May 01, 2023 Ponte Vedra Zoning and Adjustment Board

[Call meeting to order]

[00:00:37]

AND >> LIKE TO CALL TO ORDER THE MAY 1ST MEETING OF THE PONTE VEDRA ZONING AND ADJUSTMENT BOARD. WELL THE BOARD SAND AND JOIN ME IN SAYING THE PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE? [INAUDIBLE]

JOHN, CAN WE HAVE THE READING OF THE NOTICE? >> YES.

THIS IS A PRIVATELY NOTICED PUBLIC HEARING HELD IN CONCURRENCE WITH REQUIREMENTS OF FLORIDA LAW. THE PUBLIC WILL GET AN OPPORTUNITY TO COMMENT ON ALL THE BOARDS AREA OF JURISDICTIONN AN OPPORTUNITY FOR COMMENTS AT A DESIGNATED TIME DURING THE MEETING. ANY MEMBER OF THE PUBLIC DESIRING TO SPEAK MUST INDICATE BY COMPLETING A SPEAKER CARD, WHICH IS AVAILABLE IN THE FOYER.

A. -- ANY SPEAKER MAYBE HEARD AT THE DISCRETION OF THE GERMAN.

SPEAKER CARDS SHOULD BE TURNED INTO STUFF. THE PUBLIC SHALL SPEAK AT A TIME DURING THE MEETING ON EACH ITEM FOR A LENGTH OF TIME DESIGNATED BY THE CHAIRMAN, WHICH SHALL BE THREE MINUTES. THE SPEAKER SHALL IDENTIFY THEMSELVES, WHO THEY REPRESENT, AND STATE THEIR BUSINESS. SPEAKERS MAY OFFER TESTIMONY. IF THEY DO NOT, THE DEFENDER IS NOT SWORN -- CONSIDERED BY THE BOARD TO DETERMINE THE WEIGHT AND TRUTHFULNESS OF THIS STATEMENT. IF A PERSON DESIRES TO APPEAL A DECISION MADE WITH RESPECT TO ANY MANNER CONSIDERED AT THIS HEARING, SUCH A PERSON WILL NEED A RECORD OF THE PROCEEDINGS AND THEY NEED TO ENSURE THAT THE VERBATIM RECORD PROCEEDS AS MADE.

WHICH RECORD INCLUDES TESTIMONY, EVIDENCE ON WHICH THE APPEAL IS BASED.

ANY EVIDENCE PRESENTED DURING A HEARING, SUCH AS DIAGRAMS, CHARTS, PHOTOGRAPHS, AND WRITTEN STATEMENTS, SHALL BE RETAINED BY STAFF AS PART OF THE RECORD.

THE WRAP WILL BE AVAILABLE FOR -- OVER THE COUNTY IN REVIEW OF THE APPEAL RELATED TO THAT ITEM. BOARD MEMBERS WILL REMAIN, WE WILL BE REMINDED AT THE BEGINNING OF EACH ITEM THEY MUST STAY WHETHER THEY HAVE ANY COMMUNICATION WITH THE APPLICANT OR OTHER PERSONS REGARDING THE SUBSTANCE OF THE -- OUTSIDE THE FORMAL HEARING OF THE BOARD.

IF SUCH COMMUNICATIONS OCCURRED, THE BOARD MEMBER SHALL IDENTIFY THE PERSON AND MATERIAL OF THEIR COMMUNICATION. CIVILITY CLAUSE. WE WILL RESPECT ONE ANOTHER EVEN IF WE DISAGREE. DIRECT ALL COMMENTS AND ISSUES AND AVOID PERSONAL ATTACKS.

>> THANK YOU, JOHN. JUST FOR THE PUBLIC TODAY, I WOULD LIKE TO MENTION THAT WE HAVE FIVE MEMBERS OF THE PONTE VEDRA ZONING AND ADJUSTMENT BOARD PRESIDENT.

ONE PERSON WHO HAD BEEN SELECTED TO JOIN THE BOARD DECIDED NOT TO.

O WE WILL BE LOOKING INFORMATION FOR FUTURE

[Approval of meeting minutes for PVZAB 8/2/2021, 9/13/2021 and 11/1/2021]

THANK HIM FOR WITH ASSISTANCE ON THE AGENDA ITEMS PRIOR TO THE MEETING.

HE ALSO WAS VERY KIND, HE MET WITH ME EARLIER. I LOOK FORWARD TO WORKING WITH HIM. IN OUR PACKETS, WE RECEIVED THE MEETING MINUTES FOR THE PONTE VEDRA ZONING AND ADJUSTMENT BOARD MEETINGS FOR THREE MEETINGS FROM 2021.

AUGUST 2ND, SEPTEMBER 13TH, AND NOVEMBER 11TH. I WOULD LIKE TO NOTE, ANYONE

[Public comment]

HEARING NONE, CAN I HAVE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE MINUTES? >> I MOVE TO APPROVE THE

MINUTES. >> SECONDED. >> ALL IN FAVOR?

>> I. >> I. I SEE THAT WE DO HAVE ONE

SPEAKER CARD. >> YES, WE HAVE ONE COMMENT. >> KATIE, CAN YOU COME FORWARD?

[00:05:05]

>> AND GOOD AFTERNOON. 1:11 OCEAN COURSE DRIVE. I'VE BEEN IN FRONT OF THIS BOARD SEVERAL TIMES OVER THE FEW YEARS, SOME OF YOU KNOW ME, SOME OF YOU DON'T.

I'VE BEEN ON THIS COMMUNITY SENSATION AS PRESIDENT AND CURRENTLY ON THE VICE CHAIR.

I'M VERY INTO IN WITH THE COMMUNITY. I HAVE SOME SUGGESTIONS TO CONSIDER AT YOUR NEXT WORKSHOP FOR TWEAKING SOME ITEMS IN OUR CURRENT ZONING REGULATIONS.

THE FIRST ONE IS A WARNING SCIENCE IN THE SCIENCE SECTION. WE HAVE RULES FOR BUILDER SCIENCE, WE HAVE RULES FOR -- THEY LIMIT THE NUMBER AND THIS SIZE PER LOT AND IF THE WARNING SIGNS ARE ALLOWED THEY LIMITED IN ONE SQUARE FOOT, THEY DON'T LIMIT OR MAKING REFERENCE TO HOW MANY SCIENCE YOU CAN HAVE ON THAT LOT. CURRENTLY, WE HAVE SEVERAL BUILDERS, IT'S BECOMING A LITTLE BIT OF A HABIT, THEY PUT MULTIPLE NO TRESPASSING SIGNS ON ONE RESIDENTIAL LOT, IT'S A VISUAL EYESORE. I'M ASKING THIS BOARD CONSIDER NOT ONLY KEEPING THE ONE SQUARE FOOT AND THAT'S IN THE ZONING REGULATIONS RIGHT NOW, BUT LIMITING IT TO ONE -- TO THE ZONING DISTRICT. THE OTHER ITEM I WANT TO TALK ABOUT IS CHAIN LINK FENCES. I KNOW IT'S COME UP BEFORE IN FRONT OF THIS COMMITTEE.

THANK GOODNESS FOR THE CHAIN LINK FENCE COMING DOWN AROUND THE HAVANA CLUB, AT LEAST AROUND THE ROADSIDE. IT'S BEEN ALMOST TWO YEARS. THERE IS STILL ONE IN THE PARKING LOT. ACCORDING TO OUR REGULATIONS IN THE DISTRICT, THEY ARE NOT PERMITTED. THEY ARE SUPPOSED TO BE CONCEALED FROM VIEW FROM THE ROAD. THERE'S BEEN SOME ASSUMPTION THAT TEMPORARY AND PERMANENT ARE MAYBE INTERTWINED IN THAT. WE'VE GOT THE COUNTY WEIGHING IN.

I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE THE BOARD STRENGTHEN THAT RULE TO MAKE IT A PERMANENT REGULATION THAT IN THE OVERLAY DISTRICT, CHAIN LINK FENCES HAVE TO BE EITHER DECORATED, FOR LACK OF BETTER WORD, FOR INSTANCE, THE NEW VICKERS, AND THEY PUT SOME GREEN -- IN THEIR CHAIN LINK FENCING ON LABOR DAY. IT'S NOT THE BEST BUT IT'S NOT AND IT DID THE JOB. CHAIN LINK FENCES AT THE CABANA CLUB FOR TWO YEARS WAS A TOTAL EYESORE AND WAS IN THE RIGHT OF WAY. ONE FOOT AWAY FROM THE EDGE OF THE ROAD FOR TWO YEARS IS BEYOND ME. I ASKED THIS BOARD TO CONSIDER SOME DISCUSSION ON CHAIN LINK FENCES AS THE OVERLAY DISTRICT SAYS THEY -- AND IF THE OTHER ITEM I WANT TO TALK ABOUT REALLY QUICKLY THAT'S BECOMING A TREND IS ROOF TOP LIVING. THIS BOARD HAS MADE DECISIONS IN THE PAST ABOUT ATTIC STORIES NOT BEING ALLOWED, OR CONSIDERING A THIRD STORY. NOW WE HAVE A TREND OF PEOPLE ACTUALLY BUILDING LIVING SPACE ON TOP OF THEIR HOUSE. ON TOP OF 35 FEET ALREADY BEING BUILT. TEN FEET, 15 FEET FROM THEIR ADJOINING OR ADJACENT NEIGHBOR.

I THINK THAT IT'S NOT ADDRESSED IN ZONING REGULATIONS, BUT IT HAS BECOME A BIG TREND AND I

[1. PLAT 2023-09 Eckstein Estate. The subject of this item is for the recommendation of Final Plat approval for Eckstein Estate(replat). The subject property is located east of Ponte Vedra Boulevard and south of the Duval/St. Johns County line. This plat includes 1.12 acres and 1 single-family lot. This project consists of replatting Lot 5 of Block 62 within the plat of Ponte Vedra (Map Book 5, Page 48) to combine 10 feet of the adjacent lot and relocate the building restriction line. This project is not within a planned unit development and no roads are proposed. Additionally, the proposed lot will meet minimum lot requirement specified for R-1-B zoning and minimum Comprehensive Plan requirements for properties with a Residential-B future land use designation.]

BOARD. THANK YOU VERY MUCH. >> THANK YOU, KATIE.

AT THE END OF THE MEETING, WE ARE GOING TO HAVE SOME CONVERSATION ABOUT THIS WORKSHOP, SO WE CAN PUT THAT IN THERE. THE FIRST ITEM ON OUR MEETING AGENDA IS, LET'S SEE, 2023 DASH 09, ALEX DINAH STATE. THE SUBJECT OF THIS ITEM IS FOR THE RECOMMENDATION OF FINAL APPROVAL FOR THE ESTATE. IF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS LOCATED EAST OF THE BOULEVARD AND SOUTH OF THE DUVALL ST. JOHN'S COUNTY LINE.

IT INCLUDES ONE POINT 12 ACRES AND ONE SINGLE FAMILY LOT. THIS PROJECT CONSISTS OF REPLANTING LOT FIVE OF BLOCK 62 IN THE PONTE VEDRA MAP ON FIVE, PAGE 48.

TO COMBINE TEN FEET OF THE ADJACENT LOT AND RELOCATE THE BUILDING DISTRICT LINE.

THIS PROJECT IS NOT WITHIN THE PLANT UNIT DEVELOPMENT AND NO ROADS ARE PROPOSED.

ADDITIONALLY, THE -- FOR OUR ONE V. ZONING AND MINIMUM COMPREHENSIVE PLAN REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PROPERTY FOR THE RIBS RESIDENTIAL FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION.

[00:10:04]

CAN WE HAVE THE APPLICANT? SORRY. I SHOULD ASK EVERYONE IF THEY

VISITED THIS SITE. >> YEAH. I DROVE BY THE PROPERTY AND TRY TO GET OUT OF THE CAR WITH 60 MILE AN WINDS ON SUNDAY. WE WERE ABLE TO CRAWL ON THE GROUND. I GOT THE LOOK AROUND THE PROPERTY AND I DID NOT SPEAK TO

ANYONE, AND I'M CURIOUS TO HEAR THE DISCUSSIONS. >> I FAMILIAR WITH THE PROPERTY ON WEDNESDAY AFTERNOON FROM SMITH. SHE HAD QUESTIONS IN THE PAST -- THE ANSWER IS NO I HAVE NO QUESTIONS TO HEAR THE

PRESENTATION TODAY. >> I TALKED TO MISS ELLEN AVERY-SMITH.

SHE ANSWERED ALL MY QUESTIONS AND I DID VISIT THE SITE TWICE. >> I RECEIVED A CALL FROM MISS ELLEN AVERY-SMITH, WE WERE NOT ABLE TO CONNECT. BUT I DID VISIT THE SITE FOR

THE PRESENTATION. >> I DID VISIT THE SITE AND SPOKE TO MRS. AVERY-SMITH.

>> THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR, BOARD MEMBERS FOR THE RECORD. ROGERS TOWERS, HERE IN ST.

AUGUSTINE. I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF THE EX TEEN FAMILY AND I BELIEVE THAT YOU EACH HAVE A PACKAE THAT STARTS AT THIS PAGE ON YOUR DAIS.

I BELIEVE THAT WE CAN SEE HARD COPIES BETTER THAN WE CAN SEE ON THE POWERPOINT SO FORGIVE ME FOR DOING THIS THE OLD-SCHOOL WAY, BECAUSE THERE WERE A COUPLE OF PEOPLE WHO HAD QUESTIONS ABOUT THE DETAILS AND THEY ARE EASIER TO SEE ON 11 BY 17, I CHOSE TO GO THIS ROUTE.

SO JUST BY WAY OF PRESENTATION, WE ARE TALKING ABOUT THE PROPERTY AT 131 PONTE VEDRA BOULEVARD. I WOULD POINT OUT THAT THE ECKSTEIN HOME, NOT ONLY THE PROPERTY OUTLINED IN PURPLE, BUT ALL THE NORTH OF THAT LINE, WHICH IS WHY WE ARE HERE TODAY.

I WILL EXPLAIN THAT A LITTLE BIT MORE WHEN I SHOW YOU THE ORIGINAL PLAT FROM 1941.

THIS PROPERTY HAS A FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF RESIDENTIAL B WHICH ALLOWS TO DWELLING UNITS PER ACRE. WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT WITH ONE HOME ON THIS PROPERTY IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION AND THEN ALSO THE DESIGNATION FOR THE ZONING IS OUR ONE B. THE PONTE VEDRA DISTRICT REGULATIONS, AGAIN, WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT TODAY IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE ZONING.

COMPLIANCE WITH LAND USE AND COMPLIANCE WITH ZONING. NOW WE WILL DIAL IT BACK A LONG WAY. THIS IS WHERE THE CLOSE-UP VISUALS ARE GOING TO BE INTERESTING IN YOUR PACKAGE. WHAT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT IS LITERALLY A RE-PLAT OF WHAT IS CALLED FIVE HERE. THIS PROPERTY IS ON PONTE VEDRA, BACK FROM AUGUST OF 1941.

SO A VERY OLD PLAT. THE PROPERTY WE ARE TALKING ABOUT IS THIS LOT FIVE AND THEN AGAIN GOING BACK TO, AS IT'S BEEN MODIFIED, TO ADD THE TEN FEET TO THE ECKSTEIN ZONE LOT FIVE IN THE NORTHERN AND JUST NORTH OF THIS PROPERTY LINE. THAT IS WHY THIS LINE IS A BUILDING RESTRICTION LINE, IT'S VERY IMPORTANT. WHEN YOU ADD TEN FEET TO THE PLAT BY LAW, IN CHAPTER ONE 77 BOARD OF STATUTES, YOU HAVE TO RE-PLAT LOT FIVE TO ADD THAT AND THAT'S ALL WE'RE DOING.

THAT IS ALL WE ARE DOING TODAY. LITERALLY REPLANTING TOP FIVE TO HAVE THAT TEN FEET.

IN YOUR PACKET YOU'RE GOING TO SEE A DOCUMENT CALLED RELEASED BUILDING RESTRICTION LINE FOR THE PLOT, SIGNED BY THE PONTE VEDRA CORPORATION. YOU CAN SEE THAT ON THE SECOND.

PAGE THAT IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE IT RELEASES THAT VOTING RESTRICTION LINE FOR LOT FIVE SO ON THIS FLAT NOW THIS DOCUMENT IS RECORDED THIS TEN FOOT BUILDING RESTRICTION LINE ON A FIVE GOES AWAY. AS FAR AS THE RECORDED RECORD, WHAT WE ARE TRYING TO DO THEN IS FOLLOW RIGHT BEHIND THAT SO THIS IS THREE PLAT, LITERALLY, A LOT OF FIVE.

PLUS TEN FEET IN YOUR PACKAGE YOU SHOULD ALSO HAVE A TITLE REPORT.

EVERY TIME YOU DO A RE-PLAT TO USE VACANT LAND, -- FOR ONE ACRE YOU HAVE TO

[00:15:01]

THAT IS JUST FOR THE COUNTIES THAT THEY CAN GO OUT AND DO NOURISHMENT ALONG THE BEACH WITH A NEED TO DO THAT SO AND ALSO, THE PURPOSE OF THIS IS TO MOVE THE BUILDING RESTRICTION MINE BACK TO THIS PLAT FROM 1941. THIS LINE WHICH WAS FEET FROM THE NORTHERN PROPERTY LINE. THIS REPLAT MOVE NORTH TEN FEET TO BE TEN FEET FROM THE FLORIDA PROPERTY LINE SO THAT IS REALLY THE REPLAT REQUEST IN A NUTSHELL.

I CAN ANSWER WHATEVER QUESTIONS YOU MIGHT HAVE. WE APPRECIATE YOUR ATTENTION.

DOESN'T ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? >> JUST FROM MY OWN CONFUSION,

DOES THE COUNTY NO LONGER NEED THE TEN FOOT ACCESS? >> LET ME BE VERY CLEAR, THERE IS NO ACCESS GRANTED IN ANY DOCUMENT TO THE PUBLIC BETWEEN PONTE VEDRA BOULEVARD AND THE BEACH. THE ACCESS THAT IF THERE IS -- A COPY THAT IS BETWEEN THE CURRENT OWNERS OF THE LAW AND ST. JOHN'S COUNTY. THAT REMAINS IN PLACE.

THIS TIME FEE. YOU CAN SEE IT ON THE PLAT, IT IS A TEMPORARY EASEMENT SIGNED IN JANUARY 2023. IT IS GOOD FOR 60 MONTHS. THAT EASEMENT IS IN PLACE IF

THE COUNTY NEEDS TO USE IT FOR THE NEXT FIVE YEARS. >> THE SURF RIDERS CAME IN THEY COULD TACK THAT PIECE OF PROPERTY. REALLY FOR COUNTY USE ONLY?

>> THE EASEMENT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT IS, LITERALLY, TITLE COASTAL MANAGEMENT EASEMENT.

AGAIN, DATED JANUARY OF 2023. BETWEEN THE AXE NINE AND ST. JOHN'S COUNTY.

IT IS THAT EARLY FOR TEMPORARY COASTAL MANAGEMENT EASEMENT AND RIGHT AWAY FOR THE PURPOSE OF TRAVERSING, WITH HEAVY EQUIPMENT, TO REALLY WORK, SAND, PLANT, NATIVE DUNE VEGETATION, INSTALL OR REMOVE SAND FENCING, IT'S THAT AREA. THAT SHOULD BE IN YOUR PACKET.

THAT IS THE EASEMENT WE ARE TALKING ABOUT. IT ONLY GIVES ACCESS TO ST.

JOHN COUNTY ITSELF FOR THE PURPOSE OF BEACH RESTORATION -- >> OKAY.

THANK YOU. >> DID EITHER OF THE NEIGHBORS TO THE NORTH OF THE SOUTH HAVE

ANY OBJECTION TO THIS? >> NOT TO MY KNOWLEDGE. >> DO WE HAVE ANY RECORD OF ANY

OBJECTION? >> OKAY. THANK YOU.

WITH THIS TEN FOOT CHANGE, THE PROPERTY TO THE NORTH MAY STILL BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE

SETBACK? >> YES, THERE. IT HAS THE SAME ZONING.

WE DID CHECK, IT IS COMPLIANT TO REGULATIONS, AS WELL.

THAT WAS MY QUESTION, AS WELL. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS ANNE? ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS? SEEING NONE, DO I HEAR A MOTION?

>> MISS MCKINLEY, SORRY CHRISTINE VALUES SENIOR ASSISTANT COUNTY ATTORNEY.

THIS WILL BE A RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS FOR PLOT --

>> I WILL MAKE A MOTION. >> MOTION TO RECOMMEND APPROVAL OF PLAT 2023 DASH NEAR NINE

[2. PVZAR 2023-01 35 Marsh Dunes Place. Request for a Zoning Variance to Section III.B.1 of the PVZDR to allow for a second and third Front Yard setback of 30 feet in lieu of the 40-foot requirement in R-1-B zoning to accommodate construction of a singlefamily home.]

>> SECONDED. >> OKAY, EVERYONE VOTES. THE MOTION PASSES.

5 TO 0. THE NEXT ITEM ON OUR AGENDA IS POT TO BEAT A ZONING REGULATION

[00:20:19]

>> RICH, DID YOU VISIT THE SITE? DID YOU TALK TO ANYONE? >> I VISITED THE PROPERTY.

I DID NOT SPEAK WITH ANYONE. I ALSO VISITED THE SITE, I DID NOT SPEAK WITH ANYONE.

>> I HAVE BEEN TO THE SITE I HAVE HIGH COMMUNICATION WITH THE COUNTY ON THIS PARTICULAR ITEM. IT -- THERE WAS A MEETING IN 2020 THAT REGARDED THE PLAT IN THE ENTIRE AREA AT THAT POINT IN TIME THE DEVELOPERS IN ORDER TO AVOID HAVING TO AVOID PAYING FOR A BOND IN THE DEVELOPMENT REQUESTED THAT WE APPROVE THERE PLAT. AS PART OF THE CONVERSATION DURING THAT MEETING IT WAS DISCUSSED THAT IF WE DID APPROVE THE PLAT, THERE WOULD NOT BE ANY -- THAT THAT PROPERTY WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO APPLY FOR ANY FUTURE VARIANCES.

THE ATTORNEY SAID THAT THE LANGUAGE WAS NOT PUT IN THE FINAL RULING.

IF YOU LOOK AT THE MEETING, THE DISCUSSIONS IN THE STAFF REPORT, THAT IS WHAT WAS PART OF THE

CONVERSATION. >> I VISITED THE SITE. I DID NOT SPEAK TO ANYONE.

>> I, AS WELL, VISITED THE SITE BUT DID NOT SPEAK TO ANYONE. >> ALL RIGHT.

CAN THE APPLICANT COME FORWARD? >> GOOD AFTERNOON. MY NAME IS HASSAN HUSSEIN.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR GIVING THE OPPORTUNITY TO TALK ABOUT OUR HARDSHIP.

A SINGLE FAMILY HOME TO BUILD ON THAT PARTICULAR LOT. THAT LAW, AS YOU PROBABLY HAVE SEEN, IT IS AN IRREGULAR LAW. THE FRONT OF THE LAW, FACING UPON VENTURA BOULEVARD IS 100 FEET. NORTH OF THE LAW IS 170 FEET, ROUGHLY.

SOUTH OF THE LAW, FACING THE NEIGHBOR, IS ROUGHLY 250 FEET. THE, IN A WAY, IS AN IRREGULAR SHAPE. IN ADDITION TO THAT IT IS FACING THREE ROADS.

WHICH REQUIRES 3:40 FEET SETBACKS. BECAUSE OF THAT IT DOES NOT ALLOW US TO BE ABLE TO USE THE LOT TO THE MAXIMUM THAT WE CAN. WE ARE REQUESTING ON THE FRONT OF THE LAW, FACING PONTE VEDRA BOTH OF OUR, WHICH REQUIRES A 40 FOOT SETBACK, WHICH IS SIGN.

ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE LAW FACING NEIGHBOR IS A TEN FOOT SETBACK IS FINE.

ON THE OTHER SIDE, THE NORTH SIDE OF THE LAW FACING MARSH PLACE, A DEAD-END ROAD, VERY SMALL NARROWED. THAT ONLY THREE OF THE RESIDENTS ARE LIVING ON THE ROAD. WE ARE REQUESTING A TEN FEET VARIANCE, WHICH BASICALLY WILL BE 30 FEET SET BACK IN A LITTLE OUT OF 40 FEET SETBACK. THAT WAY IT ALLOWS THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY, THE WIDTH OF THE PROPERTY BE 60 FEET, VERSUS 50 FEET.

THAT ALLOWS OUR PLAN THAT WE HAVE PUT TOGETHER, WE SPENT $30,000 FOR THE PLAN.

TO FIT IN THERE. OTHERWISE, IT IS A VERY NARROW LONG BUILDING.

THE DEPTH OF THE BUILDING IS ABOUT >> I MEAN, THE DEPTH OF THE LOT IS ABOUT 270 FEET.

THE FRONT OF IT WOULD BE 50 FEET. VERY NARROW.

THAT IS WHY WE ARE REQUESTING THE TEN FEET VARIANCE. MOST OF THE LAW ON THE ROAD.

[00:25:05]

ALL OF THEM, THEY ONLY HAVE TEN FEET SETBACK FROM EACH SIDE. IT ALLOWS THEM TO HAVE AT LEAST 80 FEET FRONTAGE, OR MORE. MINE ENDS UP BEING ABOUT 50 FEET.

WE TALKED TO ONE OF OUR NEIGHBORS SURROUNDING US. NONE OF THEM HAVE ANY ISSUES WITH THIS MATTER. SINCE MARSH PLACE IS A VERY SMALL, NARROW, DEAD END ROAD.

AN ADDITIONAL SETBACK IS NOT GOING TO BE REFLECTED TO ANYTHING.

NO BOND IS GOING TO NOTICE IT. IT MAKES THE HOUSE MORE SYMMETRIC.

IT IS GOING TO BE A LOT NICER HOUSE FOR PONTE VEDRA BOULEVARD.

EVEN ONE OF OUR NATION, 34 WASHINGTON PLACE. RIGHT ACROSS THE STREET FROM US. THEIR LAW IS IDENTICAL TO US. A YEAR OR TWO AGO THEY WERE TRYING TO BILL. THEY RAN INTO THE SAME SITUATION.

THEY REQUESTED A VARIANCE, 15 FEET A BELIEVE. IT WOULD GRANTED TO THEM.

WE ARE ONLY REQUESTING A, TEN FEET VARIANTS. REALLY WOULD APPRECIATE IF YOU WOULD CONSIDER THAT. I WILL ASK TO BUILD A HOUSE THAT IS GOING TO BE A NICER HOUSE. MORE SUITABLE FOR US. IT WOULD BE A NICE TWO HAVES FOR THE NEIGHBORHOOD. AND, WITH THE PRICE OF THE LAW IN THAT AREA, WE REALLY HAVE TO BUILD SOMETHING THAT WILL BE PRESENTABLE FOR THE PRICES AND THE AREA ON TOP OF IT.

WE HAVE TO SPEND A WHOLE LOT OF MONEY RIGHT NOW. PUTTING THE PLAN TOGETHER BASED ON THIS. IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I

WOULD BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. >> YES, NO.

YOU CAN GO, RICH. >> VERY INTERESTING PIECE OF PROPERTY.

WHAT IS THE AMOUNT OF FILLING, THE AMOUNT THAT YOU WILL HAVE TO BRING IN TO FILL IN THAT

HOLE? >> IT'S THE OTHER ISSUE WE RUN INTO, THE TOP-OLOGY.

THAT PARTICULAR LAW IS HIGHER COMPARED TO THE NEIGHBORS SIDE. WE HAVE TO BRING IT DOWN.

BECAUSE OF THAT ISSUE, WE NEED A WIDER FRONTAGE. AND THAT WAS THE OTHER THING THAT THE ENGINEER DEFINED TOWARD THE END, THEY TOLD ME THAT THEY REALLY NEED IT BECAUSE OF THE TOP-OLOGY, WE HAVE TO BRING IT DOWN TO MATCH THE NEIGHBOR, WE DON'T WANT IT

SITTING THERE VERSUS THEM. >> IT WOULD BE HIGHER OR LOWER AT THE STREET LEVEL?

WHAT IS IT CALLED, MARSH PLACE? >> MARSH DUNES PLACE. IT WOULD BE THE SAME LEVEL, IDENTICAL AS THE OTHER NEIGHBOR. 34 AND 35 MARSH DUNES PLACE, THEY ARE IDENTICAL.

THEY ARE ON THE NORTH AND SOUTH OF THE MARSH DUNE. THAT'S THE SAME ISSUE THEY HAD.

>> SECOND ISSUE. YOU ARE ASKING TO MOVE THE HOME CLOSER TO A ONE A?

>> NO. IT'S NOT FROM A ONE A. IT WILL BE 40 FEET SETBACK SO THAT STATES AND THE SETBACK FROM THE NEIGHBOR, SOUTH OF THE LOT, IT WILL BE -- THAT STAYS INTACT. THE ONLY THING WE ARE REQUESTING IS TEN FEET VARIANCE FROM THE MARSH DUNES PLACE, WHICH IF YOU LOOK AT IT IT IS JUST A VERY NARROW ROAD OTHER THAN THE RESIDENT OF THOSE FOUR BUILDINGS, AND NOBODY ELSE IS GOING TO --

>> RIGHT, RIGHT. OKAY, THANK YOU. >> THANK YOU.

>> IT'S A VERY INTERESTING LOT. I DON'T THINK I'VE SEEN ANOTHER LOT THAT HAS THREE ROADS FRONTING THE LOT. KIND OF INTERESTING. DO YOU KNOW IF THE MARSH DUNES PLACE -- IS THAT ACTUALLY A COUNTY ROAD? OR IS IT A PRIVATE ROAD?

>> AS FAR AS I KNOW, AGAIN, I COULD BE WRONG, BUT AS FAR AS I KNOW, IT'S A PROPERTY.

>> IT ONLY SERVES THREE HOUSES, OR FOUR HOUSES? >> INCLUDING OURS, IT BECOMES

[00:30:04]

FOUR HOUSES. >> FOUR HOUSES. IT'S ALMOST MORE OF A SHARED

DRIVEWAY THAN A ROAD? >> IT'S A SMALL ROAD. AND THESE FOUR HOUSES ARE PLACED PRETTY NICE. THEY ARE PRETTY FAR AWAY FROM EACH OTHER.

I DON'T KNOW WHO MANAGED IT BUT THEY DID A GREAT JOB. IT'S ONE COMMON DRIVEWAY THAT

COMES IN AND GOES TO FOUR HOUSES. >> YEAH.

IT'S REALLY THAT. THAT IS MY QUESTION, THANK YOU. >> THE LAST TIME I LOOKED AT COUNTY RIGS PAPERS WERE NOT ALLOWED NEW STREETS. [LAUGHTER] THAT WAS AN INDICATION IT WAS NOT A COUNTY WROTE, MORE OF A DRIVEWAY.

>> I HAVE A QUICK QUESTION. >> YES, SIR. >> YOU BOUGHT THIS NOT ALMOST SIX MONTHS AGO. WERE YOU AWARE OF THE SETBACK AT THAT TIME?

>> YES AND NO, OKAY? I WAS UNDER THE IMPRESSION THAT FROM PONTE VEDRA BOULEVARD, WE HAVE TO HAVE 50 FEET SET BACK. I THOUGHT THAT MARSH DUNES PLACE WAS CONSIDERED AND NOT A REAL ROAD. I ZOOMED THAT ONE WILL BE TEN FEET.

THEN WE FOUND OUT IT'S ACTUALLY A ROAD ROAD. EVEN THOUGH IT'S A ROAD, IT'S REALLY AN ALLEY. IT IS SOME SORT OF DRIVEWAY FOR THOSE FOUR HOUSES THAT'S WHY.

UNFORTUNATELY WE PAID PRETTY GOOD MONEY FOR IT. IT'S A VERY VALUABLE LOT.

IT'S A VERY GOOD AREA. BUT SITTING, HAVING 3:40 FEET SETBACKS ON THE REGULAR LOT, IT IS HONESTLY CHOKING US IN REGARD TO THE, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN SEE HOW MUCH WE PAID FOR THE LOT AND EVERYTHING. IT'S A BEAUTIFUL LAW, BEAUTIFUL AREA.

I REALLY DON'T WANT TO HAVE IT AS A LONG, NARROW HOUSE SITTING IN THERE ON TOP OF IT AND RUNNING INTO ENGINEERING ISSUES BECAUSE OF THE TYPOLOGY. I DON'T KNOW IF YOU GUYS HAD THE OPPORTUNITIES TO GO TO THE NEXT DOOR NEIGHBOR WHICH THE HOUSE IS ALMOST COMPLETE.

WE ARE WAY HIGHER COMPARED TO THEM SO THAT IS THE OTHER ISSUE THAT WE RUN INTO.

>> DO YOU KNOW HOW LONG AGO, I THINK YOU MENTIONED, IT HOW LONG UNDER THE OTHER VARIANTS

IN YOUR NEIGHBOR WAS APPROVED BY THE BOARD? >> HALF A YEAR AGO, ROUGHLY.

I'M SURE THEY HAD A SIMILAR SITUATION. >> CAN I ASK, IS THAT THE HOUSE THAT IS DIRECTLY ACROSS THE STREET? MORE OF THAT WAS THE RIVERSIDE

BACK WAY. >> THAT OCCURRED AT THE JUNE MEETING.

I WAS NOT AT THE JUNE MEETING, SO I CAN'T SAY FOR SURE. >> I THINK IT WAS.

>> I THINK IT WAS THE JUNE MEETING. A YEAR AND A HALF PRIOR, WE ISSUED A ANOTHER VARIANTS ON A DIFFERENT LOT FOR A DIFFERENT SET OF CIRCUMSTANCES.

ORIGINALLY THE VARIANCE YOU WOULD HAVE TWO YEARS AGO WAS TO REDUCE THE REAR SETBACK AND ALSO REDUCE THE FRONT SETBACK. AND THEN THEY CAME BACK TO US AND WANTED TO KEEP THE REAR SETBACK AS IT WASN'T THE JUNE MEETING AND SLIGHTLY INCREASE THE FRONT SETBACK.

I REMEMBER THE FIGURES ARE NOT WITH ME. WE HAD A VARIANCE ON THE LOT ACROSS THE STREET, WHICH IS INTERESTING COMPARED WITH WHAT YOU SAID THAT YOU AREN'T

SUPPOSED TO HAVE ANY. >> THAT IS WHAT IS TROUBLING ME. AT THAT MEETING IN NOVEMBER,

BRAD'S GOT, ROBERT VECTOR, TIM AND I WERE THERE. >> WAS I THERE?

>> NO. THE WHOLE CONVERSATION WAS BETWEEN US AND RICK AND JAMES MCCARTHY, WHO WERE THE DEVELOPERS FOR THAT ENTIRE MARSH DUNES.

THEY WANTED TO AVOID HAVING TO PAY FOR THE LOT. THERE WAS THE COUNTY THAT HAD COME FORWARD -- THEY HAVE A PROCESS FOR DOING LAND DEVELOPMENT.

THEY SAID, IF YOU COME AND ASKED THEM FOR THIS, THEN YOU WILL NOT BE ABLE TO ASK FOR THE

VARIANCES ON THE PROPERTY. >> I'VE NEVER HEARD THAT BEFORE, BUT OKAY.

>> I WENT BACK AND LISTENED TO THE TAPE. I DID TALK TO BRANDON AND

[00:35:01]

THEN. >> OKAY. WE MISSED IT.

OKAY. >> YEAH, SO THAT'S MY ISSUE. I CAN REMEMBER SAYING, OKAY, WE WILL PROVE THIS. THERE WAS A CONVERSATION ABOUT THE SIZE OF, PARTICULARLY, THE TWO LOTS YOU ARE TALKING ABOUT. THE DEVELOPER WANTED TO MAXIMIZE THE NUMBER OF LOTS.

THESE LOTS ARE GOING TO BE LONG AND SKINNY. THEY BASICALLY ARGUED THAT THEY ARE STILL VERY GOOD LOTS. WHAT I SAID WAS, OKAY, LET'S DO THE MATH.

IF YOU LOOK AT THE BUILDABLE AREA AS CURRENTLY DESIGNED, YOU HAVE AROUND 6300 SQUARE FEET.

WHICH SEEMS LIKE A PRETTY SUBSTANTIAL -- >> WE ARE TRYING TO GO BELOW 6000 ON OUR THING. IT'S NOT GOING TO FIT BECAUSE OF THE SETBACK.

THE FRONTAGE WILL BE 50 FEET AND WILL GO WAY, WAY DEEP, UNDER 80 FEET DEEP.

IT'S GOING TO BE A VERY NARROW, LONG BUILDING. AND ALSO, THE TOPOLOGY OF THE LOT WILL CAUSE PROBLEMS COMPARED TO OUR NEIGHBORS. AND THAT IS PART OF THE PROBLEM THAT THE OTHER LOTS AT FOUR MARSH DUNES PLACE CAME AND REQUESTED.

I KNOW THEY HAD OTHER ISSUES. YEAH THERE WERE THE TWO VARIANTS, OURS IS ONLY ONE AND

IT'S BECAUSE OF THE SAME IDENTICAL ISSUE THEY HAD. >> AND JUST FOR ME, BASED A LITTLE HARSH, BUT WHY DID YOU DESIGN A HOUSE THAT WOULD BACK INTO THE SPOT, INTO THE WITH YOU HAVE AVAILABLE TO BUILD THAT? WHY DESIGN THE FEATURES FOR A

HOUSE THAT -- >> SAY THAT ONE MORE TIME. I'M SORRY.

>> IF YOU LOOK AT THE LOT RIGHT NOW AND IF THE SETBACKS, THERE ARE 6300 SQUARE FEET TO THE HOUSE. THE POOL, WHATEVER YOU WOULD LIKE.

THE QUESTION I HAVE IS, WHY WOULD YOU DESIGN A HOUSE THAT FIT IN THAT 6300 SQUARE FEET AS

-- >> IF THE LAW WAS A SQUARE, IT WOULD HELP ME TREMENDOUSLY.

THE LOT IS KIND OF A TRAPEZOID. 170 FEET, AND THE OTHER END IS 250 FEET.

PART OF THE END OF THE LOT IS KIND OF NOT USABLE FOR ANY CONSTRUCTION.

YOU UNDERSTAND WHAT I MEAN? THAT'S WHY IT THROWS EVERYTHING OFF.

IT WAS A SQUARE LOTS, IT WOULD'VE BEEN YES, I COULD HAVE TRULY HAVE USED AND BUILD 6300 SQUARE FEET. IT IS KIND OF IN A REGULAR SHAPE. THE SETBACKS WASTE A LOT OF THAT SPACE.

OTHERWISE, I'M NOT TRYING TO BUILD ANYTHING EXTRAORDINARY. I'M JUST TRYING TO BUILD ROUGHLY BETWEEN FIVE AND 6000 SQUARE FEET. I AM NOT TRYING TO BUILD A

MANSION OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT. >> JUST TO CLARIFY, 6300 IS A RECTANGLE WITHIN THAT

TRAPEZOID. THAT'S WHAT I AM SAYING. >> WE TALKED TO A LOT OF THEM AND 50 FEET FRONTAGE AND THE GARAGE AND EVERYTHING, ANYTHING IS POSSIBLE.

EVEN IF 20 FEET FRONTAGE TO BUILD THE HOUSE WAS NOT GOING TO BE A NICE HOUSE IN THAT AREA.

YES, YOU CAN BUILD A HOUSE WITH A 20 FOOT FRONTAGE IF YOU REALLY WANT TO.

BUT IT WILL NOT BE A LIVABLE HOUSE. THAT'S WHY WE ARE ASKING TO MAKE IT LONGER SO IT WOULD BE -- IT WON'T BE LONG AND NARROW.

BECAUSE PART OF THE GARAGE WILL TAKE PART OF IT AS WELL. >> CHIP, DID YOU HAVE A

QUESTION OR COMMENT? >> SO, IF I UNDERSTAND YOU CORRECTLY, WHAT YOU ARE SAYING IS THAT THERE WAS NO WAY, GIVEN THE LIMITATIONS, TO DO ANYTHING ARCHITECTURALLY INTERESTING.

IT WOULD BASICALLY BE A CIGAR OF A HOUSE ROAD? >> YES.

THE GARAGE IS GOING TO TAKE A PORTION OF THAT AS WELL. THE HOUSE WILL BE VERY NARROW.

>> I HAVE TO LET YOU KNOW THAT THAT IS THE SHAPE OF MY HOUSE. [LAUGHTER]

[00:40:11]

>> I MEAN, ANYTHING I CAN GET OUT OF IT, TEN FEET WOULD BE IDEAL.

IF THERE IS SPACE I REALLY NEED TO COMPLETE THE PLAN THAT I HAVE.

EVEN IF I END UP WITH SOMETHING SLIGHTLY LESS, I CAN PROBABLY GET BY AND DON'T HAVE TO REDO

THE WHOLE THING ALL OVER AGAIN. >> YEAH. DOES ANYONE HAVE ANY QUESTIONS

OR COMMENTS? >> SORRY, JUST QUICKLY. I WASN'T HERE A YEAR AND A HALF AGO. THE REASONS WHY THE VARIANCES WERE APPROVED FOR THE NEIGHBOR, THE TWO DIFFERENT VARIANCES. WAS THERE A HARDSHIP? OR WAS THERE A PLEATING FOR

EXTRA SPACE? I'M JUST TRYING -- >> IT WAS A VERY SIMILAR ARGUMENT, THE LOTS ARE VERY NARROW, IT WAS EIGHT -- LATZA VERY NARROW RELIEF IN BOTH VARIANCES. WANT TO PUT THE HOUSE FURTHER BACK AND THE OTHER ONE TO ALLOW THE SETBACK FORWARD. I THINK THE SETBACK THEY FINALLY SETTLED ON WAS -- I'M NOT SURE. I'M LEANING TOWARD PROBABLY APPROVING THIS MAINLY BECAUSE IT'S A STRANGE A LOT WITH THE THREE ROADS ON DIFFERENT SIDES. IT'S NOT A PUBLIC ROAD, IT'S A DRIVEWAY. WE CAME THE SAME RELIEF TO SOMEBODY ACROSS THE STREET.

THERE ARE NO PRECEDENCE BUT THIS, TO ME, SIMILAR OR NOT, I DON'T THINK IT WOULD BE FAIR.

>> IF IT WASN'T -- I MEAN, IF -- IT WOULD NOT BE STANDING HERE REQUESTING THAT. AND THE NEIGHBOR, WHICH IS IDENTICAL HOURS, THEY SPENT PROBABLY FIVE, SIX MONTHS TRYING TO GET THE VARIANT. THEY WERE GOING THROUGH A VERY SIMILAR SITUATION. WE ARE EVEN ASKING FOR LESS VARIANCE BECAUSE WE ARE TRYING TO BUILD SOMETHING FEASIBLE, KIND OF MAXIMIZE THE BAD SHAPE OF THE LOT, AND ALSO DON'T END UP WITH SOMETHING NARROW AND UGLY IN THE AREA. THEN WE WILL BE THE LAST OWNER

OF THAT PROPERTY. YOU KNOW? >> THERE WAS OPPOSITION ACROSS

THE STREET AS WELL. >> ACTUALLY, THE OPPOSITION IN JUNE WAS FROM THE NEIGHBORS BEHIND. THEY WANTED TO INCREASE THE SETBACK IN THE REAR PROPERTY ABOVE THE TEN FEET. IT WAS A STRANGE REQUEST.

THEY WERE VERY ADAMANT THAT IT WAS THE RIGHT THING TO DO. THEY SHOULDN'T HAVE A FURTHER SETBACK. MOVE THE HOUSE FARTHER TOWARD THE ROAD.

WE DID NOT WANT TO DO THAT. WE SETTLED ON LETTING THEM HAVE THE OPTION OF WHICHEVER VARIANCE THEY WANTED TO GO WITH. ACTUALLY ONE OF THEM EXPIRED. GIVEN THE TEN FOOT AND I THINK 27 FEET, I'M NOT SURE OF THAT. THAT WAS THE OPPOSITION. THEY WANT TO THE HOUSE MOVED

FORWARD, FARTHER FORWARD TO THE FRONT OF THE ROAD. >> CAN I GET A CLARIFICATION? IT HAS TO DO WITH THE ROADS THAT JOHN KEEPS CALLING PUBLIC ROAD.

THE ONLY ONE THERE IS -- AND IF THE OTHER TWO ARE THIS PAVED PRIVATE ROAD.

DO WE KNOW THE EXACT MEASUREMENT WHEN PRIVATE ROADS ARE IN THE DISCUSSION? DO THEY HAVE A SEPARATE RESTRICTION LINE THEN YOU ARE PUBLIC ROADS? GROWTH MANAGEMENT IS INDICATING, NO. THE SETBACK IS THE SAME WHETHER

IT IS A PUBLIC ROUTE OR NOT. >> THANK YOU. MY OTHER OBSERVATION AHEAD WHEN I WAS OVER THERE, THE HOUSE ACROSS THE STREET I CAN'T BELIEVE TWO PEOPLE -- AND I CAN UNDERSTAND WHY THE HOMEOWNER THAT IS ALREADY THERE HAD SOME PROBLEMS. WHEN YOU LOOK AT IT RIGHT NOW, FROM MARCH -- IS ALL OVER THE PLACE.

YOU LOOK AT THE HOUSE ACROSS THE STREET FROM THIS PROPERTY, IT'S LIKE AN APARTMENT BUILDING. SUPER TALL. LOOKS LIKE THERE IS ONLY 15 FEET BETWEEN THE REAR OF BOTH HOMES. THIS HOUSE, POTTERY OR WHATEVER THE NEXT STREAK IS. IT JUST LOOKS, TO ME, WHY WOULD YOU WANT TO LIVE LIKE THAT?

[00:45:02]

TO, BASED ON WHAT I OBSERVED FROM ACROSS THE STREET. >> TO SUMMARIZE, YOU ARE IN FAVOR OF CAPPING THE VARIANTS ON THE NORTHERN SIDE OF THE PROPERTY?

BUT NOT ON THE WESTERN SIDE? >> YES. >> WELL, AND I GET BACK TO THE BACK OF THAT SPLIT. TWO HOMES. IT PROPERTY.

SO, IT'S INTERESTING. THE OTHER THING OUTRIGHT ABOUT IS UNDER ANY KINDS OF DRAINAGE? A LOT OF THOSE ARE BOUND WAY DOWN. 25 OR 30 FEET.

THAT LITTLE BIT OF AREA IS MORE LEVEL WITH THE ROAD. I WONDER HOW MUCH IRRIGATION, HOW MUCH THAT TAKES OFF -- WITH SOMEBODY IN THE COUNTY HAVE ALREADY ELECTED THAT I KNOW THAT THAT IS NOT OUR CONCERN BUT ANYWAYS I WOULD BE OKAY.

MOVING TOWARDS THE STREET, MOVING WEST BECAUSE OF THE WAY THAT PRIVATE ROAD --

>> ONE PUBLIC COMMENT. MARK THERE LYNN. SORRY --

>> I'M MARK SERLING. I OWE 30 FOR MARCH DALE. WHEN WE BOUGHT THE PROPERTY IN MARCH OF 21, IT WAS CONVEYED TO US THE ONE OF THE VARIANCE WAS IN PLACE.

IT WAS TO MOVE THE NORTHERN SET BACK FROM TEN FEET TO 20 FEET. THE SOUTH THAT BACK -- THEY WANTED TO GIVE US 15 FEET. WHEN WE WENT UNDER CONSTRUCTION WE LOOKED AT THIS.

THEY ZONING, HE ORIGINAL ZONING SHOWED ALL THE VARIANTS. WE CALL THE COUNTY WE WANT TO CLARIFICATION. WHERE ARE WE SUPPOSED TO PARK THIS? THEY SAID YOU COULD DO ONE OF THE OTHER. OKAY, SO WE WENT AHEAD OF MAJOR THIS UP. WE HAND THE SOUTH LAW ABOUT TWO AND A HALF FEET OVER THE ORIGINAL DESIGN ON TO THE NEW VARIANCE AT THIS POINT WE HAVE A NEW NEIGHBOR WHO HAS BOUGHT THIS HOUSE RIGHT BEHIND US. A FEW DAYS AFTER WE WERE GIVEN OUR PERMITS ONCE WE DID THAT THEY STARTED THROWING A FIT. THEY DIDN'T LIKE THAT. THEY WANTED US TO ACTUALLY GO TO THE VARIANCE OF THE LAW. LIKE MR. HUSSEIN, WE HAD ALREADY INVESTED QUITE A BIT ON OUR PLANS. WE ARE ALREADY ENTERING CONSTRUCTION.

SO, WE ASKED FOR AN EMERGENCY MEETING. HE GRANTED THAT.

LEE ASKED HER TURN A FOOT VARIANCE TO OUR SOUTH TO FIX THE ISSUE.

SO, WE WERE GRANTED THAT VARIANCE. LATER ON ACADEMIC LAND THAT THE VARIANCE WAS APPEALED BY THE SAME PEOPLE THAT OPPOSED TO THE VARIANCE TO BEGIN WITH.

THE COMMISSIONERS UPHELD THE ORIGINAL VARIANCE. EXCUSE ME, THAT NEW VARIANTS WHICH WAS ALSO UNANIMOUSLY VOTED FOR IN PAST. AND LIKELY THE PERSON MOST IMMEDIATE TO MR. HUSSEIN, CLEAR ACROSS THE STREET, I DON'T HAVE ANY ISSUE WITH THIS.

IN FACT I WANTED TO BE STRAIGHT ABOUT MY OWN PROPERTY. AS YOU GUYS MIGHT REVIEW MR. HUSSEIN'S. IF YOU HAVE ANY MORE QUESTIONS, LET ME KNOW.

>> THANK YOU. I THINK YOU HAVE A GREAT VIEW OUT OF YOUR BACKYARD.

[LAUGHTER] IF I COULD MAKE A CORRECTION ON RECORD ON THAT.

>> IT IS NOT QUITE DONE YET. LOOKING FOR A LITTLE MORE COLOR ADDED TO IT.

>> THAT IS HOW I REMEMBER THE MEETING IN JUNE SO THANK YOU. >> ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FOR THE BOARD? AND SUMMARY I THINK I EXPLAINED MY POSITION.

[00:50:05]

>> I'M SORRY, MADAM CHAIRWOMAN. IF THAT WAS THE CASE, IF THAT IS ABOUT THE DEVELOPERS SAY THAT AND THE GENTLEMAN WHO JUST BOOK SAID HE PURCHASED A HOUSE WITH A CONVEYED VARIANCE --

>> SOMEONE ELSE BOUGHT SOMETHING. >> OKAY.

>> [INAUDIBLE] VARIANCE NUMBER TWO ON THAT PARTICULAR LAW.

THERE SEEMS TO HAVE BEEN A LOT OF -- >> MISUNDERSTANDING?

>> ISSUES WITH THE LAUNCH THAT WERE ORIGINALLY -- BUT PEOPLE WHO BOUGHT THEM.

>> UNDERSTOOD. ANY OTHER COMMENTS? THE ANYONE WANT TO MAKE A

MOTION? >> I WILL MAKE A MOTION. MOTION TO APPROVE PVZAR 23 DASH

[3. PVZAR 2023-04 Hodge Residence (1154 Ponte Vedra Blvd). Request for a Zoning Variance to Section VIII.N.2 of the Ponte Vedra Zoning Regulations to allow for a retaining wall to exceed the four (4) foot height requirement in R-1-B Zoning.]

LISTED IN THE STAFF REPORT. >> SECOND. >> MOTION HAS PASSED 4 TO 1.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH, I APPRECIATE IT. THE THIRD ITEM ON OUR AGENDA IS FOR POINT TO BE THE ZONING VARIANCE 2020 30 FOR PONDER BEAT A BOULEVARD THE -- PONTE VEDRA ZONING REGULATION FOR ALLOW A RETAINING WALL TO EXCEED THE FOUR FOOT HIGH --

RICH, DID YOU VISIT THIS PROPERTY? >> AND YES.

ANOTHER VERY INTERESTING PROPERTY, I FOUND. I DO NOT SAY THE PICTURE OF THE TREE. IS THAT AN HOUR PACKET? --

NOT IN THIS >> IT'S IN THE PACKET. >> RIGHT.

SO, I DID WALK AROUND THE PROPERTY. I DID NOT SPEAK TO ANYONE.

>> I VISITED THE SITE. I DID NOT SPEAK WITH ANYONE. >> I VISITED THE SITE AND DID

NOT SPEAK WITH ANYONE. >> I VISITED THE SITE, DID NOT SPEAK WITH ANYONE.

>> I TOO VISITED THE SITE AND DID NOT SPEAK WITH ANYONE. >> WITH THE APPS WE CAN COME

FORWARD? >> HELLO. I THOMAS WILL CHARGE LIKE WITH MARK'S HIGHLAND HOME. I'M A PROJECT MANAGER. THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR TAKING THE TIME TO HEAR ME TODAY. I WILL TRY TO BE BRIEF. I FEEL LIKE IT IS PRETTY STRAIGHTFORWARD. THE PURPOSE OF OUR VARIANCE IS TO INCREASE THE HEIGHT OF A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED RETAINING WALL. BEYOND THE CURRENT CODE MAXIMUM OF FOUR FEET IN PORTIONS OF THE WALL TO APPROXIMATELY A MAXIMUM OF TEN FREE.

THE MAIN PURPOSE IS TO MAINTAIN -- EVERYONE HAS VISITED SAYS SITE.

TO MAINTAIN THE UNIQUE TOPOGRAPHY OF THE SITE. NOT JUST 1:50 IN THAT STRETCH OF THE PROPERTY LINE ON THE SOUTH AND ADJOINING 17 INCH OAK BED.

IF WE WERE TO TAKE DOWN THE 50-INCH, -- MORE ON THE PROPERTY WOULD HAVE TO BE REMOVED. WITHOUT INCREASING THE HEIGHT OF THE RETAINING WALL, WE FEEL THAT THE PROPERTY POSES AN INCREASED RISK OF WASHOUT OF THAT TOPOGRAPHY ON THE EXISTING HOW. AND TREES POSSIBLY DYING. POTENTIALLY FALLING.

THE HOME IN THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE NEIGHBORING HOME, AS WELL. SO, OUR HARDSHIP CLAIM IS DUE TO, AS PREVIOUSLY, STATED DUE TO THE UNIQUE NATURAL BIOGRAPHY OF PROJECT.

IT JASON LA TO THE SOUTH, THE RETAINING WALL AS REQUIRED IN ORDER TO FEASIBLY BUILD ON THE PROPERTY. THEY'RE ALSO EXIST A 50 INCH OPENING ALONG THE PROPERTY LINE. IN VARIOUS PROXIMITY, DOING THE CLEANING EFFORTS GREAT EFFORT WAS GIVEN TO PRESERVE THESE TREES. UPON COMPLETION OF CLEANING IT AND WE DISCOVERED THE ROOT SYSTEM OF THE TREES EXTENDED FURTHER THAN WAS ORIGINALLY PRESENT. IN AN EFFORT TO PRESERVE BOTH OF THESE BEAUTIFUL TREES AND KEEP THE NATURAL TOPOGRAPHY INK LIKE -- A MAXIMUM IT WILL BE HIGHER THAN INVOLVED. OTHERWISE THE TREES WILL MOST LIKELY NOT BE ABLE TO BE

[00:55:03]

LOTS OBVIOUSLY, THE TWO THREES IN QUESTION, A 50-INCH OAK IN THE 70-INCH OAK OFF TO THE RIGHT-HAND SIDE WHICH ARE, PRETTY MUCH, LOOKING AT THE VERY TOP OF THE HOW.

THIS IS ANOTHER LOOK. ACTUALLY STANDING PRETTY CLOSE TO THE SOUTHERN PROPERTY LINE LOOKING UP THE HILL THAT WE JUST MOVED ACROSS. DIRECTLY AT THE 50-INCH OAK WITH THE 17-INCH OAK BEHIND. IT FURTHER ON BEHIND THAT YOU CAN -- THIS IS STRADDLING CLOSE TO THE NORTHERN SIDE OF THE PROPERTY LINE.

LOOKING INTO THE HILL AS IT SWEEPS ACROSS THE LAW. THE TOP OF THE SCREEN SO YOU CAN SEE THE IMPACT OF THE TOPOGRAPHY OF THE LOT THIS IS AN ALTERNATIVE YOU.

A LITTLE CLOSER TO A1A. AGAIN, JUST TO GIVE A DIFFERENT VANTAGE POINT.

THIS WOULD BE THE ORIGINAL TYPOGRAPHICAL SURVEY DONE IN THE LOT PRIOR TO CLEANING.

ANY GREEN HIGHLIGHTED AREAS SHOWING THE TOP MAXIMUM HEIGHTS OF THE LAW, WHICH KIND OF COINCIDES WITH THE TREETIONS. THE YELLOW BEING THE LOW POINT OF THE LAW AT 3.7.

THE GREEN BEING, APPROXIMATELY, 22 FEET IN ELEVATION. YOU CAN SEE WITH ALL THE GRAY LINES ON THEIR THE STEEP SLIPPING HAIL THAT GOES ACROSS THE LOT.

THIS IS A ZOOMED IN AREA OF THE HILL IN QUESTION. PROVIDES A UNIQUE TOPOGRAPHY OF

THE LOT >> THIS IS THE TREE SURVEY, AGAIN, COINCIDING WITH THE TOPOL PREVIOUSLY SHOWN.

-- STRADDLING THE PROPERTY LINE. THE NEARBY 70-INCH OF WHICH IS NEARBY -- . THIS IS OUR ORIGINALLY PLANNED SITE PLAN IT WAS PREVIOUSLY APPROVED SHOWING OUR FOUR FOOT RETAINING WALL.

WHICH IS COLORED HERE IN ORANGE, AND TO TREES, 15 GIOKOS EMMY INTO OAK IN GREEN

>> THIS IS A LITTLE BIT MORE OF A ZOOMED IN JUST BE ABLE TO CLOSELY SEE.

YOU CAN SEE HIGHLIGHTED IN YELLOW THE LINES THAT SHOW STEEP ELEVATION IN THE SLOPE.

THIS IS THE PROPOSED LAYOUT. I'M HERE TO HAVE THE VARIANCE REQUEST TODAY.

THE AREA IN PURPLE IS AREAS WE FEEL WOULD EXCEED THE -- WAS PLANNED AT 11 FOOT WITH A MAXIMUM HEIGHT TO 17 FEET IN THE PURPLE AREA. YOU CAN SEE PLUS THREE, PLUS THREE, PLUS THREE AS THE WALL INCREASES AND MIRRORS OF THE TOPOGRAPHY.

THIS WOULD BE A CROSS SECTION LOOKING FROM THE WESTERN OR BACK OF THE HOME TOWARDS A1A.

ON THE RIGHT-HAND SIDE WOULD BE THE PROPOSED RETAINING WALL AND DASHED ON THE RIGHT-HAND SIDE AS WELL IS -- AS THE WALL KIND OF TURNS ACROSS, YOU KIND OF SEE A LITTLE BIT BETTER HERE, HIGHLIGHTED, THE CORRESPONDING PURPLE, AND THEN THE GREEN SHOWING WHERE THE EXISTING 50-INCH OAK LOCATION WOULD BE. IT SHOWS YOU A DIFFERENT VANTAGE POINT. THIS IS SORT OF A ROUGHLY SKETCHED SET OF PICTURES SHOWING GREENE BEING THE BOTTOM OF THE WALL LOCATION, BLUE BEING THE CURRENT TOP OF THE WALL IF WE KEPT IN THE WALL AT A FOUR FOOT HEIGHT. AND THEN THE PROPOSED NEW HEIGHT TO MIRROR THE TOPOGRAPHY. AS YOU CAN SEE, WE REALLY WANT TO KEEP THE WALL HEIGHT AS MINIMAL AS POSSIBLE, JUST IN ORDER TO PRESERVE THE TREE AND THE TOPOGRAPHY AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE. SO AGAIN, YOU CAN SEE AT THE SAME PROPOSED WALL FROM THE NORTHERN PROPERTY LINE. AND JUST ANOTHER VANTAGE POINT. I'M SORRY IF THIS IS A LITTLE REDUNDANT. THE PROPOSED MATERIAL IS A WHITE VINYL MATERIAL.

[01:00:09]

THAT'S ALL FOR MY PRESENTATION. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. I'M WILLING TO ANSWER YOUR

QUESTIONS. >> I HAVE TWO QUESTIONS. ONE, GIVEN THE MAXIMUM HEIGHT

OF THE 20 FOOT AREA WHERE THE OAK SITS TODAY -- >> YES, SIR.

>> CORRECT ME, YOU DID HAVE A 17 FOOT TOP OF THE WALL, CORRECT?

>> THAT'S CORRECT, YES. >> IS THERE EVER A TIME WHERE THAT WALL WILL BE SEEN FROM A VISUAL PERSPECTIVE DRIVING PAST? MY QUESTION IS, WILL YOU BE ABLE TO SEE THE TOP HEIGHT OF

THAT WALL? >> AS YOU COME SOUTH DOWN A1A, YOU WILL SEE THE WALL, THE NATURAL TOPOGRAPHY WILL BE UP HIGHER ON THE WALL. WE WILL BE LOOKING DOWN INTO IT.

THE MAJORITY OF THE VISUAL IMPACT WILL BE ON PROPERTY OWNERS WITHIN THE WALL DIRECTLY OUTSIDE THEIR HOUSE. I THINK THE HOUSE IS PROBABLY GOING TO BE THE AMOUNT OF WALL

THAT YOU ARE ACTUALLY GOING TO SEE. >> YEAH OKAY.

YOU HAVE IN YOUR PACKET A LETTER OF RECOMMENDATION. THEY ARE SAYING THEY HAVE NO PROBLEM. YOU ALSO HAVE A LETTER OF OPPOSITION.

BY THIS ELEVATION PICTURED HERE, CAN YOU DESCRIBE WHO IS IN FAVOR AND WHO IS AN OPPOSITION?

>> I HAVEN'T SEEN ANY OF THE -- I KNOW THE PERSON THAT WAS IN OPPOSITION HAS REMOVED THAT, AS

FAR AS I KNOW. >> THAT WOULD BE THE 1152, THE NORTH PROPERTY.

IT WASN'T OPPOSITION? >> BRANDON, -- THE HOUSE IN THE NORTH, THAT'S 1:11 -- THE HOUSE THAT DOES HAVE SUPPORT FOR IT IS THE HOME TO THE SOUTH, 1156. JUST FOR THE RECORD, THE HOME DIRECTLY TO THE NORTH HAS

REMOVED THEIR OPPOSITION. >> I'M SORRY, LAST POST. I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH THE STREET. IN THIS PICTURE, IT LOOKS LIKE A LOT HERE.

IS THAT A FUTURE BUILDABLE LOT IN THAT PHOTOGRAPH? OR WILL THAT REMAIN VEGETATION?

>> THAT'S A SOUTH DIRECTLY TO THE SOUTH. THAT'S A LOT OF THAT IS

BUILDABLE. >> IT IS BUILDABLE? THANK YOU.

>> BRANDON, DO YOU HAVE SOMETHING IN WRITING FROM THE NEIGHBOR WHO OBJECTED TO SAY,

NO, I HAVE NO OBJECTION? >> I'VE NOT HEARD ANYTHING FROM THEM.

THE APPLICANT HAS PROVIDED A NUMBER OF THINGS THEY ASKED FOR. LAST I KNOW, ONE OF OUR TECHNICAL STAFF -- THEIR CONCERN WAS NOT WITH THIS AT ALL.

IT WAS ON THE OPPOSITE SIDE. THERE ARE CONCERNS OF ELEVATION BETWEEN THE PROPERTIES.

ALSO, THERE WAS -- WE HAD SOME HEAVY RAINS, THERE WAS SOME -- BLOWN OUT. THEY WERE TRYING TO RECTIFY THE SITUATION.

>> I CAN PROVIDE THAT EMAIL. I AM NOT SURE WHO WITH THE COUNTY WAS COPIED ON IT.

THE LOT OWNER STATING THAT THEY WOULD LIKE TO RETAIN THEIR OPPOSITION.

>> I SEE YOU'VE BEEN THE PROJECT MANAGER THE ENTIRE TIME.

>> YES SIR. >> TELL ME, WHEN YOU WERE INVOLVED IN THE PLANNING STAGES, DID WE PUSH THIS HOUSE AS FAR BACK AGAINST THE WETLAND AS POSSIBLE?

IT GAVE AS MUCH CLEARANCE TO THE HILL AS YOU COULD? >> CORRECT.

>> NOW, I DRIVE PAST IT EVERY DAY TO GO HOME. TELL ME THE STORY OF THE PHIL

AND THE REMOVE. WHAT HAPPENED THERE? >> THERE WAS SOME SOILS REPORTS THAT SUGGESTED SHORT SURCHARGING, WHICH IS BASICALLY SEVERAL LAYERS OF FEET OF FILL TO COMPRESS THE EARTH AND MONITOR IT. THAT'S WHERE THE OVER PHIL AND THEN THE EXECUTION WAS. IT'S BEEN A VERY TRICKY LOT, THAT'S FOR SURE.

>> ABSOLUTELY. >> WHAT IS THE ELEVATION DIFFERENCE BETWEEN YOUR HOUSE

YOU ARE CONSTRUCTING AND THE HOUSE TO THE NORTH? >> I BELIEVE THEY ARE WITHIN A

FOOT OF EACH OTHER. >> THAT'S KIND OF WHAT I THOUGHT.

SO IT IS CLOSE. YOU COULD NOT RAISE IT UP TOO MUCH MORE AND HAVE IT --

>> CORRECT. >> OKAY. THAT'S WHAT I THOUGHT, THANK

YOU. >> REGARDING THE 50 FOOT OAK, CAN YOU PUT THAT PLAQUE BACK UP

[01:05:08]

THE TRUNK ON THE GREEN IS THE TREE, RIGHT? >> THAT'S THE APPROXIMATE

LOCATION OF THE TREES, YEAH. >> THAT TREE, IS THERE A DISPUTE OVER WHO OWNS THAT TREE?

LOOKS LIKE IT'S ON THE LINE. >> US, AS THE BUILDERS, OBVIOUSLY, TREES ARE GETTING IN THE WAY OF OUR DEVELOPMENT. WE WOULD LOVE FOR THE TREE TO GO AWAY.

>> YEAH. >> HOWEVER, BOTH NOT OWNERS, OUR LOT OWNER AND THE LOT TO THE SOUTH, WHICH I BELIEVE WAS IN SUPPORT OF THIS VARIANCE, BOTH REALLY WOULD LIKE TO KEEP THE TREE BECAUSE IT HAS CHARACTER. THAT'S WHY WE ARE TRYING TO EXPLORE EVERY POSSIBLE WAY TO KEEP THIS TREE. AGAIN, WITHOUT RAISING THE WALL, THE HEIGHT UP, THAT'S UNFORTUNATELY PROBABLY WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN.

WE HAVE NOT REALLY APPROACHED THAT YET SINCE BOTH LOT OWNERS WOULD LIKE TO KEEP THE TREE.

THERE IS ALREADY A RETAINING WALL PLANNED FOR THAT AREA. WE THOUGHT THE PATH OF LEAST RESISTANCE WOULD BE TO RAISE THE TOP WALL UP AS MUCH AS POSSIBLE.

AGAIN, OUR LOT OWNERS DON'T WANT A LARGE RETAINING WALL THERE.

TRYING TO KEEP THAT AS MINIMAL AS POSSIBLE IS ULTIMATELY OUR OBJECTIVE.

>> YEAH. WHAT I SAW LOOKING AT THAT TREE WAS -- I'M KIND OF FORWARD ON MY REMARKS. I DIDN'T FIND THAT TREE WHEN ONE OF BEAUTY, BECAUSE MOST OF THE OAKS THEY WANT TO SPREAD OUT.

IT LOOKED LIKE THAT ONE MIGHT HAVE BEEN CUT ON THE NORTH SIDE AND SLOWLY BENDING AND MOVING TOWARD THE SOUTH. OF COURSE, THAT WOULD BE A PROBLEM FOR THE ROOFS.

BECAUSE OF THAT TREE IS VERY LOPSIDED. CENTER OF THE TREE.H OF THE& I WAS SORT OF CURIOUS WHY SOMEBODY WOULD WANT TO TRY TO SAVE A TREE LIKE THAT.

I GUESS THAT WINDSWEPT LOOKS KIND OF COOL. MAYBE THEY ARE THINKING THAT.

THE MATERIAL OF THE WALL, IS THAT METAL OR VINYL? >> THAT'S WHITE VINYL.

>> LIGHT VINYL? >> YEAH. >> THAT'S GOING TO BE THE

MATERIAL USED AGAINST THE TREE? >> THAT WILL BE THE MATERIAL OF THE RETAINING WALL.

SO IT'S GOING TO BE SETBACK FROM THE TREE. BUT, YEAH, THAT IS THE PROPOSED MATERIAL. THERE IS ADDITIONAL COLOR SELECTIONS AVAILABLE.

THAT IS JUST WHERE WE STAND RIGHT NOW. >> I DIDN'T REALIZE, WHAT IS THE OTHER MATERIAL THAT IS IN THERE, THERE IS NO WAY VINYL WOULD BE ABLE TO HOLD BACK THAT KIND OF WEIGHT WITH THE ROOF AND THAT. WHAT IS YOUR HIGHEST POINT?

TEN, EIGHT, 12 FEET? >> 17 WITH THE BOTTOM OF THE WALL AT SEVEN.

A MAXIMUM SHOWN PROTECTION WOULD BE TEN FOOT ABOVE. >> OKAY.

THAT MATERIAL IS KNOWN TO BE STRONG ENOUGH? WHAT IS IT, ENCASED IN WOOD OR

SOMETHING AT THE BOTTOM OR THE TOP? >> THERE IS A WOOD RAIL ALONG THE TOP. IT IS FULLY ENGINEERED. THAT'S A SEPARATE THING THAT

HAS TO GO THROUGH. >> I WOULD CALL THAT MORE OF A SHEET PILING AND THEN JUST A MATERIAL. IT IS DESIGNED TO BE DRIVEN INTO THE ONE THIRD OF THE HEIGHT. YOU GO DOWN ABOUT 5 TO 6 FEET. 8 TO 10 FEET EXPOSED.

IT IS DESIGNED FOR THAT PURPOSE. THAT MATERIAL DESIGNED AT THAT HEIGHT WOULD NOT NEED A TIE BACK SYSTEM. THAT WAS GOING TO BE MY ORIGINAL QUESTION WHEN I SAW THE DRAWINGS. YOU WOULD NOT LAST IF THERE WAS

A RETAINING WALL. >> CORRECT. >> THAT'S NOT YOUR BASIC HOUSE

VINYL? >> NO. THIS IS FAIRLY THICK.

THE ADVANTAGE WITH VINYL IS IT DOES NOT RUST. >> VERY SIMILAR TO A BULKHEAD.

AND THE VINYL BEING MORE GOOD FOR LONGEVITY AND CLEANING. >> OKAY, THANK YOU.

>> I HAVE TWO QUESTIONS. ONE IS THAT, TYPICALLY, WHEN WE SEE THE REQUEST FOR BUILDING A RETAINING WALL, THE PROPERTIES WHICH HAVE LARGE VARIATIONS AND ELEVATION, WE SEE THEM PRIOR TO THEM BUILDING THE HOUSE. I JUST THOUGHT IT WAS UNUSUAL BECAUSE YOU ABSOLUTELY NEED TO HAVE A RETAINING WALL NOT TO HAVE DONE THAT, YOU KNOW, EARLIER IN THE PROCESS.

THE OTHER POINT IS THAT EVEN IF THE TREES WERE GONE, YOU WOULD STILL NEED A RETAINING WALL

[01:10:05]

BECAUSE THERE'S A LOT OF DIRT. >> CORRECT. >> THE TREE DIES, THE TREE DIES,

YOU STILL NEED TO HOLD ALL THAT. >> THERE WILL STILL NEED TO BE A RETAINING WALL. IF YOU REMOVE THE TREE, OBVIOUSLY, THAT WILL SINK DOWN THE ELEVATION THAT WE NEED TO GET THE PROPOSED GRADE. WITH THE HIGH RETAINING WALL,

THAT'S GOING TO BE ABLE TO KEEP THE TREE INTACT. >> LASTLY, TYPICALLY WE HAVE MORE PRECISE DRAWINGS OF ACTUALLY WHAT THE RETAINING WALL IS GOING TO BE.

17 FEET FOR SIX FEET AND THEN STEPPED DOWN SO WE CAN ACTUALLY SEE WHAT WE ARE APPROVING.

I HAVE A GENERAL NOTION. THE RED AND GREEN LINES DON'T QUITE DO IT.

ARE YOU WILLING TO SAY THAT THE MAXIMUM WILL BE 17? >> CORRECT.

>> AND HOW MANY FEET OF THE WALL WILL BE AT 17? >> APPROXIMATELY 20 FEET OF LINEAR WALL LENGTH WOULD BE AT 17. IT TAPERS TO MIRROR THE TOPOGRAPHY THAT IS EXISTING. THAT'S WHY IT'S A LITTLE DIFFICULT TO GIVE EXACT MEASUREMENTS WHEN YOU ARE TRYING TO HAVE IT BLEND IN WITH THE TOPOGRAPHY.

>> SO THE BIG PILE OF DIRT THAT IS SORT OF EAST OF THE TREE, THAT IS GOING TO GO AWAY?

>> CORRECT. >> THERE IS NOT GOING TO HAVE THAT PUT DOWN FOR A QUARTER OF

A RETAINING WALL? >> NO. THAT WILL MORE LYNN LIKELY BEFORE THE FILL AS WE COMPLETE FURTHER CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS COMPLETELY AWAY FROM THE WALL.

>> CLARIFICATION. ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT A 17 FOOT TALL WALL OR AN ELEVATION OF 17

FEET? >> ELEVATION OF 17 FEET. >> THE ELEVATION AT THE TOP OF THE WALL IS 17? THE HOUSE IS AT EIGHT. YOU ARE PROBABLY DEALING WITH

ABOUT A NINE FOOT WALL THAT YOU WILL SEE. >> THAT'S CORRECT.

>> OKAY, THANK YOU. >> LET'S BACK UP. IF YOU ACTUALLY STAND AT THE CORNER, IT'S VERY DRAMATIC TO LOOK AT NOW, YOU THINK THEY NEED A WALL YES, THEY NEED A WALL. MY GOD, IT'S GOING TO COME INTO THE HOUSE.

>> ABSOLUTELY. >> A BIG RAIN, SO MUCH OF THE DIRT IS STILL LEFT.

IT LOOKED AS IF THE HEIGHT OF THE DIRT WAS ALMOST TO THE BOTTOM OF THE EVE OF THE HOUSE.

THAT'S WHY I WAS WONDERING, EIGHT FEET DID NOT SOUND LIKE ENOUGH TO ME.

SOUNDS LIKE YOU NEED TO GO HIGHER. >> THERE'S A MAXIMUM OF TEN FOOT. FROM THE BOTTOM OF THE WALL AT SEVEN TO THE TOP OF THE WALL 17

WOULD BE A MAXIMUM OF TEN FOOT. >> I WOULD LIKE TO BE ACTUALLY SPECIFIC IN THE ZONING VARIANCE TO ALLOW FOR A RETAINING WALL. RIGHT NOW IT SAYS TO EXCEED FOUR FOOT HEIGHT REQUIREMENT.

I WOULD LIKE TO SAY, WHAT IS THE HEIGHT YOU ARE WILLING TO SAY THAT IT'S GOING TO BE?

>> MAXIMUM OF TEN FOOT. >> DO YOU WANT TO LIMIT YOUR LENGTH BY HEIGHT?

OR DO YOU HAVE A SPECIFIC -- >> YOU SAID IT WAS ONLY AT THAT 17 FOOT GRADE FOR 20 SOME ODD

FEET? >> APPROXIMATELY 20 FOOT. >> YOU CALL THAT 25 FEET, THAT

WOULD GIVE YOU ENOUGH MARGIN FOR ERROR ON EITHER SIDE? >> I BELIEVE SO.

>> YOU ARE WILLING TO LIVE WITH TEN? >> YES, I THINK TEN WILL BE

SUFFICIENT. [LAUGHTER] >> OTHERWISE, YOU HAVE TO COME

BACK. >> LISTEN VERY CAREFULLY, SHE'S TRYING TO HELP YOU.

PERSONALLY, I'M GOING TO DRIVE PAST THIS EVERY DAY. I WOULD LOVE TO TALK ABOUT SOME SCREENING IN FRONT OF THE WALL AS FAR AS PLANNING. I WOULD LIKE FOR YOU TOO PROPOSED SOME SCREENING IN FRONT OF THE WALL AS FAR AS BUSH IS, SOMETHING ALONG THOSE

LINES. >> THERE ARE PLANS NOT QUITE FINALIZED FOR LANDSCAPING AND DIFFERENT, OBVIOUSLY, SOFT ESCAPES THAT WILL TAKE AWAY FROM THE LARGE WALL THAT'S GOING TO BE THERE. SO WE ARE VERY OPEN TO THAT. OBVIOUSLY, TRYING TO KEEP A TREE. THE LOT OWNERS ARE WANTING TO ADD MORE IN THE AREA.

>> DO YOU WANT TO PUT LANGUAGE LIKE THAT? >> HOW CAN WE ADD LANGUAGE THAT THE APPLICANT WOULD MAKE BEST EFFORTS TO SCREEN? I WANT TO GIVE HIM THE LEEWAY TO BUILD WHATEVER. IF THEY WANT A RAINFOREST VERSUS WHATEVER, DOESN'T MATTER TO ME. SOMETHING THAT WE DON'T SEE A TEN FOOT WHITE WALL.

>> YOU CAN DO THE CLIMBING IV. I DON'T KNOW IF THAT WILL STICK TO THE VINYL.

[01:15:03]

I GUESS IT STICKS TO ANYTHING. >> IS THAT WHY YOU WANTED TO SCREEN UP THAT MATERIAL?

>> ANYTHING ALONG THOSE LINES, WHETHER BUSH IS ON THE FRONT, YOU CAN DO PALM TREES, YOU

COULD DO WHATEVER YOU WANT, BUT YES -- >> ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT THE INSIDE OR THE TOWARD THE ROADSIDE? TOWARD THE ROADSIDE? I THINK THAT'S GOING TO BE MORE LANDSCAPED RIGHT INTO THE LAY OF THE LAND THERE WHEN YOU TURN.

YOU WON'T BE SEEING THAT WALL, OTHER THAN WHEN YOU LOOK DIRECTLY AT THE DRIVE.

>> AS WE ARE COMING SOUTH ON A1A, YOU WILL SEE IT RIGHT IN FRONT OF THEIR.

IT'S NOT A LOT. I ABSOLUTELY AGREE WITH THAT. YOU WILL NOT SEE THIS GIANT WALL. IT'S WELL HIDDEN. BUT YOU WILL SEE A BIG WHITE

TEN FOOT WALL. >> JUST TO HAVE THE LANGUAGE CRISP, IF WE HAVE A WALL WITH A MAXIMUM HEIGHT OF TEN FEET FOR A 25 FOOT LENGTH, WITH SUBSEQUENT HATES OVER FOUR FEET

FOR HOW MANY ADDITIONAL? >> OF THE LANDSCAPING? >> OF THE WALL.

>> SHE IS TALKING ABOUT THE WALL. >> IF I HAVE 25 FEET OF TEN, A LENGTH OF 25 FEET AT A TEN FOOT HEIGHT AND THEN HOW MANY ADDITIONAL?

>> YOUR SECTIONS HERE, HOW LONG ARE THEY? >> THOSE ARE, I BELIEVE THE LEFT SECTION IS 27 FEET. THE RIGHT SECTION IS A LITTLE BIT SWEEPING.

SO IT KIND OF CURVES AND DIVES DIRECTLY INTO THE TOPOGRAPHY. THAT WILL VARY A LITTLE BIT, SO

THAT'S PROBABLY ABOUT 35 FEET. >> SO A TOTAL OF 35 FEET OVER, BETWEEN FOUR AND TEN FEET?

>> OVER FOUR FOOT, I WOULD SAY THAT'S PROBABLY GOING TO BE NO MORE THAN 50 FOOT.

YEAH, INCLUDING BOTH SIDES. >> THAT'S OVER ABOVE THE 25? >> YES, THE 25 FOOT SECTION.

>> NOT TO BEAT THIS TO THE, BUT IT WOULD BE ONE CONTINUAL LEVEL OF DIFFERENT HEIGHTS?

IT'S NOT GOING TO BE A STEP UP? >> CORRECT. >> SO, IF I MAY, THIS DOCUMENT WITHOUT THE COLOURIZATION AND THE NOTES, IS AN ATTACHMENT TO THE PROPOSED ORDER?

DOES THIS DOCUMENT INCLUDE ALL THE HEIGHTS YOU JUST EXPLAINED. >> YES, YOU CAN SEE THE PLUS THREE. THAT IS A GENERAL INCREASE IN THE HEIGHT OF THE WALL.

>> OKAY. THIS WILL ALREADY, IT'S PROPOSED TO BE AN ATTACHMENT IN THE ORDER. THE QUESTION IS HOW YOU WANT TO HANDLE THE LANDSCAPING.

THERE ARE CURRENTLY FIVE CONDITIONS SUGGESTED IF THIS IS APPROVED BUT, WOULD YOU ADD A SIXTH CONDITION REQUIRING LANDSCAPING ON THE EXTERIOR SIDE OR THE OUTWARD FACING

SIGHT OF THE WALL? >> THERE IS ONLY ONE SIDE. >> YEAH, CAN WE HAD APPLICANT ONLY BEST EFFORTS TO -- FOR SCREENING A1A, WITH THAT BE THE RIGHT WAY TO SAY THAT?

>> YES, IF YOU WANT A VISUAL SCREENING OR THE HEIGHT OF THE EXPOSED WALL.

>> I SORT OF THINK WE ARE BEATING THIS ONE TO DEATH. CORRECT ME IF IF I'M RIGHT.

ONCE YOU PROBABLY HAVE ABOUT ONE FOOT OF WALL EXPOSED AND ARE REVIEWING -- YOU WILL TRANSITION YOUR SOIL ALSO. IF YOU PLAN ON LEAVING A ONE FOOT WALL HEIGHT, IT WOULD BE SYMMETRICAL THE WHOLE WAY UP TO THAT WALL?

>> SORRY IF THERE IS A POINTER HERE THAT I CAN SHOW YOU. SO THIS AREA BELOW, THE INTENT

OF THIS AREA IS TO KEEP IT FLAT. >> YEAH. >> THE BOTTOM OF THE WALL A STAY CONSISTENT. AS THE WALL KIND OF CLIMBS AND MEETS WHERE THE DRIVEWAY IS,

[01:20:01]

THAT WOULD DIE INTO THE TOPOGRAPHY. >> YOU ARE MORE CONCERNED ON THAT OUTSIDE WALL? SAM, IS THAT WHAT YOU ARE TRYING TO DECORATE?

I DON'T THINK YOU COULD REALLY SEE THE INSIDE OF THAT WALL. >> YES, YOU ARE CORRECT.

>> YOU WILL BE ABLE TO ON THE SOUTH SIDE, RIGHT BELOW, YOU WILL SEE THAT PART OF THE WALL.

>> ABSOLUTELY. >> SO. >> I THINK THIS AREA WOULD MAKE THE MOST SENSE TO HAVE LANDSCAPING, JUST TO CONCEAL THE WALL EVEN FURTHER.

>> OKAY. >> -- NOT SURE THE HOMEOWNER WILL

WANT TO HAVE SOMETHING THERE AS WELL. >> ABSOLUTELY.

>> I WOULDN'T TRY TO MAKE IT TOO LITIGIOUS. CLEARLY THEY HAVE A PLAN, I'M

SURE. >> OKAY, YOU ARE RIGHT ON THE ENTIRE THING, BASICALLY.

YOU ARE VISUALIZING THAT IT'S GOING TO LAY INTO THE LAND AS IT GOES UP TOWARD THE DRIVEWAY.

>> YES SIR. CAN I ASK WHAT THAT WINDOW IS IN THAT CORNER?

I'M JUST CURIOUS. >> I'M SORRY NO? >> WHAT IS THAT ROOM IS, THAT WINDOW THAT BASICALLY LOOKS INTO THAT CORNER ON THE SOUTH SIDE.

YEAH, THAT ONE. >> THAT IS THE MASTER BEDROOM. >> THAT'S THE BEDROOM?

THEY PROBABLY HAVE PRIVACY GLASS OR SOMETHING. >> THERE'S GOING TO BE A WINDOW TREATMENT. I'M NOT SURE IF IT'S GOING TO BE --

>> I WAS KIND OF WONDERING. THANKS. >> DOES SOMEONE WANT TO MAKE A

MOTION WITH LANGUAGE INCLUDING CAPTURING THE AMENDMENTS? >> I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE WE

OPEN IT UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENT FIRST. >> IS THERE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT?

SEEING NONE. >> ADDING LANGUAGE. IF IT IS ATTACHED TO THE PACKET, DO WE NEED TO ADD LANGUAGE ABOUT THE HEIGHTENED WALL? OKAY.

>> I THINK A NUMBER HELPS. THE SITE PLAN, I THINK THE ELEVATIONS ARE SHOWN ON THE

SITE PLAN. AND OF A VERY, CORRECT? >> CORRECT, AND IT SHOWS THE

TOP OF THE WALL AT 17 FOOT. >> RIGHT. >> NO, I AGREE.

>> IN OTHER WORDS, YOU HAVE 27 FEET. FOR THAT LENGTH, THE WALL IS

GOING TO BE FOUR FEET HIGH? >> IT WILL BE FOUR FOOT OR LESS. >> THEN IT GOES, WE HAVE THREE -- FOUR, FIVE, I CAN'T QUITE TELL BECAUSE OF THIS -- IF I WERE GIVEN THIS WORKING, I WOULD BE LIKE, WHAT DID THEY SAY, THE NUMBERS ARE KIND OF OBSCURE. IT'S NOT CLEAR. SO, YOU KNOW.

THEY HAVE 30 FEET, LOOKS LIKE 30 FEET WRITTEN IN. I AM FINE -- CAN WE WORK SOME LANGUAGE OUT TO SPECIFY? THIS LANGUAGE IS SORT OF --

>> THEY CAN IF THE APPLICANT WANTS TO OFFER LANGUAGE TO INTERPRET THE SITE PLAN THE WAY IT'S WRITTEN, THE VARIANCE APPLIES TO THE PROPOSED SITE PLAN.

THAT'S INCLUDED AS AN ATTACHMENT TO THE PROPOSED ORDER.

>> SO THIS DRYING THAT WE HAVE ON SCREEN RIGHT NOW IS WITHIN OUR PACKET WITH --

>> IT IS PDF PAGE 21. IT'S THE OVERALL SITE PLAN PROPOSED.

AND THEN PAGE 22 HAS IT ZOOMED IN. >> PARDON?

>> ARE YOU IN THE BOOKS? >> WE DON'T HAVE THAT DRYING. [INAUDIBLE]

WE DON'T HAVE THAT DRAWING. >> THE IMAGES SHOULD BE IN THE STAFF REPORT.

THE PACKET THAT WAS HANDED, THERE WERE ITEMS GIVEN TO US AFTER THE FACT, ONCE THE

[01:25:01]

PRESENTATION AND'S OR THE STAFF REPORTS WERE SUBMITTED. >> I JUST THINK WE WANT TO USE

THIS AS A PART OF THE PACKAGE. WE DON'T HAVE IT. >> DO YOU SEE -- I HAVE IT IN THE PRINT OUT, IN THE NOTEBOOK HERE. DO YOU SEE THE DRAFT ORDER FOR APPROVAL? RIGHT, LOOKS LIKE THIS. THIS IS THE DRAFT ORDER FOR APPROVAL. YOU HAVE THESE DOCUMENTS AFTER THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION.

YOU DON'T HAVE THE DRAWINGS AFTER THE LEGAL DESCRIPTION? >> PART OF MINE IS CUT OFF.

>> REALLY? SO THIS DRYING ISN'T. >> THERE IS A DISCONNECT IN THE

CONVERSATION, SORRY. >> I JUST WANTED TO MAKE SURE IT HAD PROPER NUMBERS ON IT.

BECAUSE WE ARE GOING TO REFER TO THAT. >> WE HAVE THIS DOCUMENT.

IT DOESN'T HAVE IT COLOR CODED, THE GREEN, ORANGE, PURPLE. WE DO HAVE THIS BLACK DOCUMENT.

IT IS NOT THE SAME. >> SO WE COULD JUST HAVE OUR DOCUMENT.

CAN WE GIVE IT A NUMBER OR SOMETHING? >> I'M GUESSING LANGUAGE.

>> OKAY, GREAT. >> RETAINING WALL WOULD BE ABASHED TEN FEET FOR APPROXIMATELY 25 FEET HEIGHT, TAMPERING DOWN ON EITHER SIDE FOR APPROXIMATELY 30 FEET, AND PROVIDE EFFORTS TO HAVE SCREENING FROM LANDSCAPE SCREENING FROM A1A.

>> FOR TEN FEET WITH 25 FEET IN LENGTH. >> YEAH >> I DON'T THINK WE CAN BE THAT SPECIFIC. JUST HAVING A WE WANT SOME SORT OF SCREENING FROM A1A.

>> THAT WOULD BE YOUR HIGHEST POINT, YEAH. [LAUGHTER]

>> WHO IS GOING TO GET THE MOTION? [LAUGHTER]

>> MOTION TO APPROVE. PVZAR PVZAR 2023-04 HODGE RESIDENCE, YEAH 1154 PONTE VEDRA BLVD, BASED ON THE FIVE CONDITIONS AS LISTED IN STAFF REPORT.

ADDED TO THE, THE RETAINING WALL WILL BE A MAXIMUM OF TEN FEET IN HEIGHT FOR APPROXIMATELY 25 FEET IN LENGTH AND TAPERED DOWN ON EITHER SIDE FOR APPROXIMATELY 30 FEET ON EITHER SIDE, AND PROVIDE EFFORTS TO HAVE A SCREENING FROM A1A, LANDSCAPING OR

[Staff Report ]

OTHERWISE. >> SECONDED. >> YOU WOULD AGREE?

>> I WOULD AGREE, YES. >> THANK. [LAUGHTER]

>> CAN WE VOTE? YES, NO? THE MOTION HAS PASSED.

ARE THERE ANY STAFF REPORTS? YES, WE WANTED TO MENTION THAT THE ADVERTISEMENTS FOR THE NEW ZONING ADJUSTMENT BOARD MEMBERS HAVE BEEN TAKEN DOWN, AND WE HAVE APPLICATIONS, MURRAY HAS THOSE AND SHE WILL BE HANDING THOSE OUT TO YOU IN A MOMENT.

AND IN ADDITION, WE JUST WANTED TO SPEAK BRIEFLY ABOUT THAT TO FINANCIALIZE FOURTH MEETING, AND YOUR THOUGHTS ON THAT.

>> REGARDING THE JULY MEETINGS, I HAD TALKED TO STAFF ABOUT THE SUMMER SCHEDULES, AND WANTING TO MAKE SURE THAT WE HAD MORE PEOPLE AVAILABLE FOR THAT MEETING, AND I WAS CURIOUS ABOUT EVERYBODY'S TRAVEL PLANS. ONE OF THE DAYS THAT I THOUGHT LOOKED A LITTLE LESS CONVENIENT FOR US WAS JULY 3RD, BEING THE MONDAY BETWEEN THE WEEKEND AND THE FOURTH OF JULY.

AND SO WE CAN EITHER, DEPENDING ON WHAT YOU SEE AS VARIANCE, APPLICANTS COMING IN, IF WE NEED A JULY MEETING, WE CAN

JUST MEET IN JUNE OR AUGUST. >> CURRENTLY, THERE'S TWO PROJECTS THEY MIGHT BE PREPARED TO MEET ON THAT DAY, BUT THEY

[01:30:04]

THEY COULD HAVE CERTAIN DATES OR TIMES IN BETWEEN FOR ADVERTISING. ONCE THEY HAVE RESPONDED TO THAT WITH THEIR SECOND APPRAISALS, IF THEY ARE COMPLETE, THEN I WOULD IMAGINE THAT IT COULD BE VERY EASILY INSTATED THAT THAT MEETING BASED ON YOUR DIRECTION, FOOD TO BE ENCLOSED AND MOVE ON TO AUGUST 8TH.

>> DOES THAT MAKE SENSE? >> I WILL NOT BE IN TOWN ON THE THIRD. IT'S FINE FOR ME, JUNE AND AUGUST WORK. AND MIGHT BE IN THE MINORITY.

[Board Report]

>> ALL RIGHT, SHOULD WE DO ANOTHER TEST?

>> TWO AND A SCHEDULE? WOULD THAT BE CONVENIENT?

>> IF NEEDED. >> YES, I'M AVAILABLE.

>> AND SO WE WILL CHANGE THE MEETING DATE FROM JULY 3RD TO TENTH IF WE NEED TO MEET IN JULY.

>> YES, MA'AM. WE JUST NEED TO RESERVE THE ROOM FOR THAT. I HAD SOME OTHER TOPICS THAT I WOULD LIKE TO BRIEFLY DISCUSS WITH THE BOARD.

I WAS THINKING ABOUT HAVING SOME TASK, WHICH WE HAD GIVEN TO JACOB, WHO DID NOT HAVE TIME TO FINISH, BECAUSE OF HIS DEPARTURE. AND WE HAD BEEN TALKING ABOUT HAVING A WORKSHOP, AND ONE OF THE ITEMS THAT THE COUNTY ATTORNEY HAD ADVISED US IS THAT WHEN WE ARE TALKING ABOUT ALL OF OUR WORKSHOPS ON FENCE HEIGHTS, THAT I HAD ALWAYS THOUGHT THAT THE ZONING REGULATIONS, SINCE THEY ARE SILENT ON FENCE HEIGHT, THAT THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, WHAT IT MEANS THERE WITH THEIR RECOMMENDATION.

SHE SAID, NO, THIS IS THE WAY IT WORKS.

WE NEED TO HAVE ANY REGULATIONS ON HEDGE HEIGHTS, WE WOULD HAVE TO PUT THAT LANGUAGE IN THE CODE.

I WOULD SUGGEST THAT WE TALK ABOUT THAT IN THE WORKSHOP, THE STARTING HEDGE HEIGHT, THAT'S WHAT THE LINT DEVELOPMENT HAS.

AND THEN WE CAN TALK ABOUT THE MEANING HIGHER OR LOWER.

THAT WOULD BE ONE TOPIC AT THE WORKSHOP.

AND THEN THE OTHER QUESTION REGARDING FENCING, WHICH ALWAYS SEEMS TO BE A CONFUSING ISSUE FOR THE RESIDENTS, AND WE HAD THAT AT ONE OF OUR LAST MEETINGS, WHERE PEOPLE ARE UNAWARE THAT THERE ARE REGULATIONS ON FENCING.

I KNOW IN OTHER AREAS THAT I'VE LIVED, ONE OF THE WAYS THAT FENCING GETS TO BE MONITORED IS IF YOU HAD A PERMIT, SOME SORT OF APPROVAL, NOT A BUILDING PERMIT, BUT SOMETHING OF THAT KIND TO GO ON THE FENCE. IT COULD PROVIDE MONEY TO THE COUNTY, IT DOES NOT HAVE TO BE A STRUCTURAL BUILDING DEPARTMENT. SOMETHING THAT WOULD CAPTURE THE ATTENTION OF THE PEOPLE THAT ARE CONSTRUCTING THEM, SAYING THAT THERE IS SOME REGULATION ON FENCE HEIGHTS.

IN PARTICULAR, NEW CONSTRUCTION, WHICH YOU CAN, SEE THE CONTRACTOR COMES IN, IT DOESN'T, WORK THE POOL GUY COMES IN, THEY HAVE A WALL, THEY PUT ANOTHER FENCE ON TOP OF IT, AND WE DON'T SEEM TO BE ABLE TO MANAGE THAT BUILDING PROCESS IN A WAY THAT IS SMOOTH FOR THE APPLICANTS, THE HOMEOWNERS, AND EVERYONE ELSE. I'D LIKE TO SEE IF THERE IS SOMETHING, IF WE COULD TRY TO DO SOMETHING THAT WOULD HELP THAT SITUATION OUT. AND THEN KITTY HAD RECOMMENDED, AND SHE PROBABLY HAD THE SAME GROUP OF PEOPLE CALLING ME, THAT THE REGARDING THE ROOF DECK STRUCTURES.

THERE IS ONE HOUSE ON THE GOLF COURSE THAT HAS THOSE WINDOWS, SLASH ROOF DECK STRUCTURES, AND PEOPLE HAVE ASKED, ISN'T THAT A THIRD STORY? WE HAVE SEVERAL HOMES IN THE ZONING DISTRICT THAT ARE ON EACH SIDE, THE DO YOU HAVE THOSE WALKS ON THE TOP OF THE ROOFS, WHICH ARE OF VARIOUS

[01:35:05]

THE OVERLAY DISTRICT HAS LANGUAGE ABOUT CHAIN LINK FENCES, BUT ZONING DISTRICTS DON'T HAVE ANY LANGUAGE ABOUT CHAIN LINK FENCES. SO THERE IS SOME INCONSISTENCY THERE. THE, WHAT I WAS GOING TO THINK ABOUT, IS THAT WE CAN INITIATE THE CONVERSATIONS ON THIS AT A FUTURE MEETING, THIS SUMMER, MAYBE, WE HAVE A MEETING WHERE THERE IS ONE AGENDA ITEM, WE CAN KIND OF GET OUR DUCKS IN A ORDER, WHAT WE WOULD LIKE TO DISCUSS WITH THE PUBLIC WORKSHOP ON THIS LABOR. WE COULD HAVE SOME COGENT REASONS FOR WHY WE ARE TALKING ABOUT IT YET.

IF THERE'S ANYTHING ELSE SOMEBODY IS THINKING ABOUT, AN ISSUE THAT RESIDENTS HAVE BROUGHT UP TO YOU, OR THAT YOU HAVE THOUGHT OF, FEEL FREE TO ADD IT TO THIS LIST AND --

>> I JUST HAVE A QUICK QUESTION.

I BELIEVE OUR LAST MEETING, WE SPOKE ABOUT THE GATE HOSPITALITY GOING TO BE PRESENTING TO THE COUNTY, I FOUND AN EMAIL THAT THERE IS AN MSG MEETING NEXT MONDAY, I AND I'M, SORRY ARE THEY PRESENTING THIS PLAN?

>> JUST FOR THIS SAKE. >> YES, THE CLUB IS PRESENTING AT OUR MAY MEETING AT 5:30 TO TRY AND GET ACCOMMODATIONS THAT THE CULTURAL CENTER AND CATHOLIC CHURCH, BUT THAT WASN'T AVAILABLE, AND WE COULDN'T GET A BIG ENOUGH SPACE AT CHRISTCHURCH, SO WE WILL REMAIN AT THE LIBRARY.

WE WILL HAVE THEM FIRST, IT WILL BE THE FIRST THING IN THE MEETING TO PRESENT. I IMAGINE THAT THEY'RE JUST GOING TO BE PRESENTING THE ARCHITECTURE, I DOUBT THAT THEY WILL BE PRESENTING THE 20 PLUS VARIANCES THAT THEY'RE ASKING FOR, WHICH PEOPLE ARE PROBABLY GOING TO COME AND REQUEST THAT INFORMATION FOR. WE ARE GOING TO LIMIT EVERYBODY TO THREE MINUTES, BECAUSE WE HAVE TO CONDUCT OUR MEETING AS WELL AFTER THE PRESENTATION. IN THE LIBRARY IS CLOSED, AND THEY WILL START REMINDING US AT 7:30.

THAT'S WHY WE MOVED OUR MEETINGS UP TO 5:30, WE JUST COULDN'T GET IT DONE BEFORE 7:30.

I JUST HAVE A COMMENT. >> ARE THEY ASKING FOR YOUR APPROVAL? WHERE IS THIS --

>> NO, WE JUST ASKED, THEY WERE PRESENTING FOR INDIVIDUALS, AND IT FELT AWKWARD THAT SOME PEOPLE ON THE BOARD WERE BEING ASKED TO SEE THE PRESENTATION, BUT OTHERS WERE NOT.

OUR CHAIRMAN ASKED THAT THEY PRESENT TO US IN AN OPEN FORMAT, BECAUSE THE ONLY TIME THAT SOMETHING IS PRESENTED IN PART TO V DRAW, WHERE PEOPLE CAN ACTUALLY COME TO, IT'S AT THE ORCA MEETING. EVERYTHING ELSE IS OUTSIDE, YOU ARE MEETING, THE COUNTY COMMISSIONER MEETINGS.

AND SO THIS GIVES THE COMMUNITY AN OPPORTUNITY TO COME AND SEE THE PROJECT THAT THEY HAVEN'T PRESENTED.

A LOT OF RUMORS GOING AROUND, A LOT OF STUFF ON --

>> THE 18 STORY BUILDING. >> I HAVEN'T SEEN THAT ONE.

>> BUT THERE'S A LOT, IT'S GIVING PEOPLE THE CHANCE TO COME AND SEE THE PROJECT. SOME BOARD MEMBERS AS WELL.

INSERT JUST ONE COMMENT ON SOME OF THE THINGS THAT MEGHAN WAS TALKING ABOUT PRIOR TO THE BLOCKER, WE WERE MEETING WITH HIM ONCE A MONTH, WITH JACOB IN ATTENDANCE, OR THE COUNTY ATTORNEY IN ATTENDANCE, OR SOME OTHER COUNTY PERSONNEL.

WE WERE GETTING SOMEWHERE, AND THEN OF COURSE, WITH THE BLOCK OR NOT BEING REELECTED, AND THEN JACOB LEAVING, IT JUST FEELS LIKE THE BALL IS DROPPED ON US.

AND SO ON PERMITS FOR FENCING, IT'S ONE OF THE TOPICS THAT I FOUND, THE PERMIT FOR JACK'S SPEECH, IT IS JUST REALLY LETTING THE COUNTY KNOWING THAT YOU'RE PUTTING IN, OFFENSE AND WHAT MATERIAL. WE DON'T HAVE ANY REGULATIONS

[01:40:01]

HOURS MOSTLY ABOUT HEIGHT, BUT JUST HAVING THAT FORMALITY AND FENCE COMPANIES KNOWING THAT THEY HAVE TO HAVE THIS PIECE OF PAPER MIGHT STOP ALL OF THE -- OR THE WASTED EXPENSES FOR PEOPLE PUTTING UP THE, WRONG FENCE BECAUSE WE HAVE DIFFERENT FENCE HEIGHTS FOR DIFFERENT ZONING DISTRICTS.

YOU SEE A SIX FOOT FENCE IN MY NEIGHBORHOOD, OR BEHIND CHRISTCHURCH, YOU THINK THAT'S OKAY, BUT IT'S NOT OKAY FOR OUR REGULATIONS IN PARTS OF OUR ONE A.

IT'S CONFUSING FOR ME WHEN I FIRST STARTED LEARNING ABOUT THE ZONING, AND SO ANY EXTRA STEP THAT MIGHT HELP WITH THAT, I WOULD THINK WOULD BE BENEFICIAL IN THE NEIGHBORING

COUNTY. BUT >> AND SO JUST FOLLOWING UP ON WHAT KITTY WAS TALKING ABOUT, ONE OF THE OTHER ISSUES THAT HAS COME TO THE FLOOR IS THAT SOME HOMES, THE OCEAN AT ELEVATIONS ABOVE THE NEIGHBORING -- THEIR NEIGHBORS. AND SO THEY HAVE WHAT IS ESSENTIALLY A MINI RETAINING WALL OF SOME HEIGHT AROUND THEIR PROPERTY. AND THEN THEY HAVE A POOL IN THE BACK, AND SO THE RETAINING WALL IS THREE AND A HALF FEET, THEN THEY PUT THE POOL IN AND FENCE AROUND THE POOL, WHICH IS MORE, SO NOW ON THE NEIGHBORS, YOU HAVE DEFENSE OF A COMBINATION OF MATERIALS ON THEIR SIDE.

AND SO JUST FOR US TO THINK ABOUT, IF WE COULD COME UP WITH A MORE ELEGANT SOLUTION, SEEING THAT THERE ARE THESE DIFFERENT

NEEDS. >> AND TO PIGGYBACK ON THAT, THE OTHER THINGS WERE DISCUSSING WITH GOING FORWARD WAS BEING MORE -- WE WILL FALL ON BRANDON, BECAUSE IT IS THE CLEARANCE SHEET.

THE CLEARANCE SHEETS THAT THE BUILDER NEEDS TO SIGN OFF ON.

I WENT THROUGH THIS WITH THE BOARD SIX YEARS AGO WITH BEVERLEY, BUT WE HAVE TO HAVE THAT ON THE CLEARANCE SHEET.

WE HAVE IT ON THE CLIENT SHEET, WHAT SIZE FANS YOU CAN HAVE, WHAT HEIGHT. IT'S VERY DOABLE.

WE COULD ALSO HAVE THE SIGNAGE RULES, ONE BUILDER SIGN, NO SUBCONTRACTORS SIGN, ONE NO TRESPASSING SIGN, IF WE COULD GET THERE, AND WHAT SIZE. WE COULD ALSO HAVE THE RULE THE DAY ALL DO NOT SEEM TO RECALL, WHICH IS THAT YOU CANNOT HAVE CONSTRUCTION RELATED MATERIAL ON THE RIGHT AWAY, RIGHT BY THE ROAD. THAT INCLUDES PORTA-POTTIES,

DUMPSTERS, BUILDING MATERIAL. >> FENCES.

>> ANYTHING IN THE RIGHT OF WAY.

YES, THANK YOU. THERE'S THINGS REALLY NEED TO GO ON THE CLEARANCE SHEET. BECAUSE THAT IS HOW YOU TELL THEM, OTHERWISE, WE HAVE TO GET PRIDE INVOLVED, CODE ENFORCEMENT INVOLVED, AND WE CAN HAVE A LOT OF TIME ON THE CLINICS SHEET. THAT IS BEEN DISCUSSED, AND I THINK IT WOULD BE VERY HELPFUL IN NOT AFTER THE FACT, BUT GETTING THAT OUT BEFORE. THANK YOU.

>> AND JUST TO PIGGYBACK ON KITTIES COMMENTS AGAIN, TO EXPLAIN TO APPLICANTS, WHAT THE RIGHT OF WAY IS, AND HOW FAR IT IS ON THEIR PROPERTY. MOST PEOPLE, WHERE MANY PEOPLE THINK THAT WHEN THEY BOUGHT THE HOUSE, THAT FROM THE CURB, THAT IS THERE'S. AND SO THEY'RE ALWAYS NOT PLEASANTLY SURPRISED WHEN THEY LEARNED THAT THAT OTHER PORTION OF THE PLAN IS NOT THEIRS. IT'S AN EDUCATION PROCESS.

>> THANK YOU. >> AND SO JUST A FOLLOW-UP, IS THERE A TIME THAT WE -- THE APPROVAL COMES TO THIS BOARD? IS THAT CORRECT?

>> IT WILL COME FOR RECOMMENDATION OF THE BOARD OF CAN'T COMMISSIONERS, RESIDENTS AND STAFF MODERNA HAVE AN IDEA OF WHERE THEY ARE IN THE PROCESS.

>> IT'S NOT SCHEDULED YET TO COME TO ANY HEARINGS.

IT'S IN ITS FIRST ROUND OF REVIEW.

THOSE COMMENTS HAVE GONE OUT TO THE APPLICANT, AND THEY HAVE

NOT RESPONDED. >> WHAT A GUESSTIMATE B THAT IF THEY DO COME TO US, IT WILL PROBABLY BE AUGUST OR SEPTEMBER?

>> I CAN'T MAKE THAT GUESS. >> I KNOW WE HAD JUST SPOKEN ABOUT HAVING SOME MORE CONVERSATIONS AROUND IT, AND AROUND VARIANCES WITHIN THE STRUCTURE DOCUMENTS, BEFORE

[01:45:02]

>> WE COULD ELECT SOME QUESTIONS FROM MEMBERS OF THE BOARD ABOUT HOW IT'S USED, WHERE WE NEED MORE INFORMATION.

AND THEN YOU CAN SEE HOW MUCH WE UNDERSTAND ABOUT THIS PROCESS. YOU CAN EDUCATE US SO THAT WE ARE -- WE CAN PERFORM THE JOBS BETTER.

>> RIGHT, ARE YOU ASKING ABOUT DOING A LITTLE MINI TRAINING AT THE LAST MEETING? WE WALKED THROUGH THE P D TEMPLATE MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN.

THE FORM OF THAT TEMPLATE WILL COME TO YOU AS PART OF THIS APPLICATION, IF IN THAT HEARING YOU HAVE OUTSTANDING QUESTIONS THAT ARE BEING ANSWERED. YOU CAN ALWAYS CONTINUE HERE.

DOES THAT ANSWER THE QUESTION? >> YES, I JUST WANT TO BE AS PREPARED AS POSSIBLE WITH -- THERE IS A TREMENDOUS AMOUNT OF, WHETHER IT IS FACT OR FICTION, GOING AROUND, BEING AS PREPARED AS POSSIBLE WITH THOSE APPLICATIONS OR REPAIRING,'S ET CETERA, IT'S ONE OF THOSE THINGS AHEAD OF THAT.

>> AND PERHAPS STAFF, WHEN IT'S READY TO SCHEDULE, PERHAPS THAT COULD BE THE ITEM ON YOUR AGENDA WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT THERE WILL NOT BE A LOT OF DISCUSSION.

>> FOR EXAMPLE, JEAN RECEIVED AN INITIAL COPY OF THE PATH FOR THE APPLICATION. IT HAS LISTED IN IT ALL OF THE VARIANCES, IT'S THE FIRST TIME THAT THEY APPLIED.

SO MAYBE SENDING THAT LIST TO EVERYONE ON THE BOARD IT RECEIVED IT, THEY CAN GIVE IT TO THOSE MEMBERS JUST SO THEY KNOW WHAT THE INITIAL SCOPE WAS.

AND AS IT MARCHES ALONG, JUST TO BE FAMILIAR WITH THE

LANGUAGE AND EVERYTHING. >> I THINK I STILL HAVE AN ELECTRONIC COPY OF IT THAT CAN FORWARD TO.

THIS IS THE COPY FROM A FEW MONTHS AGO.

>> I THINK THAT IT WOULD BE BETTER IF THAT COMES ROUGH, TO BE HONEST. IF YOU WANT IT TO HAVE SENT ALL THE MEMBERS THE INITIAL APPLICATION, YOU CAN DO THAT.

>> ALL RIGHT. WITH THE UNDERSTANDING THAT

ULTIMATELY IT WILL CHANGE. >> I THINK IT'S LIKE 218 PAGES LONG. IT'S SOME LIGHT CASUAL READING.

>> A LOT OF IT IS LEGAL DOCUMENTS.

AND THEN YOU CUT WAGE YOUR WAY THROUGH, AND THEN THERE'S WHAT

THEY WOULD LIKE. >> SURE.

AND IF YOU HAVE QUESTIONS, INDIVIDUALLY BEFORE MEETINGS, WE CAN DISCUSS THAT. IF YOU WANT TO SPEND TIME WITH ME, OR WITH BRANDON, I THINK THAT IT'S AN INTIMIDATING PROCESS AND WE HAVE HAD TO GO THROUGH SOME ALREADY.

SOME PROJECTS ON IT, AND SO IT'S AN IMPORTANT THING.

AND AGAIN, UNDERSTAND IF YOU AREN'T READY TO MAKE A DECISION AFTER AN INITIAL FIRST HEARING, YOU CAN ALWAYS CONTINUE IT IN A

SECOND HEARING. >> MADAM CHAIR, IF I MAY, THE DOCUMENTS THAT WE WILL BE SENDING YOU, THOSE ARE THE ONES THAT THE COMMENTS HAVE GONE OUT ON.

DOCUMENTS THAT MAY BE QUITE A BIT DIFFERENT THAT IT IS SENT BACK TO US, AND YOU ALSO GET IT.

BUT WE WILL BE HAPPY TO SEND IT TO YOU.

JUST REMEMBER THAT IT MAY BE DIFFERENT THAN WHAT YOU SEE IN

THE ULTIMATE ONE. >> FIND IT VERY INTERESTING.

AGAIN, MADAM CHAIR, IT WILL BE TOO HARD FOR US TO EMAIL IT IN ANY FASHION WHATSOEVER, AND SO WE WILL PROBABLY HAVE TO PUT IT ON THE WEBSITE, SO YOU CAN ALL GET IT.

>> IS THERE ANY OTHER BUSINESS THAT SOMEBODY WOULD LIKE TO

CONDUCT AT THIS POINT IN TIME? >> WHAT WOULD WE NEED TO

CLARIFY? >> WE HAVE TO PUT IT IN WRITING. ANNA PAGE IN THE MANUAL.

>> CHRISTINE? >> IS THERE A LEGAL OPINION ON NEEDING MORE THAN ONE NO TRESPASSING SIGN?

[01:50:03]

OR EASE IT NOTICE? >> THERE ARE SEVERAL ISSUES WITH THE SCIENCE AND ESPECIALLY REGULATING INTENT.

WE MIGHT NOT BE ABLE TO DISTINGUISH REGULATIONS ON SIGN CONTENT, AND THEY HAVE TO FOCUS ON THE ALLOWANCE OF TEMPORARY ONSITE, GIVEN THE CURRENT UNITED STATES SUPREME COURT

CASE LAW. >> I KNOW THAT THERE IS ALSO AN ISSUE REGARDING NO PARKING SIGNS ON SEVERAL CONDOMINIUMS, AND THEY DON'T HAVE ENOUGH PARKING FOR GAS AND THE RESIDENTS. IF PUT UP THE TOWING SCIENCE.

IT'S SO IF YOU DRIVE BY, CAN THEY RESTRICT THAT TYPE OF SIGN?

AS YOU SAID? >> IT WILL BE DIFFICULT TO RESTRICT IT BASED ON THE CONTENT OF THE SIGN.

>> BUT WE CAN RESTRUCTURE ON THE SIZE?

>> CORRECT. >> ALL RIGHT, GOOD.

>> THE TOTAL NUMBER OF SCIENCE, YOU CAN RESTRICT THE TOTAL

NUMBER. >> YES.

>> WE WILL TALK ONCE WE GET INTO THE ASPECTS OF WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT, BUT JUST KNOW THAT THERE ARE RESTRICTIONS ON REGULATING SIGNS BASED ON THE MESSAGE.

>> ARE THERE ANY OTHER COMMENTS OR QUESTIONS?

>> MADAM CHAIR? THOSE WERE JULY 10TH, IT'S NOT AVAILABLE IN THIS ROOM, AND SO WE DO HAVE JULY 17TH, FOR THE 31ST YOU WOULD BE RIGHT UP TO THE AUGUST MEETING, SO THE QUESTION IS WHETHER WE DO THE JULY ONE.

TWO WEEKS BETWEEN THAT ONE AND THE OTHER.

>> THERE WILL NOT BE A QUORUM. IT SEEMS LIKE TWO OF THE MEMBERS WILL ALREADY NOT BE HERE, AND SO WE WOULD PROBABLY NOT HAVE EVEN BE IN THE APPLICATION PROCESS FOR THIS WE HAD REVIEWED THOSE APPLICATIONS FOR THE NEW MEMBERS, I'M NOT SURE IF THEY WILL BE STARTING BY THAT TIME BUT THAT DECISION

IS ULTIMATELY UP TO THE. >> I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO HERE.

IS ANYBODY ELSE TO SCHEDULE LIKE THAT? SHOULD WE JUST CANCEL JULY? LET'S CANCEL JULY'S MEETING AWE AWE

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.