RE ALSO PRESERVING THE INSIDE OF IT BUT I'M PARTICULARLY SPEAKING ABOUT THAT FACADE BECAUSE THAT'S WHERE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE VARIANC. AND AGAIN, THIS IS THE FRONT DOORWAY GOING INTO THE HOUSE. IF YOU TALK ABOUT HOW -- YOU REFERENCE DOLLARS THE ENGINEER'S LETTER.

YOU WOULD HAVE TO GO THROUGH, AND YOU CAN SEE IT FROM THE DIAGRAMS IN THE PACKAGE, YOU HAVE TO ALMOST GO SORT OF THROUGH WHERE THAT DOORWAY IS, AND THEN PRESERVING THE HOUSE AS PART OF THE OTHER HOUSE IN THIS INNOVATIVE DESIGN WOULD KIND OF BE FEW TILE IN THAT SENSE. IN ANY CASE, I JUST KIND OF WANT TO GO BACK, IF YOU CAN FLIP BACK TO THE -- I JUST WANT TO GO

[00:30:07]

WE'RE HERE FOR THE VARIANCE. WE'RE HERE FOR THE VARIANCE BECAUSE WE HAVE A BUILDING THAT'S CURRENTLY ON THE PROPERTY BUILT PRIOR TO ZONING CODES AT 5.7 FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE.

I'M NOT GOING TO GO BACK THROUGH THE HISTORY, BUT THE REASON WE'RE HERE IS BECAUSE THIS FAMILY WOULD LIKE TO PRESERVE THIS HOME. THEY DON'T WANT TO TAKE THIS HOME DOWN. WE TALKED ABOUT THAT LAST TIME, AND THAT'S PART OF THE REASON WHY THEY ARE WILLING TO COME AND TRY TO FIND A COMPROMISE WITH ENGINEER, WERE ENGINEERING GUIDANCE TO TRY TO PRESERVE THIS BUILDING AND BUILD THE HOME THAT THEY WANT TO HAVE TO LIVE IN. YOU KNOW THE REQUIREMENTS OF A VARIANCE. I DON'T NECESSARILY THINK I NEED TO GO THROUGH THEM AGAIN, BUT I BELIEVE WE MEET THOSE, AND A BIG REASON WE MEET THEM IS BECAUSE OF YOUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

YOUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CLEARLY TALKS ABOUT LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE REGULATIONS WHICH FURTHER THE PROTECTION OF HISTORICALLY SIGNIFICANT STRUCTURES. IT SAYS THE COUNTY SHALL PROMOTE THE PRESERVATION ADAPTIVE REUSE OF HISTORICALLY SIGNIFICANT HOW LONG THROUGH TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE AND THE IMPLEMENTATION OF LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.

AS I ASSERTED TO YOU LAST TIME, I THINK THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO HERE, AND I THINK IT'S A GOOD -- AND AGAIN, THIS IS THE SECTION OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SO YOU CAN SEE THAT'S WHERE I'M PULLING IT FROM.

YOU KNOW, I THINK IN CONCLUSION, THESE OWNERS ARE HERE THROUGH ME TO ASK FOR A VARIANCE. WE BELIEVE THAT WE MEET THE REGULATIONS OF THE CODE BASED ON EVERYTHING I'VE PUT BEFORE YOU.

WE BELIEVE THAT WE'VE GONE BACK, AS ASKED LAST TIME, TO TRY TO FIND OTHER WAYS AND TRY TO GET ENGINEERING PROOF OF HOW THIS CAN BE DONE AND STILL BE THE LEAST INTRUSIVE METHOD OF PRESERVING THIS HOME, BUILDING THEIR NEW HOME AROUND IT, AND TRYING TO MEET THE GUIDANCE OF THE CODE AND THE REGULATIONS.

I BELIEVE WE'VE DONE SO. I BELIEVE THAT THIS IS A HISTORIC PROPERTY. AND I BELIEVE THAT IT'S IMPORTANT FOR US TO MOVE FORWARD IN A FASHION WHERE WE CAN TRY TO MEET THE DESIRES OF ALL THE COUNTY CODE AS WELL AS THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. THERE'S NEVER GOING TO BE EVERYBODY THAT'S GOING TO BE HAPPY WITH WHAT'S GOING ON, BUT I THINK THIS IS A GOOD, YOU KNOW, OPTION TO MOVE FORWARD.

I THINK WE MEET -- I'M NOT ASKING TO YOU GIVE US ANYTHING.

I THINK WE MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE VARIANCE.

AND I'M HERE FOR ANY QUESTIONS, AND I CAN SPEAK AGAIN IF THERE'S ANYONE FROM THE PUBLIC THAT INTERSECTION.

THANK YOU, MR. CHAIRMAN. >> GOOD AFTERNOON.

A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS. DOES THE UNOPENED RIGHT-OF-WAY

PROVIDE ACCESS TO THE BEACH? >> CURRENTLY IT DOES NOT.

>> DOES NOT. HAVE YOU HAD ANY DISCUSSIONS WITH THE COUNTY STAFF ABOUT FILING AN APPLICATION TO CLOSE

THE RIGHT-OF-WAY? >> NO.

I HAVEN'T. AND JUST SO YOU KNOW, YOU CAN ASK YOUR OWN LEGAL COUNSEL AND YOUR OWN STAFF, BUT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SPECIFICALLY STATES THAT WE'RE NOT SUPPOSED TO VACATE RIGHT-OF-WAYS ON THAT LEAD TO THE WATER OR TO BEACHES.

>> BUT IT'S NOT YOU. YOU JUST SAID IT WASN'T USED FOR ACCESS TO THE BEACH. IT IS?

>> IT IS A UNOPENED RIGHT-OF-WAY THAT THE COUNTY OWNS THAT ABUTS THE MEAN HIGH WATER MARK OF THE BEACH.

IF THERE'S ANY -- THERE'S -- LET ME GO BACK TO PICTURE.

THERE'S NUMEROUS -- >> I'M JUST LOOKING AT THE GOOGLE VIEWS. IT WILL LOOKS LIKE THERE'S A TRAIL AND IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE THERE IS A TRAIL AND THEN --

>> THAT'S AN OLD ONE. I THINK THIS IS HOW IT WORKS, IF I MAY, THROUGH THE CHAIR, WHEN YOU HAVE -- THIS IS ONE THAT APPEARS TO BE -- THAT SOMEBODY WALKED THROUGH IT.

WHEN YOU HAVE ACCESS WAYS TO THE BEACH, AND ALL UP AND DOWN -- I'M GOING TO GO TO THE ONE THAT HAS THE I HAD WOOER VIEW, BUT THERE'S -- THE WIDER VIEW, PUT THERE'S A NUMBER OF UNOPENED RIGHTS-OF-WAY AND THERE'S A NUMBER OF BEACH ACCESS WAYS AND THERE'S A NUMBER OF DRIVEON AXE WAYS AND THE CANVAS RAMP IS JUST NORTH OF THIS. THE WAY IT WORKS WITH THE DP AND YOU PROBABLY ALREADY KNOW THIS, BUT THE WAY IT WORKS WITH THE DEP IS TO IS TO GET A PERMIT TO BUILD A WALK OVER OR TO OPEN IT UP TO HAVE A DRIVE, YOU HAVE TO MEET A BUNCH OF REQUIREMENTS WITH THE DEP. YOU CAN ALWAYS HAVE WALKWAYS INTO THE DUNES. YOU CAN ALWAYS HAVE WALKWAYS THROUGH THE DUNES. THAT'S WHAT I BELIEVE YOU SEE HERE. IT'S NOT A COUNTY SANCTIONED WALKWAY. THAT DOESN'T MEAN THAT PEOPLE DON'T WALK THROUGH IT TO GO TO THE BEACH.

AND THAT'S WHY I I DON'T THINK IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE FOR US TO COME AND ASK TOAF THIS CLOSED TO TRY TO GET AN EXTRA 15 FEET ON THEIR PROPERTY, BUT I THINK IT IS APPROPRIATE TO ASK FOR THIS BECAUSE THEY DO HAVE THAT. IN OTHER WORDS THEY PLAY ON EACH OTHER. YOU HAVE THIS UNOPENED 30 FEET WHERE IT'S PROBABLY NEVER GOING TO BE OPENED FROM THE COUNTY.

IF IT DOES, THIS VARIANCE DOESN'T AFFECT THAT ANY WAY.

THAT WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR ANY OF THAT.

[00:35:01]

QUESTION. >> I THINK IT DOES, AND IT LOOKS LIKE THERE IS ACCESS JUST TO THE SOUTH ON SEA OATS ROAD.

IS THE HOUSE CURRENTLY OWNER OCCUPIED?

>> NOT -- WELL, NOT CURRENTLY. IT'S -- THEY COULD.

THERE COULD BE PEOPLE THERE. THE CURRENT OWNERS LIVE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD ITSELF. THAT'S WHY THEY BECAME AWARE OF THIS PROPERTY. THAT'S WHY THEY BOUGHT THE PROPERTY OVER THE LAST YEAR, YEAR AND A HALF.

YEAR OR SO. YOU'VE SEEN OR YOU MAY NOT HAVE SEEN BUT THERE'S BEEN NUMEROUS REPORTS IN BOTH -- IN PUBLIC OCCUPATIONS AND ON TV OF THEM STATING THEIR INTENT THAT THEY WANT TO PRESERVE THIS AND THAT'S WHY THEY WERE TOLD TOAF TO ASK

FOR A VARIANCE. >> IF THE VARIANCE IS FRANTD, ARE THEY GLOWING TO CONTINUE TO OWN THE PROPERTY OR HAVE AN LLC OR SOME OTHER ENTITY TO OWN THE PROPERTY?

>> THEIR INTENT TO MAKE THIS THEIR HOME AND HAVE THAT OTHER PART OF THE HOUSE BE PART OF THE HOME.

THERE ARE TECHNICAL REGULATIONS WE HAVE TOO MEET WITH THE COUNTY. THEY'RE GOING TO MEET ALL THE COUNTY REGULATIONS TO MAKE THIS, YOU KNOW, COPA SETTIC WITH COUNTY CODE. THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS THAT WE CAN'T DO ANY OF THAT UNTIL WE GET THE VARIANCE AND THE RIGHT TO GO AND ENGINEER THE PLAN OF BUILDING THIS.

>> AND I'M SORRY. I MIGHT HAVE MISSED IT.

THE COUNTY REGULATIONS TO DO WHAT WITH IT? IT'S GOING TO BE A SINGLE FAMILY OCCUPIED HOUSE.

>> THAT'S RIGHT. BUT THERE ARE CERTAIN REGULATIONS IN COUNTY CODE YOU CAN'T HAVE TWO KITCHENS, ET CETERA. THIS HOUSE ITSELF, THEY'RE NOT GOING TO USE THAT AS THEIR KITCHEN.

THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE ONE IN THE OTHER PART OF THE HOUSE THAT THAT'S BUILD AND SO THEY WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO HAVE THAT AS A FUNCTIONING KITCHEN. THEY HAVE TO CHANGE IT SO IT'S

NOT A FUNCTIONING KITCHEN. >> SO WOULD THEY BE RENTING OUT

THAT PART OF THE HOUSE? >> NO.

AGAIN, THE POINT IS THEY WANT TO HAVE THIS AS PART OF THEIR HOUSE. I THINK I WOULD BE REMISS IF I DIDN'T ADDRESS THIS BECAUSE I SAW THE EMAILS, TOO, AND YOU SEE A NUMBER OF EMAILS ABOUT, OH, THEY RUN AIR, BUSINESSES.

THEY HAVE OTHER HOUSES IN THE AREA.

THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS.

YOUR COUNCIL WILL ADVICE YOU I BELIEVE THAT'S NOT A CONSIDERATION BECAUSE WITH THAT THEY DO IN OTHER PARTS OF THE COUNTY OR WHAT THEY DO WHETHER THEY HAVE A SEPARATE KIND OF BUSINESS, THAT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS CONSIDERATION.

THIS CONSIDERATION IS WHETHER OR NOT THIS IS APPROPRIATE, WHETHER THEY MEET THE REQUIREMENTS FOR AIR VARIANCE AND, LIKE I SAID, I THINK I'VE LAID OUT BEFORE YOU -- ANYWAY, YES, SIR.

>> ONE OF THE THINGS WITH THE VARIANCE, AND I HAVEN'T LOOKED AT THE WORDS WEAVE TO CONSIDER, WHETHER IT'S TRANSFERABLE OR NOT, IF IT'S GOING TO BE OWNER OCCUPIED, ARE YOU FINE IF WE WERE TO GRANT THE VARIANCE THAT IT WOULD NOTING BE TRANSFERABLE?

>> I. THIS IT NEEDS TO BE TRANSFERABLE BECAUSE ANYTHING YOU DO THAT'S THAT ATTACHED TO THE GROUND, YOU CAN'T RESTRICT SOMEONE FROM SELLING IT. THAT'S NOT THEIR INTENT BUT IF THEY WANT TO SILT THEY WOULD HAVE TO COME BACK AND REQUEST FOR THE VARIANCE AGAIN, AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT WE'VE GROWING TO

SAY TODAY BUT -- >> YOU'RE SAYING THEIR INTENT IS

TO OCCUPY IT. >> THAT'S RIGHT.

>> THANK YOU. >> DR. HILSENBECK.

>> JAMES, COULD YOU PLEASE PUT UP THE PLAT OF THAT PROPERTY AGAIN. YOU SHOWED A PLAT.

I THINK IT HAD PAINT ON IT DESIGNATING THE HOUSE.

OF THE REALLY THOROUGH LETTERS WE RECEIVED, A VERY REALLY LONG THOROUGH LETTER, IT STATED THAT THESE GREEN THE WAYS THROUGH THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND THEN BLUEWAYS DOWN TO THE BEACH ARE -- I THOUGHT THOSE WERE PLATTED AS PART OF THIS ANASTASIA HILLS DEVELOPMENT. IS THAT NOT CORRECT?

>> I DON'T HAVE THE PLAT ITSELF. >> I THOUGHT YOU DID.

DID I HAVE IT? >> THERE WAS SOMETHING IN YOUR PRESENTATION. I THOUGHT IT WAS THE PLAT.

>> WE'LL EL WA TALK WHILE I'M LOOKING.

OKAY. >> I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT THOSE WHAT ARE CALLED BLUEWAYS AND GREENWAYS, THE BLUEWAYS ARE THE ONES SUCH AS THIS ONE, THE 30-FOOT UNOPENED RIGHT-OF-WAY THAT LEAD DOWN TO THE BEACH, THAT THOSE ARE PART OF THE PLAT OF THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, SO -- AND I WILL SAY THAT I SAW A VERY CLEAR TRAIL DOWN TO THE WEAPON OF, AND YOU CAN SEE THAT ON THE AERIAL. SO PEOPLE ARE USING THAT TO GET

DOWN TO THE BEACH. >> YES, SIR, FULLY, AND WE DON'T DISPUTE THAT AT ALL, BUT AGAIN, AS I SAID, IN ANSWER TO THE OTHER QUESTIONS, I DON'T THINK THAT THIS -- WHATEVER HAPPENS HERE, I DON'T THINK THAT THIS AFFECTS THAT BECAUSE IT'S STILL THERE. IT'S STILL THE 30-FOOT OPEN

RIGHT-OF-WAY. >> YOU'RE NOT ASKING TO CLOSE

THAT. >> THAT'S EXACTLY RIGHT, AND THAT'S WHY I THINK IT WOULD BE INAPPROPRIATE TO ASK TO CLOSE THAT. JUST TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION ABOUT THE BLUEWAYS AND GREENWAYS, I THINK AS YOU HEARD, AS DR. MCCORMICK FOUND WHEN HE ASKED YOUR EXPERT STAFF, THESE ARE UNOPENED RIGHTS-OF-WAY. THESE ARE NOT ANYTHING -- AGAIN, YOU CAN TREAT THEM HOWEVER YOU WANT TO TREAT THEM, BUT THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS, IS THAT IT DOESN'T MEAN PEOPLE -- 1ST EVER THERE'S UNOPENED RIGHTS-OF-WAY ALL OVER OUR COUNTY THAT PEOPLE CAN WALK DOWN TO GO TO WOODS GLUT NOBODY IS

[00:40:02]

DPRIEFG THROUGH THEM. >> THAT'S RIGHT.

>> YOU CAN SEE THESE ON THE PLAT IT.

APPEARS THAT IS PART OF THE OVERALL PLAT.

>> NO QUESTION. >> SO HOW WILL THE HOUSE BE -- SAY WE GRANT THIS AND EVERYTHING'S GREAT TO BUILD THE THREE-STORY HOUSE AND THEY'RE LIVING THERE AND EVERYTHING'S WONDERFUL. HOW ARE THEY GOING TO HAVE THAT HOUSE ACCESSIBLE OCCASIONALLY TO THE PUBLIC? WHAT IS THE PLAN FOR PUBLIC ACCESS OR VIEWING OF THAT HOUSE?

IS THERE ONE? >> YEAH, MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT, AS YOU KNOW, THE PLAQUE IS OUT FRONT.

THE PLAQUE IS NOT GOING ANYWHERE.

>> MY NEXT QUESTION, YOU ALLUDED TO THAT.

YOU SAID THAT THE PLAQUE WILL REMAIN.

>> YES, SIR. AND AGAIN, I REALLY DO THINK THAT -- AND I CALL IT AN INNOVATIVE PLAN FROM THE BEGINNING EVEN WHEN I TALKED TO YOU LAST TIME BUT I THINK THIS IS MORE NO RAVE IN THIS COMPROMISED POSITION WHERE THEY MOVE THE SECOND AND THIRD STORY BACK EVEN FURTHER BECAUSE YOU WILL SEE THE FACADE COME OUT. WHEN PEOPLE COME DOWN KEN WALK, AS WE JUST TALKED ABOUT, THE YOU CAN WALK ON THE UNOPENED RIGHT-OF-WAY, YOU CAN SEE THAT FRONT OF THE HOUSE, AND -- LET'S GO TO THIS POINT RIGHT HERE. SO THE WHOLE POINT IS THIS WILL BE -- THIS WILL BE BACK, AND I DON'T HAVE THAT SLIDE UP NOW BUT IT WILL BE BACK IN FURTHER RIGHT HERE ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE DOOR. THIS WILL STILL BE PART OF THE FIRST FLOOR. AND I THINK PART OF IT, THEIR INTENT IS NOT TO DETERIORATE C NUISANCE BY SAYING, WE'LL OPEN TO THE PUBLIC. YOU CAN COME ANY TIME YOU WANT.

THE THAT IS NOT THE INTENT. IT WILL BE THERE.

PEOPLE COME NOW AND LOOK AT AT THIS TIME.

FOR YEARS THEY HAVE COME AND LOOKED ANOTHER IT, AND THE PLAQUE HAS BEEN THERE SINCE AT LEAST THE EARLY 2000S.

PEOPLE HAVE BEEN COMING, A LOT OF PEOPLE I GUESS COME ON MARTIN LUTHER KING, JR. DAY. I HAVEN'T BEEN THERE WHEN THAT'S HAPPENED BUT THAT'S MY UNDERSTANDING.

AND SO I THINK THAT, TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, THEY WOULD BE WILLING TO LET PEOPLE COME AND SEE IT BECAUSE THEY WANT TO PROMOTE THE HISTORY OF IT. THAT'S THE WHOLE -- THE WHOLE REASON WHY THEY'RE GOING THROUGH THIS PROCESS WHEN THEY COULD HAVE HAVE COULD HAVE COME AND JUST ASKED TO DEMOLISH IT.

THEY DON'T WANT TO DO THAT. I THINK THEY -- BUT THEY ALSO DON'T WANT TO CREATE A NUISANCE FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD, YOU KNOW, THEN I THINK YOU'RE PROBABLY GOING TO HEAR FROM.

SO MY ANSWER TO YOUR QUESTION IS THEY WOULD BE WILLING TO OPEN IT EVERY ONCE IN A WHILE OR DO WHATEVER THEY CAN FOR POSTERITY TO ALLOW IT TO BE SEEN BUT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT WILL HAVE TO BE FIGURED OUTS DOWN THE ROAD.

>> SO THEY'RE NOT GOING TO OBJECT IF SOMEONE BALKS INTO THEIR FRONT YARD TO READ THE PLAQUE?

>> I THINK THE PLAQUE IS UP ON THE RIGHT-OF-WAY, I THINK.

>> IT'S CLOSE. YOU IT LOOKED LIKE YOU HAD TO GO

ONTO THEIR PROPERTY. >> TO ANSWER YOUR QUESTION, I DON'T THINK THAT THEY'RE GOING TO OBJECT TO THAT BECAUSE I THINK THEY KNOW THAT THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THIS HISTORICAL PROPERTY IS GOING TO DRAW PEOPLE TO COME.

AND WANT TO SEE IT, AND REALLY, YOU KNOW, AND I DON'T, YOU KNOW, I DON'T WANT TO EMPHASIZE IT TOO MUCH, BUT, I MEAN, YOU HAVE PEOPLE WHO WANT TO DO SOMETHING RIGHT, AND SO THEY'RE NOT GOING TO OBJECT WHEN PEOPLE COME AND SEE WHAT THEY'RE DOING.

I DOUBT PEOPLE ARE GOING TO WALK ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THEIR HOUSE BE ET CETERA. THAT'S SORT OF THE DOUBLE-EDGED SWORD HAVING THE UNOPENED RIGHT-OF-WAY RIGHT THERE.

PEOPLE CAN COME AND SEE THIS AND THEY CAN UNDERSTAND THE HISTORY OF OUR NATION, WHICH IS -- I DON'T KNOW -- I THINK THAT'S

VERY IMPORTANT. >> OKAY.

SUPPOSE WE GRANTED THIS. IS THERE GOING TO BE A GUARANTEE FROM THOSE OWNERS OF PRESERVATION OF THAT STRUCTURE?

>> I THINK WE CAN PUT THAT IN AS PART OF A CONDITION ON THERE.

>> OKAY. THIS MAY BE A QUESTION FOR THE COUNTY ATTORNEY. IS THERE ANYWAY WE CAN PROHIBIT THIS BEING A VACATION RENTAL OR AN AIRBNB? CAN THAT BE PART OF THE PROISKS, FINDINGS OF FACT THAT WE PUT IN

THERE? >> LET ME THINK ABOUT THAT.

>> OKAY. FAIR ENOUGH.

>> I CAN ANSWER IT WHILE SHE IS ANYTHING ABOUT IT, DR. HILSENBECK, THROUGH THE CHAIR.

I THINK THAT THE PROBLEM WITH DOING THAT FROM A LEGAL PERSPECTIVE IS THERE'S A NUMBER OF NEW LAWS THAT HAVE BEEN PASSED NOW BY OUR FLORIDA LEGISLATURE AS FAR AS AIRBNBS AND SHORT TERM RENTALS, . IN THIS PARTICULAR SENSE THAT'S NOT THEIR INTENT, BUT I THINK THERE'S A NEW -- AND I CAN'T CITE IT RIGHT NOW, AND MAYBE CHRISTINA CAN LOOK IT UP, BUT I THINK THERE'S A NEW ONE THAT PASSED MAYBE LAST SESSION THAT TALKED ABOUT YOU CAN'T ADD -- THERE'S A PREEMPTION TO ADDING NEW RESTRICTIONS ON CURRENTLY ZONED PROPERTIES.

NOW, I WILL TELL YOU THIS, AND WE CAN PUT IT ON THERE, THEY WILL FOLLOW EVERY REGULATION THAT COUNTY REQUIRES AS TO THIS PROPERTY, WHETHER OR NOT THAT MEANS -- WHETHER OR NOT -- NO SPECIFIC REFERENCE TO THAT. IF THIS IS AVAILABLE, JUST LIKE ANYBODY AROUND THEM TO BE A SHORT-TERM RENTAL, WHICH I'M NOTE TESTIFYING -- BUT WHAT I'M SAYING IS IF IT IS AVAILABLE TO

[00:45:02]

THEY'LL PASS AWAY. SOMEBODY ELSE WILL OWN IT.

WE CAN'T RESTRICT IT AS TO THAT BUT I AM WILLING TO TELL YOU THEY'RE NOT GOING TO USE IT ON ANYTHING ILLEGAL OR ANYTHING

AGAINST THE COUNTY REGULATIONS. >> OKAY.

I MAY HAVE SOME MORE IN A MINUTE BUT THAT'S IT FOR NOW.

>> ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANTS?

>> MR. CHAIR, I DO, IF NO OTHER AGENCY MEMBER DOES.

>> YES. >> THANK YOU.

FOR THE RECORD, CHRISTINEAL VALLIERE, SENIOR SIIVET COUNTY ATTORNEY. MR. WHITEHOUSE, SO THE WAY THE REQUEST CURRENTLY READS ON AGENDA IS TO REQUEST A STRAIRNS TO ALLOW A 3-FOOT SETBACK IN LIEU OF THE 15.

SO ARE YOU AMENDING ON THE RECORD TO REQUEST A 10-FOOT

SETBACK IN LIEU OF 15? >> YEAH, I THINK -- I THINK WHAT YOU CAN ALWAYS ADVERTISE FOR SOMETHING MORE.

YOU JUST CAN'T ADVERTISE FOR LESS, NOTICE FOR IT.

SO WE'VE ADVERTISED FOR THE MAXIMUM OF WHAT MIGHT HAVE BEEN NEED PD I THINK WE PROBABLY DO NEED TO LEAVE IN, IF WE DOTE TO THAT POINT, BUT I DO THINK WE NEED TO LEAVE IN THE PART ABOUT THAT THAT EAVE, THE CURRENT EAVE, AND THERE'S THAT CURRENT STRUCTURE CAN STAY AT THE DISTANCES THAT IT'S AT RIGHT NOW, AND IT CAN BE PART OF ANY KIND OF REFURBISHMENT OR RESTORATION OF WHAT WE'RE GOING TO DO OF THAT PORTION.

ANY NEW INFRASTRUCTURE WILL BE AT A MINIMUM OF A 10-FOOT SETBACK ON THAT NORTHERN SIDE. I THINK -- WE CAN CRAFT THE LANGUAGE, BUT I THINK THAT'S THE I JUST OF WHAT WE NEED TO SAY -- GIST OF WHAT WE NEED TO SAY OR DO.

>> THAT LEADS ME TO. ARE YOU ASKING FOR A VARIANCE TO LEGITIMIZE THE EXISTING STRUCTURE?

>> I THINK WE HAVE TO BECAUSE I THINK IT'S GOING TO BECOME PAST THE NEW STRUCTURE AND FOR IT TO BE LEGITIMIZED AND TO DO WORK AROUND IT, CLEARLY PART OF THE ROOF IS GOING TO HAVE TO BE REDONE. THAT FRONT PART OF THE ROOF THAT WE'RE GOING TO KEEP MIGHT NOT BE, BUT THE REST OF IT MIGHT NEED TO BE, AND SO I THINK THAT WE NEED TO -- I THINK FOR, YOU KNOW, SECURITY SAKE, TO HAVE EVERYTHING CLEAR, I THINK WE

SHOULD PUT THAT IN. >> OKAY.

SO THE AGENCY WOULD UNDERSTAND IF YOU'RE GRANTING A VARIANCE THAT WOULD ALLOW SECOND, THIRD FLOOR ADDITIONS THAT THEY'RE REQUESTING, THAT THAT COMPONENT BE SET BACK TO 10 FEET.

>> YES, MA'AM. >> MR. MILLER, DO YOU HAVE A

QUESTION? >> NO.

I'M JUST TRYING TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THE REQUEST IS, AND I NEED TO TAKE A LOOK AT THE ORDER AND THE RECOMMENDATION TO MAKE SURE WHAT THEY'RE ASKING FOR LINES UP WITH THAT.

>> OKAY. >> AND WE CAN WORK ON LANGUAGE,

TOO, WHILE PEOPLE ARE SPEAKING. >> THANK YOU, CHRISTINE.

HOW MANY CARDS DO WE HAVE, MADAME VICE CHAIR? SO MIGHT I SUGGEST YOU PUT THEM IN ALPHABETICAL ORDER, AND I'M GOING TO ASK ALL 15 OF THE PEOPLE WHO CURND IN A SPEAKER CARD TO LINE UP AT THAT PODIUM SO THAT WE'RE NOT SITTING HERE WAITING FOR PEOPLE TO WANDER UP TO THE PODIUM.

SO IF YOU'RE PLANNING TO SPEAK TO THIS ITEM AND HAVE TURNED IN A SPEAKER CARD, LINE UP AT EITHER OF THESE PODIUMS, PLEASE, SO WE CAN GO IN SUCCESSION. YOU CAN HAVE RIGHT RAT IT, SIR.

SHE'S GETTING THEM IN ALPHABETICAL ORDER BUT BUT WE'LL GO TO THIS PODIUM FIRST. WHOEVER GETS TO THIS PODIUM FIRST CAN SPEAK FIRST. THEN WE'LL GO TO THE NEXT PODIUM. YOU CAN SPEAK FROM THE MIDDLE THERE, TOO, MA'AM. THAT'S FINE SHE'S VERY SMART, SO I THINK SHE'LL GET THE ALPHABETICAL ORDER TOGETHER.

ALL RIGHT. SIR TO MY RIGHT.

NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. THREE MINUTES.

>> THANK YOU. MY NAME IS RALPH DEPASS CAWLEY.

I LIVE ON 55 ROEHRS ATLANTIC VIEW.

MY WIFE AND I PURCHASED THE PROPERTY IN 1978.

WE LIVED THERE FOR ABOUT 20 YEARS.

ITS RELEVANCE IS IT'S SIX HOISTS SOUTH OF THE MARTIN LUTHER KING PLACE. WE EXPERIENCED, WENT TO A THROH A SERIES EXPERIENCES TO TRY TO BUILD UP OVER THE EXISTING

[00:50:01]

HERE FOR TODAY. >> SIR, COULD YOU PULL THAT MICROPHONE DOWN A LITTLE BIT AND SPEAK A LITTLE LOUDER.

>> HUH HOW IS THAT? >> THAT'S MUCH BETTER.

>> I'M OFF-BALANCE. IF I TRIP.

SO MY WIFE AND I LIVED THERE FOR 20 YEARS, ALWAYS CONSIDERING HOW TO BUILD UP. WE DECIDED THAT THERE WERE TWO FACTORS THAT WERE INHIBITING THAT PROCESS.

NUMBER ONE, THE EXISTING STRUCTURE, THE WALLS AND THE ROOF WERE NOT STURDY ENOUGH TO SUPPORT A BUILDING UP.

NUMBER TWO, THE HOUSE WAS CONSTRUCTED, THE NORTH WALL 5 FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE, SO IN ORDER TO BUILD AT THAT TIME, IT HAD TO BE 15 FEET, WHICH YOU HAVE DISCUSSED AT THIS POINT. AND WE DIDN'T WANT TO HAVE TO GO THROUGH THE OPERATION OF A VARIANCE.

WHAT WE DID WEEN LISTED THE HELP OF AL LOCAL CONTRACTOR, A LOCAL ARCHITECT, AND A STRUCTURAL ENGINEER FROM JACKSONVILLE, NEARLIAL LOCAL. CAME UP WITH A PLAN TO CONSTRUCT ABOVE. WE STARTED THAT PLAN IN 1997.

IT WAS COMPLETED IN NINE MONTHS. LET ME GO OVER THE PLAN BRIEFLY.

IT'S VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT WE ACCOMPLISHED.

IT IS VERY SIMILAR TO WHAT YOU DISCUSSED.

THE ARCHITECTS CAME UP WITH USING EIGHT CONCRETE COLUMNS 30 FEET HIGH. CIRCUMFERENCE OF ABOUT -- NOT CIRCUMFERENCE. DIAMETER OF ABOUT A FOOT AND A HALF. THEY WERE USED TO PUT SUPPORTING BEAMS WHICH WOULD THEN SERVE AS THE FOUNDATION OF A UNIT TO BE BUILT ABOVE IT. NOW, IN ESSENCE WHAT HAPPENED WAS THE UNIT ITSELF COMES WITH 30 FEET HIGH, SO THE STRUCTURE WOULD EXACTLY GO OVER THE EXISTING ROOFLINE OF THE EXISTING HOUSE, AND THE WALLS AND THE ROOF WOULD BE PRESERVED.

PRESERVED. AND NUMBER TWO, WITH REGARD TO THE VARIANCE, WE DECIDED TO SHIFT THE NEW CONSTRUCTION TO BE 15 FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE. SO WE HAD A NEW STRUCTURE WHICH ESSENTIALLY HOVERED OVER THE EXISTING STRUCTURE WHICH WOULD PRESERVE IT AND CONSERVE IT WITHOUT A FACING THE EXISTING WALLS OR INTERIOR. SO WE PROCEEDED TO DO THIS.

WE DID IT IN NINE MONTHS. >> PLEASE WRAP UP, SIR.

>> ACCOMPLISHED IT IN NINE MONTHS.

AND THE STRUCTURE WAS SOUND, SAFE.

WE LIVED -- WE HAVE BEEN LIVING IN IT FOR OVER 20 YEARS.

IT SURVIVED HURRICANES. IT SURVIVED NOR'EASTERS.

THEY'RE VERY, VERY STABLE. SO TO RECAP, BUILT A STRUCTURE ON COLUMNS, CONCRETE COLUMNS OVER THE EXISTING STRUCTURE WHICH PRESERVED IT. BUILT IT 10 FEET, STARTED CONSTRUCTION 10 FEET SOUTH OF OUR -- OF THE EXISTING WALL WHICH WAS THEN, WE WERE ABLE TO AVOID GETTING INTO THE VARIANCE SITUATION. THE STRUCTURE IS VERY STABLE.

>> SIR. >> SIR, WE'VE WE'VE GOT TO MOVE ON. WE HAVE A LOT OF PEOPLE.

>> I WENT TO THE PZA WITH EVERYTHING THAT WAS GOING AND AS

WELL AS THE DDC. >> SIR.

I DON'T BELIEVE YOU TURNED IN A CARD.

>> I FOUND IT. I'VE GOT IT.

>> I DID TURN IN A CART. >> KETO BARNES IS THE FIRST ONE.

>> GOOD AFTERNOON, ALL COUNCILMEMBERS.

MY NAME IS DR. KATHERINE NEWKIRK.

AND I AM HERE AS A CITIZEN OF ST. JOHNS COUNTY.

AND I'M HERE TO SPEAK ON THE NEED FOR PRESERVING THE HISTORY OF THIS HOME. I WANT TO START OUT BY TELLING YOU A LITTLE BIT ABOUT MYSELF AND MY STORY.

I WAS RAISED AS A YOUNGEST OF TEN CHILDREN IN PENDER COUNTY, NR ON A FARM. YOUNGEST OF TEN CHILDREN, RAISED ON A FARM. GRADUATED FROM UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA CHAPEL HILL IN PHARMACY, PSYCHOLOGY, AND I GOT MY DOCTORATE FROM THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN GAINESVILLE IN PHARMACY. MY HUSBAND AND I RAISED FOUR CHILDREN, PHYSICIAN ASSISTANT, A POLICE OFFICER, A BIOLOGIST, AND A U.S. NAVY VET WHO CAME BACK TO US FROM AFGHANISTAN DISABLED BUT

[00:55:02]

OUR LIFE STORY IS THE EPITOME OF WHAT DR. MARTIN LUTHER KING WAS ALL ABOUT. THIS PARTICULAR HOME WAS RIGHT IN THE HISTORY OF WHAT HE DID FOR AMERICA.

THIS HOME HAS NATIONAL HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE.

AND IT SHOULD REMAIN. JUST A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THE LAST MLK HOLIDAY. WE HAD SOME RELATIVES VISIT FROM NORTH CAROLINA. I WANTED TO TAKE THEM SOMEPLACE, BUT I WANTED IT TO BE SOMETHING TANGIBLE.

EVERYBODY WAS GOING TO THE MLK DINNERS.

A LOT OF THEM WERE SOLD OUT. AND THEN THERE WERE SOME THAT WANTED TO DO THE PARADE. I WANTED THEM TO HAVE SOMETHING TAN DISWRIBL THAT THEY TANGIBLE THAT THEY COULD SEE.

I TOLD THEM WE WERE JUST GOING TO DRIVE TO ST. AUGUSTINE.

EVERY YEAR I HAD DRIVEN PAST THE HOME AND I'VE DRIVEN LOOKING FOR HIS HISTORY AND KNOWING SOMEWHERE ABOUTS WHERE IT IS.

BUT THIS TIME I DROVE UP AND THERE WERE PEOPLE THERE WITH MY COUSINS. WE WALKED IN THE HOUSE.

WE SAW THE BULLET HOLES THAT WERE REAL FOR HIM.

WE SAW THE SCORCHED FLOORS THAT WERE MEANT FOR HIM.

ALL I COULD THINK OF WAS A LIFE MAGAZINE THAT I HAD SEEN IN MY HISTORY. THE LIFE MAGAZINE THAT SHOWED HIM POINTING AT THAT BULLET THAT WAS MEANT FOR HIM, THAT HAD HE NOT BEEN WARNED IT COULD HAVE BEEN HIM, AND I THINK IF ALL OF THE THINGS THAT HE DID FOR THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT, FOR OUR PEOPLE. I HAVE GRANDCHILDREN, I HAVE CHILDREN THAT ARE COMING UP IN THE SCHOOL SYSTEMS OF ST. JOHNS COUNTY. WE DESERVE TO HAVE THAT HISTORY PRESERVED. WE HAVE OWNERS WHO ARE WILLING TO PRESERVE IT. AND A BUG PART OF THEIR COST.

I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THAT. IT SHOULD BE DONE WE'VE ALREADY SAID EARLIER THAT VARIANCES HAVE BEEN PERMITTED.

WHY NOT FOR THIS, THIS PLACE WITH SUCH NATIONAL.

HISTORIC REPRESENTATION? THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU, MA'AM MADAME VICE CHAIR, DID YOU HAVE SOMEBODY YOU WANTED TO PUT UP FIRST? YES, SIR.

YOU'RE NEXT. >> HELLO.

THANK YOU, EVERYBODY FOR BEING HERE TODAY.

MY NAME IS CHARLES LAWRENCE MY ADDRESS IS 5446 WINDAN TIE ROAD IT'S ADJOINING NEIGHBORHOOD TO THIS NEIGHBORHOOD.

I THINK A LOT THAT WE'RE GOING TO HEAR IN YOUR NEXT PUBLIC COME IS A DISCUSSION IN REGARD TO PRECEDENT AND WHAT TYPE PRESS DENY THIS WILL SET MOVING FORWARD, AND I HOPE A PRECEDENT IS SET TO PROTECT THIS TYPE OF HOME AND THIS HISTORICAL MONUMENT. AS THE NATION'S OALTSD CITY WE SHOULD SET A PRECEDENT TO PROTECT OUR HISTORICAL LOTIONS.

IN REGARDS TO PRECEDENT OUR COUNTY HAS SET A PRECEDENT TO PRESENT THE REMOVAL OF HISTORICAL 3407B IEWMENTS THAT REMIND US OF THE INEQUITY PART OF OUR MISTER BEAN MOVE TO THE SLAYED MARKET TO THE TROUT CREEK FACILITY BY THE THE RIV PRIFER I CHALLENGE TO YOU STAY THAT -- AND PROTECT A HISTORICAL LOCATION THAT SERVICES AS AN IMPORTANT REMINDER OF OUR COUNTRY'S NEFF HOIFORT. AS SAID BY WINSTON CHURCHILL, THOSE WHO DO NOT LEARN FROM HISTORY ARE DOOMED TO REPEAT IT.

I ASK YOU ALL TO PLEASE PASS A VARIANCE.

>> YES, SIR. >> HI.

THE THIS CEETY ON BURNS 201 OWENS AVENUE.

I WANT TO READ INTO THE LETTER A LETTER FROM SWANSON STRUCTURAL A LOCAL FIRM LEER IN ST. AUGUSTINE DATED FEBRUARY 16, 2022.

I'LL GIVE TO IT STAFF. THE SUBJECT 5480 ATLANTA VIEW SETBACK VARIANCE REQUEST AND IT STATES, AS REQUESTED ALEX SWANSON, PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER, HAS REVIEWED THE LIMITED INFORMATION REGARDING AN APPLICANT'S VARIANCE REQUEST.

BASED UPON THE PROVIDE INFORMATION IT IS OUR UNDERSTANDING THAT EXISTING STRUCTURE IS PROCEED TUDE TRUING AT CURRENT SET BHAK LINE ON THE PROPERTY AND THE APPLICANT IS PROPOSING AN ADDITION TO RESIDENCE THAT WOULD INTRODUCE NEW STRUCTURE ALSO PROTRUDING CURRENT SET BHAK LINE.

STRUCTURALLY SPEAKING THERE IS NO REASON THE ADDITION TO RESIDENCE, INCLUDING ADDITIONAL ELEVATED LEVELS, COULD NOT EXIST WITHIN THE EXTENT OF THE 15-FOOT SETBACK LINE.

WHICH IS DEPICTED IN THE GREEN AREA HATCHED IN FIGURE 1 PLOA.

NIGH SPENCE WITH HOMES BUILT TRIER TO 1980 BUS THE REQUIRED BUILDINGS HOPES WERE LESS CONSERVATIVE THE EXISTING STRUCTURAL EMPTIES CANNOT ACCEPT ANY ADDITIONAL LOAD.

IT IS TYPICAL TO DISCOVER THAT EXISTING STRUCTURAL DO NOT ANITA. CURRENT LOAD AND DEFLECTION REQUIREMENT WITHOUT WITHOUT ADD ANY LOAD.

FOR THIS END RACE STRUCTURAL ENGINEER 23 YOU'RE ADDING NEW LEVELS RATHER THAN TEAMING TO REMEDIATE EXITING STRUCTURE TO

[01:00:03]

WE ARE AVAILABLE TO REVIEW IN MORE DEPTH ONCE THE CONFLICT HAS PROVIDED ADDITIONAL INFORMATION SUCH AS EXISTING PLANS AND PROPOSED PLANS. ALEX SWANSON, PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER. SO IF A BEAM CAN SPAN THAT NORTH WALL OR A BEAM CAN COME IN 10 FEET, THAT MEANS IT COULD COME IN 15 FEET AS WELL. AND IF THEY WERE TO DO IT OH THAT VERY NORTH WALL THE CHANCE OF PRESERVING THE FACADE ARE VERY TOUGH HOWEVER THEY'RE NOW IN TOTE 10-FOOT MARK WHICH CHANGES IT. IN THIS VARIANCE IS APPROVED, NO ONE IS GLOWING TO DRIVE WAI BY IN AWE OF THIS OLD BUILDING AND SEE ANYTHING OF HISTORICAL SIGNIFICANCE UNLESS THEY NOTICE THE PLAQUE. IF THE OWNER BUILDS TO THE 15-FOOT SETBACK, NOT ONLY WOULD THAT VIEW AND CHARACTER BE PRESERVED BUT MORE OF THIS MLK HOUSE BE PRESERVED AND EXPOSED WHICH WOULD RESULT IN A MUCH BETTER JOB OF PRESERVATION.

ON OWNERS KNEW THE RULES WHEN THEY BOUGHT THIS PROPERTY.

WANTING A WIRED HOUSE HAD AN THE CODE ALLOWS IS NOT A HARDSHIP.

YES, THEY TALK ABOUT THE 15-FOOT MARK MAY GO NEAR THEIR ENTRANCE WAY WHICH, OF COURSE, CAN BE MOVED.

THE THIS FATHER BUILDING A WHOLE HOUSE THEY CAN MOVE THAT.

THEY CAN GO TO 15 FEET AND MISS THAT WHOLE ENTRANCE WAY.

ASKING TO BUILD A HOW THE 5 FEET TO A SEAT BACKPACK BECAUSE AN ENTRANCE WAY IS NOT QUITE A HARDSHIP.

WE ASK THAT YOU DENY THIS AND APPRECIATE YOUR TIME.

THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, MR. BURNS.

YES, SIR. OVER HERE.

>> HI. MY NAME IS DAVID SIGHFORD IF LIVE ON 5292 ATLANTIC STREW. I KNOW A BIT ABOUT THIS HOUSE.

MY WIFE AND I HAVE TWO DOGS. WE'VE BEEN BY IT FOR THE LAST THREE YEARS SEVERAL DOZEN TIMES. I'VE BEEN INSIDE.

I'VE SEEN ALL OF IT. I KNOW THE HISTORY.

WE'VE TALKED TO THE OWNERS. WE KNOW WHAT THEY PLAN TO DO.

I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH THE PROJECT.

I JUST WROTE DOWN A COUPLE NOTES THAT'LL TAKE ME LESS THAN A MINUTE AND THEN I'LL BE OUT OF HERE.

I'M IN SUPPORT OF THE VARIANCE. IN INCONVENIENCE AND COST TO THEMSELVES THEY HAVE CREATED A PLAN THAT ALLOWS THE ADAPTATION OF A HISTORICAL ASSET. THE CHANGE IN SETBACKS IS KEY TO THIS LAND. MOST LANDOWNERS WOULD NOT GO THROUGH THIS DIFFICULT PATHWAY FOR THE SAKE OF PRESERVATION.

IT WOULD BE FAR LESS EXPENSIVE AND DIFFICULT TO TEAR THE PROPERTY DOWN AND START WITH A CLEAN SLATE.

WE ARE LUCKY AS A COMMUNITY TO HAVE SOMEONE COME FORWARD TO BE WILLING TO BE A CARETAKER FOR THIS PROPERTY.

MOST PEOPLE DO NOT WANT VARIANCE FOR FEAR OF A SLIPPERY SLOPE OF PRECEDENCE, AND I AGREE WITH WITH THAT, BUT THIS SITUATION IS TRULY UNIQUE BECAUSE OF THE HISTORY OF THE EXISTING HOUSE AND THE ADJACENCY OF THE PARCEL TO THE RIGHT-OF-WAY.

THE VARIANCE IS ADVANTAGEOUS TO PROPERTY OWNER AND TO THE WHOLE COMMUNITY AND IT IS ADMIRABLE FOR THE PROPERTY OWNERS TO SACRIFICE SPACE IN THEIR FLEW HOME FOR THE SAKE OF PRESERVATION, GIVING UP MODERN CASE SPACE AND AMENITIES FOR A MILLED-AGED CENTURY RANCH HOUSE. I BELIEVE THAT WHETHER OR NOT THE VARIANCE IS GRANTED, THERE WILL BE A LARGE NEW 35-FOOT BUILDING AT 5480 ATLANTIC VIEW. THE CHOICE IS WHETHER TO HAVE ONE HOLDS ONTO ITS HISTORY OR ONE THAT DOESN'T.

THIS IS HISTORY. I THINK THIS IS WORTH PRESERVING. AND I THINK THE VARIANCE SHOULD GO THROUG. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. YES, SIR.

>> MY NAME IS DENNIS CHIPMAN I LIVE AT 5400 ATLANTIC VIEW.

AT YOUR LAST MEETING AND EARLIER TODAY, I BELIEVE THERE WERE SOME ASSERTIONS MADE THAT NEED TO BE CLEARED UP.

WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ARE HOMES, PROPERTIES ADJACENT TO RIGHTS-OF-WAY OR ROADS. REQUIRING A 15-FOOT SETBACK.

NOW, WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT OTHER VARIANCE REQUESTS THAT MAY OR MAY NOT HAVE BEEN APPROVED. IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, THERE IS ONE DEVELOPED ROADWAY DIRECTLY TO THE BEACH.

THERE ARE FIVE ROADS THAT LEAD FROM A A1A SOUTH TO ATLANTIC VIEW THAT IS THE STREET THAT RUNS PARALLEL TO THE BEACH. IN ADDITION, THERE ARE SEVEN UNDEVELOPED COUNTY RIGHTS-OF-WAY LEADING FROM EAST TO WEST WITHIN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD. ALONG THESE ROADS AND RIGHTS-OF-WAY THERE ARE 95 HOMES AND PROPERTIES THAT ARE SUBJECT TO THIS 15-FOOT SETBACK. NONE HAVE BEEN GRANTED A VARIANCE TO THE REQUIRED SETBACK.

A SMALL NUMBER WERE APPROVED BY THE PZA OVER THE LAST COUPLE OF

[01:05:01]

I HAVE A LISTING HERE SHOWING THE ROADS.

THERE ARE FOUR DEVELOPED WALKWAYS TO THE BEACH MAINTAINED BY THE COUNTY, YOU KNOW, WOODEN STRUCTURES LEADING ACROSS THE DUNES TO THE BEACH. THERE IS ONE ROAD, MATANZAS AVENUE, A ROADWAY ACCESS TO THE BEACH.

AND AT LEAST SEVEN OTHERS WHERE THE RIGHT-OF-WAY HAS PATHWAYS TO THE BEACH. AND THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT. NOTHING HAS BEEN GRANTED IN THE PAST. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU, SIR. YES, SIR.

>> MY NAME IS JOHN I'LLER AND MY WIFE FONDA AND I OWN A HOME AT 5548 ATLANTIC VIEW WHICH IS TEN HOUSES SOUTH OF THE PROPERTY IN QUESTION. WE'RE EXPRESSING OUR OPPOSITION TO THE ZONING VARIANCE CURRENTLY UNDER CONSIDERATION FOR THIS PROPERTY AT 5480. OUR HOUSE, HOME IS ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE CURRENTLY UNUSED COUNTY RIGHT-OF-WAY TO THE BEACH. WHEN WE PURCHASED THE HOME IN 1989, WE FOUND THAT BECAUSE OF THE CODES HAD NOT BEEN SO STRICT, THE EXISTING COTTAGE THERE WAS PLACED INCORRECTLY AND IT WAS ONLY 8 FEET, THE SETBACK WAS ONLY 8 FEET.

IN 2014, WE DECIDED WE'D LIKE TO BUILD A LARGER HOME THERE, AND SO WE WANTED TO BUILD A TWO-STORY HOUSE,Y SO WE REQUESTED A VARIANCE, ONE THAT WAS ACTUALLY REFERRED TO EARLIER, 2014-11, TO ALLOW THE NORTH WALL OF OUR NEW HOME TO BE 8 FEET, THE SAME AS THE OLD HOME WE WERE TRYING TO REPLACE, BUT THIS VARIANCE WAS DENIED BY THE BOARD, AND I THINK IT WAS STATED THAT THAT WAS A 6-0 VOTE. IN PART IT WAS DENIED DUTY OBJECTION OF ALL THE NEIGHBORS ON THE OTHER SIDE OF ATLANTIC VIEW ON THE WEST SIDE AND ALONG PELICAN WAY THAT THEY DIDN'T WANT THEIR VIEW OF THE BEACH ALONG THE WALKWAY THERE BLOCKED, AND THEY DIDN'T WANT TO SET A PRECEDENT SUCH THAT THIS WOULD BE ALLOWED. WE THEN WERE FORCED TO, BUT WE WERE HAPPY SINCE WE HAD LOST OUR VARIANCE, TO BUILD A VERY COMFORTABLE 2900 SQUARE FOOT HOME, WHICH IS ON 27 FEET WIDE ON THE 50-FOOT LOT. 15-FOOT SETBACK ONE SIDE, 8 FEET ON THE OTHER. WE ARE BEING REQUESTED IN THIS VARIANCE TODAY THAT THERE'S A 3-FOOT SETBACK, AND UNLESS THINGS ARE MODIFIED, AND THAT CLEARLY IS MUCH LESS THAN THE 1.

AND THEN AS WE HAVE SEEN FROM THE PICTURES THERE WOULD BE TWO ADDITIONAL STORIES ON TOP OF THE EXISTING HISTORIC STRUCTURE, AND THAT SHOULD DEFINITELY BLOCK THE VIEW OF THE BEACH FOR THE NEIGHBORS WHO ARE ON THE WEST SIDE OF THE ATLANTIC VIEW AND PELICAN WAY. SO IF OUR VARIANCE WHICH WAS QUHD TO ONLY BUILD A TWO-STORY HOME, 8 FEET WAS DENIED, I DON'T SEE THAT WE SHOULD ALLOW THIS ONE THAT'S A THREE-STORY HOME WHERE IT'S GOING TO BE UP THREE STORIES ONLY 3 FEET AWAY.

IF YOU GRANT A VARIANCE, IT CERTAINLY SHOULD BE WITH THE CONSIDERATION AND IT'S STATED THAT, IN FACT, IT'S NOT GOING TO BE THIS 3-FOOT SETBACK OR 5-FOOT SETD-BACK.

IT'S GOING TO BE THE FULL 15 FEET.

SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR CONSIDERATION.

>> THANK YOU. >> MY NAME IS JANIS JOHNSON.

LIVE AT A 5467 ATLANTIC VIEW. I AM IMMEDIATELY NORTH OF THE RIGHT-OF-WAY OF THE ACCESS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.

AND WHEN I PURCHASED MY HOME IN AUGUST, I DID MY DUE DILIGENCE.

I KNEW WHAT THE SETBACKS WERE IN THE COMMUNITY.

I WAS COMFORTABLE WITH THE FACT THAT A HOME WOULD BE BUILT ACROSS THE STREET THAT WOULD CONFORM TOTE COUNTY SETBACKS, A 15-FOOT SETBACK OFF THAT EASEMENT.

I RECOGNIZED THAT THERE WAS A HOME THERE.

IT APPEARED TO BE OLD AND IN TERRIBLE, TERRIBLE CONDITION, AND I ASSUMED THAT IT WOULD BE TORN DOWN.

IF YOU CHOOSE TO LEAVE THAT HOUSE STAND, THEN AT THE VERY LEAST I ASK YOU TO REQUIRE THAT ANY ADDITIONAL STRUCTURE BE BUILT 15 FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE.

WE'VE BEEN TOLD BY AN ENGINEER THAT IT CAN BE DONE.

WE HOPE THAT YOU WILL MAKE A DECISION TO SUPPORT THE NEIGHBORHOOD, TO SUPPORT YOUR RULES, AND TO CONTINUE TO REQUIRE THE 15-FOOT SETBACK. THE OWNER HAS SAID IT IS NOT HIS INTENTION TO DO THINGS. WE ALL KNOW OUR INTENTION CHANGE. WE DON'T KNOW WHAT HE WILL DO ONCE YOU GRANT THAT VARIANCE. WE PLEAD WITH YOU TO KEEP OUR

[01:10:05]

IT WAS A VERY, VERY WELL-DEVELOPED COMMUNITY.

WE HAVE 25, 27-FOOT HOMES ON 50-FOOT LOTS.

WE HAVE ACCESS TO THE BEACH. WE HAVE VIEWS TO THE BEACH.

THAT'S WHY WE PURCHASED THE NEIGHBORHOOD -- IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. IT'S WHAT GIVES OUR HOMES VALUE.

WE ASK YOU NOT TO TAKE AWAY THAT VALUE BECAUSE EVERY FOOT THAT YOU GIVE AWAY TO SOMEONE ELSE, YOU TAKE AWAY FROM US.

ME VERY PARTICULARLY. IF YOU HOLD YOUR HANDS TO THE SIDE OF YOUR HEAD AND IMAGINE THAT YOUR VIEW IS RIGHT THERE, AND THEN I COME OVER AND SAY, OOPS, GOING TO BE RIGHT THERE, DO YOU SEE THE DIFFERENCE? IT'S HUGE.

15 FEET SETBACKS ARE THE NORM, ARE THE EXPECTED IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, AND WE PLEAD WITH YOU TO MAINTAIN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. MAINTAIN OUR COMMUNITIES AND MAINTAIN OUR VIEWS. DO NOT TAKE AWAY A SINGLE FOOT FROM ME TO GIVE TO MY NEIGHBOR. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME, AND I ASK YOU TO PLEASE DENY THIS VARIANCE.

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

YES, MA'AM. >> MY NAME IS MARSHA LA COVICH I LIVE AT 5242 ATLANTIC VIEW, SEVERAL HOUSES NORTH OF THIS PROPERTY. MY ON STATEMENT IS THAT I THINK WE'RE FIGHTING FOR OUR NEIGHBORHOOD HERE IN MANY WAYS.

THIS IS ONLY ONE OF MANY WAZ WE ARE FIGHTING TO KEEP OUR NEIGHBORHOOD A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD.

I THINK ZONING PROTECTS EVERYBODY AND PREVENTS CHAOS, AND I THINK WE NEED TO ADHERE TO THE PRESENT ZONING CODE.

I'M VERY ENCOURAGED TO HEAR HERE TODAY -- I'M GLAD I CAME BECAUSE SEEMS TO ME PEOPLE ARE WORKING HARD TO COME UP WITH ALTERNATIVES TO THIS 15-FOOT SETBACK.

I'M VERY HAPPY ABOUT THE MARTIN LUTHER KING HOME.

I THINK THAT THAT'S FINE. BUT I THINK WE OUGHT TO FIND WAYS TO STAY WITHIN THE ZONE AND KEEP EVERYBODY ON A LEVEL PLAYING FIELD. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. YES, SIR.

>> YES, MY NAME IS JOSEPH MARK. I LIVE AT 548 WHY HAVE ATLANTIC VIEW. I AM DIRECTLY BEHIND THE HOUSE IN QUESTION. I'M HERE TO VOICE MY OPPOSITION TO THE ZONING VARIANCE. WHEN THIS COMMUNITY WAS CREATED, THE DEVELOPMENT PLAN PURPOSELY INCLUDED OPEN SPACE ABOUT EVERY SIX LOTS, AND YOU'VE SEEN THAT IN SOME OF THOSE OVERHEAD PICTURES THERE. THIS COMMUNITY -- THIS COMMUNITY SPACE BETWEEN HOMES ALLOWED FOR BOTH BEACH ACCESS AND THE ENJOYMENT OF SCENIC VIEWS. THESE PUBLIC SPACES ENHANCE THE CHARACTERISTIC NEIGHBORHOOD, REDUCTION IN BUILDINGS SETBACK WOULD HAVE A NEGATIVE IMPACT ON THE NEIGHBORHOOD AND ENCOURAGE OTHER INVESTORS TO ASK FOR VARIANCES AS WELL.

THE MAIN REASON GIVEN FOR THIS REQUEST IS TO MAINE THE HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE OF THE PLOT. WE'VE HEARD THAT ALL DAY TODAY AND LAST TIME. THE REMAINING HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE OF THE PROPERTY REALLY ONLY EXISTS BECAUSE AMAZINGLY THE EXISTING STRUCTURE IS STILL INTACT, THAT IT SURVIVED THIS LONG IS PRETTY IMPRESSIVE, BUT THAT'S REALLY WHERE THE HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE COMES FROM.

THIS ALLOWS THE PUBLIC TO GAIN A PERSPECTIVE THAT A BOOK OR MAGAZINE CANNOT. IF THE SOLE PURPOSE FOR VARIANCE IS TRULY TO PRESERVE HISTORY, THEN THE EXISTING STRUCTURE SHOULD REMAIN AS-IS. HOWEVER, THIS IS NOT WHAT IS PROPOSED. THE THE PROPOSED RENOVATION WOULD CREATE A MANSION BIDE EARN MOST OTHER HOUSES IN NEIGHBORHOOD WITH NO RESEMBLANCE TO THE ORIGINAL STRUCTURE, AS WAS MENTION BIDE THE ATTORNEY. IT WOULD BE SIMILAR TO ALL THE OTHER HOUSES OAT BLOCK. THE ONLY RACHELLEING FEATURE WOULD BE THE EXTERIOR DOOR AND A COUPLE OF WINDOWS AND MAYBE A SLIVER OF ROOF NOW THAT THEY'RE TRYING TO GIVE UP.

THIS WOULD MOST LIKELY BE REPLACED.

THE ROOF WOULD NEED TO BE REMOVED TO DO THE STRUCTURAL WORK THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT AND EXPOSING THE SPHWEERT TO ELEMENTS. HISTORY TO BY BETTER PROVIDER BY. RELOKING THE ALUMINUM SLIDING DOOR WITH THE BULLET HOLE AND BURNT FLOOR TO A MUSEUM WHERE EVERYONE CAN ENJOY. IN ALLOWED THE ULT ARING HOME WOULD BE INDISTINGUISHABLE FROM ANY OTHERS IN THE NEIGHBORHOODS.

MAKE MOWNESS-NATION. THE GOAL OF THIS VARIANCE IS TO BUILD THE I HAD WOOEST POSSIBLE HOUSE ALLOWED NOT TO PRESERVE HISTORIES. THE IT WILL ALSO CREATE AN ILLEGAL DUPLEX BY GRANDFATHERING IN THE YOU ORIGINAL HOME AND ALLOWING A SECOND DRENS TO BE BUILD ABOVE 37 THIS WOULD GREATLY INCREASE THE NUMBER OF RESIDENTS WITHOUT ADDITIONAL PARKING ON THE PROPERTY. THE ADJACENT RIGHT-OF-WAY WOAND UP BECOMING A DE FACTO PARKING LOT FURTHER DIMINISHING.

THE. PROPERTY WAS BOUGHT SIX MONTHS AGO WITH NUL KNOWLEDGE OF THE SETBACKS.

THE CLAIMING HARDSHIP DOES NOT SEEM JUSTIFICATION FOR DIMINISHING IF VIEWS FOR VISITORS AND RESIDENTS.

IT IS THESE SCENIC VIEWS THAT PEOPLE FREQUENTLY BALK AND BRIEK

[01:15:02]

THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT COLUMNS. THOSE DLUMS, THEY SOWED SHOWED ON FIRST PLAN WOULD EXTEND PAST THE EASEMENT THERE, AND WHY DOES THE BACK DOOR REQUIRE FIVE ADDITIONAL FEET OF SETBACK IF THE COLUMN TBHOBT MIDDLE OF THE DOOR 1 OR 2 FEET AND IT COULD BE SNAWRL? THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>> THANK YOU. YES, MA'AM.

>> SUSAN DOSIER. LIVE A 5480 ATLANTIC STREW.

DAVID HALEY HAD PLANNED TO SPEAK TO YOU TODAY.

REGRETFULLY HE COULD NOT BE HERE.

HE ASKED ME TO RELAY HIS STATEMENTS TO YOU.

I READ THIS FROM MR. HALEY. QUO I AM A FULL-TIME RESIDENT AT 5430 ATLANTIC VIEW. I OPPOSE APPROVAL OF THIS REQUESTED VARIANCE BASED ON LACK OF PRECEDENT OR PROVEN HARDSHIP.

THERE HAS NEVER BEN A SETBACK VARIANCE GRANTED FOR ANY OCEANFRONT LOT ON ATLANTIC VIEW AND THEREFORE NO PRECEDENT FOR APPROVAL. ALSO, AS IT RELATES TO PRECEDENT, IF IT'S BEEN STATED THAT THE APPLICANT PLANS TO USE THE PROPOSED NEW CONSTRUCTION SOLELY AS HIS PERSONAL FAMILY RESIDENCE AND DOES NOT INTEND TO OFFER A RENTAL UNIT AS A PART OF HIS PROPOSED HOME. PERHAPS NO ONE CAN DISCERN ANOTHER PERSON'S INTENTIONS, BUT WE CAN LOOK AT A PRECEDENT CREATED BY THE APPLICANT'S PAST ACTIVITIES.

AT HIS CURRENT HOME ON PELICAN WAY, SR 3 ZONING, IN MAY 2018 I RENTED THE APPLICANT'S ONE-BEDROOM EFFICIENCY APARTMENT LOCATED ON THE GROUND FLOOR OF HIS CURRENT RESIDENCE HOME ON PELICAN WAY. THE RENTAL UNIT PROVIDED SEPARATE ENTRANCE WAY, PRIVACY, SEPARATE FROM THE UPSTAIRS LIVING AREA. I RENTED THIS UNIT PRIOR TO PURCHASE OF MY CURRENT HOME ON ATLANTIC VIEW.

I TBRI THIS BRING THIS TO YOR INTENTION BECAUSE IT IS A PRESS DENY SET BY THE APPLICANT THAT IS IN CONTRADICTION TO DISCUSSION OF THE APPLICANT'S INTENT TO NOT OFFER RENTAL FACILITIES IN HIS PROPOSED FUTURE HOME ON ATLANTIC VIEW.

AS YOU MAKE YOUR DECISION ON WHETHER TO GRANT THIS VARIANCE REQUEST, PLEASE CONSIDER THE OLD ADAGE, THE ROAD TO HELL IS PAVED WITH GOOD INTENTIONS. WE SHOULD NOT ALLOW THIS VARIANCE REQUEST TO BE A FUTURE STEPPING STONE ON THAT PATH.

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

YES, SIR. >> MIKE MADDINGLY 5495 PELICAN WAY. IT'S NICE TO SEE EVERYBODY EVER EVERYONE AGAIN AND THANK YOU FOR TAKING THE TIME TO LISTEN TO OUR CONCERNS. DURING THE LAST MEETING AND TODAY, DR. HILSENBECK AND SEVERAL OTHER BOARD MEMBERS ASKED THE ABOUT PLANS FOR SHORT-TERM PRENLTS REGENTS.

MR. WHITED ALLOWS DID NOT ADDRESS YOUR QUESTIONS DIRECTLY.

FOR THE RECORD, THE APPLICANT IS WHAT IS REFERRED TO AS A SUPER HOST ON AIRBNB. HE HOSTS 34 SHORT-TERM RENTALS AND PROPERTIES IN ST. AUGUSTINE. I ASSUME THAT THIS IS HIS CAREER. THE HOME HE LIVES IN HAS A CONVERTED FIRST FLOOR WHICH SERVES AS A SEPARATE RENTAL WHILE HIS FAMILY LIVES UPSTAIRS. WHY DOES THIS BACKGROUND MATTER IN A ZONING VARIANCE? IT SHOWS HIS INTENT.

THERE IS NO HARDSHIP. IT IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR THE APPLICANT. IF THIS VARIANCE IS APPROVED, THE APPLICANT WILL THEORETICALLY HAVE TWO SEPARATE HOMES ON ONE NARROW LOT. THEY'VE ALREADY TOLD US DURING THE LAST MEETING SOMEWHAT TODAY, THAT THE HOMES WILL HAVE TOTALLY SEPARATE ENTRANCES AND BE INDEPENDENT OF ONE ANOTHER.

THIS MEANS TWO MORE POSSIBLE RENTALS TO HIS PORTFOLIO.

HE'S DOING IT NOW IN A SINGLE FAMILY HOME AND WILL DO IT HERE TOO. DURING THE LAST MEETING, MR. WHITEHOUSE STATED ENGINEERS 4 INFORMED HIS CLIENTS THAT IT WOULD BE IMPOSSIBLE TO BUILD THEIR PROJECT WITHOUT A VARIANCE, I WAS ASTOUNDED. I'VE WORKED CLOSELY WITH STRUCTURAL ENGINEERS MY ADULT LIFE WITH A NUMBER OF COMPLICATED PROJECTS AND HAVE NEVER HEARD AN ENGINEER MAKE A STATEMENT LIKE THAT. ENGINEERS WORK WITHIN THE PARAMETERS THEY ARE GIVEN. THEY ARE PROBLEM SOLVERS.

WHAT EXACTLY DO THEY PLAN ON BUILDING? I WAS ASTOUNDED THAT THEY WEREN'T PREPARED WITH ANY LANCE NS PLA PLANS WUG DRAWINGS, STWRG SMG TO GIVE US A VISUAL.

WITHOUT PLANS WE CAN ONLY ON ASSUME THEY WANT A LARGER HOME

[01:20:02]

PLEASE REMEMBER THE MOST IMPORTANT PARTICIPANT YOUR DECISION IS NOT TO PRESERVE THE MLK HOUSE OR NOT.

IT'S NOT THAT SIMPLE. THERE'S NOTHING OSMG STOAPG HEM FROM DEMOLISHING THIS HOME WHETHER THE VARIANCE IS GRANTED OR NOT. IF THE APPLICANT IS SO CONCERNED ABOUT PRESERVING THIS HOUSE, THEN IT'S SIMPLE TO DO.

NO VARIANCE, NO ATTORNEY NEEDED TO DO THAT.

PLEASE CONSIDER THE INTENT OF THE APPLICANT AND VOTE NO ON THIS VARIANCE REQUEST. THANK YOU.

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

>> MY NAME IS EXRIS TEEN DWYER, 5477 PELICAN WAY.

I'M THE OWNER, HOMESTEADED OWNER SINCE 2011.

MY HUSBAND AND I FOR THE RECORD MAINTAIN THAT BLUE PATH TO THE OCEAN AND WE MAINTAIN THE GREEN PATH DIRECTLY BEHIND IT AT OUR OWN EXPENSE IN PARTNERSHIP WITH THE COUNTY PARKS DEPARTMENT. THAT'S BEEN GOING ON SINCE THE LAST THREE YEARS. WE HAVE RECLAIMED THAT PROPERTY FOR OUR NEIGHBORHOOD AS TRUE PHILANTHROPISTS.

THERE'S NO COUNTY SIGN IDENTIFYING IT BECAUSE THE OWNERS OF THE HOUSE DIRECTLY NORTH OF IT STOLE THE SIGN AND CONFISCATED IT. THEY LIVE AT 54 -- 5466 ATLANTIC VIEW. WE HAVE PICTURES OF WHEN THEY TOOK THAT SIGN. THE LEGAL OWNER OF 5480 ATLANTIC VIEW IS KATRINAO HOLDING LLC. AND THE SOLE REGISTERED AGENT IS DAVID MANUKA. PATRICIA IS NOT A REGISTERED AGENT. THIS HOME IS OWNED BY AN LLC.

THIS IS A PHOTO FROM SUNBIZ. IT'S A SMALL SAMPLE OF HIS VACATION RENTAL UNITS. THE PROPERTY WAS BUILT IN 1957 AND SAMED NEGLECTED FOR DECADES. IT'S IN THE ON A A REGISTERED HISTORICAL LANDMARK. S AT A WAS THE TARGETED OF HORRIFIC VOIDGESZ IN 1964 BUT MARTIN MARTIN LUTHER KING NEVER STAYED THERE.

IT IS ONE THING TO RESPECT AND EXALT THE LIFE OF MLK, QUITE ANOTHER TO EXPLOIT HIS MEMORY FOR THE SOLE BENEFIT OF AN LLC.

THE MANUTEYS PUBLICALLY CLAIM THEY ARE FOCUSED ON PRESERVATION. WE ARE, TOO, BUT THEIR ACTIONS SPEAK LOUDER THAN THEIR WORDS. THEY SEEK PUBLIC LAND TO BUILD A VACATION RENTAL DUPLEX, CULTURALLY APPROPRIATING AND CASHING IN ON THE MEMORY OF ONE OF THE MORE GLOBALLY RECOGNIZED AND RESPECTED CIVIL RIGHTS ADVOCATES.

THIS IS NOT PRESERVATION. THEY ARE VIRTUE SIGNALINGS FOR THEIR PERSONAL AGENDA, PAN DERG TO THE BLACK COMMUNITY, VIA MEDIA PUBLICITY THAT IS FREE. THERE IS NOTHING PHILANTHROPIC ABOUT THIS. DAVID AND MAWSHT RESLIDE A 5313 PELICAN WAY. THIS ARTICL SAYS THEY ARE IN VIOLATION OF HOMESTEAD REGULATIONS AND LISTED BY EDDIE KRAMER FOR HOMESTEAD FRAUD. NEXT WE HAVE PHOTOS FROM THEIR AIRBNB LISTING IN THEIR CURRENTLY HOMESTEADED HOUSE.

THIS IS A DUPLEX, NEONOT A SINGLE-FAMILY HOME, AS IS LISTED ON THE COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISAL SITE.

THE MAN YOU THEYS LIVE IN THE SECOND AND THIRD PROCEDURES FLOORS WITH A PRIVATE ENTRANCE AND FULL KITCHEN.

PELICAN BEACH -- PELL CAM APARTMENT BEACH RETREAT HAS A SEPARATE ENTRANCE AND A SECOND FULL KITCHEN.

THAT'S NOT ALTRUISTIC. THAT IS GRATUITIES LICK PUNITIVE OF THIS COMMUNITY. THEY HAVE NO INTEREST IN PRESERVATION AND ARE INTENTIONALLY MISLEADING THIS BOARD. I IS YOU GO YOU PUT THEM UNDER OATH AND GET SOME STRAIGHT ANSWERS.

THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT. IS THERE ANYONE ELSAL FROM THE PUBLIC HERE TO SPEAK? YES, SIR.

>> I'M SORRY, MA'AM. YOU WERE GOING TO SPEAK ALSO?

>> YES. SORRY.

GOOD AFTERNOON. LET ME EMPHASIZE --

>> NAME AND ADDRESS NORT RECORD. >>> DONNA HOLLIS 5495 ATLANTIC VIEW. LET ME EMPHASIZE WE ARE A SINGLE-FAMILY DEVELOPED NEIGHBORHOOD.

NOT A MULTI-FAMILY. IT IS QUESTIONABLE WITH THEIR OWN RESIDENCE THAT THEY LIVE IN RIGHT NOW AS TO THEIR UNDERSTANDING THAT ORDINANCES SET FORTH IN A SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY. I CHECKED WITH THEIR AIRBNB

[01:25:02]

THEY NOT ONLY HAVE A FULL KITCHEN IN THE UNIT BUT ALSO A SEPARATE WASHER AND DRYER FOR THE EFFICIENCY.

CHECKING THE RECORDS, I DID NOT SEE AN ELECTRICAL PERMIT FOR THESE IMPROVEMENTS, SO I QUESTION THE VALIDITY OF THE IMPROVEMENTS MADE. AFTER PUTTING IN A SECOND KITCHEN FOR THIS EFFICIENCY, AIRBNB, ONE WOULD THINK THAT A NEW PERMIT WOULD BE REQUIRED TO ADD THIS ADDITIONAL ELECTRICAL WATTAGE WITH THE SECOND KITCHEN AS WELL AS THE SECOND WASHER AND DRYER. IDN.

AGAIN, I STRESS THAT WE ARE A SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY. THIS FAMILY IS ALREADY IN NONCOMPLIANCE OF OUR COUNTY'S ORDINANCES FOR OUR COMMUNITY AND USING THEIR PERSONAL HOME AND BUILDING OUT A SEPARATE RESIDENCE TO OPERATE AN AIRBNB. THERE ARE SEPARATE ENTRANCES WHICH MAKES IT A MULTI-FAMILY DWELLING IN A SINGLE-FAMILY COMMUNITY. WE LIVED WITH ENOUGH SINGLE-FAMILY AIRBNBS AS IT IS. WHEN WE ALLOW MORE PEOPLE TO CIRCUMVENT THE RULES AND LIVING AMONGST THE BURDEN THAT WE LIVE WITH DAILY, IT'S JUST NOT RIGHT. IF YOU GIVE THIS FAMILY A VARIANCE, THEY TOLD THE FORMER OWNER, NANCY FORTIER, THAT THEY PLANNED ON BUILDING UP AND AROUND THE EXISTING STRUCTURE AND DOING A HISTORICAL AIRBNB ON THE MARTIN LUTHER KING PART OF THE PROPERTY. AFTER READING THE ABC ARTICLE THAT THE FAMILY DID, THEY WERE SUPPOSEDLY GOING TO RESTORE THE HOME. RESTORING THE HOME BY BUILDINGS UP AND AROUND IS NOT RESTORING IT.

IF THEY REALLY WANT TO RESTORE IT, RESTORE IT.

DON'T -- THEY'RE RUINING IT. ANYHOW, NANCY FORTIERE, THE FORMER OWNER, HAD ALSO TOLD ME SHE HAD MANY OFFERS WHERE PEOPLE WERE GOING TO ACTUALLY KEEP AT THIS TIME SAME, FIX IT UP AND POSSIBLY BUILD A KITCHEN AND BATHROOM IN BETWEEN THE GARAGE AND THE STRUCTURE AND THEN IN THE BACK THEY HAD ENOUGH ROOM TO BUILD OTHER ROOMS. BUT THE THING IS THERE WAS NO VARIANCES REQUIRED FOR DOING SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

THEY WEREN'T ACTUALLY MOVING ANYTHING.

BUT MY FEAR IS YOU'RE GOING TO OKAY THIS VARIANCE, AND IN THE END THEY TEAR IT DOWN AND BUILD THEIR MEGA 42-FOOT WIDE MEGA MANSION. THESE RULES WERE PUT IN PLACE FOR A REASON. ONCE ALLOW A VARIANCE FOR ONE PERSON, IT SETS A PRECEDENT THAT WILL FOREVER CHANGE OUR COMMUNITY'S PLANNED DEVELOPMENT. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. YES, SIR.

>> CHARLES BLAN BALONEY 5530 ATLANTIC VIEW.

I'M PROBABLY THE END OF THE LOCAL COMMENTERS ON THIS PROJEC PROJECT. WE STARTED BY TALKING ABOUT SOME OF THE STRUCTURAL ISSUES THAT WERE RELATED TO THIS HOUSE, AND WE'RE GLAD TO SEE THAT WE DO NOT HAVE DWIEWLING ENGINEERS.

NOW EVERYBODY IS IN AGREEMENT THAT IN FACT A HOUSE CAN BE BUILT OVER THE EXISTING HOUSE, WHETHER IT BE A 3 FEET, 5 FEET, 15 FEET OR 20 FEET. AND WHEN MR. DI PASQUALE SPOKE TO THE FACULTY HE DID IT AT 15 FEET, NO VARIANCES, NOTHING UNIQUE REQUIRED, AND HE DID IT TWO DECADES AGO AND EVERYTHING'S BEEN FINE SINCE THEN. WE TALKED ABOUT VARIANCE HISTORY, AND I MARVEL AT THE FACT THAT THERE IS ANY CONTROVERSY OVER THAT BECAUSE FRANKLY DURING THESE SPECIAL LOTS THAT HAVE THE SETBACKS PLOTTED OR PLATTED -- I'M NOT SURE OF THE CORRECT TERM -- AROUND 100 YEARS AGO HAVE NOT HAD ANY VARIANCES AFFECT THOSE SETBACKS SINCE THEN.

AND IT'S FOR A REGION, AND R, AND WE TALKED ABOUT THAT, AND THE REASON IS FOR THE VIEWS THAT THE PEOPLE WHO ARE THAT ARE NOT FORTUNATE ENOUGH TO BE ON THE OCEAN FRONT ARE SACROSANCT AND THEY GET AN OPPORTUNITY THROUGH THOSE BLUE SPACES AND THROUGH THOSE GREEN SPACES, AND WE HAVE NEVER, EVER APPROVED THE OPPORTUNITY ANYBODY WANTED SELFISHLY WOULD WANT TO HAVE A HOME BUILT INTO THAT WHICH WOULD TAKE AWAY FROM THE VALUES OF THE HOMES THAT ARE IN THE REAR. ONE OF THE -- WUFN YOU RAISED IN THE FIRST ANY HARDSHIP IN THIS . WELL, THERE REALLY AREN'T ANY HARDSHIPS FOR THE EXISTING APPLICANT.

ALL THE HARDSHIPS EXIST WITH THE PEOPLE WHO ARE BEHIND HIM.

THEY'RE THE ONES WHOSE VIEWERS OBSTRUCTED.

THEY'RE THE ONES WHOSE LIFESTYLES ARE CHANGED.

AND THEIR THE ONES WHOSE PROPERTY VALUES DECLINE.

WHETHER YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT 3 FEET, 10 FEET OR 15 FEET.

EVEN AT 15 FEET IT'S GOING TO BE LESS THAN WHAT THEY'VE GOT RIGHT NOW, BUT HAT LEAST THAT'S WITHIN THE CODE.

AND WE'VE TALKED OFF AND ON NEAR THE END OF OUR PRESENTATIONS ABOUT INTENT WE DON'T WANT TO GO THAT WAY

[01:30:06]

INTERESTINGLY ENOUGH, ALL THE ONES THAT WE HAVE DISCOVERED THUS FAR DO RERATE TO THE SHORT-TERM RENTAL INDUSTRY.

THIS IS A SEPARATE ISSUE, ONE WHICH WE ARE GOING TO PURSUE VIGOROUSLY BECAUSE THAT NOT IN THE ZONING COMPLIANCE OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD, SO WE'LL BE BACK WITH YOU ON OTHER ISSUES.

IN CONCLUSION, ANY KIND OF A CHERNOBYL LIKE SARCOPHAGUS THAT IS BUILT OVER THIS HOUSE ABOUT CAUSE A DIMINUTION OF THE VALUE FOR HISTORICAL PURPOSES. THANK YOU FOR LISTENING TO US.

>> THAT'S ALL OUR CARDS. VICE CHAIR.

OKAY. WE ARE READY FOR REBUTTAL FROM THE APPLICANT. BEFORE WE GET THAT, I JUST WANT TO THANK EVERYBODY WHO CAME OUT TODAY TO SPEAK AND THANK YOU ALSOAL FOR THOSE WHO CAME LAST TIME AND TODAY.

I APPRECIATE YOUR PARTICIPATION AND INPUT AND WE'LL GO FROM HERE. MR. WHITEHOUSE.

>> THANK YOU, MR. CHAIR. WE'RE NOT HERE TO PRESENT A CHERNOBYL-LIKE SARCOPHAGUS TO GO OVER THIS HOUSE.

THIS CHAMBER AND EVERY PUBLIC CHAMBER HAVE NEVER BEEN VOID OF CONTROVERSY ADD HOM NUMB ATTACKS THAT HAVE NOTHING TO DO WITH THE APPLICATION. SO I WANT TO BRING IT BACK TO THE FACTS OF WHAT WE'RE ACTUALLY ASKING FOR HERE.

WE'RE ASKING FOR A VARIANCE, A VARIANCE THAT HAS REQUIREMENTS WITHIN YOUR CODE, A VARIANCE OF WHOSE REQUIREMENTS I'VE LAID OUT FOR YOU NOT ONLY TODAY BUT PREVIOUSLY AT THE PREVIOUS HEARING, SHOWING THAT THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY MEETS THOSE REQUIREMENTS. IT'S INTERESTING TO NOTE THAT YOU DIDN'T HEAR ANYBODY SAY THAT THIS ISN'T HISTORIC PROPERTY.

YOU HEARD PEOPLE SAY THAT IT MIGHT BE A PHOTO OP, BUT YOU DIDN'T HEAR ANYBODY SAY THAT IT'S NOT -- IN FACT, YOU HAVE THE TWO LEADING INCHES IN THE OUR AREA, RESPECT, WELL RESPECTED WITHIN OUR AREA SAYING TO YOU, PLEASE, PLEASE FIND WAY TO HELP TRY TO PRESERVE THIS HOME.

I THINK WE'VE COME BACK TO YOU WITH A PLAN.

YES. CAN YOU DO ANYTHING WITH ENGINEERING IN YES, YOU CAN. WE BUILT GADGET BRIDGE SPANNING LARGE BOITS OF WATERED. YOU CAN DO THINGS WITH ENGINEERING. IF FACT OF THE MATTER IS WE WENT BACK, TALKED TO THEM AND WE HAVE AN ENGINEER ON THE RECORD, EVIDENCE BEFORE YOU SAYING THIS IS PROBABLY THE BEST APPROPRIATE WAY TO DO THIS. YES, PREVIOUSLY DID WE TALK TO ENGINEERING AND THEY SAY THAT THE BEST TWAY TO DO IT WOULD BE TO BUILD AROUND IT? YES, YOU SEE EVEN FROM THE FIRST LETTER WE GOT FROM THE ENGINEER THAT'S THE BEST WAY BECAUSE IT WILL PRESERVE THE STRUCTURE. BUT WE WANTED TO FIND WAY TO MEET THE COMPLAINTS THAT WE HAVE FROM RESIDENTS, AND LET'S JUST TALK FOR A MINUTE ABOUT WHAT WE'RE ASKING A VARIANT CENTER FROM. 6 FNT 01.03E3 OF YOUR CODE.

YOU KNOW WHAT THAT TALKS ABOUT? IT TALKS ABOUT SECOND FRONT YARDS. I HEARD A LOT OF COMMENTS, JUST TREAT THESE PEOPLE LIKE EVERYBODY ELSE IS BEING TREATED.

REALLY? HOW MANY OF THOSE PEOPLE LIVE ON NOAFERL LOTS WHERE THEY HAVE 8-FOOT SETBACKS? IF WE TBLOWPT HOUSE PLANS FROM ALL OF THOSE LOTS I GARN FEE YOU EVERY ONE OF THOSE IS BUILT AT A 8-FOOT SETBACK.

THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS THESE 350E78 ARE ASKING ARE YOU FOR SOME LEEWAY BASED ON FACTS, BASED ON THE FACT THAT THEY MEET THE REQUIREMENTS FOR AIR VARIANCE TO ASK FOR IT TO BE PUT AT 10 FEET, NOT AT 8 FEET, NOT AT 5 FEET, AT 10 FEET FOR THE NEW STRUCTURE. THEY WANT TO BLILD AROUND THIS.

THEY WANT AN INNOVATIVE PLAN. YOUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CALLS FOR FINDING THE WAYS TO USE NOVATO PLANS INNOVATE PLANS TO PRESERVE HIRVEGHT STRUCTURE. THERE IS NO ARGUMENT THIS IS NOT A HIBBERT STRUCTURE THAT SHOULD BE PRESERVED.

EVEN TODAY MY DAUGHTER TELLS ME SHE'S GOING DOWNTOWN.

WHAT ARE YOU GOING DOWNTOWN FOR? IT'S BLACK HISTORY MONTH OR AFRICAN-AMERICAN HISTORY PLONTSDZ.

LENNY FOSTER, WHAT DO YOU WYE THINK WE HAVE A OUT IN OUR OUR ROTUNDED A? THEY HAVE ARTWORK BECAUSE IT'S BLACK HISTORY MONTH. THESE PEOPLE WANT TO DO THE RIGHT THING AND THIS AND THEY DO.

THEY'RE NOT COMING TO ON THEIR KNEES SAYING WE DON'T NEED IT BUT PLEASE GIVE IT TO US. I PUT YOU THAT A LAWYER SAID THEY MEET THAT. THEY MEET THE PERIMETERS ARE THEY GOING TO PLEASE EVERYONE? YOU KNOW WHY WE HAVE 6.0 -- TWO FRONT YARDS? BECAUSE WHEN WE HAVE ROADS, WE

[01:35:02]

THIS IS NEVER GOING TO BE A ROAD.

THE COUNTY WILL COME AND SAY WE'RE NEVER GOING TO DO A ROAD THERE BECAUSE THEIR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SAYS WE NEED TO CHEEP THEM OPEN. THE FACT IS THIS IS AN OPEN RIGHT-OF-WAY. YOU EVER MATANZAS DRIVE TO THE NORTH OF THE BEACH. YOU HAVE OTHER BEACH ACCESS WAYS. SAY IN THE FUTURE THEY WANTED TO DO A BEACH WALK OVER HERE AND AN ACCESS WAY.

THAT'S FINE. THIS DOESN'T INFRINGE ON THAT AT ALL. THIS DOESN'T -- ASKING FOR A FEW EXTRA FEET TO PRESERVE AN HISTORIC STRUCTURE THAT YOUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ASKS YOU TO DO, THIS DOESN'T HINDER VISIBILITY FOR A ROADWAY. THIS MERELY ASKS FOR A WAY TO DEVELOP THIS NAVY HAVE INNOVATE PLAN AND ALSOAL FRY TO MEET THE VOTE. THAT'S ALL THEY'RE ASKING FOR.

AGAIN, I DON'T THINK THERE'S ANY QUESTION THIS IS A HISTORIC STRUCTURE. WE'VE DONE THIS, AND AND I PUT THESE UP LAST TIME. WE'VE DEMINT OUR CITY.

THESE ARE THE STEPS MEDICINE THE OLD MONSON WHERE THE YOU HILTON IS. WE MOVED THE STEPS TO THE BACK SO WE COULD SEE IT. SAME THING WITH THE POOL.

THERE'S A PLAQUE RIGHT BY THE POOL.

THEY DIDN'T LEAVE THE OLD POOL. THEY BUILT A NEW ONE BUT THERE'S A PLAQUE SO WE COULD REMEMBER IT.

AGAIN WITNESS THERE'S PRECEDENT IN THIS.

THIS PARTICULAR INSTANCE, AND I WOULD CERTIFICATE TO YOU, DOES NOT CREATE A PRECEDENT FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

HOW MANY OTHER -- HOW MANY PEOPLE DID YOU SAY WE HAVE A HISTORIC STRUCTURE, WE THRIED TO GET A VARIANCE AND WE DIDN'T GET IT? ZERO.

THIS HISTORIC STRUCTURE THAT THESE PEOPLE, YOU HAVE A WILLING APPLICANT WHO WOULD REALLY LIKE TO MOVE FORWARD IN THIS FASHION AND BUILD AROUND THIS, PRESERVING THAT FACADE.

THEY HAVE COME TO YOU WITH A PLAN THAT I BELIEVE PRESERVES THIS FACADE, AND I JUST WANT TO CONCLUDE WITH MR. NOLAN'S LETTER AS I CONCLUDED LAST TIME, AND I'LL JUST READ THE LAST PART OF IT. AS YOU CONSIDER -- THIS IS DAVID NOELIN' A, NOT ME. AS YOU CONSIDER THE HISTORIC MARTIN LUTHER KING BEACH HOUSE, I HOPE YOU WILL CONSIDER THE VALUE OF IT, NOT JUST IN DOLLAR BUT AS A PART OF OUR GREAT HER KNOWLEDGE OF DEMOCRACY AND FREEDOM.

IT MAY BE THAT YOU NEVER AGAIN HAVE A SIGNIFICANT BUILDINGS BEFORE YOU. PLEASE TREAT IT WITH THE GREAT CARE IT DESERVES TO SEE THAT IT GETS PRESERVED FOR THE FUTURE.

AND AGAIN, I'M NOT TELLING TO YOU GRANT IT BECAUSE DAVID NOLAN, ONE OF THE RESPECTIVE LOCAL HIRNTS SAYS IT.

I'M TELLING TO YOU GRANT IT BECAUSE IT MEETS THE CODE, NUMBER ONE. AND NUMBER TWO YOUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CALLS FOR A YOU TO DO THIS KIND OF THING.

SO AGAIN, I'M HERE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS, AND, YOU KNOW, WE CAN CRAFT THE LANGUAGE HOWEVER IT IS IF THERE'S A MAJORITY THAT WOULD LIKE TO GRANT THIS. THANK YOU.

>> BEFORE WE HAVE QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT, I WANT TO BE SURE THAT WE UP HERE JUST ASK QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT AND GET HIS ANSWERS, AND THEN IF WE WANT TO HAVE A DISCUSSION OR ASK QUESTIONS OF STAFF, LET'S DO IT WHEN WE'RE DONE WITH THE APPLICANT, PLEASE. MR. MILLER, YOU GO FIRST.

>> AGAIN, JUST TO CLARIFY, THE APPLICATION WAS ORIGINALLY FOR H IS THE REQUIREMENT. NOW YOU'RE ASKING FOR 10 FEET IN

LIEU OF 15 FEET? >> SO FOR --

>> AND BUT ALSO TO KEEP THE EXISTING ENCROACHMENT OF THE

EXISTING HOUSE, WHICH IS 5.7. >> SO FOR CLARIFICATION, AND I THINK THE REASON WE HAVE THIS IS BECAUSE WE WENT BACK AND WE WORKED IT TO TRY TO MEET THE INTENT AND THE CONCERNS OF SOME OF THE AGENCY MEMBERS AS WELL AS THE COMMUNITY, AND I THINK PART OF IT IS THE WAY THE CODE IS, IS THAT IF YOU -- IF YOU WORK OH A HOUSE, AND THIS IS INNOVATE SO IT'S NEW, BUT WHEN YOU WORK OH A HOUSE AND WE'RE TRYING TO COMBINE THE TWO STRUCTURES.

THEY'RE CONSIDERED IN THE BUILDING CODE AS BEING THE SAME STRUCTURE. SO THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS -- AND SINCE WE'RE ADDING TO IT AND YOU'RE DOING MORE THAN 50% 50% K ON IT, THE CURRENT STRUCTURE, THE CURRENT STRUCTURE CAN REMAIN AND CAN REMAIN AT THE INFRINGEMENT IT ALREADY HAS INTO THAT SETBACK. TEAF IS AT APPROXIMATELY -- THE

EAVE IS AT APPROXIMATELY. >> 5.7 FEET.

>> THAT IS THE WALL. SO THE SWALL AT 5.7.

THE EAVE-- >> THE EAVE IS AT 3.7.

>> YES. >> SO YOU'RE ASKING FOR A VARIANCE AS TO THE EXISTING STRUCTURE TO BE -- LET'S JUST SAY 3 FEET TO BE ON THE SAFE SIDE -- BUT AS TO THE ADDITION, TO BE 10 FEET INSTEAD OF 15 FEET.

>> YES, SIR. >> ON THE ISSUE OF HARDSHIP, THE NEIGHBORING PROPERTY IS APPROXIMATELY 50 FEET WIDE, AND

IT IS JUST TO THE NORTH. >> 30.

THE COUNTY PROPERTY. IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE TALKING

ABOUT? >> I'M TALKING ABOUT THE SULL

[01:40:01]

THE IF YOU WERE TO ABIDE BY THE CODE WITH THE 20% REDUCTION FOR THE SECOND FRONT YARD, THAT WOULD MEAN ON THE SOUTH SIDE YOU HAD I DO NOT HAVE AN 8-FOOT SETBACK AND ON THE NORTH SIDE YOU'VE HAD A 15-FOOT WHICH WHO A 50-FOOT WIDE LOT -- SOMEBODYELS HELP ME OUT WITH THE MATH -- A 27-FOOT WIDE HOME.

THE PROPERTY TO THE NORTH WAS ABLE TO BUILD ON THAT, SO IF THE DEFINITION OF HARDSHIP IS ABSENT A HARDSHIP YOU CAN'T BUILD ANYTHING, HOW DO YOU HAVE A HARDSHIP?

>> SO THAT'S NOT THE HARDSHIP WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.

YOU WEREN'T HERE LAST TIME BUT JUST FOR YOUR BENEFIT.

SO WE TALKED ABOUT THARDSHIP AND THAT'S WHY WE TALKED ABOUT THE PRESERVATION OF THE HISTORIC BUILDING.

SO THE HISTORIC BUILDING IS YOU HAVE A BUILDING THERE.

WE WERE BUILDING ON THAT -- ON THAT FOOTPRINT, AND SO THE HARDSHIP WAS WE WANT TO PRESERVE THE BUILDING AND THE WAY THE ENGINEERS HAD EXPLAINED IT BEFORE WAS YOU NEED TO BUILD YOUR SUPPORT WALL AND HAVE YOUR COLUMN NORTH OF THAT SO IT DOESN'T GO OVER THE OTHER BUILDING.

WE WANT BACK AND TALKED TOON ENGINEER AND THAT'S WHY I BROUGHT IT WITH ME TODAY TO SAY, YES, YOU CAN HAVE WAY TO GO OVER THE TOP OF IT BUT IN GOING BACK AND LOOKING AT AND IT ANALYZING IT HAD FROM AN ENGINEERING, OF COURSE, AS YOU KNOW MR. MILLER YOU DO NOT YOU NEED AN ENGIO FIGURE OUT A WAY TO ENGINEER IT

ANYWAY. >> I DON'T KNOW THAT.

>> BUT THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS YOU CAN GET AN ENGINEER.

MY POINT IS SO IS THE THE AS HARDSHIP TO CONTINUE TO PRESERVE THIS, THE WALL THAT GOES INTO IT, WE'RE NOT HERE TO HAVE THE PUBLIC OR ANYBODY REDESIGN HOW SOMEBODY'S COMING TO PRESENT THT FOR THE VARIANCE. IT'S REALLY TO STAY THAT, AND YOU SEE THIS FROM THE -- NOT FROM MY PERSPECTIVE BUT FROM THE ENGINEER'S LETTER TWK THAT THE APPROPRIATE WAY TO DO IT IS PULL IT IN OVER THE HOUSE. DOUBLE TRUSSS OSH WHATEVERY ITS HE SAID. HE CAN DO THAT BUT THE BEST WAY TO DO THAT IS TO DO IT JUST TO THE NORTH OF WHERE THE DWOAR IS.

IF YOU PULL IT BACK TO 15 -- BY THE WAY, YOU CAN SAY, WHY DON'T YOU PULL IT BACK TO 15 OR 17 BUT NOW HOW WIDE IS YOUR HOUSE?

>> SO THE HARDSHIP ISN'T THAT IT'S A CORNER LOT.

THE HARDSHIP IS THAT YOU'RE PRESERVING THE EXISTING

INFRASTRUCTURE. >> YES, SIR.

>> THAN THE BUT COULDN'T YOU DO THAT WITHOUT BUILDING ANY NEW OAT PROPERTY? GLUT POINT IS THEY COULD COME IN AND TEAR THE HOUSE DOWN AND BUILD SOMETHING ELSE.

>> BUT THEN THEY TWO HAVE TO BIDE BY THE CODE.

>> YES, THAT'S FINE, BUT THEN YOU'D LOSE THE INFRASTRUCTURE.

>> SO ISN'T IT A SELF-CREATED HARDSHIP THAT YOU'RE ADDING ONTO THE BUILDING WHEN IF THE HARDSHIP IS PRESERVATION, YOU

COULD JUST NOT DO ANYTHING. >> THE HARDSHIP IS THE FACT THAT YOU HAVE THIS BUILDING ON THE PROPERTY AND WE WANT TO PRESERVE IT. YOU HAVE A CURRENTLY -- WE CAN GO BACK TO DEFINITION OF HARDSHIP.

YOU HAVE A CURRENTLY EXISTING CONDITION OF THE PROPERTY, WHICH IS A HISTORIC BUILDING. CURRENTLY EXISTING.

AND SO THE CURRENTLY EXISTING BUILDINGS CAUSES THE HARDSHIP.

BUILDING AROUND THAT CAN BE, THS ADDITIONAL INFRINGEMENT INTO THE HARDSHIP, BUILDING THAT AROUND THAT BUILDING, CONSUMING THAT IN

THE BUILDING. >> BUT ISN'T THAT SELF-CREATED?

>> THAT THEY WANT TO BUILD AROUND IT?

>> YES. >> YOU'RE GETTING IN A LEGAL

ARGUMENT HERE. >> THE ONLY KIND OF ARGUMENTS I GET INTO. [LAUGHTER]

I APOLOGIZE. >> NO, NO, YOU'RE RIGHT.

AGAIN, I THINK THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS THAT THEIR PRESENTATION IS THEY'RE ASKING TO DO IT THIS WAY BECAUSE WE WENT TO AN ENGINEER AND SHE HAD, THIS IS THE WAY YOU CAN DO IT, AND WE TRIED TO DO IT THE FIRST WAY, AND THERE WAS AN APPETITE TO TRY TO HAVE SOME COMPROMISE TO MEET SOME OF THE CONCERNS OF IT. SO WE CAME BACK AND SAID, CAN WE DO IT HERE? HE SAID, YES, BUT THE BEST WAY TO DO IT IS THE BECAUSE YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE THAT FRONT WALL -- AGAIN, YOU'RE SAYING WE'RE CREATING IT.

WE'RE NOT COMING TO YOU WITH A NEW STRUCTURE AND SAYING, HEY, LISTEN WEEK CAN WE BUILD IT AT 10 FEET, PLEASE, BECAUSE WE'RE ON A CORNER LOT OR BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, THE SAND ON THE SIDE IS HISTORIC? WE'RE COMING BECAUSE WE HAVE A STRUCTURE THAT'S PART OF THE GROUND AND WE HAVE TO BUILD AROUND IT, AND SO -- AND REALLY THAT'S WHY I PRESENT TO YOU YOUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN. THAT'S WHY I PRESENT TO YOU THE LOCAL HISTORIANS. THAT'S WHY I PRESENT TO YOU THE HISTORY. THAT'S WHY I TALKED TO YOU ABOUT BLACK HISTORY MONTH, NOT FOR EMOTION, NOT FOR YOUR CONCERN TO SAY, HEY, LET'S DO THIS, BECAUSE OF HISTORY, BECAUSE YOUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SAYS, PLEASE TRY TO DO THIS.

>> AND I APPRECIATE THAT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

AND THE OTHER MEMBERS FOR ENTERTAINING MY QUESTIONS.

>> DR. HILSENBECK. >> BEFORE I ASK A QUESTION OR TWO, I DO HAVE ANOTHER EX PARTE THAT I HAD FORGOTTEN ABOUT UNTIL KETO BURNS CAME UP. A PRESENTED OF MINE NAMES NAMED GEORGE, A PERSONAL FRIEND OF MINE, DID EMAIL ME THE OTHER DAY URGING ME TO VOTE AGAINST THIS, AND I ANSWERED HIM E CAN I HAVE CLAY. I DIDN'T SAY ONE 1-800-OR THE OTHER BUT DID I COMMUNICATE WITH HIM.

SO LET ME ASK YOU THIS, JAMES===.

IF WYE DO NOT -- I BELIEVE I ASKED IT BEFORE.

I'M NOT SURE I GOT A SUS ASSISTING OR A CONCISE ANSWER.

[01:45:01]

TO TEAR THE HOUSE DOWN? >> WE HAVEN'T HAD THAT DISCUSSION, BUT I WILL TELL YOU THAT IF THE SPRAIRNSES IS GRANTED, IT'S VERY LIKELY THAT THE HOUSE WILL BE TORN DOWN.

>> SO IF THE VARIANCE IS NOT GRANTED, VERY LIKELY --

>> I'M SORRY. IF THE VARIANCE IS NOT GRANTED.

YOU HEARD PEOPLE SAY THAT YOU MIGHT GRANT THE RAINS, AND THEY'RE GOING TO TEAR THE HOUSE DOWN ANYWAY.

THEY CAN TEAR DOWN THE HOUSE TODAY AS LONG AS THEY MEET THE COUNTY CODE, SO I DON'T KNOW THAT THIS IS A EXRGS FOR THIS BOARD. THE BOARD -- I'VE TOLD YOU LEGAL IT DOES AND THEN VOTE. WHETHER IT COULD BE TORN DOWN YEAH, IT COULD BE TORN DOWN AND IT TO BE A TRGD.

>> I AGREE IT WOULD BE A TRAGEDY.

SO THE POWER IS NOT IN OUR HANDSELL RA WHICHEVER WAY WE VOTE. IT'S IN THEIR HANDS AS TO WHETHER IT'S TORN DOWN. OUR VOTE IS NOT GOING TO DETERMINE WHETHER IT'S TORN DOWN.

IT WILL BE THEIR DECISION, NOT OURS.

I AM CONCERNED ABOUT THE TWO KITCHENS.

IS THERE A KITCHEN IN THE CURRENT STRUCTURE?

>> IT'S A HOUSE. THERE'S A KITCHEN THERE.

IT -- I'VE HAD THAT CONVERSATION WITH THE STAFF, AND WE'LL CHANGE IT. WE'LL MEET ALL COUNTY CODES.

>> OKAY. SO IF WE GALLANT THE VARIANCE, THEY BUILD THE NEW HOUSE OVER IT, THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO REMOVE THAT KITCHEN OR EL WAVE TWO KITCHENS IN THE SAME STRUCTURE BASICALLY. RIGHT?

>> THEY JUST HAVE TO REMOVE THE FUNCTIONS THAT MAKE AT A%

DIGITAL. >> LIKE A STOVE.

>> A STOVE. >> THAT'S USUALLY WHAT'S DONE.

>> THAT'S RIGHT. >> OKAY.

WELL, THAT, THEN, DOESN'T PRESERVE IN TOTO THE SIGNIFICANCE OF THE HOUSE, EITHER.

>> OR MAKE IT NON-FUNCTIONING. YOU CAN HAVE IMITATION THINGS IN A HOUSE. THAT'S IT FOR NOW.

>> DR. MCCORMICK. >> .

[INAUDIBLE] >> I WENT BACK LOOKING AT VARIANCES, AND THE REASON WHY I DID THAT WAS, AS YOU KNOW, I NOW LIVE IN OCEAN PALMS, SO I GET OVER TO OCEAN VIEW ON A REGULAR BAITSZ, WHICH I DIDN'T BEFORE, AND I WAS AMAZED BY THE CHANGES AT OCEAN VIEW. YOU'RE RIGHT, THOSE OF YOU THAT SAID THERE'S A LOT OF VACATION RENTALS OVER THERE.

THERE ARE. AND SO THERE'S SO MUCH OF THAT, THE COMPLEXION OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD HAS CHANGED SIGNIFICANTLY. BUT WE'RE NOT GOING BACK TO THOSE PROPERTIES THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN DONE.

WE STILL HAVE TO LOOK AT THAT IN TERMS OF THIS PROPERTY AND OTHER PROPERTIES THAT ARE COMING FORWARD.

THE ISSUE THAT I HAVE WITH THIS RIGHT NOW, JAMES, IS THE INTENT.

THE PREVIOUS SPEAKER, TWO OR THREE SPEAKERS BACK, MENTIONED A SERIES OF PROPERTIES THAT THESE FOLKS OWN AND WHAT THEY'RE DOING WITH THOSE PROPERTIES. MY QUESTION WOULD BE WHY ARE THEY ASKING FOR A THREE-STORY BUILDING HERE INSTEAD OF A TWO-STORY IF -- WHY WOULD THEY NEED A THREE-STORY IF THEY'RE ONLY GOING TO USE IT FOR THEIR OWN HOUSING AND THEN TO PRESERVE THE MARTIN LUTHER KING BUILDING. THAT GETS AGAIN TO INTENT BECAUSE IF YOU WANT TO GO UP THREE STORIES --

>> DR. MCCORMICK, LET HIM ANSWER THE QUESTION, PLEASE.

YOU ASKED A QUESTION. LET HIM ANSWER THE QUESTION,

PLEASE. >> OKAY.

WELL, MY QUESTION IS I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE OWNERS UNDER OATH TELLING US EXACTLY WHAT THEY PLAN TO DO.

>> IS THAT A QUESTION? >> THROUGH THE CHAIR, I'LL JUST RESPOND TO THE FIRST PART OF THAT, AND I'LL SAY MY UNDERSTANDING, AGAIN, IS THAT THEY WANT TO BUILD IT, THE TWO STORIES ABOVE IT ARE THE HOUSE. THEY'RE PRESERVING -- IS THERE GOING TO BE A GARAGE IN FRONT? SCWHRE? DOES THERE SNEED TO BE A STAIRWAY? YES. THE BOTTOM FLOOR IS THE MAJORITY THIS HISTORIC STRUCTURE. THE SECOND AND THIRD FLOOR WILL BE THEIR HOUSE. THAT'S THEIR INTENT.

YOU KNOW, WE CAN HAVE A DISCUSSION AND YOU CAN TALK TO YOUR OWN COUNSEL, BUT WHETHER OR NOT THEY HAVE A BUSINESS WHERE THEY DO SHORT-TERM RENTALS SOMEWHERE ELSE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THIS APPLICATION, ZERO. ANY CONSIDERATION OF THAT OR MENTION OF THAT IN THE CONSIDERATION IS INAPPROPRIATE BECAUSE THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS WE'RE ASKING THAT WHETHER OR NOT A VARIANCE IS APPROPRIATE FOR THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY TO PRESERVE THE MARTIN LUTHER KING BEACH HOUSE, AND THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE. AND AGAIN, WE'VE GONE BACK, YOU KNOW, BASED ON AGENCY DIRECTION, YOU KNOW, AND FOUND A WAY TO DO A MINIMUM INFRINGEMENT. I THINK IT'S A GREAT COMPROMISE.

YOU HAVE PEOPLE WHO ARE WILLING TO PRESERVE IT, AND A MEMBER MAY

[01:50:03]

IT MAY NOT BE UP TO US. IT MAY BE UP TO THE NEXT PERSON.

THE FACT OF THE MATTER IS IT MEETS THE RAINS, CRITERIA AND IT'S AN APPROPRIATE WAY TO PRESERVE THIS PROPERTY AS CALLED BY YOUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, THEN YOU SHOULD STROAT FOR IT.

-- VOTE FOR IT. >> ALL RIGHT.

ARE THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF THE IF NOT, WE'RE BACK INTO THE AGENCY FOR A MOTION. IF Y'ALL DON'T MIND, NORMALLY WE WOULD WAIT FOR SOME DISCUSSION BUT HAVE A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT I WOULD SAY RIGHT NOW BEFORE WE GO INTO A MOTION.

WHEN I READ THE REQUIREMENT FOR A VARIANCE, THE REQUIREMENTS ARE VERY SPECIFIC. IT DOESN'T SAY WE HAVE TO SET A PRECEDENT OR WORRY ABOUT A PRECEDENT.

IT SAYS VARIOUS THINGS. AND THE MOST IMPORTANT ONE HERE I THINK WE NEED TO CONSIDER IS HARDSHIP.

I ALSO WILL SAY THAT THIS OWNER HAS THE RIGHT TO HAVE A B&B ON THIS PROPERTY REGARDLESS. IF IT'S IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE ZONING. THE THIRD THING I'D LIKE TO SAY, AND I'M GOING TO ASK COUNSEL TO OPINE ON THIS, BUT I DON'T THINK IT'S OUR JOB IN TERMS OF DETERMINING A HARDSHIP TO GET INTO AN ARM-WRELG MATCH WHERE WE MIGHT HELP TO COMPLY WITH SOME OTHER ASPECT OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, SUCH AS PRESERVING HISTORICAL STRUCTURES, SO THEREFORE WE'LL GRANT A VARIANCE. I DON'T KNOW THAT THAT NECESSARILY JUSTIFIES A HARDSHIP, IN MY OPINION.

I SUPPOSE IF I WERE TO MAKE A COMPARISON, PERHAPS THE APPLICANT COULD OFFER TO BUILD A BEACH WALKOVER AND WE WOULD GRANT THEM A VARIANCE, BUT THAT AGAIN DOES NOT SATISFY THE REQUIREMENT OF HARDSHIP, IN MY OPINION, AND I'LL ASK COUNSEL

PER OPINION ON THAT. >> THANK YOU.

IN MY OPINION, THE HARDSHIP ISN'T RELATED TO HOW THEY CAN USE THE PROPERTY. UNDER THE EXISTING CODE REQUIREMENTS, IN THIS CASE SETBACK REQUIREMENTS, I THINK THAT IS THE FOCUS OF YOUR ANALYSIS IN THIS CASE.

I BELIEVE THEY RENTALLY PURCHASED THE PROPERTY AS-IS UNDERSTANDING AND KNOWING THAT IT WAS A STRUCTURE OF HISTORICAL

SIGNIFICANCE. >> DR. MCCORMICK, YOU'RE ON THE QUEUE. DR. MCCORMICK.

>> YES. >> YOU PUSHED YOUR BUTTON.

DO YOU HAVE A MOTION? >> I'M PREPARED TO MAKE A

MOTION. >> OKAY.

AND I SEE YOU, DR. HILSENBECK. GO AHEAD.

I'M SORRY. >> MY MOTION IS TO DENY ZONING VARIANCE 2021-TBIEN, 5480 ATLANTIC VIEW, REQUEST FOR A ZONING VARIANCE TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TABLE 6.01 AND SECTION 6.01.03. E.3 TO ALLOW FOR A SECOND FRONT YARD SETBACK OF 3 FEET IN LIEU OF THE 15-FOOT REQUIREMENT IN RESIDENTIAL, SINGLE FAMILY RS-3 ZONING TO BRING THE EXISTING SINGLE-FAMILY HOME INTO COMPLIANCE AND ACCOMMODATED AN ADDITION, SPECIFICALLY LOCATED AT 5480 ATLANTIC VIEW BASED UPON FOUR FINDING OF FACT AS PROVIDED IN THE STAFF REPORT.

>> SO WE HAVE A MOTION TO DENY BY DR. HILSENBECK.

I SEE YOU'RE ON THE QUEUE. IS THAT FOR DISCUSSION?

>> FOR DISCUSSION. >> SO IS THERE A SECOND TO THAT MOTION SO WE CAN MOVE INTO DISCUSSION?

>> SECOND. >> SO WE'VE GOT A SECOND BY MR. PETER. NOW WE'RE MOVING INTO DISCUSSION. DR. HILSENBECK.

>> I HAD A LOT OF DIFFERENT QUESTIONS AND CONCERNS WHEN I HEARD VARIOUS PEOPLE SPEAK, SO I WANT TO TRY TO SET THE RECORD STRAIGHT ON SOME OF THESE, AND I MIGHT -- I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S APPROPRIATE TO ASK SOME OF THE PEOPLE THAT SPOKE TO ANSWER A QUESTION OR NOT, BUT, FOR EXAMPLE, THE SPEAKER WHO WAS DENIED A VARIANCE IN 2014, NUMBER ONE, I WANTED TO KNOW IF THEY DEMONSTRATED A HARDSHIP, NUMBER TWO, IF THEY HAD AN HISTORIC STRUCTURE ON THE PROPERTY, AND NUMBER THREE, DO THEY HAVE A 75-FOOT LOT OR A 50-FOOT LOT.

SO THAT'S FIRST. SO IF SOMEBODY CAN ASK THAT -- ANSWER THAT LATER, IF THEY WISH. THERE HAVE BEEN STATEMENTS THAT NEVER HAS AN OCEAN FRONT HOME VARIANCE BEEN GRANTED IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD. FL WELL, THAT IS INCORRECT BECAUSE WE HAVE A TABLE FROM THE COUNTY WHO DID THE RESEARCH THAT, YES, THERE HAVE BEEN TWO VARIANCES GRANTED IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. ONE DOESN'T APPEAR TO BE A BEACH FRONT HOUSE HOWEVER IT WAS ON SEA OATS LANE, THE OTHER AT 5420

[01:55:01]

SOMEONE STATED THAT THE OWNERS, IF THEY GET THIS, THEY CAN BUILD A 42-FOOT WIDE MEGA MANSION. I DON'T SEE HOW THAT 42 FEET IS GOING TO COME ABOUT ON A 50-FOOT LOT.

THEY'VE ALREADY GOT A SETBACK ON ONE SIDE.

WE'RE NOT CONCERNED WITH THAT OTHER SIDE, SO I DON'T KNOW WHERE THAT NUMBER COMES FROM. PEOPLE HAVE STATED THAT PUBLIC LANDS ARE GOING TO BE APPROPRIATED IF WE APPROVE THIS.

I DON'T SEE WHAT PUBLIC LANDERS GOING TO BE APPROPRIATED.

THAT 30-FOOT NON-OPEN RIGHT-OF-WAY IS GOING TO BE THERE REGARDLESS. THAT 30-FOOT RIGHT-OF-WAY IS NOT BEING END ENCROACHED POON THE HOUSE IS DEFINITELY NOT BEING BUILT INTO THE BLUEWAY. IT DOESN'T ENCROACH ON BLUEWAY NOW AND IT WOULD NOT ENCROACH ON THE BLUEWAY IF WE GRANTED THIS.

A COUPLE OF OTHER THINGS HERE. SOMEBODY STATED THAT THERE ARE PLENTY OF 27-FOOT WIDE HOMES ON 50-FOOT LOTS.

WELL, IF YOU HAVE 15-FOOT VARIANCES ON EACH SIDE, THEN YOU'D HAVE A 57-FOOT WIDE LOT, SO I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT ADDS UP. BUT I DO WANT TO STRESS, EVEN IF THIS WERE GRANTED, THERE'S NO ENCROACHMENT ON THAT 30-FOOT BLUEWAY. AND THEN -- I CAN'T EVEN READ MY OWN WRITING. I ALREADY COVERED THAT POINT.

THANK YOU. >> .

SO THOSE ARE SOME COMMENTS I HAVE YOU JUST TRYING TO SET THE RECORD STRAIGHT. I DO BELIEVE THIS IS AN HISTORIC STRUCTURE, AND I HOPE IT IS NOT TORN DOWN.

I HOPE IT'S PRESERVED. BUT AS I SAID BEFORE, I DON'T THINK OUR VOTE TO GOING TO DETERMINE WHETHER IT'S TORN DOWN OR PRESERVED. IT IS UP TO THE OWNERS ORE FUTURE OWNERS OF THIS PROPERTY. SO I UNDERSTAND THE POINT BEING MADE BY MR. WHITEHOUSE THAT THE LDC CALL FOR NOVE INNOVATIVE REUSE OF PROPERTIES WITH HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE AND I DO BELIEVE THIS HAS HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE.

IS THIS THE BEST INNOVATIVE REUSE IN I DON'T KNOW.

THEY'RE ASKING NOW FOR BASICALLY A 10-FOOT SETBACK.

GRANDFATHER IN THE EXISTING STRUCTURE, WHICH IS 2.7 FEET FROM THE BLUEWAY, UNOPENED RIGHT-OF-WAY.

THE WALL OF THAT EXISTING STRUCTURE IS 5 FEET.

THEY'LL GO ANOTHER 5 FEET SO THEY'LL BE 10 FEET BACK FROM THE BLUEWAY. SO AS A COMPROMISE THEY'RE TRYING TO COME UP WITH 5 FEET DIFFERENCE TO SAVE AN HISTORICAL STRUCTURE OR AN HISTORIC STRUCTURE.

SO THAT'S REALLY HARD FOR ME. I'M REALLY ON THE FENCE ON THIS.

I'VE BEEN BACK AND FORTH WITH EVERY PERSON THAT SPOKE UP HERE TODAY ON WHAT TO DO ABOUT THIS. BUT, YOU KNOW, 5 FEET TO SCEFER, PRESERVE AN HISTORIC STRUCTURE, A DAVID NOLAN SAID, WE'RE NOT GOING TO HAVE THIS KIND OF HISTORIC STRUCTURE BEFORE US TO VOTE ON, BUT I'M STILL AT THIS POINT, RIGHT THIS SECOND, I'M UNDECIDED. I DON'T KNOW HOW I'M GOING TO

VOTE TODAY. >> MS. PERKINS.

[INAUDIBLE] >> CAN YOU CLARIFY WHAT YOU STATED EARLIER? THE PRESERVATION OF THE HOUSE CONSIDERED A HARDSHIP OR NOT? CAN YOU EXPAND ON WHAT YOU SAID.

>> THE HARDSHIP RELATES TO THE BUILDING ENVELOPE ITSELF, WHETHER OR NOT IT'S A HISTORIC PROPERTY.

THEY CAN STILL USE THE PROPERTY WITHOUT THE VARIANCE OR THE HISTORIC PURPOSES, SO I JUST WANTED TO THROW THAT OUT THERE.

I ALSO WANTED TO MENTION THAT IT'S CURRENTLY A GRANDFATHERED STRUCTURE. IT'S NOANT KWON NON-CONFORMI.

THERE ARE RIGHTS UNDER THE CODE TO PERFORM REPAIRS THAT DON'T EXPWEED 15% OF THE STRUCTURAL VALUE ONCE A YEAR, SO THAT THERE IS SOME AUTHORITY TO MAKE SOME IMPROVEMENTS TO THAT PROPERTY.

>> ANYBODY ELSE? LET'S REGISTER THE VOTE.

MR. MILLER. HOLD ON.

>>

>> I'M STILL HAVING A HARD TIME UNDERSTANDING WHAT THE HARDSHIP IS. YOU COULD BUILD SOMETHING HERE ABSENT THE VARIANCE. THERE IS NUMEROUS CASE LAW IN

[02:00:02]

THAT SEEMS TO BEY OF SELF-CREATED HARDSHIP IN APPLY

OPINION. >> THAT WAS MY POINT, MR. MILLER. THIS IS A BARGAINING CHIP HERE.

>> YES. >> SO COULD A DUNE WALKOVER BE A BARGAINING CHIP OR THEY MIGHT PAVE THE RIGHT-OF-WAY, THE 30 FEET BUT I DON'T THINK THAT'S IN OUR PURVIEW.

DR. HILSENBECK. >> YOU KNOW, WE HAVE FOLLOWING THIS TODAY I BELIEVE IT'S ITEMS 3 AND 4 -- LET ME LOOK -- NO, 4 AND 5, EXCUSE ME, EVE ANOTHER VARIANCE COMING UP BRF US TODAY ASKING FOR A FRONT YARD SETBACK, AND I WOULD BE INCLINED TO VOTE FOR THAT ONE. WE HAVEN'T HEARD IT YET BUT I'VE READ THAT MATERIAL OVER A COUPLE OF TIMES.

BUT WE DO VOTE FOR THESE KIND OF VARIANCES, AND THAT IS A WETLAND CONSTRAINT, SO THAT'S THE HARDSHIP FOR THAT ONE, BUT THE HARDSHIP FOR THIS ONE, I BELIEVE, IS THE FACT THAT IT'S AN HISTORIC STRUCTURE. BUT AGAIN, I THINK THEY COULD BUILD ON THIS PROPERTY WITHOUT A VARIANCE.

[Items 2 & 3 (Part 1 of 2)]

>> ALL RIGHT. DOES ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY

COMMENTS? >> MR. CHAIR, JUST A POINT OF CLARIFICATION. A YES VOTE -- THE MOTION IS TO DENY THIS, SO A YES VOTE IS TO DENY.

>> YES. THANK YOU, MR. PETER.

ALL RIGHT. WE'RE READY TO REGISTER THE VOT VOTE. ALL RIGHT.

SO THE VARIANCE IS DENIED 5 TO 2.

AND WE'RE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER 2, AND AS WE MOVE INTO ITEM NUMBER 2, THERE IS A MODIFIED SET OF CONDITIONS THAT CHRISTINE AND I THINK IS GOING TO PROVIDE TO US.

>> YES. ITEMS 2 AND 3 ARE TOGETHER.

2 IS RAY REZONING AND 3 IS A SPECIAL USE PERMIT AND IT MAY BE MORE APPROPRIATE ONCE WE HEAR THE APPLICANT, BUT THERE ARE SOME CONDITIONS IN THE FINDINGS FINDINGS OF FACT FOR APPROVAL THAT WILL BE SUBJECT TO A

MOTION. >> SO WHEN WE GET TO THAT WE WILL CLARIFY THAT. THANK YOU.

MS. TAYLOR. >> WE ARE READY.

GOOD AFTERNOON, KAREN TAYLOR 77 SARAGOSSA STREET.

WITH ME ARE MY CLIENTS SCHAEFER WEEKS, LAUREN AND JACKIE PEARSON. AND AS JUST MENTIONED, THIS IS FOR A REZONING FROM COMMERCIAL GENERAL CONDITIONS TO COMMERCIAL INTENSIVE WITH A SPECIAL USE FOR ALCOHOL SALES FOR BEER AND WINE.

THIS WAS CONTINUED, THE REZONING PORTION WAS COULDN'T FROM YOUR FEBRUARY 3RD. I FELT IT WAS BETTER TO HAVE BOTH OF THESE TOGETHER SO THAT YOU COULD SEE THEIR RELATIONSHIP. AND ORIGINALLY WE WERE HOPING TO REZONE THE DOG PARK FOR CG WHICH IS THE PROPERTY NEAREST TO THE RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY, AND WE WENT THROUGH THE APPLICATION, BUT THE COUNTY KIND OF DECIDED THAT CI WAS MORE APPROPRIATE SO WE CHANGED THAT, SO I APOLOGIZE IF THERE'S ANYTHING STILL IN A COUPLE OF THOSE DOCUMENTS THAT I NOTED THAT STILL SAY CG.

SO THE REQUEST IS FOR THE THE WHOLE SITE TO BE CI.

THIS IS A LOCATION OF THE SITE. IT'S ON YOU USE 1 NORTH AT RONALD ROAD SOUTH OF IY GMENTP AND NORTH OF THE NEW 13 WHICH HAS THE TRAFFIC LIGHT GOING IN RIGHT NOW.

IT'S SOUTH OF STOKES. IF YOU GET A LITTLE CLOSER, STOKES LANDING ROAD WHICH IS RIGHT UP TO THE NORTH HERE.

AND NORTH SCREN E SLAN BOULEVARD AS WELL TO VENETIAN BOULEVARD TO THE SOUTH. TO THE EAST IS NORTH DIXIE VILLAGE. THAT'S THE RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD. AS WELL AS CORE DOVE TAU PALMS WOULD BE DOWN IN THIS AREA JUST TO KIND OF GIVE YOU SOME RELATIONSHIP. IT DOES HAVE US-1 NORTH FRONTAGE AT 630 FEET TASTEFUL FRONTAGE. IT'S A FAIRLY NARROW SITE.

IT HAS FRONTAGE ON RONALD ROAD. AND AGAIN, IT'S IN FRONT WHAT'S CALLED NORTH DIXIE VILLAGE. THERE'S A LANDSCAPE BUSINESS IMMEDIATELY TO THE SOUTH. MOBILE HOME PARK TO THE SOUTHEAST. SUBDIVISION HERE.

THE PROPERTY TO THE NORTH WAS APPROVED FOR WORKFORCE HOUSING NOT TOO LONG AGO. AND THEN THERE'S -- IT KEEPS

[02:05:04]

AND I POINT OUT VENETIAN BOULEVARD BECAUSE THAT'S GOING TO BE A POINT THAT I MAKE FOR THE SPECIAL USE WHEN WE GET TO THAT POINT. IT'S ACTUALLY FIVE PARCELS, 2.6 ACRES. THE DITCH THAT LUNS THROUGH H THE MIDDLE OF IT ACTUALLY IS PART OF THE SUBDIVISION, AND IT IS PART OF THE REZONING THAT WE COULD KIND OF MAKE THAT.

IT GOT LEFT OUT IN THE PAST. BUT THERE'S ALSO AN ACCESS EASEMENT THAT COMES OUT TO IT THAT IS NOT PART OF THE REZONING BECAUSE WE DON'T OWN THAT AS WELL.

THAT'S AN EASEMENT. BUT YOU CAN SEE THAT THERE'S TWO PARCELS, THE NORTH PARCEL BEING .88 ACRES SO A LITTLE LESS THAN AN ACRE AND THE SOITH PARCEL BEING 1.49 ACRES, SO AROUND AN ACRE AND A HALF. IT'S IN A MIXED USE DISTRICT AND IT'S IN LARGE MIXED USE DISTRICT AND IT'S SURROUND BY B AND C AND SOME INDUSTRIAL FURTHER OUT. THE ZONING IS REALLY MIXED IN THAT AREA AND YOU CERTAINLY HEARD ME TALK ABOUT THIS BEFORE BECAUSE I DID THE REZONINGS FOR THE CI DOIN' IN HERE.

WE DID THE CW UP ON STOKES LANDING ROAD OR WHATEVER SO IT KIND SHOWS YOU THERE'S A VARIETY OF DIFFERENT ZONINGINGS ALONG THAT. THIS FLAR ZONING -- AND IT WAS IN YOUR STAFF REPORT SO I DIDN'T GET IT IN HERE BUT IT WAS A CONDITIONAL ONE THAT WAS FOR A VERY SPECIFIC USE AT THE TIME.

SO IT'S THOSE TWO SITES. THE REQUEST IS THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO USE THE NORTH PARCEL FOR A FOOD TRUCK VILLAGE AND THE SOUTH PARCEL FOR A DOG PARK. AND SO IT'S TO REZONE THE FULL 2.6 ACRES. CI ZONING IS ALWAYS REQUIRED FOR FOOD TRUCKS. THAT'S BEEN A THING THAT WE'VE -- THAT I'VE COME BEFORE YOU OTHER TIMES.

THE DOG PARK, BECAUSE THAT'S SOMETHING KIND OF NEW TO THIS, WASN'T REALLY IN THE CODE, BUT THEY FELT THAT WHEN THE ALCOHOL SALES WAS GOING TO GO ALONG WITH IT, THAT IT SHOULD GO INTO THE CI AS WELL. SO AGAIN, THE OLD ZONING WAS FOR A SUNROOM WITH FURNITURE BUSINESS.

IT WAS ACTUALLY CROSSING THE DITCH.

IT HAS ARCHITECTURAL PLANS AND THINGS AS PART OF THE CONDITIONING, AND THERE'S ACTUALLY NO WAY TO BUILD IT, SO IT'S NOT RELEVANT ANYMORE. SO THE ACCESS TO THE PARK WILL BE FROM RONALD ROAD FOR THAT EASEMENT THAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT, AND AGAIN, THE DESIGN FOR THE PARK IS AN ASTRO TURF PARK AND IT HAS DIFFERENT AREAS FOR LARGE DOGS, SMALL DOGS, PLAYING AREAS, AREAS JUST TO GATHER. IT HAS UNLEASHED AND LEASHED AREAS. AND ALSO WORK SPACES SO THAT YOU CAN BRING YOUR COMPUTER AND YOUR DOG AND BE AT THE DOG PARK AS WELL. AND SO THE IDEA WITH THE DOG PARK IS TO BRING -- IS TO OFFER SNACKS AND BEVERAGES, AND AGAIN THESE BECOME QUITE A PLACE JUST A GATHERING TYPE PLACE.

THE NORTH PARCEL AGAIN IS PLANNED FOR A FOOD TRUCK VILLAGE AND THAT WOULD BE DIRECTLY OFF US-1 SO THAT HAS TO GET DOT APPROVAL FOR THAT. THEY WANT TO DO THAT KIND OF SMALL WITH A SMALL OUTSIDE EATING AREA AND THEY'RE PLANNING TO TRY TO GET A PERMIT FROM THE COUNTY TO CROSS THAT BETWEEN THE TWO SO THAT'S THEY WOULD HAVE ACCESS, PEDESTRIAN ACCESS BETWEEN THE TWO. IT'S IN MIXED USE LAND DISTRICT, AND AGAIN THAT HAS A LOT OF DIFFERENT USES.

THERE IS SCATTERED RESIDENTIAL ALL BEYOND THAT AREA ALONG US-1 SO THE RESIDENTIAL KIND OF IS BEHIND ALL THOSE DIFFERENT AREA AREAS. AND ONE THING ABOUT THIS PARTICULARLY ONE SUBDIVISION TO THE EAST HAS A REALLY BUILT-IN BUFFERS. IT HAS OPEN SPACE.

IT'S GOT A RETENTION AREA. IT'S TO GET A LARGE AREA THAT'S ACTUALLY TREED AS WELL. AND SO WE DO HAVE THE REQUIRED BUFFERS. WE'LL STILL HAVE TO, SO WE'LL ADD TO THAT. AND IT'S NOT GOING TO GO INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD BECAUSE THE ACCESS TO THE RONALD ROAD PORTION IS VERY MINIMAL TO GET INTO THERE, AND THAT'S ACROSS FROM THE ACCESS TO THE LANDSCAPE BUSINESS AS WELL.

AND AGAIN, THESE ARE VERY SIMILAR TO OTHER SITUATIONS AND ONES THAT I POINTED OUT WOULD HAVE BEEN AT STOKES LANDING ROAD AND VENETIAN BOULEVARD. THERE'S A LOT OF COMMERCIAL THAT YOU HAVE TO GO PAST TO GET INTO THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

AND, IN FACT, THERE WERE TWO ALCOHOL SALE LOCATIONS IN THOSE.

SO WE KIND OF MIXED THEM TOGETHER.

[02:10:03]

THIS IS THE DOG PARK. THIS IS THE FOOD TRUCK.

THIS WOULD BE THE ACCESS EASEMENT COMING IN SO THE BUFFERING WOULD BE ON THE INSIDE OF THAT EASEMENT.

AND THE DIFFERENT AREAS, PARKING ALONG HERE, SMALL AREAS THEY'RE HOPING TO USE CONTAINER TYPE THINGS TO DO THEIR ALCOHOL SALES, THEIR CHECK-IN, OFFICE THINGS THAT THEY WOULD HAVE TO DO, HAVE RESTROOMS FOR CLIENTELE AND STUFF, DOG WASHING STATIONS, WHICH IS PRETTY SELF-GROOMING TYPE THINGS WHICH IS COMMON IN THESE, AND AGAIN THIS PEDESTRIAN ACCESS WE WERE TALKING ABOUT.

AND THEN THE NORTH PARCEL AGAIN WITH A PERMIT FROM DOT, A SINGLE ACCESS DRIVEWAY THAT WOULD HAVE A FEW TRUCKS IN A AREAS AND BASICALLY SERVE THE DOG PARK BUT IT WOULD ALSO SERVE THE NEIGHBORING COMMUNITY. JUST SOME PICTURES.

THIS IS FROM THE NORTH LOOKING SOUTH ALONG THE SITE.

THERE WERE A NUMBER OF MOBILE HOMES THERE THAT HAVE SINCE BEEN REMOVED. THIS IS ACCESS TO THE ONE SINGLE-FAMILY HOUSE THAT IS ON THE NORTH SIDE.

SHE'S BEEN THERE THROUGH THE LAST ZONING AND THIS ZONING AS WELL, SO A LONG TIME. THERE WILL BE BUFFERS SEPARATING THAT BECAUSE OF THE RESIDENTIAL AND ACTUALLY HER PROPERTY IS ADJACENT TO THAT NORTH PARCEL, SO SHE WOULD HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE FOOD TRUCK COURT BUT NOTHING WITH THE DOG PARK.

AND THIS IS LOOKING BACK AT HER HOUSE FROM ACROSS FROM THE MEDIAN. THE LANDSCAPE BUSINESS THAT'S IMMEDIATELY TO THE SOUTH, AND YOU CAN KIND OF SEE RONALD ROAD IT. DIDN'T DO A VERY GOOD JOB BUT THAT'S THAT SIGN AT THAT POINT. THIS IS RONALD ROAD COMING IN AND THIS IS BEYOND THE SITE, AND THIS IS THE MOBILE HOME PARK.

THAT WOULD BE WHERE YOU ENTER, AND THAT'S ACTUALLY WHERE YOU ENTER INTO THE SUBDIVISION. THIS IS THE COMMON AREA FOR THE SUBDIVISION AS WELL AS A REAR YARDS FOR THOSE TYPICAL FIRST YARDS AS WE WERE TALKING ABOUT, AND YOU CAN SEE THE RETENTION AREA IN THE BACKGROUND. THIS IS FROM THE SITE THAT IS MEL NEXT TO THE EASEMENT. THAT HOUSE WAS REMOVED SO IT'S GONE, BUT YOU CAN KIND OF SEE THE REST OF THE SITE.

EVERYTHING'S KIND OF -- KIND OF FLAT AND CLEARED.

AND THIS IS RONALD ROAD, AND THIS IS AGAIN THE ORGANS THAT WOULD ACCESS KIND OF ABOUT WHERE THE TRASH CANS ARE IS THE BOUNDARY FOR THE PROPERTY, AND THE OTHER SIDE, YOU CAN SEE THE -- THAT WE HAVE THE LANDSCAPE BUSINESS.

AND I'M GOING TO SWITCH INTO THE SPECIAL USE, AND WHEN BEE GET TO THE END WE WILL HAVE A SEPARATE THEM OUT OBVIOUSLY FOR ZONING.

BUT THIS IS SPECIAL USE. AND JUST TO DEFINE THAT, THE USE WOULD NOT BE APPROPRIATE WITHOUT RESTRICTION THROUGH THE A ZONING DISTRICT BUT CONTROLLED AS TO THE NUMBER, AREA, LOCATION OR RELATION TO THE NEIGHBORHOOD WOULD PROMOTE THE PUBLIC, HEALTH, SAFETY, WELFARE WITH MORALS, ORDER, COMFORT AND CONVENIENCE, APPEARANCE AND PROSPERITY AND GENERAL GENERAL WELFARE. AGAIN THE "FOR ON-SITE CONSUMPTION BEER, WINE AND PACKAGE SALES UNDER THE REGULATION AFTER 2. KROPP LICENSE IS MEETINGS ALL THE -- WHEN COP LICENSE AND MEETING ALL THE RIRNLTS OF THE CODE. LIKELY I KNOW YOU HAD A LONG ONE ALREADY SO I DON'T WANT TO BELABOR THESE BUT I CAN GO BACK TO THESE IF ANYBODY HAS ANY QUESTIONS.

SO THESE ARE THE FOUR GENERAL PROVISIONS THAT ARE AT THE BEGINNING OF YOUR CODE THAT THE ACTIVITIES REQUESTED BY THE SPECIAL USE, ALONG WITH THE SNACKS AND ACTIVITIES AND THE FOOD, REALLY IS AN ENVIRONMENT PRIMARILY FOR ON-PREMISE CONSUMPTION WITHIN THE ESTABLISHED VENUES.

IF THEY TEAM UP WITH SOMETHING LIKE A BEER,AL LOCAL BEER COMPANY, THAT'S KIND OF MORE OF WHAT YOU WOULD HAVE FOR THE PACKAGE TYPE SALES. SECOND, THE USE IS COMPATIBLE AND CONTIGUOUS WITH THE AREA. WE REALLY THINK IT WILL SERVE THE IMMEDIATE COMMUNITY WHICH EVEN THE SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS, AS WELL AS POINTS BEYOND.

THERE ARE TWO DOG PARKS IN JACKSONVILLE RIGHT NOW, AND ACTUALLY ONE OF THEM IS RIGHT ADJACENT TO A NEIGHBOR, AND I'LL SHOW YOU SOME PICTURES OF THAT. AGAIN, THE PROPERTY IS DIRECTLY NEAR US-1 NORTH, AND IT DOES REQUIRE BUFFERING AROUND THERE.

IT'S ALSO, THE PROPERTY ON THE NORTH WITH THE SINGLE FAMILY HOME, I ALREADY MENTIONED THAT, HAS TO HAVE THE 20-FOOT B

[02:15:02]

THAT'S EITHER THE ENTRANCE TO THE DOG PARK FOR IF ADVANCE.

WHICH WOULD BE CONSIDERED RONALD ROAD.

THE USE COMPLIES WITH ALL REQUIRED REGULATIONS AND STANDARDS OF ARTICLE 2, AND IT IS GEFNL DEFINITELY WILL, AND THE LOCATION IS NOT WITHIN 1,00L I JUST PUT THAT HERE SO WE CAN GO BACK AND FORTH IF THERE'S SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT HOW THAT'S GOING TO FUNCTION, SMEACIAL WITH THAL ALCOHOL SALES.

BASICALLY, WHEN THEY HAVE THESE FOLKS ACTUALLY GRAB HERR BEER WITH THEIR DOG AND WALK AROUND AND TALK, SO IT'S NOT LIKE IT'S IN A CONFINED SPACE BUT IT'S IN A FENCED-IN AREA WHERE PEOPLE ARE WITH THEIR DOGS, AND IT WOULD BE THE SAME FOR THE FOOD TRUCKS AS WELL. AND AGAIN, THIS IS THE ACTUAL CODE STUFF THAT A SPECIAL USE MUST BE COMPATIBLE WITH THE ADJACENT AND SURROUNDING PROPERTIES, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO PERMITTED USES, STRUCTURES AND ACTIVITIES WITHIN THE LAND USE CATEGORY OR THE ZONING DISTRICT.

AS YOU'VE SEEN BEFORE, COMPATIBILITY MEANS A CONDITION IN WHICH LAND USES OR CONDITIONS CAN COEXIST IN PROXIMITY TO EACH OTHER IN A STABLE FASHION OVER TIME.

SO WE'VE KIND -- I'VE KIND OF GONE THROUGH THESE, AND AGAIN THESE ACTS OF WILL BE, WE FEEL WILL BE COMPATIBLE.

THEY'RE NOT INCOMPATIBLE. ALCOHOL BEVERAGES, AND AGAIN IT' JUST FOR BEER AND WINE, AND IT'S ONLY A SHORT AREA ALONG US-1, BUT THERE'S CERTAINLY LOTS OF OTHER AREAS ALONG US-1 THAT ALSO SELL BEER AND WINE FOR PACKAGE AS WELL.

AND I'M GOING TO HAVE THE APPLICANT ACTUALLY COME UP AND GIVE YOU A LITTLE BIT OF TALKING KIND OF ABOUT HOW THEY OPERATE AND WHAT THEIR INTENT IS TOO. THE IF NOT APPROVE THE RELATED ACT OF WILL HAVE DETRIMENTAL ACT OF ON THE SURROUNDING USES DUE TO ODORS WITH NOISE, SMOKE, POLLUTION, TRAFFIC GENERATION OR OTHER, AND THESE REALLY WON'T. AGAIN, WE HAVE A COMBINATION OFFAL NATURAL BUFFERS, A COMBINATION OF BUFFERS THAT ARE REQUIRED. MOST OF THIS WILL BE SOFT SCAPE.

THERE WON'T BE A LOT OF HARDSCAPE TO IT.

YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT ASTRO TURF FOR WHERE THE DOGS ARE, THAT'S FOR BEING ABLE TO CLEAN UP THINGS AND STUFF LIKE THAT, AND MOST OF THE OTHER SITE, A VERY SMALL PORTION OF THE SITE FOR THE FOOD TRUCKS AS WELL. SO THERE ISN'T A LOT.

AND THOSE TREES THAT THEY HAVE TO PLANT, THE 20 FEET ON CENTER, ALONG WITH FENCING ALSO WILL HELP WITH ANY KIND NOISE ACTIVITY. THEY HAVE A VERY STRONGALLAL CONTROL ABOUT THAT THAT I WILL LET SCHAFFER TELL YOU ABOUT AS WELL SO THAT THEY HAVE VERY LITTLE TOLERANCE TO BARKING, SO -- AND FOR THEIR OWN PURPOSES AS WELL AS FOR EVERYBODY ELSE.

AND AGAIN IT GOES TO THE TRAFFIC GENERATION, THEY'RE NOT ANTICIPATING LARGE TIMES. THIS IS KIND AN OVER TIMES OF THE DAY. THAT'S KIND OF WHY THE HOURS ARE SCATTERED FROM THE 8:00 A.M. TO 11:00 P.M.

PEOPLE KIND OF JUST COME IN AND OUT.

IT'S NOT A PLACE -- IT'S NOT A PLACE YOU COME AND SIT AND STAY FOR A LONG PERIOD OF TIME. YOU STAY FOR A LITTLE WHILE WITH YOUR DOG. AND THE TRAFFIC AGAIN, AND I DON'T HAVE ANYWAY TO DETERMINE WHAT THAT TRAFFIC IS GOING TO BE BECAUSE THERE'S NO -- THERE'S NO AM COULD PRABL THING COMPN THE CODE BUT WE WERE SPLITTING THE TRAFFIC, TOO, SO THE FOOD COURT HAS ITS OWN TRAFFIC THAT'LL BE DIRECTLY OFF US-1 AND THE DOG PARK WILL HAVE A VERY -- ITS TRAFFIC THAT GOES RIGHT TO ITS PARKING LOT. AND AGAIN, THE PROPOSED USE IS ALLOWABLE IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. THE BUFFERING THAT WE WERE TALKING ABOUT. AND THESE KIND OF GET WHERE I'M GOING OVER THE SAME THINGS AGAIN, BUT WE'VE GOT THE LIMITATIONS AND THE SETBACKS AS WELL.

THOSE ALL INCREASE TO 15 FEET WITH A CI ZONING, SO THAT COOFND OF RELATES. AND THE HOURS OF OPERATION AS WE SAID ARE 8:00 TO 11:00. ONE OF THE THINGS THAT CHRISTINE MENTIONED AT THE BEGINNING WAS THAT TIMES OF DAY -- I'M SORRY -- THE TIMES OF THE WEEK, AND IT'S ACTUALLY THE REQUEST IS TO BE ABLE TO OPERATE FROM -- I'M SORRY.

[02:20:02]

IT'S WEDNESDAY TO MONDAY WITH TUESDAYS CLOSED.

SO THAT'S IN YOUR ORDER, AND I THINK IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE BUT AGAIN, SOME OF THIS TO THE HOURS OF OPERATION REALLY ARE TO ACCOMMODATED A LOT OF THE WORKING PEOPLE AND THAT TYPE OF THING. THERE'S LOTS OF OTHERS AREAS ALONG US-NORTH WITHAL ALCOHOL SALES AND SPUSKLY THE CORNWELL MARKET HAD A TAVERN TAVERN THERE FOR YEARS.

IT'S CLOSED NOW, AND THE BRITISH PLUB A VENETIAN BOULEVARD.

SO IT'S IN A VERY SIP LAR SITUATION WHERE THERE'S A PLACE THAT SELLSAL ALCOHOL THAT YOU HAVE TO PASS THROUGH.

AND THAT'S JUST TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF WHERE THAT'S RIGHT TO THE SOUTH OF THIS AND THE OTHER ONE AT THE NORTH.

AND I'M GOING TO ASK -- TO COME UP.

>> DO I NEED TO SWEAR IN? MY NAME IS SCHAFFER WEEKS.

AND GOOD AFTERNOON. THANK YOU FOR HAVING US HERE TODAY. WHILE YOU CONSIDER THIS REQUEST.

THIS IS NOT A NEW IDEA. WE'VE SEEN THIS TYPE OF BUSINESS ELSEWHERE IN THIS STATE AND THROUGHOUT THE COUNTRY.

THERE ARE TWO VERY SIMILAR BUSINESSES, LIKE KAREN SAID, IN JACKSONVILLE. THERE'S ONE IN TAMPA, ONE IN ST. PETE, ONE IN PORTLAND, ONE IN AUSTYN, TEXAS AND IT'S BEGUN DONE ELSEWHERE AND WE ARE VERY EXCITED ABOUT THE OF THE SPRO INSPECT TO BE THE FIRST ONES IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY WITH A BUSINESS LIKE THIS, MY COUNTY THAT I GREW UP IN HERE.

THIS BUSINESS IS A FUN FAMILY AND FRIENDS-ORIENTED BUSINESS WITH A LOW-IMPACT DEVELOPMENT AND IT WILL PRESERVE THE PROPERTY'S GREEN SPACE WHILE CREATING AN OUTDOOR GATHERING AREA FOR ITS PATRONS AND THEIR FANLS ANIMALS, DOGS, BUT WITH THAT WE UNDER THAT THERE COULD BE CONCERNS THAT COME WITH ALCOHOL AND THE POTENTIAL NOISE FROM DOGS, BUT I WANT TO EXPRESS THAT THIS IS NOT A BAR. THIS IS NOT A PLAS THAT PEOPLE GO TO GET ROUGH AND ROWDY AND DRINK ALL NIGHT.

THAT IS NOT WHO WE ARE. THAT IS NOT WHAT THIS IS.

THIS SAYS VERY SIMILAR, WHICH KAREN SAID IN OUR PACKET AND I THOUGHT WAS A GREAT EXAMPLE, OF GOING TO THE MOVIES AND HAVING A GLASS OF WINE WHILE WRIEWR YOU'RE THERE TO ENJOY YOURSELF.

WE WILL NOT CULTIVATE AN ATMOSPHERE OF EXPENSIVE DRINKING BECAUSE THAT IS NOT WHO WE ARE, THAT IS NOT WHAT THIS BUSINESS IS FOR BECAUSE WE ARE NOT A BAR. WE ALSO UNDERSTAND THAT THERE COULD BE CONCERNS THAT COME WITH NOISE, AND WE SHARE THE TBOAL OF CREATING A PEACEFUL ENVIRONMENT. WE ARE GOING TO STWES IN INFRASTRUCTURE TO CREATE A WORK SPACE FOR PEOPLE TO COME AND WORK AND ENJOY AND WE ALSO DON'T WANT A BUNCH YAPPY DOGS.

WHAT SPLAITS SEPARATES US FROM THE TIPPAL CAL IDEA OF A DOG PARK IS THAT WE WILL HAVE PROFESSIONALLY TRAINED STAFF ON-SITE AT ALL HOURS OF OPERATION THAT WE CALL BARK RANGERS. OUR STAFF WILL BREAK UP DOGFIGHTS BEFORE THEY HAPPEN OR ANY ANIMOSITY BETWEEN ANIMALS.

DOGS THAT ARE REPEATED OFFENDERS WILL NOT BE WELCOME WELCOME BACK AND THIS WILL TRACK WITH OUR SYSTEM THIS ALL SHOTS AND VENES ARE EXURNT. THIS WILL TRACK THE ACCESSIBLY NOISY DOGS TO HO AT A POINT WILL NOT BE WELCOMED BACK.

OUR STAFF AND OUR PATRONS WHO ARE INVESTING TO CREATE A FACE FOR THEM TO BE ABLE TO WORK AND ENJOY THEMSELVES DID NOT WANT EXCESSIVELY NOISY DOGS EITHER, AND WE HAVE SYSTEMS IN PLACE TO ACHIEVE THAT. BUT WITH THAT BEING SAID, WE ARE SPRING SEMESTER EXCITED TO HOPEFULLY JOIN THIS DOG-FRIENDLY CORRIDOR WITH PET PARADISE A FEW MILES NORTH AND A FEW VET CLINICS IN THE AREA, AND WE ARE VERY EXCITED TO BRING THIS BUSINESS TO ST. JOHNS COUNTY AND TO THIS COMMUNITY.

WE ALSO UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS SOMEWHAT OF A NEW IDEA HERE AND ALL THREE OF THE PARTNERS, ME, JACKIE PEARSON AND CALVIN DON'T HERE TODAY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS FOR CLARIFY ANYTHING.

UNLESS YOU HAVE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS SPECIFICALLY FOR ME, I'LL CURRENT IT BACK TO KAREN TAYLOR.

THANK YOU. >> JUST TO START SUMMING IT UP, THIS IS ONE OF THE DOG PARKS IN JACKSONVILLE.

THIS IS AT NEPTUNE BEACH. IT'S CALLED THE BREW HOUSE.

AND SO YOU CAN SEE THE BREW HOUSE IN THIS PARTICULAR PICTURE WHICH IS WHERE YOU GET THE ALCOHOL.

THIS IS ANOTHER ONE. IT SHOWS IT AT NIGHT.

AND BOTH THIS PICTURE AND THE NEXT PICTURE JUST KIND OF SHOWS

[02:25:01]

IT'S A FAMILY-FRIENDLY, AS HE SAID, AND THEIR LIST OF REQUIREMENTS AND THINGS THAT YOU HAVE TO ABIDE BY IS OVER 20 THINGS LONG. I HAVE A COPY OF IT IF WE WANTED TO DISCUSS IT BUT I DON'T WANT TO GO INTO DETAIL.

AGAIN, THIS IS ANOTHER KIND OF GENERAL ONE SHOWING IT WITH ALCOHOL SALES, AND THEN SAME THING ON THIS PARTICULAR ONE, AND THEN FOOD TRUCK VILLAGES, I THINK YOU ARE KIND OF USED TO THOSE. YOU'VE HEARD THOSE, BUT THIS IS NOT SNAI RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD AND IT DOESN'T ACCESS A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD, AND THE PARKING FOR IT WILL NOT ACCESS A RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOOD LIKE THE ONE ON THE BEACH AGAIN WE'VE GOT TO TWO IT'S, THE JUSTIFICATION FOR REUSE SERVICE ZONING REQUEST AS THE 2.6.

THE CI ZONING IS REQUIRED FOR FOOD TRUCKS IN THE DOG PARK, HOWEVER, MOST OF THE OTHER TYPES OF USES THAT ARE UNDER CI THAT WOULD BE OF CONCERN WOULDN'T FIT ON THIS TYPE OF SITE AND ESPECIALLY WITH THE TWO DIVISIONS OF THE SITE AND THE NARROWNESS OF THE SITE. IT'S ABOUT 1 FOUNTAIN FEET DEEP AT ITS WIDEST POINT, SO TIPPAL CAL EVEN A COMMERCIAL ESTABLISHMENT STRIP CENTER HAS TO HAVE ABOUT 200 FEET.

THERE'S JUST A MIX ALL ALONG HERE AND SO IT MEETS THE MIXED USE CATEGORY. THE SPECIAL USE, AGAIN, IS ALLOWED IN THE AREA AND WE FEEL IT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE FOR THIS AREA AND APPROPRIATE FOR THIS TYPE OF USE, FOR BOTH OF THE TYPES OF USE. IF THERE'S CERTAIN THINGS, WE'RE WILLING TO TALK ABOUT THOSE, AND IT WILL JUST BE ASSOCIATED WITH THESE TWO THINGS. I DID NOTE THERE WAS ANOTHER ONE POINTED OUT TO ME IN THE NOTES ABOUT THIS BEING TRANSFERABLE.

GENERALLY YOU HAVE THEM SO THEY'RE NOT TRANSFERABLE AND WE CERTAINLY WOULD AGREE TO THAT ON THIS PARTICULAR BECAUSE THIS IS A VERY SPECIFIC TYPE OF BUSINESS.

IT'S NOT LIKE IT'S A RESTAURANT THAT'S GOING FROM ONE PERSON TO THE NEXT. SO WE'LL QUALIFY THAT IF WE GET TO THAT POINT. AND AND AGAIN, WE ALREADY QUALIFIED THE OTHER. AS FOR THE ZONING CHANGE, ON THE SPECIAL USE, IT'S CONSISTENT WITH THE OTHER USES IN THE AREA, COMPATIBLE WITH COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. AND AS FOR THE ZONING, IT IS A REQUIREMENT TO DO THIS HIGH ZONING CLASSIFICATION.

WE STARTED WITH THE CG AND WENT TO THE CI.

AND SOME OF THAT AGAIN IS JUST BECAUSE THIS HASN'T BEEN DONE BEFORE. AND SO ACTUALLY THERE'S -- .22 ACRES OF THAT 2.. IT ISN'T GOING TO BE USED EXCEPT TO CROSS. THOSE ARE MY OTHER CONSISTENT THINGS THAT I ALWAYS SAY, AND SO WE'RE REQUESTING A RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL FOR BOTH THE SPECIAL USE AND THE REZONING. AND I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS, AND I HAVE ADDITIONAL INFORMATION IF YOU WANT.

>> SO BEFORE WE GO INTO QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT, IF ANY, THERE ANY EX PARTE COMMUNICATION TO DECLARE OOH

ITEMS 2 AND 3? >> I DROVE BY THE PROPERTY THIS

MORING. >> I DROVE BY THE PROPERTY A

COUPLE DAYS AGO. >> I ALSO DROVE BY THE PROPERTY

YESTERDAY. >> I DROVE BY THE PROPERTY

YESTERDAY. >> OKAY.

ALL RIGHT. IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? MR. PETER.

>> I JUST HAVE A QUESTION ABOUT THE HOURS RELATIVE TO FESTIVAL LIGHTING. HOW WILL FESTIVAL LIGHTING

AFFECT IF NEIGHBORHOOD? >> WELL, BASICALLY AGAIN, THAT AREA IS PRETTY FAR FROM THE NEIGHBORHOOD.

IT'S BLOCKED QUITE A BIT AND THERE ALSO ALSO BE T THINGS. SO YOU NOTICED IN THE THE ONE THAT IT'S KIND OF A LOWER TYPE THING AND THERE ARE -- THEY'VE ONLY GOT THAT CENTRAL TO IT. THAT'S KIND OF MORE THE IDEA HERE. THERE ARE LIGHTING REQUIREMENTS ABOUT SHINING ONTO OTHER PEOPLE'S PROPERTY AND THINGS LIKE THAT, LUMENS AND STUFF, SO THEY FEEL LIKE THEY'LL BE ABLE

TO MEET THAT. >> THANK YOU.

>> MR. PAIR. >> .

>> >>

[02:30:09]

>> HOW DO YOU PLAN TO IDENTIFY AND BAN THE -- [INDECIPHERABLE] DOGS.

>> THAT'S SOMETHING THAT THEY DO AT ALL THE PARKS.

IF YOU HAVE A DOG THAT'S -- IT'S ONE THING, YOU KNOW, AS THEY COME IN OR WHATEVER, IF THEY'RE SITTING THERE YAPPING OR BARKING AND YAPPING, HE'S CALLING IT THE SAME THING BASICALLY, THEN THEY

GET REMOVED. >> I DON'T THINK THAT ANSWERED

MY QUESTION, THOUGH. >> DO YOU WANT A DEFINITION OF

WHAT A YAP IS? >> HE SAYS YAPPY DOGS.

HOW DO YOU IDENTIFY WHAT'S A YAPPY DOG? AND HOW DO YOU INTEND TO BAN THEM?

>> I UNDERSTAND. MAYBE THAT WHEANTS THE CORRECT TECHNICAL TERM TO USE. THERE'S NOT A LOT OF PRECEDENT THAT SURROUNDS THIS AND THE BEST WE CAN DO IS GO TO THE BUSINESSES IN THIS COMMUNITY AND THE SURROUNDING AREAS AND SEE WHAT THEY'VE DONE IS COME UP WITH THE RULES OF WHAT THEY HAVE DONE AND HAVEN'T DONE AND COME UP WITH OUR UNOPENED RIGHT-OF-WAY ROLLS AND IT COMES TOWN TO OUR OAFERSZ AND A BARK RANGERS THAT IF A DOG IS CREATING A NUISANCE BY EXCESSIVE NOISE OR VICIOUS OR NOT CURRENT ON THEIR RABIES SHOTS OR OTHER SHOTS LIKE THAT, THAT THEY WOULDN'T BE ALLOWED TO COME, SO I DON'T KNOW THE TECHNICAL WAY TO DEFINE THAT, BUT AGAIN, WE'RE INVESTING IN THE INFRASTRUCTURE TO MAKE AT A PLACE THAT PEOPLE WANT TO COME AND WORK AND BE ABLE TO FOCUS AND A DOG THAT'S EXCESSIVELY CREATING NOISE AND THAT'S UNPLEASANT FOR PEOPLE TWHINTSDZ THE PARK AND THE PEOPLE AROUND THE PARK, WE DON'T

WANT THAT EITHER. >> SO YOU'LL JUST ASK THEM TO

LEAVE? >> YES, SIR.

>> REFUND? >> TO BE DETERMINED.

A REFUND? >> YES.

>> NO. IF THEY COME INTO THE PARK -- SO THE WAY WE'VE DONE THIS IN THE PAST IS THE FIRST TIME THAT YOU COME, YOU SIGN A -- YOU KNOW, YOU READ THROUGH OUR RULES AND YOU SIGN THAT YOU AGREE TO THEM. YOU PAY AND YOU ENTER.

AND THEN EVERY TIME YOU COME IN, YOU SAY, HEY, THIS IS MY NAME, NUMBER, HOWEVER. THEY LOOK UP THE ACCOUNT AND THEY SEE ALL YOUR INFORMATION THAT YOU HAVE AGREED TO IT YOU.

PROBABLY NEED TO RENIGHT EVERY YEAR OR SO SORRY SAY WE AMEND THE RULE AS WE GO THROUGH THIS PROCESS.

AT THAT TIME YOU'D HAVE TO RECOULD DO THE ECONOMICIN PROCESS. AT THAT TIME THEY WERE KNOW THE ROWLS P PRIEWLS IT HAD WILL PROBABLY SAY IN THERE IF YOU VIOLATE THESE RULES BE NO REFUND, AND IF THEY DO VIOLATE RULES AND ARE ASKED TO LEAVE, WE'D FOLLOW THAT PROATAL COL.

>> I UNDERSTAND THAT. I WAS GOING FORTH BARKING BECAUSE MY BARK MIGHT NOT BE AS LOUD AS YOURS, SO HOW DO YOU

DETERMINE? >> AT THE TIS CRETION OF

OURSELVES AND OUR STAFF. >> OKAY.

>> THAT'S IT. >> DR. HILSENBECK.

>> CONCERNING YOUR SITE PLAN AND THAT NEIGHBORHOOD TO THE SOUTH-SOUTHEAST, THAT SEEMS LIKE IT'S A LOWER-INCOME NEIGHBORHOOD DOWN THERE. I DIDN'T SEE MUCH OF A TREE BUFFER. IT SEEPED LIKE IT WAS JUST OPEN LAND BETWEEN THE DOG PARK AND THAT NEIGHBORHOOD TO THE SOUTH-SOUTHEAST. IS THAT CORRECT?

>> THERE'S ACTUALLY QUITE -- LET ME SEE IF I CAN

-- YOU CAN KIND SEE IT -- >> YOU HAD ONE THAT HAD

RECYCLING AND TRASH OUT. >> I HAD THAT ONE BUT I WAS TRYING SHOW YOU FROM THIS. OKAY.

THIS IS LIKE THE NORTH. THAT'S THAT LITTLE NORTH PIECE ON IT AND YOU CAN SEE THE TREES THAT ARE ON THE OTHER PROPERTY HERE TO THE BACK. THIS IS -- THAT'S THE NORTH PROPERTY BOUNDLY THAT WOULD BE TO THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.

BOUNDARY THAT WOULD BE TO THAT NEIGHBORHOOD.

>> THE SOUTHERN. >> SO WE'RE AT THE VERY NORTH

PART OF THE SITE. >> I'M NOT CONCERNED ABOUT THE NORTH PART. IT'S THE SOUTH.

>> ANYWAY, THAT WOULD BE AGAIN FOR THE DOG PARK, IF YOU LOOK AT

THE -- >> THAT'S IT.

THE LAST TWO. >> THAT ONE.

>> THAT DOG PARK IS TO THE RIGHT OF THAT PHOTO, CORRECT?

>> CORRECT. AND IT WOULD BE NORTH OF THE

GARBAGE CAN. >> RIGHT.

CORRECT. >> SO THOSE FIRST -- THAT FIRST HOUSE THAT'S BEEN TAKEN DOWN THAT I MENTIONED, YES, THAT ONE THERE ISN'T MUCH BUFFER THERE, BUT THAT EASEMENT IS SHARED BY

THEM AS WELL. >> HOW ABOUT THAT PHOTO?

>> I'LL SEE IF I CAN FIND MY -- THERE WE GO.

>> THE AERIAL IS GOOD. >> SO THAT MIGHT KIND OF HELP A LITTLE BIT. SO THIS HOUSE IS GONE, SO THAT'S

WHAT YOU'RE SEEING. >> I'M NOT WORRIED ABOUT THE HOUSES THAT WERE ON THERE. I KNOW THEY'RE GONE.

>> OKAY, BECAUSE WE HAVE TO BUFFER AND WE HAVE TO BUFFER ALONG THIS PARTICULAR LINE, SO THERE'S THAT.

UP IN HERE IS WHERE I WAS TALKING ABOUT --

>> I WAS WORRIED ABOUT THE SOUTHERN END OF THE PROPERTY ADJOINING THAT -- IT'S A MOBILE HOME PARK.

>> THE MOBILE HOME PARK? >> YES.

>> THAT'S VERY, VERY BACK INTO THAT.

THAT BASS ONE OF WAS ONE OFR PICTURES.

>> SO IT'S A LANDSCAPING BUSINESS PRIMARILY DIRECTLY

SOUTH-SOUTHEAST. >> RIGHT DIRECTLY IN FRONT, YES.

THAT'S THE LANDSCAPING BUSINESS. >> IS THERE ANY CHANCE OF

[02:35:03]

DOG PARK? >> ALONG THAT AND THE DOG PARK? THEY'LL HAVE TO DO BUFFERS ALONG THERE.

>> RIGHT. BUT DOES THAT MEAN A TREED

BUFFER? >> NO.

>> COULD YOU DO A TREE BUFFER? >> WE COULD.

>> WOULD YOU DO A TREE BUFFER? [LAUGHTER]

>> I'M NOT SAYING THAT THEY WON'T BECAUSE PART OF THE THING, IF YOU NOTICE FROM THE PICTURES, THE TREES ARE KIND OF PART OF IT, BUT THAT -- THIS ISN'T A PUD OR THING SO THAT WOULD HAVE TO BE A CERTAIN CONDITION OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT TO THAT.

>> I'M NOT PREPARED TO ASK FOR THAT CONDITION.

>> OKAY. BUT I THINK THEIR INTENT WOULD BE, YES, EVEN, AS YOU CAN SEE THE LANDSCAPE BUSINESS ISN'T THE MOST ATTRACTIVE TO LOOK AT EITHER.

>> NOT THE MOST AESTHETICALLY PLEASING.

>> AND ALSO FOR FENCING ALONG THERE, TOO, BECAUSE OF THE DISTRACTION FOR ANY -- FOR THE -- MOST OF THE PARKING IS IN THAT PARTICULAR AREA, SO THEY WILL HAVE TO PUT, WITHIN THE

LANDSCAPE AS WELL. >> I WAS JUST MORE CONCERN ABOUT PROTECTING THE VISUALS FOR THE LOW-INCOME NEIGHBORHOOD TO THE SOUTH-SOUTHEAST AND LIGHTS AT NIGHT, A BUFFER FOR LIGHTING, WHICH I THOUGHT A TREE BUFFER WOULD BE GOOD FOR THAT.

THAT'S ALL I'M SAYING. >> WE'LL TAKE THAT INTO CONSIDERATION. I DON'T THINK THEY WOULD HAVE ANY DIPLOMA. AGAIN, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE A COUPLE PARKING LOTS THERE SO YOU'LL HAVE TREES WITHIN THE

PARKING LOTS, , TOO. >> OKAY.

THANK YOU. >> DR. MCCORMICK.

>> FIRST OF ALL, COMING FROM RONNIE ROAD OR RONALD ROAD, I GUESS, INTO THE DOG PARK,AL THERE WILL BE A GATE THERE I ASSUME, SO THAT GATE WOULD BE CLOSED UNTIL A CAR COMES AND

WANTS TO COME IN, RIGHT? >> NO, THEY DON'T OWN THE EASEMENT, SO THE EASEMENT, WHICH IS ON HERE, THE EASEMENT HERE, THEIR ENTRANCE TO THE DOG PARK WILL BE IN HERE, AND IT WILL BE A PARKING LOT, SO, NO, IT WON'T BE FENCED.

>> OKAY. >> THE PARKING LOT WON'T BE.

BUT THE FACILITIES WILL BE. >> WILL BE.

THERE WILL BE A GATE THERE. >> YES.

>> ? ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? IF NOT, WE'RE BACK INTO THE AGENCY FOR A MOTION, AND WE NEET OH, YEAH.

[LAUGHTER] >> HEATHER STUDWELL.

>> ARE YOU ASKING FOR ME, MA'AM. >> GLEB NAME AND ADDRESS FORTH

RECORD. >> THERE'S BEEN A LOT TO LISTEN TO. GIVE ME ONE SECOND PLEASE.

HEATHER STUDWELL 325 LEWIS LANE. MY FIRST TIME HERE, THANK YOU VERY MUCH. DOCTOR WITH, I KNOW YOU WERE TALKING BEFORE ABOUT STOKES LANDING TOWNHOMES WHICH IS RIGHT NEXT TO THIS AREA WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.

THIS IS YOU'LL FROM YOUR PACKAGE.

UP HERE STOKESND LANG TOWNHOMES WHICH THEY'RE GOING TO TEAR DOWN EVERY SINGLE TREE IN THE PICTURES YOU WERE JUST SHOWN. EVERY SINGLE TREE.

IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE ENVIRONMENTALLY PROTECTED THERE.

THEY GOT PAST ZONING, THEY GOT PAST THE COMMISSIONERS.

THEY'RE GOING TO PUT 320 TOWNHOMES ON THERE.

THEY'RE GOING TO DUMP THEIR WASTEWATER INTO THE WATERWAY THAT YOU SEE HERE AND OVER HERE, AT LEAST FOR ESTUARY THAT LEADS TO A NAMED WATERWAY, THE TAL MAD A RIVER.

THAT'S AGAINST STA CHEWED. THE OTHER THING IS I'M LAUGHING ABOUT THIS. IT'S A GREAT BUSINESS IDEA BUT LOCATION, LOCATION, LOCATION, IT'S NOT THE LOCATION.

I UNDERSTAND MS. TAYLOR SHOWING YOU PICTURES FROM THE ROAD.

THAT IS THE ONLY PIECE OF NAKED LAND ANYWHERE ARNPRIOR TO -- I'VE LIVED IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD FOR 25 YEARS.

IT IS ALL -- MOVE SOME PAPERS HERE -- IT'S ALL ESTUARY.

IT'S ALL WATER. IT'S ALL STOKES LANDING CONSERVATION AREA HERE. SO LET'S JUST DO THIS REAL QUICKLY. THIS IS US-1.

THIS IS THE 300 TOWNHOMES HELP. THIS IS STOKES LANDING.

THIS IS WHERE THEY'RE GOING TO TAKE EVERY SINGLE I. TREE AND IT'S GOING TO FLOOD INTO ALL THOSE LITTLE HOUSES THAT YOU SAW ON THOSE PICTURES THAT MS. TAYLOR GAVE YOU.

THIS IS THE DOG PARK HERE EXPECT AND THERE'S A LOT OF COMMERCIAL ALONG US-1. WE'RE NOT TWUNG 1, 2, 3, 5 MILES ANYWHERE ELSE. YOU DUPONT GO INTO SOMEBODY'S NEIGHBORHOOD AND STAY IN THIS NEIGHBORHOOD 7 MILES AWAY THEY DO THIS. JUST BECAUSE IT'S ALL US-1, IT IS NOT. THIS IS A NEIGHBORHOOD.

I PURCHASED IT 25 YEARS AGO. THE UNIT THAT I'VE BEEN SPEAKING OF, SHE HAS BEEN THERE 40 YEARS. SHE GOES OUT AND WRANGLES THE

[02:40:04]

THERE'S PLENTY OF PLACES TO BE URBAN.

I GET IT. THERE'S PLEAFN PLACES FOR HIS WONDERFUL BUSINESS IDEA. EVERYBODY HAS TO START SOMEWHERE. WE USED TO OWN CAPS RESTAURANT.

CAPS ON THE WATERS OUT AT VIN ALL OH BEACH BY THE CASTLE.

YOU HAVE SEEN THAT THERE, THAT RESTAURANT, RIGHT?

CAPS ONVILLE AN OH VILLANO BEA. >> I DON'T KNOW WHAT HAPPENS.

WHEN YOU INTEND FOR PEOPLE NOT TO BE DRUNK, YOU CAN'T GET IT CAN'T BATE UNTIL THEY GET DRUNK. THEN YOU HAVE TO CALL THE COPS.

THEN THISMENT JA HAS RYE LYE BUT FOR THE DOGS, LIABILITY FOR THE TRAFFIC, LIABILITY FOR EVERYTHING.

BY THE WAY, THE IS THAT I FOOD BASHING FOR A DOG-WI-FI CAFE WHERE WE'RE GOING TO SIT? BUT WE'RE NOT GOING TO SIT.

WE'RE NOT ALLOWED TO STAY. WE'RE GOING TO STAND AND WALK AND GO. DO YOU UNDERSTAND HOW MANY THINGS THEY STEAD SAID TO YOU TODAY THIS THING IS? NO ONE KNOWS. CAFE AND SPORTS BAR.

IT'S AN OUTDOOR SPORTS BAR. THIS IS MY BACKYARD.

IF I WANTED TO HAVE THAT FUN IN MY BACKYARD, I WOULD INVITE YOU OVER TO MY BACKYARD. PLEASE UNDERSTAND THIS IS NOT THE LOCATION FOR IT AND PUT IT SOMEWHERE ELSE.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> LEN WEEKS.

>> GOOD AFTERNOON, LEN WEEKS, 48 DUNE CIRCLE ST. AUGUSTINE.

I WAS A LITTLE SKEPTICAL ABOUT THIS MYSELF THE FIRST TIME I HEARD ABOUT IT BUT I'VE BANE LOOKING INTO THEM WITH SHAFFER AND JACKIE AND LAUREN, AND THEY'RE A VERY FAMILY-FRIENDLY ENVIRONMENT. IT IS NOT A BAR.

IT IS TRUE, YOU CAN GET A PEER BEER OR A GLARS OF WINE OR HOT CHOCOLATE OR TEA OR COKE OR WHATEVER BUT IT'S DEFINITELY NOT A BAR. BUT THE FOOD TRUCKS THAT WE HAVE SEEN IN THE OTHER LOCATIONS, IT'S JUST A NICE AMENITY.

IF YOU'RE THERE FOR TWO OR THREE HOURS TO HAVE A LITTLE SNACK OR SOMETHIG TO EAT, TAKE YOUR KIDS THERE.

YOUR DOGS CAN RUN AROUND IN AN% OPEN ENVIRONMENT.

ST. JOHNS COUNTY IS VERY DOG FRIENDLY BUT THERE'S LESS AND LESS PLACES TO TAKE YOUR DOG THESE DAYS.

AND SO I THINK THIS IS A GREAT ASSET TO ST. JOHNS COUNTY ESPECIALLY WITH THE RAPID GROWTH WE HAVE AND PLACES TO BE OUTDOORS ESPECIALLY WITH THEY COVID ENVIRONMENT, SO I JUST THINK THIS IS A PERFECT ENVIRONMENT FOR THAT I DO THINK IT'S A GREAT LOCATION. THERE ARE SOME IN DAYTONA AND JACKSON BUT KNOWING IN ANN AGAIN APE LOT OF PEOPLE I KNOW THAT HAVE TO TAKE THEIR DOGS TO JACKVILLE DRIVE ALL THE WAY THERE. THEY DO TO SMEND AN HOUR OR TWO TO SPEND TWHER DOG IN JACKSONVILLE AND NOW THEY CAN DO IT IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY. THE PROPERTY IS A REALLY PECULIAR PIECE OF PROPERTY AND I THINK THIS IS A UNIQUE, CREATIVE WAY TO USE THIS PROPERTY IT WHEN IT'S GOT A DOT RIOT DITCH THAT RUNS RIGHT THROUGH IT. THEY'VE COME UP WITH A PLAN THAT DIVIDES IT UP INTO TWO DIFFERENT USES BUT THEY'RE COMPATIBLE WITH EACH OTHER. THEY ARE COMPATIBLE AND THEY'RE ALSO OPEN. THE LADY JUST SAID IT'S A VACANT PIECE OF LAND. WELL, THEY'RE GOING TO LANDSCAPE THIS, AND TO YOUR POINT ABOUT PUTTING TREES THERE, IF YOU LOOK AT THE LANDSCAPE PLAN THAT MARCUS HALL AND LATIMER DID, PROFESSIONAL LANDSCAPE ARCHITECTS WHO WE HAVE HIRED TO DO THIS, THEY'VE DONE A VERY NICE JOB, AND IT'S GOING TO BE MUCH NICER LOOKING THAN IT HAS BEEN FOR THE LAST 20 YEARS WHEN I DROVE BY IT EVERY SO OFTEN. AS FAR AS THE LIGHTS AND STUFF, I'M A GENERAL CONTRACTOR AND I DEAL WITH LIGHTING AND STUFF ALL THE TIME IN THE CITY, AND THERE ARE WAYS, AND THAT'S CERTAINLY A CONCERN TO MAKE SURE THAT ANYTHING THAT'S ON THAT PROPERTY, THE LIGHT AND THE NOS. IS DIVERTED AWAY FROM THE RESIDENTIAL AREA, AND THAT'S ESSENTIAL SOMETHING THAT WE'RE AWARE OF AND WOULD DO. LASTLY, AS A PARENT, AND I KNOW A FEW THAT HAVE CHILDREN OR YOU KNOW PEOPLE THAT DO, IT'S REALLY HARD FOR KIDS THAT GROW UP IN THIS TOWN SOMETIMES TO STAY HERE BECAUSE OF THE LACK OF JOBS AND CREATIVITY AND ENTREPRENEURSHIP THAT WE HAVE. I'M FORTUNATE THAT SCHAFFER WORKS WITH ME, AND RIGHT NOW HE'S COME BACK TO YOU ST. JOHNS COUNTY TO WORK WERE ME IN MY CONSTRUCTION BUSINESS BUT LAUREN AND JACKIE BOTH WORK OUT OF TOWN, AND THIS IS AN OPPORTUNITY FOR US TO HAVE OUR CHILDREN HAVE TOM FREE SPIRIT ENTREPRENEURIAL OPPORTUNITIES TO COME INTO ST. JOHNS COUNTY AND STAY HERE INSTEAD OF MOVING TO OTHER COMMUNITIES, OTHER STATES AND OTHER CITIES, SO I WOULD ASK YOU TO APPROVE THIS REQUEST AND COME AND SEE IT WHEN IT'S OPEN. THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. >> KRISTIE WEEKS.

>> >> HELLO. MY NAME IS CHRISTIE WEEKS I

[02:45:06]

I AM HERE TO ASK YOU TO VOTE FOR THIS WONDERFUL IDEA BECAUSE IT IS A FUN, CLEAN, FAMILY FRIENDLY, WONDERFUL THING TO DO WITH YOUR DOG AND YOUR FAMILY AND YOUR CHILDREN WHILE YOU DO HOMEWORK WITH YOUR CHILDREN AND HAVE A HOT CHOCOLATE AND THE FAMILY DOG RUNS AROUND. WE DON'T EVEN HAVE A DOG, UNFORTUNATELY, BUT I HAVE WANTED A R. DOG PARKS BECAUSE IT IS FUN. IT'S CLEAN.

IT'S FAMILY. IT'S OUTDOOR.

IT'S HAPPY, SOMETHING THAT THE WORLD COULD USE A LOT MORE OF THESE DAYS. SO I SUGGEST AND ASK YOU TO PLEASE APPROVE THIS BECAUSE I THINK IT'S WONDERFUL ASSET TO YOUR COMMUNITY. THANK YOU.

>> JASON STANCIL >> GOOD AFTERNOON.

MY NAME IS JASON STANCIL. I OWN KELLER HOMES.

I BOUGHT A FEW LOTS OVER TO YARBROUGH CIRCLE WE'RE DOING A SMALL DEVELOPMENT UP THERE OF ABOUT TEN HOUSES.

I SAW THE ORANGE SIGN OUT ON US-1, CONTACTED THE WEEKS TO FIGURE OUT WHAT WAS GOING ON, AND THEY TOLD ME.

I THINK IT'S A GREAT IDEA. THE DOG NOISE, I DON'T THINK IT'S GOING TO BE AN ISSUE. WE'RE BIGDZ ALL THESE HOMES BACK THERE. EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM IS PRE-SOLD. EVERY SINGLE PERSON SAID, WHAT'S GOING UP THERE? BECAUSE THEY WANT TO KNOW IF THEY'RE BUYING THESE HOMES AND THEY LOVE IT.

IT'S WHAT ST. JOHNS COUNTY NEEDS.

PEOPLE GOES UP TO DUVAL TO RIVERSIDE AND ATLANTIC BEACH TO GET THIS KIND OF THING, AND HONESTLY I CAN'T THINK OF ANYTHING BETTER. REGARDING THE DRAINAGE FOR THE CONDOS TO THE NORTH, THAT WILL HAVE ITS OWN ON-SITE WATER RETAINAGE. IT WON'T FLOW INTO THAT POND, AT LEAST IT SHOULDN'T IF EVERYBODY'S DOING THEIR JOB RIGHT. ON A JUST WANTED TO MAKE A LITTLE NOTE OF THAT JUST IN CASE.

THANKS FOR YOUR TIME. >> THANK YOU.

ALL RIGHT. IS THAT ALL OF OUR SPEAKER

CARDS? >> IT IS.

>> DOES THE APPLICANT HAVE ANY REBUTTAL?

>> JUST A FEW, AND ACTUALLY THE LADY FROM STOKES LANDING ROAD DID CALL ME THIS MORNING. SHE SAID ERRONEOUSLY SHE WAS TOLD THAT IT WASN'T -- THIS GOING TO BE HERE ODD AGENDA TODAY. BUT I DO KIND OF WANT TO POINT OUT THAT THE AREA, AND SHE'S PART OF THE STOKES LANDING ROAD GROUP, AND AS YOU UNDERSTAND AND YOU KNOW, THEY HAVE SOME ISSUES WITH THE WORKFORCE HOUSING THAT'S GOING IN, SO SHE LIVES BACK IN THAT COMMUNITY. AND WHEN I MENTIONED THAT STOKES LANDING IS VERY SIMILAR TO AND VENETIAN IS VERY SIMILAR IN THAT VENETIAN THAT GOES IN WHERE THE BRITISH PUB IS, GOES BACK BAN EXTENSIVE NEIGHBORHOOD BACK IN THAT KIND OF THING, AND THERE'S INDUSTRIAL AND COMMERCIAL ALONG THAT FRONTAGE.

THERE IS COMMERCIAL ALONG THE FRONT OF STOKES LANDING AS WELL OPPOSITE -- AND AGAIN, THE CORNWALL TAVERN ENDED UP CLOSING WHEN IT WAS SOLD. THERE'S ALSO A DOLLAR GENERAL IN THAT PARTICULAR. SO THE PLACES I'M MENTIONING IN HERE ARE IN THE SAME RELATIONSHIPS.

AND I THOUGHT THEY WERE GOOD EXAMPLES AS TO THE FOLKS BACK IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD. WE ATTEMPTED TO MEET WITH A LOT OF THOSE PEOPLE BUT THEIR WORK SCHEDULES AND THINGS DIDN'T END UP WORKING OUT VERY WELL. MOST OF THEM HAVE NO TRESPASSING SIGNS IN FRONT OF THEIR HOMES SO YOU DO NOT REALLY WANT TO GO UP TO THEIR DOORS, BUT SCHAFFER DID SEND OUT A MAILING TO EVERYBODY THAT I HAD ON THE LIST PLUS A LITTLE FARTHER, JUST SAYING, IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THIS OR WHATEVER, AND HE SENT A COPY OF THEIR BROCHURE AND WE DIDN'T RECEIVE ANYTHING BACK ON THAT. SO AGAIN, I CAN GO THROUGH AND DISCUSS SOME OF THE RUSE AND THE DIFFERENT THINGS -- RULE AND THE DIFFERENT THINGS, BUT IF YOU WENT TO ONE OF THESE YOU WOULD SEE THEY'RE VERY WELL CONTROLLED, AND ALTHOUGH YOU MIGHT NOT BE ABLE TO DEFINE WHAT A YAPPING DOG IS, IT'S ALSO NIGHING, IT'S ALSO ROUGH PLAY, IT'S ALSO ALL SORTS OF THINGS.

JACKIE CAN TALK ABOUT A LOT OF THAT IF YOU WANT, BUT I DON'T WANT TO BELABOR IT SINCE WE HAVE BEEN SUCH A LONG TIME.

AND AGAIN, THE ABILITY TO HAVE A TBEER OR A GLASS OF WINE WHILE YOU'RE SOCIALIZING IS THE INTENT OF IT.

YOU DO NOT COME THERE TO DRINK. YOU COME THERE TO SHOACIALIZE AND BE WITH YOUR -- SOCIALIZE AND BE WITH YOUR DOG.

SO IF THERE'S ANY OTHER QUESTIONS, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER

[02:50:01]

THEM. >> ALL RIGHT.

THE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? IF NOT, WE ARE NOW BACK INTO THE AGENCY FOR -- OKAY.

SO CHRISTINE, GO AHEAD AND HAVE THE FLOOR.

>> YES. THERE ARE NO CHANGES TO THE REZONING APPLICATION. THERE ARE HOWEVER CHANGES TO THE SPECIAL USE APPLICATION. ON PAGE 10 IT HAS SUGGESTED MOTIONS, FINDING TO APPROVE. THE FIRST ITEM IS REGARDING TRANSFERABILITY. IT SHOULD READ THAT THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT IS NOT TRANSFERABLE, PERIOD.

THE THIRD ITEM SHOULD READ THAT THE DEVELOPMENT TEAR SHALL BE LIMITED TO THE AREA DESIGNATED FOR SUCH ON THE CONCEPTUAL SITE PLAN. THAT'S THE SITE PLAN THAT YOU HAVE SEEN ON THE OVERHEAD. AND THEN ITEM 4 REGARDING HOURS OF OPERATION SHOULD READ THAT THE HOURS OF OPERATION ARE MONDAY -- OR WEDNESDAY THROUGH MONDAY 8:00 A.M. TO 11:00 P.M., CLOSED. ON TUESDAYS.

>> ALL RIGHT. SO WE ARE BACK INTO THE AGENCY FOR A MOTION ON THE REZONING AT THIS POINT.

MS. PERKINS. >> I'LL OFFER A MOWING TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF REZONING 202132 UNLEASH DOG PARK BASED ON FOUR FINDING OF FACT AS PROVIDED IN THE STAFF REPORT.

>> MOST BY MS. PERNG FOR APPROVAL.

SECOND BY DR. MCCORMICK. ANY DISCUSSION? LET'S REGISTER THE VOTE. ALL RIGHT.

THAT MOTION PASSES 6-1. LET'S MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER 3.

GO AHEAD, MS. PERKINS. >> MOTION TO APPROVE SPECIAL USE PERMIT IMAGINE 2021-17 UNLEASHED DOG PARK REQUEST FOR A SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW FOR THE ON-SITE SALE AND CONSUMPTION BEER AND INWOO UNDER THE REGULA

[Items 4 & 5]

>> I'M GOING TO CALL THIS MEETING BACK TO ORDER, AND WE'RE GOING TO HEAR ITEMS 4, 5 AND 6 AND THEN I UNDERSTAND THERE IS A REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION ON ITEM NUMBER 3 WHICH WE WILL HEAR AFTER ITEM NUMBER 6. SO IS MS. WAWRMTSZ HERE FOR ITEMS 4 AND 5? COME ON UP, MS. WALTERS.

DIGS ANYBODY OF ANY EXPARTD COMMUNICATION TO DECLARE ON

ITEMS 4 AND 5? >>

>> I DROVE BY. >> HER PIERRE DROVE BY.

ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY EX PARTE? MS. WALTERS WHY YOU'RE UP.

>> VERY GOOD. I'M HERE TODAY TO REQUEST A DEVELOPMENT CODE TO ALLOW THE FRONT YARD SET BA TO MEASURE 12 FEET INSTEAD OF 25 FEET IN A SINGLE FAMILY RS-3 ZONING TO ACCOMMODATE CONSTRUCTION OF A NEW SINGLE FAMILY HOME SPECIFICALLY LOCATED AT 435 NORTH ORANGE STREET.

UT OH. THIS ISN'T MINE.

>> OH, NO, DON'T GO THERE. >> HOW DO I GET THIS MINE? NO, WE'RE GOING THE WRONG WAY. OH, I SEE.

I SEE. OKAY, OKAY.

I GOT YOU. I GOT IT GOING BACKWARDS.

>> WE'VE ALREADY SEEN THIS ONE TWICE.

>> I WANT TO MAKE SURE I GET MY TIME UP HERE.

I'VE BEEN HERE A LONG TIME. I WANT TO MAKE IT LAST.

>> IT'S LIKE SEEING THE END OF THE MOVIE FIRST.

>> OKAY. VERY GOOD.

THIS IS WHAT I JUST SAID. THIS IS THE LOCATION MAP.

THIS IS NORTH ORANGE STREET FRONTAGE.

THIS IS THE LOT. IT'S A VERY BIG LOT AND WE'RE GOING TO BE CONSTRUCTING JUST ONE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE HERE, BUT THE ISSUE IS THAT IT HAS UNIQUE TOPOGRAPHY WHICH IS OUR HARDSHIP. IT'S A CORNER LOT WI FIRST FRONT SETBACK OF 25 FEET BUT THERE ARE OPEN WETLANDS THAT CONSUME THE REAR AND THE SOUTHERN PORTIONS, AND THEN THOSE WETLANDS ALSO REQUIRE AN ADDITIONAL 25-FOOT BUFFER.

SO THAT GIVES YOU LOTS OF YARD. AND ALSO THIS REDUCTION TO 12 FEET WOULD BE CONSISTENT WITH THE OTHER FRONT SETBACK OF THE NEIGHBORING SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE LOCATED AT 475 475 H

[02:55:03]

SO IT'S STILL LOTS AND LOTS OF GREEN SPACE.

IT'S JUST KIND RECON FIGURING IT TO ALLOW FOR THE WETLANDS AND THEN FOR THE ADDITIONAL 25 FEET PLATTED BUFFER.

SO THAT'S IT. THANK YOU.

>> OKAY. DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? DR. HILSENBECK?

>> I JUST HAVE DONE. THE WETLANDS ON THE PROPERTY ARE

GOING TO BE PRESERVED. >> OH, YEAH.

>> OKAY. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? ANY SPEAKER CARDS? ALL RIGHT. THEN WE ARE BACK INTO THE AGENCY FOR A MOTION. MS. PERKINS.

>> MOTION TO APPROVE ZONING VARIANCE 2021-31 SWB PER 55 NORTH ORANGE STREET EIGHT CONDITIONS AND FIVE FIND NS FACT

AS PROVIDED IN THE STAFF REPORT. >> MOTION BY MS. PERKINS, SECOND BY MR. PETER. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING TON, LET'S REGISTER THE VOTE.

ALL RIGHT. THAT MOTION PASSES.

MS. WALTERS, YOU'RE STILL UP. >> YES, I AM.

AND I'M GOING TO GO EVEN FASTER THIS TIME.

VERY SIMILAR SITUATION. THIS IS ACTUALLY THE ADJACENT LOT TO 435. THIS IS 455 NORTH ORANGE STREET.

SAME SITUATION, SAME HARDSHIP, SAME REQUEST, 12 FEET INSTEAD OF 25. YOU CAN SEE THIS IS ALSO MUCH LARGER THAN A TRADITIONAL LOT, BUT IT DOES ALSO SUFFER FROM THE SAME WETLAND ISSUES IN THE BACK PORTION RURG THE ADDITIONAL 25 FEET VEGETATIVE BUFFER, AND AGAIN THIS WOULD BE RIGHT NEXT TO 475 WHICH DOES HAVE A VARIANCE REDUCTION OF 12 FEET.

SO THIS IS OUR PROPOSED SITE PLAN.

AGAIN, YOU CAN SEE THE HOME IN THE FRONT, AND THEN ALL OF THAT VEGETATIVE BUFFER AND WETLANDS IN THE BACK OF THE LOT.

>> ANY QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT?

HEARING NONE, ANY SPEAKER CARDS? >> NONE.

>> ANY EX PARTE COMMUNICATION ON THIS ITEM?

[6. MAJMOD 2021-22 Deerpark Commerce Center. Request for a Major Modification to the St. Augustine 500,000 SF Warehouse PUD (Ord. 2005-91, as amended) to add approximately 5.98 acres; to change the PUD name to Deerpark Commerce Center; to allow a 4% upland natural vegetation in lieu of the 5% requirement; to increase the maximum height of buildings to 49 feet; and to revise the Master Development Plan (MDP) Text and Map. The subject property is located at 3800 Deerpark Blvd and includes the two unaddressed lots located to the north.]

>> MOTION TO APPROVE ZONING VARIANCE 2021-THIEF AT 455 NORTH ORANGE STREET BASED ON FOUR CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL FIVE

FINDINGS OF FACT. >> SECOND BY DR. HILSENBECK.

ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NO ONE, LET'S REGISTER THE VOTE. THANK YOU FORE YOUR BREVITIY.

>> THANK YOU. >> ONTO NUMBER 6, MS. GAIFER.

GAVER. >> GOOD AFTERNOON.

I WILL TRY TO KEEP THIS AS PREEF AS POSSIBLE AND SPEAK FAST.

COURTNEY GAVER WITH ROGERS TOWERS 100 WHETSTONE PLACE ST. AUGUSTINE I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF THE APPLICANT FOR THIS MAJOR MODIFICATION, DEERPARK INDUSTRIAL SPRERCH.

WE HAVE ALMOST OUR ENTIRE DEVELOPMENT TEAM HERE THIS AFTERNOON WITH GLENN, TIMMONS WHICH BHIRL MILL, I DREW HOLLY OUR CIVIL JEENG QUSH OSHA TRAFFIC ENGINEER, CASEY DENDOR ONE OF ON PLANNERS. WOOPES ALSO HAVE TWO ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANTS FOR THIS PROJECT AND WITH US TODAY IS BYRON PEACOCK WITH PEA CON CONSULTING GROUP WHO IS COOKING OUR WETLAND PERMITTING FOR THE PROJECT.

SO VERY BRIEFLY I DO WANT TO GIVE THE AGENCY A LITTLE BIT OF BACK GROUND ON THE APPLICANT. SO DEERPARK STLIL LEARN LLC IS AN INLIGHT REAL ESTATE PARTNERST IS AN INDUSTRIAL AND REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT COMPANY. THEY OPENED UP AND THEIR HEADQUARTERS MR. PONTE VEDRA BEACH ABOUT A YEAR AGO DURING THE PANDEMIC. WE ARE VERY HAPPY TO HAVE HEM HERE IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY. AND WE BELIEVE THAT THIS PROJECT BRINGING CLASS A SPECULATIVE INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSE SPACE IS A VERY GOOD PROJECT, AND SO WITH INLIGHT IS ERIC FERNANDEZ IN THE EVENT YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR HIM.

SO BIG PICTURE, THIS PLKS SMAIRNLG MODIFICATION TO THE ST. ST. AUGUSTINE 500,000 SQUARE FOOT WAREHOUSE PUD WHICH IS A MOITHFUL. IT WAS APPROVED NEARLY, IF YOU CAN BELIEVE IT, 20 YEARS AGO AND WAS MODIFIED IN 2015 TO EXTEND THE PHASING, SO IT'S STILL AN ACTIVITY PUD AND IS FULLY END FIEMENTD OH THE PURPOSE OF THIS APPLICATION IS REALLY TO PULL IN THE REMAINING 5.98 ACRES TO THE NORTH WHICH IS THE LAST

[03:00:01]

AND SO IN THIS APPLICATION WE'RE ALSO PROPOSING TO PROVIDE A MAXIMUM WHIEGHT RESTRICTION, CHANGE THE NAME OF THE PUD TO DEERPARK COMMERCE CENTER, AND REVISE THE MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN, TEXT AND MAP TO MEET CURRENT LDC STANDARDS THE WITH EXCEPTION ONE WAIVER THAT HAS BEEN REQUESTED.

THE APPLICATION DOES NOT INCAREENS INTENSITY.

IT ACTUALLY DECREASES INTENSITY PRETTY SIGNIFICANTLY FROM WHAT IS CURRENTLY APPROVED. SO AGAIN THE PROPERTY IS ABOUT -- IT IS APPROXIMATELY 46.48 ACRES.

IT'S LOCATED IN ELKTON IN THE I-95 STATE ROAD 207 CORRIDOR OFF DEERPARK BOULEVARD, AND THIS IS IN THE ST. AUGUSTINE INDUSTRIAL PARK AREA. IF YOU DIDN'T DRIVE AT TO THE PROPERTY OR YOU'RE NOT FAMILIAR WITH THE AREA, IT'S BASICALLY LOCATED ALONG DEERPARK BOULEVARD NORTH OF THE EASTER DAY FARM AND Q PACK INDUSTRIAL SPACES, KIND OF ACROSS FROM WASTE PRO SOUTH OF 84 LUMBER. THE PROPERTY HAS A FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF MIXED USE AND AS I'VE STATED, THE BULK OF THE PROPERTY, WHICH IS ABOUT 40 ACRES, IS CURRENTLY ENTITLED AND IS ZONED PUD FOR LIGHT INDUSTRIAL USE, AND THEN AS YOU CAN SEE, WE HAVE THE ALMOST 6-ACRE PARCEL OF THE OR ADDED LANDS WHICH IS REALLY LIKE YOUR PROVERB YELLOW HOE HOLE IN A DOUGHNUT. WE'RE PULLING NIGHT THE PUD.

SO HERE'S A LOOK AT THE PURND CURRENT MDP MAP WHICH HAS APPROVED BACK IN 2005 AND THEN THE PHASING EXTENDED IN 2015.

IT WAS A LOOFD FOR 501, 800,000 IT'S LIUS WHALER HOUSES WITH A FUTURE INPEAKS VERY THOUSAND 750 SQUARE FEET SO THAT'S ROUGH RI 5,700 SQUARE FEET IF YOU'RE DOING THE MATH.

THERE'S CURRENTLY UNACCESS POINT OFF DEERPARK BOULEVARD.

CAN SEER THERE ARE PRESERVED WETLANDS AND THEN ON-SITE STORM WATER AND RELATED PARKING. SO HERE'S A LOOK AT THE NEW PUD.

YOU CAN SEE IN YELLOW THE 5.9 ACRES THAT'S BEING PROPERTY INTO THE PUD. THE NEW PUD DOES BREAK THE SINGLE WAREHOUSE INTO TWO PROPOSED WAREHOUSES.

RIGHT NOW IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S GOING TO BE ABOUT 425,000 SQUARE FEET TOTAL, SO THAT'S WELL WITHIN THAT MAXIMUM OF ALMOST 575,000 SQUARE FEET THAT IS APPROVED, AND WE HAVE MODIFIED THE TEXT TO NOT INCLUDE THE EXPANSION FROM THE ORIGINAL PUD, SO IT WOULD REMAIN 5,001,003,000 SQUARE FEET OF MAXIMUM INTENSITY FOR THIS HUES. YOU CAN ALSO SEE WE HAVE ON-SITE OUR STORM WATER PONDS. WE HAVE OVER 10.5 ACRES PRESERVED WETLANDS. AND THEN WE HAVE TWO ACCESS POINT NOW OFF OF DEERPARK BOULEVARD AS WELL AS YOU CAN SEE OUR FIRE LOOP AROUND ACCESS ROAD AND RELATED PARKING.

SO DUE TO THE PERMIT HISTORY IN 2005 AND THE EXISTING CONDITIONS ON THE SITE, WE ARE REQUESTING ONE WAIVER FROM LDC SECTION 5 WANT 030383, AND THIS SECTION OF YOUR CODE REQUIRES A MINIMUM OF 5% OF UPLAND NATURAL VEGETATION WHICH IS NOT -- WHICH WOULD BE 2.3 ACRES OF THE SITE, SO WHEN THE COUNTY ORIGINALLY APPROVED THE PUD AND THEN SUBSEQUENT CONSTRUCTION PLANS IN 2005, EVEN THOUGH THIS LDC SECTION WAS IN YOUR CODE, IT WASN'T LIKE A SPECIFIC TEXT ITEM IN THE PUD TEXT, AND SO WHEN WE STARTED LOGIC AT THIS ETM WE REALIZED, GOSH, WHEN WE GHETTO CONSTRUCTION PLAN APPROVAL, THAT'S GOING TO BE REALLY TIGHT, THAT 5% BECAUSE THE WETLANDS THAT ARE ON THE PROPERTY AND JUST THE CONSTRAINTS, SITE CONSTRAINTS.

SO WHEN WE LOOKED THE AT THE 2005 TRUCKS PLANS THAT WERE APPROVED IT APPEARS THAT THE COUNTY APPROVED THOSE AND FIND THAT THIS SECTION WAS BASICALLY APPROVED THROUGH 4.0 ACRES OF OPEN SPACE, AND THAT WAS BOTH UPLAND BUFFERS AND ET WITHENDS THAT WERE PRESERVED ON THE PROPERTY, AND SO WE HAVE INCLUDED THIS AS A WAIVER, AND SO WE WOULD BE REQUIRED TO PROVIDE A MINIMUM OF 4%, AND THAT WOULD BE .61 ACRES OF CONSERVED UP WHY LEFT HAND NATURAL BUFFERS PLUS 1.37 ACCESS UPHANDLED NATURAL VEGETATION, AND I WILL REPRESENT TO YOU THAT THE ORIGINAL PUD PROPERTY HAS BEEN USED FOR SILVICULTURAL ACTIVITY FOR QUITE SOME TIME SO THERE'S NOT A LOT OF UPLAND NATURAL VEGETATION TO BEGIN WITH, SO -- AND SPEAKING OF WETLANDS, I WANTED TO CLARIFY A NOTATION IN THE STAFF REPORT THAT INDICATES THAT WE'RE, INC. CREENGS OUR WETLAND IMPACT FROM . 4 ACRES TO 12.08 ACRES. I'M JUST GOING TO BRIEFLY TOUCH ON THIS BUT TO THE EXTENT THERE'S ANY FURTHER QUESTIONING, MR. PEACOCK IS HERE. SO WHEN APPROVED IN 2005, YOU CAN SEE I'VE BASICALLY BROKEN IT OUT TO WHERE THE TOP SET OF BULLET POINTS IS FROM THE ORIGINAL ORDINANCE AND THEN WE HAVE OUR TOTAL WETLAND FOR THE SITE, AND THEN I BASICALLY AM

[03:05:02]

AND SO WHEN THIS WAS APPROVED IN 2005, THE TOTAL WETLANDS THAT WERE REPRESENTED TO BE ON THE PROPERTY AT THAT TIME WERE 6.4 -- 7 ACRES TOTAL. OKAY.

AND HA WAS ABOUT 16 FIRST OF THE ORIGINAL PUD PROPERTIES.

SO THE WETLAND DELINEATION ACTUALLY ON THE PROPERTY IS CLOSER TO 50%. IT'S 20.14 ACRES WITHIN THE PROPERTY. SO OF THOSE WETLANDS, WE ARE IMPACTING LESS THAN HALF AND THOSE ARE AT THE LOWER QUALITY WET ONLY SITE WHICH INCLUDES BEDDED PINE PLANTATION AND PINE FLATWOODS. I DO HAVE TWO AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS. ONE ON THE LEFT IS OF THE 2021 EARLY AND ON THE LEFT THE 2004 OOFERL.

YOU CAN SEE THERE'S A LOT OF TIMBER THAT'S BEEN PLANTED ON THE PROPERTY. BOTH INCLUDE OUR WETLAND DLIN IMMIGRATIONSIATIONS. I JUST WANTED TO GIVE THAT COMPARISON FOR THE RECORD. AGAIN, MOST OF OUR WETLAND IMPACT ARE STRIP OF WET ONTDZ WEST SIGHT OFSIDE THAT BORDER I-95 AND THAT'S WET PINE FLATWOODS THAT'S BASICALLY LEFTOVER FROM WHEN I-95 WAS ORIGINALLY BUILT.

AND AGAIN MR. PEACOCK IS HERE IF YOU HAVE ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS.

WE'VE ALREADY REVVED OR WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT PERMIT WHICH WAS FOR THE ENTIRE SITE, NOT JUST WHAT'S CURRENTLY ENTITLED BUT DID IT DOES INCLUDE THE ADDITIONAL OR ADDED LARCHEDZ.

WE TO GET THROUGH A FEW WEEKS AGO.

SO-TO-SUMMARIZE THIS PROPOSED PUD MAJOR MODIFICATION APPLICATION IS GOING TO BRING MUCH-NEEDED INDUSTRIAL SPACE TO ST. JOHNS COUNTY AT THE I-95 STATE ROTE 207 CORE DOOR.

IT IS EXATD ONE OTHER LAND. THE APPLICANT HAS ALREADY SUBMITTED NEW COMMERCIAL PLANS WHICH ARE UNDER REVIEW WITH THE COUNTY AND THEY ARE ANXIOUS TO BREAK GROUND ON THIS PECK LAWTIVE WAREHOUSE SPACE. THIS APPLICATION REDUCES THE INTENSITY OF THE CURRENT ENTITLEMENTS FOR THE PUD.

IT IS PRESERVING 10.58 ACRES OF WETLANDS.

AND IT IS CONSISTENT WITH YOUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AND THE ST. JOHNS COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

STAFF HAS NOT OBJECTED TO THIS APPROVAL OF THIS APPLICATION, AND I AM NOT AWARE OF ANY PUBLIC OBJECTION TO THIS APPLICATION, EITHER. SO WITH THAT, I WOULD STAND BY FOR COMMENTS AND WE WOULD ASK FOR YOUR RECOMMENDATION OF APPROVAL. THANK YOU.

>> IS THERE ANY EX PARTE COMMUNICATION TO DECLARE?

>> I DROVE BY THE SITE THIS MORNING.

>> ALL RIGHT. >> YES, I HAD A CONVERSATION AND

A MESSAGE. >> MS. PERKINS.

>> YES, I SPOKE WITH MS. GAVER ON FUS AND WE BRIEFLY DISCUSSED

THIS. >> I HAD A BRIEF CONVERSATION.

>> I HAD A BRIEF CONVERSATION WITH GAVER LAST WEEK.

WE DISCUSSED THE WETLAND AND THE QUALITY OF THE WETLANDS ON THE

PROPERTY. >> DR. HILSENBECK.

>> I ALSO -- THANK YOU FOR BRINGING THAT UP.

I ALSO GOT A PHONE CALL FROM MSR BACK, AND SHE TEXTED ME BACK.

WE WERE GOING TO TALK ON MONDAY, YOU BUT I DECIDED I DIDN'T NEED TO TALK. I DIDN'T REALLY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS THAT I FELT COULD BE ANSWERED, BUT I HAVE SOME TODAY.

>> OKAY. >> MR. CHAIR, I ALSO RECEIVED A CALL AND CHATTED BRIEFLY, BUT THAT WAS A GET BACK TO YOU PHONE CALL. NO SUBSTANCE.

>> ALL RIGHT. AND I ALSO HAD A PHONE CONVERSATION WITH MS. GAVER WHERE WOULDN'T OVER THE CHANGES AND DISCUSSED THE VARIANCE REQUESTED.

NOW WE ARE PREPARED FOR QUESTIONS.

DR. HILSENBECK. >> OKAY.

I DO HAVE SEVERAL QUESTIONS. I JUST WONDERED ISN'T THIS PROPERTY JUST TO THE EAST OF ALLEN NEASE ROAD THAT ADJOINS ALSO 207 THAT THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS RECENTLY TURN DOWN A REQUEST FOR A HOUSING DEVELOPMENT RIGHT UP ALLEN NEASE ROAD BECAUSE OF TRAFFIC CONCERNS THE RESIDENTS?

>> I'M NOTE AWARE OF THE APPLICATION.

I BELIEVE WHAT'S ONTO 2 EAST OF I-95 IS THE, I THINK IT'S CALLED THE ST. JOHNS COUNTY MARKETPLACE AND IT'S PROPERTY I BELIEVE

THAT'S OWN CHT AS WELL AS -- >> RIGHT ABOUT THE BUT I WAS ASKING ISN'T YOUR PROPERTY EAST OF OONL NEASE ROAD.

ALLEN NEASE ROAD IS ON THE WEST SIDE OF I-95.

>> YEAH, WE'RE TO THE EAST OF DEERPARK BOULEVARD SO WE'RE BASICALLY SANDWICHED BETWEEN DEERPARK BOULEVARD, THERE'S THE PIECE TO TOWER TO OUR DIRES INDUSTRIAL SPACE THAT'S WITHIN PUD AND THEN I-95 BOARDS US ON THE EAST.

I'M NOT AWARE OF ALLEN NEASE BEING IN THIS VICINITY.

>> ALLEN NEASE IS JUST TO THE WEST OF YOUR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT, AND THERE WAS A PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IN THERE JUST TURNED DOWN IN THE PAST MON NAFTSDZ OR TWO BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS BECAUSE OF TRAFFIC CONCERNS OF RESIDENTS.

AND THE REASON I ASKED THIS ABOUT TRAFFIC CONCERNS IS YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE -- IT STATES IN THERE THAT YOU'VE GOT THE TWO

[03:10:03]

THOSE ARE MUCH LONGER. THAT TRAFFIC IS A REAL CONCERN.

IT WAS A CONCERN FOR THE BOARD OF COUNTY CUBAN MIGRANTS FORAN NEASE ROAD ACCESS. IT'S A CONCERN FOR ME FOR THIS ONE. SO DO YOU HAVE ANY CURRENT TRAFFIC STUDIES FOR WHAT'S GOING TO BE COMING IN AND OUT OF

THERE? >> YES.

WE DO HAVE -- AND OUR TRAFFIC ENGINEER IS HERE, THOMAS, IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO COME YOU. WHAT I WOULD REPRESENT TO YOU IS EVEN WITHOUT THIS MAJOR MODIFICATION, THE PUD IS ENTITLED, AND LIKELY I SAID IT'S ENTITLED FOR ALMOST 575,000 SQUARE FEET OF LIGHT INDUSTRIAL USE, OH EVEN WITHOUT THIS MAJOR MODIFICATION, WE ARE GREATLY REDUCING THE INTENSITY BY HIM 125,000 SQUARE FEET. I MEAN, THE 6 ACRES IS ALLOWING TO US BASICALLY PRODUCE A BETTER PLAN AND HAVE TWO WAREHOUSES INSTEAD OF ONE JAIE NORMUS WAREHOUSE.

WE DID DO A PRE-APP MEETING WITH FDOT AND AS YOU CAN SEE WE DO HAVE THE ICE ANALYSIS AS CONDITION OF THE PUD IN THE EVENT THAT THERE IS SIGNALIZATION THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED AT DEERPARK BOULEVARD AND STATE ROAD 207.

I UNDERSTAND THAT IS A CONCERN. >> I'M GLAD THE TRAFFIC JEERCH'S HERE BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T SEE ANYTHING IN THE ITEM ON TRAFFIC EXCEPT A STATEMENT THAT WAS MADE, IT SAYS, SIX MONTHS AFTER CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY FOR BOTH BUILDINGS ARE ISSUED, THE CHRON OR FDOT MAY REQUEST THE YOU APPLICANT TO CONDUCT A TRAFFIC STUDY THAT SHALL DETERMINE WHETHER A SIGNAL IS WARRANTED AT INTERSECTION OF 207 AND DEERPARK ROAD.

I JUST THINK THAT'S A LITTLE BIT BACKWARDS.

I'D LIKE TO SEE A TRAFFIC STUDYE OF OCCUPANCY IS UP -- IS ISSUED AND THIS PROJECT IS UP AND RUNNING.

SO THAT'S NOT I GUESS THE WAY THE ORDINANCE READS, AND WHAT WE HAVE TO ABIDE BY, BUT THAT JUST SEEMS BACKWARDS TO ME.

I'D LIKE SEE TRAFFI STUD I BEFOREHAND, SO MAYBE HE COULD

SPEAK TO THAT. >> HELLO, EVERYONE.

I'M THOMAS HATCHER, I'M A TRAFFIC ENGINEER WITH ENGLAND-THIMS & MILLER AND THANK YOU FOR BRINGING UP TRAFFIC, DR. HILSENBECK. INDEED WE DID PERFORM A TRAFFIC STUDY. THE APPLICANT REQUESTED THAT WE PERFORM ONE, AND COORDINATE WITH THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, AND ULTAL MALT THE TRAFFIC STUDY DEMONSTRATES THAT NO STATE OF OR OPERATIONAL DEFICIENCIES WERE IDENTIFIED THE AS FAR AS THE CORN FOR ALLEN NEASE ROADING DURING OUR TRAFFIC STUDY WE OBSERVED THAT PREDOMINANTLY THE TRAFFIC LEAVING THE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT WILL TRAVEL TO I-95 THE. THE DIRECT IS ROUGHLY 77 TO 85 PERCENT TRAVELING TO AND FROM I-95.

THEREFORE, NOT MUCH OF OUR TRAFFIC WILL TRAVEL PAST ALLEN

NEASE ROAD. >> I WASN'T CONCERNED ABOUT IT TRAVELING WEST PAST ALLEN NEASE ROAD.

I WAS CONCERNED ABOUT IT JUST AS YOU SAID, 75, 78 PERCENT TRAVELING EAST TO I-95 AND HAVING TO TURN LEFT ONTO 207.

THAT'S WHAT CONCERNS ME. >> YES.

SO DURING OUR TRAFFIC STUDY, WE PERFORMED A SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS. WE PULLED THE CRASH DATA.

WE TOOK EXISTING COUNTS, EXISTING DELAY DATA.

WE ANALYZED THE TOTAL DEVELOPMENT ON DEERPARK BOULEVARD. THE RESULTS OF OUR SIGNAL WARRANT ANALYSIS IS THAT WE DO NOT BELIEVE A TRAFFIC SIGNAL WILL BE WARRANTED AT THIS INTERSECTION AFTER BUILD-OUT, SO WE DID ANALYZE THE BUILD-OUT CONDITION.

HOWEVER, DURING THAT CONDITION IN THE PUD TEXT, WE SAID ZERO TO SIX MONTHS AFTER THIS T. COS ARE ISSUED BECAUSE WE WANT TO SEE WHAT THE ACTUAL TRIP GENERATION OF THIS DEVELOPMENT WILL BE, BECAUSE THEORETICAL, ALL OF OUR THEORETICAL TRIP GENERATION IS BASED OFF HISTORICAL DATA THROUGHOUT THE UNITED STATES, AND IT'S A GENERALLY ACCEPTED PRACTICE, HOWEVER, WE PUT THAT CONDITION IN THERE JUST IN CASE THERE WAS UP OR DOWN. THEORETICALLY, NO, WE'RE NOT GOING TO USE A SIGNAL. HOWEVER, WE JUST WANTED TO USE ACTUAL TRIP GENERATION AFTER, AND WE DON'T FEEL A SIGNAL WILL

BE WARRANTED. >> OKAY.

THANK YOU. A COUPLE MORE QUESTIONS.

CONCERNING THE HEIGHT OF THE BUILDING, YOU'RE CAN GO FOR A

[03:15:01]

DO YOU HAPPEN TO KNOW THULE THOSE?

>> I DON'T HAPPEN TO KNOW HOW TALL THEY ARE BUT I WILL SAY FOR THE RECORD WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR A WAIVER OF A BUILDING HEIGHT.

THE ORIGINAL PUD AS ENTITLED DOESN'T INCLUDE A BUILDING HEIGHT AT ALL. UNDERSTAND YOUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE I BELIEVE IT'S TABLE 6.01 IF THIS WAS AN IW INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSE ZONED PROPERTY THERE ARE NO BUILDINGS HEIGHT RESTRICTION UNLESS YOUR IN A COASTAL EAR OR THE AIRPORT DISTRICT WHICH WE ARE NOT. THERE IS A REQUIREMENT OF IN YOUR CODE THAT IF YOU GO OVER THE 35-FOOT HEIGHT, THAT YOU HAVE TO HAVE THE AUTOMATED SPRINKLERS WHICH WE HAVE.

IF YOU LOOK AT THIS RUDIMENTARY PAINT MAP THAT I PUT TOGETHER, YOU CAN SEE WE'RE IN YELLOW THERE THE WITH THE STAR.

THE ST. AUGUSTINE INDUSTRIAL PUD, WHICH PARTS OF IT ARE DEVELOPED, IT ALLOWS MAXIMUM WHIELGT L. WHIEGHTD YOU HAVE TO 45 FEET WITH A SILO STRUCTURES WHICH ARE ON THE NORTHWEST PORTIONS THAT OF BLUE AREA UP TO EYE OF FEET.

THE GREEN IS THE TRAVEL CENTER AT STATE ROAD 7 PUD ON TOWER OWTH. IT WAS RECENTLY APPROVED IN 2017 AND ALLOWS A BUILDING HEIGHT UP TO 45 FEET.

THEN IF YOU LOOK, THE RED TO OUR SOUTHEAST IS CHT ZONED PROPERTY.

YOUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE ALLOWS THAT TO BE UP TO 40-FOOT PER TABLE 601 BUT IT CAN ALSO GO UP TO 60 FEET.

AND JUST SO THAT YOU UNDERSTAND A LITTLE BIT OF WHY WE'RE ASKINE ADD 10 RESTRICTION TO OURSELVES, THE 49-FOOT, BUT THE BUILDING, THIS BILLING IS BEING DESIGNED AS A CLASS A SPECULATIVE SPACE, AND SO IN ORDER FOR THIS PROJECT TO ATTRACT THE TYPE OF END USERS AND EMPLOYERS THAT WE NEED TO ATTRACT, YOU HAVE TO HAVE A HIGHER SPACE. 49 FEET WAS LIKE THE ABSOLUTE LIKE MINIMUM THAT WE NEED TO ATTRACT THESE CLASS A END USERS THAT WE WANT BECAUSE THEY'RE ALL BASICALLY STORING THEIR PRODUCT INSIDE. SO IF YOU THINK OF THE AMAZON WAREHOUSES, THAT'S LIKE STACKED UP.

AND SO IN ORDER TO ATTRACT THAT TYPE OF END USER AND THOSE TYPES OF EMPLOYERS FOR JOBS, 49 FEET IS WHY WE'RE REQUESTING THAT, BUT IT COMPAT YOU WILL BE. I REPRESENT TO YOU IT IS COMPATIBLE WITH THE ADJACENT PROPERTIES.

>> SO THERE IS NO WAIVER REQUEST?

>> NO WAIVER REQUEST, NO, SIR. WE'RE ADDING THAT RETRICKS.

>> SO CAN WE TALK ABOUT THE WETLANDS AND MAYBE YOU'LL HAVE

MR. PEACOCK COME UP HERE. >> SURE.

>> WHAT IS THE PERCENTAGE OF WET ONTDZ PROPERTY AGAIN?

>> WELL, SO THE PERCENTAGE THAT I DID WERE BASED ON WHAT'S CURRENTLY APPROVED. SO THAT IS ABOUT, TO USE ROUND NUMBERS, 40 ACRES. SO IN 2005 IT WAS REPRESENTED TO

BE ABOUT 16.5%. >> WE CAN JUST FOCUS ON THE

CURRENT. >> OKAY.

I'D HAVE TO DO THE MATH ON THAT. DO YOU WANT TO COME UP HERE

WHILE WE'RE WAITING? >> SO 22.6 ACRES OF WETLAND OUT OF 46.48 ACRES OF TOTAL PROPERTY, SO YOU HAVE THAT AS 49.7%, SO THAT'S NEARLY 50% OF THE PROPERTY IS WETLANDS.

>> YEAH, THAT DOESN'T INCLUDE -- WELL, THAT 49.7% ONLY INCLUDES THE ORIGINAL PUD PROPERTY. IT'S ACTUALLY 58.7% FOR THE

TOTAL -- 48.7%. >> WHAT WAS PRESENTED IN THE APPLICATION. I COME OUT WITH 48.75.

SAY 49%. SO NEARLY HALF OF THIS PROPERTY IS WETLANDS. AND THEN YOU MENTIONED THAT FEWER THAN 50% WERE GOING TO BE IMPACTED, BUT I HAVE 12.08 ACRES IMPACTED. THAT COMES OUT TO 53.3% IMPACTED. SO OUT OF THE WETLAND ON THE PROPERTY, FOR NEARLY HALF THE SITE, 53% OF THOSE ARE GOING TO BE IMPACTED. I THINK THAT'S EXCESSIVE OUT THERE TO IMPACT THAT MUCH WETLAND HABITAT ON ANY PROPERTY FRANKLY. SO MAYBE MR. PEACOCK WOULD WANT TO SPEAK TO THAT. BUT I HAVE OTHER QUESTIONS.

OH DUCING YOUR WAIVER ON UPLAND BUFFER FROM 5 TO 4 PERCENT, THAT DOESN'T REALLY BOTHER ME BUT WHAT BOTHERS ME IF YOU GO BACK TO YOUR MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN, YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO HAVE AVERAGE 25% NATURAL VEGETATIVE UPLAND BUFFER PROVIDED JEANTSD TO CONTIGUOUS WETLAND CONSISTENT WITH LTC CONNECTION 01.

.06B. SO LOOKING AT THAT MAP AND LOOKING AT YOUR AREAS THAT YOU SAY ARE THOSE UPLAND BUFFERS, I SEE SEVERAL DISCONTINUOUS TRACTS OF UPLAND VEGETATION, BUT I DON'T SEE A CONTINUOUS OR AN AVERAGE 25 PERCENT NATURAL

[03:20:03]

I SEE FIVE SPORADIC ONES AROUND THAT LARGER WETLAND AREA AND I SEE ONE NARROW ONE PROBABLY 15 FEET, ACCORDING TO MEASUREMENTS I TRIED TO DO, BASED ON THAT 75-FOOT ROAD, INTERNAL ROAD. I JUST DON'T SEE THAT YOU HAVE THAT. TO MEET THAT REQUIREMENT, AND MAY BE YOU DO AND THAT CAN BE EXPLAINED, BUT I JUST DO NOT SEE THAT. THEN YOU HAVE A STATEMENT THAT THERE'S OVER 10 ACRES OF WETLAND PRESERVATION.

AND THEN YOU SAY THAT THIS IS -- OVER 10 AREAS, OF WETTING PRESERVATION WITH 0 .6 ACRES OF CONSERVED UPLAND, IN AFTER NATURAL BUFERS AND BOTANICA 3 ACRES OF UPLAND NATURAL VEGETATION. WHAT DOES THAT VEGETATION PRESERVATION HAVE TO DO WITH WETLAND PRESERVATION? AND HOW DOES THAT FIT IN WITH THE REQUIREMENT FOR UPLAND

NATURAL VEGETATION? >> SO I'LL TAKE YOUR LAST

QUESTION FIRST, WHICH IS >>>IS THAT CORRECT?

>> NO. I WONDERED WHAT YOUR NATURAL UP LAND BUFFER HAS TO DO WITH PRESERVATION OF WETLANDS, PERIOD. THAT'S THE WAY YOU JUSTIFY YOUR UPLAND BUFFER IS PRESERVATION OF THOSE TEN ACRES PLUS OF

WETLANDS. >> I'M NOT AWARE WE'RE JUSTIFYING UPLAND BUFFERS WITH OUR WAIVER.

THOSE ARE TWO SEPARATE ISSUES UNLESS I'M MISUNDERSTANDING.

>> YOU'RE EXPLAINING THIS. SO I THOUGHT THAT WAS JUSTIFYING IT. YOU WERE EXPLAINING THE SITE ENCLOSED OVER TEN ACRES OF WETLAND PRESERVATION AND THEN GIVE THE NATURAL UP LAND BUFFER. I DIDN'T SEE WHAT THE UPLAND BUFFER AND PRESERVATION HAD TO DO WITH EACH OTHER.

>>>IN 2005 AS THIS IS ENTITLED THERE WERE CONSTRUCTION PLANS APPROVED. THIS LDDC SECTION WAS DEEMED MET BY STAFF IN 2005 TO ISSUE CONSTRUCTION PLAN APPROVAL BY 4.0 ACRE OF OPEN SPACE. THAT FOUR ACRE INCLUDED UPLAND BUFFERS AND ON SITE PRESERVATION.

THAT WAS CURRENTLY APPROVED, APPROVING IF 2005.

AS WE SIT HERE TODAY AND MISS BISHOP CAN CORRECT ME IF I'M WRONG WETLAND PRESERVATION IS NOT INCLUDED IN THE UPLAND NATURAL VEGETATION AT ALL. IS THAT CORRECT?

>> THAT WOULD BE CORRECT. >> YES.

SO WHAT WE'RE SAYING IS BECAUSE WE'RE PRESERVING 10.5 ACRES THE MAJORITY OF OUR NICE WETLANDS ON THE SITE, NOT THE PINE PLANTATION. IT'S VERY UNLIKELY WE WOULD MEET THAT FIVE PERCENT BECAUSE OF THE SILVER CULTURES ACTIVITYS ON THE SITE. THAT 4% IS BEING MET THROUGH .61 ACRES OF THE UPLAND NATURAL BUFFER WHICH THE LDC ALLOWS AND COUNTS AND 1.3 P SEVEN ACRES OF UPLAND WE'RE GOING TO BE ABLE TO

PRESERVE. >> YOU'RE STILL IMPACTING 53% OF THE WETLANDS ON SITE. NOT LESS THAN 50%.

BY THE CALCULATIONS IN THING AGENDA ITEM AND WHAT I READ YOU'RE IMPACTING 12.08 ACRES OF WETLANDS OUT OF 22.66 ACRES.

THAT'S 53.3. >>>THE PERCENTAGES I GAVE IN MY PRESENTATION DIDN'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH THE OVERALL PROPERTY IT'S PERCENTAGES OF WHAT IS ENTITLED OF 40 ACRES.

THERE'S A DISCREPANCY OF WHAT WAS APPROVED IN 2005 SHOWING 6 HNT 4 WETLAND ACRES ON THE SITE AS WE SIT HERE TODAY THERE'S

OVER TWENTY ACRES. >> I GOT THE NUMBERS OUT OF THE AGENDA ITEM. THEY ARE NOT CORRECT?

>> I DIDN'T, THE ONLY PERCENTAGES I PROVIDED IS IN MY

SLIDE SHOW. >> I CAME UP WITH THE PERCENTAGES BECAUSE I JUST DIVIDED NUMBERS.

I USED YOUR ACRES THAT WERE IN THE AGENDA ITEM FOR WHAT WE'RE HEAR TO APPROVE TODAY. NOT WHAT WAS APPROVED IN 2005.

>>>CORRECT. WHAT I'M TRYING TO DIFFERENTIATE IS THERE'S ALREADY THE PUD THE BULK IS APPROVED AND THE REASON IT LOOKS LIKE THE WETLAND IS INCREASING THAT MUCH IS EFFECTIVELY IN 2005 THAT 6.7 ACRES ISN'T REALITY WHAT WE'RE

LOOKING AT ON THE SITE. >> YOU'RE ADDING A PIECE TO NORTH. I'VE GOT THAT.

>> YEAH. I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT THAT PIECE AT ALL. THE CONVERSATION I'M HAVING IS AS YOU LOOK AT THE 40 ACRES, THIS PROJECT THAT'S 46.48 ACRES.

[03:25:02]

OVER TIME TODAY, EVEN WITHOUT THIS MAJOR MODIFICATION THERE ARE 20.14 ACRE ON THE CURRENT PUD AND THOSE WETLANDS HAVE BEEN DELINEATED BY THE WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT WHO ISSUED A PERMIT APPROVING THE IMPACTS THAT WE'RE PLANNING TO IMPACT ON THIS SITE. SO IF YOU HAVE SPECIFIC QUESTIONS ABOUT THE WETLANDS MR. PEACOCK CAN HANDLE THOSE.

I APOLOGIZE BUT I'M NOT THE BEST AT MATH.

>> THAT'S FINE. THAT'S GREAT.

IF HE WANTS TO ADDRESS THAT THEN I WANT TO ASK ABOUT SOILS.

I KNOW YOU LIKE SOILS OR ARE IN TO THEM JUST LIKE I AM.

>> PEACOCK CONSULTING GROUP AT 12058 ST. HOE SAY BOULEVARD

SUITE 604 JACKSONVILLE 32223. >>>DO YOU WANT TO ADDRESS THAT UPLAND BUFFER? HOW YOU'RE GOING HAVE AN AVERAGE 25-FOOT BUFFER AROUND CONTINUOUS WETLANDS ON THE MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN. HOW THOSE FIVE DISCONTINUOUS PIECES COME OUT TO BEING A 25% AVERAGE BUFFER?

>> I DON'T THINK IT'S POSSIBLE TO PROVIDE A 25-FOOT WIDE AVERAGE BUFFER WITH THAT SITE PLAN.

THE UPLANDS THERE ARE VETTED PINE PLANTATION THAT'S BEEN HIGHLY ALTERED. I'M NOT SURE AN ECOLOGICAL BENEFIT TO ADD MORE OF THE SAME L A TERED UPLANDS ADJACENT TO

THE WETLANDS. >> ACCORDING TO THE L-D-C YOU'RE SUPPOSE TO HAVE THAT AVERAGE 25-FOOT BUFFER.

I THOUGHT YOU STATED IN THE APPLICATION THAT Y'ALL MET THAT REQUIREMENT. I DON'T SEE IT.

I DON'T SEE IT THE ALL THERE LOOKING AT YOUR PLAN.

>>>DREW HOLLY WITH ETM. MY ADDRESS IS 504 HARROW ROAD JACKSONVILLE, FLORIDA. WITH REGARD TO THE UPLAND BUFFER QUESTION, I BELIEVE IT'S 25 FEET AVERAGE, 15 FOOT MINIMUM IS WHAT WE'RE DISCUSSING HERE. IN AREAS WHERE THE WETLANDS ARE NOT BEING IMPACTED, YES, WE ARE, IN FACT, MEETING THAT REQUIREMENT. IN AREAS WHERE WETLANDS ARE IMPACTED WE ARE CERTAINLY TAKING THOSE IMPACTS AND ARE PAYING MITIGATION FOR THOSE. SO IN AREAS WHERE THERE IS UPLAND BUFFER TO BE SALVAGED WE ARE KEEPING THAT AND MAINTAINING THAT 15 FOOT MINUTE OUM OR 25 FOOT AVERAGE.

>> I DON'T SEE IT. YOU HAVE THE CONTINUOUS WETLANDS YOU'RE PRESERVING ON SITE. THE BIG DEAL WAS MADE ABOUT THAT. THERE'S OVER TEN ACRES OF WETLANDS PRESERVED ON SITE. A KEY THAT I SAW IN YOUR APPLICATION MATERIALS, I LINED THAT UP WITH THE WETLANDS YOU HAVE HERE. THOSE ARE WHAT I CALL CONTINUOUS WETLANDS SINCE THEY TOUCH. I DON'T SEE A 15-FOOT MINIMUM OR 25-FOOT AVERAGE NATURAL BUFFER ON YOUR SITE PLAN.

YOU CAN CAN SAY THAT BUT SHOW ME ON THIS DIAGRAM WHERE IT IS.

I DO NOT SEE IT. >>>I'M DOING THIS ON THE FLY. WE HAVE HERE.

JUST THESE TWO. >> YOU HAVE A STRIP AT THE

EAST, NORTHEAST. >> AND THIS HERE.

>> THAT I THOUGHT WAS 15 FEET.

WHAT I MEASURED BASED ON WHAT I COULD GLEAN FROM THIS MAP AND MEASURE MYSELF I THOUGHT THAT WAS 15 FEET WIDTH.

IF YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE A MINIMUM 15-FOOT BUFFER AND YOU HAVE FIVE OTHER PIECES, COUPLE OF THEM MAYBE 25, A LITTLE MORE.

IF YOU AVERAGE THAT OUT OVER THE ENTIRE WHAT WOULD BE YOUR

[03:30:01]

I DON'T SEE THAT YOU EVEN GET CLOSE TO HAVING A 15-FOOT BUFFER. CERTAINLY NOT 25-FOOT BUFFER.

>> THE WAY WE DO THIS IS WE LOOK AT EACH INDIVIDUAL BUFFER.

THE TOTAL LENGTH OF THAT BUFFER. THE OVERALL AREA OF ALL OF THESE BUFFERS COMBINED. WE CONFIRM EACH ONE HAS A MINIMUM OF 15-FOOT OF DEPTH AND TAKE THE AVERAGE OVERALL OF THOSE BUFFERS AND CONFIRM THEIR AVERAGE WIDTH IS AT LEAST A 25

FEET TOTAL. >> I PARCELLED THIS OUT MYSELF AND I DON'T SEE THAT WORKS.

I DON'T SEE IT. I MEASURED THIS OVER AND OVER

AGAIN. >> CERTAINLY THE AREA TO THE SOUTH, THERE, AND THE AREA ALONG THE ENTRANCE ROAD HAS SIGNIFICANTLY MORE DEPTH THAN YOU SEE THE 15-FOOT BUFFER THERE UP AGAINST BUILDING ONE, I BELIEVE.

THAT ONE IS, I KNOW IT'S DIFFICULT TO SEE SCALE WISE.

THAT IS 15-FEET. YOU HAVE OTHER AREAS THAT ARE SIGNIFICANTLY DEEPER THAN THAT. I CAN ASSURE YOU WE MEET THOSE

REQUIREMENTS. >> OVER THE ENTIRE WETLAND I DON'T SEE THAT YOU COME CLOSE TO HAVING 15-FEET OVER THE WHOLE THING. 25 FEET, NO.

15 FEET, NO. I DON'T SEE IT.

>> MY I INTERRUPT. WE'RE JUST GOING BACK AND FORTH.

MR. PEACOCK COULD YOU STEP UP TO THE MICROPHONE.

YOU SEE WHERE THE ROAD COMING IN CUTS THROUGH THE WETLAND.

>> YES. >> THE BUFFER ON THE RIGHT.

AS SOON AS IT PASSES THE WETLAND.

>> CORRECT. YES.

>> YOU REQUIRED TO HAVE A BUFFER WHERE THAT ROAD IS IMPACTING THE WETLAND ON EITHER SIDE, THE NORTH OR SOUTH SIDE?

>> WHERE THERE ARE DIRECT IMPACTS TYPICALLY THERE'S A

WAIVER. >> ARE YOU REQUIRED TO HAVE A BUFFER WHERE THERE'S A RETENTION POND?

>> I DON'T BELIEVE SO. >> DO WE HAVE IMPACTS ON THE PARKING LOT TO EAST OF THAT BIG BUFFER TO THE SOUTH.

YOU SEE THAT WETLAND. IT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE IT WOULD BE NICE LONG AND STRAIGHT. I ASSUME THERE'S AN IMPACT WHERE

THE PARKING LOT IS. >> UP AGAINST I-95 THE

IRREGULAR SHAPED STRIP? >> NO.

TO THE WEST BY THE BIG WETLAND. >> THE POINT IS THAT THEY ONLY HAVE TO THAT V THE 25 FOOT WHERE THEY DON'T HAVE IMPACTS OR RETENTION POND. IF YOU JUST MEASURE AROUND THAT ENTIRE CIRCUMFERENCE YOU'RE NOT, I'M NOT SAYING THEY GOT IT.

BUT I'M JUST TELLING YOU THEY DON'T HAVE TO HAVE IT WHERE THEY HAVE IMPACTS AND DON'T HAVE TO HAVE WHERE THEY HAVE A RETENTION

POND. >> I BELIEVE WHERE THEY CAN PROVIDE AN UPLAND BUFFER IT AVERAGES 25 FEET.

DREW WAS CORRECT. IT'S JUST WHERE YOU HAVE A DEVELOPMENT YOU CAN'T PROVIDE A BUFFER.

>> WHERE YOU TAKE A DIRECT IMPACT YOU SDRONLT TO PROVIDE AN

UPLAND BUFFER, AS WELL. >> YOU'RE IN A WETLAND

POINT. >> WE HAVE RECEIVED OUR DISTRICT PERMIT ON JANUARY 31ST FOR THIS PROJECT.

>> YOU DID SAY THAT. THAT'S GOOD.

>> MR. CHAIR, MIKE ROBERTSON HERE.

I MAY HAVE INFORMATION IF YOU LET ME SPEAK.

>> GO AHEAD. >> TO ADDRESS THE AGENCY MEMBERS. THE MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN MAP IS CONSIDERED A GENERAL DEPICTION AND THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE. NOT THAT THE QUESTIONS AREN'T GOOD QUESTIONS. BUT WHEN THIS COMES DOWN TO CONSTRUCTION PLAN LEVEL, THE ENGINEER LEVEL, YOU'LL SEE IT'S A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER IS GOING STAMP AND THEY ARE GOING TO GIVE US CONFIRM WHETHER OR NOT IT MEETS THE UPLAND BUFFER AND GIVE US THE CALCULATIONS. THERE IS AN ASSURANCE FOR A PROFESSIONAL. IF THEY ARE WRONG THEY ARE WRONG IT'S ON THEM. BUT IT WILL COME TO THAT.

THEY WILL HAVE TO MEET IT WHEN THE ENGINEER SIGN AND SEALS THOSE PLANS. THAT MIGHT MAKE YOU FEEL MORE

COMFORTABLE. >> THANK YOU.

I APPRECIATE THE INFORMATION. IT DOESN'T MAKE ME FEEL MORE COMFORTABLE BUT I THINK YOU STATED IT ACCURATELY.

THANK YOU. LET ME QUICKLY ASK ABOUT SOILS.

YOU'VE GOT THREE TYPES OF SOILS OUT THERE.

I HAVE UTILIZED SOILS IN MY PROFESSIONAL WORK FOR PROBABLY 45 YEARS. YOU'VE GOT ONE FREQUENTLY FLOODED FINE SAND. THEN YOU'VE GOT TWO OTHERS ST.

JOHNS AND MYAKA, IT'S A STATE SOIL.

NONETHELESS, YOU STATE THESE HAVE SEVERE WETNESS ATTRIBUTES THAT NOT ONLY FREQUENTLY FLOODED OR VERY POORLY DRAINED.

THEY HAVE SEVERE WET ATTRIBUTES YOU SAY POSSIBLY REQUIRING DEWATERING AND SITE FILL IN THERE.

ALONG WITH IMPACTING 53.3% OF THE WETLANDS ON SITE.

[03:35:05]

I DON'T SEE THIS AS A PROPER SITE FOR A LARGE WAREHOUSE CONSTRUCTION ACTIVITY. I WILL STATE THAT PLAINLY.

I'M NOT GOING TO VOTE FOR IT. YO I DON'T THINK IT'S A GOOD SITE FOR THIS AT ALL. WHAT IF I TOLD YOU WHEN I DROVE BY THIS MORNING THERE WAS A WOOD STORK ON SITE.

WOULD THAT BE CREDIBLE TO YOU? >> THROUGH THE PURCHASING CREDITS AT A MITIGATION BANK THE BANK PROVIDE HABITAT FOR WOOD STORK SO YOU OFFSET YOUR IMPACTS THROUGH MITIGATION.

>> I KNOW MITIGATION AND YOU HAVE TO BUY IN TO ONE, OBVIOUSLY, FOR THIS. LAST THING I'M GOING TO SAY, I'M NOT EVEN GOING TO BOTHER WITH THAT QUESTION.

I'VE HAD ENOUGH. THANK YOU.

APPRECIATE IT. >>>MR. MILLER.

>>>I'LL TRY TO BE QUICK. COURTNEY, ARE YOU ENTITLED TO DO 570 THOUSAND SQUARE FEET ON THIS?

>> YES. >> AND TO EITHER YOU OR ANYONE A TRAFFIC ENGINEER WOULD THAT GENERATE MORE TRAFFIC THAN

FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND? >> IT'S GOING TO BE LESS

TRAFFIC. >> ISN'T THERE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT THAT'S GOING TO BE GOING ON JUST TO THE EAST OF

THIS ON I-95? >> I BELIEVE SO.

I THINK WE'RE CLOSER TO WHERE BAPTIST AND TOYOTA.

>> IS A RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT GOING IN BEHIND IT?

>> I THINK. >> A PLANNER BEHIND YOU SHAKING YOUR HEAD YES. PROBABLY LIKELY SOME PEOPLE LIVING IN RESIDENTIAL AREAS WILL WORK IN THE INDUSTRIAL SITE?

>> CORRECT. WE HOPE TO PRODUCE TWO HUNDRED

SKROBS. >> ON THE WETLANDS ISSUE, MY UNDERSTANDING OF THE CODE IS THAT WHERE YOU HAVE A, YOU DON'T DESTROY WETLANDS TO CREATE AN UPLAN BUFFER.

THE GAPS ARE PROBABLY A SITUATION WHERE YOU WOULD HAVE TO DESTROY WETLANDS. IT LOOKS LIKE THERE'S A JUT THAT COMES IN ORDER TO CREATE THE UPLAND BUFFER.

USUALLY THEY LOOK AT IT AS DON'T DESTROY WETLANDS TO PROTECT WETLANDS. TO MR. PEACOCK WHAT IS THE QUALITY OF THE MAJORITY OF WET WETLANDS. TALKING ABOUT 6.7 ACRES DELINEATED IN 2005 BUT OVER TIME REDESIGNATED WITH MORE WETLANDS.

>> THE SELLER HIRED ME TO DO A FORMAL JURISDICTION ON O THE PROPERTY. THAT'S WHEN IT CAME OUT HOW MUCH WETLANDS WAS ACTUALLY THERE. HE HAD ALSO GOTTEN THE PROPERTY GREEN BELTED TO KEEP HIS PROPERTY TAXES LOW.

AND HE HAD THE WEST HALF OF THE PROPERTY, OTHER THAN THE DEEP SWAMP IS IN PINE PLANTATION. THE EAST HALF WASN'T.

SO HE HIRED FORESTRY CONSULTANT TO PUT TOGETHER MANAGEMENT PLAN.

THEY TEMPERED THE SITE. PROBABLY WHEN IT WAS REALLY WET, THE STRIPS THAT ARE IRREGULAR SHAPES ARE SKIDDER TRAILS CREATED WHEN THAT WAS TIMBERED. THE ACT OF TTIMBERING CREATED A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF THOSE WETLANDS.

BEFORE I-95 WAS BUILT THERE WAS A STRIP OF DEEPER SWAMP WHERE THE HIGHWAY IS. AFTER IT WAS BUILT THIS IS A SLIVER LEFT OVER AND IT WAS A WET FLAT WOODS AREA THAT SATURATED. MOST OF IT WAS THAT QUALITY.

IT ONLY CONNECTS TO OTHER WETLAND BY SECTION OF UPLAND CUT DITCH TO THE SOUTH. IT DOESN'T HAVE A LOT OF CONNECTIVITY. IT'S UP AGAINST I-95.

IT'S BEEN CUT OVER. ECOLOGICALLY I DON'T THINK IT PROVIDES THAT MUCH VALUE TO THE ENVIRONMENT.

THAT'S WHY THE WAREHOUSE PUSHED OVER ON THAT SIDE TO AVOID FILLING THE DEEP SLEW, WHICH IS AVERAGE PERSON WOULD THINK OF AS BEING THE WETLANDS. I THINK OF THE DEEPER, HIGHER QUALITY WETLANDS THERE'S 0.06 ACRE, THAT'S WITHIN A STORM WATER POND OUT FAL. THEY ARE JUST GOING TO PUT THE PIPE IN THERE. 99% OF THE HIGH QUALITY SWAMP IS

PRESERVED. >> IN LAMENS TERMS THESE ARE

WETLANDS DUE TO ACTIVITY. >> SOME WAS.

SOME WAS MORE TRANSITIONAL WETLANDS LEFT OVER FROM I-95

BUILT. >> SOME OF THIS IS CREATED

IN THE LAST 17 YEARS. >> SOME WAS CREATED FROM THE

TIMBERING. >> EVEN IF WE DON'T APPROVE THIS TODAY WHAT IS THIS LOW QUALITY WETLANDS YOU CAN DEVELOP

ON IT? >> WE WENT THROUGH AN ALTERNATIVE SITE ANALYSIS STUDY FAIRLY DETAILED TO DETERMINE WHERE YOU CAN PUT LARGE WAREHOUSES IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY CLOSE TO 95 AND THIS WAS THE BEST SITE.

>> ACKNOWLEDGE FOR THE RECORD SHE IS SHAKING HER HEAD

[03:40:03]

>> CORRECT. THEY ARE ALREADY PERMITTED.

>> THANK YOU. >>>ANY OTHER QUESTIONS TO THE APPLICANT? ANY SPEAKER CARDS? THEN WE ARE BACK IN TO THE AGENCY FOR MOTION.

>>>MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF 2021-22 DEER PARK

CENTER. >>>MOTION.

>>>SECOND. >>>DISCUSSION?

>> DOCTOR. >> I HAVE ONE QUICK QUESTION. SAY I AGREE WITH YOU.

THESE ARE LOW QUALITY WETLANDS. I AGREE THEY ARE NOT HIGH QUALITY FROM WHAT I COULD SEE. WHAT WOULD PROVIDE MORE ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFIT? LOW QUALITY WETLAND ORS A FIVE HUNDRED THOUSAND SQUARE FOOT WAREHOUSE?

TO ME OR MR. PEACOCK. >> POINT OF ORDER THIS IS DISCUSSION TIME NOT QUESTION. QUESTION WAS DURING THE HEARING WE'RE BACK IN THE AGENCY WITH A MOTION.

>> I THINK YOU'RE TRYING TO RAISE A POINT.

MAKE YOUR POINT. >> I'M ASKING MR. PEACOCK AS AN ENVIRONMENTAL EXPERT WHAT E HE FEELS WOULD PROVIDE MORE

ENVIRONMENTAL BENEFIT. >> DO YOU WANT ME TO STATE IT. NORMALLY I GET HAMMERED FOR

OTHER WAY AROUND. >> I KNOW BUT WE'RE IN

DISCUSSION NOW. >> AS AN ENVIRONMENTAL CONSULTANT THAT GOES RIGHT TO HEART OF WHAT I DO.

MOST OF MY CLIENTS ARE DEVELOPERS.

TO DEVELOP THE AVERAGE PIECE OF PROPERTY IN THIS PART OF THE STATE YOU HAVE TO IMPACT WETLANDS.

YOU HAVE TO BALANCE WHAT'S IN YOUR CLIENTS INTEREST, WHAT HE'S TRYING TO GET FROM THAT USE AND INDUSTRIAL PART VERSUS WHAT PART OF THE PROPERTY DO YOU TRY TO AVOID.

THAT'S THE TRADE OFF. AN INDUSTRIAL PARK THEY ARE GOING TO PUT A WAREHOUSE THERE, PUT IT UP AGAINST 95 WHERE IT'S MORE LOWER QUALITY, IT'S CUT OVER AND DEGRADED AND THAT'S THE

[Items 2 & 3 (Part 2 of 2)]

MITIGATION BANK. >> THAT WAS NOT MY QUESTION.

>> THANKS. >> DO YOU HAVE FURTHER

DISCUSSION? >> NO.

>> ANY OTHER DISCUSSION? ALL RIGHT.

REGISTER THE VOTE. THAT MOTION PASSES 6-1.

>>>WE ARE GOING BACK TO ITEM NUMBER THREE AT THIS POINT.

MISS TAYLOR YOU HAVE A REQUEST FOR RECONSIDERATION.

EVIDENTLY THE PROPERTY OWNERS ARE A DIFFERENT NAME THAN THE APPLICANT I SUBMITTED. WHEN WE HAD SPECIAL USE, ITEM 3, AND HAVE IT NONTRANSFERABLE I WAS INFORMED BY CHRISTINE THAT WOULD GO TO PROPERTY OWNERS WHO ARE NOT THE ONES TO DEVELOP IT.

SO ON THE APPLICATION THE PROPERTY OWNER IS 6550, I'M SORRY THE APPLICANT 6550 U.S. NORTH LLC.

THAT IS WHO IS GOING TO DO THAT. WE WANT TO CLARIFY THE SPECIAL USE WAS GRANTED TO THE 6550 U.S. 1 NORTH LLC.

>>>I BELIEVE MMS. PERKINS YOU MADE THE MOTION. DO YOU WANT TO MAKE A MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION? IS THERE A SECOND?

>> SECOND. >> WE HAVE TO HAVE THE SAME PERSON MAKE THE SECOND OR IT DOESN'T MATTER?

>> OKAY. WHO DID MAKE THE SECOND, DO WE

KNOW? >> I THINK I DID.

>> WHY DON'T WE DO THAT. ARE YOU WILLING TO MAKE A MOTION

TO RECONSIDER. >> WE HAVE A MOTION AND SECOND TO RECONSIDER. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE LET'S REGISTER THE VOTE.

SO THAT MOTION PASSES 6-1. WE'RE BACK IN TO THE AGENCY FOR REVISED MOTION. THIS IS ONLY ON ITEM 3,

CORRECT? >> YES.

>> [INAUDIBLE] >> YES.

IN OUR SYSTEM WE DO HAVE THE CURRENT PROPERTY OWNERS AS THE APPLICANT. WE WOULD WANT TO CLARIFY, AS YOU SAID, THAT IT IS GRANTED TO THE APPLICANT, HOWEVER, IT'S

[03:45:01]

>> AND ALL THE OTHER CONDITIONS?

>> ARE THE SAME AS PREVIOUSLY DISCUSSED.

>> THEN MY MOTION WOULD BE TO APPROVE THE PERMIT MAJ2021-17 TO ALLOW FOR ON SITE SALE AND CONSUMPTION OF BEER AND WINE WITH A LICENSE. AND FINDINGS OF FACT WITH IT BEING TRANSFERABLE TO THE 6650 U.S. ONE NORTH LLC AND CONDITIONS PREVIOUSLY STATED WHERE THE HOURS OF OPERATION ARE WEDNESDAY THROUGH MONDAY AND CLOSED TUESDAY.

>> OKAY. >> AS WELL AS, THE REQUIREMENT TO INCLUDE THE CONCEPTUAL PLAN AS EXHIBIT B.

[7. REZ 2021-37 Ashton Downs. Request to rezone approximately 73.72 acres of land from Planned Rural Development (PRD) to Open Rural (OR). The subject parcel is located on an unaddressed parcel on the west side of the State Road 13A North, 1.1 miles South of County Road 208 and County Road 13A North intersection.]

>> CORRECT AS WELL AS, CONDITION NUMBER 3 THE REQUIREMENT TO HAVE THE SITE PLAN, IS THAT WHAT YOU'RE

SAYING? >> YES.

DEVELOPMENT SHOULD BE LIMITED TO WHAT IS DEPICTED.

>> DEVELOPMENT LIMITED TO WHAT DEPICTED ON THE SITE PLAN

RATHER THAN THE FLOOR PLAN. >> WE HAVE A MOTION.

>> I SECOND. >> ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE LET'S REGISTER THE VOTE.

THAT PASSES 7-0. >>>THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

>>>ITEM NUMBER 7. BREVITY IS STILL AT A PREMIUM.

>>>WE'RE NOT BACK ON THAT ONE.

>>>IS THERE ANY EXPERT COMMUNICATION TO DECLARE FOR ITEM NUMBER 7?

>> DR. MCCORMICK? >> YES.

I WENT BY THAT PLACE YESTERDAY, I THINK IT WAS, OR THE DAY BEFORE. I GUESS IT WAS THE DAY BEFORE.

>> MS. TAYLOR. >> FOR THE RECORD KAREN TAYLOR 77 SARAH GOSSER STREET AND WITH ME IS BODIE STRIKE THATTEN. THIS IS ASHLAND DOWNS REZONING TAKING A PLANNED RURAL DEVELOPMENT THAT EXPIRED BACK TO OPEN RURAL. AS YOU KNOW WHEN YOU'RE IN A PRD AND WHEN IT EXPIRES IT DOESN'T GIVE YOU ANY USES LEFT OF YOUR PROPERTY. THE PROPERTY IS LOCATED SOUTH OF 208. NORTH OF 214 AND AS YOU CAN SEE ON HERE, YOU CAN SEE WHERE THE INTERSTATE IS AND THE RIVER.

IT'S KIND OF RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE OF NOWHERE.

THIS IS A LOCATION ON THE WEST SIDE OF 13A NORTH AND IT'S ON 13A NORTH AND SOUTH OF 208. THIS IS THE ACTUAL FUTURE LAND USE DOESN'T LOOK MUCH DIFFERENT BUT THAT IS THE CULTURAL IT SHOWS THERE. AGAIN, PRETTY MUCH RURAL CULTURAL EVERYWHERE. WE'RE NOT CHANGING THAT, OBVIOUSLY. THIS IS THE ZONING AND EXISTING ZONING INCLUDES THE PARCEL TO THE NORTH, AS WELL.

I LEARNED THROUGH YOUR STAFF REPORT THAT THAT WAS A SMALL ADJUSTMENT THAT THE GENTLEMAN REMOVED THE LOTS THAT WERE PLANNED FOR THAT. I TRIED NUMEROUS TIMES TO GET HIM TO PARTICIPANT AND TOLD HIM IT WOULD BE BETTER IF HE WENT BACK TO O-R BUT HE DIDN'T BELIEVE ME.

HE'S NOT DOING THAT. WE'RE ONLY DOING THE PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT WE OWN AT THAT POINT.

SO THAT'S ONLY THIS OUTLINE. YOU CAN SEE THERE'S A COUPLE OF PRDS. ANOTHER PRD THAT WAS THE PARENT PRD AND THIS ONE DONE SECONDLY IS ALL FULLY DEVELOPED.

JUST AN IDEA THAT SHOWS YOU THE WHOLE 403 ACRES.

YOU CAN'T DO A PRD ON ANYTHING LESS THAN A HUNDRED ACRES.

THE PRD IDEA GOES AWAY AND THAT'S ANOTHER, ONCE THEY TOOK THE 30 ACRES OUT, THAT GAVE THE OPTION EVEN FOR THE REMAINING 70 ACRES NOT TO BE ABLE TO BE USED. THE OLD SITE PLAN TO GIVE YOU A GENERAL IDEA. CERTAINLY,ING WHAT WE'VE GOT RIGHT NOW. I INCLUDE OPEN RURAL ZONING IN CASE THERE ARE QUESTIONS. THERE IS A LOT OF QUESTIONS AS

[03:50:01]

THAT'S BECOMING QUITE THE THING IN THESE PARTICULAR AREAS.

JUST SOME PICTURES. THIS IS 208 LOOKING AT THE 13A INTERSECTION. THIS IS ON 13A LOOKING NORTH TO 208. THIS IS THE PRD THAT'S TO THE NORTH OF THE SITE. THIS IS THE ENTRANCE TO OSCAR ASHTON ROAD, THE NORTH SIDE OF THE OVERALL PRD.

KIND OF LOOKING DOWN TOWARDS THE SITE.

AND THAT'S, AGAIN, THE NORTH PART THAT'S OSCAR ASASHTON ROAD

>>>THERE IS AN ACCESS EASEMENT ROAD TO THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE PROPERTY USED AND THAT'S 150 FOOT EASEMENT ACROSS USE FOR THAT. THAT PORTION IS CLEARED.

AND THAT'S THE OTHER SIDE OF THE ROAD SHOWING THAT IT CONTINUES ALL THE WAY THROUGH THERE. AGAIN, THOUGHT I WOULD GET A PICTURE OF THE SIGN. I THOUGHT THIS MIGHT BE INTERESTING, AS WELL. I PULLED UP THE DIFFERENT MITIGATION BANKS IN THE AREA. THE SITE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IS RIGHT HERE. I COULDN'T FIGURE OUT HOW TO DRAW THE SITE ONTO THEIR MAPS UP THERE.

BUT ALL OF THIS IN THE RED AND ALL OF THIS IN THE GREEN ARE ALSO MITIGATION. SO, IT'S IN GOOD COMPANY TO BE IN O-R ZONING. WE FEEL IT'S COMPATIBLE.

IT'S LOTS OF O-R USES AND TIMBERING AREAS AND MITIGATION BANKS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMP PLAN AND RURAL CIVIL CULTURE AND CONSISTENT WITH THE CODE AND WE ARE ASKING FOR A RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL. HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

>> ANY QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT?

>> NO SPEAKER CARDS. BACK IN THE AGENCY FOR A MOTION.

DR. MCCORMICK. >> I'M GOING TO MAKE A MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF R-E-Z2021-37 ASHTON DOWNS

[8. REZ 2021-38 Sandy Creek Storage. Request to rezone approximately 7.85 acres of land from Open Rural (OR) to Commercial Highway Tourist (CHT). The subject property is located at 1735 County Road 210 W and an unaddressed parcel South of the previously mentioned address.]

AS PROVIDED IN THE STAFF REPORT. >> WE GO A MOTION BY DR. MCCORMICK. IS THERE A SECOND?

>> SECOND. >> SECOND.

ANY DISCUSSION? LETS REGISTER THE VOTE.

>>>THAT MOTION PASSES. WE'RE MOVING ONTO ITEM NUMBER 8.

DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY EXPERT COMMUNICATIONS FOR ITEM NUMBER

8? >> NO.

>> I DROVE BY. >> ALL RIGHT MS TAYLOR.

>> THIS IS SANDY CREEK STORAGE TO REZONE FROM RURAL TO COMMERCIAL HIGHWAY TOURIST. THIS IS AN OVERLOOK OF THE AREA.

YOU CAN SEE THE SITE IS SANDWICHED BETWEEN THE SANDY CREEK PARKWAY AND I-95. THE SANDY CREEK COMMUNITY IS TO THE SOUTHEAST HERE. THAT SHOWS YOU THE RELATIONSHIP TO THE WHOLE AREA. THIS IS A LITTLE CLOSER IN.

IT SHOWS YOU THE ACCESS TO 210. ON THE NORTH SIDE AND A LITTLE CLOSER SEEING THE INTERSTATE. KIND OF THE VACANT PROPERTIES THAT ARE TO THE SOUTHEAST AND THE SANDY CREEK.

ONE INTERESTING THING THIS ONE INDICATES AND THOSE OF YOU THAT REMEMBER RECENT ZONING, THAT'S THE MOOMOON BAY PARKWAY AND THA PARKWAY ARE IMPROVEMENTS TO CONNECT BACK TO SANDYSANDY CREE PARKWAY IN THE FUTURE. YOU LOOK AND YOU CAN SEE A LITTLE BIT MORE OF THAT AS PART OF THAT IS PUT IN.

COMMERCIAL ACTIVITIES TO THE NORTH.

A WAFFLE HOUSE, SELF-STORAGE, A TRUCK STOP.

YOU CAN SEE I-95 WEST AND THAT FUTURE CONNECTION FOR THE PARKWAY. THIS JUST GIVES YOU A LITTLE BIT

[03:55:01]

THIS IS ALL UNDEVELOPED AREA BUT, ACTUALLY, THE LARGER PORTION OF THAT IS ALL OWNED BY GATE.

THAT'S ALSO C-H-T ZONING, I'LL SHOW YOU IN A MINUTE.

MOST OF THIS HERE WE DO HAVE SANDY CREEK, THE ENTRANCE TO SANDY CREEK. I HAVE PICTURES AND I'LL SHOW YOU THAT ENTRANCE IS ABOUT DOWN HERE.

THE AREA THEY USE FOR RETENTION ALONG I-95 SO THERE'S NO DEVELOPMENT IN THAT PORTION. IT'S CERTAINLY FARTHER DOWN THE ROAD. FULLY WITHIN THE MIXED USE AND SURROUNDED BY RESIDENTIAL CBS AND EVEN SOME RURAL CIVIL CULTURAL STILL. THIS IS A DEMONSTRATION TO SHOW YOU THE OTHER AREA IS AROUND THE INTERSTATE IS MOSTLY CHT.

WE HAVE COMMERCIAL IN SOME OF THE PUDS ALONG HERE.

AND, AGAIN, THAT'S THAT LARGE PIECE OF PROPERTY.

BASICALLY, IT'S ALMOST DOWN HERE.

WE HAVE ONE SECTION OF O-R THAT WOULD BE BETWEEN US AND THE EXISTING CHT. WE HAVE A SITE PLAN.

THIS IS A SITE PLAN INCLUDED IN THE PACKAGE.

IT SHOWS YOU, TOO, OUT OF THAT 7.85 ACRES ABOUT 4.6 ACRES OF THAT WOULD BE FOR THE STORAGE. THE POWER LINE THAT GOES TO THE TOP PART OF THIS TAKES ABOUT HALF AN ACRE OR EVEN A LITTLE BIT MORE. THERE ARE WETLANDS TO THE SOUTH.

THEY ARE PLANNING SOME IMPACT TO THE WETLANDS FOR STORM WATER RETENTION AGAINST 95. THERE IS A BEE SCREENING REQUIREMENT PLANTING, FENCE, TREES 20 FEET ON CENTER BUT THAT IS ALSO TEAMED WITH WITH SECTION 606 FOR OPEN STORAGE BEING THE PRIMARY USE. THAT REQUIRES EITHER EVERGREEN PLANTS SIX FEET IN HEIGHT OR WITH A 75% OPACITY OR FENCE OR CONCRETE BLOCK WALL AND NO CHAIN LINK.

I WAS CONNECTED BY GATE AND I DID TALK TO THEM.

I HAVEN'T HEARD FROM THEM SINCE. BUT ONE THING THAT I DID IS I HAD THE ENGINEER CHANGE THE SITE PLAN JUST AS REFERENCE SO THE BUFFERING WOULD BE OUTSIDE OF THE FENCING.

YOU'D HAVE YOUR 20-FOOT BUFFER ALONG EACH BOUNDARY WITH THE FENCING INSIDE SO THE LANDSCAPING WOULD BE ALONG SANDY PARK. I WENT OUT AND TOOK PICTURES THE OTHER DAY. THERE'S TREES ALONG THE OTHER SIDE OF THE PARK OF SANDY CREEK PARKWAY.

I THOUGHT THAT WOULD BE MORE APPROPRIATE AND MAYBE DO A LITTLE BETTER SCREENING JOB ON THIS.

THIS WAS JUST WETLANDS. MIXED FORESTED.

LIKE I SAID, MOST OF THAT IS BEING RETAINED BUT THERE IS A PORTION BEING IMPACTED TO DO THE STORM WATER FACILITY.

JUST SOME PICTURES, IF YOU HAVE THEM THERE THAT'S SANDY CREEK PARKWAY FROM 210. THAT IS ON SANDY CREEK PARKWAY LOOKING NORTH 210. YOU CAN SEE THE WAFFLE HOUSE THERE. THIS IS HEADING SOUTH ON SASAND CREEK PARKWAY. SELF-STORAGE ON ONE SIDE AND LARGE SIGN ON THE SANDY CREEK PROPERTY WHICH IS PART OF THE CHT PROPERTY YOU WERE LOOKING AT.

THIS IS THE POWERLINE ON THE NORTH END AND THAT POWERLINE KEEPS GOING, AS WELL. OBVIOUSLY, CLEARED WHATEVER.

WE CAN PROBABLY USE SOME OF THAT NATURAL BUFFER ALONG THAT.

THAT'S A LARGE TYPE THING. WE STILL HAVE TO MEET THE SCREENING. THIS IS LOOKING DOWN THE PARKWAY. YOU CAN SEE THE TREES ON THE OPPOSING SIDE. SANDY CREEK HAS BEEN THERE A LONG TIME SO THE TREES HAVE GOTTEN FAIRLY LARGE.

THAT'S ONE OF THE REASON, AGAIN, I MOVED THAT IN SO THOSE TREES WOULD BE ABLE TO BE IN THE BUFFER ON THE ROAD.

THIS IS THE ENTRANCE TO SANDY CREEK.

THAT ALSO SHOWS THE RETENTION AREA THAT WRAPS AROUND AND GOES TO 95 SO ALL THAT AREA IS CLEARED.

THERE ARE ENTRANCE GATES BEYOND THAT.

LOOKING BACK UP TO GIVE YOU AN IDEA IT'S BASICALLY THE SAME ON EITHER SIDE OF THE ROAD. THE REQUEST IS THE 7.85 ACRES TO O-R TO CHT AND THAT'S THE COMMERCIAL USE SIMILAR TO THAT OTHER PIECE OF PROPERTY ACROSS THE STREET.

THERE'S OTHER MORE INTENSE, AS WE SAW EARLIER, WITH C-I, THAT

[04:00:04]

IT DOES INCLUDE OTHER USES. IT DOESN'T NECESSARILY HAVE TO BE THIS. MY CLIENT, WHO IS WITH ME HERE TODAY, THAT IS WHAT SHE WOULD LIKE TO DO AT THIS POINT IN TIME. LARGE VACANT PARCEL TO THE EAST CHT. WE HAVE I-95 TO THE WEST AND SANDY CREEK TO THE SOUTH. CURRENTLY THAT SANDY CRCREEK PARKWAY IS ONLY ACCESS FOR DEVELOPMENT.

THE DEVELOPER PARTNERED WITH BRIDGE WATER TO APPROVE WILSON ROAD WHICH IIS MOONBAY PARKWAY. OWNING PROPERTY ON THAT TOO IS A CONTRIBUTION TO WIDEN THERE AND THERE IS A SIGNAL THAT IS PLANNED TO BE GOING IN THERE AS SOON AS THEY ARE DONE WITH CONSTRUCTION. A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS I RECEIVED TWO LETTERS IN FAVOR AND TWO O OPPOSING.

BUT THERE WERE A FEW MORE IN THE PACKET.

THERE WERE A COUPLE OF QUESTIONS, TOO.

I EXPLAINED THE NEW BUFFER AND BUFFERING REQUIREMENTS SO YOU WON'T SEE THIS. THERE WAS QUESTIONS REGARDING TRAFFIC. AGAIN, RV STORAGE ISN'T LISTED BUT THEY ARE TAKING ABOUT MAYBE 40-60 BOATS DEPENDING IF YOU HAVE SMALL JOHN BOATS OR SMALL RVS OR LARGE ONES, THAT'S THE FEWER NUMBER. AGAIN, THEY REALLY DON'T GENERAL OPERATE THE A PEAK HOUR. THEY ARE USUALLY EARLY IN THE MORNING OR LATE IN THE EVENING COMING BACK.

THE OTHER ONES, THERE WERE SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT FLOOD CONTROL.

WE HAVE TO MEET ALL THE REQUIRED STORM WATER AND STORM TREATMENT AND OUT FALL AND THE PREPOST. NOISE ABATEMENT, THIS IS A PRETTY QUIET TYPE USE, GENERALLY BECAUSE THERE'S ONLY PICKUP AND DROP OFF. AGAIN, THERE'S EXPENSIVE BUFFERS. THERE'S A LARGE WETLANDS, AS I SAID, REMAINING TO THE SOUTH AND WE MOVED THE BUFFERS OVER AND WE'LL AGREE TO DO THAT. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT DEER. I WILL SAY THEY CAN STILL GO IN THE WET LAN AREA BUT THEY ARE ALSO CLOSE TO 95.

NOT EXACTLY PROBABLY THEIR CHOSEN PLACE TO BE.

THERE WERE QUESTIONS ABOUT OR THE TORR TO

>>>THE ENTIRE WEST ZONE IS ZONED CHT.

GATE PROPERTY IS 65 ACRES. SANDY CREEK INVESTMENT CORP. IS 35 ACRES. YOU'RE LOOKING AT 100 ACRES ADJACENT TO THIS AND ON THE OPPOSING SIDE.

NOT TO SAY THAT, THERE'S REASON FOR THAT.

WE REALLY FELT THIS WAS A GOOD IDEA FOR THIS LOCATION ESPECIALLY WITH A LARGE COMMUNITY RIGHT TO THE SOUTH.

IT DOESN'T HAVE THE ABILITY TO KEEP BOATS OR RVS IN THEIR YARDS. A LOT OF THE NEW DEVELOPMENTS HAVE STARTED INCLUDING AN AREA FOR THAT AND THE OLDER ONES DON'T QUITE HAVE IT. AGAIN, THERE'S SOME OPPOSITION TO THAT. WE DON'T FEEL THAT WOULD BE A DECREASE. WE FEEL LIKE IT WOULD BE AN INCREASE TO PROPERTY VALUES. AGAIN, ADJACENT LAND USES ARE COMPATIBLE. IT REPRESENTS THE SAME INTENSITY FOR PROPERTIES TO EAST AND TO THE NORTH.

AND IT'LL BE A SERVICE TO PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH, AS WELL A, THE AREA AND CONSOLIDATED COMMERCIAL AREA.

WITH THAT WE ARE REQUESTING A RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL.

I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

>>>ANY QUESTIONS? >>>DR. MCCORMICK.

>> I WAS SLOW ON THE SWITCH WHEN YOU ASKED FOR EXPERT TAKE.

I WAS OUT THERE AND LOOKED AT THAT PROPERTY.

DREW SOME THOUGHTS FROM VISITING THAT PROPERTY.

BUT THAT WAS BEFORE I READ THE COMMENTS BOTH PRO AND CON ON

THIS PARTICULAR THING. >> YOU MENTIONED THERE WERE TWO LETTERS IN FAVOR AND TWO OPPOSED.

IN MY PACKET I SAW ONLY ONE IN FAVOR AND TWO OPPOSED.

[04:05:05]

DO YOU REMEMBER THAT ONE? >> RIGHT.

>> DO YOU REMEMBER WHO WROTE THAT?

>> BETH BREEDING. >> DO YOU KNOW WHERE THAT PERSON

LIVES? >> YEAH.

I KNOW BETH. YOU DO, TOO.

>> WHERE DOES SHE LIVE? >> I DON'T KNOW.

>> SHE LIVES? JACKSONVILLE.

I WOULD DISCOUNT THAT. >> THE OTHER GENTLEMAN LIVED IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD. I GOT THAT ONE LAST NIGHT.

>> THE OTHER TWO I SAW. I DIDN'T SEE A THIRD ONE.

MAYBE IT'S IN THERE MATERIAL. >> THERE WAS A VERY NICE KIND OF POSITIVE ONE SAYING, YOU KNOW, SOME OF MY NEIGHBORS DON'T LIKE THIS. I LIKE IT BECAUSE OF THIS AND THIS. I CAN READ IT.

OR PRESENT IT. >> MAYBE IT'S IN HERE.

IT'S HARD FOR ME TO READ AND PAY ATTENTION TO ITEMS AT THE SAME

TIME. >> UNDERSTOOD.

>> I HAVE TROUBLE DOING THAT.

GETTING A LETTER FROM A PERSON THAT DOESN'T LIVE IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY IS LIKE ME ASKING MY OLDER BROTHER IN KNOXVILLE, TENNESSEE TO WRITE A LETTER. HE DOESN'T LIKE THIS.

>> THAT WASN'T IS SOLICITED LETTER OR E-MAIL.

EVIDENTLY BETH IS INVOLVED IN A PROJECT SOMEWHERE THERE SO THAT'S PROBABLY WHY SHE WROTE THAT.

>> OKAY. >> INTERESTING ENOUGH SHE DID NOT WRITE ONE FOR THE DOG PARK.

>> SHE WAS THE ONLY PERSON THAT DIDN'T.

EVERYONE ELSE DID. I'M GLAD THAT YOU SAY THERE ARE NO GOPHER TORTOISES ON THE SITE. IT'S HIGH SANDY SOIL PARTICULARLY ON THE NORTH SIDE OF THE POWER LINE.

I DROVE UP THERE TO SEE IF THIS WAS SAND HILL HABITAT.

I COULD NOT DETERMINE THAT IT WAS.

IT GRADES FROM SAND HILL TO THE NORTH MORE TO FLATWOODS ON THE

SITE. >> IT GETS A LITTLE

DIFFERENT TO THE SOUTH. >>>I DON'T HAVE ANYMORE

QUESTIONS RIGHT NOW ON THIS. >>>IS THIS LONG INTENDED USE OR TEMPORARY USE CONVERTED TO SOMETHING LATER? IF YOU DON'T KNOW SAY YOU DON'T KNOW.

IT'S OKAY. >> I DON'T KNOW.

THAT'S THE INTENDED USE NOW. IF GATE DEVELOPS THEIRS IN TO SOMETHING DIFFERENT, PROBABLY THAT WOULD MAKE THIS MORE APPEALING FOR SOMETHING IN RELATION TO WHATEVER THEY DO WITH THEIRS. AGAIN, THAT'S KIND OF, AND IT'S

PHYSICAL ACCESS TO 95. >> OKAY.

DO WE HAVE ANY SPEAKER CARDS?

> >> I LIVE AT 1673 SANDY CREEK PARKWAY. I APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO TALK TO ALL OF YOU. THIS IS THE FIRST TIME I'VE EVER DONE ANYTHING LIKE THIS. MY IGNORANCE IS I DIDN'T KNOW WE HAD TO SUBMIT THINGS. I HAVE 191 SIGNATURES OPPOSING WHAT THEY ARE TRYING TO APPROVE. FIRST OF ALL, WE HAVE AN RV BOAT STORAGE ON HIGHWAY 210 AS YOU GO OUT OF OUR COMMUNITY.

OUR COMMUNITY RIGHT NOW HAS 324 HOMES.

IT'S SLATED FOR 380. THAT MEANS RIGHT NOW WE HAVE APPROXIMATELY OVER 600 CARS COMING IN AND OUT OF THERE ON A DAILY BASIS. YOU ALREADY KNOW THAT WE HAVE TWO TRUCK STOPS THAT WE DEAL WITH.

WE HAVE A HOSPITAL GOING IN. WE HAVE OTHER BUSINESSES GOING OUT TOWARDS, AS WELL AS, BEACH WALK.

THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC IN THERE IS INCREDIBLE.

I'M STANDING UP HERE TODAY BECAUSE I'M CONCERNED ABOUT THE SAFETY, NOT ONLY FOR MYSELF, MY WIFE, BUT FOR THE COMMUNITY.

IF I GO OUT OF THE COMMUNITY AND I WANT TO GO LEFT BECAUSE I NEED TO GET ONTO I-95, I'VE GOT TO GO OVER 3 LANES OF ROAD, DO A U-TURN BY THE TRUCK STOP AND HEAD OUT.

IF I'M COMING BACK ON HIGHWAY 210 TOWARDS 95 TO GET IN TO SANDY CREEK PARKWAY. I'VE GOT TO GO UP UNDERNEATH 95 OR DO A U-TURN, WHICH IS LEGAL, TO GO IN TO SANDY CREEK PARKWAY.

THE PROBLEM THAT WE HAVE IS THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC WE HAVE RIGHT NOW. WE ONLY HAVE ONE E GRES INTO THE COMMUNITY. I DO OPPOSE THIS.

I SAY IT TAKES AWAY FROM OUR PROPERTY VALUE.

IT OPENS UP PANDORAS BOX FOR ANYTHING ELSE THAT CAN GO IN THERE. AGAIN, I'M AT THE MERCY OF YOU SAYING THAT I SHOULD HAVE KNOWN THIS BUT I DIDN'T KNOW IT.

[04:10:03]

WE DON'T WANT ANOTHER STORAGE AREA.

THANK YOU. >>>THANK YOU.

>>>HARRY CAMPBELL. >>>THANK YOU.

I'M HARRY CAMPBELL. I'M A PROPERTY OWNER IN THE SANDY CREEK. I'M SPEAKING ONLY ON MY BEHALF.

FOR THE RECORD HOMEOWNERS DO NOT HAVE CONTROL OVER THE HOME OBSERVER ASSOCIATION. THEREFORE, THEY DO NOT HAVE AN H-O-A LOOKING AFTER THEIR BEST INTEREST.

IT'S THE BUILDER IS IN CONTROL OF THE H-O-A.

THE SIGN FOR THIS ZONING WAS PLACED PERPENDICULAR TO THE ROADWAY SET BACK ON THE SIDEWALK IN THE OVERGROWTH AREA.

IF YOU NOTICE WHEN YOU DROVE THROUGH THERE.

UNLESS YOU WERE LOOKING OFF TO YOUR RIGHT DRIVING THROUGH THERE OR TO YOUR LEFT INSTEAD OF PAYING ATTENTION TO YOUR TASK OF DRIVING YOU WOULDN'T HAVE NOTICED IT.

I WANT TO BE CLEAR THAT I'M SPEAKING BASED UPON MY EXPERIENCE OVER 40 YEARS IN TRANSPORTATION, TRAFFIC STUDIES AND PUBLIC WORKS, AS WELL AS, TESTIFYING BEFORE BOARD ZONING AND THE LANDING AGENCIES FOR THE GOVERNMENT AGENCIES THAT I WORKED FOR. I AM NOT SPEAKING AS A REGISTERED PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER AND I WANTED TO MAKE THAT CLEAR FOR THE RECORD BECAUSE OF THE ETHICS REQUIRED.

THE UNADDRESSED PARCEL IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT TO SANDY CREEK. IF THAT AND THE COMMERCIAL HIGHWAY TOURIST DESIGNATION, THE LIST OF LAND USES THAT COULD BE PUT IN THERE ONCE YOU APPROVE THE ZONING WOULD HAVE A DETRIMENTAL IMPACT ON THE RESIDENTIAL CHARACTER OF NOT ONLY THE NEIGHBORHOOD BUT OF THAT STREET.

THAT IN ITSELF, THAT LOCATION AND THE POSSIBILITY THEY COULD DO THINGS OTHER THAN BOAT/RV STORAGE, IS A SERIOUS, SERIOUS VIOLATION OF OUR EXPECTATIONS AS PROPERTY OWNERS.

BECAUSE WE KNEW THAT THE SITE TO THE NORTH CLOSE TO 210 WOULD BE RV/BOAT STORAGE ONLY. NOT A STORAGE FACILITY BUT RV/BOAT STORAGE. WE KNEW THAT'S WHAT IT WAS FOR.

THE DEVELOPER PURPOSELY LEFT THAT OUT WHEN I BOUGHT MY PROPERTY. THEY MADE IT CLEAR THAT PROPERTY WAS NOT PART OF THE DEVELOPMENT. THE SANDY CREEK PROPERTY OWNERS RIGHT NOW ARE DEPENDING UPON THE ABILITY TO TURN RIGHT AND MAKE A U-TURN ALMOST EVERY TRIP THEY MAKE IS IN THAT DIRECTION. THAT'S PROBLEMATIC WITH THE EXISTING TRAFFIC BUT THE COUNTY, ON ITS OWN OWE WEBSITE, HAS THIS SECTION OF 210 AS DEFICIENT. THAT DEFICIENCY IS REASON TO NOT APPROVE THAT ZONING UNTIL THAT PROBLEM IS CORRECTED.

IF THIS RV/BOAT STORAGE IS APPROVED THE ALTERNATE ACCESS NEEDS TO BE IN PLACE BEFORE THE DEVELOPMENT RECEIVES A CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY. WITH THAT I POINT OUT THE NEGATIVE IMPACT ON THE COMMUNITY IS SIGNIFICANT.

I DON'T PERSONALLY OBJECT TO RV/BOAT STORAGE BEING ON THAT PARCEL. I OBJECT TO THE ZONING DESIGNATION FOR THAT LOCATION. THANK YOU.

>> MR. CAMPBELL CAN YOU PUT YOUR ADDRESS ON THE RECORD.

>>>28 SHADY LANE COURT ST. AUGUSTINE, FLORIDA.

>> NORMAN GANNON. >>>THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TO YOU. I FEEL I'M PROBABLY GOING REPEAT SOME OF THE INFORMATION YOU MAY HAVE HEARD FROM THE PREVIOUS

TWO. >> NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE

RECORD. >> NORMAN GANNON.

267 SPRING CREEK WAY IN SANDY CREEK.

I HAVE PREPARED REMARKS BUT I'M TALKING ABOUT FACTUAL INFORMATION. I BELIEVE A REQUIREMENT.

THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION MADE ME LEARN AS I HEARD THERE'S A PRESCRIBE NUMBER OF RESIDENTS WHICH YOU EXCEED WOULD REQUIRE MULTIPLE ENTRANCES AND EXITS. WE HEARD AND I'VE HEARD THIS BEFORE THAT OUR CURRENT DEVELOPER HAS THE FULL INTENTION

[04:15:01]

AND THAT IS SET FOR A REASON. IT'S SET FOR PUBLIC SAFETY.

I HAD AN ACCIDENT AFTER BEING HERE ONLY A COUPLE OF YEARS.

I'VE BEEN HERE NOW FIVE YEARS. EXITING THAT.

THAT WAS PRIOR TO ALL THE INCREASE IN TRAFFIC WE CURRENTLY SEE AS A RESULT OF THE DEVELOPMENT BY THE PILOT, BY THE GAS STATIONS, BY THE LAKES, INCREASE OF TRAFFIC.

IT IS DIFFICULT. I CHALLENGE ANY OF YOU TO, PLEASE, COME TO SANDY CREEK AND TRY TO EXIT THAT BETWEEN THE HOURS OF 7 AND 9:00 OR 1 TO 5:00 OR 5 TO 7:00 AND FEEL YOU CAN EXIT THAT AREA SAFELY WITH THAT ONLY EXIT.

NOT THE MENTION, AS THE OTHER INDIVIDUALS SAID, HOW TO EXIT AND THEN MAKE A U-TURN AND TURN EAST.

I DON'T UNDERSTAND, I'M NOT FULLY KNOWLEDGEABLE BUT ANTICIPATE OR EXPECT WHEN THAT NUMBER WAS SET AT THE LIMIT IT WAS SET IT WAS IN CONSIDERATION OF THE NUMBER OF HOUSES OF CARS PER HOUSEHOLD. I WOULD LIKE YOU TO CONSIDER FACTORING IN THE NUMBER OF SPOTS, THE NUMBER OF SPACES ALLOCATED TO THAT LOCATION FOR THAT PARKING AREA.

AND CONSIDER THOSE AND FACTOR EVERY TWO SPACES WOULD ADD THE EQUIVALENCE OF A RESIDENT. YOU MAKE THAT MATHEMATICALLY AND ADD THAT TOGETHER YOU FIND YOU EXCEEDED THE NUMBER OF HOMES THAT WOULD REQUIRE ANOTHER EXIT. I RESPECTLY REQUEST FOR PUBLIC SAFETY, AND I'VE ALREADY SURVIVED AN ACCIDENT EXITING THAT AREA. THAT YOU CONSIDER THAT AND MAKE IT A REQUISITE PRIOR TO APPROVING SUCH A DEVELOPMENT AS YOU'RE PROPOSING TO HAVE AN ALTERNATE SECOND EXIT IN PLACE AND USABLE PRIOR TO GRANTING THIS CHANGE.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >>>THANK YOU.

ANY OTHER SPEAKER? >> ONE MORE.

MARIA GERARDI. NO OTHER SPEAKER CARDS.

>>>ALL RIGHT. REBUTTAL?

>> MS. TAYLOR. >> I DON'T HAVE A WHOLE LOT TO SAY. AGAIN, ONE OF THE THINGS ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR SITE, I KNOW THERE WAS SOME, THERE'S ALWAYS BEEN ISSUES AND I KNOW SANDY WAS ALWAYS LOOKING FOR THAT SECONDARY EXIT OUT OF THERE. THOSE OF YOU THAT MAYBE HAVE BEEN ON THE BOARD A WHILE OR FOLLOWED IT THERE WERE SOME CONTROVERSY ON THAT. THAT'S ALL BEEN WORKED OUT.

AGAIN. SO CE WILSON ROAD IS, ACTUALLY ALL OF 210 IS PLANNED FOR SIGNIFICANT TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS. A SIGNAL AT CE WILSON WHICH IS NOW MOON BAY PARKWAY. THAT ACCESS ISN'T THERE YET BUT IT'S SHOWN, SO IT'S BEEN IN CONSTRUCTION PLANS UP TO A CERTAIN POINT OF WHERE I SHOWED YOU ON THE SITE PLANS.

THAT'S GOING TO GIVE SANDY THE OPPORTUNITY TO ACTUALLY INCREASE THAT. WHERE YOU SEE THE, AGAIN, MOON BAY PARKWAY COMING DOWN HERE. THAT'S ALREADY ON SOME CONSTRUCTION PLANS OR SOMETHING TYPE THING.

SO I DON'T KNOW IF IT'S PLANNED TO GO THROUGH THE GATE SITE OR AROUND IT BUT THERE IS PLAN FOR THAT TO BE AN ALTERNATIVE ROUTE SO THERE CAN BE ADDITIONAL UNITS IN THE SANDY CREEK, FROM WHAT I UNDERSTAND. IF YOU LOOK AT IT, ALSO, THIS ISN'T THE REALLY CLOSEST TYPE OF THING.

AGAIN, THERE IS A LARGE SECTION OF COMMERCIAL AND YOU CAN'T REALLY SEE IT. THIS WAS THE OLD KOA CAMPGROUND.

THAT IS PART OF SANDY CREEK, AS WELL.

THERE MAY BE A TEAMING UP GOING BECAUSE THAT REMAINING 65 ACRE, R AS I SAID, WAS GATE. SO WITH THE 35 THAT'S 100 ACRE AND THAT'S BEYOND WHAT'S ALREADY DEVELOPED IN THERE.

SO IT'S NOT THAT THERE WON'T BE COMMERCIAL THERE, THERE WILL BE COMMERCIAL. THERE WILL BE IMPROVEMENTS THAT GO WITH IT. THE SIGNALIZATION AND THE IMPROVEMENTS THAT WOULD COME IN AT MOON BAY PARKWAY, SHOULD HELP THAT. THERE'S A WHOLE LARGE MEDICAL FACILITY ACROSS THERE THAT'S COME IN, AS WELL.

AND SO ALSO YOU'RE GOING TO SEE THIS OTHER PIECE OF PROPERTY

[04:20:04]

THEY DON'T COME DAILY LIKE A RESIDENT WITH TEN OR ELEVEN TRIPS PER DAY. WHEN YOU TAKE YOUR BOAT OUT AND YOU GO FISHING YOU'RE GOING EARLY OR COMING BACK LATE OR WHATEVER. SO THE TRAFFIC GENERALLY ISN'T THE PEAK HOUR AND THE TIMES THAT THEY WOULD BE COMPLAINING ABOUT.

THAT'S ABOUT ALL THAT I CAN SAY. WE WOULD VERY MUCH APPRECIATE

YOUR CONSIDERATION OF THIS. >>>DOCTOR.

>>>I HAVE SOME QUESTIONS. THAT SEGMENT OF 210 RIGHT THERE ON THE EAST SIDE OF I-95. THAT IS A DEFICIENT ROAD

SEGMENT, YES OR NO? >> I DID NOT CHECK THAT.

I DIDN'T GET ANY COMMENTS ABOUT THAT.

>> COULD THE STAFF ANSWER THAT QUES A DEFICIENT ROAD SEGMENT THERE ON 210? ON THE EAST SIDE OF I-95?

>> WE HAVE SOMEONE COMING UP. TRANSPORTATION PLANNER.

>> I SEE THAT. APPRECIATE IT.

>>>GOOD AFTERNOON. GROWTH MANAGEMENT.

THAT IS CONSIDERED A DEFICIENT ROADWAY SEGMENT BASED ON TOTAL COMMITTED TRAFFIC ON THE ROADWAY.

OR THAT HAS BEEN APPROVED ALL OF IT MAY NOT BE THERE BUT IT IS CONSIDERED TO BE A DEFICIENT SEGMENT.

>> WHAT PERCENTAGE IS DEFICIENT NOW AND IS IT

OVERCAPACITY? >> YES.

DEFICIENT MEANS IT IS OVERXAS FI.

>> BY WHAT PERCENTAGE, DO YOU KNOW?

>> I DIDN'T BRING IT. >> IT'S OVER CAPACITY RIGHT NOW. OKAY.

TO ME IT IS QUITE SIGNIFICANT GIVEN THERE'S ONE CURRENTLY WE DON'T KNOW WHEN MOON BAY PARKWAY IS GOING TO GO THROUGH, IF EVER.

>> MOON BAY PARKWAY IS UNDER CONSTRUCTION.

HOWEVER, THE SECOND CONNECTION THAT'S BEEN DISCUSSED IS REQUIRED BY THE SANDY CREEK P-U-D FOR THEM TO DEVELOP ANY ADDITIONAL DEVELOPMENT IN THAT P-U-D THE SECOND ACCESS IS REQUIRED OVER TO MOON BAY PARKWAY.

>> SO THAT THE UNDER CONSTRUCTION FROM WHAT WE CAN SEE ON THE AERIAL. DOES IT EXTEND FURTHER SOUTH TOWARD THE CURRENT SANDY CREEK NEIGHBORHOOD.

>> MOON BAY PARKWAY WILL NOT GO TO SANDY CREEK DEVELOPMENT.

THERE IS ANOTHER ROADWAY THAT WOULD BE REQUIRED FROM SANDY CREEK PARKWAY HEADING EAST OVER TO MOON BAY PARKWAY.

>> RIGHT. IT GOES DOWN HERE.

SO THERE HAS TAB A CONNECTION THROUGH HERE WHICH IS A CHT.

THERE'S A WETLAND HERE SO YOU'RE NOT GOING TO DO THAT, PROBABLY THE OTHER OPTION IS UP HERE ON THE KOA SITE TO IT.

MOON BAY COMES DOWN TO HERE NOW. >> CROSSING THAT WETLAND WOULD BE DIFFICULT. SO WHEN MIGHT THAT BE COMPLETED?

>> WHAT WOULD BE COMPLETED?

>> THAT EXTENSION OF MOON BAY PARKWAY.

>> I HAVE NO IDEA. THERE'S NO PLANS CURRENTLY.

>> THERE'S NO PLAN CURRENTLY.

>> IN OUR SYSTEM TO CONNECT. >> I THOUGHT YOU SAID IT WAS

UNDER CONSTRUCTION. >> MOON BAY PARKWAY IS UNDER CONSTRUCTION BUT THAT'S NOT THE ROAD WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT ANOTHER ROAD THAT WOULD GO, AGAIN, FROM SANDY CREEK PARKWAY, TO THE EAST AND CONNECT TO MOON BAY PARKWAY.

THANK YOU FOR THAT CLARIFICATION.

I DID NOT UNDERSTAND THAT FULLY. BUT THAT IS NOT URN CONSTRUCTION

CURRENTLY SF >> NO.

THERE'S ONE INGRESS, EGRESS GOING OUT TO A DEFICIENT ROAD

SEGMENT. >> CORRECT.

>> THAT'S SIGNIFICANT, IN MY OPINION.

QUESTIONS. I NOTICED YOU DID NOT HAVE A PHOTO AS YOU'RE COMING DOWN SANDY CREEK PARKWAY, BEFORE YOU GET TO YOUR SITE. THERE'S A, I DON'T KNOW WHAT YOU CALL IT. LIKE A BRIDGE WITH A LITTLE AMENITIES RIGHT THERE. IT SORT OF SIGNIFIES TO ME YOU'RE ENTERING THE SANDY CREEK DEVELOPMENT.

[04:25:02]

>> YEAH. I PUT THE ENTRANCE GATES.

>> THAT'S FURTHER DOWN. >> NO.

THAT'S BEYOND THE ENTRANCE GATE. THAT'S IN THERE, ACTUALLY.

>> RIGHT ABOVE IT YOU'VE GOT THE RETENTION AREA AND THEN YOU CAN SEE ONE OF THE ENTRANCE GATES THERE.

>> THAT PHOTO WAS TAKEN NORTH OF YOUR PROPOSED

DEVELOPMENT? >> NO.

THIS IS ON THE SOUTH SIDE. >> I'M TALKING ABOUT

SOMETHING NORTH. >> YOU MEAN THE SIGN THAT'S

UP ALONG -- >> IT'S SOME SORT OF

AMENITY, A BRIDGE. >> IT'S ACTUALLY RIGHT HERE IN THIS PICTURE. IT'S THEIR ENTRANCE SIGN.

>> NO. THAT'S NOT IT EITHER.

>> NO. MIGHT ASK THE RESIDENTS ABOUT IT. YOU DRIVE ALONG, THERE'S A BRIDGE, THERE'S STRUCTURES THERE THAT INDICATES, WOULD SIGNIFY TO ME THAT I'M ENTERING THAT SANDY CREEK NEIGHBORHOOD.

THAT IS WELL NORTH OF THE ENTRANCE GATES YOU SHOWED.

IT'S NORTH OF YOUR PROJECT. >> MY PROJECT IS IMMEDIATELY NEXT TO WHERE THAT RETENTION AREA IS THAT I WAS SHOWING YOU.

IMMEDIATELY. SO THERE'S NOT ANOTHER PIECE IN

BETWEEN. >> I COULD HAVE SWORN I SAW IT TODAY. I JUST SAW IT A FEW HOURS AGO.

MAYBE DR. MCCORMICK SAW IT. >> YOU MAY BE, THIS IS THE PIECE OF PROPERTY IN THAT AND TENSION AREA I SHOWED.

>> I WAS NORTH OF THE POWER LINE RIGHT OF WAY.

>> AND THE ENTRANCE GATE. THE POWER LINE RITE RIGHT OF WAY

IS UP HERE. >> I'M TALKING NORTH OF

THAT. >> THERE'S TO SANDY CREAK NORTH

OF THAT. >> THERE'S A BRIDGE AND STRUCTURE. MAYBE SOME RESIDENTS KNOW.

>> THERE'S AN ENTRANCE SIGN. >> THAT'S NOT IT EITHER.

>> WHERE YOU SEE THAT ENTRANCE SIGN THAT'S IN MY PICTURE WOULD BE RIGHT IN HERE, RIGHT IN HERE.

>> OKAY. >> THAT'S WHAT I THINK YOU'RE THINKING BECAUSE IT USED TO BE A PART OF THE CAMPGROUND.

>> NO. DEFINITELY NOT.

ONE OF THE LETTERS BROUGHT UP OPPOSING THIS WAS FOR WE KNEW 191 PEOPLE SIGNED ON OPPOSING THIS.

STATED THAT THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY PROVIDES A SIGNIFICANT NOISE BUFFER FROM I-95 FOR THEM AND THEY DON'T WANT THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD TO TURN IN TO WHAT'S HAPPENED TO SOME OF THE JACKSONVILLE, DUV A L COUNTY NEIGHBORHOODS WHERE PRICE VALUES PLUMMETED AND NAZ BARRIERS WERE PUT UP TOO LATE.

WHAT DO YOU THINK OF THAT NOTION?

>> I DIDN'T GET THE PETITION AND I DON'T SEE WHAT THAT ASK FOR THE PETITION. I DON'T KNOW.

I ALSO KNOW THAT FROM LIVING IN AN HOA COMMUNITY THAT SOMEBODY COMES TO YOUR DOOR A LOT OF TIMES PEOPLE SIGN THEM OR AT THE LOCAL GROCERY STORE OR WHATEVER. I CAN'T REALLY SAY.

BUT AS FOR I DID SEE COMMENTS IN ONE OF THE THING REGARDING THAT.

>> THIS WASN'T IN A PETITION IT WAS A LETTER IN OUR PACKET.

>> ONE OF THE LETTERS. JUST FOR YOUR INFORMATION, OKAY, JUST TO LOOK AT THE SITE PLAN. YOU GO A LONG WAY ALONG SOME NICE FORESTED AREAS AND THINGS LIKE THAT LONG BEFORE YOU GET TO

ANY HOMES. >> I DROVE IN THERE.

>> YOU KNOW, LONG BEFORE THAT.

THERE'S TWO PARCELS TO THIS AND YOU CAN KIND OF SEE THE SOUTH PARCEL. THE SOUTH PARCEL WAS THE PARCEL WHERE THE MAJORITY OF THAT WAS WETLANDS.

THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF UPLANDS WE'RE GOING TO USE SOME OF THAT FOR THE RETENTION AND WE'RE DOING THAT ALONG 95.

WE'RE IMPACTING A LITTLE BIT. THAT'LL STILL STAY.

AGAIN, IN WHAT WE WANT TO DO WE'RE PLANNING ON PUTTING THE BUFFER ON THE OUTSIDE SO THEY'LL HAVE A 20-FOOT BUFFER WITH THE TREES AND THE ADDITIONAL VEGETATION REQUIRED BY THAT

SECTION 6 OF THE CODE. >> YOU STATED THAT YOU THOUGHT THIS FACILITY WOULD ACTUALLY ENHANCE PROPERTY VALUES? YOU SAY THAT HERE TODAY.

>> I THOUGHT BECAUSE YOU HAVE AVAILABILITY TO BE ABLE TO STORE YOUR BOAT AND RVS CLOSE BY, WHICH IS SOMETHING THAT'S COMMON IN THE NEWER DEVELOPMENTS.

THEY ARE INCLUDING THEM P IN THERE.

>> DO YOU HAVE ANY OPINIONS FROM A PROFESSIONAL APPRAISER TO THAT AFFECT THAT WOULD ENHANCE PROPERTY VALUES?

>> NO. BUT I DON'T HAVE AN OPINION FROM AN APPRAISER IT WILL NOT ENHANCE IT.

>> I CAN TELL YOU THIS IF IT WAS AT THE ENTRANCE OF MY

[04:30:02]

>> RIGHT NOW YOU COME BY A SELF-STORAGE FACILITY AND WAFFLE

HOUSE. >> OKAY.

FOUNTAINS DEVELOPMENT IS GOING TO ADD A LOT OF TRAFFIC.

THAT'S GOING TO BE A LARGE DEVELOPMENT ON THE NORTH SIDE OF 210. I DON'T KNOW HOW MUCH TRAFFIC IS THAT IS PROJECTED TO GENERATE. THERE'S A HOSPITAL THERE.

ALL THIS RESIDENTIAL/COMMERCIAL. ALREADY A DEFICIENT SEGMENT WITH ONE INGRESS, EGRESS FOR RESIDENTS IN AND OUT OF THERE.

TO ADD ANOTHER DEVELOPMENT AT THIS TIME TO GENERATE MORE TRAFFIC OF LARGE VEHICLES, CARS PULLING BOATS ON TRAILERS OR LARGE RVS COMING IN AND OUT. I DON'T SEE THIS IS AN APPROPRIATE PLACE AT THE ENTRANCE OF A VERY NICE NEIGHBORHOOD. THAT'S MY OPINION.

>> UNDERSTOOD. >> THANK YOU.

>> ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? IF NOT WE'RE BACK IN THE AGENCY FOR MOTION.

ANYONE?

>> COULD I ASK ONE OF THE RESIDENTS THAT LIVE IN THERE IF THERE IS A BRIDGE OVER THAT WETLAND?

YOU SEE ON THE AERIAL. >> MR. CHAIR.

>> IS THERE A BRIDGE AND SOME SORT OF STRUCTURE THERE THAT IS WHAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT?

IS THERE SOMETHING THERE. >> YES.

MY NAME IS NORMAN GANNON 267 SPRING CREEK WAY.

THERE IS. AS YOU GO SOUTH IN TO THE COMMUNITY THERE IS A SIDEWALK ON EITHER SIDE OF THE ROADS.

AND THEN THERE'S ACTUALLY A STREAM THAT PASSES UNDER THE ROADWAY AND THERE'S SOME WOODEN SUPPORTS.

MY FIRST YEAR HERE WITH THE HURRICANE WE WERE TRAPPED THERE THREE DAYS BECAUSE THAT FLOODED TO A DEPTH WE COULDN'T GET THE CAR OUT. AS YOU GO FURTHER SOUTH THERE'S ACTUALLY, IT DIVIDES AND THERE'S A BARRIER WITH FLOWERS AND SUCH THAT INTRODUCES YOU INTO THE AREA.

>> THAT'S INSIDE YOUR GATES. >> AS YOU GO A LITTLE BIT

FURTHER TO THE SOUTH. >> BUT THERE IS A BRIDGE

OVER THAT. >> THERE'S ACTUALLY, IT'S LIKE A CULVERT, IF YOU WILL. BUT, AGAIN, FOR THE WALKWAY THERE IS LIKE, BECAUSE WATER ON THE SIDEWALK, THERE'S A WOODEN STRUCTURE. IN TWO PLACE, ACTUALLY.

ONE PLACE AND A LITTLE BIT FURTHER TO THE SOUTH.

>> THANK YOU. >> MS. TAYLOR.

>> MIKE, WHAT DO YOU HAVE TO SAY?

>> MR. CHAIR, I CAN CONFIRM THAT AND I HAVE A PHOTO

HERE. >> SIT DOWN, PLEASE.

>> I'M SORRY. >> PLEASE SIT DOWN.

>> MR. CHAIR, WHEN HE MENTIONED THAT ALONG THAT WETLANDS STRAND NORTH OF THAT STORM WATER POND THERE IS AN ARCHITECTURALLY FEATURED LITTLE BRIDGEWAY.

IT LOOKS LIKE IT'S PART OF THE WETLAND STRAND.

YOU WERE MAYBE ASKING ABOUT ACCESS BUT IT'S JUST BORDERING.

SO PEOPLE DON'T WALK OFF. >> I APPRECIATE THAT.

>> THANK YOU. >> YOU CAN SEE THE TWO OF

THOSE. >> IS THERE A MOTION?

[9. CPA(SS) 2021-19 Pacetti Burchfield Family. Request for a Small Scale Comprehensive Plan Amendment to change the Future Land Use Map designation of approximately 8.6 acres of land from Rural/Silviculture (R/S) to Residential-A (RES-A). The subject property is located on the south side of Saint Marks Pond Boulevard, approximately 2.5 miles from International Golf Parkway]

>> REZONING 2021-38 SANDY CREEK STORAGE.

REZONE 7.85 ACRES OF LAND TO COMMERCIAL HIGHWAY TOURIST BASED UPON FINDING THE FACT PROVIDED IN THE STAFF REPORT.

>> SECOND. >> WE HAVE A MOTION FOR DENIAL AND A SECOND. IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? VOTE IS TO APPROVE. LET'S RECORD THE VOTE.

THAT MOTION PASSES 6-1. >>>LET'S MOVE ONTO ITEM

NUMBER 9. >>>GOOD AFTERNOON.

DOUG BURNETT. SEA GROVE MAIN STREET.

I'M GOING TO GO THROUGH IT QUICK LIKE THE LAST TIME.

I UNDERSTAND IT'S LATE IN THE DAY.

GIVE YOU A LOCATION. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT U.S. 1 AT IGP. YOU CAN SEE A LITTLE BIT BLUE SQUARE DOWN HERE IN THE MIDDLE. OBVIOUSLY, THE AIRPORT.

[04:35:01]

THIS IS THAT CONCRETE PLANT THAT'S IN THE AREA LOOKING DIRECTLY AT ACCESS OFF ST. MARKS POND.

THERE'S SOME INDUSTRIAL THAT'S ALREADY THERE EXISTING.

THERE'S A WEIGH STATION PUT IN. WHEN YOU GET HERE TO WHERE PROPERTY IS BEFORE YOU TODAY YOU GET A NUMBER OF HOUSES.

FOLKS THAT LIVED THERE A LONG PERIOD OF TIME.

WITHIN THE PACT YOU'LL SEE A STORY THE HISTORY OF THE PROPERTY. YOU CAN SEE FUTURE LAND USE AND, YES, IT'S IN R-S. THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE.

WE'RE ASKING FOR YOU TO CHANGE THAT FOR THIS, THESE TWO PARCELS, MAKE THEM REZ A SO THE FAMILY CAN BUILD FOUR HOUSES ON THE PROPERTY. LOOKING THROUGH HERE YOU CAN GET A GOOD IDEA. YOU SEE A NUMBER OF HOUSES.

IN YOUR PACKET IS THAT JUSTIFICATION.

THE ONE HOUSE IS A MOMENT IS A 1927 HOUSE.

YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT LOOSELY 95 YEARS THE FAMILY HAS HAD A RESIDENCE THERE. VACATION HOME, COTTAGE, WHATEVER YOU WANT TO CALL IT. OVER THE YEARS YOU CAN SEE IN RED THE PARCELS WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.

YOU CAN SEE MICHAEL BURCHFIELD HAS A HOME.

KELLY. THE PROPERTY SHE OWNS.

PATRICK, THE PROPERTY HE OWNS. ANOTHER EDWARD, THE PROPERTY HE OWNS ALL IN THE SAME AREA. WHEN YOU ZOOM IN AND LOOK YOU CAN SEE WHAT I CONSIDER LOOSELY YOUR TYPICAL O-R SITE SUBDIVISION. THERE'S FOLKS THAT LIVE THERE AND HAVE ALWAYS HAD HOMES. THE REASON THIS CAME UP IS KELLY WENT TO LOOK AT PULLING A BUILDING PERMIT ON THE NORTH FOUR ACRES OF THE LAND TO FIND OUT SHE COULDN'T PULL A BUILDING PERMIT ON IT BECAUSE IT'S R-S LAND.

HERE WE ARE TODAY SAYING CAN WE PLEASE GET APPROVAL FOR RES A ON THESE TWO PARCELS CAPPING THE DENSITY AT FOUR TOTAL SO THERE WOULD BE TWO ON EACH ONE. THEY WANT IT FOR THEIR KIDS TO BE ABLE TO HAVE HOUSES THERE ONE DAY.

WITH THAT IN MY PRESENTATION THAT'S THE SUMMARY OF IT.

I'LL BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS YOU HAVE.

THEY COULDN'T MAKE IT TODAY. THEY OWN OUTHOUSE SAND AND SEPTIC AND WERE NOT ABLE TO BE HERE.

THEY APOLOGIZE FOR NOT BEING HERE.

THEY THOUGHT IT WAS IMPORTANT TO BE HERE AND IT JUST DOESN'T WORK

FOR THEIR SCHEDULE. >> ALL RIGHT.

>> I REALLY ENJOYED READING THE NARRATIVE THAT YOU SUPPLIED THAT THE FOLKS SUPPLIED. THAT WAS VERY INTERESTING.

>> I DIDN'T WRITE IT. KELLY AND DALE.

>> THAT'S NOT MY QUESTION. THERE'S A CONSIDERABLE NUMBER OF WETLANDS ON THIS PROPERTY BOTH TRACTS.

YOU HAD A WETLAND DELINEATION IN THERE TOWARD THE BACK OF THE APPLICATION MATERIALS. WAY AT THE BACK WETLAND DELINEATION. I WONDER, IN ORDER TO GET FOUR HOUSES IN THERE. I WANTED TO DRIVE BY THERE TODAY BUT I RAN OUT OF TIME AND HAD TO HOT FOOT IT BACK DOWN HERE FOR THIS. I JUST DON'T THINK I COULD HAVE GOTTEN TO THE PROPERTY, ANYWAY. GIVEN THE WETLANDS, AND I DON'T KNOW IF YOU HAVE THAT SLIDE IN THERE OF THE DELINEATED WETLANDS. I WONDER HOW THEY ARE GOING TO GET THOSE FOUR HOUSES IN THERE. ONE UNIT PER, BASICALLY, TWO

ACRES. >> DOCTOR IT'S A GREAT QUESTION. ANTICIPATION OF THAT I TOOK, AND I CAN TELL YOU, BY CUTTING AND PASTING BY SCREEN SHOTTING.

I TOOK, LOOSELY, THE FOOTPRINT OF ONE-THIRD OF THIS LOT RIGHT HERE WHERE THIS HOME IS LOCATED. I SCREEN SHOTTED IT.

THE UPLANDS IT FITS AND THREE FIT EASILY IN THIS LOCATION.

THERE'S A WETLAND THROUGH HERE. BUT IF I JUST PICK THIS UP AND EQUAL SIZE, EQUAL SIZE I DROP ONE HERE AND I DROP THREE IN THIS AREA. THREE HOUSES FIT IN HERE.

>> I BELIEVE THERE'S ENOUGH UPLANDS THERE TO EASILY BUILD THE HOUSES SO YOU'RE IN THE NO WETLANDS.

SAY ONE UNIT PER ACRE IN THERE. THIS GETS REZONED.

I JUST WONDERED HOW THEY WERE GOING TO ACCESS THOSE AND CROSS THE WETLANDS. I SAW IN THE AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH UP UP THERE NOW IT LOOKED LIKE THE NORTH/SOUTH ROAD.

[04:40:01]

IF YOU FOLLOW THAT DOWN TOWARD THE SECOND PARCEL I DON'T SEE IT ON THIS BUT I SEE IT ON MY XHURT.

IT LOOKED LIKE A COUPLE OF BOATS STORED ALONG THERE AND MAYBE A ROAD THAT COMES DOWN THERE TO ALLOW YOU TO GET THROUGH THOSE WETLANDS TO ANOTHER UPLAND PIECE.

IS THAT TRUE? >> AS I UNDERSTAND IT YOU

CAN GET TO THIS NORTHERN PART. >> THAT'S THE DRIEST SAND

YOU HAVE OUT THERE. >> WE'RE ALL IN THE SAME BOAT. THIS HERE.

I THINK THE WAY YOU ACCESS THIS UPLAND IS OFF OF THIS ROADWAY

COMING DOWN THROUGH HERE. >> OKAY.

THEY CAN CROSS THAT WITHOUT GOING IN TO WETLANDS.

>> YES. AS I LOOK AT THE WETLAND DELINEATION. I DON'T HAVE THAT IN MY POWERPOINT PRESENTATION. I THINK IT'S IN YOUR PACKET.

YOU CAN SEE THE LINES WHERE THIS EXISTING ROADWAY IS RIGHT NOW.

IT'S STILL, THIS IS THE WETLAND. EXCUSE ME, RIGHT IN HERE IS THE WETLAND. BUT OFF THIS CORNER, I BELIEVE,

IS IN TO THE UPLAND. >> COMES DOWN AND GOES FURTHER SOUTH THAN YOU'RE INDICATING. ACCORDING TO YOUR WETLAND

DELINEATION. >> YES, SIR, IT'S PRETTY HEAVY. THROUGH HERE IT'S PRETTY HEAVY.

THERE'S ONLY A LITTLE BIT OF UPLAND HERE.

>> IT LOOKS LIKE GREAT PROPERTY.

THANK YOU. >>>YES, SIR.

>>>IS THERE ANY OTHER QUESTIONS?

[Items 10 & 11]

>> THERE ARE NONE. >> BACK IN THE AGENCY FOR

MOTION. >> MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF COMP PLAN SMALL SCALE 2021-19.

REQUEST FOR A SMALL SCALE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT TO CHANGE 8.6 ACRES OF LAND TO RES A BASED ON FININGS OF FACT

PROVIDED. >> WE HAVE A MOTION FOR

APPROVAL. >> SECOND.

>>>IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE LET'S REGISTER

THE VOTE. >>>THAT ITEM IS APPROVED AND NOW WE'RE GOING TO TAKE ITEMS TEN AND ELEVEN TOGETHER.

DOES ANYBODY HAVE EXPERT TAKE TO DECLARE ON ITEM 11?

MS. PERKINS. >>>MY COMPANY IN 2019 HAD THE PROPERTY UNDER CONTRACT. ULTIMATELY WE DECIDED NOT TO DEVELOP THIS. I HAVE TO CURRENT TIES TO THE

APPLICANT. >> OKAY.

ANYONE ELSE? >> RVI PLANNING IN FLORIDA REPRESENTING TAYLOR MORRISSON. TODAY MICHAEL OWENS WITH TAYLOR MORRIS YN SON IS HERE. WE'RE REQUESTING TWO ITEMS. ITEM 10 IS A COMP PLAN AMENDMENT TO CHANGE THE LAND USE FROM RURAL CIVIL CULTURE TO RESIDENTIAL C.

ITEM 11 IS TO CHANGE IT FROM OPEN O-R TO PUD FOR DEVELOPMENT OF 118 SINGLE FAMILY HOMES WITHIN THE DEVELOPMENT.

ALL THE PROPERTIES ARE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES RANGING FROM THE SIZE OF ABOUT 2400 SQUARE SQUARE FEET TO ABOUT 2800 SQUARE FEET.

THEY HAVE SIDEWALKS, AMENITIES ON SITE, RETENTION AS TYPICALLY AS REQUIRED. THERE'S A SCENIC EDGE ALONG STATE ROAD 16 AND WITH PEDESTRIAN TRAIL AND CONNECTING TO THE INTERNAL SIDEWALKS. THE PROPERTY IS 49 ACRES.

AGAIN, LOCATED ALONG STATE ROAD 16 INCLUDING OR ADD JAY SENT TO DEVELOPMENTS TO THE NORTH IS GRAND OAKS.

TO THE SOUTH IS WINWARD PINES. EXCUSE ME, WINWARD RANCH.

AND TAMOKA PINES TO THE EAST. GRAND OAKS IS RESIDENTIAL C.

WINWARD RANCHES AND THE PINES IS DEVELOP B.

LOCATED IN THE CENTRAL PART OF THE PROPERTY IS A TRI ANNING GU LAR SITE A WETLAND SYSTEM AND TO THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE PROPERTY IT'S 3.88 ACRES PRESERVED AND THEN THERE'S SOME HISTORIC AGRICULTURE DITCHES IN THE MIDDLE IMPACTED THROUGH THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY. AGAIN, THE BUFFERS AROUND THE

[04:45:04]

THERE'S A 35-FOOT BUFFER ON THE SOUTH SIDE AND THEN ADJACENT TO A TWO HUNDRED FOOT PROPERTY, WIDE PROPERTY AND THEN WHISPERING RIDGE FURTHER TO THE SOUTH.

THE PROPERTY TO THE NORTH OF THE SITE HAS BEEN TRANSFERRED TITLE TO SCHOOL SYSTEM AND THERE WILL BE AN ELEMENTARY SCHOOL AT SOME POINT DEVELOPED ON THAT SITE. EXISTING, THIS IS THE EXISTING LAND USE RURAL CIVIL CULTURE AND THEN CHANGING IT TO RESIDENTIAL C. YOU CAN SEE.

ADJACENT DEVELOPMENT, ADJACENT PROPERTIES ARE PRETTY CONSISTENT WITH THE DENSITY THAT WE'RE REQUESTING 2.61 UNITS PER ACRE.

THE PUD TO THE NORTH IS 2.5 AND TO THE NORTHWEST 2.7 AND SO FORTH. THIS IS THE SITE PLAN.

ENTRANCE IS HERE IN THE CENTRAL PART OF THE SITE.

THERE'S AN AMENITY ON, RIGHT AT THE ENTRANCE NORTH OF THE WETLAND SYSTEM. STORM WATER RETENTION POND IS ADJACENT TO STATE ROAD 16. THERE'S THE 75-FOOT SCENIC EDGE WITH A TRAIL ALONG INSIDE THE SCENIC EDGE CONNECTING TO THE SIDEWALK SYSTEMS AT THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY.

THERE'S SIDEWALK THROUGHOUT THE SITE WITH STORM WATER POND IN THE CENTRAL PART OF THE SITE AND STORM WATER POND TO THE SOUTH WESTERN CORNER OF THE SITE. THERE'S TWO SMALL PARKS, AS WELL. THE PROJECT IS COMPATIBLE WITH ADJACENT PROPERTIES AROUND IT. WE'RE DEVELOPING SINGLE FAMILY HOMES CONSISTENT WITH ADJACENT PROPERTIES IN THE AREA.

AGAIN, WE'RE HAVE 75-FOOT SCENIC EDGE ALONG STATE ROAD 16 AND THE PERIMETER BUFFERS AROUND THE OUTSIDE.

THE WETLAND SYSTEM IS FORESTED ON THE SIDE AND BEING SPREFSHED IN THE SOUTHEAST CORNER. INFRASTRUCTURE, WE HAVE WATER, WASTE WATER INFRASTRUCTURE PROVIDED BY ST. JOHNS COUNTY.

THERE'S A LETTER IN THE PACKAGE FROM ST. JOHNS COUNTY AND THE ROADWAY, THE ACCESS TO STATE ROAD 16.

THERE'S, AGAIN, SCHOOLS AND PARKS ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY.

AGAIN, RESIDENTIAL C ALLOWS UP TO SIX UNITS AN ACRE DEVELOPMENT. FOR THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT WE'RE ASKING FOR 118 UNITS AT 2.61 UNITS AN ACRE AND AGREE TO HAVE A LIMIT TO MAXIMUM OF 118 UNITS FOR THE PROJECT.

COUPLE OF IMAGES. THESE ARE A COUPLE OF THE BUILDING TYPES OFFERED AND PROPOSED FOR THIS SITE.

AGAIN, THEY VARY FROM SLIGHTLY UNDER 2500 SQUARE FEET UP TO ABOUT 2800 SQUARE FEET. THAT'S ALL I HAVE.

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS. >>>ALL RIGHT.

DR. MCCORMICK. >> I DO HAVE A QUESTION.

MY QUESTION IS ON THE 49 ACRES THAT YOU WANT TO TAKE FROM RURAL CIVIL CULTURE TO RESIDENTIAL C BUT YOU'RE SETTING A MAXIMUM OF 118 UNITS ON THAT. WOULD YOU CONSIDER HAVING MORE DENSITY THAN THAT IF YOU INSERTED AFFORDABLE HOUSING OR WORK FORCE HOUSING ON SOME OF THAT PROPERTY? AND INCREASE THE NUMBER OF UNITS IN DOING THAT?

>> NO. MY CLIENT IS NOT CONSIDERED DOING THAT. WE PROPOSE SOMETHING THAT WOULD BE MORE COMPATIBLE WITH ADJACENT DEVELOPMENTS.

AGAIN, 2.61 UNITS AN ACRE IS PRETTY CONSISTENT WITH PROPERTIES TO THE NORTH AND SOUTH OF US AND WE TRIED TO BE CONSISTENT AND COMPATIBLE WITH ADJACENT PROPERTIES.

>> IT'S A GOOD PIECE OF PROPERTY, I THINK, FOR WORK FORCE HOUSING OR AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

IF THAT'S NOT WHAT YOU CLIENT WANTS TO DO THEN, I GUESS,

[04:50:04]

YOU'RE NOT GOING TO DO IT. >> THAT'S CORRECT.

WE'RE TRYING TO BE COMPATIBLE WITH ADJACENT DEVELOPMENTS.

>> YOU'VE GOT ONE INGRESS, EGRESS POINT FROM THIS 118

DEVELOPMENT ON STATE ROAD 16. >> YES, SIR.

>> THIS BOARD TURNED DOWN A DEVELOPMENT ON PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT ON COUNTY ROAD 208 NOT LONG AGO.

IT'S PROBABLY SIX MONTHS AGO. IT WAS ONLY GOING TO HAVE 20 HOUSES AND IT ONLY HAD ONE INGRESS EGRESS AND THAT WAS THE PRIMARY REASON IT WAS TURNED DOWNGOING TO 208.

SINCE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT STATE ROAD 16 AND YOU'LL ACCESS STATE ROAD 16 CAN YOU TELL ME ABOUT THE TRAFFIC SITUATION CURRENTLY ON STATE ROAD 16, SPECIFICALLY, LINK 92.12.

WHAT THAT IS? WHAT'S GOING ON.

>> CURRENTLY STATE ROAD 16 IS BEING IN PROCESS OF BEING WIDENED. IT'S BEING DESIGNED, MY UNDERSTANDING, WITH THE COUNTY AND THE PROPERTY TO THE NORTH.

OUR PROJECT WOULD BE PAYING PROPORTIONATE SHARE OF CONTRIBUTIONS TOWARD TRAFFIC FOR ABOUT $1.3 MILLION THAT I ASSUME WOULD BE UTILIZED IF THAT! HOW MUCH?

>> 1.3. >> THAT'S WHAT I READ.

I THOUGHT YOU SAID 3. >> NO 1.3 IS WHAT I BELIEVE I READ THE CALCULATION. THAT'S WHAT WE'RE PLANNING FOR NOW. THE DIFFICULTY WITH PROVIDING ADDITIONAL ACCESS POINT TON STATE ROAD 16 IS PROXIMITY TO PROPERTY TO THE NORTH IS IMMEDIATELY TO THE NORTH SIDE AND, SO, YOUR INTERSECTION PROXIMITY WOULD BE TOO CLOSE AND PROBLEMS WITH THAT. YOU HAVE THE SAME PROBLEM ON THE SOUTH SIDE WHERE THE CHURCH IS AND YOU'RE TOO CLOSE.

>> I'LL SUMMARIZE FOR YOU WHAT I THINK THE TRAFFIC IS FROM THE APPLICATION. IT SAYS LINK 92.12 FROM STATE ROAD 16 FROM SOUTH FRANCIS ROAD TO WEST MALL ENTRANCE IS CURRENTLY OPERATING AT 86.6% OF CAPACITY AND CLASSIFIED AS DEFICIENT AT THAT. IT'S NOT OVER 100% BUT IT'S STILL DEFICIENT. AND FROM CON CURRENCY REVIEW PURPOSES AT 144.6% OF CAPACITY BASED ON TOTAL COMMITTED TRAFFIC. YOU'RE LOOKING AT AN AREA AT 144.6% COMMITTED TOTAL COMMITTED TRAFFIC AND YOU WANT TO DUMP AN

ADDITIONAL NEARLY 1200 CARS. >> PEAK HOUR TRIPS.

>> THE TOTAL TRIPS IS 1175. THAT IS IN YOUR INFORMATION.

THAT'S WHY I'M USING THAT. PEAK HOUR TRIPS I'M TALKING TOTAL TRAFFIC. NEARLY 1200 VEHICLES. AS YOU MENTIONED THAT THERE'S SUPPOSE TO BE AN UPGRADING OF THAT PARTICULAR SEGMENT AND THIS WAS ACTUALLY HIGHLIGHTED.

I DON'T KNOW IF ANY OF YOU WERE ATTENDING OR SAW THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS MEETING ON TUESDAY FEBRUARY 15TH.

BUT THIS WAS ACTUALLY, THIS EXACT EXAMPLE, NOT YOUR DEVELOPMENT BUT YOUR ADJACENT DEVELOPMENT, CONTINUOUS DEVELOPMENT, WAS COMMITTED TO SOMEWHERE BETWEEN 10-15 MILLION DOLLAR PROPORTION, FAIR SHARE, 10-15 MILLION TO UPGRADE THAT SEGMENT OF THE ROAD. IT'S SUPPOSED TO START WHEN THAT REACHES 90% CAPACITY, WHICH IT'S CLOSE TO RIGHT NOW.

YOU'VE GOT THIS ROAD SEGMENT. FIGURES THAT WERE CITED AND THIS WAS GREAT PRESENTATION BY COMMISSIONER WALDRON.

TALKING ABOUT TRAFFIC PROBLEMS CURRENTLY.

THAT NOW GOING TO COST WHEN THAT PARTICULAR DEVELOPMENT TO YOUR NORTH WAS APPROVED AT 999 UNITS THAT PUD THAT 10-15 MILLION WAS PROBABLY GOING TO PRETTY MUCH COVER THAT ROAD WIDENING TWO TO FOUR LANES. NOW THE PROJECTED COST OF THAT IS, AND WHEN THE PERSON WAS ASKED WHAT THAT WAS GOING TO BE, HE SAID YOU DON'T WANT TO KNOW. THAT WAS IN THE MEETING.

BUT THE ANSWER IS $50 MILLION NOW TO DO THAT PARTICULAR

[04:55:07]

IT HAS IMPACT ON ME AND PEOPLE WATCHING.

THE COUNTY HAS A $220 MILLION SHORTFALL IN ROAD INFRASTRUCTURE. SO THAT IS A CONCERN TO ME.

THE NEXT QUESTION. WHAT KINDS OF SOILS ARE ON THIS

PROPERTY? >> I'D HAVE TO LOOK.

>> DID YOU FILL OUT THE FORM?

>> IT WAS PART OF THE APPLICATION.

>> I BELIEVE IT'S IN YOUR PACKET.

>> I KNOW WHAT THEY ARE I'M ASKING YOU.

THERE WAS SOMETHING PUT IN THERE PERHAPS IN JEST ON THE APPLICATION, WHICH I DIDN'T FIND THAT FUNNY.

THIS IS A SERIOUS PROCESS. I HAVE A GREAT SENSE OF HUMOR NORMALLY, BUT WHEN FACTUAL INFORMATION AND WHEN YOU SIGN THAT YOU SAID THIS INFORMATION WAS FACTUAL.

>> FINE SAND, FLORIDA FINE SAND, SOME MUCK, PRIMARILY IN THAT FORESTED WETLAND AND MOSTLY FINE SAND, SOILS.

>> DID YOU HAVE ONA ONA WRITTEN DOWN THERE?

DO YOU KNOW WHAT THAT MEANS? >> I DON'T KNOW.

>> THAT'S ON THE APPLICATION.

IT SAYS ONA ONA AS THE FIRST OR SECOND.

>> THIS IS A REPORT PULLED FROM THE NATIONAL SOIL.

>> BUT YOU FILLED OUT THE APPLICATION.

>> I UNDERSTAND. >> I LOOKED IT UP BECAUSE I KNOW THERE'S ONA FINE SAND. THAT'S NOT WHAT SOMEBODY WROTE.

THERE ARE THREE DIFFERENT SONGS OUT THERE OVER THE PAST FEW YEARS CALLED ONA ONA. THERE'S ALSO ANOTHER MEANINGS FOR THAT TERM. I JUST DIDN'T THINK THAT WAS APPROPRIATE IN A SERIOUS APLY A APPLICATION

>>. I THINK THAT WAS A TYPO.

>> THAT'S WHY I ASKED IF YOU FILLED THAT OUT.

IT'S NOT A SOIL TYPE. BUT ONA FINE SAND IS, INDEED.

YOU STATE IN THERE THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE, THIS IS IN FILL

DEVELOPMENT, RIGHT? >> CORRECT.

>> YOU LOOK AT THE MAP AND IT LOOKS LIKE INFILL DEVELOPMENT. I HAVE TO SAY.

BUT COMP PLAN POLICY A.1.2.8 SPECIFICALLY STATE IS, AND THIS IS THE LAST SENTENCE OF THAT POLICY.

INFILL DEVELOPMENT SHALL NOT BE CONSIDERED IN RURAL CIVIL CULTURE OR AG INTENSIVE AREAS. A LOT OF THINGS Y'ALL ARE CITING ARE ON RURAL CIVIL CULTURE LANDS AND CONTRARY TO THIS POLICY.

ACCORDING TO THE COMP PLAN THAT POLICY, THIS IS NOT CONSIDERED INFILL DEVELOPMENT. YOU HAVE A LOT OF DIFFERENT STATEMENTS. I WOULD READ THEM HERE HOW THIS IS IN FILL DEVELOPMENT. I DON'T SEE IT AS IN FILL DEVELOPMENT. BEFORE DOUG GETS IN HERE, AS WELL, HERE'S A STATEMENT. IN ADDITION TO CON CURRENCY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT I WANT YOU TO EXPLAIN THIS STATEMENT.

IN ADDITION TO CONCURRENCY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT ON THIS PROPERTY WILL ALSO LIMIT URBAN SPRAWL FROM MAJOR TRANSPORTATION CORRIDORS FURTHER FROM I-95. I WANT YOU TO EXPLAIN HOW MORE DEVELOPMENT, THIS DEVELOPMENT PARTICULARLY, LIMITS SPRAWL.

>> TYPICALLY WHEN YOU HAVE SPRAWL DEVELOPMENT IT LEAPFROGS OUT OI AWAY FROM EXISTING DEVELOPMENT.

IN THE PROPERTY THERE IS URBAN COMMERCIAL AND URBAN RESIDENTIAL ON BOTH SIDES OF IT ALL AROUND THIS PROPERTY.

THAT'S WHY AN IN FILL PROJECT. WE'RE FILLING IN A REMAINING PIECE OF PROPERTY. WE'RE NOT LEAPING OUT IN TO VERY RURAL AREAS. THIS IS NOT A RURAL AREA.

>> I UNDERSTAND. I'VE BEEN BY THE SITE MANY TIMES. I DIDN'T DRIVE SPECIFICALLY BY IT YESTERDAY OR TODAY. I'VE BEEN BY IT.

BUT ACCORDING TO THAT COMP PLAN POLICY THAT Y'ALL CITE IN HERE TO JUSTIFY THIS. THIS IS NOT AN IN FILL DEVELOPMENT. I WANTED YOU TO TELL ME HOW THIS DEVELOPING THIS PARCEL LIMITS URBAN SPRAWL.

THAT WAS IN YOUR APPLICATION. >> A SPRAWL DEVELOPMENT WOULD BE LEAPING OUT IN TO RURAL AREAS.

THIS IS NOT A RURAL AREA. THERE IS NUMEROUS SUBDIVISIONS

[05:00:02]

THERE IS LARGE AMOUNT OF COMMERCIAL PROPERTY.

WE ARE FILLING IN A PIECE OF PROPERTY WITHIN ADJACENT URBAN OR URBAN HOMES AND COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT.

>> OKAY. I HAVE OTHER QUESTIONS BUT I'M NOT GOING TO ASK THEM. THANK YOU.

APPRECIATE YOUR ANSWERS. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OF THE APPLICANT? ANY SPEAKER CARDS?

>> ONE, CHUCK LEVINOWSKI. >>>CHUCK LEBONOWSKI.

WE'RE GOING DUMP FOR TRAFFIC ON THE 16 OVER AND OVER AGAIN AT THE BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS MEETING SAID IS DEFICIENT.

SO WE'RE GOING ADD A FEW MORE CARS ON THERE.

RIGHT NOW TO GET IN TO TAMOKA PINES AND GET OUT THEY ARE HAVING A HARD TIME. THAT'S A HANDFUL OF HOMES.

100-120 CARS. YOU PUT GRAND OAKS IN THERE AND THOUSAND OS OF CARS WILL BE COMING IN AND OUT OF 16.

TWO LANES. YOU GET TRAFFIC ON THE FAR SIDE FROM SILVER LEAF COMING THROUGH TO GO TO ST. AUGUSTINE.

HEAVEN FORBID WHAT THAT'S GOING TO BE LIKE.

16 IS OVER CAPACITY. THEY KEEP TALKING ABOUT IT.

GRAND OAKS AND THE SITUATION THERE BROUGHT UP AT THE LAST COMMISSION MEETING. THERE'S AN ISSUE.

CAN'T BUILD 16. THEY DON'T EVEN HAVE ANY PLACE TO DUMP THE STORM WATER RIGHT NOW.

WE CAN'T PUT ANYTHING MORE ON 16.

IT'S GOING THE TAKE TOO LONG TO WIDEN THAT OUT.

YOU'VE GOT 16 WAS SUPPOSED TO HAVE BEEN WIDENED TO SOUTH FRANCIS 7 YEARS AGO. IT'S STILL NOT DONE.

WE GOT SLOW DOWN THE GROWTH ON 16.

WE CAN'T HAVE ANYMORE. I DARE ANY OF YOU TO GO OUT THERE WHEN 95 IS BACKED UP AND TRY TO TRAVEL ON 16.

IT'S NOT GOING HAPPEN. PLEASE, DENY THIS APPLICATION.

WE DON'T NEED ANYMORE BUILDING AT THIS TIME ON 16 UNTIL IT'S WIDENED. THANK YOU.

>>>THANK YOU. ANY REBUTTAL FROM THE APPLICANT? DOUG BURNETT, ST. JOHNS LAW GROUP IN ST. AUGUSTINE, FLORIDA.

VERY BRIEFLY. WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE HISTORY OF PROJECTS IN THE COUNTY, THE THRESHOLD TYPICALLY IS TWO HUNDRED UNITS FOR A SECOND ENTRANCE FOR PROJECTS.

I UNDERSTAND THERE MAY BE CIRCUMSTANCES WHERE YOU HAVE THE UNIQUE 208 LOCATION WITH THE LOWER NUMBER OF LOTS WHERE YOU SAY IT'S NOT APPROPRIATE. TO PUT A SECOND ENTRANCE ONE OF THE THINGS WE LOOKED AT THERE WAS ORIGINALLY A COMMERCIAL POD IMPACTING THE WETLAND, A PRIOR DESIGN OF THE PROJECT CONTEMPLATED THAT AND HAVING ACCESS ACROSS FROM THE CHURCH.

BY NOT HAVING A SEC ACCESS POINT WE HAVE NO CONFLICT WITH THE CHURCH. THIS IS A GREAT LOCATION FOR THIS USE BECAUSE TO THE NORTH THERE'S GOING TO BE A SCHOOL.

TRADITION FOR THE SCHOOL BOARD OR THE ACTIVITY OF WHAT THE SCHOOL BOARD HAS BEEN DOING IN THIS AREA IS TAKING EVERYTHING TO AN ACADEMY. KINDERGARTEN TO 8TH GRADE.

MILL CREEK ACADEMY. WARDS CREEK ACADEMY.

MORE THAN LIKELY WE'LL GET AN ACADEMY NEXT DOOR.

THAT'S A GREAT LOCATION FOR THIS USING TO NEXT DOOR TO A SOOL.

ELEMENTARY, ACADEMY OR MIDDLE SCHOOL IT'S THERE NEXT DOOR.

TO THE SOUTH NOT ONLY CONTEMPLATING A 35-FOOT BUFFER TWO HUNDRED FEET OF FOREST BEFORE HITTING THE NEXT SUBDIVISION. IF YOU LOOK AT THE MAP AND THE COUNTY DOESN'T HAVE THIS ON I MAP.

OR PART OF THE PACKET. YOU LOOK AT THE MAP AND DEVELOPMENT BOUNDARY AND THE RED LINE AROUND IT GOES AROUND THIS BUT DOESN'T ENCOMPASS THIS. IT MAY NOT TECHNICALLY MEET THE DEFINITION OF IN FILL BUT IT MEETS COMMON SENSE, LOOK AT IT, SEE THE MAP. COMP PLAN AMENDMENT ON THE EAST SIDE OF 16, COMP PLAN AMENDMENT TO THE NORTH OF THIS AND THIS IDEA OF RETRADING THE DEAL. I DON'T THINK YOU SEE SMALLER PROJECTS COME IN THIS SIZE WHERE THEY ARE GOING TO GET DONE IN A QUICK TIME PERIOD WHERE THEY COME IN AND TRY TO RETRADE THE DEAL ON WHAT THE PROP SHARE NUMBER.

IS FAIR SHARE ON TRAFFIC CONCURRENCY THEY GET DONE.

THEY GET ACCOMPLISHED. I THINK THE BIGGER PERSPECTIVE ISSUE OF WHAT YOU MIGHT LOOK AT FOR DRI ARE THOUSAND UNIT PROJECTS WHERE THEY COME IN AND THE COST GONE UP SO MUCH.

IN FACT, IT'S DIFFERENT. THIS PROJECT IS ONE OF THOSE ONES WHERE IT PAYS FOR ITS IMPACTS UP FRONT WHEN IT PULLS

[05:05:03]

IT PAYS FOR IMPACTS SO YOU HAVE MONEY THAT CAN GO TO FUND THINGS. I TELL YOU IT DOES, IF YOU LOOK AT A.1.2.5 A IT FITS IN THIS AREA.

THIS IS GREAT LOCATION. YOU HAVE A CLEARED SITE.

THE WETLAND ON SITE THERE ARE OTHER WETLANDS FROM BASICALLY THE DITCHES FROM THE FARMING. BUT THE MAIN WETLAND IS BEING PRESERVED ON THE SITE. THIS IS WHAT YOU WANT.

THIS IS WHERE YOU WANT DEVELOPMENT.

IT MAKES GREAT SENSE. PLEASE, WE RESPECTFULLY SUBMIT THIS IS A GOOD PROJECT AND A GOOD LOCATION.

THE ROADWAY RIGHT NOW IS GOOD ACCESS.

WHEN THE FOUR LANING COMES THROUGH IT'LL BE BETTER.

WE RESPECTFULLY SUBMIT THIS IS ONE YOU SHOULD RECOMMEND APP APPROVAL.

>>>I HATE TO PROLONG THIS BUT DOUG, YOU'RE SAYING IT'S GRAECHLT IT'S GOING TO HAPPEN. IT'S A SMALLER ONE.

I AGREE IT CAN HAPPEN QUICKLY AND THE MONEY THEY PUT IN ON PROPORTION OF FAIR SHARE MAKES STATE ROAD 16 HAPPEN AND IT'S GREAT. SO THE $1.3 MILLION THEY ARE GOING TO PAY IS GOING TO SOLVE THE $50 MILLION TAB FOR WIDENING THAT SEGMENT 92.12 OF STATE ROAD 16?

I DON'T SEE HOW THAT COMPUTES. >> I UNDERSTAND YOUR POINT.

>> OKAY. WHERE'S THE SOOL GOING? CAN YOU POINT OUT ON THIS PARTICULAR AERIAL YOU HAVE UP THERE? YOU SAID THERE'S GOING TO BE A

SCHOOL. >> THAT ODD SHAPE.

EVERYTHING TO THE SOUTH OF THE GRAND OAKS ENTRY ROAD AND EVERYTHING TO THE NORTH OF THE RED LINE.

AND THEN DRAW A LINE UP ON THE LEFT SIDE.

THAT IS ALREADY OWNED BY THE SCHOOL DISTRICT.

THEY'VE ACCEPTED OWNERSHIP OF IT.

>> DO YOU HAVE ANY TRAFFIC PROJECTIONS FOR A SCHOOL? ARE THOSE REQUIRED? ARE THOSE TAKEN INTO CONSIDERATION IN ANY WAY OR HOW MUCH TRAFFIC A SCHOOL GENERATES AND HOW IT'S DWOIK TO BE, AS YOU SAID KINDERGARTEN-8TH GRADE ACADEMY. THAT'S GOING TO BE A LOT OF PEOPLE COMING IN AND OUT OF THERE.

>> WE DON'T HAVE TRAFFIC PROJECTIONS FOR THE SCHOOL.

IT'S NOT A PART OF THE PROJECT. >> I GUARANTEE YOU THERE'S GOING TO BE A LOT. I GET STUCK IN SCHOOL TRAFFIC ALL THE TIME. THERE'S A LOT OF SLOW TRAFFIC ASSOCIATED WITH SCHOOLS. I DIDN'T BRING UP THE OTHER THREE DEFICIENT SEGMENTS THAT ARE PART OF STATE ROAD 16 THAT ARE FURTHER EAST FROM HERE THAT PEOPLE WOULD UTILIZE TO ACCESS I-95 FROM THIS SITE. I HAVE TO SAY THIS IS A DEFICIENT SEGMENT. IT'S OVER CAPACITY.

I DON'T SEE DUMPING ANYMORE TRAFFIC ONTO STATE ROAD 16 RIGHT THERE AT ALL, IN MY VIEW OF THE WORLD.

IT MAY BE A GREAT LOCATION FOR THIS DEVELOPMENT BUT IT IS AGAINST THAT COMP PLAN POLICY 8.1.2.8.

I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THIS PUT ON HOLD.

COME BACK LATER WHEN THIS IS, I WON'T BE ON THE PCA AT THAT POINT. I FEEL CERTAIN.

BUT I WOULD HOPE IT GETS VOTED ON.

VOTED TO GO FORWARD AT SOME POINT BUT RIGHT NOW WITH THE WAY STATE ROAD 16 IS, I JUST CAN'T VOTE FOR IT PERSONALLY.

THANK YOU. >>>ANY OTHER QUESTIONS BY AGENCY MEMBERS? IF NOT WE'RE BACK IN AGENCY

FOR MOTION. >>>MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF COMP PLAN AMENDMENT SMALL SCALE 2021-16 PROPERTY BASED ON FINDINGS OF FACT. MOTION FOR APPROVAL OF ITEM NUMBER 10. IS THERE A SECOND?

>> SECOND. >> SECOND BY MR. MILLER.

IS THERE ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE LET'S REGISTER THE VOTE. THAT ITEM PASSES 4-3.

>>>WE MOVE ONTO ITEM NUMBER 11.

>>>MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PUD2021-14 PROPERTY

BASED UPON FIENTDINGS OF FACT. >> MOTION OF APPROVAL ON

ITEM 11. >> SECOND.

>> ANY DISCUSSION? HEARING NONE LETS RENTALINGER

THE VOTE. >>>THAT ITEM FAILS.

4-3. >>>THAT MOVES US ONTO ITEM NUMBER 12. WE NEED ANOTHER MOTION AT THIS

POINT. >>>I'M JUST TRYING TO

[05:10:04]

>> NOTHING RIGHT NOW. THERE WAS RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL. 4 H F 3 VOTE AGAINST IT.

>> ON THE PUD. >>>IF YOU VOTED FOR THE COMP PLAN THEN YOU'RE REALLY IN FAVOR OF THE PUD OR ELSE YOU SHOULD HAVE VOTED NEGATIVELY FOR THE COMP PLAN.

>> CORRECT. >> FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH THE APPLICANT IS WILLING TO COMPLY WITH EVERYTHING THAT IT NEEDS TO COMPLY WITH. SCHOOL CONCURRENCY, TRAFFIC CONKURN RI. THE PUD YOU SEE IT'S A GOOD DESIGN. ASK YOU TO PLEASE CONSIDER IT.

>> TIME FOR DEBATE IS OVER AT THIS POINT.

I NEED ANOTHER MOTION. >> I WAS JUST GOING TO ASK OUR COUNTY ATTORNEY WHAT THIS PARTICULAR VOTE MEANS, APPROVING ONE AND NOT APPROVING THE OTHER. I DON'T FULLY UNDERSTAND EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED AND WHAT THE CONSEQUENCES ARE.

>> WELL, THEORETICALLY, A VOTE TO APPROVE THE COMP PLAN AMENDMENT DOESN'T REQUIRE A VOTE TO APPROVE THE PUD REQUEST

EITHER. >> MR. MILLER.

>> I DIDN'T SEE THE VOTE QUICK ENOUGH TO SEE WHO

SWITCHED. >> I THINK I KNOW THE ANSWER BUT WANT TO BE CLEAR ON THE RECORD.

THIS IS RES-C. WHAT IS THE DENSITY IN THIS AREA FOR RES-C. SIX UNITS PER ACRE.

UNDER YOUR PUD YOU'RE LIMITED TO LIKE 2.61.

OKAY. I WOULD LIKE TO MAKE AN AMENDED MOTION FOR APPROVAL THAT MAYBE GETS THIS BY.

MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL, I DON'T HAVE IT UP.

>> ON THE PUD. MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PUD2021-14 BASED ON NONFINDINGS OF FACT PROVIDED BY THE STAFF REPORT WITH THE CONDITION THAT THE PUD IS LIMITED TO THREE

UNITS PER ACRE. >> IS THAT ACCEPTABLE TO THE

APPLICANT? >> ABSOLUTELY.

>> MOTION AND SECOND ON APPROVE L ITEM 11 WITH LIMITING

THE PUD TO THREE UNITS PER ACRE. >> WE'RE VOTING TO INCREASE

THE DENSITY? >> LIMIT.

>> BUT IT WAS ALREADY, THEY WERE LIMITING IT TO 2.61 PER ACRE. IS THAT CORRECT?

>> PER SITE PLAN, HOWEVER THIS IS TO MAKE IT CONSISTENT.

OTHERWISE IT DOESN'T MAKE ANY SENSE WHY SOMEBODY WOULD HAVE VOTED FOR COCOMP PLAN ALLOWING SIX UNITS AN ACRE AND VOTING AGAINST THE PUD. THIS WOULD MAKE IT SO THAT YOU COULD MAKE ANY MODIFICATION OR MINOR MODIFICATION THAT WOULD

INCREASE IT ABOVE. >> MAYBE SOMEBODY HAD A CHANGE OF HEART OR MIND ON THIS. OKAY.

>> IN OTHER DISCUSSION? LET'S REGISTER THE VOTE.

>> WE HAVE A COMMENT. >> YES.

>> THERE'S A LIMITATION FOR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT THERE. 2.61 UNITS PER ACRE AND I THINK IT MIRRORS THAT IN THE PLAN UNIT DEVELOPMENT IN THE TEXT.

>> I DIDN'T KNOW THERE WAS A TEXT AMENDMENT.

>> NOT TEXT AMENDMENT BUT I THINK THE LANGUAGE IN THE PUD.

>> IT WOULD. IT'S REFERENCING THAT.

SO THAT IS THE REQUIRED DOCUMENT, LAWFUL DOCUMENT THEY WOULD HAVE TO ADHERE TO, AS WELL.

>> CORRECT. >> THEN I WITHDRAW MY MOTION. I'M TRYING TO STRUGGLE WITH THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN WHY COMP PLAN AMENDMENT ALLOWING UP TO SIX UNITS AN ACRE WOULD BE ALLOWED TO GO FORWARD BUT A PUD THAT IS RESTRICTED BY SITE PLAN AND DEVELOPMENT WOULDN'T.

>> WHEN WE SUBMITTED BOTH WE SUBMITTED TEXT INFORMATION TO

LIMIT TO 2.61 UNITS PER ACRE. >> I UNDERSTAND THAT.

I'M NOT TALKING ABOUT THE APPLICATION OOIFRM TALKING ABOUT INCONSISTENCIES IN THE VOTES. UNLESS THERE IS SOME POINT OF THE SITE PLAN. IN THEORY IF THIS WERE TO GO FORWARD AND THE RECOMMENDATION WOULD BE SUPPORTED BY THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSION, SOMEONE COULD COME IN WITH WITH A REZONING AFTERWARDS WITH A MUCH MORE DENSE PROJECT BASED ON

[05:15:05]

CHANGING THIS TO RES C. >> THE COMP PLAN AMENDMENT INCLUDES A TEXT AMENDMENT LIMITING TO 118 UNITS.

>> THAT'S WHAT I ASKED. THAT'S WHAT I DIDN'T KNOW.

>> HOWEVER, WE'RE NOT SURE WHAT WAS OBJECTIONABLE.

>> I THOUGHT THERE WAS NO LIMITATION ON THE COMP PLAN.

>> ALL RIGHT. SO WE ARE BACK IN THE AGENCY FOR

ANOTHER MOTION. >> DO WE NEED ANOTHER

[12. Election of Chair and Vice-Chair. The Planning and Zoning Agency is required to annually elect a chair and vice chair. Please see the attached recommended Nomination and Voting procedures. Alternatively, after public comment, the simple suggested motions for election may be made.]

MOTION? >> WHERE HE.

>> ITEM 10 OR 11? >> ITEM 11.

ITEM 10 HAS PASSED. >> JUST CHECKING.

>> IF WE'RE DOING ANOTHER MOTION AND IT CAN BE THE SAME MOTION I'M GOING TO ASK FOR RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PUD2021-14

BASED ON NONFINDING OF FACT. >> MOTION BY MS. PERKINS.

>> SECOND. >> SECOND BY MR. MILLER.

DISCUSSION? ALL RIGHT.

LET'S REGISTER THE VOTE. THAT MOTION PASSES 4-3.

>>>OKAY. WE ARE MOVING ONTO ITEM 12 WHICH IS NOMINATION OF THE CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR.

JUST PROCEDURE WISE WE CAN HAVE AS MANY NOMINATIONS AS WE WOULD LIKE. WE'RE NOT READY FOR NOMINATIONS

YET. >> I JUST WANT TO GET IN THE

CUE. >> ALL RIGHT.

>> THE FIRST STEP WOULD BE TO OPEN IT UP FOR PUBLIC

COMMENT. >> I WAS GOING GO THROUGH THE PROCESS TO MAKE SURE WE WERE CLEAR.

WE CAN HAVE AS MANY MOTIONS AS WE WOULD LIKE.

THE FIRST PERSON WHO IS NOMINATED WE VOTE ON THAT PERSON FIRST FOR EACH POSITION. IF THEY ARE APPROVED THEY ARE APPROVED. IF THE FIRST PERSON IS NOT WE GO SECOND, THIRD AND FOURTH ET CETERA.

IS THERE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT HOW THAT WORKS?

>> DO WE HAVE TO DO PUBLIC COMMENT CONSIDERING IT LOOKS

EMPTY? >> WE'RE GOING ASK FOR IT.

PUBLIC COMMENT? ANY OF YOU?

OKAY. >> I DO HAVE A QUESTION.

IS IT LIMITATION ON THE CURRENT CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR.

CAN THEY BE RENOMINATED OR THEY HAVE TO BE A BREAK.

I'M NEW TO THIS PROCESS. >> I BELIEVE THE CURRENT CHAIR AND VICE CHAIR CAN CONTINUE TO SERVE OR SOMEONE ELSE COULD. WHAT I'M GOING TO SUGGEST AT THIS POINT IS ANYBODY THAT WANTS TO MAKE A NOMINATION GET ON THE CUE. DR. HILLSONBACK IS ON THERE.

MS. PERKINS IS ON THERE AND MR. MILLER.

WE'RE GOING TO HAVE THREE NOMINATIONS UNLESS THERE'S A DUPLICATE. DR. HILLSONBACK.

THIS IS FOR CHAIR. >> I THINK MR. MADAVINA HAS DONE A GOOD JOB. HE'S FAIR AND RAN AN ORDERLY MEETING. EVEN WHEN THEY RAN OVER TIME AND LET EVERYONE SPEAK. I WOULD NOMINATE MR. GREG MADAVINA AS CHAIR OF FOR THE FOLLOWING YEAR.

>> MS. PERKINS. >> THAT IS MY NOMINATION.

>> MR. MILLER. >> I WAS GOING TO NOMINATE

MS. PERKINS. >> WE HAVE TWO NOMINATIONS AT THIS POINT. SO WE NEED TO GO AHEAD AND REGISTER THE VOTE ON THE FIRST ONE.

INTERESTING. >> YOU CAN VOTE FOR

YOURSELF, RIGHT? >> I CAN.

I VOTED FOR MYSELF. THAT FAILS.

IT'S A TIE. NOW WE NEED TO VOTE.

>> NO, 4-3. >> THANK YOU.

I CAN'T COUNT. >> MAYBE YOU SHOULDN'T HAVE

VOTED FOR YOURSELF. >> ALL RIGHT.

>> IT'S TOO LATE. >> LET US MOVE ONTO THE VICE CHAIR. CAN WE CLEAR THE SCREEN SO WE CAN GET PEOPLE ON THE KUCHLT MR. MILLER IS ON THE CUE.

ANYONE ELSE

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.