Nov 05, 2024 Board of County Commissioners

ANYONE ELSE FOR PUBLIC COMMENT? SEEING NONE, WE'LL CLOSE. PUBLIC COMMENT.

OKAY, WE'RE BACK TO THE BOARD, COMMISSIONER DEAN.

YEAH, I'LL MOVE TO APPROVE THE TOTAL EARNED, UNUSED AND UNDISTRIBUTED REVENUE COLLECTED FOR THE 2324 TAX YEAR.

WE HAVE A MOTION. DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND. OKAY.

MOTION AND A SECOND. PLEASE VOTE.

THAT PASSES FIVE ZERO.

THANK YOU SO MUCH, MR. HOLLINGSWORTH, FOR TODAY AND FOR YOUR YEARS OF SERVICE.

OKAY. THAT LEADS US INTO AGENDA ITEM NUMBER TWO, WHICH I IMAGINE THE MAJORITY OF YOU GUYS ARE HERE FOR TODAY.

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

THIS IS EX PARTE COMMISSIONER JOSEPH.

YES, A 75, 79 PLUS EMAILS.

AND I THINK I'VE GOTTEN SOME MORE IN THE LAST FEW MINUTES AT A POST, AND I ACTUALLY GOT ONE FOR IT.

AND I RECEIVED TWO PHONE CALLS REGARDING THE PROJECT.

OKAY. THANK YOU SO MUCH, COMMISSIONER JOSEPH.

COMMISSIONER ALAIMO. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.

I RECEIVED 85 PLUS EMAILS.

I HAD A PHONE CONVERSATION WITH ZACH MILLER JUST TO BRIEF OVERVIEW OF THE PROJECT.

SAME WITH. I HAD A MEETING OFF SITE WITH DOUG MILLER AND ROBINSON DEVELOPMENT TEAM TO TO DISCUSS A BRIEF OUTLINE OF THE PROJECT.

AND I SPOKE WITH RESIDENTS THAT WERE BOTH FOR AND AGAINST THE PROJECT.

[01:10:03]

OKAY, I'M GOING TO BEAT YOU BOTH.

I HAD OVER 120 EMAILS, SOME PHONE CALLS, A MEETING WITH JOE MCINERNEY, WHO IS A RESIDENT AGAINST IT.

I ALSO HAD AN OFF SITE MEETING AT ATM WITH DOUG MILLER TO DISCUSS THE PROJECT, AND I'VE HAD MULTIPLE PHONE CONVERSATIONS WITH BOTH DOUG AND ZACH MILLER.

I'VE ALSO SPOKEN TO MANY, MANY RESIDENTS, MOSTLY IN OPPOSITION.

SO, COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST, THANK YOU.

MADAM CHAIR. HAD 105 EMAILS.

YES. THEY WERE STILL COMING IN THIS MORNING AS I WAS TAKING MY SEAT HERE.

HAD A MEETING AT ETMS OFFICE WITH THE ROBINSON IMPROVEMENT COMPANY.

TEAM THE THE LANDOWNER REPRESENTATIVE FROM FREEHOLD AND THE TEAM FROM ETM HAD SEVERAL PHONE CALLS WITH ZACH MILLER AND DOUG MILLER TO DISCUSS THE SITE LOCATION, THE HISTORY OF THE PROJECT, THE INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS THAT THE PROJECT IS OFFERING.

COMMISSIONER DEAN. YES.

I HAD ABOUT 86 EMAILS, AND I THINK THEY WERE RUNNING ABOUT 12 TO 1 IN OPPOSITION.

AND I ALSO HAD A PHONE CALL WITH JOE MCINERNEY, A MEETING WITH JESSIE HOWELL, WHO WAS OPPOSED TO THE PROJECT.

AND ABOUT THREE WEEKS AGO, I HAD A MEETING WITH DOUG MILLER AND ZACH MILLER AND THE APPLICANT, AND I THINK THAT COVERS IT.

THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER DEAN.

OKAY. THE FLOOR IS YOURS. MR. MILLER. GOOD MORNING EVERYONE.

ZACH MILLER, 303 OLD BARN COURT IS MY PRIVILEGE AND HONOR TO REPRESENT THE ROBINSON IMPROVEMENT COMPANY ON THIS ITEM.

JUST FOR A HOUSEKEEPING, THERE'S TWO ITEMS UP FOR YOU TODAY.

IT'S A PUD AND A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.

I'M GOING TO TALK ABOUT BOTH.

AND OUR WITNESSES ARE GOING TO TALK ABOUT BOTH.

SO WHY IS IT JUST A PUD? WELL, THIS IS NOT A COMP PLAN AMENDMENT.

THIS IS JUST A REZONING.

THAT MEANS YOUR DECISION IS PURELY QUASI JUDICIAL.

THERE'S NO LEGISLATIVE ACTION ON THE PUD.

THAT MEANS THE REASONS FOR YOUR DENIAL ARE LIMITED TODAY.

IT MEANS THE STANDARD OF PROOF IS LOWER.

THE PROPERTY WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TODAY IS 2673 ACRES.

APPROXIMATELY SIX YEARS AGO, THE COUNTY MADE THE DECISION TO DESIGNATE THAT PROPERTY IN THE COMP PLAN FOR UP TO 3332 RESIDENTIAL UNITS.

THAT'S IMPORTANT BECAUSE THE NUMBER OF UNITS THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TODAY WAS ALREADY DECIDED.

THIS IS JUST THE ZONING.

IT IS JUST HOW THOSE UNITS ARE ORGANIZED.

AND WHETHER YOU WANT US TO PAY FOR THE ROAD.

THAT WAS NOT AN APPLICATION FILED BY THE LANDOWNER SIX YEARS AGO.

THAT WAS AN APPLICATION PROCESSED BY THE COUNTY.

YOU'RE GOING TO HEAR A LOT ABOUT THAT TODAY.

IN FACT, YOU'RE GOING TO HEAR A LOT ABOUT THE STAFF REPORTS AT THE TIME.

YOU'RE GOING TO SEE SOME VIDEO OF THE STAFF OF THAT, AND ACTUALLY SOME VIDEO OF ONE OF YOUR FELLOW COMMISSIONER MEMBERS.

YOU'RE ALSO GOING TO HEAR FROM THE ONE OF THE REPRESENTATIVES OF THE THE PROPERTY OWNER, WHO'S GOING TO TALK ABOUT THE HISTORY OF THIS PROPERTY AND HIS FAMILY FAMILY'S LEGACY.

YOU'RE GOING TO HEAR FROM A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER WITH ALMOST 45 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE, WHO WORKED ON THE RIGHT OF WAY DONATION AGREEMENT SIX YEARS AGO, AND THAT WAS PART OF THE 2019 COMP PLAN AMENDMENT.

YOU'RE GOING TO HEAR FROM CERTIFIED PLANNER WHO USED TO WORK FOR THE COUNTY, AND SHE'S GOING TO WALK YOU THROUGH THE DETAILS OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AND THE PUD, AND HOW WE MEET THE APPLICABLE CRITERIA.

FINALLY, YOU'RE GOING TO HEAR FROM AN ATTORNEY WHO HAS 16 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE IN THE LAND USE AREA WHO'S HANDLED BURT HARRIS CLAIMS, COMP PLAN CONSISTENCY CLAIMS, AND WHO'S GOING TO GO OVER THE STANDARD OF REVIEW FOR THE ZONING.

FIRST, MR. LEN CARTER FROM THE ROBERTSON IMPROVEMENT COMPANY.

IS THIS A PROBLEM? NO. OKAY. OKAY.

YEAH. GOOD MORNING.

THANK YOU. MY NAME IS LYNN CARTER, AND I'M HERE WITH MY TWO BROTHERS, TRAV AND JOE CARTER.

AND WE'RE WITH ROBINSON IMPROVEMENT COMPANY.

4417 BEACH BOULEVARD, SUITE 200IN JACKSONVILLE.

THE ROBINSON IMPROVEMENT COMPANY PROPERTY HAS BEEN IN OUR FAMILY FOR OVER 100 YEARS, AND IT WAS PURCHASED BY OUR GREAT GREAT GRANDFATHER, JOHN ROBINSON.

IT'S BEEN USED FOR FARMING, RAISING CATTLE AND THE LAST 60 PLUS YEARS GROWING TIMBER.

IN 2014, SAINT JOHN'S COUNTY ENGAGED THE COMPANY TO PROVIDE A RIGHT OF WAY FOR CR 2209 BECAUSE THE ORIGINAL PLANNED CORRIDOR WAS OBSTRUCTED BY MITIGATION BANKS.

AT THE TIME THE COUNTY CAME TO US, WE ALSO WERE CONSIDERING A MITIGATION BANK AS ONE OF OUR LAND OPTIONS.

OUR DESIGN TEAM WILL SHORTLY ADDRESS THE EVOLUTION OF THE RIGHT OF WAY AGREEMENT AND THE 2019 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT.

THE TIMBER LEASE ON THE PROPERTY EXPIRES AT THE END OF NEXT YEAR, AND THAT IS WHY THE 2026 DATE IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS THE FIRST DATE OF CERTIFICATE OF OCCUPANCY.

BASED ON THE TIMBER EXPLORATION, WE STARTED PLANNING FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY CONSISTENT WITH THE COUNTY'S 2019 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT.

[01:15:02]

OUR FAMILY MET WITH SEVERAL MASTER DEVELOPERS AND UNANIMOUSLY CHOSE FREEHOLD COMMUNITIES BECAUSE OF THEIR AGRIHOOD CONCEPT AND THEIR OTHER EXCEPTIONAL DEVELOPMENTS IN FLORIDA.

WE THINK IT'S A WONDERFUL FIT FOR THE PROPERTY, THE AREA, AND HONORING JOHN ROBINSON'S LEGACY.

OVER 800 ACRES, OR ABOUT A THIRD OF THE PROPERTY, WILL BE PROTECTED IN THE DEVELOPMENT.

WE LOOK FORWARD TO A MUTUALLY BENEFICIAL PROJECT.

WE WANT TO BE A GOOD COMMUNITY PARTNER.

WHILE WE ARE COGNIZANT THAT WE HAVE A FIDUCIARY RESPONSIBILITY TO OUR SHAREHOLDERS.

WE'RE PROUD TO BE WORKING WITH FREEHOLD TO DEVELOP VERDE, AND WE RESPECTFULLY REQUEST YOUR APPROVAL OF OUR APPLICATION.

THANK YOU SIR. GOOD MORNING DAD.

GOOD MORNING. GOOD MORNING EVERYONE.

DOUG MILLER ENGLAND, THAMES AND MILLER, 14 775 OLD SAINT AUGUSTINE ROAD.

32258. I'VE BEEN A I AM A PROFESSIONAL REGISTERED ENGINEER.

I'VE BEEN AN ENGINEER FOR 45 YEARS.

I'VE BEEN RECOGNIZED AS AN EXPERT IN STATE AND FEDERAL COURTS AND STATE ADMINISTRATIVE 120 20 HEARINGS.

I'VE BEEN RECOGNIZED AS AN EXPERT IN TRANSPORTATION, STORMWATER MANAGEMENT, UTILITY PLANNING, WATER RESOURCES, SOLID WASTE, AND LAND USE PLANNING.

AND MY CURRICULUM VITAE HAS BEEN FILED WITH THE COURT.

I'M SORRY. THE CLERK.

SO YOU KNOW, AS LYNN OUTLINED AND ZACH OUTLINED, YOU CANNOT SEPARATE THE COUNTY ROAD 2209 IN THIS REZONING.

THEY ARE HAND AND GLOVE GO TOGETHER.

SO WE NEED TO TALK A LITTLE BIT ABOUT 2209 2209 BEGAN IN 1998 WITH AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE COUNTY AND THE FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION TO BUILD A PARALLEL CORRIDOR WEST OF I-95.

MUCH LIKE US, ONE SERVES THAT SAME PURPOSE EAST OF 95, PRIMARILY TO TAKE TRIPS, INTERCHANGE TO INTERCHANGE TRIPS, INTRA COUNTY TRIPS TO KEEP.

SINCE MOST OF THE COUNTY'S ROADS GO EAST WEST TO KEEP THOSE TRIPS OFF I-95.

THAT IS THE PURPOSE OF 2209.

THEY ENTERED INTO AN AGREEMENT IN 1998, AND IT WAS AMENDED IN 2002.

IT IS A 32 MILE ROADWAY THAT YOU SEE WHAT YOU SEE ON THIS MAP.

THE GREEN IS WHAT IT.

IN 2016, WHEN WE ENTERED INTO CONVERSATIONS WITH THE COUNTY ABOUT THE ISSUE THAT THEY HAD WITH THE ALIGNMENT THROUGH THE MITIGATION BANKS.

THE GREEN THEY HAD ACQUIRED, THEY WERE SHORT, ABOUT NINE AND A HALF OR TEN MILES IN THE MIDDLE TO PERFECT THE ENTIRE 32 MILE CORRIDOR.

YOU KNOW, WE'VE HEARD SOME COMMENTS THAT THIS IS JUST A DEVELOPER ROAD.

NOTHING COULD BE FURTHER FROM THE TRUTH.

AND JUST TO PUT THIS 2209 THROUGH SAINT JOHN'S COUNTY AND REGIONAL CONTEXT.

THIS IS WHAT IT CONNECTS TO IN FLAGLER COUNTY AND VOLUSIA COUNTY.

IT'S IT'S CALLED THE I-295 TO I-4 CONNECTOR.

SO STARTING DOWN IN DELAND, ALL THE WAY UP THROUGH VOLUSIA AND FLAGLER COUNTY.

THE 2209 YOU'RE FAMILIAR WITH CONNECTS TO NINE B AND THEN TO THE I-295 EAST BELTWAY.

THAT'S THIS IS IN THE LONG RANGE PLAN NOW FOR THE RIVER TO SEE TPO TRANSPORTATION PLANNING ORGANIZATION MUCH LIKE YOU ARE IN THE FIRST COAST TPO.

THIS IS THE VOLUSIA AND FLAGLER COUNTY TPO.

SO THIS IS A LONG RANGE PLAN FOR THE BENEFIT OF ALL THE COUNTIES.

IT'S CERTAINLY NOT JUST A ROAD FOR DEVELOPMENT IN SAINT JOHNS COUNTY.

SO LET'S TALK ABOUT THIS LITTLE BLOW UP OF THE AREA AND WHERE YOU WERE AT IN 2016.

ENGLAND, THAMES AND MILLER HAD BEEN RETAINED TO DO A HIGHEST AND BEST USE STUDY ON THE ROBINSON PROPERTY.

YOU SEE THE CROSSHATCH BLUE BOX? THAT'S THE 2673 ACRES.

WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE REZONING OF THE GOLD BOUNDARY.

[01:20:06]

YOU SEE, SOUTH OF 214 IS ABOUT 11,500 ACRES THAT THE ROBINSON'S ALSO OWNED.

WE WERE ASKED TO DO A HIGHEST AND BEST USE STUDY AT THAT TIME AS PART OF THAT STUDY.

WE MET WITH THE COUNTY BECAUSE AS YOU CAN SEE, THE ORIGINAL ALIGNMENT, WHICH IS SHOWN IN THE ORANGE AND DOTTED YELLOW OR ORANGE AND BLACK, THE WAS THE ORIGINAL ALIGNMENT THAT THE COUNTY HAD CONNECTED TO ON THE NORTH AND THE SOUTH.

THE PROBLEM WAS THE MITIGATION BANKS HAD SINCE BLOCKED THAT ALIGNMENT.

HOWEVER, THERE WAS ABOUT THREE MILES THAT STILL WENT THROUGH THE ROBINSON IMPROVEMENT COMPANY PROPERTY SOUTH OF 214.

SO WE MET WITH THE ASSISTANT COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR, DARRYL LOCKLEAR, AND WE WERE JUST INQUIRING, WHAT IS THE STATUS OF THE REST OF THIS ALIGNMENT? WHEN WILL YOU BE ACQUIRING, PARTICULARLY FROM THE ROBINSON IMPROVEMENT COMPANY? THIS ORIGINAL ALIGNMENT, WHEN WILL YOU BE ACQUIRING THIS, THESE THREE MILES? AND WE WERE A BIT SURPRISED WHEN THE COUNTY SAID, TOLD US THAT THEY DIDN'T THINK THEY COULD ACQUIRE THE RIGHT OF WAY THROUGH THE MITIGATION BANKS FOR A HOST OF REASONS.

BOTH COST CONSERVATION EASEMENTS.

THE FACT THAT THESE ARE PRIVATE CREDITS THAT HAD ALREADY BEEN SOLD FOR MITIGATION.

THE COMPLEXITIES, THEY DID NOT BELIEVE THEY WOULD EVER BE ABLE TO ACQUIRE THAT RIGHT OF WAY.

THE CHALLENGE FOR THE COUNTY WAS THEY REALLY COULDN'T MOVE AS THEY TOLD US.

THEY COULDN'T MOVE THE ROAD TO THE WEST BECAUSE IF IT'S MOVED TO THE WEST, IT'S TOO FAR FROM 95, AND PEOPLE AREN'T GOING TO DRIVE THAT FAR WEST TO GET TO THE NORTH, AND THEY'RE JUST GOING TO CONTINUE TO DO I 95.

AND SO REALLY, THE ONLY CHOICE, IN FACT, I BELIEVE DARRELL LOCKLEAR'S COMMENT WAS THIS IS A VERY OPPORTUNE MEETING.

I'M GLAD YOU'RE HERE.

WE WOULD LIKE TO GET THE THE RIGHT OF WAY FROM ALL THE RIGHT OF WAY.

7.4 MILES.

THAT'S SHOWN IN ORANGE FROM THE ROBINSON IMPROVEMENT COMPANY.

AND THE ROBINSON FAMILY SAID, WELL, IF YOU WANT TO PURCHASE A RIGHT OF WAY, WE'LL CERTAINLY LISTEN TO WHAT YOU HAVE TO SAY.

THEY SAID, WELL, THE PROBLEM IS, IN ORDER TO USE THE ORANGE RIGHT OF WAY, WE HAVE TO BUY SEVERAL MILLION DOLLARS WORTH OF LAND BETWEEN YOUR PROPERTY AND THE LAND TO THE NORTH, AND OUR BUDGET JUST WON'T.

WE DON'T HAVE ANY MONEY TO BUY YOUR RIGHT OF WAY.

SO DISCUSSIONS CONTINUED IN THE END RESULT WAS HOW ABOUT IF YOU PROVIDE A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT PROVIDES ENTITLEMENTS SO THAT THERE CAN BE SOME LIFT ON THE VALUE OF THE PROPERTY FOR THE ROBINSONS, AND THEN THEY WILL DONATE TO YOU THE 7.4 MILES.

SO THAT WAS A BARGAIN.

THAT WAS THE BARGAIN IN 2018.

NO MORE, NO LESS.

AND THE ONLY THING WE'RE HERE TODAY IS TO COMPLETE THE BARGAIN.

WE TALK A GREAT DEAL ABOUT MAKING SURE THAT DEVELOPERS MEET THEIR OBLIGATIONS WHEN THEY SIGN UP TO DO SOMETHING, AND I COMPLETELY AGREE WITH THAT.

I ALSO THINK THE COUNTY NEEDS TO DO WHAT THEY SAID THEY WERE GOING TO DO, AND THEIR OBLIGATIONS SHOULD BE A TWO WAY STREET.

THE COUNTY ASKED FOR THE ROBINSONS TO PUT EXACTLY THE CONDITIONS THAT THEY WOULD REQUIRE IN ORDER TO DO THE DONATION, AND THIS IS THE CONDITIONS THAT IT WOULD FOLLOW.

THE CORRIDOR THAT WAS SHOWN THAT THE COUNTY WOULD ACQUIRE THE RIGHT OF WAY FROM 208 TO THE NORTHERN PROPERTY LINE.

THE COUNTY WOULD PREPARE AND APPROVE AN AMENDMENT FOR THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, CHANGING THE LAND USE DESIGNATION FROM RESIDENTIAL BUILDINGS ON THE 2673 ACRES.

REMEMBER, THE 11,500 ACRES STILL REMAINS RURAL SILVICULTURE, NO DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS, AND THE ROBINSONS WOULD AGREE THAT THEY WOULD NOT DEVELOP THE PROPERTY PRIOR TO JANUARY 1ST, 2026, AND THAT THE COUNTY WOULD PAY FOR ALL THE LEGAL SURVEY ENGINEERING ASSOCIATED WITH THE RIGHT OF WAY DONATION.

SO THAT WAS THE BARGAIN, AND THE COUNTY MOVED FORWARD WITH THAT BARGAIN.

SO THEY TOOK IT THROUGH FOR PUBLIC HEARINGS.

THE FIRST PCA TRANSMITTAL HEARING IN JANUARY OF 2018, IT WAS RECOMMENDED FOR APPROVAL BY THE PCA.

[01:25:06]

A SECOND PUBLIC HEARING FEBRUARY 2018.

THE BCC ALSO APPROVED THE TRANSMITTAL HEARING.

THE THIRD PUBLIC HEARING WAS THE PGA IN OCTOBER 2018 TO ADOPT THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THEN THE BCC MEETING IN JANUARY OF 2019.

SO THOSE ARE FOUR PUBLIC HEARINGS.

EACH OF THOSE PUBLIC HEARINGS HAD FOUR NOTICE METHODS MAIL OUT SIGNS, ADVERTISEMENT, NEIGHBORHOOD BILL OF RIGHTS.

THERE WAS VIRTUALLY NO OPPOSITION TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF THIS PROPERTY.

PROPERTY FOR 3332 UNITS AT THOSE FOUR HEARINGS.

SO THIS IS WHAT IT SAYS.

IT SAYS THIS PROPERTY IS FINE FOUND COMPATIBLE AT THIS LOCATION FOR 3332 DWELLING UNITS.

IT MUST BE COMPATIBLE TO BE CONSISTENT WITH THE COMP PLAN.

YOU MADE THAT FINDING IN 2019 ALSO, THAT THERE WILL BE A DONATION OF 7.4 MILES AT NO COST TO THE COUNTY.

THAT WAS THE BARGAIN ENTITLEMENT RIGHTS, BEING ABLE TO USE THE LAND IN EXCHANGE FOR 7.4.

IT WASN'T A SECRET.

IT WASN'T IN THE BACK DOOR.

IT WAS IN FOUR PUBLIC HEARINGS OVER 18 MONTHS.

ALL NOTICED.

SO THAT'S THAT'S REALLY WHAT WHAT WE'RE HERE ABOUT.

BUT I DO WANT TO SHOW YOU AND PLAY A QUICK SNIPPET OF THE STAFF.

TERESA BISHOP THERE.

THEN TO TERESA WAS A LONG TIME IN CHARGE OF LONG RANGE PLANNING, COMPREHENSIVE PLANNING FOR THE COUNTY.

SHE RECENTLY RETIRED.

I'M SURE YOU ALL MISS HER.

WE DO. SO THIS IS THE HEARING COMMISSIONERS TERESA BISHOP, GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT.

ITEM 12 IS AN ADOPTION HEARING FOR THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT KNOWN AS ROBERTSON ITS COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT 2017 DASH ZERO ONE.

IT IS A REQUEST TO CHANGE THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP FROM RURAL SILVICULTURAL TO RESIDENTIAL B AND AS I SAID, IT IS AN ADOPTION HEARING TO CHANGE FROM RESIDENTIAL TO RESIDENTIAL B FROM RURAL SILVICULTURAL IT'S APPROXIMATELY 2673 ACRES, AND IT IS A COUNTY INITIATED AMENDMENT. AND WE'VE INITIATED THIS AMENDMENT AT YOUR REQUEST FOR THE EXTENSION OF COUNTY ROAD 2209 TO FURTHER THE RIGHT OF WAY AND ACQUIRING RIGHT OF WAY FOR THAT ROADWAY.

AND THE AMENDMENT DOES INCLUDE A TEXT POLICY THAT STATES THAT NO DEVELOPMENT WILL OCCUR PRIOR TO 2026, AND IT LIMITS DEVELOPMENT TO A 3332 DWELLING UNITS.

THERE IS NO DEVELOPMENT PLAN ASSOCIATED WITH THIS PARTICULAR AMENDMENT.

SINCE IT IS THE COUNTY INITIATED AMENDMENT.

THERE IS NO DEVELOPER THAT'S INVOLVED WITH THIS AMENDMENT AT THIS TIME.

FUTURE DEVELOPMENT WILL ALL BE SUBJECT TO ALL LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS AND PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS THAT ARE IN PLACE WHEN DEVELOPMENT DOES COME IN IN 2026. AND THEN JUST A BIT OF BACKGROUND IN 2016.

IN NOVEMBER OF 2016, THE ROBERTSON IMPROVEMENT COMPANY AGREED TO DONATE APPROXIMATELY 250 FOOT OF RIGHT OF WAY AND STORMWATER POND SITES FOR THE EXTENSION OF COUNTY ROAD 2209 THROUGH THEIR PROPERTY.

AND THAT WAS IF THE COUNTY WOULD CONSIDER A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT FOR A PORTION OF THEIR PROPERTY.

SO WE'RE HERE DOING EXACTLY WHAT THE COUNTY SAID WE SHOULD DO AND THE COUNTY TODAY.

THERE IS IS 822MI².

THERE IS NOT A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN ON ANY PARCEL THAT IDENTIFIES THE NUMBER OF UNITS.

THE TIMING HAS BEEN FOUND TO BE CONSISTENT AND HAS INCOMPATIBLE ZONING.

YOU'RE REQUIRED TO HAVE COMPATIBLE ZONING.

THE UNDERLYING ZONING IS OR YOU CANNOT DO 332 3332 UNITS IN OUR ZONING.

WE'RE HERE TO GET YOU CONSISTENT.

WHY DIDN'T WE ASK THE COUNTY TO DO THE ZONING? THE REASON WE DIDN'T ASK THE COUNTY TO DO THE ZONING IS IT YOUR CODE REQUIRES MORE THAN A ZONING FOR MORE THAN TEN ACRES TO BE A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT, WHICH IS THE CUSTOM ZONING WHICH THE COUNTY CAN OBVIOUSLY NOT DO A CUSTOM ZONING FOR A PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT.

[01:30:05]

WHAT? THEY DON'T KNOW WHAT TO DO.

THAT'S THE ONLY REASON WE'RE HERE.

WE'RE SIMPLY PERFECTING THE AGREEMENT AND COMPLETING THE BARGAIN, AND WE EXPECT YOU TO DO THE SAME TODAY.

SO LET'S TALK ABOUT THE ACTUAL YOU KNOW, LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE REQUIREMENTS.

WHAT ABOUT INFRASTRUCTURE? SO LET'S TALK ABOUT TRANSPORTATION.

SO AGAIN, THE ROBINSONS ARE PROPOSING TO BUILD A 4.1 MILES OF 2209 FOR A COST OF $61.5 MILLION.

THAT CONNECTS 214 TO 208.

AGAIN, IT'S ALSO DONATING ANOTHER FOUR MILES SOUTH OF 214 DOWN TO 305 OF RIGHT OF WAY.

SO LET'S LOOK AT THE FIRST LINK 208 BETWEEN COUNTY ROAD 2209 AND I-95 AT BUILDOUT.

EVERY UNIT 3332 UNITS FULLY OCCUPIED.

COUNTY ROAD 208 OPERATES AT 76% OF ITS CAPACITY.

THIS IS LET'S LOOK AT TWO.

WELL, LET'S LOOK AT THE INTERCHANGE.

INTERCHANGE DOT HAS THE INTERCHANGE UNDER UNDER CONSTRUCTION RIGHT NOW.

THEY'RE THEY'RE BUILDING A HIGH CAPACITY INTERCHANGE IMPROVEMENT DOING A DIVERSION DIMING.

THE DOT IS DESIGNED THAT ROAD THROUGH 2042 FOR OVER 30,000 VEHICLES PER DAY.

IT INCLUDES THIS.

IT INCLUDES THIS ROBINSON TRACK BECAUSE IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

HOW ABOUT STATE ROAD 16? THE TWO LANE. HAVE YOU ALL BEEN IN LITIGATION TRYING TO GET A DEVELOPER TO DO THE RIGHT THING.

HOW MANY TRIPS TO BUILD OUT DOES ROBINSON PUT ON THE TWO LANE SECTION OF STATE ROAD 16? ZERO. NOT ONE.

ZERO. LET'S TALK ABOUT TWO.

14. THE CONNECTION AT THE OTHER END.

THAT'S AT BUILDOUT, 63% OF COUNTY ROAD TWO.

14 IS ALL THE CAPACITY IS ALL THE CAPACITY THAT'S CONSUMED.

HOW ABOUT ALAN KNEES? 86%. THIS IS ALL A BUILD OUT NUMBERS.

HOW ABOUT WATER AND SEWER AND REUSE? WELL, 2209, INCLUDING THE PIECE THROUGH THE ROBINSON IS IS GOING TO BE USED AS YOUR MAJOR TRANSMISSION CORRIDOR FOR MUCH OF THE WATER, SEWER AND REUSE COMPONENTS TO CONNECT YOUR NORTHERN GRID TO YOUR SOUTHERN GRID.

THERE'S A WATER PLANT A FEW BLOCKS AWAY THAT HAS CAPACITY.

TODAY, IT'S AN 8 MILLION GALLON A DAY WATER PLANT, CURRENTLY OPERATING AT 6 MILLION GALLONS A DAY.

ABOUT WHERE THE THE NUMBER FOUR IS SHOWN.

HOW ABOUT WATER SUPPLY? THIS BECAUSE IT'S IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IS IN YOUR WATER SUPPLY AND IN YOUR CUP.

SO THE POINT IS THIS IS WHERE INFRASTRUCTURE CAPACITY EXISTS TODAY AND HAS AND CAN ACCOMMODATE BUILDOUT.

IS THERE DEFICIENCY? YES. BECAUSE WE'RE WE'RE LOOKING AT AN EIGHT MILE DIAMETER.

AND YOU KNOW, THERE'S 3% HERE AND 7% HERE.

MOST OF THOSE DEFICIENCIES ARE ON STATE ROADS THAT ARE DEFICIENT WITH OR WITHOUT THE PROJECT.

THAT'S WHAT PROPORTIONATE SHARE IS.

THAT'S WHERE THE STATUTE AND YOUR REGULATIONS REQUIRE YOU TO ACCEPT FAIR SHARE OR PROPORTIONATE FAIR SHARE.

BUT THE INFRASTRUCTURE IN THIS AREA OF THE COUNTY, THIS IS AS GOOD AS IT GETS.

I CAN'T REMEMBER A PROJECT THAT WE BOUGHT BEFORE YOU THAT HAD INFRASTRUCTURE AT THIS CAPACITY AT THE MAJOR CONNECTING POINTS, AND I'LL BET YOU CAN'T NAME ONE EITHER.

SO WE'LL TALK JUST BRIEFLY.

THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT IS ALSO A COMPANION TO THE ZONING BUILD OUT 3332 DEVELOPMENT UNITS.

THE PROPORTIONATE FAIR SHARE IMPACTS IS $56.7 MILLION.

MOST OF THOSE IMPACTS ARE ACTUALLY ON THE ROAD THAT WE'RE BUILDING.

BY THE WAY, THE PROPORTIONATE PROPORTION OF FAIR SHARE MITIGATION IS $61.5 MILLION.

SO THERE'S ABOUT $5 MILLION MORE MITIGATION THAN THERE ACTUALLY IS AN IMPACT, $0 ARE ALLOCATED FOR THE RIGHT OF WAY. THAT'S MITIGATION IS ABOUT $18,470 PER DEVELOPMENT UNIT.

[01:35:03]

THAT'S WOULD SET THE RECORD FOR A PROPORTIONATE, FAIR SHARE IN SAINT JOHNS COUNTY.

JUST TO GIVE YOU A SENSE OF THE IMPACT, FEE YOU CHARGE FOR TRANSPORTATION IS BETWEEN 9 AND $10,000, DEPENDING UPON SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE HOME. SO THIS IS ABOUT DOUBLE YOUR ACTUAL IMPACT FEE.

SO IN THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, BASED ON THAT, THE DEVELOPER WILL LIKELY ONLY RECEIVE ACTUALLY ABOUT HALF OF WHAT HE ACTUALLY SPENDS.

IN PHASE ONE, YOU HAVE TO SPEND $40 MILLION FOR ONE HOUSE, $40 MILLION, TWO MILES OF 2209 TO OCCUPY ONE HOUSE.

IT'S A PRETTY GOOD BARGAIN, I WOULD SAY.

SO THAT'S JUST A SUMMARY OF WHAT'S IN THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THAT'S REALLY REQUIRED BY STATE STATUTE.

BUT LET'S LOOK AT THE TRUE VALUE.

THE TRUE VALUE IS WAY MORE THAN, THAN THE THE 60 1.5 MILLION.

BECAUSE REMEMBER YOU GOT A 7.4 MILES OF RIGHT OF WAY AT NO COST.

SO WHAT WOULD THAT COST BE? WHAT'S THE VALUE RECEIVED? 24.8 MILLION BASED ON WHAT YOU PAID FOR THE ONE MILE FROM 208 TO THE PROPERTY BOUNDARY. IT DOESN'T GET A BETTER COMP THAN THAT.

THAT'S SAME RIGHT OF WAY, SAME LOCATION.

TOUCHING THIS RIGHT OF WAY.

YOU PAY $96,000 AN ACRE.

THERE'S 258 ACRES, 224 ACRES OF RIGHT OF WAY.

THE REMAINDER IS THE POND SITES.

SO 258 ACRES.

THAT'S WHAT YOU HAVE RECEIVED ALREADY TODAY IN YOUR BANK.

AND YOU PAID ZERO, OF COURSE.

THE VALUE OF THE ROAD TO BE CONSTRUCTED 61.5 MILLION.

TOTAL VALUE THAT THE COUNTY IS RECEIVING OUT OF THIS BARGAIN IS $100.8 MILLION.

I CAN'T REMEMBER ANY TIME, ANY DEAL THAT APPROACHES THIS.

SO WE'LL GO BACK TO THE EXISTING APPROVALS AND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, THE DESIGNATED COMPREHENSIVE PLAN RESIDENTIAL, BE 3332 UNITS BY STATE STATUTE IS ALREADY DETERMINED TO BE COMPATIBLE. NO DEVELOPMENT TO BE 2026 IS, TERESA BISHOP SAID IN HER.

THE ONLY THING THEY NEED TO DO IS COME BACK AND SHOW THAT THEY MEET THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE IN A ZONING.

THAT'S WHAT WE'RE HERE FOR TODAY.

I'M I'M HERE AS AN EXPERT TESTIFYING THAT IN MY PROFESSIONAL OPINION, WE DO MEET THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.

I'M NOW GOING TO TURN THIS OVER TO OUR SENIOR PLANNER AND LINDSAY HAGER, WHO'S GOING TO WALK THROUGH OTHER LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE ISSUES AND HOW WE COMPLY.

THANK YOU. DOUG. GOOD MORNING, COMMISSIONERS.

FOR THE RECORD, MY NAME IS LINDSAY HAGER.

I'M A PLANNING MANAGER WITH ENGLAND, THAMES AND MILLER.

OUR ADDRESS IS 14775 OLD SAINT AUGUSTINE ROAD.

AND FOR THE RECORD, I'VE BEEN A PRACTICING PLANNER HERE IN NORTHEAST FLORIDA FOR OVER 25 YEARS.

SOME OF THAT TIME I'VE HAD HERE IN SAINT JOHNS COUNTY WORKING FOR THE GROWTH MANAGEMENT DEPARTMENT.

SO WE'LL JUST TOUCH ON SOME KEY COMPONENTS OF THE PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT.

AS YOU KNOW, YOUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE GIVES US GUIDANCE FOR HOW WE DEVELOP PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENTS.

AND THAT'S COMING IN TWO FORMS. ONE WHERE WE'D HAVE A TEXT WHICH GIVES US SOME DESCRIPTIONS ABOUT THE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM.

AGAIN, THAT WAS PROVIDED TO US FROM THE 2019 COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT ON THE TYPE OF USE RESIDENTIAL AND THE TOTAL NUMBER OF UNITS, AND THEN ALSO THE TIMING OR THE PHASING. THE SECOND COMPONENT OF A PLANNED UNIT DEVELOPMENT IS YOUR MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN MAP.

AND I'VE TAKEN SOME LIBERTY HERE TO ACCENTUATE WHAT IS YOUR BLACK AND WHITE MAP THAT YOU SEE WITHIN YOUR PUD DOCUMENTS TO HIGHLIGHT SOME SOME IMPORTANT POINTS OF THE CONCEPTUAL PLAN, REALLY, WHERE YOU SEE THAT PATTERN OF GROWTH THAT DOUG WALKED US THROUGH BEGINNING WITH 2209 COMING FROM COUNTY ROAD 208.

AND THEN YOU SEE ALONG OUR WESTERN BOUNDARY, WHERE WE HAVE THOSE MITIGATION BANKS THAT WERE ESTABLISHED IN 2004, 2012.

AGAIN, THAT REASON FOR THAT REALIGNMENT OF 2209 THROUGH THIS PROPERTY, WHICH IS ABOUT 2600 ACRES, YOU SEE OUR WETLAND SIGNATURE HERE RUNNING THROUGH.

[01:40:01]

AND IN YOUR DOCUMENT, THERE'S A COMMITMENT TO PRESERVE A MINIMUM OF 885 ACRES OF WETLANDS.

YOU'LL SEE THAT COME THROUGH ON ENGINEERING PLANS AS WE PLACE THOSE WETLANDS WITHIN CONSERVATION EASEMENTS.

YOU SEE THE AREA IN THAT LIGHT BEIGE OR TAN COLOR REALLY SPLIT INTO THE TWO VILLAGES EAST AND WEST OF 2209, WHICH WOULD BE WHERE THE RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WOULD APPEAR WITHIN THE AREA, AND SOME GREEN AREAS HIGHLIGHTED AS THE 40, THE 28 ACRE COMMUNITY PARK IN THE SOUTHERN AREA AND TWO OTHER AMENITY AREAS LOCATING TO CARRY FORWARD WHAT ARE TYPICAL USES THAT YOU SEE BROUGHT FORWARD IN RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT? THE TOTAL DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM GENERALLY SPLIT BETWEEN LET'S CALL TRADITIONAL UNITS AND THEN AGE RESTRICTED UNITS.

THOSE ARE SPECIFIC AND TARGETED AND WITHIN OUR DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM.

SO AGAIN IN 2019 WE HAD MISS BISHOP WALK US THROUGH WHAT IS COMPATIBILITY DETERMINATION.

YOUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN GIVES US THAT GUIDANCE, THAT RECIPE TO FOLLOW UNDER POLICY A13 11 ABOUT DETERMINING WHAT COMPATIBILITY IS.

AND IT'S REALLY EVALUATING HOW USES CAN COEXIST ADJACENT TO EACH OTHER OVER TIME.

SO THERE'S NO UNDUE BURDEN FROM ONE OR THE OTHER, THE EXISTING OR THE PROPOSED.

SO THIS MAP IS HELPFUL TO US BECAUSE AGAIN, IT SHOWS FOR US WHAT WERE THE USES IN PLACE IN 2019 WHEN THAT DECISION WAS MADE.

AND THERE HAVE BEEN NO CHANGES THAT ARE PRESENTED TO YOU NOW.

SO AGAIN ALONG THE WESTERN BOUNDARY, YOU SEE WHERE WE HAVE THOSE MITIGATION BANKS AND WE HAVE SPECIFIC REGULATIONS TO ADDRESS FOR HOW WE'LL HAVE SETBACKS ADJACENT TO THOSE MITIGATION BANKS AND THE LIKE FOR OUR EXTERNAL BOUNDARIES.

YOU SEE WHERE THE ROADWAY 2209, WHICH IS ESSENTIALLY IS OUR FIRST PHASE OF DEVELOPMENT AGAIN.

MR. MILLER WALKED US THROUGH WHAT HAS TO BE CONSTRUCTED IN ORDER TO BUILD ONE HOME, AND THEN YOU SEE AND HIGHLIGHT IT IN THE WHITE AREAS, THE EXISTING LOTS OR THE EXISTING NEIGHBORHOODS THAT ESTABLISHED NEIGHBORHOODS, GENERALLY TO THE NORTH OF OUR PROPERTY AND ALONG TO AGAIN ON THE WEST, AND THEN THE WELL FILLED LOCATIONS.

THERE ARE SPECIFIC REGULATIONS BUILT WITHIN OUR PUD TO AGAIN BRING FORWARD A PATTERN OF DEVELOPMENT THAT WOULD ADDRESS THAT, INCREASING WHAT WOULD BE THE MINIMUM LOT SIZES ALONG THOSE AREAS AND PROVIDING FOR THOSE USES AND BUFFERING THAT YOU SEE.

SO WE VISITED THE PGA LAST MONTH, JUST IN OCTOBER, PRESENTING TO THE PGA, WE REMOVED THE NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL COMPONENT OF OUR PUD.

WE DISCUSSED THAT THEN WITH YOUR PLANNING BOARD AND WITH THAT REMOVED OUT TWO WAIVERS.

SO THE PRODUCT, THE PUD THAT'S PRESENTED IN FRONT OF YOU FOR OUR REVIEW HAS 16 WAIVERS TO WALK THROUGH SINCE OUR PGA HEARING.

AND IN THAT DISCUSSION, WE'VE REDUCED THE PHASE ONE DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR SINGLE FAMILY UNITS TO 850.

THAT'S INTENTIONAL.

THAT'S BUILDING ON THE TIMING OR GROWTH MANAGEMENT COMPONENTS OF BRINGING DEVELOPMENT ONLINE, RIGHT.

SO WE HAVE THAT COMPONENT OF THE RIGHT OF WAY AGREEMENT LETTER THAT YOU SAW THAT WE WOULD HAVE NO COS BEFORE 2026.

SO WE'RE ADDING IN. AGAIN, LET'S PHASE IN AND COMPARTMENTALIZE THE AMOUNT OF DEVELOPMENT THAT CAN OCCUR IN CERTAIN TRANCHES SO THAT WE DELIVER INFRASTRUCTURE AHEAD OF THAT DEVELOPMENT. BEFORE YOU HAVE PEOPLE THAT LIVE IN THE COMMUNITY.

SOME OTHER COMPONENTS THAT WE DID, WE LISTENED TO OUR PGA MEMBERS, THE MULTIFAMILY USE.

WE HAD EVERY TYPE OF RESIDENTIAL USE THAT COULD COME WITHIN THAT DEVELOPMENT.

SO WHAT YOU HAVE IN FRONT OF YOU WOULD BE SINGLE FAMILY, DETACHED.

YOU HAVE SINGLE FAMILY ATTACHED.

WE SEE THAT AS TOWNHOMES OR PATIO HOMES.

AND YOU ALSO SEE SOME OF OUR DESIGN REGULATIONS FOR THAT TRADITIONAL NEIGHBORHOOD DESIGN, WHICH IS A COMPONENT THAT THAT GOES ALONG WITH THE AGRIHOOD THEME THAT WE'D LIKE TO PRESENT INTO THIS PROJECT.

AGAIN, I TOUCHED ON A LITTLE BIT AND HERE YOU SEE IT HIGHLIGHTED TRYING TO CARRY FORWARD IN THAT BRIGHT LINE ON THE NORTHERN AND EASTERN EDGES THERE WHERE WE HAVE OUR ESTABLISHED NEIGHBORHOODS, THAT AREA HAS A SPECIFIC PURPOSE TO HAVE A BUFFER OF A 35 FOOT TRANSITION BUFFER.

FOLKS IN THE NORTHWEST SECTOR THAT WOULD FEEL AND BE MOST LIKE OUR DEVELOPMENT EDGES THAT WE HAVE.

SO WE BORROWED FROM THAT STRATEGY OF BRINGING IN NEW DEVELOPMENT WITH EXISTING DEVELOPMENT, BUT ALSO WITHIN THOSE AREAS WE HAVE THAT YOUR MINIMUM LOT SIZE WOULD BE 60FT.

THAT'S YOUR STARTING, YOUR MINIMUM LOT SIZE.

I THINK THERE WAS SOME QUESTION OR CONCERN OVER THE MINIMUMS THAT WE'RE SETTING.

AGAIN, THIS IS A REGULATORY DOCUMENT TO MOVE FORWARD.

AND SO IN THAT ALONG THOSE AREAS YOU SEE IN THE HIGHLIGHTED THE MINIMUM LOT SIZE STARTING THERE WOULD BE 60FT.

WE ALSO REMOVE THE ACCESS TO THE WELL FIELDS.

THAT WAS THROUGH STAFF DISCUSSION WITH WHY IS THAT SHOWN.

I THINK PGA ASKED ABOUT THAT TOO.

AND INTENSE. OUR LAND, THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE WOULD SAY WHEN NEW DEVELOPMENTS COME ON, YOU SHOULD CONSIDER AND PLAN FOR WHERE YOU CAN HAVE FOR INTERCONNECTIVITY. SO SIMPLY WHAT THAT CONNECTION WAS FOR WAS TO ACHIEVE FOR THAT INTENT.

AND SO THERE WAS SOME DISCUSSION TO REMOVE THAT.

AND WE HAVE DONE SO.

SO THE OTHER COMPONENTS WHEN WE TALK ABOUT PD SO WE HAVE TEXT, WE HAVE OUR MAP AND WHAT WE'RE BRINGING FORWARD.

YOU'RE LOOKING AT A MASTER PLAN COMMUNITY THAT'S COVERING 2600 ACRES.

WE HAVE WAIVERS WITHIN OUR PD THAT'S PRESENTED TO YOU.

WE ARE IN GOOD STANDING WITH OTHER MASTER PLANNED COMMUNITIES THAT YOU HAVE WITHIN WITHIN SAINT JOHN'S COUNTY, WITH THE NUMBER OF WAIVERS THAT YOU MAY SEE THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN

[01:45:01]

APPROVED. I LIKE TO GROUP, ALTHOUGH WE HAVE 16 INDIVIDUAL WAIVERS, WE ENUMERATE THOSE.

THAT'S INTENTIONAL SO THAT STAFF KNOWS HOW TO PERMIT FOR THOSE WE KNOW HOW TO MOVE FORWARD IN THAT CASE, BUT THEY CAN BE GROUPED INTO THREE BUCKETS MASTER PLAN COMMUNITY.

WHAT YOU ARE ENABLED WHEN YOU KNOW HOW YOU'RE GOING TO BUILD INDIVIDUAL PRODUCTS, YOU KNOW WHAT YOU'RE DOING.

FOR EXAMPLE, IN THIS CASE, BUILDING A FOUR LANE ROADWAY THROUGH YOUR PRODUCT, WHAT THAT NEEDS TO LOOK LIKE.

WE HAVE ARCHITECTURAL AND DIMENSIONAL STANDARDS AND THEN TECHNICAL STANDARDS.

THAT'S WHEN OUR ENGINEERS GET TOGETHER AND SAY IT MIGHT BE A GOOD IDEA TO MEANDER OUR A MULTI-USE PATH OUTSIDE OF THE RIGHT OF WAY.

THAT CHART THAT YOU SEE IS JUST TO GIVE US SOME GUIDANCE ABOUT WHAT WAIVERS LOOK LIKE.

YOUR CODE WOULD SAY WHEN YOU'RE BUILDING, WHEN YOU'RE DEVELOPING A PLAN, UNIT DEVELOPMENT WAIVERS ARE ANTICIPATED BECAUSE YOU'RE BUILDING SOMETHING NEW CUSTOM PUD.

AS DOUG EXPLAINED.

SO LET'S LOOK SO THE PUD HAS AND YOUR STAFF REPORT WALKS THROUGH EACH OF THE PUD.

EACH OF THE WAIVERS.

THIS JUST SIMPLY SUMMARIZES FOR US AND DOES A LITTLE BIT OF RESEARCH.

SO YOU CAN SEE THE NUMBER OF TIMES THIS BOARD HAS APPROVED SOME THAT WAIVER IN SOME FASHION, EITHER THE EXACT SAME WAY THE DIMENSION STANDARD OR TOUCHED UPON IT.

AGAIN, BECAUSE YOU'RE BEING PRESENTED WITH MASTER PLAN COMMUNITIES.

TWO THAT I LIKE TO ADDRESS ARE DIRECTIONAL SIGNAGE, RIGHT? WHEN YOU'RE DEALING WITH 2600 ACRES, NOT A SMALLER SUBDIVISION, BUT YOU'RE 2600 ACRES.

SEPARATE IT FROM YOUR MASTER, YOUR MAIN ROAD CONNECTION OF 208.

YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE A NEED TO INCREASE THE WAYFARING SIGNAGE TO DIRECT FOLKS WITHIN THAT PROPERTY RIGHT ON EAST AND WEST VILLAGE OF 2209.

SPEAKING OF 2209, YOU'VE GOT PARTS OF THAT BUILT.

WE USE THAT IN THE NORTHERN PART OF THE COUNTY.

WE HAVE OUR MULTI-USE PATH WHICH MEANDERS OUT OF THE RIGHT OF WAY.

YOUR CODE WOULD SAY, WE WANT ALL OF THAT WITHIN OUR RIGHT OF WAY WITH GOOD INTENTION.

IF YOU'RE DEALING WITH INDIVIDUAL PROPERTY OWNERS, IT'S DIFFICULT THEN TO WORK WITH INDIVIDUALS TO ACQUIRE OR PUT ANY OF YOUR INFRASTRUCTURE OUTSIDE OF THAT.

SO LET'S DIRECT US TO HAVE MULTI-USE PATH WITHIN THE RIGHT OF WAY.

BUT WHEN YOU'RE WITHIN A SINGLE LANDOWNER AND YOU'RE PLANNING FOR THAT ROAD, IT MAY BE MORE ESTHETICALLY PLEASING.

OR WE COULD AVOID WETLAND IMPACTS, OR WE CAN ENHANCE LANDSCAPING IF WE ALLOW FOR THAT MULTI-USE PATH TO MEANDER OUTSIDE OF THE RIGHT OF WAY AND GIVE TO THE COUNTY A HOLD HARMLESS AGREEMENT. SO THOSE ARE TWO PRACTICAL APPLICATIONS OF WAIVERS THAT YOU SEE.

AND AGAIN, THAT WE'VE WE'VE UTILIZED THAT AS A COMMUNITY AT LEAST FOUR TIMES IN OUR MASTER PLAN COMMUNITIES.

A DIFFERENT A LITTLE DIFFERENT.

WHEN WE TALK ABOUT WAIVERS.

THEY'RE NOT VARIANCES.

THEY ARE TO DEVELOP YOUR PLAN TO PRESENT YOU WITH THAT HOLISTIC PLAN.

AND THEN YOUR STAFF UTILIZES THOSE WAIVERS TO PUT INTO YOUR PERMIT PORTAL.

THEY KIND OF TRAIL DOWN TO THE PERMITS SO THAT THEY KNOW HOW TO REVIEW THE PLANS THAT COME BEFORE THEM.

AND THEY'RE ALSO USED TO EVALUATE, TO MODERNIZE YOUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE, TO SAY WHAT YOU'RE SEEING IN THE MARKET VERSUS WHAT'S BEING DEVELOPED AS SINGLE AND SUBDIVISIONS.

SO JUST IN SUMMARY, I'LL INVITE ZACH TO COME UP WITH ME JUST REPEATING THE THINGS THAT WE UNDERSTAND FROM 2019.

WE'VE BEEN THIS DEVELOPMENT WAS ASSIGNED A CERTAIN NUMBER OF UNITS, 3332 GIVEN A START DATE FOR WHEN THOSE CODES WOULD COME ON IN 2026, WE HAD TO BE EVALUATED AGAINST OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AT THAT TIME.

SAME POLICY IN PLACE.

THERE WE MEET OUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.

WE'RE FINDING IN THE SAME ELEMENTS OF FINDING STOOD ON OUR TEXT AND OUR MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN MAP.

WE'RE INTRODUCING THE THEME OF AGRIHOOD.

AND HERE FOR THAT CHARACTER THAT WE SEE, BUT ALSO WHAT BRINGING FORWARD.

AND WHILE IT'S NOT TRADITIONAL THAT YOU ARE HAVING ROW CROPS PER SE, ALTHOUGH WE HAVE A MONOCULTURE OF PINE THAT WE'RE DOING SILVICULTURE NOW, BUT IT DOES BRING US TO HAVE AN AMENITY THAT COULD BRING YOU CLOSER TO GROWING WHAT YOU WOULD HAVE OF VEGETABLES AND SEE AND PRODUCE THAT YOU WOULD SEE ON YOUR SITE, RATHER THAN, SAY, HAVE A GOLF COURSE OR PICKLEBALL, PRESENT IT TO THAT.

SO YOUR PUD HAS INCREASED BUFFERS, YOU'VE INCREASED SETBACKS, WE'VE REMOVED MULTIFAMILY USE, WE'VE INCREASED OUR MINIMUM LOT SIZE.

AND MR. MILLER WALKED US THROUGH WHAT WOULD BE THE DEVELOPER'S CONSTRUCTION OF THE ROADWAY, WHICH IS TOTALING $61 MILLION.

SO WITH THAT, I'LL BRING UP ZACH TO WALK US THROUGH A COUPLE COMPONENTS, AND WE'RE ALL HERE IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ONCE WE GET IN.

COMMISSIONER COMMENTS. THANK YOU, MISS HAGER.

THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING AGAIN.

ZACH MILLER 3203.

OLD BARN COURT HAPPY TO REPRESENT THE APPLICANT AND TALK ABOUT THE LEGAL STANDARD REVIEW IN THREE DIFFERENT COMPONENTS.

FIRST, YOU HEARD THIS TOUCHED ON A LITTLE BIT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN CONSISTENCY.

THIS ISN'T JUST IN YOUR CODE.

THIS IS REQUIRED BY STATE LAW.

ONE 6330 215.

WHAT DOES IT SAY? ANY ADVERSELY AGGRIEVED OR ADVERSELY AFFECTED PARTY MAY MAINTAIN A DE NOVO ACTION.

WHAT THAT MEANS IS IT'S NOT ON THE RECORD.

IT MEANS DISCOVERY. IT MEANS AN ACTUAL TRIAL.

FOR ANY RELIEF.

AND A LOCAL GOVERNMENT DENYING A DEVELOPMENT ORDER THAT RENDERS A PROPERTY INCONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

WHY IS THAT IMPORTANT? AS YOU HEARD SIX YEARS AGO OR ALMOST SIX YEARS AGO.

THIS PROPERTY WAS DESIGNATED RESIDENTIAL B, BUT WITH A TEXT AMENDMENT ALLOWING UP TO 3332 UNITS.

THE ZONING IS OR THE ZONING IS INCONSISTENT WITH THAT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

[01:50:03]

THIS IS JUST TO PUT ON THE RECORD THAT A DENIAL DOES CONSTITUTE A DEVELOPMENT ORDER, AND A REZONING CONSTITUTES A DEVELOPMENT PERMIT.

SO YOUR ACTION TODAY DOES FALL UNDER THE STATUTE.

THIS IS THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT THAT WAS APPROVED IN 2019, DESIGNATING THIS FOR 3332 HOMES.

AS WAS POINTED OUT EARLIER, WHY WASN'T THERE A ZONING IN 2019? BECAUSE. YOUR CODE REQUIRES THAT ANY NEW DEVELOPMENT ON PARCELS GREATER THAN TEN ACRES, THE ZONING MUST BE A PUD. SO YOUR CODE DID NOT ALLOW A CONSISTENT ZONING AT THAT TIME.

THAT WAS FINE, BECAUSE THE TIMING AT THE AT THE TIME OF THAT COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT SAID WE WOULDN'T GO FORWARD WITH DEVELOPMENT UNTIL JANUARY 2026.

AS YOU'VE HEARD, WE'VE ACTUALLY PUSHED THAT DATE OUT TO JANUARY 2028 AND LIMIT IT TO 500 UNITS FOR 2030, AND WE HAVE TO SPEND OVER $40 MILLION IN MITIGATION BEFORE WE DO ONE HOME.

SO FAILURE TO APPROVE THIS, IN MY PROFESSIONAL OPINION, WOULD LEAVE THE PROPERTY, THE ZONING INCONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND IN VIOLATION OF ONE 6330 215. YOU HEAR A LOT ABOUT THIS BURT J.

HARRIS PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS.

I'M NOT SURE IN ANY OF THE PRESENTATIONS I'VE SEEN IF ANYBODY HAS ACTUALLY PUT THE STATUTE UP ON THE BIG BOARD.

SO WHAT DOES IT ACTUALLY SAY WHEN A SPECIFIC ACTION OF A GOVERNMENTAL ENTITY HAS INORDINATELY BURDENED AN EXISTING USE OR A VESTED RIGHT? WHAT IS A VESTED RIGHT? THE EXISTENCE OF A VESTED RIGHT IS TO BE DETERMINED BY APPLYING THE PRINCIPLES OF EQUITABLE ESTOPPEL AND SUBSTANTIVE DUE PROCESS.

OBVIOUSLY, SOME LAWYER WROTE THIS, BUT INORDINATELY BURDEN IS DEFINED BY THE STATUTE, MEANING THAT AN ACTION OF ONE OR MORE GOVERNMENT ENTITIES HAS DIRECTLY RESTRICTED OR LIMITED THE USE OF REAL PROPERTY, SUCH THAT THE PROPERTY OWNER IS PERMANENTLY UNABLE TO OBTAIN THE REASONABLE INVESTMENT BACKED EXPECTATIONS FOR AN EXISTING USE OR A VESTED RIGHT TO A SPECIFIC USE OF PROPERTY.

YOU HAVE A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FOR RIGHT OF WAY DONATION THAT ALLOWS FOR US TO DEVELOP 3332 UNITS, AND YOU HAVE A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT THAT ALLOWS US TO DEVELOP THE 3332 UNITS.

I WOULD SUBMIT TO YOU THAT THOSE ARE VESTED RIGHTS.

WHAT IS EQUITABLE ESTOPPEL? HERE'S WHAT THE SECOND DCA SAID WAY BACK IN 1975.

THE DOCTRINE OF EQUITABLE ESTOPPEL IS THE IS APPLICABLE TO LOCAL GOVERNMENT EXERCISING ITS ZONING POWER.

WHEN A PROPERTY OWNER RELYING IN GOOD FAITH UPON SOME ACT OR OMISSION, IN THIS CASE THE ACT BEING ENTERING INTO THE RIGHT OF WAY DONATION AGREEMENT AND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION HAS MADE A SUBSTANTIAL CHANGE IN POSITION OR INCURRED SUCH EXTENSIVE OBLIGATIONS AND EXPENSES THAT WOULD BE HIGHLY INEQUITABLE AND UNJUST TO DESTROY THE RIGHTS, AND I APOLOGIZE.

THIS IS 1975 HE HAS ACQUIRED.

I WOULD WROTE THEY HAVE ACQUIRED.

SO WHAT DID WE RELY ON 2016 AND THIS WAS PERFECTED IN 2019.

THE AGREEMENT FOR THE DONATION OF OVER 250 ACRES FOR THE RIGHT OF WAY THAT WAS AT NO COST TO THE COUNTY.

YOU GOT THAT FOR FREE.

THAT THAT VALUE IN $2,018 WAS 25 MILLION.

WHAT WERE THE BENEFITS? THIS ISN'T MY PRESENTATION.

THIS WAS YOUR STAFF'S PRESENTATION.

AGAIN, YOU GOT 7.4 MILES OF RIGHT OF WAY.

THE RIGHT OF WAY SECURES 2209, WHICH IS A REGIONALLY SIGNIFICANT ROADWAY RUNNING ALL THE WAY SOUTH OF JACKSONVILLE, ALL THE WAY TO DELAND.

THIS AT THIS POINT WILL CONNECT TO COUNTY ROAD 305.

WE HAVE WAIVED THE RIGHTS TO ANY IMPACT FEE CREDITS FOR THE DONATION OF THE RIGHT OF WAY.

THAT MAY HAVE HAPPENED BEFORE.

IN THE 16 YEARS I'VE BEEN DOING MOBILITY FEE CREDIT AGREEMENTS AND IMPACT FEE CREDIT AGREEMENTS, I CAN'T THINK OF AN INSTANCE WHERE A OWNER IS COMPLETELY GIVEN UP THE RIGHTS TO IMPACT FEE CREDITS FOR THE VALUE OF THE RIGHT OF WAY.

IN $2,018, THAT WAS $25 MILLION THAT THEY GAVE UP.

THAT'S WHAT THE COUNTY GOT.

THAT'S WHAT WE RELIED ON.

GOOD FAITH OF GETTING THE 3332 UNITS.

THIS IS ALSO WHAT YOUR STAFF SAID.

THE DONATION OF THE RIGHT OF WAY REMOVES THE CORRIDOR FROM POTENTIAL DEVELOPMENT OR ENCUMBRANCES SUCH AS CONSERVATION.

OTHER EASEMENT. REMEMBER FROM THE PRESENTATION EARLIER, THE ORIGINAL ALIGNMENT WAS GOING TO GO WEST OF THIS PROPERTY, BUT THAT WAS TOO EXPENSIVE AND WOULD HAVE INTERRUPTED CONSERVATION EASEMENTS AND MITIGATION BANKS.

THIS IS JUST CONNECTING AND OFFERING A ALTERNATIVE TO I-95 TO KEEP THE PROPERTY, OR KEEP RESIDENTS FROM THAT NEED TO MOVE NORTH AND SOUTH OFF I-95.

THIS IS ALSO WHAT YOUR STAFF SAID.

PLANNED DEVELOPMENT ALONG THIS CORRIDOR CAN ALLOW FOR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND JOB OPPORTUNITIES IN A CENTRALLY LOCATED PART OF THE COUNTY.

THESE WERE THE BENEFITS THAT THE COUNTY GOT AS PART OF THE DEAL.

HERE'S WHAT WE GAVE UP AS PART OF THE DEAL.

THE $7.4 MILLION, 258 ACRES, $25 MILLION.

DELAYING ANY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT UNTIL 2026.

AS PART OF THIS, WE'RE DELAYING IT UNTIL JANUARY 2028.

AND WE'RE MORE THAN 500 UNITS UNTIL JANUARY OR JANUARY 2030.

[01:55:01]

WE HAVE TO SPEND $40 MILLION BEFORE WE BUILD ONE HOME.

THAT'S EQUITABLE ESTOPPEL.

THAT'S THE BENEFIT TO THE COUNTY, AND IT WOULD BE HIGHLY INEQUITABLE TO DENY US THE REZONING FOR THE RIGHTS THAT ARE ALREADY VESTED, PER THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

THAT'S WHAT BERT HARRIS IS.

SO LET'S TALK ABOUT THE ACTUAL RIGHT OF WAY AGREEMENT.

EVERYBODY NEEDS TO READ THIS REALLY QUICKLY.

JUST JUST KIDDING.

BUT IT'S UP THERE. FOR THE RECORD, I'M SURE IT'S IN YOUR AGENDA PACKET.

I'M GOING TO PICK OUT TWO SPECIFIC PORTIONS THAT ARE NOWHERE NEAR THIS LONG.

THIS IS IN THE WAREHOUSE CLAUSE.

THIS AGREEMENT IS CONTINGENT UPON THE APPROVAL AND EFFECTIVENESS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT.

THE EFFECTIVE DATE.

THIS AGREEMENT SHALL BECOME EFFECTIVE UPON THE EXECUTION OF ALL PARTIES.

DONE, AND THE APPROVAL AND THE EFFECTIVENESS OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT.

RESPECTFULLY, MY OPINION AS SOMEONE WHO'S DONE THIS IS THAT IT'S NOT EFFECTIVE UNTIL THERE IS A REZONING THAT IS CONSISTENT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

WHY DOES THAT MATTER? OUR CLIENTS WANT TO DONATE THE RIGHT OF WAY.

WE THINK IT'S GOOD FOR THE COUNTY.

WE THINK IT'S GOOD FOR OUR CLIENTS.

BUT THE AGREEMENT EXPIRES IN 2034.

IF WE DON'T BUILD THE ROAD, WE DON'T GET THE ZONING, THEN THE TIMING IS THAT THE ENGINEERING AND THE ACTUAL LOCATION OF THAT RIGHT OF WAY IS THE RESPONSIBILITY OF THE COUNTY.

THAT'S MILLIONS OF DOLLARS THAT YOU HAVE TO SPEND BEFORE YOU COME TO US TO REQUEST THE SPECIFIC LOCATION.

I'LL END WITH, I DON'T KNOW IF YOU CAN HIT THE PLAY BUTTON.

COMMISSIONER DUGGAN WELL, LET ME BORROW A PHRASE FROM ONE OF MY.

I THINK THIS IS AN OFFER WE CAN'T REFUSE.

AND I COULD SPEND 20 MINUTES TALKING ABOUT IT, BUT I'LL TRY TO SORT OF BE SUCCINCT AND.

AND 35 SECONDS.

THIS IS BASICALLY ALLOWING US TO ACQUIRE THE, IF NOT ALL, BUT THE FINAL MAJOR PIECE OF RIGHT OF WAY FOR A HIGHWAY THAT'S DESPERATELY NEEDED. AND WE'RE ABLE TO ACQUIRE IT WITHOUT ANY CASH COMING FROM OUR SOMEWHAT LIMITED BUDGET AND WE'RE GETTING DEVELOPMENT THAT WILL PROBABLY, IN MY OPINION, HEAD IN THIS GENERAL DIRECTION IN ROUGHLY 5 OR 6 YEARS ANYWAY.

AND THE AGREEMENT WITH THE LANDOWNER, THE UNDERLYING LANDOWNER, IS THAT NO DEVELOPMENT WOULD COMMENCE UNTIL 2026.

DID I SEE THAT FIGURE? RIGHT, TERESA? 2026. SO I THINK IT'S I THINK THIS IS SOMETHING WE WE NEED TO GRAB A HOLD OF QUICK AND RUN WITH IT.

AND IT'S A DESPERATELY NEEDED PUBLIC WORKS PROJECT.

I'M GOING TO JUST GUESS.

AND I'M NO APPRAISER, BUT I'M GUESSING THAT THIS IS PROBABLY SOMEWHERE BETWEEN 6 AND 8 MILLION.

IF YOU HAD TO PUT A DOLLAR FIGURE ON THE 224 ACRES IF WE WENT TO CONDEMNATION.

SO THAT'S MY POSITION.

I CAN'T TOP COMMISSIONER DEAN, SO I'LL LEAVE THAT FOR A REBUTTAL.

AND ANY QUESTIONS THAT THE COMMISSIONERS HAVE ANY QUESTIONS FOR MR. MILLER? OKAY.

OKAY. THAT CONCLUDES OUR PRESENTATION.

WE'RE BACK TO THE BOARD. WE WANT TO OPEN IT UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.

ALL RIGHT, MADAM CHAIR, WE WILL OPEN IT UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENT.

THAT BEING SAID, I HAVE TWO DESIGNATED SPEAKERS, SO WE ARE GOING TO DESIGNATE.

WE'LL HAVE MR. MCINERNEY UP FIRST WITH TEN MINUTES, AND THEN AFTER THAT, WE'LL HAVE JESSE HOWELL FOR TEN MINUTES.

THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING.

GOOD MORNING. BOARD. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. JOE MCINERNEY 1005 BLACKBERRY LANE.

HENRY, I'M SORRY THEY PUT YOU IN A BOX.

I THINK WE'LL WORK TO TAKE YOU OUT OF THAT BOX.

THERE ARE SOME ERRONEOUS STATEMENTS MADE.

SO, LOOK, I START WITH THIS.

THE PCA MET TWO WEEKS AGO AND VOTED 7 TO 0 TO RECOMMEND RECOMMEND DENIAL.

WE NEED TO MOVE.

MOVE ONE OR THE OTHER HERE.

AND IN HIS STATEMENT, MEMBER JACK PETER SAID THIS IS ONE OF THE MOST INCOMPLETE APPLICATIONS I'VE REVIEWED.

SO MANY OPEN COMMENTS, THINGS NOT FINISHED.

THINGS MISSING TO THIS.

AS MY COLLEAGUES HAVE SAID, TO MOVE THIS FORWARD WITH SO MANY OPEN QUESTIONS FROM STAFF, REPORT JUST SEEMS TO ME TO BE ILL ADVISED AT THIS TIME.

LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, YOU SAW A DIFFERENT PRESENTATION TODAY THAN DID THE PCA.

[02:00:01]

PROBABLY PLANNED SO INCOMPLETE APPLICATION AND UNANSWERED QUESTIONS, YES.

BUT IMPORTANTLY TRAFFIC.

TRAFFIC WAS TOUCHED ON EARLIER AND NOT COMPLETELY.

I GUESS WE COULD SHOUT TRAFFIC BECAUSE AS I WALK DOOR TO DOOR, THROUGH CABBAGE HAMMOCK AND THROUGH WHISPER PINES, YOU KNOW, THE RESIDENTS SAID, OH NO, NOT MORE TRAFFIC. SO YOU KNOW, THAT'S THEIR UNFILTERED FEAR OF THIS PROJECT.

TRAFFIC, THOUGH, IS NOT JUST A PUBLIC PERCEPTION.

IT'S ALSO WHAT OUR TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT SAYS.

AND THEY HAVE CONCERNS AND YOU HAVE THAT IN FRONT OF YOU.

QUESTIONS LIKE PLEASE ADDRESS TRAFFIC IMPACTS TO TWO LANE COUNTY ROADS.

PASETTI 214 HOLMES KING.

ET CETERA. PLEASE EXPLAIN HOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF 2209 PROVIDES ADEQUATE MITIGATION FOR THE PROJECT IMPACTS THAT WILL OCCUR WITH PHASE ONE.

WE DIDN'T HEAR THOSE TODAY.

CONSTRUCTION OF 2209 OVER TWO PHASES MAY NOT BENEFIT THE COUNTY.

DIDN'T HEAR THAT TODAY.

AND OUR COUNTY STAFF GIVES US EIGHT ROAD SEGMENTS THAT ARE ADVERSELY IMPACTED.

EIGHT ROAD SEGMENTS THAT ARE ADVERSELY AFFECTED.

WE HEARD TODAY EARLIER THAT THERE WERE NONE.

THERE SEEMS TO BE A DISAGREEMENT WITH OUR TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT, AND NOT ONLY ARE THEY IMPACTED, BUT THEY ARE ALREADY EXCEEDING 100%.

ALL EIGHT OF THOSE EXCEED 100% ALREADY AND WILL BE MADE WORSE BY THIS PROJECT.

YOU HAVE THAT TABLE IN YOUR PACKET.

SO WE MAY BE HERE TODAY BECAUSE SOME QUESTIONS HAVE BEEN ANSWERED OVER THE LAST TWO WEEKS.

YOU'VE SEEN A DIFFERENT PRESENTATION.

BUT YOU KNOW WHAT? THE ROADS ARE STILL OVERCROWDED AND THEY WILL REMAIN OVERCROWDED.

ON THE BASIS OF ROADS THAT ARE OVERCROWDED.

AGAIN, WE HEARD NOTHING OF COMPREHENSIVE PLAN A1 311 TWO BUT THAT'S IN YOUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

AND IT SAYS A REZONING REQUEST SHALL NOT BE APPROVED IF THE PROPOSED TRAFFIC FLOW HAS AN UNREASONABLE IMPACT ON THE SURROUNDING AREA.

WE DIDN'T HEAR THE APPLICANT SAY ANYTHING ABOUT THAT.

WE DID HEAR THEM TALK ABOUT THE FLORIDA STATUTE THAT SAYS THEY CAN CONTRIBUTE PROPORTIONAL FAIR SHARE.

BUT LOOK, WE'RE NOT SAYING THEY CAUSED THE PROBLEM.

WE'RE SAYING THE PROBLEM IS THERE AND THIS SHALL NOT BE APPROVED IF THE PROPOSED TRAFFIC MAKES THAT WORSE.

WE'VE HEARD ABOUT A PHASE ONE, A POSSIBILITY OF 500 HOMES.

I'VE JUST DONE SOME SOME MATH HERE TO 3389 DAILY TRIPS.

I DIVIDED 500 BY 332 AND APPLIED THAT TO 22,000 DAILY TRIPS.

WELL, IT HARDLY MATTERS.

3389 DAILY TRIPS UNTIL THE YEAR 2030.

BUT YOU KNOW WHAT ALL THOSE CARS GO TO? 208 PHASE ONE ONLY CONSTRUCTS HALFWAY DOWN, NOT TO 214.

THOSE CARS ADVERSELY IMPACT THE SAME ROADS, THE SAME ROADS THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN IDENTIFIED FOR US BY OUR TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT.

AND WHAT ABOUT 2031? WE HAVE COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST ALWAYS TALKS ABOUT TRUST BUT VERIFY.

I LOVE THAT WE HAVE NO CERTAINTY OF THESE ROADS BEING IMPROVED AT ANY TIME, AT ANY TIME, LET ALONE 2031.

IT SOUNDS LIKE A BLANK CHECK IN MANY WAYS.

SO LOOK, PHASE ONE, IS THAT A POSSIBILITY? DOESN'T LOOK LIKE IT.

IT'S STILL ADVERSELY AFFECTING ALL THOSE ROADS.

AND SO RATHER THAN TO BUY OFF ON THIS ON THE BASIS OF, HEY, YOU KNOW, FEWER HOMES FOR A LIMITED PERIOD OF TIME YOU'RE REALLY APPROVING THE ENTIRE PLAN.

AND WE CAN APPLY A13, 11.2.

CLEARLY. CAN THIS REALLY BE DENIED? WHAT DID THE 2019 AGREEMENT SAY? WELL, IT CERTAINLY DID PROVIDE A LAND USE OF RZB.

BUT DO YOU KNOW WHAT THE ZONING STAYED AT? OPEN RURAL? IF THE COUNTY WAS DETERMINED TO APPROVE THIS AND SAY, HEY, YOU KNOW, YOU CAN START BUILDING IN 2026, THEY WOULD HAVE COME THROUGH WITH THE WHOLE PACKAGE IN 2019. THE WHOLE PACKAGE, A LAND USE, A REZONING, IT WOULD HAVE BEEN READY TO GO.

RIGHTS OF WAY.

AND OUR BUILDING DEPARTMENT WOULD BE LOOKING AT CONSTRUCTION PLANS.

SO LOOK HERE, THIS IS WHAT OUR STAFF TELLS US.

AS PREVIOUSLY STATED FROM THE 2019 AGREEMENT, THERE IS NO DEVELOPMENT PLAN OR REZONING WITH THIS PROPOSED AMENDMENT. IN THE FUTURE 2026, IT'S ANTICIPATED A PUD ZONING CHANGE WILL BE SUBMITTED AND REVIEWED,

[02:05:06]

REVIEWED ACCORDING TO THE LAND DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS AND PERMITTING REQUIREMENTS IN PLACE AT THAT TIME.

THAT'S WHAT WE'RE LOOKING AT TODAY.

AND FOR MR. DEAN TO SAY THIS WAS A THIS WAS A GREAT DEAL.

I KNOW THAT HE KNEW THIS.

HE KNEW THAT SOMETHING WOULD BE COMING FORWARD IN 2026.

THIS WAS PART OF THAT DEAL.

THIS IS ALL HENRY WAS SAYING.

HE WASN'T SAYING, HEY, LET'S START CONSTRUCTION.

SO WHERE DO WE GO FROM HERE? 2019 ONLY CALLED FOR A REVIEW, NOT AUTOMATIC APPROVAL.

IF REVIEWED BUT DENIED, THE DEAL IS STILL ON THE TABLE.

THERE'S NOTHING THAT REQUIRES YOU TO AUTOMATICALLY APPROVE THIS TODAY.

CLEARLY, OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN SAYS THAT A REZONING THAT ADVERSELY IMPACTS TRAFFIC SHALL NOT BE APPROVED, SHALL NOT BE APPROVED.

SO TODAY'S REVIEW SHOULD CONCLUDE THAT COUNTY ROADS ARE NOT READY FOR THIS PROJECT AGAIN IN 2019.

ALL HENRY SAID WAS THAT DEVELOPMENT CONTINUES TO MOVE SOUTH.

YES, THAT'S TRUE. I THINK THERE WAS A BELIEF AND AN UNDERSTANDING THAT THINGS WERE GOING TO CONTINUE TO HAPPEN.

ROADS WOULD BE IN PLACE AND IF SO, HEY, IT'S A GOOD DEAL.

BUT FOR WHATEVER REASON, FOR WHATEVER REASON, THAT HASN'T QUITE HAPPENED.

THE ROADS ARE NOT READY FOR THIS PROJECT, AND THERE IS NO CERTAIN DATE WHEN COUNTY ROADS WILL BE READY.

WE'RE TRYING TO COLLECT MONEY.

WE'RE TRYING TO APPROPRIATE MONEY.

WE'RE TRYING TO CREATE CAPITAL AND IMPROVEMENT.

FIVE YEAR CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLANS.

BUT THERE'S NO CERTAINTY ABOUT 214.

THERE'S NO CERTAINTY ABOUT PASETTI.

ALLEN. NICE ROAD.

I MEAN, THIS TRAFFIC.

IF THIS IS APPROVED, HALF OF THIS TRAFFIC IS MOVING DOWN ALLEN.

NICE ROAD TO 207 THROUGH VERMONT HEIGHTS.

EVERYBODY IS HEADED FOR I-95.

SO TO SAY THAT 208 IS UNDER CAPACITY AND 214 IS UNDER CAPACITY.

AND ALLEN NICE IS UNDER CAPACITY.

HEY, EVERYBODY IS HEADED FOR I-95.

AND THAT WILL BE A NIGHTMARE.

THIS THIS PLAN OF APPROVED TODAY IS A NIGHTMARE PLAN.

SO GIVEN THAT THERE'S NO CERTAINTY WHEN THE COUNTY ROADS WILL BE IMPROVED, GIVEN THAT THEY ARE NOT READY, THIS APPLICATION SHOULD BE DENIED.

I PUT IN ONE FINAL SLIDE THAT THE DEAL IS STILL ON THE TABLE.

WE'VE HEARD 2034.

HEY, WE'VE GOT A LOT OF WORK TO DO.

WE BOTH DO.

YOU HAVEN'T SEEN ANYTHING TODAY IN TERMS OF A REAL MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN.

THIS APPLICANT SUBMITTED AN INCREMENTAL MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN.

YES. THEY HAVE TALKED TO DEVELOPERS.

THEY THEY HAVE DONE SOME WORK.

BUT, YOU KNOW, THE DEAL IS STILL ON THE TABLE.

THIS IS NOT READY TO GO TODAY.

I DON'T THINK THAT WAS THE INTENT IN 2019.

THERE WAS NO IMPLIED IMPLICATION IN THE DECISION IN 2019 THAT ALL YOU HAVE TO DO IS SHOW UP IN 2026. OH, IT'S 2024 AND RECEIVE YOUR APPROVAL.

SO I ASK YOU TO DENY THIS.

THIS APPLICANT CAN SIT OUT FOR A YEAR, CLEARLY AT NO HARDSHIP.

WE'VE GOT WORK TO DO.

THIS PROJECT AND THIS.

THESE COUNTY ROADS ARE JUST NOT READY.

FOLKS, PLEASE HOLD YOUR APPLAUSE.

HOLD YOUR APPLAUSE. PLEASE HOLD YOUR APPLAUSE.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. MCINERNEY. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

TRYING TO GET OUT. OF HERE.

THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.

FIRST AND FOREMOST, THANK YOU FOR YOUR ATTENTIVENESS TODAY.

JESSIE HOWELL, 5160 COUNTY ROAD 13, SOUTH ELKTON, FLORIDA.

34 YEAR RESIDENT OF SAINT JOHNS COUNTY, FLORIDA.

A FEW HOUSEKEEPING NOTES FROM P-C-A.

OF COURSE, IT WAS UNANIMOUS MOTION TO RECOMMEND DENIAL, AS POINTED OUT BY MR. MCINERNEY. I MENTIONED SOME THINGS ABOUT THE CRASH STUDY DURING THE PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING.

I'M NOT GOING TO COVER THAT A LOT TODAY, BUT I MENTIONED A HISTORIC BLACK CHURCH ACROSS THE STREET THAT THEY SAID THAT THEY COULDN'T HAVE INVESTIGATED THAT BECAUSE IT WOULD HAVE BEEN TRESPASSING. YOU CAN ACTUALLY SEE THE REMNANTS OF IT FROM THE ORANGE NOTIFICATION SIGNS.

SO IF YOU LOOK HARD, YOU CAN SEE IT.

IT'S ON THEIR 1937 MAPS.

THEY USED TO LOOK AT THE TURPENTINE CAMPS.

THEY ALSO DURING THE REBUTTALS LAST TIME DURING PCA, MENTIONED THAT IT'S POORLY DRAINED DUE TO THE NEIGHBORING AREAS DRAINING INTO IT CURRENTLY.

[02:10:07]

THAT'S EXACTLY THE POINT WE'RE TRYING TO PROVE IS THAT IT'S GOING TO ADVERSELY AFFECT THE DRAINAGE OF THE AREAS AROUND IT.

WE'RE NOT REALLY CONCERNED WITH THE DRAINAGE WITHIN THE 3300 ACRES, BECAUSE WE KNOW THEY'LL BUILD IT UP OR, SORRY, 2600 ACRES.

WE KNOW THEY'LL BUILD IT UP AROUND FOUR FEET.

I'M ALSO A COMPANY TODAY, AND I EMAILED IT TO YOU LAST NIGHT BY A PETITION OF 2000 NAMES OVER 2000, NOW IN OPPOSITION TO THE ROBINSON IMPROVEMENT COMPANY.

APPLICATION BASED ON THE FACTS OF ADVERSE EFFECTS TO TRAFFIC AND FLOOD CONCERNS.

SO I LIKE TO START WITH THE AGRI-HOOD.

LAST TIME WE HEARD THIS NICE LONG PRESENTATION ABOUT THE AGRI-HOOD PORTION OF IT THAT'S A BIT MISLEADING.

THEY OBVIOUSLY THEY TOOK OUT THE COMMERCIAL SPACE ASPECT, SO I'M NOT GOING TO SPEND A LOT OF TIME WITH THAT HERE.

BUT PAGES NINE AND TEN OF THE MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN, OR BASICALLY 10% DESIGN STUDY, BECAUSE IT'S AN INCREMENTAL PLAN LIST MINIMUM LOT SIZES AT A 10TH OF AN ACRE AND NO MINIMUM LOT SIZES FOR THE AMENITY AND FARM USE ITEMS THAT THEY'RE TRYING TO PAINT THE PICTURE THAT MAKE THIS AN AGGREGATE AND MAKE IT UNIQUE.

I LIKE THE WORD UNIQUE FROM THEIR PRESENTATIONS, BECAUSE IT'S AS IF THERE'S NOT CURRENTLY 20 000 ACRES OF FARMLAND SURROUNDING THIS, WHERE PEOPLE CAN DO FARMER'S MARKETS AND GROW THEIR OWN FOOD AS IT IS.

SO PARK AND AMENITY PLANS ARE LEFT VERY VAGUE AND OPEN ENDED.

THERE'S A LOT OF RISK IN THIS MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN AS IT STANDS, PARTICULARLY WITH TRAFFIC.

WE'LL GET INTO THAT A LITTLE MORE DETAIL HERE.

10% OF THE HOMES IN EACH PHASE MAY BE CONSTRUCTED AS MODEL HOMES DURING CONSTRUCTION OF INFRASTRUCTURE.

SO THEY'RE SAYING THEY HAVE TO INVEST.

I THINK IT WAS 40 MILLION BEFORE THE BUILDING OF ONE HOME.

WELL, THEY'RE SAYING THAT CONCURRENTLY THEY CAN BUILD 10% OF THE HOMES.

SO BASICALLY UP TO 100 WITH THE ORIGINAL PLAN.

I GUESS IT WOULD BE 80 NOW WITH THE CONSTRUCTION OF 22 AND NINE.

ANOTHER IMPORTANT DETAIL I NOTICED FROM THE LAST PRESENTATIONS THIS MORNING IS THAT THE ORIGINAL 2019 PLAN WAS MENTIONING 7.2 MILES OF RIGHT OF WAY. ROBINSON IMPROVEMENT COMPANY DOES NOT OWN THE 11,500 ACRES TO THE SOUTH OF THAT NOW, SO WE NEED TO MAKE SURE THAT THE RIGHT TO TRANSFER THAT RIGHT OF WAY WAS INCLUDED, BECAUSE CURRENTLY THEY DON'T OWN THAT.

I DON'T KNOW THAT THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO GIVE AWAY THAT SECOND PORTION THAT TAKES IT ALL THE WAY JUST NORTH OF 305.

ALSO, THE PORTION JUST BEFORE THE PROJECT TO THE NORTH RUNS THROUGH THE TUPELO MITIGATION BANK.

SO I'M NOT SURE IF THE COUNTY HAS SET ASIDE FUNDS OR THE MEANS TO GRAB THAT.

SO LET'S SEE.

18 WAIVERS REQUESTED.

I KNOW THAT'S NOT A LOT COMPARED TO SOME OF THE OTHER DEVELOPMENTS, BUT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THIS ONE.

WE'RE NOT TALKING ABOUT THOSE. WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE FUTURE MOVING FORWARD.

WE'RE ALREADY SUFFERING FOR SOME OF THE THINGS WE'VE DONE IN THE PAST IN THIS COUNTY.

TRUE HOOD'S, LIKE YOU SEE IN THEIR MARKETING MATERIALS, TYPICALLY HAVE A LOT OF UPLAND PRESERVED.

I MEAN, THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT 885 ACRES OF PRESERVED SPACE HERE.

IT'S WETLANDS, AND THEY'RE DESTROYING 125 ACRES OF THEM, ESSENTIALLY 123.2 WETLANDS IMPACTED OR DESTROYED, WHICH IF YOU LOOK AT THEIR MINIMUM LOT SIZES, WHICH ARE THE SAME AS EVERY OTHER DEVELOPMENT IN THE AREA, THAT WOULD BE THE EQUIVALENT OF 1233 LOTS IF YOU REALLY WANT TO LOOK AT THE MINIMUMS. SO THE ONLY THING MORE ALARMING THAN THE LACK OF DETAIL IN THIS APPLICATION IS THE DETAILS THAT WERE INCLUDED.

I'M NOT GOING TO GO INTO A TON OF DETAIL ABOUT EMERGENCY SERVICES.

THERE'S CURRENTLY A HUGE INCREASE IN CALLS EVERY YEAR.

THE ISO FIRE RATING, I BELIEVE, IS BASED ON A CONTINUOUS 2209.

SO THAT'S A BIG ISSUE BECAUSE 2209 IS NOT CONTIGUOUS TO 208 YET IT HASN'T ARRIVED FROM 16 TO 208.

I THINK THE ORIGINAL 19 2019 PLAN HAD ANTICIPATED THAT 2209 WOULD BE THERE BY 2026, WHICH IS WHY THE APPLICATION SAID THEY EXPECT THE REZONING IN 2026, NOT IN 2024.

I KNOW WE DON'T LIKE THE TERM EARLY OR PREMATURE, BUT THAT'S WHY PEOPLE ARE SAYING THAT BECAUSE THE THINGS ARE NOT IN PLACE THAT WERE ANTICIPATED WHEN THE REZONING APPLICATION WOULD COME FORWARD. AND ALSO THE 2022 REPORTS ON EMERGENCY SERVICES INFRASTRUCTURE, THEY DON'T REALLY CONSIDER THE COMPLETION OF THE EXISTING DEVELOPMENTS THAT ARE GOING ON RIGHT NOW IN THAT SAME AREA.

SO IT'S ALREADY PUTTING A HUGE STRAIN ON TRAFFIC.

SO 16 AND 95 INTERCHANGE IS SEVERELY CONGESTED.

IT'S DANGEROUS. IT'S AT 179.5% CAPACITY.

NOW THEY MENTIONED THAT IT WOULD NOT IMPACT ONE SINGLE CAR ON 16.

I THINK WHAT THEY MEANT TO SAY WAS BETWEEN THE OUTLET MALLS IN SOUTH FRANCIS ROAD, WHICH IS AN INERT SECTION, I MEAN, THAT'S ESSENTIALLY SAYING NOBODY'S GOING TO TAKE THAT SECTION OF 16 TO GO NORTH INSTEAD OF 95.

THAT'S ANTICIPATING EVERYBODY TO GET ON 95.

BUT THE INTERCHANGE THERE IS AT 179.5% CAPACITY.

I WENT THROUGH IT ON THE WAY HERE.

AND YOU CAN DEFINITELY TELL IF THIS BUILDING WAS IN THAT INTERCHANGE.

WE WOULDN'T EVEN BE DISCUSSING THIS.

BUT A LOT OF THE AREAS LET'S SEE, THERE'S THERE'S EIGHT ROADWAYS CURRENTLY IN A FOUR MILE RADIUS BETWEEN 100 AND 175.9% CAPACITY, UNDERFUNDED BY $241 MILLION.

SO I DON'T KNOW WHERE THE PLANS ARE TO ALLEVIATE THAT AND GET THOSE ROADS IN PLACE, BUT THEY'RE NOT THERE CURRENTLY.

I KNOW THERE WAS SOME TALK ABOUT PROPORTIONAL FAIR SHARE, BUT WHEN SOMEBODY IS ALREADY DROWNING IN 20FT OF WATER, IF YOU RAISE THEM UP ONE FOOT, THEY'RE STILL DROWNING.

SO ALTHOUGH THEY DIDN'T NECESSARILY CREATE THIS PROBLEM, THIS IS A VERY REAL PROBLEM THAT WE HAVE.

[02:15:04]

AND AND POSSIBLE REASON FOR DENIAL.

NOW AS MENTIONED, COUNTY ROAD 2209 HASN'T BEEN CONSTRUCTED FROM SILVERLEAF TO 16 YET.

COMPLETELY OR FROM 16 TO 208.

NOR HAS FUNDING BEEN SECURED FOR THOSE PORTIONS.

SO THEY MENTIONED THIS IS NOT A ROADWAY JUST FOR THE DEVELOPMENT.

THEY'RE HEARING THAT SENTIMENT RIGHT NOW.

IT ABSOLUTELY IS.

THERE IS NO ROAD TO 2209 OTHER THAN 208.

SO IT WOULD ONLY SUPPORT THE DEVELOPMENT.

AND WE CAN ANTICIPATE, OH, WELL, IT MIGHT BE DONE BY 2028.

IT MIGHT BE DONE BY 2030.

BUT THAT'S WHAT GETS US INTO THESE SITUATIONS OF RISK.

THE 2019 AGREEMENT ALSO STATED THAT THE OWNER SHOULD NOT BE RESPONSIBLE FOR LEGAL, SURVEY OR ENGINEERING WORK ASSOCIATED WITH THE DONATION OF RIGHT OF WAY OR STORMWATER SITES.

I'M NOT SURE THAT THAT'S COMPLETELY RESOLVED WITH THE AMBIGUITY IN THIS APPLICATION, THAT THERE MIGHT STILL BE RISK ON THE COUNTY TO BE RESPONSIBLE FOR SOME OF THOSE STORMWATER SITES. ALSO, AGAIN, LOOKING AT FOUR MILES OF IT VERSUS 7.2 MILES THAT ROBINSON IMPROVEMENT COMPANY DOESN'T OWN ANYMORE.

THIS REQUEST FOR CONVEYANCE IS VALID UNTIL 2034, AND THERE'S TOO MUCH RISK TO IMPROVE IN ITS CURRENT FORM.

FLOOD CONCERNS. I KNOW WE'RE RUNNING A LITTLE BIT LOW ON TIME HERE, BUT THIS IS IN THE SAME DRAINAGE BASINS AS A LOT OF OTHER MAJOR DEVELOPMENTS.

WE'RE SEEING FLOODING CONSISTENTLY.

THE MAJORITY OF THE WATER TABLE ON THE PROPERTY IS BETWEEN 0 AND 18IN.

I THINK THERE'S 22 DIFFERENT SOIL TYPES IN THIS AREA, 20 OF WHICH ARE CONSIDERED POORLY DRAINED, MODERATE TO SEVERE.

MY FAVORITE ONE, THERE'S ACTUALLY A SOIL TYPE IN HERE THAT'S NAMED AFTER THE AREA.

SO THIS PART OF SAINT AUGUSTINE OR THIS PART OF SAINT CHARLES COUNTY IS CALLED BAKERSVILLE.

MY FAVORITE SOIL TYPE THAT'S IN HERE IS CALLED BAKERSVILLE MUCK, WHICH IS SYNONYMOUS FOR MUD.

SO WET. IT'S GOT A SOIL TYPE NAMED AFTER IT.

THERE'S THE REAL WETLANDS MAP TOO, SO YOU CAN SEE THEIR MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN, WHICH I WOULD CONSIDER A 10% OR LESS DESIGN PHASE ON THE LEFT.

AND THEN YOU CAN SEE ALL THE WETLANDS IMPACTED.

SO IT'S SPREAD OUT PRETTY WELL THROUGH THERE.

I THINK I MADE THE ANALOGY. IT LOOKS LIKE SOME WEIRD GREEN AND BLUE LEOPARD PRINT SHIRT DURING THE BZA MEETING, BUT STILL, IT'S A LOT MORE SIGNIFICANT THAN YOU THINK.

AND THEN RIGHT IN THE TOP CORNER THERE, YOU CAN SEE WHERE 22 AND NINE WOULD GO THROUGH THE TUPELO MITIGATION BANK.

THAT'S A SHOVEL TEST EXPERIMENT FROM THE CRASH STUDY.

PRETTY TYPICAL ONE THAT WAS TERMINATED DUE TO SATURATION.

YOU KNOW, WITH WATER TABLE BEING BETWEEN 0 AND 18IN ON AVERAGE OF THE PLACE.

AND AS THEY MENTIONED, CURRENTLY IT DRAINS POORLY BECAUSE EVERYWHERE AROUND THERE IS DRAINING TO IT.

I ACTUALLY SPOKE WITH WELLS FARMS WHO SAID THAT THEY USED TO LEASE THE LAND THAT WAS THE SOD FARM, AND THEY COULDN'T FARM IT ANYMORE BECAUSE THE DRAINAGE WAS SO POOR IN THAT AREA.

NOW WATER STRAIN.

IT DOES SAY THAT THEY WILL HAVE A BUILD OUT FROM SAINT JOHNS COUNTY UTILITIES WITH RECLAIMED WATER FOR IRRIGATION PURPOSES.

BUT THERE IS SOME AMBIGUITY IN THE MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN.

IT'S THAT IRRIGATION FROM ON SITE SHALLOW WELLS MAY BE USED FOR AMENITIES AND OTHER AGRICULTURAL USES, SO WE'RE ALREADY COMPETING FOR WATER IN THE AREA.

ION TANNINS, SALTWATER INTRUSION ARE VERY COMMON PROBLEMS. AND THE RAULERSON ROAD, CABBAGE HAMMOCK, TOKAY TERRACE EXISTING COMMUNITIES.

SO THE LEVEL OF AMBIGUITY HERE IS TOO RISKY TO APPROVE THIS IN 2024, AS OPPOSED TO THE ORIGINAL ANTICIPATION THAT IT COULD BE 2026.

AIR QUALITY CONCERNS. WE DON'T TALK ABOUT THIS A LOT IN FLORIDA, BUT IT'S THE EQUIVALENT OF BUILDING 30, BURNING 30 MILLION POUNDS OF COAL PER YEAR IN OUR LOCAL COMMUNITY.

DOESN'T SOUND LIKE A LOT, BUT, YOU KNOW, THE BALANCE TODAY IS EXERCISING PRIVATE PROPERTY RIGHTS VERSUS THE CONCERNS OF THE PUBLIC.

AND IF I WANTED TO BURN 30 MILLION POUNDS OF COAL ON MY PROPERTY AND AFFECT MY NEIGHBORS, IT WOULD BE A CAUSE FOR CONCERN.

WILDLIFE. THE ONLY THING I'M GOING TO MENTION HERE IS THERE HAS BEEN PANTHERS SIGHTED NORTH AND SOUTH OF IT.

NOW, FWC SIGHTED SOURCES THERE YOU CAN SEE THE GOPHER TORTOISE HABITAT IS ACTUALLY ON THE ONLY TWO SOIL TYPES THAT ARE POORLY DRAINED.

SO THE ONLY TWO DECENT SOIL TYPES THEY FOUND.

THAT'S ONLY A 15% STUDY.

SO THEY HAVE TO DO A FORMAL 100% STUDY BEFORE THIS CAN BE DEVELOPED.

SO DENYING THE APPLICATION TODAY DOES NOT REMOVE THEIR ABILITY TO CAPITALIZE ON THEIR LAND NEGATIVELY, ESPECIALLY NOT BEFORE THE DEAL IS OFF THE TABLE IN 2034.

ALSO MENTIONED I FAILED TO MENTION SCHOOL OVERCROWDING.

THIS WOULD BE 490 MORE STUDENTS WHEN 13,000 ARE CURRENTLY IN 600 PORTABLE CLASSROOMS. YEAH. WITH THAT I'LL SAY GO OUT AND VOTE, EVERYBODY.

I APPRECIATE YOUR TIME.

THANK YOU, MR. HALL.

PLEASE REFRAIN FROM APPLAUSE.

PLEASE REFRAIN. VERY IMPRESSIVE PETITION.

I SEE A LOT OF FAMILIAR NAMES ON THIS.

THANK YOU. OKAY.

AND WITH THAT, WE WILL GO INTO.

MADAM CHAIR, CAN I. SORRY.

CAN I SAY SOMETHING REAL QUICK? FOLKS, I JUST HAVE TO LET YOU KNOW.

WE ARE IN WHAT IS CALLED A QUASI JUDICIAL HEARING.

AND I WOULD JUST ASK THAT YOU FOLLOW THE SAME RULES HERE THAT YOU WOULD IN A COURT OF LAW.

THE LAW REQUIRES THAT WE NOT BE INFLUENCED BY OUTBURSTS IN THE CROWD.

SO THE CHAIR AND THE VICE CHAIR ARE WITHIN THEIR RIGHTS TO HAVE PEOPLE REMOVED FROM THE AUDIENCE.

IF THERE ARE OUTBURSTS, I KNOW IT'S A HIGHLY EMOTIONAL HEARING.

I REALIZE THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT AND THIS WILL IMPACT YOUR LIVES NO MATTER WHICH WAY IT GOES, IF YOU HAVE SOMETHING TO SAY.

[02:20:05]

MYSELF AND EVERY COMMISSIONER WANTS TO HEAR WHAT YOU HAVE TO SAY, I WOULD STRONGLY ENCOURAGE YOU TO COME UP TO THE MICROPHONES AND USE EVERY BIT OF THE THREE MINUTES THAT ARE THAT ARE ALLOTTED.

BUT PLEASE, NO MORE CLAPPING OR OUTBURSTS OR I THINK, YOU KNOW, THE CHAIR IS GOING TO BE REQUIRED TO REMOVE PEOPLE FROM THE AUDITORIUM SO AS NOT TO INFRINGE ON THE APPLICANT'S DUE PROCESS RIGHTS.

THANK YOU. AND WITH THAT, YOU WOULDN'T MIND READING BEFORE WE GO BACK INTO PUBLIC COMMENT.

THANK YOU SO MUCH. OKAY.

AT THIS TIME, THE BOARD WILL HEAR PUBLIC COMMENTS ON MATTERS THAT ARE NOT ON THE REGULAR AGENDA.

WHEN ADDRESSING THE BOARD, PLEASE COME TO ONE OF THE THREE PODIUMS AND STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.

EACH PERSON WILL BE PROVIDED WITH THREE MINUTES TO SPEAK, AND WE ASK THAT YOU SPEAK DIRECTLY INTO THE MICROPHONE.

SPEAKERS WILL COMPLY WITH THE BOARD'S RULES OF CIVILITY AND DECORUM.

COMMENTS ARE TO BE ADDRESSED TO THE BOARD AS A WHOLE AND TO NOT ANY INDIVIDUAL COMMISSIONER.

SPEAKERS MAY NOT DEMAND AN IMMEDIATE RESPONSE FROM THE BOARD.

NO PERSON WILL ADDRESS THE BOARD WITH PERSONAL, IMPERTINENT OR SLANDEROUS REMARKS OR WITH BOISTEROUS BEHAVIOR.

MEMBERS OF THE AUDIENCE WILL REFRAIN FROM ANY DISRUPTIVE DEMONSTRATION OF APPROVAL OR DISAPPROVAL OF ANY COMMENTS.

ANY PERSON THAT FAILS TO COMPLY WITH THESE RULES MAY BE REMOVED FROM THE AUDITORIUM.

FINALLY, ANY SPEAKER THAT WOULD LIKE TO PRESENT ANY MATERIALS, PLEASE UTILIZE THE CENTER PODIUM.

PAPER MATERIALS CAN BE PLACED ON THE X FOR OUR OVERHEAD CAMERA TO DISPLAY, AND A LAPTOP WILL BE SET UP FOR THE USB PRESENTATIONS.

AFTER PRESENTING, PLEASE PROVIDE THE MATERIALS TO THE STAFF OF THE CLERK OF THE COURT TO BE ENTERED INTO THE PUBLIC RECORD.

THANK YOU. OKAY, BEFORE WE START, I WANT TO CLARIFY MY APOLOGIES.

WE'RE GOING TO GO INTO A TIME CERTAIN GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT, WHICH IS SUPPOSED TO START AT 1130.

[Public Comment is Time Certain from 11:30 AM - 12:00 PM, or at the conclusion of the Regular Agenda, whichever occurs first]

I WANT TO GO AHEAD AND GET THAT 30 MINUTES OUT OF THE WAY, AND THEN WE WILL DO GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT FOR THE ROBINSON IMPROVEMENT.

DORIS TAYLOR, 208 LOBELIA ROAD.

I WOULD STRONGLY REQUEST THAT YOU ALL THIS BOARD USE EVEN HANDED APPLICATION OF YOUR RULES.

WHEN THE AUDIENCE APPLAUDS ON SOMETHING THAT YOU LIKE, YOU ALLOW IT.

WHEN THE AUDIENCE APPLAUDS, WHEN YOU DON'T LIKE IT, YOU LECTURE AND THREATEN.

LET'S GO FOR SOME EVEN HANDED APPLICATION OF THE RULES.

EARLIER TODAY, THE THE AUDIENCE APPLAUDED A COUPLE OF TIMES.

NO COMMENT.

IT WAS FINE, BUT NOT NOW BECAUSE YOU DIDN'T LIKE IT.

NOW, THIS IS NOT JUST TODAY.

I'VE SEEN IT OVER AND OVER AGAIN.

SO IF YOU WANT TO LECTURE US AND THREATEN US, THEN YOU NEED TO APPLY THE LAWS, THE RULES TO YOURSELVES AS WELL.

YEAH. I'LL REMIND EVERYBODY, WE WERE NOT IN QUASI JUDICIAL HEARINGS AT ANY OF THE TIMES THAT THERE WAS APPLAUSE DURING THE ROBINSON PRESENTATION.

WE ARE IN A QUASI JUDICIAL HEARING.

THAT BEING THE SIGNIFICANT.

REALLY ONLY DIFFERENCE, MISS TAYLOR.

GOOD MORNING, CHERIE BADGER, 2772 SOUTH COLLINS AVENUE.

I JUST WANT TO MAKE A LITTLE CLARIFICATION.

THANKS TO MISS SPIEGEL.

WHAT I'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT WAS WORKFORCE HOUSING.

Y'ALL SEEM TO THINK WORKFORCE HOUSING.

I TOLD YOU, A 35 YEAR GUIDANCE COUNSELOR MAKES 61,000.

THE SHERIFF'S DEPARTMENT AND POLICE DEPARTMENT, JACKSONVILLE START THEIR EMPLOYEES OUT.

SO I MADE A MISTAKE AND CONFUSING WORKFORCE HOUSING WITH LOW INCOME HOUSING.

AND THANK YOU SO MUCH, MISS SPIEGEL.

GOD BLESS YOU AND HAVE A GOOD DAY.

GOOD MORNING. KIM SCHWERMER, 52, WHATELY LANE.

THE CURRENT BOC VOC CONTINUES BEING COMPLACENT IN REGARDS TO PAVER VIOLATIONS ALL OVER SAINT JOHN'S COUNTY, WHICH WILL PASS THE BURDEN TO THE NEW BOARD.

HAS SOMEONE FILLED THE POSITION OF THE PERSON THE COUNTY FIRED THAT HAD BEEN ASSIGNED TO COME UP WITH A SOLUTION TO THE CURRENT PAVER CODE.

TODAY, OUR FINES HAVE ACCUMULATED TO $7,350, WHILE OTHERS, IN VIOLATION ARE NOT BEING FINED, FOLLOWED UP ON AND FORCED TO COME INTO COMPLIANCE OR APPLY FOR A VARIANCE. I'M NOT JUST TALKING ABOUT PRIDE REPORTS WE SUBMITTED, BUT ALSO ONES THAT WERE REPORTED BY THEIR NEIGHBORS.

IN ADDITION TO THE REPORTS WE DID, THE COUNTY NOTICED OTHER VIOLATIONS THAT WE HAD NOT LISTED, AND THEY ISSUED VIOLATION NOTICES FOR THOSE AS WELL.

407 MEADOW RIDGE DRIVE RECEIVED A VIOLATION NOTICE ON APRIL 22ND, 2024 FOR PAVERS CLOSER TO THREE FEET OF THEIR PROPERTY LINE ON THE LEFT AND FOR

[02:25:01]

THE DRIVEWAY BEING WIDER THAN 18FT AT THE RIGHT OF WAY.

THERE WAS NO MORATORIUM COMMENT BY THE COUNTY, BUT YET NO RE-INSPECTION OR FOLLOW UP HAS TAKEN PLACE OVER SIX MONTHS LATER, WELL BEYOND THE REQUIRED TIMEFRAME STATED BY MR. POTTER. 87 DAUPHINE BOULEVARD RECEIVED MULTIPLE VIOLATIONS ON APRIL 11TH, 2024, AND THEY ARE SIGNIFICANT.

THEY ADDED AN ADDITIONAL DRIVEWAY TO THEIR LEFT FRONT PORTION WITHOUT A PERMIT, WHICH IS CLOSER THAN FIVE FEET FROM THE PROPERTY LINE ON THE LEFT.

THEIR MAIN DRIVEWAY ON THE RIGHT IS WIDER THAN 18FT AT THE RIGHT OF WAY, AND PAVERS RUNNING ALONG THE RIGHT OF HOME ARE CLOSER THAN THREE FEET TO THE PROPERTY LINE.

TO PAINT THE PICTURE FOR YOU, THEY HAVE CREATED TWO DRIVEWAYS, ONE ON EACH SIDE OF THEIR PROPERTY THAT IS CONNECTED, MAKING ROOM FOR MULTIPLE CARS IN THEIR BOAT.

CODE ENFORCEMENT PUT THEM ON MORATORIUM ON MAY 7TH, 2024, AND ON JUNE 18TH ADDED THAT ADDITIONAL INFO WOULD FOLLOW BASED ON FUTURE CONSIDERATIONS BY THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT.

40 DAUPHINE BOULEVARD RECEIVED A VIOLATION ON APRIL 15TH, 2024, FOR THEIR DRIVEWAY BEING EXTENDED WIDER THAN 18FT AT THE RIGHT OF WAY AND FOR HAVING CONCRETE CLOSER THAN THREE FEET OF THEIR PROPERTY LINE.

YOU COULD THROW A BLOCK PARTY ON THEIR LARGE DRIVEWAY.

CODE ENFORCEMENT PUT THEM IN MORATORIUM ON MAY 9TH, WITH AN UPDATE ON JUNE 18TH THAT THEY WERE WAITING ON ADDITIONAL INFO FROM THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT.

THIS PAST WEEK, DEVELOPMENT SERVICES MADE COMMENTS ON NEARLY A DOZEN STALE REPORTS CONFIRMING VIOLATIONS AND SAID CODE ENFORCEMENT WOULD FOLLOW UP AND ISSUE NOTICES.

CODE ENFORCEMENT WILL DO ABSOLUTELY NOTHING, WHICH HAS BEEN THEIR STANCE SINCE THE BOC AND MR. COMMANDO TOLD THEM AND OTHER HOMEOWNERS NOT TO DO ANYTHING ABOUT THEIR VIOLATIONS.

CODE ENFORCEMENT COMPLETELY IGNORES DEVELOPMENT SERVICES, CONFIRMED VIOLATIONS, OR THEY QUICKLY GO IN TO UPDATE THE REPORT TO SAY THEY ARE IN MORATORIUM OR ARE AWAITING DIRECTION FROM THE COUNTY ATTORNEY.

THE BOC OR THE BUILDING DEPARTMENT? THANK YOU. GOOD MORNING, ZACH SCHWERMER.

THE PAVER GUY AT 52 WHATLEY LANE.

AS YOU KNOW, MY MOM HAS BEEN SPEAKING AT EVERY BOC MEETING THE PAST FEW MONTHS, AND I HAVE STARTED EMAILING YOU EVERY OTHER WEEK THAT THERE IS NO BOC MEETING.

WE CONTINUE TO MONITOR THE HUNDREDS OF VIOLATIONS THAT I HAVE REPORTED.

WHAT YOU DO OR DON'T DO DOES NOT GO UNNOTICED.

THE COUNTY CLOSES INVESTIGATIONS OF BLATANT CODE VIOLATIONS WHEN IT IS IN A GATED COMMUNITY.

AS A COUNTY OFFICIALS, YOU SHOULD ABSOLUTELY HAVE ACCESS TO A GATED COMMUNITY.

OTHERWISE, WHAT IS THE POINT OF A COUNTY CODE EVEN EXISTING IN GATED COMMUNITIES IF THEY ARE EXEMPT FROM THE SAME LEVEL OF SPECIAL DISTRICTS LIKE THE PONTEVEDRA ZONING DISTRICT? THAT IS SELECTIVE ENFORCEMENT.

WHERE DOES IT SAY THAT? IF YOU LIVE IN A GATED COMMUNITY, THAT YOU CAN BREAK COUNTY CODE AND THAT YOU ARE EXEMPT FROM IT? I CAN PROVIDE YOU A GATE CODE TO ONE OF THESE COMMUNITIES.

ARE YOU THEN GOING TO ENFORCE IN THAT GATED COMMUNITY AND IGNORE THE OTHERS, FURTHER CONTINUING YOUR SELECTIVE ENFORCEMENT? WE HAVE BEEN APPROACHED BY A MAJOR GLOBAL STREAMING NETWORK TO BE A PART OF A 12 PIECE DOCUMENTARY.

WE HAVE ALREADY PARTICIPATED IN THREE HOURS WORTH OF INTERVIEWS.

THEY WANT TO COVER ISSUES AND COUNTIES AND HOA'S LIKE OUR OWN AND PROVIDE RESOURCES TO FIGHT BACK.

WE HAVE ALWAYS PROVIDED OPPORTUNITIES TO MAKE A CHANGE.

BEFORE WE TAKE ANY ACTIONS.

BUT WE ARE ALWAYS IGNORED.

WE HAVE SHOWN WE ARE WILLING TO GO TO ANY LENGTH, AND WE WILL DO SO UNTIL YOU DECIDE TO COMMUNICATE WITH US.

AS YOU HAVE OTHERS IN THE COUNTY IN VIOLATION OF COUNTY CODE, AND MAKE A DIFFERENCE FOR EVERYONE EQUALLY.

IF THERE IS NO CHANGE OR PAUSE BY THE NEXT BOC, I AM GOING FORWARD WITH NEW REPORTS IN THE NEXT 14 DAYS.

NEARLY ALL OTHER HOMES IN VIOLATION OF THE SAME COUNTY CODE ARE AT $0 IN FINES, HAVE INCURRED $0 IN LEGAL FEES AND $0 IN NON ZONING VARIANCE APPLICATION FEES.

YOU ASSURE THEM THAT THEY WILL BE OKAY, AND THAT THEY WILL HAVE NO ISSUE AND NOT TO REMOVE THEIR PAVERS, BUT DON'T ADDRESS US AND CONTINUE TO IGNORE US.

I'M NOT PAYING A SINGLE DOLLAR MORE TO THE COUNTY, WHETHER THAT BE FOR A SECOND APPLICATION OR THE DAILY FINES.

FIX THIS PROBLEM NOW.

NOW I HAVE A FEW PHOTOS THAT I'D LIKE TO SHOW YOU.

THESE ARE PHOTOS OF OTHER VIOLATIONS ACROSS SAINT JOHN'S COUNTY.

THIS IS A PATH.

AS YOU CAN SEE, THESE ARE ALL PATHS THAT GO DOWN THE SIDE OF THE HOME.

SOME ARE SHARED PATHS THAT CONNECT TO THEIR NEIGHBOR'S YARDS.

SOME GO RIGHT UP TO THE PROPERTY LINE, SOME OVER THE PROPERTY LINE.

MOST OF THEM FILL ENTIRELY IN THEIR SIDE YARDS AND AT THE VERY END.

THIS IS AN EXAMPLE OF ONE THAT'S IN A GATED COMMUNITY.

AND HERE AT THE VERY END, I'M GOING TO SHOW YOU A PHOTO OF OUR HOUSE.

IT DOES NOT DIFFER FROM ANY OF THESE OTHER VIOLATIONS OF COUNTY CODE.

THANK YOU. VOTE BLUE.

YEAH.

[02:30:15]

BJ WEST CITY OF SAINT AUGUSTINE.

REMEMBER, IN 2022, COMMISSIONER WALDRON STATED HE WAS NOT FOR A SALES TAX INCREASE AT ANY TIME OF INFLATION, WHICH WE'RE IN RIGHT NOW.

HERE WE ARE IN 2024 AND THE SCHOOLS WANT VOTERS TO VOTE FOR A TAX HIKE.

YET PARENTS CONTINUE TO TAKE THEIR CHILDREN OUT OF PUBLIC SCHOOLS.

FYI, AT THE NORTHWEST INTERSECTION OF US ONE AND KING STREET, THE CITY OF SAINT AUGUSTINE HAS DESIGNATED A BROWNFIELD WHERE A GARAGE IS TO BE BUILT.

THE DEVELOPER WILL BE ELIGIBLE FOR A TAX CREDIT FROM THE STATE.

QUESTION. IS THIS A WRITE OFF FOR THE DEVELOPER OR TAX DOLLARS TO CLEAN FOR TAX DOLLARS TO CLEAN UP THE PROPERTY? QUESTION AND I'LL CONTINUE TO SAY THIS UNTIL WE GET AN ANSWER.

GOT TO PERSEVERE.

QUESTION HOW MANY MORE MONTHS OR YEARS WILL THIS COUNTY FUNCTION WITHOUT A COUNTY ATTORNEY? DID YOU ALL HEAR THAT? HOW MANY MORE MONTHS WILL THIS COUNTY FUNCTION WITHOUT A COUNTY ATTORNEY? AND PLEASE LISTEN TO 90.5 FM WHERE ONE CAN FIND HOPE.

AND I NOTICED THIS MORNING MAYBE IT WAS JUST ME.

I HOPE EVERYONE WAS PAYING ATTENTION TO THIS.

I MISSED COMMISSIONER JOSEPH.

WAS SHE NOT INVITED TO STAND UP WHENEVER YOU WERE SAYING SO LONG TO TWO OF THE COMMISSIONERS.

DID I MISS THAT? I DON'T THINK I SAW HER STAND UP HERE TO SAY GOODBYE.

I JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND THAT.

I HAD PRETTY GOOD VISION, BUT I DIDN'T SEE THAT HAPPEN.

IS THERE ANY EXPLANATION FOR THAT? I'M SURE THERE IS A REASON.

BUT HIS SERVICE TO NOT JUST SAINT JOHNS COUNTY, BUT TO THE STATE OF FLORIDA.

YOU WILL BE MISSED ON THE DAIS, BUT KNOW THAT I WILL COME TO YOU FOR ADVICE MOVING FORWARD, AND I GREATLY APPRECIATE YOU.

VICE CHAIR ALAIMO, THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE.

IT'S NOT EASY SITTING UP ON THE DAIS.

I SIT ON IT, I WE ALL GET ATTACKED, BEAT UP.

BUT IT'S SOMETHING THAT WE DO BECAUSE AS PUBLIC SERVANTS, IT IS THE RIGHT THING TO DO.

AND I COMMEND EACH AND EVERY ONE OF YOU.

ALL FIVE OF YOU, HAVE IT IN YOUR HEART TO BE PUBLIC SERVANTS.

SO I GREATLY APPRECIATE THAT AND CONTINUE THE GREAT RELATIONSHIP THE CITY OF SAINT AUGUSTINE BEACH HAS WITH ADMINISTRATOR ANDREWS, AND WE CONTINUE TO WORK FORWARD COLLECTIVELY, NOT AGAINST ONE ANOTHER.

GOD BLESS. THANKS, BILL.

THANK YOU. JULIET MANDLER 330.

SUNSTONE COURT, SAINT AUGUSTINE 32086.

I AM REQUESTING PERMISSION FROM THE CHAIR OR THE WHOLE COMMISSION TO SPEAK ON THE CROQUET COURT AGENDA ITEM, BECAUSE I AM NOT AVAILABLE LATER TODAY TO SPEAK ON IT.

DO YOU FEEL FREE TO GO AHEAD AND USE YOUR THREE MINUTES? THANK YOU SO MUCH.

ALL RIGHT. SO FOR FULL TRANSPARENCY, I AM HOA, PRESIDENT OF THE ROCK SPRINGS FARMS HOA.

I'M HERE BOTH AS JUST A HOMEOWNER AND CITIZEN AND THE HOA PRESIDENT.

I HAD TWO REQUESTS SLASH CONCERNS REGARDING THE CROQUET COURT DESIGN.

THE FIRST ONE IS WE HAVE A POND, A RETENTION POND THAT BELONGS TO THE HOA THAT WE ARE REQUIRED TO MAINTAIN. I AM IMPLORING THE COMMISSION AND PARKS AND REC TO PLEASE KEEP THAT IN MIND WITH THE DESIGN THAT WE NEED ACCESS TO MAINTAINING THAT POND. MOVING FORWARD, THE SECOND ONE IS A REQUEST.

AS A HOMEOWNER, IF IT'S POSSIBLE IN THE DESIGN PHASE TO ADD SOME TYPE OF NATURAL BERM OR NATURAL BORDER FOR PRIVACY CONCERNS, THAT WOULD BE GREAT BECAUSE WE HAVE HOMEOWNERS WHO ARE DIRECTLY ADJACENT TO THE RETENTION POND AND THEREFORE THAT COUNTY PARK.

AND THE OTHER THING IS, I JUST WANTED TO COME HERE AND THANK COMMISSIONER DEAN.

COMMISSIONER ALAIMO, ESPECIALLY FOR ALL OF YOUR STEADFAST, STEADFAST COMMITMENT TO OUR COMMUNITY.

AND I WANTED TO THANK THE ENTIRE COMMISSION AS A WHOLE.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH FOR EVERYTHING YOU'VE DONE FOR OUR COMMUNITY.

AND I'M HOPING THAT MY TWO REQUESTS FOR THE CROQUET PARK WILL BE CONSIDERED.

[02:35:08]

THANK YOU SO MUCH.

HELLO, CHARLIE HUNT, MILL CREEK ESTATES.

I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT TODAY IS A VERY HISTORIC DAY THAT IF YOU NEVER BELIEVE IN A GHOST, THEN YOU NEED TO LOOK AT THE BALLOT.

SO, YES, SAINT JOHN'S COUNTY HAS BEEN TAINTED WITH GHOST IN THIS ELECTION SEASON.

AND TO TAKE AND PUT THAT IN PERSPECTIVE OF.

DO THEY HAVE AN OPTION? YES THEY DO. DO THEY DO IT BECAUSE OF A CERTAIN CONCERN OR COMMUNITY? PROBABLY NOT. IT'S BECAUSE OF TO ALLEVIATE PEOPLE FROM VOTING AND TO PUT IT TO WHERE IT MAKES IT HARDER TO WIN THE ELECTION FOR CERTAIN CANDIDATES.

SO. BUT THAT'S SILLY.

GHOST ARE REAL.

BELIEVE ME, WE KNOW THAT.

ALSO, I'D LIKE TO GO INTO A LITTLE HISTORY ABOUT MR. ALLEN NIECE HIM BEING KNOWN FOR THE SCHOOL BOARD AND HAVING A SCHOOL NAMED AFTER HIM AND A ROAD.

HE WAS ALSO KNOWN FOR AS A PIONEER IN RESTORATION AND CONSERVATION.

CONSERVATION EFFORTS.

IN THE MID 20TH MR. NIECE PLANTED OVER 55 MILLION PINE TREES IN NORTH FLORIDA.

HE WORKED FOR OUT OF SAINT JOHN, OR EXCUSE ME, OUT OF TALLAHASSEE TO WORK WITH TREE RESTORATION.

AND EVEN WHEN HE FINALLY CAME DOWN TO SAINT JOHNS COUNTY TO WORK DIRECTLY MORE FOR THE COUNTY AND PLANTING TREES AND RESTORATION. HE WAS ALSO ACTUALLY NICKNAMED JOHNNY PINE NUT JUST A SPIN OFF FROM THE APPLESEED GUY.

AND HE WAS BROUGHT DOWN HERE TO MANAGE ABOUT 17,000 ACRES OF A COMPANY FOR RESTORATION BECAUSE OF THE OVER OVERCUT AND OVERWORKED TIMBERLAND AND THE AND THE ACTUAL LAND ITSELF.

SO YES, MISTER NEASE IS VERY IMPORTANT ON THE SENSE OF CONSERVING THE COUNTY, BUT IS NOT KNOWN OF WHY.

IT'S LIKE I SAID, IT'S MORE KNOWN FOR THE THE SCHOOL BOARD, BUT IT SEEMS LIKE MR. MRS ACTIONS IS GOING OFF TO THE WAYSIDE NOW.

YEAH. CONSERVATION OF PROPERTY, CONSERVATION OF ENVIRONMENT.

THAT'S BEING YES, IT WAS DRASTICALLY CLEARED.

AND WITH THE 20 DIFFERENT TYPES OF SOILS THAT'S OUT THERE AND A LOT OF THESE PROPERTIES, IT'S, IT'S GOOD SOMETIMES THAT THE, THE PAST BRINGS UP TO THE PRESENT.

THANK YOU. BETH BREEDING.

YEAH. BETH BREEDING 1368 BIRMINGHAM ROAD SOUTH JACKSONVILLE.

32207. I JUST WANTED TO SAY THANK YOU SO MUCH TO COMMISSIONER DEAN AND TO COMMISSIONER LIMO FOR THE YEARS THAT YOU'VE DEVOTED WHILE I DIDN'T ALWAYS GET YOUR VOTE, I VERY MUCH APPRECIATED THAT.

YOU ALWAYS DID RETURN MY CALL.

YOU ALWAYS LET ME HAVE MY SAY.

AND YOU ALWAYS GAVE ME YOUR OPINION OF WHY MY PROJECTS DIDN'T CUT THE MUSTARD, SO TO SPEAK.

BUT I THANK YOU SO MUCH, AND I HOPE THAT I GET OTHER OPPORTUNITIES TO WORK WITH YOU IN THE FUTURE.

THANK YOU. WELL, THIS IS MY FIRST TIME GOING IN FRONT OF A COUNTY.

I'M FROM DADE COUNTY, BROWARD COUNTY AREA.

I JUST MOVED UP HERE FOUR YEARS AGO.

FIVE YEARS AGO. I LOVE THIS PLACE.

RIGHT. SIR, CAN YOU JUST STATE YOUR NAME AND.

OH. I'M SORRY. MY NAME IS EDDIE MARRERO.

I'M FROM PUERTO RICO, TOO.

AND AND I LIVE AT 2040 CHAUCER LANE IN PONTE VEDRA.

I'VE I WORK IN THIS AREA.

I WORK IN THE AREA THAT THEY WERE DOING THE THE.

THEY'RE PLANNING ALL THIS STUFF, AND IT TAKES ME RIGHT NOW AN HOUR TO GET TO THEIR HOUSE.

COULD YOU IMAGINE IF THEY DO ALL THIS DEVELOPMENT THAT YOU GUYS ARE PLANNING? MY POINT HERE IS TO LET YOU KNOW THAT BEFORE YOU GUYS DECIDE ANYTHING, AND I'M PROUD OF BEING IN FRONT OF YOU GUYS, IS THAT GO LOOK AT DADE COUNTY AND SEE WHAT HAPPENED THERE.

THEY HAVE A NUCLEAR PLANT OUT THERE THAT IF ANYTHING HAPPENED, WHICH IS OUTDATED, THERE'S NO WAY OUT.

[02:40:05]

PEOPLE ARE GOING TO DIE.

AND THE FLOODING OVER THERE IS ANYTIME IT RAINS, THREE INCHES OF RAIN, YOU GO LOOK AT FORT LAUDERDALE.

YOU CAN'T GO INTO FORT LAUDERDALE.

YOU GO TO MIAMI.

THEY BUILD ALL THEM SKYSCRAPERS AND THEY SAY, OH, THEY'RE BEAUTIFUL, BUT THEY'RE EMPTY AND ALL THAT WATER IS OUT THERE.

SO THEY JUST ONE HOUSE, ONE WHOLE BUILDING FELL DOWN ON PEOPLE KILLING SO MANY PEOPLE.

IF YOU ALL HEARD ABOUT THAT AND YOU KNOW, THIS IS THINGS THAT HAPPEN WHEN WE DON'T PLAN A FUTURE FOR OUR LAND.

THIS COUNTY IS BEAUTIFUL.

IT HAS SO MUCH TO TO GIVE FOR IT.

WE DON'T HAVE TO CHANGE MUCH.

WE JUST HAVE TO BE CAREFUL WITH WHAT WE CHANGE.

THANK YOU SO MUCH.

THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE FOR GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT? SEEING NONE, MADAM CHAIR, WE'LL CLOSE GENERAL PUBLIC COMMENT.

OKAY. WE'RE BACK TO THE BOARD NOW.

WE'RE GOING TO HEAR PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE ROBINSON IMPROVEMENT COMPANY.

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

MADAM CHAIR, JUST AS A REMINDER TO THE AUDIENCE, IF YOU HAVE SIGNED A DESIGNATED SPEAKER FORM FOR EITHER MR. HOWELL OR PROVIDED A SIGNATURE OR EMAIL FOR MR. MCINERNEY, YOU HAVE EXCEEDED YOUR TIME AND WILL NOT BE PROVIDING PUBLIC COMMENT AT THIS TIME.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MISS WEST.

GOOD MORNING. GOOD MORNING, CHUCK LABANOWSKI 1748, NORTH CHAPARRO.

YOU KNOW, I THINK THIS PROJECT IS NOT COMPATIBLE CURRENTLY WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA.

WE'VE GOT A LOT OF ISSUES.

YOU KNOW, THERE'S GOING TO BE A LOT OF WAIVERS OUT THERE.

I KNOW ONE WAIVER THAT CONCERNS ME IS THE ONE OF THE TREE REMOVAL AND NOTHING BEING DONE FOR AT LEAST FOUR YEARS FOR EVERYTHING THEY PULL OUT OF THERE. THAT'S A CONCERN.

NOW THERE'S A HIGHWAY THAT'S GOING IN 2209.

AWESOME. CURRENTLY, RIGHT NOW, THAT HIGHWAY WILL GO NOWHERE BUT WITHIN THE COMMUNITY ITSELF.

NOWHERE. BECAUSE NO ONE HAS ADDRESSED THE ISSUE OF THE TUPELO PORTION OF 2209 THAT'S GOING TO BE GOING THROUGH.

NO ONE HAS ADDRESSED THAT.

DO WE HAVE ANY ACCESS TO THAT PROPERTY? DOES THE ROBINSON HAVE ACCESS? YEAH. I THINK IT'S GREAT THAT THERE'S GOING TO BE CONSERVATION OF THE WETLANDS.

885 BIGGEST CONCERN.

ARE THE WETLANDS THAT THEY'RE GOING TO DESTROY.

WHERE IS THIS GOING TO BE MADE UP? THE DESTRUCTION OF THAT MUCH WETLANDS, EVEN FOR 2209.

THAT'S A MAJOR CONCERN.

HERE'S ANOTHER CONCERN. YOU KNOW, WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE HIGHWAYS OUT THERE RIGHT NOW.

THEY'RE CURRENTLY THERE'S NO FUNDING FOR 208 OR 214.

NONE. THERE'S NO MORE FUNDING FOR FOUR MILE ROAD IF PEOPLE WANT TO GO OUT THAT WAY OFF OF 214.

THERE IS NO INTERSECTION PLANNED BY FDOT FOR AN INTERSTATE INTERSECTION AT 214.

NONE. BUT YET THEY'RE GOING TO PUT ON APPROXIMATELY 8200 VEHICLES.

BUT THAT DOESN'T TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION WHAT'S GOING ON AROUND THAT AREA.

YOU GOT A LITTLE OVER 3300 HOMES GOING IN ROBINSON.

BUT THEN YOU HAVE ANOTHER 3000 OFF OF 214 THAT WILL EVENTUALLY BE POSSIBLY BE BUILT.

ARE YOU KIDDING ME? 22,000. APPROXIMATELY 22,000 VEHICLES ARE GOING TO HIT THE 208 AND THE 214 AREA OVER A PERIOD OF TIME WHEN 2209 IS NOT EVEN COMPLETED AND NOT EVEN FUNDED ON THE NORTHERN END OF 208 INTO 16.

IT'S A MAJOR CONCERN.

214 WILL BE A NIGHTMARE.

208 YES, THERE'S CONSTRUCTION BEING DONE RIGHT NOW AT THE INTERSECTION OF 95 AND 16.

THAT'S NOT GOING TO HELP. 208, A TWO LANE ROAD AND IT'S NOT GOING TO HELP.

214 THANK YOU.

GOOD MORNING. MY NAME IS COLE ROSKY.

I LIVE AT 3295 RAULERSON ROAD.

MY BACKYARD IS THIS WONDERFUL SUPPOSEDLY AGRIHOOD.

SO I KNOW THE LAND VERY WELL.

I MEAN, I LIVE THERE, THEY JUST DO THEIR QUICK STUDIES AND WALK AWAY AND DRIVE AWAY.

SO I'M GOING TO BRIEFLY TOUCH ON TRAFFIC REAL QUICK.

THIS IS OFF OF Y'ALL'S WEBSITE.

EVERYTHING IN BLUE IS ALREADY OVER 100% CAPACITY.

THE ORANGE IS RIGHT THERE 9996, SO ON AND SO FORTH.

THE BLUE MARKS HERE IS EVERY ROAD THAT WILL BE DIRECTLY IMPACTED BY THEIR PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.

[02:45:03]

I LIVE RIGHT THERE. I KNOW WHAT I TRAVEL DAY IN AND DAY OUT.

HERE WE GO AGAIN.

IT'S AN AWFUL LOT OF BLUE AGAIN AND AGAIN.

ROUGHLY 98 OF 172 ROADS ON Y'ALL'S LIST HERE ON YOUR WEBSITE IS ABOVE UTILIZATION.

I THINK WE HAVE A MAJOR ISSUE NOT ONLY WITH THIS DEVELOPMENT, EVERY DEVELOPMENT Y'ALL ARE BRINGING TO THIS COMMUNITY.

DO WE WANT TO JUST MAX OUT EVERY ROAD HERE.

IS THAT THE PLAN? DO WE BUILD ROADS JUST TO MAX OUT THE UTILIZATION? I PERSONALLY DON'T LIKE TO SIT IN TRAFFIC.

I DON'T LIVE IN NEW YORK CITY FOR A REASON.

HERE. ONCE AGAIN, HERE'S ALL THE ROAD PLANNING.

ALL THESE LITTLE VIEWS RIGHT HERE ARE UNFUNDED.

EVERY LITTLE MARK RIGHT HERE IS A ROAD THAT WOULD DIRECTLY IMPACT THE AREA I LIVE THERE.

ONCE AGAIN, REMEMBER.

BRIEFLY. HERE'S JUST YOUR 2209.

OBVIOUSLY EVERYBODY'S TOUCHED ON IT.

IT'S ONLY RIGHT THERE, NOT EVEN HERE WHERE THEY WANT TO BE.

AND IF YOU REFERENCE BACK HERE, IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE DONE 2209 BACK IN 2010, I BELIEVE THAT SAYS RIGHT THERE I CAN'T SEE THIS FAR, BUT NEEDLESS TO SAY, IT'S NOWHERE NEAR WHERE IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE.

AND WE'RE TALKING ABOUT BUILDING AND ADDING MORE HOMES.

SAINT AUGUSTINE HIGH SCHOOL, WE HAVE AN ISSUE WITH SCHOOLS, PORTABLES AT EVERY SINGLE SCHOOL.

THEY SAY THERE'S NOT MANY CHILDREN GOING TO BE BROUGHT BY THIS NEIGHBORHOOD THAT WILL IMPACT.

BUT LOOK AT THE AREA OF SAINT AUGUSTINE HIGH SCHOOL HAS TO SUPPORT ON TOP OF ALL OF THE OTHER DEVELOPMENTS YOU HAVE.

WE HAVE AN ISSUE WITH SCHOOLS.

I COULD BE INCORRECT, BUT I HEARD THAT THE SCHOOLS DON'T HAVE MONEY RIGHT NOW TO BUILD ANY MORE SCHOOLS.

MILL CREEK ACADEMY ONCE AGAIN, ALL THE DEVELOPMENT IN THAT AREA.

YOU ADD THIS DEVELOPMENT.

EVERY OTHER DEVELOPMENT.

MILL CREEK ACADEMY COULD NOT SUPPORT IT.

I JUST I WORK BY THOSE HIGH SCHOOLS AND EVERYTHING.

THEY JUST BUILT THOSE WATERS OUT BACK.

PORTABLES, WETLANDS.

LOOK AT ALL THE WETLANDS.

AND THEN HERE'S THE FLOODING.

I CAN TELL YOU, I LIVE, I HAVE WETLANDS, AN ACRE AND A HALF OF MY LAND IS WETLANDS.

I CAN TELL YOU WHERE THE WATER GOES TO THE WHERE OR TO THIS DEVELOPMENT IS PROPOSED.

WHERE AM I GOING TO GO WHEN I CANNOT DRAIN MY WATER? AM I GOING TO FLOOD? WHAT'S GOING TO BE DONE FOR ME AND EVERY OTHER RESIDENT IN THE AREA? THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

BETH BREEDING, 1368 BIRMINGHAM ROAD, SOUTH, JACKSONVILLE.

COMPETITION AND VARIETY OF PRODUCT ARE VERY IMPORTANT FOR CITIZENS LOOKING TO BUY HOMES.

IT AFFECTS AFFORDABILITY AND TRAFFIC PATTERNS.

IT'S A HUGE PROBLEM WHEN ONLY TWO DEVELOPMENTS HAVE AN INVENTORY OF LOTS FOR SALE IN THIS COUNTY, AND GOOD FAITH, THIS APPLICANT IS WILLING TO DONATE CONSIDERABLE LAND THAT THE COUNTY NEEDS. THE COUNTY DOES NOT HAVE THE MONEY TO PURCHASE IT.

THE. THESE ARE OBLIGATIONS OF THE COUNTY WITH THE STATE AGREEMENT TO CONSTRUCT AN ALTERNATE TO 95.

HOW ELSE ARE YOU GOING TO GET THIS LAND? THIS APPLICATION IS COMPLIANT WITH THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND SHOULD BE APPROVED TODAY.

MUCH MORE OF 2209 WOULD BE CONSTRUCTED IF THE COUNTY WOULD APPROVE THE DEVELOPMENT THAT'S WILLING TO BUILD IT.

ADLER CREEK IS THE PERFECT EXAMPLE OF THAT.

THIS COUNTY DOES NOT HAVE THE FUNDS TO BUILD IT, NOR WILL THEY.

THE FACT IS, FOR 2209 TO BE BUILT, YOU WILL NEED A DEVELOPER TO STEP UP AND CONSTRUCT IT.

YOU WILL HAVE TO GRANT DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS FOR THIS TO HAPPEN.

THE ONLY WAY TO RELIEVE TRAFFIC ON ROADS LIKE STATE ROAD 16 IS TO CONSTRUCT 2209, THAT IS THE ALTERNATE TO 95 TO MOVE TRAFFIC NORTH AND SOUTH FASTER.

THERE IS NO REASONABLE ARGUMENT TO TURN THIS PROJECT DOWN.

WHAT IS THE POINT OF HAVING A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN IF THE COUNTY DOES NOT GRANT COMPATIBLE ZONING? THANK YOU. RANDY LAVERY.

151 BOYLESTON COURT, SAINT AUGUSTINE.

I'D LIKE THE ROBINSON FAMILY TO REALLY TUNE IN TO THIS.

PLEASE DO NOT LET FREEHOLD CORPORATION DEVELOP ANY MORE PROPERTIES IN SAINT JOHNS COUNTY UNTIL THEY COME BACK AND TAKE RESPONSIBILITY FOR THE AREAS THEY NEGLECTED AS CONTROLLING BOARD MEMBERS OF THE CDD.

THE FIRST IMPRESSION OF SHEARWATER AS YOU DRIVE IN DOES NOT READILY SHOW THE MANY THINGS IT DID WRONG IN SHEARWATER.

DON'T BE FOOLED BY THE WOW FACTOR.

LANDSCAPING. THE ORIGINAL SECTIONS HAS DETERIORATED TO HUGE AREAS OF WEEDS AND DIRT.

THE NEW SECTIONS WHERE HOMES ARE FOR SALE.

OH YEAH, THEY LOOK NICE.

THEY NEED TO RESOD AND REPLACE TREES AND VEGETATION THAT HAS BEEN NEGLECTED.

ROADS HAVE DETERIORATED, WITH MANY POTHOLES AS CONTROLLERS OF THE CBD.

THEY HAVE NOT LIMITED CONSTRUCTION VEHICLES TO THE SOUTH ENTRANCE WHERE ALL THE NEW CONSTRUCTION IS TAKING PLACE.

THEY NEED TO MAKE THE CONSTRUCTION VEHICLES, USE THE SOUTH ENTRANCE AND PROPERLY REPAVE THE AREAS THAT ARE DAMAGING OUR VEHICLES.

THEY CREATED A BEAUTIFUL AMENITY CENTER WITHOUT SUFFICIENT PARKING.

THERE ARE ABOUT 100 SPOTS FOR ALMOST 3000 HOMES.

THEY NEED TO COME BACK AND CREATE MORE PARKING.

THE POOLS ARE ALSO NOT LARGE ENOUGH FOR ALMOST 3000 HOMES ON ANY WEEKEND IN THE SUMMER.

THERE'S NOT EVEN ENOUGH SPACE FOR THE PEOPLE WHO LIVE HERE, AND THERE ARE STILL MANY HOMES TO BE BUILT.

[02:50:03]

THEY SHOULD HAVE BEEN MADE TO PROVIDE ANOTHER POOL IN THE SOUTHERN SECTION, WHICH HAS BEEN OVERLOADED WITH TOWNHOMES.

THERE HAS BEEN VANDALISM THAT FREEHOLD HAS NOT MADE THE KNOWN CULPRITS PAY FOR.

INSTEAD, THE COMMUNITY HAD TO PICK UP THE TAB.

FREEHOLD NEEDS TO PAY THE COMMUNITY BACK OR MAKE THE VANDALS FAMILY PAY.

THEY ONLY MADE ONE LANE BY SCHOOLS, SO TRAFFIC BACKS UP TO THE POINT THAT PEOPLE CANNOT GET INTO OR OUT OF OUR COMMUNITY.

EMERGENCY VEHICLES AS WELL.

THAT HAPPENED BY TIMBERLAND CREEK ELEMENTARY, AND NOW IT'S THE SAME THING BY TROUT CREEK ACADEMY.

THEY DIDN'T LEARN FROM THEIR PREVIOUS MISTAKES.

DON'T LET THEM MAKE MORE MISTAKES IN OUR COUNTY.

AS YOU CAN SEE FROM THESE EXAMPLES, FREEHOLD IS NOT A RESPONSIBLE DEVELOPER OR A GOOD NEIGHBOR BASED ON THEIR RECORD.

PLEASE DO NOT LET FREEHOLD DEVELOP ANY MORE PROPERTIES IN SAINT JOHNS COUNTY UNTIL THEY RIGHT THE WRONGS THAT THEY HAVE DONE TO THE CITIZENS OF SAINT JOHNS COUNTY AND SHEARWATER DEVELOPMENT, I INVITE YOU TO COME TO THE SHEARWATER SO YOU CAN SEE FOR YOURSELF WHAT NEEDS TO BE DONE.

PHOTOS WERE PROVIDED FOR ALL OF YOU IN AN EMAIL I SENT OCTOBER 24TH.

AND PLEASE FOLLOW THE ADVICE OF YOUR PLANNING AND ZONING BOARD.

THEY'RE NOT FOOLED BY FREEHOLD.

I HOPE YOU'RE NOT EITHER.

AND ROBINSON COMPANY.

THAT'S A BRIEF LOOK AT WHO YOU ARE IN BED WITH.

LET ME GET SOME PICTURES UP HERE REAL QUICKLY.

THIS HERE IS A FREEHOLD CONTROLLED AND MAINTAINED PROPERTY.

MY DRYER CYCLE IS COMPLETE.

THIS HERE IS MY NEIGHBOR'S YARD.

THIS HERE IS FREEHOLD CONTROLLED PROPERTY.

THIS IS EXAMPLE OF OUR ROADS.

AND THAT IS FREEHOLD PROPERTY AS WELL.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. SIR. SIR.

HI THERE. KETO BURN, 6857 EAST COVE AVENUE.

I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF SAKA SOUTH ANASTASIA COMMUNITIES ASSOCIATION.

WE REPRESENT A COUPLE HUNDRED CITIZENS HERE IN SAINT JOHNS COUNTY, AND WE ARE OPPOSED TO THIS DEVELOPMENT.

I SEE THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING 16 WAIVERS TO THE LDC, SOME OF WHICH ARE MORE SIGNIFICANT THAN OTHERS.

THE ONE THAT STANDS OUT, THE BIGGEST TO ME IS THE WAIVER NUMBER FIVE.

THE APPLICANT IS REQUESTING A WAIVER TO THE REQUIREMENT TO PROVIDE A DETAILED SITE PLAN.

A DETAILED SITE PLAN IS THE ONLY THING THAT I MEAN, THAT IF YOU WANT TO HEAR SOMETHING AND MAKE A DECISION ON SOMETHING, YOU NEED TO KNOW WHAT YOU'RE DECIDING ON.

I'VE READ THROUGH A LOT OF THESE PACKETS BEFORE, AND I DON'T THINK I CAN REMEMBER ONE THAT DIDN'T HAVE A DETAILED SITE PLAN.

I SUPPOSE TECHNICALLY AN APPLICANT CAN ASK FOR ANY WAIVER THEY WANT TO, BUT THE DEVIL'S IN THE DETAILS.

AND IF YOU DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHAT YOU'RE HEARING TODAY, THEN THE VOTE SHOULD BE NO.

ANOTHER WAIVER IS ITEM NUMBER SIX.

THE WAIVER ALLOWS FOR AREA HEIGHT AND BULK REGULATIONS FOR ZERO LOT LINE RESIDENTIAL.

IT'S A LITTLE BIT CONTRADICTIVE TO HAVE A ZERO LOT LINES IN A PLACE THAT THEY ARE SAYING IS THAT AGRIHOOD? I DON'T I DON'T KNOW ABOUT YOU GUYS, BUT I'VE NEVER DRIVEN THROUGH A ZERO LOT LINE COMMUNITY AND THOUGHT, MAN, THAT'S A PLACE FOR AGRICULTURE IS RIGHT THERE.

IT'S JUST IT SEEMS AWFULLY CONTRADICTIVE ON THE SURFACE.

SPEAKING OF AGRIHOOD, IT'S A IT'S A CATCHY NAME.

AND AND I SAW THE VIDEO AT PGA WHERE THEY TALKED ABOUT HOW GREAT IT WOULD BE, BUT I'M NOT SURE IT'S WARRANTED.

THE PGA MEETING THE APPLICANT MENTIONED ROUGHLY 18 ACRES OF THE PROJECT WOULD BE AGRICULTURE.

THAT'S LESS THAN HALF A PERCENT.

EXCUSE ME. LESS THAN 1%.

IT'S ABOUT TWO THIRDS OF A PERCENT.

SO AGAIN THAT WAS JUST WHAT THEY MENTIONED.

THERE'S NO DETAILED MDP TO ACTUALLY KNOW HOW MANY ACRES ARE AGRICULTURE.

BUT IF YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT LESS THAN 1% AND NAMING IT AFTER THAT, I THINK EVERYBODY HERE CAN SEE THROUGH THAT.

WE KNOW THE PROPERTY IS WET.

WE'VE HEARD ABOUT THAT FROM NEIGHBORS.

THE APPLICANT EVEN ADMITTED THEY CONTEMPLATED MAKING THIS PROPERTY A MITIGATION BANK.

THEY WOULDN'T CONTEMPLATE THAT IF IT WEREN'T VERY WET.

OF COURSE, I THINK THIS PROPERTY IS IS CLEARLY I MEAN, IT FEELS LIKE THE DEFINITION OF INCOMPATIBLE, THE PROPERTY TO THE SOUTH IS OR THE PROPERTY TO THE WEST IS, OR PROPERTY TO THE NORTH IS OR, AND TO THE EAST IS OR.

AND THE COUNTY STAFF ANALYSIS CONCLUDES THAT IF THE DEVELOPMENT IS APPROVED, IT WILL, QUOTE, DRAMATICALLY CHANGE THE CHARACTER OF THE AREA.

SO WITH THAT, I ASK THAT YOU GUYS DENY THIS.

AND WITH MY LAST LITTLE BIT OF TIME HERE, I WANT TO THANK COMMISSIONER, DEAN AND COMMISSIONER ALAIMO FOR YOUR TIME ON THE BOARD AND THANK THE COMMISSIONERS AS A WHOLE.

I HAVE NO IDEA WHAT IT'S LIKE TO BE A COMMISSIONER, BUT I IMAGINE IT'S EXHAUSTING.

YOU GUYS GET LEANED ON IN EVERY DIRECTION.

YOU'RE GOING TO CATCH FLACK NO MATTER WHAT.

YOU VOTE EVERY TIME.

AND TO SIT UP, TO SIT HERE TWICE A MONTH FOR THE YEARS THAT YOU HAVE AND WILL CONTINUE TO IS ADMIRABLE.

SO THANK YOU GUYS FOR BEING COMMISSIONERS.

AND AGAIN, PLEASE DENY THIS.

THANK YOU. HELLO.

MY NAME IS RAQUEL GREGORY.

I LIVE AT 2130 RYAN ROAD NEXT TO WATER PLANT ROAD, WHERE THAT WONDERFUL WATER PLANT WE WERE JUST TALKING ABOUT EARLIER.

I'M HERE TODAY TO URGE YOU TO VOTE NO ON THE AGRIHOOD PLAN.

[02:55:02]

I'M HERE AS A CONCERNED CITIZEN REGARDING THE GROWTH OF OUR COUNTY.

I AGREE WITH MANY THAT ARE HERE TODAY.

BEHIND ME. I MIRRORED THE SAME CONCERNS, HOWEVER, IN EMAIL INTERCHANGES, MY CONCERNS HAVE BEEN LABELED SELF-RIGHTEOUS BY SOME ON THE BOARD.

THAT IS A PROBLEM FOR ME.

THE LANGUAGE OF THAT IS A PROBLEM FROM MY POINT OF VIEW.

IT MAKES ME FEEL THAT, YOU KNOW MORE THAN THE CONCERNED CITIZENS BEHIND ME WHO ARE HERE TODAY TO VOICE THEIR OPINIONS AND HAVE A PUBLIC RIGHT TO DO SO, AND EMAIL EACH AND EVERY ONE OF YOU WITHOUT COMMENT BACK.

THAT IS RUDE AND UNCOURTEOUS.

WITH THAT SAID, WE'RE AT A PUBLIC HEARING FOR YOU TO HEAR THE PUBLIC WHO ARE ALLOWED TO SPEAK TO YOU.

I'VE DRIVEN DOWN THIS ROAD MANY TIMES.

I LIVE RIGHT OFF 214 AFTER THE HURRICANE.

RECENTLY IT LOOKED LIKE A LAKE.

THERE WERE PEOPLE THAT ACTUALLY DROVE DOWN THAT ROAD AND COMMENTED TO ME AND SAID, THERE'S A LAKE OUT BY WHERE YOU LIVE.

NO, THERE'S NOT A LAKE WHERE I LIVE.

IT WAS CLEARED AND IT'S COMPLETELY COVERED IN FLOODING.

WE ALL KNOW THAT WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT IT.

WE ALL KNOW THAT THE PROPOSED PLAN IS GOING TO PUT AT LEAST SIX 6000 MORE CARS ON 214.

THAT'S A MOM MATH. WE'VE ALL DONE IT HERE AGAIN OVER AND OVER FOR YOU GUYS.

WE CAN FIGURE IT OUT.

OUR TAXES WILL GO UP BECAUSE THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO FUNDING FOR SCHOOLS IN 2018.

BIG COMMUNITIES LIKE THIS WERE ABLE TO JUST NOT GIVE THAT EXTRA MONEY.

AND WE ARE NOW, AS CITIZENS, HAVING TO PAY FOR THAT.

AGAIN, LIKE NOTED HERE, THERE IS NOT ENOUGH ROOM FOR ANY MORE CHILDREN TO GO TO THESE SCHOOLS.

MY KIDS STAND ON 214 I HAVE CALLED THE TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT AND ASKED WHY MY CHILDREN HAVE TO STAND IN A ZONE OF 55 MILES AN HOUR.

HE IS SIX YEARS OLD AND I WAS TOLD TO GO OUT AND VOTE AND TALK TO THE COUNTY COMMISSIONERS BECAUSE WE DON'T HAVE ENOUGH BUSSES.

I WAS TOLD THAT BY THE DIRECTOR OF THE TRANSPORTATION DEPARTMENT THREE WEEKS AGO, BEFORE I DECIDED TO COME HERE.

THE OPTICS DON'T LOOK VERY GOOD.

WE'RE HERE ON NATIONAL ELECTION DAY, TAKING TIME OUT OF OUR DAYS, OUR WORK LIVES, TO SAY WHAT'S GOING TO DIRECTLY IMPACT US AS CITIZENS.

AND I EXPECT YOU TO RESPOND TO THE WILL OF THE PEOPLE AND FOR THE COMMUNITY.

MY CHILDREN AREN'T GOING TO GO TO YOUR POOL.

THEY'RE NOT GOING TO BE ALLOWED TO PLAY IN THE PARK.

SO HOW IS THIS BENEFITING US MUTUALLY? YOU TALKED ABOUT SHAREHOLDERS FIRST.

FIRST, NOT THE COMMUNITY HERE.

YOU TALKED ABOUT TELLING YOUR SHAREHOLDERS HOW MUCH THEY WERE GOING TO GET, HOW MUCH THE COUNTY IS GOING TO GET.

BUT WHAT ARE WE GOING TO GET? WE'RE NOT GOING TO GET ANYTHING FROM THIS.

IT IS NOT MUTUALLY RESPONSIBLE.

IT IS NOT OKAY WITH THE CITIZENS.

AND WE'RE HERE TO TELL YOU THAT.

AMELIA HARVEY, 2010 RYAN ROAD.

I FEEL IT IS IMPORTANT FOR ME TO BEGIN BY SAYING I UNDERSTAND AND RESPECT THE RIGHTS OF PRIVATE PROPERTY OWNERS TO DEVELOP THEIR LAND.

HOWEVER, I CONSIDER A MANAGED AND SMART GROWTH TO BE A PRIORITY ABOVE THOSE RIGHTS.

WHEN I FIRST READ THE DOCUMENTS CONCERNING ZONING CHANGE TO RESIDENTIAL B, I THOUGHT ABOUT HOW OUR AREA IS NOT READY FOR THIS KIND OF DEVELOPMENT, BUT I THOUGHT TWO HOMES PER ACRE WAS REASONABLE.

OF COURSE, THAT'S BEFORE I UNDERSTOOD ABOUT THINGS LIKE NET DEVELOPABLE ACRES AND ZERO LOT LINES.

I CAN'T SPEAK FOR EVERYONE HERE, BUT I CAN'T BE THE ONLY PERSON WHO FEELS LIKE THEY'VE BEEN DUPED INTO BELIEVING THIS DEVELOPMENT WOULD BE SOMETHING DIFFERENT FROM THE DENSE COMMUNITIES THAT HAVE SPREAD ACROSS OUR COUNTY.

IF YOU HAVEN'T LOOKED AT THE ARDEN COMMUNITY ON SATELLITE VIEW, I ENCOURAGE YOU TO DO SO.

THE VERY LAST WORD I WOULD USE TO DESCRIBE WHAT YOU SEE THERE IS AGRA.

ANYTHING. THE INFRASTRUCTURE FOR THIS KIND OF COMMUNITY DOES NOT EXIST ALONG OR NEAR COUNTY ROAD 214.

THE TRAFFIC CONCERNS YOU HAVE HEARD HERE TODAY ARE VALID.

THE. SORRY.

THE DEVELOPER ONLY HAS TO ACCOUNT FOR TRAFFIC WITHIN FOUR MILES, BUT WE KNOW THE RESIDENTS WILL COMMUTE FURTHER THAN THAT ON A DAILY BASIS.

214 HAS RECENTLY SEEN AN UPTICK IN COMMUTERS FROM THE MIRABELLA AREA, WHO HAVE FOUND THIS ROUTE TO BE A BETTER ALTERNATIVE TO THE NIGHTMARE THAT STATE ROAD 16 HAS BECOME.

WE HAVE SEEN AN UPTICK IN COMMUTERS FROM PUTNAM COUNTY WHO HAVE SEEN THIS ROUTE TO BE A BETTER ALTERNATIVE TO THE NIGHTMARE THAT STATE ROAD 207 HAS BECOME.

I AM HERE TO ASK YOU TO NOT ADD TO THAT TRAFFIC NIGHTMARE.

HAVE ANY OF YOU TRIED USING ALANIZ ROAD TO GET TO 207 DURING PEAK HOURS ON A WEEKDAY? WHAT ABOUT USING HOLMES BOULEVARD TO GET TO.

214 DURING PEAK HOURS ON A WEEKDAY? IT IS A TEST OF ANYONE'S PATIENCE ON THE BEST OF DAYS.

THE ADDITION OF COUNTY ROAD TWO.

209 WILL NOT ALLEVIATE ANY OF THESE TRAFFIC CONCERNS WHEN ALL THIS UNCONNECTED SECTION OF ROADWAY WILL DO IS LINK TWO RURAL ROADS THAT ARE NOT CAPABLE OF SUSTAINING THIS

[03:00:03]

KIND OF AN INCREASE IN COMMUTERS.

I AM HERE ONCE AGAIN, COMMISSIONERS, TO ASK YOU TO DO THE RESPONSIBLE THING AND DELAY APPROVAL OF THIS OF THIS PROPOSAL UNTIL THE INFRASTRUCTURE OF THIS AREA IS IMPROVED AND ABLE TO HANDLE THIS DEVELOPMENT WITHOUT BEING OVERWHELMED.

THANK YOU. MY NAME IS DAN PALMER.

I LIVE AT 161 COUNTY ROAD 13 SOUTH, AND JUST FELT LIKE I HAD TO SAY SOMETHING.

YOU KNOW, THIS MASSIVE DEVELOPMENT IS NOT JUST STRAINING THE INFRASTRUCTURE OF OUR SCHOOL SYSTEMS, FIRE DEPARTMENT, POLICE, ROAD WORKS AND ALL IT.

IT SPREADS OUT FURTHER THAN THAT.

MY WIFE JUST RECENTLY WENT TO GET HER EYES WORKED ON THE OPHTHALMOLOGIST.

THEY HAD A POST-IT OF PAPER THAT SAID ASKING FOR FORBEARANCE BECAUSE THEY WERE SO OVERWHELMED THAT THE POPULATION HAS GROWN SO MUCH, BUT THE NUMBER OF OPHTHALMOLOGISTS HASN'T BEEN COMMENSURATE WITH THAT.

AND THAT'S EVERYTHING.

NOW THAT'S OTHER MEDICAL.

TRY GETTING A DENTIST APPOINTMENT.

TRY. GETTING EVERYTHING TAKES SO MUCH LONGER YOU'RE PUSHED THROUGH QUICKLY.

IT'S NOT SOMETHING WE NECESSARILY THINK A LOT ABOUT.

IT'S HARD TO GET TRADESMEN TO COME TO THE EXISTING HOMES.

EVERYBODY'S BUSY.

I KNOW WE CAN'T STOP DEVELOPMENT, BUT WE NEED TO PUMP THE BRAKES A LITTLE BIT TO JUST LET EVERYTHING CATCH UP.

AND, YOU KNOW, BUILDING THIS NEW SECTION OF 2209 DOESN'T.

I MEAN, IT MIGHT PROVIDE SOME LEGAL MITIGATION, BUT IT DOESN'T SEEM LIKE IT WILL REALLY MITIGATE CONTEMPORARILY TO THE TRAFFIC THAT WILL BE INCREASED.

THOUSANDS OF THOUSANDS OF CARS ON TWO, 14, 13, A 13, 208 AND THE HOLMES BOULEVARD INTERSECTION.

IT'S LIKELY TO BE DECADES UNTIL THIS 2209 REALLY DOES SOMETHING TO HELP THE COUNTY.

MY WIFE AND I WENT 30 SOME YEARS AGO TO A MEETING ABOUT THE 312 EXTENSION, YOU KNOW, AND IT WAS GOING TO HIT A PIECE OF PROPERTY THAT WE HAD OR MIGHT. AND WE WENT THERE AND HERE IT IS THESE MANY DECADES LATER, THEY JUST FINISHED ANOTHER LITTLE SEGMENT.

IT DOESN'T LOOK LIKE IT'S GOING TO BE COMPLETED IN MY LIFETIME.

YOU KNOW, WE MOVED OUT TO THE RIVER 30 SOME YEARS AGO BECAUSE WE LOVE THE CHARACTER OF THE LAND.

WE LOVE WHERE WE LIVE.

WE LOVE HAVING THE BUFFERED AREA OF THE AGRICULTURAL LAND.

AND I JUST DON'T THINK THAT THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT FITS THE CHARACTER OF THE AREA AROUND IT MUCH AT ALL.

AND IT'S JUST WHAT WE DON'T NEED RIGHT NOW.

WE. IT'S JUST WHAT WE DON'T NEED RIGHT NOW.

THAT'S ABOUT IT. I THANK YOU, AND I WANT TO THANK YOU ALL FOR YOUR SERVICE TO THANK YOU SO MUCH.

I WAS A COMMISSIONER OF A SMALL TOWN, AND IT WAS ENOUGH OF A PAIN, YOU KNOW.

THANK YOU SIR.

RICK. MILLION SEVEN EIGHT BROADCAST COURT.

MR.. MR. DEAN, THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE.

ONE OF THE SPEAKERS INDICATED THAT FOR ONE HOUSE TO BE BUILT WOULD COST $40 MILLION.

MOST BUSINESSES DO NOT GIVE AWAY $40 MILLION, SO I'M WILLING TO BET WITH A 20% REDUCTION IN WETLANDS.

HOW MANY 60 FOOT LOTS WILL BE ADDED ON THAT PROPERTY TO RECOUP THE $40 MILLION? AND ALSO, THEY INDICATED THAT YOU WERE GIVEN A GIFT OF ROUGHLY $25 MILLION FOR THE 47.4 MILES OF LAND TO HELP 2209.

HOW MUCH IS THAT GOING TO COST TO TAXPAYERS TO CONNECT TO THAT ROAD AND BUILD ALL THE OTHER INFRASTRUCTURE TO MAKE IT WORTHWHILE? SO IF YOU APPROVE THIS, BECAUSE THEY KEEP SAYING YOU OWE US IS WHAT I HEARD.

SO IF YOU APPROVE IT, IT WON'T BE ON YOU ANYMORE.

IT'LL BE ON THE TAXPAYERS TO FILL THE BUCKET WITH MONEY.

AND UNFORTUNATELY, THE BUCKET HAS A HOLE IN THE BOTTOM OF IT.

OR MORNING STILL, I GUESS.

NO. IT'S AFTERNOON. GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSIONERS.

MY NAME IS JUDY SPIEGEL.

I LIVE AT 101 GREEN WILLOW LANE.

FIRST OF ALL, I'D LIKE TO SAY THAT WE HAVE TOPPED 75% VOTER PARTICIPATION IN THIS ELECTION, WHICH IS INCREDIBLE.

I'M ALL ABOUT COMMUNITY, AND I'M ALL ABOUT COMMUNICATION, AND I'M ALL ABOUT HEARING WHAT PEOPLE HAVE TO SAY.

EVERYBODY HAS A VOICE.

YOU ARE EXPERTS.

YOU DO UNDERSTAND A LOT MORE THAN WE THE PEOPLE UNDERSTAND.

[03:05:03]

BUT I HAD A PHONE CONVERSATION IN JULY WITH COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST, AND HE MENTIONED A DEVELOPMENT THAT HAPPENED IN ANOTHER COUNTY, AND I APOLOGIZE, I DON'T REMEMBER WHAT COUNTY, BUT HE SAID THAT THEY HAD TAKEN YEARS TO TALK WITH THE COMMUNITY AND WORKED OUT AN AGREEMENT FOR A32000 ACRE PARCEL THAT HAD 3000 PROPERTIES.

AS FAR AS I REMEMBER THE CONVERSATION.

AND I THINK WHAT I'M HEARING HERE IS THIS GREAT AGREEMENT FOR THIS PORTION OF ROAD THAT IS PROBABLY SOMEDAY REALLY GOING TO BE BENEFICIAL AND THE DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS THAT GO AROUND IT.

BUT ON THE OTHER HAND, THAT I'M HEARING OUR INFRASTRUCTURE RIGHT NOW IS OVERBURDENED AS IT IS AND PROBABLY WON'T BE ABLE TO HANDLE THIS MUCH QUICK. DEVELOPMENT.

I'M ALSO HEARING 2034 AND I'M ALSO HEARING INCREMENTAL.

DEVELOPMENTS. SO THE BENEFIT FOR THE COUNTY IS NOT GOING TO BE FOR A WHILE.

SO. I KNOW THAT THERE PROBABLY IS ZERO CHANCE THAT THIS COMPLETELY BE DENIED, BUT I LIKE THE IDEA OF A PAUSE.

I LIKE THE IDEA OF WE YOU KNOW, WE GOT THIS VERY LATE AND, YOU KNOW, THERE'S VERY FEW DETAILS IN THIS MDP OF A PAUSE AND COMMUNICATION SO THAT SOMETHING THAT IS INTENDED TO REALLY BENEFIT OUR COMMUNITY AND OUR COUNTY CAN REALLY BENEFIT OUR COMMUNITY AND OUR COUNTY. THERE'S NEVER GOING TO BE AN ULTIMATE DECISION WHERE EVERYBODY'S HAPPY.

AND YOU ALL KNOW THAT EVERY DAY YOU DEAL WITH THAT.

BUT THERE'S A WAY TO LISTEN, AND THERE'S A WAY TO.

THE FACT THAT THEY TOOK THE MULTIFAMILY OUT IS GOOD.

THEY WENT INTO A WE SAW IT FOR LIKE TWO MINUTES AND THEN MADE OUR DECISIONS, BUT CHANGES WERE MADE.

SO MAYBE SOME MORE TIME IS NECESSARY FOR CHANGES TO BE MADE.

THIS IS GOING TO BE DEVELOPED AT SOME POINT.

THEY DO HAVE A RIGHT, AT LEAST IN SOME PERSPECTIVE, BUT IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE TODAY RIGHT NOW.

SO THAT'S REALLY WHAT I WANT TO SAY AGAIN.

COMMISSIONER. DEAN. COMMISSIONER ALAIMO, THANK YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE.

AND THE ONE WORD THAT I HAVE FOR YOU IS WHEN YOU ARE IN CONNECTION WITH THE LIVING GOD.

IT'S NEVER A DEMOTION.

IT'S ALWAYS A PROMOTION.

WHAT HE HAS FOR YOU IS GOING TO BE BETTER THAN WHAT YOU'VE DONE.

SO THANK YOU BOTH VERY MUCH FOR YOUR SERVICE.

HI, MY NAME IS LINDA LEE.

I LIVE AT 78 PEARL CREST COURT.

I WOULD LIKE TO SAY PLEASE HOLD ON THIS AND DENY IT OR JUST PUT IT ON PAUSE TO BE LOOKED AT LATER AND LISTENING TO IT.

IN THE BEGINNING I WAS LIKE, OH MY GOSH, YOU KNOW, THIS DOES SOUND LIKE IT'S GOING TO BE PRETTY GOOD.

BUT THEN IN REALIZING WE'RE TALKING YEARS DOWN THE ROAD, AND THIS WAS ORIGINALLY PRESENTED BACK DURING COVID TIME SO PEOPLE COULDN'T COME OUT AND REALLY UNDERSTAND WHAT WAS GOING ON.

I DON'T KNOW ALL THE INS AND OUTS, BUT I DO KNOW THAT INFRASTRUCTURE IS NOT READY FOR THIS.

THE SCHOOLS ARE NOT READY FOR THIS AND THE ROAD GOING RIGHT DOWN THE MIDDLE OF THIS, THIS DEVELOPMENT.

I'M NOT SURE IF FREEHOLD'S GOING TO DO THE SAME THING THAT THEY DID TO US IN SHEARWATER, WHERE THEY'VE MADE THE ROAD GOING ALL THE WAY DOWN OUR DEVELOPMENT, ARE THE RESIDENTS RESPONSIBILITY TO PAY FOR.

I'M LOOKING OUT.

I'M I'M UP HERE TO LOOK OUT FOR THE RESIDENTS OF THE FUTURE.

I DON'T WANT THEM TO SUFFER AND GO THROUGH WHAT WE'RE GOING THROUGH AND SHEARWATER WITH THE DIFFERENT THINGS THAT WE'RE FINDING OUT THAT SURE THAT FREEHOLD AS A DEVELOPER HAS DONE TO US, WE HAVE TO.

I'VE ALWAYS UNDERSTOOD IF YOU HAD A GATED COMMUNITY, YOU'RE RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ROADS.

I GET THAT, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT THAT'S FAIR.

BUT WE HAVE A MAIN ROAD THAT GOES OVER THREE MILES THROUGH OUR OUR AREA, OUR WHOLE NEIGHBORHOOD.

WE THE PEOPLE HAVE TO PAY TO MAINTAIN IT.

ALL THE WHILE FREEHOLD WOULD NOT OPEN UP THE BACK ENTRANCE, WOULD NOT USE THE CONSTRUCTION.

HAVE CONSTANTLY AND THEY'RE BUILDING IN THE BACK NOW THREE MILES IN THE BACK OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD, BUT YET THEY'RE DRIVING THROUGH THE COMPLETE NEIGHBORHOOD ON THE ROAD.

WE HAVE TO MAINTAIN WITH ALL THE BIG TRUCKS AND THE TENANT'S TONNAGE ON THOSE TRUCKS EVERY SINGLE DAY.

I DON'T WANT THAT TO HAPPEN TO FUTURE RESIDENTS, AND I DON'T KNOW WHAT THE PLAN IS FOR THIS AGRICULTURAL PLACE, BUT I HOPE IT DOESN'T HAPPEN TO THEM.

SO MANY OF OUR PROBLEMS, WE FOUND, ARE DEVELOPER PROBLEMS THAT WERE CREATED BY THE DEVELOPER THAT WE'RE NOT FINDING OUT UNTIL FIVE, SIX, SEVEN YEARS LATER.

FOR EXAMPLE, THINGS THAT WERE SUPPOSED TO BE COMMERCIAL MERCHANDISE EQUIPMENT, THEY DIDN'T.

[03:10:03]

THEY USED RESIDENTIAL ANY WAY TO CUT COSTS.

FREEHOLDERS FOUND IT.

PLEASE BE VERY CAREFUL WHEN YOU'RE DEALING WITH FREEHOLD.

AND I DON'T THINK THE ROBINSONS AND THEIR WONDERFUL GESTURE OF DONATING THIS, THIS PROPERTY.

I MEAN, WHAT A LEGACY TO LEAVE.

BUT DON'T LET YOUR LEGACY BE TARNISHED BY UNDERHANDED DEVELOPER.

HELLO. CARLA MAXWELL CORDEAUX, 4405 MANUCCI ROAD IN THE PAST FEW YEARS, I'VE BEEN ENGAGING IN GROWTH MANAGEMENT MEETINGS, AND I'VE LEARNED A LOT ABOUT SAINT JOHN'S COUNTY LAND DEVELOPMENT CODES.

THESE CODES ARE RULES ARE IN PLACE TO REGULATE GROWTH AND PROMOTE RESPONSIBLE DEVELOPMENT.

BUT I'VE NOTICED THAT WITH EACH APPLICANT, THE CODES ARE EITHER STRICTLY ENFORCED OR SOMETIMES COMPLETELY DISREGARDED.

ABOUT THE ROBINSON PROJECT.

HERE ARE AT LEAST THREE CODES THAT SAY THAT THIS HIGH DENSITY PROPOSED PROJECT, AS IS, SHOULD NOT BE APPROVED.

A125 CLEARLY SHOWS THE ORIGINAL AGREEMENT FOR A COMP PLAN AMENDMENT WITH THIS DEVELOPER SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN MADE, SINCE THIS PROPOSED PROJECT DID NOT SHOW JUSTIFICATION FOR NEED FOR THIS AMENDMENT.

IT DOESN'T DISCOURAGE URBAN SPRAWL, AND IT ISN'T A DEVELOPMENT AREAS WHERE EXISTING PUBLIC FACILITIES AND SERVICES EXIST.

PART C SAYS NO CPA SHOULD BE APPROVED UNLESS ADEQUATE INFRASTRUCTURE TO ACCOMMODATE THE AMENDMENT EXISTS OR IS PROGRAMED AND FUNDED THROUGH THE ADOPTED CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT SCHEDULE.

AMENDMENTS THAT RESULT IN UNREASONABLE NEGATIVE IMPACTS AND DO NOT PROVIDE SUFFICIENT COMPATIBILITY MEASURES SHOULD NOT BE APPROVED.

YOU CAN'T ARGUE THAT THE INFRASTRUCTURE IS NOT THERE.

214 ROADWAY WAS NOT DESIGNED TO HANDLE THOUSANDS OF EXTRA CAR TRIPS, AND THE EIGHT OTHER ROADWAYS IMPACTED BY THIS PROPOSED PROJECT ARE ALREADY 100% AND ABOVE.

A127 SAYS AREAS DESIGNATED AG SILVICULTURE ARE NOT DEVELOPMENT AREAS.

CPA'S TO ADD DEVELOPMENT AREAS SHALL BE DISCOURAGED UNLESS THE APPLICANT DEMONSTRATES THAT THE AMENDMENT PROVIDES ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, JOB CREATION, PRESERVATION OF NATURAL ENVIRONMENT OR OTHER PUBLIC BENEFIT.

THIS IS PLENTY OF.

THERE IS PLENTY OF AFT DATA TO SUPPORT THE CASE FOR FARMLAND PROTECTION.

ONCE CONVERTED TO RESIDENTIAL, IT WILL NEVER BE CONVERTED BACK.

IT WILL BE LOST FOREVER.

SO IT. SO IT'S TOO LATE TO STOP THE CPA OF THIS PROPERTY.

BUT A1 311 SAYS A REZONING REQUEST SHALL NOT BE APPROVED IF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IS INCOMPATIBLE WITH THE SURROUNDING AREA, IF IT WILL HAVE UNREASONABLE IMPACT AND WILL CHANGE THE CHARACTERISTICS OF THE EXISTING NEIGHBORHOOD.

WILL CREATE TRAFFIC FLOW ISSUES AND HAVE UNREASONABLE IMPACT ON PROJECTED ROADWAYS DESIGNED TO CARRY OR CARRY LIGHTER TRAFFIC.

THIS PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT IS A NICE LOOKING DESIGN, BUT IS NOT REMOTELY COMPATIBLE WITH THIS AREA AND WOULD RUIN THE RURAL NATURE OF 214.

ADDING A GARDEN AND A BARN TO A HIGH DENSITY NEIGHBORHOOD DOES NOT MAKE IT RURAL OR AGRICULTURAL FEEL.

APPROVING THIS PROPOSED HIGH DENSITY PROJECT WOULD ONLY SET A PRECEDENT FOR MORE OF THE SAME IN THIS AREA.

WHERE DOES IT END TAKING ALL OF THIS INTO ACCOUNT AND THE MANNER IN WHICH THIS PROPOSED PROJECT WAS EXPEDITED AND THE 16 WAIVERS IT SHOULD BE DENIED.

I LIVE AT 1297 COUNTY ROAD 13 SOUTH.

MY NAME IS DIANE WILSON.

AND ADMITTEDLY, I DON'T UNDERSTAND ALL OF THE CONCEPTS AND WAIVERS, MEDICATION AND THE CONNECTION OF 2209.

WHAT I DO UNDERSTAND IS IT FEELS LIKE YOU'RE JUST PLOPPING A PUD IN THE MIDDLE OF NOWHERE.

YOUR STAFF OR COUNTY STAFF SHOWS IT AS A SPARSE RURAL DEVELOPMENT AREA WITH 1 TO 2 ACRES, 1 TO 10 ACRE HOMES IN THAT GENERAL AREA.

THE LADY BEFORE ME, I DIDN'T CATCH HER NAME, BUT SHE TOOK A LOT OF THE POINTS THAT I WAS GOING TO SAY.

I'M REALLY GOING TO GIVE YOU MORE OF THE COUNTY CODE THAT ALLOWS YOU TO UPHOLD AND DENY THIS PUD.

A 1.3.

11 SAYS THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS SHALL UTILIZE THE FOLLOWING CRITERIA OF THE APPLICATION AND CONSIDERATION OF ALL REZONING REQUESTS.

I CAN READ ALL OF THESE IF YOU WANT, BUT I'M SURE THAT YOU KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THEY ARE.

REZONING REQUESTS SHALL BE NOT SHALL NOT BE APPROVED IF THE PROPOSED PROPOSED PERMITTED USES ARE DETERMINED TO HAVE AN UNREASONABLE IMPACT

[03:15:04]

ON THE CONTIGUOUS AND SURROUNDING AREAS WITH RESPECT TO SENSORY CHARACTERISTICS OF ODOR, NOISE, VIBRATION, LIGHTING, AS WELL AS NON-SENSORY.

IT GOES ON AND ON AND ON.

THE OTHER OBJECTIVES ARE 8.1.2.

THE CONTROL OF URBAN SPRAWL SHALL.

THE COUNTY SHALL CONTROL URBAN SPRAWL CHARACTERIZED BY LEAPFROG.

ALSO THE FLORIDA STATE STATUTE, THEY CAN UTILIZE IT TO VALIDATE THEIR PUD, BUT IT ALSO 1.1 63.314. ITEM 54 SAYS URBAN SPRAWL MEANS THE DEVELOPMENT PATTERN CHARACTERIZED BY LOW DENSITY, AUTOMOTIVE DEPENDENT. YOU CAN'T GO ANYWHERE OUT THERE WITHOUT AN AUTOMOBILE.

THEY'VE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT THE TRAFFIC.

A .1.23 DISTRICTS SHALL BE CLUSTERED PER STUDENT OF THE PROVISIONS OF PLANNED RURAL DEVELOPMENT REGULATIONS.

A .1.25 DISCOURAGE URBAN SPRAWL.

COMPACT, CONTIGUOUS CONTIGUOUS PATTERN.

ENSURE COMPATIBLE DEVELOPMENT ADJACENT TO AGRICULTURAL LANDS.

PROTECT ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITIES AND CHARACTERISTICS.

PROVIDES INTERCONNECTIVITY OF ROADWAYS AND SUPPORT THE USE OF NON-AUTOMOTIVE.

A .1.27 SAYS ALL THOSE AREAS DESIGNATED ON THE FUTURE LAND USE MAP, THERE DEPICTED THE OVERALL GROWTH PATTERN OF THE COUNTY.

AREAS DESIGNATED RS AND I ARE NOT DEVELOPMENT AREAS.

PRESERVATION OF THE NATURAL ENVIRONMENT SHOULD BE ENFORCED HERE, AND A .1.3 11 ENSURES THE COMPATIBILITY OF ADJACENT AND SURROUNDING.

AND I'M DONE. PLEASE DENY THIS APPLICATION AS IT'S AHEAD OF ITS TIME.

ALL RIGHTY. GOOD AFTERNOON, CHARLIE HUNT, MILL CREEK ESTATES.

FACT IN DECEMBER 20TH OR ON DECEMBER 20TH, 2016, STAR INVESTORS FOR WHO'S RAN BY STELLAR DEVELOPMENT COMPANY AND TURKEY TROT, WHICH IS RUN BY CHRIS.

SHE CAME IN TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS AND THEY HAD A MEETING AND THEY WERE GOING TO DONATE 225 ACRES OF PROPERTY, WHICH IS THE PROPERTY THAT'S BEING YOU KNOW, THE THE HOLY GRAIL OF DONATING TO THE COUNTY.

BUT THEY HAD TO THE COUNTY HAD TO BUY A HUNDRED ACRES TO GET THAT DONATED TO THEM.

SO REALLY, ARE THEY DONATING IT WHEN THEY HAD TO BUY TWO PROPERTIES? ONE PROPERTY WAS 65 ACRES FROM THE STELLAR DEVELOPMENT GROUP, THE STAR INVESTORS, AND THE OTHER ONE WAS FOR 30 ACRES FROM THE TURKEY TROT, WHICH AMOUNTED UP TO ABOUT 400, OR, EXCUSE ME, 40 OR $4 MILLION THE COUNTY PAID TO GET DONATED TO THEM.

OKAY, THAT'S WHAT I'M SAYING.

IT'S NOT SHOWED UP THERE IN THEIR FACTS BECAUSE THIS PRIOR TO 2018, BEFORE THEY REALLY STARTED TO PUT TOGETHER THE WHOLE ASPECT OF IT BECAUSE IT IS TO DONATE THAT 225 ACRES.

THE COUNTY HAD TO BUY THE 100 ACRES FOR FOR FOR ROUGHLY $4 MILLION.

FACT BECAUSE THAT IS IN THE AGENDA ON 20TH DECEMBER 2016.

IT IS IN THERE.

IT'S LOOK, IT'S TWO YEARS BEFORE ALL THE DATES THAT THEY'RE SHOWING UP ONTO THE BOARD.

FACT COMMISSIONER WALDRON SAID, WOULD HATE TO SEE THE COUNTY MISS THIS THIS ACQUISITION BECAUSE IT WAS DIRT CHEAP.

ALSO, HE SAID IT'S SCARY WITH THE MONEY SITUATION AT THE TIME, BUT WELL, WE'LL FACE IT WHEN WE GET TO IT.

FACT IT'S IN THE STATEMENTS OR THE MINUTES.

FACT IN THE MINUTES.

COMMISSIONER DEAN ASKED IF A HALF CENT GAS TAX COULD BE BROUGHT ABOUT TO HELP ALLEVIATE SOME OF THESE PAYMENTS OR THE MAKE UP, SOME OF THE DEBT, BECAUSE IF THEY SPEND MONEY, THEY WOULD LIKE TO MAKE UP SOME MORE DEBT.

THAT WAS JUST A THOUGHT IN HIS MIND.

OKAY. AND LASTLY, LASTLY, MR. NIECE WORKED FOR ROBINSON COMPANY FROM 1947 TO 1971.

HE ESTABLISHED THE FORESTRY PROGRAM HERE IN THE COUNTY.

THANK YOU. HI,

[03:20:02]

MY NAME IS CINDY LONG.

I LIVE AT 7819 RUSTY ANCHOR ROAD IN COOLEY COVE, AND I ORIGINALLY MOVED UP HERE ABOUT TEN YEARS AGO AND LIVED IN NOCATEE IN THE DUVAL COUNTY PART AND GOING TO MY HOME OFF OF 95.

IT WAS A TWO LANE DARK ROAD, AND I TOLD MY MOM, I DON'T WANT TO DRIVE DOWN THIS ROAD AT NIGHT BECAUSE IT'S REALLY SCARY, BUT I DON'T HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT THAT NOW BECAUSE IT'S REALLY WELL LIT.

SO WE WANTED TO MOVE OUT TO THE COUNTY, OUT BY THE RIVER BECAUSE IT'S QUIET, THERE'S LESS TRAFFIC.

I CAN SEE THE STARS AGAIN.

YOU CAN'T DO THAT WHEN YOU HAVE A LOT OF ZERO LOT LINE BUILDINGS.

NOW WITH THIS PROJECT, THERE'S GOING TO BE A LOT OF HOMES ON 208.

THERE'S ANOTHER PROJECT COMING UP, WATERLILY ON 13 AND 208 WITH ANOTHER 3000 HOMES.

SILVERLEAF ISN'T EVEN BUILT OUT YET WITH 25%.

SO OUT OF ABOUT WHAT? I'M NOT GOOD WITH MATH, BUT IT'S, WHAT, 2500 HOMES RIGHT NOW AND IT'S SUPPOSED TO HAVE A BUILD OUT OF WHAT, 10 OR 15,000? WE CANNOT HANDLE THE TRAFFIC.

BUILD OUT.

SILVERLEAF, BEFORE YOU APPROVE ANYTHING ELSE.

BECAUSE YOU ARE NOT.

YOU DON'T LIVE WHERE I LIVE.

YOU DON'T SEE TRYING TO GET SOMEWHERE RIGHT NOW.

AND ON TOP OF THAT, WHEN I LIVED IN NOCATEE, I COULD EASILY GO TO GET AN EYE DOCTOR APPOINTMENT, GET A DENTIST APPOINTMENTS, AMONG OTHER THINGS.

WELL, NOW I CAN'T GET ANYTHING CLOSE TO ME.

I STILL HAVE TO DRIVE TO PONTE VEDRA BEACH.

I STILL HAVE TO DRIVE UP TO JACKSONVILLE TO GET AN APPOINTMENT, AND THAT'S 3 OR 4 MONTHS OUT.

SO BEING NATIVE, NATIVE AMERICAN, YOU PROBABLY DON'T REALIZE THAT WE HAVE TO DEAL WITH IHS SERVICES, WHICH MEANS YOU HAVE TO WAIT.

SOMETIMES PEOPLE DIE IN A YEAR BECAUSE THEY CANNOT GET AN APPOINTMENT.

AND THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO DO TO ALL OF THE PEOPLE BACK HERE, BECAUSE THERE AREN'T ENOUGH DOCTORS, OPTOMETRISTS, DENTISTS.

THAT'S WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO DO TO THEM.

YOU'RE GOING TO MAKE THEM DIE BECAUSE THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO WAIT A YEAR JUST TO GO SEE A PROVIDER.

PLEASE DENY THIS PROJECT.

THERE'S SO MANY HOLES IN IT, WE DON'T EVEN KNOW WHAT THEY'RE REALLY GOING TO BUILD.

MY NAME IS EVELYN FLETCHER AND I RESIDE AT 1250 SOUTH WINTERHAWK DRIVE OF WILDWOOD OWL CREEK.

I APPRECIATE YOU GIVING ME TIME TODAY.

I JUST WANT TO ECHO SOME OF THE COMMENTS THAT HAVE ALREADY BEEN MADE.

MY BACKGROUND IS IN SOCIAL SCIENCE, SO I REALLY APPRECIATE ALL THE SOIL TERMINOLOGY RESEARCH THAT'S ALREADY BEEN PRESENTED.

I USED TO REPRESENT THE AG COMMUNITY AS A COUNTY AGRICULTURAL AGENT, AND NOW I'M THEIR FRIEND AND BIGGEST CHEERLEADER.

SO I'VE SPENT A LOT OF TIME IN THIS AREA THAT IS OPEN FOR DISCUSSION RIGHT NOW.

AND JUST COMMENTING ON, AGAIN, THE DRAINAGE ISSUE.

THE MAJORITY OF THIS PROPERTY IS IN POORLY DRAINED SOIL.

SO EVEN THOUGH THE AMOUNT OF WETLANDS HAS BEEN PRESENTED AS FAR AS WHAT WILL BE PROTECTED REGARDLESS, MOST OF THIS PROPERTY ARE SPODOSOLS. SO OUR FLATWOOD SOILS ALONG WITH ALFISOLS AND WHAT DO THEY HAVE IN COMMON? POOR DRAINAGE.

WE JUST WENT THROUGH TWO HURRICANES.

I PERSONALLY LIVE ON A HIGH AND DRY SAND HILL, AND I INTENTIONALLY BOUGHT THE PROPERTY BECAUSE OF THE DRAINAGE AND BECAUSE IT WAS NOT IN THE FLOOD ZONE.

SO THE FOLKS IN THIS AREA, PART OF THIS PARCEL IS IN FLOOD ZONE A, SO NOT ONLY WILL THEY NEED TO ACQUIRE FLOOD INSURANCE, BUT CAN THEY EVEN AFFORD IT IF APPROVED FOR SUCH? THERE HAS BEEN A LOT OF DISCUSSION ABOUT TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC WELL WITHIN THIS AREA.

WHAT ABOUT THE EQUIPMENT TRAFFIC COMING FROM THE FARMLANDS? ARE THESE RESIDENTS GOING TO BE EDUCATED? THAT IT'S COMMON FOR A TRACTOR TO BE CROSSING THE ROAD OR SLOW TRAFFIC DOWN? BECAUSE NOT EVERY FARMER IS BLESSED TO HAVE ALL THEIR AG ACREAGE ON ONE PARCEL.

SO THAT IS SOMETHING TO JUST TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION, BECAUSE I WOULD BE ANTICIPATING A LOT OF THE FOLKS MOVING TO THIS COMMUNITY PROBABLY AREN'T FROM THE LOCAL AREA, AND WON'T

[03:25:04]

BE FAMILIAR WITH THE TYPICAL TRANSPORTATION AND MOVEMENT OF AG EQUIPMENT.

ALSO, IT WAS MENTIONED IN THIS PLAN OF THIS 18 ACRES THAT WILL BE IN PARTNERSHIP WITH EXPERIENCED FARMERS.

SO I'M JUST CURIOUS WHO THOSE ARE, BECAUSE I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH ANYONE THAT HAS VOLUNTEERED TO ASSIST WITH THIS PRODUCTION.

AND ONE FARMER WAS ALREADY NAMED EARLIER WHO TRIED TO FARM THAT LAND AND STRUGGLED.

AND HE'S ONE OF OUR BEST FARMERS IN THIS COMMUNITY.

AND IF THERE WAS CONSIDERATION OF, OH, WELL, WE'LL SUPPORT THE FARMERS BY BUYING THEIR PRODUCE, A LOT OF THESE FARMERS ARE CONTRACTED AND THE CULTIVARS AND VARIETIES THAT THEY GROW, THEY HAVE TO SELL BACK TO THEIR CONTRACTOR.

THEY CAN'T JUST GIVE IT AWAY TO THE PUBLIC.

AND IF THE PUBLIC WANTED TO BUY IT, I HOPE THEY'RE WILLING TO BUY A SEMI TRUCKLOAD BECAUSE THESE FOLKS ARE ON A COMMERCIAL SCALE.

SO WITH THAT SAID, WITH OUR AG COMMUNITY CONTRIBUTING $171 MILLION TO THIS COMMUNITY, I REQUEST THAT YOU KEEP THIS LAND AS OPEN RURAL, WHICH IS INTENDED AND DESIGNED TO SUPPORT A BALANCED GROWTH OF ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT WHILE BEING COMPATIBLE WITH ADJACENT LAND USES.

AND I THANK YOU.

IT'S GOOD TO SEE YOU, PERCY. THANK YOU MA'AM.

GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS.

MY NAME IS JAY CAMUS, AND FOR A FEW OF YOU, YOU MAY KNOW ME.

I USED TO WORK FOR THE COUNTY SOME YEARS AGO.

YOURS TRULY WAS YOUR FIRST.

I'M SORRY. ADDRESS IS 1315 COUNTY ROAD 13 SOUTH.

ABOUT SEVEN YEARS AGO, I RETIRED FROM THE COUNTY, AND I WAS YOUR FIRST ACTUAL ARBORIST FOR THE COUNTY.

AND I'VE SEIZED THIS OPPORTUNITY TO TRY TO POINT OUT A FEW THINGS THAT, IN THE BREADTH OF ALL THE INFORMATION THAT YOU MAY TRY TO ABSORB, HAVING WRITTEN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE THAT CONVERTED IT TO TREE INCHES FROM TREE CREDITS, UNFORTUNATELY I'M ALL TOO FAMILIAR WITH IT.

SO RATHER THAN TRY TO REITERATE ALL THE GREAT POINTS THAT MY PREDECESSORS UP HERE HAVE POINTED OUT TO YOU, I WANTED TO BRING UP A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT WERE NOT SPECIFICALLY TALKED ABOUT.

THE WAIVER LIST THAT THIS APPLICANT IS BRINGING IS EXTENSIVE AND, QUITE FRANKLY, UNNECESSARY.

THE JUSTIFICATIONS THEY PROVIDED ARE NOT REALLY BELIEVABLE, AND YOUR STAFF, THROUGH THE COUNTY STAFF, HAS DONE A FABULOUS JOB OF IDENTIFYING WHAT OUR ALTERNATIVES OR WHAT OUR SOLUTIONS TO THOSE WAIVER REQUESTS.

I WOULD HIGHLY SUGGEST THAT WE TRY TO VISIT THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS AND HAVE THE APPLICANT REWRITE THEIR WAIVER REQUEST IF THEY WANT TO PURSUE THAT.

WHAT STRIKES ME THE MOST IS THAT THE COMP PLAN AMENDMENT SAYS YOU SHALL NOT APPROVE SOMETHING THAT'S NOT COMPATIBLE.

SO I'M REALLY TRUSTING THAT YOU WILL FOLLOW THAT A RECOMMENDATION, BUT A COUPLE OF OTHER THINGS THAT HAVE WEIGHED ON MY MIND.

HAVING WATCHED SO MANY DEVELOPMENTS FROM OUR RIVER TOWN AND WORLD GOLF VILLAGE AND THE REST OF IT AS STRAINED AS WE ARE, I WOULD LIKE TO SEE THE COUNTY MOVE IN A DIRECTION THAT REQUIRES THE DEVELOPMENT TO PAY FOR THINGS, NOT JUST DONATE THE LAND, PAY FOR THE SCHOOL THAT'S GOING TO BE PUT ON THE LAND.

SHOULD THE SCHOOL BOARD DECIDE THEY NEED TO HAVE THAT AND PAY FOR THE FULL AMOUNT OF ROAD IMPROVEMENTS TO MAKE THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT FUNCTIONAL, NOT JUST FOR THE RESIDENTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT, FOR THE RESIDENTS, LIKE RETIRED OLD FOLKS LIKE ME NOW DRIVING AROUND AND HOPING TO GET TO I-95 OR FOR THAT MATTER, TRY TO GET INTO SAINT AUGUSTINE.

OKAY. IT WAS BROUGHT UP EARLIER THAT, YOU KNOW, CERTAINLY YOU TRY TO NOT APPROVE THIS, BUT RATHER DELAY IT AND REQUIRE, IF NOT REQUEST, THAT THE APPLICANT MODIFY THEIR APPLICATION TO REFLECT SOMETHING MORE PALATABLE.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME THIS AFTERNOON.

THANK YOU. BJ WEST, CITY OF SAINT AUGUSTINE.

THE PCA DENIED IT 7 TO 0 ON OCTOBER 17TH.

I WANT THIS TO BE ON THE RECORD.

IF IT CAN BE.

RESIDENTS ARE EXPERTS, NOT JUST LAWYERS, ENGINEERS AND DEVELOPERS.

RESIDENTS ARE EXPERTS.

SEE, DENY AND SUPPORT WHAT THE BCA WENT THROUGH IN MAKING THEIR DECISION.

[03:30:07]

AND OF COURSE, THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT THING AND I'LL KEEP ON BRINGING IT UP.

OH, MR. DEAN'S NOT HERE.

I WANT TO SAY THANK YOU TO THE RESIDENTS FOR SPEAKING FOR YOUR QUALITY OF LIFE.

AND HOPEFULLY THIS BOARD HAS PAID ATTENTION.

AND WILL IT BE A VOTE TO PASS IT BY? FOR ONE THING, THINK ABOUT THE ONE THAT WON'T BE VOTING FOR IT.

OR WILL IT BE FIVE ZERO TO DENY IT? IT'S EXCITING.

THE TENSION IN THIS ROOM IS REALLY AMAZING AND I WANT TO ASK THIS QUESTION SITTING HERE AND LISTENING THE THINGS PEOPLE SAY.

THIS CONCERNS ME.

I GET CONCERNED ABOUT THINGS WHEN I SIT IN HERE.

I HOPE EVERYONE IS PAYING ATTENTION.

I HOPE THEY'RE PAYING ATTENTION NOW.

THERE WON'T BE AN ANSWER.

I'M ASKING THE QUESTION.

WE GOT AN IDEA, THOUGH.

I DON'T GAMBLE, WHICH COMMISSIONER CALLED A RESIDENT SELF-RIGHTEOUS.

THE QUESTION WAS, WHICH COMMISSIONER CALLED A RESIDENT WHO DARED TO GET UP HERE AND SPEAK SELF-RIGHTEOUS.

YOU KNOW, THERE'S A LOT GOING ON BEHIND THE SCENES.

AND THIS IS ONE REASON WE COME IN HERE AND WE PUT FORTH QUALITY OF LIFE ISSUES, BASICALLY.

I KNOW THERE'S LAWS, BUT, YOU KNOW, I'M PRETTY SURE YOU'VE GOT DIFFERENT LAWSUITS GOING ON FOR DIFFERENT PEOPLE BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT HAPPY WITH YOU OR THEY ARE HAPPY WITH YOU. BUT TO CALL SOMEONE THAT AND BE A POLITICIAN REALLY, REALLY, REALLY, REALLY CONCERNS ME. SO LET ME READ THAT AGAIN.

I GOT 17 SECONDS.

WHICH COMMISSIONER WHO SPOKE SELF RIGHTEOUS ANY ANSWERS.

HI. MARK TURNER, 4024 VERMONT BOULEVARD IN ELKTON.

FIRST OFF, I'M GLAD TO BE ABLE TO VISIT WITH YOU ALL AS A 35 YEAR VETERAN OF OUR ARMED FORCES NOW THAT I'M RETIRED.

SO GLAD TO BE HERE.

YOU ALL Y'ALL PROBABLY KNOW BECAUSE I'VE SPOKEN TO YOU BEFORE.

I'M IN A MILITARY ENGINEER.

CORPS OF ENGINEER, TRAINED MASTER PLANNER.

AND I HAVE WORKED IN A NUMBER OF DIFFERENT PLACES ALL OVER THE UNITED STATES, IRAQ, KUWAIT, QATAR, SAUDI ARABIA AND JORDAN.

ALSO, AS YOU KNOW, BECAUSE YOU RECEIVE MY LETTER ON OCTOBER THE 7TH THAT I SPEAK ON BEHALF OF CONCERNED RESIDENTS OF VERMONT HEIGHTS.

WE'RE VERY ECLECTIC, BUT CERTAINLY UNIQUE IN THAT WE'RE THE OLDEST PLANNED DEVELOPMENT IN SAINT JOHNS COUNTY WILL BE 100 YEARS OLD NEXT YEAR.

SO WE ARE LOOKING FORWARD TO THAT CELEBRATION.

IN MY LETTER IT SAID THAT THE RESIDENTS OF VERMONT HEIGHTS COMMUNITY HAVE EXPRESSED CONCERNS OVER THE YEARS REGARDING SECONDARY ACCESS, TRAFFIC SAFETY, CONGESTION, AND COMMERCIALIZATION OF OUR RESIDENTIAL THRUWAY.

WE OPPOSE THE DEVELOPMENT AS IT SEEKS TO CREATE ADDITIONAL TRAFFIC FROM CR 214 DOWN ALLEN EAST ROAD ONTO BOULEVARD FOR TRAFFIC, INTENDING TO ACCESS 207 AND I-95.

THIS IS A WELL KNOWN CONCERN THAT THE COUNTY HAS BEEN UNABLE TO RESOLVE.

AS WE'VE SAID IN THE PAST, NO RESIDENTS SHOULD HAVE VEHICLES SUCH AS FUEL TRUCKS, OIL TRUCKS, AND TRACTOR TRAILERS ROUTINELY TRAVELING WITHIN 40 TO 50FT OF HOMES ON A PURELY RESIDENTIAL STREET.

SINCE THE PUBLIC LACKS THE NEEDED INFORMATION TO ASSESS THIS PARTICULAR PROJECT, I ALSO PROVIDED A COMMENT FROM THE COUNTY STAFF BACK IN 2018.

THE TRANSPORTATION COMPONENT OF THE 2018 REQUEST NOTED THAT THE FOLLOWING REGARDING THE ADDITIONAL ACCESS OF CR 2209, BUT DID NOT INDICATE HOW PEAK TRAFFIC ACCESS TO SR 207 WOULD AFFECT THE NEED FOR ALTERNATE ROUTES, SUCH AS THOSE PROVIDED BY ALLEN ROAD.

ADDITIONALLY, THOUGH THE TRAFFIC STUDY INCLUDED A FOUR MILE RADIUS, HOLMES BOULEVARD AND SR 207 ARE BEYOND, THAT RADIUS WILL BE IMPACTED AND SHOULD BE INCLUDED ON ANY LIST OF IMPACTED ROADS.

ADDITIONALLY, IT'S CONCERNING THAT KNOWN IMPACTED INTERSECTIONS HAVE NOT BEEN ANALYZED OR IMPROVED DUE TO THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE SECTION

[03:35:06]

6040583, WHICH ONLY REQUIRES THE ANALYSIS TO INCLUDE THE NEAREST NON SITE ACCESS INTERSECTIONS IN ALL DIRECTIONS.

THIS MEANS THAT YOU AND THE PUBLIC WOULD NOT RECEIVE THE NECESSARY TRAFFIC INTENSITY OR TRAFFIC PATTERN INFORMATION BETWEEN THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AND ACCESS TO I-95.

GIVEN THAT THE TRAFFIC STUDY ONLY INCLUDED A FOUR MILE RADIUS, WE ASK THAT YOU LISTEN TO YOUR STAFF, LISTEN TO THE PGA, LISTEN TO THE PUBLIC, AND VOTE NO ON THIS PROPOSAL AND THE FUTURE WATER LILY DEVELOPMENT.

WHEN I WAS A LITTLE BOY, MY GRANDMOTHER LIVED IN A POLISH AMERICAN NEIGHBORHOOD CALLED PORT RICHMOND IN PHILADELPHIA, PENNSYLVANIA, AND THEY HAD HORSE DRAWN HUCKSTERS SELLING FRUITS AND VEGETABLES AND FISH.

ED SLAVIN, BOX 384.

AND GRANDMOM SAID, DID YOU EVER HEAR A HUCKSTER HOLLER, ROTTEN FISH? YOU HAVE JUST HEARD A RATHER FUNGIBLE RUN OF MINE PRESENTATION BY A DEVELOPER.

NOW, THE DEVELOPER'S CONSULTANT, AS I UNDERSTAND IT, IS ENGLAND, TIMBS AND MILLER AND ENGLAND.

TIMPSON. MILLER ALSO DOES A LOT OF WORK FOR THE COUNTY, AND I THINK THAT'S AN ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST.

AND THIS SUBTLE CORRUPTION OF OUR GOVERNMENT MUST BE ENDED AT ONCE.

AND MR. MILLER'S SON IS THE LAWYER FOR THIS APPLICANT.

NOW, THIS LOOKS LIKE A JAPANESE FORM OF GOVERNMENT OR ORGANIZATION AND CORPORATIONS CALLED A KEIRETSU.

LOOK IT UP.

IT'S LIKE ALL IN THE FAMILY.

SPEAKING OF MOVIE AND TV THE ANALOGIES.

MY FRIEND HENRY DEANE WAS QUOTED IN THE VIDEO AT A PRIOR COUNTY COMMISSION MEETING, I THINK IN 2019, QUOTING A LINE FROM THE GODFATHER, AN OFFER YOU CAN'T REFUSE.

WELL, GO WATCH THAT MOVIE TONIGHT AND SEE THE CONTEXT THAT THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT.

I THINK THE GODFATHER, DON CORLEONE, HAD LUCA BRASI PUT A GUN TO SOMEBODY'S HEAD AND MAKE HIM AN OFFER HE CAN'T REFUSE.

AND MICHAEL TOLD THAT STORY TO KAY AT THE BEGINNING OF THAT MOVIE.

NOW, THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT THIS DEVELOPER AND THEIR MOUTHPIECE HAS DONE TO YOU.

IF YOU DON'T GIVE US THIS, WE'LL SUE MY.

ONE OF MY PROFESSORS AT MEMPHIS STATE SAID, YOU CAN SUE ANYONE, ANYTIME, ANYWHERE.

BE NOT AFRAID. IT'S IN THE BIBLE 106 TIMES.

NOW I WANT TO KNOW, AS JUDGE LITT WOULD ASK CUI BONO, WHO BENEFITS? COULD WE PLEASE IDENTIFY ALL THE BENEFICIAL OWNERS AND INVESTORS IN THIS PROJECT, INCLUDING THE MASTER DEVELOPER, AS THEY CALL THEMSELVES.

WHO ARE THEIR LOBBYISTS? OH, BY THE WAY, SAINT JOHN'S COUNTY DOES NOT REQUIRE LOBBYISTS TO BE DISCLOSED BECAUSE A FORMER COMMISSIONER FROM PONTE VEDRA SAID, OH, IT WOULD BE BURDENSOME TO REQUIRE LOBBYIST REGISTRATION.

YEAH, $25 A YEAR.

THIS IS A BAD PROPOSAL, AND YOU DON'T NEED TO APPROVE IT.

IT'S NOT TIMELY.

IT'S INCOMPLETE.

AND WE HAVE ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST.

I FIND IT INDEFENSIBLE THAT SAINT JOHN'S COUNTY PAYS THIS SAME ENGINEERING FIRM TO DO WORK FOR THE COUNTY.

IS ANYBODY ELSE TROUBLED BY THAT? AND MISS HAYGOOD DID SOME WORK A FEW YEARS AGO FOR THE CITY OF SAINT AUGUSTINE BEACH, AND IT WAS SO BAD IT HAD TO BE REDONE BY THE NEW CITY ATTORNEY FOR THE CITY OF SAINT AUGUSTINE BEACH. JAMES PATRICK WILSON, BECAUSE HER WORK WAS FLAWED.

NOW YOU'RE GOING TO LET THIS DEVELOPER WRITE OUR LAWS? THAT DOG WON'T HUNT.

PLEASE TURN THIS DOWN AND SEND THEM BACK TO THE PLANNING BOARD.

AND DON'T LET THE WRITER LOSS.

THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE FOR PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE ROBINSON? GOOD AFTERNOON. SUZANNE CLULOW 109 LAUREL WOOD WAY 32086.

I ALWAYS LIKE TO GO LAST BECAUSE THEN MOST OF WHAT I AGREE WITH, I CAN JUST SAY I AGREE WITH EVERYBODY THAT YOU'VE HEARD, EXCEPT FOR A COUPLE THAT CAME UP AND SPOKE IN SUPPORT.

FOR ONE THING, WHEN I SAW THE AMOUNT OF WETLANDS ON THIS PARCEL, I WAS FLOORED. HOW ARE THEY GOING TO PUT THAT MANY HOMES AROUND ALL THAT WETLAND? WELL THEY'RE NOT THEY'RE GOING TO IMPACT A WHOLE LOT MORE THAN THAN WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO SAVE AND WHAT THEY'RE SAVING.

THEY'RE NOT SAVING BECAUSE IT'S TOO WET TO DO ANYTHING WITH.

WELL, THAT'S NUMBER ONE.

YOU KNOW, I'M THE PERSON THAT GETS UP AND SAYS, WHERE IS THE WORKFORCE HOUSING?

[03:40:04]

WHERE IS THE WORKFORCE HOUSING? IT'S NOT THERE.

OF COURSE IT'S NOT THERE.

BECAUSE IN ORDER TO BUILD ON A PARCEL THAT IS THAT LARGE, WITH ALL THAT WETLANDS, THEY'VE GOT TO MAKE THE MONEY SOMEWHERE AND THEY'RE GOING TO MAKE IT IN ALL THE MONEY THEY'RE GOING TO GET FROM EACH ONE OF THOSE HOMES.

WE DON'T NEED ANY MORE HOMES THAT ARE 500, 600, $700,000.

WE'VE ALREADY GOT 30,000 HOMES THAT HAVE BEEN APPROVED THAT HAVE NOT YET BEEN BUILT, THAT ARE ALL GOING TO BE IN THAT PRICE RANGE.

WE DON'T NEED ANY MORE OF THAT.

WE NEED HOMES FOR REAL PEOPLE THAT DO THINGS FOR US.

LIKE THE MEDICAL SHE WAS TALKING ABOUT EARLIER.

THAT'S WHY WE DON'T HAVE DOCTORS OFFICES.

WE GOT PLENTY OF DOCTORS.

WE GOT PLACES FOR THEM TO LIVE.

NURSES, TECHS, OFFICE STAFF.

NO. I THOUGHT IT WAS INTERESTING WHAT CHARLIE HUNT BROUGHT UP TODAY.

I'D LIKE TO DO A LITTLE INVESTIGATING OF THAT.

WHAT YOU HEARD TODAY IS NOT IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM WHAT PCA HEARD AT ALL.

THEY GAVE NO INFORMATION THERE, AND THEN THEY UNLOADED IT ON YOU TODAY AND ARE TRYING TO BACK YOU UP AGAINST THE WALL AND SAY, YOU'VE GOT TO APPROVE THIS TODAY. YOU DO NOT NEED TO PROVE THIS TODAY.

HONESTLY, I HOPE YOU DON'T KICK THE CAN DOWN THE ROAD AND SAY WE'LL SEND IT BACK TO PCA.

I HAVE A TERRIBLE FEELING THAT'S WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN, BUT PLEASE SAY NO.

YOU KNOW THIS ISN'T ANY GOOD.

ALL OF YOU KNOW THIS IS NOT A GOOD PROJECT.

ANYONE ELSE FOR PUBLIC COMMENT? SEEING NONE, WE WILL CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT.

MADAM CHAIR. OKAY, THAT BRINGS US BACK TO MR. MILLER. AND JUST AS A COURTESY TO EVERYBODY, AFTER WE FINISH THIS ITEM, THE BOARD IS GOING TO GO TO LUNCH, SO EVERYTHING ELSE WILL BE HEARD AFTER LUNCH.

SO IF ANYBODY IS WAITING FOR A NUMBER AFTER THAT, I JUST WANTED TO LET EVERYBODY KNOW.

WHICH, MR. MILLER, YOU GET TO WHICHEVER MR. MILLER WANTS TO SPEAK.

ALL RIGHT. ZACH MILLER AGAIN.

THREE 203 OLD BARN COURT.

I THINK MISTER DOUG MILLER IS GOING TO START OFF ON IT AND THEN MISS HAGAR AND THEN I'LL FINISH.

UP. WITH THESE LAWYERS HAVE A LOT OF SLIDES.

SORRY. CAN'T SEEM TO GET BACK TO.

OKAY, OKAY, OKAY.

I'M HERE. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR PATIENCE.

DOUG MILLER AND MILLER, 17, 1775 OLD SAINT AUGUSTINE ROAD.

ONE. I WANT TO SPEAK TO JUST SOME OF THE THINGS THAT AREN'T FACTUALLY CORRECT THAT MANY OF THE SPEAKERS SAID.

AND MR. MCINERNEY SEEMED TO AMPLIFY.

AND THAT IS THE CAPACITY OF THE SURROUNDING ROADS.

AT BUILD OUT THE COUNTY ROAD 208 FROM 2209 TO I-95 WILL OPERATE AT FULL BUILD OUT AT 77% OF ITS CAPACITY, NOT OVER CAPACITY.

DOESN'T NEED IMPROVEMENT.

77% OF CAPACITY.

THE INTERSECTION OF 2208 STATE ROAD 16 AND I-95 IS DESIGNED AND UNDER CONSTRUCTION. A CAPACITY IMPROVEMENT TO BUILD A DIVERGING DIAMOND THAT WILL TAKE GROWTH THROUGH 2042, INCLUDING THIS

[03:45:05]

PROJECT. NOT OVER CAPACITY.

THE STATE ROAD 16 NORTH OF THE OUTLET MALL, SOUTH OF SOUTH FRANCIS, WILL NOT HAVE ONE TRIP FROM THIS PROJECT.

THAT'S NOT OUR MODEL SHOWING THAT THAT'S THE COUNTY'S MODEL.

IT'S INDISPUTABLE WE DON'T MAKE THE MODEL.

THE MODEL DETERMINES WHERE THE TRIPS GO.

THE DISTRIBUTION ZERO TRIPS 214 BETWEEN ALLEGHENYS AND 2209 OPERATING AT FULL BUILD OUT 63% AND ALAN KNEES OPERATES AT 86%.

NONE OF THOSE LINKS ARE OVER CAPACITY AT FULL BUILD OUT, NOR ARE THEY OVER CAPACITY AT IN THE PHASE ONE.

PHASE ONE 208 OPERATES AT 68%.

THE INTERCHANGE WILL BE OPEN NO ISSUES, 214 AT 17% AND ALAN KNEES AT 33%.

STILL NO TRIPS ON STATE ROAD 16.

SO WHAT THEY'VE SAID IS JUST FACTUALLY NOT CORRECT.

SO WE TALK ABOUT INFRASTRUCTURE, MAKING SURE IT'S IN PLACE.

IT IS IN PLACE.

THAT'S THE WHOLE POINT.

PLUS THE 66 MILLION.

I DID WANT TO ADDRESS THE VERMONT HEIGHTS ISSUE BECAUSE WE'VE ALREADY SHOWN THAT ALAN KNEES IS STILL OPERATING AT LEVEL OF SERVICE, EVEN AT BUILD OUT.

BUT THE REAL SOLUTION TO THE VERMONT, VERMONT HEIGHTS WANTING A SOMETHING TO DIVERT TRAFFIC OFF ALAN KNEES AND THROUGH VERMONT HEIGHTS TO 207 IS 2209.

AND THIS PROJECT IS BUILDING 4.1 MILES OF IT AND DONATING ANOTHER FOUR MILES OF IT, OF RIGHT OF WAY.

THAT'S THE SOLUTION TO THEIR PROBLEM.

THAT'S THAT'S REALLY THE IT'S SO THIS IS PART OF OF THAT SOLUTION.

THERE'S BEEN A GREAT DEAL OF TALK ABOUT THE FACT THAT THERE ARE LINKS MOST OF THEM TO THE EAST OF 95 THAT ARE DEFICIENT.

AND THAT IS TRUE.

THERE ARE WITH OR WITHOUT THIS PROJECT, THEY ARE DEFICIENT.

BUT HERE'S WHAT THE STATE STATUTE SAYS RELATED TO THAT.

CHAPTER 163 380 FLORIDA STATUTES AND APPLICANT SHALL NOT BE HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR THE ADDITIONAL COST OF REDUCING OR ELIMINATING DEFICIENCIES WHEN AN APPLICANT CONTRIBUTES OR CONSTRUCTS ITS PROPORTIONATE SHARE PURSUANT TO THIS PARAGRAPH, A LOCAL GOVERNMENT MAY NOT REQUIRE PAYMENT OR CONSTRUCTION OF TRANSPORTATION FACILITIES WHOSE COSTS WOULD BE GREATER THAN THE DEVELOPMENT'S DEVELOPMENTS PROPORTIONATE SHARE OF THE IMPROVEMENTS NECESSARY TO MITIGATE THE DEVELOPMENT'S IMPACT.

THAT'S A STATUTE.

THAT'S A MEASURING STICK THAT YOU HAVE TO USE.

THAT'S THE MEASURING STICK.

WE STILL PAY A PROPORTIONATE SHARE.

BUT THOSE IMPROVEMENTS AND INTERESTINGLY, ALL BUT ONE HOLMES BOULEVARD, WHICH THIS PROJECT HAS A 3% IMPACT ON, THE REST OF THEM ARE ALL STATE ROADS I-95.

STATE ROAD 16 207, WHICH IS A GOOD THING BECAUSE FDOT HAS A CONSTRUCTION BUDGET SLIGHTLY MORE THAN YOURS, ABOUT $13 BILLION ANNUALLY.

WE JUST NEED TO GET THEM TO PRIORITIZE THESE DEFICIENT ROADS.

LASTLY WELL, NOT QUITE.

LASTLY, I DID WANT TO TALK ABOUT THERE WAS SOME TALK ABOUT, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE FOUR PUBLIC HEARINGS IN 2018 AND 2019, AND THAT THERE WAS VIRTUALLY NO OPPOSITION TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT FOR 3332 UNITS.

THAT WAS BEFORE COVID.

COVID STARTED IN JANUARY OF 2020.

SO COVID HAD NO IMPACT ON PUBLIC PARTICIPATION IN THOSE FOUR PUBLIC HEARINGS.

I DID WANT TO SPEAK ABOUT DRAINAGE JUST BRIEFLY.

[03:50:09]

THE THE SOILS HERE ARE TYPICAL OF ALL THE SOILS WEST OR EAST OF THE SAINT JOHNS RIVER, BETWEEN THE SAINT JOHNS RIVER AND THE INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY.

THERE ARE MANY ENGINEERING TECHNIQUES.

THERE ARE LOTS OF RULES.

WE GO THROUGH THE WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT.

WE THERE'S SEPARATION BETWEEN THE GROUNDWATER AND THE ROAD BASE.

THERE IS NO INCREASE IN PEAK RUNOFF RATES FOR 25 YEAR STORM ALLOWED TO ANY ADJACENT PROPERTY UNDER THE NEW STATEWIDE STORMWATER RULE.

WE WILL NOW BE MEETING PRE-POST NUTRIENT REDUCTION REQUIREMENTS FOR THIS SITE, AS WELL AS MANY OTHERS IN THE COUNTY, SO NITROGEN AND PHOSPHORUS WILL THAT CURRENTLY RUNOFF WILL BE REDUCED, WATER QUALITY WILL BE IMPROVED, DRAINAGE WILL BE IMPROVED BOTH ON THIS SITE BUT ALSO ON THE SURROUNDING LAND BECAUSE IT'S REQUIRED THAT WE DO THAT.

SO THE ONE THING THAT IS INDISPUTABLE THE DRAINAGE WILL GET BETTER IF THIS PIECE OF PROPERTY IS IS DEVELOPED.

CURRENTLY WEYERHAEUSER'S OUT THERE DOING THEIR LAST CUT.

CULVERTS ARE CRUSHED.

YOU KNOW, DITCHES ARE FILLED IN.

THOSE WILL ALL BE RESTORED.

BUT ON TOP OF THAT, WE HAD TWO FEET OF RAIN IN SEPTEMBER.

SO THAT'S WHERE THE LAKE COMES FROM.

BUT THOSE ARE ALL.

THOSE ARE ALL NORMAL AND CUSTOMARY TO GET GET REPLACED.

I ALSO WANTED TO SAY ABOUT THE INCREMENTAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN, THAT'S THE NORM.

YOU KNOW, WE WERE THE PLANNERS AND ENGINEERS FOR THE NOCATEE PROJECT.

ALL OF NOCATEE WAS DONE INCREMENTALLY, ONE PIECE AT A TIME.

NO DIFFERENT THAN THIS.

AND REMEMBER, THIS IS A 20 YEAR PROJECT.

YOU KNOW, THIS ISN'T WE'RE NOT PLANTING MUSHROOMS. THESE DON'T YOU APPROVE IT? TOMORROW THERE'S 3300 HOMES.

THIS IS A 20 YEAR PROJECT, YOU KNOW.

THAT'S WHY THEY'RE DONE INCREMENTALLY.

BECAUSE MARKETS CHANGE, YOU KNOW.

PERSONAL PREFERENCE ON HOME BUYERS CHANGE.

SO INCREMENTAL DEVELOPMENT PLANS ARE ALLOWED.

APPROVABLE AND NOT UNUSUAL.

SO THOSE ARE MY COMMENTS.

THANKS. GREAT.

THANK YOU. FOR THE RECORD, LINDSAY HAGER WITH ENGLAND, THAMES AND MILLER.

AND I'LL BUILD ON WHAT DOUG JUST EXPLAINED ON INCREMENTAL MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLANS.

THIS THAT WE SEE ON THE SCREEN IS GREAT.

IT PROVIDES THAT CONTEXT.

OUR FIRST INCREMENT IS BUILDING 2209.

THE OTHER ELEMENTS SHOWN ON YOUR MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN MAP THAT'S IN YOUR PACKET AND YOUR PUD TEXT PROVIDE FOR EXTERNAL BUFFERS THAT 35 FOOT TRANSITION BUFFER TO THE EXISTING USES, WHICH HAVE NOT CHANGED SINCE 2019 TO THE NORTH AND TO THE WEST, SKIPPING OVER THE WELL FIELDS AND TO THE EXISTING ESTABLISHED RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS THAT FILLS IN THAT PART.

IF WE WERE TO SEE A INTERNAL LOCAL ROAD NETWORK COMING OFF OF 2209 INTO THE AREA THAT WE'VE DESIGNATED AS RESIDENTIAL, YOU KNOW WHAT USES ARE GOING TO GO THERE. THOSE ARE CHANGES THAT WE COULD WORK WITH YOUR STAFF AND RE REIMAGINE THAT LOT LAYOUT SO YOU CAN HAVE AN INCREMENTAL PLAN THAT'S PROPOSED HERE SHOWING FOR THAT 2600 ACRES.

AND THEN THE LAST PART TO CLEAN UP, YOU'VE BEEN PRESENTED WITH TWO STAFF REPORTS.

AGAIN, WE'RE HERE WITH THE PUD AND THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.

YOU DO NOT HAVE ANY OPEN COMMENTS FROM YOUR STAFF.

SO A COUPLE PRESENTATIONS, I THINK, PULLED FROM OUR REVIEW THAT WE'VE BEEN IN REVIEW WITH THE COUNTY SINCE AUGUST.

AND THAT'S NOT CURRENT, WHAT'S PROVIDED IN FRONT OF YOU TODAY.

SO THAT'S ALL I HAVE TO SHARE BACK AND TURN IT OVER TO YOU.

ZACH. SORRY, I GOT TO FLIP OVER THESE SLIDES.

ENGINEERS HAVE A LOT OF SLIDES.

AND I APOLOGIZE THAT I HAVE TO GIVE THIS PRESENTATION.

BUT UNFORTUNATELY, THE LAW REQUIRES THAT THIS PRESENTATION BE ON THE RECORD.

COMMISSIONER. SO IN A BASIC STANDARD OF REVIEW ON A PETITION FOR CERT ON A QUASI JUDICIAL ITEM, THERE'S THREE PRONGS.

THE FIRST ONE IS DUE PROCESS, WHICH TRANSLATES INTO BASIC FAIRNESS.

NOW MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC, THEIR DUE PROCESS RIGHT, IS NOTICE AND OPPORTUNITY TO BE HEARD.

AND THEY'VE BEEN PRESENTED THAT.

BUT THERE'S MORE THAN THAT FOR THE APPLICANT.

DUE PROCESS REQUIRES AN IMPARTIAL TRIBUNAL AND DECISION MAKER, MEANING THAT YOU HAVE TO ONLY RELY ON THE EVIDENCE THAT'S BEEN PRESENTED TO YOU TODAY.

YOU CAN'T RELY ON ANY EVIDENCE THAT YOU'VE RECEIVED OUTSIDE OF THIS HEARING, OR ANY EMAILS THAT YOU RECEIVED OR ANY EVIDENCE THAT YOU PRESENT ON YOUR OWN.

[03:55:05]

THAT IMPARTIAL DECISION MAKER, REGARDLESS OF WHETHER THE DECISION IS MADE BY A FACT FINDER.

REVIEWING BODY, YOU'RE REVIEWING BODY.

I LIKE THIS QUOTE.

QUASI JUDICIAL HEARING.

A PRESIDING OFFICIAL SHOULD BE JUDICIAL IN ATTITUDE AND DEMEANOR AND FREE FROM PRE-JUDGMENT AND ZEAL FOR OR AGAINST THE APPLICANT.

AGAIN, YOUR DECISION IS CONFINED, CONFINED JUST TO THE EVIDENCE PRESENTED TODAY, NOT ANY EVIDENCE OUTSIDE THIS HEARING.

IT CANNOT BE BASED ON YOUR OWN INFORMATION AND PERSONAL PREFERENCES.

IT IS ONLY ON THE EVIDENCE THAT'S HERE TODAY.

ANY EVIDENCE THAT'S USED OUTSIDE THE EVIDENCE THAT'S PRESENTED TODAY IS A VIOLATION OF MY CLIENT'S DUE PROCESS RIGHTS.

SECOND PRONG ESSENTIAL REQUIREMENTS LAW.

WHAT IS THAT? THAT'S YOUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.

THE CORRECT LAW. AND THIS IS ON YOUR PACKET.

IT'S IN YOUR STAFF REPORT IS 5.03.0003.

LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE AND COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

MISS HIGA HAS PROVIDED COMPETENT, SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE THAT WE MEET THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.

NOW, THE QUESTION YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE IS WHAT ABOUT WAIVERS? THIS IS WHY MISS HIGA PRESENTED THAT THESE ARE WAIVERS, NOT VARIANCES.

YOUR CODE PROVIDES FOR A WAIVER PROCESS, A DESCRIPTION OF ANY REQUESTED WAIVERS FROM THE STRICT PROVISION LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE TO ALLOW FOR INNOVATIVE DESIGN TECHNIQUES, TECHNIQUES, AND ALTERNATIVE DEVELOPMENT PATTERNS THROUGH THE PUD ZONING PROCESS.

AN EXPLANATION OF THE BENEFITS ARISING FROM THE APPLICATION OF FLEXIBLE STANDARDS AND CRITERIA OF THIS CODE SHALL BE PROVIDED TO JUSTIFY SUCH NEEDS.

THERE IS COMPETENT, SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE FOR THOSE WAIVERS.

THE BEST EVIDENCE OF IT IS EVERY ONE OF THESE WAIVERS HAS BEEN USED IN PRETTY MUCH EVERY OTHER MAJOR PROJECT THAT HAS BEEN APPROVED IN SAINT JOHNS COUNTY.

I THINK THIS IS REALLY IMPORTANT ON THE ESSENTIAL REQUIREMENTS OF LAW.

YOU MAY NOT REFUSE THE APPLICATION IF THERE'S COMPETENT, SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE IN A QUASI JUDICIAL HEARING THAT WE MEET THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.

YOU ALSO CAN'T USE CRITERIA OUTSIDE YOUR LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.

YOU CAN'T ARBITRARILY DECIDE EACH CASE.

YOU HAVE TO USE THE ACTUAL PROVISIONS IN YOUR CODE AND YOUR COMP PLAN.

NOW, ONE OF THE THINGS YOU'VE HEARD A LOT ABOUT THIS IS TOO MANY HOMES 3332 IS TOO MANY.

THAT DECISION WAS ALREADY MADE IN 2019 WHEN YOU HAD THE TEXT AMENDMENT AND THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT.

THIS IS A CASE I PERSONALLY WORKED ON.

WHEN A PARTY COMPLIES WITH THE LAW AND SEEKING TO UTILIZE THE HIGHEST AND BEST USE OF THEIR PROPERTY, AND THE GOVERNING AUTHORITY REFUSES TO APPLY THE CORRECT LAW.

MEANING, IF YOU'RE APPLYING A PETITION OR EMAILS YOU RECEIVED OUTSIDE OF THIS, OR YOUR OWN PERSONAL PREFERENCES OR PART OF THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE THAT DOESN'T APPLY, OR WHAT YOU THINK THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE SHOULD BE THAT CONSTITUTES A MISCARRIAGE OF JUSTICE.

THAT'S THE FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS.

THIS IS A CASE I LITIGATED AGAINST THE CITY OF JACKSONVILLE BEACH FOR DOING EXACTLY THAT LAST ONE COMPETENT, SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE.

I THINK YOU'VE HEARD A LOT ABOUT THIS.

RESIDENTS TESTIFYING THAT THERE BE MORE TRAFFIC IS NOT COMPETENT, SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE.

YOU'VE HEARD COMPETENT, SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE FROM AN ENGINEER WITH 45 YEARS EXPERIENCE THAT THERE IS NOT GOING TO BE ANY TRIPLING OF CAPACITY ON THE TWO ROADS NEARBY.

YOU'VE HEARD FROM COMPETENT, SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE THAT WE ARE MITIGATING FOR OUR IMPACTS.

GENERALIZED STATEMENTS IN OPPOSITION, EVEN FROM AN EXPERT, WHICH ARE TOTALLY CONCLUSORY IN NATURE, ARE NOT COMPETENT, SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE ONLY BECAUSE IT WAS BROUGHT UP THAT THERE WAS A PETITION SUBMITTED.

A MERE POLL OF NEIGHBORING LANDOWNERS, OF THEIR OPINIONS AND PROPOSALS, OR WHETHER OR DEVALUE THEIR PROPERTY, IS NOT COMPETENT.

SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE.

UNSUBSTANTIATED LAYMAN OPINIONS AS TO WHAT WOULD HAPPEN TO THE CHARACTER OF AN AREA, OR ANTICIPATED ADVERSE EFFECTS FROM A PROPOSAL ARE NOT COMPETENT.

SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE.

LAY WITNESS SPECULATION ABOUT POTENTIAL TRAFFIC PROBLEMS. LIGHT AND NOISE POLLUTION.

IN GENERAL, UNFAVORABLE IMPACTS OF PROPOSED LAND USE ARE NOT CONSIDERED COMPETENT.

SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE.

RESPECTFULLY, FROM WHAT YOU'VE HEARD TODAY, I DON'T BELIEVE YOU HAVE ANY COMPETENT, SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE TO DENY THIS APPLICATION.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MR. MILLER. OKAY.

MR. ROBERTSON. YES, I.

I'D LIKE TO START OFF BY JUST ADDRESSING SOMETHING I HEARD MISS HAGAR SAY, IF YOU DON'T MIND.

WHEN I SPOKE WITH YOU THIS MORNING, MAYBE TWO HOURS AGO, WE STILL HAD EIGHT OPEN COMMENTS.

IS THAT CORRECT? AND I BELIEVE MISS HAGAR SAID WE HAD NO OPEN COMMENTS.

YES, I KNOW THIS IS MOVING FAST AND IT'S BEEN FLUID, SO.

SURE. MIKE ROBERTSON, GROWTH MANAGEMENT DIRECTOR I THINK JUST SOME CONFUSION.

WE CONSIDER THE COMMENTS THAT WE HAVE WITHIN THE WAIVERS AS OPEN COMMENTS.

I THINK MISS HAGAR WAS ALLUDING THINKING THAT BECAUSE THERE ARE WAIVERS, SO THERE ARE STAFF CONCERNS WITHIN THE WAIVERS.

AND SO THAT'S WHERE THAT CAME FROM.

THANK YOU I APPRECIATE THAT.

YES, MA'AM. AND IF I MAY, BEFORE IT GOES INTO THE BOARD WE HAVE IN OUR FINDINGS OF FACT, JUST JUST TO MAKE SURE WE HAVE ACCURATE HERE ON THE FINDINGS, SHOULD THE BOARD TO DECIDE TO DENY IT ON NUMBER TEN, IT DOES LIST THE EXISTING ZONING AS INDUSTRIAL WAREHOUSE.

[04:00:01]

THAT'S INCORRECT. OPEN RURAL AGAIN.

FOR THE RECORD, OUR APOLOGIES.

OKAY. DOES ANYBODY. I GUESS WE'RE BACK TO THE BOARD.

DOES ANYBODY HAVE ANY QUESTIONS? COMMENTS FOR MR. MILLER? OKAY.

WELL, I'LL START OFF WITH SOME OF MY MY THOUGHTS.

I HAVE I'VE THOUGHT VERY LONG AND HARD ABOUT THIS.

AND THE FACT THAT THERE'S 11 INSUFFICIENT LINKS, MANY OF THEM BEING WITH STATE ROAD 16.

I WE HAVE TO GET THAT ROAD BUILT.

THAT THAT'S JUST I CAN'T IN GOOD FAITH APPROVE SOMETHING THAT'S GOING TO AFFECT 16 LIKE THAT.

AND QUITE FRANKLY, I JUST TO REITERATE WHAT THE PCA SAID, WHICH IS A70 DENIAL, I PERSONALLY I JUST DON'T THINK THIS PROJECT IS READY FOR PRIME TIME. IT'S IT'S NOT THAT IT THERE WON'T BE A TIME ONE DAY WHEN IT'S APPROPRIATE, BUT I DO NOT THINK THAT THAT TIME IS NOW.

SO BASED ON THAT, BASED ON WHAT I, WHAT I CONSIDER TO BE AN INCOMPLETE APPLICATION, WHAT I CONSIDER TO STILL BE OPEN STAFF COMMENTS.

I THINK WE'RE STILL MISSING SCHOOL CONCURRENCY, IS THAT RIGHT? I JUST IT FEELS TOO MUCH LIKE THIS DEVELOPMENT, EVEN THOUGH WITH THE PROPOSED CONSTRUCTION OF 2209, IT IS STILL LEAPFROG.

WE DON'T HAVE THAT EXTRA SECTION OF 2209 THAT WE NEED IN ADLER.

AND SO FOR THOSE REASONS, I'M GOING TO BE MOVING TO DENY THIS.

COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST, THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.

I DON'T KNOW WHICH MR. MILLER WOULD LIKE TO FIELD QUESTIONS, BUT I DO HAVE SOME QUESTIONS FOR FOR THE APPLICANT.

TO FOR THE PRICE OF ONE, I LIKE IT.

THANK YOU TO BOTH, MR. MILLERS, I APPRECIATE IT. AND OBVIOUSLY WE HEARD A LOT OF INFORMATION.

WE HEARD A LOT OF TESTIMONY FROM THE PUBLIC.

SO FORGIVE ME. I'VE JUST GOT A FEW QUESTIONS.

I KNOW THIS IS A 20 YEAR PHASED DEVELOPMENT.

WHEN DO WE EXPECT THE FIRST HOME TO BE AVAILABLE FOR SALE? WELL IT'S ADDRESSED.

THIS IS NOT BEFORE 2028.

SO SOMETIME IN 2028.

SO THAT WOULD MEAN THE LAST HOME WOULD BE AVAILABLE FOR SALE 2048 ROUGHLY.

IS THAT THE TIME? WELL, ONE LITTLE POINT TO CLEAR UP, BECAUSE THERE WAS A COMMENT EARLIER THAT WE HAVE TO SPEND $40 MILLION BEFORE ONE HOME IS ACTUALLY GOING TO BE $40 MILLION BEFORE WE CAN EVEN PLAN TO DO ONE HOME.

SO YEAH.

YES. THAT'S CORRECT.

MR. MCINERNEY, IN HIS PRESENTATION CITED PART OF OUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN, 8.1.3.1.2 IF I'M NOT MISTAKEN, I MAY HAVE.

HE WAS TALKING FAST, AND I WAS SCRIBBLING, SO FORGIVE ME IF THAT'S NOT ENTIRELY ACCURATE.

IT'S THE PART OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN THAT SAYS IF THIS HAS A NEGATIVE IMPACT ON THE TRAFFIC, THEN WE SHOULD MOVE TO DENY.

MR. MILLER. DOUG MILLER, YOU CITED THE STATUTE THAT SAYS WE CAN'T REQUIRE YOU TO PAY FOR ALL THE TRANSPORTATION ILLS OF THE COUNTY THROUGH YOUR PROJECT.

THAT IS. PLEASE.

THAT IS EXACTLY CORRECT.

YOU CANNOT. MR. MCINERNEY IS, I THINK, MISAPPLIED THAT UNDER THIS SPECIFIC ISSUE.

SO HE'S JUST FACTUALLY WRONG.

WOULD YOU DISAGREE THAT THERE WILL BE SOME TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS? NO, I SAID THAT IN MY TESTIMONY.

THERE ARE THERE ARE PRIMARILY STATE ROADS THAT ARE ALREADY DEFICIENT WITH OR WITHOUT THIS PROJECT.

WE ARE PAYING OUR PROPORTIONATE SHARE TO FIX THEM, BUT THEY WILL STILL BE DEFICIENT.

THAT IS THE VERY DEFINITION OF PROPORTIONATE FAIR SHARE WHERE YOU PAY INCREMENTS ON MULTIPLE LINKS AND DO ONE WHOLE PIPELINE IMPROVEMENT.

THAT'S THE VERY DEFINITION THAT IS IN YOUR CODE.

THANK YOU SIR. ZACH, ANYTHING ELSE TO ADD TO THAT? ONE THING I'D ADD TO IT IS WHY WOULD YOU HAVE THE STATE STATUTE THAT ALLOWS YOU TO MAKE PROPORTIONATE, FAIR SHARE OF MR. MCINERNEY'S THEORY WAS CORRECT THAT STATUTE BE MOOT? ONE THING ABOUT THIS PROJECT THAT I'VE WORKED ON SEVERAL.

OBVIOUSLY MY DAD'S WORKED ON A LOT MORE.

I'VE NEVER SEEN A PROJECT THAT DIDN'T TRIP THE CAPACITY ON THE TWO ROADS CLOSEST TO IT, AND THUS HAD BUILD OUT WON'T.

OKAY. THERE WAS A CONCERN RAISED IN PUBLIC COMMENT.

FORGIVE ME. I DON'T REMEMBER BY WHO.

DO THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO GIVE THE RIGHT OF WAY THAT CONNECTS US TO 305? I THINK THAT WAS RAISED AS A QUESTION DURING PUBLIC COMMENT.

DO WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO THAT ACCESS? YES. TO ACCESS THAT PART OF THE RIGHT OF WAY DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.

THAT'S 0.17.2 MILES, WHICH GOES ALL THE WAY TO THAT THAT INTERSECTION.

AND DO WE HAVE THE RIGHT TO THE TUPELO PARCEL? I THINK THAT WAS ALSO RAISED.

MR. LEWANDOWSKI RAISED THAT QUESTION.

[04:05:02]

THERE'S THERE'S ABOUT A HALF AN ACRE.

WHEN THE COUNTY IS OBLIGATED TO BUY RIGHT OF WAY THAT WE'RE GOING TO BUILD THE ROAD ON TO THE PROPERTY LINE.

THERE'S ABOUT A CORNER OF IT.

IT'S CLEAR WE DIDN'T HAVE ANYTHING TO DO WITH THAT.

BUT THE COUNTY CLEARLY DIDN'T WANT TO TAKE, YOU KNOW, RESIDENTIAL HOME BY PUTTING IT TO THE EAST OF THE PROPERTY CORNER. THEY PUT IT TO THE WEST.

SO THERE'S ABOUT ONE ACRE THAT WILL HAVE TO BE ACQUIRED IN ORDER TO COMPLETE THE COUNTY'S OBLIGATION.

IT'S IT CAN EITHER, YOU KNOW, I'M IT HAS LITTLE ECOLOGICAL VALUE IN THE MITIGATION BANK, THAT LITTLE CORNER, BUT THE APPLICANT HAS AGREED THAT THEY WILL PROVIDE THE MITIGATION AND THE MITIGATION FOR THE MITIGATION FOR THAT ONE ACRE TRIANGLE AT THE CORNERS TO PROVIDE ACCESS.

BUT THE COUNTY DOES NEED ABOUT A HALF AN ACRE TO COMPLETE ITS OBLIGATION.

SO WE STILL HAVE TO GO GET THE THE HALF AN ACRE.

YES, YES. OKAY.

LAST QUESTION, AND THIS IS I REALIZE THESE SOUND LIKE, LIKE, TOUGH QUESTIONS, BUT I JUST THEY'RE COMING UP, AND I NEED TO.

I NEED TO CIRCLE THESE SQUARES IN MY MIND.

SOMEBODY IN PUBLIC COMMENT SAID LEAPFROG DEVELOPMENT COMMISSIONER ARNOLD HAD SAID LEAPFROG DEVELOPMENT.

WE DON'T REALLY HAVE THIS PORTION OF 2209 CONNECTING TO THE NORTHERN PORTIONS OF 2209 THAT MAY HAVE BEEN ANTICIPATED IN THE PAST.

HOW IS THIS NOT LEAPFROG DEVELOPMENT? I GUESS THAT'S MY QUESTION.

WELL, IT'S IT'S IT'S NOT UNUSUAL FOR THE COUNTY TO COME IN PROPORTIONATE, FAIR SHARE TO HAVE LINKS THAT STARTED.

IT'S UNUSUAL.

210 IS A PERFECT EXAMPLE.

YOU KNOW SECTIONS OF.

210 WERE DONE.

SECTIONS WERE NOT.

THE I MEAN REALLY IT'S THE COUNTY'S RESPONSIBILITY TO MAKE THESE ROAD IMPROVEMENTS.

THE PROPORTIONATE FAIR SHARE IS A WAY FOR THESE TO BE DONE BY PIPELINE AND IMPACT FEES TO GET THEM DONE SOONER. BUT THERE'S NOTHING IN YOUR CODE THAT SAYS YOU HAVE TO START AT RACETRACK ROAD ON 2209, AND ONLY BUILD IT CONTIGUOUS CONTIGUOUSLY UNTIL YOU GET TO THE.

THERE'S JUST NOTHING IN YOUR CODE THAT REQUIRES THAT.

YES, SIR. I'LL GIVE YOU A LAWYER ANSWER.

IF YOU ACTUALLY LOOK AT THE MAP IN YOUR STAFF REPORT, YOU'LL SEE THAT IT'S ACTUALLY BEEN PUT TO THE NORTH.

THE OTHER PART IS THE CASE LAW TREATS LEAPFROG DEVELOPMENT AS ANOTHER TERM FOR SPOT ZONING.

BY DEFINITION, IF SOMETHING IS CONSISTENT WITH YOUR COMP PLAN, IT CANNOT BE SPOT ZONING.

SO THE DECISION OF WHETHER THIS WAS LEAPFROG OR NOT WAS MADE IN 2019.

NOR IS THIS CAN IT BE URBAN SPRAWL IF IT'S IN THE COMP PLAN.

WELL SAID. OKAY.

THANK YOU GENTLEMEN.

THAT CONCLUDES MY QUESTIONS FOR YOU.

I DO HAVE SOME QUESTIONS FOR STAFF.

MR. ROBERTSON AND MR. D'SOUZA. I'LL HAVE A QUESTION FOR YOU, TOO.

BECAUSE I'M JUST TRYING TO WRAP MY HEAD AROUND SOME OF THE THINGS THAT WE'VE HEARD AND SEEN TODAY.

MR. ROBERTSON, WE'VE HEARD CONCERNS, I THINK, SPECIFICALLY FROM SACCA, FROM MR. BURNS ABOUT WAIVER NUMBER FIVE, THE NOT HAVING A DETAILED SITE PLAN.

WOULD YOU PLEASE GIVE ME YOUR PERSPECTIVE STAFF'S PERSPECTIVE ON THAT? HAVING A DETAILED SITE PLAN.

I KNOW YOU MADE SOME COMMENTS IN THE STAFF REPORT.

IF YOU WOULD PLEASE SHARE THOSE WITH US.

SURE. MIKE ROBERTSON, FOR THE RECORD, THROUGH THE CHAIR, I THINK MR. MILLER IS CORRECT IN THAT WE DO SEE WAIVERS TO THE INCREMENTAL MDP MAP REQUIREMENT THAT SOME GET APPROVED, SOME DON'T.

AND MY OPINION, BASED ON THIS DEVELOPMENT AND OUR REVIEW OF THIS DEVELOPMENT, WE THOUGHT HAVING SOME DETAIL WOULD HAVE BEEN A GOOD THING.

SO IT'S A IT'S A VERY LARGE SCALE GETTING TO SEE MAYBE THE FIRST PHASE TO SEE WHERE THEY HOW THE LAYOUT WAS GOING TO BE.

THEY MENTIONED AGRIHOOD.

WHAT DOES THAT MEAN? WE COULD SEE IT ON THE GROUND A LITTLE BIT.

SO IT IS NOT HE'S CORRECT.

IT IS NOT UNCOMMON TO ASK FOR THAT WAIVER.

SOMETIMES IT GETS APPROVED, SOMETIMES IT DOESN'T.

OKAY. THANK YOU, MR. ROBERTSON.

MR. D'SOUZA. THE NEXT QUESTION IS FOR YOU.

ESPECIALLY DURING PHASE ONE OF THIS DEVELOPMENT, THE TRAFFIC WILL HAVE NO CHOICE BUT TO GO NORTH.

MR. MILLER, AN ENGINEER FOR 45 YEARS, HAS ASSURED US THAT NONE OF THE TRIPS IN THE MODEL WILL IMPACT 16.

I'M JUST THINKING OF HOW DO PEOPLE GET TO THE GROCERY STORE? WHERE ARE THEY GOING TO GO TO CHURCH IF THEY NEED TO FILL UP THEIR TANK OF GAS? ALL OF THOSE SERVICES ARE ON STATE ROAD 16.

[04:10:01]

SO IF I'M A RESIDENT OF THIS COMMUNITY IN PHASE ONE, THE SOUTHERN END OF 22 AND NINE IS NOT CONNECTED.

THERE'S A PUBLIX AT THE CORNER OF PEZZETTI ROAD AND 16 ON ONE END, AND THEN THERE'S ANOTHER PUBLIX ON THE OTHER END OF 16 NEAR KENTON MORRISON ROAD. PLEASE HELP ME UNDERSTAND HOW THE MODEL DOES NOT IMPACT OR SHOW THESE TRIPS IMPACTING STATE ROAD 16, BECAUSE I AM A LAYMAN AND I JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND.

YES. SO IN AND SPECIFICALLY STATED THAT IT IS IT IS ON 16 BETWEEN THOSE TWO END POINTS.

SO THE 208 REALIGNMENT IS OCCURRING.

AND SO WHAT THEY'RE SAYING IS THAT THE MODEL IS SHOWING IN, IN THE WAY THAT IT WAS SET UP WITH ITS DECISION MAKING FOR WHERE TRAFFIC IS GOING TO GO WHEN IT HITS AN INTERSECTION.

IS THAT THE THE TRAFFIC THAT WOULD GO AND TAKE THAT PORTION BETWEEN THE INTERSECTION AND WHERE THE 208 REALIGNMENT INTERSECTION IS COMING? THE TRIPS ARE NOT SHOWING IN THEIR IN THEIR MODELING.

YOU KNOW, IT'S A MODEL.

IT'S THE BEST GUESS THAT WE CAN GET THERE.

SO, YOU KNOW, TRAFFIC WOULD STILL HIT 16 IN SOME RESPECT.

IF THEY'RE GOING TO THE 208 SPLIT AND HEADING WEST TO GO UP TO BASSETTI, YOU KNOW, THEY'LL EVENTUALLY HIT THAT INTERSECTION, WHICH AGAIN, WE CURRENTLY UNDER DESIGNED BY THE COUNTY.

IT'S ONE OF OUR LARGE CIP PROJECTS WHERE ALL THOSE IMPROVEMENTS WE'RE DOING AT THAT INTERSECTION OR, YOU KNOW, THEY'RE TAKING TWO AWAY TO THE EAST, GOING TO 16 ON THAT ROUTE.

SO AT THOSE TWO POINTS OF CONSTRICTION, WHICH WERE REFERENCED IN MR. MILLER'S RESPONSE, YOU KNOW, THAT'S WHERE WE SEE THE BIG ISSUES.

THAT'S WHERE TRAFFIC IS GOING TO HIT STATE ROAD 16.

IT'S NOT GOING TO HIT IN THAT MIDDLE SECTION WHERE IT'S ESSENTIALLY A FREE FLOW, BECAUSE THE ONLY CONNECTIONS WE HAVE ARE FRANCIS AND THE THE GRAND OAKS COMMUNITY.

AND THEN THERE'S, YOU KNOW, SOME SMALLER ONES WITHIN THERE.

BUT, YOU KNOW, IT'S NEGLIGIBLE, NEGLIGIBLE TRAFFIC COMPARED TO THOSE LARGER ENDS THAT YOU'RE SEEING.

SO, YOU KNOW, BETWEEN THOSE TWO CONSTRICTION POINTS, BUT, YOU KNOW, YOU WOULD BE SEEING IT THERE.

THAT'S THAT'S WHAT WE'RE SEEING.

AND I THINK THAT WAS WHAT THE RESPONSE WAS AS WELL.

BUT IF I'M A RESIDENT IN THIS COMMUNITY AND I WANT TO GO SEE NIGHTS OF LIGHTS, I'M GOING TO HAVE TO GET ON 16 AND GO.

YOU ABSOLUTELY WILL BE GETTING ON TO STATE ROAD 16.

OKAY. THANK YOU, MR. D'SOUZA. I HOPE I THANK YOU, I APPRECIATE THAT THE LAST QUESTION I HAVE IS FOR LEGAL.

AND IF YOU GUYS DON'T KNOW THE ANSWER TO THIS QUESTION, I THINK, AND I DON'T KNOW, IS OKAY, I'M JUST TRYING TO SEEK SOME CLARIFICATION.

WE'VE HEARD A LOT OF TESTIMONY FROM THE APPLICANT THAT THAT WE SORT OF HAVE A, HAVE A LEGAL OBLIGATION BASED ON SOME OF THE PROMISES THAT WERE MADE IN 2018 AND 2019 TO APPROVE THE REZONING TODAY.

AND I WAS JUST HOPING THAT YOU COULD SHED SOME LIGHT ON THAT OR CLARIFY THAT FOR ME.

THROUGH THE CHAIR TO COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST.

OKAY. HERE YOU HAVE THE SAME OBLIGATION WITH ANY REZONING.

YOU DO NOT YOU'RE NOT OBLIGATED TO APPROVE THIS.

THE APPLICANT HAS TO PROVIDE THAT.

THEY MEET THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTS.

ONCE THEY PROVE THAT BURDEN, THEN WE HAVE THE OBLIGATION TO SAY HOW THEY DON'T.

YOUR STAFF REPORT FULLY SETS FORTH THE ITEMS THAT THEY DO NOT MEET.

AND THAT IS COMPETENT, SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE.

SO YOU'RE NOT OBLIGATED TO APPROVE ZONING BASED ON THE COMP PLAN AMENDMENT THAT WAS DONE BACK IN 2019.

THANK YOU, MISS WEST.

THOSE ARE ALL MY QUESTIONS, MADAM CHAIR.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? COMMENTS? COMMISSIONER DEAN. WELL, LET ME FOLLOW UP ON KELLY WEST'S COMMENTS.

SINCE I WAS THE PERSON SITTING UP HERE ON THE DAIS IN 2019 AND YOU SAW THE VIDEO, I DIDN'T GO INTO GREAT DETAIL, BUT I CAN SHARE WITH YOU MY THOUGHTS AT THE TIME. MY THOUGHT AT THE TIME WAS EXACTLY WHAT KELLY SAID.

I MEAN, THIS WASN'T MY FIRST RODEO AND LAND USE ISSUES IN THE STATE OF FLORIDA, AND I DIDN'T THINK IT WAS NECESSARY TO EXPLAIN MY POSITION THEN, BUT I'LL DO IT NOW.

AND MY POSITION WAS, AND IT STILL IS TODAY, THAT THIS IS, I THOUGHT, A VERY, A VERY GOOD PROJECT.

ON THE ONE HAND, AND I THINK IT'S A GOOD PROJECT, IT WAS A GOOD DECISION ON MY PART IN 2019 TO DO THE AGREEMENT THAT ONLY INCLUDED THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT.

I KNEW IT WOULD BE COMING BACK FOR THIS BOARD TO CONSIDER.

WHAT I DIDN'T KNOW IN 2019 WAS THAT WE WOULD CONTINUE FOR THE NEXT FIVE YEARS TO FALL MORE AND MORE BEHIND.

HOW MANY TIMES HAVE YOU HEARD ME SIT HERE AND BRING THE ISSUE UP ABOUT ADVOCATING 16 WIDENING DOT.

I MEAN, WE'VE GONE TO OUR FEDERAL CONGRESSMAN.

WE'VE GONE TO I SPOKE WITH THE SPEAKER SPECIFICALLY TWO YEARS AGO ABOUT FUNDING 16 WIDENING.

SO WHERE THAT LEAVES ME TODAY IS THAT IT'S VERY UNFORTUNATE THAT WE HAVE WHAT ON ON ITS FACE, SITTING ALONE, LOOKING AT IT IN ISOLATION.

[04:15:03]

I THINK A GOOD PROJECT, WELL PLANNED.

AND AGAIN, $100 MILLION THAT THE APPLICANT IS PUTTING ON THE TABLE.

I MEAN, THAT'S WHY I SAID IT'S HARD TO REFUSE.

OKAY. BUT WHAT WE HAVE HERE IS A SITUATION WHERE WE COLLECTIVELY THE STATE, THE COUNTY PAST COMMISSIONERS.

ME SITTING HERE AS COMMISSIONER TODAY HAVE BEEN UNABLE TO ACHIEVE THE THINGS I WANTED TO ACHIEVE WITH RESPECT TO DEALING WITH OUR TRANSPORTATION.

TRANSPORTATION CRISIS.

SO I'M VERY DISAPPOINTED THAT I CANNOT SUPPORT THIS PROJECT IN THE FACE OF A70 RECOMMENDATION FROM THE PGA TO DENY.

AND IT'S BEEN POINTED OUT PRETTY CLEARLY WHERE THE DEFICIENCIES ARE.

AND I THINK THE APPLICANT HAS GONE ABOVE AND BEYOND TO DO EVERYTHING HE CAN WITH RESPECT TO WHAT I MEAN, WHAT DO WE WANT TO ASK THEM TO DO? PUT IN $200 MILLION, $300 MILLION.

I MEAN, TO ME, $100 MILLION IS A PRETTY, PRETTY, PRETTY DEEP POCKET.

THAT'S PRETTY GOOD.

BUT WE'RE IN A SITUATION WHERE I THINK WE AS A COMMISSION, HAVE TO START DEMANDING, JUST AS WE DID TWO YEARS AGO WITH GREENBERG, NOT GREENBERG. GREENBRIAR, HALO.

PUT THE MONEY UP FRONT AND GET IT DONE.

I'M NOT SUGGESTING THAT WE NEED TO PUT THAT BURDEN ON THIS APPLICANT TO SOLVE ALL OUR TRANSPORTATION PROBLEMS, BUT I HAVE TO SAY THAT, MADAM CHAIR, I HAVE TO AGREE WITH YOUR COMMENTS, AND THAT'S WHERE I COME DOWN TODAY.

THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER DEAN.

WELL, SEEING NO OTHER SPEAKERS, I'M GOING TO GO AHEAD AND MOVE TO DENY PUD.

2020 4-09 ROBINSON IMPROVEMENT COMPANY BASED ON TEN FINDINGS OF FACT AS LISTED IN THE STAFF REPORT.

SECOND. MOTION AND A SECOND.

PLEASE VOTE. AND THAT IS UNANIMOUS.

I DON'T MR. I DON'T HAVE TO MOVE ON. THREE. CORRECT.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

THIS TIME, THE BOARD WILL RECESS FOR LUNCH.

WE WILL BE BACK AT 2:00.

RIGHT. WELCOME BACK EVERYONE.

WE'RE GOING TO START BACK WITH AGENDA ITEMS NUMBER FOUR AND FIVE.

[Items 4 & 5]

GOOD AFTERNOON.

QUASI QUASI JUDICIAL.

THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER ALAIMO.

COMMISSIONER JOSEPH.

A 57 OR MORE EMAILS THAT ARE OPPOSED.

AND MEETING WITH WES BENEKE AND TINA HOPE.

RESIDENTS AGAINST COMMISSIONER ALAIMO.

THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. I HAD 61 PLUS EMAILS.

I HAD A MEETING WITH WES BENEKE AND TINA HOPE.

THEY ARE RESIDENTS THAT ARE OPPOSED TO THIS, TO THIS PROJECT.

I ALSO MET WITH ELLEN AVERY SMITH AND THE APPLICANT TO KIND OF GIVE A RUNDOWN OF WHAT THEY WERE LOOKING TO ACCOMPLISH.

I HAD OVER 60 EMAILS ABOUT THIS PROJECT.

I ALSO HAD A MEETING IN THE OFFICE WITH WES FENWICK AND TINA HOPE, WHO ARE RESIDENTS IN OPPOSITION.

I ALSO HAVE HAD A PHONE CALL MEETING WITH MISS AVERY SMITH YESTERDAY.

THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST.

THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. I HAD OVER 57 EMAILS.

I DID HAVE THE MEETING WITH WES FENWICK AND TINA HOPE.

THEY WERE OPPOSED TO SWAPPING OUT THE SQUARE FOOTAGE.

THEY HAD SOME QUESTIONS ABOUT THE CONVERSION RATE.

THEY HAD QUESTIONS ABOUT THE PARKING SPACES AND THE HOA PROHIBITION OF SHORT TERM RENTALS.

SO THOSE WERE ALL THINGS THAT THEY BROUGHT UP.

I DID MEET WITH ELLEN AVERY SMITH TO DISCUSS THE SITE LOCATION, THE HISTORY OF THE PROJECT AND THE CONVERSION RATE, AND WHY THEY FELT LIKE IT WAS A GOOD FIT.

AND THEN I HAD ANOTHER PHONE CALL YESTERDAY FROM ELLEN AVERY SMITH.

IT WAS ABOUT 2 TO 3 MINUTES WHERE WE DISCUSSED ANY QUESTIONS THAT I HAD SINCE OUR LAST MEETING.

THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST.

COMMISSIONER DEAN. YES.

WITH 64 FEMALES MATING WITH WEST BENDIK AND TINA HOPE TO RESIDENTS WHO WERE OPPOSING THE PROJECT, AND A MEETING WITH ELLEN AVERY SMITH REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT YESTERDAY.

I BELIEVE LOSING TRACK OF TIME.

OKAY. WITH THAT, THE FLOOR IS YOURS.

THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. BOARD MEMBERS ELLEN AVERY SMITH, ROGERS TOWERS, 100 WHETSTONE PLACE HERE IN SAINT AUGUSTINE.

AND WITH ME TODAY ON BEHALF OF THE OWNER OF THESE TWO PROPERTIES WE'RE TALKING ABOUT IN BEACH WALK ARE EVAN ROSENBLATT AND ALPHONSO COSTA.

SO FOR JUST TO SET THE STAGE, I'M GOING TO DO WE'RE GOING TO DO A COMBINED PRESENTATION FOR THE DRY MODIFICATION APPLICATION AND THE

[04:20:09]

PUD MAJOR MODIFICATION APPLICATION, BECAUSE SOME OF THE DETAILS OF THOSE APPLICATIONS ARE THE SAME.

AND I ALSO THINK THAT IT WOULD BE GOOD FOR THE PUBLIC AND THE BOARD TO UNDERSTAND THE HISTORY OF THIS PROJECT AND HOW WE GOT HERE TODAY.

SO JUST BY WAY OF BACKGROUND.

TWIN CREEKS DRY N PUD IS LOCATED IN THIS AREA.

YOU SEE DURBIN PARK AND THEN THE 12 MILE.

SWAMP. HERE'S US, ONE TO THE EAST.

AND THEN YOU SEE COUNTY ROAD 210 THAT BIFURCATES THE PROPERTY.

AND HERE'S I-95.

OKAY. JUST BY WAY OF A LITTLE MORE BACKGROUND IN THE DREAM PUD, WHICH WERE ORIGINALLY APPROVED IN 2005, AND THE LAST SIGNIFICANT MODIFICATION TO THE DREAM PUD WERE DONE IN THE 2014 2015 TIME FRAME.

IN THAT TIME FRAME, WHAT'S CALLED THE ACTIVITY CENTER, WHICH WE'RE GOING TO GET INTO THE DETAILS OF IN A MINUTE.

THIS YELLOW HIGHLIGHTED AREA HERE IS COUNTY ROAD 210.

HERE'S THE YELLOW HIGHLIGHTED AREA.

THIS WAS CALLED THE ACTIVITY CENTER.

IT IS APPROVED FOR RESIDENTIAL.

COMMERCIAL. A LITTLE BIT OF LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AND OFFICE USES AS A MATTER OF RIGHT.

AND I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT FOR DISCUSSION TODAY BECAUSE THERE SEEMS TO BE SOME MISINFORMATION, OR AT LEAST MISUNDERSTANDING IN THE PUBLIC ABOUT THE PERMITTED USES.

AS A MATTER OF RIGHT IN THIS PROJECT, PARTICULARLY WITHIN THE ACTIVITY CENTER.

SO HERE'S THE BOUNDARIES AGAIN OF TWIN CREEKS.

HERE'S THE ACTIVITY CENTER.

YOU SEE THE CRYSTAL LAGOON AND THE PROPERTIES WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THAT ARE OWNED BY MY CLIENTS HERE ARE ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THIS LAGOON.

THEY OWN APPROXIMATELY 215,000FT² OF COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS AND 120 HOTEL ROOMS THAT SOME OF WHICH HAVE BEEN CONVERTED TO ANOTHER 30 HOTEL ROOMS. SO NOW WE'RE TALKING ABOUT 200,000FT² OF COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS AND 150 HOTEL ROOMS IN THEIR PROPERTY ALLOWED AS A MATTER OF RIGHT THAT THEY PURCHASED FROM THE MASTER DEVELOPER OF THE DRY AND PUD.

THE FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF THE PROPERTY IS MIXED USE DISTRICT, WHICH ALLOWS UP TO 75% FLOOR AREA RATIO FOR NONRESIDENTIAL USES AND 13 UNITS PER ACRE OF RESIDENTIAL USES.

AND HERE'S THE PUD AGAIN.

BOUNDARIES FOCUSING ON IN ON THE ACTIVITY CENTER, WHICH IS WHERE THIS PROPERTY THAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT, THE BEACHWALK RETAIL IS LOCATED.

I'M NOT GOING TO BELABOR THIS LIST, BUT PART OF THE THE DISCUSSION I WANT TO HAVE WITH THE BOARD AND THE RESIDENTS TODAY IS, IF YOU LOOK IN YOUR STAFF REPORT IN THE PUD, IF YOU LOOK AT THE ACTUAL TEXT, WHICH STARTS ON PAGE FIVE, THIS IS SECTION F, IT HAS FIVE PAGES OF A TABLE THAT SHOWS THE PERMITTED USES THAT ARE ALLOWED AS A MATTER OF RIGHT IN THIS PORTION OF THE ACTIVITY CENTER THAT IT'S CALLED IN THIS DOCUMENT.

SO I KNOW THAT I READ SOME OF THE RESIDENT EMAILS, SOME OF WHICH WERE DUPLICATIVE, BUT THEY DID FOCUS IN ON THE FACT THAT THEY THINK THAT THE RESTAURANT IS THE ONLY APPROVED USE ON THIS PROPERTY ALONG THE LAGOON, AND THAT IS SIMPLY NOT THE CASE.

ANY OF THESE USES, INCLUDING HOTELS AND MOTELS THAT ARE LISTED ON THIS CAN BE BUILT WITHIN THE ACTIVITY CENTER PROPERTY. I ALSO SAW A COMMENT FROM THE RESIDENTS ABOUT THE BJ'S BJ'S WHOLESALE CLUB.

AND JUST IF YOU LOOK AT THIS LIST IT DOES LIST LIKE WAREHOUSING WITH OR WITHOUT DISTRIBUTION CENTERS AND LARGE RETAIL DEVELOPMENT LIKE BIG BOX RETAIL THAT ARE ALLOWED AS A MATTER OF RIGHT IN THAT AREA.

SO I JUST WANT TO BE CLEAR AND THAT'S THIS LIST IS NOT INCLUSIVE.

IF YOU LOOK IN THE PUT TEXT IN THAT TABLE, YOU WILL SEE ALL THE PERMITTED USES, YOU KNOW.

BUT I'M JUST LISTING SOME OF THESE THINGS THAT COULD RANGE FROM RANGE FROM TOP GOLF DRIVING RANGES TO BARS TO AUTOMOTIVE SERVICE AREAS.

I MEAN, YOU CAN READ THEM ALL FOR YOURSELF.

SO THE PURPOSES OF THE APPLICATIONS ARE RELATIVELY MINIMAL.

ONE IS TO INCREASE THROUGH A TRAFFIC TRIP EXCHANGE.

I WANT TO BE VERY CLEAR.

THE DRI THAT IS APPROVED TODAY ALLOWS CONVERSION BETWEEN LAND USES BASED ON TRANSPORTATION TRIPS.

AND SO WHAT WE DID WAS THESE GENTLEMEN SAID WE'D LIKE TO GO FROM 150 HOTEL ROOMS TO 200 HOTEL ROOMS SO THAT THERE'S A TRIP

[04:25:04]

CONVERSION MATRIX.

IT'S JUST MATH THAT HAS BEEN REVIEWED AND APPROVED BY YOUR STAFF.

SO WE'RE ASKING FOR 50 ADDITIONAL HOTEL ROOMS IN EXCHANGE FOR A REDUCTION OF THE TOTAL AMOUNT OF COMMERCIAL SQUARE FOOTAGE ALLOWED IN THE DRY OF 7900FT².

SO YOU'RE DOING IT'S REALLY A TRIP EXCHANGE WITH NO NET NEW TRIPS FROM THE PROJECT.

THEN WE'RE PROPOSING TO REVISE THE PUD TEXT TO REFLECT EXTENSIONS OF PHASING AND BUILD OUT DATES THAT ARE DONE PURSUANT TO FLORIDA STATUTES SECTION 252 .363.

THAT ALLOWED AS A MATTER OF RIGHT.

AND THEN TO UPDATE SOME OF THE DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS WITH RESPECT TO THE LAND USE EXCHANGES THAT ARE DONE PURSUANT AGAIN TO THE DRY DEVELOPMENT ORDER LAND USE EXCHANGE TABLE, WHICH IS IN THE APPROVED DRI DEVELOPMENT ORDER.

SO THEY'RE ALLOWED AS A MATTER OF.

RIGHT. SO GOING TO WHAT THESE TABLES LOOK LIKE.

SO WHAT WE'RE CHANGING IS LITERALLY DECREASING 7900FT² IN THE MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE IN THE DRY AND PUD. SO REDUCING THIS NUMBER BY 7900FT².

HERE'S THE TRIP EXCHANGE.

SO THIS IS SIMPLY A MATHEMATICAL EQUATION INCREASE OF 50 HOTEL ROOMS. HERE'S THE HERE'S THE TRIP GENERATION RATE IN EXCHANGE FOR 7900FT² OF COMMERCIAL SPACE IN THE DRY.

SO AGAIN, NO TRIP INCREASES AS A RESULT OF THIS EXCHANGE.

AND HERE IS THE DRY DEVELOPMENT ORDER.

HERE'S THE MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN THAT REFLECTS AGAIN THE 200 HOTEL ROOMS. HERE ARE THE HERE IS THE PHASING, WHICH WE'RE PROPOSING TO REVISE AGAIN BASED JUST ON LAW AND STATUTE, BASED ON EMERGENCY DECLARATIONS BY THE GOVERNOR AND THEN GOING TO THE ACTIVITY CENTER.

SO THIS IS THE APPROVED MAP.

WE'RE NOT ASKING FOR ANY CHANGES.

YOU SEE THE ACTIVITY CENTER AND YOU SEE WHERE IT SAYS COMMERCIAL RETAIL, HOTEL OFFICE, AND YOU SEE ALL OF THE RESIDENTIAL. AND ONE OF THOSE WORDS THAT I CAN'T READ BECAUSE IT'S VERY BLURRY, BUT YOU SEE THE KIND OF AREAS AND THEN THIS IS OFFICE AND RETAIL USE.

AND SO YOU SEE THIS WHOLE AREA THAT AGAIN, WE'RE NOT REVISING THIS MAP ALLOWS ALL OF THESE USES AS A MATTER OF.

RIGHT. SO WITH THE RESPECT TO THE PUD MODIFICATION AGAIN, UPDATING THE MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN WITH THE CHANGE OF LAND USES, UPDATING THE NONRESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS, ADDING SOME CRITERIA FOR THE HOTEL COTTAGES WHICH I'LL GO THROUGH FOR YOU IN JUST A MINUTE.

AND THE DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND THEN UPDATING THE PHASING SCHEDULE, BOTH FOR THE LAND USE EXCHANGES AND FOR THE EMERGENCY DECLARATIONS AND THEN UPDATING AGAIN, THE MAP H OR THE MAP SERIES THAT GOES WITH THE PUD TO UPDATE THE PHASING TABLE AND THE DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS.

SO WHEN WE'RE TALKING ABOUT THE HOTEL COTTAGES AND ONE THING I WANT TO MENTION TO THE BOARD NOW, BECAUSE AGAIN, WE DO PAY ATTENTION TO WHAT THE RESIDENTS SAY IN THEIR EMAILS AND WHAT THEY SAID AT P-C-A.

AND I DO WANT TO SAY, FOR THE RECORD AT P-C-A, WE WERE NOT AWARE UNTIL RIGHT BEFORE P-C-A THAT THERE WAS ANYONE WHO HAD ANY CONCERNS ABOUT THIS PROJECT. AND SO THE GENTLEMAN WHO REPRESENTED THE RESIDENTS AT P-C-A, I REACHED OUT TO HIM.

WE WERE UNABLE TO CONNECT BECAUSE HE WAS GOING OUT OF TOWN.

BUT WE DID HAVE THAT EXCHANGE AND TRY TO GET TOGETHER.

AND I JUST WANT TO MENTION THAT FOR THE RECORD.

BUT BASED ON HIS COMMENTS AT P-C-A, WE WANT TO AND COMMENTS FROM THE PGA BOARD MEMBERS, INCLUDING MISS SPIEGEL.

WE WANT TO PUT INTO THE RECORD THAT THERE WOULD BE A MAXIMUM NUMBER OF HOTEL COTTAGE, MAXIMUM NUMBER OF 68.

THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF SIX BEDROOM COTTAGES WILL BE ZERO, SO THERE WAS MENTION AT PCA OF SIX BEDROOM COTTAGES.

WERE SAYING ON THE RECORD TODAY NO SIX BEDROOM COTTAGES WITH RESPECT TO FIVE BEDROOM COTTAGES, ONLY 25% OR 17 OF THE COTTAGES AGAIN MAXIMUM CAN BE FIVE BEDROOMS. MAXIMUM NUMBER OF FOUR BEDROOM COTTAGES WOULD BE 25% OR 17, AND THE REST OF THE COTTAGES AGAIN MAXIMUM TWO AND THREE BEDROOMS. AND SO YOU'RE TALKING AND SO WE'RE OFFERING THAT IN IN IN RESPONSE TO THE RESIDENT COMMENTS IN THE EMAILS YOU RECEIVED AND ALSO AT PCA TO MAKE CLEAR FOR THE HOTEL COTTAGES, THEY ARE ACCOUNTED FOR AS A HOTEL ROOM UNDER THE DRI.

THEY HAVE TO BE LOCATED ON THE HOTEL PARENT PARCEL.

THEY CAN HAVE FULL KITCHENS IF THEY NEED TO.

[04:30:02]

THERE IS ONE SINGLE OWNER OF EACH COTTAGE, SO THESE ARE NOT TIMESHARES.

THEY'RE NOT FRACTIONALS.

THE HOTEL OWNER, AGAIN, WILL PROHIBIT OCCUPANCY OF ANY HOTEL COTTAGE FOR MORE THAN THREE CONSECUTIVE MONTHS BY THE SAME PERSON, FAMILY OR OTHER GROUP.

MOST IMPORTANTLY FOR YOU AND FOR THE RESIDENTS, THE HOTEL MANAGER, WHICH WILL BE MARGARITAVILLE COMPASS HOTEL, WILL MANAGE THESE COTTAGES.

SO WHEN YOU CHECK INTO THE HOTEL OR WHEN YOU WANT TO CHECK INTO A COTTAGE, YOU GO TO THE HOTEL RESERVATION DESK, YOU CHECK IN, YOU GET ALL OF YOUR STUFF TAKEN CARE OF. YOU ACTUALLY, THEY MANAGE THE COTTAGE, THEY CLEAN THE COTTAGE, THEY MAINTAIN THE COTTAGE.

THEY THEY WILL TAKE DELIVERY OF WHATEVER PACKAGING IS DELIVERED.

ALL OF THAT IS MANAGED BY THE HOTEL.

AND I KNOW THERE HAVE BEEN CONCERNS BY THE RESIDENTS ABOUT THESE BEING PARTY HOUSES.

THAT IS NOT GOING TO BE ALLOWED BY THE HOTEL MANAGEMENT COMPANY.

IF I AM IN ONE OF THE COTTAGES AND SOMEBODY IS PARTYING NEXT TO ME, I HAVE THE RIGHT TO CALL THE HOTEL MANAGER AND SECURITY AND HAVE THOSE PEOPLE SHUT DOWN, WHICH THE HOTEL MANAGEMENT AND SECURITY WILL DO.

AND MR. ACOSTA AND MR. ROSENBLATT WILL COME TALK ABOUT THAT IN A LITTLE WHILE.

AGAIN, I WANT TO ALSO, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THE RESIDENTS MENTIONED IN THE IN THE EMAILS IS THIS NOTION OF VACATION RENTALS NOT BEING ALLOWED IN THEIR COMMUNITY. THE ACTIVITY CENTER IS NOT SUBJECT TO THEIR HOA DOCUMENTS.

IT IS A COMMERCIAL PROPERTY.

IT WAS NEVER DESIGNED TO BE PUT UNDER THE HOA DOCUMENTS.

IT WAS NEVER INTENDED TO BE PUT UNDER THE HOA DOCUMENTS.

AND SO THOSE RESTRICTIONS DO NOT APPLY TO THIS COMMERCIAL PROPERTY.

I JUST WANT TO BE VERY CLEAR ABOUT THAT.

THIS IS WHAT THE COTTAGES WILL LOOK LIKE.

SO ONE AND TWO BEDROOM OR ONE AND TWO STORY COTTAGES THAT LOOK JUST LIKE THESE.

AND AGAIN, GOING TO THE MAP CHANGES AGAIN.

200 HOTEL ROOMS, A REDUCTION IN THE NUMBER OF COMMERCIAL SQUARE FEET BY 7900FT².

AND AGAIN, THE MAP THE ONLY THING WE'RE CHANGING ON THE MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN.

AGAIN, THIS IS STILL THE ACTIVITY CENTER ON THE PUD MAP.

HERE'S THE LAGOON.

THESE COTTAGES AND THE HOTEL WILL BE ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE LAGOON AGAIN ON PROPERTY OWNED BY THIS APPLICANT, WHICH IS BEACHWALK RETAIL.

AND SO YOU CAN SEE THE MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN DETAILS IF THERE NEEDS TO BE PARKING PER CODE BECAUSE THE MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN CAN BE REVISED TO ADD PARKING.

IF STAFF DETERMINES THAT WE NEED THAT THIS PROJECT NEEDS ADDITIONAL PARKING.

PER CODE, THEN PARKING SPACES CAN BE ADDED.

THEY OWN PLENTY OF LAND OUT BECAUSE THEY OWN THE LAND BETWEEN THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE CRYSTAL LAGOON AND COUNTY ROAD 210, SO THERE'S AMPLE ROOM FOR ADDITIONAL PARKING ALL OVER THIS AREA.

AND AS A MATTER OF RIGHT AGAIN GOING BACK TO THE PUD, THE PARKING CAN BE SHARED AMONG THE VARIOUS USES.

THAT WAS THE POINT OF THE ACTIVITY CENTER.

YOU'VE GOT APARTMENTS OUT THERE ALREADY WHICH PROVIDE PLENTY OF HOUSING FOR PEOPLE WHO CAN'T, WHO CAN'T OR DON'T WANT SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.

SO YOU'VE ALREADY GOT APARTMENTS IN THE ACTIVITY CENTER AREA, AND THIS IS JUST ADDING A MORE COMPATIBLE USE THAN, SAY, A, YOU KNOW, A LARGE RETAIL CENTER OR SOMETHING, ANOTHER BJ'S WHOLESALE OR WHATEVER GOING IN.

AND SO WITH THAT BEING SAID, AGAIN, THE PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS ARE IN COURT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE COMP PLAN.

WE'RE NOT REDUCING THE NUMBER OF PARKING SPACES THAT ARE REQUIRED.

ANY OF THEIR CRITERIA FOR, YOU KNOW, TRIGGERING SOMETHING MORE THAN A MAJOR MODIFICATION.

AND AGAIN, HOTELS ARE ALLOWED AS A MATTER OF RIGHT.

THE REQUEST IS TO ADD THESE HOTEL COTTAGES, WHICH ARE APPARENTLY AND I'LL LET THE GENTLEMAN TALK ABOUT IT IN A LITTLE WHILE, WHICH IS SEEMS TO BE THE GROWING TREND IN HOTELS, BECAUSE IF YOU'VE GOT CHILDREN AND YOU DON'T WANT TO SHARE A HOTEL ROOM, YOU AND YOUR WIFE OR YOUR HUSBAND AND YOUR CHILDREN, THESE ARE THE PERFECT WAY TO HAVE THE KIDS IN A SEPARATE BEDROOM FROM THE HUSBAND AND WIFE AND HAVE A KITCHEN.

SO WHEN YOU WAKE UP IN THE MORNING, YOU CAN SERVE THEM CEREAL OR WHATEVER IT IS WITHOUT GOING DOWN TO THE RESTAURANT IF THE FAMILY WANTS TO RELAX.

SO AGAIN, MARGARITA COMPASS HOTEL AND WE ARE HERE TO ANSWER WHATEVER QUESTIONS YOU HAVE, AND THEN WE'LL COME UP AFTER PUBLIC COMMENT FOR REBUTTAL. THANK YOU, MISS AVERY SMITH.

COMMISSIONER JOSEPH. SO HI.

SINCE I DIDN'T MEET WITH YOU, I'D KIND OF HAVE SOME QUESTIONS, IF YOU DON'T MIND.

AND I WANT TO EXPLAIN WHY PEOPLE DIDN'T UNDERSTAND WHEN YOU WERE IN THE PCA WHAT WAS GOING ON.

BECAUSE I SAW IT AND I THOUGHT, OH, 50 MORE HOTEL ROOMS. NOT A BIG DEAL. I DIDN'T REALIZE EACH ROOM WAS FIVE BEDROOMS OR FOUR BEDROOMS, AND IT WAS SHOCKING TO SEE THAT 68 COTTAGES AND A LOT MORE

[04:35:10]

ROOMS, AND THEN YOU WANT PARKING FOR EACH ROOM AND ALL THAT.

SO WHAT I WANTED TO START WITH IS I SATELLITE GOOGLED THE ORLANDO PIECE OF PROPERTY.

THEIR COTTAGES ARE PRETTY SET APART AND THERE'S I COUNTED LOTS OF PARKING FOR EACH ONE.

I PROBABLY PROBABLY AVERAGED FOUR PARKING SPOTS FOR EACH ONE, AND THEY HAVE AN AMENITY, LIKE A REALLY COOL POOL.

ARE YOU ALLOWED TO USE THE LAGOON OVER AT BEACHWALK, OR DO YOU HAVE AN AMENITY OF ANY KIND LIKE A POOL? OR SO I'M GOING TO ASK.

ALFONSO. BUT I DO WANT TO POINT OUT, FOR THE RECORD, BECAUSE COMMISSIONER JOSEPH I WHEN I CALLED THE BOARD OFFICES TO MAKE MEETING REQUEST FOR THE COMMISSIONERS. I ALWAYS ASK TO MEET WITH ALL FIVE OF YOU SO THAT I CAN ANSWER WHATEVER QUESTIONS YOU HAVE.

AND I KNOW THAT YOU MET WITH THE RESIDENTS.

I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, IT WOULD BE HELPFUL IF YOU WOULD ALSO MEET WITH THE APPLICANTS, BECAUSE THEN, YOU KNOW, WE COULD ANSWER WHATEVER QUESTIONS OR BE PREPARED FOR THEM WHEN WE COME TO THIS BOARD.

I UNDERSTAND, BUT I KIND OF LIKE ASKING MY QUESTIONS IN FRONT OF THE PUBLIC BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW, WHEN I MEET WITH YOU, I DON'T FEEL LIKE THE ENTIRE STORY IS GIVEN TO EVERYONE.

GOOD AFTERNOON. ALFONSO ACOSTA, JUNIOR, BEACHWALK RETAIL CENTER LLC, 7900 GLADES ROAD, SUITE 600.

BOCA RATON, FLORIDA, 33434.

COUNTY COMMISSION FOR YOUR TIME TODAY.

AND THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER JOSEPH, FOR YOUR QUESTION.

YES, THE THE HOTEL WILL HAVE AMENITIES INCLUSIVE OF A OF A POOL.

WELL, WHERE ARE THEY GOING TO BE? BECAUSE WHEN I LOOK AT YOUR PLAN, IT'S ALL PARKING.

AND THEN THE COTTAGES WHICH ARE ONE OF YOUR ADVERTISED AS FOUR BEDROOM 2000FT².

I THINK MY HOME IS 2000FT² AND THEY'RE COTTAGES, SO I'M REALLY CONCERNED THERE'S NO AREA FOR YOU TO HAVE AN AMENITY.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR QUESTION.

I'M NOT SURE WHICH SITE PLAN YOU'RE REFERRING TO AND WHAT ADVERTISEMENT REGARDING A FOR THE ORLANDO ADVERTISING.

OH, SO THIS IS NOT IDENTICAL TO THE ORLANDO.

SO THEY'RE SMALLER HOMES.

YES. WHAT'S THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF LIKE A 4 OR 5 BEDROOM? THE MAXIMUM SIZE WILL BE ANYWHERE FROM 1800 TO 1900 SQUARE FEET.

OKAY. HOW MANY BATHROOMS? TYPICALLY WE HAVE ANYWHERE IN A 3 TO 4 BEDROOM.

YOU'D HAVE ANYWHERE FROM TWO TO 2 TO 3 BATHROOMS. WELL, AND STILL ON THAT MAP, ARE YOU GOING TO PUT A POOL IN SOMEWHERE? BECAUSE I DON'T KNOW IF THERE'S ENOUGH.

YES, I THOUGHT I ANSWERED THAT QUESTION.

YES, WE ARE WHERE THOUGH, BECAUSE I SAW ALL PARKING AND THEN THE COTTAGES.

IT JUST SEEMS LIKE TOO MANY.

I DON'T HAVE A PROBLEM WITH YOUR HOTEL.

IT'S A COOL IDEA.

THANK YOU. BUT I THINK A LOT LESS COTTAGES WOULD MAKE A LOT MORE SENSE.

WELL, I APPRECIATE THAT COMMENT.

FROM A BUSINESS PLAN AND BUSINESS EXECUTION STANDPOINT AND VIABILITY OF WHAT THE MARKET HAS TOLD US AND FULL TRANSPARENCY.

YOU KNOW, WE HAD INITIALLY PLANNED TO TO BRING RESTAURANTS TO ACCOMPANY THE HOTEL SURROUNDING RESTAURANTS AROUND THE LAGOON.

WE'VE BEEN ATTEMPTING THAT FOR YEARS SINCE WE BOUGHT THIS PROPERTY FROM THE MASTER DEVELOPER.

AND UNFORTUNATELY AND, YOU KNOW, IT'S IT'S HUMBLING TO SAY THAT UNFORTUNATELY, WE WE WERE NOT ABLE TO PERFORM AND EXECUTE ON THAT BUSINESS PLAN DESPITE TALKING TO MORE THAN 100 RESTAURATEURS.

BUT WE ARE EXCITED ABOUT BEING ABLE TO BRING SUCH A REVERED BRAND LIKE MARGARITAVILLE AND THE ABILITY TO EXECUTE ON THIS USE. THIS HOTEL USE IS REALLY HEAVILY PREDICATED ON THE ABILITY TO HAVE THESE COTTAGE UNITS, WHICH DRIVE ADDITIONAL REVENUE BEYOND THE ADDITIONAL TRADITIONAL HOTEL KEY.

BUT, YOU KNOW, ALONG THE LINES OF WHAT MISS AVERY SMITH SAID A LITTLE BIT AGO.

AND IN BEING RESPONSIVE TO REACTIONS AND COMMENTARY DURING PCA, WE WENT BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD AND SAID, WHEN I STOOD UP HERE TWO WEEKS AGO AND SAYING THE UNIT MIX COULD BE ANYWHERE FROM 2 TO 6 BEDROOMS WE WENT BACK TO THE DRAWING BOARD AND SAID, OKAY, NO SIX BEDROOMS, CAP AND MAXIMUM PERCENTAGE OF FIVE BEDROOMS AND FOUR BEDROOMS BECAUSE WE WANTED TO BE RESPONSIVE IN THAT SENSE.

BUT SORRY, STILL, WE'RE STILL IT'S STILL A ALMOST 2000 SQUARE FOOT HOME.

WHERE IS EVERYONE GOING TO PARK? I THINK ONE OF YOUR HOMES WAS ADVERTISED TO HOLD TEN PEOPLE AND THAT WAS ONLY FOUR BEDROOM.

AND YOU DON'T HAVE ENOUGH PARKING, OBVIOUSLY.

AND IF YOU'RE GOING TO ADD AN AMENITY, DO PEOPLE THINK THEY'RE GOING TO GET TO GO TO THE LAGOON? BECAUSE THAT'S WHAT IT LOOKS LIKE.

LOOKS LIKE THEY'RE GOING TO GET TO GO THERE BECAUSE YOU'RE RIGHT THERE.

I'M NOT SURE WHAT YOU SAID.

PEOPLE WILL THINK THAT WE HAVE NOT COME TO AN AGREEMENT ON THE ABILITY TO ACCESS THE LAGOON.

SO AS OF RIGHT NOW, WE DO NOT INTEND OR WE DO NOT HAVE THE ABILITY TO ACCESS THE LAGOON BASED ON THE CURRENT BUSINESS PLAN.

SO THAT IS NOT SOMETHING AND WE'RE NOT ADVERTISING THE ABILITY TO STAY AT THE HOTEL RIGHT NOW BECAUSE THE HOTEL IS NOT BUILT.

[04:40:03]

BUT IF YOU'RE REFERENCING ORLANDO, IT SOUNDS LIKE, YEAH, I'M JUST TRYING TO SEE THAT'S THE PRODUCT.

AND I WAS TRYING TO SEE WHY I WOULD GO TO BEACHWALK TO STAY THERE.

IF I CAN'T GO IN THE LAGOON, THERE'S NO AMENITY BECAUSE IT'S ALL PARKING.

I HAVE TO HAVE A CAR BECAUSE I'M NOT IN THE MIDDLE OF DISNEYLAND AND UNIVERSAL, WHERE THERE'S NO BUS, BUS TRAFFIC AND ALL THAT.

YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO HAVE A CAR.

IF YOU'VE GOT FOUR FAMILIES, IT'S GOING TO BE 3 TO 4 CARS.

I MEAN, I'M JUST BEING LOGICAL.

I'M NOT ATTACKING YOU.

I REALLY LIKE THE HOTEL CONCEPT, BUT I THINK THERE'S TOO MANY OF THE THE COTTAGES.

I JUST DON'T SEE HOW THAT'S GOING TO FIT.

YOU KNOW, I APPRECIATE YOUR COMMENTS.

AND, YOU KNOW, WE'VE WE'VE BEEN IN THIS SPACE.

THIS THIS PART OF THE REAL ESTATE BUSINESS FOR FOR QUITE SOME TIME AND WORKING HAND IN GLOVE WITH, WITH MARGARITAVILLE AS WELL, IN TERMS OF UNDERSTANDING THE CLIENTELE AND CUSTOMERS THAT WE SERVE.

AND A LOT OF THESE ARE, IN FACT, FAMILIES WHICH WHICH YOU APPROPRIATELY POINTED OUT.

AND OFTENTIMES A 3 OR 4 BEDROOM COTTAGE IS, IS PATRON BY A FAMILY OF ANYWHERE FROM FROM 3 TO 5 PEOPLE, A COUPLE AND AND THEIR CHILDREN, OFTENTIMES ONE VAN AT MOST TWO CARS TYPICALLY.

BUT NO MATTER WHAT, WE WOULD ENSURE THAT WE MEET ANY REQUISITE PARKING REQUIREMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH WITH THE PROJECT.

I DON'T I DON'T SEE THAT, BUT I'LL KEEP LISTENING.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU VERY MUCH.

OKAY. COMMISSIONER LIMO.

THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.

AND COMMISSIONER JOSEPH, YOU KIND OF ALLUDED TO TO ONE OF THE QUESTIONS THAT I HAD WAS, WHERE ARE YOU GOING TO HAVE ACCESS TO THE LAGOON? IS THAT SOMETHING THAT'S GOING TO BE THE EXPECTATION OF THESE FOLKS? BUT I THINK WE KIND OF COVERED THAT, THAT YOU'RE GOING TO LOOK TO GET YOUR OWN AMENITIES CORRECT.

BUT THEN THE SECOND QUESTION THAT I HAD IS, YOU KNOW, EXTENDING HOTEL ROOMS. WHAT WHAT IS THE DEFINITION? THE STATE'S DEFINITION OF A HOTEL IS THIS IS THAT IS THESE COTTAGES PART OF WHAT WOULD BE THE STATE DEFINES AS A AS A HOTEL HOTEL ROOM.

THE DEFINITION OF THE HOTEL COTTAGE IS IN THE PUD TEXT.

AND SO HANG ON LET ME SWITCH BACK TO THIS.

SO THE P IN A HOTEL THERE ARE HOTELS THAT ARE ALLOWED IN THE DRI ALREADY UNDER THE TYPICAL USE OF THE WORD HOTEL.

BUT GOING BACK TO YOUR POINT, COMMISSIONER ALAIMO IN THE PUD TEXT OUR DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND REGULATIONS FOR THE HOTEL COTTAGES.

SO AGAIN, THIS IS ALL IN THE TEXT.

THEY COUNT AS A HOTEL ROOM UNDER THE PUD.

THEY HAVE TO BE LOCATED ON THE HOTEL PARENT PARCEL.

SO THEY THEY HAVE TO BE CONTROLLED BY THE HOTEL OPERATOR.

THEY CAN HAVE FULL KITCHENS BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, YOU MIGHT HAVE A FAMILY WITH SEVERAL CHILDREN THERE WHO WANT TO HAVE BREAKFAST IN OR DINNER IN OR WHATEVER IT IS, ONE OWNER.

SO NO FRACTIONALS, NO TIMESHARES, NONE OF THAT KIND OF STUFF.

AND ALL OF THESE REGULATIONS ARE IN THE PUD TEXT THAT ALLOW THE COUNTY TO OVERSEE THE BECAUSE THIS IS GOING TO NOW PROPOSE TO BE IN THE ZONING ORDINANCE.

ALSO IN THE PUD TEXT, THERE ARE PARAMETERS FOR SETBACKS AND BUILDING HEIGHTS AND THAT KIND OF THING FOR THE HOTEL COTTAGES ALSO AS PART OF THE HOTEL USE. OKAY.

YEAH, THAT WAS JUST MY QUESTION.

LIKE I SAID, I HAD MET WITH THE SOME SOME OF THE RESIDENTS THAT ARE THAT ARE FROM THAT AREA, AND I THINK THEIR CONCERN WAS THAT THIS WAS IN THE PUD.

YOU WERE DEFINING WHAT A HOTEL WAS AND NOT EXACTLY WHAT THE TRUE DEFINITION OF A HOTEL ROOM WAS, AND THAT THESE ARE NOTHING MORE THAN SHORT TERM RENTALS.

SO. SO I JUST, LIKE I SAID, WANTED TO KIND OF CLARIFY THAT, JUST GET THAT INFORMATION OUT THERE.

THAT'S RIGHT. BECAUSE THEY WILL NOT AGAIN, THE HOTEL OWNER WILL MANAGE AND OPERATE THESE ROOMS. THESE ARE NOT VRBO'S AGAIN, THEY'RE GOVERNED BY THE HOTEL DOCUMENTS, THE HOTEL MANAGEMENT COMPANY, AND ARE NOT PART OF THE HOA. THANK YOU FOR THAT ELLEN.

APPRECIATE THE CLARIFICATION.

AND I, I THEY LOOK REALLY NICE.

THEY GO WITH THE WHOLE MARGARITAVILLE THEME.

THANK YOU. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS OKAY.

WE'LL HEAR PUBLIC COMMENT.

THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. WE'LL NOW OPEN IT UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENT ON AGENDA ITEMS NUMBER FOUR AND FIVE.

IF YOU'D LIKE TO SPEAK ON THESE PLEASE COME FORWARD.

STATE YOUR NAME YOUR ADDRESS.

YOU'LL BE GIVEN THREE MINUTES.

I DO HAVE TWO DESIGNATED SPEAKERS.

I APOLOGIZE, THAT'S MY FAULT.

I SHOULD HAVE SPOKEN UP. THE FIRST DESIGNATED SPEAKER IS GOING TO HAVE TEN MINUTES.

AND HER NAME IS TINA HOPE.

GOOD AFTERNOON, MISS HOPE.

SORRY, WE'RE NOT USED TO HAVING THIS MANY DESIGNATED SPEAKERS IN ONE MEETING.

I'M SORRY, I'M NOT SURE.

IF I START THE POWERPOINT.

[04:45:04]

WAYNE'S COMING. THANK YOU.

THERE YOU GO. JUST LIKE HITTING THE BUTTON.

YEAH. THERE WE GO.

OKAY. GOOD AFTERNOON.

MY NAME IS TINA HOPE.

I LIVE AT 418 TORTOLA WAY.

I'M A RESIDENT OF THE BEACH WALK COMMUNITY.

I AM SPEAKING TODAY ON BEHALF OF A GROUP OF HOMEOWNERS WHO ARE OPPOSED TO THIS MAJOR MODIFICATION.

FIRST OFF, I WANT TO SAY WELCOME TO THE MARGARITAVILLE HOTEL TO BEACHWALK, BECAUSE QUITE FRANKLY, A HOTEL WAS ALWAYS IN THE ORIGINAL PUD THAT HAS BEEN ESTABLISHED NUMEROUS TIMES IN THIS PROPOSAL, AS ALREADY MENTIONED, THE DEVELOPER IS SEEKING TO EXCHANGE 7900 SQUARE FOOT OF COMMERCIAL ENTITLEMENTS FOR AN INCREASE IN 50 HOTEL ROOMS. THEIR LEGAL COUNSEL HAS STATED MULTIPLE TIMES IT'S SIMPLE MATH.

HOWEVER, THE APPLICANT IS THEN PROPOSING TO USE THE NEW 200 HOTEL ROOM ENTITLEMENT TO BUILD A 132 ROOM TRADITIONAL HOTEL, WHICH IS MARGARITAVILLE COMPASS, AND THEN BUILD 68 DENSELY PACKED MULTI-LEVEL HOTEL COTTAGES, WHICH THEY ALSO REFER TO IN THEIR APPLICATION AS SHORT TERM UNITS. WE ARE NOW BEING TOLD THE HOTEL COTTAGES WILL BE A MIX OF 2 TO 5 BEDROOMS, WITH COOKING FACILITIES ANYWHERE FROM 1200 TO 1700 SQUARE FEET, AND THEY CAN BE RENTED UP TO THREE MONTHS.

SO BASICALLY 132 SLEEPING ROOMS IN A TRADITIONAL COMPASS HOTEL.

IN ADDITION TO APPROXIMATELY A RANGE OF 136 TO 340 SLEEPING ROOMS IN A 68 HOTEL COTTAGES DEPENDING ON THE MIX THEY CHOOSE, EVEN ON THE LOWER END OF THAT, IF THEY BUILD ONLY TWO BEDROOM COTTAGES, THE TOTAL FOR BOTH THE HOTEL AND THE COTTAGES WOULD BE 268 SLEEPING ROOMS, WHICH ALREADY EXCEEDS THE 200 HOTEL ROOM CAP THE DEVELOPER HAS ASKED FOR.

AND JUST TO BE CLEAR, WE ARE NOT HERE TO DISPUTE TO DISPUTE THE TRADITIONAL HOTEL.

IT'S ALREADY BEEN IN THE PUD.

WHAT WE ARE DISPUTING ARE THE 68 HOTEL COTTAGES BEING REPRESENTED AS A SINGLE HOTEL ROOM BY THE APPLICANT.

THESE HOTEL COTTAGES, IN OUR OPINION, ARE NOT INDIVIDUAL HOTEL ROOMS, SO WE ARE ASKING THE COUNTY TO HELP US PROPERLY DEFINE THEM.

THERE HAVE BEEN MANY REFERENCES MADE BY THE APPLICANT'S LEGAL COUNSEL THAT THESE ARE VERY SIMILAR TO THE COTTAGES THAT THE MARGARITAVILLE RESORT IN ORLANDO.

THESE COTTAGES, HOWEVER, IN ORLANDO, ARE ADVERTISED ON THEIR SITE AS STANDALONE HOMES.

THE APPLICANT IS ATTEMPTING TO DEFINE THESE COTTAGES AS HOTEL ROOMS HERE IN SAINT JOHNS COUNTY.

THE APPLICANT HAS STATED THE HOTEL COTTAGES WILL BE SOLD TO INDIVIDUAL PRIVATE INVESTORS, BUT IT WILL NOT BE A TIMESHARE BECAUSE THE INVESTOR WILL NOT AT ANY POINT RESIDE ON THE PROPERTY. HOTEL COTTAGES WILL BE SERVICED MAINTAINED BY THE COMPASS HOTEL, BUT NOT NECESSARILY WILL THEY MAINTAIN OWNERSHIP.

SO ACCORDING TO THE LDC SECTION OF THE DEFINITIONS, WHICH THIS IS ALSO INCLUDED IN THE APPLICATION, A HOTEL IS DEFINED AS A BUILDING OR A GROUP OF BUILDINGS IN WHICH SLEEPING ACCOMMODATIONS ARE OFFERED TO THE PUBLIC, AND INTENDED PRIMARILY FOR RENTAL TO TRANSIENTS WITH DAILY CHARGE.

SO THIS IS, IN OUR OPINION, DOES NOT DEFINE A HOTEL ROOM, BUT RATHER IT ATTEMPTS TO DEFINE WHAT A HOTEL IS.

SO LET'S TAKE A LOOK AT THE FLORIDA STATUTES.

A PUBLIC LODGING ESTABLISHMENT CAN BE CLASSIFIED AS TO FOLLOW.

IT CAN BE CLASSIFIED AS A HOTEL, MOTEL, TIMESHARE PROJECT OR A VACATION RENTAL.

SO FOR A HOTEL, IT'S ANY PUBLIC LODGING ESTABLISHMENT CONTAINING SLEEPING ROOM ACCOMMODATIONS FOR 25 OR MORE GUESTS AND PROVIDING THE SET UP.

SO WE BELIEVE THAT THE TRADITIONAL HOTEL BUILDING CLEARLY MEETS THIS REQUIREMENT.

THE HOTEL COTTAGE IS NOT A HOTEL BUILDING ON ITS OWN, BECAUSE IT DOES NOT HAVE SLEEPING ACCOMMODATIONS FOR 25 OR MORE GUESTS, BUT IT DOES HAVE SLEEPING ROOMS.

[04:50:01]

SO LET'S REFER BACK TO THE LDC DEFINITIONS OF A SLEEPING ROOM.

A SLEEPING ROOM IS ANY ROOM THAT CAN BE USED FOR SLEEPING, AND THAT IS LOCATED ON AN EXTERIOR WALL, HAS A CLOSET, AND A DOOR HAS AN EMERGENCY MEANS OF ESCAPE.

SO LET'S SAY THAT THE APPLICANT BELIEVES THAT A HOTEL COTTAGE IS IN FACT A HOTEL ROOM.

THEY PRESENTED AT THE PCA MEETING THAT EACH HOTEL COTTAGE WILL ONLY HAVE TWO PARKING SPOTS.

HOWEVER, IN THE LDC SECTION ON PARKING AND LOADING STANDARDS, THE OFF STREET PARKING REQUIREMENTS FOR A HOTEL IS ONE PARKING SPACE FOR EACH SLEEPING ROOM, SO FIVE SLEEPING ROOMS, FIVE PARKING SPOTS, THREE SLEEPING ROOMS, THREE PARKING SPOTS.

THAT WOULD MEAN A RANGE OF 136 TO 340 PARKING SPACES FOR THE 68 COTTAGES ALONE, DEPENDING ON THE MIX OF BEDROOMS. IN ADDITION TO THE 132 REQUIRED PARKING SPACES FOR THE HOTEL.

SO, JUST TO BE FAIR, THE COTTAGES ARE 2 TO 5 BEDROOMS, SO LET'S SAY WE AVERAGE THREE AND A HALF ROOMS FOR THE COTTAGES.

THAT WOULD BE ROUGHLY 238 REQUIRED PARKING SPOTS, PLUS THE 132 THAT ARE REQUIRED FOR THE HOTEL.

THAT'S AN AVERAGE OF 370 PARKING SPACES.

I'M HEARING THE APPLICANT MAY POSSIBLY USE ON STREET PARKING WITHIN THE ACTIVITY CENTER TO MEET THIS REQUIREMENT.

AND WE KNOW HOW DANGEROUS ON STREET PARKING CAN BE BECAUSE ADULTS AND CHILDREN OFTEN DO NOT UTILIZE THE CROSSWALKS.

I DON'T SEE HOW THAT BOTH PARCELS WOULD EVEN ACCOMMODATE THAT.

WE DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHERE THE NUMBER WILL LAND BECAUSE THE APPLICANT HAS CHANGED THEIR PLANS MULTIPLE TIMES.

THAT BEING SAID, IF THEY ORIGINALLY THOUGHT A HOTEL COTTAGE WAS IN FACT A HOTEL ROOM, WE BELIEVE THEY WOULD HAVE ALREADY KNOWN THE NUMBER OF REQUIRED PARKING SPOTS FOR THE HOTEL BASED ON THE LDC REQUIREMENTS, WELL BEFORE THE RESIDENTS BROUGHT UP THIS ISSUE WITH THE COUNTY.

BUT OF COURSE, REQUIRED PARKING IS BASED ON THE ASSUMPTION A HOTEL COTTAGE IS A HOTEL ROOM.

DO WE BELIEVE THESE ARE HOTEL ROOMS? NO WE DON'T. LET'S REFER BACK TO THE FLORIDA STATUTES.

SO THERE IS A CLASSIFICATION FOR VACATION RENTALS.

A VACATION RENTAL IS ANY UNIT OR GROUP OF UNITS IN A CONDOMINIUM COOPERATIVE, OR INDIVIDUALLY OR COLLECTIVELY OWNED.

SINGLE. TWO, THREE, FOUR OR DWELLING UNIT THAT IS ALSO A TRANSIENT PUBLIC LODGING ESTABLISHMENT.

BUT THAT IS NOT A TIMESHARE PROJECT.

AND THEY SPECIFICALLY SAID THIS IS NOT A TIMESHARE.

THE LDC SHORT TERM VACATION RENTAL DEFINITION PRETTY MUCH MIRRORS THE SAME AS THE FLORIDA STATUTES.

MORE EVIDENT THE FLORIDA DEEPER DIVISION OF HOTELS AND RESTAURANTS.

ALSO, IN OUR OPINION, DEFINES THESE HOTEL COTTAGES AS VACATION RENTALS.

REFERRING TO THE SAME STATUTES THE APPLICANT HAS ALSO ADDED IN THE APPLICATION SECTION F G.

HOTELS AND MOTELS CAN INCLUDE INDIVIDUAL BUILDINGS THAT SERVE AS SHORT TERM STAY UNITS.

SUCH UNITS SHALL BE REFERRED TO AS HOTEL COTTAGES.

SO IN OUR OPINION, WE BELIEVE THESE ARE SHORT TERM VACATION RENTALS.

THEY'RE NOT INDIVIDUAL HOTEL ROOMS OR INDIVIDUAL HOTELS.

THEY ARE MAINTAINED BY THE HOTEL BUT BELONG TO INDIVIDUAL INVESTORS.

SO THE IMPORTANT QUESTION IS IF THESE HOTEL COTTAGES ARE IN FACT SHORT TERM VACATION RENTALS, WHICH ULTIMATELY IS DECIDED BY THE BOARD TODAY, THE VACATION RENTAL ORDINANCE ONLY CURRENTLY APPLIES TO RENTALS EAST OF THE INTRACOASTAL.

IF PASSED TODAY, THIS MAY VERY WELL BE THE HIGHEST CONCENTRATION CONCENTRATION OF SHORT TERM VACATION RENTALS WEST OF THE INTRACOASTAL AND NORTHERN SAINT JOHNS COUNTY, AND THIS ORDINANCE WILL NOT EVEN APPLY IF PASSED TODAY.

WE ARE ALLOWING THEM TO GO UNCHECKED AND UNREGULATED BY THE COUNTY IN WHICH THEY OPERATE.

THE COUNTY SHOULD HAVE THE FINAL SAY ON HOW THEY OPERATE IN OUR COMMUNITY, NOT JUST THE STATE, TO ENSURE COMPATIBILITY WITH OUR LOCAL NEIGHBORHOODS AND ENSURE THEY REMAIN SAFE WITHIN OUR LOCAL COMMUNITY AND NOT BECOME A PUBLIC NUISANCE.

IF PASSED TODAY IN ITS CURRENT FORM, WE ARE ALLOWING THE APPLICANT TO SELF DEFINE WHAT A HOTEL ROOM IS WITH THEIR ADDED REVISIONS TO THE PUD, INSTEAD OF THE COUNTY DEFINING IT. THIS EXCHANGE OF ENTITLEMENTS IS SPECIFICALLY ONLY FOR 50 HOTEL ROOMS, NOT SHORT TERM VACATION RENTALS, WITH 2 TO 5 BEDROOMS CATERING TO LARGER GROUPS.

I'M ASKING THE BOARD TODAY TO VOTE NO ON THIS APPLICATION IN ITS CURRENT FORM.

THE HOTEL COTTAGES ARE NOT BEING ACCURATELY REPRESENTED, SO THEREFORE THIS IS A SITUATION WE BELIEVE THE COUNTY VOTING NO IS NOT DENYING A LANDOWNER THEIR RIGHT TO BUILD.

SHORT TERM RENTALS ARE NOT PART OF THE ORIGINAL PUD.

THE APPLICANT, OF COURSE, CAN ASK FOR A CONTINUATION IN ORDER TO RESUBMIT A MORE COMPLETE AND ACCURATE APPLICATION.

[04:55:06]

I WOULD JUST LIKE TO POINT OUT HOTELS ARE COMING TO NORTHERN SAINT JOHNS, AND THEY'RE NOT COMING TO A COMMERCIAL LOT.

MILES AWAY, THEY'RE LITERALLY COMING TO OUR BACKYARDS.

I'M HOPING OUR COUNTY LEADERS CONSIDER ADOPTING A MORE DEFINITIVE CODE OF ORDINANCE FOR HOTELS.

CLEARLY DEFINING WHAT IS A HOTEL? WHAT IS AN EXTENDED DAY HOTEL? WHAT IS A HOTEL ROOM? WHAT IS A HOTEL SUITE? THE CURRENT LDC IS JUST NOT SUFFICIENT, I HOPE A MOTION IS CALLED TODAY TO ENSURE THAT HAPPENS.

AS ALWAYS, I THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME AND I THANK EACH AND EVERY ONE OF YOU FOR YOUR SERVICE TO OUR COUNTY.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, MISS HOPE.

AND OUR NEXT DESIGNATED SPEAKER ALSO TEN MINUTES IS CLAIRE CARP.

GOOD AFTERNOON.

GOOD AFTERNOON. MA'AM, YOUR PRESENTATION IS ON THE SCREEN.

YOU CAN USE THE CLICKER.

IT'S ALREADY UP. OKAY.

THERE WE YOU GO. OKAY. GOT IT.

PERFECT. AND THE CLICKER.

ON THE PODIUM TO YOUR RIGHT.

PODIUM TO YOUR RIGHT.

RIGHT. OH.

THE MOUSE. RIGHT.

NO, THERE'S A CLICKER.

I'M SO SORRY. TO THE PODIUM.

OH, I SEE IT. I SEE.

OF COURSE, I HAD TO MAKE YOU GET ALL THE WAY OVER THERE.

THANK YOU. WAYNE. THANK YOU.

TYLER. SORRY. I HAD WITH MORNING, BUT IT'S THE AFTERNOON.

GOOD AFTERNOON. GOOD MORNING.

MY NAME IS CLAIRE KARP, AND I LIVE AT 305 MARQUESA CIRCLE.

AND THIS IS THE VIEW FROM MY BALCONY.

AS YOU CAN SEE, I LIVE VERY, VERY CLOSE TO THIS POD.

AND WHAT HAPPENS TODAY AFFECTS ME, MY FAMILY, MY FRIENDS AND MY NEIGHBORS.

TODAY. I'M SO SORRY.

OH, THIS IS NOT ON MY SCREEN, SO IT'S NOT ACTUALLY CONNECTED.

OH, IS IT NOT? IT'S WRONG. AND I WILL REALLY ASK.

OKAY. NO. IT'S GREAT. I'M SO SORRY.

IT'S OKAY. I ASKED YOU TO PLEASE DENY THE APPLICATION, THE POD MODIFICATION.

BECAUSE THE REQUEST IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE GOALS, OBJECTIVES AND POLICIES OF THE 2025 SAINT JOHNS COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

SPECIFICALLY REGARDING COMPATIBILITY, 8.1.3.11 AMENDMENTS THAT RESULT IN UNREASONABLE NEGATIVE IMPACTS AND DO NOT PROVIDE SUFFICIENT COMPATIBILITY MEASURES SHOULD NOT BE APPROVED.

WE BELIEVE THAT THE APPLICANT FAILS TO PROVIDE ENOUGH COMPATIBILITY MEASURES, PARTICULARLY IN TERMS OF DENSITY, INTENSITY, GENERAL APPEARANCE, AND ESTHETICS AND NOISE.

INCOMPATIBILITY REGARDING DENSITY AND INTENSITY.

THIS COTTAGE ARE NOT A SIMPLE 50 ROOMS LIKE WE'VE HEARD FROM MY MY FRIEND AND NEIGHBOR TINA.

WE DO NOT OPPOSE THE HOTEL.

WHAT WE ARE OPPOSING IS 68 STAND ALONE BUILDINGS, WAY TOO DENSELY COMPACTED WITH HARDLY ANY SEPARATION.

IN THIS MAP I MARKED IN RED AND PURPLE THE AREA WHERE THEY WANT TO PUT THOSE 55 COTTAGES.

BUT IF YOU COMPARE IT TO THE 55 VILLAS, WHICH ARE VERY COMPARABLE IN SIZE, THEY'RE ACTUALLY 2020 2500FT². THEY ARE DOUBLE THE SIZE.

THIS MAKES THIS VERY DENSE.

THERE IS THE DEPENDENCIES OF THE COTTAGES WITH NO AMENITIES LIKE IT'S BEEN POINTED OUT, AND NO GREEN SPACE THAT IS NOT CONSISTENT WITH BEACH WALK.

WE HAVE TONS OF GREEN SPACE AND WE DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT THEY ARE ASKING YOU FOR APPROVAL FOR 68 BUILDINGS, BUT THEY ARE NOT TELLING US.

AND YOU, WHERE ARE THEY GOING? THOSE OTHER 13.

BASICALLY, THE DEVELOPER IS ASKING YOU FOR A BLANK CHECK TO DO WHATEVER THEY WANT, WHEREVER THEY WANT IT, AND HOWEVER LONG IT TAKES TO COMPLETE IT. THIS APPLICATION WANTS TO SUBSTITUTE 48,024 24,245 OF WHAT IT WAS TO BE THE HEART OF THE COMMUNITY, THE AMENITY CENTER.

YES, WE KNOW THAT AMENITY CENTER COULD HAVE MIXED USES, AND THAT'S WHY WHAT WE LOVE ABOUT IT.

IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE A VERY WALKABLE AND ENJOYABLE AREA OF RETAIL AND RESTAURANTS THAT WE, THE RESIDENTS, WERE ALL GOING TO ACCESS AND ENJOY.

THEY ARE REPLACING IT WITH AN ESTIMATED 98,600, OR WHAT WE BELIEVE IS THE APPROXIMATE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF THE COTTAGES, BUT WE'RE NOT SURE BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT TELLING US

[05:00:04]

EXACTLY. BUT IT'S A LOT THAT WE, THE RESIDENTS, DON'T GET ACCESS TO.

WE WON'T GET TO ENJOY THAT, AND WE DEFINITELY WILL NOT GET A SENSE OF COMMUNITY LIKE THE AMENITIES AND AMENITY CENTER WOULD DO.

WE ALSO ASK YOU TO PLEASE DENY THE APPLICATION ON THE FOLLOWING ARGUMENT.

SECTION 50.030.066 OF THE CODE DASH F SAYS PUD.

PUD DISTRICTS SHALL BE LOCATED AND DESIGNED AS TO MINIMIZE THE NEGATIVE EFFECTS OF THE EXTERNAL IMPACTS SUCH AS TRAFFIC, NOISE OR LIGHTS.

PROJECT CONTROL SHOULD BE ACCOMPLISHED TO SUCH TECHNIQUES AS DENSITY AND INTENSITY LIMITATION.

THIS REQUEST FOR FROM THE APPLICANT FAILS TO DO SO BECAUSE ACTUALLY IT'S MAKING THE AREA HYPER DENSE WITH NO MITIGATION TO THE ADVERSE EFFECTS AND INSTEAD ACTUALLY CAUSING THEM. DURING THE PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING.

THE LAWYER FOR THE APPLICANT SAYS THESE COTTAGES WERE GOING TO BE SIMILAR TO THE COTTAGES IN ORLANDO AND SHOWED THIS LOVELY PICTURE OF MUTED COLORS.

THIS IS ACTUALLY LIKE THE MARGARITAVILLE COTTAGES LOOK LIKE.

THAT IS NOT THE ESTHETICS OF BEACHWALK.

BEACHWALK IS MUTED COLORS AND NANTUCKET.

THIS IS MORE LIKE A TROPICAL.

AND IN FACT MARGARITAVILLE IS VERY WELL KNOWN FOR THIS COLOR SCHEME.

AND WE BELIEVE THAT THE LICENSING AGREEMENT WILL WILL FORBID THE APPLICANT TO CHANGE THE COLOR SCHEME.

SO THEY ARE NOT GOING TO BE COMPATIBLE IN TERMS OF APPEARANCE WITH APPEARANCE WITH BEACHWALK.

NOT ONLY THAT, BUT WE HAVE, AS I SAID, PLENTY OF GREEN SPACE AND THERE'S NO GREEN SPACE IN THESE COTTAGES.

INCOMPATIBLE INCOMPATIBILITY.

INCOMPATIBILITY DUE TO NOISE.

THE. THE APPLICANT IS TRYING TO PASS THIS AS A SIMPLE COMMERCIAL EXCHANGE, BUT THIS IS NOT THE SAME.

RESTAURANT AND AND SHOPS HAVE POSTED BUSINESS HOURS HOURS.

SO EVEN IF THEY HAVE MUSIC OR PATRONS COMING AND GOING, THERE IS AN EXPECTATION OF QUIETNESS AT THAT POSTED TIME.

A SHORT TERM. A SHORT TERM RENTAL WITH BALCONIES AND PORCHES WOULD BE ACCESSIBLE AND NOISY 24 OVER SEVEN.

LARGER GROUPS OF TRANSIENT GUESTS TEND TO DISREGARD NOISE ORDINANCE OR MANAGEMENT RULES.

DISTURBING VERY NEARBY COMMUNITY RESIDENTS IN WHICH A 20 FOOT BUFFER WILL NOT MINIMIZE.

SOME OF THE COTTAGES ARE WATERFRONT, WHICH MEANS THEY ARE FACING 14 ACRES OF OPEN SPACE.

NOISE TRAVELS UNINTERRUPTED.

THERE IS A PLETHORA OF BAD REVIEWS ABOUT MARGARITAVILLE COTTAGES.

I PICKED THIS ONE IN PARTICULAR BECAUSE THEY ARE TALKING ABOUT HOW THEY DO HAVE RULES REGARDING NOISE AND NO PARTIES, BUT THEY ARE COMPLAINING ABOUT LARGE PARTIES THROUGH BEING NOT RESPECTING THE RULES AND MANAGEMENT, NOT DOING ANYTHING ABOUT IT.

AGAIN, THIS IS MARGARITA BELL IN ORLANDO AND YOU MIGHT YOU MIGHT THINK, OH, BUT THOSE ARE ORLANDO.

THOSE ARE NOT HERE. HERE.

LET'S JUST KEEP IN MIND THAT THEY ARE IS THE SAME MANAGEMENT GROUP.

THE PEOPLE THAT ARE TRYING TO DO THIS IN BEACHWALK ARE THE SAME PEOPLE THAT ARE DOING THIS IN ORLANDO.

THEY ALSO SAID THAT THEY WERE GOING TO BE NICE COTTAGES THAT THEY'RE GOING TO BRING TO FAMILIES, BUT THEY'RE NOT JUST GOING TO RENT IT TO FAMILIES, THEY'RE GOING TO RENT IT TO WHOEVER PAYS FOR HIM, FOR THEM.

AND WE FOUND A LISTING AND YOU CAN SEE IT.

IT'S $40 A NIGHT PER PERSON.

AND I'M SORRY, BUT THAT'S PARTY HOUSE PRICING.

THE PARTY LIFE AND DRINKING IS PART OF THE MARGARITAVILLE CONCEPT.

LARGE OCCUPANCY SHORT TERM RENTALS ARE OFTEN PARTY HOUSES.

THIS IS TOTALLY IN CHARACTER IN COMPATIBILITY WITH OUR COMMUNITY.

WE ARE NOT A PARTY COMMUNITY.

WE HAVE OCCASIONAL GOOD EVENTS AT THE LAGOON, BUT WE ARE A RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY.

WE'RE LOSING HALF OF WHAT WAS GOING TO BE OUR HEART AND GAINING DOUBLE THE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF A TRIDENT COMPLEX OF NOISY SHORT-TERM RENTALS.

SHORT-TERM RENTALS THAT ARE NOT ALLOWED IN OUR COMMUNITY.

I WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE LAWYER, AND THEY SAID THEY WERE SO SURPRISED TO HEAR OUR OPPOSITION ON THE PLANNING AND ZONING MEETING.

OF COURSE, THEY WERE SURPRISED.

THEY NEVER REACHED OUT TO US.

NEVER EVER.

THEY WOULD HAVE FOUND OUT THAT ALL OF US WERE CONCERNED ABOUT THIS.

[05:05:01]

SINCE THEY ARE THEY WERE.

WE WOULD HAVE FOUND OUT IN TERMS THAT THEY WERE COTTAGES, NOT HOTEL ROOMS. WE WERE SURPRISED JUST AS MUCH AS YOU WERE.

THEY WERE. THEY WOULD HAVE KNOWN THAT WE HAVE SERIOUS CONCERN ABOUT TRAFFIC, SO MUCH SO THAT COUNTY 210 HAD A POLL REGARDING THAT LIKE A SURVEY BECAUSE IT'S SO BAD THERE, RIGHT.

BUT THEY NEVER REACH AND WE NEVER TOLD THEM TO TO GET TO.

WE NEVER TOLD THEM GET TO TELL THEM THAT.

BUT AFTER THE MEETING THEY KNEW THEY SAW THE THERE'S A THE THERE'S A NONPROFIT NON CHANGE.ORG PETITION WITH OVER 400 SIGNATURES.

THEY SAW THE PRESENTATION.

THERE WAS WE HAD A COMMUNITY SPEAKER.

THEY STILL DIDN'T REACH OUT BUT IT WAS THE MOST IMPORTANT THING HERE IS THAT THE PETITIONER HAS NO PROVISIONS IN PLANS FOR AMENITIES, AND THEY HAVE NOT REACHED OUT TO THE COMMUNITY TO GET ACCESS TO THE LAGOON OR THE CLUB.

THE CLUB.

SO WHAT ARE THEY GOING TO DO, WE ASK? THEY'RE GOING TO JUST DRINK AND DRINK AND DRINK BECAUSE THERE'S NOT THERE'S NOT GOING TO BE NOTHING TO DO FOR THOSE COTTAGES.

THEY ARE NOT GOING TO TRY.

IN CONCLUSION, I WOULD LIKE TO SAY THAT A DOT A .1.3.

11 OF THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN STATES THAT AMENDED AMENDMENTS THAT RESULT IN UNREASONABLE NEGATIVE IMPACTS SHOULD NOT BE APPROVED.

WHAT IS MORE UNREASONABLE, I ASK THE BOARD, THAN RIPPING OUT HALF OF OUR HEART WITH A COMPLETELY INCOMPATIBLE COLLECTION OF DENSE, STRIDENT, NOISY BUILDINGS WITHOUT AMENITIES AND NO COMPLIANCE WITH OUR HOA RULES.

THANK YOU. THAT'S OUR FINAL DESIGNATED SPEAKER FOR THIS ITEM.

SO NOW WE'LL GO INTO PUBLIC COMMENT.

EVERYONE WILL GET THREE MINUTES EACH, PROVIDED YOU DID NOT SIGN OVER YOUR RIGHT TO COMMENT TO EITHER ONE OF THE PREVIOUS DESIGNATED SPEAKERS.

I DID NOT. MY NAME IS WES BENEKE.

I LIVE AT 451 CARIBBEAN PLACE.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME, COMMISSIONERS.

DEAN. EVERYONE ELSE, APPRECIATE HAVING A CHANCE TO HAVE MET WITH YOU THIS PAST WEEK AND TALK TO YOU GUYS ABOUT THIS.

I FOUND THAT VERY INFORMATIVE.

THERE'S A COUPLE OF THINGS THAT I WANT TO POINT OUT MYSELF THAT WAS NOT THINGS THAT WERE NOT SAID TODAY, AND EMPHASIZE A FEW THINGS THAT HAVE BEEN SAID.

AND I THINK IT IT GOES WITHOUT SAYING, WHILE THIS MAY NOT BE SOMETHING YOU RESERVE ON AIRBNB OR VRBO.

THIS MEETS EVERY DEFINITION IN A CONSUMER'S MIND OF WHAT A SHORT TERM VACATION RENTAL IS.

I DON'T THINK THE WEBSITE YOU GO TO SHOULD DETERMINE WHETHER OR NOT THIS IS AN AIRBNB.

THIS IS AN AIRBNB THAT'S DISGUISED AS A HOTEL ROOM.

HALLOWEEN IS OVER.

A COTTAGE IS NOT A HOTEL ROOM, IT IS HOTEL ROOMS. THEY'RE TRYING TO REDEFINE THAT.

I THINK THAT'S A SLIPPERY SLOPE FOR THE COUNTY.

I THINK A LACK OF AN ORDINANCE, IF THAT IS TRUE, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT I HOPE FUTURE COMMISSIONERS CAN TAKE UP AND AND ADDRESS HERE IN SAINT JOHNS COUNTY.

AND UNLIKE THE ROBINSON PUD, THIS IS AFTER THE FACT.

THIS IS AFTER THEY'VE ALREADY SOLD 900 HOMEOWNERS PROPERTY.

THIS SHOULD HAVE BEEN DONE LONG AGO.

THEY'VE HAD YEARS TO DO THIS.

THIS GOES BACK TO 2006, EVEN IF THEIR LAST MODIFICATION WASN'T, YOU KNOW, WAS TEN YEARS AGO.

THIS IS AFTER THE FACT.

I FEEL LIKE THIS IS A BAIT AND SWITCH ON THE HOMEOWNERS AND THE FACT THAT WE'RE RESTRICTED FROM SHORT TERM RENTALS, WHILE THEY MAY NOT BE, IS ALSO, TO ME, JUST VERY SUSPECT AND SOMETHING THAT IS OUT OF CHARACTER FOR THE COMMUNITY.

I'VE SAID THIS TO A LOT OF PEOPLE THIS IS NOT ORLANDO.

THIS IS, IN FACT, NOT EVEN A MARGARITAVILLE.

IT'S A COMPASS BY MARGARITAVILLE.

IF YOU WERE TO GO LOOK THAT UP AND COUNTY ROAD 210 AT THE END OF THE DAY, NORTHERN SAINT JOHNS COUNTY IS NOT A VACATION DESTINATION.

THERE IS NOTHING FOR ANYONE COMING HERE FOR A SHORT TERM BASIS, WHETHER IT'S ONE WEEK OR THREE MONTHS TO DO.

AND THE LAST THING WE WANT TO HAVE ARE PEOPLE SITTING AROUND WITH NOTHING TO DO.

THAT JUST LEADS TO TROUBLE AND MISCHIEF, IF YOU ASK ME, ESPECIALLY AT SOME OF THE RATES THAT WE'VE SEEN QUOTED, WE'VE NOT SEEN A MARKET STUDY FOR THIS THAT AT LEAST WAS MENTIONED THAT THERE WAS ONE. I HIGHLY DOUBT IT EXISTS.

THERE'S BEEN NO PROBLEMS LEASING AND SELLING RESTAURANTS TO OUR WEST AND EAST, FROM NOCATEE TO THE FOUNTAINS AT 95.

ALL OF THAT'S APPARENTLY TAKEN AND LOOKING PRETTY SUCCESSFUL TO ME.

WE ENJOY THAT A BUNCH.

WE WOULD LIKE TO ENJOY THAT SAME THING RIGHT IN FRONT OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD WITH THAT LIVE WORK, PLAY LIFESTYLE THAT WE WERE SOLD.

AND JUST A COUPLE OF THINGS TO POINT OUT.

YOU KNOW, WHILE I'M NOT A LAWYER HERE AND I'M NOT FAMILIAR WITH THE ORDINANCES, I THINK THAT THIS PROCESS IS UNFAIR TO US AS HOMEOWNERS HAVING TO SIT HERE THROUGH THE DAY TO DO THIS, TO FIND OUT ABOUT THIS AFTER THE FACT.

I HOPE THAT SOMETHING IN THE FUTURE CHANGES THIS.

BUT I THINK THE FACT THAT A DEVELOPER WHO HAS REPEATEDLY BROKEN PROMISES TO US AS OWNERS TO THE COUNTY, WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT THE ENTIRE 210 ROAD WIDENING DEBACLE, CAN COME AND ASK FOR A REQUEST LIKE THIS AND GET AN APPROVAL, THAT'S SOMETHING THAT JUST SHOULDN'T HAPPEN AT ALL.

THEY SHOULD HAVE TO CORRECT ALL OF THEIR OUTSTANDING ISSUES AND DEFAULTS WITH THE COUNTY BEFORE THEY CAN PROCEED FURTHER.

[05:10:03]

I LOOK FORWARD TO YOUR DENIAL ON THIS.

I LIVE AT 84 KAPALUA PLACE IN SAINT JOHN'S.

MY NAME IS AMANDA ROSSI.

I COME TO YOU TODAY AS A CONCERNED CITIZEN AND HOMEOWNER, AS WELL AS A INDUSTRY EXPERT IN THE MORTGAGE INDUSTRY OF OVER 32 YEARS, SO I'VE HEARD THAT THESE WILL NOT BE SHORT TERM RENTALS OR TIMESHARES.

HOWEVER, HOW WILL THEY BE FINANCED? WHERE IS THE MARKETING? WHO ARE YOU MARKETING? WOULD THAT BE FOREIGN NATIONALS WHO ARE LOOKING TO INVEST IN THE UNITED STATES, UNKNOWING THAT THESE SHORT TERM RENTALS HAVE NO MARKET HERE.

WHERE WILL THE RENTAL INCOME COME FROM THESE FOREIGN NATIONALS THAT INVEST IN THIS AREA HERE? BELIEVE THAT THE PROPERTIES WILL BE RENTED ENOUGH TO COVER THEIR MORTGAGE PAYMENTS.

HOWEVER, THAT'S NOT GOING TO BE THE CASE.

I'VE DONE STUDIES ON MY OWN IN THIS AREA, AND I DO NOT SEE WHERE THERE IS A NEED FOR 68 SHORT TERM RENTALS.

EXCUSE ME. AS THE GENTLEMAN BEFORE ME STATED, IDLE HANDS ARE THE WORK OF THE DEVIL.

WE COULD HAVE INDIVIDUALS LIVING IN THESE AREAS FOR UP TO THREE MONTHS, NOT ONE MILE FROM A HIGH SCHOOL.

AS OTHERS HAVE ALREADY MENTIONED, THE ROADWAYS CANNOT SUPPORT THESE ADDITIONAL TRANSIENT PERSONS.

I KNOW THAT MARGARITAVILLE IS STATING THAT THEY WILL BE MANAGING THESE.

HOWEVER, THESE INDIVIDUALS THAT WILL BE OWNING THIS WILL BE DONE.

SO AS A HOTEL, IT'S CALLED A CONDO HOTEL, AND THERE WILL BE FINANCING AND DEFAULTS, AND THERE WILL BE ADDITIONAL PROPERTIES THAT WILL HAVE TO BE EITHER OWNED BY THE COUNTY AFTER THE FACT OR AN ADDITIONAL USE.

COME UP WITH.

I APOLOGIZE, I'VE NEVER SPOKEN IN FRONT OF COMMISSIONERS BEFORE.

YOU'RE DOING GREAT. WELL. THANK YOU.

I'M JUST VERY VERY DISAPPOINTED IN THE AREA THAT I THOUGHT THAT I WOULD BE RETIRING IN.

AND TO FIND THAT NOT ONLY I FULLY SUPPORT A HOTEL, I HAVE FAMILY AND FRIENDS THAT COME HERE THAT NEED TO STAY THERE.

WE DO NOT NEED ADDITIONAL 2 TO 4 BEDROOM HOMES OF SHORT TERM RENTAL, WHICH IS EXACTLY WHAT THIS IS.

THAT WILL BE NOT ONLY NOT PAYING TAXES NOT BEING ABLE TO VOTE, BUT WILL POSSIBLY BE INCREASING NOT ONLY OUR MEDICAL, OUR PUBLIC SAFETY, BUT AS WELL AS OUR EDUCATIONAL AREAS.

BECAUSE IF YOU DON'T THINK THAT PEOPLE USE THESE TO GET THEIR CHILDREN INTO THESE STATE OF THE ART TOP IN FLORIDA EDUCATIONAL AREAS, YOU WOULD BE SADLY MISTAKEN.

I WILL DO EVERYTHING I CAN TO MAKE SURE FROM AN INVESTMENT PERSPECTIVE THAT THIS IS NOT FINANCED HERE.

HOPEFULLY YOU WILL VOTE NO.

AT LEAST OBTAIN ADDITIONAL INFORMATION.

ASK MORE QUESTIONS.

WHY IS THIS NEEDED? WHO ARE THEY MARKETING TO? WHAT ARE THE PEOPLE GOING TO COME DO? 15 MINUTES FROM THE BEACH THAT DOESN'T HAVE ANY KIND OF ACTIVITIES? I DON'T THINK SO. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

THOSE ARE ALL GOOD QUESTIONS.

EDITOR SLAVE IN BOX 308 FOR SAINT AUGUSTINE, FLORIDA.

CANDIDATE FOR MOSQUITO CONTROL.

80% OF THE PEOPLE HAVE ALREADY VOTED.

MY LATE FRIEND LARRY TUCKER WAS A LOBBYIST AND A JOURNALIST, AND HE LOBBIED TO GET THE BERT J.

HARRIS JUNIOR PRIVATE PROPERTY PROTECTION ACT PASSED, AND HE EXPLAINED TO ME YEARS AGO, GOD REST HIS SOUL, SMART MAN.

HE SAID, THE BERT J.

HARRIS PRIVATE PROPERTY PROTECTION ACT COULD BE USED TO PROTECT HOMEOWNERS AND RESIDENTS.

AND AS I HEAR THE TESTIMONY, WHICH IS UNREBUTTED SO FAR, MISS KARPEN, MISS HORNE AND THE OTHER WITNESSES THEY'RE REASONABLE INVESTMENT BACKED EXPECTATIONS ARE THAT THEY WERE MOVING INTO A RESIDENTIAL AREA, NOT AT A PARTY AREA.

AND I DON'T HAVE ANY PROBLEM WITH PARTY AREAS.

I MEAN, SAINT AUGUSTINE BEACH THRIVES ON IT.

RECENTLY NONE OF THE LADIES WHO GRADUATED HIGH SCHOOL WITH ME IN NEW JERSEY 50 YEARS AGO SIGNED UP AND HAD A PARTY HOUSE, AND THEY VISITED.

AND IT'S GOOD FOR THE ECONOMY, BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT BEACH WALK IS SUPPOSED TO BE ABOUT.

AND THE CHARACTER OF THIS NEIGHBORHOOD WOULD BE ALTERED FOREVER.

AND I THINK YOU'D BE FACING MAYBE 200 OR 100 J.

HARRIS JR. PRIVATE PROPERTY PROTECTION LAWSUITS.

THEY COULD SUE YOU. AND THE LADY WHO JUST SPOKE SAID, WHERE ARE THEY GETTING THE FINANCING? WHO'S GOING TO LEND? WELL, I THINK THE ANSWER COMES FROM OUR DISTINGUISHED FORMER SAINT JOHNS COUNTY COMMISSION CHAIRMAN BEN RICH SENIOR EXPLAINED.

HE EXPLAINED TO ME YEARS AGO THAT IN PLACES WHERE THERE WAS A LOT OF MONEY HANGING AROUND OVERSEAS, THEY'D GO TO FLORIDA AND THEY'D HIRE CROOKED DEVELOPERS AND CROOKED LAWYERS AND ACCOUNTANTS AND ARCHITECTS AND BUILD THINGS ON SPECULATION.

[05:15:04]

AND THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT THIS IS.

THIS IS A SPECULATOR. THIS IS NOT A DEVELOPER.

I THINK IT DEMEANS DEVELOPMENT.

THE WORLD BANK DOES DEVELOPMENT.

I THINK A LOT OF THESE SPECULATORS ARE JUST IN IT FOR THE SHORT TERM MONEY HAUL AND MAYBE RIPPING OFF FOREIGN INVESTORS ON EX PARTE CONTACTS.

I THINK WE SHOULD CEASE AND DESIST EVER AGAIN.

HAVING COMMISSIONERS MEET PRIVATELY WITH SPECULATORS OR DEVELOPERS, IF YOU'RE GOING TO DO IT, VIDEOTAPE IT.

AND IF YOU DON'T, THE FBI MIGHT REMEMBER SCOTT MADDOX.

AND THESE AREN'T COTTAGES.

THESE ARE PARTY HOUSES.

SO I WOULD VOTE NO IF I WERE Y'ALL.

I'M NOT GOING TO SAY THAT DOG WON'T HUNT.

I'LL JUST SAY THIS IS A DOG WITH FLEAS.

THERE'S NO MARKET STUDY.

THE TESTIMONY IS UNREBUTTED FROM THE PEOPLE YOU'VE HEARD FROM.

AND GOSH, THESE DEVELOPERS HAVE A LOT OF NERVE.

I KNOW WHAT A HOTEL ROOM IS.

I USED TO TRAVEL AROUND THE COUNTRY AND STAYED IN A LOT OF HOTELS, A COTTAGE, A PARTY HOUSE IS NOT A HOTEL ROOM.

WE SHOULD NOT LET CORPORATIONS WRITE OUR LAWS ANY LONGER.

YOU SHOULD DENY THIS.

AND IF THERE'S ANY NEED, I THINK A GOOD POINT WAS MADE.

MAYBE WE SHOULD ACTUALLY REWRITE THE CODE AND HAVE PEOPLE REWRITE IT INSTEAD OF CORPORATIONS AND THEIR MOUTHPIECES.

OOPS. IT'S NOT GOING TO WORK.

OKAY, LARRY.

I DIDN'T COME PREPARED WITH ANY PAPERWORK.

JOE MCINERNEY, 1005 BLACKBERRY LANE.

SO, LOOK, THE ISSUE OF ROOMS VERSUS SLEEPING ROOMS WAS IMPORTANT.

AND AND QUITE HONESTLY, ALL OF THE PREVIOUS SPEAKERS HAVE MADE GREAT POINTS.

MY POINT PALES BY COMPARISON, BUT I DID WANT TO JUST POINT OUT TO THE COMMISSIONERS THAT IT'S OUR OWN TABLE 6.17 THAT TALKS ABOUT SLEEPING ROOMS. SO THERE IT IS. SO WE CAN'T SEE AN EXCHANGE TABLE THAT SAYS ROOMS BECAUSE IT DOESN'T COMPLY IF IT SAYS THAT.

AND IT DOES. IT DOESN'T COMPLY WITH OUR OWN.

TABLE 6.17.

SO WE DO HAVE TO THINK ABOUT SLEEPING ROOMS. I'M GOING TO SCROLL THROUGH HERE.

THIS IS JOE MACMATH HERE.

AND WE REALLY DIDN'T HEAR TODAY AND ALMOST NOT TODAY WHAT THE MIX OF SLEEPING ROOMS WILL BE.

IT'S A LOT MORE THAN 50.

WE HEARD WHEN WE'VE GOT FIVE ROOM COTTAGES.

FOUR ROOM COTTAGES. SO ON THE TOP THERE 50 ROOMS TRANSLATED INTO 29.5 TRIPS.

AND IT WAS A TRIP EXCHANGE.

AND SO THAT WAS EQUAL TO 7900FT² OF COMMERCIAL.

YOU KNOW, THAT'S, THAT'S THE, THE, THE COUNTY'S EXCHANGE RATE.

BUT IN FACT, WHEN SUDDENLY YOU DEAL WITH SLEEPING ROOMS AND NOT ROOMS YOU'RE DEALING WITH, I PUT DOWN 272 SLEEPING ROOMS. IT SOUNDS LIKE IT'S PERHAPS MORE, BUT EVEN 272 SLEEPING ROOMS. DOING THAT SAME MATH RESULTS IN 43,000FT² OF COMMERCIAL THAT IS NEEDED TO BALANCE THESE ADDITIONAL SLEEPING ROOMS. SO WE'RE COMING UP SHORT.

7900 DOESN'T APPEAR TO BE CORRECT EITHER.

NOW FOR ME, I HOPE YOU WILL DENY THIS ON THE BASIS OF WHAT ALL OF OUR OTHER SPEAKERS HAVE SAID.

THEY'VE MADE EXCELLENT POINTS, REALLY HAVE MADE EXCELLENT POINTS.

I JUST WANTED TO BRING UP HERE THAT THE APPLICATION IS ALSO DEFICIENT IN TERMS OF THE EXCHANGE OF COMMERCIAL.

SO I THINK WE'RE YOU'RE LOOKING AT A AT AN INCOMPLETE AND DEFICIENT APPLICATION.

YOU SHOULD DENY IT ON THAT BASIS.

WOULD ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO MAKE COME ON DOWN.

I'LL GO LEFT.

I MARK COOPER.

36. TAUTOLOGY.

SO A COUPLE OF POINTS TO DISCUSS ON WHAT'S BEEN PRESENTED.

ONE, I'D LIKE TO ADDRESS THE UPDATED PHASING AND DATE EXTENSIONS THAT DEVELOPERS ARE REQUESTING PURSUANT TO SECTION 252.363 OF THE FLORIDA STATUTES. I UNDERSTAND THEIR LEGAL COUNSEL STATED IT'S A MATTER OF LAW, AND THIS EXTENSION IS BEING REQUESTED DUE TO SEVERAL DECLARED NATURAL EMERGENCIES THAT ARE REQUESTING A SIX YEAR EXTENSION ON THEIR PHASING AND BUILD OUT DATES.

THE FLORIDA STATUTES STATE THAT THE EXTENDED PERIOD TO EXERCISE THE RIGHTS UNDER THE PERMIT OR, OR OTHER AUTHORIZATION MAY NOT EXCEED

[05:20:06]

48 MONTHS IN TOTAL.

IN THE EVENT OF MULTIPLE NATURAL EMERGENCIES, WHICH THE GOVERNOR DECLARES A STATE OF EMERGENCY.

PERHAPS WE COULD GET FURTHER CLARIFICATION FROM THEIR LAWYER TO THE BOARD AND RESIDENTS WHY THIS EXTENSION EXCEEDS THE STATUTE.

THE STATE STATUTE OF FOUR YEARS.

I GUESS A SECOND TOPIC IS.

I'D APPRECIATE IT IF THE BOARD WOULD DO FURTHER TO TO ADOPT NEW RULES AND ORDINANCES AND CODES ON THE CLARIFICATION OF HOTELS, HOTEL ROOMS. WHAT'S AN EXTENDED DAY HOTEL? WHAT'S A HOTEL ROOM? WHAT'S A SUITE? AND AS A RESIDENT OF BEACHWALK, VERY CONCERNED ABOUT THE LIABILITY.

WE HAVE SOME OF THE HIGHEST INSURANCE, NO COMMUNITY, LITERALLY NO COMMUNITY IN NOCATEE.

AND SAINT JOHN'S COUNTY PAYS WHAT WE PAY IN INSURANCE FOR THAT LAGOON.

AND NOW YOU WANT TO BRING A BUNCH OF PARTY HOUSES IN.

IT'S IT'S SCARY TO ME.

AND IT MAKES ME WONDER WHETHER IT'S WORTH OWNING A PIECE OF PROPERTY THERE, WITH THE POTENTIAL UNDERLYING LIABILITY AS BEING AN OWNER OF THE LAGOON.

THERE'S JUST SO MUCH MORE THAT THEY'RE MISSING IN THEIR REQUESTS ABOUT SECURITY AND AND HOW THEY'RE GOING TO, YOU KNOW, WHAT LIABILITY THEY'RE GOING TO TAKE ON AND WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE BEHIND THAT.

SO I'D LIKE TO SEE MORE MONEY BEHIND THIS.

THANK YOU. WOULD ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO MAKE PUBLIC COMMENT? SEEING NONE. WE'LL GO AHEAD AND CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT.

MADAM CHAIR. OKAY.

THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER ALAIMO, MISS AVERY SMITH.

WELCOME BACK. THANK YOU.

I'M GOING TO START BECAUSE I AM AN ATTORNEY.

I HAVE TO START WITH THE NOTION OF COMPETENT, SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE.

AND I HAVE A LOT OF RESPECT FOR WHAT, PARTICULARLY THE TWO DESIGNATED REPRESENTATIVES SAID DURING THEIR PRESENTATIONS, BUT NEITHER PROVIDED ANY KIND OF EVIDENCE THAT THEY ARE EXPERTS IN LAW, PLANNING OR ANYTHING ELSE.

AND I JUST HAVE TO POINT THAT OUT.

FOR THE RECORD, I'M NOT TRYING TO BE MEAN SPIRITED, BUT THIS IS A QUASI JUDICIAL HEARING, AND PEOPLE WHO ARE GOING TO BE TALKING ABOUT QUOTING STATUTES AND ALL OF THOSE THINGS NEED TO BACK UP THAT THOSE NOTIONS OR THOSE STATEMENTS WITH EXPERTISE.

GOING TO THAT.

I'M GOING TO GO BACK TO.

SORRY. ONE OF THE LADY WHO LADIES WHO SPOKE WAS TALKING ABOUT STANDARDS, ABOUT A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

WE ARE NOT HERE SEEKING A COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AMENDMENT.

THE FUTURE LAND USE DESIGNATION OF THE PROPERTY IS MIXED USE DISTRICT, AND IT HAS BEEN FOR MORE THAN 20 YEARS.

AND SO JUST FOR THE RECORD, WE'RE NOT CHANGING THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AT ALL WITH RESPECT TO THIS PROPERTY.

I THINK THERE HAS BEEN SOME MISUNDERSTANDING ABOUT WHAT THE ACTIVITY CENTER IS WITHIN THE DRI AND PUD.

IT IS SIMPLY DEFINED IN THAT DOCUMENT, AND I UNDERSTAND THESE DOCUMENTS ARE VOLUMINOUS, BUT THE MAPS FOR THE DRI AND PUD CLEARLY SHOW THIS IS AN ACTIVITY CENTER.

IT'S NOT LIKE AN AMENITY CENTER FOR A RESIDENTIAL COMMUNITY.

AND SO THE WHOLE IDEA, AGAIN, OF TWIN CREEKS AND IT HAS BEEN FOR 20 YEARS IS YOU'VE GOT THE RESIDENTIAL CIVIC NODES BACK HERE.

SO HERE'S RESIDENTIAL RESIDENTIAL CONSERVATION.

THEN YOU HAVE OFFICE, COMMERCIAL, RETAIL, RESIDENTIAL OVER IN THIS AREA.

AND THEN YOU HAD THE ACTIVITY CENTER, WHICH IS A SPECIFIC GEOGRAPHIC AREA BOUNDED BY THIS ROAD THAT WOULD ALLOW FOR COMMERCIAL, OFFICE, HOTEL, MULTIFAMILY, RESIDENTIAL, ALL THESE CULTURAL, INSTITUTIONAL USES.

THAT'S WHAT THAT DISTRICT WAS CALLED.

IT DOESN'T MEAN IT WAS SUPPOSED TO BE THE AMENITY CENTER FOR THE RESIDENTIAL USES IN THIS PROPERTY OR WITHIN THE COMMUNITY.

AND I'M SORRY IF THAT HAS NOT BEEN CLEAR IN THE DOCUMENTS, BUT IT'S BEEN LIKE THIS AGAIN, IN THE EXISTING APPROVED DRI AND PUD, IT CLEARLY SHOWS THIS ACTIVITY CENTER AND THE USES THAT ARE PERMITTED.

[05:25:01]

AND SO I UNDERSTAND THAT THERE MAY HAVE BEEN SOME MISUNDERSTANDING ABOUT AMENITY CENTER, BUT THAT'S NOT THE CASE HERE FOR THIS PROPERTY.

I ALSO WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE FACT THAT THE DRC HAS DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS AND DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS AS A MATTER OF LAW, AND THE PUD IS THE ZONING ORDINANCE FOR THIS PROPERTY.

AND SO THE DRC REQUIRES, WHEN IT DEFINES HOTEL ROOMS. THAT'S BASED ON THE DEFINITION IN STATE STATUTES OF HOTEL ROOMS. AND THERE'S MORE THAN ONE AREA IN THE STATUTES, INCLUDING THE DRC LAW THAT TALKS ABOUT HOTEL ROOMS. AND SO I'M SETTING THAT ASIDE FOR NOW, BECAUSE HOTEL ROOMS ARE A MATTER OF LAW APPROVED IN THIS DRY AND HAVE BEEN FOR 20 YEARS.

WHAT WE'RE TALKING ABOUT WITH RESPECT TO THESE HOTEL COTTAGES, WE ARE REVISING THE PUD TEXT TO ALLOW A NEW HOTEL COTTAGE AGAIN IN THE ACTIVITY CENTER THAT ARE SUBJECT TO.

I'M SORRY.

LET ME GO BACK. ONE THAT ARE SUBJECT TO ALL OF THESE STANDARDS, AND THEY ARE GOING TO TALK TO YOU ABOUT MANAGEMENT.

BUT AGAIN, ALL OF THESE COTTAGES WILL BE ON PROPERTY OWNED BY THE HOTEL OWNER.

THEY WILL BE MANAGED.

SECURITY WILL BE PROVIDED BY THE HOTEL OWNER.

ALL OF THOSE KINDS OF THINGS.

AGAIN, THESE GENTLEMEN ARE NOT THE DRY DEVELOPER.

THEY PURCHASED THEIR COMPANY, PURCHASED THIS PROPERTY AND DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS FROM THE MASTER DEVELOPER OF THE DRY.

SO WE ARE WE CANNOT SOLVE ANY PROBLEMS THAT THESE RESIDENTS HAVE UNFORTUNATELY, ABOUT ANYTHING ELSE RELATED TO THE DRY OUTSIDE OF THE FOUR CORNERS OF THEIR PROPERTIES. I JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE THAT EVERYBODY UNDERSTANDS THAT THERE WERE SOME COMMENTS BY ABOUT FOREIGN NATIONALS AND ALL OF THIS. I MEAN, WE ARE NOT HERE TO TALK ABOUT DISCRIMINATORY STATEMENTS.

I THINK THAT THEY CAN SPEAK FOR HOW THERE.

THESE ARE NOT CONDO HOTELS AGAIN.

THEY ARE GOING TO BE ON PROPERTY OWNED BY THE MANAGEMENT COMPANY OR OWNED BY THE HOTEL OWNER, I APOLOGIZE.

IN LISTENING TO THE CONVERSATIONS ON THE FLOOR, HOPEFULLY THE RESIDENTS WILL APPRECIATE THAT THESE GENTLEMEN WILL AGREE TO PROVIDE ONE PARKING SPACE PER ROOM IN THE HOTEL OR THE AND THE COTTAGES SO THEY HAVE ENOUGH LAND TO PROVIDE PARKING AND SO THEY CAN REVISE THE PUD MASTER DEVELOPMENT PLAN TO PROVIDE PARKING FOR WHATEVER THEIR FINAL HOTEL COTTAGE ROOM COUNT WOULD BE ONE SPACE PER ROOM.

THEY ARE ALSO WILLING TO SAY THAT THEY WILL INCREASE THE AMOUNT, THE NUMBER OF COMMERCIAL SQUARE FEET FROM 7900 COMMERCIAL SQUARE FEET TO BE EXCHANGED FOR THESE 50 HOTEL COTTAGES TO 16,000 COMMERCIAL SQUARE FEET.

SO THAT'S MORE THAN DOUBLE TO TAKE INTO ACCOUNT ANY CONCERN PEOPLE HAVE ABOUT THE TRAFFIC TRIPS THAT WILL BE GENERATED BY THE PROJECT.

WITH WITH RESPECT TO THE PHASING AND BUILD OUT DATES, WE ARE NOT THE MASTER DEVELOPER.

I GOT INFORMATION ABOUT THE DATE EXTENSIONS THAT HAD ALREADY BEEN REQUESTED FROM PARTIES WHO REPRESENT THE MASTER DEVELOPER.

WE ARE WILLING TO WORK WITH STAFF TO MAKE SURE ALL OF THOSE DATES ARE CONSISTENT WITH FLORIDA LAW, AND SO WE ARE WILLING TO DO THAT.

YOU KNOW, AGAIN, IN RESPONSE TO THE RESIDENT COMMENTS.

SO AGAIN, ONE PARKING SPACE PER ROOM, 16,000FT² OF COMMERCIAL INSTEAD OF 7900 TO BE REDUCED, TAKEN OUT OF THE MAXIMUM ALLOWED IN THE DRI AND PUD AND THEN ADJUSTING OF COURSE, IN IN IN COOPERATION WITH YOUR STAFF TO MAKE SURE THAT ALL OF THE DATES THAT ARE IN THE DRI AND PUD PROPOSED EXTENSIONS ARE CONSISTENT WITH FLORIDA LAW.

AND SO I'M SURE YOU GENTLEMEN HAVE MORE TO SAY AS WELL.

THANK YOU FOR THAT, ELLEN.

THANK YOU AGAIN FOR HAVING US.

ALFONSO ACOSTA JR.

AND THANK YOU TO THE PUBLIC FOR THE VARIOUS COMMENTS AND PRESENTATIONS THAT WERE MADE.

AS MISS AVERY SMITH SAID, YES, IN RESPONSE TO COMMISSIONER JOSEPH'S QUESTIONS AND SOME OTHER CONCERNS EXPRESSED SPECIFICALLY AS IT RELATES TO PARKING WE ARE PERFECTLY COMFORTABLE WITH PROVIDING A COMMITMENT OF ONE PARKING SPACE PER ROOM, BOTH FOR THE HOTEL AND THE RESPECTIVE COTTAGES.

SO, YOU KNOW, BASED ON THE MAXIMUM PERCENTAGE OF COTTAGES WITH NO MORE THAN 25% FIVE BEDROOMS AND 25% FOUR BEDROOMS, AND THE REST TWOS AND THREES. YOU KNOW, IF FOR WHATEVER REASON, WHEN WE GO FOR FOR PERMITTING, WE WOULDN'T BE ABLE TO MEET THE ONE SPACE PER ROOM THRESHOLD, WE WOULD DOWNWARDLY

[05:30:04]

REVISE OUR SIZED COTTAGES, RESPECTIVELY, IN ORDER TO TO TO ACHIEVE THAT.

YOU KNOW, AS IT RELATES TO SOME OF THE ITEMS THAT WERE DISCUSSED DURING THE PRESENTATIONS.

YOU KNOW, I'M NOT HERE TO DISCUSS THINGS SUCH AS FOREIGN NATIONALS AND ALSO SOME OF THE, IN MY OPINION, ASPERSIONS THAT WERE CAST AS IT RELATES TO DIFFERENT DEVELOPER ENTITIES.

BUT I WOULD SAY THAT FOR THIS SPECIFIC PROJECT, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE A REALLY HIGH INVESTMENT THESIS CONVICTION AS IT RELATES TO THIS, THIS PROJECT AND THIS OPPORTUNITY.

AND THAT IS ALSO, I THINK, SUPPORTED BY THE FACT THAT MARGARITAVILLE IS BEHIND US AND GIVING US A LICENSING AGREEMENT TO EXECUTE THIS BUSINESS PLAN. INVESTING MILLIONS OF DOLLARS, TENS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS, TIME AND RESOURCES.

I THINK OF OUR OWN IS INDICATIVE OF THE FACT THAT WE DO KNOW THAT THERE IS A MARKET HERE TO EXECUTE ON THIS PARTICULAR BUSINESS PLAN.

AND, YOU KNOW, I RESPECT THE OPINIONS OF OTHERS WHO HAVE SPOKEN TODAY AND IN THE PAST AND EXPRESSED OTHERWISE.

AGAIN, THAT'S THEIR OPINION.

BUT FRANKLY, YOU KNOW, IT'S NOT THEIR TIME, RESOURCES AND MONEY.

AND SO, YOU KNOW, AGAIN, I JUST WANT TO SAY REALLY APPRECIATE YOUR TIME TODAY AND THE COMMENTS AND FEEDBACK FROM EVERYONE.

AND THANK YOU.

GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSIONERS.

THANKS FOR HAVING US HERE TODAY.

MY NAME IS EVAN ROSENBLATT WITH BEACHWALK RETAIL CENTER, 7900 GLADES ROAD, SUITE 600, BOCA RATON, FLORIDA.

33434. AS MY COLLEAGUES IN BOTH SAID JUST WANT TO MAKE IT CLEAR, WE PURCHASED THIS LAND FROM THE MASTER DEVELOPER, AND THAT IS NOT US.

WE BOUGHT RIGHTS 216,000 SQUARE FOOT OF COMMERCIAL AND 120 HOTEL KEYS, WHICH SOME HAVE BEEN CONVERTED ALREADY.

AND TO AN EXTENT WE'VE DELIVERED, YOU KNOW, RETAIL ALONG CR 210.

SOME PEOPLE WERE SAYING THEY DIDN'T SEE ANY RETAIL.

SO THERE ARE OTHER COMPONENTS, AS MISS AVERY SMITH HAS PRESENTED, THAT ARE THE MAKEUP OF THE RETAIL ACTIVITY CENTER AND THE ALLOWED USES.

AND HONESTLY, IT'S KIND OF KIND OF OFFENSIVE THAT WE'RE BEING ACCUSED OF NOT TRYING TO FIND SOMETHING COMPATIBLE WITH THE NEIGHBORHOOD BECAUSE IT'S KIND OF, YOU KNOW, WE KIND OF MADE A DECISION WHEN WE PIVOTED THAT THE RESTAURANTS DID NOT WORK, THAT WE INSTEAD OF LOOKING AT THE BACK OF ANOTHER WALMART ACROSS THE LAGOON, THERE ARE HOTEL COTTAGES THAT ARE VERY COMPATIBLE AND COMPARABLE TO THE EXACT ARCHITECTURE OF THE HOUSES THAT SURROUND THE LAGOONS. AND WHEN THEY'RE SITTING IN THEIR BEACH WALK CLUB ACROSS THE WAY, THAT'S WHAT THEY'RE GOING TO BE SEEING.

AND, YOU KNOW, SOME OTHERS SAID THAT THEY DON'T HAVE ACCESS.

THE HOTEL IS GOING TO HAVE A RESTAURANT COMPONENT TO IT.

THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE ACCESS TO IT.

YOU KNOW, THERE'S THERE'S A LOT OF LIKE, ACCUSATIONS OUT THERE THAT ARE JUST COMPLETE MISINFORMATION AND IT'S NOT TRUE.

I MEAN, THE THOUGHT WAS PUT INTO THIS TO MAKE IT SOMETHING THAT GOES WITH THE ARCHITECTURE OF THE SURROUNDING AREA, INSTEAD OF HAVING ANOTHER BRICK WALL THAT THEY'RE STARING AT FROM ACROSS THE BLUE WATER.

IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE.

YOU KNOW, AND AGAIN, THEY TOUCHED ON A LOT OF THE POINTS THAT I HAD WRITTEN DOWN.

BUT YES, PARKING SPACES, WHAT YOU SAW.

COMMISSIONER JOSEPH IS HONESTLY, I DON'T KNOW WHICH WEBSITE THEY PULLED THAT FROM.

YOU KNOW, THE PLAN CHANGES WE'VE TALKED ABOUT IN P AND Z CENTRALIZING THE HOTEL ITSELF AND FLANKING THE THE LAGOON WITH THE COTTAGES.

AND THAT, YOU KNOW, THERE IS MORE THAN SUFFICIENT PARKING.

AS WE SAID, WE AGREED TO THE ONE SPOT PER ROOM THAT'S, YOU KNOW, COMPATIBLE WITH THE OTHER PARTS OF THE CODE.

YOU KNOW, NOT NECESSARILY WHAT WE'RE ASKING FOR HERE, BUT YOU KNOW, AGAIN, THESE WERE THESE WERE ALL THINGS THAT WE THOUGHT WERE IMPROVING THEIR NEIGHBORHOOD, NOT IN ANY WAY CREATING SOMETHING THAT WAS A HARDSHIP.

AND WE STILL STAND BY THAT AS WELL.

IT WAS BROUGHT UP ABOUT NOISES.

YOU KNOW, AGAIN, IF YOU HAD EIGHT RESTAURANTS ALONG THE LAGOON, THERE'S NOISES LIKE THAT, YOU KNOW, IT'S IT'S AGAIN, THIS IS GOING TO BE A HOTEL THAT'S MANAGED AND IT'S IN AN AREA THAT IT CAN BE SECURITY AND PATROLLED AND EVERYTHING AND EASY TO YOU KNOW, FOR THEM TO BE ABLE TO ADDRESS ANY ISSUES THAT WOULD COME UP BETTER THAN A RESTAURANT THAT WAS OPEN TILL LATE AT NIGHT.

SO I DON'T BELIEVE THAT THAT'S A VALID ARGUMENT EITHER.

YOU KNOW, I CAN TELL YOU AS INTENSITY WAS BROUGHT UP AS WELL, I MEAN, A SINGLE 7900 SQUARE FOOT RESTAURANT, WE HAD A WE HAD A PLAN FOR ONE TENANT THAT WENT BANKRUPT.

AND I CAN TELL YOU FROM THAT PLAN, THERE WAS 435 SEATS AVAILABLE FOR THAT.

[05:35:01]

THAT'S ONE RESTAURANT.

THAT'S WHY THE TRIPS EQUAL OUT.

THAT'S, YOU KNOW, IT'S THE THE AMOUNT OF TRAFFIC THAT THAT BRINGS IS SIGNIFICANTLY MORE.

AND THIS IS A COMPARABLE, YOU KNOW, COMPARABLE SWAP.

AND AS MISS SMITH ALREADY PRESENTED, WE'RE WILLING TO TO DOUBLE THAT TO THE 16,000 JUST TO DISPEL THAT AND MAKE SURE THAT EVERYBODY IS COMFORTABLE THAT WE'RE NOT CREATING ANY MORE BURDEN ON THIS AREA.

YEAH. I THINK THAT REALLY KIND OF SUMS UP WHAT I HAD TO SAY THAT THEY HADN'T COVERED.

BUT AGAIN, APPRECIATE YOUR TIME AND THANK YOU.

THANK YOU SIR. WE'RE HERE TO ANSWER WHATEVER QUESTIONS THE BOARD HAS.

OKAY. ANY QUESTIONS FOR MISS AVERY SMITH? OKAY. NO QUESTIONS. THANK YOU.

SO WE ARE BACK TO THE BOARD FOR DISCUSSION.

I SEE, COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST.

THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR. JUST SOME QUESTIONS FOR OUR STAFF.

MR. ROBERSON, MR. D'SOUZA. JUST PUTTING YOU ON ALERT.

I KNOW, I GOT THAT POST-LUNCH KIND OF SLEEPINESS GOING, BUT I'M PULLING YOU BACK UP TO THE FRONT OF THE ROOM.

IT'S GOING TO BE A LONG DAY.

IT WAS THE CAKE.

IT WAS THE CAKE. THAT'S RIGHT.

TAXPAYERS ARE GOING TO GET THEIR MONEY'S WORTH OUT OF YOU TODAY, MR. D'SOUZA. THE TRAFFIC TRIP EXCHANGE CALCULATION.

I JUST WANT TO CONFIRM.

YOU KNOW, LIKE JOE SAID EARLIER TODAY, I'M A TRUST BUT VERIFY GUY.

IS THAT ACCURATE? YES, SIR. DO THEY HAVE.

WELL, NOW THEY'VE NOW THEY'VE UPPED WHAT THEY'RE OFFERING FOR THE PARKING SPACES.

BUT BUT THE APPLICATION AS IT CAME IN TODAY, DID IT HAVE SUFFICIENT PARKING PER OUR CODE AND PER THE REQUIREMENTS.

SO I WOULD WANT TO DEFER TO PLANNING AND ZONING.

OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD, I BELIEVE IT HAD CLOSE TO THE AMOUNT THAT WE CALCULATED.

BUT I WILL HAVE CYNTHIA COME UP AND CONFIRM MY BEST RECOLLECTION.

THANK YOU DOUG. GOOD AFTERNOON.

MEMBERS OF THE BOARD, CYNTHIA MAY WITH PLANNING AND ZONING.

AND WE DID ACTUALLY TAKE THE PLAN THAT YOU SAW COMPARED A COUPLE OF DIFFERENT TIMES THIS EVENING.

IT'S ALMOST EVENING ANYWAYS.

AND THEY HAD 398 PARK, 91 PARKING SPACES, WHICH IS VERY CLOSE TO IF ALL OF THE BEDROOMS REQUIRED A PARKING SPACE. I THINK THAT WE LOOKED AT THAT AS BEING A LITTLE OVER 400, AND WE DIDN'T COUNT THAT PARKING AREA TO THE LOWER RIGHT SIDE AT ALL.

SO FOR THE PLAN, THEY'RE SHOWING THEY HAD ENOUGH PARKING TO ACCOMMODATE WHAT THEY WERE PROPOSING TO BUILD.

BUT WE DON'T BELIEVE THAT THAT IS PROBABLY THE PLAN THEY'RE GOING TO MOVE FORWARD WITH.

AND WHEN IT DOES COME IN, STAFF WILL MAKE SURE THAT THEY DO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS.

OKAY, MISS MAY, I'VE GOT ONE MORE FOR YOU.

SURE. AN 1800 SQUARE FOOT SINGLE FAMILY HOME, OR WHAT WOULD APPEAR TO BE A SINGLE FAMILY HOME THAT IS LOCATED ON A HOTEL PROPERTY MANAGED BY THE HOTEL.

DOES THAT QUALIFY AS A HOTEL ROOM? THE. THE DEFINITION OF HOTEL.

AND WE WENT OVER THIS WITH OUR COUNTY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE.

THE COTTAGE AT THE TIME THAT WE UNDERSTOOD IT DID MEET THE THE CRITERIA FOR BEING A HOTEL.

BASED ON OUR DEFINITION WITHIN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.

SO YES, IT DID QUALIFY AS A HOTEL.

IT DID FOR THE DEFINITION.

THROUGH THE CHAIR. MR. CAAMANO, MISS WEST, MR. TAYLOR, WOULD YOU CARE TO ADD ANYTHING TO THAT? I AGREE WITH THAT.

SO I THINK WE'RE LOOKING AT A PUBLIC LODGING ESTABLISHMENT, WHICH IS CAN BE A COMPLEX OF BUILDINGS ON THE SAME LOT.

AND SO I THINK THIS FALLS WITHIN THAT.

ALL RIGHT. WELL, I'M JUST GOING TO TALK INTO MY FELLOW COMMISSIONERS, JUST FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH.

I MEAN, THIS APPLICANT FILED AN APPLICATION BASED ON WHAT THE RULES WERE AT THE TIME.

IT IS A HOTEL ROOM.

THEY ARE MEETING THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS.

THE TRIP EXCHANGE CALCULATION IS ACCURATE.

ACCORDING TO MR. D'SOUZA.

I THINK IT MIGHT BE SOMETHING THAT WE NEED TO AMEND OR ADJUST OR CHANGE MOVING FORWARD, BUT I'M NOT SURE THAT WE CAN HOLD IT AGAINST THIS APPLICANT.

SO JUST FOR WHAT IT'S WORTH, FOR CONSIDERATION, THOSE ARE MY THOUGHTS.

THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST.

I HAVE A COUPLE OF THOUGHTS AND QUESTIONS REAL QUICK.

THE TRAFFIC CALCULATIONS WE'RE USING THAT'S WITH THE ROAD IN ITS CURRENT STATE OR WITH THE ROAD IS SUPPOSED TO BE BECAUSE.

AND I UNDERSTAND YOU GUYS PURCHASED THE PROPERTY.

I UNDERSTAND THAT, AND AND FOR THAT, I AM SORRY.

I'M SORRY. IF YOU WERE SOLD A BAD DEAL, I WE KIND OF FEEL THE SAME WAY.

BUT MY CONCERN IS THAT IN THAT AREA, THE ROAD IS STILL NOT BUILT.

WELL, I'LL ANSWER FROM OUR PERSPECTIVE AGAIN, IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING AND I DON'T.

I AM NOT THE MASTER DEVELOPER'S COUNSEL, BUT IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE MASTER DEVELOPER.

THESE ENTITLEMENTS ARE FROM PHASE TWO OF THE DRI.

[05:40:02]

IT IS MY UNDERSTANDING THAT THE MASTER DEVELOPER, OR THE DEVELOPMENT IN GENERAL, IS IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS FOR PHASE TWO OF THE ENTIRE PROJECT.

BECAUSE COUNTY ROAD 210 HAS BEEN WIDENED WITHIN THE BOUNDARIES OF THE PROJECT.

BUT I WILL DEFER TO MR. D'SOUZA IF HE THINKS OTHERWISE.

AND AGAIN, THESE ARE DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS AGAIN THAT THEY PURCHASED FROM THE MASTER DEVELOPER, RELYING ON AGAIN THE OBLIGATIONS BEING PERFORMED.

BUT THEY DO OWN THE DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS AS WELL AS THE LAND, YOU KNOW, FROM A LEGAL PERSPECTIVE AND WOULD LIKE TO MOVE FORWARD BECAUSE THEY DON'T DO NOT HAVE THE OBLIGATION TO DO OTHERWISE.

I UNDERSTAND, THANK YOU.

SO IN TERMS OF THE TRIP GENERATION THAT'S THAT'S OUTSIDE OF THE IDEA OF THE MITIGATION THAT'S REQUIRED FOR THE DRY.

THE DRY HAS MITIGATED FOR THE TRANSPORTATION IMPACTS FOR PHASE TWO, BECAUSE THAT WAS THE SIX LANE REQUIREMENT FOR THE FOR THE COUNTY ROAD 210 WITHIN THE DRY. THE COUNTY IS CURRENTLY AS A CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROJECT UNDERTAKING THE PHASE ONE OBLIGATIONS, OF WHICH I THINK THERE IS STILL DISPUTE BETWEEN THE COUNTY AND THE DEVELOPER OVER THAT OBLIGATION AND THE MONIES THAT ARE OWED FOR THE COUNT TO THE COUNTY FOR US HAVING TAKEN ON THAT OBLIGATION TO CONSTRUCT.

SO PHASE TWO HAS BEEN MITIGATED FOR FOR TRANSPORTATION.

PHASE ONE HAS NOT BEEN MITIGATED IN THE SENSE THAT WE HAVE NOT RECEIVED THE MONIES OWED TO THE COUNTY.

BASED OFF OF THE MOU THAT WAS EXECUTED BY THE COUNTY AND THE DEVELOPER.

THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER JOSEPH.

YES. I YOU KNOW, I JUST WISH THAT IT EITHER COULD BE TABLED OR PUSHED DOWN THE ROAD TO HAVE THEM MEET WITH THE COMMUNITY, COME BACK WITH A BETTER PLAN, LESS, LESS COTTAGES AND ACTUALLY MAYBE A SWIMMING POOL FOR THOSE PEOPLE, BECAUSE RIGHT NOW THEY DON'T HAVE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE LAGOON.

MAYBE THEY MAKE THE AGREEMENT WITH THE LAGOON AND WORK SOMETHING OUT WITH THE COMMUNITY.

I JUST FEEL LIKE IT'S NOT FAIR TO ALL THESE PEOPLE WHO CAN'T EVEN RENT THEIR OWN HOUSES IN THAT.

I MEAN, IT'S AGAINST THEIR RULES TO BE ABLE TO RENT OUT THEIR HOMES.

AND I MEAN, I THINK A HOTEL IS GREAT, BUT I'D RATHER SEE SEE IT HIGHER WITH ALL THE ROOMS IN THE HOTEL BUILDING.

BUT I JUST WISH WE COULD SOMEHOW PUSH IT DOWN THE WAY AND HAVE THEM COME BACK OR TABLE IT, I DON'T KNOW.

THAT'S JUST MY THOUGHTS.

THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER DEAN.

WELL, WHEN WHEN IS THE 7/10 OF A MILE BOTTLENECK GOING TO BE COMPLETED? IT'S UNDER CONSTRUCTION, BUT WE'RE HAVING SOME DIFFICULTIES GETTING THE RIGHT OF WAY THAT IS UNDER CONSTRUCTION.

THE RIGHT OF WAY HAS BEEN ACQUIRED.

CURRENTLY, THERE IS AN ISSUE THAT PUBLIC WORKS IS WORKING THROUGH WITH THE UTILITY PROVIDERS.

SO RIGHT NOW THEY'RE WORKING ON A LOT OF THE UTILITY RELOCATIONS THAT ARE NECESSARY.

THE COUNTY IS WHILE THE OBLIGATION OF THE DRI WAS TO FOUR-LANE THAT ROAD, THE COUNTY HAS DECIDED TO GO AHEAD IN SIX LANE THAT PORTION OF ROAD.

RIGHT. SO WE ARE WE ARE ADDING AN ADDITIONAL AMOUNT OF CAPACITY OUT THERE.

SO THERE IS A SLIGHT DELAY.

I THINK IT'S STILL PROJECTED TO BE DONE WITHIN 12 TO 15 MONTHS.

BASED OFF THE TOP OF MY HEAD ON THAT ONE, THERE WAS A DELAY.

IT DID.

THE HOPE IS THAT IT DOESN'T PUSH IT BACK TOO MUCH, BUT IT'S A UTILITY UTILITY ISSUE CURRENTLY.

BUT STILL, WORK IS PROGRESSING.

YOU KNOW, JUST MINOR SETBACKS.

I GOT IT. THAT'S CLOSE ENOUGH FOR GOVERNMENT WORK BECAUSE.

BECAUSE THAT WOULD BE JUST ABOUT IN THE SAME TIME, I WOULD GUESS THAT THE THE MARGARITAVILLE HOTEL AND COTTAGES WOULD BE BUILT.

JUST FYI.

AND AS FAR AS LOOK, I'M NOT I'M NOT GOING TO SIT HERE AND TELL VACATIONERS WHERE TO GO OR SIT IN THEIR ROOM AND DRINK BEER ALL NIGHT.

THAT'S NOT MY JOB.

BUT I WILL SAY THIS, THAT IT'S A SHORT DRIVE ON 210 TO BOTH MICKLER'S LANDING AND THE PONTE VEDRA CONCERT HALL. AND THOSE ARE TWO DESTINATIONS.

AND THE CONCERT AND IRONICALLY, THE CONCERT HALL IS PROBABLY GOING TO OPEN UP, WE HOPE, KNOCK ON WOOD, AROUND JULY OR AUGUST OF 25.

SO IN MY OPINION, AND BASED ON THE THE ADVICE WE'VE RECEIVED FROM OUR LEGAL STAFF, I'M PREPARED TO MAKE MOTIONS IF THERE'S NO OTHER DISCUSSION.

SEEING NONE, GO AHEAD, COMMISSIONER DEAN.

OKAY, I MOVE TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2024 492 D3 MOD 2020 402 NEW TWIN CREEKS D3 BASED ON FIVE FINDINGS OF FACT AS PROVIDED IN THE STAFF REPORT.

SECOND, OKAY, WE HAVE A MOTION IN A SECOND.

PLEASE VOTE. AND THAT PASSES THREE TWO.

AND I'M PREPARED TO MAKE A MOTION ON FIVE UNLESS WE NEED ANOTHER PRESENTATION OR DISCUSSION.

NOPE. PLEASE GO AHEAD.

[05:45:03]

MOTION TO ENACT ORDINANCE 20 2454.

MAJOR MOD 2020 406 BEACHWALK RETAIL CENTER BASED ON SIX FINDINGS OF FACT AS PROVIDED IN THE STAFF REPORT.

SECOND, WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

PLEASE VOTE.

AND THAT ALSO PASSES THREE TWO.

OKAY. THAT TAKES US TO AGENDA ITEM NUMBER SIX.

[6. IFT 2024-26 Park Impact Fee Credit Transfer - Twin Creeks DRI to the Multi-family at St. Augustine Centre PUD. The standard language in the County's proportionate fair share and impact fee agreements allows for the assignment of unused impact fee credits with approval of the County. Section 13 of the County's Impact Fee Ordinances also provides that credit cannot be transferred without approval of the County. Recent amendments to Section 163.31801(10), F.S., of the Impact Fee statute allow impact fee credit holders to assign and transfer unused credits to development projects under certain circumstances. This option applies to all unused impact fee credits regardless of whether they were established before the statutory amendment. Twin Creeks Ventures, LLC and Twin Creeks Development Associates, LLC has requested the transfer of $150,000 of the remaining park impact fee credit to the Multifamily at St. Augustine Centre PUD. Park impact fee credit was awarded to the Twin Creeks DRI pursuant to the Twin Creeks DRI Development Order (Resolution 2015-240), as amended; and that certain Impact Fee Agreement (Agreement) between Twin Creeks Development Associates, LLC, Twin Creeks Ventures LLC and St. Johns County, approved June 21, 2016 (attached for reference), for the dedication of a 22 acre park site and construction of the access road to the park. The Twin Creek DRI, which is located on CR 210 east of I-95 in Impact Fee District 2 (Northeast), currently has an unused park impact fee credit balance of $209,108.16. The St. Augustine Centre PUD is located in the northeast quadrant of the SR 16/I-95 interchange also in Impact Fee District 2 (Northeast). Staff has no objection to the requested transfer and finds the request meets the purpose of the Agreement, the Park Impact Fee Ordinances and the requirements of Florida Statute. This item was pulled from the 10/15/2024 BCC Consent Agenda for discussion; however, the applicant could not be present and requested to be scheduled on the 11/5/2024 BCC.]

IS ANYONE HERE TO PRESENT AGENDA ITEM NUMBER SIX? 916. NO.

WELCOME BACK.

GOOD AFTERNOON, COMMISSIONERS.

DICK D'SOUZA, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR FOR GROWTH MANAGEMENT.

WE DID REACH OUT TO THE APPLICANT BECAUSE THIS WAS THE DATE THAT THEY HAD REQUESTED.

HE'S BEHIND YOU. HE JUST WALKED IN.

PERFECT. GOOD AFTERNOON.

GOOD AFTERNOON. COMMISSIONERS.

JOHN KINSEY, AS YOU ALL KNOW, I'M THE MASTER DEVELOPER OF BEACHWALK.

I AM ALSO THE OWNER OF TWIN CREEKS DEVELOPMENT ASSOCIATES, AND WE ARE THE ENTITY WHICH DEDICATED TO THE COUNTY THE LAND IN THE CENTER OF THE BEACON LAKE COMMUNITY FOR THE TWO, OR THE FOUR SOCCER FIELDS THAT ARE SUPPOSED TO BE CONDUCTED THERE.

THIS IS THE FOURTH AND FINAL REQUEST FOR THE TRANSFER OF IMPACT FEE CREDITS RELATING TO THE ORIGINAL DEDICATION OF PROPERTY FOR THOSE FIELDS, AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF THE ACCESS ROAD GIVING ACCESS TO THOSE FIELDS.

THIS IS IN THE AMOUNT OF ABOUT $150,000.

OBVIOUSLY THOSE WERE DONE SOME TIME AGO.

THERE WILL, TO BE SURE, BE ADDITIONAL CREDIT TRANSFERS ONCE WE'RE ABLE TO RESOLVE WITH VARIOUS AGENCIES OF THE COUNTY CERTAIN DISPUTES REGARDING THE ACTUAL DEVELOPMENT OF THOSE FIELDS, WHICH HAVE BEEN GOING ON SINCE JANUARY OF 2022.

ALL RIGHT. I'M NOT GOING TO GO INTO ALL OF THOSE DISPUTES TODAY.

IT'S NOT PERTINENT TO THIS REQUEST.

THIS IS RELEVANT TO THE TRANSFER OF CREDITS FOR WORK AND VALUE, WHICH WAS PROVIDED LONG AGO.

THE FIRST THREE OF THESE REQUESTS HAVE BEEN PASSED THROUGH THE COMMISSION ON THE CONSENT AGENDA.

WE DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY THIS ONE IS NOT.

BUT WE'RE HERE TODAY, AND WE ASK YOU TO APPROVE THE CONSENT AS PRESENTED.

THANK YOU, MR. KINSEY. ANY QUESTIONS? COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST? I HAVE A QUESTION FOR MR. CAIN ON THIS ITEM.

MR. CAIN, THE LAND WAS DEDICATED TO US BY THE THE TWIN CREEKS DRY.

IT'S FOR FOUR RECTANGLE FIELDS, AS YOU LIKE TO CALL THEM.

HAS THE DEVELOPER MET THEIR OBLIGATION FOR THESE FOUR RECTANGLE FIELDS.

THE LAND HAS BEEN DEDICATED.

THE FIELDS HAVE NOT BEEN CONSTRUCTED.

WHY HAVEN'T THE FIELDS BEEN CONSTRUCTED AND WHEN CAN WE EXPECT THEM TO BE CONSTRUCTED? WHAT'S STANDING IN THE WAY OF THAT? I THINK THAT'S OF GREAT INTEREST TO ME.

I AM NOT SURE THAT I HAVE THAT ANSWER.

WE'VE COMMUNICATED WITH THE DEVELOPER ABOUT THE PARCEL BEFORE IN THE PAST, BUT MY UNDERSTANDING WAS THAT THOSE WOULD BE CONSTRUCTED BEFORE THE BEGINNING OF PHASE TWO, BUT THAT WOULD BE MORE GROWTH MANAGEMENT QUESTION AS WELL.

OKAY. MR. KIM, I MIGHT HAVE SOME OTHER QUESTIONS AFTER PUBLIC COMMENT.

ABSOLUTELY. ACTUALLY, COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST.

YES, SIR. WHAT HAD TO BE DONE BEFORE THE COMMENCEMENT OF PHASE TWO WAS WE HAD TO BOND THE COMPLETION OF THE SOCCER FIELDS, AND THAT WAS DONE IN LATE 2021, WHICH LED THEN TO MY FIRST CONTACT WITH PARKS AND RECREATION IN JANUARY OF 2022 TO DISCUSS WITH THEM WHAT WE WERE GOING TO BUILD, HOW THAT MIGHT INTEGRATE WITH THINGS THAT THEY MIGHT WANT, AND TO MAKE WHAT WE THOUGHT WAS THE HOPEFUL ATTEMPT TO NOT HAVE US GO IN AND PUT IN WHAT WE'RE REQUIRED TO BUILD, AND THEN HAVING THEM HAVE TO COME IN AND TEAR IT UP LATER ON.

THE WHOLE PROCESS WAS ABOUT, AND WE'VE BEEN TRYING SINCE JANUARY OF 2022, AND THERE HAVE BEEN EXTENDED PERIODS OF TIME WHERE WE DIDN'T HEAR ANYTHING BACK.

AND SO WE SAID, WE'RE NOT GOING TO START THIS UNTIL YOU TELL US THAT YOU'RE SURE YOU'RE NOT GOING TO TEAR IT UP.

AND A YEAR AGO, COLIN AND COLIN GOUGH AND I WERE TALKING AND HE SAID, WHEN WE GET DONE WITH 210, WE'LL RESOLVE THIS.

[05:50:03]

WE STILL HAVEN'T HEARD ANYTHING FROM THEM ON THAT OR ON 210, BUT I'M SORRY.

LET'S GET BACK TO, TO THIS.

THIS IS AN IMPACT FEE TRANSFER FROM THE FIRST PHASE OF WHAT WE DEVELOPED.

WE'RE READY, WILLING AND ABLE TO MOVE FORWARD TO COMPLETE IT.

WE'D LIKE TO NOT PUT IN SOMETHING YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE TO TEAR UP.

BUT IF THEY WANT US TO, WE WILL.

BUT, MR. KINSEY, ON THAT POINT, HAVE YOU EVER HEARD SOMEBODY SAY, I DON'T WANT TO HEAR ABOUT THE LABOR PAINS.

JUST SHOW ME THE BABY.

I'M SORRY. WHAT? HAVE YOU EVER HEARD SOMEBODY SAY, I DON'T WANT TO HEAR ABOUT THE LABOR PAINS.

JUST SHOW ME THE BABY.

IT'S A SAYING THAT BASICALLY MEANS IF AT THE END OF THE LONG STORY, THE JOB DOESN'T GET DONE, THEN WE JUST KNOW AT THE END OF YOUR STORY, THE JOB ISN'T DONE.

AND I THINK OUR RESIDENTS ALL THEY WE'VE GOT KIDS WHO ARE BEING CRAMMED ONTO BALL FIELDS ALL OVER THE COUNTY.

WE DON'T HAVE ADEQUATE CAPACITY AT THE BALL FIELDS.

AND I THINK WHAT'S OF INTEREST TO OUR RESIDENTS IS JUST ACTIVATING THESE BALL FIELDS.

SO WHILE THERE MIGHT BE A LOT OF REASONS AND IT MIGHT BE COMPLEX ON THE BACK END, I THINK THE INTERESTS OF THE RESIDENTS OF SAINT JOHNS COUNTY, WHICH WE REPRESENT AS A BOARD HERE, IS JUST TO GET THE BALL FIELDS ACTIVATED.

SO I THINK THAT'S THAT'S WHY I'M ASKING MR. CAIN, AND THAT'S WHY I MIGHT HAVE SOME OTHER QUESTIONS OF OTHER STAFF LATER ON, BECAUSE WE'VE GOT TO GET THESE BALL FIELDS ACTIVATED.

IT WAS AN OBLIGATION OF YOUR DEVELOPMENT.

AND IT'S SOMETHING THAT I FEEL COMPELLED TO TO ADVOCATE FOR ON BEHALF OF THE RESIDENTS WHO'VE BEEN ASKING ME FOR THESE FIELDS SINCE THE DAY I WAS SWORN IN FOUR YEARS AGO.

YES, SIR. COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST, I COULD SHOW YOU A FOLDER OF EMAILS THAT I'VE SENT TO THE STAFF OF COMMISSION, COUNTY ATTORNEY, AND OTHER THINGS. HEY, WHAT'S GOING ON? HEY, WHEN CAN WE GET THIS MOVING? THE FOLDER OF REPLY EMAILS IS INCREDIBLY BARE.

THANK YOU. I SEE, MR. BRADLEY.

MR. CAIN HAS A PICTURE OF THE FIELDS OF THE.

OH, I'D LOVE TO. I'D LIKE TO SEE IT.

THANK YOU. THROUGH THE CHAIR.

THAT'S JUST THE PICTURE OF THE CURRENT SITE CONDITIONS.

AND THE YOU CAN.

THIS IS THE PARK IDENTIFIED HERE IN RED.

THE PARK LAND. AND THEN THERE HAS BEEN AN INITIAL DEPOSIT OF SAND AT THE SITE.

APPROXIMATELY ABOUT 18 MONTHS AGO.

I'M BALLPARKING THAT FOR THERE, BUT IT'S BEEN STATIC LIKE THAT FOR THE PAST 18 MONTHS.

THANK YOU, MR. CAIN. MR. KINSEY, IS THAT THE PARK YOU PROMISED THE COUNTY? SIMPLE QUESTION. THE PARK? NO, NO, IT IS ABSOLUTELY THE PARK THAT WE PROMISED THE COUNTY.

THE COMPLETED PARK. IS IT THE COMPLETED MULTI-PURPOSE FIELDS? NO, MA'AM. IT'S NOT.

ALL RIGHT. AND WE'VE OFFERED TO Y'ALL TO HELP SAVE YOU MONEY.

IF YOU WANT ME TO GO IN THERE AND SOD THAT PROPERTY, I CAN DO IT IN A COUPLE OF WEEKS, AND THEN YOU CAN COME IN AND TEAR IT UP TO INSTALL WHAT YOU NEED TO INSTALL, WHICH WILL MEAN WASTING THE MONEY OF THE TAXPAYERS.

IT SEEMED TO MAKE A LOT MORE SENSE AND THIS WAS WHY WE DID IT FROM THE VERY FIRST DAY.

THIS IS WHAT WE'RE LOOKING TO DO.

HERE'S WHERE THE DIRT IS COMING FROM.

HERE'S WHAT'S GOING IN THERE.

ALL RIGHT. LET'S GET TOGETHER AND TALK ABOUT HOW DO WE GET THE GRASS PLANTED? HOW DO WE MAKE THE GRASS GROW? WHAT DO YOU WANT TO DO AS FAR AS YOU WANT TO PUT IN STORMWATER PIPES? BECAUSE THE PLANS THAT WERE APPROVED FOR THIS DON'T HAVE ANY STORMWATER PIPE DRAINAGE.

THEY DON'T. THEY WERE APPROVED BY THIS COUNTY, CREATED PRETTY MUCH EXACTLY THE WAY IT IS.

THERE'S NO REQUIREMENT IN THE DEVELOPMENT ORDER THAT WE DELIVER PARKING SPACES TO YOU.

IT'S NOT IN THERE.

ALL RIGHT. SO WE OFFER IT UP TO YOUR PEOPLE.

HEY, WHEN WE'RE BRINGING IN OUR FILL, WOULD YOU LIKE US TO BRING IN SOME FILL FOR YOUR PARKING LOT AND SAVE YOU SOME MONEY? AND WE NEVER HEARD BACK FROM THEM, SO WE SAID, FINE.

WE JUST WENT AHEAD AND FILLED IT.

IT'S NOT THE SAME SAND THAT WE USE ON THE SOCCER FIELDS, BECAUSE THAT'S NOT THE MATERIAL YOU WANT UNDER.

EXCUSE ME, UNDERNEATH THE PARKING LOTS.

SO IT HAS ALWAYS BEEN OUR INTENT, AND WE'VE MADE EVERY REASONABLE EFFORT THAT ANYONE COULD MAKE TO WORK WITH YOUR STAFF, TO WORK WITH EVERYBODY, TO FINISH THAT FIELD, JUST AS WE MADE EVERY REASONABLE ATTEMPT THAT WE COULD MAKE TO FINALIZE WITH YOUR STAFF.

WITH REGARD TO COUNTY ROAD 210, WHAT THE DOLLAR AMOUNT IS THAT WE OWE? WE'VE SENT TWO PROPOSALS TO YOUR STAFF ON COUNTY ROAD 210, ONE IN JANUARY.

EXCUSE ME. FEBRUARY OF 2024.

ONE IN JULY OF 2024.

WE HAVE NOT HEARD A SINGLE RESPONSE FROM YOUR STAFF TO EITHER ONE OF THOSE PROPOSALS.

I CAN'T IMAGINE HOW ANY COMMISSION MEMBER COULD THINK THAT IS A REALISTIC WAY, A REASONABLE WAY FOR THE COUNTY TO DEAL WITH A DEVELOPER WHO'S SPENT ALREADY SPENT TENS OF MILLIONS OF DOLLARS TO IMPROVE THIS COUNTY, AND IS WILLING TO SPEND ANOTHER 7 MILLION AND CHANGE, AND YOUR STAFF CAN'T EVEN BE BOTHERED TO RESPOND TO

[05:55:06]

US, JUST AS THEY COULDN'T BE BOTHERED TO RESPOND TO US FOR MONTHS AND MONTHS AND MONTHS ON END WITH REGARD TO THESE.

AND THAT'S ALL THAT I HAVE TO SAY.

WITH ALL DUE RESPECT, MR. KINSEY. I DON'T BELIEVE A WORD YOU JUST SAID.

EXCUSE ME. SO WE'LL HEAR PUBLIC COMMENT NOW.

I'M SORRY. I DIDN'T HEAR THAT.

WE'RE GOING TO GO TO PUBLIC COMMENT.

WE'LL NOW HEAR PUBLIC COMMENT ON AGENDA ITEM NUMBER SIX.

PLEASE COME FORWARD. STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS FOR THE RECORD.

YOU'LL BE GIVEN THREE MINUTES.

THANK YOU. JUSTIN PELLIZOTTI, 836 BROOKSTONE COURT.

PHASE TWO SAYS THAT THE PARK WILL BE CONSTRUCTED IN PHASE TWO.

IT ALSO SAYS IT WILL BE ADA COMPLIANT, WHICH WOULD INCLUDE PARKING.

I ALSO HAVE A PICTURE TO SHOW YOU.

THIS IS A PICTURE OF THAT SAID PARK.

SAID PARK.

MICROPHONE'S NOT WORKING.

VERY GOOD. OKAY. SO THIS IS THAT PARK RIGHT NEXT TO IT HAPPENS TO BE A K-8 MIDDLE SCHOOL ACADEMY.

LAKESIDE ACADEMY OPENED UP THIS YEAR.

THAT'S ONE OF 16 MIDDLE SCHOOL AND ACADEMIES THAT THE ASSOCIATION THAT I REPRESENT, SAINT JOHN'S MIDDLE SCHOOL ATHLETIC ASSOCIATION PROVIDES SPORTS FOR 12 SPORTS, 16 SCHOOLS.

NOT A LOT OF PARKS, AS YOU KNOW.

SOME OF YOU HAVE CHILDREN IN SPORTS AT THAT AGE LEVEL.

A COUPLE OF YEARS AGO, THE PARKS AND REC DEPARTMENT CAME TO ME AND SAID, HEY, WE'VE GOT SOME RELIEF COMING.

WE HAVE A NEW PARK.

THERE'S GOING TO BE A NEW PARK WITH FOUR LIT FIELDS.

WE'VE GOT TO GET THE BATHROOMS APPROVED BY THE COUNTY.

BUT ONCE WE GET THAT, WE'VE GOT SOME RELIEF FOR THE STUDENT ATHLETES OF SAINT JOHNS COUNTY.

IT'S BEEN LIKE THIS SINCE.

I DON'T LIVE THERE.

I DON'T KNOW THIS DEVELOPER.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT'S GOING ON, BUT I KNOW THAT I PERSONALLY AND THE 51,000 STUDENTS IN SAINT JOHNS COUNTY AND THE 18,000 STUDENTS THAT ATTEND THESE K-8 SCHOOLS NEED RELIEF.

YOU APPROVED $192 MILLION OF PARKS, WHICH IS FANTASTIC.

BEST THING THAT YOU GUYS HAVE DONE IN A LONG, LONG TIME.

NOW, WHAT WE CAN'T DO IS WE CAN'T GO GIVING AWAY MONEY, GIVING AWAY PARK LAND, GIVING AWAY PARK SPACE.

AND I DON'T KNOW THE THE DYNAMIC OF ALL OF THAT, BUT THIS NEEDS TO BE A PARK.

OTHERWISE WE FALL BEHIND.

WE TAKE THAT $192 MILLION, WE FLUSH IT DOWN THE TOILET BECAUSE WE'RE ALREADY TEN YEARS BEHIND.

WE CAN'T GIVE UP ANY MORE PARK SPACE ANYWHERE.

JUST LIKE WE CAN'T BE BUILDING MORE WITHOUT MORE SCHOOLS.

WE CAN'T BE BUILDING MORE WITHOUT MORE PARKS.

I'VE HEARD I'VE SAT HERE ALL DAY AND HEARD ABOUT INFRASTRUCTURE, OUR LACK OF INFRASTRUCTURE, OUR LACK OF ROADS.

BUT NOBODY TALKS ABOUT THE LACK OF PARKS.

BUT IT'S REAL. IT EXISTS, AND IT'S HURTING A LOT OF PEOPLE IN THIS AREA.

WE TALKED ABOUT IDLE HANDS.

IDLE HANDS AND KIDS.

YOU WANT TO TALK ABOUT THE DEVIL'S WORK? THAT'S WHY WE EXIST.

TO PROVIDE OPPORTUNITIES.

THE SCHOOL DISTRICT ISN'T PROVIDING THEM.

THEY'RE NOT PUTTING LAND THERE.

THEY'RE NOT BUILDING PARKS.

THAT'S THEIR FAULT.

THEY ABANDONED THIS.

THEY MADE IT OUR PROBLEM.

NOW WE HAVE THE OPPORTUNITY TO DO RIGHT AND FIX IT.

THIS NEEDS TO BE A PARK.

THANK YOU BOTH, ROY AND HENRY, FOR YOUR TIME.

AND THANK YOU.

BOARD. BETH BRADY, 1368 BIRMINGHAM ROAD SOUTH, JACKSONVILLE, 32207.

WHILE THIS PARK ISSUE SOUNDS EXTREMELY IMPORTANT I'M JUST HERE TO TRY TO BRING SOMETHING TO LIGHT THAT HAS COME TO MY ATTENTION.

YOU ALL KNOW I COME TO YOU OFTEN, INCLUDING TODAY FOR IMPACT FEE TRANSFERS.

AND SO IT CAME TO MY ATTENTION THAT RECENTLY, AN AGREEMENT WITH MR. KINSEY WAS MODIFIED, THAT THE 210 PROPERTY IS IN THE NORTHEAST QUADRANT, AND THAT LANGUAGE WAS ADDED THAT ALLOWS HIM TO TRANSFER ANYWHERE AT ALL IN THE NORTHWEST DISTRICT.

THE NORTHWEST IS WHERE THE MAJORITY OF MY SELLERS ARE, AND THERE'S NOT A LOT OF HIGH GROWTH THERE.

AND I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHEN I'VE HAD TO COME AND SING FOR MY SUPPER, WHEN MY DEVELOPERS HAVE IMPROVED COUNTY ROAD 210, AND I HAD TO COME MAKE THE ARGUMENT THAT JUST TWO MILES AWAY, FRONTING ON 210 AND NORTHEAST AND SHOW HOW MUCH TRAFFIC AND THAT IT HAD A DEFINITE NEXUS, AND I WAS HAPPY TO DO SO.

BUT MY ISSUE IS I DON'T MIND THE STATE STATUTE.

THE WAY I UNDERSTAND IT IS ANY AREA THAT YOU TOUCH YOU CAN TRANSFER, THAT'S FINE, BUT THAT'S NOT WHAT'S BEING ALLOWED.

AND SO I HOPE I'M WRONG.

AND WHAT I WAS TOLD BY COUNTY STAFF THAT HIS AGREEMENT WAS MODIFIED FAIRLY RECENTLY TO ALLOW IMPROVEMENTS BEING DONE IN THE NORTHEAST TO GIVE HIM THE ENTIRE NORTHWEST AREA TO SELL INTO.

SO I WOULD JUST LIKE SOMEONE TO LOOK INTO THAT AND LET ME KNOW, YOU KNOW.

[06:00:02]

I PROMISED Y'ALL I WOULD ONLY TAKE THE LOW HANGING FRUIT.

I WOULDN'T BRING CONTROVERSIAL THINGS, AND I WANT TO STAND BY THAT.

BUT IF THE INTERPRETATION FROM THE COUNTY HAS CHANGED AND Y'ALL ARE GOING TO ALLOW IT ACROSS LINES ANYWHERE AND OTHER DISTRICTS, PLEASE LET ME KNOW THAT SO THAT I CAN BEST REPRESENT MY CLIENTS.

WOULD YOU LIKE TO COME DOWN? PUBLIC COMMENT.

I DON'T KNOW IF I DID OR NOT.

CLAIRE CARVER, 385 MARQUESA.

STILL. I JUST WANT TO TELL YOU THAT YOU GUYS SHOULDN'T REWARD BAD BEHAVIOR.

THIS DEVELOPER HAS CONSTANTLY DISAPPOINT BEACH WALK.

AND BY THE WAY, THIS IS RIGHT NEXT TO THE MYTHICAL TROPHY LAKE THAT WE WERE SUPPOSED TO HAVE THAT I'VE KNOWN ABOUT FOR FIVE YEARS.

NO, SORRY. FOR FOUR YEARS.

I DON'T WANT TO MISREPRESENT AND WE ARE STILL WAITING FOR IT.

IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE FISHING AND THINGS LIKE THAT AND NOTHING.

ALSO, WE HAVEN'T HEARD ABOUT THE EAST BEACH.

WELL, NO, WE HEARD A LOT ABOUT THE EAST BEACH, FOR I'VE LIVED IN MY HOUSE, THE ONE WITH THE CUTE LITTLE VIEW FOR TWO YEARS AND THREE MONTHS, AND I CAN LOOK, BUT I CANNOT TOUCH.

FOR THOSE TWO YEARS AND THREE MONTHS, I'VE HEARD IN THREE MONTHS IT'S GOING TO OPEN.

IN TWO MONTHS IT'S GOING TO OPEN NEXT MONTH, IT'S GOING TO OPEN IN JULY.

HE TOLD US THAT HE WAS GOING TO TURN OVER THE LAGOON.

NO, SORRY. IN FEBRUARY HE TOLD US THAT PROBABLY AROUND JULY HE WOULD BE TURNING OVER THE LAGOON.

WE DON'T YOU KNOW WHY THEY COULDN'T GET THEY CANNOT GET ACCESS TO THE LAGOON BECAUSE NOBODY CAN LIKE THEY THEY WE DON'T HAVE CONTROL OF THE LAGOON.

HE STILL RETAINS CONTROL OF THE LAGOON.

NOT NOT NOT NOT ONLY THAT, BUT I LOVE THAT THEY SAY, OH, WE JUST BOUGHT THAT LAND.

IT'S NOT OUR PROBLEM.

EXCUSE ME.

FALCONE GROUP IS PART OF THE DEVELOPER.

IT WAS. I WAS TRYING TO LOOK FOR THE PICTURE WHERE THEY WERE LISTED IN THEIR GROUP OF PART OF THE GROUP.

HIS SON. AND FUNNY ENOUGH, THEY JUST REMOVED IT.

I MEAN, IT SHOWS ON THE ON THE ON THE GOOGLE SEARCH, BUT YOU CANNOT ACTUALLY LOOK AT IT.

IT IS THE SAME PEOPLE CONSTANTLY DISAPPOINTING US IN THOSE THOSE THOSE EXCUSES THAT HE SAID TO YOU REGARDING ALL THIS.

IT WAS EXACTLY TO THE I MEAN, I SWEAR TO GOD, I WISH WE HAD RECORDED IT TO THE DOT, TO WHAT HE SAID TO US ABOUT COUNTY ROAD TO TEN, THAT IT WAS YOUR FAULT THAT YOU GUYS WERE NOT RESPONDING, THAT YOU GUYS WERE NOT DOING ANYTHING ABOUT IT.

SO EXCUSE ME.

PLEASE DON'T GIVE HIM MONEY WHEN HE DOESN'T FINISH WHAT HE'S PROMISED US TO YOU AND TO US AND JUST.

THAT'S ALL YOU HAVE TO. I HAVE TO SAY THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. I AGREE, AND SLAVE IN BOX 384 AT SLAVE COMM. IN THE WORDS OF ROBERT PENN WARREN IN HIS FAMOUS BOOK, ALL THE KING'S MEN.

SOME PEOPLE, SOME ORGANIZATIONS ARE ALWAYS SAYING, GIMME, GIMME, GIMME.

MY NAME IS JIMMY. JUST TURN THIS ONE DOWN OR CONTINUE IT.

MAKE SURE HE KEEPS HIS COMMITMENTS AND DON'T BUY THESE EXCUSES.

I AGREE WITH THE PRIOR SPEAKERS.

THANK YOU. WOULD ANYONE ELSE LIKE TO MAKE PUBLIC COMMENT? SEEING NONE, WE WILL GO AHEAD AND CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT ON AGENDA ITEM NUMBER SIX.

OKAY. THANK YOU. WE ARE WE ARE BACK TO THE BOARD.

MR. KINSEY, UNTIL YOU DELIVER THE PARK YOU PROMISED OUR KIDS.

I'M SORRY I COULDN'T. MR. KINSEY, UNTIL YOU DELIVER THE PARK THAT YOU PROMISED TO OUR KIDS.

I CAN'T APPROVE THIS.

SO THAT'S WHERE I STAND, COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST.

WELL, YOU SAID IT BETTER THAN I COULD, SO.

I KNOW THIS, COMMISSIONER.

DEAN. I KNOW THIS IS YOUR DISTRICT, BUT I JUST.

I FEEL STRONGLY THAT WE CANNOT.

I MEAN, THIS IS A PARK IMPACT FEE TRANSFER, AND WE DON'T HAVE A PARK, SO.

I KNOW. I WISH IT WAS TWO YEARS AGO WHEN IT WAS YOUR DISTRICT.

THE FICKLE FINGER OF GOD MOVED IT TO MY DISTRICT.

I THINK THAT THE CHAIR RAISES A GOOD QUESTION AND A GOOD POSITION.

I HAVE BEEN I WILL SAY THIS, AND I WANT TO SAY ON THE RECORD I'VE HAD SOME PRETTY SERIOUS DISAGREEMENTS WITH MR. KINSEY ON THE SIX LINING.

FOUR LINING OR SIX LINING OF THE BOTTLENECK.

WE'VE HAD A NUMBER OF DISCUSSIONS, I WILL TELL YOU THAT.

AND I WILL SEPARATE THAT ISSUE FROM THE PARK ISSUE AND TELL YOU THAT IN THE LAST THREE YEARS, MAYBE I THINK, MR.

[06:05:09]

KINSEY, I THINK YOU HAVE REACHED OUT TO ME AND EXPLAINED THAT YOU NEEDED ME TO INTERVENE BECAUSE STAFF WOULD NOT GET BACK TO YOU.

YES, SIR. I FEEL COMPELLED TO SAY THAT ON THE RECORD BECAUSE I LIVED IT AND IT HAPPENED.

NOW I'M NOT I'M NOT POINTING FINGERS AT ANY STAFF.

I'M NOT POINTING FINGERS AT KINSEY.

I'M NOT POINTING FINGERS AT ANYBODY.

I JUST WANT TO GET THE FACTS ON THE TABLE.

BUT ON THE PARK ISSUE, I THINK WE NEED TO SEE THE PARK AND WE NEED TO SEE IT SOON, BECAUSE THIS IS JUST YET ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF DEVELOPMENT THAT HAS TAKEN PLACE OVER THE YEARS.

AND WE CAN ARGUE AND WE CAN POINT FINGERS.

WELL, HENRY SAYS IT HAPPENED ALL BEFORE 2008.

NO, I APPROVED THOUSANDS OF UNITS.

BUT THE FACT IS, WE SERVE, AS YOU SAID, CHRISTIAN, THE PEOPLE.

WE SERVE THE PEOPLE, AND WE NEED TO GET WITH IT AND GET THE INFRASTRUCTURE IN.

AND WITH THAT SAID, I GUESS I'M PREPARED TO.

WELL, I'M NOT SURE WHAT TO DO HERE BECAUSE IT DOESN'T HAVE A MOTION.

MADAM CHAIR, JUST MAKE A MOTION.

AND COMMISSIONER ALAIMO, I THINK, HAS SOME COMMENTS BEFORE WE GET TO YOUR MOTION, COMMISSIONER ALAIMO.

OH, THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.

NO, I, I WAS JUST GOING TO RAISE THE SAME, YOU KNOW, ECHO YOUR COMMENTS AS WELL.

I MEAN, I KNOW THERE'S A LOT OF BACK AND FORTH.

THERE'S A LOT OF MOVING PARTS WITH THIS, A LOT OF HE SAID, SHE SAID, BUT, YOU KNOW, AT THE END OF THE DAY, THERE'S NO WAY I COULD SUPPORT THIS WITHOUT THE PARK.

I MEAN, THAT THAT WAS PROMISED TO THE KIDS.

COMMISSIONER. LIMO. COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST.

COMMISSIONER. DEAN, I'M NOT SURE IF WE EVEN HAVE TO DENY IT.

I MEAN, MAYBE WE COULD JUST CONTINUE IT ON MY CHEAT SHEET AND WE JUST TAKE NO ACTION.

THAT'S WHAT IT APPEARS.

SO I'M PREPARED TO TAKE NO ACTION.

OKAY. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, MR. KENNEDY.

THANK YOU. THAT LEADS US INTO OUR NEXT ITEM, WHICH IS ITEM NUMBER SEVEN.

[7. Public Hearing * DEVAGRMOD 2024-01 First Amendment to Greenbriar Helow HBIS Development Agreement. Greenbriar Property Holdings, LLC (Developer) has proposed a modification to the Greenbriar Helow HBIS Development Agreement (Agreement) to: 1) allow the County to utilize mitigation funds for the CR 210/Greenbriar Rd/Veterans Pkwy intersection improvements in addition to the widening of Longleaf Pine Pkwy, as originally contemplated in the Agreement; 2) to allow the developer additional time to complete the Greenbriar Road widening; and 3) to provide for wetland mitigation credits for Greenbriar Road widening in the County’s ROMA, if needed. There are no changes proposed to the approved development or limits on platting based on completion of mitigation. This is the second of two required public hearings to modify a Development Agreement. The first public hearing was held on October 1, 2024, before the Board of County Commissioners.]

WELCOME BACK.

I. KNOW.

THIS MAY BE HIS NOTES.

I'M SORRY, MADAM CHAIR.

IT'S OKAY.

I'M SORRY. MADAM CHAIR, I JUST DIDN'T WANT HIM TO WALK AWAY WITHOUT HIS NOTES.

THANK YOU. ELLEN AVERY SMITH, ROGERS TOWERS, 100 WHETSTONE PLACE HERE IN SAINT AUGUSTINE.

I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF GREENBRIAR PROPERTY HOLDINGS FOR THE SECOND READING OF A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.

AND SO KEVIN CRAMER WITH GREENBRIER PROPERTY HOLDINGS IS HERE WITH ME TODAY.

THE PROJECT ENGINEER IS ENGLAND THAMES AND MILLER.

AND SO JUST BY WAY OF BACKGROUND AND I KNOW THE HOUR IS GETTING LATE, SO I'M GOING TO MOVE THROUGH THIS.

SO AS YOU KNOW HERE'S OUR GREENBRIER ROAD, HERE'S COUNTY ROAD 210 WEST, HERE'S VETERANS PARKWAY AND THEN LONGLEAF PINE PARKWAY. SO THIS IS THE PROPERTY THAT'S OWNED BY GREENBRIER PROPERTY HOLDINGS.

THIS IS SEPARATE FROM THE PROPERTY THAT WAS RETAINED BY JOE HILO, WHO SOLD THIS PORTION OF THE SITE TO GREENBRIER PROPERTY HOLDINGS.

SO YOU'LL RECALL IN THE GREENBRIER HILO PROJECT, YOU HAD THE VARIOUS VILLAGES YOU HAD THE K THROUGH EIGHT SCHOOL SITE.

YOU HAVE THE PARK, THE REGIONAL PARK HERE, THE ROBERTS ROAD FIRE STATION AND OTHER IMPROVEMENTS AS PART OF THAT DEVELOPMENT AGAIN, JOE HILO AND HIS FAMILY RETAINED WHAT'S OUTLINED IN BLUE HERE, BUT THAT CONTAINED 1439 MULTIFAMILY UNITS, TOWNHOMES, CONDOMINIUMS AND APARTMENTS, AS WELL AS NONRESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES.

AND THEN GREENBRIAR PROPERTY HOLDINGS PURCHASED THE PROPERTY THAT'S HIGHLIGHTED IN ORANGE HERE THAT IS APPROVED OR APPROVED FOR 2061 UNITS, BUT 917 OF THOSE ARE AGE RESTRICTED.

SO THIS GOES BACK TWO AND A HALF YEARS AGO.

SO YOU'LL RECALL AT THAT TIME, I GUESS IT WAS THE END OF 22, 22, TWO YEARS AGO.

TIME FLIES WHEN YOU'RE HAVING FUN.

BUT ANYWAY, AS PART OF THOSE COMBINED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS, YOU'LL RECALL THERE WERE TWO COMPANION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS, ONE FOR THIS PROPERTY AND ONE FOR THE HILO PROPERTY.

AND THEY WERE CROSS-REFERENCED BECAUSE THEY AGREED TO PAY TRANSPORTATION MITIGATION FOR BOTH PROPERTIES IN COMBINATION.

AND SO WHAT HAPPENED WAS THE PROPORTIONATE SHARE THAT WAS DUE FOR BOTH PROPERTIES ALTOGETHER WAS 23.7 MILLION.

AND THEN THEY AGREED TO ALSO PREPAY IMPACT FEES FOR A TOTAL OF 28.9, ALMOST $29 MILLION.

AND SO A PORTION OF THAT PROPERTY OR THAT LAND.

[06:10:03]

I'M SORRY. LET ME TAKE A DEEP BREATH.

IT'S BEEN A DAY.

A PORTION OF THAT MONEY WAS SUPPOSED TO BE USED, GIVEN TO THE COUNTY, BECAUSE YOU HAD ALREADY HAD DESIGNED FOR THE FOUR LANING OF LONGLEAF PINE PARKWAY.

AND SO THIS GROUP GAVE THE COUNTY CASH TO PUT, ALONG WITH SOME CASH FROM THE SAINT JOHNS COUNTY TO WIDEN THE SECTION OF LONGLEAF PINE PARKWAY TO BETWEEN VETERANS PARKWAY ALL THE WAY DOWN HERE TO ROBERTS ROAD.

AND THAT MONEY WAS $19.2 MILLION, AND IT WAS PAID BY BOTH DEVELOPERS IN THE FIRST QUARTER OF 2023, SO THE COUNTY HAD THAT CASH IN HAND. IT WAS PAID UP FRONT BEFORE ANY DEVELOPMENT EVER COMMENCED.

AND THEN GREENBRIAR PROPERTY HOLDINGS WAS SUPPOSED TO, OR IS SUPPOSED TO WIDEN THIS SEGMENT OF GREENBRIAR ROAD FROM APPROXIMATELY WHERE VETERANS PARKWAY COMES DOWN AND MEETS UP WITH COUNTY ROAD 210 AND 210 WEST BACK TO THE PROJECT ENTRANCE.

THAT'S ABOUT 7/10 OF A MILE AT THE TUNE OF ABOUT $10 MILLION.

SO THE TOTAL CONTRIBUTION FROM THIS PROJECT WAS $40 MILLION UP FRONT, AS YOU LIKE TO SAY, UP FRONT TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS.

SO AGAIN, IN DECEMBER 2022, THIS BOARD APPROVED THOSE COMPANION DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS.

THE FUNDS WERE PAID PURSUANT TO THOSE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENTS TO THE COUNTY.

AND THEN AND THEN THE WIDENING OF GREENBRIAR ROAD IS IN DESIGN.

ACTUALLY, IT IS DESIGNED AND IT'S IN PERMITTING NOW.

SO EVERYTHING IS GOING ACCORDING TO PLAN.

SO SEVERAL MONTHS AGO, I WAS SITTING AT MY DESK IN MY OFFICE AND I GOT A CALL FROM STAFF AND THEY SAID, WE HAVE GREAT NEWS.

THE COUNTY HAS SAVED $4 MILLION FROM THE WIDENING OF LONGLEAF PINE PARKWAY, AND WE WANT PERMISSION FROM THIS DEVELOPER JUST BECAUSE IT WAS EASIER TO MODIFY ONE AGREEMENT THAN TWO, THAT WE WANT PERMISSION TO MOVE $4 MILLION FROM LONGLEAF PINE PARKWAY, SET FORTH IN THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT TO IMPROVEMENTS TO COUNTY ROAD 210 AT 210 WEST GREENBRIAR AND VETERANS PARKWAY.

AND THE GUY SAID, SURE, THAT'S FINE WITH US.

WE TALKED TO THE STAFF.

WE WORK THROUGH THE DETAILS OF A MODIFICATION TO THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.

AS YOU PROBABLY KNOW.

AND MR. DEAN. COMMISSIONER DEAN KNOWS PROBABLY BETTER THAN ANYONE IN THIS ROOM.

THE US ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS HAD GIVEN HAS DELEGATED ITS PERMITTING RESPONSIBILITIES TO DEP DEPP, AND THEN A COURT BACK IN FEBRUARY OF 2024 UNRAVELED THAT.

SO NOW THE COURT IS PERMITTING ITS HANDLING ITS OWN PERMIT APPLICATIONS, WHICH IS SLOWING DOWN THE PROCESS OF GETTING PERMITS TO IMPACT WETLANDS TO WIDEN THIS SECTION OF GREENBRIER ROAD.

IT ALSO IMPACTS THE COUNTY'S ABILITY, BECAUSE THE COUNTY NEEDS THE SAME TYPE OF PERMIT FROM THE CORPS TO DO IMPROVEMENTS TO THAT INTERSECTION AT 210. SO WE'RE KIND OF JOINED AT THE HIP, IF YOU WILL, FOR UNFORTUNATELY, WITH THE ARMY CORPS OF ENGINEERS AND THE PLAYING AROUND OF POLITICS WITH DELEGATION OF ITS AUTHORITY.

SO WE'RE JUST ASKING FOR A LITTLE BIT OF ADDITIONAL TIME TO COMPLETE CONSTRUCTION OF THE ROAD, NOT TO COMMENCE CONSTRUCTION OF THE ROAD.

AND THERE IS A TIMELINE IN THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT MODIFICATION THAT TALKS ABOUT HOW THE PERMIT APPLICATION WAS FILED.

IT'S BEING TRACKED.

YOUR STAFF. YOU HAVE EXPERTS, INCLUDING A GENERAL COUNSEL, A FORMER GENERAL COUNSEL OF THE WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT, WHO IS MAKING SURE THAT WE'RE PROPERLY FOLLOWING THE LAW AND DOING IT EXPEDITIOUSLY.

SO WITH THAT BEING SAID, THOSE ARE REALLY THE PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS TO THE JUST THE GREENBRIER PROPERTY HOLDINGS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.

AND WE WOULD RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT YOU APPROVE THAT SO THE COUNTY CAN HAVE THE $4 MILLION FOR THE INTERSECTION, AND THESE GUYS CAN MOVE ALONG WITH PERMITTING OF THEIR ROAD AND CONSTRUCTING IT.

ANY QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD? OKAY. LET'S HEAR PUBLIC COMMENT NOW.

THANK YOU, MR. SMITH.

OPEN IT UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENT ON AGENDA ITEM NUMBER SEVEN.

IF YOU'D LIKE TO COME FORWARD AND SPEAK, PLEASE STATE YOUR NAME AND ADDRESS.

YOU'LL BE GIVEN THREE MINUTES.

ALL RIGHT. SEEING NONE, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT.

OKAY. WE'RE BACK TO THE BOARD.

COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.

PREPARED TO MAKE A MOTION.

IF YOU'RE READY.

YEAH. BUT BEFORE I DO, I WANTED TO.

THE LAST TIME WE HEARD THIS ITEM WAS ABOUT A MONTH AGO, AND I REALLY GAVE A LOT OF CREDIT TO A GOOD DEVELOPER.

NOT ONLY FULFILLING THEIR OBLIGATION, BUT EXCEEDING THE OBLIGATION THAT WE EXPECTED WHEN WE INITIALLY MADE THIS AGREEMENT TWO YEARS AGO.

WE'VE HEARD A LOT ABOUT BAD DEVELOPERS AND DEVELOPERS NOT LIVING UP TO THEIR OBLIGATIONS.

AND HERE WE HAVE A DEVELOPER NOT ONLY MEETING THE OBLIGATION BUT EXCEEDING IT.

SO THANK YOU, MR. KRAMER.

BUT I FORGOT TO MENTION LAST TIME THE HARD WORK THAT STAFF PUT IN TO FIGHT TO KEEP THE COSTS LOW ENOUGH THAT WE WOULD HAVE $4 MILLION EXTRA, THAT WE WOULD GET EXTRA

[06:15:10]

ROADS FOR OUR RESIDENTS OUT OF THIS AGREEMENT.

SO TO JAMIE LOCKLEAR AND PROCUREMENT TO GREG CALDWELL, TO DICK DESOUZA, MIKE ROBERTSON OR ANYBODY ELSE THAT WAS INVOLVED, PLEASE FORGIVE ME IF I LEFT OUT YOUR NAME, BUT OUR STAFF DID A TREMENDOUS JOB IN KEEPING THE COST DOWN ON THIS PROJECT.

WHEN COSTS HAVE BEEN GOING UP ALL THE TIME SO THAT OUR RESIDENTS CAN GET $4 MILLION OF EXTRA TRANSPORTATION INFRASTRUCTURE OUT OF THIS PROJECT.

SO THANK YOU TO EVERYBODY THAT WAS INVOLVED WITH THAT.

I'M GOING TO MOVE TO APPROVE THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE GREENBRIER HILO HIBISCUS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, FINDING THAT THE PROPOSED MODIFICATION IS CONSISTENT WITH THE SAINT JOHNS COUNTY COMPREHENSIVE PLAN AND LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.

SECOND. OKAY.

WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

AND THAT LEADS US INTO AGENDAS.

THANK YOU. OKAY.

AGENDA ITEMS EIGHT AND NINE, WHICH ARE ALSO QUASI JUDICIAL.

[Items 8 & 9]

AND ALSO MISS AVERY SMITH.

WE'RE WEARING HER OUT TODAY.

COMMISSIONER JOSEPH, ONE EMAIL ONE AND PLUS EMAILS.

NO MEETINGS. COMMISSIONER LIMO.

THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.

NO, I HAD NO EMAILS.

I DID HAVE A MEETING WITH ELLEN AVERY SMITH AND CODY HUDSON JUST TO KIND OF OUTLINE WHAT THEY WERE LOOKING TO DO.

I ALSO HAD AN OFF SITE MEETING WITH TRAVIS HUDSON AND JUST A BRIEF OVERVIEW OF WHAT THEY WERE LOOKING TO DO.

SO THAT'S ALL I HAVE. OKAY.

I BELIEVE I GOT ONE EMAIL AS WELL AND HAVE SPOKEN WITH MISS AVERY SMITH MULTIPLE TIMES DURING OUR CONVERSATIONS ABOUT OTHER PROJECTS.

SO, COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST, I HAVE NO RECORD OF ANY EMAILS.

I DID HAVE A MEETING WITH ELLEN AVERY SMITH TO DISCUSS THE PROPOSED CHANGES, THE MODIFICATIONS TO THE DRI AND THE PUD, AND I'M SURE I HAD A PHONE CALL OR TWO ABOUT THIS AS WELL. COMMISSIONER DEANE.

MEETING WITH ELLEN AVERY SMITH ABOUT TWO WEEKS AGO, IF I RECALL.

OKAY. THE FLOOR IS YOURS.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU SO MUCH.

AGAIN, ELLEN AVERY SMITH, ROGERS TOWERS, 100 WHETSTONE PLACE, SAINT AUGUSTINE.

AND WITH ME TODAY FROM THE SILVERLEAF TEAM ARE, OF COURSE, OF COURSE FROM THE HUDSON COMPANIES WOULD BE CODY, HUDSON, KIM, BRIAN AND JOHN METCALF.

AND THAT OUR PROJECT PLANNING EXPERT IS CASEY DENDOR FROM ENGLAND, THAMES AND MILLER, AND ALSO JEFF CRAMMOND FROM ETM AS OUR PROJECT TRANSPORTATION ENGINEER IN CASE WE NEED EXPERTISE, WHICH WE ALWAYS NEED, BUT SOMETIMES.

SO JUST TO GIVE A LITTLE BIT OF AN OVERVIEW OF SILVERLEAF.

YOU'LL RECALL THAT ALL OF THIS PROPERTY IS WITHIN THE SILVERLEAF DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT, OR DRI.

AND MOST OF THIS PROPERTY IS WITHIN THE PUD.

THIS IS IN A SEPARATE PUD.

AND THEN SOME OF THIS PROPERTY IS NOT WITHIN THE PUD AT ALL.

LIKE SEE THIS IS THE PUD MAP.

THIS PROPERTY IS IN THE DRI BUT NOT IN THE PUD.

AND AGAIN GRAND CREEK IS NOT IN THE SILVERLEAF PUD.

SO THOSE ARE THE PROPERTIES WE'RE TALKING ABOUT TODAY WITH RESPECT.

SO WE HAVE A DRI MODIFICATION AND A PUD MODIFICATION.

I'M GIVING YOU THIS PRESENTATION BECAUSE WE'RE MAKING ESSENTIALLY THE SAME CHANGES TO BOTH DOCUMENTS.

AND SO WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING TO DO IS WE TALKED A LITTLE BIT EARLIER ABOUT STATUTORY EXTENSIONS THAT ARE PERMITTED AS A MATTER OF LAW.

SO WE ARE EXTENDING THE PHASING DATES BASED ON GUBERNATORIAL EMERGENCY DECLARATIONS FROM NOT HELENE AND MILTON, BUT PRIOR EMERGENCY DECLARATIONS THAT WERE PENDING AND THE GOVERNOR KEPT EXTENDING.

SO WE'RE JUST AVAILING OURSELVES OF THAT PORTION OF THE LAW.

AND THEN AGAIN, WE'RE NOT ADDING ANY ENTITLEMENTS.

SO NO MORE RESIDENTIAL UNITS, NO MORE NON RESIDENTIAL SQUARE FOOTAGE, NO LAND BEING ADDED TO THE BOUNDARIES OF THE DRI OR PUD. JUST TO BRING YOU UP, SINCE WE'VE BEEN TALKING A LOT ABOUT TRANSPORTATION MITIGATION AND AGAIN UP FRONT TRANSPORTATION SOLUTIONS SILVERLEAF, THIS IS ALL OF THE OBLIGATIONS IN THE DEVELOPMENT OF REGIONAL IMPACT THAT HAVE BEEN COMPLETED TO DATE TO THE TUNE OF ALMOST $132 MILLION RIGHT HERE.

THIS IS ALL COMPLETED OR ABOUT TO BE COMPLETED, AND IF WE WANT MORE DETAILS OF THAT, KIM CAN COME UP AND TALK TO US ABOUT THAT.

THE ONLY REMAINING OBLIGATION IS THIS 4.16 OR $4.17 MILLION THAT WE'RE GOING TO TALK ABOUT TODAY.

SO ALL TOGETHER FOR SILVERLEAF 136 PLUS MILLION DOLLARS OF TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENTS.

AGAIN, UP FRONT IN THE PROJECT.

AND I THINK THAT'S IMPORTANT TO MENTION.

JUST SO YOU HAVE A STATUS REPORT ON THE PROJECT.

SO REALLY THE MODIFICATIONS THAT WE'RE SEEKING TO THE DRI ARE I JUST TOLD YOU ABOUT THE $4.16 MILLION AND THAT'S TO MOVE

[06:20:08]

REMOVE AS A PUBLIC COLLECTOR ROAD, A PORT, A ROAD THAT IS LOCATED.

HOLD ON. YOU'LL RECALL THAT THERE IS A CONNECTION POINT HERE THROUGH PARCEL 40 THAT WOULD GO DOWN THROUGH.

PARCEL 40 INTO PARCEL 41 A AND CONNECT HERE TO STATE ROAD 13.

THAT IS BEING PROPOSED TO BE REMOVED AS A PUBLIC COLLECTOR ROAD.

IT WILL BE CONSTRUCTED AS A PRIVATE, POTENTIALLY GATED ROAD.

WHEN WE HAD OUR COMMUNITY MEETING A COUPLE OF MONTHS AGO WITH THE RESIDENTS WHO WERE ALONG STATE ROAD 13, MANY OF THEM, THEY WERE HAPPY ABOUT THE CHANGE BECAUSE THEY DO NOT WANT A COLLECTOR ROAD COMING THROUGH DOWN TO STATE ROAD 13.

AND THERE.

MOST OF THE REASON FOR THAT DEALS WITH THE FACT THAT MOST OF THE REASON DDOT AGREED TO THIS IS BECAUSE THEY'RE BUILDING THE OUTER BELTWAY THAT WILL CONNECT ALL THE WAY THROUGH THE PROPERTY, BUT IT DOES NOT CONNECT TO STATE ROAD 13.

IT ONLY CONNECTS TO 16 A OR, I'M SORRY, LONGLEAF PINE PARKWAY.

AND AGAIN, IF WE WANT TO GET INTO THAT THEN WE HAVE A TRANSPORTATION EXPERT HERE TO TALK ABOUT IT GOING FORWARD? AGAIN, WE ARE MAKING MINOR CHANGES TO THE BOUNDARY PARK, TO SOME OF THE PARCEL BOUNDARIES, INTERIOR TO SILVER LEAF, NOT EXTERIOR.

AND THEN WE'RE EXTENDING THE DRI PHASING AND BUILD OUT THOSE KINDS OF DATES PURSUANT TO LAW.

AND THEN WITHIN THE PUD.

THE THE CHANGE TO THE PUD THAT IS NOT DOES NOT APPLY TO THE DRI.

THERE ARE PORTIONS OF THE PROPERTY WITHIN THE PUD THAT CAN HAVE WHAT ARE CALLED BIG BOX.

THERE'S A THRESHOLD FOR WHAT IS DEFINED AS A BIG BOX IN CERTAIN AREAS OF THE PUD.

AND SO WE'RE SIMPLY SAYING THAT THAT CAP RIGHT NOW IS 55,000FT².

BUT A LOT OF THE RETAILERS TARGET, EVEN PUBLIX, ALL OF THE OTHERS WANT BIGGER STORES THAN 55,000FT².

SO WE'RE SIMPLY ASKING TO BUMP THAT CAP TO 125,000FT².

AND THAT HOLD ON A MINUTE, WILL BE IN THESE.

I'M GOING TO GO BACK TO THE OTHER MAP.

SORRY. THAT WILL BE IN THESE PINK AREAS THAT HAVE THE MIXED USE DESIGNATION.

BUT RIGHT HERE, THESE PINK PARCELS AND INTERIOR TO SILVERLEAF.

AND THEN ALSO DOWN HERE AT 16 A AND SILVERLEAF PARKWAY.

AND SO THEN THE LAST CHANGE IS TO REVISE IS TO INCLUDE A WAIVER FOR THREE THROUGH CUTS.

AND I'M NOT AN EXPERT ON TRANSPORTATION PLANNING.

SO THIS REALLY TO ME AGAIN TAKING OUT THE $4.15 MILLION, GIVING THAT AS A CASH CONTRIBUTION TO THE COUNTY SO THAT YOU CAN APPLY IT TO THE SECTION OF 16 1682.

IMPROVEMENTS BETWEEN THIS LOCATION AND THIS LOCATION.

ANYWHERE YOU HAVE THAT NEED, YOU CAN, YOU WILL HAVE THAT CASH VERY SHORTLY.

ASSUMING THE BOARD APPROVES THESE APPLICATIONS WITHIN 60 DAYS, THAT CASH WILL BE DUE TO THE COUNTY FOR THOSE ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS.

AND THEN ALSO ON THIS CREEK FRONT PARCEL HERE, WHICH IS ALREADY IN THE PUD AND DRC BOUNDARIES, THERE IS ALREADY A BOAT DOCK THERE, AND THERE ARE SOME, I'LL CALL IT, VERY LAID BACK RECREATIONAL AMENITIES, AND THOSE WILL BE PERMITTED TO REMAIN ON THAT PROPERTY.

AND FOR THAT PARCEL TO BE USED AS A KAYAK LAUNCH AND SOME ACCESS FOR SILVERLEAF RESIDENTS JUST IN THIS PORTION OF THE PROPERTY.

AND AGAIN, I THINK WE TALKED ABOUT AT PCA, JUST TO MAKE VERY CLEAR THAT PARCEL 40 CANNOT BE DEVELOPED UNTIL THE EARLIER OF JANUARY 1ST, 2030, OR WHEN THE OUTER BELTWAY COMES THROUGH.

AND SO THAT IS NOT CHANGING EITHER.

WE'VE ALREADY TALKED ABOUT THE 125,000FT² THAT'S IN THESE AREAS THAT ARE THE PINK HAT AND WITH HATCHING.

AND THEN WITH RESPECT TO THE MEDIAN CUT, THERE IS A REVISED WAIVER THAT ALLOWS BASICALLY TWO MEDIAN CUTS IN COUNTY ROAD 2209 NEAR THE FIRST COAST EXPRESSWAY.

THAT'S TO ALLOW DEVELOPMENT OF THE TOWN CENTER AREA AND SILVERLEAF, WHICH IS GOING TO BE A IT HAS DESIGNED AND WILL BE A MAJOR COMMERCIAL CENTER FOR THIS AREA OF THE COUNTY. AND SO JUST TO GET FOLKS IN AND OUT OF THESE PARCELS, THERE WILL BE TWO MEDIAN CUTS.

[06:25:01]

THEY DO NOT MEET THE EXISTING DISTANCE SEPARATION.

AND THEN ONE OF THOSE MEDIAN CUTS HAS WHAT'S CALLED A THROUGH CUT.

AND THAT BASICALLY MEANS, IN MY LAYMAN'S VERNACULAR, YOU CAN'T GO STRAIGHT.

YOU HAVE TO EITHER TURN LEFT OR TURN RIGHT.

YOU CAN'T GO STRAIGHT ACROSS THE INTERSECTION.

AND IF WE WANT MORE DETAIL, WE HAVE TECHNICAL FOLKS IN THE BACK WHO CAN PROVIDE THAT.

AND THEN HERE'S JUST A ZOOM IN OF WHAT THAT LOOKS LIKE.

AND SO THAT IS A QUICK SUMMARY.

I'M SORRY I RUSHED THROUGH IT, BUT I JUST WANTED TO GET YOU OUT OF HERE AT A DECENT HOUR.

AND IF YOU'VE GOT ANY QUESTIONS OR COMMENTS, PLEASE LET ME KNOW.

THANK YOU. MISS US? NO, I GUESS I SHOULD SAY THANK YOU, I APOLOGIZE I WAS NOT HERE FOR THE FOR THE FIRST HEARING OF THIS, BUT I DID WANT TO SAY AFTER SPEAKING WITH THE RESIDENTS AND I GUESS WE'VE BEEN TALKING ABOUT THIS FOR, I GUESS, MY ENTIRE TENURE ON THE BOARD AT THIS POINT.

BUT THANK YOU FOR NOT DUMPING ANY MORE CARS ONTO THE SCENIC HIGHWAY OF STATE ROAD 13.

AND ALSO, THANK YOU FOR THE MUCH NEEDED AND LONG OVERDUE IMPROVEMENTS THAT ARE COMING TO THE HISTORICAL COMMUNITY OF ELLSWORTH.

THANK YOU, COMMISSIONER JOSEPH.

I AGREE WITH THE MAKING THAT GATED ROAD, BUT I DON'T AGREE WITH EVERYTHING ELSE AND IT'S ALL PUT TOGETHER SO I CAN'T SEPARATE IT.

SO IF I VOTE NEGATIVE FOR THAT, IT'S NOT BECAUSE OF THAT.

I LIKED THAT A LOT.

THE GATED ROAD WHICH IS NOT DUMPING THE CARS.

SO I JUST WANTED TO LET YOU KNOW AHEAD OF TIME.

ANY OTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY. WE'LL HEAR PUBLIC COMMENT.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.

WE'LL NOW OPEN IT UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENT FOR AGENDA ITEMS EIGHT AND NINE.

GOOD AFTERNOON COMMISSIONERS.

MY NAME IS VICKI PEPPER.

I LIVE ON HARBOR VISTA CIRCLE IN SAINT AUGUSTINE, AND I'M HERE REPRESENTING MYSELF IN CARE COMMUNITY ADVOCATES FOR RACIAL EQUITY.

WE'RE AN INFORMAL, INDEPENDENT CIVIC ACTION GROUP THAT GREW OUT OF SAINT AUGUSTINE'S ONGOING COMMUNITY CONVERSATION EFFORT.

CARE'S PURPOSE IS TO SERVE BLACK AND OTHER UNDERSERVED COMMUNITIES IN SAINT JOHNS COUNTY BY IDENTIFYING RESOURCES, INCLUDING FUNDING SOURCES, LINKING THEM WITH COMMUNITY NEEDS AS IDENTIFIED BY COMMUNITY LEADERS.

WE'RE HERE TODAY BECAUSE THE DEVELOPER IS REQUESTING MODIFICATIONS TO THE SILVERLEAF LEAF DRY AND MAJOR MODIFICATION TO THE PUD.

BEFORE YOU DELIBERATE ON IMPROVING THESE REQUESTS, CARE WOULD LIKE TO OFFER SOME IMPORTANT POINTS FOR YOU TO CONSIDER.

YOU KNOW, AFFORDABLE HOUSING FOR EVERYONE IN SAINT JOHNS COUNTY IS A TOP CARE CONCERN.

WE'VE LONG SAID THAT STOPPING ALL DEVELOPMENT IS UNREALISTIC, AND WON'T ADDRESS THE SOBERING REALITY THAT MANY VITAL EMPLOYEES IN OUR LOCAL WORKFORCE, AS WELL AS SENIORS AND OTHERS ON FIXED INCOMES, EITHER ALREADY HAVE OR ARE NOW FINDING THEMSELVES PRICED OUT OF OUR HOUSING MARKET.

INCREASINGLY, LONG COMMUTES FROM SURROUNDING COUNTIES HAVE LED TO CHRONIC EMPLOYEE SHORTAGES FOR MANY LOCAL BUSINESSES, AS WELL AS EXACERBATING THE STRAIN ON OUR ALREADY OVERTAXED LOCAL ROADS.

SO RATHER THAN STOPPING DEVELOPMENT IN SAINT JOHNS COUNTY, CARE RESEARCH THOUGHTFUL, WELL PLANNED GROWTH.

BUT GIVEN OUR CURRENT HOUSING SITUATION, GROWTH ISN'T SMART UNLESS IT'S STRATEGICALLY LOCATED AND WILL SERVE TO INCREASE OUR HOUSING STOCK FOR RESIDENTS AT ALL INCOME LEVELS WHO CURRENTLY ARE STRUGGLING TO OBTAIN OR RETAIN HOUSING.

YES, THIS MEANS SOME TRADE OFFS IN TERMS OF DENSITY AND TRAFFIC ARE GOING TO BE REQUIRED, BUT YOU MUST ENSURE WHENEVER YOU'RE MAKING SUCH TRADE OFFS, YOU'RE GETTING GOOD VALUE FOR THE PUBLIC. AT THE BOC MEETING ON JANUARY 16TH, JOE MCINERNEY PRESENTED A SLIDE WE FOUND SHOCKING.

OVER THE YEARS, SEVERAL LARGE DEVELOPMENTS HAVE BEEN APPROVED FOR TENS OF THOUSANDS OF HOUSING UNITS IN OUR COUNTY, NONE OF WHICH ARE DESIGNATED TO BE AFFORDABLE AT ANY LEVEL LESS THAN FULL MARKET RATE.

WE ALL KNOW THAT AT TODAY'S PRICES, THAT'S GOING TO MAKE THEM UNATTAINABLE FOR LARGE AND IMPORTANT SEGMENTS OF OUR WORKFORCE.

AND HEADING THAT LIST WAS SILVERLEAF, WITH OVER 16,000 HOUSING UNITS APPROVED.

WE DEPEND ON YOU, OUR ELECTED OFFICIALS, AS STEWARDS OF THE PUBLIC TRUST, TO USE YOUR AUTHORITY TO REGULATE LAND USE AND APPROVE ZONING VARIANCES WISELY TO SERVE THE INTERESTS OF OUR COMMUNITY. YOU SHOULD BE USING THE LEVERAGE THIS AUTHORITY GIVES YOU AGGRESSIVELY IN ORDER TO INCREASE OUR AFFORDABLE HOUSING STOCK.

MIXED INCOME, MIXED USE DEVELOPMENTS ARE THE MODERN TREND.

PLEASE DON'T IMPROVE ANY NEW NEW DEVELOPMENTS IN THE COUNTY THAT DON'T CONTAIN A SIGNIFICANT PORTION OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

AND WHEN THE DEVELOPER OF A LARGE, PREVIOUSLY APPROVED BUT NOT YET BUILT PROJECT SEEKS ADDITIONAL PUBLIC BENEFITS THROUGH MODIFICATIONS OF ITS PLANS, THIS NEED FOR ADDITIONAL COUNTY APPROVAL PROVIDES AN OPPORTUNITY TO RAISE AND DISCUSS WITH THE DEVELOPER THE ISSUE OF INCORPORATING SOME QUANTITY OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING INTO THOSE PLANS.

PLEASE DON'T SQUANDER SUCH OPPORTUNITIES.

THE RESIDENTS OF SAINT JOHNS COUNTY ARE DEPENDING ON YOU AND WE DESERVE NO LESS.

THANK YOU. I AGREE AS SLAVE IN BOX 3084 AND SLAVE COMM, YOU KNOW, 2016. THE BCC AT THE TIME, AND THIS IS BEFORE HENRY WAS ON THE BOARD.

[06:30:02]

APPROVED DELETING 50 ACRES OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING FROM NOCATEE BECAUSE THE DEVELOPER DEMANDED IT.

IT'S KIND OF LIKE THE STORY THAT THEY TELL ABOUT THE FORMER GOVERNOR OF LOUISIANA EARL LONG, OR ACTUALLY EARL TOLD IT ABOUT OKAY.

ALLEN, WHO WAS A PUPPET GOVERNOR WHEN HUEY LONG WAS ELECTED TO THE SENATE BEFORE HE WENT TO THE SENATE.

AND AS EARL LONG TOLD THE STORY A LEAF BLEW IN HIS WINDOW ONCE, AND HE SIGNED IT.

AND THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT THE BCC DID BACK IN 2016.

THAT WAS AN ABORTION, TOOK OUT 50 ACRES OF AFFORDABLE HOUSING, AND THE PAYOFF WAS, OH, WE'LL GIVE YOU $800,000 FOR HOUSING THAT DOESN'T PROVIDE THE ACREAGE.

SO WHERE ARE PEOPLE SUPPOSED TO LIVE? OUR PLANNING PROCESS IS DEEPLY FLAWED.

IT'S PREJUDICED. IT'S RACIST.

AND I HAVE A PENDING COMPLAINT WITH THE HUD UNDER TITLE SIX ABOUT THAT.

THE BCC VOTED 3 TO 2.

YOU KNOW WHAT THEY DID TO REFUSE TO DO A PUBLIC HOUSING AUTHORITY.

AND THE ARGUMENTS THAT WERE MADE AND THE DISCUSSION THAT WAS HAD WAS PREJUDICED.

IT WAS DEEPLY PREJUDICED.

AND I HOPE IN YOUR HEARTS THAT Y'ALL OR THE NEXT BCC WILL REVERSE THAT HORRIBLE DECISION.

NOW, JUST FOR THE RECORD, THE DEVELOPER OF SILVERLEAF IS TRAVIS JAMES HUTSON, SOON TO BE FORMER STATE SENATOR.

THE ADVISOR TO SILVERLEAF IS ENGLAND, TIMBS AND MILLER, WHICH ALSO DOES WORK FOR THE COUNTY.

SO I HAVE A QUESTION THROUGH THE CHAIR OF THE COUNTY STAFF OF THE COUNTY ATTORNEY WHO HAS EXAMINED THE ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICT OF INTEREST IN HAVING ENGLAND.

TIMBS AND MILLER GIVE ADVICE TO THE COUNTY AND TO DEVELOPERS ON THE SAME PROJECTS.

IT SAYS IN THE BIBLE, A MAN CANNOT SERVE TWO MASTERS.

IT'S IN MATTHEW.

OUR COUNTY CODE NEEDS TO BE REVISED TO ADDRESS ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST.

AND I HAD A DISCUSSION ONCE WITH MY FRIEND HENRY DEAN ABOUT IT, AND HE'S GOT 42 YEARS OF EXPERIENCE IN GOVERNMENT, BUT HE HAD NEVER HEARD THE TERM LAST YEAR.

ORGANIZATIONAL CONFLICTS OF INTEREST.

AND I ASSURE YOU, LADIES AND GENTLEMEN, IT IS A THING AND IT EXISTS AND IT IS CAREFULLY REGULATED AND EXAMINED IN FEDERAL GOVERNMENT PROCUREMENT.

BUT HERE IN SAINT JOHNS COUNTY, THERE'S A LACK OF INTEREST, A LACK OF RIGOR, A LACK OF RESEARCH AND A LACK OF PUBLIC INTEGRITY.

SO I WOULD VOTE AGAINST THIS.

AND I THINK SOMEBODY NEEDS TO TEACH YOU ALL HOW TO DO FLOOR AMENDMENTS, WHICH I LEARNED TO DO IN SENATOR SASSER'S OFFICE WHEN I WAS 20 YEARS OLD.

LET'S NOT APPROVE THIS.

AND I AGREE WITH VICKY PEPPER.

CHUCK LABANOWSKI 1748 NORTH CAPRARO.

YOU KNOW, IT'S GREAT TO HEAR THAT THINGS ARE GOING TO GET DONE, BUT WHAT CONCERNS ME IS THEY'RE GOING TO TRY TO DOUBLE A BUILDING SIZE FOR BIG BOX. HAS ANYONE CONTACTED THE PEOPLE THAT ARE CURRENTLY LIVING THERE AND GOTTEN THEIR OPINION? JUST A THOUGHT.

BUT WHAT I DO LOVE ABOUT THIS IS THEY'RE GOING TO CLOSE DOWN THE THRUWAY THROUGH THERE TO 13.

THEY'RE GOING TO HOPEFULLY.

AND IT SCARES ME.

THEY SAY POSSIBLY IT'S GOING TO BE A GATED COMMUNITY.

I'VE HEARD TOO MANY OF THOSE THINGS HAPPEN HERE, POSSIBLY, AND IT NEVER HAPPENS.

I WOULD LOVE TO SEE THEM COMMIT UP FRONT TODAY THAT IT WILL BE GATED.

SO THAT WAY THE TRAFFIC'S NOT GOING ALL THE WAY THROUGH TO THE SCENIC ROAD.

I WOULD ALSO LOVE TO SEE THOSE LOTS THAT ARE HERE ON 13, HAVE THEM A LITTLE BIT LARGER AND HAVE THE HOMES SET BACK AWAY FROM THE SCENIC ROAD. THANK YOU.

GOOD AFTERNOON, CHARLIE HUNT, MILL CREEK ESTATES.

YOU KNOW, ISN'T IT FUNNY THAT SOMETHING HAPPENED EARLIER WHERE A DEVELOPER STARTED BUILDING AND BUILDING AND BUILDING AND PEOPLE WERE MOVING IN, MOVING IN BECAUSE IT WAS SO GREAT. AND THEN ALL OF A SUDDEN, ALL THESE CHANGES STARTED COMING ABOUT AND RESIDENTS WERE LIKE, WHY IS IT SO MUCH? WHY IS IT SO BIG? WHY DO YOU NEED TO PUT MORE STUFF IN HERE? WELL, BECAUSE WE WANT TO, WE NEED TO BECAUSE IF NOT, NOBODY'S GOING TO MOVE HERE.

YEAH. JUST TO GET IT BUMPED UP 80 OR FROM 55,000 TO 125,000.

THAT'S JUST A BUMPED UP FOR SQUARE FOOTAGE.

AND ABOUT THE THE GENEROUS $4 MILLION THAT WILL BE DONATED TO THE COUNTY TO HELP CLOSE OFF THAT

[06:35:08]

ROAD. AND IT WOULD BE DONE PRIVATELY.

YES, WE UNDERSTAND THAT BECAUSE IT'S EVEN THOUGH IT'S SHOWING THAT IT'S BEING DEVELOPED, IT'S GOING TO BE PRIVATE.

IT'S GONNA BE PRIVATE. THEY'RE LETTING THE COUNTY YOU'RE PAYING THE COUNTY OFF BY ALLOWING YOU TO DO THAT.

I'M TRYING TO FIGURE OUT THE ETHICS IN THAT IF THEY COME AND DONATE MONEY SO TO THE COUNTY SO THEY CAN COME BACK AND CLOSE IT OFF FOR THEIR OWN GOOD. IT IS, BUT WE KNOW WE KNOW WHO OWNS THE PROPERTY, WHO OWNS THAT, WHO RUNS THIS AREA, AND WHO RUNS THE, THE DONATIONS DURING THE POLITICAL SEASONS.

SO THAT'S WHAT IT SEEMS TO BE.

AND WELL, ACTUALLY, THAT'S WHAT IT PROBABLY IS.

BUT YES, TO SIT THERE AND SAY, WE WANT TO DO ONE ROAD INTO A PRIVATE STRUCTURE, $4 MILLION FOR YOU.

AND OH, YEAH, BY THE WAY, WE WOULD LIKE TO JUMP UP FROM 55 TO 125,000FT², ALL IN ONE PACKAGE.

YOU KNOW, IT'S LIKE ALL OR NOTHING.

OKAY. BUT WE KNOW HOW IT'S GOING TO GO.

AND ANYHOW, HAVE A GOOD DAY.

SUZANNE CLULOW 109 LAUREL WOOD WAY 32086.

IT'S BEEN QUITE A MEETING, AND I THINK WE'VE ALL GOTTEN AN EARFUL, AND I THINK WE'VE LEARNED A LOT.

VAGUE TERMS AREN'T GOING TO CUT IT ANYMORE.

MAYBE. WANNA COULDA, SHOULDA.

I THINK WE'RE FROM HERE FORWARD.

WE REALLY NEED TO PRESERVE THE LAND THAT WE HAVE AND BE VERY SURE OF WHAT WE WERE GETTING WHEN WE GIVE IT OFF TO A DEVELOPER.

IF WE DON'T NEED IT, DON'T APPROVE IT.

I'M GOING TO A SEMINAR TOMORROW ON BURT HARRIS.

I WANT TO FIND OUT ABOUT THIS BURT HARRIS, THAT THE 3000 FRIENDS OF FLORIDA OR SOMEBODY IS DOING.

BECAUSE ALL I EVER HEAR IS WE CAN'T DO THINGS BECAUSE OF THIS PARTICULAR LAW, AND I WANT TO LEARN MORE ABOUT IT.

BUT FOR THIS ITEM I AGREE.

TELL THEM THAT IT'S GOING TO BE GATED.

GATED OFF FOR SURE.

AND THEN YOU KNOW WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO GET.

AS FOR THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING, I'M YOU KNOW, YOU KNOW HOW I FEEL ABOUT THAT.

I'VE ALREADY INVESTIGATED THESE DOLLARS AND FIGURED OUT HOW THEY'VE GOTTEN OUT OF GIVING US THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING, AND I ACCEPT THAT. BUT WE'VE GOT TO, FROM HERE ON OUT, UNDERSTAND THAT WE DON'T NEED ANY MORE OF CERTAIN TYPES OF PRODUCT.

WE NEED TO BE ABLE TO HOUSE THE PEOPLE THAT DO THE WORK FOR US, AND NOBODY ELSE WANTS TO DO, AS IS EVIDENCED BY I AGREE, CAN'T GET A DOCTOR'S APPOINTMENT FOR SIX EIGHT MONTHS.

AND THIS IS FOR PEOPLE THAT HAVE CANCER AND THEY'RE TRYING TO GET DIAGNOSED AND TREATMENTS.

WE'VE GOT TO DO BETTER.

GOOD AFTERNOON. THIS LOOKS LIKE A WEARY BUNCH, SO I'M GOING TO BE REALLY FAST.

I'VE MET MOST OF YOU BEFORE.

MY NAME IS TRACY CONSIDINE.

I LIVE AT 6700 COLLIER ROAD IN ORANGEDALE, AND I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF THE WILLIAM BARTRAM SCENIC AND HISTORIC HIGHWAY.

I'M AN ATTORNEY. I'VE BEEN DOING LEGAL WORK FOR THE HISTORIC HIGHWAY FOR OVER 15 YEARS NOW.

WE'RE DEDICATED TO THE PRESERVATION OF THE HIGHWAY, AND THE CHAIRMAN ASKED ME TO COME SPEAK TO YOU TODAY IN SUPPORT OF THIS PROPOSITION, TO CLOSE THIS ROAD. YOU MAY RECALL WE WERE HERE SEVERAL YEARS AGO, AND WE NEVER REALLY OBJECTED TO THE SILVERLEAF EXPANSION.

IT WAS THE DENSITY, AND SILVERLEAF VOLUNTARILY REDUCED THE DENSITY ALL THE WAY UP AND DOWN THE SOUTHERN TERMINUS CORRIDOR WITH ADEQUATE SETBACKS AND EVERYTHING. SO WE'RE GOING TO PROMOTE THE COUNTY'S STATED GOALS OF TAKING TRAFFIC OFF THE HISTORIC HIGHWAY, JUST LIKE THE NEW BELTWAY IS NOT GOING TO HAVE AN ON AND OFF.

[06:40:03]

SO THIS IS WONDERFUL.

THIS IS MUSIC TO OUR EARS.

THIS IS SOMETHING WE NEED.

WE IT WILL THERE WILL BE ACCESS.

THERE HAS TO BE ACCESS OBVIOUSLY FOR THE RESIDENTS THAT LIVE THERE.

BUT I'M CONFIDENT IT WILL BE GATED.

AND THERE'S FURTHER DISCUSSION ABOUT LESSENING DENSITY IN THIS AREA BECAUSE AS YOU KNOW, IT'S HORSE COUNTRY.

MY WIFE AND I HAVE HORSES.

SCOTT CLEM SPECIFICALLY SENT US TO THIS AREA 20 YEARS AGO.

WE GOT OUT A MAP OF THE COUNTY AND HE SAID, STAY AWAY FROM THE TWO TOWN CORRIDOR, STAY AWAY FROM THE INTERNATIONAL GOLF PARKWAY.

BUT YOU SEE THIS AREA IN ORANGE DALE, HE SAID, YOU HAVE SOME OF THE HIGHEST QUALITY WETLANDS IN THE COUNTY.

HERE YOU GOT THE CONVERGENCE OF TROUT CREEK, SIX MILE CREEK.

WARD'S CREEK, THE HUGE SWAMP.

I COULD GO THROUGH A LIST OF WILDLIFE AND YOU GUYS ALL KNOW THAT IT'S THERE.

WE'VE RECENTLY SAW A FLORIDA PANTHER ON THE PROPERTY.

WE'VE GOT BOBCAT.

WE'VE GOT ALL KINDS OF STUFF.

AND IF THE HISTORIC HIGHWAY DESIGNATION ISN'T ENOUGH, WE'VE GOT THE NORTHWEST.

NORTH. EXCUSE ME.

NORTHWEST SECTOR PLAN OVERLAY THAT THE COUNTY HAS ADOPTED FOR THIS PARTICULAR AREA.

AND SO THE BOTTOM LINE HERE IS I'M CONFIDENT THAT THE BOARD'S GOING TO MAKE THE RIGHT DECISION.

WE'RE DIVERTING COMMERCIAL OFF 13 AND ON TO 16 A AS WELL WHICH IS PART OF OUR STATED GOALS.

THIS ACCOMPLISHES THE GOALS.

AND I DON'T KNOW OF ANYBODY REALLY THAT'S AGAINST THIS.

WITH THE PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY THAT I WORK WITH.

AND I WANT TO THANK MR. ALAIMO AND MR. DEAN FOR YOUR SERVICE ON THE COMMISSION.

HI, MY NAME IS CINDY LONG.

I'M 7819 RUSTY ANCHOR ROAD IN CALICO.

THIS IS VERY CONFLICTING FOR ME BECAUSE I LIVE OFF OF 13, BUT WHEN I TRY TO DRIVE MY HUSBAND TO THE AIRPORT IN THE MORNING GOING THROUGH 16 A UP THROUGH SILVERLEAF PARKWAY, I'M ONLY IMAGINING WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN WHEN YOU EXPAND THE BIG BOX TO 125,000FT², WHAT KIND OF TRAFFIC THAT'S GOING TO BRING? I ALSO READ I DIDN'T GET TO I, I ONLY GOT TO READ IT QUICKLY.

SO I'M DOING THIS AT THE TOP OF MY HEAD THAT I WOULD I HATE HAVING TO SAY, I DON'T WANT THE CONNECTOR BECAUSE I DO, BUT THEN I DON'T BECAUSE I UNDERSTAND WHERE THEY'RE COMING FROM.

BUT TO GET TO BUT BUT TO, YOU KNOW, TO LEAVE WHERE I LIVE, IT'S DIFFICULT KNOWING THAT THE TRAFFIC BECAUSE YOU MIGHT WANT TO CUT THAT OFF, THAT YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE A SCHOOL, YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE BIG BOX RETAIL, YOU MIGHT HAVE A GOLF COURSE, YOU MIGHT HAVE COLLEGE OR UNIVERSITY IN THERE, AND YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE A HOSPITAL AS WELL.

AND ALL OF THAT TRAFFIC HAS TO GO ON TO 16 A OR B PARKWAY.

AND IF THERE'S AN ACCIDENT THERE.

I'M GOING TO HAVE TO GO UP THROUGH 13 WHERE THEY LIVE TO BE ABLE TO GET TO THE AIRPORT, BECAUSE I CAN'T GO TO INTERNATIONAL GOLF PARKWAY BECAUSE THAT'S A NIGHTMARE TOO.

AND I ALSO READ SOMEWHERE WHERE THEY SAID THEY WERE GOING TO MITIGATE THE DUST.

AND I WILL TELL YOU THAT THEY DON'T, BECAUSE SO MANY TIMES I DRIVE DOWN THERE ON A WINDY DAY AND I'M AFRAID MY CAR IS GOING TO GET SANDPAPERED BY THE DUST THAT'S GOING ON RIGHT NOW.

SO LIKE I SAID, I JUST HAD A JUST A QUICK CHANCE TO LOOK AT THE PROPOSAL TODAY.

BUT THESE ARE THE THINGS THAT, YOU KNOW, BEING A NEW RESIDENT OVER THERE FOR THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS, TRYING TO GET AWAY FROM THE BIG BOX, THE TRAFFIC.

I DON'T KNOW WHAT TO SAY, BUT IT'S JUST NOT WE NEED A HOSPITAL FIRST.

WE CAN DO ANYTHING.

OKAY, WE NEED SOMETHING CLOSE.

BUT AGAIN, JUST TRYING TO GET THROUGH 16 A TO SILVERLEAF PARKWAY JUST TO GET TO NINE B IS GOING TO BE GETTING WORSE AND WORSE.

AND I WAS IN NAPLES THIS WEEKEND AND I'M JUST GOING OH NO.

[06:45:03]

ANYONE ELSE FOR PUBLIC COMMENT? SEEING NONE WE'LL GO AHEAD AND CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT.

XAVIER SMITH, DO YOU HAVE ANY RESPONSE TO ANY OF THIS? I DO SEE, WE HAVE A QUESTION FROM COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST, MISS AVERY SMITH, JUST THE PARCELS THAT DIRECTLY ABUT STATE ROAD 13.

CAN YOU REMIND US OF THE DENSITY OF THE HOUSING ON THOSE PARCELS? I'M TRYING TO GO BACK.

I'M SORRY, COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST.

GIVE ME ONE MINUTE.

SO IN THE DRY.

THESE ARE RESIDENTIAL.

A LAND USE.

AND HANG ON ONE MINUTE I'M GOING TO GET.

I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU THE CORRECT NUMBERS, BECAUSE THEY RANGE IN DENSITY FROM ONE TO MORE TO ONE UNIT PER ONE ACRE TO ONE UNIT PER LIKE 50 ACRES, DEPENDING.

BUT I WANT TO GIVE YOU THE EXACT QUOTATION FROM THE PUD TEXT.

BUT THEY. YES, LESS THAN ONE UNIT PER ACRE ON AVERAGE.

HOLD ON ONE MINUTE.

ANY CASEY, YOU HAVE IT AS OUR PROJECT PLANNER, BUT SHE'S GOING TO COME UP AND TALK ABOUT BIG BOX IN A MINUTE TO MY RIGHT.

MY RECOLLECTION IS ONE UNIT FOR EVERY FIVE NET ACRES.

DOES THAT SOUND CLOSE? YES, IT DOES, BUT I WANT TO.

EQUESTRIAN LOTS.

OKAY. OKAY.

THAT'S 40.

I'M SORRY, COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST.

ELLEN, WHILE YOU'RE DOING THAT, CAN YOU JUST PUT SLIDE FOUR UP SO I CAN JUST LOOK AT THAT? SORRY. YES.

SO I'M SORRY ABOUT THIS.

THIS IS WHAT HAPPENS WHEN YOU HAVE TOO MANY PIECES OF PAPER.

I'LL TELL YOU WHAT, CASEY.

IF YOU'LL LOOK FOR. OKAY? SHE'S GOT IT. NO, IT'S ALSO IN THE PUD.

HOLD ON. IF IT'S NOT IMMEDIATELY AVAILABLE, IT'S NOT THAT IMPORTANT.

GO AHEAD AND SAY THAT. WELL, ELLEN LOOKS IT UP.

EXACTLY. I BELIEVE IT IS ONE DWELLING UNIT PER FIVE ACRES, AND EACH LOT IS LIMITED TO ONE ACRE IN SIZE.

AND THE BUFFER, AGAIN, THIS IS JUST MY MEMORY, BUT.

BUT I FEEL LIKE I STUDIED THIS PROJECT FOR ABOUT A YEAR BEFORE WE VOTED ON IT.

75 FOOT BUFFERS.

DOES THAT SOUND RIGHT? DO YOU HAVE THE BUFFER ON YOU? NEVER MIND, NEVER MIND.

I DON'T. I DON'T WANT TO HAVE YOU LOOK SOMETHING ELSE UP.

IT'S REALLY OF ALL THE THINGS THAT WERE IN THIS PROJECT, I THINK ONE OF THE THINGS THAT I REMEMBER LIKING THE MOST ABOUT IT WAS THE WAS THE ABSOLUTE RESPECT THAT IT HAD FOR THE SCENIC HIGHWAY, AND THAT THE SCENIC HIGHWAY DOES HAVE A 70 OR, YEAH, 75 FOOT SCENIC EDGE FROM THE ROADWAY.

THAT'S WHAT THAT'S THE ONE YOU'RE ASKING ABOUT.

I'M SORRY. I THOUGHT YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT FROM THE ADJACENT.

NO, FROM THE SCENIC HIGHWAY.

SO THAT 75 FOOT SCENIC EDGE.

IS THAT THE PROPER TERMINOLOGY? AND THEN THERE'S ONE UNIT.

ONE DWELLING UNIT FOR EVERY FIVE NET ACRES, I THINK WAS THE IT'S IN THE PUD.

SO IT SAYS IT GOES BASED ON PARCELS.

I'M GOING TO I'M SORRY, COMMISSIONER JOSEPH, I'M GOING TO GO BACK TO MY MAP FOR A MINUTE.

SO WITHIN PARCEL.

SO IT DEPENDS ON PARCELS 41 A, 41 B AND 42 SHALL NOT EXCEED A TOTAL OF 195 SINGLE FAMILY LOTS, RESULTING IN A GROSS DENSITY OF APPROXIMATELY ONE UNIT PER FIVE ACRES.

AND THEN IT BREAKS DOWN IN PARCEL 41 B INCLUDES NO MORE THAN THREE SINGLE FAMILY, LOTS OF WHICH ARE THREE.

A MINIMUM OF THREE ACRES AND THEN PARCEL 41, WHICH LOTS ARE ADJACENT TO STATE ROAD 13 OR NOT.

SO THERE'S A LOT MORE DETAIL, BUT IT'S BASICALLY ONE UNIT PER FIVE ACRES ON AVERAGE.

AND THEN WITH RESPECT TO WHAT YOU'RE TALKING ABOUT WITHIN PARCEL 40, WE DID AGREE THAT ADJACENT TO COLLIER AND HARDWOOD LANDING ROAD, THAT THERE WOULD BE THE LOTS WOULD BE A CERTAIN SIZE, A MINIMUM OF ONE HALF ACRE OF 100, MINIMUM OF 100FT WIDE AND 200FT DEEP.

[06:50:05]

THAT'S SUFFICIENT.

YEAH. JUST TO ADDRESS SOME OF THE CONCERNS ABOUT DENSITY, ESPECIALLY ALONG THE SCENIC HIGHWAY, WHICH IS IT'S A JEWEL WITHIN THE COUNTY.

IT'S SOMETHING I GREATLY VALUE.

I JUST WANTED TO REESTABLISH THOSE DENSITIES AND THE SCENIC EDGE.

THANK YOU. YEAH.

AND WE ALSO WANT TO SAY THAT WITH RESPECT TO THE PORTION OF THE ROAD THAT WE'RE REMOVING AS A COLLECTOR, BY THE WAY, WE'RE REMOVING IT AS A COLLECTOR AND PROVIDING THE $4.16 MILLION AS THE REPLACEMENT MITIGATION.

SO THEY'RE NOT.

WE'RE STILL KEEPING THE ROAD FOR SILVERLEAF, WHICH WE WILL AGREE TO GATE.

SO THAT'S ONE CHANGE.

AND THEN THE THE MONEY THAT WOULD HAVE BEEN SPENT, THE MITIGATION VALUE OUTSIDE OF SILVERLEAF, WHICH IF WE NEED TO GO INTO THAT WE CAN WAS 4.16 MILLION.

AND AGAIN IT CAN BE USED BY THE COUNTY.

YOU WILL RECEIVE THE MONEY WITHIN 60 DAYS IF THIS IS APPROVED TODAY FOR IMPROVEMENTS TO 16 A IN THIS AREA ADJACENT TO SILVERLEAF. AND THEN CASEY, WE ARE NOT ASKING FOR MORE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF COMMERCIAL IN THE PUD OR DRY? YES. SO TO CLARIFY ON THE BIG BOX RETAILERS, THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE ADDRESSES BIG BOX RETAILERS SAYING THAT THEY'RE NOT ALLOWED UNDER THE RESIDENTIAL SEE LAND USE CATEGORY WHERE THERE'S COMMERCIAL.

BUT THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE DOES NOT DEFINE WHAT A BIG BOX RETAILER IS.

IT DOES NOT SET FORTH A SQUARE FOOTAGE.

SO WHEN THE PUD WAS APPROVED FOR LIMITING AND SAYING THAT THESE AREAS WOULD NOT HAVE BIG BOX RETAILERS, IT'S SELF-IMPOSED.

THE 55,000FT².

THAT'S NOT A DEFINED TERM ANYWHERE IN THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE OR IN THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

SO THE PROPOSED INCREASE TO 125,000FT² DOES NOT CONFLICT WITH THE LAND DEVELOPMENT CODE.

IN GENERAL SPEAKING TERMS, A BIG BOX RETAILER IS USUALLY SOMETHING LIKE A WHOLESALE RETAILER, SIMILAR TO LIKE A COSTCO, A BJ'S, SAM'S CLUB AND THINGS OF THAT NATURE. AND THEY WOULD AGAIN ONLY BE PERMITTED.

LIKE CASEY SAID, IT'S THE PINK THAT HAS THIS HATCHED.

SO THAT SHOWS YOU RESIDENTIAL SEE LAND USE, YOU KNOW, THE THE CROSS-HATCHING, NOT THE X HATCHING THAT GOES BASED ON THEIR MIXED USE WHAT'S CALLED MIXED USE PINK ON THIS MAP.

BUT WITH THE HATCHING THAT SHOWS RESIDENTIAL SEE LAND USE.

AND ONE MORE THING WITH RESPECT TO AFFORDABLE HOUSING SILVERLEAF DRY, WE'RE NOT MODIFYING THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

SO THE AFFORDABLE HOUSING AND I'M SUMMARIZING THIS.

IT'S IN SPECIAL CONDITION.

26 SO SILVERLEAF DONATED 200 PLATTED LOTS WITHIN ARMSTRONG ESTATES.

AND THERE'S MORE DETAIL THAT'S IN THE DEVELOPMENT ORDER.

BUT IT ALSO SAYS IN ADDITION, ALL RETAIL, LIGHT INDUSTRIAL AND OFFICE DEVELOPMENT WITHIN THE SILVERLEAF PROJECT SHALL CONTRIBUTE $0.70 PER SQUARE FOOT TO SAINT JOHN'S COUNTY AT THE TIME OF ISSUANCE OF A BUILDING PERMIT FOR SUCH SQUARE FOOTAGE, WHICH SHALL BE USED BY SAINT JOHN'S COUNTY FOR DOWN PAYMENT ASSISTANCE.

IMPROVEMENT OF EXISTING SUBSTANDARD HOUSING AND OR FOR THE DEVELOPMENT AND CONSTRUCTION OF VERY LOW AND LOW INCOME HOUSING WITHIN THE ARMSTRONG NEIGHBORHOOD.

AND THERE'S MORE DETAIL, BUT THAT'S NOT BEING REVISED.

SO SILVERLEAF IS PROVIDING FOR AFFORDABLE HOUSING.

AND THE MORE THE TOWN CENTER AND SOME OF THESE RETAILS RETAIL AREAS BUILD OUT, THE MORE MONEY THAT WILL BE CONTRIBUTED TO THE COUNTY'S COFFERS TO PROVIDE AFFORDABLE HOUSING ASSISTANCE PURSUANT TO THE DEVELOPMENT ORDER.

THANK YOU, MISS AVERY SMITH, COMMISSIONER JOSEPH SLIDE FOR IT.

DOES THAT SHOW THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO MOTIONS? OH, NO. NEXT, YOU HAD A DRY EXPLANATION AND THEN YOU HAD THE PUD EXPLANATION.

IT'S A BLUE SLIDE.

I DON'T IT WAS JUST PRETTY CLEAR.

WELL, THERE IT IS.

THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER JOSEPH.

HE GOT THEIR THEIR NUMBER DIFFERENTLY.

OKAY, SO THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN THE TWO MOTIONS, WHERE IS THE GATED CONNECT, IS THAT IN THE FIRST ONE, OR IS THAT IN BOTH OF THEM? THE GATED CONNECTION WILL BE IN THE PUD.

OKAY. THANK YOU. YES.

OKAY. ANY FURTHER QUESTIONS? OKAY. IF NOT, I'M PREPARED TO MAKE A MOTION.

FIRST MOTION TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2024.

DASH 493, DRY MOD 2020 401 SILVERLEAF.

DRY. DRY.

BASED ON THE FINDINGS OF FACT AS PROVIDED IN THE STAFF REPORT.

SECOND. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

PLEASE VOTE. THAT PASSES FOUR ONE.

[06:55:02]

JUST WAITING ON IT TO LOAD.

OKAY. SECOND MOTION TO ENACT ORDINANCE 2024 24 DASH 55.

MAJOR MODIFICATION 2024.

DASH ZERO FOUR SILVER LEAF.

PUD BASED ON SIX FINDINGS OF FACT AS PROVIDED IN THE STAFF REPORT.

SECOND MOTION AND A SECOND.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU ALL VERY MUCH FOR YOUR TIME.

OKAY. THAT WAS AGENDA ITEMS NUMBER EIGHT AND NINE.

THAT BRINGS US TO TEN ALSO QUASI JUDICIAL COMMISSIONER JOSEPH.

[10. Public Hearing * CDD AMD 2024-02 Elevation Pointe CDD. A petition to amend the Elevation Pointe Community Development District (CDD) in order to remove approximately 74.94 acres from the district boundary.]

NO MEETINGS, NO EMAILS.

COMMISSIONER LIMO. THANK YOU, MADAM CHAIR.

I HAD NO MEETINGS AND NO EMAILS.

I MYSELF HAD NO EMAILS AND NO MEETINGS.

COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST. NO RECORD OF ANY MEETINGS OR EMAILS.

COMMISSIONER DEAN. NONE.

MY NAME IS JONATHAN JOHNSON.

GOOD AFTERNOON.

I'M WITH THE LAW FIRM OF KUTAK ROCK, 107 WEST COLLEGE AVENUE IN TALLAHASSEE, FLORIDA, 32 301.

APPRECIATE THE OPPORTUNITY TO BE HERE WITH YOU.

I'LL TRY TO BE BRIEF AND SUCCINCT.

I'M HERE ON BEHALF OF THE ELEVATION COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT, WHICH HAS FILED A PETITION TO AMEND ITS BOUNDARIES PURSUANT TO SECTION 190 .046.

THE PUBLIC NOTICE HAS BEEN PROVIDED OF TODAY'S PUBLIC HEARING.

THE PURPOSE OF THE BOUNDARY AMENDMENT.

AS YOU MAY RECALL, THIS PROPERTY INCLUDES BOTH RESIDENTIAL USES, WHICH ARE TOWNHOMES, AS WELL AS NONRESIDENTIAL MIXED USE DISTRICT USES, WHICH ARE PREDOMINANTLY COMMERCIAL, HOTEL AND MULTIFAMILY.

IN 2020, THE DISTRICT WAS CREATED BY THIS BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS.

IN 2022, THE DISTRICT ISSUED ITS PUBLIC BONDS TO FUND IMPROVEMENTS WITHIN ITS BOUNDARIES.

AT THE TIME OF THAT ISSUANCE IN 2022, WE ISSUED BONDS ONLY TO FUND IMPROVEMENTS TO THE RESIDENTIAL COMPONENTS OF THE PROJECT.

IN FACT, OUR BOND COVENANTS SPECIFICALLY PROHIBITED US FROM USING THOSE BOND FUNDS TO FUND ANYTHING BUT THE SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL COMPONENT OF THE PROJECT BASED UPON INPUT FROM THE INVESTORS IN THOSE BONDS AT THE TIME.

NOW, HERE IN 2024, THERE IS A BUYER FOR THE BALANCE OF THE OF THE NONRESIDENTIAL USES.

THAT BUYER IS CORNERSTONE COLORED AUGUSTINE LLC, AND THEY HAVE APPROACHED THE DISTRICT AND INDICATED THAT THEY HAVE DEFINITIVE PLANS TO SELF-FUND PRIVATELY FUND ANY IMPROVEMENTS TO THEIR PARCEL, AND THEY DO NOT WISH TO USE THE CDD FOR ANY SUCH FUNDING.

AND THEY'VE INDICATED A DESIRE TO CLEAN UP TITLE TO THEIR PROPERTY BY REMOVING THE DISTRICT AS AN ENCUMBRANCE ON THAT PROPERTY.

TO THAT END, THE DISTRICT BOARD ADOPTED A RESOLUTION AGREEING, AND WE FILED A PETITION WHICH BROUGHT US HERE TODAY.

WE HAVE FILED PRE-FILED WRITTEN AFFIDAVITS IN THE FORM OF TESTIMONY FROM MR. KANAANI, WHO IS THE CHAIRMAN OF THE DISTRICT BOARD, AS WELL AS A REPRESENTATIVE OF ELEVATION POINT DEVELOPMENT.

MR. FLYNT, OUR DISTRICT MANAGER, AND MR. DEITCH AND MR. SHELTON WITH WITH KIMLEY-HORN, WHO ARE THE DISTRICT'S DISTRICTS, ENGINEER AND PLANNER, ALL ADDRESSING THE STATUTORY CRITERIA THAT YOUR STAFF ANALYZED IN THE REPORT AND WHICH ARE CONTAINED IN SECTION 190 .046.

SO WITH THAT, THAT'S WHY WE'RE HERE, AND WE WOULD ASK FOR YOUR SUPPORT IN ADOPTING THE ORDINANCE, AMENDING THOSE BOUNDARIES.

AND I WOULD BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS THAT YOU MAY HAVE.

ANY QUESTIONS? OKAY.

LET'S HEAR PUBLIC COMMENT.

WE'LL NOW HEAR PUBLIC COMMENT ON AGENDA ITEM NUMBER TEN.

SEEING NONE WE WILL CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT.

OKAY. WE'RE BACK TO THE BOARD.

THIS IS ALSO MY DISTRICT.

SO MOTION TO ENACT ORDINANCE 2024 DASH 56 APPROVING CD AMENDMENT 2020 4-02 ELEVATION POINT CD BASED UPON THREE FINDINGS OF FACT AS PROVIDED IN THE STAFF REPORT.

SECOND. MOTION AND A SECOND.

WE'RE ON TO AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 11.

THANK YOU. OKAY.

ALSO QUASI JUDICIAL.

[11. Public Hearing * ADMA 2024-01 & ADMA 2024-02 Marsh Landing Linkside Lots Appeals. This is an appeal of an administratively approved Small Adjustment application, SMADJ 24-32 Marsh Landing Linkside Lots, approved by the Growth Management Department Planning and Zoning Division on August 12, 2024. The Small Adjustment added two (2) residential lots along the northeast corner of the Linkside Circle and Marsh Landing Parkway intersection. Two separate appeals were filed against the approval of SMADJ 24-32, both of the appeals, ADMA 24-01 and ADMA 24-02, are made part of this staff report.]

I BELIEVE COMMISSIONER JOSEPH.

NOTHING. COMMISSIONER ALAIMO, I HAD ONE PLUS EMAIL, NO MEETINGS.

BUT I DID SPEAK WITH ZACH MILLER ON THE PHONE.

HE JUST CALLED ME TO ASK ME IF I HAD ANY, YOU KNOW, LAST MINUTE QUESTIONS, SO.

OKAY. I MYSELF HAD A COUPLE OF EMAILS AND ALSO SPOKE WITH MR. MILLER REGARDING THIS APPEAL.

COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST, I HAVE TWO EMAILS, AND I HAD A PHONE CALL FROM ZACH MILLER AND JESSE KILLEBREW ASKING IF I HAD ANY QUESTIONS.

I DID NOT.

COMMISSIONER DEAN YEAH.

I HAD ONE EMAIL AND ALSO A PHONE CALL FROM JESSE KILLEBREW TO DISCUSS THE ITEM.

THANK YOU. YOU REMINDED ME I ALSO HAD A PHONE CALL FROM JESSE KILLEBREW.

OKAY. WELCOME BACK THROUGH THE CHAIR.

REAL QUICK. I'LL PUT YOU IN THE PROPER POSTURE.

[07:00:01]

SO YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU AN APPEAL FROM.

YOU HAVE TWO SEPARATE APPEALS THAT HAS BEEN CONSOLIDATED REGARDING A SMALL ADJUSTMENT APPLICATION.

THE SMALL ADJUSTMENT APPLICATION IS SOMETHING BY YOUR CODE THAT STAFF IS ALLOWED TO APPROVE UPON REVIEW BY THE OFFICE OF COUNTY ATTORNEY.

SO THESE THIS MATTER WAS APPROVED.

SUBSEQUENTLY, TWO APPEALS WERE FILED.

THE FIRST ONE BY MR. GOLDING, WAS FILED.

THERE ARE REQUIREMENTS IN THE CODE AS TO WHAT AN APPEAL MUST CONTAIN.

THAT APPEAL WAS LEGALLY INSUFFICIENT.

WE SENT COMMENTS TO MR. GOLDING ASKING HIM TO CURE THOSE DEFECTS.

THOSE DEFECTS WERE NOT CURED.

YOU SUBSEQUENTLY HAD A SECOND APPEAL FILED BY MR. PECK. THAT ONE ALSO WAS DEFICIENT.

HE DID REPLY A RESPONSE.

YOUR CODE DOES NOT ALLOW US TO ANY MECHANISM TO DISPOSE OF THEM OTHER THAN BRING THEM TO YOU.

SO THE ONE IS LEGALLY INSUFFICIENT, IN OUR OPINION.

THE OTHER ONE IS PROBABLY RIPE FOR YOU TO HEAR, BUT THEY HAVE BEEN CONSOLIDATED INTO ONE PROCESS.

THE APPELLANTS WILL GENERALLY GO FIRST.

WE'VE ALLOWED THEM TEN MINUTES EACH, AND THEN MR. MILLER WILL GO SECOND. AS REPRESENTATIVE FOR THE APPLICANT.

SO THE APPELLANTS WOULD BE MR. PIKE AND MR. GOULDING. CORRECT.

OKAY. COMMISSIONER JOSEPH, DO YOU HAVE A QUESTION? NO, BUT I WANTED TO SAY I DID HAVE AN EMAIL PLUS EMAIL.

SORRY. OF COURSE.

OKAY. MADAM CHAIR AND I APOLOGIZE, I, I ALSO HAD A MISSED CALL FROM JESSE KILLEBREW.

OKAY. THAT ROUNDS OUT OUR QUASI.

LET'S START WITH MR. PIKE. TEN MINUTES.

MR. NOLAN WOULD LIKE TO GO FIRST.

I HAVE NO PROBLEM WITH THAT.

ALSO. TEN MINUTES.

OH. TEN MINUTES. OKAY.

GOOD AFTERNOON. AFTERNOON.

EVENING. WHATEVER IT IS.

I APOLOGIZE FOR NOT REPLYING.

I THOUGHT I HAD UNTIL THE 19TH.

THIS HEARING WAS MOVED TO TODAY, SO I CHANGED MY TRAVEL PLANS TO BE HERE BECAUSE THIS IS VERY IMPORTANT FOR ME AND MY FAMILY.

CHRIS GOULDING, 25, LAKESIDE CIRCLE, LIVE IN MARSH LANDING.

MR. DEAN, WE COULDN'T LET YOU LEAVE WITHOUT TALKING ABOUT MARSH LANDING ONCE AGAIN, BUT YOUR FIRST APPEAL OF THE YEAR.

HERE IT IS. WE HAVE TWO TODAY ON THIS MATTER.

THIS WAS THE APPEAL.

I JUST WANTED TO SHOW YOU THAT TWO OF THE STAFF MEMBERS DENIED AND TWO APPROVED THE. I'M SORRY.

THIS WAS FOR THE MODIFICATION FOR THE THE MAJOR THAT BECAME MINOR.

THAT'S NOW BEING APPEALED.

THIS IS THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OF THE TWO LOTS.

THIS IS MY HOME.

THIS IS A GOLF COURSE THAT HAS EXISTED AS SUCH AS A RECREATIONAL AREA FOR 40 YEARS, THAT NOW THEY WILL BE PUTTING TWO HOMES INTO. ACROSS THE STREET IS CABBAGE CREEK.

HERE IS A DEVELOPER SITE PLAN.

SINCE THEY'RE NOT THE BUILDER, THEY COULD NOT GIVE US A MORE DETAILED SITE PLAN.

BUT ON HERE, IT SHOWS THEIR SETBACKS ON THE FRONT, ON THE SIDES, ON THE REAR AND AROUND A RETENTION POND THAT WOULD BE PUT IN BETWEEN THE TWO LOTS.

LOOKS TO ME LIKE THERE'S A BURL THAT RUNS STRAIGHT THROUGH THE RETENTION POND.

I DON'T GET IT.

ARE THESE HOMES GOING TO BE CANTILEVERED INTO THE RETENTION POND? OUR PRIMARY CONCERNS ARE RELATED TO DEVELOPMENT IMPEDING DRAINAGE IN THE AREA.

GIVEN THE AREA IN QUESTION ACTS AS A STORMWATER MANAGEMENT AREA, ONE THAT ABSORBS AND HOLDS WATER AND DRAINS THE AREA VIA DRAINAGE INFRASTRUCTURE CURRENTLY INSTALLED ON THE PROPERTY.

AT TIMES, THE LAND HOLDS HIGH WATER KNEE DEEP FOR EXTENDED PERIODS OF TIME.

EXISTING STORMWATER INFRASTRUCTURE PIPES AND DRAINS INSTALLED ON THE LAND CANNOT HANDLE THE VOLUME OF WATER AS IT STANDS TODAY, AND AS A RESULT, BACKS UP AND CREATES A POND ON THE PROPERTY THAT COVERS THE WIDTH OF THE PROPERTY, THE STREET AND THE ADJACENT LAND.

GIVEN THIS, THE PROPOSED RETENTION POND ON THE SUBMITTED PLANS IS QUESTIONABLE AT BEST.

[07:05:01]

DEVELOPMENT, DEVELOPMENT AND DISRUPTION OF THE STORMWATER INUNDATION AREA WILL PUT OUR PROPERTY AND THE SURROUNDING AREAS AT FURTHER RISK OF FLOODING AND CREATE A RISK FOR THE COMMUNITY OVERALL.

WE'VE LIVED ADJACENT TO THE PROPERTY SINCE MAY OF 2022.

DURING THAT TIME, WE HAVE EXPERIENCED IN AREAS WHERE THE COMBINATION OF WEATHER, WATER LEVELS AND CABBAGE CREEK AND INADEQUATE DRAINAGE RESULTED IN AN AREA OF FLOODING ON A REGULAR BASIS.

FURTHER DEVELOPMENT OF THIS AREA WILL UNDOUBTEDLY MAKE AN ALREADY PRECARIOUS SITUATION WORSE AND PUT DWELLINGS, INFRASTRUCTURE AND EGRESS ROUTES FOR THE COMMUNITY AT RISK.

THE COUNTY ENGINEERS IN BLUE RESPONDED TO MY EMAIL THAT SPORTING STORMWATER MODELS INDICATE THE AREA IS A KNOWN STORMWATER INUNDATION AREA.

SURROUNDING HOMES, INFRASTRUCTURE AND EXISTING STORMWATER MANAGEMENT WILL BE AFFECTED BY THE DEVELOPMENT AND WILL POSE ADDITIONAL LOAD ON THE SURROUNDING AREA AND ITS INFRASTRUCTURE.

THE SIZE, LOCATION, DEPTH OF THE POND DIRECTLY AFFECTED DIRECTLY AFFECT WHAT THE LOTS THE LAND AND SURROUNDING AREA CAN HANDLE.

THE POND AS RENDERED ON THE PLANS COULD ALSO POSE A RISK TO THE DWELLINGS PROPOSED.

ALSO NOTE THE INTERSECTION OF THE LAKESIDE CIRCLE AND MARSH LANDING PARKWAY IS THE PRIMARY EGRESS ROUTE FOR THE SOUTH SIDE OF THE NEIGHBORHOOD. IF THIS AREA FLOODS, THIS WOULD IMPACT THE CITIZENS ABILITY TO EVACUATE SAFELY SHOULD THEY NEED TO DURING A STORM EVENT OR POST-STORM, THEREBY EXPOSING THE RESIDENTS TO RISK AS A DIRECT RESULT OF THE DEVELOPMENT.

YOU KNOW WHAT THEY SAY ABOUT A PICTURE.

THIS IS WHAT THE LAMPPOST IS DIRECTLY IN THE MIDDLE OF THE TWO LOTS.

THE LEFT SIDE, WHICH CURRENTLY HAS A BATHROOM.

AND THEN THIS IS THE RIGHT SIDE.

THIS IS ADJACENT TO MY PROPERTY.

THIS IS A COMMON OCCURRENCE.

THIS IS THE RIGHT SIDE AGAIN OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.

THIS IS CROSS STREET, CABBAGE CREEK.

THAT'S THE CREEK UNDER THE BRIDGE.

IT COMES AND SPANS ALL THE WAY ACROSS THE STREET.

SO A TEN FOOT CREEK IS NOW 100FT.

MORE DRAINAGE.

EVERYBODY KNOWS ABOUT POLICY.

A 1.311.

I WANT TO POINT OUT DRAINAGE TO IT.

IF BUILDING DEVELOPMENT ENSUES.

THE FOLLOWING ARE INCOMPATIBILITIES.

THE CONSTRUCTION NOISE WILL IMPACT MY WIFE'S HOME OFFICE.

ALL THE WHILE, MY DOG HUMPHREY WILL BARK AT EVERY TRUCK AND PERSON HE HEARS OR SEES.

THE LAWTON HOME SIZES ARE MUCH SMALLER THAN THE SURROUNDING HOMES.

MOST IMPORTANTLY, THE NEW FFP WILL CAUSE ALL RUNOFF TOWARDS SURROUNDING NEIGHBORS.

MY HOME.

EGRESS WILL NOT EXIST.

UGLY ESTHETICS OF THE POND RIGHT NOW.

IT WAS DENIED AT OR IT WAS APPROVED TO DEVELOP KINGFISHER.

THERE'S THREE HOMES UP FOR SALE NOW.

WILL I BE NEXT? I'M NOT SURE.

POSSIBLY. WITH 25 OF THE PERCENT TO 25%.

A LOT REMAIN OPEN SPACE.

RIGHT NOW, THERE'S 100 FOOT FRONTAGE ON THESE TWO LOTS.

MINE HAS 301FT.

RETENTION POND.

WHO'S GOING TO MAINTAIN IT? IT'S GOING TO BE THE THE THE HOMEOWNER'S RESPONSIBILITY.

I'M PRETTY HANDY.

I BUILD HOMES.

I DON'T KNOW HOW TO MAINTAIN A RETENTION POND.

WILL THE HOMEOWNER ON THE RIGHT MAINTAIN IT WHILE THE HOMEOWNER ON THE LEFT MAINTAIN IT.

NOW, IF A PICTURE IS WORTH A THOUSAND WORDS, WHAT ABOUT A VIDEO?

[07:10:10]

SORRY. I'M SLIDING.

KEEP SLIDING. THIS IS ME DURING A STORM EVENT IN MY BOOTS, CLEARING A GRATE SO THAT MY HOME DOES NOT FLOOD.

THE ONLY REASON MY HOME DIDN'T FLOOD BECAUSE I'M OUT THERE WITH A RAKE.

I WALKED TWO FEET FURTHER AND MY BOOTS GOT FILLED WITH WATER.

I THOUGHT I HAD 20 MINUTES.

THAT'S A LOT OF WATER COMING OUT OF THAT PIPE.

IT'S LIKE TWO FIRE HYDRANTS, TWO FIRE HOSES THAT'S ALL OFF OF THIS PROPERTY.

BECAUSE I'M THE ONE CLEARING THE GREAT.

SHEETS OF WATER RUNNING ACROSS THE STREET ONTO THESE TWO LOTS.

HOW IS IT OKAY TO BUILD ON THESE LOTS? I BUILD HOMES, I CURRENTLY HAVE 73 HOMES I'M BUILDING.

IF MY BOSS TOLD ME TO BUILD ON THESE LOTS MORALLY, I WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO.

I WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO HAND A HOMEOWNER KEYS AND TELL THEM TO LIVE ON THESE LOTS.

THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

THANK YOU. AND OUR NEXT DESIGNATED SPEAKER IS MR. EDWARD PIKE. THANK YOU.

THOMAS. GOOD EVENING.

ALMOST. WELL, GOOD AFTERNOON OR EVENING, COMMISSIONERS.

EDWARD PIKE, 281 LAKESIDE CIRCLE, 32082.

THANK YOU FOR THE TIME AND YOUR ATTENTION.

MY UNDERSTANDING IS THAT MY COMPLETE APPEALS PACKAGE THAT WAS SENT IN WAS MADE AVAILABLE TO ALL OF YOU.

SO I TRUST THAT YOU HAVE HAD THE TIME TO AT LEAST REVIEW IT AND AND KNOW WHAT THIS IS, IS SOMEWHAT ABOUT.

SO INSTEAD OF GOING THROUGH THAT ENTIRELY, I WOULD JUST LIKE TO TRY TO BRING OUT SOME OF THE HIGHLIGHTS THAT I THAT THE THINGS THAT ARE MOST IMPORTANT TO MYSELF AND MY WIFE AND OUR NEIGHBORS. MR. GOLDEN DID SUCH A GREAT JOB SHOWING YOU AND ILLUSTRATING THE THE FLOODING AND THE DRAINAGE ISSUES THAT ARE THERE.

SO I'M NOT GOING TO REALLY SPEAK TO THAT.

ONLY ONE REFERENCE.

AND THAT IS IT BEGS THE QUESTION, WHY WASN'T THIS PARCEL DEVELOPED A SINGLE FAMILY HOME SITES ORIGINALLY 30 PLUS YEARS AGO? BECAUSE THE SAME PARTY THAT DEVELOPED MARSHLAND AND DECIDED NOT TO PLACE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES IN THIS SITE IS NOW 30 PLUS YEARS LATER, TRYING TO MAKE THIS PROPERTY SUITABLE FOR SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.

THIS PARCEL WOULD HAVE BEEN SOLD AS A PREMIUM AS GOLF COURSE LOTS IF THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN DEVELOPED, BUT THEY WEREN'T, SO THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN THE HIGHEST VALUE I WOULD THINK.

SO. MY POINT IS, IF IT DIDN'T MAKE SENSE 30 YEARS AGO, IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE NOW, ESPECIALLY 30 YEARS AFTER THE DEVELOPMENT AND CONSTRUCTION OF THE HOMES SURROUNDING THIS AREA ON LAKESIDE CIRCLE, MARSH LANDING PARKWAY, MERCER, MERGANSER DRIVE AND BRANT PINE, BENT PINE COURT.

NEXT THING THAT I WANT TO BRING UP IS IS THIS THAT, ACCORDING TO SAINT JOHNS COUNTY APPRAISER, AS YOU KNOW, I'M NOT AN ATTORNEY. I'M NOT A REAL ESTATE EXPERT OR LAND USE EXPERT OR WHATEVER.

SO I'M GOING TO THE TO THE RESOURCES THAT I HAVE AVAILABLE.

AND ONE IS THE SAINT JOHNS COUNTY PROPERTY APPRAISAL.

THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS IDENTIFIED AS THAT PARCEL NUMBER IS OWNED BY THE THE PEOPLE WHO HAVE APPLIED, OBVIOUSLY.

AND IT'S DESIGNATED AS PROPERTY CLASS 3800, WHICH IS GOLF COURSE AND DRIVING RANGES.

I DON'T SEE IT IDENTIFIED AS SINGLE FAMILY HOME.

COMPARE THAT OR CONTRAST THAT TO MY PROPERTY.

AND THAT'S IDENTIFIED WITH MY NUMBER.

AND YOU CAN SEE THAT THAT IS IDENTIFIED AS A DIFFERENT PROPERTY CLASS SIGNIFYING SINGLE FAMILY HOME.

THERE'S THE SCREENSHOT FROM THIS COUNTY APPRAISERS OFFICE.

IT'S IT'S LIGHT, BUT YOU CAN SEE IT.

IT'S THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.

AND RIGHT DOWN HERE YOU CAN SEE THAT IT'S PROPERTY CLASS 3800 GOLF COURSE AND DRIVING RANGE.

AND AGAIN HERE'S A SCREENSHOT OF MY PROPERTY.

THIS IS THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.

MINE IS RIGHT NEXT TO MR. GOLDEN'S ON THE OTHER SIDE.

WE ALL WOULD MEET AT THAT ONE COMMON POINT HERE, BUT YOU CAN SEE THAT MY PROPERTY CLASS IS IDENTIFIED AS 100 SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.

[07:15:05]

NEXT POINT IS ITEM THREE ON THE PLANNING AND ZONING APPROVAL LETTER THAT WENT OUT OVER MR. JACOB SMITH'S SIGNATURE.

STATES THAT THE CHANGES DO NOT REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF OPEN SPACE RECREATION AREA OR CHANGE THE LOCATION OF OPEN SPACE RECREATION AREA.

BUT TO ME, AGAIN, A NONPROFESSIONAL IT APPEARS THAT DEVELOPER HAS TRIED TO MEET THIS REQUIREMENT BY DESIGNATING A PORTION OF THE SUBJECT PROPERTY AS GOLF COURSE USE AREA.

THE. THE APPLICATION FOR THE STATES THAT THE GOLF COURSE AREA SHALL REMAIN DESIGNATED FOR GOLF COURSE USE, AND THAT'S A REQUIREMENT FOR SMALL ADJUSTMENT.

REFER TO THE MDP PLAN, WHICH I'LL PUT UP IN A SECOND.

I'LL PUT IT UP NOW AND I'LL I'LL PUT THAT UP AND THEN YOU CAN LOOK AT THAT.

THIS IS THE SAME ONE THAT CHRIS DID A MINUTE AGO.

THIS IS OBVIOUSLY THE SUBJECT PROPERTY OUTLINED THE DARK LINE.

IT'S THE TWO LOTS TOGETHER.

THE RETENTION POND IN THE MIDDLE.

YOU CAN SEE THIS ONE'S A LITTLE MORE DETAILED.

IT HAS THE SETBACKS DRAWN IN.

YOU CAN SEE THAT ONCE YOU GET THROUGH THE PROPERTY ITSELF AND YOU MAKE THE SETBACKS, THIS DASHED DOTTED LINES HERE AND HERE ARE THE WHAT I'M CALL BUILDABLE SITES, YOU KNOW, BECAUSE YOU CAN'T BUILD IN THE SETBACKS.

BUT NOTICE THAT THIS GOLF COURSE AREA, BY THIS DOTTED SEMI-CIRCLE LINE THAT COMES OUT IN HERE, THAT'S GOLF COURSE USE AREA.

SO WHAT DOES THAT REALLY MEAN? DOES THAT MEAN THAT GOLF COURSE USE AREA IS NOT IS IS THEY CAN'T BUILD ON THAT.

AND ARE GOLFERS LIKE MYSELF GOING TO HAVE ACCESS TO GO INTO THAT IN ANY GOLFER GO INTO THAT AREA.

CAN I PLAY THROUGH THEIR BACKYARD AND THROUGH THEIR PATIO IF I HIT AN ERRANT BALL? I MEAN, IT JUST THERE'S TOO MANY QUESTIONS HERE THAT THAT AT LEAST I DON'T UNDERSTAND AND THERE'S NO ANSWERS TO IT JUST MAKES IT VERY, VERY ODD.

SO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY.

OH. I'M SORRY. WRONG ONE.

I APOLOGIZE. OH, THE OTHER ONE.

IT SAID IF THIS GOLF COURSE USE AREA IS GOING TO BE RESTRICTED SOMEHOW.

WHO IS GOING TO BE THE ONES THAT MONITOR THOSE RESTRICTIONS AND MADE SURE THAT THEY'RE UPHELD.

SO IF YOU APPROVE THIS BASED UPON OH, THEY'VE INCLUDED THIS AND WE'RE NOT GOING TO REDUCE RECREATION AREA, HOW DO WE KNOW THAT TEN YEARS FROM NOW, FIVE YEARS FROM NOW, THREE YEARS FROM NOW, THAT THE HOME BUILDER HASN'T BUILT A FENCE, THEY'RE RESTRICTING MY ABILITY TO PLAY THROUGH.

I'VE GOT LOTS OF TIME LEFT.

TRY TO MAKE IT QUICK SO WE CAN ALL GO HOME.

SO KIND OF HERE'S KIND OF MY SUMMARY.

WHEN YOU BUY A HOME IN A DEVELOPED, BUILT OUT NEIGHBORHOOD SUCH AS MARSH LANDING, YOU CAN REASONABLY EXPECT NOT TO EXPERIENCE NEW CONSTRUCTION NOISES, DUST, OR CONGESTION AND TRAFFIC.

NOW I SEE WHY I FORGOT TO PUT MY GLASSES ON.

THAT'S WHY IT'S BEEN SO DIFFICULT TO READ THESE NOTES.

WELL, THAT MADE IT WORSE.

OKAY THE HOUSES IN THIS AREA OF MARSHLAND, MARSH LANE, WERE BUILT APPROXIMATELY 89 TO 93.

SO WHEN PURCHASING A HOME IN A NEW CONSTRUCTION AREA.

AND I THINK CHRIS GOLDEN COULD ATTEST TO THIS SINCE HE'S A HOME BUILDER.

WHEN YOU BUILD A HOME IN A NEW CONSTRUCTION AREA THAT IS CURRENTLY UNDER CONSTRUCTION, THE BUILDER WILL ALMOST ALWAYS HAVE A CLAUSE IN THE CONTRACT WHERE THE BUYER ACKNOWLEDGES AND EXPECTS THAT THEY ARE BUYING IN A CONSTRUCTION ZONE, SO THEY WOULD EXPECT THOSE CONSTRUCTION NOISES, DUST AND TRUCKS, ETC..

THE SUBJECT PROPERTY HAS BEEN AN OPEN SPACE GOLF COURSE FOR 30 PLUS YEARS.

CURRENT HOMEOWNERS NEVER EXPECTED THAT HOMES COULD BE BUILT ON THIS PROPERTY, AND I CERTAINLY DIDN'T WHEN I BOUGHT MY HOME, JUST LIKE MR. GOLDEN DID. NEVER, NEVER ASSUME THAT OR WOULD HAVE EXPECT THAT.

SO THERE ARE SEVERAL OPEN LOTS IN MARSHALL LANDING THAT ARE ZONED 0000 RESIDENTIAL.

BECAUSE THEY ARE ZONED FOR SINGLE FAMILY HOMES, THEY JUST HAVEN'T BEEN SOLD YET IN A HOME NOT BUILT ON.

WELL, I CAN'T SAY THEY HAVEN'T BEEN SOLD YET, THEY JUST HAVEN'T BEEN BUILT ON YET, BUT THEY'VE ALREADY ZONED.

THE SUBJECT PROPERTY HAS NEVER BEEN IDENTIFIED AS SUCH, AND NO ONE WOULD HAVE REASON TO BELIEVE THAT HOLMES WOULD EVER GO UP THERE.

SO THIS IS NOT THE CASE OF BUILDING ON AN INFILL LOT THAT HAS REMAINED VACANT UNTIL NOW.

THIS IS AN ATTEMPT TO CREATE SINGLE FAMILY LOTS OUT OF A GOLF COURSE RECREATIONAL SPACE.

THIS AREA COULD FEASIBLY BE A CONSTRUCTION ZONE FOR MANY YEARS.

IN THEIR ORIGINAL APPLICATION, THEY SAID IT WAS GOING TO BE A FIVE YEAR PROCESS.

THE NOISE FROM THINK ABOUT THIS.

THEY HAD TO COME IN TO GET RID OF MOST OF THAT WHERE THEY'RE GOING TO HAVE TO PUT A LOT OF INFILL.

SO YOU'RE GOING TO HAVE EARTHMOVERS AND DUMP TRUCKS COMING AND BRINGING IN LOADS OF, OF, OF INFILL OR FILL DIRT.

[07:20:01]

WE HAVE PAVING TRUCKS, CEMENT TRUCKS.

OTHERS WILL BE THE FIRST WAVE.

WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO TEAR UP LAKESIDE IN ORDER TO HOOK UP ALL OF THE UTILITIES THE GAS, THE WATER, THE SEWER, ETC..

WHEN AN ACTUAL HOUSE CONSTRUCTION STARTS, WE'RE ALL GOING TO EXPERIENCE SAWS, HAMMERS, PNEUMATIC DRILLS, NAIL GUNS, ALONG WITH THE COMPRESSORS RUNNING FROM SUN UP TO SUN DOWN, BASICALLY. WHILE THESE HOMES GET GET BUILT.

SO THAT'S WHY I DO NOT FEEL THAT THIS IS APPROPRIATE FOR THIS LAND.

I KNOW THAT ALL OF YOU ARE AWARE OF THIS, OBVIOUSLY, BECAUSE I TOOK THIS OUT OF THE THE COUNTY COMMISSIONER'S WEBSITE AND IT'S A ESSEX COUNTY. NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF COUNTIES CODE OF ETHICS FOR COUNTY OFFICIALS, WHICH OBVIOUSLY YOU KNOW ABOUT BECAUSE I KNOW YOU HAVE TO TAKE EVERY YEAR.

YOU HAVE TO GO BACK AND DO IT.

I HAD TO DO IT IN THE FINANCIAL SECURITIES INDUSTRY.

EVERY YEAR YOU GOT TO GO BACK AND GET, YOU KNOW, MONEY LAUNDERING, MAKE SURE YOU KNOW IT.

YOU DIDN'T FORGET ANYTHING.

BUT THE ONE THAT I, THAT I HIGHLIGHTED HERE AND THE EMPHASIS WAS ADDED BY ME, PROMOTE DECISIONS.

DECISIONS WHICH ONLY BENEFIT THE PUBLIC INTEREST.

MY CONTENTION IS THAT THIS IS NOT IN THE PUBLIC, THE PUBLIC BEING THE HOMEOWNERS AND THE RESIDENTS OF MARSHLAND.

MY CONCLUSION.

33 SECONDS.

THE THE PROPOSED PROJECT IS NOT IN THE PUBLIC'S BEST INTEREST.

THIS PROJECT WOULD BE DETRIMENTAL TO HOMEOWNERS, NOT ONLY THOSE ADJACENT TO THE SUBJECT PROPERTY, BUT TO THE ENTIRE MARSHLAND COMMUNITY.

THIS PROJECT PROVIDES NO BENEFIT, REAL OR PERCEIVED, TO THE CURRENT HOMEOWNERS OF MARSH LANDING.

THE ONLY WINNER IN THIS WOULD BE THE DEVELOPER, AND AS IT'S ONCE SAID BY SOMEONE ELSE A LOT SMARTER THAN ME, JUST BECAUSE YOU HAVE THE RIGHT TO DO SOMETHING DOES NOT MAKE IT THE RIGHT THING TO DO.

SO I ASK FOR YOUR VOTING DOWN THIS OR APPROVING MY APPEAL OR HOWEVER IT WORKS.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. THANK YOU, MR. PIKE. AND OUR FINAL DESIGNATED SPEAKER FOR THE EVENING, MR. MILLER. GOOD EVENING.

MINUTES. THIS IS THE FIRST MEETING I'VE EVER BEEN AT WHEN I'VE SAID GOOD EVENING AND GOOD MORNING.

PRESENTATION. GOING OUT WITH A BANG.

THERE WE GO. OH, YEAH. DON'T START IT YET.

ZACH MILLER, 303 OLD BARN COURT, REPRESENTING THE APPLICANT WHO GOT THE SMALL ADJUSTMENT APPROVED.

JUST FOR THE RECORD, THIS IS NOT A REZONING.

THIS IS NOT A MINOR MODIFICATION.

THIS IS NOT A MAJOR MODIFICATION.

THIS IS AN APPEAL OF A SMALL ADJUSTMENT THAT WAS APPROVED.

THIS IS THE SITE OF THE PROPERTY.

YOU'RE PROBABLY FAMILIAR OF THIS WITH THIS.

THERE'S THE GOLDING HOUSE.

THERE'S THE PIKE HOUSE.

PIKE'S HOUSE IS APPROXIMATELY 160FT AWAY FROM OUR PROPERTY BOUNDARY, AND THE GOLDING HOUSE IS 60 TO 70FT.

I JUST WANT TO SHOW YOU THIS TO KIND OF GIVE YOU AN IDEA OF HOW BIG OF A SITE WE'RE TALKING ABOUT.

IT'S A 434FT AT ITS WIDEST PORTION.

IT SOMETIMES LOOKING AT IT, YOU DON'T LOOK AT THE SCALE OF HOW BIG THIS ACTUALLY IS.

AGAIN, THIS ISN'T PART OF THE SMALL ADJUSTMENT CRITERIA, BUT I THINK IT'S WORTH BRINGING IT UP.

I BROUGHT IT UP ON THE KINGFISHER LOT.

THERE WAS NO SURPRISES ON THIS WHEN THE HOA WAY PAST THE APPROVAL OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF, OF THE OR THE TRANSITION OF THE GOLF COURSE AND THE FINANCING FOR THAT.

THEY APPROVED DEVELOPING FOUR LOTS.

ONE WAS CONVERTED TO ONE LOT THAT WAS ON KINGFISHER, BUT THE OTHER ONE WAS THE TWO LOTS HERE.

THIS WAS SENT OUT TO EVERY MEMBER OF THE HOA.

THERE ARE NO MYSTERIES HERE.

THIS WAS BEHIND 15 HOLE.

THEY FLIPPED THE NINE, SO IT'S.

NOW THAT'S ACTUALLY THE FRONT NINE.

THIS WAS APPROVED BY 92% OF THE HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATION.

IN EXCHANGE, THEY GOT A RESTRICTION ON THE REST OF THE GOLF COURSE THAT IT CAN ONLY BE USED AS GOLF COURSE.

IT WAS THIS SITE IN THE KINGFISHER SITE THAT WOULD BE ALLOWED TO BE DEVELOPED AS SINGLE FAMILY.

JUST BRINGING THIS UP AGAIN, THIS IS YOUR COMPREHENSIVE PLAN.

IT DESIGNATES THIS SITE AS TWO UNITS AN ACRE.

THE ORIGINAL DRI FOR THE PROPERTY IS ACTUALLY ALSO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN DESIGNATION FOR THE PROPERTY.

THIS IS THE ZONING FOR THE PROPERTY.

THE REASON I BRING THIS UP IS IN YOUR ZONING AND NO DOCUMENT WILL YOU FIND A MINIMUM AMOUNT OF OPEN SPACE OR A MINIMUM AMOUNT OF ACREAGE FOR ACTIVE RECREATION? GOLF COURSE IS NOT CALLED OUT ON THE ZONING.

YOU HAVE DRIVING RANGE.

YOU HAVE SOME COMMERCIAL USES.

YOU HAVE POOLS, CABANAS, THINGS LIKE THAT.

BUT THERE'S NO REQUIREMENT IN THIS PD FOR A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF OPEN SPACE OR A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF ACTIVE RECREATION OR A CERTAIN AMOUNT OF GOLF COURSE.

IT DOESN'T REALLY MATTER, BECAUSE THIS PROPERTY HAS BEEN DESIGNATED SINGLE FAMILY SINCE 1984.

THIS IS THE FINAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THIS AREA.

THIS IS REPEATED IN AT LEAST 6 OR 7 PLANS THAT I FOUND FOR MARSH LANDING, AND THE SUBJECT PROPERTY IS IN THE SAME AREA THAT THE PIKE AND THE GOLDING PROPERTY IS DESIGNATED AS, WHICH IS SINGLE FAMILY.

THAT'S WHY WE WERE ABLE TO DO THIS AS A SMALL ADJUSTMENT, BECAUSE IT'S BEEN DESIGNATED FOR NOW 40 YEARS AS SINGLE FAMILY.

[07:25:06]

THIS JUST OUTLINES THE AREA OF SINGLE FAMILY.

IT ACTUALLY GOES INTO UNIT FIVE, WHICH IS ALSO SINGLE FAMILY, AND UNIT SIX, WHICH IS ALSO SINGLE FAMILY.

THAT'S OUR PROPERTY.

SINGLE FAMILY.

THAT'S THE GOLDING PROPERTY.

SINGLE FAMILY.

THAT'S THE PYKE PROPERTY.

SINGLE FAMILY. THE SAME.

RIGHT? THAT ALLOWED THEM TO HAVE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES IS THE SAME, RIGHT? THAT ALLOWS US TO HAVE SINGLE FAMILY HOMES.

WHICH IS WHY WE WERE ABLE TO PROCESS THIS AS A SMALL ADJUSTMENT.

WHILE YOUR STAFF, THE COUNTY ATTORNEYS AND YOUR PLANNERS ALL AGREED IT COULD BE PROCESSED AS A SMALL ADJUSTMENT THIS IS YOUR STAFF'S RESPONSE.

THIS IS IN YOUR STAFF REPORT OUTLINING EXACTLY WHAT I JUST SAID.

ONE OTHER HIGHLIGHT.

BECAUSE THE PUD HAS THOUSANDS, I THINK IT'S EVEN MORE THAN THAT.

IT MIGHT BE CLOSE TO 1500 UNUSED DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS.

WE DON'T NEED TO DO A MAJOR MODIFICATION TO THE PUD.

SO THE SITES DESIGNATED FOR SINGLE FAMILY, AND WE HAVE EXCESS DEVELOPMENT RIGHTS.

THAT ADDS UP TO BEING ABLE TO PROCESS THIS AS A SMALL ADJUSTMENT.

AGAIN, HERE IS THE SITE PLAN.

AGAIN, NO OPEN SPACE DESIGNATED, NO GOLF COURSE DESIGNATED.

NOMINAL AMOUNTS. ACTUALLY, IN DOING RESEARCH ON THIS BEFORE WE FILED AS A SMALL ADJUSTMENT, I LOOKED AT THE MOST RECENT HOMES THAT WERE DEVELOPED IN MARSHALL LANDING, AND THIS WAS OVER AT HARBOR ISLAND.

IT WAS ORIGINALLY FILED AS A MAJOR MODIFICATION, BUT THE STAFF REALIZED THAT BECAUSE THERE'S NO OPEN SPACE REQUIREMENTS AND BECAUSE IT WAS DESIGNATED AS A SINGLE FAMILY, IT SHOULD BE PROCESSED AS A SMALL ADJUSTMENT.

AND YOU CAN SEE THE LINE IN THERE AS IT WAS ORIGINALLY PROCESSED AS A MAJOR MODIFICATION.

STAFF SAID NO, YOU SHOULD PROCESS THIS AS A SMALL ADJUSTMENT.

THIS IS THE SMALL ADJUSTMENT APPLICATION THAT WAS APPROVED FOR THOSE TWO LOTS IN 2009.

ONE OF THE POINTS THAT WAS BROUGHT UP WAS DRAINAGE.

AND THIS IS IN YOUR STAFF REPORT THAT YOU DON'T HAVE A DRAINAGE REQUIREMENT FOR SMALL ADJUSTMENT.

IT'S ACTUALLY NOTED IN YOUR STAFF REPORT THAT THAT'S SOMETHING THAT'S BROUGHT UP DURING ENGINEERING.

THAT SAID, WE HAVE A PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER, DAVID TAYLOR, WHO DID THE SITE PLAN, IS GOING TO ADDRESS DRAINAGE IN A SECOND.

ONE OF THE QUESTIONS THAT CAME UP FROM I THINK IT WAS MR. PIKE, WAS THE GOLF COURSE USE AREA.

AND IN THE WRITTEN DESCRIPTION OF OUR SMALL ADJUSTMENT WE SPECIFICALLY PUT IN THERE FOR GOLF COURSE USES ONLY.

WE CAN'T BUILD ANY HOMES IN THAT GOLF COURSE USE AREA.

WE CAN'T PUT A FENCE IN IT.

WE CAN'T PUT A GAZEBO, WE CAN'T PUT A SWIMMING POOL.

WE HAVE TO STAY OUTSIDE THAT GOLF COURSE USE AREA.

THE REASON IT LOOKS LIKE WE HAVE A BUILDING RESTRICTION LINE IN IT IS YOUR CODE ON THE SITE PLAN REQUIRES US TO ACTUALLY IDENTIFY SETBACKS FROM THE EDGES OF THE PROPERTY, BUT WE WOULD HAVE TO MEASURE THAT SETBACK FOR THAT PORTION OFF OF THE GOLF COURSE USE AREA.

SO WE HAVE TO STAY AWAY FROM THAT.

IF WE WERE TO BUILD IN IT, WE COULDN'T GET A PERMIT.

THAT'S THE ENFORCEMENT.

I KNOW THAT WAS A QUESTION THAT WAS BROUGHT UP.

THIS IS JUST A ZOOM IN OF THE GOLF COURSE USE AREA AND THE STORMWATER POND.

AGAIN, FOR SCALE, THAT STORMWATER POND IS 7000FT².

I BRING THAT UP BECAUSE IT SHOWS YOU HOW MUCH AREA WE STILL HAVE LEFT TO BUILD HOMES.

LIKE, I THINK JUST EVEN WITHIN THE SETBACKS OFF THE GOLF COURSE USE AREA, YOU'RE LOOKING AT A BASE SIZE OF ALMOST 5000FT² TO BUILD A HOME ON.

I DON'T MEAN TO PICK ON MR. PIKE AND MR. GOLDING, BUT I AM THE ATTORNEY FOR THE APPLICANT.

I HAVE TO PUT THIS ON THE RECORD RESPECTFULLY.

PER YOUR CODE, THEIR APPLICATIONS ARE DEFICIENT.

THIS IS THE APPLICATION SUBMITTED BY MR. GOLDING. HE JUST ADDRESSES DRAINAGE CONCERNS.

AS YOUR STAFF BROUGHT UP.

DRAINAGE IS NOT AN ITEM THAT WOULD BE CONSIDERED ON A SMALL ADJUSTMENT.

IF YOU LOOK AT THE CRITERIA FOR SMALL ADJUSTMENT, IT IS NOWHERE NOTED.

AND YOUR STAFF BROUGHT THIS UP.

THIS IS WHY YOUR STAFF DETERMINED THAT HIS APPLICATION WAS LEGALLY DEFICIENT.

I'LL ALSO POINT OUT HERE THAT HE DOESN'T EVER ADDRESS HOW HE'S AN ADVERSELY AFFECTED PARTY.

I'LL TALK ABOUT THAT MORE IN A SECOND.

THIS IS THE ORIGINAL APPLICATION OF MR. PIKE. HE IDENTIFIES AS A DECISION FROM THE PLANNING AND ZONING AGENCY, WHICH IS INCORRECT.

IT WAS ACTUALLY YOUR STAFF.

IT'S UNSIGNED.

HE HAD TO FILE THIS APPLICATION WITHIN 30 DAYS.

THE APPEAL RIGHTS HERE ARE JURISDICTIONAL.

YOU CAN'T AMEND THAT AFTER THE FACT.

THIS IS THE APPLICATION THAT WAS SUBMITTED WITHIN THE 30 DAYS.

I EMAILED YOUR STAFF, JACOB, AND ASKED, WELL, WHAT IS IN THIS APPLICATION FOR APPEAL? AND HERE'S WHAT HE WROTE BACK.

ZACH, THERE IS ALMOST NOTHING TO ATTACH THE APPLICATION.

IT INCLUDES A NARRATIVE, BUT THERE'S NOT ONE ON OUR FILES.

THE APPLICATION INCLUDES A COPY OF THE SITE PLAN.

THE APPLICATION HAS BEEN YET TO REVIEW.

I DON'T THINK THIS TOOK LONG TO REVIEW.

BY LAW, STAFF REPORTS CONSTITUTE COMPETENT, SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE.

THIS IS A SMORGASBORD OF CITATIONS THROUGHOUT THE STATE.

YOUR STAFF APPROVED THIS SMALL ADJUSTMENT.

YOUR STAFF HAS RENDERED THE SAID THAT THE APPLICATIONS WERE LEGALLY INSUFFICIENT.

THAT'S COMPETENT, SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE TO DENY THESE APPEALS.

I HAVE TO PUT THIS ON THE CODE.

I DO DISAGREE WITH YOUR STAFF A LITTLE BIT ON THIS.

[07:30:01]

I DON'T THINK YOU CAN APPEAL APPROVALS OF SMALL ADJUSTMENT.

HERE'S A LIST OF ITEMS IN YOUR CODE THAT YOU CAN APPEAL, AND IT'S LIMITED TO APPEALS TO DECISIONS OF THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR IN ENFORCING THE CODE.

APPROVAL OF A SMALL ADJUSTMENT IS NOT ENFORCING THE CODE.

ANY FINAL DECISIONS BY THE COUNTY ADMINISTRATOR AND ENFORCING THE CODE.

THIS IS JUST A DIFFERENT SECTION.

ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS MEANS THOSE ACTIONS TAKEN BY SAINT JOHN'S COUNTY IN RESPONSE TO VIOLATIONS OF THIS CODE.

HOW I READ THAT IS THAT YOU CAN APPEAL A DECISION IF YOUR NEIGHBOR IS VIOLATING THE CODE IN SOME WAY, AND THE COUNTY STAFF IS NOT DOING ANYTHING ABOUT THAT, YOU CAN APPEAL THAT TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSION.

I APOLOGIZE, I REPEATED THE SLIDE ALSO.

MR. PIKE AND MR. GOLDING DID NOT PUT IN THEIR APPLICATIONS HOW THEY'RE ADVERSELY AFFECTED PARTIES.

NORMALLY, IT'S PRESUMED IF YOU GET NOTICE OF A HEARING, YOU'RE AN ADVERSELY AFFECTED PARTY.

HOWEVER, THERE WAS NO HEARING HERE, SO THERE WAS NO MAILED NOTICE.

SO THERE'S NOTHING IN THE APPLICATION SUBMITTING THAT THEY'RE ADVERSELY AFFECTED.

THAT SAID, I KNOW I ONLY HAVE A MINUTE LEFT.

MR. TAYLOR IS HERE TO ADDRESS DRAINAGE VERY QUICKLY.

DAVID TAYLOR, 86, 47 BAY PINE ROAD.

WORK WITH DON ASSOCIATES.

I'M HERE FOR ANY QUESTIONS YOU MAY HAVE ON DRAINAGE.

I KNOW, MR. JOSEPH, I HAVE SOME.

OKAY. I SEE A QUESTION FOR COMMISSIONER JOSEPH IS THIS DO WE NEED TO DO IT DURING THE DESIGNATED SPEAKER TIME, OR DO WE NEED TO GO TO PUBLIC COMMENT? JUST SOME DIRECTION, PLEASE.

MISS WEST, YOU CAN GO AHEAD AND TAKE QUESTIONS.

NOW WOULD BE MORE COHESIVE.

OKAY. SURE.

YOU CAN START THE CLOCK. OKAY.

I LIVED IN MARSH LANDING, AND THAT ALWAYS FLOODED THAT AREA WHERE YOU CAN'T EVEN SOMEWHAT SOMETIMES DRIVE THROUGH IT, SO I DO I DO UNDERSTAND THAT WE HAVE EVERY LEGAL POINT, BUT THESE ARE PEOPLE THAT LIVE THERE.

THEY'RE NOT LAWYERS.

THEY'RE TRYING AS HARD AS THEY CAN TO MAKE WHATEVER DEADLINES THEY NEED TO MAKE.

THE DRAINAGE IS AN ISSUE.

IT'S ALWAYS BEEN AN ISSUE IN THERE.

AND THEN THE OTHER QUESTION I HAD IS, WHY IS IT REGISTERED AS A GOLF COURSE AND DRIVING RANGE ON THE PROPERTY APPRAISER.

I CAN'T, I DON'T KNOW, I DIDN'T UNDERSTAND WHAT WAS THAT CAN ANSWER THE GOLF COURSE.

OKAY. ANSWER.

MAY I ANSWER THAT? AND THEN HE CAN ANSWER QUESTIONS THROUGH THE CHAIR TO COMMISSIONER JOSEPH.

I BELIEVE THAT'S BECAUSE THAT'S THE DESIGNATION FOR HOW IT'S TAXED, BUT IT'S ZONED SINGLE FAMILY.

AND THOSE DON'T ALWAYS LINE UP WITH EACH OTHER.

PROPERTY THAT'S VACANT WILL USUALLY BE DESIGNATED UNDER THE TAX PROPERTY APPRAISER AS WASTELAND OR VACANT LAND OR OPEN SPACE, EVEN THOUGH IT'S ZONED FOR SINGLE FAMILY.

I FEEL LIKE YOU GET AN EXCUSE, BUT THEY DON'T GET AN EXCUSE FOR DRAINAGE.

I MEAN, I JUST, I JUST SOMETIMES I JUST DON'T UNDERSTAND WHY IT'S JUST NOT STRAIGHTFORWARD FOR THE PEOPLE THAT ACTUALLY PAID MONEY TO LIVE HERE AND PAY TAXES.

YOU KNOW, I'M JUST TRYING TO STAND UP FOR THEM AND I APOLOGIZE.

I DON'T UNDERSTAND WHAT YOU MEAN BY EXCUSE.

IT'S WHAT THE ZONING DESIGNATION IS.

OKAY, OKAY.

I LOOKED AT THE PICTURES, AND THE THE FLOODING IS CAUSED BY THE CANAL.

THE CANAL IS CONNECTED TO THE INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY, AND THE CANAL IS STAGING UP AND GOING OVER THE ROAD.

AND IT'S NOT JUST AT THIS LOCATION, IT'S AT OTHER LOCATIONS THERE.

SO WE CAN'T FIX THE PROBLEM OF THE FLOODING OF THE ROAD BECAUSE THE ROAD WAS BUILT LOW.

THIS LOT WE ARE BUILDING A POND ON, IT COULD BE A WET POND, A DRY POND OR SWALE.

WE ARE BUILDING THIS POND SO THAT THIS PROPERTY HAS NO IMPACT ON THE EXISTING STORMWATER SYSTEM OF MARSH LANDING.

THE MARSH LANDING IS A IS A PUMP SYSTEM, AND THAT WATER IS PUMPED INTO ITS OWN CANAL OUT TO THE INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY.

THE SITE HAS DRAINAGE.

IT WAS PROBABLY CLOGGED.

AS PART OF THIS DEVELOPMENT, THAT DRAINAGE WILL BE REDIRECTED INTO THE POND WHERE IT GOES.

NOW, THE SITE WILL BE ELEVATED, AS YOU CAN SEE BY THE PICTURES, THE SITE WILL BE ELEVATED 3 TO 4FT.

OKAY. ONE THING THAT I WAS TALKING TO ZACH ABOUT IS.

AND MR. DEAN WILL UNDERSTAND THIS FOR SURE, AND YOU GUYS PROBABLY UNDERSTAND IT, TOO.

THE INTRACOASTAL WATERWAY IS A HUGE BODY OF WATER.

IT'S LIKE THE OCEAN. OKAY.

IF YOU FILL THIS LOT WITH DIRT, THAT WATER LEVEL WILL NOT CHANGE.

IT WILL NOT GO ANY FURTHER UNTIL THE MAN'S LAND.

IT WILL NOT GO ANYWHERE ELSE.

BECAUSE IT'S LIKE AN ANALOGY.

PUTTING A BEBE OR A MARBLE INTO THE OCEAN OR A BUCKET OF WATER.

IT DOESN'T CHANGE THE WATER ELEVATION.

IS IT ENVIRONMENTALLY OKAY TO THROW A WHOLE BUNCH OF FILL DIRT IN THERE AND.

YES. WITH THE NEXT DOOR NEIGHBORS AND EVERYTHING, IT DOESN'T.

IT WILL NOT AFFECT THE NEIGHBORS.

IT'S A LOW LYING AREA THAT HAS DRAINAGE RIGHT NOW THAT GOES INTO THE SYSTEM.

FILLING OF THAT LOT WILL HAVE NO IMPACT ON THE WATER LEVEL.

AND IT WON'T. IT WON'T BE ANY WORSE THAN IT IS RIGHT NOW.

SO IT'S NOT GOING TO GET ANY BETTER.

I CAN'T MAKE IT ANY BETTER BECAUSE.

BECAUSE IT'S CONNECTED TO THE CANAL AND THE CANAL STAGES UP TO FOUR AND A HALF, OR WHATEVER ELEVATION THAT IS.

THIS PROPERTY IS PROBABLY AT ELEVATION TWO AND A HALF.

THE ROADS AROUND THERE ARE LIKE TWO OR LIKE AN ELEVATION FOUR AND A HALF.

[07:35:04]

THE PICTURES THAT HE SENT, I ZOOMED IN BECAUSE I THOUGHT WE MIGHT COULD FIX IT, BUT MAYBE BUILDING A BERM ALONG THE CANAL.

BUT THE WATER WAS COMING ACROSS THE ROAD DOWN THAT ROAD.

THE WHOLE AREA IS A LAKE.

I MEAN, IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN BUILT UP ANOTHER FOOT, PROBABLY.

SO I CAN'T I CAN'T FIX THE PROBLEMS. BUT WE ARE NOT IMPACTING THEM.

WE'RE NOT IMPACTING THE MARSH LANDING SYSTEM, THE DRAINAGE AND THE AND THE INFRASTRUCTURE THAT WE PUT ON THIS SYSTEM WILL CONTAIN OUR WATER AND BASICALLY WILL NOT PUT ANY MORE WATER ONTO THE ADJACENT NEIGHBORS.

I MEAN, THAT'S WHAT WE DO. AND STAFF REVIEWS THAT THE ENGINEERING STAFF WILL HAVE TO GET A STORMWATER PERMIT.

SO, I MEAN, THERE'S SEVERAL MECHANISMS THAT MAKE SURE THAT WE DON'T IMPACT NEIGHBORS.

AND THAT'S WHAT WE DO.

OKAY. ANY OTHER QUESTIONS FROM THE BOARD? PUBLIC COMMENT. WE'LL NOW HEAR PUBLIC COMMENT ON AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 11.

HOW Y'ALL DOING? ED SLAVIN BOX 308 FOR ED SLAVIN.

COM. IF I WERE Y'ALL, I WOULD SUSTAIN THE GOLDING AND PIKE APPEALS.

BECAUSE IF YOU DON'T, I THINK THAT THEY MIGHT HAVE A LAWSUIT UNDER THE BERT J.

HARRIS JUNIOR PRIVATE PROPERTY PROTECTION ACT.

THE REASONABLE EXPECTATION INVESTMENT BACKED EXPECTATIONS OF THESE NEIGHBORS IS THAT THEY WOULD NOT BE FLOODED OUT.

AND I THINK THEIR APPEAL IS VALID.

AND I THINK THAT THE DEFENSE LAWYER IS RELYING ON A TECHNICALITY.

LET ME QUOTE STEVEN SPIELBERG'S 1997 FILM AMISTAD, WHERE THE FORMER SLAVE CINQUÉ SAYS, WHAT KIND OF PLACE IS THIS? WHERE YOU ALMOST MEAN WHAT YOU SAY, WHERE LAWS ALMOST WORK? HOW CAN YOU LIVE LIKE THAT? WE NEED AN OMBUDSMAN.

WE NEED A PUBLIC ADVOCATE.

WE NEED SOMEBODY IN THIS BUILDING WHO ACTUALLY HELPS PEOPLE.

IF SOMEBODY HAS AN APPEAL, THEY SHOULD NOT BE HAVING TO STRAIN AT A GNAT WITHOUT A LAWYER AND COME HERE AND GET KICKED IN THE TEETH BY SOMEONE WHO IS A LAWYER.

IT'S JUST WRONG.

YOUR INSTITUTIONAL RELATIONSHIPS HERE WITH THE PEOPLE OF SAINT JOHNS COUNTY ARE RUDE.

AND THAT'S WHY TWO OF Y'ALL WERE DEFEATED.

WE NEED TO CHANGE OUR TREATMENT OF WETLANDS.

I KNOW COMMISSIONER DEAN HAS READ MY 2006 ARTICLE THAT MATRIX WETLANDS HAVE MASS DESTRUCTION.

WETLAND DESTRUCTION WAS LONG US GOVERNMENT POLICY.

KATRINA WAS NOT THE FIRST HURRICANE KILLING PEOPLE LEFT UNPROTECTED BY WIDESPREAD WETLAND DESTRUCTION.

HUNDREDS OF FLORIDA FARMERS, HUNDREDS WERE KILLED NEAR LAKE OKEECHOBEE DURING 2019 26 TO 27 FLOODS IN THE 1840S.

40S. A GENTLEMAN BY THE NAME OF BUCKINGHAM SMITH, WORKING FOR THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT, LAMBASTED THE UTTER WORTHLESSNESS OF THE EVERGLADES AND SAID THAT THE ENTIRE REGION WAS WORTHLESS.

GOVERNOR NAPOLEON BONAPARTE BROWARD OF FLORIDA, PUSHED FOR FILLING IN ALL THE WETLANDS AND SAVING THE EVERGLADES FOR BEING DRAINED AND MADE FIT FOR CULTIVATION.

CRIMINOLOGIST EDWARD ALVORD ROSS WROTE IN THE ATLANTIC IN 1907 THAT SOME SEEKING SUCCESS ARE IN A HURRY AND NOT PARTICULAR ABOUT THE MEANS, SHOWING WHAT HE CALLED CRIMINAL PERSONALITIES, AND IN THE WORDS OF THE LATE GREAT ELIHU ROOT, REPUBLICAN CORPORATE LAWYER.

SECRETARY OF WAR AND STATE FOR MCKINLEY AND TEDDY ROOSEVELT.

THE MOST VALUABLE ADVICE THAT A LAWYER, A REAL LAWYER FOR AN ORGANIZATION, CAN GIVE AN ORGANIZATIONAL CLIENT IS.

YOU'RE DARN FOOLS AND YOU SHOULD STOP.

WHY ARE WE SUBJECTING THIS NEIGHBORHOOD AND THESE PEOPLE TO THE POTENTIAL OF FLOODING? WHY ARE WE RISKING SAINT JOHN'S COUNTY BEING SUED IN THE BURT HARRIS ACTION TO MAKE, WELL, ENGLAND? TIMPSON MILLER AND ZACK MILLER HAPPY? WE COULD DO BETTER THAN THIS.

I WOULD SUSTAIN THE APPEALS AND I WOULD START AN OFFICE PUBLIC ADVOCATE OMBUDSMAN.

THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE FOR PUBLIC COMMENT ON AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 11? SEEING NONE, WE WILL GO AHEAD AND CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT ON AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 11.

OKAY. WE'RE BACK TO THE BOARD FOR ANY QUESTIONS COMMENTS, DISCUSSION.

COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST. MADAM CHAIR, IF YOU'D LIKE, I'D BE PREPARED TO MAKE A MOTION.

YEAH, ABSOLUTELY. THAT WAS COMMISSIONER JOSEPH'S DISTRICT.

BUT I WOULD CERTAINLY DEFER TO COMMISSIONER JOSEPH.

OKAY. I'LL MOVE TO DENY ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL.

2401 MARSH LANDING, LAKESIDE.

LOTS UPHOLDING THE APPROVAL OF SMALL ADJUSTMENT.

2432 BASED ON TWO FINDINGS OF FACT AS PROVIDED IN THE STAFF REPORT.

[07:40:03]

SECOND. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

PLEASE VOTE.

AND THAT PASSES, CAN I.

EXCUSE ME. CAN I CHANGE MY VOTE? I HIT THE WRONG BUTTON.

I'M SORRY. I KNOW I'M ALLOWED TO.

SURE. OKAY. REVOTE! THANK YOU. HENRY.

OKAY. AND THAT PASSES FIVE ONE.

ALL RIGHT. FIVE ZERO. SECOND MOTION TO DENY ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL.

20 402 MARSH LANDING.

LAKESIDE LOTS UPHOLDING THE APPROVAL OF SMALL ADJUSTMENT.

2432. BASED ON TWO FINDINGS OF FACT AS PROVIDED IN THE STAFF REPORT.

SECOND. MOTION AND A SECOND.

PLEASE VOTE. THAT ALSO PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.

OKAY. OKAY.

THAT TAKES US TO AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 12.

[12. Public Hearing * SJC Acquisitions, LLC - Brownfield Designation. The Florida Brownfields Redevelopment Act, sections 37677- 376.85, Florida Statutes, requires the local government with jurisdiction over a proposed brownfield area to designate such area, by resolution, pursuant to the administrative process and criteria set forth in the Act. The primary goals of the Brownfields Redevelopment Act are to reduce public health and environmental hazards on existing commercial and industrial sites that are abandoned or underused, create financial and regulatory incentives to encourage voluntary cleanup and redevelopment of sites, and derive appropriate cleanup target levels. SJC Acquisitions, LLC is requesting a resolution designating approximately 39.60 acres of real property off Agricultural Center Drive (parcel nos. 095574-0010 and 095574-0020) in unincorporated St. Johns County a Brownfield Area as authorized under the Florida Brownfields Redevelopment Act. The property was previously used as a gun range and for agricultural uses which may have resulted in elevated concentrations of lead, other metals, and contaminants. SJC Acquisitions plans to conduct further assessment and remediation activities on the Property to achieve regulatory site closure from the Florida Department of Environmental Protection. SJC Acquisitions is pursuing the Brownfield designation to benefit from the State of Florida’s Voluntary Cleanup Tax Credit program and cleanup liability protection from the State.]

GOOD EVENING. GOOD EVENING.

IT IS EVENING NOW. IT IS TREY MILLS, DRIVER, MCAFEE, ONE INDEPENDENT DRIVE, SUITE 1200, JACKSONVILLE.

FIRST OF ALL, COMMEND YOU ON A LONG DAY.

AND A LOT OF CONTENTIOUS HEARINGS.

BUT Y'ALL DONE A GREAT JOB, YOU AND YOUR STAFF.

SO I'LL TRY TO GET OUT OF HERE AS QUICKLY AS POSSIBLE.

WE HAVE SOME CROQUET PLAYERS BACK THERE WHO ARE EAGER TO BE HEARD WITH IMPATIENT CROQUET PLAYERS.

YEAH, AND I THINK SOME HUNGRY SIGNIFICANT OTHERS.

BUT AS YOU MAY RECALL I APPEARED BEFORE YOU LAST MONTH FOR A BROWNFIELD DESIGNATION UNDER THE FLORIDA BROWNFIELD ACT. FOR THE OLD ANCIENT CITY GUN RANGE OWNED NOW BY MY CLIENT, SJC ACQUISITIONS.

THIS IS THE SECOND PUBLIC HEARING AS REQUIRED BY THE FLORIDA BROWNFIELD ACT, IN WHICH WE WOULD HOPE THAT YOU WILL ENACT A RESOLUTION APPROVING BROWNFIELD DESIGNATION. IF YOU DO DO THAT, I WOULD THEN TOMORROW, HOPEFULLY GO TO DEP AND ENTER INTO AN AGREEMENT WITH DEP THAT WOULD REQUIRE MY CLIENT TO CLEAN UP THAT PROPERTY. AS A AS A REMINDER, THE THE BERMS THAT THE GUN RANGE ARE LIKELY FULL WITH A LEAD CONTAMINATION.

WE DON'T KNOW IF THAT SOIL'S BEEN DISPLACED THROUGHOUT THE PROPERTY, BUT WE KNOW WE KNOW WE'RE GOING TO HAVE TO REMEDIATE THE LEAD IN THE IN THOSE BERMS, POSSIBLY REMOVE THAT SOIL. AND THEN WE'RE ALSO GOING TO HAVE TO DO SOME SITE ASSESSMENT WORK TO DETERMINE IF THOSE IMPACTS HAVE SPREAD THROUGHOUT THE SITE.

SO YOUR RESOLUTION TONIGHT WOULD, WOULD ENABLE US TO GO THROUGH THAT PROCESS, WOULD OBLIGATE US TO CLEAN IT UP.

AND WOULD PROVIDE US WITH SOME LIABILITY PROTECTION AND THE ABILITY TO, TO SEEK SOME CORPORATE INCOME TAX CREDITS AT THE, AT THE STATE LEVEL FOR, FOR THOSE CLEANUP COSTS. SO MORE THAN HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS.

I KNOW IT'S BEEN A LONG DAY SO THANK YOU.

ANY QUESTIONS. OKAY.

WE'LL HEAR PUBLIC COMMENT.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. NOW I'LL OPEN IT UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENT ON AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 12.

SEEING NONE, MADAM CHAIR, WE WILL GO AHEAD AND CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT.

OKAY. WE'RE BACK TO THE BOARD, MR. MILLS. I DON'T HAVE ANY QUESTIONS.

I JUST WANTED TO THANK YOU FOR WAITING SO LONG TODAY.

I KNOW IT'S BEEN A LONG DAY. Y'ALL HAVE DONE GREAT TODAY.

APPRECIATE IT. OKAY.

MOTION TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2024.

DASH 494, DESIGNATING THE REAL PROPERTY LOCATED AT AGRICULTURAL CENTER CENTER DRIVE, A BROWNFIELD PURSUANT TO SECTION 376.80 FLORIDA STATUTE. SECOND MOTION AND A SECOND.

THAT BRINGS US TO ITEM NUMBER 13.

THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.

GOOD EVENING, MISS SPENCER.

GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS.

[13. Consider appointments to the Industrial Development Authority. Currently, there is (1) vacancy on the Industrial Development Authority (IDA) due to the expired term of Viv Helwig. A vacancy ad was posted and ran for (30) days. Please see attached for your review and consideration, a recommendation letter from the IDA and (8) applications: Dirk Lobenbruck Dist. 1, Boris Lyubomirsky Dist. 1, Sarah Hoff Dist. 2, Nick Primrose Dist. 2, Heather Harley-Davidson Dist. 3, Paul Morris Dist. 3, Kyle Sawchuk Dist. 4, Michael Kelly Dist. 5.]

JOANNE SPENCER, SENIOR ASSISTANT TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS.

I'M HERE TODAY IN REGARDS TO APPOINTMENTS TO THE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY, ALSO KNOWN AS THE IDA.

THERE WAS A VACANCY AD THAT RAN FOR 30 DAYS, AND THERE WERE EIGHT APPLICATIONS THAT WERE REVIEWED BY THE IDA.

AND THEY MOVED TO PUT FORWARD BORIS LYUBOMIRSKY AS THE NEXT APPOINTMENT FOR THIS FILLING THIS BOARD.

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS, I'M ON STANDBY.

ANY QUESTIONS FOR MISS SPENCER? COMMISSIONER JOSEPH? YES.

I WAS NOTICING HIS ADDRESS.

IT'S JACKSONVILLE. IS HE ALLOWED TO DO IT OR.

AND HE IS ON THE TRACK CLUB, WHICH I, OF COURSE, LOVE.

I DID NOT SEE THAT HIS ADDRESS WAS BECAUSE HE.

HE ACTUALLY LIVES IN JULINGTON CREEK, SO.

OKAY, EVEN THOUGH IT SAYS JACKSONVILLE.

OH, HE. YES.

IT'S 32259.

A LOT OF PEOPLE UP IN THAT PART OF THE COUNTY, WHICH IS WHERE I LIVE.

GOOD. HE'S A TRACK RUNNER TOO, I LIKE THAT, THANK YOU.

YEAH. THAT'S 32295.

THANK YOU. IS SAINT JOHN'S.

IT'S A FATAL FLAW AMONGST MY PEOPLE IN JCP.

[07:45:01]

WE OFTEN PUT JACKSONVILLE.

IT'S WE'RE STILL TEACHING PEOPLE THAT CLAIMED IT FOR SO LONG OKAY.

THERE'S NO QUESTIONS. WE'LL GO TO PUBLIC COMMENT.

ALL RIGHT. WE'LL OPEN IT UP FOR PUBLIC COMMENT ON AGENDA ITEM NUMBER 13.

IT IS I THE RUNNER.

SO THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TODAY.

SO MY NAME IS BORIS LUBOMIRSKI.

I LIVE WITH MY WIFE AND KIDS AT 1109 BASIL BRANCH COURT IN SAINT JOHN'S.

I APPLIED FOR THE OPEN MEMBER POSITION ON THE IDA.

I'D LIKE TO JOIN THE BOARD TO HELP CONTINUE THE STRONG RECORD OF THIS COMMITTEE TO FACILITATE BUSINESS GROWTH.

THE POTENTIAL OF THIS COUNTY IS LIMITLESS.

BUSINESS DEMAND IS HIGH.

THE RESOURCE POOL IS STRONG, AND THE LOCAL GOVERNMENT HAS AN EXCEPTIONAL APPROACH TO MEETING THE NEEDS OF THE BUSINESSES AND PEOPLE.

I BRING A VALUABLE SET OF EXPERIENCES AND SKILLS THAT WILL HELP THIS COMMITTEE MEET ITS GOALS.

LET ME HIGHLIGHT THE MOST RELEVANT ONES.

I HAVE SPENT ALMOST 30 YEARS AT FORTUNE 500 COMPANIES IN A NUMBER OF INDUSTRIES THAT THIS BOARD IS TRYING TO ATTRACT, INCLUDING HEALTH CARE AND AEROSPACE.

I'VE WORKED IN A NUMBER OF CORPORATE FUNCTIONS AND HAVE LED EFFORTS IN THOSE AREAS THROUGH PROCESS IMPROVEMENTS.

THAT HAS GIVEN ME A GOOD PERSPECTIVE ON THE INNER WORKINGS OF THESE COMPANIES.

IN OTHER WORDS, I UNDERSTAND INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT, HOW IT'S EXECUTED ON THE OTHER SIDE OF THE TABLE.

I ALSO HAVE AN UNDERGRAD DEGREE IN FINANCE AND AN MBA.

LASTLY, A MAJORITY OF MY CAREER HAS BEEN SPENT DOING SUCCESSFUL TRANSFORMATIONAL INITIATIVES.

MANY WERE CAPITAL PROJECTS SIMILAR TO THE ONES THAT WE'D BE TALKING TO THESE COMPANIES ABOUT.

IN SUMMARY, I HAVE AN EXTENSIVE INDUSTRIAL EXPERIENCE AND WILL ALLOW ME TO BE ABLE TO BUILD RELATIONSHIPS.

AGAIN, THANK YOU FOR THE OPPORTUNITY TO SPEAK TODAY AND THANK YOU FOR ALL THE WORK YOU'RE DOING TO MAKE SAINT JOHN'S ONE OF THE BEST COUNTIES TO LIVE, PLAY AND WORK IN THE COUNTRY.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU SIR.

ANYONE ELSE FOR PUBLIC COMMENT ON AGENDA ITEM 13? SEEING NONE, WE'LL CLOSE PUBLIC COMMENT.

OKAY, WE'RE BACK TO THE BOARD, COMMISSIONER WHITEHURST.

I'M HAPPY TO MOVE THIS ITEM, BUT I JUST WANT TO SAY QUICKLY, AS YOU JUST HEARD, BORIS IS A SHARP MIND, A CRITICAL THINKER, AND WILL BE A PERFECT FIT, IN MY VIEW, ON THE IDA.

THEY PROVIDE AN IMPORTANT SERVICE AND MAKING RECOMMENDATIONS TO THIS BOARD.

SO WITH THAT, I MOVE TO APPOINT BORIS LUBOMIRSKI TO THE INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT AUTHORITY FOR A FULL FOUR YEAR TERM SET TO EXPIRE NOVEMBER 5TH, 2028.

SECOND AND MADAM CHAIR, BEFORE WE MOVE ON, I JUST WANTED TO I SEE THAT VIV HELLWIG'S TERM HAS EXPIRED ON THAT BOARD, AND I'VE KNOWN VIV FOR A VERY LONG TIME. HE OWNS A BUSINESS HERE CALLED VESTED METALS.

HE RUNS A GREAT BUSINESS, AND I KNOW HE'S BEEN ON THAT BOARD FOR A WHILE.

SO I JUST WANTED TO, YOU KNOW, THANK HIM FOR HIS SERVICE.

AND I ALSO SAW THAT NICK PRIMROSE ALSO APPLIED FOR THIS POSITION.

I'VE GOTTEN TO KNOW NICK THE LAST FEW MONTHS, AND I THINK DOWN THE ROAD IT WOULD BE GOOD TO TO SEE HIM ON A BOARD AS WELL.

I THINK HE BRINGS A LOT TO THE TABLE, BUT OF COURSE YOU HAVE A GREAT BACKGROUND AND I THINK YOU'LL DO A GREAT JOB ON THIS BOARD.

I'M HAPPY TO SUPPORT YOU.

WE HAVE A MOTION. AND DO WE HAVE A SECOND? SECOND. SECOND. SECOND.

THAT'S IT. OKAY.

OKAY. PLEASE VOTE.

THAT PASSES UNANIMOUSLY.