Jun 27, 2022 Ponte Vedra Zoning and Adjustment Board

[Call meeting to order]

[00:00:33]

>> I LIKE TO CALL TO ORDER: ORDER THE JUNE 27, 2022 SPECIAL MEETING OF THE PONTE VEDRA ZONING AND ADJUSTMENT BOARD.

WE WILL START WITH THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE, IF EVERYBODY

WOULD STAND, PLEASE. >> I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS, ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.

>> THANK YOU. OKAY.

DO YOU HAVE TO READ THE THING FIRST BEFORE I ASKED FOR ANY

PUBLIC COMMENTS? >> I SHOULD PROBABLY.

>> YET. WILL HAVE THE READING OF THE PUBLIC NOTICE STATEMENT.HANK YOU, JOHN.

>> THIS IS A PUBLIC HEARING OUT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF FLORIDA LAW. THE PUBLIC IS GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO COMMENT ON TOPICS RELEVANT TO THE BOARDS AREA AND THE PUBLIC WILL BE GIVEN AN OPPORTUNITY TO OFFER COMMENTS AT A DESIGNATED TIME DURING THE HEARING.

ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC DESIGNED TO SPEAK MUST INDICATE BY COMPLETING A SPEAKING CARD WHICH ARE AVAILABLE IN THE FOYER. ADDITIONAL SPEAKERS MAY BE HEARD ONLY AT THE DISCRETION OF THE CHAIRMAN.

SPEAKER CARDS WILL BE TURNED INTO STAFF.

PUBLIC SHALL SPEAK DURING THE MEETING ON EACH AND FOR LENGTH OF TIME DESIGNATED BY THE CHAIRMAN, WHICH WILL BE THREE MINUTES. SPEAKERS SHALL BE IDENTIFIED AND WHO THEY REPRESENT AND STATE THEIR ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. SPEAKERS MAY BE SWORN FOR TESTIMONY. IF THE TESTIMONY IS NOT SWORN WILL BE CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD IN DETERMINING THE WEIGHT AND TRUTHFULNESS OF THE TESTIFIED. IF A PERSON DECIDES TO APPEAL ANY DECISION WITH RESPECT TO A MATTER CONSIDERED AT THIS HEARING, SUCH PERSONS WOULD NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS AND MAY NEED TO ENSURE THAT THE VERBATIM RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS IS MADE. WHICH RECORD INDICATES TESTIMONY AND EVIDENCE UPON WHICH THE BOARD -- THE APPEAL IS BASED. ANY PHYSICAL DOCUMENTATION OR EVIDENCE PRESENTED DURING THE HEARING SUCH AS DIAGRAMS, CHARTS, PHOTOGRAPHS AND WRITTEN STATEMENTS SHALL BE RETAINED BY STAFF AS PART OF THE RECORD. THE RECORD WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR OTHER BOARD AGENCIES, COMMITTEES, IN THE COUNTY TO REVIEW. (INDISCERNIBLE) APPEAL RELATED TO THE ITEM. BOARD MEMBERS ARE REMINDED AT THE BEGINNING OF THE ITEM TO STATE WHETHER THEY HAD ANY COMMUNICATION WITH THE APPLICANT.

BERNIE PERSONS -- (INDISCERNIBLE) FORMAL HEARING FOR THE BOARD. IF COMMUNICATION HAS OCCURRED, THE BOARD MEMBER SHALL IDENTIFY THE PERSON INVOLVED IN THE MATERIAL UNDER COMMUNICATION. WE WILL RESPECT EACH OTHER EVEN IF WE DISAGREE. WE READ ALL (INDISCERNIBLE) COMMENTS AND WE WILL AVOID ANY PERSONAL ATTACKS.

>> ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, JOHN.

WE HAVE ONE ITEM ON THE TALK ABOUT -- HOW WE ARE GOING TO PROCESS THIS. WE'RE FIRST GOING TO ASK IF THERE ARE MANY MEMBERS THAT SHOW BECAUSE THERE ARE A LOT OF YOU OUT THERE -- MORE THAN WE USUALLY HAVE AT OUR MEETING.

WE CAN ASK IF THERE'S ANYBODY IN THE AUDIENCE WHO WANTS TO MAKE A PUBLIC COMMENT THAT'S NOT ABOUT THE ITEMS ON OUR AGENDA. I WILL INVITE YOU UP FOR THAT.

AND THEN, AFTER THAT, WE ARE GOING TO GO AHEAD AND HEAR THE ITEM THAT'S ON THE AGENDA. I'M GOING TO ASK OUR BOARD MEMBERS IF THEY VISITED THE SITE, HAD ANY CONVERSATIONS WITH ANYONE. SO WE WILL DISCLOSE THAT.

WE WILL THEN HAVE THE APPLICANT MAKE THEIR PRESENTATION.E MAY ASK SOME QUESTIONS TO THE APPLICANT AFTER THAT.

AND, WE WILL CALL FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.

[1. PVZVAR 2022-15 Zurlinden Residence. Request for a Zoning Variance to Section III.B.1 of the Ponte Vedra Zoning Regulations to allow for a Front Yard setback of 34'6" in lieu of the required forty (40) feet, and modify the northerly setback from ten (10) feet to twelve (12) feet. The subject property is located at 34 Marsh Dunes Place.]

WE'LL FINISH OUR Q&A. WE MAY DO A SUMMARY.

AND THEN, WE WILL SEE IF WE HAVE A MOTION FOR THE ITEM.

SO I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE YOU ALL KNEW THAT YOU WERE GOING TO GET A CHANCE TO COME UP AND SPEAK AND WE WILL GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS. SO LET ME ASK RIGHT NOW IF THERE IS ANYONE WHO WANTS TO COME UP AND SPEAK THAT HAS SOMETHING DIFFERENT THAN THE ITEM ON THE AGENDA? SEEING NO ONE, THEN I'M GOING TO ASK EACH OF OUR BOARD MEMBERS IF THEY HAVE HAD ANY CONTACT WITH ANYONE OR VISITED THE SITE OF THE ITEM THAT WE ARE GOING TO HEAR IN OUR FIRST ITEM -- PVZVAR 2022- 15, THE ZURLINDEN RESIDENCE.

[00:05:05]

THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED AT 34 MARSH DUNES PLACE.

SAM, WOULD YOU LIKE TO GO FIRST, PLEASE?

>> I HAVE VISITED WITH THE SITE AND HAVE NOT SPOKEN 21.

>> OKAY. I VISITED THE SITE.

I WALKED IT AND I SPOKE WITH HOLLY LAWRENCE, WHO WAS A NEIGHBOR ABUTTING THIS PROPERTY AND TOM SARRIS, WHO ALSO WAS A NEIGHBOR ABUTTING THE PROPERTY. AND WE DIDN'T SUBSTANTIALLY TALK ABOUT THIS AT ALL, EXCEPT TO ASK QUESTIONS ABOUT WHERE THEIR HOMES WERE, WHERE THEY THOUGHT THE PROPERTY LINE WAS AND WHAT THEY THOUGHT THAT THE VARIANCE WAS.

BUT THOSE WERE THE ONLY CONVERSATIONS THAT I HAVE.

JOHN? >> I DO NOT SPEAK WITH ANYBODY IN RELATION TO THIS VARIANCE. I DID WALK THE SITE IN DETAIL

THIS MORNING. >> OKAY.

THANK YOU. RICH ENSSLEN.

>> I DID WALK THE SITE AND I HAD NO CONVERSATION WITH ANYONE. BUT I'M ASKING IF I COULD -- OPEN UP THE QUESTIONING WITH A THING THAT I THINK WOULD BE HELPFUL FOR EVERYBODY TO TRY TO FOLLOW?

>> OKAY. DO YOU WANT TO DO THAT AFTER THE PRESENTATION BY THE APPLICANT?

>> NO, I WANT TO DO THAT BEFORE.

>> YOU WANT TO DO THAT RIGHT NOW?

>> IF THAT'S A LOT. >> GO AHEAD, RICH.

>> BECAUSE THERE'S SOME HISTORY ON THIS ONE AND SOME OF US WERE ON THE BOARD AND SOME OF US WERE NOT.

I THOUGHT IT WOULD BE HELPFUL IF WE HAD THE COUNTY EXPLAIN WHAT THE PROCESS IS AFTER WE LEAVE THESE MEETINGS AND THE VARIANCES ARE APPROVED OR NOT APPROVED.

HOW DOES IT THEN GO THROUGH THE COUNTY TO THE BUILDER, TO THE HOMEOWNER, BEFORE THE FIRST SHOVEL OF DIRT COMES OUT OF THE GROUND? I NEED TO KNOW FOR MYSELF AND HOPEFULLY IT WILL HELP EVERYBODY ELSE.

BUT IF WE COULD DO THAT, I WOULD APPRECIATE THAT.

>> OKAY, RICH. YOU KNOW, ACTUALLY I WAS TALKING TO JACOB BEFORETHE MEETING TO ASK HIM TO EXPLAIN TO ME WHAT HAD BEEN APPROVED IN THE PAST , HOW THE PLAT WAS LAID OUT AND WHAT WE ARE SUPPOSED TO BE LOOKING AT TODAY. AND IT IS IMPORTANT FOR THIS PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD TO UNDERSTAND OUR RESPONSIBILITIES ARE THAT TO APPROVE A VARIANCE, THERE HAS TO BE A PROVEN HARDSHIP. WE DO HAVE TO UNDERSTAND THE PROCESS THAT THE COUNTY GOES THROUGH.

SO I THINK THAT WOULD BE APPROPRIATE NOW, UNLESS CHRISTINE OR (NAME) TELLS ME IT'S A NOT ALLOWED.

>> IF YOU WOULD LIKE AN EXPLANATION OF WHAT HAPPENS AFTER VARIANCE APPROVES AND IT GOES THROUGH THE PERMITTING PROCESS. THAT'S YOUR QUESTION, MR.

ENSSLEN? >> ALL THE WAY THROUGH THE

FIRST SHOVEL FULL OF DIRT, YES. >> AND MAY HE ALSO TALK ABOUT THIS SPECIFICALLY SINCE WE HAVE BEEN CALLED INTO A PUBLIC MEETING THAT'S MADE TO ORDER AND TALKING ABOUT THE 2020 MEETING AND WHERE WE ARE TODAY AND WHERE WE ARE TODAY?

>> YES. >> OKAY.

PLEASE, JACOB.> THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR SUBJECT WAS SMITH WITH GROWTH MANAGEMENT FOR THE RECORD.

SO TO MR. ENSSLEN'S FIRST PART OF THE QUESTION, WHEN WE APPROVE A VARIANCE OR ONE OF OUR ZONING BOARDS APPROVES A VARIANCE OR SIMILAR APPLICATION, IN THIS CASE WE WILL RECEIVE A FINAL ORDER APPROVING THAT VARIANCE.O THAT'S A DOCUMENT THAT INCLUDES THE REGULATIONS THAT HAVE BEEN WAIVED OR ALTERED PER THE VARIANCE REQUEST.

AND, THAT ORDER IS RECORDED AND IS HELD ONTO BY COUNTY STAFF AND DISSEMINATED TO THE APPLICANT.

FROM THAT POINT ON, THE APPLICANT HAS THE OPTION TO PURSUE TO BUILD. ANDSO, THAT PROCESS IS WHAT WE CALL A CLEARANCE SHEET. THE CLEARANCE SHEET IS, EFFECTIVELY, A ZONING PERMIT. AND A CLEARANCE SHEET GOES THROUGH A SERIES OF REVIEWS , WHICH IS VIEWED BY SEVERAL DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS, INCLUDING THE PLANNING DEPARTMENT, ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT, ENVIRONMENTAL DEPARTMENT. THOSE WOULD BE THE MOST COMMON ONES THAT WE WOULD SEE FOR CLEARANCE SHEET FOR A SINGLE-FAMILY HOME. OFTEN TIMES, THERE'S A LITTLE BIT OF BACK AND FORTH OR COMMENTS MADE IN THE CLEARANCE SHEET PROCESS. ONCE THE APPLICANT HAS RESOLVED ANY OUTSTANDING COMMENTS THAT MAY HAVE COME FROM STAFF, THEY RECEIVE AN APPROVED CLEARANCE SHEET, WHICH IS STAMPED.

AND THEN, THEY CAN THEN TAKE THAT TO THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT TO PROCESS THEIR BUILDING PLANS.

THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT PROCESS IS SEPARATE AND IS NOT SOMETHING GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIRECTLY OVERSEAS.

BUT ULTIMATELY, IT'S GOING TO GO THROUGH A SIMILAR REVIEW PROCESS IS UP AND ONCE THAT IS APPROVED, THE APPLICANT OR BUILDER IS ABLE TO GO FORTH AND BUILD.

IS THERE ANYTHING ELSE, MR. ENSSLEN, THAT YOU WOULD LIKE ME

[00:10:02]

TO TOUCH ON REGARDING THAT? >> SO, DOES THE BUILDER THEN OR THE OWNER COME BACK -- EXCUSE ME -- DO THEY THEN COME BACK WITH LIKE A FINALIZED -- THE ACTUAL BUILDING PLANS FOR THE HOME AND THE LOT? DOES THAT COME BACK, THEN, TO THE COUNTY? TO MAKE SURE IT'S --.

>> YES, SIR. SO AGAIN, AT SOME POINT, THIS BECOMES MORE OF A BUILDING DEPARTMENT PROCESS.

BUT IN ORDER TO RECEIVE THEIR CERTIFICATE OF OPTIC STOMACH OCCUPANCY, THE SITE IS INSPECTED AND REVIEWED PER BUILDING CODES AND SITE PLAN LAYOUT.

AND THAT'S HOW THEY MOVE FORWARD TO COMPLETE OUT THE

PROJECT. >> OKAY.

IS THAT THEN ON-SITE? OR JUST PAPER EXERCISE?

>> I BELIEVE THERE ARE INSPECTORS ON SITE.

>> OKAY. ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU. >> DID YOU WANT TO SAY

SOMETHING, JOHN? >> YEAH.

I ALSO HAVE A QUESTION. CAN YOU EXPLAIN -- DOES A VARIANCE EXPIRE? I KNOW SOME OF THE VARIANCES WE HAVE LIKE A ONE-YEAR TIMEFRAME, A TWO YEAR TIMEFRAME.

DOES A VARIANCE EXPIRE? AND THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN A VARIANCE FOLLOWING THE PROPERTY AND A VARIANCE FOLLOWING THE

OWNER? >> YES, SIR.SO VARIANCES CAN AND DO EXPIRE. OFTENTIMES, A ONE-YEAR COMMENCEMENT PERIOD IS PLACED ON A VARIANCE.

THAT'S TYPICAL. IN THE CASE OF THE VARIANCE, THE RELATED VARIANCE THAT WE ARE HERE FOR, WHICH IS PVZVAR 20-20 ? TWO, THERE WAS NOT A ONE-YEAR EXPIRATION PERIOD.

IT WAS CONSIDERED COMMENCED UPON REPORT L.

IN THIS CIRCUMSTANCE, IT DID NOT HAVE A ONE-YEAR VARIANCE COMMENCEMENT PERIOD. BUT IT IS COMMON FOR THAT.

AND I APOLOGIZE -- YOU HAD A SECOND PART OF THAT QUESTION?

>> AND ALSO, (INDISCERNIBLE) VARIANCE THAT FOLLOWS THE PROPERTY AND A VARIANCE THAT FOLLOWS THE APPLICANT?

>> SO VARIANCE CAN BE WRITTEN TO BE TRANSFERABLE OR NOT IN A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT WAYS. I WOULD SAY MOST TIMES FOR ISSUES RELATED TO SETBACKS AND SIMILAR, THE VARIANCE IS INTENDED TO BE TRANSFERABLE, THAT WAY ANY FUTURE OWNER INHERITS THAT ABILITY TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THAT VARIANCE.

>> OKAY. ONE MORE! OKAY -- IF YOU HAVE BEEN GRANTED A VARIANCE, ARE YOU OBLIGATED TO BUILD ACCORDING TO THAT VARIANCE?

>> YOU ARE OBLIGATED TO BUILD ACCORDING TO THAT VARIANCE IF YOU ARE CHOOSING TO UTILIZE THE RELIEF GRANTED IN THE VARIANCE.

BUT NO, OTHERWISE YOU WOULD BE ABLE TO BUILD TO STANDARD CODE AND WOULD NOT BE FORCED TO UTILIZE THE VARIANCE.> ESSENTIALLY IT'S EITHER OR -- EITHER YOU DON'T USE VARIANCE OR YOU GO BACK TO THE ORIGINAL CODE?

>> THAT IS CORRECT. >> OKAY.

THANK YOU. >> JACOB CAN YOU DESCRIBE WHAT HAPPENED IN THIS SITUATION, PLEASE?

>> YES, MADAM CHAIR. WHAT WE HAVE HERE IS -- WE ARE HERE TO SPEAK ON APPLICATION PVZVAR 2022-15, WHICH IS FOR THE ZURLINDEN RESIDENCE, WHICH IS A HOMESITE AT 34 MARSH DUNES PLACE. THE APPLICANT IS HERE TO RECTIFY A BIT OF AN ADMINISTRATIVE ISSUE RELATED TO A PRIOR VARIANCE, WHICH WAS PVZVAR 2020-2, IN WHICH A VARIANCE EXISTS TO ALLOW FOR A 25 FOOT FRONT SETBACK IN EXCHANGE FOR INCREASED SIDE SETBACK, WHICH WOULD BE THE NORTHERN PROPERTY BOUNDARY AT THIS SITE.

THIS PROJECT HAS RECEIVED A CLEARANCE SHEET FROM THE COUNTY STAFF, WHICH WAS LATER FOUND TO BE IN ERROR.

THE APPLICANT IS CURRENTLY REQUESTING A SLIGHTLY DIFFERENT BUT SIMILAR VARIANCE REQUEST, WHERE THEY ARE NOW ASKING FOR A 34 AND A HALF FOOT FRONT SETBACK IN LIEU OF THE 40 FOOT REQUIREMENT. AND THEY ARE OFFERING A 12 FOOT SIDE SETBACK IN LIEU OF THE 10 FOOT REQUIREMENT.

I KNOW WE ARE THROWING A BUNCH OF NUMBERS OUT THERE.

>> AND I THINK IT'S IMPORTANT, IF YOU LOOK AT WHAT'S UP ON THE SCREEN, AND I BELIEVE THIS IS PART OF THE APPLICANT'S PRESENTATION. SO IF I MAY? THE FRONT SETBACK IS WHERE THE DRIVEWAY IS UP ON THE SCREEN,

CORRECTLY. >> THAT IS CORRECT.

>> AND THE NORTHERN, OR SIDE SETBACK THAT IT WAS ORIGINALLY 25 FEET FROM THE DRIVEWAY SIDE, AND 20 FEET FROM THE OPPOSITE SIDE OF THE DRIVEWAY. AND NOW, THEY ARE REQUESTING A

[00:15:02]

>> THAT IS CORRECT. >> OKAY.

ALL RIGHT. ANYBODY ELSE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS

FOR JACOB? >> YEAH.

JACOB WERE YOU -- YOU WERE HERE FOR THE 2020 --?

>> YES, SIR. >> IF YOU REMEMBER THE HARDSHIP WAS THAT THIS LOT, EFFECTIVELY, IS A THREE CORNERED LOT.

AND IT ALMOST GOT THE LOT TO BE UNBILLABLE AS FAR AS THE SIZE WENT. BECAUSE YOU'VE GOT FRONTAGE ON A1A, YOU'VE GOT FRONTAGE ON MARSH DUNES PLACE AND FRONTAGE ON THE ROAD THAT GOES UPON THE WEST SIDE.

SO THAT WAS THE HARDSHIP? >> THAT IS CORRECT.

THE LOT IS HEAVILY CONSTRAINED BY WHAT I WOULD TERM A FRONT SETBACK , BASICALLY, ACROSS ALL OF ITS NON-SIDE BOUNDARY.

>> YEP. OKAY.

THANK YOU. >> OKAY.

IF THERE ARE NO MORE QUESTIONS, THANK YOU, JACOB.

THAT WAS JACOB SMITH. THANK YOU JACOB.

I APPRECIATE THAT. I WOULD NOW LIKE THE APPLICANT TO COME UP, PLEASE, AND MAKE A PRESENTATION.

IF YOU WOULD START WITH YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS, PLEASE.

>> HELLO, THANK YOU BOARD. MY NAME IS RYAN PAHLOW.

I LIVE AT 157 BEAR PEN ROAD IN PONTE VEDRA BEACH, FLORIDA.

I'M A GENERAL CONTRACTOR AND HAVE BEEN IN THE PONTE VEDRA AREA SINCE 2009 BUILDING HOMES HERE.

GOOD AFTERNOON. I WOULD LIKE TO THANK THE BOARD FOR MEETING TODAY WITH WHAT APPEARS TO BE A SPECIAL SESSION TO DISCUSS THE VARIANCE APPLICATION 2022 -00015, KNOWN AS THE ZURLINDEN RESIDENCE. OING TO ADD SOME COMMENTARY SO THAT EVERYONE IS CLEAR HOW WE GOT HERE.

ON OR AROUND FOUR -NINE OF 2021, MY CLIENTS -- THAT'S THEIR FAMILY SITTING BACK HERE -- MY CLIENTS PURCHASED THE LOT FROM THE DEVELOPER AS A LOCATION FOR THEIR PERMANENT RESIDENCE, AS THEY ARE RELOCATING HERE FOR WORK.

CURRENTLY, THEY ARE IN A RENTAL IN PONTE VEDRA.

THEY STARTED TO DESIGN AFTER CLOSING ON THEPROPERTY, THEY STARTED TO DESIGN THE HOME WITH BRIAN CODY OF SUPERIOR HOME DESIGNS. BRIAN HAS BEEN DESIGNING HOMES IN THIS AREA FOR 35 YEARS . BRIAN MADE THE NECESSARY CALLS TO THE COUNTY DEPARTMENT TO DISCUSS THE LOT AND THE VARIANCE THAT HAD BEEN APPLIED FOR BY THE DEVELOPER.

THE VARIANCE WAS EXPLAINED TO HIM AND HE RECEIVED A COPY OF THE VARIANCE TO AID IN HIS DESIGN ON THIS UNIQUELY SHAPED LOT. AND I APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT EVERYBODY HAS RECOGNIZED THE UNIQUENESS OF IT.

I THINK THAT'S PART OF WHAT ALLOWS US TO EVEN APPLY FOR A VARIANCE. AT NO TIME WAS IT UNDERSTOOD OR EXPLAINED THAT THE VARIANCE ADJUSTED OF THE FRONT AND THE BACK SETBACKS, WHICH WAS REFERRED TO AS THE SIDE AND FRONT, I BELIEVE. IN FACT, THE LANGUAGE IN THE VARIANCE DOES NOT STATE ANY SPECIFICS REGARDING THE REAR SETBACK AMOUNT. RATHER, IT SPEAKS TO ADJUSTING THE FRONT SETBACK FROM 42 25, WHICH ALLOWS YOU TO GET CLOSER TO THE MARSH DUNES PLACE ROAD. WITH THIS INFORMATION IN HAND, THE UNIQUENESS OF THE LOT UNDERSTOOD, AND THE RETENTION POND THAT IS IN THE SCALLOPED OUT SECTION -- I'M NOT SURE WHERE THE POINTER -- THIS IS THE RETENTION POND THERE.

WITH THAT IN MIND, WITH THIS INFORMATION IN HAND, THE UNIQUENESS OF THE LODGE AND RETENTION POND, THE PLAN ROUND PLANS WERE COMPLETED. ENGINEERING WAS COMMENCED AND SUBSEQUENT (INDISCERNIBLE) ST. JOHNS COUNTY FOR BOTH CLEARANCE AND BUILDING APPROVAL WERE DELIVERED.

ON 2-16 OF 2022, I SUBMITTED THE CLEARANCE SHEET FOR REVIEW BY THE VARIANCE DEPARTMENTS OF APPROVAL.

JACOB KIND OF WENT THROUGH THE STANDARD DEPARTMENTS.

WITHIN A COUPLE OF WEEKS I RECEIVED COMMENTS BACK FROM THE DEPARTMENT. I HAVE ACOPY OF THOSE , AND I BELIEVE THEY MAY BE -- HERE. SO THIS IS THE FIRST PAGE OF

[00:20:07]

I'VE BEEN DOING THIS FOR QUITE SOME TIME IN ST. JOHNS COUNTY.

I'M VERY USED TO RECEIVING COMMENTS.

AND WHAT I MEAN BY THAT IS IT'S A THOROUGH PROCESS.ND SO, I'VE BEEN THROUGH THE PROCESS. I EXPECTED TO GET COMMENTS BACK. I LET THE OWNERS KNOW THAT WE WOULD RECEIVE COMMENTS IN THAT VERY RARELY HAVE I MADE IT THROUGH THE ONE PASS. SO THESE COMMENTS WERE PRESENTED TO ME. MEANING THAT ALL THE DEPARTMENTS REVIEWED THE PLANS. AND SO, WITHIN THESE COMMENTS, THERE WAS NOTHING THAT DISCUSSED THE REAR SETBACK.

IN MY POINT IN PRESENTING THESE IS SO THAT FOLKS IN THIS ROOM UNDERSTAND THAT THERE WAS NOT A COMMENT THAT HAD TO DO WITH THE REAR SETBACK AND NOT MEETING THAT -- DEPENDING ON IF YOU WERE TAKING THE VARIANCE WERE NOT TAKING THE VARIANCE.

HOWEVER, I WILL NOTE THAT ON THE SET OF PLANS, IF WE GO TO WHAT IS REFERRED TO AS THE CLEARANCE SHEET.

IN THIS GENERAL AREA HERE -- AND I HAVE COPIES OF THIS, IF YOU GUYS WOULD LIKE A COPY PUT IN FRONT OF YOU? I HAVE ONE FOR EACH OF THE BOARD.

IT ACTUALLY REFERENCES THE VARIANCE THAT WAS APPLIED FOR BY THE MCGARVEY'S AND APPROVED. AND IF YOU HAVE A COPY OF THE ORIGINAL VARIANCE, THERE'S NO CLEAR LANGUAGE IN THAT VARIANCE THAT STATES ANYTHING REGARDING THE REAR SETBACK BEING ADJUSTED. IT MENTIONS IT, BUT IT DOESN'T MENTION ANY DISTANCE. ALSO, WITH THE SUBMITTAL THAT WE TURNED IN, IN THE TOP RIGHT CORNER HERE, RIGHT THERE, THERE IS A NOTE THAT SHOWS EXACTLY HOW FAR WE ARE FROM THE PROPERTY LINE. WHICH HAS MY FOUNDATION, WHICH IS THE ENTIRE REAR PORTION OF THE HOUSE AT 12 FEET OF THE PROPERTYLINE . MEANING THAT WE ARE TWO FEET FURTHER TO THE SOUTH THAN WE ARE REQUIRED TO BE.

WE COULD BE TWO FEET CLOSER TO THE PROPERTIES THAT EXIST BEHIND. AND YOU GUYS SAW THOSE SITES BECAUSE HE WALKED THE LOT. SO GOING BACK TO MY COMMENTS.

MOST OF ALL OF THEM WERE STANDARD ITEMS AND REQUESTED FOR FURTHER INFORMATION TO BE ADDED AND SUBMITTED TO THE SITE PLAN. SO NONE OF THEM QUESTIONED THE POSITION OF THE HOME RELATIVE TO THE FRONT OR REAR SETBACKS.

THE SITE PLAN EVEN INCLUDES THE ORIGINAL VARIANCE IN BOLD TYPE ACROSS THE DRIVEWAY, WITH NOTES OF ORIGINAL SETBACK AND 25 FOOT FRONT. SO WE FELT LIKE WE WERE INSIDE OF THE ORIGINAL. REVISIONS TO THE SITE PLAN WERE SUBMITTED. SO THESE PLANS GO BACK TO THE VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS THAT HAD COMMENTS.

THEY REVIEW THOSE AGAIN. AND IN DOING SO, THEN THEY CAN EITHER PUT ANOTHER ROUND OF COMMENTS BACK OUT TO US, OR THEY CAN APPROVE IT. AND SO, THE REVISIONS TO THE SITE PLAN WERE SUBMITTED. THE BUILDING APPLICATION TURNED IN AND PLANS WERE APPROVED ON 4-5 OF 2022.

WE STARTED CONSTRUCTION IN HASTE UNTIL WE WERE CITED WITH A STOP WORK ORDER BY ST. JOHNS COUNTY.

SINCE THEN, THERE HAVE BEEN MANY MEETINGS AND CALLS WITH ST. JOHNS COUNTY, SPECIFICALLY WITH HUNTER CONRAD, JACOB SMITH, AND HIS MANAGER REGARDING WHAT HAPPENED AND WHERE TO GO FROM HERE. THE TRUTH IS, THERE WAS A MISTAKE MADE BY THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT.

THE DATES TO THE FIRST CALL, THE ARCHITECT HAD WITH THE DEPARTMENT.ND THERE WERE SHARED DISCUSSIONS BACK AND FORTH ON THAT. WHICH IS NOW COUPLED WITH THE LANGUAGE THAT IS IN THE ORIGINAL VARIANCE THAT THE MCGARVEY'S RECEIVED AND THE APPROVAL OF THE SITE PLAN.

[00:25:12]

THAT WOULD BE THE BLOCK WALLS THAT YOU SAW UP AND THE REMAINING BLOCK THAT IS SITTING ON SITE, AND THE REST OF THE MORTAR THAT'S THERE TO BE USED IF WE ARE ALLOWED TO MOVE FORWARD. MEANWHILE, THE OWNERS CONTINUE TO INCUR INTEREST COSTS, FACE THE FINANCIAL BURDEN ON ON-TIME ITEMS THAT WERE ORDERED BASED ON CRITICAL PATH STOP AND THE TIMELINE OF THEIR CONSTRUCTION LOAN WITH THE LOW INTEREST RATE TICKS AWAY. I'M HERE TO REQUEST A VARIANCE TO THIS LOT THAT'S FIVE FOOT SIX INCHES, TO ADJUST THE FRONT SETBACK TO 34.6 IN LIEU OF THE 40 SO THAT THE PROJECT CAN MOVE FORWARD. WE ALL KNOW THE LOT IS UNIQUE.

IT STATES SUCH IN THE PREVIOUSLY APPROVED VARIANCE.

WE ALSO WILL MOVE THE REAR SETBACK FROM 10 FEET TO 12 FEET, WHICH IS WHERE IT IS PLACED TODAY.

SO OUR NEXT REQUEST OF MODIFICATION IS ACTUALLY THREE FOOT SIX IF YOU THINK OF IT IN TERMS OF WHAT WE ARE ADJUSTING TO THE REAR. I FEEL THAT WE HAVE MET THE BURDEN FOR APPROVAL. APPRECIATE THE BOARD'S TIME IN LISTENING TODAY. AND IF YOU HAVE ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS, I'M HAPPY TO ANSWER THOSE.

I DO HAVE A THING THAT I COULD PUT ON THE POWERPOINT.

IT'S HERE FOR THE FINANCIAL COSTS INCURRED TO DATE.

AND SO, IN TODAY'S CONSTRUCTION ENVIRONMENT, YOU CAN'T GET ANYTHING QUICKLY. AND SO, WE HAVE BEEN SITTING STILL. TRUSSES WERE ORDERED BASED ON STARTING THE FOUNDATION. WINDOWS AND DOORS WERE ORDERED BASED ON US STARTING THE FOUNDATION.AND ALL OF IT IS TALLIED UP AT THE BOTTOM OF THAT PAGE.

SO THE OTHER MAJOR THING THAT IS, I THINK, A PLAYER HERE WITH THE LOCATION OF THE POND THAT'S RETENTION.

WE DON'T HAVE A WAY TO ADJUST THIS HOUSE.

IF WE PULL IT FORWARD, YOU RECOGNIZE THAT THE DRIVEWAY ON THE FAR RIGHT GARAGE IS RIGHT ON THE EDGE OF THE POND.

IT IS NOTED IN MY NOTES FROM THE COUNTY.

IT'S RIGHT HERE. MY NOTES FROM THE COUNTY THAT DEPENDING ON HOW THIS LOOKS AT THE FINAL INSPECTION, IS THAT MR. ENSSLEN, IS CORRECTLY YOU ASKED ABOUT HOW THAT PROCESS WORKS IN THE FIELD. AT THE END OF CONSTRUCTION, WHEN WE GO TO REQUEST A FINAL INSPECTION AND ALSO A SEAL FOR THE HOME, THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT DOES THEIR FINAL INSPECTION. BUT I SPEND THE MOST TIME AND HAVE PROBABLY THE LONGEST CONVERSATIONS WITH MATT RUDOLPH AND ERIC CLARK, WHO COME OUT IN THE FIELD AND LOOK AT SPECIFICALLY UNIQUE SITES TO MAKE SURE FROM A DRAINAGE PERSPECTIVE AND FROM A DRIVEWAY PERSPECTIVE THAT WE ARE DOING OUR PART TO MAKE SURE THAT WE ARE NOT A HINDRANCE TO A NEIGHBOR. ROSCOE LOTS, THINGS LIKE THAT.

THEY ARE VERY COMPLEX AND YOU CAN FLOOD YOUR NEIGHBOR.

SO IT'S NOTED IN MY NOTES FROM THE PEOPLE WHO REVIEWED IT THAT WE ARE GOING TO HAVE TO PAY SPECIAL ATTENTION TO THAT DRIVEWAY AND HOW IT IMPACTS THE SIDE.

BUT TO SIMPLY SAY THAT WE COULD MOVE THIS HOUSE FORWARD ON THE LOT DOESN'T WORK. BECAUSE AS WE COME FORWARD, IT CLOSES OFF THE ABILITY TO ACCESS THE DOUBLE GARAGE THAT'S ON THE RIGHT SIDE OF THIS. EVEN MOVING IT A FRACTION WILL CAUSE A PINCH POINT BETWEEN THE TWO CARGARAGE AND THE FIRST CAR GARAGE . DOES EVERYBODY SEE THAT? OKAY. DO YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR

ME? >> ANY QUESTIONS -- JOHN

PATTON? >> YES.

COULD YOU GO BACK -- I THINK IT'S TWO SLIDES -- TO THE ACTUAL VARIANCE? IT MIGHT BE FORWARD OR BACK.

>> SURE. >> OKAY, JACOB, IF SOMEBODY IS LOOKING UP A VARIANCE, IS THIS WHAT THEY WOULD FIND?

>> YES, SIR. MR. PATTON, THIS IS LITERALLY THE COPY OF THE VARIANCE. THERE'S TWO MORE PAGES -- GLAXO BASED ON THIS, WHAT WAS APPROVED AS FAR AS THE VARIANCE GOES AND SIGNED OFF BY US AT THAT TIME, THERE IS NO REFERENCE TO THE NORTHERN PROPERTY LINE?

>> THERE IS NO DIRECT REFERENCE TO THE 20 FOOT MEASUREMENT OF THE NORTHERN PROPERTY LINE. ON THE NEXT PAGE OF THIS VARIANCE, THERE IS A VERY SHORT SENTENCE THAT DOES ADDRESS --

[00:30:05]

SO THERE IS A SLIGHT REFERENCE -- THEY WOULD ALMOST HAVE TO GO BACK TO THE ORIGINAL HEARING IN THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION FOR THE VARIANCE TO UNDERSTAND THE 10 FOOT VERSUS 20 FOOT DIFFERENTIAL?

>> YES, SIR. >> OKAY.

>> IF I MAY ADD TO THAT, SORRY, CHRISTINE VALLIERE, SENIOR (INDISCERNIBLE) ATTORNEY. THERE'S ALSO A REFERENCE ON THE SECOND PAGE TO AN ATTACHED SITE PLAN, WHICH SITUATES THE HOUSE CONSISTENT WITH THE SIDE SETBACK OF 20 FEET IN THE FRONT

SETBACK. >> OKAY.

>> IT IS THERE, ADMITTEDLY, IT SHOULD ALSO ADDRESS THE SIDE SETBACK REQUEST AS WELL, TO THE 40 FOOT REQUEST.

BUT THERE IS THE REFERENCE TO BOTH, AND THE SITE PLAN IS

ATTACHED AS WELL. >> OKAY.

THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, CHRISTINE.

SAM, I THINK YOU HAD SOME QUESTIONS?

>> CERTAINLY MOVING THAT SIDE SETBACK BACK, TELL ME WHAT YOUR PLANS FOR DRAINAGE ARE? YOU'VE CLEARLY GOT THE STORM WATER RIGHT UP FRONT, BUT HOW THIS AFFECTS THE NEIGHBORING

PROPERTIES? >> YEAH.

I'M BACK TO THE SITE PLAN. SO ONE OF THE COMMENTS THAT WAS IN THE INITIAL PASS ON THE DIFFERENT DEPARTMENTS THAT REVIEW.THERE WAS A NOTE THAT WAS NOTED FOR WHAT ARE WE GOING TO DO WITH THE DRAINAGE? IT'S ACTUALLY LISTED AS A DRAINAGE EASEMENT BEHIND THERE. AND IF YOU ALL VISITED THE SITE, YOU REALIZE THERE'S QUITE A BIT OF UNDULATION TO THE BACK REGARDLESS OF WHERE WE ARE. WE HAVE A SECTION THAT IS NEAR THE CABANA PORTION THAT IS CONNECTED BY ROOFLINE.

THAT'S RIGHT HERE. THIS SECTION RIGHT HERE, MY STEM WALL IS EIGHT COURSES TALL, BUT IT'S NOT ANY TALLER THAN THE REST OF THE HOUSE. SO YOU REALIZE HOW MUCH OF THE PROPERTY DIPS RIGHT THERE. PART OF THE PROPOSAL THAT I PUT TOGETHER FOR THE OWNERS AND PART OF WHAT I USE FOR RUNOFF AND MITIGATION IS GUTTERS AND DOWNSPOUTS.

AND SO, EVERY PORTION OF THIS HOUSE THAT IS ALONG A DRAINAGE OR ON THIS SITE OVER HERE AND AROUND, BASICALLY, THE ENTIRE HOME WILL HAVE GUTTERS ON IT. THOSE GUTTERS WILL GO DOWN INTO ADS PIPING. AND THAT PIPING WILL RUN TO THE LOGICAL DISCHARGE LOCATION. OBVIOUSLY, YOU CAN'T MOVE WATER UPHILL. SO IN THIS CASE, THE MAJORITY OF EVERYTHING WILL GO TO RETENTION.

THERE IS ALSO NOTED -- WE WILL GUTTER THE ENTIRE ROOFLINE STRUCTURE, WHICH I HAVE COPIES OF THE PLANS HERE AS WELL.

BUT THIS ENTIRE OUTLINE OF THE HOUSE WILL HAVE GUTTERS.

AND SO, ALL OF THIS IS GOING TO BE TAKEN THIS DIRECTION.

AND INTO THIS POND HERE. AND SO, RIGHT HERE, I BELIEVE IT IS NOTED THAT THERE IS AN INLET DRAIN THERE.

I CAN'T SAY THAT TODAY'S CONDITIONS ARE EXACTLY WHAT IT WILL LOOK LIKE A WEEK FROM NOW. BUT THE CONCEPT BEHIND IT IS TO FIND THE LOWEST LOCATION WITHIN THAT, PUT INLETS THERE.

AND THEN, DIG THEM OUT OVER TO WHERE THEY CAN MEET THE RETENTION POND. AND SO, THAT IS THE PROCESS

THAT WE WOULD USE. >> SO IF I UNDERSTAND CORRECTLY, YOUR PLAN IS TO EFFECTIVELY HARD PIPE IT ALL

THE WAY TO THE RETENTION POND? >> THAT IS CORRECT.

>> OKAY. JOHN, YOU HAVE A QUESTION?

>> I WALK THE SITE. IT DOES NOT LOOK LIKE YOU PUT ANY ADDITIONAL FILL IN THE SITE.

>> THERE IS NOT ANY ADDITIONAL FILL.

IF YOU GO TO THE MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN'S THAT WERE APPROVED FOR THIS NEIGHBORHOOD, AND IF I ZOOM IN, THERE IS A FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATION LISTED RIGHT THERE IN THE MIDDLE OF THAT. AND SO, I CAN TELL YOU WHAT THAT IS. THE FINISHED FLOOR ELEVATION IS 16 FEET, WHICH IS 2.8 FEET LOWER THAN THE ROAD.

THAT WASTHE MINIMUM FLOOR . THAT'S WHAT THE DEVELOPERS SAID IS A MINIMUM, NOT THE MAXIMUM. SO WE ARE AS LOW AS WE COULD BE BASED ON WHAT WAS APPROVED FOR THE DEVELOPMENT.

AND THEREFORE, YOU KNOW, THE HIGHER WE GET, THE TALLER IT GETS FOR ANY NEIGHBOR. AND ALSO, THE MORE DIFFICULT IT BECOMES FOR RETAINING WATER. SO THAT IS CORRECT.

[00:35:11]

>> OKAY. THE NEXT QUESTION -- THERE IS A LOT OF CONCERN ABOUT THE VISIBILITY FROM YOUR HOUSE TO THE BACKYARDS OF OTHER HOUSES. COULD YOU SHOW US THE REAR

ELEVATION OF THE HOUSE, PLEASE? >> SURE.

CAN I BRING THESE? CAN I APPROACH?

CENTER THERE. >> OKAY, THE TWO WINDOWS ON THE FIRST FLOOR ARE IN THOSE ALCOVE AREAS?

>> YES, SIR. >> SO THE REST -- AND YOU'VE GOT WINDOWS UPSTAIRS, ONE BEING A NORMAL HEIGHT WINDOW AND OTHERS BEING FAIRLY HIGH WINDOWS?

>> CORRECT. >> DUE TO THE ELEVATION OF YOUR -- OKAY. I JUST WANTED CLARIFICATION.

THANK YOU. >> I JUST WANTED TO WHAT THOSE WERE. WHEN YOU LOOK AT THE REAR ELEVATION, THE THREE THAT ARE TO GATHER, THE SMALL TRANSOM WINDOWS, AS I WOULD CALL THEM, THEY HAVE AN EIGHT FOOT HEIGHT.

SO THE BOTTOM OF THE WINDOW IS ROUGHLY 6 FEET.

THE OTHER SMALL WINDOW ADJACENT TO IT, JUST ABOVE THE ROOF LINE, IS A WINDOW IN A BATHROOM.

BUT IT IS, AGAIN, THE TOP OF THE WINDOW IS AT 6 -- THE TOP OF THE WINDOW IS 8 AND THE BOTTOM IS 6. AND THE OTHER WINDOW THAT YOU ARE LOOKING AT IS OUT OF A BEDROOM AND

REQUIRED FOR EGRESS. >> ALL RIGHT.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? >> I WILL NOTE, BECAUSE I DON'T WANT TO BE MISLEADING IN ANY WAY.

I LIKE TO FLIP A PAGE, IF I COULD, THE CABANA.

THERE IS A WINDOW THERE AND I WANT TO MAKE SURE --.

>> SURE. >> SO THIS WINDOW IN THE TOP RIGHT IMAGE, RIGHT HERE, IS THE WINDOW IN THE CABANA.

THAT IS ALSO IN THE BATHROOM. IT'S ABOVE THE TOILET AND IT WILL HAVE THE SAME HEIGHT. AGAIN, WE ARE ON THE FIRST FLOOR SO IT'S A LITTLE BIT DIFFERENT.

CERTAINLY I WOULD HAVE TO LOOK AT THE ORDER TO SEE IF WE ORDERED THAT AN OBSCURED GLASS OR NOT.

BUT AGAIN, I THINK THE BIGGEST POINT IN ANY OF THIS IS WE ARE NOT ANY TALLER THAN WE COULD HAVE BEEN.E ARE ACTUALLY AS LOW AS WE COULD BE. THEREFORE, NOT MAKING THE VIEW FROM THE LOCATIONS ON THE HOMES THAT ARE DOWN QUITE A BIT, THE NATURAL GRADE FROM THE OLD DUNES.

>> OKAY.ALL RIGHT, THANK YOU, MR. PAULO.

THAT I SAY THAT CORRECTLY? THANK YOU.

JOHN, I'M IN A TURN IT OVER TO YOU TO ASK FOR THE PUBLIC

SPEAKERS, PLEASE. >> OKAY.

WE WILL START WITH DAVID LAWRENCE.

DAVID, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME, ADDRESS AND A REMINDER YOU HAVE

THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK. >> YES, SIR.

GOOD AFTERNOON, BOARD. I'M DAVID LAWRENCE AND I LIVE AT 105 (INDISCERNIBLE) PONTE VEDRA BEACH.

I'M THE ONE DIRECTLY BEHIND THE CABANA, WHICH IS REALLY A GUESTHOUSE THAT IS CONNECTED BY A ROOF AND OUTDOOR KITCHEN THAT IS TOTALLY VISIBLE FROM MY BACKYARD.

MY MAIN CONCERN IS, OBVIOUSLY, YOU GUYS WENT OUT THERE AND YOU SAW THE LARGEDROP OFF FROM OUR FENCE TO OUR POLES .

AND MY NEIGHBOR TOM IS AT THE SAME ELEVATION THAT I AM.

I THINK IT'S A LITTLE MISLEADING TO SAY THAT THERE WASN'T ANY FILL. THERE WERE AT LEAST 20 TRUCKLOADS OF PHIL -- DUMP TRUCK LOADS OF FILL, SIMILAR TO THE ONES THAT ARE DOING THE SAND RELOCATION ON (NAME).

THE INDENTATION ON THE DUNES WAS SO LARGE THAT THEY HAD AN ENTIRE EXCAVATOR UNDERNEATH -- IN BETWEEN THE DUNES THAT WAS

[00:40:03]

WHEN THEY PULLED OUT ALL THE TREES AND SAW HOW THE DUNES WENT LIKE THIS, AND EXCAVATOR COULD FIT AT THE BOTTOM.

THAT'S HOW MUCH FILL THEY BROUGHT IN.

I CONTACTED THE BUILDER, RYAN, THAT YOU JUST HEARD FROM.

AT LEAST 17 TIMES BY PHONE. AND I TALKED TO HIM THREE DIFFERENT TIMES, ALL IN EXCESS OF 30 MINUTES.

AND I WAS GIVEN BY HIM HIS WORD -- HIS WORD -- THAT HE WOULD TALK TO THE OWNER AND WE WOULD GET SOMETHING RESOLVED.

IT WASN'T UNTIL I WAS IGNORED FOR NEARLY 3 WEEKS THAT WE COMPLAINED TO THE COUNTY. BECAUSE I WAS RAISED TO DEAL WITH YOUR NEIGHBORS PERSONALLY, AND NOT WASTE THE COUNTY'S TIME. I'VE BEEN IN GOVERNMENT IN THE NAVY FOR OVER 20 YEARS. AND I KNOW HOW BUREAUCRACY WORKS. AND IT'S NOT GOOD FOR ANYBODY.

IT'S NEVER GOOD FOR ANYBODY TO FIGHT.

I'VE LIVED ALL OVER THE WORLD AND NEVER HAD ANY PROBLEMS WITH MY NEIGHBORS. IT WOULD HAVE GONE SO FAR FOR THE OWNER AND THE BUILDER TO JUST SIT DOWN WITH THE TWO GUYS BEHIND AND GO OVER EVERYTHING. I HAD TO CALL THE POLICE THE FIRST DAY THEY CAME OUT TO START THE EXCAVATIONS, BECAUSE THEY WERE PULLING OUT 100-YEAR-OLD OAK TREES.

THE BEAUTIFUL TREES THERE. AND THEY WEREN'T SUPPOSED TO BE. I NOTIFIED RYAN OF THE VARIANCE AT THAT TIME STOP ALSO, SEVERAL TIMES BY TEXT MESSAGE ANDPHONE MESSAGE . AND I'M SURE, YOU CAN ASK HIM AND HE WILL VERIFY THAT I TOLD HIM IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE 20 FEET. I WAS TOLD BY THE OWNER ONLY AFTER A STOP WORK ORDER WAS PUT IN THAT IT WAS A CALCULATED IGNORE. WHO TALKS THAT WAY?

THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU.

THOMAS (NAME). PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND

ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD. >> TOM (NAME) 101 (INDISCERNIBLE) PONTE VEDRA BEACH.

THAT WAS MY NEXT-DOOR NEIGHBOR WHO JUST SPOKE.

I'M GOING TO MAKE THIS QUICK. THERE SOMETHING THAT I REALLY DON'T UNDERSTAND OUT OF ALL OF THIS.

ON THE ORIGINAL (INDISCERNIBLE).

>> THOMAS, COULD YOU SPEAK A LITTLE MORE TO THE MICROPHONE,

PLEASE? >> SHIRT.

HOW'S THAT? >> THAT'S GOOD.

>> OKAY. IN THE ORIGINAL BOARD MEETING BACK JUNE 30 OF 2020, IT WAS -- MR. MCGARVEY MADE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD THAT THE NEW OWNERS OF THE PROPERTY, OR WHOEVER WAS GOING TO BUY THE PROPERTY, IF THEY COULD HAVE 25 FOOT SETBACK FROM THE ROAD AS OPPOSED TO THE STANDARD 40. AND AT THAT TIME, THE SETBACK BETWEEN THAT PROPERTY AND MINE WAS AT 10 FEET.

BUT HE RECOMMENDED THAT THEY'D HAVE A 25 FOOT.

AND TO HELP US OUT, THAT WE WOULD HAVE THEN, INSTEAD OF 10 FOOT, 20 FOOT. AND HE CITED THEIR HARDSHIP REASONS QUITE NUMEROUS. NUMBER 1 IS PRIVACY.

NUMBER 2 IS THE SOLE CLOSENESS OF THE BUILDING (INDISCERNIBLE) TO ME. I'M (INDISCERNIBLE) OF A MAN.

AND HE IS ALSO CONCERNED ABOUT DRAINAGE.

THE BOARD VOTED AND APPROVED OF IT.

THEN IT WAS ANOTHER MEETING (INDISCERNIBLE) ON JULY 13, WHICH EVERYBODY SEEMS TO BE SAYING THAT WHOEVER THE NEW PROPERTY OWNER IS GOING TO BE WOULD HAVE THEIR 25 FOOT VARIANCE FROM THE ROAD, BUT NO MENTION IN NUMBERS REGARDING OUR 20 FOOT. YET, IN SPEAKING TO AN ATTORNE , THESE THINGS ARE WELL OVER MY HEAD, THERE IS REFERENCE.

THE SECOND PAGE OF THAT -- THAT RENDERS, OKAY, THAT WHAT WAS HELD BACK A COUPLE WEEKS EARLIER IS TO BE ABIDED BY.

AND THAT CALLS FOR THE 20 FOOT VARIANCE.

NOW, I'D LIKE TO KNOW, AS SIMPLE AS I AM, WHERE DO WE GET -- HOW DID WE GET FROM THE ORIGINAL VARIANCE OF THEM AT 25 FOOT, AND US AT 20 FOOT, TO WHERE WE ARE AT NOW?

[00:45:02]

THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU, MR. (NAME).

>> MR. (NAME)? >> OKAY.

>> OKAY. SANDRA VAN STAYTON? PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.

>> GOOD AFTERNOON, SANDRA VAN STAYTON, 113 BROKEN POTTERY DRIVE, PONTE VEDRA BEACH. FIRST OF ALL, THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR SERVING IN THIS CAPACITY ON BEHALF OF THE RESIDENTS. WE DESPERATELY NEED PEOPLE LIKE YOU WHEN DEVELOPERS COME IN AND WANT TO BUILD, AND YOU CONSIDER THE VOICES OF EVERYONE SURROUNDING THE AREA, WHICH IS WHY YOU SEND OUT NOTICES, SO YOU CAN HEAR WHAT IMPACT IT HAS. I JUST WANT TO MAKE A GENERAL COMMENT, BECAUSE WE ARE THE FOURTH HOUSE IN, SO WE ARE ALREADY EXPERIENCING CONSTRUCTION THAT THE BUILDING -- THE HOUSE IS DONE. AND FROM THE ONE UNDER CONSIDERATION TODAY. AND WHEN THEY BUILT, THERE WAS TO BE A 10 FOOT VEGETATIVE BUFFER.

AND PARTS OF IT WERE 20 FOOT SET IN.

THE DEVELOPER SAID CERTAIN TREES WOULDN'T BE CUT DOWN.

AS SOON AS THEY BEGAN, THEY CUT DOWN ADDITIONAL OAK TREES THAT SHOULD NOT HAVE BEEN CUT DOWN. PART OF THE BUFFER, WHEN THEY STARTED BUILDING WHAT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE: SUPPOSED TO PROTECT US, THEY CUT DOWN LIMBS.O NOW WE ARE INSIDE OF OUR HOMES WITH THE FILLER BROUGHT IN, FROM INSIDE OUR LIVING ROOM. I WOULD EVEN SAY FROM WALKING IN OUR FRONT DOOR, WE LOOK AT CEMENT -- STRUCTURE THAT AT THE LEVEL WE ARE AT AND WITH THE BUILDUP, IS ABOUT 35 TO 40 FEET SUPERSTRUCTURE RIGHT BEHIND OUR HOME -- EVERY BIT OF IT IS VISIBLE TO ME FROM MY LIVING ROOM, MY DINING ROOM, YOU NAME IT. WE PUT ON LIGHTS DURING THE DAY IN THE HOUSE BECAUSE WE HAVE NO SUNLIGHT.

NOW KEEP IN MIND THE ADJOINING NEIGHBORHOOD IS THE GROWTH.

31 ESTABLISHED HOMES IN THE 1990S.

ALL BUT THREE HOMES HAVE REAR YARDS THAT CAME UP AGAINST NEIGHBORS. OTHER NEIGHBORS REAR YARDS.

OR THE LOTS -- THE TWO LOTS IN QUESTION.

EVERYBODY WAS REQUIRED TO COMPLETELY LANDSCAPE AND HAVE COMPLETE PRIVACY. THIS IS A NIGHTMARE IN OUR BACKYARD. AND WHEN TERMS LIKE UNIQUE LOT IS USED, WHAT IT MEANS IS A UNIQUE NIGHTMARE FOR THE PEOPLE BEHIND YOU AND THAT IT WASN'T MEANT TO BE BUILDABLE IN THE FIRST PLACE. SO THEN YOU GO THROUGH ALL THESE GYRATIONS AND THIS IS WHAT ENDS UP HAPPENING -- TRAMPLED LANDSCAPING AND COMPLETE DESTRUCTION OF QUALITY OF LIFE. AT THIS TIME, I THINK THE BEST I CAN BE DONE -- AND I DON'T EVEN KNOW IF IT'S WITHIN YOUR PURVIEW -- TO (INDISCERNIBLE) SINCE THE DEVELOPER ALREADY GOT APPROVED UPSIDE LOTS BUTTING UP AGAINST REAR LOTS, IS TO IMPOSE UPON THESE HOMES A REQUIREMENT TO DO LANDSCAPING.

NOT JUST OH, THERE'S ONLY THREE WINDOWS.

THERE IS A GIANT CEMENT WALL -- TO BUFFER THAT AND TO SCREEN IT FROM US, SITTING DOWN AT THE BOTTOM OF THE DUNE, LOOKING INTO THE SKY AND SEEING NOTHING BUT CONCRETE.

SO IF THERE IS A WAY, YOU KNOW? AND HONESTLY, IF I'M BEING HONEST ESCROW I KNOW MY TIMES UP.

THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN 10 AND 20 FEET? YOU KNOW, YOU WERE STILL LOOKING AT A GIANT WALL.

SO -- THE WHOLE THING IS UNFORTUNATE, BUT MITIGATION AT

[00:50:01]

SO PLEASE LOOK INTO SOME KIND OF MITIGATION.

AND ALSO, DRAINAGE IS GOING TO BE A REALLY BIG DEAL -- THAT THEY COME THROUGH ON THIS. THANK YOU.

>> OKAY. MICHAEL (NAME).

PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS, PLEASE.

>> SURE. GOOD AFTERNOON I'M (NAME) BARTLETT, I'M A REAL ESTATE ATTORNEY FROM PONTE VEDRA 255 NORTH ROSCOE BOULEVARD IN PONTE VEDRA, REPRESENTING THE LAWRENCE FAMILY. YOU'VE HEARD FROM DAVID LAWRENCE EARLIER. MRS. LAWRENCE IS HERE AS WELL AND HAD FILED AN INITIAL COMPLAINT THAT KIND OF STARTED ALL OF THIS. I TOOK QUITE A BIT OF TIME LISTENING TO AND READING THE INFORMATION GIVEN TO US BY THE BUILDER. IT'S A DIFFICULT POSITION FOR HIM TO BE IN, HAVING BUILT OVER A BUILDING RESTRICTION LINE.

AND I'VE HAD THAT BEFORE WITH A NUMBER OF MY CLIENTS OVER THE 40 YEARS THAT I'VE DONE THIS LAW PRACTICE.

IT CAN BE RESOLVED SIMPLY BY DUE DILIGENCE AND FEASIBILITY BEFORE YOU BUY A LOT. AND IN ALL CASES, WHEN I'M SITTING DOWN AT A CLOSING TABLE AND DISCUSSING THE PERSON ABOUT BUYING A LOT AND ASKING ABOUT THEIR DUE DILIGENCE -- BECAUSE I'VE SEEN THIS SO MANY TIMES -- ALL IT TAKES IS AN ARCHITECT OR AN ENGINEER TO RESOLVE THAT ISSUE.

NOW, YOU ARE PAYING AN ARCHITECT A CONSIDERABLE AMOUNT OF FUNDS TO BEGIN WITH, AND ENGINEER, TO DESIGN YOUR LOT.

ASK THEM IF THEY'VE DONE THE SETBACKS ACCORDING TO THE ORDINANCES. THERE'S NOT ANY CONFUSION, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, OVER THIS ORDINANCE THAT HAS BEEN VARIED.

WHAT'S CONFUSING IS THAT THIS IS A VARIANCE ON A VARIANCE.

IN THE LAST VARIANCE WAS CLEAR TO STOP THIS VARIANCE BEING A VARIANCE ON A VARIANCE, REQUIRES BY LAW COMPETENT AND SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE. THAT HARDSHIP HAS BEEN MET.

NOW, I'M PRO BUILDER, SO I DIDN'T LIKE -- I LISTENED TO THE BUILDER AND I DIDN'T HEAR ANYTHING OTHER THAN FINANCIAL HARDSHIP. AND THAT'S NOT ALLOWED BY OUR CODE. FRANKLY, IT'S UNDERSTANDABLE.

IF SOMEONE DOES SOMETHING WRONG, THEY NEED TO FIX IT.

AS REGRETTABLE AS IT IS, MY HEART GOES OUT TO THIS BUILDER.

MORE IMPORTANTLY, MY NEIGHBORS. THE NEIGHBORS ARE IN A VERY EGREGIOUS SITUATION. RIGHT ON TOP OF THE HILL -- IT WAS BUILT UP 16 FEET. THEN, IT'S GOING UP ANOTHER THREE STORIES -- THE BASE AND THE SECOND.

AND I'M SORRY -- A TOTAL OF THREE, IF YOU COUNT THE 16 FOOT FOUNDATION. IN THE CARRIAGE HOUSES IN THE

REAR, WITH THE WINDOWS. >> I'LL LET YOU GO ON FOR ANOTHER FEW MINUTES.> I LIKE TO HAVE ANOTHER MINUTE, SIR.

MAY I APPROACH? I THINK IT'S A GOOD IDEA THAT YOU FOLKS SEE A FEW PICTURES OF THE PROPERTY.

AND WE ALSO HAD A LICENSED ENGINEER WHO DOES NOTHING BUT LAND DEVELOPMENT COME TO THE SITE AND GIVE US AN OPINION ABOUT WHAT'S WRONG WITH THIS SITE.

AND I THINK -- I HAVE A COPY OF THE BUILDER AS WELL.

I THINK IT -- A KIND OF SHOCK TO MY CONSCIENCE.

YOU HAVE TO WATCH REAL CLOSE JUST HOW THESE HOUSES GO UP.

THERE ARE A LOT OF THINGS THAT ARE IRREGULAR.

THE MOST IMPORTANT THING FOR YOU TO REMEMBER IS DRAINAGE IS HUMONGOUS OF A LOT THAT SIZE. AND A HOME OF OVER -- OVER 6000 SQUARE-FOOT HOME, INTERIORLY, I THINK IT'S 5100 THAT WE DEVELOPED. BUT THE ROOF THROWS UP SO MUCH WATER AND IT'S HARD TO STOP. AND TO SUGGEST THAT YOU CAN PUT A PIPE UP THERE AND FIX EVERYTHING IS ALMOST LUDICROUS.

IF YOU WALKED THE LOT AND SAW HOW LONG THAT PATH HAS TO RUN TO GET TO THE WATER MANAGEMENT LAKE.

WE ALL HOPE IT DOESN'T LEAK OR BREAK.

[00:55:02]

AND THEY HAVE THEIR SWIMMING POOL IN THE BACK AND OF COURSE, ALL THE WINDOWS ARE BUILT IN THE BACK.

IT SEEMS LIKE CHARLES (NAME) DEVELOPED THE GROWTH BACK IN THE 90S. IT SEEMS LIKE MOST OF THOSE SINGLE-STORY HOUSES HAD HUGE WINDOWS IN THE BACK TO COLLECT THE VIEW. ARE YOU LET ME DO THIS WITHOUT BREAKING ANYTHING? OKAY!

>> AND YOUR TIME IS ALMOST UP! >> (INDISCERNIBLE) WAS UP HERE A LITTLE EARLIER. THIS IS TOM'S HOUSE.

IT'S EVEN MORE OBVIOUS WITH TOM'S HOUSE THAT IT JUST SEEMS TO BE BUILT RIGHT ON THE PROPERTY LINE.

NOW, WHEN THE BUILDER DID HIS PRESENTATION, I DON'T PARTICULARLY WANT TO BE CRITICAL OF IT.

BUT HOW -- OR WHY -- THEY WENT IN AND TOOK ALL THOSE HUGE TREES OUT IS BEYOND ME. I'LL TELL YOU WHAT I THINK.

THIS IS A DOG ON 6000 SQUARE HOUSE.

IT'S A BIG AND. AND EVERY INCH IN PONTE VEDRA

-- >> WRAP UP.

YOUR TIME -- >> YES, SIR.

I WILL. EVERY INCH OF PONTE VEDRA HAS BEEN BUILT UPON -- EXCEPT THIS ONE.AX THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU. >> MICHAEL MCKEE?

>> CAN I GET THIS TO YOU SO YOU CAN SEE WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT?

>> THANK YOU.

[CHATTER] >> MICHAEL MCKEE?

>> CAN I HAVE ONE MINUTE? >> YOU ALREADY HAD THREE

MINUTES EXTRA. >> I DID?

>> YOU'VE HAD SIX MINUTES. >> THAT FLEW BY! WHAT A LAWYER HAVE YOU EVER SEEN THAT'S NOT WINDED?

>> OKAY, YOU GET 20 SECONDS NOW.

WRAP UP, PLEASE. >> YES, SIR.

I'M DOING IT!HE PACKAGE THAT YOU WILL RECEIVE HAS COPIES OF THE ORIGINAL ORDINANCE AS VARIED THE NEW ORDINANCE AS REQUESTED. THERE WAS NO ERROR IN THAT VARIANCE OMITTING THE BACK SETBACK -- THE REAL SETBACK.

THERE WAS A SECOND PAGE THAT NEEDED TO BE TURNED OVER.

YOU WILL HAVE COPIES OF IT AND YOU WILL SEE IT.

THANK YOU. DARN!

RAN OUT OF TIME! >> MICHAEL MCKEE? (INDISCERNIBLE) I HAVE NO IDEA HOW TO PRONOUNCE THE LAST NAME.

>> GOOD AFTERNOON, EVERYBODY. MY NAME IS MICHAEL MCKEE.

I REPRESENT DAVE AND HOLLY AT 105 BROKEN POTTERY DRIVE.

I WOULD LIKE TO SAY AT THE OUTSET, THERE IS A DECISION THAT SHOULD BE MADE BY THIS BOARD, BECAUSE THERE IS A MATERIAL MISREPRESENTATION OUTRIGHT ON PVZVAR 22-15, BECAUSE THIS VARIANCE THAT WE ARE HERE TODAY STATES THAT WE ARE TRYING TO GET A VARIANCE ON R-1-B ZONING.

WE ARE, IN FACT, NOT TRYING TO DO THAT.

BECAUSE PVZVAR 2020-2 IS THE CURRENT ZONING SETBACKS.

AS MY PARTNER STATED EARLIER, PAGE 2 NUMBER 1 AND NUMBER 4 BOTH REFERENCE THE NORTHERN SETBACK.

IT'S A VERY, VERY CLEAR ITEM. SO IT IS AGAIN UNFORTUNATE THAT THE BUILDER OR ARCHITECT MAY HAVE MISSED IT ON THE AIR ORIGINAL APPLICATION FOR CLEARANCE SHEET.

BUT THIS IS A MISTAKE. IT'S AN UNFORTUNATE MISTAKE.

[01:00:04]

THEY COULD HAVE DONE A LITTLE BIT MORE DUE DILIGENCE.

THE ARCHITECT OR THE BUILDER COULD HAVE READ THE SECOND PAGE OF THE SECOND VARIANCE OF PVZVAR 2020, AND THEY COULD HAVE FOUND OUT THERE WAS A 20 FOOT SIDE SETBACK ON THE NORTHERN PROPERTY BOUNDARY. SO I WOULD URGE THIS BOARD TO FIRST CONSIDER WHETHER OR NOT IT IS MISLEADING ON ITS FACE, AND WHETHER OR NOT, IF THEY WOULD LIKE TO HAVE A VARIANCE, THAT THEY SUBMIT A PROPER APPLICATION WITH THE PROPER SETBACKS, SO THAT YOUR LEGAL RECORD IN THE ORDINANCE WOULD ACTUALLY STATE THE PROPER SETBACKS FROM WHICH THEY'RE GOING TO BE MODIFIED -- WHICH ARE CURRENTLY 20 FEET IN THE REAR AND 25 FEET IN THE FRONT. THAT IS NOT STATED IN PVZVAR 2022-15. SO IN CLOSING, I WILL SAY THIS: ADMINISTRATIVE ERROR IS NOT UNDUE HARDSHIP.

AND THE ONLY TIME YOU CAN GRANT A VARIANCE, BASED ON MY UNDERSTANDING, IS IF IT IS UNDER HARDSHIP.

AND HERE, FINANCIAL BURDEN, FINANCIAL HARDSHIP BY THAT OF THE PERSON CREATING THE HARDSHIP, THAT IS NOT DOING YOUR DUE DILIGENCE AND CHECKING THE EXISTING VARIANCE.

IT DOES NOT QUALIFY UNDER HARDSHIP.

WE HAVE ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNERS THAT DO HAVE AN UNDUE HARDSHIP THAT WAS CLEARLY STATED IN THE HEARING ON JULY 13 OF 2020, IN WHICH THE EXISTING VARIANCE WAS APPROVED.

SO -- THAT'S ALL I HAVE. INC. YOU.

>> THANK YOU. OKAY.

LAST IS (NAME). AND I'M SORRY, I REALLY MURDERED THAT (LAUGHING)! PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME WITH THE

CORRECT PRONUNCIATION. >> YEAH, THAT WAS SO CLOSE! IT'S (NAME) AND I MET 109 BROKEN POTTERY DRIVE.

SO I LIVE AT THE HOUSE JUST WEST TO THE TWO HOMES THAT ARE IN CONSIDERATION HERE. AND I'LL TRY TO BE BRIEF.

VERY GOOD DISCUSSIONS HERE. PAND I KNOW TIME IS IMPORTANT.

AND I THINK TIME IS VERY IMPORTANT.

IF WE COULD GO BACK IN TIME, I THINK THERE WERE DECISIONS THAT WERE MADE TO WE PLOT THIS. IT USED TO BE TWO PLOTS THAT WAS BROKEN INTO 4 THAT REQUIRED THIS ROAD TO BE PUT IN.

WHICH OBVIOUSLY NARROWED THE LOT THAT CREATED THIS VERY, VERY NARROW SITUATION. THE DEVELOPER SAW THIS AND SAID VERY CLEARLY IN HIS PRESENTATION AND DOCUMENTATION IN THE 2020 VARIANCE. ACTUALLY, THEY DISCUSSED HARDSHIP, THE HARDSHIP BEING PRIVACY ISSUES OF NEIGHBORS.

AND I THINK THE DISCUSSION -- THE LEGAL DISCUSSION AT THE TIME WAS YES, THAT DOES APPLY -- PRIVACY OF NEIGHBOR HARDSHIP. SO THAT VARIANCE WAS ACTUALLY GIVEN -- A 25 FOOT (INDISCERNIBLE) WAS GIVEN TO ACTUALLY PUSH THE HOME AWAY. AND AGAIN, JUST ALONG WITH SANDRA VON STAYTON, WHO I LIVE NEXT TO, WE ALSO HAVE A HOME THAT WAS BUILT. AND IT IS EVEN AT A HIGHER ELEVATION. THAT ELEVATION, THOSE PICTURES THAT WERE PRESENTED? AND IF YOU GUYS DID HOT OUT THERE, I THINK I WAS JUST A FEW MINUTES LATE BUT I THINK SOME PEOPLE TO GO OUT TO THE PROPERTIES.

BUT YOU COULD SEE -- EVEN IF YOU SAT IN YOUR CAR, YOU COULD CLEARLY SEE THAT THE BRIDGE LINE OUT THERE WAS ALMOST TO THE ROOFLINES OF THE HOMES OVER THERE.

SO THE ELEVATION AND THE CLOSEST OF STENTS TO THOSE PROPERTIES WAS REALLY ADDRESSING THAT VARIANCE.

I THINK EVERY WAY VOTED EXCEPT FOR THE ONE VOTE.

I THINK THE ONE BOAT WAS REALLY TO ADMONISH THE DEVELOPER FOR CREATING THIS SITUATION, WHICH I THINKWAS DISCUSSED IN THAT MEETING ALSO. SO ANYWAY -- VERY GOOD DISCUSSIONS. THANK YOU .

AND YOU GUYS GOT A TOUGH DECISION.

THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU.

>> THANK YOU, JOHN. MR. PILO, DO YOU HAVE ANY REBUTTAL? YOU ARE PERMITTED THAT AFTER PUBLIC COMMENT. OR IS THAT JUST IN A

COMMISSIONERS HEARING? >> NO, THAT'S FINE.

YES, HE GETS AN OPPORTUNITY TO REBUT.

[01:05:01]

AND THERE WAS A REQUEST FOR BOTH THE FRONT AND THE SIDE

SETBACK. >> OKAY.

THANK YOU, CHRISTINE. ARE YOU GOING TO PUT IT UP ON THE SCREEN? OKAY.SORRY, SO YOU SEE HERE THE SECOND SENTENCE IS WE WILL AGREE TO INCREASE THE NORTH SETBACK FROM (INDISCERNIBLE) FEET.

(INDISCERNIBLE) FRONT SETBACK (INDISCERNIBLE).> OKAY.

THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU.

>> YOU HAVE TO SAY HER NAME AND ADDRESS AGAIN BECAUSE THIS IS BEING RECORDED. THANK YOU.

>> THIS IS RYAN APOLLO. I MET 157 BEAR PENN ROAD, PONTE VEDRA BEACH (INDISCERNIBLE). IN RESPONSE TO A COUPLE OF THE COMMENTS. REGARDING THE FILL, IF YOU LOOK AT THE MASTER DEVELOPMENT ITEMS THAT WERE LISTED BY CONLEY AND WICKER, AND I DON'T KNOW WHO THOSE GET SUBMITTED TO.

I'M NOT A DEVELOPER. AND SO, THE COMMENT ABOUT THE 20 LOADS OF FILL. I DON'T REBUT THAT.

THE REALITY IS, WHEN YOU'VE GOT HOLES IN THAT, IN ITS DUNES, WHEN YOU'VE GOT HOLES IN THAT THAT ARE EXTENSIVE TO THE POINT THAT YOU ARE DOWN TO 11 FEET AND YOU'VE GOT OTHER AREAS IN THE LOT THAT ARE UP IN THE 17, 18 POINT RANGE, OF COURSE, YOU'VE GOT TO HAVE A LEVEL BUILDING PAD.

AGAIN, I WILL GO BACK TO THE COMMENT THAT WE DID NOT EXCEED WHAT WAS LISTED AS THE MINIMUM. AND AGAIN, THERE IS NOT A MAXIMUM LISTED, BUT THERE WAS A CLEAR MINIMUM AND THAT'S WHERE WE ARE AT. SO TO THAT POINT.

AND I DON'T DISAGREE WITH MR. LAWRENCE'S COMMENT THAT THE EXCAVATOR CANNOT BE SEEN. BECAUSE IF IT WAS DOWN IN AN EIGHT, NINE FOOT HOLE IN THE HOUSE WHERE THEYLIVE IS DOWN BELOW, I CLEARLY UNDERSTAND THAT.O I WANTED TO ADDRESS THAT . REGARDING THE 20 AND 25 -- I'M NOT SURE OF. AND MAYBE I WILL ASK FOR CLARIFICATION AGAIN FROM JACOB. THE REQUEST ON VARIANCE AND USING THAT VARIANCE, OR GOING BACK TO THE ORIGINAL -- WHAT I'LL CALL THE ORIGINAL SETBACKS THAT WERE SET FORTH FOR THIS

PROPERTY -- IS IT AN EITHER OR? >> YES, SIR.

JACOB SMITH WITH GROWTH MANAGEMENT.

AND I'LL LET OUR ATTORNEY'S OFFICE CHIME IN IF I SAY ANYTHING WRONG. BUT THE WAY THAT WE WOULD TYPICALLY OPERATE IF THERE IS A VARIANCE ON A PARCEL, THE VARIANCE COULD BE APPLICABLE. AND IF THE OWNER ORDEVELOPER CHOSE NOT TO UTILIZE AT VARIANCE , STANDARD ZONING

WOULD ALSO APPLY. >> OKAY.

SO BASED ON THAT, WHAT MY VARIANCE READS, WHAT I SUBMITTED TO YOU WAS I WAS ASKING FOR AN ADJUSTED FRONT SETBACK TWO 34 1/2. WE ARE ALREADY TWO FEET FURTHER AWAY FROM THE SUBJECT PROPERTIES, WHERE WE BUILT THE HOUSE. SO WE COULD BE TWO FEET CLOSER TO THEM, BUT WE ARE NOT. SO I JUST WANT TO BE SURE THAT'S CLEAR. AND BASED ON THE APPLICATION AND THE WAY IT WAS ORIGINALLY WRITTEN AND SUBMITTED TO ST.

JOHNS COUNTY AND REVIEWED TWO TIMES BY THE VARIOUS DEPARTMENTS -- HOWEVER YOU WANT TO VIEW IT, NOTHING WAS EVER BROUGHT UP. INFORMATION WAS THERE, THE VARIANCE WAS POSTED ON THE APPLICATION.

IT WAS ON THE SITE PLAN FOR REVIEW.

AND CERTAINLY, FOR SCRUTINY. AND YOU SAW THE LIST OF ITEMS THAT WERE QUESTIONED AGAIN -- SO BACK TO THE VARIANCE IN THE VARIANCE NOTES. WHEN THE INFORMATION THAT IS COMING OUT OF ST. JOHNS COUNTY FROM THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT IN GENERAL IS ARE THESE TWO PIECES OF PAPER WITH THE ATTACHED SITE PLAN -- AND I'LL GO TO THE SITE PLAN.

BECAUSE THERE ISN'T A NOTE THAT SHOWS THERE IS A LINE, BUT IT DOESN'T GO INTO ANY DETAIL AS TO WHAT THAT ADJUSTMENT IS AND WHAT THE ACTUAL DISTANCE IS. AND SO, TO THAT POINT, THE INFORMATION WAS SHARED WITH THE ARCHITECT, WHO DREW THE DESIGN FOR THE OWNER. I IS THE BUILDER SUBMIT THE PAPERWORK. AND SO, REALLY, ULTIMATELY, WHEN YOU LOOK AT IT FROM A STANDPOINT OF BEING AT A

[01:10:06]

WE COULD BE. WE ARE ASKING FOR AN ADJUSTMENT TO THE FRONT.Y QUESTION IS WHO DOES THE FRONT AFFECT? AND I DON'T BELIEVE IT'S REALLY ANYBODY, IF THE ADJUSTMENT WAS ALLOWED TO GO TO 25. AND SO, WE ARE WITHIN -- WELL WITHIN -- THAT NUMBER. AND THAT'S ACTUALLY NOTED ON THE SITE PLAN AS WELL. AND LASTLY, THE WAY THAT YOU BUILD A HOME TO AVOID -- AND I'VE BEEN THROUGH THIS PROCESS AS PART OF THE DISCUSSIONS ON OTHER PROJECTS FOR HOW TO BUILD NOT TO ADVERSELY AFFECT YOUR NEIGHBOR.

AND I'LL REFERENCE ROSCOE LOTS, BECAUSE THE ATTORNEY THAT'S HERE REFERENCED THAT HE LIVES THERE.

THE ISSUE OVER THE YEARS HAS BEEN PEOPLE ARE BUILDING UP AND BUILDING UP AND BUILDING UP. THERE ARE NUMBER OF HOMES THAT FLUTTERED ON ROSCOE. WE ARE ALL AWARE OF THAT.

AND SO, THE CONSTRUCTION METHOD OF USING A STEM WALL, WHICH IS WHAT WAS IN THE PICTURES THAT WERE SHOWN BY BOTH THE COUNCILMEMBERS BEING THE COUNSEL FOR THE PEOPLE THAT ARE HERE SPEAKING AND WHAT YOU SAW, THAT'S A STEM.

THE IDEA BEHIND THAT IS WE DON'T CHANGE, GROSSLY AFFECT THE ELEVATIONS OF THE DIRT AROUND THE ACTUAL HOME.

AND SO, YES, WE BROUGHT PHIL IN AND WE LEVELED THE LOT.

THERE ARE HIGHER AREAS THAT WERE ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY.

THERE STILL ARE BECAUSE WE DIDN'T TAKE IT ALL THEWAY TO THE WEST. THIS AREA OVER HERE, AS YOU GUYS ARE WELL AWARE, IS HEAVILY TREED .

AND ALSO, BACK OVER HERE. THE ELEVATION GETS MUCH TALLER IN THOSE AREAS. SO OUR PAD IS ACTUALLY LOWER AND MORE LEVEL THAN WHAT'S IN THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE LOT BEYOND THE CABANA. MY POINT IN SAYING THAT IS THAT WHEN YOU BUILD WITH A STEM WALL, THE PREMISE OF IT VERSUS BUILDING ON A SLAB OR ON GRADE. TO GET TO THE NUMBER WITH THE SLAB ON GRADE, YOU HAVE TO EFFECTIVELY PICK UP THE ENTIRE LOT SO THAT YOU DON'T HAVE UNDERMINING OF THE FOUNDATION.

THE IDEA BEHIND A STEM WALL IS TO DIG DEEPER AND COME DIRECTLY VERTICAL. SO THAT YOU DON'T BRING IN AS MUCH PHIL AS WOULD BE NEEDED. AND THEN, BEYOND THAT, THERE WAS ANOTHER COMMENT ON THE ROOF RUNOFF.

I'M VERY AWARE OF THAT. WE TALK ABOUT IT ALL THE TIME.

AND SO, OUR OBJECTIVE AND WHAT WE WILL DO AND WHAT I STATED BEFORE IS THAT THERE HAS ALWAYS BEEN GUTTERS PLANNED.

AND WITH THOSE GUTTERS, IT'S NOT JUST DOWNSPOUTS INTO THE GROUND. AND RUNNING OFF INTO THOSE AREAS. IT IS COLLECTED AND IT IS MANAGED. AND THAT IS AN ACCEPTED PRACTICE BY ST. JOHNS COUNTY. IT'S ENCOURAGED.

ALTHOUGH, IT'S NOT REQUIRED. IT'S NOT.

BUT WE WILL DO IT. WE'VE COMMITTED TO IT.

AND IT'S PART OF THE BUDGET FOR THE OWNERS THAT ARE SITTING IN THE ROOM TODAY. SO -- I THINK THAT'S ALL I HAVE

TO SAY. >> THANK YOU.

JACOB, WAS THERE, AS FAR AS YOU KNOW, ANY CODE VIOLATIONS IN THE FIELD THAT WAS BROUGHT IN OR THE TREES THAT WERE REMOVED? OR IS THAT ACCORDING TO THE SITE PLAN?

>> NO KNOWLEDGE OF ANY VIOLATIONS REGARDING PHIL.

>> OKAY. THANK YOU.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE BOARD?SAMUEL?

>> CHRISTINE, WAS THERE ANY MENTION OF (INDISCERNIBLE) OR VEGETATION IN THAT BUFFER IN THE ORIGINAL REQUEST?

>> NOT THAT I CAN SEE, AND I DON'T HAVE ACCESS TO THAT STAFF

REPORT. >> I DON'T THINK I WAS THERE FOR THAT MEETING. WAS THE 20 FOOT -- NEGOTIATING POINT FROM THE DEVELOPER? WERE THEY GIVEN SOMETHING FROM

THE DEVELOPER FOR THIS? >> I'M NOT SURE.

I WASN'T HERE FOR THAT MEETING EITHER.

IT WAS OFFERED AS THE OUTSET TO MITIGATE FOR THE DECREASE TO THE FRONT SETBACK AS FAR AS I CAN TELL.

>> SAMUEL, I WAS HERE. THERE WAS NO DISCUSSION OF VEGETATION IN THAT BUFFER. AND AT THE TIME, IT WAS A COMBINATION OF THE 25 FOOT AND THE 20 FOOT.

SO IT WAS TALKED ABOUT THERE. I TRY TO GO BACK TO MY PAPERWORK BUT I COULDN'T FIND THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION.

[01:15:01]

IT WAS NOT A CONCESSION AT THE MEETING.

>> THANK YOU, JOHN. OKAY.

I'M GOING TO DO JUST A LITTLE SUMMARY.

I'VE BEEN TAKING NOTES HERE. I JUST REMIND OUR BOARD, EACH BOARD MEMBER HERE MAKES AN INDIVIDUAL DECISION ON HOW THEY VOTE. OUR JOB PERCENT FOREMOST IS IF THERE IS A HARDSHIP ON THIS PROPERTY (INDISCERNIBLE).

-- -- AND I THINK MR. DOBRANSKY EVEN SAID IT.

THIS IS A VERY NARROW LOT TO BE BUILDABLE STOP IT'S VERY DIFFICULT TO PUT A HOUSE ON A LOT THIS SHAPE AND SIZE, GIVEN THE ROADS THAT SURROUND IT. I DO BELIEVE THERE IS A HARDSHIP. BUT EACH MEMBER HAS TO MAKE THAT DECISION. IF THEY BELIEVE IT'S A HARDSHIP, WE CAN THEN REQUEST THE VARIANCE.

SO WHILE THE LANGUAGE DOES NOT MENTION THE 20 FEET, IT'S CLEAR FROM THE MEETING TAPE, IT'S CLEAR FROM WHAT CHRISTINE PRESENTED THAT THAT WAS INTENDED.

AND AT THAT TIME, YOU KNOW, WAS THIS IN THE PUBLIC INTEREST? WAS IT CONSISTENT WITH THE SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENT?IT WAS. BUT WHAT TO BE CONSIDERED -- THE ORIGINAL OR THE NEW VARIANCE? LIKE I SAID, THIS IS A QUASI JUDICIAL HEARING.

I THINK JACOB WAS QUITE CLEAR THAT THE BUILDER DOES NOT HAVE TO COMPLY WITH THE ORIGINAL VARIANCE .

THAT THEY COULD SUBMIT A NEW VARIANCE.

THERE ARE INCURRED COSTS HERE. THERE'S INTEREST, THERE'S TIME THAT WOULD BE RESETTING IF WE DIDN'T APPROVE IT.UR JOB IS NOT TO SAVE MONEY FOR INDIVIDUALS.

IT'S NOT TO SAVE MONEY FOR THE COUNTY IF THEY ARE AT FAULT.

IT'S TO PROTECT OUR CITIZENS PRIVACY AND ALSO FOLLOW THE PONTEVEDRA'S ENCODE.WE MAY CONSIDER THE NEW VARIANCE.

THE LOCATION OF THESE LOTS IS UNFORTUNATE IN TERMS OF HOW THEY BACK UP TO ONE ANOTHER. THE HOMES ON BROKEN POTTERY, THE BACKYARDS FACING THE SIDE YARDS.

IT SETS UP AN ISSUE WITH NEIGHBORS THAT CAN'T AGREE ON WHAT ASPECTS OF THE BUILDING THERE SHOULD BE.

HOWEVER, THAT'S NOT UNPRECEDENTED.

IT'S NOT UNIQUE IN PONTEVEDRA. THIS IS PRETTY COMMON IN PONTEVEDRA. BUT OUR JOB HERE IS TO ACTUALLY DECIDE IF THIS IS WITHIN THE BUILDING CODE, IF THERE IS A HARDSHIP, CAN WE LOOK AT A VARIANCE? CAN WE CONSIDER A VARIANCE? THE VARIANCE REQUESTED TODAY IS TO GO FROM 40 FOOT SETBACK IN THE FRONT TO 34 FEET .5 EDGE SETBACK. AND IF WE DO CONSIDER THAT, IS IT CONSISTENT WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA? AND IS IT OPPOSED TO ANY PUBLIC INTEREST? SO WE ARE ACTUALLY LOOKING AT THIS FRONT YARD, BECAUSE THIS NORTHERN BOUNDARY CAN BE AT 10 FEET STOP WHETHER IT'S AT 12 FEET, IT'S STILL IN THE BUILDABLE AREA.

10 FEET IS IN THE BUILDABLE AREA.

SO THEY ARE ASKING FOR A FIVE FOOT FOUR INCH VARIANCE.

I THINK IT SEEMS CONSISTENT WITH THE SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENT. LIKE I SAID, IT'S UNFORTUNATE IN TERMS OF HOW THESE HOMES BACK UP TO EACH OTHER.

THIS IS NOT UNIQUE IN PONTEVEDRA.

IT'S ACTUALLY PRETTY COMMON, UNFORTUNATELY.

SO THAT IS A SUMMARY I HAVE. WOULD ANYONE LIKE TO ADD TO THAT FROM THE BOARD'S PERSPECTIVE?

JOHN? >> I LIKE TO MAKE A COMMENT.

THE CONFUSION OF THE VARIANCE IN THE WAY IT WAS WORDED AND HAVING TO LOOK AT THE ATTACHMENT (INDISCERNIBLE) YOU KNOW, LED TO A PLAN BEING APPROVED THAT WASN'T CONSISTENT WITH EITHER THE EXISTING SETBACKS OR THE VARIANCE SETBACKS. AND EFFECTIVELY, THE HOMEOWNER DIDN'T APPROVE IT. I THINK PART OF THE HARDSHIP IS THERE WAS AN ERROR MADE. AND IT WAS AN HONEST ERROR.

IT CREATED CONFUSION AS TO WHAT REALLY SHOULD HAVE TAKEN PLACE.

SO THAT'S MY THOUGHT. >> THANK YOU, JOHN.

IF THERE ARE NO OTHER COMMENTS, I WOULD ASK, DOES THE BOARD HAVE A MOTION FOR THIS VARIANCE REQUEST? THE INTERJECTION. I JUST WANT TO CLARIFY FOR THE RECORD THAT THE REQUEST FOR THE FRONT SETBACK IS 34 FEET, SIX

INCHES. >> WHAT DID I SAY SOMETHING

DIFFERENT? >> FIVE.

>> OKAY. SORRY.

[Staff Report]

MOTION? >> I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE PVZVAR 28 -- -- CYLINDER RESIDENCE BASED ON THE FINDINGS OF FACT AND SUBJECT TO THE FIVE CONDITIONS LISTED IN

THE STAFF REPORT. >> DO I HEAR A SECOND? I'LL SECOND THE MOTION. OKAY.

I THINK WE ARE READY TO VOTE. OKAY.

[01:20:10]